• Guest, the forum is undergoing some upgrades and so the usual themes will be unavailable for a few days. In the meantime, you can use the forum like normal. We'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the 2025 Survey »

LCHF isn't working.

Fage natural yogurt is
yes a tad
Natural full fat fage yogurt is 3.8g
 

I once worked on the renal unit of a hospital. The dietician used to say that the only people who kept to their diets were the ones who became completely obsessive about them. So my advice is to keep on obsessing - I certainly shall.
 

Thanks very much. Luckily I have no problems eating cheese. One of my problems with cutting carbs is that, the last time I checked, my BMI was 16.5, and I think it may have gone down since. I want to get it back at least to 18.5.
 
Alexandra100 said:
Thanks very much. Luckily I have no problems eating cheese. One of my problems with cutting carbs is that, the last time I checked, my BMI was 16.5, and I think it may have gone down since. I want to get it back at least to 18.5.
Click to expand...
Then chow down on some good fats. Like cheese and nuts. Sounds awful doesn't it ?? Haha
 
going for a 20mile walk? Someone else doing 20 lengths of swimming! In my mind this is activity at a level of training for marathons, in my sad reality. But it probably explains why LCHF for me (and like the person who started this thread) is not shifting my weight nor my BG. Bad news for me but it is the reality. My new resolution is to stay below 100gr carbs per day for next 3 months and see what happens. I will also try to stick to walking every weekend - there is not time in the evenings as I work long hours). I ll report back in 3 months...
 
@Dinet, do you test before and 2 hours after meals? 100 grams of carbs for day for me would be too much. I eat to my meter and my meter dictates that 30 grams per day is my max. I also need to do a 16 hour fast like many on this forum where I eat my 3 meals in an 8 hour window and fast for the remaining 16 hours.
 
Dinet, I'm convinced that walks don't have to be marathon length to rev up the metabolism. In fact I have a feeling several shorter walks in the day are more effective than one long one bookended by inactivity. I don't know if even this is realistic for you, but these days I am often going out for a 10-15 minute walk just before bedtime. Then again after breakfast if I can dredge up the time. I'm not sure exercise is the key to weight loss, though I do think it may help keep the bg down. I used at one time to go for 15 mile runs, and then come in and compulsively hoover up anything in my kitchen that didn't move. Naturally losing weight didn't happen.

Good luck anyway. Are you posting on the thread for moderate exercisers?
 
I agree. Shorter slower walks afte rmeals are better. Raising heart rate raises adrenaline and cortisol therefore raising bg. Also keeping it lower and slower burns more fat as you're not in the anaerobic phase but more the fat burning phase.

I think short slow walks help bg but lowering carbs ( diet ) is by far most effective. I can't handle much more than 20 c per day. I need to keep glycogen stores and empty or excess carbs or protein just float around.
 

Most weeks I don't do a long walk. Most days I walk for at least 10 minutes after the evening meal. Research has shown that you can get a lot of benefits JUST from standing up every 30 minutes and walking 10 steps!

Simple things like walking up the office stairs, parking a little distance from the office, or getting off the train one station before home can make a big difference.

100g of carbs a day is a bit high for LCHF, I think the best results are from under 20g a day at least for the first few weeks, then once the body has learned to burn fat, carbs can be increased upto something like 100g. Or even just fast for two days along with a little exercise to get your body into fat burning mode.
 
Last edited:
Decided to try and get more fat into my diet by drinking double cream.
It seems like the only thing I haven't tried.
2 more weeks then I'll know.
 
When did Low Carbing mean under 30g a day? it seems to be creeping ever lower. It used to be under 130g a day. Is this a new development, to tell people to go ever lower before they have even tried a higher figure? I find this lowering of the definition of Low Carb disturbing and potentially dangerous.

Spare me the cries of "dont you care about amputation and eyesight" of course I do. But I also care about the overall health and well being of people embarking on this long journey with diabetes. The pressure to drop and drop carb levels right from the word go is, and being told that 100g of carbs is too high is, I believe, off putting and may not even be necessary.

Can we have some moderation in newbie suggestions please.
 
Carbs raise blood sugar and insulin . Therefore if people have high blood sugar or are insulin resistant then lowering carbs would be the logical approach until they see lower numbers. There is nothing dangerous about lowering carbs. There is something dangerous about high blood sugar. Lowering carbs until their personal tolerance is about the only way to to at least try to stay off meds.
I've eaten less than 20 carbs per day for 25+ years, long before DX and other than D I'm in great health.

And for type 2 with high bs it's important to take some of the load off their pancreas to preserve beta cells. Lowering carbs is the answer again.

Carbs also raise cholesterol so another good reason to lower carbs.
 

If you look at the older books you will see that they start their diets with very low carb for a few weeks, then increase the carbs slowly until the person is losing weight at a study speed.

For us with Type2, I think it is best to start with very low carb, then once BG starts to come under control consider more carbs. Once BG is under good control and enough weight has been lost, then 130g a day would not be a bad option.

(A lot can be said for starting with a 72hr fast, then very low carb until BG under control)

If someone is prediabetic just halving the carbs they eat is likely to sort them out.
 
some ppl had excellent results on very low cards, well done to you and i m kinda envious, tell the truth. But guys did u read the bit about some of us feeling very tired ALL THE TIME and also not seeing great improvements?
 
I agree, I started on diagnosis in May on 100g carbs a day. Only after six weeks when I was really used to it did I drop further. I then reduced to between 50-70g and that's where I've stayed. My recent HbA1c was 36 so I don't think it necessary for me to drop any lower.
 
I am going the other way and am now adding back a few carbs into some meal while checking my BG after meals. It is a very long time since any BG reading has been above 6. It will be interesting to see what my HbA1c is at the start of next year....
 
How many a day are you're eating now and what kind of carbs are you adding? How many? I'll be interested to see what happens.
For me, (type 1 so easy to see) 2 carb raises me about 7-10 US points. So it's easy to figure out how to correct a hypo without overshooting.
 
serenity648 said:
...I find this lowering of the definition of Low Carb disturbing and potentially dangerous....
Click to expand...

As Kristen251 said - there is nothing dangerous about lowering carbs. I just wanted to say it again, as this is a LCHF thread, and it is an extremely important piece of information.

This is the science behind LCHF: All humans have two systems to burn energy - the glucose burning system, and the fat burning system. Our bodies switch between these two systems as part of our normal functioning. In the absence of food we become fat burning - ie burning our body fat stores for energy. This is how we can withstand periods of famine and plain old days without food. (To a point! Naturally.) In the absence of carbs (glucose) we are fat burning. We are all built this way. This is why LCHF and Intermittent Fasting work for us (theoretically!).

We do need glucose to help power our magnificent brains. If we do not get it from food - our bodies make glucose from protein and food-fat. We cannot be dangerously devoid of carbs. Again - our bodies make glucose if we do not get it from food. This is why carbs are not an essential macronutrient.

Eating carbs at all is an option.
 
read my post. You can see I am not against low carbing. I am against telling newbies that they need to severely reduce their carbs, right from the word go, and being pushy about the potential consequences if they dont severely reduce their carbs below 50g.

We often, on this forum, point out the scare mongering in the media. I am protesting against scaremongering and extreme advice to newbie, before they even have got to grips with the idea of self testing even. I think it is unecessary and counterproductive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn More.…