Is it healthy to completely cut out carbs from my diet?
Options
Replies
-
CafeRacer808 wrote: »French_Peasant wrote: »I was under the impression that the discussion was on the theoretical mechanics of sustaining this particular diet; if I missed that we were discussing your personal preferences and their relationship to scurvy instead of the historical sweep of the elements contributing to the diet, please accept my apologies.
You did, indeed, miss it and I accept your apology.
0 -
RuNaRoUnDaFiEld wrote: »3rdof7sisters wrote: »Low carb, yes. Cut out overly processed foods, yes.
No carb, close to impossible to eliminate carbs totally.
Your body/brain needs carbs.
It doesn't, the body can convert from fat and protein.
http://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/nutrition-and-healthy-eating/in-depth/carbohydrates/art-20045705
0 -
Yet many people have enormous success in losing weight (and maintaining) simply by counting calories and eating less than they expend. How do we explain that wizardry in the absence of the use of highly complex, nonlinear equations? Anecdotally, I've lost 60 pounds and never once had to break out my scientific calculator to solve for my biological processes - I chose calorie/macro goals based upon my goals and calculated daily needs, and adjusted as necessary based upon the results I was getting.
Kudos! 60 pounds is a great accomplishment. Glad you're in the portion of the population that this works well for. That bit where you adjusted as necessary based on results is great and really the only accurate (cheap, available) method of figuring out your expenditure. However, you had 60 pounds to lose! For those of us with 10-15 lbs to lose, it's really difficult to hone in on what that expenditure is, how much of a deficit to have, results are often masked by fluctuations in water and these can be significant particularly for women.
There plenty of studies where weight loss does not align well with that predicted from CICO. Of course, this is not a failure of the energy balance equation, but rather a failure of our estimations for calorie intake, expenditure, or both. Reduction of carbohydrates, for some of the population at least, seems to work well. Is this fundamentally because calorie expenditure is greater than calorie intake? OF COURSE.
Low-carb also has proven benefits which have nothing to do with weight loss, which is why I adopted it as a long term way of eating. I like eating fewer carbs, it makes me feel better. Isn't that what those in the "moderation" crowd tell people of MFP - eat what you want within your calorie limit, fuel your body appropriately and don't neglect health? If you do well and feel good with higher or whatever carbs, I wouldn't suggest you change that.1 -
breannemarie1993 wrote: »Cutting out starches and added sugars isn't a bad idea at all... they are foreign to the body and don't really belong there anyways. However, to cut out "carbs" in general is next to impossible. Fruits contain a ton of carbs and most veggies do as well. So if you're cutting out the bad, processed crap, I say go for it. You'll be miserable for the first two weeks because our bodies become very addicted to sugars but it won't kill you. If you have the motivation and will power, do it!
Yeah, no.
3 -
I love my fruit and veggies, the more the better for me (admittedly i struggle with getting enough veggies, and too much fruit, I need to find a balance there), i just feel better overall when i get plenty of veggies in me. And to be totally honest i think organ meats would make a "reappearance" before i could even swallow it :sick: I just couldn't do it, no matter how healthy it is claimed to be...
My husband is the same. He spent months at a time living in the bush, and he ate some vile things, but he too draws the line at liver et al.1 -
3rdof7sisters wrote: »RuNaRoUnDaFiEld wrote: »3rdof7sisters wrote: »Low carb, yes. Cut out overly processed foods, yes.
No carb, close to impossible to eliminate carbs totally.
Your body/brain needs carbs.
It doesn't, the body can convert from fat and protein.
http://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/nutrition-and-healthy-eating/in-depth/carbohydrates/art-20045705
I'm not sure what your wanting me to read on that link.
Carbs are not an essential macro. To be essential your body must need them and not be able to make them. The body can make glucose for the brain and the blood cells by converting the aminos in protein.1 -
So, for the average person, you are saying they do not need
Fruits, vegetables, whole grains, legumes
Just lean protein, healthy fats are all you need.
I am serious about this, where do the fruits, vegetables come into a healthy diet?
Sorry that I am so ignorant. Correct me if I am wrong, but the UK is advocating for 10 servings of fruit and vegetables daily.0 -
3rdof7sisters wrote: »So, for the average person, you are saying they do not need
Fruits, vegetables, whole grains, legumes
Just lean protein, healthy fats are all you need.
I am serious about this, where do the fruits, vegetables come into a healthy diet?
Sorry that I am so ignorant. Correct me if I am wrong, but the UK is advocating for 10 servings of fruit and vegetables daily.
I personally eat a load of fruit, veg and carbs.
But to make a statement saying the brain needs them was incorrect. The body can make what it needs.1 -
3rdof7sisters wrote: »So, for the average person, you are saying they do not need
Fruits, vegetables, whole grains, legumes
Just lean protein, healthy fats are all you need.
I am serious about this, where do the fruits, vegetables come into a healthy diet?
Sorry that I am so ignorant. Correct me if I am wrong, but the UK is advocating for 10 servings of fruit and vegetables daily.
You are not ignorant nor are you wrong. What the folks have been arguing is that fruits/veggies/grains/etc are not ESSENTIAL for a healthy diet. The only two macros that are ESSENTIAL for a healthy diet are protein and fat. Note that the definition of ESSENTIAL is that it is a macro that the human body cannot manufacture on it's own, therefore it must come from outside the body. Carbs are not ESSENTIAL because the body can manufacture the small amounts of glucose that are actually required for proper function from the fats and protein consumed and use ketones for energy in place of glucose.
Yes, all of the carbs can be a part of a healthy diet, and lots of people include them in a healthy diet, but they are not ESSENTIAL to a healthy diet. In fact, there are people for whom certain carbs are poison - like Celiacs, and others for whom fiber is a major no-no - those with certain forms of IBS can have horrible symptoms from consuming even very small amounts of fiber.
The biggest problem with government guidelines is that they are always a 'one size fits all' approach and humans are very complex and very diversified and it is a rare occasion when the 'one size fits all' approach actually covers everyone.1 -
No it's not.0
-
3rdof7sisters wrote: »So, for the average person, you are saying they do not need
Fruits, vegetables, whole grains, legumes
Just lean protein, healthy fats are all you need.
I am serious about this, where do the fruits, vegetables come into a healthy diet?
Sorry that I am so ignorant. Correct me if I am wrong, but the UK is advocating for 10 servings of fruit and vegetables daily.
Yeah I think very few people (I have seen one or two around the internet) would contend that fruits and vegetables aren't healthy. I think many people can have issues with high-sugar fruits (mangoes, dates, etc) if they are already eating a carb-heavy diet, especially at the expense of fat and protein. Personally, things like dates make me want to just keep eating dates, and candy, and really just keep eating. BUT this isn't proven, and anecdotally isn't the case for everyone.
Fruits and veg contain a ton of nutrients, both essential and non-essential, that contribute to good health. (Important point there, just because something is non-essential doesn't mean it can't be a beneficial addition to your diet). I eat a ketogenic diet (meaning less than 40-50 g net carbs/day, high fat) and would be hard-pressed to find a day when I'm not eating 8-10 portions of veg or fruit (mostly veg, but I do eat berries and some other fruit occasionally).0 -
FarewellBlues wrote: »Yet many people have enormous success in losing weight (and maintaining) simply by counting calories and eating less than they expend. How do we explain that wizardry in the absence of the use of highly complex, nonlinear equations? Anecdotally, I've lost 60 pounds and never once had to break out my scientific calculator to solve for my biological processes - I chose calorie/macro goals based upon my goals and calculated daily needs, and adjusted as necessary based upon the results I was getting.
Kudos! 60 pounds is a great accomplishment. Glad you're in the portion of the population that this works well for. That bit where you adjusted as necessary based on results is great and really the only accurate (cheap, available) method of figuring out your expenditure. However, you had 60 pounds to lose! For those of us with 10-15 lbs to lose, it's really difficult to hone in on what that expenditure is, how much of a deficit to have, results are often masked by fluctuations in water and these can be significant particularly for women.
There plenty of studies where weight loss does not align well with that predicted from CICO. Of course, this is not a failure of the energy balance equation, but rather a failure of our estimations for calorie intake, expenditure, or both. Reduction of carbohydrates, for some of the population at least, seems to work well. Is this fundamentally because calorie expenditure is greater than calorie intake? OF COURSE.
Low-carb also has proven benefits which have nothing to do with weight loss, which is why I adopted it as a long term way of eating. I like eating fewer carbs, it makes me feel better. Isn't that what those in the "moderation" crowd tell people of MFP - eat what you want within your calorie limit, fuel your body appropriately and don't neglect health? If you do well and feel good with higher or whatever carbs, I wouldn't suggest you change that.
You understand that the energy balance equation still needs to be figured out regardless of your way of eating? So what has that got to do with you liking to low carb? Your argument isn't an argument here.
And if you use a weight trending app, track accurately you can pretty quickly work out CICO even as a woman. Of course some may not consider 6-8 weeks quick but in the grand scheme of things it's a small investment. You just need some averages and you can work the rest out based on losses/gains/staying the same. That applies whether you have 10 or 100 pounds to lose.7 -
OP, your thread title hit the magic button and started the current argument du jour
. Carbs and their usefulness, necessity, correlation to the devil is kind of the hot topic right now.
As others have said, fruits and veggies are carbs. Carbs do not make you gain weight, excess calories do. There are plenty of people who have successfully lost weight by cutting out grains and eating protein, fats, and veggies so if you want to try it, go for it. There are also plenty of people who have successfully lost weight while eating a lot of carbs, so it's not necessary to cut them out. You have to find the way of eating that you can be happy and satiated with at the right amount of calories. It's different for everyone.
As a point of reference, I lost 15 vanity lbs eating @ 50% carbs, including potatoes, pasta, bread, pretzels, pizza, cereal etc. all the time. I did it by using a food scale and making sure I was hitting my calorie goal (I watched my protein as well). I wasn't hungry or bloated. My blood pressure, cholesterol, blood sugar, etc have always and continue to be in the optimal range. Not saying that because it worked for me it will work for everyone, just that carbs aren't universally the source of excess weight, poor health, and demon possession universally. Good luck! 7 -
FarewellBlues wrote: »Yet many people have enormous success in losing weight (and maintaining) simply by counting calories and eating less than they expend. How do we explain that wizardry in the absence of the use of highly complex, nonlinear equations? Anecdotally, I've lost 60 pounds and never once had to break out my scientific calculator to solve for my biological processes - I chose calorie/macro goals based upon my goals and calculated daily needs, and adjusted as necessary based upon the results I was getting.
Kudos! 60 pounds is a great accomplishment. Glad you're in the portion of the population that this works well for. That bit where you adjusted as necessary based on results is great and really the only accurate (cheap, available) method of figuring out your expenditure. However, you had 60 pounds to lose! For those of us with 10-15 lbs to lose, it's really difficult to hone in on what that expenditure is, how much of a deficit to have, results are often masked by fluctuations in water and these can be significant particularly for women.
There plenty of studies where weight loss does not align well with that predicted from CICO. Of course, this is not a failure of the energy balance equation, but rather a failure of our estimations for calorie intake, expenditure, or both. Reduction of carbohydrates, for some of the population at least, seems to work well. Is this fundamentally because calorie expenditure is greater than calorie intake? OF COURSE.
Low-carb also has proven benefits which have nothing to do with weight loss, which is why I adopted it as a long term way of eating. I like eating fewer carbs, it makes me feel better. Isn't that what those in the "moderation" crowd tell people of MFP - eat what you want within your calorie limit, fuel your body appropriately and don't neglect health? If you do well and feel good with higher or whatever carbs, I wouldn't suggest you change that.
Well, that's just not been my experience. I'm a woman, and though I've already lost 95 pounds, I'm down to the last few vanity pounds after stretches of maintenance eating.
When I eat at a regular deficit and log accurately, I lose as expected. Granted that the bulk of my activity is pretty easy to get decent estimates for energy expenditure for since it's step based, and I have used a Fitbit for quite a while. It's had time to get to know me and provides a very good estimation of my TDEE.
I don't need to eat a special way to lose weight, so I'm not sure what point you're making about people with less weight to lose, CICO being estimates, and low carb other than it being your preference. Which is all cool because I'm all for people dieting in a way that suits their dietary preferences.
I'm just having trouble understanding what point you're trying to make here.3 -
Need2BFitAgain wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »You understand veg and fruit are carbs? So in that context it's fine. BUT carbs don't make you gain weight, excess calories do, same for sugar.
I reduce starchy carbs when losing just because they're the easiest thing to reduce and still feel satisfied but they're still part of nearly every meal, just in smaller quantities.
This is debatable... if you subscribe to the Ketogenic Way of Eating... Carbs cause insulin spikes which cause your body to store unused energy as fat.. just sayin.
If you have unused energy, you are eating at a surplus which would cause fat gain. Has nothing to do with the carbs. It's really not debatable.9 -
Need2BFitAgain wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »You understand veg and fruit are carbs? So in that context it's fine. BUT carbs don't make you gain weight, excess calories do, same for sugar.
I reduce starchy carbs when losing just because they're the easiest thing to reduce and still feel satisfied but they're still part of nearly every meal, just in smaller quantities.
This is debatable... if you subscribe to the Ketogenic Way of Eating... Carbs cause insulin spikes which cause your body to store unused energy as fat.. just sayin.
Are you saying that eating carbs causes a person to store fat, even in a calorie deficit?6 -
Christine_72 wrote: »I love my fruit and veggies, the more the better for me (admittedly i struggle with getting enough veggies, and too much fruit, I need to find a balance there), i just feel better overall when i get plenty of veggies in me. And to be totally honest i think organ meats would make a "reappearance" before i could even swallow it :sick: I just couldn't do it, no matter how healthy it is claimed to be...
My husband is the same. He spent months at a time living in the bush, and he ate some vile things, but he too draws the line at liver et al.
Christine, do you eat a lot of fruit year round, or is it more seasonal? I tend to go crazy on it during the summer, but eat much less during the winter. I really think it's normal to take advantage of seasonal windfalls and wouldn't stress about it.
I'm with you on organ meat. Or "barely cooked" meat. Then again, I don't eat any meat! 3 -
3rdof7sisters wrote: »So, for the average person, you are saying they do not need
Fruits, vegetables, whole grains, legumes
Just lean protein, healthy fats are all you need.
I am serious about this, where do the fruits, vegetables come into a healthy diet?
Sorry that I am so ignorant. Correct me if I am wrong, but the UK is advocating for 10 servings of fruit and vegetables daily.
You do not need them because your body will make them.
That doesn't mean that not eating them is optimal.
Eat up, follow what the UK is advocating.3 -
Fruits and vegetables are fruits and vegetables. Carbs are macro-nutrients, and they are one part of fruits and vegetables.VintageFeline wrote: »You understand veg and fruit are carbs?
OP, there is no problem with trying something new for a few weeks to see how it works for you.
0 -
Fruits and vegetables are fruits and vegetables. Carbs are macro-nutrients, and they are one part of fruits and vegetables.VintageFeline wrote: »You understand veg and fruit are carbs?
OP, there is no problem with trying something new for a few weeks to see how it works for you.
Given the OP said cutting out carbs and we are talking about macros in that context then it's not incorrect to say fruit and veg are Carbs. Their micronutrient profiles differ but so do starchy carbs.3
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.9K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 397 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 975 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions