Low Calorie vs Low Carb

tranquil327

Hi Everyone,

Inviting anyone to weigh in on which they believe renders the best weight loss results: Low Calorie or Low Carb. I'm at a bit of a crossroads having gained a significant amount of weight and am caught between these 2 weight loss philosophies to achieve my goal. Replies can be based on statistics, science, or just personal preference.

AJ_G

Just eat fewer calories than you burn every day, no need for any philosophy. If going low carb is the only way you think you can do that, then do what you must, otherwise, I'd strongly suggest eating a balanced diet with adequate protein (1g per lb of Lean Body Mass), enough dietary fat (0.35 - 0.4 grams per lb of body weight), and just allocate the remainder of your calories to carbohydrates. Eat whatever you want to hit these goals and lose weight.

Mr_Knight

If you eat low carb and high calorie, you will not lose weight.

Low calorie is *required* - low carb is one way of getting there.

ohmscheeks

Low calorie here; never done low carb.

kgeyser

I don't think it's an "either or" proposition. A calorie deficit is necessary for weight loss (even low carb requires a deficit); the method for maintaining that calorie deficit is largely just personal preference. Choose an eating style that works for you and your lifestyle, and just go with it.

Sirius_12

Calories are all that matter, imo. But many people say the low carb diets reduce hunger. Studies I've checked into show that in the long run, weight loss and adherence rates are about the same as with low calorie plans.

abi111

i am low carb and low calorie, some people say that their hunger is reduced on low carb so reduced calories comes naturally so they don't need to count their calories but i do need to keep them in check. it works for me.

Kalikel

Low calorie. You could, technically, gain weight on a low-carb diet.

If you go the low-carb route, consider getting the carbs you eat from fruits and veggies. Fruits and veggies have vitamins and minerals that our bodies need and they bring fiber. So, I would say Good Carbs there, for sure.

I've always been a little wary of diets that put you into ketosis on purpose, having spent most of my adult life thinking of ketosis as a danger sign, to be avoided. I'm still not convinced it's a healthy thing to do.

Calories at urge most important thing to watch. People do lose weight on low-carb diets, though!

cwolfman13

jcollins327 wrote: »

Hi Everyone,

Inviting anyone to weigh in on which they believe renders the best weight loss results: Low Calorie or Low Carb. I'm at a bit of a crossroads having gained a significant amount of weight and am caught between these 2 weight loss philosophies to achieve my goal. Replies can be based on statistics, science, or just personal preference.

over the long run, they're exactly the same...

you lose more weight initially with low carb because you lose a lot of water weight and deplete your glycogen stores....you can expect a similar increase if/when you start consuming more carbs again.

carbs have jack *kitten* to do with losing fat...calories do. low carb is just another way of cutting out calories. calories are a unit of energy...your body is a machine and like any machine, requires energy to function. consuming less energy than is required to maintain the status quo means your body has to burn stored energy (body fat) to make up the difference...it has jack to do with carbs. stop reading stupid "health" magazines.

lauraesh0384

Once upon a time I did low carb. Did I get results from it? Definitely. But I reached a point where I found myself binging on carbs because I felt so deprived of them. I would do good for a while, then I'd go on an all out carb fest, which resulted in weight gain. It was a vicious cycle. I used to be one of those people that thought I could only lose weight by restricting carbs, but I have since seen the light. I'm much happier now that I'm eating higher amount of carbs and I have yet to have a binging episode because I don't have things I can't eat.

wabmester

It depends. Do you have any signs of insulin resistance? High triglycerides? Low HDL? High blood sugar?

If so, then definitely low carb is the way to go.

If not, then both low-carb and calorie restriction should have about the same effect.

In a sense, a low-carb diet is a low-calorie diet, but many people tend to reduce their caloric intake effortlessly when carbs are below a certain threshold.

nvmomketo

I agree with most of the others. Generally speaking you need to eat at a lower caloric level to lose weight. If you are a sedentary person eating 3500kcals of low carb food per day, you probably won't lose weight. A slight caloric deficit is needed to lose weight.

That being said, I'm a big fan of combining the two: low-carb and low-cal. People eating low carb at a caloric deficit tend to lose a bit more weight than those who are eating just low calories. That tends to last for about 6 months and then by 1 year, both ways of eating (low-cal and low-cal with low-carb) are statistically about the same.

I also like LCHF because I find it suppresses my appetite and almost completely wipes out my carb cravings, which were pretty substantial to begin with. It's also helped level out my blood sugars and improved my arthritis pain. As you can tell, I'm a fan of LCHF.

It's not for everyone though. Some people are unhappy without carbs, worry they will be missing out on micronutrients, or find athletic performance is diminished without higher carbs. Some people don't make it through the first couple of weeks when one will often feel tired and head achy, and others feel no need to try it because they are satisfied with their own WOE. It really is a personal choice (well, unless your doctor prescribed it ).

Best wishes.

sevenofnine01

Mr_Knight wrote: »

If you eat low carb and high calorie, you will not lose weight.

Low calorie is *required* - low carb is one way of getting there.

This right here.

I've done both in the past, and am currently on (and loving) low carb, but low calorie is non-negotiable to lose weight. That's a must.

Low carb is hard to do, and best after you've gotten the hang of the 'dieting' and watching your portions. It takes quite a bit of prep and finding good low carb snacks that are healthy isn't convenient on the go. You don't want to eat junk.

FWIW, if I'm travelling (which I do frequently, I'm only home about half the year) I switch over to "just" low calorie. It's much healthier than trying to eat out low-carb (which is frustrating).

When you eat low cal you can walk into any McDonalds and have a salad on a busy day. When it's low carb, you HAVE to have your food with you or you're left eating junk (like a hot dog from a street meat vender with no bun and a tube of mystery meat. Been there. Not healthy. Not satisfying).


Low Cal always works. Low carb can mess you up and you could gain weight if you're not careful.

jonnybhoy

jcollins327 wrote: »

Hi Everyone,

Inviting anyone to weigh in on which they believe renders the best weight loss results: Low Calorie or Low Carb. I'm at a bit of a crossroads having gained a significant amount of weight and am caught between these 2 weight loss philosophies to achieve my goal. Replies can be based on statistics, science, or just personal preference.

If you log everything exactly you will find that low carb is also low calorie

GaleHawkins

The two together work well for me to lose 30 pounds without going hungry over the past 10 months.

MoiAussi93

I watch calories, but do eat low carb. It is the easiest way for me to eat low calorie. I just about never get hungry, or get cravings for sugar (which used to be a big problem for me), and never binge eating this way.

It's not for everyone, but it is without a doubt the best way of eating that I have ever tried.

umayster

Low calorie AND low carb! Works great - high fat and moderate protein help keep your hunger levels from undermining weight loss.

eahanna719

Carb cycling has worked great for me. Keep with low calorie but in days I'm more active I enjoy more carbs days I'm less active I don't. Tricked my body into not knowing what's coming so it would just burn everything instead of hold onto the weight.

mwyvr

Lower carb and lower calorie and increased activity (I love cardio - running, trail running, mountain running, distance running, perhaps there's a pattern there) and I'm 76 pounds lighter since September last year and pretty darn fit.

I don't subscribe to the all calories are equal in the long run. Someone eating a reduced calorie diet of 100% carbs or 100% proteins or fats will suffer poor health for as long as they do survive. The question is what's the right macro balance for the individual? Is 70% carbs too much? For a great many people, yes, that will be too much. How about 50%? For many, the answer will also be yes. As others have commented on already, any other health conditions including sensitivity to insulin will make a big difference.

From a weight loss perspective when looked at from a very high level the notions of reduced caloric intake and macro mix seem not connected. Eat fewer calories and you'll lose weight, yes.

But for many people when looked at from a total health perspective, macros absolutely matter and its disingenuous to state otherwise.

Sirius_12

I tried carb cycling. But I kept falling off my bike trying to eat the baked potato.

yarwell

wabmester wrote: »

In a sense, a low-carb diet is a low-calorie diet, but many people tend to reduce their caloric intake effortlessly when carbs are below a certain threshold.

By the same token most low calorie diets are reduced carbohydrate too.

tranquil327

WOW! Guys I cannot thank you enough for sharing such thoughtful and insightful responses. I've read each of them very carefully and it seems most of you lean towards a low-cal lifestyle with an element of low carb. I think my problem with getting this weight off is that while I've been eating and tracking my carbs and have been keeping them low, I've neglected to track my calories. How can I expect to lose weight when my calories have most likely been between 2500-3000/day with little to no exercise. Low-cal has worked for me in the past and I think it's time to start counting calories again. Again - many thanks to you all and best of luck to each of you on your weight loss journeys.

yarwell

jcollins327 wrote: »

Inviting anyone to weigh in on which they believe renders the best weight loss results: Low Calorie or Low Carb. I'm at a bit of a crossroads having gained a significant amount of weight and am caught between these 2 weight loss philosophies to achieve my goal. Replies can be based on statistics, science, or just personal preference.

Here's a compilation of comparison trials, if that helps -

http://smashthefat.com/science

professionalHobbyist

Why is there this misconception that by going on any specialized diet you can magically go beyond the calories you need?

I remember when it was low fat, and it was all about just watching fat and eating lots.

There was a low carb way to eat all you want....

But none of those work when there is no calorie regulation

I like low carb specifically to adapt my muscles to burn a higher percentage of fat as fuel.

So I eat moderately low carb and do fairly long pretty intense cardio nearly fasted.

It works.

For me it works.

It was the next step to get rid of some stubborn torso fat.

But I always am about keeping a lid on calories and doing 1 hour plus cardio sessions.

So there is no calories versus carbs. There is only calorie control by the method that works best for you.

The idea there is an all can eat diet is a marketing scam!

Best of luck OP on finding a nutrition plan that works for you

Kalikel

jcollins327 wrote: »

WOW! Guys I cannot thank you enough for sharing such thoughtful and insightful responses. I've read each of them very carefully and it seems most of you lean towards a low-cal lifestyle with an element of low carb. I think my problem with getting this weight off is that while I've been eating and tracking my carbs and have been keeping them low, I've neglected to track my calories. How can I expect to lose weight when my calories have most likely been between 2500-3000/day with little to no exercise. Low-cal has worked for me in the past and I think it's time to start counting calories again. Again - many thanks to you all and best of luck to each of you on your weight loss journeys.

I eat a very high-carb diet and lose weight. I'm not recommending a high-carb diet, just saying that it can be done.

Fruits and veggies will NOT stop anyone from losing weight! They keep you nice and full, give you all those lovely vitamins and minerals you need and bring fiber (a carb) along for the ride. They're yummy, too.

I do hope people aren't abandoning fruits and veggies to lose weight.

Fruits and veggies are our friends.

lemurcat12

My answer is lower calories than you need for maintenance (which may not mean "low calorie," depending on how that's defined), but for many people they may end up being the same thing.

How a low carb diet works is that you either have an easier time sticking with lower calories by cutting carbs (which is true for some people) or, in some cases, you find that you get so satiated on the foods you are eating that you naturally eat well below your maintenance. (I think it's common for this latter effect to eventually wear off.)

It's quite possible to maintain or gain on a low carb diet, so the safest approach generally is to watch calories AND carbs if doing a low carb approach. (And you can keep low carbs if you prefer it when in maintenance, then.)

Anyway, for me calories and not carbs were my focus, and I lost 95 lbs happily. I did cut carbs some as an easy way to cut calories (for me), but I would not have been happy doing a true low carb plan, so didn't.

ireadlabelsdammit

Sirius_12 wrote: »

I tried carb cycling. But I kept falling off my bike trying to eat the baked potato.

Lol hard boiled egg for me pls, I'm low carb

mwyvr

professionalHobbyist wrote: »

I like low carb specifically to adapt my muscles to burn a higher percentage of fat as fuel.

So I eat moderately low carb and do fairly long pretty intense cardio nearly fasted.

It works.

For me it works.

Likewise, in every respect.

DoogCampbell

I do low calorie to lose weight. I do low carb in periods (4-12 weeks) when I want to focus on cutting body fat, but I don't perform as well in the gym on low carb so its a periodical thing for me (usually for summer). As everyone says, you cant lose weight without eating less calories, the low carb just plays on the hormonal affect the food has on your body but as mentioned above, I can't imagine ketosis over a long period can be healthy so a cycle seems like a sensible idea.

auntstephie321

I've lost weight both watching carbs and not watching carbs, I posted about my results a while ago

http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10180583/to-carb-or-not-to-carb-for-weightloss#latest

TeaBea

Good results to me are not just the number on the scale when I've reached goal......

I won't be incorporating low carb into my maintenance regimen, so there is no reason to do low carb now. Maintenance is hard enough without trying to figure it out...when I get there.