Carbs
amr32r
Posts: 245 Member
i am noticing anytime I go under 100 carbs I crash big time( even when my fat and protein are high) I'm thinking I shouldn't go under and cross my fingers and hope I can still lose weight ughhh
0
Replies
-
Good luck. I think that many people have to play around and see what level of carbs work for them.0
-
You can definitely lose weight on 100 or more a day, just keep an eye on your calories and you'll be fine.
What you are experiencing when you go below 100 is likely low blood sugar as your body hasn't adjusted the amount of insulin it's pumping out (do you have insulin resistance?)
It takes some time for your body to adjust to the lower carb level. In the beginning I had some issues as well but after a few weeks have adapted.0 -
That's not uncommon. Sometimes you can get in a sort of in between place where your carbs aren't low enough to really use fat freely for energy but at the same time you're restricting carbs so you're not getting as much energy as you need from them either. Give it long enough and you'll adjust but there is no need to -- stick to your calorie goal and I'm sure you'll do just fine. Best wishes.
0 -
I will open the sticky subject of sugar
If you are getting plant based carbs, for me they are very easy in my energy levels. No highs or crashes
Sugar has a typical spike and crash. It isn't a myth. Some have it more than others. Kids can go bonkers on a sugar high! Ask any mom!!
Just a question and maybe it is a certain kind of food.0 -
@Alabasaterverve....that sounds more like a CICO stance than a low carber??!!0
-
Whats CICO, Jumana? I keep hearing it mentioned. Is it a type of diet?0
-
calories in calories out. The old style of dieting where you are starving all the time
0 -
CoconuttyMummy wrote: »Whats CICO, Jumana? I keep hearing it mentioned. Is it a type of diet?
It stands for calories in calories out. It isn't a diet, it's how your body functions. If you eat more calories than you burn on a daily basis the extra energy will be stored as fat, if you eat less calories than your body needs to fuel your activity each day, you will lose weight.0 -
My response to the OP is accurate and designed to be helpful; not to promote some sort of dietary belief system. That said, I've been eating a low carb diet for a little over three years now -- I'm a huge fan and I imagine I'll happily be eating low carb for the rest of my life. I'm very much a "low carber".jumanajane wrote: »@Alabasaterverve....that sounds more like a CICO stance than a low carber??!!0 -
CoconuttyMummy wrote: »Whats CICO, Jumana? I keep hearing it mentioned. Is it a type of diet?
It is a good reference point.
I can eat a great diet. But if I eat 2x what my body needs I can store fat.
It gets controversial when some tiny percentage of CICO only adherents say to eat 1200 calories on a doughnut diet is the same as a balanced diet. But very few take CICO to that illogical extreme. It is mainly a way some people get emotional and argue on forums! Just my opinion and observation
My personal calorie limit is 2500 for maintenance. I rarely hit it except on days I lift hard. I am sore all over today and had two hard lifting days Thursday and Friday, so I will be close today.
I eat a moderate to low carb mix of food at a CICO level where I am burning off body fat.
It works for me. Some do something different and I salute their success as well!
Love Peace and Bacon Grease
0 -
Keto allows me to lose weight because I don't have the blood sugar highs and lows that I did with the SAD. It allows me to stay at my caloric deficit and I'm very happy with that. But, yes, CICO will help you lose weight. LCHF is just a great way for me to get there.0
-
I see my cynical comment was taken seriously. Sorry! For those who adhere to the CICO theory and it works for them fine, way to go! For those who dont, like me and I imagine a large proportion of post menopausal ladies who struggle to lose weight, it isnt an effective theory. Our bodies are far more complex than just CICO.0
-
Withdrawal from carbs can be tough in the beginning. But weight loss can occur at that level. We all have to find what works for us. Too many times people think they need to eat exactly as others to duplicate their success, but this is not true. What works for one doesn't always work for all. Good luck in finding the level where you feel good and are losing weight!
0 -
I had a week of feeling a bit light headed when I first consistently kept the carbs below 100 gms. Seems to have stopped now, so my body must have adjusted in some way?0
-
jumanajane wrote: »I see my cynical comment was taken seriously. Sorry! For those who adhere to the CICO theory and it works for them fine, way to go! For those who dont, like me and I imagine a large proportion of post menopausal ladies who struggle to lose weight, it isnt an effective theory. Our bodies are far more complex than just CICO.
This is just a question to understand what you are meaning.
Do you think you can eat more calories than you need and they go away?
Or your eating style and choices works for you and happens to be under the calories you need although you don't happen to count them?
I know lots of negative comments on low carb adherents focus on the notion we think calories magically go away if we eat low carb.
I have not experienced any magic for calories going away when I ate very low carb. I did feel full when eating a salad and steak
And just so you know where I am on this topic, I just enjoyed a nice rare 12 ounce hunk of tenderloin for lunch. Some fried cabbage with sesame seeds and soy sauce as a side.
0 -
i am noticing anytime I go under 100 carbs I crash big time( even when my fat and protein are high) I'm thinking I shouldn't go under and cross my fingers and hope I can still lose weight ughhh
Yes, you can still lose weight. But if you're "crashing" that suggests blood sugar control problems. Have you been diagnosed? Keeping your carbs lower at least in the initial stages may help with the blood sugar control by keeping your insulin levels lower.
At 100g/d carb, you'll be mildly ketotic in about a week. You'll get all the benefits of the other hard-core low-carbers, including hunger control. But your insulin levels will be a bit higher, and your ketone levels will be lower than somebody consuming, say, 50g/d.
Experiment. It's also possible that the "crash" is due to low electrolytes. Are you getting enough?0 -
professionalHobbyist wrote: »This is just a question to understand what you are meaning.
Do you think you can eat more calories than you need and they go away?
Or your eating style and choices works for you and happens to be under the calories you need although you don't happen to count them?
I know lots of negative comments on low carb adherents focus on the notion we think calories magically go away if we eat low carb.
I am not @jumanajane but I love throwing my hat into this ring. If you eat more calories than you may have needed, they don't "go away" but they also don't automatically get stored in fat either. Or they may be stored in fat, only to quickly come out over the next day or so in such a fashion as to reduce your hunger and intake to counter-balance that excess. Often even that doesn't happen. They'll be burned or used to fuel some other metabolic process. They can be used to fuel tissue healing or rebuilding (both excessively calorific activities). We don't necessarily get to choose what happens to excess energy. What we do know is that 3,500 excess calories (above maintenance) almost never equals a full pound of added weight. At best it's usually 0.6 to 0.8 pounds of added weight, and usually not even that. That's from the energy loss from converting it into a form it can be stored in. And, that 0.6-0.8 pounds isn't typically just fat either. Some will be new lean body mass.
If you're eating above your needs, you probably won't lose weight. It's not impossible, if you're not far above your needs and your body chooses to use energy for rebuilding beyond the amount that would balance things. But, you're not always going to gain much, if any, weight. Continuously eating way above your needs, force-feeding beyond desire, can cause weight gain. Even in the experiment where the guy ate 5,000 calories a day (really almost 6,000) and gained much less than expected (and it seemed to be LBM gains not fat), he still gained weight. He wasn't eating 5,000 calories a day and losing weight. He just didn't gain nearly the predicted amount.
While CICO isn't "wrong" it's also not very meaningful in any real sense. It's like saying that making "People-In <= People-Out" is a meaningful way to control how crowded it is on the subway in the morning. All we have to do is make sure more people get out than get in and it won't be so uncomfortable for everyone!0 -
This is a good conversation! I was worried asking would be taken as being argumentative. I just don't understand all of this. Some adds up and some still is mysterious.
The only anecdotal thing I can add is that I eat lots of protein. And I don't question why but it is easy to gain LBM with moderate to low carbs and two days of hard lifting.
Maybe that metabolic process is helping with that? Recovery days seem to burn thru calories.
One other thing is eating lots of mixed nuts will slow weight loss. But then again I don't gain weight, just slows loss.
Hmmmm.... Much to dig into here.
Anyway, I appreciate an attempt to peacefully answer the question I was asking. So often seeking to understand turns into arguing.
I know there is something to the LC diet that provides a good environment for LBM growth. At over 50 I can add muscle more easily on this lifestyle than in my 30's. Just don't know the nuts and bolts of why.
Thanks !
Part of why this group is awesome
P.S. Fit Goat - you would have been proud of my Father's Day steak. 12 ounces trimmed and perfectly cooked.
0 -
Lol, No I dont mean eating more than you need means the excess magically goes away!
I mean that a lot of us over 50, over menopause ladies eat below our supposed calorie needs, exercise, are low or ZC and struggle like hell to lose weight. Often we lose and gain the same few pounds for months. Many of us have tried ZC, higher carbs, lower cals, higher cals etc and we still struggle to lose every ounce.
I have eaten low carb (mostly) since 2003 which was pre-menopause for me and I lost weight easily then, maintained happily and then started creeping away from LC only to come back again. Since 2010 when i was deemed to be post menopause the weight crept up and it became harder and harder. I had a period of 2 years of eating fairly low carb and started LCHF about 4 months ago. I never used to count cals before as after a lifetime of counting calories or points I had realised It made me obsessive. No way back in 2003 was i doing that again .....or so I thought! Back in 2010 I became aware that losing was a struggle and started taking note of calories again. I reduced my intake as well as my carbs but didnt record 'religiously' until this time when everything in my mind said dont but the need for results said yes. Well, I have had results but nowhere near as effectively as before and on much lower calories and sooooo slow.
Cortisol, hormones, stress, inflammation, etc etc all affect weight loss regardless of CICO. If you have a look at the over 50 ladies ...our special needs thread and the cortisol thread you will see documented the huge struggle a lot of us are facing....on low calories a lot of the time!
hehehe just ANOTHER case of how men have the advantage!0 -
Mmmm, 12 oz steak.0
-
I recorded the 840 calories for it !!
@ Jane ,
Thank you for sharing how it works for you. I try and find common ground where there is some.
Like you, I am in the over 50 group, thankfully made it.
There is something to limiting carbs a bit for me. I think t may be age driven. I just rarely need the high octane fuel that carbs are.
I also look at the anti inflammatory values of foods when choosing veggies. I eat kale a few times a week for that reason.
The metabolic mystery of lean muscle gain with low carb high protein is still something I accept and don't totally understand.
I expected adding muscle would be nearly impossible with all the TV commercials saying men need to buy testosterone supplements at once! But my Dr said that is rare to mess up weight management and that I am fine. Not to be influenced by pharmaceutical company hype. Resistance training and exercise naturally helps keep T regulated.
So I get you on the post menopausal thing. I put my activity leve to sedentary although I get 10000 steps per day average and workout 5 days a week. I think age has decided to make me keep low to moderate carb with a 1600 calorie limit to keep dropping pounds.
So not fair!!!
But today I have over 12000 steps with nothing put in for exercise so I'm enjoying 2000 calories. I know push mowing a half acre yard was a solid 700 calories out in the afternoon sun!
Have a good one
0 -
I second fit-goat...mmmmmmm.0
-
i am noticing anytime I go under 100 carbs I crash big time( even when my fat and protein are high) I'm thinking I shouldn't go under and cross my fingers and hope I can still lose weight ughhh
I had somewhat of this effect until I dropped my carbs to the range of 35-50 grams of carbs a day. I've seen some references to 50-100 grams of carbs being kind of a danger zone before one is fat adapted. It makes it really hard, like you have one foot on each side of the fence line. So you might try dropping a good bit to get to the lower range so your body will stop screaming at you for carbs in whatever form. It is worth a try and took me a couple days of not counting calories, just carbs, to adjust to the lower number, but I couldn't hack it in that middle 50-100 grams of carb range. Now that my metabolism is on the mend and I'm fat adapted, I would think I could creep into that range without as much issue, but I'm not at a point where I'm ready to try that...
So, just another voice in the mix.0 -
KnitOrMiss wrote: »I've seen some references to 50-100 grams of carbs being kind of a danger zone before one is fat adapted.
Phinney and Volek say that metabolism seems to be maladapted at that level. They call it a "functional gap" in homeostasis. I would love to see how they came to that conclusion -- I haven't been able to track it down, and it doesn't match my personal experience, but it's an interesting idea.
0 -
jumanajane wrote: »Lol, No I dont mean eating more than you need means the excess magically goes away!
I mean that a lot of us over 50, over menopause ladies eat below our supposed calorie needs, exercise, are low or ZC and struggle like hell to lose weight. Often we lose and gain the same few pounds for months. Many of us have tried ZC, higher carbs, lower cals, higher cals etc and we still struggle to lose every ounce.
I have eaten low carb (mostly) since 2003 which was pre-menopause for me and I lost weight easily then, maintained happily and then started creeping away from LC only to come back again. Since 2010 when i was deemed to be post menopause the weight crept up and it became harder and harder. I had a period of 2 years of eating fairly low carb and started LCHF about 4 months ago. I never used to count cals before as after a lifetime of counting calories or points I had realised It made me obsessive. No way back in 2003 was i doing that again .....or so I thought! Back in 2010 I became aware that losing was a struggle and started taking note of calories again. I reduced my intake as well as my carbs but didnt record 'religiously' until this time when everything in my mind said dont but the need for results said yes. Well, I have had results but nowhere near as effectively as before and on much lower calories and sooooo slow.
Cortisol, hormones, stress, inflammation, etc etc all affect weight loss regardless of CICO. If you have a look at the over 50 ladies ...our special needs thread and the cortisol thread you will see documented the huge struggle a lot of us are facing....on low calories a lot of the time!
hehehe just ANOTHER case of how men have the advantage!
I soooooo connect with this.
0
This discussion has been closed.