keto diet

[Hraklea]

1000 is a little too extreme, you are going to straight up stall out your metabolism. I wouldn't go over 500.

Thanks for the advice, but I wasn't promoting my diet. I was just pointing out that Afrospinach's idea that "your metabolism adapts to a calorie deficit in two weeks" is wrong.

It still boils down to that equation, but most people who try and use it don't actually have the data to apply it, so attacking keto users for approaching the same goal from a different direction is pretty nonsensical.

Actually, it was Osmeric who was attacking counting calories as "it was proved that it doesn't work" (yet he refused to explain what that means when I asked).

[Osmeric]

Actually, it was Osmeric who was attacking counting calories as "it was proved that it doesn't work" (yet he refused to explain what that means when I asked).

I explained exactly what I meant. Please don't be a lying liar, mkay?

"Doesn't work" in the sense of "fails to lead to sustained weight reduction in randomized clinical trials". It fails as a treatment for obesity.

Now, this failure may be because people can't stick with the program, but that's no excuse. A treatment that demands behavioral changes is a failure if those behavioral changes cannot be sustained.

[Deleted]

Make sure you are drinking a lot of water and keeping your sodium up.

All good I think, salting the food and drinking excessive amounts of water.

I'm concerned my fat intake isn't high enough so padding it out with pure peanut butter.

Strangely in the mood for cereal, specifically Lucky Charms.

[Hraklea]

I explained exactly what I meant. Please don't be a lying liar, mkay?

No, you didn't. You kept begging for the question, and when I did ask the obvious (post #187), you simply ignored me.

Now, this failure may be because people can't stick with the program, but that's no excuse.

So.... your so-called proof has a flaw, and you think calling it an "excuse" is an argument. I can't argue with that.

Just to be clear: counting calories doesn't mean "eat any crap you want as long as it fits your caloric deficit". It means "eat healthy food, but don't overeat it".

[Deleted]

Ok so I'm at the end of 4th day now and I think I have done something wrong since I'm feeling lethargic/lightheaded/dizzy and even slight exercise makes my heart pump like crazy. Checked on the Reddit FAQ and I'm guessing that I'm not getting enough salts and water. Maybe I should really try drinking bouillon or broth even though I don't think I will like it.

[Tdub90]

All good I think, salting the food and drinking excessive amounts of water.

I'm concerned my fat intake isn't high enough so padding it out with pure peanut butter.

Strangely in the mood for cereal, specifically Lucky Charms.

Careful of the carb content in peanut butter!

[belfpala]

Careful of the carb content in peanut butter!

Real peanut butter is just peanuts, maybe some salt. Check the labels.

[Tdub90]

Real peanut butter is just peanuts, maybe some salt. Check the labels.

The general idea though is that peanuts should not be comsumed over almonds and other nuts (peanuts are legumes and not nuts). Peanuts have been shown to be near the worst choice when other options are available.

http://nutritiondata.self.com/facts/...2?quantity=5.0

I'm just saying there are better options. Do some looking around for research about legumes.

[Deleted]

damn

well that's my only slip up so far

[Osmeric]

No, you didn't. You kept begging for the question, and when I did ask the obvious (post #187), you simply ignored me. .

Yes, I did. I said calorie counting in randomized clinical trials fails to lead to sustained weight loss.

How many more times do I have to type that before you read for comprehension?

Your question #187 was different: asking me to explain why that scientific fact is true. That's a DIFFERENT question.

So.... your so-called proof has a flaw, and you think calling it an "excuse" is an argument. I can't argue with that.

No, I'm pointing out that an approach that fails in a clinical setting, for whatever reason, is still a failure, even if you want to blame the patients for the failure. The willingness of patients to go along with the demands of a treatment regimen is a boundary condition medicine has to work within.

[belfpala]

The general idea though is that peanuts should not be comsumed over almonds and other nuts (peanuts are legumes and not nuts). Peanuts have been shown to be near the worst choice when other options are available.

http://nutritiondata.self.com/facts/...2?quantity=5.0

I'm just saying there are better options. Do some looking around for research about legumes.

Ahh, I thought you were talking about Jiffy or something, which obviously has a lot of sugar. The real nuts also have carbs, but you're right, they have more nutrients.

[Tdub90]

Ahh, I thought you were talking about Jiffy or something, which obviously has a lot of sugar. The real nuts also have carbs, but you're right, they have more nutrients.

When I was on Keto, I just avoided nuts all together just because of the carbs they have. I don't need nut butter so I didn't miss it.

[Deleted]

Going on 1600 ish calories, mainly proteine (On a daily basis i eat 1 banana, 1 mineola, 1 can of tuna, 1 whey shake, veggies and chicken/fish for diner, cottage cheese with some blue and raspberrys.) ive been doing this for a month now, in combination with 20 mins of interval cardio and 3 compound exercises (pullups, deadlift, bench) ive gained in power and lost 4kg in 3 weeks. The food gets boring as fuck and i always have this hungry feeling, but its all worth it for tyhe 6 pack.

[Tdub90]

Going on 1600 ish calories, mainly proteine (On a daily basis i eat 1 banana, 1 mineola, 1 can of tuna, 1 whey shake, veggies and chicken/fish for diner, cottage cheese with some blue and raspberrys.) ive been doing this for a month now, in combination with 20 mins of interval cardio and 3 compound exercises (pullups, deadlift, bench) ive gained in power and lost 4kg in 3 weeks. The food gets boring as fuck and i always have this hungry feeling, but its all worth it for tyhe 6 pack.

What do your carbs look like? Just from a glance It looks like you'd be over 30g. Protein shakes sometimes have a decent amount of carbs, bananas do, the veggies depending on the type, the berries.

[Deleted]

What do your carbs look like? Just from a glance It looks like you'd be over 30g. Protein shakes sometimes have a decent amount of carbs, bananas do, the veggies depending on the type, the berries.

well over 50, though keeping below 100. (banana and mineola count for 40, shake is on 16g (including milk). Veggies count for 10, blue and raspberrys for 8 ish. On weekends i go well over it ( have a cheatday / refeed ).

Edit: Might actually be lower than that. 5.6 on the blueberry/rasp.. fuck now i wanna know. Brb.
Milk with shake is on 12. 30 ish proteine.
500ml cottage cheese with berries is 27.6. 60 ish proteine.
tuna is 0,1 25 ish proteine.
So that leaves the veggies 5 prot and chicken 30 prot (around 10), banana 20 2 prot ish and mineola 17 1 prot

So thats 85 carb
150 ish prot

[PizzaSHARK]

Counting calories has been shown in randomized trials to not work. It does not lead to sustained weight loss.

Source, please. It can be demonstrably proven that counting calories does lead to weight loss (or weight gain.)

So thats 85 carb
150 ish prot

That's WAY too high if you actually want to enter ketosis. If you're doing low-carb that's one thing, but if you're actually trying to do keto, 85g is way, way too high. Fruit and milk will have to be almost completely cut out of your diet - milk has a ton of sugar in it (hence, carbs), and most fruit (such as bananas, apples, oranges, etc) also have a ton of sugar without much fiber to compensate. Berries tend to have more fiber, so they're a little easier to fit into a keto diet.

1000 is a little too extreme, you are going to straight up stall out your metabolism. I wouldn't go over 500.

Complete bunk. You can't "stall out" your metabolism, it doesn't work like that.

[Endus]

Source, please. It can be demonstrably proven that counting calories does lead to weight loss (or weight gain.)

I suspect the studies he's referring to looked at actual dieters, and their actual success rates.

It isn't that caloric restriction "doesn't work", it's that caloric restriction is;

1> More complicated than people think (they don't account for BMR or the like, and don't monitor themselves properly)
2> Really tough on the willpower, which is pretty terrible if the reason you're overweight in the first place is lack of willpower to restrict your eating habits.

Consider AA. People talk about how ineffective it is, on an overall scale; while there is the occasional success story, many more fall back into drinking. Now, consider you're addicted to food. You can't even do an AA-type program, because the core of those systems is never touching alcohol again. You can't just give up food.

Caloric restriction as a diet is like trying to stop being an alcoholic by just drinking a drink or two a night. There's a reason AA doesn't let you do that.

[PizzaSHARK]

Caloric restriction as a diet is like trying to stop being an alcoholic by just drinking a drink or two a night. There's a reason AA doesn't let you do that.

Which is why diets like keto, paleo, IF, etc all exist - they're just different ways of accomplishing the same goal. It's the same reason exercise routines exist - you let someone else do all the heavy thinking and you just follow along with what they've come up with.

But saying it's a willpower thing and saying it doesn't work are two entirely different things. One is mostly correct, and the other is demonstrably false.

[Sussex]

Which is why diets like keto, paleo, IF, etc all exist - they're just different ways of accomplishing the same goal. It's the same reason exercise routines exist - you let someone else do all the heavy thinking and you just follow along with what they've come up with.

But saying it's a willpower thing and saying it doesn't work are two entirely different things. One is mostly correct, and the other is demonstrably false.

No, they exist because people are lazy and don't want to hear the truth and would rather be told "hey eat until you're full but just don't eat X"

Why do you think people like Mike "the fraud" Chang are so successful on youtube? Because people want to be sold bullshit, they want instant/fast results without effort or thinking.

Don't get me wrong, years ago when I was as ignorant as the general population when it came to proper nutrition I was doing all those retarded diets and meal plans. Discovering IIFYM/calorie counting opened my eyes and it's the only style of dieting that has let me control my body-composition at will where as all the other diets were completely random because I had no idea how many total calories or the macro breakdown of what calories I was putting into my body.

The fact is counting macros/calories is 100% fact and backed by hundreds of years of scientific research and is the form of portion control used by the ENTIRE WORLD....where as no carb diets are unsubstantiated bro science that only quacks in the medical/nutritional/exercise industry follow.

Just because most people don't count calories or don't know how to properly count calories or blatantly under-report how many calories they eat in studies (which has been proven) doesn't mean it doesn't work. Also - the thermic effect of calories are already taken into account...hence why carbs/protein are 4 cals per gram and fat is 9 cals per gram.

[Endus]

Nwhere as no carb diets are unsubstantiated bro science that only quacks in the medical/nutritional/exercise industry follow.

That's a lie. Ketosis-based methods are well-recognized in the medical field. It's a highly documented and well-understood metabolic state.