Does low carb make you lose faster?

AnswerzPwease

for most people yes. keeping insulin low(not eating carbs) as long as possible will speed up fat loss. when you eat carbs you secrete insulin. insulin is responsible for shuttling in nutrients to fat cells and limits fat oxidation when its elevated in the blood. a good compromise is dont eat any carbs until after your workout in the afternoon evening. its effective and you wont go totally nuts

None of that is necessary. Carbs can be whenever, not just after the afternoon workout. Fast loss is not going to speed up to to timing carbs.

On the whole fat oxidizing, you can't just look at the process of when insulin secreted. There are peaks and valleys and the valleys have to outweigh the peaks.

Saying someone will not go crazy eating the way you suggest is your opinion not a fact. I know many people including myself That would find eating like that to be a pain and unnecessary.

Low carb is effective due to a reduction in calories. Not because it's low carb. If you replaced the calories with protein you somehow lose weight because carbs are low. It's about overall calories, not just carbs.

FYI- protein also creates an insulin response.

I've always been a little confused by the peaks and valleys.

If I eat 10 small meals a day, even though in a calorie defecit, won't I consistently be in a peak because I'm eating very often and the body doesn't have much time to go into a valley?

eric_sg61

for most people yes. keeping insulin low(not eating carbs) as long as possible will speed up fat loss. when you eat carbs you secrete insulin. insulin is responsible for shuttling in nutrients to fat cells and limits fat oxidation when its elevated in the blood. a good compromise is dont eat any carbs until after your workout in the afternoon evening. its effective and you wont go totally nuts

None of that is necessary. Carbs can be whenever, not just after the afternoon workout. Fast loss is not going to speed up to to timing carbs.

On the whole fat oxidizing, you can't just look at the process of when insulin secreted. There are peaks and valleys and the valleys have to outweigh the peaks.

Saying someone will not go crazy eating the way you suggest is your opinion not a fact. I know many people including myself That would find eating like that to be a pain and unnecessary.

Low carb is effective due to a reduction in calories. Not because it's low carb. If you replaced the calories with protein you somehow lose weight because carbs are low. It's about overall calories, not just carbs.

FYI- protein also creates an insulin response.

I've always been a little confused by the peaks and valleys.

If I eat 10 small meals a day, even though in a calorie defecit, won't I consistently be in a peak because I'm eating very often and the body doesn't have much time to go into a valley?

The body is constantly storing and burning at the same time. The metabolism is like a set of dimmer switches, not a set of on/off switches. in an overall deficit, burning will outpace the storing. The opposite is true for a surplus.

dieselbyte

for most people yes. keeping insulin low(not eating carbs) as long as possible will speed up fat loss. when you eat carbs you secrete insulin. insulin is responsible for shuttling in nutrients to fat cells and limits fat oxidation when its elevated in the blood. a good compromise is dont eat any carbs until after your workout in the afternoon evening. its effective and you wont go totally nuts

None of that is necessary. Carbs can be whenever, not just after the afternoon workout. Fast loss is not going to speed up to to timing carbs.

On the whole fat oxidizing, you can't just look at the process of when insulin secreted. There are peaks and valleys and the valleys have to outweigh the peaks.

Saying someone will not go crazy eating the way you suggest is your opinion not a fact. I know many people including myself That would find eating like that to be a pain and unnecessary.

Low carb is effective due to a reduction in calories. Not because it's low carb. If you replaced the calories with protein you somehow lose weight because carbs are low. It's about overall calories, not just carbs.

FYI- protein also creates an insulin response.

I've always been a little confused by the peaks and valleys.

If I eat 10 small meals a day, even though in a calorie defecit, won't I consistently be in a peak because I'm eating very often and the body doesn't have much time to go into a valley?

The body is constantly storing and burning at the same time. The metabolism is like a set of dimmer switches, not a set of on/off switches. in an overall deficit, burning will outpace the storing. The opposite is true for a surplus.

^All of this. Anyone that tells you low carb makes you lose weight faster because of insulin response doesn't understand how the body works. As @MrM27 stated, insulin has a basal level and is always present. Protein also stimulates an insulin response. Low carb will lead to faster initial weight loss due to muslce glycogen depletion (water weight), but fat loss is dependent on calories in vs out. Low carb followers lose weight due to caloric deficit, not the fact that they consume less carbs.

Meal timing/frequency doesn't inhibit weight loss, calories in vs out determines weight loss. So even if you at 20 small meals, your net caloric deficit is all that matters. As @eric_sg61 stated, your metabolism doesn't turn on or off.

kgeyser

I believe this question was already thoroughly answered in your previous post: http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1347263-do-you-believe-in-strictly-calories-in-calories-out

I don't recall ever asking this question in that thread. That thread did get very, very long and someone else may have brought it up.

I never said you asked this specific question, I said the question was thoroughly answered in your post.

You did ask about insulin response as one of your questions, there was a very long conversation about the body's response to carbs and the role of carbs in weight loss. A lot of people took the time to respond to your topic thoroughly and include studies, you might want to take the time to read their responses.

hookilau

I believe this question was already thoroughly answered in your previous post: http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1347263-do-you-believe-in-strictly-calories-in-calories-out

I don't recall ever asking this question in that thread. That thread did get very, very long and someone else may have brought it up.

I never said you asked this specific question, I said the question was thoroughly answered in your post.

You did ask about insulin response as one of your questions, there was a very long conversation about the body's response to carbs and the role of carbs in weight loss. A lot of people took the time to respond to your topic thoroughly and include studies, you might want to take the time to read their responses.

Agreed.
As a diabetic, I found the link to the thread very interesting.
People really took the time to write out full paragraphs & scenarios to answer your question.

Though I admit I stopped reading when you said you were on meds to lose weight, & that you were on a lower than most calorie diet (for a man). I was interested specifically in the insulin response answers.

edited to add: wanted to add that I stopped reading after the above was disclosed because in that context, we differ

yarwell

If I eat 10 small meals a day, even though in a calorie defecit, won't I consistently be in a peak because I'm eating very often and the body doesn't have much time to go into a valley?

You need to find studies that record the 24h insulin area under the curve, with small meals the peaks will be less but it's possible you'll have an elevated insulin level for a bigger part of the 24h.

The difference between the insulin response to carbs and protein is that glucagon goes in opposite directions - with protein glucagon has to kick up the release of glucose in order to stop the insulin response dropping the blood sugar. With carbs the insulin is to pull down the blood sugar :-

AnswerzPwease

I believe this question was already thoroughly answered in your previous post: http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1347263-do-you-believe-in-strictly-calories-in-calories-out

I don't recall ever asking this question in that thread. That thread did get very, very long and someone else may have brought it up.

I never said you asked this specific question, I said the question was thoroughly answered in your post.

You did ask about insulin response as one of your questions, there was a very long conversation about the body's response to carbs and the role of carbs in weight loss. A lot of people took the time to respond to your topic thoroughly and include studies, you might want to take the time to read their responses.

I gotta be honest, all I hear is "Blah, blah, blah".

If you don't like that I asked a question that relates in some way to something I asked in the past, then I really don't care. I find it ridiculous that people take the time to moderate the forum. There are moderators for this reason. Feel free to ignore my threads. Or feel free to take the time out of your day to come in them, and reply with this nonse. Either way, I don't care.

There are plenty of people who have given some awesome answers in this thread that have helped a ton and I thank them greatly.

z
z
z

AnswerzPwease

If I eat 10 small meals a day, even though in a calorie defecit, won't I consistently be in a peak because I'm eating very often and the body doesn't have much time to go into a valley?

You need to find studies that record the 24h insulin area under the curve, with small meals the peaks will be less but it's possible you'll have an elevated insulin level for a bigger part of the 24h.

The difference between the insulin response to carbs and protein is that glucagon goes in opposite directions - with protein glucagon has to kick up the release of glucose in order to stop the insulin response dropping the blood sugar. With carbs the insulin is to pull down the blood sugar :-

Yeah thats what I was thinking.

Even though they're smaller peaks, they're so often it may not leave the body much time to get into a dip before its fed more and peaks again.

Meerataila

I lost a lot of weight on low carb a couple of years ago. But as far as I can tell, the only reason it worked is because it made me less hungry. I still tracked calories, and aside from the initial water weight lost, I didn't notice any magical, seemingly physics defying drop in pounds. I just wasn't as hungry and cravy. The few times I gorged myself on meat and cheese, I gained weight, just as though I'd gorged on cookies and ice cream.

parkscs

Low carb diets tend to be very satiating, oftentimes allowing you to more easily create an aggressive caloric deficit than a high carb diet. They can also produce better results to the extent you're more insulin resistant, as many obese people are. These factors can potentially lead to you losing faster, but it's not because of any metabolic advantage offered by low carb diets.

nosebag1212

for most people yes. keeping insulin low(not eating carbs) as long as possible will speed up fat loss. when you eat carbs you secrete insulin. insulin is responsible for shuttling in nutrients to fat cells and limits fat oxidation when its elevated in the blood. a good compromise is dont eat any carbs until after your workout in the afternoon evening. its effective and you wont go totally nuts

utter nonsense

Iwishyouwell

Yes, it did help me lose weight pretty fast. At least at first. That's because I enjoy most lower carbohydrate foods, but I almost never overeat them. So low carbing regulated my weight loss at a steady rate without the need for calorie counting.

But even that eventually slowed down and I just hit a maintenance. I'm a big fan of dietary fat and was eating a lot of it, which was keeping my calories up. Low carb made it much easier for me to cut down on the "calories in" portion of eating without feeling deprived, and it actually made me feel more energetic than high carbohydrate consumption does, but it doesn't cancel out CICO.

dieselbyte

Low carb diets tend to be very satiating, oftentimes allowing you to more easily create an aggressive caloric deficit than a high carb diet. They can also produce better results to the extent you're more insulin resistant, as many obese people are. These factors can potentially lead to you losing faster, but it's not because of any metabolic advantage offered by low carb diets.

Huh? You speak of insulin resistance as if it were a good thing?? Insulin resistance is not healthy or normal, and can lead to a host of physical and phsycological problems.

charlieibeling

there is no debate. insulin blunts fat loss

fats and protein are essential for survival. carbs are not. protein is more thermogenic in its metabolism and necessary for maintanence of muscle tissue. cutting protein will slow metabolic rate and lead to muscle loss which will also reduce metabolism. reducing carbs is the easiest way to keep metabolism high and lose weight

ninerbuff

Less carbs means less water retention, less glycogen storage and less calories for many.

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

parkscs

Low carb diets tend to be very satiating, oftentimes allowing you to more easily create an aggressive caloric deficit than a high carb diet. They can also produce better results to the extent you're more insulin resistant, as many obese people are. These factors can potentially lead to you losing faster, but it's not because of any metabolic advantage offered by low carb diets.

Huh? You speak of insulin resistance as if it were a good thing?? Insulin resistance is not healthy or normal, and can lead to a host of physical and phsycological problems.

Reading comprehension? I'm not sure how you're getting "insulin resistance = good!" out of my post.

I can rephrase, although I think I was clear to begin with. If YOU are insulin resistance, you may find more success in terms of fat loss when following a low carb diet. Many obese people tend to also be insulin resistant. I'm not at all saying that's at all a good thing, but it is pretty well known that obesity is associated with an elevated risk of developing insulin resistance. In any event, to the extent someone is insulin resistant, they may well see better losses when eating a low carb diet. But outside of conditions of this nature there's no real metabolic advantage from following a low carb diet.

charlieibeling

here is a good read on insulin and what it does in the body
http://www.vivo.colostate.edu/hbooks/pathphys/endocrine/pancreas/insulin_phys.html


Here is a cut and paste of the pertinent facts
Insulin inhibits breakdown of fat in adipose tissue by inhibiting the intracellular lipase that hydrolyzes triglycerides to release fatty acids.

Insulin facilitates entry of glucose into adipocytes, and within those cells, glucose can be used to synthesize glycerol. This glycerol, along with the fatty acids delivered from the liver, are used to synthesize triglyceride within the adipocyte. By these mechanisms, insulin is involved in further accumulation of triglyceride in fat cells.

From a whole body perspective, insulin has a fat-sparing effect. Not only does it drive most cells to preferentially oxidize carbohydrates instead of fatty acids for energy, insulin indirectly stimulates accumulation of fat in adipose tissue.

RachelSteeners

I eat low carb (max 200 grams a day) and I've been losing consistently.

lindsey1979

I agree with the folks that made the following points:

(1) High fat, low carb diets tend to be more satiating, so some people have an easier time maintaining a caloric deficit. For others, it makes no difference -- this is really a personal preference on how easy, enjoyable you personally find low carb.

(2) There may be an metabolic advantage for those with insulin resistance, which is quite common, especially among the obese. However, others may actually be disadvantaged if they're more insulin sensitive. So, once again, it comes down to an individual circumstance issue rather than a bright line rule that applies to everyone.