Becoming Healthy Again

[DrewChan]

Not really a "fad diet". Banting lived in the 1800s.
Well, with LCHF you don't starve yourself or limit yourself to a tiny portion of the food spectrum.

Fad: an intense and widely shared enthusiasm for something, especially one that is short-lived; a craze.

Banting hit hard and fast, it was defintely not a gradual uptake gaining a steady incline in 2014

http://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=banting diet

 

[CrazYmonkeY159]

IF is not a diet, it is an eating schedule. There are diets which fall under IF that can be considered a fad diet (like the Warrior diet and leangains). Even then, leangains is an eating schedule with time sensitive IIFYM constraint.

LCHF is a diet regime. And I do not believe that it is a fad diet at all. Atkins was a LCHF fad diet because it came with a slew of marketed products and books and DVDs. If you want to think of it this way. LCHF is IIFYM with a few restrictions on the macronutrient composition. I see no difference in general with LCHF/Keto/banting as they are defined now, I just don't like how banting is associated with Tim Noakes which is why I prefer to use LCHF. Keto is just LCHF on steroids.

I have a problem accepting the term fad diet when IF and LCHF have been scientifically proven of their benefits over the years. Paleo is a fad diet. While Paleo is a very clean and healthy diet, its philosophical basis does not do much for me. see : http://vimeo.com/27570335

 

[konfab]

Ye no. I am using the correct definition of a diet, not the layman's definition. A diet is to food, as climate is to weather.

Most people who go on Calorie deficit diets, will rebound and gain weight though. That is true, if only because a calorie deficit is infeasible in the long run. And also because those diets are usually high in Carbs, which are the things that make you fat in the first place. So the moment you crack and start binge eating you pack on the weight again.

In LCHF you never eat at a calorie deficit, yet you lose tons of weight. It has to do with the body's interaction with insulin and fat stores. Without insulin to inhibit your fat cells, your body is free to use it's own fat and regulates your hunger far better. You don't have relapses or rebounds.

If you are losing weight on LCHF, you are in a calorie deficit. Which is what the Stellenbosch study showed.
The reason why some people fail on these diets is because they completely disregard the principles in the diet once they have reached their goals. The same thing would happen to LCHF if they went off their diets. Just like what Noakes preaches, dieting has to be more permanent. So with kilojoule counting, all you do is find a limit where you don't gain or lose weight and that is it.

For me, that limit is about 10 000 kJ, about 25 slices of whole wheat bread. Anyone who needs to eat that much has something wrong with them.

 

[OrbitalDawn]

Fad: an intense and widely shared enthusiasm for something, especially one that is short-lived; a craze.

Banting hit hard and fast, it was defintely not a gradual uptake gaining a steady incline in 2014

http://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=banting diet

It's still not something's that is short-lived, though. There might be a fad element to the sudden huge uptake, but that doesn't mean the diet can be dismissed as a "fad diet".

 

[DrewChan]

It's still not something's that is short-lived, though. There might be a fad element to the sudden huge uptake, but that doesn't mean the diet can be dismissed as a "fad diet".

It might not be, it may be something that lives on to cure obesity etc, I just don't believe the collective users of banting will be able to keep up with the stringent low carb diets -

People in general suck at sticking to anything-

Thus it would die and slip into obscurity, having risen fantastically and petered out

 

[OrbitalDawn]

It might not be, it may be something that lives on to cure obesity etc, I just don't believe the collective users of banting will be able to keep up with the stringent low carb diets -

People in general suck at sticking to anything-

Thus it would die and slip into obscurity, having risen fantastically and petered out

People not sticking to it isn't really a fundamental weakness of the diet, and from what I've seen this is easier to stick to precisely because you don't have to starve yourself or limit yourself to goat food.

I don't think treating it as a kind of silver bullet to the obesity problem or diabetes is healthy either, but that's not the approach I've generally noticed.

And for all the hype around the clashes of experts on this, for the vast majority of the diet everyone's actually in agreement. Especially in the fundamental aspect - people, on average, eat too much carbs.

 

[DrewChan]

People not sticking to it isn't really a fundamental weakness of the diet, and from what I've seen this is easier to stick to precisely because you don't have to starve yourself or limit yourself to goat food.

I don't think treating it as a kind of silver bullet to the obesity problem or diabetes is healthy either, but that's not the approach I've generally noticed.

And for all the hype around the clashes of experts on this, for the vast majority of the diet everyone's actually in agreement. Especially in the fundamental aspect - people, on average, eat too much carbs.

I agree with everything in this post

 

[RanzB]

In LCHF you never eat at a calorie deficit, yet you lose tons of weight. It has to do with the body's interaction with insulin and fat stores. Without insulin to inhibit your fat cells, your body is free to use it's own fat and regulates your hunger far better. You don't have relapses or rebounds.

I disagree with this, only in the sense that I think it's different for everyone.

People have stopped carbs and seen steady weightloss just from that and increased fat.

I was doing LCHF for a while, and only once I started tracking my macros and eating to a calorie deficit did I see steady weighloss, around 15 kgs in the last 5 months or so.

 

[DrewChan]

I disagree with this, only in the sense that I think it's different for everyone.

People have stopped carbs and seen steady weightloss just from that and increased fat.

I was doing LCHF for a while, and only once I started tracking my macros and eating to a calorie deficit did I see steady weighloss, around 15 kgs in the last 5 months or so.

15Kgs - well done

 

[RanzB]

15Kgs - well done

Thanks. I think it's actually more, but I only started tracking it when I began making sure I was in a calorie deficit.

 

[DrewChan]

Thanks. I think it's actually more, but I only started tracking it when I began making sure I was in a calorie deficit.

Takes dedication to maintain a defecit for so long.

Care to share your macros/ plan?

I'm down 4kgs in 3 weeks alternating between 1400 calories and 2300 calories depending on whether I am lifting

 

[RanzB]

Takes dedication to maintain a defecit for so long.

To be honest some days I have trouble hitting my macros, so I do my best to hit my protein target for the day and eat fat to satiate myself. Even on the days I somehow go over I'm not too bothered because I don't hit my target completely most days.

Care to share your macros/ plan?

I used a Keto calculator, added in my stats (ie weight, eye-balled my BMI - obese like a motherfuc.er - amount of exercise per week) which gave me my ballpark daily protein goal. Then I added in how many carbs per day - I keep it under 23g. The rest of the calories is made up by your fat amount. You can increase or decrease this according to how much of a deficit you want to eat at each day. Obviously higher deficit - increased weightloss. I didn't overdo it, I think I was around 30%, but I can't recall exactly how much. The calculator gave me a 0.9kg/week loss at my percentage.

Also, I had to remember to change my goals according to my new weight every so often.

I'm down 4kgs in 3 weeks alternating between 1400 calories and 2300 calories depending on whether I am lifting

This is my main concern. When I'm lifting I don't know how much extra protein to add to my diet. I use Whey, so I have a post-workout protein shake, which is around 25g protein I think.

 

[cerebus]

I have no diet control at all but I exercise a lot. Like, I bike 14km/day to work and back plus I gym around 3-4 times a week over lunch. But I can see there's still some amount of fat that you just can't get rid of with exercise alone. I'm not at all obese but I really want to cut my fat percentage down to look lean. I'm still psyching myself up to try some kind of diet thing but man I just love my own cooking too much

 

[DrewChan]

To be honest some days I have trouble hitting my macros, so I do my best to hit my protein target for the day and eat fat to satiate myself. Even on the days I somehow go over I'm not too bothered because I don't hit my target completely most days.



I used a Keto calculator, added in my stats (ie weight, eye-balled my BMI - obese like a motherfuc.er - amount of exercise per week) which gave me my ballpark daily protein goal. Then I added in how many carbs per day - I keep it under 23g. The rest of the calories is made up by your fat amount. You can increase or decrease this according to how much of a deficit you want to eat at each day. Obviously higher deficit - increased weightloss. I didn't overdo it, I think I was around 30%, but I can't recall exactly how much. The calculator gave me a 0.9kg/week loss at my percentage.

Also, I had to remember to change my goals according to my new weight every so often.



This is my main concern. When I'm lifting I don't know how much extra protein to add to my diet. I use Whey, so I have a post-workout protein shake, which is around 25g protein I think.

I hit about 180gr protein on lift days probably around 130gr on non lift days. Hard to get in sometimes

 

[SoulTax]

I have no diet control at all but I exercise a lot. Like, I bike 14km/day to work and back plus I gym around 3-4 times a week over lunch. But I can see there's still some amount of fat that you just can't get rid of with exercise alone. I'm not at all obese but I really want to cut my fat percentage down to look lean. I'm still psyching myself up to try some kind of diet thing but man I just love my own cooking too much

All it really takes is combining that level of exercise, with cutting out at least refined carbs. The carbs in your diet, inhibit your fat stores from being used. Cut the refined carbs out, replace it with olive oil and other fats. Watch your body re-awaken its ability to burn the last bits of fat.

 

[SoulTax]

If you are losing weight on LCHF, you are in a calorie deficit. Which is what the Stellenbosch study showed.
The reason why some people fail on these diets is because they completely disregard the principles in the diet once they have reached their goals. The same thing would happen to LCHF if they went off their diets. Just like what Noakes preaches, dieting has to be more permanent. So with kilojoule counting, all you do is find a limit where you don't gain or lose weight and that is it.

For me, that limit is about 10 000 kJ, about 25 slices of whole wheat bread. Anyone who needs to eat that much has something wrong with them.

Sorry, my mistake. What I meant to say is that you don't need to try to eat at a calorie deficit. Because your body is dipping into its own stores of calories in the fat cells, you are less hungry. And because your body does not have a chemical and hormonal "addictive" response to your food stuffs (As it does with high carb intake), you don't have the "fake" hunger to battle against when keeping your calorie intake at a deficit.

A very small amount of people might eat LCHF at a calorie surplus, but those people are few and far between, and most likely are very close to a more ideal weight. They are also people attempting to eat LCHF to the same portion sizes as they were previously used to on a more HCLF centric diet. As soon as they correct this portion size, they find that it is pretty simple to maintain without feeling hungry. It is a problem with their own execution of the diet, not with the diet's inherent difficulty with attaining a calorie deficit.

 

[drnaphtali]

Sorry, my mistake. What I meant to say is that you don't need to try to eat at a calorie deficit. Because your body is dipping into its own stores of calories in the fat cells, you are less hungry. And because your body does not have a chemical and hormonal "addictive" response to your food stuffs (As it does with high carb intake), you don't have the "fake" hunger to battle against when keeping your calorie intake at a deficit.

A very small amount of people might eat LCHF at a calorie surplus, but those people are few and far between, and most likely are very close to a more ideal weight. They are also people attempting to eat LCHF to the same portion sizes as they were previously used to on a more HCLF centric diet. As soon as they correct this portion size, they find that it is pretty simple to maintain without feeling hungry. It is a problem with their own execution of the diet, not with the diet's inherent difficulty with attaining a calorie deficit.

I also understood from the LCHF diet - and please correct me if I am wrong - that even if you do eat at a surplus, you will maintain your body weight. You will only pick up weight again if you are at an extreme surplus.

 

[FalconZA]

How sad must life become when something as enjoyable/social/healthy as eating becomes a numbers counting exercise? Where has good old common sense gone?

1) don't eat like a freaking pig (portion size matters)
2) don't stuff yourself with copious amounts of junk food.
3) go for a run every now and again
4) profit???

is it really that hard? Are we really at that point in humanity where we worry about food being prepared on a surface that might have had glutens on it? REALLY???

 

[konfab]

How sad must life become when something as enjoyable/social/healthy as eating becomes a numbers counting exercise? Where has good old common sense gone?

1) don't eat like a freaking pig (portion size matters)
2) don't stuff yourself with copious amounts of junk food.
3) go for a run every now and again
4) profit???

is it really that hard? Are we really at that point in humanity where we worry about food being prepared on a surface that might have had glutens on it? REALLY???

The numbers game is just a guide so you can get used to what is a reasonable portion.

 

[RanzB]

How sad must life become when something as enjoyable/social/healthy as eating becomes a numbers counting exercise? Where has good old common sense gone?

1) don't eat like a freaking pig (portion size matters)
2) don't stuff yourself with copious amounts of junk food.
3) go for a run every now and again
4) profit???

This is a stupid post.