Low carb diets?

Acg67

I love when people either do not know or just ignore the fact that people who eat low carb have a several hundred calorie advantage over lowfat high carb dieters. There are several different metabolic reasons for it.
It is also an effective treatment for type 2 diabetes.

But ignoring this, and several other good reasons to TRY a low carb diet, blindly bashing it is really cool on MFP. I have consistently lost weight when clearly not in a deficit when adhering to LC. 3000 calories a day. Bacon and eggs, ribeye steaks, chicken wings, lots of high fiber low GI veggies. Sometimes it's just hard to not want taters bread and pasta.

Care to explain the wizardry that allows for fat loss while not in a deficit

tigersword

I love when people either do not know or just ignore the fact that people who eat low carb have a several hundred calorie advantage over lowfat high carb dieters. There are several different metabolic reasons for it.
It is also an effective treatment for type 2 diabetes.

But ignoring this, and several other good reasons to TRY a low carb diet, blindly bashing it is really cool on MFP. I have consistently lost weight when clearly not in a deficit when adhering to LC. 3000 calories a day. Bacon and eggs, ribeye steaks, chicken wings, lots of high fiber low GI veggies. Sometimes it's just hard to not want taters bread and pasta.

Care to explain the wizardry that allows for fat loss while not in a deficit

To be fair, he said weight, not fat. Low carb means losing significant water weight as glycogen levels drop, you don't need to be in a deficit to drop water weight. You do need a deficit to lose fat however. I've also lost 60 pounds of fat eating 3000 calories a day, not cutting carbs, I just burn 3500 calories a day between my active job and exercise regimen.

chsmith79

What are your opinions and experiences with them and (about) how many calories are you eating on them?

thanks!

I have done a low-carb diet( <30 grams/day) 3 different times. I lost 40+ lbs twice and 20+ the third time. Never kept up with calories. I ate as much as I wanted and never exercised. I can't give any scientific evidence as to why it works other than if your body doesn't have any carbs to burn for "fuel" it turns to the stored fat. They have really worked for me but this last time, after I gained everything I lost back and more, I went to counting calories and basically eating less and doing CF. To maintain the Low-carb diet(for me) is just too hard long term. I believe eating less and exercising is better and healthier for me. That being said I still try to watch what carbs I eat. More veggies/fruit and less starches. I will eat rice,pasta,potatoes,corn, etc. just in moderation. Like 1/4 cup or even just a spoonful, just to get the taste but not go crazy. That's just me, everybody is different.

NovoActive

I love when people either do not know or just ignore the fact that people who eat low carb have a several hundred calorie advantage over lowfat high carb dieters. There are several different metabolic reasons for it.
It is also an effective treatment for type 2 diabetes.

But ignoring this, and several other good reasons to TRY a low carb diet, blindly bashing it is really cool on MFP. I have consistently lost weight when clearly not in a deficit when adhering to LC. 3000 calories a day. Bacon and eggs, ribeye steaks, chicken wings, lots of high fiber low GI veggies. Sometimes it's just hard to not want taters bread and pasta.

Care to explain the wizardry that allows for fat loss while not in a deficit

To be fair, he said weight, not fat. Low carb means losing significant water weight as glycogen levels drop, you don't need to be in a deficit to drop water weight. You do need a deficit to lose fat however. I've also lost 60 pounds of fat eating 3000 calories a day, not cutting carbs, I just burn 3500 calories a day between my active job and exercise regimen.

Care to explain the wizardry that allows for fat loss while not in a deficit ---> When you eat a diet low in carbs you secrete less insulin (the primary anabolic hormone responsible for fat storage) so you sore less fat (this fat can be derived from dietary fat or carbs, However the carbs will only contribute to fat storage if your muscle and liver glycogen is saturated).
Also a comparing two isocaloric diets one with high protein and one with high carb, the thermal effect will greatly contribute to
daily energy expenditure due to the fact that a human body needs to use as much as 25% more energy to digest protein compared to carbs that yields same amount of calories.

"Low carb means losing significant water weight as glycogen levels drop" ---> You do know you dehydrate by only loosing 3% of your bodies water mass? Or do you mean "significant water weight" from the water attached to the glycogen molecules only? That would mean you need to severely deprive your body from its stored energy (muscle and liver glycogen).
This is not a sound explanation.

Spartan_Maker

I love when people either do not know or just ignore the fact that people who eat low carb have a several hundred calorie advantage over lowfat high carb dieters. There are several different metabolic reasons for it.
It is also an effective treatment for type 2 diabetes.

But ignoring this, and several other good reasons to TRY a low carb diet, blindly bashing it is really cool on MFP. I have consistently lost weight when clearly not in a deficit when adhering to LC. 3000 calories a day. Bacon and eggs, ribeye steaks, chicken wings, lots of high fiber low GI veggies. Sometimes it's just hard to not want taters bread and pasta.

Care to explain the wizardry that allows for fat loss while not in a deficit

To be fair, he said weight, not fat. Low carb means losing significant water weight as glycogen levels drop, you don't need to be in a deficit to drop water weight. You do need a deficit to lose fat however. I've also lost 60 pounds of fat eating 3000 calories a day, not cutting carbs, I just burn 3500 calories a day between my active job and exercise regimen.

Care to explain the wizardry that allows for fat loss while not in a deficit ---> When you eat a diet low in carbs you secrete less insulin (the primary anabolic hormone responsible for fat storage) so you sore less fat (this fat can be derived from dietary fat or carbs, However the carbs will only contribute to fat storage if your muscle and liver glycogen is saturated).
Also a comparing two isocaloric diets one with high protein and one with high carb, the thermal effect will greatly contribute to
daily energy expenditure due to the fact that a human body needs to use as much as 25% more energy to digest protein compared to carbs that yields same amount of calories.

"Low carb means losing significant water weight as glycogen levels drop" ---> You do know you dehydrate by only loosing 3% of your bodies water mass? Or do you mean "significant water weight" from the water attached to the glycogen molecules only? That would mean you need to severely deprive your body from its stored energy (muscle and liver glycogen).
This is not a sound explanation.

After contemplating this thread's posts, I think the more likely reason why low carbohydrate diets could result in a better body composition, among other things, is because of the relative respiratory quotients (RQ) of carbohydrates (1), protein (.85), and ketones (.7). An RQ of .7 is pure fat oxidation. A person in ketosis regularly has depleted glycogen stores and doesn't blunt lipolysis at any point in their day. Of course, they have little need for glucose at all, since the brain is running off of ketones. What's more, if someone on a ketogenic diet only performs low-intensity exercise, like walking, and some modest resistance training, there's unlikely to be much, if any, amino acid wasting from gluconeogenesis. If these people also supplemented with branched chain amino acids, that threat is attenuated.

Has anyone come across any study reporting body composition comparisons where protein was held constant, carbohydrates were </= 15% for Group A, and carbohydrates were >/= 50% for Group B, and food was controlled rather than self-reported? For instance, 10/30/60 vs. 50/30/20? It would also be nice if the subjects weren't from a discrete group like athletes or the obese.

Bakkasan

I love when people either do not know or just ignore the fact that people who eat low carb have a several hundred calorie advantage over lowfat high carb dieters. There are several different metabolic reasons for it.
It is also an effective treatment for type 2 diabetes.

But ignoring this, and several other good reasons to TRY a low carb diet, blindly bashing it is really cool on MFP. I have consistently lost weight when clearly not in a deficit when adhering to LC. 3000 calories a day. Bacon and eggs, ribeye steaks, chicken wings, lots of high fiber low GI veggies. Sometimes it's just hard to not want taters bread and pasta.

Care to explain the wizardry that allows for fat loss while not in a deficit

My aren't you just combative?! You entertain me, please do more! You tell me why, because I do. In fact, I lose fat and maintain or gain strength.

If it WORKS FOR YOU, DO IT. That's the wizardry!

Acg67

I love when people either do not know or just ignore the fact that people who eat low carb have a several hundred calorie advantage over lowfat high carb dieters. There are several different metabolic reasons for it.
It is also an effective treatment for type 2 diabetes.

But ignoring this, and several other good reasons to TRY a low carb diet, blindly bashing it is really cool on MFP. I have consistently lost weight when clearly not in a deficit when adhering to LC. 3000 calories a day. Bacon and eggs, ribeye steaks, chicken wings, lots of high fiber low GI veggies. Sometimes it's just hard to not want taters bread and pasta.

Care to explain the wizardry that allows for fat loss while not in a deficit

To be fair, he said weight, not fat. Low carb means losing significant water weight as glycogen levels drop, you don't need to be in a deficit to drop water weight. You do need a deficit to lose fat however. I've also lost 60 pounds of fat eating 3000 calories a day, not cutting carbs, I just burn 3500 calories a day between my active job and exercise regimen.

Care to explain the wizardry that allows for fat loss while not in a deficit ---> When you eat a diet low in carbs you secrete less insulin (the primary anabolic hormone responsible for fat storage) so you sore less fat (this fat can be derived from dietary fat or carbs, However the carbs will only contribute to fat storage if your muscle and liver glycogen is saturated).
Also a comparing two isocaloric diets one with high protein and one with high carb, the thermal effect will greatly contribute to
daily energy expenditure due to the fact that a human body needs to use as much as 25% more energy to digest protein compared to carbs that yields same amount of calories.

So is it the high protein or lower carbs?

My aren't you just combative?! You entertain me, please do more! You tell me why, because I do. In fact, I lose fat and maintain or gain strength.

If it WORKS FOR YOU, DO IT. That's the wizardry!

Lots of people gain or maintain strength while dieting down, but what makes you a special snowflake is that you think you can lose fat without creating a caloric deficit

Matt_Wild

Ultimately its calories in and out, no two ways.

However carbs that are harder to digest do make you feel more satisfied for longer than simple carbs. Net difference tho is zero.

If you can resist snacking further still, you could diet on haribo and protein, plus fats and lose the same as brown rice, protein and fats. No difference in fat lost nor body comp.

lljksilk

Low carb diets are beneficial in situations pre-diabetes or early diagnosed diabetes.

In terms of general weight loss, low carb diets "work" by restricting calories and you feel full because of the increased amount of protein/fat you are taking in.

There are no health risks that I am aware of provided you follow the popular diets to the letter. So my advice is that the best diet is the one you can stick with. But there is no reason to choose a low carb diet over any other if you are looking for any particular advantage in weight loss. Ultimately low carb diets cause a quick decrease in water weight - but over the long term, at best you are getting a 3% metabolic advantage.

So for every 100 calories you'd burn on a normal diet, you might burn 103 on a low carb diet and also have to deal with dreaming of ice cream and cookies.

Bakkasan

Lots of people gain or maintain strength while dieting down, but what makes you a special snowflake is that you think you can lose fat without creating a caloric deficit

Unfortunately my long run of experience trumps the snowflake theory. How much weight did you have to lose in your life just wondering? 4? You put on a little fat last winter? I truly do value your experience over mine.

SideSteel

You do not lose fat mass in a chronic caloric surplus.

EDIT: That's not to say that low carb approaches are bad or ineffective. I think it's a valid approach for some people, but the misunderstandings of insulin and the bastardization of thermodynamics are the part that I draw issue with.

Acg67

Lots of people gain or maintain strength while dieting down, but what makes you a special snowflake is that you think you can lose fat without creating a caloric deficit

Unfortunately my long run of experience trumps the snowflake theory. How much weight did you have to lose in your life just wondering?

Too bad your experience didn't do too much for your general understanding of basic concepts regarding weightloss

I've lost 65-70lbs from my highest weight

bcattoes

My experiences are all second hand because I know it's not something I personally would stick to. I know several (7 I can think of right off hand) who have lost weight on low carb. 2 lost a significant amount of weight. None of them kept it off, because none of them stuck to the diet long term.

The diet holds no real advantage in weight loss for most people. Though I think many people find it easier to cut calories when they cut carbs because many of their favorite foods are carb based, so they not as tempted to overeat. But this is the danger if you don't plan to eat low carb forever. Once you stop eating low carb you may still find it hard to eat them in moderation because you haven't taught yourself to do so.

Whether eating low carb improves health beyond lost weight depends on the source of the carbs you give up and individual body chemistry. If most of your carbs come from sugary drinks, desserts, candy and overly processed grains, then giving those up would likely improve your health. If you are eating whole grains, vegetables and fruit, giving those up likely will not improve your health beyond the benefits of losing weight while eating them.

lukeevans85

I love when people either do not know or just ignore the fact that people who eat low carb have a several hundred calorie advantage over lowfat high carb dieters. There are several different metabolic reasons for it.
It is also an effective treatment for type 2 diabetes.

But ignoring this, and several other good reasons to TRY a low carb diet, blindly bashing it is really cool on MFP. I have consistently lost weight when clearly not in a deficit when adhering to LC. 3000 calories a day. Bacon and eggs, ribeye steaks, chicken wings, lots of high fiber low GI veggies. Sometimes it's just hard to not want taters bread and pasta.

Care to explain the wizardry that allows for fat loss while not in a deficit

My aren't you just combative?! You entertain me, please do more! You tell me why, because I do. In fact, I lose fat and maintain or gain strength.

If it WORKS FOR YOU, DO IT. That's the wizardry!

You started at 338 lbs according to your profile...

Without actually going and calculating your TDEE (since I don't know your height)...I'm guessing for someone who weighs (weighed) 338 lbs....3000 cals IS A DEFICIT. My SW was 225 and my TDEE was over 2500. I eat 1900 - 2100 cals a day generally. And that's more than 100 lbs less than your SW.

sin485

if i dont get enough carbs i dont have the energy to work out! so yea that diet not for me

Bakkasan

You started at 338 lbs according to your profile...

Without actually going and calculating your TDEE (since I don't know your height)...I'm guessing for someone who weighs (weighed) 338 lbs....3000 cals IS A DEFICIT. My SW was 225 and my TDEE was over 2500. I eat 1900 - 2100 cals a day generally. And that's more than 100 lbs less than your SW.

I can give you that, and there is still the issue of a 15-25% caloric advantage to low carb which really was my only point about it being a deficit vs surplus. Albeit I did it poorly!

lukeevans85

Actually...just to take this a step further (and keep in mind I'm assuming you to be average height and in your mid 30's)

If you weighed 338lbs, were 5'9'' tall, 35 years old, and exercise 1-3 days per week your TDEE is 3863 calories. That means you can eat 3863 cals per day to MAINTAIN your weight. So if you're eating at 3000 you are eating at a deficit of 863 calories per day.

The only way 3000 cals is maintenance for you is if you are sedentary...and your height is 3'9''

I'm guessing you aren't 3'9''.

Acg67

You started at 338 lbs according to your profile...

Without actually going and calculating your TDEE (since I don't know your height)...I'm guessing for someone who weighs (weighed) 338 lbs....3000 cals IS A DEFICIT. My SW was 225 and my TDEE was over 2500. I eat 1900 - 2100 cals a day generally. And that's more than 100 lbs less than your SW.

I can give you that, and there is still the issue of a 15-25% caloric advantage to low carb which really was my only point about it being a deficit vs surplus. Albeit I did it poorly!

And how does this caloric advantage manifest itself?

lukeevans85

Also...while looking at your diary...even just for this week. You are eating almost the same amount of cals (or less) as I am...my SW is 113 lbs lighter than your SW and often times you are netting less than me. Which is actually an extreme deficit.

Oh and you're eating the same amount of carbs I am. And I eat a crap load of carbs.

So realistically...you're not even on a low carb diet dude.

Bakkasan

AG, since you have been so nice: http://bit.ly/UFOeWa


edit: Haha going over your history you just post obtuse anti low carb everywhere. I do LOVE your beer choices though. No need or use anymore with ya here.

xiamjackie

What are your opinions and experiences with them and (about) how many calories are you eating on them?

thanks!

I think alot of people have misconceptions about low carb, not everyone goes into ketosis and lowers their carbs that much. I keep my carbs around 120 a day and with my fiber intake i net below 100. I don't feel deprived whatsoever. I have alot of energy and have no problem getting through my workouts because i eat healthy carbs like veggies and whole grains at times. A lot of people like low carb because sugar cravings are reduced and sometimes eliminated and after being on it for sometime, when i crave something sweet i eat fruit. I dont eat processed junk thAt has no carbs, just with anyway of eating you have to watch all things. And fat is not the enemy. Try and get as much good fats as possible. I try to stick to leaner meats and will occasionally have some higher fat ones but try not to go overboard. I eat between 2000 to 2200 cals a day, considering meat and dairy are usually a hit higher cal, along w fats.

To each his own and what you choose to do, but if you follow a low carb approach the right way, it is healthy. Low carbs doesn't always mean 20 carbs a day.

ETA - i got my calories by figuring out my TDEE and BMR

I usually eat net carbs around 120 a day too. I don't understand how this is low-carb.

Bakkasan

So realistically...you're not even on a low carb diet dude.

I am not LCing right now or actually logging my food. I had a big *kitten* bowl of pasta with garlic rolls and sausage last night.

bcattoes

What are your opinions and experiences with them and (about) how many calories are you eating on them?

thanks!

I think alot of people have misconceptions about low carb, not everyone goes into ketosis and lowers their carbs that much. I keep my carbs around 120 a day and with my fiber intake i net below 100. I don't feel deprived whatsoever. I have alot of energy and have no problem getting through my workouts because i eat healthy carbs like veggies and whole grains at times. A lot of people like low carb because sugar cravings are reduced and sometimes eliminated and after being on it for sometime, when i crave something sweet i eat fruit. I dont eat processed junk thAt has no carbs, just with anyway of eating you have to watch all things. And fat is not the enemy. Try and get as much good fats as possible. I try to stick to leaner meats and will occasionally have some higher fat ones but try not to go overboard. I eat between 2000 to 2200 cals a day, considering meat and dairy are usually a hit higher cal, along w fats.

To each his own and what you choose to do, but if you follow a low carb approach the right way, it is healthy. Low carbs doesn't always mean 20 carbs a day.

ETA - i got my calories by figuring out my TDEE and BMR

I usually eat net carbs around 120 a day too. I don't understand how this is low-carb.

Yeah, I eat "low carb" by some definitions, though I make no effort to do so. The problem with all these low carb threads is that there is no single definition of a low carb diet.

I've also noticed that a whole lot of people seem to think that grains and carbs are synonyms.

Acg67

AG, since you have been so nice: http://bit.ly/UFOeWa

Lol did you read that study?

Here's another one (I know I know, not done in 2012 so it doesn't count, but still)

Presence or absence of carbohydrates and the proportion of fat in a high-protein diet affect appetite suppression but not energy expenditure in normal-weight human subjects fed in energy balance
British Journal of Nutrition, Nov, 2010; 104

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20565999

Bakkasan

It doesn't matter, #1 works for me, #2 its a study which validates my point whether you agree or not. This is THE INTERNET.

AllTehBeers

It doesn't matter, #1 works for me, #2 its a study which validates my point whether you agree or not. This is THE INTERNET.

So you're not interested in learning, only posting things that agree with what you say and plug your ears to the rest?

I don't understand why so many don't want to even consider other's when they post conficting scientific studies. At least read it so you can form an opinion based on knowledge and not solely on anecdotal evidence.

lukeevans85

It doesn't matter, #1 works for me, #2 its a study which validates my point whether you agree or not. This is THE INTERNET.

So let me make sure I didn't miss anything.

You swear up and down that low carb diets are the way to go and that you have lost all your weight with NO deficit.

It's proven that you are eating at a deficit...quite possibly even an extreme (and maybe unsafe) deficit.

Multiple links are provided to ACTUAL scientific studies showing that low carb is not all its cracked up to be.

You provide a link to google...basically.

Then you say that you don't care about ANY of that....and that google works for you and that's how you know you're right.

Well you must be a consultant for Dr. Oz.

Acg67

It doesn't matter, #1 works for me, #2 its a study which validates my point whether you agree or not. This is THE INTERNET.

Funny the study you posted, bodyweight was nearly identical across all 3 diets. Odd seeing as there is such a caloric advantage.
And does a single study really validate your point if the majority of the current literature does not?

Spartan_Maker

It doesn't matter, #1 works for me, #2 its a study which validates my point whether you agree or not. This is THE INTERNET.

Funny the study you posted, bodyweight was nearly identical across all 3 diets. Odd seeing as there is such a caloric advantage.
And does a single study really validate your point if the majority of the current literature does not?

Are you aware of any studies that meet the criteria I set forth in my previous post: (1) low carb group is in ketosis (10-30-60); (2) high carb group (50-30-20); (3) protein and calories held constant; (4) food intake was controlled and not self-reported; and (5) subjects were representative of the population-at-large rather than elite athletes or morbidly obese people?

I'm having a difficult time finding such a study and would be very interested to see the results of one set up this way. I'm going to keep searching, but surely you guys who regularly debate this issue must have found something close.

The more I consider the issues in this thread, the more I think a low-carb diet should be the default diet for most people on MFP. In the last two days, I've read several times that 25% of adults in the U.S. are thought to be insulin resistant. If it's that bad among the general population, it's almost assuredly at least that high among MFP members. I'd feel pretty guilt about potentially dissuading a large number of people who may unknowingly be insulin resistant from pursuing a diet that would most certainly benefit them, if not save their lives. More important, the corrolary to that isn't something I'd want on my conscience.

FeebRyan

I've also noticed that a whole lot of people seem to think that grains and carbs are synonyms.

me too, its very annoying.