Looking for a diet that is low carb/healthy carb AND low fat
Replies
-
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »
And how long are you planning to do that?
That's lower in both fat AND in carbs than what most would suggest as healthy and sustainable long term. Are you including fruits and vegetables in that carb count? Or do you mean net carbs and/or processed carbs when you say 40-60g total?
I would think that simply adding a bit of dairy, legumes, and/or cooking oil to your diet would help in all aspects.
I was planning to keep with that....Why is it not healthy to both limit carbs and fat? I mean I am not cutting them out completely. I tried googling low fat/ low carb but all I get is comparisons between the two, not what both together specifically looks like. Before I lost any weight I had high cholesterol and I worry about my heart so limiting fats makes sense to me. But I also need to be careful with carbs because of insulin resistance....
I have cholesterol issues too (in fact, I have familial hypercholesterolemia) and I can safely eat more fat that than a day, and you should too. Some fat is essential for hormone function and vitamin absorption from all of those vegetables you eat. Try upping your fat intake to at least .45 grams per pound of a healthy body weight for yourself.
^^^ This.
Fat is an essential nutrient. (Carbs aren't an essential nutrient, not because they're bad for you, but because your body can make what it needs from other macronutrients.) You need to eat them. Your body can't make what it needs (hormones, cell membranes, more) without fat in your intake.
If you have problems with cholesterol and triglycerides, eating mostly healthy fats - nuts, avocados, olive oil, seeds, oily fish, etc. - for your fats is part of a good eating strategy.
Low carb and low fat inherently means high protein (unless you add alcohol, which I'm not hearing). Those are all the macronutrients there are. You don't find many low fat/low carb diets because (1) that would probably be called "high protein", (2) most people don't want to eat that way, and (3) it's probably not the healthiest choice for anyone (other than, possibly, some very rare medical condition(s)).8 -
Okay I see what you are saying. That makes sense. I was playing with the numbers and your .4g fat/lb of body weight and it seems like it would roughly be 32 grams minimum for me. When I plug that into calorie deficit and what the 3 macros look like it does seem like in general they end up very similar. With around 30ish % fat / 30 ish %carb and 40 ish %protein.Why is it not healthy to both limit carbs and fat?
1)Bodies need a minimum of 0.4g fat/lb body weight for hormone synthesis. Lower than that creates endocrine & satiety problems
2)That leaves protein. A high protein diet has risks.
- constipation short term
- Kidney disease long term
- It’s expensive
I tried googling low fat/ low carb but all I get is comparisons between the two, not what both together specifically looks like.
That’s because low carb OR low fat diets are recommended. Low carb AND low fat diets are not recommended. Try eating equal calories from all three macros. It’s a moderately low carb approach. See how you feel and how sustainable it feels to you and adjust from there.
And that does sound doable...I mean just changing which cut of beef you eat could have a substantial difference in fat grams.
Like I said, I am just trying to prepare myself as I transition. The way I am eating now feels very in tune with my body and I want to continue that but also make sure I am being healthy.
Thank you all for the advice.
9 -
What, pray tell, is unwise about a diet that emphasizes lean meats, vegetables, and fruits with an appropriate calorie goal?johnslater461 wrote: »It was around 500-800 calories and the emphasis was on vegetables, lean meats and small bits of some fruits.
If you feel great doing this, just keep the same kinds of foods, but scale the portions up to a more sustainable calorie goal.
The diet she was on was intended as a very short term measure. Unless you have some kind of credentials, this advice isn't necessarily wise, thus the previous advice to consult a dietitian.
2 -
johnslater461 wrote: »
What, pray tell, is unwise about a diet that emphasizes lean meats, vegetables, and fruits with an appropriate calorie goal?johnslater461 wrote: »It was around 500-800 calories and the emphasis was on vegetables, lean meats and small bits of some fruits.
If you feel great doing this, just keep the same kinds of foods, but scale the portions up to a more sustainable calorie goal.
The diet she was on was intended as a very short term measure. Unless you have some kind of credentials, this advice isn't necessarily wise, thus the previous advice to consult a dietitian.
I mean I do see what you are saying about the minimum amount of fat but I also agree with with John is saying.
But please tell me what would be wrong with this as my meal plan:
Breakfast:
1 cup Herbal Tea
1 Large Hardboiled Egg
1/2 (75g) Fuji Apple
Lunch:
1 small Greek nonfat yogurt
1 scoop Whey Protein Vanilla
Dinner:
150 gram Chicken Breast
8 oz Steamed Peas and Carrots
2 cups Arugala
1 tbl lemon juice
That is approx. 11g Fat / 42g Carb / 64g Protein
I mean, without even looking at the macros it seems like it would be pretty darn healthy.
6 -
Weight Watchers. Both lower carb and low fat.2
-
johnslater461 wrote: »
What, pray tell, is unwise about a diet that emphasizes lean meats, vegetables, and fruits with an appropriate calorie goal?johnslater461 wrote: »It was around 500-800 calories and the emphasis was on vegetables, lean meats and small bits of some fruits.
If you feel great doing this, just keep the same kinds of foods, but scale the portions up to a more sustainable calorie goal.
The diet she was on was intended as a very short term measure. Unless you have some kind of credentials, this advice isn't necessarily wise, thus the previous advice to consult a dietitian.
I mean I do see what you are saying about the minimum amount of fat but I also agree with with John is saying.
But please tell me what would be wrong with this as my meal plan:
Breakfast:
1 cup Herbal Tea
1 Large Hardboiled Egg
1/2 (75g) Fuji Apple
Lunch:
1 small Greek nonfat yogurt
1 scoop Whey Protein Vanilla
Dinner:
150 gram Chicken Breast
8 oz Steamed Peas and Carrots
2 cups Arugala
1 tbl lemon juice
That is approx. 11g Fat / 42g Carb / 64g Protein
I mean, without even looking at the macros it seems like it would be pretty darn healthy.
How many calories is that?
11 grams of fat isn't much at all. For one day, not that big of a deal. Over time, it may be an issue.3 -
johnslater461 wrote: »
What, pray tell, is unwise about a diet that emphasizes lean meats, vegetables, and fruits with an appropriate calorie goal?johnslater461 wrote: »It was around 500-800 calories and the emphasis was on vegetables, lean meats and small bits of some fruits.
If you feel great doing this, just keep the same kinds of foods, but scale the portions up to a more sustainable calorie goal.
The diet she was on was intended as a very short term measure. Unless you have some kind of credentials, this advice isn't necessarily wise, thus the previous advice to consult a dietitian.
I mean I do see what you are saying about the minimum amount of fat but I also agree with with John is saying.
But please tell me what would be wrong with this as my meal plan:
Breakfast:
1 cup Herbal Tea
1 Large Hardboiled Egg
1/2 (75g) Fuji Apple
Lunch:
1 small Greek nonfat yogurt
1 scoop Whey Protein Vanilla
Dinner:
150 gram Chicken Breast
8 oz Steamed Peas and Carrots
2 cups Arugala
1 tbl lemon juice
That is approx. 11g Fat / 42g Carb / 64g Protein
I mean, without even looking at the macros it seems like it would be pretty darn healthy.
Except for the lack of calories. If I did the math right, 11g Fat / 42g Carb / 64g Protein is only 523 calories.
Is lack of calories and fiber leading to constipation?0 -
kshama2001 wrote: »johnslater461 wrote: »
What, pray tell, is unwise about a diet that emphasizes lean meats, vegetables, and fruits with an appropriate calorie goal?johnslater461 wrote: »It was around 500-800 calories and the emphasis was on vegetables, lean meats and small bits of some fruits.
If you feel great doing this, just keep the same kinds of foods, but scale the portions up to a more sustainable calorie goal.
The diet she was on was intended as a very short term measure. Unless you have some kind of credentials, this advice isn't necessarily wise, thus the previous advice to consult a dietitian.
I mean I do see what you are saying about the minimum amount of fat but I also agree with with John is saying.
But please tell me what would be wrong with this as my meal plan:
Breakfast:
1 cup Herbal Tea
1 Large Hardboiled Egg
1/2 (75g) Fuji Apple
Lunch:
1 small Greek nonfat yogurt
1 scoop Whey Protein Vanilla
Dinner:
150 gram Chicken Breast
8 oz Steamed Peas and Carrots
2 cups Arugala
1 tbl lemon juice
That is approx. 11g Fat / 42g Carb / 64g Protein
I mean, without even looking at the macros it seems like it would be pretty darn healthy.
Except for the lack of calories. If I did the math right, 11g Fat / 42g Carb / 64g Protein is only 523 calories.
Is lack of calories and fiber leading to constipation?
Now scale that up to an appropriate calorie goal (say triple it)
33g fat, 126g carb, 192g protein (as it stands right now)
Protein looks higher than necessary (but not dangerously so) so we can lower that a bit and increase the fat and/or carbs while still keeping the same food choices and just tweaking the portions3 -
johnslater461 wrote: »
What, pray tell, is unwise about a diet that emphasizes lean meats, vegetables, and fruits with an appropriate calorie goal?johnslater461 wrote: »It was around 500-800 calories and the emphasis was on vegetables, lean meats and small bits of some fruits.
If you feel great doing this, just keep the same kinds of foods, but scale the portions up to a more sustainable calorie goal.
The diet she was on was intended as a very short term measure. Unless you have some kind of credentials, this advice isn't necessarily wise, thus the previous advice to consult a dietitian.
I mean I do see what you are saying about the minimum amount of fat but I also agree with with John is saying.
But please tell me what would be wrong with this as my meal plan:
Breakfast:
1 cup Herbal Tea
1 Large Hardboiled Egg
1/2 (75g) Fuji Apple
Lunch:
1 small Greek nonfat yogurt
1 scoop Whey Protein Vanilla
Dinner:
150 gram Chicken Breast
8 oz Steamed Peas and Carrots
2 cups Arugala
1 tbl lemon juice
That is approx. 11g Fat / 42g Carb / 64g Protein
I mean, without even looking at the macros it seems like it would be pretty darn healthy.
Did you do the math to see how many calories it is?
Also, don't confuse nutritious with healthy... they are not necessarily the same thing.5 -
@meinco , have you looked into the Mediterranean Diet? It isn't exactly any of the things you mentioned, but it has been shown to be helpful for the medical conditions you brought up.4
-
johnslater461 wrote: »
What, pray tell, is unwise about a diet that emphasizes lean meats, vegetables, and fruits with an appropriate calorie goal?johnslater461 wrote: »It was around 500-800 calories and the emphasis was on vegetables, lean meats and small bits of some fruits.
If you feel great doing this, just keep the same kinds of foods, but scale the portions up to a more sustainable calorie goal.
The diet she was on was intended as a very short term measure. Unless you have some kind of credentials, this advice isn't necessarily wise, thus the previous advice to consult a dietitian.
I mean I do see what you are saying about the minimum amount of fat but I also agree with with John is saying.
But please tell me what would be wrong with this as my meal plan:
Breakfast:
1 cup Herbal Tea
1 Large Hardboiled Egg
1/2 (75g) Fuji Apple
Lunch:
1 small Greek nonfat yogurt
1 scoop Whey Protein Vanilla
Dinner:
150 gram Chicken Breast
8 oz Steamed Peas and Carrots
2 cups Arugala
1 tbl lemon juice
That is approx. 11g Fat / 42g Carb / 64g Protein
I mean, without even looking at the macros it seems like it would be pretty darn healthy.
Did you do the math to see how many calories it is?
Also, don't confuse nutritious with healthy... they are not necessarily the same thing.
She was on a medically supervised VLCD. I read this as a typical day.
2 -
Okay I see what everyone is saying and now I am just more confused.
I understand the .4g/fat per lb which is 30ish grams for me
But then if you take a typical day of my meals, that is only 11g fat but that is also because it is VLCD
If I up the calories which I am going to do in about 10 days and like what was said, triple those numbers (though I won't be upping that much anytime soon) that makes 33g of fat but wow...that seems like a crazy amount of carbs 126g and almost 200g of protein.
And that idea doesn't mesh with what I was originally thinking.....but it is the way I like to eat now based on the last month of what I have been eating.
So I think I am just all confused about where to go from here or what that looks like.
1 -
Okay I see what everyone is saying and now I am just more confused.
I understand the .4g/fat per lb which is 30ish grams for me
But then if you take a typical day of my meals, that is only 11g fat but that is also because it is VLCD
If I up the calories which I am going to do in about 10 days and like what was said, triple those numbers (though I won't be upping that much anytime soon) that makes 33g of fat but wow...that seems like a crazy amount of carbs 126g and almost 200g of protein.
And that idea doesn't mesh with what I was originally thinking.....but it is the way I like to eat now based on the last month of what I have been eating.
So I think I am just all confused about where to go from here or what that looks like.
I apologize for misunderstanding. I thought you were *proposing* that as a post-VLCD transition, not citing it as an example of the type of meal you were eating now. 200 grams of protein would be a lot for your post-VLCD life which is why lots of people are pointing out that going low carbohydrate *and* low fat may not work for you . . . you can take some of those calories from protein and put them into fat or carbohydrates and still be doing what is considered to be a high protein diet.
And this wouldn't have to be a radical change to how you are eating now. It could be something simple like, yogurt with some fat instead of non-fat yogurt, some sauce with your chicken, some berries with your breakfast, some fat on your vegetables, some almonds added to a snack. These are tiny tweaks that can fit into the way you prefer to eat now.
4 -
Okay I see what everyone is saying and now I am just more confused.
I understand the .4g/fat per lb which is 30ish grams for me
But then if you take a typical day of my meals, that is only 11g fat but that is also because it is VLCD
If I up the calories which I am going to do in about 10 days and like what was said, triple those numbers (though I won't be upping that much anytime soon) that makes 33g of fat but wow...that seems like a crazy amount of carbs 126g and almost 200g of protein.
And that idea doesn't mesh with what I was originally thinking.....but it is the way I like to eat now based on the last month of what I have been eating.
So I think I am just all confused about where to go from here or what that looks like.
126 carbs is not crazy high. For your medical conditions, the TYPE of carbs is going to be important. Vegetables, whole grains, and dairy should be your primary sources of carbs, assuming you like and can tolerate dairy. Both your blood sugar and your blood lipids will respond well to high fiber foods, like vegetables and whole grains.2 -
janejellyroll wrote: »And this wouldn't have to be a radical change to how you are eating now. It could be something simple like, yogurt with some fat instead of non-fat yogurt, some sauce with your chicken, some berries with your breakfast, some fat on your vegetables, some almonds added to a snack. These are tiny tweaks that can fit into the way you prefer to eat now.
I see what you mean now. That would be doable.
Sorry for this thread, it kind of went all over the place. I started out just wanting a keyword to use to google recipes, LOL and ended up with lots of great thoughts about where to go from here instead.
I appreciate the time everyone took to help.
1 -
johnslater461 wrote: »
What, pray tell, is unwise about a diet that emphasizes lean meats, vegetables, and fruits with an appropriate calorie goal?johnslater461 wrote: »It was around 500-800 calories and the emphasis was on vegetables, lean meats and small bits of some fruits.
If you feel great doing this, just keep the same kinds of foods, but scale the portions up to a more sustainable calorie goal.
The diet she was on was intended as a very short term measure. Unless you have some kind of credentials, this advice isn't necessarily wise, thus the previous advice to consult a dietitian.
Listen, all I meant by this comment was that her macro percentages on a short-term VLCD may not translate to a healthy, long-term diet, being as how it was very low in fat. I definitely regret not saying it that way to begin with.2 -
kshama2001 wrote: »johnslater461 wrote: »
What, pray tell, is unwise about a diet that emphasizes lean meats, vegetables, and fruits with an appropriate calorie goal?johnslater461 wrote: »It was around 500-800 calories and the emphasis was on vegetables, lean meats and small bits of some fruits.
If you feel great doing this, just keep the same kinds of foods, but scale the portions up to a more sustainable calorie goal.
The diet she was on was intended as a very short term measure. Unless you have some kind of credentials, this advice isn't necessarily wise, thus the previous advice to consult a dietitian.
I mean I do see what you are saying about the minimum amount of fat but I also agree with with John is saying.
But please tell me what would be wrong with this as my meal plan:
Breakfast:
1 cup Herbal Tea
1 Large Hardboiled Egg
1/2 (75g) Fuji Apple
Lunch:
1 small Greek nonfat yogurt
1 scoop Whey Protein Vanilla
Dinner:
150 gram Chicken Breast
8 oz Steamed Peas and Carrots
2 cups Arugala
1 tbl lemon juice
That is approx. 11g Fat / 42g Carb / 64g Protein
I mean, without even looking at the macros it seems like it would be pretty darn healthy.
Except for the lack of calories. If I did the math right, 11g Fat / 42g Carb / 64g Protein is only 523 calories.
Is lack of calories and fiber leading to constipation?
This was my first thought, too. Almost no fiber (recommended minimum for women is 25g) plus not enough fat + predominantly protein = recipe for constipation.1 -
@meinco, It IS fun to look at recipes! The Whole30, SkinnyMS, and Mediterranean Diet sites (just to name a few) all have some really good recipes that are heavy on lean meats and all types of plants without drowning everything in cheese and butter. I don't follow any of these, but I do reference all of them for yummy meal ideas when I hit a roadblock. A balanced diet is not rocket science. Unless you have a medical condition and need to follow medical orders, just eat your lean meats, fruits, veggies, legumes and/or grains, and throw in some nuts/nut butters, avocado, and olive oil (and other healthy oils), and you're good to go, like @janejellyroll was saying in her last post.2
-
Maybe this will help. The numbers won't line up for you because they are based on my weight(s), but maybe it will give you a bit of context.
When thinking about calories and macros, you should think about each in terms of acceptable ranges. Fall below the minimum for a meaningful length of time, and you'll probably see some detrimental effects. Go above the maximum and there will be, at best, no added benefit (i.e. diminishing returns).
So, how do you read that table?
The left most column is my personal "milestone" weights. To the right of each milestone is the minimum and maximum values, in grams of fat, carbs, and protein that I need based on that weight.- The fat numbers are pretty standard - .3g per lb and .5g per lb. One could go higher depending, but there isn't usually a need to beyond personal preference. One certainly wouldn't want to go lower for any meaningful period of time.
- The carbs numbers are pretty flexible, and somewhat based on my preferences and training goals. You can mostly tweak those as needed... but I'd caution you against going too low for the sake of long term adherence.
- Protein numbers are also fairly standard. You can probably go slightly lower than the .75g per lb depending on your goals, but there probably isn't a reason to go any higher than the 1.25.
The right-most column is the total cals per day based on macros. That basically reminds me that going lower than about 1500 cals per day is probably going to be problematic for me, and going higher than 3600 won't result in any added benefit.
This is my mental crutch when I start overthinking/over-complicating things. I know from experience that I maintain my weight on about 2300 cals, so I can use that along with the info on the table to figure out where my numbers should be based on my goals.
Does that help?
4 -
-
iWishMyNameWasRebel wrote: »@meinco, It IS fun to look at recipes! The Whole30, SkinnyMS, and Mediterranean Diet sites (just to name a few) all have some really good recipes that are heavy on lean meats and all types of plants without drowning everything in cheese and butter. I don't follow any of these, but I do reference all of them for yummy meal ideas when I hit a roadblock. A balanced diet is not rocket science. Unless you have a medical condition and need to follow medical orders, just eat your lean meats, fruits, veggies, legumes and/or grains, and throw in some nuts/nut butters, avocado, and olive oil (and other healthy oils), and you're good to go, like @janejellyroll was saying in her last post.
South Beach websites will probably also have recipes that appeal to those who like this way of eating.1 -
Except for the lack of calories. If I did the math right, 11g Fat / 42g Carb / 64g Protein is only 523 calories.
Is lack of calories and fiber leading to constipation?
This was my first thought, too. Almost no fiber (recommended minimum for women is 25g) plus not enough fat + predominantly protein = recipe for constipation.
Since it came up ...
Actually I haven't had too much of a problem. I did initially but that is because I usually took a fiber supplement daily and now I no longer do. But once I upped my water and added in apples (sometimes melba toast or a wasa cracker) I haven't had any problems. It's not a daily thing anymore but certainly not uncomfortable during my 48-72 hour cycle now.
0 -
Maybe this will help. The numbers won't line up for you because they are based on my weight(s), but maybe it will give you a bit of context.
When thinking about calories and macros, you should think about each in terms of acceptable ranges. Fall below the minimum for a meaningful length of time, and you'll probably see some detrimental effects. Go above the maximum and there will be, at best, no added benefit (i.e. diminishing returns).
So, how do you read that table?
The left most column is my personal "milestone" weights. To the right of each milestone is the minimum and maximum values, in grams of fat, carbs, and protein that I need based on that weight.- The fat numbers are pretty standard - .3g per lb and .5g per lb. One could go higher depending, but there isn't usually a need to beyond personal preference. One certainly wouldn't want to go lower for any meaningful period of time.
- The carbs numbers are pretty flexible, and someone based on my preferences and training goals. You can mostly tweak those as needed... but I'd caution you against going too low for the sake of long term adherence.
- Protein numbers are also fairly standard. You can probably go slightly lower than the .75g per lb depending on your goals, but there probably isn't a reason to go any higher than the 1.25.
The right-most column is the total cals per day based on macros. That basically reminds me that going lower than about 1500 cals per day is probably going to be problematic for me, and going higher than 3600 won't result in any added benefit.
This is my mental crutch when I start overthinking/over-complicating things. I know from experience that I maintain my weight on about 2300 cals, so I can use that along with the info on the table to figure out where my numbers should be based on my goals.
Does that help?
Actually this is very helpful. Thank you. I am a numbers girl so yes, this makes it better to put into perspective.0 -
janejellyroll wrote: »iWishMyNameWasRebel wrote: »@meinco, It IS fun to look at recipes! The Whole30, SkinnyMS, and Mediterranean Diet sites (just to name a few) all have some really good recipes that are heavy on lean meats and all types of plants without drowning everything in cheese and butter. I don't follow any of these, but I do reference all of them for yummy meal ideas when I hit a roadblock. A balanced diet is not rocket science. Unless you have a medical condition and need to follow medical orders, just eat your lean meats, fruits, veggies, legumes and/or grains, and throw in some nuts/nut butters, avocado, and olive oil (and other healthy oils), and you're good to go, like @janejellyroll was saying in her last post.
South Beach websites will probably also have recipes that appeal to those who like this way of eating.
Thank you, I will check them out. Everyone I know either does nothing or does Keto so those recipes end up clogging up my feeds on Pinterest or FB. I will check some of these out.
I remember reading about a few really successful people who eat almost the same thing every day. While I would hate the lack of variety (and it probably isn't the healthiest long term) I can def. see the appeal. Once you add in more diversity it seems to get more confusing
But it's all a process. I lost 40lbs, then took a long while off. Then came back and lost another 25lbs. Still have about 70 more lbs to go but I will get there. One meal at a time 3 -
Maybe this will help. The numbers won't line up for you because they are based on my weight(s), but maybe it will give you a bit of context.
When thinking about calories and macros, you should think about each in terms of acceptable ranges. Fall below the minimum for a meaningful length of time, and you'll probably see some detrimental effects. Go above the maximum and there will be, at best, no added benefit (i.e. diminishing returns).
So, how do you read that table?
The left most column is my personal "milestone" weights. To the right of each milestone is the minimum and maximum values, in grams of fat, carbs, and protein that I need based on that weight.- The fat numbers are pretty standard - .3g per lb and .5g per lb. One could go higher depending, but there isn't usually a need to beyond personal preference. One certainly wouldn't want to go lower for any meaningful period of time.
- The carbs numbers are pretty flexible, and somewhat based on my preferences and training goals. You can mostly tweak those as needed... but I'd caution you against going too low for the sake of long term adherence.
- Protein numbers are also fairly standard. You can probably go slightly lower than the .75g per lb depending on your goals, but there probably isn't a reason to go any higher than the 1.25.
The right-most column is the total cals per day based on macros. That basically reminds me that going lower than about 1500 cals per day is probably going to be problematic for me, and going higher than 3600 won't result in any added benefit.
This is my mental crutch when I start overthinking/over-complicating things. I know from experience that I maintain my weight on about 2300 cals, so I can use that along with the info on the table to figure out where my numbers should be based on my goals.
Does that help?
I think what you've said here is very useful - a good way of looking at it. I'm just in for a quibble: To say that 0.3g/lb for the low end of fat might be a little too low for women IMO. I get that you're not one like OP is.
3 -
johnslater461 wrote: »
What, pray tell, is unwise about a diet that emphasizes lean meats, vegetables, and fruits with an appropriate calorie goal?johnslater461 wrote: »It was around 500-800 calories and the emphasis was on vegetables, lean meats and small bits of some fruits.
If you feel great doing this, just keep the same kinds of foods, but scale the portions up to a more sustainable calorie goal.
The diet she was on was intended as a very short term measure. Unless you have some kind of credentials, this advice isn't necessarily wise, thus the previous advice to consult a dietitian.
I mean I do see what you are saying about the minimum amount of fat but I also agree with with John is saying.
But please tell me what would be wrong with this as my meal plan:
Breakfast:
1 cup Herbal Tea
1 Large Hardboiled Egg
1/2 (75g) Fuji Apple
Lunch:
1 small Greek nonfat yogurt
1 scoop Whey Protein Vanilla
Dinner:
150 gram Chicken Breast
8 oz Steamed Peas and Carrots
2 cups Arugala
1 tbl lemon juice
That is approx. 11g Fat / 42g Carb / 64g Protein
I mean, without even looking at the macros it seems like it would be pretty darn healthy.
That's very low calories, if that's really all you're eating in a day.0 -
MerryMavis1 wrote: »johnslater461 wrote: »
What, pray tell, is unwise about a diet that emphasizes lean meats, vegetables, and fruits with an appropriate calorie goal?johnslater461 wrote: »It was around 500-800 calories and the emphasis was on vegetables, lean meats and small bits of some fruits.
If you feel great doing this, just keep the same kinds of foods, but scale the portions up to a more sustainable calorie goal.
The diet she was on was intended as a very short term measure. Unless you have some kind of credentials, this advice isn't necessarily wise, thus the previous advice to consult a dietitian.
I mean I do see what you are saying about the minimum amount of fat but I also agree with with John is saying.
But please tell me what would be wrong with this as my meal plan:
Breakfast:
1 cup Herbal Tea
1 Large Hardboiled Egg
1/2 (75g) Fuji Apple
Lunch:
1 small Greek nonfat yogurt
1 scoop Whey Protein Vanilla
Dinner:
150 gram Chicken Breast
8 oz Steamed Peas and Carrots
2 cups Arugala
1 tbl lemon juice
That is approx. 11g Fat / 42g Carb / 64g Protein
I mean, without even looking at the macros it seems like it would be pretty darn healthy.
That's very low calories, if that's really all you're eating in a day.
Context: this is a current day from OP's medically supervised VLCD, not what she is planning on eating long-term.0 -
janejellyroll wrote: »MerryMavis1 wrote: »johnslater461 wrote: »
What, pray tell, is unwise about a diet that emphasizes lean meats, vegetables, and fruits with an appropriate calorie goal?johnslater461 wrote: »It was around 500-800 calories and the emphasis was on vegetables, lean meats and small bits of some fruits.
If you feel great doing this, just keep the same kinds of foods, but scale the portions up to a more sustainable calorie goal.
The diet she was on was intended as a very short term measure. Unless you have some kind of credentials, this advice isn't necessarily wise, thus the previous advice to consult a dietitian.
I mean I do see what you are saying about the minimum amount of fat but I also agree with with John is saying.
But please tell me what would be wrong with this as my meal plan:
Breakfast:
1 cup Herbal Tea
1 Large Hardboiled Egg
1/2 (75g) Fuji Apple
Lunch:
1 small Greek nonfat yogurt
1 scoop Whey Protein Vanilla
Dinner:
150 gram Chicken Breast
8 oz Steamed Peas and Carrots
2 cups Arugala
1 tbl lemon juice
That is approx. 11g Fat / 42g Carb / 64g Protein
I mean, without even looking at the macros it seems like it would be pretty darn healthy.
That's very low calories, if that's really all you're eating in a day.
Context: this is a current day from OP's medically supervised VLCD, not what she is planning on eating long-term.
Ah, gotcha! Thanks for the clarification 0 -
Maybe this will help. The numbers won't line up for you because they are based on my weight(s), but maybe it will give you a bit of context.
When thinking about calories and macros, you should think about each in terms of acceptable ranges. Fall below the minimum for a meaningful length of time, and you'll probably see some detrimental effects. Go above the maximum and there will be, at best, no added benefit (i.e. diminishing returns).
So, how do you read that table?
The left most column is my personal "milestone" weights. To the right of each milestone is the minimum and maximum values, in grams of fat, carbs, and protein that I need based on that weight.- The fat numbers are pretty standard - .3g per lb and .5g per lb. One could go higher depending, but there isn't usually a need to beyond personal preference. One certainly wouldn't want to go lower for any meaningful period of time.
- The carbs numbers are pretty flexible, and somewhat based on my preferences and training goals. You can mostly tweak those as needed... but I'd caution you against going too low for the sake of long term adherence.
- Protein numbers are also fairly standard. You can probably go slightly lower than the .75g per lb depending on your goals, but there probably isn't a reason to go any higher than the 1.25.
The right-most column is the total cals per day based on macros. That basically reminds me that going lower than about 1500 cals per day is probably going to be problematic for me, and going higher than 3600 won't result in any added benefit.
This is my mental crutch when I start overthinking/over-complicating things. I know from experience that I maintain my weight on about 2300 cals, so I can use that along with the info on the table to figure out where my numbers should be based on my goals.
Does that help?
I think what you've said here is very useful - a good way of looking at it. I'm just in for a quibble: To say that 0.3g/lb for the low end of fat might be a little too low for women IMO. I get that you're not one like OP is.
That's fair.
that table is kind of my quick reference cheat sheet for myself. So some of the numbers might need some tweaking to be really accurate and correct for other people.3 -
I'm a diabetic, and I feel most comfortable (and maintain good glucose control) on about 150 g net carbs a day. 126 is not super high, that's very low compared to a standard American diet. You have said you don't want to be low enough to do keto, and if you aren't wanting to be low enough to be in ketosis, you don't need to be lower than about 150. The last thing you want is to be dipping in and out of ketosis, never fully keto adapting, and feeling the keto flu all the time.
It sounds to me like focusing on nutrient dense foods instead of macros would be a good thing for you. So yes blueberries, no white bread. Yes almonds, no fried foods. Low carb plus low fat means high protein since protein is all that's left, and a very high protein diet comes with its own issues, such as feeling low energy and a higher incidence of kidney problems. Just focus on eating good food!1
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K 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
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions