Carbs or fat? Totally confused
Options
Replies
-
Macros aren't the most important thing in weight loss, don't eat too many carbs or fat but pay attention to your calories mostly because that's the main thing. Another important thing is to check your nutrients. Try to hit most of your goals for things such and protein, iron and vitamins each day as it is important to stay healthy during weight loss.
It is possible to be losing weight but still eat unhealthily but this is almost as bad for your body as being overweight is. You can reach your goal weight but be unhealthy and ultimately this is a really bad thing for your body because you still can get many diseases even when not overweight, just from having an unhealthy body.1 -
I find paying attention to my macros very helpful. It's not strictly necessary for weight loss tho - that always comes down to CICO. For me, reducing carbs gives me better appetite control. Yes, when you reduce carbs you increase fat; I get between 60-70% of calories from fat. It does feel indulgent, maybe even "sinful" lol! That's part of what makes it easy for me to stick with (hard to feel deprived while indulging in steak, chicken with the skin, butter, cream, bacon, full fat cheese, whole eggs, full fat dressings, etc). It is important to remember that a good bit of your initial loss on a low carb diet will be water (for me it was about 5 lbs). If you have a high carb meal or "treat" you will see your weight jump up a few lbs the next day, but it is only water and will come off within a day or two so it's really not a big deal.
I've been eating LCHF for three years now. Lost 50 lbs eating this way without counting calories or consciously restricting intake and have kept it off effortlessly ever since. I'm down to the lowest weight I've been since my junior year of high school, and smack in the middle of normal bmi for my height. It may or may not work for you, but if you are interested, OP, I'd suggest hopping over to the low carb forum (link below). Read the stickies there and ask any questions you might have. It's a great group of very knowledgable low carbers! Good luck!
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/group/394-low-carber-daily-forum-the-lcd-group3 -
In your case, you have to learn about calories. That's almost 100% of what it comes down to when losing weight. Stop focusing on the tiniest percent that is really just confusing for you anyway. Get in a deficit. Lose weight. Don't be afraid to eat fat, or carbs...and eat a decent amount of protein. The end.5
-
this is a short article that I found fairly easy by searching are all calories equal. there were a ton of other articles to read also.. maybe I'm wrong.. and if so I'm ok with that, but I like to try and give good advice so to be attacked while trying to help caught me off gaurd. It's amazing how quick people are on these forums to try and prove everyone wrong lol. Have a nice night peeps. I won't be participating in this debate anymore lol
I was not trying to attack you personally and I probably could have done without the "amusingly ironic" comment, but sometimes it's a reflex response from the many people on here who are 100% certain that it's their way or the highway and to disagree with them is wrong. Many of them aren't willing to keep an open mind that maybe they had been previously exposed to misinformation. And that's what it boils down to for me, trying to help prevent the further spread of misinformation that could hinder or cause difficulty in someone's weight loss journey. There are a lot of people that come here looking for advice and I hate to see them given information that science has proven to be wrong. Especially when that information might lead the dieter to getting frustrated and giving up.4 -
calories must be in a deficit BUT!! The quality DOES MATTER.. macros make a difference and so does food type.. example.. If you eat fast food all day but stay within your macros you will not lose weight like someone who eats clean to hit their macros.. You can even narrow this down to things like using fish instead of steak to get in your protein.. The body will process and use cleaner food better. SO DONT BELIEVE THE HYPE. and another tid bit.. Don't be scared to eat more protein to supplement the decrease in carbs.. Raising fats is ok but the benefits of protein are immeasurable..
How did I lose 90lbs including some fast food and so called 'junk food' as well as hitting my protein, fiber and fat goals with nutritious foods @Krisfit40 ?Wynterbourne wrote: »this is a short article that I found fairly easy by searching are all calories equal. there were a ton of other articles to read also.. maybe I'm wrong.. and if so I'm ok with that, but I like to try and give good advice so to be attacked while trying to help caught me off gaurd. It's amazing how quick people are on these forums to try and prove everyone wrong lol. Have a nice night peeps. I won't be participating in this debate anymore lol
I was not trying to attack you personally and I probably could have done without the "amusingly ironic" comment, but sometimes it's a reflex response from the many people on here who are 100% certain that it's their way or the highway and to disagree with them is wrong. Many of them aren't willing to keep an open mind that maybe they had been previously exposed to misinformation. And that's what it boils down to for me, trying to help prevent the further spread of misinformation that could hinder or cause difficulty in someone's weight loss journey. There are a lot of people that come here looking for advice and I hate to see them given information that science has proven to be wrong. Especially when that information might lead the dieter to getting frustrated and giving up.
I like this.0 -
all our bodies are different... we all react different to different styles... what works for one might not work for everybody... medical issues sometimes are a reason for a certain type of diet... you just got to find what works for your body... try different things.....6
-
It's astonishing that we're still having an argument around "calories being calories," "burn more than you consume" - there's a mountain of real science pertaining to how the kinds of foods we consume directly affect out hormonal and metabolic pathways - 100 calories of sugar and 100 calories of grass fed beef are not the same 100 calories, and the resulting aftermath of the former is hormonal and metabolic fluctuations that serve to store more fat. No one can out-exercise a bad diet, our overall and general fitness will suffer as a result of fueling ourselves with bad fuel.6
-
aashish14914 wrote: »I read in an article about how quickly one can loss weight. After reading all i came to conclusion that having less carb food (between 50-100 g or even <50 g) would help in loosing your fat fast. But for having less carb one have to eat more Fat which maintain your daily calories need. I am really confused. It is like sin to have so much fat when you are trying to get rid of your weight, eat fat but in less amount (I weigh 194 lbs, height 183 cm & age 22). For me it is estimated to have 2200 calories, 73 g fat and 275 g carbs to loose my 6 lbs in 4 weeks. But i am trying to have less carbs foods (Max. 150g carbs), so where to put my 500 calories that less carbs creates. Please suggest whether i have to eat recommended carbs or put my required carbs calories any where else. I am really confused.
ARE YOU A LITTLE MORE CONFUSED THAN EVER NOW???? YOU just find what works for you... i did low carb high fat for 10 years and it worked great... for what i needed it to do.... I was type 2 diabetic and am not now.. well i got it under control... and i lost 130 pounds..... BUT.... it did some funky things to my heart... i had to stop it.... I am vegan now and love it... im older now and still trying to control the diabetes and high blood pressure... its working for me... so at different times in my life... a different plan worked for what i needed it to do... its now time for a healthy heart..... life is getting very precious... good luck to you2 -
ClementinaRusso wrote: »It's astonishing that we're still having an argument around "calories being calories," "burn more than you consume" - there's a mountain of real science pertaining to how the kinds of foods we consume directly affect out hormonal and metabolic pathways - 100 calories of sugar and 100 calories of grass fed beef are not the same 100 calories, and the resulting aftermath of the former is hormonal and metabolic fluctuations that serve to store more fat. No one can out-exercise a bad diet, our overall and general fitness will suffer as a result of fueling ourselves with bad fuel.
And yet we still have to remind people that weight loss and fitness are two separate things. You can be skinny and unfit. The "bad fuel" you're referring to doesn't change your weight loss, it changes your fitness. You're blending together two goals, that while commonly worked on together, are still two separate goals.
8 -
ClementinaRusso wrote: »It's astonishing that we're still having an argument around "calories being calories," "burn more than you consume" - there's a mountain of real science pertaining to how the kinds of foods we consume directly affect out hormonal and metabolic pathways - 100 calories of sugar and 100 calories of grass fed beef are not the same 100 calories, and the resulting aftermath of the former is hormonal and metabolic fluctuations that serve to store more fat. No one can out-exercise a bad diet, our overall and general fitness will suffer as a result of fueling ourselves with bad fuel.
Really? please link to this "real science"
Hormones are responsive to sleep, stress and anxiety
Metabolism is responsive to mass and there is minutiae in TEF but TDEE is responsive to activity and exercise levels
As @Wynterbourne says you are conflating two goals here
Excess calories result in excess fat storage
Also you should read up on the professor who followed a Twinkie diet and his improved health markers from pure weight loss
100 calories of pure sugar and 100 cals of grass fed beef can both have their place in a rounded nutritiously healthy diet dependent on goals and there can be strong rationale for why either is preferable at a given point in time6 -
aashish14914 wrote: »I read in an article about how quickly one can loss weight. After reading all i came to conclusion that having less carb food (between 50-100 g or even <50 g) would help in loosing your fat fast. But for having less carb one have to eat more Fat which maintain your daily calories need. I am really confused. It is like sin to have so much fat when you are trying to get rid of your weight, eat fat but in less amount (I weigh 194 lbs, height 183 cm & age 22). For me it is estimated to have 2200 calories, 73 g fat and 275 g carbs to loose my 6 lbs in 4 weeks. But i am trying to have less carbs foods (Max. 150g carbs), so where to put my 500 calories that less carbs creates. Please suggest whether i have to eat recommended carbs or put my required carbs calories any where else. I am really confused.
STOP the presses. Keep researching weight loss. It is simply burn more calories than you take in. Do not make this about carbs and fats and so on.
If you don't understand why you should eat more carbs..less carbs..No wait..eat more fat..no less fat..
Keep it simple..Burn more calories than you take in..see what works for you..before worrying about carbs, and fats, and protein, and everything else.
2 -
There is a difference. Keep it simple1
-
ClementinaRusso wrote: »It's astonishing that we're still having an argument around "calories being calories," "burn more than you consume" - there's a mountain of real science pertaining to how the kinds of foods we consume directly affect out hormonal and metabolic pathways - 100 calories of sugar and 100 calories of grass fed beef are not the same 100 calories, and the resulting aftermath of the former is hormonal and metabolic fluctuations that serve to store more fat. No one can out-exercise a bad diet, our overall and general fitness will suffer as a result of fueling ourselves with bad fuel.
Seeing that you just joined MFP today, that's an interesting observation. Hmm....3 -
Alluminati wrote: »ClementinaRusso wrote: »It's astonishing that we're still having an argument around "calories being calories," "burn more than you consume" - there's a mountain of real science pertaining to how the kinds of foods we consume directly affect out hormonal and metabolic pathways - 100 calories of sugar and 100 calories of grass fed beef are not the same 100 calories, and the resulting aftermath of the former is hormonal and metabolic fluctuations that serve to store more fat. No one can out-exercise a bad diet, our overall and general fitness will suffer as a result of fueling ourselves with bad fuel.
Seeing that you just joined MFP today, that's an interesting observation. Hmm....
I originally responded to them on my phone so I couldn't see their total number of posts. After your comment I hopped on my computer. Funny that their complaint about "we're still arguing about this" was their very first post on their very first day? Yeah, something's rotten in Denmark.4 -
Wynterbourne wrote: »this is a short article that I found fairly easy by searching are all calories equal. there were a ton of other articles to read also.. maybe I'm wrong.. and if so I'm ok with that, but I like to try and give good advice so to be attacked while trying to help caught me off gaurd. It's amazing how quick people are on these forums to try and prove everyone wrong lol. Have a nice night peeps. I won't be participating in this debate anymore lol
I was not trying to attack you personally and I probably could have done without the "amusingly ironic" comment, but sometimes it's a reflex responsefrom the many people on here who are 100% certain that it's their way or the highway and to disagree with them is wrong. Many of them aren't willing to keep an open mind that maybe they had been previously exposed to misinformation. And that's what it boils down to for me, trying to help prevent the further spread of misinformation that could hinder or cause difficulty in someone's weight loss journey. There are a lot of people that come here looking for advice and I hate to see them given information that science has proven to be wrong. Especially when that information might lead the dieter to getting frustrated and giving up.
In all fairness, this goes for both sides. Just look a the 20 page debate threads, neither side will back down because it's obvious they think they are 100% right.
2 -
Eating clean will make sure you're eating foods that are higher in nutritional density, and (mostly) lower in calorie density. This can make it easier to maintain a calorie deficit. At the same time, a lower-carb, higher protein and fat diet can also make a deficit easier to maintain due to greater satiety, combined with eating clean or not. The mechanical aspect of losing weight (really body fat is what we're after) is still simply staying in a calorie deficit.1
-
Christine_72 wrote: »Wynterbourne wrote: »this is a short article that I found fairly easy by searching are all calories equal. there were a ton of other articles to read also.. maybe I'm wrong.. and if so I'm ok with that, but I like to try and give good advice so to be attacked while trying to help caught me off gaurd. It's amazing how quick people are on these forums to try and prove everyone wrong lol. Have a nice night peeps. I won't be participating in this debate anymore lol
I was not trying to attack you personally and I probably could have done without the "amusingly ironic" comment, but sometimes it's a reflex responsefrom the many people on here who are 100% certain that it's their way or the highway and to disagree with them is wrong. Many of them aren't willing to keep an open mind that maybe they had been previously exposed to misinformation. And that's what it boils down to for me, trying to help prevent the further spread of misinformation that could hinder or cause difficulty in someone's weight loss journey. There are a lot of people that come here looking for advice and I hate to see them given information that science has proven to be wrong. Especially when that information might lead the dieter to getting frustrated and giving up.
In all fairness, this goes for both sides. Just look a the 20 page debate threads, neither side will back down because it's obvious they think they are 100% right.
True, but I'm mostly referring to the debates where one side has peer-reviewed studies and published scientific articles backing up their "opinion" and the other side is quoting 'insert random fashion magazine'.1 -
ClementinaRusso wrote: »It's astonishing that we're still having an argument around "calories being calories," "burn more than you consume" - there's a mountain of real science pertaining to how the kinds of foods we consume directly affect out hormonal and metabolic pathways - 100 calories of sugar and 100 calories of grass fed beef are not the same 100 calories, and the resulting aftermath of the former is hormonal and metabolic fluctuations that serve to store more fat. No one can out-exercise a bad diet, our overall and general fitness will suffer as a result of fueling ourselves with bad fuel.
You're posting on the wrong site.
Not than anyone here believes or is suggesting that you eat donuts for breakfast, lunch and dinner. But just about everyone here believes that if you eat 1,800 calories of donuts for one year, five years or ten years, and exercise X amount, your weight will be exactly the same if you eat 1,800 calories of a balanced diet for one year, five years or ten years and exercise X amount.
Just intuitively, it makes no sense.0 -
MarkusDarwath wrote: »Eating clean will make sure you're eating foods that are higher in nutritional density, and (mostly) lower in calorie density. This can make it easier to maintain a calorie deficit. At the same time, a lower-carb, higher protein and fat diet can also make a deficit easier to maintain due to greater satiety, combined with eating clean or not. The mechanical aspect of losing weight (really body fat is what we're after) is still simply staying in a calorie deficit.
Will it? Why? Nobody has ever come up with a definition of eating clean ...I can easily see it being nutritiously inadequate as a diet...in fact there are many stories of serious nutritional deficiencies in those who take "healthy eating" fads to extreme ...
I don't have an issue with how anyone approaches their weight loss. Lower carb does indeed work for some, but again what definition are you using (I've heard everything from <150g to <25g) but it is very much personal and subjective in terms of what what is "easier" or creates greater satiety ...personally my most satisfying meals combine all macros and I lost and maintain on 200-300g carbs daily ...but that's just how it falls I only track my protein to ensure I hit 100g minimum1
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
- 389 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
- 919 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions