Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Low-carb Diet Forum' started by pdmjoker, Jul 14, 2019.
Zoe would be proud!
I really don't think the CICO calcs would say that..
about 2,300 max according to the one's I've just used..
To calculate you basal metabolic rate an easy calculation is to multiply your bodyweight (in kg) by 24.
230lb is 105kg give or take.
105kg x 24 is 2500 Calories.
That's the amount just to stay alive without any movement (both non exercise and exercise) accounted for.
Non exercise activity can contribute up to 20% of your daily energy expenditure.
Even with a modest activity factor of 1.2 you end up at approximately 3000 calories.
I don't need an online calculator to do this as it was learned during my qualification. Oops.
Except I'm pretty sedentary apart from a short dog walk.. so I'm afraid your calculation really isn't correct.
did you miss that the calculation @bulkbiker showed has 'sedentary' on it. The non exercise activity is included in the calculation.
So it seems that the good news is that we can all throw away our glucometers and stop having to self fund strips. After all this time and expense all we really needed was a calculator!
Apologies, I'm not sure how that part-comment appeared in the post - it wasn't supposed to be posted and wasn't addressed to you.
To briefly answer your question, though, there is no suggestion that calories can be inhaled. However, the proportion of calories that actually make it from the plate into the bloodstream varies between people. For example, some people are fairly good at digesting sweetcorn, whereas in others it passes straight through. Two people can eat the same meal but differences in gut microbiome are thought to alter the amount of energy that each can obtain from that meal.
Apologies again for the confusion - what I am really interested in is the links to the studies which show that people following LCHF can lose weight despite eating more calories. Thanks.
I think my gut microbiome evolved from sloths : )
This discussion has been so informative. I had no idea how flawed the nutrition science is until the last few years when I learned how to manage my weight and diabetes and am now digging into the dietary recommendations for chronic kidney disease. What a mess. More dogma than science. Am so frustrated.
Edited to add: I do not have chronic kidney disease. My kidney function and liver function lab results are excellent thanks to the LCHF/Keto, real food diet. My friend is the one who has CKD, due to 25 years of standard of care medicine. This has to change.
@Winnie53 I agree it is so confusing and really I feel quite angry that Big Food and Big Medicine have been allowed to play with our health in the interests of lining someone's pockets.
In the fifties, my mum was told by her family doctor that smoking would help her "nerves". I fully expect dogma such as CICO, Eatwell and so on to be held equally ridiculous in the future.
Edit: and don't get me started on "healthy" processed seed oils, trans fats and packets of pure fructose that are available in supermarkets as alternative sweeteners.
A good example of some Calories Out that are difficult to include in any calculation.
jpscloud, over the years I've read accounts of doctors being told when they graduate from medical school that 50% of what they were taught will be right, the other 50% wrong. It's up to them to figure out which. Nutritionists and dietitians would do well to do the same.
I'd like to see those posting the CICO argument to familiarize themselves with pediatric endocrinologist Robert Lustig, MD, formally with UCSF who spent a good part of his career treating obese children, some diabetic. This recent lecture would be a good start...
I also have to say, my husband whose formal training is in physics is greatly enjoying this thread this morning. His first question to me was what about the mitochondria?
Every time I was put onto a low calorie diet my body decided that I needed to cut down energy expenditure - so I went cold, pale, and sleepy, it was an effort to walk or cycle to work, to actually do the work and to get back home again with some shopping. Going out in the evening or at weekends was impossible due to lacking energy and interest.
You can't go against evolution - those who could survive hard times were the ones who won out in the end, when conditions improved they were still alive to produce the next generation.
Well I have already posted an n=1 study in this thread and that's the only study that matters to me. I wonder if @ATZ has read it yet?
You will notice that my OP has been amended by a moderator. I seem to remember the missing words are something like 'I also did this experiment because I was tired of people on this forum saying fat makes you fat and that you need to reduce calories to lose weight.'
I am amazed that the people who quote thermodynamics can't seem to understand that insulin is the fat promoting hormone. If you are insulin resistant (which you can be for 20+ years before T2 diagnosis) then you can't use the insulin effectively and you have too much of it so it makes you fat. Reducing carb calories (which promote insulin secretion) and replacing them with fat calories (which don't increase insulin levels even with extra fat calories) helps you lose weight because you produce less insulin. Not rocket science is it? Yet some of you are still convinced that you always need to reduce calories to lose weight. CICO. All calories are not equal in the body's ability to use them.
Isn't this the most important point? If you find a 'diet' in the broadest sense that you enjoy, surely you will stick to it? Whether it's low fat, LCHF or what ever is secondary.
I should have also added that I have the impression the those fighting the CICO corner are not taking into account the very logical reasons why T2's limit carb intake, hence the possible perception that this forum is dogmatic in it's promotion of LCHF.
Shiba Park, according to investigative journalist Nina Tiecholz, there are now more than 100 studies showing that the low carb high fat diet works. The ongoing 2 year results of the study being carried out by Indiana University (which I believe is being funded by Virta Health) is continuing to show excellent results...
It concerns me greatly that a nutritionist would think that we are "dogmatic in the promotion of LCHF" on this forum. I am not. I facilitate a group for type 2 diabetics and pre-diabetics with an emphasis on diet and walking. While I do encourage members to move toward the LCHF and/or LCHF/Keto diet, I respect our members choice of diet because I understand there is no one diet that works for everyone.
What keeps me up at night, often listening to lectures online when I can't sleep, is how to influence/persuade local physicians and nutritionists to tell their patients/clients about the low carb and ketogenic diet for weight loss, if needed, and stopping the progression of their diabetes and diabetic complications instead of just putting them all on Metformin, and advising them to eat less, move more. Currently, most newly diagnosed diabetics are NOT given this information. [Edited to add]: Thankfully this is slowly changing around the world, including in the UK thanks to this forum and Dr. David Unwin and his wife Jen.
My hope is that the posts here, which have been excellent, have helped shift the CICO poster's thinking, even if only a little bit.
Okay, I just got this link in my email from my husband. From Peter Attia...
Am assuming he believes it worthy of posting and sharing here, but I'm at work and haven't read it, though I vaguely remember reading it previously, and it was likely above my ability to comprehend, both then and now, but perhaps you all can...
What a fantastic write up.
Does clearly separates the CICO dogma, from what many of us know to otherwise be the truth of food.
Personally I find I eat plenty, but am eating fewer times then I did, but when I tried the eatwell plate I was ravenous and exhausted.
Now I've lost weight, and got my HBA1C into a much better place then I could have on the eatwell.
That report cleared up for me why I was having issues.
In a young healthy, undamaged system maybe CICO, has a lot of merit, but once any sort of metabolic damage begins..(pre diabetic ?) Then the rules change, and CICO loses the relevance it had, as your husband helpful list explains.
Thank him so much for posting in.
EDIT. Had meant to mention that the calories pre diabetes was as you'd expect..I was eating sensibly I thought, fruits, fresh baked bread, lie calorie, low fat choices... So probably in and around 2000/2500, .. But OMG, the carb level was in the hundreds easily...
I think I'm eating a reasonable amount of calories, but I don't even count them anymore it's all about the carbs for me.. And they now run at a max of 60/80 grams a day, usually lower.
That is exactly what I found through my lifetime journey through the healthcare industry.I was predominately a Critical Care RN.I was an 'expert',yet what I knew,and didnt know,fits the 50/50 to a tee.And I am the first to admit it.
I am appalled at what I was taught and spewed out as fact.Either through my own instilled ignorance or later,when I became aware,by being muzzled by the industry.Speak up and lose your job.
I am thankful I woke up,and did my own research and found out what a monstrosity the healthcare industry truly is,and its 'experts',really are.A bunch of claptrap and nonsense.
The upshot? Be your own expert.A bit of study and you can easily go toe to toe with most 'experts',and frequently exceed them,despite their 'expert' badges that makes them Gods and the last word.They are not!