fat vs fat

[cygirl]

I would really like some comments on the whole fat concern.I am acually reading that there is a new diet out there that incourages people to eat great amounts of fat.
Can this really be true.I cant believe that people would even be able to eat this way......eggs dripping in lard.Auggggg
Would we feed our children this way?
They say that this is the new way to stay healthy and fit.
My opinion is.....there is always one nutty doc in the crowd. :daze:

[Kestrel]

Perhaps it would help if you expanded your reading beyond Atkins. There is already a thread on the diet you're questioning in the Media section. As mentioned in that section, the two oldest proponents of low-carb have always recommended high-fat, not high-protein, and both diets have been around for decades.

[cygirl]

I have read tons of things on different diets but i just just wondering how people felt about this.
I would like to know if anyone out there is going to stay on one of these diets for life.....
If you should decide to stick to it are there really no health concerns.

No where does it say 100% so just looking for feed back.

[Kestrel]

I've been on such a diet for years. And what do you mean by 100%?? 100% of what?

[cygirl]

if you have been on this diet for years i would be interested to see your stats.

100% that is is healthy

[Kestrel]

Not sure what you mean by stats. I eat low-carb/high fat for health benefits, not to lose weight, as I have none to lose. I'm 56, and quite positive that low-carb/high-fat is of benefit to me. I have no energy problems, no health problems, and am physically active. All pretty boring, I guess...

[LukeA]

I eat very high fat. I add butter to everything, drizzle olive and coconut oils on all sorts of things, cook everything in ghee and other oils such as organic canola and safflower oils. I use lots of cream, and high fat cheeses, and plenty of nuts nearly every day. I feel a thousand times better than before, and my results speak for themself.

[cygirl]

If you didnt need to lose what was the health benefit.

I am going to do some more reading n this subject but has anyone else been on this diet that is out there.
If not for weight why would you eat this way.

[kathy555]

CY Girl, If you are concerned about fat, then try eating food with the healthy types of fat, like olive oil, avacados, etc. You may want to read up about polyunsaturated fats vs saturated fats. One health benefit of the high protein diet is that you are avoiding a lot of the processed foods which contain chemicals and cancer causing preservatives. Just my two cents. Kathy555

[LukeA]

If you didnt need to lose what was the health benefit.

I am going to do some more reading n this subject but has anyone else been on this diet that is out there.
If not for weight why would you eat this way.

I know you werent addressing me, but I just had to chime in. ;)

High fat, low carb is a healthy way of eating, and just because you arent overweight has no bearing on whether you should eat that way or not.

I personally dont follow a specific plan, however I do eat low carb, very high fat (no hydrogenated or rancid fats though), and i started eating this way to improve my health in general. Not just to lose weight. Nearly all of my health problems have either improved loads, or gone away entirely. Also since it is a healthy way to eat it can prevent many health problems from occuring in the first place.

[Lisa N]

I would really like some comments on the whole fat concern.I am acually reading that there is a new diet out there that incourages people to eat great amounts of fat.
Can this really be true.I cant believe that people would even be able to eat this way......eggs dripping in lard.Auggggg
Would we feed our children this way?
They say that this is the new way to stay healthy and fit.
My opinion is.....there is always one nutty doc in the crowd. :daze:

Cygirl, can you be more specific, please? Which diet specifically are you referring to? Keckwick? Fat fast? Neither of those were intended to be a long term WOE.
While high fat (no transfats) paired with low carbs shouldn't pose a problem, high fat paired with high carbs, especially highly refined carbs poses a great health risk.
Would I feed my kids eggs dripping in lard? Probably not. But I would feed them eggs fried in butter (and frequently do). ;)

[Rosebud]

I am going to do some more reading n this subject
You could start here: The Skinny on Fats. (http://www.westonaprice.org/knowyourfats/skinny.html)

Rosebud:rose:

[cygirl]

thanx Rosebud.! :wave:

I quess the real debate is how much fat is ok.
I couldnt live on high fats,
--6 eggs cooked in lard etc.

[TBoneMitch]

Cygirl: you don't know for sure until you've tried it!

[cygirl]

Cygirl: you don't know for sure until you've tried it!

If what you are saying is i will like it i can tell you i wont.Thats just me.

I dont know anyone that would eat this for a health benifit nor have i heard of a doc telling a sick unhealthy person to eat this way.

Nothing i have read the last while tells me this is good.

Tell me what health concerns this has cleared up for you.

Sorry :)

[322432]

You people who can't live on fat make the medical profession rich!!

[cygirl]

You people who can't live on fat make the medical profession rich!!


can you tell me what you mean by this.

[TBoneMitch]

Cygirl: I've cleared serious acne problems, seasonal allergy problems, IBS (irritable bowel sydrome), eczema, overweight (lost about 45 pounds of fat).

Gained much more endurance for exercise, more energy during the day, less need for sleep, much less hunger (eat 1-3 times a day, usually 2), which means more free time, saved quite a bit of money too (since lard, bacon, eggs, beef fat, coconut oil, natural sausages, are cheap).

So much for my case, but I bet many others could tell you about the same thing.
If you have never read anything that tells you this type of diet is healthy, keep reading!
I could name you many doctors who put many sick persons on this type of diet.

But if you are not willing to pursue this discussion any further, I will let it rest.

[cygirl]

I am so very glad it works for you!! :thup:

[MeBLady]

If what you are saying is i will like it i can tell you i wont.Thats just me.

I dont know anyone that would eat this for a health benifit nor have i heard of a doc telling a sick unhealthy person to eat this way.

Nothing i have read the last while tells me this is good.

Tell me what health concerns this has cleared up for you.

Sorry :)

I know someone who was an unhealthy, sick person whose series of docs told him to eat "this way". My father, who had a series of major strokes brought on by undiagnosed diabetes in March of 2004.

Docs put him on LC. A year later, he has recovered from his strokes with minimal disability, completely medication free -- no plavax (blood thinner), no high bp med, diabetes controlled completely by his diet, and is 100 pounds lighter.

This WOE saved his life.

Prior to this WOE for myself, I had coughing attacks (I smoke), chest pains, extreme fatique, back aches, diarhea, heartburn, sleep apnea, and borderline high BP....on a daily basis. Within ONE WEEK of this WOE, ALL of these symptoms disappeared, and 2 1/2 months later, I am also 37 pounds lighter.

This WOE also saved MY life.

[Abd]

If what you are saying is i will like it i can tell you i wont.Thats just me.

I dont know anyone that would eat this for a health benifit nor have i heard of a doc telling a sick unhealthy person to eat this way.

Nothing i have read the last while tells me this is good.

Tell me what health concerns this has cleared up for you.

Sorry :)

Actually, what was said that you won't know until you try it. However, as to myself, eggs dripping with lard is not only not appealing, I'm a Muslim.... butter, however, is another story. I'd ask "cygirl" what foods she *does* like. Not the foods that she thinks or imagines are good for her, but the ones she enjoys eating. If she eats bread, does she like butter on it? Does she eat meat?

I can say that I avoided the fat in meat for years, sneaking a bite here and there. Prime rib, yum! -- and that is often very fatty. I had another reason for avoiding it. I tended to feel sick after eating it. I thought the reason was the fat. I had g.i. reflux chronically, and it seemed to me that it was worse when I ate fat. But even with low fat, it did not go completely away.

Then I went on the Atkins diet, with some trepidation. Guess what? Even very fatty meals don't cause reflux now. I rarely feel discomfort after eating now. Quite clearly, fat was *not* the problem; the problem may have been the bread - in a restaurant -- or rice or potatoes that I would eat as much as I liked of, at the same time as I ate that fat. Probably a lot of fat plus a lot of carbs = reflux for me.

If you read the Atkins book, and look around at the current research, you will find that, yes, a high fat diet is actually recommended for a number of disorders, diabetes among others. Obesity itself is a serious health problem, and low-carb diets seem to have an edge up in dealing with it. It also seems, quite contrary to what everyone believed, that a high-fat diet, even a diet high in saturated fats like beef fat, butter, cream, may be heart-healthy.

I actually started a low-carb diet on the recommendation of my physician. The problem? *High cholesterol numbers.* He recommended South Beach, probably because it seems safer, the prejudice against saturated fat is very strong, in spite of the scarcity of hard evidence. I did quite a bit of research, and decided to do Atkins instead, the science behind it seemed more sound to me. When some of my cholesterol numbers went up, my docor wrote "terrible" on the lab results, "Please come in." But when I spoke with him in person, first of all, he could see that I had lost weight. He could see that I wasn't depressed. And he easily acknowledged that LDL cholesterol -- the only number that was worse, other numbers were better -- was only a "risk factor," not, in itself, a sign of disease. I'll be doing more detailed lab work to find out what *kind* of LDL cholesterol is floating in my blood; it may well be that my lipid levels are healthier than they were, in terms of predictive effect, if we knew more about the subject.

When I was being taken into the exam room, the nurse started to walk by the scale. "Aren't you going to weigh me?", I asked. "Weren't you weighed recently?" "Yes, but I've been on an Atkins diet, and I've lost weight since then." "Oh," she commented, "that diet really works."

And the doctor said the same thing. Doctors who are willing to look at what actually happens to their patients find that many of them do well, indeed very well, on an Atkins diet.

It's called a Nutritional Approch for good reason. It is not just about losing weight.

If you don't like fat, truly, then an Atkins diet is probably not for you. You *might* be able to do as well on a low-fat diet, but it may get much more complicated as well as more difficult. For most people, fat in the diet is satisfying.

Consider ice cream. If you don't like ice cream at all, this won't apply to you. Traditional ice cream is high-fat and high-carb, both. Now, you can buy low-fat ice cream; usually it is still high-carb. And you can buy low-carb ice cream, usually it is high fat. Having tried both many times, I can tell you very easily what I prefer. Low-carb ice cream, sweetened with Splenda or maltitol or the like, I find just as delicious as the regular stuff. But low-fat tastes flat to me. I could put sugar and low-fat milk in my coffee, but, yuck! Coffee and heavy cream, however, with or without a little Splenda, a treat!

That is what my appetite tells me. Yes, your mileage may vary. If a diet consists of foods that you don't like to eat, it probably is not going to work for you. But low-carb diets (which are usually high-fat, even South Beach is high in fat, but it is so-called "good fats" like olive oil) actually seem to allow the best foods, aside from sugar and pasta and potatoes. (Strictly, there are no forbidden foods in the long-term maintenance phase of the diet, but moderation is indeed necessary for things like potatoes; and once one has been weaned from sugar, at least I can testify this myself, one may become averse to it, that sugar rush can be quite unpleasant.)

So, let's see, about your question. Diabetes, Hyperlipidemia, Obesity, Depression, isn't that enough? And, yes, it turns out that fat may be good for mental acuity or memory.

But, really, the research is limited. It's amazing how stuck so many so-called experts got on the low-fat gospel, without there being the kind of careful research that is needed to tease out the complexities of human nutrition.

[MeBLady]

But, really, the research is limited. It's amazing how stuck so many so-called experts got on the low-fat gospel, without there being the kind of careful research that is needed to tease out the complexities of human nutrition.

This is one of the most interesting concepts I found on the LC WOL.

For years, I've thought that the good Lord above must have designed a better way to lose weight and eat healthy that technology simply hadn't discovered yet.

The low fat gospel just doesn't seem reasonable -- we have to starve to lose weight this way, and the results just aren't that fufilling. Everything that tastes "good" is a no no in a low fat diet. I've seen many, like myself, that have teetered over into an obese weight, and reasonably feel a sence of doom -- many have turned to gastric bypasses because losing weight in the only way that mainstream science has promoted has proven time and time again to be near impossible.

To me, LC makes sense. It allows our bodies to do the work, as it should, and is physically and mentally fufilling. Its healthy and it WORKS.

[cygirl]

My point was totally takin wrong.I too like the Atkins,Southbeach diets and I eat this way with a couple of differences but i am not convinced that my health would be better if i was eating 4 times the amount of fat daily that i am now.If you take a look at the posts in the (lc/research) and watch the vidio these people are NOT doing SB or Atkins they are eating huge amounts of fat.65% of their diet is fat.

Abd....the reason you are in better health is not becuase you eat great amounts of fat it is because you have lost the weight.
Most health problems i beleive are because people cant put their forks down.

[cygirl]

Perhaps it would help if you expanded your reading beyond Atkins. There is already a thread on the diet you're questioning in the Media section. As mentioned in that section, the two oldest proponents of low-carb have always recommended high-fat, not high-protein, and both diets have been around for decades.


and watch the video....this woman looks like Hell

[Lisa N]

If you take a look at the posts in the (lc/research) and watch the vidio these people are NOT doing SB or Atkins they are eating huge amounts of fat.65% of their diet is fat.

Cygirl, that may not be South Beach, but it is certainly in line with Atkins induction: http://atkins.com/Archive/2004/2/3-915798.html
Note that when they analyzed their own menus, 58% of daily calories were coming from various fats. 60-65% isn't a great deal more.
Please also consider that as you move upwards on the carb ladder, fat percentages do decrease somewhat, but are never reduced to the 'recommended' 30% of total daily calories. ;)
Personal taste aside, I really am curious about what you seem to think is so horrible about having a high fat intake when carbs are limited?

[MeBLady]

My point was totally takin wrong.I too like the Atkins,Southbeach diets and I eat this way with a couple of differences but i am not convinced that my health would be better if i was eating 4 times the amount of fat daily that i am now.If you take a look at the posts in the (lc/research) and watch the vidio these people are NOT doing SB or Atkins they are eating huge amounts of fat.65% of their diet is fat.

Cygirl, one thing to consider is that you are only 120 pounds. I doubt you would have an easy time eating 6 eggs dripping in lard. Those who are over 300 pounds could possibly eat 6 eggs w/liberal butter for breakfast.

As far as the percentages ... 65% fat is most certainly within following Atkins as well as Protein Power, depending on the stage of that plan the individual is in.

Atkins induction's fat percentage is around 70%, decreases as one adds more carbs.

That percentage isn't as bad as it sounds. I stopped keeping track (became too obsessed with Fitday.com), but I'm probably around 60-65% fat, strictly by cooking my eggs in butter, using a couple of T of butter on my broccoli, frying bacon in olive oil, using olive oil based dressing on my salad, eating a 1 oz. cheese stick....I'm VERY satisfied with my weight loss and my new found energy/health.

Abd....the reason you are in better health is not becuase you eat great amounts of fat it is because you have lost the weight.
Most health problems i beleive are because people cant put their forks down.

That doesn't explain relief of my unhealthy symptoms ... I experienced relief within the first week of this WOE, before a substantial amount of weight came off.

I've lost weight in my younger years very quickly in unhealthy ways (starving), and though I was a "skinny" person, I still had no energy, heartburn, reflux, unhealthy bowel movements, etc. The last time I was 160 pounds, my BP was 170/90......I'm 179 as of this morning, checked my BP yesterday -- 140/80.

Though weight alone CAN by all means provide some corrections to some health problems, it isn't enough by itself, especially if the weight was lost in an unhealthy manner.

If this WOE was truly unhealthy, we wouldn't be seeing testimonials of the correction of health problems....skinny or obese.

[Lisa N]

MeBLady, I agree that weight loss can't explain the improvements in health completely.
For myself, my diabetes was completely controlled within 2-3 weeks of starting low carb; not enough time to have lost a great deal of weight (I'm a Turtle when it comes to losing). Ditto for my blood pressure.
My DH also experienced almost immediate relief of his gastric reflux symptoms when he joined me on low carb (within a few days, actually)...again, weight loss could not have been a contributing factor there.
When I track on Fitday, my percentage of calories coming from fats are consistently in the 55-65% range and have been for the nearly 4 years I've been on low carb since my plan keeps me at 30 grams of carb per day on a permanent basis for blood sugar control.

[TBoneMitch]

Thanks for sharing this, MeBLady, quite an interesting story!

I would like to corroborate what you said also: my seasonal allergies, along with the acne, sleepiness, and energy levels, improved a lot before I lost any significant amount of weight.

[cygirl]

but it is certainly in line with Atkins induction: http://atkins.com/Archive/2004/2/3-915798.html



yes it is but i didnt say that i said for life.There is a reason why you are only on induction for 2 weeks.
I dont do induction i have a way to eat for life.Not a diet really.

[cygirl]

one thing to consider is that you are only 120 pounds.


Thank-you for pointing that out for me. :wave:

I didnt realize till now that most of the people on this new fat diet are quite a bit heavier than me....
I realize to that this is the reason i would have no need to go on it.

[Kestrel]

In the summer about 70 to 80% of my total calories is from fat, due to the miles spent biking. Seems pretty natural to me...

[MeBLady]

yes it is but i didnt say that i said for life.There is a reason why you are only on induction for 2 weeks.
I dont do induction i have a way to eat for life.Not a diet really.


I believe most LC plans out there are designed as a WOL....Atkins and Protein Power are. However, one is not going to eat the same way to lose weight as they do to maintain, so the "corrective" phase IS temporary.

The "corrective" phases of LCing are going to have higher fat percentages for two reasons -- the carbs are lower and have to be replaced with something, and because saturated fat is healthy and necessary for the body to correct its problems. The more "problems" you have, the more fat is needed to remedy those problems.

Saturated fats aren't merely "healthy" for you, they are necessary for the body to function. More necessary when the body has a lot of work to do to correct itself.

Thank-you for pointing that out for me. :wave:

I didnt realize till now that most of the people on this new fat diet are quite a bit heavier than me....
I realize to that this is the reason i would have no need to go on it.

My point is that someone of a much lower weight, such as yourself, is not going to need as much food overall in order to be satisfied, and for the body to function. You, at 120 lbs, cannot eat like a 300 pound person and expect not to gain weight. I would think that WOULD be unhealthy, cause you'd be overeating.

However, by the same token, I wouldn't think that you would "need" as much fat in your diet either, unless you are correcting a health problem....yet, again, how many carbs you are consuming to maintain your weight does make a difference in what the fat percentage in your diet should be.

Lisa N's post above, for instance, is maintaining a 30 carb a day level for life to control her diabetes.....a good average end up maintaining around 50/60 carbs per day once they have met their weight goal, which is going to lower the fat percentage in their diet -- that doesn't necessarily mean that one is putting less butter on their broccoli, they are just consuming more broccoli so the "percentage", rather than actual "amount" is going be altered.
Protein levels are lowered as one's weight drops too, so one isn't going to need as much butter to fry their eggs in....and so on.

Now, if you are eating only 20 carbs a day and managing to maintain a low fat percentage in your diet as well no matter what your weight, I would definitely consider doing more research .... THAT is a health risk as well as a good way to wreck your motab. and store fat.

[TBoneMitch]

Cygirl: I am not overweight at all anymore (165-170 at 5'11) and still eat a very high fat diet (like Kestrel, 75%+ fat), for the overall benefits it gives me.

[MeBLady]

Cygirl: I am not overweight at all anymore (165-170 at 5'11) and still eat a very high fat diet (like Kestrel, 75%+ fat), for the overall benefits it gives me.

Just chiming in again to say I don't disagree with this, just got into the mindset of gradually being able to up my carbs and naturally decrease some fat intake....

Hard to beleive I can think about pre maintenance in another 19 pounds. Ha, first time I have said that for myself -- PRE MAINTENANCE!!! OMG! LOL

TBone, how do you maintain with high fat? Do you keep your carbs low, or simply burn through exercise?

[cygirl]

tbone, how do you maintain with high fat? Do you keep your carbs low, or simply burn through exercise?


i too would like to know this

[Kestrel]

I average 50 to 80 grams of carbs per day (I follow the Lutz plan, but tend to be a bit under his 6 BE per day on occasion), and stick with high fat, as much saturated as possible. Since I'm not looking to lose weight, I find this quite good for me. I don't tend to change carbs all that much, but I do try to add more fats in the summer due to activity levels.

[TBoneMitch]

I'm quite on the same page than Kestrel, I keep the carbs to 50-80g, somedays I may get only 30g, but usually I'm right in the 50-80 range.

The fat stays high, animal fat mainly, and the exercise I do is relatively intense, but no more than 4x a week, including a deck hockey game once a week (hey, I'm from Quebec, what do you expect!!). the other 3 sessions are weight training sessions, around an hour each. During the summer, I use more my bike to travel, so my caloric intake will be higher, but the carbs will stay low.

[locarbbarb]

Hi cygirl :wave:

I think I may have written to you once before on a different subject, so hello, it's nice to talk with you again.

I follow The Rosedale Diet, which the doc that created it considers to be high-fat (& low-carb), but with an emphasis on the 'good' fats like olive oil, avocados, salmon and other fish, etc.

There is a debate whether saturated fats pose a health risk. From my own experience with them, they tend to raise my cholesterol, so I have to keep the beef, etc. to a minimum (but I do love a good steak or some roast beef on occasion :yum: )

I don't believe that lard or any excess of anything is good for a person, but my philosophy is live and let live. Who knows, if a person is happy with their food plan, that happiness in itself may contribute to their good health.

I agree that too much saturated fat is not for me, but who's to say what is right for someone else? That's what makes this site (and the world) so interesting!

Happy Low-Carbing! :)

[bluesmoke]

The only debate on saturated fat is whether you deal with the facts or not. Saturated (animal) fat is an essential nutrient. There is no evidence that saturated fat, in a low carb diet, is harmful. The various Atkins Diet studies have shown no elevation heart disease markers, quite the contrary. BTW, lard is not a saturated fat. If yur cholesterol level goes up, have you been tested to get an accurate picture of which type of cholesterol is elevated? Not that it matters, there is no, repeat no, study showing any detrimental effect of "high" cholesterol in women, none at all. There is evidence that women over 50 have higher mortality level when their cholesterol levels are low. Nyah Levi

[dina1957]

BTW, lard is not a saturated fat. According to Fitday, I tbs of lard contains:
Total fat - 12.8g
Saturated - 5.02g
Polyunsaturated Fat 1.43g
Monounsaturated Fat 5.77g
So, lard is ~40% saturated. But there is no fat that is 100% saturated,
even coconut oil is around 90% saturated.All fats, both from animal and plant sources, are composed of all three types of fatty acid: SFA, MFA, and PFA.
The ration varies, from olive oil being lower in SFA (around 11%),
to coconut oil being the highest. Fat from animal sources does not mean
100% saturated, even butter is only 60% saturated fat. The "leanest" on saturated fats, are goose,
duck and chicken fat. You can get twice as much saturated fat from a tbs
of coconut oil (plant soruce) than from the same amount of lard (animal soruce):lol: .
People often get confused assuming animal fat is 100% saturated.
We should get all three kinds of fatty acidds in our diet, and try to have them in equal amounts,
regardless of the quantity consumed. Even if you eat lots of lard, you will be getting lots
of MFA in your diet, and some Vit.D as well.;) Just my two cents.
D.

[Samuel]

I believe there is some misunderstanding here. Cygirl was talking about this thread:

http://forum.lowcarber.org/showthread.php?t=241413

Which is about a diet developed by a Polish Doctor which promotes eating amounts of fat which far exceed the amounts you eat when you are on Atkins or other known lo carb diets. An example for the recommended (Fat/Protein/Carbs) ratio is (81%/12%/7%)

In my opinion, Atkins is better since it allows you to eat larger amounts of protein and also more enjoyable.

[Abd]

I believe there is some misunderstanding here. Cygirl was talking about this thread:
http://forum.lowcarber.org/showthread.php?t=241413


I also overlooked that aspect of what Cygirl was talking about, but I noticed it today before coming to this message. Cygirls' followups, however, were about her own opinions about fat, and we discussed those instead of the original thread.

The diet described actually is, in a sense, like an Atkins diet, i.e., the fat fast for people who are metabolically resistant, i.e., resist converting from a carbohydrate metabolism to one that burns fat. Atkins suggests that this diet should only be undertaken with medical supervision, as I recall.

[bluesmoke]

Thanks Dina, for clarifying the point. Nyah Levi

[KryssiMc]

I think I'm more concerned with her attitude towards this WOL. This is not a quick-fix diet to lose a few lbs. Weight loss is the perk...good health is the goal, isn't it?

I had only a few lbs to lose myself and was not really overweight. Some spots I didn't like, but who doesn't have those? Anyway, I was diagnosed with hypoglycemia and Atkins controls that for me. I can eat up to 120 carbs a day in maintenance and not gain any weight. What else has happened?...

1. I don't crash anymore 1 hr after a meal
2. I sleep at night
3. I am much more fun to be around since I am less irritable
4. I am never hungry like I was on a low fat WOL
5. I lost those "annoying pooches" on my body

And for this all I had to do was to give up Pepsi and start eating whole foods! Wow, what a concept! Do I miss my bread and pasta? Yes, I do and I allow myself these things in moderation only and try to find the more healthy alternatives to these items such as whole grain and soy.

If you don't feel you need to lose weight...that's fine. But everyone needs to wake up and smell the coffee about refined and processed foods. It's for health. And putting down the fork is not the answer...you should be able to pick it up and eat whenever you want...just make the right choices.

Kryssi

[Lisa N]

I believe there is some misunderstanding here. Cygirl was talking about this thread:

http://forum.lowcarber.org/showthread.php?t=241413

Which is about a diet developed by a Polish Doctor which promotes eating amounts of fat which far exceed the amounts you eat when you are on Atkins or other known lo carb diets. An example for the recommended (Fat/Protein/Carbs) ratio is (81%/12%/7%)

In my opinion, Atkins is better since it allows you to eat larger amounts of protein and also more enjoyable.

Ah! That clears up my confusion! :D
Dr. Kwasniewski does claim that his plan has produced astounding reversal of symptoms in a great number of patients, including those with diabetes, heart disease and MS.
Also, it may sound extreme, but when you actually plug in the numbers, it doesn't look as extreme as you might imagine.
For example, protein requirements are based on body weight in kilograms (much like Protein Power) and the rest of the ratios are based on your protein requirements.
So...if you have a protein requirement of 60 grams per day, your fat intake would be 150-210 grams and your carb intake would be 48 grams.

[cygirl]

Which is about a diet developed by a Polish Doctor which promotes eating amounts of fat which far exceed the amounts you eat when you are on Atkins or other known lo carb diets. An example for the recommended (Fat/Protein/Carbs) ratio is (81%/12%/7%)



this was what i was talking about......81% Fat

[MeBLady]

I'm quite on the same page than Kestrel, I keep the carbs to 50-80g, somedays I may get only 30g, but usually I'm right in the 50-80 range.

The fat stays high, animal fat mainly, and the exercise I do is relatively intense, but no more than 4x a week, including a deck hockey game once a week (hey, I'm from Quebec, what do you expect!!). the other 3 sessions are weight training sessions, around an hour each. During the summer, I use more my bike to travel, so my caloric intake will be higher, but the carbs will stay low.

It sounds like with both you and kestrel, the fat has to stay high in order to maintain rather than lose.....also, I wonder if because both of you are guys, that you have that extra benefit. Us women have a harder time.

I still have a long way to go before I am able to read what my body is telling me it needs in order to maintain -- but it is nice to know that there is the possibility of staying high fat in maintenance (full agreement with the health benefits of such) when I reach that point. Guess I will figure out what works best for me when I get there!

this was what i was talking about......81% Fat

Upthread, you said 65-70%. 81% does sound a little extreme to me -- the "fat" doesn't bother me, but the amount of protein v. the amount of fat does.

I may be wrong, but isn't a "fat flush" intended to be temporary?

[cygirl]

Meblady,

read some of the threads and you will find out that people are living on this high % of fat for life........they say it is wonderful.In the beginning i was asking why anyone would want to do this.I have found out from some of these people that food is not variety.I still dont beleive the diet is good for you but limited foods...no way

[Kestrel]

Yes, I'm a guy, and I keep the fat high particularly in the summer to balance calories against activity. If I need more calories, I eat fat, not protein. And carbs stay at the 50-80 grams level. 80% fat doesn't seem like an issue to me...

[cygirl]

Kestel,

what are your stats.?

You say you are on low carb but don't you spend more time worring if you are getting enough fat.

[Kestrel]

Cygirl, I have no idea what you're implying about "food is not variety"...

I am on low-carb, and I don't worry about fat at all. If I'm loosing weight, then I need more calories, typically from fat. Loosing weight is not my goal at all. I believe in low-carb as it makes sense. If Lutz and others weren't having such success at treating colitus and Crohn's, and other intestinal disorders with low-carb, perhaps I'd have a different view of low-carb.

[MeBLady]

Meblady,

read some of the threads and you will find out that people are living on this high % of fat for life........they say it is wonderful.In the beginning i was asking why anyone would want to do this.I have found out from some of these people that food is not variety.I still dont beleive the diet is good for you but limited foods...no way

In this context I agree with you....not that high fat is unhealthy, but when fat is being substituted for protein and even some nutricious carbs, it seems to me more like another "fast" to keep the scale moving.

I see many people who do these types of fasts, and I think it is disheartening and not at all healthy.

With this particular diet, Lisa N posted the following, which made more sense to me:

Also, it may sound extreme, but when you actually plug in the numbers, it doesn't look as extreme as you might imagine.
For example, protein requirements are based on body weight in kilograms (much like Protein Power) and the rest of the ratios are based on your protein requirements.
So...if you have a protein requirement of 60 grams per day, your fat intake would be 150-210 grams and your carb intake would be 48 grams.


Taking this in mind, I can't say that this would be a diet that I would be interested in doing, temporary or otherwise, but it doesn't seem to be TOO far off from Atkins.

IMO, one does need a balanced diet of nutricious foods in order to be healthy. If you look at the percentages of a LC diet, it doesn't seem balanced "on paper" because of the higher fat percentage....but actually living it and noticing what is put on one's plate does, indeed, show balanced nutricious meals.

[cygirl]

Loosing weight is not my goal at all. low-carb.

your the only one i have come across that isnt trying to loose weight here.

the woman on the video has a (steady) yes steady diet of lard,cream and fatty meats.

how boring and unhealthy in time.oh she looks like hell frozen over too.

[cygirl]

Taking this in mind, I can't say that this would be a diet that I would be interested in doing, temporary or otherwise, but it doesn't seem to be TOO far off from Atkins.




REALLY,have you looked at the thread( LCReserch) watch the video of the size 4 woman.

[MeBLady]

REALLY,have you looked at the thread( LCReserch) watch the video of the size 4 woman.

Yeah, I did look at the thread, and saw a picture of a woman doing it. She wasn't the prettiest woman I have ever seen by any means, but what exactly did you think was wrong with her?

LOL, she DID look better than I did in my "before" pic ;-)

your the only one i have come across that isnt trying to loose weight here.


There are many around here that have reached their weight goals and now in maintenance.

I will say that a great majority of those I have run across that have been LCing longer than a few months do consider this to be a "WOL" and treat it as such...good health over weight loss....many in this specific area, which is why I check it often. I'm learning a lot from them!

I don't want to be like the many more newbies I have come across that seem to be treating LCing as a quick fix diet....lose weight as fast as they can and go back to their old bad habits. I've noticed those disappear quite quickly, which is also disheartening. Don't have too many people to share my journey with -- many that started at the same time as me are already gone.

[cygirl]

:lol:

i thought she looked like she needed some fresh-air,sun and veggies...lol

you have done really well and i saw your before pic and you still look healthy. :wave:

[kwikdriver]

how boring and unhealthy in time.oh she looks like hell frozen over too.

I'm curious about where the research is that supports this statement.

[Lisa N]

i thought she looked like she needed some fresh-air,sun and veggies...lol

*shrug* Considering camera lighting and probably no makeup, she looked fine to me. BTW...sun and fresh air have nothing to do with what you eat. ;)

[MeBLady]

:lol:

i thought she looked like she needed some fresh-air,sun and veggies...lol

LOL! I didn't think she looked unhealthy.....just kind of plain. Her neck looked badly wrinkled, but that could be age or dropping a huge amount of weight quickly.

you have done really well and i saw your before pic and you still look healthy. :wave:

Oh God, I thought I looked 60 years old in my before pic. My hair was stringy, my skin was pale and puffy -- and I was in full make up with my
hair freshly done.

Thanks, I am pretty happy with my results so far. I'm 17 pounds lighter than my current avatar pic and in progress photo, it will be time soon to update my gallery.

[cygirl]

I'm curious about where the research is that supports this statement.

how do you research a opinion?And i am saying that if I came up with a new diet I would use someone a little more....well lets say.....healthy looking :lol:

[kwikdriver]

how do you research a opinion?And i am saying that if I came up with a new diet I would use someone a little more....well lets say.....healthy looking :lol:

Given the intent and challenges of this community, it might be appropriate when making a claim that someone's WOE is "unhealthy" to clearly label your statement as your own opinion. There are enough nasty tempered trolls here making such unfounded claims already. No need to -- even mistakenly, as I have no doubt was the case this time -- adopt their tactics of unfounded claims, ad hominem, and argument by ridicule, ourselves.

"How do you research an opinion?"

The internet? Books? Research papers? That's off the top of my head.

[Lisa N]

how do you research a opinion?And i am saying that if I came up with a new diet I would use someone a little more....well lets say.....healthy looking :lol:


Opinions are usually based on things that we have read or heard which may or may not be accurate. It seems that your opinion is that a high fat diet is uhealthy, but what is that opinion based on?
We have been told for years that dietary fat = unhealthy, but really there is little to no scientific evidence to back that up unless we are talking about transfats.
The high fat = heart disease hypothesis also has little to no scientific evidence to back it up because, unsurprisingly, the diets of the study particpants were also in nearly every study high in refined carbohydrate products which leaves us to ponder whether it was the high fat content or the high refined carbohydrate content which was responsible for the study results.
Studies that have been done on high fat (75% +) in the absence of high carbs have shown, to the astonishment of some of the researchers, that cardiac profiles did not get worse as they expected; they got better. :D

I guess it all comes down to this: eat in a way that seems healthiest to you. If the thought of a high fat diet makes you gag, don't follow one. OTOH, if another person finds a high fat intake the best thing since sliced bread (literally in our case ;) ) why get your knickers in a knot because they feel well and remain healthy following it?

[Kestrel]

Cygirl, the diet is not knew; the one that you're speaking about goes back about thirty years. South Beach is somewhat more recent, as I recall; perhaps it will die a natural death in the near future.

And why should anyone be surprised if someone follows low-carb, but is not actually trying to lose weight? As I said, I follow low-carb because it makes sense. Boring and unhealthy? Why do you think so?

[MeBLady]

Boring and unhealthy? Why do you think so?

I am thinking about the lunch I just had.....ground beef and cheddar cheese w/guacamole on a LC tortilla. It was de-lish!

Filet Mignon w/sateed mushrooms, lettuce greens with italian dressing, scrambled eggs w/tabasco, cantaloupe, apples, kiwis, steamed broccoli, brussel sprouts, caulflower w/butter or cheese sause, shrimp scampi, chicken salads...

This stuff is MUCH less boring than a bowl of dry shredded iceberg lettuce, cup of low fat cottage cheese, carrot, and a breadstick. Much more filling too ;-)

[cygirl]

And why should anyone be surprised if someone follows low-carb, but is not actually trying to lose weight? As I said, I follow low-carb because it makes sense. Boring and unhealthy? Why do you think so?


You are following high fat......

low carb does make sense.

Kestrel,I too eat like that.
I think i was takin wrong and i am aloud my opinion without backing myself up all the time.

[Lisa N]

Cygirl...think about it this way:

If you are following a low carb plan, carbs are restricted, right? That leaves us fat and protein.
Now...let's say that you are following a maintainence program at around 2,000 calories per day. Your Carb level for maintaining is 60 grams of carb per day.
So....we have 60 grams of carb at roughly 4 calories per gram...240 calories.
You need some protein...let's estimate that you like meat and eat about 120 grams of protein per day (remember, this isn't the total weight of the meat; just the number of grams of protein that the meat contains since meat is also comprised of water and fat as well). Protein is also roughly 4 calories per gram...so you have another 480 calories there.
Between the carbs and the protein, you are at 720 calories of your total of 2,000. Guess where the balance of your calories is going to come from? Yup...fats. To get the balance of your calories, you'll need about 142 grams of fat at roughly 9 calories per gram which would equal about 64% of your total daily caloric intake. Even if you were to increase your protein intake to 150 grams per day (that's a lot of meat, BTW), that still leaves your total daily percentage of calories from fat at 58%.
By today's medical guidelines (AHA et al), 58-65% of your daily caloric intake from fat is dietary suicide and yet those on low carb plans find that their overall health and bloodwork improve dramatically.
I don't find the ratios of this Optimal diet plan to be that much of a stretch when I look at it from this perspective. ;)

[TBoneMitch]

Cygirl: not many wild animals get much variety in their foods, especially carnivorous animals. Oh, they may eat different animals depending on their availability, but their exclusive meat diet keeps them in top health. As it did for the eskimos (som living their whole lives only on seal, or only on fish, or only on caribou, or a mix of the three), or many other wild tribes of «primitive» humans.

IMHO, variety in nutrition is overrated.

[dina1957]

Cygirl:
High fat diet aside, it's simply hard to keep fat below 40%, if you get at least 100-120g of protein from leanest animal source (skinless chicken breast, lean red meat, etc.), 1-2 boiled eggs, and a bit of olive oil (1tbs) with your salad. Simply put, try to meet RDA requirements and keep your calories in reasonable range, and your carbs lower, and you wil get more fat than food pyramid allows anyway. ;) This is even not counting nuts, adocado, and fatty fish like salmon and tuna. So, unless you are eating salad with vinegar only, egg whites, cod fish and such, you will get at least 40% of your calories from fat. So, it's a trade off, either keep your fat super low or your carbs (15%), since your protein intake should support lean body mass and remain the same reagrdless of the diet. Simply take your pick. But remember, you can't have it both;) If the idea of eating 6 eggs dripping in lard is not appealing (I am not sure who can eat 6 eggs at once:lol: ), then simply eat salmon, sardines, advocado, seeds and nuts. You will get lots of heart friendly Omega-3, and less saturated fat. When it comes to high fat diet, think low fat in reverse. Remeber low fat craze, it was recommended to keep fat intake <20%, even better 10-15% of your total calories. So, it's the same with carbs. Both, fat and carbs are sources of energy, carbs being fast burning fuel, while fat burns slowly. All LC diets are based on the same premises: burn fat instead of glucose. Protein is not a fuel, however, can be turned into glucose, if eaten to excess.
As with everything, YMMV on any diet, it's just a matter of preferances.
JMHO.
D.

[JennLynnRN]

I've read through all these posts and I just don't understand why you (Cygirl) are even here following a LC WOE! If you don't subscribe to the belief that a high fat diet can actually be healthy and good, then what are you doing here? A LC WOE goes hand in hand with a high-fat WOE. If you don't like it, find another WOE! Go back to low-calorie, low-fat and then come back in a year and prove us wrong!

[KryssiMc]

. Remeber low fat craze, it was recommended to keep fat intake <20%, even better 10-15% of your total calories.


Oh God, remember those days? This WOL just makes sense to me. Being hungry and grumpy=bad. Feeling full and healthy=good. How can anyone argue this? I am living proof that this WOE works and will continue to shout it from the rooftops.

[cygirl]

I've read through all these posts and I just don't understand why you (Cygirl) are even here following a LC WOE! If you don't subscribe to the belief that a high fat diet can actually be healthy and good, then what are you doing here? A LC WOE goes hand in hand with a high-fat WOE. If you don't like it, find another WOE! Go back to low-calorie, low-fat and then come back in a year and prove us wrong!


As you can see from my stats low carb works for me too.No need to get catty.
I started this post because of the woman that eats lard and animal fat as a main stay.Look at what she eats....dare you to eat this way and say its wonderful.Weather healthy or not!
I am glad you are the only people right so now what we can do is start feeding our babies like this as soon as they start eating because 15+percent of children are obese.You will be rich and famous.....lucky.Meow

[Kestrel]

I guess I still don't get what the problem is; so the lady eats lard and animal fat. What exactly is the problem??

From one cooking web site: "Rendered and clarified hog fat. Lard is richer than many other fats, and makes suberbly tender, flaky biscuits and pastries..."

If you're on low-carb, fats are certainly going to be a key to the program...

[Lisa N]

I started this post because of the woman that eats lard and animal fat as a main stay.Look at what she eats....dare you to eat this way and say its wonderful.Weather healthy or not!

If you're talking about the article on the Optimal Diet in the Media forum, you might want to check it again. Nowhere in the article does it say exactly what the woman interviewed eats on a daily basis. The breakfast menu presented is the reporter's version of what the diet is like.
Was that an accurate depiction? Not from what I've read, but the article is designed to make you assume that this is how the woman interviewed eats and jump to exactly the types of conclusions that you are jumping to. Remember...journalists keep portraying the Atkins diet as the "all-you-can-eat bacon and cheeseburger diet". If I went by what reporters said about low carbing without actually getting the facts myself, I doubt that I even would have considered low carbing in the first place.

As Benjamin Franklin once said..."Don't believe anything you hear and only about half of what you read." which is right up there with "Trust, but verify". ;)

I am glad you are the only people right so now what we can do is start feeding our babies like this as soon as they start eating because 15+percent of children are obese.

Are 15% + of children obese because their parents are feeding them animal fat and lard? Nope. 15% and more of children are obese because their parents are feeding them chips, cookies, sugary breakfast cereal, Pop Tarts, Pizza, McDonalds, juice by the gallon and all manner of junk food high in refined carbohydrates and sugar...but by golly it's low in fat! ;)
Personally, I don't think it would be a terrible thing to keep sugar away from children and feed them a high fat diet instead (along with plenty of vegetables, adequate protein and some fruits). After all..children up to the age of 3 have much higher fat requirements than even we do because they need it for proper brain development. Parents who try to restrict fat intake before that age are doing their kids a huge disservice. If you feel that they're getting too chubby, how about switching those Snackwell cookies and Scooby-Do fruit snacks for some carrots and sour cream dip and taking them to the park to play a little more often? :idea:

[ChicknLady]

Try TheOmnivore.com. I, too, was confused by the whole fat thing, and the more I read the more convinced I got that fat is very good, even in large amounts, providing it's the right kind. The 'right kind' appears to be most any animal-derived fat, and cold-pressed vegetable oils like olive oil. Avocado oil is supposed to be good, but I've read conflicting things on flax. Soy, corn, canola etc... are very bad.

Beth

[DietSka]

I started this post because of the woman that eats lard and animal fat as a main stay.Look at what she eats....dare you to eat this way and say its wonderful.
I can easily raise that bar, lol (fat-wise, not quantity-wise). I love smoked pork fat (as in the fatty part of bacon, no meaty bits, smoked instead of cured). Lovely creamy texture, great smoky taste. Absolutely wonderful with tomatoes!
I'm also known to endulge in at least half a cup of heavy cream every day. Cream has always been my favourite food and I could never get bored with it! I don't drink it, it's too thick. :) I enjoy it with a teaspoon much like one would eat icecream. Yummy!
Eggs in lard... I'm not a big fan of eggs and I prefer them boiled. But as far as lard is concerned, I'd much rather have a fatty lardy cut of meat than a stringy fatless muscle. And don't get me started on skinless chicken breast, so dry I could choke on it!

So yes, having lots of animal fat in my menu is a wonderful way to eat, but it's my opinion as a person who's never developed a fat phobia. I know where you're coming from, I know someone whose tolerance for animal products is limited to milk in his coffee and the very occasional fatless muscle (chicken, mostly). Anything else - fat, organs, sausages - is a no-no. He's not afraid of fat per se but the notion that fat is bad is so deeply ingrained in him that he's actually developed the taste... actually, the lack of taste for it.

It's how you're raised, I believe. Like, for example, people around the world love shrimp. I hate shrimp! I had shrimp for the first time when I was 25 and I was so well aware of how it looks that at some level it ruined my ability to really taste it, all I could think about was how disgusting it looks. If I had had it since childhood, I would perhaps think of shrimp as a perfectly normal looking, tasty food. Or, another example, bugs and worms -- people eat those, too, in some parts of the world -- I couldn't ever! Is shrimp nutritious? Or bugs or worms? Or fat, for that matter? Yes, they all are and people have eaten them for ages and their kids, too. But in the end it all comes down to "can you really take the plunge with an open mind?" It's harder for adults than children, we already have our preconceived notions about looks, taste and texture, about what's edible and/or healthy and all of these can enhance or ruin our appreciation of a particular food item.

[Samuel]

I don't like cooking in animal fats or eating animal skin, but I can understand that this is a matter of personal taste. However, since there are no restaurants which serve this kind of food, people on this diet are ristricted to home eating which people can stand for a limited time ony.

Dr. Kwasniewski has mentioned that his diet differs substantially from Atkins diet. He said that Atkins diet was made for the people who want to lose weight and that it does its purpose fine but his is for the ones who want to improve their health (It strengthens the immune system and affects aging process) He also said that the amount of carbs he allows is to prevent the state of ketosis.

He allows around 35-80 carbs for most people. I don't think we can be completely out of ketosis unless we exceed 100 grams and if I believe he is right I don't see how his diet can be safe if I judge it by Dr. Atkins says. Here is why:

Dr Atkins has never said that saturated fats are not harmful as a general rule. He has only said that "within the low carb context they cannot harm you." Now, how can the low carb context cause the difference? The only answer I have is that fats are metabolized differently when the body is in the state of ketosis and that the new method of metabolization does not cause the same harmful effects as the regular one. This means that without ketosis we are at risk if we eat excessive amounts of saturated fats.

[black57]

Fat no longer scares me. It is too bad that limited studies have turned people away from healthy fat. What scares me is insulin resistance. That is what makes fats scary and the only day that contributes to insulin resistance is carbohydrate indulgence.
Meds for high blood pressure, elevated cholesterol and elevated insulin only treat the symptoms of insulin resistance. As it states in the book Protein Power, the right diet is the only remedy to these symptoms which works quite well. Glucagon is a vital hormone that fights these things and glucagon is produced when and only when insulin is stabilized. Glucagon sends signals to the kidneys to release salts and fluids. It tells the liver to reduce the production of cholesterol and triglycerides. The artery walls also relax resulting in lowered blood pressure. Fat cells are also enabled to released stored fat to be burned for energy. When insulin levels are too high they suppress the body's ability to produce glucagon. By eating a low carb lifestyle the body is able to produce its own blood pressure and lipid medication. It is more efficient than synthetic meds and much cheaper.

This information tells me that fat does not make you fat!!!

[Lisa N]

However, since there are no restaurants which serve this kind of food, people on this diet are ristricted to home eating which no body can do for too long.

Samuel, I have to respectfully disagree with this statement. I'm a mom of 2 pre-teen daughters, work full time outside the home and volunteer at various activities and yet we eat a home cooked dinner at home as a family 13 out of 14 nights in a 2 week period (breakfast as well and lunches are packed from home). I've been married for nearly 20 years and this has been our pattern of eating for all of that 20 years. Yes...it's quite possible to eat at home the majority of the time without having to resort to frozen dinners, hamburger helper or any of that junk. ;)

[MeBLady]

I don't like cooking in animal fats or eating animal skin, but I can understand that this is a matter of personal taste. However, since there are no restaurants which serve this kind of food, people on this diet are ristricted to home eating which no body can do for too long.

Dr. Kwasniewski has mentioned that his diet differs substantially from Atkins diet. He said that Atkins diet was made for the people who want to lose weight and that it does its purpose fine but his is for the ones who want to improve their health (It strengthens the immune system and affects aging process) He also said that the amount of carbs he allows is to prevent the state of ketosis.

He allows around 35-80 carbs for most people. I don't think we can be completely out of ketosis unless we exceed 100 grams and if I believe he is right I don't see how his diet can be safe if I judge it by Dr. Atkins says. Here is why:

Dr Atkins has never said that saturated fats are not harmful as a general rule. He has only said that "within the low carb context they cannot harm you." Now, how can the low carb context cause the difference? The only answer I have is that fats are metabolized differently when the body is in the state of ketosis and that the new method of metabolization does not cause the same harmful effects as the regular one. This means that without ketosis we are at risk.

What you are stating seems to be in line with Protein Power. The Eades' claim the same thing as this Dr. Kwasniewski....that Atkins IS geered more toward weight loss, which is all fine and good, but health is second in priority, weight loss first.

The Protein Power plan claims to be health first, with weight loss a great extra bonus. Starting at 30/40 c. a day, the book states that you won't be in ketosis, but that ketosis is not necessary to lose weight (I do agree with you that there is most likely some ketonic activity going on at least at the 30/40 carb level tho -- I've experienced "metal breath" and "oily" urine at this level myself)

I disagree with your opinion that the LC context is what makes saturated fats "not harmful", and that without ketosis, we are at risk....for the most part.

According to Protein Power, saturated fats are not simply "not harmful", they are GOOD for you -- necessary to make new cell membranes (prevent and actually reverse aging), necessary as a carrier of nutriants in the blood, necessary to carry cholesterol to the liver where it is used efficiently. Those who have health problems to correct, my book states basically that there is no such thing as too much healthy fats.

IMO, the only problem with consuming high saturated fats, or all "good" fats is that they are higher in calorie....and at the end of the day, a calorie is still a calorie, and without the lower carb level (or strenuous exercise) to increase the burning of fat, there is a risk of weight gain in consuming high calorie/high fat levels.

PP warns that "smaller" people may have to watch their fat intake, especially when they are reaching their weight goal, due to "calories", and advises when one reaches a plateau, fat is the first thing to be cut down (not cut off). My assumption is that people who reach this level are most likely more healthy, and not in need of a huge amount of fat for their body to function and/or correct problems, and that the carb level is higher.

With that said, I think that "Fat CAN make you fat" -- but the LC WOL counteracts this and allows us to consume higher fat levels to get the health benefits from it, WITHOUT getting fat.

not many wild animals get much variety in their foods, especially carnivorous animals. Oh, they may eat different animals depending on their availability, but their exclusive meat diet keeps them in top health. As it did for the eskimos (som living their whole lives only on seal, or only on fish, or only on caribou, or a mix of the three), or many other wild tribes of «primitive» humans.

IMHO, variety in nutrition is overrated.


While I do agree with you that variety in nutrician is overrated -- with the low fat/low calorie mindset by all means, I do feel that a balance, even in LC is necessary.

I would think that even those living in primitive times had access to vegetation, or consumed animals that did. Carnivorous animals have different bodies than we do -- we may be all mammals, but our bodies don't work exactly the same way.

Perhaps, tho, it is the difference in primitive times v. modern society, where the average individual today cannot obtain a diet completely free of processed foods.

I've watched many that do these meat fasts for an extended period of time, and end up having to stock up on their supplements. When I lower my carbs too much for too long a time, I also have experienced symptoms of vitamin deficiency. Sure, I can pop supplements -- but isn't it healthier to get as many nutriants through real food?

I completely support and agree with the LC WOL, including high fats....it is the substituting of huge quantities of fat and complete elimination of carbs (ie: healthy veggies/nutriant rich fruit) that I would consider extreme.

IMO, we DO need a balanced diet....and that a LC diet, if followed the way the doctors who wrote their plans designed, IS balanced.

[TBoneMitch]

Samuel, I have to disagree with your statement that ketosis is the only process in which saturated fats are «not harmful».

In fact, as MeBLady said, I believe SFs are al;ways healthy, but that a low insulin level is key to health.

Dr Kwasniewski states in his books that since saturated fats are the body's best fuel, they are always utilised first, and that any fuels are utilised after. So if you have a high SF intake with a high car intake, the body firstly uses SFs, so less carbs get burned, so more carbs can be transformed in triglycerides (fats), cholesterol, and more glucose in the blood can participate in glycation reactions, etc. Also, wight gain would obviously be an important side effect.

So SFs are always healthy, but combining high SFs with high carbs is not good (possibly worse than low-fat) because there is plenty of excess inferior fuel (glucose) around to cause problems.

[Kestrel]

I'll join in and mention that Lutz recommends animal fats over vegetable fats as well, and he specifically recommends against minimal-level carb practices.

As to restaurants, the last one I visited was March 8 for dinner, since I was traveling on business... I prefer to eat at home, since I don't want my foods cooked in vegetable oils.

[JennLynnRN]

As you can see from my stats low carb works for me too.No need to get catty.
I started this post because of the woman that eats lard and animal fat as a main stay.Look at what she eats....dare you to eat this way and say its wonderful.Weather healthy or not!
I am glad you are the only people right so now what we can do is start feeding our babies like this as soon as they start eating because 15+percent of children are obese.You will be rich and famous.....lucky.Meow


You're the only one throwing names around! I especially like the "meow" comment at the end. Who did you say was being catty?!

Edited to add: As an aside, I see from your profile that you haven't ready ANY books on Atkins or other LC plans. Perhaps you should do this before you engage in other scientific/educational discussions.

[Samuel]

Samuel, I have to respectfully disagree with this statement...... Yes...it's quite possible to eat at home the majority of the time without having to resort to frozen dinners, hamburger helper or any of that junk. ;)
Sorry, I didn't like my statement either. I changed it but somehow you caught the old one!

You said that it is possible to eat at home the majority of the time. So what can you do the rest of the time? How about when your company receives a visitor whom you should take to lunch or dinner?

[cygirl]

edited to add: As an aside, I see from your profile that you haven't ready ANY books on Atkins or other LC plans. Perhaps you should do this before you engage in other scientific/educational discussions.

As per lots of people on this site i dont use my profile so maybe you should do some reserch before judge what i have read.Your a real inspiration telling me to go somewhere else.....see you in a year....who's catty?.

Sorry to everyone i didnt know i had to be a specialist in scientific/ed to talk and have opinions here.

[cygirl]

If you don't like it, find another WOE! Go back to low-calorie, low-fat and then come back in a year and prove us wrong!

Not catty for you? Like to see you when you are.

[kwikdriver]

Sorry, I didn't like my statement either. I changed it but somehow you caught the old one!

You said that it is possible to eat at home the majority of the time. So what can you do the rest of the time? How about when your company receives a visitor whom you should take to lunch or dinner?

Eat the best things available on the menu, and undereat that day so your body burns everything you eat as fuel. That way, there's less of a chance of, say, trans fats working their mischief on your body. Really though, the whole thing starts spinning out of control when the possibility of an occasional meal that might contain a small amount of trans fat causes agitation.

[kwikdriver]

As per lots of people on this site i dont use my profile so maybe you should do some reserch before judge what i have read.Your a real inspiration telling me to go somewhere else.....see you in a year....who's catty?.

Sorry to everyone i didnt know i had to be a specialist in scientific/ed to talk and have opinions here.

Anyone can have an opinion on any subject they please. But there's a difference, and it isn't a very fine one, between expressing your opinion in a thoughtful, constructive manner on the one hand, and being pointlessly argumentative on the other. If one side of a discussion has facts and evidence to support their position, and you have none, it isn't very becoming simply to continue repeating your position simply because you feel you have the right to do so. It is, however, highly annoying.

Or let's look at this another way. There are people who read and participate on this board with an eye towards making literally life or death decisions about their diet. There are folks here, many of whom have posted in this very thread, who present useful information, backed by research, to assist in those decisions. And then there are a very few people who simply want to repeat their opinions over and over, as though they were facts. The first kind of person is constructive, the second is, at best, noise, and a source of confusion. Judging by the level of your contributions in this thread, the second camp is the one you firmly belong in.

[Samuel]

I disagree with your opinion that the LC context is what makes saturated fats "not harmful", and that without ketosis, we are at risk....for the most part.
I know very little about medicine personally but I have some doctors among my relatives and as you may expect none of them agrees with any sort of low carb dieting. All of them watch their saturated fat intake, eat few eggs and minimum butter and of course will never listen if you tell them about what Dr. Eades, Dr. Atkins or Dr. Kwasniewski have said.

My doctor feels the same. Each time I have a visit with him, he finds nothing wrong with me but still tells me that he does not recommend low carb dieting. Low calorie dieting is the answer to him!

Most members of this forum believe that the fear of saturated fats and cholesterol are completely baseless.

I'm one of the people who believe that the truth cannot be told by one side alone. There must be a way to make the two opinions meet togrther and what Dr. Atkins have mentioned repeatedly in his "Atkins for life book" has given me an answer.

Dr. Atkins has mentioned that within the context of lo carb life style, saturated fats are not harmful. He has even gone further by saying that eating low carb changes saturated fats from being harmful to being useful.

Now, what did he mean by that? People metabolize fats in the same way unless if they are in the state of ketosis. This is how I got this idea.

[PoofieD]

However, since there are no restaurants which serve this kind of food, people on this diet are ristricted to home eating which no body can do for too long.

First there are alot of choices out there, but as to not being able to eat at home very long... why not?
There are some of us that long ago learned the joy of HOME MADE food. and prefer it. Its easier, budget-wise and just more nutritious..
I can understand that our culture in some quarters the idea of home and family have been stressed to the point of seeming no return, but there are alot of people still trying to keep alive the astounding arts of keeping a real home.
IF you ever decide they can help you with ways to do this. even if your busy, busy, busy.

[Lisa N]

How about when your company receives a visitor whom you should take to lunch or dinner?

Hmmm...well in my position, I wouldn't be the one wining and dining the client. ;)
There are times when I have to eat lunch in a restaurant, but they are fairly rare and I don't freak out about the possbility of a gram or two of transfats on those occasions. Same thing goes for the dinners out every few weeks as a family; I try to make the best choices possible.

There are some of us that long ago learned the joy of HOME MADE food. and prefer it.

LOL, PoofieD! There are times where DH almost begrudgingly agrees to take the family out for dinner. His reasoning being, "Why should I pay all that money for food that I like a lot less than your cooking?" ;)


BTW...folks...I need to put my moderator hat on for a minute here and remind everyone that even though this is the War Zone, the forum rules still apply and insults/flames, etc...are a violation of the forum rules. If you feel that you have been flamed or that a post violates the forum rules, please use the 'report bad post' icon located at the top right corner of each and every post instead of returning the insult in kind. :idea:

[JennLynnRN]

Cygirl: I'm not going to sit here and argure back and forth with you, but the fact remains...I am not the only one who is noticing your stubborness here. It really seems like you are here to cause trouble and not to seek/provide support. Your original post has been addressed by MANY well educated individuals, and you have been provided lots of research to indicate that perhaps you were not correct in your stance. If you want to keep arguing with everyone here for no apparent reason other than to argue, then I stand by what I said about perhaps finding a different venue for expressing your opinions. And no, you don't have to "be a specialist to have an opinon around here", but when other more knowldgeable people offer you THEIR opinions, perhaps you should be more receptive rather than simply arguing.

[cygirl]

when other more knowldgeable people offer you THEIR opinions, perhaps you should be more receptive rather than simply arguing.

Oh i agree :agree:

[Samuel]

...So if you have a high SF intake with a high carb intake, the body firstly uses SFs, so less carbs get burned, so more carbs can be transformed in triglycerides (fats), cholesterol, and more glucose in the blood can participate in glycation reactions, etc.

Are you sure about this? I have never heared that carbs can be a source of cholesterol before.

[Lisa N]

I have never heared that carbs can be a source of cholesterol before.

Not directly, but indirectly. Excess carb intake stimulates high insulin production which in turn stimulates various eicosanoid production leading to increased (usually LDL) cholesterol production in the liver.
As I'm sure you're already aware, excess carb intake also drives up triglyceride levels.

[MeBLady]

I know very little about medicine personally but I have some doctors among my relatives and as you may expect none of them agrees with any sort of low carb dieting. All of them watch their saturated fat intake, eat few eggs and minimum butter and of course will never listen if you tell them about what Dr. Eades, Dr. Atkins or Dr. Kwasniewski have said.

My doctor feels the same. Each time I have a visit with him, he finds nothing wrong with me but still tells me that he does not recommend low carb dieting. Low calorie dieting is the answer to him!

I have to say that I have never come across a doctor that disagreed with low carbing....BUT, I have quite a few diabetics on both sides of my family, and this seems to be a common WOE for this condition. Low carbing was recommended to me at my last checkup, being that I am (well, WAS, LOL) obese and have a family history of diabetes.

That said, I can't say that I have had, or witnessed, a doctor I have seen promote saturated fats except in the context of healthy fats v. transfats. Chose healthy over trans -- bottom line.

The Eades' do go into depth with all the scientific/technical reasonings behind their position, and so far, it makes much more sense than the contradicting opinions I have researched.

Yeah, I think this position is still considered out of the mainstream, but that doesn't bother me one bit. I've found many other "out of the mainstream" ways of life that I have found comfort in embracing when the mainstream society's way proved failure.....at least for me and my family.

Anyone ever notice that society is always telling us how to live and what to do? What to eat, how to exercise, how to educate, how to parent, etc.? How many times have they changed their minds, and how many times have they been wrong?

Most members of this forum believe that the fear of saturated fats and cholesterol are completely baseless.

I'm one of the people who believe that the truth cannot be told by one side alone. There must be a way to make the two opinions meet togrther and what Dr. Atkins have mentioned repeatedly in his "Atkins for life book" has given me an answer.

I don't think the fears of saturated fats are baseless, especially to a new LCer. Its hard to trust this mindset after years of being told by society that the healthy way is low fat/low calorie. I think that is why it is SO important for a person just beginning to low carb to read the book for the plan they have chosen. Unfortunately, not everybody does that, and I think that is why we see people who try and make their own plan with the information they have -- and attempt to LC the low fat way.

I agree that the truth is best found by hearing both sides. I listened to the LF/low calorie for years -- and honestly? Never really bought that it worked, it certainly never worked for me. I may have lost weight before my weight was too much out of control to attempt, but that way of dieting left me weak and hungry....and it didn't relieve my "ills" along with the weight loss as LCing did.

This link that Rosebud posted at the beginning of this very thread did a good job in bringing the two opposite sides together for me: http://www.westonaprice.org/knowyourfats/skinny.html

Dr. Atkins has mentioned that within the context of lo carb life style, saturated fats are not harmful. He has even gone further by saying that eating low carb changes saturated fats from being harmful to being useful.

Now, what did he mean by that? People metabolize fats in the same way unless if they are in the state of ketosis. This is how got this idea.

Well, this could be explained by simply applying the opinion that myself and TBone expressed when disagreeing with you......that saturated fats are always healthy, but when combined with high carb, other complications come into play.

And really, I think this means high carbs are the "bad" thing -- high carbs prevent you from getting the many health benefits of saturated fats ;-)

I don't think this has anything to do with actual ketosis, but simply low-er carb. LC doesn't necessarily equal ketosis.

[TBoneMitch]

Samuel: the fact that no doctor that you know recommends LC or saturated fat does not mean that it's not the way to go, or that they are right.

Almost in every branch of science, every time someone went against the prevailing opinion, he was a quack. Especially when there might be reason to think that he is, after all, right.

So it's no surprise to me that MDs and RDs totally disagree with Atkins, Eades, Lutz, Kwasniewski.

But no amount of disagreement can change the fact that insulin drives triglyceride and, to a lesser extent, cholesterol production.

No amount of disagreement can change the fact that saturated fat is the preferred fuel of the human body, and the main type of fat that it produces from carbs (along with monounsaturated fat).

And finally, no amount of disagreement can change the fact that homo sapiens became homo sapiens when he started eating more meat, more animal fat, and less vegetation than his ape and hominid predecessors.

[JennLynnRN]

And finally, no amount of disagreement can change the fact that homo sapiens became homo sapiens when he started eating more meat, more animal fat, and less vegetation than his ape and hominid predecessors.


Oh.....a loaded statement!!! I agree with you on that one, but don't be surprised if you get a rush of non-evolutioners disputing this one! LOL

[TBoneMitch]

Yes, I thought long and hard before posting it...but that's what I think in my mind!!

[Samuel]

Samuel: the fact that no doctor that you know recommends LC or saturated fat does not mean that it's not the way to go, or that they are right.

But no amount of disagreement can change the fact that insulin drives triglyceride and, to a lesser extent, cholesterol production.

Actually, next month I'll be vacationing with one of these doctors. He is 72 years old, retired, never been overweight, not in need of weight control but always favours low fat food and in great health. There is no way I can tell him that if he eates high fat food he can do better! I can tell him that my lipid profile has improved but he will tell me that his is great!

Concerning your saying that cholesterol can come from carbs too, I'm sure all doctors know that except that they believe that this is a minor source for cholesterol; the major source they know is the fat you eat!


I have to say that I have never come across a doctor that disagreed with low carbing.
You are lucky. I have never come across one who does! Most of them understand that it could lose you weight and they may appreciate that, but none of them can see how it can improve your health or that a person who has no weight problem should ever eat high fat.

Concerning my assumption that the state of ketosis protects lo carbers against the harmful effects of fats, I'm basing it on the following:

According to Dr. Atkins, when we are on a lo carb diet, fatty acids break down into ketone bodies leaving a newer fatty acid which is shorter in chain length by the two-carbon fragment. I assume that the new fatty acid is incapable to produce the harful effects.

Thank you all.

[vandi68]

I believe there is some misunderstanding here. Cygirl was talking about this thread:

http://forum.lowcarber.org/showthread.php?t=241413

Which is about a diet developed by a Polish Doctor which promotes eating amounts of fat which far exceed the amounts you eat when you are on Atkins or other known lo carb diets. An example for the recommended (Fat/Protein/Carbs) ratio is (81%/12%/7%)

In my opinion, Atkins is better since it allows you to eat larger amounts of protein and also more enjoyable.

After reading this article, I would have to agree with Cygirl on this is too much, if indeed this is what she is talking about. Here is a quote from the article. It makes me a little sick just to read it:
He's talking about eating 250 grams per day, three times more than most health guidelines. To eat that much you have to start early. Breakfast would require a four egg-yolk omelet cooked in lard, a side of bacon and sausage, toast bathed in butter - all washed down with a cup of heavy whipping cream. And that's just a third of your fat goal.
It does not sound healthy at all!! Yuck.

[MeBLady]

You are lucky. I have never come across one who does! Most of them understand that it could lose you weight and they may appreciate that, but none of them can see how it can improve your health or that a person who has no weight problem should ever eat high fat.

That is probably the difference right there....they aren't recognizing that this WOL is good for "anyone" rather than just people with problems to correct.

I remember being shocked in seeing my dad's first meals served to him in the hospital right after his strokes....roast beef, green beans w/liberal butter, coffee with heavy cream, eggs and sausage. My first thought was that they had just blew out his brain to clean out the arteries, now busy clogging them up again with all the fat?? He had a neurologist, heart specialist, and a family practicioner working together and approving his meals.

My aunt had a gastric bypass, and her doc put her on LC too -- which I thought was strange, as the LC would have worked by itself and avoided surgery :-/.

Concerning my assumption that the state of ketosis protects lo carbers against the harmful effects of fats, I'm basing it on the following:

According to Dr. Atkins, when we are on a lo carb diet, fatty acids break down into ketone bodies leaving a newer fatty acid which is shorter in chain length by the two-carbon fragment. I assume that the new fatty acid is incapable to produce the harful effects.

Thank you all.

I think where we are differing is that you are coming from an Atkin's perspective and I am coming more from Protein Power.

I am a bit confused by the state of ketosis, considering PP states that their plan will NOT leave you in a ketonic state, yet the same process in burning fat is occuring.

Out of curiousity ... does DANDR state that you are in a ketonic state after induction when the carb level begins to increase? Cause I know at that point, the two plans are nearly identical.

[black57]

That is probably the difference right there....they aren't recognizing that this WOL is good for "anyone" rather than just people with problems to correct.

I remember being shocked in seeing my dad's first meals served to him in the hospital right after his strokes....roast beef, green beans w/liberal butter, coffee with heavy cream, eggs and sausage. My first thought was that they had just blew out his brain to clean out the arteries, now busy clogging them up again with all the fat?? He had a neurologist, heart specialist, and a family practicioner working together and approving his meals.

My aunt had a gastric bypass, and her doc put her on LC too -- which I thought was strange, as the LC would have worked by itself and avoided surgery :-/.



I think where we are differing is that you are coming from an Atkin's perspective and I am coming more from Protein Power.

I am a bit confused by the state of ketosis, considering PP states that their plan will NOT leave you in a ketonic state, yet the same process in burning fat is occuring.



PP does say that their diet will put you in ketosis...it is low carb right? Check out pp 147 and 148. They say that there is nothing wrong with that and it simply means that you are burning fat. PP is very similar to Atkins. ;)

Black57

[cygirl]

After reading this article, I would have to agree with Cygirl on this is too much, if indeed this is what she is talking about. Here is a quote from the article. It makes me a little sick just to read it:
It does not sound healthy at all!! Yuck.

Yes the more people i have talked to i find lots agree.
I think people are scared to comment becuase of anger toward me and my thoughts. :thup:

I see you are on your own plan kinds like me. :wave: good luck

[Samuel]

Out of curiousity ... does DANDR state that you are in a ketonic state after induction when the carb level begins to increase? Cause I know at that point, the two plans are nearly identical.We should be in ketosis during all weight loss stages. At maintenance, we should find a place at the foggy border between the two states where we neither gain nor lose and set our carb intake amount to keep us there permanently.

As far as I know, there are two methods to metabolize fats:

(1) The default method in which fatty acids go through series of processes and end with a fuel which is used for energy. After all energy needs are met, energy can be stored as body fat.

(2) The second method in which fatty acids breaks into ketone bodies and a different kind of fatty acids before it completes its journey. Ketones supply body cells with energy. After all energy needs are met, ketones can only exit the body. They cannot be stored as body fat.

To my believe, the body uses the first method alone when carb intake exceeds (100-120) carbs depending on the individual.

When carb intake is reduced below this amount, the two methods take place at the same time and method 2 share grows as the carb intake moves down twards zero.

So carb reduction acts like moving a mode switch slowly from one mode to another. The first mode is for a vegetarian human and the second mode is for a meat eating human.

The vegetarian human can metabolize fats, but probably not the perfect way. The meat eating human metabolizes fats better.

Ketones do not appear in the urine or saliva until they exceed the amount the body can use. This is why you don't notice them unless you eat 35 carbs or less.

[MeBLady]

Ketones do not appear in the urine or saliva until they exceed the amount the body can use. This is why you don't notice them unless you eat 35 carbs or less.

Hey Samuel, thank you for taking the time to explain.....the above pretty much cleared up my confusion :-)

PP does say that their diet will put you in ketosis...it is low carb right? Check out pp 147 and 148. They say that there is nothing wrong with that and it simply means that you are burning fat. PP is very similar to Atkins.

Black57


I personally found the original PP book very confusing, and PPLP is focused more on the scientific/technical aspects of the plan -- in a better way than PP, LOL. I don't recall, nor can I find, a reference where the term "ketosis" is even used in PPLP.

If you have the original PP book handy, can you post the info on the page you referenced? My copy is currently on loan to a neighbor as I don't use it often.

I recall reading the "non ketonic" reference in the 30-Day Low Carb Diet Solution, a book which sets a new low carber on the basics of PP without all the mumbo jumbo. By no means was ketosis discouraged, just that the higher level of carbs from the beginning of the plan didn't put you in this state. With Samuel's explanation above, I am interpreting this to mean that one doing PP at 30/40 carb level per day may not see the presence of ketones on strips, or other symptoms -- none of which are needed in order to lose weight.

I am well aware that Atkins and PP are very similar -- my understanding is that they are nearly identical, except that PP basically starts at the OWL phase of Atkins.

My understanding also, was that the heavy ketonic state was at the Atkin's induction level.

[joanee]

Excellent, fascinating thread! Well done, all participants!:thup:

[black57]

MeBLady, the copy I have is, dated 1999. Ketosis is addressed on pp 148, 149-150. I prefer their comments on the hormone glucagon which enhances ketosis ( lipolysis ).

They say that if you are in Phase I and are overweight, you will more than likely go into ketosis. They also state that there is nothing wrong with that
( p148 ) :)

[DrippinBld]

Breakfast would require a four egg-yolk omelet cooked in lard, a side of bacon and sausage, toast bathed in butter - all washed down with a cup of heavy whipping cream. And that's just a third of your fat goal.
It does not sound healthy at all!! Yuck.

I totally agree - bread is truly evil stuff.

[Stylus]

totally agree - bread is truly evil stuff.
Touche ! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: