What do you mean by "eliminating carbs"? Aren't carbs a necessity?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. Thanks. But I'm still waiting for this answer... I KNOW carbs are necessity in one's diet. That's a fact. What are the good ones, the ones I don't necessarily have to avoid, but will be eating in moderation?

Fruits are carbs that are good for you in moderation. Lots of healthy vitamins that cancel out the sugar. Carbs are not necessity-- your body can make glucose from fat and protein.

This is that kind of magical gibberish thinking that gets you immediately tossed into the trendy bandwagon dupes

Telling someone to eat fruit is magical gibberish?

Not pp. I believe they were referring to the phrase "Lots of healthy vitamins that cancel out the sugar." That is magical gibberish.

[Anonymous]

You don't need to eliminate carbs to lose weight. I think a lot of the reason people lose weight on low-carb diets is because they're practicing portion control and not eating a bunch of empty carbs that they are not burning off with cardio. I'm a distance runner, so I'll never eliminate carbs, but I practice portion control (1 piece of bread at dinner, not 4, 1 serving of spaghetti, not 3) and I'm choosy about the carbs I eat - like whole grains vs. white starchy carbs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You don't need to eliminate carbs to lose weight. I think a lot of the reason people lose weight on low-carb diets is because they're practicing portion control and not eating a bunch of empty carbs that they are not burning off with cardio. I'm a distance runner, so I'll never eliminate carbs, but I practice portion control (1 piece of bread at dinner, not 4, 1 serving of spaghetti, not 3) and I'm choosy about the carbs I eat - like whole grains vs. white starchy carbs.

Actually, the reason people lose weight on low-carb diets is because for those of us with busted insulin sensitivity, it makes for fewer peaks and valleys in our blood sugar and over time can revive some insulin sensitivity.

[Anonymous]

6:49 - not all people have busted insulin sensitivity. But yes, that's another reason.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:6:49 - not all people have busted insulin sensitivity. But yes, that's another reason.

That's why I said, "for those of us..."

[Anonymous]

present_tense wrote:Maybe some basic info will help. Carbohydrates are one of the three primary "macronutrients," along with protein and fat. A macronutrient is simply a major nutrient group.

The process of digesting carbohydrates breaks down complex forms of the macronutrient into simpler forms of sugar so they can be released into your bloodstream as glucose.

Your body needs glucose, so part of your intuition is correct: you do need to consume carbohydrates.

You do need glucose, but you don't need to get it from carbohydrates in your diet.

Fat and protein can both be converted into glucose if necessary through a process called gluconeogenesis.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here. Thanks. But I'm still waiting for this answer... I KNOW carbs are necessity in one's diet. That's a fact. What are the good ones, the ones I don't necessarily have to avoid, but will be eating in moderation?

Read the South Beach book. It will explain all. It's a great program and works really well. My DH lost 40 lbs on it. And it becomes a lifestyle change.

[Anonymous]

You will die on a NO-carb diet. Your body needs some carbs. You can do low carb, even extremely low carb, but not no carb.

And Israeli cous cous is not healthier than regular cous cous, the "pearl" size is just bigger.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You will die on a NO-carb diet. Your body needs some carbs. You can do low carb, even extremely low carb, but not no carb.

And Israeli cous cous is not healthier than regular cous cous, the "pearl" size is just bigger.

Well, we're all going to die, but can you give some scientific reason why a no-carb diet is a killer? My guess is that a person could get along very well on just meat and eggs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You don't need to eliminate carbs to lose weight. I think a lot of the reason people lose weight on low-carb diets is because they're practicing portion control and not eating a bunch of empty carbs that they are not burning off with cardio. I'm a distance runner, so I'll never eliminate carbs, but I practice portion control (1 piece of bread at dinner, not 4, 1 serving of spaghetti, not 3) and I'm choosy about the carbs I eat - like whole grains vs. white starchy carbs.

Not true for everyone. I gain weight on a portion-controlled diet of 1200-1300 calories per day, but lose weight on a low-carb diet where I don't measure or log food. Individual bodies respond differently to various ways of eating.

[Anonymous]

I'm trying to understand the point you're trying to make with this, because gluconeogenesis is not necessarily always a good thing. This is the process, as you correctly point out, of converting glucose from protein. But if your body's using protein instead of carbohydrates for glucose, then it isn't using that protein to build muscle; muscle is exactly what we want if we're concerned about body composition. This is precisely why low carb diets aren't advised for people who also are strength training (which should be everyone given the non-aesthetic benefits of it). (And by strength training I essentially mean any progressive resistance weight-bearing exercise, including yoga).

The other thing that confuses me about your post is that I don't think you're advocating a diet composed solely of proteins and fats, to the exclusion of things like vegetables and fruits. But I can't quite pin down what you're trying to say.

So, while you are technically correct that the body can cannibalize muscle to produce the glucose it needs to conduct its business, this isn't really a practical way of looking at it. But I concede I may be missing your point. I also concede that I'm hitting the outer limits of my cellular-level understanding of metabolism. Can you elaborate?

Finally, this discussion is why I always advocate people driving to be more fit rather than losing weight. If we focus on losing weight, then things like ultra-low carb diets seem to make good sense. But if we focus on health, strength, mobility--and dare I say virility, then carbs are essential. They are far less essential than the standard role they've come to play in the American diet, but they are essential nonetheless.

Jason

Not the PP, but it sounds like they're talking about the ketogenic diet in which fat (not protein) is used for glucose production. Protein consumption is increased so that the body does not break down muscle. This article explains it (but gets into the scientific weeds a bit). I've been lurking around the keto subreddit and people are losing tons of weight by creating a caloric deficit but also limiting carbs and upping their protein and fat intake. That site links to a keto calculator where you can figure out what your macro levels should be. I haven't tried the diet yet and am skeptical that it works, but there are a lot of before-and-afters on that site where people are losing weight much more quickly than if they had just stuck to a carb-heavy, low-calorie diet. Granted, it seems to work better for the very overweight and/or insulin-resistant. And I don't think OP should try it because of her thyroid issues. But I've got about 40 pounds to lose...I think I'm going to try it for awhile and see what happens.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You will die on a NO-carb diet. Your body needs some carbs. You can do low carb, even extremely low carb, but not no carb.

And Israeli cous cous is not healthier than regular cous cous, the "pearl" size is just bigger.

Well, we're all going to die, but can you give some scientific reason why a no-carb diet is a killer? My guess is that a person could get along very well on just meat and eggs.

Scurvy is just one of the many diseases you'd quickly get if you cut all vegetables and fruit from your diet, and those have at least some carbs.

There's really no such thing as a "no carb" diet - even eggs have 1g of carbs each.

[Anonymous]

There are some great books about this topic. I just read "Wheat Belly" which is about eliminating carbs, particularly wheat. No it is not the building block of your diet. Remember that the US is one of the leading producers of both wheat and milk -- so of course we push eating that. Does not mean it is good for you. In this book he talks about eliminating carbs. He veers a bit too far toward "if you were a diabetic..." but there is a load of great info in there. Carbs are in so many foods, so eliminating them entirely is pretty tough. But you can always cut back...!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You don't need to eliminate carbs to lose weight. I think a lot of the reason people lose weight on low-carb diets is because they're practicing portion control and not eating a bunch of empty carbs that they are not burning off with cardio. I'm a distance runner, so I'll never eliminate carbs, but I practice portion control (1 piece of bread at dinner, not 4, 1 serving of spaghetti, not 3) and I'm choosy about the carbs I eat - like whole grains vs. white starchy carbs.

Actually, the reason people lose weight on low-carb diets is because for those of us with busted insulin sensitivity, it makes for fewer peaks and valleys in our blood sugar and over time can revive some insulin sensitivity.

+1 so you are not "starving" from low blood sugar moments

[Anonymous]

present_tense wrote:Thanks, 10:02, for your helpful response. On the face of it, this doesn't sound like a healthy way to go given the nutrients we get from fruits and vegetables.

I feel like I'm fighting a battle I can't win against the "lose weight" instead of "get healthy" mentality. I get the impulse to force change we can see, but losing weight is only one of several health concerns we ought to have.

Gonna read the sources you posted. Thanks again.

Jason

I'm the one who posted the keto links and I'm guilty of focusing on losing weight instead of getting healthy. I'm sure it's flawed thinking, but I feel like if I can just lose those 40-50 lbs, then I'll start being healthy.