"Roger Zoul" wrote in message ...
tcomeau wrote:
:: (One of the Survivors) wrote in
:: message . com...
::: I've been low-carbing for a couple of weeks now and I'm wondering
::: how caloric intake affects your weight loss on this diet. I've
::: stayed at a good level of carbs a day (15-30g, cut from probably
::: 300g at least), but how does the increase of calories affect a
::: person on this diet? How do you calculate how many calories you
::: should have in one day? I am 6'2, 220lbs (down from 226)...Isn't
::: there a number of calories that a person just works off in a
::: regular day? I do a fair bit of moving around at work and I've
::: been walking 4 or 5 nights a week, so I'm curious as to how to
::: limit my intake.
:::
::: Also, is there a number to shoot for as far as grams of fat are
::: concerned?
::
:: Restricting and counting calories has been shown to fail in 98% of
:: cases. The numbers do not make sense in the real world.
::
:: Why bother counting calories when simply count carbs does the trick?

Because simply counting carbs doesn't do the trick for many people.

And what makes you believe that if counting calories won't work that
counting carbs will?

Because I have seen, first hand, LCing work for *everyone* who has
tried it and applied it correctly, without exception, and I have seen
posts, reports and photos of hundreds who have succeeded in the
low-carb forums. These people are only a small fraction of those
succeeding on low-carb diets. And an ever increasing number of studies
have confirmed the efficacy of low-carb diets.

Which is far more success than can be said about those who attempt a
low-fat/low-cal diet for weight loss. If all that was needed to lose
weight was to count calories and restrict high-calorie foods, such as
fat, then anyone *wanting* to be thin and applying even a *modicum* of
effort to restrict calories and fat would *be* thin. But we know that
that is NOT the case, don't we?

TC