Why don't the macro nutrients not add up to total calories?

Krav

Can someone please explain how to read those numbers.
Protein, carbs and fat are all way over 100% but still the calories are below 100%.

mph

I notice the same thing. I manually multiplied grams of carbs and proteins by 4 and grams of fat by 9, and I got a different total calorie amount. Is Cronometer using a different calculation?

Here is my calculation:
Protein: 73.1 X 4 = 292.4
Carbs: 42.5 X 4 = 170
Fats: 352.1 X 9 = 3198.9

Total is 3661.36. However, Cronometer says total calories is 3724.9.

(This also impacts the percentages of total calories that Cronometer displays.)

Karen_Cronometer

Hi there,

The energy factors for protein, carbs and fats you've used are average values. There are more specific factors available for some of the lab-analyzed foods in our database so your total may not match what you've calculated. For example, some sources of fat may be 9.1 kcal/g or carbs might be 3.8 or 4.2 kcal/g.

mph

Thanks! that is helpful, but I'm still a bit confused. I look at my net carbs, and it's at 42.5 grams. Cronometer says that is 381 calories. 42.5 X 4 = 170 (using average values). 170 vs 381 is a huge difference, and doesn't seem to be accounted for based on the rounding error you provided. Why would that difference be so significant?

Karen_Cronometer

There are some calories that come from other carbs that are not counted in your net carb target. For example, on average fibre contains 2 kcal/g.

Krav

If that's the case cronometer needs to be reworked imo.
In my profile I set a calorie target, but in daily use I have to manually calculate it because the totals aren't correct.

There may be some solid (scientific) explanation for all those numbers, but imo that not my job to consider. That's why I subscribe to this service.

Totals don't add up. The carbs number can't be just accepted as it is, but needs recalculation (for fiber).
Perhaps something similar is true for protein and/or fat.

For me it takes away the beauty of simplicity that I (once) thought cronometer provided.

Let's look at the numbers I posted. All three are well over 100% but the total is under 100%. Uncounted fiber-carbs would make it even worse if I understand you correctly. It shows 114% but in reality it's perhaps 133%?

After your explanation I still don't understand how both mph and me both have over 100% in the lower 3 bars but my as a total below 100% and mph above 100%. The fiber carb explanation can't explain both. Or can it?

Karen_Cronometer

Hi Krav,

There does look like something strange going on with your energy and macro target settings that are not explained by the differences in energy in carbs and other macronutrients.

Would you mind writing into support@cronometer.com so we can look into your targets and see if we can straighten things out?

Cheers,

Krav

Hi Karen,

Unfortunately that's not possible because yesterday my subscription was up for renewal and I didn't renew because of this issue.
So I have (no longer) an account to share with Support.

Karen_Cronometer

Hi Krav,

No problem - let us know if there's anything we can do to help with this in the future.

You can still access your account settings and data in a free account, even without access to the extra Gold features.

Best,

mph

Please keep me updated if any progress is made on this. I would really like more training/tutorials on this issue.