CICO & Carbohydrates
coleg04
Posts: 126 Member
Good morning all!
I have some thoughts and I would love and appreciate some feedback, if possible.
First, I completely understand CICO and that this is the only way to lose weight; however, for me, if I do not limit my carbohydrates to about 20-30% of my diet I get crazy sugar/starch cravings and do not stay satiated for long. Additionally, it is extremely difficult for me to eat a "traditional" diet and still feel full in a caloric deficit without doing this. Am I alone here? I make sure I have enough carbs to feel normal and eat more especially before and after weight training, but I can't find much information about this.
Also, I believe this is why when I do not pay attention to my diet I can eat so much and gain weight quickly. I love carbs. The thing is 2 pop-tarts = 400kcal total and will leave me hungry again in an hour wheras 400 calories of chicken breast will keep me full for 3-4 hours. I used to think the low-carb diet was successful for me because of my blood sugar, but that was before I fully grasped the concept of CICO. I just wanted to know what people think of this and the way I seem to function.
Any feedback would be greatly appreciated.
I have some thoughts and I would love and appreciate some feedback, if possible.
First, I completely understand CICO and that this is the only way to lose weight; however, for me, if I do not limit my carbohydrates to about 20-30% of my diet I get crazy sugar/starch cravings and do not stay satiated for long. Additionally, it is extremely difficult for me to eat a "traditional" diet and still feel full in a caloric deficit without doing this. Am I alone here? I make sure I have enough carbs to feel normal and eat more especially before and after weight training, but I can't find much information about this.
Also, I believe this is why when I do not pay attention to my diet I can eat so much and gain weight quickly. I love carbs. The thing is 2 pop-tarts = 400kcal total and will leave me hungry again in an hour wheras 400 calories of chicken breast will keep me full for 3-4 hours. I used to think the low-carb diet was successful for me because of my blood sugar, but that was before I fully grasped the concept of CICO. I just wanted to know what people think of this and the way I seem to function.
Any feedback would be greatly appreciated.
0
Replies
-
Side note: I am 30 years old, male, 6 foot 4 and currently at 226lbs. My heaviest was 256lbs (4 years ago before I began strength training so I have a lot more muscle now).0
-
Lots of people realize that a calorie deficit is how they lose weight but paying attention to macronutrients (carbohydrates, fats, protein) allows them to more easily maintain that deficit.
Carbohydrates don't trigger hunger for me, but I've found that if I try to eat low fat, I am hungry and miserable. A low fat deficit is terrible for me, but when I increase my fat I can be happy on the same amount of calories.5 -
A calorie deficit is all you require to lose weight. Macro splits are down to personal preference!8
-
It works that way for me as well. I find that eating lower carb is a much more satisfying way of eating for me. I'm a huge sweets fan, so the other benefit of low-carb is that my sweets cravings are greatly diminished. All in all, I just find it easier!3
-
Good morning all!
I have some thoughts and I would love and appreciate some feedback, if possible.
First, I completely understand CICO and that this is the only way to lose weight; however, for me, if I do not limit my carbohydrates to about 20-30% of my diet I get crazy sugar/starch cravings and do not stay satiated for long. Additionally, it is extremely difficult for me to eat a "traditional" diet and still feel full in a caloric deficit without doing this. Am I alone here? I make sure I have enough carbs to feel normal and eat more especially before and after weight training, but I can't find much information about this.
Also, I believe this is why when I do not pay attention to my diet I can eat so much and gain weight quickly. I love carbs. The thing is 2 pop-tarts = 400kcal total and will leave me hungry again in an hour wheras 400 calories of chicken breast will keep me full for 3-4 hours. I used to think the low-carb diet was successful for me because of my blood sugar, but that was before I fully grasped the concept of CICO. I just wanted to know what people think of this and the way I seem to function.
Any feedback would be greatly appreciated.
Maybe more quality carbs? I don't think a couple pop tarts is going to fill anyone up...there are numerous quality carbohydrates out there...pop tarts are just junk food...not all carbs are junk food.
legumes, lentils, potatoes and sweet potatoes, oats, barley, veggies, fruit, etc, etc...all carbs...not junk food.4 -
fast vs slower carbs - helped me - instead of a white potato, i have sweet potato or similar...but year, poptarts wouldn't be my first choice for a carb source unless i needed a quick sugar rush0
-
cwolfman13 wrote: »Good morning all!
I have some thoughts and I would love and appreciate some feedback, if possible.
First, I completely understand CICO and that this is the only way to lose weight; however, for me, if I do not limit my carbohydrates to about 20-30% of my diet I get crazy sugar/starch cravings and do not stay satiated for long. Additionally, it is extremely difficult for me to eat a "traditional" diet and still feel full in a caloric deficit without doing this. Am I alone here? I make sure I have enough carbs to feel normal and eat more especially before and after weight training, but I can't find much information about this.
Also, I believe this is why when I do not pay attention to my diet I can eat so much and gain weight quickly. I love carbs. The thing is 2 pop-tarts = 400kcal total and will leave me hungry again in an hour wheras 400 calories of chicken breast will keep me full for 3-4 hours. I used to think the low-carb diet was successful for me because of my blood sugar, but that was before I fully grasped the concept of CICO. I just wanted to know what people think of this and the way I seem to function.
Any feedback would be greatly appreciated.
Maybe more quality carbs? I don't think a couple pop tarts is going to fill anyone up...there are numerous quality carbohydrates out there...pop tarts are just junk food...not all carbs are junk food.
legumes, lentils, potatoes and sweet potatoes, oats, barley, veggies, fruit, etc, etc...all carbs...not junk food.
That's what I am saying. Non junk food is going to give you a much greater chance of felling satiated. Lets also not forget that protein and fiber is generally recognized as having the biggest impact on fullness.3 -
I find that 400 calories of poptarts and 400 calories of say, sweet potatoes, are not going to satiate in the same way (largely because of volume- that would be like 16 oz of sweet potato, not sure I could even eat that in one sitting). Because of this it's not so much a carb problem for me, but choice of carb. Some just keep me full better than others, so I try to opt for those first. If I were to fill my carbs with poptarts and chips and other stuff I'd definitely love to eat every single day/meal, I would either over eat very easily and gain weight, or be very miserable trying to stick to my calorie budget.1
-
It's fine to limit your carbs, whether you do it for medical or non-medical reasons. It's the idea that everybody must limit carbs in order to lose fat that is a problem, because it simply isn't true. But if that is what you like to do for whatever reason, go ahead and do it.8
-
trigden1991 wrote: »A calorie deficit is all you require to lose weight. Macro splits are down to personal preference!
This. I do better with a higher carb ratio, someone else will be totally different. Just figure out what works for you and then go with it 0 -
First, I completely understand CICO and that this is the only way to lose weight; however, for me, if I do not limit my carbohydrates to about 20-30% of my diet I get crazy sugar/starch cravings and do not stay satiated for long.
I don't experience this, but some others say they do. It's a common reason for doing low carb, I think. There's nothing inconsistent between understanding that CICO is how weight loss works and preferring a particular macro ratio.Additionally, it is extremely difficult for me to eat a "traditional" diet and still feel full in a caloric deficit without doing this. Am I alone here? I make sure I have enough carbs to feel normal and eat more especially before and after weight training, but I can't find much information about this.
There is no one traditional diet. Human diets are quite varied and humans can be healthy on a wide range of macro ratios. Personally beyond getting enough protein I don't pay much attention to macros, only making generally healthy choices.
Are you alone? ;-) No, surely you know that low carbing (even much lower than you are doing) is quite popular right now. If 20-30% carbs is what works for you, great!The thing is 2 pop-tarts = 400kcal total and will leave me hungry again in an hour wheras 400 calories of chicken breast will keep me full for 3-4 hours.
Well, this isn't really a fair comparison. Protein is on average filling for people, and whether you low carb or not you'd want to get a decent amount of protein and have a filling diet. Similarly, pop tarts (which probably have some fat, I don't eat them, so don't know the break down), aren't really a good proxy for "carbs"--carbs range from potatoes and rice and bread to fruit and vegetables. Many foods that get called "carbs" are really half carbs, half fat, like chips or sweet baked goods, etc. That's a misuse of the term, IMO, and when people who aren't choosing the usually more filling carbs (like vegetables, fruit, whole grains, whole foods like legumes and tubers) or preparing them in a less satiating way that involves lots of fat (french fries) blame "carbs" I think that's a misunderstanding.
But again some really do find a higher percentage of carbs, even more filling, nutrient-dense carbs (well, more filling for many of us) to be less satisfying, and they should eat accordingly. I find fat completely unsatiating so have to take that into account (and yet I still manage to eat 25-30% fat, because foods with fat are usually tasty).
Anyway, what you are doing seems fine.4 -
deannalfisher wrote: »fast vs slower carbs - helped me - instead of a white potato, i have sweet potato or similar...but year, poptarts wouldn't be my first choice for a carb source unless i needed a quick sugar rush
According to nutritiondata:
Potatoes, flesh and skin, raw (100 g) is GL 8.
Sweet potatoes, uprepared, raw (100 g) is also GL 8 (fewer cals, however, but not a huge difference).
Of course, with both what is going to matter more is what you add to it and what you eat it with, as most people don't just eat plain potatoes or sweet potatoes on their own. Potatoes actually score quite high on satiety tests. (I am also not sure why they always get compared to each other as if they were white and whole wheat bread -- they are both tubers, but different plants, and both have positives when it comes to micronutrients. Just as I wouldn't choose broccoli over cauliflower and never eat cauliflower or spinach over kale and never eat kale, I think it's even better to eat (if you like both) both potatoes--white and red and purple--and sweet potatoes. Variety is good.)
Also, I do happen to find both way tastier than a poptart, and I'd expect much more filling (don't think I've had a poptart since I was a kid at a friend's house, as I wasn't a fan. My sister eats them regularly and has never been fat, however.)
4 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »Good morning all!
I have some thoughts and I would love and appreciate some feedback, if possible.
First, I completely understand CICO and that this is the only way to lose weight; however, for me, if I do not limit my carbohydrates to about 20-30% of my diet I get crazy sugar/starch cravings and do not stay satiated for long. Additionally, it is extremely difficult for me to eat a "traditional" diet and still feel full in a caloric deficit without doing this. Am I alone here? I make sure I have enough carbs to feel normal and eat more especially before and after weight training, but I can't find much information about this.
Also, I believe this is why when I do not pay attention to my diet I can eat so much and gain weight quickly. I love carbs. The thing is 2 pop-tarts = 400kcal total and will leave me hungry again in an hour wheras 400 calories of chicken breast will keep me full for 3-4 hours. I used to think the low-carb diet was successful for me because of my blood sugar, but that was before I fully grasped the concept of CICO. I just wanted to know what people think of this and the way I seem to function.
Any feedback would be greatly appreciated.
Maybe more quality carbs? I don't think a couple pop tarts is going to fill anyone up...there are numerous quality carbohydrates out there...pop tarts are just junk food...not all carbs are junk food.
legumes, lentils, potatoes and sweet potatoes, oats, barley, veggies, fruit, etc, etc...all carbs...not junk food.
^This. Poptarts (or their gluten free equivalent) wouldn't fill me, but a bowl of old-fashioned oatmeal with some plain yogurt stirred in would.
There are some people for whom carbs in any form seem to be a problem, and they are more sated by fat, though.
Since you seem to be okay with some carbs, OP, you should concentrate on quality sources of them like cwolfman mentioned.1 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »deannalfisher wrote: »fast vs slower carbs - helped me - instead of a white potato, i have sweet potato or similar...but year, poptarts wouldn't be my first choice for a carb source unless i needed a quick sugar rush
According to nutritiondata:
Potatoes, flesh and skin, raw (100 g) is GL 8.
Sweet potatoes, uprepared, raw (100 g) is also GL 8 (fewer cals, however, but not a huge difference).
Of course, with both what is going to matter more is what you add to it and what you eat it with, as most people don't just eat plain potatoes or sweet potatoes on their own. Potatoes actually score quite high on satiety tests. (I am also not sure why they always get compared to each other as if they were white and whole wheat bread -- they are both tubers, but different plants, and both have positives when it comes to micronutrients. Just as I wouldn't choose broccoli over cauliflower and never eat cauliflower or spinach over kale and never eat kale, I think it's even better to eat (if you like both) both potatoes--white and red and purple--and sweet potatoes. Variety is good.)
Also, I do happen to find both way tastier than a poptart, and I'd expect much more filling (don't think I've had a poptart since I was a kid at a friend's house, as I wasn't a fan. My sister eats them regularly and has never been fat, however.)
i don't know why but i just feel satiated much longer on sweet potatos - c'est la vie0 -
I think CICO and cravings/satiety are two different things.
Yes CICO is critical to actually losing weight, but it doesn't do a thing for cravings/satiety which is where macros come into play. First off though, quality matters - the more nutrient dense your food regardless of the macros, the more leptin your body will release, which will keep you feeling fuller longer. One of biggest reasons, I never felt full is that I had become leptin-resistant; and the reason for that was a malabsorption issue. My body always thought it was not getting enough nutrients and would release grehlin. Since I've dealt with that malabsorption issue, I respond to leptin much more reasonably.
So in the past, the biggest macro that I dealt with was carbs and protein. The rest didn't matter as much to me as long as I was eating at least half the number of carb grams in protein and keeping it under the cal levels. Worked well for a while, but I need a jump start so my nutritionist put me on a more "bulletproof" type macro level: 25% protein, 20% carb, 55% fat. It's a lot less food, but I'm not hungry. Nothing is processed and the carbs are coming primarily from vegetables. My weight seems to be moving again so, it appears to be working.......we'll see again in January whether or not this style needs to be added into my life on a rotating basis (I don't think I could do it forever, but we'll see)0 -
White potatoes always getting a bad rap...
I blame the magazines at the grocery store checkout...9 -
deannalfisher wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »deannalfisher wrote: »fast vs slower carbs - helped me - instead of a white potato, i have sweet potato or similar...but year, poptarts wouldn't be my first choice for a carb source unless i needed a quick sugar rush
According to nutritiondata:
Potatoes, flesh and skin, raw (100 g) is GL 8.
Sweet potatoes, uprepared, raw (100 g) is also GL 8 (fewer cals, however, but not a huge difference).
Of course, with both what is going to matter more is what you add to it and what you eat it with, as most people don't just eat plain potatoes or sweet potatoes on their own. Potatoes actually score quite high on satiety tests. (I am also not sure why they always get compared to each other as if they were white and whole wheat bread -- they are both tubers, but different plants, and both have positives when it comes to micronutrients. Just as I wouldn't choose broccoli over cauliflower and never eat cauliflower or spinach over kale and never eat kale, I think it's even better to eat (if you like both) both potatoes--white and red and purple--and sweet potatoes. Variety is good.)
Also, I do happen to find both way tastier than a poptart, and I'd expect much more filling (don't think I've had a poptart since I was a kid at a friend's house, as I wasn't a fan. My sister eats them regularly and has never been fat, however.)
i don't know why but i just feel satiated much longer on sweet potatos - c'est la vie
Yeah, satiety is individual, so I'm sure that could be true. In the context of a meal I notice no difference. (Couldn't say about on their own, as I never eat them that way.)0 -
White potatoes always getting a bad rap...
I blame the magazines at the grocery store checkout...
I think it's just because they are white. Someone here (different thread, a while ago) once said: "processed foods like white rice, white bread, white potatoes," which has always made me wonder if some actually do think potatoes are the processed form of sweet potatoes, just like some seem to think that brown sugar is unprocessed sugar. MFP always manages to make me wonder.4 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »White potatoes always getting a bad rap...
I blame the magazines at the grocery store checkout...
I think it's just because they are white. Someone here (different thread, a while ago) once said: "processed foods like white rice, white bread, white potatoes," which has always made me wonder if some actually do think potatoes are the processed form of sweet potatoes, just like some seem to think that brown sugar is unprocessed sugar. MFP always manages to make me wonder.
Racist I say.7 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »deannalfisher wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »deannalfisher wrote: »fast vs slower carbs - helped me - instead of a white potato, i have sweet potato or similar...but year, poptarts wouldn't be my first choice for a carb source unless i needed a quick sugar rush
According to nutritiondata:
Potatoes, flesh and skin, raw (100 g) is GL 8.
Sweet potatoes, uprepared, raw (100 g) is also GL 8 (fewer cals, however, but not a huge difference).
Of course, with both what is going to matter more is what you add to it and what you eat it with, as most people don't just eat plain potatoes or sweet potatoes on their own. Potatoes actually score quite high on satiety tests. (I am also not sure why they always get compared to each other as if they were white and whole wheat bread -- they are both tubers, but different plants, and both have positives when it comes to micronutrients. Just as I wouldn't choose broccoli over cauliflower and never eat cauliflower or spinach over kale and never eat kale, I think it's even better to eat (if you like both) both potatoes--white and red and purple--and sweet potatoes. Variety is good.)
Also, I do happen to find both way tastier than a poptart, and I'd expect much more filling (don't think I've had a poptart since I was a kid at a friend's house, as I wasn't a fan. My sister eats them regularly and has never been fat, however.)
i don't know why but i just feel satiated much longer on sweet potatos - c'est la vie
Yeah, satiety is individual, so I'm sure that could be true. In the context of a meal I notice no difference. (Couldn't say about on their own, as I never eat them that way.)
i wonder if it has something to do with the breakdown of sugars in sweet potatos vs. white ones? or maybe just have I prepare because I normally dice and just roast SP, whereas white potatoes tend to get more treatment/additions0 -
Sounds like you are discovering what works for you personally.
For me I can (over)eat a ton of protein and fat without feeling full or satisfied but starchy carbs fill me up nicely. Grains, beans, veg and fruit generally I also find quite satiating.
Pop tarts though - bleugh!! Sorry pop tart lovers but I think they are absolutely gross.1 -
-
deannalfisher wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »deannalfisher wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »deannalfisher wrote: »fast vs slower carbs - helped me - instead of a white potato, i have sweet potato or similar...but year, poptarts wouldn't be my first choice for a carb source unless i needed a quick sugar rush
According to nutritiondata:
Potatoes, flesh and skin, raw (100 g) is GL 8.
Sweet potatoes, uprepared, raw (100 g) is also GL 8 (fewer cals, however, but not a huge difference).
Of course, with both what is going to matter more is what you add to it and what you eat it with, as most people don't just eat plain potatoes or sweet potatoes on their own. Potatoes actually score quite high on satiety tests. (I am also not sure why they always get compared to each other as if they were white and whole wheat bread -- they are both tubers, but different plants, and both have positives when it comes to micronutrients. Just as I wouldn't choose broccoli over cauliflower and never eat cauliflower or spinach over kale and never eat kale, I think it's even better to eat (if you like both) both potatoes--white and red and purple--and sweet potatoes. Variety is good.)
Also, I do happen to find both way tastier than a poptart, and I'd expect much more filling (don't think I've had a poptart since I was a kid at a friend's house, as I wasn't a fan. My sister eats them regularly and has never been fat, however.)
i don't know why but i just feel satiated much longer on sweet potatos - c'est la vie
Yeah, satiety is individual, so I'm sure that could be true. In the context of a meal I notice no difference. (Couldn't say about on their own, as I never eat them that way.)
i wonder if it has something to do with the breakdown of sugars in sweet potatos vs. white ones? or maybe just have I prepare because I normally dice and just roast SP, whereas white potatoes tend to get more treatment/additions
I'd bet it's the preparation. Potatoes with fat (for example) would have a lower GI than without, and yet on the satiety index plain potatoes score high and those with fat and salt (you know, like fries) score low, for the same calories. I cook sweet and regular potatoes the same almost always -- chopped and roasted with a bit of olive oil and salt, with the skin.
But who knows, people are really variable on what's satiating to them, so it could just be one of those things. That's the only reason I object when people generalize about what foods are satiating (although I do think some are more satiating to more people on average, of course, especially foods with fiber and protein).0 -
deannalfisher wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »deannalfisher wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »deannalfisher wrote: »fast vs slower carbs - helped me - instead of a white potato, i have sweet potato or similar...but year, poptarts wouldn't be my first choice for a carb source unless i needed a quick sugar rush
According to nutritiondata:
Potatoes, flesh and skin, raw (100 g) is GL 8.
Sweet potatoes, uprepared, raw (100 g) is also GL 8 (fewer cals, however, but not a huge difference).
Of course, with both what is going to matter more is what you add to it and what you eat it with, as most people don't just eat plain potatoes or sweet potatoes on their own. Potatoes actually score quite high on satiety tests. (I am also not sure why they always get compared to each other as if they were white and whole wheat bread -- they are both tubers, but different plants, and both have positives when it comes to micronutrients. Just as I wouldn't choose broccoli over cauliflower and never eat cauliflower or spinach over kale and never eat kale, I think it's even better to eat (if you like both) both potatoes--white and red and purple--and sweet potatoes. Variety is good.)
Also, I do happen to find both way tastier than a poptart, and I'd expect much more filling (don't think I've had a poptart since I was a kid at a friend's house, as I wasn't a fan. My sister eats them regularly and has never been fat, however.)
i don't know why but i just feel satiated much longer on sweet potatos - c'est la vie
Yeah, satiety is individual, so I'm sure that could be true. In the context of a meal I notice no difference. (Couldn't say about on their own, as I never eat them that way.)
i wonder if it has something to do with the breakdown of sugars in sweet potatos vs. white ones? or maybe just have I prepare because I normally dice and just roast SP, whereas white potatoes tend to get more treatment/additions
If they both have the same GI, would that not say the sugars are broken down pretty darn similarly?0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »deannalfisher wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »deannalfisher wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »deannalfisher wrote: »fast vs slower carbs - helped me - instead of a white potato, i have sweet potato or similar...but year, poptarts wouldn't be my first choice for a carb source unless i needed a quick sugar rush
According to nutritiondata:
Potatoes, flesh and skin, raw (100 g) is GL 8.
Sweet potatoes, uprepared, raw (100 g) is also GL 8 (fewer cals, however, but not a huge difference).
Of course, with both what is going to matter more is what you add to it and what you eat it with, as most people don't just eat plain potatoes or sweet potatoes on their own. Potatoes actually score quite high on satiety tests. (I am also not sure why they always get compared to each other as if they were white and whole wheat bread -- they are both tubers, but different plants, and both have positives when it comes to micronutrients. Just as I wouldn't choose broccoli over cauliflower and never eat cauliflower or spinach over kale and never eat kale, I think it's even better to eat (if you like both) both potatoes--white and red and purple--and sweet potatoes. Variety is good.)
Also, I do happen to find both way tastier than a poptart, and I'd expect much more filling (don't think I've had a poptart since I was a kid at a friend's house, as I wasn't a fan. My sister eats them regularly and has never been fat, however.)
i don't know why but i just feel satiated much longer on sweet potatos - c'est la vie
Yeah, satiety is individual, so I'm sure that could be true. In the context of a meal I notice no difference. (Couldn't say about on their own, as I never eat them that way.)
i wonder if it has something to do with the breakdown of sugars in sweet potatos vs. white ones? or maybe just have I prepare because I normally dice and just roast SP, whereas white potatoes tend to get more treatment/additions
I'd bet it's the preparation. Potatoes with fat (for example) would have a lower GI than without, and yet on the satiety index plain potatoes score high and those with fat and salt (you know, like fries) score low, for the same calories. I cook sweet and regular potatoes the same almost always -- chopped and roasted with a bit of olive oil and salt, with the skin.
But who knows, people are really variable on what's satiating to them, so it could just be one of those things. That's the only reason I object when people generalize about what foods are satiating (although I do think some are more satiating to more people on average, of course, especially foods with fiber and protein).
I like baked yams with butter and sour cream, just like I would eat baked russet potatoes. So very satiating for me.0 -
deannalfisher wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »deannalfisher wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »deannalfisher wrote: »fast vs slower carbs - helped me - instead of a white potato, i have sweet potato or similar...but year, poptarts wouldn't be my first choice for a carb source unless i needed a quick sugar rush
According to nutritiondata:
Potatoes, flesh and skin, raw (100 g) is GL 8.
Sweet potatoes, uprepared, raw (100 g) is also GL 8 (fewer cals, however, but not a huge difference).
Of course, with both what is going to matter more is what you add to it and what you eat it with, as most people don't just eat plain potatoes or sweet potatoes on their own. Potatoes actually score quite high on satiety tests. (I am also not sure why they always get compared to each other as if they were white and whole wheat bread -- they are both tubers, but different plants, and both have positives when it comes to micronutrients. Just as I wouldn't choose broccoli over cauliflower and never eat cauliflower or spinach over kale and never eat kale, I think it's even better to eat (if you like both) both potatoes--white and red and purple--and sweet potatoes. Variety is good.)
Also, I do happen to find both way tastier than a poptart, and I'd expect much more filling (don't think I've had a poptart since I was a kid at a friend's house, as I wasn't a fan. My sister eats them regularly and has never been fat, however.)
i don't know why but i just feel satiated much longer on sweet potatos - c'est la vie
Yeah, satiety is individual, so I'm sure that could be true. In the context of a meal I notice no difference. (Couldn't say about on their own, as I never eat them that way.)
i wonder if it has something to do with the breakdown of sugars in sweet potatos vs. white ones? or maybe just have I prepare because I normally dice and just roast SP, whereas white potatoes tend to get more treatment/additions
If they both have the same GI, would that not say the sugars are broken down pretty darn similarly?
by breakdown I meant the composition of starch vs sugar and then within the sugars - sucrose, glucose and fructose which differ fairly significantly between the 2
http://www.precisionnutrition.com/regular-vs-sweet-potatoes (just above 1/3 of the way down the page)0 -
I feel like when people talk about CICO, we're really talking just about the mathematical equation, but newbies sometimes miss that there are a lot of other factors that go into figuring out what kind of eating plan works best for long-term weight loss. It's important that we're careful about how we talk about the concept of CICO, so that we emphasize what it does and doesn't say.
Strictly speaking, CICO just talks about energy balance; it says that a calorie is a unit of energy, and that all units of energy are the same.
CICO doesn't take into account satiety (some foods keep you fuller for longer, and which foods keep YOU full are not necessarily the same foods that keep someone else full). It also doesn't take into account nutritional profile (you get different nutrients from broccoli, steak and twinkies, so eating just any one of those things isn't a good idea). It also doesn't address personal preference, which is a HUGE part of dieting that we don't always acknowledge.
4 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »First, I completely understand CICO and that this is the only way to lose weight; however, for me, if I do not limit my carbohydrates to about 20-30% of my diet I get crazy sugar/starch cravings and do not stay satiated for long.
I don't experience this, but some others say they do. It's a common reason for doing low carb, I think. There's nothing inconsistent between understanding that CICO is how weight loss works and preferring a particular macro ratio.Additionally, it is extremely difficult for me to eat a "traditional" diet and still feel full in a caloric deficit without doing this. Am I alone here? I make sure I have enough carbs to feel normal and eat more especially before and after weight training, but I can't find much information about this.
There is no one traditional diet. Human diets are quite varied and humans can be healthy on a wide range of macro ratios. Personally beyond getting enough protein I don't pay much attention to macros, only making generally healthy choices.
Are you alone? ;-) No, surely you know that low carbing (even much lower than you are doing) is quite popular right now. If 20-30% carbs is what works for you, great!The thing is 2 pop-tarts = 400kcal total and will leave me hungry again in an hour wheras 400 calories of chicken breast will keep me full for 3-4 hours.
Well, this isn't really a fair comparison. Protein is on average filling for people, and whether you low carb or not you'd want to get a decent amount of protein and have a filling diet. Similarly, pop tarts (which probably have some fat, I don't eat them, so don't know the break down), aren't really a good proxy for "carbs"--carbs range from potatoes and rice and bread to fruit and vegetables. Many foods that get called "carbs" are really half carbs, half fat, like chips or sweet baked goods, etc. That's a misuse of the term, IMO, and when people who aren't choosing the usually more filling carbs (like vegetables, fruit, whole grains, whole foods like legumes and tubers) or preparing them in a less satiating way that involves lots of fat (french fries) blame "carbs" I think that's a misunderstanding.
But again some really do find a higher percentage of carbs, even more filling, nutrient-dense carbs (well, more filling for many of us) to be less satisfying, and they should eat accordingly. I find fat completely unsatiating so have to take that into account (and yet I still manage to eat 25-30% fat, because foods with fat are usually tasty).
Anyway, what you are doing seems fine.
Thank you for the well thought out response!0 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »Good morning all!
I have some thoughts and I would love and appreciate some feedback, if possible.
First, I completely understand CICO and that this is the only way to lose weight; however, for me, if I do not limit my carbohydrates to about 20-30% of my diet I get crazy sugar/starch cravings and do not stay satiated for long. Additionally, it is extremely difficult for me to eat a "traditional" diet and still feel full in a caloric deficit without doing this. Am I alone here? I make sure I have enough carbs to feel normal and eat more especially before and after weight training, but I can't find much information about this.
Also, I believe this is why when I do not pay attention to my diet I can eat so much and gain weight quickly. I love carbs. The thing is 2 pop-tarts = 400kcal total and will leave me hungry again in an hour wheras 400 calories of chicken breast will keep me full for 3-4 hours. I used to think the low-carb diet was successful for me because of my blood sugar, but that was before I fully grasped the concept of CICO. I just wanted to know what people think of this and the way I seem to function.
Any feedback would be greatly appreciated.
Maybe more quality carbs? I don't think a couple pop tarts is going to fill anyone up...there are numerous quality carbohydrates out there...pop tarts are just junk food...not all carbs are junk food.
legumes, lentils, potatoes and sweet potatoes, oats, barley, veggies, fruit, etc, etc...all carbs...not junk food.
^This. Poptarts (or their gluten free equivalent) wouldn't fill me, but a bowl of old-fashioned oatmeal with some plain yogurt stirred in would.
There are some people for whom carbs in any form seem to be a problem, and they are more sated by fat, though.
Since you seem to be okay with some carbs, OP, you should concentrate on quality sources of them like cwolfman mentioned.
Thank you for the last suggestion, I will!0 -
Does anyone else believe that timing of carbohydrates matters? I did low carb and it's hard to get the idea that if I am going to eat carbs it should be earlier in the day (so i have a chance to burn them off) instead of at night. With CICO obviously its the same but some thinking dies hard.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