Is it healthy to completely cut out carbs from my diet?
Options
Replies
-
ok, just for giggles, @Lillymoo01 (and just to clarify this conversation), please define 'optimum health' for us.
Not littlymoo01 but I'll play
-healthy weight for your stats
-no medical conditions/no need to take prescriptions
-healthy range waist circumference
-consistent good blood work panels (I know there's debate about what that actually looks like, but I go by what my doctor recommends as I respect and trust his judgment)
-normal blood pressure
-good mental health
-no detrimental habits like smoking, excessive alcohol consumption etc
And I personally think you can hit all of these by eating all sorts of macros ratios combinations. You can also be doing everything 'right' and still not be in optimal health due to genetics/medical conditions that are out of your control etc.
One thing I've learned over the past few years is to not take things so seriously. I eat how I like, am successfully managing my weight, have solid feedback from my doctor and I enjoy life. That's good enough for me 4 -
I will also note, that you can have optimal health regardless of the lifestyle that you live. But I will also say this, if you have to supplement, your diet is not optimal (unless you a medical condition that would make it impossible through diet alone, like POTS).5
-
Pretty much the vast majority of people "trying" to lose weight are still back in the seventies and reading questionable research. All one needs to read is "The Obesity Code" by Dr. Jason Fung. It is not about calories in vs calories out. This has been proven to be a complete falsehood. If you eat more, your body boosts its metabolic rate to burn those extra calories. Ever notice how you sometimes feel really warm/hot after a big meal? That is your metabolism at work. As for carbohydrates, your body doesn't need them, it can manufacture all the sugar it needs. I challenge anyone here to name me one essential carbohydrate. The body requires essential amino acids (that's protein) and it requires essential fatty acids (that's fat), but there is no such thing as an essential carbohydrate. We also eat too often. 3 meals and 3 snacks per day is overkill and unnecessary. Try cutting out the least important meal of the day and the 3 snacks.
Jason Fung is about as far from "proof" as a children's story book...
One might argue that Dr. Seuss is more credible.11 -
Try cutting out the least important meal of the day and the 3 snacks.
You don't think that might help because it's reducing your calories in? It's calories in vs calories out. It works for everyone. It's not a code, it's not a secret, some guy didn't just discover the key to weight loss that no one knew.3 -
I eat a lot of carbs. Like white bread, potatoes, white rice, pasta.
Would it be a problem to completely cut out carbs from my diet for 1-2 weeks?
With the exception of having ready break in the morning for breakfast. And just have a diet of fruit, veg and protein?
I've read here that starchy food can contribute to weight gain and I want to cut it out together with high sugar foods (like cakes and biscuits) for a couple of weeks.
Would this be a good idea?
Has anyone tried cutting down on carbs?
The OP specified cutting out starchy stuff (not fruits & veggies). It's definitely not a problem (unless you are coming in under calorie goal and need the filler calories). If you are eating plenty of vegetables/fruit, you'll be getting your carbs and fiber. Depending on your goal calories, it can be quite difficult or impossible to meet protein and other requirements without going over on calories unless you do cut down on the starchy stuff.1 -
A rose by any other name..............
Call it what you will, but however you lose, whatever plan you choose, whether or not you cut carbs, or any other food group, it always, always, always comes down to eating less calories than you are burning for weight loss.extra_medium wrote: »Try cutting out the least important meal of the day and the 3 snacks.
You don't think that might help because it's reducing your calories in? It's calories in vs calories out. It works for everyone. It's not a code, it's not a secret, some guy didn't just discover the key to weight loss that no one knew.
^^^This is fact. It is not a secret. Many factors can go into how each of us loses weight, but it is always because we are eating less than our body burns.
It is very interesting how many experts there are on MFP. Ever wonder how anyone became overweight and out of shape?
2 -
Pretty much the vast majority of people "trying" to lose weight are still back in the seventies and reading questionable research. All one needs to read is "The Obesity Code" by Dr. Jason Fung. It is not about calories in vs calories out. This has been proven to be a complete falsehood. If you eat more, your body boosts its metabolic rate to burn those extra calories. Ever notice how you sometimes feel really warm/hot after a big meal? That is your metabolism at work. As for carbohydrates, your body doesn't need them, it can manufacture all the sugar it needs. I challenge anyone here to name me one essential carbohydrate. The body requires essential amino acids (that's protein) and it requires essential fatty acids (that's fat), but there is no such thing as an essential carbohydrate. We also eat too often. 3 meals and 3 snacks per day is overkill and unnecessary. Try cutting out the least important meal of the day and the 3 snacks.
go ahead and eat 1000 calories over your maintenance level and report back and tell us it is till not about calories in vs out..6 -
Here's the thing though...for all of you that think its only about calories serious question... Why is it that you can take one person on a 1500 calorie diet (hypothetically speaking) eating say 30% calories from carbs and another person on 1500 calories (same calories) and eating say 60% calories from carbs and the person eating 1500 calories eating 30% carbs loses more fat/weight than the person eating calories with 60% carbs. Something has to be said about this....What in your opinion is the answer if it is only about calories? Would you agree that every person is different? Thoughts?0
-
dawnflowers104 wrote: »Here's the thing though...for all of you that think its only about calories serious question... Why is it that you can take one person on a 1500 calorie diet (hypothetically speaking) eating say 30% calories from carbs and another person on 1500 calories (same calories) and eating say 60% calories from carbs and the person eating 1500 calories eating 30% carbs loses more fat/weight than the person eating calories with 60% carbs. Something has to be said about this....What in your opinion is the answer if it is only about calories? Would you agree that every person is different? Thoughts?
they dont...
in the short term a low carber loses more because water weight but over time (six months) they lose about the same..
4 -
I eat a lot of carbs. Like white bread, potatoes, white rice, pasta.
Would it be a problem to completely cut out carbs from my diet for 1-2 weeks?
With the exception of having ready break in the morning for breakfast. And just have a diet of fruit, veg and protein?
I've read here that starchy food can contribute to weight gain and I want to cut it out together with high sugar foods (like cakes and biscuits) for a couple of weeks.
Would this be a good idea?
Has anyone tried cutting down on carbs?
I know plenty of people that have lost weight buy cutting out carbs. But since carbs were a major player in their diet, it's logical that they lost weight. Maybe you should do more research on it?0 -
dawnflowers104 wrote: »Here's the thing though...for all of you that think its only about calories serious question... Why is it that you can take one person on a 1500 calorie diet (hypothetically speaking) eating say 30% calories from carbs and another person on 1500 calories (same calories) and eating say 60% calories from carbs and the person eating 1500 calories eating 30% carbs loses more fat/weight than the person eating calories with 60% carbs. Something has to be said about this....What in your opinion is the answer if it is only about calories? Would you agree that every person is different? Thoughts?
I would honestly guess that the person eating the starchy stuff is probably actually eating more calories and underestimating them. They are calorie dense and it can be really easy to be quite off on estimates if you are not weighing those items. They also tend to be the tempting items one goes back for seconds on.3 -
FarewellBlues wrote: »For some people it seems that higher amounts of carbohydrate in the diet have an undesirable impact on hormone levels, which messes with the "Calories Out" side of the equation -- this is not fully understood yet, but the last 10 years especially have seen a wealth of research on the topic.
In any case, people who always yell "CALORIES IN LESS THAN CALORIES OUT" make me chuckle ... it's like, duh. Almost everyone is well aware of that. To steal an analogy, it's like asking "How can I get rich?" and someone says "Save more than you spend!" Well sure, but it's a little more nuanced as to HOW exactly you're going to achieve that.
Also, so many things affect both sides of the energy balance equation. It's like, in physics, of course you have energy conservation. But calculating the amount of energy radiating from some system often involves solving highly complex, nonlinear equations. Biological processes are at least as complicated.
Anyway, OP, I'm sure you know that vegetables and fruit have carbs. I'm sure you know you can't eat as many calories as you want and lose weight. Eating a diet of meats, fats, fruit and veg can certainly be very healthy and very sustainable - play around a bit and figure out what works best for you.
Great post!0 -
Hello_its_Dan wrote: »Hello_its_Dan wrote: »Lillymoo01 wrote: »So @EbonyDahlia you don't agree that having vegetables everyday is essential? Strange when that should be close to 50% of our diet. That astounds me, unless you are not knowledgeable enough to realise that vegetables have carbs.
Carbs are not an essential nutrient, therefore vegetables are not essential. Vegetables can certainly contribute to a healthy diet but they are by no means needed. There are actually quite a few carnivores and almost zero carbers on MFP who are thriving without plant matter in their diets. As long as you eat quality animal products, it is not difficult to maintain excellent health without plants in one's diet.
Terrible advice and one to avoid.
Vitamins
Minerals
Phytonutrients
Fiber
What do you suggest?
Supplements?
C'mon!
Any good cut of meat (especially eating a varied diet of meats) along with healthy fats from things like eggs and butter will provide all of the vitamins and minerals that the body needs to thrive.
Phytonutrients - a catch-phrase used by the health food gurus backed by lots of correlation studies that do not offer direct cause/results to justify needing them.
Fiber - needed only to clean out the residue of higher carb diets
Again, as has been posted before, carbs are not a required macro and the body can and does manufacture any glycogen that it needs from both protein and fat.
Still not advised.
You'll be hard pressed to find an RD or RN who'd agree with the above statement.
I'm an RN and I do agree that carbs are not required, as do my two cardiologist friends and colleagues.
Registered Nutritionist?
Should have specified RDN.
Most nurses know jack about Nutrition.2 -
If you are going "super low / no carb" for 2 weeks cold turkey (ketosis) side effects that I haven't seen mentioned here are constipation; "carb crash / dehydration" (need to make sure your electrolytes stay balanced) and “ketosis flu” or the “induction flu” in the first few days while the body is adapting to burning ketones instead of glucose.
The basic symptoms are:
– Headaches
– Nausea
– Upset stomach
– Lack of mental clarity (brain fog)
– Sleepiness
– Fatigue
See this website: https://thefastdiet.co.uk/forums/topic/do-you-have-the-ketosis-flu/
You need to plan how you are going to navigate these two weeks so that you are not too miserable.
Alternatively, go slowly into no carb land, and see how well you manage that and keep your calories in a healthy range.
0 -
Workout + High # Carbs/Cals
Rest + Lower Carbs/Cals & occasional cardio
1 -
If you are going "super low / no carb" for 2 weeks cold turkey (ketosis) side effects that I haven't seen mentioned here are constipation; "carb crash / dehydration" (need to make sure your electrolytes stay balanced) and “ketosis flu” or the “induction flu” in the first few days while the body is adapting to burning ketones instead of glucose.
The basic symptoms are:
– Headaches
– Nausea
– Upset stomach
– Lack of mental clarity (brain fog)
– Sleepiness
– Fatigue
See this website: https://thefastdiet.co.uk/forums/topic/do-you-have-the-ketosis-flu/
You need to plan how you are going to navigate these two weeks so that you are not too miserable.
Alternatively, go slowly into no carb land, and see how well you manage that and keep your calories in a healthy range.
Seriously, is there an up side to low/no carb?
And is this a sustainable way to keep the weight off for life?
Sounds pretty restrictive to me.
0 -
-
dawnflowers104 wrote: »Here's the thing though...for all of you that think its only about calories serious question... Why is it that you can take one person on a 1500 calorie diet (hypothetically speaking) eating say 30% calories from carbs and another person on 1500 calories (same calories) and eating say 60% calories from carbs and the person eating 1500 calories eating 30% carbs loses more fat/weight than the person eating calories with 60% carbs. Something has to be said about this....What in your opinion is the answer if it is only about calories? Would you agree that every person is different? Thoughts?
they dont...
in the short term a low carber loses more because water weight but over time (six months) they lose about the same..
^ Exaaaactly. There is no magic to a low-carb/keto diet.
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/research-review/ketogenic-low-carbohydrate-diets-have-no-metabolic-advantage-over-nonketogenic-low-carbohydrate-diets-research-review.html2 -
dawnflowers104 wrote: »Here's the thing though...for all of you that think its only about calories serious question... Why is it that you can take one person on a 1500 calorie diet (hypothetically speaking) eating say 30% calories from carbs and another person on 1500 calories (same calories) and eating say 60% calories from carbs and the person eating 1500 calories eating 30% carbs loses more fat/weight than the person eating calories with 60% carbs. Something has to be said about this....What in your opinion is the answer if it is only about calories? Would you agree that every person is different? Thoughts?
The majority of studies that show greater weight loss in low carb diets, do so by increasing protein requirements (often 2x higher than the low fat group). Protein is a thermogenic and is correlated with higher metabolism and satiety. So it's not the carbs or fat.. it's protein. You also have to consider the conditions in which they do the study. In many cases, in low carb trials, they are not done in a metabolic ward and again, with the increase in protein, it leads to higher compliance. So if anything, an argument an be made in favor of high protein.2 -
Pretty much the vast majority of people "trying" to lose weight are still back in the seventies and reading questionable research. All one needs to read is "The Obesity Code" by Dr. Jason Fung. It is not about calories in vs calories out. This has been proven to be a complete falsehood. If you eat more, your body boosts its metabolic rate to burn those extra calories. Ever notice how you sometimes feel really warm/hot after a big meal? That is your metabolism at work. As for carbohydrates, your body doesn't need them, it can manufacture all the sugar it needs. I challenge anyone here to name me one essential carbohydrate. The body requires essential amino acids (that's protein) and it requires essential fatty acids (that's fat), but there is no such thing as an essential carbohydrate. We also eat too often. 3 meals and 3 snacks per day is overkill and unnecessary. Try cutting out the least important meal of the day and the 3 snacks.
You are my kind of girl!!
1
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.9K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 398 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
- 977 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions