Skip to main content

Calories still matter

In all the discussion of the composition of diets - low fat or low carb etc - and the potential for "metabolic advantage" we can sometimes forget the simple fact that calories still matter.

If you are eating too much, you are not going to lose weight no matter how low your carbs are. Dr Eades had a post on this today: Low carb and calories

Although the lowered insulin and elevated glucagon open the doors to the fat cells allowing fat to come out to be burned, the fat comes out only if it’s needed. If you are meeting all your body’s energy needs with the food you eat, the body doesn’t need the fat in the fat cells. On a low-carb diet your body burns fat for energy. But it doesn’t care where this fat comes from; it can come from the diet or it can come from the fat cells or it can come from both. If you are consuming enough fat to meet all your body’s requirements, your body won’t go after the fat in the fat cells no matter how severely you restrict your carbs. You will burn dietary fat only and no body fat. And you won’t lose weight. It’s that simple.


The low-carb diet is a wonderful, healthful way to lose weight quickly, but you do have to watch your calories as well to a certain extent. If your plugging along losing away, keep doing what you’re doing. But if you quit losing, take a look at your cheese and/or nut consumption. Cut those out, and I’ll just about guarantee that your weight loss will pick up again.

Comments

Shaf said…
A complete about-face.
Chris said…
Hi there Shaf

an about face from me or Eades?

I admit I flip about a bit on diet - am generally low carb-ish but read a lot of Lyle's stuff and know it is not quite as simple as the low carb community sometimes presents it.
Dave Clary said…
I read that at work today while munching some almonds from a can I keep in one of my desk drawers! I've gone from some fairly rapid weight lost (10 pounds a month) to a very, slow but steady pace now. I eat a lot of nuts and fruit that I could back off on; however, I'm getting within range of my eventual goal so I'm content to keep eating the way I plan on eating once I get there!
Shaf said…
Eades has done a complete 180° and probably hopes no-one notices.
Anonymous said…
Actually, he hasn't.

I heard the same thing over at Colpo's board; that Dr. Eades has conceded; there is no metabolic advantage; he was wrong, etc.

He's just clarified a point that apparently got lost in the brou-ha-ha over the existence (or not) of a metabolic advantage - that calories count. He never said that if you eat 10,000 calories a day you'd lose weight so long as your total intake of carbs was 10 grams or less. To boot, he explicitly said that he believed the metabolic advantage to be no more than a couple hundred calories' worth (give or take).
Anonymous said…
"Actually, he hasn't."

Except for the fact that in his book, he claimed that obesity and weight gain were more about insulin and less about calories, which is why it's impossible to take anything that guy says seriously

Popular posts from this blog

Dry January

I mentioned a few weeks ago that I was taking part in "Dry January".  I didn't make a big song and dance about it, but I decided to go for a calendar month or so with no alcohol.  A few people have asked me about my experience, so here are a few points. Why take a break from drinking? Alcohol is an interesting topic.  As a drug it is widely accepted in society, central to so much of our socialising and leisure.  There seem to be lots of health benefits - so we are told - yet there are also a lot of problems in terms of health, relationships and lifestyle that come from drinking. Over a few years I'd begun to become aware and then concerned that I was drinking too much and too regularly.  I am in a busy and stressful job and sometimes a glass of wine after work to relax is really helpful.  But over time, one glass became two.  Two glasses became ....I might as well finish the bottle.  A habit got established....and was starting to get too e...

So where have I been?

You will have noticed that this blog has been quiet for a while....  There are a few reasons for that, reasons that I thought I'd list here: WORK -  my day job has been incredibly busy and stressful this year. Working 10-14 hour days the last thing on my mind when I got home was putting something on here.  FACEBOOK/TWITTER - I suppose I've been using other channels to do some of what I used to do here. Quick fire posts pointing to interesting studies or news etc tend to get posted to Twitter (@chrishighcock) or to the Facebook Hillfit group http://www.facebook.com/groups/263083947097000/  REASSESSMENT - I've found myself less comfortable with some of the positions I've taken in the past. Sometimes I'm embarrassed by some of the things I've promoted. I'm not Paleo or low carb. I think Tabata and intervals are misunderstood and misapplied. I cannot really claim to be HIT.   I find myselfunable  honestly to post things on here and pretend that I am some sort o...

Taking up space for a brief update

I've a couple of posts in draft that I will get up soon -  an update / reflection on Dry January and some thoughts on the scheduling benefits of short workouts if your life is busy.  Before that though, I am pointing to something else. However, I wanted to highlight something that is coming this weekend that I've been involved in.   Amber Rogers (Gokaleo and author of Taking Up Space ) has been pulling together a bundle of books from various authors with a common theme, one that I've been pushing here recently.   Keep it simple, avoid the hype, be patient, be consistent and flee the gurus.   I've talked before about how we get obsessed with pushing for more and more, when enough is OK.  I've given my view that so much of the health and fitness internet world is more like a gnostic religion than something that will benefit your life. There are other voices out there saying similar things and I'll be pointing to a bundle of books later this week ...