High carb
Replies
-
I'd say high carb coupled with high fat are the macros of choice for most obese people.3
-
midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Traveler120 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »For non-endurance athletes, the debate is different. Obviously there are some of us with medical issues who benefit greatly from a low carb diet. But for the otherwise healthy person eating a SAD (high carb) diet, the question is about satiety. While everyone is different, 2/3 of Americans are overweight or obese. This statistic makes me think that many Americans are still hungry after maintenance when eating SAD, thus leading to consumption of excess calories. So for the otherwise healthy person who is tracking and restricting calorie consumption to avoid over-consumption, high carb works.
This is a common misconception that SAD is high carb and that's what's responsible for US obesity (rather than overconsumption). Interestingly, the US is one of the lowest carb countries. Many countries in the "under 50%" carbs category, like US, UK, Australia, also have the highest levels of overweight and obesity compared to the truly high carb countries.
http://chartsbin.com/view/1154
Perhaps that point is valid as a percentage of total diet. However, quantity is a different story.
Same website: http://chartsbin.com/view/1160
U.S. kcal per person per day: 3,770 And 49% carbs
3,770 X 49% = 1,847 calories from carbs per day / 4 calories per gram = 462g of carbs per day
I know it is subjective and some might disagree, but 462g of carbs per day is high carb.
Compare that to the Democratic Republic of the Congo with 80% carbs (Wow! That is tied with Bangladesh for the highest carb consumer on the chart you shared):
1,590 kcal per person per day X 80% = 1,272 / 4 calories per gram = 318g of carbs per day
This is also high carb, but the percentage of total diet makes it appear to be lower because we eat a lot of everything. Americans eat 45% more carbs than people of the Congo, who appear to be the highest carb consumers from the chart you first shared. So yes, SAD is high carb. The fact that SAD is high in everything else doesn't change that it is high in carbs.
Every definition I've seen for the Standard American Diet is high fat, low fiber, highly processed, low in plant-based food. Nothing about carbs.
When you say a diet is "high carb" that refers to what percentage of the total diet is carbs. A person eating 1000 cals and 150g of carbs is eating a high carb diet because 70% of the cals come from carbs. A person eating 3000 cals and eating 150g of carbs is eating a low carb diet because only 20% of their cals come from carbs. It's not about the number of grams or quantities of carbs.
OP, I never pay attention to carbs and they usually fall for me in what I've always seen termed "moderate" - 50-55%. I focus on getting protein to @ 80-100 g. So I'd say typically 55% carbs, 20% protein, 25% fat.
Everyone talks about carbs and fat, but I found that getting my protein up made me way more likely to hit my calorie target without being hungry. Fiber would be the next most important to me. Once those two things are in line I'm good, and I don't really pay attention to where carbs and fat end up. I'm a firm believer that macro splits are mostly personal preference, maybe they become a bit more important in relation to fitness goals or health conditions.
Nope, when I say high carb, I mean how many grams of carbs are included. Maybe you mean percentage and maybe some others mean percentage, but I don't.
Does that make SAD a high carb, high fat high, protein diet?
I suppose it does.
So....overconsumption in general, then?
Yes, still hungry when eating high carb.
But if macros are otherwise pretty balanced (which in all honesty, they are pretty balanced in the SAD), then they aren't technically eating "high carb." They're eating "high everything." Overeating is caused by a multitude of factors, but if you're trying to argue that so many Americans are obese because of all the carbs they're eating, your argument just doesn't really hold water.
"High everything" includes "high carb" inherent within that definition. The whole question of this thread is whether anyone has tried high carb. The answer is that most Americans do eat high carb. Also, most Americans are overweight or obese.
Maybe I misunderstood, but my understanding of the counter-argument is: "Yea, but Americans aren't overweight or obese because they eat high carb, it is because they eat other macros in high amounts also."
And my answer to that is: OK, sure... Americans eat even more carbs in total grams than this other country (Congo) tied with the highest percentage. ---> So my point is about over-consumption also. The difference between my point and yours seems to be that I consider over-consumption of everything to be a high carb diet and you don't. The only relevance of our disagreement is semantics about whether the mostly overweight and obese population (Americans) eats high carb. If you deem SAD high carb, then you will see the correlation between eating high carb and being overweight or obese. If you believe that SAD is not high carb, then you won't see the correlation that I see.
It's fine if you don't see that correlation. Just know that we can't move into the "why" discussion until you do.
Again, where are you drawing the conclusion that most Americans eat high carb from? Based on your interpretation of SAD? If you put 50 Americans in a room, you think that there is a standard way of eating amongst all of them, or even a majority of them? The phrase Standard American Diet is one of those phrases like "clean eating" that I do not believe has an objective, consistent definition or application - so it is overall a useless term.
Individuals (American or otherwise) are not obese because they eat too many carbs. They are obese because they eat too many calories. Period.
If you go back, there are sources identifying average per-person, per day consumption of carbs.
Right, I looked at the link. I'm wondering what contributes to your distinction that most Americans eat high carbs, while ignoring the other relevant markers of total calories and percentage of fat consumption.5 -
Based on the definition OP seemed to be using (as explained earlier in the thread) the 50% carb amount normally given for the so-called SAD is not a high carb diet and it CERTAINLY is not the HCLF diet he further clarified he was asking about.
If Americans eat a high fat-high carb-high protein diet (which is a goofy way to describe what is simply a high calorie diet), there is NO basis to claim that high carb = high calories vs. high fat = high calories or high protein = high calories or even a generally balanced diet (or balanced carbs and fat) = high calories. To try to point to carbs in general as the culprit for the problems with the average diet in the US (again, ignoring the diversity that exists) makes no sense given that worldwide (as Traveler pointed out) other elements of it are far more unlike areas with lower obesity rates and better health stats.5 -
WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Traveler120 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »For non-endurance athletes, the debate is different. Obviously there are some of us with medical issues who benefit greatly from a low carb diet. But for the otherwise healthy person eating a SAD (high carb) diet, the question is about satiety. While everyone is different, 2/3 of Americans are overweight or obese. This statistic makes me think that many Americans are still hungry after maintenance when eating SAD, thus leading to consumption of excess calories. So for the otherwise healthy person who is tracking and restricting calorie consumption to avoid over-consumption, high carb works.
This is a common misconception that SAD is high carb and that's what's responsible for US obesity (rather than overconsumption). Interestingly, the US is one of the lowest carb countries. Many countries in the "under 50%" carbs category, like US, UK, Australia, also have the highest levels of overweight and obesity compared to the truly high carb countries.
http://chartsbin.com/view/1154
Perhaps that point is valid as a percentage of total diet. However, quantity is a different story.
Same website: http://chartsbin.com/view/1160
U.S. kcal per person per day: 3,770 And 49% carbs
3,770 X 49% = 1,847 calories from carbs per day / 4 calories per gram = 462g of carbs per day
I know it is subjective and some might disagree, but 462g of carbs per day is high carb.
Compare that to the Democratic Republic of the Congo with 80% carbs (Wow! That is tied with Bangladesh for the highest carb consumer on the chart you shared):
1,590 kcal per person per day X 80% = 1,272 / 4 calories per gram = 318g of carbs per day
This is also high carb, but the percentage of total diet makes it appear to be lower because we eat a lot of everything. Americans eat 45% more carbs than people of the Congo, who appear to be the highest carb consumers from the chart you first shared. So yes, SAD is high carb. The fact that SAD is high in everything else doesn't change that it is high in carbs.
Every definition I've seen for the Standard American Diet is high fat, low fiber, highly processed, low in plant-based food. Nothing about carbs.
When you say a diet is "high carb" that refers to what percentage of the total diet is carbs. A person eating 1000 cals and 150g of carbs is eating a high carb diet because 70% of the cals come from carbs. A person eating 3000 cals and eating 150g of carbs is eating a low carb diet because only 20% of their cals come from carbs. It's not about the number of grams or quantities of carbs.
OP, I never pay attention to carbs and they usually fall for me in what I've always seen termed "moderate" - 50-55%. I focus on getting protein to @ 80-100 g. So I'd say typically 55% carbs, 20% protein, 25% fat.
Everyone talks about carbs and fat, but I found that getting my protein up made me way more likely to hit my calorie target without being hungry. Fiber would be the next most important to me. Once those two things are in line I'm good, and I don't really pay attention to where carbs and fat end up. I'm a firm believer that macro splits are mostly personal preference, maybe they become a bit more important in relation to fitness goals or health conditions.
Nope, when I say high carb, I mean how many grams of carbs are included. Maybe you mean percentage and maybe some others mean percentage, but I don't.
Does that make SAD a high carb, high fat high, protein diet?
I suppose it does.
So....overconsumption in general, then?
Yes, still hungry when eating high carb.
But if macros are otherwise pretty balanced (which in all honesty, they are pretty balanced in the SAD), then they aren't technically eating "high carb." They're eating "high everything." Overeating is caused by a multitude of factors, but if you're trying to argue that so many Americans are obese because of all the carbs they're eating, your argument just doesn't really hold water.
"High everything" includes "high carb" inherent within that definition. The whole question of this thread is whether anyone has tried high carb. The answer is that most Americans do eat high carb. Also, most Americans are overweight or obese.
Maybe I misunderstood, but my understanding of the counter-argument is: "Yea, but Americans aren't overweight or obese because they eat high carb, it is because they eat other macros in high amounts also."
And my answer to that is: OK, sure... Americans eat even more carbs in total grams than this other country (Congo) tied with the highest percentage. ---> So my point is about over-consumption also. The difference between my point and yours seems to be that I consider over-consumption of everything to be a high carb diet and you don't. The only relevance of our disagreement is semantics about whether the mostly overweight and obese population (Americans) eats high carb. If you deem SAD high carb, then you will see the correlation between eating high carb and being overweight or obese. If you believe that SAD is not high carb, then you won't see the correlation that I see.
It's fine if you don't see that correlation. Just know that we can't move into the "why" discussion until you do.
Again, where are you drawing the conclusion that most Americans eat high carb from? Based on your interpretation of SAD? If you put 50 Americans in a room, you think that there is a standard way of eating amongst all of them, or even a majority of them? The phrase Standard American Diet is one of those phrases like "clean eating" that I do not believe has an objective, consistent definition or application - so it is overall a useless term.
Individuals (American or otherwise) are not obese because they eat too many carbs. They are obese because they eat too many calories. Period.
If you go back, there are sources identifying average per-person, per day consumption of carbs.
Right, I looked at the link. I'm wondering what contributes to your distinction that most Americans eat high carbs, while ignoring the other relevant markers of total calories and percentage of fat consumption.
I've thoroughly explained that already. Are you arguing instead that SAD is low carb? I'm unclear on your point.0 -
midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Traveler120 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »For non-endurance athletes, the debate is different. Obviously there are some of us with medical issues who benefit greatly from a low carb diet. But for the otherwise healthy person eating a SAD (high carb) diet, the question is about satiety. While everyone is different, 2/3 of Americans are overweight or obese. This statistic makes me think that many Americans are still hungry after maintenance when eating SAD, thus leading to consumption of excess calories. So for the otherwise healthy person who is tracking and restricting calorie consumption to avoid over-consumption, high carb works.
This is a common misconception that SAD is high carb and that's what's responsible for US obesity (rather than overconsumption). Interestingly, the US is one of the lowest carb countries. Many countries in the "under 50%" carbs category, like US, UK, Australia, also have the highest levels of overweight and obesity compared to the truly high carb countries.
http://chartsbin.com/view/1154
Perhaps that point is valid as a percentage of total diet. However, quantity is a different story.
Same website: http://chartsbin.com/view/1160
U.S. kcal per person per day: 3,770 And 49% carbs
3,770 X 49% = 1,847 calories from carbs per day / 4 calories per gram = 462g of carbs per day
I know it is subjective and some might disagree, but 462g of carbs per day is high carb.
Compare that to the Democratic Republic of the Congo with 80% carbs (Wow! That is tied with Bangladesh for the highest carb consumer on the chart you shared):
1,590 kcal per person per day X 80% = 1,272 / 4 calories per gram = 318g of carbs per day
This is also high carb, but the percentage of total diet makes it appear to be lower because we eat a lot of everything. Americans eat 45% more carbs than people of the Congo, who appear to be the highest carb consumers from the chart you first shared. So yes, SAD is high carb. The fact that SAD is high in everything else doesn't change that it is high in carbs.
Every definition I've seen for the Standard American Diet is high fat, low fiber, highly processed, low in plant-based food. Nothing about carbs.
When you say a diet is "high carb" that refers to what percentage of the total diet is carbs. A person eating 1000 cals and 150g of carbs is eating a high carb diet because 70% of the cals come from carbs. A person eating 3000 cals and eating 150g of carbs is eating a low carb diet because only 20% of their cals come from carbs. It's not about the number of grams or quantities of carbs.
OP, I never pay attention to carbs and they usually fall for me in what I've always seen termed "moderate" - 50-55%. I focus on getting protein to @ 80-100 g. So I'd say typically 55% carbs, 20% protein, 25% fat.
Everyone talks about carbs and fat, but I found that getting my protein up made me way more likely to hit my calorie target without being hungry. Fiber would be the next most important to me. Once those two things are in line I'm good, and I don't really pay attention to where carbs and fat end up. I'm a firm believer that macro splits are mostly personal preference, maybe they become a bit more important in relation to fitness goals or health conditions.
Nope, when I say high carb, I mean how many grams of carbs are included. Maybe you mean percentage and maybe some others mean percentage, but I don't.
Does that make SAD a high carb, high fat high, protein diet?
I suppose it does.
So....overconsumption in general, then?
Yes, still hungry when eating high carb.
But if macros are otherwise pretty balanced (which in all honesty, they are pretty balanced in the SAD), then they aren't technically eating "high carb." They're eating "high everything." Overeating is caused by a multitude of factors, but if you're trying to argue that so many Americans are obese because of all the carbs they're eating, your argument just doesn't really hold water.
"High everything" includes "high carb" inherent within that definition. The whole question of this thread is whether anyone has tried high carb. The answer is that most Americans do eat high carb. Also, most Americans are overweight or obese.
Maybe I misunderstood, but my understanding of the counter-argument is: "Yea, but Americans aren't overweight or obese because they eat high carb, it is because they eat other macros in high amounts also."
And my answer to that is: OK, sure... Americans eat even more carbs in total grams than this other country (Congo) tied with the highest percentage. ---> So my point is about over-consumption also. The difference between my point and yours seems to be that I consider over-consumption of everything to be a high carb diet and you don't. The only relevance of our disagreement is semantics about whether the mostly overweight and obese population (Americans) eats high carb. If you deem SAD high carb, then you will see the correlation between eating high carb and being overweight or obese. If you believe that SAD is not high carb, then you won't see the correlation that I see.
It's fine if you don't see that correlation. Just know that we can't move into the "why" discussion until you do.
Again, where are you drawing the conclusion that most Americans eat high carb from? Based on your interpretation of SAD? If you put 50 Americans in a room, you think that there is a standard way of eating amongst all of them, or even a majority of them? The phrase Standard American Diet is one of those phrases like "clean eating" that I do not believe has an objective, consistent definition or application - so it is overall a useless term.
Individuals (American or otherwise) are not obese because they eat too many carbs. They are obese because they eat too many calories. Period.
If you go back, there are sources identifying average per-person, per day consumption of carbs.
Right, I looked at the link. I'm wondering what contributes to your distinction that most Americans eat high carbs, while ignoring the other relevant markers of total calories and percentage of fat consumption.
I've thoroughly explained that already. Are you arguing instead that SAD is low carb? I'm unclear on your point.
No, as I stated above, I don't believe there is a "Standard American Diet". I believe assembling a random sampling of Americans would yield nothing in the way of consistency in dietary choices. I'm just curious why you are focusing on carbs as the culprit for obesity?
2 -
WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Traveler120 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »For non-endurance athletes, the debate is different. Obviously there are some of us with medical issues who benefit greatly from a low carb diet. But for the otherwise healthy person eating a SAD (high carb) diet, the question is about satiety. While everyone is different, 2/3 of Americans are overweight or obese. This statistic makes me think that many Americans are still hungry after maintenance when eating SAD, thus leading to consumption of excess calories. So for the otherwise healthy person who is tracking and restricting calorie consumption to avoid over-consumption, high carb works.
This is a common misconception that SAD is high carb and that's what's responsible for US obesity (rather than overconsumption). Interestingly, the US is one of the lowest carb countries. Many countries in the "under 50%" carbs category, like US, UK, Australia, also have the highest levels of overweight and obesity compared to the truly high carb countries.
http://chartsbin.com/view/1154
Perhaps that point is valid as a percentage of total diet. However, quantity is a different story.
Same website: http://chartsbin.com/view/1160
U.S. kcal per person per day: 3,770 And 49% carbs
3,770 X 49% = 1,847 calories from carbs per day / 4 calories per gram = 462g of carbs per day
I know it is subjective and some might disagree, but 462g of carbs per day is high carb.
Compare that to the Democratic Republic of the Congo with 80% carbs (Wow! That is tied with Bangladesh for the highest carb consumer on the chart you shared):
1,590 kcal per person per day X 80% = 1,272 / 4 calories per gram = 318g of carbs per day
This is also high carb, but the percentage of total diet makes it appear to be lower because we eat a lot of everything. Americans eat 45% more carbs than people of the Congo, who appear to be the highest carb consumers from the chart you first shared. So yes, SAD is high carb. The fact that SAD is high in everything else doesn't change that it is high in carbs.
Every definition I've seen for the Standard American Diet is high fat, low fiber, highly processed, low in plant-based food. Nothing about carbs.
When you say a diet is "high carb" that refers to what percentage of the total diet is carbs. A person eating 1000 cals and 150g of carbs is eating a high carb diet because 70% of the cals come from carbs. A person eating 3000 cals and eating 150g of carbs is eating a low carb diet because only 20% of their cals come from carbs. It's not about the number of grams or quantities of carbs.
OP, I never pay attention to carbs and they usually fall for me in what I've always seen termed "moderate" - 50-55%. I focus on getting protein to @ 80-100 g. So I'd say typically 55% carbs, 20% protein, 25% fat.
Everyone talks about carbs and fat, but I found that getting my protein up made me way more likely to hit my calorie target without being hungry. Fiber would be the next most important to me. Once those two things are in line I'm good, and I don't really pay attention to where carbs and fat end up. I'm a firm believer that macro splits are mostly personal preference, maybe they become a bit more important in relation to fitness goals or health conditions.
Nope, when I say high carb, I mean how many grams of carbs are included. Maybe you mean percentage and maybe some others mean percentage, but I don't.
Does that make SAD a high carb, high fat high, protein diet?
I suppose it does.
So....overconsumption in general, then?
Yes, still hungry when eating high carb.
But if macros are otherwise pretty balanced (which in all honesty, they are pretty balanced in the SAD), then they aren't technically eating "high carb." They're eating "high everything." Overeating is caused by a multitude of factors, but if you're trying to argue that so many Americans are obese because of all the carbs they're eating, your argument just doesn't really hold water.
"High everything" includes "high carb" inherent within that definition. The whole question of this thread is whether anyone has tried high carb. The answer is that most Americans do eat high carb. Also, most Americans are overweight or obese.
Maybe I misunderstood, but my understanding of the counter-argument is: "Yea, but Americans aren't overweight or obese because they eat high carb, it is because they eat other macros in high amounts also."
And my answer to that is: OK, sure... Americans eat even more carbs in total grams than this other country (Congo) tied with the highest percentage. ---> So my point is about over-consumption also. The difference between my point and yours seems to be that I consider over-consumption of everything to be a high carb diet and you don't. The only relevance of our disagreement is semantics about whether the mostly overweight and obese population (Americans) eats high carb. If you deem SAD high carb, then you will see the correlation between eating high carb and being overweight or obese. If you believe that SAD is not high carb, then you won't see the correlation that I see.
It's fine if you don't see that correlation. Just know that we can't move into the "why" discussion until you do.
Again, where are you drawing the conclusion that most Americans eat high carb from? Based on your interpretation of SAD? If you put 50 Americans in a room, you think that there is a standard way of eating amongst all of them, or even a majority of them? The phrase Standard American Diet is one of those phrases like "clean eating" that I do not believe has an objective, consistent definition or application - so it is overall a useless term.
Individuals (American or otherwise) are not obese because they eat too many carbs. They are obese because they eat too many calories. Period.
If you go back, there are sources identifying average per-person, per day consumption of carbs.
Right, I looked at the link. I'm wondering what contributes to your distinction that most Americans eat high carbs, while ignoring the other relevant markers of total calories and percentage of fat consumption.
I've thoroughly explained that already. Are you arguing instead that SAD is low carb? I'm unclear on your point.
No, as I stated above, I don't believe there is a "Standard American Diet". I believe assembling a random sampling of Americans would yield nothing in the way of consistency in dietary choices. I'm just curious why you are focusing on carbs as the culprit for obesity?
The topic of this discussion is high carb diets. I pointed out that SAD is high carb - math and sources have been detailed already. I also pointed out that many Americans are overweight or obese. Therefore, a high carb diet correlates with a high rate of overweight / obesity.0 -
midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Traveler120 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »For non-endurance athletes, the debate is different. Obviously there are some of us with medical issues who benefit greatly from a low carb diet. But for the otherwise healthy person eating a SAD (high carb) diet, the question is about satiety. While everyone is different, 2/3 of Americans are overweight or obese. This statistic makes me think that many Americans are still hungry after maintenance when eating SAD, thus leading to consumption of excess calories. So for the otherwise healthy person who is tracking and restricting calorie consumption to avoid over-consumption, high carb works.
This is a common misconception that SAD is high carb and that's what's responsible for US obesity (rather than overconsumption). Interestingly, the US is one of the lowest carb countries. Many countries in the "under 50%" carbs category, like US, UK, Australia, also have the highest levels of overweight and obesity compared to the truly high carb countries.
http://chartsbin.com/view/1154
Perhaps that point is valid as a percentage of total diet. However, quantity is a different story.
Same website: http://chartsbin.com/view/1160
U.S. kcal per person per day: 3,770 And 49% carbs
3,770 X 49% = 1,847 calories from carbs per day / 4 calories per gram = 462g of carbs per day
I know it is subjective and some might disagree, but 462g of carbs per day is high carb.
Compare that to the Democratic Republic of the Congo with 80% carbs (Wow! That is tied with Bangladesh for the highest carb consumer on the chart you shared):
1,590 kcal per person per day X 80% = 1,272 / 4 calories per gram = 318g of carbs per day
This is also high carb, but the percentage of total diet makes it appear to be lower because we eat a lot of everything. Americans eat 45% more carbs than people of the Congo, who appear to be the highest carb consumers from the chart you first shared. So yes, SAD is high carb. The fact that SAD is high in everything else doesn't change that it is high in carbs.
Every definition I've seen for the Standard American Diet is high fat, low fiber, highly processed, low in plant-based food. Nothing about carbs.
When you say a diet is "high carb" that refers to what percentage of the total diet is carbs. A person eating 1000 cals and 150g of carbs is eating a high carb diet because 70% of the cals come from carbs. A person eating 3000 cals and eating 150g of carbs is eating a low carb diet because only 20% of their cals come from carbs. It's not about the number of grams or quantities of carbs.
OP, I never pay attention to carbs and they usually fall for me in what I've always seen termed "moderate" - 50-55%. I focus on getting protein to @ 80-100 g. So I'd say typically 55% carbs, 20% protein, 25% fat.
Everyone talks about carbs and fat, but I found that getting my protein up made me way more likely to hit my calorie target without being hungry. Fiber would be the next most important to me. Once those two things are in line I'm good, and I don't really pay attention to where carbs and fat end up. I'm a firm believer that macro splits are mostly personal preference, maybe they become a bit more important in relation to fitness goals or health conditions.
Nope, when I say high carb, I mean how many grams of carbs are included. Maybe you mean percentage and maybe some others mean percentage, but I don't.
Does that make SAD a high carb, high fat high, protein diet?
I suppose it does.
So....overconsumption in general, then?
Yes, still hungry when eating high carb.
But if macros are otherwise pretty balanced (which in all honesty, they are pretty balanced in the SAD), then they aren't technically eating "high carb." They're eating "high everything." Overeating is caused by a multitude of factors, but if you're trying to argue that so many Americans are obese because of all the carbs they're eating, your argument just doesn't really hold water.
"High everything" includes "high carb" inherent within that definition. The whole question of this thread is whether anyone has tried high carb. The answer is that most Americans do eat high carb. Also, most Americans are overweight or obese.
Maybe I misunderstood, but my understanding of the counter-argument is: "Yea, but Americans aren't overweight or obese because they eat high carb, it is because they eat other macros in high amounts also."
And my answer to that is: OK, sure... Americans eat even more carbs in total grams than this other country (Congo) tied with the highest percentage. ---> So my point is about over-consumption also. The difference between my point and yours seems to be that I consider over-consumption of everything to be a high carb diet and you don't. The only relevance of our disagreement is semantics about whether the mostly overweight and obese population (Americans) eats high carb. If you deem SAD high carb, then you will see the correlation between eating high carb and being overweight or obese. If you believe that SAD is not high carb, then you won't see the correlation that I see.
It's fine if you don't see that correlation. Just know that we can't move into the "why" discussion until you do.
Again, where are you drawing the conclusion that most Americans eat high carb from? Based on your interpretation of SAD? If you put 50 Americans in a room, you think that there is a standard way of eating amongst all of them, or even a majority of them? The phrase Standard American Diet is one of those phrases like "clean eating" that I do not believe has an objective, consistent definition or application - so it is overall a useless term.
Individuals (American or otherwise) are not obese because they eat too many carbs. They are obese because they eat too many calories. Period.
If you go back, there are sources identifying average per-person, per day consumption of carbs.
Right, I looked at the link. I'm wondering what contributes to your distinction that most Americans eat high carbs, while ignoring the other relevant markers of total calories and percentage of fat consumption.
I've thoroughly explained that already. Are you arguing instead that SAD is low carb? I'm unclear on your point.
No, as I stated above, I don't believe there is a "Standard American Diet". I believe assembling a random sampling of Americans would yield nothing in the way of consistency in dietary choices. I'm just curious why you are focusing on carbs as the culprit for obesity?
The topic of this discussion is high carb diets. I pointed out that SAD is high carb - math and sources have been detailed already. I also pointed out that many Americans are overweight or obese. Therefore, a high carb diet correlates with a high rate of overweight / obesity.
According to *your* definition of high carb. Americans also consume higher than average total calories (notice you didn't address my comments about there not actually being a Standard American Diet) which is what actually causes (not correlates to) higher rates of obesity.
But cool, I love correlation! I sent this one to my brother (a civil engineer) the other day. Not coincidentally, he loves pizza...
7 -
WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Traveler120 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »For non-endurance athletes, the debate is different. Obviously there are some of us with medical issues who benefit greatly from a low carb diet. But for the otherwise healthy person eating a SAD (high carb) diet, the question is about satiety. While everyone is different, 2/3 of Americans are overweight or obese. This statistic makes me think that many Americans are still hungry after maintenance when eating SAD, thus leading to consumption of excess calories. So for the otherwise healthy person who is tracking and restricting calorie consumption to avoid over-consumption, high carb works.
This is a common misconception that SAD is high carb and that's what's responsible for US obesity (rather than overconsumption). Interestingly, the US is one of the lowest carb countries. Many countries in the "under 50%" carbs category, like US, UK, Australia, also have the highest levels of overweight and obesity compared to the truly high carb countries.
http://chartsbin.com/view/1154
Perhaps that point is valid as a percentage of total diet. However, quantity is a different story.
Same website: http://chartsbin.com/view/1160
U.S. kcal per person per day: 3,770 And 49% carbs
3,770 X 49% = 1,847 calories from carbs per day / 4 calories per gram = 462g of carbs per day
I know it is subjective and some might disagree, but 462g of carbs per day is high carb.
Compare that to the Democratic Republic of the Congo with 80% carbs (Wow! That is tied with Bangladesh for the highest carb consumer on the chart you shared):
1,590 kcal per person per day X 80% = 1,272 / 4 calories per gram = 318g of carbs per day
This is also high carb, but the percentage of total diet makes it appear to be lower because we eat a lot of everything. Americans eat 45% more carbs than people of the Congo, who appear to be the highest carb consumers from the chart you first shared. So yes, SAD is high carb. The fact that SAD is high in everything else doesn't change that it is high in carbs.
Every definition I've seen for the Standard American Diet is high fat, low fiber, highly processed, low in plant-based food. Nothing about carbs.
When you say a diet is "high carb" that refers to what percentage of the total diet is carbs. A person eating 1000 cals and 150g of carbs is eating a high carb diet because 70% of the cals come from carbs. A person eating 3000 cals and eating 150g of carbs is eating a low carb diet because only 20% of their cals come from carbs. It's not about the number of grams or quantities of carbs.
OP, I never pay attention to carbs and they usually fall for me in what I've always seen termed "moderate" - 50-55%. I focus on getting protein to @ 80-100 g. So I'd say typically 55% carbs, 20% protein, 25% fat.
Everyone talks about carbs and fat, but I found that getting my protein up made me way more likely to hit my calorie target without being hungry. Fiber would be the next most important to me. Once those two things are in line I'm good, and I don't really pay attention to where carbs and fat end up. I'm a firm believer that macro splits are mostly personal preference, maybe they become a bit more important in relation to fitness goals or health conditions.
Nope, when I say high carb, I mean how many grams of carbs are included. Maybe you mean percentage and maybe some others mean percentage, but I don't.
Does that make SAD a high carb, high fat high, protein diet?
I suppose it does.
So....overconsumption in general, then?
Yes, still hungry when eating high carb.
But if macros are otherwise pretty balanced (which in all honesty, they are pretty balanced in the SAD), then they aren't technically eating "high carb." They're eating "high everything." Overeating is caused by a multitude of factors, but if you're trying to argue that so many Americans are obese because of all the carbs they're eating, your argument just doesn't really hold water.
"High everything" includes "high carb" inherent within that definition. The whole question of this thread is whether anyone has tried high carb. The answer is that most Americans do eat high carb. Also, most Americans are overweight or obese.
Maybe I misunderstood, but my understanding of the counter-argument is: "Yea, but Americans aren't overweight or obese because they eat high carb, it is because they eat other macros in high amounts also."
And my answer to that is: OK, sure... Americans eat even more carbs in total grams than this other country (Congo) tied with the highest percentage. ---> So my point is about over-consumption also. The difference between my point and yours seems to be that I consider over-consumption of everything to be a high carb diet and you don't. The only relevance of our disagreement is semantics about whether the mostly overweight and obese population (Americans) eats high carb. If you deem SAD high carb, then you will see the correlation between eating high carb and being overweight or obese. If you believe that SAD is not high carb, then you won't see the correlation that I see.
It's fine if you don't see that correlation. Just know that we can't move into the "why" discussion until you do.
Again, where are you drawing the conclusion that most Americans eat high carb from? Based on your interpretation of SAD? If you put 50 Americans in a room, you think that there is a standard way of eating amongst all of them, or even a majority of them? The phrase Standard American Diet is one of those phrases like "clean eating" that I do not believe has an objective, consistent definition or application - so it is overall a useless term.
Individuals (American or otherwise) are not obese because they eat too many carbs. They are obese because they eat too many calories. Period.
If you go back, there are sources identifying average per-person, per day consumption of carbs.
Right, I looked at the link. I'm wondering what contributes to your distinction that most Americans eat high carbs, while ignoring the other relevant markers of total calories and percentage of fat consumption.
I've thoroughly explained that already. Are you arguing instead that SAD is low carb? I'm unclear on your point.
No, as I stated above, I don't believe there is a "Standard American Diet". I believe assembling a random sampling of Americans would yield nothing in the way of consistency in dietary choices. I'm just curious why you are focusing on carbs as the culprit for obesity?
The topic of this discussion is high carb diets. I pointed out that SAD is high carb - math and sources have been detailed already. I also pointed out that many Americans are overweight or obese. Therefore, a high carb diet correlates with a high rate of overweight / obesity.
According to *your* definition of high carb. Americans also consume higher than average total calories (notice you didn't address my comments about there not actually being a Standard American Diet) which is what actually causes (not correlates to) higher rates of obesity.
But cool, I love correlation! I sent this one to my brother (a civil engineer) the other day. Not coincidentally, he loves pizza...
I did address that long before you even asked. I'm sorry you couldn't understand.
Correlation in the case of high carb diets and obesity is relevant to the high carb topic. I get that you are trying to argue correlation doesn't always equal causation, but your method is ridiculous unless you want to argue that correlation can never equal causation. Do you?0 -
I had this theory that junk food is about 50/50 carbohydrates and fat, because that's a very rare combination in natural food, and so it's very rewarding to the brain. It's like the jack pot to your reward system. Can you think of any? The only thing I can think of is some kinds of nuts, and a lot of people have the same experience of easily overeating nuts.
Think of every junk food. It's usually a 50/50.
Chocolate, Pizza, Dohnuts, Potato chips, Muffins. If you check the macros, they are usually 50/50. Exceptions are candy, but they are high in sugar, which is a concentrated reward substrate. Also very rare in nature.
A few years ago, in the depth of a library, studying metabolism for my biochem class, I was going over the pathways, and it hit me that it seems like the absolute worst combination is fat and carbohydrates together.
I thought to myself, "What if both high carb and low carb people are doing the same thing?"
They both erradicate the worst offenders.2 -
I eat pretty high carb, pretty high fat, and pretty low protein and find gaining weight difficult- it's pretty much just all about the calories
1 -
midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Traveler120 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »For non-endurance athletes, the debate is different. Obviously there are some of us with medical issues who benefit greatly from a low carb diet. But for the otherwise healthy person eating a SAD (high carb) diet, the question is about satiety. While everyone is different, 2/3 of Americans are overweight or obese. This statistic makes me think that many Americans are still hungry after maintenance when eating SAD, thus leading to consumption of excess calories. So for the otherwise healthy person who is tracking and restricting calorie consumption to avoid over-consumption, high carb works.
This is a common misconception that SAD is high carb and that's what's responsible for US obesity (rather than overconsumption). Interestingly, the US is one of the lowest carb countries. Many countries in the "under 50%" carbs category, like US, UK, Australia, also have the highest levels of overweight and obesity compared to the truly high carb countries.
http://chartsbin.com/view/1154
Perhaps that point is valid as a percentage of total diet. However, quantity is a different story.
Same website: http://chartsbin.com/view/1160
U.S. kcal per person per day: 3,770 And 49% carbs
3,770 X 49% = 1,847 calories from carbs per day / 4 calories per gram = 462g of carbs per day
I know it is subjective and some might disagree, but 462g of carbs per day is high carb.
Compare that to the Democratic Republic of the Congo with 80% carbs (Wow! That is tied with Bangladesh for the highest carb consumer on the chart you shared):
1,590 kcal per person per day X 80% = 1,272 / 4 calories per gram = 318g of carbs per day
This is also high carb, but the percentage of total diet makes it appear to be lower because we eat a lot of everything. Americans eat 45% more carbs than people of the Congo, who appear to be the highest carb consumers from the chart you first shared. So yes, SAD is high carb. The fact that SAD is high in everything else doesn't change that it is high in carbs.
Every definition I've seen for the Standard American Diet is high fat, low fiber, highly processed, low in plant-based food. Nothing about carbs.
When you say a diet is "high carb" that refers to what percentage of the total diet is carbs. A person eating 1000 cals and 150g of carbs is eating a high carb diet because 70% of the cals come from carbs. A person eating 3000 cals and eating 150g of carbs is eating a low carb diet because only 20% of their cals come from carbs. It's not about the number of grams or quantities of carbs.
OP, I never pay attention to carbs and they usually fall for me in what I've always seen termed "moderate" - 50-55%. I focus on getting protein to @ 80-100 g. So I'd say typically 55% carbs, 20% protein, 25% fat.
Everyone talks about carbs and fat, but I found that getting my protein up made me way more likely to hit my calorie target without being hungry. Fiber would be the next most important to me. Once those two things are in line I'm good, and I don't really pay attention to where carbs and fat end up. I'm a firm believer that macro splits are mostly personal preference, maybe they become a bit more important in relation to fitness goals or health conditions.
Nope, when I say high carb, I mean how many grams of carbs are included. Maybe you mean percentage and maybe some others mean percentage, but I don't.
Does that make SAD a high carb, high fat high, protein diet?
I suppose it does.
So....overconsumption in general, then?
Yes, still hungry when eating high carb.
But if macros are otherwise pretty balanced (which in all honesty, they are pretty balanced in the SAD), then they aren't technically eating "high carb." They're eating "high everything." Overeating is caused by a multitude of factors, but if you're trying to argue that so many Americans are obese because of all the carbs they're eating, your argument just doesn't really hold water.
"High everything" includes "high carb" inherent within that definition. The whole question of this thread is whether anyone has tried high carb. The answer is that most Americans do eat high carb. Also, most Americans are overweight or obese.
Maybe I misunderstood, but my understanding of the counter-argument is: "Yea, but Americans aren't overweight or obese because they eat high carb, it is because they eat other macros in high amounts also."
And my answer to that is: OK, sure... Americans eat even more carbs in total grams than this other country (Congo) tied with the highest percentage. ---> So my point is about over-consumption also. The difference between my point and yours seems to be that I consider over-consumption of everything to be a high carb diet and you don't. The only relevance of our disagreement is semantics about whether the mostly overweight and obese population (Americans) eats high carb. If you deem SAD high carb, then you will see the correlation between eating high carb and being overweight or obese. If you believe that SAD is not high carb, then you won't see the correlation that I see.
It's fine if you don't see that correlation. Just know that we can't move into the "why" discussion until you do.
Again, where are you drawing the conclusion that most Americans eat high carb from? Based on your interpretation of SAD? If you put 50 Americans in a room, you think that there is a standard way of eating amongst all of them, or even a majority of them? The phrase Standard American Diet is one of those phrases like "clean eating" that I do not believe has an objective, consistent definition or application - so it is overall a useless term.
Individuals (American or otherwise) are not obese because they eat too many carbs. They are obese because they eat too many calories. Period.
If you go back, there are sources identifying average per-person, per day consumption of carbs.
Right, I looked at the link. I'm wondering what contributes to your distinction that most Americans eat high carbs, while ignoring the other relevant markers of total calories and percentage of fat consumption.
I've thoroughly explained that already. Are you arguing instead that SAD is low carb? I'm unclear on your point.
No, as I stated above, I don't believe there is a "Standard American Diet". I believe assembling a random sampling of Americans would yield nothing in the way of consistency in dietary choices. I'm just curious why you are focusing on carbs as the culprit for obesity?
The topic of this discussion is high carb diets. I pointed out that SAD is high carb - math and sources have been detailed already. I also pointed out that many Americans are overweight or obese. Therefore, a high carb diet correlates with a high rate of overweight / obesity.
According to *your* definition of high carb. Americans also consume higher than average total calories (notice you didn't address my comments about there not actually being a Standard American Diet) which is what actually causes (not correlates to) higher rates of obesity.
But cool, I love correlation! I sent this one to my brother (a civil engineer) the other day. Not coincidentally, he loves pizza...
I did address that long before you even asked. I'm sorry you couldn't understand.
Correlation in the case of high carb diets and obesity is relevant to the high carb topic. I get that you are trying to argue correlation doesn't always equal causation, but your method is ridiculous unless you want to argue that correlation can never equal causation. Do you?
You addressed in this thread, the concepts that @lemurcat12 and I were raising that there is no "Standard" American Diet since American food choices and dietary habits are so variable? I looked back again since you said this was addressed and I don't see it. Can you restate your thoughts on that?
Not sure why you'd rely on what you believe to be a correlating factor (high carb) , ignore another correlating factor (high fat) and blow off the actual direct cause (too many calories). It's sort of a narrow view which conveniently fits your way of eating to demonize carbs and falsely portray those as the hallmark of a diet that doesn't actually exist in consistent practice.4 -
midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Traveler120 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »For non-endurance athletes, the debate is different. Obviously there are some of us with medical issues who benefit greatly from a low carb diet. But for the otherwise healthy person eating a SAD (high carb) diet, the question is about satiety. While everyone is different, 2/3 of Americans are overweight or obese. This statistic makes me think that many Americans are still hungry after maintenance when eating SAD, thus leading to consumption of excess calories. So for the otherwise healthy person who is tracking and restricting calorie consumption to avoid over-consumption, high carb works.
This is a common misconception that SAD is high carb and that's what's responsible for US obesity (rather than overconsumption). Interestingly, the US is one of the lowest carb countries. Many countries in the "under 50%" carbs category, like US, UK, Australia, also have the highest levels of overweight and obesity compared to the truly high carb countries.
http://chartsbin.com/view/1154
Perhaps that point is valid as a percentage of total diet. However, quantity is a different story.
Same website: http://chartsbin.com/view/1160
U.S. kcal per person per day: 3,770 And 49% carbs
3,770 X 49% = 1,847 calories from carbs per day / 4 calories per gram = 462g of carbs per day
I know it is subjective and some might disagree, but 462g of carbs per day is high carb.
Compare that to the Democratic Republic of the Congo with 80% carbs (Wow! That is tied with Bangladesh for the highest carb consumer on the chart you shared):
1,590 kcal per person per day X 80% = 1,272 / 4 calories per gram = 318g of carbs per day
This is also high carb, but the percentage of total diet makes it appear to be lower because we eat a lot of everything. Americans eat 45% more carbs than people of the Congo, who appear to be the highest carb consumers from the chart you first shared. So yes, SAD is high carb. The fact that SAD is high in everything else doesn't change that it is high in carbs.
Every definition I've seen for the Standard American Diet is high fat, low fiber, highly processed, low in plant-based food. Nothing about carbs.
When you say a diet is "high carb" that refers to what percentage of the total diet is carbs. A person eating 1000 cals and 150g of carbs is eating a high carb diet because 70% of the cals come from carbs. A person eating 3000 cals and eating 150g of carbs is eating a low carb diet because only 20% of their cals come from carbs. It's not about the number of grams or quantities of carbs.
OP, I never pay attention to carbs and they usually fall for me in what I've always seen termed "moderate" - 50-55%. I focus on getting protein to @ 80-100 g. So I'd say typically 55% carbs, 20% protein, 25% fat.
Everyone talks about carbs and fat, but I found that getting my protein up made me way more likely to hit my calorie target without being hungry. Fiber would be the next most important to me. Once those two things are in line I'm good, and I don't really pay attention to where carbs and fat end up. I'm a firm believer that macro splits are mostly personal preference, maybe they become a bit more important in relation to fitness goals or health conditions.
Nope, when I say high carb, I mean how many grams of carbs are included. Maybe you mean percentage and maybe some others mean percentage, but I don't.
Does that make SAD a high carb, high fat high, protein diet?
I suppose it does.
So....overconsumption in general, then?
Yes, still hungry when eating high carb.
But if macros are otherwise pretty balanced (which in all honesty, they are pretty balanced in the SAD), then they aren't technically eating "high carb." They're eating "high everything." Overeating is caused by a multitude of factors, but if you're trying to argue that so many Americans are obese because of all the carbs they're eating, your argument just doesn't really hold water.
"High everything" includes "high carb" inherent within that definition. The whole question of this thread is whether anyone has tried high carb. The answer is that most Americans do eat high carb. Also, most Americans are overweight or obese.
Maybe I misunderstood, but my understanding of the counter-argument is: "Yea, but Americans aren't overweight or obese because they eat high carb, it is because they eat other macros in high amounts also."
And my answer to that is: OK, sure... Americans eat even more carbs in total grams than this other country (Congo) tied with the highest percentage. ---> So my point is about over-consumption also. The difference between my point and yours seems to be that I consider over-consumption of everything to be a high carb diet and you don't. The only relevance of our disagreement is semantics about whether the mostly overweight and obese population (Americans) eats high carb. If you deem SAD high carb, then you will see the correlation between eating high carb and being overweight or obese. If you believe that SAD is not high carb, then you won't see the correlation that I see.
It's fine if you don't see that correlation. Just know that we can't move into the "why" discussion until you do.
Again, where are you drawing the conclusion that most Americans eat high carb from? Based on your interpretation of SAD? If you put 50 Americans in a room, you think that there is a standard way of eating amongst all of them, or even a majority of them? The phrase Standard American Diet is one of those phrases like "clean eating" that I do not believe has an objective, consistent definition or application - so it is overall a useless term.
Individuals (American or otherwise) are not obese because they eat too many carbs. They are obese because they eat too many calories. Period.
If you go back, there are sources identifying average per-person, per day consumption of carbs.
Right, I looked at the link. I'm wondering what contributes to your distinction that most Americans eat high carbs, while ignoring the other relevant markers of total calories and percentage of fat consumption.
I've thoroughly explained that already. Are you arguing instead that SAD is low carb? I'm unclear on your point.
No, as I stated above, I don't believe there is a "Standard American Diet". I believe assembling a random sampling of Americans would yield nothing in the way of consistency in dietary choices. I'm just curious why you are focusing on carbs as the culprit for obesity?
The topic of this discussion is high carb diets. I pointed out that SAD is high carb - math and sources have been detailed already. I also pointed out that many Americans are overweight or obese. Therefore, a high carb diet correlates with a high rate of overweight / obesity.
Let's math. Say I eat 10000 calories per day with 10% carbs. That's 1000 calories from carbs, so 250 grams.
Now if I get obese, is that because of the carbs or because I eat 4 people's worth of food while sitting on my *kitten*?
Your argument is weak because to get anything substantial out of correlation you have to adjust for confounding factors, the amount of calories you eat being probably the most obvious and in-your-face one.7 -
A perfect example of correlation does not imply causation.
The attribute that causes obesity could be any one of SAD's attributes. Carbohydrate content is merely one attribute among many. This is the classic error of thinking the thing we are focusing on is likely the thing causing the effect. My conclusion is that the attribute that is likely responsible is the high food reward and the high fat-carb ratios. All diets that work in some way exclude that potent combination.1 -
Christine_72 wrote: »I'd say high carb coupled with high fat are the macros of choice for most obese people.
Yes! This is my conclusion too. If you look at what most obese people have trouble resisting, it's junk food that consists of some high mixture of both macros together.
Who is binge eating plain potatoes, or plain bananas to obesity? That's just not how it happens.1 -
I had this theory that junk food is about 50/50 carbohydrates and fat, because that's a very rare combination in natural food, and so it's very rewarding to the brain. It's like the jack pot to your reward system. Can you think of any? The only thing I can think of is some kinds of nuts, and a lot of people have the same experience of easily overeating nuts.
Think of every junk food. It's usually a 50/50.
I'm not sure about extra rewarding or not found in nature (I'd have to think about it some and nuts are a good comparison). For example, I know you are largely vegetarian from what you said above, but I think some kinds of meat (combination of protein and fat) are certainly as palatable/rewarding to my taste buds. Or cheese, despite it being mostly fat (and what I'd call as much "junk food" as many of the things identified below). Also, if you put together a traditional dinner (even a healthful one), it normally will give you that highly palatable combination of fat and carbs, among other things. The SAD when I was growing up and what I still often eat for dinner fit that mold. For example (a common dinner for me): salmon, roasted potatoes with a little olive oil, a mix of brussels sprouts and cauliflower with (again) some olive oil. Maybe some avocado on the side too. Yet I both gained and lost weight eating in this basic way, just by changing how much oil I added, portion sizes, and some other things.
But yes, that most junk food and other foods that most struggle to stop eating are about 50/50 fat and carbs is a point I've made a lot. I don't think this makes them unhealthy -- for example, you pick out pizza and it's something I can make at home or get at a good local Italian restaurant in a pretty healthful form--lots of vegetables, olive oil, thin crust, reasonable amount of cheese, tomatoes. In that form it's largely similar to lots of pasta dishes which I think are a good balanced meal: lean protein, lots of vegetables, a starch (in reasonable amount), some added source of fat like olive oil or olives or pine nuts or cheese.[/quote]
I do happen to agree that HCLF and LCHF do similar things, at least in many cases, by effectively cutting out or hugely limiting many foods that people tend to overeat. IMO, the bigger effect of this is that a lot of the foods easily available to people fit these molds, so people on these diets have to eat more mindfully or cook for themselves or both. One can do the same thing just by being picky about what one eats within a more balanced diet. I don't really like storebought snacks or fast foods, so if I want a sweet snack in theory I have to bake it, which makes me less likely to do so (well, with the exception of ice cream, where I can easily buy it). This only works so well, since it's easy to overeat anyway, but if you are mostly cooking you can control the calories even without greatly limiting a macro. If one wants to just cut calories without thinking about it as much, though, at least in the short term low carb or low fat likely work. Easy to start cheating or find foods that fit but still count as "junk food" (high cal, low nutrients, easy to overeat). I've heard that from friends who are low carb and who are vegan -- you eventually adjust and find it easily to overeat. (If it actually changes appetite that's different, but I don't actually think most people overeat due to appetite, but because food is tempting and oh so available and enjoyable.)
0 -
WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Traveler120 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »For non-endurance athletes, the debate is different. Obviously there are some of us with medical issues who benefit greatly from a low carb diet. But for the otherwise healthy person eating a SAD (high carb) diet, the question is about satiety. While everyone is different, 2/3 of Americans are overweight or obese. This statistic makes me think that many Americans are still hungry after maintenance when eating SAD, thus leading to consumption of excess calories. So for the otherwise healthy person who is tracking and restricting calorie consumption to avoid over-consumption, high carb works.
This is a common misconception that SAD is high carb and that's what's responsible for US obesity (rather than overconsumption). Interestingly, the US is one of the lowest carb countries. Many countries in the "under 50%" carbs category, like US, UK, Australia, also have the highest levels of overweight and obesity compared to the truly high carb countries.
http://chartsbin.com/view/1154
Perhaps that point is valid as a percentage of total diet. However, quantity is a different story.
Same website: http://chartsbin.com/view/1160
U.S. kcal per person per day: 3,770 And 49% carbs
3,770 X 49% = 1,847 calories from carbs per day / 4 calories per gram = 462g of carbs per day
I know it is subjective and some might disagree, but 462g of carbs per day is high carb.
Compare that to the Democratic Republic of the Congo with 80% carbs (Wow! That is tied with Bangladesh for the highest carb consumer on the chart you shared):
1,590 kcal per person per day X 80% = 1,272 / 4 calories per gram = 318g of carbs per day
This is also high carb, but the percentage of total diet makes it appear to be lower because we eat a lot of everything. Americans eat 45% more carbs than people of the Congo, who appear to be the highest carb consumers from the chart you first shared. So yes, SAD is high carb. The fact that SAD is high in everything else doesn't change that it is high in carbs.
Every definition I've seen for the Standard American Diet is high fat, low fiber, highly processed, low in plant-based food. Nothing about carbs.
When you say a diet is "high carb" that refers to what percentage of the total diet is carbs. A person eating 1000 cals and 150g of carbs is eating a high carb diet because 70% of the cals come from carbs. A person eating 3000 cals and eating 150g of carbs is eating a low carb diet because only 20% of their cals come from carbs. It's not about the number of grams or quantities of carbs.
OP, I never pay attention to carbs and they usually fall for me in what I've always seen termed "moderate" - 50-55%. I focus on getting protein to @ 80-100 g. So I'd say typically 55% carbs, 20% protein, 25% fat.
Everyone talks about carbs and fat, but I found that getting my protein up made me way more likely to hit my calorie target without being hungry. Fiber would be the next most important to me. Once those two things are in line I'm good, and I don't really pay attention to where carbs and fat end up. I'm a firm believer that macro splits are mostly personal preference, maybe they become a bit more important in relation to fitness goals or health conditions.
Nope, when I say high carb, I mean how many grams of carbs are included. Maybe you mean percentage and maybe some others mean percentage, but I don't.
Does that make SAD a high carb, high fat high, protein diet?
I suppose it does.
So....overconsumption in general, then?
Yes, still hungry when eating high carb.
But if macros are otherwise pretty balanced (which in all honesty, they are pretty balanced in the SAD), then they aren't technically eating "high carb." They're eating "high everything." Overeating is caused by a multitude of factors, but if you're trying to argue that so many Americans are obese because of all the carbs they're eating, your argument just doesn't really hold water.
"High everything" includes "high carb" inherent within that definition. The whole question of this thread is whether anyone has tried high carb. The answer is that most Americans do eat high carb. Also, most Americans are overweight or obese.
Maybe I misunderstood, but my understanding of the counter-argument is: "Yea, but Americans aren't overweight or obese because they eat high carb, it is because they eat other macros in high amounts also."
And my answer to that is: OK, sure... Americans eat even more carbs in total grams than this other country (Congo) tied with the highest percentage. ---> So my point is about over-consumption also. The difference between my point and yours seems to be that I consider over-consumption of everything to be a high carb diet and you don't. The only relevance of our disagreement is semantics about whether the mostly overweight and obese population (Americans) eats high carb. If you deem SAD high carb, then you will see the correlation between eating high carb and being overweight or obese. If you believe that SAD is not high carb, then you won't see the correlation that I see.
It's fine if you don't see that correlation. Just know that we can't move into the "why" discussion until you do.
Again, where are you drawing the conclusion that most Americans eat high carb from? Based on your interpretation of SAD? If you put 50 Americans in a room, you think that there is a standard way of eating amongst all of them, or even a majority of them? The phrase Standard American Diet is one of those phrases like "clean eating" that I do not believe has an objective, consistent definition or application - so it is overall a useless term.
Individuals (American or otherwise) are not obese because they eat too many carbs. They are obese because they eat too many calories. Period.
If you go back, there are sources identifying average per-person, per day consumption of carbs.
Right, I looked at the link. I'm wondering what contributes to your distinction that most Americans eat high carbs, while ignoring the other relevant markers of total calories and percentage of fat consumption.
I've thoroughly explained that already. Are you arguing instead that SAD is low carb? I'm unclear on your point.
No, as I stated above, I don't believe there is a "Standard American Diet". I believe assembling a random sampling of Americans would yield nothing in the way of consistency in dietary choices. I'm just curious why you are focusing on carbs as the culprit for obesity?
The topic of this discussion is high carb diets. I pointed out that SAD is high carb - math and sources have been detailed already. I also pointed out that many Americans are overweight or obese. Therefore, a high carb diet correlates with a high rate of overweight / obesity.
According to *your* definition of high carb. Americans also consume higher than average total calories (notice you didn't address my comments about there not actually being a Standard American Diet) which is what actually causes (not correlates to) higher rates of obesity.
But cool, I love correlation! I sent this one to my brother (a civil engineer) the other day. Not coincidentally, he loves pizza...
I did address that long before you even asked. I'm sorry you couldn't understand.
Correlation in the case of high carb diets and obesity is relevant to the high carb topic. I get that you are trying to argue correlation doesn't always equal causation, but your method is ridiculous unless you want to argue that correlation can never equal causation. Do you?
You addressed in this thread, the concepts that @lemurcat12 and I were raising that there is no "Standard" American Diet since American food choices and dietary habits are so variable? I looked back again since you said this was addressed and I don't see it. Can you restate your thoughts on that?
Not sure why you'd rely on what you believe to be a correlating factor (high carb) , ignore another correlating factor (high fat) and blow off the actual direct cause (too many calories). It's sort of a narrow view which conveniently fits your way of eating to demonize carbs and falsely portray those as the hallmark of a diet that doesn't actually exist in consistent practice.
SAD includes an average per person per day consumption of 462g of carbs.
Here is a restatement that hopefully makes sense:
1. SAD is high carb.
2. A majority of Americans are overweight or obese.
3. A high carb diet is therefore correlated with being overweight or obese.
4. The WHY isn't as clear.stevencloser wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Traveler120 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »For non-endurance athletes, the debate is different. Obviously there are some of us with medical issues who benefit greatly from a low carb diet. But for the otherwise healthy person eating a SAD (high carb) diet, the question is about satiety. While everyone is different, 2/3 of Americans are overweight or obese. This statistic makes me think that many Americans are still hungry after maintenance when eating SAD, thus leading to consumption of excess calories. So for the otherwise healthy person who is tracking and restricting calorie consumption to avoid over-consumption, high carb works.
This is a common misconception that SAD is high carb and that's what's responsible for US obesity (rather than overconsumption). Interestingly, the US is one of the lowest carb countries. Many countries in the "under 50%" carbs category, like US, UK, Australia, also have the highest levels of overweight and obesity compared to the truly high carb countries.
http://chartsbin.com/view/1154
Perhaps that point is valid as a percentage of total diet. However, quantity is a different story.
Same website: http://chartsbin.com/view/1160
U.S. kcal per person per day: 3,770 And 49% carbs
3,770 X 49% = 1,847 calories from carbs per day / 4 calories per gram = 462g of carbs per day
I know it is subjective and some might disagree, but 462g of carbs per day is high carb.
Compare that to the Democratic Republic of the Congo with 80% carbs (Wow! That is tied with Bangladesh for the highest carb consumer on the chart you shared):
1,590 kcal per person per day X 80% = 1,272 / 4 calories per gram = 318g of carbs per day
This is also high carb, but the percentage of total diet makes it appear to be lower because we eat a lot of everything. Americans eat 45% more carbs than people of the Congo, who appear to be the highest carb consumers from the chart you first shared. So yes, SAD is high carb. The fact that SAD is high in everything else doesn't change that it is high in carbs.
Every definition I've seen for the Standard American Diet is high fat, low fiber, highly processed, low in plant-based food. Nothing about carbs.
When you say a diet is "high carb" that refers to what percentage of the total diet is carbs. A person eating 1000 cals and 150g of carbs is eating a high carb diet because 70% of the cals come from carbs. A person eating 3000 cals and eating 150g of carbs is eating a low carb diet because only 20% of their cals come from carbs. It's not about the number of grams or quantities of carbs.
OP, I never pay attention to carbs and they usually fall for me in what I've always seen termed "moderate" - 50-55%. I focus on getting protein to @ 80-100 g. So I'd say typically 55% carbs, 20% protein, 25% fat.
Everyone talks about carbs and fat, but I found that getting my protein up made me way more likely to hit my calorie target without being hungry. Fiber would be the next most important to me. Once those two things are in line I'm good, and I don't really pay attention to where carbs and fat end up. I'm a firm believer that macro splits are mostly personal preference, maybe they become a bit more important in relation to fitness goals or health conditions.
Nope, when I say high carb, I mean how many grams of carbs are included. Maybe you mean percentage and maybe some others mean percentage, but I don't.
Does that make SAD a high carb, high fat high, protein diet?
I suppose it does.
So....overconsumption in general, then?
Yes, still hungry when eating high carb.
But if macros are otherwise pretty balanced (which in all honesty, they are pretty balanced in the SAD), then they aren't technically eating "high carb." They're eating "high everything." Overeating is caused by a multitude of factors, but if you're trying to argue that so many Americans are obese because of all the carbs they're eating, your argument just doesn't really hold water.
"High everything" includes "high carb" inherent within that definition. The whole question of this thread is whether anyone has tried high carb. The answer is that most Americans do eat high carb. Also, most Americans are overweight or obese.
Maybe I misunderstood, but my understanding of the counter-argument is: "Yea, but Americans aren't overweight or obese because they eat high carb, it is because they eat other macros in high amounts also."
And my answer to that is: OK, sure... Americans eat even more carbs in total grams than this other country (Congo) tied with the highest percentage. ---> So my point is about over-consumption also. The difference between my point and yours seems to be that I consider over-consumption of everything to be a high carb diet and you don't. The only relevance of our disagreement is semantics about whether the mostly overweight and obese population (Americans) eats high carb. If you deem SAD high carb, then you will see the correlation between eating high carb and being overweight or obese. If you believe that SAD is not high carb, then you won't see the correlation that I see.
It's fine if you don't see that correlation. Just know that we can't move into the "why" discussion until you do.
Again, where are you drawing the conclusion that most Americans eat high carb from? Based on your interpretation of SAD? If you put 50 Americans in a room, you think that there is a standard way of eating amongst all of them, or even a majority of them? The phrase Standard American Diet is one of those phrases like "clean eating" that I do not believe has an objective, consistent definition or application - so it is overall a useless term.
Individuals (American or otherwise) are not obese because they eat too many carbs. They are obese because they eat too many calories. Period.
If you go back, there are sources identifying average per-person, per day consumption of carbs.
Right, I looked at the link. I'm wondering what contributes to your distinction that most Americans eat high carbs, while ignoring the other relevant markers of total calories and percentage of fat consumption.
I've thoroughly explained that already. Are you arguing instead that SAD is low carb? I'm unclear on your point.
No, as I stated above, I don't believe there is a "Standard American Diet". I believe assembling a random sampling of Americans would yield nothing in the way of consistency in dietary choices. I'm just curious why you are focusing on carbs as the culprit for obesity?
The topic of this discussion is high carb diets. I pointed out that SAD is high carb - math and sources have been detailed already. I also pointed out that many Americans are overweight or obese. Therefore, a high carb diet correlates with a high rate of overweight / obesity.
Let's math. Say I eat 10000 calories per day with 10% carbs. That's 1000 calories from carbs, so 250 grams.
Now if I get obese, is that because of the carbs or because I eat 4 people's worth of food while sitting on my *kitten*?
Your argument is weak because to get anything substantial out of correlation you have to adjust for confounding factors, the amount of calories you eat being probably the most obvious and in-your-face one.
I'm not clear what you think my argument is, but your hypothetical doesn't invalidate my point at all. It seems like you misunderstand my point.
What I'm NOT saying:
1. The only way to become overweight or obese is to eat high carb.
2. Eating high carb always results in being overweight or obese.
1 -
A perfect example of correlation does not imply causation.
The attribute that causes obesity could be any one of SAD's attributes. Carbohydrate content is merely one attribute among many. This is the classic error of thinking the thing we are focusing on is likely the thing causing the effect. My conclusion is that the attribute that is likely responsible is the high food reward and the high fat-carb ratios. All diets that work in some way exclude that potent combination.
My diet works fine and I eat that stuff, so no, it's not a potent combination. The cause of obesity is clear. It's too many calories.4 -
midwesterner85 wrote: »SAD includes an average per person per day consumption of 462g of carbs.
Here is a restatement that hopefully makes sense:
1. SAD is high carb.
2. A majority of Americans are overweight or obese.
3. A high carb diet is therefore correlated with being overweight or obese.
4. The WHY isn't as clear.
There may be no why. You have not included enough evidence to make it clear there is a why. It's like saying CA has a high number of white men. CA voted for Clinton. A high number of white men is therefore correlated with voting for Clinton. The why is not so clear.
In particular you are leaving out relevant factors in what appears to be an effort to create a misleading narrative. Let me add some of those factors:
1. SAD has a high amount of total calories, and these calories are made up of (relative to other countries) a high amount of total carbs, a high amount of total fat, and even a high amount of total protein.
2. When looked at percentage-wise, the SAD has many dissimilarities with diets in areas that are not correlated with overweight or obesity.
3. On the macro level, these dissimilarities include a higher percentage of fat, but not a higher percentage of carbs.
4. Other differences include more sugar, more highly processed snack foods, more processed and red meat, more saturated fat.
5. If you look at countries across the board, a high calorie level is correlated with being overweight or obese. High total numbers of carbs and fat are both correlated with being overweight or obese. A high carb percentage is not correlated with being overweight or obese.
None of this suggests that in a calorie-controlled diet or a WF-based diet that a high carb percentage correlates with being overweight or obese or that total number of carbs in the absence of high total numbers of fat correlates with being overweight or obese. I believe this is more responsive to what OP was wondering about. He can comment if he disagrees, of course.3 -
A perfect example of correlation does not imply causation.
The attribute that causes obesity could be any one of SAD's attributes. Carbohydrate content is merely one attribute among many. This is the classic error of thinking the thing we are focusing on is likely the thing causing the effect. My conclusion is that the attribute that is likely responsible is the high food reward and the high fat-carb ratios. All diets that work in some way exclude that potent combination.
Then why are there so many people that eat high carb high fat foods that are not obese? I think our biggest mistake is looking solely at diet content when trying to figure out why more and more people are becoming obese.1 -
I haven't read the rest of the thread but i'll put in my 2 cents...
The problem with correlating carbs with weight is that it is simply one part of the picture. It comes down to total calories, not necessarily the composition of macronutrients in a diet.
It's no surprise that the fattest nations in the world eat the most TOTAL calories. As i'm sure you can see the countries who are eating their calories from mainly carbohydrate sources (like most of africa) are likely eating low-calorie density foods. This is not to say that it is the carb intake that is allowing them to be leaner, but the total calories they are eating.
As for me, i eat roughly 250g of carbs a day. high? low? it's all relative.5 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »SAD includes an average per person per day consumption of 462g of carbs.
Here is a restatement that hopefully makes sense:
1. SAD is high carb.
2. A majority of Americans are overweight or obese.
3. A high carb diet is therefore correlated with being overweight or obese.
4. The WHY isn't as clear.
There may be no why. You have not included enough evidence to make it clear there is a why. It's like saying CA has a high number of white men. CA voted for Clinton. A high number of white men is therefore correlated with voting for Clinton. The why is not so clear.
In particular you are leaving out relevant factors in what appears to be an effort to create a misleading narrative. Let me add some of those factors:
1. SAD has a high amount of total calories, and these calories are made up of (relative to other countries) a high amount of total carbs, a high amount of total fat, and even a high amount of total protein.
2. When looked at percentage-wise, the SAD has many dissimilarities with diets in areas that are not correlated with overweight or obesity.
3. On the macro level, these dissimilarities include a higher percentage of fat, but not a higher percentage of carbs.
4. Other differences include more sugar, more highly processed snack foods, more processed and red meat, more saturated fat.
5. If you look at countries across the board, a high calorie level is correlated with being overweight or obese. High total numbers of carbs and fat are both correlated with being overweight or obese. A high carb percentage is not correlated with being overweight or obese.
None of this suggests that in a calorie-controlled diet or a WF-based diet that a high carb percentage correlates with being overweight or obese or that total number of carbs in the absence of high total numbers of fat correlates with being overweight or obese. I believe this is more responsive to what OP was wondering about. He can comment if he disagrees, of course.
oh, well, perhaps, but usually there are reasons behind phenomena
0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »SAD includes an average per person per day consumption of 462g of carbs.
Here is a restatement that hopefully makes sense:
1. SAD is high carb.
2. A majority of Americans are overweight or obese.
3. A high carb diet is therefore correlated with being overweight or obese.
4. The WHY isn't as clear.
There may be no why. You have not included enough evidence to make it clear there is a why. It's like saying CA has a high number of white men. CA voted for Clinton. A high number of white men is therefore correlated with voting for Clinton. The why is not so clear.
In particular you are leaving out relevant factors in what appears to be an effort to create a misleading narrative. Let me add some of those factors:
1. SAD has a high amount of total calories, and these calories are made up of (relative to other countries) a high amount of total carbs, a high amount of total fat, and even a high amount of total protein.
2. When looked at percentage-wise, the SAD has many dissimilarities with diets in areas that are not correlated with overweight or obesity.
3. On the macro level, these dissimilarities include a higher percentage of fat, but not a higher percentage of carbs.
4. Other differences include more sugar, more highly processed snack foods, more processed and red meat, more saturated fat.
5. If you look at countries across the board, a high calorie level is correlated with being overweight or obese. High total numbers of carbs and fat are both correlated with being overweight or obese. A high carb percentage is not correlated with being overweight or obese.
None of this suggests that in a calorie-controlled diet or a WF-based diet that a high carb percentage correlates with being overweight or obese or that total number of carbs in the absence of high total numbers of fat correlates with being overweight or obese. I believe this is more responsive to what OP was wondering about. He can comment if he disagrees, of course.
You are right in that there may not be a why. Like I said, it isn't clear... maybe there is none, maybe there are several. I'm just not sure on that.
We've already gone over the high carb quantity vs. high carb percentage difference even before @stevencloser put forth a moderate carb, high calorie hypothetical. When I say "high carb," the person eating 462g per day is eating high carb regardless of whether that is 5% of his/her diet or 100% of his/her diet. That is simply a high volume of carbs. Similarly, when I started eating low carb, I did not eat LCHF. I ate low carb. Plain and simple. I ate moderate fat and moderate protein, but not high protein and not high fat. By your definition, perhaps I wasn't eating low carb. Based on actual carb quantity, I was eating low carb.2 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »I don't specifically pick low carb or high carb, I just eat what I want and let macros fall wherever, trying to put slightly more effort into protein because if I don't I tend to eat under 40 grams. As an average, the days that are most successfully satiating while still within calories happen to average at around 60% carbs, 20% protein and 20% fat. That's about 250-280 grams of carbs, 70-90 grams of protein and 30-40 grams of fat.
Me as well...1 -
midwesterner85 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »SAD includes an average per person per day consumption of 462g of carbs.
Here is a restatement that hopefully makes sense:
1. SAD is high carb.
2. A majority of Americans are overweight or obese.
3. A high carb diet is therefore correlated with being overweight or obese.
4. The WHY isn't as clear.
There may be no why. You have not included enough evidence to make it clear there is a why. It's like saying CA has a high number of white men. CA voted for Clinton. A high number of white men is therefore correlated with voting for Clinton. The why is not so clear.
In particular you are leaving out relevant factors in what appears to be an effort to create a misleading narrative. Let me add some of those factors:
1. SAD has a high amount of total calories, and these calories are made up of (relative to other countries) a high amount of total carbs, a high amount of total fat, and even a high amount of total protein.
2. When looked at percentage-wise, the SAD has many dissimilarities with diets in areas that are not correlated with overweight or obesity.
3. On the macro level, these dissimilarities include a higher percentage of fat, but not a higher percentage of carbs.
4. Other differences include more sugar, more highly processed snack foods, more processed and red meat, more saturated fat.
5. If you look at countries across the board, a high calorie level is correlated with being overweight or obese. High total numbers of carbs and fat are both correlated with being overweight or obese. A high carb percentage is not correlated with being overweight or obese.
None of this suggests that in a calorie-controlled diet or a WF-based diet that a high carb percentage correlates with being overweight or obese or that total number of carbs in the absence of high total numbers of fat correlates with being overweight or obese. I believe this is more responsive to what OP was wondering about. He can comment if he disagrees, of course.
You are right in that there may not be a why. Like I said, it isn't clear... maybe there is none, maybe there are several. I'm just not sure on that.
We've already gone over the high carb quantity vs. high carb percentage difference even before @stevencloser put forth a moderate carb, high calorie hypothetical. When I say "high carb," the person eating 462g per day is eating high carb regardless of whether that is 5% of his/her diet or 100% of his/her diet. That is simply a high volume of carbs. Similarly, when I started eating low carb, I did not eat LCHF. I ate low carb. Plain and simple. I ate moderate fat and moderate protein, but not high protein and not high fat. By your definition, perhaps I wasn't eating low carb. Based on actual carb quantity, I was eating low carb.
So if you have a high TDEE do you eat high everything?0 -
midwesterner85 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »SAD includes an average per person per day consumption of 462g of carbs.
Here is a restatement that hopefully makes sense:
1. SAD is high carb.
2. A majority of Americans are overweight or obese.
3. A high carb diet is therefore correlated with being overweight or obese.
4. The WHY isn't as clear.
There may be no why. You have not included enough evidence to make it clear there is a why. It's like saying CA has a high number of white men. CA voted for Clinton. A high number of white men is therefore correlated with voting for Clinton. The why is not so clear.
In particular you are leaving out relevant factors in what appears to be an effort to create a misleading narrative. Let me add some of those factors:
1. SAD has a high amount of total calories, and these calories are made up of (relative to other countries) a high amount of total carbs, a high amount of total fat, and even a high amount of total protein.
2. When looked at percentage-wise, the SAD has many dissimilarities with diets in areas that are not correlated with overweight or obesity.
3. On the macro level, these dissimilarities include a higher percentage of fat, but not a higher percentage of carbs.
4. Other differences include more sugar, more highly processed snack foods, more processed and red meat, more saturated fat.
5. If you look at countries across the board, a high calorie level is correlated with being overweight or obese. High total numbers of carbs and fat are both correlated with being overweight or obese. A high carb percentage is not correlated with being overweight or obese.
None of this suggests that in a calorie-controlled diet or a WF-based diet that a high carb percentage correlates with being overweight or obese or that total number of carbs in the absence of high total numbers of fat correlates with being overweight or obese. I believe this is more responsive to what OP was wondering about. He can comment if he disagrees, of course.
You are right in that there may not be a why. Like I said, it isn't clear... maybe there is none, maybe there are several. I'm just not sure on that.
We've already gone over the high carb quantity vs. high carb percentage difference even before @stevencloser put forth a moderate carb, high calorie hypothetical. When I say "high carb," the person eating 462g per day is eating high carb regardless of whether that is 5% of his/her diet or 100% of his/her diet. That is simply a high volume of carbs. Similarly, when I started eating low carb, I did not eat LCHF. I ate low carb. Plain and simple. I ate moderate fat and moderate protein, but not high protein and not high fat. By your definition, perhaps I wasn't eating low carb. Based on actual carb quantity, I was eating low carb.
So if you have a high TDEE do you eat high everything?
Not necessarily.
ETA: Personally, if my TDEE was significantly higher, I would still eat low carb. That's what I would do... not everyone would do that.0 -
midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »SAD includes an average per person per day consumption of 462g of carbs.
Here is a restatement that hopefully makes sense:
1. SAD is high carb.
2. A majority of Americans are overweight or obese.
3. A high carb diet is therefore correlated with being overweight or obese.
4. The WHY isn't as clear.
There may be no why. You have not included enough evidence to make it clear there is a why. It's like saying CA has a high number of white men. CA voted for Clinton. A high number of white men is therefore correlated with voting for Clinton. The why is not so clear.
In particular you are leaving out relevant factors in what appears to be an effort to create a misleading narrative. Let me add some of those factors:
1. SAD has a high amount of total calories, and these calories are made up of (relative to other countries) a high amount of total carbs, a high amount of total fat, and even a high amount of total protein.
2. When looked at percentage-wise, the SAD has many dissimilarities with diets in areas that are not correlated with overweight or obesity.
3. On the macro level, these dissimilarities include a higher percentage of fat, but not a higher percentage of carbs.
4. Other differences include more sugar, more highly processed snack foods, more processed and red meat, more saturated fat.
5. If you look at countries across the board, a high calorie level is correlated with being overweight or obese. High total numbers of carbs and fat are both correlated with being overweight or obese. A high carb percentage is not correlated with being overweight or obese.
None of this suggests that in a calorie-controlled diet or a WF-based diet that a high carb percentage correlates with being overweight or obese or that total number of carbs in the absence of high total numbers of fat correlates with being overweight or obese. I believe this is more responsive to what OP was wondering about. He can comment if he disagrees, of course.
You are right in that there may not be a why. Like I said, it isn't clear... maybe there is none, maybe there are several. I'm just not sure on that.
We've already gone over the high carb quantity vs. high carb percentage difference even before @stevencloser put forth a moderate carb, high calorie hypothetical. When I say "high carb," the person eating 462g per day is eating high carb regardless of whether that is 5% of his/her diet or 100% of his/her diet. That is simply a high volume of carbs. Similarly, when I started eating low carb, I did not eat LCHF. I ate low carb. Plain and simple. I ate moderate fat and moderate protein, but not high protein and not high fat. By your definition, perhaps I wasn't eating low carb. Based on actual carb quantity, I was eating low carb.
So if you have a high TDEE do you eat high everything?
Not necessarily.
Anything resembling a balanced diet would be high everything.3 -
Gianfranco_R wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »SAD includes an average per person per day consumption of 462g of carbs.
Here is a restatement that hopefully makes sense:
1. SAD is high carb.
2. A majority of Americans are overweight or obese.
3. A high carb diet is therefore correlated with being overweight or obese.
4. The WHY isn't as clear.
There may be no why. You have not included enough evidence to make it clear there is a why. It's like saying CA has a high number of white men. CA voted for Clinton. A high number of white men is therefore correlated with voting for Clinton. The why is not so clear.
In particular you are leaving out relevant factors in what appears to be an effort to create a misleading narrative. Let me add some of those factors:
1. SAD has a high amount of total calories, and these calories are made up of (relative to other countries) a high amount of total carbs, a high amount of total fat, and even a high amount of total protein.
2. When looked at percentage-wise, the SAD has many dissimilarities with diets in areas that are not correlated with overweight or obesity.
3. On the macro level, these dissimilarities include a higher percentage of fat, but not a higher percentage of carbs.
4. Other differences include more sugar, more highly processed snack foods, more processed and red meat, more saturated fat.
5. If you look at countries across the board, a high calorie level is correlated with being overweight or obese. High total numbers of carbs and fat are both correlated with being overweight or obese. A high carb percentage is not correlated with being overweight or obese.
None of this suggests that in a calorie-controlled diet or a WF-based diet that a high carb percentage correlates with being overweight or obese or that total number of carbs in the absence of high total numbers of fat correlates with being overweight or obese. I believe this is more responsive to what OP was wondering about. He can comment if he disagrees, of course.
oh, well, perhaps, but usually there are reasons behind phenomena
No, there are many correlations that aren't causative. That doesn't mean there are no reasons -- are you actually trying to misrepresent the conversation? If so, why? Do you think that people aren't able to see that you are doing that? I will give you the benefit of the doubt and assume maybe you really misunderstood, but I find it hard to see how that was possible.
midwesterner said that the US had a high total carb consumption and a high obesity rate and that why the two things were correlated was a question -- in other words, he was suggesting that there is a link. I don't think there's any link between relative carb consumption and obesity. Instead, I think there's a link to calorie consumption and that the US high calorie consumption is made up of a pretty typical macro mix consistent with what is consumed (or lower carb by percentage than is consumed) in many countries without a weight problem. This is not saying that there's no cause for the US increase in obesity which would indeed be a silly thing to say (and no one did). It's probably multi-cause, however, and some of the causes are likely ones I alluded to in my post. But this LCHF dogma that the US is fat because we eat--gasp!--50% carbs on average is not supported by anything at all, especially if you look globally. Our carb percentage is not unusual. Our total calories are, and some other aspects of our diet are.
So to summarize: of course, I believe there is a why as to why the US is fat, but I don't think it's about carb percentage. I don't believe anyone has identified any convincing evidence that it is, and the only way that anyone has attempted to construct an argument to that effect is by leaving out other factors that appear more relevant when looked at globally. I mentioned some of these factors, I notice that you ignored that.2 -
midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »SAD includes an average per person per day consumption of 462g of carbs.
Here is a restatement that hopefully makes sense:
1. SAD is high carb.
2. A majority of Americans are overweight or obese.
3. A high carb diet is therefore correlated with being overweight or obese.
4. The WHY isn't as clear.
There may be no why. You have not included enough evidence to make it clear there is a why. It's like saying CA has a high number of white men. CA voted for Clinton. A high number of white men is therefore correlated with voting for Clinton. The why is not so clear.
In particular you are leaving out relevant factors in what appears to be an effort to create a misleading narrative. Let me add some of those factors:
1. SAD has a high amount of total calories, and these calories are made up of (relative to other countries) a high amount of total carbs, a high amount of total fat, and even a high amount of total protein.
2. When looked at percentage-wise, the SAD has many dissimilarities with diets in areas that are not correlated with overweight or obesity.
3. On the macro level, these dissimilarities include a higher percentage of fat, but not a higher percentage of carbs.
4. Other differences include more sugar, more highly processed snack foods, more processed and red meat, more saturated fat.
5. If you look at countries across the board, a high calorie level is correlated with being overweight or obese. High total numbers of carbs and fat are both correlated with being overweight or obese. A high carb percentage is not correlated with being overweight or obese.
None of this suggests that in a calorie-controlled diet or a WF-based diet that a high carb percentage correlates with being overweight or obese or that total number of carbs in the absence of high total numbers of fat correlates with being overweight or obese. I believe this is more responsive to what OP was wondering about. He can comment if he disagrees, of course.
You are right in that there may not be a why. Like I said, it isn't clear... maybe there is none, maybe there are several. I'm just not sure on that.
We've already gone over the high carb quantity vs. high carb percentage difference even before @stevencloser put forth a moderate carb, high calorie hypothetical. When I say "high carb," the person eating 462g per day is eating high carb regardless of whether that is 5% of his/her diet or 100% of his/her diet. That is simply a high volume of carbs. Similarly, when I started eating low carb, I did not eat LCHF. I ate low carb. Plain and simple. I ate moderate fat and moderate protein, but not high protein and not high fat. By your definition, perhaps I wasn't eating low carb. Based on actual carb quantity, I was eating low carb.
So if you have a high TDEE do you eat high everything?
Not necessarily.
Anything resembling a balanced diet would be high everything.
If your definition of "balanced" is equal calories from all macros, then yes, a person with a high enough TDEE would be eating high in all macros.
ETA: Also assumes that said person is eating at maintenance.0 -
midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »SAD includes an average per person per day consumption of 462g of carbs.
Here is a restatement that hopefully makes sense:
1. SAD is high carb.
2. A majority of Americans are overweight or obese.
3. A high carb diet is therefore correlated with being overweight or obese.
4. The WHY isn't as clear.
There may be no why. You have not included enough evidence to make it clear there is a why. It's like saying CA has a high number of white men. CA voted for Clinton. A high number of white men is therefore correlated with voting for Clinton. The why is not so clear.
In particular you are leaving out relevant factors in what appears to be an effort to create a misleading narrative. Let me add some of those factors:
1. SAD has a high amount of total calories, and these calories are made up of (relative to other countries) a high amount of total carbs, a high amount of total fat, and even a high amount of total protein.
2. When looked at percentage-wise, the SAD has many dissimilarities with diets in areas that are not correlated with overweight or obesity.
3. On the macro level, these dissimilarities include a higher percentage of fat, but not a higher percentage of carbs.
4. Other differences include more sugar, more highly processed snack foods, more processed and red meat, more saturated fat.
5. If you look at countries across the board, a high calorie level is correlated with being overweight or obese. High total numbers of carbs and fat are both correlated with being overweight or obese. A high carb percentage is not correlated with being overweight or obese.
None of this suggests that in a calorie-controlled diet or a WF-based diet that a high carb percentage correlates with being overweight or obese or that total number of carbs in the absence of high total numbers of fat correlates with being overweight or obese. I believe this is more responsive to what OP was wondering about. He can comment if he disagrees, of course.
You are right in that there may not be a why. Like I said, it isn't clear... maybe there is none, maybe there are several. I'm just not sure on that.
We've already gone over the high carb quantity vs. high carb percentage difference even before @stevencloser put forth a moderate carb, high calorie hypothetical. When I say "high carb," the person eating 462g per day is eating high carb regardless of whether that is 5% of his/her diet or 100% of his/her diet. That is simply a high volume of carbs. Similarly, when I started eating low carb, I did not eat LCHF. I ate low carb. Plain and simple. I ate moderate fat and moderate protein, but not high protein and not high fat. By your definition, perhaps I wasn't eating low carb. Based on actual carb quantity, I was eating low carb.
So if you have a high TDEE do you eat high everything?
Not necessarily.
Anything resembling a balanced diet would be high everything.
If your definition of "balanced" is equal calories from all macros, then yes, a person with a high enough TDEE would be eating high in all macros.
ETA: Also assumes that said person is eating at maintenance.
No, doesn't have to be equal. Just balanced. Low carb could be balanced as well. My TDEE is about 4k right now. What is "low" carb for me? Or low fat?2 -
midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »SAD includes an average per person per day consumption of 462g of carbs.
Here is a restatement that hopefully makes sense:
1. SAD is high carb.
2. A majority of Americans are overweight or obese.
3. A high carb diet is therefore correlated with being overweight or obese.
4. The WHY isn't as clear.
There may be no why. You have not included enough evidence to make it clear there is a why. It's like saying CA has a high number of white men. CA voted for Clinton. A high number of white men is therefore correlated with voting for Clinton. The why is not so clear.
In particular you are leaving out relevant factors in what appears to be an effort to create a misleading narrative. Let me add some of those factors:
1. SAD has a high amount of total calories, and these calories are made up of (relative to other countries) a high amount of total carbs, a high amount of total fat, and even a high amount of total protein.
2. When looked at percentage-wise, the SAD has many dissimilarities with diets in areas that are not correlated with overweight or obesity.
3. On the macro level, these dissimilarities include a higher percentage of fat, but not a higher percentage of carbs.
4. Other differences include more sugar, more highly processed snack foods, more processed and red meat, more saturated fat.
5. If you look at countries across the board, a high calorie level is correlated with being overweight or obese. High total numbers of carbs and fat are both correlated with being overweight or obese. A high carb percentage is not correlated with being overweight or obese.
None of this suggests that in a calorie-controlled diet or a WF-based diet that a high carb percentage correlates with being overweight or obese or that total number of carbs in the absence of high total numbers of fat correlates with being overweight or obese. I believe this is more responsive to what OP was wondering about. He can comment if he disagrees, of course.
You are right in that there may not be a why. Like I said, it isn't clear... maybe there is none, maybe there are several. I'm just not sure on that.
We've already gone over the high carb quantity vs. high carb percentage difference even before @stevencloser put forth a moderate carb, high calorie hypothetical. When I say "high carb," the person eating 462g per day is eating high carb regardless of whether that is 5% of his/her diet or 100% of his/her diet. That is simply a high volume of carbs. Similarly, when I started eating low carb, I did not eat LCHF. I ate low carb. Plain and simple. I ate moderate fat and moderate protein, but not high protein and not high fat. By your definition, perhaps I wasn't eating low carb. Based on actual carb quantity, I was eating low carb.
So if you have a high TDEE do you eat high everything?
Not necessarily.
Anything resembling a balanced diet would be high everything.
If your definition of "balanced" is equal calories from all macros, then yes, a person with a high enough TDEE would be eating high in all macros.
ETA: Also assumes that said person is eating at maintenance.
No, doesn't have to be equal. Just balanced. Low carb could be balanced as well. My TDEE is about 4k right now. What is "low" carb for me? Or low fat?
Regardless of your TDEE or CI, I would consider <150g to be low carb. I currently aim for much lower than that. When I started eating low carb, I was around 125g daily and my TDEE was about half of yours and CI was even lower since I was eating at a deficit... still considered <150g to be low carb.
Please clarify what you mean by "balanced."0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions