Why full fat greek yoghurt?

[Sarbak]

I have been using FAGE fat free greek yoghurt for the last few months, but I've noticed quite a few people saying that full fat is better... but is this just because the higher fat content will supposedly make you feel fuller? For someone who is trying to lose weight with a combination of low carbs and keeping half an eye on calories, I can eat twice as much fat free as I can full fat and I don't struggle with hunger at all with what I eat.

For example, the FAGE fat free per 100g is 54cal, 0g fat, 3g carbs, 10.3g protein with no sweeteners or obvious nasties added.
By comparison, Yeo Valley greek style is 129cal, 9.7g fat, 5.3g carbs and 5g protein

I completely agree with the idea of avoiding "low fat" stuff, because that often has added sugars. Tesco low fat greek style, for example, having 7.2g of carbs, over twice as many as the fat free one I eat.

 

[Hotpepper20000]

Have you checked what the fat fee yogurt does with your BG?

I have been using FAGE fat free greek yoghurt for the last few months, but I've noticed quite a few people saying that full fat is better... but is this just because the higher fat content will supposedly make you feel fuller? For someone who is trying to lose weight with a combination of low carbs and keeping half an eye on calories, I can eat twice as much fat free as I can full fat and I don't struggle with hunger at all with what I eat.

For example, the FAGE fat free per 100g is 54cal, 0g fat, 3g carbs, 10.3g protein with no sweeteners or obvious nasties added.
By comparison, Yeo Valley greek style is 129cal, 9.7g fat, 5.3g carbs and 5g protein

I completely agree with the idea of avoiding "low fat" stuff, because that often has added sugars. Tesco low fat greek style, for example, having 7.2g of carbs, over twice as many as the fat free one I eat.

 

[Sarbak]

Have you checked what the fat fee yogurt does with your BG?

Nope - I'm not testing yet, but I do know that my HbA1c has dropped from 65 to 37 in the last 4 months that I've been including it in my diet, so I'm guessing it's not doing anything terrible.

 

[bulkbiker]

but is this just because the higher fat content will supposedly make you feel fuller? For someone who is trying to lose weight with a combination of low carbs and keeping half an eye on calories,

There's no "supposedly" about it..it will very likely keep you feeling fuller for longer.
The problem with calorie restriction is that after a while it stops working then you have to cut more then more etc etc
Once your metabolism starts to slow then you have to cut even more.
Eat until satiated then no more is a better strategy utilising your hormones rather than fighting them.
It's far more what and when you eat than how many calories.

 

[sno0opy]

I tend to avoid the "low fat" standard yogurt as it often has quite high carbs compared to full fat.

However I don't want the calories or fat from the full fat.

I tend to go for the Skyr, or Skyr style "extra thick" greek style yogurt. Lower calories, zero fat but i find it quite satisfying and it has a good protein content.

It depends how hard your hitting the LCHF diet as to if you go one direction or the other. Trying to do LCHF while restricting calories is tough as you just often cant get enough into you to be full.

I was restricting to 1800 calories for the best part of a year and didn't find my self hungry too much if i selected the right foods that I could eat a bit more of with less calories.

 

[Mbaker]

Tends be be that low fat yogurts fill the taste profile with added sugar. I believe in the Pareto principles, so if you are getting great results objectively via your biomarkers, fat loss, you don't get hungry during your eating windows, you like the taste of low fat yogurt then why not have it. I like 1 sour cream low fat version which is low in sugar but I like the taste of once in a while - the rest of my diary is full fat from a local dairy farm.

 

[JoKalsbeek]

I have been using FAGE fat free greek yoghurt for the last few months, but I've noticed quite a few people saying that full fat is better... but is this just because the higher fat content will supposedly make you feel fuller? For someone who is trying to lose weight with a combination of low carbs and keeping half an eye on calories, I can eat twice as much fat free as I can full fat and I don't struggle with hunger at all with what I eat.

For example, the FAGE fat free per 100g is 54cal, 0g fat, 3g carbs, 10.3g protein with no sweeteners or obvious nasties added.
By comparison, Yeo Valley greek style is 129cal, 9.7g fat, 5.3g carbs and 5g protein

I completely agree with the idea of avoiding "low fat" stuff, because that often has added sugars. Tesco low fat greek style, for example, having 7.2g of carbs, over twice as many as the fat free one I eat.

Full fat Greek yoghurt is filling, relatively low carb, and.... If you like another type better, and it fits with how you want to eat, and has fewer carbs to boot, (Bonus!) you eat whichever yog you want! Really, it's general advice. If you find something else that suits you better, go for it!

 

[Sarbak]

I imagine in relation to diabetes it could have to do with the way it is metabolised, as dairy still has some natural sugars/carb content, and consuming carbs with fat helps slow the uptake of sugars into your system preventing spikes in your blood glucose levels,

Good point and I agree, but I thought protein did the same, ie slowing the uptake of any sugars - so with this having twice as much protein per 100g than a full fat example, I figured it was probably comparable and my fat free version frees up more calories for all the double cream I'm now having in my tea and coffee lol

 

[Sarbak]

There's no "supposedly" about it..it will very likely keep you feeling fuller for longer.

Poor choice of words on my part - I wasn't really disputing that, but my point was that I'm not hungry with my way of eating, so if that's the key benefit then I don't feel like I need it, so I'd rather save the unnecessary calories. Does that make sense?

 

[Sarbak]

The problem with calorie restriction is that after a while it stops working then you have to cut more then more etc etc
Once your metabolism starts to slow then you have to cut even more.

You've said this a few times before, but it's only partially true - there is a limit to which your metabolism will slow and people will often reach a plateau in their weight loss because of this, but it's definitely not true that it's exponential and that you have to continually reduce calories to see weight loss. You absolutely may need to make some changes to kick start the metabolism again, but that does not need to be a further reduction of calories. I speak from experience. Perhaps you do too - so let's agree that we're all different and that calorie restriction works for me and may not for others

 

[Sarbak]

It depends how hard your hitting the LCHF diet as to if you go one direction or the other. Trying to do LCHF while restricting calories is tough as you just often cant get enough into you to be full.

I'm eating around 1400 to 1500 calories a day (I haven't got a strict limit, just monitoring out of interest), with probably 40-50g of carbs, 75-100g of fat and 100-120g of protein. I haven't had a problem with hunger or lack of energy at all. I am a firm believer that a large part of feeling hungry is actually mental rather than physical - if I keep myself busy/occupied/distracted, I just don't think about food.

 

[ianf0ster]

There is no reason to avoid your zero fat Fage Yoghurt. I think that is the type that Dr Ted Naiman uses, though sometimes he eats a low fat low carb version instead. He tends to be more concerned with weight loss or body building than with diabetes, so some of hi suggestions are far too carby for my BG.

In general full fat greek yoghurt is a good for diabetics following LCHF - without calorie restriction (eating to your BG meter) which you have chosen not to do. There are many different ways to achieve the same goal of non-diabetic BG and weight loss.
Bulkbiker and some others have chosen carnivore, Some have chosen Keto, I have chosen very low carb not quite keto, yet other people get results from lowish carb and yet others from very low calorie (800) starvation diets - either shakes or real food.

So long as it works for your body, your taste in food and your pocket then there is no single correct way. However since it needs to be sustained/maintained then my opinion (backed by reported results from others) is that Low Carb Higher Protein, Higher traditional Fat without Calorie restriction is the easiest for most people. No further modification is required for the rest of my life!

 

[bulkbiker]

but it's only partially true - there is a limit to which your metabolism will slow and people will often reach a plateau in their weight loss because of this

You are quite right I phrased it badly - what I meant was "sustained weight loss long term".

We can all lose weight short term.
Simply stop eating.
However as a long term plan that isn't sustainable.

Whilst I can concur that short term caloric restriction is effective it is exactly that a short term measure.

I am a prime example of the diet, lose, regain cycle that many of us have unsuccessfully followed for years.
I'm guessing you may be too?

 

[TeddyTottie]

The full-fat stuff tastes nicer to me, and after a lifetime of being told not to eat fat, it makes me feel rebellious to stuff it down! Actually I have mostly moved on to double cream these days because... I can, with no detriment to health, weight or BG.

But if you prefer the 0% stuff and it suits you, why change?

Btw - has anyone tried this?

https://uk.fage/yoghurts/fage-trublend/fage-trublend-vanilla

It’s allegedly yoghurt and fruit and not too much else. Although I note it contains maize starch, presumably as a thickener (which it wouldn’t need if it had a decent fat percentage ). Around 4.1 to 4.8 g of carbs/100g depending on variety. But I can’t see how big the pot is, so I dunno the amount per serving.

 

[DCUKMod]

You've said this a few times before, but it's only partially true - there is a limit to which your metabolism will slow and people will often reach a plateau in their weight loss because of this, but it's definitely not true that it's exponential and that you have to continually reduce calories to see weight loss. You absolutely may need to make some changes to kick start the metabolism again, but that does not need to be a further reduction of calories. I speak from experience. Perhaps you do too - so let's agree that we're all different and that calorie restriction works for me and may not for others

Hi there, I'm not taking any sides in this difference of opinion, but there have been quite a number of people commenting on the forum, over time, about how their metabolisms have worked over time, regarding weight loss.

Quite a number state that over time, they found themselves losing weight very easily in the first instance, then having to eat less and less to lose weight.

It could make an interesting thread at some point, if that interests you.

 

[LaoDan]

I need my metabolism to be firing on all cylinders. Restricting calories too hard prevents me from being on top of my game. Even at minus 10% BMR, I still find myself needing to cycle in extra meals from time to time. I need to feel good, strong and healthy. Even if I’m only dropping 1 or 2 kg per month.. though, everyone has different goals

 

[zeeeee]

I couldn't keep up with low calories I started getting hungrier and hungrier and i came to the conclusion low carb and low calories isn't sustainable over the long term, it took me a while to realise this so now i eat to satiety and eat when I'm hungry wether its OMAD or 2 meals a day and my weight has stayed steady at 72kg down from 96kg which I feel is the perfect weight for me.

 

[carty]

I would definitely recommend that you test your BGs to check how your body deals with what you eat .We are all different and what is ok for me may send your BGs into orbit .
Carol

 

[Sarbak]

Whilst I can concur that short term caloric restriction is effective it is exactly that a short term measure.

I am a prime example of the diet, lose, regain cycle that many of us have unsuccessfully followed for years.
I'm guessing you may be too?

I've not really been an on again/off again dieter. I'm an all or nothing person, so unless I am 100% committed, I don't even bother to try. So, I've lost weight only once before - about 10 or 11 years ago, where I followed pretty much the same diet I'm doing now (low carbs - focus on low GI) and lost 8 stone over 6 months. I still had about 3 stone to go, but had a 'cheat' day for my birthday and then completely fell off the wagon until my diagnosis back in May. Whilst I can't say with certainty, I have no reason to believe that my weight loss wouldn't have continued back then, albeit no doubt slowing up the closer I got to my goal. So, it's a somewhat tried and tested method for me and until the scales prove otherwise, I have no reason to believe that I can't sustain my current level of weight loss for at least another few months, when I expect it to slow down and become harder to lose the last stone or two.

 

[Sarbak]

Quite a number state that over time, they found themselves losing weight very easily in the first instance, then having to eat less and less to lose weight.

It could make an interesting thread at some point, if that interests you.

Yeah, maybe I'll start something. At the end of the day, we're all different - in our will power, choice of foods, calorie restriction level, general metabolism, activity levels etc etc, so results are absolutely going to be different for everyone.