I'm So Confused!

Higher protein and lower carb diets generally require higher than normal fat intake. Researching low carb diets and the scientific literature on dietary fat, and not epidemiological but controlled trials and a person still doesn't feel comfortable, then low carb is probably not for them. I suspect you'll get a boat load of it doesn't matter as long as "CICO" Cheers.

kschwab0203 wrote: »

Hi!

I started using MFP in 2016 and found it extremely helpful in losing weight. I've used it pretty religiously since then. At this point I've got the calorie thing down and I am trying to eat healthier and pay more attention to macros. I've also shifted from just cardio to strength training using weight machines at the gym 20-30 minutes 4x a week and cardio.

This is where things become overwhelmingly confusing for me!

How do you eat low carb without eating high fat? How do you eat low fat without eating high carbs?

Your only other option if you want low carb plus low fat is high protein.

You have 3 macronutrients to play with. (Well, there's alcohol which is none of those 3, but I don't recommend using lots of that to balance calories.)

Why do you want to eat low carb? (There are good reasons, for some people; but not everyone needs to eat low carb to lose weight. It would help to know why you want to eat low carb.)

Why do you want to eat low fat? (Same kind of question.)

Do I count all carbs or net carbs? Are all carbs created equal?

Again, what's your reasoning for wanting to eat low carb.

All carbs aren't equal, exactly. There are subtypes (sugars = simple carbs, starches = complex carbs) that have a bit different role in the body, for example. For sure, all foods that happen to contain carbs are not equal nutritionally or calorically.

An apple is not a cookie. That's not so much because they're "different carbs" but because they're different foods with different nutrition other than the carb part.

Do all fats counts? Which way healthier for your heart?

All fats have calories. All foods have calories. (Some edible things have so few that they can count as zero in normal quantities, though, like tea or most vinegars.)

For health, you want to be getting some monounsaturated (MUFA) and polyunsaturated (PUFA) fatty acids, from things like olive oil, nuts, seeds, avocados, etc. You may also want to get some Omega-3 fats (from cold water fatty fish, some nuts, etc.) rather than totally Omega-6 fats (seed oils, mostly). You don't have to go super-obsessive about all of that, just try to eat some of the foods types that have the kinds most people tend to under-consume (MUFA/PUFA and O-3).

A gram of pure fat has about the same number of calories, regardless of type. The other nutritional attributes can differ a little.

We need some fats in our diet, and some protein. Those are "essential nutrients", in the technical sense that our bodies can't manufacture them out of anything else. Our bodies can manufacture carb-equivalents out of other nutrients. The implication is that some minimum amount of fat and protein is essential for best odds of continuing long-term good health.

Cutting fat too far is a bad plan. I figure 0.35-0.45g minimum per pound of body weight is reasonable, but if I were male I might think a little less is OK.

How much protein do I really need? DOes protein powder count?

Different people have different ideas of protein needs. Personally, I use a rule of thumb that a reasonable minimum is 0.6-0.8g daily per pound of healthy goal weight. Some people prefer to go with 1g per pound of goal weight, especially if athletically very active. About the highest recommendation I've seen (with a good rationale) was around 1.2g per pound of goal weight.

Some people base their recommendation on lean body mass (LBM) instead of healthy goal weight, but most people don't have a reliable way to estimate lean body mass. For comparison, 0.6-0.8g per pound of healthy goal weight would be equivalent to 0.8-1g per pound of lean body mass for quite a range of people (not all).

Protein powder counts. I don't routinely use protein powder/bars, but that's because I don't mostly find them tasty or satisfying, and I don't have trouble getting (exceeding) my 100g daily minimum from food, even as a vegetarian. (I'm 5'5", F, in maintenance, targeting staying around 125 pounds, athletically active.) I don't think there's anything wrong with those supplements, and they're great if you find you can't get adequate protein from food.

Do I have to eat 'clean" and organic? And by the way, 5 people can have 5 different explanations on what clean eating is.

No, you don't have to eat clean or organic. ( I don't know what clean means, either. People disagree. I let them.)

Even for health, the evidence is sketchy that organic makes any significant difference. For most people, getting overall good nutrition, averaged over a day or few, is the more important thing.

Good overall nutrition IMO is adequate protein, adequate fat (maybe with some consideration of that MUFA/PUFA/Sat Fat/Omega balance), and a boatload of varied, colorful veggies/fruits for micronutrients and fiber. It doesn't all need to be perfect every single day, just kind of average out around a reasonable level over relatively small time spans. Digestive transit can take 50+ hours, bodies have some ways of hanging onto certain nutrients for short time periods to balance things out, blah blah blah. No need for obsession.

Some people find less highly-processed foods more filling, and there's a loose tendency for more highly processed foods to be more calorie-dense and nutrition-sparse . . . but that's not universal among processed foods, and they still have nutrients anyway, so fitting some in is IMO fine.

IMO, thinking in absolutes, in black and white, is a trap. Orthorexia is a thing, and not a good one.

I certainly don't want to eat too much fat and have that impact my lipid panel, but then too many carbs can do some damage there too!

The information out there can be so conflicting and confusing. I feel like nothing I eat is going to be right. How can one possibly follow all the "rules" and not just starve?

Relax. Stress is bad for you too, y'know? 😉

Humans are adaptive omnivores. Your ancestors lived (long enough to breed, at least) for millennia, not optimizing their nutrition, and sometimes even eating far from nutritional adequacy. For you, pretty good is good enough, using common sense rules. Just my opinion, though, and I'm not a registered dietitian, just an interested amateur.

If you're starting from some relevant disease condition (diabetes, kidney disease, heart disease, etc.) or doctor-diagnosed nutritional deficiency (anemia, etc.), you may have some special considerations. If you're a generally healthy person, common sense and sensible eating will take you a long way, without getting into some of the minutia I typed above, IMO.

If you want to optimize your nutrition, or come closer to doing so than you are at the start, you can take some time learning this stuff.

Nutrition has no direct effect on bodyfat weight management: Just calories do. Nutrition can have an indirect effect, though. Sub-par nutrition may spike appetite, cause cravings, making it hard to stick with calorie goal. Sub-par nutrition can tank energy level, make us burn fewer calories in daily life than expected/estimated, because we rest more, move less. The direct effect on body fat is still via calories. If you have any of those indirect effects, you'll probably notice, and can adjust.

Any thoughts, perspective, or advice on how you navigated through all this nutrition info overload would be appreciated!

Thanks!

Like I said, relax. Eat sensibly (you know what this means, I'll bet, if you trust yourself). If you wish, learn more about nutrition as you have time available, make adjustments in your eating patterns over time to improve, you'll do fine.

kschwab0203 wrote: »

AnnPT77 wrote: »

kschwab0203 wrote: »

Hi!

I started using MFP in 2016 and found it extremely helpful in losing weight. I've used it pretty religiously since then. At this point I've got the calorie thing down and I am trying to eat healthier and pay more attention to macros. I've also shifted from just cardio to strength training using weight machines at the gym 20-30 minutes 4x a week and cardio.

This is where things become overwhelmingly confusing for me!

How do you eat low carb without eating high fat? How do you eat low fat without eating high carbs?

Your only other option if you want low carb plus low fat is high protein.

You have 3 macronutrients to play with. (Well, there's alcohol which is none of those 3, but I don't recommend using lots of that to balance calories.)

Why do you want to eat low carb? (There are good reasons, for some people; but not everyone needs to eat low carb to lose weight. It would help to know why you want to eat low carb.)

Why do you want to eat low fat? (Same kind of question.)

Do I count all carbs or net carbs? Are all carbs created equal?

Again, what's your reasoning for wanting to eat low carb.

All carbs aren't equal, exactly. There are subtypes (sugars = simple carbs, starches = complex carbs) that have a bit different role in the body, for example. For sure, all foods that happen to contain carbs are not equal nutritionally or calorically.

An apple is not a cookie. That's not so much because they're "different carbs" but because they're different foods with different nutrition other than the carb part.

Do all fats counts? Which way healthier for your heart?

All fats have calories. All foods have calories. (Some edible things have so few that they can count as zero in normal quantities, though, like tea or most vinegars.)

For health, you want to be getting some monounsaturated (MUFA) and polyunsaturated (PUFA) fatty acids, from things like olive oil, nuts, seeds, avocados, etc. You may also want to get some Omega-3 fats (from cold water fatty fish, some nuts, etc.) rather than totally Omega-6 fats (seed oils, mostly). You don't have to go super-obsessive about all of that, just try to eat some of the foods types that have the kinds most people tend to under-consume (MUFA/PUFA and O-3).

A gram of pure fat has about the same number of calories, regardless of type. The other nutritional attributes can differ a little.

We need some fats in our diet, and some protein. Those are "essential nutrients", in the technical sense that our bodies can't manufacture them out of anything else. Our bodies can manufacture carb-equivalents out of other nutrients. The implication is that some minimum amount of fat and protein is essential for best odds of continuing long-term good health.

Cutting fat too far is a bad plan. I figure 0.35-0.45g minimum per pound of body weight is reasonable, but if I were male I might think a little less is OK.

How much protein do I really need? DOes protein powder count?

Different people have different ideas of protein needs. Personally, I use a rule of thumb that a reasonable minimum is 0.6-0.8g daily per pound of healthy goal weight. Some people prefer to go with 1g per pound of goal weight, especially if athletically very active. About the highest recommendation I've seen (with a good rationale) was around 1.2g per pound of goal weight.

Some people base their recommendation on lean body mass (LBM) instead of healthy goal weight, but most people don't have a reliable way to estimate lean body mass. For comparison, 0.6-0.8g per pound of healthy goal weight would be equivalent to 0.8-1g per pound of lean body mass for quite a range of people (not all).

Protein powder counts. I don't routinely use protein powder/bars, but that's because I don't mostly find them tasty or satisfying, and I don't have trouble getting (exceeding) my 100g daily minimum from food, even as a vegetarian. (I'm 5'5", F, in maintenance, targeting staying around 125 pounds, athletically active.) I don't think there's anything wrong with those supplements, and they're great if you find you can't get adequate protein from food.

Do I have to eat 'clean" and organic? And by the way, 5 people can have 5 different explanations on what clean eating is.

No, you don't have to eat clean or organic. ( I don't know what clean means, either. People disagree. I let them.)

Even for health, the evidence is sketchy that organic makes any significant difference. For most people, getting overall good nutrition, averaged over a day or few, is the more important thing.

Good overall nutrition IMO is adequate protein, adequate fat (maybe with some consideration of that MUFA/PUFA/Sat Fat/Omega balance), and a boatload of varied, colorful veggies/fruits for micronutrients and fiber. It doesn't all need to be perfect every single day, just kind of average out around a reasonable level over relatively small time spans. Digestive transit can take 50+ hours, bodies have some ways of hanging onto certain nutrients for short time periods to balance things out, blah blah blah. No need for obsession.

Some people find less highly-processed foods more filling, and there's a loose tendency for more highly processed foods to be more calorie-dense and nutrition-sparse . . . but that's not universal among processed foods, and they still have nutrients anyway, so fitting some in is IMO fine.

IMO, thinking in absolutes, in black and white, is a trap. Orthorexia is a thing, and not a good one.

I certainly don't want to eat too much fat and have that impact my lipid panel, but then too many carbs can do some damage there too!

The information out there can be so conflicting and confusing. I feel like nothing I eat is going to be right. How can one possibly follow all the "rules" and not just starve?

Relax. Stress is bad for you too, y'know? 😉

Humans are adaptive omnivores. Your ancestors lived (long enough to breed, at least) for millennia, not optimizing their nutrition, and sometimes even eating far from nutritional adequacy. For you, pretty good is good enough, using common sense rules. Just my opinion, though, and I'm not a registered dietitian, just an interested amateur.

If you're starting from some relevant disease condition (diabetes, kidney disease, heart disease, etc.) or doctor-diagnosed nutritional deficiency (anemia, etc.), you may have some special considerations. If you're a generally healthy person, common sense and sensible eating will take you a long way, without getting into some of the minutia I typed above, IMO.

If you want to optimize your nutrition, or come closer to doing so than you are at the start, you can take some time learning this stuff.

Nutrition has no direct effect on bodyfat weight management: Just calories do. Nutrition can have an indirect effect, though. Sub-par nutrition may spike appetite, cause cravings, making it hard to stick with calorie goal. Sub-par nutrition can tank energy level, make us burn fewer calories in daily life than expected/estimated, because we rest more, move less. The direct effect on body fat is still via calories. If you have any of those indirect effects, you'll probably notice, and can adjust.

Any thoughts, perspective, or advice on how you navigated through all this nutrition info overload would be appreciated!

Thanks!

Like I said, relax. Eat sensibly (you know what this means, I'll bet, if you trust yourself). If you wish, learn more about nutrition as you have time available, make adjustments in your eating patterns over time to improve, you'll do fine.

Recently my A1C was slightly elevated (first time ever). This is what prompted me to cut back my carbs. Cardiac problems and diabetes run in my family. This is what makes me worried about the fat intake. I also suffer from HBP which is well controlled with medication. I'd like to lose another 10 lbs (I'm still considered obese), but mostly I want to gain muscle and be more toned and just overall healthier. I started this when I was 35 aand now I'm 41 so things like muscle loss and lack of certain hormones and how foods affect health not just weight are things I need to think about now.

I'm going to speak more explicitly about my personal experience here, because I don't want to oversell theory that may not apply to you. But I can tell you about my experience, and promise I'm not misrepresenting that.

I don't know much about diabetes or pre-diabetes, because I've not experienced it. (Blood sugar was one thing that seemed to be OK even when I was obese. I don't think my genetics point that way, though it was an issue for some relatives who were obese.) My loose understanding is that you probably would need to manage your carbs, but maybe not necessarily cut them super low. I'll let people who know more comment.

I did have high cholesterol, high triglycerides, and high blood pressure. Now I don't. I had those when I was 183 pounds at 5'5" (so BMI just over the line into obese, BMI 30.4, but that wasn't my highest weight ever). I did not take medication for them, though my doctor was encouraging me to start statins. (I didn't want to, which was part of the reason I lost weight.) I may have some genetic tendencies in the direction of high BP, cardiovascular issues, but not super-strong ones, i.e., it was mostly a problem in relatives who were overweight, not slim.

Most of those conditions/risks had improved significantly by the time I reached the mid-150s pounds, so BMI 25ish. Now, at BMI 21-point-something, 128.4 pounds this morning, my BP and blood lipids are solidly in the normal range, often the more favorable end of the normal range. They've been there for 6+ years at a healthy weight, after previous decades of high values when overweight/obese.

For me, most of the change was just weight loss. I didn't hugely change the foods I eat to lose/maintain weight (already ate pretty healthfully, just too much). I probably increased the proportion of veggies/fruit in my diet vs. grains (and treat foods), when I was cutting calories, and some people report high veggie/fruit intake as having beneficial results for BP and blood lipid issues. There's some research evidence suggesting that high veggie/fruit intake has benefits like that, but it's statistically correlation evidence, not actual proof.

You may have the body type (muscularity, breadth of frame, breast size) to need to be at a higher BMI than me to be at your most healthy weight. I have no way of knowing. I'm not devoid of muscle, but I'm not a serious strength trainer (far from it). I'm substantially more muscular than average for my demographic, but I'm a full quarter century older than you are, 66. (My profile photo is me, at age 60, female, as context.) If you're concerned about muscle loss and lack of hormones, I'm probably already way over that hill. (I went into menopause from chemotherapy at 44/45.) TBH, I think many (not all) women give age/hormones too much blame for things that have a pretty strong behavioral component. They are relevant, of course, but not insurmountable IMO.

Your exercise regimen may be as important as your eating regimen, for your health concerns. Pretty strong evidence points that way. Good show that you're devoting time and attention to that!

With concerns about BP and cardiac health, it's good that you're keeping some cardio in the picture alongside strength training, IMO. Most people with those conditions benefit from CV exercise.

Strength exercise is good (even though I'm a slacker about doing it myself - not gonna lie). The muscularity increase from strength training - as I'm sure you know - will be slow. Strength increase and improved definition can be faster, which convinces some women they're gaining muscle mass fast, but it's unlikely to be fast, especially in a calorie deficit.

My reference group of friends/acquaintances is not a valid statistical sample, but that personal experience suggests that a good exercise routine and sensible eating, coupled with a healthy body weight, go along way to keeping many women healthy long term, without getting super technical about nutrition. I work out regularly with women in their 60s/70s, and whose eating I have a general idea of, who lead me to say that. Genetic factors do matter, though.

You'll get some good advice from others here, I'll bet. I think my PP about nutrition is the best I've got that's relevant, and I do suspect it reflects a degree of detailed geekdom that isn't essential to achieving reasonable results. I think nutrition is fun and interesting, as a science/data geek, so am probably more focused on it that many people, and more so than essential as well.