• 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 »

When does Fat Burning Kick in?

D

Diaphanous123

Member
Hello
I am the wife of Ray who was diagnosed Type 2 last July and put on Metformin and the usual dietary advice by the Doctors. He started with a HBA1C of 11.4 and has got that down to 6.5 in his first 4 months. When that reading was taken he had been low-carbing for about 3 weeks, and had lost about 20 pounds. It seems the low-carb is working well for his blood sugar and he is testing and feels much better for it.
Thing is, his weight loss has stalled since he started the low-carb, and he could do with losing another couple of stone. I joined him on the low-carb regime two weeks ago, and although I lost some of the Christmas weight gain in the first week, now I am not losing, in fact I put two or three pounds back on.
We are eating low-carb, I would say most days less than 40g. We eat mainly eggs, meat (with fat), butter, olive oil, cream, fish, sausages (checking carb count) and salads or green leafy veg once or twice a day. We have not been calorie counting but following the advice to just eat until we feel satisfied.
My question is this: Have we to just be patient and wait until the insulin response switches off and fat burning kicks in? I read somewhere that this takes 3 weeks, so I may still be on track, but Ray has been doing it for longer than that? Or are we doing it wrong - do we have to count calories as well? (As an estimate I would say we have both stayed within 2000 cals per day). Anyone else find low-carb good for Blood Sugar but not so good for weight loss?
 
Welcome to the forum Diaphanous, when you say 'eat till satisfied' what size of portions are you eating? If you eat more than your energy requirements require then you will put on weight even if low carbing.
 
Diaphanous,
I lost quite a lot of weight initially, but have been pretty much stalled for about a year. 2000calories is the quoted amount for an average adult, but you need to reduce by about 20% to keep losing.
 
Yes, I know the usual weight-loss advice is to cut calories, but we have read these books advocating low-carb: Trick and Treat by Barry Groves, and I am currently reading The Great Cholesterol Con by Dr Malcolm Kendrick.
The impression given is that you can rely on the chemical nature of your digestion to change from glucose-burning to fat-burning, and that any excess fat eaten will just be excreted. I must admit it does seem too good to be true. Perhaps this works for weight maintenance but not weight loss? But these books seem to imply that you will lose weight on this lifestyle simply by virtue of cutting the carbs.
Indeed, it may well be that our portion sizes are too large for losing weight, but these books tell us to ignore calorie counting, forget it, don't go hungry, just count carbs and the weight will melt away.
I have ordered some ketone strips because unless our bodies are in ketosis then I guess we can't say that we are fat burning? At least we will know.
Any more input on this would be gratefully received.
 
Yes, low carb is an excellent method to lose weight. However as the previous posters have said, you ignore calories at your peril. If you consume any foods to excess, too many calories, it will not aid your weight loss. despite what the books say. Books are not always the best place to get your information from. B.Groves and Kendrick have some very odd ideas. However, if you like them.....

Reduce all portion sizes by half, that will cut the Calories. The recommended daily limits for people of 2000 calories is for maintainance, not for those who want to lose weight. It may not be the best thing to stick to. I am nearly 6ft and weigh 14 st 9 lbs and my daily Calorie intake never exceeds 1300, I have lost over 5 stone using this method. I reduce carbs, not low carb and restrict portion sizes, weighing everything I eat and eating main meals from a side plate.

You can eat masses of food to achieve 2000 calories, even if you are sticking to a level of say 40g carbs. If you aren't burning it off with exercise or activity, it ends up as fat, as weight gain.
 
Ah, now, of course I do understand that for diabetics the low-carb method is about much more than losing weight. But as a non-diabetic, from the weight-loss point of view, if we are coming back to the basic equation calories in vs. calories out, then I suppose I could have more carbs in my diet?

Thing is, I have like many people dieted many times in my life. The concept of eating less and exercising more is no stranger to me. And as a bit of a carb addict, I was kind of thinking that if by making the (massive, for me) sacrifice of cutting my beloved carbs, I would magically change my metabolism to a fat-burning machine, it would be worth it... And also it is much more convenient if both of us are following the same regime.

Whereas, if it's all just back down to portion control and calorie counting, well I may re-think the low-carb thing - for me. My hubby is happy on it and it seems good for his blood sugar, so that is of course a different matter - but he too needs to eat less to reduce his weight further, you are saying? So are you saying that the whole concept of Hays, Atkins et al is really all down to portion control and not down to accelerated fat-burning? :(
 
Diaphanous123 said:
So are you saying that the whole concept of Hays, Atkins et al is really all down to portion control and not down to accelerated fat-burning? :(
Click to expand...

No...... :shock: I have never said that !
 
No cugila, I apologise - I may have put words in your mouth. Sorry!
I am still confused though, concerning the weight loss aspect, about the issue of greater fat burning on a low-carb diet and whether this has an appreciable effect, as opposed to it all being down to calorie control.
 
Diaphanous123 said:
No cugila, I apologise - I may have put words in your mouth. Sorry!
I am still confused though, concerning the weight loss aspect, about the issue of greater fat burning on a low-carb diet and whether this has an appreciable effect, as opposed to it all being down to calorie control.
Click to expand...
They are interlinked really, on a low carb diet you will certainly burn fat especially if you stick to below 50 gm carbs a day for a while but you also have to watch the portion sizes as the protein and fat content can also have an effect on how much you burn off. That is why portion size comes into the equation as well.
 
I am confused here too, because as far as I have understood, you do not count calories when on a Low carb diet. I think talking about 2000 calories a day as a guide for everybody is not helpful either. Surely this is different for people depending on activity etc.
This whole thing of putting calories in and using them, as though the body is a machine is a bit old hat too, isn't it?
I find some of this advice confusing and contradictory.

I have been on Low carb diets in the past, not for losing weight, although I am now trying it for Type II Daibetis. I have found in the past that you do lose weight quickly initally, but this does tend to slow down. I think the main reasons for this are that carbs can sneak back in, (they are sneaky little devils) and I do think that the body does become complaisant. It is worth giving it a litle kick every now and again. When you are dieting, that kick can be to have a good meal every now and again, but of course this is not on the cards when your bloo sugar levels are important. Looking out for sneaky carbs and adding changes to the diet may help.
Incidently, I found that Atkins with its high cal creams and butter just as effective in losing wieght as a less restrictive and slightly healthier South Beach diet. it is keeping up the keytosis that is important with Atkins. Not recommended for good health though.
Now I have probably added to the confusion
Debs
 
Here's my experience.
Dropped all visible white carbs on diagnosis to loose 4.5 stones in 6 months and then it stopped. I was, at that point, still obese with a BMI of 29 (not that I trust the BMI measurement all that much. I dropped from a size 24 to a size 14). A year later, my weight was stable but at 14st 6-8lbs and 5 feet 10 inches tall it was still too much. HbA1c 5.3 on 1gm metformin daily. Advised by GP to drop to 500mg but BS crept up a little too much for my liking.

I re-examined what I was eating and dropped all carb products. For example, I had two slices of bread at 9gms a slice, or a crispbread with the same value. I occasionally had lo-carb wraps and dramfields pasta. The effect was immediate, literally. I one week, I dropped to 14st and half a pound. This was just before Christmas. I over indulged and gained 4lbs. It's all gone now. This morning I was 14 st 1lb and the day I hit the 13 stones you will all know about it!

There are two things I've noticed that affect my weight.
One is lack of fat. If I don't keep up my good fat intake, I don't loose. The other is that my body must be incredibly sensitive to even the small amount of processed carb I was eating and looking back, even one slice of bread switched on my carb gene and got me eating more than I needed to.

I know this is an experience of one but I hope it helps in some way.

wiflib
 
Thanks wiflib, that is very interesting, and well done you for losing all that weight!
But...when you cut out the pieces of bread/crispbread etc, did you replace that part of the meal with the calorie equivalent in fat or protein? Or did you do without that meal (or part of that meal) entirely, thereby reducing your calorie intake?
I notice you say keeping your fats up aids your weight loss, although I suspect our problem may be keeping our fats up too much - it's so easy to let your hand slip with the olive oil bottle, or put another chunk of butter on the veg.
(But, according to many low-carb gurus - it doesn't matter! But it seems to matter to us, and to others on the forum who have posted).
Can you in some way quantify how much fat you would have at a meal and still lose weight?
Thanks
 
I am confused here too, because as far as I have understood, you do not count calories when on a Low carb diet. I think talking about 2000 calories a day as a guide for everybody is not helpful either. Surely this is different for people depending on activity etc.
This whole thing of putting calories in and using them, as though the body is a machine is a bit old hat too, isn't it?
I find some of this advice confusing and contradictory.
Click to expand...

Portion control is just as important in low carb! It does depend on activity as well. Obviously someone more active will burn more calories than someone less mobile. Old hat ? no. Just plain old biology.

For instance, an 8oz steak has no carbs, great!! but...if you ate 2-3 a day on the assumption that you were eating no carbs that would be 1269 calories. Also as 60% of protein on a low carb diet turns into glucose in the body therefore 38.7 gm of your steak (224gm) turns into glucose which for a diabetic has an effect of your blood sugar levels.

Confusing ? yes. Contradictory? yes. This is because this is a forum full of opinions and members with different takes on diet and most other subjects to do with diabetes.

It is a long learning process with many different aspects.
 
You know, I'm not sure that any of us should be so sure about any of this.
Who's version of biology are we talking about here? :)
I we think we all have a lot to learn about nutrition. There are things that we just do not understand.
I am amazed to see that many of things that good old Atkins said may actually be true!!
At the time he was vilified. God forbid he might be right. :shock:
A forum made up of many different ideas sounds great to me. :D
Debs
 
So, what I am deducing from all this is that:
Low carbing does help with fat loss.
That means, burning fat instead of glucose, and not setting down excess glucose as fat.
But if you need to lose weight, then calories still count just as much as if you were high-carb.
Everyones calorific requirements are of course different, as are activity levels.
If you eat too much fat on a low-carb diet, it will be excreted?
But this maintains your weight, it doesn't enable you to lose.
You should eat more (pure) fat than protein because excess protein makes glucose.
If you eat enough fat to sustain you, energy-wise, you will not have to use your fat stores as energy, ergo you will not lose weight.
And it is best to be very strict on the carbs at the beginning, then (maybe) you can get away with a few more carbs later on in the process.
So, a low-carb diet, from a weight loss perspective, is not a "magic bullet", but still a good way of getting your fat metabolism going.
But - the maxim calories in vs. calories out still very much applies.
So the idea that we can eat as much as we like and still lose weight on a low-carb regime is somewhat misleading?
Does that sum up the general viewpoint from those of you experienced in low-carbing?
Thanks so much for your helpful input.
 
I think I might be muddying the waters further here but I have found that I eat much less Protein and fat anyway - that satisfied feeling comes much quicker!

If we come back to the issue of fat burning - what about exercise? The only way to burn fat only and not muscle is by including exercise in your regime. Good muscle tone burns more fat anyway - and I have found that resistance and weight training really keeps my sugar levels down.

Little and often to keep your metabolic rate up works well, and I find that not having any more protein than what you can put in the palm of your hand is a good guide. Fat - well I tend to avoid all solid fats and do not eat much red meat apart from the occasional bit of bacon.

I found the South Beach diet a good basis - but if you are trying to lose weight portion is definately the key.
 
Indeed I imagine exercise comes into it, and I am expecting better weight loss results when I start teaching my dance classes again (hopefully tonight, weather permitting!) My husband though, sue to back trouble, joint problems etc, can only manage a bit of light walking every day, with the dogs, which is better than nothing.

It's great that you are feeling sated with less food, which is what they say happens.
Trouble is we are so darn hungry a lot of the time. I am menopausal, on HRT. I don't know what hubby's excuse is, but even though we are eating low carb, we are still having terrible snacking urges in the afternoon and evening. Some days are better than others, admittedly, and if we have had a quite fatty meal like pork with crackling (yum!) we feel less like snacking, but keeping within a calorie-controlled diet at the same time as cutting the carbs right down is the problem. We need to eat fairly high fat in order to curtail the snacking urges. Anyone else encounter this?
 
This just shows how we are all different. Now I have cut the carbs, not as low as you. However I don't eat loads of fat, but I have no urge to snack between meals, no cravings. Yet I have managed to lose over 5 st since January 2009 with no effort at all. I do use resistance bands and some walking, seems very effective as I too had joint problems which have now eased since the weight loss, tell hubby to try the bands, easy non stressful exercise. You can even do them sitting down and they are inexpensive.
 
Hmmmm There appears to be many versions of human biology though doesn't there?
Some things that we've held as truths for many years are now not quite what we thought.
I always think its worth keeping an open mind. :)
 
Back
Top