can you stll lose belly fat and have carbs?

Never read it but being that 1 in 4 people have gluten allergie, even just mild it may intact help, I eat a tiny bit of wheat and look 6 months pregnant ! But as everyone has said fat comes off where bit wants, eat a cal defect and exercise !

The only carb associated with belly fat is alcohol. The liver prefers to store the excess calories from it in your abdominal fat. I couldn't find the study, but I found this quote. "In general, alcohol intake is associated with bigger waists, because when you drink alcohol, the liver burns alcohol instead of fat," says Michael Jensen, MD, an endocrine expert and obesity researcher with the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn. ( http://www.webmd.com/diet/features/the-truth-about-beer-and-your-belly )

There is no way to burn fat in one area, like your belly. The amount of carbs you eat doesn't determine fat. Calorie surplus is what causes fat. You can eat 0 carbs and still gain fat if you eat more calories than you burn.

Some people find reducing carbs, or eating carbs with a lower Glycemic Index, helps them control how many calories they eat. If that works for you, great; use it as a tool and realize that's all it is. Carbs are not good or bad, they're just a macro that gives you energy. I find it easier to control my calories when I eat less higher GI foods. I still eat them, I just plan for how I will deal with the blood sugar crash a few hours later so I can stay within my calorie limit for the day/week.

You are very wrong. there is no storage for alcohol calories.

Good to know the 100 or so calorie in a shot of vodka don't need to be tracked because they're not absorbed. Oh wait, they are. Alcohol is a type of sugar broken down and processed by the liver. Ethanol (alcohol) is oxidized to acetaldehyde by liver enzymes and then it enters the citric acid cycle to be metabolized. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kreb_cycle

Yes, they go to a place called "boozeland". It's probably where all the extra calories go for special snowflakes too. How magical

Alcohol must be metabolized by the body immediately...alcohol cannot be stored by the body as fat...that energy has to be used immediately. While your body is busy doing that, it can't metabolize other nutrients or oxidize fat though.

I have found that since I cut out wheat (ever read the book, Wheat Belly?) and added sugar that I have lost a disproportionate share of abdominal fat. I used to just lose it all over when I was at a higher percentage of carbs. Now, I limit my carbs to 20% and still avoid the added sugar and wheat. I eat a bit of organic, sourdough rye and oatmeal almost every morning. Other than that, I get my carbs from veggies and fruits.

Wheat Belly is absolute nonsense. Your claims are equally ridiculous.

OP, do not listen to this person.

Still your usual rudeness, I see. What exactly is ridiculous about what I have said? I have lost a little less than six pounds in the last four months--yet I have gone down a size in jeans and the ones I am wearing right now are loose around the waist. You have posted nothing in support of your claims yet you feel free to insult those who have actual experience with what they claim. Tsk-tsk. For shame!

The ridiculous thing is that you have zero data. "Oh I lost weight, and my belly got smaller!" Oh. Well OK. Happens to the rest of us too. My abdomen skinfold went from 23mm to 9.5 mm while averaging something like 200+ g of carbs a day.

Besides, anecdotes are not data. The idea that carbs somehow contribute to belly fat is completely without any merit whatsoever.

There's a LOT of scientific evidence that lowering excessively high blood sugar leads to loss of body fat (and almost every obese person has chronically elevated levels of blood sugar--duh, that's how they got fat!). Further, almost every obese woman has leptin resistance, and a lot of them have insulin resistance as well. The most effective way to lower both is to restrict carbohydrates. The medical community seems to be confused over the whole subject of carbohydrates. But, people are starting to share information on their weight loss and lots of "anecdotes" add up to the importance of restricting carbohydrates--particularly the "empty calorie" kind like sucrose and wheat starch.

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1120102-scapegoat-of-this-decade-sugar






I raise you actual studies.

Metabolic and behavioral effects of a high-sucrose diet during weight loss.

www.ajcn.org/content/65/4/908.full.pdf
http://www.alanaragonblog.com/2010/01/29/the-bitter-truth-about-fructose-alarmism



Here are studies that show GI didn't make a significant difference

An 18-mo randomized trial of a low-glycemic-index diet and weight change in Brazilian women

http://www.ajcn.org/content/86/3/707.abstract

Conclusions: Long-term weight changes were not significantly different between the HGI and LGI diet groups; therefore, this study does not support a benefit of an LGI diet for weight control. Favorable changes in lipids confirmed previous results.



Reduced glycemic index and glycemic load diets do not increase the effects of energy restriction on weight loss and insulin sensitivity in obese men and women.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16177201

In summary, lowering the glycemic load and glycemic index of weight reduction diets does not provide any added benefit to energy restriction in promoting weight loss in obese subjects.



Long-term effects of 2 energy-restricted diets differing in glycemic load on dietary adherence, body composition, and metabolism in CALERIE: a 1-y randomized controlled trial

http://www.ajcn.org/content/85/4/1023.abstract?ijkey=57903af923cb2fcdc065ffd37b00a32e22f4c5cf&keytype2=tf_ipsecsha

Conclusions:These findings provide more detailed evidence to suggest that diets differing substantially in glycemic load induce comparable long-term weight loss.



No effect of a diet with a reduced glycaemic index on satiety, energy intake and body weight in overweight and obese women.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17923862

CONCLUSION:

This study provides no evidence to support an effect of a reduced GI diet on satiety, energy intake or body weight in overweight/obese women. Claims that the GI of the diet per se may have specific effects on body weight may therefore be misleading.



Diaz EO et. al. Glycaemic index effects on fuel partitioning in humans. Obes Rev. (2006) 7:219-26.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-789X.2006.00225.x/full

Summary

The purpose of this review was to examine the role of glycaemic index in fuel partitioning and body composition with emphasis on fat oxidation/storage in humans. This relationship is based on the hypothesis postulating that a higher serum glucose and insulin response induced by high-glycaemic carbohydrates promotes lower fat oxidation and higher fat storage in comparison with low-glycaemic carbohydrates. Thus, high-glycaemic index meals could contribute to the maintenance of excess weight in obese individuals and/or predispose obesity-prone subjects to weight gain. Several studies comparing the effects of meals with contrasting glycaemic carbohydrates for hours, days or weeks have failed to demonstrate any differential effect on fuel partitioning when either substrate oxidation or body composition measurements were performed. Apparently, the glycaemic index-induced serum insulin differences are not sufficient in magnitude and/or duration to modify fuel oxidation


HFCS not linked to fatty liver disease

http://www.nrcresearchpress.com/doi/abs/10.1139/apnm-2012-0322#.UaPWA5G9KSN

http://www.nrcresearchpress.com/doi/abs/10.1139/y2012-122#.UaPW95G9KSM

"Recent research indicates an association between brain dysfunction and the pathogenesis of metabolic syndrome. To investigate this, we created a Medline search (up to December 2011) of articles in PubMed. The results indicated that refined carbohydrates, saturated and total fat, high levels of ω-6 fatty acids, and low levels of ω-3 fatty acids and other long chain polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA), all in conjunction with sedentary behaviour and mental stress can predispose to inflammation...."

It seems that food science, like all other science has been compromised by political considerations these days. I once heard a chemist insist that you could get just about any conclusion you wanted in a scientific report (for the right amount of money in a research grant, of course). The whole GMO debacle in Washington is a case in point. Frankenscience will eventually extinguish the vast majority of human life on the planet--if we let it.

Talks about the 'science' behind carbs and belly fat.

Is given examples of science that debunk the 'science'.

Claims science can't be trusted because of political money conspiracy instead of debating the point.

:laugh:

Look t my profile pic sorry on phone can't post a pic on here. But you will have your answer I eat carbs I've never lowered my carbs. I do eat more whole grains and fruits an veggies.

sigh i dont think there is an answer to how to lose belly fat! i think it's genetic lol. i'm not "fat" but i still have belly fat.. when i was skinny at younger age, i still had little of belly fat. it's def where my fat wants to go! it'll be nice if they go to my boobs lol

Carbs do not cause fat. Calorie surpluses cause fat. Eat a calorie deficit and you will lose fat. Resistance traing and you will retain muscle.

Step one... Stop arguing...
Step two... Read article by Lyle McDonald whom is an expert in the field of dieting. BTW... I'm sorry but women don't react carbs differently than men; they just tend to have slower metabolic rates. I find the sexism in this claim appalling. I am so appalled I am crying uncontrollably and don't know when I will stop... I very ultra extremely appalled... By this racism... Why be racist against men? We've done nothing wrong... But... A few things maybe.
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/nutrition/carbohydrate-and-fat-controversies-part-1.html

Step three... Get a glass wine... Turn on some good tunes... Sit back... Let the good times roll.