High carb
Options
Replies
-
Mine's definitely high carb. 75% carbs, 10-15% fat and 10-15% protein (on 1700-2000 cals). Mainly because I eat mostly plant foods, I avoid adding oils when cooking and keep animal products to a minimum. Started over a year ago. Finished losing weight, from 152 lbs to now maintaining at 113 lbs.
Bloodwork's all good too, esp cholesterol which went down to normal. Also my fasting glucose recently was 81mg/dl (normal is 65-99) and A1c was 5.2% ( normal is 4.8 - 5.6). So no diabetes.4 -
Traveler120 wrote: »Mine's definitely high carb. 75% carbs, 10-15% fat and 10-15% protein (on 1700-2000 cals). Mostly because I eat mostly plant foods, I avoid adding oils when cooking and keep animal products to a minimum. Started over a year ago. Finished losing weight, from 152 lbs to now maintaining at 113 lbs.
Bloodwork's all good too, esp cholesterol which went down to normal. Also my fasting glucose recently was 81mg/dl (normal is 65-99) and A1c was 5.2% ( normal is 4.8-5.6)
Very cool. I'm eating mainly plant based, and I aim for 70% 20% 10%. A bit more protein 'cause I want the muscle. Nice to hear a positive anecdote.2 -
I eat a lot of carbs in the summer when I'm doing a lot of high intensity cycling.0
-
midwesterner85 wrote: »It used to be believed (and still is by many) that the only possible way to complete a long endurance competition (Ironman, ultra-marathon, and even marathons) is to constantly gobble down carbs throughout the competition. An industry was created (or perhaps the industry created this notion, I'm not sure) to make gel packs, energy bars, and sports drinks for quick and high carb snacks and drinks to consume during such activity. That does work, and there is a clear scientific reason why it works.
On the other hand, low carbers who have become fat adapted are capable of using fat for energy at a higher rate than high carbers. It takes time to adapt to being very efficient using fat, but those people don't have to constantly eat gels and high-carb energy bars because they can get a lot of energy from fat (more than the high carber, and enough to complete the event). Low carbers need more electrolytes / sodium, which both groups need.
As a cyclist, I stay the hell away from gels and energy bars and all of that. They're unpleasant to get down.
Everybody who does regular cardiovascular exercise adapts to burn fat more efficiently as a fuel source. It's a pretty common rule of thumb for cyclists not to eat on rides unless they're longer than three hours.0 -
A few years ago, I was advised to change to a high carb (mainly wholegrains, fruit and veg), low fat diet for health reasons, with more frequent eating. I gained weight, but that may have been due to the more frequent eating. Previously I have had a vegetarian and a vegan diet. My weight didn't change on either of those.0
-
midwesterner85 wrote: »For non-endurance athletes, the debate is different. Obviously there are some of us with medical issues who benefit greatly from a low carb diet. But for the otherwise healthy person eating a SAD (high carb) diet, the question is about satiety. While everyone is different, 2/3 of Americans are overweight or obese. This statistic makes me think that many Americans are still hungry after maintenance when eating SAD, thus leading to consumption of excess calories. So for the otherwise healthy person who is tracking and restricting calorie consumption to avoid over-consumption, high carb works.
This is a common misconception that SAD is high carb and that's what's responsible for US obesity (rather than overconsumption). Interestingly, the US is one of the lowest carb countries. Many countries in the "under 50%" carbs category, like US, UK, Australia, also have the highest levels of overweight and obesity compared to the truly high carb countries.
http://chartsbin.com/view/11549 -
midwesterner85 wrote: »It used to be believed (and still is by many) that the only possible way to complete a long endurance competition (Ironman, ultra-marathon, and even marathons) is to constantly gobble down carbs throughout the competition. ..........
On the other hand, low carbers who have become fat adapted are capable of using fat for energy at a higher rate than high carbers. ..........
Both groups have a way that works to obtain energy for endurance activities. The high carb method has been touted for decades, and the low carb method has not received as much attention... and there is less profit to be made from gel pack, energy bar, and sports drink sales.
I'd simply look at what the most successful elite marathon runners do and have been doing for decades - the Kenyans and Ethiopians. Going by the carbs map link above, these are high carb nations. Kenya is at 68% and Ethiopia at 79%. I've yet to hear about low carbing East African runners winning medals. They don't exist.
And I'm pretty sure they're not training on gel packs, energy bars and sports drinks. They simply eat lots of teff, ugali (corn flour), beans, grains, sugary tea, rice, veg, fruits, etc, just regular, affordable, carby foods that are part of the traditional diet.
4 -
Traveler120 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »For non-endurance athletes, the debate is different. Obviously there are some of us with medical issues who benefit greatly from a low carb diet. But for the otherwise healthy person eating a SAD (high carb) diet, the question is about satiety. While everyone is different, 2/3 of Americans are overweight or obese. This statistic makes me think that many Americans are still hungry after maintenance when eating SAD, thus leading to consumption of excess calories. So for the otherwise healthy person who is tracking and restricting calorie consumption to avoid over-consumption, high carb works.
This is a common misconception that SAD is high carb and that's what's responsible for US obesity (rather than overconsumption). Interestingly, the US is one of the lowest carb countries. Many countries in the "under 50%" carbs category, like US, UK, Australia, also have the highest levels of overweight and obesity compared to the truly high carb countries.
http://chartsbin.com/view/1154
Perhaps that point is valid as a percentage of total diet. However, quantity is a different story.
Same website: http://chartsbin.com/view/1160
U.S. kcal per person per day: 3,770 And 49% carbs
3,770 X 49% = 1,847 calories from carbs per day / 4 calories per gram = 462g of carbs per day
I know it is subjective and some might disagree, but 462g of carbs per day is high carb.
Compare that to the Democratic Republic of the Congo with 80% carbs (Wow! That is tied with Bangladesh for the highest carb consumer on the chart you shared):
1,590 kcal per person per day X 80% = 1,272 / 4 calories per gram = 318g of carbs per day
This is also high carb, but the percentage of total diet makes it appear to be lower because we eat a lot of everything. Americans eat 45% more carbs than people of the Congo, who appear to be the highest carb consumers from the chart you first shared. So yes, SAD is high carb. The fact that SAD is high in everything else doesn't change that it is high in carbs.
1 -
Traveler120 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »It used to be believed (and still is by many) that the only possible way to complete a long endurance competition (Ironman, ultra-marathon, and even marathons) is to constantly gobble down carbs throughout the competition. ..........
On the other hand, low carbers who have become fat adapted are capable of using fat for energy at a higher rate than high carbers. ..........
Both groups have a way that works to obtain energy for endurance activities. The high carb method has been touted for decades, and the low carb method has not received as much attention... and there is less profit to be made from gel pack, energy bar, and sports drink sales.
I'd simply look at what the most successful elite marathon runners do and have been doing for decades - the Kenyans and Ethiopians. Going by the carbs map link above, these are high carb nations. Kenya is at 68% and Ethiopia at 79%. I've yet to hear about low carbing East African runners winning medals. They don't exist.
And I'm pretty sure they're not training on gel packs, energy bars and sports drinks. They simply eat lots of teff, ugali (corn flour), beans, grains, sugary tea, rice, veg, fruits, etc, just regular, affordable, carby foods that are part of the traditional diet.
For distance runners, yes, this holds. Oddly, for strength sports we see a lot of conflicting stuff. The Eastern Euros practically drown themselves in dead animal carcass, while the Chinese do seem to maintain a pretty high carb/high fat diet.
Both have absolutely wrecked *kitten* in the Olympics, so yeah, looks to be a wash there.0 -
Traveler120 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »It used to be believed (and still is by many) that the only possible way to complete a long endurance competition (Ironman, ultra-marathon, and even marathons) is to constantly gobble down carbs throughout the competition. ..........
On the other hand, low carbers who have become fat adapted are capable of using fat for energy at a higher rate than high carbers. ..........
Both groups have a way that works to obtain energy for endurance activities. The high carb method has been touted for decades, and the low carb method has not received as much attention... and there is less profit to be made from gel pack, energy bar, and sports drink sales.
I'd simply look at what the most successful elite marathon runners do and have been doing for decades - the Kenyans and Ethiopians. Going by the carbs map link above, these are high carb nations. Kenya is at 68% and Ethiopia at 79%. I've yet to hear about low carbing East African runners winning medals. They don't exist.
And I'm pretty sure they're not training on gel packs, energy bars and sports drinks. They simply eat lots of teff, ugali (corn flour), beans, grains, sugary tea, rice, veg, fruits, etc, just regular, affordable, carby foods that are part of the traditional diet.
Sure, the high carb method works... no question there. My point was that a LCHF method can work for distance runners as well, it just doesn't get the same attention and is not as well known.0 -
midwesterner85 wrote: »Traveler120 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »For non-endurance athletes, the debate is different. Obviously there are some of us with medical issues who benefit greatly from a low carb diet. But for the otherwise healthy person eating a SAD (high carb) diet, the question is about satiety. While everyone is different, 2/3 of Americans are overweight or obese. This statistic makes me think that many Americans are still hungry after maintenance when eating SAD, thus leading to consumption of excess calories. So for the otherwise healthy person who is tracking and restricting calorie consumption to avoid over-consumption, high carb works.
This is a common misconception that SAD is high carb and that's what's responsible for US obesity (rather than overconsumption). Interestingly, the US is one of the lowest carb countries. Many countries in the "under 50%" carbs category, like US, UK, Australia, also have the highest levels of overweight and obesity compared to the truly high carb countries.
http://chartsbin.com/view/1154
Perhaps that point is valid as a percentage of total diet. However, quantity is a different story.
Same website: http://chartsbin.com/view/1160
U.S. kcal per person per day: 3,770 And 49% carbs
3,770 X 49% = 1,847 calories from carbs per day / 4 calories per gram = 462g of carbs per day
I know it is subjective and some might disagree, but 462g of carbs per day is high carb.
Compare that to the Democratic Republic of the Congo with 80% carbs (Wow! That is tied with Bangladesh for the highest carb consumer on the chart you shared):
1,590 kcal per person per day X 80% = 1,272 / 4 calories per gram = 318g of carbs per day
This is also high carb, but the percentage of total diet makes it appear to be lower because we eat a lot of everything. Americans eat 45% more carbs than people of the Congo, who appear to be the highest carb consumers from the chart you first shared. So yes, SAD is high carb. The fact that SAD is high in everything else doesn't change that it is high in carbs.
Every definition I've seen for the Standard American Diet is high fat, low fiber, highly processed, low in plant-based food. Nothing about carbs.
When you say a diet is "high carb" that refers to what percentage of the total diet is carbs. A person eating 1000 cals and 150g of carbs is eating a high carb diet because 70% of the cals come from carbs. A person eating 3000 cals and eating 150g of carbs is eating a low carb diet because only 20% of their cals come from carbs. It's not about the number of grams or quantities of carbs.
OP, I never pay attention to carbs and they usually fall for me in what I've always seen termed "moderate" - 50-55%. I focus on getting protein to @ 80-100 g. So I'd say typically 55% carbs, 20% protein, 25% fat.
Everyone talks about carbs and fat, but I found that getting my protein up made me way more likely to hit my calorie target without being hungry. Fiber would be the next most important to me. Once those two things are in line I'm good, and I don't really pay attention to where carbs and fat end up. I'm a firm believer that macro splits are mostly personal preference, maybe they become a bit more important in relation to fitness goals or health conditions.7 -
midwesterner85 wrote: »..........This is also high carb, but the percentage of total diet makes it appear to be lower because we eat a lot of everything. Americans eat 45% more carbs than people of the Congo, who appear to be the highest carb consumers from the chart you first shared. So yes, SAD is high carb. The fact that SAD is high in everything else doesn't change that it is high in carbs.
It also doesn't change the fact that it's even higher in fats compared to the rest of the world, especially the countries with the lowest overweight/obesity rates.
From your link: http://chartsbin.com/view/1160 you've pointed at carbs but conveniently left out the other relevant details, so here they are:
-World: 2780 kcal/person/day (Carbohydrates: 63%, Proteins: 11%, Fats: 26%)
-Developed countries: 3420 kcal/person/day Carbohydrates: 53%, Proteins: 12%, Fats: 34%
-Developing World: 2630 kcal/person/day Carbohydrates: 67%, Proteins: 11%, Fats: 23%
-Sub-Saharan Africa: 2240 kcal/person/day Carbohydrates: 72%, Proteins: 10%, Fats: 19%
-Central Africa: 1820 kcal/person/day Carbohydrates: 75%, Proteins: 11%, Fats: 26%
**From the table - US -3770 Kcal, 49% Carbs, 12% Protein, 38% Fats
And since you used the D.R.Congo -1590 Kcal, 80% carbs, 6% protein, 14% fats
So yes, the US eats 575 more calories from carbs, BUT 1432 calories from fat VS 222 calories in the DRC.
That's 1210 calories more from fats!! And 452 from protein VS 95 in the DRC. That's 357 calories more from protein.
But let's blame the carbs right? Not the obvious overall over-consumption of total calories in the US and other overweight/obese nations?
12 -
midwesterner85 wrote: »Traveler120 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »For non-endurance athletes, the debate is different. Obviously there are some of us with medical issues who benefit greatly from a low carb diet. But for the otherwise healthy person eating a SAD (high carb) diet, the question is about satiety. While everyone is different, 2/3 of Americans are overweight or obese. This statistic makes me think that many Americans are still hungry after maintenance when eating SAD, thus leading to consumption of excess calories. So for the otherwise healthy person who is tracking and restricting calorie consumption to avoid over-consumption, high carb works.
This is a common misconception that SAD is high carb and that's what's responsible for US obesity (rather than overconsumption). Interestingly, the US is one of the lowest carb countries. Many countries in the "under 50%" carbs category, like US, UK, Australia, also have the highest levels of overweight and obesity compared to the truly high carb countries.
http://chartsbin.com/view/1154
Perhaps that point is valid as a percentage of total diet. However, quantity is a different story.
Same website: http://chartsbin.com/view/1160
U.S. kcal per person per day: 3,770 And 49% carbs
3,770 X 49% = 1,847 calories from carbs per day / 4 calories per gram = 462g of carbs per day
I know it is subjective and some might disagree, but 462g of carbs per day is high carb.
Compare that to the Democratic Republic of the Congo with 80% carbs (Wow! That is tied with Bangladesh for the highest carb consumer on the chart you shared):
1,590 kcal per person per day X 80% = 1,272 / 4 calories per gram = 318g of carbs per day
This is also high carb, but the percentage of total diet makes it appear to be lower because we eat a lot of everything. Americans eat 45% more carbs than people of the Congo, who appear to be the highest carb consumers from the chart you first shared. So yes, SAD is high carb. The fact that SAD is high in everything else doesn't change that it is high in carbs.
Every definition I've seen for the Standard American Diet is high fat, low fiber, highly processed, low in plant-based food. Nothing about carbs.
When you say a diet is "high carb" that refers to what percentage of the total diet is carbs. A person eating 1000 cals and 150g of carbs is eating a high carb diet because 70% of the cals come from carbs. A person eating 3000 cals and eating 150g of carbs is eating a low carb diet because only 20% of their cals come from carbs. It's not about the number of grams or quantities of carbs.
OP, I never pay attention to carbs and they usually fall for me in what I've always seen termed "moderate" - 50-55%. I focus on getting protein to @ 80-100 g. So I'd say typically 55% carbs, 20% protein, 25% fat.
Everyone talks about carbs and fat, but I found that getting my protein up made me way more likely to hit my calorie target without being hungry. Fiber would be the next most important to me. Once those two things are in line I'm good, and I don't really pay attention to where carbs and fat end up. I'm a firm believer that macro splits are mostly personal preference, maybe they become a bit more important in relation to fitness goals or health conditions.
Nope, when I say high carb, I mean how many grams of carbs are included. Maybe you mean percentage and maybe some others mean percentage, but I don't.
0 -
I am Italian + lift weights = eat all the carbs...
5 -
midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Traveler120 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »For non-endurance athletes, the debate is different. Obviously there are some of us with medical issues who benefit greatly from a low carb diet. But for the otherwise healthy person eating a SAD (high carb) diet, the question is about satiety. While everyone is different, 2/3 of Americans are overweight or obese. This statistic makes me think that many Americans are still hungry after maintenance when eating SAD, thus leading to consumption of excess calories. So for the otherwise healthy person who is tracking and restricting calorie consumption to avoid over-consumption, high carb works.
This is a common misconception that SAD is high carb and that's what's responsible for US obesity (rather than overconsumption). Interestingly, the US is one of the lowest carb countries. Many countries in the "under 50%" carbs category, like US, UK, Australia, also have the highest levels of overweight and obesity compared to the truly high carb countries.
http://chartsbin.com/view/1154
Perhaps that point is valid as a percentage of total diet. However, quantity is a different story.
Same website: http://chartsbin.com/view/1160
U.S. kcal per person per day: 3,770 And 49% carbs
3,770 X 49% = 1,847 calories from carbs per day / 4 calories per gram = 462g of carbs per day
I know it is subjective and some might disagree, but 462g of carbs per day is high carb.
Compare that to the Democratic Republic of the Congo with 80% carbs (Wow! That is tied with Bangladesh for the highest carb consumer on the chart you shared):
1,590 kcal per person per day X 80% = 1,272 / 4 calories per gram = 318g of carbs per day
This is also high carb, but the percentage of total diet makes it appear to be lower because we eat a lot of everything. Americans eat 45% more carbs than people of the Congo, who appear to be the highest carb consumers from the chart you first shared. So yes, SAD is high carb. The fact that SAD is high in everything else doesn't change that it is high in carbs.
Every definition I've seen for the Standard American Diet is high fat, low fiber, highly processed, low in plant-based food. Nothing about carbs.
When you say a diet is "high carb" that refers to what percentage of the total diet is carbs. A person eating 1000 cals and 150g of carbs is eating a high carb diet because 70% of the cals come from carbs. A person eating 3000 cals and eating 150g of carbs is eating a low carb diet because only 20% of their cals come from carbs. It's not about the number of grams or quantities of carbs.
OP, I never pay attention to carbs and they usually fall for me in what I've always seen termed "moderate" - 50-55%. I focus on getting protein to @ 80-100 g. So I'd say typically 55% carbs, 20% protein, 25% fat.
Everyone talks about carbs and fat, but I found that getting my protein up made me way more likely to hit my calorie target without being hungry. Fiber would be the next most important to me. Once those two things are in line I'm good, and I don't really pay attention to where carbs and fat end up. I'm a firm believer that macro splits are mostly personal preference, maybe they become a bit more important in relation to fitness goals or health conditions.
Nope, when I say high carb, I mean how many grams of carbs are included. Maybe you mean percentage and maybe some others mean percentage, but I don't.
Does that make SAD a high carb, high fat high, protein diet?5 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Traveler120 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »For non-endurance athletes, the debate is different. Obviously there are some of us with medical issues who benefit greatly from a low carb diet. But for the otherwise healthy person eating a SAD (high carb) diet, the question is about satiety. While everyone is different, 2/3 of Americans are overweight or obese. This statistic makes me think that many Americans are still hungry after maintenance when eating SAD, thus leading to consumption of excess calories. So for the otherwise healthy person who is tracking and restricting calorie consumption to avoid over-consumption, high carb works.
This is a common misconception that SAD is high carb and that's what's responsible for US obesity (rather than overconsumption). Interestingly, the US is one of the lowest carb countries. Many countries in the "under 50%" carbs category, like US, UK, Australia, also have the highest levels of overweight and obesity compared to the truly high carb countries.
http://chartsbin.com/view/1154
Perhaps that point is valid as a percentage of total diet. However, quantity is a different story.
Same website: http://chartsbin.com/view/1160
U.S. kcal per person per day: 3,770 And 49% carbs
3,770 X 49% = 1,847 calories from carbs per day / 4 calories per gram = 462g of carbs per day
I know it is subjective and some might disagree, but 462g of carbs per day is high carb.
Compare that to the Democratic Republic of the Congo with 80% carbs (Wow! That is tied with Bangladesh for the highest carb consumer on the chart you shared):
1,590 kcal per person per day X 80% = 1,272 / 4 calories per gram = 318g of carbs per day
This is also high carb, but the percentage of total diet makes it appear to be lower because we eat a lot of everything. Americans eat 45% more carbs than people of the Congo, who appear to be the highest carb consumers from the chart you first shared. So yes, SAD is high carb. The fact that SAD is high in everything else doesn't change that it is high in carbs.
Every definition I've seen for the Standard American Diet is high fat, low fiber, highly processed, low in plant-based food. Nothing about carbs.
When you say a diet is "high carb" that refers to what percentage of the total diet is carbs. A person eating 1000 cals and 150g of carbs is eating a high carb diet because 70% of the cals come from carbs. A person eating 3000 cals and eating 150g of carbs is eating a low carb diet because only 20% of their cals come from carbs. It's not about the number of grams or quantities of carbs.
OP, I never pay attention to carbs and they usually fall for me in what I've always seen termed "moderate" - 50-55%. I focus on getting protein to @ 80-100 g. So I'd say typically 55% carbs, 20% protein, 25% fat.
Everyone talks about carbs and fat, but I found that getting my protein up made me way more likely to hit my calorie target without being hungry. Fiber would be the next most important to me. Once those two things are in line I'm good, and I don't really pay attention to where carbs and fat end up. I'm a firm believer that macro splits are mostly personal preference, maybe they become a bit more important in relation to fitness goals or health conditions.
Nope, when I say high carb, I mean how many grams of carbs are included. Maybe you mean percentage and maybe some others mean percentage, but I don't.
Does that make SAD a high carb, high fat high, protein diet?
I suppose it does.0 -
midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Traveler120 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »For non-endurance athletes, the debate is different. Obviously there are some of us with medical issues who benefit greatly from a low carb diet. But for the otherwise healthy person eating a SAD (high carb) diet, the question is about satiety. While everyone is different, 2/3 of Americans are overweight or obese. This statistic makes me think that many Americans are still hungry after maintenance when eating SAD, thus leading to consumption of excess calories. So for the otherwise healthy person who is tracking and restricting calorie consumption to avoid over-consumption, high carb works.
This is a common misconception that SAD is high carb and that's what's responsible for US obesity (rather than overconsumption). Interestingly, the US is one of the lowest carb countries. Many countries in the "under 50%" carbs category, like US, UK, Australia, also have the highest levels of overweight and obesity compared to the truly high carb countries.
http://chartsbin.com/view/1154
Perhaps that point is valid as a percentage of total diet. However, quantity is a different story.
Same website: http://chartsbin.com/view/1160
U.S. kcal per person per day: 3,770 And 49% carbs
3,770 X 49% = 1,847 calories from carbs per day / 4 calories per gram = 462g of carbs per day
I know it is subjective and some might disagree, but 462g of carbs per day is high carb.
Compare that to the Democratic Republic of the Congo with 80% carbs (Wow! That is tied with Bangladesh for the highest carb consumer on the chart you shared):
1,590 kcal per person per day X 80% = 1,272 / 4 calories per gram = 318g of carbs per day
This is also high carb, but the percentage of total diet makes it appear to be lower because we eat a lot of everything. Americans eat 45% more carbs than people of the Congo, who appear to be the highest carb consumers from the chart you first shared. So yes, SAD is high carb. The fact that SAD is high in everything else doesn't change that it is high in carbs.
Every definition I've seen for the Standard American Diet is high fat, low fiber, highly processed, low in plant-based food. Nothing about carbs.
When you say a diet is "high carb" that refers to what percentage of the total diet is carbs. A person eating 1000 cals and 150g of carbs is eating a high carb diet because 70% of the cals come from carbs. A person eating 3000 cals and eating 150g of carbs is eating a low carb diet because only 20% of their cals come from carbs. It's not about the number of grams or quantities of carbs.
OP, I never pay attention to carbs and they usually fall for me in what I've always seen termed "moderate" - 50-55%. I focus on getting protein to @ 80-100 g. So I'd say typically 55% carbs, 20% protein, 25% fat.
Everyone talks about carbs and fat, but I found that getting my protein up made me way more likely to hit my calorie target without being hungry. Fiber would be the next most important to me. Once those two things are in line I'm good, and I don't really pay attention to where carbs and fat end up. I'm a firm believer that macro splits are mostly personal preference, maybe they become a bit more important in relation to fitness goals or health conditions.
Nope, when I say high carb, I mean how many grams of carbs are included. Maybe you mean percentage and maybe some others mean percentage, but I don't.
But we are talking about a term that has an actual definition. The definition of HCLF is percentages. You can't just redefine a common term so it fits your POV. HCLF is a diet where a high percentage of the calories come from carbs. That's like saying you've decided the Mediterranean Diet is a diet where you eat lots of goat meat, and then you argue with people who say the Mediterranean Diet is a balanced diet because when you say Mediterranean you mean lots of goat meat.
5 -
midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Traveler120 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »For non-endurance athletes, the debate is different. Obviously there are some of us with medical issues who benefit greatly from a low carb diet. But for the otherwise healthy person eating a SAD (high carb) diet, the question is about satiety. While everyone is different, 2/3 of Americans are overweight or obese. This statistic makes me think that many Americans are still hungry after maintenance when eating SAD, thus leading to consumption of excess calories. So for the otherwise healthy person who is tracking and restricting calorie consumption to avoid over-consumption, high carb works.
This is a common misconception that SAD is high carb and that's what's responsible for US obesity (rather than overconsumption). Interestingly, the US is one of the lowest carb countries. Many countries in the "under 50%" carbs category, like US, UK, Australia, also have the highest levels of overweight and obesity compared to the truly high carb countries.
http://chartsbin.com/view/1154
Perhaps that point is valid as a percentage of total diet. However, quantity is a different story.
Same website: http://chartsbin.com/view/1160
U.S. kcal per person per day: 3,770 And 49% carbs
3,770 X 49% = 1,847 calories from carbs per day / 4 calories per gram = 462g of carbs per day
I know it is subjective and some might disagree, but 462g of carbs per day is high carb.
Compare that to the Democratic Republic of the Congo with 80% carbs (Wow! That is tied with Bangladesh for the highest carb consumer on the chart you shared):
1,590 kcal per person per day X 80% = 1,272 / 4 calories per gram = 318g of carbs per day
This is also high carb, but the percentage of total diet makes it appear to be lower because we eat a lot of everything. Americans eat 45% more carbs than people of the Congo, who appear to be the highest carb consumers from the chart you first shared. So yes, SAD is high carb. The fact that SAD is high in everything else doesn't change that it is high in carbs.
Every definition I've seen for the Standard American Diet is high fat, low fiber, highly processed, low in plant-based food. Nothing about carbs.
When you say a diet is "high carb" that refers to what percentage of the total diet is carbs. A person eating 1000 cals and 150g of carbs is eating a high carb diet because 70% of the cals come from carbs. A person eating 3000 cals and eating 150g of carbs is eating a low carb diet because only 20% of their cals come from carbs. It's not about the number of grams or quantities of carbs.
OP, I never pay attention to carbs and they usually fall for me in what I've always seen termed "moderate" - 50-55%. I focus on getting protein to @ 80-100 g. So I'd say typically 55% carbs, 20% protein, 25% fat.
Everyone talks about carbs and fat, but I found that getting my protein up made me way more likely to hit my calorie target without being hungry. Fiber would be the next most important to me. Once those two things are in line I'm good, and I don't really pay attention to where carbs and fat end up. I'm a firm believer that macro splits are mostly personal preference, maybe they become a bit more important in relation to fitness goals or health conditions.
Nope, when I say high carb, I mean how many grams of carbs are included. Maybe you mean percentage and maybe some others mean percentage, but I don't.
But we are talking about a term that has an actual definition. The definition of HCLF is percentages. You can't just redefine a common term so it fits your POV. HCLF is a diet where a high percentage of the calories come from carbs. That's like saying you've decided the Mediterranean Diet is a diet where you eat lots of goat meat, and then you argue with people who say the Mediterranean Diet is a balanced diet because when you say Mediterranean you mean lots of goat meat.
Fine - let me know what term you want me to use in this discussion to refer to those who eat a lot of carbs and I'll use that term. It's just semantics at this point.
ETA: FTR, I never said HCLF. I said "high carb."0 -
So I eat 175 grams of protein per day, 300 grams of carbs and 100 grams of fats per day and thats a minimum. Wonder what I shall classify it?2
-
midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Traveler120 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »For non-endurance athletes, the debate is different. Obviously there are some of us with medical issues who benefit greatly from a low carb diet. But for the otherwise healthy person eating a SAD (high carb) diet, the question is about satiety. While everyone is different, 2/3 of Americans are overweight or obese. This statistic makes me think that many Americans are still hungry after maintenance when eating SAD, thus leading to consumption of excess calories. So for the otherwise healthy person who is tracking and restricting calorie consumption to avoid over-consumption, high carb works.
This is a common misconception that SAD is high carb and that's what's responsible for US obesity (rather than overconsumption). Interestingly, the US is one of the lowest carb countries. Many countries in the "under 50%" carbs category, like US, UK, Australia, also have the highest levels of overweight and obesity compared to the truly high carb countries.
http://chartsbin.com/view/1154
Perhaps that point is valid as a percentage of total diet. However, quantity is a different story.
Same website: http://chartsbin.com/view/1160
U.S. kcal per person per day: 3,770 And 49% carbs
3,770 X 49% = 1,847 calories from carbs per day / 4 calories per gram = 462g of carbs per day
I know it is subjective and some might disagree, but 462g of carbs per day is high carb.
Compare that to the Democratic Republic of the Congo with 80% carbs (Wow! That is tied with Bangladesh for the highest carb consumer on the chart you shared):
1,590 kcal per person per day X 80% = 1,272 / 4 calories per gram = 318g of carbs per day
This is also high carb, but the percentage of total diet makes it appear to be lower because we eat a lot of everything. Americans eat 45% more carbs than people of the Congo, who appear to be the highest carb consumers from the chart you first shared. So yes, SAD is high carb. The fact that SAD is high in everything else doesn't change that it is high in carbs.
Every definition I've seen for the Standard American Diet is high fat, low fiber, highly processed, low in plant-based food. Nothing about carbs.
When you say a diet is "high carb" that refers to what percentage of the total diet is carbs. A person eating 1000 cals and 150g of carbs is eating a high carb diet because 70% of the cals come from carbs. A person eating 3000 cals and eating 150g of carbs is eating a low carb diet because only 20% of their cals come from carbs. It's not about the number of grams or quantities of carbs.
OP, I never pay attention to carbs and they usually fall for me in what I've always seen termed "moderate" - 50-55%. I focus on getting protein to @ 80-100 g. So I'd say typically 55% carbs, 20% protein, 25% fat.
Everyone talks about carbs and fat, but I found that getting my protein up made me way more likely to hit my calorie target without being hungry. Fiber would be the next most important to me. Once those two things are in line I'm good, and I don't really pay attention to where carbs and fat end up. I'm a firm believer that macro splits are mostly personal preference, maybe they become a bit more important in relation to fitness goals or health conditions.
Nope, when I say high carb, I mean how many grams of carbs are included. Maybe you mean percentage and maybe some others mean percentage, but I don't.
But we are talking about a term that has an actual definition. The definition of HCLF is percentages. You can't just redefine a common term so it fits your POV. HCLF is a diet where a high percentage of the calories come from carbs. That's like saying you've decided the Mediterranean Diet is a diet where you eat lots of goat meat, and then you argue with people who say the Mediterranean Diet is a balanced diet because when you say Mediterranean you mean lots of goat meat.
Fine - let me know what term you want me to use in this discussion to refer to those who eat a lot of carbs and I'll use that term. It's just semantics at this point.
ETA: FTR, I never said HCLF. I said "high carb."
Maybe I am splitting hairs, but honestly, I've never heard the SAD diet termed a high carb diet. It's always about how much red meat, processed meat, and fast food we eat. And when I eat fast food, it's a fat heavy meal, not a carb heavy meal.
I eat moderate pretty much everything, so I don't know what term to use!3
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392.1K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.9K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.4K Fitness and Exercise
- 404 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 987 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions