How low should carbs be for it to be considered low carb.
rckk18
Posts: 27 Member
In the last 6 days I am averaging 73 carbs a day. Is that about right for a low carb diet ? I have lost 4 lbs in the last 7 days.
0
Replies
-
It's not fat you've lost, It's water weight from going low on carbs.
But, when you do start to really ea them again, the water weight will return. Hence why low carb, unless under direction of a doctor, is a dumb idea.
Carbs don't make you fat, eating too much is what makes people fat.0 -
I went low carb for a week to break a month long plateau I hit after losing weight steadily for 7 months and lost 2lbs, so it did the trick in that sense. I still stuck to my calorie limit of 1200, but reduced my carbs to no more than 40 grams a day.
I'm actually not sure how many carbs would be considered the right amount to be considered low carb, but it's not something I could do long term.0 -
To play devil's advocate, my family has a history of blood sugar issues and diabetes. If you have higher than average blood sugar levels, low carb can actually help a lot. If you do not create as much insulin, your body will not store as much excess fat. As someone who can't seem to lose weight on a healthy, calories restricted diet, I am seeing some progress on a lower carb diet. Also, you don't need to do Atkins style low carb to make this work - lower glycemic load diets are great and not nearly as restrictive.
-
The important thing to note @martyqueen52 (and all other "low carb diets don't work" proponents) is that simply stated, weight loss is not "one size fits all." We all have different reasons we gained weight - and overeating is not everyone's problem. High insulin levels, high cortisol levels, and even water retention can cause issues depending on the severity of each.0 -
Low carb is a great option if it helps you decrease overall calories eaten. It isn't a dumb idea if its what works for you. You will gain water weight back, but not all you lose is water weight. If you eat at maintenance levels, you won't gain back fat.
74 g per day is somewhat low carb to me, as 20-30g is what I consider to be low carb. But to each their own, if its working for YOU then continue to do. If I eat low carb, I eat around 5%-10% of my calories from carbs (veggies, and some dairy). To me, an added benefit to dropping carbs is I feel less hungry.0 -
ValentineNicole wrote: »To play devil's advocate, my family has a history of blood sugar issues and diabetes. If you have higher than average blood sugar levels, low carb can actually help a lot. If you do not create as much insulin, your body will not store as much excess fat. As someone who can't seem to lose weight on a healthy, calories restricted diet, I am seeing some progress on a lower carb diet. Also, you don't need to do Atkins style low carb to make this work - lower glycemic load diets are great and not nearly as restrictive.
-
The important thing to note @martyqueen52 (and all other "low carb diets don't work" proponents) is that simply stated, weight loss is not "one size fits all." We all have different reasons we gained weight - and overeating is not everyone's problem. High insulin levels, high cortisol levels, and even water retention can cause issues depending on the severity of each.
Hence, why I said "unless under direction of a doctor". But thanks for re-conforming my point. I guess reading is hard.-5 -
100gms or less and you are there.
0 -
Typically, low carb diets vary from 20g to 100g of carbs per day, with 50g being a fairly popular target.
Low carb diets with "unrestricted" calories work because they cause you to be satiated on fewer calories. Exactly how many carbs you can eat and still feel satisfied with fewer total calories is going to vary - both between people and on the pattern of your carb consumption.
0 -
martyqueen52 wrote: »It's not fat you've lost, It's water weight from going low on carbs.
But, when you do start to really ea them again, the water weight will return. Hence why low carb, unless under direction of a doctor, is a dumb idea.
Carbs don't make you fat, eating too much is what makes people fat.
She never explicitly stated either of those two things, so you are assuming she believes those things. How is your reading comprehension?
Low carb is definitely not dumb. If one wants to not eat carbs so that it helps them stay in a deficit, then the one that does low carb actually comes out looking pretty smart if it works for them. But you, sir/madam, come off as an ignorant *kitten* for saying it is dumb. Everyone has their reasons and strategy for achieving the same goal.
Btw...what does water weight have to do with losing weight by burning fat? Your logic dictates that since the water weight is a big factor in what makes this strategy dumb, it will be unsuccessful. So, please explain to me the correlation(s).0 -
RockstarWilson wrote: »martyqueen52 wrote: »It's not fat you've lost, It's water weight from going low on carbs.
But, when you do start to really ea them again, the water weight will return. Hence why low carb, unless under direction of a doctor, is a dumb idea.
Carbs don't make you fat, eating too much is what makes people fat.
She never explicitly stated either of those two things, so you are assuming she believes those things. How is your reading comprehension?
Low carb is definitely not dumb. If one wants to not eat carbs so that it helps them stay in a deficit, then the one that does low carb actually comes out looking pretty smart if it works for them. But you, sir/madam, come off as an ignorant *kitten* for saying it is dumb. Everyone has their reasons and strategy for achieving the same goal.
Btw...what does water weight have to do with losing weight by burning fat? Your logic dictates that since the water weight is a big factor in what makes this strategy dumb, it will be unsuccessful. So, please explain to me the correlation(s).
isn't it a little early to start trolling folks?0 -
My understanding is that "low carb" is generally 100 grams or less of carbohydrates. Keto is something else entirely and personally I wouldn't recommend it given the stank that came from my colleague's pie hole when he did that.
0 -
RockstarWilson wrote: »martyqueen52 wrote: »It's not fat you've lost, It's water weight from going low on carbs.
But, when you do start to really ea them again, the water weight will return. Hence why low carb, unless under direction of a doctor, is a dumb idea.
Carbs don't make you fat, eating too much is what makes people fat.
She never explicitly stated either of those two things, so you are assuming she believes those things. How is your reading comprehension?
Low carb is definitely not dumb. If one wants to not eat carbs so that it helps them stay in a deficit, then the one that does low carb actually comes out looking pretty smart if it works for them. But you, sir/madam, come off as an ignorant *kitten* for saying it is dumb. Everyone has their reasons and strategy for achieving the same goal.
Btw...what does water weight have to do with losing weight by burning fat? Your logic dictates that since the water weight is a big factor in what makes this strategy dumb, it will be unsuccessful. So, please explain to me the correlation(s).
isn't it a little early to start trolling folks?
Since when is intelligent conversation considered trolling? I came here for information, but the first response says "it is dumb, dont do it (except with doctor)" So, I am just looking for the reasons.0 -
Work on that, and you won't get called out.RockstarWilson wrote: »RockstarWilson wrote: »martyqueen52 wrote: »It's not fat you've lost, It's water weight from going low on carbs.
But, when you do start to really ea them again, the water weight will return. Hence why low carb, unless under direction of a doctor, is a dumb idea.
Carbs don't make you fat, eating too much is what makes people fat.
She never explicitly stated either of those two things, so you are assuming she believes those things. How is your reading comprehension?
Low carb is definitely not dumb. If one wants to not eat carbs so that it helps them stay in a deficit, then the one that does low carb actually comes out looking pretty smart if it works for them. But you, sir/madam, come off as an ignorant *kitten* for saying it is dumb. Everyone has their reasons and strategy for achieving the same goal.
Btw...what does water weight have to do with losing weight by burning fat? Your logic dictates that since the water weight is a big factor in what makes this strategy dumb, it will be unsuccessful. So, please explain to me the correlation(s).
isn't it a little early to start trolling folks?
Since when is intelligent conversation considered trolling? I came here for information, but the first response says "it is dumb, dont do it (except with doctor)" So, I am just looking for the reasons.
0 -
I believe in order to "qualify" it's anything under 20% of your diet.The term "low-carbohydrate diet" is generally applied to diets that restrict carbohydrates to less than 20% of caloric intake, but can also refer to diets that simply restrict or limit carbohydrates to less than recommended proportions (generally less than 45% of total energy coming from carbohydrates).[4][5]0
-
Work on that, and you won't get called out.RockstarWilson wrote: »RockstarWilson wrote: »martyqueen52 wrote: »It's not fat you've lost, It's water weight from going low on carbs.
But, when you do start to really ea them again, the water weight will return. Hence why low carb, unless under direction of a doctor, is a dumb idea.
Carbs don't make you fat, eating too much is what makes people fat.
She never explicitly stated either of those two things, so you are assuming she believes those things. How is your reading comprehension?
Low carb is definitely not dumb. If one wants to not eat carbs so that it helps them stay in a deficit, then the one that does low carb actually comes out looking pretty smart if it works for them. But you, sir/madam, come off as an ignorant *kitten* for saying it is dumb. Everyone has their reasons and strategy for achieving the same goal.
Btw...what does water weight have to do with losing weight by burning fat? Your logic dictates that since the water weight is a big factor in what makes this strategy dumb, it will be unsuccessful. So, please explain to me the correlation(s).
isn't it a little early to start trolling folks?
Since when is intelligent conversation considered trolling? I came here for information, but the first response says "it is dumb, dont do it (except with doctor)" So, I am just looking for the reasons.
Yes, I will never ask questions again...0 -
RockstarWilson wrote: »martyqueen52 wrote: »It's not fat you've lost, It's water weight from going low on carbs.
But, when you do start to really ea them again, the water weight will return. Hence why low carb, unless under direction of a doctor, is a dumb idea.
Carbs don't make you fat, eating too much is what makes people fat.
She never explicitly stated either of those two things, so you are assuming she believes those things. How is your reading comprehension?
Low carb is definitely not dumb. If one wants to not eat carbs so that it helps them stay in a deficit, then the one that does low carb actually comes out looking pretty smart if it works for them. But you, sir/madam, come off as an ignorant *kitten* for saying it is dumb. Everyone has their reasons and strategy for achieving the same goal.
Btw...what does water weight have to do with losing weight by burning fat? Your logic dictates that since the water weight is a big factor in what makes this strategy dumb, it will be unsuccessful. So, please explain to me the correlation(s).
You're right, she never did, but, when losing 4lbs. in seven days is stated, it's blatantly obvious. No comprehension needed, it's common science of water loss. How is your general knowledge on nutrition?
That's your PO that low carb isn't dumb, as is mine, to as it IS dumb. I guess you can't take PO's very well, or you're not very intellectual in arguing without name calling, like you did.
And that's right, I am an *kitten*.... and there's nothing you can, could, or ever will do about it. So enjoy it with a smile.
Last point, reference her first comment, and mine. Not even going to try to explain the underlying keynotes to it.
I'm curious as to what names you're going to call me next, kid.0 -
RockstarWilson wrote: »
Work on that, and you won't get called out.RockstarWilson wrote: »RockstarWilson wrote: »martyqueen52 wrote: »It's not fat you've lost, It's water weight from going low on carbs.
But, when you do start to really ea them again, the water weight will return. Hence why low carb, unless under direction of a doctor, is a dumb idea.
Carbs don't make you fat, eating too much is what makes people fat.
She never explicitly stated either of those two things, so you are assuming she believes those things. How is your reading comprehension?
Low carb is definitely not dumb. If one wants to not eat carbs so that it helps them stay in a deficit, then the one that does low carb actually comes out looking pretty smart if it works for them. But you, sir/madam, come off as an ignorant *kitten* for saying it is dumb. Everyone has their reasons and strategy for achieving the same goal.
Btw...what does water weight have to do with losing weight by burning fat? Your logic dictates that since the water weight is a big factor in what makes this strategy dumb, it will be unsuccessful. So, please explain to me the correlation(s).
isn't it a little early to start trolling folks?
Since when is intelligent conversation considered trolling? I came here for information, but the first response says "it is dumb, dont do it (except with doctor)" So, I am just looking for the reasons.
Yes, I will never ask questions again...
You're making my point. >_<0 -
Low carb is a great option if it helps you decrease overall calories eaten. It isn't a dumb idea if its what works for you. You will gain water weight back, but not all you lose is water weight. If you eat at maintenance levels, you won't gain back fat.
74 g per day is somewhat low carb to me, as 20-30g is what I consider to be low carb. But to each their own, if its working for YOU then continue to do. If I eat low carb, I eat around 5%-10% of my calories from carbs (veggies, and some dairy). To me, an added benefit to dropping carbs is I feel less hungry.
Perfectly stated.
I think some other things stated above include the idea of whether this is temporary or permanent. I keep my carb count below 150 (net carb) each day - over the long run (which to me should be forever) that would constitute a permanent change.
Speaking generally, anything below 20 net carb is super low, 20-50 is optimal for weight loss, 50-100 is suboptimal, and 100-150 would be considered maintenance. Anything above this and you run the risks of what others state above including MelRC117.0 -
I'd also caution one thing about low carb, if you're doing a lot of high intensity workouts, you'll quickly run out of energy and poop out. You may need more carbs at that point.
Through trial and error you'd be able to find a peak and trough method of cycling carbs for your goals. That's something I'm planning an experiment on soon.0 -
I'd also caution one thing about low carb, if you're doing a lot of high intensity workouts, you'll quickly run out of energy and poop out. You may need more carbs at that point.
Through trial and error you'd be able to find a peak and trough method of cycling carbs for your goals. That's something I'm planning an experiment on soon.
nods.
low carb has an advantage of cutting out a huge portion of easily eaten high calorie foods- I lean "lowish"carb only because I don't have a lot of calories to play with and they take up so much room when I do eat them- but I mean anywhere from 100-200 g gets me through life on average in a reasonable manner.
BUT- you do need carbs- and it definitely helps to have carby snacks before long lifts- or intense workouts. trail and error is required.0 -
If you want intelligent answers to questions like this, ask them here:
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/group/394-low-carber-daily-forum-the-lcd-group
The main forums are filled with people who have a Dr Oz level of knowledge about low carb, and love to share it every chance they get. The helpful answers tend to get buried in all the BS out here.
Anything under 150 is low carb. When you get down to the 20-30 range you're dealing with keto, which is a much more regimented thing than simple low carb. For low carb to work, you must replace the missing carbs with fats, and you still have to be at a deficit in order to lose. While it's true a portion of that 4lbs is probably water, depending on how you were eating prior to starting, your continued losses will not be. You won't lose every week, it will fluctuate just like everyone else, but you should find you get hungry less often, and, if you eat at keto levels, you don't get what most people consider "hunger" ever. It's a different feeling of needing food, but it's not the insistent feeling most people talk about when they say they're hungry.0 -
oh ho ho, someone got salty.
Are people just in a bad mood because it's a beautiful monday?0 -
Rainy in the desert, so it is delightful! And I apologize about the name calling, but I still am curious about the reasons for your opinion, mcfly :-).
And my knowledge on nutrition is laughable compared to doctors, but moderate to fairly well in the laymen crowd. I am usually in NK when I stick to a ketogenic diet, using beta-ketones as a yardstick. It does help me stick to a calorie deficit better, which in turn helps me with weight loss.0 -
oh ho ho, someone got salty.
Are people just in a bad mood because it's a beautiful monday?
Just curious why the people who don't like LC go out of their way to hijack every LC question they see. You don't see other people doing that to questions about lifting or 5:2 or IIFYM. What's with the obsession?0 -
Going as low carb as you can may be helpful.
http://annals.org/article.aspx?articleid=717451
However, as dbmata said, if you are doing lots of high intensity stuff, you wouldn't want to lower your cab intake too too much. In that instance, cellular (whole food) carb choices would be the best alternative (as per the article I posted on an earlier thread today)0 -
"I'm sorry about name calling, but I'm going to do it again."RockstarWilson wrote: »Rainy in the desert, so it is delightful! And I apologize about the name calling, but I still am curious about the reasons for your opinion, mcfly :-).
Nice. Very nice.
0 -
Why does this hurt you so?oh ho ho, someone got salty.
Are people just in a bad mood because it's a beautiful monday?
Just curious why the people who don't like LC go out of their way to hijack every LC question they see. You don't see other people doing that to questions about lifting or 5:2 or IIFYM. What's with the obsession?
0 -
"I'm sorry about name calling, but I'm going to do it again."RockstarWilson wrote: »Rainy in the desert, so it is delightful! And I apologize about the name calling, but I still am curious about the reasons for your opinion, mcfly :-).
Nice. Very nice.
Went from insulting and...heavy...to light and humorous while still apologizing, no pun intended.0 -
Why does this hurt you so?oh ho ho, someone got salty.
Are people just in a bad mood because it's a beautiful monday?
Just curious why the people who don't like LC go out of their way to hijack every LC question they see. You don't see other people doing that to questions about lifting or 5:2 or IIFYM. What's with the obsession?
Because it's more likely they're going to make someone sick than help them. Is there some magic spell, every time 3 people succeed on low carb, they gain a pound? The question is, why does it hurt them so much? Maybe they're Cybermen, and can't deal with anyone being different?0 -
maybe what none of us says really matters?
Why does this hurt you so?oh ho ho, someone got salty.
Are people just in a bad mood because it's a beautiful monday?
Just curious why the people who don't like LC go out of their way to hijack every LC question they see. You don't see other people doing that to questions about lifting or 5:2 or IIFYM. What's with the obsession?
Because it's more likely they're going to make someone sick than help them. Is there some magic spell, every time 3 people succeed on low carb, they gain a pound? The question is, why does it hurt them so much? Maybe they're Cybermen, and can't deal with anyone being different?
maybe some are adherents of the one true way, and others are adherents of the other true way, while some others are just adherents of the isolated whey.
Maybe it's just all opinion, and doesn't matter with solid quantitative data showing proof of performance?
and other times, there is no spoon.
0 -
Wow. What is wrong? Why so negative. Asking for the opinion on what "low carb numbers should be" doesn't mean go off on whether or not it works. We are all stating our opinions not facts. I have done low carb before lost 40lbs in 30 days. It was very strict, under 20grams. I couldn't have lost 40lbs of water. But I went back to eating fast food and lots of it. I gained all 40 back and then some. This time I'm doing lower carb, meaning under 100, aiming for 70g, and getting them from veggies fruit eggs meat. I try to eat only whole grains in moderation, once a day. In MY opinion eating healthy fats are fine, just keep it all in balance under 1400 calories, and aim for 1200 if you are a female. I have lost 14.6 lbs in 20 days doing this, so it's working for me. Play around with your numbers to see what works best for you is my advice.0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2nXGPZaTKikThis discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 424 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions