Low calories or low carbs..what worked better for you?
Options
Replies
-
NOT eating aka fasting is keto. It's also known as starvation. Which is also a calorie restriction in the extreme sense. Calorie restriction, ranging from nothing (fasting) to below energy balance (deficit) leads to burning of stored body fat. Ketones are a byproduct of fat oxidation. Calorie deficits produce some measurable amount of ketones, so it's keto by definition.
Calorie deficit = keto. Want a higher number of measurable ketones? Eat less.
Not really.
https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/180858.php
"Some people encourage ketosis by following a diet called the ketogenic or low-carb diet. The aim of the diet is to try and burn unwanted fat by forcing the body to rely on fat for energy, rather than carbohydrates."
Keto dieters aren't starving themselves but trying to force their bodies to rely on fat as a fuel source. All keto eaters I know still hit their daily calories
I'm familiar with ketosis. I practice it. Though, in the practice of fat loss, calories will always dictate whether you're actually burning stored body fat or just adding more to it. It's not magic.
By removing carbs, you remove the competing substrate for cellular energy and allow free fatty acids to take the place of what glucose does for tissue function. Don't mistake substituting a fuel source for actual fat burning and therefore, fat loss.
Simplistic example, let's just assume I have a hybrid car that allows for electricity and diesel. Electricity will be fatty acids and diesel will be glucose. Just because I don't have to refuel with diesel, doesn't make electricity any more efficient to drive around the street. It just means I use less diesel. The same steady output to drive around the city is the same regardless.
Keto dieters can hit their daily intake of calories and if they're at a deficit, they will lose body fat. If they eat at maintenance, their net energy stores are in balance. If they eat at a surplus, they will store energy in the form of fat.
Again, not magic. It's thermodynamics. Low carb creates a deficit if you were to keep the other 2 macros the same simply because you're not eating that many calories worth of high carbs.
I responded to your statement comparing keto to fasting. I agree with your responding statement quotes here and stand by my statement that keto does not mean fasting or starving as stated in the comment I responded to4 -
Low cals are the main factor but it is also important to eat mainly low (vs hi) GI (glycemic index) carbs, which contribute to appetite suppression, the prevention of bood sugar spiking and the burning of stored fat.
See, for example: https://www.bodybuilding.com/fun/zaino14.htm11 -
calorie deficit1
-
NOT eating aka fasting is keto. It's also known as starvation. Which is also a calorie restriction in the extreme sense. Calorie restriction, ranging from nothing (fasting) to below energy balance (deficit) leads to burning of stored body fat. Ketones are a byproduct of fat oxidation. Calorie deficits produce some measurable amount of ketones, so it's keto by definition.
Calorie deficit = keto. Want a higher number of measurable ketones? Eat less.
Not really.
https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/180858.php
"Some people encourage ketosis by following a diet called the ketogenic or low-carb diet. The aim of the diet is to try and burn unwanted fat by forcing the body to rely on fat for energy, rather than carbohydrates."
Keto dieters aren't starving themselves but trying to force their bodies to rely on fat as a fuel source. All keto eaters I know still hit their daily calories
I'm familiar with ketosis. I practice it. Though, in the practice of fat loss, calories will always dictate whether you're actually burning stored body fat or just adding more to it. It's not magic.
By removing carbs, you remove the competing substrate for cellular energy and allow free fatty acids to take the place of what glucose does for tissue function. Don't mistake substituting a fuel source for actual fat burning and therefore, fat loss.
Simplistic example, let's just assume I have a hybrid car that allows for electricity and diesel. Electricity will be fatty acids and diesel will be glucose. Just because I don't have to refuel with diesel, doesn't make electricity any more efficient to drive around the street. It just means I use less diesel. The same steady output to drive around the city is the same regardless.
Keto dieters can hit their daily intake of calories and if they're at a deficit, they will lose body fat. If they eat at maintenance, their net energy stores are in balance. If they eat at a surplus, they will store energy in the form of fat.
Again, not magic. It's thermodynamics. Low carb creates a deficit if you were to keep the other 2 macros the same simply because you're not eating that many calories worth of high carbs.
I responded to your statement comparing keto to fasting. I agree with your responding statement quotes here and stand by my statement that keto does not mean fasting or starving as stated in the comment I responded to
I appreciate that. There's a bit of disconnect from the quote of the diet's aim to "try and burn unwanted fat by forcing the body to rely on fat for energy" and eating enough so that people are hitting their daily calories [unspecified whether it's a deficit, maintenance, or surplus].
You're correct, keto doesn't mean anyone needs to be fasting or starving, but my point was fasting/starving *is* ketotic by nature. Without any outside source incoming energy, the body will be forced to rely on energy stores for fuel. It's a survival trait, which is what a keto diet is mimicking.
Any diet that imposes a calorie restriction (regardless of the macro composition) is a form of starvation in a very loose sense of the word, and therefore, I was making a connection that in order to force the body to pull from its own stored energy, it must be in a state of energy deficit.
What creates ketones is the ratio of acetyl-coA to oxaloacetate. If oxaloacetate is reduced, acetyl-coA will build up a production of ketone bodies. The liver can use protein and fat substrate conversion, but carbs are the just easiest source to farm oxaloacetate and keep the citric acid cycle going. To that extent, it means nothing if you eat in excess and produce an appreciable amount of ketones from a large influx of dietary fat. See Jimmy Moore.
Again, for actual fat loss, the net energy balance must create a deficit. Keto or not keto doesn't matter.2 -
NOT eating aka fasting is keto. It's also known as starvation. Which is also a calorie restriction in the extreme sense. Calorie restriction, ranging from nothing (fasting) to below energy balance (deficit) leads to burning of stored body fat. Ketones are a byproduct of fat oxidation. Calorie deficits produce some measurable amount of ketones, so it's keto by definition.
Calorie deficit = keto. Want a higher number of measurable ketones? Eat less.
Not really.
https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/180858.php
"Some people encourage ketosis by following a diet called the ketogenic or low-carb diet. The aim of the diet is to try and burn unwanted fat by forcing the body to rely on fat for energy, rather than carbohydrates."
Keto dieters aren't starving themselves but trying to force their bodies to rely on fat as a fuel source. All keto eaters I know still hit their daily calories
I'm familiar with ketosis. I practice it. Though, in the practice of fat loss, calories will always dictate whether you're actually burning stored body fat or just adding more to it. It's not magic.
By removing carbs, you remove the competing substrate for cellular energy and allow free fatty acids to take the place of what glucose does for tissue function. Don't mistake substituting a fuel source for actual fat burning and therefore, fat loss.
Simplistic example, let's just assume I have a hybrid car that allows for electricity and diesel. Electricity will be fatty acids and diesel will be glucose. Just because I don't have to refuel with diesel, doesn't make electricity any more efficient to drive around the street. It just means I use less diesel. The same steady output to drive around the city is the same regardless.
Keto dieters can hit their daily intake of calories and if they're at a deficit, they will lose body fat. If they eat at maintenance, their net energy stores are in balance. If they eat at a surplus, they will store energy in the form of fat.
Again, not magic. It's thermodynamics. Low carb creates a deficit if you were to keep the other 2 macros the same simply because you're not eating that many calories worth of high carbs.
I responded to your statement comparing keto to fasting. I agree with your responding statement quotes here and stand by my statement that keto does not mean fasting or starving as stated in the comment I responded to
I appreciate that. There's a bit of disconnect from the quote of the diet's aim to "try and burn unwanted fat by forcing the body to rely on fat for energy" and eating enough so that people are hitting their daily calories [unspecified whether it's a deficit, maintenance, or surplus].
You're correct, keto doesn't mean anyone needs to be fasting or starving, but my point was fasting/starving *is* ketotic by nature. Without any outside source incoming energy, the body will be forced to rely on energy stores for fuel. It's a survival trait, which is what a keto diet is mimicking.
Any diet that imposes a calorie restriction (regardless of the macro composition) is a form of starvation in a very loose sense of the word, and therefore, I was making a connection that in order to force the body to pull from its own stored energy, it must be in a state of energy deficit.
What creates ketones is the ratio of acetyl-coA to oxaloacetate. If oxaloacetate is reduced, acetyl-coA will build up a production of ketone bodies. The liver can use protein and fat substrate conversion, but carbs are the just easiest source to farm oxaloacetate and keep the citric acid cycle going. To that extent, it means nothing if you eat in excess and produce an appreciable amount of ketones from a large influx of dietary fat. See Jimmy Moore.
Again, for actual fat loss, the net energy balance must create a deficit. Keto or not keto doesn't matter.
I never said anything to the effect that a deficit isn't needed for weight loss. I simply responded to the statement that keto and fasting are the same thing is incorrect.
A lot of people on this site have negative ideas that keto means no veggies or starving yourself. That isn't the truth. My only goal is to make sure they know that.0 -
NOT eating aka fasting is keto. It's also known as starvation. Which is also a calorie restriction in the extreme sense. Calorie restriction, ranging from nothing (fasting) to below energy balance (deficit) leads to burning of stored body fat. Ketones are a byproduct of fat oxidation. Calorie deficits produce some measurable amount of ketones, so it's keto by definition.
Calorie deficit = keto. Want a higher number of measurable ketones? Eat less.
Not really.
https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/180858.php
"Some people encourage ketosis by following a diet called the ketogenic or low-carb diet. The aim of the diet is to try and burn unwanted fat by forcing the body to rely on fat for energy, rather than carbohydrates."
Keto dieters aren't starving themselves but trying to force their bodies to rely on fat as a fuel source. All keto eaters I know still hit their daily calories
I'm familiar with ketosis. I practice it. Though, in the practice of fat loss, calories will always dictate whether you're actually burning stored body fat or just adding more to it. It's not magic.
By removing carbs, you remove the competing substrate for cellular energy and allow free fatty acids to take the place of what glucose does for tissue function. Don't mistake substituting a fuel source for actual fat burning and therefore, fat loss.
Simplistic example, let's just assume I have a hybrid car that allows for electricity and diesel. Electricity will be fatty acids and diesel will be glucose. Just because I don't have to refuel with diesel, doesn't make electricity any more efficient to drive around the street. It just means I use less diesel. The same steady output to drive around the city is the same regardless.
Keto dieters can hit their daily intake of calories and if they're at a deficit, they will lose body fat. If they eat at maintenance, their net energy stores are in balance. If they eat at a surplus, they will store energy in the form of fat.
Again, not magic. It's thermodynamics. Low carb creates a deficit if you were to keep the other 2 macros the same simply because you're not eating that many calories worth of high carbs.
I responded to your statement comparing keto to fasting. I agree with your responding statement quotes here and stand by my statement that keto does not mean fasting or starving as stated in the comment I responded to
I appreciate that. There's a bit of disconnect from the quote of the diet's aim to "try and burn unwanted fat by forcing the body to rely on fat for energy" and eating enough so that people are hitting their daily calories [unspecified whether it's a deficit, maintenance, or surplus].
You're correct, keto doesn't mean anyone needs to be fasting or starving, but my point was fasting/starving *is* ketotic by nature. Without any outside source incoming energy, the body will be forced to rely on energy stores for fuel. It's a survival trait, which is what a keto diet is mimicking.
Any diet that imposes a calorie restriction (regardless of the macro composition) is a form of starvation in a very loose sense of the word, and therefore, I was making a connection that in order to force the body to pull from its own stored energy, it must be in a state of energy deficit.
What creates ketones is the ratio of acetyl-coA to oxaloacetate. If oxaloacetate is reduced, acetyl-coA will build up a production of ketone bodies. The liver can use protein and fat substrate conversion, but carbs are the just easiest source to farm oxaloacetate and keep the citric acid cycle going. To that extent, it means nothing if you eat in excess and produce an appreciable amount of ketones from a large influx of dietary fat. See Jimmy Moore.
Again, for actual fat loss, the net energy balance must create a deficit. Keto or not keto doesn't matter.
I never said anything to the effect that a deficit isn't needed for weight loss. I simply responded to the statement that keto and fasting are the same thing is incorrect.
A lot of people on this site have negative ideas that keto means no veggies or starving yourself. That isn't the truth. My only goal is to make sure they know that.
Nor did I say that “keto = fasting.” I said that fasting is ketotic by nature. Much like “a dollar = currency, but currency =/= dollars.” So you’ve succeeded in your goal. I’m actually not fully responding directly to you, though I address your quote as a segue into my points.
I can’t speak for others, but my negative view of keto comes from zealots who promote keto or low carb as the *only* way to burn fat, reverse diabetes, cure cancer, disregard calories, or eat obscene amounts of fat without consequence. And my goal is to negate any of those common misconceptions in a general statement.4 -
NOT eating aka fasting is keto. It's also known as starvation. Which is also a calorie restriction in the extreme sense..
This says "fasting is keto". You did say that. And that is what I responded to as false information.
I will take the fact that you now say you didn't make that claim that you must have mistyped and didn't mean it as it read.
I'm not keto either. I love my dried fruit too much for that. I do think it works great for some though. I personally feel best at around 100g net carbs and my only food eliminations are based around allergies. It's important that everyone find what works for them. And again, I am just bothered by all of the and keto posts about how it eliminates veggies 100% or you have to starve yourself on that plan. Without accurate info the people it could work for might not find it.
2 -
I feel best eating lower calorie- eat roughly 100-125 grams carbs- whole food diet- seldom eat real junk food- balance, nutrition, and variety is my preference. Eating around 100 grams of carbs gives me more variety and also seems to keep sugar cravings under better control.1
-
SirSmurfalot wrote: »Low carb all the way.
While a deficit is important like most everyone has been parroting, it is more difficult to burn fat if your blood sugar, and thus insulin is elevated. Thus restricting carbs is very important to any kind of diet plan.
Your body is always going to burn dietary carbs and muscle glycogen first. So even if you are counting calories the your body will be asking for more carbs every time your blood sugar drops a little.
This is why people on low calorie diets have such a struggle with cravings and constant hunger.
Sure it works, but it is slow because burning your body fat is a last resort for fuel and you are constantly hungry because of the blood sugar/insulin swings.
In contrast a low carb diet allows you to shed pounds and water weight fairly quickly without constantly feeling hungry.
Dietary fat = fullness, which makes it much easier to carry a calorie deficit without cravings or really even noticing it at all, and in the absence of dietary carbs your body fat is broken down as a primary fuel source (ketosis).
As a result, you lose weight quickly and without struggle....all you have to do is put down the carbs you are physically addicted to eating.
1. Carbs don't require restriction
2. Carbs aren't the only macro that raises insulin
3. Fat burning happens with the right energy balance, not with the absence of carbs.
4. Not every carb consumer is constantly hungry/has cravings. For some, carbs can be quite filling.
5. Dietary fat doesn't cause fullness for everyone.... it certainly didn't for me.
6. Some here have actually had cravings for fatty foods such as salami, cheeses, cream. Cravings aren't only for carbs.
7. Body is used as fuel if the energy balance is correct (consume less calories than one burns/maintenance). Low carbers do not defy the laws of physics.
8. Keto/low carb burns dietary fat instead of carbohydrate first, then body fat if in deficit.
9. High fat diets can cause digestive distress to some (especially those with IBS and gall bladder issues, plus other medical conditions).
10. Regardless of diet, body fat will be utilized by the body as fuel if in caloric deficit. Macros are a highly personal thing depending on satiety. Low carb/Keto/moderate carb/high carb may not be for everyone. Some do best on high carb, while others work well on Keto. All that matters in the end that to lose weight, on any diet, one must be in a caloric deficit. No one can eat more than their personal maintenance and lose weight... that defies science.
14 -
6packdad_ie wrote: »Calorie deficit. Lost over 20 kg. Plus work out 5/6 times a week.
Lost 20kg After how long?0 -
NOT eating aka fasting is keto. It's also known as starvation. Which is also a calorie restriction in the extreme sense..
This says "fasting is keto". You did say that. And that is what I responded to as false information.
I will take the fact that you now say you didn't make that claim that you must have mistyped and didn't mean it as it read.
I'm not keto either. I love my dried fruit too much for that. I do think it works great for some though. I personally feel best at around 100g net carbs and my only food eliminations are based around allergies. It's important that everyone find what works for them. And again, I am just bothered by all of the and keto posts about how it eliminates veggies 100% or you have to starve yourself on that plan. Without accurate info the people it could work for might not find it.
Just a quick observation. I find that you mention the spreading of misinformation about what constitutes Keto interesting. Not that this does not happen, but let's get real here; can you name me another subset of the dieting and fitness world that routinely spews more rank nonsense than the Keto crowd? I can't think of any offhand. This makes it far more difficult for many people to take them seriously, and even more difficult to have much pity for people mischaracterizing their plans.4 -
JustRobby1 wrote: »NOT eating aka fasting is keto. It's also known as starvation. Which is also a calorie restriction in the extreme sense..
This says "fasting is keto". You did say that. And that is what I responded to as false information.
I will take the fact that you now say you didn't make that claim that you must have mistyped and didn't mean it as it read.
I'm not keto either. I love my dried fruit too much for that. I do think it works great for some though. I personally feel best at around 100g net carbs and my only food eliminations are based around allergies. It's important that everyone find what works for them. And again, I am just bothered by all of the and keto posts about how it eliminates veggies 100% or you have to starve yourself on that plan. Without accurate info the people it could work for might not find it.
Just a quick observation. I find that you mention the spreading of misinformation about what constitutes Keto interesting. Not that this does not happen, but let's get real here; can you name me another subset of the dieting and fitness world that routinely spews more rank nonsense than the Keto crowd? I can't think of any offhand. This makes it far more difficult for many people to take them seriously, and even more difficult to have much pity for people mischaracterizing their plans.
I'm not keto. I do think most of the misinformation though comes from people jumping on it like a fad without understanding or researching what it is.
My whole point was to end some of the misinformation. How would judging someone rather than spreading correct information help anything?
3 -
JustRobby1 wrote: »NOT eating aka fasting is keto. It's also known as starvation. Which is also a calorie restriction in the extreme sense..
This says "fasting is keto". You did say that. And that is what I responded to as false information.
I will take the fact that you now say you didn't make that claim that you must have mistyped and didn't mean it as it read.
I'm not keto either. I love my dried fruit too much for that. I do think it works great for some though. I personally feel best at around 100g net carbs and my only food eliminations are based around allergies. It's important that everyone find what works for them. And again, I am just bothered by all of the and keto posts about how it eliminates veggies 100% or you have to starve yourself on that plan. Without accurate info the people it could work for might not find it.
Just a quick observation. I find that you mention the spreading of misinformation about what constitutes Keto interesting. Not that this does not happen, but let's get real here; can you name me another subset of the dieting and fitness world that routinely spews more rank nonsense than the Keto crowd? I can't think of any offhand. This makes it far more difficult for many people to take them seriously, and even more difficult to have much pity for people mischaracterizing their plans.
I'm not keto. I do think most of the misinformation though comes from people jumping on it like a fad without understanding or researching what it is.
My whole point was to end some of the misinformation. How would judging someone rather than spreading correct information help anything?
I was not referencing you specifically, just making a general observation. My point being that groups and individuals who routinely spread false information are not often afforded much courtesy when they claim to be misunderstood.
As an example, take some wackaloon who claims 911 was an inside job, global warming is a myth, aliens are being held by the government, etc. Is it possible that such a person might be incredibly bright and able to offer some insightful commentary on a wide range of topics? Perhaps, but they will have a much more difficult time getting people to listen because their credibility is crippled from the onset.
The beginning of this very thread did not exactly start off on the right foot now did it?3 -
...Keto dieters can hit their daily intake of calories and if they're at a deficit, they will lose body fat. If they eat at maintenance, their net energy stores are in balance. If they eat at a surplus, they will store energy in the form of fat...
Which is 100% no different from what happens with any macro combination one chooses to subsist upon.6 -
Low cals are the main factor but it is also important to eat mainly low (vs hi) GI (glycemic index) carbs, which contribute to appetite suppression, the prevention of bood sugar spiking and the burning of stored fat.
See, for example: https://www.bodybuilding.com/fun/zaino14.htm
The only time GI is relevant is when you're eating a particular food in a fasted state, in isolation from any other food. A high GI food eaten in combination with proteins and fats will make the GI of that particular food a moot point because it's altered by the fats and proteins eaten along with it.
And although many people aren't aware of it, protein causes an insulin spike equivalent to that of carbs (and insulin is also a hormone which is responsible for a lot more than just fat storage): http://weightology.net/insulin-an-undeserved-bad-reputation/8 -
As a diabetic I can only handle about 45g of carbs at a meal. However, in practice I've found that I have fewer cravings if I avoid added sugars and white bread, which seem to knock my blood sugar around more than other foods, even when eaten as part of a meal. Different diabetics respond to the same foods differently - some can't handle fruit and potatoes, which are no problem for me.
Since two diabetics will have completely unique blood glucose responses to the same exact food, it seems likely that healthy people - who haven't been studied nearly as much - would vary in which foods made them feel cravings as well. If restricting carbs is easy for you and works to help you keep yourself in a deficit then do that - if it seems unreasonably difficult, don't do it.
By the way, AnvilHead is absolutely right that protein and fat also trigger a rise in insulin levels, although they don't raise blood glucose levels in the same way carbs do.11 -
Well, carbs are 50-65% of my daily intake on any given day so I definitely am NOT low carb. I eat whatever suits me and is within my very reasonable calorie goals for weight loss - a deficit but also not particularly low cal because I eat quite a lot compared to others my height.
I eat at whatever macro level feels right to me that day. I tend toward mostly protein and plants some days, and other days is more carb heavy. Nothing is cut from my diet because I intend to do this forever and I don't believe in omitting anything (except bananas, those things are evil) because then I don't have to relearn any eating habits.0 -
Right now I'm watching calories and carbs, the latter because a 30 to 50g a day carb diet suppresses and stabilizes my appetite and makes it easier to stay within my calorie budget. I only plan to stay on it a few weeks, though, before I start working up to a moderate carb level that will be more sustainable. When I did this before I reached my goal weight and managed to maintain for 4 years before I slipped off the wagon. I'm not eating steaks, by the way, and rarely more than one or two standard servings of cheese or butter a day.0
-
JustRobby1 wrote: »NOT eating aka fasting is keto. It's also known as starvation. Which is also a calorie restriction in the extreme sense..
This says "fasting is keto". You did say that. And that is what I responded to as false information.
I will take the fact that you now say you didn't make that claim that you must have mistyped and didn't mean it as it read.
I'm not keto either. I love my dried fruit too much for that. I do think it works great for some though. I personally feel best at around 100g net carbs and my only food eliminations are based around allergies. It's important that everyone find what works for them. And again, I am just bothered by all of the and keto posts about how it eliminates veggies 100% or you have to starve yourself on that plan. Without accurate info the people it could work for might not find it.
Just a quick observation. I find that you mention the spreading of misinformation about what constitutes Keto interesting. Not that this does not happen, but let's get real here; can you name me another subset of the dieting and fitness world that routinely spews more rank nonsense than the Keto crowd? I can't think of any offhand. This makes it far more difficult for many people to take them seriously, and even more difficult to have much pity for people mischaracterizing their plans.
The HCLF vegans/Raw til 4 people often give the keto crowd a run for their money in this regard.6
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 388 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
- 918 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions