are carbs really that terrible?
Replies
-
And with the scenario posted, it would actually be a problem utilizing fat calories, not a problem with carbs.DeguelloTex wrote: »
Then you have a medical condition which is skewing the apparent calories in and out.DeguelloTex wrote: »
How do you explain 3 being greater than 4?
Yes, yes, "in the Tibetan Philosophy, Sylvia Plath sense of the word, we're all dying." I mean dying as in immeninent. If you're out of nutrients to perform metabolic pathways, you become unable to move or expend energy. You don't just not burn fat and suddenly defy the laws of thermodynamics. If it worked that way, no one would lose weight while starving to death because having used up the micro-nutrient stores first, we wouldn't even reach low body fat during starvation.PeachyCarol wrote: »Got to look at your micro nutrients and vitamins. These are the essential building blocks of moving weight. The better levels they are at, the faster the weight will move. Carbs are fat in disguise. When you eat too many Carbs they turn into fat, provided that the liver and pancreas are working. Too much fat in your blood stream can cause blockages in the liver and too few micronutrients stop the pancreas working. So the reason why LCHF diets work imo is that the micro nutrients get to burn the fat from the cells in the liver and the liver sends the micro nutrients to the pancreas which produce the enzymes to burn more fat. Stopping the carbohydrates forces the body to use its fuel cells to burn fat instead of using the cells to convert carbohydrates into fat. Limiting your diet will limit your nutrients in order for the liver and pancreas to work properly. This of course assumes you have normal functioning liver and pancreas to start with. Eat less carbs and more veg and fats. You will feel fuller and have fat burning system not a fat storing system.
Oh dear.
Fat doesn't get stored permanently in a caloric deficit.
I'm going to leave my comments to that.
Carbs are fat in disguise?Got to look at your micro nutrients and vitamins. These are the essential building blocks of moving weight. The better levels they are at, the faster the weight will move. Carbs are fat in disguise. When you eat too many Carbs they turn into fat, provided that the liver and pancreas are working. Too much fat in your blood stream can cause blockages in the liver and too few micronutrients stop the pancreas working. So the reason why LCHF diets work imo is that the micro nutrients get to burn the fat from the cells in the liver and the liver sends the micro nutrients to the pancreas which produce the enzymes to burn more fat. Stopping the carbohydrates forces the body to use its fuel cells to burn fat instead of using the cells to convert carbohydrates into fat. Limiting your diet will limit your nutrients in order for the liver and pancreas to work properly. This of course assumes you have normal functioning liver and pancreas to start with. Eat less carbs and more veg and fats. You will feel fuller and have fat burning system not a fat storing system.
That is like the worst possible Transformers spin-off imaginable.
You both obviously have no idea of how the micro nutrients work with the liver function into producing energy and what it does with excess energy
What moves weight, is necessity. If your body needs energy and doesn't have glucose available, it will burn fats. If your body could actually have a micronutrient deficiency so easily limit energy release from storage, we'd all be dead. Burning fat is a necessity.
I'll offer you some insight. You probably think being thin or normal weight is an outcome the body actively tries to maintain and that becoming fat is a completely unnatural problem. Therefore, it makes sense to you that a deficiency, an imbalance, is the cause of being fat. It is giving too much intention and goal directed behavior to your body to think of it that way.
The truth is that being deficient in nutrients is going to, if anything, increase calorie burn as your body will have to spend more energy recycling the necessary components to produce metabolic reactions.
Being overweight is not a micronutrient deficiency. At the simplest level, it is about energy input and output. The higher output is to input, the more fat stores have to burn, and thus the faster weight is loss. That's about it.
This statement is factually incorrect. You can be overweight and nutrient deficient. You can be over weight obese and still be malnurished. If you do not make enough fatty acids in your diet you will not be able to burn calories.
Your statements are not a counter to my statement. My statement was not that "You cannot be overweight and micronutrient deficient." My statement is that being overweight is not a symptom of a micro-nutrient deficiency. I literally mean that your words sound like you're claiming becoming overweight has to do with lacking a micronutrient. It doesn't.
And I don't know what you mean by make enough fatty acids. Your body usually does not make much, if any fatty acids, even in an overfed state. The typical metabolic pathways are to use carbohydrates to avoid burning stored fats and dietary fats, so that they can be directly used as fats. Your body will never not use calories because it lacks a nutrient. That would mean you're dying.
Hate to break it to you but everyone is dying. I do not process carbohydrates because I lack micro nutrients therefore I gain weight and am over weight for under eatting ie calories in are not being burnt up but are being stored as fat
Being diabetic won't prevent you from metabolizing glucose. It won't even prevent you from breaking down other carbohydrates into glucose.
Ok so how do you explain 1300 calories = weight gains and 2000 calories = weight loss. The only difference in diet is high carbs 1300 and high fat no carbs 2000
You dont but I am being told that to lose weight you have to lose calories Calories In and Calories out. But its not true in my case. Carbs out Fat in = lose weight for me
Thus not losing at an honest 1300 calories would be very odd for almost anyone.0 -
The sad part is that I skipped from page 4 to page 12 and the argument is still more or less in the same place as it was on page 4.
brb, have to weigh out my pasta for lunch. Delicious carbyness.0 -
Yes, yes, "in the Tibetan Philosophy, Sylvia Plath sense of the word, we're all dying." I mean dying as in immeninent. If you're out of nutrients to perform metabolic pathways, you become unable to move or expend energy. You don't just not burn fat and suddenly defy the laws of thermodynamics. If it worked that way, no one would lose weight while starving to death because having used up the micro-nutrient stores first, we wouldn't even reach low body fat during starvation.PeachyCarol wrote: »Got to look at your micro nutrients and vitamins. These are the essential building blocks of moving weight. The better levels they are at, the faster the weight will move. Carbs are fat in disguise. When you eat too many Carbs they turn into fat, provided that the liver and pancreas are working. Too much fat in your blood stream can cause blockages in the liver and too few micronutrients stop the pancreas working. So the reason why LCHF diets work imo is that the micro nutrients get to burn the fat from the cells in the liver and the liver sends the micro nutrients to the pancreas which produce the enzymes to burn more fat. Stopping the carbohydrates forces the body to use its fuel cells to burn fat instead of using the cells to convert carbohydrates into fat. Limiting your diet will limit your nutrients in order for the liver and pancreas to work properly. This of course assumes you have normal functioning liver and pancreas to start with. Eat less carbs and more veg and fats. You will feel fuller and have fat burning system not a fat storing system.
Oh dear.
Fat doesn't get stored permanently in a caloric deficit.
I'm going to leave my comments to that.
Carbs are fat in disguise?Got to look at your micro nutrients and vitamins. These are the essential building blocks of moving weight. The better levels they are at, the faster the weight will move. Carbs are fat in disguise. When you eat too many Carbs they turn into fat, provided that the liver and pancreas are working. Too much fat in your blood stream can cause blockages in the liver and too few micronutrients stop the pancreas working. So the reason why LCHF diets work imo is that the micro nutrients get to burn the fat from the cells in the liver and the liver sends the micro nutrients to the pancreas which produce the enzymes to burn more fat. Stopping the carbohydrates forces the body to use its fuel cells to burn fat instead of using the cells to convert carbohydrates into fat. Limiting your diet will limit your nutrients in order for the liver and pancreas to work properly. This of course assumes you have normal functioning liver and pancreas to start with. Eat less carbs and more veg and fats. You will feel fuller and have fat burning system not a fat storing system.
That is like the worst possible Transformers spin-off imaginable.
You both obviously have no idea of how the micro nutrients work with the liver function into producing energy and what it does with excess energy
What moves weight, is necessity. If your body needs energy and doesn't have glucose available, it will burn fats. If your body could actually have a micronutrient deficiency so easily limit energy release from storage, we'd all be dead. Burning fat is a necessity.
I'll offer you some insight. You probably think being thin or normal weight is an outcome the body actively tries to maintain and that becoming fat is a completely unnatural problem. Therefore, it makes sense to you that a deficiency, an imbalance, is the cause of being fat. It is giving too much intention and goal directed behavior to your body to think of it that way.
The truth is that being deficient in nutrients is going to, if anything, increase calorie burn as your body will have to spend more energy recycling the necessary components to produce metabolic reactions.
Being overweight is not a micronutrient deficiency. At the simplest level, it is about energy input and output. The higher output is to input, the more fat stores have to burn, and thus the faster weight is loss. That's about it.
This statement is factually incorrect. You can be overweight and nutrient deficient. You can be over weight obese and still be malnurished. If you do not make enough fatty acids in your diet you will not be able to burn calories.
Your statements are not a counter to my statement. My statement was not that "You cannot be overweight and micronutrient deficient." My statement is that being overweight is not a symptom of a micro-nutrient deficiency. I literally mean that your words sound like you're claiming becoming overweight has to do with lacking a micronutrient. It doesn't.
And I don't know what you mean by make enough fatty acids. Your body usually does not make much, if any fatty acids, even in an overfed state. The typical metabolic pathways are to use carbohydrates to avoid burning stored fats and dietary fats, so that they can be directly used as fats. Your body will never not use calories because it lacks a nutrient. That would mean you're dying.
Hate to break it to you but everyone is dying. I do not process carbohydrates because I lack micro nutrients therefore I gain weight and am over weight for under eatting ie calories in are not being burnt up but are being stored as fat
Being diabetic won't prevent you from metabolizing glucose. It won't even prevent you from breaking down other carbohydrates into glucose.
Ok so how do you explain 1300 calories = weight gains and 2000 calories = weight loss. The only difference in diet is high carbs 1300 and high fat no carbs 2000
Honestly? Assuming this is you, probably that you don't know how to count calories, and you do worse when it comes to counting the ones in carbs, while over counting ones in fatty / protein foods.
If you have someone doing this under metabolic ward conditions, I'd be all eyes to read the study.[/quote
I weigh everything and monitor everything accurately to the gram0 -
Let's just dissect the scenarios:
1300 calories, high carb, let's say 700 calories coming from carbs, 300 calories protein, 300 calories from fat
vs
2000 calories, high fat, no carb. Let's say 1600 calories from fat, 400 calories protein.
To gain weight calories in > calories out
becomes
(700 c carbs + 300 c pro + 300 c fat) > BMR1 + TDEE1 + NEAT1 + thermic effect of food1
in this scenario, if gaining faster than a pound every 11.6 days, the thermic effect of food must include the cost of converting carbs into triglycerides and fatty acids.
The other scenario involves
1600 c fat + 400 c pro < BMR2 + TDEE2 + NEAT2 + thermic effect of food2
Now, assuming activity is the same, so TDEE1 + NEAT1 = TDEE2 + NEAT2, we can eliminate those as confounders.
This leaves us with BMR1 + thermic effect of food2 + 700 cal < BMR2 + thermic effect of food 2
OR
malabsorption of fats in scenario 2, means there is not really 1600 c of fat as intake. Though the claim seems to be about carb issues, so we'll ignore that possibility.
Now, we've already noticed, there's a fair chance thermic1 > thermic2 because of the costs in de novolipogensis.
This means BMR1 +700 cal < BMR2.
I'm having a hard time seeing what possible metabolic pathway is active in BMR2 that is shut off in BMR1 by carbs to the tune of 700 calories.0 -
Professional dietitians doing the same are 20% off when checked. I'm therefore still left with issues of logging accuracy being more probable than a seeming violation of thermodynamics based on a lack of nutrients.
Yes, yes, "in the Tibetan Philosophy, Sylvia Plath sense of the word, we're all dying." I mean dying as in immeninent. If you're out of nutrients to perform metabolic pathways, you become unable to move or expend energy. You don't just not burn fat and suddenly defy the laws of thermodynamics. If it worked that way, no one would lose weight while starving to death because having used up the micro-nutrient stores first, we wouldn't even reach low body fat during starvation.PeachyCarol wrote: »Got to look at your micro nutrients and vitamins. These are the essential building blocks of moving weight. The better levels they are at, the faster the weight will move. Carbs are fat in disguise. When you eat too many Carbs they turn into fat, provided that the liver and pancreas are working. Too much fat in your blood stream can cause blockages in the liver and too few micronutrients stop the pancreas working. So the reason why LCHF diets work imo is that the micro nutrients get to burn the fat from the cells in the liver and the liver sends the micro nutrients to the pancreas which produce the enzymes to burn more fat. Stopping the carbohydrates forces the body to use its fuel cells to burn fat instead of using the cells to convert carbohydrates into fat. Limiting your diet will limit your nutrients in order for the liver and pancreas to work properly. This of course assumes you have normal functioning liver and pancreas to start with. Eat less carbs and more veg and fats. You will feel fuller and have fat burning system not a fat storing system.
Oh dear.
Fat doesn't get stored permanently in a caloric deficit.
I'm going to leave my comments to that.
Carbs are fat in disguise?Got to look at your micro nutrients and vitamins. These are the essential building blocks of moving weight. The better levels they are at, the faster the weight will move. Carbs are fat in disguise. When you eat too many Carbs they turn into fat, provided that the liver and pancreas are working. Too much fat in your blood stream can cause blockages in the liver and too few micronutrients stop the pancreas working. So the reason why LCHF diets work imo is that the micro nutrients get to burn the fat from the cells in the liver and the liver sends the micro nutrients to the pancreas which produce the enzymes to burn more fat. Stopping the carbohydrates forces the body to use its fuel cells to burn fat instead of using the cells to convert carbohydrates into fat. Limiting your diet will limit your nutrients in order for the liver and pancreas to work properly. This of course assumes you have normal functioning liver and pancreas to start with. Eat less carbs and more veg and fats. You will feel fuller and have fat burning system not a fat storing system.
That is like the worst possible Transformers spin-off imaginable.
You both obviously have no idea of how the micro nutrients work with the liver function into producing energy and what it does with excess energy
What moves weight, is necessity. If your body needs energy and doesn't have glucose available, it will burn fats. If your body could actually have a micronutrient deficiency so easily limit energy release from storage, we'd all be dead. Burning fat is a necessity.
I'll offer you some insight. You probably think being thin or normal weight is an outcome the body actively tries to maintain and that becoming fat is a completely unnatural problem. Therefore, it makes sense to you that a deficiency, an imbalance, is the cause of being fat. It is giving too much intention and goal directed behavior to your body to think of it that way.
The truth is that being deficient in nutrients is going to, if anything, increase calorie burn as your body will have to spend more energy recycling the necessary components to produce metabolic reactions.
Being overweight is not a micronutrient deficiency. At the simplest level, it is about energy input and output. The higher output is to input, the more fat stores have to burn, and thus the faster weight is loss. That's about it.
This statement is factually incorrect. You can be overweight and nutrient deficient. You can be over weight obese and still be malnurished. If you do not make enough fatty acids in your diet you will not be able to burn calories.
Your statements are not a counter to my statement. My statement was not that "You cannot be overweight and micronutrient deficient." My statement is that being overweight is not a symptom of a micro-nutrient deficiency. I literally mean that your words sound like you're claiming becoming overweight has to do with lacking a micronutrient. It doesn't.
And I don't know what you mean by make enough fatty acids. Your body usually does not make much, if any fatty acids, even in an overfed state. The typical metabolic pathways are to use carbohydrates to avoid burning stored fats and dietary fats, so that they can be directly used as fats. Your body will never not use calories because it lacks a nutrient. That would mean you're dying.
Hate to break it to you but everyone is dying. I do not process carbohydrates because I lack micro nutrients therefore I gain weight and am over weight for under eatting ie calories in are not being burnt up but are being stored as fat
Being diabetic won't prevent you from metabolizing glucose. It won't even prevent you from breaking down other carbohydrates into glucose.
Ok so how do you explain 1300 calories = weight gains and 2000 calories = weight loss. The only difference in diet is high carbs 1300 and high fat no carbs 2000
Honestly? Assuming this is you, probably that you don't know how to count calories, and you do worse when it comes to counting the ones in carbs, while over counting ones in fatty / protein foods.
If you have someone doing this under metabolic ward conditions, I'd be all eyes to read the study.
I weigh everything and monitor everything accurately to the gram0 -
-
This content has been removed.
-
So this thread began with the OP describing his carb heavy VLCD. The thread remains.
Then it turns into an argument about whether or not carbs or evil.
Then it takes the final turn into the stretch home of someone claiming that one can eat more calories and lose weight if one is doing low carb.
This is the most MFP thread ever.
Needs moar detox.
0 -
So this thread began with the OP describing his carb heavy VLCD. The thread remains.
Then it turns into an argument about whether or not carbs are evil.
Then it takes the final turn into the stretch home of someone claiming that one can eat more calories and lose weight if one is doing low carb.
This is the most MFP thread ever.
0 -
Also processed foods and sugars.So this thread began with the OP describing his carb heavy VLCD. The thread remains.
Then it turns into an argument about whether or not carbs are evil.
Then it takes the final turn into the stretch home of someone claiming that one can eat more calories and lose weight if one is doing low carb.
This is the most MFP thread ever.
0 -
So this thread began with the OP describing his carb heavy VLCD. The thread remains.
Then it turns into an argument about whether or not carbs are evil.
Then it takes the final turn into the stretch home of someone claiming that one can eat more calories and lose weight if one is doing low carb.
This is the most MFP thread ever.
0 -
Carbs usually won't make you fat, you can even eat more of them than the same amount of fat calories. After eating carbs, you want to move your body. After eating fats, you have no energy and it's more likely that the fat will store as fat. It's still calories in vs calories out but still something people should be aware of. The fat you eat is often the fat you wear. Carbs can indirectly cause weight gain because with enough carbs your body is not burning the dietary fat you eat. Your body prefers carbs so the dietary fat will be stored as fat. Dietary fat is stored very efficiently in adipose tissue. The solution to people who love carbs is a high carb low fat diet. Don't eat lots of fat with your carbs because the fat will be stored as fat. All countries who eat more than 75% of their daily calories from carbs have a thin population. Thailand, India, Japan, just name it. The people who think eating meat, cheese, dairy and eggs will make you look like a lean model are just ignorant. It's ignorant to think that the fat you eat magically burns away and the carbs convert themselves into fat. Carbs converting into fat (de novo lipogenesis) is very rare in humans. It will happen if you drink sodas and fruit smoothies tho but rice, bread and potatoes? No way you will get fat from those foods. The reason people lose weight on ketogenic low carb diets is because the dieters feel like *kitten* and eat nothing. Ketose only happens when you are sick so you are simulating sickness by not eating carbs.
Eek. I disagree with almost everything here:
Carbs don't make me want to move my body. They make me want to pop in another video and find more to eat.
Fat is not more easily stored than carbs.
Those high carb nations eat a very different high carb diet than North Americans do. I highly doubt it is because they eat a lot of carbs.
I eat meat, cheese, eggs, and some dairy (primarily) and am much closer to my ideal weight because of it. I've read a good dozen books on the topic of LCHF and ketosis, as well as numerous articles to male sure I am doing a good thing for myself. I am not ignorant.
De novo lipogenesis is far from rare.
I've been eating a ketogenic diet for a few months and I don't feel like *kitten*. I feel the best I have in a couple of decades. I am simulating sickness. I am not eating many carbs so my body will use ketones for fat oxidation, which appears to be the best fuel for me. Ketosis is not dangerous or an inferior state of being. At all.LyndseyLovesToLift wrote: »
Seriously though, who actually hates carbs? Even if you do low carb (WHY WHY WHY?!), that doesn't mean you don't enjoy eating them. Carbs = good. Calorie = calorie.
For HEALTH HEALTH HEALTH!
Sure carbs taste good. What feels (tastes) good isn't always good for you.PeachyCarol wrote: »Got to look at your micro nutrients and vitamins. These are the essential building blocks of moving weight. The better levels they are at, the faster the weight will move. Carbs are fat in disguise. When you eat too many Carbs they turn into fat, provided that the liver and pancreas are working. Too much fat in your blood stream can cause blockages in the liver and too few micronutrients stop the pancreas working. So the reason why LCHF diets work imo is that the micro nutrients get to burn the fat from the cells in the liver and the liver sends the micro nutrients to the pancreas which produce the enzymes to burn more fat. Stopping the carbohydrates forces the body to use its fuel cells to burn fat instead of using the cells to convert carbohydrates into fat. Limiting your diet will limit your nutrients in order for the liver and pancreas to work properly. This of course assumes you have normal functioning liver and pancreas to start with. Eat less carbs and more veg and fats. You will feel fuller and have fat burning system not a fat storing system.
Oh dear.
Fat doesn't get stored permanently in a caloric deficit.
I'm going to leave my comments to that.
Carbs are fat in disguise?Got to look at your micro nutrients and vitamins. These are the essential building blocks of moving weight. The better levels they are at, the faster the weight will move. Carbs are fat in disguise. When you eat too many Carbs they turn into fat, provided that the liver and pancreas are working. Too much fat in your blood stream can cause blockages in the liver and too few micronutrients stop the pancreas working. So the reason why LCHF diets work imo is that the micro nutrients get to burn the fat from the cells in the liver and the liver sends the micro nutrients to the pancreas which produce the enzymes to burn more fat. Stopping the carbohydrates forces the body to use its fuel cells to burn fat instead of using the cells to convert carbohydrates into fat. Limiting your diet will limit your nutrients in order for the liver and pancreas to work properly. This of course assumes you have normal functioning liver and pancreas to start with. Eat less carbs and more veg and fats. You will feel fuller and have fat burning system not a fat storing system.
That is like the worst possible Transformers spin-off imaginable.
You both obviously have no idea of how the micro nutrients work with the liver function into producing energy and what it does with excess energy
What moves weight, is necessity. If your body needs energy and doesn't have glucose available, it will burn fats. If your body could actually have a micronutrient deficiency so easily limit energy release from storage, we'd all be dead. Burning fat is a necessity.
I'll offer you some insight. You probably think being thin or normal weight is an outcome the body actively tries to maintain and that becoming fat is a completely unnatural problem. Therefore, it makes sense to you that a deficiency, an imbalance, is the cause of being fat. It is giving too much intention and goal directed behavior to your body to think of it that way.
The truth is that being deficient in nutrients is going to, if anything, increase calorie burn as your body will have to spend more energy recycling the necessary components to produce metabolic reactions.
Being overweight is not a micronutrient deficiency. At the simplest level, it is about energy input and output. The higher output is to input, the more fat stores have to burn, and thus the faster weight is loss. That's about it.
This statement is factually incorrect. You can be overweight and nutrient deficient. You can be over weight obese and still be malnurished. If you do not make enough fatty acids in your diet you will not be able to burn calories.
That's true. I became prediabetic and overweight. My triglycerides were below normal, as was my cholesterol, vitamin A and D. I got fat but didn't have high triglycerides.0 -
PeachyCarol wrote: »
A good carb? ;-)0 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »So this thread began with the OP describing his carb heavy VLCD. The thread remains.
Then it turns into an argument about whether or not carbs are evil.
Then it takes the final turn into the stretch home of someone claiming that one can eat more calories and lose weight if one is doing low carb.
This is the most MFP thread ever.
It pretty much sums up MFP.0 -
I still haven't figured out if the low calories OP mentioned in his post were his all day everyday calories, or what he had eaten up until that point in the day...
12 pages later and he hasn't come back, I'm not holding high hopes of an explanation0 -
So this thread began with the OP describing his carb heavy VLCD. The thread remains.
Then it turns into an argument about whether or not carbs are evil.
Then it takes the final turn into the stretch home of someone claiming that one can eat more calories and lose weight if one is doing low carb.
This is the most MFP thread ever.
The best, for sure.
And, I'll bet if low carb people were counting calories via weighing food and exercise calories (as accurate as possible) while losing weight, they would find they are eating more calories than they burn.
High carb, low carb, moderate carb, weight loss comes down to CICO. Type of diet is individual only.
0 -
christinev297 wrote: »I still haven't figured out if the low calories OP mentioned in his post were his all day everyday calories, or what he had eaten up until that point in the day...
12 pages later and he hasn't come back, I'm not holding high hopes of an explanation
The OP has to leave a message that leads to people question OP and never come back to respond. It wouldn't be the essence of MFP in one thread without that.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »Got to look at your micro nutrients and vitamins. These are the essential building blocks of moving weight. The better levels they are at, the faster the weight will move. Carbs are fat in disguise.
What does it mean to be fat in disguise? Carbs don't give you everything fat does, although I do agree that for most people it makes little difference what the percentage of carbs vs. fat is in the diet.
Also, of course, carbs are one of the best ways to get in your micros, so cutting them might not be the best idea, at least assuming you eat largely nutrient-dense carbs.
I am not cutting the micronutrients I am just getting them differently. If you read the rest of the quote about Carbs you saw it was more to do with converting Carbs being stored as fat. Hence Carbs disguised as fat.
This makes no sense. How are you getting them? Net fat gain is about calories--you don't gain net fat if you are below maintenance and you do if you are above maintenance, regardless of macro percentage.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
Carbs usually won't make you fat, you can even eat more of them than the same amount of fat calories. After eating carbs, you want to move your body. After eating fats, you have no energy and it's more likely that the fat will store as fat. It's still calories in vs calories out but still something people should be aware of. The fat you eat is often the fat you wear. Carbs can indirectly cause weight gain because with enough carbs your body is not burning the dietary fat you eat. Your body prefers carbs so the dietary fat will be stored as fat. Dietary fat is stored very efficiently in adipose tissue. The solution to people who love carbs is a high carb low fat diet. Don't eat lots of fat with your carbs because the fat will be stored as fat. All countries who eat more than 75% of their daily calories from carbs have a thin population. Thailand, India, Japan, just name it. The people who think eating meat, cheese, dairy and eggs will make you look like a lean model are just ignorant. It's ignorant to think that the fat you eat magically burns away and the carbs convert themselves into fat. Carbs converting into fat (de novo lipogenesis) is very rare in humans. It will happen if you drink sodas and fruit smoothies tho but rice, bread and potatoes? No way you will get fat from those foods. The reason people lose weight on ketogenic low carb diets is because the dieters feel like *kitten* and eat nothing. Ketose only happens when you are sick so you are simulating sickness by not eating carbs.
Eek. I disagree with almost everything here:
Carbs don't make me want to move my body. They make me want to pop in another video and find more to eat.
Fat is not more easily stored than carbs.
Those high carb nations eat a very different high carb diet than North Americans do. I highly doubt it is because they eat a lot of carbs.
I eat meat, cheese, eggs, and some dairy (primarily) and am much closer to my ideal weight because of it. I've read a good dozen books on the topic of LCHF and ketosis, as well as numerous articles to male sure I am doing a good thing for myself. I am not ignorant.
De novo lipogenesis is far from rare.
I've been eating a ketogenic diet for a few months and I don't feel like *kitten*. I feel the best I have in a couple of decades. I am simulating sickness. I am not eating many carbs so my body will use ketones for fat oxidation, which appears to be the best fuel for me. Ketosis is not dangerous or an inferior state of being. At all.LyndseyLovesToLift wrote: »
Seriously though, who actually hates carbs? Even if you do low carb (WHY WHY WHY?!), that doesn't mean you don't enjoy eating them. Carbs = good. Calorie = calorie.
For HEALTH HEALTH HEALTH!
Sure carbs taste good. What feels (tastes) good isn't always good for you.PeachyCarol wrote: »Got to look at your micro nutrients and vitamins. These are the essential building blocks of moving weight. The better levels they are at, the faster the weight will move. Carbs are fat in disguise. When you eat too many Carbs they turn into fat, provided that the liver and pancreas are working. Too much fat in your blood stream can cause blockages in the liver and too few micronutrients stop the pancreas working. So the reason why LCHF diets work imo is that the micro nutrients get to burn the fat from the cells in the liver and the liver sends the micro nutrients to the pancreas which produce the enzymes to burn more fat. Stopping the carbohydrates forces the body to use its fuel cells to burn fat instead of using the cells to convert carbohydrates into fat. Limiting your diet will limit your nutrients in order for the liver and pancreas to work properly. This of course assumes you have normal functioning liver and pancreas to start with. Eat less carbs and more veg and fats. You will feel fuller and have fat burning system not a fat storing system.
Oh dear.
Fat doesn't get stored permanently in a caloric deficit.
I'm going to leave my comments to that.
Carbs are fat in disguise?Got to look at your micro nutrients and vitamins. These are the essential building blocks of moving weight. The better levels they are at, the faster the weight will move. Carbs are fat in disguise. When you eat too many Carbs they turn into fat, provided that the liver and pancreas are working. Too much fat in your blood stream can cause blockages in the liver and too few micronutrients stop the pancreas working. So the reason why LCHF diets work imo is that the micro nutrients get to burn the fat from the cells in the liver and the liver sends the micro nutrients to the pancreas which produce the enzymes to burn more fat. Stopping the carbohydrates forces the body to use its fuel cells to burn fat instead of using the cells to convert carbohydrates into fat. Limiting your diet will limit your nutrients in order for the liver and pancreas to work properly. This of course assumes you have normal functioning liver and pancreas to start with. Eat less carbs and more veg and fats. You will feel fuller and have fat burning system not a fat storing system.
That is like the worst possible Transformers spin-off imaginable.
You both obviously have no idea of how the micro nutrients work with the liver function into producing energy and what it does with excess energy
What moves weight, is necessity. If your body needs energy and doesn't have glucose available, it will burn fats. If your body could actually have a micronutrient deficiency so easily limit energy release from storage, we'd all be dead. Burning fat is a necessity.
I'll offer you some insight. You probably think being thin or normal weight is an outcome the body actively tries to maintain and that becoming fat is a completely unnatural problem. Therefore, it makes sense to you that a deficiency, an imbalance, is the cause of being fat. It is giving too much intention and goal directed behavior to your body to think of it that way.
The truth is that being deficient in nutrients is going to, if anything, increase calorie burn as your body will have to spend more energy recycling the necessary components to produce metabolic reactions.
Being overweight is not a micronutrient deficiency. At the simplest level, it is about energy input and output. The higher output is to input, the more fat stores have to burn, and thus the faster weight is loss. That's about it.
This statement is factually incorrect. You can be overweight and nutrient deficient. You can be over weight obese and still be malnurished. If you do not make enough fatty acids in your diet you will not be able to burn calories.
That's true. I became prediabetic and overweight. My triglycerides were below normal, as was my cholesterol, vitamin A and D. I got fat but didn't have high triglycerides.
Last time I heard, De Novo Lipogenesis is pretty damn rare, for two reasons:
1) carbs are what your body mostly utilizes as energy source before the other macros apart from alcohol
2) even if there's an excess it's first stored in your glycogen
So not only do you have to eat in a surplus, the amount of carbs you eat have to exceed the amount of carb oxidation by your body and your glycogen stores have to be full.0 -
PeachyCarol wrote: »
Thanks, but I took mine this morning.
And my microwave is out of order, so I can't pop my own (oh, dirty carbs), so seriously, PASS THE POPCORN
0 -
christinev297 wrote: »I still haven't figured out if the low calories OP mentioned in his post were his all day everyday calories, or what he had eaten up until that point in the day...
12 pages later and he hasn't come back, I'm not holding high hopes of an explanation
Yup.
Only, I think OP might be female (from her profile). Other than that, you're spot on.0 -
After losing 20 pounds are you pre diabetic?Carbs usually won't make you fat, you can even eat more of them than the same amount of fat calories. After eating carbs, you want to move your body. After eating fats, you have no energy and it's more likely that the fat will store as fat. It's still calories in vs calories out but still something people should be aware of. The fat you eat is often the fat you wear. Carbs can indirectly cause weight gain because with enough carbs your body is not burning the dietary fat you eat. Your body prefers carbs so the dietary fat will be stored as fat. Dietary fat is stored very efficiently in adipose tissue. The solution to people who love carbs is a high carb low fat diet. Don't eat lots of fat with your carbs because the fat will be stored as fat. All countries who eat more than 75% of their daily calories from carbs have a thin population. Thailand, India, Japan, just name it. The people who think eating meat, cheese, dairy and eggs will make you look like a lean model are just ignorant. It's ignorant to think that the fat you eat magically burns away and the carbs convert themselves into fat. Carbs converting into fat (de novo lipogenesis) is very rare in humans. It will happen if you drink sodas and fruit smoothies tho but rice, bread and potatoes? No way you will get fat from those foods. The reason people lose weight on ketogenic low carb diets is because the dieters feel like *kitten* and eat nothing. Ketose only happens when you are sick so you are simulating sickness by not eating carbs.
Eek. I disagree with almost everything here:
Carbs don't make me want to move my body. They make me want to pop in another video and find more to eat.
Fat is not more easily stored than carbs.
Those high carb nations eat a very different high carb diet than North Americans do. I highly doubt it is because they eat a lot of carbs.
I eat meat, cheese, eggs, and some dairy (primarily) and am much closer to my ideal weight because of it. I've read a good dozen books on the topic of LCHF and ketosis, as well as numerous articles to male sure I am doing a good thing for myself. I am not ignorant.
De novo lipogenesis is far from rare.
I've been eating a ketogenic diet for a few months and I don't feel like *kitten*. I feel the best I have in a couple of decades. I am simulating sickness. I am not eating many carbs so my body will use ketones for fat oxidation, which appears to be the best fuel for me. Ketosis is not dangerous or an inferior state of being. At all.LyndseyLovesToLift wrote: »
Seriously though, who actually hates carbs? Even if you do low carb (WHY WHY WHY?!), that doesn't mean you don't enjoy eating them. Carbs = good. Calorie = calorie.
For HEALTH HEALTH HEALTH!
Sure carbs taste good. What feels (tastes) good isn't always good for you.PeachyCarol wrote: »Got to look at your micro nutrients and vitamins. These are the essential building blocks of moving weight. The better levels they are at, the faster the weight will move. Carbs are fat in disguise. When you eat too many Carbs they turn into fat, provided that the liver and pancreas are working. Too much fat in your blood stream can cause blockages in the liver and too few micronutrients stop the pancreas working. So the reason why LCHF diets work imo is that the micro nutrients get to burn the fat from the cells in the liver and the liver sends the micro nutrients to the pancreas which produce the enzymes to burn more fat. Stopping the carbohydrates forces the body to use its fuel cells to burn fat instead of using the cells to convert carbohydrates into fat. Limiting your diet will limit your nutrients in order for the liver and pancreas to work properly. This of course assumes you have normal functioning liver and pancreas to start with. Eat less carbs and more veg and fats. You will feel fuller and have fat burning system not a fat storing system.
Oh dear.
Fat doesn't get stored permanently in a caloric deficit.
I'm going to leave my comments to that.
Carbs are fat in disguise?Got to look at your micro nutrients and vitamins. These are the essential building blocks of moving weight. The better levels they are at, the faster the weight will move. Carbs are fat in disguise. When you eat too many Carbs they turn into fat, provided that the liver and pancreas are working. Too much fat in your blood stream can cause blockages in the liver and too few micronutrients stop the pancreas working. So the reason why LCHF diets work imo is that the micro nutrients get to burn the fat from the cells in the liver and the liver sends the micro nutrients to the pancreas which produce the enzymes to burn more fat. Stopping the carbohydrates forces the body to use its fuel cells to burn fat instead of using the cells to convert carbohydrates into fat. Limiting your diet will limit your nutrients in order for the liver and pancreas to work properly. This of course assumes you have normal functioning liver and pancreas to start with. Eat less carbs and more veg and fats. You will feel fuller and have fat burning system not a fat storing system.
That is like the worst possible Transformers spin-off imaginable.
You both obviously have no idea of how the micro nutrients work with the liver function into producing energy and what it does with excess energy
What moves weight, is necessity. If your body needs energy and doesn't have glucose available, it will burn fats. If your body could actually have a micronutrient deficiency so easily limit energy release from storage, we'd all be dead. Burning fat is a necessity.
I'll offer you some insight. You probably think being thin or normal weight is an outcome the body actively tries to maintain and that becoming fat is a completely unnatural problem. Therefore, it makes sense to you that a deficiency, an imbalance, is the cause of being fat. It is giving too much intention and goal directed behavior to your body to think of it that way.
The truth is that being deficient in nutrients is going to, if anything, increase calorie burn as your body will have to spend more energy recycling the necessary components to produce metabolic reactions.
Being overweight is not a micronutrient deficiency. At the simplest level, it is about energy input and output. The higher output is to input, the more fat stores have to burn, and thus the faster weight is loss. That's about it.
This statement is factually incorrect. You can be overweight and nutrient deficient. You can be over weight obese and still be malnurished. If you do not make enough fatty acids in your diet you will not be able to burn calories.
That's true. I became prediabetic and overweight. My triglycerides were below normal, as was my cholesterol, vitamin A and D. I got fat but didn't have high triglycerides.
0 -
_Terrapin_ wrote: »
After losing 20 pounds are you pre diabetic?Carbs usually won't make you fat, you can even eat more of them than the same amount of fat calories. After eating carbs, you want to move your body. After eating fats, you have no energy and it's more likely that the fat will store as fat. It's still calories in vs calories out but still something people should be aware of. The fat you eat is often the fat you wear. Carbs can indirectly cause weight gain because with enough carbs your body is not burning the dietary fat you eat. Your body prefers carbs so the dietary fat will be stored as fat. Dietary fat is stored very efficiently in adipose tissue. The solution to people who love carbs is a high carb low fat diet. Don't eat lots of fat with your carbs because the fat will be stored as fat. All countries who eat more than 75% of their daily calories from carbs have a thin population. Thailand, India, Japan, just name it. The people who think eating meat, cheese, dairy and eggs will make you look like a lean model are just ignorant. It's ignorant to think that the fat you eat magically burns away and the carbs convert themselves into fat. Carbs converting into fat (de novo lipogenesis) is very rare in humans. It will happen if you drink sodas and fruit smoothies tho but rice, bread and potatoes? No way you will get fat from those foods. The reason people lose weight on ketogenic low carb diets is because the dieters feel like *kitten* and eat nothing. Ketose only happens when you are sick so you are simulating sickness by not eating carbs.
Eek. I disagree with almost everything here:
Carbs don't make me want to move my body. They make me want to pop in another video and find more to eat.
Fat is not more easily stored than carbs.
Those high carb nations eat a very different high carb diet than North Americans do. I highly doubt it is because they eat a lot of carbs.
I eat meat, cheese, eggs, and some dairy (primarily) and am much closer to my ideal weight because of it. I've read a good dozen books on the topic of LCHF and ketosis, as well as numerous articles to male sure I am doing a good thing for myself. I am not ignorant.
De novo lipogenesis is far from rare.
I've been eating a ketogenic diet for a few months and I don't feel like *kitten*. I feel the best I have in a couple of decades. I am simulating sickness. I am not eating many carbs so my body will use ketones for fat oxidation, which appears to be the best fuel for me. Ketosis is not dangerous or an inferior state of being. At all.LyndseyLovesToLift wrote: »
Seriously though, who actually hates carbs? Even if you do low carb (WHY WHY WHY?!), that doesn't mean you don't enjoy eating them. Carbs = good. Calorie = calorie.
For HEALTH HEALTH HEALTH!
Sure carbs taste good. What feels (tastes) good isn't always good for you.PeachyCarol wrote: »Got to look at your micro nutrients and vitamins. These are the essential building blocks of moving weight. The better levels they are at, the faster the weight will move. Carbs are fat in disguise. When you eat too many Carbs they turn into fat, provided that the liver and pancreas are working. Too much fat in your blood stream can cause blockages in the liver and too few micronutrients stop the pancreas working. So the reason why LCHF diets work imo is that the micro nutrients get to burn the fat from the cells in the liver and the liver sends the micro nutrients to the pancreas which produce the enzymes to burn more fat. Stopping the carbohydrates forces the body to use its fuel cells to burn fat instead of using the cells to convert carbohydrates into fat. Limiting your diet will limit your nutrients in order for the liver and pancreas to work properly. This of course assumes you have normal functioning liver and pancreas to start with. Eat less carbs and more veg and fats. You will feel fuller and have fat burning system not a fat storing system.
Oh dear.
Fat doesn't get stored permanently in a caloric deficit.
I'm going to leave my comments to that.
Carbs are fat in disguise?Got to look at your micro nutrients and vitamins. These are the essential building blocks of moving weight. The better levels they are at, the faster the weight will move. Carbs are fat in disguise. When you eat too many Carbs they turn into fat, provided that the liver and pancreas are working. Too much fat in your blood stream can cause blockages in the liver and too few micronutrients stop the pancreas working. So the reason why LCHF diets work imo is that the micro nutrients get to burn the fat from the cells in the liver and the liver sends the micro nutrients to the pancreas which produce the enzymes to burn more fat. Stopping the carbohydrates forces the body to use its fuel cells to burn fat instead of using the cells to convert carbohydrates into fat. Limiting your diet will limit your nutrients in order for the liver and pancreas to work properly. This of course assumes you have normal functioning liver and pancreas to start with. Eat less carbs and more veg and fats. You will feel fuller and have fat burning system not a fat storing system.
That is like the worst possible Transformers spin-off imaginable.
You both obviously have no idea of how the micro nutrients work with the liver function into producing energy and what it does with excess energy
What moves weight, is necessity. If your body needs energy and doesn't have glucose available, it will burn fats. If your body could actually have a micronutrient deficiency so easily limit energy release from storage, we'd all be dead. Burning fat is a necessity.
I'll offer you some insight. You probably think being thin or normal weight is an outcome the body actively tries to maintain and that becoming fat is a completely unnatural problem. Therefore, it makes sense to you that a deficiency, an imbalance, is the cause of being fat. It is giving too much intention and goal directed behavior to your body to think of it that way.
The truth is that being deficient in nutrients is going to, if anything, increase calorie burn as your body will have to spend more energy recycling the necessary components to produce metabolic reactions.
Being overweight is not a micronutrient deficiency. At the simplest level, it is about energy input and output. The higher output is to input, the more fat stores have to burn, and thus the faster weight is loss. That's about it.
This statement is factually incorrect. You can be overweight and nutrient deficient. You can be over weight obese and still be malnurished. If you do not make enough fatty acids in your diet you will not be able to burn calories.
That's true. I became prediabetic and overweight. My triglycerides were below normal, as was my cholesterol, vitamin A and D. I got fat but didn't have high triglycerides.
If i get close to 50g of carbs in a day, my next day's fasting blood glucose is back in prediabetic range even though I'm at an acceptable weight for my height (155 lbs at 5'8"). I want to lose some more weight, but I'm guessing prediabetic blood glucose readings will keep popping up if I eat too many carbs.
On days when I keep my carbs low, without any too large meals, my BG stays as normal to low normal, even without exercise.0 -
_Terrapin_ wrote: »
After losing 20 pounds are you pre diabetic?Carbs usually won't make you fat, you can even eat more of them than the same amount of fat calories. After eating carbs, you want to move your body. After eating fats, you have no energy and it's more likely that the fat will store as fat. It's still calories in vs calories out but still something people should be aware of. The fat you eat is often the fat you wear. Carbs can indirectly cause weight gain because with enough carbs your body is not burning the dietary fat you eat. Your body prefers carbs so the dietary fat will be stored as fat. Dietary fat is stored very efficiently in adipose tissue. The solution to people who love carbs is a high carb low fat diet. Don't eat lots of fat with your carbs because the fat will be stored as fat. All countries who eat more than 75% of their daily calories from carbs have a thin population. Thailand, India, Japan, just name it. The people who think eating meat, cheese, dairy and eggs will make you look like a lean model are just ignorant. It's ignorant to think that the fat you eat magically burns away and the carbs convert themselves into fat. Carbs converting into fat (de novo lipogenesis) is very rare in humans. It will happen if you drink sodas and fruit smoothies tho but rice, bread and potatoes? No way you will get fat from those foods. The reason people lose weight on ketogenic low carb diets is because the dieters feel like *kitten* and eat nothing. Ketose only happens when you are sick so you are simulating sickness by not eating carbs.
Eek. I disagree with almost everything here:
Carbs don't make me want to move my body. They make me want to pop in another video and find more to eat.
Fat is not more easily stored than carbs.
Those high carb nations eat a very different high carb diet than North Americans do. I highly doubt it is because they eat a lot of carbs.
I eat meat, cheese, eggs, and some dairy (primarily) and am much closer to my ideal weight because of it. I've read a good dozen books on the topic of LCHF and ketosis, as well as numerous articles to male sure I am doing a good thing for myself. I am not ignorant.
De novo lipogenesis is far from rare.
I've been eating a ketogenic diet for a few months and I don't feel like *kitten*. I feel the best I have in a couple of decades. I am simulating sickness. I am not eating many carbs so my body will use ketones for fat oxidation, which appears to be the best fuel for me. Ketosis is not dangerous or an inferior state of being. At all.LyndseyLovesToLift wrote: »
Seriously though, who actually hates carbs? Even if you do low carb (WHY WHY WHY?!), that doesn't mean you don't enjoy eating them. Carbs = good. Calorie = calorie.
For HEALTH HEALTH HEALTH!
Sure carbs taste good. What feels (tastes) good isn't always good for you.PeachyCarol wrote: »Got to look at your micro nutrients and vitamins. These are the essential building blocks of moving weight. The better levels they are at, the faster the weight will move. Carbs are fat in disguise. When you eat too many Carbs they turn into fat, provided that the liver and pancreas are working. Too much fat in your blood stream can cause blockages in the liver and too few micronutrients stop the pancreas working. So the reason why LCHF diets work imo is that the micro nutrients get to burn the fat from the cells in the liver and the liver sends the micro nutrients to the pancreas which produce the enzymes to burn more fat. Stopping the carbohydrates forces the body to use its fuel cells to burn fat instead of using the cells to convert carbohydrates into fat. Limiting your diet will limit your nutrients in order for the liver and pancreas to work properly. This of course assumes you have normal functioning liver and pancreas to start with. Eat less carbs and more veg and fats. You will feel fuller and have fat burning system not a fat storing system.
Oh dear.
Fat doesn't get stored permanently in a caloric deficit.
I'm going to leave my comments to that.
Carbs are fat in disguise?Got to look at your micro nutrients and vitamins. These are the essential building blocks of moving weight. The better levels they are at, the faster the weight will move. Carbs are fat in disguise. When you eat too many Carbs they turn into fat, provided that the liver and pancreas are working. Too much fat in your blood stream can cause blockages in the liver and too few micronutrients stop the pancreas working. So the reason why LCHF diets work imo is that the micro nutrients get to burn the fat from the cells in the liver and the liver sends the micro nutrients to the pancreas which produce the enzymes to burn more fat. Stopping the carbohydrates forces the body to use its fuel cells to burn fat instead of using the cells to convert carbohydrates into fat. Limiting your diet will limit your nutrients in order for the liver and pancreas to work properly. This of course assumes you have normal functioning liver and pancreas to start with. Eat less carbs and more veg and fats. You will feel fuller and have fat burning system not a fat storing system.
That is like the worst possible Transformers spin-off imaginable.
You both obviously have no idea of how the micro nutrients work with the liver function into producing energy and what it does with excess energy
What moves weight, is necessity. If your body needs energy and doesn't have glucose available, it will burn fats. If your body could actually have a micronutrient deficiency so easily limit energy release from storage, we'd all be dead. Burning fat is a necessity.
I'll offer you some insight. You probably think being thin or normal weight is an outcome the body actively tries to maintain and that becoming fat is a completely unnatural problem. Therefore, it makes sense to you that a deficiency, an imbalance, is the cause of being fat. It is giving too much intention and goal directed behavior to your body to think of it that way.
The truth is that being deficient in nutrients is going to, if anything, increase calorie burn as your body will have to spend more energy recycling the necessary components to produce metabolic reactions.
Being overweight is not a micronutrient deficiency. At the simplest level, it is about energy input and output. The higher output is to input, the more fat stores have to burn, and thus the faster weight is loss. That's about it.
This statement is factually incorrect. You can be overweight and nutrient deficient. You can be over weight obese and still be malnurished. If you do not make enough fatty acids in your diet you will not be able to burn calories.
That's true. I became prediabetic and overweight. My triglycerides were below normal, as was my cholesterol, vitamin A and D. I got fat but didn't have high triglycerides.
If i get close to 50g of carbs in a day, my next day's fasting blood glucose is back in prediabetic range even though I'm at an acceptable weight for my height (155 lbs at 5'8"). I want to lose some more weight, but I'm guessing prediabetic blood glucose readings will keep popping up if I eat too many carbs.
On days when I keep my carbs low, without any too large meals, my BG stays as normal to low normal, even without exercise.
So, what is a normal range for blood glucose? As you lose weight I wonder if BG numbers aren't as sensitive to carbs. IDK.
0 -
MY blood glucose numbers dropped within a week of changing my diet. To be honest, they haven't improved with more weight loss. For me, it's all about what I've eaten and how much. I've gone from about 185-190 lbs down to about 155 lbs in the last 3 months. It really hasn't helped my FBG; I need to eat low carb.
The other day I had 2 Tbs of xylitol sweetened chocolate chips with about a 1/3 of a cup of macadamia nuts for a bedtime snack; I also had broiled carrots (a higher carb veggie) with dinner. My FBG the next day was 5.7. My FBG is carb sensitive. Perhaps it would not be as carb sensitive for someone who had lost more weight than me, but I doubt they could ever go back to higher carb without ramifications.
Illness appears to have affected my FBG too. I had a virus for a month, and during that time my fasting BG was back to prediabetic range.
Normal FBG is 3.9 to 5.5 (70-100). If I stay LC, and without too many calories, I usually stay between a 4.4 and 5.2.
http://www.niddk.nih.gov/health-information/health-topics/Diabetes/diagnosis-diabetes-prediabetes/Pages/index.aspx
http://www.type2diabetesguide.com/conversion-chart-for-blood-sugar-levels.shtml#.VhBcpuxVhHw0 -
MY blood glucose numbers dropped within a week of changing my diet. To be honest, they haven't improved with more weight loss. For me, it's all about what I've eaten and how much. I've gone from about 185-190 lbs down to about 155 lbs in the last 3 months. It really hasn't helped my FBG; I need to eat low carb.
The other day I had 2 Tbs of xylitol sweetened chocolate chips with about a 1/3 of a cup of macadamia nuts for a bedtime snack; I also had broiled carrots (a higher carb veggie) with dinner. My FBG the next day was 5.7. My FBG is carb sensitive. Perhaps it would not be as carb sensitive for someone who had lost more weight than me, but I doubt they could ever go back to higher carb without ramifications.
Illness appears to have affected my FBG too. I had a virus for a month, and during that time my fasting BG was back to prediabetic range.
Normal FBG is 3.9 to 5.5 (70-100). If I stay LC, and without too many calories, I usually stay between a 4.4 and 5.2.
http://www.niddk.nih.gov/health-information/health-topics/Diabetes/diagnosis-diabetes-prediabetes/Pages/index.aspx
http://www.type2diabetesguide.com/conversion-chart-for-blood-sugar-levels.shtml#.VhBcpuxVhHw
It seems most professionals recommend regular exercise, not just modifying the diet to improve those numbers. So, are you moving/exercising? If so, has it improved those numbers?
0 -
MY blood glucose numbers dropped within a week of changing my diet. To be honest, they haven't improved with more weight loss. For me, it's all about what I've eaten and how much. I've gone from about 185-190 lbs down to about 155 lbs in the last 3 months. It really hasn't helped my FBG; I need to eat low carb.
The other day I had 2 Tbs of xylitol sweetened chocolate chips with about a 1/3 of a cup of macadamia nuts for a bedtime snack; I also had broiled carrots (a higher carb veggie) with dinner. My FBG the next day was 5.7. My FBG is carb sensitive. Perhaps it would not be as carb sensitive for someone who had lost more weight than me, but I doubt they could ever go back to higher carb without ramifications.
Illness appears to have affected my FBG too. I had a virus for a month, and during that time my fasting BG was back to prediabetic range.
Normal FBG is 3.9 to 5.5 (70-100). If I stay LC, and without too many calories, I usually stay between a 4.4 and 5.2.
http://www.niddk.nih.gov/health-information/health-topics/Diabetes/diagnosis-diabetes-prediabetes/Pages/index.aspx
http://www.type2diabetesguide.com/conversion-chart-for-blood-sugar-levels.shtml#.VhBcpuxVhHw
It took longer for my blood glucose to lower. My first fasting test was 117. I didn't really think I would have a high number (not that high). I started counting sugar grams and I still had a hard time getting my BSG under 100. Once I finally quit counting sugar grams and starting eating more vegetables and less processed carbs (meaning eating clean) it has been an average of 92. I walk every day and do Tony Horton's 10 minute trainer before my walk.
You are doing great--it isn't easy but it is important for your health.0 -
30 to 35 lbs in 3 months is a relatively fast burn for that starting weight. I'd consider the possibility that some muscle mass was lost.MY blood glucose numbers dropped within a week of changing my diet. To be honest, they haven't improved with more weight loss. For me, it's all about what I've eaten and how much. I've gone from about 185-190 lbs down to about 155 lbs in the last 3 months. It really hasn't helped my FBG; I need to eat low carb.
The other day I had 2 Tbs of xylitol sweetened chocolate chips with about a 1/3 of a cup of macadamia nuts for a bedtime snack; I also had broiled carrots (a higher carb veggie) with dinner. My FBG the next day was 5.7. My FBG is carb sensitive. Perhaps it would not be as carb sensitive for someone who had lost more weight than me, but I doubt they could ever go back to higher carb without ramifications.
Illness appears to have affected my FBG too. I had a virus for a month, and during that time my fasting BG was back to prediabetic range.
Normal FBG is 3.9 to 5.5 (70-100). If I stay LC, and without too many calories, I usually stay between a 4.4 and 5.2.
http://www.niddk.nih.gov/health-information/health-topics/Diabetes/diagnosis-diabetes-prediabetes/Pages/index.aspx
http://www.type2diabetesguide.com/conversion-chart-for-blood-sugar-levels.shtml#.VhBcpuxVhHw
I think muscle mass is rather productive for glucose control as each pound represents a lot of capacity for storing glycogen, which is a pretty quick way to shuttle glucose out of the blood.
I have diabetes in my family, and have been severely overweight most of my life. Yet I can have ice cream and have blood glucose of 94 about 15 minutes after finishing it. Good be genetic luck, but I tend to attribute it to resistance training.0 -
Just need to find what works for you. I can eat 1500 calories with lots of carbs and feel like crap and not lose a pound and eat 1500 calories without carbs and the weight comes off easily.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions