Old 06-15-16, 11:45 PM
  #47  
Emperor Ryker
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 179

Bikes: 2008 Trek 2.1

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by link0
It's just math man. Macro ratios are useful for many who find it easier to imagine ratios vs grams. Many others, such as you, prefer using grams. No big deal. You can convert any macro ratio to a gram amount by multiplying. You obviously have to combine macro ratios with total caloric intake to get an absolute amount.
Sure, of course you can convert between those, but as the article explains, it's not a good practice to start out with ratios. You need a certain amount of grams of, say, fats, not a certain share of the total intake. If you need 70g of fats to function normally and you're eating 50g, then it doesn't matter whether those 50g represent 20% or 50% of your total intake. It's not enough and that's what matters. The only reason why ratios "work" for some people is that they unwittingly select a ratio that just so happens to work for them in that case. The practice of doing so is still wrong and can lead to deficiencies.
Emperor Ryker is offline