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.
Now that's interesting you say that. Every time I've heard anyone talk about gaining weight or bulking up, it's almost always involves eating more carbs, smoothies, shakes etc. I've never heard anyone talk of keto as a way to gain weight.
Whenever you take in more calories that your body can burn you are going to gain weight, no matter what the food is.
Whenever you take in more calories that your body can burn you are going to gain weight, no matter what the food is.
Definitely not disagreeing with you there, but I will say that I've never heard anyone say they gained weight and became obese by pigging out on kale, spinach and broccoli.
But there's a first time for everything.
Definitely not disagreeing with you there, but I will say that I've never heard anyone say they gained weight and became obese by pigging out on kale, spinach and broccoli.
But there's a first time for everything.
Its the people who think that they can eat a ton of fat laden proteins like bacon, cream, cheeses that get into trouble.
If you are coming from a standard american diet and going to a Keto Diet by default you are reducing total caloric intake. That is why you are losing weight.
I could do the same thing switching from a standard american diet to a twinkie diet and still lose 25 lbs simply because I reduced my total caloric intake.
BTW you can still gain weight doing Keto.
Sure you could, but, would your health be the same as a result of it, I don't think so.
================================================== ==
People are wrong in the regard of taking in more calories on lower carb diets is the same as calorie counts on other food intake diets, the body metabolizes the way it uses the fuel differently. I know this from experience, when I have done the various ways of eating. There are numerous factors which will cause people to use fuel/foods differently.
It is a fact that many people who use a low-carb reverse a multitude of negative health issues, like, high blood pressure, diabetes, body fat index. Weight may go up, but, if one is following the plan correctly, that will be the result of muscle gain, not fat. One can of course us low-carb to gain weight as a result of muscle mass improvement, but, they follow a different plan than the normal low carb meal plans followed which require substantially lower amounts of carbs.
It's not as simple as number calories in and out since if one drops their caloric intake too low too often, one will alter metabolic rate and can end up having more difficult time losing in the future on the lowest of caloric intake. People without any real experience in these matters can say all they want without real life experience or actual proof except for regurgitating what they heard repeated over and over by some non-factual reading material or spiels.
The bottom line, though, is what works for one may, without a doubt, not work for another, including calories in calories out. To all who are trying, hope you find what works for you.
Definitely not disagreeing with you there, but I will say that I've never heard anyone say they gained weight and became obese by pigging out on kale, spinach and broccoli.
But there's a first time for everything.
People can gain weight eating veggies. Have you seen the calorie count for those salads at restaurants? People think they are eating healthy by choosing a salad only to find out it has 1,000 calories.
Sure you could, but, would your health be the same as a result of it, I don't think so.
================================================== ==
We aren’t talking about health here though, we are talking strictly weight loss. Doesn’t matter what you eat the simple fact is that if you eat less of something you will lose weight.
[quote=Diesel350z;60600451]We aren’t talking about health here though, we are talking strictly weight loss. Doesn’t matter what you eat the simple fact is that if you eat less of something you will lose weight.[/QUOTE]
And, again, not always true according to the science. Also, my answers were geared toward the wider questions being discussed not just those an individual here has decided what's relevant. Others were discussing a variety of ideas about weight loss. So there, your not the boss of me.
We aren’t talking about health here though, we are talking strictly weight loss. Doesn’t matter what you eat the simple fact is that if you eat less of something you will lose weight.[/QUOTE]
And, again, not always true according to the science. Also, my answers were geared toward the wider questions being discussed not just those an individual here has decided what's relevant. Others were discussing a variety of ideas about weight loss. So there, your not the boss of me.
I know of no known studies where you don’t lose weight when consuming less calories.
People can gain weight eating veggies. Have you seen the calorie count for those salads at restaurants? People think they are eating healthy by choosing a salad only to find out it has 1,000 calories.
That's not from the greens. That's from the sauces and add-ons.
This is a good article for those hoping to lose weight... limit sugar, alcohol, and fructose consumption (including too much fruit or eat the fruit around when you do your cardio) Basically if you eliminate hot pockets, pizza, ice cream, fast food, cake, pie, etc... you will significantly increase your overall health. Stick to lean meats, vegetables, whole grains, legumes, nuts, some fruit... common sense stuff. I disagree with the author of "how not to die" that you should binge on fruit and eat lots of things like dates though. Pure sugar. High in fructose. No agave either. Honey... in moderation.. not tablespoons per day. Same with maple syrup and other "natural" sweeteners.
"What do the Atkins Diet and the traditional Japanese diet have in common? The Atkins Diet is low in carbohydrate and usually high in fat; the Japanese diet is high in carbohydrate and usually low in fat. Yet both work to promote weight loss. One commonality of both diets is that they both eliminate the monosaccharide fructose. Sucrose (table sugar) and its synthetic sister high fructose corn syrup consist of 2 molecules, glucose and fructose. Glucose is the molecule that when polymerized forms starch, which has a high glycemic index, generates an insulin response, and is not particularly sweet. Fructose is found in fruit, does not generate an insulin response, and is very sweet. Fructose consumption has increased worldwide, paralleling the obesity and chronic metabolic disease pandemic. Sugar (i.e., fructose-containing mixtures) has been vilified by nutritionists for ages as a source of “empty calories,” no different from any other empty calorie. However, fructose is unlike glucose.
In the hypercaloric glycogen-replete state, intermediary metabolites from fructose metabolism overwhelm hepatic mitochondrial capacity, which promotes de novo lipogenesis and leads to hepatic insulin resistance, which drives chronic metabolic disease. Fructose also promotes reactive oxygen species formation, which leads to cellular dysfunction and aging, and promotes changes in the brain’s reward system, which drives excessive consumption. Thus, fructose can exert detrimental health effects beyond its calories and in ways that mimic those of ethanol, its metabolic cousin. Indeed, the only distinction is that because fructose is not metabolized in the central nervous system, it does not exert the acute neuronal depression experienced by those imbibing ethanol. These metabolic and hedonic analogies argue that fructose should be thought of as “alcohol without the buzz.”"
Yes.
I don't subscribe to any diet (by which I mean a pattern of eating intended to be life-long) that eliminates any entire macronutrient areas that homo sapiens has evolved to feed upon. No native human groups are, for instance, pure vegan; none is pure carnivore. We are omnivores. The entire concept of being purely vegan or carnivore is possible only because of modern food storage and transport technologies.
And as has been noted, people can be very healthy on diets very low in carbohydrates as well as low in fats...and there are long-term people groups who have flourished both ways over the centuries.
But there are some similarities. To key on.
But first, I have to say this: There is always more than one thing going on in every case, good or bad. It's not just what is eaten, it's also how frequently food is eaten, particularly if there are significant and frequent mini-fasts. It's also the style of meals, whether food is eaten hastily while under stress, or at leisure while relaxed. It's the amount of exercise one gets as well as the amount of rest. And it's very much the quality--the wholesomeness, the cleanliness, and the completeness of the food being eaten.
Given all that, people serious about the quality of what they eat eliminate or significantly reduce highly processed foods and foods high in sugar, particularly high fructose corn syrup. People serious about the quality of what they eat will eat organic as much as possible. Even serious vegans will avoid American-grown grains, which are all surfeit in glyphosates (thank you, Monsanto and Congress).
Doing those things, whether vegan or keto or carnivore or paleo will produce positive results.
I will say, though, that most criticism I see of the keto diet is based on criticism of lousy keto dieting or criticism of a false concept of the keto diet. For instance, a clean keto diet will still contain a great deal of high-fiber green vegetables, four or five servings a day.
Most of the clinical studies don't compare apples to apples; they compare clean vegan (because up until now, people claiming to be vegan have been overall careful of how they eat and live...there's never just one thing going on) to "dirty" omnivore. But now that being vegan has become a pop sensation, in about 20 years there will be plenty of people who have been on "dirty" vegan diets to compare with those "dirty" omnivores. What we haven't had yet are significant, long-term mass clinical studies of "clean" vegans compared to "clean" keto diets.
And I will also say that "all calories are not alike." Because of the other factors I mentioned--there's never just one thing going on--merely reducing calories won't necessarily result in a safe reduction of weight. And there are easy and hard ways to reduce calories in a permanent lifestyle.
One thing I like about intermittent fasting is that it's easy--even my wife finds it easy to skip breakfast--and instead of eating tiny meals that never quite leave a person feeling satisfied, you get to eat one or two quite substantial meals every day that leave you feeling comfortably stuffed.
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.
your not the boss of me. 
