Low Carb Responses from the General Forums
Replies
-
We are all human. We do not all have the same chemical soup, inherited genes, familial and cultural history regarding food preferences, and medical conditions (physical and mental) to deal with. If it works for you fine. That doesn't mean you are an expert in all ways to tell someone else how to treat their problems. Sharing is nice, bullying is bad.
This. So much this. Live and let live. The world is full of people attacking others for being different in some way. Do what works for you and let other people do what works for them.
0 -
Gianfranco_R wrote: »Yes the solution for some people is to eat more fat and less carbs, [...] the problem is not carbohydrates.
If for some people the solution is to eat less carbs, it is also evident that at least for them the problem is indeed their previous carbs intake (elementary, my dear watson)
I was specifically addressing the claim about the obesity epidemic and insulin resistance/diabetes being caused by carbohydrate.
0 -
Figured I'd add this here in anyone didn't see it. It actually went surprisingly well, until the dudebros showed up to hijack it at the end: http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10108477/why-dont-the-low-carb-folks-believe-in-cico/p1
The OP question is asking why don't low carb folks believe in CICO, or why do they say that CICO does not apply when going low carb.
What is a good answer to that? Or is the question itself flawed or loaded in some way?
0 -
For me CICO which includes over 20 carbs a day leaves me starving at the lower level of CI of 1000 to 1300 a day to lose weight. I can not sustain the continual feeling of hunger.
On Low carb, 20 carbs or under, high fat or higher fat and not worrying too much about calories in I can easily eat about 1300 calories a day or less and never feel hunger or have a feeling of being deprived in any way. I usually end up not eating the full 1300 calories because I am never starving. This way of eating is sustainable for me even if my weight loss is not really fast. I have health issues and I am in the older age group and age does make a difference in the rate of weight loss.
On CICO I gain weight at 1000 to 1300 calories a day. The carbs make me hungry. Apparently my body does not process them well.0 -
Figured I'd add this here in anyone didn't see it. It actually went surprisingly well, until the dudebros showed up to hijack it at the end: http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10108477/why-dont-the-low-carb-folks-believe-in-cico/p1
The OP question is asking why don't low carb folks believe in CICO, or why do they say that CICO does not apply when going low carb.
What is a good answer to that? Or is the question itself flawed or loaded in some way?
We don't believe that Calories Out is independent from Calories In, nor do we believe that Calories Out is an easily known or predictable value. It's not that we don't believe you are burning more calories than you're eating, if you're losing weight. Likewise, if you're not losing weight, we [generally] believe that you're eating as much as you're burning (or more than you're burning).
Basically, what your body does with the food you eat is determined by more than a simple prediction based on population statistics and just total calories in. If you reduce your calories below a point where your body can compensate, you'll lose weight regardless of the quality of the calories. No one is denying that. We just don't think that's the best way. You may be able to eat more food and lose the same amount of weight. Or, you may be able to eat a different combination of foods (with the same calories) that makes losing weight easier and makes you feel better at the same time.
0 -
FIT_Goat, have you ever taken your temperature on your current diet?
I ask because calorie restriction has been shown to lower body temperature. Likewise, high-protein diets have been shown to raise it (but I don't know for how long).
Just one way your metabolism might adjust to input. The other way would be to lose or gain muscle mass. FIT_Goat should be able to leap tall buildings pretty soon.
0 -
I'm never really sick, so I don't ever think to take my temp. I just took it now, 98.6 deg_F. That's "normal." But, it's possible my temperature runs higher after meals. It's been a few hours since I have eaten. I'll test out my ability to jump buildings tomorrow, when it's light out.
0 -
Figured I'd add this here in anyone didn't see it. It actually went surprisingly well, until the dudebros showed up to hijack it at the end: http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10108477/why-dont-the-low-carb-folks-believe-in-cico/p1
The OP question is asking why don't low carb folks believe in CICO, or why do they say that CICO does not apply when going low carb.
What is a good answer to that? Or is the question itself flawed or loaded in some way?
The OP of it intended it to be a loaded question, and thought he was going to get a flood of people telling him he was stupid and mean. Instead he got 12 pages of people explaining that what he thinks people mean when they say CICO didn't work for them isn't actually what they're saying. Then the rest of the dudebros showed up to troll.
0 -
FIT_Goat, have you ever taken your temperature on your current diet?
I ask because calorie restriction has been shown to lower body temperature. Likewise, high-protein diets have been shown to raise it (but I don't know for how long).
Just one way your metabolism might adjust to input. The other way would be to lose or gain muscle mass. FIT_Goat should be able to leap tall buildings pretty soon.
I have been a calorie restrictor, sometimes to the extreme, for a very very...sigh...very, long time. My body temp runs anywhere from 95.9 to 97.6. If it goes higher than that, it means I am probably sick. Hoping that this woe can help me undo some of the damage I have done to myself.
0 -
I hope so too, UndrCnstruction. There's hope that it does. Back when I was at the tail end of losing weight by restriction alone, I was gaining weight at 1800 calories a day. Now, I am slowly losing at 2,500 despite being older and smaller. Of course, I did it for a shorter period of time than you likely did. It may take longer to heal for you.0
-
DarlingNikki2011 wrote: »Lrdoflamancha wrote: »I was accused of demonizing carbs.... What ever that means.
Demonizing...really??? Sheesh.
Fat has been demonized for over 30+ years and their complaining about demonizing Carbs? The truth is that, for a lot of people, Carbs should be demonized. The whole obesity-metabolic syndrome-insulin resisitant-diabetic epidemic today is caused by carbs. The solution, for some people, it to lay off the carbs and start eating much more fat.
Dan the Man from Michigan
Yes the solution for some people is to eat more fat and less carbs, but we don't have adequate data to claim that carbs are responsible for obesity. We have population data from people who eat a predominantly carbohydrate rich diet who do not suffer from the issues you list at the same level as the US. That alone should indicate that the problem is not carbohydrates.
Not only are carbs bad for the fat people, but LFHC diets are bad for some skinny people. There are ample studies that low fat damages arteries, causes inflammation, heart attacks, strokes, depression and cancer. When we add up the costs, some have estimated that 70% of all health care costs in the US are due to obesity-metabolic syndrome-insulin resistance-diabetes and the associated problems that skinny people get: insulin resistance, strokes, heart attacks, inflammation, artery damage.
If you want to see a video, go to YouTube and look up "Fat Head".
High Carb Diets should be demonized. In the same manner as High Fat diets have been demonized for the last 30 years. Especially when children eat High Carb diets and burn out their pancreas. It would be one thing if the country had highly active people that could burn off the carbs, but that's not the case anymore. The kids sit in front of screens and don't get much exercise anymore. When this country was mostly an agrarian society, people did a lot of physically work. People could burn off the carbs. Things are so different now.
Dan the Man from Michigan
0 -
Even for those of us who do the hard work of the older times it's not always possible to burn off all the carbs/calories. If it were the work alone, well then I've got the cure for obesity et al right here. Come help out.
0 -
DarlingNikki2011 wrote: »Lrdoflamancha wrote: »I was accused of demonizing carbs.... What ever that means.
Demonizing...really??? Sheesh.
Fat has been demonized for over 30+ years and their complaining about demonizing Carbs? The truth is that, for a lot of people, Carbs should be demonized. The whole obesity-metabolic syndrome-insulin resisitant-diabetic epidemic today is caused by carbs. The solution, for some people, it to lay off the carbs and start eating much more fat.
Dan the Man from Michigan
Yes the solution for some people is to eat more fat and less carbs, but we don't have adequate data to claim that carbs are responsible for obesity. We have population data from people who eat a predominantly carbohydrate rich diet who do not suffer from the issues you list at the same level as the US. That alone should indicate that the problem is not carbohydrates.
Not only are carbs bad for the fat people, but LFHC diets are bad for some skinny people. There are ample studies that low fat damages arteries, causes inflammation, heart attacks, strokes, depression and cancer. When we add up the costs, some have estimated that 70% of all health care costs in the US are due to obesity-metabolic syndrome-insulin resistance-diabetes and the associated problems that skinny people get: insulin resistance, strokes, heart attacks, inflammation, artery damage.
If you want to see a video, go to YouTube and look up "Fat Head".
High Carb Diets should be demonized. In the same manner as High Fat diets have been demonized for the last 30 years. Especially when children eat High Carb diets and burn out their pancreas. It would be one thing if the country had highly active people that could burn off the carbs, but that's not the case anymore. The kids sit in front of screens and don't get much exercise anymore. When this country was mostly an agrarian society, people did a lot of physically work. People could burn off the carbs. Things are so different now.
Dan the Man from Michigan
I agree with this. The problem is, when someone is of "normal" body weight and they get sick no one blames their diet, when that is where much of the blame should go. When a fat person gets sick, it gets blamed on their obesity, and thus indirectly their diet, but more so that fact that they are fat. I am a firm believer that obesity is more of a sign/symptom of an underlying problem (usually insulin resistance) than a cause of most health issues it is blamed for. So while fat people are told they must eat better ("healthy whole grains") thinner people just get medical treatment. And yes, we all pay for the bad information that we have been told for years about what is a "healthy" way to eat.0 -
The OP question is asking why don't low carb folks believe in CICO, or why do they say that CICO does not apply when going low carb.
What is a good answer to that? Or is the question itself flawed or loaded in some way?
The question is a bit ill defined. If I read "CICO" to mean eating 500 calories a day less will result in one pound a week of weight loss than personally I don't beleive that and can point to a lot of evidence.
If CICO means a well constructed experiment in a metabolic chamber with accurate measurement of all mass and energy flows will show that energy going in = energy coming out then yes, I would expect that to be the case.
A simpler question perhaps is "do you believe the effect on the body of 500 calories of food is dependant on the composition of those calories".0 -
It is frustrating that when people talk about Atkins it's always called "high protein" or "no carb". If people follow the diet the way it's meant to be it's very healthy. My blood sugar is a lot better when I cut out all the bad carbs and eat more fresh low carb veggies, good fats and some lower carb fruits. My advice would be for people to really read the true Atkins Diet Plan and really follow it.0
-
Today I learned your brain requires a minimum of 135g of carbs to survive because someone's nutritionist says so, and you should eat more carbs because they end in "hydrate."0
This discussion has been closed.