Avoiding Carbs, is this healthy/good/too much?

boredatwork82 wrote: »

In fairness Jimmyie, we have kind of already established that, but we have moved on to discussing the quantities involved.

Please feel free to critique my initial post and let me know if in your opinion the quantities of carbs, fat, & protein are correct, or would you recommend any changes or tweaks to it?

I drink loads of water so I am happy enough in that department.

Input your diet into a calorie counter, find the macro breakdown ie ratio of carbs/fats/protein in grams. Post your weight, your basal metabolic rate (look that up too), any excercise you do (not detailed just resistance or cardio, how many times a week), along with your macro breakdown. Then you'll get useful comments. You could be a 150kg powerlifter or a 50kg high fat lunatic. Without any specificity any advice will be totally arbitrary and useless.

boredatwork82 wrote: »

So my BASAL Metabolic rate is 2539.4 as per some bmi calculator site.
It says then to multiple that by 1.55 (moderately active weight).

That gives me a recommended Calorie intake of 3936.07.
That looks really high.

As regards exercise I would do an hour- 2 hours of cardio say 4-5 times a week.

I don't do any resistance work yet as I am focusing on the cycle for July 5th. After that I will be changing my exercise regime.

http://www.bmi-calculator.net/bmr-calculator/harris-benedict-equation/


According to another site the macro breakdown of a such a diet based on the above calorie reading is:

Carbs 246
Protein 443
Fats 131

Let me know if this is what you mean or not?

I meant the macro breakdown of your current diet, the foods you listed in your first post. Work out their macronutrient composition using myfitnesspal or nutritiondata.self.com . Include your weight and height also

Bruno26 wrote: »

Carbohydrates are not essential for survival. Fat is the body's preferred fuel.

Carbs mightn't be essential for survival but glucose is. The body gets its glucose easiest from carbs, if you're on a low carb diet as a survival mechanism the body can use fat or break down muscle and convert it to glucose through gluconeogenesis but it seems like highly stupid thing to do on purpose to me, why use expensive protein for energy when you can use carbs? Carbs are preferred for muscle contraction.

Bruno26 wrote: »

Due to our genetic make-up the majority of us are insulin resistant to some extent.

Due to LIFESTYLE choices some of us MAY be SOMEWHAT insulin resistant. Insulin isn't an on off thing, it's a massive spectrum. If you're going to make claims like that, which could cause a health scare and/or unwarranted worry to people who may read your tripe and be brainwashed like you, you're going to have to give evidence. I know you can't provide evidence on your conspiracy theories because the government, big pharma and big agriculture burned all the evidence but if you have any decency at all you'll provide evidence for your scare tactics or say nothing.

Bruno26 wrote: »

When carbs are eaten our blood glucose levels rise. Insulin is secreted by the pancreas in response to glucose entering the bloodstream from the gut. The insulin causes the glucose which is not used immediately for energy to be stored by the liver and muscles as glycogen. Once the glycogen reserves are filled the excess is stored as fat.

If the carbs cannot be burned off it gets converted by the liver into fat and sent to our fat tissues for storage. We're just getting fatter and hungrier.

That was all true and then you just stuck on 'We're getting fatter and hungrier' total non-sequitur, WTF was that, it doesn't make any sense at all?
What is wrong with you described? It's how the body functions. The normal and sane approach first, followed by yours:

You exercise, you use glycogen, you eat carbs, carbs are easily converted to glucose and go into your muscles, your muscles recover, you are able to exercise at the same intensity within hours, if there are excess carbs they will be stored as fat.

You exercise, you use glycogen, you eat fat, it is stored as fat and then, along with protein, is converted to glucose through a ridiculous amount of steps, glucose will eventually get into muscles, you won't be able to exercise with the same intensity that day, if there is excess it will go back to fat, and you will look like an idiot.

(Gross simplification of both processes)

So you use fats for energy instead of carbs, fat has to be stored as fat and then turned to glucose, rather than used immediately like carbs, it's less effective for performance (at high levels of heart rate/intense activities at least), takes longer to recover from that exercise and the excess is stored as fat any, and you look like an idiot.

Bruno26 wrote: »

Insulin the body's defence mechanism against carbs, both transforms carbs/glucose into fat and then stores it by preventing it from being used. The result is you get fat.

Insulin isn't a defence mechanism.

generic2012 wrote: »

Insulin also; causes ribosomes to manufacture protein which is what builds muscle; prevents protein breakdown; transports the branched chained amino acids in muscle cells; and allows for the transportation of glycogen into muscle cells. Glycogen isn't stored in adipose tissue apart from minuscule, negligible amounts. It's easy to to think of something as 'good' or 'bad' but it isn't always wise.

Bruno26 wrote: »

Carbohydrates are nutrient deficient and often packed with salt and sugar, you feel the need to eat more of them therefore it's very difficult to keep the weight off.

Spinach, kale, berries, fruit etc are nutrient deficient? Saying carbohydrates are 'often packed with ... sugar' is the same as saying that water is often packed with H2O, which is a very very stupid statement.

Bruno26 wrote: »

Of the three macronutrients in our diet only carbohydrate is non-essential for life. We cannot function properly for more than a few days without eating fat. Without protein we develop protein calorie malnutrition within a few months. Avoiding carbs has no short or long term effect on humans except weight loss.

Fat and Protein are converted to do the same job as carbs so that's a total moot point and saying that avoiding carbs only leads to weight loss is a lie. It will also lead to a decrease in performance at intense activities and weird breath. Carbohydrates are preferred fuel for muscle contraction. It's estimated that the body can store 2,000 calories worth of carbohydrates before it's turned to fat, that's a lot of ANY food. Even half a kg of pure table sugar wouldn't get you that.

Bruno26 wrote: »

Carbohydrate serves only two functions in humans. It must either be burned as an energy fuel or is stored as fat. It cannot be used to build any of the body's structures. Persons with insulin resistance have a reduced capacity to burn carbs as a fuel both during exercise and when at rest, or to store it as glycogen.

Carbohydrate as energy source stops protein (muscle) being used as an energy source, it is a better energy source for exercise full stop. Brain fog ensues during/after exercise without adequate carbs. More benefits you forgot to include to giving up carbs are halitosis, muscle cramps and diarrhoea.

Fat is stored as body fat and then, if necessary, used as energy where as carbs are used as energy and in the very unlikely event of going over the 2,000 calorie body reserves stored as fat.

One of, if not the, best ways to lower insulin sensitivity is intense exercise, low carb diets hinder so don't use it as an argument.

generic2012 wrote: »

Ingredients of an egg:

AQUA (75.8%), AMINO ACIDS (12.6%) (GLUTAMIC ACID
(14%), ASPARTIC ACID (11%), VALINE (9%), ARGININE (8%), LEUCINE
(8%), LYSINE (7%), SERINE (7%), PHENYLALANINE (6%), ALANINE (5%),
ISOLEUCINE (5%), PROLINE (4%), TYROSINE (3%), THREONINE (3%),
GLYCINE (3%), HISTIDINE (2%), METHIONINE (3%), CYSTINE (2%),
TRYPTOPHAN (1%)); FATTY ACIDS (9.9%) (OCTADECENOIC ACID (45%),
HEXADECANOIC ACID (32%), OCTADECANOIC ACID (12%),
EICOSATETRAENOIC ACID (3%), EICOSANOIC ACID (2%), DOCOSANOIC
ACID (1%), TETRACOSANOIC ACID (1%), OCTANOIC ACID (<1%),
DECANOIC ACID (<1%), DODECANOIC ACID (<1%), TETRADECANOIC
ACID (<1%), PENTADECANOIC ACID (<1%), HEPTADECANOIC ACID (<1%),
TETRADECENOIC ACID (<1%), HEXADECENOIC ACID (<1%),
EICOSENOIC ACID (<1%), DOCOSENOIC ACID (<1%), OMEGA-6 FATTY
ACID: OCTADECADIENOIC ACID (12%), OMEGA-3 FATTY ACID:
OCTADECATRIENOIC ACID (<1%), EICOSAPENTAENOIC ACID (EPA)
(<1%), OMEGA-3 FATTY ACID: DOCOSAHEXAENOIC ACID (DHA) (<1%));
SUGARS (0.8%) (GLUCOSE (30%), SUCROSE (15%), FRUCTOSE (15%),
LACTOSE (15%), MALTOSE (15%), GALACTOSE (15%)); COLOUR (E160c,
E160a), E306, E101; FLAVOURS (PHENYLACETALDEHYDE, DODECA-2-
ENAL, HEPTA-2-ENAL, HEXADECANAL, OCTADECANAL, PENTAN-2-ONE,
BUTAN-2-ONE, ACETALDEHYDE, FORMALDEHYDE, ACETONE); SHELL
(E170), ALSO CONTAINS BENZENE & BENZENE DERIVATIVES, ESTERS,
FURANS, SULFUR-CONTAINING COMPOUNDS AND TERPENES.

OM NOM NOM NOM.

I've eaten four eggs already today! :cool:

siochain wrote: »

PM me when you start that tread I'd be interested a to follow it. I convinced a few middle and long distance runners to switch from high carbs in the diets and gels and stuff during races to good fat sources and the results were better than I even expected.

Will do Sir.

Doing the Mile failte 1200 starting tomorrow so it'll be interesting to see how I fair on that.

Whatever about racing for 3hrs where your hr might average 150-160 for long distance stuff at a hr average 130ish the body is very very adaptable to running on fat. I'm an average cyclist at best but can do things on high fat I can't do on high carb.

Check out Barry Murray optimumnutritionf4sport( for BMC nutritionist) and check out@enduro who posts on boards; he is a ultra distance runner

Are you a coach or personal trainer? I've never seen you post something that wasn't very informative or helpful.

@Bruno26 why do you just ignore posts that provide evidence against your view? Surely if your view was correct you could refute any contrary information put to you? Why do you just post links by people with financial incentives in promoting the high fat cult? You haven't given one shred of reputable information out, you've filled pages with dangerous and false information with zero regard for peoples' health. Any sane person in your position would question the fact that there is no evidence to back up their claims, but not you. In my view spurious health claims such as yours with no evidence and purposeful ignorance of requests for evidence, because it goes against science and common sense and puts peoples' health at risk, warrants a ban. Man up and answer some of the questions about your information.