 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsGeneral TopicsLow CarbWeightWatchers WeightAdviser.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Weight Loss Forum / General Topics / March 2005Can you be Low Carb AND less than 35% fat???
Hi, all After reading about the FitDay.com software online, I thought I'd try it. Seems I'm eating equal amounts of Protein and Fat, and a much smaller amount of Carbohydrates. Now, I know that if you are lowering one part of the C/P/F, one or more of the others will go up. That's a gimme. What I'm interested in, is it beneficial or even warrented to try and decrease fat? I'm really not doing a strict Atkins Diet anymore, but am less than 20% on carbs for the last 2 days. I'm not sure you can push the protein higher without increasing fat, too. Not sure you would want to. I'm thinking about going like I am now (which I'm losing at a nice rate, maybe a little fast) until May and then asking my GP to check my blood levels again. All my chemistry was great the last time (Aug 04). It would be interesting to see if the change in the diet has had an affect on the cholesterol/triglycerides/LDL/HDL, etc. Just wanted some input from those of you that have info on stuff like this. Donna K. 398.8/291.2/275 (next short term goal) New WOE began Jan 2003 > Hi, all > After reading about the FitDay.com software online, I thought I'd [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > gimme. What I'm interested in, is it beneficial or even warrented to > try and decrease fat? Not on a low carb diet. > I'm really not doing a strict Atkins Diet anymore, but am less than > 20% on carbs for the last 2 days. I'm not sure you can push the [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > etc. Just wanted some input from those of you that have info on > stuff like this. A low carb diet that is practiced as low fat has less chance for bringing about weight loss. That happens for a couple of reasons, one is that excess protein is converted to sugar, and second is that it is difficult to eat the necessary quantity of protein. Eating protein without increasing fat is possible, a lot of meats such as turkey breast are fat free. This has been discussed many times in alt.support.diet.low-carb.  Signature223/173.2/180 > A low carb diet that is practiced as low fat has less chance for > bringing about weight loss. That happens for a couple of reasons, one > is that excess protein is converted to sugar, and second is that it is > difficult to eat the necessary quantity of protein. Eating protein > without increasing fat is possible, a lot of meats such as turkey > breast are fat free. Interesting. I'm not really sure that I would even need to worry about the fat at this point. It has got to be better to have this much weight off, pretty much regardless of how it's done (within reason). I guess just seeing the graph surprised me for some reason. You know, out of sight out of mind. I've been so fixated on the carbs that I didn't even think about the fat level. > This has been discussed many times in alt.support.diet.low-carb. I'm sure, but I don't find the "atmosphere" conducive to learning. I could try and search the archives. That would limit exposure to the group. Donna K. 398.8/291.2/275 (next short term goal) New WOE began Jan 2003 >> A low carb diet that is practiced as low fat has less chance for >> bringing about weight loss. That happens for a couple of reasons, one [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > reason. You know, out of sight out of mind. I've been so fixated > on the carbs that I didn't even think about the fat level. I think that the progress that you are having cannot be described as anything but "wonderful". >> This has been discussed many times in alt.support.diet.low-carb. > > I'm sure, but I don't find the "atmosphere" conducive to learning. > I could try and search the archives. That would limit exposure to > the group. I know what you are talking about... Signature223/173.2/180 > I think that the progress that you are having cannot be described as > anything but "wonderful". Thank You so much. I'm really kind of shocked myself. Maybe it was just time for things to start clicking. I can only hope/work that it continues. :) Donna K. 398.8/291.2/275 (next short term goal) New WOE began Jan 2003 > Hi, all > After reading about the FitDay.com software online, I thought I'd [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > 398.8/291.2/275 (next short term goal) > New WOE began Jan 2003 I would argue that you *are* following Atkins - because that diet is about *sufficient* carbs. True, you are not following induction, but you are trying to find the "right" amount of carbs, which is what Atkins was actually on about. I found just by eliminating refined carbs from my diet, I was able to make carbs the lowest of the C/P/F balance quite easily, and that's as far as I think I need to take it. -- Succorso > I would argue that you *are* following Atkins - because that diet is > about *sufficient* carbs. True, you are not following induction, but you > are trying to find the "right" amount of carbs, which is what Atkins was > actually on about. Well, if you put it that way, okay. :) Really, I'm just keeping the carbs down by not eating regular pasta, potatoes, rice, refined sugar. I have been eating more vegetables: broccoli, brussel sprouts, cauliflower, green beans. I've been cooking with less butter/oil/etc, so the vegetables are prepared healthier. > I found just by eliminating refined carbs from my diet, I was able to > make carbs the lowest of the C/P/F balance quite easily, and that's as > far as I think I need to take it. If I remember correctly, the C/P/F ratio was around 10%/45%/45% over the last few days. I like the fact I don't really have cravings and very seldom get "hungry" unless I have gone over 5 hours without eating. Hopefully, my blood chemistry will remain good and I'll not have to worry about it right now. Kinda scared to increase the carbs too much, don't know how my system would react to it. Donna K. 398.8/291.2/275 (next short term goal) New WOE began Jan 2003 > Hi, all > After reading about the FitDay.com software online, I thought I'd [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > 398.8/291.2/275 (next short term goal) > New WOE began Jan 2003 Look at you sliding down the scale! I remember the day you posted that you broke 300 -- excellent progress, Donna! I am currently trying to figure out my correct balance on FitDay too -- I am going to take my laptop to my next nutritionist visit and see if he can help me adjust my numbers. Right now I am kind of going for fat 30%, carb 40% and protein 30%, which is the Zone. But I find that I am going over 30% on fat, and am trying to get that down while getting protein up. So I am interested to see how it continues for you. Mary > Look at you sliding down the scale! I remember the day you posted that you > broke 300 -- excellent progress, Donna! Thank You!!! I'm kinda amazed myself. I don't think I really thought I would make it below 300, now I'm looking at 275! > I am currently trying to figure out my correct balance on FitDay too -- I am > going to take my laptop to my next nutritionist visit and see if he can help > me adjust my numbers. Right now I am kind of going for fat 30%, carb 40% and > protein 30%, which is the Zone. But I find that I am going over 30% on fat, > and am trying to get that down while getting protein up. So I am interested > to see how it continues for you. I really like the software. I'm using the online version to see if I want to buy it. Do you use the online software or have you purchased it? I'm not sure it would be worth it or not. I'll need to check into it further before I decide. Donna K. 398.8/291.2/275 (next short term goal) New WOE began Jan 2003 > I really like the software. I'm using the online version to see if I > want to buy it. Do you use the online software or have you purchased > it? I'm not sure it would be worth it or not. I'll need to check into > it further before I decide. I got the FitDay PC software last w/e & I'm quite pleased. Having it on your own PC makes it a lot faster than using the online version & you can easily check out previous days without the dreaded waits. There's a good database of foods with full nutrition info as well calories burnt in all sorts of activities. You can assess your caloric requirements, estimate your daily restriction, set weight goals, calculate your BMI, etc. You can probably do all this on the Net but ths is a lot faster. For $20, I think it's worth it. >> Look at you sliding down the scale! I remember the day you posted > that you >> broke 300 -- excellent progress, Donna! > > Thank You!!! I'm kinda amazed myself. I don't think I really thought > I would make it below 300, now I'm looking at 275! I never thought I would actually make it below 200. It took 22 years--eek! >> I am currently trying to figure out my correct balance on FitDay too > -- I am [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > it? I'm not sure it would be worth it or not. I'll need to check into > it further before I decide. I bought it and love it -- I thought the price was very good for the features. I haven't used the online version in a long time, so I don't really know what the differences are. Mary > I never thought I would actually make it below 200. It took 22 years--eek! But you made it!!!! That's all that matters. :) Response regarding FitDay software > I bought it and love it -- I thought the price was very good for the > features. I haven't used the online version in a long time, so I don't > really know what the differences are. Price is great. I really have gotten to like the online version, so I'd probably like the real version, too. Just have to scrape together $20 bucks, then I'll buy it. Donna K. 398.8/291.2/275 (next short term goal) New WOE began Jan 2003 >> I never thought I would actually make it below 200. It took 22 > years--eek! > > But you made it!!!! That's all that matters. :) Thanks, Donna! I felt so lame being unable to reach that goal no matter what I did at the time -- and sometimes that feeling can linger on till now, where I am hovering above goal weight and can't seem to get there ... but now I have a better handle on things and can see the goal as within reach now. > Response regarding FitDay software >> I bought it and love it -- I thought the price was very good for the [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > I'd probably like the real version, too. Just have to scrape together > $20 bucks, then I'll buy it. I think you will enjoy it! Mary > Thanks, Donna! I felt so lame being unable to reach that goal no matter what > I did at the time -- and sometimes that feeling can linger on till now, > where I am hovering above goal weight and can't seem to get there ... but > now I have a better handle on things and can see the goal as within reach > now. There was a time when I flirted with 250 and between missinformation from the scientific community and a thyroid that finally died, I gave up. That's been over 15 years ago. I would excercise 2-4 hours 5-6 days a week, kept my calories below 2000 (same as now) and still my weight crept up. It's one of the reason's I think Complex Carbs are really bad for me. I was afraid that 300 would be the same wall, but (except for a 6 month plateau) it came and went. I'm now focusing on 275, but really think that 250 is my next big milestone to cross. I've got a much better frame of mind and attitude this go round, thankfully. Also, I have a wonderfully supportive DH that is a tremendous help, and can't possibly be bragged on enough. I also have a wonderful DS that is 4.5 yo, who just by being around can give me great strength (and sometimes a great challenge...teehee). Donna K. 398.8/287.4/275 (next short term goal) New WOE began Jan 2003 You don't say...........I Love Marushka! > I bought it and love it -- I thought the price was very good for the > features. I haven't used the online version in a long time, so I don't > really know what the differences are. > > Mary There you are! :-) So glad you are doing well -- hope that snow melts soon! Mary > You don't say...........I Love Marushka! > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >> >> Mary > Seems I'm eating equal amounts of Protein and Fat, and a much > smaller amount of Carbohydrates. Okay. Equal calories or equal grams? > Now, I know that if you are lowering > one part of the C/P/F, one or more of the others will go up. For percentages, sure. > What I'm interested in, is it beneficial or even warrented to > try and decrease fat? Not unless you are already in your last 10 pounds or maybe 20. Once low in carbs decreasing fat stops helping. The reason is hormonal. Eat low enough carbs to be in ketosis and your insulin falls below some threshhold. Eat even less and all you're doing is working towards starvation mode triggered by thryoid-T3/leptin feedback. Eat more fat and your body releases more glucagon; eat less fat and your body releases less glucagon. It's an indirect reaction that includes adrenaline feedback. Here's the key: Glucagon level determines the rate of fat withdrawal. More dietary fat, indirectly more glucagon, more fat withdrawn, higher resting metabolism. As you approach an overeating level this gets overwhelmed, no free lunch and no unlimited fat. Less dietary fat, indirectly less glucagon, less fat withdrawn, lower resting metabolism. As you approach starvation the decrease doesn't hit zero so the big hammer approach of starvation does trigger some loss. > I'm really not doing a strict Atkins Diet > anymore, but am less than 20% on carbs for the last 2 days. You can't tell if you're strict from your carb intake. As long as you're in ketosis then you count as strict or not depending on what order you added your carbs. Strict is about adherence to the process not about lowness of carb count. > I'm not sure you can push the protein higher without > increasing fat, too. Whey/soy/egg protien isolate powder. Yuck in quantity. > Not sure you would want to. Since it is merely extra calories that don't much effect withdrawal of fat, agreed. Then again the optimal loss is getting down to your lowest safe level of protein and making up the calories with fat. Doing that (per the hormonal feedback loops above) does work to bust stalls, but eating small amounts of very greasy meat is yuck as well. > I'm thinking about going like I am now (which I'm losing > at a nice rate, maybe a little fast) until May If it's going well, don't break it. > and then asking my GP to check my > blood levels again. All my chemistry was great the last time (Aug 04). > It would be interesting to see if the change in the diet has had an > affect on the cholesterol/triglycerides/LDL/HDL, etc. Dr Atkins claimed 80% of folks see better blood results after 6 months on his plan. Given posted numbers this appears to be true. You aren't actually doing Atkins but close enough that I suggest you have that 80% chance after doing it 6+ months. >Here's the key: Glucagon level determines the rate of >fat withdrawal. More dietary fat, indirectly more >glucagon, more fat withdrawn, higher resting metabolism. This makes loads of physiologic sense. It's counterintuitive, but I believe it is necessary to eat fat to lose fat, like you say until the body gets within 10lbs of its excess fat reserves. Something about lean times and famine making the body value its fat deposits more than muscle. Plant starches are the last thing to go in a famine, so carbing up on a low-fat diet regimen basically simulates a famine for the body. I'm not a big ketosis fan but 30-40-30 seems about right. > >Here's the key: Glucagon level determines the rate of > >fat withdrawal. More dietary fat, indirectly more > >glucagon, more fat withdrawn, higher resting metabolism. > > This makes loads of physiologic sense. It's counterintuitive, but I > believe it is necessary to eat fat to lose fat, like you say It is quite counterinituitive but it does work. There are intuitive parts - Overeat and the mechanism is overwhelmed. Undereat enough and eventually you break through any starvation modes. > until the > body gets within 10lbs of its excess fat reserves. The mechanism itself continues to work, it's just that the numbers change as you lose and eventually you start hitting limits. Atkins CCLL determines your minimum carb intake to resist thyroid/leptin cycle starvation defenses. Protein intake can't fall below some level without triggering a similar defense. But as you get less stored fat, your total caloric needs go down. Those minimums start to get near what you actually eat and the place to cut starts being fat. > Something about lean times and famine making the body value its fat > deposits more than muscle. Correct. Burn off the tissue that burns the most energy and stores the least first. Burn off the tissue burns the least energy and stores the most last. It is SO easy to ignore this and attempt to lose fast enough that your body is canabalizing lean. Sometimes it seems like every newbie out there takes losing lean as their goal without thinking this through. > Plant starches are the last thing to go in a famine, so carbing up on a > low-fat diet regimen basically simulates a famine for the body. Yet low fatting works for a percentage of thepopulation. >Yet low fatting works for a percentage of thepopulation. with shooting hunger and deprivation. I lost 50lbs and wasn't hungry at all and I still had caloric room for not exactly healthy food like In N Out. I felt a weird "10% distress" signal a lot, but that was probably because I was losing at an agressive 2lbs/week (~1%/mass/week). > >Yet low fatting works for a percentage of thepopulation. > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > signal a lot, but that was probably because I was losing at an > agressive 2lbs/week (~1%/mass/week). Low fat does work for me, I have tried low carb a few times but my body doesn't like it at all, I end up with very low energy & feeling like I'm catching the flu.. With a good supply of carbs from fruit & veg, cereal & fiber crackers I can go quite low on the calories & still feel great, most of the time without hunger. I do eat smoked salmon once or twice a week for its fish oil & use the odd teaspon of olive oil here'n'there but I don't see the reason to add more fat to my diet, since it has over twice as many cals as carbs & protein I'd rather go with the other two. >> >Yet low fatting works for a percentage of thepopulation. >> [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > don't see the reason to add more fat to my diet, since it has over twice > as many cals as carbs & protein I'd rather go with the other two. Different things work for different people. Just as some people do well on low carb due to things like insulin resistance, there are those who end up not doing well with a fatty diet (even "good" fats) because of things like liver problems. Lower fat diets have been very successful for dieters in the past (including the majority on the National Weight Loss Registrty) and tend to work fine especially when the fat is *not* replaced by sugar like many "fat-free" products are. Personally if I go over a certain amount of fat over the course of a few days I will then end up puking my guts out for days to follow. Fat is also a binge trigger for me and studies of binge eaters have shown that a typical binge is much higher in fat than any other macronutrient, including carbs. I try to keep my fat intake to 20-25% of my total calories unless I'm having an episode with my liver and then I have to shoot for 10% or less. YMMV Jenn > Different things work for different people. Just as some people do well > on [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > and tend to work fine especially when the fat is *not* replaced by sugar > like many "fat-free" products are. I also try to avoid sugar since it provides just empty calories & they say eating sugar makes you crave more sugar. I'm not really sure whether this applies to me, I seem to go through 'sweet' periods and 'savoury' periods in my life. But I'm not worried about sugar in fruit like some people, I think the nutritional value & taste of fresh fruit more than make up for it. > Personally if I go over a certain amount of fat over the course of a few > days I will then end up puking my guts out for days to follow. Fat is [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > calories unless I'm having an episode with my liver and then I have to > shoot for 10% or less. According to Fitday, I average 23% fat. I try to avoid fat most of the time but I think it would be difficult to go as low as 10%, you probably have to study the labels of everything very carefully to achieve such low levels. > According to Fitday, I average 23% fat. I try to avoid fat most of the > time but I think it would be difficult to go as low as 10%, you probably > have to study the labels of everything very carefully to achieve such low > levels. It's a very bland diet with very few food choices (mostly carbs) that fortunately I've only had to do a few times in my life. Nowadays there are more options with protein shakes and meal replacements that work well to provide sufficient nearly fat free nutrition for the extreme cases of need. Jenn Low Carb + Low Fat fails. > Hi, all > After reading about the FitDay.com software online, I thought I'd [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > 398.8/291.2/275 (next short term goal) > New WOE began Jan 2003 |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.