Low Carb Friends

Low Carb Friends (http://www.lowcarbfriends.com/bbs/)
-   Nutritional Ketosis / High Fat, Low Carb (http://www.lowcarbfriends.com/bbs/nutritional-ketosis-high-fat-low-carb/)
-   -   Newbie Needs Assistance (http://www.lowcarbfriends.com/bbs/nutritional-ketosis-high-fat-low-carb/796559-newbie-needs-assistance.html)

dawnth1 02-06-2013 04:36 PM

Newbie Needs Assistance
 
Hello,

I appreciate all assistance. I am on day 10 keto.
About me:
Im 140lbs, and trying to get to 130lbs, which has been impossible since I turned 40.
I am over 40, very active, so I have plenty of muscle, and I burn about 400-550 calories 4 days a week approx. (Cardio and intense weights).

As I try to figure out the best ratio and calories for me (which is so hard with all the info out there) I am currently taking in on average...

20-23g net carbs, 100-110 protein (trying to bring that down), just recently getting myself to the 120 mark on fat. (I had to start doing the coconut oil to get my fats up.) Now up to about 1500-1600 Calories.

Ketostix: (I use them for informational purposes, because I look into things way too deeply :-): after day 3, trace.
Since starting CO, noted:
"Trace" morning, "pink" after breakfast/CO, "Trace" after workout, and back up to pink after about an hour+ after snack (celery/almond butter)

So Apparently I have been in Ketosis, for a little while now, and when I workout I use them all, and when Im not and eating fat, then I have excess. OK, sounds right to me.

I have lost no water weight, no inches, no lbs, no nada!

Questions:
1. Do I have to experience symptoms? Or is that for people who are secreting an abundance of ketones not being used by the body? I have yet to experience any symptoms. Very mild headache. Thats about it.

2. What really is the best ratio and calorie intake for me? I am medium framed, and build muscle easily. I have done so much research, and the most scientific equation, had me taking in over 2000 calories???

3. If I am in Keto how do I know which fat is being burned? How much is too much CO? I love the coconut oil stuff, and would love taking that down all day long, but I don't want to prevent my body fat from taking a along walk of a short pier!

4. If I do not meet my required caloric intake for the day, should I take in Coconut oil to meet that caloric requirement? Or is it better I go without the calories?

5. Seriously, do I really need to severely drop my exercise, to a measly walking for 30 min for my body to stop with the separation anxiety it apparently has for my fat cells??? I prefer being toned instead of saggy, but thats just me. :hyst:

6. If CO does not bother me before bed, is there any benefit to taking it at that time?

7. Am I just being impatient?

I would appreciate well learned knowledge from anyone who can help. Would especially love a reasonable opinion on the best ratio and calorie intake.
Thanks so much everyone!
Dawn

reddarin 02-06-2013 07:15 PM

Hi Dawn :hiya:

Lots of questions heh.

What was your way of eating prior to 10 days ago?

1. No, symptoms don't always happen I think. Or your headache may have been the extent of it. It isn't the ketones that cause the symptoms. It is the metabolism switching over to fat for energy from carbs which is why everyone is a little different on experiencing induction flu.

2. 2000 looks about right for maintenance for your weight. You mention you are now up to 1500 to 1600 calories. Were you eating a lot less before? There is no true best ratio from a formula though. They can only be guidelines since everyone's a little different.

3. Fat burning is more like fuel in a gas tank. Fresh fuel and fuel already in it are mixed not used in a first in first out manner. So the answer is don't eat so much that your tank is always full or overflowing.

4. It is a tricky question in some respects. You don't want to get too low on calories nor have too big of a caloric deficit. You'll have to experiment a little.

5. You might need to moderate it a little if you are doing more than 15 hours a week.

6. Probably not. But CO creates ketones. I was taking some as my last food of the day but I was doing it very early in the evening and I was doing it for the ketones. Do you experience a thermogenic effect with it? It is probably more of a voodoo type thing but I like the idea of making it the last thing I eat.

7. Yes/No :)

dawnth1 02-06-2013 09:49 PM

Thank you for your responses.
1. Ate about 1400to 1600 calories, low fat, med to low carbs, but then at night, I would drink alcohol a lot!
Think about a bottle of champagne a night. Can't believe I was able to stop cold turkey! Behavior, not really addiction. :-) so probably looking at more than 2000 calories a lot in sugar.

2. Since I started low carb, hi fat, I was feeling full and comfortable all day so only felt like getting in about 1200 to 1400 calories. Been great! The way I was eating before I was always hungry and shaky, especially as I work out quite a bit. I do not want to maintain, I want to lose :-) I brought my recording device down to 1700.
6. Yes, I break a gentle hot flash with Co. is that good?
Thanks!

drjlocarb 02-07-2013 07:06 AM

The keto calculator (google it) shows at 1600 cals, you would lose 2.5 lbs a month and reach goal in June. I would go with enough calories to meet BMR as a low 1380 and 62g ptn as a low.

reddarin 02-07-2013 09:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dawnth1 (Post 16244780)
Thank you for your responses.
1. Ate about 1400to 1600 calories, low fat, med to low carbs, but then at night, I would drink alcohol a lot!
Think about a bottle of champagne a night. Can't believe I was able to stop cold turkey! Behavior, not really addiction. :-) so probably looking at more than 2000 calories a lot in sugar.

2. Since I started low carb, hi fat, I was feeling full and comfortable all day so only felt like getting in about 1200 to 1400 calories. Been great! The way I was eating before I was always hungry and shaky, especially as I work out quite a bit. I do not want to maintain, I want to lose :-) I brought my recording device down to 1700.
6. Yes, I break a gentle hot flash with Co. is that good?
Thanks!

Actually, champagne is a LC friendly drink heh. Here is a post with some information about picking the right one: http://www.lowcarbfriends.com/bbs/ma...l#post13578186

I guess the less expensive ones do have sugar despite what the label says because they are put on the shelf before all of the sugar is converted.

So, 1200 to 1400 kept your weight the same? I'd probably try to keep the calories between at least 1500 and 1600 so your daily caloric deficit isn't so huge. Just ballparking it your deficit at 1200 calories looks like about a 1400 calorie gap in vs. out.

The thermogenic effect is cool, and part voodoo depending on what you read, because it burns calories in and of itself.

dawnth1 02-07-2013 03:43 PM

Yes, I ate about 1400 calories, plus champagne which is still alot of sugar calories about 500 right? So thats about 2000 calories, and I suspect the only thing that has been keeping me at 140 is the exercise..

Champagne ok for Low carb diet? no way!! Why? its fermented sugar, like beer? Not that Im complaining :-)

So If I understand you both (correct me if I am wrong)
1600 as a high, and 1380 as a low. I will look into that calculator!

Now, if my diet doesnt reach my minimum calories, should i supplement with CO so that I am guaranteed the number of calories I need to keep my body from thinking its starving?

Thanks again. Every bit of information is so valuable!
Thanks!

reddarin 02-08-2013 09:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dawnth1 (Post 16246370)
Yes, I ate about 1400 calories, plus champagne which is still alot of sugar calories about 500 right? So thats about 2000 calories, and I suspect the only thing that has been keeping me at 140 is the exercise..

Right, but since starting NK you've been eating very low calories because of the appetite suppression you've experienced:

"Since I started low carb, hi fat, I was feeling full and comfortable all day so only felt like getting in about 1200 to 1400 calories"

...and your weight is rock steady. I think it is the calorie deficit that is the problem. That is, you are not eating enough and your body is holding on to every ounce of fat it can because of the perceived famine.

Quote:

Champagne ok for Low carb diet? no way!! Why? its fermented sugar, like beer? Not that Im complaining :-)
Yes, the sugars get used up so it ends up being a low carb drink. But brands that are rushed to market and put on the shelf too quickly still have unconverted sugar so they are not necessarily low carb friendly. That link I posted has more information about what to look for. :)

Quote:

So If I understand you both (correct me if I am wrong)
1600 as a high, and 1380 as a low. I will look into that calculator!
No. I do not believe that starving your body with huge calorie deficits is the best way to lose weight nor is it healthy.

Phinney uses this formula for calculating daily caloric needs: (reference_weight/2.2)*35 for an active person.

Assuming 130 is an appropriate weight for you (130/2.2)*35 = 2068 calories a day. But you work out a lot so I think your daily use is higher than that and something to keep in mind.

If you eat at least 1500 calories a day your caloric deficit should be at least 600 calories. But if your really burning 2500 calories a day your real deficit shoots up to about 1000. Calorie deficit is important because the body responds with cortisol when it is stressed and high deficits stress the body. Cortisol does a lot but one of the bad things for you is it acts to hold on to fat.

Looking at it from the other angle, pushing calories down and keep reducing them till your body cries uncle, you get into territory where the body starts doing bad things to your lean body mass no matter how much protein you eat. That is the magical 1200 number that you see a lot. Even I say don't go under 1200 sometimes but 1200 is a rotting floor in a creaky attic. Phinney said he wouldn't recommend 1200 calories without clinical supervision. I doubt he meant, 'but 1201 is fine'. He also said that in the 10s of thousands of patient data he has seen he's never seen an adult over 5 foot tall that is ambulatory that uses less than 1200 calories. If you look at how he is phrasing that it is clear that he is not saying that 1200 is a safe floor for anyone that isn't practically comatose.

You might try reasonable calorie cycling. 1800 on workout days. 1500 on rest days. Or some rational amount like that.

Quote:

Now, if my diet doesnt reach my minimum calories, should i supplement with CO so that I am guaranteed the number of calories I need to keep my body from thinking its starving?
Yes. You need to consistently hit your calorie goal to have the data to make an informed decision about possibly reducing them (or raising them). And you need to keep a sane calorie deficit. You don't have a big window of calories to experiment with for going lower. The ideal is to eat as much as possible and lose weight rather than eat as little as possible and lose weight.

Keep in mind that close to goal weight loss is usually the most difficult weight loss. And, of course, we are all every one of us N=1 experiments.

:)

Yvonnem2000 02-08-2013 09:36 AM

I skimmed the responses, didn't read every word. I know you said you're bringing protein down. For me, I had to bring protein down to about 75 g to lose weight. That worked for me last fall, at least. I haven't been doing it long enough this time around to tell if it's working yet.

drjlocarb 02-08-2013 11:50 AM

Word of warning, when I followed the 30x kg reference wt advice, I gained 10 lbs in 1 month. Four months later, I am still trying to lose the last 2 pounds of that new found weight. Your metabolism may not be as wonky as mine.

reddarin 02-08-2013 01:37 PM

1500 calories is 25/kg not 30.

Which is interesting because 5 points is the spread Phinney gave for active versus very sedentary.

dawnth1 02-08-2013 07:29 PM

Ok so if I really need a minimum of 1200 just for my body to do it's basic survival duties + 400 spent on exercise, that's 1600. Then I should probably tack on a couple hundred more to cover additional caloric expenditure. Maybe 1800 is good for workout days, and 1600 form noon? But then how I determine the best percentages for protein?

reddarin 02-08-2013 08:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dawnth1 (Post 16248852)
Ok so if I really need a minimum of 1200 just for my body to do it's basic survival duties + 400 spent on exercise, that's 1600. Then I should probably tack on a couple hundred more to cover additional caloric expenditure. Maybe 1800 is good for workout days, and 1600 form noon? But then how I determine the best percentages for protein?

Is 1200 your BMR number?

1600 and 1800 look like good places to start to me. You can tweak them up or down after you get a feel for how they work for you.

Protein is not a percentage. And it is best to regard macro percentages as a tool to indicate how you are doing rather than an isolated benchmark. More along the nature of 2 points make a line and the 3rd checks the line. The macro percentages are the 3rd point but the 3rd point by itself is meaningless if you follow me. Determine your real protein grams and everything else is based off of that.

For example...

130 pounds at 1.5g protein per kg is 89g of protein.

89 grams of protein is 356 calories.

1600-356 = 1244

Your carbs and fat come from those calories. If you eat 30g carbs (total not net) that's 120 calories so the remaining 1124 would go to fat which is 124g of fat.

Expressed as macro percentages you end up with 70% fat, 22% protein and 7% carbs.

Your protein percentage will rise or fall based on how much fat and carbs you eat but your real protein grams should be 89g.

See how the macro % are just checks on the system?

You do not have to have them. If you set your protein goal and keep your total carbs under x amount and keep an eye on your calories it can be less of a hassle than messing with the %s.

I use them and I like them because I can tell at a glance how I am doing by looking at the percentages. If I map out my day on my food log and my protein % is way high it is a red flag that one of the other two macros is whacky or my calories are out of whack. When I look back at a list of my macros and trailing weigh-ins I can see at a glance trends that looking at raw grams would be difficult to see. And, of course, NK is the quintessential LCHF woe so keeping the fat macro up is important in my opinion unless there is some other factor present. I have to end all of my posts with that caveat heh.

dawnth1 02-08-2013 09:13 PM

Thank you!! Very informative. Since I didn't know how many grams of protein I needed, I didn't know the rest. Now I know. I'm at 20 grams carbs. Thanks again!

Susanpmi 02-23-2013 12:59 PM

So much math! I have been reading this forum for a month now and trying to do my best to follow the percentages, but I am not cut out for all of these calculations. That is why I started low carb, about 8 or 9 years ago - because I hated counting anything. I lost about 15 lbs. and was stable at my goal weight, maintaining with more of a South Beach approach for about 6 years, but since I hit 50, I have gained the 15 back. My height/weight numbers and goals are similar to yours, dawnth1, and I have been trying this for almost a month and have gained four pounds! I am going to admit that most of the gains I saw were when I "accidentally" went off plan by eating something I did not prepare myself (restaurants, friend's houses), only to figure out it must've had more sugar in it than I thought. I find it really, really easy to stay on plan when I just stay home and cook every single morsel for myself from scratch. But I am a social butterfly and find it really difficult to stay on plan when I stray from that the slightest bit. Maybe I am not cut out for this WOE, what with my aversion to math and the joy I take at having someone else cook for me. But I love the satisfied feeling the high fat foods give me. I tried the Dukan diet (my parents who both just turned 80, and my sister in law had amazing success with this approach) and could NOT take it. That food seemed like prison fare to me compared to ketogenic foods. I definitely have a "fat" tooth, rather than a "sweet" tooth. I am thinking I am going to give myself two more weeks on this plan and then reassess the situation. I enjoy the forum and all the I get here.

reddarin 02-23-2013 01:58 PM

Skip the math then Susan. If your numbers are about the same as Dawns just get your protein right, about 90g, keep the carbs low and eat good fats for the rest. No particular need to count calories unless you are not getting results.

If you get hungry for no reason and fat isn't satiating you then drop protein a smidge, like 10g or so, and double check your fat sources for PUFAs (avoid them) and carb creep. Use total carbs not net.

:)

Susanpmi 02-23-2013 04:05 PM

Oh, thanks reddarin, I have been thinking net carbs. Wow, if you like vegetables, like I do, it can be pretty challenging to stay low enough on total carbs.

reddarin 02-23-2013 05:29 PM

The trick is to stay below the trigger level for water retention which seems to be 60g or so total carbs. You could try to start at that level and bump downwards as needed but it is a lot of carbs for NK. Your particular level could even be higher than 60g. You'll have to experiment and always keep in mind that you are experimenting to establish parameters - no failures just figuring out what works for you.

mizzcase 02-23-2013 05:57 PM

Yes, listen to Red, he knows his stuff!

Remember, everyones body is different! I am 5'4 and eat between 1500-1750 calories a day, per Red's recommendation. I have been losing EFFORTLESSLY. My BMR is 1390 and when I tried to eat around that per the other NK "advocates", I stalled out.

I never gained 10 pounds in a month either way because I wasn't overeating by 35,000 calories a month. :)

When in doubt, always start out at higher calories, then work your way down. I can't think as to why anyone would start off limiting calories and starving themselves for no reason. :)

MerryKate 02-23-2013 11:04 PM

So, how many calories do you cut back at a time..50 calories...100...200? I'm averaging 1850/day this month, but I'm losing really slowly and thinking I need to start cutting back my intake. I'd also been counting net carbs, and after looking at all the protein calculations, I've been going with the lowest numbers - around 60-70 grams/day. Would eating too little protein cause a weight-loss slowdown?

mizzcase 02-24-2013 05:44 AM

Hm, I don't think too little protein would cause a slowdown.. People eat <10% protein on fat fasts and lose like crazy (myself included). Maybe its the carbs for you? I have no metabolic issues and stop losing if I eat over 30 net carbs-- whether I'm eating 1200 or 2000 calories a day.

I think the amount you decreasing calories by is a wholly individual issue, but I'd roll with 100 per week, measuring your progress. If your eating 1850, try 1750 for a week. If you don't lose at all with that, try 1650, etc. Keep your monthly cycles in mind though. I can never tell what my body is going to do at any given time of the month, LOL!

MerryKate 02-24-2013 03:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mizzcase (Post 16277264)
Keep your monthly cycles in mind though. I can never tell what my body is going to do at any given time of the month, LOL!

Thanks for the help. That's actually part of my problem - it can take me a month to see any progress on the scale. My weight is lowest on days 10 and 20; the rest of the month I'm up and down all over the place. :/ After reading Reddarin's comment, I'm going to make a concerted effort to keep my total carbs down below 30 and see what happens in the month of March. I was doing so well on NK - I really hope I can get back there again.

reddarin 02-24-2013 04:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MerryKate (Post 16278192)
Thanks for the help. That's actually part of my problem - it can take me a month to see any progress on the scale. My weight is lowest on days 10 and 20; the rest of the month I'm up and down all over the place. :/ After reading Reddarin's comment, I'm going to make a concerted effort to keep my total carbs down below 30 and see what happens in the month of March. I was doing so well on NK - I really hope I can get back there again.

Hi Kate.

At 59:10 in the Long Term Stalls podcast. Phinney says that there is an inflammatory phase (late luteal phase) just before menses. He said that cold water ocean fish two to three times a week or about a gram per day of dietary fish oil supplement may help too because of Omega3. "That may help with both preventing the weight swings and also some of the inflammatory mediated symptoms in the late luteal phase".

Since LC is a low inflammation woe, I think that if you eat at the low end of your protein range (but careful not to eat too little) and try to eat minimal total carbs during that time you may be able to overcome the extra inflammation and steady your weight or see losses.

My thinking is that in a case like yours you have more things going on causing more inflammation than a woman that has a milder experience. So if you maximize the low inflammation aspects of LC/NK, eat the fish or fish oil as Phinney suggests during that time and then resume normal NK the rest of the month you may have better results.

Punkin 02-25-2013 05:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by reddarin (Post 16276502)
check your fat sources for PUFAs (avoid them) and carb creep.
:)

I thought these were the good fats. Ie. fish oils, nuts, flax etc. I thought I read in the Phinney and Voleks book that these are the fats we should make an effort to get into our diet. Why are you saying to avoid them. Please explain.

reddarin 02-25-2013 06:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Punkin (Post 16278900)
I thought these were the good fats. Ie. fish oils, nuts, flax etc. I thought I read in the Phinney and Voleks book that these are the fats we should make an effort to get into our diet. Why are you saying to avoid them. Please explain.

Can you give me some examples of what you read?

reddarin 02-25-2013 07:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Punkin (Post 16278900)
I thought these were the good fats. Ie. fish oils, nuts, flax etc. I thought I read in the Phinney and Voleks book that these are the fats we should make an effort to get into our diet. Why are you saying to avoid them. Please explain.

Wait. I said:

"check your fat sources for PUFAs (avoid them) and carb creep"

I have the Living book but not the Performance book. So if you could give me a page number from the Living book where Phinney/Volek encourage PUFAs as a macro fat source I can look it up. You'll have to quote the Performance book.

But, perhaps you are misreading what I said? Aren't PUFAs associated with vegetable oils? Fish oil is not a fat source, it is a supplement. Fish itself is a protein source. Flax is usually eaten as a fiber source. Nuts are a protein source that is fatty.

Don't most protein sources contain Omega6 in ample quantities?

I think the Omegas are usually referred to as 'essential fats' not 'good fats'. On the other hand, mono and sat fats are typically referred to as good fats and PUFAs are bad fats. For LC/NK anyway.

Punkin 02-25-2013 01:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by reddarin (Post 16279110)
mono and sat fats are typically referred to as good fats and PUFAs are bad fats. For LC/NK anyway.

Maybe you could just explain why PUFAs are bad fats for LC/NK, because it might be confusing. I know I am confused, since I thought there were good fats.

reddarin 02-25-2013 01:52 PM

I'd love to. Can you post the page numbers from the Living book and some text from the Performance book that made you feel that I was incorrect? I'd like to know what exactly I am addressing from the books.

reddarin 02-25-2013 02:34 PM

The Art and Science of Low Carb Living Page 218 (This chapter is about cooking with and eating fat):

"After 50 years of demonizing fat, there are two obvious impediments to adding good fats back into our diet. The first is limited access, and the second is its preparation as foods we like to eat.

Access to fat? You ask. There's lots of fat to be had in stores and restaurants. Yes, but what kind? Most of the fat in prepared mayonnaise, dressings, sauces, and marinades is the wrong kind for a person on a high fat diet - high in polyunsaturated fat (PUFA) from the cheap, government subsidized soy, corn, and cottonseed oils used as ingredients. Olive oil is considered too expensive an ingredient by most manufacturers and the less expensive high oleic (low PUFA) versions of safflower and sunflower oils are slow coming to market. After decades of telling consumers that high PUFA oils are good for you, it is hard for the marking folks in the big food companies to start saying the opposite without looking foolish."

reddarin 02-25-2013 03:16 PM

This is from Butter Believer.

PUFA: What is it and Why Should it Be Avoided? | Butter Believer

Google 'butter believer what is pufa'.


"Why is Polyunsaturated Fat So Bad?
If you google “polyunsaturated fat,” you’re soon bombarded with the “facts” from mainstream medical sites advocating the use of PUFA over that dastardly artery-clogging saturated fat we’re all told to shun from our diet. But, those of us who’ve been educated from sources other than those profiting off of the food and medical industries understand that’s a big load of Metamucil’ed crap. They are onto something, though. Not all fats are healthy. So what makes polyunsaturated fat so inferior to saturated? There’s more to it than you might think.

DNA-Disrupting Inflammation and Free Radical Damage
The most widely-recognized danger of PUFA oils is the inflammation in the body caused by consuming it in excess. Lots of foods are somewhat inflammatory. And, that’s okay. A little inflammation actually keeps things like your immune system running smoothly. But when taken to the extreme, inflammation isn’t so helpful. High levels of inflammation have been linked to all sorts of serious issues, like heart disease, diabetes, and even cancer.

Excessive inflammation in the body from PUFAs happens because of the presence of free radicals formed in the processing of the industrial oils (like vegetable and canola), which renders them rancid. Free radicals are atoms with an unpaired electron floating around, which causes them to basically go nuts. These compounds attack cell membranes and red blood cells, and they even cause damage to DNA and RNA strands, leading to cellular mutations in the body’s tissues. In skin, it causes wrinkles and premature aging. In blood vessels, the buildup of plaque. In tissues and organs, it can set the stage for tumors to form. I think you get the picture. Free radicals are bad, bad news, and they’re ever-present in industrial PUFA oils.

reddarin 02-25-2013 03:48 PM

More from that article at Butter Believer:

"PUFA and Your Metabolism
PUFA oils have an absolutely devastating effect on the body’s metabolism. That’s because PUFA’s directly interfere with the functioning of the thyroid gland, and also how well the thyroid hormones are able to be utilized, or metabolized, by the body. This type of interference with thyroid functioning is a major cause for a sluggish metabolism in the body.

Oh and remember that pesky inflammation PUFAs tend to cause? Well, that leads to a big rise in the counter-inflammatory stress hormones of cortisol (the “belly fat” hormone) and a weird thing called Suppressor of Cytokine Signaling (SOCS-3). That’s because those hormones come out to play when they start seeing things like Interleukin-6, which although it sounds more like the name of a sci-fi starship commander, is an example of an inflammatory molecule which are known to rise in direct proportion to the presence of omega-6 PUFAs in the diet. The stress hormones released as a result are a big, big deal. Why? Matt Stone of 180DegreeHealth explains:"


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:46 PM.