Low fat vs Low carb.. which is better

Options
psuLemon
psuLemon Posts: 38,398 MFP Moderator
in Health and Weight Loss
Below is some great stuff from examine.com, as always. Discusses a year long study compar LF and LC., compliance and cholesterol.

https://examine.com/nutrition/low-fat-vs-low-carb-for-weight-loss/

Year long study comparing low carb vs.low fat ad litibum eating.

Dr. Norton's discussion on the topic.

https://youtu.be/GOTVzupttyA


Essentially, it doesn't matter. Equal drop our rates, and equivalent weight loss in terms of statistical significance. So each whatever way you can stick with.

Replies

  • fb47
    fb47 Posts: 1,058 Member
    edited March 2018
    Options
    I saw that video just 2 minutes before seing your post :D I like Norton's videos.
  • psuLemon
    psuLemon Posts: 38,398 MFP Moderator
    Options
    fb47 wrote: »
    I saw that video just 2 minutes before seing your post :D I like Norton's videos.

    Yea, he has very solid stuff and they seem to be improving. Although, i prefer Jeff Nippard in terms of a YouTube personality.
  • Lillymoo01
    Lillymoo01 Posts: 2,865 Member
    Options
    Lucky I am a moderate carb, moderate fat, moderate protein kind of girl. Why? Because that is how I like it and I know it does not make a blind bit of difference when it comes to weight loss.
  • ugofatcat
    ugofatcat Posts: 385 Member
    Options
    I think by fixating only on low or high carbohydrate without taking nutritional composition into account, you are missing out on the big picture. I don't consider 20 grams carbohydrate from fruit to be the same as 20 grams of carbohydrate from pop. (In terms of nutrition, not talking about calories.) By focusing only on macros you may be missing out of vitamins, minerals, antioxidants, fiber, and phytonutrients.

    But at the end of the day it does comedown to what people will stick to. If it helps someone lose and maintain weight that's benefical.
  • psuLemon
    psuLemon Posts: 38,398 MFP Moderator
    Options
    ugofatcat wrote: »
    I think by fixating only on low or high carbohydrate without taking nutritional composition into account, you are missing out on the big picture. I don't consider 20 grams carbohydrate from fruit to be the same as 20 grams of carbohydrate from pop. (In terms of nutrition, not talking about calories.) By focusing only on macros you may be missing out of vitamins, minerals, antioxidants, fiber, and phytonutrients.

    But at the end of the day it does comedown to what people will stick to. If it helps someone lose and maintain weight that's benefical.

    No one, to include this study, suggests that you shouldn't consider composition of food. But one certainly can incorporate a soda and fruit into their diet and be perfect healthy.

    This just further reinforces that calories are the primary concern for weight management, not the amount of carbs you consume.
  • LivingtheLeanDream
    LivingtheLeanDream Posts: 13,342 Member
    Options
    The one that works is the one you can stick to :smile:
  • fb47
    fb47 Posts: 1,058 Member
    Options
    ugofatcat wrote: »
    I think by fixating only on low or high carbohydrate without taking nutritional composition into account, you are missing out on the big picture. I don't consider 20 grams carbohydrate from fruit to be the same as 20 grams of carbohydrate from pop. (In terms of nutrition, not talking about calories.) By focusing only on macros you may be missing out of vitamins, minerals, antioxidants, fiber, and phytonutrients.

    But at the end of the day it does comedown to what people will stick to. If it helps someone lose and maintain weight that's benefical.

    In a diet, you don't need a one or the other mentality...you can have both in your diet. It's especially true in a bulk.

Categories