Low carb... Is it a diet fad?
Replies
-
lemurcat12 wrote: »Micronutrients are found in foods that are not carb heavy too. Micronutrient intake is largely a non issue for any well planned diet regardless of the type including low carb, Zone, vegetarian.
Any well-planned diet, yes, but I've looked at plenty of super low carb diets here after the person in question promoted their specific diet to others, and they looked to be far short of some basic micros on a regular basis.And no, bonking is less of an issue for someone who is adapted to a ketogenic state. Extreme endurance athletes seem to benefit from very low carb diets for that very reason. Even if it was true that fat is a less efficient fuel, and it could be for those not yet keto adapted, it would be a non-issue for most low carb people including me.
Not true at all. Intense exercise can't be fueled without carbs, and if you look even at extreme endurance athletes who are promoted as low carb examples, they tend to eat lots of carbs when racing.
Even the few low carbers I have seen on this board who were endurance cyclist where "carb loading" on their ride days. The one I am thinking of use the GU gel several time. And while net carbs ended up low, his total was equivalent to my normal day.0 -
We interrupt your normal programming to say thanks to @lemurcat12 and @nvmomketo for the laughs. "Bonking" means something entirely different down here in little old New Zealand. But, it does apparently burn plenty of calories, so perhaps figuring out whether low-carb/high-carb affects endurance or, ahem, performance, could be an interesting exercise.
Sorry for the de-rail, please continue.
Heh -- reminscent of the Joseph O'Connor essay I quoted over on the "what's a stone" thread (highly recommended, as it ended up being about food and differences in language). Apparently some Irish football fans at DisneyWorld found their guide's discussion of how much she liked a ride and how proud they were of their giant Mickey a lot more amusing than she intended!0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »Micronutrients are found in foods that are not carb heavy too. Micronutrient intake is largely a non issue for any well planned diet regardless of the type including low carb, Zone, vegetarian.
Any well-planned diet, yes, but I've looked at plenty of super low carb diets here after the person in question promoted their specific diet to others, and they looked to be far short of some basic micros on a regular basis.And no, bonking is less of an issue for someone who is adapted to a ketogenic state. Extreme endurance athletes seem to benefit from very low carb diets for that very reason. Even if it was true that fat is a less efficient fuel, and it could be for those not yet keto adapted, it would be a non-issue for most low carb people including me.
Not true at all. Intense exercise can't be fueled without carbs, and if you look even at extreme endurance athletes who are promoted as low carb examples, they tend to eat lots of carbs when racing.
That isn't true. Intense exercise can be fueled without carbs. Carbs will provide some extra fuel though for those who need it during intense competition or training. Peter Attia MD refers to carbs as a performance enhancing drug.
Those who are not adding in carbs can still perform very well, but at a very high competitive level, say nationals or something, adding in some carbs for explosive, short duration sports would most likely give a slight edge.lemurcat12 wrote: »Micronutrients are found in foods that are not carb heavy too. Micronutrient intake is largely a non issue for any well planned diet regardless of the type including low carb, Zone, vegetarian.
Any well-planned diet, yes, but I've looked at plenty of super low carb diets here after the person in question promoted their specific diet to others, and they looked to be far short of some basic micros on a regular basis.And no, bonking is less of an issue for someone who is adapted to a ketogenic state. Extreme endurance athletes seem to benefit from very low carb diets for that very reason. Even if it was true that fat is a less efficient fuel, and it could be for those not yet keto adapted, it would be a non-issue for most low carb people including me.
Not true at all. Intense exercise can't be fueled without carbs, and if you look even at extreme endurance athletes who are promoted as low carb examples, they tend to eat lots of carbs when racing.
Even the few low carbers I have seen on this board who were endurance cyclist where "carb loading" on their ride days. The one I am thinking of use the GU gel several time. And while net carbs ended up low, his total was equivalent to my normal day.
I think I know who you mean. He ate low carb foods but timed his carbs for his long bike rides and never came out of ketosis even though he was eating a good 200+g of carbs per day.0 -
I
carbs and have lost plenty of weight, improved my fitness level and maintained LBM while eating them 0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »Micronutrients are found in foods that are not carb heavy too. Micronutrient intake is largely a non issue for any well planned diet regardless of the type including low carb, Zone, vegetarian.
Any well-planned diet, yes, but I've looked at plenty of super low carb diets here after the person in question promoted their specific diet to others, and they looked to be far short of some basic micros on a regular basis.And no, bonking is less of an issue for someone who is adapted to a ketogenic state. Extreme endurance athletes seem to benefit from very low carb diets for that very reason. Even if it was true that fat is a less efficient fuel, and it could be for those not yet keto adapted, it would be a non-issue for most low carb people including me.
Not true at all. Intense exercise can't be fueled without carbs, and if you look even at extreme endurance athletes who are promoted as low carb examples, they tend to eat lots of carbs when racing.
That isn't true. Intense exercise can be fueled without carbs. Carbs will provide some extra fuel though for those who need it during intense competition or training. Peter Attia MD refers to carbs as a performance enhancing drug.
Those who are not adding in carbs can still perform very well, but at a very high competitive level, say nationals or something, adding in some carbs for explosive, short duration sports would most likely give a slight edge.lemurcat12 wrote: »Micronutrients are found in foods that are not carb heavy too. Micronutrient intake is largely a non issue for any well planned diet regardless of the type including low carb, Zone, vegetarian.
Any well-planned diet, yes, but I've looked at plenty of super low carb diets here after the person in question promoted their specific diet to others, and they looked to be far short of some basic micros on a regular basis.And no, bonking is less of an issue for someone who is adapted to a ketogenic state. Extreme endurance athletes seem to benefit from very low carb diets for that very reason. Even if it was true that fat is a less efficient fuel, and it could be for those not yet keto adapted, it would be a non-issue for most low carb people including me.
Not true at all. Intense exercise can't be fueled without carbs, and if you look even at extreme endurance athletes who are promoted as low carb examples, they tend to eat lots of carbs when racing.
Even the few low carbers I have seen on this board who were endurance cyclist where "carb loading" on their ride days. The one I am thinking of use the GU gel several time. And while net carbs ended up low, his total was equivalent to my normal day.
I think I know who you mean. He ate low carb foods but timed his carbs for his long bike rides and never came out of ketosis even though he was eating a good 200+g of carbs per day.
Michael Phelps would concur...0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »We interrupt your normal programming to say thanks to @lemurcat12 and @nvmomketo for the laughs. "Bonking" means something entirely different down here in little old New Zealand. But, it does apparently burn plenty of calories, so perhaps figuring out whether low-carb/high-carb affects endurance or, ahem, performance, could be an interesting exercise.
Sorry for the de-rail, please continue.
Heh -- reminscent of the Joseph O'Connor essay I quoted over on the "what's a stone" thread (highly recommended, as it ended up being about food and differences in language). Apparently some Irish football fans at DisneyWorld found their guide's discussion of how much she liked a ride and how proud they were of their giant Mickey a lot more amusing than she intended!
Lol0 -
Obviously I'm not an Olympic athlete... But the one thing I did notice when I lowered my carbs was that I had more energy, not less. The sluggish afternoon slump was gone, and I found I met my exercise goal quicker every day, plus I added more miles.0
-
Christine_72 wrote: »Obviously I'm not an Olympic athlete... But the one thing I did notice when I lowered my carbs was that I had more energy, not less. The sluggish afternoon slump was gone, and I found I met my exercise goal quicker every day, plus I added more miles.
Exercising gives me tons of energy too, without me being low-carb.0 -
Christine_72 wrote: »Obviously I'm not an Olympic athlete... But the one thing I did notice when I lowered my carbs was that I had more energy, not less. The sluggish afternoon slump was gone, and I found I met my exercise goal quicker every day, plus I added more miles.
Exercising gives me tons of energy too, without me being low-carb.
Yes, but I didn't have this much energy before. Which was my point 0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »Micronutrients are found in foods that are not carb heavy too. Micronutrient intake is largely a non issue for any well planned diet regardless of the type including low carb, Zone, vegetarian.
Any well-planned diet, yes, but I've looked at plenty of super low carb diets here after the person in question promoted their specific diet to others, and they looked to be far short of some basic micros on a regular basis.And no, bonking is less of an issue for someone who is adapted to a ketogenic state. Extreme endurance athletes seem to benefit from very low carb diets for that very reason. Even if it was true that fat is a less efficient fuel, and it could be for those not yet keto adapted, it would be a non-issue for most low carb people including me.
Not true at all. Intense exercise can't be fueled without carbs, and if you look even at extreme endurance athletes who are promoted as low carb examples, they tend to eat lots of carbs when racing.
That isn't true. Intense exercise can be fueled without carbs. Carbs will provide some extra fuel though for those who need it during intense competition or training. Peter Attia MD refers to carbs as a performance enhancing drug.
Those who are not adding in carbs can still perform very well, but at a very high competitive level, say nationals or something, adding in some carbs for explosive, short duration sports would most likely give a slight edge.lemurcat12 wrote: »Micronutrients are found in foods that are not carb heavy too. Micronutrient intake is largely a non issue for any well planned diet regardless of the type including low carb, Zone, vegetarian.
Any well-planned diet, yes, but I've looked at plenty of super low carb diets here after the person in question promoted their specific diet to others, and they looked to be far short of some basic micros on a regular basis.And no, bonking is less of an issue for someone who is adapted to a ketogenic state. Extreme endurance athletes seem to benefit from very low carb diets for that very reason. Even if it was true that fat is a less efficient fuel, and it could be for those not yet keto adapted, it would be a non-issue for most low carb people including me.
Not true at all. Intense exercise can't be fueled without carbs, and if you look even at extreme endurance athletes who are promoted as low carb examples, they tend to eat lots of carbs when racing.
Even the few low carbers I have seen on this board who were endurance cyclist where "carb loading" on their ride days. The one I am thinking of use the GU gel several time. And while net carbs ended up low, his total was equivalent to my normal day.
I think I know who you mean. He ate low carb foods but timed his carbs for his long bike rides and never came out of ketosis even though he was eating a good 200+g of carbs per day.
Michael Phelps would concur...
Again, I think you'd be hard pressed to find any athlete who is elite to not be using carbs as their primary fuel. Athletes want fuel for their workouts, pre and post, none have been mentioned in this thread or any thread who eat LC consistently and who perform at a high level. It is a non-starter in terms of comparison.
0 -
bluefish86 wrote: »Low carb isn't neccesarily no carb. Low carb doesn't automatically mean a ketogenic diet.
I eat low carb... I eat rice, dark chocolate, starchy vegetables, some fruits, lentils and even occasionally wheat products (though I do find them hard to digest so I tend to avoid them). I find protein and fats are more satiating, so for me, it works and is sustainable.
I don't think it's a fad, I just think what works for some may not work for all.
This, i do lowerish carb just cause it makes me less hungry.0 -
Wheelhouse15 wrote: »EvgeniZyntx wrote: »Wheelhouse15 wrote: »EvgeniZyntx wrote: »Wheelhouse15 wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »I don't know anyone who eats a stick of butter... My max is 15grams
I remember a thread where someone said they did this and one other person said they do too.
I remember a thread where someone said they take 5 tablespoons of coconut oil in their morning coffee.
I remember a thread where someone said they ate more than half their diet in a macro that isn't even required nutritionally.
oh. I forget. Nevermind that.
If you function on a glucose fuel diet, you get your energy from carb calories. If you function on a fat fuel diet you get your energy from fat calories.
You seem to be implying coconut oil is not valid food and eating it is mock-worthy? I thought the official line is 'no bad foods'?
And it's not necessary to eat five times your fat minimum either but you always goes over that be too....
Hmm. There is is no minimum for carbohydrate consumption so that would put it at zero. If one is eating 40-50% of their calories in carbs... Well, that's more than five times over the minimum. Not necessary I guess?
Hmm.
There's maximum recommendations for protein and fat, I wonder what the rest of your calorie intake should consist of if you put them both at maximum and it's less than 100%.
That is not a requirement but just a recommendation by organizations whose guidelines don't work well for me (like ADA, Mayo, and AHA). I think their advice is quite outdated, along with advice to use egg substitutes instead of eggs, using low fat dairy, and substituting vegetable oils for saturated fats in cooking.
I honestly can't find any studies stating what a humans maximum fat intake should be. My guess is that it won't go higher than 90% but just because one would start to be lacking in protein.
If you have a study with the science that discovered the maximum fat intake for people, I would like to see it. It would be quite relevent to my diet.lemurcat12 wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »I don't know anyone who eats a stick of butter... My max is 15grams
I remember a thread where someone said they did this and one other person said they do too.
I remember a thread where someone said they take 5 tablespoons of coconut oil in their morning coffee.
I remember a thread where someone said they ate more than half their diet in a macro that isn't even required nutritionally.
oh. I forget. Nevermind that.
If you function on a glucose fuel diet, you get your energy from carb calories. If you function on a fat fuel diet you get your energy from fat calories.
You seem to be implying coconut oil is not valid food and eating it is mock-worthy? I thought the official line is 'no bad foods'?
And it's not necessary to eat five times your fat minimum either but you always goes over that be too....
Hmm. There is is no minimum for carbohydrate consumption so that would put it at zero. If one is eating 40-50% of their calories in carbs... Well, that's more than five times over the minimum. Not necessary I guess?
Most likely the majority of the carbs in a good diet will be providing micronutrients. It's also recommended to consume carbs if doing intense exercise. One can fuel oneself with fat, sure (in fact, we all use fat as fuel, you don't need to be doing a keto diet for that to be the case), but it's always less efficient so won't prevent you from bonking if exercising intensely beyond a certain period of time.
If memory serves, Gale claims to consume about 800 calories in coconut oil, which isn't providing much in the way of micros, just calories.
I doubt it it pertinent to the conversation to include specific people's dietary preferences when they are not participating in the thread.
Micronutrients are found in foods that are not carb heavy too. Micronutrient intake is largely a non issue for any well planned diet regardless of the type including low carb, Zone, vegetarian.
And no, bonking is less of an issue for someone who is adapted to a ketogenic state. Extreme endurance athletes seem to benefit from very low carb diets for that very reason. Even if it was true that fat is a less efficient fuel, and it could be for those not yet keto adapted, it would be a non-issue for most low carb people including me. I rarely do cardio or weights for more than an hour; occassionally I might be out hiking for hours but in that case I bring lunch.stevencloser wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »I don't know anyone who eats a stick of butter... My max is 15grams
I remember a thread where someone said they did this and one other person said they do too.
I remember a thread where someone said they take 5 tablespoons of coconut oil in their morning coffee.
I remember a thread where someone said they ate more than half their diet in a macro that isn't even required nutritionally.
oh. I forget. Nevermind that.
If you function on a glucose fuel diet, you get your energy from carb calories. If you function on a fat fuel diet you get your energy from fat calories.
You seem to be implying coconut oil is not valid food and eating it is mock-worthy? I thought the official line is 'no bad foods'?
And it's not necessary to eat five times your fat minimum either but you always goes over that be too....
Hmm. There is is no minimum for carbohydrate consumption so that would put it at zero. If one is eating 40-50% of their calories in carbs... Well, that's more than five times over the minimum. Not necessary I guess?
about as necessary as blowing at your fat minimum by 50%….
I just find it amusing that the keto/LC crew argues that carbs are not necessary, OK, maybe not, but it is not necessary to blow out your fat minimum by 50% either, but you all love to gloss over that point….
oh and see @stevencloser response….
I don't think I glossed over it. I must keep carbs very low to manage my insulin resistance. I must also keep protein moderate to manage said stubborn insulin resistance (as you know, protein raises insuli and BG too). What is left? Air? Breatharian lifestyle isn't going to cut it for me.
For me, it is "necessary to blow out fat minimum by 50%" or I'll be awfully hungry. I'm not sure why eating higher fat would be bothersome for you.
Do you have any peer reviewed research on the extreme endurance athletes? From what I've seen it seems that they do ok in the steady state, which fat can keep up with, but suck wind in the higher power output aspects like final push where you really need carbohydrates since fat doesn't oxidize quickly enough.
No. I've never looked for any. Just personal accounts and discussions.
Peter Attia experimenetd on himself and had fairly clear results. He is not an extreme endurance athlete though. http://eatingacademy.com/how-a-low-carb-diet-affected-my-athletic-performance
Ben Greefield did similar things. again, he is sort of an extreme endurance athlete. I know he does triathalons. http://www.bengreenfieldfitness.com/2014/05/how-much-fat-can-you-burn-2/
Athletes in ketosis will often add some carbs right before an event that requires a short all out burst of energy. they still are in ketosis and find glucose performance enhancing for those short energy bursts.... from what I understand.
The guy who says he only prepped for 14 days prior to a Hawaii Ironman?
There is some interesting info out there, but I'm just not seeing it as the ideal program for an endurance athlete.
Maybe future research will prove it, but it certainly does not yet.
Isn't the Hawaii Ironman invitation only? If so don't know how you prep for only 14 days.
I don't either, but it is what he says.
http://www.bengreenfieldfitness.com/2014/10/ben-greenfield-ironman-race-report/
Actually, now that I look at the site I've seen some of this guy before, he was in great shape already and has run several Tris before so I can see it.
The guy is a real athlete. But I'm going to take what he says with a grain of salt - I'd really like to see a small group study - not a one athlete analysis.0 -
EvgeniZyntx wrote: »Wheelhouse15 wrote: »EvgeniZyntx wrote: »Wheelhouse15 wrote: »EvgeniZyntx wrote: »Wheelhouse15 wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »I don't know anyone who eats a stick of butter... My max is 15grams
I remember a thread where someone said they did this and one other person said they do too.
I remember a thread where someone said they take 5 tablespoons of coconut oil in their morning coffee.
I remember a thread where someone said they ate more than half their diet in a macro that isn't even required nutritionally.
oh. I forget. Nevermind that.
If you function on a glucose fuel diet, you get your energy from carb calories. If you function on a fat fuel diet you get your energy from fat calories.
You seem to be implying coconut oil is not valid food and eating it is mock-worthy? I thought the official line is 'no bad foods'?
And it's not necessary to eat five times your fat minimum either but you always goes over that be too....
Hmm. There is is no minimum for carbohydrate consumption so that would put it at zero. If one is eating 40-50% of their calories in carbs... Well, that's more than five times over the minimum. Not necessary I guess?
Hmm.
There's maximum recommendations for protein and fat, I wonder what the rest of your calorie intake should consist of if you put them both at maximum and it's less than 100%.
That is not a requirement but just a recommendation by organizations whose guidelines don't work well for me (like ADA, Mayo, and AHA). I think their advice is quite outdated, along with advice to use egg substitutes instead of eggs, using low fat dairy, and substituting vegetable oils for saturated fats in cooking.
I honestly can't find any studies stating what a humans maximum fat intake should be. My guess is that it won't go higher than 90% but just because one would start to be lacking in protein.
If you have a study with the science that discovered the maximum fat intake for people, I would like to see it. It would be quite relevent to my diet.lemurcat12 wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »I don't know anyone who eats a stick of butter... My max is 15grams
I remember a thread where someone said they did this and one other person said they do too.
I remember a thread where someone said they take 5 tablespoons of coconut oil in their morning coffee.
I remember a thread where someone said they ate more than half their diet in a macro that isn't even required nutritionally.
oh. I forget. Nevermind that.
If you function on a glucose fuel diet, you get your energy from carb calories. If you function on a fat fuel diet you get your energy from fat calories.
You seem to be implying coconut oil is not valid food and eating it is mock-worthy? I thought the official line is 'no bad foods'?
And it's not necessary to eat five times your fat minimum either but you always goes over that be too....
Hmm. There is is no minimum for carbohydrate consumption so that would put it at zero. If one is eating 40-50% of their calories in carbs... Well, that's more than five times over the minimum. Not necessary I guess?
Most likely the majority of the carbs in a good diet will be providing micronutrients. It's also recommended to consume carbs if doing intense exercise. One can fuel oneself with fat, sure (in fact, we all use fat as fuel, you don't need to be doing a keto diet for that to be the case), but it's always less efficient so won't prevent you from bonking if exercising intensely beyond a certain period of time.
If memory serves, Gale claims to consume about 800 calories in coconut oil, which isn't providing much in the way of micros, just calories.
I doubt it it pertinent to the conversation to include specific people's dietary preferences when they are not participating in the thread.
Micronutrients are found in foods that are not carb heavy too. Micronutrient intake is largely a non issue for any well planned diet regardless of the type including low carb, Zone, vegetarian.
And no, bonking is less of an issue for someone who is adapted to a ketogenic state. Extreme endurance athletes seem to benefit from very low carb diets for that very reason. Even if it was true that fat is a less efficient fuel, and it could be for those not yet keto adapted, it would be a non-issue for most low carb people including me. I rarely do cardio or weights for more than an hour; occassionally I might be out hiking for hours but in that case I bring lunch.stevencloser wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »I don't know anyone who eats a stick of butter... My max is 15grams
I remember a thread where someone said they did this and one other person said they do too.
I remember a thread where someone said they take 5 tablespoons of coconut oil in their morning coffee.
I remember a thread where someone said they ate more than half their diet in a macro that isn't even required nutritionally.
oh. I forget. Nevermind that.
If you function on a glucose fuel diet, you get your energy from carb calories. If you function on a fat fuel diet you get your energy from fat calories.
You seem to be implying coconut oil is not valid food and eating it is mock-worthy? I thought the official line is 'no bad foods'?
And it's not necessary to eat five times your fat minimum either but you always goes over that be too....
Hmm. There is is no minimum for carbohydrate consumption so that would put it at zero. If one is eating 40-50% of their calories in carbs... Well, that's more than five times over the minimum. Not necessary I guess?
about as necessary as blowing at your fat minimum by 50%….
I just find it amusing that the keto/LC crew argues that carbs are not necessary, OK, maybe not, but it is not necessary to blow out your fat minimum by 50% either, but you all love to gloss over that point….
oh and see @stevencloser response….
I don't think I glossed over it. I must keep carbs very low to manage my insulin resistance. I must also keep protein moderate to manage said stubborn insulin resistance (as you know, protein raises insuli and BG too). What is left? Air? Breatharian lifestyle isn't going to cut it for me.
For me, it is "necessary to blow out fat minimum by 50%" or I'll be awfully hungry. I'm not sure why eating higher fat would be bothersome for you.
Do you have any peer reviewed research on the extreme endurance athletes? From what I've seen it seems that they do ok in the steady state, which fat can keep up with, but suck wind in the higher power output aspects like final push where you really need carbohydrates since fat doesn't oxidize quickly enough.
No. I've never looked for any. Just personal accounts and discussions.
Peter Attia experimenetd on himself and had fairly clear results. He is not an extreme endurance athlete though. http://eatingacademy.com/how-a-low-carb-diet-affected-my-athletic-performance
Ben Greefield did similar things. again, he is sort of an extreme endurance athlete. I know he does triathalons. http://www.bengreenfieldfitness.com/2014/05/how-much-fat-can-you-burn-2/
Athletes in ketosis will often add some carbs right before an event that requires a short all out burst of energy. they still are in ketosis and find glucose performance enhancing for those short energy bursts.... from what I understand.
The guy who says he only prepped for 14 days prior to a Hawaii Ironman?
There is some interesting info out there, but I'm just not seeing it as the ideal program for an endurance athlete.
Maybe future research will prove it, but it certainly does not yet.
Isn't the Hawaii Ironman invitation only? If so don't know how you prep for only 14 days.
I don't either, but it is what he says.
http://www.bengreenfieldfitness.com/2014/10/ben-greenfield-ironman-race-report/
Actually, now that I look at the site I've seen some of this guy before, he was in great shape already and has run several Tris before so I can see it.
The guy is a real athlete. But I'm going to take what he says with a grain of salt - I'd really like to see a small group study - not a one athlete analysis.
Anything anyone with a blog like that says I would take with a grain of salt too; he is, after all, selling something.0 -
Wheelhouse15 wrote: »EvgeniZyntx wrote: »Wheelhouse15 wrote: »EvgeniZyntx wrote: »Wheelhouse15 wrote: »EvgeniZyntx wrote: »Wheelhouse15 wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »I don't know anyone who eats a stick of butter... My max is 15grams
I remember a thread where someone said they did this and one other person said they do too.
I remember a thread where someone said they take 5 tablespoons of coconut oil in their morning coffee.
I remember a thread where someone said they ate more than half their diet in a macro that isn't even required nutritionally.
oh. I forget. Nevermind that.
If you function on a glucose fuel diet, you get your energy from carb calories. If you function on a fat fuel diet you get your energy from fat calories.
You seem to be implying coconut oil is not valid food and eating it is mock-worthy? I thought the official line is 'no bad foods'?
And it's not necessary to eat five times your fat minimum either but you always goes over that be too....
Hmm. There is is no minimum for carbohydrate consumption so that would put it at zero. If one is eating 40-50% of their calories in carbs... Well, that's more than five times over the minimum. Not necessary I guess?
Hmm.
There's maximum recommendations for protein and fat, I wonder what the rest of your calorie intake should consist of if you put them both at maximum and it's less than 100%.
That is not a requirement but just a recommendation by organizations whose guidelines don't work well for me (like ADA, Mayo, and AHA). I think their advice is quite outdated, along with advice to use egg substitutes instead of eggs, using low fat dairy, and substituting vegetable oils for saturated fats in cooking.
I honestly can't find any studies stating what a humans maximum fat intake should be. My guess is that it won't go higher than 90% but just because one would start to be lacking in protein.
If you have a study with the science that discovered the maximum fat intake for people, I would like to see it. It would be quite relevent to my diet.lemurcat12 wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »I don't know anyone who eats a stick of butter... My max is 15grams
I remember a thread where someone said they did this and one other person said they do too.
I remember a thread where someone said they take 5 tablespoons of coconut oil in their morning coffee.
I remember a thread where someone said they ate more than half their diet in a macro that isn't even required nutritionally.
oh. I forget. Nevermind that.
If you function on a glucose fuel diet, you get your energy from carb calories. If you function on a fat fuel diet you get your energy from fat calories.
You seem to be implying coconut oil is not valid food and eating it is mock-worthy? I thought the official line is 'no bad foods'?
And it's not necessary to eat five times your fat minimum either but you always goes over that be too....
Hmm. There is is no minimum for carbohydrate consumption so that would put it at zero. If one is eating 40-50% of their calories in carbs... Well, that's more than five times over the minimum. Not necessary I guess?
Most likely the majority of the carbs in a good diet will be providing micronutrients. It's also recommended to consume carbs if doing intense exercise. One can fuel oneself with fat, sure (in fact, we all use fat as fuel, you don't need to be doing a keto diet for that to be the case), but it's always less efficient so won't prevent you from bonking if exercising intensely beyond a certain period of time.
If memory serves, Gale claims to consume about 800 calories in coconut oil, which isn't providing much in the way of micros, just calories.
I doubt it it pertinent to the conversation to include specific people's dietary preferences when they are not participating in the thread.
Micronutrients are found in foods that are not carb heavy too. Micronutrient intake is largely a non issue for any well planned diet regardless of the type including low carb, Zone, vegetarian.
And no, bonking is less of an issue for someone who is adapted to a ketogenic state. Extreme endurance athletes seem to benefit from very low carb diets for that very reason. Even if it was true that fat is a less efficient fuel, and it could be for those not yet keto adapted, it would be a non-issue for most low carb people including me. I rarely do cardio or weights for more than an hour; occassionally I might be out hiking for hours but in that case I bring lunch.stevencloser wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »I don't know anyone who eats a stick of butter... My max is 15grams
I remember a thread where someone said they did this and one other person said they do too.
I remember a thread where someone said they take 5 tablespoons of coconut oil in their morning coffee.
I remember a thread where someone said they ate more than half their diet in a macro that isn't even required nutritionally.
oh. I forget. Nevermind that.
If you function on a glucose fuel diet, you get your energy from carb calories. If you function on a fat fuel diet you get your energy from fat calories.
You seem to be implying coconut oil is not valid food and eating it is mock-worthy? I thought the official line is 'no bad foods'?
And it's not necessary to eat five times your fat minimum either but you always goes over that be too....
Hmm. There is is no minimum for carbohydrate consumption so that would put it at zero. If one is eating 40-50% of their calories in carbs... Well, that's more than five times over the minimum. Not necessary I guess?
about as necessary as blowing at your fat minimum by 50%….
I just find it amusing that the keto/LC crew argues that carbs are not necessary, OK, maybe not, but it is not necessary to blow out your fat minimum by 50% either, but you all love to gloss over that point….
oh and see @stevencloser response….
I don't think I glossed over it. I must keep carbs very low to manage my insulin resistance. I must also keep protein moderate to manage said stubborn insulin resistance (as you know, protein raises insuli and BG too). What is left? Air? Breatharian lifestyle isn't going to cut it for me.
For me, it is "necessary to blow out fat minimum by 50%" or I'll be awfully hungry. I'm not sure why eating higher fat would be bothersome for you.
Do you have any peer reviewed research on the extreme endurance athletes? From what I've seen it seems that they do ok in the steady state, which fat can keep up with, but suck wind in the higher power output aspects like final push where you really need carbohydrates since fat doesn't oxidize quickly enough.
No. I've never looked for any. Just personal accounts and discussions.
Peter Attia experimenetd on himself and had fairly clear results. He is not an extreme endurance athlete though. http://eatingacademy.com/how-a-low-carb-diet-affected-my-athletic-performance
Ben Greefield did similar things. again, he is sort of an extreme endurance athlete. I know he does triathalons. http://www.bengreenfieldfitness.com/2014/05/how-much-fat-can-you-burn-2/
Athletes in ketosis will often add some carbs right before an event that requires a short all out burst of energy. they still are in ketosis and find glucose performance enhancing for those short energy bursts.... from what I understand.
The guy who says he only prepped for 14 days prior to a Hawaii Ironman?
There is some interesting info out there, but I'm just not seeing it as the ideal program for an endurance athlete.
Maybe future research will prove it, but it certainly does not yet.
Isn't the Hawaii Ironman invitation only? If so don't know how you prep for only 14 days.
I don't either, but it is what he says.
http://www.bengreenfieldfitness.com/2014/10/ben-greenfield-ironman-race-report/
Actually, now that I look at the site I've seen some of this guy before, he was in great shape already and has run several Tris before so I can see it.
The guy is a real athlete. But I'm going to take what he says with a grain of salt - I'd really like to see a small group study - not a one athlete analysis.
Anything anyone with a blog like that says I would take with a grain of salt too; he is, after all, selling something.
The guy also sells magnetic bracelets. There isn't enough salt in the Pacific Ocean to cover this dude's claims.
0 -
FunkyTobias wrote: »Wheelhouse15 wrote: »EvgeniZyntx wrote: »Wheelhouse15 wrote: »EvgeniZyntx wrote: »Wheelhouse15 wrote: »EvgeniZyntx wrote: »Wheelhouse15 wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »I don't know anyone who eats a stick of butter... My max is 15grams
I remember a thread where someone said they did this and one other person said they do too.
I remember a thread where someone said they take 5 tablespoons of coconut oil in their morning coffee.
I remember a thread where someone said they ate more than half their diet in a macro that isn't even required nutritionally.
oh. I forget. Nevermind that.
If you function on a glucose fuel diet, you get your energy from carb calories. If you function on a fat fuel diet you get your energy from fat calories.
You seem to be implying coconut oil is not valid food and eating it is mock-worthy? I thought the official line is 'no bad foods'?
And it's not necessary to eat five times your fat minimum either but you always goes over that be too....
Hmm. There is is no minimum for carbohydrate consumption so that would put it at zero. If one is eating 40-50% of their calories in carbs... Well, that's more than five times over the minimum. Not necessary I guess?
Hmm.
There's maximum recommendations for protein and fat, I wonder what the rest of your calorie intake should consist of if you put them both at maximum and it's less than 100%.
That is not a requirement but just a recommendation by organizations whose guidelines don't work well for me (like ADA, Mayo, and AHA). I think their advice is quite outdated, along with advice to use egg substitutes instead of eggs, using low fat dairy, and substituting vegetable oils for saturated fats in cooking.
I honestly can't find any studies stating what a humans maximum fat intake should be. My guess is that it won't go higher than 90% but just because one would start to be lacking in protein.
If you have a study with the science that discovered the maximum fat intake for people, I would like to see it. It would be quite relevent to my diet.lemurcat12 wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »I don't know anyone who eats a stick of butter... My max is 15grams
I remember a thread where someone said they did this and one other person said they do too.
I remember a thread where someone said they take 5 tablespoons of coconut oil in their morning coffee.
I remember a thread where someone said they ate more than half their diet in a macro that isn't even required nutritionally.
oh. I forget. Nevermind that.
If you function on a glucose fuel diet, you get your energy from carb calories. If you function on a fat fuel diet you get your energy from fat calories.
You seem to be implying coconut oil is not valid food and eating it is mock-worthy? I thought the official line is 'no bad foods'?
And it's not necessary to eat five times your fat minimum either but you always goes over that be too....
Hmm. There is is no minimum for carbohydrate consumption so that would put it at zero. If one is eating 40-50% of their calories in carbs... Well, that's more than five times over the minimum. Not necessary I guess?
Most likely the majority of the carbs in a good diet will be providing micronutrients. It's also recommended to consume carbs if doing intense exercise. One can fuel oneself with fat, sure (in fact, we all use fat as fuel, you don't need to be doing a keto diet for that to be the case), but it's always less efficient so won't prevent you from bonking if exercising intensely beyond a certain period of time.
If memory serves, Gale claims to consume about 800 calories in coconut oil, which isn't providing much in the way of micros, just calories.
I doubt it it pertinent to the conversation to include specific people's dietary preferences when they are not participating in the thread.
Micronutrients are found in foods that are not carb heavy too. Micronutrient intake is largely a non issue for any well planned diet regardless of the type including low carb, Zone, vegetarian.
And no, bonking is less of an issue for someone who is adapted to a ketogenic state. Extreme endurance athletes seem to benefit from very low carb diets for that very reason. Even if it was true that fat is a less efficient fuel, and it could be for those not yet keto adapted, it would be a non-issue for most low carb people including me. I rarely do cardio or weights for more than an hour; occassionally I might be out hiking for hours but in that case I bring lunch.stevencloser wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »I don't know anyone who eats a stick of butter... My max is 15grams
I remember a thread where someone said they did this and one other person said they do too.
I remember a thread where someone said they take 5 tablespoons of coconut oil in their morning coffee.
I remember a thread where someone said they ate more than half their diet in a macro that isn't even required nutritionally.
oh. I forget. Nevermind that.
If you function on a glucose fuel diet, you get your energy from carb calories. If you function on a fat fuel diet you get your energy from fat calories.
You seem to be implying coconut oil is not valid food and eating it is mock-worthy? I thought the official line is 'no bad foods'?
And it's not necessary to eat five times your fat minimum either but you always goes over that be too....
Hmm. There is is no minimum for carbohydrate consumption so that would put it at zero. If one is eating 40-50% of their calories in carbs... Well, that's more than five times over the minimum. Not necessary I guess?
about as necessary as blowing at your fat minimum by 50%….
I just find it amusing that the keto/LC crew argues that carbs are not necessary, OK, maybe not, but it is not necessary to blow out your fat minimum by 50% either, but you all love to gloss over that point….
oh and see @stevencloser response….
I don't think I glossed over it. I must keep carbs very low to manage my insulin resistance. I must also keep protein moderate to manage said stubborn insulin resistance (as you know, protein raises insuli and BG too). What is left? Air? Breatharian lifestyle isn't going to cut it for me.
For me, it is "necessary to blow out fat minimum by 50%" or I'll be awfully hungry. I'm not sure why eating higher fat would be bothersome for you.
Do you have any peer reviewed research on the extreme endurance athletes? From what I've seen it seems that they do ok in the steady state, which fat can keep up with, but suck wind in the higher power output aspects like final push where you really need carbohydrates since fat doesn't oxidize quickly enough.
No. I've never looked for any. Just personal accounts and discussions.
Peter Attia experimenetd on himself and had fairly clear results. He is not an extreme endurance athlete though. http://eatingacademy.com/how-a-low-carb-diet-affected-my-athletic-performance
Ben Greefield did similar things. again, he is sort of an extreme endurance athlete. I know he does triathalons. http://www.bengreenfieldfitness.com/2014/05/how-much-fat-can-you-burn-2/
Athletes in ketosis will often add some carbs right before an event that requires a short all out burst of energy. they still are in ketosis and find glucose performance enhancing for those short energy bursts.... from what I understand.
The guy who says he only prepped for 14 days prior to a Hawaii Ironman?
There is some interesting info out there, but I'm just not seeing it as the ideal program for an endurance athlete.
Maybe future research will prove it, but it certainly does not yet.
Isn't the Hawaii Ironman invitation only? If so don't know how you prep for only 14 days.
I don't either, but it is what he says.
http://www.bengreenfieldfitness.com/2014/10/ben-greenfield-ironman-race-report/
Actually, now that I look at the site I've seen some of this guy before, he was in great shape already and has run several Tris before so I can see it.
The guy is a real athlete. But I'm going to take what he says with a grain of salt - I'd really like to see a small group study - not a one athlete analysis.
Anything anyone with a blog like that says I would take with a grain of salt too; he is, after all, selling something.
The guy also sells magnetic bracelets. There isn't enough salt in the Pacific Ocean to cover this dude's claims.
LOL I didn't get to the product part; I just knew he was doing a sales job.0 -
Christine_72 wrote: »Obviously I'm not an Olympic athlete... But the one thing I did notice when I lowered my carbs was that I had more energy, not less. The sluggish afternoon slump was gone, and I found I met my exercise goal quicker every day, plus I added more miles.
Was the sluggish afternoon slump when you had the old scale and 9 pounds heavier? Just curious.
0 -
_Terrapin_ wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Micronutrients are found in foods that are not carb heavy too. Micronutrient intake is largely a non issue for any well planned diet regardless of the type including low carb, Zone, vegetarian.
Any well-planned diet, yes, but I've looked at plenty of super low carb diets here after the person in question promoted their specific diet to others, and they looked to be far short of some basic micros on a regular basis.And no, bonking is less of an issue for someone who is adapted to a ketogenic state. Extreme endurance athletes seem to benefit from very low carb diets for that very reason. Even if it was true that fat is a less efficient fuel, and it could be for those not yet keto adapted, it would be a non-issue for most low carb people including me.
Not true at all. Intense exercise can't be fueled without carbs, and if you look even at extreme endurance athletes who are promoted as low carb examples, they tend to eat lots of carbs when racing.
That isn't true. Intense exercise can be fueled without carbs. Carbs will provide some extra fuel though for those who need it during intense competition or training. Peter Attia MD refers to carbs as a performance enhancing drug.
Those who are not adding in carbs can still perform very well, but at a very high competitive level, say nationals or something, adding in some carbs for explosive, short duration sports would most likely give a slight edge.lemurcat12 wrote: »Micronutrients are found in foods that are not carb heavy too. Micronutrient intake is largely a non issue for any well planned diet regardless of the type including low carb, Zone, vegetarian.
Any well-planned diet, yes, but I've looked at plenty of super low carb diets here after the person in question promoted their specific diet to others, and they looked to be far short of some basic micros on a regular basis.And no, bonking is less of an issue for someone who is adapted to a ketogenic state. Extreme endurance athletes seem to benefit from very low carb diets for that very reason. Even if it was true that fat is a less efficient fuel, and it could be for those not yet keto adapted, it would be a non-issue for most low carb people including me.
Not true at all. Intense exercise can't be fueled without carbs, and if you look even at extreme endurance athletes who are promoted as low carb examples, they tend to eat lots of carbs when racing.
Even the few low carbers I have seen on this board who were endurance cyclist where "carb loading" on their ride days. The one I am thinking of use the GU gel several time. And while net carbs ended up low, his total was equivalent to my normal day.
I think I know who you mean. He ate low carb foods but timed his carbs for his long bike rides and never came out of ketosis even though he was eating a good 200+g of carbs per day.
Michael Phelps would concur...
Again, I think you'd be hard pressed to find any athlete who is elite to not be using carbs as their primary fuel. Athletes want fuel for their workouts, pre and post, none have been mentioned in this thread or any thread who eat LC consistently and who perform at a high level. It is a non-starter in terms of comparison.
Again, I agree with you. I was pointing at the joke that carbs are performance enhancing drugs. Which is exact why every elite athlete has a diet higher in carbs... Carbs > Fat as an energy source. 0 -
_Terrapin_ wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Micronutrients are found in foods that are not carb heavy too. Micronutrient intake is largely a non issue for any well planned diet regardless of the type including low carb, Zone, vegetarian.
Any well-planned diet, yes, but I've looked at plenty of super low carb diets here after the person in question promoted their specific diet to others, and they looked to be far short of some basic micros on a regular basis.And no, bonking is less of an issue for someone who is adapted to a ketogenic state. Extreme endurance athletes seem to benefit from very low carb diets for that very reason. Even if it was true that fat is a less efficient fuel, and it could be for those not yet keto adapted, it would be a non-issue for most low carb people including me.
Not true at all. Intense exercise can't be fueled without carbs, and if you look even at extreme endurance athletes who are promoted as low carb examples, they tend to eat lots of carbs when racing.
That isn't true. Intense exercise can be fueled without carbs. Carbs will provide some extra fuel though for those who need it during intense competition or training. Peter Attia MD refers to carbs as a performance enhancing drug.
Those who are not adding in carbs can still perform very well, but at a very high competitive level, say nationals or something, adding in some carbs for explosive, short duration sports would most likely give a slight edge.lemurcat12 wrote: »Micronutrients are found in foods that are not carb heavy too. Micronutrient intake is largely a non issue for any well planned diet regardless of the type including low carb, Zone, vegetarian.
Any well-planned diet, yes, but I've looked at plenty of super low carb diets here after the person in question promoted their specific diet to others, and they looked to be far short of some basic micros on a regular basis.And no, bonking is less of an issue for someone who is adapted to a ketogenic state. Extreme endurance athletes seem to benefit from very low carb diets for that very reason. Even if it was true that fat is a less efficient fuel, and it could be for those not yet keto adapted, it would be a non-issue for most low carb people including me.
Not true at all. Intense exercise can't be fueled without carbs, and if you look even at extreme endurance athletes who are promoted as low carb examples, they tend to eat lots of carbs when racing.
Even the few low carbers I have seen on this board who were endurance cyclist where "carb loading" on their ride days. The one I am thinking of use the GU gel several time. And while net carbs ended up low, his total was equivalent to my normal day.
I think I know who you mean. He ate low carb foods but timed his carbs for his long bike rides and never came out of ketosis even though he was eating a good 200+g of carbs per day.
Michael Phelps would concur...
Again, I think you'd be hard pressed to find any athlete who is elite to not be using carbs as their primary fuel. Athletes want fuel for their workouts, pre and post, none have been mentioned in this thread or any thread who eat LC consistently and who perform at a high level. It is a non-starter in terms of comparison.
Again, I agree with you. I was pointing at the joke that carbs are performance enhancing drugs. Which is exact why every elite athlete has a diet higher in carbs... Carbs > Fat as an energy source.
I let the part about a MD not knowing the definition of a drug slide lol. Of course, water used to be banned from early marathons as a performance enhancer, not sure about the drug part0 -
_Terrapin_ wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Micronutrients are found in foods that are not carb heavy too. Micronutrient intake is largely a non issue for any well planned diet regardless of the type including low carb, Zone, vegetarian.
Any well-planned diet, yes, but I've looked at plenty of super low carb diets here after the person in question promoted their specific diet to others, and they looked to be far short of some basic micros on a regular basis.And no, bonking is less of an issue for someone who is adapted to a ketogenic state. Extreme endurance athletes seem to benefit from very low carb diets for that very reason. Even if it was true that fat is a less efficient fuel, and it could be for those not yet keto adapted, it would be a non-issue for most low carb people including me.
Not true at all. Intense exercise can't be fueled without carbs, and if you look even at extreme endurance athletes who are promoted as low carb examples, they tend to eat lots of carbs when racing.
That isn't true. Intense exercise can be fueled without carbs. Carbs will provide some extra fuel though for those who need it during intense competition or training. Peter Attia MD refers to carbs as a performance enhancing drug.
Those who are not adding in carbs can still perform very well, but at a very high competitive level, say nationals or something, adding in some carbs for explosive, short duration sports would most likely give a slight edge.lemurcat12 wrote: »Micronutrients are found in foods that are not carb heavy too. Micronutrient intake is largely a non issue for any well planned diet regardless of the type including low carb, Zone, vegetarian.
Any well-planned diet, yes, but I've looked at plenty of super low carb diets here after the person in question promoted their specific diet to others, and they looked to be far short of some basic micros on a regular basis.And no, bonking is less of an issue for someone who is adapted to a ketogenic state. Extreme endurance athletes seem to benefit from very low carb diets for that very reason. Even if it was true that fat is a less efficient fuel, and it could be for those not yet keto adapted, it would be a non-issue for most low carb people including me.
Not true at all. Intense exercise can't be fueled without carbs, and if you look even at extreme endurance athletes who are promoted as low carb examples, they tend to eat lots of carbs when racing.
Even the few low carbers I have seen on this board who were endurance cyclist where "carb loading" on their ride days. The one I am thinking of use the GU gel several time. And while net carbs ended up low, his total was equivalent to my normal day.
I think I know who you mean. He ate low carb foods but timed his carbs for his long bike rides and never came out of ketosis even though he was eating a good 200+g of carbs per day.
Michael Phelps would concur...
Again, I think you'd be hard pressed to find any athlete who is elite to not be using carbs as their primary fuel. Athletes want fuel for their workouts, pre and post, none have been mentioned in this thread or any thread who eat LC consistently and who perform at a high level. It is a non-starter in terms of comparison.
Again, I agree with you. I was pointing at the joke that carbs are performance enhancing drugs. Which is exact why every elite athlete has a diet higher in carbs... Carbs > Fat as an energy source.
I think I misquoted you but was responding to someone else in the thread about the advantages of fat over carbs. Each elite I speak to , or have had a meal with, never compromise carbs and performance. I think if fat had any role in being superior we'd heard of it by now.
0 -
Christine_72 wrote: »Obviously I'm not an Olympic athlete... But the one thing I did notice when I lowered my carbs was that I had more energy, not less. The sluggish afternoon slump was gone, and I found I met my exercise goal quicker every day, plus I added more miles.
don't have that problem so I guess my n=1 trumps your n=10 -
stevencloser wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »I don't know anyone who eats a stick of butter... My max is 15grams
I remember a thread where someone said they did this and one other person said they do too.
I remember a thread where someone said they take 5 tablespoons of coconut oil in their morning coffee.
I remember a thread where someone said they ate more than half their diet in a macro that isn't even required nutritionally.
oh. I forget. Nevermind that.
If you function on a glucose fuel diet, you get your energy from carb calories. If you function on a fat fuel diet you get your energy from fat calories.
You seem to be implying coconut oil is not valid food and eating it is mock-worthy? I thought the official line is 'no bad foods'?
And it's not necessary to eat five times your fat minimum either but you always goes over that be too....
Hmm. There is is no minimum for carbohydrate consumption so that would put it at zero. If one is eating 40-50% of their calories in carbs... Well, that's more than five times over the minimum. Not necessary I guess?
Hmm.
There's maximum recommendations for protein and fat, I wonder what the rest of your calorie intake should consist of if you put them both at maximum and it's less than 100%.
That is not a requirement but just a recommendation by organizations whose guidelines don't work well for me (like ADA, Mayo, and AHA). I think their advice is quite outdated, along with advice to use egg substitutes instead of eggs, using low fat dairy, and substituting vegetable oils for saturated fats in cooking.
I honestly can't find any studies stating what a humans maximum fat intake should be. My guess is that it won't go higher than 90% but just because one would start to be lacking in protein.
If you have a study with the science that discovered the maximum fat intake for people, I would like to see it. It would be quite relevent to my diet.lemurcat12 wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »I don't know anyone who eats a stick of butter... My max is 15grams
I remember a thread where someone said they did this and one other person said they do too.
I remember a thread where someone said they take 5 tablespoons of coconut oil in their morning coffee.
I remember a thread where someone said they ate more than half their diet in a macro that isn't even required nutritionally.
oh. I forget. Nevermind that.
If you function on a glucose fuel diet, you get your energy from carb calories. If you function on a fat fuel diet you get your energy from fat calories.
You seem to be implying coconut oil is not valid food and eating it is mock-worthy? I thought the official line is 'no bad foods'?
And it's not necessary to eat five times your fat minimum either but you always goes over that be too....
Hmm. There is is no minimum for carbohydrate consumption so that would put it at zero. If one is eating 40-50% of their calories in carbs... Well, that's more than five times over the minimum. Not necessary I guess?
Most likely the majority of the carbs in a good diet will be providing micronutrients. It's also recommended to consume carbs if doing intense exercise. One can fuel oneself with fat, sure (in fact, we all use fat as fuel, you don't need to be doing a keto diet for that to be the case), but it's always less efficient so won't prevent you from bonking if exercising intensely beyond a certain period of time.
If memory serves, Gale claims to consume about 800 calories in coconut oil, which isn't providing much in the way of micros, just calories.
I doubt it it pertinent to the conversation to include specific people's dietary preferences when they are not participating in the thread.
Micronutrients are found in foods that are not carb heavy too. Micronutrient intake is largely a non issue for any well planned diet regardless of the type including low carb, Zone, vegetarian.
And no, bonking is less of an issue for someone who is adapted to a ketogenic state. Extreme endurance athletes seem to benefit from very low carb diets for that very reason. Even if it was true that fat is a less efficient fuel, and it could be for those not yet keto adapted, it would be a non-issue for most low carb people including me. I rarely do cardio or weights for more than an hour; occassionally I might be out hiking for hours but in that case I bring lunch.stevencloser wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »I don't know anyone who eats a stick of butter... My max is 15grams
I remember a thread where someone said they did this and one other person said they do too.
I remember a thread where someone said they take 5 tablespoons of coconut oil in their morning coffee.
I remember a thread where someone said they ate more than half their diet in a macro that isn't even required nutritionally.
oh. I forget. Nevermind that.
If you function on a glucose fuel diet, you get your energy from carb calories. If you function on a fat fuel diet you get your energy from fat calories.
You seem to be implying coconut oil is not valid food and eating it is mock-worthy? I thought the official line is 'no bad foods'?
And it's not necessary to eat five times your fat minimum either but you always goes over that be too....
Hmm. There is is no minimum for carbohydrate consumption so that would put it at zero. If one is eating 40-50% of their calories in carbs... Well, that's more than five times over the minimum. Not necessary I guess?
about as necessary as blowing at your fat minimum by 50%….
I just find it amusing that the keto/LC crew argues that carbs are not necessary, OK, maybe not, but it is not necessary to blow out your fat minimum by 50% either, but you all love to gloss over that point….
oh and see @stevencloser response….
I don't think I glossed over it. I must keep carbs very low to manage my insulin resistance. I must also keep protein moderate to manage said stubborn insulin resistance (as you know, protein raises insuli and BG too). What is left? Air? Breatharian lifestyle isn't going to cut it for me.
For me, it is "necessary to blow out fat minimum by 50%" or I'll be awfully hungry. I'm not sure why eating higher fat would be bothersome for you.
and why do you find people that eat high carb bothersome?
that last statement is pretty amusing given your opinion that half the population should be low carb….0 -
stevencloser wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »I don't know anyone who eats a stick of butter... My max is 15grams
I remember a thread where someone said they did this and one other person said they do too.
I remember a thread where someone said they take 5 tablespoons of coconut oil in their morning coffee.
I remember a thread where someone said they ate more than half their diet in a macro that isn't even required nutritionally.
oh. I forget. Nevermind that.
If you function on a glucose fuel diet, you get your energy from carb calories. If you function on a fat fuel diet you get your energy from fat calories.
You seem to be implying coconut oil is not valid food and eating it is mock-worthy? I thought the official line is 'no bad foods'?
And it's not necessary to eat five times your fat minimum either but you always goes over that be too....
Hmm. There is is no minimum for carbohydrate consumption so that would put it at zero. If one is eating 40-50% of their calories in carbs... Well, that's more than five times over the minimum. Not necessary I guess?
Hmm.
There's maximum recommendations for protein and fat, I wonder what the rest of your calorie intake should consist of if you put them both at maximum and it's less than 100%.
That is not a requirement but just a recommendation by organizations whose guidelines don't work well for me (like ADA, Mayo, and AHA). I think their advice is quite outdated, along with advice to use egg substitutes instead of eggs, using low fat dairy, and substituting vegetable oils for saturated fats in cooking.
I honestly can't find any studies stating what a humans maximum fat intake should be. My guess is that it won't go higher than 90% but just because one would start to be lacking in protein.
If you have a study with the science that discovered the maximum fat intake for people, I would like to see it. It would be quite relevent to my diet.lemurcat12 wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »I don't know anyone who eats a stick of butter... My max is 15grams
I remember a thread where someone said they did this and one other person said they do too.
I remember a thread where someone said they take 5 tablespoons of coconut oil in their morning coffee.
I remember a thread where someone said they ate more than half their diet in a macro that isn't even required nutritionally.
oh. I forget. Nevermind that.
If you function on a glucose fuel diet, you get your energy from carb calories. If you function on a fat fuel diet you get your energy from fat calories.
You seem to be implying coconut oil is not valid food and eating it is mock-worthy? I thought the official line is 'no bad foods'?
And it's not necessary to eat five times your fat minimum either but you always goes over that be too....
Hmm. There is is no minimum for carbohydrate consumption so that would put it at zero. If one is eating 40-50% of their calories in carbs... Well, that's more than five times over the minimum. Not necessary I guess?
Most likely the majority of the carbs in a good diet will be providing micronutrients. It's also recommended to consume carbs if doing intense exercise. One can fuel oneself with fat, sure (in fact, we all use fat as fuel, you don't need to be doing a keto diet for that to be the case), but it's always less efficient so won't prevent you from bonking if exercising intensely beyond a certain period of time.
If memory serves, Gale claims to consume about 800 calories in coconut oil, which isn't providing much in the way of micros, just calories.
I doubt it it pertinent to the conversation to include specific people's dietary preferences when they are not participating in the thread.
Micronutrients are found in foods that are not carb heavy too. Micronutrient intake is largely a non issue for any well planned diet regardless of the type including low carb, Zone, vegetarian.
And no, bonking is less of an issue for someone who is adapted to a ketogenic state. Extreme endurance athletes seem to benefit from very low carb diets for that very reason. Even if it was true that fat is a less efficient fuel, and it could be for those not yet keto adapted, it would be a non-issue for most low carb people including me. I rarely do cardio or weights for more than an hour; occassionally I might be out hiking for hours but in that case I bring lunch.stevencloser wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »I don't know anyone who eats a stick of butter... My max is 15grams
I remember a thread where someone said they did this and one other person said they do too.
I remember a thread where someone said they take 5 tablespoons of coconut oil in their morning coffee.
I remember a thread where someone said they ate more than half their diet in a macro that isn't even required nutritionally.
oh. I forget. Nevermind that.
If you function on a glucose fuel diet, you get your energy from carb calories. If you function on a fat fuel diet you get your energy from fat calories.
You seem to be implying coconut oil is not valid food and eating it is mock-worthy? I thought the official line is 'no bad foods'?
And it's not necessary to eat five times your fat minimum either but you always goes over that be too....
Hmm. There is is no minimum for carbohydrate consumption so that would put it at zero. If one is eating 40-50% of their calories in carbs... Well, that's more than five times over the minimum. Not necessary I guess?
about as necessary as blowing at your fat minimum by 50%….
I just find it amusing that the keto/LC crew argues that carbs are not necessary, OK, maybe not, but it is not necessary to blow out your fat minimum by 50% either, but you all love to gloss over that point….
oh and see @stevencloser response….
I don't think I glossed over it. I must keep carbs very low to manage my insulin resistance. I must also keep protein moderate to manage said stubborn insulin resistance (as you know, protein raises insuli and BG too). What is left? Air? Breatharian lifestyle isn't going to cut it for me.
For me, it is "necessary to blow out fat minimum by 50%" or I'll be awfully hungry. I'm not sure why eating higher fat would be bothersome for you.
and why do you find people that eat high carb bothersome?
that last statement is pretty amusing given your opinion that half the population should be low carb….
Every person I know in life eats more carbs than me. Every single one. I only know of two other people who eat lower carb. In my part of the world, LCHF is a very small minority, and a ketogenic diet is a tiny minority.... That is probably partially why few athletes are doing it - few people are doing it at all.
I don't find a higher carb diet bothersome in the least, as long as I am not forced to do it. On the other hand, sure, qthere are characters who bother me on occasion, but they only manage a small, minor annoyance, and usually provide a laugh with their efforts.
Really, I'm not going to high carb threads to discus why I think that woe could be a bad idea unlike some higher carb people who for some reason frequent most low carb threads just to say it is a bad idea or they don't get why someone would eat that way.
Just to play devil's advocate, why shouldn't half the population try low carb? Would that be a bad thing in your opinion? Most of North America moved towards high carb and it was a fail. LCHF is safe, as safe as any diet, and could improve the health of some of those with insulin resistance, heart disease, some autoimmune diseases, and even some cancers. People should be free to try it. There are very very few people it could hurt.
If they gave it a month or two, how is that bad? It doesn't threaten higher carbers' way of life. If LCHF doesn't help, or they hate it, they can always move on to something else. Those who found something else that works already - great! Keep doing what they are doing.0 -
stevencloser wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »I don't know anyone who eats a stick of butter... My max is 15grams
I remember a thread where someone said they did this and one other person said they do too.
I remember a thread where someone said they take 5 tablespoons of coconut oil in their morning coffee.
I remember a thread where someone said they ate more than half their diet in a macro that isn't even required nutritionally.
oh. I forget. Nevermind that.
If you function on a glucose fuel diet, you get your energy from carb calories. If you function on a fat fuel diet you get your energy from fat calories.
You seem to be implying coconut oil is not valid food and eating it is mock-worthy? I thought the official line is 'no bad foods'?
And it's not necessary to eat five times your fat minimum either but you always goes over that be too....
Hmm. There is is no minimum for carbohydrate consumption so that would put it at zero. If one is eating 40-50% of their calories in carbs... Well, that's more than five times over the minimum. Not necessary I guess?
Hmm.
There's maximum recommendations for protein and fat, I wonder what the rest of your calorie intake should consist of if you put them both at maximum and it's less than 100%.
That is not a requirement but just a recommendation by organizations whose guidelines don't work well for me (like ADA, Mayo, and AHA). I think their advice is quite outdated, along with advice to use egg substitutes instead of eggs, using low fat dairy, and substituting vegetable oils for saturated fats in cooking.
I honestly can't find any studies stating what a humans maximum fat intake should be. My guess is that it won't go higher than 90% but just because one would start to be lacking in protein.
If you have a study with the science that discovered the maximum fat intake for people, I would like to see it. It would be quite relevent to my diet.lemurcat12 wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »I don't know anyone who eats a stick of butter... My max is 15grams
I remember a thread where someone said they did this and one other person said they do too.
I remember a thread where someone said they take 5 tablespoons of coconut oil in their morning coffee.
I remember a thread where someone said they ate more than half their diet in a macro that isn't even required nutritionally.
oh. I forget. Nevermind that.
If you function on a glucose fuel diet, you get your energy from carb calories. If you function on a fat fuel diet you get your energy from fat calories.
You seem to be implying coconut oil is not valid food and eating it is mock-worthy? I thought the official line is 'no bad foods'?
And it's not necessary to eat five times your fat minimum either but you always goes over that be too....
Hmm. There is is no minimum for carbohydrate consumption so that would put it at zero. If one is eating 40-50% of their calories in carbs... Well, that's more than five times over the minimum. Not necessary I guess?
Most likely the majority of the carbs in a good diet will be providing micronutrients. It's also recommended to consume carbs if doing intense exercise. One can fuel oneself with fat, sure (in fact, we all use fat as fuel, you don't need to be doing a keto diet for that to be the case), but it's always less efficient so won't prevent you from bonking if exercising intensely beyond a certain period of time.
If memory serves, Gale claims to consume about 800 calories in coconut oil, which isn't providing much in the way of micros, just calories.
I doubt it it pertinent to the conversation to include specific people's dietary preferences when they are not participating in the thread.
Micronutrients are found in foods that are not carb heavy too. Micronutrient intake is largely a non issue for any well planned diet regardless of the type including low carb, Zone, vegetarian.
And no, bonking is less of an issue for someone who is adapted to a ketogenic state. Extreme endurance athletes seem to benefit from very low carb diets for that very reason. Even if it was true that fat is a less efficient fuel, and it could be for those not yet keto adapted, it would be a non-issue for most low carb people including me. I rarely do cardio or weights for more than an hour; occassionally I might be out hiking for hours but in that case I bring lunch.stevencloser wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »I don't know anyone who eats a stick of butter... My max is 15grams
I remember a thread where someone said they did this and one other person said they do too.
I remember a thread where someone said they take 5 tablespoons of coconut oil in their morning coffee.
I remember a thread where someone said they ate more than half their diet in a macro that isn't even required nutritionally.
oh. I forget. Nevermind that.
If you function on a glucose fuel diet, you get your energy from carb calories. If you function on a fat fuel diet you get your energy from fat calories.
You seem to be implying coconut oil is not valid food and eating it is mock-worthy? I thought the official line is 'no bad foods'?
And it's not necessary to eat five times your fat minimum either but you always goes over that be too....
Hmm. There is is no minimum for carbohydrate consumption so that would put it at zero. If one is eating 40-50% of their calories in carbs... Well, that's more than five times over the minimum. Not necessary I guess?
about as necessary as blowing at your fat minimum by 50%….
I just find it amusing that the keto/LC crew argues that carbs are not necessary, OK, maybe not, but it is not necessary to blow out your fat minimum by 50% either, but you all love to gloss over that point….
oh and see @stevencloser response….
I don't think I glossed over it. I must keep carbs very low to manage my insulin resistance. I must also keep protein moderate to manage said stubborn insulin resistance (as you know, protein raises insuli and BG too). What is left? Air? Breatharian lifestyle isn't going to cut it for me.
For me, it is "necessary to blow out fat minimum by 50%" or I'll be awfully hungry. I'm not sure why eating higher fat would be bothersome for you.
and why do you find people that eat high carb bothersome?
that last statement is pretty amusing given your opinion that half the population should be low carb….
Every person I know in life eats more carbs than me. Every single one. I only know of two other people who eat lower carb. In my part of the world, LCHF is a very small minority, and a ketogenic diet is a tiny minority.... That is probably partially why few athletes are doing it - few people are doing it at all.
I don't find a higher carb diet bothersome in the least, as long as I am not forced to do it. On the other hand, sure, qthere are characters who bother me on occasion, but they only manage a small, minor annoyance, and usually provide a laugh with their efforts.
Really, I'm not going to high carb threads to discus why I think that woe could be a bad idea unlike some higher carb people who for some reason frequent most low carb threads just to say it is a bad idea or they don't get why someone would eat that way.
Just to play devil's advocate, why shouldn't half the population try low carb? Would that be a bad thing in your opinion? Most of North America moved towards high carb and it was a fail. LCHF is safe, as safe as any diet, and could improve the health of some of those with insulin resistance, heart disease, some autoimmune diseases, and even some cancers. People should be free to try it. There are very very few people it could hurt.
If they gave it a month or two, how is that bad? It doesn't threaten higher carbers' way of life. If LCHF doesn't help, or they hate it, they can always move on to something else. Those who found something else that works already - great! Keep doing what they are doing.
Interensting that you mention that Keto is very rare, it probably is, but based on the number of people who seem to be on some version of LCHF here I would have assumed that it's more popular.
Note on the failure of high carb, actually, low carb hasn't been any more successful since both high and low carb diets work but people can't tend to stay on either. Those who are on high carb tend to add in fats and those on low carb tend to add in carbs, and then eventually they end up back to old eating habits..0 -
Every person I know in life eats more carbs than me. Every single one. I only know of two other people who eat lower carb. In my part of the world, LCHF is a very small minority, and a ketogenic diet is a tiny minority.... That is probably partially why few athletes are doing it - few people are doing it at all.
I don't find a higher carb diet bothersome in the least, as long as I am not forced to do it. On the other hand, sure, qthere are characters who bother me on occasion, but they only manage a small, minor annoyance, and usually provide a laugh with their efforts.
Really, I'm not going to high carb threads to discus why I think that woe could be a bad idea unlike some higher carb people who for some reason frequent most low carb threads just to say it is a bad idea or they don't get why someone would eat that way.
Just to play devil's advocate, why shouldn't half the population try low carb? Would that be a bad thing in your opinion? Most of North America moved towards high carb and it was a fail. LCHF is safe, as safe as any diet, and could improve the health of some of those with insulin resistance, heart disease, some autoimmune diseases, and even some cancers. People should be free to try it. There are very very few people it could hurt.
If they gave it a month or two, how is that bad? It doesn't threaten higher carbers' way of life. If LCHF doesn't help, or they hate it, they can always move on to something else. Those who found something else that works already - great! Keep doing what they are doing.
I don't think anyone said a low carb diet is bad, but rather, that if not implemented well, that it is can be bad.
And most of American went to a supersized world which include high amounts of FAT and CARBS. Blaming only part of the equation is an issue. Weight management is the problem with most of america. It's getting away from low nutrient, high calorie foods and lack of exercise and reversing it to maximize nutrient dense food and exercise.0 -
Christine_72 wrote: »Obviously I'm not an Olympic athlete... But the one thing I did notice when I lowered my carbs was that I had more energy, not less. The sluggish afternoon slump was gone, and I found I met my exercise goal quicker every day, plus I added more miles.
I think for a lot of people eating lots of fast carbs (especially when not really exercising) can lead to slumps like that. I realized around the time I started this that I was sometimes using quick carbs for energy during the day and would go up and down. Stopping that was really helpful.
I don't find that's the case if one chooses more sensibly, at least for me, and I really don't find fat especially satiating (nuts can be, but low fat vs. full fat yogurt makes no difference, I find lean meat more filling than higher fat cuts, and adding oil adds no satiety for me). Anyway, of course people should find what works for them, and I do think low carb helps with satiety for some (although I suspect than in many of those cases changing up the carbs would have helped too).
What I'm talking about re exercise are lots of studies (as well as the choices by the vast majority of those engaging in the sports I'm interested in) showing training advantages to including carbs and, of course, consuming carbs when racing (even those few who train on lower carb diets). I also do find, although with limited experience, that I feel more energetic and recover better with more carbs (I fall into low carb days often enough that I noticed this even before looking into the research when I started adding in a lot more longer bike rides and runs). I ran 18 miles yesterday without consuming anything (carbs or otherwise) during the run, so it's not like eating carbs makes you unable to complete a training run (long and not that fast) without them -- as I said, everyone burns fat, you don't need to do low carb to do so -- but I think that was a mistake and I would have done better toward the end if I had included some nutrition. (And I think consuming carbs afterwards was likely helpful to my recovery.)0 -
stevencloser wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »I don't know anyone who eats a stick of butter... My max is 15grams
I remember a thread where someone said they did this and one other person said they do too.
I remember a thread where someone said they take 5 tablespoons of coconut oil in their morning coffee.
I remember a thread where someone said they ate more than half their diet in a macro that isn't even required nutritionally.
oh. I forget. Nevermind that.
If you function on a glucose fuel diet, you get your energy from carb calories. If you function on a fat fuel diet you get your energy from fat calories.
You seem to be implying coconut oil is not valid food and eating it is mock-worthy? I thought the official line is 'no bad foods'?
And it's not necessary to eat five times your fat minimum either but you always goes over that be too....
Hmm. There is is no minimum for carbohydrate consumption so that would put it at zero. If one is eating 40-50% of their calories in carbs... Well, that's more than five times over the minimum. Not necessary I guess?
Hmm.
There's maximum recommendations for protein and fat, I wonder what the rest of your calorie intake should consist of if you put them both at maximum and it's less than 100%.
That is not a requirement but just a recommendation by organizations whose guidelines don't work well for me (like ADA, Mayo, and AHA). I think their advice is quite outdated, along with advice to use egg substitutes instead of eggs, using low fat dairy, and substituting vegetable oils for saturated fats in cooking.
I honestly can't find any studies stating what a humans maximum fat intake should be. My guess is that it won't go higher than 90% but just because one would start to be lacking in protein.
If you have a study with the science that discovered the maximum fat intake for people, I would like to see it. It would be quite relevent to my diet.lemurcat12 wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »I don't know anyone who eats a stick of butter... My max is 15grams
I remember a thread where someone said they did this and one other person said they do too.
I remember a thread where someone said they take 5 tablespoons of coconut oil in their morning coffee.
I remember a thread where someone said they ate more than half their diet in a macro that isn't even required nutritionally.
oh. I forget. Nevermind that.
If you function on a glucose fuel diet, you get your energy from carb calories. If you function on a fat fuel diet you get your energy from fat calories.
You seem to be implying coconut oil is not valid food and eating it is mock-worthy? I thought the official line is 'no bad foods'?
And it's not necessary to eat five times your fat minimum either but you always goes over that be too....
Hmm. There is is no minimum for carbohydrate consumption so that would put it at zero. If one is eating 40-50% of their calories in carbs... Well, that's more than five times over the minimum. Not necessary I guess?
Most likely the majority of the carbs in a good diet will be providing micronutrients. It's also recommended to consume carbs if doing intense exercise. One can fuel oneself with fat, sure (in fact, we all use fat as fuel, you don't need to be doing a keto diet for that to be the case), but it's always less efficient so won't prevent you from bonking if exercising intensely beyond a certain period of time.
If memory serves, Gale claims to consume about 800 calories in coconut oil, which isn't providing much in the way of micros, just calories.
I doubt it it pertinent to the conversation to include specific people's dietary preferences when they are not participating in the thread.
Micronutrients are found in foods that are not carb heavy too. Micronutrient intake is largely a non issue for any well planned diet regardless of the type including low carb, Zone, vegetarian.
And no, bonking is less of an issue for someone who is adapted to a ketogenic state. Extreme endurance athletes seem to benefit from very low carb diets for that very reason. Even if it was true that fat is a less efficient fuel, and it could be for those not yet keto adapted, it would be a non-issue for most low carb people including me. I rarely do cardio or weights for more than an hour; occassionally I might be out hiking for hours but in that case I bring lunch.stevencloser wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »I don't know anyone who eats a stick of butter... My max is 15grams
I remember a thread where someone said they did this and one other person said they do too.
I remember a thread where someone said they take 5 tablespoons of coconut oil in their morning coffee.
I remember a thread where someone said they ate more than half their diet in a macro that isn't even required nutritionally.
oh. I forget. Nevermind that.
If you function on a glucose fuel diet, you get your energy from carb calories. If you function on a fat fuel diet you get your energy from fat calories.
You seem to be implying coconut oil is not valid food and eating it is mock-worthy? I thought the official line is 'no bad foods'?
And it's not necessary to eat five times your fat minimum either but you always goes over that be too....
Hmm. There is is no minimum for carbohydrate consumption so that would put it at zero. If one is eating 40-50% of their calories in carbs... Well, that's more than five times over the minimum. Not necessary I guess?
about as necessary as blowing at your fat minimum by 50%….
I just find it amusing that the keto/LC crew argues that carbs are not necessary, OK, maybe not, but it is not necessary to blow out your fat minimum by 50% either, but you all love to gloss over that point….
oh and see @stevencloser response….
I don't think I glossed over it. I must keep carbs very low to manage my insulin resistance. I must also keep protein moderate to manage said stubborn insulin resistance (as you know, protein raises insuli and BG too). What is left? Air? Breatharian lifestyle isn't going to cut it for me.
For me, it is "necessary to blow out fat minimum by 50%" or I'll be awfully hungry. I'm not sure why eating higher fat would be bothersome for you.
and why do you find people that eat high carb bothersome?
that last statement is pretty amusing given your opinion that half the population should be low carb….
Every person I know in life eats more carbs than me. Every single one. I only know of two other people who eat lower carb. In my part of the world, LCHF is a very small minority, and a ketogenic diet is a tiny minority.... That is probably partially why few athletes are doing it - few people are doing it at all.
I don't find a higher carb diet bothersome in the least, as long as I am not forced to do it. On the other hand, sure, qthere are characters who bother me on occasion, but they only manage a small, minor annoyance, and usually provide a laugh with their efforts.
Really, I'm not going to high carb threads to discus why I think that woe could be a bad idea unlike some higher carb people who for some reason frequent most low carb threads just to say it is a bad idea or they don't get why someone would eat that way.
Just to play devil's advocate, why shouldn't half the population try low carb? Would that be a bad thing in your opinion? Most of North America moved towards high carb and it was a fail. LCHF is safe, as safe as any diet, and could improve the health of some of those with insulin resistance, heart disease, some autoimmune diseases, and even some cancers. People should be free to try it. There are very very few people it could hurt.
If they gave it a month or two, how is that bad? It doesn't threaten higher carbers' way of life. If LCHF doesn't help, or they hate it, they can always move on to something else. Those who found something else that works already - great! Keep doing what they are doing.
I have never said, nor have I seen, anyone say that LCHF is not a WOE that one can choose to utilize as a weight loss strategy. However, what we are saying is that LCHF will not make you lose weight faster, is not healthier, and is not some magical cure all for every known disease known to man.
To your last point, LCHF is totally unnecessary for weight loss or health, and people can achieve the same affects through diet, exercise, and hitting their micros and macros, without LCHF.0 -
Christine_72 wrote: »Obviously I'm not an Olympic athlete... But the one thing I did notice when I lowered my carbs was that I had more energy, not less. The sluggish afternoon slump was gone, and I found I met my exercise goal quicker every day, plus I added more miles.
For me, this was the original purpose (along with craving control) for going "slow carb". I felt that my energy (and mood) were all over the place. Once I got things evened out a bit, the rest took care of itself.
0 -
Wetcoaster wrote: »Now I will interrupt your normal programming. Was reading and came across this low carb pizza recipe. I was wondering if any of you low carbers have tasted this and how was it. Sounds like it would be good. http://www.fathead-movie.com/index.php/2013/06/30/weekend-bonus-the-older-brothers-oldest-sons-faux-carb-pizza/
We eat fathead pizza all the time. Yum! And it doesn't jack around my blood sugar like regular pizza crust either.0 -
I have never said, nor have I seen, anyone say that LCHF is not a WOE that one can choose to utilize as a weight loss strategy. However, what we are saying is that LCHF will not make you lose weight faster, is not healthier, and is not some magical cure all for every known disease known to man.
To your last point, LCHF is totally unnecessary for weight loss or health, and people can achieve the same affects through diet, exercise, and hitting their micros and macros, without LCHF.
So it's just a semantics game where appearing in any discussion of low carbing to say it is "totally unnecessary" is somehow OK as long as you don't say "it isn't a WOE that one can choose".
You won't get the triglyceride / HDL ratio of LCHF on high carbs, to name but one, so your health claims are dubious at best.
0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »Micronutrients are found in foods that are not carb heavy too. Micronutrient intake is largely a non issue for any well planned diet regardless of the type including low carb, Zone, vegetarian.
Any well-planned diet, yes, but I've looked at plenty of super low carb diets here after the person in question promoted their specific diet to others, and they looked to be far short of some basic micros on a regular basis.And no, bonking is less of an issue for someone who is adapted to a ketogenic state. Extreme endurance athletes seem to benefit from very low carb diets for that very reason. Even if it was true that fat is a less efficient fuel, and it could be for those not yet keto adapted, it would be a non-issue for most low carb people including me.
Not true at all. Intense exercise can't be fueled without carbs, and if you look even at extreme endurance athletes who are promoted as low carb examples, they tend to eat lots of carbs when racing.
That isn't true. Intense exercise can be fueled without carbs. Carbs will provide some extra fuel though for those who need it during intense competition or training. Peter Attia MD refers to carbs as a performance enhancing drug.
Those who are not adding in carbs can still perform very well, but at a very high competitive level, say nationals or something, adding in some carbs for explosive, short duration sports would most likely give a slight edge.
I've seen no evidence of this. Ben Greenfield was consuming carbs during a race while on his keto experiment and still bonked, which Attia apparently attributed to him being glycogen depleted at the beginning of the race and they planned adding in even more carbs: http://carbsanity.blogspot.com/2013/10/ketogenic-triathlete.html
Another example that is frequently used as evidence that you don't need carbs for ultra endurance similar does use them on a race, even one that (as noted) should be the most conducive to that is Tim Olson, and again he does fuel with carbs:
http://anthonycolpo.com/tim-olson-another-low-carb-athlete-that-never-was/
As he says: "There is no such thing as using 100% fat or 100% carbohydrate to fuel any activity, although there is a spectrum in which fat predominates at low exercise intensities while carbohydrate increasingly predominates as the intensity increases."
Above 75% of your VO max you aren't going to be burning fat, or at least not much at all.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.3K 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
- 424 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