Any low carb/high fat dieters here?

[SunsetRunner]

Just got my fitbit Charge 2 and I'm new to the board.  I'm seeing a lot of low calorie dieters but haven't yet run across low carb/high fat dieters?  Are you here?

[A_Lurker]

@SunsetRunner- I don't follow any specific plan (I'm likely lower carb than most, but not low carb).  Someone may chime in, but you can also search for LCHF to find threads that would interest you.

[USAF-Larry]

@SunsetRunner, most people find that "diets" don't work long term, but lifestyle changes do. I am sure the "12 Videos" will be referenced here soon, but remember that the name Diet refers to what you eat on a regular basis.  If you go to any type of fad/designer/celebrity diet plan, you will find yourself craving something that is prohibited in the plan, which will be followed by binging on the previously banned foods.  Eat balanced meals, avoid junk food, and use portion control to maintain a good caloric intake.

[SunsetRunner]

Hello. Lchf eater here. My name is Maggie. I'm 51 and have been doing some form of a low carb/high diet for a few years. I started out eliminating wheat when I discovered I was gluten sensitive and then transitioned to eliminating all forms of sugar along with it. It's been quite I journey, falling off the wagon then back on many, many times. I've explored many ways of following this woe by doing strict Paleo, Ketogenic, Whole30, pretty much anything out there at times when I was falling off the wagon to get myself back on. My body is happiest when I eat 50-100 g of carbs a day (only from unprocessed or minimally processed sources).  I'm not too fanatic about grass-fed protein--I choose it if I can afford it. I'm working on cutting back a bit on the protein and getting more veggies in. I eat fats (mostly grassfed butter and coconut oil) to satiety. I don't do paleoish or ketoish deserts as I have a history of bingeing.  This way of eating works for me and I've been able to maintain a healthy weight for over 10 years. 

[SunsetRunner]

I eat about the same-grass fed when I can, organic when I can but not fanatic about it.  I've mainly followed Atkins and have done well but still need to lose about 10. I'm sticking to 25-30 net carbs, mainly from whole foods and still track my food through cron-o-meter.com   I was looking through the recipe/nutrition section here and felt bad that so many are still starving themselves to lose weight;I like our way much better 🙂

[SunsetRunner]

@USAF-Larry Yes, "diet" has always referred to what you eat :grin:  I asked about other lchf eaters because of the food suggestions I'd read here-most seemed to be low calorie;low fat and I don't lose weight eating that way and was always hungry.   LCHF is pretty much eating whole, minimally processed foods and I've reaped excellent heatlh benefits eating this way.  Under ATkins, foods are only prohibited the first two weeks (to stop the cravings) and then added back in a measured manner.  This adding back slowly allows triggers to be identified.  It is a healthy, easy and satisfying way to eat and I think that after nearly 50 years, Atkins can't be called a fad anymore.  

[SunsetRunner]

It saddens me too that so many are still worried about calories in/calories out and restricting instead of being fat-fueled. This way of eating has been so freeing for me. I occasionally track through cron-o-meter especially when I start to explore new foods/recipes to be sure I'm not veering off too much in my carbs/protein etc. When I tried going lower carb (20g or less) I found this affected my hormones negatively (I could heat up a small town with my hot flashes!).

So nice to see another fan enjoying the benefits of this woe. With all the media out there now and the studies proving it works, hopefully we will see more people at least giving it a try. 

Cheers, Maggie

[Dominique]

---

@SunsetRunner wrote:

It saddens me too that so many are still worried about calories in/calories out and restricting instead of being fat-fueled.

---

Energy balance (calories in vs. calories out) is the primary factor that affects weight loss (or gain), so I don’t see what’s saddening about paying attention to it. You can eat low carb/high fat if you want, but you will still need to be in a caloric deficit if you want to lose weight: being "fat-fueled" won’t let you eat unrestricted quantities of food (if you want to lose weight). The way you split your macronutrients (e.g. low carb/high fat vs. high carb/low fat) is mostly a matter of personal preference, just like meal frequency (e.g. intermittent fasting vs. six meals a day). Everyone needs to find what floats their boat.

[Dominique]

---

@SunsetRunner wrote:

 haven't yet run across low carb/high fat dieters?

---

Just check older posts: there are quite a few people who are / have been following low carb/high fat (or even ketogenic) diets. The problem about talking diets is it often ends in a sterile "my diet is better than yours" debate.

[Dominique]

---

@SunsetRunner wrote:

I was looking through the recipe/nutrition section here and felt bad that so many are still starving themselves to lose weight;I like our way much better 🙂

---

I agree very low calorie diets are bad, but if you want to eat a decent amount of food and still be able to lose weight, you need to increase your activity so you can have a higher intake and still be in a deficit. If your expenditure is 1500 calories, you won’t be able to eat 2000 calories worth of an Atkins (or any other) diet and lose weight. In other words, there is nothing magical about Atkins or LCHF that will allow you to ignore the principle of energy balance.

If your expenditure is 2500 calories, you can eat 2000 calories any way you want (and that includes Atkins/LCHF, but any other style as well) and lose weight. However, it can be tough to get enough fiber and enough of the micronutrients found in veggies and fruits.

[SunsetRunner]

@Dominique For me to lose on a low calorie/low fat diet, my calories need to be 1200 or less and the weight loss is painfully slow and I always thought about food. Additionally, my cholesterol levels were crap, mostly from being post menopause but the low fat diet made no difference at all.

Following a lchf diet, I lose, easily, on 1700 calories a day and this was before my hip replacement and I wasn't exercising at all.  I've lost 32 pounds, my HDL has gone from bottom of the range to over 60 (the heart protective range) and my LDL dropped from 189 to 110.  And best of all, I stopped thinking of food all the time, my veggie intake is higher than it had ever been, and I'm enjoying what I'm eating.  The beauty of not eating low fat is that high fat satisfies we naturally eat less without even trying.  I agree not all ways of eating work the same for everyone, but I really think that the ease of weight loss and improved cardio markers make it worth a shot.  

[GershonSurge]

To put it bluntly, low carb, high fat diets lead people to an early death. @USAF-Larry, I know you think the McDougall way of eating is a "Fad diet," but that's not the case. I know you are hoping for 44 videos, but I'll give a few more.

Here are 8 lectures by Nathan Pritikin who showed he could reverse heart disease with diet. He ran many conclusive studies showing the value of a high carb, low fat diet. 

Here are 196 videos from McDougall Advanced study weekends. He brings in an eclectic mix of speakers who will show how broad the research is.

Here are 200 videos by T. Colin Campbell who is reversing heart disease at the Cleveland Clinc.

Here are 196 videos by T. Colin Campbell on the China Study -- no, it hasn't been disproved. Most people don't even know what it showed.

I'm working my way through these as I jog 10 to 12 miles most mornings. 

I'm not going to debate those who disagree with me simply because there is too much information to put in a post here. I'm also not going to hide the simple path to great health and freedom from doctors who are trying to make more money for the group they belong to.

[A_Lurker]

@SunsetRunner- I lose weight fairly consistently on 2500 calories a day and although I may lighten up favourites I don't buy low fat / low cal / low carb products*.  As @Dominique said it's about a calorie deficit at the end of the day.  If you've found a way of eating that works for you, so be it.  I always tell people that they need to find something that they can do forever, not just until they lose weight.  I don't want a diet that excludes fruits.  In fact, before the diet wars begin, I don't want a WOE that excludes any one specific food.

* I naturally hit about 40% carbs, 40% fat, 20% protein without really trying to.  So for me this is a natural way of eating.  I don't expect that it would suit everyone.

[USAF-Larry]

The fact that  a book was written 50 years ago, @SunsetRunner, has nothing to do with the value of its contents. I have a number of engineering books from college that are now over 50 years old, and they are totally out of touch with today's technology - we know a lot more about the synergy of things now than we did 50 years ago. 

Whether or not the Atkins diet is considered a fad or a celebrity or a designer diet, is really immaterial. Remember the author died of a heart attack at a young age. After hanging around on the green side of the earth for nearly thre-fourths of a century, I have learned that good health can be achieved by focusing on nutrient-rich choices like lean protein, whole grains, fruits, and vegetables instead of looking for the next great diet plan. And, any diet plan, regardless of how good it is, without an good exercise plan is a waste of time.

[SunsetRunner]

Very true Larry, but I'm not sure conflating technology with the human body is appropriate.  I mentioned the 50+ years to show it's not a recent fad.  This is basically how people ate before the government invessted itself in nutrition and came up with the food pyramid which, imo, was the start of the obesity epidemic in the United States.  I can tell you my experience (annecdotal, I know) and it coresponds with others I know who eat the same way.  My cardic measures have improved significantly:  my HDL came up into the heart protective range, my LDL dropped, my triglycerides are crazy low (50), and testing shows my LDL particles are the large and fluffy type where before they were the small and dense dangerous type.

As retired military, I don't expect you to go against the grain :grin:  We'll just have to agree to disagree that Atkins is a fad diet (If you wish, I can link you to credible studies showing it's benefits).  

Atkins did have cardiomyopathy-which is caused by a virus, not diet.  He did have some plaque build up, as would be expected in a 69 year old man (not what I would call 'a young age'.).  But what killed him was falling and hitting his head.

[GershonSurge]

@SunsetRunner,

Atkins did die after hitting his head in a fall on the ice. His medical records were never released. His family refused to allow an autopsy. Any conjecture about his health at the time is just that -- conjecture. What is known is he was always obese, which is the prime predicter of heart disease. It is also known he weighed about 265 pounds at his death. His family claimed he gained 64 pounds in about eight days due to water retention. I can't imagine any medical team pumping a person up with water. 

Atkins refused to do any scientific studies on the Atkins diet during his lifetime. He claimed he didn't have the money.

I would like to see the links to the credible studies showing the benefits. By benefits, I mean that lifespans were significantly increased after following the Atkins diet. 

The first nutritional guide published by the government was published in 1865. The food pyramid was around when I was in third grade in 1961. Grains and other starches were the broad foundation.

The obesity epidemic started in 1980 almost as if a switch was turned on. Back then about 5% of the population was obese. Now it's around 37%, I think. The growth has been linear, which is unusual in anything of this sort. The percentage of the population that was overweight remained a constant 33% since the 50's. That's the earliest I found data for. 

As a woman, you are mostly not at risk for a heart attack unless you smoke or are obese, but that's not the only disease. You are at higher risk for osteoporosis, which is caused by protein as a percentage of calories being above about 13%. (The actual number is within a couple percent. I just don't remember it.) High protein diets cause a myriad of other problems as do high fat diets. High fat is above about 10%.

[A_Lurker]

---

@SunsetRunner wrote:

Very true Larry, but I'm not sure conflating technology with the human body is appropriate.  I mentioned the 50+ years to show it's not a recent fad.  This is basically how people ate before the government invessted itself in nutrition and came up with the food pyramid which, imo, was the start of the obesity epidemic in the United States. 

---

I'm not sure that's how people ate.  My mother grew up in Scotland and although her family was better off than most she grew up on porridge for breakfast, sandwiches for lunch, and stews for dinner full of root vegetables.  Those less well off simply couldn't afford meat so the sandwiches were often bread with butter and the stews mostly the vegetables with small amounts of meat.  Things might have been different in North America though.

What likely contributed more to the obesity epedemic was progress.

[Dominique]

---

@SunsetRunner wrote:

For me to lose on a low calorie/low fat diet, my calories need to be 1200 or less and the weight loss is painfully slow and I always thought about food. [...] Following a lchf diet, I lose, easily, on 1700 calories a day and this was before my hip replacement and I wasn't exercising at all.

So basically you are saying that if you are expending –  say – 1450 calories, with a 1200 calories intake (250 calories deficit) eaten with a low fat diet, you are hardly losing anything, but with a 1700 calories intake (250 calories surplus) eaten LCHF style you are  losing easily? In other words, eating an LCHF diet allows you to lose weight even when being in a caloric surplus? That would be very surprising.

I will agree that different people find different diets more or less appealing (personal preferences), but whatever diet (or style of eating) you like and are following is still only going to lead to weight loss if it entails a caloric deficit.

[USAF-Larry]

---

A_Lurker wrote:. 

---

I'm not sure that's how people ate.  My mother grew up in Scotland and although her family was better off than most she grew up on porridge for breakfast, sandwiches for lunch, and stews for dinner full of root vegetables.  Those less well off simply couldn't afford meat so the sandwiches were often bread with butter and the stews mostly the vegetables with small amounts of meat.  Things might have been different in North America though.

What likely contributed more to the obesity epedemic was progress.

---

It was pretty much the same in the Early U.S., @A_Lurker. I grew up in a large midwestern farm family, and we were certainly not considered "well off".  We grew most of what we ate, and we worked hard every day on the farm. But we were very healthy because of our lifestyle. We didn't know what processed food was. Oddly enough, all these years later I still don't care for processed foods. We still grow our own vegetables, which we preserve to feed us through the winter.  I am a firm believer that lifestyle changes that result in healthy eating and exercise will result in life-long health & fitness. Yo-Yo diets can't do that, only lifestyle changes can.

[GershonSurge]

---

@USAF-Larry wrote:

@SunsetRunner, most people find that "diets" don't work long term, but lifestyle changes do. I am sure the "12 Videos" will be referenced here soon, but remember that the name Diet refers to what you eat on a regular basis.  If you go to any type of fad/designer/celebrity diet plan, you will find yourself craving something that is prohibited in the plan, which will be followed by binging on the previously banned foods.  Eat balanced meals, avoid junk food, and use portion control to maintain a good caloric intake.

---

@USAF-Larry,

Putting the McDougall way of eating in this category is completely erroneous. Many doctors around the country are using similar ways of eating to reverse many diseases, including type 2 diabetes for which it has virtually a 100% success rate. 

You may think you have won a point on the internet, but your uneducated objections are putting people's lives at risk. Hope you are happy with that.