It's a guide. Of course the specifics are different for everyone, but I haven't seen too many posts saying the guidelines are bunk. Now there is a population of young men who basically can eat like they have eight assholes and still look fit; they might think it's bunk. And I'm sure the curve is different for people who work out for general fitness and people who lift hard or are athletes.
I must have missed the consensus on this. Such a diverse group - I wonder if you could get a consensus on anything.
I wonder if the Ornish/low fat forums have their own Dietary fat Curve.
10g - 20g - Accelerated fat burning
20 - 30g - Effortless weight loss
30g - 40g - weight maintenance
40 - 50g - slow insidious fat gaining
60g + = DANGER ZONE.
Sure, it might be only be a guide and it may even work for people, but it's still kind of ridiculous and just as easily refuted by countless populations.
I think they can both be valid. The potato thread which totally freaked me out at first because I don't see primal as a one note thing, flips the low carb to all carb. They all admit it's not something to do long term. I'm looking forward to seeing the results and follow up.
The reason, I think, that just about everything can be refuted is that there isn''t one magic pill. There's a general magic pill for general health: eat wholesomely produced food and move around. But after that, the tweaking has to be done by the individual.
And that tweaking changes even for the individual over time. 30 years ago, I went from 156 pounds to 118 pounds in six weeks simply by eating one meal a day. And that meal was more often than not a half of a large pizza packed with toppings. I could never do that now. Well, maybe I could, but I'd have to be a full time student, part time worker who goes dancing twice a week, takes two PE classes in addition to academics... Dang, I think I need a nap just thinking of all that activity. :)
Anyway, you get my drift. A guide is just a guide. But it's a good place to start.
The curve for weight loss, when combined with high fat, was not working for me. Well it was working to a point, but slow. So when I reach maintenance, it may be a better guideline for me.
I started losing weight on higher carbs. Well low for SAD standards but well above the curve for losing. I just glanced and saw a 227 gram day (181 net) and I was losing about 10lbs per month. (30-40%fat)
I know weight loss slows as you reach goal but I am not close. And you can see exactly when I went primal and cut carbs and increased fat because then I was only losing 4-5lbs. I continued Moar Fat, and weight loss crawled to .8 for ALL of September. Oct. 3 I switched to low fat more carbs, and eventually on the tater train for the experiment, and I have lost over 5lbs in 7 days.
So use it as a guide but realize that it is different for everyone. You just have to experiment and find your own numbers, and realize that those could change also and then it will be time to try something else.
The difference for me between low carbs and more carbs and subsequently with the low/high fat, I was full for longer in between meals with low carbs/high fat. It enabled me to IF. So I was eating less frequently and losing less weight. With more carbs and less fat, I find I get hungry sooner, and wake up hungrier. Like now, I have been up since 4 am and I am getting hungry, but it is controlled and I can push it off and not worry about chewing my arm off. So I was able to learn how to get my hunger in check but I do find I get hungry more often and back to eating 3 times per day and maybe a snack or two, rather than some days just one big meal. So it is a trade off that I am willing to deal with for now in order to get some more weight off. I know that I can always add more fat back in , I just have to understand that weight loss will slow down, and at about 70-75% I will start to gain and then a 48 hour fast will take it back off, but it is just back and forth, no real progress for weight loss. But I can see it working when I reach maintenance but for now, my main goal is weight loss since I dont think I have any other major health issues.
Oh hey, are we having this argument again?
I have been primal/paleo for 2.5 years now. In the past six weeks, I have lost about 6 pounds, and I am eating more carbs than I have been during this timeframe. I am using a leangains style plan by upping carbs on my training days(250-275g) and lower carbs on non-training days (50-75g). This averages about 175 carbs per day doing this. My carbs consist mostly of sweet potatoes and fruit, and I mean a lot of each. Finally for the first time in my life I can see abs.
I believe the key is caloric restriction by means of IF and carb cycling. It has worked for me, and has dispelled any theory that fruit and other carbs cause fat gain. I am sure that activity level plays a part. Someone sitting around all day eating a lot of carbs, regardless of the source, may end up gaining fat.
For people who don't like the carb curve, Phil Maffetone has a Two-week test where you can determine your own carb curve. Actually, the two weeks just help determine if you have any carb intolerance and after that it's fairly painstaking to determine your own carb curve. No carb intolerance, no need to cut back, but stay away from processed grains.
[url=http://philmaffetone.com/2weektest.cfm]Phil Maffetone, www.philmaffetone.com - 2 Week Test[/url]
I think Mark is coming from the position that if you are Ken Korg, typical office guy in his 40s with the expanding waistline, you probably have insulin resistance if not full on metabolic syndrome. You're probably an average person, if you follow these average numbers you are going to see positive results. These average numbers are probably based on an average 2000 calorie a day diet with carb numbers based on the myriad of other low carbohydrate diets out there. If you aren't Ken Korg, then you aren't exactly his audience.
If he doesn't have references in his book, you might need to try a different book with similar recommendations. His book is available at a local bookstore in my town so if you have a well-stocked bookstore, you might try looking for his book there to see if you'd like to purchase it.
[QUOTE=Lukey;975328]i'm not sure where he got the info but before you start spreading the info, you should know that it's more the percentage of your calories rather than the amount of carbohydrate. A true low carb diet is anything under 15-20% of your calories. So if you burn 2000 a day thats anything under 80-100g.[/QUOTE]
Thanks for the clarification, Lukey.
[QUOTE=Metric;975331]I don't have the book with me but are there any references listed for that page? Why don't you email him directly?[/QUOTE]
Thanks Metric. I don't recall seeing any references at all, though I haven't read the whole thing (Blueprint).
Do you happen to have Mark's email address?