Low carb dieters!
Options
Replies
-
neanderthin wrote: »
Science seems to support satiety for lower carb. Personally I don't see a problem in selecting foods that promote satiety as a weight loss solution. Saying that, going to an extreme is for the most part not necessary for satiety to kick in for most people. For me it was and still is in the 20-25% range and when I did try going really low, life wasn't worth living and it didn't make any difference in my ad labitum eating anyway.Man this gets old. Low carb diets TEND (but not necessarily WILL) to put people in a deficit. Its just a smaller deficit with more satisfaction and less hunger. Its still CICO, not sure why everyone argues about it. OP, seriously, if you truly want ideas and suggestions from people who have done it successfully, use the link and come find the low carb group. You are never going to win this argument. Ever.
The only people arguing are the low carbers saying it is not CICO...
I thought she was saying what low carb is what works for her over straight calorie counting. I know I saw that in several of her posts, I may have missed the one where she said CICO doesn't work. And the low carbers rarely ever argue because most of the veterans are tired of beating their heads against a stone wall and the newbies get chased off. But by all means continue to argue away. I'm just saying it gets really old.
She has clearly stated several times that she wasn't losing weight while tracking and being in a "calorie restriction diet" but when she started eating low carb she actually increased her calories overall and started losing weight. And with all that she said she doesn't track her food but then that she does, then that she doesn't and finally that she doesn't because this site tracks it for her.Man this gets old. Low carb diets TEND (but not necessarily WILL) to put people in a deficit. Its just a smaller deficit with more satisfaction and less hunger. Its still CICO, not sure why everyone argues about it. OP, seriously, if you truly want ideas and suggestions from people who have done it successfully, use the link and come find the low carb group. You are never going to win this argument. Ever.
the only one arguing it is not CICO is the OP ...
And the only ones that ever START the argument are the ones who don't eat low carb, and always when the OP has asked for advice from others following the same WOE. OP may not have articulated her point well, I can concede that. It doesn't negate the fact that non-low carbers jumped in to tell her how wrong she is when she specifically asked for low carb advice. I am not a heavy lifter, therefore I don't go into threads asking for advice on heavy lifting and start handing it out. I also don't go in there telling them that heavy lifting is all wrong and they should be doing, I don't know, yoga or something. Its the same concept. If you don't do low carb, why are you in a thread written by someone asking for low carb advice?
The arguments start when the non low carbers clarify why said low carb diet is working. Low carbers generally do not like to hear low carb works due to CICO...
The argument starts because people who don't eat low carb feel the need to give advice to those who do. I don't go into heavy lifting threads and demand someone tell me the exact science and terminology of lifting (please don't, I really don't care) and then argue that they have it all wrong. Why? I don't currently lift, I don't have much experience to speak about, and I haven't studied it. Therefore I leave it to those who do have experience and have studied it to hand out advice. It would be nice if the low carb WOE were given this same respect.
See the difference there is that if you did decide to do that we can actually respond with the science of why and how it works. Why? Because the science is a fact. We know how the musculoskeletal system works. If you argue the points we make we can rebut with actual science. In these low carb threads the information given to back up some wild claims are usually from biased websites or blogs and not actual science to say they are right and we are wrong. If you're going to sit here and make claims like the OP asks that make no sense, we have the right to question it
Yes, and I've clearly stated several times now that she was wrong to argue. My point is this whole thing started AFTER non-low carbers jumped in to give advice she wasn't asking for. We are now several pages into this thread and those doing most of the debating have yet to offer her any ideas or recipes.
Her is the thing, we all have choices. The OP had the choice to start this thread and all members have a choice as to what they will comment. Neither you nor I have control over that. The OP could have chosen to ignore the people that criticized her but instead she chose to engage them while making some pretty outlandish claims.
At that point we get to a crossroad (and I will include myself in the group), we will combat those claims and debate the actual science of all this because that's what we do, it's our choice. The OP chose to rebut or science with more claims and saying we don't understand anything. Then it goes in circles. Everyone chose to engage. Then comes you, you chose to intervene and complain about what is going on in the thread even though we all chose to participate on our own. Instead of saying to yourself that it wasn't worth it you decided to defend the OP because you felt it was your duty. You chose to do that. But you didn't have to.
Now, here we are, at another crossroad, do you continue to engage or do you say to yourself that we aren't worth your effort? Either way the forum will continue and the battle between good and evil who rage on forever.
I think I'll continue to engage, thanks. Feel free to ignore me if I hit a nerve.
Nope, you don't posses the ability to strike my nerves. So if you've decided to keep engaging then you might want to stop crying about what other people post.
Pot meet kettle. If you don't don't like my posts feel free to disengage yourself. I'm going to continue to stick up for low carbers so get used to it or get over it.
Low carbers unite!!!
so you are sticking up for the pseudo science low carbers then like the OP …got ya...
oh I here you ..
I am talking about OP's claims..that she did not calorie restrict and ONLY lost weight on low carb ..and that if she ate 1200 regular carb and 1200 low carb she only lost on 1200 low carb, and on and on …..
if you want to have fun read through pages one through five….
Oh, but she did lose weight on low calories. I think 3 pounds in a month? Taking into account probable inaccurate logging that's probably exactly how much should be expected, but it wasn't as fast as she hoped. So she went on low carb, lost a bunch of water and went "See? I told you!"
That's my interpretation.0 -
stevencloser wrote: »neanderthin wrote: »
Science seems to support satiety for lower carb. Personally I don't see a problem in selecting foods that promote satiety as a weight loss solution. Saying that, going to an extreme is for the most part not necessary for satiety to kick in for most people. For me it was and still is in the 20-25% range and when I did try going really low, life wasn't worth living and it didn't make any difference in my ad labitum eating anyway.Man this gets old. Low carb diets TEND (but not necessarily WILL) to put people in a deficit. Its just a smaller deficit with more satisfaction and less hunger. Its still CICO, not sure why everyone argues about it. OP, seriously, if you truly want ideas and suggestions from people who have done it successfully, use the link and come find the low carb group. You are never going to win this argument. Ever.
The only people arguing are the low carbers saying it is not CICO...
I thought she was saying what low carb is what works for her over straight calorie counting. I know I saw that in several of her posts, I may have missed the one where she said CICO doesn't work. And the low carbers rarely ever argue because most of the veterans are tired of beating their heads against a stone wall and the newbies get chased off. But by all means continue to argue away. I'm just saying it gets really old.
She has clearly stated several times that she wasn't losing weight while tracking and being in a "calorie restriction diet" but when she started eating low carb she actually increased her calories overall and started losing weight. And with all that she said she doesn't track her food but then that she does, then that she doesn't and finally that she doesn't because this site tracks it for her.Man this gets old. Low carb diets TEND (but not necessarily WILL) to put people in a deficit. Its just a smaller deficit with more satisfaction and less hunger. Its still CICO, not sure why everyone argues about it. OP, seriously, if you truly want ideas and suggestions from people who have done it successfully, use the link and come find the low carb group. You are never going to win this argument. Ever.
the only one arguing it is not CICO is the OP ...
And the only ones that ever START the argument are the ones who don't eat low carb, and always when the OP has asked for advice from others following the same WOE. OP may not have articulated her point well, I can concede that. It doesn't negate the fact that non-low carbers jumped in to tell her how wrong she is when she specifically asked for low carb advice. I am not a heavy lifter, therefore I don't go into threads asking for advice on heavy lifting and start handing it out. I also don't go in there telling them that heavy lifting is all wrong and they should be doing, I don't know, yoga or something. Its the same concept. If you don't do low carb, why are you in a thread written by someone asking for low carb advice?
The arguments start when the non low carbers clarify why said low carb diet is working. Low carbers generally do not like to hear low carb works due to CICO...
The argument starts because people who don't eat low carb feel the need to give advice to those who do. I don't go into heavy lifting threads and demand someone tell me the exact science and terminology of lifting (please don't, I really don't care) and then argue that they have it all wrong. Why? I don't currently lift, I don't have much experience to speak about, and I haven't studied it. Therefore I leave it to those who do have experience and have studied it to hand out advice. It would be nice if the low carb WOE were given this same respect.
See the difference there is that if you did decide to do that we can actually respond with the science of why and how it works. Why? Because the science is a fact. We know how the musculoskeletal system works. If you argue the points we make we can rebut with actual science. In these low carb threads the information given to back up some wild claims are usually from biased websites or blogs and not actual science to say they are right and we are wrong. If you're going to sit here and make claims like the OP asks that make no sense, we have the right to question it
Yes, and I've clearly stated several times now that she was wrong to argue. My point is this whole thing started AFTER non-low carbers jumped in to give advice she wasn't asking for. We are now several pages into this thread and those doing most of the debating have yet to offer her any ideas or recipes.
Her is the thing, we all have choices. The OP had the choice to start this thread and all members have a choice as to what they will comment. Neither you nor I have control over that. The OP could have chosen to ignore the people that criticized her but instead she chose to engage them while making some pretty outlandish claims.
At that point we get to a crossroad (and I will include myself in the group), we will combat those claims and debate the actual science of all this because that's what we do, it's our choice. The OP chose to rebut or science with more claims and saying we don't understand anything. Then it goes in circles. Everyone chose to engage. Then comes you, you chose to intervene and complain about what is going on in the thread even though we all chose to participate on our own. Instead of saying to yourself that it wasn't worth it you decided to defend the OP because you felt it was your duty. You chose to do that. But you didn't have to.
Now, here we are, at another crossroad, do you continue to engage or do you say to yourself that we aren't worth your effort? Either way the forum will continue and the battle between good and evil who rage on forever.
I think I'll continue to engage, thanks. Feel free to ignore me if I hit a nerve.
Nope, you don't posses the ability to strike my nerves. So if you've decided to keep engaging then you might want to stop crying about what other people post.
Pot meet kettle. If you don't don't like my posts feel free to disengage yourself. I'm going to continue to stick up for low carbers so get used to it or get over it.
Low carbers unite!!!
so you are sticking up for the pseudo science low carbers then like the OP …got ya...
oh I here you ..
I am talking about OP's claims..that she did not calorie restrict and ONLY lost weight on low carb ..and that if she ate 1200 regular carb and 1200 low carb she only lost on 1200 low carb, and on and on …..
if you want to have fun read through pages one through five….
Oh, but she did lose weight on low calories. I think 3 pounds in a month? Taking into account probable inaccurate logging that's probably exactly how much should be expected, but it wasn't as fast as she hoped. So she went on low carb, lost a bunch of water and went "See? I told you!"
That's my interpretation.
Agreed. Three lbs a month for someone with only 30 lbs to lose and who was likely not logging accurately is pretty good. I would've been proud of that loss!0 -
I'm doing Keto which is high fat/medium protein/ very low carbs. I also strive for 70%F 25%P 5%C. Also saturated fats are not the enemy we once believed. There is so much research out there on this! Saturated fats help regulate hormonal systems and your mind (which is mostly made of fat lol). So a type II diabetic, celiacs suffer, PCOS having, with some clinical depression thrown in person like me really thrives on this diet. I have honestly never felt better, had better blood work, and have had my depression so stable in my entire adult life. I really find it miraculous for me! Also due to the high fat content I eat less naturally, I'm just not as hungry. Try it for a month and see how you're doing. I love it!
How can I find out more on this diet?0 -
Low carb diet did not work for me at all. We are all different. Going vegetarian/vegan has made all the difference for me. Good luck.0
-
And you see 1000-1200 calories as something other than low calorie dieting? Funny!jennibean40 wrote: »Im so glad low calorie dieting works for you dear. @ndj1979
0 -
I'm not really on a low-carb diet as I'm still losing weight and I've been eating a normal amount of carbs for my age and activity level. I believe if you don't eat alot of carbs, you will lose weight but also muscle.0
-
Well this was a fun read.
I low carbed after reading Atkin's book back in the '90's. After my initial water weight whoosh, I lost weight at a reasonable rate, but only to a certain point. The scale just wouldn't move any lower. All together, I only lost about 10 pounds, and I gave up and switched to paleo. I still didn't lose any more weight.
The whole problem I had at the time was that I was not counting calories. Atkins didn't stress the importance of them enough in his book, in my opinion.
I've changed my diet since those days. I'm a moderate carb vegetarian. My energy flags if my carbs get either too high or too low. I'm menopausal and have medical conditions that could make it harder to lose weight. And yet, I'm losing weight just fine simply be being very accurate with my intake--using a food scale, measuring all liquids and verifying all data base entries I choose--so that I have a good assessment of how many calories I'm consuming.
Low-carbing, if it works for you, that's great. But nothing circumvents that fact that it's all about how many calories you take in vs. how many calories you expend. CICO will always work, no matter which way of eating you choose.0 -
yelandaking713 wrote: »I'm doing Keto which is high fat/medium protein/ very low carbs. I also strive for 70%F 25%P 5%C. Also saturated fats are not the enemy we once believed. There is so much research out there on this! Saturated fats help regulate hormonal systems and your mind (which is mostly made of fat lol). So a type II diabetic, celiacs suffer, PCOS having, with some clinical depression thrown in person like me really thrives on this diet. I have honestly never felt better, had better blood work, and have had my depression so stable in my entire adult life. I really find it miraculous for me! Also due to the high fat content I eat less naturally, I'm just not as hungry. Try it for a month and see how you're doing. I love it!
How can I find out more on this diet?
http://www.reddit.com/r/keto/wiki/faq0 -
I'm jumping in on the discussion for the hell of it. I feel like I have finally gotten in tune with my body.
I've lost 39 lbs since Feb 3 (278 > 238) and I can't imagine that is all water weight. There have been only 3 times I brought my carbs greater than 20g in one day. Truth be told, weeks 2 & 3 were really hard for me while my body was transitioning from glucose to ketones as a primary source, but after that I have had zero issues with fatigue. I've had more energy than I know what to do with actually.
While I wouldn't recommend a ketogenic diet for most people, it has help me lower my blood sugar, cholesterol, LDL and triglycerides. My A1C has gone from a 9.4% down to 5.4% so I must be doing something right. I have plenty of calories, but I eat when I am hungry so sometimes I don't eat at all. There's probably only one day out of the week I go over my calorie limit, but even at a deficit I have plenty of energy that I used to need carbs for. Most of my training is done in a fasted state and I continue to improve my running and strength every time.
Here's the thing though, while I can imagine myself continuing this forever, at some point there won't be a need to. Once I get down to my goal weight I imagine I will slowly introduce more carbs back into my diet. As I continue to lose weight I will keep changing my macros as needed. Right now it is 70% fat, 25% protein, and 5% carbs.
Again, this is something that seems to have worked for me and that's all that matters. If you try to push a high carb diet on me it will be a lost cause because I don't want to risk diabetes again. It's just not worth it to me.
Good luck to everyone on finding a diet that works for them!0 -
Can someone please give me back the 30 minutes I wasted reading this 2wat of a thread?? Thanks for nothing.0
-
-
40 lbs in 1 month? ^^^^ How many calories are you eating daily?
Here's my net calories under weekly goal (1600 calories) for the first 4 weeks. I also fast for 24 hours once a week on Monday or Tuesday.
Week 1 - 6428 (I started with a 3 day fast so it was really low.)
Week 2 - 800
Week 3 - 4885 (began running this week)
Week 4 - 13610 -
jennibean40 wrote: »The best way ive found to drop lbs without pills or starving! Anyone else use this method? Interested in ideas, recipes, and success stories!
Same here.
I've found low carb an excellent dieting tool and for me it's the ideal food choice.
A decent go-to low carb meal is chilli!!
To add to this standard low carb thread - with the extreme views it gets from both the for and against!
Low carb is a fantastic dieting tool, works great for millions. On the flip it also doesn't work great for millions of others.
Just like calorie counting or limiting calorie intake of all food groups (i.e. Moderation), it has its pros and it has it cons.
If you're not that big into bread, cereal or pasta style foods, you'll probably like low carb and find it incredibly sustainable.
If you feel not eating those types of food will be a struggle, then move on by, low carb probably will not work for you.
Point being, it's healthy (as healthy as any other diet) and for people like me, who find calorie counting (logging food and having to stop eating when I'm still hungry) in general - is like hell on earth.
LC is extraordinarily easy and satisfying (for me).0 -
I am diabetic and chose to maintain a reduced carb diet, about 60g Carbs/Day. This keeps my blood sugar levels under control. Along with a 1200 calorie diet I've lost a considerable amount of weight. Low carb can be great but don't eliminate them. Do what works for you
0 -
40 lbs in 1 month? ^^^^ How many calories are you eating daily?
Here's my net calories under weekly goal (1600 calories) for the first 4 weeks. I also fast for 24 hours once a week on Monday or Tuesday.
Week 1 - 6428 (I started with a 3 day fast so it was really low.)
Week 2 - 800
Week 3 - 4885 (began running this week)
Week 4 - 1361
Assuming those calorie counts are 100% accurate...that works out to about 3 lbs of fat loss. Where did the other 36 go?0 -
ceoverturf wrote: »40 lbs in 1 month? ^^^^ How many calories are you eating daily?
Here's my net calories under weekly goal (1600 calories) for the first 4 weeks. I also fast for 24 hours once a week on Monday or Tuesday.
Week 1 - 6428 (I started with a 3 day fast so it was really low.)
Week 2 - 800
Week 3 - 4885 (began running this week)
Week 4 - 1361
Assuming those calorie counts are 100% accurate...that works out to about 3 lbs of fat loss. Where did the other 36 go?
I think we are missing the possibility of a lost limb!!!0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 402 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
- 998 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions