Why Do YOU Eat Low Carb?
Replies
-
So, after reading through all of this, and the effect low carb diets have had on people, I think what is really happening is people are eliminating food sensitivities they have, and thus losing weight, no more migraines, bloating, upset stomach, better sleep, more energy, etc.,etc.,etc. All of the above are symptoms of food allergies (which I suffer from all of them, including Meniere Syndrome symptoms, among others). The most common food intolerance's: Wheat, gluten, white rice, potatoes, and various other grains. What do all of these foods have in common? Our ancestors didn't eat them.
So I'm not buying this 20g of carbs a day thing. We require carbs to function at 100%. All everyone is experiencing is the elimination of foods their bodies can digest. They've just cut out a whack load of other foods as well.
As for the "our biology is designed to store it when we come across it," I'm sorry, but you're full of crap. Our ancestors were NOT carnivores. They were omnivores, leaning more towards herbivores. How often do you see a group of chimps chasing down a gazelle and ripping it's carcass into itty bitty pieces and swallowing them? Granted, they don't eat a lot of grains, because they're not readily available. 90% of their diet comes from fruit and veggies.0 -
interesting.bump..for later.0
-
Sugar is toxic.
Carbohydrate is rare in nature and our biology is designed to store it when we come across it.
Insulin (triggered by carbohydrate) suppresses important hormones like Ghrelin and Leptin, that control hunger and satiation.
Carbohydrate causes an imbalance of good and bad cholesterol and prevents the body from regulating it appropriately.
Carbohydrate causes hardening of arterial walls, causing clogged arteries that cholesterol attempts to repair. This becomes a chronic issue and is commonly blamed on cholesterol and fat.
Carbohydrate can cause insulin insensitivity leading to diabetes and other chronic issues like metabolic syndrome.
Many types of cancer are accelerated in growth by carbohydrate because cancers develop insulin receptors.
Carbohydrate effects the brain the same way many addictive drugs do.
Carbohydrate addicts suffer with withdraw symptoms when they quit cold turkey.
Also, Carbohydrate is 100% NOT NECESSARY IN THE DIET. We only need fat and protein.
So why eat it unless you have a specific purpose and a means to use that carbohydrate effectively.
It is technically true that you don't need carbohydrates in a set (and bad) definition, but still a horrible idea.
"Carbohydrates provide your body with the most important source of energy, used in each of your body's cells, tissues and organs. This energy is used to fuel all of the activities it takes for your body to live. According to the Mayo Clinic, carbohydrates such as whole grains and dietary fiber may help reduce your risk of developing cardiovascular disease, obesity and type 2 diabetes. Fiber, found in whole grains, fruits, vegetables and legumes, is essential for digestive health.
Health Risks of Eliminating Carbohydrates
Without including healthy carbohydrates in your diet, you are at an increased risk for certain adverse health conditions. Eliminating carbohydrates and replacing those calories with fatty sources of protein can increase your intake of saturated fat and cholesterol, known to increase your risk of heart disease and certain types of cancer. Eliminating carbohydrates also eliminates fiber from your diet, which can contribute to constipation and other gastrointestinal problems. Ketosis, a condition that occurs in the body by incomplete fat breakdown, arises with low carbohydrate intake and can cause weakness, nausea, dehydration, dizziness and irritability."
Read more: http://www.livestrong.com/article/419298-can-you-live-without-carbohydrates/#ixzz235JI5AXB
So basically... No. To everything you said. Because I think Mayo Clinic knows a bit more about health and medicine than you.
I've read repeatedly from multiple sources that fat and cholesterol intake has little to no impact on heart disease. In fact, there are plenty of accounts were people are eating mostly carbohydrate, are on medication for cholesterol, and have heart disease.
Those symptoms you described are also temporary and sourced from carbohydrate addiction. I also get plenty of fiber from vegetables and I'm quite regular.
There are also plenty of cases were people lived solely on protein and fat and did not have any of the issues you stated above.
I don't suggest you rely on a single source for information.
Edit: If anyone wishes to discuss this further, PM me. I have errands to run. (I sure hope I don't collapse and die from lacking carbs)
I have to agree I've been seeing more and more information linking sugars to plaque build up and questioning the rolls of fat on Plaque build up. I think it is safe to say there are still open questions and a healthy debate.0 -
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/welcome/guidelines
1. No Attacks or Insults and No Reciprocation
a) Do not attack, mock, or otherwise insult others. You can respectfully disagree with the message or topic, but you cannot attack the messenger
Good conversation after cleaning up a bit.
:flowerforyou: MFP Moderator0 -
Low carb diets are only useful for shredding body fat in short periods of time, they're not for endurance or performance athletes like yourself.
4-6 weeks is the maximum recommended safe time to be on a low carb diet (25-30% carb) After that all kinds of health problems arise.
Safe carbs would be 40% or higher. Body builders and performance athletes stick around 50% carbs at higher caloric intake (low glycemic of course)
But for the average Joe getting off the couch we want to kick start that fat loss by metabolizing more fat stores and using energy from there, instead of lots of carbs in the tummy / blood stream =D0 -
This is a good reason why people should not pick up Gary Taubes books.
I liked his books. His larger book, Good Calories Bad Calories is packed full of referenced research. OP, this is a good place to start.
Some people knock him, but everyone has their critics weather is rational or not.
Dr. Lustig goes in depth as to why sugar is toxic. I would suggest you read his book and or watch his YT videos.
Hooboy! Taubes and Lustig. The cavalcade of Bozos! LOL0 -
Sugar is toxic.
Carbohydrate is rare in nature and our biology is designed to store it when we come across it.
Insulin (triggered by carbohydrate) suppresses important hormones like Ghrelin and Leptin, that control hunger and satiation.
Carbohydrate causes an imbalance of good and bad cholesterol and prevents the body from regulating it appropriately.
Carbohydrate causes hardening of arterial walls, causing clogged arteries that cholesterol attempts to repair. This becomes a chronic issue and is commonly blamed on cholesterol and fat.
Carbohydrate can cause insulin insensitivity leading to diabetes and other chronic issues like metabolic syndrome.
Many types of cancer are accelerated in growth by carbohydrate because cancers develop insulin receptors.
Carbohydrate effects the brain the same way many addictive drugs do.
Carbohydrate addicts suffer with withdraw symptoms when they quit cold turkey.
Also, Carbohydrate is 100% NOT NECESSARY IN THE DIET. We only need fat and protein.
So why eat it unless you have a specific purpose and a means to use that carbohydrate effectively.
This is pretty much nonsense.
Yup!
Wow lol. Do they realize how wrong they are :S I mean some of these things can happen, but it's not carbs fault lol. It's your a unhealthy this and that's fault allot of the time.0 -
I eat low carb because I have PCOS and due to PCOS I have an insulin resistance. I have lost 51lbs since 4/31/12. I feel better and have more energy since switching my eating but I think that has a lot to do with my weight loss as well. If I could eat more carbs and not continue to gain weight I would, I do love quinoa, homemade breads, and LOVE fruit but need to keep my intake down until I get to goal weight then I can slowly start adding low GI/complex carbs in slowly to find my body's balance.0
-
My carbs come from veg, dairy, and fruit (in that order). Since I'm closer to my goal weight I've upped the carbs a bit, but always try to stay under 75.
I have been doing this for almost a year and a half and I stick with lower carb because it works for me. It is the ONLY thing I've been able to stick with and see results, and because I come from a long line of Type 2's including my gramma who has lost both legs and most of her vision to Diabetes and an uncle (who is like 5 minutes older than me) who has already been dx'd himself. I was morbidly obese for years and a gestational diabetic who had the monster huge babies that come with it. Some of those babies have special needs and I need to stick around and take care of them. Because of my weight loss, I have a better shot at that.
If low carb makes no sense to you, or doesn't work for you, awesome. Do what does make sense and works for you. I really don't understand the threads that seem to be about talking the rest of us out of it.0 -
Dr. Oz made me do it.0
-
wow, i must say there are a lot of people that have no idea what they are talking about, and it makes me really feel bad for them.0
-
Best answer.Dr. Oz made me do it.0 -
So, after reading through all of this, and the effect low carb diets have had on people, I think what is really happening is people are eliminating food sensitivities they have, and thus losing weight, no more migraines, bloating, upset stomach, better sleep, more energy, etc.,etc.,etc. All of the above are symptoms of food allergies (which I suffer from all of them, including Meniere Syndrome symptoms, among others). The most common food intolerance's: Wheat, gluten, white rice, potatoes, and various other grains. What do all of these foods have in common? Our ancestors didn't eat them.
So I'm not buying this 20g of carbs a day thing. We require carbs to function at 100%. All everyone is experiencing is the elimination of foods their bodies can digest. They've just cut out a whack load of other foods as well.
As for the "our biology is designed to store it when we come across it," I'm sorry, but you're full of crap. Our ancestors were NOT carnivores. They were omnivores, leaning more towards herbivores. How often do you see a group of chimps chasing down a gazelle and ripping it's carcass into itty bitty pieces and swallowing them? Granted, they don't eat a lot of grains, because they're not readily available. 90% of their diet comes from fruit and veggies.
As much as I advocate low carb, I understand that our lifestyles and our biology may not allow a 100% reductions for long periods of time, and our food doesn't either. I don't advocate 100% reductions. We need plant food just as much as we need protein and fat. There is a HUGE difference between 10-50g of carbs per day eating lots of veggies, and 300-500+g of carbs per day eating processed grains. Food sensitivities, I agree, are critical to address.
I also completely agree that our ancestors are omnivores, but that doesn't mean we need to eat 5-10x the carbs our ancestors did. 70-75% of our ancestors diet consisted of game. That's in calories. In bulk, yes plants take up a lot of the diet. It's not easy for a human to eat the 3-4k calories needed to sustain them in plants. Our ancestors didn't exactly sit idle talkign on forums all day. They were hard working people. That is why herbivores spend a 90% of their time eating. Also chimps are not human and their dietary requirements are quite different.
So a drastic reduction based on our new lifestyle helps dramatically.
People in my circles come to me, often frustrated, for advice on losing weight. I often see that their diet is mostly carbohydrate. All I suggest is a moderate reduction of carbs, eat enough protein and eat the rest in fat. Maintaining the deficit is important. Fat is needed for hormone production, and being fat-phobic is a recipe for failure. People often ignore important hormones that control our appetite and feelings of satiation, and eating to many crabs suppresses those important hormones.
I eat carbohydrate depending on my activity levels. If I'm at my desk doing nothing physical, I'm not going to eat a lot of carbs.
We don't have to abstain, we just need to consider the consequences of the food we eat and make good decisions. Carb reduction is a good idea. Complete elimination is not practical nor is it needed.
So back to my main point. Why eat carbs? Just get them naturally through a natural diet. The hormones will work themselves out and so will our body composition.0 -
I chose to cut out grains, starchy vegetables and limit my fruit intake by carbs instead of eating as much as I wanted as long as it fit in my calories. My goal was to get my carbs under 100 for the health benefits -- diabetes, heart disease and cancer are in my family. It was easy to eat under 100g just by cutting out the grains and starches but over the course of a few weeks I found that I responded even better to a lower level of carbs and now I try and keep my total carbs under 50g.
Since I'm responding so positively to eating this way I have to assume I have some degree of insulin resistance which makes sense because before on a diet ranging from 150g - 200g of carbs I would have occasional bouts of hypoglycemia if I went more than a couple hours without eating.
So the health benefits motivated me to start eating a low carb, high fat diet but the appetite control and the ability to get hungry, eat and be full is priceless. For the first time in years I don't have this low nagging hunger all the time that never gets satisfied. The best way I can describe it is when I was a kid playing outside and my mom calling me in to eat. I practically had to be forced inside but once I was sitting down I realized how hungry I was. I'd eat and everything tasted so good because I was hungry, I'd get full, stop eating and feel really satisfied for the rest of the night. That how I feel again and how imagine "normal" people feel as well.
I'd like to keep feeling like this so trust me when I say it's no hardship eating delicious food but having to sacrifice other delicious food to do it.
If you keep reading the wiki page you linked to it also says:Seriously, please expand your knowledge beyond a few sources of a fringe 'guru' and try to achieve a broader and more stable view of the world: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbohydrate (check out the third paragraph on its 'rarity' and how it "is 100% NOT NECESSARY IN THE DIET")
Carbohydrates are not necessary building blocks of other molecules, and the body can obtain all its energy from protein and fats.[10][11]0 -
I'm not exactly low-carb, but I'm on 40/30/30. 270 cals of protein is more satisfying to me than 270 of carbs. I also find that I get headaches when I eat too many starches. I love fruits and vegetables and I wouldn't trade them for the world, but a grain-based diet just doesn't work for me.0
-
sure, if you are doing intense workouts you are going to need the energy. But if you are not, you don't need all those carbs.0
-
I DON'T
I've tried... but "low carb" to me equates to about 180 grams of carbs... and that is a struggle for me. I'm way too addicted to fruit.....
Usually I eat about 350-450 grams of carbs a day. That keeps me happy...
Right now I'm only at about 160, and I'm grumpy!! 0 -
I HAVE NO IDEA IF THIS IS CORRECT, BUT FROM WHAT I HAVE READ ONLINE (EX. ATKINS.COM) IS THAT IF YOUR BODY DOESN'T HAVE CARBS TO USE AS FUEL IT WILL USE YOUR STORED FAT AS ITS FUEL RESOURCE. AND TO ME IT'S WORTH A TRY TO SEE IF I CAN DROP THE FIRST FEW POUNDS THIS WAY. I SERIOUSLY JUST SPENT ALL DAY YESTERDAY RESEARCHING THE ATKINS DIET AND TODAY IS MY FIRST DAY ON IT. I ONLY TOOK IN 20 G OF CARBS TODAY AND I FEEL LIKE I HAVE MORE ENERGY ALREADY! BUT AT SAME TIME I SIT BEHIND A DESK ALL DAY, SO MAYBE I DON'T NEED AS MUCH AS OTHER ACTIVE PEOPLE.
Why are you yelling?
& Of course atkins is going to advocate low-carb. That's what that diet is. Try research that's not biased.
^^LOL!
All caps = annoying!
Carbs in the form of fruits and vegetables are King.
Starchy carbs in the forms of bread, pasta, rice etc can be a problem. I eat Paleo but I'm not a fanatic about it. I feel so much better for it.0 -
So, after reading through all of this, and the effect low carb diets have had on people, I think what is really happening is people are eliminating food sensitivities they have, and thus losing weight, no more migraines, bloating, upset stomach, better sleep, more energy, etc.,etc.,etc. All of the above are symptoms of food allergies (which I suffer from all of them, including Meniere Syndrome symptoms, among others). The most common food intolerance's: Wheat, gluten, white rice, potatoes, and various other grains. What do all of these foods have in common? Our ancestors didn't eat them.
So I'm not buying this 20g of carbs a day thing. We require carbs to function at 100%. All everyone is experiencing is the elimination of foods their bodies can digest. They've just cut out a whack load of other foods as well.
As for the "our biology is designed to store it when we come across it," I'm sorry, but you're full of crap. Our ancestors were NOT carnivores. They were omnivores, leaning more towards herbivores. How often do you see a group of chimps chasing down a gazelle and ripping it's carcass into itty bitty pieces and swallowing them? Granted, they don't eat a lot of grains, because they're not readily available. 90% of their diet comes from fruit and veggies.
As much as I advocate low carb, I understand that our lifestyles and our biology may not allow a 100% reductions for long periods of time, and our food doesn't either. I don't advocate 100% reductions. We need plant food just as much as we need protein and fat. There is a HUGE difference between 10-50g of carbs per day eating lots of veggies, and 300-500+g of carbs per day eating processed grains. Food sensitivities, I agree, are critical to address.
I also completely agree that our ancestors are omnivores, but that doesn't mean we need to eat 5-10x the carbs our ancestors did. 70-75% of our ancestors diet consisted of game. That's in calories. In bulk, yes plants take up a lot of the diet. It's not easy for a human to eat the 3-4k calories needed to sustain them in plants. Our ancestors didn't exactly sit idle talkign on forums all day. They were hard working people. That is why herbivores spend a 90% of their time eating. Also chimps are not human and their dietary requirements are quite different.
So a drastic reduction based on our new lifestyle helps dramatically.
People in my circles come to me, often frustrated, for advice on losing weight. I often see that their diet is mostly carbohydrate. All I suggest is a moderate reduction of carbs, eat enough protein and eat the rest in fat. Maintaining the deficit is important. Fat is needed for hormone production, and being fat-phobic is a recipe for failure. People often ignore important hormones that control our appetite and feelings of satiation, and eating to many crabs suppresses those important hormones.
I eat carbohydrate depending on my activity levels. If I'm at my desk doing nothing physical, I'm not going to eat a lot of carbs.
We don't have to abstain, we just need to consider the consequences of the food we eat and make good decisions. Carb reduction is a good idea. Complete elimination is not practical nor is it needed.
So back to my main point. Why eat carbs? Just get them naturally through a natural diet. The hormones will work themselves out and so will our body composition.
This is the smartest thing I've seen anyone say so far. that being said, it is in sharp contrast to your first post.
I agree, if you're NOT very active (desk job, very little activity outside of work), you will NOT want to eat a lot of carbs. That makes sense. However, the purpose of eating a lot of carbs if you are very active it to prevent your body from eating up the glycogen stores in your muscles. Once those are gone, you're screwed, and your workout is over.
I hear a lot of people talking about insulin spikes after eating carbs. I'm not going to say it doesn't happen, but I'm not at all surprised it does happen. the purpose of eating all the carbs is to burn it all off quickly. If we don't, the body needs to do something with it, and the only thing it can do is turn it into fat. This goes back onto the previous point: If you'r not burning it, don't eat it. If you are going to burn it, eat it up! The trick is to find the steady balance (oh, and your body needs a certain level of carbs to function. I doubt 20g a day will cut it).0 -
Because I have more energy when I keep my carbs at 40% or less of my daily intake. Excessive carbs make me feel sluggish. I did 40/30/30 as an endurance swimmer and I was perfectly fine. I also find I'm more hungry, especially if my carb intake is high in starch/grains. Fruit makes me hungry too, like really hungry.
pretty much this. also i notice i bloat easily when eating bread. like today for instance lol0 -
When I eat low carb, I lose weight quicker. I feel better. I have more energy. I don't eat random crappy foods. I don't retain as much water. It just works.0
-
Besides the fact that my body loves to store carbs around my middle, I have to say that when I eat processed foods, sugar, enriched flour, etc...it causes my ATTITUDE to plummet....my friends and loved ones always ask if I've eaten those foods when I become moody!!! If I'm really conscious about avoiding refined carbs, I laugh alot and become very happy and energetic. Don't know if it's a scientific truth or not....just the way my body handles it. Maybe I should start a new thread for those with attitude problems....it might be the refined carbs!! LOL0
-
So, after reading through all of this, and the effect low carb diets have had on people, I think what is really happening is people are eliminating food sensitivities they have, and thus losing weight, no more migraines, bloating, upset stomach, better sleep, more energy, etc.,etc.,etc. All of the above are symptoms of food allergies (which I suffer from all of them, including Meniere Syndrome symptoms, among others). The most common food intolerance's: Wheat, gluten, white rice, potatoes, and various other grains. What do all of these foods have in common? Our ancestors didn't eat them.
So I'm not buying this 20g of carbs a day thing. We require carbs to function at 100%. All everyone is experiencing is the elimination of foods their bodies can digest. They've just cut out a whack load of other foods as well.
As for the "our biology is designed to store it when we come across it," I'm sorry, but you're full of crap. Our ancestors were NOT carnivores. They were omnivores, leaning more towards herbivores. How often do you see a group of chimps chasing down a gazelle and ripping it's carcass into itty bitty pieces and swallowing them? Granted, they don't eat a lot of grains, because they're not readily available. 90% of their diet comes from fruit and veggies.
I also completely agree that our ancestors are omnivores, but that doesn't mean we need to eat 5-10x the carbs our ancestors did. 70-75% of our ancestors diet consisted of game. That's in calories. In bulk, yes plants take up a lot of the diet. It's not easy for a human to eat the 3-4k calories needed to sustain them in plants. Our ancestors didn't exactly sit idle talkign on forums all day. They were hard working people. That is why herbivores spend a 90% of their time eating. Also chimps are not human and their dietary requirements are quite different.
You're making things up again
Eaton et al. Paleolithic nutrition revisited: A twelve-year retrospective on its nature and implications. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition (1997) 51, 207±216
http://www.direct-ms.org/pdf/EvolutionPaleolithic/Eaton Paleo Nutri Review EJCN.pdf0 -
So, after reading through all of this, and the effect low carb diets have had on people, I think what is really happening is people are eliminating food sensitivities they have, and thus losing weight, no more migraines, bloating, upset stomach, better sleep, more energy, etc.,etc.,etc. All of the above are symptoms of food allergies (which I suffer from all of them, including Meniere Syndrome symptoms, among others). The most common food intolerance's: Wheat, gluten, white rice, potatoes, and various other grains. What do all of these foods have in common? Our ancestors didn't eat them.
So I'm not buying this 20g of carbs a day thing. We require carbs to function at 100%. All everyone is experiencing is the elimination of foods their bodies can digest. They've just cut out a whack load of other foods as well.
As for the "our biology is designed to store it when we come across it," I'm sorry, but you're full of crap. Our ancestors were NOT carnivores. They were omnivores, leaning more towards herbivores. How often do you see a group of chimps chasing down a gazelle and ripping it's carcass into itty bitty pieces and swallowing them? Granted, they don't eat a lot of grains, because they're not readily available. 90% of their diet comes from fruit and veggies.
As much as I advocate low carb, I understand that our lifestyles and our biology may not allow a 100% reductions for long periods of time, and our food doesn't either. I don't advocate 100% reductions. We need plant food just as much as we need protein and fat. There is a HUGE difference between 10-50g of carbs per day eating lots of veggies, and 300-500+g of carbs per day eating processed grains. Food sensitivities, I agree, are critical to address.
I also completely agree that our ancestors are omnivores, but that doesn't mean we need to eat 5-10x the carbs our ancestors did. 70-75% of our ancestors diet consisted of game. That's in calories. In bulk, yes plants take up a lot of the diet. It's not easy for a human to eat the 3-4k calories needed to sustain them in plants. Our ancestors didn't exactly sit idle talkign on forums all day. They were hard working people. That is why herbivores spend a 90% of their time eating. Also chimps are not human and their dietary requirements are quite different.
So a drastic reduction based on our new lifestyle helps dramatically.
People in my circles come to me, often frustrated, for advice on losing weight. I often see that their diet is mostly carbohydrate. All I suggest is a moderate reduction of carbs, eat enough protein and eat the rest in fat. Maintaining the deficit is important. Fat is needed for hormone production, and being fat-phobic is a recipe for failure. People often ignore important hormones that control our appetite and feelings of satiation, and eating to many crabs suppresses those important hormones.
I eat carbohydrate depending on my activity levels. If I'm at my desk doing nothing physical, I'm not going to eat a lot of carbs.
We don't have to abstain, we just need to consider the consequences of the food we eat and make good decisions. Carb reduction is a good idea. Complete elimination is not practical nor is it needed.
So back to my main point. Why eat carbs? Just get them naturally through a natural diet. The hormones will work themselves out and so will our body composition.
This is the smartest thing I've seen anyone say so far. that being said, it is in sharp contrast to your first post.
I agree, if you're NOT very active (desk job, very little activity outside of work), you will NOT want to eat a lot of carbs. That makes sense. However, the purpose of eating a lot of carbs if you are very active it to prevent your body from eating up the glycogen stores in your muscles. Once those are gone, you're screwed, and your workout is over.
I hear a lot of people talking about insulin spikes after eating carbs. I'm not going to say it doesn't happen, but I'm not at all surprised it does happen. the purpose of eating all the carbs is to burn it all off quickly. If we don't, the body needs to do something with it, and the only thing it can do is turn it into fat. This goes back onto the previous point: If you'r not burning it, don't eat it. If you are going to burn it, eat it up! The trick is to find the steady balance (oh, and your body needs a certain level of carbs to function. I doubt 20g a day will cut it).
My first post was very generalized. The discussion became much more specific.
It is true that you can lose intensity if you run out of glycogen. But that doesn't mean that you can't be effective in what you're doing. Endurance sports, especially very long marathons, people run out of glycogen pretty quickly, generally in the first few miles. After that, the pace slows down and the energy comes from fat.
http://www.livestrong.com/article/231986-when-does-glucose-convert-to-fat/
"GLUCOSE CONVERSION
Glucose is a six-carbon sugar molecule. Your body first converts this molecule into two three-carbon pyruvate molecules through the process of glycolysis and then into acetyl CoA. When your body requires immediate energy, acetyl CoA enters the Citric Acid Cycle creating energy molecules in the form of ATP. When glucose intake exceeds your body's energy needs--for example, you eat an ice-cream sundae and then go relax on the sofa for five hours--your body has no need to create more energy molecules. Therefore, acetyl CoA begins the process of fatty acid synthesis becoming triglycerides that are stored in the fat tissues of your body. These triglycerides are stored energy molecules which can be broken down later to give you the energy you need to, for example, get up off the couch and go for a bike ride"
And
"LIPOLYSIS
Fat is broken down through the process of lipolysis and beta-oxidation. These reactions occur in the mitochondria or energy warehouses of the cells. The process is cyclical; two carbons are removed from the long fatty acid chain per turn of the cycle, forming acetyl CoA. At this point, acetyl CoA enters the Citric Acid Cycle to produce energy in the form of ATP. This process uses the identical pathway glucose molecules used after glycolysis when they were directed to make energy for the cell rather than being stored as fat"
Also this video is great.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PdJFbjWHEU&feature=player_detailpage#t=3747s
I don't think glucose is specifically necessary to our biology. We can burn fat for long term energy. We constantly need a steady blood glucose level, and we can get that from fat.
When you dump glucose in the blood, and if our level and muscles are full of glycogen, that glucose goes to fat, and we then convert it back to glucose for use. But it's much more steady coming from fat than it is from diet. Think burst vs steady stream. This is why people on low carb often comment that they have improved and stable energy levels instead of peaks and valleys.0 -
You're making things up again
Eaton et al. Paleolithic nutrition revisited: A twelve-year retrospective on its nature and implications. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition (1997) 51, 207±216
http://www.direct-ms.org/pdf/EvolutionPaleolithic/Eaton Paleo Nutri Review EJCN.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit#Diet
" The typical Inuit diet is high in protein and very high in fat – in their traditional diets, Inuit consumed an average of 75% of their daily energy intake from fat.[33]"
"In the 1920s anthropologist Vilhjalmur Stefansson lived with and studied a group of Inuit.[39] The study focused on the fact that the Inuit's extremely low-carbohydrate diet had no adverse effects on their health, nor indeed, Stefansson's own health. "
Clearly made up (sarcastic). I'm not perfect in referencing everything from memory, but being an *kitten* about it doesn't help.
In order to prove something to be 100% true, you have to explain the exception. I'm not saying we need to be 100% devoid of carbs.0 -
^This. I dont limit my carbs I just dont eat them in excess. When I was younger I used to have 2-3 slices of toast in the am, then for lunch at school a sandwich etc. I just dont feel that great if I eat too much. But I still need them for energy.For me, eating a lot of carbs, especially those white carbs like bread and pasta make me feel super bloated and uhhh back things up. Even if I don't actually weigh less, I feel lighter and have more energy when I limit them.0 -
You're making things up again
Eaton et al. Paleolithic nutrition revisited: A twelve-year retrospective on its nature and implications. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition (1997) 51, 207±216
http://www.direct-ms.org/pdf/EvolutionPaleolithic/Eaton Paleo Nutri Review EJCN.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit#Diet
" The typical Inuit diet is high in protein and very high in fat – in their traditional diets, Inuit consumed an average of 75% of their daily energy intake from fat.[33]"
"In the 1920s anthropologist Vilhjalmur Stefansson lived with and studied a group of Inuit.[39] The study focused on the fact that the Inuit's extremely low-carbohydrate diet had no adverse effects on their health, nor indeed, Stefansson's own health. "
Clearly made up.
Dude, that's the INUIT you're talking about! they live above the arctic circle! They developed that diet from living up there - where there is no vegetation - for thousands of years! Of course their diet is comprised of 75% fat, they can't get food from anywhere else! Go look for information on the Azteks and tell me their diet is 75% fat, or how about the Chinese? 75% of their diet is rice.
I'm sorry, but you just lost a lot of credibility saying that. Not very many of use have Inuit as our ancestors.
As for the glycogen - cyclists don't use up their glycogen very quickly. Also, their races are often 5+ hours long, and it gets faster as time progresses, not slower. The idea in cycling is to NOT use your glycogen stores, by eating/drinking a mix of simple and complex carbohydrates (mostly simple) with a slight mix of protein. The body will burn the simple carbohydrates from what you eat first, before it touches anything else. You can also train your body to use fat before the glycogen stores as well, but it's a lot of serious hard work, and once you stop training it to do so, it'll quickly revert back to just using the glycogen stores.
In a real race situation, your body will never be able to break down fat as quickly as your muscles will need it.
The only reason why runners use up their glycogen stores is because they don't eat or drink as much as a cyclist does in an hour of racing. I really don't understand why.0 -
^This. I dont limit my carbs I just dont eat them in excess. When I was younger I used to have 2-3 slices of toast in the am, then for lunch at school a sandwich etc. I just dont feel that great if I eat too much. But I still need them for energy.For me, eating a lot of carbs, especially those white carbs like bread and pasta make me feel super bloated and uhhh back things up. Even if I don't actually weigh less, I feel lighter and have more energy when I limit them.
I'll agree refined grains are not good, but this could also be a case of a food intolerance. Whole grain foods shouldn't give you as much of an issue, unless it is, as I mentioned, a food intolerance.0 -
If low carb makes no sense to you, or doesn't work for you, awesome. Do what does make sense and works for you. I really don't understand the threads that seem to be about talking the rest of us out of it.
^^^ Well said!0 -
You're making things up again
Eaton et al. Paleolithic nutrition revisited: A twelve-year retrospective on its nature and implications. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition (1997) 51, 207±216
http://www.direct-ms.org/pdf/EvolutionPaleolithic/Eaton Paleo Nutri Review EJCN.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit#Diet
" The typical Inuit diet is high in protein and very high in fat – in their traditional diets, Inuit consumed an average of 75% of their daily energy intake from fat.[33]"
"In the 1920s anthropologist Vilhjalmur Stefansson lived with and studied a group of Inuit.[39] The study focused on the fact that the Inuit's extremely low-carbohydrate diet had no adverse effects on their health, nor indeed, Stefansson's own health. "
Clearly made up.
Dude, that's the INUIT you're talking about! they live above the arctic circle! They developed that diet from living up there - where there is no vegetation - for thousands of years! Of course their diet is comprised of 75% fat, they can't get food from anywhere else! Go look for information on the Azteks and tell me their diet is 75% fat, or how about the Chinese? 75% of their diet is rice.
I'm sorry, but you just lost a lot of credibility saying that. Not very many of use have Inuit as our ancestors.
As for the glycogen - cyclists don't use up their glycogen very quickly. Also, their races are often 5+ hours long, and it gets faster as time progresses, not slower. The idea in cycling is to NOT use your glycogen stores, by eating/drinking a mix of simple and complex carbohydrates (mostly simple) with a slight mix of protein. The body will burn the simple carbohydrates from what you eat first, before it touches anything else. You can also train your body to use fat before the glycogen stores as well, but it's a lot of serious hard work, and once you stop training it to do so, it'll quickly revert back to just using the glycogen stores.
In a real race situation, your body will never be able to break down fat as quickly as your muscles will need it.
The only reason why runners use up their glycogen stores is because they don't eat or drink as much as a cyclist does in an hour of racing. I really don't understand why.
Uhm. They are still human. Were does it say that their biology is so much more different than ours that their diet is bad?
So unless we train for it, we basically don't function on fat? That doesn't make any sense either. The fat is there to be used and the body's mechanics are capable of tapping the fat when needed. I lift an run on low carb all the time. I'm not crippled because of low carb.
I'm going to make me a fatty dinner.
PM me if you want to talk more.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions