For the people who have tried both, which diet would you say works better? A low carb diet or counting calories?

Counting calories sounds good because it would allow me to eat carbohydrates which I love, but if a low carb diet gives better results than a low calorie diet then I would rather go low carb. What would be best to do?

I'm so tired of trying to find the right diet. I've read about so many different diets the past week that my head hurts.

First of all what works for you will not always work for someone else.
I have changed my opinion many times in the last year about what works for me and what doesn't. It is based on research and trial and error. I try something for about 2 weeks. I now only rely on my body fat, measurements and how clothes fit and see if it is working.

That said, I do a combination of moderate carbs and calorie counting.

For me a high carb diet triggers cravings and overeating.
I eat at least 5 times a day sometimes six.
I eat a lean protein and several servings of vegetables each time I eat.
I only eat other carbs like fruit in the morning and other carbs like oats and grains after I exercise. But my goals may be different than yours. I'm into fat burning right now and I like to weight lift.

I eat my largest meal in the morning and I carb cycle meaning for 3 days my carbs are about 30% of my calories and then 1 day they are about 40%.

This is not a diet to me it is a lifestyle and I will never go back to obese again.

I did the Atkins diet and I have to say I didn't find such a low-carb lifestyle to be sustainable.
Sure, I lost a lot of weight very quickly but I put it all back on and then some because I simply could not eat like that for ever. As soon as I started introducing carbs back in I lost control and ate and ate. People I know who have done low-carb diets have found the same.
I am calorie counting at the moment and the weight is coming off more slowly but I can pretty much eat what I want so I know I will be able to do this for the rest of my life easily. I won't lose control because I am not denying myself anything. So I think, on that basis, low calorie diets give better long-term results.
It really does depend on you though, some people have amazing long-term success on low-carb plans but I think (and this is just my opinion) that counting calories is the most viable way to control and lose weight.

I agree with the above. I've never done low carb as I know for me it would be unsustainable. Rice and pasta particularly are a regular part of my diet as is lots of fruit - I would feel deprived limiting these. I don't have problems with control of these things either like some and don't eat many bread products. I can eat my 50g and be satisfied.

I can't really compare weightloss between the two but I will say that I have lost 70+ lbs in the last 9 months calorie counting.

Kitty

I've used every excuse in the book to avoid low-carb dieting. Even when my doctor diagnosed me with insulin resistance and recommended I try a reduced-carb diet, as he put it "because it seems to be more effective for insulin resistant patients." I still couldn't shake all the arguments I had heard and internalized over the years against low-carb dieting: - it's unhealthy - it's unsustainable - when you add back any carbs you'll regain it all - you're hair will fall out - you'll get constipated, it'll give you bad breath....

Maybe even a few of the arguments are true, but you know it's the only eating plan that I can consistently lose weight on, without being dead-tired and ravenously food-obsessed-hungry 24/7. I tried the philisophical compromise, the South Beach Diet, and did well at first, but found that I could "abuse" low-glycemic carbs, nearly as badly as high-glycemic ones. For me, I may have to come to grips with the possibility that high glycemic foods will always trigger severe carb cravings, and I may have to consider avoiding them forever.

And yet, I still log my food and even calories, besides carbs, more out of habit than anything else. Which is how I found out that I actually AM able to eat more calories on a low-carb plan while losing more weight. And I've had energy to exercise more than I have in months. (I did skip "induction" this time around, because I'm taking metformin, a diabetic medication, which makes me ill if I go to low-carb). I pretty much thought it was all hype and that "a calorie is a calorie," and any extra weight loss from low-carbing was because of reduced hunger and as a result reduced calories (not that this shouldn't have been reason enough for me to commit to it).

To be honest, I pretty much thought the concept of "carb-addiction" was ridiculous. But, since I've been doing more reading (and self-experimenting), I think there really is something to the theory. I can't say whether it is or is not "the most viable," way to lose weight. While there's a lot of research that shows few who attempt to lose weight succeed long-term, there isn't a lot of research on how the successful ones are doing it. Sustainability has a lot to do with what you're willing to do long-term. Not sure I even have that answer for myself yet, but I agree that if you read the Atkins and other low-carb books, maintanance-level and even while losing, more and more carbs are introduced until the person finds (I'm sure JerseyGyrl would know the term) the carb-level at which they feel the best and can still lose or maintain their weight at a comfortable level. I'm still trying to find that "sweet spot," so to speak, but I don't think it's any different or any more difficult than a calorie counter finding the right calorie level and any dieter finding what foods are easier to avoid than eat in moderation.

I would definitely suggest that anyone not getting decent results on calorie counting to at least try low carb. Yes, it may mean changing the way they think about food forever, but what successful plan doesn't. If the only success you have is on low carb, then "sustainability" is really a mute point. In order to succeed, you have to learn to work with the plan.

You will have to excuse the scientist in me but research actually shows that they work about the same for weight loss. This is really a matter of what works for you. The best diet for you is the one you can stick to for life. You should not view this as something you go on and off but as a way of eating for the rest of your life so that you can maintain your weight loss. You may want to familiarize yourself with a couple from each category to decide what will work best for you.

I think it comes down to personal choice, with callorie counting some people eat a lot of junk as long as its low calorie , and some people do think that low carb alows you to eat as much bacon, cheese, etc.. I think whichever plan you chose you need to focus on healthy food. For me low carb works best and is something I can do for life. I keep track of everything in fitday and so I'm keeping track of how many callories I'm eating but haven't needed to restrict them while on low carb. I think reading as many books as possible is a good idea, your library may have "Living the low carb life" by Johny Bowden, "Good calories bad calories" by Gary Taubs, Atkins new diet revolution. For me it is important to understand why I need to eat some foods and avoid others for health and for weight loss.

I think WW gets the same bad reputation Atkins does, in a different way. Weight watchers has 8 healthy guidelines that take up almost all of your points for the day...healthy fats, fruits, grains, dairy, lean proteins...people go on WW thinking "I can eat whatever I want if I stay within my points", and to a certain degree that's true, but it isn't following the program as it was meant to be followed (ie, adhering to the healthy guidelines)...just like people going on Atkins think they can eat whatever bacon and cream and butter they want, and never read the book to go deeper into the program and discover all of the OTHER foods that make up at Atkins eating plan.

A truer statement has never been spoken!! This is why I can't stress enough to people..."If you want to do Atkins...READ THE BOOK!!!"

I do both, actually. I found with very low carb, the state of ketosis works to curb your hunger--which is great! But if I went by the "only eat when I'm hungry" rule on low carb, my calories ended up being SUPER low (800-1000 calories a day, anyone?). I now count both my carbs and my calories. It's interesting to me that on a diet where I'm so satisfied all the time that I have to count to make sure I have enough calories, as opposed to making sure I'm not eating too many.

I've done both calorie-counting and low carb independently of one another as well. Low carb works best for me personally--but I count my calories, too. I use Fit Day, log everything... It's not so bad once you're used to it It all comes down to a personal choice, and what you can sustain. In my opinion, everyone can benefit from reducing their carbohydrate intake and upping their protein and good fats--no matter what diet plan they're following. To the degree that people moderate carbs is up to them--I like ketosis-level carb restriction, some people use Zone-levels and hit a more moderate 30%. It really depends on you.

EDIT: One thing I didn't say, and I meant to, is that there is no magic about whichever way you choose. No one diet is going to be the magic cure for obesity or health--it's still your hard work and determination that gets you to your goal eventually. Depending on your lifestyle and how your body reacts, one diet or another might make the journey easier or harder for you. But no diet is going to work over night, or in some mystical way.

I've read that insulin resistant folks and diabetics do better on carb-controlled or low-carb diets. There's some indication that fibromyalgia patients do better on the Zone.

It would be nice if there were more research to attempt to predict which diets work best for specific situations, so trial and error wouldn't be the only way for people to learn which WOE will work best (or at least develop ways to narrow the search so some people don't have to do years and years of trial and error before finding what works for them). There are theories out there (like the blood type diet) but so far, not a whole lot of research to back up the claims.

I have not ever had much luck with counting calories to reduce weight. Usually because I end up with such cravings that I binge eat or I start planning how I'm going to cheat. This also goes for the exercising to lose. Exercising has always made me very hungry and I blow my diet because I cannot stop eating. But this is not true with a low-carb approach.

Now, I am an Atkins purist. I only eat Induction Acceptable foods [all veggies & no fruits] but I eat 25-30 grams net carbs [carbs minus fiber only]. I still have 28 pounds to lose but being able to eat more veggies keeps me feeling satiated and gives me enough energy to strength train and endurance train on alternate days. I no longer experienced the after workout hunger-monster because my protein and fats are high enough to give my muscles the fuel it needs to recouperate. When I hit a plateau, like I have at the weight I was when I got pg with my daughter, I will track my foods in FitDay to make sure I am getting enough calories and carbs.