Counting Carbs and Calories?

tcomeau wrote:

Counting calories is neither needed nor is it even remotely useful as
a yardstick to predict weight gain or loss.

you've got to be kidding.

"tcomeau" wrote in message
om...

Counting calories is neither needed nor is it even remotely useful as
a yardstick to predict weight gain or loss.

TC

Right.

And counting the gallons of gas I put in my tank is neither needed nor is it
even remotely useful for figuring out my gas mileage.

I found that I only had to count calories when I increased carbs.
When my carbs were below 40 a day, it didn't seem to matter how much I
ate, I still lost weight. However, as I continued to increase carbs,
I had to count calories to keep them at 10 times body weight to
continue to lose weight. Has anybody else had this experience or am
I the only one??

On Thu, 20 May 2004 10:00:16 -0500, "Someplace_Else"
wrote:

I ate low carb based on the Atkins plan for about 2 years, just counting
carbs and had good results. I went off for about 2 years (started again 4
weeks ago), and now some of the info I've been reading says you should count
calories as well as carbs.

I'm sure that would be effective as well, but my question is: Is counting
calories really necessary? If so what should your calorie count be? I
can't imagine eating 1400 cal's and 30 carbs a day.

Any input would be appreciated.

Thanks,

Sofia
173/161/130

Your situation mirrors mine pretty closely. I lost 50 lbs 3 years ago, gained
it back (grr, don't ask) and now I'm back full-force on Atkins but as I had
read in this newsgroup over and over again - it's a LOTTTTT slower the "2nd"
time around. I've always had a problem eating enough calories and have read
that cutting protein should help kickstart weightloss again. I am trying to
figure out what works well because I've been very strict with my meals and am
tracking every thing I put in my mouth on Fitday. I also have started going by
the formulas listed on Jenny the Bean's awesome webpage:
http://www.geocities.com/jenny_the_bean/proteincalc.htm which is a hell of a
lot of work, but I want to see where it gets me. For example this is what I'm
now going by - BMR = 1832 calories
Need 2481 total calories to maintain
No less than 1985 Calories to lose weight
436.24 Calories of protein
120 Calories from carbohydrates
Calorie intake from fat =1428.76
±109 grams of protein
No more than 30 grams of carbohydrates
Grams of fat needed: 158.75

@ 6% carbs 22% protein 72% fat

Not the easiest guidelines to follow, but hopefully it works. If you're having
no problem losing weight, keep doing what you're doing!! But if you're
struggling to see any progress and it's been at least a month or two, feel free
to go the experimental/overly anal route like me

I ate low carb based on the Atkins plan for about 2 years, just counting
carbs and had good results. I went off for about 2 years (started again 4
weeks ago), and now some of the info I've been reading says you should count
calories as well as carbs.

I'm sure that would be effective as well, but my question is: Is counting
calories really necessary? If so what should your calorie count be? I
can't imagine eating 1400 cal's and 30 carbs a day.

Any input would be appreciated.

Thanks,

Sofia
173/161/130

I used to track everything I ate via www.fitday.com , when I was on weight
watchers (which worked well for me too). It didn't occur to me to use it
for low carb, it makes perfect sense though.

The first time around I lost 30 pounds in about 2 months, and for the most
part kept it off for 2 years. It has been slower this time, but I feel
healthier and have also added lots of exercise.

Thanks everyone for your input!

-Sofia
(5'7) 173/159.2/130

"Erika RollerGirl" wrote in message
...
Your situation mirrors mine pretty closely. I lost 50 lbs 3 years ago,
gained
it back (grr, don't ask) and now I'm back full-force on Atkins but as I
had
read in this newsgroup over and over again - it's a LOTTTTT slower the
"2nd"
time around. I've always had a problem eating enough calories and have
read
that cutting protein should help kickstart weightloss again. I am trying
to
figure out what works well because I've been very strict with my meals and
am
tracking every thing I put in my mouth on Fitday. I also have started
going by
the formulas listed on Jenny the Bean's awesome webpage:
http://www.geocities.com/jenny_the_bean/proteincalc.htm which is a hell of
a
lot of work, but I want to see where it gets me. For example this is what
I'm
now going by - BMR = 1832 calories
Need 2481 total calories to maintain
No less than 1985 Calories to lose weight
436.24 Calories of protein
120 Calories from carbohydrates
Calorie intake from fat =1428.76
±109 grams of protein
No more than 30 grams of carbohydrates
Grams of fat needed: 158.75

@ 6% carbs 22% protein 72% fat

Not the easiest guidelines to follow, but hopefully it works. If you're
having
no problem losing weight, keep doing what you're doing!! But if you're
struggling to see any progress and it's been at least a month or two, feel
free
to go the experimental/overly anal route like me

I ate low carb based on the Atkins plan for about 2 years, just counting
carbs and had good results. I went off for about 2 years (started again
4
weeks ago), and now some of the info I've been reading says you should
count
calories as well as carbs.

I'm sure that would be effective as well, but my question is: Is
counting
calories really necessary? If so what should your calorie count be? I
can't imagine eating 1400 cal's and 30 carbs a day.

Any input would be appreciated.

Thanks,

Sofia
173/161/130

(The Queen of Cans and Jars) wrote in message ...
tcomeau wrote:

Counting calories is neither needed nor is it even remotely useful as
a yardstick to predict weight gain or loss.

you've got to be kidding.

More than 95% of those who try to lose weight by restricting and
counting calories (ie. fat) fail to lose the weight and keep it off.
Hardly a dependable approach to weight loss.

TC

"Jim Bard" wrote in message ...
"tcomeau" wrote in message
om...

Counting calories is neither needed nor is it even remotely useful as
a yardstick to predict weight gain or loss.

TC

Right.

And counting the gallons of gas I put in my tank is neither needed nor is it
even remotely useful for figuring out my gas mileage.

More than 95% of those who try to lose weight by restricting and
counting calories (ie. fat) fail to lose the weight and keep it off.
Hardly a dependable approach to weight loss.

TC

"Roger Zoul" wrote in message ...
tcomeau wrote:
:: "Someplace_Else" wrote in message
:: ...
::: I ate low carb based on the Atkins plan for about 2 years, just
::: counting
::: carbs and had good results. I went off for about 2 years (started
::: again 4
::: weeks ago), and now some of the info I've been reading says you
::: should count
::: calories as well as carbs.
:::
::: I'm sure that would be effective as well, but my question is: Is
::: counting
::: calories really necessary? If so what should your calorie count
::: be? I
::: can't imagine eating 1400 cal's and 30 carbs a day.
:::
::: Any input would be appreciated.
:::
::: Thanks,
:::
::: Sofia
::: 173/161/130
::
:: Counting calories is neither needed nor is it even remotely useful as
:: a yardstick to predict weight gain or loss.

Nonsense.

More than 95% of those who try to lose weight by restricting and
counting calories (ie. fat) fail to lose the weight and keep it off.
Hardly a dependable approach to weight loss.

TC

tcomeau wrote:

(The Queen of Cans and Jars) wrote:
tcomeau wrote:

Counting calories is neither needed nor is it even remotely useful as
a yardstick to predict weight gain or loss.

you've got to be kidding.

More than 95% of those who try to lose weight by restricting and
counting calories (ie. fat) fail to lose the weight and keep it off.
Hardly a dependable approach to weight loss.

you've got to be kidding.

On 20 May 2004 13:24:09 -0700, (tcomeau) wrote:

Counting calories is neither needed nor is it even remotely useful as
a yardstick to predict weight gain or loss.

Agree.

First, the counting of cals is at best an inaccurate methodology.
Second, very few keep it up for any extended time so it has no
lifelong value. Third, even if you could count accurately, whose to
say you have accurately measured or know the food volumes you have
consumed. Not every 4 ounce piece of this or that has exactly this
amount of cals. And was that 4 ounces or 4.1239 or 3.892?

Lastly, who in their right mind would want to be a slave to a calorie
counting regimen in the first place?
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap960222.html
Lift well, Eat less, Walk fast, Live long.