The amazing results of watching my carbs...

While I can't equal your carb counts (on any remotely typical day ), I can't imagine trying low-carb eating, personally. I tried it probably 40+ years ago when it was popular, and it made me pretty miserable. Now, especially as a vegetarian, it doesn't seem suitable at all, for me.

There are some in my demographic (post-menopausal, aging (64), female, severely hypothyroid) who find low-carb eating beneficial (usually for appetite), and I have no reason to doubt them. Certainly, low carb or keto eating can deliver adequate nutrition, so to each their own. I've even suggested certain people try low carb or keto to see if it helps them. I do dispute posts that occasionally (in threads here) portray low carb eating as a form of universal weight loss/satiation near-magic, especially if the claim is for my demographic, because it only takes one clear counter example to disprove a "universal solution" argument. (Classic logic, yes?)

I do wonder how much of the perceived benefit of low carb has to do with eating style. For decades, I've generally not been a person who's profoundly attracted to so-called "hyperpalatable" foods, including many of the specific foods many people mention when they talk about "cutting carbs" (bread, pasta, rice, baked goods, candy, etc. even chips/crisps, pizza, french fries, and things that many people seem to call "carbs", even though that latter set get more calories from fat than carbs). I ate whole wheat pasta somewhat frequently, and liked a veggie/cheese heavy pizza, and would eat some of those foods happily if presented, but otherwise didn't base my diet on that sort of thing.

Those foods tend to be not very nutrient dense, not very satiating, and for many difficult to moderate. The carbs I actually most eat and enjoy (veggies, fruits, dairy) are normally more nutrient dense, or filling for most people. (Somehow, I managed to dramatically overeat them anyway : Practice makes perfect?)

For example, beans (kidney, pinto, black, etc.) are very carb-y, but most people find them difficult to overeat, and I rarely see people here saying that they're a "carb addict" who binges on beans.

If someone initially eats a lot of low-nutrient-density, less satiating carbohydrate-heavy foods, and cuts those out, replacing them with more satiating foods (even low carb ones), I can see how that would have positive effects on calorie compliance. I'm very certain I reduced carbs initially to hit my calorie goal, because many of those common carb sources aren't my favorite foods in the first place.

I'm guessing, Novus, that your TDEE is higher than mine. On a typical 2000 plus or minus a couple of hundred calories eating schedule now (ultra-slow-loss maintenance), I'm usually getting in the mid-200s grams of carbs. I think that's around 50%, most days. (It was more like 150g +/- during loss.)

I literally pay no attention at all to macro percentages (I always have to look mine up, either target or historical-experience ones, when it comes up in a thread). I think in grams. I have a protein minimum (100g), a fat minimum (50g) and am moderately religious about hitting those (over is fine). Carbs? They're there for balancing calories, in my world, occasionally along with some moderate alcohol calories.

I find it so interesting that many (most?) people get enough fats without attention. Despite a love affair with cheese, that's the macro I'm most likely to be puzzlingly short on. When I was first remodeling my eating to lose weight, my protein minimum (which was a bit lower during the loss phase) was a little bit of a challenge (consider the vegetarian thing), but since having worked that out several years ago, protein only rarely needs a little calorie-Tetris to accomplish.

But, yes, to your core point: Once I dialed in my basic calorie requirements (higher than MFP predicted), it was generally true for me that most weight changes over a period of time were very predictable as 3500 calories = 1 pound, approximately.

The one exception - since I'm an occasional peak-y indulge-y eater - is that if I eat way over my TDEE for a day or two, I don't seem to see as much fat gain as I'd have expected. (Talking eating like 2-3 times my TDEE here, not just a few hundred extra calories). Perhaps there are limits to how much food my body can absorb, when it's not used to doing so, I don't know. (I do see just that little resting heart rate bump the next day, so there's probably some extra burn-off happening, too.)

But 3500 calories over maintenance = a pound, once the water weight weirdness has passed, is a pretty darned good practical estimate, for me, with that one exception.

alexmose wrote: »

I read the title, saw @AnnPT77 responded and was like 'here we go', but happy to see the full post hehe

psychod787 wrote: »

alexmose wrote: »

I read the title, saw @AnnPT77 responded and was like 'here we go', but happy to see the full post hehe

When Aunt Granny speaks, I listen... lol

So, granny sez ya oughta read threads @NovusDies starts, because ya know they're gonna be good . . . ya young whippersnappers, ya!

:drinker: