A Call for a Low-Carb Diet

Aaron_K123

It does not matter what you eat as how much you eat ... no deficit no loss. Pure and simple.

So, since it doesn't matter what I eat, I should be able to lose wight as long as there's a deficit, even if I'm living off of french fries, soda, and cake? :huh: Yeah, right. Dude, you're not going to lose weight by eating ****ty junk food all day even if you're staying within your calorie goal. Obviously we need the deficit to lose weight, but the quality of food matters too. What we eat matters.

Yes if you stay within your calorie goal you would be losing weight. I'd like to know what cake you're eating if you're sitting on the couch all day eating it and STILL within your calorie goal. Don't muddy the waters more and bring in nutrients. Purely for a weight loss purpose alone, yes you can eat only soda, cake and French fries and still lose weight if you're within your calorie allowance.

I see this come up all the time on the forums and feel like the two "camps" just talk past one another even though they actually believe the same things.

1. It is absolutely true that if you are at a caloric deficit you will lose weight regardless of what the source of said calories is. You can lose weight eating nothing but twinkies if you want.

2. It is absolutely true that if you do not get a proper balance of macros and nutrients you will find it impossible to maintain your diet in a sustainable, satisfying and healthy way long term and therefore eating nothing but twinkies is not a viable way to lose weight.

Both are true and I doubt either side would disagree with either statement, its just one person arguing that the glass is half full while the other yells back that it is half empty. It is boring.

I don't see how eating low carb is the same as eating only cake and French fries all day. It is POSSIBLE to lose weight only eating those items. You seem to have this view of low carb that it's very restrictive.

From a weight loss standpoint it really is about calorie deficit. Like I said before, if you bring nutrients into it then it's not just about simple weight loss and CICO. I don't see how it's a "camp" thing at all.

I wasn't even refering to low carb and and no point in this post did I even talk about carbs, i picked twinkies because it is an undeniable junk food not because it is carbs. I wasn't disagreeing with you I was agreeing with you and describing why I thought people say that that sort of weight loss isn't possible. Not sure why you are getting argumentative over something I didn't even say.

Aaron_K123

There is one person and one person alone that is responsible for your health as an adult and that is you. Your health is your responsibility and if you become overweight or obese it is because you have neglected your health. You may have reasons for that neglect associated with job or family but that does not mean you did not neglect that one aspect of your life. You may have various medical conditions that make your metabolism different than that of the population (hyper- hypothyroidism, PCOS etc) but then it is your responsibility to recognize that, understand your maintenance level and adjust accordingly. Placing blame on something beyond your control is just acceptance that being unhealthy is somehow your destiny and that is NOT the kind of mindset that is going to improve your life.

Harsh reality time. If you are obese, if you are overweight, that is a self-infliicted condition regardless of what your life or medical situation may be. If there is a condition that forces you to gain weight to an unhealthy level regardless of what you do I have not heard of it.

There CAN be things outside of your control that make you scrawny, or skinny, or unhealthily thin...but there isn't such a thing for being overweight.

Actually, they believe PCOS to be genetic. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2776334/) I listed this study because it is a case study and sites many other studies for those of you who are interested.
I'm not sure why being "scrawny" is outside of your control any more than an inherited gene defect the effects the way your body processes insulin. I know about this particular disease because I suffer from it. I also know how difficult it is to get a Dr. to take you seriously when you are seriously suffering and trying to lose weight and be healthy, but you aren't losing any weight because you have a disorder.

edited for clarity

I wasn't claiming that for someone with PCOS it is their fault that they have PCOS, of course having PCOS is beyond their control. That said being overweight is within their control, even if they have PCOS. PCOS has affects on your metabolism for sure but it doesn't mean you are doomed to be overweight. My ex had PCOS and she was quite fit, she just had to make sure she ate frequently enough or she would get groggy.

Aaron_K123

and when step A proves, on multiple data points and calculations, that my "maintenance" level is drastically below my expected calculated BMR, and that the deficits have to be so low as to be in the realm of dangerous (both mentally and physically), then my first priority has to be determining what medical factors are impeding proper weight loss.

As for your efficiency comment if you are saying your BMR is much LOWER than expected that means your body is actually EXTREMELY efficient, much more so than the average population. So I am not sure why you are saying operating at low efficiency.

what i mean is that at a 500-calorie deficit, the daily amount needed to lose one pound per week, i will only lose about .7lbs. it puts my BMR under 1,200 calories a day, which means to lose weight i have to drop down to less than 1,000 calories a day. it's unsustainable and borders on dangerous.

Then exercise more or lose weight at a slower rate, I guess I don't get it. Nothing says you have to lose weight based solely on your BMR nor do you have to lose weight at the rate of 1 pound per week. Nothing here makes CICO wrong or weight loss impossible so I guess what is the point here...that it is hard? Yeah of course it is hard.

Calculators tell me that I maintain at 3000 calories a day, but I don't...I maintain at more like 2500 calories a day. So what do I do about that? Well I adjust to what my body actually does and go off of that and I ignore the calculators. The calculators are based on population averages and assumptions. Just because the calculator says I could be eating 500 calories more when I found that I can't doesn't make me mope about it though nor does it make me think there is something wrong with me.

amusedmonkey

There is one person and one person alone that is responsible for your health as an adult and that is you. Your health is your responsibility and if you become overweight or obese it is because you have neglected your health. You may have reasons for that neglect associated with job or family but that does not mean you did not neglect that one aspect of your life. You may have various medical conditions that make your metabolism different than that of the population (hyper- hypothyroidism, PCOS etc) but then it is your responsibility to recognize that, understand your maintenance level and adjust accordingly. Placing blame on something beyond your control is just acceptance that being unhealthy is somehow your destiny and that is NOT the kind of mindset that is going to improve your life.

Harsh reality time. If you are obese, if you are overweight, that is a self-infliicted condition regardless of what your life or medical situation may be. If there is a condition that forces you to gain weight to an unhealthy level regardless of what you do I have not heard of it.

There CAN be things outside of your control that make you scrawny, or skinny, or unhealthily thin...but there isn't such a thing for being overweight.

Actually, they believe PCOS to be genetic. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2776334/) I listed this study because it is a case study and sites many other studies for those of you who are interested.
I'm not sure why being "scrawny" is outside of your control any more than an inherited gene defect the effects the way your body processes insulin. I know about this particular disease because I suffer from it. I also know how difficult it is to get a Dr. to take you seriously when you are seriously suffering and trying to lose weight and be healthy, but you aren't losing any weight because you have a disorder.

edited for clarity

I wasn't claiming that for someone with PCOS it is their fault that they have PCOS, of course having PCOS is beyond their control. That said being overweight is within their control, even if they have PCOS. PCOS has affects on your metabolism for sure but it doesn't mean you are doomed to be overweight. My ex had PCOS and she was quite fit, she just had to make sure she ate frequently enough or she would get groggy.

I totally agree with you. I have PCOS and if I had blamed it for my weight I wouldn't have been able to lose 90 pounds and counting. Having a medical condition only makes it more possible to gain faster and lose slower, it does not alter the gain/loss process itself - eating over/under maintenance. It's self-inflected, be it by continuously going over maintenance, not caring enough to watch/notice weight change, or by simply not looking for information about one's condition.

yarwell

Yes. That's what I was getting at - the low carb group made a more significant change from baseline than the low fat group.

In diet composition yes, but calorie intake was not significantly different at 6 or 12 month and LC was 160 cal lower (11%) at 3 months (P=0.0456)

The odd thing (to me) is that both groups kept to a reported intake of at least 500 cals below baseline yet after 3 months both groups regained some weight.

yarwell

I don't think accepting self reported caloric intakes on diets that are structured completely different from each other to prove a theory works.

Why are they structured differently ? one group was told to restrict fats, the other carbs. Neither had a calorie goal.

It would be odd if the randomisation put all the under-reporters in one group and over-reporters in the other, this time it even managed to spread out the races fairly evenly.

parkscs

Yes. That's what I was getting at - the low carb group made a more significant change from baseline than the low fat group.

In diet composition yes, but calorie intake was not significantly different at 6 or 12 month and LC was 160 cal lower (11%) at 3 months (P=0.0456)

The odd thing (to me) is that both groups kept to a reported intake of at least 500 cals below baseline yet after 3 months both groups regained some weight.

That just reinforces how well the average person logs their food. Especially after 6 or 9 months and some results, it's easy to get a bit complacent. That's also why I typically feel like banging my head on the keyboard when someone recommends another person eat more after their weight loss has stopped for a few months. Just because they wrote down X calories doesn't mean they are grossing or even netting X calories. That just means they logged X calories. I also thought the numbers in that study with regard to carbs were pretty interesting. I seem to recall their cap was 40g/day, but didn't I see earlier in this thread that the low carbers were averaging 90+ grams per day - and that's just what they logged?

amusedmonkey

Yes. That's what I was getting at - the low carb group made a more significant change from baseline than the low fat group.

In diet composition yes, but calorie intake was not significantly different at 6 or 12 month and LC was 160 cal lower (11%) at 3 months (P=0.0456)

The odd thing (to me) is that both groups kept to a reported intake of at least 500 cals below baseline yet after 3 months both groups regained some weight.

The margin of error could be higher in the self-reported moderate carb group. That's because, in my own experience, it's easier to nibble around and forget that you did when you are doing a moderate carb diet. In the case of low carb you have to consciously cook and prepare the food, and due to the satiating effect of protein and fat you are less prone to snacking, not to mention that food is less available as packaged, ready to eat, and easy to access products to snack on.

The regain later may have been the result of "a little bit more won't hurt" mentality. After a while almost everyone goes through that phase.

likitisplit

There is one person and one person alone that is responsible for your health as an adult and that is you. Your health is your responsibility and if you become overweight or obese it is because you have neglected your health. You may have reasons for that neglect associated with job or family but that does not mean you did not neglect that one aspect of your life. You may have various medical conditions that make your metabolism different than that of the population (hyper- hypothyroidism, PCOS etc) but then it is your responsibility to recognize that, understand your maintenance level and adjust accordingly. Placing blame on something beyond your control is just acceptance that being unhealthy is somehow your destiny and that is NOT the kind of mindset that is going to improve your life.

Harsh reality time. If you are obese, if you are overweight, that is a self-infliicted condition regardless of what your life or medical situation may be. If there is a condition that forces you to gain weight to an unhealthy level regardless of what you do I have not heard of it.

There CAN be things outside of your control that make you scrawny, or skinny, or unhealthily thin...but there isn't such a thing for being overweight.

Actually, they believe PCOS to be genetic. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2776334/) I listed this study because it is a case study and sites many other studies for those of you who are interested.
I'm not sure why being "scrawny" is outside of your control any more than an inherited gene defect the effects the way your body processes insulin. I know about this particular disease because I suffer from it. I also know how difficult it is to get a Dr. to take you seriously when you are seriously suffering and trying to lose weight and be healthy, but you aren't losing any weight because you have a disorder.

edited for clarity

I wasn't claiming that for someone with PCOS it is their fault that they have PCOS, of course having PCOS is beyond their control. That said being overweight is within their control, even if they have PCOS. PCOS has affects on your metabolism for sure but it doesn't mean you are doomed to be overweight. My ex had PCOS and she was quite fit, she just had to make sure she ate frequently enough or she would get groggy.

I totally agree with you. I have PCOS and if I had blamed it for my weight I wouldn't have been able to lose 90 pounds and counting. Having a medical condition only makes it more possible to gain faster and lose slower, it does not alter the gain/loss process itself - eating over/under maintenance. It's self-inflected, be it by continuously going over maintenance, not caring enough to watch/notice weight change, or by simply not looking for information about one's condition.

I'm actually ambivalent about this. Yes, what you put in your mouth is your choice.

But, when I was nursing and gaining weight, I was HUNGRY all the time. Like rob-a-bank hungry. Hunger is pretty compelling. It's designed to be. It can push somebody to take major risks for survival.

I really can't leave it at "it was your choice" for somebody eating the extra sandwich or three in that situation.

I see a lot of people with a lot of excuses. And I see a lot of successful people who, by self-report, have moved beyond them (me being one of them). There's probably more people with excuses than there are people who are being motivated by biological drives to unhealthy behaviors. But I know there are people in the second group too.

lemurcat12

I don't think accepting self reported caloric intakes on diets that are structured completely different from each other to prove a theory works.

Why are they structured differently ? one group was told to restrict fats, the other carbs. Neither had a calorie goal.

It would be odd if the randomisation put all the under-reporters in one group and over-reporters in the other, this time it even managed to spread out the races fairly evenly.

One restriction required a substantial change in the diet, one did not. IME, any change which requires someone on the SAD to become more mindful about their diet, as making the significant change would, is likely to help with calorie restriction. Add to that that the low carb diet by definition keeps out foods that are more commonly over eaten, whereas the fat restriction isn't high enough to do that. (At 30 percent it's not really low. They were doing 35 percent before.)

My suspicion, contrary to this, is that a real low fat diet would have performed even worse, but that's because I believe that low carb is on average more satiating than low fat, especially if low fat people compensate with certain kinds of carbs.

The effect was also greatest when people were focusing on changing the diet, in the early period. Again, consistent with common sense.

amusedmonkey

There is one person and one person alone that is responsible for your health as an adult and that is you. Your health is your responsibility and if you become overweight or obese it is because you have neglected your health. You may have reasons for that neglect associated with job or family but that does not mean you did not neglect that one aspect of your life. You may have various medical conditions that make your metabolism different than that of the population (hyper- hypothyroidism, PCOS etc) but then it is your responsibility to recognize that, understand your maintenance level and adjust accordingly. Placing blame on something beyond your control is just acceptance that being unhealthy is somehow your destiny and that is NOT the kind of mindset that is going to improve your life.

Harsh reality time. If you are obese, if you are overweight, that is a self-infliicted condition regardless of what your life or medical situation may be. If there is a condition that forces you to gain weight to an unhealthy level regardless of what you do I have not heard of it.

There CAN be things outside of your control that make you scrawny, or skinny, or unhealthily thin...but there isn't such a thing for being overweight.

Actually, they believe PCOS to be genetic. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2776334/) I listed this study because it is a case study and sites many other studies for those of you who are interested.
I'm not sure why being "scrawny" is outside of your control any more than an inherited gene defect the effects the way your body processes insulin. I know about this particular disease because I suffer from it. I also know how difficult it is to get a Dr. to take you seriously when you are seriously suffering and trying to lose weight and be healthy, but you aren't losing any weight because you have a disorder.

edited for clarity

I wasn't claiming that for someone with PCOS it is their fault that they have PCOS, of course having PCOS is beyond their control. That said being overweight is within their control, even if they have PCOS. PCOS has affects on your metabolism for sure but it doesn't mean you are doomed to be overweight. My ex had PCOS and she was quite fit, she just had to make sure she ate frequently enough or she would get groggy.

I totally agree with you. I have PCOS and if I had blamed it for my weight I wouldn't have been able to lose 90 pounds and counting. Having a medical condition only makes it more possible to gain faster and lose slower, it does not alter the gain/loss process itself - eating over/under maintenance. It's self-inflected, be it by continuously going over maintenance, not caring enough to watch/notice weight change, or by simply not looking for information about one's condition.

I'm actually ambivalent about this. Yes, what you put in your mouth is your choice.

But, when I was nursing and gaining weight, I was HUNGRY all the time. Like rob-a-bank hungry. Hunger is pretty compelling. It's designed to be. It can push somebody to take major risks for survival.

I really can't leave it at "it was your choice" for somebody eating the extra sandwich or three in that situation.

I see a lot of people with a lot of excuses. And I see a lot of successful people who, by self-report, have moved beyond them (me being one of them). There's probably more people with excuses than there are people who are being motivated by biological drives to unhealthy behaviors. But I know there are people in the second group too.

Believe me, I had (and have) these days when all I want is to eat nonstop. The solution could be as simple as making lower calorie and more filling choices combined with eating at maintenance until it passes. Excuses are just excuses. There is more than one way to tackle hurdles, victimizing oneself is not one of them.

These people may need to be more creative with their approach, seeking medical help if all fails, but it just boils down to choice. Do I choose to stay the same weight or lose it? This depends on which of the choices has more desirable consequences to me. If one chooses to stay fat because losing weight and maintaining it does not sound appealing or is not worth the effort, that's great! It's when these same people cry victim that annoys me.

Even after I chose to lose weight I went through a 5 month period about a year ago where I chose, consciously, to maintain for a while. At the time, maintenance sounded more appealing to me than losing weight and served my goals better because I was going through some rough times. Rough times did not "force" me to press pause, choosing to focus on one aspect of my life more than the other did. And that's fine. I knew the reasons and the consequences and I willingly chose to go that route.

likitisplit

There is one person and one person alone that is responsible for your health as an adult and that is you. Your health is your responsibility and if you become overweight or obese it is because you have neglected your health. You may have reasons for that neglect associated with job or family but that does not mean you did not neglect that one aspect of your life. You may have various medical conditions that make your metabolism different than that of the population (hyper- hypothyroidism, PCOS etc) but then it is your responsibility to recognize that, understand your maintenance level and adjust accordingly. Placing blame on something beyond your control is just acceptance that being unhealthy is somehow your destiny and that is NOT the kind of mindset that is going to improve your life.

Harsh reality time. If you are obese, if you are overweight, that is a self-infliicted condition regardless of what your life or medical situation may be. If there is a condition that forces you to gain weight to an unhealthy level regardless of what you do I have not heard of it.

There CAN be things outside of your control that make you scrawny, or skinny, or unhealthily thin...but there isn't such a thing for being overweight.

Actually, they believe PCOS to be genetic. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2776334/) I listed this study because it is a case study and sites many other studies for those of you who are interested.
I'm not sure why being "scrawny" is outside of your control any more than an inherited gene defect the effects the way your body processes insulin. I know about this particular disease because I suffer from it. I also know how difficult it is to get a Dr. to take you seriously when you are seriously suffering and trying to lose weight and be healthy, but you aren't losing any weight because you have a disorder.

edited for clarity

I wasn't claiming that for someone with PCOS it is their fault that they have PCOS, of course having PCOS is beyond their control. That said being overweight is within their control, even if they have PCOS. PCOS has affects on your metabolism for sure but it doesn't mean you are doomed to be overweight. My ex had PCOS and she was quite fit, she just had to make sure she ate frequently enough or she would get groggy.

I totally agree with you. I have PCOS and if I had blamed it for my weight I wouldn't have been able to lose 90 pounds and counting. Having a medical condition only makes it more possible to gain faster and lose slower, it does not alter the gain/loss process itself - eating over/under maintenance. It's self-inflected, be it by continuously going over maintenance, not caring enough to watch/notice weight change, or by simply not looking for information about one's condition.

I'm actually ambivalent about this. Yes, what you put in your mouth is your choice.

But, when I was nursing and gaining weight, I was HUNGRY all the time. Like rob-a-bank hungry. Hunger is pretty compelling. It's designed to be. It can push somebody to take major risks for survival.

I really can't leave it at "it was your choice" for somebody eating the extra sandwich or three in that situation.

I see a lot of people with a lot of excuses. And I see a lot of successful people who, by self-report, have moved beyond them (me being one of them). There's probably more people with excuses than there are people who are being motivated by biological drives to unhealthy behaviors. But I know there are people in the second group too.

Believe me, I had (and have) these days when all I want is to eat nonstop. The solution could be as simple as making lower calorie and more filling choices combined with eating at maintenance until it passes. Excuses are just excuses. There is more than one way to tackle hurdles, victimizing oneself is not one of them.

These people may need to be more creative with their approach, seeking medical help if all fails, but it just boils down to choice. Do I chose to stay the same weight or lose it? This depends on which of the choices has more desirable consequences to me. If one chooses to stay fat because losing weight and maintaining it does not sound appealing or is not worth the effort, that's great! It's when these same people cry victim that annoys me.

Even after I chose to lose weight I went through a 5 month period about a year ago where I chose, consciously, to maintain for a while. At that time, maintenance sounded more appealing to me than losing weight and served my goals better because I was going through some rough times. Rough times did not "force" me to press pause, choosing to focus on one aspect of my life more than the other did. And that's fine. I knew the reasons and the consequences and I willingly chose to go that route.

I have days when I want to eat all the time. What I had then was months where I was ravenous before, during and after meals. It was very different.

Exercise, when I finally had time to do it, helped. Lowering my body fat helped A LOT. Learning how to lose weight on an adequate number of calories so I wasn't forcing myself to binge was critical.

So, yes, I was able to find ways to work through the situation. And it was actually pretty easy when I had all the pieces together.

But I know how unhelpful somebody saying "you just need to take personal responsibility" is when you are taking all the personal responsibility you can and are hurting and nothing is working.

I agree. Personal responsibility is the answer. But I feel ambivalent about taking a hard line.

Need2Exerc1se

Interesting article in today's New York Times.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/02/health/low-carb-vs-low-fat-diet.html

From the article:

“To my knowledge, this is one of the first long-term trials that’s given these diets without calorie restrictions,” said Dariush Mozaffarian, the dean of the Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy at Tufts University, who was not involved in the new study. “It shows that in a free-living setting, cutting your carbs helps you lose weight without focusing on calories. And that’s really important because someone can change what they eat more easily than trying to cut down on their calories.”

Flies in the face of everything we believe here.

Does it? Granted, I very knew to this site, but I would assume there are just as many struggling here as elsewhere when focusing on calories alone.

I do wonder though why they chose to put low-fat up against low-carb, though. Doctors and scientists who study nutrition have been against low-fat diets for quite some time, especially if weight loss is the only goal. Your local GP, who probably does not keep up with nutrition as s/he should, may still recommend it, though. It's pretty common knowledge that eating things like olive oil, avocado, oily fish and nuts are recommended for good health.

You can't review a study on low-fat vs low-carb and rationally conclude that low-carb works better than counting calories. To know if calorie counting works better than low carb w/o calorie counting, one would have to study those ways of eating.

It wasn't comparing calorie counting to low carb w/o calorie counting. It was comparing a group with fat intake at 30% and a group with intake of carbs at 40g (so the low carb group had to focus more on counting than the "low" fat group. Neither one were specifically told to count their calories and limit themselves specifically below a calorie amount.

Even if people were wrong in what they reported (both groups being wrong), then what about the actual loss numbers at the end of it? For me , I'm not arguing against CICO, I'm saying the avenue to restrict your calorie in can be different than just the standard low cal and that when you eat low carb, even if you don't intend to restrict calories, you do because you just aren't as hungry. Simple as that. Some people may not be hungry eating high carb while restricting calories, but for many people, eating moderate protein and high fat keeps their hunger in check. Don't say you don't like blanket statements MrM and then proceed to make one yourself. Good for you for eating high carb and eating in calorie restriction, good for you for drinking Coke, but that doesn't mean nobody else can be hungry while eating high carb or think that Coke is worth it for the calories.

Who or what is MrM? You quoted my post, but seem to be aswering another.

My point was that the quote in the OP that said low-carb may be easier than counting calories, whether true or not, is not a conclusion one could make from the study, since the study did not compare counting calories to low-carb.

jtakingcareofherself

It sure does. A calorie is a calorie regardless if it comes from carrots or cookies, protein, fat or carbs. Weight loss is simple math, calories in versus calories out.

except it's not... simple math, that is.

for years i've shouted from the rooftops that the idea of "calories in < calories out = weight loss" simply did not work on me. i now have enough data to change that, but only slightly... my body only seems to work at about 75% efficiency, so the caloric deficit i'd need to create in order to manage the same rate of loss that everyone else has is unsustainable and downright dangerous. so if anyone wants proof that there are "special little snowflakes" in the world who aren't able to follow the dogmatic mantra, i'm it.

I suspect that your body's "efficiency" is about equal to your inability to accurately measure your intake.

You really enjoy the drive by insults.

And machines need oil to drive efficiently, don't they?

jtakingcareofherself

What is missing in this typical diatribe about CICO and low carb is reference to hormones, and the integral role they play in weight loss. Your body will not be able to use adipose cells for energy if your insulin is high. That is a fact.

And weight loss is one thing, and weight maintenance is another.

Catter_05

and when step A proves, on multiple data points and calculations, that my "maintenance" level is drastically below my expected calculated BMR, and that the deficits have to be so low as to be in the realm of dangerous (both mentally and physically), then my first priority has to be determining what medical factors are impeding proper weight loss.

As for your efficiency comment if you are saying your BMR is much LOWER than expected that means your body is actually EXTREMELY efficient, much more so than the average population. So I am not sure why you are saying operating at low efficiency.

what i mean is that at a 500-calorie deficit, the daily amount needed to lose one pound per week, i will only lose about .7lbs. it puts my BMR under 1,200 calories a day, which means to lose weight i have to drop down to less than 1,000 calories a day. it's unsustainable and borders on dangerous.

Then exercise more or lose weight at a slower rate, I guess I don't get it. Nothing says you have to lose weight based solely on your BMR nor do you have to lose weight at the rate of 1 pound per week. Nothing here makes CICO wrong or weight loss impossible so I guess what is the point here...that it is hard? Yeah of course it is hard.

Calculators tell me that I maintain at 3000 calories a day, but I don't...I maintain at more like 2500 calories a day. So what do I do about that? Well I adjust to what my body actually does and go off of that and I ignore the calculators. The calculators are based on population averages and assumptions. Just because the calculator says I could be eating 500 calories more when I found that I can't doesn't make me mope about it though nor does it make me think there is something wrong with me.

To be honest, I have had this disorder for a very long time and have never been obese. I have probably been at the high end of healthy to slightly overweight since puberty. During my high school years I was on the track team, exercising constantly and I could never lose weight. I barely ate. It wasn't that I wanted to be skinny, I just wanted to be thinner.
I went to the Dr. and no one could tell me what was wrong. It wasn't until fertility issues became a problem that I was diagnosed. This was mostly because we moved to a metropolitan area that had specialists who could diagnose and treat me. From what I've read, I am actually pretty lucky that I have managed to stay in a healthy bmi range as most people who have PCOS can't. There is a lot more information out there now though. In the 80's and 90's when I was suffering, information about diets and disorders were not as readily available.
I guess my point is that it's easy to point your finger at people and say it's their fault, but I think it can be rather discouraging, at least it was to me, when people tell you it's in your head or it's in your control. When your body doesn't work right it really isn't your fault. Especially, when no one has told you what you can do to fix it. I have finally been able to lose some of the 20 lbs that has been clinging to me with medical intervention and a low carb approach.
But, for people who are undiagnosed the frustration and pointlessness that is felt when you are exercising and barely eating and still the scale won't move, telling them it's their fault is just cruel and damaging.

Need2Exerc1se

Interesting article in today's New York Times.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/02/health/low-carb-vs-low-fat-diet.html

From the article:

“To my knowledge, this is one of the first long-term trials that’s given these diets without calorie restrictions,” said Dariush Mozaffarian, the dean of the Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy at Tufts University, who was not involved in the new study. “It shows that in a free-living setting, cutting your carbs helps you lose weight without focusing on calories. And that’s really important because someone can change what they eat more easily than trying to cut down on their calories.”

Flies in the face of everything we believe here.

Does it? Granted, I very knew to this site, but I would assume there are just as many struggling here as elsewhere when focusing on calories alone.

I do wonder though why they chose to put low-fat up against low-carb, though. Doctors and scientists who study nutrition have been against low-fat diets for quite some time, especially if weight loss is the only goal. Your local GP, who probably does not keep up with nutrition as s/he should, may still recommend it, though. It's pretty common knowledge that eating things like olive oil, avocado, oily fish and nuts are recommended for good health.

You can't review a study on low-fat vs low-carb and rationally conclude that low-carb works better than counting calories. To know if calorie counting works better than low carb w/o calorie counting, one would have to study those ways of eating.

It wasn't comparing calorie counting to low carb w/o calorie counting. It was comparing a group with fat intake at 30% and a group with intake of carbs at 40g (so the low carb group had to focus more on counting than the "low" fat group. Neither one were specifically told to count their calories and limit themselves specifically below a calorie amount.

Even if people were wrong in what they reported (both groups being wrong), then what about the actual loss numbers at the end of it? For me , I'm not arguing against CICO, I'm saying the avenue to restrict your calorie in can be different than just the standard low cal and that when you eat low carb, even if you don't intend to restrict calories, you do because you just aren't as hungry. Simple as that. Some people may not be hungry eating high carb while restricting calories, but for many people, eating moderate protein and high fat keeps their hunger in check. Don't say you don't like blanket statements MrM and then proceed to make one yourself. Good for you for eating high carb and eating in calorie restriction, good for you for drinking Coke, but that doesn't mean nobody else can be hungry while eating high carb or think that Coke is worth it for the calories.

Who or what is MrM? You quoted my post, but seem to be aswering another.

My point was that the quote in the OP that said low-carb may be easier than counting calories, whether true or not, is not a conclusion one could make from the study, since the study did not compare counting calories to low-carb.

I'm MrM.

OIC Pleased to meet you. It seems your message was misdirected to me.

rprussell2004

There are two types of people in the States: Those who enjoy a LCHF diet and the myriad associated benefits, and those who mindlessly mock us.

Give up the arguing, folks. It's pointless. The 40-year-old "Food Pyramid" is too entrenched.

Let the people shlork down their bread and potatoes and leave us the bacon. They'll die off soon enough.

eric_sg61

There are two types of people in the States: Those who enjoy a LCHF diet and the myriad associated benefits, and those who mindlessly mock us.

Give up the arguing, folks. It's pointless. The 40-year-old "Food Pyramid" is too entrenched.

Let the people shlork down their bread and potatoes and leave us the bacon. They'll die off soon enough.

LOL another LCHF person who thinks bacon is healthy..........lol just lol