Reason to eat Low Fat as well as Low Carb

This is from howstuffworks.com. I was a bit surprised by this since the Atkins diet (the most popular low carb diet) promotes eating fats.

The conversion of carbohydrates or protein into fat is 10 times less efficient than simply storing fat in a fat cell, but the body can do it. If you have 100 extra calories in fat (about 11 grams) floating in your bloodstream, fat cells can store it using only 2.5 calories of energy. On the other hand, if you have 100 extra calories in glucose (about 25 grams) floating in your bloodstream, it takes 23 calories of energy to convert the glucose into fat and then store it. Given a choice, a fat cell will grab the fat and store it rather than the carbohydrates because fat is so much easier to store.

My motto: Don't do the math!

(Sorry, I am allergic to numbers. LOL)

The way Atkins and the Zone work is that by not taking in the easily-burned sugars, you are forcing your body to burn fat. At least, that's the way I remember it.

That clip is suggesting that your body only takes 2 calories to attach fat to an existing fat cell and 23 calories to attach glucose or other foods like protein). So my take away from that is to eat both low carb and low fat. Except for Omega-3 rich fats like avacado and olive oil, flax oil, etc.

Two other points well worth considering are regarding vitamin absorption and satiety.

Some vitamins (ADEKs) can not/will not/do not absorb properly unless in the presence of dietary fats.  Studies have also shown diets higher in fat are more satiating than lower fats, meaning they keep people full, longer and ultimately it takes fewer calories to hit full and to stay satisfied.

Having gobbled up all the studies and been on every diet known to mankind, I know for myself the only sustainable way of eating is higher in fat and moderate in protein, understanding of course that everyone's mileage varies.

We had WLS to take care of the "full longer" issue. I am rarely actually hungry since about 3 weeks post op. I have noticed that since I eat about the same time every day that I feel "hungry" around meal times. But its not like hungry was a couple months ago.

I understand your point.  I am 7 years post op which is a world apart from 3 weeks. While I am also not as hungry as I was preop, I do still get hungry, and for me fat content makes a difference.

It may never for you and that would be great. We are all so different.

I would respectfully disagree.  Fat is needed to absorb many vitamins (ADEK), it helps regulate hormones, helps keep one full,  and so on....

Also, low fat products are not "real" foods.

I personally eat plenty of butter, bacon grease, and coconut oil.  Yes, these are all healthy fats (this goes against the mainstream but there is plenty of good research out there).

Avoid trans-fats/hydrogenated oils.

Great web site if you're interested...www.kriskris.com

~Jennifer

http://www.kriskris.com/low-carb-vs-low-fat

and another good one....

http://www.foodrenegade.com/5-ways-get-more-fat-your-diet

Low-fat is not fat free. I am mearly pointing out that the body does not use as many calories to absorb fat as say protein. You still should consume high omega-3 oils such as olive oil or flax oil.

This is the thing that never made much sense to me about the low carb diets (at least they way they are implemented by many, including Atkins) - what good does it do to starve your body of carbs, and the nutrition that goes with them, so that (in theory) you burn your stored fat quicker only to add more fat back into the storage bin?

I think that what this illustrates is that our bodies are still smarter than we are, and over the longer term it still prefers balance to extremes. We often see references to biochemical reactions or cycles that are supposed to prove why someone's diet is best, but this ignores the hundreds (if not thousands) of overlying, complementary and competing biochemical cycles in the body. For instance, we are told that we must keep insulin levels down as higher levels are supposed to promote deposition of fats; however, higher insulin levels are also used in the transport of proteins to muscle cells - so which do we starve (or promote) at the expense of the other? Or do we try to keep some balance and maybe bias things in one direction or another as needed rather than going to extremes? This is probably why these diets move in fad cycles - the pendulum swinging between low carb and low fat extremes - as the body will respond to extreme conditions for a while but then will seek its normal middle ground where it wants to operate.

Overall, given the cyclical nature of the diet industry (both the legitimate MDs and the research that supports them as well as the late night infomercial set,) and the continued worsening of the "obesity epidemic" in western society, it seems that extreme macronutrient deprivation is not addressing the root cause of the problem. One of the dangers that I see on these boards is the occasional reference to being "full fat on everything" - while others have noted the essential nature of dietary fats to ADEK absorption, excesses of it are just as bad as excesses of sugars, and some of those people will unfortunately be leading the next phase of the obesity crisis where fat abuse takes over from sugar abuse as the primary obesity vector.