Low carb just for J sixpack

[chiang mai]

Forgive me but this discussion reminds me of my ex-wife and myself fighting over whether the shepherds pie should be topped with cheddar or cantal!

[robblok]

Now you are saying also low carb also means restricting your intake..

Of CARBS!!! Of CARBS!!!

Even the very name LOW CARB is just incomprehensible.

DUH.

how is that different then what I am saying that you should always restrict intake to loose weight.

It's TOTALLY different from some of your ignorant "critical points." Get somebody with a brain to explain it to you. No more spoonfeeding, remember?

Ah you mean somebody who ignores the evidence that there is no metabolic advantage in low carb diets that people loose the same amount of weight on it if they have the same number of calories. Something that i can prove with scientific studies that back me up ?

Arguing with you is like arguing with someone who says the earth is flat. Completely disregarding scientific evidence from laboratory tests. As you can't seem to come up with any solid evidence that low carb is superior at the same number of calories as any other diet that has the same amounts of proteins and calories it seems you are the one without a brain.

I will dig up that report where the people were in a lab and provided with the food one low carb one not low carb and there was no difference. Thing is this was a gold standard lab test as the lab provided the food no (many times wrong) self reporting.

It should settle the argument as you can't seem to come up with anything like that.

[robblok]

Forgive me but this discussion reminds me of my ex-wife and myself fighting over whether the shepherds pie should be topped with cheddar or cantal!

Sorry for that but i just get tired of people claiming magical properties to low carb. I found some good lab test showing low carb has no advantage over a normal good high protein diet.

I read the books too about low carb and not a single lab test to prove his point more like statistics completely ignoring the fact that correlation is not causation.

[h90]

Is it not the case that the definition of "low Carb" is to reduce the number of calories derived from carbs per meal and to reduce the ratio of carbs to protein and fat per meal? For some that might mean reducing the percentage of carbs per meal from 60% to 40%, for others it might mean going from 50% to say 30%, we're all going to be slightly different I suspect.

That being the case it seems not relevant whether portion size is reduced or not as long as the criteria above is met.

But it would seem to me that nobody would sensibly go zero carb, for more than a very short time, we're just not designed to do that.

I thought that is about pushing the body into ketone body production?, which won't happen at 40 or 30 %.

More in the max 2-10%

[chiang mai]

Is it not the case that the definition of "low Carb" is to reduce the number of calories derived from carbs per meal and to reduce the ratio of carbs to protein and fat per meal? For some that might mean reducing the percentage of carbs per meal from 60% to 40%, for others it might mean going from 50% to say 30%, we're all going to be slightly different I suspect.

That being the case it seems not relevant whether portion size is reduced or not as long as the criteria above is met.

But it would seem to me that nobody would sensibly go zero carb, for more than a very short time, we're just not designed to do that.

I thought that is about pushing the body into ketone body production?, which won't happen at 40 or 30 %.

More in the max 2-10%

No I don't think it is necessarily that radical, at the extreme perhaps but again, it means different things to different people. To be honest, ketone production means damage to the body so that can't be good.

[robblok]

Is it not the case that the definition of "low Carb" is to reduce the number of calories derived from carbs per meal and to reduce the ratio of carbs to protein and fat per meal? For some that might mean reducing the percentage of carbs per meal from 60% to 40%, for others it might mean going from 50% to say 30%, we're all going to be slightly different I suspect.

That being the case it seems not relevant whether portion size is reduced or not as long as the criteria above is met.

But it would seem to me that nobody would sensibly go zero carb, for more than a very short time, we're just not designed to do that.

I thought that is about pushing the body into ketone body production?, which won't happen at 40 or 30 %.

More in the max 2-10%

No I don't think it is necessarily that radical, at the extreme perhaps but again, it means different things to different people. To be honest, ketone production means damage to the body so that can't be good.

I am not so sure ketone is bad if you look at the clip paulyW has shown it does have its advantages especially for athletes that compete in prolonged events like maratons ect. Again I am not against low carb at all just think the advantage is over played a bit if you already have a healthy diet.

I liked the test being done to the guy in that chamber stuff like that is real research. Real numbers and a controlled environment. Too bad studies like that are so expensive.

[flyingdoc]

As one ages, particularly with men, it is always a problem with putting on weight. The latest research states that the previous Public Enemy no 1, namely saturated fats, has now been firmly replaced by sugar, in any form! A great many companies have jumped on the 'healthy living' bandwagon, and clearly stated that saturated fat content has been reduced, but very often that reduction is made up with an increase in sugar content, which of course is not emphasised! Sugar saturated cells have 26 times more receptors which can attract cancer, which is another factor to consider very seriously.

Thailand grows a root plant called Konjac (Glucomannan), and this has been on trial for the last 2 years on trial in LOS, and has been found to greatly reduce cravings and appetite/over indulgence.. It is not expensive and could well be the answer to many prayers!

[robblok]

As one ages, particularly with men, it is always a problem with putting on weight. The latest research states that the previous Public Enemy no 1, namely saturated fats, has now been firmly replaced by sugar, in any form! A great many companies have jumped on the 'healthy living' bandwagon, and clearly stated that saturated fat content has been reduced, but very often that reduction is made up with an increase in sugar content, which of course is not emphasised! Sugar saturated cells have 26 times more receptors which can attract cancer, which is another factor to consider very seriously.

Thailand grows a root plant called Konjac (Glucomannan), and this has been on trial for the last 2 years on trial in LOS, and has been found to greatly reduce cravings and appetite/over indulgence.. It is not expensive and could well be the answer to many prayers!

That plant I have used and the tablets too. Jaa bug (or something like that). I have even had the root of that plant fried with some soy sauce. (yea tried a lot).

I agree sugar is not a good thing and i try to limit it a lot refined sugar just isnt that good for you.

[mrfaroukh]

You can eat healthy and loose weight. Just remember there is carb even in vegetables, but the carb in veg is a healthy one. If you want to be healthy and also loose weight the best way is to eat more of protein (chicken fillet, fish) grilled of course. I eat 3 boiled white eggs + salad in the morning, an apple after 2 hours, one or two chicken fillet with little boiled rice or salads for lunch, little chicken fillet just before gym, and have fish max 45 min. after the gym. Now at night I may have a glass of milk and an apple.

I also do other activities and I am looking much better day by day. By they way too much of brocolli is bad for thyroid, be aware of it.

I also have nuts at home at all time. No roasted nuts. Whenever I feel little hungry I take few of each.

Once in a while I also enjoy the junk food like pizza, burgers etc.

Enjoy life

[robblok]

You can eat healthy and loose weight. Just remember there is carb even in vegetables, but the carb in veg is a healthy one. If you want to be healthy and also loose weight the best way is to eat more of protein (chicken fillet, fish) grilled of course. I eat 3 boiled white eggs + salad in the morning, an apple after 2 hours, one or two chicken fillet with little boiled rice or salads for lunch, little chicken fillet just before gym, and have fish max 45 min. after the gym. Now at night I may have a glass of milk and an apple.

I also do other activities and I am looking much better day by day. By they way too much of brocolli is bad for thyroid, be aware of it.

I also have nuts at home at all time. No roasted nuts. Whenever I feel little hungry I take few of each.

Once in a while I also enjoy the junk food like pizza, burgers etc.

Enjoy life

To be honest most diets / food programs say you should cheat once in a while. I I haven't had real junk food for ages, but i still treat myself to nice food. I love oishi salmon and such.. sizzler .. meat and salad... vietnamese food.. vegetable heaven. Sometimes some ramen or something like that.

[Muhendis]

There is plenty of detailed advice from multiple sources about various ways to lose weight. If you are fit and healthy then your diet is quite likely fine. If you are also overweight then you need to reduce your intake of everything. In other words you can eat and drink as normal but make your meals smaller and avoid the 'tween meal and television snacks. This can be difficult because as we get older our metabolic rate slows down but our habits remain the same.

If you have some malady that affects the way you live, for example angina, allergies, diabetes etc., these are medical conditions which, as you have discovered can be affected by diet. In these cases advise from an internet forum is not a good idea.

To go for the global "Atikinson" diet is not necessarily going to work. It is generally accepted that it will help you lose weight quite dramatically but then if you are not careful, you will quickly put it back on. To regard it as the panacea for the overweight of this world is to be misled.

[robblok]

Ok the research article i promised, some real science and hard evidence instead of some statistics.

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/research-review/ketogenic-low-carbohydrate-diets-have-no-metabolic-advantage-over-nonketogenic-low-carbohydrate-diets-research-review.html

But I still think there are cases when low carb is good, i just don't believe its magic compared to everything else just like the author of that article.

There is a way to loose weight and only by trial and error do you learn what is best for you.. low carb could be it but it is no magic.

[h90]

Is it not the case that the definition of "low Carb" is to reduce the number of calories derived from carbs per meal and to reduce the ratio of carbs to protein and fat per meal? For some that might mean reducing the percentage of carbs per meal from 60% to 40%, for others it might mean going from 50% to say 30%, we're all going to be slightly different I suspect.

That being the case it seems not relevant whether portion size is reduced or not as long as the criteria above is met.

But it would seem to me that nobody would sensibly go zero carb, for more than a very short time, we're just not designed to do that.

I thought that is about pushing the body into ketone body production?, which won't happen at 40 or 30 %.

More in the max 2-10%

No I don't think it is necessarily that radical, at the extreme perhaps but again, it means different things to different people. To be honest, ketone production means damage to the body so that can't be good.

No ketone production does not mean damage that is the normal natural way to burn fat at food shortage. Before humans developed farming we most probably live on ketone bodies most of the year (not sure for tropic areas but sure for middle to north Europe).

[koo]

Maybe I'm having a thick day but I've read this thread twice and I still don't quite any significant difference between you both, I'll read it all again but suspect the gap in thinking is miniscule!

Maybe, we are just stubborn.

I just don't believe that low carb without limiting portion size too will work. I believe low carb and limiting portion size will work. I just don't believe that a sensible diet some good carbs, some good proteins and good fats at the same caloric levels as low carb (both have the same protein amount) will give any different results in weight loss.

Low carbs usually seem to say you can eat what you want and loose weight, I am of the opinion you can still overeat on low carb if you want.

When you go low carb, you don't have to limit the portion size. It comes naturally, as you feel full faster from the amount of fat and protein you eat. Also, pretty soon after starting the low carb program, you get "fed up" with all the fat and protein and you start looking for lighter options (=green salads). Without cravings, your appetite takes care that the total calorie intake is less than you consume --> you lose weight.

Also, the process of making glucose (for the brain) from fat and protein is an energy consuming, which helps in losing weight as well.

Stating that you only lose water in a low carb diet is true for very short (under a week) diets, but a true low carb ketose requires you to consume less than 20 grams of carbs per day for at least 2 weeks, and then very gradually increasing the carbs. Already in the second week all excess water has been outed and the continuing weight loss is from fat. You could lose muscle as well, but that is why almost all low carb instructions require you both to keep up the protein intake (to build muscle) and to excercise for the muscle to remain in shape.

[robblok]

Maybe I'm having a thick day but I've read this thread twice and I still don't quite any significant difference between you both, I'll read it all again but suspect the gap in thinking is miniscule!

Maybe, we are just stubborn.

I just don't believe that low carb without limiting portion size too will work. I believe low carb and limiting portion size will work. I just don't believe that a sensible diet some good carbs, some good proteins and good fats at the same caloric levels as low carb (both have the same protein amount) will give any different results in weight loss.

Low carbs usually seem to say you can eat what you want and loose weight, I am of the opinion you can still overeat on low carb if you want.

When you go low carb, you don't have to limit the portion size. It comes naturally, as you feel full faster from the amount of fat and protein you eat. Also, pretty soon after starting the low carb program, you get "fed up" with all the fat and protein and you start looking for lighter options (=green salads). Without cravings, your appetite takes care that the total calorie intake is less than you consume --> you lose weight.

Also, the process of making glucose (for the brain) from fat and protein is an energy consuming, which helps in losing weight as well.

Stating that you only lose water in a low carb diet is true for very short (under a week) diets, but a true low carb ketose requires you to consume less than 20 grams of carbs per day for at least 2 weeks, and then very gradually increasing the carbs. Already in the second week all excess water has been outed and the continuing weight loss is from fat. You could lose muscle as well, but that is why almost all low carb instructions require you both to keep up the protein intake (to build muscle) and to excercise for the muscle to remain in shape.

I never said you only loose water on low carb as with limited portion sizes you will loose fat too. I was just going against the you can eat all you want and stuff like that. I tried low carb, it did not do much for my hunger at all and i stayed on it. Also the research i posted stated that in that experiment hunger also stayed with the low carb guys. So it does not help everyone.. but its the higher protein that helps against the hunger. As a amateur bodbybuilder i take more then enough proteins. I take my carbs too as they fuel my weightlifting sessions.

Anyway.. i am not against it.. its just not magical or has huge metabolic advantages. I admit it will work for some and i benefited from going lower carb when i was getting insulin resistant. Now I dont really need it.

[thailandbeachisland]

Thank you for this thread.

I do not eat meat so if I also do not eat carbs I will only have vegetables and tofu left.

Any other idea ? I would like to try a low carb diet for a while.

[h90]

Maybe I'm having a thick day but I've read this thread twice and I still don't quite any significant difference between you both, I'll read it all again but suspect the gap in thinking is miniscule!

Maybe, we are just stubborn.

I just don't believe that low carb without limiting portion size too will work. I believe low carb and limiting portion size will work. I just don't believe that a sensible diet some good carbs, some good proteins and good fats at the same caloric levels as low carb (both have the same protein amount) will give any different results in weight loss.

Low carbs usually seem to say you can eat what you want and loose weight, I am of the opinion you can still overeat on low carb if you want.

When you go low carb, you don't have to limit the portion size. It comes naturally, as you feel full faster from the amount of fat and protein you eat. Also, pretty soon after starting the low carb program, you get "fed up" with all the fat and protein and you start looking for lighter options (=green salads). Without cravings, your appetite takes care that the total calorie intake is less than you consume --> you lose weight.

Also, the process of making glucose (for the brain) from fat and protein is an energy consuming, which helps in losing weight as well.

Stating that you only lose water in a low carb diet is true for very short (under a week) diets, but a true low carb ketose requires you to consume less than 20 grams of carbs per day for at least 2 weeks, and then very gradually increasing the carbs. Already in the second week all excess water has been outed and the continuing weight loss is from fat. You could lose muscle as well, but that is why almost all low carb instructions require you both to keep up the protein intake (to build muscle) and to excercise for the muscle to remain in shape.

The glucose you make is almost only from protein. The amount from fat is extreme low.

But the brain is slowly switching from glucose to ketone bodies, so it can replace 70-80 % of its glucose needs with ketone bodies (which are made from fat).

[Tolley]

A true low carb diet goes well beyond just being beneficial for weight loss it is also helpful in eliminating most modern day health conditions. Ye

A true low carb would concentrate only on fats from meat, oils like coconut, and vegetables.

That means no fruit, sugar, alcohol, nuts, legumes, refined carbs, dairy or grains etc.

[attento]

The human digestive system evolved to deal with a mixture of carbohydrates and proteins, with very small amounts of fats and sugars. On this diet, humans have developed for thousands of years. Most people who are overweight are that way because they eat too much, and usually it is too much of an inappropriate dietary mix. Simple but true.

Of course, there are medical conditions which override this simplicity, but they are far fewer than some people choose to believe. It is this area of uncertainty where the opportunity exists for the charlatans and/or "diet experts" to prey upon the unwary and impressionable with their "miracle" dietary regimes.

[h90]

Thank you for this thread.

I do not eat meat so if I also do not eat carbs I will only have vegetables and tofu left.

Any other idea ? I would like to try a low carb diet for a while.

I don't know if you eat egg and/or milk.

Non fat milk, protein powder from milk and cooked eggs was the main things I ate.

Important is the high protein and with tofu only, it will be hard (I don't know how good or bad tofu is, but eating for weeks/month only tofu might might be too boring)

[h90]

A true low carb diet goes well beyond just being beneficial for weight loss it is also helpful in eliminating most modern day health conditions. Ye

A true low carb would concentrate only on fats from meat, oils like coconut, and vegetables.

That means no fruit, sugar, alcohol, nuts, legumes, refined carbs, dairy or grains etc.

right....just not coconut....better fish oils, pork fat etc

[h90]

The human digestive system evolved to deal with a mixture of carbohydrates and proteins, with very small amounts of fats and sugars. On this diet, humans have developed for thousands of years. Most people who are overweight are that way because they eat too much, and usually it is too much of an inappropriate dietary mix. Simple but true.

Of course, there are medical conditions which override this simplicity, but they are far fewer than some people choose to believe. It is this area of uncertainty where the opportunity exists for the charlatans and/or "diet experts" to prey upon the unwary and impressionable with their "miracle" dietary regimes.

no....considering that your are from Europe....think about living in the forest, what will you eat:

berries: only autumn

roots: yes but not too many

small animals: mouse, rats, rabbit, birds

eggs

insects

deer if working in groups

fish if you are smart

in autumn huge amounts of fruits.

So most of the time fat and protein and small amounts of carbs, while in autumn you can quickly gain some fat to survive the winter on carbs. In Winter you have only fat and protein.

That populations need lesser Vitamin C as more north the live supports that.

[chiang mai]

Are you not describing a diet that accompanies a lifespan of around 40 years, hardly optimal I guess.

[robblok]

Are you not describing a diet that accompanies a lifespan of around 40 years, hardly optimal I guess.

That is my problem with paleo diets people never lived long enough to develop health problems & there are not many records left from that time.

Just eating what is available is not always the most beneficial.

Anyway i am a firm believer that people should try more then a few things to see what suits them. Low carb is just one of these things but not more magical as others. Though of course there are many crazy plans but low carb is one of the more sensible. Just not as magical as some people want us to believe.

[robblok]

I think if you just eliminate refined sugars and refined carbs from your diet and add some veggies you are already way ahead of the game and going to extremes like low carb is not needed (unless insulin sensitivity)

They did a study on kids in the Netherlands and gave 641 kids drinks in the afternoon (cans) the kids did not know what cans contained the sugar and wich that did not. This was done on 6 schools and statistics were collected after 6 - 12 and 18 months and it was proven that kids who had the cans with sugar gained 1 kg more weight and fat as the ones who did not. Clear proof that sugar is bad. The cans were 250 ml and one was given to a kid per day. The reprasentative from coca cola of course denied the problem ( money on the line)

After this the researchers where gathered and executed because of doing unethical tests on kids (just joking)

[BlackJack]

all carbs are not created equal

http://www.mendosa.com/gilists.htm

[attento]

The human digestive system evolved to deal with a mixture of carbohydrates and proteins, with very small amounts of fats and sugars. On this diet, humans have developed for thousands of years. Most people who are overweight are that way because they eat too much, and usually it is too much of an inappropriate dietary mix. Simple but true.

Of course, there are medical conditions which override this simplicity, but they are far fewer than some people choose to believe. It is this area of uncertainty where the opportunity exists for the charlatans and/or "diet experts" to prey upon the unwary and impressionable with their "miracle" dietary regimes.

no....considering that your are from Europe....think about living in the forest, what will you eat:

berries: only autumn

roots: yes but not too many

small animals: mouse, rats, rabbit, birds

eggs

insects

deer if working in groups

fish if you are smart

in autumn huge amounts of fruits.

So most of the time fat and protein and small amounts of carbs, while in autumn you can quickly gain some fat to survive the winter on carbs. In Winter you have only fat and protein.

That populations need lesser Vitamin C as more north the live supports that.

If we study the history of human evolution, we find that our early ancestors were not forest dwellers. They evolved on what is open savannah (the modern equivalent). Later, a few groups living in tropical regions found a home in forested areas, but most Euopean cultures were not forest dwellers. Fats and sugars have only constituted a small part of mans diet, historically. Throughout evolution, it would seem that mans diet has moved from being mainly animal protein, to gradually including a higher proportion of carbohydrate. Of course, different sources of animal protein would include varying amounts of fats, this also being affected by the season in the temperate regions, as you suggest. The gradual evolution from hunters to hunter-gatherers to crop growers, was a move away from animal protein and animal fats towards higher proportions of polysaccharides (mainly starches) in the diet. The recent ( in evolutionary terms) increase in fat and sugar intake (in the "developed" world) has been linked closely with the industrialisation of food preparation. Both fats and sugars, helping to make industrially prepared foods more palatable.

[attento]

all carbs are not created equal

http://www.mendosa.com/gilists.htm

and, all calories are not equal (depending the source)

[robblok]

http://eatingacademy...-interpretation
http://www.ncbi.nlm....les/PMC3564212/

credits to Jsixpack for digging up these studies. There seems to be an advantage for low carb. I was wrong, it can be as much as 5% compared to low fat. That is something i can believe, not claims of it being vastly superior and much higher numbers and eat all you want ect.

I hope to see a study of low carb high fat vs low carb hi protein.. i think the latter has an even higher advantage as protein takes more energy to digest.

5 percent might not sound like a lot but day in day out it kinda adds on.I have always been on low / moderate carbs (with the occasional high carb day to load my stores as I do weight lifting and need glycocen energy not ketone energy).

[h90]

Are you not describing a diet that accompanies a lifespan of around 40 years, hardly optimal I guess.

40 years is great. Consider 5 month per year almost no vitamins, extreme cold, almost starving. very poor clothes.

If you are from middle Europe think of living the winter outside and living from what you find. And how much Vitamin C is there and how well you sleep in the -5 degree Celcius place (which is nice warm if it has -25 in the winternight)