Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It is actually more simple than that. It is not carbohydrates that is the problem exactly, but grains (wheat especially), as it has nothing in common with the wheat of 50 years ago. Remember the Green Revolution in the 1970s that solved a good chunk of
Whole grain consumption is associated with lower body weight, less diabetes, less cardiovascular disease, etc. I eat plenty of whole grains and have no problem remaining lean.
The two groups both had access to a dietician throughout the year. Why are you so hell bent on discrediting something that appears to have a growing body of scientific research supporting it?
I'm hell bent in giving an accurate summary of what happened in this study, among what I've already said, this study didn't even look low-fat diets...it compared a moderate fat to a higher fat diet:
"People in both groups had counseling sessions with a dietitian: The low-fat group was told to get no more than 30 percent of their daily calories from fat, while the low-carbohydrate group was given a limit of 40 grams of carbohydrates per day. At the end of one year, the low-fat group averaged nearly 200 grams of carbohydrate daily compared to about 130 for the low-carb group, according to the study."
A diet that is 30% fat isn't low-fat, that is just a bit lower than what the average American consumes. And, as I mentioned, the two groups received different advice that went beyond fat intake. For example higher fat group was encouraged to eat more protein.
This study doesn't tell us much at all, it just compared a moderate fat diet with a diet with a bit more fat. The low-carbohydrate group wasn't truly low-carbohydrate and the low-fat group wasn't low fat.
Whole grain consumption is associated with lower body weight, less diabetes, less cardiovascular disease, etc. I eat plenty of whole grains and have no problem remaining lean.
I'm hell bent in giving an accurate summary of what happened in this study, among what I've already said, this study didn't even look low-fat diets...it compared a moderate fat to a higher fat diet:
"People in both groups had counseling sessions with a dietitian: The low-fat group was told to get no more than 30 percent of their daily calories from fat, while the low-carbohydrate group was given a limit of 40 grams of carbohydrates per day. At the end of one year, the low-fat group averaged nearly 200 grams of carbohydrate daily compared to about 130 for the low-carb group, according to the study."
A diet that is 30% fat isn't low-fat, that is just a bit lower than what the average American consumes. And, as I mentioned, the two groups received different advice that went beyond fat intake. For example higher fat group was encouraged to eat more protein.
This study doesn't tell us much at all, it just compared a moderate fat diet with a diet with a bit more fat. The low-carbohydrate group wasn't truly low-carbohydrate and the low-fat group wasn't low fat.
Yet the not so low carb diet had better results than the not so low fat diet didn't it?
Whole grain consumption is associated with lower body weight, less diabetes, less cardiovascular disease, etc. I eat plenty of whole grains and have no problem remaining lean.
That just is not the case for many Anericans these days if they consume similar levels of grains now compared to the past. Wheat causes all kinds of negative impacts for an increasingly large percentage of the population.
That's the whole reason that HFLC works. People were instructed to eat certain foods but were not instructed to restrict their calories. The HF group ate less calories because when you eat a HFLC you naturally eat less. I eat a HFLC diet and I lose weight because I am not hungry all the time so I eat less. There really ISN'T any magic to it.
About 10 years ago I lost a lot of weight on the Atkins diet. I managed to keep it off for quite a few years but I gave in to my mother's hysteria about fat and converted to low fat, which is naturally higher in carbs. I gradually gained back the weight. Now I am back on Atkins and I have lost a bunch of weight. I am not hungry and I naturally eat less. I don't have to plan to eat less, I am just not as hungry so I eat less.
I eat a HFLC diet and I eat a variety of proteins including steak, fish, nuts, seeds, poultry. I also use a variety of oils including coconut oil, butter and olive oil.
HFLC diets really do work for most people.
I don't understand how eating low-carb/high-fat makes it easy to eat less (at least calorically, not bulk). I mean, I'm sure it does for some people (obviously for you), but for me -- no way. All the foods that most traditional low-carb/high-fat proponents suggest one eats all contain large amounts of calories. For instance, people following the traditional Atkins-style of eating routinely eat large portions of full-fat beef, whole eggs (cooked in real butter), whole chicken (with the skin), bacon, etc.; and they often use heavy cream in their coffee, and eat whole cheese and full-fat cottage cheese, nuts, etc. All the 'good' foods in this type of diet are calorically dense. So, even if eating high-fat/low-carb increases satiety and reduces the need to snack between meals, I find it hard to believe that the satiety point is reached before one exceeds his/her daily caloric needs.
Most of the high-fat/low-carb proponents (Dr. Atkins, Gary Taubes, etc.) never mentioned counting calories or having to count calories. But if the energy hypothesis is correct (calories in/calories out), then high-fat/low-carb eaters have to be eating less calories than they burn, but it's seems difficult to do eating foods that are so calorically loaded.
I could easily sit down and eat a pound of 85% grass-fed, organic ground beef along with a nice big salad for dinner. It's enough to satisfy me, but I don't feel stuffed afterwards. And that's just for dinner. That's over 1000 calories right there; the 1-pound of beef is just under 1000 calories; the salad is at least 300-400 more. That's a decent-sized meal, but again, after eating it, I don't feel stuffed in any way. Could I eat more? Absolutely. And if you include several eggs cooked in butter along with something like bacon or sausage in the morning for breakfast, the calorie count for the day (just for breakfast and dinner) is already sky-high. And that doesn't include lunch or any snack throughout the day.
For me, it doesn't seem to matter whether it's high-fat/low-carb or high-carb/low-fat -- I don't just magically get satiated after I reach a certain caloric threshold. But maybe I'm in the minority.
Forget everything you have thought about calories...on Atkins...if you want a snack at 10 pm?
Get a plate of cheeses and egg salad, greel olives and left over rack of lamb...and you will lose weight...if
that doesn't
satiate you ...get a plate of ricotta cheese mixed with stevia for desert....and a drop of vanilla...hmm.
Next?
Pour whip cream, stevia, instant coffee with a couple frozen strawberries in a blender...all that not satiate you?
Then I give up.
Forget everything you have thought about calories...on Atkins...if you want a snack at 10 pm?
Get a plate of cheeses and egg salad, greel olives and left over rack of lamb...and you will lose weight...if
that doesn't
satiate you ...get a plate of ricotta cheese mixed with stevia for desert....and a drop of vanilla...hmm.
Next?
Pour whip cream, stevia, instant coffee with a couple frozen strawberries in a blender...all that not satiate you?
Then I give up.
LOL...Oh, that would more than satiate me -- but how could anyone lose weight and/or stay lean eating like that on a regular basis?
I don't understand how eating low-carb/high-fat makes it easy to eat less (at least calorically, not bulk). I mean, I'm sure it does for some people (obviously for you), but for me -- no way. All the foods that most traditional low-carb/high-fat proponents suggest one eats all contain large amounts of calories. For instance, people following the traditional Atkins-style of eating routinely eat large portions of full-fat beef, whole eggs (cooked in real butter), whole chicken (with the skin), bacon, etc.; and they often use heavy cream in their coffee, and eat whole cheese and full-fat cottage cheese, nuts, etc. All the 'good' foods in this type of diet are calorically dense. So, even if eating high-fat/low-carb increases satiety and reduces the need to snack between meals, I find it hard to believe that the satiety point is reached before one exceeds his/her daily caloric needs.
Most of the high-fat/low-carb proponents (Dr. Atkins, Gary Taubes, etc.) never mentioned counting calories or having to count calories. But if the energy hypothesis is correct (calories in/calories out), then high-fat/low-carb eaters have to be eating less calories than they burn, but it's seems difficult to do eating foods that are so calorically loaded.
I could easily sit down and eat a pound of 85% grass-fed, organic ground beef along with a nice big salad for dinner. It's enough to satisfy me, but I don't feel stuffed afterwards. And that's just for dinner. That's over 1000 calories right there; the 1-pound of beef is just under 1000 calories; the salad is at least 300-400 more. That's a decent-sized meal, but again, after eating it, I don't feel stuffed in any way. Could I eat more? Absolutely. And if you include several eggs cooked in butter along with something like bacon or sausage in the morning for breakfast, the calorie count for the day (just for breakfast and dinner) is already sky-high. And that doesn't include lunch or any snack throughout the day.
For me, it doesn't seem to matter whether it's high-fat/low-carb or high-carb/low-fat -- I don't just magically get satiated after I reach a certain caloric threshold. But maybe I'm in the minority.
Here's the thing-being on the Atkins diet does not mean you can eat huge quantities of food without gaining weight. The laws of physics always apply no matter what diet you decide to follow. If you want to lose weight you have to eat less than you burn regardless of what kind of foods you eat.
Dr. Atkins certainly does mention calories in his book. He says you don't have to count calories but if you are following the diet and not losing weight you may simply be eating too much. He also says that you should eat until you are satisfied, not that you should eat as much as you can stuff into your body. I am astonished by the number of people who think they know about all the Atkins diet yet have not ever read a single page of any of the books.
If you eat until you are no longer hungry on Atkins you will naturally eat fewer calories. I normally eat 2 eggs cooked in butter for breakfast. That's under 200 calories, less calories than a bowl of oatmeal cooked with skim milk. The difference is that if I eat oatmeal for breakfast I'm looking for a snack at 10Am. If I eat the eggs I am not hungry until much later.
On a low fat diet I would eat a chicken breast without skin (145 cal) with brown rice (100 calories a cup) and vegetables/salad. On a low carb diet I eat a chicken breast with skin (195 cal) along withe the veggies/salad and skip the rice. The meal is 50 calories less than it was before and much more satisfying.
The Atkins diet is not a good diet for people who like to stuff themselves. Even though you do not count calories, calories still count.
On a low fat diet I would eat a turkey sandwich with mustard on whole wheat bread (around 350 calories). Yesterday I made salmon salad (salmon, mayo, dill seed, herbs) and had it on spinach/arugula with salad dressing. My lunch was also about 350 calories. I wasn't hungry again until around 8PM. Can you imagine eating a turkey sandwich at noon and being satisfied for 8 hours? I would be looking for a snack at 4PM. I know that I eat fewer calories overall on a low carb diet and I am not hungry all the time.
LOL...Oh, that would more than satiate me -- but how could anyone lose weight and/or stay lean eating like that on a regular basis?
I think she was being sarcastic and reacting to your ridiculous claim of eating a pound of ground beef at every meal. Nobody can eat that way and lose weight. I do eat full fat cuts of beef, but not a pound at a time.
I think summing it all up would be; to eat in moderation, reduce carbs that spike insulin (reduce insulin spikes, period, ideally) & avoid refined foods. Whether you're vegan, meat-eater, etc. plays a 2nd-ary role. Here, vegans do have better quality of life/less chronic debilitating disease -- but not necessarily longer lives -- & so these tradeoffs allow us all to make our own choices re: diet.
For me, it works to be plant-based, avoid all meat/poultry, etc. & other than 2-3x/wk eating a fish like macrel, salmon, sardines, or trout. Other than that, lower grains & keep veggies high as possible, my fruit moderate & the fats from nuts/seeds/olive/coconut oils to moderate to low. I know from experience that after a wk driving cross-country w/ my g/f, & her eating mostly pretzels as snacks & I eating mostly nuts/peanuts, I lost lbs & she gained. Proof to me there that grains & carbs -- NOT fats -- were the problem.
Thx for listening & I hope anyone can help tweak this diet even more. I'm always talking to my docs re: this, & some have no idea re: foods, & other ones are v. knowledgeable. But you are what you eat, says the docs that agree w/ this type diet/lifestyle.
I have 2 major holes in my diet though; 1st is wine in ANY amount, as it isn't needed yet is my liking & weakness. 2nd, a bit of overeating/or too fast eating to rush to get it over, so I make eating not a pleasure but rather a performance task to eat to be healthy, not eat to just like taste, etc.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
