vegan diet vs high protein diet
Replies
-
harlowbyrd wrote: »
I know that it's not. I could have dropped these few lbs, by yo yo ing for a month.I'm not only trying to find a diet, but something for the long run. I dont eat beef and pork anyways, but not sure if I can sustain meatless lifestyle. I measured myself on a new scale.5'3 and 102lb is a BMI of 17.8 - seriously underweight ....
You are categorically NOT 41% BF if those numbers are right
- scales do not measure BF
Vegan is not a weight loss diet
I am not going to respond to tactless comments
Tactless comments?
Your ticker says you are trying to lose 4 pounds, which would put you at under a 100 pounds at 5 ft 3. You say you are 41% body fat, which is 100% impossible at your weight. You obviously have some disordered thoughts around body image going on here and need to get some help.0 -
You really believe calories in/calories out for weight loss is false? Really?Justygirl77 wrote: »
Well I am NOT a fan of CICO because, well, it's false. But I have eaten different ways, vegan, raw vegan, SAD, etc. In my own experience, eating in such a way as to avoid spikes in blood sugar has brought the steadiest and fastest results ever, even at my current age of 46! Make veggies your first choice, non-starchy, and especially get lots of greens!! Aim for 1lb of non-starchy veggies a day, and increase your fiber to 35-45g/day. Then draw into your meals proteins, and try to eat 35% protein. Eat 40-50% healthy fats such as coconut products, nuts, avos, etc. 15% or less carbs, derived from the above mentioned foods. Personally, I pulled out dairy, sugar, fruit and grains from my diet for now. I will eat them later, after I have finished shedding all the unhealthy stress-fat that went on my body! I would be happy to answer questions of you have them. If you can see my profile page, I have listed my progress since I started doing this! Health and blessings!harlowbyrd wrote: »Can't decide which one to do, I want to decrease body fat percentage. I'm 102 lbs, 41% body fat. I know that, ultimately it all goes down to calories in and out, but is there anyone who tried both ? If so, what were the results ? Any advice is greatly appreciated
Just do you know, it's the only possible way to lose weight. How you get to the calorie deficit-type of diet, etc.-personal preference only.
Yes, CICO is the wrong focus. It has in mind the one-dimensional goal of the number on the scale. If that is all you are wanting is a lower number on the scale, then by all means EAT WHATEVER YOU WANT AS LONG AS IT FITS IN YOUR CALORIES.
0 -
@Justygirl77 has great information. Second, nothing is impossible. First off OP, you need to validate those PBF numbers - you need to have someone do a 7 point caliper test for body fat, second you need to do a multi-point measurement of your body areas and run those against charts with your age, height, and body weight to determine what you have for a PBF - that will validate the scale's PBF number - whether it is truly off or not. If you are more concerned, I would ask your doctor to order a DEXA scan to provide a final verification. DEXA is literally 100% accurate - but most DEXA scanning companies require a doctor's referral.0
-
You are not answering the question about whether your body fat or your weight is a type.harlowbyrd wrote: »
There is no way to high heavens you are 41% body fat at 102 pounds. In fact, if you believe that, you need to talk with someone because that is disordered thoughts around weight loss. Besides that, 102 pounds at 5 ft 3 is underweight.
First of all, why on earth should I have to answer a question, if I don't want to, is beyond me!
Secondly, I'm going to be my kind self, and tell you that I indeed weighed myself on a new scale!0 -
Justygirl77 wrote: »
You really believe calories in/calories out for weight loss is false? Really?Justygirl77 wrote: »
Well I am NOT a fan of CICO because, well, it's false. But I have eaten different ways, vegan, raw vegan, SAD, etc. In my own experience, eating in such a way as to avoid spikes in blood sugar has brought the steadiest and fastest results ever, even at my current age of 46! Make veggies your first choice, non-starchy, and especially get lots of greens!! Aim for 1lb of non-starchy veggies a day, and increase your fiber to 35-45g/day. Then draw into your meals proteins, and try to eat 35% protein. Eat 40-50% healthy fats such as coconut products, nuts, avos, etc. 15% or less carbs, derived from the above mentioned foods. Personally, I pulled out dairy, sugar, fruit and grains from my diet for now. I will eat them later, after I have finished shedding all the unhealthy stress-fat that went on my body! I would be happy to answer questions of you have them. If you can see my profile page, I have listed my progress since I started doing this! Health and blessings!harlowbyrd wrote: »Can't decide which one to do, I want to decrease body fat percentage. I'm 102 lbs, 41% body fat. I know that, ultimately it all goes down to calories in and out, but is there anyone who tried both ? If so, what were the results ? Any advice is greatly appreciated
Just do you know, it's the only possible way to lose weight. How you get to the calorie deficit-type of diet, etc.-personal preference only.
Yes, CICO is the wrong focus. It has in mind the one-dimensional goal of the number on the scale. If that is all you are wanting is a lower number on the scale, then by all means EAT WHATEVER YOU WANT AS LONG AS IT FITS IN YOUR CALORIES.
I'm sorry, but how does a statement of energy balance equate to focusing on the scale?
Nutrition and energy balance are separate topics.
0 -
You can separate them if you want to!0
-
mamapeach910 wrote: »Justygirl77 wrote: »
You really believe calories in/calories out for weight loss is false? Really?Justygirl77 wrote: »
Well I am NOT a fan of CICO because, well, it's false. But I have eaten different ways, vegan, raw vegan, SAD, etc. In my own experience, eating in such a way as to avoid spikes in blood sugar has brought the steadiest and fastest results ever, even at my current age of 46! Make veggies your first choice, non-starchy, and especially get lots of greens!! Aim for 1lb of non-starchy veggies a day, and increase your fiber to 35-45g/day. Then draw into your meals proteins, and try to eat 35% protein. Eat 40-50% healthy fats such as coconut products, nuts, avos, etc. 15% or less carbs, derived from the above mentioned foods. Personally, I pulled out dairy, sugar, fruit and grains from my diet for now. I will eat them later, after I have finished shedding all the unhealthy stress-fat that went on my body! I would be happy to answer questions of you have them. If you can see my profile page, I have listed my progress since I started doing this! Health and blessings!harlowbyrd wrote: »Can't decide which one to do, I want to decrease body fat percentage. I'm 102 lbs, 41% body fat. I know that, ultimately it all goes down to calories in and out, but is there anyone who tried both ? If so, what were the results ? Any advice is greatly appreciated
Just do you know, it's the only possible way to lose weight. How you get to the calorie deficit-type of diet, etc.-personal preference only.
Yes, CICO is the wrong focus. It has in mind the one-dimensional goal of the number on the scale. If that is all you are wanting is a lower number on the scale, then by all means EAT WHATEVER YOU WANT AS LONG AS IT FITS IN YOUR CALORIES.
I'm sorry, but how does a statement of energy balance equate to focusing on the scale?
Nutrition and energy balance are separate topics.
One and the same.
If you apply CICO, there's calories-in and calories-out.
CI = intake - that means your nutritional profile matters, getting to your macros (appropriating them correctly as well) and making sure you include fiber in the diet is essential for weight loss.
Eat whatever you want is dumb and pointless, and as @Justygirl77 says - do whatever you want - just know the most conservative method to weight loss (fat pounds) requires the highest nutritional component available to achieve it. Win-win.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
Justygirl77 wrote: »
You really believe calories in/calories out for weight loss is false? Really?Justygirl77 wrote: »
Well I am NOT a fan of CICO because, well, it's false. But I have eaten different ways, vegan, raw vegan, SAD, etc. In my own experience, eating in such a way as to avoid spikes in blood sugar has brought the steadiest and fastest results ever, even at my current age of 46! Make veggies your first choice, non-starchy, and especially get lots of greens!! Aim for 1lb of non-starchy veggies a day, and increase your fiber to 35-45g/day. Then draw into your meals proteins, and try to eat 35% protein. Eat 40-50% healthy fats such as coconut products, nuts, avos, etc. 15% or less carbs, derived from the above mentioned foods. Personally, I pulled out dairy, sugar, fruit and grains from my diet for now. I will eat them later, after I have finished shedding all the unhealthy stress-fat that went on my body! I would be happy to answer questions of you have them. If you can see my profile page, I have listed my progress since I started doing this! Health and blessings!harlowbyrd wrote: »Can't decide which one to do, I want to decrease body fat percentage. I'm 102 lbs, 41% body fat. I know that, ultimately it all goes down to calories in and out, but is there anyone who tried both ? If so, what were the results ? Any advice is greatly appreciated
Just do you know, it's the only possible way to lose weight. How you get to the calorie deficit-type of diet, etc.-personal preference only.
Yes, CICO is the wrong focus. It has in mind the one-dimensional goal of the number on the scale. If that is all you are wanting is a lower number on the scale, then by all means EAT WHATEVER YOU WANT AS LONG AS IT FITS IN YOUR CALORIES.
No need to shout.
If you're working with weight management, CICO is the focus because it's the only way to gain, lose, or maintain weight. It has nothing to do with the scale, it has to do with how I feel, clothes fitting properly, etc.
Thank you, I do eat what I want as long as it fits in my calories and reasonably meets my macros.
0 -
0 -
harlowbyrd wrote: »
You are not answering the question about whether your body fat or your weight is a type.harlowbyrd wrote: »
There is no way to high heavens you are 41% body fat at 102 pounds. In fact, if you believe that, you need to talk with someone because that is disordered thoughts around weight loss. Besides that, 102 pounds at 5 ft 3 is underweight.
First of all, why on earth should I have to answer a question, if I don't want to, is beyond me!
Secondly, I'm going to be my kind self, and tell you that I indeed weighed myself on a new scale!
Because you're asking for help and avoiding the fact that your information is not correct. Seriously, your scale is wrong that you are 40% body fat at 102 pounds, and your goal of becoming more underweight is not healthy.0 -
harlowbyrd wrote: »
You are not answering the question about whether your body fat or your weight is a type.harlowbyrd wrote: »
There is no way to high heavens you are 41% body fat at 102 pounds. In fact, if you believe that, you need to talk with someone because that is disordered thoughts around weight loss. Besides that, 102 pounds at 5 ft 3 is underweight.
First of all, why on earth should I have to answer a question, if I don't want to, is beyond me!
Secondly, I'm going to be my kind self, and tell you that I indeed weighed myself on a new scale!
You are obviously hangry - eat more! And see a therapist.
Or you are a troll.
0 -
Justygirl77 wrote: »You can separate them if you want to!
The attention you pay to the quality of your calories does not negate the fact that they're there.
The calories being THERE vs. them being burnt is CICO.
The attention you pay to the quality of the calories you are eating is nutrition.
CICO is not flawed, as you assert.
Nowhere am I stating that I think nutrition doesn't matter.
This whole thing is already way off topic enough.
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
tedboosalis7 wrote: »nothing is impossible.
Many things are impossible. Someone being 5'3, 41% body fat, with a lean mass of about 60 IS most certainly impossible. If that were true--and it's not--advising her to do ANYTHING but see a doctor would be gravely irresponsible. Encouraging a diet would be terrible advice.
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
This content has been removed.
-
harlowbyrd wrote: »I don't dislike myself because of the weight gain. I'm perfectly content and feeling comfortable in my (thicker) skin. That being said I would like to have a healthy bmi.
You aren't thick skinned. You really should seek professional help to walk you through your distorted body image issues.0 -
I was a vegan for a bit. You can get plenty of daily protein eating animal-free, but you're going to have to plan, cook, and prepare foods wayyyy more. You must not ever forget that without animal protein, you have to create the complete proteins with your food combinations. Just eating vegetables and carbs ain't gonna cut it. This was my downfall. Meat still grosses me out, but I'm ok with chicken and fish and eat it now. Just read up beforehand and add a B12 supplement to your life. Also, I would check out the cookbook "Isa Does It" for delicious vegan recipes or the Post-Punk Kitchen website. 0
-
harlowbyrd wrote: »
First of all, why on earth should I have to answer a question, if I don't want to, is beyond me!
Secondly, I'm going to be my kind self, and tell you that I indeed weighed myself on a new scale!
Hello! I think what people are trying to say is that it sounds like your scale is inaccurate. I've found that to be true myself of body fat scales, for some reason they're always off and don't work right, even new ones. I don't think anyone is trying to suggest you're making it up or anything, simply that the scale is off. Being 5'3 and 102lbs you are medically underweight. How do you feel about that? Do you feel like you have fat to lose? Do you feel like you look thin? I know you are feeling bombarded with questions, but I think it's more just concern for your health. Normally when people post that they are trying to lose weight and are underweight, it's indicative of disordered eating/eating disorder. That's a very serious thing. So when we see you post this, we are trying to help make sure you get the help you need, or at least understand the potential harm you could be doing to your body.0 -
Ok, guys, my apologies! Turnes out it's 170
-
Did you have any thoughts about what I wrote?0
-
This content has been removed.
-
harlowbyrd wrote: »Ok, guys, my apologies! Turnes out it's 17
That makes much more sense, but fact of the matter is, you're still underweight and should gain a few/body recomp0 -
harlowbyrd wrote: »Ok, guys, my apologies! Turnes out it's 17
You're underweight trying to get more underweight. Not a good thing.0 -
harlowbyrd wrote: »Ok, guys, my apologies! Turnes out it's 17
Yay! Well done for checking and revising. Does this mean you're now happy with your body?
Kind regards.0 -
Justygirl77 wrote: »
Yes, CICO is the wrong focus. It has in mind the one-dimensional goal of the number on the scale. If that is all you are wanting is a lower number on the scale, then by all means EAT WHATEVER YOU WANT AS LONG AS IT FITS IN YOUR CALORIES.
CICO is an energy balance equation not a diet lifestyle. Also, what you are probably referring to, without a full understanding, is IIFYM. Either way, no one in this thread will tell the OP to just eat junk food. What we would say ia there is no reason for the OP to choose a lifestyle but she should focus on getting nutrient dense foods, adequate protein (can be from meats or other sources), and start a solid lifting routine. Since the OP is borderline underweight, she should probably work on a recomp or potentially bulk to work on adding muscle and filling in her skin.
Also, IRT blood sugar, the average person doesn't have an issue with regulating it so bringing that into the equation is just not helpful and way over complicating things.
0 -
Eating whatever you want and CICO is a weak link just to try and say CICO doesn't work.Justygirl77 wrote: »
You really believe calories in/calories out for weight loss is false? Really?Justygirl77 wrote: »
Well I am NOT a fan of CICO because, well, it's false. But I have eaten different ways, vegan, raw vegan, SAD, etc. In my own experience, eating in such a way as to avoid spikes in blood sugar has brought the steadiest and fastest results ever, even at my current age of 46! Make veggies your first choice, non-starchy, and especially get lots of greens!! Aim for 1lb of non-starchy veggies a day, and increase your fiber to 35-45g/day. Then draw into your meals proteins, and try to eat 35% protein. Eat 40-50% healthy fats such as coconut products, nuts, avos, etc. 15% or less carbs, derived from the above mentioned foods. Personally, I pulled out dairy, sugar, fruit and grains from my diet for now. I will eat them later, after I have finished shedding all the unhealthy stress-fat that went on my body! I would be happy to answer questions of you have them. If you can see my profile page, I have listed my progress since I started doing this! Health and blessings!harlowbyrd wrote: »Can't decide which one to do, I want to decrease body fat percentage. I'm 102 lbs, 41% body fat. I know that, ultimately it all goes down to calories in and out, but is there anyone who tried both ? If so, what were the results ? Any advice is greatly appreciated
Just do you know, it's the only possible way to lose weight. How you get to the calorie deficit-type of diet, etc.-personal preference only.
Yes, CICO is the wrong focus. It has in mind the one-dimensional goal of the number on the scale. If that is all you are wanting is a lower number on the scale, then by all means EAT WHATEVER YOU WANT AS LONG AS IT FITS IN YOUR CALORIES.tedboosalis7 wrote: »mamapeach910 wrote: »Justygirl77 wrote: »
You really believe calories in/calories out for weight loss is false? Really?Justygirl77 wrote: »
Well I am NOT a fan of CICO because, well, it's false. But I have eaten different ways, vegan, raw vegan, SAD, etc. In my own experience, eating in such a way as to avoid spikes in blood sugar has brought the steadiest and fastest results ever, even at my current age of 46! Make veggies your first choice, non-starchy, and especially get lots of greens!! Aim for 1lb of non-starchy veggies a day, and increase your fiber to 35-45g/day. Then draw into your meals proteins, and try to eat 35% protein. Eat 40-50% healthy fats such as coconut products, nuts, avos, etc. 15% or less carbs, derived from the above mentioned foods. Personally, I pulled out dairy, sugar, fruit and grains from my diet for now. I will eat them later, after I have finished shedding all the unhealthy stress-fat that went on my body! I would be happy to answer questions of you have them. If you can see my profile page, I have listed my progress since I started doing this! Health and blessings!harlowbyrd wrote: »Can't decide which one to do, I want to decrease body fat percentage. I'm 102 lbs, 41% body fat. I know that, ultimately it all goes down to calories in and out, but is there anyone who tried both ? If so, what were the results ? Any advice is greatly appreciated
Just do you know, it's the only possible way to lose weight. How you get to the calorie deficit-type of diet, etc.-personal preference only.
Yes, CICO is the wrong focus. It has in mind the one-dimensional goal of the number on the scale. If that is all you are wanting is a lower number on the scale, then by all means EAT WHATEVER YOU WANT AS LONG AS IT FITS IN YOUR CALORIES.
I'm sorry, but how does a statement of energy balance equate to focusing on the scale?
Nutrition and energy balance are separate topics.
One and the same.
If you apply CICO, there's calories-in and calories-out.
CI = intake - that means your nutritional profile matters, getting to your macros (appropriating them correctly as well) and making sure you include fiber in the diet is essential for weight loss.
Eat whatever you want is dumb and pointless, and as @Justygirl77 says - do whatever you want - just know the most conservative method to weight loss (fat pounds) requires the highest nutritional component available to achieve it. Win-win.
You are creating and argument no one said. No one in this thread ever said eat whatever you want. You are just saying that to argue.tedboosalis7 wrote: »@Justygirl77 has great information. Second, nothing is impossible. First off OP, you need to validate those PBF numbers - you need to have someone do a 7 point caliper test for body fat, second you need to do a multi-point measurement of your body areas and run those against charts with your age, height, and body weight to determine what you have for a PBF - that will validate the scale's PBF number - whether it is truly off or not. If you are more concerned, I would ask your doctor to order a DEXA scan to provide a final verification. DEXA is literally 100% accurate - but most DEXA scanning companies require a doctor's referral.
She actually isn't saying anything great. Again, both of you are creating an argument no one made in this thread.
Both of you are derailing this thread by putting words in people's mouths.
I responded to someone on this forum - you are doing the same thing you always do - you are creating the problem yourself.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
You don't need to lose weight, period.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.3K 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
- 423 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