Low Cal or Low Carb????

^^^ what he said

You have to have a calorie deficit to lose weight. For me, it's easier to swap out carbs for something else so I get to eat a bit more. You can eat a tiny bit of bread or a big bowl of veggies- I chose veggies! (Usually)

Low carb is not low calorie. First of all 1 gram of fat represents 9 calories while 1 gram of carbohydrate represents 4 calories. So, replacing carbs with fat is not low calorie and you can easily overshoot your calorie goals while doing low-carb. Remember, you put on extra calories by eating in a surplus of what your body requires to function based on your activity level. If you're going to do low-carb, that's fine, but understand what your calorie requirements are for you to lose weight. Also, don't just shoot for 1200 like some sheep do because 1200 is likely far too low for most women. You want to lose weight on as many calories possible for successful long-term weight management.

Carbs aren't this horrible thing either, people can lose weight with carbohydrates.

To drop weight you have to drop cals, going lo carb is one way to do that.

Pick one that you can stick to for the long term. I rather eat less of what I enjoy then eliminate or severely restrict any particular food group.

Sometimes?

Depends. Are you referring to lowcal/lowcarb diet foods or monitoring your overall consumption to ensure that your carbs or calories are lower?

Carbs are your main energy source, so I wouldn't advise going too low carb. Those such diets tend to work in the short term because people on them tend to switch from processed to whole foods and drastically increase their protein intake, decreasing caloric intake by an average of several hundred per day; it's not because of anything inherent to eating fewer carbs. Bear in mind that humans throughout most of human history have eaten mostly carbs - generally above 70% - and obesity is only a recent problem. The leanest countries in the world have extremely high carb consumption. That's not to suggest that you should eat a super-high carb diet, but to exemplify how high carb itself does not hinder weight loss or maintenance.

Other than that, be weary of "kick starting" your results, especially on a low-carb diet. Those many "kick started" lb you lose will be mostly water and glycogen stores and not fat. In other words, it could be the case that you quickly lose, say, 8 lb, but your body doesn't look any different, you haven't lost any cm, and your clothes don't feel any different. That's because you've lost only a negligible amount of fat.

Assuming fat loss, and not mere weight loss, is your goal, you should take it slowly. That will tip the scale more slowly, but it will change your body composition (fat mass/lean body mass) more quickly. It can be the difference between losing no weight but two inches off your waist and losing 5 lb but no inches.

frob23 wrote: »

Omanya wrote: »

Bear in mind that humans throughout most of human history have eaten mostly carbs - generally above 70%

Source?

This,
Yet I imagine, even if a paper is cited, it's going to be at best speculation.

peter56765 wrote: »

I've lost weight with both, but I gained it all back and then some after a year of low carb. Been maintaining for 2 years now by watching calories instead of carbs.

My personal experience is that low carb dieting is great for weight loss but does not prepare you to handle maintenance. The constant allure of forbidden fruit (literally) pecks away at your resolve. How realistic is it that you will deprive yourself of 80% of everything at the grocery store and 95% of everything at a restaurant for the rest of your life? Nowadays, I count calories and eat whatever I want as long as it fits within my limits. And if I go over, I simply make it up over the next day or two. No "induction phase" stuff to deal with.

Having said all that, I must concede doing low carb taught me to emphasize those foods more in my diet. Low carb eating is more satisfying and less addicting. It's tragically easy to scarf down 500+ calories of chips, cereal or cookies. Try doing that with hard-boiled eggs!

I am going on year 3 of maintenance after going low carb. I agree with Peter 56765= I still don't eat carbs like I did before. I emphasize protein and vegetables (fats follow along with protein easily). I have added back a banana or apple most days and carbs are in my two servings of greek yogurt I generally eat each day. Totally agree on the hard -boiled egg.. best snack ever as it kills your hunger pangs quick! I do agree with low carb and calorie logging...I am not sure what is meant by "low calorie" maybe I should say "calorie aware and accountable" vs low calorie. I found it is pretty easy to not eat all my calories on low carb, so I had to log calories to make sure I was getting enough calories.

meganjcallaghan wrote: »

ndj1979 wrote: »

technically low carb is low calorie..if you cut out calorie dense foods and eat less of them then you are doing low calorie…

personally, I would just eat low calorie and stay within your carb macro …carbs are not the devil….

whaa? low carb isn't the same as low calorie. you could eat meats and fats all day er'day and quite quickly end up over your calorie goal.

Obviously you've never eaten low carb to see why its not as easy as you think eating above maintanance calories....

Bakkasan wrote: »

Sometimes Mac and cheese just makes everything better in the world.

This!

MelRC117 wrote: »

Sam_I_Am77 wrote: »

Low carb is not low calorie. First of all 1 gram of fat represents 9 calories while 1 gram of carbohydrate represents 4 calories. So, replacing carbs with fat is not low calorie and you can easily overshoot your calorie goals while doing low-carb. Remember, you put on extra calories by eating in a surplus of what your body requires to function based on your activity level. If you're going to do low-carb, that's fine, but understand what your calorie requirements are for you to lose weight. Also, don't just shoot for 1200 like some sheep do because 1200 is likely far too low for most women. You want to lose weight on as many calories possible for successful long-term weight management.

Carbs aren't this horrible thing either, people can lose weight with carbohydrates.

No, no its not. WHY DO YOU THINK LOW CARB WORKS? Because you feel full, causing you to eat less and then stay under your calorie allowance. That's all it is OP. That is why I prefer low carb over low calorie.

I can easily over eat on fat bombs, I love fried chicken skin, and heavy cream in all my soups was heavenly! The cals build fast!

ThePhoenixIsRising wrote: »

MelRC117 wrote: »

Sam_I_Am77 wrote: »

Low carb is not low calorie. First of all 1 gram of fat represents 9 calories while 1 gram of carbohydrate represents 4 calories. So, replacing carbs with fat is not low calorie and you can easily overshoot your calorie goals while doing low-carb. Remember, you put on extra calories by eating in a surplus of what your body requires to function based on your activity level. If you're going to do low-carb, that's fine, but understand what your calorie requirements are for you to lose weight. Also, don't just shoot for 1200 like some sheep do because 1200 is likely far too low for most women. You want to lose weight on as many calories possible for successful long-term weight management.

Carbs aren't this horrible thing either, people can lose weight with carbohydrates.

No, no its not. WHY DO YOU THINK LOW CARB WORKS? Because you feel full, causing you to eat less and then stay under your calorie allowance. That's all it is OP. That is why I prefer low carb over low calorie.

I can easily over eat on fat bombs, I love fried chicken skin, and heavy cream in all my soups was heavenly! The cals build fast!

But that's no different than only eating so many candy bars from the bag or only so many chips or fries or peanut butter or whatever you eat on a low cal diet. Going over in calories isn't harder on a low cal diet than on a low carb diet. Being in ketosis for most people makes them less hungry.

I don't understand how the PP thinks that low carb ISN'T low calorie...its just how people get to low calorie. I don't know how the fact that fat has a different amount of calorie per gram than protein and protein really makes a difference. You don't sub 100g of carbs for 100g of fat.