What makes you lose weight the most, a diet high in carbohydrates or high in fat?
If I go on a low calorie diet of 1000 or 1200 calories, will I lose weight if it is high in carbohydrates? For example, if my diet consists of 300 grams of pasta, will I still lose weight or not? What if it is high in fat and low in carbohydrates?
What makes you lose weight more, with the same calories, a low carb diet (rich in fat) or a low fat, that is, a diet rich in carbohydrates?
If I go on a 1200 calorie diet, I will lose weight whether I choose a high carbohydrate (and low fat) diet or if I choose a high fat and low carbohydrate diet . For example , a meta-analysis from last year that collected 58 studies on the subject, came to the conclusion that a low-fat diet did not lose more or less weight in the long term than a high-fat diet. In fact, looking at individual studies, some go as far as to say that more weight is lost by reducing carbohydrates and increasing fat, in others the weight loss is similar, or the difference is minimal. Worse, many studies are done in the short term, i.e. they are completed in a few weeks (6 to 12), while few have examined the sample for a year. If I told you that after three months, you lose two extra pounds without eating carbohydrates, but that after twelve months you may have metabolic or thyroid problems, would the low-carbohydrate diet still seem so tempting?
There. This is somewhat the limit of studies that do not go beyond two or three months of observation in most cases.
However, in 23 studies, carbohydrate but not calorie restriction led to more significant weight loss than low-fat, high-carbohydrate calorie diets. This too must be said. Just as it must be said that this “advantage” was then lost when people returned to normal eating habits : the weight lost was regained ( source )
On The Carbs Asylum website, run by a biologist and researcher who proposes us to dismantle the cliché that carbohydrates are bad, a study on a diet high in carbohydrates and above all in simple sugars showed that people with calorie restriction they lost weight equally, even by eating very sugary foods.
These are data not to be ignored, because they tell us important things:
– we can lose weight with very different diets , as long as the energy we consume is greater than the energy that food provides.
– a low-carbohydrate diet can be a strategy to lose weight quickly : but we must also look at the long-term sustainability of such a diet, wondering how many of us would eat few carbohydrates, basically vegetables and little fruit, even after the end of the diet. – many diets where calories are not counted
, such as paleo diets or some ketogenic or volumetric diets (you eat low calorie foods), actually promote food restrictions that promote weight loss precisely because in one way or another they create a deficit.
– in some of these diets, people ended up gaining weight. This is because even the most convinced keto fanatic or the most exasperated paleo know that you cannot eat certain foods at will, even if allowed, and they admit that calories do matter.
Try it on yourself and from tomorrow eat a pound of oil seeds a day. There are also online calorie and macronutrient calculators for those on a carbohydrate-free diet (keto-calculator).
At this point, being free of carbohydrates no longer seems so beneficial in the long term, as high-fat foods are often high in calories as well.
– calories are an important parameter, and it is not true that they do not exist: people who ate the rice diet in the seventies lost a lot of weight, despite eating white rice, which is a food with a high glycemic index. This means that the glycemic load of foods and their quality are important, but they have a relative importance with respect to calories and that if we want to lose weight we must always pay attention to calories.
In short: let’s not just worry about what to eat to lose weight, let’s also worry about eating less than what we spend, a fundamental detail if we want to lose weight. Not the only one, for heaven’s sake, but certainly not negligible.
+ There are no comments
Add yours