First, allow me to say that I have sought high and low for an answer to this question, but have not found one.

I understand that on the Atkins program, the primary source of energy is fat because the absence of carbohydrates initiates the process of ketosis. However, if we know that excess carbs are stored as fat and and in turn makes us fat, what happens to excess fat? Protein?

Please advise.

Thanks.

Loqui

There is no excess fat. Your body takes it and uses it and then burns the fat you've stored and are carrying around as well. It takes well over 1700 calories, Loqui for your body just to function . Next time you're searching, try looking up "basal metabolic rate". 10 to 12 times your body weight is what you need to get by every day.

Protein is another story. Your body needs and uses the protein you feed it; it is the building material for the production of millions of protein compounds needed to replace the wear and tear of daily . It isnt burned as energy.

The following should give you some answers : http://eatprotein.com/answers5.html#5a

The book by the Eades, Protein Power and Protein Power Lifeplan, are very informative as far as explaining the chemistry and biology behind why this works. I'm sure they are available from your local library.

Nat

How is it you need 10 to 12 times your body weight in calories? Doesn't it depend on how fat you are? Fat is not a "live" part of your body in that it is not metabolically active the way muscle tissue is. It is not part of your basal metabolic equation. What if you are 100 pounds overweight? Does that mean you should eat an extra 1000 calories a day to support your fat? I don't think so.

I've wondered about that too. Wouldn't you want to eat less calories to help facilitate losing weight? Or is that just low-fat thinking?

I think you have a point. I forgot which book was it, that gave the calculation based on LBM (lean body mass), and not on total weight. I'll check through my library, but if any recalls it, please sgare.

Wa'il

No, too few calories will get you in "starvation mode" and you may encounter metabolic resistance.

Wa'il

I believe that the number of calories you should eat DOES PARTIALLY depend on your lean body mass (LBM), but it's even more complicated than that. Even people with identical body masses will metabolize calories at a different rate. People are different. Check out some of Covert Bailey's writings to learn more about this. Also, based on my readings, the body does indeed turn excess protein into fat (with the liver's help). Again, see Covert Bailey.

While it is important not to starve oneself while low-carbing, it's not quite fair to say everyone needs more than 1700 calories a day just to function.

The body does not metabolize calories though. Calories result from metablizing food.



I read his "Fit or Fat" with no clues on this subject, he's known to be anti-fat, pro-carb. I like his exercise points though.



Do you happen to know which book?



True, a 3 foot child's needs differ from a 5 to 7 foot adults need.

Unfortunately, many dieters think they are being "strict" and doing it "better" by eating as little as possible, and they should really understand their minimal requirement for basal metabolism. How to find that minimum requirement though is a bit tricky. The 10 times weight is one of them. Hearing about others is very useful. I tend to trust formulas with LBM more than total weight. I just can't remember the LBM formulas. If anyone recalls it, please jump in.

Wa'il

Sorry, I'm not near my library at the moment so I can't check on which of Bailey's books has the info I've cited, but I will look it up when I get home and let you know. Yes, he's anti-fat (which doesn't please me) but this doesn't mean he's not an authority on how we metabolize food. And yes, I suppose you're right that we don't metabolize calories, per se. The main point I wanted to stress was that we DON'T KNOW and CAN'T PREDICT how fast any given person will burn their food, even when we know their lean body mass. We have to experiment to know how many carbs we gain or lose on, and likewise with calories.

Sure, I'm just trying to gather the info and understand it.

Processing food differently for people is quite logical as our enzyme healthiness differ for various reasons, and our food quality too.

But there is a minimal requirement for our bodies. Differing processing is one thing, and differing needs (for resting/basal metabolism) is another.

As for Covert Baily's authority, I'm not "dissing" him at all.

Any info you find will be greatly appreciated.

Wa'il

Yes, a lot of factors determine one's BMR, not just lean body mass, or overall body mass ... but also age, health conditions, previous dieting, activity level, etc, etc ...

Although fat tissue is not as metabolically active as muscle, it's not inert. It is active, meaning it uses energy and produces heat. As well, an extremely obese person will have hundreds and hundreds of feet of extra capillaries and blood vessels which the heart will have to work harder to pump blood through ... plus the extra effort required to just carry the extra weight around. I'm definitely no expert, but it would seem that an obese person would have some energy requirements over-and-above feeding only the LBM. (???)

I've read elsewhere, that suggested someone who is extremely overweight could use 8 to 10 x weight as the caloric requirement, as opposed to the 10 to 12 "rule" for leaner people. That would make sense, given the lower BMR of fat.

Doreen

This post was addressed to Loqui. Let's take a look at Loqui's current weight using two of the methods (which have been around for a long time, I didnt pull that number out of thin air)

(For adult females - Multiply body weight by 10; add the body weight to this value. (i.e., for a 120 lb female, 1,200 + 120=1,320 cal/day BMR) ) : 257 * 10 = 2570 + 29 = 2579. Try eating that. It isnt easy. But by at least trying it's very unlikely you're going to eat 1200 calories and think you've had enough food.

OR

Adult female: 655 + (4.3 x weight in lbs.) + (4.7 x height in inches) - (4.7 x age in years). 655 + (4.3 * 257) + (4.7 * 61") - (4.7 * 29) = 1910.5

I guess I was wrong. She doesnt need 1700 calories. If you want more info try this site How Stuff Works - How Many Calories do YOU need?

Yes everyone metabolizes differently. Specially those of us who've messed up our systems with starvation diets of one kind or another. But I'm sorry, 1200 calories doesn't cut it. We've tried that before, it didnt work with low fat, why would it work with low carb?

Nat

Not disagreeing with what you said, but want to point our that BMR (basal metabolic rate) is for sleeping/resting rate, with no effort to expend energy.

And I agree, this discussion is very interesting, I'm learning a lot from everyone!

Wa'il

Yes, Wa'il you're right (again) about BMR. Or at least you agree with a large portion of the scientific community

This is direct from How Things Work :



Karen suggested that someone look up BMR in a Journal. So I did. I was quite shocked by what I found. I'm still trying to find that "optimal zone" between what I eat and what I burn, but now I'm moving the calories UP instead of Down. Quite a learning curve.

Nat

I love this place.

Everyone can argue a point without being condescending or hateful. I belong to another group that has had to BAN members for being combative.

Hats off to tamarian/wa'il......You're so diplomatic. It's wonderful to see that.

Thanks!