Low carb... Is it a diet fad?
Options
Replies
-
tiptoethruthetulips wrote: »
I think you can figure it out….0 -
I can, but I am querying your absolute statement.0
-
tiptoethruthetulips wrote: »I can, but I am querying your absolute statement.
good you get it, then we are done here….
unless you want to share some science about the properties of keto/low carb that somehow makes it superior to other ways of eating…?0 -
Wheelhouse15 wrote: »Wetcoaster wrote: »2013 NSCA Personal Trainers Conference: Looking Back at my Debate with Dr. Jeff Volek
by Alan Aragon
http://www.alanaragonblog.com/2013/03/13/2013-nsca-personal-trainers-conference-looking-back-at-my-debate-with-dr-jeff-volek/I went on to examine the common methodological limitation of low-carb versus low-fat comparisons failing to match protein intake. As such, the advantage of greater thermic effect, satiety, and lean mass retention will strongly favor the groups whose protein is optimized, or at least adequate. Low-fat/high-carb treatments often fall short of adequate protein intake, and the disadvantages are inherent.
The argument Alan Aragon makes against low-carb is that low-carb has the unfair advantage of being also higher-protein..... Hmmm.... Interesting argument
Keto isn't high protein, is it? In fact, most keto adherents restrict to moderate protein because too much will be converted to carbs and take them out of keto. Low carb diets can be high protein though, but not a ketogenic one.
That's true - but the quote was snipped to make a point and the entire paragraph has a different thrust.
t's worth reading the entire link (I'm sure you already have Wheelhouse)0 -
toad_allyinlove wrote: »Low carb is it fact or fiction? Fad or good? What do you guys think? Pro's or con's?
It's a fact. Whether it's the WOE for you is another matter. Only you can answer that. If you're interested, I suggest you go to Low Carber Daily Forum and read the Launch Pad. It contains some good information including some generally accepted definitions of "low carb" and "keto" and other terms.
I find a keto diet very easy to follow; I enjoy it. I find that fats and proteins are very satisfying, the food is delicious, and in line with what I generally prefer to eat. Starchy carbs were never my friends for various reasons. Finding a way I could still be healthy and avoid foods that don't really like me just made keto an easy choice.0 -
Wheelhouse15 wrote: »Wetcoaster wrote: »2013 NSCA Personal Trainers Conference: Looking Back at my Debate with Dr. Jeff Volek
by Alan Aragon
http://www.alanaragonblog.com/2013/03/13/2013-nsca-personal-trainers-conference-looking-back-at-my-debate-with-dr-jeff-volek/I went on to examine the common methodological limitation of low-carb versus low-fat comparisons failing to match protein intake. As such, the advantage of greater thermic effect, satiety, and lean mass retention will strongly favor the groups whose protein is optimized, or at least adequate. Low-fat/high-carb treatments often fall short of adequate protein intake, and the disadvantages are inherent.
The argument Alan Aragon makes against low-carb is that low-carb has the unfair advantage of being also higher-protein..... Hmmm.... Interesting argument
Keto isn't high protein, is it? In fact, most keto adherents restrict to moderate protein because too much will be converted to carbs and take them out of keto. Low carb diets can be high protein though, but not a ketogenic one.
That's true - but the quote was snipped to make a point and the entire paragraph has a different thrust.
t's worth reading the entire link (I'm sure you already have Wheelhouse)
I think most of those points he made were previously addressed.
0 -
toad_allyinlove wrote: »Low carb is it fact or fiction? Fad or good? What do you guys think? Pro's or con's?
It is one possible approach to achieving a calorie deficit and losing weight, sure.
Fad -- no, but it's trendy now, in addition to scare stuff about carbs, and that's basically faddish. Carbs aren't bad for you (and can't really be generalized about), and most of the low nutrition/high cal foods that get called "carbs" are about half fat. That said, cutting down on them (as you must when doing low carb) can help achieve a calorie deficit and lose weight.
Pros -- for some people lowering carbs helps them deal with insulin resistance issues or issues with hunger. For others, I think it's a simple approach to improving their diets some -- if they ate lots of high cal carby stuff and not enough protein or vegetables, the change might cause them to be more thoughtful about their diets in a good way (although I think it would be even easier to do within the context of more balanced macros and without trying to get in some super high amount of fat, which often isn't especially high in nutrients either).
Cons -- I think it's easier to meet nutritional needs on a more balanced diet and disapprove of limiting vegetables or worrying about the consumption of fruit, legumes, etc. For me, I feel better eating carbs and like them, and enjoy having a varied diet. But I've also never had hunger issues and don't find fat particularly satiating.
Basically, it depends on the person; for some people it's a good choice. Like any other diet type, low carb diets can be very nutritious diets or very poor diets, depending on the specific food choices you make.0 -
tiptoethruthetulips wrote: »I can, but I am querying your absolute statement.
good you get it, then we are done here….
unless you want to share some science about the properties of keto/low carb that somehow makes it superior to other ways of eating…?
I don't think any weight loss program/way of eating is superior, I think its a case of do doing what suits the person and what is sustainable for an individual.
Why bother posting anything on either side, its all been posted before (and is getting quite boring) and each side will find something contrary in what the other has posted.
I am contrary to any posting that says their way is the best way for every individual, but nothing wrong in saying this worked for me and may work for you.
Let's face it majority of OP's just want to hear what worked and what didn't work for those who choose to reply. I am done being a participant to derailing the thread, I have to be up for work in less than six hours.
OP do what works for you, you probably know by now what doesn't, give alternatives a try. It may be that over time you alternate between various programs/methods as your circumstances change but do consider the long term and sustainability. Calorie counting is a good first option, after a genuine try if it isn't working see what needs tweaking or see if another program works for you, plenty out there: low carb, meditarrane.an, WW, primal, mindful eating, portion control, etc0 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »It's a fad if you treat it like a fad. If you use it like a tool that helps you manage your calories it's a good tool for some (not for me personally), but if you expect to lose any real weight eating at a calorie level that exceeds your maintenance you will be sorely disappointed. It's a fiction if you buy into all the magic properties sometimes attributed to it as a set in stone fact instead of a personal variable. Some people, for example, tend to feel less hungry on low carb diets, and assume that's the case for everyone. It's not. It's a tool just like any other tool (IF, using smaller plates, increasing your activity, eating or not eating breakfast...etc) that some people use to make it easier to eat fewer calories than their body burns. And just like any other tool, it works for some and doesn't for others.
Pros:
- Improves blood sugar for some people
- Improves hunger for some people
- Improves blood panel for some people
- Easier to stick to for some people
Cons:
- Makes blood sugar worse for some people
- Makes hunger worse for some people
- Makes blood panel worse for some people
- Harder to stick to for some people
Ha, pretty much this. I think everyone should set their fat and protein goals, aim to hit those, and then treat carbs as a sliding scale and figure out what carb level helps people stay within their calorie goals, gives them enough energy to hit their fitness goals, allows them to eat the food they like, and fits any medical issues they may have.0 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »It's a fad if you treat it like a fad. If you use it like a tool that helps you manage your calories it's a good tool for some (not for me personally), but if you expect to lose any real weight eating at a calorie level that exceeds your maintenance you will be sorely disappointed. It's a fiction if you buy into all the magic properties sometimes attributed to it as a set in stone fact instead of a personal variable. Some people, for example, tend to feel less hungry on low carb diets, and assume that's the case for everyone. It's not. It's a tool just like any other tool (IF, using smaller plates, increasing your activity, eating or not eating breakfast...etc) that some people use to make it easier to eat fewer calories than their body burns. And just like any other tool, it works for some and doesn't for others.
Pros:
- Improves blood sugar for some people
- Improves hunger for some people
- Improves blood panel for some people
- Easier to stick to for some people
Cons:
- Makes blood sugar worse for some people
- Makes hunger worse for some people
- Makes blood panel worse for some people
- Harder to stick to for some people
Ha, pretty much this. I think everyone should set their fat and protein goals, aim to hit those, and then treat carbs as a sliding scale and figure out what carb level helps people stay within their calorie goals, gives them enough energy to hit their fitness goals, allows them to eat the food they like, and fits any medical issues they may have.
This is a stellar way of looking at such a controversial issue...0 -
Lol, there are things we have control in in our life and eating is one of them. Unless there isn't a way to pay for one's food, that person controls what they consume. Unlike things we don't have control over (job security, 401K, gas prices, etc.) how we eat is basically a habitual behavior that doesn't change that much unless it's focused on.If you can't sustain a low carb diet the rest of your life and you're just doing it to lose weight, then yes it's a fad diet.
The vast majority of people have no idea what they'll be doing for the rest of their life. There are things I do right now in my life, which are terrific as far as I'm concerned, which I probably won't be able to do in 20 years. I'm still going to do them even though they aren't sustainable for the rest of my life.
People who drink, once they quit, very often say they're never going to have another drink again. Yet 95% go back to drinking within 5 years or less. Does that mean people who want to quit the swill never should?
As far as food goes, most foods are elective, not compulsory. People can and do quit all sorts of foods they may feel like quitting (animal products as a whole, cane sugar, corn sugar, grains, fructose containing foods, shellfish, pork, dairy, nightshades, seed oils, tree nuts, whatever). I don't think they should be discouraged from doing so based on the "rest of your life" partyline.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
0 -
Really? It's basically math and many people who've lost weight are pretty good at calculating (without having to log on) how many calories they are eating every day. A banana ISN'T going to be 500 calories, but may be in the realm of 70-110 calories. It's not that hard to add up numbers.tiptoethruthetulips wrote: »If you can't sustain a low carb diet the rest of your life and you're just doing it to lose weight, then yes it's a fad diet.
I am a big believer in losing weight the way a person intends to maintain it for the long term, but in reality for a lot of people (including me) a lot of weight loss programs are not sustainable for the long, and that includes counting calories or similar programs such as WW which uses points. I certainly wouldn't consider calorie counting as a fad diet because it isn't sustainable for the long term/rest of a person's life.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
0 -
Ketosis is really only used for contest prep for most. 12-16 weeks to get down to 4% body fat. And they aren't getting stronger. Not to mention the day before contest, they may be in their weakest and most "unhealthiest" state.Wheelhouse15 wrote: »
Ketogenic diets aren't very good when it comes to adding muscle. mTOR pathway is disrupted. And many athletes rely on trying to put on some muscle mass for elite level sports.
Is it a fad? Nope, the traction Ketogenics is gaining for weight loss, as well as athletic performance, is tremendous. I think it will be the dominant eating diet in the next 10 years, and low-fat high-sugar high-carb will be considered one of the most harmful in human diet eating history.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
I don't know of too many in strength training or body building that even attempt ketosis, particuarly since it doesn't allow for IGF-1 release, nor high amounts of leucine, which are the two main systemic ways to counter the downgrade effects of AMPK on mTOR. Low/lower carb diets are used but they also contain large amounts of protein particularly BCAAs from what I've seen. Of course, if you are running a drug stack you can always add in IGF-1 but that is one of the worst things to add to a stack since it has a high affinity to a lot of cells you don't want to target including cancer cells.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
0 -
toad_allyinlove wrote: »Low carb is it fact or fiction? Fad or good? What do you guys think? Pro's or con's?
Fact, it works from well to lifesaving for some people.
Good, not a fad. If you want to see the current fad just peruse the grocery store for the mind numbing quantity of products with the fat stripped out of them. Just try finding a simple yogurt with its normal level of fat! Low fat was a diet fad that evolved into systemic hysteria.
Pros? If eating much in carbs provokes nonstop eating or energy crashes you might want to try low carb to discover how it might help you. For some people eating more fats, moderate protein and minimizing carbs can help get control over eating and weight and best of all - makes them feel better.
Cons? It is hard to do unless you try to learn about nutrition. It requires planning and thought to avoid the massive levels of carbohydrates in most of the easy, advertised, common and 'tasty' foods that fill our lives. And lastly, you'll likely have to deal someone who can't seem to wrap their head around the healthiness of your diet.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.
Great post.0 -
Aside for the mentioned pros and cons of low carb it is also significantly harder to perform as either and endurance athlete or bodybuilding / strength development. It isn't impossible - but the space and time needed to make adjustments is rather fine.
It is an excellent method to reach fast weight loss to meet a specific weight goal (water weight loss, not fat loss goal) over a short time - but without very careful followup - it also likely to result in a rebound.0 -
Pollywog_la wrote: »I have been low carb high/fat for over 3 years now.
And have been losing weight those three years.
I am old enough to have tried everything else, and THIS method works for me and I plan to continue it.
Is it the best method for everyone? I doubt that.
But if nothing else has worked for you long term, it is worth a shot.
It is not a fad, and is not new.
William Banting is one the more famous users who popularized a version of it:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Banting
My benefits are:
Lost weight (100 lbs so far)
Improved lipids
Normal blood sugar (was diagnosed diabetic day before I started)
Normal blood pressure
More energy
No more acid reflux (this was in the first week, so diet related, not weight loss related)
Rarely hungry
Negatives:
Really, just giving up or reducing foods I loved too much before. But the ONLY thing I gave up completely was Coca Cola. I was addicted to that for 40 years. Won't ever drink that again in case cravings return.
I will still have part of a birthday cake or bread at a restaurant every once in a while. I just don't keep that stuff at home or seek it out.
I cook most everything I eat now, and I think most people would have positive health outcomes just doing that alone.
I go off and on with counting calories. If I don't, personally, I can eat way more than I need as cheese and butter pack so many calories in small amounts.
But there was a 7 month period or so where I took a break from counting calories...just continued to eat the low carb way I had been. I didn't lose weight, but I didn't gain any back either. Without even trying. This told me this method worked for me and was something I could definitely do long term.
This is one of the biggest pro's for me. Eating very low carb eliminates thoughts of food and food seeking behaviour. I used to feel like I was without self discipline. If you are eating the right food for your body there is very little self discipline needed and it is far easier to make good eating decisions on a regular daily basis.
0 -
Barley, lentils, plain oatmeal, and beans were one of my first foods in my weight loss journey. I guess I have a love with them.0
-
Not what I read:
Lol, there are things we have control in in our life and eating is one of them. Unless there isn't a way to pay for one's food, that person controls what they consume. Unlike things we don't have control over (job security, 401K, gas prices, etc.) how we eat is basically a habitual behavior that doesn't change that much unless it's focused on.If you can't sustain a low carb diet the rest of your life and you're just doing it to lose weight, then yes it's a fad diet.
The vast majority of people have no idea what they'll be doing for the rest of their life. There are things I do right now in my life, which are terrific as far as I'm concerned, which I probably won't be able to do in 20 years. I'm still going to do them even though they aren't sustainable for the rest of my life.
People who drink, once they quit, very often say they're never going to have another drink again. Yet 95% go back to drinking within 5 years or less. Does that mean people who want to quit the swill never should?
As far as food goes, most foods are elective, not compulsory. People can and do quit all sorts of foods they may feel like quitting (animal products as a whole, cane sugar, corn sugar, grains, fructose containing foods, shellfish, pork, dairy, nightshades, seed oils, tree nuts, whatever). I don't think they should be discouraged from doing so based on the "rest of your life" partyline.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Exactly what I said. I was a bit more long winded about it though. But since this is true, keto is just as viable an option as any other measure taken to control food intake and lose weight. As far as lifelong sustainability goes, the recidivism rate in weight loss, no matter how it's undertaken, remains about the same. Keto, Slimfast, Eating Less of All Foodz - 90+% won't stick with any of these approaches for life.
Sounds here like eating the way you do now (content) ISN'T sustainable in 20 years.The vast majority of people have no idea what they'll be doing for the rest of their life. There are things I do right now in my life, which are terrific as far as I'm concerned, which I probably won't be able to do in 20 years. I'm still going to do them even though they aren't sustainable for the rest of my life.
I would argue that it can easily be done.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
0 -
EvgeniZyntx wrote: »Aside for the mentioned pros and cons of low carb it is also significantly harder to perform as either and endurance athlete or bodybuilding / strength development. It isn't impossible - but the space and time needed to make adjustments is rather fine.
It is an excellent method to reach fast weight loss to meet a specific weight goal (water weight loss, not fat loss goal) over a short time - but without very careful followup - it also likely to result in a rebound.
This is spoken from the perspective of an athlete/builder using low carb for body comp and isn't really that relevant to general population seeking a better way of eating long term, is it?0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.4K Getting Started
- 259.6K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 387 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.2K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 911 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions