Struggling with the eating fat logic

[Boardingblues]

So I get the bit about not eating carbs so that calories are gained from proteins and fat and that the objective is to burn fat…. But surely if I eat fat, it is that fat that will get burnt first and my fat, the stuff I want rid of, will just sit there, unused! Someone please explain this to me!

Following. There is a programme on this week called 'the truth about fat' so that might help clear things up!

It's more complicated than that.

When you eat carbs, it sends a message to your pancreas to release insulin. Insulin is a hormone that opens up fat cells to let more fat in. Also while insulin is in the body, no fat can be released from the cell for energy.

With an absence of carbs and therefore insulin, your body will burn the fat and protein that you eat and when this is all used, it will then release the fat from your cells to use as energy too.

You will be fat adapted after 4/6 weeks and this will be your bodies natural way of working.

From what I've read it gets even more complicated than that Sass I believe that once you are fat adapted your body actually uses a mixture of your stored body fat and the fat you take in with food. It likes a mixture of different fatty acids so it releases body fat and adds it into the equation so you use both at the same time.

I doubt there will be much to learn from a TV program. The general media are still too blinkered to accept that we have been fed lies for years when it comes to fat.

Don't worry about it feeling odd to be told to have more fat. It takes a bit of getting used to when you have been on low fat and low cal diets. It is self limiting for most people. You will always get the odd one with an extraordinary capacity to glug down cartons of double cream like its going out of fashion but for most of us a high fat diet is much more satisfying and food loses its hold over your life.

Since I'm someone who doesn't really believe that low-carb diets are so great, I can offer another explanation (I think consistent with previous):

A lot of studies on people following low carb diets find that in reality the calorie count drops dramatically when people stick to it, drops to the sort of levels that weight loss would be expected if they were merely calorie counting. Maybe because fat is so filling or because of how the whole diet interacts with blood sugar levels so people don't feel so hungry and subsequently eat less. I guess bottom line is that it becomes a comfortable (sustainable) way to eat less over all long term.

As simply put as possible:

Fat doesn't make you fat because the sugar that eventually gets released from the fat you eat is so small that you would have to eat TONS of it before it's enough to be stored. Your body is made to use the energy in the fat much better than carbs.

Sugar (carbs) is highly digestible and absorbed by the body and therefore is easily stored as fat. The more you eat the more you store as you can't burn it all off.

here's the scientific results of a low carb high fat diet:

onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-789X.2012.01021.x/abstract;jsessionid=7396D07C42DB2B84642D35158B132AF9.d04t04

I know Miffy I started to type about leptin etc, but it would take too long.

I don't believe it's anything to do with calories ragged not in the way you describe anyway. The reason you need more calories on carbs is due to insulin resistance and leptin, amongst other things that I've forgot the name of. (Robert lustig explains it best in "fat chance"

In short, your body tells your brain that your fat stores are empty even though they are not, when you have carbs/insulin resistance and this resets itself if you don't eat carbs. Hence why, low carb dieters don't eat as much.

A calorie is a calorie is a calorie is not true imo, and actually not important in any way shape or form. You eat real food full of vitamins minerals protein and fat and you don't need to look at your calories.

It's hard to explain over a message.

Some research here about how low carb diets seem to result in lower calorie intake (systematic review in top journal).

I suppose nice thing is you don't need to understand why it works to make it work.

5,800 a day experiment

peter attia's explanation

IMO it would be very helpful if either fat on our body or fat in food was given a different name, as it is, given the way we have been 'taught', one is the same as/leads to the other, which isn't the case - but OP if you can give fat in food your own different name it may be useful in getting your head around it?

Many thanks to all! I will follow the links… But ITMT, what would happen if you did low carb, low fat, high protein?

I found that I lost weight on high fat/low carb diets because I got so full so quickly that I ate substantially less.

If you did low fat low carb you'd firstly feel so deprived and miserable that you most likely wouldn't stick it out very long . If you did manage it then you would lose weight, you would be mainly eating fish/meat/eggs and veggies after all, but longer term you would probably end up with health problems - poor energy, headaches, poor skin/hair/nails, which could be dry or greasy/spotty, poor digestion, low energy, it's a long list! - all due to fat deficiency (there's no such thing as carb deficiency ).

OK - but surely, "normal" fat - i.e at a regular level, with skin on chicken and some cheese for example, must be more effective than increasing your fat intake?

I know where you are coming from, but I don't know all the 'science' between LCHF, you might want to do a shout out to BIWI if you don't get an answer here.

Personally I think a diet based on whole food carbs (minimal bread, pasta, rice and processed stuff), protein, plenty of good fat (rather than any fat) and lots of veg, followed 80% of the time, is most effective and sustainable but each to their own. LCHF is sustainable for many people because it allows them to eat unlimited amounts of the food they enjoy and aren't allowed on other diets. Others don't stick at it for the opposite reason, because life without 'indulgent' carbs can be hard and a fall off that particular wagon is difficult to recover from!

Quick answer. High protein gets turned into glucose by the body. So in effect your body makes carbs.

That doesn't answer the high fat requirement though sass?

sleep paleo sounds like something you should be embracing. It isn't high in fat, its low in rubbish carbs.

The problem with your argument though is your use if good fats. I'm presuming you are meaning mono and poly? And therefore bad fat is saturated?

Except it isn't. That was a mistake made years ago by a man called cancel Keyes.
There have been a lot of studies since that say there is no link to heart disease from saturated fat.

Anyway, to get back to your question about high fat.

In order to be a fat burning machine, instead of a carb burning machine, you need to be in ketosis. If you eat medium or high carbs, you won't be. If you eat high protein, you won't be (see previous post).

Paleo is still a carb burning machine.

Your body prefers to burn alcohol first, carbs second and fat last.

Your body has about x amount of calories stored, when these are burnt, you need to refuel. Your body is not efficient at burning the fat stored in it. The analogy that helps you realise this, is thinking of a petrol tanker that has run out of fuel. It has plenty of fuel on board, but it can't access it.

Whereas someone fat adapted as access to y amount of calories (your fat stores) which literally lasts hours and hours longer.

There are roughly exact amounts in some literature but I've forgotten the numbers. I think its something like 2,000 cals from carbs and 20,000 cals for atore d fat. But I could be miles off.

This is the reason I don't want to do paleo even though I like it, I won't be in ketosis.

If you want to know how it works YouTube is a good resource and easier than reading pretty heavy science at times.

Look for
Gary taubes
Jeff volek& Stephen phinney (might be under the heading "the art and science of low carb performance)
The food revolution (the diet doctor)

*Ancel keyes

Saturated fat study

It is hard at first Rudy because you've been brainwashed to believe it is bad for you.

It does get easier if you read stuff and change how you think. I couldn't eat the skin off chicken, I still struggle with it sometimes.

You need the higher fat, because if you are carb restricted AND fat restricted, you would be eating very high protein (which will trigger an insulin response).

Also, (natural) fat is very nutritious, full of fat soluble vitamins, and fatty acids and other goodies - your brain and nervous system need this stuff and to give just one example, most of us (if eating a western diet) are deficient in Choline, if you were eating enough fish, eggs and liver to be sufficient in Choline, you would be unlikely to be deficient in any fat soluble nutrient with the exception of vit D... So it's worth googling "Choline"

sass I don't need or want to put a label on it even though I know my woe leans towards paleo . I think rules (diets) are damaging for most people, they provide a wagon to fall off, which all too often leads to guilt or a 'fuck it I've ruined everything, may as well eat the contents of the fridge now' situation!

When I say 'good' fat I mean foods high in omega 3, but I also eat full fat dairy, meat and other saturated fat the only thing I would avoid is hydrogenated fat. Difference is I don't make a point of eating lots of saturated fat.

Oh and the other, very key part of my WOE is eating mindfully and intuitively.