Low carb diets?
Options
Replies
-
Diets are doomed to failure, developing an eating pattern that is easy to stick to for the rest of your life is the only way to go.
:huh: How is an eating pattern, whether short term or long term, not a diet??0 -
The conversion of carbohydrates or protein into fat is 10 times less efficient than simply storing fat in a fat cell, but the body can do it. If you have 100 extra calories in fat (about 11 grams) floating in your bloodstream, fat cells can store it using only 2.5 calories of energy. On the other hand, if you have 100 extra calories in glucose (about 25 grams) floating in your bloodstream, it takes 23 calories of energy to convert the glucose into fat and then store it. Given a choice, a fat cell will grab the fat and store it rather than the carbohydrates because fat is so much easier to store.
If that were the case, low carb, moderate-high fat diets wouldn't work...............and they do..................0 -
Well, yeah, that way you would. But how many of us are actually going to burn 2300 calories in a day?
What I'm saying is that when you exercise, the majority of what you are burning is carbs. It takes 30 minutes or more usually before you even begin burning fat deposit. So, if you don't have any carbs to burn, you'll just burn fat instead. That is essentially what ketosis is
I burn about 2700 a day. Carbs are 50% of my calories. So far, I have averaged 2-3 pounds lost per week.0 -
Well, yeah, that way you would. But how many of us are actually going to burn 2300 calories in a day?
What I'm saying is that when you exercise, the majority of what you are burning is carbs. It takes 30 minutes or more usually before you even begin burning fat deposit. So, if you don't have any carbs to burn, you'll just burn fat instead. That is essentially what ketosis is
You burn a ratio of carbs and fat. If you are strength training, you are signaling your body to burn a higher ratio of fat. And if you are in a calorie deficit, then your body has no choice but to turn to fat stores for reserved energy.0 -
I can only speak for myself and my experience is this...I lost 75 pounds in 6 months low-carbing & felt great. I didn't count calories because I ate when I was hungry, the real kind of hunger - not the false hunger you get when you're eating sugar, breads & starches. I had tons of energy and I've never eaten so many veggies as I did while low carbing, I think thats the biggest misconception. You need to try it and see if it works for you and if not, try something else. It isn't easy at first but after the first week, I had zero problems. Once you get the carbs out of your system, you don't have the cravings anymore.
My doctor told me that I will be on some sort of low-carb diet for the rest of my life, its just how I'm built so there must be something to it...aside from all of the cookbooks & support groups all over the world. (FYI, Low-Carb Gourmet by Karen Barnaby is a FANTASTIC cookbook.)
Good luck to you!0 -
OP: What you are talking about is the Ketosis Diet.
The idea is that you eat below 100grams of carbs a day to put your body into a state of ketosis. in this state your body burns fat for energy because of the carb deficiency (this only kicks in after about 2 weeks). If this is something you're interested in I would suggest reading up about it, or search for the topic in food and nutrition, I posted about it and got some good responses.
(I have been doing it for over two weeks now and it is going well so far, but it depends entirely on each individual)0 -
Diets are doomed to failure, developing an eating pattern that is easy to stick to for the rest of your life is the only way to go.
:huh: How is an eating pattern, whether short term or long term, not a diet??
:laugh:
Exactly!
I love my new diet! I get twice the protein that I used to take in, and I still eat plenty of carbohydrates and fats. I eat my favorite foods while nourishing my body. Also, I exercise regularly. including both strength training and cardio. My new diet is sustainable in the long-term because it is balanced, easy, affordable, and super-yummy! Barring any unforeseen medical problems in the future, this diet is a keeper! :bigsmile:
ETA: My energy is through the roof without any supplements! I used to take supplements for energy, but I don't need them anymore. I feel better than I have since I was a teenager!0 -
OP: What you are talking about is the Ketosis Diet.
The idea is that you eat below 100grams of carbs a day to put your body into a state of ketosis. in this state your body burns fat for energy because of the carb deficiency (this only kicks in after about 2 weeks). If this is something you're interested in I would suggest reading up about it, or search for the topic in food and nutrition, I posted about it and got some good responses.
(I have been doing it for over two weeks now and it is going well so far, but it depends entirely on each individual)
I think you need to be way below to go into ketosis. When i did extremely low carb in the past was the only time I have gone into ketosis and that was eating about 20g carbs a day. I eat 100-120 a day, netting below because of fiber and I don't go into ketosis. Not all low carb eating puts you into ketosis, just to clarify.0 -
They offer nothing, I did it for 2 weeks. Nothing really changed in weight loss department I use to get tired easily my mood would be all over the place and I just ate heaps of carbs later on down the track. In the 2012 Olympics a trainer said to his swimmer he couldn't eat any carbs for a year leading up to the Olympics he came 6th. Just goes to show its pointless but hey everyone is different
You did it wrong for 2 weeks and gave up. You have to tough it out to adjust to ketosis, not revert back to eating tons of carbs later down the track. That doesn't mean it's pointless, it means you did it wrong.
Anyone training an OIympic swimmer on no carbs is a moron. Swimmers train exhaustively and in most cases need to eat copious amounts of carbs to fuel their sport specific training. They also tend to be extremely low in body fat, so a diet to reduce body fat is, for them, pointless. If any part of the swimmer story is true, I'd venture to guess that the swimmer in question got out of shape and put on some pudge in between training cycles and the coach put him on low-carb for a time to get him back to swimming shape. But even so, look at your statement: He went low carb and finished sixth. So he was on this pointless, energy sucking, low carb diet and STILL MANAGED TO BE THE SIXTH FASTEST SWIMMER IN THE WORLD. What about the other 99.9999% of swimmers who weren't low carb? Why didn't they smoke him?
For most people it is not pointless, as you say everyone's different, it works when done correctly. It's not the only way, but it does work and works quite well when done correctly by someone who is dedicated and disciplined enough.0 -
I do low carb and I love it, Ive lost a load of weight and am full of energy. This is without any hard exercise due to injuries. I walk & cycle a fair bit though.
Im gluten intolerent so I started by cutting that out and then dropped to around 60g carbs a day. I think gradually cutting out is the best way and much less of a shock!
I feel a lot better eating this way and I mainly think thats due to lack of bloating / sickness from bread etc.
That said, I do think its different for everyone and the sensible thing is to find an eating plan that works out for you
0 -
well, ive pretty much decided im staying with this "lifestyle" i would work out so hard, play around with different calorie limits...reduce fats, up my protein etc etc...and i didnt lose weight.
then i stopped eating bread and rice.....whoosh! the weight came off!0 -
I'm actually on Dukan. Its low carb. Which fits my blood type (0 = meat eater/hunter gathers, by Dr. Peter D'Adamo standards), and I have allergies to most grains anyway. Plus I lose more when restricting them. So though some might wish to fight it... it seems to work out just fine for others. I still eat carbs in vegs, fruits and the grains I can handle. Just not an abundance.
Another good option is slow carb.
*facepalm*0 -
I'm actually on Dukan. Its low carb. Which fits my blood type (0 = meat eater/hunter gathers, by Dr. Peter D'Adamo standards), and I have allergies to most grains anyway. Plus I lose more when restricting them. So though some might wish to fight it... it seems to work out just fine for others. I still eat carbs in vegs, fruits and the grains I can handle. Just not an abundance.
Another good option is slow carb.
*facepalm*
*facepalm* <--- BAHAHA I love this.0 -
EARLYXR - YOUR COMMENTS MAKE SO MUCH SENSE0
-
"Ok, but what about the dietary fat you eat in place of the carbs that your body burns instead of the stored fat? Or the protein that you eat that gets converted to glucose via gluconeogenesis to make up for the lack of carbs? You're seriously over simplifying the way the body utilizes energy. And of course, that also completely ignores the hormonal effects of cutting carbs, like the reduction in growth hormone, loss of lean tissue, and possible psychological effects as well.
Also, what do you mean by "how many of us are going to burn 2300 calories?" 2000 calories is what the average person burns in a day, I'm usually around 3000-3500 per day. You do burn calories even when you aren't exercising, after all... What science are you actually studying? "
I'm not really sure how to reply specifically to your quote, but you I don't really eat foods high in fat no matter what. And yeah, it will inevitably get converted to glucose... you need glucose to stay alive. But that conversion requires energy. There have been studies done showing that it does on rats and they lose more weight. I can try to find the specific studies if you'd like. And I don't believe cutting out carbs has "psychological effects". People don't need pasta and bread and processed food to function. I eat plenty of vegetables and fruits, which provides some carbs, but not as many as a full plate of pasta. And yes, I know you burn calories not doing anything. I think the last time I calculated the amount I burn not doing anything, it was about 1200. That means I'd have to burn an additional 1100 to be at the number the other guy was mentioning. And I'm studying biology for my undergrad... what are youuuu actually studying?
I'm not trying to be rude but I don't think you actually know what you are talking about. You are way over-simplifying the body's energy usage.
Say you eat 1500 calories of carbs, and your basal metabolic rate is 1600 calories per day. That means doing nothing, you burn 1600 calories... of the carbs you ate OR the fat you have. Regardless of WHAT you ate, you are making a deficit of 100 calories of energy which your body gets from somewhere else... meaning your fat deposits usually, and eventually your muscles and tissues.
YES, your body goes into ketosis when you have no available glucose/glycogen left, but if you ate 1500 calories of protein anyway, your body would FIRST use those 1500 calories of protein by converting them into something it can use (sugar or sugar by-products). Your body DOES NOT automatically start using your fat stores JUST because you didn't eat any glucose today.... Sorry but your chemistry and biology classes haven't taught you much, yet anyway. (5 years of biochemistry here)
Thermodynamically, (which you said you were curious about) fat and protein and carbohydrates do contain vastly different amounts of energy per gram of material, which is why they would be different calories for the same amount of food. Your body needs a specific amount of energy per day, and will scavenge it from any available material, starting with what you eat, even if you don't eat carbohydrates!!!0 -
Uh-uh miahh, you also over simplify the process of energy pathways utilized by the body in a statement like this. I'm sure you know it is highly unlikely for the body to only use one source of calories (the 1500 calories of ingested protein mentioned above) to meet the energy demands.I'm sure you know for a specific state (ketogenic, carb saturated, exercising, resting etc.) the body still has its hierarchy of preferred energy source and that this hierarchy changes as the state of the body changes. A specific cell may elusively utilize one source of energy (fatty acids, amino acids, glucose) for a given time, but the body as a whole will rarely be able to do this.YES, your body goes into ketosis when you have no available glucose/glycogen left, but if you ate 1500 calories of protein anyway, your body would FIRST use those 1500 calories of protein by converting them into something it can use (sugar or sugar by-products). Your body DOES NOT automatically start using your fat stores JUST because you didn't eat any glucose today.... Sorry but your chemistry and biology classes haven't taught you much, yet anyway. (5 years of biochemistry here)
I have also come across this in the literature, but not that they differ vastlyThermodynamically,... fat and protein and carbohydrates do contain vastly different amounts of energy per gram of material, which is why they would be different calories for the same amount of food. ...
Can you please elaborate on this ?
(Damn, ran out of time.)0 -
Low carb worked realllllly well to get my weight loss going. I lost alot initially. But ultimately I need to calorie count too now. I also have PCOS so I have to follow a low carb diet for life(dr. ordered).0
-
I tried lowering my carbs for a while but it just drove me mad so I stick with the eatwell plate for my balance and it's worked so far - eating between 1400 and 1500 calories a day
0 -
I did low carb for quite a while - and able to eat much lower calories on that. However, since then, most trainers & nutritionists that I have met say that you need the carbs - as long as they are good ones! Be sure to eat whole grain stuff (oatmeal, wheat rice, etc...) Beans are also loaded in carbs, but very healthy for you... I also hear that you will gain weight back rather quickly if you try to re-introduce carbs back into your diet too quickly. I am now trying to somewhat follow Chris Powell's idea (Extreme Makeover: Weight Loss Edition) of the following:
Sunday = Cheat Day (2400 cals maximum)
Monday = Low Day (1200 calories, high fat, low carb)
Tuesday = High Day (1500 calories, low fat, high carb)
Wednesday = Low Day (1200 calories, high fat, low carb)
Thursday = High Day (1500 calories, low fat, high carb)
Friday = Low Day (1200 calories, high fat, low carb)
Saturday = High Day (1500 calories, low fat, high carb)
For this, you end up eating an average of 1,500 calories oer day, and are expected to workout 6 days per week (without eating those calories back). I am enjoying it so far, as I don't miss the carbs when I get them every second day...0 -
Uh-uh miahh, you also over simplify the process of energy pathways utilized by the body in a statement like this. I'm sure you know it is highly unlikely for the body to only use one source of calories (the 1500 calories of ingested protein mentioned above) to meet the energy demands.I'm sure you know for a specific state (ketogenic, carb saturated, exercising, resting etc.) the body still has its hierarchy of preferred energy source and that this hierarchy changes as the state of the body changes. A specific cell may elusively utilize one source of energy (fatty acids, amino acids, glucose) for a given time, but the body as a whole will rarely be able to do this.YES, your body goes into ketosis when you have no available glucose/glycogen left, but if you ate 1500 calories of protein anyway, your body would FIRST use those 1500 calories of protein by converting them into something it can use (sugar or sugar by-products). Your body DOES NOT automatically start using your fat stores JUST because you didn't eat any glucose today.... Sorry but your chemistry and biology classes haven't taught you much, yet anyway. (5 years of biochemistry here)
I have also come across this in the literature, but not that they differ vastlyThermodynamically,... fat and protein and carbohydrates do contain vastly different amounts of energy per gram of material, which is why they would be different calories for the same amount of food. ...
Can you please elaborate on this ?
(Damn, ran out of time.)
You are definitely right that the energy pathways vary quite a bit, but I was trying to make the point that for most people, calories in vs. calories out are more important than cutting out sugar. At the end of the day, or week, your body has used it's daily BMR of calories (or x7 per week)... and if you ate at your BMR or averaged that much per day over a week, it doesn't matter as much WHAT you ate, because the energy expenditure is the most important part of the fat loss. Eating at a deficit is more important than trying to cut out sugar "because it makes us fat".
Protein and carbs contain around 4 calories per gram. Fat contains 9 calories per gram. This is pretty different (more than two times as much for fat) although you can pick at my word choice if you'd like! If you always ate fatty foods, you'd have to cut back on the sheer amount of food in some cases because they are more dense in calories.
Studies that show that low carbohydrates alone have no effect on weight loss when other factors are held constant:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3360561
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1989409
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2058571
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/81789800
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.9K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 399 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 981 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions