Carbs
Options
Replies
-
That's people nature.0
-
1) You don't drop fat any quicker on a low carb diet than you do on any other diet with equivalent calories. You initially lose a lot of water weight, some of which is the glycogen in your muscles - which leads to #2.....
2) Yes, it will probably hurt your performance in the weight room.
3) If you double up on protein, you're defeating the ostensible purpose of a ketogenic diet, because protein is just as insulogenic as carbs are.
To add to this... I wouldn't double up on protein, unless your base levels are really low. Protein is a very poor source of energy, which is why you hear so many body builders complaining about energy levels.
If you only need to drop some water weight, ketogenic is going to be a good option short term. But if you are trying to look at fat loss, don't bother with that stuff, and start looking into Lyle McDonald's work... something we can't really discuss on this forum.
Who's even hating. You don't lose fat at a fast rate on low carb or ketogenic. If you any diet is going to increase fat loss, in free living conditions or in other studies, it's high protein; fats and carbs have almost no impact on it.
You are mistaken. Maybe YOU don't lose it at a fast rate. I've averaged over 10 pounds a month for 6 months. That's pretty fast IMHO. How would you really know anyway? Have your tried it? Oh, you read about it. Or you tried a different method successfully. I see. I would bet most of the people who are anti-lchf never did it. They tried it for a week. Or read it was bad someplace. You are so opinionated about this. If you are going to be an expert at least be open to other solutions and get your head out of the sand.
I have averaged a lot more than that for even longer without doing low anything. What does that prove other than I have been able to maintain a calorie deficit? Nobody here is bashing lchf. We are simply saying it isn't some magic way of losing weight that many make it out to be. The real secret to losing weight is that there is no secret. You simply eat fewer calories than you burn. That is it. Beyond that, find what keeps you satisfied and provides proper nutrition. If you are bothered by the truth, maybe it is time for some reflection.4 -
1) You don't drop fat any quicker on a low carb diet than you do on any other diet with equivalent calories. You initially lose a lot of water weight, some of which is the glycogen in your muscles - which leads to #2.....
2) Yes, it will probably hurt your performance in the weight room.
3) If you double up on protein, you're defeating the ostensible purpose of a ketogenic diet, because protein is just as insulogenic as carbs are.
To add to this... I wouldn't double up on protein, unless your base levels are really low. Protein is a very poor source of energy, which is why you hear so many body builders complaining about energy levels.
If you only need to drop some water weight, ketogenic is going to be a good option short term. But if you are trying to look at fat loss, don't bother with that stuff, and start looking into Lyle McDonald's work... something we can't really discuss on this forum.
Who's even hating. You don't lose fat at a fast rate on low carb or ketogenic. If you any diet is going to increase fat loss, in free living conditions or in other studies, it's high protein; fats and carbs have almost no impact on it.
You are mistaken. Maybe YOU don't lose it at a fast rate. I've averaged over 10 pounds a month for 6 months. That's pretty fast IMHO. How would you really know anyway? Have your tried it? Oh, you read about it. Or you tried a different method successfully. I see. I would bet most of the people who are anti-lchf never did it. They tried it for a week. Or read it was bad someplace. You are so opinionated about this. If you are going to be an expert at least be open to other solutions and get your head out of the sand.
So you aren't eating no carb then. Think you didn't grasp that OP is suggesting no carb not low carb.
Your calorie deficit defines your rate of loss.
Yes. Missed the no carb. Sorry, I think that is a horrible idea. I'm not into the meat and magnesium diet. Eat meat until you don't go, then overdose on magnesium to go. I eat plenty of healthy vegetables.
On your second comment. To some extent. But restricting calories and eating low fat is how most people try to create a deficit. Once people stop and go back to the old habits they gain, plus some. I've done that about 10 times and I'll never do it again.
To all the people who love to jump on a say there is no benefit or advantage to LCHF. It's the same group of people that love saying it. Well, you are very wrong. How do you think that makes people feel who have succeeded and failed over and over gain with low-fat, low-calorie diets and they are having great success on LCHF. And they feel like they can eat like that for the rest of their lives and never gain it back. Maybe you should stop being so anti-lchf. I mean, what do you really care anyway. If it works for some people and the love it, encourage them to do what they want. If you want to cut your calories to lose weight. Great! Go for it. Enjoy your eqq whites on dry toast!
If you believe you lose weight on LCHF without restricting calories, you drank the sugar-free kool-aid Fung wants to serve.9 -
If you are bothered by the truth, maybe it is time for some reflection. It's not the only truth. So maybe you should reflect on it.0
-
-
You guys!! Do i need to pull out my favourite gif!?
As for low carb.... I enjoyed it, if it wasn't for a couple of side effects i would have continued on with it. I did lose weight quicker, but only because my appetite and cravings reduced, therefore somewhat effortlessly reducing my calories without feeling that gnawing hunger i hate so much.
6 -
If you are bothered by the truth, maybe it is time for some reflection. It's not the only truth. So maybe you should reflect on it.
Are you seriously suggesting that cutting carbs will cause you to lose body fat without a calorie deficit? That seems to be the debate this has devolved into and there aren't different truths about that.5 -
Christine_72 wrote: »As for low carb.... I enjoyed it, if it wasn't for a couple of side effects i would have continued on with it. I did lose weight quicker, but only because my appetite and cravings reduced, therefore somewhat effortlessly reducing my calories without feeling that gnawing hunger i hate so much.
I found it easier (not easy) to lose with low carb for the same reason - reduced hunger. I stayed with it for a year. Worked great for helping me stay in a deficit the whole time.1 -
I like carbs a lot, and they help fuel me for my running. I think no carb is super silly, and low carb is more manageable but I love my English muffins and ice cream ¯\_(ツ)_/¯4
-
I like carbs a lot, and they help fuel me for my running. I think no carb is super silly, and low carb is more manageable but I love my English muffins and ice cream ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Me too! I don't run, but I couldn't live without my big bowl of Kashi Berry Cereal loaded with Fresh strawberries, blueberries, raspberries, and milk every morning. And a brownie with milk before bed, too! No carbs? No thanks!1 -
FYI, I'm eating a bowl of Skinny Pop salt-and-pepper popcorn as I read this...5
-
I suppose you can try it out to see how you do, but for me carbs fuel my lifting sessions and I perform better with them in my diet. I do lower my carbs a little on rest days which works for me. When you say you need to drop weight quickly, do you mean water weight for a powerlifting meet?2
-
1) You don't drop fat any quicker on a low carb diet than you do on any other diet with equivalent calories. You initially lose a lot of water weight, some of which is the glycogen in your muscles - which leads to #2.....
2) Yes, it will probably hurt your performance in the weight room.
3) If you double up on protein, you're defeating the ostensible purpose of a ketogenic diet, because protein is just as insulogenic as carbs are.
To add to this... I wouldn't double up on protein, unless your base levels are really low. Protein is a very poor source of energy, which is why you hear so many body builders complaining about energy levels.
If you only need to drop some water weight, ketogenic is going to be a good option short term. But if you are trying to look at fat loss, don't bother with that stuff, and start looking into Lyle McDonald's work... something we can't really discuss on this forum.
Who's even hating. You don't lose fat at a fast rate on low carb or ketogenic. If you any diet is going to increase fat loss, in free living conditions or in other studies, it's high protein; fats and carbs have almost no impact on it.
You are mistaken. Maybe YOU don't lose it at a fast rate. I've averaged over 10 pounds a month for 6 months. That's pretty fast IMHO. How would you really know anyway? Have your tried it? Oh, you read about it. Or you tried a different method successfully. I see. I would bet most of the people who are anti-lchf never did it. They tried it for a week. Or read it was bad someplace. You are so opinionated about this. If you are going to be an expert at least be open to other solutions and get your head out of the sand.
So you aren't eating no carb then. Think you didn't grasp that OP is suggesting no carb not low carb.
Your calorie deficit defines your rate of loss.
Yes. Missed the no carb. Sorry, I think that is a horrible idea. I'm not into the meat and magnesium diet. Eat meat until you don't go, then overdose on magnesium to go. I eat plenty of healthy vegetables.
On your second comment. To some extent. But restricting calories and eating low fat is how most people try to create a deficit. Once people stop and go back to the old habits they gain, plus some. I've done that about 10 times and I'll never do it again.
To all the people who love to jump on a say there is no benefit or advantage to LCHF. It's the same group of people that love saying it. Well, you are very wrong. How do you think that makes people feel who have succeeded and failed over and over gain with low-fat, low-calorie diets and they are having great success on LCHF. And they feel like they can eat like that for the rest of their lives and never gain it back. Maybe you should stop being so anti-lchf. I mean, what do you really care anyway. If it works for some people and the love it, encourage them to do what they want. If you want to cut your calories to lose weight. Great! Go for it. Enjoy your eqq whites on dry toast!
People aren't anti LCHF. They are anti LCHF proselytizing and BS. For the vast majority of people it is a very elaborate placebo. Which is fine. Just be honest about it.
It is almost NEVER presented as "this is a style of eating that I enjoy and helps me maintain a deficit".
No, it's presented as THE GREATEST THING EVAH!!! by a veritable army of dilettantes and grifters. And unsuspecting folks read the crap and the breathless testimonials and radically change their entire way of eating to do something they could have achieved with any eating style. Mostly they just end up wasting 3-6 months of their lives chasing a unicorn.
People need to know the facts so that they can make informed decisions. Presenting facts is not "hating", unless you have a financial or emotional stake in a particular eating habit.
The most recent scientific evidence--some of the best that has been done in this area--has been consistent in demonstrating that LCHF has no benefit for fat loss independent of a sustained calorie deficit. There is no Santa Claus, no Easter Bunny, and no Insulin Fairy.
11 -
1) You don't drop fat any quicker on a low carb diet than you do on any other diet with equivalent calories. You initially lose a lot of water weight, some of which is the glycogen in your muscles - which leads to #2.....
2) Yes, it will probably hurt your performance in the weight room.
3) If you double up on protein, you're defeating the ostensible purpose of a ketogenic diet, because protein is just as insulogenic as carbs are.
To add to this... I wouldn't double up on protein, unless your base levels are really low. Protein is a very poor source of energy, which is why you hear so many body builders complaining about energy levels.
If you only need to drop some water weight, ketogenic is going to be a good option short term. But if you are trying to look at fat loss, don't bother with that stuff, and start looking into Lyle McDonald's work... something we can't really discuss on this forum.
Who's even hating. You don't lose fat at a fast rate on low carb or ketogenic. If you any diet is going to increase fat loss, in free living conditions or in other studies, it's high protein; fats and carbs have almost no impact on it.
You are mistaken. Maybe YOU don't lose it at a fast rate. I've averaged over 10 pounds a month for 6 months. That's pretty fast IMHO. How would you really know anyway? Have your tried it? Oh, you read about it. Or you tried a different method successfully. I see. I would bet most of the people who are anti-lchf never did it. They tried it for a week. Or read it was bad someplace. You are so opinionated about this. If you are going to be an expert at least be open to other solutions and get your head out of the sand.
So you aren't eating no carb then. Think you didn't grasp that OP is suggesting no carb not low carb.
Your calorie deficit defines your rate of loss.
Yes. Missed the no carb. Sorry, I think that is a horrible idea. I'm not into the meat and magnesium diet. Eat meat until you don't go, then overdose on magnesium to go. I eat plenty of healthy vegetables.
On your second comment. To some extent. But restricting calories and eating low fat is how most people try to create a deficit. Once people stop and go back to the old habits they gain, plus some. I've done that about 10 times and I'll never do it again.
To all the people who love to jump on a say there is no benefit or advantage to LCHF. It's the same group of people that love saying it. Well, you are very wrong. How do you think that makes people feel who have succeeded and failed over and over gain with low-fat, low-calorie diets and they are having great success on LCHF. And they feel like they can eat like that for the rest of their lives and never gain it back. Maybe you should stop being so anti-lchf. I mean, what do you really care anyway. If it works for some people and the love it, encourage them to do what they want. If you want to cut your calories to lose weight. Great! Go for it. Enjoy your eqq whites on dry toast!
People aren't anti LCHF. They are anti LCHF proselytizing and BS. For the vast majority of people it is a very elaborate placebo. Which is fine. Just be honest about it.
It is almost NEVER presented as "this is a style of eating that I enjoy and helps me maintain a deficit".
No, it's presented as THE GREATEST THING EVAH!!! by a veritable army of dilettantes and grifters. And unsuspecting folks read the crap and the breathless testimonials and radically change their entire way of eating to do something they could have achieved with any eating style. Mostly they just end up wasting 3-6 months of their lives chasing a unicorn.
People need to know the facts so that they can make informed decisions. Presenting facts is not "hating", unless you have a financial or emotional stake in a particular eating habit.
The most recent scientific evidence--some of the best that has been done in this area--has been consistent in demonstrating that LCHF has no benefit for fat loss independent of a sustained calorie deficit. There is no Santa Claus, no Easter Bunny, and no Insulin Fairy.
The Insulin Fairy is real. I've seen pictures:
9 -
Sources more reliable than dietdoctor would be a good place to start learning about the pros and cons of a low carb diet. Cherry picking and manipulating bits of a study here and there will not give you accurate information.4 -
Well, we've had this conversation as far as I'm concerned. Thank you for your opinions and comments. I wonder why so many people like LCHF if it's such a fallacy. The reason is probably that they struggled before and are having some success using it. As far as the only reason being a deficit, that maybe so. I wouldn't know because I don't count my calories or weigh my food. I try to eat when I'm hungry and not when I an not. I gave up beer which is very high in both calories and carbs. I do miss beer. Is low carb a magic bullet? No. But for some, it's much more sustainable in the long run. This is especially true for the morbidly obese with a lot of medical issues. As far as the diet doctor eating plan, his low carb plan is very simple and viable. I don't think zero carb is a good idea at all.
Starting weight - 277 (Nov 30, 2016)
Current weight - 215
Goal weight - 170
Cheers0 -
-
When doing a ketogenic diet it says to have .8-1g of protein per body weight, that is easily achievable for me. I haven't changed how much protein I eat while on the keto diet and I still lift, I don't have a problem in the weight room. That being said, I've only been doing keto for a couple weeks.. with some slips in there. You could always try it and if it isn't working for you... then add carbs back into your diet.
Keto is less than 30g of net carbs a day (lower is better), ye ole fashioned LC diet is less than 100g but less than 50g is better. You could just start by ridding yourself of pasta, bread and processed carbs... I mean, that's good for you to do anyways! Incorporate more protein, healthy fats, and veggies.0 -
I wonder why so many people like LCHF if it's such a fallacy.
Because a diet does not have to magically work differently than other diets in order to be a more sustainable way of eating for some people?
No one said it didn't work. They said it's not necessary to lose weight (and specifically that "no carb" is not necessary). Low carb may, or may not, be a good choice for OP -- it's for OP to decide if he wants to try it -- but at this point there's no reason to think that he needs to in order to lose weight, as he seems to have thought. If his concern is dropping water weight in the short term, yeah, it might help, but in the short term is also when it's likely to most hurt his performance, which is something he should understand.
You seem to be reading in stuff that was not said, I really am not sure why, it's interesting.ThatLadyFromMN wrote: »Keto is less than 30g of net carbs a day (lower is better), ye ole fashioned LC diet is less than 100g but less than 50g is better.
Why is less than 50 g "better"?3 -
HooBoy! I have not spent much time here in the last 3 years or so due to various personal life and professional life reasons. I've been back for about a week and it's like I never left when reading this thread......
4
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 390 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 922 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions