[BFL] What is BFL?

[siki00]

What is this? I've seen it several times on the board. Can someone explain this to me.

Thanks!
Michelle

[fern2340]

Hi Michelle!
I moved your post here so you could find out all about Body For Life (BFL). Lots of members here have great success w/ this program. There is a great deal of info in this forum.

Happy reading!
Linda

[Inigo]

BFL is "Body for Life"

Check out their site. www.bodyforlife.com and read the book.

It's a much saner approach to a healthy lifestyle that consists of exercise, healthy eating, and resistance training (which is the most important aspect).

I'd stay away from Atkins or any other low carb diet. The key is the type of carbs that you eat. Learn the difference between low and high glycemic carbs. If you do that, exercise, and train with weights, you'll be on the path to the healthiest body you can possibly have.

[Natrushka]

Originally posted by Inigo
I'd stay away from Atkins or any other low carb diet.

That's a very interesting statement, Inigo, seeing as you joined this low carb / Atkins forum.

I am afraid that your view of our WOL puts you in quite the minority here. Can you tell me just what's wrong with a low carb lifestyle?

Nat

[Inigo]

Oops- I thought I had joined a BFL forum.

I should have stated "extremely low carb" diet. :)

Carbs are fuel. The body needs fuel to function. I also think that the term "low carb diet" is very restrictive sounding. The majority of us can still lose weight and maintain a higher carb to protein ratio. And, it's healthier.

Of course, if you've managed to pile on fat pounds over the years, which most likely everyone here has, I guess "low" carbs is appropriate... compared to the amount we were eating when gaining fat.

[Natrushka]

Originally posted by Inigo
Oops- I thought I had joined a BFL forum.

It is, but it's also a LC forum - most of us here do BFL or BodyRx or The Body Sculpting Bible for Women with LC nutrition.

I should have stated "extremely low carb" diet. :) I am sure that what many of us consume carbbage wise you would consider extremely low-carb" - but that hasn't stopped us from increasing our strength, decreasing our body fat, and gaining lean mass. Just have a look through the gym logs.

Carbs are fuel. The body needs fuel to function. I also think that the term "low carb diet" is very restrictive sounding. The body does need fuel. It, however, does not have to be from carbs, with the exception of 20-30g a day for certain brain cells and red blood cells. The body has the ability to manufacture glucose whenever it is needed to maintain glucose homeostasis. We burn fat for fuel - and as we've been 'at it' for a while, we do very efficiently :)

The majority of us can still lose weight and maintain a higher carb to protein ratio. The majority of those of us here cannot. We are diabetic, we have PCOS, we have severe Insulin Resistance (IR).

And, it's healthier. Actually, it's not. Show me one independantly researched and funded study that can prove this? It can't be done. Believe me when I say we have a huge reference/research forum and we have thoroughly researched this. You can check it out if you'd like :)

Of course, if you've managed to pile on fat pounds over the years, which most likely everyone here has, I guess "low" carbs is appropriate... compared to the amount we were eating when gaining fat. Bingo. It's still all about relativity :) When you have been made ill (fat) by one extreme (low fat / resticted calorie and protein) then to repair the damage (IR) you often have to go to the opposite extreme (low carb).

LCers don't eat 20g of carbs for the rest of their lives - this is the biggest issue you'll find we have with the popular beliefs about our Way of Life. There are phases to all LC plans called "Maintenance" that are much more moderate carb wise. It all boils down to what our bodies can stand.

Nat

[Inigo]

Originally posted by Natrushka

The body does need fuel. It, however, does not have to be from carbs, with the exception of 20-30g a day for certain brain cells and red blood cells.

20-30 grams? That's ridiculous. :D I guess you could be classified as being alive.. But you probably wouldn't feel like it.



The majority of those of us here cannot. We are diabetic, we have PCOS, we have severe Insulin Resistance (IR).


Obviously anyone with these conditions should be under the care of a doctor. I'm speaking for otherwise healthy individuals without these medical issues.


Actually, it's not. Show me one independantly researched and funded study that can prove this? It can't be done. Believe me when I say we have a huge reference/research forum and we have thoroughly researched this. You can check it out if you'd like :)

Good point. You CAN'T because the very nature of diets like Atkins haven't been studied over long periods of time. The majority of research that I've found on the subjects seems to point to major risks when following a diet such as Atkins over a long period of time.


[B]
Bingo. It's still all about relativity :) When you have been made ill (fat) by one extreme (low fat / resticted calorie and protein) then to repair the damage (IR) you often have to go to the opposite extreme (low carb). [B]

Why jump to the opposite "extreme" (which is exactly what this is). Why not try doing things the sensible way? These extremes are called "yo-yo'ing".

I still say that following the basics will get you there and KEEP you there for the long haul. Eat healthy proteins, fats, and carbs. Get off the couch. Work out. Unless you have a medical problem, you will get in shape. And I bet that most of what I'm saying will make sense. :) I know.... because I've seen it over in over.

[Natrushka]

Originally posted by Inigo
I still say that following the basics will get you there and KEEP you there for the long haul. Eat healthy proteins, fats, and carbs. Get off the couch. Work out. Unless you have a medical problem, you will get in shape. And I bet that most of what I'm saying will make sense. :) I know.... because I've seen it over in over.

And I, and many other 'normal healthy people' here, have lived this. Eating what we are told is healthy - restricting calories - exercise if you want to be healthy. And what did I get for it? FAT. I do not have diabetes, nor do I have any other medical problems. I had mild hypertension, I have always had that, regardless of size.

Today I have lost 28% BF, gained 15 lbs of muscle, I have normal BP and a blood lipid profile to die for. How did I do it? I stopped eating refined carbs. No more grains. No more rice. No more prepackaged and cellophane wrapped foods. Veggies, meat, fats, berries, nuts, seeds and dairy products.

Re-reading your post I'm pretty sure the problem here is lack of understanding as to just what a LC plan entails. It's not eating a lb of bacon for breakfast every day. It's not a 12 oz rib eye with a side of saussage. LC is whole, natural foods - foods that have no shelf life because they are fresh and natural.

20-30 grams? That's ridiculous. I guess you could be classified as being alive.. But you probably wouldn't feel like it. And that is dismissive and closed minded.

Obviously anyone with these conditions should be under the care of a doctor. I'm speaking for otherwise healthy individuals without these medical issues. Who do you think would be prescribing these diets for their patients? An obese person has a medical condition, they are obese.

The majority of research that I've found on the subjects seems to point to major risks when following a diet such as Atkins over a long period of time. Please quote me this or provide a link - I'm very intrigued.

Nat

[Inigo]

Originally posted by Natrushka


And I, and many other 'normal healthy people' here, have lived this. Eating what we are told is healthy - restricting calories - exercise if you want to be healthy. And what did I get for it? FAT. I do not have diabetes, nor do I have any other medical problems. I had mild hypertension, I have always had that, regardless of size.


Then you were doing something wrong. Plain and simple. It's simply impossible for an otherwise healthy person to exercise, train with weights, and burn more calories than they took in to gain FAT.


Today I have lost 28% BF, gained 15 lbs of muscle, I have normal BP and a blood lipid profile to die for. How did I do it? I stopped eating refined carbs. No more grains. No more rice. No more prepackaged and cellophane wrapped foods. Veggies, meat, fats, berries, nuts, seeds and dairy products.


Refined carbs. Rice. IE: High glycemic carbs. That's what I've been saying all along. It's obvious that carbs that trigger spikes in insulin aren't good for you if you are trying to burn fat. That doesn't mean that you should drop all carbs and take in 20-30 grams a day. Even if it's for a "short" period of time.


Re-reading your post I'm pretty sure the problem here is lack of understanding as to just what a LC plan entails. It's not eating a lb of bacon for breakfast every day. It's not a 12 oz rib eye with a side of saussage. LC is whole, natural foods - foods that have no shelf life because they are fresh and natural.


The why not call it the "fresh and natural carbs" diet? :) LC means "LOW CARBOHYDRATE" correct? Well, that doesn't mean unrefined carbs... That doesn't mean sweet potatoes... That doesn't mean fresh fruits...



Please quote me this or provide a link - I'm very intrigued.



www.google.com "atkins diet health risks"

[itsjoyful]

show me the money!

I think I'll make up a diet, bash everyone else, and make a few million.

[Inigo]

Originally posted by itsjoyful
show me the money!

I think I'll make up a diet, bash everyone else, and make a few million.

:D Dr Atkins? :D

[itsjoyful]

I was refering to all the hits that came up on YOUR search. They were all sellin' somethin'.

But I guess you realized that.... ;)

[Natrushka]

Originally posted by Inigo
Then you were doing something wrong. Plain and simple. It's simply impossible for an otherwise healthy person to exercise, train with weights, and burn more calories than they took in to gain FAT. Why do I feel as though I am talking to a brick wall? The alternative is I am stupid and do not know how to tell the difference between fat and muscle or protein/fat and carbs.

That doesn't mean that you should drop all carbs and take in 20-30 grams a day. Even if it's for a "short" period of time. Why not?

That doesn't mean fresh fruits... I eat fresh fruit every day. I listed fresh fruit in my previous post - please refer back to it.

www.google.com "atkins diet health risks" Sorry, Toots, I'm not doing your research for you. However, you might try reading:

Duke Health Briefs: Low-Carb Diet Effective In Research Study (http://forum.lowcarber.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=51444)
What if It's All Been a Big Fat Lie? (http://forum.lowcarber.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=49715)
The History of the Food Pyramid -- How America became afraid of cholesterol--Dr Enig (http://forum.lowcarber.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=51755)
Funding affects researchers' "spin" on results (http://forum.lowcarber.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=54007)
The low fat/low cholesterol diet is ineffective--European Heart Journal (http://forum.lowcarber.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=53847)
Gary Taubes -- Cardiovascular Disease (Science Magazine ) (http://forum.lowcarber.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=53891)
Clinical Commentary: Westman Study of a High-Protein, Low-Carbohydrate Diet (http://forum.lowcarber.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=53911)
Why are we eating less fat and getting fatter? (http://forum.lowcarber.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=53895)
In conclusion, high intake of refined grains may increase stomach cancer risk (http://forum.lowcarber.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=54220)

This is your chance to learn a little bit about what LC truly is and how it's a healthy way of eating - for life.

Enjoy,
Nat

[Inigo]

I'm not "bashing" anyone... at least I hope I'm not. Simply expressing my thoughts on this LC thing. I just think that "LC" can be very misleading to some who aren't familiar with it. I have a family member who did the Atkins diet and lost HUGE amounts of fat... only to double in size over the last few years.

I simply think that people need to eat the "proper" carbs. The same with fats. We need them. I don't relate to someone being a little fat as being "ill". If they are otherwise healthy and fat, they are lazy. I know it's hard to accept. It's not a pretty thing to hear. But it's the truth.

If you simply follow one of these "LC" diets without understanding what it takes to BUILD muscle, you'll lose fat easily in the beginning... but you'll see it again in the end. Sorry if my opinions seem harsh. But they are what the are...

[itsjoyful]

You my dear, are in a minority here. I know of NO ONE here is is at their particular weight because they are just 'lazy'. you have NEVER walked in the shoes of ANY ONE here to make that statement.
Shame on you for judging those you don't even know.
Brenda

[Natrushka]

Originally posted by Inigo
But they are what the are...

Yes, they are. They are your uninformed opinions. We're trying to make that light bulb over your head go off, here, that's all.

Simply expressing my thoughts on this LC thing. I just think that "LC" can be very misleading to some who aren't familiar with it. I have a family member who did the Atkins diet and lost HUGE amounts of fat... only to double in size over the last few years. This isnt a 'thing' - this is how we eat. LC can be misleading - so can Low Fat. 20 years of pulling the wool over our eyes. That is why this board exists. We are here to help people, to offer advice and guidance and support. Of course if you go back to eating high carbs after you've lost the fat you'll gain it back - that's a given (and it's also explained in the books!).

I simply think that people need to eat the "proper" carbs. The same with fats. We need them. As do we - our definitions of 'proper' differ, however.

If they are otherwise healthy and fat, they are lazy. I know it's hard to accept. It's not a pretty thing to hear. But it's the truth. Now this is something I have never heard before. :rolleyes: Guess what, Inigo? You are wrong. Period.

Nat

[Inigo]

Originally posted by Natrushka

As do we - our definitions of 'proper' differ, however.


I don't think so. I think our definition of a good carb is about the same. Any low glycemic carb. Do you disagree?

I'm just saying that a person doesn't need to freak out and drastically reduce these carbs. You call this a "Way if Life"? If so, I believe your life will be miserable in a few years.


Now this is something I have never heard before. :rolleyes: Guess what, Inigo? You are wrong. Period.


Hmm. that's something I *have* heard before. :) But I disagree. It's rare for people to criticize their inaction to bring about certain results. I understand your response here. But I disagree with it.

[Natrushka]

Originally posted by Inigo
I don't think so. I think our definition of a good carb is about the same. Any low glycemic carb. Do you disagree?
Yes, with the following caveat. I do not need carbs for fuel. I burn fat. The carbs I eat are low G.I. - as a coincidence mostly, and because of a high fiber content, mainly.

I'm just saying that a person doesn't need to freak out and drastically reduce these carbs. You call this a "Way if Life"? If so, I believe your life will be miserable in a few years. You didn't read any of those articles did you? Do you remember me talking about "Maintenance" and "Moderation"? It's a few posts back.

It's rare for people to criticize their inaction to bring about certain results. You are not 'reading'/'listening', Inigo. I was active. Hell, I am less active now than I was 18 months ago. I too understand that admitting you do not understand how something works is difficult. I can accept that.

Nat - off to workout ;) (bye Brenda)

[Inigo]

Originally posted by Natrushka

Sorry, Toots, I'm not doing your research for you. However, you might try reading:

Duke Health Briefs: Low-Carb Diet Effective In Research Study (http://forum.lowcarber.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=51444)

Are you kidding? I stopped at the Duke study. It's funded by Atkins! :D :D

“While we’re impressed with the weight loss of this diet, we still are not sure about the safety of it,” Westman said. “More studies need to be done in order to be confident about the long-term safety of this type of diet.” Hmmm... guess they can't say it's safe. No one is denying that it burns fat quickly .

For example, all participants developed ketonuria, the presence of measurable ketones in urine. The level seen in this study translates to roughly that of a non-dieting person if they didn’t eat for a couple of days, said Westman. “This is a finding that we need to learn more about. The level of ketones present was not terribly high, but we don’t know if this is safe or harmful to one’s health over a long period of time.”

I'll save my time by not reading the other links provided..

[itsjoyful]

good for you, keep your head in the sand.
;)
b

[Inigo]

Originally posted by Natrushka

Yes, with the following caveat. I do not need carbs for fuel. I burn fat. The carbs I eat are low G.I. - as a coincidence mostly, and because of a high fiber content, mainly.


You do need carbs for fuel. You're body will start burning protein if left to burning fat alone.. which eats away at muscle... which lowers your metabolism...

Low GI carbs by coicidence? So you are saying that if high GI carbs were stocked with fiber you'd eat them as well??? A healthy amount of low GI carbs along with protein and EFA's is what I'm talking about.


You are not 'reading'/'listening', Inigo. I was active. Hell, I am less active now than I was 18 months ago. I too understand that admitting you do not understand how something works is difficult. I can accept that.


I "hear" you loud and clear. It seems that you have been on the LC kick for a year. A year. Plenty of time to shed some fat and feel good about the progress. No one can doubt that.

I want to see pictures of people that have been eating 20-30 grams of carbs a day with some "maintenance" and "moderation" periods tossed in for 5 years. 10 years. Then I'll be convinced. I think the "moderation" period should be every day.

[Inigo]

Here's some research for you:

http://irweb.swmed.edu/newspub/newsdetl.asp?story_id=436

[itsjoyful]

Read the study, but it seems to me that they really had to go to some far extreams to get these results.

Remember, the majority of the people here go on Effective Carb Count. They may eat a total of only 20 carbs, but maybe up to 70 minus the fiber.
brenda

[Inigo]

Originally posted by itsjoyful
Read the study, but it seems to me that they really had to go to some far extreams to get these results.

Remember, the majority of the people here go on Effective Carb Count. They may eat a total of only 20 carbs, but maybe up to 70 minus the fiber.
brenda

"Ten healthy subjects ate a regular diet for two weeks at the start of the study. They followed that with a highly restrictive diet that included some vegetables but no fruits and less than 20 grams of carbohydrates for two weeks. Participants then ate a less-restrictive diet for the final four weeks. During the last five days of each of these stages, the study subjects stayed overnight in UT Southwestern’s General Clinical Research Center for testing. Each member of the group also took a daily multivitamin tablet."

That seems like a pretty ordinary track for most LC and specifically Atkins dieters. Yes, I do think it's too the extreme. Which is my entire point.

Anyway.... I'll stop the debate. :) Best of luck on your "diet". You've done great so far.... and I'd argue that it was due to the overall lowering of calories and resistance training... and a number of people (none of which would be regulars on *this* board) would agree.

[itsjoyful]

you come up with ONE study and then YOU end the debate. Classic.
Brenda

[Inigo]

Originally posted by itsjoyful
you come up with ONE study and then YOU end the debate. Classic.
Brenda

I ended the "debate" because it wasn't really going anywhere was it? :) We simply disagree. I'll stick to moderation and a healthy lifestyle eating low GI carbs. If you prefer to cut your overall carb intake to anywhere near 30-70 grams a day that's your choice. I came up with one study because that's basically all I needed. The first study that Nat indicated mentioned that they could not be sure that this DIET was safe, refering to Atkins. It was also funded by Atikins. I figured I wouldn't waste our time any longer.

We'll sit back and watch the results and the health issues over time... that's the only way we'll know for sure if *this* "Way of Life" is safe. I contend that it is not. And time HAS shown that there are safe ways to build and maintain a HEALTHY body without going to the extremes.

Enjoy.

[Trilbe]

Howdy, Inigo!

I just wanted to pop-in and say that even though this is a low-carb forum it's nice to hear a dissenting voice once in a while, it makes for some juicy threads--like this one!
;)

Anyway, I just wanted to point out to you that I think that most doctors, and people who have naturally great bodies, miss out on the fact that we are all individuals. Weight-training and/or Weight Watchers might work for most people, but there are some people that it just DOES NOT work for.

You are truly BLESSED in that you are able to have a great body by doing weight-training. But I know--from experience--that it doesn't work for me. I started BFL (10 weeks ago) with 47% bodyfat. I absolutely NEED to lose bodyfat! Unfortunately, just lifting weights won't get me there. Lifting weights with a low-fat diet won't get me there either--I know, because I've tried it! And sadly, unlike most people here, exercise and low-carb/high fat doesn't work for me, either. I get NOWHERE! The only thing I've had results with has been weight-training plus cardio with low-carb and low-fat. NOT a lot of fun going low-carb AND low-fat, but I am (at last) getting back my health and my figure...

Over the years my parents, my doctor and my trainer have been CONVINCED that I was "cheating" because none of the solutions that work for "everybody" ever worked for me. BUT I HONESTLY WASN'T CHEATING! I followed those plans RELIGIOUSLY and they just didn't work for me. I did Weight Watchers for a year and, after the ups and downs, I ended up with a net gain of 8 pounds. My trainer made me cry, because he just would NOT believe that I wasn't cheating--and I absolutely was NOT cheating!

Well, I've finally found the answer. It is that I'm an individual! I had to find a solution that fit ME. So, I've been doing a combination of Protein Power (with less fat and a few more carbs) and Body for Life and I've had AMAZING results (for me), for the first time in my life. I'm not on the road to being a Grand Champion. But I'm losing fat for the FIRST TIME IN MY LIFE!

Here are the changes (start / current)
as of Challenge 1 / Week 10 / Day 7:
Hips - 47" / 44.5"
Waist - 36" / 33.75"
Thighs - 32.5" / 28.5"
Calves - 19" / 18.5"
Upper Arms - 17" / 15.5"
Weight - 210.5lb / 192.5lb
Body Fat - 47% / 41%

So, I just wanted to chime-in and say that if you think that there is ONE SOLUTION that will give EVERYBODY a great body then you're doing a disservice to a lot of people. I know this from painful experience.

Trilbe

[Inigo]

Originally posted by Trilbe
Howdy, Inigo!

So, I just wanted to chime-in and say that if you think that there is ONE SOLUTION that will give EVERYBODY a great body then you're doing a disservice to a lot of people. I know this from painful experience.

Trilbe

Hi there. Congratulations on finding a program that works for you. Don't get me wrong, I'm in no way saying that one solution will give everybody a great body. Some will find working out at different times of the day more beneficial. Some will find a good portion of protein right before bed gives them a kick on muscle growth and recovery. I will say that what you've described, if I understand you correctly, is basically what I've been saying. If you have increased your protein intake, exercise and vigorously train with weights, and eat low glycemic carbs, you're bascially doing what I've been stressing. :)

All I am saying is that NO ONE knows for sure if reducing carbs, even low GI carbs, to extremely low levels is safe, and most research seems to indicate some concern over the long term safety of these "diets".

Take the FRONT PAGE of this very website! It's stating a BOLD FACE LIE when it says "Atkins Diet Healthy & Effective " headlining an article that points to Duke research that STATES:

“While we’re impressed with the weight loss of this diet, we still are not sure about the safety of it,” Westman said. “More studies need to be done in order to be confident about the long-term safety of this type of diet.”

For example, all participants developed ketonuria, the presence of measurable ketones in urine. The level seen in this study translates to roughly that of a non-dieting person if they didn’t eat for a couple of days, said Westman. “This is a finding that we need to learn more about. The level of ketones present was not terribly high, but we don’t know if this is safe or harmful to one’s health over a long period of time.”

What is UP WITH THAT? There's no question that severely restricing carbs will cause fast fat loss. BUT- You can't tell me that eating 30-70 grams of carbs a day is safe and healthy. No one can. I'm not here trying to cause grief. You haven't heard me push a certain program. I'm keeping it simple. Call it what you want... Body for Life, Body RX, whatever. The *key* to long term health and fitness is resistance training along with frequent, healthy small meals that INCLUDE low glycemic carbs.

[itsjoyful]

:eek: I thought you were done.

[fridayeyes]

OOOf!

You can lead 'em to water, but you can't drown 'em.

"Hello! My name is Inigo Montoya. You must eat my way. Prepare to die!"

One word: Framingham

Two words: LC healthiest

Oh, well. Susan Powter, anyone?

:::ducks and runs - FAST!:::

Cheers,

Friday

[Inigo]

Originally posted by itsjoyful
:eek: I thought you were done.

I thought so too... until I saw Trilbe drop a line. So I responded to her. And then I noticed the bold face lie on the front page of this website.

You seem to want to engage in some sort of personal battle with me. That's not what I'm here for. You don't have to agree with what I'm saying. But, your blind defensiveness is very telling.

Care to respond to the comments I made in regards to the lie on this very website or the health and safety issues mentioned in the Duke study? No. You only seem to want to bash me because my views differ from yours. What about the research from the other University that I mentioned. No comment.

The reason I ended the "debate" with you earlier is because you were heading down the ol' personal attack path. I want no parts of that. If anything, I'm only trying to offer a different point of view on a VERY CONTROVERSIAL "diet". I'm not making comments to offend or upset anyone. I'm making them to help. I HAVE SEEN WHAT THE ATKINS DIET does to people, unfortunately one of them was a family member, and I think that websites like this, that post misleading headlines to the community, need to hear both sides of the coin.

[Sleemie]

Hey Inigo....

I don't want to attack you, and to tell you the truth I'm not as fanatical about the low carb thing as some people, and that's no criticism of anyone on here. This is my position....I am a low-carber because it works for me to lose weight. I also lift weights three times a week and go to martial arts class 3-4 times a week. I just started the MA class, so I can't say what role that's played in my losing weight....I know the weight lifting has done practically nothing to get rid of the fat. I've got nice muscles...but they're all hidden. Anywho, I will never get on here and argue the point that low carbing is safe in the long run, or even in the short run, or that it's healthier than traditional healthy eating. In fact, I'm sometimes concerned that I'm missing out on many of the health benefits of whole wheat and grains and their ability to stave off cancer and so forth, so I try to eat as much of the healthy stuff as I can, fresh veggies and other foods high in antioxidents. I'm also a little concerned about pushing myself as hard as I do with my exercise routine while low carbing. This is the bottom line of how I feel about it....if there are some long term affects of this type of eating, then I'll worry about that when the time comes. I just know that right now it's making me feel better about myself by helping me to burn off the fat that I've otherwise have been able to get rid of. I CAN'T say that it's healthy in the long run because I don't know, and you CAN'T say it's not healthy in the long run because you don't know....and neither do the experts. The positions on both sides are all theoretical....there's no hard evidence to support either position.

One point.....regardless of one's lifestyle and level of activity, if a person eats 200 grams of carbs a day and gains weight, but when eating 70 grams of carbs a day they maintain their weight, their body obviously does not need the extra carbs that they're getting.

As far as the person you know who gained a lot of weight back...that's not because of the diet, that's because the person didn't follow the diet as prescribed. You've gotta be eating a good amount of carbs to gain that much weight back simply from changing your diet. This person must have gone back to eating a bunch of "bad" carbs. Folks on here call it a "Way of Life" because it's more that then it is a diet....you always have to watch your carbs to keep the weight off, and that's not to say you have to be extreme about it, one could probably eat the amount of carbs that you suggest is healthy and still maintain their weight loss. In fact, I don't feel completely comfortable about eating the low number of carbs required for me to lose weight, but I'll take that chance, but the amount of carbs I can eat for maintenance if most people really looked at it would probably not have a major complaint about it. I think it's more the level of carbs eaten during the loss stage that people are critical of, but that's only temporary.

[Trainerdan]

Inigo ...

You do need carbs for fuel. You're body will start burning protein if left to burning fat alone.. which eats away at muscle... which lowers your metabolism...

This statement is incomplete. The body will turn to muscle protein in the absence of INADEQUATE protein intake. If carbs are low, yes, some protein will be used as fuel. As will ketones (fatty acids).

If the proper amount of protein is consumed FOR SOMEONE FOLLOWING A LOW CARB DIET, muscle loss in not an issue. Look at my pic. I am not losing muscle, and my metabolism is so fast that I often cause my GF to complain about my body heat that I am throwing off.

--

Also, I agree that some carbs are needed for fuel. I train athletes, and the high carb menatlity is so ingrained on them that they are now carb dependant --- dare I say carb addicted. If an active/athletic schedule is what someone has, then why would you consume more carbs than is needed to fuel the activity?

Once I break the athletes of this way of thinking, then get them on an eating schedule that allows for the minimum of carbs (usually one carb containing meal 2 hours before competition or practice), performance is boosted.

Metabolism is raised due to the high protein intake (the body is extremely inefficient at procesing protein for storage as fat), and the fat intake is normally EFAs or the healthy Omega fats. These actually boost hormone levels or bring them up to normal. Using this strategy, I have seen decreased bodyfat, increased muscle mass, and imporved performance across the board.

BUT, to the individual that is not super active, why would you eat high carb/low fat? Excess carbs are readily stored as fat. Low dietary fat levels lead to a host of medical conditions.

Reducing carbs to a level that suits an individual's specific metabolic needs is the best thing anyone can do to assist in the fat loss process. For some, that may be 20 grams. Some 50 grams. Some 100 grams. Whatever is needed.

The LC lifestyle works. Quote all the studies you want, and be as arguementative as you like. I am out there in the trenches, and I have experimented with every diet plan thru the years.

The LC style gets results, and when tailored to an individual's specific metabolic needs and coupled with sufficient protein and EFA intake ... there is no nutritional strategy out there that beats it.

[Inigo]

Originally posted by Trainerdan
Inigo ...
If the proper amount of protein is consumed FOR SOMEONE FOLLOWING A LOW CARB DIET, muscle loss in not an issue. Look at my pic. I am not losing muscle, and my metabolism is so fast that I often cause my GF to complain about my body heat that I am throwing off.


You may not be losing muscle. In your case I would argue that your gains however would be severely restricted (or mostly likely non-existent) if you are someone in the 20-30 grams of carbohydrates a day class. Not knowing a thing about your history, I'd guess that you are eating over 100 grams of low GI carbs a day. That is not what I'm talking about here.


Also, I agree that some carbs are needed for fuel.


Not according to Nat. She only needs enough for her brain to function.. or something like that. :)


If an active/athletic schedule is what someone has, then why would you consume more carbs than is needed to fuel the activity?


You wouldn't. But I think your missing the point of what I'm saying here. I'm talking about extremely low levels of carbohydrates for extended periods of time. I'm talking 20-30 even 40 grams. IF YOUR GOAL IS TO BE HEALTHY, YOU WILL NEED TO BE MORE ACTIVE THAN WHAT'S REQUIRED TO BURN THAT LITTLE AMOUNT OF CARB! Give me a break... :confused:


BUT, to the individual that is not super active, why would you eat high carb/low fat? Excess carbs are readily stored as fat. Low dietary fat levels lead to a host of medical conditions.


Never suggested you should.


Reducing carbs to a level that suits an individual's specific metabolic needs is the best thing anyone can do to assist in the fat loss process. For some, that may be 20 grams. Some 50 grams. Some 100 grams. Whatever is needed.


And my argument is that the "some 100 grams" is more the norm. You can't be serious and say that a large number of people can grow strong, healthy, fit bodies maintaining 20 total grams of carbohydrate in one day. That, is absurd. And that's my argument against the Atkins diet and any other where carbohydrate intake, even low GI carbs, are extremely limited.

I'm not really trying to be "argumentative". I've been in the "trenches" myself for 10 years. I've never been ON a diet. I was the fat pudgy kid. I saw (and experienced) amazing transformations in the Navy (and NO, sailors aren't very active) that are very typical of healthy eating mixed with weight training and to a certain extent, cardio workouts. Kinda hard to run on a small ship! :)

Maybe my definition of LC just isn't ringing through here. But, from the information I've seen on Atkins, I think the common Atkins dieter is in trouble. Just my opinion. :D

[Metaldude7]

Dan and others:
How do you explain this quote (from the author of a book recommended on this site)?
"Although ketogenic diets are useful for fat loss, while simultaneously sparing muscle loss, they have one significant drawback: they cannot sustain high intensity exercise. Activities like weight training can only use carbohydrates as an energy source, ketones and free fatty acids (FFA) cannot be used. Therefore the lack of carbohydrates on a ketogenic diet will eventually lead to decreased performance in the weight room, which may result in muscle loss, and carbohydrates must be introduced into a ketogenic diet without affecting ketosis. "

Inigo,
Have you explained your workouts (and their level of intensity)? I ask because I KNOW that less than 100 or so grams of carbs for me mean that I will not finish my workouts. I see the point of complex carbs at a reasonable level to maintain workouts, etc, but I don't believe that super-low anything (carbs or fat) will be helpful.

[Inigo]

Originally posted by Metaldude7

Inigo,
Have you explained your workouts (and their level of intensity)? I ask because I KNOW that less than 100 or so grams of carbs for me mean that I will not finish my workouts. I see the point of complex carbs at a reasonable level to maintain workouts, etc, but I don't believe that super-low anything (carbs or fat) will be helpful.

I normally work out at least 3 times a week. From time to time I'll throw a 4th workout in... (who likes working calves right?) :D

My workouts usually last at least 45 minutes. I try not to go much longer than that. If I do cardio during the week, I'll hit the treadmill for about 20 minutes. I focus on the resistance training. I do NOT train to failure.

And no, I don't eat 100 grams of carbs on workout days. I eat WELL over that amount. Heck, I probably have at least 30g's post workout and approx 20 or so pre-workout.

I'm simply amazed when I read information on this site about people maintaining 20-30-40 grams of carbs a DAY for weeks on end. Simply amazing. I'd LOVE to see these people in the gym. I'd LOVE to see how intense their workouts are.

I'm saying the same thing you are. I get so dissappointed when people focus soooo much attention on FAT LOSS. In most cases they don't know a THING about the benefits of intense resistance training. "Dieters" are always fighting a tough mental challenge. One that says you must do without. One that says you must LOSE something. I'm suggesting that they should focus on their GAINS. Gain MUSCLE. Focus on the carbs you CAN eat and WHEN you can eat them.

I also get flat out pissed when I see misleading lies like the one on the cover of this website. "Atkins Diet Healthy & Effective" July, 2002, Duke University Reasearch on the Atkins Diet and in the exact same article that this site points to as showing the diet "Healthy" they say this:

While we’re impressed with the weight loss of this diet, we still are not sure about the safety of it,” Westman said. “More studies need to be done in order to be confident about the long-term safety of this type of diet.”

For example, all participants developed ketonuria, the presence of measurable ketones in urine. The level seen in this study translates to roughly that of a non-dieting person if they didn’t eat for a couple of days, said Westman. “This is a finding that we need to learn more about. The level of ketones present was not terribly high, but we don’t know if this is safe or harmful to one’s health over a long period of time.”

What a crock.

[Sleemie]

I lift weights 3 days a week and I go fairly intensely. Up until around two weeks ago I would say I was "watching" my carbs, which meant that I had about 100g a day, but about a week and a half ago I decided to go back in to the induction phase of atkins down to under 20g per day and I didn't really notice any drop off in performance. Some exercises I even felt a little stronger at, and some I didn't feel as strong as usual, so it balanced out. I go for about 45 minutes and if you counted EVERY rep I do it totals about 250....I do 3 sets of each exercise and I go to failure on the 2nd and 3rd sets of each exercise.

I also take a Kung Fu class in the evenings 4 days a week and again noticed no significant drop off, except for my normal rough days towards the end of the week.

I think dropping from 100 g to under 20 g is significant, and I also think that 100g is plenty....so if carbs were needed that much for my workouts, shouldn't there be a bigger drop in my performance....

[Inigo]

Originally posted by Sleemie

I think dropping from 100 g to under 20 g is significant, and I also think that 100g is plenty....so if carbs were needed that much for my workouts, shouldn't there be a bigger drop in my performance....

You say your workouts are "fairly" intense... Not quite sure what that means. Can you honestly say that you can't work out any harder than what you're doing? I you can, then your workouts are extremely intense. If you can't, then you need to boost your workouts.

How long have you been on the routine you describe? From what you're saying, I'm thinking for a fairly short period of time. Stick to that plan of 20 grams a day. You'll feel it. Why did you drop back to 20g's? Was it simply because you weren't seeing results fast enough?

[fridayeyes]

How intense are my workouts:

I lift hard and heavy 4x a week, with am cardio outdoors in the hills 2-3 x a week.

I've put on more than 20 lbs of muscle in 9 months, most of it in the last 3. (Have also lost 50 lbs of fat) I did this on 1g per body lb in protein and 20 g ECC/ per day, plus one carb-up day aweek. For my next 12 weeks or so, I'll be going to an ECC of 40-50/day and 1.5 g protein per lb of body weight, but dropping the carb-up day. I will also be targeting my carbs to counteract cortisol. I'm pretty sure I'm about to hit diminishing returns as far as adding muscle (LBM of 140 lbs at 5'7"), but I can probably add another few lbs.

More on intensity:

I maxed the stack on one of my gym's leg-press machines (currently doing 375 lbs, hitting failure in the late 3rd to early 4th set) and also maxed one of the back extension machines. I'm only 2-3 plates away from maxing a few more machines (calf press, abductor/adductor). Most of the other women and some of the guys who get on after me have to lower the weights, sometimes even on upper body.

This info is for any of the LC posters reading, as it's fairly obvious by now that one person only has a certain axe to grind.

A fire dies if it isn't fed, and I will not be feeding this particular SNERT anymore. Eventually it will get bored and go play elsewhere.

Or, for a more Biblical approach, Luke 10:10 - when you go into a village and find your message isn't welcome, you should go away and knock the dust off your shoes.

Cheers,

Friday

[Inigo]

Originally posted by fridayeyes

I've put on more than 20 lbs of muscle in 9 months, most of it in the last 3.


Hmmm. more that 11 pounds of muscle in 3 months. Good job. :)

I'd argue that you could have gained more if you had increased your carbohydrate intake pre and post workout. Most bodybuilders would agree.



This info is for any of the LC posters reading, as it's fairly obvious by now that one person only has a certain axe to grind.


No axe to grind. I'm simply stating an opinion, that is heavily backed, that your health requires more that 20 grams of carbohydrate a day. That's about it. Oh, and when I see bold face lies like the one that adorns the main page to this site, I'll point that out as well... And no one has offered to explain this garbage.

[Sleemie]

Well, it's hard to quantify the intensity in words, but as I said, I go to failure on 2 out of the 3 sets I do for each exercise. Could I do more if I had to, sure. I don't work so hard that I absolutely couldn't do any more, I mean who does except for serious gym rats. However, I do feel like I've gotten a good workout afterwards, and my arms feel "heavy" for lack of a better word.

When you said my "routine" did you mean the low carb thing or the weights? I've been doing the weights for about 6-7 months at around 100 g a day, the really low carb thing just for one and half weeks. With atkins, you only do the 20g for the two week induction phase, so next week I'll add more carbs...probably up to around 30-40 g per day until I lose the 10-15 extra lbs I want, which should take about 2-3 months. I did it because doing the weights for 6-7 months at 100 g a day pretty much did nothing for getting rid of the fat....I just started the Kung Fu class around 2 months ago, and even with that and the weights the fat wasn't going anywhere....so that's why I've lowered my carbs. I basically carry all of my excess fat in my midsection and torso. My arms are decent and so are my legs. I can feel some nice muscle in my chest when I flex, but it's covered by fat, then there are the tummy and love handles.

I've been wondering about my weight lifting routine...I posted a question about it on the main page of "general exercise" so, I'm open to any suggestions you may have.

http://forum.lowcarber.org/forumdisplay.php?forumid=12&s=

[Trainerdan]

I'd argue that you could have gained more if you had increased your carbohydrate intake pre and post workout. Most bodybuilders would agree.

Since we are talking about BBers here, when they are entering contest prep and opting to lose as much fat as possible while reataining as much muscle mass as possible (the goal of most members here), what do they do?

THEY DROP THIER CARBS!

The goal here is to lose as much fat as possible. Which is the goal of a large majority of the members here. If you think I am wrong, then look at standard cutting diets of bodybuilders. They are low in carbs. Why do you think that is? Because it works. It's been working in the BB circles for years. Decades even.

As for Atkins WOE/WOL, once these individuals reach goal, they do increase carbs to an individual limit at which they do not gain fat. This is done by slowly increasing the intake over a period of time.

REGARDING INTENSITY . I have some pretty damn intense workouts, and I currently average 70g carbs per day (somedays higher, some lower). Even at 100g, this puts my carb level at 13% of my daily macronutrient ratio. That is still low-carb, my friend.

[Trainerdan]

How do you explain this quote (from the author of a book recommended on this site)?

Well, I personally do a CKD, since that is what I have found to work for me. What works for me and my metabolism/chemistry may not work for others here.

Many members here are on the road to fat loss through manipulating their carbohydrate intake, and there is nothing wrong with that.

Everyone is entitled to try out whatever plan they want to see what works for them. 20 to 30 grams per day is too low for me. Then again, I carry over 200 lbs. of LBM. Someone who doesn't have as much LBM may not need as many carbs.

If 20 - 30 grams works and gets fat loss rolling, who are you to say it's wrong? If someone is very overweight, the benefits of the fat loss (sub-Q and visceral) far outweigh any POTENTIAL risks associate with Atkins.

Experimentation is key to finding what your body needs to achieve the goals you have set for yourself.

If it's BFL with PP, so be it. If it's Atkins with Pilates, have a ball. Hell, if it's Neanderthin combined with Dinosaur Training I say lift those barrels, eat that meat, and grunt like a caveman if that's what gets you results.

There are a slew of plans that are discussed on this board. To be closed minded to anything is ignorance. No one way works for everyone -- and dare I say ANYONE.

I did low fat/high protein/high carbs for a long time and never got the results that I strived for. And it was not for lack of intensity. It was finding what works for me to shed the fat that was obsuring my definition.

I have found it in the LC WOL. Granted, my approach is different from the others but we are all in the same family of low-carb intake.

And since you enjoy quoting books and studies so much, I'll be sure to stop back here once I get home in front of my reference materials ...

BTW, to the one who keeps referring to this board and it's messages as "garbage" offends me (and I'm sure the others) that host/run this site personally. I'll be back ...

[tamarian]

Originally posted by Inigo
I also get flat out pissed when I see misleading lies like the one on the cover of this website. "Atkins Diet Healthy & Effective" July, 2002, Duke University Reasearch on the Atkins Diet and in the exact same article that this site points to as showing the diet "Healthy" they say this:

While we?re impressed with the weight loss of this diet, we still are not sure about the safety of it,? Westman said. ?More studies need to be done in order to be confident about the long-term safety of this type of diet.?


Hi Inigo,

I think you'd get pissed simply because they told you something you don't want to hear.

The study was funded by Atkins center, simply because he was pressured into it in an FDA sponsored conference in 2000, particularly by a vegan idol you may recognize by the name of Ornish. Transcripts were posted here in the forum. No one else chose to fund it.

It's a pitiful argument to pressure someone into funding a study conducted by an academic institution, and once the results bite you in the butt, you come and complain that he should not have funded it. Seems like he's dammed if he does, dammed if he doesn't. Very objective argument, eh?

But that's beside the point, it's not like there's only one study into the effectiveness on low-carbing, there are tens of them, which Atkins didn't fund.

When a scientific study makes you angry, you should take a step back and ask yourself some simple questions on why it made you angry. To me, I've read some of your posts to see where you're coming from, and found your opinion is simply based on politically correct views on diet and nutrition. Those PC views are generally established in society through publicity generated through political and economic organizations with vested interest in promoting their products to the public.

The basic low-fat movement was generated by lawyers!

I understand your frustration, but until your develope some research skills and be able to read through scientific journals, especially in biochemistry, you will have to suffer a bit, since most scientific studeis go against the popular beleif that high-carb diets are good for you.

Your most frequent argument that 20-30 grams of carbs are too low, defy many scientific studeis on foraging societeis and the Eskimo/Inuit. I know that most people using your argument expect everyone to see their point without any need to provide scientific references, but you may have picked the wrong crowd to slip this by without some questions on your sources :)

I would say the strongest argument you made so far was in regards to ketoacidosis, but this argument as well has been proven faulty by various studeis, and centers around the ignorance by some researchers between Ketosis and Ketoacidosis, Ketoacidosis occures even while eating high-carbs, and totally unrelated to low-carb.

Wa'il
P.S. I'm the Webmaster, and would gladly remove any of the tons of research published here, if you can prove with specific references that any of them are false.

[VictoriaT]

Hi everyone,

First off, I am fat. However, I am not lazy. I took offense to that statement. That is just the type of statement some better-than-thou look at themselves-in-the-mirror bodybuilder would say. I am 5 9 and was 280 lbs and kicking everyone's behind while teaching aerobics 5 times a week at the gym. I kept GAINING weight. So I am now Low carbing, feeling great, and down 30 lbs in 2 months. I wouldnt change this way of eating for anything..I love it!!!

Second, as a researcher, 10 people for a study is not enough. Its not representative of a population. As I looked to see who funded THAT study, I saw it was an advocate of the Low fat way of eating......hmmmmm What else would they say? They stand to lose millions if they showed that LC is good for us. How is that different than Dr Atkins funding a study? As Tamarian states, no one else chose to fund it! By the way--their scientists need to realize the difference between ketosis and ketoacidosis. There is a difference......

Thanks
Vicki

[RawSienna]

I don't have the knowledge or expertise to effectively "argue" any points made here. So I won't even try.

I only know this. When I eat too many refined carbs I go into "eat more" mode. Two hours later I am looking for more. Then more. Then more. At my highest weight of nearly 250 pounds (5'4") I was eating a lot of carbs. A lot. Carbs controlled my life.

When I restrict my carbs, by lowering the total amount, and keeping them "natural" the cravings are removed. Literally.

That is ALL that matters to me. I am SICK and TIRED of dieting. This is not dieting. This is a WOE that keeps me sane. I will NEVER go back to lowfat eating. EVER.

My 2 cents worth.
:)

[SusanKH]

Inigo,
We're all different, but what you say about being lazy is soooo wrong. My mother struggled with her weight all of her life. She did everything right - low calorie, exercise - and remained fat. After too many tests to list, her physicians informed her that she just had an extremely effecient metabolism, meaning she needs very little food to survive. She's thin now because she eats plain simple foods, which by their nature are classified, for the most part, as low carb. I just don't think it's fair to label people as lazy when you haven't walked in their shoes.
Susan

[DeeX2]

I am restarting BFL tomorrow, or should I say a modified version. I am planning to do a more low carb version of this program.

Nat's stats are truely amazing. She is certainly a motivation for me.

I plan to post my being stats in my journal tomorrow and start with a cardio workout first.

See you all tomorrow!~