Scroll to see replies
Don't know much myself, but perhaps request for this to be moved to fitness, under nutrition? You might get some more replies, because it seems to be more suited there
I've done it lol. Decided regular diets were not working so tried something radical. It was really hard. I had headaches and felt angry and horrible for days but then got over that once I got used to it. It's hard to keep on top of as you are really restricted but I lost a LOT of weight and quickly. The thing is as soon as I stopped it all pretty much went back on.
It's either a quick fix or a way of life forever but it worked for me while I was doing it!
It's either a quick fix or a way of life forever but it worked for me while I was doing it!
Original post by BethaneyJ
I've done it lol. Decided regular diets were not working so tried something radical. It was really hard. I had headaches and felt angry and horrible for days but then got over that once I got used to it. It's hard to keep on top of as you are really restricted but I lost a LOT of weight and quickly. The thing is as soon as I stopped it all pretty much went back on.
It's either a quick fix or a way of life forever but it worked for me while I was doing it!
It's either a quick fix or a way of life forever but it worked for me while I was doing it!
how long did it take for you to lose weight and what sort of stuff were u eating?
Original post by pinkangelgirl
how long did it take for you to lose weight and what sort of stuff were u eating?
It started to come off after a day or 2 actually. So really quick. I did Atkin's Initiation which means all meats and eggs, no fruit or dairy other than hard cheese or full fat cream cheese but only 3 ounces a day (if I remember rightly). And you could have a small amount of salad but very strict types like brocolli, cucumber etc.
I ended up eating normal dinners minus the carb (pasta, potato etc) but lunch and dinners were hard. eggs in every way you can think of, bacon and eggs, lots of cucumber slices with cheese on top. Chicken (the cooked stuff you get from the shops!). I was also drinking a lot of water or diet coke. Any diet drinks are good but the less aspartame you drink the better as for some people it slows the weight loss down.
I lost over a stone in around 15 days which isn't really the best idea - it's a bit fast, but you can expect to lose up to 2 (3 at most) pounds a day. It's craycray.
Original post by BethaneyJ
bit fast, but you can expect to lose up to 2 (3 at most) pounds a day. It's craycray.
Hmm.. Personally I wouldn't do it at all if weight loss was that fast. 2 pounds a week is not bad, but 2 pounds a day is too much. I read somewhere that if you lose weight too fast, you also risk losing muscle as well as body fat, or even instead of in some cases
I'm doing keto and its working well, but its not a miracle diet or anything. Eating lots of fat keeps you full for a long time. I used to be hungry an hour after eating ~300g of pasta, now when I eat a fatty breakfast i'm not even slightly hungry until 7/8pm at night. The fullness aspect is why people lose weight easily on keto, its quite difficult to overeat when not involving carbs. Keto is a low carb/moderate protein/high fat diet. Note the moderate protein, most of the calories are meant to come from fat, you aim to eat enough protein to prevent muscle degeneration but not much more.
As for actual weight loss, in the first week or two you dump a lot of water weight, around 10lbs/4.5kg usually because carbohydrates cause your body to retain extra water. After you've dumped the water weight the amount you lose depends entirely on the calorific deficit you are using. On average I'm dropping 2lbs a week, which is normal in any proper diet.
As for actual weight loss, in the first week or two you dump a lot of water weight, around 10lbs/4.5kg usually because carbohydrates cause your body to retain extra water. After you've dumped the water weight the amount you lose depends entirely on the calorific deficit you are using. On average I'm dropping 2lbs a week, which is normal in any proper diet.
Original post by de_monies
Hmm.. Personally I wouldn't do it at all if weight loss was that fast. 2 pounds a week is not bad, but 2 pounds a day is too much. I read somewhere that if you lose weight too fast, you also risk losing muscle as well as body fat, or even instead of in some cases
Yeah this is why I stopped. It's really not the best idea. But you can monitor your protein and ketone output to show what you are burning (urine sticks). You don't get any vitamins and have to take suppliments and it made my skin really bad for the first week. I wouldn't really recommend it unless someone is serious about doing it properly with vitamins and monitoring etc and they have perhaps tried a lot of other things first.
Original post by BethaneyJ
Yeah this is why I stopped. It's really not the best idea. But you can monitor your protein and ketone output to show what you are burning (urine sticks). You don't get any vitamins and have to take suppliments and it made my skin really bad for the first week. I wouldn't really recommend it unless someone is serious about doing it properly with vitamins and monitoring etc and they have perhaps tried a lot of other things first.
Fair enough. No carbs at all seems like hell - I love my milk
Someone else said that they're losing 2lb/week using the Ketosis diet. Personally,I'm calorie counting and losing around 1Kg/week or so, and that's with me basically eating what I want, unless it's processed or fried
Original post by de_monies
Fair enough. No carbs at all seems like hell - I love my milk
Someone else said that they're losing 2lb/week using the Ketosis diet. Personally,I'm calorie counting and losing around 1Kg/week or so, and that's with me basically eating what I want, unless it's processed or fried
Someone else said that they're losing 2lb/week using the Ketosis diet. Personally,I'm calorie counting and losing around 1Kg/week or so, and that's with me basically eating what I want, unless it's processed or fried
It was at first. I felt like I could eat nothing. But after 2 weeks you can start eating yoghurt and milk and berries which helped a LOT. Then my uncle died so I thought.... sod it. Haha. I imagine I'll be starting it again soon. Weight watchers type things where you can eat anything but in moderation just doesn't work for me. I am very all or nothing.
You get used to eating now carbs but it's definitely hard for the first week or so. When you come off keto just bare in mind you body will grab onto any carbs you put in and you will gain weight fast, so it's important to introduce the carbs slowly into your diet to prevent the shock to the system.
Great for fat loss though, just make sure you get enough fat in!
Great for fat loss though, just make sure you get enough fat in!
It's good.
It's not like those faddy diets you see in women's magazines -- "how to drop a dress size in 12 minutes and 34 seconds", this is a way of life in my opinion.
There's a book called The Paleo Solution that I want to read, the Paleolithic diet means eating food before we started to farm... no grains (oats, wheat, rye, barley, lentils), legumes (peanuts, beans), no refined carbohydrates, alcohol (or at least compromise and have an alcoholic drink with as little sugar as possible), processed foods, starches and dairy. So basically low carbohydrate, high protein, high fat. Eat lean meats, oily fish, nuts and seeds, avocados & olives, seafood/shellfish, fruits and veg, but limit the fruit - too much sugar.
http://robbwolf.com/
Plenty of information there.
I think it's good, but it shouldn't be grouped in with those diets people do for a quick fix or plan to go on then come off. This is permanant and healthy living.
It's not like those faddy diets you see in women's magazines -- "how to drop a dress size in 12 minutes and 34 seconds", this is a way of life in my opinion.
There's a book called The Paleo Solution that I want to read, the Paleolithic diet means eating food before we started to farm... no grains (oats, wheat, rye, barley, lentils), legumes (peanuts, beans), no refined carbohydrates, alcohol (or at least compromise and have an alcoholic drink with as little sugar as possible), processed foods, starches and dairy. So basically low carbohydrate, high protein, high fat. Eat lean meats, oily fish, nuts and seeds, avocados & olives, seafood/shellfish, fruits and veg, but limit the fruit - too much sugar.
http://robbwolf.com/
Plenty of information there.
I think it's good, but it shouldn't be grouped in with those diets people do for a quick fix or plan to go on then come off. This is permanant and healthy living.
Original post by Wilfred Little
It's good.
It's not like those faddy diets you see in women's magazines -- "how to drop a dress size in 12 minutes and 34 seconds", this is a way of life in my opinion.
There's a book called The Paleo Solution that I want to read, the Paleolithic diet means eating food before we started to farm... no grains (oats, wheat, rye, barley, lentils), legumes (peanuts, beans), no refined carbohydrates, alcohol (or at least compromise and have an alcoholic drink with as little sugar as possible), processed foods, starches and dairy. So basically low carbohydrate, high protein, high fat. Eat lean meats, oily fish, nuts and seeds, avocados & olives, seafood/shellfish, fruits and veg, but limit the fruit - too much sugar.
http://robbwolf.com/
Plenty of information there.
I think it's good, but it shouldn't be grouped in with those diets people do for a quick fix or plan to go on then come off. This is permanant and healthy living.
It's not like those faddy diets you see in women's magazines -- "how to drop a dress size in 12 minutes and 34 seconds", this is a way of life in my opinion.
There's a book called The Paleo Solution that I want to read, the Paleolithic diet means eating food before we started to farm... no grains (oats, wheat, rye, barley, lentils), legumes (peanuts, beans), no refined carbohydrates, alcohol (or at least compromise and have an alcoholic drink with as little sugar as possible), processed foods, starches and dairy. So basically low carbohydrate, high protein, high fat. Eat lean meats, oily fish, nuts and seeds, avocados & olives, seafood/shellfish, fruits and veg, but limit the fruit - too much sugar.
http://robbwolf.com/
Plenty of information there.
I think it's good, but it shouldn't be grouped in with those diets people do for a quick fix or plan to go on then come off. This is permanant and healthy living.
Paleo isn't keto or low/no carb.
Original post by Brotherhood
Paleo isn't keto or low/no carb.
Paleo isn't low carb?
practitioners should derive about 56–65% of their food energy from animal foods and 36–45% from plant foods. They recommend a diet high in protein (19–35% energy) and relatively low in carbohydrates (22–40% energy), with a fat intake (28–58% energy) similar to or higher than that found in Western diets.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleolithic_diet#Practices
OK.
Or are you trying to say you can do the Paleo diet with a high carb intake? As they are different things.
Original post by Wilfred Little
Paleo isn't low carb?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleolithic_diet#Practices
OK.
Or are you trying to say you can do the Paleo diet with a high carb intake? As they are different things.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleolithic_diet#Practices
OK.
Or are you trying to say you can do the Paleo diet with a high carb intake? As they are different things.
Paleo is low carb in practice because it is hard to eat a high amount of carbs from vegetable sources alone, but in principle it isn't. Low carb and paleo are often mentioned together as there is a lot of overlap, but they're not the same. Some Paleo protocols ascribe low carb but many don't and the principle of paleo is the type of food you eat, not what macronutrient it is.
Original post by Brotherhood
Paleo is low carb in practice because it is hard to eat a high amount of carbs from vegetable sources alone, but in principle it isn't. Low carb and paleo are often mentioned together as there is a lot of overlap, but they're not the same. Some Paleo protocols ascribe low carb but many don't and the principle of paleo is the type of food you eat, not what macronutrient it is.
Yeah I get you sorry, that's what I thought you were getting at. I did start a new paragraph though as I didn't want to imply they are both exclusive to each other.
Original post by 4TSR
I heard it's a great idea and great success. I also heard it wasn't......
what do you guys think?
what do you guys think?
All diets work in one of two ways:
1) Calorie restriction
2) Increased activity level
Most people consume large amounts of carbohydrates, reducing carbohydrate consumption reduces your calorific intake and in doing so creates a calorie deficit, which causes you to lose weight - it is no more mystical than that. The "metabolic" benefit that some people speak of is negligible if not non-existent. Equal or better results could be gained by a simple calorie controlled diet.
Low carb and ketogenic diets have a couple of fundamental problems though:
1) Carbohydrates are the preferred fuel source of the brain and your muscles - restrict carbohydrates and you will see a fall in athletic performance, lethargy, lack of concentration, headaches, mood swings, etc. Sure some people see an improvement after a couple of weeks but a lot don't without eating more carbs or limiting exercise intensity and volume. Again far from ideal.
2) Malnourishment - most people's diets are deficient in fruit and vegetables, low carb and ketogenic diets take things even further by restricting fruit and vegetable choices and consumption even more. To match this some people use vitamin and mineral supplements but they're expensive and have questionable efficacy.
3) Compliance - low or no carb diets are highly restrictive and do not fit in well with day to day life. The result is that most people give up within a relatively short space of time and regain most (if not all) of the weight they lost.
4) Cost - large amounts of high quality meats and fish are expensive. Few people can afford to maintain it or do it properly.
5) Health - low carb and ketogenic diets are deficient in vegetables and fruit, and within that fibre, vitamins and minerals, and a lot of people trying to cut the cost of the diet also eat more processed meats. Again, far from ideal.
Original post by jms
Eating lots of fat keeps you full for a long time. I used to be hungry an hour after eating ~300g of pasta, now when I eat a fatty breakfast i'm not even slightly hungry until 7/8pm at night. The fullness aspect is why people lose weight easily on keto, its quite difficult to overeat when not involving carbs.
Fat's aren't very satiating. Protein, fibre and water rich foods - YES. Fat - NO. If you're getting the majority of your calories from fat it is relatively easy to overeat or even gain weight.
Considering low carb and ketogenic diets are low in fibre and water rich foods (eg; vegetables, beans, lentils) it isn't ideal.
Original post by de_monies
Hmm.. Personally I wouldn't do it at all if weight loss was that fast. 2 pounds a week is not bad, but 2 pounds a day is too much. I read somewhere that if you lose weight too fast, you also risk losing muscle as well as body fat, or even instead of in some cases
More myth than true.
It is harder than a lot of people think to lose large amounts of muscle, by and large we're talking about chronic malnourishment coupled with a significant calorie deficit and a lack of resistance training full stop.
The reason why rapid weight loss isn't ideal is because you're sacrificing your health and performance, and in the short term the majority of your weight loss is going to be water, not fat or muscle.
Original post by Wilfred Little
It's good.
It's not like those faddy diets you see in women's magazines -- "how to drop a dress size in 12 minutes and 34 seconds", this is a way of life in my opinion.
There's a book called The Paleo Solution that I want to read, the Paleolithic diet means eating food before we started to farm... no grains (oats, wheat, rye, barley, lentils), legumes (peanuts, beans), no refined carbohydrates, alcohol (or at least compromise and have an alcoholic drink with as little sugar as possible), processed foods, starches and dairy. So basically low carbohydrate, high protein, high fat. Eat lean meats, oily fish, nuts and seeds, avocados & olives, seafood/shellfish, fruits and veg, but limit the fruit - too much sugar.
http://robbwolf.com/
Plenty of information there.
I think it's good, but it shouldn't be grouped in with those diets people do for a quick fix or plan to go on then come off. This is permanant and healthy living.
It's not like those faddy diets you see in women's magazines -- "how to drop a dress size in 12 minutes and 34 seconds", this is a way of life in my opinion.
There's a book called The Paleo Solution that I want to read, the Paleolithic diet means eating food before we started to farm... no grains (oats, wheat, rye, barley, lentils), legumes (peanuts, beans), no refined carbohydrates, alcohol (or at least compromise and have an alcoholic drink with as little sugar as possible), processed foods, starches and dairy. So basically low carbohydrate, high protein, high fat. Eat lean meats, oily fish, nuts and seeds, avocados & olives, seafood/shellfish, fruits and veg, but limit the fruit - too much sugar.
http://robbwolf.com/
Plenty of information there.
I think it's good, but it shouldn't be grouped in with those diets people do for a quick fix or plan to go on then come off. This is permanant and healthy living.
Paleo is a fad diet? Maybe not but it scores highly in the dogma stakes.
Sure it is a step forward for most but do we know that it is what Paleolithic man ate? Do we know that we are "designed" to eat it? Do we know that it is the "best" diet? No.
Even Paleo proponents can't decide amongst themselves - some say dairy products are ok, some not, some say legumes are ok, some not, some say rice is ok, some not, some say nuts and seeds are ok, some not, etc. All of that is woven together with a mixture of irrationality and poor science. For example, some foods are excluded from the diet because they contain "antinutritional factors" whereas in other instances it is ignored. Studies which found genetic markers to gluten sensitivity in some diseased populations are presented in a way to convince the reader that gluten CAUSED these diseases when in actual fact there is little or no evidence that that is the case. Elsewhere conflicting studies and evidence is ignored in an attempt to make a more convincing argument.
Frankly it is a mess.
Original post by ch0c0h01ic
Paleo is a fad diet? Maybe not but it scores highly in the dogma stakes.
Sure it is a step forward for most but do we know that it is what Paleolithic man ate? Do we know that we are "designed" to eat it? Do we know that it is the "best" diet? No.
Even Paleo proponents can't decide amongst themselves - some say dairy products are ok, some not, some say legumes are ok, some not, some say rice is ok, some not, some say nuts and seeds are ok, some not, etc. All of that is woven together with a mixture of irrationality and poor science. For example, some foods are excluded from the diet because they contain "antinutritional factors" whereas in other instances it is ignored. Studies which found genetic markers to gluten sensitivity in some diseased populations are presented in a way to convince the reader that gluten CAUSED these diseases when in actual fact there is little or no evidence that that is the case. Elsewhere conflicting studies and evidence is ignored in an attempt to make a more convincing argument.
Frankly it is a mess.
Sure it is a step forward for most but do we know that it is what Paleolithic man ate? Do we know that we are "designed" to eat it? Do we know that it is the "best" diet? No.
Even Paleo proponents can't decide amongst themselves - some say dairy products are ok, some not, some say legumes are ok, some not, some say rice is ok, some not, some say nuts and seeds are ok, some not, etc. All of that is woven together with a mixture of irrationality and poor science. For example, some foods are excluded from the diet because they contain "antinutritional factors" whereas in other instances it is ignored. Studies which found genetic markers to gluten sensitivity in some diseased populations are presented in a way to convince the reader that gluten CAUSED these diseases when in actual fact there is little or no evidence that that is the case. Elsewhere conflicting studies and evidence is ignored in an attempt to make a more convincing argument.
Frankly it is a mess.
What
I said it isn't. This is a fad diet - http://www.cabbage-soup-diet.com/ 7 days
it is a step forward for most
I'm glad you agree. If it's a step forward for most, it's a good thing, no?
As for the rest of your post, I don't care, every diet is like that, too many differences of opinion. Welcome to fitness.
Original post by Wilfred Little
My point was that it is up for debate. It certainly shares similar characteristics to other "fad" diets, the irony is that the authors try to distance themselves from it by calling it a "lifestyle" and claiming that it was what we were "evolved" to eat.
I'm glad you agree. If it's a step forward for most, it's a good thing, no?
Sure, but there are many other alternative diets which achieve the same thing which aren't as restrictive and without relying on poor science or by deliberately trying to mislead the public.
As for the rest of your post, I don't care, every diet is like that, too many differences of opinion. Welcome to fitness.
This comment exemplifies some of the greatest issues with Paleo dogmatism - ignorance, a lack of scientific understanding and irrationality. Many people are unaware of the mass of conflicting evidence but at the same time they cannot be bothered to look for it or question the validity of what they are reading. I suspect that a lack of scientific background significantly contributes to this. Equally people don't know where to look for this "evidence" or how to critically assess it's significance.
To the contrary the concepts of eating less processed food, eating more lean meat and fish, eating more vegetables, everything within moderation, exercising more, etc have been around for decades and are well supported by evidence.
But as you say though, people cannot be bothered.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Extremely scared for my little cousin
- Does carbohydrates cause acne?
- Exercise
- binge eating
- weight loss at uni
- Can I take protein shakes if I mainly do cardio?
- How to get rid of acne or hypopigmentation?
- Healthy nutrition
- Weight loss
- How to lose face fat?
- Will the calories effect my growth
- How do people eat 2000 calories a day?
- Does swimming make you lose muscle ?
- Why am i hungry all the time and how do i stop it?
- How to shape/tone body
- How am I gaining weight
- how can i loose weight?:(
- No results (gym)
- I ate at 6pm, do I need to eat again?
- Is breakfast actually important
Latest
Trending
Last reply 1 week ago
is it possible to go from a size 16 [L] to a size 12 [M] in five months?Trending
Last reply 1 week ago
is it possible to go from a size 16 [L] to a size 12 [M] in five months?
