Is limiting carbs bad for you?
Options
Replies
-
I try to keep my carbs under 100grms so I can have more protein and fats in my diet. Is 80 to 100 grams of carbs too high for a low carb diet. My cholesterol, triglicerides and blood sugar are normal from eating this way. Am I missing something by not going lower on my carbs. I am loosing weight and work out 45min, 5 days a week but I am starting to run out of gas. My doctor told me to increase my carbs but everything is going so well that I hate to do that.0
-
@southhamptonmike , you remind me of Kramer in the gas gauge episode.
You can wait until you run out of gas, of course....0 -
Please don't think that I am saying LCHF, overy LCHF (ketogenic) dietsare the only way to go. They aren't. For some people they are better, for others they aren't. It's an individual thing.
My main point is that eating low carb is a safe and healthy way to eat (unless one decides to subsist on only bacon, transfats, and rancid polyunsaturated oils - which most people won't).
As pointed out though, other people in the thread have stated you "need to stay below 100g of carbs", which is dumb. No one has to do anything when it comes to carbs.
OP, it may not be bad for you unless you don't tolerate it well. Give it a try and see if low carb works for you. Some people find a low carb, high fat diet more satiating and easier to stick to their calorie goal. Others don't find that it works for them. You need to experiment and find the way of eating that works for you and allows you to meet your goals.
I'm just going to sit here and agree with Auddii!
I ate lower carbs when I first started dieting (around 100 grams or so), but as I've increased my activity, I've found that I needed to up that a bit to feel better. I don't think of myself as a low-carber, I tend to think of myself as a moderate everything-er.
Just as I found what has worked best for me and my personal energy and activity levels, I'd recommend the same to you, OP.0 -
southhamptonmike wrote: »I try to keep my carbs under 100grms so I can have more protein and fats in my diet. Is 80 to 100 grams of carbs too high for a low carb diet. My cholesterol, triglicerides and blood sugar are normal from eating this way. Am I missing something by not going lower on my carbs. I am loosing weight and work out 45min, 5 days a week but I am starting to run out of gas. My doctor told me to increase my carbs but everything is going so well that I hate to do that.
A low carb diet is generally considered to be under 150 or 100g. It really is just a label. 0g to 150g is considered LCHF.
Because you are working out, eating 80-100g of carbs a day may be eough to get you into ketosis, or rather in and out of ketosis. Going into ketosis can be a short drain on energy because you are basically depleteing your glycogen until your body switches to fat oxidation. Every time you go in an out of ketosis, you may get that energy low.
My advice would be to go lower carb (below 50g per day) or higher carb (around 150g per day or higher depending on your activity level) to make sure you are not going in and out of ketosis. It depends on if you want to be in ketosis or not.
Try upping your sodium too. Going LCHF causes water weight and electrolytes to be lost. Upping salt to 3000 to 5000mg per day can help with sluggishness.
Good luck.0 -
thanks nvmomketo, this makes a lot of sense to me. I think that is actually what is happening to me. I tried to go below 50g carbs per day but had headaches. I think i'll up my carbs a little, like the doctor said and also your advice.0
-
southhamptonmike wrote: »I try to keep my carbs under 100grms so I can have more protein and fats in my diet. Is 80 to 100 grams of carbs too high for a low carb diet. My cholesterol, triglicerides and blood sugar are normal from eating this way. Am I missing something by not going lower on my carbs. I am loosing weight and work out 45min, 5 days a week but I am starting to run out of gas. My doctor told me to increase my carbs but everything is going so well that I hate to do that.
A low carb diet is generally considered to be under 150 or 100g. It really is just a label. 0g to 150g is considered LCHF.
Because you are working out, eating 80-100g of carbs a day may be eough to get you into ketosis, or rather in and out of ketosis. Going into ketosis can be a short drain on energy because you are basically depleteing your glycogen until your body switches to fat oxidation. Every time you go in an out of ketosis, you may get that energy low.
My advice would be to go lower carb (below 50g per day) or higher carb (around 150g per day or higher depending on your activity level) to make sure you are not going in and out of ketosis. It depends on if you want to be in ketosis or not.
Try upping your sodium too. Going LCHF causes water weight and electrolytes to be lost. Upping salt to 3000 to 5000mg per day can help with sluggishness.
Good luck.
150 g seems way too high to use as the cutoff for "LCHF," especially for people with lower calorie goals. I'm just lowered my cals back down to 1450, and that would put my carb goal under 150 with 40-30-30, which is not low carb. And of course it seems wrong to call 30% fat or 48 g fat high fat, which is where 40-30-30 would put it.0 -
southhamptonmike wrote: »thanks nvmomketo, this makes a lot of sense to me. I think that is actually what is happening to me. I tried to go below 50g carbs per day but had headaches. I think i'll up my carbs a little, like the doctor said and also your advice.
My experience is very much in line with @nvmomketo's advice. I had been keeping my net carbs under 100 grams for several months, and everything was good. Two or three weeks ago I decided to try keto and dropped them to under 50. After a few days, I was a little tired and had a little dizziness and very mild headaches. I followed the advice of more experienced keto people and increased my salt consumption and these problems disappeared in about an hour. Now, I seem to have even more energy that I did before. For me, the slight dizziness when I bend forward is the early warning signal for low salt. If I have something salty (bouillon or some salted water typically), it goes away quickly and no other issues present.
If you are going to go low enough on carbs to enter ketosis, it really is very important to up your salt intake. If you do, you will feel great. And I think if you are in the "border area"...50-100, you could at times drift in and out like nvmomketo mentioned. I do know that when I was staying under 100, a few times I had a few days lower than usual...maybe in the 50s...and I noticed my calves were a little prone to cramping and I had a little dizziness...I think this was me starting to go into keto and I just needed more salt and other electrolytes.
But I agree...there is absolutely no harm to reducing carbs, even to much lower levels than you are at. Just find the level that works best for your goals and preferences, and if you are tired eat or drink more salt and that will go away.0 -
hamlet1222 wrote: »what puzzles me is where glycogen fits in. Some low-carb diet proponents suggest that it not possible to burn fat until you've depleted your glycogen stores.
Nah, that's clearly not true, as many of us dieters aren't going low carb enough to wipe out our glycogen stores completely, and we're still losing fat. You can tell if you actually deplete glycogen reserves, you "hit the wall" in runners' terminology, and you will go into ketosis.
You probably do need to at least begin to deplete glycogen stores (which is impossible not to do if you're on a caloric deficit) before your body begins oxidizing appreciable amounts of fat. If you're on a diet with a deficit, but not a low-carb diet, your glycogen levels are likely usually partially depleted, but not fully so.
It's true your body "prefers" glycogen to fat, but it actually is going to tap all energy stores simultaneously, just in differing ratios.
0 -
I would like to remind everyone to try and stay on topic. And I would like to remind everyone of the two below rules.
1. No Attacks or Insults and No Reciprocation
a) Do not attack, mock, or otherwise insult others. You can respectfully disagree with the message or topic, but you cannot attack the messenger. This includes attacks against the user’s spelling or command of written English, or belittling a user for posting a duplicate topic.
b) If you are attacked by another user, and you reciprocate, you will also be subject to the same consequences. Defending yourself or a friend is not an excuse! Do not take matters into your own hands – instead, use the Report Post link to report an attack and we will be happy to handle the situation for you.
2. No Hi-Jacking, Trolling, or Flame-baiting
Please stay on-topic in an existing thread, and post new threads in the appropriate forum. Taking a thread off-topic is considered hi-jacking. Please either contribute politely and constructively to a topic, or move on without posting. This includes posts that encourage the drama in a topic to escalate, or posts intended to incite an uproar from the community.
0 -
Not sure if it's because she was breastfeeding too, but the lady in this article nearly died after limiting carbs:
dailymail.co.uk/health/article-3262230/New-mother-nearly-DIES-low-carb-diet-32-year-old-developed-life-threatening-condition-ditching-bread-rice-pasta-breastfeeding.html0 -
crazychic_1133 wrote: »Not sure if it's because she was breastfeeding too, but the lady in this article nearly died after limiting carbs:
dailymail.co.uk/health/article-3262230/New-mother-nearly-DIES-low-carb-diet-32-year-old-developed-life-threatening-condition-ditching-bread-rice-pasta-breastfeeding.html
‘The primary diagnosis was thought to be ketoacidosis due to starvation induced by the LCHF diet,’ doctors writing in the journal.
The article should have given us an estimate of how many calories she was eating per day versus calories burned while breastfeeding and for her other daily activities. But it doesn't say. Leaving one to wonder: was her condition induced by low carb, or by severe calorie restriction due to the appetite suppressing effects of low carb?
0 -
@MoiAussi93 and @nvmomketo - what are your approximate macro ratios?0
-
From the women who was breastfeeding:
"The woman described in the case report in the journal contacted me of her own accord through common acquaintances. She tells a different story from the one perpetuated by the media:
What isn’t made clear is that I, the breastfeeding woman, had been eating LCHF for approximately six years before this incident, but, because of stress during my second pregnancy and after childbirth I suffered loss of appetite. This led to more stress as I wanted to eat, but my body said no. I ate whatever I could keep down: crackers, yoghurt, fruit… The problem was that I barely consumed any food at all, and didn’t get enough energy from fats or carbohydrates..
I came down with a fever that lasted a whole week, this was two weeks before I was admitted to Mora [hospital] and during that week I ate almost nothing, I mostly drank water. And while I wasn’t eating, my daughter was, which naturally depleted me of nutrients. To say that I ate a low-carb diet and got sick is just wrong, I regrettably ate nothing and whatever I ate was actually carbs.
I still do low-carb, but the difference between now and when I got sick is that now I actually eat. I’m healthy and haven’t had any issues for a year now. I completely breastfed my daughter for another 10 months and didn’t feel bad at all. (Well actually, I did feel psychologically lousy because of what the doctors threatened and accused me of, but nothing else)
"
Source0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »lisaloolovesblue wrote: »For example, the Atkins diet. That diet says NO carbs, (including the little bit in milk), but you can have all the fat you want.
I don't think no carbs is healthy at all, and I think diets that are enormously high in sat fat aren't good for you, probably (with more evidence against processed meats and deep fat fried foods if they are a significant part of the diet, as well as transfats, of course). However, Atkins isn't recommending that, I don't think, or no carbs. It has a brief very low carb induction period and then different levels, and it does recommend vegetables. (I haven't done it, but I know people who have.)
It actually requires vegetables, but yes.0 -
crazychic_1133 wrote: »Not sure if it's because she was breastfeeding too, but the lady in this article nearly died after limiting carbs:
dailymail.co.uk/health/article-3262230/New-mother-nearly-DIES-low-carb-diet-32-year-old-developed-life-threatening-condition-ditching-bread-rice-pasta-breastfeeding.html
‘The primary diagnosis was thought to be ketoacidosis due to starvation induced by the LCHF diet,’ doctors writing in the journal.
The article should have given us an estimate of how many calories she was eating per day versus calories burned while breastfeeding and for her other daily activities. But it doesn't say. Leaving one to wonder: was her condition induced by low carb, or by severe calorie restriction due to the appetite suppressing effects of low carb?
according to the article, she was eating less than 20g of carbs, while on Atkins for instance it is suggested to skip the phase 1 of the diet and start at 50g of carbs.
http://uk.atkins.com/community/blog/h,-baby!-how-to-lose-baby-weight-with-atkins.html
People who have special conditions should always work with a dietitian and avoid the DIY approach.
0 -
Gianfranco_R wrote: »crazychic_1133 wrote: »Not sure if it's because she was breastfeeding too, but the lady in this article nearly died after limiting carbs:
dailymail.co.uk/health/article-3262230/New-mother-nearly-DIES-low-carb-diet-32-year-old-developed-life-threatening-condition-ditching-bread-rice-pasta-breastfeeding.html
‘The primary diagnosis was thought to be ketoacidosis due to starvation induced by the LCHF diet,’ doctors writing in the journal.
The article should have given us an estimate of how many calories she was eating per day versus calories burned while breastfeeding and for her other daily activities. But it doesn't say. Leaving one to wonder: was her condition induced by low carb, or by severe calorie restriction due to the appetite suppressing effects of low carb?
according to the article, she was eating less than 20g of carbs, while on Atkins for instance it is suggested to skip the phase 1 of the diet and start at 50g of carbs.
http://uk.atkins.com/community/blog/h,-baby!-how-to-lose-baby-weight-with-atkins.html
People who have special conditions should always work with a dietitian and avoid the DIY approach.
Scroll up, read Alabaster Verve's post if you didn't already. It's another scare story, light on facts, implying low carb is the culprit when clearly loss of appetite due to stress (which she tried to fix by then eating more carbs) was the real issue.
Stress kills, but we all know that, so I guess they wanted to blame low carb instead.0 -
AlabasterVerve wrote: »From the women who was breastfeeding:
"The woman described in the case report in the journal contacted me of her own accord through common acquaintances. She tells a different story from the one perpetuated by the media:
What isn’t made clear is that I, the breastfeeding woman, had been eating LCHF for approximately six years before this incident, but, because of stress during my second pregnancy and after childbirth I suffered loss of appetite. This led to more stress as I wanted to eat, but my body said no. I ate whatever I could keep down: crackers, yoghurt, fruit… The problem was that I barely consumed any food at all, and didn’t get enough energy from fats or carbohydrates..
I came down with a fever that lasted a whole week, this was two weeks before I was admitted to Mora [hospital] and during that week I ate almost nothing, I mostly drank water. And while I wasn’t eating, my daughter was, which naturally depleted me of nutrients. To say that I ate a low-carb diet and got sick is just wrong, I regrettably ate nothing and whatever I ate was actually carbs.
I still do low-carb, but the difference between now and when I got sick is that now I actually eat. I’m healthy and haven’t had any issues for a year now. I completely breastfed my daughter for another 10 months and didn’t feel bad at all. (Well actually, I did feel psychologically lousy because of what the doctors threatened and accused me of, but nothing else)"
Source
This doesn't surprise me. From what I understand, it is very difficult to have ketoacidosis if you are not diabetic, and so something had to be very wrong for her to get to that point. And while ketoacidosis can be very dangerous, it's drastically different from ketosis.0 -
lisaloolovesblue wrote: »blankiefinder wrote: »What matters is a calorie deficit, however you choose to achieve that. Just be aware that if you are low carb, and then splurge on carbs or resume a normal diet, you will have a jump in weight as your body restores it's normal water levels.
There is a lot more that matters than just a calorie deficit. A calorie deficit is all that matters to pure and simple weight loss. But weight loss can happen in a variety of ways, and not all of them are healthy.
For example, the Atkins diet. That diet says NO carbs, (including the little bit in milk), but you can have all the fat you want. All that fat and protein is supposed to make you fuller longer, which helps you to achieve your calorie deficit. However, you "mortgage your future," as my professor says.
Can you lose weight on the Atkins diet? Yes. Is it contributing to your overall health? Absolutely not. It contributes to heart disease.
Our bodies get energy from three "buckets," if you will. It draws from these sources in order:
1) Glucose in the blood.
2) Glycogen in the liver.
3) Fat in the body.
When we eat carbohydrates, the body breaks that up into glucose, and stores some in the blood. That is your blood sugar. When that "bucket" gets full, the body stores the fuel in the liver in the form of glycogen. When that bucket gets full, the rest is stored as fat.
When you do aerobic exercise, your body first draws energy from the blood, then from the liver, and then from the fat. That is why we are recommended to do at least 30 minutes of aerobic exercise; at that point we are burning more fat than glucose and glycogen.
SO, how does this all relate to the carbohydrates that you eat? Without carbohydrates, your body cannot fill up those first two buckets as their initial source of energy.
It sounds all fine and dandy to have your body's only source of energy to be fat, but that's actually really bad for you. Your body produces ketones when you burn fat, which, when not filtered out properly, lowers the pH of your blood, meaning your blood is more acidic than it's supposed to be. This can lead to a variety of health problems.
Now, I'm not a health professional (yet); I'm just a student. So if any part of that needs tweaking, please correct me! But as far as my knowledge goes, this is correct.
I just want to point at that Atkins never once says NO CARBS. In fact, if you actually follow the diet as intended and not just stay in induction forever, you can eat a wide variety of carbs, including whole grains and fruit. Many people like to think Atkins is all you can eat bacon and cheese. It's not. He also severely stressed that in induction the carbs you get come strictly from low GI veggies, so you are essentially still eating carbs and getting decent fiber intake if you're doing it right. Also, carbs aren't the only thing that gets broken down into glucose and essentially your body can run on ketones as energy. Ketoacidosis is in fact a life threatening thing, but usually only for diabetics and alcoholics who already have insulin issues. A normal person eating a low carb diet is not going to be affected by excess ketones. Ketosis is vastly different.
Low carb can help you stay in a nice calorie deficit which is how it helps you lose weight. It's not for everyone, but if you like it, go for it. All you can do is try it and see.
0 -
So there are no reasons to not restrict carbs unless you find that style of diet unsustainable. For me, I cannot restrict carbs. Personally when I am in a cut (losing weight), I restrict fats. I tend to keep carbs high and protein moderate (1g per lb of lean body mass). In the grand scheme, I look at calories, protein and then the rest (I do also strive to get 20g+ of fiber a day).
But in my experience, I do not do well with restricting foods I love. I eat them in moderation, pending I can hit my protein goals for that day. I focus my efforts on getting 80-90% of my calories from whole sources and I try to hit personal best every time I lift.0 -
I limit my carbs, but it happened fairly naturally. I was hungry. So I needed more protein. And I was getting plenty of carbs from vegetables, etc. That works well for me. But it's not a low-carb diet per se......just happened due to hunger.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.9K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 399 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 978 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions