Low Calorie vs Low Carb

arv51862

Yeah, it's not an either / or choice... You have to eat at a calorie deficit, the "low carb" diet is merely one attempt at lowering caloric intake. From my experience, if you cut your carbs too low, you loose the energy needed to function properly (including to burn fat). Low calorie is the way to go, if you want to eat more (and still loose weight), you have to earn your extra calories with exercise (encouraged).

Ticklemynose

Losing weight and being healthy are 2 separate things. You can lose weight but still be unhealthy. It took me so long to wrap my head around this since people assume how you look is how you are. The assumption being that slim is healthy, overweight is not. You can be slim on the outside and fat inside. I personally rather go slow and have a complete overhaul, eat good fulling food below my calorie limit and lose weight while learning good nutrition and exercise. I realised the things we limit ourselves greatly are also the things we binge on. So having cheat days are necessary to be emotionally in tune with ourselves.

smslogan317

I do both, and what drives it is my goals or plateaus, I cycle carbs, calories, fats, protein, I cycle it all, I do low carb, low calorie, low fat, high fat, high carb, high protein. In the end for me its my goals and my body that drive my decision. Right now I am cutting, so I will keep my carbs and calories low, and keep my fat and protein pretty high, come fall/winter I will bump up my calories, increase carbs and drop protein and fats down some. My workouts will then go from high volume lower weight, to more strength based with low volume heavy weight.

af1973

Low carb...because once you kick the carb addiction you can control your calorie intake a lot better. I have to make myself eat something. I don't have much of an appetite with the keto diet

IsaackGMOON

af1973 wrote: »

Low carb...because once you kick the carb addiction you can control your calorie intake a lot better. I have to make myself eat something. I don't have much of an appetite with the keto diet

Carb addiction???????

loulamb7

Lower calories has worked best for me. No need to restrict anything, just manage a deficit and still enjoy rice, pasta, bread, etc.

hyperbeth1

I actually gained weight on low carb. I am doing lower calories. It has worked better so far.

GaleHawkins

IsaackGMOON wrote: »

af1973 wrote: »

Low carb...because once you kick the carb addiction you can control your calorie intake a lot better. I have to make myself eat something. I don't have much of an appetite with the keto diet

Carb addiction???????

@IsaackGMOON "carb addiction" is a loose term that means different things to different people. When one removes all the Cokes from the house for example yet gets up in the middle of the night and drives 10 miles to a Coke machine might be referred to a Carb addiction by some. Again it is not a scientific term in the minds of many. When I went off carbs cold turkey for pain management it was really bad for two weeks then the cravings just faded. Was I a Carb Addict I can not say but I can say I was a Carb Abuser for 40 years and paid a high price health wise. In my case it is true on a real keto diet there is not the hunger or cravings like when I was living mainly on carbs.

dakotababy

It is calories in VS calories out - doesnt matter what the calories are made up of. As long as your calories are less than what you burn you will lose weight.

ms_true

Good question. If you go low calorie/low protein you will lose lean muscle mass (up to 30% of weight loss). Keep your protein high. Otherwise when you get to goal and start the maintenance phase, you'll not have as much lean muscle mass to boost your metabolism. This is probably part of the reason why people regain their weight loss and more. Check out this study:

Lean Mass Loss

"Current National Institutes of Health guidelines for treating overweight and obese adults recommend low-calorie/low-fat diets for weight loss, with protein recommendations expressed as a percentage of total calories (20). People trying to lose weight by reducing calories may inadvertently consume very low levels of protein, possibly resulting in loss of lean mass, which can be especially detrimental in older adults (7). In a 9-week weight-maintenance study in older women, those consuming low dietary protein (0.45g/kg body weight/day) experienced substantial decreases in lean mass compared to those consuming adequate dietary protein (0.92 g/kg body weight/day) (21). In a meta-analysis by Krieger and colleagues (12), diets higher in protein (>1.05 to ≤1.20 g/kg body weight/day) were associated with greater fat-free mass retention than diets lower in protein (<0.7 g/kg body weight/day) during energy restriction. Thus, the RDA for protein may be inadequate for retaining fat-free mass during caloric restriction."

My goal for protein is 90 and carbs restricted between 50 & 100. I don't wish to go lower for carbs as it's hard on your kidneys.

yarwell

loulamb7 wrote: »

Lower calories has worked best for me. No need to restrict anything

you're restricting everything surely ?

Unknown

This content has been removed.

jonnybhoy

My low carb is low calorie by that I mean I am eating a deficit, I avoid all "diet" food low fat yoghurt etc

ndj1979

cwolfman13 wrote: »

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.

this …

OP - use whatever method you feel is sustainable for you in the long run.

but like wolf man said low carb is just another way to get into a deficit.

at the end of the day it all boils down to CICO….

nvmomketo

True. In the long run going low carb and low cal creates about the same weight loss as eating just low cal. In the short term (6 months) those eating low carb and low cal tend to lose more weight. Not a huge amount, just a few kilos.

IsaackGMOON

nvsmomketo wrote: »

True. In the long run going low carb and low cal creates about the same weight loss as eating just low cal. In the short term (6 months) those eating low carb and low cal tend to lose more weight. Not a huge amount, just a few kilos.

Wouldn't that be mainly water weight? It would return with the re-introduction of carbohydrates back into the diet.

cwolfman13

af1973 wrote: »

Low carb...because once you kick the carb addiction you can control your calorie intake a lot better. I have to make myself eat something. I don't have much of an appetite with the keto diet

i here ya...i can't wait until i can stop selling my body to strangers for more lentils...

nvmomketo

IsaackGMOON wrote: »

nvsmomketo wrote: »

True. In the long run going low carb and low cal creates about the same weight loss as eating just low cal. In the short term (6 months) those eating low carb and low cal tend to lose more weight. Not a huge amount, just a few kilos.

Wouldn't that be mainly water weight? It would return with the re-introduction of carbohydrates back into the diet.

A pound or two maybe. A few kilos? I think that is probably doubtful.

DeguelloTex

Water weight fluctuations can be at least a couple of kilos day to day.