Keto or no keto?

13

Replies

  • mmapags
    mmapags Posts: 8,934 Member
    kimny72 wrote: »
    100_PROOF_ wrote: »
    Keto would be the quickest way to shed weight. And never have to be at a calorie deficit

    As long as you get passed the adaptation period

    Please explain how one would lose weight without creating a caloric deficit?
    Do you mean water weight?
    There's no magic to being keto for weight loss, a calorie deficit is still needed.
    Calorie deficit- weight loss

    Please post your sources for this information and any relevant research to support your claim.

    I’ve been eating anywhere from 1500 to 1700 calories a day and lost 50lbs in a year ... when I reach my goal and began going to the gym I upped it to 2000 ... either of those number don’t seem to be a deficit... right? I was eating significantly less calories when I was heavier. I don’t think the calories matter it more the quality of food that makes the difference

    Actually, 1500 is the minimum calories recommended for men, so 1500-1700 cals is almost definitely a deficit. Regardless, if an overweight, adult male is eating less than 1500 cals and not losing weight they should go to a university hospital to be studied and documented.

    I'm not going to touch the rest, as we were earlier asked not to debate in this thread.

    Is the 1500 calories for men on the standard American diet or you referring to keto ... for me that’s a lot of food ... the only reason I can now consume 2000 is because of the gym

    It makes no difference what the diet is. 1500 is the minimum for males for calorie intake. You are in a calorie deficit.
  • WinoGelato
    WinoGelato Posts: 13,454 Member
    I’m not one to give advice. I just stated what worked for me. Calorie counting isn’t for me. Doing keto was a way to naturally burn my own fat, while being able to eat until I’m full

    Everyone is different and has to experiment to see what helps them achieve there goal

    Sounds like you’re another person who is confusing CICO (the basic energy balance which drives all weight loss, gain and maintenance) with Calorie Counting (a method people use to track their intake and burn in order to ensure they have their energy balance at the right level to achieve your goals).

    Whether you count calories or do keto, or do both as many successful people here do - you must be in a calorie deficit to lose weight. I’m not sure why you’re skeptical of your own numbers, they support the concept of CICO since you said when you go to the gym you can eat more calories - you increased your CO so you can increase your CI as well. And I’m a 5’2 female who would definitely lose eating 1500-1700 cals and even still lose slowly eating 2000 cals. Why do you doubt these numbers for yourself?
  • nvmomketo
    nvmomketo Posts: 12,019 Member
    toxikon wrote: »
    Do you enjoy eating fruit, bread, pasta, potatoes, desserts and sweets?

    If the answer is yes, keto probably isn't for you.

    Weight loss comes down to eating at a calorie deficit, so you can lose weight while continuing to enjoy all your favourite foods.

    People are drawn to keto because of the initial motivating water weight loss and some health benefits and appetite suppression it can provide. But it's not magic, and for many people (including me), it simply wasn't sustainable longterm.

    With the exception of fruit, I enjoyed all the things you listed so very much that I was overweight for six years and just couldn’t shake it. Every attempt to limit or moderate those foods failed utterly, because I really, really enjoy eating them.

    Then I tried keto, stopped craving those foods at all, and the weight came right off as a result. Plus now I can taste the sweetness of fruit much more clearly, and enjoy it tremendously, and eat some daily while staying in ketosis. So it’s really win-win-win for me.

    I would discourage people from trying keto if less complicated approaches already work for them; no need to make eating harder than it has to be. But I wouldn’t call liking bread a disqualifying trait for trying it out, when it might just as easily be the opposite.

    Nicely said. :)