Low Carb-High Fat

Dorothy - that is a good point. Honestly I hadn't given protein a 2nd thought. I just went back and looked at my MFP diary (I've been tracking for a little over a month now) and I only met my protein goal about 1/3 of the time. Maybe that is my problem about why I feel so beat up over my workouts.

Any tips on how to get more protein? I have tried making protein shakes w/ a low-carb protein powder (sweetened w/ stevia) that is 170 cals/22g protein per scoop and I mix it with unsweetened vanilla almond milk and some type of fresh or frozen berry, but it seems to make me super super tired/groggy/foggy.
 
Hi Candace,
You can easily get more protein by incorporating eggs/ chicken/ turkey/ tuna/ salmon/ edamame/ cottage cheese/ plain greek yogurt/ low fat cheese. I'm one who does not like to cook so on Sundays I'll make up enough chicken breasts or fish for the 5 day work week so I'm not grabbing something unhealthy due to lack of time. Maybe your fatigue after the protein shake is from the insulin surge with the sugar from the berries?:confused: Just a guess. I no longer add fruit to my protein shakes but use spinach/ kale/ avocado etc and feel really good after.
Good luck,
Jamie
 
Katerchen and Kariev: the voices of reason.

I don't subscribe to any particular 'diet' or method of eating. It makes sense to me that our bodies need different amounts of fuel, calorie levels and types of fuel at different ages, and according to our changing activity levels. So, this must remain a very individualistic pursuit, especially on a forum where most of us are striving to exercise intensely and achieve good health and slow the aging process.

No-one can proscribe an eating plan for you. All the ladies here who gave testimony to a plan working for them can testify to its success at a particular time of their life, according to the lifestyle they lead now. That's all they have in common. I am happy that all have found a way to be healthier, more energetic and feel better. There are many ways to achieve this.

During the 2nd world war, people in the UK didn't suffer from obesity, diabetes and heart disease (so much) because food was rationed. People didn't starve, they ate differently: less animal protein per meal, less sugar and fat, more vegetables and grains that the land could provide. The nation was healthier than than it is today. Second reason: everyone was far more active than they are now.

Activity does matter, and Katerchen is right, according to a documentary screened on British TV last year by Horizon science programmes: it is not just the 1 hour of exercise you do each day that matters, but all the total movement you achieve throughout the day. So, a waitress rushed off her feet during lunch and dinner services could actually be healthier than a Cathlete doing HiiT for an hour. When the test subjects in this programme wore what was commonly called 'the fidget pants,' it was easily seen that the waitress' total movement for the day tripled that of the office worker who went for a daily run or bike ride.

My mother has always lived according to one rule only: moderation. Nothing is outlawed, just eat a lot less of it if it isn't a whole food. So, here again, we face the question of portion sizes. Everyone coming to the US for the first time is astonished at the portion sizes served here in restaurants. Believe it. An ice cream at the local creamery here in Ann Arbor, MI is called a single scoop, but what it is is actually as much ice cream as can be crammed into and onto the cone! So, about 5 times what I received when having an ice cream in the UK as a child. When I have one to celebrate some milestone with my girls, as far as I am concerned, that IS dinner for the day, or lunch.

So, all of these dictates are true: total calories consumed matters, quality of calories consumed matters, moderation and portion size matter, level of total activity matters.

There is no one magic bullet, only healthier life style practices. What makes sense to you?

Clare

I
 
Most of this was supported by Dr. Atkins years ago and he was ridiculed for it and almost lost his medical license. He quoted endless research supporting his opinions and everyone scoffed at his ideas. What convinced me was a friend who was lean, worked out regularly and ate very carefully. His cholesterol was thru the roof along with his triglycerites. He could not get health insurance. He was in his forties at the time. Within 2 weeks of using the Atkins program all his results were normal. He would call me in the a.m and tell me he was having an omelet with avocado and bacon! Before it was oatmeal. Dry!
Not pushing any particular position but I do agree with a lot in this article.
I am vegetarian so not eating animal products but not scimping on good fats either like avocados.
 
skatch said:
Lately I've read a lot about how conventional wisdom is wrong. To lose weight, low cal diets don't work, calories in calories out is wrong. Science is now backing a low carb diet with high fat. Anyone read Primal Blueprint? Why We Get Fat and What To Do About it? The Calorie Myth? Anyone else follow a low carb-high fat diet?
Click to expand...

The low carb diet was around long before Atkins made it popular. IIRC, it was used to control seizures for epileptic patients. It was difficult to follow strictly because patients were too skinny to stay healthy.

The picture of low carb in the popular media is you can eat all you want as long as you skip carbs which are evil. That isn't quite true. Low carb diets allow you to eat about 300-500 calories more per day that you would normally eat on a restricted calorie diet and still lose weight. That is because it forces your body to find its glucose in its own supplies mainly muscle and fat tissues. While we can't convert fat into glucose, we can convert the glycerol backbone of triglyceride into glucose so glucose levels remain stable. The body will do anything to get its glucose.

Low carb works best for people who gain muscle easily meaning people with a lot of fast twitch fiber. However, it seems that not everybody has the right genetic makeup to stay healthy on it. A friend of mine of 15 years decided to go on Atkins. She ended up an alcoholic and in less than a year destroyed a happy marriage. Her husband who also did atkins with her blew out both of his knees in six months when he took up running on a low carb diet. He forgot that the gluco in glucosamine is actually a glucose molecule. He needs surgery on both knees. I'm sure that there are people who do fine for long period of time on a modified low carb diet but I haven't met any. The same goes for low fat.

For what it is worth, there are studies that show that at one year there is little difference between the 2 diets. The key is mindful eating. If you are looking for a diet, try the 5:2 diet. I remember somebody posting about it here a while back.
 
Soapmaker said:
The low carb diet was around long before Atkins made it popular. IIRC, it was used to control seizures for epileptic patients. It was difficult to follow strictly because patients were too skinny to stay healthy.

The picture of low carb in the popular media is you can eat all you want as long as you skip carbs which are evil. That isn't quite true. Low carb diets allow you to eat about 300-500 calories more per day that you would normally eat on a restricted calorie diet and still lose weight. That is because it forces your body to find its glucose in its own supplies mainly muscle and fat tissues. While we can't convert fat into glucose, we can convert the glycerol backbone of triglyceride into glucose so glucose levels remain stable. The body will do anything to get its glucose.

Low carb works best for people who gain muscle easily meaning people with a lot of fast twitch fiber. However, it seems that not everybody has the right genetic makeup to stay healthy on it. A friend of mine of 15 years decided to go on Atkins. She ended up an alcoholic and in less than a year destroyed a happy marriage. Her husband who also did atkins with her blew out both of his knees in six months when he took up running on a low carb diet. He forgot that the gluco in glucosamine is actually a glucose molecule. He needs surgery on both knees. I'm sure that there are people who do fine for long period of time on a modified low carb diet but I haven't met any. The same goes for low fat.

For what it is worth, there are studies that show that at one year there is little difference between the 2 diets. The key is mindful eating. If you are looking for a diet, try the 5:2 diet. I remember somebody posting about it here a while back.
Click to expand...

So based on two people you totally debunk low carb? We are starting to see a lot of studies come out about how incredibly toxic sugar is to the human body. People who are conscious of their carb intake tend to avoid the highly processed foods that are loaded with carbs. They tend to shop the perimeters of the supermarket: fresh veggies, berries, lean meats. Most breads, even the touted whole grain breads are highly processed and really not good for the body. Yes, there are those who take the low carbs thing to the extreme and can do harm for the body, but if you understand the nutrition aspect and keep your carbs lower using healthy carbs it is actually a diet that will reduce inflammation and control insulin levels. I challenge anyone to get off the addictive sugars and lower their carbs and you will see how much better you feel. Limit yourself to lower carb fruits, veggies, and watch your grain intake. Keep it at 100-150 grams a day. That is actually a high level for a low carber, but if you have been eating a normal "healthy" diet, your carbs are much higher and probably doing your body some long term damage.
 
dorothyrd said:
That is actually a high level for a low carber, but if you have been eating a normal "healthy" diet, your carbs are much higher and probably doing your body some long term damage.
Click to expand...

I still believe, in the long run, a balanced diet which does not excludes any food group is the way to go. One cannot ignore the science of how our teeth and our digestive system are designed to process ALL food groups. - Now, highly processed human foods are a different matter - but there is nothing wrong with whole grains, bananas, unprocessed foods. If you eat foods in the least processed state, especially in the good old USA, people would lose weight.

Yes, the grain we eat today is not the grain they ate 10 000 years ago - but the meat we eat is not either. Our pigs do not have much resemblance with the pigs 10 000 years ago (they were a lot more fatty then).

A special program is not necessary to lose weight if one eats whole foods sensibly. This society has become so needy of having to 'follow a program' that simple common sense approach to weight loss (and one that does not require any special expensive foods, a membership or requires following strict rules) is totally ignored or ridiculed. ALL THOSE NEW BREAKTHROUGH BOOKS AND MAGAZINE ARTICLES WANT YOUR MONEY - that's it. They do not want to help you lose weight because they would stop selling their product if their advice or gadget would actually work.
 
A diet that has 100-150 grams of carbs will allow things like bananas and steel cut oats and whole grains, so is a well rounded diet. It is very true that a good portion of our food is not as good as it used to be. Even veggies and fruit are lower in nutrition due to the soil they are grown in.

This nation now has children getting type 2 diabetes. So it seems left to our own devises, families are not making good choices. People here are not the norm. People here know how to read a food label, how to balance their choices. But look around when you grocery shop and see how many people are buying cases of soda, or even vitamin water loaded with sugar because they think it is good for them. Sugar is addictive. I finally convinced my husband that if he really wanted to lose 20 pounds all he had to do is ditch the 3 a day Mountain Dew, the sugary evening snacks, and add a breakfast that contained some protein, not carbs(he was a no breakfast eater). He spent 2 weeks suffering from the addiction and now is good and has lost 20 pounds slowly over about 3 months. He now is reading labels. He is shocked at some of the sugars in foods he thought were healthy. He understand now why the weight would not budge. He is not counting calories, or carbs, but just reduced his processed sugar intake quite a bit and now looks and feels better.
 
dorothyrd said:
So based on two people you totally debunk low carb? We are starting to see a lot of studies come out about how incredibly toxic sugar is to the human body. People who are conscious of their carb intake tend to avoid the highly processed foods that are loaded with carbs. They tend to shop the perimeters of the supermarket: fresh veggies, berries, lean meats. Most breads, even the touted whole grain breads are highly processed and really not good for the body. Yes, there are those who take the low carbs thing to the extreme and can do harm for the body, but if you understand the nutrition aspect and keep your carbs lower using healthy carbs it is actually a diet that will reduce inflammation and control insulin levels. I challenge anyone to get off the addictive sugars and lower their carbs and you will see how much better you feel. Limit yourself to lower carb fruits, veggies, and watch your grain intake. Keep it at 100-150 grams a day. That is actually a high level for a low carber, but if you have been eating a normal "healthy" diet, your carbs are much higher and probably doing your body some long term damage.
Click to expand...

I'm not so sure why you felt that I was trying to debunk the low carb diets from what I wrote. My intention was to give the OP an idea of how low carb actually works. It allows people to eat a little more than what they would normally do on restricted calorie diets and still lose weight. The range is in the 350 to 500 calories because the body has to waste some fat to get its glucose. There is nothing magical about it and it isn't particularly healthy for everybody. Since my friend developed her problem on low carb eating, I heard more people mention similar issues. Mental and joint problems are the 2 that I heard about the most. They certainly don't get much publicity.

There are people who do better on low carb and others who do better on higher carb. By the time you get to 100 to 150 grams of carbs a day, the benefit of restricting carbs becomes minimal. I certainly wasn't recommending that she eats sugar.

Grains also aren't the problem. It is the way we cook and eat them that is a problem. I recently got to appreciate how little I knew about the effect our cooking methods have on the food we eat, particularly carbs/high glycemic foods. I have been eating 2 very high fiber muffin a day after reacting badly to an antibiotic/codeine treatment. I was afraid I was going to gain a lot of weight doing that for 3 months but the fear of catching a nasty intestinal bug was much greater. I ended up losing and not gaining. It turned out that resistant starch changes the way our bodies process food. It also feeds intestinal bacteria to keep them happy and producing many of the chemicals that our bodies need especially the colon. Resistant starch comes from high glycemic foods like pasta and potatoes but we destroy it with the way we cook these foods. It makes more sense to me now why people are gaining so much weight eating the same ingredients that never caused a problem before. I wish there was a cooking guide on how to maximize the resistant starch content of food. It would save us all so much angst over what to eat every day.
 
Soapmaker said:
I wish there was a cooking guide on how to maximize the resistant starch content of food. It would save us all so much angst over what to eat every day.
Click to expand...

If you add fat and/or protein to food with a high GI, it lowers the GI. Potatoes with butter have a lower GI than a plain potato, the same goes for a slice of bread with butter and slices of turkey (note that I am not talking about the typical american sandwich bread - I am talking about natural sourdough/whole grain breads).

Like I said before: Eating unprocessed foods keeps you in the normal weight range without hunger or nutrient deficiency. We need to take the 'science' out of our food (the chemicals, flavorings, enhancers, as well as the things that 'speed up the process' as artificial fertilizers or dough conditioners).
 
Candiceena said:
Dorothy - that is a good point. Honestly I hadn't given protein a 2nd thought. I just went back and looked at my MFP diary (I've been tracking for a little over a month now) and I only met my protein goal about 1/3 of the time. Maybe that is my problem about why I feel so beat up over my workouts.

Any tips on how to get more protein? I have tried making protein shakes w/ a low-carb protein powder (sweetened w/ stevia) that is 170 cals/22g protein per scoop and I mix it with unsweetened vanilla almond milk and some type of fresh or frozen berry, but it seems to make me super super tired/groggy/foggy.
Click to expand...


You may want to add a bit of a healthy 'fat' to your smoothie, like a tsp/tbs of coconut oil, flax seed, nut butter, etc. It would help balance out the ratios in the macros, and give you a bit of a boost as well.
 
I think it is really hard to generalize for EVERYONE. We are all different. Although the internal mechanics of our bodies are similar, the functioning of each is still unique. I believe how we grew up, the bacteria we were exposed to .. all takes residence in the gut, and now has an effect on the digestion of the food we eat. There is scientific evidence supporting the fact that gut bacteria play a role in obesity. The cause and effect of this finding isn't truely yet known, but when you consider that some people have good results for weight loss with high-carb/low fat, and others with high fat/low carb, and still others with 'moderation', its calls into play outside (or inside as the case maybe) factors in the overall success.

I believe that you need to find a way of eating that is (1) successful for you and (2) you can stick with.

Yes - excluding any big macro from your diet will lead to a large imbalance, and is certainly NOT recommended. But in each macro is a large 'range' of choices.

Each person really needs to investigate the foods they eat and how they feel on them. How is your energy? Did you have enough to do a workout? Did you lose weight? Did you lose fat? Did you lose inches? If you are low carbing and don't have enough energy for your intense workouts, do you feel better with a carb-cycling program where you eat higher carbs on training days?

There is also a huge off shoot group for IIFYM (if it fits your macros.) Less 'food restriction', and eating to fit into your personal macro nutrients. Need more carbs to meet your daily macros? Eat a poptart. No foods are 'evil' or 'excluded' as long as they fit into your macros for the day.

I think there is lots of freedom out there to find your own personal WOE - you just need to experiment to see what is best for you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Our Newsletter

Get awesome content delivered straight to your inbox.

Top