Anyone else have issues with low carb diets?
Replies
-
My step-dad lost 120lb on Atkins and has kept it off, and my mom lost 40lb on the Atkins. Both in a span of 8 months, kept it off, and it's been over 3 years. I personally get too hungry. Carbs keep me full (oh the joys of a fast metabolism). If it works for you, it works. Of course everyone should consult a doctor before starting a majorly different eating plan, like a low carb one.
Also, your Paleo facts are wrong.0 -
Darn nice way to open a good troll post. Grats0
-
When did this happen? Link, or it didn't.
http://www.marksdailyapple.com/how-much-glucose-does-your-brain-really-need/#axzz2AKomRHXp
One of many just with a quick Google search. Some are medical journals, this is not. Your brain will make the energy it needs from fat.0 -
I love it when uninformed people mouth off about other people's eating habits. Read the books and understand what each of these plans are before posting. If you wish to have some sort of educational discourse, don't ask more uninformed individuals to comment on it. Everybody has an opinion, but that doesn't mean it has value.0
-
Of course, she talked about the effect of ketosis on the kidneys, not fuel sources for the brain. Besides, the fact that the brain can use ketones doesn't change the fact that glucose is the brain's preferred source.
Not exactly. If glucose is available, the brain will use it. As far as "preferred", however, the brain has been shown to run better on ketones. The brain only truly requires about 30g to 40g glucose, which can be synthesized by the body, but it will use around 120g to 130g if available.
When did this happen? Link, or it didn't.
Thousands of years ago? This isn't controversial.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14769487
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/60617360 -
I would never have a diet or a religion that did not allow me to eat everything delicious under the sun.0
-
I am T2 and I do workouts. BUT I am not 30 years old anymore, either. I don't work out every day. This morning, I woke up with a fasting sugar of 127....not good. But that was because I was carb heavy yesterday. Today I cut it way back.
Losing weight low carb is very effective. But if I were NOT diabetic, I would up my carbs a bit so I could enjoy more. But, for me, the point is moot. I will be low carb the rest of my life, with some rare situations like parties or dinner out. I want to stay OFF my meds for good.
thanks for sharing - I'm actually a student nurse studying to become a CDE (certified diabetes educator) - low carb is certainly important in your case, but I think you'd be interested in doing a bit of research on glycemic indexes rather than trying to avoid carbs in general - also, there's a great video on youtube.com if you type in "how to become diabetic in 6 hours" that explains dietary fat's role in insulin sensitivity that I think you should watch. in your case, it's not just carbs, but fat and glycemic indexes too - but since your body is still producing insulin, the best thing you can do to increase the sensitivity to the insulin you're producing is to exercise - good luck!
Yes - I agree
I eat according to the glycemic index and eat pretty low fat in general, else I could not keep under 1200 calories
I excercise nearly every day either rowing, walking, swimming or weight training for at least 30 minutes
So I use egg whites or egg beaters not whole eggs, chicken, turkey and fish more than beef and pork whole grains if any...etc0 -
I love it when uninformed people mouth off about other people's eating habits. Read the books and understand what each of these plans are before posting. If you wish to have some sort of educational discourse, don't ask more uninformed individuals to comment on it. Everybody has an opinion, but that doesn't mean it has value.
why don't you start by telling me what I'm uninformed about instead of just b!tching about the thread?0 -
I always do better if I make protein a priority over carbs. I think people eat too many carbs in general in the form of high-calorie snacks and ultra-processed foods, so just being mindful of that helps you change your eating habits for the better.
That being said, rice and pasta are cheap and delicious, especially mixed with tons of veggies and just about any lean protein. They will always be around ♪
Food will always be villainized because we want to point the finger at one specific thing and lay blame on it instead of ourselves. Also, it helps sell books and diet programs that are usually so expensive and ridiculous, they wouldn't fly without making outrageous claims which promise to give us magical answers and absolve us of guilt.
It's not my excessive caloric intake and desk job that made me fat, it was THAT BANANA.
*shakes fist*
^^ YES!!! That evil Banana and it's partner the evil egg!!!0 -
You've already demonstrated that haven't researched many of these eating styles. Wrong about South Beach, paleo/primal, how the brain functions, lack of understanding ketosis/ketoacidosis... I don't much feel like going on, it bores me, and I have research to attend to. be proud. Look at how many people you trolled today. Nicely done.0
-
to the OP:
i didn't read through the 4 pages of replies.
but i've got 2 words..
CARB CYCLE.
also... every low carber out there isn't on a ketosis inducing/maintaining diet. there's a difference between striving for ketosis, and living low carb. i stay at 40-70 net when not doing a high carb/cheat day, which is "low carb", but i'm not in ketosis.
and, by reading your original post, i'm pretty sure you don't understand why low/lower carb works better. protein and fat DOES turn into glucose, and this process is extremely beneficial to weight loss.
http://www.livestrong.com/article/273899-do-fat-protein-turn-into-glucose/0 -
If he wanted to prove fat spikes blood sugar, he could’ve simply shown a glucose reading after the olive oil. But instead he guzzles olive oil, stuffs himself with white flour and then measures his glucose. His conclusion is sleight-of-hand.
that's not at all what Delgado was trying to prove. fat does NOT raise blood glucose at all. carbs do. he was showing what happens when you COMBINE fat and carbs. I think he ate a pretty typical American diet - that was what he was intending to do... show that dietary fat keeps blood glucose elevated for longer periods of time - it blocks the action of insulin, therefore your body produces more of it in response to high blood glucose, and it leads to resistance.
if you google dietary fat and insulin resistance, you'll find a lot. it's not saying that dietary fat raises blood glucose or that it "spikes" it. the carbs do that, but fat keeps it up there.
as a type 1 diabetic who now eats 70% of her calories in carbs and 10% in fat, I take LESS insulin now than I did when I had a higher fat, lower carb ratio. without dietary fat, your body utilizes the carbs quickly - especially when you're very active. I don't even give myself insulin for a piece of fruit before a run.
also, I'd like to point out, the study wasn't on triglycerides... your points on triglycerides could very well be true, but that wasn't the point of the experiment - it was to show how long blood glucose stays elevated when eating carbs paired with dietary fat.0 -
to whoever said dietary fat leads to insulin resistance, please explain... because as far as I've researched, it's excessive carbohydrate intake that causes this. carbs=sugar to your digestive system... sugar causes insulin response in the body. Too much sugar = a lot of insulin. Just like staying in a smelly room for a few minutes, you get numb to the smell... too much insulin after a while and your body gets numb to it, hence a 'resistance'.
http://www.springerlink.com/content/7734t22852m6w515/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_42LfH8veEU
A ten year old study and a well studied dude that likes to drink cocktails in the pool.
http://nickdelgado.com/
Funny stuff.0 -
You've already demonstrated that haven't researched many of these eating styles. Wrong about South Beach, paleo/primal, how the brain functions, lack of understanding ketosis/ketoacidosis... I don't much feel like going on, it bores me, and I have research to attend to. be proud. Look at how many people you trolled today. Nicely done.
wait a minute...
funny how I'm the troll when you're the one popping up in a thread to just complain and won't even point out the ways in which I'm supposedly wrong.
I was obviously using South Beach and Paleo as examples of low carb, but they weren't the focus - I wasn't attacking those specific diets, I was voicing my health concerns over extremely low carb diets. I was wrong about South Beach, but please humor me and tell me how I was wrong about Paleo - does it not ban grains and dairy? does it not instruct people to "limit" fruit intake? hmmm.... seems pretty low carb to me.
how the brain functions? are you saying the brain can function on ketones alone? because that's the only mention of brain function I made. the brain needs glucose. cerebral spinal fluid is filled with glucose.
where is my lack of understanding of ketosis and ketoacidosis? I'm actually pretty well versed in several forms of acidosis, both metabolic and respiratory... please point out my inaccuracies, I'd love to learn from you since you clearly have "research to attend to" and must be a very smart person!0 -
I guess I would be a person that falls in the category of eating 'low carb'. I have been eating like this for about a year and a half. This is not a diet to me, this is my life. That being said, I eat lots of veggies, meat, dairy, eggs, I eat fruit (but not bananas - lol!), and I do eat lots of food high in fiber like nuts and occasionally bread (gasp!). This is my lifestyle do to being insulin resistant. I strive to stay under 80-100 carbs a day.
That being said, I do get annoyed with people who go on a low carb diet as a quick weight loss method. I also get annoyed with people who go on a 7-day fast for a quick weight loss method or use HCG or eat nothing but apples for a month or whatever just to LOSE WEIGHT FAST. Maybe its wrong of me to be annoyed, but I would like to see people care about themselves and chose to eat healthier and be fitter and not focus on the weight loss so much. To me, I am living a healthier lifestyle and the weight loss is just a happy side effect. I don't care if you eat Paleo, are a Vegan, a Vegetarian, Hate Carbs or Love Carbs. I just wish that people would focus more on the HEALTHINESS factor and less on the WEIGHT LOSS factor.
Unless my insulin resistance disappears, I will be eating like this for the rest of my life (and God willing because I eat like this, it will be a long and healthy one).0 -
I don't have issues with any kind of diet. If something works for you, then that's great. Why would you assume that any one way of eating would work for everybody? All I know is that a high carbohydrate diet does not work for me.
FYI, I've never shot for ketosis, but I've set my carbohydrate goal to 75-150 or so, or around 25% of my diet.
Why on earth would you be horrified to state your opinion?I see all this stuff on low carb and ketogenic diets and I'm horrified to tell you the god's honest truth.
Yep. Sure do. I'm just not disciplined enough to consistently do ketosis, but I don't see any problem with it.I understand that it works and it works fast, but does anyone ever care to know what's actually happening to their body during ketosis?
The operative word is CAN. Lots of things can lead to kidney damage.How it lowers the pH of your blood and can lead to kidney damage long term?
You really need to define terms here. Are you only arguing against ketotic diets, or anything that restricts carbs, or just things that limit fruits & veggies? I think you have to separate grains from fruit here. I don't limit fruit, but that's because I was never a big fan in the first place....I was just curious if anyone shares my frustration with the Atkins and South Beach diets? Paleo is another one - I agree with the quality of foods, but banning grains and limiting fruit and replacing that with meat and fats is just another low carb diet.
I do, yes. I have researched the heck out of the impacts of macronutrient mixes for years.Anyone know anything about biology? About metabolic processes?
Defined "preferred". This is pseudoscience without defining terms. Of course the body burns sugar first because we have very little ability to store it.Glucose is the body's preferred form of energy
You are correct. The brain cannot survive without glucose, but the body can create glucose without consuming carbohydrates. Technically speaking, carbohydrate is the only macronutrient that we survive entirely without, thought I wouldn't particularly want to.- it's the only macronutrient that is digested and utilized for energy the fastest and without any waste products (unlike protein/uric acid and fat/ketones) - the brain cannot survive without it and that's a fact.
Why of course? If I eat 5000 calories of olive oil a day, I'm pretty sure I'm NOT going to lose weight.If you starve your body of glucose, OF COURSE you're going to lose weight.
So you're telling me that fad dieting is dangerous? mmm hmmm... A deliberate conscious choice to go with a ketotic diet is not any more dangerous than the standard American diet.Short term, I get it, it serves its purpose, but long term? not healthy. If you're looking to cut some weight before a competition, it's useful, but the normal fad dieters out there?
The human body is actually really good at burning fat, but I grant you that there is an adjustment from using sugar as a primary fuel to using fat as the primary fuel. I don't understand why you assume that because you are unable to do a thing, that others are also unable to do that thing.I just think it's straight up dangerous. ESPECIALLY when you add exercise to the equation.
I could never go low carb (and yes, I have type 1 diabetes), because I exercise so much - how are you expected to fuel your workouts?
Again with the fear of offense. I don't understand. Let's just have a dialog without the drama. As for the easy out - Easy? There's nothing easy about losing weight for me, and this is the only part of your rant that bothered me.I'm sorry, I know I'm going to ruffle some feathers here, and that's not necessarily my intention (please believe me). I just think low carb is almost like an easy way out vs. long term vitality and health.
I have not read that book or seen that movie, but I've read a few blog posts on Forks Over Knives and I wasn't impressed. What makes these media better than the other side of the argument?I'm not talking about carbs from breads, pastas and potatoes, by the way, I'm talking about carbs from fruits and vegetables. How can anyone argue that fruits and vegetables are NOT healthy? If you look at the percentage of fats and proteins in relation to carbs in naturally occurring fruits and vegetables, why would you think that a diet that is the direct INVERSE of that is healthy?
Anyone ever read that book 80/10/10 by Dr. Douglas Graham? Anyone ever see that movie Forks Over Knives? I guess those were eye openers for me.
So you've never heard of low-carb vegetarians?... if you're a veggie eater, of course you're going to lean towards vegetarian/vegan. But when it comes to weight loss and health, I just don't agree with the low carb approach. I believe the best approach is to watch overall calories and portions, keep it simple and everything in moderation.
/end rant (sorry - seriously not trying to offend people here, just would like to start an open discussion on the topic)
The only part of your rant that offended me was your insinuation that I'm somehow taking the easy way out by going with a strategy that actually works for me. In other words my inability to succeed with your kind of diet somehow indicates a flaw in my character.0 -
There is no denying that some carbs are healthy and others are not healthy. Potatoes, White flour, white rice, sugar and other highly refined food products should take a back see to less processed carbohydrates like 100% whole wheat, brown rice, other whole grains, and fruits & vegetables. Potatoes and refined plant foods just don't have any significant nutritional value once they've had the rest of the plant stripped - they are just empty calories. They are OK in moderation but let's not forget the the nation got fat during the 80's and 90's eating fat free foods full of empty carbs like in snackwells and fat free ice cream.
A great example would be that one could choose to eat a sweet potato instead of a potato which has more carbs but it also has more nutrition than a potato so it's worth it. If one focus's on balanced nutrition, like getting enough fiber, vitamins, minerals and the right amount of protein for their needs, then the proper carbohydrate levels will fall right into place. If one wants to get proper nutrition, then they won't have room for that other stuff very often.0 -
When did this happen? Link, or it didn't.
http://www.marksdailyapple.com/how-much-glucose-does-your-brain-really-need/#axzz2AKomRHXp
One of many just with a quick Google search. Some are medical journals, this is not. Your brain will make the energy it needs from fat.
OK, that's not a study. It's a blog. And Mark's Daily Apple is a Paelo blog. I don't trust that source.
Google is only giving me more blogs and stuff from head-shrinkers. (I don't trust *them* either.)0 -
(I don't trust *them* either.)
Might I suggest just putting your fingers in your ears and screaming LA LA LA LA? Your brain will make it's own energy from fat and protein. Period. This is not up for debate.0 -
to the OP:
i didn't read through the 4 pages of replies.
but i've got 2 words..
CARB CYCLE.
also... every low carber out there isn't on a ketosis inducing/maintaining diet. there's a difference between striving for ketosis, and living low carb. i stay at 40-70 net when not doing a high carb/cheat day, which is "low carb", but i'm not in ketosis.
and, by reading your original post, i'm pretty sure you don't understand why low/lower carb works better. protein and fat DOES turn into glucose, and this process is extremely beneficial to weight loss.
http://www.livestrong.com/article/273899-do-fat-protein-turn-into-glucose/
how do you know you're not in ketosis? do you test your urine for ketone bodies? just curious how you maintain this state of non-ketosis on a 40-70g of carbs a day diet? I thought the general rule of thumb was that if you're getting less than 100g a day, you're in ketosis?
oh, I know exactly why low carb works and why it works fast, but I disagree on it working "better" because I don't believe it to be healthy. that's what this thread is about. I know all about gluconeogenesis - and fat is not the first source of energy for it, protein is. in order to prevent catabolism of skeletal muscle (to go with your weight loss), you need to consume large amounts of dietary protein which has its own metabolic waste product called uric acid.
sorry, but I prefer to get my info from actual studies, not articles on Livestrong:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28265240 -
Of course, she talked about the effect of ketosis on the kidneys, not fuel sources for the brain. Besides, the fact that the brain can use ketones doesn't change the fact that glucose is the brain's preferred source.
Not exactly. If glucose is available, the brain will use it. As far as "preferred", however, the brain has been shown to run better on ketones. The brain only truly requires about 30g to 40g glucose, which can be synthesized by the body, but it will use around 120g to 130g if available.
When did this happen? Link, or it didn't.
Thousands of years ago? This isn't controversial.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14769487
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6061736
Ok, those studies do not say what I thought you said. But maybe you didn't say what i thought you said. :flowerforyou:0 -
There is no denying that some carbs are healthy and others are not healthy. Potatoes, White flour, white rice, sugar and other highly refined food products should take a back see to less processed carbohydrates like 100% whole wheat, brown rice, other whole grains, and fruits & vegetables. Potatoes and refined plant foods just don't have any significant nutritional value once they've had the rest of the plant stripped - they are just empty calories. They are OK in moderation but let's not forget the the nation got fat during the 80's and 90's eating fat free foods full of empty carbs like in snackwells and fat free ice cream.
A great example would be that one could choose to eat a sweet potato instead of a potato which has more carbs but it also has more nutrition than a potato so it's worth it. If one focus's on balanced nutrition, like getting enough fiber, vitamins, minerals and the right amount of protein for their needs, then the proper carbohydrate levels will fall right into place. If one wants to get proper nutrition, then they won't have room for that other stuff very often.
Potatoes are not "empty calories" and to state that they are "processed" is to *really* stretch the word processed. Is washing the dirt off a process? Then ok, yes, I wash my potatoes after I pull them from the ground to eat them.0 -
(I don't trust *them* either.)
Might I suggest just putting your fingers in your ears and screaming LA LA LA LA? Your brain will make it's own energy from fat and protein. Period. This is not up for debate.
I have read through that blog enough to know that the guy is a loon. I'll be happy to read any *real* studies. That is, one where the scientific method is used to prove or disprove a hypothesis.0 -
If he wanted to prove fat spikes blood sugar, he could’ve simply shown a glucose reading after the olive oil. But instead he guzzles olive oil, stuffs himself with white flour and then measures his glucose. His conclusion is sleight-of-hand.
that's not at all what Delgado was trying to prove. fat does NOT raise blood glucose at all. carbs do. he was showing what happens when you COMBINE fat and carbs.
also, I'd like to point out, the study wasn't on triglycerides... your points on triglycerides could very well be true, but that wasn't the point of the experiment - it was to show how long blood glucose stays elevated when eating carbs paired with dietary fat.
Then why make a big deal of showing a lipid panel before and after the experiment? I'm well aware that high fat and high carbs are a bad combination. I just don't see what the video has to do with disproving a low-carb approach to diabetic control. Many state that increasing fat is not harmful IF carbs are reduced at the same time...I know of no low-carb diet that advocates combining massive amounts of fat and carbs.0 -
sorry, but I prefer to get my info from actual studies, not articles on Livestrong:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2826524
Livestrong > Mark's Daily Apple! :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
But um, yeah. Science rules! :flowerforyou:0 -
As I understand it, the mechanism is that both very high and very low carbohydrate intake causes insulin resistance. The very high is obvious, but very low carbohydrate makes your body "want" to keep what glucose IS available out and ready instead of tucked away somewhere. This is because, as discussed earlier, the brain does need glucose.dietary fat leads to insulin resistance.
I think those studies are based off of ultra high fat diets..........which typically lead to subjects being overweight, hence the insulin resistance starting to occur.
In a very low carbohydrate situation though, I don't see how insulin resistance would be harmful.0 -
The only issue I have with low carb diets is the perception that those following them are eating nothing but meat and cheese.
By most standards, I'm low carb because a heavy carb day would be around 85g, typcially I'm around 60g. Most days I have eggs or a veggie/egg scramble for breakfast, a huge salad with 6oz of meat for lunch, and for dinner 8-12 oz of lean protein, two cups of veggies and a 1/2 cup of starch (usually a sweet potato, rice or squash). I rarely eat sugar, grains or fruit - sugar because it makes me ill, grains because I'm allergic, and last because I just don't like them. I'd rather eat a bowl full of brocolli than an apple.
So yeah, I'm low carb compared to most, but I don't see anything unhealthy about how I eat.0 -
A ten year old study and a well studied dude that likes to drink cocktails in the pool.
http://nickdelgado.com/
Funny stuff.
I'm sorry you can't do your own research, a quick google search is all it takes, but here you go, I'll do the work for you:
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/55/6/1174.abstract
http://www.springerlink.com/content/1243786rq457j84m/
http://www.springerlink.com/content/1enfcr0fm56k1xh2/
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1749-6632.2002.tb04288.x/abstract?systemMessage=Wiley+Online+Library+will+be+disrupted+on+27+October+from+10:00-12:00+BST+(05:00-07:00+EDT)+for+essential+maintenance&userIsAuthenticated=false&deniedAccessCustomisedMessage=
http://journals.cambridge.org/download.php?file=/49268_A3C6B685670A000D4BBFFB45ECDE8313_journals__BJN_BJN83_S1_S000711450000101Xa.pdf&cover=Y&code=998bd76ef506c52e7005a5003ed21b36
http://ukpmc.ac.uk/abstract/MED/11172480
http://diabetes.diabetesjournals.org/content/46/11/1768.short0 -
sorry, but I prefer to get my info from actual studies, not articles on Livestrong:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2826524
Livestrong > Mark's Daily Apple! :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
But um, yeah. Science rules! :flowerforyou:
you might be confusing me with someone else - I never posted anything from Mark's Daily Apple - I think that guy is nuts.0 -
If he wanted to prove fat spikes blood sugar, he could’ve simply shown a glucose reading after the olive oil. But instead he guzzles olive oil, stuffs himself with white flour and then measures his glucose. His conclusion is sleight-of-hand.
that's not at all what Delgado was trying to prove. fat does NOT raise blood glucose at all. carbs do. he was showing what happens when you COMBINE fat and carbs.
also, I'd like to point out, the study wasn't on triglycerides... your points on triglycerides could very well be true, but that wasn't the point of the experiment - it was to show how long blood glucose stays elevated when eating carbs paired with dietary fat.
Then why make a big deal of showing a lipid panel before and after the experiment? I'm well aware that high fat and high carbs are a bad combination. I just don't see what the video has to do with disproving a low-carb approach to diabetic control. Many state that increasing fat is not harmful IF carbs are reduced at the same time...I know of no low-carb diet that advocates combining massive amounts of fat and carbs.
yep, fair point... I think it's because he's definitely a plant based high carb low fat follower.... I wasn't really so focused on his lipid profile, it was his glucose and how long it stayed so elevated and how HIGH it went (technically to diabetic levels, even in a non diabetic)0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K 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