Eating Fruits While Cutting

Diet and Nutrition
1

Hope someone can help settle this discussion I’ve been having.

Suppose you figure out your maintenance and energy calorie requirement to be 3,000 calories a day.

If you eat 2,500 cal you’ll (in theory) lose a pound a week and at 2,000 cal you should (in theory) lose two lbs a week.

So . . .

QUESTION #1 If you’re in CALORIE DEFICIT MODE does it matter where those calories are coming from? (For example, can you eat 2,000 calories worth of donuts and still lose two pounds a week?)

QUESTION #2 (Related to above) some experts (Tom Venuto for example) say no FRUITS when cutting weight because SIMPLE CARBS interfere with weight loss . . . but again if you’re in CALORIE DEFICIT MODE does it matter whether you eat fruits and other simple carbs?

Thank you

2

A good rule of thumb for general health concerning fruits and vegetables is this: eat as many as you possibly can. Set no limits on your fresh fruit and vegetable intake. Fruits and vegetables have very little calories, and digesting the fiber in fruits and vegetables burns calories as well. Eat them frequently and eat more than you’d like.

If you’re cutting for a bodybuilding contest, then the rules are different, but don’t worry about eating too many fruits and vegetables if you’re trying to lose fat. Except for potatoes, and bananas, fruits and vegetables have very little digestible calories.

I have never heard of Tom Venuto. If you’re trying to cut weight, what this usually means is that you’re trying to drop water weight for a wrestling match, weightlifting meet, or some other sporting event with weight classes. If this is the case, then you’ve got to minimize the food mass you’re taking in.

But if Fat Loss is your primary goal, or even if it’s not, just eat as many fruits and vegetables as you want, then have some more.
French Fries don’t count as vegetables.

Unless you want to go on a specific diet, there are 4 rules you should obey for good body composition.

  1. Eat Frequently. If your digestive system is working throughout the day, you’ll be burning calories digesting food. Fruits and Vegetables are great in part because they have very few calories but they demand your body to burn many calories.

  2. Eat Protein Frequently. The more muscle mass you have, the higher your metabolism will be. Your body needs amino acids all the time to create and repair new liver cells, skin cells, and all sorts of cells. If it doesn’t find amino acids readily available in the blood the moment it needs them, then the body will cannibalize its own muscle mass to get some amino acids.

  3. Eat appropriate amounts of carbs and fats based on your daily activity. If you didn’t do anything all day, you don’t need many complex carbs or fats. If you worked out, you’ll need a lot.

  4. Don’t eat foods that your great grandmother would not recognize as food. Assume your great grandmother traveled the world over a hundred years ago and knows what other cultures then considered food, but would have no idea what a Snickers bar was.

3

[quote]Boss6 wrote:
Hope someone can help settle this discussion I’ve been having.

Suppose you figure out your maintenance and energy calorie requirement to be 3,000 calories a day.

If you eat 2,500 cal you’ll (in theory) lose a pound a week and at 2,000 cal you should (in theory) lose two lbs a week.

So . . .

QUESTION #1 If you’re in CALORIE DEFICIT MODE does it matter where those calories are coming from? (For example, can you eat 2,000 calories worth of donuts and still lose two pounds a week?)

QUESTION #2 (Related to above) some experts (Tom Venuto for example) say no FRUITS when cutting weight because SIMPLE CARBS interfere with weight loss . . . but again if you’re in CALORIE DEFICIT MODE does it matter whether you eat fruits and other simple carbs?

Thank you[/quote]

The body doesn’t work in such a cut and dried fashion. Just because you are eating a 1000 cal deficit does not mean you will lose two lbs a week. Not in the least. Our bodies are amazing things and adapt very quickly to what we are doing.

It is always about calories and energy balance. You have to eat few calories than you expend to lose weight. Notice I said weight, if you cut calories too much and have inadequate protein intake you will lose muscle which is something that you don’t want to do. Yes, you could do the donut diet, but you would be unhealthier for it and lose a lot of muscle in the process leaving you skinny fat.

Since it appears that you are new to dieting, here are a few rules that apply in most cases. You will notice they have more than a few similarities to the ones above.

Move more.
Eat less.
Eat often.
Eat real food(whole foods, not highly processed).
Include a lean Protein source in every meal.
Eat good sources of fats, nuts, olive oil, fish.
Eat Fruits and Veggies and Whole Grains.
Ideally you keep the fruits and whole grains to breakfast and more fruits around workouts while veggies are fair game all day. But, this isn’t crucial to success.
Don’t drink calories.
Do not eat too little, usually a moderate caloric deficit(500-600) calories works best.
Train hard.

Also, I do very well with keeping a diet log. It allows me to keep track of how I am doing and really takes the guess work out of dieting. If it goes into your mouth, it goes on the log.

4

[quote]FightingScott wrote:
A good rule of thumb for general health concerning fruits and vegetables is this: eat as many as you possibly can. Set no limits on your fresh fruit and vegetable intake. Fruits and vegetables have very little calories, and digesting the fiber in fruits and vegetables burns calories as well. Eat them frequently and eat more than you’d like.

But if Fat Loss is your primary goal, or even if it’s not, just eat as many fruits and vegetables as you want, then have some more.
[/quote]

Venuto publishes articles on IRON MAGAZINE . . . here’s a link http://www.ironmagazine.com/listarticles-1.html

I understand your weight rules . . . good, common sense recommendations.

What are your thoughts on my specific question . . . i.e. if you’re eating reduced calories to lose fat does it really matter what those calories consist of?

Can you eat 2,000 calories worth of Krispy Kreme donuts and still lose weight as long as you’re eating less calories than your body needs?

I understand that long term, the fat snf sugar in donuts is unhealthy . . . but that’s not what I’m asking. I’m trying to understand whether the percentage of Carbs/fat/proteins matter when you are on a reduced calorie diet.

Thank you

5

When talking about carbs be aware that simple and complex can be a bit misleading. Fructose though a sugar is metabolized differently (in liver rather than stomach) and so falls much lower on the GI that one would expect.

Other “complex carbs” such as maltodextrin are just a string of glucose molecules and are very fast digesting. In terms of when to have your carbs above post go it, mornings when you break a long fast (hence break-fast) and around workouts.

6

Absolutely, you need to bump up protein while cutting to mantain your muscle’s while you cut as above posts said to avoid muscle catabolism. Furthermore, despite what any FDA employee or RD might tell you bodybuilders have been lowering carbs while cutting for years. So drop down the carbs bump up the fat and especially protein.

7

OK . . . makes sense . . . so the donut diet will allow you to lose weight and besides the other long-term health complications (impact on insulin production, ruin complexion, rot your teeth, clog arteries, etc) it leaves you “skinny fat.”

I like the term “skinny fat” . . . it’s a very clear definition of the problem.

I’d like to follow up . . .

When you’re on a reduced calorie diet and eating mostly protein and carbs . . . does FRUIT have some sort of negating effect on fat/weight loss by virtue of being a SIMPLE CARBOHYDRATE? Asked another way, do SIMPLE CARBS somehow inhibit fat/weight loss?

Second, when on a reduced calorie diet a person is at risk of losing muscle as well as fat . . . can this be offset by increasing protein consumption?

Thank you

8

[quote]OneMoreRep wrote:
When talking about carbs be aware that simple and complex can be a bit misleading. Fructose though a sugar is metabolized differently (in liver rather than stomach) and so falls much lower on the GI that one would expect.

Other “complex carbs” such as maltodextrin are just a string of glucose molecules and are very fast digesting. In terms of when to have your carbs above post go it, mornings when you break a long fast (hence break-fast) and around workouts. [/quote]

Exactly. I’ve usually thought about carbs as relatively high or low on the Glycemic Index . . . not Simple or Complex . . . so the following threw me and I’ve been discussing it with friends who don’t really know more than I do . . . so I thought I’d find people who know what they’re talking about.

OK . . . here’s an article by Tom Venuto http://www.ironmagazine.com/viewarticle-4496.html

In it, he says the following:

//QUOTE// This is accomplished by following a diet that is composed of 40% carbs, 40% proteins and 20% fats (please refer to my Bodybuilding Nutrition Basics article). This ratio works very well for most people except for hardgainers that can get away with eating more carbs and fats.

Carbs should come mainly from complex slow releasing sources such as oatmeal, grits, brown rice, and sweet potatoes, in combination with fibrous sources such as green beans and broccoli. Proteins should come mainly from chicken, turkey, tuna, turkey, salmon, and lean red meats.

Since you are focused on reducing body fat, dairy products and fruits need to be eliminated at this time, not because they are not healthy but due to the fact that the type of simple carbs contained in these foods may slow down fat loss.

Finally, you need some fats and these should come on the form of fish oils, flaxseed oil or extra virgin canned olive oil. //END QUOTE//

Notice the point about eliminating dairy and fruits. I have never heard that.

On a low carb eating plan like Protein Power and Atkins you cut carbs to 20-40 grams/day which eliminates most fruits but does allow dairy.

On a reduced calorie eating plan, the recommendation is to generally eat a balanced diet in smaller portions. For example, Bill Phillips and Body For Life recommends mostly protein and carbs, and does allow fruits and low-fat dairy. Performance Nutrition Products & Protein Supplements | EAS

The Zone Diet allows both low-fat dairy and fruits.
http://www.zonediet.com/EATING/HowtoMakeaZoneMeal/tabid/82/Default.aspx

So I’m not sure why Mr Venuto would make the case against dairy and fruits.

I will write and ask him of course, but I wanted to get other opinions too.

Thanks again for your response.

9

[quote]Boss6 wrote:

It is always about calories and energy balance. You have to eat few calories than you expend to lose weight. Notice I said weight, if you cut calories too much and have inadequate protein intake you will lose muscle which is something that you don’t want to do. Yes, you could do the donut diet, but you would be unhealthier for it and lose a lot of muscle in the process leaving you skinny fat.

OK . . . makes sense . . . so the donut diet will allow you to lose weight and besides the other long-term health complications (impact on insulin production, ruin complexion, rot your teeth, clog arteries, etc) it leaves you “skinny fat.”

I like the term “skinny fat” . . . it’s a very clear definition of the problem.

I’d like to follow up . . .

When you’re on a reduced calorie diet and eating mostly protein and carbs . . . does FRUIT have some sort of negating effect on fat/weight loss by virtue of being a SIMPLE CARBOHYDRATE? Asked another way, do SIMPLE CARBS somehow inhibit fat/weight loss?

Second, when on a reduced calorie diet a person is at risk of losing muscle as well as fat . . . can this be offset by increasing protein consumption?

Thank you

[/quote]

Jesus dude are you writing a term paper on weight loss? Do you really need this info spoonfed to you? There are probably 423,548 articles on this site related to your exact questions.

And if you don’t mind me saying- asking if you can eat 2000 cals worth of Krispy Kremes and still lose weight makes you officially the dumbest person alive. Congratulations.

You need to go to the beginners section and hang out for a long time.

10

I don’t buy the whole ‘maintenance - 500 cals = 1 lb / week of fat loss’. Here’s why:

Where do those 500 cals come from? Fats, Protein or Carbs? A combination? Surely, the 1 lb/wk depends on where the calories are subtracted from.

I think what is more effective is looking at how many grams of each macronutrient per lb bodyweight you are intaking.

You could get adequate fats, protein and carbs and have a total caloric intake that might not seem ideal for bulking/cutting, but depending on the ratios of intake of each macro, you would still make progress toward your physique goal. I could be wrong, but I’m pretty sure it’s not as easy as just slicing off 500 calories from maintenance (at least for fat loss).

11

Depending on what the theory behind the diet it is, it is quite possible to diet with a moderate fruit intake. In fact, that is usually how I prefer to do it. I just time the majority of my carbohydrate intake at breakfast and around my workouts. But, then again I was fat and had some degree of insulin resistance.

Don’t follow the glycemic index, it is flawed; if you are going to follow something follow glycemic load. It takes glycemic index and creates a new system based on carbohydrate in a common serving/portion size. Incidentally, foods like fruits and veggies drop considerably.

[quote]OK . . . makes sense . . . so the donut diet will allow you to lose weight and besides the other long-term health complications (impact on insulin production, ruin complexion, rot your teeth, clog arteries, etc) it leaves you “skinny fat.”
[/quote]

Yes. Adequate protein intake is protein sparing, allowing us to recomposition our bodies easier.

The message is you can diet with a high carbohydrate intake, it just depends on how your body responds. The big thing is switching to a more whole foods based diet, with frequent lean protein intake, that is the key to success.

12

[quote]Boss6 wrote:
FightingScott wrote:
A good rule of thumb for general health concerning fruits and vegetables is this: eat as many as you possibly can. Set no limits on your fresh fruit and vegetable intake. Fruits and vegetables have very little calories, and digesting the fiber in fruits and vegetables burns calories as well. Eat them frequently and eat more than you’d like.

But if Fat Loss is your primary goal, or even if it’s not, just eat as many fruits and vegetables as you want, then have some more.

Venuto publishes articles on IRON MAGAZINE . . . here’s a link http://www.ironmagazine.com/listarticles-1.html

I understand your weight rules . . . good, common sense recommendations.

What are your thoughts on my specific question . . . i.e. if you’re eating reduced calories to lose fat does it really matter what those calories consist of?

Can you eat 2,000 calories worth of Krispy Kreme donuts and still lose weight as long as you’re eating less calories than your body needs?

I understand that long term, the fat snf sugar in donuts is unhealthy . . . but that’s not what I’m asking. I’m trying to understand whether the percentage of Carbs/fat/proteins matter when you are on a reduced calorie diet.

Thank you

[/quote]

It matters where the calories come from. If you eat nothing but a few doughnuts you will lose muscle at a faster rate and fat at a slower rate than if you ate the same number of calories from protein and good fats.

13

[quote]Boss6 wrote:

I understand your weight rules . . . good, common sense recommendations.

What are your thoughts on my specific question . . . i.e. if you’re eating reduced calories to lose fat does it really matter what those calories consist of?

Can you eat 2,000 calories worth of Krispy Kreme donuts and still lose weight as long as you’re eating less calories than your body needs?

I understand that long term, the fat snf sugar in donuts is unhealthy . . . but that’s not what I’m asking. I’m trying to understand whether the percentage of Carbs/fat/proteins matter when you are on a reduced calorie diet.

Thank you

[/quote]

If weight loss is your only go, then the ONLY thing you need to worry about is Calories IN vs. Calories OUT. If that’s your only question END OF THREAD.

If you’re concerned with body composition, then everything becomes more complicated.

14

[quote]
Jesus dude are you writing a term paper on weight loss? Do you really need this info spoonfed to you? There are probably 423,548 articles on this site related to your exact questions.

And if you don’t mind me saying- asking if you can eat 2000 cals worth of Krispy Kremes and still lose weight makes you officially the dumbest person alive. Congratulations.

You need to go to the beginners section and hang out for a long time.[/quote]

Hmmm . . . a lot of hostility for no reason probably indicates you’re not getting sufficient number of carbs in your diet . . . please, no need to be rude, have a donut and stfu if you have nothing positive to contribute.

If the thread doesn’t interest you, move on. No one asked you for any input. By the way . . . if you really believe that I’m curious about whether an all-donut calorie deficient diet is effective . . . that would make you the second dumbest person alive. Congratulations back at you, pal.

The question of how much the macronutrient combinations affect a calorie deficient diet is probably one of the hottest areas of research right now and there are numerous theories.

For example . . . most diet plans recommend limitting fruit intake however, fruits and other low-calorie density foods create a feeling of fullness which can lead to less calories taken overall. This should be important to body builders and weight lifters . . . unless of course, you care to argue that people who work with iron never get hunger pains:

//quote// In the long-term studies they reviewed, eating low-energy-density foods promoted moderate weight loss. In studies lasting longer than 6 months, weight loss was 3 times greater in persons who ate foods of low energy density (low in fat and high in fiber) than in those who simply ate low-fat foods. //end quote//

Good article here

15

[quote] If weight loss is your only go, then the ONLY thing you need to worry about is Calories IN vs. Calories OUT. If that’s your only question END OF THREAD.

If you’re concerned with body composition, then everything becomes more complicated.
[/quote]

I think that’s an excellent way to summarize it and you’ve said it with more clarity than most who write on the subject.

There seem to be two very distinct schools of thought (allow me to state the blindingly obvious) . . .

  1. Eat your daily caloric requirement but control macronutrient ratios (for example 40% carb, 40% protein, 20% fat).

  2. Ignore exact macronutrient ratios but eat fewer calories than your body requires.

I suppose a third approach would be the hybrid method . . .

  1. Eat fewer calories than your daily caloric requirement and control macronutrient ratios (for example 40% carb, 40% protein, 20% fat)

I think this “hybrid” is where most weight lifters/body builders are. We try to eat less AND watch our protein, carbs and fats.

My impression . . . is that we still have a way to go in the understanding of how fruits and vegetables affect a fat loss plan. As the article I quoted above said

//quote// Although we lack direct evidence from clinical trials that consumption of fruits and vegetables promotes weight loss, we have indirect evidence that eating fruits and vegetables may be very helpful to people who want to lose or maintain weight, as fruits and vegetables are low in calories and fat as well as high in fiber and water content. //unquote//

My guess . . . we’re going to eventually find that eating foods that are low and very-low in caloried density INSTEAD of dense (complex carb) foods like pasta, brown rice and yams are actually more effective in a fat loss eating regimen.

16

[quote]PonceDeLeon wrote:
I don’t buy the whole ‘maintenance - 500 cals = 1 lb / week of fat loss’. Here’s why:

Where do those 500 cals come from? Fats, Protein or Carbs? A combination? Surely, the 1 lb/wk depends on where the calories are subtracted from.

I think what is more effective is looking at how many grams of each macronutrient per lb bodyweight you are intaking.

You could get adequate fats, protein and carbs and have a total caloric intake that might not seem ideal for bulking/cutting, but depending on the ratios of intake of each macro, you would still make progress toward your physique goal. I could be wrong, but I’m pretty sure it’s not as easy as just slicing off 500 calories from maintenance (at least for fat loss).[/quote]

Well, the one thing I’m 100% positive about is that I DON’T KNOW.

Intuitively, I would think all calories are created equal and the people who argue for calorie deficiency in diets seem to be arguing that all calories are equal.

It’s a hard point to argue against. Caloric deficiency will lead to weight loss . . . so yes, you can eat nothing but donuts and still lose weight if you don’t eat ENOUGH donuts.

But having said that, we also know

  1. Food has different thermic effect . . . so while on average, 10% of the calories ingested are used as energy to digest the food, we know that we can INCREASE the thermic effect through exercise and using different foods (hence, the type of calorie matters)

  2. Oxidation of macronutrients differs. For example, here is a quote from an excellent article published by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization. The article does a great job at getting to the specifics of how macronutrients affect oxidation and body fat:

//quote// Achieving body weight regulation requires more than achieving energy balance; it also requires that macronutrient balance be achieved. Macronutrient balance means that the intake of each macronutrient is equal to its oxidation. If this is not the case for a particular macronutrient, body stores of that macronutrient will change. For a weight-stable individual this means that the composition of fuel oxidized is equal to the composition of energy ingested. When the state of energy and macronutrient balance is disrupted (e.g. overfeeding, altering chronic level of physical activity), the body attempts to restore this state of homeostasis. In such cases, the differences in the rapidity with which balance of each macronutrient is restored has important implications for the role of diet composition in body weight regulation. //end quote//

http://www.fao.org/docrep/W8079E/w8079e0m.htm

So this is very clear evidence (I think) that the type of caloried does matter because the body deals with macronutrients differently . . . all calories are not equal.

By the way, let’s say you could eat nothing but Krispy Kreme ORIGINAL GLAZED . . . http://www.krispykreme.com/doughnuts.pdf

Each would be 200 calories each so you’d need ten a day.

You’d get 120 grams of fat in a day and 220 grams of carbs. So lots of energy.

Unfortunately, you’d only get 20 grams of protein. Since the body can’t manufacture its own protein, this eating scheme, like most calorie deficient plans . . . puts you at risk of losing the catabolic-anabolic fight. As one poster wrote earlier, you’ll be skinny-fat.

Now . . . let’s say you ingested 200 grams of protein a day (about 800 calories) in six meals and ate a Krispy Kreme donut with each meal.

You’d end up with 200 g protein, 72 g fat and 120 g carbs . . . which is not too shabby a diet.

So maybe we can say that “a calorie is a calorie in a reduced caloric eating plan IF AND ONLY IF you get sufficient protein.”

17

[quote]Boss6 wrote:
PonceDeLeon wrote:
I don’t buy the whole ‘maintenance - 500 cals = 1 lb / week of fat loss’. Here’s why:

Where do those 500 cals come from? Fats, Protein or Carbs? A combination? Surely, the 1 lb/wk depends on where the calories are subtracted from.

I think what is more effective is looking at how many grams of each macronutrient per lb bodyweight you are intaking.

You could get adequate fats, protein and carbs and have a total caloric intake that might not seem ideal for bulking/cutting, but depending on the ratios of intake of each macro, you would still make progress toward your physique goal. I could be wrong, but I’m pretty sure it’s not as easy as just slicing off 500 calories from maintenance (at least for fat loss).

Well, the one thing I’m 100% positive about is that I DON’T KNOW.

Intuitively, I would think all calories are created equal and the people who argue for calorie deficiency in diets seem to be arguing that all calories are equal.

It’s a hard point to argue against. Caloric deficiency will lead to weight loss . . . so yes, you can eat nothing but donuts and still lose weight if you don’t eat ENOUGH donuts.

But having said that, we also know

  1. Food has different thermic effect . . . so while on average, 10% of the calories ingested are used as energy to digest the food, we know that we can INCREASE the thermic effect through exercise and using different foods (hence, the type of calorie matters)

  2. Oxidation of macronutrients differs. For example, here is a quote from an excellent article published by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization. The article does a great job at getting to the specifics of how macronutrients affect oxidation and body fat:

//quote// Achieving body weight regulation requires more than achieving energy balance; it also requires that macronutrient balance be achieved. Macronutrient balance means that the intake of each macronutrient is equal to its oxidation. If this is not the case for a particular macronutrient, body stores of that macronutrient will change. For a weight-stable individual this means that the composition of fuel oxidized is equal to the composition of energy ingested. When the state of energy and macronutrient balance is disrupted (e.g. overfeeding, altering chronic level of physical activity), the body attempts to restore this state of homeostasis. In such cases, the differences in the rapidity with which balance of each macronutrient is restored has important implications for the role of diet composition in body weight regulation. //end quote//

http://www.fao.org/docrep/W8079E/w8079e0m.htm

So this is very clear evidence (I think) that the type of caloried does matter because the body deals with macronutrients differently . . . all calories are not equal.

By the way, let’s say you could eat nothing but Krispy Kreme ORIGINAL GLAZED . . . http://www.krispykreme.com/doughnuts.pdf

Each would be 200 calories each so you’d need ten a day.

You’d get 120 grams of fat in a day and 220 grams of carbs. So lots of energy.

Unfortunately, you’d only get 20 grams of protein. Since the body can’t manufacture its own protein, this eating scheme, like most calorie deficient plans . . . puts you at risk of losing the catabolic-anabolic fight. As one poster wrote earlier, you’ll be skinny-fat.

Now . . . let’s say you ingested 200 grams of protein a day (about 800 calories) in six meals and ate a Krispy Kreme donut with each meal.

You’d end up with 200 g protein, 72 g fat and 120 g carbs . . . which is not too shabby a diet.

So maybe we can say that “a calorie is a calorie in a reduced caloric eating plan IF AND ONLY IF you get sufficient protein.” [/quote]

The trouble with this is that you’d be missing out on MANY nutrients that are essential to maintaining muscle while losing fat. Supplementing with vitamins and minerals may counteract this to a certain degree, but it would simply not be enough to justify eating that way.

I am not saying that you are a proponent of that sort of diet, however I must add to the discussion the fact that a diet of that sort would also accumulate a massive acid load on the body, forcing the body to counter the net endogenous acidity with calcium from bones and glutamine from muscle. So Krispy Kreme + Protein Shake VLCD = loss of muscle and bone mass. This is clearly not a desirable situation. . .

CT frequently discusses calories as a relative non-point, as the body does not recognize calories but it does recognize nutrient quantities. I definitely agree with him.

18

[quote]The trouble with this is that you’d be missing out on MANY nutrients that are essential to maintaining muscle while losing fat. Supplementing with vitamins and minerals may counteract this to a certain degree, but it would simply not be enough to justify eating that way.

I am not saying that you are a proponent of that sort of diet, however I must add to the discussion the fact that a diet of that sort would also accumulate a massive acid load on the body, forcing the body to counter the net endogenous acidity with calcium from bones and glutamine from muscle. So Krispy Kreme + Protein Shake VLCD = loss of muscle and bone mass. This is clearly not a desirable situation. . .

CT frequently discusses calories as a relative non-point, as the body does not recognize calories but it does recognize nutrient quantities. I definitely agree with him.[/quote]

Great points, thank you. I don’t know anything about “acidity” but will study it.

  1. The proponents of calorie deficiency diest always talk in terms of “eating a balanced diet” so in fairness to them, the KRISPY KREME DIET is a lousy example to use. It’s an extreme and really doesn’t represent their thinking.

However, the point I’ve read on various websites devoted to calorie deficient diets is that the macronutrient mix is not as important when one is calorie deficient.

  1. I just don’t know if I agree that calories are a non-point. Even guys like Atkins repeatedly stated that low-carbing is not a license to binge. He would make the point that “you can eat all the steak you want” yet elsewhere he would say “but don’t expect to lose weight even on THIS diet if you eat too many calories.”

So at some point calorie intake has to become an issue.

But after I dig into “acidity” I will dig into “CT” and his articles on calories.

Many thanks.

19

[quote]Boss6 wrote:

Suppose you figure out your maintenance and energy calorie requirement to be 3,000 calories a day.

If you eat 2,500 cal you’ll (in theory) lose a pound a week and at 2,000 cal you should (in theory) lose two lbs a week.[/quote]

20

Another potential problem with the Krispy Kreme diet is that insulin levels might be chronically not optimal for fat burning.

For me personally, when trying to lose fat while retaining muscle, milk is not good. Other dairy products that reduce most of the carbs are fine: TJ’s Greek yogurt, cheese, cottage cheese, and Metabolic Drive protein powder. But milk seems to impair fat loss for me.

Fruit, however, does not. So the factor that seems to matter for me is glycemic/insulin load. Maybe fiber has an effect too.