Hello all...

OK, so on Atkins we're supposed foods with low low carbs and tons of protein and fat. In the absence of carbs, our body will begin burning its fat stores for energy. OK, great.

BUT what in the world happens to all that fat we're eating? It just doesn't make sense. Back in the carb world, when we ate fatty foods, they made us fat. Even the fatty steaks and eggs, which don't have carbs. But now, on a diet without carbs, the fatty foods actually make us LOSE weight. It doesn't make sense! Does the fat we eat on Atkins go right through? Or does it go to the butt, the tummy, the thighs, like normal fat on a normal diet? And then have to be burned off?

I hope I'm making sense. I can't understand this!!
Thanks!

This is the way that _I_ understand it, which is doubtless not only smplistic, but very wrong. But what the heck ...

In the BOD (Bad Old Days) when we ate high levels of both fat and carbs, our bodies used the carbs (& stored what it didn't use as fat) and stored or otherwise disposed of the fat in lovely little niches like our arteries. In the BOD our bodies were using the nasty ol' carb burning fuel system, so it stored the fats rather than used them.

But then we all got wise, and dropped out those carbs, and our metabolisms (after a day or two of whining about it) started to get into the fat-burning thing, and now the fats are used up as they were in our caveman days (which in my case aren't that far behind me). We have very few carbs to burn, so the fat gets burned instead.

I've just had my first blood test since being on Aitkins, and my cholesterol is within normal limits for the first time in years and years of low fat eating.

Of course, someone probably has a far better explanation than me, but that's the way I understand it, and it keeps me happy, and so I stick with it.

what you say makes sense...

but why is it that a low-fat version of atkins ISN'T better? (according to atkins himself)

because the way i look at it, now fat is just like calories...

instead of burning "calories" our bodies are burning "fat."

the less calories you eat, the more stored calories your body had to burn, in the BOD. so you loose weight, i.e., when you eat only 1000 calories but burn 2000 in a day.

so doesn't it make sense to say if we eat less fat, then our bodies can get to work burning off that stored fat?

I could be wrong, but to the best of my knowledge, there is no proof that eating fat causes you to be fat.

Good explanation!

The reason fat is good - it helps curb your hunger - make you fuller faster. A low fat version would just leave you hungry. Then you'd eat more... and so on.

I don't think so - your body will start burning protein instead, so you lose muscle instead of/or as well as fat. If your metabolism is getting No carbs and No fat (or very little) then all hell breaks loose (just like it did in our caveman days when there was no fat available).

I eat heaps of fat, and am still losing both inches and weight and cholesterol points very nicely. Atkins warns against the low fat approach.

Right at the moment I'm tucking into my low-carb jelly and double thick cream!

I think unless you are eating straight sticks of butter, there is nutritional value to the foods you are eating that have fats in them. I also think that the fats maybe act as a bit of a lubricant (ex. if there are not carbs to hold onto, then the fats are less likely to have anything to stick to)? That is probably wrong, but in my own head, it is the only way i can rationalize something that doesn't quite make sense.
You don't want to get into the habit of eating too few calories. Your body will go into starvation mode, and will hold onto every extra pound. If you cut out your carbohydrates, and then want to cut down on your fats, I honestly don't know where you would get the bulk of your caloric intake from. I have a hard time reaching over 1300 right now, and i eat ample amounts of fats...

Fat doesn't make you fat. Sugar does. That's what the carbs do when you eat them. They turn into sugar.

The fat fills you up, so you just aren't as hungry.

That reminds me of my dh... he was picking off his chicken skin the other night, saying it [chicken skin] wasn't good for you as he was washing the meal down with Pepsi.

I had to chuckle.

Anyway, I think as far as the original I think you just pee it out, is that right? Maybe it adds a little "lube" to the #2's too (?)

Have a great day!

True if you lower the fat, then you lower the calories. BUT if you lower the calories too much, then your metabolism slows & so does your weight loss. I know it sounds strange but often when people stall they must increase fat (and indirectly calories) in order to lose again. So much of what we've been taught just isn't true- low fat low calories isn't the answer. Weight loss is a funny business, but why argue the whys if its working.
God Bless,
Amy-Lynne

What we took for granted as a balanced diet really was not. Over- dosing in carbs caused our bodies to malfunction metabolically. I began to think of carbohydrates as being the glue that makes fats and cholesterol stick to our arteries and gut.

What fats are not burned, possibly, are used to keep the bowels regular. Think about it. Like myself, my family is African American. Once my sister opened a jar of her hair pomade and failed to return the top. This pomade contained olive oil and other oils. Her puppy thought it made a great meal and ate the entire jar. Do you see where I am going? Her puppy had the runs for days.

In the past, as for me, I not only ate bread, pasta,corn etc, I also ate candy, cake, popcorn. I used to get on the computer and eat a bowl of oreo cookies and a bowl of Lays potato chips ( Hey, they are not just for breakfast anymore ). I did not worry about how much I ate. I just ate it. I began noticing symptoms of hypoglycemia and carboholism. Diabetes runs in my family. If I had drastically limited carbs from the get-go, who knows, maybe I would be able to eat mashed potatoes or chick peas .

Where the extra fat goes:

1. Burned off - we feel more energetic and/or warmer w/ Atkins Diet. Low carb intake and exercise aids this.

2. Excreted in the stools - there may be limits to how rapidly fat can be absorbed by the digestive system, and the excess is lost through normal elimination. Fiber from veggies aids this process.

3. Excreted as ketones - through urine, sweat, breath. Extra water facilitates this process.

4. Excreted on the skin - oiler skin, when washed, cleans a small amount of the fat away.

These are the current theories as to the disposition of the extra fat. As controversial as some of them are, one thing is clear - if you are dropping weight, the extra fat is NOT being stored!

Don't forget that Dr Atkins' book states that it takes more calories to burn fat than to burn carbs so you can eat more cals (in the form of fat) than you can on a low cal/low fat diet.

I think that the fat that you're eating is being burned thru daily activities and body functions (just as it usually would but more are burned because there are no carbs to burn first) and once your body has burned all the cals you've ingested for the day, moves on to your fat stores (our ultimate goal). I am one of the believers that calories do matter, but that you can get away with eating more calories when you're in a fat burning mode than when you're in a carb burning mode. Also, by keeping your cals at a higher level your body doesn't feel threatened with starvation and readily burns the cals you're eating, assuming that since you've been eating regularly you will continue to do so and your body can assume it's safe to burn cals and doesn't need to hold on to them.

Hope that's clearer than mud. This is the explanation that makes sense to me.

N.

ps--another advantage is that the fat keeps you full and gives you food-satisfaction so you can stick to your plan.

Nikkil - I like that explanation. I also wondered id the dietary fat first had to be converted to BF and then converted to energy. I pictured this revolving door - DF going in and comming out as BF after a brief rest. Whatever the science behind it, it works for me!

Lets talk about fat for a while. There is so much confusion and misunderstanding.

Let us examine why we have accepted in the past that fat makes us fat or why fat is unhealthy.

First there is the calories. It is true that there are 9 calories in a gram of fat and 4 calories in a gram of protein and a gram of carbohydrate. It seems logical therefore that to reduce the fat has a greater advantage, if the objective is just to reduce calories. In foods that are "reduced fat" the macro nutrient that has increased is generally carbohydrate.

Second there is the link between fat and cholesterol. Again it is true that dietary fat is the raw material from which the body makes cholesterol. It is also true that if you add more fat to your diet your cholesterol will increase, but only if you continue to eat a lot of carbohydrate at the same time that you add the fat

Although fat is the raw material used to make cholesterol, it is insulin that runs the machinery that actually makes it. Thus if you reduce the level of insulin, the cell can't convert fat to cholesterol almost no matter how much fat is available.

This is why Atkins and others observed that if you reduce the amount of carbohydrate when you add the fat, not only will you not see any increase you could even see a reduction in cholesterol levels. This is what has happened to me.

The problem with the typical diet is that it is almost all fat and carbohydrate.

Your reading of Atkins will have told you that it is carbohydrate that has the most profound effect on the production of insulin. and it is insulin, as all diabetics know that makes the most change in blood sugar levels. Fat does not do anything as far as insulin is concerned. As all that we eat consists of three basic macro nutrients.. Protein, Carbohydrate, and fat we should examine what the various combinations actually do. The biggest influence on Insulin is High carb and Low protein. This is why all the books say that if you are eating carbohydrate then do not eat it alone and have some protein with the same meal. A cereal brakfast with a slice of toast is worse than the same slice of toast and scrambled egg on top.

I may be going on a bit in the emphasis but it is so seductive to accept the mantra that fat makes you fat when it is so patently untrue.

The creation of fat in our bodies is a metabolic function and is affected by two hormones Insulin and Glucagon it is NOT fat becoming fat.

Insulin has the effect of lowering elevated blood sugar, it shifts the metabolism into storage mode and converts glucose and protein to fat. It also is the transporter of fat from blood cells into fat cells. Unfortunately when we lose "fat" we do not lose the actual cell itself, it just empties. It is still there to fill up again. During our early life we create fat cells and they are with us for life unless of course we have lypo suction .

Glucagon is more of a friend , it shifts the body into burning mode, converts dietary fat into ketones and releases fat from their little fat cells into the blood, and reduces the level of cholesterol. It therefore allows us to use fat for energy. This is where the fat goes (which was the original question). If more ketones are produced than can be used for energy then these are expelled by the breathe, through urine and stools.

What combination produces the most glucagon? PROTEIN and FAT.!

So why am I fat and why is my brother, who when we were young ate exactly the same as I, slim? It is not fair but nevertheles a fact. The reason is that I was either born with or aquired a lower resistance to insulin. I certainly have not eaten more fat!

I do not believe in calories at all. Calories are a mesure of heat, not of how well your body uses food. They can only address how much food you've burned, while ignoring food not digested.

They have somewhat taken into effect fiber, which is not absorbed. But, they still use full values for fat and protein which assume they are used by your body rather than being excreted. In fact, I feel that you excrete, piss out, sweat out, etc...the vast majority of your fat intake. Very little probably gets used for burning, unlike Carbohydrates.

I'm willing to bet that a percentage could be attached to each of those: Fat, Protein, Carbs...that would allow calories to be adjusted to accurately reflect their contribution to your weight. Currently, the numbers 9-4-4 simply reflect how many calories are needed to burn them...But, don't reflect how well they get eliminated through other means, namely excretion.

I believe fats have a strong advantage in this area. They may take more calories to burn as fuel. But, unlike carbs, I do not believe they are normally stored (in large amounts) for later use. Our bodies are very good at storing excess carbs for later use, but not at storing dietary fat.

When I was eating Hi-Carb...I would go days without going to the bathroom. But, since eating Hi-Fat...I go once or more a day. Not to disgust anyone, but the stools are also looser than they were eating low-fat/high-carb. I'm attributing that to the amount of Fat It also shows me that quite a bit of that fat gets excreted rather than stored.

Finally, why not just eat less fat...Simple, your metabolism slows down when you don't get enough fat. Thusly, if you eat too little fat...you will burn less.