Low Carb Friends  
Netrition.com - Tools - Reviews - Faces - Recipes - Home


Go Back   Low Carb Friends > Main Lowcarb Lobby
Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-09-2013, 01:30 PM   #31
Blabbermouth!!!
 
Ntombi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Boston, then OH, then NYC, now SoCal. Whew!
Posts: 38,350
Gallery: Ntombi
Stats: Restart: 360/284.4/190
WOE: Atkins for weight loss, NK for maintenance.
Start Date: Restarted: 1-3-13 Original: 8-23-02
Right. Becoming keto-adapted often takes longer than people think, and they get impatient. But once you're through the barrier, it makes a big difference, and you never want to go back.
Ntombi is offline   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old 10-09-2013, 01:38 PM   #32
Blabbermouth!!!
 
Ntombi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Boston, then OH, then NYC, now SoCal. Whew!
Posts: 38,350
Gallery: Ntombi
Stats: Restart: 360/284.4/190
WOE: Atkins for weight loss, NK for maintenance.
Start Date: Restarted: 1-3-13 Original: 8-23-02
Annette, thanks, I just subscribed to Vinnie Tortorich's podcast.
Ntombi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2013, 03:05 PM   #33
Senior LCF Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Canada
Posts: 914
Gallery: Punkin
Stats: 160/95/100
WOE: NK or LC
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjgh06 View Post
ntombi - While I agree with most of what you said, I think you are misunderstanding my point. Even when a person is keto-adapted, if they are a high-intensity exerciser such as endurance training or marathons, the body is going to need a higher intake of carbs than the normal non-active individual. I am not saying the carbs have to come from bad areas. Many athletes add in fruits and tubers as the healthier than grains carb source. But there is no way getting around the fact that an athlete especially one is doing high intensity training needs more carbs than a non athletic, healthy person. Most high endurance trainers need at least 60-100g extra carb intake beyond the low carb plan each day during training. A good read for this is Primal Compromise for Athletes.

Otherwise, I say we just have to disagree.
Yes and this is my experience. There is a difference between being an athlete and a "competitive" athlete. They have known about keto-adaptation and the type of diet for a very long time, it isn't new information. Those setting world records are taking in a decent amount of carbs.
Punkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2013, 03:09 PM   #34
Blabbermouth!!!
 
Ntombi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Boston, then OH, then NYC, now SoCal. Whew!
Posts: 38,350
Gallery: Ntombi
Stats: Restart: 360/284.4/190
WOE: Atkins for weight loss, NK for maintenance.
Start Date: Restarted: 1-3-13 Original: 8-23-02
Not all of them.

Yes of course some eat higher carb, and yes, some eat lower carb and stay in ketosis. No one said it was a new thing. I'm only saying eating carbs and not being in ketosis is not necessary for world-class endurance athletes. That's a fact. Whether you choose to do differently doesn't mean there aren't world-class athletes setting records and competing just fine while being keto-adapted.
Ntombi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2013, 03:00 AM   #35
Senior LCF Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Canada
Posts: 914
Gallery: Punkin
Stats: 160/95/100
WOE: NK or LC
Really? When I hired a PT to prepare for a national body building competition, I was told that I had to eat 100 to 150g carbs a day. I eat around 30g net. I've also been watching a lot of elite endurance events on TV and notice that they are still drinking sugary sports drinks during the events. Do you think that is just show and they are spitting them out when the camera isn't on them? I haven't heard of any them going full ketogenic yet. It is my understanding that they do the ketogenic diet to lose the excess body fat. But during the competitive season they reintroduce carbs. Even Peter Attia, uses a carbohydrate called superstarch, which is a long chain of glucose molecules to fuel his long bike rides. Although I think if you are a well trained endurance athlete you burn a lot of fat, on longer endurance events. I don't think for example you need to have carb supplements when running a marathon. At least I never needed them. However, I didn't win either. I was under the impression that a lot of the top athletes do carb cycling, either TKD or CKD. Which means they won't be in NK, and their carbs would be over 50g/day.
Punkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2013, 05:45 AM   #36
Chatty Cathy
 
clackley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Ontario
Posts: 16,607
Gallery: clackley
Stats: 228.5/168/125
WOE: N.K.=vlc/hf/moderate protein & organic/pastured
Start Date: Restart Oct 18 2009
Super starch is a unique product and not the same as the kind of carbs that are being referred to here.
clackley is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2013, 06:40 AM   #37
Major LCF Poster!
 
avid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: treasure coast
Posts: 1,131
Gallery: avid
Stats: 180/134/131...
WOE: Lotsa veggies and LC
Most of us here aren't world class competitive athletes so I'll skip that part of the discussion. As for the original query I can only tell of my personal experience.
When I first decided to try LC, I did not count calories and lost alot of weight just counting carbs. I did eat high calorie foods such as sour cream, cream cheese etc., but even though I didn't count calories, I was conscious of how much I ate and did lose pounds of fat. As I became keto-adapted my appetite decreased. This made life alot easier, and I continued to lose. After a while, the weight loss slowed and I paid more attention to how much I ate...not what, but how much. I was deep in ketosis and so wasn't hungry but I started to elimate the 'grazing' and other 'eating when not hungry' activities. I kept losing.
As I began to approach goal, after losing almost 50 pounds, I began to stall. I came onto LCF and posted a typical daily eating plan. I got some excellent suggestions. The best ones encouraged me to count calories and cut back. I did so, specifically in my case was the amount of hwc I was using in my coffee. I drink alot of coffe and was putting about 3 tablespoons of hwc in each cup. My total calorie intake from hwc alone was nearly a thousand calories per day. (WOW)!!.
I cut back, and voila!, the last pounds dropped off and I hit (and exceeded) goal.
I have been in maintanence for several months. I weigh myself daily. I have a small range of about 1 1/2 pounds that is my "acceptable" fluctuation...when I get over the upper limit, I know I have to lose it so I cut back on peanut butter which is my current indulgence. I still use hwc in my coffee but measure a 'heavy' tblspoonful....by that I mean I measure a tablespoonful of cream and let it spill over a little into the cup. It's very satisfying and I keep at goal. Peanut butter is another story, so when I get over my allowed weight I have to 'sacrifice' and cut way back, or eliminate it entirelly for that day.
This is how I did it, and continue to do it. So far so good.
I hope we all get to a healthy, desirable weight and stay there.
You chose wisely, when you came to LCF.
__________________
Health conscious sixty something since September '12
avid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2013, 08:42 AM   #38
Way too much time on my hands!
 
peanutte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 10,650
Gallery: peanutte
Stats: 188/118
WOE: Atkins maintenance
Start Date: 01/03/09
I think Avid's experience with the HWC makes a good point. Even if a person does not want to "count calories" (which, let's be honest, really means restrict calories, because plenty of non-"calorie counters" here do track their food for the purposes of hitting a certain fat percentage total--so they have the "counted" calorie information), weighing and measuring portions can be extremely helpful.

I know I can eat right without using my online tracker and without using my food scale--I'm not dependent on those things. I do just fine on vacations or times when I'm away from my tools for several days or a week or whatever. However, I don't assume that I can accurately eyeball everything and be right about it, or trust my hunger/satisfaction to always be within my caloric needs; if I were even, let's say, two or three hundred calories over my estimations on a regular basis, those seemingly insignificant amounts would start to add up. Just as we see "carb creep" causing people to stall and regain, we also see calorie creep.

Once you are at your goal weight, and have leveled off with your loss, you ARE eating your maintenance amount. You're not losing, you're not gaining. So you pretty much have to keep doing the same thing that got you there, and that means calories, carbs, and portion control are just as important when you were losing. There may be some wiggle room for adding in a little more here and there, but your baseline is probably going to remain the same.

I don't think it's carbs vs. calories, so much as carbs, calories, fat, protein, exercise, and everything else all together.
peanutte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2013, 10:12 AM   #39
Chatty Cathy
 
clackley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Ontario
Posts: 16,607
Gallery: clackley
Stats: 228.5/168/125
WOE: N.K.=vlc/hf/moderate protein & organic/pastured
Start Date: Restart Oct 18 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by avid View Post
Most of us here aren't world class competitive athletes so I'll skip that part of the discussion. As for the original query I can only tell of my personal experience.
When I first decided to try LC, I did not count calories and lost alot of weight just counting carbs. I did eat high calorie foods such as sour cream, cream cheese etc., but even though I didn't count calories, I was conscious of how much I ate and did lose pounds of fat. As I became keto-adapted my appetite decreased. This made life alot easier, and I continued to lose. After a while, the weight loss slowed and I paid more attention to how much I ate...not what, but how much. I was deep in ketosis and so wasn't hungry but I started to elimate the 'grazing' and other 'eating when not hungry' activities. I kept losing.
As I began to approach goal, after losing almost 50 pounds, I began to stall. I came onto LCF and posted a typical daily eating plan. I got some excellent suggestions. The best ones encouraged me to count calories and cut back. I did so, specifically in my case was the amount of hwc I was using in my coffee. I drink alot of coffe and was putting about 3 tablespoons of hwc in each cup. My total calorie intake from hwc alone was nearly a thousand calories per day. (WOW)!!.
I cut back, and voila!, the last pounds dropped off and I hit (and exceeded) goal.
I have been in maintanence for several months. I weigh myself daily. I have a small range of about 1 1/2 pounds that is my "acceptable" fluctuation...when I get over the upper limit, I know I have to lose it so I cut back on peanut butter which is my current indulgence. I still use hwc in my coffee but measure a 'heavy' tblspoonful....by that I mean I measure a tablespoonful of cream and let it spill over a little into the cup. It's very satisfying and I keep at goal. Peanut butter is another story, so when I get over my allowed weight I have to 'sacrifice' and cut way back, or eliminate it entirelly for that day.
This is how I did it, and continue to do it. So far so good.
I hope we all get to a healthy, desirable weight and stay there.
You chose wisely, when you came to LCF.
Good to hear that you are doing so well Avid!

It seems that for sure you were consuming too much 'something' via the hwc. I have to wonder though, was it the added carb grams (approx 8g or so)or the amount of dietary fat would not allow for the burning of stored body fat? Neither of which have to do with the calorie amount but would explain the inability to lose those last few lbs..

My point is that we have notions about calories that are not really true. As low carbers, we already know that the types of food and their effects on the body are more significant than any other information. Yet we still hold on to the calorie count as the final analysis. It is right back to the old calories in/calories out dogma and all the implications that that brings.
__________________
Cathy
Original start - Feb. 2000 180/125

"The energy content of food (calories) matters, but it is less important than the metabolic effect of food on our body." Dr. P. Attia

"dumping carbohydrates on your broken metabolism is tantamount to doing jumping jacks on two broken legs" -The Spark of Reason

“Eat animals. Mostly fat. Enjoy!

Last edited by clackley; 10-10-2013 at 10:14 AM..
clackley is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2013, 10:31 AM   #40
Major LCF Poster!
 
avid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: treasure coast
Posts: 1,131
Gallery: avid
Stats: 180/134/131...
WOE: Lotsa veggies and LC
Quote:
Originally Posted by clackley View Post
Good to hear that you are doing so well Avid!

It seems that for sure you were consuming too much 'something' via the hwc. I have to wonder though, was it the added carb grams (approx 8g or so)or the amount of dietary fat would not allow for the burning of stored body fat? Neither of which have to do with the calorie amount but would explain the inability to lose those last few lbs..

My point is that we have notions about calories that are not really true. As low carbers, we already know that the types of food and their effects on the body are more significant than any other information. Yet we still hold on to the calorie count as the final analysis. It is right back to the old calories in/calories out dogma and all the implications that that brings.
No, not at all...If you re-read my post, I make it absolutely clear that I lost the vast majority of my excess fat weight NOT counting calories. In fact I clearly stated that I was eating very fat laden, high calorie foods. It was only after losing nearly 50 pounds and coming very close to goal that I began to look at the calories. After several months on maintenace I can tell you that the verdict is IN....carbs are by far the most important food group when it comes to weight. But if you set ambitious goals as I did, and want to be trim and fit rather than just "ok"...then all those fat calories can hinder your success. Yes, we need more fat when we go LC, but like anything else, we can get too much of a good thing.
avid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2013, 11:07 AM   #41
Way too much time on my hands!
 
peanutte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 10,650
Gallery: peanutte
Stats: 188/118
WOE: Atkins maintenance
Start Date: 01/03/09
Quote:
After several months on maintenace I can tell you that the verdict is IN....carbs are by far the most important food group when it comes to weight. But if you set ambitious goals as I did, and want to be trim and fit rather than just "ok"...then all those fat calories can hinder your success. Yes, we need more fat when we go LC, but like anything else, we can get too much of a good thing.
Yeah, I don't get why it needs to be calories OR carbs. I don't understand the resistance to acknowledging that excess calories prevent weight loss, even when carbs are low; this is mentioned in the Atkins books. As far as carbs go, some people find they need to keep their daily count really low in order to lose and maintain. Others add more carbs in OWL and do fine. Others try adding more carbs and find that doesn't work for them. I don't see how it's really any different to figure out your personal calorie needs than it is to figure out your personal carb tolerance.

If someone else who is my same age and height, who had my same starting weight, gets all the way down to my same maintenance weight by eating 2000 calories a day and let's say 15-20 grams of carbs and 70% fat, that's great. That doesn't mean it would have the same results for me. To me it's no different than looking at someone who might have lost the same amount of weight on WW eating 100 grams of carbs a day and 1400 calories--if it worked for that person, great. The important thing is what works for them as individuals and what worked for me as an individual.
peanutte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2013, 12:04 PM   #42
Major LCF Poster!
 
Aomiel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,541
Gallery: Aomiel
Stats: 330/140/140 A1c 4.8
WOE: Bernstein (Maintenance)
Start Date: January 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by clackley View Post
I sure hope I don't come across as 'spouting'. That is certainly not my intention and I do think calories do count but not as much as the absolute macro nutrient amounts, which of course can be translated into 'calories'.
Cathy,
You don't. I always love your posts and the science behind everything, but (and I think you'll agree with me), science is merely a 'possible' explanation. What works for some, doesn't work for others. Not because the 'science' is wrong but because it hasn't (or we haven't) taken *all* factors into account.
Aomiel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2013, 09:41 PM   #43
Very Gabby LCF Member!!!
 
drjlocarb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Indiana
Posts: 4,340
Gallery: drjlocarb
Stats: 274 /219/190
WOE: vlc/NK
Start Date: LC-1999,jan2010 274 NK 1-1-13 at 244
Calories or carbs??

I want to lose weight and it means achieving both to get there.
drjlocarb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2013, 01:10 AM   #44
Senior LCF member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 9,532
Gallery: Leo41
Stats: 340 then/145 now
WOE: Low carb/calorie cycling
Peanutte makes a really good point--that is often overlooked on these boards, IMO--that is, what works for someone may be applicable only to that individual, so it's best that we share our experience (as Avid did so well) rather than try to make claims that often seem to be universally applicable--and are not.

For me, for example, restricting carbs is essential to managing my weight. Even after maintaining my loss for over 3 years, I cannot go above 25g of carbs without a return of my insatiable appetite and rapid weight gain. But I'm probably an extreme example of carb sensitivity, and I know that many people can climb that carb ladder to much higher levels of carbs.

It's similar with calories. I am post-menopausal and hypothyroid, and throughout my weight loss, I had to carefully monitor calories. I could actually gain weight on just meat and eggs unless I was conscious of calories. I know this because it happened.

My 'issues' are extreme, and they are the major reason I was morbidly obese from early childhood. People here who have a similar life-long problem with weight may share some of my issues.

My point is that none of us should claim to 'know' how anyone else should manage his/her weight.

When I was over 300 lbs and beginning this journey, a doctor yelled at me and accused me of 'cheating' because I had not lost any weight that week. He assumed someone my size would easily lose if I were eating as I 'claimed.'

He was wrong. Even well over 300 lbs, I had to severely limit carbs and calories to lose about a pound a week. Years later, my endo speculated that I have a 'genetically slow metabolism,' something that would not be apparent to the average MD.

That's why I get annoyed when people post that Atkins "doesn't work" any longer for them. Usually, they assume that simply limiting carbs results in weight loss, and that may be true for most people. But if someone stops losing, it's almost always because the caloric deficit necessary for any weight loss is no longer there. Throughout my weight loss, I had to regularly lower my personal calorie limit because my 'smaller' body simply needed a lot less food.
Leo41 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2013, 05:36 AM   #45
Senior LCF Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Canada
Posts: 914
Gallery: Punkin
Stats: 160/95/100
WOE: NK or LC
Superstarch is a carbohydrate.
Punkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2013, 05:41 AM   #46
Chatty Cathy
 
clackley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Ontario
Posts: 16,607
Gallery: clackley
Stats: 228.5/168/125
WOE: N.K.=vlc/hf/moderate protein & organic/pastured
Start Date: Restart Oct 18 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Punkin View Post
Superstarch is a carbohydrate.
It does not act like a carb. It does not raise blood glucose or insulin. I thought you read Dr. Attia's blog on it?
clackley is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2013, 05:42 AM   #47
Chatty Cathy
 
clackley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Ontario
Posts: 16,607
Gallery: clackley
Stats: 228.5/168/125
WOE: N.K.=vlc/hf/moderate protein & organic/pastured
Start Date: Restart Oct 18 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by drjlocarb View Post
Calories or carbs??

I want to lose weight and it means achieving both to get there.
Just wanted to say HELLO there stranger! And I might add a 'bingo' to your comment. You can call it calorie restriction or macro nutrient restriction. The same thing in my mind except that the macro nutrients are the more significant because not all food has the same effect on the body.

Last edited by clackley; 10-11-2013 at 05:44 AM..
clackley is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2013, 07:02 AM   #48
Way too much time on my hands!
 
peanutte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 10,650
Gallery: peanutte
Stats: 188/118
WOE: Atkins maintenance
Start Date: 01/03/09
I don't see how macro nutrients are more significant if a person is trying to hit certain percentages and yet they are taking in hundreds more calories than necessary and no weight loss is happening--assuming the goal is weight loss. I do agree that a comparable amount of calories from Twinkies and potato chips are not the same as protein, leafy greens, good fats, vegetables and eggs, but again I don't see how the calories and nutrients are treated as separate things or need to be. No matter how low my calories might be on a particular day, I make sure I am getting good nutrition. In fact it's even more important with lower calories because you can't be wasting your fuel on anything that's just empty calories. On the flip side, if my nutrition looked good on paper, like if my percentages were balanced the way I wanted, but my calories were too high, I wouldn't lose or maintain.

People often seem to have an aversion to the word calories, I guess because that word brings to mind unpleasant diets on which a person felt extremely deprived and might have been eating in a way that wasn't beneficial to them, with high carbs, very low fat, inadequate protein, etc. Personally I love the fact that low-carb makes sure my calories are spent more wisely--nutritionally speaking--than on a different type of diet (for me).
peanutte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2013, 07:07 AM   #49
Very Gabby LCF Member!!!
 
drjlocarb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Indiana
Posts: 4,340
Gallery: drjlocarb
Stats: 274 /219/190
WOE: vlc/NK
Start Date: LC-1999,jan2010 274 NK 1-1-13 at 244


I have been here, just not posting much.
drjlocarb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2013, 07:13 AM   #50
Chatty Cathy
 
clackley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Ontario
Posts: 16,607
Gallery: clackley
Stats: 228.5/168/125
WOE: N.K.=vlc/hf/moderate protein & organic/pastured
Start Date: Restart Oct 18 2009
Good to know!
clackley is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2013, 08:43 AM   #51
Senior LCF member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 9,532
Gallery: Leo41
Stats: 340 then/145 now
WOE: Low carb/calorie cycling
I totally agree with Peanutte.

Because personal health is a priority for me, having to restrict my calories in order to maintain my weight actually helps to keep me on plan. I have no room for 'empty' calories because good nutrition is my priority. Eating both low carb and low calorie means that my diet is very nutritious.

I just returned from a regular check up with my endo, and all my excellent blood values testify to my healthy WOE.
Leo41 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2013, 09:54 AM   #52
Very Gabby LCF Member!!!
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,732
Gallery: momov2boys
Quote:
Originally Posted by peanutte View Post
Personally I love the fact that low-carb makes sure my calories are spent more wisely--nutritionally speaking--than on a different type of diet (for me).
momov2boys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2013, 06:26 AM   #53
Major LCF Poster!
 
avid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: treasure coast
Posts: 1,131
Gallery: avid
Stats: 180/134/131...
WOE: Lotsa veggies and LC
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leo41 View Post
I totally agree with Peanutte.

Because personal health is a priority for me, having to restrict my calories in order to maintain my weight actually helps to keep me on plan. I have no room for 'empty' calories because good nutrition is my priority. Eating both low carb and low calorie means that my diet is very nutritious.

I just returned from a regular check up with my endo, and all my excellent blood values testify to my healthy WOE.
Excellent post!
I agree with an emphatic YES!
I love the way you said it...."I have no room for empty calories"...Describes my eating plan perfectly. Food is a vehicle for fueling the cells that sustain life. If I require pleasure I can watch a soccer game or snuggle with my honey.
avid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2013, 10:40 AM   #54
Senior LCF Member
 
Kittycatmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 175
Gallery: Kittycatmom
Stats: 184/159/150
WOE: Low carb, high fat, moderate protein / gluten free
Start Date: August 2013
Yes! No more room for empty calories-- this is so true for me now. I just love reading everyone's thoughts
Kittycatmom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2013, 11:42 AM   #55
Fat Burning Machine Extraordinaire!
 
DiamondDeb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 74,023
Gallery: DiamondDeb
Stats: 125+ lbs lost
Great discussion!

The more we learn from research about how the body uses the foods we eat the more blurred the lines have become regarding the "best" or correct way to lose. While I have a need to know the facts I also have concluded I need to keep an eye on everything...or at least be mindful of what I'm eating. It definitely is not just one thing or the other. It all matters to a degree even if we are not counting or tracking.

I don't need to count calories or carbs but I tend to under-eat sometimes so I like to plug things in. I rarely weigh or measure unless it is something I don't eat that often.

Count me in the "no room for empty calories" group. Never thought I'd be in this category but it is a good fit for me. It was just squeezing through that door that was tough. lol... I kicked & fought & protested before I finally surrendered.

My doctor seems to have forgotten my real name; he calls me "Amazing!" Sadly, he does not want to know how I am doing it.
__________________
It’s truly remarkable how successful Madison Avenue has been at indoctrinating
eating habits that produce huge profits for giant multinational corporations
– and developing devastating health consequences for consumers –
into generations of society. ~
Mark Sisson, The Primal Blueprint
DiamondDeb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2013, 04:49 AM   #56
Senior LCF Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Canada
Posts: 914
Gallery: Punkin
Stats: 160/95/100
WOE: NK or LC
Quote:
Originally Posted by clackley View Post
It does not act like a carb. It does not raise blood glucose or insulin. I thought you read Dr. Attia's blog on it?
Of course! And you do have to count it as a carb. It doesn't matter that it doesn't raise your blood glucose or insulin. It is a digestible carb and you must include it as part of your carb intake, you can't just pretend it doesn't count.
Punkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:08 AM.


Copyright ©1999-2014 Friends Forums LLC. All rights reserved. - Terms of Service | Privacy Policy
LowCarbFriends® is a registered mark of Friends Forums, LLC.