What should I expect from a low carb diet?



In article <[email protected]>, Bob Garrison wrote:
>

> A low carb diet for a runner sounds dumb!

"sounds dumb" is not much of a criticism.

How many grams of carbs a day do you need to finish a single 5 mile training run ? It doesn't
exactly require a "tour de france" diet, or a "comrades carbo load". My numbers say that you don't
need anything close to 300gm carbs a day to do this. In fact you could probably get by on about
half of that.

Most people who are trying to drop a substantial amount of weight will probably be doing somewhat
less than 35 miles per week, so for these people, diet is probably a higher priority than
performance nutrition.

For anyone doing more than 35 miles per week, the level of activity alone should be sufficient to
control weight.

> Why not stay with 60:20:20 and eat smaller portions?

Well for starters, your protein needs don't get any smaller just because you go on a diet. For most
people, that protein will come with some fat. Also, taking in smaller portions is not practical --
for most people, a shift to food that is less dense in macronutrients is important. Foods like
salads or low calorie vegetables are an excellent choice, but these are really much more palatable
if you're not trying to stay on a "low fat" diet.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/
 
In article <[email protected]>, Malcolm Ferguson wrote:
> Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>
>>There is a lot of evidence that it is an effective way to control weight.
>>
> There's a lot of evidence missing about the long term effects of these starvation diets.

Low carb != "starvation". It doesn't even imply ketosis.

>>cut back on calories and lose fat, you either need low fat, low carb, or a bit of both.
>>
> Or how about smaller portion sizes?

Addressed in other post.

> I find sufficient fat in a meal makes it more filling (i.e. smaller portion will do) and leaves me
> feeling satisified for longer. The

Exactly. This is why it's a bad idea to try too hard to reduce the amount of fat in ones diet. 20%
total calories works out to 45gm fat. You can't go much lower than that without a lot of effort.
Even female fitness contestants who eat controlled portions of chicken breasts, etc take in about
20gm fat each day.

If someone is basically pigging out on high fat food, then simply stopping the pigout will already
produce results. However, if you're already on a 60:20:20 diet with 2000 calories, there's not much
space to move anymore.

> proper answer is of course to eat a balanced diet coupled with a healthy lifestyle (ie. sufficient
> exercise) and eating small enough portions that calories-in is in perspective with calories-out.

Yes, and as you've pointed out, a sufficient amount of fat is needed to "balance" a diet, and this
is all the more critical with small portions.

The bottom line is that most people can cut out some high GI carbs without getting hungry all the
time (there's not much reason IMO for an active person to throw away high fiber low GI carb foods),
but it's much harder to do the same with fat and protein.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/
 
Donovan Rebbechi <[email protected]> wrote:

> What happens if you stop eating carbs ? Do you just drop dead or something ?

You'd probably drop dead a whole lot sooner :p

--
Nova Scotia, Canada
 
Donovan Rebbechi <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> This is why it's a bad idea to try too hard to reduce the amount of fat in ones diet. 20% total
> calories works out to 45gm fat. You can't go much lower than that without a lot of effort. Even
> female fitness contestants who eat controlled portions of chicken breasts, etc take in about 20gm
> fat each day.

I must be the exception to the rule. For the past six months I've been averaging 1900 calories, 37
grams fat (17%), 293 grams carbohydrates (61%), 104 grams protein (.6 * body weight). However, now
that I've passed my weight goals, I'm concentrating more on nutrition for running. I've increased
my protein intake to 140 grams per day (.8 * body weight) and still managed to keep the fat to 38
grams per day.

I would not say that I'm trying hard to reduce the fat. I am pretty much eating what I want to eat
just not as many calories. But I have been making an extra effort to up the protein amount by adding
2 scoops of whey protein (thanks for the tip Donovan) , which adds an additional 44 grams of protein
with only 260 calories and 4 grams of fat.

-Phil
 
"Bob Garrison" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "SwStudio" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > "Bob Garrison" <[email protected]> wrote in message >
> > > "Norm" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> > > > How will this affect my running. I currently run about 40 minutes
> every
> > > > other day and do weights the other days. Will the low carb diet
> > adversely
> > > > affect my energy level?
> > > >
> > > > Norm
> > > >
> > >
> > > A better question is why do you want to be on a low carb diet?
> >
> >
> > Because when done sensibly (not extreme), it is a way of losing weight. If done in conjunction
> > with exercise and other changes it works for many people.
> >
> > cheers,
> > --
> > David (in Hamilton, ON) www.allfalldown.org
> >
>
> See my answer to Donovan.
>
>

Re-read my post. Get a dictionary and look up the words "sensibly", "other", "changes", and
particularly the three words "conjunction", "with", and "exercise".

After you've done that, come back and explain where it appeared in any way, shape, or form that I
was suggesting a low-carb diet is a "magic" (your word) way to lose weight. I know that, Bob. We all
know that the bottom line is calories in/calories out. It's been discussed ad nauseum around here.

cheers,
--
David (in Hamilton, ON) www.allfalldown.org
 
Possibly, I would say probably over time. Carbs are the fuel for all exercise to some extent
if not all.

--
Sam, glad to be back after a bit of a hiatus. "Norm" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> How will this affect my running. I currently run about 40 minutes every other day and do weights
> the other days. Will the low carb diet adversely affect my energy level?
>
> Norm
 
"David" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Norm" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Will the low carb diet adversely affect my energy level?
>
> Yes. Carb's are synonymous with energy. Protein is not a source of energy.
>
Not exactly true. Protein does undergo oxidative processes. The contribution is small, 5 to 15%
depending on the intensity and duration of the exercise and glycogen status.

> --
> Nova Scotia, Canada
 
--
Sam, glad to be back after a bit of a hiatus. "Lyndon" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Norm,
>
> >"Donovan Rebbechi" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> >> In article <[email protected]>, Norm wrote:
> >> > How will this affect my running. I currently run about 40 minutes
every
> >> > other day and do weights the other days. Will the low carb diet
> >adversely
> >> > affect my energy level?
> >>
> >> Depends on what you mean by "low carb". How many grams of carbs do you
> >take
> >> each day ?
> >>
> >> It might be a good idea to take some carbs just before your run, or to
put
> >it
> >> another way, consolidate your daily carbs into one meal and run shortly
> >after
> >> that meal (for example, you could have 50gm of carbs or so in 1 meal,
and
> >> run an hour or so after that)
> >>
> >> FWIW, Lyle McDonald has written a few books (Ultimate Diet is the
latest)
> >on
> >> low carb diets that are appropriate for people on demanding exercise
> >programs.
> >> One of the main issues is making glycogen available for exercise, yet
> >keeping
> >> it low the rest of the time. You could post questions about these
books
> >on
> >> misc.fitness.weights.
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> --
> >> Donovan Rebbechi http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/
> >
> >I would guess I'm taking in between 50 and 100 gms of carbs spread out
over
> >the day. I'll check out the books and the NG. Thanks.
> >
> Oh, yeah, the ultimate diet food. FAT!
>
> Look, an endurance athlete needs 6-10g/kg per day of carbs to avoid
glycogen
> depletion. If you do get depletion, you need about 5g/kg over the next
4-6
> hours just to get back to normal. This the ACSM recommendation, not from
some
> wacko who is dead.
>
> At my high school, there are a bunch of hot girls who run cross country
simply
> to get VERY skinny; They don't give a damn about winning anything except
maybe
> a bikini contest. To my knowledge, none is doing anything crazy like
Atkins.
> Before you go off and kill yourself with all that fat, why don't you go
look at
> a cross country or track practice at your local high school and look at
their
> bodies. If you don't know how, I've got a picture for you:
>
> http://www.trackwest.org/images/teampic.jpg
>
> Just go to a REAL diet expert (a registered dietician) to help set up a program, use some COMMON
> SENSE, and run more.
>
> Name ONE exercise physiologist (go ask Sam) or ONE name running coach that recommends the
> Atkins ****.
>
In terms of performance, I see nothing in Atkins that would be beneficial to an athlete. One
exercise physiologist's opinion...

> Lyndon
>
> "Speed Kills...It kills those that don't have it!" --US Olympic Track
Coach
> Brooks Johnson
 
--
Sam, glad to be back after a bit of a hiatus. "Doug Freese" <[email protected]> wrote in
message news:[email protected]...
>
>
> Lyndon wrote:
>
> If you don't know how, I've got a picture for you:
> >
> > http://www.trackwest.org/images/teampic.jpg
>
> And I thought you prefered track because you liked to run fast. You're a wolf in sheep's clothing,
> Lyndon. I'm thinking about going back to the track for some, er, "fast stuff." ;)
>
> How come the guys are in the front? Is there a requirement for the girls to register a 8.56547 on
> the fox scale to get on the team?

WOW!!! I would think every skinny guy in school would want to be on this team!

>
>
> --
> Doug Freese "Caveat Lector" [email protected]
 
--
Sam, glad to be back after a bit of a hiatus. "Bob Garrison" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Donovan Rebbechi" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> > In article <[email protected]>, Bob Garrison wrote:
> > >
> > > "Norm" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> > >> How will this affect my running. I currently run about 40 minutes
> every
> > >> other day and do weights the other days. Will the low carb diet
> adversely
> > >> affect my energy level?
> > >
> > > A better question is why do you want to be on a low carb diet?
> >
> > I think it's safe to assume that the answer has something to do with
> weight
> > control. Since carbs make up most of our diet (in terms of calories),
they
> are
> > an obvious target for anyone hoping to cut calories.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > --
> > Donovan Rebbechi http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/
>
> Sure, but the bottom line for weight control (I assume we are talking
about
> weight reduction) is eating fewer calories than we burn. There is nothing magical about low carb.
> You can have 100% of your calories coming from low carb and still gain weight.
>
In the study from Washington U on the various diets, one factor in the low carb diets is that they
people on it tended to take in less energy on those diets. I suspect that people on these diets
get satiated quickly and thus do not eat as much as others. Still an energy balance (or imbalance
issue really)...
 
--
Sam, glad to be back after a bit of a hiatus. "Donovan Rebbechi" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>, Bob Garrison wrote:
>
> > Sure, but the bottom line for weight control (I assume we are talking
about
> > weight reduction) is eating fewer calories than we burn.
>
> Yes, and a low carb diet is one way to achieve that end (of consuming
further
> calories). Indeed, it's quite an effective way, according to most research
on
> the topic.
>
> Suppose you start with a 2000 calorie/day diet. If the macronutrient ratio
is
> a 60:20:20, then you have about 45gm fat, 270gm carb, and 90gm of protein. Which one is easier to
> cut back on ?
How about cutting back 20 g CHO and 10 g Protein (120 kcals). Also, when you diet, there is
a larger loss of lean mass than when one exercises. So if (when) you go off the diet, you
have a lower metabolic rate. That is bad news. I would prefer someone add more exercise or
add some intensity to lose fat and maintain, if not increase, lean mass. To me, this is the
best way although a small decrease in energy intake will speed up this process. I would also
caution people not to decrease the intake if it compromises recovery and glycogen stores.

>
> > There is nothing magical about low carb.
>
> There is a lot of evidence that it is an effective way to control weight.
To
> cut back on calories and lose fat, you either need low fat, low carb, or a
bit
> of both. The problem with going for "low fat" is that you end up on a diet
of
> food that tastes like cardboard very quickly. On the other hand, it is
quite
> easy to cut back substantially on carbs, by elimintating
macronutrient-dense
> carb foods.

You also can lose some micronutrients that you might want to have around.
>
> Cheers,
> --
> Donovan Rebbechi http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/
 
"Donovan Rebbechi" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>, Bob Garrison wrote:
> >
> > "Norm" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> >> How will this affect my running. I currently run about 40 minutes
every
> >> other day and do weights the other days. Will the low carb diet
adversely
> >> affect my energy level?
> >
> > A better question is why do you want to be on a low carb diet?
>
> I think it's safe to assume that the answer has something to do with
weight
> control. Since carbs make up most of our diet (in terms of calories), they
are
> an obvious target for anyone hoping to cut calories.
>
> Cheers,
> --
> Donovan Rebbechi http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/

BINGO! I would like to drop about 5 pounds. I have increased my activity but need a little something
more. But I don't want to do something that will decrease my energy level. The last thing I want is
to be tired all the time or not be able to finish my runs.

Norm
 
"Malcolm Ferguson" <Malcolm_Ferguson@NO_SPAM_PLEASEyahoo.com> wrote in
message news:[email protected]...
> Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>
> >There is a lot of evidence that it is an effective way to control weight.
> >
> There's a lot of evidence missing about the long term effects of these starvation diets.
>
> > To cut back on calories and lose fat, you either need low fat, low carb, or
a bit
> >of both.
> >
> Or how about smaller portion sizes? People eat too much. And they don't seem to recognise the
> effects of grazing.
>
> > The problem with going for "low fat" is that you end up on a diet of food that tastes like
> > cardboard very quickly.
> >
>
> I find sufficient fat in a meal makes it more filling (i.e. smaller portion will do) and leaves me
> feeling satisified for longer. The proper answer is of course to eat a balanced diet coupled with
> a healthy lifestyle (ie. sufficient exercise) and eating small enough portions that calories-in is
> in perspective with calories-out.
>
> Cheers, Malc
>

I'm doing LOW carb not NO CARB. I still eat a balanced diet. I still use sugar in my decaf and drink
a Sprite now and then. I just cut back on unnecessary calories..... I hope.

Norm
 
David wrote:

> [email protected] (Miss Anne Thrope) wrote:
>
>
>>Expect to be hungry.
>
>
> Lord knows why I'm responding to High_Colonic... but you should actually expect the opposite.
> Refined carbs cause the sugar rush/crash cycle that sends 'false' hunger signals to your brain...

Maybe in obese couch potato slugs whose total exercise is using the remote TV control. For those
that consistently exercise this alleged rise with refined carbs is Atkins hype. This old, it's fine
to have the double whopper or two but throw away the evil bread.

which is why you want to
> reach for fiber-rich carbs. Also, protein is a good appetite supressant.

It's better for you in general but not because of the GI kaka.

Now some of the fast food places are making burgers and serving them without bread under this
notion. I'll just bet once all the fast food places stop using bread the obesity trend in the US
will melt away.

--
Doug Freese "Caveat Lector" [email protected]
 
"Sam" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Not exactly true. Protein does undergo oxidative processes. The contribution is small, 5 to 15%
> depending on the intensity and duration of the exercise and glycogen status.

That's pretty interesting. I didn't know that. Thanks for the info Sam.

--
Nova Scotia, Canada
 
David wrote:

> Donovan Rebbechi <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>What happens if you stop eating carbs ? Do you just drop dead or something ?
>
>
> You'd probably drop dead a whole lot sooner :p

And feel a whole like shittier while you're dying. ;)

--
Doug Freese "Caveat Lector" [email protected]
 
Donovan Rebbechi wrote:

> In article <[email protected]>, Malcolm Ferguson wrote:
>
>>Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>>
>>
>>>There is a lot of evidence that it is an effective way to control weight.
>>>
>>
>>There's a lot of evidence missing about the long term effects of these starvation diets.
>
>
> Low carb != "starvation". It doesn't even imply ketosis.

Once anyone starts applying adjectives like low or high to carbs, fats, or protein this invisible
hand should grab people by their underwear and give someone a big weggie. First off the term "low"
is meaningless unless it is totally qualified. If not fully qualified it sadly implies Atkins' mass
of opaque myth and ketosis etc etc.

If eating less, whatever the hell that means, carbs works to get the tonage off, fine. As
long as one's running is not affected by a poor carbo intake. We can play with proportions
until we are blue.

If we can only get those Kenyans off their high carb diets, lower their GI, lose some weight they
might be able to compete. And those Copper Canyon Mexican folks that run all day and night on only
carbs. Maybe it's good thing they can't read.

In my not so humble opinion low carbs as defined by atkins for runners is not bright. I'll go out on
a further limb and say the Sear's 40/30/30 is too low.

--
Doug Freese "Caveat Lector" [email protected]
 
In article <[email protected]>, Sam wrote:

Sam, could you not put your sig at the top ???? My newsreader trims your entire post when you do
that. Or if you must put it at the top, don't use the usual two dashes followed by whitespace which
the newsreader interprets as the start of a sig.

> > Suppose you start with a 2000 calorie/day diet. If the macronutrient ratio is a 60:20:20, then
> > you have about 45gm fat, 270gm carb, and 90gm of protein. Which one is easier to cut back on ?
>
> How about cutting back 20 g CHO and 10 g Protein (120 kcals). Also,

Cutting back on protein is counterproductive if it results in negative nitrogen balance.

> when you diet, there is a larger loss of lean mass than when one exercises.

Even more so if you have inadequate protein.

> So if (when) you go off the diet, you have a lower metabolic rate. That is bad news. I
> would prefer someone add more exercise or add some intensity to lose fat and maintain, if
> not

Yes, this is a great idea, but there's a limitation on how much exercise one can add. If weight
control is the primary goal, I'd actually suggest resistance training + some form of non-impact
cardio (not running, maybe elliptical or anything else that burns a lot of calories).

> [losing micronutrients by cutting back on macronutrient dense food]

I simply don't buy this -- potatos, pasta, rice, sugar, flour ... which of these are rich in
micronutrients ?

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom Back