HOW MUCH CARBS TO LOSE WEIGHT?
Replies
-
DeguelloTex wrote: »That's a very negative post about people who feel macros are an important consideration for them. Just because it doesn't seem important to you doesn't mean you need to devalue their approach. If it works for them, you should support them, not say they're getting carried away.
Well, I think there are two types of people who follow more restrictive diets:
1. Those doing it because it's important to them personally. For example, someone who is vegan for ethical reasons.
2. Those doing it because they believe they can't lose weight without it. For example, someone who thinks they need to eat vegan to lose.
The first group is fine - you can have whatever set of dietary restrictions that you feel are right for yourself (vegan, keto, kosher, halal, etc.) and you can lose weight. People here are losing weight on each of the above.
The second group needs to be educated that, while there are certainly reasons people might restrict their diet, it's not a requirement for weight loss. For those for whom the diet is a burden and not a choice, they should be told there are other ways they can be equally successful that might fit better into their life.0 -
This thread is a prime example of why people struggle to lose weight and are so bloody lost. Go low carb! No, go low fat! No, eat only at 6 PM. Don't drink milk, it has sugars! Oh noes!
You gain weight if your calories are in a surplus. You lose weight in a deficit. Anyone who suggests otherwise is doing a huge disservice to everyone reading this.0 -
Perhaps the fairest thing to say would be this.
At the very beginning of someone's weight loss journey, CICO is King. It's hard to get into for a lot of people, so confusing the issue by adding in other factors can actually derail someone's ability to progress, and CICO will make you lose weight, no one can argue against that.
Later on in someone's weight loss, macros can become more important, just as @PeachyCarol said, as she became more active and lost weight, her macro needs changed based on that.
So OP, since weight loss is only part of your goal (seems to me your weight is okay, it distribution you're worried about) perhaps macros will matter more to you. I think you need to do some more self-assessment. Find out your BMR, RMR, TDEE, and most importantly, figure out what your goals are. Are you really trying to lose weight? Or is your distribution the issue? Cause that will make a big difference in what you choose to do with your diet.0 -
And of course, I would be remiss if I didn't say maybe you're ready to jump into it full swing, CICO, macros, the whole lot, clearly you've done some research:)0
-
So are you claiming that challenging someone's flawed beliefs and assertions about macros, or sugar, or carbs, or keto, or whatever isn't really being negative, and can actually be helpful for someone who's interested in learning more? That disagreement about ideas can actually be positive and supportive?rankinsect wrote: »DeguelloTex wrote: »That's a very negative post about people who feel macros are an important consideration for them. Just because it doesn't seem important to you doesn't mean you need to devalue their approach. If it works for them, you should support them, not say they're getting carried away.
Well, I think there are two types of people who follow more restrictive diets:
1. Those doing it because it's important to them personally. For example, someone who is vegan for ethical reasons.
2. Those doing it because they believe they can't lose weight without it. For example, someone who thinks they need to eat vegan to lose.
The first group is fine - you can have whatever set of dietary restrictions that you feel are right for yourself (vegan, keto, kosher, halal, etc.) and you can lose weight. People here are losing weight on each of the above.
The second group needs to be educated that, while there are certainly reasons people might restrict their diet, it's not a requirement for weight loss. For those for whom the diet is a burden and not a choice, they should be told there are other ways they can be equally successful that might fit better into their life.0 -
DeguelloTex wrote: »So are you claiming that challenging someone's flawed beliefs and assertions about macros, or sugar, or carbs, or keto, or whatever isn't really being negative, and can actually be helpful for someone who's interested in learning more? That disagreement about ideas can actually be positive and supportive?
Teehee:) No not at all! I'm sure he's advocating we all get mortally offended by one another at the slightest hint of disagreement! (Sugar is the devil!) Lol!
0 -
DeguelloTex wrote: »That's a very negative post about people who feel macros are an important consideration for them. Just because it doesn't seem important to you doesn't mean you need to devalue their approach. If it works for them, you should support them, not say they're getting carried away.
Although I realize that the point of your post is was to try to belittle and insult me, I actually do support people who choose to eat excessive amounts of protein or cut their carbs down to almost nothing. If they feel better doing it, that's what they should do and I support it 100%.
It just isn't necessary, so people who don't wish to do it shouldn't bother or worry about it when someone else says they should do it. Let those who want to do it do that, but don't get carried away doing something you don't want to do, just because other people said you should. Eat the diet YOU want to eat.
I support both ways, depending on the person. Everyone should do what works for them.0 -
There wouldn't be any point in trying to belittle you. Additionally, doing so would be against the community guidelines.DeguelloTex wrote: »That's a very negative post about people who feel macros are an important consideration for them. Just because it doesn't seem important to you doesn't mean you need to devalue their approach. If it works for them, you should support them, not say they're getting carried away.
Although I realize that the point of your post is was to try to belittle and insult me, I actually do support people who choose to eat excessive amounts of protein or cut their carbs down to almost nothing. If they feel better doing it, that's what they should do and I support it 100%.
It just isn't necessary, so people who don't wish to do it shouldn't bother or worry about it when someone else says they should do it. Let those who want to do it do that, but don't get carried away doing something you don't want to do, just because other people said you should. Eat the diet YOU want to eat.
I support both ways, depending on the person. Everyone should do what works for them.
It just seemed odd that you see saying that someone is getting carried away is supporting them 100%. I guess support comes in all shapes and sizes.
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
I do software development in the field of animal nutrition. I don't have the education in this field that my co-workers do. When I started several years ago, they began advising as to how I was handling my personal nutrition. They gave me a lot of information and homework as a sort of cram course on the subject. This is when I made the change to low-carb.0
-
Like the primates eat, presumably.I do software development in the field of animal nutrition. I don't have the education in this field that my co-workers do. When I started several years ago, they began advising as to how I was handling my personal nutrition. They gave me a lot of information and homework as a sort of cram course on the subject. This is when I made the change to low-carb.
0 -
No, actually we are more like swine.DeguelloTex wrote: »Like the primates eat, presumably.
Think about it. They grow swine and use their livers transplanted to people as a temporary measure until a human donor can be found.
Gives a whole new meaning to "pigging out."
0 -
Can't say that I've ever seen a swine on a low carb diet before. Must be the new hipster thing or something0
-
juggernaut1974 wrote: »Can't say that I've ever seen a swine on a low carb diet before. Must be the new hipster thing or something
I prefer the medieval times diet personally, although I do consider myself a hipster. We have a thread going , you should check it out . there's even an explanation as to which foods are okay and what isn't recommended
0 -
thorsmom01 wrote: »juggernaut1974 wrote: »Can't say that I've ever seen a swine on a low carb diet before. Must be the new hipster thing or something
I prefer the medieval times diet personally, although I do consider myself a hipster. We have a thread going , you should check it out . there's even an explanation as to which foods are okay and what isn't recommended
I'd love to see this...
Potatoes: If available, no irish
Rats: Unadvisable, plague0 -
Humans are more like pigs than primates? Boy, the public schools really hosed me on that one.0
-
I actually do support people who choose to eat excessive amounts of protein or cut their carbs down to almost nothing. If they feel better doing it, that's what they should do and I support it 100%.
It just isn't necessary.
At 6'/368# at the time, I recently started at a hospital based bariatric clinic for the non-surgical route. Being diagnosed as pre-diabetic, insulin resistant and having dysmetabolic syndrome (matching all 5 criteria) this is what they recommended for me. Not ultra low on the carbs but since my body doesn't work with the insulin the way it should, we are working to have it have a smaller amount of carbs to work with as energy so that it uses protein more. Also eating every 2 to 2-1/2 hours small things focused on protein. Currently my Calories are set at just under 2200 and I am not exercising at all yet and the changes have gone from 368 at the end of August when I started to 337 as of yesterday. So the combination of it all is working. Part of this is likely a calorie deficit and not eating 3000 calories per day but I do believe that with my situation, the lower carb count is important as my body isn't using the glucose it breaks down into as much and stores more of it instead.
That isn't to say it is the same for everyone and sure, calorie deficit makes a biggest difference for all but for some of us, other factors matter as well. I could eat the same 2000 calories and the way it affects my system would be different if it included 200g of carbs and 90g of protein versus 90g of carbs and 200g of protein.
And as to the OP's original question that started all of this... Yes, you can deduct dietary fiber from total carbs since dietary fiber passes through your body and therefore doesn't affect the body. I was also told at the clinic that you can also deduct half of any sugar alcohols. So if what you are eating has 20g carbs, 5g fiber and 6g sugar alcohol you would have a net carb total of 12g (20-5=15, 15-3=12).
0 -
clgaram720 wrote: »thorsmom01 wrote: »juggernaut1974 wrote: »Can't say that I've ever seen a swine on a low carb diet before. Must be the new hipster thing or something
I prefer the medieval times diet personally, although I do consider myself a hipster. We have a thread going , you should check it out . there's even an explanation as to which foods are okay and what isn't recommended
I'd love to see this...
Potatoes: If available, no irish
Rats: Unadvisable, plague
Yep, check out the thread. I bumped it up so you could find it. I feel its a more sustainable approach personally0 -
Exactly. If you want to put weight on swine, you start with high carbs.juggernaut1974 wrote: »Can't say that I've ever seen a swine on a low carb diet before. Must be the new hipster thing or something
Like us, swine do not do well with soy so read the label well when buying protein.
The diet and digestive system ( the way they process food ) is very similar to humans (and other primates.)DeguelloTex wrote: »Humans are more like pigs than primates? Boy, the public schools really hosed me on that one.
We have a lot more science directed at feeding swine than we do at feeding chimps so it's a broader spectrum of analysis.
0 -
Exactly. If you want to put weight gain on swine, you start with high carbs.juggernaut1974 wrote: »Can't say that I've ever seen a swine on a low carb diet before. Must be the new hipster thing or something
Like us, swine do not do well with soy so read the label well when buying protein.
The diet and digestive system and the way they process food is much closer to humans (and other primates.)DeguelloTex wrote: »Humans are more like pigs than primates? Boy, the public schools really hosed me on that one.
We have a lot more science directed at feeding swine than we do at feeding chimps so it's a broader spectrum of analysis.
How much research have they done on swine trying to lose weight?
Of course, if one is trying to gain mass, one will need to up their intake (hi-carb)...that isn't really what's at dispute here.0 -
thorsmom01 wrote: »
Yep, check out the thread. I bumped it up so you could find it. I feel its a more sustainable approach personally[/quote]
Thanks!0 -
juggernaut1974 wrote: »
Exactly. If you want to put weight gain on swine, you start with high carbs.juggernaut1974 wrote: »Can't say that I've ever seen a swine on a low carb diet before. Must be the new hipster thing or something
Like us, swine do not do well with soy so read the label well when buying protein.
The diet and digestive system and the way they process food is much closer to humans (and other primates.)DeguelloTex wrote: »Humans are more like pigs than primates? Boy, the public schools really hosed me on that one.
We have a lot more science directed at feeding swine than we do at feeding chimps so it's a broader spectrum of analysis.
How much research have they done on swine trying to lose weight?
Of course, if one is trying to gain mass, one will need to up their intake (hi-carb)...that isn't really what's at dispute here.
Who needs carbs?0 -
Odysseus...Circe.........are we talking 'bout Homer?!?0
-
In regard to recommendations on protein:
It is not "excessive" to recommend .65-.85 g per pound of bodyweight of protein to a dieter. The RDA of protein is for healthy individuals who are not dieting.
Dieters have a need for more protein than people at a healthy weight in order to preserve muscle mass while eating at a deficit.
So, no, it is not just fine to eat the minimum RDA unless you don't care about carrying around extra body fat.
http://evidencemag.com/dieting-protein-needs/0 -
I totally get that people have all kinds of reasons for eating what they eat and that some of them are physical, medical ones. I even said, up thread, that unless your doctor has told you to eat a certain way or you want to eat a certain way, there was no reason to do it.UncaToddly wrote: »I actually do support people who choose to eat excessive amounts of protein or cut their carbs down to almost nothing. If they feel better doing it, that's what they should do and I support it 100%.
It just isn't necessary.
At 6'/368# at the time, I recently started at a hospital based bariatric clinic for the non-surgical route. Being diagnosed as pre-diabetic, insulin resistant and having dysmetabolic syndrome (matching all 5 criteria) this is what they recommended for me. Not ultra low on the carbs but since my body doesn't work with the insulin the way it should, we are working to have it have a smaller amount of carbs to work with as energy so that it uses protein more. Also eating every 2 to 2-1/2 hours small things focused on protein. Currently my Calories are set at just under 2200 and I am not exercising at all yet and the changes have gone from 368 at the end of August when I started to 337 as of yesterday. So the combination of it all is working. Part of this is likely a calorie deficit and not eating 3000 calories per day but I do believe that with my situation, the lower carb count is important as my body isn't using the glucose it breaks down into as much and stores more of it instead.
That isn't to say it is the same for everyone and sure, calorie deficit makes a biggest difference for all but for some of us, other factors matter as well. I could eat the same 2000 calories and the way it affects my system would be different if it included 200g of carbs and 90g of protein versus 90g of carbs and 200g of protein.
And as to the OP's original question that started all of this... Yes, you can deduct dietary fiber from total carbs since dietary fiber passes through your body and therefore doesn't affect the body. I was also told at the clinic that you can also deduct half of any sugar alcohols. So if what you are eating has 20g carbs, 5g fiber and 6g sugar alcohol you would have a net carb total of 12g (20-5=15, 15-3=12).
A doctor telling you to do it is a very good reason! Probably the best reason. But just wanting to is fine, as well.
I'm not saying people shouldn't do what they want, just that they shouldn't feel obligated to eat some certain way because other people tell them they should.
Asking the doctor is really the smartest way to go about it.
0 -
PeachyCarol wrote: »Luvee_Dove5 wrote: »juggernaut1974 wrote: »
And you'd STILL have it backwards...
Yep.. calories determine fat loss... not macros. Macros can modify certain parts of the energy balance equation but that is it.
I disagree. Get your macros right, and the calories will fall into place. Too many carbs is not good for metabolism, especially as you age. You may be able to get away with it (high carbs) when you are younger, or if you are highly active.
Carbs become sugar in your blood stream, so try keeping them "low and slow": higher protein and fat and fiber macros, lower carbs (and sugar). So if your lean body mass is 140lbs, eat 140g protein. The amount of fat you take in will be just whatever is required to make your meals. My own fat intake is about 40-50% of my calories. Aim for high veggie intake and a serving of fiber supplement, so that your fiber intake is about 45g, give or take 5g. If you keep your Net Carbs (gCarbs - gFiber) low, it's much easier to lose weight. Of course if you are doing a lot of aerobic exercise, your carb intake will be a little higher in order to fuel that, but keep them minimal for fat loss.
Incidentally, eating this way will make you feel very satiated.
I'm 53. You're wrong.
I agree with you on protein intake, but disagree with you on carb intake, and how easy it is to lose weight, and how satisfying a particular macro ration is.
You know why? Those things vary on an individual basis depending on activity level and personal preference and who knows what else.
Even over the time I've been losing weight, it's changed for me. I've kept my protein intake consistent, but whereas I used to feel more satisfied with moderate carbs and moderate/high fat supplementing that? Once I became more active, the whole ballgame changed. I got very hungry. Fat wasn't filling me up any more. My body wanted carbs and is happiest now on a lower fat intake and a much higher carb intake.
And I still lose weight just fine, even at my age.
For you, it is wrong. It is true for some people - perhaps over half of all people. The only way to judge is to look at all people's health in the last years of their life and compare it to their younger years.
It was true for me. My insulin resistance went downhill fast in my late thirties when I was about 10-20lbs over a normal BMI. When I was younger I was running 1-2 hours per day, lifting weights, and carb loading. I lived on noodles, baked goods, and veggies. Now? That would push my blood glucose into diabetic numbers.
As you said, it varies on an individual basis.rankinsect wrote: »DeguelloTex wrote: »That's a very negative post about people who feel macros are an important consideration for them. Just because it doesn't seem important to you doesn't mean you need to devalue their approach. If it works for them, you should support them, not say they're getting carried away.
Well, I think there are two types of people who follow more restrictive diets:
1. Those doing it because it's important to them personally. For example, someone who is vegan for ethical reasons.
2. Those doing it because they believe they can't lose weight without it. For example, someone who thinks they need to eat vegan to lose.
The first group is fine - you can have whatever set of dietary restrictions that you feel are right for yourself (vegan, keto, kosher, halal, etc.) and you can lose weight. People here are losing weight on each of the above.
The second group needs to be educated that, while there are certainly reasons people might restrict their diet, it's not a requirement for weight loss. For those for whom the diet is a burden and not a choice, they should be told there are other ways they can be equally successful that might fit better into their life.
I think you left out group 3: those people following restrictive diets to improve their health (which often goes hand in hand with weight loss.juggernaut1974 wrote: »
Exactly. If you want to put weight gain on swine, you start with high carbs.juggernaut1974 wrote: »Can't say that I've ever seen a swine on a low carb diet before. Must be the new hipster thing or something
Like us, swine do not do well with soy so read the label well when buying protein.
The diet and digestive system and the way they process food is much closer to humans (and other primates.)DeguelloTex wrote: »Humans are more like pigs than primates? Boy, the public schools really hosed me on that one.
We have a lot more science directed at feeding swine than we do at feeding chimps so it's a broader spectrum of analysis.
How much research have they done on swine trying to lose weight?
Of course, if one is trying to gain mass, one will need to up their intake (hi-carb)...that isn't really what's at dispute here.
Who needs carbs?
LOL
0 -
rankinsect wrote: »DeguelloTex wrote: »That's a very negative post about people who feel macros are an important consideration for them. Just because it doesn't seem important to you doesn't mean you need to devalue their approach. If it works for them, you should support them, not say they're getting carried away.
Well, I think there are two types of people who follow more restrictive diets:
1. Those doing it because it's important to them personally. For example, someone who is vegan for ethical reasons.
2. Those doing it because they believe they can't lose weight without it. For example, someone who thinks they need to eat vegan to lose.
The first group is fine - you can have whatever set of dietary restrictions that you feel are right for yourself (vegan, keto, kosher, halal, etc.) and you can lose weight. People here are losing weight on each of the above.
The second group needs to be educated that, while there are certainly reasons people might restrict their diet, it's not a requirement for weight loss. For those for whom the diet is a burden and not a choice, they should be told there are other ways they can be equally successful that might fit better into their life.
3. Those of us for whom a certain type of diet is medically necessary.
OP, the best thing that you can do is to track carefully to see what actually works for you over time.0 -
Macros matter! We are not bunsen burners.0
-
rankinsect wrote: »Insulin, yes, will promote the creation of fat, but even on a high-carbohydrate diet, your insulin level is only elevated just after a meal (and, in fact, is elevated by both protein and carbohydrates). So yes, for a brief time after a meal, you create some fat. For most of the day, when you're not eating, insulin levels are low and the fat you produced just after that meal is oxidized for energy.
That rather depends on the individual. Some have prolonged hyperinsulinaemia 24/7 aka insulin resistance.0 -
rankinsect wrote: »Insulin, yes, will promote the creation of fat, but even on a high-carbohydrate diet, your insulin level is only elevated just after a meal (and, in fact, is elevated by both protein and carbohydrates). So yes, for a brief time after a meal, you create some fat. For most of the day, when you're not eating, insulin levels are low and the fat you produced just after that meal is oxidized for energy.
That rather depends on the individual. Some have prolonged hyperinsulinaemia 24/7 aka insulin resistance.
But that doesn't mean lipogenesis occurs 24/7, or that lipolysis is inhibited 24/7 in those individuals. In fact, it is the very fact that the fat cells are resistant to the effects of insulin that is the reason those people still undergo normal amounts of lipolysis and lipogenesis; these people don't gain extra fat because they are insulin resistant, like anyone else, they gain extra fat because they consume more calories than they burn.
Now, in those with insulin resistance, low-carb diets can be medically beneficial, but it's not because they can't burn fat due to their insulin levels, but because it helps control their blood sugar levels.0
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