• psud@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    7 months ago

    I envy the people who can diet by just eating less. That for me is a path to intolerable hunger

    Only limiting carbohydrates has worked for me, and I had to increase my meat intake just to ensure I have enough nutrition, with the little you want to eat on low carb

    • SOB_Van_Owen@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      7 months ago

      I could never sustain a restriction like this without modifying what I ate. It would have a profound effect of how soon and how much I was compelled to eat next. Once this was very clear to me after dozens of attempts at weight loss, I began to cook and eat for satiety. A low-glycemic, minimally processed diet free of added sugar is what worked best for me long-term. I lost 115 lbs, resolved diabetes, hypertension and non alcoholic fatty liver disease. Also vastly improved some other chronic problems. I’ve remained at a healthy weight now for 23 years with little variation. A lot of effort really and likely not possible for everyone -especially now. I can say it was worthwhile for me.

      The steely resolve of CICO will only take a person so far. In my view that’s why it’s so unsustainable for most.

      • considine@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        Why do you think it is especially difficult to follow this diet now? I keep trying to implement it myself but find the high effort required difficult to sustain, given other demands on my attention and will power.

        • SOB_Van_Owen@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          7 months ago

          Do you mean a general calorie restriction to lose weight or compositional change in diet to maximize satiety? Either is difficult without a strong impetus. For me the latter is far easier than the former. It seems to me that both are made a lot more difficult now than 24 years ago by the level of distraction and focus disrupting technologies we have to use on the daily. Not to mention economic material conditions are broadly worse for most people than they were two decades ago. Folks seem more harried and stressed with less discretionary time. Additionally, to my eye, food culture is getting worse. What is regarded as staple food is junkier and seemingly designed to circumvent the “fixed stomach problem”.

          I hit a wall with my health and felt I could either break my problem into manageable pieces I could maybe find a way to live with and possibly enjoy sustainably, or else suffer a declining quality of life that was already unacceptable. At that point it was worth it for me to do all kinds of trial and error about what worked personally. And it still is. I have no super willpower. Just an understanding of what is at stake. And a willingness to sorta game my drives.

          • considine@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            7 months ago

            Thanks for your thoughtful answer. I agree that so much is at stake with diet. It all changed for me when I hit 40. I’m going to have to think about the manageable pieces of diet you mentioned. That appeals to me as practical.

      • psud@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        I don’t think a protein shake will have the nutrients actual meat has though. It’s really hard to get the nutrition you need on a serious weight loss diet and any food substitute isn’t going to cut it. To add, I’m over 40 with a history of dieting (I have tried all them), so I doubt I started this with full reserves of a well fed 20 year old

    • MilitantVegan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      7 months ago

      Low carb diets have been consistently shown to only cause short-term weight loss, followed by even greater weight gain if the person even bothers to adhere to the diet long term in the first place. This is in addition to the fact that low carb diets lead to a lower lifespan.

      Calories per 1 gram of macros- Carbs: 4 Protein: 4 Fat: 9

      https://www.pcrm.org/good-nutrition/nutrition-information/the-carbohydrate-advantage

      • psud@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Indeed. Atkins made me thin, then fat again. I think the problem was that it was too easy to eat too little, making it hard to stick to long term

        More meat has fixed that for me. I have been successfully losing fat over the last two years just by making what I eat mostly meat

      • psud@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Also, what does it matter that there’s more energy per gram of fat versus carrots? Your body knows when it has enough energy* and you stop being hungry. Consider 19th century explorers eating pemmican (made of 50/50 fat and dried meat - they avoided the versions with berries and sugar) they would eat tiny amounts - less than the meat in a McDonald’s cheeseburger as a days food, despite the fact it hardly filled their stomachs

        *Though on high carb your body will say it wants more all of it, since carbs are only available briefly in summer in history so you want to eat as much as you can. As a bonus, carbs from plants are half fructose and the fructose is turned to fat directly. You want to save some summer energy for winter

        • MilitantVegan@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          I don’t even know where to begin unraveling this bad take. You should at least start by reading an intro to nutrition book or something, sounds like you’ve been drinking a lot of unscientific koolaid.