HOW MUCH CARBS TO LOSE WEIGHT?
Replies
-
I've been a low carber for about 4 months and have lost 41 of my 72 total pounds doing low carb. I can't speak for anyone but myself, but eating 1600+ calories (not net calories, but total) and watching my macros has helped me more than eating a low calorie diet ever did. I have multiple health issues that have led me to low carb dieting, under the supervision of doctors. People respond differently to a low carb lifestyle (which is what it should be called - you need to remember before you start that if you decide to go back to eating carbs your body could not handle it well and you could gain all your weight back) my sister tried it for a month and lost absolutely nothing. She actually gained 3 pounds.
Not everyone's body is the same and I will never understand people's need to trash things because it's not the way they do things. Eat your bread, I'll pass. As long as we're both healthy - WHO CARES?!
Low carb is definitely a lifestyle choice, and it's wonderful that it's worked for you to keep your calorie deficit.
Just because a person does low carb and decides to switch their diet style does not mean they will gain all their weight back. And, a person won't gain all their weight back if they eat within their calorie goals. Low carb is not for everyone, and the only magic in it, or any other diet for that matter, is the magic we give it.
If your sister gained weight while doing low carb (am I reading that correctly?
), it's simply because she ate more calories than she burned.
Calorie deficit trumps all with losing weight, but the dietary plan we use to get there is 100% preference (or, on doctor's orders if you have an underlying condition).
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
YesPeachyCarol wrote: »So I see we need to define what cake means for the purposes of discussion, because even on Atkins, one can make an almond flour and egg white torte with Splenda and yes, have cake. Or a low carb cheesecake.
That is not, however, the cake one thinks of when one usually says cake. Wheat flour (or other starchy flours for us celiacs out there), butter or oil, eggs, sugar. Lots of frosting made with butter and more sugar.
You can eat that on primal blueprint?
Yep, you can eat that (in moderation of course).0 -
PeachyCarol wrote: »So I see we need to define what cake means for the purposes of discussion, because even on Atkins, one can make an almond flour and egg white torte with Splenda and yes, have cake. Or a low carb cheesecake.
That is not, however, the cake one thinks of when one usually says cake. Wheat flour (or other starchy flours for us celiacs out there), butter or oil, eggs, sugar. Lots of frosting made with butter and more sugar.
You can eat that on primal blueprint?
Yep. I've done low carb and cake was definitely on the no go list.
Right now the banner for the private low carb group I am a member of...has one of those NO symbols over a bunch of pasta, sugar, cakes, etc. So yeah, it's definitely the consensus that low carb is not having certain foods and cake is definitely on that list.
So it must be true of everyone eating a low carb lifestyle????0 -
This content has been removed.
-
tennisdude2004 wrote: »PeachyCarol wrote: »So I see we need to define what cake means for the purposes of discussion, because even on Atkins, one can make an almond flour and egg white torte with Splenda and yes, have cake. Or a low carb cheesecake.
That is not, however, the cake one thinks of when one usually says cake. Wheat flour (or other starchy flours for us celiacs out there), butter or oil, eggs, sugar. Lots of frosting made with butter and more sugar.
You can eat that on primal blueprint?
Yep. I've done low carb and cake was definitely on the no go list.
Right now the banner for the private low carb group I am a member of...has one of those NO symbols over a bunch of pasta, sugar, cakes, etc. So yeah, it's definitely the consensus that low carb is not having certain foods and cake is definitely on that list.
So it must be true of everyone eating a low carb lifestyle????
If it is not, it's the exception that proves the rule. If you eat cake while doing low carb...you're the outlier. Low carb and cake don't play well together. It is what it is.
How many carbs are there in cake then that make it a no go food for someone eating 100 - 150g of carbs a day????0 -
TIL that almond flour and coconut flour cakes are the same as a bakery cake that everyone thinks of as cake. And those flours qualify as starchy.
As someone who has been paid to bake for people and knows how coconut flour and almond flour bake up when sweetened with honey? This is amusing.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
PeachyCarol wrote: »PeachyCarol wrote: »Luvee_Dove5 wrote: »juggernaut1974 wrote: »
And you'd STILL have it backwards...
Yep.. calories determine fat loss... not macros. Macros can modify certain parts of the energy balance equation but that is it.
I disagree. Get your macros right, and the calories will fall into place. Too many carbs is not good for metabolism, especially as you age. You may be able to get away with it (high carbs) when you are younger, or if you are highly active.
Carbs become sugar in your blood stream, so try keeping them "low and slow": higher protein and fat and fiber macros, lower carbs (and sugar). So if your lean body mass is 140lbs, eat 140g protein. The amount of fat you take in will be just whatever is required to make your meals. My own fat intake is about 40-50% of my calories. Aim for high veggie intake and a serving of fiber supplement, so that your fiber intake is about 45g, give or take 5g. If you keep your Net Carbs (gCarbs - gFiber) low, it's much easier to lose weight. Of course if you are doing a lot of aerobic exercise, your carb intake will be a little higher in order to fuel that, but keep them minimal for fat loss.
Incidentally, eating this way will make you feel very satiated.
I'm 53. You're wrong.
I agree with you on protein intake, but disagree with you on carb intake, and how easy it is to lose weight, and how satisfying a particular macro ration is.
You know why? Those things vary on an individual basis depending on activity level and personal preference and who knows what else.
Even over the time I've been losing weight, it's changed for me. I've kept my protein intake consistent, but whereas I used to feel more satisfied with moderate carbs and moderate/high fat supplementing that? Once I became more active, the whole ballgame changed. I got very hungry. Fat wasn't filling me up any more. My body wanted carbs and is happiest now on a lower fat intake and a much higher carb intake.
And I still lose weight just fine, even at my age.
For you, it is wrong. It is true for some people - perhaps over half of all people. The only way to judge is to look at all people's health in the last years of their life and compare it to their younger years.
It was true for me. My insulin resistance went downhill fast in my late thirties when I was about 10-20lbs over a normal BMI. When I was younger I was running 1-2 hours per day, lifting weights, and carb loading. I lived on noodles, baked goods, and veggies. Now? That would push my blood glucose into diabetic numbers.
As you said, it varies on an individual basis
You citing that half of all people? That's a strawman. Diabetes and prediabetes and insulin resistance are not a cause for going keto or drastically lowering carbs except by choice. Moderting/managing carbs by balancing them with fat and protein? Yes. Cutting them drastically? Nope.
I'd be happy to get a diabetic into this if need be. @earlnabby @jgnatca
I disagree. Insulin resistance affects around half of all people sometime in their lives. I have seen well done studies that show people with insulin resistance tend to lose weight faster on a LCHF diet (I don't think I brought up keto). Yes, some insulin resistant people can still manage their T2D and prediabetes by moderating carbs with protein and fat, but not all. My guess is that most people would have lowered blood glucose on a LCHF diet where carbs are below 100-150g per day.
I have insulin resistance. On days when I eat more than 50g of carbs, my BG numbers are high for a day. Moderation doesn't work for all.
Wasn't it 40% who "have it or are at risk"? Not that it affects half of everyone.0 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »PeachyCarol wrote: »So I see we need to define what cake means for the purposes of discussion, because even on Atkins, one can make an almond flour and egg white torte with Splenda and yes, have cake. Or a low carb cheesecake.
That is not, however, the cake one thinks of when one usually says cake. Wheat flour (or other starchy flours for us celiacs out there), butter or oil, eggs, sugar. Lots of frosting made with butter and more sugar.
You can eat that on primal blueprint?
Yep. I've done low carb and cake was definitely on the no go list.
Right now the banner for the private low carb group I am a member of...has one of those NO symbols over a bunch of pasta, sugar, cakes, etc. So yeah, it's definitely the consensus that low carb is not having certain foods and cake is definitely on that list.
So it must be true of everyone eating a low carb lifestyle????
If it is not, it's the exception that proves the rule. If you eat cake while doing low carb...you're the outlier. Low carb and cake don't play well together. It is what it is.
How many carbs are there in cake then that make it a no go food for someone eating 100 - 150g of carbs a day????
As someone who did low carb, too much. It makes it difficult to meet the calorie levels and other macro goals when all the carbs come from one piece of food. Most would agree. If you don't...as I said, you are the outlier. If I did a poll of those on MFP doing low carb and asked if they ate regular ol' non modified cake, the predominant answer would be no. There is no debate here. You could eat cake, 90+% would choose not to if they are eating a low carb lifestyle. I'll go back to the banner in the LCHF group as evidence to support that it is not typical, nor recommended to eat cake.
53g of carbs in a slice of chocolate cake. I eat cake, I don't eat cake everyday (it's not top of my most enjoyable food list) but I bet most people eating in moderation don't eat it everyday either and when they do it's probably in the similar portion size to what I eat.
Maybe that's why most anti-low carb people on theses forums are so against it???
They have either not eaten a low carb lifestyle and believe (mistakenly) that low carb means no carb, or they have followed such a strict regime whilst on a low carb diet (maybe in fear of loosing the badge for whatever diet they signed up for) that they now have a warped view of what can be enjoyed on a low carb lifestyle.
I think you are wrong about a lot of people eating on a low carb diet not enjoying 'treat food' (for a better phrase) on MFP, I have seen many people mention they aim for a 80/20 split.
However if I am the exception then yay for me, I get to lose weight, fuel my exercise and eat cake all whilst on a low carb diet.
0 -
PeachyCarol wrote: »
Lower fat oxidation is associated with increasing obesity over time.0 -
My portion of chocolate cake -- 180 grams -- has 83 grams of carb, fwiw.0
-
DeguelloTex wrote: »My portion of chocolate cake -- 180 grams -- has 83 grams of carb, fwiw.
That's a big portion - I would generally have 93g (with frosting)0 -
That's barely three ounces. Mine might be large -- I, and my calorie goal are larger than most -- but that seems on the small side.tennisdude2004 wrote: »DeguelloTex wrote: »My portion of chocolate cake -- 180 grams -- has 83 grams of carb, fwiw.
That's a big portion - I would generally have 93g (with frosting)
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
DeguelloTex wrote: »
That's barely three ounces. Mine might be large -- I, and my calorie goal are larger than most -- but that seems on the small side.tennisdude2004 wrote: »DeguelloTex wrote: »My portion of chocolate cake -- 180 grams -- has 83 grams of carb, fwiw.
That's a big portion - I would generally have 93g (with frosting)
Does me. Now if we where talking portion size for prime rib - I would be eating on the large portion size.0 -
rankinsect wrote: »I do realise that the blind cannot see so I'll leave it to the sighted to read the available data http://caloriesproper.com/insulin-resistance/
Well, much of that is interesting, but none of those are particularly good studies.
Yeah, whatever. Studies that show a large difference in the weight loss between groups based on diet composition are somewhat unlikely to be all fraudulent, bogus or completely accidentally tilted one way. There's clealry a diet composition / body function interaction beyond thermodynamics - we aren't heat exchangers.
Cornier's study used a fairly modest difference in diet composition and found that "Insulin-sensitive women on the HC/LF diet lost 13.5 +/- 1.2% (p < 0.001) of their initial BW, whereas those on the LC/HF diet lost 6.8 +/- 1.2% (p < 0.001; p < 0.002 between the groups). In contrast, among the insulin-resistant women, those on the LC/HF diet lost 13.4 +/- 1.3% (p < 0.001) of their initial BW as compared with 8.5 +/- 1.4% (p < 0.001) lost by those on the HC/LF diet (p < 0.04 between two groups). These differences could not be explained by changes in resting metabolic rate, activity, or intake"
So that's a difference of about 5 to 6% difference in body weight loss over 16 weeks if you're an obese woman on the wrong diet for your insulin sensitivity. Insulin sensitive people appeared to benefit more by being on the higher carb option than the resistant lose out.
Lyle McDonald opines on the merits of the right diet composition for the individual at http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/insulin-sensitivity-and-fat-loss.html/
So the answer to the OP's question may be "it depends on the individual".0 -
debsdoingthis wrote: »Now you are talking about spot reducing. Unfortunately your body doesn't just lose wherever you want it to. It would be wonderful if it did!
If it did, someone would develop a way to make it "spot increase" and the whole breast/butt implant business would be out of business.
In many ways, the idea of eating as a way to spot reduce is kind of like the question people ask of "how does ibuprofen know to stop only the pain in my ankle when I take it?".
You can exercise a certain area to reshape that area but the idea of eating to spot reduce would be the equivalent of asking how you should run on a treadmill to strengthen only the top part of your heart muscle.
0 -
rankinsect wrote: »I do realise that the blind cannot see so I'll leave it to the sighted to read the available data http://caloriesproper.com/insulin-resistance/
Well, much of that is interesting, but none of those are particularly good studies.
Yeah, whatever. Studies that show a large difference in the weight loss between groups based on diet composition are somewhat unlikely to be all fraudulent, bogus or completely accidentally tilted one way. There's clealry a diet composition / body function interaction beyond thermodynamics - we aren't heat exchangers.
Cornier's study used a fairly modest difference in diet composition and found that "Insulin-sensitive women on the HC/LF diet lost 13.5 +/- 1.2% (p < 0.001) of their initial BW, whereas those on the LC/HF diet lost 6.8 +/- 1.2% (p < 0.001; p < 0.002 between the groups). In contrast, among the insulin-resistant women, those on the LC/HF diet lost 13.4 +/- 1.3% (p < 0.001) of their initial BW as compared with 8.5 +/- 1.4% (p < 0.001) lost by those on the HC/LF diet (p < 0.04 between two groups). These differences could not be explained by changes in resting metabolic rate, activity, or intake"
So that's a difference of about 5 to 6% difference in body weight loss over 16 weeks if you're an obese woman on the wrong diet for your insulin sensitivity. Insulin sensitive people appeared to benefit more by being on the higher carb option than the resistant lose out.
Lyle McDonald opines on the merits of the right diet composition for the individual at http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/insulin-sensitivity-and-fat-loss.html/
So the answer to the OP's question may be "it depends on the individual".
"Yeah, whatever" isn't a particularly strong comeback to a list of problems with said studies.0 -
stevencloser wrote: »
"Yeah, whatever" isn't a particularly strong comeback to a list of problems with said studies.
Well, nitpickers gonna pick - especially having stated that any outcome other than their preconception must be a study problem.
What credible study deficiency would explain the large weight loss differences cited, for example ? The IR people on high carb were hungry and sneaked in more food whereas the reduced carb people hid some of the food and didn't eat it ? The IS people did the opposite ?
0 -
stevencloser wrote: »
"Yeah, whatever" isn't a particularly strong comeback to a list of problems with said studies.
Well, nitpickers gonna pick - especially having stated that any outcome other than their preconception must be a study problem.
What credible study deficiency would explain the large weight loss differences cited, for example ? The IR people on high carb were hungry and sneaked in more food whereas the reduced carb people hid some of the food and didn't eat it ? The IS people did the opposite ?
Knowing the few facts about any weight loss, what do you propose? That IR people suddenly get a fever on a low carb diet and burn more calories away?0 -
Like the study's authors "I don't know". Isn't this where the recommendation for further work ( and funding ) into FOXC2 as a regulator of adipocyte metabolism usually appears? They identified an effect of diet composition of weight loss, observed a correlation with insulin sensitivity, noted that everyone lost at least the expected weight for the deficit used and were left clutching at straws.
They did feel confident enough to recommend that IS individuals be prescribed a different macro composition hypocaloric diet to those with IR, but "I wasn't there, man".0 -
PeachyCarol wrote: »So I see we need to define what cake means for the purposes of discussion, because even on Atkins, one can make an almond flour and egg white torte with Splenda and yes, have cake. Or a low carb cheesecake.
That is not, however, the cake one thinks of when one usually says cake. Wheat flour (or other starchy flours for us celiacs out there), butter or oil, eggs, sugar. Lots of frosting made with butter and more sugar.
You can eat that on primal blueprint?
Right now the banner for the private low carb group I am a member of...has one of those NO symbols over a bunch of pasta, sugar, cakes, etc. So yeah, it's definitely the consensus that low carb is not having certain foods and cake is definitely on that list.
That was switched to because the previous banner of a bunch of steaks was not representative of the vegetarian low carbers' lifestyles.0 -
stevencloser wrote: »PeachyCarol wrote: »PeachyCarol wrote: »Luvee_Dove5 wrote: »juggernaut1974 wrote: »
And you'd STILL have it backwards...
Yep.. calories determine fat loss... not macros. Macros can modify certain parts of the energy balance equation but that is it.
I disagree. Get your macros right, and the calories will fall into place. Too many carbs is not good for metabolism, especially as you age. You may be able to get away with it (high carbs) when you are younger, or if you are highly active.
Carbs become sugar in your blood stream, so try keeping them "low and slow": higher protein and fat and fiber macros, lower carbs (and sugar). So if your lean body mass is 140lbs, eat 140g protein. The amount of fat you take in will be just whatever is required to make your meals. My own fat intake is about 40-50% of my calories. Aim for high veggie intake and a serving of fiber supplement, so that your fiber intake is about 45g, give or take 5g. If you keep your Net Carbs (gCarbs - gFiber) low, it's much easier to lose weight. Of course if you are doing a lot of aerobic exercise, your carb intake will be a little higher in order to fuel that, but keep them minimal for fat loss.
Incidentally, eating this way will make you feel very satiated.
I'm 53. You're wrong.
I agree with you on protein intake, but disagree with you on carb intake, and how easy it is to lose weight, and how satisfying a particular macro ration is.
You know why? Those things vary on an individual basis depending on activity level and personal preference and who knows what else.
Even over the time I've been losing weight, it's changed for me. I've kept my protein intake consistent, but whereas I used to feel more satisfied with moderate carbs and moderate/high fat supplementing that? Once I became more active, the whole ballgame changed. I got very hungry. Fat wasn't filling me up any more. My body wanted carbs and is happiest now on a lower fat intake and a much higher carb intake.
And I still lose weight just fine, even at my age.
For you, it is wrong. It is true for some people - perhaps over half of all people. The only way to judge is to look at all people's health in the last years of their life and compare it to their younger years.
It was true for me. My insulin resistance went downhill fast in my late thirties when I was about 10-20lbs over a normal BMI. When I was younger I was running 1-2 hours per day, lifting weights, and carb loading. I lived on noodles, baked goods, and veggies. Now? That would push my blood glucose into diabetic numbers.
As you said, it varies on an individual basis
You citing that half of all people? That's a strawman. Diabetes and prediabetes and insulin resistance are not a cause for going keto or drastically lowering carbs except by choice. Moderting/managing carbs by balancing them with fat and protein? Yes. Cutting them drastically? Nope.
I'd be happy to get a diabetic into this if need be. @earlnabby @jgnatca
I disagree. Insulin resistance affects around half of all people sometime in their lives. I have seen well done studies that show people with insulin resistance tend to lose weight faster on a LCHF diet (I don't think I brought up keto). Yes, some insulin resistant people can still manage their T2D and prediabetes by moderating carbs with protein and fat, but not all. My guess is that most people would have lowered blood glucose on a LCHF diet where carbs are below 100-150g per day.
I have insulin resistance. On days when I eat more than 50g of carbs, my BG numbers are high for a day. Moderation doesn't work for all.
Wasn't it 40% who "have it or are at risk"? Not that it affects half of everyone.
I'm not sure of the exact numbers. If it is 40%, then my estimation of 50% is high but not ridiculously high. Plus, my disclaimer of "sometime in their lives" could make that number closer to 50% because as people age the chances of developing insulin resistance (or other health issues that could benefit from a LCHF diet) increases.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
Calories are definitely very important but are not the whole picture. For some people ( thyroid issues, t2D etc) cutting down the carbs and raising the fat works very well. Low carb can reduce cravings and high fat can satiates you.0
-
BeccaColliesBurton wrote: »Calories are definitely very important but are not the whole picture. For some people ( thyroid issues, t2D etc) cutting down the carbs and raising the fat works very well. Low carb can reduce cravings and high fat can satiates you.
Not for everyone. I am T2Dm and low carb does not reduce my cravings (raising fat actually increases my cravings). I do much better eating moderate carb, moderate fat.0 -
OP ... go with your 1400 calorie/ 100 g Carb profile.
Take it for a test drive and see how it works for you. It' a good starting point.
Also, because you are not really interested I losing weight but losing fat, get a measurement of your current level of body fat and use that as your metric for progress.
BMI is a totally useless algorithm.
As far as the input you have received, you'll have to separate the chaff from the wheat ...... or just get rid of the wheat altogether. 0 -
OP ... go with your 1400 calorie/ 100 g Carb profile.
Take it for a test drive and see how it works for you. It' a good starting point.
Also, because you are not really interested I losing weight but losing fat, get a measurement of your current level of body fat and use that as your metric for progress.
BMI is a totally useless algorithm.
As far as the input you have received, you'll have to separate the chaff from the wheat ...... or just get rid of the wheat altogether.
No, as a guy do not go for 1400 calories. That's a >1 pound loss per week for someone at a normal weight already. Ridiculously low calories are not a good starting point. And BMI is not totally useless for the vast majority of people.0 -
So the profile function of MFP is wrong?steven c loser wrote: »No, as a guy do not go for 1400 calories. That's a >1 pound loss per week for someone at a normal weight already. Ridiculously low calories are not a good starting point. And BMI is not totally useless for the vast majority of people.
You cannot make such absolute statements without knowing his complete profile as it was entered into MFP or am I wrong there as well? If MFP says he should be at 1400 calories to meet "HIS" goal, and he decides to do 500 calorie burn of aerobic everyday then it adjusts to 1900 for a daily goal.
If he feels his weight loss is exceeding his needs/goals then add back more.
% of Body fat is a much better measurement than BMI for everyone which is a greater percentage than "vast."
The body fat he is carrying around is not something that needs to be preserved no matter what his weight is. If he feels he is getting too skinny then it's time to hit the gym and work on adding lean body mass.
All of that is a natural progression once someone decides to change their lifestyle and focus more on nutrition. It's a individualized learning process.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K 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
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions