paleo/low carb/keto vs calorie counting

Ducks47
Ducks47 Posts: 131 Member
edited April 2019 in Food and Nutrition
What made you opt for this method over calorie counting? Or do you think calorie counting is better? Why?

Replies

  • RelCanonical
    RelCanonical Posts: 3,882 Member
    A low carb style of diet does not work for me without calorie counting because I have poor portion control. I have trouble stopping when satisfied. I have to have a number to tell me when to stop, and usually I'm fine and not hungry later.
  • MikePTY
    MikePTY Posts: 3,814 Member
    All diets work through calories in vs calories out. Your body counts calories for you, whether you are counting them yourself or not, or doing keto, low carb, paleo, potato diet, whichever. If you eat less than you burn, you will lose weight. If you eat more than you burn, you will gain weight.

    Some people may find certain diets or WOE helps keep them satiated and within their goals better. That's great for them. But there's no magic to it. Calorie counting can be done in conjunction with different WOEs, or on its own.
  • WinoGelato
    WinoGelato Posts: 13,454 Member
    Why do you feel these are mutually exclusive?
  • h7463
    h7463 Posts: 626 Member
    edited April 2019
    MikePTY wrote: »
    I do both keto and calorie counting. I think they both play a role I weight loss. With keto as you know it’s low carb high fat. When you look into the science behind why type 2 diabetics are the way they are, It all comes down to the carbs. carbs are simply not meant to be eaten in the portions we so often indulge in. Americans often have more and more access to them and that’s why we are seeing the increase in obesity. There is also the science behind the calories in and out. Your body can only burn so many calories in a day. So if your blowing over your limit your body has to work harder and harder to try and get through all the calories consumed, if you go to low your body goes into starvation. I usually stick to making sure I keep to my macros and I actually have the problem of not eating enough on the keto diet because I’m so full constantly. I do about 25-35 grams of carbs, and then try to eat more fat then protein but I don’t worry about it as much as the carbs. Right now I’m averaging 1200 calories in everyday. That’s super low considering how much I weigh and that I usually burn 3000 calories in a day. But without the massive amounts of carbs in my life I’m simply not hungry. I used to eat everything in sight but a sugar detox really tells you what your body actually wants.

    Humans have been eating carbs for 1000s of years. Bread and potatoes are not a modern invention. Throughout many points in history, diets were higher in carbs than they are now, as meat was a delicacy that was really only afforded by the rich. That's why when there was a potato blight, hundreds of thousands of people died of famine. Bread, rice, potatoes, etc, have been staples of world diets for millennium.

    Americans have become obese in modern times for a number of reasons. Very little of which have to do with carbs.
    Activity level - We are much less active than we used to be. Modernization and technology mean we move much less in our daily lives, there for have a lower "calories out"
    Food availability - That food in general is fully available to more people also leads to an increase in obesity, simply because people have the opportunity to consume as many calories as they want. For most of the population for most of human history, that was not the case.
    Rise of eating for pleasure/dining out - The increase in people dining regularly at restaurants and fast food has certainly had an impact, but if anything, most of this comes from the food being high fat, not high carb. Most food prepared at restaurants is much higher fat than it needs to be, because it is cooked with lots of oils and creams in order to enhance flavor.

    One only needs to look at a culture like the Japanese, which has long had a high carb diet while also having low obesity and longer lifespans than their western counterparts, to know that carbs are not this big enemy they have been made out to be.

    As far as your own personal intake, if you are actually intaking 1200 and burning 3000, that is way too high a deficit and not healthy for you.

    I'd like to add modern All-you-can-eat-buffets to your list. Not at all my favorite restauants, and I'd have to bank an entire day's worth of calories to even consider going. There seems to be a lot of pressure around, piling up as much food on the plates as possible, just to get the most out of the money. It's an embarrassing display of gluttony, and it hasn't been a pretty sight since Ancient Rome, Im sure..

    To the OP's oringinal question: It depends on your goals. If you don't mind gaining weight, you can eat up on any nutriton plan. Losing weight only works with counting calories, regardless of how you call your diet.
  • Panini911
    Panini911 Posts: 2,325 Member
    Ducks47 wrote: »
    What made you opt for this method over calorie counting? Or do you think calorie counting is better? Why?

    to lose weight you need to eat at a calorie deficit over time.

    people eat paleo/low carb/keto/"clean" and maintain or gain weight as well as lose. those are just ways of eating. some may find they naturally eat fewer calories on one of those and thus don't need to calorie count to lose weight but that would be a small percentage of people.

    most people STILL need to calorie count to lose weight regardless of their chosen way of eating.
  • kshama2001
    kshama2001 Posts: 28,052 Member
    h7463 wrote: »
    MikePTY wrote: »
    I do both keto and calorie counting. I think they both play a role I weight loss. With keto as you know it’s low carb high fat. When you look into the science behind why type 2 diabetics are the way they are, It all comes down to the carbs. carbs are simply not meant to be eaten in the portions we so often indulge in. Americans often have more and more access to them and that’s why we are seeing the increase in obesity. There is also the science behind the calories in and out. Your body can only burn so many calories in a day. So if your blowing over your limit your body has to work harder and harder to try and get through all the calories consumed, if you go to low your body goes into starvation. I usually stick to making sure I keep to my macros and I actually have the problem of not eating enough on the keto diet because I’m so full constantly. I do about 25-35 grams of carbs, and then try to eat more fat then protein but I don’t worry about it as much as the carbs. Right now I’m averaging 1200 calories in everyday. That’s super low considering how much I weigh and that I usually burn 3000 calories in a day. But without the massive amounts of carbs in my life I’m simply not hungry. I used to eat everything in sight but a sugar detox really tells you what your body actually wants.

    Humans have been eating carbs for 1000s of years. Bread and potatoes are not a modern invention. Throughout many points in history, diets were higher in carbs than they are now, as meat was a delicacy that was really only afforded by the rich. That's why when there was a potato blight, hundreds of thousands of people died of famine. Bread, rice, potatoes, etc, have been staples of world diets for millennium.

    Americans have become obese in modern times for a number of reasons. Very little of which have to do with carbs.
    Activity level - We are much less active than we used to be. Modernization and technology mean we move much less in our daily lives, there for have a lower "calories out"
    Food availability - That food in general is fully available to more people also leads to an increase in obesity, simply because people have the opportunity to consume as many calories as they want. For most of the population for most of human history, that was not the case.
    Rise of eating for pleasure/dining out - The increase in people dining regularly at restaurants and fast food has certainly had an impact, but if anything, most of this comes from the food being high fat, not high carb. Most food prepared at restaurants is much higher fat than it needs to be, because it is cooked with lots of oils and creams in order to enhance flavor.

    One only needs to look at a culture like the Japanese, which has long had a high carb diet while also having low obesity and longer lifespans than their western counterparts, to know that carbs are not this big enemy they have been made out to be.

    As far as your own personal intake, if you are actually intaking 1200 and burning 3000, that is way too high a deficit and not healthy for you.

    I'd like to add modern All-you-can-eat-buffets to your list. Not at all my favorite restauants, and I'd have to bank an entire day's worth of calories to even consider going. There seems to be a lot of pressure around, piling up as much food on the plates as possible, just to get the most out of the money. It's an embarrassing display of gluttony, and it hasn't been a pretty sight since Ancient Rome, Im sure..

    To the OP's oringinal question: It depends on your goals. If you don't mind gaining weight, you can eat up on any nutriton plan. Losing weight only works with counting calories, regardless of how you call your diet.

    Yes, at most restaurants here in the US, I can count on getting two and sometimes three meals from an entree. I often have a hard time finishing what is supposedly an appetizer.

    In my Thai cookbook, the portions are MUCH smaller than American servings. For example, for the Pad Se Ew (beef, noodles, veggies) which is supposed to serve 4, I double the meat and add extra veggies and we still only get three servings out of it.
  • RelCanonical
    RelCanonical Posts: 3,882 Member
    Just leaving this here.

    4d49e5aabe1d018b4de0638c20240233f9e72ae3_00.gif
  • Unknown
    edited August 2019
    This content has been removed.