Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
Low carb and vegetables
Options
Replies
-
Gianfranco_R wrote: »Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Gianfranco_R wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Gianfranco_R wrote: »DorkothyParker wrote: »I would say I eat vegetables about the same. But I agree, most low carbers still have a mindset that a plate should have protein plus side dishes. Replacing said sides with cruciferous greens and such instead of rice, noodles, bread, or potatoes is likely to occur.
Meatitarians are the exception, not the rule. And I, for one, appreciate their commitment to their n=1 experiments and sharing them with us, though it is not a choice I would make for myself.
I get the whole "If you eat more veggies on low carb, then you had a crap diet" but that's sort of irrelevant. Equally irrelevant, I would say it's *easier* to be low carb on 1300 k/cal and be satiated than on a standard reduced-calorie 1300 k/cal diet, even if they are both eating the same vegetables. I would also argue that if you are satiated on a 1300 kcal diet, then maybe, if you look at your *net* carb intake, you might realize you are technically low-carb (not necessarily keto).
I would add that those who are on a standard reduced-calorie of 1200/1300 cal diet and keep eating sugary treats and starchy foods are surely not meeting the 5-a-day recommendation...
I ate low starch, but got plenty of veg and some sweets on 1250. Feel free to look back to 2014, when I logged more consistently.
OK, let's run a report on April 2014, shall we?
So as I see you ate ice cream or gelato... twice, on 5th and 20th.
In both occasions, you went over your calorie allotment (1441 and 1568).
That should be already enough, to prove my point, but if we look closer, we can see that on April 5th you ate just 356 g of vegetables (no fruit), so slightly below the 400g recommendation...
April 5, 2014
FOODS Calories Carbs Fat Protein Cholest Sodium Sugars Fiber
Early Morning
Squash - Zucchini, includes skin, raw, 91 g 15 3g 0g 1g 0mg 9mg 2g 1g
Cauliflower - Raw, 80 g 20 4g 0g 2g 0mg 24mg 2g 2g
Pearson - Blackeye Peas, 1/4 cup (85g) (3oz) 59 11g 0g 4g 0mg 153mg 1g 3g
Beef - Loin, bottom sirloin butt, tri-tip steak, lean only, raw, 3 oz 131 0g 7g 18g 55mg 47mg 0g 0g
Oil - Olive, 0.3 tablespoon 36 0g 4g 0g 0mg 0mg 0g 0g
Essential Everyday - 1% Low Fat Cottage Cheese, 1/2 cup (115g) 90 5g 2g 13g 10mg 450mg 4g 0g
Lunch
Butter - Unsalted, 1 tbsp 102 0g 12g 0g 31mg 2mg 0g 0g
Oil - Vegetable, canola, 1 tbsp 124 0g 14g 0g 0mg 0mg 0g 0g
Tomatoes - Green, raw, 5 slice or wedge 23 5g 0g 1g 0mg 13mg 4g 1g
Beef - Short Ribs, 6 oz 330 0g 23g 39g 119mg 74mg 0g 0g
Potatoes - White, flesh and skin, raw, 200 g 140 31g 0g 3g 0mg 12mg 2g 5g
Wheat flour - White, all-purpose, enriched, bleached, 0.2 cup 91 19g 0g 3g 0mg 1mg 0g 1g
Afternoon
Bryers - Butter Pecan Ice Cream, 1 cup 280 36g 12g 4g 20mg 200mg 24g 0g
TOTAL: 1,441 114g 74g 88g 235mg 985mg 39g 13g
Point?
My question exactly.
I was moving from DorkothyParker's observation that the carb level on a standard 1200 cal diet can be considered "low carb". And in fact, on such a diet, 50% carb means 150 grams and 40% means 120g.
Eat some bread, a portion of pasta, 2 scoops of ice cream and there is no way you can find space for adequate amount of fruit and vegetables (while on the other hand, low carber tipically avoid those foods because of their high glycemix index).
People coming from the SAD should be educated on getting proper nutrition, instead of being told to eat treats every day otherwise they will go insane...
Usually the same people advocating for small treats also advocate for a moderate deficit and using exercise to up daily calorie intake because it's easier to sustain long term.
I'd also make the case that almost all WOE's have treats built into them. The treats just look different. I think the only diets that probably don't have some level of treats are VLCD or those which verge on ED, which of course are not recommended.
I would even say that treats are not necessarily excluded from VLCD diets either. I budgeted for sweets when I was on a VLCD.
Not recommending VLCD. Please don't kill me for having done it in the past.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »DorkothyParker wrote: »Do a majority of low carbers generally eat more vegetables than SAD? Yes.
There's no basis for this claim.
So far as I can tell most low carbers were anti veg which is what caused them to incline to low carb.
Where is the basis that "most" low carbers hated vegetables? The majority of low-carbers (and I include Keto - slow carbers in that) I've come across are the exact opposite. I've heard people who became exposed to new kinds of vegetables or new ways of cooking them. In all of the low carb groups I've come across there have only been a small few that don't each vegetables. They readily admit to being outside the norm and I've never seen anyone actually promote the removal of vegetables from their diet. I'll grant you this is my experience and not based on any study. I'm not sure there are studies about that (shrug).
People on MFP and people I know in RL who were attracted to low carbing. Usually it's because they like the idea that eating lots of high fat foods is important and "rabbit food" is not.
But, honestly, I don't want to get into an argument about it and I admit it's not based on anything but anecdote. I don't have anything against low carbing (as pointed out, I have had reasonably low carbs myself at times, although I would never do keto and I'm currently trying to eat less meat so more carbs). My basic position is that carb percentage doesn't have much to do with how healthy a diet is -- low carb, medium carb, and even high carb diets can be quite healthy and quite unhealthy.
What I find irritating and was probably overreacting to is:
(1) a segment of voiciferous posters on MFP who like to claim that eating carbs is generally worse than not and having lower carbs is always better (even if that means no fruits and veg). They typically combine this with a claim that eating vegetables is unimportant and sometimes promotion of "carnivorous" challenges, which I personally do consider extremely unhealthy.
(2) the idea that going low carb increases vegetables -- that just doesn't make sense to me, since nothing is stopping anyone from eating more veg with a higher carb percentage (and I don't think it makes sense to worry about keeping veg percentage down).
and (3) just general anti carb rhetoric in general. This tends to go along with people calling junk food that's about 50% fat "carbs" and ignoring the fact that many very nutritious foods are largely carbs, including many of those recommended by nutrition experts and other largely respected people (eat food, mostly plants, not too much).
Anyway, I have been having a bad week for lots of reasons and was probably doing lots of misreading, so if I misconstrued your comments I apologize, and I certainly agree that not all low carbers eat diets low in veg.0 -
Christine_72 wrote: »Gianfranco_R wrote: »Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Gianfranco_R wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Gianfranco_R wrote: »DorkothyParker wrote: »I would say I eat vegetables about the same. But I agree, most low carbers still have a mindset that a plate should have protein plus side dishes. Replacing said sides with cruciferous greens and such instead of rice, noodles, bread, or potatoes is likely to occur.
Meatitarians are the exception, not the rule. And I, for one, appreciate their commitment to their n=1 experiments and sharing them with us, though it is not a choice I would make for myself.
I get the whole "If you eat more veggies on low carb, then you had a crap diet" but that's sort of irrelevant. Equally irrelevant, I would say it's *easier* to be low carb on 1300 k/cal and be satiated than on a standard reduced-calorie 1300 k/cal diet, even if they are both eating the same vegetables. I would also argue that if you are satiated on a 1300 kcal diet, then maybe, if you look at your *net* carb intake, you might realize you are technically low-carb (not necessarily keto).
I would add that those who are on a standard reduced-calorie of 1200/1300 cal diet and keep eating sugary treats and starchy foods are surely not meeting the 5-a-day recommendation...
I ate low starch, but got plenty of veg and some sweets on 1250. Feel free to look back to 2014, when I logged more consistently.
OK, let's run a report on April 2014, shall we?
So as I see you ate ice cream or gelato... twice, on 5th and 20th.
In both occasions, you went over your calorie allotment (1441 and 1568).
That should be already enough, to prove my point, but if we look closer, we can see that on April 5th you ate just 356 g of vegetables (no fruit), so slightly below the 400g recommendation...
April 5, 2014
FOODS Calories Carbs Fat Protein Cholest Sodium Sugars Fiber
Early Morning
Squash - Zucchini, includes skin, raw, 91 g 15 3g 0g 1g 0mg 9mg 2g 1g
Cauliflower - Raw, 80 g 20 4g 0g 2g 0mg 24mg 2g 2g
Pearson - Blackeye Peas, 1/4 cup (85g) (3oz) 59 11g 0g 4g 0mg 153mg 1g 3g
Beef - Loin, bottom sirloin butt, tri-tip steak, lean only, raw, 3 oz 131 0g 7g 18g 55mg 47mg 0g 0g
Oil - Olive, 0.3 tablespoon 36 0g 4g 0g 0mg 0mg 0g 0g
Essential Everyday - 1% Low Fat Cottage Cheese, 1/2 cup (115g) 90 5g 2g 13g 10mg 450mg 4g 0g
Lunch
Butter - Unsalted, 1 tbsp 102 0g 12g 0g 31mg 2mg 0g 0g
Oil - Vegetable, canola, 1 tbsp 124 0g 14g 0g 0mg 0mg 0g 0g
Tomatoes - Green, raw, 5 slice or wedge 23 5g 0g 1g 0mg 13mg 4g 1g
Beef - Short Ribs, 6 oz 330 0g 23g 39g 119mg 74mg 0g 0g
Potatoes - White, flesh and skin, raw, 200 g 140 31g 0g 3g 0mg 12mg 2g 5g
Wheat flour - White, all-purpose, enriched, bleached, 0.2 cup 91 19g 0g 3g 0mg 1mg 0g 1g
Afternoon
Bryers - Butter Pecan Ice Cream, 1 cup 280 36g 12g 4g 20mg 200mg 24g 0g
TOTAL: 1,441 114g 74g 88g 235mg 985mg 39g 13g
Point?
My question exactly.
I was moving from DorkothyParker's observation that the carb level on a standard 1200 cal diet can be considered "low carb". And in fact, on such a diet, 50% carb means 150 grams and 40% means 120g.
Eat some bread, a portion of pasta, 2 scoops of ice cream and there is no way you can find space for adequate amount of fruit and vegetables (while on the other hand, low carber tipically avoid those foods because of their high glycemix index).
People coming from the SAD should be educated on getting proper nutrition, instead of being told to eat treats every day otherwise they will go insane...
Well said! Especially the last paragraph
What I find frustrating about this is that a lot of us who resist the focus on labels like "processed foods" and say you should look at overall nutrition content of a diet certainly would agree that people should be educated in proper nutrition and that there's no need to eat treats everyday (although if someone wants to, and has the calories to do so, it's not harmful -- and I'd not just include sweet things in my definition of "treats" but cheese, higher fat cuts of meat like bacon or roasted chicken with the skin, etc.).
I wonder why it's so hard to communicate -- I tend to find comments like lisa's (which you agreed with) to be intentionally insulting, as she seems to be saying that those with different ideas about nutrition than her don't care about it.
IMO, rejecting easy over-simplifications like "avoid processed foods" or "eat clean" is important because that tends to go along with a more nuanced understanding of nutrition.
I don't always eat precisely the way I aspire too, but I hope you and I could agree, from our participation together on this board, that it's incredibly unfair and false to claim that I am not interested in good nutrition or that my comments about not overgeneralizing about "processed foods" or it being okay to have some gelato or ice cream don't mean that I recommend not learning about nutrition or eating a poor diet.
I wish people could see how insulting such comments are, especially when they ignore the bulk of what's actually said and recommended.0 -
lisawinning4losing wrote: »But yeah, I'll agree that "a lot" is relative.
Honestly, I'm not really worried about anyone eating carrots. I'm much more worried about all the processed food and that kind of stuff. You can eat all the carrots you want as far as I'm concerned, if that's what you like. You can go full Bugs Bunny style, and it won't bother me!
conversely there is nothing wrong with a diet of processed foods as long as said diet meets calorie, micro, and macros goals...
not sure why that is such a difficult concept to grasp....0 -
lisawinning4losing wrote: »Honestly, if someone's doing a 1200 calorie diet and all they care about is calories, I could easily see them sacrificing 50 calories in vegetables in order to have a cookie instead. Sure, why not? I bet it happens all the time. Because it's just all about calories, right? And that cookie sure looks better than that broccoli, to someone who's been on SAD. Of course you can have both, but, keep in mind that you still need to have enough calories for food that will stick to your ribs, and most people are going to gravitate more toward the cookie after their belly is full than toward the broccoli. Why have vegetables on the side when you can have dessert instead? It's all just calories, right?
Also, I'd like to point out that salad greens are very light, so 3 oz is a lot. It's the entire box, in fact. You can't even fit it all on one plate. It's like two or three big salads. It's like a mountain of lettuce and spinach and stuff. But it's only 3 grams of carbs. The average person absolutely does not eat that much salad in one day. The average person doesn't even eat vegetables every day. And I still have 17 carbs left over, if I'm doing 20 carbs.
And if my garden keeps going well, I'll soon be picking my own lettuce and spinach! Yay!
but its ok to cut out carbs and eat an insane amount of fat?
why is it a false choice between broccoli and a cookie? why can't one have both ...?
0 -
ForecasterJason wrote: »
I don't think everyone is an agreement on that amount, as I've seen some say that kind of food can make up more of one's diet.Gianfranco_R wrote: »Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Gianfranco_R wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Gianfranco_R wrote: »DorkothyParker wrote: »I would say I eat vegetables about the same. But I agree, most low carbers still have a mindset that a plate should have protein plus side dishes. Replacing said sides with cruciferous greens and such instead of rice, noodles, bread, or potatoes is likely to occur.
Meatitarians are the exception, not the rule. And I, for one, appreciate their commitment to their n=1 experiments and sharing them with us, though it is not a choice I would make for myself.
I get the whole "If you eat more veggies on low carb, then you had a crap diet" but that's sort of irrelevant. Equally irrelevant, I would say it's *easier* to be low carb on 1300 k/cal and be satiated than on a standard reduced-calorie 1300 k/cal diet, even if they are both eating the same vegetables. I would also argue that if you are satiated on a 1300 kcal diet, then maybe, if you look at your *net* carb intake, you might realize you are technically low-carb (not necessarily keto).
I would add that those who are on a standard reduced-calorie of 1200/1300 cal diet and keep eating sugary treats and starchy foods are surely not meeting the 5-a-day recommendation...
I ate low starch, but got plenty of veg and some sweets on 1250. Feel free to look back to 2014, when I logged more consistently.
OK, let's run a report on April 2014, shall we?
So as I see you ate ice cream or gelato... twice, on 5th and 20th.
In both occasions, you went over your calorie allotment (1441 and 1568).
That should be already enough, to prove my point, but if we look closer, we can see that on April 5th you ate just 356 g of vegetables (no fruit), so slightly below the 400g recommendation...
April 5, 2014
FOODS Calories Carbs Fat Protein Cholest Sodium Sugars Fiber
Early Morning
Squash - Zucchini, includes skin, raw, 91 g 15 3g 0g 1g 0mg 9mg 2g 1g
Cauliflower - Raw, 80 g 20 4g 0g 2g 0mg 24mg 2g 2g
Pearson - Blackeye Peas, 1/4 cup (85g) (3oz) 59 11g 0g 4g 0mg 153mg 1g 3g
Beef - Loin, bottom sirloin butt, tri-tip steak, lean only, raw, 3 oz 131 0g 7g 18g 55mg 47mg 0g 0g
Oil - Olive, 0.3 tablespoon 36 0g 4g 0g 0mg 0mg 0g 0g
Essential Everyday - 1% Low Fat Cottage Cheese, 1/2 cup (115g) 90 5g 2g 13g 10mg 450mg 4g 0g
Lunch
Butter - Unsalted, 1 tbsp 102 0g 12g 0g 31mg 2mg 0g 0g
Oil - Vegetable, canola, 1 tbsp 124 0g 14g 0g 0mg 0mg 0g 0g
Tomatoes - Green, raw, 5 slice or wedge 23 5g 0g 1g 0mg 13mg 4g 1g
Beef - Short Ribs, 6 oz 330 0g 23g 39g 119mg 74mg 0g 0g
Potatoes - White, flesh and skin, raw, 200 g 140 31g 0g 3g 0mg 12mg 2g 5g
Wheat flour - White, all-purpose, enriched, bleached, 0.2 cup 91 19g 0g 3g 0mg 1mg 0g 1g
Afternoon
Bryers - Butter Pecan Ice Cream, 1 cup 280 36g 12g 4g 20mg 200mg 24g 0g
TOTAL: 1,441 114g 74g 88g 235mg 985mg 39g 13g
Point?
My question exactly.
I was moving from DorkothyParker's observation that the carb level on a standard 1200 cal diet can be considered "low carb". And in fact, on such a diet, 50% carb means 150 grams and 40% means 120g.
Eat some bread, a portion of pasta, 2 scoops of ice cream and there is no way you can find space for adequate amount of fruit and vegetables (while on the other hand, low carber tipically avoid those foods because of their high glycemix index).
People coming from the SAD should be educated on getting proper nutrition, instead of being told to eat treats every day otherwise they will go insane...
Usually the same people advocating for small treats also advocate for a moderate deficit and using exercise to up daily calorie intake because it's easier to sustain long term.
And to add on, those same people always recommend addressing all other nutritional requirements prior to eating goodies, which generally limits junk for to 10% of calories of less.
do you not understand dietary context?
what additional benefit does one get if you eat 1000% over the RDA of micro nutrients?0 -
Gianfranco_R wrote: »Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Gianfranco_R wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Gianfranco_R wrote: »DorkothyParker wrote: »I would say I eat vegetables about the same. But I agree, most low carbers still have a mindset that a plate should have protein plus side dishes. Replacing said sides with cruciferous greens and such instead of rice, noodles, bread, or potatoes is likely to occur.
Meatitarians are the exception, not the rule. And I, for one, appreciate their commitment to their n=1 experiments and sharing them with us, though it is not a choice I would make for myself.
I get the whole "If you eat more veggies on low carb, then you had a crap diet" but that's sort of irrelevant. Equally irrelevant, I would say it's *easier* to be low carb on 1300 k/cal and be satiated than on a standard reduced-calorie 1300 k/cal diet, even if they are both eating the same vegetables. I would also argue that if you are satiated on a 1300 kcal diet, then maybe, if you look at your *net* carb intake, you might realize you are technically low-carb (not necessarily keto).
I would add that those who are on a standard reduced-calorie of 1200/1300 cal diet and keep eating sugary treats and starchy foods are surely not meeting the 5-a-day recommendation...
I ate low starch, but got plenty of veg and some sweets on 1250. Feel free to look back to 2014, when I logged more consistently.
OK, let's run a report on April 2014, shall we?
So as I see you ate ice cream or gelato... twice, on 5th and 20th.
In both occasions, you went over your calorie allotment (1441 and 1568).
That should be already enough, to prove my point, but if we look closer, we can see that on April 5th you ate just 356 g of vegetables (no fruit), so slightly below the 400g recommendation...
April 5, 2014
FOODS Calories Carbs Fat Protein Cholest Sodium Sugars Fiber
Early Morning
Squash - Zucchini, includes skin, raw, 91 g 15 3g 0g 1g 0mg 9mg 2g 1g
Cauliflower - Raw, 80 g 20 4g 0g 2g 0mg 24mg 2g 2g
Pearson - Blackeye Peas, 1/4 cup (85g) (3oz) 59 11g 0g 4g 0mg 153mg 1g 3g
Beef - Loin, bottom sirloin butt, tri-tip steak, lean only, raw, 3 oz 131 0g 7g 18g 55mg 47mg 0g 0g
Oil - Olive, 0.3 tablespoon 36 0g 4g 0g 0mg 0mg 0g 0g
Essential Everyday - 1% Low Fat Cottage Cheese, 1/2 cup (115g) 90 5g 2g 13g 10mg 450mg 4g 0g
Lunch
Butter - Unsalted, 1 tbsp 102 0g 12g 0g 31mg 2mg 0g 0g
Oil - Vegetable, canola, 1 tbsp 124 0g 14g 0g 0mg 0mg 0g 0g
Tomatoes - Green, raw, 5 slice or wedge 23 5g 0g 1g 0mg 13mg 4g 1g
Beef - Short Ribs, 6 oz 330 0g 23g 39g 119mg 74mg 0g 0g
Potatoes - White, flesh and skin, raw, 200 g 140 31g 0g 3g 0mg 12mg 2g 5g
Wheat flour - White, all-purpose, enriched, bleached, 0.2 cup 91 19g 0g 3g 0mg 1mg 0g 1g
Afternoon
Bryers - Butter Pecan Ice Cream, 1 cup 280 36g 12g 4g 20mg 200mg 24g 0g
TOTAL: 1,441 114g 74g 88g 235mg 985mg 39g 13g
Point?
My question exactly.
I was moving from DorkothyParker's observation that the carb level on a standard 1200 cal diet can be considered "low carb". And in fact, on such a diet, 50% carb means 150 grams and 40% means 120g.
Eat some bread, a portion of pasta, 2 scoops of ice cream and there is no way you can find space for adequate amount of fruit and vegetables (while on the other hand, low carber tipically avoid those foods because of their high glycemix index).
People coming from the SAD should be educated on getting proper nutrition, instead of being told to eat treats every day otherwise they will go insane...
Usually the same people advocating for small treats also advocate for a moderate deficit and using exercise to up daily calorie intake because it's easier to sustain long term.
And to add on, those same people always recommend addressing all other nutritional requirements prior to eating goodies, which generally limits junk for to 10% of calories of less.
Thank you.
Personally, even on days when I don't hit all my desired nutrient goals, it's never because I limit vegetables to fit in a cookie. If I happen to want a cookie and am concerned about calories, I either decide to have it on another day or cut out something else I consider somewhat options (like have a smaller portion of pasta or less cheese). Among other things, vegetables just don't have enough calories that it would make sense to cut them for some high cal item, and I also just don't think limiting veg is a good habit. (Also, I've been mostly eating at maintenance and training for endurance events, so I have some extra calories, usually.)
Do I always eat as many vegetables as I'd like? No -- for example, I try to eat them at all meals but sometimes am lazy in the morning so just have oatmeal with berries, or I buy a sandwich which doesn't come with as many veg as I'd like or some such. Real life means we aren't always perfect. But this idea that people who eat cookies or ice cream must be cutting out vegetables to fit it in seems to be false to me. At least it's not how I approach it and I think people can have sensible moderate diets that hit their nutrition goals without deciding sweets (or cheese or whatever one's favorite treat) must be all or nothing.0 -
I understand that. And no, I'm not suggesting that people should try to greatly exceed the RDA. But to get 100% of every single vitamin and mineral is naturally not going to leave a huge amount of room for other food (again, I'm not saying that treats are bad if micro needs have been met). While yes I know people with larger calorie requirements can get away with more, there is some offsetting since (for some vitamins and minerals) exercise and greater body size increases nutrient requirements.ForecasterJason wrote: »
I don't think everyone is an agreement on that amount, as I've seen some say that kind of food can make up more of one's diet.Gianfranco_R wrote: »Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Gianfranco_R wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Gianfranco_R wrote: »DorkothyParker wrote: »I would say I eat vegetables about the same. But I agree, most low carbers still have a mindset that a plate should have protein plus side dishes. Replacing said sides with cruciferous greens and such instead of rice, noodles, bread, or potatoes is likely to occur.
Meatitarians are the exception, not the rule. And I, for one, appreciate their commitment to their n=1 experiments and sharing them with us, though it is not a choice I would make for myself.
I get the whole "If you eat more veggies on low carb, then you had a crap diet" but that's sort of irrelevant. Equally irrelevant, I would say it's *easier* to be low carb on 1300 k/cal and be satiated than on a standard reduced-calorie 1300 k/cal diet, even if they are both eating the same vegetables. I would also argue that if you are satiated on a 1300 kcal diet, then maybe, if you look at your *net* carb intake, you might realize you are technically low-carb (not necessarily keto).
I would add that those who are on a standard reduced-calorie of 1200/1300 cal diet and keep eating sugary treats and starchy foods are surely not meeting the 5-a-day recommendation...
I ate low starch, but got plenty of veg and some sweets on 1250. Feel free to look back to 2014, when I logged more consistently.
OK, let's run a report on April 2014, shall we?
So as I see you ate ice cream or gelato... twice, on 5th and 20th.
In both occasions, you went over your calorie allotment (1441 and 1568).
That should be already enough, to prove my point, but if we look closer, we can see that on April 5th you ate just 356 g of vegetables (no fruit), so slightly below the 400g recommendation...
April 5, 2014
FOODS Calories Carbs Fat Protein Cholest Sodium Sugars Fiber
Early Morning
Squash - Zucchini, includes skin, raw, 91 g 15 3g 0g 1g 0mg 9mg 2g 1g
Cauliflower - Raw, 80 g 20 4g 0g 2g 0mg 24mg 2g 2g
Pearson - Blackeye Peas, 1/4 cup (85g) (3oz) 59 11g 0g 4g 0mg 153mg 1g 3g
Beef - Loin, bottom sirloin butt, tri-tip steak, lean only, raw, 3 oz 131 0g 7g 18g 55mg 47mg 0g 0g
Oil - Olive, 0.3 tablespoon 36 0g 4g 0g 0mg 0mg 0g 0g
Essential Everyday - 1% Low Fat Cottage Cheese, 1/2 cup (115g) 90 5g 2g 13g 10mg 450mg 4g 0g
Lunch
Butter - Unsalted, 1 tbsp 102 0g 12g 0g 31mg 2mg 0g 0g
Oil - Vegetable, canola, 1 tbsp 124 0g 14g 0g 0mg 0mg 0g 0g
Tomatoes - Green, raw, 5 slice or wedge 23 5g 0g 1g 0mg 13mg 4g 1g
Beef - Short Ribs, 6 oz 330 0g 23g 39g 119mg 74mg 0g 0g
Potatoes - White, flesh and skin, raw, 200 g 140 31g 0g 3g 0mg 12mg 2g 5g
Wheat flour - White, all-purpose, enriched, bleached, 0.2 cup 91 19g 0g 3g 0mg 1mg 0g 1g
Afternoon
Bryers - Butter Pecan Ice Cream, 1 cup 280 36g 12g 4g 20mg 200mg 24g 0g
TOTAL: 1,441 114g 74g 88g 235mg 985mg 39g 13g
Point?
My question exactly.
I was moving from DorkothyParker's observation that the carb level on a standard 1200 cal diet can be considered "low carb". And in fact, on such a diet, 50% carb means 150 grams and 40% means 120g.
Eat some bread, a portion of pasta, 2 scoops of ice cream and there is no way you can find space for adequate amount of fruit and vegetables (while on the other hand, low carber tipically avoid those foods because of their high glycemix index).
People coming from the SAD should be educated on getting proper nutrition, instead of being told to eat treats every day otherwise they will go insane...
Usually the same people advocating for small treats also advocate for a moderate deficit and using exercise to up daily calorie intake because it's easier to sustain long term.
And to add on, those same people always recommend addressing all other nutritional requirements prior to eating goodies, which generally limits junk for to 10% of calories of less.
do you not understand dietary context?
what additional benefit does one get if you eat 1000% over the RDA of micro nutrients?
0 -
ForecasterJason wrote: »
I understand that. And no, I'm not suggesting that people should try to greatly exceed the RDA. But to get 100% of every single vitamin and mineral is naturally not going to leave a huge amount of room for other food (again, I'm not saying that treats are bad if micro needs have been met). While yes I know people with larger calorie requirements can get away with more, there is some offsetting since (for some vitamins and minerals) exercise and greater body size increases nutrient requirements.ForecasterJason wrote: »
I don't think everyone is an agreement on that amount, as I've seen some say that kind of food can make up more of one's diet.Gianfranco_R wrote: »Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Gianfranco_R wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Gianfranco_R wrote: »DorkothyParker wrote: »I would say I eat vegetables about the same. But I agree, most low carbers still have a mindset that a plate should have protein plus side dishes. Replacing said sides with cruciferous greens and such instead of rice, noodles, bread, or potatoes is likely to occur.
Meatitarians are the exception, not the rule. And I, for one, appreciate their commitment to their n=1 experiments and sharing them with us, though it is not a choice I would make for myself.
I get the whole "If you eat more veggies on low carb, then you had a crap diet" but that's sort of irrelevant. Equally irrelevant, I would say it's *easier* to be low carb on 1300 k/cal and be satiated than on a standard reduced-calorie 1300 k/cal diet, even if they are both eating the same vegetables. I would also argue that if you are satiated on a 1300 kcal diet, then maybe, if you look at your *net* carb intake, you might realize you are technically low-carb (not necessarily keto).
I would add that those who are on a standard reduced-calorie of 1200/1300 cal diet and keep eating sugary treats and starchy foods are surely not meeting the 5-a-day recommendation...
I ate low starch, but got plenty of veg and some sweets on 1250. Feel free to look back to 2014, when I logged more consistently.
OK, let's run a report on April 2014, shall we?
So as I see you ate ice cream or gelato... twice, on 5th and 20th.
In both occasions, you went over your calorie allotment (1441 and 1568).
That should be already enough, to prove my point, but if we look closer, we can see that on April 5th you ate just 356 g of vegetables (no fruit), so slightly below the 400g recommendation...
April 5, 2014
FOODS Calories Carbs Fat Protein Cholest Sodium Sugars Fiber
Early Morning
Squash - Zucchini, includes skin, raw, 91 g 15 3g 0g 1g 0mg 9mg 2g 1g
Cauliflower - Raw, 80 g 20 4g 0g 2g 0mg 24mg 2g 2g
Pearson - Blackeye Peas, 1/4 cup (85g) (3oz) 59 11g 0g 4g 0mg 153mg 1g 3g
Beef - Loin, bottom sirloin butt, tri-tip steak, lean only, raw, 3 oz 131 0g 7g 18g 55mg 47mg 0g 0g
Oil - Olive, 0.3 tablespoon 36 0g 4g 0g 0mg 0mg 0g 0g
Essential Everyday - 1% Low Fat Cottage Cheese, 1/2 cup (115g) 90 5g 2g 13g 10mg 450mg 4g 0g
Lunch
Butter - Unsalted, 1 tbsp 102 0g 12g 0g 31mg 2mg 0g 0g
Oil - Vegetable, canola, 1 tbsp 124 0g 14g 0g 0mg 0mg 0g 0g
Tomatoes - Green, raw, 5 slice or wedge 23 5g 0g 1g 0mg 13mg 4g 1g
Beef - Short Ribs, 6 oz 330 0g 23g 39g 119mg 74mg 0g 0g
Potatoes - White, flesh and skin, raw, 200 g 140 31g 0g 3g 0mg 12mg 2g 5g
Wheat flour - White, all-purpose, enriched, bleached, 0.2 cup 91 19g 0g 3g 0mg 1mg 0g 1g
Afternoon
Bryers - Butter Pecan Ice Cream, 1 cup 280 36g 12g 4g 20mg 200mg 24g 0g
TOTAL: 1,441 114g 74g 88g 235mg 985mg 39g 13g
Point?
My question exactly.
I was moving from DorkothyParker's observation that the carb level on a standard 1200 cal diet can be considered "low carb". And in fact, on such a diet, 50% carb means 150 grams and 40% means 120g.
Eat some bread, a portion of pasta, 2 scoops of ice cream and there is no way you can find space for adequate amount of fruit and vegetables (while on the other hand, low carber tipically avoid those foods because of their high glycemix index).
People coming from the SAD should be educated on getting proper nutrition, instead of being told to eat treats every day otherwise they will go insane...
Usually the same people advocating for small treats also advocate for a moderate deficit and using exercise to up daily calorie intake because it's easier to sustain long term.
And to add on, those same people always recommend addressing all other nutritional requirements prior to eating goodies, which generally limits junk for to 10% of calories of less.
do you not understand dietary context?
what additional benefit does one get if you eat 1000% over the RDA of micro nutrients?
thats what multivitamins are for...to supplement your intake of regular micros..
and I don't think you understand the concept as you keep coming back with statements like the one you did, or you just refuse to accept it.0 -
What are we even discussing anymore? I don't think any low-carber would suggest this is the *only* way to eat. But it's sustainable and I feel we have defended that it can be very healthy and can promote the recommended vegetable consumption. (OK, I don't eat carrots but I tried one recently and it was very sweet. I had a huge bowl of tasty steamed broccoli and butter last night right when I got home from work, though!)
If we are basing on personal experience, I find it a lot easier to meet my protein goals with this way of eating, I am less hungry as I find fat very satiating, and I have had no backslide compared to when I am solely counting calories as a recovered anorexic. On the other hand, I am reducing my alcohol intake quite naturally and in spite of the fact that I must be consuming fewer calories, I have more energy and don't feel physically hungry.
Vegetables are nice regardless of diet. Fruit is fine, but not necessarily required to be healthy.
Full disclosure, I do take a multivitamin every day.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »Gianfranco_R wrote: »Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Gianfranco_R wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Gianfranco_R wrote: »DorkothyParker wrote: »I would say I eat vegetables about the same. But I agree, most low carbers still have a mindset that a plate should have protein plus side dishes. Replacing said sides with cruciferous greens and such instead of rice, noodles, bread, or potatoes is likely to occur.
Meatitarians are the exception, not the rule. And I, for one, appreciate their commitment to their n=1 experiments and sharing them with us, though it is not a choice I would make for myself.
I get the whole "If you eat more veggies on low carb, then you had a crap diet" but that's sort of irrelevant. Equally irrelevant, I would say it's *easier* to be low carb on 1300 k/cal and be satiated than on a standard reduced-calorie 1300 k/cal diet, even if they are both eating the same vegetables. I would also argue that if you are satiated on a 1300 kcal diet, then maybe, if you look at your *net* carb intake, you might realize you are technically low-carb (not necessarily keto).
I would add that those who are on a standard reduced-calorie of 1200/1300 cal diet and keep eating sugary treats and starchy foods are surely not meeting the 5-a-day recommendation...
I ate low starch, but got plenty of veg and some sweets on 1250. Feel free to look back to 2014, when I logged more consistently.
OK, let's run a report on April 2014, shall we?
So as I see you ate ice cream or gelato... twice, on 5th and 20th.
In both occasions, you went over your calorie allotment (1441 and 1568).
That should be already enough, to prove my point, but if we look closer, we can see that on April 5th you ate just 356 g of vegetables (no fruit), so slightly below the 400g recommendation...
April 5, 2014
FOODS Calories Carbs Fat Protein Cholest Sodium Sugars Fiber
Early Morning
Squash - Zucchini, includes skin, raw, 91 g 15 3g 0g 1g 0mg 9mg 2g 1g
Cauliflower - Raw, 80 g 20 4g 0g 2g 0mg 24mg 2g 2g
Pearson - Blackeye Peas, 1/4 cup (85g) (3oz) 59 11g 0g 4g 0mg 153mg 1g 3g
Beef - Loin, bottom sirloin butt, tri-tip steak, lean only, raw, 3 oz 131 0g 7g 18g 55mg 47mg 0g 0g
Oil - Olive, 0.3 tablespoon 36 0g 4g 0g 0mg 0mg 0g 0g
Essential Everyday - 1% Low Fat Cottage Cheese, 1/2 cup (115g) 90 5g 2g 13g 10mg 450mg 4g 0g
Lunch
Butter - Unsalted, 1 tbsp 102 0g 12g 0g 31mg 2mg 0g 0g
Oil - Vegetable, canola, 1 tbsp 124 0g 14g 0g 0mg 0mg 0g 0g
Tomatoes - Green, raw, 5 slice or wedge 23 5g 0g 1g 0mg 13mg 4g 1g
Beef - Short Ribs, 6 oz 330 0g 23g 39g 119mg 74mg 0g 0g
Potatoes - White, flesh and skin, raw, 200 g 140 31g 0g 3g 0mg 12mg 2g 5g
Wheat flour - White, all-purpose, enriched, bleached, 0.2 cup 91 19g 0g 3g 0mg 1mg 0g 1g
Afternoon
Bryers - Butter Pecan Ice Cream, 1 cup 280 36g 12g 4g 20mg 200mg 24g 0g
TOTAL: 1,441 114g 74g 88g 235mg 985mg 39g 13g
Point?
My question exactly.
I was moving from DorkothyParker's observation that the carb level on a standard 1200 cal diet can be considered "low carb". And in fact, on such a diet, 50% carb means 150 grams and 40% means 120g.
Eat some bread, a portion of pasta, 2 scoops of ice cream and there is no way you can find space for adequate amount of fruit and vegetables (while on the other hand, low carber tipically avoid those foods because of their high glycemix index).
People coming from the SAD should be educated on getting proper nutrition, instead of being told to eat treats every day otherwise they will go insane...
Well said! Especially the last paragraph
What I find frustrating about this is that a lot of us who resist the focus on labels like "processed foods" and say you should look at overall nutrition content of a diet certainly would agree that people should be educated in proper nutrition and that there's no need to eat treats everyday (although if someone wants to, and has the calories to do so, it's not harmful -- and I'd not just include sweet things in my definition of "treats" but cheese, higher fat cuts of meat like bacon or roasted chicken with the skin, etc.).
I wonder why it's so hard to communicate -- I tend to find comments like lisa's (which you agreed with) to be intentionally insulting, as she seems to be saying that those with different ideas about nutrition than her don't care about it.
IMO, rejecting easy over-simplifications like "avoid processed foods" or "eat clean" is important because that tends to go along with a more nuanced understanding of nutrition.
I don't always eat precisely the way I aspire too, but I hope you and I could agree, from our participation together on this board, that it's incredibly unfair and false to claim that I am not interested in good nutrition or that my comments about not overgeneralizing about "processed foods" or it being okay to have some gelato or ice cream don't mean that I recommend not learning about nutrition or eating a poor diet.
I wish people could see how insulting such comments are, especially when they ignore the bulk of what's actually said and recommended.
It's ok. He was just trying to score points, and shocking, only two people agreed with his "good points." Because as was pointed out, he cherry picked two days and blatantly ignored the others and you ate back your exercise calories, which I do, too. So, don't worry. You're easily one of the best posters on this board.
Some people just like to be disingenuous.0 -
DorkothyParker wrote: »What are we even discussing anymore? I don't think any low-carber would suggest this is the *only* way to eat. But it's sustainable and I feel we have defended that it can be very healthy and can promote the recommended vegetable consumption. (OK, I don't eat carrots but I tried one recently and it was very sweet. I had a huge bowl of tasty steamed broccoli and butter last night right when I got home from work, though!)
If we are basing on personal experience, I find it a lot easier to meet my protein goals with this way of eating, I am less hungry as I find fat very satiating, and I have had no backslide compared to when I am solely counting calories as a recovered anorexic. On the other hand, I am reducing my alcohol intake quite naturally and in spite of the fact that I must be consuming fewer calories, I have more energy and don't feel physically hungry.
Vegetables are nice regardless of diet. Fruit is fine, but not necessarily required to be healthy.
Full disclosure, I do take a multivitamin every day.
No, we'll just see some of them claim it is proven optimal for people with insulin resistance and they'll claim 2/3's or more of the world's population is insulin resistant.0 -
Fair enough, but I think relatively few people would find it disadvantageous compared to their current diet. (Certain medical conditions may apply, I am very healthy so cannot attest to any pre-existing medical conditions.)
Lots of people seem to enjoy promoting their WOE. In fact, just about everyone on this site who has lost weight/found greater health is going to think "This is a great way to eat!" in regards to whatever method they used. I don't think it's fair to single out low-carbers when everyone here is sharing their success.
Again, if the discussion is "Does low-carb encourage eating vegetables?" I would say it can, but compared to only some WOE. (Vegetarians and vegans have us all licked!) I would say it doesn't "discourage" vegetable consumption necessarily. Full carnivores are to keto what fruititarians are to vegans.0 -
That, and the keto-evangelism generally, plus claims that we are all going to get dementia from the carbs.
Whatever the problems with the average American diet, focusing on carb percentage seems unlikely to be the issue given the many healthy traditional diets with as high or higher carb percentages. Which is not to say that lowering carbs might not be a sustainable and healthy way to diet for some -- I'm a carb agnostic when it comes to percentages -- but the constant banging on about carbs being bad is annoying.
And I really don't think it's cool to evangelize for a particular way of eating beyond just generally saying it's sensible to eat a generally nutritious diet. (It's like how lots of low carbers insist that fat is satiating, when for many it's not, and that going low carb will prevent you from being hungry all the time when many or most people probably don't have that as an issue.)0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »DorkothyParker wrote: »Do a majority of low carbers generally eat more vegetables than SAD? Yes.
There's no basis for this claim.
So far as I can tell most low carbers were anti veg which is what caused them to incline to low carb.
Where is the basis that "most" low carbers hated vegetables? The majority of low-carbers (and I include Keto - slow carbers in that) I've come across are the exact opposite. I've heard people who became exposed to new kinds of vegetables or new ways of cooking them. In all of the low carb groups I've come across there have only been a small few that don't each vegetables. They readily admit to being outside the norm and I've never seen anyone actually promote the removal of vegetables from their diet. I'll grant you this is my experience and not based on any study. I'm not sure there are studies about that (shrug).
People on MFP and people I know in RL who were attracted to low carbing. Usually it's because they like the idea that eating lots of high fat foods is important and "rabbit food" is not.
But, honestly, I don't want to get into an argument about it and I admit it's not based on anything but anecdote. I don't have anything against low carbing (as pointed out, I have had reasonably low carbs myself at times, although I would never do keto and I'm currently trying to eat less meat so more carbs). My basic position is that carb percentage doesn't have much to do with how healthy a diet is -- low carb, medium carb, and even high carb diets can be quite healthy and quite unhealthy.
What I find irritating and was probably overreacting to is:
(1) a segment of voiciferous posters on MFP who like to claim that eating carbs is generally worse than not and having lower carbs is always better (even if that means no fruits and veg). They typically combine this with a claim that eating vegetables is unimportant and sometimes promotion of "carnivorous" challenges, which I personally do consider extremely unhealthy.
(2) the idea that going low carb increases vegetables -- that just doesn't make sense to me, since nothing is stopping anyone from eating more veg with a higher carb percentage (and I don't think it makes sense to worry about keeping veg percentage down).
and (3) just general anti carb rhetoric in general. This tends to go along with people calling junk food that's about 50% fat "carbs" and ignoring the fact that many very nutritious foods are largely carbs, including many of those recommended by nutrition experts and other largely respected people (eat food, mostly plants, not too much).
Anyway, I have been having a bad week for lots of reasons and was probably doing lots of misreading, so if I misconstrued your comments I apologize, and I certainly agree that not all low carbers eat diets low in veg.
That's alright. We got you @Lemurcat12 . Nothing but love out here on the MFP killing fields. I think it is important to be able to debate without the need for it to affect relationships, even when those relationships are with strangers on the internet. It's all good.
0 -
I try to forget those claims. What were discussing again?lemurcat12 wrote: »That, and the keto-evangelism generally, plus claims that we are all going to get dementia from the carbs.
Whatever the problems with the average American diet, focusing on carb percentage seems unlikely to be the issue given the many healthy traditional diets with as high or higher carb percentages. Which is not to say that lowering carbs might not be a sustainable and healthy way to diet for some -- I'm a carb agnostic when it comes to percentages -- but the constant banging on about carbs being bad is annoying.
And I really don't think it's cool to evangelize for a particular way of eating beyond just generally saying it's sensible to eat a generally nutritious diet. (It's like how lots of low carbers insist that fat is satiating, when for many it's not, and that going low carb will prevent you from being hungry all the time when many or most people probably don't have that as an issue.)
0 -
Heh.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 388 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 916 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions