Carbs
Replies
-
How would I not have background on you? You have 28,000 posts. haha. You dish out advice like its gospel. But humans are different so worked great for you won't work for everyone. As far as I can tell you say the same thing all the time. I advocate that people should do what they want to do.0
-
WendyLeigh1119 wrote: »WendyLeigh1119 wrote: »
Its not about "hating". It's about the stupidity of needlessly cutting something that won't improve your weight goals nor health and makes effective, long term fitness and healthy eating more difficult.
Linking to someone called "The Diet Doctor" doesn't help your case, either.
Try reading the site and check the guy out before knocking it.
I did read the site. And that is why I mentioned your link. He mentions foods that are high in calories and sugar that happen to be carbs. Eating them and gaining weight isn't because of the carbs it's because they're high calorie, high sugar, saturated fatty foods. Not because they're "carbs".
I mean, he actually has photos of donuts and soda as if the problem with those foods is the number of carbs. So yes. The site is laughable and clearly preying on confused dieters.
You need to read more.0 -
CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »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.
if you are losing 10lbs a month then either you have a LOT of weight to lose, or you have a really big deficit.oh and when starting low carb diets the first big loss is usually water weight.I have tried low carb(also tried keto) so Im not knocking it. Its not for me.
I do...or did. Wonderful! I'm glad you know that.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.
Depends on how much you weighed, how much you had to lose. When I had a lot to lose I lost that fast without doing low carb.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 like low carb. I don't notice that it is a fast rate of loss than not low carbing (I've done both). Saying that low carb does not have magical fat weight loss properties (beyond some initial water weight) is NOT being anti lchf. I mean, seriously, why would you think that?7 -
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!
Sorry but you are coming over as dreadfully myopic and misinformed.
EVERYONE loses weight by having a negative calorie balance.
I've succeeded, I haven't changed the way I eat - just reduced calories for a while. I didn't go either very low calorie or low fat.
Been happily and successfully maintaining for years.
You think you have found your way - good, I genuinely hope you are successful. But it's just one way to skin a cat.
And why are you so determined to turn this into LCHF propaganda? It's not the subject of this thread.
Maybe create your own rather than derail this one?
13 -
How would I not have background on you? You have 28,000 posts. haha. You dish out advice like its gospel. But humans are different so worked great for you won't work for everyone. As far as I can tell you say the same thing all the time. I advocate that people should do what they want to do.
If you think my 28,000 post all say the same thing, you have a very myopic view of my post.10 -
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.
No, this is nonsense. People create a deficit all kinds of ways. When I wasn't doing low carb I've mainly done 40-30-30, which is not low fat, and on the whole I think most people around here aren't into low fat (although IMO it works for some, just like LCHF does).
Doing moderate eating or low fat eating is NOT more likely to make someone (in general, on average) not sustain than LCHF. Instead, it matters who the person is. Obviously, for an individual picking something sustainable for YOU is important, and some may find WFPB and some may find low fat and some may find not looking at macros and some may find LCHF and some may find 40-30-30 and so on most sustainable. It depends on the person. Point is that LCHF is not magically superior for all. And saying that is not "hating on" LCHF. I do LCHF, and currently like it.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.
Why would it make you feel bad? I don't get it. You found something that works for you, great, why pretend like it's the best for all or that it has some weight loss properties that other diets do not. Instead, it's better for you for various reasons, perhaps. Most people choose to do something they think will work well for them, after all -- using your own logic, if saying that LCHF is not inherently superior is supposed to make you feel bad, aren't you making all the people not looking at macros or doing low fat successfully or enjoying 40-30-30 feel bad? I mean, I don't see why they should care, but that's the argument you are making.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!
I never have eaten egg whites on dry toast when dieting, including when I was doing what might be called low fat, and certainly not with 40-30-30.
I find it odd that you interpreted the responses in this conversation as anti lchf. Not saying "LCHF is the very best diet ever, for all"=anti-LCHF?7 -
At least in my case, you would be 100% mistaken in your assumptions above. I ran a keto diet about 25 years ago, for about twice as long as you've been running it. I did a lot of research and reading before I did it, and I've done a lot of research, reading and learning about keto diets (and a lot of other topics pertaining to diet, nutrition, health, training and physiology) since.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've espoused my opinion about ketogenic diets before. I'm not anti-keto, I'm anti-woo. I think they can be an effective diet protocol for weight loss. My experience tells me so, as I lost over 40 pounds when I did the keto diet. For some people, it promotes satiety and better adherence. For other people, it's a nightmare of restrictiveness, imbalance, brain fog, gastric disturbances, fatigue/low energy and poor workout performance. But either way the keto diet is not magical, it doesn't defy the laws of energy balance and it's not the One True Way to weight loss, perfect health and spiritual enlightenment.
Make no mistake - if you're consistently losing weight (beyond water/glycogen) on a ketogenic diet, you're in a caloric deficit. Because you don't lose weight any other way. That is a scientifically established fact and has nothing to do with being a "hater".10 -
We'll that's kind of the exact opposite of what I am. Maybe you have stayed thin, but it's very common for people to gain weight back. I agree with the more ways to skin the cat! And I support people using any method they want to use. I've done most of them.0
-
It's sadly common for people to regain the weight they lose irrespective of how they eat.
11 -
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
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 394K Introduce Yourself
- 43.9K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 432 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.1K Motivation and Support
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.9K MyFitnessPal Information
- 15 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.7K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions