Why the special (Paelo, Low Carb, Primal) diets?
Replies
-
I have been tracking calories for nearly 40 days now, and have lost approximately 13 pounds at around a 1000 calorie deficit with 3 - 4 days a week of cardio and weights (hard workouts). I have not done anything special except carefully count calories and somewhat macros (but not as close as I probably should be doing).
I have been listening to the primal potential podcast, and don't agree with the ideas of things like "fat loss breakfast." I also don't understand why people go to the extreme with special foods, diets, etc, none which seem long term viable. When I hear what people eat all I can think is... why would I want to eat that way? Doing research many of these diets have been straight refuted (such as this link about low carb, http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/2011/08/carbohydrate-hypothesis-of-obesity.html). In fact based on my training I feel like crap when working out without sufficient carbs.
I understand that people can loose weight on these diets, but it seems like watching calories, points, macros, whatever you choose will provide longer lasting results. Why do people do it then? To try and get minor edges on weight loss? To try to avoid the hard work of weight loss? Why?
In 2011 I logged my foods at a modest cut (500-750 calorie deficit, 1-1.5 lbs/week loss) for about 8 months. I lost 46 lbs eating whatever I wanted and being mindful of portion sizes, weighing or measuring most foods.
Then got pregnant, had babies, and regained. I'm done having babies and the youngest isn't relying on me for breastmilk anymore so I started cutting again last fall, at about a 1 lb/week deficit. I had an absolutely horrible time staying within my calories! Just atrocious adherence to the plan. Raging hunger. I would lose for a month or two, then binge and regain half. Clearly, not sustainable. My doctor suggested trying low carb/high fat. I do this in addition to calorie counting, but my adherence is considerably better. Much less hunger. I notice that if I do go over for a day or two, I'm naturally less hungry on the following days, maintaining my weekly deficit. I'm actually losing slightly faster than my deficit would predict because I think I'm overestimating a few things.
Anyway, low carb works for me right now. I'm not sure why I had diet adherence issues when I cut calories alone, but I'd be willing to bet that my age (over 35 now vs 30 when I started), the fact that pregnancy left me wing thyroid issues, and probably some latent insulin resistance all are factors. I'm not really concerned with analyzing why.
I was found to have hyperthyroidism when I was pregnant with my second child. I never had issues with losing weight at ANY point in my life until "that" happened. Since then the struggle is astounding. People throw around the "special snowflake" term a tad loosely for my taste when things like this are mentioned. But the thyroid can and will eff up every thing you have going on from hair and nails to weight gain and loss. I found that the high fat and low carb plan seriously helped with my ravenous hunger that you describe. Of course I went into greater detail with what I actually improvise several comments up, but yeah. I think you and I could be two peas in a thyroid pod.0 -
Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »
who set fire to feces?eminentclapper wrote: »Pretty much all these Diets have been developed and defined for one purpose only: making money by selling stuff (incl. books). But that doesn't mean they don't work, because they all do. If any of them makes it easier for you to stay on a path that works for you, by all means, go for it! Have you tried the Twinkies diet yet?
Twinkles diet!!! Yes!
Anyway, thanks everyone for the reasonable responses (and no thank you to the people who have to Inflame crap).
I wasn't going to say anything originally, but the original post was a little on the inflammatory side what with all the judgement and such.2 -
ThatUserNameIsAllReadyTaken wrote: »Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »
who set fire to feces?eminentclapper wrote: »Pretty much all these Diets have been developed and defined for one purpose only: making money by selling stuff (incl. books). But that doesn't mean they don't work, because they all do. If any of them makes it easier for you to stay on a path that works for you, by all means, go for it! Have you tried the Twinkies diet yet?
Twinkles diet!!! Yes!
Anyway, thanks everyone for the reasonable responses (and no thank you to the people who have to Inflame crap).
I wasn't going to say anything originally, but the original post was a little on the inflammatory side what with all the judgement and such.
The original original post? Yes. And the replies were inline with that I thought. Good replies, on the whole.1 -
I know I can lose weight when I just track calories. I have been slowly edging my weight down for years using just calorie counting. But...when I limit carbs to below 100gm and even better below 50gm my cravings disappear, I am 75% less likely to binge, and I feel so great! I had already cut wheat because it is a migraine trigger for me but lowering carbs further made my body seem to function with more energy and alertness. People do what works for them. I happen to like getting my calories from higher fat foods and I raise all my own meat, I have a close friend who is a high carb extremely low fat vegan. Pick what works for you and go with it. Nothing wrong with "just" calorie counting.4
-
Because it fixes my digestive issues. I haven't had to take medication for it since I started keto. Also, no more cravings and better diet adherence. Plus lots of yummy food. And lots of new, low carb, recipes to try.3
-
I have been doing a Whole30 for 18 days. It sucks. Rides suck, running sucks. The diet is just stupid, and I don't find any validity to their claims. (you can eat white potatoes but you can't eat beans) But, I've lost 7 pounds in those 18 days, which is a nice loss for me on about 1700 calories a day. I was eating closer to 1500 and not losing anything. (though you aren't supposed to weigh yourself or track your calories on a whole30, another stupid thing) I'm going to keep it up till the end of the 30 days because my kids are looking at me regarding the commitment. If they weren't around, I'd stop. Though I do tell them it's stupid. Anyway, it's not clear why I'm losing weight (some of it is water weight). Depending on how I do for the rest of the time, I may up my carbs at the end, but keep up restrictions on refined sugars and flours.
By the way, this was in something the OP posted: Carbohydrate consumption per se is not behind the obesity epidemic. However, once overweight or obesity is established, carbohydrate restriction can aid fat loss in some people. The mechanism by which this occurs is not totally clear, but there is no evidence that insulin plays a causal role in this process.0 -
Alluminati wrote: »Because it works for them and seems easy to them to track that way. Because they feel good when they eat like that, which in turn helps them adhere to their goals. And adhering to your goals whether it's loss/maintain/gain is what counts most, not what you are eating (in a general sense).
BOOM! Nail on the head.
OP, you always have to do what's best for you.0 -
I do it because it works for me and it keeps me on track. I often do Whole30s (a modified version of Paleo). I noticed that eating cleanly, I will lose more weight eating more calories (with exercise held constant) than I do with just a straight restriction.I've lost 7 pounds in those 18 days, which is a nice loss for me on about 1700 calories a day. I was eating closer to 1500 and not losing anything. (though you aren't supposed to weigh yourself or track your calories on a whole30, another stupid thing)
I'm not really clear on these statements. A deficit is 100% required to lose weight, so either you are eating less calories than you realize while losing at the same rate, or you are eating more calories while still in a deficit and losing at a slower rate.
Diet type is preference only and you can't cheat a calorie deficit.1 -
Quite simply, I'm addicted to carbs. I find it much harder to control my intake when my diet includes carbs, whereas it's nearly impossible for me to binge on fat and protein heavy foods.3
-
I originally didn't start low carb or keto to lose weight. I used to just count calories (ate high carb low fat). But I couldn't stop "mini-binging" up to maintenance, after 40lb lost with my previous way of eating. And then someone suggested to up fats. They didn't say do low carb or anything, just up fats.
And so I upped them, and wasn't satisfied. And then I upped them some more. And then I noticed my digestion was getting better. So I upped them more. Of course, something has to go down now, and it wasn't going to be my protein levels. So the only option was carbs. Then I just "naturally" settled on keto, which was the perfect ratio to keep me satisfied, and....well... lubricate the digestive track well enough for me to stop medication.5 -
Because not everyone's body is perfect. I have PCOS and low carb seems to work better for those of us with PCOS. Would I prefer to not deal with the hormone issues and just eat at a deficit without worrying about anything else? Absolutely!! That just doesn't work for me though.
I think it is great that it is super simple for you and you've had success over your 40 days. You have to do what works for you and I'll do what works for me. Low carb is sustainable for me because I'm not real crazy about breads, pastas, etc. I am on day 69 and at 31.3 lbs lost so I know my "super special" low carb eating is working for me
4 -
People follow diets like these for two main reasons: 1) It works for them, or 2) they have a medical condition where eating this way helps with that condition.
An example of the latter is for those who need to eat less sodium due to blood pressure/other issues. A paleo diet tends to be low in sodium content.
0 -
NotSoPerfectPam wrote: »I have been doing a Whole30 for 18 days. It sucks. Rides suck, running sucks. The diet is just stupid, and I don't find any validity to their claims. (you can eat white potatoes but you can't eat beans)
They used to say no potatoes either, but eventually couldn't come up with a reason for it that passed the laugh test. (The reason they were giving when I looked at it was that people might have french fries/chips, but is that a reason to say that roasted potatoes are verboten? Give a reason for no french fries if you want that to be the rule (even homemade).) I'm even good with that, since I can see that part of it was get away from easy "junk food" options.
No legumes is dumb too, granted, but the whole thing is extra super hardcore paleo, so you can't expect legumes to be permitted, as the diet generally doesn't.But, I've lost 7 pounds in those 18 days, which is a nice loss for me on about 1700 calories a day. I was eating closer to 1500 and not losing anything. (though you aren't supposed to weigh yourself or track your calories on a whole30, another stupid thing)
Well, it's not supposed to be a diet, it's supposed to be about eating more healthfully (although that is not always the case, IMO, I don't think their rules would make my own diet more healthy), and seeing if you have any food sensitivities. (Being curious about that and also liking a challenge is why I considered doing it, but then I decided the most challenging parts -- no dairy or potatoes (at that time) were rules that I thought were based in no good reason, so I did not, did my own thing.) Anyway, I get the attraction to the challenge and wanting to finish it, even if you are finding it stupid.I'm going to keep it up till the end of the 30 days because my kids are looking at me regarding the commitment. If they weren't around, I'd stop. Though I do tell them it's stupid. Anyway, it's not clear why I'm losing weight (some of it is water weight).
If you are accidentally going lower carb (easy to do on Whole30 or even regular paleo) or cutting out higher sodium foods (if you were eating less whole foods based before, for example), water weight is likely the reason. Another is that some ways of eating can be easier to underlog and some to overlog, and a whole foods based diet can be less calories on paper because I think higher fiber foods often tend to be, as does meat.0 -
I had a very hard time adhering to simple calorie counting. I felt too hungry to consistantly create the necessary deficit long enough to reach my goal. I tried LCHF and it was like someone flipped a switch. Suddenly I could eat a lot less, without all the hunger. This allowed me to remain in a deficit long enough to lose the weight I needed to lose, plus some additional "vanity" lbs that I never thought I could lose!
I see it as working smarter, rather than harder. So yes, I am doing a "special" woe (not a "diet", I've been eating this way for over three years, and most of that time I've been in maintenance, so I don't regard LCHF as a "diet" anymore) to make weight management easier for me. Why would I want to take the harder path?* You don't get bonus points for suffering.
* I realize many people find straight calorie counting easier than doing a LC diet, and in that case, they are working smarter, not harder, if they stick with just calorie restriction. It's all about finding what is easiest for you, so you can stick with it long term. Again, weight loss shouldn't make you miserable. If it does, you might want to rethink your approach.
4 -
Low carb is not a diet for me. I eat like this for the rest of my life. Protein keeps me way more satisfied than carbs. It's a lifestyle for me, nothing forced for a few weeks.3
-
I actually distinguish between low carbing and special diets, like paleo (which also can be a "lifestyle," of course, or "clean eating").
My problem with paleo and other such (which is not to say it doesn't work for people, as it clearly does, for some, and I did it for a bit myself) is that I don't see anything achieved by it that wouldn't be better achieved by thinking through and coming up with your own personal way to eat (which wouldn't make sense to call paleo, IMO). Grains don't work for you, even whole grains? Lactose intolerant? Cut out grains and dairy. But the particular rules that work for me (since I don't agree that the opposite of a special diet is thinking ONLY about calories) are not at all the same as the paleo ones -- I think it's important to eat protein at each meal (normally, I make exceptions), to eat mostly whole foods, to eat lots of vegetables at every meal (when possible), etc., but I also think it's important to get protein from non animal sources for a good amount of my meals (meaning legumes), that potatoes are a lovely addition to my diet and so are whole grains, that worrying about eating too much summer fruit if everything else is met is pointless FOR ME, that I care about eating seasonally and what happens to be available from the farm I subscribe to is more important to me than macro percentages, etc.
But low carb isn't really that regimented. It's just saying "this is the macro ratio that feels most satiating and works best for me, I will usually eat to it, with whatever foods I choose." While I don't care that much about specific macros, I don't think watching macros is the same thing as following a specific diet that bans specific foods (for reasons beyond personal issues with them).3 -
Because diabetes.
That's why I watch my carbs. It's a WOE for me and totally sustainable. Do I wish I could have more? Yep. Sure do. But I like my feet and I love being able to see so keeping my glucose readings tightly controlled is imperative. I'd like to dance with my sons on their weddings days and see their beautiful brides (or grooms--whatever). That's why I do it.
8 -
I think especially in our culture right now (in the U.S.), there's this weird cross between thinking people should look a certain way (thin, fit)- combined with fighting that norm with body positivity and a kind of anti-diet movement. I think that there are people in my generation (20's 30's) who would be embarrassed to say they were going on a diet, or using weight watchers, or even using this app, because they don't want to give the appearance that they care, but WOULD say that they eat "primal" or "paleo" because this is more aligned with "fitness" rather than weight loss. ...So I think that is one reason.
I will say as far as weight loss, I think all that stuff is really unnecessary and eating less and moving more is really what it comes down to. That being said, while I wouldn't identify as "paleo" or "primal" or whatever those things are - I will state that eating a high protein and fat diet has allowed me to recomp my body and make it LOOK a particular way that I like, unrelated to its weight. BUT when I want a piece of chocolate, I have MY favorite piece of chocolate or cake or whatever it is, not some primal branded coconut oil over marketed hype treat that supposedly fits into their principles.
so those are my two cents.5 -
Once upon a time Atkins was the only low carb diet and Dr. Atkins said as long as you kept your carbohydrate level very low, weight loss would follow. He never said calories don't count, but that it wasn't really necessary to count them or keep a food journal. Even today, low carb message boards are full of people asking why they aren't losing, or are stalled out, even though their carb intake is at a ketogenic level. The answer is obvious. Here at MFP where reality takes a front row, even low carb folks agree calories are what matters when it comes to weight loss. All the low carb books out there (along with your link to the article) always point at insulin as the boogeyman of obesity. What they always fail to mention is that everything you eat triggers insulin release, not just carbs. And high insulin levels are not a cause of obesity. It's actually the other way around. That's what an endocrinologist told me.
"an endocrinologist" is probably not up to date with latest research
http://www.utsouthwestern.edu/newsroom/news-releases/year-2014/august/high-insulin.html0 -
There's the whole 'carbs are evil' mentality, but I'm sure it's sustainable for 'some' people... but probably for big meat eaters vs people with a sweet tooth (totally generalizing).
yes indeed, I'm a vegetarian for religious reasons and I eat to a ketogenic pattern. So there: your black swan.0 -
Once upon a time Atkins was the only low carb diet and Dr. Atkins said as long as you kept your carbohydrate level very low, weight loss would follow. He never said calories don't count, but that it wasn't really necessary to count them or keep a food journal. Even today, low carb message boards are full of people asking why they aren't losing, or are stalled out, even though their carb intake is at a ketogenic level. The answer is obvious. Here at MFP where reality takes a front row, even low carb folks agree calories are what matters when it comes to weight loss. All the low carb books out there (along with your link to the article) always point at insulin as the boogeyman of obesity. What they always fail to mention is that everything you eat triggers insulin release, not just carbs. And high insulin levels are not a cause of obesity. It's actually the other way around. That's what an endocrinologist told me.
"an endocrinologist" is probably not up to date with latest research
http://www.utsouthwestern.edu/newsroom/news-releases/year-2014/august/high-insulin.html
That research does not indicate insulin is a cause of obesity. It does indicate that excessive amounts of insulin bypass or overcome inadequate fat storage in mice genetically altered to lack glucagon receptors. Normal mice would have been fat on the amounts these mice were fed prior to insulin administration.
It also indicates that glucagon is likely a good target for diabetes treatment.3 -
I have not read all of the replies but thought I would put my story out there. 8 years ago I went on the South Beach Diet and lost 50+ lbs. I felt great, exercised all of the time and looked great. South Beach is low carb and low fat so I gave up many of the things that I love to eat. Over the next & years, life happened. I had some personal losses and some bad job situations that got me down. I said screw it and just ate the things that I liked.
Fast forward to last year around this time and my Doctor is warning me about becoming type II. I had a couple of borderline A1C readings and he said it was just a matter of time unless I lost weight.
I went back on South Beach and fell off, 5 or 6 times. Exercise was not a problem because I have always been active. I did a lot of cycling at pretty good speeds 16+ mph for 15-20 miles, 2 to 3 times per week. I did not lose any real weight. This spring, I was talking with a friend at work who lost a lot of weight and he told me about the Keto diet. I was not very enthusiastic about it until I read up on it. It was calorie counting the foods that I already eat. I did give up bread and other carbs as I am limited to 28g of carbs per day, but I did not give up the vast majority of foods that I eat regularly. I had to add more vegetables which is still a struggle but I have done so for the most part. I also mixed up my exercise with cardio machines at the gym. I plan to add weight lifting to the plan in the next few weeks.
I have been on this diet for 95 days and have lost 39 lbs. As I get closer to my goal (which is a moving target now), I think about what is going to happen next. I have an appointment with my doctor and plan to discuss with him. Do I add carbs back? I don't know at this point. Eating this way has been easy for me.
So in summary, I am on a Keto diet because it is calorie counting the way I already eat so it is easy for me.0 -
I do it because it works for me and it keeps me on track. I often do Whole30s (a modified version of Paleo). I noticed that eating cleanly, I will lose more weight eating more calories (with exercise held constant) than I do with just a straight restriction.I've lost 7 pounds in those 18 days, which is a nice loss for me on about 1700 calories a day. I was eating closer to 1500 and not losing anything. (though you aren't supposed to weigh yourself or track your calories on a whole30, another stupid thing)
I'm not really clear on these statements. A deficit is 100% required to lose weight, so either you are eating less calories than you realize while losing at the same rate, or you are eating more calories while still in a deficit and losing at a slower rate.
Diet type is preference only and you can't cheat a calorie deficit.
I mean I weigh or measure out my food so I know that it is not 100% calorie deficit for me. In both situations, I am in a calorie deficit and in both situations I lose weight. When I eat cleanly, focusing on protein and healthy fats (not just Whole30), the pounds come off faster. I believe that this is because some of the additives in the foods do have an impact on our bodies and when I give them up, it is easier to lose weight (and I have done less accurate versions of body fat % (i.e. the handheld device), which supports that a good part of it after the first week is fat.) Like I said. Everyone is different. My sister is a vegetarian and lives on a high carb, high fat diet (yes she eats fairly healthy, but the amount of cheetos and pizza she eats would definitely not work for me!) and it is pretty much impossible for her to gain weight.2 -
I believe that this is because some of the additives in the foods do have an impact on our bodies and when I give them up, it is easier to lose weight (and I have done less accurate versions of body fat % (i.e. the handheld device), which supports that a good part of it after the first week is fat.) Like I said. Everyone is different.
This. Sorry. I don't buy that a calorie is a calorie is a calorie. I've been counting calories for two years and when I cut down on my carbs and eat the same, I lose more weight
2 -
I do it because it works for me and it keeps me on track. I often do Whole30s (a modified version of Paleo). I noticed that eating cleanly, I will lose more weight eating more calories (with exercise held constant) than I do with just a straight restriction.I've lost 7 pounds in those 18 days, which is a nice loss for me on about 1700 calories a day. I was eating closer to 1500 and not losing anything. (though you aren't supposed to weigh yourself or track your calories on a whole30, another stupid thing)
I'm not really clear on these statements. A deficit is 100% required to lose weight, so either you are eating less calories than you realize while losing at the same rate, or you are eating more calories while still in a deficit and losing at a slower rate.
Diet type is preference only and you can't cheat a calorie deficit.
I mean I weigh or measure out my food so I know that it is not 100% calorie deficit for me. In both situations, I am in a calorie deficit and in both situations I lose weight. When I eat cleanly, focusing on protein and healthy fats (not just Whole30), the pounds come off faster. I believe that this is because some of the additives in the foods do have an impact on our bodies and when I give them up, it is easier to lose weight (and I have done less accurate versions of body fat % (i.e. the handheld device), which supports that a good part of it after the first week is fat.) Like I said. Everyone is different. My sister is a vegetarian and lives on a high carb, high fat diet (yes she eats fairly healthy, but the amount of cheetos and pizza she eats would definitely not work for me!) and it is pretty much impossible for her to gain weight.
No, not everyone is different when it comes to a calorie deficit- a calorie deficit to lose weight applies to every single person, even if some have higher or lower TDEEs based on medical conditions and/or exercise. If your sister ate over her TDEE, she would gain weight-just like anyone else, but instead she eats at maintenance.
Anytime you eat less carbs, there will be a drop on the scale because carbs cause water retention, but actual fat loss takes time and a calorie deficit.0 -
I do it because it works for me and it keeps me on track. I often do Whole30s (a modified version of Paleo). I noticed that eating cleanly, I will lose more weight eating more calories (with exercise held constant) than I do with just a straight restriction.I've lost 7 pounds in those 18 days, which is a nice loss for me on about 1700 calories a day. I was eating closer to 1500 and not losing anything. (though you aren't supposed to weigh yourself or track your calories on a whole30, another stupid thing)
I'm not really clear on these statements. A deficit is 100% required to lose weight, so either you are eating less calories than you realize while losing at the same rate, or you are eating more calories while still in a deficit and losing at a slower rate.
Diet type is preference only and you can't cheat a calorie deficit.
I mean I weigh or measure out my food so I know that it is not 100% calorie deficit for me. In both situations, I am in a calorie deficit and in both situations I lose weight. When I eat cleanly, focusing on protein and healthy fats (not just Whole30), the pounds come off faster. I believe that this is because some of the additives in the foods do have an impact on our bodies and when I give them up, it is easier to lose weight (and I have done less accurate versions of body fat % (i.e. the handheld device), which supports that a good part of it after the first week is fat.) Like I said. Everyone is different. My sister is a vegetarian and lives on a high carb, high fat diet (yes she eats fairly healthy, but the amount of cheetos and pizza she eats would definitely not work for me!) and it is pretty much impossible for her to gain weight.
No, not everyone is different when it comes to a calorie deficit- a calorie deficit to lose weight applies to every single person, even if some have higher or lower TDEEs based on medical conditions and/or exercise. If your sister ate over her TDEE, she would gain weight-just like anyone else, but instead she eats at maintenance.
Anytime you eat less carbs, there will be a drop on the scale because carbs cause water retention, but actual fat loss takes time and a calorie deficit.1 -
From what i've seen, the people who choose paleo/low carb/etc. usually fit into one or more of the following;
- Saw it and trying it, usually has been into "fad" diets/quick before - may think it's the miracle secret to weightloss but don't know too much more
- Have a medical reason to eliminate certain foods and these diets fit in well with what they need medically
- Find it easier to eliminate foods rather than have them in moderation
- Struggles with (has struggled before) becoming obsessive over calories or finds calorie counting unsuitable for their lifestyle.
- Like the structure or find the "rules" of the diet motivating
- Agree with the philosophy/reasoning behind eating that way
- Feel more satisfied/full/more energy from consumption of certain macros
Personally, I find calorie counting more sustainable for me as I don't like being locked into what I can and cannot eat but don't mind having limits on how much I can eat. For me, it helps me make a logical decision on what to eat. But CICO is the rule, how we meet that rule is up to us and everyone needs to find what works for them.9
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.5K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 430 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K 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