Type 2 Carbs or calories

I would say carbs. I am trying to make sure 60-70% fats in my diet and 20% or under carbs and is working so far. I also gave myself a 1500 day traditional low calorie target. I've found it quite easy to stick to that or less because on the high fat diet I;m not hungry. So in effect I am doing both High fat and low calorie.

Depends what suits you personally probably most will say count carbs but that does not work for everyone so some here do count calories

I voted for carbs over cals, found it easier for some reason and it worked for me

Carbs are an absolute for me. I need to stay under 20. Then I eat moderate protein and fill the rest in with fat to satisfy. I still need to watch calories though. As well as my fat sources. I need to stick with more mono/ plant fats like avocado, Evoo, nuts rather than saturated fats. I would estimate I eat about 1200 cals a day but I don't count them

I count both - you don't have to choose.

I was diagnosed on October 2. Since three days after diagnosis, my blood glucose has been under control (the carbs) - and since then I have also lost 70 lbs (the calories).

(But if what you're trying to control is blood glucose - the carbs are what have an immediate impact; weight loss has a long term (if any) impact on blood glucose.)

I counted both. 1200 calories and initially 60 plus g carbs later reduced to 30g. That worked for me. I lost all my excess weight and gained control of my BS. I no longer count calories as I found the right balance of fats and have maintained my new weight for almost 2 years whilst also maintaining control of my BS.

If you cut the carbs right down eating fat won't make you any fatter. But you must cut the carbs if you increase the fats or it won't work.

I would say Carbs, but then again I count neither as it would just over complicate things.

Neohdiver said:

I count both - you don't have to choose.

I was diagnosed on October 2. Since three days after diagnosis, my blood glucose has been under control (the carbs) - and since then I have also lost 70 lbs (the calories).

(But if what you're trying to control is blood glucose - the carbs are what have an immediate impact; weight loss has a long term (if any) impact on blood glucose.)

Click to expand...

Personally I think the weight loss comes about because on LCHF you just eat less because you aren't hungry. I have never counted calories just reduced carbs as much as possible.

bulkbiker said:

Personally I think the weight loss comes about because on LCHF you just eat less because you aren't hungry. I have never counted calories just reduced carbs as much as possible.

Click to expand...

I agree that is how LCHF works for some people to lose weight without counting calories - because, ultimately, losing weight comes about because you eat fewer calories than your body needs. If you eat less because you aren't hungry, that will create the calorie deficit needed to lose weight.

For good or bad, I don't have the normal hunger triggers - I actually don't know what "hungry" feels like. Some forms of fat trigger cravings for me (which are unrelated to hunger). The absence of grain based carbs triggers cravings for me (so the entire premise of the diet, for me, is a recipe for out-of-control eating (I've been eating LC, moderate protein wtih a 1200 cap (mostly) for more than 11 months, have lost 70 lbs, and have my diabetes under control - so enough experience to know that that that craving isn't just something I'll adjust to over time.). Something in Quest bars does, as well - although I have not narrowed down the specific ingredient, since I only recently discovered Quest bars when I was looking for a small treat at one of our rest stops on a recent road trip.

So I have to count calories (or devise other schemes that result in eating fewer calories) - and be very careful about the kind of fats I'm eating to avoid triggering binge eating. So far, the minor binges have been limited to low carb foods - so it hasn't impaired my BG, but I could easily eat several thousand calories of Quest bars, bacon, or cheese, for example, without batting an eyelash - even though I'm quite happy on (currently) 800 calories a day - as long as I avoid the things that trigger cravigns.

Others take HF as a license to gorge on fat, thinking that LCHF is some kind of magic that defies the laws of physics. If you're on a LCHF diet and not losing weight, because you've been enjoying the HF too much, you may need to count calories - if weight loss is a goal of yours.

I think both will have results, but carbs will have a more profound impact from personal experience, everyone is different, see what shoe fits best and wear it

Hi. In general counting calories is of little value. What many don't realise is that the calories food produces by test burning is very different from the calories obtained, and metabolism that happens, in the body hence the calories listed on packaging don't mean much. Fats and protein have only a small effect on blood sugar compared with carbs and carbs are the biggest villain when it comes to weight gain.

I count sugar not carbs or anything else have lost 2 stone in a few months , had pre diabetis and downloaded the sugar smart app and now realise all the sugar food manufacturers stuff into our food they know it's addictive and very bad for us, feel amazing off it and taste buds have been born again so to speak, fully recommend it for anyone. I read all food labels now. 120 teaspoons in 2 litres of ice cream RDA is 6 teaspoons, soon mounts up in drinks and foods, mint sauce 15 in a jar.

I tried to mix the words carbories but it made me think Cadbury, then chocolate, dark chocolate not Cadbury we need Carbories chocolate

I count both.

_lyn_lyn_1963 said:

I count sugar not carbs or anything else have lost 2 stone in a few months , had pre diabetis and downloaded the sugar smart app and now realise all the sugar food manufacturers stuff into our food they know it's addictive and very bad for us, feel amazing off it and taste buds have been born again so to speak, fully recommend it for anyone. I read all food labels now. 120 teaspoons in 2 litres of ice cream RDA is 6 teaspoons, soon mounts up in drinks and foods, mint sauce 15 in a jar.

Click to expand...

The problem with only counting sugars is that ALL carbohydrates turn to glucose once in the body. It does not matter whether it is whole wheat bread or sugar cubes. You would seem to have a fairly high tolerance for carbs and that is wonderful for you, but the majority of type 2's here do not. If I ate the diet you describe I would be in the 20's all the time. We all have different tolerances and what works for one person does not work for the next. For someone newly diagnosed with a high A1c the best plan is generally to go very low carb and then once BS is under control start adding foods using their meter to determine what works for them personally.

Daibell said:

Hi. In general counting calories is of little value. What many don't realise is that the calories food produces by test burning is very different from the calories obtained, and metabolism that happens, in the body hence the calories listed on packaging don't mean much. Fats and protein have only a small effect on blood sugar compared with carbs and carbs are the biggest villain when it comes to weight gain.

Click to expand...

I understand your view point and don't necessarily disagree but by controlling both carbs and calories I am now over six stones lighter now as has been said so often one size does not fit all.

JohnEGreen said:

I understand your view point and don't necessarily disagree but by controlling both carbs and calories I am now over six stones lighter now as has been said so often one size does not fit all.

Click to expand...

Hi. There's nothing wrong with counting both as long as you recognise, and I'm sure you do, that in general we need to low-carb. Having too much fat will also cause it to be stored unless your carb intake is near zero, so calories then need to be taken into account. My main concern is the global ignorance about calories from test burning versus actual behaviour in the body. It's this ignorance that has in part contributed to the obesity problem.