Low carb or calorie deficit more effective?

calorie cutting.

Low carb can be deceiving in a way you will lose water which creates the illusion that you are losing fat by losing weight

Glycogen binds with water. So if you deplete your glycogen stores, you lose the water which create weight loss but NOT fat loss if you do not create a deficit. Creating a calorie deficit "burns" stored fat.

Try going low carb for a few days, weight your self, then eat your carbs at the same calorie amount and your weight shoots up

Read the OP - the question was low carb + deficit or just deficit by itself. Low carb with a caloric deficit will produce fat loss over time and oftentimes does so while allowing people to stay very satiated at an aggressive caloric deficit.

Muscle glycogen depletion is probably the least persuasive reason why you should consider a low carb diet and only really occurs during the first 1-2 weeks of the diet. When your weight "shoots up" on a carb refeed, that's simply water weight and nothing to be concerned over. In short, dropping or adding that water weight isn't a big deal.

Sorry can you please explain to me about muscle glycogen depletion does this mean I will lose muscle mass? Thankyou your answer was very helpful :')

No, it's not a muscle mass issue. Glycogen is a storage form of carbohydrates (made up of glucose molecules). The body generally stores something like 100-125 g of glycogen in the body -- mainly in the liver and skeletal muscle -- to be used for immediate energy needs when there isn't sufficient glucose in the blood stream from food.

But, glycogen also requires you to retain water. That's why when people go on keto diets and deplete their glycogen stores in order to burn ketones as their primary energy source rather than glucose, they often lose a lot of water weight in the first week or so. Since the body doesn't have the glycogen anymore, it sheds this excess water. So, if someone that was on a keto diet, eats enough carbs to throw them out of ketosis, they'll build up glycogen stores again and retain that excess water as well.

Make sense?

I think it's really a personal choice. From what I can tell, they're both legitimate paths to success -- it will just depend on the individual's preferences and specific issues.

Some hate to restrict carbs, so generally a low-carb calorie deficit isn't going to be a good match for them. And if they take weight off in a reasonably similar manner with a calorie deficit alone, then there is no real benefit for these folks.

However, others find it much easier to maintain a sizeable calorie deficit when they low carb. High fat, moderate protein and low carb diets are highly satiating. So much so, that some don't feel the need to count calories at all. For others, they may have a carb sensitivity issue (like insulin resistance), so a low carb diet is near mandatory to create the calorie deficit.

I personally like low carb myself as it helps reduce cravings and I feel great on it (but I also have insulin resistance and some gluten intolerance issues -- so I avoid a lot of grains for that reason alone). However, I don't restrict carbs to the extent where it's a keto diet -- I keep carbs at 50-80g per day as a general fule. I find it far more effective for weight loss than a calorie deficit alone. But, my experience isn't going be the same for everyone.

I'd suggest you give it a try and see if it works for you.

bottom line is calorie deficit. If she substitutes carb with other calorie dense food and do not create a deficit, I doubt the extra fat is going away. There may be some moving in the scales but that will be water weight. High carb, high protein, high fat, vegan, etc.. Bottom line to losing the excess fat is calorie deficit

Yes, but if (1) they're starving, they're far less likely to be able to maintain a calorie deficit (they're far more likely to binge). That's why satiety is a really important for most people in dieting/lifestyle changes. If you can accomplish the same thing in an easier way with less effort or heartache, why wouldn't you do it?

Of course, what constitutes "easier" varies from person-to-person, but for some restricting carbs makes it much easier to maintain a caloric deficit.

(2) If they have any carb sensitivity issue, like insulin resistance, it may be absolutely necessary for them to do so in order to avoid big insulin spikes (which both causes hunger sensations and ultimately greater fat storage) due to their abnormal glucose metabolism. It's not a requirement for all that have these issues, but it is for many -- for good reason.

That is where the macro ratio come in. One does not necessarily have to go low carb unless medically necessary -- there are simple and complex carbs. Complex carbs have higher satiety than simple carbs. In that case, rice crispies vs potatoes. One would not feel the satiety when eating sugar compared to eating potatoes or oats. There are also food like fruits that are "high carb" but also high in fiber which helps with satiety

I think you are misunderstanding what I am saying. I am not saying low carb is ineffective. What I am saying the bottomline of fatloss is calorie deficit - be it low carb, high carb, high protein, high fat, etc

Lose fat and prevent further problems with insulin and pcos- diabetes runs in my family, type 1 & 2.

Since you have issues with insulin, pcos and diabetes, you may find restricting carbs to be very helpful. I know that I do and do many others in similar situations, but it's not an absolute rule for everyone. I'd recommend you try it out and see how you feel -- many take trial and error for a while until they find a carb number that works for them. For some, it's rather low, for others, it's much higher.

I know I didn't know how much better I'd feel until I tried it. I cut out grains for similar reasons and was surprised by how much better I felt with them out of my diet. I've still got a sweet tooth and still enjoy sweet stuff from time to time, but it's much more manageable and I enjoy smaller portions much more since my overall diet is much lower in carbs.

I think it's really a personal choice. From what I can tell, they're both legitimate paths to success -- it will just depend on the individual's preferences and specific issues.

Some hate to restrict carbs, so generally a low-carb calorie deficit isn't going to be a good match for them. And if they take weight off in a reasonably similar manner with a calorie deficit alone, then there is no real benefit for these folks.

However, others find it much easier to maintain a sizeable calorie deficit when they low carb. High fat, moderate protein and low carb diets are highly satiating. So much so, that some don't feel the need to count calories at all. For others, they may have a carb sensitivity issue (like insulin resistance), so a low carb diet is near mandatory to create the calorie deficit.

I personally like low carb myself as it helps reduce cravings and I feel great on it (but I also have insulin resistance and some gluten intolerance issues -- so I avoid a lot of grains for that reason alone). However, I don't restrict carbs to the extent where it's a keto diet -- I keep carbs at 50-80g per day as a general fule. I find it far more effective for weight loss than a calorie deficit alone. But, my experience isn't going be the same for everyone.

I'd suggest you give it a try and see if it works for you.

bottom line is calorie deficit. If she substitutes carb with other calorie dense food and do not create a deficit, I doubt the extra fat is going away. There may be some moving in the scales but that will be water weight. High carb, high protein, high fat, vegan, etc.. Bottom line to losing the excess fat is calorie deficit

Yes, but if (1) they're starving, they're far less likely to be able to maintain a calorie deficit (they're far more likely to binge). That's why satiety is a really important for most people in dieting/lifestyle changes. If you can accomplish the same thing in an easier way with less effort or heartache, why wouldn't you do it?

Of course, what constitutes "easier" varies from person-to-person, but for some restricting carbs makes it much easier to maintain a caloric deficit.

(2) If they have any carb sensitivity issue, like insulin resistance, it may be absolutely necessary for them to do so in order to avoid big insulin spikes (which both causes hunger sensations and ultimately greater fat storage) due to their abnormal glucose metabolism. It's not a requirement for all that have these issues, but it is for many -- for good reason.

That is where the macro ratio come in. One does not necessarily have to go low carb unless medically necessary -- there are simple and complex carbs. Complex carbs have higher satiety than simple carbs. In that case, rice crispies vs potatoes. One would not feel the satiety when eating sugar compared to eating potatoes or oats. There are also food like fruits that are "high carb" but also high in fiber which helps with satiety

I think you are misunderstanding what I am saying. I am not saying low carb is ineffective. What I am saying the bottomline of fatloss is calorie deficit - be it low carb, high carb, high protein, high fat, etc

I agree with you that people don't need to go low carb as a general rule, but doing so may make it easier for them to maintain a calorie deficit or a general sense of well-being (like for folks with insulin resistance, this is common). The carb choices -- whether simple, complex or low -- are going to come down to personal preferences and issues.

Which is where the macros and personal choices and necessity comes in. But people should be aware that the "cause" of real weight loss (in this case fat loss) is calorie deficit. Going low carb but not creating a deficit will create an illusion of weight loss because of depleted glycogen in the first days or weeks...

I am mentioning this so that when one goes low carb they wont be frustrated when the "weight loss" stalls or when their weight suddenly does up by 5 lbs in one day

At best, it is better for the OP to gauge progress with a tape measure. Coz seriously, scales can be crazy especially pertaining to the water weight.

I like a combo of both lower-ish carb and calorie counting. I made the hugest omelet today that had cheese, ham, and lots of vegetables for 400 calories. I wasn't hungry again until 12:30. Then I had a big bowl of homemade vegetable soup, some grilled chicken, and a spinach salad with goat cheese, walnuts, olive oil and balsamic vinegar, all for another 400 calories. By having lots of low-carb meals, it frees up some calories once in a while for pasta, pizza, homemade bread, or other stuff that makes life worth living (for me) and I'm not hungry AT ALL.

Which is where the macros and personal choices and necessity comes in. But people should be aware that the "cause" of real weight loss (in this case fat loss) is calorie deficit. Going low carb but not creating a deficit will create an illusion of weight loss because of depleted glycogen in the first days or weeks...

I am mentioning this so that when one goes low carb they wont be frustrated when the "weight loss" stalls or when their weight suddenly does up by 5 lbs in one day

At best, it is better for the OP to gauge progress with a tape measure. Coz seriously, scales can be crazy especially pertaining to the water weight.

I can't understand what you're arguing here, because no one is disputing caloric deficits are needed for weight loss. That's why I tried to point out the OP is asking about "low carb with deficit" vs. "just deficit." You keep pointing out the obvious and saying people don't understand your point... but your point is an obvious one and it's not being argued. Again, no one is saying you don't need a caloric deficit. Lindsey is simply saying that a low carb diet can make it easier for some, but not all, people to achieve such a caloric deficit. That has jack to do with muscle glycogen depletion and the accompanying water weight and it has everything to do with food choices and satiety.

I stated that the bottomline is caloric deficit and for one to not be frustrated about the scales, one has to be aware the effects of water weight -- carbs are converted to glycogen. So low carb will include water weight. Many people are not aware of this and they get frustrated if they see a 5lb increase in their weight overnight even if they have not consumed 17500 excess calories. What is wrong with stating something that will let her get LESS frustrated about the scales? I EVEN MENTIONED IT WOULD BE BETTER TO TRACK PROGRESS WITH TAPE MEASURE

And then someone quoted me as if I was implying that low carb is wrong which is not especially with people with medical conditions. If the OP wants to go low carb, she can do it if that's the best for her. Low carb, high carb, high protein, high fat. It's her choice. It's her macros.

I think you are the one making issues here. I am NOT telling her to not go low carb. Just some circumstances that accompanies low carb.

Part of what I think you're missing is how carb level can affect folks with carb sensitivity issues -- like the OP has disclosed that she has. It's not so easy to maintain a caloric deficit when you have insulin resistance because your body has an exaggerated insulin response. Your cells don't take up glucose like normal people, so your body has to increase the insulin to get more of them to respond. Increased insulin has a couple of effects -- it does force more of the glucose into your cells, which is good, but it also drops blood sugar dramatically (signally hunger) and ultimately results in more carbs being turned into fat rather than used by your cells for energy like a normal person.

So, you're not getting the energy you'd get from food like a normal person. When the insulin increases, you feel hungry even though you shouldn't. So, people are more prone to overeat because of this faulty mechanism. Or if they manage to stick to the allotted calories, they often feel horrible -- very sluggish because the glucose in their blood stream isn't getting into the cells where it needs to be.

To combat this, some use drugs like metformin which helps sensitize your cells to insulin like a normal person. Many restrict carbs to keep the big insulin spikes from happening. Losing weight often helps with insulin resistance, but having insulin resistance makes it more difficult to lose weight -- nice, little catch-22 there.

So, for people these types of people in particular, it's not just about a caloric deficit, but about both a caloric deficit AND restricting carbs.