Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
Has Paleo had its day?
Replies
-
tennisdude2004 wrote: »
I haven’t seen anyone on this thread saying that LCHF is better than any other diet model, or that weight lose is anything other than calorie deficit.
On this thread, I have seen people dismissing keto as a craze (even though it has been around for a century) and openly wanting to topple it. Which is probably why you don’t find many LCHF / keto dieters getting involved in these types of debates.
If you want some example of people happily eating less carbs than you can manage to then there are a couple of keto / LCHF groups on MFP and I’m sure google can point you in the direction of much empirical scientific evidence.
Or search through low carb threads on MFP. Plenty of scientific evidence has been posted by people happily and successfully eating in a low carb diet model, many of them not even calorie counting
I don't know why you're reading words (selecting words, actually) without reading the context, even after it was explained to you. Do you agree with these statements?
- Keto is currently very popular
- A very large number of people want to do it because they've heard it works without even knowing what it is
- A good number of people think it's the best and only way to lose weight without considering their own preferences
- A good number of people have an irrational fear of carbs
- A good number of people think it works regardless of calorie intake
...and so on.
Is that not the definition of a craze? It doesn't matter how long a diet has been around or how well it works for some people, when something becomes overly popular and acquires a halo of magic and misinformation, can it not be called a craze? What is being dismissed is not the diet, but its current state, and what is being "toppled" is not the diet, but the halo around it.
You're also acting as if keto is being singled out and attacked. Here are just a few things that get the same treatment:
- IF as a magical solution
- Plant based eating as a magical solution
- Macros as a rigid magical solution
- ACV as a magical solution
- Some pill or shake as a magical solution
... you get the idea.
The reason keto looks like it's experiencing more pushback than anything else is, well, because it's currently a craze so more threads are being made about it - back in the day, that was Paleo.17 -
soufauxgirl wrote: »
See bolded. I would really like to see some empirical scientific evidence to back up this comment.
Better still, I would actually like to hear from more than just one person who has had long term success from following LCHF. I can only think of you and one other poster on here that are huge advocates but nobody else.
Thank you @Mari22na for sharing your keto experience and subsequent failure to keep the weight off long term.
Why is it so hard for people to understand that all it takes is a CALORIE DEFICIT to lose weight instead of saying only their way of eating is the best.
Irony alert.
This is why you don't see many posts from people experimenting with or who have fully embraced things such as paleo or keto, etc. The vast majority of responding participants aren't interested in genuine discussion and understanding of the OPs situation. They just want to bash it, in most cases because they don't understand it. You're guilty of the same charge you're aiming at others.
I've had long-term success (6+ years of over 60lbs from my heaviest) following what most would categorize as LCHF (not keto, as I don't see the benefit for myself and I eat way too many vegetables). Add that one to your list, since it seems to be a scorecard you're keeping.
15 -
Paleo was the new Atkins, and keto is the new paleo. Same crap, new name. Have to repackage it to keep making money.8
-
@soufauxgirl I appreciate that.
A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still.
I went full tilt paleo/primal/keto/IF/eliminate all of things which is the recipe for gaining all of the weight back. It only served to dig a much deeper hole for me. I fell for it hook, line and sinker.
You don't need to count, you don't need to track, eat of all of fat. Fat is where's it's at. Fat, fat, fat for the WIN. Fruit is totally worthless. There's nothing in fruit that you can't get out of a vegetable which is mostly some frozen spinach softball or a pristine bed of kale and spinach to lay your head upon each night.
You won't hear from those who ate it all back. No, because they are starting over again. Over and over and over.
Doing the things you've always done will get you what you've always gotten. Rebound weight gain.
Clean or Dirty Eating. Good or Bad. Naughty or Nice...foods. All or Nothing. That's assigning moral judgments to food and is completely off the charts biased in every way. Everything within my being began to fight against all of these brutally strict protocols. Can you really eat 85% fat, 10% protein and 5% carbs for the rest of your life.
Do you think you can do that. The minute you start sliding back off the goose all of the weight returns with friends.
You know how long it took you to take it off, it will come back at the speed of light. The body is bent on survival. Whether you can admit it or not, dog breath and having your body reek like roadkill is not normal. It's trying to tell you something. Oooo, I know all about fat adaptation and becoming a revved up fat burner rather than a sugar burner is the answer to all of your weight problems. The extinction burst.
I'm not here to burst any bubbles or dreams. I was here a few years before I ever said one word. I began reading the posts of those who won't lead you astray. They're sharing the truth with the perfect mix of common horse sense and brains. I began to change my mind about everything.
I gave myself permission to do everything on my own terms. I started by throwing all of the protocol books in the bin. Honor your hunger. Eat the things you enjoy and find movement that you can actually do for the rest of your life. The body is bent on survival. There's reasonable restriction and overrestriction not only with too little food but dialing everything down into 3 or 4 items. The brain is the most powerful and rugged mountain we will ever have to climb in our lifetime. I've climbed the Grand Tetons.
I know you are stronger now. If it takes a few years before you start sliding off the goose and eating it all back that only adds to the stress. The optimum setpoint can be a slippery sucker that's often out of reach. There's the the brain weight vs. the dream weight. They rarely agree.
The body you have today is where you are now for the foreseeable future. The point being that when you can no longer imagine taking off more body weight because it's not going to change your lifting/running/sprinting abilities or back/hips/knees/feet tolerance of said abilities- working on building a better core is not enough to offset bulging discs, pinched nerves, bone spurs and arthritis - tread lightly.
I don't believe in diets anymore. Tracking my food here is like putting fuel into my vehicle, changing the oil and air filter, checking the air pressure before I head out over the open highway. It's routine maintenance. I'm no longer hung up on food in general and when I stopped letting diets run my life I no longer go thrill eating.9 -
VegHeadGettingFit wrote: »Paleo was the new Atkins, and keto is the new paleo. Same crap, new name. Have to repackage it to keep making money.
I don't agree with this. Atkins was about restricting carbs, more at first and then less later on. Paleo is about food choices and has little to do with keto except that the food choices tend to be closer to the lower carb spectrum. Keto is about restricting carbs to below 50g, which is similar to Atkins' induction phase, but there is no need to phase out of it after two weeks.
They are all just popular diets that usually improve health.... All of which limit refined and highly processed carbs - that could be the common factor between them.8 -
accidentalpancake wrote: »
Irony alert.
This is why you don't see many posts from people experimenting with or who have fully embraced things such as paleo or keto, etc. The vast majority of responding participants aren't interested in genuine discussion and understanding of the OPs situation. They just want to bash it, in most cases because they don't understand it. You're guilty of the same charge you're aiming at others.
I've had long-term success (6+ years of over 60lbs from my heaviest) following what most would categorize as LCHF (not keto, as I don't see the benefit for myself and I eat way too many vegetables). Add that one to your list, since it seems to be a scorecard you're keeping.
Well it sounds like you werent in full blown LCHF mode then if you were eating too many vegetables. Just plain old calorie deficit seems to have done the trick. Well done.7 -
soufauxgirl wrote: »
I have had long-term weight loss success (almost 3 years in maintenance) without having to resort to manipulating my way of eating, no LCHF IIFYM IF KETO just good old fashioned calorie counting, and following the principles of CICO. This has made my lifestyle so much easier to follow, knowing that I do not have to be as restrictive but still obviously keep a degree of control on my food intake, and I don't think but KNOW that will be something I can upkeep forever.
Reading the majority of these threads has reinforced my opinion that the most effective, sustainable achievable and most importantly SAFE way of eating is one where there is no need to cut out or reduce food groups like CARBS, FATS, PROTEINS, SUGAR and other essential nutritional elements.
I also did a search about forums and discussions promoting LCHF as you suggested and found the most recent to be authored by yourself and two other posters. This is very telling to see such little advocacy for KETO LCHF et al on these boards. The last post on the biggest LCHF group forum was about two weeks ago, I thought it would be a hive of activity, my bad once again
Ketogenic (and paleo) diets are safe. In what way are they not?
And why not reduce carbs and sugar, which are non-essential nutritional elements? If one wants to lose weight, you'll have to restrict something. Restricting non-essential nutrients is a safe place to start. It's the smartest place to start if one has IR related health issues, IMO.
ETA that very few low carbers and keto'ers post on the main forums because almost every time they do the get many posts along the lines of "all you need is a calorie deficit" or even opinions that it is not safe. They might have posted asking for a favourite fat bomb recipe, but they'll often get judgements or unsollicitated and off topic advice instead. They soon learn and stop posting.6 -
soufauxgirl wrote: »
Well it sounds like you werent in full blown LCHF mode then if you were eating too many vegetables. Just plain old calorie deficit seems to have done the trick. Well done.
You may have misread. He said he lost weight using LCHF (which is under 100-150g carbs a day). He said he did not eat keto (under 50g carbs a day). Both require a calorie deficit for weight loss. Being in a calorie deficit does not cancel out a diet low in carbs...2 -
The entirety of life is just too huge to contemplate the concept of never.
It you have to eat 'Cheat Meals' to compensate for the eating protocol has that changed everything for you then?
2 -
I created a new diet called Gen Z diet. It is the reverse of paleo....Paleo says we should eat like paleolithic folk....my diet says we should eat like Gen Z folk....9
-
My original factory settings did not include Cheat Meals. Do you remember a time in your life when you didn't have to cheat on your eating protocol. If your cheat meals consist of more foods that are deliberately engineered to be highly craved then your 'Cheat Meal' is another disconnect for the brain.
It's the same with telling yourself that you're not really on a diet, it's a lifestyle change but it's dialed down into just a few items. Disconnect for the brain. Cheating, cheat meals can leave you caught between completely overreaching and totally underachieving. Between gung-ho and ho-hum. Then there's I can't fool myself realism 'cause this ain't your or my first rodeo with dieting and rebound weight gain.3 -
soufauxgirl wrote: »
Well it sounds like you werent in full blown LCHF mode then if you were eating too many vegetables. Just plain old calorie deficit seems to have done the trick. Well done.
As I knew you probably would, you have perfectly illustrated the issue with your perspective. I made a single, very general statement about my WOE, and you turned that into several assumptions to drive a smug declarative conclusion. No curiosity, no want to understand. You're attempting to take the high road by doing the same thing you're charging keto adherents (of which I am not) of.
Let's review.
I never said anything to indicate that I take issue with the concept of CICO.
I said LCHF, and you have no idea what my intake looks like. Low/high are relative terms, completely dependent on the volume a person eats. My absolute values are going to be higher than 90% of people here due to my size, but my carb intake is still 10%-15% (20% max) on any given day, with fat 50%+. That, my friend, is LCHF no matter how you'd like to slice it.
If you don't have useful input when someone asks for it on a specific eating protocol, why are you speaking? The vast majority of people here have zero experience with or have researched (past reading U.S. News and World Report) different ways of eating. Instead of being dogmatic that nothing aside from moderation and chanting CICO in a dark room will get results, just move along and discuss with those who are similarly inclined. You're in as much of an echo chamber as you think others are.12 -
accidentalpancake wrote: »
As I knew you probably would, you have perfectly illustrated the issue with your perspective. I made a single, very general statement about my WOE, and you turned that into several assumptions to drive a smug declarative conclusion. No curiosity, no want to understand. You're attempting to take the high road by doing the same thing you're charging keto adherents (of which I am not) of.
Let's review.
I never said anything to indicate that I take issue with the concept of CICO.
I said LCHF, and you have no idea what my intake looks like. Low/high are relative terms, completely dependent on the volume a person eats. My absolute values are going to be higher than 90% of people here due to my size, but my carb intake is still 10%-15% (20% max) on any given day, with fat 50%+. That, my friend, is LCHF no matter how you'd like to slice it.
If you don't have useful input when someone asks for it on a specific eating protocol, why are you speaking? The vast majority of people here have zero experience with or have researched (past reading U.S. News and World Report) different ways of eating. Instead of being dogmatic that nothing aside from moderation and chanting CICO in a dark room will get results, just move along and discuss with those who are similarly inclined. You're in as much of an echo chamber as you think others are.
Ultimately a calorie deficit is how you have achieved weight loss, we are in agreeance with that. Its hard for me to understand why its necessary to have to lower your carb intake so drastically though when in theory its not really necessary. You can still enjoy a moderate carb intake. It would be a miserable angry existence for me to maintain a LCHF regime, but each to their own and kudos to you for being able to keep that up for so long.4 -
soufauxgirl wrote: »
Ultimately a calorie deficit is how you have achieved weight loss, we are in agreeance with that. Its hard for me to understand why its necessary to have to lower your carb intake so drastically though when in theory its not really necessary. You can still enjoy a moderate carb intake. It would be a miserable angry existence for me to maintain a LCHF regime, but each to their own and kudos to you for being able to keep that up for so long.
Moderate to high carbs are technically unnecessary.
Not everyone has the lack of ability to reduce their carb intake as you do by the sounds of it.
It would probably be best to not judge everybody by your own dietary tastes.
6 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »
Moderate to high carbs are technically unnecessary.
Not everyone has the lack of ability to reduce their carb intake as you do by the sounds of it.
It would probably be best to not judge everybody by your own dietary tastes.
Low to very low carbs are technically unnecessary too.
All that's necessary for weight/fat loss is a calorie deficit. By whatever means it is created/maintained.12 -
soufauxgirl wrote: »
Ultimately a calorie deficit is how you have achieved weight loss, we are in agreeance with that. Its hard for me to understand why its necessary to have to lower your carb intake so drastically though when in theory its not really necessary. You can still enjoy a moderate carb intake. It would be a miserable angry existence for me to maintain a LCHF regime, but each to their own and kudos to you for being able to keep that up for so long.
Again, the issue is that you are creating a narrative to argue. I didn't once say that it's necessary. I said that it works for me. It's not restrictive, and I'm not missing out on anything. To the contrary, I get to enjoy the foods the give me energy and that I enjoy eating.
I think this makes the whole point. If people don't think a paleo/keto/etc. lifestyle will work for them, fine. I don't see anyone here trying to shove it down anyone else's throat. Quite the opposite, in fact. I'm not a fan of keto myself, and think it does fall under the umbrella of craze/fad, but paleo really boils down to a whole foods diet with a focus on ethically sourced foods and not what gets repeated ad infinitum here (mimicry of paleolithic diet, tons of fat, no vegetables, etc.), just to soothe insecurities of people who can't be bothered to research. If it's not your bag, just move on. You're not 'saving' anyone by insulting approaches that plenty of people have success with. Not everyone can give up bread, but not everyone can successfully maintain a healthy weight while bread is part of it either.8 -
Low to very low carbs are technically unnecessary too.
All that's necessary for weight/fat loss is a calorie deficit. By whatever means it is created/maintained.
Agreed, but as meta analysis proves both low carb and moderate to high carb are optimal.
So why would anyone advice a person against doing either?9 -
Because Twinkies. But you can only eat one, once a week. And then talk about how it's really great. About how you control the Twinkies now instead of the Twinkies controlling you back in the olden days when you weighed 300 lbs. I mean you weighed 300 lbs. from eating too many calories and those calories came from green salad, raw apples, steamed asparagus and boiled eggs. Because calories. CALORIES.
I can eat twinkies whenever I feel like it. Because calories.
And yes the calories that made you fat came from green salad, raw apples, steamed asparagus, boiled eggs, twinkies, and a million other things you shoved into your mouth because your body doesn't care what it came from.6 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »
Moderate to high carbs are technically unnecessary.
Not everyone has the lack of ability to reduce their carb intake as you do by the sounds of it.
It would probably be best to not judge everybody by your own dietary tastes.
Not a matter of lack of ability to reduce carbs, but rather there is no need to if eating in a calorie deficit.
That sounds kinds of judgey but whatever.
7 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »
Agreed, but as meta analysis proves both low carb and moderate to high carb are optimal.
So why would anyone advice a person against doing either?
You advise someone against low carb (or any level of carbs for that matter) when it's arbitrarily chosen because they heard "it works" or got suckered or scared into it. The best advice for a starting dieter is to just start eating at a deficit and adjust their macros based on their experience and preferences. MFP macro levels are fine as a starting point because they're closer to how many people eat than any macro extremes. Even then, people are also told these macros are not set in stone and that as long as they get their minimum protein and fat they can fill the rest with whatever they want. Extra steps are unnecessary until they are. The advice is not against low carb, but against lack of flexibility and arbitrary rules that lack personalization.10 -
No. Just wait until January and they'll all be back. All are welcome though. Every thread is an opportunity.
As for Paleo, I thought it had had its day, but then again, I saw a raspberry ketones thread just last week
And that garcinia cambogia stuff too. Old favorites die hard.1 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »
You advise someone against low carb (or any level of carbs for that matter) when it's arbitrarily chosen because they heard "it works" or got suckered or scared into it. The best advice for a starting dieter is to just start eating at a deficit and adjust their macros based on their experience and preferences. MFP macro levels are fine as a starting point because they're closer to how many people eat than any macro extremes. Even then, people are also told these macros are not set in stone and that as long as they get their minimum protein and fat they can fill the rest with whatever they want. Extra steps are unnecessary until they are. The advice is not against low carb, but against lack of flexibility and arbitrary rules that lack personalization.
It works for millions of people and is as healthy as IIFYM / Calorie Counting.
Who are you to assume it will not work for them? I would suggest they they are trying LCHF because they've maybe tried your way of doing things and like millions of others, have found it unsustainable - different horses for different course.
Why not just focus on giving the OP the tools and information to help them make their diet a success. I'm sure if its not for them they will work it out for themselves, but they have a right to give it a good try without being scupper before they begin.
11 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »
It works for millions of people and is as healthy as IIFYM / Calorie Counting.
Who are you to assume it will not work for them? I would suggest they they are trying LCHF because they've maybe tried your way of doing things and like millions of others, have found it unsustainable - different horses for different course.
Why not just focus on giving the OP the tools and information to help them make their diet a success. I'm sure if its not for them they will work it out for themselves, but they have a right to give it a good try without being scupper before they begin.
I'm really not sure how you read posts. Where in my post did you see me assuming their preference? What I'm basically advocating is that they explore their preferences and situation. If they tried something and it didn't work, then that's exactly the process I'm advocating: to explore what things aren't working for them and how they could adapt them. They may as well arrive at an extra low or extra high level of carbs as their preferred level, but it would be due to their own preference, not because they were told to do it. There is a big difference there. Sustainability comes from personalization, and learning to make personalized decisions early is setting them up for success. That's why most threads start with replies that ask questions without making assumptions: what is your reason for choosing this way of eating?9 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »
I'm really not sure how you read posts. Where in my post did you see me assuming their preference? What I'm basically advocating is that they explore their preferences and situation. If they tried something and it didn't work, then that's exactly the process I'm advocating: to explore what things aren't working for them and how they could adapt them. They may as well arrive at an extra low or extra high level of carbs as their preferred level, but it would be due to their own preference, not because they were told to do it. There is a big difference there. Sustainability comes from personalization, and learning to make personalized decisions early is setting them up for success. That's why most threads start with replies that ask questions without making assumptions: what is your reason for choosing this way of eating?
And if a thread starts with something like "I want to do keto, but it's so hard not being able to have rice or bread", threads in which Tennisdude was in as well, so he should be aware of them, it is completely logical to ask them why the hell they'd try a way of eating that's not enjoyable for them.
But somehow it's only okay to try and get people to do keto, never to tell them it's okay to eat a different way if that's not their cup of tea.13 -
stevencloser wrote: »
And if a thread starts with something like "I want to do keto, but it's so hard not being able to have rice or bread", threads in which Tennisdude was in as well, so he should be aware of them, it is completely logical to ask them why the hell they'd try a way of eating that's not enjoyable for them.
But somehow it's only okay to try and get people to do keto, never to tell them it's okay to eat a different way if that's not their cup of tea.
Thank you for your very selective example.
The OP on this thread isn't suggesting they are struggling with KETO, merely asking for tips.....why then is the very first response asking if keto is the right choice?
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10676788/keto#latest
First one I opened in the Getting Started forum.
6 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »
Thank you for your very selective example.
The OP on this thread isn't suggesting they are struggling with KETO, merely asking for tips.....why then is the very first response asking if keto is the right choice?
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10676788/keto#latest
First one I opened in the Getting Started forum.
Because that is the first question you should ask when embarking on ANY plan, especially on those that restrict entire food groups.
I've seen the same question asked when people embark on vegetarian or vegan diets, and it's the right question to ask there as well.
Funny I don't see you white knighting in those threads.
14 -
johnslater461 wrote: »
Because that is the first question you should ask when embarking on ANY plan, especially on those that restrict entire food groups.
I've seen the same question asked when people embark on vegetarian or vegan diets, and it's the right question to ask there as well.
Funny I don't see you white knighting in those threads.
So all threads asking a weight loss question (assuming all have a plan whether it is follow WW, vegetarian, IIFYM, etc) should be along the lines of "why are you following this plan?"
10 -
So all threads asking a weight loss question (assuming all have a plan whether it is follow WW, vegetarian, IIFYM, etc) should be along the lines of "what are you following this plan?"
You can thank the metric tons of misinformation about dieting on the internet for that.13 -
johnslater461 wrote: »Because that is the first question you should ask when embarking on ANY plan, especially on those that restrict entire food groups.
I've seen the same question asked when people embark on vegetarian or vegan diets, and it's the right question to ask there as well.
In none of those cases is it appropriate if they've already made up their mind. If they are merely considering it, then sure that's different. However, challenging their preference for your preference doesn't seem appropriate, particularly when your preference has no physiological advantage.
Context matters.4 -
paperpudding wrote: »I have noticed that whereas there used to be lots of threads asking about Paleo, promoting Paleo, users endorsing it etc - have not seen any of these for a while.
Keto seems to have taken over as the new In Thing. Yes, along with IF.
I do not follow either but keto seems more defined to me, is a clear plan - whereas Paleo was vague and following a largely non existent scientific basis IMO - has that consigned it to history? No, because until every dollar can be squeezed out of it with new books and cookbooks coming out every year, until the money dries up and those books end up in the dollar bin at the dollar store, it will still be around.
Just curious.
3
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 395.4K Introduce Yourself
- 44.1K Getting Started
- 260.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 176.2K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.7K Fitness and Exercise
- 445 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.2K Motivation and Support
- 8.2K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 4.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 16 News and Announcements
- 1.3K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.9K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions