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

What level is High Protein?

lucylocket61 said:
Thank you, that brilliant!!!!!
Click to expand...

No problem. You can even type in the supermarket, and exact brand of what you have to make sure you get things right. Planning at least a day ahead means I am always completely certain of all the food I am eating. Makes life so much simpler.
 
I've been looking for a link, but I can't find it.

Robb Wolf's prescription for someone starting a low-carb diet is 300g of protein a day. The rationale behind this is that they'll make themselves so sick trying to eat that much protein, that (1) they'll never complain that they're hungry without carbs and (2) they'll automatically reduce their protein intake to a sensible level.

This article from Paul Jaminet is worth a read: http://perfecthealthdiet.com/2011/10/pe ... rt-harris/
Under the "Food Reward and Obesity" section he discusses protein and satiety in terms of how, under experiemental conditions, a rats appetite (and total calorie intake) is finely tuned to make sure that (s)he gets exactly enough protein to meet structural needs and (if necessary) fuel gluconeogenesis. If you feed them a food that is low in protein but high in carbs, they will continue eating until they've met their protein requiement, even though that means taking on lots of extra carbohydrate calories.

So lets review the lessons of today:
(1) Low-carb diets are not high-protein (unless you really want them to be).
(2) Even if you wanted to eat a high-protein diet you probably couldn't.
(3) Your appetite is finely tuned to make your protein requirements (unless you eat lots of carbs when it's influenced by glucose swings instead).

I'm looking forward to derailing some more anti-low-carb myths tomorrow.
Where shall we start? "Saturated fat is bad for you" or "if low-carb diets were healthy you wouldn't have to eat vitamins" or "something stupid about 2 cups of salad".
 
borofergie said:
So lets review the lessons of today:
Click to expand...


The lesson of the today is the same as yesterdays with regards to the 'Type 2 Diabetic, Kidney Damage' thread, always check with your HCP's who are the experts and will advise you at what level protein is safe for you if kidney disease is present.

Have a good nights sleep Stephen!
 

Yes sorry Sid I had misread one of your posts on the "Something must be done" thread yesterday where you mentioned 200g. Reading it again I can see you did not make the statement about yourself so apologies once again. So 100g / day Sid that's only a bit more than me and probably borderline ketogenic if you believe the ADA. That would make you LCHF too or are you LCLPLF like the rest of us :lol:


Yes looks like I owe you an apology too Nigel seems I mis-typed 120 rather than the 130 you mentioned you did the other day. That's interesting because its the same level as the ADA 2011 & 2012 RDA recommendation for carbs and the kind of value I recommend new members start at in my welcome posts. If you've been doing that for years then you were obviously well ahead in the LCHF revolution. Well done you! Proud of you mate :clap:
 
xyzzy said:
Yes looks like I owe you an apology too Nigel seems I mis-typed 120 rather than the 130 you mentioned you did the other day.
Click to expand...


No need to apoligise xyzzy I know mistakes can happen. I'm currently on 150g a day (the beauty of basal/bolus) where you can adjust your insulin to the carbs you eat.
 
xyzzy said:
So 100g / day Sid that's only a bit more than me and probably borderline ketogenic if you believe the ADA. That would make you LCHF too or are you LCLPLF like the rest of us :lol:
Click to expand...

I thought to be in ketosis you had to eat less than 30g a day xyzzy and when I started my aprox 60g a day diet three and a bit years ago no one here said I was a low carber but I think its all semantics as anyone who eats less than the daily average carbs is by definition a low carber, as for fat I do not eat any more fat than I used to in fact I eat a little less as I eat much less of everything but as I've said many times I truly believe that most average Brits eat way to much food period. I am guessing that eating between 60 and 100g carbs a day diet probably includes enough fat anyway. And I still feel that despite what many LC'ers say very few cardiologists would agree that it is a good idea to increase sat fats in your diet and I am aware that someone will have a video of some cardiologist saying otherwise but one swallow does not a summer make. Its irrelevant anyway as I am not deficient in any department or suffering as a result of not increasing my fat intake also I know from my own experience that when I do eat more fat I put weight on, I love cheese but if I hit the cheese board every night I know that the scales will say at the end of the week. I would go further and say that I often read threads here from people who say they are lchf and cant loose weight, could that be that they are not low enough in carbs and are eating too much fat?

Ketosis source second paragraph here: http://www.keto.org/summary.htm
 
Sid Bonkers said:
I thought to be in ketosis you had to eat less than 30g a day xyzzy and when I started my aprox 60g a day diet three and a bit years ago no one here said I was a low carber
Click to expand...

Nope, if you eat less than 100g of carbs a day you are "in ketosis" to some extent

According to Lyle MacDonald, if you eat:
>100g of carbs then your brain is fuelled entirely by glucose
<100g of carbs then your brain is fuelled by a mixture of ketones and glucose
<50g of carbs then some people produce enough ketones to change the colour of a ketostix
<25g of carbs your brain is almost entirely fuelled by ketones apart from 25g of glucose which can be produced by gluconeogenesis

You can short circuit this by eating massive amounts of protein (which is not a good idea for lots of the reasons described above).
 
noblehead said:
The lesson of the today is the same as yesterdays with regards to the 'Type 2 Diabetic, Kidney Damage' thread, always check with your HCP's who are the experts and will advise you at what level protein is safe for you if kidney disease is present.
Click to expand...

Yes, but that's true of whatever diet you eat. There is nothing espeically "high protein" about a low-carb diet.
 

Sid, I would agree with your one swallow analogy.
I would suggest to anyone wanting to understand how saturated fat came to be demonised - yes there was a time when it was considered healthy, and probably will be again, that they read (with an open mind) this book :

The Diet Delusion by Gary Taubes (also known under its US title Good Calories, Bad Calories)

No one has to agree with all his conclusions, but his expose of how dietary recommendations come/came about is eye-opening.
People (not just one swallow) objected at the time, and the health of nations in the meantime is hardly a glowing testimony of embracing a low-fat approach.

In my understanding the demonisation of saturated fat was NEVER proved. Most people do think it was, however, with so many medics singing from the same hymn sheet.
Old habits die hard is the saying (and to remove one wonky leg from a stool makes the whole stool fall over.)
My studies have shown me that saturated fat is not only NOT bad, but good for you.

So to return to the thread, Lucy was in a quandary, because lowering carb intake necessarily raises protein or fat or both.
Protein and fat tend to be more satiating, whereas many people recognise how it's easy to just carry on eating carbs (I used to demolish a tub of Pringles in one go, or follow one bag of crisps with another)

Taubes' book, if nothing else, demonstrates that medical concensus is not always a good indicator of what's good for you.
It's worth a read whatever your viewpoint.

Geoff
 
librarising said:
Taubes' book, if nothing else, demonstrates that medical concensus is not always a good indicator of what's good for you.
It's worth a read whatever your viewpoint.

Geoff
Click to expand...

Well everyone is entitled to an opinion Geoff but I will remain firmly on the side of medical consensus on this issue, if I had a heart attack I think I would go and see a cardiologist rather than Garry Taubes if you follow my drift
 

I agree Sid I think the terminology has just changed a bit in the last year or so. To my mind the distinction is for want of a better phrase if you are "purposefully" attempting to be in ketosis. So yes for everyone that full on Ketosis point is slightly different but like yourself I really don't care as long as I am restricting carbs enough so that my meter says I'm safe. My average is around 60g / day, some days I would be labelled VLC as I might only do 10 - 20g but other days like yesterday for instance I actually ended up doing a bit over 100g. I don't see any reason, other than what your meter says, to particularly pick a target grams per day to be less than. Saying that I have no problem with those who want to do a full on VLC lifestyle as far as I can see its just as good and safe a choice as my own or other styles.

I read the other week and I honestly can't find it again that the ADA calls < 130g low carb because it falls under their 130g RDA value and label the range between 130 and 250 as moderate carb. The ADA pick 130g as to them it is high enough so that it is very unlikely you will be in ketosis. It was for that reason I suggested at 100g you were borderline ketogenic but I don't see that as any kind of problem.

So what you call LC'ers I think most of us would call VLC'ers (those who purposefully are aiming for ketosis) and you and me are undoubtedly LC'ers! On the fat thing again I'm probably close to you on this. I measure both carbs and calories and have a problem believing that a LCHF regime that doesn't consider calories is unlikely to be as successful weight loss wise as one that does.

I still don't see any point in denying the blindingly obvious point that if you restrict your carbs right down and then fix your protein intake to a reasonable level then by definition you must be eating more fat so the regime you are on would be called LCHF by most professional dieticians. I don't see the phrase LCHF as a taboo statement that shouldn't be mentioned. I have no problem in just admitting doing LCHF especially when you discover those exact kind of diets are advocated by other leading health services for diabetics and it transpires they were recommended to diabetics in the UK and seen to work very successfully prior to HCLF being introduced back in the 1980's.

What I would ask you Sid is how you can possibly reconcile eating in the 60 - 100 range with any dietary guidelines that most PCT's give the newly diagnosed or how you say reconcile that against the standard UK dietary recommendations or things like the latest UK 2012 position statement as in the day before yesterday on another thread you said to me...

sid bonkers said:
I believe that the NHS diet as it was advised to me is fine
Click to expand...

My point is Sid, to me, the diet you were advised to do does sound absolutely fine but it sounds nothing like the one most members get advised to do if you read people posts and experiences.

Perhaps you'd like to comment back on the "Something must be done thread" or maybe make a new thread where we can discuss it as this one's about Lucy's question on kidneys and protein.
 

Yes this ability for you T1's to do the "adjust your insulin to the carbs you eat." makes me quite jealous sometimes :mrgreen: . I know you have lots of other stresses and strains which makes that fact not necessarily as useful as it sounds but would just remind you and other insulin users very politely that we diet only T2's don't have that "luxury" and would ask you to bear that in mind when suggesting dietary advice to us.

Anyway 150g still makes you a LCHF revolutionary in my book Nigel :lol:
 


It's a misprint not caught by the proofreader; it should be ABSCP - Atkins Blood Sugar Control Programme.

My copy is the British Edition, published 2004.

Viv 8)
 


I was far from bragging about being on basal/bolus merely stating how my carb intake can fluctuate from week to week. I like the 'LCHF revolutionary' title :lol:
 
Good News:

I checked with my surgery. She didnt mention protein or kidneys because my kidneys are better!!!

In fact, my latest figures showed them returned to better than your average healthy person result. So the treatment I had 2 years ago was a complete success ++++++++

Just wanted to share : )
 

Brilliant news Lucy! You have this Diabetes thing licked!
 

Brilliant Lucy - well done!!
 
What fantastic news Lucy. One less thing to worry about on your quest to control your diabetes. :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:
 


That is brilliant news that your treatment worked Lucy and I'm so pleased you checked with the surgery first! :clap:
 
That's GREAT Lucy!! :thumbup: Now treat yourself to a lovely big juicy steak!! :thumbup: BBQ season is here!!
 
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.…