Low Carb Just "a Fad".

rhubarb73 said:

- weight lifting is 25% of any diet

Click to expand...

Weight lifting, or any other exercise has nothing to do with diet (other than needing to eatienough to support it).

Exercise may affect our weight - positively by increasinf muscle mass, negativlly by burning fat (which most people see as a positve outcome as well)

Diet is "what you choose to eat". (Unless you're German where it can be an important historical debate).

bamba said:

Diet is "what you choose to eat". (Unless you're German where it can be an important historical debate).

Click to expand...

...especially when eating Worms...

Brunneria said:

...especially when eating Worms...

Click to expand...

Well you have to get the protein from somwhere

xfieldok said:

He's an idiot. I read somewhere low carb has been around since the 1800's. To be honest, I wouldn't waste my energy on him. Find another gym and get on with your life.

Click to expand...

Actually slightly longer - see Google for John Rollo who in the 1790s used a ketogenic diet to treat diabetes - meat only though I believe this was actually rancid pork! ??

Robbity

rhubarb73 said:

Will you two pack it in! I’m trying to be an angry goldfish and this is having the opposite effect.

Click to expand...

You could always try a mealworm. Very good LC option for goldfish.

rhubarb73 said:

Will you two pack it in! I’m trying to be an angry goldfish and this is having the opposite effect.

Click to expand...

Wasn't the post on topic for a goldfish's staple food?

How does a goldfish lift weights?

rhubarb73 said:

Will you two pack it in! I’m trying to be an angry goldfish and this is having the opposite effect.

Click to expand...

Well just don't waste your goldfishy time going round and round in circles trying to reason with idiots, especially those who think they know it all... It just gets you frustrated and never works!

Robbity

xfieldok said:

How does a goldfish lift weights?

Click to expand...

Well, it's just an 'arrnless 'obby, isnt it?
Robbity

xfieldok said:

How does a goldfish lift weights?

Click to expand...

He uses some mussels....

This is an interesting thread! Thank you .
I am a PT but can confirm that there is zero nutritional component in that qualification so he is using a public forum to air his personal views and should expect to be challenged; if he cannot explain those views rationally then what does his opinion matter?
He clearly needs to sell the benefits of strength training hence the overstated claim that it is 25% of any results; some of us are honest enough to say that diet is 90-99% of this and that it is critical to get your eating better before you waste your time and money in the gym. You may wish to remind him that body builders know all about low carb as a way to strip body fat away!
He is right though in that for longevity your strength (as a proxy for muscle mass) predicts how long you will live. Provided obese people go in gently and do not have very severe hypertension then weight lifing is a good metaboic conditioner because the more muscle mass you have the more sensitive to your own insulin you will be.
The type 2s I see tend to think that they should just be doing long bouts o f cycling or walking. If they ask about the best diet for a diabtetic I will talk about improving their diet in terms of the quantity and quality of carbs they are eating and where they could make improvements.

Many trainers and their clients believe that calories in/calories out works (in this paradigm sugar calories are no worse than carrot calories) because they know that a client who is overweight and adopts a low calorie (under 1500) diet then they will lose weight in the short term especially when they combine it with vigorous workouts! The client is happy to lose weight quickly and the trainer may be happy to show the quick fix transformation he/she has made whether or not that client then went and regained the weight when they inevitably stopped starving themselves. They will then simply berate themselves for being greedy/lazy and go through the diet/training cycle again until it gets too hard at which point they will blame ageing and give up!

rhubarb73 said:

Hello - help required if anyone is up for joining in an argument.
I seem to have stumbled into a squabble with a personal fitness trainer at my local sports club. He is using the club's social media account to promote his weight lifting classes, but also his views on diets which make some fairly bold public claims. These claims include:
- low carb and low sugar are "fad" diets
- those "fad" diets won't last
- strength testing is more important to weight loss than reducing carbs
- weight lifting is 25% of any diet
- there is no such thing as "bad for you" foods
- sugar is not inherently fattening
- weight loss is only achieved through calorie control, sugar reduction is only an indirect cause.
- there is no upper limit on protein intake resulting in detrimental impact

He's got a bit upset with me because I've told him his advice is factually incorrect, and in parts dangerous (getting an overweight or obese person to take up weight lifting before getting some dietary control increases the risk of heart problems). It is also pretty unpleasant to say to people who are trying low carb and may be low on confidence or insecure that their diet is a fad and won't last. He's demanded evidence that he wrong - I've pointed at some, and he just scoffs. It winds me up that he's using a public platform and a health banner to say things that are self serving but flawed.
Anyway the more evidence I can throw in his direction, the better. Any thoughts? (or should I just ignore it and get on with my life?)

Click to expand...

Well he is behind the times because the NHS attitudes are changing, driven by the experience of patients like myself who have had quite bad diabetes for over a decade, gone on a low carb diets, lost more than 30 kilos, and are formally discharged as diabetics. Why argue with him?
But where does the 'this is a fad' argument come from? It seems curiously persistent. Look at the insistence of whoever writes for Wikipedia about branding the Atkins Diet as an ineffectual fad diet. I don't understand why we, and Diabetes UK, have not pressed Wikipedia in our numbers to suspend this -- as they will do if they are told that their entries are factually biassed and misleading and that entry certainly is. But it clearly comes from someone with a pharmaceutical or medical background.
I can tell you that none of my health professionals are dismissing my diet as a fad. The diabetes specialist nurse is the best -- and I am pretty sure this is because she has already seen other success stories like mine with the low carb diet. By the way, I am wearing a shirt this morning which I haven't previously been able to wear since about 1995. (If wearing a shirt that old that is something to be proud of!)

Crocodile said:

If we take our diabetic hats off and exclude the minority with various metabolic disorders then his statements aren't as bad as they look. I read this as though he is preaching to the general population of which the majority are not diabetics nor unfortunate enough to be bestowed with other disorders.
- low carb and low sugar are "fad" diets:
- those "fad" diets won't last: For the majority, the statement is not that outlandish. For carb tolerant majorities it may well be a fad.
- strength testing is more important to weight loss than reducing carbs: Not certain what he means by 'strength testing'. If he means exercise then he is not really being honest. If he means reducing carbs and then replacing the lost energy input from another source that is a different thing.
- weight lifting is 25% of any diet: Trying hard to sell his service I suppose. In reality, exercise is not a massive contributor to weight loss.
- there is no such thing as "bad for you" foods: Probably not much to say about that. I think we all know otherwise.
- sugar is not inherently fattening: True. It does depend on quantity and what else is being consumed though.
- weight loss is only achieved through calorie control, sugar reduction is only an indirect cause: True again. Reduction of stored energy is achieved by consuming less than what is required. The rate of loss may vary but the statement is correct.
- there is no upper limit on protein intake resulting in detrimental impact: A broad statement. There is no implicit meaning in what he says. Clarification is required. Deny all fats and see how far he gets.

Click to expand...

On proteins, there certainly can be an upper limit for some people as high protein can and does cause kidney damage to them.

rhubarb73 said:

Hello - help required if anyone is up for joining in an argument.
I seem to have stumbled into a squabble with a personal fitness trainer at my local sports club. He is using the club's social media account to promote his weight lifting classes, but also his views on diets which make some fairly bold public claims. These claims include:
- low carb and low sugar are "fad" diets
- those "fad" diets won't last
- strength testing is more important to weight loss than reducing carbs
- weight lifting is 25% of any diet
- there is no such thing as "bad for you" foods
- sugar is not inherently fattening
- weight loss is only achieved through calorie control, sugar reduction is only an indirect cause.
- there is no upper limit on protein intake resulting in detrimental impact

He's got a bit upset with me because I've told him his advice is factually incorrect, and in parts dangerous (getting an overweight or obese person to take up weight lifting before getting some dietary control increases the risk of heart problems). It is also pretty unpleasant to say to people who are trying low carb and may be low on confidence or insecure that their diet is a fad and won't last. He's demanded evidence that he wrong - I've pointed at some, and he just scoffs. It winds me up that he's using a public platform and a health banner to say things that are self serving but flawed.
Anyway the more evidence I can throw in his direction, the better. Any thoughts? (or should I just ignore it and get on with my life?)

Click to expand...

i have been on the low carb healthy clean eating plan for 2years now and have lost 3 and a half stone and still losing. Never felt better and my levels have dropped from extremely high to 4.7 /5.4. This is a plan for life not a fad.

DavidGrahamJones said:

Firstly point out the meaning of FAD - an intense and widely shared enthusiasm for something, especially one that is short-lived; a craze.

Secondly remind him of William Bantings booklet called Letter on Corpulence, Addressed to the Public and written in 1863. Maybe refer him to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Banting, just to fill in some gaps like why he followed the dietary regime he did.

Even as a teenager, now over 50 years ago for me, I remember mum dieting and the first thing she did was cut out bread and potatoes. So this low carb lark isn't so much of a fad really and certainly not short lived. Maybe he can explain why in his ignorance he can say that something that has been a round for over 150 years is in his mind a fad.

BTW, I recommend reading about Banting, and the physician (Dr William Harvey) who recommended a low carb diet after attending lectures in Paris about Diabetes. The Frenchman (Claud Bernard) who gave the lectures is interesting as well.

I think he needs to have some empirical evidence to backup his BS. He's entitled to his opinions, but he can't just grab ideas out of thin air. He needs the evidence, maybe he can suggest some further reading?

Click to expand...

Well I've now spent 57 years on a fad diet that won't last.......not bad going, eh?

I think the issue as pointed out by others is a lack of education on the subject. As most of us on here have become somewhat experts we can see the issues with this guy's approach.
It may be, if you have time, that it would help him to gain wider insight by a little bit of education and mention that by being able to understand the varied approaches taken and researched by diabetics he can give his business wider reach, and a more sustainable client base.
Arguements and confrontation rarely work for either party.
Conversations that start with "Tell me about" work well and lead into the "OK that's great, really interesting. What's your view on ......

Followed by "have you considered research which may not agree 100% with your understanding"

Either that or change gym!

When my brother was diagnosed T2 a few months ago he obviously asked for my advice. His son, who is a very well paid personal trainer in London said that it was the wrong thing to do and to go down the route of CICO. He is now dumbfounded that my brother, his father, has lost three stone very easily and got his A1c below the threshold, it wasn't very high when diagnosed.

carol43 said:

When my brother was diagnosed T2 a few months ago he obviously asked for my advice. His son, who is a very well paid personal trainer in London said that it was the wrong thing to do and to go down the route of CICO. He is now dumbfounded that my brother, his father, has lost three stone very easily and got his A1c below the threshold, it wasn't very high when diagnosed.

Click to expand...

What is CICO?

Calorie in / Calorie out.
Is still in my opinion a valid PART of the arguement. If you overeat whether it is fat or carbs you will not lose weight.

As I have said on other posts, reduce calories, and for us T2, my preference is to get more of my calories from fat on an LCHF type diet.

We have specific and varied issues about how our systems work (or not) and how we use stored fat or even store fat is changed in our metabolism.

I also exercise and most of that is weights ( free weights at home - no gym)

So LCHF diet means you are actively managing your diet so likely also aware of carbs in any case.

My target is 2kg a month weight loss. Not more. And it's working for me.