• Guest - w'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the 2025 Survey »

Low carb? Totally confused

  • Thread starter Thread starter Pip16
  • Start Date Start Date
So there you have it.
No Carbs no protein.
Just fat then.
But hey i dont like fat.
Having lost 35 kg or 72 pounds and got my diabetes under control i must have done something right.
I wonder what that was...a balanced diet maybe and portion control even and calorie control.
Not rocket science really.
I think we all forget that we need to eat something and some of that we have to enjoy.
So follow the blood test and find what's good and bad for you. Read those labels.
You are not a nerd as we all do it.
 

Same story, and the same results as me.
 

I guess you could call 33% fat, low fat
I guess you could call 33% carb high carb
but what do we call 33% protein?
 
jack412 said:
I guess you could call 33% fat, low fat
I guess you could call 33% carb high carb
but what do we call 33% protein?
Click to expand...
I think he said 33% fat, protein,carbs,by calories. Not 33% fat.
Thats a lot of fat to eat.
 
jack412 said:
yes, 33% fat by calories, he can call it low fat if he wants to, I'm cool with that
Click to expand...

Good,glad you have finally agreed you're cool with my diet, especially as it's mostly unsaturated.

Probably apart from 1 tablespoon of olive oil occasionally if I do fry,(120 calories) there's nothing else I add to anything, but even that's very occasional. Skimmed milk, low fat for the rest of my food, more than enough fat for my daily intake of calories.
Exceptions, - say 100g of cheese, half my daily fat intake.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Its hard for LCHF to accept that others can survive there own way with out tags and jargon.
Its just food that our bodies can handle.
Not Swedish or hip and trendy just food that my body accepts and i like to eat and can eat.
 
I guess you missed my posts linking the Newcastle diet, I do it quite often

1/3, 1/3 and 1/3 I'm sure that would have a name. if it doesn't we should give it one. the big thurd diet
 
jack412 said:
I guess you missed my posts linking the Newcastle diet, I do it quite often

1/3, 1/3 and 1/3 I'm sure that would have a name. if it doesn't we should give it one. the big thurd diet
Click to expand...

It particularly suits you if you seem to feel yet another label is required, and reinforced the sites opinion that you seem to stop at nothing to try to take new posters thread of track, just to try to throw a few insults about.
 
douglas99 said:
It particularly suits you if you seem to feel yet another label is required, and reinforced the sites opinion that you seem to stop at nothing to try to take new posters thread of track, just to try to throw a few insults about.
Click to expand...

Clearly you dont understand we are trying to simplify the debate.
It is easy to over complicate what we eat.
Keep it simple and take the BS away and its just a balance.
Then new people dont get confused and find a way forward that works for them.
 
as long as people get their BG in range, it doesn't matter how it's done,
I've been off side with people when I suggest the poster could ask their Dr about more drugs,
the success of the Newcastle diet
because I think carb are almost addictive for some people
even my..fats and carbs are like a seesaw and as one goes down the other goes up

for me a low carb higher fat is working and I'm not hungry, my bloods are good and I'm losing weight, how can I say it's not working for me.
 
Glad we all agree jack, and I'm glad you accept your diet suits you, and the op needs to find one that suits them, maybe such as 1andylock, and myself suggest.
If you found carbs addictive, fair enough, avoid them, in case they draw you back in.
I can't say I do, so I have no issue with them, I can pick then up, eat the portion, then stop.
So no more needs be said on the subject then, let's keep the thread on track.
 
Hi. No need to make it complicated. Just keep the carbs down; perhaps 150gm/day initially and see what the meter says and increase the fats and protein as needed to give enough calories and nutrients to keep you healthy and sensibly full.
 
Daibell said:
Hi. No need to make it complicated. Just keep the carbs down; perhaps 150gm/day initially and see what the meter says and increase the fats and protein as needed to give enough calories and nutrients to keep you healthy and sensibly full.
Click to expand...
Yes exactly that Daibell, there's no need to complicate matters and no need to fell hungry at all
 
Bit worrying, as that's appeared twice now, and really should be pointed out.
Maybe the rush to agree is overcoming the warnings, and the fear of feeling vaguely hungry?

But, at the risk of repeating advice, protein can cause problems if kidney function is impaired, excess protein turns to glucose, so protein is always worth watching.
 
Poor Pip16 (the OP, in case anyone had forgotten).

Yet another thread started with a genuine request for advice, but wrecked by unhelpful squabbling.
 
Brunneria said:
Poor Pip16 (the OP, in case anyone had forgotten).

Yet another thread started with a genuine request for advice, but wrecked by unhelpful squabbling.
Click to expand...

I entirely agree.
It's a shame that choice seems to be frowned on by some.
 
douglas99 said:
I entirely agree.
It's a shame that choice seems to be frowned on by some.
Click to expand...

Then why do you do it?

(That was a rhetorical question. If you wish to respond, please PM me.
If you answer on the open forum then you are sustaining the derailment)
 
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.…