low carb Does work!!!!
Replies
-
Ok--happy for all who reach their goals regardless of how they get there. Just thought this might be a supportive, open minded group--a community--of people... a place to share our knowledge, personal experience and enthusiasm. Have a great day.
I see this a lot, and I don't get it. Why would anyone post in a forum without reading a few threads and getting a feel for the community (let alone this specific thread)? There are so many groups to join that support any and every WOE, activity, hobby or interest, why pick a thread that is clearly contentious and get hurt feelings because somebody disagrees with you?1 -
Glad it works for you. I think it's important for people to discover what works for them and their lifestyle . I don't subscribe to any particular diet and love my carbs. Thanfully it hasn't been an issue for my weightloss.0
-
hjlourenshj wrote: »Im doing low swimming and it really works!!!! Whatever everyone is saying. I use to swim for 10 minutes in the morning but what i do now is go for a 10 mile crazy run in the morning and then i don't want to go swimming anymore but doesnt matter. I don't miss it. I lost a lot of weight the last 2,5 weeks. A lot of people are saying that i loose because my kcal out is bigger now but whatever. Its al about low swimming
Thats EXACTLY what i read every single time someone starts about low carb.
Im happy that you are loosing weight. But please call it as it is. Low carb people cut out junkfoods like candy, cookies & chips and calling it a lifestyle. All those extra's what makes people overweight easy. Then they will blame the carbs in that junkfood as the problem, not the amount they where eating. For the easy they will also ban bread, pasta and some fruits because carbs not stilling their hunger. CICO people don't see pasta and bread as the problem for being overweight but the amount of calories they where eating of all those other junkfoods. Now they count all kcal but leave room for those things every now and then because if everyone is honest, junkfoods are delicious.
I had cut most "junk foods" out of my diet long before I ever went low carb. That certainly helped, but really wasn't enough. I cut back on the so called "good carbs" and that really made the difference in my appetite. So I am able to eat less without feeling so hungry. And when I keep the carbs low, I personally don't need to count calories to lose (and now maintain) weight. I know not everyone experiences that, but it is a very nice benefit that I am enjoying.
I think you may have kicked the hornet's nest with your implication that junk food makes you gain - most people who are strictly looking at calorie counting to lose weight seem to understand that junk food doesn't make you gain. You gain when you are in a surplus, regardless of what you are eating.
Yes, some junk foods are delicious. I find the majority aren't worth it most of the time. Bread and pasta are also pretty good, but again, not worth it to me most of the time. Steak, butter, bacon, and heavy cream are delicious, and I get to eat those to satiety
. I prefer those over most "junk foods". Moral of the story - creating a deficit is necessary no matter what dietary framework you choose, but for long term adherence, you have to find what works for you.
2 -
stevencloser wrote: »Chitchatkat wrote: »CI<CO. There are many ways to achieve it. Low carb is just one of them. Get over it...
There's so much more to LCHF than calories in/out, though. Yes, it helps reduce calories because you don't feel hungry on lchf/keto once you're in ketosis. Without the insulin surges caused by carbs, your body burns its stored fat for fuel...so you end up losing lots more body fat (inches) than on a calorie counting diet which includes carbs. There's lots of great info on the other health benefits of keto, too---most of which have nothing to do w/ weight loss. I've tried all sorts of diets and this is is the only sustainable choice. Effortless. Please read Gary Taubes' "Why We Get Fat" or the many keto/lchf websites for more great info!
This is a fundamental misunderstanding of how Keto works.
If Taubes told you this in his book exactly as you told us, it cements yet again that he's a quack who knows nothing about how the human body works in regards to food.
On keto your body burns more fat. THAT INCLUDES THE FAT YOU EAT. THE THINGS YOU EAT ARE FUEL TO YOUR BODY JUST THE SAME. Because you eat more fat on a keto diet than on a regular diet you just end up burning more of the fat you eat, no more of the fat in your body.
We burn both fat eaten and stored, actually. But ok. There are more experts out there on Keto than Taubes who agree. It's not a new concept.0 -
Chitchatkat wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »Chitchatkat wrote: »CI<CO. There are many ways to achieve it. Low carb is just one of them. Get over it...
There's so much more to LCHF than calories in/out, though. Yes, it helps reduce calories because you don't feel hungry on lchf/keto once you're in ketosis. Without the insulin surges caused by carbs, your body burns its stored fat for fuel...so you end up losing lots more body fat (inches) than on a calorie counting diet which includes carbs. There's lots of great info on the other health benefits of keto, too---most of which have nothing to do w/ weight loss. I've tried all sorts of diets and this is is the only sustainable choice. Effortless. Please read Gary Taubes' "Why We Get Fat" or the many keto/lchf websites for more great info!
This is a fundamental misunderstanding of how Keto works.
If Taubes told you this in his book exactly as you told us, it cements yet again that he's a quack who knows nothing about how the human body works in regards to food.
On keto your body burns more fat. THAT INCLUDES THE FAT YOU EAT. THE THINGS YOU EAT ARE FUEL TO YOUR BODY JUST THE SAME. Because you eat more fat on a keto diet than on a regular diet you just end up burning more of the fat you eat, no more of the fat in your body.
We burn both fat eaten and stored, actually. But ok. There are more experts out there on Keto than Taubes who agree. It's not a new concept.
That's why I said "That includes the fat you eat". If you think you're burning more bodyfat because you're burning more fat total, you don't know what you're talking about.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
Science_101 wrote: »
This! And if you think you're going to be burning stored body fat slogging down 100+ grams of fat a day.......then I got some bad news for you.stevencloser wrote: »Chitchatkat wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »Chitchatkat wrote: »CI<CO. There are many ways to achieve it. Low carb is just one of them. Get over it...
There's so much more to LCHF than calories in/out, though. Yes, it helps reduce calories because you don't feel hungry on lchf/keto once you're in ketosis. Without the insulin surges caused by carbs, your body burns its stored fat for fuel...so you end up losing lots more body fat (inches) than on a calorie counting diet which includes carbs. There's lots of great info on the other health benefits of keto, too---most of which have nothing to do w/ weight loss. I've tried all sorts of diets and this is is the only sustainable choice. Effortless. Please read Gary Taubes' "Why We Get Fat" or the many keto/lchf websites for more great info!
This is a fundamental misunderstanding of how Keto works.
If Taubes told you this in his book exactly as you told us, it cements yet again that he's a quack who knows nothing about how the human body works in regards to food.
On keto your body burns more fat. THAT INCLUDES THE FAT YOU EAT. THE THINGS YOU EAT ARE FUEL TO YOUR BODY JUST THE SAME. Because you eat more fat on a keto diet than on a regular diet you just end up burning more of the fat you eat, no more of the fat in your body.
We burn both fat eaten and stored, actually. But ok. There are more experts out there on Keto than Taubes who agree. It's not a new concept.
That's why I said "That includes the fat you eat". If you think you're burning more bodyfat because you're burning more fat total, you don't know what you're talking about.
"Fat burns in the flame of carbohydrate"
I routinely eat 100+g of fat per day. Lost 50 lbs that way. So long as you remain in a calorie deficit, why wouldn't you lose wieght eating 100g of fat per day? That's only 900 calories; you still have plenty of room for adequate protein and a even bit of carb (at least I did, I was eating roughly 1600 cal per day while losing weight). You don't need carbs to burn fat. That's absurd.
2 -
This topic is getting too debatey. What we need now is a "detox cleanse" thread.
I'm new enough that I haven't seen one of those, but I can only imagine how hilarious it would be. I mean, the potential!nutmegoreo wrote: »
Omg... Dead!0 -
nutmegoreo wrote: »
Literally would be heaving guts if I had that. Guess there's something to this detox, or "cleanse".
ETA- those peeps look morbidly real.0 -
msalicia116 wrote: »nutmegoreo wrote: »
Literally would be heaving guts if I had that. Guess there's something to this detox, or "cleanse".
ETA- those peeps look morbidly real.
One end or the other, I suspect those wouldn't stay in you long! But that's the idea. Clean you out!1 -
It's amazing how vicious people can become with other people. We're all wanting to lose weight, rid the fat, gain some muscle...what have you. I agree with "agree to disagree". Not everything works for everybody. Even if your beginning is water weight loss. Isn't it like that for most? I think the real definition of "it works" comes after a time period of using a certain method. Simple calorie count works for me (4 years in the journey). I have a friend who has been on her journey for more than a year and low/no carb worked for her. Another friend found that no dairy worked for her. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion of what works because I'd what they have experienced. Keep in mind there is also science to back up what certain foods/groups do to bodies.5
-
This content has been removed.
-
Science_101 wrote: »tlflag1620 wrote: »Science_101 wrote: »
This! And if you think you're going to be burning stored body fat slogging down 100+ grams of fat a day.......then I got some bad news for you.stevencloser wrote: »Chitchatkat wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »Chitchatkat wrote: »CI<CO. There are many ways to achieve it. Low carb is just one of them. Get over it...
There's so much more to LCHF than calories in/out, though. Yes, it helps reduce calories because you don't feel hungry on lchf/keto once you're in ketosis. Without the insulin surges caused by carbs, your body burns its stored fat for fuel...so you end up losing lots more body fat (inches) than on a calorie counting diet which includes carbs. There's lots of great info on the other health benefits of keto, too---most of which have nothing to do w/ weight loss. I've tried all sorts of diets and this is is the only sustainable choice. Effortless. Please read Gary Taubes' "Why We Get Fat" or the many keto/lchf websites for more great info!
This is a fundamental misunderstanding of how Keto works.
If Taubes told you this in his book exactly as you told us, it cements yet again that he's a quack who knows nothing about how the human body works in regards to food.
On keto your body burns more fat. THAT INCLUDES THE FAT YOU EAT. THE THINGS YOU EAT ARE FUEL TO YOUR BODY JUST THE SAME. Because you eat more fat on a keto diet than on a regular diet you just end up burning more of the fat you eat, no more of the fat in your body.
We burn both fat eaten and stored, actually. But ok. There are more experts out there on Keto than Taubes who agree. It's not a new concept.
That's why I said "That includes the fat you eat". If you think you're burning more bodyfat because you're burning more fat total, you don't know what you're talking about.
"Fat burns in the flame of carbohydrate"
I routinely eat 100+g of fat per day. Lost 50 lbs that way. So long as you remain in a calorie deficit, why wouldn't you lose wieght eating 100g of fat per day? That's only 900 calories; you still have plenty of room for adequate protein and a even bit of carb (at least I did, I was eating roughly 1600 cal per day while losing weight). You don't need carbs to burn fat. That's absurd.
Where did you get your biochemistry or physiology degree from? Do the words TCA cycle, Acetyl Co A, or oxaloacetate ring a bell. Maybe review Fundamentals of Biochemistry chapter 24 to refresh your memory
You don't need a biochemistry or physiology degree to know people can survive for months on their fat stores alone eating nothing at all. You don't need to eat carbohydrate to burn fat. That's absurd.0 -
Science_101 wrote: »tlflag1620 wrote: »Science_101 wrote: »
This! And if you think you're going to be burning stored body fat slogging down 100+ grams of fat a day.......then I got some bad news for you.stevencloser wrote: »Chitchatkat wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »Chitchatkat wrote: »CI<CO. There are many ways to achieve it. Low carb is just one of them. Get over it...
There's so much more to LCHF than calories in/out, though. Yes, it helps reduce calories because you don't feel hungry on lchf/keto once you're in ketosis. Without the insulin surges caused by carbs, your body burns its stored fat for fuel...so you end up losing lots more body fat (inches) than on a calorie counting diet which includes carbs. There's lots of great info on the other health benefits of keto, too---most of which have nothing to do w/ weight loss. I've tried all sorts of diets and this is is the only sustainable choice. Effortless. Please read Gary Taubes' "Why We Get Fat" or the many keto/lchf websites for more great info!
This is a fundamental misunderstanding of how Keto works.
If Taubes told you this in his book exactly as you told us, it cements yet again that he's a quack who knows nothing about how the human body works in regards to food.
On keto your body burns more fat. THAT INCLUDES THE FAT YOU EAT. THE THINGS YOU EAT ARE FUEL TO YOUR BODY JUST THE SAME. Because you eat more fat on a keto diet than on a regular diet you just end up burning more of the fat you eat, no more of the fat in your body.
We burn both fat eaten and stored, actually. But ok. There are more experts out there on Keto than Taubes who agree. It's not a new concept.
That's why I said "That includes the fat you eat". If you think you're burning more bodyfat because you're burning more fat total, you don't know what you're talking about.
"Fat burns in the flame of carbohydrate"
I routinely eat 100+g of fat per day. Lost 50 lbs that way. So long as you remain in a calorie deficit, why wouldn't you lose wieght eating 100g of fat per day? That's only 900 calories; you still have plenty of room for adequate protein and a even bit of carb (at least I did, I was eating roughly 1600 cal per day while losing weight). You don't need carbs to burn fat. That's absurd.
Where did you get your biochemistry or physiology degree from? Do the words TCA cycle, Acetyl Co A, or oxaloacetate ring a bell. Maybe review Fundamentals of Biochemistry chapter 24 to refresh your memory
Mmhmm...about that... http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2129159/
Dietary carbohydrates do participate in those things, but are not a requirement for them. Gluconeogensis from aminos covers the need quite well. Also, Acetyl Co A is also produced by the beta oxidation of fatty acids. So, what was your point again?1 -
This content has been removed.
-
Science_101 wrote: »OH boy I guess we are going to play study poker played by people who don't have a PhD and are not published in journals. Comic gold
The appropriate response is to admit you made a mistake. Not double down on the dumb.4 -
Science_101 wrote: »OH boy I guess we are going to play study poker played by people who don't have a PhD and are not published in journals. Comic gold
I'm not going to play anything. The fact that people consistently and constantly burn off bodyfat while in a state of dietary ketosis is proof enough of what I just said. I'm not even just talking about sub-50g runners either. I've personally run as low as 3g incidental carbs per day (as they exist in trace amounts, even in beef) while cutting, and I know at least one person who managed literal zero carb by consuming nothing but ZC protein isolates and oils, emulsified with water. So yeah, if it were a requirement, we'd all be little more than fatty skeletons, as our bodies catabolized every muscle available, trying in vain to keep itself running.0 -
domgibson88 wrote: »So, I'm sick of when people on here say they are struggling and someone on here suggests low carb and then another person berates them and says it's all about calories eat as much as you want but stay within the calories but heres the thing, did that and could not stay within my calories because carbs don't keep me satiated....they satisfy for an hour then I'm hungry again.. For example I used to have cheerios for breakfast but by first break at work (930) I was starving and usually grabbed a cookie or bag of chips...now I have 3 scrambled eggs with salsa (more calories) but I'm good till lunch!!I may have a small healthy snack like some Spitz or a handful of almonds but that's it!!!Now I'm not saying this works for everyone but I've lost 6 pounds in 2 and a half weeks doing this, it's working for me...so when someone on here suggests low care it is a VALID suggestion...the whole "eat whatever you want and stay within calorie goal" is not the ultimate answer so don't be quick to judge someone's suggestion.. Different lifestyles work for different people.
Just take all of it with a grain of salt, do what works for you, and do your own thing. I see quite a bit of the same, but the extremes of opinion really come from all different angles. In the end for a lot of people it's just avoiding foods that they tend to overeat, and there are many different ways of eating that help the different people get there.
For me it's always been a bit more complex than the macro balance, and certain foods just don't do much for my hunger. Other than a brief period I've never really eaten low carb, but have to admit that overall if I struggled with moderation a low carb approach might be my best approach, due to most of the foods I overeat having a fairly high carb ratio. But the fat content is a big issue too, and very few really low fat foods keep me full for long.
Energy balance can't be denied, but the ways to get to that desired energy balance are many.0 -
Science_101 wrote: »tlflag1620 wrote: »Science_101 wrote: »
This! And if you think you're going to be burning stored body fat slogging down 100+ grams of fat a day.......then I got some bad news for you.stevencloser wrote: »Chitchatkat wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »Chitchatkat wrote: »CI<CO. There are many ways to achieve it. Low carb is just one of them. Get over it...
There's so much more to LCHF than calories in/out, though. Yes, it helps reduce calories because you don't feel hungry on lchf/keto once you're in ketosis. Without the insulin surges caused by carbs, your body burns its stored fat for fuel...so you end up losing lots more body fat (inches) than on a calorie counting diet which includes carbs. There's lots of great info on the other health benefits of keto, too---most of which have nothing to do w/ weight loss. I've tried all sorts of diets and this is is the only sustainable choice. Effortless. Please read Gary Taubes' "Why We Get Fat" or the many keto/lchf websites for more great info!
This is a fundamental misunderstanding of how Keto works.
If Taubes told you this in his book exactly as you told us, it cements yet again that he's a quack who knows nothing about how the human body works in regards to food.
On keto your body burns more fat. THAT INCLUDES THE FAT YOU EAT. THE THINGS YOU EAT ARE FUEL TO YOUR BODY JUST THE SAME. Because you eat more fat on a keto diet than on a regular diet you just end up burning more of the fat you eat, no more of the fat in your body.
We burn both fat eaten and stored, actually. But ok. There are more experts out there on Keto than Taubes who agree. It's not a new concept.
That's why I said "That includes the fat you eat". If you think you're burning more bodyfat because you're burning more fat total, you don't know what you're talking about.
"Fat burns in the flame of carbohydrate"
I routinely eat 100+g of fat per day. Lost 50 lbs that way. So long as you remain in a calorie deficit, why wouldn't you lose wieght eating 100g of fat per day? That's only 900 calories; you still have plenty of room for adequate protein and a even bit of carb (at least I did, I was eating roughly 1600 cal per day while losing weight). You don't need carbs to burn fat. That's absurd.
Where did you get your biochemistry or physiology degree from? Do the words TCA cycle, Acetyl Co A, or oxaloacetate ring a bell. Maybe review Fundamentals of Biochemistry chapter 24 to refresh your memory
I'll be happy to read any material you might provide stating that our bodies require dietary carbohydrate intake in order to burn fat. Thanks in advance.
2 -
Science_101 wrote: »OH boy I guess we are going to play study poker played by people who don't have a PhD and are not published in journals. Comic gold
In what area of study did you obtain your Ph.D? What journals are you published in?
Making an appeal to authority when you don't actually have any is... Yeah... "Comic gold" about sums it up hon.
3 -
I think the confusion with CICO vrs ratios of fat/carb/protein has more to do with satiety than anything else, and how content and happy we are on ANY eating regimen is the key to success. We can argue about it all day long, but in the end, it's almost just semantics. Yes, to lose weight, you need to eat at a deficit. But yes, to lose weight (and keep it off), you need to find a "formula" that works for your tastes, energy level, contentment, and fits your lifestyle.
For me, that's a mix of quality carbs and protein with every meal, along with sensible fat and a reduction in salt and sugar. Nothing fancy, or fanatical. I do find if I eat lots of sugar, I crave more, and it triggers binges. Cut it out, and I can stick to my plan with no issues. Other folks have different issues, and hopefully can learn to manage them long term.
So that's how I roll, and I've lost 107 pounds with minimal drama and suffering, and have started to work on maintenance over the last 4 months.
I know folks who swear by low carb diets. It seems to work for them. It doesn't for me. Whether that's mental, physical, or mystical isn't that important.
As long as we are all willing to listen to our own signals, and are willing to make changes when necessary, most any plan will work.3 -
I agree with you on the protein for breaky. I generally have two eggs scrambled or over easy with two flics of bread in the morning. If I don't have eggs, then I get really hungry in a short period of time. It seems the protein carrys me pretty good into the afternoon with generally a plum or nectarine yo he me into dinner...0
-
Low-carb may have worked for you but it's not the solution to everyone (congrats on your weight loss by the way). I'm a high-carb vegan. We're extremely opposite. Eggs? I'll take oatmeal and fruit instead. But that's what works for me (which I've also lost weight on, 59 pounds to be exact). It all comes down to personal preference, not a "one size fits all".0
-
That Science 101 guy is probably what made you type out this thread, OP lol.
I am also LCHF, I brought a study to my doctor involving people with my own general stats at the time (obese, high cholesterol, markers for diabetes) and she let me experiment. There are also studies out there showing positive effects on people with healthy BMI, and that long-term LCHF is not deadly. My cholesterol dropped substantially to a normal range, so I am no longer faced with having to take cholesterol medicine.
A lot of people can't sustain on LCHF; I can, and it's better than me not feeling full after two full-to-the-brim bowls of cereal.
It also helps that LCHF helps me stay in charge of my emotional eating. I do take an anti-anxiety medication but I also feel so creative making LCHF foods that it's become a joy and a positive challenge to create things. This morning I had a low-carb cinnamon scone and bulletproof coffee. SO GOOD.
People feel satisfied on different things. I could eat oatmeal and sub sandwiches forever. I can actually feel full before I feel like I'm going to explode on LCHF. Maybe it's a mental trigger. Maybe more fats help my body trigger the fullness signal I didn't get on LCHF.
There are many factors involved but in the end LCHF is what keeps me in control and I am healthy to boot.1 -
VividVegan wrote: »Low-carb may have worked for you but it's not the solution to everyone (congrats on your weight loss by the way). I'm a high-carb vegan. We're extremely opposite. Eggs? I'll take oatmeal and fruit instead. But that's what works for me (which I've also lost weight on, 59 pounds to be exact). It all comes down to personal preference, not a "one size fits all".
Congrats on your almost 60 pound weight loss! My mother in law loves high carb. She doesn't understand how ravenous a piece of toast (which is her breakfast every morning) would make me be soon afterward. It really is an individual thing.0 -
ogmomma2012 wrote: »...
A lot of people can't sustain on LCHF; I can, and it's better than me not feeling full after two full-to-the-brim bowls of cereal...
People feel satisfied on different things. I could eat oatmeal and sub sandwiches forever. I can actually feel full before I feel like I'm going to explode on LCHF. Maybe it's a mental trigger. Maybe more fats help my body trigger the fullness signal...
There are many factors involved but in the end LCHF is what keeps me in control and I am healthy to boot.
I love the freedom from the "hungries".
1 -
Most "weight loss plans" have people eating all their carbs in the AM...some BS about them getting processed better. But if I have carbs early, I'm hungry, much like the OP. So I eat protien, dairy and veggies all day and have a bowl of cereal (or ice cream) at night before bed. That way I'm never hungry and I don't feel like I'm missing out. And I balance out my calories better. And I lose weight easier...but it's still all about calories. Finding a way to get those calories in and it not be hard is the key.0
-
I have been low carb for maybe 3 or 4 mos...I lost @ 30lbs...3
-
I haven't read all the post so apologies if this is a bit redundant.
I spent the past 2-3 years following a low carb approach. Paleo, Primal, High Fat Low Carb, Keto etc All diets that focus on lowering carbs. When I was sticking to it, I'd typically shoot for what Mark Sisson recommends - the sweet spot 50-75 carbs per day. I learned to build nutritious meals. I enjoy Paleo food. I enjoyed not having to count calories.
The problem...I could never stick with it more than 30 days, or maybe 10-15 pound weightloss.
I spent the past 2-3 years doing low carb on and off. Essentially this was yo yo dieting.
You know what? The overall result (no matter what yo yo diet)? I reached my highest weight in my life this past July 2016 - 215 pounds.
Now, I've also gone though yo yo workouts. Crossfit, HIIT work outs, walking...I'd do good for 4 months and then life throws you a curve ball and I was back to stress eating and sedentary behaviors.
Simply, for me, low carb is not sustainable.
Pros:
- eat until full - now calorie counting
- when in a keto state you can go a long time without eating
- fat and protein taste good, so in general meals taste good/OK
Cons:
- unless you are militantly consistent and/or choose to make this your forever way of eating, low carb is difficult to sustain long term.
- eating only protein and plant products can become mind-numbingly boring. That steak and asparagus tasted great on week one, but week 8? It's hard to stomach or psychologically damaging to limit that much
- eating high fat is great, but if you do want to sneak in the occasional carb (or worse you couple high fat with high carb) = you are basically eating the standard american diet which will make you fat
- It is psychologically damaging to eat restrictively - to cut out an entire food group. When I did that I would OBSESSIVELY count my compliant days...and enviably fall off track
2 -
Science_101 wrote: »Chitchatkat wrote: »YES! LCHF (emphasis on high fat) absolutely does work...AND it's the healthiest way to eat because it suppresses the insulin surges caused by carbs. LCHF eating heals the body and nourishes the brain. It gets our bodies to burn stored fat for fuel, which leads to inches lost gradually. I highly recommend that you read Why We Get Fat by Gary Taubes. He explains the science behind lchf. Don't buy into the calorie counting diets that include carbs...they're unhealthy, unsustainable, & don't work. I lost 34 lbs post-menopause at 56. I'm 58 now & feel younger & more energetic than ever.
Please go to the library or Amazon and buy a physiology textbook to learn what insulin does. Insulin is raised EVERYTIME you eat. Insulin is a satiety hormone and signals to the body that you just ate. Then, it mobilizes the food that you just consumed for energy. The healthiest and longest LIVING cultures in the world eat high carb diets. There are no healthy cultures that eat high fat diets, not even the Inuit (they actually have a rare genetic mutation to stay out of ketosis) they are also not very healthy compared to the Asians and various other cultures that get up to 90% of their diets from carbs. It is a sad day when people parrot your brand of misinformation because they read a book by a science JOUNALIST instead of spending the money on a basic physiology course. But, I guess Instagram, Facebook, YouTube, and blogs are more credible in this day and age.
"When people are misinformed, giving them facts to correct those errors only makes them cling to their beliefs more tenaciously.” - Nyhan, B. & Reifler, J.
I've seriously bought maybe 5-6 books on nutrition - all written for pro low carb high fat or paleo way of eating. They are fun to read and I think there is some great research out there...but its so overly complex. I am a smart person, its not like I don't comprehend it. For most average people (non researchers), it takes a simple problem and spins it into 20 different angles that we must monitor for "optimal" health - insulin, leptin, ghrelin, gluten, gut flora, times of the day we eat, this fat, that fat, this hormone does this, that hormone that...
When consuming this literature I became the end-all-be-all person of nutrition wisdom. I would spend hours lecturing to friends the miracles of LCHF and how we shouldn't eat bread - like ever. I would obsessively think of 20 different things, buy more books, read more blog posts.
The funny thing? I had NO NO NO knowledge of healthy portions or calories. Bah! I used to roll my eyes on the calorie in calorie out theories. A calorie? Bah-humbug they are not important.
I just looked at food as mass and ate till full. Yet didn't realize that my 2 glasses of wine was an extra 400 calories...
I repeat, LCHF is great in theory but it over complicates a very simple issue.
I've received the same benefits from reducing portion size and eating a variety of things through calorie coutning:
- satiety
- better sleep
- great energy
- great digestion (THE BEST DIGESTION actually)
- weight loss
- clear skin
- steady energy throughout the day
- etc etc
Yo Yo eating LCHF led me to my highest weight - 215 lbs (5'6"). I am now using MFP and educating myself on simple CICO and i've lost 6+ pounds in 3 weeks. I don't feel deprived at all, rather liberated and in control3
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