What’s the best diet for weight loss ?

Alf Veedersane

LeakyLime wrote: »

The calories in / calories out crowd are also very dogmatic - "it's just that simple " they say!

Ignores the fact that people put on weight differently and two people may eat similar, relatively healthy diets, one will put on weight, the other will not. Hormones play a roll.

You won't know until you try cut out carbs, if it makes you feel better and lose weight eaiser.

And ultimately, the health benefits of that will out weigh and 'negative ' effects of eating more healthy fats.

No one says hormones don't have an impact (though Noakes' study didn't really demonstrate that they did). Or that different foods aren't processed differently by the body.

But the primary driver of weight loss will be burning more calories than you consume. How you go about doing that is a matter of personal preference.

Macy0161

LeakyLime wrote: »

The calories in / calories out crowd are also very dogmatic - "it's just that simple " they say!

Ignores the fact that people put on weight differently and two people may eat similar, relatively healthy diets, one will put on weight, the other will not. Hormones play a roll.

Not simple, just science.

Different people have different BMR and TDEE for a variety of reasons, which would mean that different people eating the same diet wouldn't put on or lose weight at the same rate. That doesn't change that it's still calories in v calories out. Just that the "calories out" will be different for different people.

Daisy78

Can anyone recommend an accurate calorie calculator? I have had varying results from differing ones, some telling me I need to consume 1200 calories a day and others telling me I should be on 1400 to lose weight. Seems to vary quite a bit.

Macy0161

Daisy78 wrote: »

Can anyone recommend an accurate calorie calculator? I have had varying results from differing ones, some telling me I need to consume 1200 calories a day and others telling me I should be on 1400 to lose weight. Seems to vary quite a bit.

There's the TDEE calculation in the sticky at the top of the thread, or https://scoobysworkshop.com/calorie-calculator/

Cill94

LeakyLime wrote: »

The calories in / calories out crowd are also very dogmatic - "it's just that simple " they say!

Ignores the fact that people put on weight differently and two people may eat similar, relatively healthy diets, one will put on weight, the other will not. Hormones play a roll.

You won't know until you try cut out carbs, if it makes you feel better and lose weight eaiser.

And ultimately, the health benefits of that will out weigh and 'negative ' effects of eating more healthy fats.

People have different calorie requirements. This ain’t news.

And certainly doesn’t refute calories in|out.

Daisy78

Macy0161 wrote: »

There's the TDEE calculation in the sticky at the top of the thread, or https://scoobysworkshop.com/calorie-calculator/

I don’t see a link to that TDEE calculator? I scrolled back to the top of the thread and don’t see it?

Mellor

LeakyLime wrote: »

The calories in / calories out crowd are also very dogmatic - "it's just that simple " they say!

Because it is that simple.
It is literally one of the fundamental laws of physics and the universe.

Ignores the fact that people put on weight differently and two people may eat similar, relatively healthy diets, one will put on weight, the other will not. Hormones play a roll.

Nothing about that is ignored calories in / out
In fact it confirms calories in / out.

scrubs33

Some really interesting replies on this thread. I need to get rid of about a stone and a half and had tried WW but found the recipes a bit bland and the going a bit tough. A cook book/website/Twitter feed was mentioned to me (not sure if I can mention it but the initials are PON so I’m sure people know it) and it has worked slowly but surely. At it 3 weeks and down about 6 pounds. No drastic changes to lifestyle but I have started to go on more regular short walks but I’ve cut the junk at the weekend. Was never a big drinker in the first place so that helps I suppose but love Taytos on a Saturday night. Switched to popcorn and it’s made a difference for sure.
I’ve given myself to the end of the summer to hit my target and I don’t think I’ll be far off it.

BabysCoffee

I think it is a bit unfair that it seems to me like ketoers are being shut down on this thread. The original question asks What's the best diet for weight loss? Keto has as much right to be mentioned in responses as any other diet (whether other posters think the responses are arrogant / dogmatic or any other manner is irrelevant).

bladespin

The best method for weight loss is calorie deficit, whether that’s through counting, IF, Keto etc; the best one is whatever you can sustain, none are any better than the next despite the wild claims some make.

Personally, I count using some bits from each, I was using IF before it was a thing (without knowing) by skipping meals when I wasn’t hungry, when I cut the first foods to go are carb dense foods like bread etc.

The absolute best method is to make yourself knowledgeable about your food, its values and especially portion sizes - for me that was the lightbulb moment.

I can gain or loose at will, it’s never easy or overly pleasant to restrict though.

Alf Veedersane

BabysCoffee wrote: »

I think it is a bit unfair that it seems to me like ketoers are being shut down on this thread. The original question asks What's the best diet for weight loss? Keto has as much right to be mentioned in responses as any other diet (whether other posters think the responses are arrogant / dogmatic or any other manner is irrelevant).

You could say the same for people who say calories i /calories out doesn't work. That's shutting down people who calorie count.

I don't think people are trying to shut down keto - at least I didn't read it that way. Like I said, whatever works for a person because it's more sustainable for them is what counts.

I just have an issue with it where people say carbs are bad or for other reasons that they give more weight to than the management of calorie intake with respect to weight loss.

Keto is a perfectly valid way of managing weight. There are other benefits. As is intermittent fasting. As is counting calories. And the reason they can work for people is because they are sustainable ways for those people to manage calorie balance

Cill94

BabysCoffee wrote: »

I think it is a bit unfair that it seems to me like ketoers are being shut down on this thread. The original question asks What's the best diet for weight loss? Keto has as much right to be mentioned in responses as any other diet (whether other posters think the responses are arrogant / dogmatic or any other manner is irrelevant).

If you read back in the comments I think you'll see most of us who've chimed in have stated that keto is a viable method of reducing your caloric intake. I'm happy if someone has struggled with weight loss and keto is a sustainable solution for them.

That doesn't mean people should get a free pass to give out advice that is simply incorrect. Just because someone's diet worked does not mean they understand how.

BabysCoffee

All fair points above in response to my point this morning, I guess what I'm not happy about is what I am perceiving to be personal attacks on ketoers - eg calling us fundamentalists, arrogant, etc.
There is no call for this.

Alf Veedersane

BabysCoffee wrote: »

All fair points above in response to my point this morning, I guess what I'm not happy about is what I am perceiving to be personal attacks on ketoers - eg calling us fundamentalists, arrogant, etc.
There is no call for this.

There wouldn't be a call for it if it was being applied across the board.

There can be an element that is particularly dogmatic about it that is being referred to.

But that's not just for keto and it wouldn't apply to most people here in this thread.

That said, I can see how it would feel a bit like you're being criticised personally even though I don't believe it's the intention

Macy0161

People aren't calling out Keto (or any other method), they're calling out that the need to try and justify it with "evidence" that doesn't have scientific support. "Some research suggests"/ "there appears to be some evidence" isn't the same as proper peer reviewed science. In this thread, such evidence has been presented as fact.

Daisy78 wrote: »

I don’t see a link to that TDEE calculator? I scrolled back to the top of the thread and don’t see it?

No calculator, just the equation in there somewhere! But Scoobies based on the same logic.

BabysCoffee

Macy0161 wrote: »

People aren't calling out Keto (or any other method), they're calling out that the need to try and justify it with "evidence" that doesn't have scientific support. "Some research suggests"/ "there appears to be some evidence" isn't the same as proper peer reviewed science. In this thread, such evidence has been presented as fact.


No calculator, just the equation in there somewhere! But Scoobies based on the same logic.

Would this be accepted evidence?
https://www.dietdoctor.com/low-carb/saturated-fat


Saturated fat and health risks: the evidence to date
Guidance to reduce saturated fat is based on studies which show 1) a causal link between saturated fat and LDL cholesterol and 2) a causal link between LDL cholesterol and coronary heart disease.
5
However, convincing evidence for a direct link between saturated fat and heart disease is lacking

Let’s take a closer look at what systematic reviews of observational studies and controlled studies tell us about saturated fat intake and the risk of coronary heart disease (CHD), other diseases, and death from any cause.

A 2009 meta-analysis of 28 cohort studies and 16 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) concluded “The available evidence from cohort and randomised controlled trials is unsatisfactory and unreliable to make judgement about and substantiate the effects of dietary fat on risk of CHD.”
6
A 2010 meta-analysis of 21 cohort studies found no association between saturated fat intake on CHD outcomes.
7
A 2014 systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies and randomized, controlled trials found that the evidence does not clearly support dietary guidelines that limit intake of saturated fats and replace them with polyunsaturated fats.
8
A 2015 meta-analysis of 17 observational studies found that saturated fats had no association with heart disease, all-cause mortality, or any other disease.
9
A 2017 meta-analysis of 7 cohort studies found no significant association between saturated fat intake and CHD death.
10
Two systematic reviews of clinical trials — considered the strongest, most reliable evidence — found that replacing saturated fats with unsaturated fats may slightly reduce the risk of heart attack and other cardiovascular events. This effect only applied to men, however, and had no impact on total mortality or death from heart disease.
11
Other extensive and similarly high-quality reviews have failed to establish any benefit.
12

A 2020 Cochrane review of RCTs likewise showed a reduction in cardiovascular events for lower saturated fat intake, but this effect was modest. This study also found no difference on cardiovascular death or all-cause death.
13

An observational study of high-risk subjects out of Italy, France, and Scandanavia reported a minimal association between saturated fat intake and progression of carotid intima-media thickness (CIMT, a measurement of subclinical vascular disease). The hazard ratio was tiny at 1.1 and 1.2. However, once the authors adjusted for age and gender, the association disappeared. The conclusion was that there is no evidence that saturated fat intake causes a progression of vascular disease.
14

Mente and colleagues published a large observational study that examined dietary patterns and lipid data from over 100,000 people in 18 countries around the world. Called the PURE study, its data analysis found that higher saturated fat intake was associated with beneficial effects on a number of heart disease risk factors, including higher HDL levels, lower triglyceride levels, and – what seemed to be the strongest predictor of CHD risk — a decreased ratio of ApoB (found in LDL particles) to Apo A (found in HDL particles).
15
However, as with many epidemiology studies, this study had significant flaws, including not measuring trans fat and inadequate measurement of the quality of carbohydrate. It also measured dietary intake on one occasion, in contrast to most epidemiological studies which have serial dietary data collection points.

Macy0161

I wasn't really thinking that extreme, more much (much) less of this type of bs...

Bananahands wrote: »

Ditching the carbs is crucial for weight loss, you have to look at the spuds, bread, pasta, porridge etc as bowls of sugar.

tamara25

I have a half stone to lose. I’ve managed to lose a stone already but my clothes are still a bit tight around my waist especially. I keep my carb intake as low as I can but I’m really struggling with completely cutting out sugar ie: biscuits, chocolate that type of thing. I might only have 2 biscuits most days but then out of the blue I could eat alot of extra sugar. So if I ditch sugar completely will I definitely lose the last few lbs. doing loads of walking also.

Cill94

tamara25 wrote: »

. So if I ditch sugar completely will I definitely lose the last few lbs. doing loads of walking also.

If your daily calories reduce then yes.

However you also have to consider whether zero sugar is a viable long term solution for you. If not, then you’ll just end up gaining the weight back once you start eating those foods again.

Qgirl

Cill94 wrote: »

If your daily calories reduce then yes.

However you also have to consider whether zero sugar is a viable long term solution for you. If not, then you’ll just end up gaining the weight back once you start eating those foods again.

Do not over simplify calories in or out math.


If you stop refine sugar, refine grain and refine oil. Most certain you will lose weight. Why? The nutrient what regulates your metabolism and well being not calories in or out.

Macy0161

BabysCoffee wrote: »

Would this be accepted evidence?

See also this....

Qgirl wrote: »

Do not over simplify calories in or out math.


If you stop refine sugar, refine grain and refine oil. Most certain you will lose weight. Why? The nutrient what regulates your metabolism and well being not calories in or out.

bladespin

Qgirl wrote: »

Do not over simplify calories in or out math.


If you stop refine sugar, refine grain and refine oil. Most certain you will lose weight. Why? The nutrient what regulates your metabolism and well being not calories in or out.

No clue what that's supposed to mean but you won't loose any weight if you substitute these with higher calorie 'healthy' foods, you will 'feel' better though.

Qgirl

bladespin wrote: »

No clue what that's supposed to mean but you won't loose any weight if you substitute these with higher calorie 'healthy' foods, you will 'feel' better though.

Food consumption to extract nutrients not calories count.
If you consume proper healthy food you simply unable to over eat.

What makes you to over eat is junk, processed & refined food full of toxic additives and poisons that mess with your hormones&neurotransmitters and make food crave all day long

bladespin

Qgirl wrote: »

Food consumption is to extract nutrients not calories count.
If you consume proper healthy food you simply unable to over eat.

What makes you to over eat is junk, processed & refined food full of toxic additives and poisons that mess with your hormones and make food crave all day long

It's very easy to overconsume healthy food and exceed your calorie requirement, people do it all the time, not everyone who's overweight got that way by eating crap, many do for sure but not all, it's also the main reason most struggle to loose weight on 'healthy' diets, they're eating better but still too much.

Qgirl

bladespin wrote: »

It's very easy to overconsume healthy food and exceed your calorie requirement, people do it all the time, not everyone who's overweight got that way by eating crap, many do for sure but not all, it's also the main reason most struggle to loose weight on 'healthy' diets, they're eating better but still too much.

There is some misconception of what is healthy or unhealthy foods.
You will feel sick if you try to overeat healthy foods.

bladespin

Qgirl wrote: »

There is some misconception of what is healthy or unhealthy foods.
You will feel sick if you try to overeat healthy foods.

I have a lot of respect for intuitive eating but it's not that simple, even something as simple as an extra apple a day will add up over a year and weight will be gained. Binging aside, you can quite easily overeat without knowing or feeling it.

Qgirl

bladespin wrote: »

I have a lot of respect for intuitive eating but it's not that simple, even something as simple as an extra apple a day will add up over a year and weight will be gained. Binging aside, you can quite easily overeat without knowing or feeling it.

Obviously not on the same day if you already being exposed to junk/processed food. You would have to go trought rehabilitation process.

It takes a few month. But I can insure you once you get rid of addiction/craving you would never question me again on that

bladespin

Qgirl wrote: »

Obviously not on the same day if you already being exposed to junk/processed food. You would have to go trought rehabilitation process.

It takes a few month. But I can insure you once you get rid of addiction/craving you would never question me again on that

Regardless of exposure, if you take in too many calories you gain weight, even if they're from 'good' foods and it's very easy to overeat without your body telling you to stop.
Craving often has very little to do with junk, more to do with your body lacking something, unfortunately the message often gets misinterpreted and we opt for 'junk' foods to satisfy eg, a deficiency of magnesium will make you crave chocolate etc.

El_Duderino 09

bladespin wrote: »

Regardless of exposure, if you take in too many calories you gain weight, even if they're from 'good' foods and it's very easy to overeat without your body telling you to stop.
Craving often has very little to do with junk, more to do with your body lacking something, unfortunately the message often gets misinterpreted and we opt for 'junk' foods to satisfy eg, a deficiency of magnesium will make you crave chocolate etc.

I think this must vary a lot for different people. I know that for me, eating junk (and carbs) lead me to be more hungry and more likely to overeat. It was more like cravings than hunger. Keto was really useful to me to get from cravings to normal hunger and eating patterns. I've always eaten pretty health. Never ate takeaways more than once a month or anything like that,

Some people don't seem to recognise this relationship between carbs and cravings and likelihood of overeating. So I presume that's just the different between people and the different reasons they put on weight in the first case.

For me it almost certainly had something to do with refined carbs, insulin, craving more carbs. Getting rid of carbs (keto) made a huge difference to me.

Cill94

Qgirl wrote: »

Do not over simplify calories in or out math.


If you stop refine sugar, refine grain and refine oil. Most certain you will lose weight. Why? The nutrient what regulates your metabolism and well being not calories in or out.

Simplifying the most over-complicated area of health and fitness is great. Saves people a lot of time, stress, and money on things that don’t matter.

Most certainly a lot of people will lose weight by eliminating those foods. Because they’re high in calories.