We need a "Pro Calorie Counting" thread/discussion
FIT_Goat
Posts: 4,224 Member
With the recent changes to the Launchpad, I have also added a link to the "Anti" Counting Calories thread... as well as a place-holder for the "Pro" Counting Calories thread. I'm hoping someone else will step up and write a thread about why we should still count calories on low-carb. I'm obviously not that person. I fear my bias would show through.
If any, or all, of those are true then please post your best "pro counting" arguments in this thread. Please make it as complete as possible. I would prefer if you try and include the best stuff from previous posts. But, in the end, I (or some other moderator) will likely go through this thread and pull out the greasy good bits to make one mega-post to be my counterpoint.
This is open to all members of this group. You don't need to be a mod/leader/old-hat/keto/etc. If you think you have something to add, please have your say.
I rather expect that the combination of all of your information and arguments will be impressive enough to put my original thread to shame (and cause me to go back and rewrite it as one better post).
So, this thread is open... go to town. Make me cry for mercy!
Edit: If, on the other hand, you want to argue against counting and help me improve that thread, then go over to Doesn't-Counting-Calories-Count and respond to that thread. I'll eventually go through that and pull all the anti-counting points, references, and stuff into a better and single original post. Then both of these will become their own reference posts, not open threads.
- Did you read my anti-counting thread and want to argue about how wrong I am?
- Do you know a lot (or something at all) about when/why counting and actively tracking calories is important for low carb?
- Are you someone who feel the compulsive need to weigh everything?
- Have you ever weighed your bacon raw, then subtracted the amount of fat you poured off, to make sure you have the most accurate possible count? [BTW: I am guilty of this myself]
- Do you just want to make sure that both sides of the argument are presented?
If any, or all, of those are true then please post your best "pro counting" arguments in this thread. Please make it as complete as possible. I would prefer if you try and include the best stuff from previous posts. But, in the end, I (or some other moderator) will likely go through this thread and pull out the greasy good bits to make one mega-post to be my counterpoint.
This is open to all members of this group. You don't need to be a mod/leader/old-hat/keto/etc. If you think you have something to add, please have your say.
I rather expect that the combination of all of your information and arguments will be impressive enough to put my original thread to shame (and cause me to go back and rewrite it as one better post).
So, this thread is open... go to town. Make me cry for mercy!
Edit: If, on the other hand, you want to argue against counting and help me improve that thread, then go over to Doesn't-Counting-Calories-Count and respond to that thread. I'll eventually go through that and pull all the anti-counting points, references, and stuff into a better and single original post. Then both of these will become their own reference posts, not open threads.
3
Replies
-
Why to count calories on a low-carb diet:
1) That's why we're here on MFP -- to count stuff.
2) Counting keeps us mindful of what we're eating.
3) Low-carb doesn't necessarily mean high satiety. Satiety is complex, and low-carb diets may lose their satiety power with time according to studies.
4) Many of the healthful effects of a low-carb diet may be due to calorie deficits, so know your calories.
5) Some of us just like to count.
6) Especially me.
edited for even more:
7) Fat is calorie-dense, and as you fall off the low-carb wagon, you may doom yourself with high calories. Counting will help keep you in caloric check.
8) If we eat too much, we may want to exercise to burn off some of those extra calories. Counting gives you an estimate for how much to punish yourself.6 -
Why to count calories on a low-carb diet:
1) That's why we're here on MFP -- to count stuff.
2) Counting keeps us mindful of what we're eating.
3) Low-carb doesn't necessarily mean high satiety. Satiety is complex, and low-carb diets may lose their satiety power with time according to studies.
4) Many of the healthful effects of a low-carb diet may be due to calorie deficits, so know your calories.
5) Some of us just like to count.
6) Especially me.
edited for even more:
7) Fat is calorie-dense, and as you fall off the low-carb wagon, you may doom yourself with high calories. Counting will help keep you in caloric check.
8) If we eat too much, we may want to exercise to burn off some of those extra calories. Counting gives you an estimate for how much to punish yourself.
I wish i could get away with not counting but i cant. I would eat all the fat bombs because they are good and not realize that i was burstingly full till it was too late. I have to count to keep myself in a deficit.
Plus I have PCOS and IR so my bmr is lower than a normal woman with my stats, so keeping my calories lowish while doing keto/LCHF is essential.
Then again, I am not at the Fit_Goat level of LCHF and if I was, i might be able to not count also. Im so jelly of him atm
0 -
I hope the count weighed his apples - if he just wrote "3 apples" in his diary I'm going to be so pissed.
7 -
I hope the count weighed his apples - if he just wrote "3 apples" in his diary I'm going to be so pissed.
haha I just spit water at the computer, count just counts, weighing is for chumps
Or you could do it the Cookie Monster way, shovel it all in and just hope most of it misses3 -
Disclaimer: I just took my meds, and I may stop making sense along the way here. If that happens, I'll fix it in the morning
I have gained a lot of weight on LC. Some of it is health related, but not all of it. There's no fluid retention in my upper body, and I'm up 4 shirt sizes from my normal weight.
I wasn't eating too many carbs, or having big binges and trying to make up for them later. It was as simple as having a serious medical complication and no insurance. As I became more pre-occupied with the combined illness and stress, I became less concerned with tracking. I should probably also mention that at this point, I literally don't get hungry. If I go way too long without eating, I'll start to feel shaky or dizzy, but I never get the usual growling stomach, light discomfort, or other symptoms that used to come with being hungry. It is entirely up to me how much or when I eat.
When I got back to weighing and logging again in November, I was actually lower on carbs than I thought, but almost half again where I should be in fats. It didn't take a whole lot to get there - 2 coffees instead of one, grabbing whatever butter the knife took instead of weighing, pouring oil straight in the pan instead of measuring, making whipped cream with a random pour instead of 2T. I was still eating until I felt the start of fullness, and didn't always clean my plate, but all those little things added up to a lot of damage over several years. For the first time in my entire life (and I used to weight 500 at one point), I got a high bp reading, and that's what it took to get me back on track. I'd simultaneously managed to keep myself in full keto while gaining a lot more weight than I have any business trying to juggle when my circulation is such a risk factor.
My TL;DR: while LC or keto may keep you in a deficit automatically, there's no guarantee it will. If you have health complications, there are even more variables that can change it, including the plain day to day worry of dealing with those complications. The LC/keto community inherently has a higher percentage of people with health issues than other WOE, so it's even less realistic to make any kind of assumptions about how it will work for "most" people. We don't really have a "most" to begin with.0 -
For those of us with a specific timeline (mine is given by a doctor based on when I want to get pregnant), I need to lose consistently, tracking calories makes that a more attainable fact.
Health issues complicate matters for many of us. Counting calories when your metabolism isn't quite right is more crucial.
While we are not perfect machines, we are walking bags of chemistry. Reactants=Products. X amount of calories=Y amount of work the body is able to do. I want my body to do work, I need to eat adequately.
And the real reason I count calories: WHY NOT?? I am a geek, I like data, I like graphs, I speak the language that is biology and mathematics and I probably know more about how the body works than I should.
It's a goal, I like goals, I like meeting and beating them.
Not counting them when they are right there seems rather pointless, and I want to know how and with what I'm fueling my body. It's important to me.1 -
I count because:
1) I like data
2) as my stomach shrinks it takes less to fill it and I found my self only eating less than 1000 calories a day (which is not healthy in anyones book)
3) I count to make sure that I am at least eating my BMR after exercise is acocunted for. There are days when I have to find high calorie foods at 8:00 PM because I'm so low.0 -
I count because...
After a lifetime (47 of my 58 years) of food abuse I have absolutely no idea how much is 'right' to eat. Sometimes I just don't want food at all, other times I remember my initial information on LCHF that you can eat anything you please as long as it's high healthy fats, and that sure as heck didn't work for me!
I'm post-menopausal and *everything* that I've read (including doctors and professors), as well as my own person experience points to the fact that my weight will not drop unless I do count. Even on 1600 calories a day (I'm 5' 5", very solid muscular build, and jog and run on the treadmill regularly) I didn't lose an ounce. 1450 calories a day (as long as I don't go over my macros on either fat or protein) will produce a slow loss.
I'm still new to LCHF so I watch my macros and calories to make sure I'm staying within keto guidelines too. If I don't weigh, measure and record I never reach any of my goals correctly.5 -
I started low carbing about 3 years ago following a programme which didn't involve any counting, weighing or measuring, just eating low carb foods. It didn't work for me, I made my portions too large and ate too much dairy. I didn't lose a thing.
I re-started on Atkins on 5th Jan this year following their portion size recommendations and counting calories and carbs on here. I've lost just over a stone to date (or 16lbs for an American translation )
A bit like GrannyMay, I need some sort of portion control because my natural sense of how much to eat is completely out of whack. Fit Goat, from your profile pic you look like a young man and have the metabolism that brings, as a 43 year old women I have to be much more careful and pay careful attention to how much I'm eating. I'm keeping a wary eye on the 50+ thread on here for an idea of what's round the corner for me.2 -
DissLocated wrote: »I<snip>I'm keeping a wary eye on the 50+ thread on here for an idea of what's round the corner for me.
You're very welcome to join that thread if you feel an affinity DL
0 -
Thanks GrannyMay!0
-
JPW I also have trouble with actual hunger signals. I think it's part diabetes and part eating on a schedule for so many years. Diabetics are told to eat at certain times everyday. This helps keep sugars level but it also messes up the bodies natural signals, at least for me. I do feel hungry but it'll be like one minute I'm fine and the next I'm tanking out and trying to eat everything in site. As much as I hate tracking, to say nothing of weighing and measuring, I think it's necessary. I just have to accept it.0
-
I just spit my coffee out! (Which had heavy cream in it, which I weighed...and counted)
0 -
In all seriousness though (or as serious as I can get)....if I don't count, I simply lose track. I take a lot of medications, and don't have the best memory as stupid as that sounds. If I don't log and keep track, I will forget about the fatbomb I ate this morning with my coffee, or as JPW said, two cups of coffee instead of one etc. I do think though, that once I have done some repair to my metabolism I may find my body will work itself out as to when to stop eating and maybe someday I won't have to weigh and log and measure so militantly. Wow, run on sentence, sorry. Basically I measure and log because without this tool I am too scatterbrained and I am still trying to figure out how many calories a day I actually need.0
-
When I noticed that Goat posted this, I had to come see. lol
I think tracking is an excellent way to learn what real healthy portion sizes are and to improve your ability to recognize them for when you are unable to track. For example, when my family goes camping, I am unable to track, but my weighting and tracking has helped me hone my ability to determine what amounts are suitable without my scale. I've yet to gain as a result.
Tracking also sets you up for good habits. As others have said, keeping mindful of what you put in your mouth. And it isn't out of the realm of possibility that you may one day be able to not have to track much, if at all, in maintenance. That is my personal goal. To be able to only track one week every month or two to keep my portion control radar current0 -
LOL, I am nothing if not fair. I might disagree with the need to count, but I want both sides presented as best as possible.
It might be best to include that ad libitum eating will obviously be hard/impossible for people who are trying to closely monitor more than just total carbs. If you're trying to hit a specific protein or fat macro, and/or really calculate net carbs, then you'll need to track for that. Obviously, I deny the importance of this, but that doesn't mean some people don't want to do it.0 -
LOL, I am nothing if not fair. I might disagree with the need to count, but I want both sides presented as best as possible.
It might be best to include that ad libitum eating will obviously be hard/impossible for people who are trying to closely monitor more than just total carbs. If you're trying to hit a specific protein or fat macro, and/or really calculate net carbs, then you'll need to track for that. Obviously, I deny the importance of this, but that doesn't mean some people don't want to do it.
You have to admit, that relates closely to the vegetable issue. A meatatarian is highly unlikely to ever go too high on carbs to begin with. If you eat them, though, you can't just wing it and assume you're low enough, especially if you're aiming for keto.1 -
Sounds like we've reached consensus. Update the no-counting thread to include the "for carnivores only" disclaimer. Mmmm, veggies.
0 -
LOL, I am nothing if not fair. I might disagree with the need to count, but I want both sides presented as best as possible.
It might be best to include that ad libitum eating will obviously be hard/impossible for people who are trying to closely monitor more than just total carbs. If you're trying to hit a specific protein or fat macro, and/or really calculate net carbs, then you'll need to track for that. Obviously, I deny the importance of this, but that doesn't mean some people don't want to do it.
You have to admit, that relates closely to the vegetable issue. A meatatarian is highly unlikely to ever go too high on carbs to begin with. If you eat them, though, you can't just wing it and assume you're low enough, especially if you're aiming for keto.
Just for the sake of Devil's Advocacy...
I've been doing keto for over 9 months, and I've been playing around a bit these last couple weeks. I find as long as I stick with leafy greens, green above-ground veggies, low-carb dairy, and no more than 2oz nuts daily, and keep carrots, onions, or tomatoes to an "occasional food," I have little trouble keeping the carbs in check. My habit system keeps itself. That's eating to satiety, mind you. Mine haven't gone over 40 once. Frequently I'm under 30g net carbs. I used to be a human vacuum cleaner when it came to food.
So, as with anything else, YMMV. It's perfectly doable to not track. IF. If you have good satiety cues and if your intake is of low-carb veggies. Once you sufficiently train yourself, it's possible to not count for some people.
I wouldn't adopt this behavior out of the gate, as it can be difficult to get in the swing of things. It's best, IMO-of course, to count carbs for a few weeks, then add other macros/cal counting. Then, when/if you feel comfortable, you can move away from that and not be so rigid in maintenance.
Just my observations, and everyone has my permission to disagree.
1 -
baconslave wrote: »LOL, I am nothing if not fair. I might disagree with the need to count, but I want both sides presented as best as possible.
It might be best to include that ad libitum eating will obviously be hard/impossible for people who are trying to closely monitor more than just total carbs. If you're trying to hit a specific protein or fat macro, and/or really calculate net carbs, then you'll need to track for that. Obviously, I deny the importance of this, but that doesn't mean some people don't want to do it.
You have to admit, that relates closely to the vegetable issue. A meatatarian is highly unlikely to ever go too high on carbs to begin with. If you eat them, though, you can't just wing it and assume you're low enough, especially if you're aiming for keto.
Just for the sake of Devil's Advocacy...
I've been doing keto for over 9 months, and I've been playing around a bit these last couple weeks. I find as long as I stick with leafy greens, green above-ground veggies, low-carb dairy, and no more than 2oz nuts daily, and keep carrots, onions, or tomatoes to an "occasional food," I have little trouble keeping the carbs in check. My habit system keeps itself. That's eating to satiety, mind you. Mine haven't gone over 40 once. Frequently I'm under 30g net carbs. I used to be a human vacuum cleaner when it came to food.
So, as with anything else, YMMV. It's perfectly doable to not track. IF. If you have good satiety cues and if your intake is of low-carb veggies. Once you sufficiently train yourself, it's possible to not count for some people.
I wouldn't adopt this behavior out of the gate, as it can be difficult to get in the swing of things. It's best, IMO-of course, to count carbs for a few weeks, then add other macros/cal counting. Then, when/if you feel comfortable, you can move away from that and not be so rigid in maintenance.
Just my observations, and everyone has my permission to disagree.
I think that's also a question of where your limit is. I try to stick to 22 or less. Most days (tracking) I hit around 18 or 20 and that sometimes means I have to choose either or, berries or celery, but not both. Other days, I have less of something else, and I do have room for both. 60 is my upper limit where I'm absolutely out of keto, but once I get towards the 30 and up range, that's when I start hitting those patches where I'm out for 4 hrs, back in at dinner. For me, personally, I prefer not to switch back all day, since it just seems like an inefficient use of my resources.
That's also another issue that can change at maintenance, although (see previous post), not tracking on maintenance for me is still dangerous.0 -
If you have good satiety cues
Perhaps it is enough for me to just reply to this and say "I don't, so I calorie count if I want to effectively lose weight," but I like to write a lot instead
At my worst, I would order whatever the "best deal" was at Dominos and honestly plan on spreading it out over 2 or 3 meals, say pizza + wings or 2 pizzas + wings + soda combos. Whatever it was I'd eat as much as possible at once. Despite a year of keto, despite losing 75 pounds on keto and 110 pounds from my max weight overall, I am still sort of that guy. I do not yet know what satiety is. If I choose to fast, I can, and I can go a good while without eating, no problems there. But if I buy a bag of pork rinds and choose to keep it near me in case I want a mid-day snack, the entire bag will be eaten at once. 800 calories instead of 100.
In similar fashion, all food put on my plate at all times will be eaten. I lose weight 100% by preperation. Now, after a full year on keto, do I need to log every calorie? No, I don't. But if I want effective weight loss on keto, I do still find I need to do that. Without it, I will have significantly more ups and downs. I can eyeball my food reasonably well, I'm not saying taht if I don't calorie count I'm going to gain 10 pounds in short order. But I will probably stall out or inch downwards at best, sometimes I inch upwards.
That's the difference for me with keto. I can still eat just as much as I used to when I was 100 pounds heavier. I still feel like I *want* to eat just as much many times. But, on keto if I don't calorie count I just stall or inch up/down depending. On a standard diet if I didn't calorie count I would rocket upwards. So the edge is still heavily in favor of low carb. The other thing is taht I said I "feel like I want to eat just as much". On a standard diet, with my blood sugar going crazy, I feel like I *must* eat or else.
I recognize that I am unable to spot "satisfied" as far as my range of hunger goes. That's something I should probably try to get some help with at some point. But right now, I have my way to manage it and its clearly working, and along with this weight loss I'm doing a ton of other "self help" type undertakings, so this is at the low end of the list.
As far as advice for new folks go... I feel like there are four sides to giving advice to new people:
1) Some experienced low carbers never counted calories and don't need to and hate the CICO dogma. To that group I would say that when giving advice remember that it is possible to eat too much on keto, and for some people not counting calories will hurt them.
2) Some experienced low carbers have a horrible relationship with food and feel the need to count (like me). To my group I would say to keep in mind that very many people have incredible success without counting calories. Don't forget that, don't preach calories to people who don't need it.
3) Many people new to low carb don't know anything but calorie counting, and approach low carb like any other diet. These people could benefit from hearing about the wonders of satiety on low carb diets and may find their lives greatly improved if they learn that they don't have to count everythign all the time.
4) Many people new to low carb have only heard bullet points from atkins. Including "you can eat all you want on low carb, you don't need to count!" These people need to be told that low carb isn't magic, you can still screw it up. That calories can and do matter if you go to an extreme in ignoring them you will not find the success you expect.1 -
Alright, let's see what we have so far. I'm going to try and break down the main arguments into bullet points. If you feel a point needs to be elaborated on, or I missed a point, let me know (or just type what you think should be said and tell me where to stick it).
There's still time, if people want to chime in. I am expected to let this discussion ride for just a bit before I sum it all up. I am going to title each blurb mostly from wabmester's outline, not because I think those are the best labels, but that is where I am starting when scrolling down the thread right now.
(my comments are in parentheses)- That's why we're here on MFP -- to count stuff.
This includes calories and macros. Some people just like to count.
WHY NOT?? I am a geek, I like data, I like graphs, I speak the language that is biology and mathematics
Not counting them when they are right there seems rather pointless, and I want to know how and with what I'm fueling my body. It's important to me.
I like data.
I watch my macros and calories to make sure I'm staying within keto guidelines - Counting keeps us mindful of what we're eating.
Eating without realizing it, snacking, boredom...
if I don't count, I simply lose track.
Tracking also sets you up for good habits. As others have said, keeping mindful of what you put in your mouth
if I buy a bag of pork rinds and choose to keep it near me in case I want a mid-day snack, the entire bag will be eaten at once - Low-carb doesn't guarantee you won't over-eat
Satiety is complex, and low-carb diets may lose their satiety power with time according to studies. (would love the studies)
while LC or keto may keep you in a deficit automatically, there's no guarantee it will
I started low carbing about 3 years ago following a programme which didn't involve any counting, weighing or measuring, just eating low carb foods. It didn't work for me, I made my portions too large and ate too much dairy. I didn't lose a thing.
Despite a year of keto, despite losing 75 pounds on keto and 110 pounds from my max weight overall, [. . .] I do not yet know what satiety is. - Many of the healthful effects of a low-carb diet may be due to calorie deficits, so know your calories.
** I think this one really is the same as it doesn't assure we don't over-eat. I would also love some references here (although we don't need them to let it stay).
- Fat is calorie-dense
If you're not tracking it is easy to over-eat fat and go over your calories. Counting will make you aware if that starts happening.
- We may want to exercise to burn off some of those extra calories
Counting gives you an estimate for how much to punish yourself. (Arg, this is a point I leave only with great deliberation. I think Taubes does a decent job of explaining why exercise does the opposite of helping us lose weight)
- Some foods that are technically allowed are easy to over-eat
I would eat all the fat bombs because they are good and not realize that i was burstingly full till it was too late.
- I have medical or emotional issues that make ad libitum eating less successful
I have PCOS and IR
having a serious medical complication and no insurance
The LC/keto community inherently has a higher percentage of people with health issues than other WOE
Counting calories when your metabolism isn't quite right is more crucial.
post-menopausal - I have a specific timeline and can't let my body decide on how quickly I lose
mine is given by a doctor based on when I want to get pregnant
wedding/special event
I like goals, I like meeting and beating them.
If I don't weigh, measure and record I never reach any of my goals correctly. - Low-Carb can be too satiating and I often under-eat accidentally
I found my self only eating less than 1000 calories a day
count to make sure that I am at least eating my BMR after exercise is accounted for
Sometimes I just don't want food at all
I also have trouble with actual hunger signals. - To help me realize what amount of food is "normal"
I have absolutely no idea how much is 'right' to eat
I need some sort of portion control because my natural sense of how much to eat is completely out of whack.
I am still trying to figure out how many calories a day I actually need.
I think tracking is an excellent way to learn what real healthy portion sizes are and to improve your ability to recognize them - Not counting only works if you eat no veggies
(I disagree, but this isn't my place to argue-Goat)
Sounds like we've reached consensus. Update the no-counting thread to include the "for carnivores only" disclaimer
relates closely to the vegetable issue. A meatatarian is highly unlikely to ever go too high on carbs to begin with. If you eat them, though, you can't just wing it and assume you're low enough, especially if you're aiming for keto.
sometimes means I have to choose either or, berries or celery, but not both.
I think that hits most of the points. Obviously, this needs some elaboration, cleaning up, and editing. radiii makes good points, but I feel like we're trying to address all of them by presenting both sides of the counting/not-counting argument as best as possible. It's why I refused to link to just my "anti-counting" post without having a "pro-counting" post in place to counter it.1 - That's why we're here on MFP -- to count stuff.
-
I mentioned the point about fat being calorie dense because LCHF trains you to increase your fat consumption, but what happens to your eating habits as you fall off of the LC aspect? If you stay HF-trained, you're in trouble.
Here's a study that looked at LC long term (3 years):
http://www.europeanreview.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/375.pdf
Conclusions: Favorable changes in leptin
that accompany weight loss are not sustained in
individuals who followed a low-carbohydrate diet
for one year. A low-carbohydrate diet had no
significant effect on insulin, adiponectin, TNF-alpha,
or CRP compared to a low-fat diet at 36
months.
Leptin is one of the hunger control hormones. High levels signal satiety, but high levels are also inflammatory. In general, leptin levels decline as you lose weight. This is your body telling you to eat more.
Regarding the point about health effects, most studies that show health effects on a LC diet have weight loss as a confounding factor. In isocaloric studies, low-fat diets showed similar improvement in health markers suggesting it's mostly about weight loss, not LC.2 -
Here's a study that looked at LC long term (3 years):
http://www.europeanreview.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/375.pdf
Regarding the point about health effects, most studies that show health effects on a LC diet have weight loss as a confounding factor. In isocaloric studies, low-fat diets showed similar improvement in health markers suggesting it's mostly about weight loss, not LC.
I have problems drawing conclusions from this study. While the people were counseled to have a <30 gram/day carbohydrate diet (and likely did for the earlier stages until they started regaining weight), there is an almost complete relapse by the 36 month mark.
At the 36 month mark, the "low-carb" group is averaging over 194 grams/day in carbs and it is making up 39% of their calories. Lower than the baseline and low-fat groups? Yes. But low enough to be considered low-carb? I don't think so. If anything, it could be demonstrated that failing to stay on a low-carb diet will cause a return to the levels observed before.
I think that's a bigger problem than counting, relapse. If you go back to eating carbs, you're obviously not going to be benefiting from low-carb anymore. You'll likely end up back to counting. Same with the argument about being trained to eat more fat being bad, contingent on a return to eating a high carb diet. Yes, eating high-fat and high-carb is likely to be the worst possible thing you can do. But, that's not something the happens because someone didn't count calories when doing a low-carb diet.1 -
You're right, but that's the problem with diets. Very few people stick with them, and I'm not aware of any studies that followed people who adhered to LC for years.
To me, that's an argument to continue logging. We need all the help we can get. 0 -
In isocaloric studies, low-fat diets showed similar improvement in health markers suggesting it's mostly about weight loss, not LC.
http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=205916Weight loss was greater for women in the Atkins diet group compared with the other diet groups at 12 months, and mean 12-month weight loss was significantly different between the Atkins and Zone diets (P<.05). Mean 12-month weight loss was as follows: Atkins, −4.7 kg (95% confidence interval [CI], −6.3 to −3.1 kg), Zone, −1.6 kg (95% CI, −2.8 to −0.4 kg), LEARN, −2.6 kg (−3.8 to −1.3 kg), and Ornish, −2.2 kg (−3.6 to −0.8 kg). Weight loss was not statistically different among the Zone, LEARN, and Ornish groups. At 12 months, secondary outcomes for the Atkins group were comparable with or more favorable than the other diet groups.
While this is not strictly iso-caloric, the reported calories for each of the groups was very similar. There's less than 100 calories difference between the Atkins group and the other groups at any specific point in time. The low carb group did lose more weight though. And they had similar or better secondary outcomes. So, again, it could be confounded with the weight loss. But, these were free-living women. They weren't perfectly compliant.
And, again, I am unhappy with the total amount of carbs considered low-carb. I don't think 34.5% or 138 grams/day on average really qualifies as "low-carb" but it's what the people actually ate when on their own. They started out averaging 61 grams a day, which is significantly better than where they eventually ended up. Long-term compliance is probably a much larger confounder than calorie counting.0 -
I personally think LC > LF, and I think the studies back that up. But I also think most of the beneficial health effects come from losing body fat, not because of the carb restriction. Any way you can lose body fat long term is a Good Thing.
The "metabolic repair" view of LCHF is interesting, but I'm not sure it's established science yet.
And even if LCHF had proven-beyond-a-doubt health benefits (which it seems to for a few things), I'm not sure it's a diet I could adhere to for the long term.1 -
You're right, but that's the problem with diets. Very few people stick with them, and I'm not aware of any studies that followed people who adhered to LC for years.
To me, that's an argument to continue logging. We need all the help we can get.
We may not have very many studies, but we do have people who have done low carb diets for years. We even have people who have done the stricter forms like ketogenic diets for over a decade. Then we have whole populations who exist on almost no carbs, and they have survived for generations.
It can be long term. That things go back to bad when people go back to their old habits, should be a given.1
