"Size of portions, wiser choices as important as number of carbs"
 

Size of portions, wiser choices as important as number of carbs

By Bev Bennett, Globe Correspondent, 1/7/2004

link to article

If you traded your favorite breakfast cereal for steak and eggs in order to lose weight on a low-carbohydrate diet, you'll be in for a big disappointment.

Sure, you can lose 5 to 10 pounds in a couple of weeks by eliminating bread, pasta, fruits, most vegetables, and dairy products -- just like the books say. But much of that weight loss will be water. And if you, like most people, fall off the program, the weight you regain will be fat and flab. "You start to look like the Michelin guy," says Dr. David L. Katz, director of the Yale Prevention Research Center in New Haven.

Carbohydrate reduction is the current "magic pill" for weight loss. Look on restaurant menus and supermarket shelves and you'll find an array of low-carbohydrate options. But low-carbohydrate plans actually sabotage your weight-loss efforts in several ways, according to nutrition experts.

Unless you work out, your body composition changes when you're on a high-protein, high-fat, and low-carbohydrate diet. Your body converts muscle to fat, according to Dr. Katz. And when you go off the diet and start to eat, the pounds come back as fat, not muscle.

In addition to being unsightly -- you probably went on a diet expecting to look fabulous fast -- having less muscle makes it more difficult to lose weight and keep it off. Muscle has a higher metabolic rate. The more muscle you have, the more calories you can consume without gaining weight.

And if that isn't enough, a low-carbohydrate diet can make you cranky. Eating carbohydrates helps increase serotonin levels, making you happier and more relaxed. Denying yourself carbohydrates may make you so irritable you self-medicate with cookies. Theoretically, low-carbohydrate diets have some positive potential. Learning to eat spaghetti by the cup, not the plateful, or skipping a daily doughnut should result in fewer weight problems. Unfortunately, many diets don't teach you to distinguish between high-fat refined carbohydrates and nutritionally superior ones. "Cheese doodles aren't the same as oatmeal. The notion of a carbohydrate as a single classification is ridiculous," says Dr. Katz, author of "The Way to Eat."Instead of slapping all carbohydrates with a negative label, nutritionists advise making better choices: Cutting back on white bread, and including more whole grains, fruits, and vegetables will help you lose weight, according to Marc O'Meara, a registered dietitian at Brigham and Women's Hospital. "I don't feel there's any one diet for everyone. Some people need a higher protein diet; others need more carbohydrates. If you moderate from a low-carbohydrate diet by adding whole grains, not refined grains, you probably won't overeat," he says.

The reason is that the fiber in whole grains, fruits, and vegetables provides satiety. You feel full. When patients complain to O'Meara that they're hungry on a low-carbohydrate diet, he recommends adding either a slice of whole wheat bread or an apple to each meal.

"You don't have to choose white bread," says O'Meara. "Eating a whole-grain carbohydrate will get the serotonin levels up, too."

Hey, Gotbeer! You can't throw gasoline on the fire without even commenting!!!!

Sure I can! I mean, I'm so damn cranky from low-carbing that the gasoline comes naturally.

An article like this, with so many things wrong, is just mind-boggling - I better go eat some Wonder Bread to get my spirits back up again.

Riiighhhhtt.....I guess that's why study after study has shown that those who lose weight via low carb consistently lose less lean body mass (that's muscle) than those who lose weight via high carb/low fat, usually by a good amount less.
What I'd love to see this guy explain is why on earth your body would convert muscle to fat when it's already got an abundent supply (of fat, that is) and you have ample protein coming in to support that muscle.
I will buy that if you go off the plan and go back to your old eating habits that the majority of the weight you gain back will be fat and not muscle, but I think they're missing the point of low carb in that you're not supposed to ever go off the plan...you move to maintainence once you reach your weight loss goals.

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

I do?? When? And where are these cookies from? I hope that they're chocolate chip! If I'm eating cookies that I don't know about they better be good!!! ;)

See? Your poor brain is so bad off from not having sugar to run on that you don't even remember eating those cookies to self-medicate! :lol: :lol:

There was so much in this article I want to respond to I don't know where to begin! Garbage.

All right - let's Fisk the idiot.



Oh, yes, I do so miss those 45 lbs I lost.



I gave up 2 vegetables - just 2, not "most" - corn and potatoes. I restricted beans and carrots. I eat MORE veggies now than I did before.



About 90 people at my office tried it. After one year, 3 fell off. One of those is getting back on it when her kid is born around 3/17/04. My boss's boss has lost 25 lbs on it so far, and her young son's seizures have abated.



It is getting better, yes, but high-carb products still dominate the shelves and the restaurants.



ROFLMAO! :lol:



The "high" from ketosis is so great that it is used to ease the pain and depression of terminally ill patients - and sugar cancels that effect rapidly.



So, one weak wannabe version of the diet kills them all? Can he even name this slacker? No, because there are none (that I've seen, anyway.)



I eat neither Doodles nor oatmeal, but if I had to eat one, I'd prefer the Cheese Doodles - more cheese in them, and I don't have to cover them with brown sugar and milk to make them palatable. And not all carbs slapped with a negative label - fiber rocks, for example.



Fat also provides satiety. Duh. I am rarely hungry on Atkins, and NEVER as hungry as I was ALL THE TIME on low-fat.



If that crap about serotonin were even remotely true, wouldn't white bread be MORE effective at raising serotonin because the carbs in it would hit your bloodstream more quickly and heavily?

:lol: I'm visualizing you blowing the smoke off your keyboard after that rebuttal!

Like I said - gasoline. :)

Good God, what ignorant pish-pash. It's almost not worth responding to. Almost.



The first stage of most weight loss plans involve water, but there are no studies that say low carb diets cause more water loss than other plans -- and in fact there is significant evidence that it's more efficient at getting to fat, faster.



As opposed to low fat plans, where you buff up after you fall off the wagon? Anyone who loses on any diet then falls off it regains fat. This is amazingly dumb.



They're right that companies are lining up to profit off this, and if we succumb to their offerings, we'll sabotage their efforts. But this...yoinks, did nobody fact check it?



Pray tell, Dr. Katz, how precisely would this differ from any other diet? Why do these quacks single out low carb for situations that exist with any diet plan?



This is the first I've heard of this. I'm mostly satisfied, and feeling great after 44 pounds of "water" gone, at least according to this idiot. :)

Wait, am I writing angry!? Must be that lack of carbs.



Wonder what he self-medicated with before coming up with this sack of lies?



Wait, you now need an apple after you've had a bick steak & some brocolli, or a chicken breast, salad and cheese, just to feel full? What patients are not full on a low carb diet? There isn't any reason to be.

I just can't believe someone printed this when most of it is comprised of half-truths and dubious conclusions. Maybe they hired Jayson Blair.

"You start to look like the Michelin guy," says Dr. David L. Katz, director of the Yale Prevention Research Center in New Haven.

The Yale-Griffin Prevention Research Center (PRC) was established in 1998 through a 5-year, nearly $3 million grant from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

The CDC recommends all americans follow the USDA food pyramid. The food pyramid was constructed by big grain (in conjunction with the bavarian illuminati of eye in pyramid fame, perhaps) hence the 11 servings of the grain group mandated.

Thank you all for responding for me...you said everything I wanted to say and said it better!

I've said it before, but it bears repeating. When I farmed, the current USDA food pyramid was the exact model of the composition of the feed I used to fatten pigs (the animal with the digestive system closest to ours) for market. Just where are they planning on selling us? Nyah Levi

Wow!! I didn't know that!! I was told years ago, by a dietitian, NOT to follow the food pyramid because the base was all wrong. Much too much "grain" and not enough vegtables and the "good" fats.

Wow! what a truckload of trash. Can muscle actually BE converted to fat???????? I have never heard THAT before!
k :thdown:

Of all the articles I've seen posted on Low Carb, this may be the champion for ignorance or willful deception. It's simply awful reporting.

Every time I read that all the weight lost on lowcarb is water, I start to imagine my insides swooshing around. I mean, really, if I lost 100 pounds of water you would think that I would have heard and felt all that water moving around inside me! It's a funny thing, but those 100 pounds sure felt like fat to me.

From what I have read and understood muscle and be converted to fat if you stop using the muscle (something like that)

Usually people who are bulky muscle who want to get very slender will try and convert their muscle to fat and then burn the fat.

I did a quick google search and found a website explaining this though I wont offer the link since the nature of the website may be questionable or offensive to some but it went through the steps of showing how this person went about converting their fat to muscle and the first 2 things done were

1) cut protein dramatically
2) Carb intake went up and fat intake went down

I found that amusing.

While I can't be sure, I believe that the author is referring to is the common misconception that low carb dieters lose more lean body mass than those who lose weight using the conventional methods (a lot of rot, actually) and when they go off the plan and regain the weight, the majority of the weight regained will be fat leaving you with a higher body fat percentage than when you started.
As I said earlier, study after study has shown the first part (losing more lean body mass) to be blatantly false. In fact, those on low carb plans consistenly lose less lean body mass (and in some cases actually gained muscle) than those who lose weight via high carb/low fat specifically because low fat diets tend to be much lower in protein. When the body is getting sufficient protein and essential amino acids to support its lean body mass, it has no reason to cannibalize its own muscle tissue to get what it needs which often happens in low fat diets that are deficient in protein.
Unless you are actively working to maintain your lean body mass (ie weight resistance training paired with adequate protein), some loss of lean body mass (muscle) as you lose weight is normal as your muscles have to carry less weight around and don't have to work as hard, but it's considerably less loss of lean body mass on low carb than it would be on low fat/high carb.

Well...I am extremely concerned. I don't "work out", (although I do use an exercise bike and treadmill, a gym rat would laugh me out of a gym if they saw my "work out" and tell me I was wasting my time). Which brings me to my concerns. I have lost 16.5 inches (chest, waist, hips), and I want to know, since this WOE converted my muscle to fat, WHAT THE HECK IS HOLDING MY TORSO UP?? I assume (and you know what they say about THAT!) since most of my muscles are now fat, fat is holding my skeletel frame upright...but can fat do that??? Is ending up on the floor, a puddle of fat and bone, in my future?? :help:

I've also been pretty sedentary for a year+. I don't do very strict low-carbing in the sense of keeping tabs on how much carbs I eat, I mostly just don't. :) My main meals almost never have carbs other than veggies. I do eat treats (sugary too).

But still, I'm low-carb and sedentary. Now, if my "muscles turned to fat" I'd have to either A) weigh less at same inches or B) weigh same at more inches, right? Since fat density < muscle density.

Could someone explain (just rhetorical question) me why I have lost inches, but weigh more than ever? =P

- edit -: I don't look at weight as a scale for anything anymore, so I'm not bothered at all about weighing 10kg more than I did while doing my army service. Me and my SO browsed some 5 year old photos few days back, and I laughed my ass off at my skinny self! Was a photo of me taken right after army service. :)

Adequate protein intake is just magic. And IMHO, adequate begins at 1.5grams/kg for _sedentary_ people.More protein eaten, less lost from muscles!

Well, I may be denser (in fact, I know I am) but there is so much #$$%W$%# outright lying in this article, they can kiss...well, something much more shapely, thanks to low carbing!!!~

This is how it works.. Some of the original research to discredit low-carb was done in 3 or 4 day tests. In the first 3 or 4 days most of the weight lost was water, from emptying out your glycogen stores.
After that your body starts breaking down fat for ketones, but until there are enough ketones to run the whole show, the body converts protein to glucose (dietary protein if available if not available it breaks down muscle).
So the end result of a 4 day low-carb test (with limited protein) shows loss of water and muscle. Then it gets written in stone and quoted forever.
Day 5 where you spare protein by running on ketones is never reached. The research is designed to end just before the positive results.

The funny thing is that on a low fat diet with enough carbs, that is just what happens. When you get down to the point where you begin to break down fat while using up muscle you give the body more carbs and stop the process. The net result is that you are always running out of glycogen and always using muscle for fuel while you break down fat.
Dr. Miriam Nelson of Tufts Univ. (no friend of low carb) has determined that under a USDA approved diet 21-25% of all weight lost is really muscle.

danny

Absolutely love that line! Mind if I borrow it sometime?