Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 02-17-2012, 09:52 AM   #16  
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 33

Default

both..will be effective..
Sukrutha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2012, 02:46 PM   #17  
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 12

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lyla View Post
I count calories, but i don't eat that little as much of you does, my range is between 1800-1850 every day. The problem with me and carbs is that i can eat with no problem my 1800 calories per day and still be hungry, with a low carb diet i have to force myself to eat the 1800. And i'm not talking about high IG cabs, but low IG carbs do give me the same hungry effects, even at 1800 cals

I do count my calories everyday, though. As someone posted before, calories are important to lose weight, we still need a deficit. Is easier in a low carb noy to eat enough, but calories does matter, not even Atkins (or any other writter or doctor) is above thermodynamic laws.
Atkins had the idea of a metabolic advantage, meaning you boost your basal metabolism by about 1000 calories. More recent studies show that its because low carb dieters tend to eat less. There is significantly more WEIGHT loss associated with atkins, initially, because of the lack of glycogen stored in muscles. While the glycogen itself may only be a few grams, it holds a lot of water. Its common to drop 10 pounds in the first 1-2 weeks, but a lot of that is due to the loss in water weight associated with using up glycogen.

Atkins really does suppress hunger. Your main goal with the diet is to not think about food, and let the diet work for you. My first bout with the diet, about 10 years ago, I could go 1-2 days without eating because I simply wasn't hungry, and just didn't realize I didn't eat. My advice: Don't do this. You will stall weight loss, and you will fail.

The key is, eat when you're hungry - just watch carbs. That may be 3000 calories one day, and 1000 the next.

Last edited by emmveepee; 02-22-2012 at 02:49 PM.
emmveepee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2012, 07:18 PM   #18  
Senior Member
 
kaplods's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Wausau, WI
Posts: 13,383

S/C/G: SW:394/310/180

Height: 5'6"

Default

I can't really say that low-carb is working better than low-calorie, because my diet IS low-calorie, it just also happens to be low-carb.


I can tell you why a low-carb/low-calorie diet works better for me than a high-carb/low-calorie diet - and that in a nutshell is hunger and craving control. I also have more energy and have fewer and less severe flares and symptoms from my health issues (arthritis, fibromyalgia, asthma, autoimmune disease, skin issues, IBS....).

I have been able to prove to myself that I do lose more on 1800 calories of low-carb than on 1800 calories of high-carb, but the difference isn't quite as dramatic as my comfort-level. On 1800 calories of low-carb, I feel like I'm eating a lot of food, and I don't get hungry. On 1800 calories of high-carb, I feel like I'm starving to death 24/7. And the more carbs I eat, the hungrier I get, so I feel hungrier on 5,000 calories of high-carb than on 500 calories of no-carb (not that I'm advocating eating that low-calorie or even that low-carb).

I can and have stalled on low-carb (If you eat 6,000 calories, even if none of the the calories are coming from carbs, you aren't necessarily going to lose weight), so calorie-control is still an important element. A lot of people don't have to count calories when eating low-carb, because they naturally eat less because of the hunger-control. I do need a portion-control element because my hunger signals aren't incredibly reliable.


Finding a comfortable balance of hunger and calorie control, I find that a low-carb (but not so low that I feel nauseous) exchange plan works best for me. Since I can't go "too low" without getting ill, paleo principles work really well (as long as I remember not to overdo the fruit).
kaplods is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2012, 07:59 PM   #19  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 201

S/C/G: 206/222/160

Height: 5'5.5

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kaplods View Post
On 1800 calories of low-carb, I feel like I'm eating a lot of food, and I don't get hungry. On 1800 calories of high-carb, I feel like I'm starving to death 24/7. And the more carbs I eat, the hungrier I get, so I feel hungrier on 5,000 calories of high-carb than on 500 calories of no-carb (not that I'm advocating eating that low-calorie or even that low-carb).
This. I used to be climbing the wall starving all the time trying to eat to the food pyramid. Even if I binged on a few thousand calories of high carb food, I was hungry again soon after. On low carb, it's easy to eat until I'm satisfied.

I have tuna (in oil) and salad for lunch most days. If I added two slices of bread and made a sandwich, I'd be starving by 3pm. It's hard to explain to people that eating less makes me fuller, but it is what it is and I'm happy :-)
AnaBee is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Should I Count Carbs or Calories? zetaphine Atkins 17 02-22-2012 08:14 PM
carbs or calories? futureskinnygirl10 General Diet Plans and Questions 13 01-12-2012 08:36 AM


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:21 PM.


We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.