Here's a scenario for you.
What would be better for losing fat?
>I eat 2000 calories a day, 90% of them are carbs
or
>I eat 2000 calories a day, 10% of them are carbs
Given I burn the same amount of calories per day in each scenario, would it really be equal?
Why do carbs get such a bad rap here?
Other urls found in this thread:
They don't have bad reputation here. You just don't need as much of them as most fatties intake. However you should include them in a balanced diet.
So people are fat because of calorie abuse, not because it's a hormonal problem ex. they eat too many carbs so their fluctuating insulin levels make them fat
Maybe it is a hormonal case for some, probably below 1%, I even know one girl who has Hashimoto and she could somehow maintain cardio-bunny physique, so most fatties are just delusional about their habits. They also tend to disregard bacterial gut flora and how it works.
Depending on your race you have different nutritional requirements. If you want an example, read about the inuit. They have bigger livers and kidneys because they are genetically adapted to a purely carnivorous diet. To some degree you can also recalibrate your digestive system to function on several diets. Find what works for you.
CICO is true, but isn't the only factor in health.
Shit like sugar makes me bloated and fat as fuck.
I tried to supplement my calories with chocolate milk and my fucking face started to change, I looked all fucked up and fat. It also happens to a lesser degree if I eat desserts often
CICO is a fucking lie made by kikes to stop people losing weight.
a gram of uranium is 20 billion calories. you are telling me if you eat a gram of uranium you will put on 20 billion calories worth of fucking fat? objectively false
what REALLY controls weight is insulin. this is why IF is preached to be such an effective weight loss tool, because it fucking works unlike CICO
>the body is a perfectly efficient machine that processes all kind of calories at the same rate and efficiency, also every single person on earth has equally efficient calorie absorption
this is why cico is not entirely accurate, but it's accurate enough for it to work. 90% carbs will make you look like absolute garbage in any case.
Thats because the body cant digest uranium you absolute autist.
omega brainlet
>a gram of uranium is 20 billion calories. you are telling me if you eat a gram of uranium you will put on 20 billion calories worth of fucking fat? objectively false
jesus christ user I-I don't know what to say....
>10% of them carbs
I don't see that realistically being possible
Providing you're eating at a caloric deficit you will lose the same amount of weight regardless. A 500 caloric deficit is a 500 caloric deficit. Just as 1 kg of feathers is equal to 1 kg of bricks.
Now with that said, the process of de novo lipogenesis in humans is very inefficient (the conversion of excess carbohydrates into fatty acids). If you were to overeat, as in be in a caloric surplus, it's better to overeat on a VERY high carbohydrate/low fat diet where over 80% of calories come from carbohydrates, an less than 10% come from fat. You would not gain the same amount of weight as if you were eating high fat since excess dietary fat is easily stored as adipose tissue, unlike carbohydrates which need de novo lipogenesis (inefficient).
Once again, the above only matter when in a caloric surplus. If you're eating at a caloric deficit, it doesn't matter... You will lose weight regardless. People on high fat low carb diets tend to lose a lot very quickly because they're depleting their glycogen stores and losing predominately water.
It's anecdotal but I lost > 30 kg on a high carb low fat vegan diet.
Carbs are the primary reason fatties are so fat, because carbs are so easy to overeat, or perhaps even more importantly, drink
It's very difficult to eat 2000 calories from carb sources and only get 10% protein. That's only 50g. If you ate only pasta that's 80g of protein. Even if you ate only carrots, you'd still be getting 60g. So this scenario is very unrealistic.
Why does MFP have my carb goal at 315 g/day?
That's only like 1300 calories
No, it's like you just said, overeating unhealthy foods make fatties fat.
Eating a well-rounded diet between 1500 and 2500 calories (based on size) will yield a healthy person, assuming they aren't grossly overweight. You can't blame a nutrient. You have to compare apples to apples.
you are so fucking incomprehensibly stupid, go ahead, fucking check yourself and try eating only tree branches, but you will die out of starvation, because our digestive system doesn't get any energy from fucking celulose it cannot even process
Not if you're eating whole foods and the bulk of your calories come from root vegetables like potatoes and sweet potatoes.
This is 83.4% carbs, 10.1% protein, 6.5% fat. It also provides 100% of vitamins/minerals with the exception of B12 (take a supplement). It's also low sodium (you don't need much).
If you look at the foods they're all satiating too, with potatoes having the highest satiety index.
When I was losing weight I followed a HCLF vegan diet, similar to the above, and lost over 35 kg easily.
HOWEVER, if you have blood sugar issues, I'm not sure I would recommend it. I had to stop eating so many potatoes/sweet potatoes because of hyperglycemia (high blood sugar). I do not believe my blood sugar issues were caused by the above eating pattern, but rather my highly processed diet that I had eaten for >20 years prior. If you're fat but healthy I believe this will work for you.
Lel, 2,5k, I eat at 2,8k/day and cannot gain weight.
>1.5 kilograms of potatoes
They're superior to rice and pasta. You could literally live off nothing but potatoes and milk and be healthier than the majority of Americans... If you add some greens then it's even better...
Back when I first started losing weight in 2014, I followed CICO and IIFYM heavily. My usual diet consisted of 1500 calories worth of fries/burgers/whatever the fuck I wanted, and eventually I stopped counting any macro that wasn't protein.
I still lost 100lbs in 8-9 months, despite eating carbs and sugars and terrible shit.
This is anecdotal evidence and just my own experience though, so take it with a grain of salt.
whats the name of this site/app please
...
Cronometer
certain macros are less efficient to metabolise, 100 calories of fibre gives you less overall calories than 100 calories of sugar
Wrong Calorie bud
I literally lost 15 pounds eating nothing but cereal the past summer
I didn't want to post but you are NOT TROLLING YOU ARE ACTUALLY THIS STUPID.
Dude, please shut the fuck up. How arrogant can you be to post advice when you are this fucking stupid.
A pubmed search takes 5 seconds...
Reading the most cited abstracts takes 5 minutes...
You couldn't do that because you are illiterate and yet you know how to type a conceited post. If there was any justice in this world you would be beaten in the street like a dog for your pride.
It's a pasta my dude. You just got beaned.
I always felt like what you eat could change the way your metabolism works because you produce different hormones or something. Couldn't that mean that you actually have a different TDEE depending on your diet which means CICO could still be true while different diets could still work?
Nothing of this is researched so please tell me where I'm wrong.
I think "caloric deficit" and "food energy" should be distinguished because nutrient absorption is extremely complicated. Bomb calorimetry measurements and the Atwater system (where the 4/4/9 carb/protein/fat comes from) are not reliable for determining food energy usable by the human body. One takeaway though is that fat catabolism is directly linked to protein consumption under ketosis (rather than purely "more fat is better").
Personally I prefer to eat higher carb when not cutting because I think that cutting certain foods out of your diet completely leads to binge/purge cycles (as a teen I fucked this up pretty bad), and also low carb tends to make performance suffer. But for cutting, if you have very good self control, low carb is pretty good (anecdotally my bloodwork improves a bit under low carb), otherwise I would go with mediated carb diet. Speed is one thing but compliance is another.
Your body can actually make parts of you out of protein. The second option is obviously better.
I didn't say anything about gaining weight...
I get that, but having a variety of grains and vegetables would yield more protein than that. You should probably limit it to a potato per day.
>started CICO a month ago
>Lost 10 pounds
bet that makes you mad, huh trolls?
I don't eat potatos, also no pasta. I would say 90% of my carbs intake is from rice and the other 10% from porridge...and sips, my guilty pleasure.
Kek
Except this is wrong. Obviously the main component in weight loss is calories but you are going to feel like complete and total shit for various reasons if you go 90% carbs vs 90% fat.
Just look up the benefits of keto and fasting
God I'm hitting myself for not being able to find the video on this but they actually did a test with this.
They put people on a very low calorie diet, like 900-1200 calories. One ate nothing but protein while the other ate nothing but protein. Not very surprisingly the people eating almost all carbs felt like they were near dying, starving at all times and loosing large amounts of muscle.
On the flip side the protein only dieters were mainly losing fat while suffering very low hunger pains and only minor fatigue.
I can already here you calling bullshit before you respond so I'm working right now and finding the source. If I recall it was rather well backed on WHY that was happening.
Lol, read about gut flora before you start saying shit and the fatties are fucking delusional. It is their problem, not some meme-faggotry-level genetics.
I think you need to do some research. Gut bacteria isn't affected by low carb diets.
How do you actually not feel like shit on 900-1200 calories? Maybe it's because my bf% is coming to equilibrium (about 15% but I'd like about 10 or so) and ran PSMF last month for about 5 weeks and then some (150g protein, all steamed chicken/lean fish with turnip greens/spinach) and I couldn't fucking do it without refeeding every 2 weeks. That being said I did lose almost 10kg (def some from water weight) and I never got hungry, but I didn't notice my cardiovascular performance suffer too much afterwards.
You dumb? It is affected by high-carbs diet. Read my fucking post. I said this - fatties are dumdums, because they think 'carbs good', whereas carbs are bad(not bad-bad, overindulging in them is bad), because they fucking change your gut flora so you crave more and more, ergo fatties should learn...and you should fucking train your reading comprehension. I have never said, what you implied yet you responded to me, calling bullshit.
I've done it myself from around 25% bodyfat all the way down to 9% bodyfat and I was able to feel good throughout the entire thing with doing only the prescribed "cheat meals" and refeeds that lyle suggests.
That being said I a lot of spinach and kale throughout the whole thing and was taking a decent amount of vitamins to make sure all of my micros were being hit. I have a rather physical job on top of it.
I did start doing an EC stack was I got to around 19% bodyfat and I felt better than when I was bulking while on that shit.
Why are you calling me out if you are agreeing with me then?
>brainlet
calling people out on reading comprehension when he has none, fucking classic.
you started this by quoting me and saying I am wrong
These are mine:
So, pretty please with fucking sugar on top, show me where I am wrong or just stop arguing what has already been proven in countless research, dipshit
>not bulking with uranium
Fucking smoothskins, when will they learn
Yah what you said is wrong.
Eating 90% carbs will cause hormonal problems that will greatly interfere with weight loss.
It won't affect 1%, it will affect most people who don't get enough fat in their diet.
Ah. How long did you run the PSMF course for? How did you do your Ephedra? I supplement vitamins/minerals as well as O3 oils via highly concentrated EPA/DHA fish oil but I suppose I may need longer to adjust for it. It may be because of sleep though.