High Protein, Low Carbs Vs Calorie Counting

clippergear

I've been doing a bunch reading and have found a lot on the idea that more weight can be lost on a high protein, low carb diet than a diet of calorie counting. I wanted to get others perspective on this idea because I'm kinda confused now and wondering if I'm doing the correct thing with MFP.

stevencloser

You need to be in a calorie deficit to lose weight. No special diet lets you circumvent that. At the same deficit you're going to lose about the same amount of fat, regardless if that's low carb or not.
It's all up to your preference.

Hornsby

A calorie deficit is king. Doesn't matter how you get there for weight loss. If you eat above your energy requirements, you will gain weight. If you eat under your energy requirements, you will lose weight. Make up of the food is of little matter.

You are on an MFP forum though, where the majority believes in calorie counting so your answers will most likely lean that way.

Mistraal1981

If you eat more calories than you burn you will put on weight.
If you eat less calories than you burn you will lose weight.

It doesn't matter where those calories come from. The only difference is that 200 calories of broccoli will make you feel fuller for longer than 200 calories of chocolate. So what you choose to eat to get you through the day is up to you.

ChrisM8971

I think it should be high fat if you go down the low carb route because your body will burn dietary fat rather than carbohydrates as fuel. You can also get a large initial drop with low carb eating through a reduction in water weight but once that has gone the rate of loss on a carb restricting diet and calorie counting should be pretty much the same provided your calorie deficit is the same on both.

There are some good reasons for some to go down the low carb route, health issues, the fact some feel fuller for longer and so find it easier to stay in a calorie deficit etc.

I remember being told after losing 50 lbs that I had done well but if I really wanted to lose weight then I would need to cut carbs!

At the end of the day it all comes down to calorie deficit, its just the method of achieving it that varies and you need to find which one suits you

Nancy_Niles

The way I understand it, people who are trying to lose weight and are ALSO either pre-diabetic or insulin resistant (me) or suffer from metabolic syndrome should do low carb because it has a greater effect on blood sugar. If you don't have that problem, I wouldn't suffer through a low carb diet if I didn't have to.

gcibsthom

I did the low carb/no carb diet for about 6 months and lost 60lbs. The problem is that you cut out all fruits, vegetables, grain, etc. If it ain't meat, cheese, or eggs, you can't eat it. It works great for the first couple of months, but it drives up cholesterol levels and to be honest, I had to have my fruits and grains, etc. So cutting back on portions, and counting calories, while not as dramatic as low carb, is more reliable for KEEPING the weight off. Losing is easy. Maintaining is the tough part for me.

MelaniaTrump

I'm losing weight with high carb and high fiber. Healthy foods. It's all about the calories... all about the daily calories.
I see you are 47. Talk to your doctor first since high fat can mean higher intake of saturated fats. Are your current cholesterol numbers high?

Jeneba

Thanks, Nancy Niles, for saying what I was about to post! It is also applicable for those with hypo-thyroid and low cortisol. But, to be honest, those who say you can get away without counting calories are dreaming.

I am in the middle of a 14 day cleanse and have never felt so good in ages. But when I weigh in tomorrow, I expect to (1) not have lost an ounce OR (2) gained.

It is very frustrating to put in so much effort and not get the results I had hoped for.

clippergear

I appreciate everybody's thoughts on this subject. Thank you for posting. I think I'll stick with MFP and the calorie counting because as a lot of you said, it doesn't matter where the calories come from as long as you stay under your count!! Thanks again.

cb2bslim

I know you are asking about a protein diet but in my case I followed a very strict diet. And by no means do I know anything about the "health benefits" of a high protein/low carb diet, so bare with me.

The diet and counting calories both worked for me. I started out a very strict protein diet (20 foods or less) day in and day out. It lasted about a month. Yes, I was dropping the weight. I couldn't stomach it anymore so I started modifying it and found out MFP calorie counting works just as well. I count my calories and keep my protein, fat, carbs, fiber and sodium in check. The one thing that I liked about the protein diet was that it opened my eyes to how bad I was eating prior to this journey.

I don't want to bad mouth a strict diet because every person is different. Some will gain weight back when going off a strict diet. Let's face it, if there is no medical need of a certain diet, do you really want to be eating like that rest of your life? I would rather make healthier decisions and share regular meals with family and friends.

Good luck to you.

lemurcat12

Low carb/high protein basically can be a good trick to get yourself in a calorie deficit or make maintaining a calorie deficit easier, since for many people protein is a lot more satiating than carbs. Also, if you are someone who has traditionally overeaten lots of foods that contain carbs (traditional "junk" foods are about half carbs, half fat, like chips, fries, cookies, donuts; soda is obviously just carbs), going low carb will mean you cut out of your diet these foods.

It's going to be less helpful if (like me) you didn't eat lots of that stuff and can easily overeat on lower carb things (like cheese). I also think people probably adjust over time as people find things to overeat that fit in their new way of eating -- that's why often the effect of changing to a new diet wears off over time.

All that aside, if your protein is on the lower side it can be helpful to increase it to, say, .65-.85 g per lb of healthy body weight, both to see if it does help with fullness (if that's an issue for someone) and because increasing to this amount can help preserve lean body mass when eating at a deficit (assuming one also works out).

Whether people find that more carbs make it harder for them to stay full on lower calories varies a lot -- some say carbs are less filling than fat, others say the opposite (and this is likely a majority from the studies I've seen). For me, "carbs" and "fat" is less relevant than the specific food item.

Very high protein isn't necessary for any reason, and to the extent people think "carbs" and/or "fat" is bad, that's wrong.

JQuinnLife

I can tell you have never heard of Ketogenics, and neither have many of the posters here.

Yes, while ultimately CICO is what determines if you lose weight, there are still other factors that effect health, particularly carbohydrates, sugar, and insulin. If all you ate was candy, but only ate 1,300 calories a day, would you lose weight? Absolutely. Would your metabolism and overall health be pretty good? No.

So what Ketogenics does is eliminate carbohydrates from your diet. Carbs break down into sugar, your body's only way to process that sugar is by insulin. Which has a lot of health effects and issues.

Removing carbs from your diet for a long enough period of time (usually 3-4 weeks) will put you into Keto-adaptation. Your body will no longer rely on the fairly limited resources of carbohydrate energy reserves, but on the huge reserves of fat energy. You become fat-adapted.

If you're really interested in learning more about the health and weight loss benefits of Ketogenics, I definitely recommend: https://reddit.com/r/keto/

You can also message me with any questions.

stevencloser

And here we go with the all candy diet.

If all you ate was butter but only 1300 of it you'd get sick and die of malnutrition.
Therefore I'm completely eliminating as much fat as possible from my diet.

JQuinnLife

stevencloser wrote: »

Therefore I'm completely eliminating as much fat as possible from my diet.

Doesn't understand Ketogenics, gives advice about Ketogenics. #logic

stevencloser

I'm just using your logic. It's not my fault it's bad.

queenliz99

Nage3000 wrote: »

stevencloser wrote: »

Therefore I'm completely eliminating as much fat as possible from my diet.

Doesn't understand Ketogenics, gives advice about Ketogenics. #logic

#nologic

JQuinnLife

stevencloser wrote: »

I'm just using your logic. It's not my fault it's bad.

I just got rekt by @stevencloser

baconslave

clippergear wrote: »

I've been doing a bunch reading and have found a lot on the idea that more weight can be lost on a high protein, low carb diet than a diet of calorie counting. I wanted to get others perspective on this idea because I'm kinda confused now and wondering if I'm doing the correct thing with MFP.

Ketogenic eater for over 1.5 years here.

Low-carb and calorie-counting. Calories count for both. They are just 2 different paths to the same place. Some people find the LC path easier to achieve that deficit. Some people find just plain calorie-counting less complicated and more preferable. It's all personal preference.

So, assuming that there are no medical conditions to make the decision for you... if counting calories with moderation is your cup of tea, use that.
If you find moderating certain carbohydrates is almost impossible without a crutch, use a version of low-carb to help you get that deficit.

Either way, you need a sustainable way to have a consistent calorie deficit to lose weight.
Simple.

I lost more weight doing a low-carb/high-fat diet than straight calorie-counting. But that is because it was a much more sustainable approach for me. The best plan is one that fits your health and medical profile and that you can sustain. That's it. I stuck with what was sustainable. I did that for 1.5 years and lost the weight.

Consistency, persistence, and time.

psuLemon

Nage3000 wrote: »

I can tell you have never heard of Ketogenics, and neither have many of the posters here.

Yes, while ultimately CICO is what determines if you lose weight, there are still other factors that effect health, particularly carbohydrates, sugar, and insulin. If all you ate was candy, but only ate 1,300 calories a day, would you lose weight? Absolutely. Would your metabolism and overall health be pretty good? No.

So what Ketogenics does is eliminate carbohydrates from your diet. Carbs break down into sugar, your body's only way to process that sugar is by insulin. Which has a lot of health effects and issues.

Removing carbs from your diet for a long enough period of time (usually 3-4 weeks) will put you into Keto-adaptation. Your body will no longer rely on the fairly limited resources of carbohydrate energy reserves, but on the huge reserves of fat energy. You become fat-adapted.

If you're really interested in learning more about the health and weight loss benefits of Ketogenics, I definitely recommend: https://reddit.com/r/keto/

You can also message me with any questions.

You should do some more research because insulin does not cause health effects or issues. In fact, you might want to spend some time researching the blue zones. They are 70 to 80% carbs and are the longest living people in the world.

Regarding the bold, what is your point? You either burn glycogen or fat. In a fat adapted environment, you burn body fat (if in a deficit) and dietary fat.

Also, the reason many people try to make that argument is because they were doing higher carb wrong and fail how to implement it in a beneficial fashion. Many of of who are high carb concentrate on nutrient dense foods to maximize the health benefits and satiety. That means veggies, fruits, whole grains/oats, legumes, fish, lean proteins and dairy. Generally that means, high in vitamins/minerals/antioxidants, unsaturated fats, omega-3s, etc...


OP, like others mention, the reason for greater weight loss up front is because of glycogen/water weight depletion. After the first few weeks, it will level out and weight loss will be equal over time. Now, if you find that fat fills you up more than carbs, then it might be beneficial to reduce carbs in support of fats. If you are like me, its better to eat lean proteins, high fiber foods and starches.

In the end, the most important factor in weight loss is dietary compliance (ability to stick with a particular dietary strategy). Ultimately, while we can suggest a variety (Mediterranean, LCHF, KETO, Vegan, Paleo, etc...) but it would be up to you to figure out which best fits your personality and lifestyle.

lemurcat12

Nage3000 wrote: »

I can tell you have never heard of Ketogenics, and neither have many of the posters here.

I strongly suspect that it is impossible to read the forums for more than 10 minutes and not have heard of ketogenics. (Also, high protein/low carb isn't keto -- high fat/low carb is.)

Yes, while ultimately CICO is what determines if you lose weight, there are still other factors that effect health, particularly carbohydrates, sugar, and insulin.

Yes, there are other factors that affect health, such as the healthfulness of the overall diet. I don't believe an average LCHF diet is better than other diets from this perspective -- both keto and high carb diets (as well as all in-between) can be healthful or not, depending on the specific food choices made.

If all you ate was candy, but only ate 1,300 calories a day, would you lose weight? Absolutely. Would your metabolism and overall health be pretty good? No.

Was OP considering an all-candy diet?

So what Ketogenics does is eliminate carbohydrates from your diet.

No -- which is why keto can be done healthfully, because you can still eat a decent amount of vegetables. Eliminating all carbs would be nuts, and specifically eliminating vegetables does not make for a healthful diet (there are traditional populations whose consumption of vegetables is limited, especially at certain times of year, but they tend to eat in ways adapted to that, and include in their diet foods, such as organ meat, which the average LCHF dieter likely does not eat so much of).

Carbs break down into sugar, your body's only way to process that sugar is by insulin. Which has a lot of health effects and issues.

No.

Also, all traditional human diets appear to be non-ketogenic.

Removing carbs from your diet for a long enough period of time (usually 3-4 weeks) will put you into Keto-adaptation. Your body will no longer rely on the fairly limited resources of carbohydrate energy reserves, but on the huge reserves of fat energy. You become fat-adapted.

We can all access fat storage and run on a mix of fat and glycogen. How much of each depends on the person and what the person is doing. And even after being keto adapted one cannot use fat for certain kinds of activities, because the process is too inefficient. (If one does not intensely exercise, that may not matter.)