Calories vs. Carbs

bababuey

Hi everyone.

The last 2 days (Ive only been a member for 2 days) I have come in under my calorie count (allowed is 1800 a day) and also above my daily calorie burning count (My goal is 75 burned calories a day, I've been doing over 100)

But my intake of carbs is above 100 grams. So basically Im wondering will weight loss actually take place if Im taking in under 1800 calories but am in taking so many carbs?

Can someone explain the dynamics of these 2 aspects of dieting and how they come into play in weight loss?

PJilly

There are some who believe you have to cut carbs drastically to lose weight. I'm not one of them. My daily calories just so happen to be 1,800 too, and I've lost 30 pounds eating 200+ grams of carbs a day. My preference for ratios is 45% carbs, 30% protein, and 25% fat.

Becka77

If you will use the "Search" feature, I'm sure you will find this question answered over and over and over...

snyder2teach

Calories are always important. My problem is that for months I was under my calorie goal, but still putting on weight. The dr sent me to a dietician who told me to focus on carbs two weeks ago. I'm now down 13 pounds. I think you're going to have to figure it out. If counting only calories works for you, yeah! If you're not losing, try watching carbs too. Everybody is different.

Good luck!

TrainingWithTonya

Some people function better on high carb and others function better on low carb. It is a guessing game for most people to get in the right ratios. Personally, I do 70% carbs, 15% protein, and 15% fat. I have more energy, better memory, and generally better health by eating more carbs. I have a couple of friends though, who are diabetic and have to limit carb intake.

Basically, there is a continuum of ratios that you can look at like a bell curve. The majority of people function best between 45 and 65% carbohydrates, where the top of the bell is. To the left, you have the people who function better with fewer carbs, significantly fewer then those who function best in the 45-65% range. To the right, you have the people who function better with more carbs, significantly fewer then those who function best in the 45-65% range. Dietitians and nutritionists recommend the standard of 45-65% to start out and then as we see how people respond, then we adjust them up or down on the continuum.

The trend right now is in the low carb recommendations, but that is mostly because of hype and not science. Actual science shows that high protein and high fat diets have more negative physiological side effects for the majority of people. (Just like the carbs, that is on a continuum of how people respond in relation to their percentage of intake.) So, my recommendation to clients is to stick with the standard recommendations (45-65% carbs, 10-35% protein, and 10-35% fat with less the 7% from saturated fat) and if they don't work for your overall health, then start trying different combinations.

lizzys

its the fat, if your doing high calories like you , you want to do low fat. if your doing low carb and low cals you can do more fat.. i like the low carb low cal low fat higher protein higher fiber in fruit and veges

jrich1

I have really only counted calories, and the rest seems to fall into place

LotusF1ower

Hi everyone.

The last 2 days (Ive only been a member for 2 days) I have come in under my calorie count (allowed is 1800 a day) and also above my daily calorie burning count (My goal is 75 burned calories a day, I've been doing over 100)

But my intake of carbs is above 100 grams. So basically Im wondering will weight loss actually take place if Im taking in under 1800 calories but am in taking so many carbs?

Can someone explain the dynamics of these 2 aspects of dieting and how they come into play in weight loss?

Hi! Welcome to MFP!

You would still lose the weight.

However, you may find you get hungry and unless you have an iron will, you may be tempted to snack and end up going over your calorie intake. Ensure you have protein at every meal, it will fill you up and you won't be tempted.

Before I started my own weight loss journey, I would eat loads of carbs and sweet stuff, in fact, the more I ate the more I wanted. It was only after I changed my habits on this "diet" that I began to find I no longer craved any carbs or sweets and actually wanted more protein as it stopped me being hungry.

The very best with your own weight loss, this is a wonderful site and I am sure you will love it here :flowerforyou:

MFPfriend

I don't think you necessarily need to have low carbs to lose weight. There are many MFP users that have lost tons of weight eating carbs.
Like another user said, a lot of this lifestyle change is learning what works for you. I personally use 40% carbs, 30% protein, and 30% fat, but I have a medical condition that makes it hard for me to eat a lot of carbs and lose weight.

Play around with your numbers and see what works best for you. If you are going to do low-carb and then re-introduce carbs later, make sure you put the carbs in slowly, or a lot of the weight can come back quickly.

bababuey

Thanks everyone. I am trying to stay under 1800 calories, and have done so for the last 3 days, so in a week's time we will see if the weight loss actually is happening even with the carbs being as high as 100g a day

However, you may find you get hungry and unless you have an iron will, you may be tempted to snack and end up going over your calorie intake. Ensure you have protein at every meal, it will fill you up and you won't be tempted.

This is so very true. Sigh. Last night I kind of broke and had 1/2 a bounty bar... I say kind of because regularly I'd have had 2 snickers bars.

Today I gave all my candy bars/sweets/bad things to my roommates. I have nothing left but oranges and bananas.

TrainingWithTonya

Just FYI: the minimum RDA for carbohydrates is 130g per day. That is what is required for proper organ function since the only source of fuel for the brain is glucose.

SHBoss1673

Just FYI: the minimum RDA for carbohydrates is 130g per day. That is what is required for proper organ function since the only source of fuel for the brain is glucose.

I'm not generally a proponent of ketogenic diets (except under specific circumstances). But I would like to dispel this idea. While it's true that the brain can't use ketones for energy, the body can create glucose even in the absence of carbohydrates by breaking down other molecules and recombining them as simple sugars. I wouldn't worry about that too much. In fact this is exactly what happens when you remove carbohydrates from your diet.

To the OP, going over your carbohydrates in and of itself probably won't halt weight loss (unless you are allergic to certain carbohydrates) but it does raise a big giant red flag IMHO if you do it consistently. It tells me that you're not planning your diet for proper macro-nutrient intake. In other words, in order to eat extra carbs but not go over your calories, you're shorting either fats or proteins (or both) which isn't necessarily a good thing.

PJilly

To the OP, going over your carbohydrates in and of itself probably won't halt weight loss (unless you are allergic to certain carbohydrates) but it does raise a big giant red flag IMHO if you do it consistently. It tells me that you're not planning your diet for proper macro-nutrient intake. In other words, in order to eat extra carbs but not go over your calories, you're shorting either fats or proteins (or both) which isn't necessarily a good thing.

I don't think the OP is going over on carbs. He was wondering if eating more than 100 grams was too much to lose weight, but 100 grams is only 22% of his 1,800 calories coming from carbs.

SHBoss1673

To the OP, going over your carbohydrates in and of itself probably won't halt weight loss (unless you are allergic to certain carbohydrates) but it does raise a big giant red flag IMHO if you do it consistently. It tells me that you're not planning your diet for proper macro-nutrient intake. In other words, in order to eat extra carbs but not go over your calories, you're shorting either fats or proteins (or both) which isn't necessarily a good thing.

I don't think the OP is going over on carbs. He was wondering if eating more than 100 grams was too much to lose weight, but 100 grams is only 22% of his 1,800 calories coming from carbs.

you're right, I read it wrong, I thought it was 100 grams over. Oh well.

PJilly

you're right, I read it wrong, I thought it was 100 grams over. Oh well.

That makes sense. NOW I get why you said what you said! I was a little confused there...

tralalara

New article out on AP news. "Low carb diet trumps low fat on 'good' cholesterol". Wish I had a link. Very good article.
I don't do Atkins but I do restrict carbs to some degree. I've had good success using 40/30/30.

Suksabai

It's an interesting argument and one that I've been considering over the last few days.

About 18 months ago I followed the South Beach Diet before falling pregnant with my son. I found it pretty easy and, even as a vegetarian, was able to fill up on protein and rarely felt hungry. I lost about 7 kgs and was happy.

Now I'm using MFP and have fallen back into eating 'good carbs' with every meal and sticking to my suggested calorie intake. The weight is coming off but I feel permanently hungry. I reckon this can only be due to fluctuating blood sugar levels due to my carb intake. I'm thinking I might do an experiment and combine a slightly modified version of South Beach with MFP and see what happens.

I'll let you know how I get on...