Low Carb VS Low Fat VS Low Cal...

Nightporter

Nightporter

New member
Hello everyone!

Sorry if something like this has already been posted...

I'm thinking of 'deiting' again... I really hate the word, so I'll just say cutting back on a few things instead...

The diet my parents always told me to go on was Atkins. So I did. I lost weight fast... And gained it back fast as well. People tell me all the time It's super 'unhealthy' and all that. I'm not a health nut by any means, just someone looking to be a bit thinner.

The thing is, I'm a bit confused on what I should cut back on. I'm thinking that Low Carb maybe isn't for me since I'm not the biggest meat fan. ... I'm thinking Low Fat. Thought I've 'heard' that Low Fat is now an old fashioned thing of the past for most people... Then I thought, hey... What about Low Cal? It's a scientific fact that cutting calories will help... But can you really eat more than a cup of lettuce and a carrot for supper?

I'm here to ask everyone on here... Professional and Amatuer alike which diet best works for them. I'm not wanting to do a crash diet and lose a ton of weight super fast, maybe something slower. But not RIDICULOUSLY slow like 5 years or so. I'm curious what plan works for you... Or what plans did work and which ones did NOT. I want to hear your take on everything I mentioned and maybe even things I did not mention. What made you feel better mentally/physically?

Thanks for reading! I'm very curious and I can't want to hear back from anyone who would like to help.

-N-
 
Read Steve's thread on the Calorie think, it really helped clear up a lot of things I was misguided about.

http://weight-loss.fitness.com/topic/9468-starvation-calories-adaptations.html


That's the link.

check over all the stickies if you can, I think you'll find some valuable information.

You body needs fats, carbs, and proteins to live and function.

I'm doing the calorie thing, but I'm trying to do it properly.
 
Thanks for the link, LowFatMilk!

The whole Low-Cal thing is like a whole new world to me... Seems complicated to grasp at first!

Thanks again,

-N-
 
I don't recommend cutting out entire nutrient groups. That doesn't work for most... at least not in the long term. We only have 3 macronutrient groups (protein, carbs, and fat) so eliminating one whole group really sets up a large hurdle for yourself if you are hoping to achieve long-term/permanent success.

Here's something you don't seem to understand.....

All diets, Atkins and alike, revolve around the same core tenant.... eat less calories than you expend. Sure, promoters and supporters of things like Atkins claim there's a metabolic advantage to not eating carbs..... but show me the supporting data to that claim. Atkins works b/c A) it leads to fast water loss which isn't what you should be after... we're interested in fat loss and B) this is the not-so-obvious... by eliminating one entire food group (carbs) you're pretty much guaranteed to reduce your caloric intake, at least in the short term. So the weight loss is not from some magical combination of nutrients... it's coming from the caloric state of the person.

More calories in than out, you gain weight.

Less calories in than out, you lose weight.

Sure, nothing works out so clean and simply but as a general rule of thumb... this is how it works.

With that in mind.... I'd suggest constructing a diet that works for you. Start with calories. Figure out how many you need to eat to maintain. There are sticky threads on this very subject but as a rough estimate.... 14 calories per pound is a good starting place. That will give you an estimation of the point where calories in = calories out and you have weight maintenance. From there, you need to create a deficit in order to lose weight. Taking something like 20-30% off maintenance is a good starting place.

Once you know your caloric goal, fill it with a good balance of nutrients. I like to start with the essentials. These are the nutrients that must come from out diets b/c our bodies can't produce them; some of the amino acids (protein) and fats (omega 3 & 6).

Protein is a sticky subject. If you're weight training and dieting, taking in 1 gram per pound of lean body mass (total body weight - fat weight) is a good starting point. If you aren't weight training, shooting a little less than this isn't going to kill you.... although there's a lot more good that comes from eating protein beyond its essential-ness. Things like satiety, thermic effect of food, muscle maintenance are all characteristics of adequate protein consumption. If you don't understand these things, don't sweat it.

Protein has 4 calories per gram.

Once you have your protein figured out, move on to fat. Something like .25-.4 grams per pound is a good starting point, but this number can vary widely. Something like 25-30% of your total caloric intake will suffice. This should come primarily from the good stuff.... think natural peanut butter, flax, fish oil pills, extra virgin olive oil, fish, nuts, avocados, etc. The remainder will come from the residual saturated and trans fats you pick up in the remainder of the foods you eat.

Fats have 9 calories per gram.

From there, it's pretty much fair gain. If you're doing a lot of exercise, getting adequate carbs is important. Something like a minimum of 200 grams is a ballpark. Some go much less, some go much more.... this all really depends on the individual and the circumstance.

Carbs have 4 calories per gram.

It's important to note that this last step where there's some 'wiggle room' is nice b/c you can add in some goodies that you love to eat as long as it's within your caloric and nutrient goals/limits. The more rigidity and rules, the less the chances most will adhere long term. This isn't always the case... but seems to be the majority in my experience.

***************

Just to give you an example:

Suppose we have a 150 lb female with a lean body mass of 100 lbs.

Her estimated maintenance caloric intake = 2100 calories (150*14)

She'll create her caloric goal (deficit) by subtracting 30% from her maintenance intake giving her a target of approx. 1500 calories (2100 - (.3 * 2100))

Once you know your target caloric intake (1500 calories) figure out what foods you are going to use to meet said target.

Start with protein. We'll shoot for 100 grams of protein (1 * lbm)

There are 4 cals in each gram of protein so this will total 400 calories.

We still have 1100 calories to fulfill (1500-400).

Next we'll worry about fats. We'll shoot for 45 grams of fat (150 * .3)

There are 9 calories in each gram of fat so this will total 405 calories.

We now have 695 calories left to fulfill (1100 - 405).

This is the very individual part. You can fill in the 695 calories with a mixture of carbs and fats, which again is a very individual matter. I tend to leave protein stagnant although it wouldn't kill you to move it up to 1.5 grams per pound of LBM while dieting. The reason for this is our bodies will preferentially pull aminos from our blood stream before turning to its existing stores of aminos (muscle). Losing muscle is rarely a good thing!

****************

That's a lot, I realize. But hopefully it makes sense. And feel free to ask questions.
 
Nightporter said:
Thanks for the link, LowFatMilk!

The whole Low-Cal thing is like a whole new world to me... Seems complicated to grasp at first!

Thanks again,

-N-
Click to expand...

But it's really not- do read the stickied threads in the nutrition forum... they help to uncomplicate things -and it leaves you eating what youo like and just being aware of what you're eating...

nice to see you back by the way..
 
Oh, and sorry for the long post. Much of what I said above can be found in the stickies. Every once in a while I like to reinforce the viewpoints though.
 
Hey Maleficent & Steve! Thanks for your replies...

I'm very curious about all of this because I have been exposed to all 3 things in some way or another...

My parents are firm believers that Atkins is the healthiest way. Their main reason to back it up is they say carbs have only been eaten by humans for a tiny fraction of the time we've existed on this planet. They say that before that, humans mostly only ate meat, and that Carbs were never meant to be eaten by humans. It seems like a good arguement, but I'm starting to wonder if perhaps it's a body thing and not a whole human timeline thing? Like since we've all been having carbs from the cradle that our bodies get used to having them... Does that make sense?

My Grandparents (when they used to diet) would stress that calories were what you needed to look out for. Eating fats, protiens, and carbs were OK if you had small portions. They said that burning more calories than you ate made you lose weight... it seems like a simple arguement.

Now, I'm living with my boyfriend and his family for a short time. His mother looks down on fat VERY much. She believes sugar is OK to eat, and makes very very sugary foods all of the time. She lost 150+ pounds with the method of a peanut butter and flaxseed bread for breakfast, half cup of yogurt and granola for lunch, and a big, but low-fat supper. She's eaten on this routine for at least 15 years or so, and is a firm believer that you should cut out all fats that you can.

I realize that it's not good to cut out a single thing... Which is why counting calories makes more sense. ... Low Carb and Low Fat just seem wierd to me, and when I have tried them, I constantly am craving something fatty or carb-filled... But I am wondering if my body is craving it also?

I'm thinking of starting out with just better eating... Common sense. Like, instead of Ramen Noodles for lunch, a ham sandwitch on rye bread with mustard instead of mayo? Instead of cookies for a snack, an apple? And instead of an egg on a bagel for breakfast, maybe oatmeal and a fruit? Also... Cutting out ALL sugary drinks (Which I have already done, besides 'Silk' once in a while) I could also do some searching and find out foods that are high in calories and cut them out? While at the same time, finding the foods low in calories and bring them in? Do you think this is a good start?

I won't be able to get in the full good-eating swing until I move back home (which is only a month away) But for now I'm going to excersize as much as I can to hopefully get used to it so it's not a pain when I get back home... It's tough to get a daily bikeride in though when it never stops snowing! But I digress...

Steve, I will have to re-read your post a few times to get it all to sink in, but I think I understand the majority of it! If I multiply 14 calories per pound I have... I come out with 3220 calories, that seems like a lot! Thought, I really don't know my weight and I haven't known it for months because my boyfriends mom doesn't allow scales in the house. I'm just trying to go by what I see in the mirror!

Thanks again for taking the time to post everything!

-N-
 
She lost 150+ pounds with the method of a peanut butter and flaxseed bread for breakfast, half cup of yogurt and granola for lunch, and a big, but low-fat supper. She's eaten on this routine for at least 15 years or so, and is a firm believer that you should cut out all fats that you can.
Click to expand...
that's a fairly low calorie diet as well...
 
The only think I can say to that post if you have smart grandparents.

:)

The other two 'groups' have an interest, but they don't really understand the mechanics. Which isn't a big deal... most don't!

Also, about the maintenance intake... that means you're currently around 230 lbs, you guess. Your actual maintenance is probably around 2800 - 3200. These aren't exacts. And this also assumes a good bit of exercise. If you aren't exercising, maintenance is probably closer to the low end, or maybe even a tad lower.

Just remember that you aren't signing contracts here.

You're using a roughly estimated starting point. Once you do this, you have to track and monitor progress. Hopefully this doesn't solely consist of weighing yourself either.... measurements are great!

If things aren't heading in the desired direction, you know something is off and you need to dig. Either your consistency with your caloric goal is off, your food measurements are off. If you're relatively certain these aren't the case, then you must be over-estimating your maintenance intake.
 
Thanks!

I'm trying to get excersize when I can... I live in Northern Minnesota, and it's rare to find a thawed sidewalk/road to bike or walk on. I've gone on a few walks/bikerides over the past week or so, hopefully as things warm up the snow and ice will melt and I can ride every day!

As for the calories... If I continue to eat the maintenece intake, I won't burn any... So, you mentioned to take 20% to 30% off... Would I continue to do this as I reach every platau? I saw you mentioned in another post (The one I was redirected to) that you can't continue to lower you calories or there would be nothing left! Would you kick them up a notch? Then maybe take them down a notch to stir things up? Same with the excersize?

I just know plateus can be one of the worst things to deal with in weight loss, even enough to cause someone to quit! But I won't worry about those until I reach one.

Thanks again,

-N-
 
Nightporter said:
As for the calories... If I continue to eat the maintenece intake, I won't burn any... So, you mentioned to take 20% to 30% off... Would I continue to do this as I reach every platau?
Click to expand...

The thing is, as you lose weight, your maintenance intake drops. Your caloric requirements are based a lot on your weight. So plateaus are partially caused by this reduction in body weight. In these cases, yes, cutting calories is the option.

There's other instances where plateaus arise even outside the context of a reduction in body weight. There's different solutions for these but I don't think you need to worry about these right now.

I saw you mentioned in another post (The one I was redirected to) that you can't continue to lower you calories or there would be nothing left! Would you kick them up a notch? Then maybe take them down a notch to stir things up? Same with the excersize?
Click to expand...

Again, I wouldn't worry about this yet. Baby steps.

I just know plateus can be one of the worst things to deal with in weight loss, even enough to cause someone to quit! But I won't worry about those until I reach one.
Click to expand...

That's sort of wrong, IMO.

Your mentality should be, "I know plateaus are going to happen. They're an inevitable part of dieting. I can't be discouraged when they occur. I simply need to modify my approach."
 
Hi Steve,

I just wanted to say thanks for helping me out so much... I guess you're right about Plateus. When I would hit them, I'd always think 'at least I'm not gaining...' and try to shake things up. My dad, however, is the one who would always give up when he hits a plateu. He's tried atkins several times, and every time he hits a plateu he gets very frustrated and figures it's worthless... I will try to stay very far from this mentality as possible. I'm not too worried since I'm a more positive person now than I was when I used to try dieting.

Yup, baby steps is exactly right... I'll just do my best and take it one day at a time!

Thanks again,

-N
 
You're welcome.

The best you can do it lay out a simple, individualized plan for yourself and focus on consistently following it. When hang ups arise, which they will, a) make sure you're mentally prepared for said hang ups and b) remember that there is an entire community here willing to offer advice on how to get past the plateau.

But don't spend too much energy worrying about something that's not going to happen until down the road a bit.

Again, just realize it's there and for now, focus on developing and consistently following a plan of attack. Do that and things will fall into place.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top