Extreme Low Carb Diet
Replies
-
tennisdude2004 wrote: »My view point on LCHF still stands that it's an excellent tool and 'as healthy a diet' as someone can have and weight loss only happens with a calorie deficit.
One doesn't need to follow fad diets sensationalized by the media and TV doctors to be healthy and lose weight. They just need common sense.
Just because the media has recognized the LCHF diet as a healthy tool that can be used towards weight loss, doesn't mean it is a fad
All diets are fads. They are just recipes for people who have no clue how to lose weight because they don't know the basic science behind weight loss and/or don't have the commitment to do so.
-Follow this plan for 6 weeks...
-Count your calories using this point system...
-Drink this green juice...
-Take these pills...
-Buy this stuff...
-Restrict these whole foods because they will cause insulin spikes...
-Consume a protein shake before bed or your muscles will go catabolic overnight...
It's all mumbo-jumbo. There is a huge market for diet plans and they make certain people very rich. But weight loss shouldn't be that complicated... and it isn't!0 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »My view point on LCHF still stands that it's an excellent tool and 'as healthy a diet' as someone can have and weight loss only happens with a calorie deficit.
One doesn't need to follow fad diets sensationalized by the media and TV doctors to be healthy and lose weight. They just need common sense.
Just because the media has recognized the LCHF diet as a healthy tool that can be used towards weight loss, doesn't mean it is a fad
All diets are fads. They are just recipes for people who have no clue how to lose weight because they don't know the basic science behind weight loss.
-Follow this plan for 6 weeks...
-Count your food by this scale of points...
-Drink this green juice...
-Take these pills...
-Buy this stuff...
-Restrict these whole foods because they will cause insulin spikes...
-Consume a protein shake before bed or your muscles will go catabolic overnight...
It's all mumbo-jumbo. There is a huge market for dieting and they make certain people very rich. But weight loss shouldn't be that complicated... and it isn't!
People do not need to go low carb to lose weight. It is just a more healthful way of eating for some people.
I disagree that all diets are fads. A diet is what people tend to eat.0 -
Can we cover via probability based deduction problem?
Let's throw out some known facts
Percent of registered dietitians who mismeasure their food size even knowing they'll be checked in an experiment: 25%.
Times the Laws of Thermodynamics have been violated conclusively: < .01% (actually 0).
Assumptions:
the average dieter, particularly new ones, will be less accurate with food measurements than a dietitian from the experiment.
the average diet is known to obey the laws of physics.
So, which is more likely:
A. the dieter has mismeasured food in an uncontrolled environment (~>25%)
B. the laws of thermodynamics that have always held up under properly controlled conditions have been violated (~0%)
C. some other thing (incalculable without further information)0 -
Can we cover via probability based deduction problem?
Let's throw out some known facts
Percent of registered dietitians who mismeasure their food size even knowing they'll be checked in an experiment: 25%.
Times the Laws of Thermodynamics have been violated conclusively: < .01% (actually 0).
Assumptions:
the average dieter, particularly new ones, will be less accurate with food measurements than a dietitian from the experiment.
the average diet is known to obey the laws of physics.
So, which is more likely:
A. the dieter has mismeasured food in an uncontrolled environment (~>25%)
B. the laws of thermodynamics that have always held up under properly controlled conditions have been violated (~0%)
C. some other thing (incalculable without further information)
It's option D.
0 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »My view point on LCHF still stands that it's an excellent tool and 'as healthy a diet' as someone can have and weight loss only happens with a calorie deficit.
One doesn't need to follow fad diets sensationalized by the media and TV doctors to be healthy and lose weight. They just need common sense.
What like the WHOLE FOODS? Please!!!!
I do happen to think that limiting the amount of inflammatory foods in my diet is healthy.
I certainly do not want MY diet to lack in essential fats and protein.
For me and probably countless others Low Carb means I don't have to restrict my portion size, that I don't have to stop eating something when i'm still hungry or I still want more.
The the biggest benefit is I can eat the food I love and not have the ball-ache or worry about weighing it or logging it.
For me it's simplicity and taste at it's finest.
0 -
IsaackGMOON wrote: »Can we cover via probability based deduction problem?
Let's throw out some known facts
Percent of registered dietitians who mismeasure their food size even knowing they'll be checked in an experiment: 25%.
Times the Laws of Thermodynamics have been violated conclusively: < .01% (actually 0).
Assumptions:
the average dieter, particularly new ones, will be less accurate with food measurements than a dietitian from the experiment.
the average diet is known to obey the laws of physics.
So, which is more likely:
A. the dieter has mismeasured food in an uncontrolled environment (~>25%)
B. the laws of thermodynamics that have always held up under properly controlled conditions have been violated (~0%)
C. some other thing (incalculable without further information)
It's option D.
No giving me the D.0 -
IsaackGMOON wrote: »Can we cover via probability based deduction problem?
Let's throw out some known facts
Percent of registered dietitians who mismeasure their food size even knowing they'll be checked in an experiment: 25%.
Times the Laws of Thermodynamics have been violated conclusively: < .01% (actually 0).
Assumptions:
the average dieter, particularly new ones, will be less accurate with food measurements than a dietitian from the experiment.
the average diet is known to obey the laws of physics.
So, which is more likely:
A. the dieter has mismeasured food in an uncontrolled environment (~>25%)
B. the laws of thermodynamics that have always held up under properly controlled conditions have been violated (~0%)
C. some other thing (incalculable without further information)
It's option D.
No giving me the D.
bruh
0 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »My view point on LCHF still stands that it's an excellent tool and 'as healthy a diet' as someone can have and weight loss only happens with a calorie deficit.
One doesn't need to follow fad diets sensationalized by the media and TV doctors to be healthy and lose weight. They just need common sense.
What like the WHOLE FOODS? Please!!!!
I do happen to think that limiting the amount of inflammatory foods in my diet is healthy.
I certainly do not want MY diet to lack in essential fats and protein.
For me and probably countless others Low Carb means I don't have to restrict my portion size, that I don't have to stop eating something when i'm still hungry or I still want more.
The the biggest benefit is I can eat the food I love and not have the ball-ache or worry about weighing it or logging it.
For me it's simplicity and taste at it's finest.
Open your diary... Lol... I want an example of this... or just paste an .img of it in this thread.0 -
tennisduse2004 wrote:What like the WHOLE FOODS? Please!!!!
I do happen to think that limiting the amount of inflammatory foods in my diet is healthy.
I certainly do not want MY diet to lack in essential fats and protein.
For me and probably countless others Low Carb means I don't have to restrict my portion size, that I don't have to stop eating something when i'm still hungry or I still want more.
The the biggest benefit is I can eat the food I love and not have the ball-ache or worry about weighing it or logging it.
For me it's simplicity and taste at it's finest.
Its not just the low carbers that dont have to worry about portion size. I am like i have a tape worm and can still lose weight. I lost weight in my tenure without logging calories too. And i eat over 200g of carbs a day... i generally aim for 250g. But this has more to do with thr fact that i have a good amount of muscle, my tdee is about 3000 ish calories and i enjoy being active. And my diet doesn't lack essential fats or proteins because its actually pretty easy to hit both of those levels. Even high carbs can hit the essential levels. I actually exceed both levels and hit 45 to 50% of my calories from carbs.
0 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »My view point on LCHF still stands that it's an excellent tool and 'as healthy a diet' as someone can have and weight loss only happens with a calorie deficit.
One doesn't need to follow fad diets sensationalized by the media and TV doctors to be healthy and lose weight. They just need common sense.
What like the WHOLE FOODS? Please!!!!
I do happen to think that limiting the amount of inflammatory foods in my diet is healthy.
I certainly do not want MY diet to lack in essential fats and protein.
For me and probably countless others Low Carb means I don't have to restrict my portion size, that I don't have to stop eating something when i'm still hungry or I still want more.
The the biggest benefit is I can eat the food I love and not have the ball-ache or worry about weighing it or logging it.
For me it's simplicity and taste at it's finest.
Open your diary... Lol... I want an example of this... or just paste an .img of it in this thread.
You Lol at him and expect him to do this for you? Really?0 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »
Until it's proven incorrect!!!
Just so we're all on the same page here. Are you saying, that in the context of the conversation the picture was used, that the science is incorrect.
Or was this merely a drive by?0 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »My view point on LCHF still stands that it's an excellent tool and 'as healthy a diet' as someone can have and weight loss only happens with a calorie deficit.
One doesn't need to follow fad diets sensationalized by the media and TV doctors to be healthy and lose weight. They just need common sense.
What like the WHOLE FOODS? Please!!!!
I do happen to think that limiting the amount of inflammatory foods in my diet is healthy.
I certainly do not want MY diet to lack in essential fats and protein.
For me and probably countless others Low Carb means I don't have to restrict my portion size, that I don't have to stop eating something when i'm still hungry or I still want more.
The the biggest benefit is I can eat the food I love and not have the ball-ache or worry about weighing it or logging it.
For me it's simplicity and taste at it's finest.
Open your diary... Lol... I want an example of this... or just paste an .img of it in this thread.
You Lol at him and expect him to do this for you? Really?
You know i never understood the whole lets compare diaries thing like it proves that much. Also, i dont think tennisdude logs.
The only time where i think it even is to be in consideration is when its a thread on not losing/gaining based on goals or people make statements like you can eat more calories by eating "xx" diet. Ultimately, if your goal is to maximize TEF, then moderate to high protein and mod to high carb is the way to go... as fat doesnt take many calories to digest. Although, i will caveat is medical conditions that inhibit insulin to stabalize, allowing your body to enter fat burning mode again.0 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »
Until it's proven incorrect!!!
Just so we're all on the same page here. Are you saying, that in the context of the conversation the picture was used, that the science is incorrect.
Or was this merely a drive by?
Drive by! it was a comment aimed at the picture!
0 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »My view point on LCHF still stands that it's an excellent tool and 'as healthy a diet' as someone can have and weight loss only happens with a calorie deficit.
One doesn't need to follow fad diets sensationalized by the media and TV doctors to be healthy and lose weight. They just need common sense.
What like the WHOLE FOODS? Please!!!!
I do happen to think that limiting the amount of inflammatory foods in my diet is healthy.
I certainly do not want MY diet to lack in essential fats and protein.
For me and probably countless others Low Carb means I don't have to restrict my portion size, that I don't have to stop eating something when i'm still hungry or I still want more.
The the biggest benefit is I can eat the food I love and not have the ball-ache or worry about weighing it or logging it.
For me it's simplicity and taste at it's finest.
Open your diary... Lol... I want an example of this... or just paste an .img of it in this thread.
I haven't log since I've been on this site (Feb 2014).
0 -
tennisduse2004 wrote:What like the WHOLE FOODS? Please!!!!
I do happen to think that limiting the amount of inflammatory foods in my diet is healthy.
I certainly do not want MY diet to lack in essential fats and protein.
For me and probably countless others Low Carb means I don't have to restrict my portion size, that I don't have to stop eating something when i'm still hungry or I still want more.
The the biggest benefit is I can eat the food I love and not have the ball-ache or worry about weighing it or logging it.
For me it's simplicity and taste at it's finest.
Its not just the low carbers that dont have to worry about portion size. I am like i have a tape worm and can still lose weight. I lost weight in my tenure without logging calories too. And i eat over 200g of carbs a day... i generally aim for 250g. But this has more to do with thr fact that i have a good amount of muscle, my tdee is about 3000 ish calories and i enjoy being active. And my diet doesn't lack essential fats or proteins because its actually pretty easy to hit both of those levels. Even high carbs can hit the essential levels. I actually exceed both levels and hit 45 to 50% of my calories from carbs.
I'm not saying it is only low carber's that can eat intuitively - I am merely siting my own experience.
If I switch to more carbs in my diet, I really struggle to control my appetite.
Besides my favour foods are mainly meat based
I'm just about to make a pancetta and Shiitake omelette (with a large glass of wine)!0 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisduse2004 wrote:What like the WHOLE FOODS? Please!!!!
I do happen to think that limiting the amount of inflammatory foods in my diet is healthy.
I certainly do not want MY diet to lack in essential fats and protein.
For me and probably countless others Low Carb means I don't have to restrict my portion size, that I don't have to stop eating something when i'm still hungry or I still want more.
The the biggest benefit is I can eat the food I love and not have the ball-ache or worry about weighing it or logging it.
For me it's simplicity and taste at it's finest.
Its not just the low carbers that dont have to worry about portion size. I am like i have a tape worm and can still lose weight. I lost weight in my tenure without logging calories too. And i eat over 200g of carbs a day... i generally aim for 250g. But this has more to do with thr fact that i have a good amount of muscle, my tdee is about 3000 ish calories and i enjoy being active. And my diet doesn't lack essential fats or proteins because its actually pretty easy to hit both of those levels. Even high carbs can hit the essential levels. I actually exceed both levels and hit 45 to 50% of my calories from carbs.
I'm not saying it is only low carber's that can eat intuitively - I am merely siting my own experience.
If I switch to more carbs in my diet, I really struggle to control my appetite.
Besides my favour foods are mainly meat based
I'm just about to make a pancetta and Shiitake omelette (with a large glass of wine)!
Those statements sound contradictory.0 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisduse2004 wrote:What like the WHOLE FOODS? Please!!!!
I do happen to think that limiting the amount of inflammatory foods in my diet is healthy.
I certainly do not want MY diet to lack in essential fats and protein.
For me and probably countless others Low Carb means I don't have to restrict my portion size, that I don't have to stop eating something when i'm still hungry or I still want more.
The the biggest benefit is I can eat the food I love and not have the ball-ache or worry about weighing it or logging it.
For me it's simplicity and taste at it's finest.
Its not just the low carbers that dont have to worry about portion size. I am like i have a tape worm and can still lose weight. I lost weight in my tenure without logging calories too. And i eat over 200g of carbs a day... i generally aim for 250g. But this has more to do with thr fact that i have a good amount of muscle, my tdee is about 3000 ish calories and i enjoy being active. And my diet doesn't lack essential fats or proteins because its actually pretty easy to hit both of those levels. Even high carbs can hit the essential levels. I actually exceed both levels and hit 45 to 50% of my calories from carbs.
I'm not saying it is only low carber's that can eat intuitively - I am merely siting my own experience.
If I switch to more carbs in my diet, I really struggle to control my appetite.
Besides my favour foods are mainly meat based
I'm just about to make a pancetta and Shiitake omelette (with a large glass of wine)!
Those statements sound contradictory.
In what way?
0 -
gettingfitformywedding wrote: »Thanks to everyone who posted their opinion and advice! I read through everyone's response and have decided to follow the low carb for a couple of weeks and see how it goes. I'm on day two and feel lots of energy and don't feel hungry! As I had said before, I did low cal and did well on it, but am wanting to see how my body responds to something different. Sometimes it's good to shake things up a bit. Every person responds differently to different things. I will post my 15 day results.
Two weeks isn't very long. Many who go lery low carb feel poorly the first few weeks because their electrolytes are out of balance. A vLC diet will cause you to need about 5000mg of sodium per day, so you will need to double your salt intake (most likely). You may need to up potassium and magnesium too.
I agree with @2Poufs. Consider giving it 4 weeks.
Good luck!callsitlikeiseeit wrote: »a low carb diet is essentially a way to cut calories. Unless you are diabetic, or have a history of diabetes in your family perhaps, it's generally unnecessary to follow a LC diet.cwolfman13 wrote: »low carb is just a way to cut calories...if you low carb and lose weight then you've also cut calories. people do put on some weight when they introduce carbs back into their diet as they restore depleted glycogen stores...essentially water...which has mass and thus weight.
I would disagree that low carb is just a way to cut calories. I'm sure it is for some people because carbs are easy to cut, but LCHF is a way of eating that most use to improve their health. It can be eaten in a calorie deficit or not, or to bulk.
LCHF is one of many WOE that will help improve health and wellness. Any WOE that a person can sustain that will help them lose weight and become more fit will inherently improve your health markers.
For the OP, only time will tell if its beneficial and sustainable. For some people it works very well and for some (me) its a huge failure.
Following to see how the OP does in 15 or 30 days. Good luck OP.
I agree. It's one of many WOEs. It's just a matter of finding the one best suited for your personal health issues, and that you find satisfactory.callsitlikeiseeit wrote: »a low carb diet is essentially a way to cut calories. Unless you are diabetic, or have a history of diabetes in your family perhaps, it's generally unnecessary to follow a LC diet.cwolfman13 wrote: »low carb is just a way to cut calories...if you low carb and lose weight then you've also cut calories. people do put on some weight when they introduce carbs back into their diet as they restore depleted glycogen stores...essentially water...which has mass and thus weight.
I would disagree that low carb is just a way to cut calories. I'm sure it is for some people because carbs are easy to cut, but LCHF is a way of eating that most use to improve their health. It can be eaten in a calorie deficit or not, or to bulk.
Please substantiate the claim that "most" use LCHF to improve health. Are you saying the majority of LCHF adherents or using a different definition or is this yet another baseless claim aka the usual
Apologies. I should have said that most of the people who use a LCHF diet over the long term, and who frequent the various MFP groups (like Low Carber Daily), state that they use this diet to improve their health. They eat at a deficit for weight loss.
And I really don't think my usual claims are baseless.... My guess is that you write that because you generally disagree with my opinion; that alone does not mean that I wrong.
So indeed your claim was baseless until you totally changed the claim and then it is based on a pretty small sample size that is in no way representative of the group at large. It's not that I disagree with your opinion, you fail to support your claims with any actual evidence at nearly a 100% rate.0 -
Ok. So what I want to know is, for all responders who are so vehemently anti low carb - and for those of you who just generally don't think it makes a difference whatsoever - cico, cico, forever and ever, amen, etc ... why bother responding in the first place to keto/lowcarb/lchf/onlymeat4evah! threads? What is the payoff? Anyone who is doing low carb and getting good results is probably going to continue doing it. Same with people who are eating a more traditional, less restrictive woe. Different strokes for different folks.
Why is it necessary to be so combative about it?
0 -
gettingfitformywedding wrote: »Thanks to everyone who posted their opinion and advice! I read through everyone's response and have decided to follow the low carb for a couple of weeks and see how it goes. I'm on day two and feel lots of energy and don't feel hungry! As I had said before, I did low cal and did well on it, but am wanting to see how my body responds to something different. Sometimes it's good to shake things up a bit. Every person responds differently to different things. I will post my 15 day results.
Two weeks isn't very long. Many who go lery low carb feel poorly the first few weeks because their electrolytes are out of balance. A vLC diet will cause you to need about 5000mg of sodium per day, so you will need to double your salt intake (most likely). You may need to up potassium and magnesium too.
I agree with @2Poufs. Consider giving it 4 weeks.
Good luck!callsitlikeiseeit wrote: »a low carb diet is essentially a way to cut calories. Unless you are diabetic, or have a history of diabetes in your family perhaps, it's generally unnecessary to follow a LC diet.cwolfman13 wrote: »low carb is just a way to cut calories...if you low carb and lose weight then you've also cut calories. people do put on some weight when they introduce carbs back into their diet as they restore depleted glycogen stores...essentially water...which has mass and thus weight.
I would disagree that low carb is just a way to cut calories. I'm sure it is for some people because carbs are easy to cut, but LCHF is a way of eating that most use to improve their health. It can be eaten in a calorie deficit or not, or to bulk.
LCHF is one of many WOE that will help improve health and wellness. Any WOE that a person can sustain that will help them lose weight and become more fit will inherently improve your health markers.
For the OP, only time will tell if its beneficial and sustainable. For some people it works very well and for some (me) its a huge failure.
Following to see how the OP does in 15 or 30 days. Good luck OP.
I agree. It's one of many WOEs. It's just a matter of finding the one best suited for your personal health issues, and that you find satisfactory.callsitlikeiseeit wrote: »a low carb diet is essentially a way to cut calories. Unless you are diabetic, or have a history of diabetes in your family perhaps, it's generally unnecessary to follow a LC diet.cwolfman13 wrote: »low carb is just a way to cut calories...if you low carb and lose weight then you've also cut calories. people do put on some weight when they introduce carbs back into their diet as they restore depleted glycogen stores...essentially water...which has mass and thus weight.
I would disagree that low carb is just a way to cut calories. I'm sure it is for some people because carbs are easy to cut, but LCHF is a way of eating that most use to improve their health. It can be eaten in a calorie deficit or not, or to bulk.
Please substantiate the claim that "most" use LCHF to improve health. Are you saying the majority of LCHF adherents or using a different definition or is this yet another baseless claim aka the usual
Apologies. I should have said that most of the people who use a LCHF diet over the long term, and who frequent the various MFP groups (like Low Carber Daily), state that they use this diet to improve their health. They eat at a deficit for weight loss.
And I really don't think my usual claims are baseless.... My guess is that you write that because you generally disagree with my opinion; that alone does not mean that I wrong.
So indeed your claim was baseless until you totally changed the claim and then it is based on a pretty small sample size that is in no way representative of the group at large. It's not that I disagree with your opinion, you fail to support your claims with any actual evidence at nearly a 100% rate.
How are you expecting me to back up my personal observations? And why would I bother for you, a person who appears to have no interest in low carb except to argue against it even though it is not a dangerous or unhealthy diet.
You baffle me a bit.0 -
gettingfitformywedding wrote: »My mom and co worker have convinced me that a low carb diet is what I should follow to reach my weight loss goals. I've read the other forums and am not interested in the debate on whether low calorie or low carb is the better of two.. I've tried low carb, I did well on it but constantly felt hungry. I know different diets work for different people, but these two people in particular have lost significant weight following extreme low carb diet. My coworker has lost 120 pounds since January of this year when he went to the doctor for the first time in awhile and found out he was diabetic and weighed over 300 pounds. These two people are following a diet similar to Atkins.. only eating 20-30 carbs per day. I suppose my question is.. is this realistic? 20 carbs is not a lot at all especially when you're used to eating 200-250 carbs per day. I feel that even if I lose the weight, or in my coworkers situation that when/if he stops following the low carb regime OR even goes back to eating a daily recommended amount of carbs that he will likely gain it back. Advice?
The reason they lost weight is because they ate at a calorie deficit. Low carb was just the tool to help them eat at a calorie deficit. No diet, including low carb, is the magic solution to weight loss.
I can't answer your question regarding carb amount, but I can tell you that any diet will work if you eat at a calorie deficit, and no diet will work if you eat at maintenance or a surplus.
That said, if you truly don't like low carb, why are you considering it? You really need to find the diet that works for you. 0 -
gettingfitformywedding wrote: »My mom and co worker have convinced me that a low carb diet is what I should follow to reach my weight loss goals. I've read the other forums and am not interested in the debate on whether low calorie or low carb is the better of two.. I've tried low carb, I did well on it but constantly felt hungry. I know different diets work for different people, but these two people in particular have lost significant weight following extreme low carb diet. My coworker has lost 120 pounds since January of this year when he went to the doctor for the first time in awhile and found out he was diabetic and weighed over 300 pounds. These two people are following a diet similar to Atkins.. only eating 20-30 carbs per day. I suppose my question is.. is this realistic? 20 carbs is not a lot at all especially when you're used to eating 200-250 carbs per day. I feel that even if I lose the weight, or in my coworkers situation that when/if he stops following the low carb regime OR even goes back to eating a daily recommended amount of carbs that he will likely gain it back. Advice?
If a low carb diet helps you implement a low calorie diet, good for you. If you expect to eat the same calories that you do today, but only change the macros, nothing will happen.
Not true. You CAN eat more calories and lose weight if you're limiting carbs.
To the op, I on Atkins now and you need to make sure you are eating enough fat to feel full. I eat 3-4 meals a day and I am satisfied and I used to eat junk food all day long.
Edit to add, Atkins can be low calorie depending on what you eat but you're not supposed to count calories. I know that I'm eating about 1800-1900 calories though and I've lost 4 pounds in the last 4 days with no exercise so...obv something is working
Maybe you CAN eat more calories and lose weight if you're limiting carbs, but you still can't eat a surplus of calories or you will gain weight. No diet cancels out the fact that to lose weight you must eat less calories than you burn, to maintain weight you must eat the same amount of calories as you burn, and to gain weight you must eat more calories than you burn.
It seems to me that eating low carb helped you to eat in a calorie deficit. 0 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisduse2004 wrote:What like the WHOLE FOODS? Please!!!!
I do happen to think that limiting the amount of inflammatory foods in my diet is healthy.
I certainly do not want MY diet to lack in essential fats and protein.
For me and probably countless others Low Carb means I don't have to restrict my portion size, that I don't have to stop eating something when i'm still hungry or I still want more.
The the biggest benefit is I can eat the food I love and not have the ball-ache or worry about weighing it or logging it.
For me it's simplicity and taste at it's finest.
Its not just the low carbers that dont have to worry about portion size. I am like i have a tape worm and can still lose weight. I lost weight in my tenure without logging calories too. And i eat over 200g of carbs a day... i generally aim for 250g. But this has more to do with thr fact that i have a good amount of muscle, my tdee is about 3000 ish calories and i enjoy being active. And my diet doesn't lack essential fats or proteins because its actually pretty easy to hit both of those levels. Even high carbs can hit the essential levels. I actually exceed both levels and hit 45 to 50% of my calories from carbs.
I'm not saying it is only low carber's that can eat intuitively - I am merely siting my own experience.
If I switch to more carbs in my diet, I really struggle to control my appetite.
Besides my favour foods are mainly meat based
I'm just about to make a pancetta and Shiitake omelette (with a large glass of wine)!
Those statements sound contradictory.
In what way?
You're favorite foods are mainly meat, but you can't control your appetite with carbs.
I'm not saying it is necessarily contradictory, just they sound that way.0 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisduse2004 wrote:What like the WHOLE FOODS? Please!!!!
I do happen to think that limiting the amount of inflammatory foods in my diet is healthy.
I certainly do not want MY diet to lack in essential fats and protein.
For me and probably countless others Low Carb means I don't have to restrict my portion size, that I don't have to stop eating something when i'm still hungry or I still want more.
The the biggest benefit is I can eat the food I love and not have the ball-ache or worry about weighing it or logging it.
For me it's simplicity and taste at it's finest.
Its not just the low carbers that dont have to worry about portion size. I am like i have a tape worm and can still lose weight. I lost weight in my tenure without logging calories too. And i eat over 200g of carbs a day... i generally aim for 250g. But this has more to do with thr fact that i have a good amount of muscle, my tdee is about 3000 ish calories and i enjoy being active. And my diet doesn't lack essential fats or proteins because its actually pretty easy to hit both of those levels. Even high carbs can hit the essential levels. I actually exceed both levels and hit 45 to 50% of my calories from carbs.
I'm not saying it is only low carber's that can eat intuitively - I am merely siting my own experience.
If I switch to more carbs in my diet, I really struggle to control my appetite.
Besides my favour foods are mainly meat based
I'm just about to make a pancetta and Shiitake omelette (with a large glass of wine)!
Those statements sound contradictory.
In what way?
You're favorite foods are mainly meat, but you can't control your appetite with carbs.
I'm not saying it is necessarily contradictory, just they sound that way.
same with me except for the meat hahaha. puzzle that!
0 -
melodicraven wrote: »Ok. So what I want to know is, for all responders who are so vehemently anti low carb - and for those of you who just generally don't think it makes a difference whatsoever - cico, cico, forever and ever, amen, etc ... why bother responding in the first place to keto/lowcarb/lchf/onlymeat4evah! threads? What is the payoff? Anyone who is doing low carb and getting good results is probably going to continue doing it. Same with people who are eating a more traditional, less restrictive woe. Different strokes for different folks.
I would expect the target is not people doing extreme low carb and happy about it, but those who feel they must low carb but are miserable and those who have gotten convinced that eating fruit or oatmeal or potatoes is unhealthy, as we keep seeing pop up on MFP (the current version of "nuts are unhealthy because high in fat").
I think personal choice to low carb is great. IME, a lot of low carbers are evangelistic about it and the current trend is that "carbs" are bad, when in fact many carbs are extremely health-promoting.
0 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisduse2004 wrote:What like the WHOLE FOODS? Please!!!!
I do happen to think that limiting the amount of inflammatory foods in my diet is healthy.
I certainly do not want MY diet to lack in essential fats and protein.
For me and probably countless others Low Carb means I don't have to restrict my portion size, that I don't have to stop eating something when i'm still hungry or I still want more.
The the biggest benefit is I can eat the food I love and not have the ball-ache or worry about weighing it or logging it.
For me it's simplicity and taste at it's finest.
Its not just the low carbers that dont have to worry about portion size. I am like i have a tape worm and can still lose weight. I lost weight in my tenure without logging calories too. And i eat over 200g of carbs a day... i generally aim for 250g. But this has more to do with thr fact that i have a good amount of muscle, my tdee is about 3000 ish calories and i enjoy being active. And my diet doesn't lack essential fats or proteins because its actually pretty easy to hit both of those levels. Even high carbs can hit the essential levels. I actually exceed both levels and hit 45 to 50% of my calories from carbs.
I'm not saying it is only low carber's that can eat intuitively - I am merely siting my own experience.
If I switch to more carbs in my diet, I really struggle to control my appetite.
Besides my favour foods are mainly meat based
I'm just about to make a pancetta and Shiitake omelette (with a large glass of wine)!
Those statements sound contradictory.
In what way?
You're favorite foods are mainly meat, but you can't control your appetite with carbs.
I'm not saying it is necessarily contradictory, just they sound that way.
I find this contradictory too.
My favorite foods are meat and cheese and as a result I can overeat doing low carb (and even paleo, minus the cheese) no prob. I don't overeat on pasta and bread so long as I don't just eat them because they are there, so cutting them out seemed dumb to me when I thought about it.
Carbs don't make me hungrier, though. And--sadly--fats don't sate me.0 -
i don't want to call it a diet, but i have been eating low(er) carbs, between 50 and 100 daily, and I love it. I have completely eliminated grains from my diet and it works, for me. When I was eating bread, i would always have cravings for bread and would find myself just eating an extra slice or two for no reason. After eliminating it, I dont have binge cravings for breads anymore. It also seems like it is easier for me to eat at a deficit without eating grains. I still eat plenty of veggies and some fruit and i drink lots of water. I've lost 15 lbs in the past 6 weeks and i feel like this way of eating is a lifestyle that I can easily carry out without feeling like i'm depriving myself.0
-
tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisduse2004 wrote:What like the WHOLE FOODS? Please!!!!
I do happen to think that limiting the amount of inflammatory foods in my diet is healthy.
I certainly do not want MY diet to lack in essential fats and protein.
For me and probably countless others Low Carb means I don't have to restrict my portion size, that I don't have to stop eating something when i'm still hungry or I still want more.
The the biggest benefit is I can eat the food I love and not have the ball-ache or worry about weighing it or logging it.
For me it's simplicity and taste at it's finest.
Its not just the low carbers that dont have to worry about portion size. I am like i have a tape worm and can still lose weight. I lost weight in my tenure without logging calories too. And i eat over 200g of carbs a day... i generally aim for 250g. But this has more to do with thr fact that i have a good amount of muscle, my tdee is about 3000 ish calories and i enjoy being active. And my diet doesn't lack essential fats or proteins because its actually pretty easy to hit both of those levels. Even high carbs can hit the essential levels. I actually exceed both levels and hit 45 to 50% of my calories from carbs.
I'm not saying it is only low carber's that can eat intuitively - I am merely siting my own experience.
If I switch to more carbs in my diet, I really struggle to control my appetite.
Besides my favour foods are mainly meat based
I'm just about to make a pancetta and Shiitake omelette (with a large glass of wine)!
Those statements sound contradictory.
In what way?
You're favorite foods are mainly meat, but you can't control your appetite with carbs.
I'm not saying it is necessarily contradictory, just they sound that way.
There's nothing contradictory in the least about my statement (if that's what you are comparing)!!!??
If you are comparing my experience with your own experience (as Lemurcat12 is) then our experiences are contradictory (to a fashion), but my statement in isolation does not fall under the definition of contradictory.
0 -
jaywirth88 wrote: »i don't want to call it a diet, but i have been eating low(er) carbs, between 50 and 100 daily, and I love it. I have completely eliminated grains from my diet and it works, for me. When I was eating bread, i would always have cravings for bread and would find myself just eating an extra slice or two for no reason. After eliminating it, I dont have binge cravings for breads anymore. It also seems like it is easier for me to eat at a deficit without eating grains. I still eat plenty of veggies and some fruit and i drink lots of water. I've lost 15 lbs in the past 6 weeks and i feel like this way of eating is a lifestyle that I can easily carry out without feeling like i'm depriving myself.
There's nothing wrong with that. You found what works for you and that's great.
The issue starts when people (not you!) come in and start spouting anecdotal, barely substantiated evidence, that flies against the face of accepted science and use that to proselytise newbies.
That's when you see the woo-radars humming and coming in to save more people from mass misinformation.0 -
gettingfitformywedding wrote: »Thanks to everyone who posted their opinion and advice! I read through everyone's response and have decided to follow the low carb for a couple of weeks and see how it goes. I'm on day two and feel lots of energy and don't feel hungry! As I had said before, I did low cal and did well on it, but am wanting to see how my body responds to something different. Sometimes it's good to shake things up a bit. Every person responds differently to different things. I will post my 15 day results.
Two weeks isn't very long. Many who go lery low carb feel poorly the first few weeks because their electrolytes are out of balance. A vLC diet will cause you to need about 5000mg of sodium per day, so you will need to double your salt intake (most likely). You may need to up potassium and magnesium too.
I agree with @2Poufs. Consider giving it 4 weeks.
Good luck!callsitlikeiseeit wrote: »a low carb diet is essentially a way to cut calories. Unless you are diabetic, or have a history of diabetes in your family perhaps, it's generally unnecessary to follow a LC diet.cwolfman13 wrote: »low carb is just a way to cut calories...if you low carb and lose weight then you've also cut calories. people do put on some weight when they introduce carbs back into their diet as they restore depleted glycogen stores...essentially water...which has mass and thus weight.
I would disagree that low carb is just a way to cut calories. I'm sure it is for some people because carbs are easy to cut, but LCHF is a way of eating that most use to improve their health. It can be eaten in a calorie deficit or not, or to bulk.
LCHF is one of many WOE that will help improve health and wellness. Any WOE that a person can sustain that will help them lose weight and become more fit will inherently improve your health markers.
For the OP, only time will tell if its beneficial and sustainable. For some people it works very well and for some (me) its a huge failure.
Following to see how the OP does in 15 or 30 days. Good luck OP.
I agree. It's one of many WOEs. It's just a matter of finding the one best suited for your personal health issues, and that you find satisfactory.callsitlikeiseeit wrote: »a low carb diet is essentially a way to cut calories. Unless you are diabetic, or have a history of diabetes in your family perhaps, it's generally unnecessary to follow a LC diet.cwolfman13 wrote: »low carb is just a way to cut calories...if you low carb and lose weight then you've also cut calories. people do put on some weight when they introduce carbs back into their diet as they restore depleted glycogen stores...essentially water...which has mass and thus weight.
I would disagree that low carb is just a way to cut calories. I'm sure it is for some people because carbs are easy to cut, but LCHF is a way of eating that most use to improve their health. It can be eaten in a calorie deficit or not, or to bulk.
Please substantiate the claim that "most" use LCHF to improve health. Are you saying the majority of LCHF adherents or using a different definition or is this yet another baseless claim aka the usual
Apologies. I should have said that most of the people who use a LCHF diet over the long term, and who frequent the various MFP groups (like Low Carber Daily), state that they use this diet to improve their health. They eat at a deficit for weight loss.
And I really don't think my usual claims are baseless.... My guess is that you write that because you generally disagree with my opinion; that alone does not mean that I wrong.
So indeed your claim was baseless until you totally changed the claim and then it is based on a pretty small sample size that is in no way representative of the group at large. It's not that I disagree with your opinion, you fail to support your claims with any actual evidence at nearly a 100% rate.
How are you expecting me to back up my personal observations? And why would I bother for you, a person who appears to have no interest in low carb except to argue against it even though it is not a dangerous or unhealthy diet.
You baffle me a bit.
Words have meanings, "LCHF is a way of eating that most use to improve their health", was it prefaced with in my opinion or in my experiences?
If you wouldn't bother supporting your claims, why bother continuing to just make things up, all in support of a way of eating?
Can you specifically quote where I've argued against the diet and if if i've said it was dangerous or unhealthy? Or is this just another baseless claim?
I agree, it is baffling so many low carb advocates here try to lie and mislead people constantly with made up claims, that when called on to support, they cannot do so.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.9K Introduce Yourself
- 43.9K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 429 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.1K Motivation and Support
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 15 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions