To think low carbing whilst on Slimming World is dangerous?

[PlayingHouse]

I have started Slimming world - which is essentially a lot fat diet.

I have seem a lot of people who are also on SW saying they are cutting carbs to help weight loss.

I thought that a low carb diet meant high fat in order to still get the nutrition you need.

So AIBU to think a low carb + SW diet is just dangerous and lacking in essential nutrients?

Higher protein instead?

Isn't low carb SW pretty much what used to be a 'red' day?

SP is low fat low carb, high protein and super free veg and fruit. Completely fine. Don't do it if you don't want tom you don't have to

It's fine. There is a type of SW diet which is low carb which helps boost weight loss, it's all about protein and fruit and veg. Not dangerous at all.

On the SP you get more healthy extras.

I'm talking about low carbing on the EE.

Although perfectly happy to admit I am wrong and to be educated

You get an extra Healthy B on SP but im not sure how that makes much difference?

There is nothing on the SW plan that says you have to eat carbs, all free food is equal, it's just the speed foods that are necessary in a meal. You can use free food however you like. I don't really see a problem with eating lots of protein and fruit and veg.

Low carb does not mean high fat, it just means low carb! When you think about it, the only nutrient that the fat would adequately replace would be energy, which is what you are trying to reduce.

Extreme diets of any kind can be dangerous, though.

YABU, mainly because you may have mistaken cutting out starchy carbs, potato, bread etc, for low carb.

DSis does SW and she described it as low carb, until I pointed out that all that veg is carbs, all of it! It is a common misunderstanding, made worse by the slimming industry who like to demonise food groups - it helps sell their unique product!

Vegetables are low carb though. So you can eat some vegetables on a low carb diet. Just not on a no carb diet :)

Ok, I get it now.

So if my weight loss stalls, then I could replace pasta, rice and potatoes and bread to see of that helps with no concerns?

Also, If veg are carbs (I didn't know this) do people cut them out when they are low carbing?

And if low carb isn't high fat, why do the low carbers I know each so much high fat food?

I might be more confused now than before

And do people really do 'no carb' diets?

Yes, to the first.

Hopefully not, to the second. That would leave you really short of a wide range of vital nutrients.

As for the third, that's the extra special diet that Doctor Atkins invented... there is some truth in it, ketosis can be a very good thing. But he was mad as a hatter (and lied about his 'research). Lots of current diets are based on his, just repackaged with the same misinformation.

Having said that, there is quite a lot of research (done properly this time) that seems to support the idea that any type of fat is irrelevant to weight loss. So you could eat a very high fat diet and lose weight. But there may be other health implications (scarily again, newish research suggests that this may be far less than we have been led to believe).

So the only advice you really need is: find a healthy plan that suits you and ignore what anyone else does.

DSis hates my 5:2 style diet and I really can't do SW/WW. But we both lost weight and maintain the loss - healthily.

So sod 'em all, do what suits you

Personally I don't think low carb and low fat is very clever idea. I don't think protein alone provides enough energy but I know little about SW and its design soooo idk.

Pretty much everything has carbs so no carb is impossible

?? Protein is a good source of energy, about the same as carbs (4kcals/gram). Fat provides a bit more than twice that much. So most of your energy intake should come from the lower energy macronutrients.

Too little fat will also rob you of essential vitamins (A D E and K) as they are carried into the body dissolved in fat. Too little fat = to few macro nutrients = a range of quite nasty illnesses.

There are quite a few incredibly high protein diets out there... and there is a lot of research that backs them up, to some extent. If you have money and can afford the level of supplementation, some would say they are the best diets!

You can have cheese, eggs and nuts on SW SP, plus meat, fish, veg etc so it's not no fat, so not nutritionally deficient. I also think they don't encourage it long term either.

I don't know anything about swimming world, but what u know is in order to lose weight you need to use more energy than you eat. I don't think every woman should eat 2000 calories we are not all the same height or body mass.

Endless muller lights is more dangerous than low carbing!

Also,slimming worlds weird 'unlimited'

SW red day = a lower carb/ lower glycaemic index diet. Fish or meat plus unlimited salad/veg?

Low carb doesn't mean no carbs.

My diet is made up largely of high protein foods with veggies and fruit. The fats I do eat are generally "good fats" from things like nuts, seeds, avocado etc. it's designed to help build muscle and lose fat and is working. I've almost halved my body fat this year eating this way.

There are some low carb diets out there that are also high fat - eg Atkins. It seems that sugar is the enemy rather than dietary fat though. Dietary sugars are readily stored as fat and that's the theory behind low carb.

Low fat also doesn't mean no fat. Choosing leaner cuts of meat for example will mean more nutrition for less calories. Eggs, fish etc have some fat.

They won't starve

Green days.... Are they still unlimited PASTA??

AnyonForTennis...

SW does let you eat 'unlimited' pasta and muller lights, but as a third of your portion is supposed to be non starchy veg or non starchy and low sugar fruit...if you're actually managing to eat unlimited amounts then you must have been eating huge amounts of food before that and it'll more than likely still work.

Your body needs both carbs and fats to put on weight and a lack of either will make you lose. Calories are pretty irrelevant as if there is no increase in insulin levels you won't put on weight.

Oooh! I shall need some evidence for those 2 statements. I think I recognise the physiological processes they refer to, but have no idea where the conclusions come from.

Osmio - where did you get that from? I ask as I am currently working on a piece of diet and exercise research. Looking at how good science is subverted by commercialism (which is why I can currently bore for England on kcals and nutrients).

But muller lights are stuffed full of sugar so what's the point? They don't fill you up