Count carbs or calories?

gregfrompenn

I weigh 219 pounds, I was thinking about counting only my carbs and reducing them to 200 grams per day, do you think this is a good weight loss plan?

malibu927

As long as you're in a calorie deficit, that's fine

kristen6350

Nope. Sorry. I eat (most of the time) less than 150g a day, but if I don't keep my calories under 1600, I'm not losing. It's all about calories in/calories out.

You'll get mixed reviews, but even the people that do ketosis (where you keep your carbs at VERY low levels) still count calories.

Alyssa_Is_LosingIt

Counting carbs alone will not cause you to lose weight. You can eat 200 g of carbs a day and still very easily be in a calorie surplus. Count calories - it's easy and effective, and it gives you more flexibility in your diet.

tennisdude2004

Count calories - unless you are in a deficit it will not matter how many or how few carbs you eat, you will not lose weight.

The only think you really need to keep an eye on, Macro nutrient wise, when counting calories is that you get adequate protein.

Outside of that, in a calorie deficit, let the carbs and fat just match your taste buds.

SergeantSausage

No.

Carbs are irrelevant.

Count calories instead.

Liftng4Lis

Calories.

PeachyCarol

It won't matter if you cut your carbs to 20g a day. You could still eat so much fat and protein that you're eating too many calories.

It's all about calories. You need to count them.

I used to think that all you needed to do was count carbs because I read Atkins book and that's what his book makes you think. It's wrong. Calories count.

RaspberryTickleChicken

Calories but keep a watchful eye on the carbs

Sabine_Stroehm

gregfrompenn wrote: »

I weigh 219 pounds, I was thinking about counting only my carbs and reducing them to 200 grams per day, do you think this is a good weight loss plan?

I support low carb diets. However, I doubt 200 is low enough to really impact anything.
If 200 seems low to you, I'd suggest calorie counting, or another approach.

Why did you pick carbs, and why 200?

gregfrompenn

I picked 200 because I was thinking 2000 calories per day, 40% of that equals 800 calories or 200 grams and I know carbs are my problem

Sabine_Stroehm

gregfrompenn wrote: »

I picked 200 because I was thinking 2000 calories per day, 40% of that equals 800 calories or 200 grams and I know carbs are my problem

Oh, I see.
So you'd be counting calories too? If not, how would you know if you were at 40%?

juggernaut1974

Calories

/thread

AdannaIkoli2015

Calories is what really matters

elphie754

gregfrompenn wrote: »

I weigh 219 pounds, I was thinking about counting only my carbs and reducing them to 200 grams per day, do you think this is a good weight loss plan?

This alone will not make you lose weight. To lose weight you have to be in a calorie deficit which restricting carbs may or may not give you.

Track your total cals.

elphie754

RaspberryTickleChicken wrote: »

Calories but keep a watchful eye on the carbs

Why?

yolo9752

Calories.

Hornsby

SergeantSausage wrote: »

No.

Carbs are irrelevant.

Count calories instead.

Correct, and straight to the point.

nsoss

Carbs are not irrelevant.

In order to lose weight efficiently, you need to efficiently burn fat. This is much easier to do with a low carb diet. This is a very simplified explanation, but with a moderate or high carb diet you're burning more sugar and less fat. How efficiently or inefficiently you burn sugar vs fat also varies greatly from person to person.

You can still lose weight ignoring carb intake if your calorie deficit is enough, but it's harder.

So calories and carbs both count.

And 200 mg of carbs is far from a low level.

cerad2

Assumptions
1. Your weight is more or less stable with your current eating habits
2. You currently consume more than 200 grams of carbs per day
3. You don't replace your reduced carbs with high calorie food

If the above assumptions are accurate then going to 200 carbs will put you in a calorie deficit which will (eventually) result in weight loss. It's not a bad way to get started as it allows you to ease into a new eating style without trying to "fix" everything in one shot. You will stall eventually since your body needs fewer calories as your weight drops.

cerad2

G35GT wrote: »

ceoverturf wrote: »

Calories

/thread

I'm all for making simple things simple and not complicating them. Calories first.

So counting calories is simpler than counting carbs? Seems like counting calories requires tracking all your foods while counting carbs can be limited to foods containing carbs.