Atkins Diet Quick Hits:Should I count Calories on Induction?

[bowulf]

@pinkmushroom55 How many electrolytes (sodium, potassium) are getting? How many Calories are getting each day (hopefully enough - the new book suggests at least 1200)? Does Induction have yucky side effects? Yep, especially for those addicted to carbs or really insulin resistant. How much water do drink and veggies eat each day? For me giving up caffeine was the worst, but it got better.

You lost 10 pounds in 2+ weeks. That is pretty good unless you have 200+ pounds to lose.

[hdyhhfdg]

Once you go into OWL and phases 3 and 4, are you out of Ketosis? If so, how does your body not gain weight back once you're increasing your carb intake? Isn't it going to use carbs for fuel again?? Or how does that work? Once your out of ketosis, you can eat more carbs and still not gain?? OR at least in OWL?

[bowulf]

@hdyhhfdg As you increase your carbohydrate counts by 5g at a time, you will eventually leave ketosis. You increase it until you reach the CCLL (critical carb count for losing). Once you know that number, you simply eat below, and you weight loss should continue over the long period (you may have weeks where it hesitates). So many low carbers don't need to be in ketosis to lose all the way to goal.

You are still fueling with fat but not exclusively. Many insulin resistance get better too.

[bowulf]

@pinkmushroom55 I am glad I could help. I know on Atkins I was first able to find the off switch for my appetite.

[Chaaarge]

look, I'm happy that low carb has worked for you, but people need to look at how weight loss and fat loss occurs. it is about the calories. the reason you lose weight on atkins is because you simply are eating less, because, fats and proteins are very satisfying. you also lose a lot of water weight because carb binds to water. But carbs really aren't the enemy in weight loss, it's the amount of food. Atkins was a cardiologist, I'd rather read real nutrition studies from harvard, yale etc

[bowulf]

@Chaaarge Sorry, it is not about Calories. It is about the composition of the Calories as the body works differently in response to some Calories than others. Otherwise, it would not matter if you ate 1500 Calories per day on Twinkies or Steak or apples. There have been multiple studies that have shown on the Calories more weight was lost on a low carb lifestyle, and even people on 500 Calories on simple sugar gained weight.

[bowulf]

@Chaaarge You mean like the multiple studies I have referred to in my videos from places like Harvard and Duke. All of which supported the low carb lifestyle. It isn't that hard to find a study even long term studies (20 years long enough?) that states the same thing. Not only is low carb and the restriction of carbs good for weight loss that it also improves health in many arenas, like heart and cancer.

[Chaaarge]

@bowulf I don't wanna seem like a spammer, but if you want I can give you the links if you want to a harvard study from 2009 that sais it all comes down to calories, and a yale study from 2003 that sais low carb may not aid in weight loss. The new england journal of medicine sais the same. I don't wanna bash atkins too much though because his diet has helped people with health problems, and yes, you would lose weight eating 1500 calories of twinkies

[bowulf]

@Chaaarge Well a 2003 Harvard study said the exact opposite thing (Calorie In Calorie Out). Penelope Green fed people for 12 weeks, and the low carbers who ate the same amount of Calories lost the most weight. Low Carbers who ate 25000 MORE calories lost more weight than the control group as well. NEJM showed low carbers lost statistically significant more weight than any other group.

The Metaanalysis published in the AMA Journal "Effects of Low-Carbohydrate vs Low-Fat Diets on Weight Loss"

[PurpleHoneyBear]

@bowulf Penelope Green, yes. She said "Maybe they (the low carb, high protein group) burned up more calories digesting their food." That is precisely what happened.

I'm not sure, but perhaps you and I agree on this. Are you saying that it's just not as simple as calories in/calories out? Because if so, you are totally correct. But you do acknowledge that, at the end of the day, whatever turns out to be your caloric deficit will also gauge your weight loss? (besides water masking results).

[bowulf]

@PurpleHoneyBear I am saying that correctly identifying the Caloric intake (not simply expelled as waste undigested) and the amount of Calories consumed or expended in energy is so fraught with problems that identifying the Caloric deficit to be a disservice. The body will adjust one variable (the amount of energy expended -- metabolism) as one adjusts the variables.

I personally tracked much high weight loss at eating 3000-4500 daily than I did when consuming 1500 Calories.

[bowulf]

@PurpleHoneyBear A simple Caloric look at Calorie In Calorie Out had no relevance to my history of weight loss. Could a metabolic advantage or excess amount of my eaten foods go undigested or require higher energy consumption to eat explain my higher weight loss? Possibly. It however also ignores the role of hormones affect on the body's fat storing and consumption cycles too.

My point ultimately is it useful to focus on Calories as being useful or the primary tool for weight loss.

[bowulf]

@PurpleHoneyBear A simple Caloric look at Calorie In Calorie Out had no relevance to my history of weight loss. Could a metabolic advantage or excess amount of my eaten foods go undigested or require higher energy consumption to eat explain my higher weight loss? Possibly. It however also ignores the role of hormones affect on the body's fat storing and consumption cycles too.

My point ultimately is it useful to focus on Calories as being useful or the primary tool for weight loss.

[bowulf]

@Chaaarge Demonstrated in the 6 main comparison studies between low carbers and low fat dieters that the LC'ers had a greater adherence rate and better success rate. The majority of studies are pretty clear. LC is the more successful plan to follow.

I'd suggest you view my Misconception Series, such as:

*Atkins Diet Misconceptions: Lack of long term studies?

*Atkins Diet Misconceptions: Low Carb Failure Rates Far Exceeds Others?

*Atkins Diet Misconceptions: Calorie-In Calorie-Out Fallacy

[flaskofcoffee]

@Chaaarge

My own, personal, experience - its NOT the calories.

My first few weeks on low carb included lots more calories than before, but with very low carb content. The weight began to melt away, rapidly. (92Kg - 80Kg - 3 mths approx).

I have noticed, however, that the carbohydrate 'problem' is a personal issue.

I live in Japan, where carbs are staple yet obesity rare. My girfriend has NO problem with weight despite eating high carbs (rice), but the same food puts pounds on me.

[robinhowardjohnson]

@Chaaarge go on then wheres the links? Every doctor i have spoken to has RECCOMENDED atkins and also a heliopath and phsycics ...they all said atkins was bashed because massive corporations started rumours because it ruined their buisness

[Chaaarge]

@robinhowardjohnson h t t p : // harvardscience. harvard. edu /medicine- health/articles/weight-loss-bo­ttom-line-fewer-calories that's the harvard study.

h t t p : / / w w w . huffingtonpost . com / 2009/02/25/ lowcarb - lowfat - study -find_n_170056 . h t m l

that's another study

[bowulf]

@Chaaarge "Young CM, Scanlan SS, Im HS, Lutwak L: Effect of body composition and other parameters in obese young men of carbohydrate level of reduction diet.

Am J Clin Nutr 1971 , 24:290-6

Lower carb participants of 1800 kCals lost more weight and greater percentage of fat lost.

[robinhowardjohnson]

@Chaaarge SO many whom have SUCESSFULLY done atkins will tell you its a hard road but the results are well worth it...

[watchmeshrink20101]

@Chaaarge ur wrong if im eting carbs, no matter how little calories, im not gonna lose weight period.

[PurpleHoneyBear]

@Chaaarge Speaking of twinkies, you can lose weight eating twinkies simply because you're in a calorie deficit. The man who lost around 50lbs on a high carb diet of junk food is a good example.

Different foods interact differently with the body. The thermic effect of food varies between the macronutrients, for example. Accounting for that and other factors including the inefficiency of the machine (in this case, the body itself) means that calories in/out is not quite accurate. But we agree.

[bowulf]

@PurpleHoneyBear If you are talking about the junk food diet by Kansas State University associate professor, Mark Haub, it actually was less junk food that popular portrayed. He ate many meals with no twinkies or Hostess cakes at all.

[PurpleHoneyBear]

@Chaaarge I'd have to look at the studies that you both referenced, but if any of them are not controlled lab studies where participants are fed a specific amount of calories, then they're not accurate. We know that because it's been established that people tend to way overestimate their caloric intake.

You are correct. The difference in weight loss is largely attributed to higher water loss and the high satiety factor of the high protein diet. These diets are very useful for that reason.

[b1naryd1g1t5]

The Atkins diet only works because of caloric restriction. Modern studies have shown that people who eat mostly proteins and fats eat much less than those who eat a diet high in carbs. So, the old rule of calories in < calories out still applies. The "secret" of the diet is simply satiety.

Moreover, the Atkins diet was not invented by Atkins at all -- there are published examples of it in medical journals going back to the 19th century. It was disputed then as it is now.

[bowulf]

As for the Calories In Calories Out being the sole determinant of success, that ihas been proven wrong in multiple studies. What has also been shown in studies is that LCers can eat more Calories and lose more weight than low fat. It has also been shown to be easier to follow and improve cardiac risk factors more. Check out my Calories in Calories Out Fallacy video for more information.

Really it comes down should I care or or is important count Calories, and my answer is no.

[b1naryd1g1t5]

@bowulf

To say that calories in < calories out has been disputed by Atkins is ludicrous. If true it would mean that Atkins has single-handedly overturned the 1st law of thermodynamics (a law in physics that has been tested over and over and over for hundreds of years). Somehow I doubt this is the case.

The truth is, there are studies on BOTH sides. There are numerous studies showing that LC dieters eat LESS. This is a fact. And yes, I am aware of your studies you cite...

[bowulf]

Then explain how one eats more Calories (takes in more energy) and loses more weight. The simple fact is the body is NOT a simple engine. If you are tracking Calories, you are only tracking the inputs, and the ability to track the output is extremely faulty. So while the Laws of Thermodynamics may have proven over and over in other systems, using a simple energy in energy out ignores the complexity of the human body.

Eat less than whom?

[b1naryd1g1t5]

@bowulf

But the studies you cite were also short term. There are no really long term studies on Atkins. Moreover, there have been studies done to test his "Metabolic Advantage" theory and it was proved bogus. What the studies showed, again, is that LC dieters eat less food because proteins and fats are more filling. This was shown with a very large and long study of various diets over many years.

[bowulf]

Check out my "Atkins Diet: Lack of long term studies?" video. There are multiple studies lasting from 2-20 years in length with thousands of dieters and non-dieters following low carb or ketogenic diets.

As for the Metabolic Advantage being proved false, if Atkins Dieters lost more weight on more Calories what do you think caused the additional weight loss? Short term was 12 weeks, not exactly a month or simply water loss advantage.

Eat less food than whom? Their former selves likely.

[bowulf]

Eat more than less effective extreme Low Calorie diets, yes most definitely. If it was simply a Calorie In, Calorie Out system, starvation mode dieting would have no meaning. One's metabolism would not be affected by the amount of Calories entering the system. I personally lost considerably more weight eating 3500-4500 Calories per day on Atkins than on a strict 1500 Calorie diet.

So other than trying to prove Atkins Diet followers eat less (than whom - former selves?), what is your point?

[b1naryd1g1t5]

@bowulf

There were twin studies done where one twin was put on Atkins and the other on a regular diet of the same amount of calories. They were going to test Atkins' theory that LC dieters burn more calories at rest. The results? The twins burned the SAME amount of calories regardless of carb intake. So, basically there is no "metabolic advantage."

Another study tested to see if ketosis somehow allowed calories to "escape" through breath or urine. The results? No, that doesn't happen.

[b1naryd1g1t5]

So, since we know people on LC dont burn more calories and we know they don't pass them out of the body through ketosis, then this means either they are simply eating less or the energy (food) is disappearing without a trace. This, again, breaks the 1st law of thermodynamics.

Again, one long term survey study showed LC people eat less calories. There is no doubt about this.

[bowulf]

You want to complain about lack of long term studies, and you use a study that was only two weeks long? With a grand total of 2 people? Seriously? This passes for science a case study of 2 people over the course 2 weeks.

The Atkins Diet twin also did burn more Calories -- not significant but it was more. Given a comparison study of greater time, more people, I think I'll believe the other study.

[bowulf]

Excuse me if I don't fall over myself in believe the study when I have lived the opposite. I ate more than double the Calories on Atkins and lost considerably more weight (2 pounds on the 1500 Calories per day vs. over 30 pounds in 1 month on Atkins).

Until someone can explain my reality in Calories In Calories Out, I'll continue to believe what you eat plays a far greater than how much Calorically you eat.

Plus tell me this, what is metabolic pathway to store fat in the absence of insulin.

[bowulf]

But ultimately what is your point? We can argue all day on the metabolic advantage with competing studies. If you want to argue the Calorie In Calorie Out Fallacy, go check out Michael Eades blog. He rails against it daily, and it's still no more successful diet strategy for people like me than it was 10 & 20 years ago.

There may be people that Calorie Counting works. It just left me frustrated, generally the same weight, and constantly hungry.

[b1naryd1g1t5]

@bowulf

When the AMA released it's rebuttal of the Atkins diet in 1974, they made a couple of interesting points. For instance, they pointed out that many Asian cultures have diets that consist of very high (if not 100%) carbohydrate, yet many people in those regions are very lean. If carbs are what make you fat, how do you explain the Asians? Sure, you can argue they eat fewer calories than Americans, which is true, but that goes against your point that calories don't matter.

[bowulf]

In what form do they eat their carbohydrates? Typically vegetables and slow digested carbohydrates. They are also typically lower fat as well which means the insulin spikes when they have little to store. Compare that to Standard American Diet, full of refined sugars, starches, and flours, and is loaded with junk fats.

What's changed recently with the Asian obesity epidemic? They are still largely low Fat, but their refined sugar has increased greatly.

BTW- did I say Calories didn't matter?

[bowulf]

"I'll continue to believe what you eat plays a far greater than how much Calorically you eat."

I did say you shouldn't need to count them as a means to lose weight AND that the amount of them matter less than what you eat.

Still waiting on an explanation how I lost considerably more weight eating twice the number of Calories.

[bowulf]

As for not being invented by Atkins, I don't think anyone says he invented low carbing. He even points out his book Dr. William Banting's Letter on Corpulance back in the 1800s and that many native tribes like Inuit had ate this way for thousands of years. Shoot, Vilhjalmur Stefansson proved in the 1920s that one could subsist on 85-100% meat only diet.

As for being disputed, there are always those that fail to see the truth or swear the earth is flat. Why should Atkins be any different?

[reidradionc]

This is my 7th day of induction. I'm planning on making it stick this time. The "follow your hunger" advice is exactly what I was wondering about. Thanks again.

[deckertone]

Kent, what you are taking as far as vitamins and/or supplements if any? thanks

[bowulf]

I typically only take a multi- once a day. I have made a supplement video on Youtube however on some other suggested supplements.

My main belief with that stuff is cover the basics with a multi- and then treat specific ailments or symptoms with specific recommendations, i.e. out of energy try L-Carnitine, etc...

[chuckabuckmoore]

hey kent, I just completed 10 days of inductions phase and I feel great. My flu is over, but i am having problems with my eating within my 6 hours window. I mean, i have a huge breakfast and when 6 hours pass, i am really not that hungry. is it ok to go over 6 hours? or find a small snack.

[bowulf]

It is a good suggestion, but it has to confirm to your schedule. The thing you want to guard against is your body shutting down or killing your metabolism. If you can delay and not feel fatigued or immediately get so famished you eat anything, you can try delaying. It's not optimal, and you'll have to be cognizant of those potential side effects.

[junkinthetrunkk]

Thanks for the shout out Kent! you always give such great information! So I exercised yesterday (weight training) and got ont on the scale this morning and saw a slight increase from yesterday... UGH...is this normal?

~AMber

[bowulf]

Yes a temporary weight gain is normal especially if you lifted. The muscle retain some water as they fix all the microtears and repair themselves. Cardio can do it occassionnally if you drink more water than normal and the body hasn't returned to equilibrium yet. It's just water weight.

That's the only negative about weighing every day.

[lmdelsanto1]

Hi..29 weeks and 66 pounds. I have got it down to a science. I never count calories..I eat for my health, loads of greens. My Diabetes is completely controlled. One day it was 86!! and in February it was 577!! My wake up call) I just want to tell you I love this lifestyle so much I am creating recipes with the Almond and Hazelnut flour replacements...good to see your video...hugs from rhode island. My goal is 130.

[bowulf]

Simply fantastic -- I have had the best success stories come through and post to this video. Your diabetes success speaks volumes and should be told to every single new diabetic. Good job!!!

[winter654123]

Thanks for not replying to my e-mail I sent 2 weeks ago Kent. :( I really could have used the help about the keto levels. Rebecca

[bowulf]

I am sure you can appreciate I do my best at answering all my pms and occassionally fall through the cracks. The answer is the level of ketones is not as important as simply the presence. Darker colors are more an indicator of hydration levels, and should tell you to drink more rather than eat higher carbs.

[winter654123]

Thank you for getting back with me Kent I appreciate your help.

[NickEMT]

Thanks to Kent's great advice I lost 40 lbs on Atkins. On Induction, I did not count any calories at all. I kept my carbs @ 20 or less, and as long as I was losing weight, I was happy.

[bowulf]

Thanks Nick for showing another Atkins success story at goal!

[Happycripple]

You should pay attention if you are excreting excess ketone bodies. You can smell them when you know the odor. And cvs as well as like walmart sell ketone strips to measure urine ph levels. I judge by my breath and urine now but I used ketone strips to test urine ph at first. You will eventually just know the feeling. .

[bowulf]

Yep, can I just say Amen? :-)

[FindingKristy]

thank you so much for the shutout, great video! Induction phase is almost over for me, and I will be moving on to the next phase, however I"m not sure yet what Ron's plan is to do.. it's something we will be discussing in our next video! Thanks again :)

[bowulf]

I look forward to reading and seeing the next chapter in both of your stories. The positive outlook is infectious and remotivates even long timers like me.

[ChapStyck]

I just finished induction and lost about 5 pounds, 30- 40 pounds more to go. So can I eat more fruits now? And are mangoes allowed?

Thanks~!!

[bowulf]

Congrats on the 5 pounds!

Check out my ongoing weight loss (OWL end of a good thing) video where I deal with this question. The short answer is no... You should progress through the rungs of OWL and add an additional 5g of carbs each week until you no longer lose for the week.

Melons and berries are rung 4, and other fruits (like mangos) are rung 7. Follow the rules for OWL, and your success is just a matter of time.

[angielooo]

I'm on day 72 and already I've lost almost 40 pounds!!! I love Atkins!

[bowulf]

I am happy to be surrounded with such good spokespeople for this way of living. There is no feeling of being the sole voice with you guys around. Over a half pound lost average per day is simply awesome.

[deckertone]

Excellent video! Just finished Induction w/ a loss of 11lbs! Very excited. I will extend Induction as I have about 70lbs more to lose! I never knew there was more to life than food! :)

[bowulf]

That is fantastic Induction progress - 13%!!! Success stories like yours and your life beyond food comment certainly help those that are just starting or wondering if there really is something to this. Great job!

[georgiatavira]

Thanks for another great video!

[bowulf]

You are very welcome.

[gabad33]

Hey Kent. Thank you for your videos! You've got a wealth of knowledge and I'm very thankful you are sharing them with the world. Btw, I started 6 days ago and already I've lost 4 lbs! Questions: How much diet rite can I safely drink? Do you know if splenda is bad for you? Also can you explain net carbs. Does that mean just vegetables or can I eat Zone bars? Thanks again for making videos!!

[bowulf]

3 servings per day -- check out my daily sweetener video. Splenda IMO is safe within these intake limits for most people.

As for net carbs, the long answer is check out my net carbs vs. net impact carbs video. The short answers is take the total carbs and subtract ONLY the fiber carbs to reach net carbs. Do not subtract sugar alcohols or any other carbs from the total.

Zone bars are not on the Acceptable Foods list, so no eating them until you reach OWL and the rung of each ingredient.

[Tamar1973]

I counted calories during induction but not for the reason people might think. I counted them to make sure I was eating enough calories because I noticed that when I was in induction, that I was satiated with much fewer calories than on the typical American diet. I didn't want to let my body go into starvation mode so I did keep a food diary with both carbs and calories.

[bowulf]

Yep, I totally agree with this reason for counting them. The appetite suppression is a powerful thing, and I personally was amazed at the feeling of actually not being hungry or thinking about my next meal for once.

[xf89]

Great video! I keep trying to convince my hubby that calories don't really count with a LC diet!

[bowulf]

Thank you, and with your success so far, your husband should just accept what you say. Of course husbands should do that anyway. :-)

[bowulf]

I had to reupload this due to the original was so out of sync, that I couldn't stand to leave it up.

[ChroniclesofaFATGIRL]

I Lurve Quick LC Video's:)

[bowulf]

Hey, I really appreciate all my followers -- especially the ones from TX.