Not losing weight on low carb?
Options
Replies
-
You do not need to bother trying to "get in fat burning mode". When you eat fewer carbs to burn more fat, you're also eating more fat. So the fact that fat oxidation may go up in the short term doesn't mean squat.
Eating in a long term calorie deficit will cause you to lose fat regardless of which particular substrates you're burning in the short term. And note that this doesn't mean macronutrient intakes are irrelevant.
So wrong.
You are either in the carbohydrate burning mode, or the fat burning mode.
You must be in the fat burning mode, and running at a calorie deficit, in order to burn fat and so lose weight.
Read my long post again. This is basic physiology.
Tip for you... anytime you are in a calorie deficit.. regardless if you eat carbs or not.. you are fat burner mode. It's basic science. If what you were saying was actually true, which it's not, the people on 80/10/10 diets wouldn't lose weight.
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE don't listen to Steve. You just need a calorie deficit. How you get there; IIFYM, low carb, vegan, paleo, IF....its your choice...but it really comes down to eating less calories than you burn.
I really truly wish that someone would have been straightforward with me about how low carb really worked when I first ate low carb. (Not that anyone mislead me purposely, but it wasn't pointed out either). I think understanding why it works is important and that doesn't take away from any of the benefits you mentioned you are enjoying.-1 -
-
Jim_Barteck wrote: »Ummm, yeah, that is close to what I used to eat - and now I am overweight. ha ha!
And you wonder why people are "bullying" you? Take a look in the mirror at your attitude.
It wasn't what you were eating. It was that you wouldn't stop eating it. You ate too much of it. Period.
Now you want to make fun of other people who can make it work simply because you didn't show the self-restraint necessary to make it work for yourself?
Talk about bullying attitudes....
You are grossly wrong, once again, by what I was conveying. I fully admitted to having a diet where I ate all the wrong things and it effected my weight. The gentleman who posted that admitted that he was eating that way for a reason. I assume he works out and lifts weights, or does something where he can eat that way. I am not of the same lifestyle as him. I gain weight when I eat like that, plain and simple. I wasn't making fun of him. Kudos to him for doing something that works for HIM. Now go back to the house that fell on you, troll!
Yes, he logs and tracks his calories so he knows where he can fit in any food he wants...
0 -
OP, if you have any further questions, you might want to wander over to the keto or low-carb groups. You'll avoid certain misinformers and won't have all the "don't do low-carb, it's not magic" noise.
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/group/1143-keto
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/group/1494-reddit-keto
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/group/394-low-carber-daily-forum-the-group
No one really believes it's magic, that's just something people who don't like the premise of low-carb pull out as a knee-jerk to discredit it. Don't worry Muggles, we set our own straight just fine.0 -
baconslave wrote: »OP, if you have any further questions, you might want to wander over to the keto or low-carb groups. You'll avoid certain misinformers and won't have all the "don't do low-carb, it's not magic" noise.
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/group/1143-keto
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/group/1494-reddit-keto
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/group/394-low-carber-daily-forum-the-group
No one really believes it's magic, that's just something people who don't like the premise of low-carb pull out as a knee-jerk to discredit it. Don't worry Muggles, we set our own straight just fine.
Who are the "misinformers"? I mean I can only think of the one fake guy...0 -
Who are the "misinformers"? I mean I can only think of the one fake guy...
There's plenty, although the typical post isn't so much misinformation as unsolicited advice to completely overhaul the OP's routine. But as far as misinformers, we could start with:Agreed. Also, I'd see a dietitian over a nutritionist as they have more education. Being in a full state of ketosis isn't healthy and can lead to high cholesterol, kidney problems, kidney stones, osteoporosis, and of course all the diseases linked to high cholesterol like heart disease. Carbs are absolutely necessary in one's diet to fuel your brain and cells. Any nutritionist that recommends a low carb diet is not a nutritionist that I would recommend.0 -
Ahhh... OK.
I usually see these individuals labeled as "misinformers" when they try to help people on low carb that are struggling.Type of food and macro ratio does not matter as far as weight loss goes. In order to lose weight, you must eat less calories than you burn. Calorie reduction causes weight loss, balance of macros is for energy, satiety, and nutrients.
In other words, choose your diet type, but you must eat at a calorie deficit to lose weight.
Eat less and you will lose weight.0 -
Ahhh... OK.
I usually see these individuals labeled as "misinformers" when they try to help people on low carb that are struggling.Type of food and macro ratio does not matter as far as weight loss goes. In order to lose weight, you must eat less calories than you burn. Calorie reduction causes weight loss, balance of macros is for energy, satiety, and nutrients.
In other words, choose your diet type, but you must eat at a calorie deficit to lose weight.
Eat less and you will lose weight.
Oh, I'm sure that happens too, but personally I don't see any real misinformation in what you're quoting. I probably wouldn't say macro ratio doesn't matter in terms of weight loss, as it does as a practical matter since most people care about body composition at the end of the day... but now we're splitting hairs, haha.0 -
The purpose of a low carb diet is so that your body stops feeling hungry and burns the fat in your body.
The purpose of a low carb diet is primarily to lower calorie intake. Also helps to get insulin under control if you have a problem with insulin resistance.
If you low carb and do not maintain a state of negative energy balance you will not burn the fat on your body.0 -
the food I eat is high protein, low fat.
If you are low carb, high protein and low fat you are not likely in ketosis. The excess protein via gluconeogenesis will likely kick you out of ketosis. Lower your protein and raise your fat and see if that helps. Also still, eat at a deficit. Should not be hard to do since low carb helps curb appetite...
0 -
Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »Why must everyone respond with "why are you doing what you're doing, do what I'm doing"?
Agreed...
0 -
You do not need to bother trying to "get in fat burning mode". When you eat fewer carbs to burn more fat, you're also eating more fat. So the fact that fat oxidation may go up in the short term doesn't mean squat.
Eating in a long term calorie deficit will cause you to lose fat regardless of which particular substrates you're burning in the short term. And note that this doesn't mean macronutrient intakes are irrelevant.
So wrong.
You are either in the carbohydrate burning mode, or the fat burning mode.
You must be in the fat burning mode, and running at a calorie deficit, in order to burn fat and so lose weight.
Read my long post again. This is basic physiology.
Tip for you... anytime you are in a calorie deficit.. regardless if you eat carbs or not.. you are fat burner mode. It's basic science. If what you were saying was actually true, which it's not, the people on 80/10/10 diets wouldn't lose weight.
Not necessarily.
You can be in a temporary negative caloric balance and still be working on burning through your glycogen stores. Glycogen stores have to be at a certain level before you will switch over to fat burning mode.
Since when do we care about temporary negative caloric balances? When people refer to a caloric deficit, they mean for an extended period of time. Glycogen stores are not endless. Frankly, I think you've lost sight of the forest for the trees.0 -
Who are the "misinformers"? I mean I can only think of the one fake guy...
There's plenty, although the typical post isn't so much misinformation as unsolicited advice to completely overhaul the OP's routine. But as far as misinformers, we could start with:Agreed. Also, I'd see a dietitian over a nutritionist as they have more education. Being in a full state of ketosis isn't healthy and can lead to high cholesterol, kidney problems, kidney stones, osteoporosis, and of course all the diseases linked to high cholesterol like heart disease. Carbs are absolutely necessary in one's diet to fuel your brain and cells. Any nutritionist that recommends a low carb diet is not a nutritionist that I would recommend.Ahhh... OK.
I usually see these individuals labeled as "misinformers" when they try to help people on low carb that are struggling.Type of food and macro ratio does not matter as far as weight loss goes. In order to lose weight, you must eat less calories than you burn. Calorie reduction causes weight loss, balance of macros is for energy, satiety, and nutrients.
In other words, choose your diet type, but you must eat at a calorie deficit to lose weight.
Eat less and you will lose weight.
Yes, parkscs clarified what I meant perfectly, thanks. That's what I was referring to. That and fake people.
It IS completely a matter of CICO. Most low-carbers get that and will say that. There is a medical reason OP is on a LC diet. And though I don't have medical issues, it has 1)helped force portion control to retrain myself, 2)helped me naturally lower calories by staying fuller more easily, 3)helped get rid of horrible cravings that lead me to binge. So, yes, though it is CICO, people are medically steered to LC diets for certain reasons and people gravitate there for their own reasons like mine. All weight loss requires a calorie deficit no matter which plan you use. And some people are personally better able to sustain some plans than others.
It just seems to me that many IIFYM and other normal calorie deficit folks are under the mistaken impression that we believe that low-carb is voodoo magic that violates the laws of physiology. That isn't the case.
We do CICO our own way and to us it is better than the rest, for us. But we realize there is more than one way to skin a cat. Skin your cat your way; we'll skin it ours. World peace ensues.
0 -
Prrecisely, because in a prolonged calorie deficit the fat burn/fat store equilibrium will be in a net fat burn resulting in weight (fat) loss.You do not need to bother trying to "get in fat burning mode". When you eat fewer carbs to burn more fat, you're also eating more fat. So the fact that fat oxidation may go up in the short term doesn't mean squat.
Eating in a long term calorie deficit will cause you to lose fat regardless of which particular substrates you're burning in the short term. And note that this doesn't mean macronutrient intakes are irrelevant.
So wrong.
You are either in the carbohydrate burning mode, or the fat burning mode.
You must be in the fat burning mode, and running at a calorie deficit, in order to burn fat and so lose weight.
Read my long post again. This is basic physiology.
I'm saying that trying to micromanage substrate utilization is pointless. If you are in a calorie deficit for extended periods of time you will net fat loss regardless of what substrates are being used in the short term.
0 -
I guess I have to ask why the medical nutritionist put you on a low carb diet over just tracking your calories/fitting macros? Is it for a particular health reason? Is it to get you used to tracking and being conscious of what you are actually eating?
I only ask because I was an utter failure at low carb (I lasted 10 weeks and that was it). I never got over the carb cravings (I had vivid creams about the smell of fresh baking bread on an almost nightly basis). I ate to the plan and was still pissed off and hungry. And to top it off, I didn't lose that much weight. Add that to the fact that I knew I wouldn't be able to sustain the low carb thing forever, and it was all "give me a bagel, dammit!"
But if this is working for you now, good for you. Just don't be afraid to change things up if it isn't working. You need to figure out what works for you and is sustainable in the long term.0 -
baconslave wrote: »
Yes, parkscs clarified what I meant perfectly, thanks. That's what I was referring to. That and fake people.
It IS completely a matter of CICO. Most low-carbers get that and will say that. There is a medical reason OP is on a LC diet. And though I don't have medical issues, it has 1)helped force portion control to retrain myself, 2)helped me naturally lower calories by staying fuller more easily, 3)helped get rid of horrible cravings that lead me to binge. So, yes, though it is CICO, people are medically steered to LC diets for certain reasons and people gravitate there for their own reasons like mine. All weight loss requires a calorie deficit no matter which plan you use. And some people are personally better able to sustain some plans than others.
It just seems to me that many IIFYM and other normal calorie deficit folks are under the mistaken impression that we believe that low-carb is voodoo magic that violates the laws of physiology. That isn't the case.
We do CICO our own way and to us it is better than the rest, for us. But we realize there is more than one way to skin a cat. Skin your cat your way; we'll skin it ours. World peace ensues.
In terms of the highlight, this is the reason half of these discussions start. It's misinformation from both sides without knowing the full story. It's no different with sugar threads or detox threads or whatever. Whenever some provides one-sided science or makes magical claims, it will bring in those who disagree or want to provide a correction; one of those claims with jump starting your metabolism. Maybe the expression was tongue-and-cheek or metabolism it was legit.. who knows. My point being, for the most part, people on both sides of the argument want to make sure the OP understands the science and it's NOT the specific diet that makes you lose weight, but rather the calorie level. At the same point, there are those who just like argument or spew non-sense to start drama.0 -
baconslave wrote: »
Who are the "misinformers"? I mean I can only think of the one fake guy...
There's plenty, although the typical post isn't so much misinformation as unsolicited advice to completely overhaul the OP's routine. But as far as misinformers, we could start with:Agreed. Also, I'd see a dietitian over a nutritionist as they have more education. Being in a full state of ketosis isn't healthy and can lead to high cholesterol, kidney problems, kidney stones, osteoporosis, and of course all the diseases linked to high cholesterol like heart disease. Carbs are absolutely necessary in one's diet to fuel your brain and cells. Any nutritionist that recommends a low carb diet is not a nutritionist that I would recommend.Ahhh... OK.
I usually see these individuals labeled as "misinformers" when they try to help people on low carb that are struggling.Type of food and macro ratio does not matter as far as weight loss goes. In order to lose weight, you must eat less calories than you burn. Calorie reduction causes weight loss, balance of macros is for energy, satiety, and nutrients.
In other words, choose your diet type, but you must eat at a calorie deficit to lose weight.
Eat less and you will lose weight.
Yes, parkscs clarified what I meant perfectly, thanks. That's what I was referring to. That and fake people.
It IS completely a matter of CICO. Most low-carbers get that and will say that. There is a medical reason OP is on a LC diet. And though I don't have medical issues, it has 1)helped force portion control to retrain myself, 2)helped me naturally lower calories by staying fuller more easily, 3)helped get rid of horrible cravings that lead me to binge. So, yes, though it is CICO, people are medically steered to LC diets for certain reasons and people gravitate there for their own reasons like mine. All weight loss requires a calorie deficit no matter which plan you use. And some people are personally better able to sustain some plans than others.
It just seems to me that many IIFYM and other normal calorie deficit folks are under the mistaken impression that we believe that low-carb is voodoo magic that violates the laws of physiology. That isn't the case.
We do CICO our own way and to us it is better than the rest, for us. But we realize there is more than one way to skin a cat. Skin your cat your way; we'll skin it ours. World peace ensues.
yes, but if your read OP's posts she specially said that low carb is what burns fat ...
I was not even going to post in this thread until I saw the "advice" that was given from a "nutritionist" and felt compelled to clarify ...0 -
So bombsell, you honestly eat poptarts for breakfast and chips for lunch and you don't get fat? Really...how does one do that? Even when not dieting, I don't eat like that. Unless you work out all day?
I am not being scammed by an expert at a hospital. The purpose is to not feel hungry and that part is working.
I eat poptarts, chips and I ate homemade pie over the weekend. I have lost 16 pounds eating everything as before just less of it. I don't work out all day either. I got to my desired weight and have kept it off.For the most part I eat a well balanced diet and have a healthy relationsip with food and exercise. If I want a poptart and want chips with my sandwich then I partake. I count out a serving, log it and move on.
0 -
I guess I have to ask why the medical nutritionist put you on a low carb diet over just tracking your calories/fitting macros? Is it for a particular health reason? Is it to get you used to tracking and being conscious of what you are actually eating?
I only ask because I was an utter failure at low carb (I lasted 10 weeks and that was it). I never got over the carb cravings (I had vivid creams about the smell of fresh baking bread on an almost nightly basis). I ate to the plan and was still pissed off and hungry. And to top it off, I didn't lose that much weight. Add that to the fact that I knew I wouldn't be able to sustain the low carb thing forever, and it was all "give me a bagel, dammit!"
But if this is working for you now, good for you. Just don't be afraid to change things up if it isn't working. You need to figure out what works for you and is sustainable in the long term.
Nomad, you might want to try the Hagan approach.
I think you are realizing that weight loss at its core is a psychological game. Dealing with hunger cravings takes real discipline- and our media-driven culture doesn't help things.
Obesity comes from learned behavior- but that behavior can be "unlearned."
Try water-fasting for the morning. Sure, it will be uncomfortable, but you should be able to gut it out. Nothing bad will happen to physically. A lot of myths out there on this.
Why should you be able to gut it out?
Because in the afternoon and early evening, you can eat whatever you want, and in any amount. Then, after a 8-9 hour eat period, it is back to water-fasting until noon the next day.
So the morning should be endurable because you can eat whatever you fantasize about in the afternoon.
If you can keep this up for a few days, you should get used to the empty stomach in the morning, and you SHOULD find that your cravings change for the better.
This is huge. Your brain will begin to re-wire.
Now, people will jump all over this post for a variety of reasons that make perfect sense on the surface.
But if you have the courage to actually TRY it, I think you will be surprised.
People jump on your post because you suggest there are a lot of myths out there, and then follow it by promoting a myth. You don't need to eat breakfast, but if you do, it won't stop "fat burning mode" if you are in an overall calorie deficit. Meal timing and frequency has absolutely been proven to be irrelevant to fat loss.
0 -
baconslave wrote: »
Who are the "misinformers"? I mean I can only think of the one fake guy...
There's plenty, although the typical post isn't so much misinformation as unsolicited advice to completely overhaul the OP's routine. But as far as misinformers, we could start with:Agreed. Also, I'd see a dietitian over a nutritionist as they have more education. Being in a full state of ketosis isn't healthy and can lead to high cholesterol, kidney problems, kidney stones, osteoporosis, and of course all the diseases linked to high cholesterol like heart disease. Carbs are absolutely necessary in one's diet to fuel your brain and cells. Any nutritionist that recommends a low carb diet is not a nutritionist that I would recommend.Ahhh... OK.
I usually see these individuals labeled as "misinformers" when they try to help people on low carb that are struggling.Type of food and macro ratio does not matter as far as weight loss goes. In order to lose weight, you must eat less calories than you burn. Calorie reduction causes weight loss, balance of macros is for energy, satiety, and nutrients.
In other words, choose your diet type, but you must eat at a calorie deficit to lose weight.
Eat less and you will lose weight.
Yes, parkscs clarified what I meant perfectly, thanks. That's what I was referring to. That and fake people.
It IS completely a matter of CICO. Most low-carbers get that and will say that. There is a medical reason OP is on a LC diet. And though I don't have medical issues, it has 1)helped force portion control to retrain myself, 2)helped me naturally lower calories by staying fuller more easily, 3)helped get rid of horrible cravings that lead me to binge. So, yes, though it is CICO, people are medically steered to LC diets for certain reasons and people gravitate there for their own reasons like mine. All weight loss requires a calorie deficit no matter which plan you use. And some people are personally better able to sustain some plans than others.
It just seems to me that many IIFYM and other normal calorie deficit folks are under the mistaken impression that we believe that low-carb is voodoo magic that violates the laws of physiology. That isn't the case.
We do CICO our own way and to us it is better than the rest, for us. But we realize there is more than one way to skin a cat. Skin your cat your way; we'll skin it ours. World peace ensues.
yes, but if your read OP's posts she specially said that low carb is what burns fat ...
I was not even going to post in this thread until I saw the "advice" that was given from a "nutritionist" and felt compelled to clarify ...
Meh...technically ketosis DOES burn fat. I think all the med-speak from the dietician got a little twisted in translation.
And that's fine. And understandable. Somebody had already put her straight on that account before I stumbled upon the thread, including you, so thumbs up.
But how many people get on threads specifically to set low-carbers straight and let them know how dumb it is to low-carb? Quite a few. That's one particular beef. And the other is: "don't do low-carb. That's stupid. CICO and eat what I eat." IMO, unhelpful comments. I mean, if OP asked, "should I do low-carb?" Then that would be a valid response. I, obviously, am a low-carber and support such diets, but even I'll tell someone that if there is no medical reason, and you are looking at a low-carb diet and lack craving issues like I have, well just count calories. But if the question is, as it is here, "Why am I not losing on low-carb?" then it's unhelpful. Sure they can give that opinion, as it is a public forum, but it still is unhelpful.
In this case, OP had bloodwork come back iffy, which includes blood glucose issues. In the opinion of her nurse/dietician, it's necessary. So for people to respond "don't listen to your medical professional, do this instead" just for the sake of the lulz, is harmful.
Things don't happen in a vacuum. What if she listens to that misinformation and her health tanks? We'd probably never know. But who cares as long as people get their daily lulz, right?
That is where I'm coming from.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.9K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 399 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 978 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions