If you've got a chronic inflammatory process going on in your body, you
will probably be a lot hungrier than someone who doesn't.  If you were
my patient, we'd go over all the food you are eating, how many hours
sleep you are getting, etc.  Short of trying to sort it all out, I'm
nor sure about what you are asking.  Are you having trouble controlling
your appetite?  If you are an American, it's unlikely that you are
eating too little, in terms of calories.

For example, what does "separate your calorie intake through the day"
means?  Are you eating one meal a day at this point?

Fiber has no calories, so that's not an issue.

One point that needs to be made is that the charts you see in books and
magazines represent a gross assessment, and are basically worthless if
you want to really zero in on what's best for you as an individual.

Read the labels.....

I'd use www.fitday.com for some time (say, 2 weeks) to assess how i am
eating now. It's an effective learning tool, too.

 So if you were to find out you need to make any adjustments, you'd
already have some knowledge to use for achieving those adjustments.

In general it is good to eat more nutrient dense foods and to reduce eating
energy dense foods. But maximum vitamin and mineral intake is not a good
goal. You can easily get too much retinol and iron. Aim for optimal amounts.

For a guide to nutrient-dense foods and how to determine them,
http://sankey.ws/diet.html
might be of help

WRONG!

It should read: Get enough fat, protein and carbohydrates (according to
your caloric needs i.e., activity level) on a daily basis.

Again it should read: Spreadout your caloric intake through out the day
by eating 3 meals a day. Try to skip in between meal snacks.

Get enough fiber by eating 5 servings of "real" fruits and vegetables
(either raw or cooked) a day, plus "whole" grains.

30 minutes a day, seven days a week of walking or of more intense
exercise.

Along with 7 to 8 hours of sleep.

The notion that you can get all of your nutritional needs met by diet
alone is total B/S, IMHO opinion.

I cover the subject of diet on my website in 17 pages.
http://food.naturalhealthperspective.com/

In regards to the need for nutritional supplementation: "The total
intake of nutrients from your diet is generally closely linked with
total caloric intake."
http://supplements.naturalhealthperspective.com/poordiets.html

Even for the person of normal weight, trying to get your recommended
intake of calcium and magnesium would require a diet of some 7,000
calories a day. Hence, it simply not realistic for a person to rely on
their diet alone for their mineral needs.  The poor bioavailability of
minerals from a fiber heavy diet simply does not add up to what is
needed for strong bones.

"The total intake of nutrients from your diet is generally closely
linked with total caloric intake.

Are you trying to lose weight? On a restricted diet of 1,500 calories
most people obtain ONLY about 50% of the recommended daily intakes of
nutrients.[2] In another study of a varied diet at different energy
levels, "results show[ed] that at low energy levels, meeting nutrient
needs was difficult and that even at higher calorie intakes, contrary
to what was expected, certain nutrients were found to be
inadequate."[3] Fasting should be viewed as an extreme form of dieting.

Are you happy with your present weight? You may be surprised to learn
that many people obtain only about 80% of the recommended daily
allowances of nutrients from a 2,500 calories a day.[2] The average
dietary intake of some vitamins, such as folic acid, pantothenic acid,
vitamin A, beta-carotene, vitamin C and B1, is likely to be inadequate
from diet alone.[2] "While most vitamins are very well absorbed [from
food], most essential minerals are not."[4] Results of the 1982-1991
Total Diet Studies indicated that Intakes of calcium, magnesium, iron
(females only), zinc and copper were below recommended intakes for some
groups of individuals.[5]"
http://supplements.naturalhealthperspective.com/poordiets.html

"Researchers obtained information from about 200 men and women
participating in a study on diet. The volunteers were 79 years of age
and older and were living in a rural section of Iowa, a state in the
Midwestern section of the United States. The participants' diets were
lacking in variety, with an average of only 22 different foods consumed
over the three-day period. In fact, only about 20% of the group
consumed adequate amounts of at least 16 essential nutrients.
Furthermore, about 40% of the group consumed diets defined by the
researchers as inferior, containing adequate amounts of 13 or fewer
nutrients. More than half of the respondents' diets were lacking in
folate, vitamins D and E, calcium, and magnesium.[3]"
http://naturalhealthperspective.com/supplements/

The belief that one must consume huge amounts of food in order to be
adequately nourished naturally is incorrect. See
http://sankey.ws/dietpills.html
for some specific examples with real numbers attached.

It is *possible* to obtain the recommended daily intake (RDI) of all
USDA-quantified nutrients with as little as 1000 calories/day of
natural foods (though I admit I wouldn't stick to that narrow a diet
for long!) And remember that the RDIs used for the calculations on
that page are roughly double the real requirement of healthy people,
to give wiggle room for those with minor health problems.

It is easy to be naturally well nourished on 2000 calories/day - lots
of food choices. It just depends on what you eat. It's also easy to
overdose with artificially-concentrated supplements, dangerously so
with most fat-soluble nutrients.

There is a minimum quantity of dietary protein per body weight that
if not reached results in nitrogen imbalance and subsequent health
problems. That minimum amount is related to body weight and so is
best expressed in grams per kg body weight per day. A similar measure
is applicable to each of the essential amino acids separately, and
expressed best in the same units. There is ample literature on this.

There is a maximum protein percentage of diet above which toxicity
effects are observed. There is not much quantitative literature on
this.

I summarize some of these points at
http://sankey.ws/protein.html

So, whether you relate protein in diet to body weight or to diet
percentage depends on what aspect you are discussing.