Is anyone on a low-fat diet? Why?

Natihilator
Natihilator Posts: 1,778 Member
edited November 12 in Health and Weight Loss
I came across a 6-week eating plan that someone was given by a nutritionist, and they swear by it and said they lost 25lbs. in 6 weeks time (I know that may not be realistic or healthy and is relative to their body, but still I am in a plateau and need something to kick-start my weight loss again) Upon closer inspection I realized that while the diet allowed carbs like brown&white rice and oatmeal and fruit, as well as six 3-ounce portions of lean protein a day, it restricts all dairy, cheese, oils and nuts. That made me really hesitant because I know that fat is integral in a balanced diet, and helps with keeping hunger away.

My question is, is it a bad idea to follow a low-fat diet, even if it's for a short time to get out of a plateau? When and for whom is a low-fat diet appropriate?

Also, please no responses saying how if I know that fats are good then why am I asking, I'm looking for more than sassy 'you should know better' answers :P

Replies

  • Natihilator
    Natihilator Posts: 1,778 Member
    Bump
  • LesliePierceRN
    LesliePierceRN Posts: 860 Member
    My initial reaction is that by cutting out the fats, they significantly reduce calories.. otherwise, i can't see the validity in it, and of course, it's not good long term, so why bother? I don't like the idea of having to learn a series of "tricks" to lose weight when there's a tried and true mathematical equation that works every time. Move more than you eat. I for the life of me can never figure out why "nutritionists" get on these bandwagons when they of all people should know better.
  • Natihilator
    Natihilator Posts: 1,778 Member
    My initial reaction is that by cutting out the fats, they significantly reduce calories.. otherwise, i can't see the validity in it, and of course, it's not good long term, so why bother? I don't like the idea of having to learn a series of "tricks" to lose weight when there's a tried and true mathematical equation that works every time. Move more than you eat. I for the life of me can never figure out why "nutritionists" get on these bandwagons when they of all people should know better.

    Yeah, the nutritionist aspect kept me from completely writing it off. I feel like I know what to eat, but I want to follow a more regimented plan, I work better within constraints implemented by others. Thanks for your input!
  • jadedone
    jadedone Posts: 2,446 Member
    I think Dean Ornish advocates super low fat diets. Or it could be someone else.

    I think there are some people that would react well to this sort of diet, since our body chemistries are so different.

    I would not be one of them, as if I do not have sufficient fat I am STARVING (moreso than protein actually).
  • bkandisjj29
    bkandisjj29 Posts: 172
    I am on a low-fat diet currently to try to control my gall stones until surgery.

    But my first reaction to your post was that maybe the nutritionist prescribed this diet because the person starting the diet had been eating a lot of bad fats, fried foods, junk foods, etc... and the nutritionist was aiming towards heart health or good cholestoral (sp)?
  • danifo0811
    danifo0811 Posts: 544 Member
    I used one when I had severe heartburn. if I kept my fat intake to less than 25 g/ day it did help but not eliminate my problem. I wasn't trying to lose weight so my calories were reasonable. I probably lost about 1 lbs a month while I was on it.

    I had surgery because I could not imagine living like that and I was concerned about vitamin absorption.
  • Edithrenee
    Edithrenee Posts: 546 Member
    i lost 70 pounds on low fat, my thing is there is fat in everythign we eat and i hear the arguement we need good fats.. If im fat i dont need fat sorry but like i say if there is fat in a bout everything we eat then i dont need to seek out eating fat.. I feel it is like this.. you have fat on the body and eat low fat is easier and healther for me.. I cant take the low carbs high protein diets..

    I gained off of those I realy think it is the individual perosn however what works foe me may not work for everyone..
  • rockerbabyy
    rockerbabyy Posts: 2,258 Member
    i lost 70 pounds on low fat, my thing is there is fat in everythign we eat and i hear the arguement we need good fats.. If im fat i dont need fat sorry but like i say if there is fat in a bout everything we eat then i dont need to seek out eating fat.. I feel it is like this.. you have fat on the body and eat low fat is easier and healther for me.. I cant take the low carbs high protein diets..

    I gained off of those I realy think it is the individual perosn however what works foe me may not work for everyone..
    everyone has fat on their body - even people at healthy weights.
    fat doesnt make you fat, too many calories does.
    you dont have to do high-this, low-that.. my carbs and fat are set at 30%, my protein is at 40..pretty balanced really.. im sure i could make it more even if i wanted to, but im happy where im at.
  • Natihilator
    Natihilator Posts: 1,778 Member
    But my first reaction to your post was that maybe the nutritionist prescribed this diet because the person starting the diet had been eating a lot of bad fats, fried foods, junk foods, etc... and the nutritionist was aiming towards heart health or good cholestoral (sp)?

    Yeah, that crossed my mind too. I never had a diet high in fried foods and saturated fats, even when I didn't try to eat healthy, so I think I'll just adapt this eating plan to include nuts and olive oil and see how it goes.
  • LoraF83
    LoraF83 Posts: 15,694 Member
    I think most people who do low-fat diets get in the trap of buying low-fat branded food. Most people will not eat a plan as outlined by a nutritionist (which will tell you to avoid dairy, eat brown rice, lean protien, like you said) but will instead buy items that are labeled low fat. My problem with that is a low-fat label often equals additives to make it such, or to make it taste good. And I don't see how adding extra chemicals/compound/additives/etc could help me lose weight.
  • grandmamere
    grandmamere Posts: 155 Member
    Ok, here is what I did back in 2005.I reduced my calorie intake to 1200 (max) a day, fat percent 20 or less, sugar limited, and walked everyday for 3 months then went to strength training 3 x a week and cardio 3 x a week. lost 50 lbs in 6 months. I've set my goals to 1200 cal and fat percent at 20, carbs and protein at 40 each. Hope this helps you too. FYI due to 3 surgerys (work related injuries) I gained it all back because I stopped excersing AND did not watch what I ate, I just ate everything and sat on my backside the past 4 years (2007 - 2011) and have paid the price dearly. ARGH, stupid me, etc, etc, etc, ALL my fault and I hope to get back to being a healthy, lean me.
  • lizzys
    lizzys Posts: 841 Member
    i'm on a calorie diet but i try not to go over my fat grams i have way to much fat around my tummy
  • Natihilator
    Natihilator Posts: 1,778 Member
    Thanks for the responses. I don't buy into "low-fat" labeled food anymore (added sugar and half of the satisfying flavour? no thanks) I have a feeling doing a low-fat diet will make me feel too forbidden from the foods with healthy fats I enjoy, and since I have no medical reason to do it I've decided to stick to my 40-30-30 carbs/protein/fat ratio.
  • grinch031
    grinch031 Posts: 1,679
    My initial reaction is that by cutting out the fats, they significantly reduce calories.. otherwise, i can't see the validity in it, and of course, it's not good long term, so why bother? I don't like the idea of having to learn a series of "tricks" to lose weight when there's a tried and true mathematical equation that works every time. Move more than you eat. I for the life of me can never figure out why "nutritionists" get on these bandwagons when they of all people should know better.

    This tried and true mathematical equation has demonstrated failure in the long term for most individuals. When people lose a lot of weight their metabolism will inevitably slow down, making it very difficult to keep a caloric deficit/balance going. Not only that, but living in a post-weight loss state means battling a lot of unsatisfied hunger.

    Besides the belief that cutting the more calorically dense foods (fat) would result in automatic calorie reduction, another reason for the low-fat diets are because of early studies that wrongfully implicated fat in cardiovascular disease.
  • Natihilator
    Natihilator Posts: 1,778 Member
    My initial reaction is that by cutting out the fats, they significantly reduce calories.. otherwise, i can't see the validity in it, and of course, it's not good long term, so why bother? I don't like the idea of having to learn a series of "tricks" to lose weight when there's a tried and true mathematical equation that works every time. Move more than you eat. I for the life of me can never figure out why "nutritionists" get on these bandwagons when they of all people should know better.

    This tried and true mathematical equation has demonstrated failure in the long term for most individuals. When people lose a lot of weight their metabolism will inevitably slow down, making it very difficult to keep a caloric deficit/balance going. Not only that, but living in a post-weight loss state means battling a lot of unsatisfied hunger.

    Sorry, I don't understand what you're getting at? If it's that long-term weight-loss is never successful, that's not really relevant to the topic at hand.
  • grinch031
    grinch031 Posts: 1,679
    My initial reaction is that by cutting out the fats, they significantly reduce calories.. otherwise, i can't see the validity in it, and of course, it's not good long term, so why bother? I don't like the idea of having to learn a series of "tricks" to lose weight when there's a tried and true mathematical equation that works every time. Move more than you eat. I for the life of me can never figure out why "nutritionists" get on these bandwagons when they of all people should know better.

    This tried and true mathematical equation has demonstrated failure in the long term for most individuals. When people lose a lot of weight their metabolism will inevitably slow down, making it very difficult to keep a caloric deficit/balance going. Not only that, but living in a post-weight loss state means battling a lot of unsatisfied hunger.

    Sorry, I don't understand what you're getting at? If it's that long-term weight-loss is never successful, that's not really relevant to the topic at hand.

    Well it was surely a relevant response to the quoted poster. The low-fat diet is one approach that demonstrates calories are not the only variable that matters in weight loss and health. Although there is a belief that dietary fat causes health problems (unproven), and there is also a belief that cutting dietary fat reduces overall calorie intake (again unproven).
  • mnichol
    mnichol Posts: 642
    Yes, trying to be kind to my heart and arteries!
  • michal121
    michal121 Posts: 5
    Fat is high in calories. Some risk factor of high fat are cancer, diabetes, liver and kidney disease, breathing and sleeping problems. Low fat diet support weight loss because weight loss requires a reduction in calories.
    Beyond diet review
This discussion has been closed.