How and why carbs and a high carb intake will keep you fat!!

i'd be VERY careful throwing around this study, it's a short term study (done over 2 weeks, with 1 week being a control) and using highly trained performance athletes, who will have significantly different metabolic effects than 99% of the general population.

Of course there are study limitations, as all studies have limitations, but it's still relevant to our discussion and should be considered when looking at varying protein intakes.

I don't know about "significantly different metabolic effects," though. If anything their caloric output via TEA (thermic effect of activity) will be increased, but they aren't inherently calorie-burning machines. Actually this works the opposite way, though. The fact that they are already strength conditioned athletes would almost imply their trained bodies would hold onto muscle to a greater extent, yet in 2 weeks of adopting a higher protein diet, they held onto a statistically significant higher amount.

Yes there are limitations, though, you are correct. This is a relatively new concept in empirical observation, so we'll see much more in the next few years.

I have 4 or 5 studies somewhere, i'll see if I can dig them up, that show pretty much the opposite results with obese and normal weight individuals, I.E. high protein intake didn't make any significant change in LBM while increasing urea output (I.E. increased kidney function and liver function which can be a bad thing, especially if the person has metabolic related disorders that can effect organs).

Hey if you can dig them up, I'll be sure to give them a read. I'd love some new perspective.

I'd say this, we're pretty sure that between .4g and .7g per pound body weight in protein will be relatively safe, and won't cause any serious long term health effects (another problem with these studies, no long term research means for people who need to do this for a year or more, we just don't know what it could do to them) in and of itself. Thus I'd always lean towards caution.

That's fair. I would say .7 - .8g per pound LBM is a common suggestion for people who aren't physically active. I just feel like these boards are probably more heavily populated with people who do exercise, and thus higher protein is safer for muscle-sparing effects in terms of fat loss.

Personally, my theory is that as body fat % goes down, the need for protein goes up with moderate to intense exercise, there is some correlation for this (again, I'll have to find the studies, I'm at work so I can't right now), but ultimately, caps out somewhere around .7 to .8 grams per lb of body weight (I.E. between 1 gram per Kilo and 1.5 grams per kilo body weight) with extreme athletes sometimes being able to utilize up to 2 grams per kilo (just shy of 1 gram per pound).

That's a great theory. And I would bet a lot of money it's true. The less stored fat = the higher chance of stored amino acids undergoing gluconeogenesis for fuel. There's a reason why bodybuilders weighing 180 pounds at 6% body fat will eat a diet of 1,400 calories 2 weeks leading up to a show entirely composed of pure protein. Low body fat + low intake + physically active = catabolic, and significantly higher protein works to offset that (enough amino acids to nourish muscles + enough free amino acids for your body to use freely as fuel).

I will say I think we're splitting hairs a bit here though, if you tell someone to eat around .6 grams per pound, I think they'd be fine in 95% of the cases.

Fine? Undoubtedly. But based on the research I've read, I would still recommend a slightly higher intake ESPECIALLY when physically active for optimal results.

Is butter a carb?

\
NO

The body likes to go to carbs for energy. The body uses proteins to build muscles and repair, but it can catabolize them for energy if it needs to. However, it cannot use carbs to do what protein does, help you build muscle and repair. Knowing that lean muscle mass helps your metabolism, that alone, should probably make more people err on the side of protein, if there is protein in disagreement.

Form and function. If you're going to burn all of the carbs you take in, then eat them. I need them. If I don't get enough, as a marathon runner, I will start to use protein for energy and it's just not quite as efficient. I went over this process in bio.

A runner can still be skinny fat on lots of cardio though. Not enough protein, no muscle and all fat(even if they're still thin). Or taking in more carbs than they need.

Complex carbs are probably a better choice just due to their chemical bonding. It takes a lot of energy to break down polymers rather than just handing it simple monomers(often simple sugars).

This is my understanding.

[i'd be VERY careful throwing around this study, it's a short term study (done over 2 weeks, with 1 week being a control) and using highly trained performance athletes, who will have significantly different metabolic effects than 99% of the general population.

I have 4 or 5 studies somewhere, i'll see if I can dig them up, that show pretty much the opposite results with obese and normal weight individuals, I.E. high protein intake didn't make any significant change in LBM while increasing urea output (I.E. increased kidney function and liver function which can be a bad thing, especially if the person has metabolic related disorders that can effect organs).

I'd say this, we're pretty sure that between .4g and .7g per pound body weight in protein will be relatively safe, and won't cause any serious long term health effects (another problem with these studies, no long term research means for people who need to do this for a year or more, we just don't know what it could do to them) in and of itself. Thus I'd always lean towards caution.

Personally, my theory is that as body fat % goes down, the need for protein goes up with moderate to intense exercise, there is some correlation for this (again, I'll have to find the studies, I'm at work so I can't right now), but ultimately, caps out somewhere around .7 to .8 grams per lb of body weight (I.E. between 1 gram per Kilo and 1.5 grams per kilo body weight) with extreme athletes sometimes being able to utilize up to 2 grams per kilo (just shy of 1 gram per pound).

I will say I think we're splitting hairs a bit here though, if you tell someone to eat around .6 grams per pound, I think they'd be fine in 95% of the cases.

Just trying to make the point that consuming protein in excess of 30-35% or roughly 1g/lb of lean body mass isn't exactly 'bro-science'. There is nothing inherently wrong with consuming more than the aforementioned levels of protein, because as I stated before, the optimal level of protein is context dependent and not some hard and fast figure that one shouldn't exceed. Someone on Lyle McDonald's PSMF would benefit highly from consuming 1.0-1.5 grams of protein per lbs of bodyweight and have been doing it for a long time.

On a related note, when consuming alot of protein or even moderate protein, it's always good to accompany that with a lot of cruciferous veggies.

bump

And further, on the glucose is glucose thing, yes it is. But it takes breaking those chemical bonds, depending on its source, which takes energy to do so, before it becomes an individual glucose monomer that your body would use to create ATP.

I believe mynameisuntz has mentioned the TEF on a few occasions! lol

And further, on the glucose is glucose thing, yes it is. But it takes breaking those chemical bonds, depending on its source, which takes energy to do so, before it becomes an individual glucose monomer that your body would use to create ATP.

I believe mynameisuntz has mentioned the TEF on a few occasions! lol

I think she sees it now

SOOO, if you consume all your calories (but don't go over) and 80% of them are carbs...there's nothing wrong with that???? Say goodbye to a normal blood sugar level.

Tell that to the Okinawans. Dietary staples: white rice and starchy vegetables. Their carb intake, depending on time period and season, has been estimated to fluctuate between 60 - 90% of their calories.

Guess what? They are the longest-living people on earth with the lowest rates of disability in old age.

And here we are in America talking about how high carbs are bad. The Okinawans are laughing as they are still active at 90 years of age.

The Tarahumara might be another interesting population to study, as they are a long-distance running population in Mexico with a carb-heavy diet. Or the Sardinians in Italy with a carb-based diet, also one of the longest-living populations on earth with the lowest rates of disability.

Great read while I sit at Panara Bread...hmmm...what should I order?

A loaf of buttery bread :-P just kidding

Do they still offer the bread mobile??

Now that is some awesome stuff lol

I wasn't arguing with ya, mynameisuntz...

Also, I had no idea what TEF meant. I was just calling off of what I learned in bio.

Unfortunately for the OP, his opinion on this objective subject matter is wrong.

Ah, Untz, actually, you are incorrect. According to the definition below, it's really not possible for an opinion to be wrong.

–noun
1. a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty.
2. a personal view, attitude, or appraisal.
3. the formal expression of a professional judgment: to ask for a second Medical opinion.

Yep, now look at the wealth of information that DISPROVES his opinion. Want me to find a single study that shows you can lose fat with a high carb intake? Technically that's all I need to show the OP is wrong. One single case where someone lost fat with a high carb intake.

It's my opinion that gravity is false. I also don't believe that the sun is the center of our solar system. Are these opinions correct, or logically sound to you? If I say that, then you have every right to tell me I'm wrong.

Similarly the OP IS wrong. It is not up for debate. Because, as mentioned already, the second I provide a single study where people with a high carb intake can lose fat is the moment his entire argument as he's presented it is disproven.

#1 - I have no idea what the OP believes for sure, or whether he intended to say "carbs will keep people fat" or "carbs will keep SOME people fat." I would guess that he MEANT the latter. And the fact, UNTZ, that you would agree with him if he had added one little word tells a tale. As for "grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty." You can quote all the studies in the world, honestly - what I am going to believe is what I can see, hear, touch, and experience myself. If I develop an opinion contrary to what you believe, but based on my own experiences, it is "right" to me and "right" to anyone who has the same belief.

Doesn't matter what he meant or intended to say; what matters if what he said. And he has said multiple things in this thread, which I highly suggest you go check out again, because everything he's said has led me to believe that he is NOT drawing lines between different populations such as those who are insulin sensitive compared to those who are insulin resistant, or diabetic vs. non-diabetic. No, he is speaking in broad, universal terms.

Still...not...getting it. If low carb works for YOU, are you going to tell me low carb will work for EVERYONE? This is why science exists. Your personal experiences are irrelevant to the rest of the population and are not able to be applied to the rest of the population. This is why we research. There's no way I'm looking for research to tell you what is best for you if you say you have found what works for you; that is NOT what I'm saying.

What I AM saying is I will find research to disprove that the low carb method is the best and most effective method for everyone, and not only that, but that it is NECESSARY for fat loss. THAT is what I'm disproving. Does that make sense...?

#2 - That's his personal view, maybe based on his own experience, maybe based on his own studies - you can't say he's wrong because you have no idea WHY he has made the appraisal he has made because you haven't walked in his shoes.

It doesn't matter what his experiences are. He is saying high carb = inhibited fat loss for EVERYONE. He is not speaking on his own behalf, but on the behalf of the human population. THAT is why he is wrong.

I believe some of what you believe - that carbs can and will keep SOME people fat, not all.

Then we're in agreement and you don't even realize it.

I just feel compelled to point out that just because you can cite a million articles and have an extensive vocabulary, that does not make you an expert on this subject...........on any subject, really.

Never claimed to be an expert, but I'm willing to claim that I have a better grasp on it than the OP - who cites meaningless Youtube videos submitted by someone who is not a professional, whereas I cite sources that are the FOUNDATION of this field created by the professionals. Research is where doctors [should] form their opinions and stances on medications, methods, treatments, etc. THAT is what I cite; that is where the OP falls short.

Er, 2g/kg body weight is more than 1g/pound lean body mass.

Math is fun!

Geez, man, you even copied my signature?!

Can't we have SOME sort of public distinction between us? I mean, I like all your posts because we agree on most everything that I've read of your stuff, but I'm starting to read your posts and tell myself, "wow I really don't remember writing this...AWW HIM AGAIN! I'VE BEEN HAD!"

Tell that to the Okinawans. Dietary staples: white rice and starchy vegetables. Their carb intake, depending on time period and season, has been estimated to fluctuate between 60 - 90% of their calories.

Guess what? They are the longest-living people on earth with the lowest rates of disability in old age.

And here we are in America talking about how high carbs are bad. The Okinawans are laughing as they are still active at 90 years of age.

The Tarahumara might be another interesting population to study, as they are a long-distance running population in Mexico with a carb-heavy diet. Or the Sardinians in Italy with a carb-based diet, also one of the longest-living populations on earth with the lowest rates of disability.

Mynameisuntz, how dare you further your arguments with facts! :laugh:

On a related note, the ROK (Republic of Korea) was recently ranked as the thinnest nation in the world (Japan #2).....and yes, they eat a lot of rice! If they get sick of rice, then they eat udon noodles. Sick of that? Then they eat Ramen noodles. Haha, exaggerating a bit, but you get the idea... Whenever I visit my parents and relatives there, I'm always amazed again and again by how small their portion sizes are.

Carbs won't make you fat if you have a proper caloric intake..............

What?

The OP is saying carbs make you fat. "Why carbs and a high carb intake will keep you fat."

Carbs won't make you fat unless your calories are above maintenance. Period. There's nothing wrong with carbs.

Stop spreading carb/insulin-phobia.

I am the OP and learn to read the post in full before you comment. I never said it MAKES YOU FAT, i said it will keep your body fat because your body will use muscle as energy before it will use fat.

that is a bunch of crap.

Mynameisuntz, how dare you further your arguments with facts! :laugh:

On a related note, the ROK (Republic of Korea) was recently ranked as the thinnest nation in the world (Japan #2).....and yes, they eat a lot of rice! If they get sick of rice, then they eat udon noodles. Sick of that? Then they eat Ramen noodles. Haha, exaggerating a bit, but you get the idea... Whenever I visit my parents and relatives there, I'm always amazed again and again by how small their portion sizes are.

I'm sorry, I can start using anecdotal and personal evidence if you want! Everyone, regardless of size, should eat 2,200 calories to lose weight, with ~180 - 200g protein, 200g carbs (give or take 100, depending on the day and mood, but averaging 200), and 50-100g fat (same rationale as carbs). EVERYONE.

Goodness I would not last a week in Korea, then. Well, if they never ran out of white rice, I'd be okay. But upon moving to the noodles...might have some long-term issues there. I don't know what it is, but plain white rice...love. Love it. But flavored noodles, I don't know. Maybe it's the sodium?

I believe the Tarahumarans have a much shorter ALS, but that's mostly due to non-dietary variables, such as feuding drug lords.

I'm blanking on what ALS refers to.