low carb and calorie counting

Options
24

Replies

  • rmhyre
    Options
    I keep it under 20g of net carbs per day and don't specifically care about calories. Eating low carb curbs your appetite where it's kinda hard to overeat for most people. With that said, I do log my food and keep an eye on calories. They always end up within the same range and I've had a lot of success. Today is my 8 month anniversary and I haven't wavered at all from it.
  • Alliwan
    Alliwan Posts: 1,245 Member
    Options
    i do low carb and count calories. I often can eat because I'm bored or lonely or craving things, etc even if I;m not hungry or even if I am very full. So i have to count calories to keep myself from over eating.
  • deansdad101
    deansdad101 Posts: 644 Member
    Options
    <snip>
    , thanks to following LCHF it's not the struggle it used to be with hunger. It's more like someone else said, just a record of things so I know where I am at.

    <snip> but I monitor my macro's and just try to stay as close as everything as possible. It's getting easier but there is definitely a learning curve (for me anyway).

    <snip>. After I reworked my calories and macros I lost about four more pounds. So that means I had a successful 1 month of induction / keto. I am keeping on this path!!!
    Jenny;

    As frequently as this question comes around you'd think I would be able to figure out why it does and more importantly, exactly what folks mean by "counting" cals vs carbs - I just don't get it.

    Assuming most here are using MFP to TRACK daily intake, and specifically macro percentages, how is it possible to NOT track cals? (macro percentages are a function of total kcal intake).

    "Counting cals" is not only absolutely necessary for, as you say, "...keeping a record of things..." but it provides yet another data point for reference and it's pretty much a "no brainer" since it happens automatically (using MFP) when entering meals.

    "Reworking calories and macros.." (something everyone should be doing on a monthly basis), is the key - "counting" isn't, TRACKING IS.

    If by "counting" folks actually mean "tracking" (as opposed to "focusing on") it makes more sense to me - it's all about where one places their priorities. For us (many of us) it's about carbs/macros first, cals secondarily.

    Substantial evidence exists showing that most (if not ALL) of the various calorie counting apps (MFP, LoseIT, etc) are AT BEST accurate only to about a 16% + or - margin of error. Said another way, the 1500 kcals MFP says you "should" be eating (or are eating daily) MIGHT actually be 1740 or 1260 - and that's the BEST of them, others have demonstrated significantly higher margins of error.

    Read most of the other, more "mainstream" forums/posts on MFP and you'll see an almost maniacal focus on cals in/cals out - people arguing about whether 30 minutes of walking, biking, running (whatever) means they can eat 25 or 500 more cals that day.

    The most frequently repeated phrase is "as long as I'm in cal deficit, my fat intake is low and protein high enough, the carbs will take care of themselves" - second only to "I exercise so I HAVE TO keep my carbs UP".

    It's understandable, but sad that so many just plain don't 'git it". LCHF is NOT "first and foremost" a DIET (as in weight loss diet) - it IS a major lifestyle change focused on overall HEALTH and WELLNESS - weight loss is just one of many of its highly beneficial "side effects".

    Cals do matter but macros matter more - and as many have found, one of the primary benefits of LCHF is that after adapting to the lifestyle, cal intake really does "take care of itself" as satiety is reached with significantly lower cal intake levels.

    Yes, it's a major lifestyle change and challenging in the beginning to find the "balance" between carbs/fats/protein, but as time goes on it becomes second nature and many find the need to focus on cals at all pretty much disappears.

    "Tracking" for most is still important, if only to stay "in the range" for macros but for others, that too runs almost on automatic pilot - one learns by experience which are the "good" foods and which to avoid as well as what a "good/healthy" portion size of each is.

    In short, counting, tracking, focusing on - whatever one chooses to call it, DOES matter - at least at first. Once experience and knowledge replaces what "somebody told me" or "I read on another group that...." it might or might not be necessary at all.

    For some, tracking is motivational and a necessary component - for others it's not.

    To each his/her own.
  • JennyToy
    JennyToy Posts: 149 Member
    Options
    DeansDad,

    Yes, for me, this sums it up:

    <if by "counting" folks actually mean "tracking" (as opposed to "focusing on") it makes more sense to me - it's all about where one places their priorities. For us (many of us) it's about carbs/macros first, cals secondarily. >

    Because I am new to...having energy...having a normal appetite...i don't have a good mental picture of where i am with macro's (or calories) during the day, although only a month in I can see I am learning and really making progress.

    <Read most of the other, more "mainstream" forums/posts on MFP and you'll see an almost maniacal focus on cals in/cals out - people arguing about whether 30 minutes of walking, biking, running (whatever) means they can eat 25 or 500 more cals that day. >

    I not only don't understand this, i don't believe the ridiculous level of anti LCHF on the main boards. No respect that for works for one person may not work for another. It's craziness. I know CICO works for many people, and it even worked for me for a long time.

    I personally find it motivational and necessary. But i have been pursuing weight loss for almost 3 years now. So it's quite second nature. I am not bothered in the least that i may track even after i meet my goal. Thanks to smart phones we all carry around with us-it's not really very difficult :)
  • CARoberts73
    CARoberts73 Posts: 71 Member
    Options
    This is actually just the topic I'm struggling with this morning. I did low carb (25-35 or 40 daily) a few weeks ago, before vacation, and lost 9 lbs in 2 weeks. Gained some back over vacation, got right back on the wagon......and haven't lost a pound in the last 3 weeks. I keep bandying about the same 2 lbs. I'm getting frustrated, and I worry about my cholesterol which is always very high, and has been since my 20's, for genetic reasons. I'm starting to think maybe I need to track calories, just out of curiosity, and see if that may be contributing to the problem.
  • Leonidas_meets_Spartacus
    Options
    I
    I think, though, when it really comes right down to the brass tax.....no matter the kind of food lifestyle you have chosen, it all equates to factoring the amount of calories in against the amount of calories out (if you are trying to lose weight).

    I would think that no matter your eating style, you have to count the calories. I count them religiously. I weigh and measure every morsel of food that goes in my mouth. (Well, except if I have a bite of my hubby's ice cream and the bite is less than a TBSP)

    No. I stop tracking when I want to lose weight. I eat more to lose weight while keeping protein around 80-100 gms. It depends on individual basis and calorie in calorie out theory doesn't work on a daily basis as metabolism is not constant. Human metabolism is very complex and not a simple math, if it was basic calorie in calorie out, every one with a deficit would have lost weight easily.
  • deansdad101
    deansdad101 Posts: 644 Member
    Options
    DeansDad,

    Yes, for me, this sums it up:

    <snipped>

    <Read most of the other, more "mainstream" forums/posts on MFP and you'll see an almost maniacal focus on cals in/cals out - people arguing about whether 30 minutes of walking, biking, running (whatever) means they can eat 25 or 500 more cals that day. >

    I not only don't understand this, i don't believe the ridiculous level of anti LCHF on the main boards. No respect that for works for one person may not work for another. It's craziness. I know CICO works for many people, and it even worked for me for a long time.

    I personally find it motivational and necessary. But i have been pursuing weight loss for almost 3 years now. So it's quite second nature. I am not bothered in the least that i may track even after i meet my goal. Thanks to smart phones we all carry around with us-it's not really very difficult :)
    Jenny;

    Slightly off track and not meant to be critical but I do have to take issue with your statement that "I know CICO works for many people....".

    I do realize what you were saying, indeed it did "work" for me (for a while), much the same as it did for you.

    But if we define "works for..." in a broader (and longer time frame) context (which CICO monomaniacs refuse to do) - it's simply not possible to perpetuate the ruse that it "works".

    The results of the 40+ year "experiment" in CICO, low-fat, junk laden, HFCS, high carb "diet" imposed on us by the USDA and medical "professionals" - speak volumes.

    Skyrocketing rates of Type 2 Diabetes;
    Obesity and overweight proportions of the population rising to levels never before seen in history;
    Failure to control rates of heart disease (which was the "reasoning" behind no eggs, no dietary fat, etc in the first place)
    Continually increasing rates of Alzheimer's, a plethora of cancers, and on and on.
    Not to mention childhood emotional and learning disorders;
    Or that 95% of low cal, low fatters FAIL after a year and "yo-yo";
    Or that the "exercise" contingent IGNORES the data which shows that "exercise" (especially to extremes) INCREASES caloric intake and undermines weight loss in a large majority of cases. (yet the "eat back exercise cals?" debate persists and folks spend countless dollars purchasing gizmos to calculate to the gram how many "extra" cals they can "eat back" - what a hoot!)

    We, as a nation, did what we were told (CICO, low-fat) by those we SHOULD have been able to trust.

    That they (docs, usda, the "experts" and the cico-lites REFUSE to recognize, and more importantly ACKNOWLEDGE their mistakes is, at the very least, morally reprehensible.

    Yet, every day, over and over the sheeple repeat the mantra - "your doc knows best - just keep on keeping on and drink the koolaid"

    Sorry for the rant - it gets frustrating....but...

    ....the "good" news is - it really does seem like the "word" IS getting out there, little by little.

    I think I'm seeing (or maybe dreaming) that the monomaniacs seem somewhat less willing to put their ignorance on public display lately - wishful thinking????
  • deansdad101
    deansdad101 Posts: 644 Member
    Options

    No. I stop tracking when I want to lose weight. I eat more to lose weight while keeping protein around 80-100 gms. It depends on individual basis and calorie in calorie out theory doesn't work on a daily basis as metabolism is not constant. Human metabolism is very complex and not a simple math, if it was basic calorie in calorie out, every one with a deficit would have lost weight easily.
    Leon;

    Why is something so simple so difficult for so many to comprehend?
  • Leonidas_meets_Spartacus
    Options

    No. I stop tracking when I want to lose weight. I eat more to lose weight while keeping protein around 80-100 gms. It depends on individual basis and calorie in calorie out theory doesn't work on a daily basis as metabolism is not constant. Human metabolism is very complex and not a simple math, if it was basic calorie in calorie out, every one with a deficit would have lost weight easily.
    Leon;

    Why is something so simple so difficult for so many to comprehend?

    Belief in the system and what they read online or books. Which is sad in a way because there are lot of folks who eat at deficit and give up because of lack of progress. Your body doesn't know calories, but your hormones sure know how to react when you eat protein, carbs and fat.
  • CARoberts73
    CARoberts73 Posts: 71 Member
    Options
    I think I am going to have to look into my macros and / or try lower or higher numbers. I'm stalled after only a few weeks and getting frustrated. But this is how I truly prefer to eat, and I do NOT want to go back to calorie counting, so I will have to find a way to make it work.
  • DAM5412
    DAM5412 Posts: 660 Member
    Options
    I don't understand how anyone can track their carbs, but not their calories? I would be lost without my 'food' tracker keeping me accountable and providing me with a location to log my food...to manage both carb and calorie intake.

    That being said, and I am very new to low carb eating, I struggle with just calorie in/calories out. I find when I eat more carbs, my appetite is completely out of control and I struggle with emotional eating. When I limit my carbs, food becomes fuel and my appetite is not an issue/distraction. I am able to better evaluate options and eat consciously. I do not have much in the morning and by lunch time (which is usually 6-8 hours after I get up and I've worked out) I am hungry, but not hangry or irrationally so. I can eat a relatively small low carb lunch and be fine again for several hours. This seems to be working for me, for now.

    I have had to scale back my running activities, but I was getting bored with it and not seeing results. I am now walking more (pretty much every day) and started a strength video workout (about 2x a week).

    So far, I am happy with my results (my scale today told me I am down another 2 lbs, but I am going to wait a few days and see if that maintains), and even more so, my energy levels and moods are great. I am sleeping well, getting up without feeling exhausted and going through my day without being a slave to food.

    OK sorry, that's a lot more info than you needed, but I guess my view is yes, count both. Monitor how you feel on certain days and try to relate to your diet. Tweak as needed and be flexible, but steadfast. What works for you will reveal itself if you are paying attention.
  • icrushit
    icrushit Posts: 773 Member
    Options
    Low carb here, although starting to reverse out of it at the moment as I'm nearing my goal. I count calories and carbs, as the way I see it, low carb has been great for adherence for me, ie I find it much more easy to stick to a calorie deficit when what I ate was rich in fat and protein :)

    On a side note, I've tracked my weight loss since I began, as well as also tracking what I would have expected to lose just on the basis of the calorie deficit I was eating, and found it pretty much to be a wash, as both numbers were quite close. I don't know if there is any magic to low carb, other than helping you maintain a caloric deficit through being full enough on the low carb foods you are eating. Perhaps there is some additional magic, but personally with regard to myself, I haven't seen any, aside from perhaps the potential speedy water loss from the initial glycogen depletion, which may be a benefit to some (ie athletes/ those who need to 'make weight' to be eligible for certain weight classes)

    I've done slow carb in the past by the way, and gotten good results (70lbs of good results), but this time I decided to try low carb, and personally found it even more effective than good, slow carbs. My blood sugar has been entirely problem-free, and my energy levels and hunger levels just great, although I shall be re-introducing carbs once my weight loss is over, just at a lower level than I ate pre-low carb.
  • Sabine_Stroehm
    Sabine_Stroehm Posts: 19,263 Member
    Options
    Low carb here, although starting to reverse out of it at the moment as I'm nearing my goal. I count calories and carbs, as the way I see it, low carb has been great for adherence for me, ie I find it much more easy to stick to a calorie deficit when what I ate was rich in fat and protein :)

    On a side note, I've tracked my weight loss since I began, as well as also tracking what I would have expected to lose just on the basis of the calorie deficit I was eating, and found it pretty much to be a wash, as both numbers were quite close. I don't know if there is any magic to low carb, other than helping you maintain a caloric deficit through being full enough on the low carb foods you are eating. Perhaps there is some additional magic, but personally with regard to myself, I haven't seen any, aside from perhaps the potential speedy water loss from the initial glycogen depletion, which may be a benefit to some (ie athletes/ those who need to 'make weight' to be eligible for certain weight classes)

    I've done slow carb in the past by the way, and gotten good results (70lbs of good results), but this time I decided to try low carb, and personally found it even more effective than good, slow carbs. My blood sugar has been entirely problem-free, and my energy levels and hunger levels just great, although I shall be re-introducing carbs once my weight loss is over, just at a lower level than I ate pre-low carb.
    I didn't do Tim Ferriss' slow carb (not sure if that's what you're thinking), just good old low glycemic carbs, many of which are allowed on low carb diets. Man does it keep my blood sugar steady.
    My eating is pretty close to South Beach Diet phase 2 or 3.
    Congrats on being near goal!
  • icrushit
    icrushit Posts: 773 Member
    Options
    I didn't do Tim Ferriss' slow carb (not sure if that's what you're thinking), just good old low glycemic carbs, many of which are allowed on low carb diets. Man does it keep my blood sugar steady.
    My eating is pretty close to South Beach Diet phase 2 or 3.
    Congrats on being near goal!

    Thanks, although the closer I get to my goal, the more I end up pushing it out a little more, lol :)

    Was actually thinking good old low glycemic carbs actually, but have started reading Tim Ferriss' 4 Hour Body book out of curiousity just recently actually, lol.

    Low GI carbs are great at keeping the blood sugar under control alright I found, although I was reading Alan Aragon's article (http://alanaragon.com/glycemic-index) recently about how low GI does not necessarily correlate with low insulin, which made for interesting reading I must admit, as I hadn't been aware of the disparity between the two.
  • Sabine_Stroehm
    Sabine_Stroehm Posts: 19,263 Member
    Options
    I didn't do Tim Ferriss' slow carb (not sure if that's what you're thinking), just good old low glycemic carbs, many of which are allowed on low carb diets. Man does it keep my blood sugar steady.
    My eating is pretty close to South Beach Diet phase 2 or 3.
    Congrats on being near goal!

    Thanks, although the closer I get to my goal, the more I end up pushing it out a little more, lol :)

    Was actually thinking good old low glycemic carbs actually, but have started reading Tim Ferriss' 4 Hour Body book out of curiousity just recently actually, lol.

    Low GI carbs are great at keeping the blood sugar under control alright I found, although I was reading Alan Aragon's article (http://alanaragon.com/glycemic-index) recently about how low GI does not necessarily correlate with low insulin, which made for interesting reading I must admit, as I hadn't been aware of the disparity between the two.
    Yeah, I tend to think more about glycemic load and impact.... and how to blunt it when needed, than just GI. Does that make sense?
  • icrushit
    icrushit Posts: 773 Member
    Options
    Yeah, I tend to think more about glycemic load and impact.... and how to blunt it when needed, than just GI. Does that make sense?

    Yeah, thats the way I see it too, although when eating eating more carbs in the past, I didn't sweat it too much, just tried to eat complex carbs mostly, and to mix the simple ones with complex ones and sometimes fats too, to dull any blood sugar funkiness they could inspire if I wasn't careful.

    For example, my homemade granola bars have a both sugar and honey in them, but that is balanced nicely by the fat in the nuts and seeds in them, and the complex carbs from the oats in them, and never had one affect my blood sugar :)

    I must say I really do like having no blood sugar issues at all, no matter how hard I push my body, since I've been eating low carb though. There's nothing worse than that low blood sugar crash, although I imagine my insulin sensitivity has improved since doing lower carb. I think also what I like a lot is not having to be conscious of food as much, as now I seem far more inclined to do whatever I want, even if its been some time since I've eaten. I never quite had that confidence/ attitude even when eating complex carbs, as for some reason, it just felt like a more temporary source of energy. That may quite well be just me, but I just feel less inhibited with the stable source of energy from all that fat, and also lack of worry about hunger from the protein/ fat combo. I'm probably drifting here now, but its just a hard feeling to explain :)
  • Sabine_Stroehm
    Sabine_Stroehm Posts: 19,263 Member
    Options
    Yeah, I tend to think more about glycemic load and impact.... and how to blunt it when needed, than just GI. Does that make sense?

    Yeah, thats the way I see it too, although when eating eating more carbs in the past, I didn't sweat it too much, just tried to eat complex carbs mostly, and to mix the simple ones with complex ones and sometimes fats too, to dull any blood sugar funkiness they could inspire if I wasn't careful.

    For example, my homemade granola bars have a both sugar and honey in them, but that is balanced nicely by the fat in the nuts and seeds in them, and the complex carbs from the oats in them, and never had one affect my blood sugar :)

    I must say I really do like having no blood sugar issues at all, no matter how hard I push my body, since I've been eating low carb though. There's nothing worse than that low blood sugar crash, although I imagine my insulin sensitivity has improved since doing lower carb. I think also what I like a lot is not having to be conscious of food as much, as now I seem far more inclined to do whatever I want, even if its been some time since I've eaten. I never quite had that confidence/ attitude even when eating complex carbs, as for some reason, it just felt like a more temporary source of energy. That may quite well be just me, but I just feel less inhibited with the stable source of energy from all that fat, and also lack of worry about hunger from the protein/ fat combo. I'm probably drifting here now, but its just a hard feeling to explain :)
    Oh yeah. If lunch is delayed, I'm fine. Before I'd be psycho.
  • Keto_T
    Keto_T Posts: 673 Member
    Options
    I focus on carbs first, then protein, then not being hungry (fat if needed) then calories. Usually focusing on carbs and protein (and fat as a side note) keeps calories in check without actually watching them.
  • deansdad101
    deansdad101 Posts: 644 Member
    Options
    I focus on carbs first, then protein, then not being hungry (fat if needed) then calories. Usually focusing on carbs and protein (and fat as a side note) keeps calories in check without actually watching them.
    Tia;

    Some (myself included) would suggest that you might want to reconsider the order of focus. ("...focusing on carbs and protein....fat if needed....").

    Significant carb reduction WITHOUT a corresponding increase in dietary fat intake can be a recipe for disaster as it's the FAT that provides the energy source NOT the protein. (Yes, SOME of the protein is converted).

    Consensus of the current research indicates that daily protein requirements typically run in the 20 - 25% (or calculated as a function of lean body mass) range and that more is NOT necessarily better - it can, in fact, be counter productive especially as it relates to weight reduction.

    I absolutely agree with your comment that "....calories (pretty much) stay in check without actually watching them" - however, at least in the beginning stages, tracking (not focusing on) them does make sense and since it really doesn't require any extra effort if you are already tracking F + C + P and you need the cal "target" in order to calculate Macro percentages anyway - why not?

    The key (at least IMO) is "tracking" vs. "focusing on".

    Track the cals but focus on the macros.
  • Keto_T
    Keto_T Posts: 673 Member
    Options
    I focus on carbs first, then protein, then not being hungry (fat if needed) then calories. Usually focusing on carbs and protein (and fat as a side note) keeps calories in check without actually watching them.
    Tia;

    Some (myself included) would suggest that you might want to reconsider the order of focus. ("...focusing on carbs and protein....fat if needed....").

    Significant carb reduction WITHOUT a corresponding increase in dietary fat intake can be a recipe for disaster as it's the FAT that provides the energy source NOT the protein. (Yes, SOME of the protein is converted).

    Consensus of the current research indicates that daily protein requirements typically run in the 20 - 25% (or calculated as a function of lean body mass) range and that more is NOT necessarily better - it can, in fact, be counter productive especially as it relates to weight reduction.

    I absolutely agree with your comment that "....calories (pretty much) stay in check without actually watching them" - however, at least in the beginning stages, tracking (not focusing on) them does make sense and since it really doesn't require any extra effort if you are already tracking F + C + P and you need the cal "target" in order to calculate Macro percentages anyway - why not?

    The key (at least IMO) is "tracking" vs. "focusing on".

    Track the cals but focus on the macros.

    I am not new to low carbing and not in the beginning stages. I follow the OKL (Optimal Keto Living) method. I focus on actual grams of macros and not percentages. The OKL theory is that less than optimal protein will contribute to loss of lean muscle mass while greater than optimal dietary fat will inhibit the use of body fat (fat loss/weight loss). I keep my carbs ≤ 35g net, protein ≥ 100g, and fill in the rest with fat.

    I follow my hunger with regards to calories and don’t restrict. As with most keto diets, calories are pretty self-restricting. Some days mine are pretty low, some days they are higher. So yes, I focus first on carbs, then protein, then fill in with fat and it’s been working pretty well for me.