Low Carb vs. Moderate Carb
Options
Replies
-
Exactly; the move from hunting and gathering to harvesting (which was HUNDREDS of thousands of years ago, people, not even just "centuries") was a huge, huge change in our collective history.
THERE'S SO MUCH EVOLUTIONARY ANTHROPOLOGY ON THE BOARDS TODAY, I FEEL LIKE I'M IN COLLEGE AGAIN. :drinker:
your final bit made me smile so I just wanted to say thanks for the chuckle!
arguments can be made that hundreds of thousands of years is a drop in the ocean for human evolution...0 -
Yikes, I don't want to do super long quote, and I don't necessarily think low carb is the devil here, but your research is huuuugely biased. Any standard biology or anthropology class covers the development of agriculture as being closer to 100,000 years ago, not 10,000 years ago, with a "sensitivity" to carbs being the minority of further species than the majority.
And I'm not sure how you can seriously consider something that says, "obesity was very frequent in those times based on the findings of Egyptian mummies" when the mummies we find were specifically the wealthy who could afford the process (most people were NOT mummified, contrary to popular belief), and tooth decay is almost 100% been attributed to the amount of SAND in their food o_O0 -
Long term, 40% of your calories from carbs, focusing on low glycemic foods seems to to work well for steady weight loss and long term weight maintenance according to NYTimes science writer Gary Taubes (http://www.amazon.com/Why-We-Get-Fat-About/dp/0307949435)
I found his books convincing and following those guidelines very helpful to me. It also was way more doable than Atkins.
I read several studies of diet plans and Atkins is excellent for short term, fast weight loss but extremely difficult to maintain long term. So transitioning up, as you plan, sounds sensible.
I have no intention of maintaining this ultra low carb lifestyle forever, not because I don't thrive on it, but because socially it is too restrictive. What I do plan to do is ever so slowly reintroduce carbs after I hit my goal weight, from then I will slowly get to a place I am comfortable.
What I will never do is go back to eating the white breads/rice/pasta that I used to, I dont even miss it!0 -
Exactly; the move from hunting and gathering to harvesting (which was HUNDREDS of thousands of years ago, people, not even just "centuries") was a huge, huge change in our collective history.
THERE'S SO MUCH EVOLUTIONARY ANTHROPOLOGY ON THE BOARDS TODAY, I FEEL LIKE I'M IN COLLEGE AGAIN. :drinker:
your final bit made me smile so I just wanted to say thanks for the chuckle!
arguments can be made that hundreds of thousands of years is a drop in the ocean for human evolution...
Oh absolutely it's a drop in the bucket, but it's still a drop.0 -
Yikes, I don't want to do super long quote, and I don't necessarily think low carb is the devil here, but your research is huuuugely biased. Any standard biology or anthropology class covers the development of agriculture as being closer to 100,000 years ago, not 10,000 years ago, with a "sensitivity" to carbs being the minority of further species than the majority.
And I'm not sure how you can seriously consider something that says, "obesity was very frequent in those times based on the findings of Egyptian mummies" when the mummies we find were specifically the wealthy who could afford the process (most people were NOT mummified, contrary to popular belief), and tooth decay is almost 100% been attributed to the amount of SAND in their food o_O
TBH I was putting the first thing I found on the subject purely to try and get the point across that the human body has been around for a lot longer time than we have been consistently eating carbs. its definitely not the best source for this debate but I am at work and don't have the time to find the research that I found when I started this process.
And by the sounds of it your much more of an expert on this than I could ever claim to be!
Finally, all research by its definition is biased as the researcher inherently has an agenda that he/she wants to meet.0 -
My point is that people eating grains is not a result of an "industry" and that grains are not the cause of obesity. If those things were true, grains would be something that only became a dietary staple in the last 20-30 years rather than something that became a staple thousands of years ago.
Correct, grains most definitely are NOT the cause of obesity, there are many people across the world who eat high-carb diets with no obesity epidemics. HOWEVER that does not mean that fats should be demonized in favour of grains as they currently are in western culture (the only culture I have experience of)
Grains are a staple of our diet because they are easier to preserve and procure/grow than proteins/fats. Everyone on the earth can buy a bowl of rice, but only a certain subset can afford a steak to go on top.
Again, I have no issue with standard diets/lifestyles, what I do have an issue with is the demonizing of the low-carb lifestyle when there simply isn't enough correct evidence to point either way
Finally someone who makes sense and realizes everyone is different and not one diet works for everybody. Make the guy who was arguing with you should read article on insulin resistance and it's effects on people with it. There is a reason why low carb diets work for some people and other people have great results off of high carb low fat diets. A guy even lost weight doing a Twinkie diet. Some some people it is all about calories. For me it's not, it's about what foods I eat. I use a low carb diet to start dropping weight then switch to a low GI diet once I get to a certain point. It's because I know what works for me and my body type.
I am guessing you haven't read about CKD and TKD's. A lot of professional body builders use this diets when getting ready for competitions. Any I am going to get off my soap box.
To the OP: There are a lot of different diets out there the trick is finding what you can stick to and works for you. Don't believe a lot of the non-sense posted in this thread. The body really only need 10-20g of carbs a day. There are just a few parts of the body that require glucose to function and with 10-20g of carbs a day you can meet those requirements. I could site medical publications and studies on this but, I really don't feel like it.
Thank you for more eloquently putting what I was trying to get across.0 -
Yikes, I don't want to do super long quote, and I don't necessarily think low carb is the devil here, but your research is huuuugely biased. Any standard biology or anthropology class covers the development of agriculture as being closer to 100,000 years ago, not 10,000 years ago, with a "sensitivity" to carbs being the minority of further species than the majority.
And I'm not sure how you can seriously consider something that says, "obesity was very frequent in those times based on the findings of Egyptian mummies" when the mummies we find were specifically the wealthy who could afford the process (most people were NOT mummified, contrary to popular belief), and tooth decay is almost 100% been attributed to the amount of SAND in their food o_O
TBH I was putting the first thing I found on the subject purely to try and get the point across that the human body has been around for a lot longer time than we have been consistently eating carbs. its definitely not the best source for this debate but I am at work and don't have the time to find the research that I found when I started this process.
And by the sounds of it your much more of an expert on this than I could ever claim to be!
Finally, all research by its definition is biased as the researcher inherently has an agenda that he/she wants to meet.
Research can be inherently biased, absolutely! Just... most of the evolutionary texts I've studied and read over the years haven't been in the context of pushing a diet plan :laugh:0 -
Yikes, I don't want to do super long quote, and I don't necessarily think low carb is the devil here, but your research is huuuugely biased. Any standard biology or anthropology class covers the development of agriculture as being closer to 100,000 years ago, not 10,000 years ago, with a "sensitivity" to carbs being the minority of further species than the majority.
And I'm not sure how you can seriously consider something that says, "obesity was very frequent in those times based on the findings of Egyptian mummies" when the mummies we find were specifically the wealthy who could afford the process (most people were NOT mummified, contrary to popular belief), and tooth decay is almost 100% been attributed to the amount of SAND in their food o_O
TBH I was putting the first thing I found on the subject purely to try and get the point across that the human body has been around for a lot longer time than we have been consistently eating carbs. its definitely not the best source for this debate but I am at work and don't have the time to find the research that I found when I started this process.
And by the sounds of it your much more of an expert on this than I could ever claim to be!
Finally, all research by its definition is biased as the researcher inherently has an agenda that he/she wants to meet.
Research can be inherently biased, absolutely! Just... most of the evolutionary texts I've studied and read over the years haven't been in the context of pushing a diet plan :laugh:
Well theres the problem... damn early homonids not writing down what they were eating, didnt they know that a few people would be arguing about this on the internet in 2012??!?!?! :P0 -
Yikes, I don't want to do super long quote, and I don't necessarily think low carb is the devil here, but your research is huuuugely biased. Any standard biology or anthropology class covers the development of agriculture as being closer to 100,000 years ago, not 10,000 years ago, with a "sensitivity" to carbs being the minority of further species than the majority.
And I'm not sure how you can seriously consider something that says, "obesity was very frequent in those times based on the findings of Egyptian mummies" when the mummies we find were specifically the wealthy who could afford the process (most people were NOT mummified, contrary to popular belief), and tooth decay is almost 100% been attributed to the amount of SAND in their food o_O
TBH I was putting the first thing I found on the subject purely to try and get the point across that the human body has been around for a lot longer time than we have been consistently eating carbs. its definitely not the best source for this debate but I am at work and don't have the time to find the research that I found when I started this process.
And by the sounds of it your much more of an expert on this than I could ever claim to be!
Finally, all research by its definition is biased as the researcher inherently has an agenda that he/she wants to meet.
Research can be inherently biased, absolutely! Just... most of the evolutionary texts I've studied and read over the years haven't been in the context of pushing a diet plan :laugh:
Well theres the problem... damn early homonids not writing down what they were eating, didnt they know that a few people would be arguing about this on the internet in 2012??!?!?! :P
Our alien overlords 5,000 years from now will probably be wondering, "Wtf?" when they take a look back at us!0 -
Yikes, I don't want to do super long quote, and I don't necessarily think low carb is the devil here, but your research is huuuugely biased. Any standard biology or anthropology class covers the development of agriculture as being closer to 100,000 years ago, not 10,000 years ago, with a "sensitivity" to carbs being the minority of further species than the majority.
And I'm not sure how you can seriously consider something that says, "obesity was very frequent in those times based on the findings of Egyptian mummies" when the mummies we find were specifically the wealthy who could afford the process (most people were NOT mummified, contrary to popular belief), and tooth decay is almost 100% been attributed to the amount of SAND in their food o_O
TBH I was putting the first thing I found on the subject purely to try and get the point across that the human body has been around for a lot longer time than we have been consistently eating carbs. its definitely not the best source for this debate but I am at work and don't have the time to find the research that I found when I started this process.
And by the sounds of it your much more of an expert on this than I could ever claim to be!
Finally, all research by its definition is biased as the researcher inherently has an agenda that he/she wants to meet.
Research can be inherently biased, absolutely! Just... most of the evolutionary texts I've studied and read over the years haven't been in the context of pushing a diet plan :laugh:
Well theres the problem... damn early homonids not writing down what they were eating, didnt they know that a few people would be arguing about this on the internet in 2012??!?!?! :P
Our alien overlords 5,000 years from now will probably be wondering, "Wtf?" when they take a look back at us!
Screw the overlords, my ancestors will be leading the rebel resistance0 -
I'm with Rodhands. Look, to whomever said a ketogenic diet would put you at "higher risk", explain. Higher risk of what, losing weight and being awesome? Or, perhaps you mean heart disease? The ketogenic diet is used to help kids with epilepsy, and works for a few other things (personally has worked well for my IBS, which can be debilitating). So, you think doctors are suggesting these kids go keto so that they can stop having seizure knowing it will give them a higher risk of a heart attack. C'monn
Look, there's one main reason I love keto, and that's because I'm a lazy *kitten* with weak willpower. That's how I got fat in the first place. With keto, you eat delicious things like bacon, sausage, and salads loaded with three cheese dressings and more bacon, and you STILL lose weight! And WHY do you lose weight? Because its so easy to feel full and STAY full for the majority of the day, AND still stay in a calorie deficit! I have NEVER had that from diets in the past. Do you understand what this means?
It's the diet to end all diets! At least, it is for me. No only am I learning what being hungry really feels like (instead of insatiable hunger after a carb crash), but feeling better, more conscious of what I'm putting in my body, and losing weight faster than I ever have before. Other diets are just to long and I lose motivation so quickly. ...this diet offers a whole new perspective on things.
I especially love when MFP tell me "if you keep going at this rate, you'll lose 30lbs in 6 months!" Knowing full well I could drop that weight in a month if I tried hard enough.0 -
I low carb because I'm diabetic and carbs spike my blood sugars. Is it for everyone? No but then one size fits all has always been a joke.0
-
I've never purposely done low carb, but I've had great success, both in weight loss and fitness gains, with moderate carb,
I don't eat a consistent amount of carbs. Some days would qualify as low carb, many would be high carb, but most (and the average) would be moderate.
I mainly stick to what are commonly refered to as "good carbs" - vegetables, legumes, fruits, whole grains, nuts - and I limit added sugar and try to avoid overly processed ("white") grain products and white potatoes.0 -
So tired of Atkins critics. It's not a fad diet of eating 20 grams of carbs for the rest of your life. 20 grams is induction and those carbs are suppose to be salad veggies. You then gradually add back 5 grams of carbs a week in a particular order to see what your body can handle. For the most part it's lower glycemic foods first. Grains at the end. There is no magic number, it's what your body can handle. I'm up to 20% carbs in the OWL phase and doing great. I could end up at 30% or 50%, don't know since I am not in pre-maintenance phase yet.
This has worked like a charm for me. Not because carbs are the devil, it was the crappy types of carbs I was eating. Atkins helped me get over the cravings they caused.
I tried South Beach but it added back carbs too fast. Slow and steady has worked for me.0 -
Read back, I have said what industry and my reason why I disagree with the pushing of "whole grains are brilliant", not necessarily because they aren't but because that is done at the expense of demonizing fats which is just a ridiculous notion.
I haven't read all the replies so I apologize if this has already been asked and answered, but who are you refering to when you say whole grains are said to be brilliant at the expense of demonizing fat?0 -
I do Chris Powells Carb Cycling and I love it!0
-
Well theres the problem... damn early homonids not writing down what they were eating, didnt they know that a few people would be arguing about this on the internet in 2012??!?!?! :P
I know for sure that they were NOT eating Chex Party Mix, Lays BBQ Potato Chips, White Rice, Genetically Modified Wheat, Rye, Corn .... or Ice Cream or Cane Sugar.0 -
Well theres the problem... damn early homonids not writing down what they were eating, didnt they know that a few people would be arguing about this on the internet in 2012??!?!?! :P
I know for sure that they were NOT eating Chex Party Mix, Lays BBQ Potato Chips, White Rice, Genetically Modified Wheat, Rye, Corn .... or Ice Cream or Cane Sugar.
Or brussel sprouts cooked in avocado oil, or coffee with coconut oil in it, or bacon, or pretty much anything else anyone eats in 2012. Poor guys!0 -
Try South Beach, it's easier to live with. And you get to eat more carbs in the first two weeks.
Has anyone on here ever gone from Atkins to a more moderate carb diet including potatoes, whole wheat breads, brown rice, etc? Did you see big gains? I dont think I want to do super low carb (20 or less) all the time but would like to try what I would call moderate going over no more than 50 or so carbs a day. Im wondering how eating low carb but adding a little of the above mentioned foods may affect the diet as a whole. Definitely don't want to do it if it will sabotage the low carb part of it all! Or..........do I just need to find really good substitutes for the carb-heavy foods I love?
Any advice from people who have been down this road will be much appreciated!! Add me if you would like too!0 -
I try to eat 100g carb, !00g protein, and 50 g fat. It was suggested for me by my nutrtionist. It works for me.
Wow! That is amazing success you have! Congrats to you. You definitely have the proof that it works for you.
I tend to stay around that balance as well. I get most of my carbs from non starch veggies and other high fiber sources. As long as I don't go overboard, I can have an occasional treat now and then. I don't mind giving up bread and potatoes to be able to have a fun sized Snicker bar every once in a while. Too much tho and I start wanting more. I have added sweet potatoes yesterday and today and will see how I do on them. I just don't miss the bread, pasta, and other simple carbs anymore. Higher protein and good fats keep me feeling fuller, more energetic, and steady weight loss.
Moderate carb works for me, tho I completely accept that others can do well on higher carb.
I don't think any diet that says you can't have broccoli or green beans is good for long term, but I don't know of any that actually DO restrict those. Are there ones that do? Even Atkins allows non starch veggies.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 402 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
- 998 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions