Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
Low carb and vegetables
Replies
-
Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »
Nope. It's not. That said, many folks vastly improve their diets when they begin eating low carb. And, yes, many eat more plant foods than the folks who tell them a low carb diet isn't healthy. That's part of the irony.
Even before I started low carb, and was only eating a few servings of vegetables a day, I was amazed at how many vegetarian friends I had who ate almost no non-starchy vegetables, no leafy greens, nothing cruciferous, no peppers, only potatoes, corn, legumes, soy products and tomato sauce in the form of spaghetti or cheese pizza.
0 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »I find this discussion really interesting to read. If someone asked me how to do a low carb diet I'd say: protein (meat) and veg with every meal.
I wouldn't go as far as "with every meal". At least not in any reasonable portions. There simply is not enough carbs in the typical 20 net carb keto plan to accommodate a reasonable portion with every meal, unless you severely limit the vegetable choices or their portions. Now a 50 gram net carbs plan would be more reasonable. Here is a snack I had today:
Clearly eating a tomato and a green beans would not be the best choices for vegetables since that would consume 16 grams of net carbs, even though they are not starchy or high carb per se. If you had cheese or a few nuts on that day, you're basically done for the day and can't fit in any more vegetables.
Edited to add: Ignore this. I see where your fiber is located.
Although tomatoes are fairly high in sugar, the entry that you used for tomato isn't counting the fiber that is in 160 grams of tomato. That's one of the pitfalls of MFP. Not everyone enters data into the database accurately. Or maybe I'm looking at the wrong column. I think there are at least two grams of fiber in that much tomato.
0 -
lithezebra wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »I find this discussion really interesting to read. If someone asked me how to do a low carb diet I'd say: protein (meat) and veg with every meal.
I wouldn't go as far as "with every meal". At least not in any reasonable portions. There simply is not enough carbs in the typical 20 net carb keto plan to accommodate a reasonable portion with every meal, unless you severely limit the vegetable choices or their portions. Now a 50 gram net carbs plan would be more reasonable. Here is a snack I had today:
Clearly eating a tomato and a green beans would not be the best choices for vegetables since that would consume 16 grams of net carbs, even though they are not starchy or high carb per se. If you had cheese or a few nuts on that day, you're basically done for the day and can't fit in any more vegetables.
Edited to add: Ignore this. I see where your fiber is located.
Although tomatoes are fairly high in sugar, the entry that you used for tomato isn't counting the fiber that is in 160 grams of tomato. That's one of the pitfalls of MFP. Not everyone enters data into the database accurately. Or maybe I'm looking at the wrong column. I think there are at least two grams of fiber in that much tomato.
Fiber is the last column. Net carbs would be 17 grams.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »I routinely eat 50 g / day in fruits and veg (more veg). I really don't get how people think they can eat lots of veg while keto-ing -- apparently they have a different standard.
You eat 50 grams a day total, or 50 grams a day of fruit and 50 grams a day of vegetables, or you consider 50 grams of a vegetable to be one serving?
I consider about 100 grams of a vegetable to be a serving and aim for about 550 grams of vegetables a day. I'm converting loosely from pounds. To keep it low carb, I don't eat things like carrots, potatoes and corn. Even in my bad old days, when I wasn't low carbing, I was eating at least 200 grams of vegetables a day, plus a few pieces of fruit.
Anyway, my diary is open, although some of my veggie entries are recipes, which don't reflect the ingredients. (There's a stew I'm having for dinner that is mostly fermented cabbage, tomato sauce, and meat). Most of my carbs today came from eating muesli. I'm doing low carb, not keto, but if I skipped the muesli, my net carbs would be low enough for keto.
0 -
I'm on the lower carb spectrum and I eat fruit and veggies nearly everyday. If my carbs tip over 100g because of them I don't worry about it. Plus I NEED my fibre.
I would never, ever change to a carnivore diet :noway: I'm an advocate of including plenty of fruit and veg in our diet, and it makes me sad when people freak out because they ate an apple or had "too much" broccoli or cauliflower etc0 -
lithezebra wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »I routinely eat 50 g / day in fruits and veg (more veg). I really don't get how people think they can eat lots of veg while keto-ing -- apparently they have a different standard.
You eat 50 grams a day total, or 50 grams a day of fruit and 50 grams a day of vegetables, or you consider 50 grams of a vegetable to be one serving?
Yeah, that was confusing. I was thinking of sugar grams -- I often eat about 50 grams of sugar from fruit and veg (mostly veg). (My diary is open too, but I'm not the best logger lately.)I consider about 100 grams of a vegetable to be a serving and aim for about 550 grams of vegetables a day. I'm converting loosely from pounds. To keep it low carb, I don't eat things like carrots, potatoes and corn. Even in my bad old days, when I wasn't low carbing, I was eating at least 200 grams of vegetables a day, plus a few pieces of fruit.
That seems reasonable. I try to eat about 200 g/meal, sometimes more, sometimes less. I don't consider potatoes and corn to be veg -- they are the starch course. I don't limit carrots, though -- that's the kind of thing that I think is wacky about low carbing.
Anyway, as I've said many times I think you can do a healthy low carb diet (especially when toward the higher carb end). I just think it's crazy how super low carb/carnivore and eating no veg tends to be promoted by some low carbers on MFP.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »If you had to cut out potatoes to eat vegetables, you had a crap diet and don't eat right.
Some people eat potatoes AS a vegetable. I said I prefer MORE vegetables and LESS starch. Hence the'everything in moderation' part of my post.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »
Anyway, as I've said many times I think you can do a healthy low carb diet (especially when toward the higher carb end). I just think it's crazy how super low carb/carnivore and eating no veg tends to be promoted by some low carbers on MFP.
You have also said many times that if you eat more veggies with low carb than you did without then you had a terrible diet. The two statements seem to be somewhat contradictive.
0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »
Anyway, as I've said many times I think you can do a healthy low carb diet (especially when toward the higher carb end). I just think it's crazy how super low carb/carnivore and eating no veg tends to be promoted by some low carbers on MFP.
You have also said many times that if you eat more veggies with low carb than you did without then you had a terrible diet. The two statements seem to be somewhat contradictive.
Nope. if you ate so few veg that low carbing resulted in an increase, your diet sucked.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »
Anyway, as I've said many times I think you can do a healthy low carb diet (especially when toward the higher carb end). I just think it's crazy how super low carb/carnivore and eating no veg tends to be promoted by some low carbers on MFP.
You have also said many times that if you eat more veggies with low carb than you did without then you had a terrible diet. The two statements seem to be somewhat contradictive.
Nope. if you ate so few veg that low carbing resulted in an increase, your diet sucked.
But if low carb can be healthy, isn't it possible that one's diet before low carb could have been only slightly less healthy, or is it your contention that low carb diets are so low on the threshold of healthy that anything less would automatically indicate a terrible diet that sucks? Is there any middle ground, and of so, are low carb diets automatically excluded from that zone?
ETA: Also, by your standard of 5 servings of vegetables per day being acceptable; it has already been stated that one could actually get double that while limiting themselves to 20g carbs per day.0 -
If you want low carb vegetables, and don't have a problem with salt, fermented veggies are a great option. Some brands of sauerkraut have essentially no net carbs.0
-
lemurcat12 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »
Anyway, as I've said many times I think you can do a healthy low carb diet (especially when toward the higher carb end). I just think it's crazy how super low carb/carnivore and eating no veg tends to be promoted by some low carbers on MFP.
You have also said many times that if you eat more veggies with low carb than you did without then you had a terrible diet. The two statements seem to be somewhat contradictive.
Nope. if you ate so few veg that low carbing resulted in an increase, your diet sucked.
But if low carb can be healthy, isn't it possible that one's diet before low carb could have been only slightly less healthy, or is it your contention that low carb diets are so low on the threshold of healthy that anything less would automatically indicate a terrible diet that sucks? Is there any middle ground, and of so, are low carb diets automatically excluded from that zone?
ETA: Also, by your standard of 5 servings of vegetables per day being acceptable; it has already been stated that one could actually get double that while limiting themselves to 20g carbs per day.
Meh. I wouldn't bother. It's just an opinion that is being shared. It doesn't seem to be based on any relevant science or personal experience.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »
Anyway, as I've said many times I think you can do a healthy low carb diet (especially when toward the higher carb end). I just think it's crazy how super low carb/carnivore and eating no veg tends to be promoted by some low carbers on MFP.
You have also said many times that if you eat more veggies with low carb than you did without then you had a terrible diet. The two statements seem to be somewhat contradictive.
Nope. if you ate so few veg that low carbing resulted in an increase, your diet sucked.
But if low carb can be healthy, isn't it possible that one's diet before low carb could have been only slightly less healthy, or is it your contention that low carb diets are so low on the threshold of healthy that anything less would automatically indicate a terrible diet that sucks? Is there any middle ground, and of so, are low carb diets automatically excluded from that zone?
ETA: Also, by your standard of 5 servings of vegetables per day being acceptable; it has already been stated that one could actually get double that while limiting themselves to 20g carbs per day.
Meh, I think the point being there is a very loud but (I think) small portion of the low carb community that essentially shuns vegetables. This is not unique to low carb as I've met several people who insisted that they hated vegetables (potatoes and other starchy vegetables always seem to be excluded from this).
As previously mentioned there are lots of people with blog or video challenges where they are meateterians (or whatever) and eat nothing except meat. It seems to be the exact opposite of the freelee (or whatever her name is). They seem to be very popular and like many fads, more people seem to be taking part.
I'll say it again, the more you chose to limit from your diet, the more attention you need to pay to ensure you're getting the proper nutrients (whether you're limiting carbs, meat, dairy, or whatever). Doesn't mean it can't be done, but there are definitely ways to eat while ignoring nutritional needs and ending up deficient.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »
Anyway, as I've said many times I think you can do a healthy low carb diet (especially when toward the higher carb end). I just think it's crazy how super low carb/carnivore and eating no veg tends to be promoted by some low carbers on MFP.
You have also said many times that if you eat more veggies with low carb than you did without then you had a terrible diet. The two statements seem to be somewhat contradictive.
Nope. if you ate so few veg that low carbing resulted in an increase, your diet sucked.
But if low carb can be healthy, isn't it possible that one's diet before low carb could have been only slightly less healthy, or is it your contention that low carb diets are so low on the threshold of healthy that anything less would automatically indicate a terrible diet that sucks? Is there any middle ground, and of so, are low carb diets automatically excluded from that zone?
ETA: Also, by your standard of 5 servings of vegetables per day being acceptable; it has already been stated that one could actually get double that while limiting themselves to 20g carbs per day.
Meh. I wouldn't bother. It's just an opinion that is being shared. It doesn't seem to be based on any relevant science or personal experience.
Yeah, it seems to be an argumentative all round day today
0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »
Anyway, as I've said many times I think you can do a healthy low carb diet (especially when toward the higher carb end). I just think it's crazy how super low carb/carnivore and eating no veg tends to be promoted by some low carbers on MFP.
You have also said many times that if you eat more veggies with low carb than you did without then you had a terrible diet. The two statements seem to be somewhat contradictive.
Nope. if you ate so few veg that low carbing resulted in an increase, your diet sucked.
But if low carb can be healthy, isn't it possible that one's diet before low carb could have been only slightly less healthy, or is it your contention that low carb diets are so low on the threshold of healthy that anything less would automatically indicate a terrible diet that sucks? Is there any middle ground, and of so, are low carb diets automatically excluded from that zone?
ETA: Also, by your standard of 5 servings of vegetables per day being acceptable; it has already been stated that one could actually get double that while limiting themselves to 20g carbs per day.
Meh, I think the point being there is a very loud but (I think) small portion of the low carb community that essentially shuns vegetables. This is not unique to low carb as I've met several people who insisted that they hated vegetables (potatoes and other starchy vegetables always seem to be excluded from this).
I agree that the LCHF group who avoids veggies is small. There are't many like that. Most eat veggies at a few meals per day. Yes the keto'ers eat fewer veggies but that's okay.lemurcat12 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »
Anyway, as I've said many times I think you can do a healthy low carb diet (especially when toward the higher carb end). I just think it's crazy how super low carb/carnivore and eating no veg tends to be promoted by some low carbers on MFP.
You have also said many times that if you eat more veggies with low carb than you did without then you had a terrible diet. The two statements seem to be somewhat contradictive.
Nope. if you ate so few veg that low carbing resulted in an increase, your diet sucked.
But if low carb can be healthy, isn't it possible that one's diet before low carb could have been only slightly less healthy, or is it your contention that low carb diets are so low on the threshold of healthy that anything less would automatically indicate a terrible diet that sucks? Is there any middle ground, and of so, are low carb diets automatically excluded from that zone?
ETA: Also, by your standard of 5 servings of vegetables per day being acceptable; it has already been stated that one could actually get double that while limiting themselves to 20g carbs per day.
As previously mentioned there are lots of people with blog or video challenges where they are meateterians (or whatever) and eat nothing except meat. It seems to be the exact opposite of the freelee (or whatever her name is). They seem to be very popular and like many fads, more people seem to be taking part.
I don't think a meatetarian (carnivore) is the opposite of Freelee banana girl. More like the opposite of vegetarianism, or perhaps veganism?lemurcat12 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »
Anyway, as I've said many times I think you can do a healthy low carb diet (especially when toward the higher carb end). I just think it's crazy how super low carb/carnivore and eating no veg tends to be promoted by some low carbers on MFP.
You have also said many times that if you eat more veggies with low carb than you did without then you had a terrible diet. The two statements seem to be somewhat contradictive.
Nope. if you ate so few veg that low carbing resulted in an increase, your diet sucked.
But if low carb can be healthy, isn't it possible that one's diet before low carb could have been only slightly less healthy, or is it your contention that low carb diets are so low on the threshold of healthy that anything less would automatically indicate a terrible diet that sucks? Is there any middle ground, and of so, are low carb diets automatically excluded from that zone?
ETA: Also, by your standard of 5 servings of vegetables per day being acceptable; it has already been stated that one could actually get double that while limiting themselves to 20g carbs per day.
I'll say it again, the more you chose to limit from your diet, the more attention you need to pay to ensure you're getting the proper nutrients (whether you're limiting carbs, meat, dairy, or whatever). Doesn't mean it can't be done, but there are definitely ways to eat while ignoring nutritional needs and ending up deficient.
Yes, there are unhealthy ways to eat LCHF, but that is true of any diet. We can only eat so many things so choosing foods with some thought makes sense.0 -
So one can eat 200 grams of veg (half of the WHO's "five a day") and take in less than 10g of carbohydrate, with a blood sugar impact equivalent to 2 grams of glucose or less. My n=1 experience of this is that a typical "meat and two veg" low carb meal accompanied by a glass of dry wine has literally zero effect on my blood sugar level measured continuously.
I propose that eating a low carbohydrate diet, even a ketogenic diet, is entirely compatible with vegetable consumption although obviously one has to avoid / limit the higher starch or sweeter root veg.
You know you're cheating with the wine, right?
No, the effect is the same with or without the wine, but I'm aware that alcohol is even higher than in the "*kitten* I need to dispose of fast" list than carbs as far as the liver is concerned.
It is not likely the same with or without the wine. The liver has a one-track mind and prioritizes processing alcohol. While it is processing alcohol, it is NOT engaged in gluconeogenesis (turning stored glycogen into glucose) and dumping it into your bloodstream. That background level of glucose, added by your liver to keep you from having hypos when you aren't eating, vanishes temporarily.
My point was that low carb meals without wine do not increase my blood glucose, the same as the one with wine that you picked up on. The CGM flatlines through meat and two veg like it did through salmon with veg & wine.
I wouldn't expect a lot of gluconeogenesis during a meal to be honest, doesn't the insulin response to the protein shut that down anyway ? (except in T1D or severe IR)0 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »I find this discussion really interesting to read. If someone asked me how to do a low carb diet I'd say: protein (meat) and veg with every meal.
I wouldn't go as far as "with every meal". At least not in any reasonable portions. There simply is not enough carbs in the typical 20 net carb keto plan to accommodate a reasonable portion with every meal, unless you severely limit the vegetable choices or their portions. Now a 50 gram net carbs plan would be more reasonable. Here is a snack I had today:
Clearly eating a tomato and a green beans would not be the best choices for vegetables since that would consume 16 grams of net carbs, even though they are not starchy or high carb per se. If you had cheese or a few nuts on that day, you're basically done for the day and can't fit in any more vegetables.
230 grams of green beans isn't a reasonable portion as a side vegetable, it's almost three WHO "5-a-day" portions. A 300g bag split between three of us would be our size of portion ie 100g each with 3.2g of carbohydrate.
In fact you ate the whole 5-a-day allocation in that "snack" anyway.0 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »I find this discussion really interesting to read. If someone asked me how to do a low carb diet I'd say: protein (meat) and veg with every meal.
I wouldn't go as far as "with every meal". At least not in any reasonable portions. There simply is not enough carbs in the typical 20 net carb keto plan to accommodate a reasonable portion with every meal, unless you severely limit the vegetable choices or their portions. Now a 50 gram net carbs plan would be more reasonable. Here is a snack I had today:
Clearly eating a tomato and a green beans would not be the best choices for vegetables since that would consume 16 grams of net carbs, even though they are not starchy or high carb per se. If you had cheese or a few nuts on that day, you're basically done for the day and can't fit in any more vegetables.
230 grams of green beans isn't a reasonable portion as a side vegetable, it's almost three WHO "5-a-day" portions. A 300g bag split between three of us would be our size of portion ie 100g each with 3.2g of carbohydrate.
In fact you ate the whole 5-a-day allocation in that "snack" anyway.
I would also notice that, according to the NHS, beans and pulses "only count as one portion a day, no matter how many you eat. This is because, although they are a good source of fibre, they contain fewer nutrients than other fruits and vegetables."
http://www.nhs.uk/Livewell/5ADAY/Pages/Whatcounts.aspx
0 -
auntchiladas wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »I eat more fruits (berries/melon/grapefruit) and veggies following LC than I normally did following a SAD.
That always wondered me. By definition you have less of a window to allow for fruit and veggies on LC yet so many say they only started really eating them once they started LC.
Well, for most people transitioning into LCHF, I assume they were eating carbs in places of vegetables to feel more full. Personally, I eat way more vegetables doing Keto/LCHF because I'm not stuffing my face with potatoes or rice.
funny I get 40 to 50% of my diet from carbs and I have no issues getting in fruits and vegetables daily ...0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »
Anyway, as I've said many times I think you can do a healthy low carb diet (especially when toward the higher carb end). I just think it's crazy how super low carb/carnivore and eating no veg tends to be promoted by some low carbers on MFP.
You have also said many times that if you eat more veggies with low carb than you did without then you had a terrible diet. The two statements seem to be somewhat contradictive.
Nope. if you ate so few veg that low carbing resulted in an increase, your diet sucked.
But if low carb can be healthy, isn't it possible that one's diet before low carb could have been only slightly less healthy, or is it your contention that low carb diets are so low on the threshold of healthy that anything less would automatically indicate a terrible diet that sucks? Is there any middle ground, and of so, are low carb diets automatically excluded from that zone?
ETA: Also, by your standard of 5 servings of vegetables per day being acceptable; it has already been stated that one could actually get double that while limiting themselves to 20g carbs per day.
A serving is too nebulous a term for me. How big are those servings at 2g carbs per?0 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »I find this discussion really interesting to read. If someone asked me how to do a low carb diet I'd say: protein (meat) and veg with every meal.
I wouldn't go as far as "with every meal". At least not in any reasonable portions. There simply is not enough carbs in the typical 20 net carb keto plan to accommodate a reasonable portion with every meal, unless you severely limit the vegetable choices or their portions. Now a 50 gram net carbs plan would be more reasonable. Here is a snack I had today:
Clearly eating a tomato and a green beans would not be the best choices for vegetables since that would consume 16 grams of net carbs, even though they are not starchy or high carb per se. If you had cheese or a few nuts on that day, you're basically done for the day and can't fit in any more vegetables.
230 grams of green beans isn't a reasonable portion as a side vegetable, it's almost three WHO "5-a-day" portions. A 300g bag split between three of us would be our size of portion ie 100g each with 3.2g of carbohydrate.
In fact you ate the whole 5-a-day allocation in that "snack" anyway.
Oh, good to know. I'm an unreasonable vegetable eater. Most of my dinners at home involve 200-300g of vegetables.0 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »I find this discussion really interesting to read. If someone asked me how to do a low carb diet I'd say: protein (meat) and veg with every meal.
I wouldn't go as far as "with every meal". At least not in any reasonable portions. There simply is not enough carbs in the typical 20 net carb keto plan to accommodate a reasonable portion with every meal, unless you severely limit the vegetable choices or their portions. Now a 50 gram net carbs plan would be more reasonable. Here is a snack I had today:
Clearly eating a tomato and a green beans would not be the best choices for vegetables since that would consume 16 grams of net carbs, even though they are not starchy or high carb per se. If you had cheese or a few nuts on that day, you're basically done for the day and can't fit in any more vegetables.
230 grams of green beans isn't a reasonable portion as a side vegetable, it's almost three WHO "5-a-day" portions. A 300g bag split between three of us would be our size of portion ie 100g each with 3.2g of carbohydrate.
In fact you ate the whole 5-a-day allocation in that "snack" anyway.
Oh, good to know. I'm an unreasonable vegetable eater. Most of my dinners at home involve 200-300g of vegetables.
I also feel like that isn't that much, is that really the recommendation? Or just "absolute minimum"?0 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »I find this discussion really interesting to read. If someone asked me how to do a low carb diet I'd say: protein (meat) and veg with every meal.
I wouldn't go as far as "with every meal". At least not in any reasonable portions. There simply is not enough carbs in the typical 20 net carb keto plan to accommodate a reasonable portion with every meal, unless you severely limit the vegetable choices or their portions. Now a 50 gram net carbs plan would be more reasonable. Here is a snack I had today:
Clearly eating a tomato and a green beans would not be the best choices for vegetables since that would consume 16 grams of net carbs, even though they are not starchy or high carb per se. If you had cheese or a few nuts on that day, you're basically done for the day and can't fit in any more vegetables.
230 grams of green beans isn't a reasonable portion as a side vegetable, it's almost three WHO "5-a-day" portions. A 300g bag split between three of us would be our size of portion ie 100g each with 3.2g of carbohydrate.
In fact you ate the whole 5-a-day allocation in that "snack" anyway.
Oh, good to know. I'm an unreasonable vegetable eater. Most of my dinners at home involve 200-300g of vegetables.
230g of a single vegetable ?0 -
stevencloser wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »I find this discussion really interesting to read. If someone asked me how to do a low carb diet I'd say: protein (meat) and veg with every meal.
I wouldn't go as far as "with every meal". At least not in any reasonable portions. There simply is not enough carbs in the typical 20 net carb keto plan to accommodate a reasonable portion with every meal, unless you severely limit the vegetable choices or their portions. Now a 50 gram net carbs plan would be more reasonable. Here is a snack I had today:
Clearly eating a tomato and a green beans would not be the best choices for vegetables since that would consume 16 grams of net carbs, even though they are not starchy or high carb per se. If you had cheese or a few nuts on that day, you're basically done for the day and can't fit in any more vegetables.
230 grams of green beans isn't a reasonable portion as a side vegetable, it's almost three WHO "5-a-day" portions. A 300g bag split between three of us would be our size of portion ie 100g each with 3.2g of carbohydrate.
In fact you ate the whole 5-a-day allocation in that "snack" anyway.
Oh, good to know. I'm an unreasonable vegetable eater. Most of my dinners at home involve 200-300g of vegetables.
I also feel like that isn't that much, is that really the recommendation? Or just "absolute minimum"?
The WHO say a portion is 80 grams and that's what 5 a day is based on. Large portions of the population eat less than that. Look up the median for your country or state it's quite an eye opener.
I would probably have 160 - 240 g of vegetables with dinner, but I wouldn't eat a whole cauliflower (but I do know volume eaters that would).0 -
auntchiladas wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »I eat more fruits (berries/melon/grapefruit) and veggies following LC than I normally did following a SAD.
That always wondered me. By definition you have less of a window to allow for fruit and veggies on LC yet so many say they only started really eating them once they started LC.
Well, for most people transitioning into LCHF, I assume they were eating carbs in places of vegetables to feel more full. Personally, I eat way more vegetables doing Keto/LCHF because I'm not stuffing my face with potatoes or rice.
funny I get 40 to 50% of my diet from carbs and I have no issues getting in fruits and vegetables daily ...
Good to know, but on some days your veg intake would also fit on Atkins Phase 1
0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »
True, but the same thing could be said about a CICO model. Actually, I think you could make an argument that by eliminating some food choices, you are in effect promoting others.lemurcat12 wrote: »Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »If one ate fewer veg before going low carb (and limiting veg), one ate a ridiculously poor diet and is not a good example.
Yes, lots of Americans eat a poor diet. This is not a recommendation.
Nope. It's not. That said, many folks vastly improve their diets when they begin eating low carb. And, yes, many eat more plant foods than the folks who tell them a low carb diet isn't healthy. That's part of the irony.
I just think it's weird to eat so few veg that you eat more by going low carb. Super weird.
I agree. Yet MANY folks on here eat virtually no vegetables.
Agreed, but that's an issue with the SAD. Not a reason to promote low carb.
Nope. I eat lots of veg on normal carbs. If people didn't it is because they ate a bad diet.
And I eat a lot more veggies on low carb. If other low carb dieters do not, it is a matter of their personal choice.
It's weird to increase consumption of foods that are mostly carbs on a low carb diet. Presumably due to eating a poor diet before.
It may be weird to you, but I don't think it's weird at all. At some point, we all have huge changes in our diet. And for each of us, there is a turning point for that change. And for many LCHF, switching to that lifestyle so happens to be that point. This is very common with other restrictive diets (Paleo, Whole 30, Vegan, etc...). It one reason why restrictive diets work for some.0 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »I find this discussion really interesting to read. If someone asked me how to do a low carb diet I'd say: protein (meat) and veg with every meal.
I wouldn't go as far as "with every meal". At least not in any reasonable portions. There simply is not enough carbs in the typical 20 net carb keto plan to accommodate a reasonable portion with every meal, unless you severely limit the vegetable choices or their portions. Now a 50 gram net carbs plan would be more reasonable. Here is a snack I had today:
Clearly eating a tomato and a green beans would not be the best choices for vegetables since that would consume 16 grams of net carbs, even though they are not starchy or high carb per se. If you had cheese or a few nuts on that day, you're basically done for the day and can't fit in any more vegetables.
230 grams of green beans isn't a reasonable portion as a side vegetable, it's almost three WHO "5-a-day" portions. A 300g bag split between three of us would be our size of portion ie 100g each with 3.2g of carbohydrate.
In fact you ate the whole 5-a-day allocation in that "snack" anyway.
Oh, good to know. I'm an unreasonable vegetable eater. Most of my dinners at home involve 200-300g of vegetables.
230g of a single vegetable ?
Yes?0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »
True, but the same thing could be said about a CICO model. Actually, I think you could make an argument that by eliminating some food choices, you are in effect promoting others.lemurcat12 wrote: »Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »If one ate fewer veg before going low carb (and limiting veg), one ate a ridiculously poor diet and is not a good example.
Yes, lots of Americans eat a poor diet. This is not a recommendation.
Nope. It's not. That said, many folks vastly improve their diets when they begin eating low carb. And, yes, many eat more plant foods than the folks who tell them a low carb diet isn't healthy. That's part of the irony.
I just think it's weird to eat so few veg that you eat more by going low carb. Super weird.
I agree. Yet MANY folks on here eat virtually no vegetables.
Agreed, but that's an issue with the SAD. Not a reason to promote low carb.
Nope. I eat lots of veg on normal carbs. If people didn't it is because they ate a bad diet.
And I eat a lot more veggies on low carb. If other low carb dieters do not, it is a matter of their personal choice.
It's weird to increase consumption of foods that are mostly carbs on a low carb diet. Presumably due to eating a poor diet before.
It may be weird to you, but I don't think it's weird at all. At some point, we all have huge changes in our diet. And for each of us, there is a turning point for that change. And for many LCHF, switching to that lifestyle so happens to be that point. This is very common with other restrictive diets (Paleo, Whole 30, Vegan, etc...). It one reason why restrictive diets work for some.
Start a low carb diet increase carbs isn't weird conceptually at all to you? Not what happens, just conceptually.
It's like saying
I joined a literary club, so I could read leas.
I joined the grym, so I could exercise less.
I moved to a smaller house, so I had more room for stuff.
I got my PhD, so I could be less knowledgeable.
I turned on spellchecker, so I could have more errors in my final drafts.
Sure, you could manage all those, but typically we'd assume someone was using the literary device of irony for most of those sentences.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »
Anyway, as I've said many times I think you can do a healthy low carb diet (especially when toward the higher carb end). I just think it's crazy how super low carb/carnivore and eating no veg tends to be promoted by some low carbers on MFP.
You have also said many times that if you eat more veggies with low carb than you did without then you had a terrible diet. The two statements seem to be somewhat contradictive.
Nope. if you ate so few veg that low carbing resulted in an increase, your diet sucked.
But if low carb can be healthy, isn't it possible that one's diet before low carb could have been only slightly less healthy, or is it your contention that low carb diets are so low on the threshold of healthy that anything less would automatically indicate a terrible diet that sucks? Is there any middle ground, and of so, are low carb diets automatically excluded from that zone?
ETA: Also, by your standard of 5 servings of vegetables per day being acceptable; it has already been stated that one could actually get double that while limiting themselves to 20g carbs per day.
Meh, I think the point being there is a very loud but (I think) small portion of the low carb community that essentially shuns vegetables. This is not unique to low carb as I've met several people who insisted that they hated vegetables (potatoes and other starchy vegetables always seem to be excluded from this).
As previously mentioned there are lots of people with blog or video challenges where they are meateterians (or whatever) and eat nothing except meat. It seems to be the exact opposite of the freelee (or whatever her name is). They seem to be very popular and like many fads, more people seem to be taking part.
I'll say it again, the more you chose to limit from your diet, the more attention you need to pay to ensure you're getting the proper nutrients (whether you're limiting carbs, meat, dairy, or whatever). Doesn't mean it can't be done, but there are definitely ways to eat while ignoring nutritional needs and ending up deficient.
I have seen LCHF members say they don't eat veggies, but I have also see that with many moderate to higher carb.. its more the individual then those collectively on the diet. But I don't think I have seen members suggesting not to eat veggies regardless of the diet they follow.
But let's be honest, the few vocal members of their diet =/= a community view. IMO, this veggie discussion would be the equivalent to arguments against those members who eat a serving of ice cream daily.
I believe the MFP saying goes, it seems like we are majoring in the minors since we are looking at one component without taking total dietary context into consideration as there are many ways to address nutritional requirements.0 -
Start a low carb diet increase carbs isn't weird conceptually at all to you? Not what happens, just conceptually.
Increasing the consumption of healthy foodstuffs that happen to have carbs would be more accurate. There's more protein than carbs in some veg.
Like joining a literary club, quitting reading the Daily Mail, and reading more books.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions