Low to no carb
Replies
-
Cravings and satiety are two completely different issues. Yes, both protein and fat will help with satiety. However, you can feel full and still have carb cravings. I did...that's part of why it was so hard for me to lose when I tried eating sugary foods in moderation. A little sugar led to massive cravings for much more. That led to sugar binges.
What don't you understand about the posters stating their cravings were diminished with a low-carb or keto diet? Had they chosen a low-fat diet (fortunately debunked within the last few years) they probably would have failed.
Fantastic logic, what if they raised their protein intake and that was what kept them satiated and it wasn't the lower carbs?
Please post all the debunking of low fat diets, thx
When I went low carb, the cravings disappeared. Yes, I could have theoretically lost the weight eating a high carb diet...you can lose on any diet you can stick to. But STICKING TO IT is the key. Some people, I am one of them, find low carb diets MUCH MUCH MUCH easier to stick to. Yes, the fat and protein prevents me from getting hungry. But in my case, the lack of sugar cravings is much more important than never being hungry.
I realize there are a bunch of people on this site who claim that cutting out sweets entirely led to them feeling deprived and eventually binging. However, there are many, and I am one, who are the exact opposite. Cutting out added sugar and certain other carbs PREVENTS binging. Each person needs to find what works best for them.
Moderation works best for some. Low carb works best for others...and keto is ideal for some portion of them.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
What don't you understand about the posters stating their cravings were diminished with a low-carb or keto diet? Had they chosen a low-fat diet (fortunately debunked within the last few years) they probably would have failed.
Fantastic logic, what if they raised their protein intake and that was what kept them satiated and it wasn't the lower carbs?
Please post all the debunking of low fat diets, thx
What is it with all these guys with selfies of their bodies? They always have the same comment.
There is something called Google. Do your own research.
I don't care how they did it. If you limit yourself to 1,500 calories or whatever number of calories, find the way that works best for you. And many people succeed with high-fat, low-carb diets.
If a high-protein diets work for people, great.
If a low-fat high carb diet works, great. But I don't hear too many successes with that approach.
What is the big deal?
Confirmation bias doesn't allow it
As posted before:
http://authoritynutrition.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Weight-loss-on-low-carb-and-low-fat-diets.jpg
From the article. Scroll down and look at the 1st chart (I can't copy it). What don't you understand?
Weight Loss
Here is a graph that shows the difference in weight loss between studies. 21 of 23 studies reported weight loss numbers:
The majority of studies achieved statistically significant differences in weight loss (always in favor of low-carb).
Authority nutrition is run by a low carb zealot.not exactly an unbiased source
The studies don't control for protein........... try again
Relatively high-protein or 'low-carb' energy-restricted diets for body weight loss and body weight maintenance?
http://m.runnersworld.com/weight-loss/low-fat-diet-tops-low-carb-in-first-controlled-trial
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0100652
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/251821010 -
What don't you understand about the posters stating their cravings were diminished with a low-carb or keto diet? Had they chosen a low-fat diet (fortunately debunked within the last few years) they probably would have failed.
Fantastic logic, what if they raised their protein intake and that was what kept them satiated and it wasn't the lower carbs?
Please post all the debunking of low fat diets, thx
What is it with all these guys with selfies of their bodies? They always have the same comment.
There is something called Google. Do your own research.
I don't care how they did it. If you limit yourself to 1,500 calories or whatever number of calories, find the way that works best for you. And many people succeed with high-fat, low-carb diets.
If a high-protein diets work for people, great.
If a low-fat high carb diet works, great. But I don't hear too many successes with that approach.
What is the big deal?
Confirmation bias doesn't allow it
As posted before:
http://authoritynutrition.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Weight-loss-on-low-carb-and-low-fat-diets.jpg
From the article. Scroll down and look at the 1st chart (I can't copy it). What don't you understand?
Weight Loss
Here is a graph that shows the difference in weight loss between studies. 21 of 23 studies reported weight loss numbers:
The majority of studies achieved statistically significant differences in weight loss (always in favor of low-carb).
Lol! Please do tell how many of those had significant differences in fat loss and tightly controlled for both calories and protein intake? I already know the answer but can't wait for you to tell us. Also that doesn't "debunk" low fat diets in the least bit.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
Why is it necessary to control for protein intake ? if taking out the major component of the SAD the other two are going to go up, it seems an arbitrary constraint to limit that to fat. The studies are about whether carbohydrate restriction works for weight loss in humans, not isocaloric carbohydrate restriction at constant protein intake.
Some show no difference, some show carbohydrate restriction is better, do any show fat restriction at the same calories and protein to be better ?0 -
ah yes, a six day trial which doesn't achieve steady state. Look at the calorie balance in that one.0 -
What don't you understand about the posters stating their cravings were diminished with a low-carb or keto diet? Had they chosen a low-fat diet (fortunately debunked within the last few years) they probably would have failed.
Fantastic logic, what if they raised their protein intake and that was what kept them satiated and it wasn't the lower carbs?
Please post all the debunking of low fat diets, thx
What is it with all these guys with selfies of their bodies? They always have the same comment.
There is something called Google. Do your own research.
I don't care how they did it. If you limit yourself to 1,500 calories or whatever number of calories, find the way that works best for you. And many people succeed with high-fat, low-carb diets.
If a high-protein diets work for people, great.
If a low-fat high carb diet works, great. But I don't hear too many successes with that approach.
What is the big deal?
Confirmation bias doesn't allow it
As posted before:
http://authoritynutrition.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Weight-loss-on-low-carb-and-low-fat-diets.jpg
From the article. Scroll down and look at the 1st chart (I can't copy it). What don't you understand?
Weight Loss
Here is a graph that shows the difference in weight loss between studies. 21 of 23 studies reported weight loss numbers:
The majority of studies achieved statistically significant differences in weight loss (always in favor of low-carb).
Lol! Please do tell how many of those had significant differences in fat loss and tightly controlled for both calories and protein intake? I already know the answer but can't wait for you to tell us. Also that doesn't "debunk" low fat diets in the least bit.
I'm not debunking anything. I previously stated that if a low-fat diet works for someone, that is just fine. Why would I question that person's success?
Your problem is that you dismiss studies that more people lose weight with HFLC diets, which seems to be validated at MFP. There is an entire active dedicated HFLC group on MFP. I can't find the low-fat group. Maybe I just don't see it.
Why are statements like favoring HFLC diets over high-carb diets such a threat to your very existence?
Actually this was a statement from you "Had they chosen a low-fat diet (fortunately debunked within the last few years)", you then asked to present some evidence of said debunking which you've been unable to do so
Where did I dismiss any study that showed higher weightloss for low carb? I merely asked if well known confounders were Controlled for.
It seems you've never actually read the studies he mentioned and if you did, don't understand their short comings0 -
Why is it necessary to control for protein intake ? if taking out the major component of the SAD the other two are going to go up, it seems an arbitrary constraint to limit that to fat. The studies are about whether carbohydrate restriction works for weight loss in humans, not isocaloric carbohydrate restriction at constant protein intake.
Some show no difference, some show carbohydrate restriction is better, do any show fat restriction at the same calories and protein to be better ?Who hy is it necessary to control for protein intake ? if taking out the major component of the SAD the other two are going to go up, it seems an arbitrary constraint to limit that to fat. The studies are about whether carbohydrate restriction works for weight loss in humans, not isocaloric carbohydrate restriction at constant protein intake.
Some show no difference, some show carbohydrate restriction is better, do any show fat restriction at the same calories and protein to be better ?
Higher protein diets have a slight metabolic advantage and also have been shown to have higher satiety measures than other diets, thus if not Controlled for it there is no way to determine if it was a higher protein intake of the lower carbs
Depends on the study, there are some that do, but they rely on self reported intake so they are iffy at best, numerous metabolic ward studies that control for both protein and calories have found no significant difference in fat loss0 -
there is equally no need to determine if it was the higher protein or the lower carb when the two go hand in hand. Is diet A better than diet B is the key question for practical use outside a metabolic ward, not a pedantic analysis of the precise metabolic factor of the macronutrients.
Ed: So can we have a link to an isoprotein metabolic ward study with the same calorie deficit please (that isn't conducted by the author of a diet) which shows no difference in fat loss (as opposed to weight loss).
0 -
there is equally no need to determine if it was the higher protein or the lower carb when the two go hand in hand. Is diet A better than diet B is the key question for practical use outside a metabolic ward, not a pedantic analysis of the precise metabolic factor of the macronutrients.
Ed: So can we have a link to an isoprotein metabolic ward study with the same calorie deficit please (that isn't conducted by the author of a diet) which shows no difference in fat loss (as opposed to weight loss).
So there's no way to go lower carb and increase fats and keep protein the same? How are they hand in hand?
http://press.endocrine.org/doi/full/10.1210/jc.2007-0692
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/63/2/174.full.pdf+html0 -
Why are we arguing about LCHF vs HCLF? The OP said that they have hypothyroidism and are currently having trouble regulating levels, and are looking at LC to lose weight. Their post has nothing to do with cravings, or satiety, or which person loses more weight with which diet.0
-
Why are we arguing about LCHF vs HCLF? The OP said that they have hypothyroidism and are currently having trouble regulating levels, and are looking at LC to lose weight. Their post has nothing to do with cravings, or satiety, or which person loses more weight with which diet.
Because the Agent Smiths love to argue.0 -
Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »Why are we arguing about LCHF vs HCLF? The OP said that they have hypothyroidism and are currently having trouble regulating levels, and are looking at LC to lose weight. Their post has nothing to do with cravings, or satiety, or which person loses more weight with which diet.
Because the Agent Smiths love to argue.
The Agent Smiths weren't the ones who started the argument, nor was anything they said argumentative; it was actually a reasonable response given the content of the OP.0 -
Agent Smith simply stated that low carbing worked by creating a calorie deficit before the issue of thyroid was raised. That's not an argumentative post.
THEN he was argued with. I suppose that should not have been rebutted at all.
To the OP, the main concern I have for her is her unregulated thyroid. Is she under the care of an endocrinologist? Diet won't fix this.
I've been in the situation of having a thyroid go out of whack and not respond to medication for a time. It's not fun. Weight can be a problem then, no matter what you do. You really need medical intervention.0 -
Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »Why are we arguing about LCHF vs HCLF? The OP said that they have hypothyroidism and are currently having trouble regulating levels, and are looking at LC to lose weight. Their post has nothing to do with cravings, or satiety, or which person loses more weight with which diet.
Because the Agent Smiths love to argue.
The Agent Smiths weren't the ones who started the argument, nor was anything they said argumentative; it was actually a reasonable response given the content of the OP.
I disagree. I think one of the agent smith's started it right out the gate.
But whatever, I'm sure the OP has abandoned thread by now.0 -
I think that's what I need is the under 20 carbs. I am going to do some research about it and figure out a meal plan and shopping list. I know it's going to be extremely hard but with hypothyroid and my levels being unbalanced it's hard to lose. I tried low fat, low calorie and it never worked. I did the atkins 3 years ago and lost a lot but this time it just doesn't seem to be working and I feel so confused. I just need to focused. Thanks all
Since your issue is with hypothyroid, you also might find this group to be helpful.
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/group/753-hypothyroidism-and-hyperthyroidism
BTW, yes, this is a great suggestion.0 -
Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »Why are we arguing about LCHF vs HCLF? The OP said that they have hypothyroidism and are currently having trouble regulating levels, and are looking at LC to lose weight. Their post has nothing to do with cravings, or satiety, or which person loses more weight with which diet.
Because the Agent Smiths love to argue.
The Agent Smiths weren't the ones who started the argument, nor was anything they said argumentative; it was actually a reasonable response given the content of the OP.
I disagree. I think one of the agent smith's started it right out the gate.
But whatever, I'm sure the OP has abandoned thread by now.
Your stalking of the "Agent Smith's" is borderline creepy0 -
LOL. Kinda hard to avoid Agent Smiths here.Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »Why are we arguing about LCHF vs HCLF? The OP said that they have hypothyroidism and are currently having trouble regulating levels, and are looking at LC to lose weight. Their post has nothing to do with cravings, or satiety, or which person loses more weight with which diet.
Because the Agent Smiths love to argue.
The Agent Smiths weren't the ones who started the argument, nor was anything they said argumentative; it was actually a reasonable response given the content of the OP.
I disagree. I think one of the agent smith's started it right out the gate.
But whatever, I'm sure the OP has abandoned thread by now.
Your stalking of the "Agent Smith's" is borderline creepy
0 -
Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »Why are we arguing about LCHF vs HCLF? The OP said that they have hypothyroidism and are currently having trouble regulating levels, and are looking at LC to lose weight. Their post has nothing to do with cravings, or satiety, or which person loses more weight with which diet.
Because the Agent Smiths love to argue.
The Agent Smiths weren't the ones who started the argument, nor was anything they said argumentative; it was actually a reasonable response given the content of the OP.
I disagree. I think one of the agent smith's started it right out the gate.
But whatever, I'm sure the OP has abandoned thread by now.
Yes, telling someone who says they can't lose weight and so must low carb, that all diets work exactly the same was starting something. In no way was it on top and perfectly relevant.
Your contributions have certainly added a ton to the thread.0 -
Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »Why are we arguing about LCHF vs HCLF? The OP said that they have hypothyroidism and are currently having trouble regulating levels, and are looking at LC to lose weight. Their post has nothing to do with cravings, or satiety, or which person loses more weight with which diet.
Because the Agent Smiths love to argue.
Btw what's your pet name for all the ignorant low carb enthusiasts that always pop up ie. The ones who post the diet doctor and authority nutrition links and simply make things up to support low carb like low fat diets have been debunked?-1 -
Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »Why are we arguing about LCHF vs HCLF? The OP said that they have hypothyroidism and are currently having trouble regulating levels, and are looking at LC to lose weight. Their post has nothing to do with cravings, or satiety, or which person loses more weight with which diet.
Because the Agent Smiths love to argue.
The Agent Smiths weren't the ones who started the argument, nor was anything they said argumentative; it was actually a reasonable response given the content of the OP.
I disagree. I think one of the agent smith's started it right out the gate.
But whatever, I'm sure the OP has abandoned thread by now.
No, the comment was that low carb and keto create fat loss the same as any other diet - which is true, correct? And since the OP didn't mention a medical condition and said they were having trouble getting a handle on weight loss (just weight loss), responding that going LC is not necessary is a completely reasonable response. The person even clarified what they meant by the statement.
If you choose not to believe that based on your own biases about the tone of comment or the person saying it, that's on you, not him, and it's up to you to determine how you are going to choose to react. If you thought he was derailing or flame baiting…there's a guideline for that, and it should have been reported.
OP, I hope the groups people suggested have information that help you figure things out.0 -
No, I'm still here. Didn't think my question was going to cause such an argument. But thank you all for your responses and group recommendations. Oh and I do see my endo on a regular buy for some reason my thyroid has just been in chaos since October. I'm on synthyroid and I am hoping low carbing will help control my weight while my thyroid decides to respond to meds. By the way I have had both endo and primary tell me low carb is the best weightloss program for hashimotos hypothyroid. That's why I was asking for help. Recipes, suggestion and experiences thanks all.0
-
No, I'm still here. Didn't think my question was going to cause such an argument. But thank you all for your responses and group recommendations. Oh and I do see my endo on a regular buy for some reason my thyroid has just been in chaos since October. I'm on synthyroid and I am hoping low carbing will help control my weight while my thyroid decides to respond to meds. By the way I have had both endo and primary tell me low carb is the best weightloss program for hashimotos hypothyroid. That's why I was asking for help. Recipes, suggestion and experiences thanks all.
That tends to happen when you mention the words "low" and "carb" together in the main forums. You'll get a lot more useful info in the groups that were linked than you will out here.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »Why are we arguing about LCHF vs HCLF? The OP said that they have hypothyroidism and are currently having trouble regulating levels, and are looking at LC to lose weight. Their post has nothing to do with cravings, or satiety, or which person loses more weight with which diet.
Because the Agent Smiths love to argue.
Btw what's your pet name for all the ignorant low carb enthusiasts that always pop up ie. The ones who post the diet doctor and authority nutrition links and simply make things up to support low carb like low fat diets have been debunked?
Just give up already. If a low-fat diet works for you, great. I'm happy for you and I believe you.
But the low-fat diet resulted in the obesity and diabetes epidemic when it was pushed on the American public in the early 1980's. People began to believe it was FAT, not CALORIES, that make you fat. Finally, the government gave up. Fat no longer makes you fat! About time.
EGGS were demonized as heart attacks on a plate. So they were replaced with much higher calorie BAGELS. When they were introduced SNACKWELL cookies flew off the shelf because they were low-fat.
How hard is this to understand?
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/21/opinion/when-the-government-tells-you-what-to-eat.html?_r=0
Did you really post an OP ed from the anti science quack Nina Teicholz?
So low fat diets resulted in obesity? Did they cause it, if so how?
And now idiots think carbs or sugar make you fat, what a long way we've come
You've still yet to post a single shred of actual evidence of low fat diets being debunked. Are you done making things up now?
-1 -
This is why we can't have nice things.0
-
This content has been removed.
-
All, drop this low carb vs low fat crap. Its doesn't address the OPs concerns. If you really want to keep it up, i can start handing out strikes for hijacking.
Op, check out the link that @kgeyser linked. Since you have a medical condition things need to be addressed differently.
But if you do low carb, you need high fat.0 -
Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »Why are we arguing about LCHF vs HCLF? The OP said that they have hypothyroidism and are currently having trouble regulating levels, and are looking at LC to lose weight. Their post has nothing to do with cravings, or satiety, or which person loses more weight with which diet.
Because the Agent Smiths love to argue.
Btw what's your pet name for all the ignorant low carb enthusiasts that always pop up ie. The ones who post the diet doctor and authority nutrition links and simply make things up to support low carb like low fat diets have been debunked?
Just give up already. If a low-fat diet works for you, great. I'm happy for you and I believe you.
But the low-fat diet resulted in the obesity and diabetes epidemic when it was pushed on the American public in the early 1980's. People began to believe it was FAT, not CALORIES, that make you fat. Finally, the government gave up. Fat no longer makes you fat! About time.
EGGS were demonized as heart attacks on a plate. So they were replaced with much higher calorie BAGELS. When they were introduced SNACKWELL cookies flew off the shelf because they were low-fat.
How hard is this to understand?
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/21/opinion/when-the-government-tells-you-what-to-eat.html?_r=0
Did you really post an OP ed from the anti science quack Nina Teicholz?
So low fat diets resulted in obesity? Did they cause it, if so how?
And now idiots think carbs or sugar make you fat, what a long way we've come
You've still yet to post a single shred of actual evidence of low fat diets being debunked. Are you done making things up now?
Never seen anyone freak out so much when their world view is challenged.
I guess this is also a bunch of BS.
http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/02/19/nutrition-panel-calls-for-less-sugar-and-eases-cholesterol-and-fat-restrictions/
From your first link, now go to your second link and check what sources they used to make their recommendations
And I've never quite seen someone so ignorant and seemingly incapable of doing even a cursory amount of unbiased research
"But the primary problem is that nutrition policy has long relied on a very weak kind of science: epidemiological, or “observational,” studies in which researchers follow large groups of people over many years. But even the most rigorous epidemiological studies suffer from a fundamental limitation. At best they can show only association, not causation. Epidemiological data can be used to suggest hypotheses but not to prove them.
Instead of accepting that this evidence was inadequate to give sound advice, strong-willed scientists overstated the significance of their studies."0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 427 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions