Low Carb vs. Reduced Calorie Diets

I did low carbohydrate diets off and on over the years and lost significant weight in doing so.  I am now a month into a reduced calorie diet.  The early results from reduced calories have been roughly equivalent to the results I had doing low carb before.  The following are my observations from doing the both diets.  These are my current opinions, subject to change after more time doing the reduced calorie diet.

Low Carb: Can eat as much as you want as long as you avoid carbs.
Reduced Calorie:  Can eat anything you want with moderation.

Low Carb:  When ketosis kicks in, my breath stinks and my cognitive abilities suffer.
Reduced Calorie:  Breath is fine and my mind is clear.

Low Carb:  Each month I lost half of what I did the previous month.
Reduced Calorie: Long term effectiveness to be determined.

Low Carb:  To lose weight, I had to consume less than 30-45 net carbs a day.  I found effective maintenance is difficult.  For me, it was all or nothing.
Reduced Calorie:  Maintenance difficult is to be determined.  But, bumping my caloric intake up to a level where I will not lose or gain weight should be simple.  And, with my body type, my base metabolic rate is relatively high so this should not be a problem.

Low Carb:  I had to take vitamin supplements because I wasn't getting the right mix of nutrients.  For example, if I didn't take potassium, I got muscle cramps.
Reduced Calorie:  I seem to be getting a good variety of foods in my diet.  If I need to take vitamins has not yet been determined.

Low Carb: Energy level was high.
Reduced Calorie:  Energy level is also high. Note that I took a great deal of effort in setting an appropriate target for daily calorie intake.

Low Carb:  Cravings for sweets generally went away when they were removed from my diet.
Reduced Calorie:  Still crave sweets.  My personal caloric intake goals allow me to have some desserts and I am doing okay at consuming them in smaller portion sizes.

Low Carb:  Eating out is difficult.  At sit down restaurants I  usually had to ask for substitutions which is a pain in the butt.  Fast food has almost no options other than salads and I quickly tire of salads.
Reduced Calories:  Substitutions are not usually necessary.  Plus, many restaurants have calories posted.  There are options even at fast food restaurants.  McDonalds even has a pretty low calorie ice cream cone.  Wendy's chili is a great substitution for fries.

Low Carb:  Others just don't get it.  Politely eating what others have prepared is difficult.  Waitresses think something is wrong when you eat just the topings off a sandwich or pizza.
Reduced Calorie:  Everybody gets it.  There is no need to explain the details of what you can or can't eat.  When at someone's house, you can manage your diet through portion control.

Low Carb:  Food costs about doubled.
Reduced Calorie:  Food costs about the same as before, maybe a little less.

Low Carb:  The online community is tight and supportive.  The rest of the world however constantly tries to convince you that it's a dangerous diet.
Reduced Calorie:  Experience so far shows the online community to be not as passionate.  This may be due to the diet being widely accepted with the world at large.

Low Carb:  There are lots of poorly conducted studies trying to debunk it's effectiveness.  I had great personal success doing low carb.  It works, often with little baring on the amount of calories eaten.
Reduced Calorie:  Most "experts" on diet and health assume this works.  But, I don't think it's as simple as just "calories in vs. calories out".

With either diet, everyBODY is different.  Your personal experiences may differ from mine.

----

Author comments on May 25, 2012:



I should add one more comparison... this one in favor of low carb:


Low Carb:  Can drink lots of clear alcohols as they have few to no carbs.  Drinking never seemed to impact my personal ability to lose weight while doing low carb.


Reduced Calorie:  When I go out after work, I can't drink with the crowd.  I might have one or possibly two drinks but I have not figured out how to get drunk without blowing my caloric intake goals.

My Weight Loss Strategy

Positive Thinking

 Positive Action

Positive Habits

Positive Results

I have begun by focusing on "Positive Thinking".  I have been utilizing James Allen to get my mind in gear and have been working on a diet strategy in parallel.  The next phase begins April 9th when I begin to reduce my caloric intake.  I'm still contemplating what exercise program might work well for me given my busy travel schedule.  Weight training has it's appeal but with the extensive travel I do at work, it may be hard to keep up with.  I'm going to check with the YMCA about reciprocal memberships in the areas where I travel most.  If unable to have access to a gym, I might resign myself to simply walking.  I'm also going to look into taking Yoga classes. 

Colds, Travel, and Dieting

I have had a terrible cold for a few days.  My one year old son had it first.  Before I had children, I was hardly ever sick.  Now, whenever they catch a bug, I get it also.  As such, I'm waiting for my health to return before I begin adjusting my diet. 

I'll be on the road for business the next two weeks.  After this, we have a Spring Break vacation planned.  I think I'm going to wait until I return from vacation to start a diet program. 

It's always so easy to put off starting a diet.  But, it's not so difficult to set a date in the not-so-far-off future and to stick with it.  I've set my mind to begin the Monday after returning from Spring Break, ie. Easter Monday.  I'm already instructing my good wife to go easy on the Easter candy as I don't want the house full of junk food when we start our diet.  In the meantime, I will continue studying about my diet of choice, this time reduced calories.

How many calories do I need to lose weight?

Yesterday, I showed you how to calculate BMR.  Now we can sue this value to set a target calorie intake based on our weight loss goals.


Formulas:

To maintain current weigh you need this many calories:

Little to no exercise	Daily calories needed = BMR x 1.2
Light exercise (1–3 days per week)	Daily calories needed = BMR x 1.375
Moderate exercise (3–5 days per week)	Daily calories needed = BMR x 1.55
Heavy exercise (6–7 days per week)	Daily calories needed = BMR x 1.725
Very heavy exercise (twice per day, extra heavy workouts)	Daily calories needed = BMR x 1.9

Calorie deficit required to meet goal. = PoundsToLose * 3500 / #days 

Daily calorie target to achieve goal = BMR * activity factor / Pounds to Lose * 3500 / #days

I calculated that my base metabolic rate with a factor for being pretty much sedentary is 2952.   Assuming that a pound of fat really produces about 3500 calories, then I can easily calculate the calorie deficit I need to meet a goal.  I'd like to lose 100 pounds in a single year.  To do so, I would need to reduce my daily calories by 958.  So, I'd to set my personal daily target for calorie consumption to be around 1994.   It's not an exact science, so to make it easier to remember, I'd round my target up to 2000 calories per day.

If I knew how many calories were burned during various specific activities, I suppose I could allow this target to move up and down depending on each day's physical activity.

Ugh, I suspect I'm going to be hungry. This would imply reducing my typical caloric intake by about 1/3.  It's a big adjustment and not likely to be easy.  I wonder if I should take it slower?

As you can see, I'm anal.  So, I'll probably plug these formulas into a spreadsheet and track my progress.  And allow the spreadsheet to automatically adjust my target according to changes in my weight or other physical attributes.  I'll need to think a little about the best way to do this.

How many calories is right for me?

I have tried dozens of different online calorie calculators that are supposed to determine how many calories I need to maintain my current weight and also to lose weight.  None of them seem to match and almost none site the formulas that they are using.  I'm not going to blindly follow any online calculator that doesn't site it's calculation method.  I want to understand what is really happening.  So, I did a little research into calculating base metabolic rate (BMR) and resting metabolic rate (RMR).  These represent the amount of calories burned by your body while idle.  It is important to know your BMR because you can factor in your activity level and know what amount of calories consumed will maintain your current weight without gaining or losing. You can adjust your diet and exercise accordingly to lose weight.

The most accurate means for estimating BMR and RMR appears to be through direct or indirect calorimetry which measures carbondioxide production.  Since we can't do this on our own, I won't bother discussing the related formulas.  I would very much like to know where you can go to have your RMR measured this way.

There are numerous formulas for estimating BMR based on your weight, height, age, gender, and physical composition (ex: lean body mass).  All of these formulas appear to be based on statistics which are most accurate for the most average type of body.  Which means that none are extremely accurate with people who's bodies are at extremes.  And, even when physical attributes are the same, studies have shown a good deal of variance in actual vs. estimated BMR from person to person.  So any of the formulas of calculating BMR will be imperfect.  Because of this, I'm taking the most common formulas for calculating BMR and comparing the results.

Wikipedia has a nice article on BMR  that shows the following formulas.  I will plug in my own stats to see how they compare.  Please note that these formulas are based on average body types and any extreme may throw off the results.

First, the Harris-Benedict equation: 

For Men:  


For Women:  

where P is total heat production at complete rest, m is the weight, h is the height, and a is the age, and with the difference in BMR for men and women being mainly due to differences in body weight

For me, my P =  2801 calories / day.  

Then came the Mifflin Equation around 1990 (some studies show it to be 5% more accurate):

 

where P is total heat production at complete rest, m is the weight, h is the height, and a is the age, and s = +5 for males & -161 for females.

For me, my P = 2460 calories / day.

The Katch-McArdle Formula for BMR:

where LBM = Lean Body Mass in kg

For me, my P = 2133 calories / day.

The Cunningham Formula (RMR):

where LBM = LEan Body Mass in kg

For me, my P = 2295 calories / day.

These last two are thought to be more accurate because lean body mass burns calories.

Adjustments for activity level:

To adjust for activity level, multiple any of these by 1.2 to 1.9  (1.2 being the least active and 1.9 being highly active).

Little to no exercise	Daily calories needed = BMR x 1.2
Light exercise (1–3 days per week)	Daily calories needed = BMR x 1.375
Moderate exercise (3–5 days per week)	Daily calories needed = BMR x 1.55
Heavy exercise (6–7 days per week)	Daily calories needed = BMR x 1.725
Very heavy exercise (twice per day, extra heavy workouts)	Daily calories needed = BMR x 1.9

Based on these formulas, and factoring in little to no exercise (1.2 multiplier), my body needs between 2560 and 3361 calories per day to maintain my current weight.  That is a huge range.  My first thought is that any formula that doesn't take into account lean body mass probably is not very accurate unless you are pretty close to the average physical make-up.  This is because muscle burns more calories than fat.  But let's put it to the test.

I have been keeping a food journal for the last few days but not on any special diet.  My reason for doing this was to understand my typical calorie intake so that I'd understand how I got where I am and also the degree of adjustment I'll be making when I begin a diet.  Based on just a few days in my journal, I'm estimating that I consume on average between 3000 and 3200 calories per day.  Let's just say 3100 per day.  About this time 2 years ago, I weighted 307 pounds.  I now weight between 335 and 340 pounds.  Let's say I gained 33 pounds in 24 months.  Generally it is thought that a pound of fat contains 3500 calories.  So, to gain 33 pounds, I'd have to have had a surplus of 115,500 calories over these two years which is 158 calories per day.  If I am consuming on average 3100 calories per day, that means to have maintained my original weight of 307 pounds, I would have had to have stayed under 2942, which is pretty darn close to Mifflin equation with a 1.2 multiplier for activity.  Therefore, for me personally, it would appear that the Mifflin equation is the right calculation for my body type.  My BMR according to Mifflin is 2460.  Multiply this by 1.2 and you get 2952 which is the amount of calories I can eat without gaining or losing weight.

Aha!  So, now, I have something I can work with.  I will form my weight loss program around the fact that using the Mifflin formula my BMR w/ activity factor is 2952.  I can now decide how much I want to lose over a given period of time and estimate how many calories under 2952 I need to consume to meet my goal.  And, of course, I'll need to re-calculate my BMR occasionally and adjust if and when I begin an exercise program.

Lean Body Mass & Body Fat Percent

Lean body mass (LBM) and body fat percentage are ways to quantify the physical composition of our bodies.  It helps us compare our muscle and bone mass to our fat.  Rather than measuring a diet's success on weight, it makes much more sense to track LBM and fat percentage.  Especially if you are exercising, you might find your weight has plateaued but your waste-line is shrinking.

There are numerous methods for calculating your lean body mass and percentage of body fat.  I would love to have someone help me to try all of these methods so that we could compare accuracy.  If anyone knows where you can have each of these tests performed, please let me know.  I am stuck using the Covert Baily formula which only requires tape measure and a scale.

1. A professional will use calipers to measure the thickness of fat in various places on your body. The result is supposed to have a margin of error of only 4%. I have no idea what formula they use nor what points they measure. 
2. Because muscle is more dense than fat, you can also be placed in a tank of water to see how much volume you displace. There are also machines that can measure air displacement. 
3. Bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA), which uses the resistance of electrical flow through the body to estimate body fat. I have no idea as to the accuracy nor where you can get this test.
4. Apparently you can also use MRIs, CT scans, and ultrasounds to somehow estimate lean body mass as well.
5. A simple tape measure and scale can also be used. The most commonly accepted is the Covert Baily formula to estimate body fat percent.  You can then multiply your weight by this to get the total weight off fat & subtract this from your weight to calculate your lean body mass. I am uncertain as to it's accuracy compared the other methods mentioned above. None are perfect as our bone density will vary with age and there are other factors.

The Covert Baily formula is as follows:

Women Over Thirty
hips + thigh - (2xcalf) - wrist = % body fat
Example: hips = 39"; thigh = 23"; calf = 13 1/2"; wrist = 6"
39 + 23 - (2x13.5=27) - 6 = 29% body fat

Men Over Thirty (example based on my own measurements)
waist + (1/2 hips) - (2.7xforearm) - wrist = % body fat
Example: waist = 55"; hips = 56"; forearm = 15";wrist = 7.75
55 + (0.5 x 56 = 28) - (2.7 x 15 = 29.0) - 7.75 = 46.25% body fat

Then, to calculate lean body mass:

TotalWeight - (TotalWeight * PcntBodyFat / 100) = LBM
Example: 335 - (335 * 46.25 / 100) =  180 pounds other than fat.

The waist should be measured at the belly button, not necessarily the belt line and the hips at the widest point   below the belt.

Regardless of which method you use, it gives you a physical attribute to watch while dieting that will tell you if you are losing fat or muscle.  It also will help you know you are losing fat even if your weight has not changed or even gone up.

With this knowledge, I am almost ready to begin my diet.  I have a little more research to do on calories and base metabolic rates.  I will use these to determine what my caloric intake should be to maintain my weight and also to lose weight.  I will post this information within the next couple of days.

BMI is too simple and misleading.

BMI is a common statistic used for weight studies, calculating insurance rates, etc.  It is simply a weight-height ratio.  It is based on the average person and really is a poor measurement across the board.  I have a stocky build, am big boned, and have big muscles. According to the USDA, any BMI above 25 is unhealthy and above 30 is obese.  My BMI, based on my actual height and weight is 46.7.   Yes, that's right, I'm currently fat.  I calculate my lean body mass(weight with zero fat) to be between about 180 pounds. If I was able to get my fat down to zero (better than the leanest body builder), my BMI would still be 25.1 which is still considered a tad overweight.  Keep in mind that this is is zero fat which is not realistic.  A percent body fat of 14-17% is considered to be fit and above average.  Based on this, my fit weight range would be between 205 and 211 pounds.  This would put my BMI at 29, which is the upper of what is considered unhealthy, pushing the edge of what is considered to be obese.

BMI = weight (in kilograms) divided by height squared (in meters). 

I know that I am overweight, but BMI is simply not a sufficient measurement for my body type.  It's misleading and exaggerates my obesity as I have bigger bones and bigger muscles than the average person.  In addition to those with body types like mine,  BMI is not considered reliable for children, pregnant women, body builders, and the frail elderly. 

Should I do low carb or try low calorie?

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.

Is Juice Fasting Healthy?

Recently, on netflix, I watched the documentary "Fat, Sick, and Nearly Dead" which follows a man during a two month juice fast.  He was medically supervised and his blood work throughout showed no reason to be concerned.  The results on his body were amazing.   I tried to calculate his caloric intake and figured it to be about 2000 calories per day.  This is sufficient to keep the body going and to lose weight.  In the documentary, he did indeed lose tons of weight and claimed to be feeling great.  It even "cured" some of his other health ailments.  While the results were inspiring, I couldn't help but wonder if it's really healthy.  Juice fast diets typically use a wide range of vegetables and fruits.  If done properly,  you'd be getting plenty of vitamins and calories from carbohydrates, but where are the fats and proteins in this diet that are necessary for the body to function?    At first glance, this juice fast diet seems to be too trendy and perhaps even dangerous.

I have spent years going on and off of low carbohydrate diets where most of the "experts" said it was unhealthy.  On or off, my cholesterol levels and blood pressure have been fine.  The low carb diet worked well for me and I felt good.  So, why should I be so quick to just toss aside the idea of a juice fast simply because it doesn't fit into my current reality framework.  I think it's worth investigating.  And, so for the last week, I have been reading about juice fasts.  I'm the kind of guy who has to study something and understand it before I jump in.  

In a nutshell, here is what I have found:   Most websites and books touting the benefits of juice fasting seem to be tied to money making schemes where they try to sell you juicers or guides.  Almost all claim that the diet is good for detox but can never really pinpoint exactly what these so-called toxins are.  Supposedly, you feel sick a few days into the diet and then as the toxins leave your body you start feeling much better than you did even before the fast.  I can find no scientific studies to explain what these toxins are nor if they really are flushed out of your body.  Granted, many vegetables do contain antioxidants which could be helpful.  However, you can have these vegetables in your diet with or without fasting.  And, I haven't quite figured out how to make a juice with significant healthy fats and proteins.  I seriously doubt that I could juice an avocado or nuts without creating an oily mess.  Furthermore, juicing implies a lack of fiber.  Just having liquids in your diet is touted to cleans the colon and digestive track.  I'm concerned that little fiber might not be healthy either.  With all of this said, I really can find no specific documented unhealthy side effects to juice fasting.  While it may not be healthy per-se, I can't prove that it is un-healthy either.  Beneficial or not, it seems that most people's bodies can handle it okay.  

Partly because I can't prove or disprove the effectiveness of "juicing" I am considering trying a 10 day juice fast.  There is no way that I would attempt to go two months like the guy in the documentary.  I still don't know that it would be safe for prolonged periods of time.  

My expectations would be:

1. Gain better control over my hunger and cravings.
2. I'm not convinced about detox but expect to feel woozy for the first few days until glycogen stores in my liver are depleted due to reduced caloric intake.
3. Changes to the way I feel.  I suspect that I will feel rough at the beginning but that I may begin feeling good simply due to having more vitamins that were previously missing in my diet.  
4. "Shrink" my stomach.  I suspect that for a short while after, less food will feel more filling.
5. A good springboard for giving up caffeine.  If I do this fast, I plan on not allowing caffeinated beverages back into my diet.

Before I decide if to start, I'll need to do more research to develop the best recipes to get the proper nutrition mix.  If I can't get enough protein, I probably won't make an attempt.  

If any of my readers know of any good "juice fast" resources, please share by posting comments here.

What Foods Make You Feel Full?

I'm trying to analyze what makes one food more filling and satisfying than another.  I know it sounds basic, but I think truly understanding this might help me to plan a more satisfying weight loss program.  Could it be the water weight or the amount of indigestible fiber?  Or could it be the caloric density , net carbohydrate levels, or maybe it has something to do with vitamins?

Assume that you could only eat one cup of a single food.  What would be the most filling/satisfying and what would be the least?  For example, 1 cup of macaroni is much more filling than one cup of shredded lettuce.  Please post comments stating which foods you find most and least satisfying.  Once I get a list, I am going to look for patterns in their nutritional composition.