Hi there,

I am new to the SP, only on week two. I have started the plan in order to get my blood sugar level under control, try to control cravings, mood swings, headaches, etc. I am also hoping it will help control my IBS. Not really in it to loose weight. A few pounds can never hurt but I think I have a normal body composition.

So after the first week, I was wondering if some people actually gain weight on the plan? I used to stick to the typical low fat type diet, never worried too much about counting calories as my weight was steady but did keep a food journal for a while and looking back I used to eat between 1,400 and 1,800 calories a day.

Now I haven't done the math, but I bet that I am eating more than that now that I eat nuts and cheese for snacks (instead of low cal carby stuff).

I am wondering if this new WOE might actually edge my weight up if I am not careful about controlling fatty snacks such as nuts and cheese. Now I know everyone warns against trying to do a low fat version of low carb. However, I do believe to an extent in the calories in/calories out theory.

What are your thoughts????

Thanks.

Guerita, do you have high bloodsugar? If so, you are probably at least insulin resistant and following a low-fat diet would eventually cause you to gain weight, as well as cause other debilitating conditions like your IBS.

On a low-carb diet, you don't worry about fat. Since your body composition is normal, you don't need to eat more fat to convince your body to burn it, so much as you need to eat adequate fat for your body to function correctly and build/maintain your cells.

Do not try to lower fat to maintain or lose weight. That's the whole point of lowering carbohydrate. That is what makes you fat and raises your bloodsugar. Fat DOES NOT make you fat.

As far as calories, before you say you are eating a lot more calories, check it out. I thought I was eating more calories because I eat loads of fat, but I am actually eating fewer than when I was carbing out all the time. A lot of people like Fitday.com to calculate their caloric intake.

HTH,
;-Deb

As a general rule...(not from SP who doesn't worry about calories) -- 10-12x body weight in calories for weight loss. As much as 18x for maintenance.

Also...SP first principles. The diet will heal your metabolism...in an anorexic, that would mean weight gain! In an insulin resistant person you get weight loss.

Also remember that weight gain doesnt necessarily mean fat gain! If you work out, it could be muscle!

Lisa

I know it seems odd that one can eat what we have been conditioned to think of as high calorie food, totally ignore calories, and still have good results. I believe that the key is that your body self-regulates its intake of fat and protein. For example, how many eggs would you want at one sitting, or how much bacon, cheese etc. These are not the foods people overeat. Pasta, ice cream, sweet rolls, potato chips - those are the the foods that most of us binge on.

By the way, you mentioned IBS. I have noticed a 95% reduction in symptoms since dramatically reducing my carbohydrate intake. The other night I had some Haagen Daz in a moment of weakness and boy, did I pay the price the next morning! I hope you have similar results with your IBS.

Bottom line: watch the carbs, eat plenty of fresh vegetables and don't worry about the chicken, beef, pork, fish, butter, eggs, cream etc. Pay attention to how you feel - that's what counts in my opinion.

Thanks for your replies. I guess what I am worrying about is that I haven't come to grips yet with my constant snacking. Yes, yes, I use food to alleviate boredom and depression.

I understand that I probably won't overeat protein but yes I do over-indulge on the nuts and I know they also have carbs and you need to watch them. That was more what I am worried about.

sometimes if we overindulge in a food, we're sensitive to that food. With nuts, some nut-sensitive people will get migraines from overinduling--they stink, but at least they're a pretty solid sign that you're allergic.

I've found that if I buy nuts I like okay but not love (if you know what i mean ), I do fine. Also buying them unsalted helps me eat only reasonable amounts.

If you gained weight and it was all muscle tissue and bone density, this would be a good result, not a bad one.

HTH!

I was just the same when I started the SP. HOwever so far I have lost 11 lbs even when eating nuts etc.

You have to change your mindset a bit. But once you start seeing the results you will find it easier. Now I eat my big breakfast of bacon, eggs and sausages at the weekend with no guilt!!!!

Also I buy raw unsalted nuts which I feel you can't overeat.

Clodagh

Guerita - going back to your original question. If you eat a certain number of calories in fat, you will feel very full and satisfied, and will stay that way for some hours until your next meal time. If you eat the same number of calories from non-fats, you won't feel full or satisfied and you will probably then eat more and add more calories BEFORE your next meal is due. BUT - and this is a very important BUT in my book - A calorie is a calorie. I am quite small (5 ft), am near target (1 stone to go to my weight goal), and I could live on cream, butter, nuts, seeds (well, almost!) I HAVE to limit my calorie intake - whether from fats, carbs or protein (I personally favour fats and proteins and can do without carbs). You have to bear in mind that many people on this and other LC forums who post their food intake and give out hints and tips may have as much weight to lose as my current body weight and they can eat literally twice as many calories as I can in a day without putting on weight. So when they say "don't worry about calories/fats" this is relevant to THEM at THEIR weight (the bigger you are, the more calories your metabolism uses - as your weight decreases, so your intake has to decrease). I know that I personally have a very fine line between eating too much: SINCE LOW CARBING, if I eat above 1700 cals a day I start to put weight on; between 1300 & 1700 cals per day I maintain - which I'm looking forward to when I'm there! ; below 1300 cals I lose weight . BUT if I eat below 1100 cals a day I MAINTAIN. This is also interesting: when I was on a low fat diet, I lost weight when eating between 900 - 1100 cals a day, and put weight on if I ate more than 1400 a day (never could go below 900 so no idea what would have happened!!)

Freelast - very good points! How interesting to me too that the 10-12x rule of low-carbing works so well for you! The only quibble I have with your message is that a calorie is not a calorie...which you actually go on to prove when you mention how on low-fat you had to eat so many fewer calories to lose than wen low-carbing! Our bodies use calories differently depending on the source...

That being said...you are right and everyone needs to do what feels right for their own body to succeed at losing weight.

Lisa

Thanks again for more replies. What Freeatlast says does make more sense to me. I do believe that I have to watch calories a bit as I am not that big and cannot eat as much as someone else who is bigger.

Hello,

May I please inject my big nose?

Firstly, I want to say that way back when I weighed a mere 225 pounds, not too fat for someone of my stature and only about 25 pounds over my goal weight, I went to JENNY CRAIG.

I had an extremely physical job at that time and needed waaaaaaaaaay more calories than the pathetic 1100 they wanted me to have--and most of them from--you guessed it--carbs.

I told them I was having a hard time with so few calories, and I was not losing any weight to boot! I decided to take matters into my own hands and increased my caloric count an additional 1500 calories!!! I ate more protein, but not too much more fat (still thinking low fat was the bomb).

Guess what happened? I lost weight, and they couldn't believe it! I actually managed to lose about 20 pounds, but as soon as I went back to the carbs I was eating before BAM! All on and then a downward (or upward) spiral on the scale to over 300.

Fast forward to now. I used to keep a record of all I was eating on the SP when I first started for about the first 2 months with this program I downloaded called WEIGHT BY DATE (from www.provariant.com I think).

I input all the foods from Trader Joe's and other brands that I was eating so that I would have the EXACT amounts of fat, carbs, calories, etc.

You will fall off your chair when you find out how many calories I was and am still eating. Brace yourselves....

Somedays, over 6,000 calories, depending on whether or not I have ice cream, snacks, etc.!

And yet, I have lost 27 pounds! I've lost a lot of inches and 2 dress sizes, bras size, underwear went from a 14 to an 11 (that's a big loss in my booty!).

On 4000-6000 calories a day? Amazing, but true. And yes, I consider myself VERY insulin resistant, but on the way to healing. Your mileage may vary, this is just my 2 cents.

--TheBetty

In that case, TheBetty, does calorie intake depend on metabolism? Do some people burn off a lot and some with a sluggish metabolism burn off very little? If so, I think I fall in the latter group because as soon as I start cutting down on calories, I start losing. However, I have also started exercising which could mean my metabolism is starting to get shaken up. Interesting, isn't it? I read in a similar thread that GWilson is very light (about 130 if I remember rightly) but consuming about 2000 calories.... could mean she is very fit (like you?) and burning a lot of it off.

Judy

Just to keep this thing going: it is true that a calorie is a calorie IN THE BODY. The question is whether a calorie measure when food is 100% consumed in a laboratory accurately reflects what happens inside the body. That is where there is considerable room for debate, I believe.

Also, it is certainly true that smaller, lighter people require less calories to maintain their BMR just as an SUV requires more gas than a KIA mainly because of the difference in weight. It simply takes more energy to move it around. That is also why, if you lose 10% or your body weight you would ordinarly require 10% less energy (calories) to move yourself around. This could be partly offset by increased exercise, but it is also why traditional dieting doesn't work. When people dramatically reduce calories and drop weight, they are starving and naturally return to eating normally. Then, of course, they gain weight. A smaller person's "margin of error" would also be smaller, wouldn't it?

Finally, it is clearly not just a matter of calories (as measured in the laboratory.) There is also considerable variation in how people process food depending on their body chemistry, and other factors. I am enjoying eating a balanced diet, never being hungry or depleted, losing weight at a nice, steady pace, and feeling like a million bucks.

Stumbled across this thread and thought I’d say something about the Calorie is not a Calorie issue. Perhaps it's not necessarily about how big or how small you are, but simply because how fast we can burn food for energy and because of a previous yo-yo diets experience.

I've read an interesting book on the burning issue. It's the Balance written by Oz Garcia. He divides people into 3 groups: slow-burners, fast-burners and mixed burners, and defines 3 types of relatively low-carb diets according to how fast you 'burn'. There's a questionnaire to identify your type.

I have a friend who is exactly the same height as me, but much thinner and she eats for England! She constantly feels hungry too and has difficulty to maintain weight... it easily slides down (not up like in my case). When I was filling in the questionnaire in his book, I figured that my answers just show how different my friend and I would react in same situations. Even though I go to the gym 4 times a week and my friend goes about 1 every 2 weeks or hardly ever, she burns much more energy just sitting there and worrying about something I wouldn't even notice. My friend can be very impulsive as well as extremely emotional. She is a good example of a so-called 'fast-burner', therefore she needs to tailor her diet accordingly.

Just my 3 pence

PS. enjoyed the book, found lots of interesting parallels with Drs Eades' theories, and I think the healthy low-carb idea mirrors SP concept