My wife and I are both significantly overweight (again). In the past, I have found low carb diets to be quite effective for myself and moderately successful for my wife. It seems much more difficult for her to give up carbs than it is for me. After the first month doing low carb, I feel great but she doesn't. EveryBODY is different. What works well for one person doesn't always work as well for another.
The typical cycle for me is this... Over a period of several years, I become about a hundred pounds overweight. About this time, I realize that I'm feeling lousy and not happy about my body. So, I resolve to fix it. First, I prepare myself mentally for a month or so. During this month or so, I get my intentions focused. I study and plan my weight loss strategy. I also eat all of the unhealthy foods in my house that I can't bare to throw away. This last part I liken to the excessive Mardi-Gras blow-out just before Lent. Then it's time to start the diet, which has always been low-carb. I usually stick with the low carb diet for six months to a year. The first month, I lose 20 to 30 pounds. The next month, I lose 10 to 15. The third month, I lose just 5 to 7 pounds. Each month I lose half of what I did the previous month until I am losing so little that I'm not sure if it's working anymore. But, alas, add it up and the results are impressive. I will have typically lost about 50 or 60 pounds in the first six months.
My wife is wanting me to try a low calorie diet this time around. If I do low carb, I do it alone. If I do low calorie we can do it together. I have never really bought into the "calories in vs. calories out" theory. I know that there is some truth to it but consider the body much more complex and know that carbohydrates impact your insulin and fat storage in a way that is more profound than caloric intake alone. Regardless, the last time I tried to reduce calories was about twenty years ago and that was just for a single week. I think it's worth a real try. So, I will probably do this soon at least for a couple of months to see what happens.
With that said, I'm the kind of guy who has to research things before jumping in head-first. I'm going to spend the next few weeks reading about caloric restriction and formulate an approach that will work for me. The first thought I have is to investigate caloric density. In other words, which foods are the most filling with the least calories? I don't want to be hungry, so I want to know what foods will fill me up and provide very little macro-nutrients (carbs, fats, and protein). These foods contain lots of fiber and/or lots of water. I've tried to find good charts of caloric density online and find all of them to be conflicting. Most claim to be using a formula such as calories divided by grams. Yet, the charts don't match up. And, many try to express this as a percentage which is mathematically unsound as you quickly wind up with 200% "density". I have just downloaded a huge database of raw nutritional statistics from the USDA and am going to create my own chart using the simple calories/grams formula. I'd like to come up with some sort of factor where I can weigh in serving size so that I can include sauces and things that are eaten in lower volumes but might contain a higher caloric density. Because foods consisting of mostly water (ex. broth) digest rather quickly, I'd like to also factor in the amount of water or fiber. This seems like a fairly simple approach and I doubt I am breaking any new ground here. I'll be very interested to see which foods rank at the top and bottom of my chart. Once I refine my calculations and build a chart, I will share it here.
As yo usay, everybody is different. I have found that low-carbing does nothing for me (tried it three times), whereas oveall healthy food intake with restricted calories has helped me lose more than 30 pounds (with about 10 more to lose). Scientists comparing several weight-loss approaches (I only have got the German source, sorry for that!) have stated taht the exact method does not matter, as long as the amount of calories is restricted. I believe that low-carbing can be beneficial for some, but what I have loved most with "healthy food/limited calories" is that I have learned a way of eating that will hopefully allow me to stay within a healthy weight range for the rest of my life, plus I basically get to eat whatever I want (in moderation).
ReplyDeleteWith low calorie, the flexibility to eat anything in moderation is indeed appealing to me. From personal experience with low carb, as long as I stay under 45 net carbs, I seem to be able to eat a lot more calories and still lose weight. It's nice to be able to eat as much as you want so long as you avoid foods with carbs. But, I suppose there must be some ultra low calorie foods that could fill you up as well. And low calorie would definitely be easier on the wallet. Low carb typically doubles my food costs.
ReplyDelete