Calorie For Calorie, Fat Restriction Is Better For Weight Loss

(Nathan Toben) #21

I could be wrong but metabolism, whether fast or slow, has it’s advantages. Slowing one’s metabolic rate through diet can impede future efforts towards weight loss, and body recomposition is healthyof course.

but also a slow metabolism and less need for calories is linked to longevity.

Kind of depends on what your goals are and what your starting point is, health-wise.

While an endomorph with metabolic syndrome and a history of under-eating would stand to gain from dramatically increasing their daily caloric intake following a low-glycemic plan, an underweight ectomorph who eats everything in sight might stand to gain from reducing their intake, increasing the quality of foods, and emphasizing complete proteins.

(You've tried everything else; why not try bacon?) #22

So here we have a study purporting to tell us something important, but it involves no more than 19 participants, and the experimental period is so short that the diets barely had time to have an effect? Excuse me, but am I missing something? How do you even randomize only 19 people to the two different arms of the study? :roll_eyes:

Ever since his big fight with Gary Taubes, Hall’s had a bug up is ass about LCHF/keto. I wish he’d fucking get over it and go back to doing real research for a change. Then we might learn something. I was also amused that the Web site shows recent articles referring to that study, and the first one listed is by Hall himself.

(Doug) #23

On the good side, I think it’s because of lowering insulin resistance and the “gate” then being open to feed the cells, rather than to storing fat. This results in less hunger, less “eat (carbs) and end up feeling even hungrier” or getting hungry so soon again.

Rather a neutral thing - seems to me that people most often have problems with getting enough fat, rather than protein. I don’t see this as a huge deal, in that without too much more butter, olive oil, etc., the ratio can be swing a fair bit. And even if not, within the context of a very low-carb diet, a ratio of protein that’s relatively high by keto standards has nothing like the effect on the insulin/glucagon deal like it does within a carb-eater.

On the bad side, calorie reduction, per se, does not work in the long term for many people. Dr. Fung had an article - I think it was about Jenny Craig - and the long term success rate of their clients at keeping weight off was exceedingly low, below 1%. For keto people, this may improve to a higher percentage, and if so, good, if that is where one ends up. All other things being equal, calorie reduction, by itself, does usually extend life.

(Sarah Bruhn) #24

The purpose of this study was to isolate fat vs carbohydrate calorie for calorie, which this study did a basically good job of doing but take it out of the lab and it isn’t terriby useful, it ignores how people actually eat- how fat satiates, how people tend to replace carbs with added fat and the effects of this.

The sample was pretty small and the study held only over 2 weeks (so no one got fat adapted) so this shows us what might happen over two weeks if you “restrict” carbs to 140 grams per day.
They admit insulin was reduced by restricting carbs and by restriction they mean 140g of carbs!

Given the composition of the baseline diet, it was not possible to design an isocaloric very low-carbohydrate diet without also adding fat or protein.

Calorie for Calorie assumes that calories is the main mechanism for weight gain and weight loss, which we are learning more and more it is not… that is the major flaw here, calorie for calorie has little meaning when it comes to weight loss.

(Terence Dean) #25

I’m three times a failure with Jenny Craig but now I know the reason why. You’re starving the whole time, that’s the biggest difference and the reason why it fails for me. Don’t get me wrong I lost all my weight all three times, but put it all back on because you get so sick of low calorie food that it makes you want to go back to eating carbs. No advice that carbs were bad for me, just calorie restriction.

(Doug) #26

I think it’s a good question if people on a keto diet will then have better success simply “eating less.” My wife and I have both noted the extreme satisfaction and lack of hunger extending a long time after eating things like bacon and eggs, eggs and sausage, sausage and sauerkraut…

(You've tried everything else; why not try bacon?) #27

Our BMR is the result of a number of factors, one of which is the amount of tissue we have to maintain, so one thing that lowers BMR is losing weight. That is certainly a good thing.

Another thing that lowers BMR is calorie restriction. If we diet by cutting calories, the body responds by lowering BMR to match, which makes losing weight more difficult, which means we have to go even hungrier in order to continue losing, which makes the body reduce the BMR further, and so forth. I think it is clear why most people consider this a bad thing.

The way Dr. Fung explains it, as long as there are calories coming in, the body adjusts to suit the intake. If we fast, on the other hand, the body simply draws energy from stored fat and keeps the metabolism going without altering the metabolism. The corollary of this is that if the body is reducing BMR, it’s going to want to hold onto its stored fat for as long as possible, to keep us going in adverse circumstances. If the body is increasing BMR, on the other hand, it becomes willing to use stored fat as well as dietary fat, which is one of the reasons that a well-formulated ketogenic diet helps to normalize our weight by allowing excess stored fat to be metabolized. (This is all in the absence of carbohydrate, of course, since stimulating a high level of insulin secretion creates an entirely different hormonal ball game.)

Off the top of my head, I would say that if you stop having your period from eating too little, or your hair and fingernails stop growing, or you are in your pubertal growth spurt but your growth is stunted, these would all be signs of not getting enough calories for your daily minimum needs. I’m sure there are other signs, as well.

#28

But, again, hair and fingernail growth slowing is simply a result of eating less. But so is my having fewer and less massive BMs. But how are those bodily damage? To me, it would be a positive thing to need fewer haircuts and fewer manicures, pedicures, or podiatrist visits.

How would you objectively determine your daily minimum needs? How would you test whether they are being met? Surely something negative would show up in some type of testing before growth is stunted or periods stop?

But with keto, my hunger/appetite is only a fraction of what it was, so I’m not hungrier. I would say the majority of my eating is out of habit, not hunger. How many overweight people, on any way of eating, actually eat because they are truly needful of caloric intake? They eat out of habit. Out of boredom. For pleasure. For emotional reasons. Addictions. Etc. A lowered BMR is a problem if those are the reasons someone eats. But the real problem is not the lowered BMR, but the reasons.

The popularity of IF and OMAD for those on the keto WOE aren’t because they are getting hungrier. How popular are IF and OMAD for those on low fat diets?

(Doug) #29

OZ, I agree - a “lowered BMR,” per se, need not be a problem. For us overweight people on a keto diet, using our own fat makes up for any dietary shortfall, in general - it renders the “BMR versus food intake” thing moot, or at least much more so than for lean people or carb-eaters.

(You've tried everything else; why not try bacon?) #30

Lean tissue loss, is one thing that would show up on a scan before it became obvious just looking at the person. The body is resilient and hard to damage, but take a look at the photos of African infants with kwashiorkor or of the survivors being rescued from Auschwitz and Buchenwald and tell me they haven’t been damaged. It is possible to refeed such people, but I understand they often have weight and metabolic problems for the rest of their lives. Underfed children can also become impaired mentally, since their brain is not yet fully formed, and its growth can be harmed.

You will probably tell me that the “brain fog” ketogenic people experience when they eat a large amount of carbohydrate isn’t a sign of damage, but I would contend that it is. The fact that it is reversible damage doesn’t make it any less damage.

(Mark Rhodes) #31

Wrestlers making weight class?

#32

I agree wholeheartedly. Even pre-keto, I would have breakfast at my favorite cafe and order the chorizo egg scramble, which was a large plateful of food. Or a large omelet w/ some breakfast meat on the side. I would skip the toast and potatoes that came w/ them. Those breakfasts would fill me up and keep me full until mid-afternoon at least. Very keto-like, although I didn’t know it at the time. And, my BS on those days was very good!

#33

Reminds me of my great uncle who served in the Army during WWII along w/ one of his buddies. They started at the boot in Italy and went up and then through the Battle of the Bulge and finally ended up freeing one of the concentration camps. Food was very scarce for our military (my dad served in the Pacific and went from 190 to 120 by the end of the war) so the troops were often hungry and underfed. After he and his buddy got back home post war, his buddy proceeded to overeat constantly, and died of overeating about 10 years later.

(Terence Dean) #34

To be honest I have no idea what my BMR is, who gives a rats? The value I see in my apps doesn’t mean anything to me, they’re just calculated values. But its clear we don’t need to do what I was doing which was eating a decent sized meal for dinner and then tucking into a ton of Kentucky Fried Chicken at 10:30pm!

I knew it was stupid but I kept doing it, I wasn’t that hungry really how can you be only 2 hours after a big meal?

Keto just gives me the opportunity to control those food cravings from my brain. Jees it used to get so bad that I’d be driving like a maniac to get to KFC before it closed, how bad is that!? Carbs addiction is a serious threat to health, I’m sure glad I found a cure.

(You've tried everything else; why not try bacon?) #35

After half a pound of spaghetti, my stomach would be full to the point of literally bursting (“just one wafer-thin mint,” and it would have all been over) and I would still be hungry. So I’d eat the rest of the box two hours later, once there was more room in my stomach.

(Terence Dean) #36

Exactly Paul, it was sheer madness!

(Doug) #37

I used to be hell on that (American) $20 deal where you get 8 pieces of chicken, two family-sized mashed potatoes and gravies, 4 biscuits, (yes, I know… :frowning_face:) and one big coleslaw.

I’d love to be able to cheaply test my own resting metabolic rate. I don’t track anything, don’t even weigh myself more than a handful of times a year, but I think it would be fascinating to see what effect different foods, diets, fasts, etc., had on one’s metabolism.

I looked at getting my own equipement, but it’s like $3000 or more even for used stuff, and some chemicals are consumed during use. Ouch. Other than that, it’s usually like $50 or $75 to have one test done for you.

(Terence Dean) #38

Yeah all that expense for a machine to say, “You are healthy”! :rofl: or “You’re eating too much, stop it”

(Terence Dean) #39

Haha its too late to make me envious but that’s an excellent deal! I think they had a super Tuesday deal here where you could get 10 pieces for $8, must have been a slow day for them. Correction, it was $9.95 for 9 pieces.

(Doug) #40

The local KFC here has the all-you-cat-eat buffet 7 days a week. It’s like $7, perhaps $8 with tax. Great deal compared to fast-food chicken in general, which has become fairly brutal in normal pricing. Of course, for keto, it’s one wicked minefield…