|
keto
|
View this Thread in Original format
| LoveHate |
low carb seems to be the craze right now and everybody is doing it.
just wanted to know what ta's take was on keto or paleo , caveman, etc
it all seems to follow the same principle which is to avoid bread, pasta, sugar (including fruits) at all cost ...
me personally i feel like life is too short to never eat lasagne again, but I'm willing to try it out if if it means ill see results. |
|
|
| Lira |
I've heard actual dietitians and palaeontologists say it's rubbish.
I'd recommend going to a dietitian to get a diet that fits your needs with all the proper scientific basis you can get. It's helped me a lot, and my diet is about as pastafully Italian as my beloved nonna's (lost 15 kilos and I look somewhat ripped from the rib-cage up already :D).
Life without lasagne would be a mistake. |
|
|
| LoveHate |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lira
I've heard actual dietitians and palaeontologists say it's rubbish.
I'd recommend going to a dietitian to get a diet that fits your needs with all the proper scientific basis you can get. It's helped me a lot, and my diet is about as pastafully Italian as my beloved nonna's (lost 15 kilos and I look somewhat ripped from the rib-cage up already :D).
Life without lasagne would be a mistake. |
and garlic bread :haha:
yeah i don't have much to lose just about 30 pounds , you really start packing on once you turn 25..
i guess its all about restricting your calories at the end of the day which might be easy to do if you just avoid carbs , but i will definitely speak to someone who is qualified, so perhaps maybe there is a way i can do it and still enjoy italian.
Will keep yall updated |
|
|
| Jon_Snow |
| I don't believe any extreme or fad diet is healthy or sustainable in the long run. The crux of the problem is modern life has done two things: eliminated exercise and surround us with processed densely packed high calorie fast food. Drink water, eat more fruits and vegetables and less of all the other crap you eat. Then exercise more. |
|
|
| Zoso |
| Man, I took some keto-mine at a club back in the late 90s...it effed me up. I mean, it's fun as , but I couldn't recommend it as the basis of any regular, sustained diet. |
|
|
| JEO |
Forget about keto and those things. You can fry up your kidneys or some like that with those. I mean you could try it I guess, but it's just not that fun. You'll see in dialysis then. Actually, go on and try paleo for a week or two and afterwards notice the fist-sized holes in your kitchen cupboard doors; you made those. You need carbs, fat, and protein, and an overall diverse diet to keep a healthy brain. No one wants to be as aggressive as a caveman and as dumb as a ing barn-door just to be fit.
Instead of going on a crash-keto or paleo, I think you should first get a clear picture of how much you really eat in one day. Then I think you should find out your maintenance calories (estimate your fat percentage by measuring your waist, etc. there are guides online, put all your measurements in an online calculator that will give you an estimate of your energy need) and get comfortable eating that every day, and then aim for that calorie amount every day for a week or so to get used to what it is to maintain your current weight. After that, when you are comfortable eating your maintenance calories, drop your daily intake with 150-300kcal, depending on what you feel you could actually keep going with. I recommend going as far as a 300kcal daily deficit for a week and seeing what it does to your weight, your image in the mirror, and your mood. Later on you can adjust that deficit to what you think works for you, but take that 150-300kcal as your guideline first. Keep doing that for a long stretch of time and "theoretically" you should lose weight.
But weight, there's more!
You just want to lose fat, right? Not the little muscle you have? You surely don't want to end up someone who is SKINNY FAT?!? Take up a bodyweight exercise routine or light gym routine to keep your muscles active and your body thinking it needs these muscles instead of getting rid of unused tissue first. Otherwise on an all-too-familiar "just restricting my caloriessss izz so simpleee" diet you'll just end up looking like a smaller Seth Troxler with a sagging abdomen and flabby that you notice in speedbumps. It doesn't feel good, trust me. Most of us have been through those jiggles. You'll see. Hormones play a big role in your health, so don't ing go on bitchy two hour long pensioner-strolls thinking you'll be a slim boy in no time if you keep this up. You'll waste your life and manhood by doing that. Instead lift weights or yourself like a man (assuming you are a man, of course).
Getting enough (not like 3g per kg bodyweight) protein is important if you want to preserve or (sometimes even) build your muscle-mass during your calorie deficit phase. In case you will take up a bodyweight routine and you will do, let's say, a 30 min bodyweight routine every day, keep eating at maintenance for the first week and see where that takes you. Maintenance calories minus the calories you burn during your bodyweight exercises will be your method for maximizing fat loss and minimizing muscle loss, as far as that is possible. Of course the underlying things (calorie restriction) are still the same.
So my advice: eat at maintenance and start up a light but diverse exercise routine that will utilize as much and as many of your muscles as possible. Be sure to make it challenging enough so that you will be "out of breath" often enough; maybe surprisingly, that is where your burned fat comes out from: your mouth, as you breathe out. Keep your protein intake up, and forget "Italian" as a daily thing, if that's what you've been doing so far. If you're "smart" about it, and can fit that stuff in your daily calories, do it then. Just remember how ed you'll feel when that 15 minute stuffing-your-face is over and you're already regretting you did it and now you can eat nothing else for the day. Find a balance between restricting what you eat and going nuts on lasagne. Just don't go on some bull keto or paleo diet that promises you to be healthy because cavemen only ate moose after running after one for two hours.
Also, treat yourself wisely to keep sane: there are few things better food-wise than a deserved bag of candy or a pizza when you know you're not gonna gain fat because of it, meaning you either already used that energy before, or kept away from everything else to indulge on that crap, while still fitting it in your daily calories.
| quote: | Originally posted by LoveHate
i guess its all about restricting your calories at the end of the day which might be easy to do if you just avoid carbs |
1g of carbohydrates is 4kcal, 1g of fat is 9kcal. It's easier to restrict your calories by restricting unnecessary fat intake. |
|
|
| Mr.Mystery |
| All diets are rubbish. Just consume less than you burn. |
|
|
| Zoso |
| quote: | Originally posted by JEO
1g of carbohydrates is 4kcal, 1g of fat is 9kcal. It's easier to restrict your calories by restricting unnecessary fat intake. |
And this, my fellow COR whores, is why I eat a sleeve of Chips Ahoy "low fat" cookies each and every day. :o |
|
|
| Jon_Snow |
| Ironically back in the Paleolithic period, dietitians recommended the "American" diet to their hunter gatherer patients. |
|
|
| Sand Leaper |
| quote: | Originally posted by JEO
1g of carbohydrates is 4kcal, 1g of fat is 9kcal. It's easier to restrict your calories by restricting unnecessary fat intake. |
Carbohydrates are far easier to OD on in your diet than fat, though, considering that sugar is in EVERYTHING in the grocery store. This is why they are so often the first nutrient to get the axe in nutrient excluding diets, even though fat has a higher caloric density. Plus, you don't actually need carbohydrates in your diet to live. Your body can generate glucose through gluconeogenesis if you eat too little of it. Fat, not so much. Finally, fat doesn't with your insulin sensitivity anywhere near to the same degree as carbohydrates, which is vital to weight loss if you're struggling with any aspects of metabolic syndrome.
On the other hand, paleo/high fat diets essentially mean that you are guzzling fossil fuels like there's no tomorrow. Eating avocado, eggs, meat, coconut oil, dairy, chicken etc. instead of brown rice, sweet potato, chickpeas, quinoa, nuts and oats will also blow up your food bill.
Unless your diet is tailored to a very specific purpose beyond simple weight loss (due to particular health issues or athletic performance, say), I don't think nutrient restriction is all that necessary to lose weight. Just figure out your resting metabolic rate and alter your intake of food accordingly. |
|
|
| Jon_Snow |
| Well that's the world we live in where people think eating low fat chips is healthy. Not unlike when the food industry introduced "healthy" low fat spreads. |
|
|
| JEO |
| quote: | Originally posted by Sand Leaper
Carbohydrates are far easier to OD on in your diet than fat, though, considering that sugar is in EVERYTHING in the grocery store. |
Fair enough. It's true that it's easier to have an excess of carbs than fat, but wisely choosing a low-fat product, that doesn't compensate with sugar, over the normal one can pay off. Then again, this comes from someone living in a country where at least some low-fat products don't just compensate the lack of fat with sugar.
I've noticed that with, for example, cheeses it makes sense to pick the low-fat one if calorie restriction is your goal. As an example a cheese of which I use the low-fat version of: normal (non-low-fat) version has 361 kcal / 100g, of which 29% is fat; the low-fat version has 270 kcal / 100g, of which 17% is fat. The low-fat one only compensates with added salt: it has 1.3% salt compared to 0.9% in the normal one.
Call me stupid, but that's a low-fat product that actually has significantly less energy than the normal one.
| quote: | Originally posted by Sand Leaper
Unless your diet is tailored to a very specific purpose beyond simple weight loss (due to particular health issues or athletic performance, say), I don't think nutrient restriction is all that necessary to lose weight. Just figure out your resting metabolic rate and alter your intake of food accordingly. |
I agree.
In terms of a "healthy" diet, taking one macro and leaving it out almost completely isn't necessary – let alone good – for you. Don't "avoid" anything "at all costs", rather aim for a diverse diet, just keep the total intake in check. More so for making sure you get the necessary micronutrients than just the right distribution of macronutrients. You can get leaner with just eating a bunch of crap and restricting your calorie intake in general, but in terms of overall health I would go for actual healthy foods like many vegetables, some fruits, lots of berries (especially blueberries), rye bread, potatoes (that's boiled or baked potatoes, not fries) and rice (not deep-fried or how ever they prepare it in the big world), and for protein lean meats and sour-milk products, like quark. |
|
|
|
|
