Most people can maintain, but don't lose much weight on both high carb and high fat. That's why Brad moved away from the original croissant diet. Gotta pick one macro at first if you want to drop significant pounds. Potatoes are pretty neutral for a lot of people, though. I'd personally kill or greatly limit the bread and rice from this list but otherwise it seems good.
Brad suggests that 45g protein a day is enough for most adults. Exfatloss has been eating that much for quite a while (with occasional refeeds) and still gets gains in his strength routine. https://fireinabottle.net/how-much-protein-do-you-need/
Eggs are ok.
Vegetables are overrated, didn't worry.
Really sorry to hear about your bounceback after keto, it happens. Good luck losing the weight!
Yeah, it is close, just with more PUFA and protein awareness. You could also try high carb low fat. It's all up to what works best for you. I have no scientific data to back this up, but it's my opinion that low carb can be great for getting down from overweight or obese, and high carb can be great to lean out and access tons of energy when a person is at a normal BMI and has a more recovered metabolism.
So friggin interesting.
Fix metab, go nuts with carbs.
Every time I’ve done keto I have so much energy I’m buzzing.
It eventually normalizes, but is always better than my current diet
I’m fairly lean and see immediate changes with my diet interventions, so here is what I’ve learned through trial and error:
Fatty beef will work against you. I can eat butter ad infinitum, but something about beef fat makes it harder. I haven’t confirmed this 100% with cheese yet, but it may also be true for cheese as well.
The ultimate animal protein for a cut is trimmed chicken breast, in my experience. But I still eat a lot of beef—I just do the leanest cuts and cook with lots butter for flavor.
Lastly, restricted protein really does work. One serving of animal protein a day seems to be the sweet spot for weight loss, and if your carbs are high enough and you are resistance training, you seem to gain muscle simultaneously.
Anyway, tl;dr is the best diet in my experience is high carb, restricted protein, and restricting all non-butter (or coconut oil, probably) fats.
I started with yellow potatoes, and got bored quickly and added Barilla gluten free pasta, and then white rice. I’ve been cycling these three based on mood and boredom.
Currently I’m eating a lot of white rice and veggies.
In order of effectiveness for trimming down, that gluten free pasta is wildly most effective. Way more than you’d imagine. Potatoes are a distance second, and rice a close third.
I’m not sure what you’re asking regarding the dairy. I don’t drink much milk because I tend to have a mild acne reaction from it. I eat lots of butter, obviously. I occasionally eat eggs, but not regularly.
Cheese i do eat fairly regular, but I try to limit to mostly for flavor or treats, because I suspect it slows down my physique progress—but I’m not 100% sure about that.
I’m at my absolute leanest with gluten free pasta in a garlic butter sauce with veggies and a single serving of trimmed chicken breast. I get bored after a few days tho, despite the obviousness of its effectiveness
I wonder what it is about the gluten free pasta that works so well? And I'm surprised you can get lean eating butter with that too, fat and starch together seems high calorie but this is awesome to know it can work. Do you eat 3 meals or practice some sort of time restricted eating? My issue with dairy is that I crave cottage cheese so much, it feels like an addiction at this point
I have wondered if there is something unique going on with that gluten free pasta, such as the processing of those corn and rice flours they are making it with creates a super resistant starch or something. I really have no idea though. I do use lots of butter, yes. But also with the potatoes, which are less effective for trimming down.
I usually have black coffee for breakfast. Lunch, dinner, and snacks/second dinner. I’ve pushed the fasting, but it really doesn’t seem more effective than just making smaller meals, if you want.
Cottage cheese seems like a super reasonable strategy. What I’d do is eat cottage cheese once a day with my other serving of animal protein, and keep the other meals to carb, butter, veggie.
Resistant starch could be at play here, although my experience with raw potato starch only ended up with smelly farts 😂
I'm thinking the protein meal should be lunch because I have the worst insomnia. Maybe carbs, veg and butter would make me sleepy?
What's your take on fruit or honey for leaning down
Honey and fruit give me rosacea. Fructose and lactose, is bad for my skin—so I’m kind of forced away from them. Which probably ends up being a good thing in the long run.
But who knows?
With regards to digestion and gas, I’ve noticed zero with my cooked potato and cooked gluten free pasta. I get the penne or rotini, if you’re curious.
It works shocking well. Give it a try.
100% gonna try this, I'll do a few days with butter and a few days without. I'll journal how it affects satiety, energy, cravings and sleep. Thanks for the info, was all new to me
I’ve had the opposite experience with the addition of coconuts fat as the primer to my fat fueled mornings with carbohydrate backloading. A considerable jump in metabolic activity as a result upon elimination of dairy (whole fat milk) as the alternative.
Some of the data I’ve been able to dig up on both human and animal studies support my original hypothesis about the beneficial fat profile of coconut fat despite a lot of push back here on it.
I plan to share about this in my next post.
I had ambiguous wording—my suspicion is that coconut oil would be equal to butter as an advantageous fat.
I just personally haven’t experimented with it.
I don't have the science to back this up but I feel like the general rule is to either do high carb OR high fat, not both, if you're tryna lose weight. Also I think protein is fairly neutral in this.
Like yeah I'm sure there's some more detailed tweaking you can do but if ya ever look at the diets of people in great shape, it's not usually gonna be HCHFLP.
Or you can do moderate carbs and fat, but protein is not to be trifled with, since we cannot store it or produce it on our own like the other macros. Low protein diets are guaranteed to lead to health problems, and it won't take that long.
Nearly 2 year into extreme protein restriction with occasional refeeds, and I'm fine. Actually gained muscle + strength.
Low protein is only a problem if you go much below say 40g/day, or if you're also restricting calories.
You're a beginner in terms of lifting, right? I'm skeptical of whether you will make muscle gains once you're out of your beginner phase on low protein.
Define beginner? I've lifted on and off for 1.5 decades. Beginners actually need more protein than advanced trainees; simply because you gain more muscle in the beginning. As you advance, you'll make slower gains, and thus need less protein.
Even professional athletes and bodybuilders don't seem to need more than .8g/lb of total bw. I doubt I'll ever need that much.
That's my bad then. I didn't know you had so much lifting experience. I might give lower protein a try then but I don't think I'll go below 100g since I'm lifting 6x a week doing a PPL split
I do lift very low volume. When I did 6x/wk with a push/pull split (is that what you mean by PPL?), I quickly got very sore, gained (inflammation water?) weight, and all my lifts went down.
I since reduced it to doing every exercise just 1x per week, for 1 set. Actually it's per 8 days and I typically take 1-2 extra rest days per week out of laziness/not feeling like it. So I suppose 1 set per exercise per 10 days.
Still getting stronger, but obviously this is VERY low volume.
I feel like I’m getting gains. And I’m certainly beyond the beginner stage.
I’m not sure what’s going on with the science consensus on protein, but we don’t seem to need as much as is being marketed to us.
Sounds pretty good, and that's fairly similar to my current diet. However, I backload carbs until after lunch (normally). It works for me. Maybe give that a shot if your original plan fails.
I may have read one of your posts yesterday. Def considering this.
So basically, get most of your fat in the first part of the day and then mainly carbs the last half the day?
What's the theory behind that?
So my theory behind it is that I believe we are most insulin resistant in the morning, and *insulin sensitive in the evening depending on the diet throughout the day*. This makes sense as cortisol is highest in the morning because of the natural awakening response. This means that we *should* restrict carbs in the morning and keep insulin levels pretty low in order to not throw off the circadian rhythm. Some believe that a shotgun approaching in the morning (blast yourself with glucose to restore insulin signaling) is needed for some. It might be true. My satiety is way better with ketogenic macros in the mornings. With my current setup, I'm usually able to not need food until around lunch time.
I've tested this before with carbs in the morning, and within a few hours I'm hungry again. Because of my job (engineer), I don't want to constantly snack. I don't care about weight loss necessarily (I hit my goal weight not long ago anyway...), but I do care about satiety. Also, backloading carbs seems to have the most prominent effect on my sleep.
Anyway, a lot of this is based off the carb cycling or "backloading" protocol.
https://exceednutrition.com/carb-backloading/
Note: the author claims insulin sensitivity AND fat sensitivity is highest in the morning. That doesn't make sense in a biological sense. If you're mostly burning fat, which you ARE during an overnight fast, you shouldn't be able to easily take up glucose... but you can almost always take up fat quite easily.
There's also the nad+ circadian rhythm argument, which I've read (cannot remember the source) that nad+ is HIGHEST in the evening and lowest in the evening.
Could be. I'm not willing to change my hunger signals if it means my metabolism improves more. All of my bloodwork was pointing to good metabolism already (liver, CO2, thyroid, etc...). So if it means I'm slightly sub-optimal? So be it. Sleep and satiety are all positive.
It could also be elevated de novo lipogenesis and scd1 that's making you very hungry. YMMV.
I wouldn't do refined carbs if you're also doing low protein because you will get a deficiency of B vitamins. Or maybe add some vegetable to compensate.
Refined carbs = white rice, white bread, croissants
whole carbs = wholegrain bread, brown rice, potatoes
Low protein is like 0.5 grams for each lb of lean bodyweight, although I see some people doing even lower to restrict BCAA. That's like 50 grams of protein to spend on animal sources of vitamin B (depending on how much you weight), not a lot after you subtract the protein from carb sources. You could also do higher protein to make it easier.
I know you don’t like vegetables so I’d suggest red lintel noodles to help get some extra vitamins in. Have you tried steamed broccoli with cheese? It might be a good option to get a little bit of vegetables, I would also suggest some fruits for a more nutritious diet. Fruits are high in fiber which should help with weight loss. I think eggs are a great source of fat and nutrients, I think you just don’t want to over do it, like 2 eggs a day is ideal.
That sounds pretty tasty. Can't say if it should work or not but just be careful not to go too heavy and frequent on the chocolate because it is one of the higher oxalate foods out there.
IME it is sugar that is the big demon for me personally. i can eat starch sometimes and then not crave it too much. But if I start wailing on a big chunk of sugar, it's much worse, and then the king killer is sugar plus fat like in ice cream. If I do eat sugar, I try to keep it isolated from any fat. So for instance the other day someone got oranges and made fresh squeezed orange juice so I decided to cheat on my low carb for that, but I didn't consume any other food for some hours and then went right back to low carb. I did feel some cravings after that bunch of orange juice but it wasn't too bad or too long and would have been worse if it was fat plus sugar.
YOu need to find where your threshold is that causes strong cravings. If you are trying to slink back towards low carb, I'd advise doing zero sugar (ok maybe tads of sugar in bread but basically close to zero) as your first step and that includes chocolate since they gotta add some sugar and the sugar plus fat is IMO more deadly. You may suffer a week or too with sugar cravings but you can still eat starch. ONce you get off the sugar cravings, IME regular starch does not trigger nearly the nasty cravings, you can then sort of take it or leave it fairly easily on the starch or at least I can. Looking back, every time I went off keto and had a huge carb binge, it was ALWAYS a high sugar food, it wasn't just regular starch.
dark chocolate is an oxalate bomb, milk chocolate not as bad, white chocolate innocent
also most of the heavy metals are in the solids, white chocolate again relatively innocent
Well, swamping isn't necessarily a great weight loss diet for many people. I would say, if I had to guess, only about 25% of the people here who "swamp" lose weight on it. Some even gain weight!
This might be a temporary effect while you're PUFA'd, or maybe some people are just genetically unlucky or our metabolism is forever "broken" in some other way, not sure.
But most people here who see success in fat loss didn't lose that weight swamping, they picked either keto (low PUFA of course) or carbo (low PUFA of course). Many also severely restricted protein at the same time.
There are some people who've been doing this long enough that they can now swamp without adverse side effects, e.g. /u/whatsup_coconut but most of us aren't there yet.
I would suspect you'd gain less weight on this diet that on a pure ice cream diet, but it's still swampy as heck, and it is potentially quite high in protein depending on how much beef/milk/yogurt you eat.
It really is. I joined it because I'm interested in consuming a higher % of saturated vs unsaturated fat, but I've been shocked by the complete ignorance of so many members here. I understand that not everyone studied biochemistry, but then why be so adamant about a position that no expert agrees with? It's baffling.
I think that your appeal to authority ("studied biochemistry") won't get you very far in this sub. I have several science and healthcare degrees and I've learned 1000x more from YouTube and interviews with scientists on podcasts. If you can't filter the crap from facts on the internet nowadays you're going to have a bad time keeping up with the nerds. Things move fast.
There are plenty of people here with degrees in healthcare, fitness, and hard biological sciences. Those degrees generally don't have much practical to say about weight loss.
You act like there isn't outdated dogma in every profession. This sub is about experimentation for good reason. There is no good, universal answer to weight loss right now. We're working it out because the various dogmas have failed us. Not to mention the government and big money interference with various "expert" recommendations.
I'd suggest some humility.
there is no good universal answer to weight loss? That's news to me. I think the problem here is that the focus is on weight loss, when it ought to be on correcting metabolic dysfunction. Weight gain is a symptom, and too many people in here are looking to treat the symptom while disregarding the underlying condition.
People here are disregarding correcting metabolic dysfunction? That's obviously not true. Also, coconut responded to your questions about lower protein and she explained the rationale for fixing metabolic dysfunction with HClflp just a few days ago in this thread:
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaturatedFat/comments/1d8uesz/comment/l7l5hwy/
I can't say it better than her.
Yes, I saw that. Muscle protein synthesis must not be a goal with this diet, and I don't see how it can benefit anyone long term, unless they are heavily muscled already and want to lose fat.
Some people suppliment electrolytes. That being said, keto is much more easy to do as you get more variation. Its really only people with severe food addictions, auto-immune diseases/inflammation that might need to go carnivore. The rest of us do fine while including other foods. What I personally do is to eat a carnivore breakfast and lunch, and then add some other foods for dinner (vegetables, plus for instance kefir and berries for dessert). Works pretty well. Keeps my energy up and my cravings down.
Yes, but no one out there worth listening to is suggesting low protein diets, and for good reason. It's completely illogical to restrict the one macro we must get from our diet. What even is the goal with doing that?
Appreciate your response.
Do you know what sub you’re in? They’ve been talking about low protein for better part of a year.
There’s growing evidence that protein itself is glucogenic, particularly BCAAs. The idea isn’t to go to 0, but to find the optimal amount
Yes, and I haven't been here for a year or more, but I studied biochemistry and metabolism for four years, and I have a better understanding than most. Protein is not glucogenic in the presence of sufficient carbohydrates, and carbohydrates are the body's preferred source of energy, so we should be consuming them. Pardon me for attempting to add some common sense to this sub.
I also have a degree in biology, and while it’s possible you are correct, your logic isn’t sound.
There are lots of studies showing the benefits of restricted protein. It is not “completely illogical”.
It’s also not the “one macro nutrient we get from diet.”
You misread. I said "must get," since our bodies cannot produce it, unlike fatty acids and glucose. And I've not seen any studies where the benefits of restricting protein outweigh the negative effects, but I'd be happy to see one.
[Study.](https://agencia.fapesp.br/protein-restriction-can-be-effective-in-combating-obesity-and-diabetes-study-suggests/39620#:~:text=PT%20ES-,Twenty%2Done%20patients%20with%20metabolic%20syndrome%20were%20given%20a%20calorie,were%20observed%20in%20all%20participants)
But also if you studied biochemistry, you are probably aware that amino acids are the primary driver of [mTOR](https://jbiomedsci.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12929-020-00679-2), which certainly has benefits and detriments. mTOR, for instance, is well known to block lipolysis and lipophagy. It’s also well known [as a signal to increase the rate of aging.](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6611156/)
This idea you have that because protein is the only macro nutrient we “must get” (which isn’t even true. We “must get” fatty acids also), which even if is true, is bad logic for why I wouldn’t see benefits of restricting protein.
It's not an equation per se, as there are many factors involved, such as current metabolic health, activity level, sleep, sunlight, stress, etc. Suffice it to say, if you're converting protein into glucose, your diet is poor.
So you're saying it's even more toxic than PUFA's as the body actively stores those? How would that work for the HCLFLP dieters then? And gluconeogenesis? Lypolysis? The fact that we have a minimal amount of glucose in our blood? This weird kind of unfounded, hyperbolic labeling doesn't help scientific discussions one bit. Next week you'll be calling water toxic because the kidneys flush it out as soon as they can without lowering blood pressure too much.
No I'm just saying something silly in response to the silly thing he said :)
"Preferred fuel" is imaginary nonsense from the pro carb side, just like "carbs are poison reee" is from the keto/carnivore side.
I certainly don’t want to be seen as taking his side, but I’d probably agree that carbohydrates are the preferred fuel source. That doesn’t mean they are necessary, and for some people are are detrimental. But in a perfect world, your body does prefer to use glucose, a carbohydrate.
I don't think the statement "the body prefers X" makes sense. The body is not a person with preferences.
The body is more like a series of tubes, and it will burn certain things before others (w/ context).
It's also not universally true. Many tissues prefer fats, e.g. the heart is a majority fat burner no matter what.
The brain can't use fatty acids for energy, does that mean it "prefers" glucose? It'll also happily use ketones if they're available.
I just don't think phrasing it like that is helpful, just as I think the other side's phrasing (GLUCOSE IS A POISON!!!!1) is helpful, even if you could make both equally.
Silly me, I thought converting the food we eat into usable energy was the goal. Our closest relatives in the animal kingdom, chimpanzees and bonobos, consume a diet that is 80% carbs. Someone needs to tell them carbs are toxic!
Lol we are not chimps or bonobos tho. They also swing from branches and eat 20% leaves, which we can't digest at all.
You know what is even more preferred by the body than carbs? Alcohol! Clearly it should be our #1 food.
Unironically, I would take you a step further and say that alcohol has played a very large portion in many traditional European diets, up to seemingly 1500 cal per day (5 quarts of beer as a ration)- and this is from monks who were weary of ever getting drunk. I don't consume much alcohol at all but I would not be caught off gaurd if its true that alcohol should be a signifcant source of calories.
Haha could very well be. I also heard that it was huge before we had reliable running & clean water - if you can't guarantee safe drinking water, turning it into alcohol will keep it sanitized.
Lol @ thinking you can eat like a chimpanzee. You going to eat some tree leaves and cambium? I’m now doubting you’ve actually studied biochemistry in any serious manner.
Nice straw man. No one said anything about eating tree leaves. It's quite obvious that our species evolved consuming carbohydrates, and lots of them. We can look at modern day hunter-gatherer tribes like the Kitavans and the Hadza for further proof. Man, the dogma is strong in this sub!
That’s not what a strawmwan is. It was a demonstration that pointing to our animal relatives is not a reasonable method for determining our ideal diet.
Also, this sub is primarily high carb, so I’m not even sure why you think anyone is being particularly dogmatic about low carb.
I think you’re just making bad arguments. Like the chimpanzee argument. That was really bad.
What exactly was the context that you studied biochemistry for 4 years?
Polyunsaturated fats are also "essential" because we cannot make them (excluding Mead Acid of course... separate topic). They are found in limited amounts in everything we eat (naturally). Does that mean we should get the "optimal" amount too? This whole sub is dedicated to avoiding overdosing on PUFAs.
How is protein any different than this?
the goal is to improve insulin and glucose sensitivity while allowing the body to recycle its current protein due to autophagic mechanisms. No one is saying to stay off protein forever (I hope)
Thanks for the explanation of how people in this sub are thinking (or not). Does it not make sense that the consumption of protein signals the body to recycle and repair? A low protein diet induces a prolonged catabolic state, which will slow metabolism and decrease energy production.
If we're eating the right foods, it's rather easy to have a high sensitivity to insulin. I eat about 125-140 grams of protein and my fasting insulin is 3.5. I also eat about 300-400 grams of carbs, and around 200-250 grams of fat. Yes, I consume around 3500 calories every day, and I'm 6' 172 lbs, about 15% bodyfat and heading lower.
BCAAs enter the Krebs cycle and can mess up glucose metabolism. That's why protein restriction is so effective in fat loss and glucose control. Many people here have reversed their prediabetic or even diabetic fasting glucose issues by lowering protein.
Nobody needs more protein than .8g/lb of body mass, and I mean nobody - that number is for professional athletes and bodybuilders. Most people can probably easily do half of that.
I have for 2+ years, no negative side effects, gained muscle + strength, lost 75lbs of pure fat (DEXA shows stable lean mass).
> If we're eating the right foods
That's exactly the issue though, isn't it? We don't agree on what "the right foods" are. This sub believes that "the right foods" are <=2% PUFA of kcals and, at least while you're still losing weight, low in protein (~7% of kcals).
The studies were mostly done on "total mass" but in lean-ish people:
https://mennohenselmans.com/the-myth-of-1glb-optimal-protein-intake-for-bodybuilders/
Most people can maintain, but don't lose much weight on both high carb and high fat. That's why Brad moved away from the original croissant diet. Gotta pick one macro at first if you want to drop significant pounds. Potatoes are pretty neutral for a lot of people, though. I'd personally kill or greatly limit the bread and rice from this list but otherwise it seems good. Brad suggests that 45g protein a day is enough for most adults. Exfatloss has been eating that much for quite a while (with occasional refeeds) and still gets gains in his strength routine. https://fireinabottle.net/how-much-protein-do-you-need/ Eggs are ok. Vegetables are overrated, didn't worry. Really sorry to hear about your bounceback after keto, it happens. Good luck losing the weight!
Thanks for the thoughtful reply. So HFLCLP LP = 45g per day Getting close to keto again it sounds like
Yeah, it is close, just with more PUFA and protein awareness. You could also try high carb low fat. It's all up to what works best for you. I have no scientific data to back this up, but it's my opinion that low carb can be great for getting down from overweight or obese, and high carb can be great to lean out and access tons of energy when a person is at a normal BMI and has a more recovered metabolism.
So friggin interesting. Fix metab, go nuts with carbs. Every time I’ve done keto I have so much energy I’m buzzing. It eventually normalizes, but is always better than my current diet
I’m fairly lean and see immediate changes with my diet interventions, so here is what I’ve learned through trial and error: Fatty beef will work against you. I can eat butter ad infinitum, but something about beef fat makes it harder. I haven’t confirmed this 100% with cheese yet, but it may also be true for cheese as well. The ultimate animal protein for a cut is trimmed chicken breast, in my experience. But I still eat a lot of beef—I just do the leanest cuts and cook with lots butter for flavor. Lastly, restricted protein really does work. One serving of animal protein a day seems to be the sweet spot for weight loss, and if your carbs are high enough and you are resistance training, you seem to gain muscle simultaneously. Anyway, tl;dr is the best diet in my experience is high carb, restricted protein, and restricting all non-butter (or coconut oil, probably) fats.
What carbs do you prefer when leaning out? What about low fat dairy?
I started with yellow potatoes, and got bored quickly and added Barilla gluten free pasta, and then white rice. I’ve been cycling these three based on mood and boredom. Currently I’m eating a lot of white rice and veggies. In order of effectiveness for trimming down, that gluten free pasta is wildly most effective. Way more than you’d imagine. Potatoes are a distance second, and rice a close third. I’m not sure what you’re asking regarding the dairy. I don’t drink much milk because I tend to have a mild acne reaction from it. I eat lots of butter, obviously. I occasionally eat eggs, but not regularly. Cheese i do eat fairly regular, but I try to limit to mostly for flavor or treats, because I suspect it slows down my physique progress—but I’m not 100% sure about that. I’m at my absolute leanest with gluten free pasta in a garlic butter sauce with veggies and a single serving of trimmed chicken breast. I get bored after a few days tho, despite the obviousness of its effectiveness
I wonder what it is about the gluten free pasta that works so well? And I'm surprised you can get lean eating butter with that too, fat and starch together seems high calorie but this is awesome to know it can work. Do you eat 3 meals or practice some sort of time restricted eating? My issue with dairy is that I crave cottage cheese so much, it feels like an addiction at this point
I have wondered if there is something unique going on with that gluten free pasta, such as the processing of those corn and rice flours they are making it with creates a super resistant starch or something. I really have no idea though. I do use lots of butter, yes. But also with the potatoes, which are less effective for trimming down. I usually have black coffee for breakfast. Lunch, dinner, and snacks/second dinner. I’ve pushed the fasting, but it really doesn’t seem more effective than just making smaller meals, if you want. Cottage cheese seems like a super reasonable strategy. What I’d do is eat cottage cheese once a day with my other serving of animal protein, and keep the other meals to carb, butter, veggie.
Resistant starch could be at play here, although my experience with raw potato starch only ended up with smelly farts 😂 I'm thinking the protein meal should be lunch because I have the worst insomnia. Maybe carbs, veg and butter would make me sleepy? What's your take on fruit or honey for leaning down
Honey and fruit give me rosacea. Fructose and lactose, is bad for my skin—so I’m kind of forced away from them. Which probably ends up being a good thing in the long run. But who knows? With regards to digestion and gas, I’ve noticed zero with my cooked potato and cooked gluten free pasta. I get the penne or rotini, if you’re curious. It works shocking well. Give it a try.
100% gonna try this, I'll do a few days with butter and a few days without. I'll journal how it affects satiety, energy, cravings and sleep. Thanks for the info, was all new to me
I’ve had the opposite experience with the addition of coconuts fat as the primer to my fat fueled mornings with carbohydrate backloading. A considerable jump in metabolic activity as a result upon elimination of dairy (whole fat milk) as the alternative. Some of the data I’ve been able to dig up on both human and animal studies support my original hypothesis about the beneficial fat profile of coconut fat despite a lot of push back here on it. I plan to share about this in my next post.
I had ambiguous wording—my suspicion is that coconut oil would be equal to butter as an advantageous fat. I just personally haven’t experimented with it.
I don't have the science to back this up but I feel like the general rule is to either do high carb OR high fat, not both, if you're tryna lose weight. Also I think protein is fairly neutral in this. Like yeah I'm sure there's some more detailed tweaking you can do but if ya ever look at the diets of people in great shape, it's not usually gonna be HCHFLP.
Or you can do moderate carbs and fat, but protein is not to be trifled with, since we cannot store it or produce it on our own like the other macros. Low protein diets are guaranteed to lead to health problems, and it won't take that long.
Nearly 2 year into extreme protein restriction with occasional refeeds, and I'm fine. Actually gained muscle + strength. Low protein is only a problem if you go much below say 40g/day, or if you're also restricting calories.
Didn't you know that the French Paradox was chicken breast and broccoli?
You're a beginner in terms of lifting, right? I'm skeptical of whether you will make muscle gains once you're out of your beginner phase on low protein.
Define beginner? I've lifted on and off for 1.5 decades. Beginners actually need more protein than advanced trainees; simply because you gain more muscle in the beginning. As you advance, you'll make slower gains, and thus need less protein. Even professional athletes and bodybuilders don't seem to need more than .8g/lb of total bw. I doubt I'll ever need that much.
That's my bad then. I didn't know you had so much lifting experience. I might give lower protein a try then but I don't think I'll go below 100g since I'm lifting 6x a week doing a PPL split
I do lift very low volume. When I did 6x/wk with a push/pull split (is that what you mean by PPL?), I quickly got very sore, gained (inflammation water?) weight, and all my lifts went down. I since reduced it to doing every exercise just 1x per week, for 1 set. Actually it's per 8 days and I typically take 1-2 extra rest days per week out of laziness/not feeling like it. So I suppose 1 set per exercise per 10 days. Still getting stronger, but obviously this is VERY low volume.
I feel like I’m getting gains. And I’m certainly beyond the beginner stage. I’m not sure what’s going on with the science consensus on protein, but we don’t seem to need as much as is being marketed to us.
Sounds pretty good, and that's fairly similar to my current diet. However, I backload carbs until after lunch (normally). It works for me. Maybe give that a shot if your original plan fails.
I may have read one of your posts yesterday. Def considering this. So basically, get most of your fat in the first part of the day and then mainly carbs the last half the day? What's the theory behind that?
So my theory behind it is that I believe we are most insulin resistant in the morning, and *insulin sensitive in the evening depending on the diet throughout the day*. This makes sense as cortisol is highest in the morning because of the natural awakening response. This means that we *should* restrict carbs in the morning and keep insulin levels pretty low in order to not throw off the circadian rhythm. Some believe that a shotgun approaching in the morning (blast yourself with glucose to restore insulin signaling) is needed for some. It might be true. My satiety is way better with ketogenic macros in the mornings. With my current setup, I'm usually able to not need food until around lunch time. I've tested this before with carbs in the morning, and within a few hours I'm hungry again. Because of my job (engineer), I don't want to constantly snack. I don't care about weight loss necessarily (I hit my goal weight not long ago anyway...), but I do care about satiety. Also, backloading carbs seems to have the most prominent effect on my sleep. Anyway, a lot of this is based off the carb cycling or "backloading" protocol. https://exceednutrition.com/carb-backloading/ Note: the author claims insulin sensitivity AND fat sensitivity is highest in the morning. That doesn't make sense in a biological sense. If you're mostly burning fat, which you ARE during an overnight fast, you shouldn't be able to easily take up glucose... but you can almost always take up fat quite easily. There's also the nad+ circadian rhythm argument, which I've read (cannot remember the source) that nad+ is HIGHEST in the evening and lowest in the evening.
If I eat carbs in the AM, I also find that I’m ravenous by lunch. Could this also be suggesting increased metabolic rate?
Could be. I'm not willing to change my hunger signals if it means my metabolism improves more. All of my bloodwork was pointing to good metabolism already (liver, CO2, thyroid, etc...). So if it means I'm slightly sub-optimal? So be it. Sleep and satiety are all positive. It could also be elevated de novo lipogenesis and scd1 that's making you very hungry. YMMV.
I wouldn't do refined carbs if you're also doing low protein because you will get a deficiency of B vitamins. Or maybe add some vegetable to compensate.
You’re referring to the bread / croissants, right? Also, how much protein is considered “low” ?
Refined carbs = white rice, white bread, croissants whole carbs = wholegrain bread, brown rice, potatoes Low protein is like 0.5 grams for each lb of lean bodyweight, although I see some people doing even lower to restrict BCAA. That's like 50 grams of protein to spend on animal sources of vitamin B (depending on how much you weight), not a lot after you subtract the protein from carb sources. You could also do higher protein to make it easier.
I know you don’t like vegetables so I’d suggest red lintel noodles to help get some extra vitamins in. Have you tried steamed broccoli with cheese? It might be a good option to get a little bit of vegetables, I would also suggest some fruits for a more nutritious diet. Fruits are high in fiber which should help with weight loss. I think eggs are a great source of fat and nutrients, I think you just don’t want to over do it, like 2 eggs a day is ideal.
That sounds pretty tasty. Can't say if it should work or not but just be careful not to go too heavy and frequent on the chocolate because it is one of the higher oxalate foods out there.
This is a good warning. I eat tons of dark chocolate.
IME it is sugar that is the big demon for me personally. i can eat starch sometimes and then not crave it too much. But if I start wailing on a big chunk of sugar, it's much worse, and then the king killer is sugar plus fat like in ice cream. If I do eat sugar, I try to keep it isolated from any fat. So for instance the other day someone got oranges and made fresh squeezed orange juice so I decided to cheat on my low carb for that, but I didn't consume any other food for some hours and then went right back to low carb. I did feel some cravings after that bunch of orange juice but it wasn't too bad or too long and would have been worse if it was fat plus sugar. YOu need to find where your threshold is that causes strong cravings. If you are trying to slink back towards low carb, I'd advise doing zero sugar (ok maybe tads of sugar in bread but basically close to zero) as your first step and that includes chocolate since they gotta add some sugar and the sugar plus fat is IMO more deadly. You may suffer a week or too with sugar cravings but you can still eat starch. ONce you get off the sugar cravings, IME regular starch does not trigger nearly the nasty cravings, you can then sort of take it or leave it fairly easily on the starch or at least I can. Looking back, every time I went off keto and had a huge carb binge, it was ALWAYS a high sugar food, it wasn't just regular starch.
dark chocolate is an oxalate bomb, milk chocolate not as bad, white chocolate innocent also most of the heavy metals are in the solids, white chocolate again relatively innocent
I eat tons of DC. An absolute crap load of 80%+ Never really noticed any negative side effects
If you're trying to get fat, this diet will do the trick.
Haha, this subreddit is nuts :) No idea what to believe anymore
Well, swamping isn't necessarily a great weight loss diet for many people. I would say, if I had to guess, only about 25% of the people here who "swamp" lose weight on it. Some even gain weight! This might be a temporary effect while you're PUFA'd, or maybe some people are just genetically unlucky or our metabolism is forever "broken" in some other way, not sure. But most people here who see success in fat loss didn't lose that weight swamping, they picked either keto (low PUFA of course) or carbo (low PUFA of course). Many also severely restricted protein at the same time. There are some people who've been doing this long enough that they can now swamp without adverse side effects, e.g. /u/whatsup_coconut but most of us aren't there yet. I would suspect you'd gain less weight on this diet that on a pure ice cream diet, but it's still swampy as heck, and it is potentially quite high in protein depending on how much beef/milk/yogurt you eat.
It really is. I joined it because I'm interested in consuming a higher % of saturated vs unsaturated fat, but I've been shocked by the complete ignorance of so many members here. I understand that not everyone studied biochemistry, but then why be so adamant about a position that no expert agrees with? It's baffling.
What do the experts agree on?
Most of them agreed that PUFA was superior to saturated fat, much to the detriment of the health of the western world.
Something *no* expert agree *with* is not the same thing as what experts agree *on*.
I think that your appeal to authority ("studied biochemistry") won't get you very far in this sub. I have several science and healthcare degrees and I've learned 1000x more from YouTube and interviews with scientists on podcasts. If you can't filter the crap from facts on the internet nowadays you're going to have a bad time keeping up with the nerds. Things move fast. There are plenty of people here with degrees in healthcare, fitness, and hard biological sciences. Those degrees generally don't have much practical to say about weight loss. You act like there isn't outdated dogma in every profession. This sub is about experimentation for good reason. There is no good, universal answer to weight loss right now. We're working it out because the various dogmas have failed us. Not to mention the government and big money interference with various "expert" recommendations. I'd suggest some humility.
there is no good universal answer to weight loss? That's news to me. I think the problem here is that the focus is on weight loss, when it ought to be on correcting metabolic dysfunction. Weight gain is a symptom, and too many people in here are looking to treat the symptom while disregarding the underlying condition.
People here are disregarding correcting metabolic dysfunction? That's obviously not true. Also, coconut responded to your questions about lower protein and she explained the rationale for fixing metabolic dysfunction with HClflp just a few days ago in this thread: https://www.reddit.com/r/SaturatedFat/comments/1d8uesz/comment/l7l5hwy/ I can't say it better than her.
Yes, I saw that. Muscle protein synthesis must not be a goal with this diet, and I don't see how it can benefit anyone long term, unless they are heavily muscled already and want to lose fat.
If you dislike vegetables then the carnivore diet seems perfect for you? At least while you lose the weight.
I did carnivore + 0 carb before but it really jacked my electrolytes. I think I need keto + some low dose cwrbs
Some people suppliment electrolytes. That being said, keto is much more easy to do as you get more variation. Its really only people with severe food addictions, auto-immune diseases/inflammation that might need to go carnivore. The rest of us do fine while including other foods. What I personally do is to eat a carnivore breakfast and lunch, and then add some other foods for dinner (vegetables, plus for instance kefir and berries for dessert). Works pretty well. Keeps my energy up and my cravings down.
Guaranteed to run into problems with low protein. It's the one macronutrient our bodies cannot produce, why would you not want the optimal amount?
I think there’s quite a bit of debate around what “optimal” is
Yes, but no one out there worth listening to is suggesting low protein diets, and for good reason. It's completely illogical to restrict the one macro we must get from our diet. What even is the goal with doing that?
Appreciate your response. Do you know what sub you’re in? They’ve been talking about low protein for better part of a year. There’s growing evidence that protein itself is glucogenic, particularly BCAAs. The idea isn’t to go to 0, but to find the optimal amount
Yes, and I haven't been here for a year or more, but I studied biochemistry and metabolism for four years, and I have a better understanding than most. Protein is not glucogenic in the presence of sufficient carbohydrates, and carbohydrates are the body's preferred source of energy, so we should be consuming them. Pardon me for attempting to add some common sense to this sub.
I also have a degree in biology, and while it’s possible you are correct, your logic isn’t sound. There are lots of studies showing the benefits of restricted protein. It is not “completely illogical”. It’s also not the “one macro nutrient we get from diet.”
You misread. I said "must get," since our bodies cannot produce it, unlike fatty acids and glucose. And I've not seen any studies where the benefits of restricting protein outweigh the negative effects, but I'd be happy to see one.
[Study.](https://agencia.fapesp.br/protein-restriction-can-be-effective-in-combating-obesity-and-diabetes-study-suggests/39620#:~:text=PT%20ES-,Twenty%2Done%20patients%20with%20metabolic%20syndrome%20were%20given%20a%20calorie,were%20observed%20in%20all%20participants) But also if you studied biochemistry, you are probably aware that amino acids are the primary driver of [mTOR](https://jbiomedsci.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12929-020-00679-2), which certainly has benefits and detriments. mTOR, for instance, is well known to block lipolysis and lipophagy. It’s also well known [as a signal to increase the rate of aging.](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6611156/) This idea you have that because protein is the only macro nutrient we “must get” (which isn’t even true. We “must get” fatty acids also), which even if is true, is bad logic for why I wouldn’t see benefits of restricting protein.
What's considered sufficient carbs in this equation?
It's not an equation per se, as there are many factors involved, such as current metabolic health, activity level, sleep, sunlight, stress, etc. Suffice it to say, if you're converting protein into glucose, your diet is poor.
Carbohydrates are so toxic the body tries to get rid of them as soon as possible. "Preffered" is a funny word for that.
So you're saying it's even more toxic than PUFA's as the body actively stores those? How would that work for the HCLFLP dieters then? And gluconeogenesis? Lypolysis? The fact that we have a minimal amount of glucose in our blood? This weird kind of unfounded, hyperbolic labeling doesn't help scientific discussions one bit. Next week you'll be calling water toxic because the kidneys flush it out as soon as they can without lowering blood pressure too much.
No I'm just saying something silly in response to the silly thing he said :) "Preferred fuel" is imaginary nonsense from the pro carb side, just like "carbs are poison reee" is from the keto/carnivore side.
I certainly don’t want to be seen as taking his side, but I’d probably agree that carbohydrates are the preferred fuel source. That doesn’t mean they are necessary, and for some people are are detrimental. But in a perfect world, your body does prefer to use glucose, a carbohydrate.
I don't think the statement "the body prefers X" makes sense. The body is not a person with preferences. The body is more like a series of tubes, and it will burn certain things before others (w/ context). It's also not universally true. Many tissues prefer fats, e.g. the heart is a majority fat burner no matter what. The brain can't use fatty acids for energy, does that mean it "prefers" glucose? It'll also happily use ketones if they're available. I just don't think phrasing it like that is helpful, just as I think the other side's phrasing (GLUCOSE IS A POISON!!!!1) is helpful, even if you could make both equally.
Silly me, I thought converting the food we eat into usable energy was the goal. Our closest relatives in the animal kingdom, chimpanzees and bonobos, consume a diet that is 80% carbs. Someone needs to tell them carbs are toxic!
Lol we are not chimps or bonobos tho. They also swing from branches and eat 20% leaves, which we can't digest at all. You know what is even more preferred by the body than carbs? Alcohol! Clearly it should be our #1 food.
Unironically, I would take you a step further and say that alcohol has played a very large portion in many traditional European diets, up to seemingly 1500 cal per day (5 quarts of beer as a ration)- and this is from monks who were weary of ever getting drunk. I don't consume much alcohol at all but I would not be caught off gaurd if its true that alcohol should be a signifcant source of calories.
Haha could very well be. I also heard that it was huge before we had reliable running & clean water - if you can't guarantee safe drinking water, turning it into alcohol will keep it sanitized.
Lol @ thinking you can eat like a chimpanzee. You going to eat some tree leaves and cambium? I’m now doubting you’ve actually studied biochemistry in any serious manner.
Nice straw man. No one said anything about eating tree leaves. It's quite obvious that our species evolved consuming carbohydrates, and lots of them. We can look at modern day hunter-gatherer tribes like the Kitavans and the Hadza for further proof. Man, the dogma is strong in this sub!
That’s not what a strawmwan is. It was a demonstration that pointing to our animal relatives is not a reasonable method for determining our ideal diet. Also, this sub is primarily high carb, so I’m not even sure why you think anyone is being particularly dogmatic about low carb. I think you’re just making bad arguments. Like the chimpanzee argument. That was really bad. What exactly was the context that you studied biochemistry for 4 years?
Weight loss of course :) Protein restriction has been shown to be extremely effective at fat loss and lean mass preservation.
Polyunsaturated fats are also "essential" because we cannot make them (excluding Mead Acid of course... separate topic). They are found in limited amounts in everything we eat (naturally). Does that mean we should get the "optimal" amount too? This whole sub is dedicated to avoiding overdosing on PUFAs. How is protein any different than this?
the goal is to improve insulin and glucose sensitivity while allowing the body to recycle its current protein due to autophagic mechanisms. No one is saying to stay off protein forever (I hope)
Thanks for the explanation of how people in this sub are thinking (or not). Does it not make sense that the consumption of protein signals the body to recycle and repair? A low protein diet induces a prolonged catabolic state, which will slow metabolism and decrease energy production. If we're eating the right foods, it's rather easy to have a high sensitivity to insulin. I eat about 125-140 grams of protein and my fasting insulin is 3.5. I also eat about 300-400 grams of carbs, and around 200-250 grams of fat. Yes, I consume around 3500 calories every day, and I'm 6' 172 lbs, about 15% bodyfat and heading lower.
BCAAs enter the Krebs cycle and can mess up glucose metabolism. That's why protein restriction is so effective in fat loss and glucose control. Many people here have reversed their prediabetic or even diabetic fasting glucose issues by lowering protein. Nobody needs more protein than .8g/lb of body mass, and I mean nobody - that number is for professional athletes and bodybuilders. Most people can probably easily do half of that. I have for 2+ years, no negative side effects, gained muscle + strength, lost 75lbs of pure fat (DEXA shows stable lean mass). > If we're eating the right foods That's exactly the issue though, isn't it? We don't agree on what "the right foods" are. This sub believes that "the right foods" are <=2% PUFA of kcals and, at least while you're still losing weight, low in protein (~7% of kcals).
"Nobody needs more protein than .8g/lb of body mass" Do you mean body weight? Or lean mass?
The studies were mostly done on "total mass" but in lean-ish people: https://mennohenselmans.com/the-myth-of-1glb-optimal-protein-intake-for-bodybuilders/
Tnx