What the hell are carbs?
Options
Replies
-
I would imagine that your nutritionist is referring to heavy/refined/processed carbs that don't have much nutrition, such as bread or pasta.
Carbs in fruits and vegetables are fine as they're natural - these are 'fiber' carbs and needed.
Just like sugar in a banana is natural when compared to sugar in sweets, natural carbs are full of nutrition (such as fibre) and are a much better choice when compared to processed carbs.
this is just wrong...3 -
So if I restrict myself to 50g of carbs a day and they all come from pasta & bread that's not a low carb diet?janejellyroll wrote: »Wow, some of these points scrutinising everything I say for no reason really...
I'm not saying to cut out bread and pasta - I eat both - I'm answering the first question asking what the nutritionist meant by carbs. It's obvious she didn't mean vegetables.
Eating bread isn't the same as eating vegetables; cooking salmon doesn't make it artificial. Absolutely ridiculous points you're trying to make.
BREAD WOULD NOT EXIST UNLESS SOMEONE COMBINED THE INGREDIENTS, KNEADED IT, LET IT RISE, AND BAKED IT; yes, it's made from natural ingredients, that doesn't make it a raw food, which I'm guessing is what the nutritionist is referring to - you're not eating wheat raw, are you?!
I'm not saying to cut out bread and pasta, I'm saying that a low carb diet refers to this (again, like atkins and keto diets).
It's not rocket science.
Chili wouldn't exist unless someone chopped the ingredients, mixed them, and applied heat. Salmon, as a food, wouldn't exist unless someone went to the water, got a fish out, killed it, cut it into pieces, applied seasoning, and cooked it. So . . . what's the point?
What does any of this have to do with whether or not we should eat bread?
I have not once said we shouldn't eat bread, I have said that a LOW CARB DIET cuts out high calorie carbs such as pasta and bread. That's all!!!!!!
#doingitwrong1 -
Spot on Sijomial it also creates a change in the bodies metabolism.
Low carb diets make the body utilise fats as the main energy source. Hence low carb calorie restricted diets result in faster fat loss. HOWEVER Once you re-introduce carbs, you'll find you likely gain weight back on quicker as carbs are easier to metabolise than fats and the extra cheese you've been cramming becomes your new fat storage... Bad times...
Good for a quick burn, but not an ideal resolution long term as chocolate etc will come calling again one day.
(This is my own experience - I'm not saying its guaranteed, but from my POV it is what has happened to me previously and my clients despite me warning them away from this kind of diet.)
no, they don't.4 -
stanmann571 wrote: »Spot on Sijomial it also creates a change in the bodies metabolism.
Low carb diets make the body utilise fats as the main energy source. Hence low carb calorie restricted diets result in faster fat loss. HOWEVER Once you re-introduce carbs, you'll find you likely gain weight back on quicker as carbs are easier to metabolise than fats and the extra cheese you've been cramming becomes your new fat storage... Bad times...
Good for a quick burn, but not an ideal resolution long term as chocolate etc will come calling again one day.
Um no...........
When you don't ingest carb calories, you are ingesting protein and fat calories. When you eat low carb - your energy sources are ingested protein, ingested fat, and stored fat.
If I'm eating a reduced calorie diet (CICO)....my energy sources are ingested carbs, ingested protein, ingested fat, and stored fat. I'm not storing fat when I am eating less than my TDEE.
Weight regain is more likely due to glycogen stores. Your body "wrings out" glycogen stores (low carb flu) when you start eating low carb, it replenishes those stores when you go back to regular eating habits.
Again you are not storing fat when you are not eating more than your TDEE.
Eat low carb because you have medical issues, or because you enjoy it, not because it is "faster fat loss"....because it's not.
It's proven it is faster fat loss.
https://authoritynutrition.com/23-studies-on-low-carb-and-low-fat-diets/
IT may show a tiny insignificant/irrelevant benefit to reducing muscle loss. but so do high protein non-keto diets.
Ketosis may have a small increase in total calorie burn... but again, it's within the 10% margin of error of calorie measurement/estimation.
You must not have looked at the page he linked to.5 -
See my edit Sijomial and also note I always use my Tanita Body Composition measurements checked against Skin fold measurements on my clients.
In the simplest way of explaining it... Their weight loss has been 9/10 down to body fat reduction. I agree that it is linked to the calorie deficit but the body does metabolise carbs easier than fats.
It is very rare that the people I have worked with's body fat remains the same whilst their water weight goes up on the re-introduction of carbs. Very, very rare.
Their body fat goes up as they continue with the same amount of fat, despite my advice on scaling back some of the fats as you slowly re-introduce carbs.
As I say this is all my own experience of what I have seen and I am sure you might have seen different. but experience led examples are all I have to hand right now and I don't fancy surfing the web for different examples from the many experiments worldwide (and especially at Loughborough University) with similar to these results.
Using a BIA scale which is badly affected by changes in hydration levels - hmmm. Makes you wonder doesn't it?
I'm working from human physiology not a junk site like Authority Nutrition.
Please don't go surfing for any more links!
Or maybe start your own thread in Debate section perhaps because I'm conscious we are going waaaaay off subject. (Sorry OP!)14 -
emmaellery1989 wrote: »Starting to wish I hadn't asked!
Sorry, emmaellery -- this is an enthusiastic bunch, and a fairly simple question can turn into a melee. And yes, there are lots of different points of view. Please don't take it personally.
Having read your follow-up post, it sounds like your situation is more complex than it seemed at first. Hope your next appointment with the nutritionist goes well.6 -
RAD_Fitness wrote: »stanmann571 wrote: »Spot on Sijomial it also creates a change in the bodies metabolism.
Low carb diets make the body utilise fats as the main energy source. Hence low carb calorie restricted diets result in faster fat loss. HOWEVER Once you re-introduce carbs, you'll find you likely gain weight back on quicker as carbs are easier to metabolise than fats and the extra cheese you've been cramming becomes your new fat storage... Bad times...
Good for a quick burn, but not an ideal resolution long term as chocolate etc will come calling again one day.
Um no...........
When you don't ingest carb calories, you are ingesting protein and fat calories. When you eat low carb - your energy sources are ingested protein, ingested fat, and stored fat.
If I'm eating a reduced calorie diet (CICO)....my energy sources are ingested carbs, ingested protein, ingested fat, and stored fat. I'm not storing fat when I am eating less than my TDEE.
Weight regain is more likely due to glycogen stores. Your body "wrings out" glycogen stores (low carb flu) when you start eating low carb, it replenishes those stores when you go back to regular eating habits.
Again you are not storing fat when you are not eating more than your TDEE.
Eat low carb because you have medical issues, or because you enjoy it, not because it is "faster fat loss"....because it's not.
It's proven it is faster fat loss.
https://authoritynutrition.com/23-studies-on-low-carb-and-low-fat-diets/
IT may show a tiny insignificant/irrelevant benefit to reducing muscle loss. but so do high protein non-keto diets.
Ketosis may have a small increase in total calorie burn... but again, it's within the 10% margin of error of calorie measurement/estimation.
You must not have looked at the page he linked to.
You must not have looked at the actual studies. None of them controlled for calories. ALL relied on self reporting.
So, it's interesting... but irrelevant.10 -
stanmann571 wrote: »RAD_Fitness wrote: »stanmann571 wrote: »Spot on Sijomial it also creates a change in the bodies metabolism.
Low carb diets make the body utilise fats as the main energy source. Hence low carb calorie restricted diets result in faster fat loss. HOWEVER Once you re-introduce carbs, you'll find you likely gain weight back on quicker as carbs are easier to metabolise than fats and the extra cheese you've been cramming becomes your new fat storage... Bad times...
Good for a quick burn, but not an ideal resolution long term as chocolate etc will come calling again one day.
Um no...........
When you don't ingest carb calories, you are ingesting protein and fat calories. When you eat low carb - your energy sources are ingested protein, ingested fat, and stored fat.
If I'm eating a reduced calorie diet (CICO)....my energy sources are ingested carbs, ingested protein, ingested fat, and stored fat. I'm not storing fat when I am eating less than my TDEE.
Weight regain is more likely due to glycogen stores. Your body "wrings out" glycogen stores (low carb flu) when you start eating low carb, it replenishes those stores when you go back to regular eating habits.
Again you are not storing fat when you are not eating more than your TDEE.
Eat low carb because you have medical issues, or because you enjoy it, not because it is "faster fat loss"....because it's not.
It's proven it is faster fat loss.
https://authoritynutrition.com/23-studies-on-low-carb-and-low-fat-diets/
IT may show a tiny insignificant/irrelevant benefit to reducing muscle loss. but so do high protein non-keto diets.
Ketosis may have a small increase in total calorie burn... but again, it's within the 10% margin of error of calorie measurement/estimation.
You must not have looked at the page he linked to.
You must not have looked at the actual studies. None of them controlled for calories. ALL relied on self reporting.
So, it's interesting... but irrelevant.
That is absolutely ridiculous. You can say that about any study trying to prove anything to do with weight loss. Unless someone is locked in a room and unable to leave and force fed the food, you'll always have that excuse.16 -
RAD_Fitness wrote: »stanmann571 wrote: »RAD_Fitness wrote: »stanmann571 wrote: »Spot on Sijomial it also creates a change in the bodies metabolism.
Low carb diets make the body utilise fats as the main energy source. Hence low carb calorie restricted diets result in faster fat loss. HOWEVER Once you re-introduce carbs, you'll find you likely gain weight back on quicker as carbs are easier to metabolise than fats and the extra cheese you've been cramming becomes your new fat storage... Bad times...
Good for a quick burn, but not an ideal resolution long term as chocolate etc will come calling again one day.
Um no...........
When you don't ingest carb calories, you are ingesting protein and fat calories. When you eat low carb - your energy sources are ingested protein, ingested fat, and stored fat.
If I'm eating a reduced calorie diet (CICO)....my energy sources are ingested carbs, ingested protein, ingested fat, and stored fat. I'm not storing fat when I am eating less than my TDEE.
Weight regain is more likely due to glycogen stores. Your body "wrings out" glycogen stores (low carb flu) when you start eating low carb, it replenishes those stores when you go back to regular eating habits.
Again you are not storing fat when you are not eating more than your TDEE.
Eat low carb because you have medical issues, or because you enjoy it, not because it is "faster fat loss"....because it's not.
It's proven it is faster fat loss.
https://authoritynutrition.com/23-studies-on-low-carb-and-low-fat-diets/
IT may show a tiny insignificant/irrelevant benefit to reducing muscle loss. but so do high protein non-keto diets.
Ketosis may have a small increase in total calorie burn... but again, it's within the 10% margin of error of calorie measurement/estimation.
You must not have looked at the page he linked to.
You must not have looked at the actual studies. None of them controlled for calories. ALL relied on self reporting.
So, it's interesting... but irrelevant.
That is absolutely ridiculous. You can say that about any study trying to prove anything to do with weight loss. Unless someone is locked in a room and unable to leave and force fed the food, you'll always have that excuse.
And those studies do exist...11 -
emmaellery1989 wrote: »Starting to wish I hadn't asked!
Please don't think that way. I have enjoyed reading this thread. Whether it is a "complex" question or a "simple" question, it is all relevant. I have been reading in the forums for years. Just keep reading the threads. They are very educational and great for the new MFP users. You will soon get to know the long time posters names and learn new information every day. You will also realize very quickly who is full of "woo" and who is full of "woo hoo". Keep reading and enjoy!
ETA: If I get a Woo, please let me know if it is meant as a "woo" or a "woo hoo". lol7 -
If it didn't have a face at one point, it has carbs.4
-
emmaellery1989 wrote: »Starting to wish I hadn't asked!
That is what happens in a open forum, especially if it is called MFP. The problem is that people ask questions without providing enough information about their personal situation, and as you said, sometimes using irony that doesn't translate well in the written word. The results are: hijacked thread, members arguing with each other answers, some people giving the wrong information, and the tune goes on and on.
Next time that you post a question, take your time and explain what kind of information you are really looking for. Or better, Google it first. The last time that I checked, Mr. Google or Ms. Cortana don't argue with each other and don't hijack threads.2 -
emmaellery1989 wrote: »Starting to wish I hadn't asked!
That is what happens in a open forum, especially if it is called MFP. The problem is that people ask questions without providing enough information about their personal situation, and as you said, sometimes using irony that doesn't translate well in the written word. The results are: hijacked thread, members arguing with each other answers, some people giving the wrong information, and the tune goes on and on.
Next time that you post a question, take your time and explain what kind of information you are really looking for. Or better, Google it first. The last time that I checked, Mr. Google or Ms. Cortana don't argue with each other and don't hijack threads.
Actually, I'd say MFP is about the most mellow of any internet forum I have belonged to or currently belonged to.14 -
@cwolfman13
If you say so. I was never part of any other internet forum so I can't argue with that statement. And after reading your comment, I never will.
One of the things that I learned in all the years that I have been part of MFP is to never ask any questions about health, fitness or diet. Good answers get lost in the mix of arguments.5 -
RAD_Fitness wrote: »stanmann571 wrote: »RAD_Fitness wrote: »stanmann571 wrote: »Spot on Sijomial it also creates a change in the bodies metabolism.
Low carb diets make the body utilise fats as the main energy source. Hence low carb calorie restricted diets result in faster fat loss. HOWEVER Once you re-introduce carbs, you'll find you likely gain weight back on quicker as carbs are easier to metabolise than fats and the extra cheese you've been cramming becomes your new fat storage... Bad times...
Good for a quick burn, but not an ideal resolution long term as chocolate etc will come calling again one day.
Um no...........
When you don't ingest carb calories, you are ingesting protein and fat calories. When you eat low carb - your energy sources are ingested protein, ingested fat, and stored fat.
If I'm eating a reduced calorie diet (CICO)....my energy sources are ingested carbs, ingested protein, ingested fat, and stored fat. I'm not storing fat when I am eating less than my TDEE.
Weight regain is more likely due to glycogen stores. Your body "wrings out" glycogen stores (low carb flu) when you start eating low carb, it replenishes those stores when you go back to regular eating habits.
Again you are not storing fat when you are not eating more than your TDEE.
Eat low carb because you have medical issues, or because you enjoy it, not because it is "faster fat loss"....because it's not.
It's proven it is faster fat loss.
https://authoritynutrition.com/23-studies-on-low-carb-and-low-fat-diets/
IT may show a tiny insignificant/irrelevant benefit to reducing muscle loss. but so do high protein non-keto diets.
Ketosis may have a small increase in total calorie burn... but again, it's within the 10% margin of error of calorie measurement/estimation.
You must not have looked at the page he linked to.
You must not have looked at the actual studies. None of them controlled for calories. ALL relied on self reporting.
So, it's interesting... but irrelevant.
That is absolutely ridiculous. You can say that about any study trying to prove anything to do with weight loss. Unless someone is locked in a room and unable to leave and force fed the food, you'll always have that excuse.
This is why getting caught up in nutrition/diet particulars is largely futile - because studies re nutrition that tell you anything other than vague correlation are incredibly difficult. And any site that routinely states that a study based on self-reporting or survey responses gives you anything other than vague correlation should be ignored. The best you can do is look at multiple studies over years and draw conclusions carefully.
Unless subjects' diets and activity are tightly controlled and monitored, it's pretty much impossible to control all the variables and completely trust the data.
Sorry for continuing the thread jack OP, good luck!6 -
@cwolfman13
If you say so. I was never part of any other internet forum so I can't argue with that statement. And after reading your comment, I never will.
One of the things that I learned in all the years that I have been part of MFP is to never ask any questions about health, fitness or diet. Good answers get lost in the mix of arguments.
Honestly, the longer I've been here and the more threads I've read, the easier it has become to pick out the good answers and enjoy the mix of arguments
But yeah, it's not for everyone! 7 -
@cwolfman13
If you say so. I was never part of any other internet forum so I can't argue with that statement. And after reading your comment, I never will.
One of the things that I learned in all the years that I have been part of MFP is to never ask any questions about health, fitness or diet. Good answers get lost in the mix of arguments.
Honestly, the longer I've been here and the more threads I've read, the easier it has become to pick out the good answers and enjoy the mix of arguments But yeah, it's not for everyone!
This is basically what I was going to say...5 -
@cwolfman13
If you say so. I was never part of any other internet forum so I can't argue with that statement. And after reading your comment, I never will.
One of the things that I learned in all the years that I have been part of MFP is to never ask any questions about health, fitness or diet. Good answers get lost in the mix of arguments.
Oh yeah, MFP is pretty mild compared to others-you should have been on MDA during it's heyday, brutal
0 -
emmaellery1989 wrote: »emmaellery1989 wrote: »So with help of a nutritionist I'm meant to be on a low carb diet.
But now I'm confused.
Items such as cucumber are coming up as carbs? And so are carrots?
And she's told me now I'm eating too many carbs??
I live on meat, fish, fresh fruit, veg and a few nuts.
So what are carbs???????
OP, your thread kind of got hijacked here but I waned to add something.
If I remember correctly, it came up in another thread that your diet is already very restrictive due to stomach issues. It is completely unnecessary to restrict your diet any further than it absolutely needs to be. If a food agrees with your digestive system, log it and eat it. You don't HAVE to eat low carb to lose weight.
I would strongly recommend asking your doctor for a referral to a Registered Dietitian to go over the foods that upset your stomach and how to make a healthy diet from what's left. :drinker:emmaellery1989 wrote: »So with help of a nutritionist I'm meant to be on a low carb diet.
But now I'm confused.
Items such as cucumber are coming up as carbs? And so are carrots?
And she's told me now I'm eating too many carbs??
I live on meat, fish, fresh fruit, veg and a few nuts.
So what are carbs???????
OP, your thread kind of got hijacked here but I waned to add something.
If I remember correctly, it came up in another thread that your diet is already very restrictive due to stomach issues. It is completely unnecessary to restrict your diet any further than it absolutely needs to be. If a food agrees with your digestive system, log it and eat it. You don't HAVE to eat low carb to lose weight.
I would strongly recommend asking your doctor for a referral to a Registered Dietitian to go over the foods that upset your stomach and how to make a healthy diet from what's left. :drinker:
Hi, thanks for noticing my original question . I have just explained what I was actually trying to say.
I get severe stomach pains from gluten, starchy foods and most dairy. So I tend to just try and eat a very basic diet and that's what works for me.
OP, have you seen a doctor? You really should if you have not already to find out what the cause is of your gastrointestinal distress. A condition behind the issues could be causing other havoc with your body of which you may by asymptomatic and not aware.4 -
Carlos_421 wrote: »PaulaWallaDingDong wrote: »piperdown44 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »French_Peasant wrote: »I would imagine that your nutritionist is referring to heavy/refined/processed carbs that don't have much nutrition, such as bread or pasta.
Carbs in fruits and vegetables are fine as they're natural - these are 'fiber' carbs and needed.
Just like sugar in a banana is natural when compared to sugar in sweets, natural carbs are full of nutrition (such as fibre) and are a much better choice when compared to processed carbs.
So carbs in bread....are not fiber carbs...and are not natural? Hmmmm.
No, bread isn't natural, it's man made and it's a refined carb (especially if it's white, whole grain is better for you and more nutritional). Bread is made from natural ingredients (wheat) so does have fiber in it, but it's a 'starchy' refined carb and nowhere near as nutritional as natural fiber carbs found in vegetables that grow naturally, such as broccoli.
How can something with "natural ingredients" be unnatural? I mean, if I made a pot of chili that would be (wo)manmade, but it doesn't mean that the nutrients in it somehow vanish. Many of the foods we eat undergo some form of prep or processing (either by us or prior to the point of purchase).
A diet can include bread and broccoli. It's not like we have to forgo all the benefits of broccoli forever in order to have a slice of bread.
Beans in that chili or Texas style? Just had to ask.....
Just sharing for funsies: My mom used to make chili with beans, but we didn't like it so she started using macaroni. Thank God nobody called the authorities, because I'm pretty sure that was a crime.
Your mom made goolosh.
I though goulash traditionally had beets in it?2
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.4K Getting Started
- 259.6K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 387 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.2K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 911 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions