Just for the record....and maybe I've just been around here for way too long....but I've been here for several rather long and contentious debates over this subject, zero carb.

Personally, I do not support this way of eating...but if it works for you long term...good for you.

In my experience, the way we eat to lose it, is the way we will need to keep eating to keep it off.

I've seen way too many people trying to eat this way (meat and eggs)for months on end, only to end up binging on starchy carbs after a certain amount of time and ultimately not losing weight.

In the end, the best level of carbs to eat is what you can live with for the long term while keeping your weight stable.... after you reach your goal weight.

I agree Judy. I have never met a soul in real life who can eat nothing but meat and be healthy.

Actually, there was a boy about 9, from a couple my parents used to hang out with, who ended up in the hospital on his death bed because he refused to eat anything but meat, literally.

Turned out to be a deficiency in his body, which was corrected and now he eats a well varied diet.

Long term is the key.

Lisa

Yeah I agree...whatever you do you have to be committed to it. Some people use it as stall breaker and a quick fix but never train themselves to eat on plan long term.

Some zero carbers are committed to life and because they believe all carbs are bad for you ...their posts can cause angry feelings because they are essentially saying that other's plans are unhealthy. If they are here on this board then they need to accept that this is a low carb board and that their plan is only one of many.
Edit to add: I don't mean that to sound bossy. Everyone has to do what they think is right, but no one wants their plan to be called unhealthy when all of these plans are lightyears away from the average diet.

I remember back when South Beach was new and a lot of people thought that SB was not real low carb. That is how I found LC and this board (through SB)

My dad's had an artery in his neck cleaned out TWICE! All the relevant research seems to point to the most health benefits coming from under 20 g./day carbs. I've decided to go VLC and not exclude anything as long as I stay at 20 or lower. I'm going to see if it is do-able in the long term. I hope so because I'd sure like to avoid an artery cleaning. My dad's dad, by the way, died at 42 from a heart attack. I never knew him.

Um, the low carb diets that have been researched and found beneficial for blood sugar control and improved cholesterol profiles have been 120g carbs or less, not 20. One example is the long term 3 diet study released last year. Most of the people doing such research are authors on the paper pushing the definition posted early in this thread.

"Improved" cholesterol profiles and blood sugar control may not be enough in my family. I'm not suggesting low carb is 20 g. It is VERY LC. Hopefully I'll be able to undo the damage I've done AND absolutely KILL my chances of dying of a heart attack in the next 10 years.

I would definitely agree that keeping your carbs at or below 120 g. should be defined as low-carb. I'd say even to 150-200 g. if your body can handle it. Mine can't. Unfortunately, I was on blood pressure medication at 25 years old and I was not overweight. What's that tell you? Tells ya I'm not your typical 32 yr. old right now either. My blood pressure has been awesome lately. I got off the meds a couple years ago, but it still always ran high. It's been 120/80 or lower since I've been low carbing.

If you first started low carbing years ago, you had little evidence to base your decision on. You went with it based on a little evidence and faith. I've also seen lots of anecdotal evidence that suggests that going VLC tears down the competition when it comes to reducing all the indicators of heart disease.

Hmmm, well I would say anything under 100g to be low carb. Personally, if I could do my low-carb journey all over again, I wouldn't cut my carbs too low to begin with. I would see if I could lose eating more variety first. I did do a stint of VLCing for quite awhile and found it hard to add stuff back in - I wanted to add stuff back because I was starting to gain fat weight and not feeling the best with carbs bottoming out under 5-10g a day, even with high fat intake.

I am a zc person and I am healthy, lol. However, I think all low carb plans are good, not just mine. If someone can only reduce their carbs or sugar 5 grams, that is an improvement. Even if you change nothing in your eating and cut out soda, that was would be good too. I encourage anyone to make healthier choices that are feasible for them and their life.

When I figure out how many hairs make a beard, I will answer the question on low carb, LOL!

Thanks for being honest and sharing this. This is why I said what I did.

Heh, but Judy the above applies almost to every diet/WOE, I mean how many people go on Atkins/SBD/CAD whatever you name it, lose weight,( some even get to goal), and then end up falling off the wagon and start binging on starchy carbs?? This is not limited to ZC.

No, not limited to ZC or VLC but more prevalent there.

It really depends on what works for you. I believe it is possible to have a very healthy diet under 20g of carbs, but to give you a picture of how low that is, it pretty much means you're not eating any plants at all.

Some people, like me, find that unless they cut back to extremely low levels of carbs, their cravings never go away - for them it's an addiction and the only way to stop is to go cold turkey. Other people seem to do fine with more carbs, or even feel like they need them to be healthy. Listen to your own body and you will learn what's right for you.

If we can't trust our body, who can we trust, right?

I completely agree 100% and I think this is the key to all "diets", and why so many "diets", or the people on them, fail.

*This is only my opinion, and therefore is not any more important or right that anyone else's, it's just that..my opinion *

I can understand going very low carb for an initial period to "jump start" your metabolism, your body, into understanding that things are going to be different now. As I understand, that is part of the reason Dr. Atkins originally had behind his "induction period". But to continue on with a serious restriction of carbs - ESPECIALLY zero carbs - I feel, is setting yourself up for disaster, either in the near future or later on down the line.

You can't think of it as a "diet"...you have to think of it as a new way of eating. And if you're not prepared to eat like this for the rest of your life, you won't maintain, and you need to look at other options WHATEVER they may be, LC or not. Weightwatchers is very successful...THE most long-term successful diets out there...they teach people how to eat for life. It doesn't work for me unless I cut out white flour, processed sugar, other processed food, and that's okay. But I am doing this with the knowledge that I'll ALWAYS have to cut those foods out of my diet, or not only will I gain, but I"ll suffer with the stomach and intestinal issues I have suffered with for a long time. I don't carry around a pen and paper and count every carb I injest....I am fairly knowledgable about carbs and what foods contain them in what quantities. Without counting perfectly, but still keeping track somewhat, I keep myself under about 50 per day.

EDITED TO ADD: I also have to say, that if you are zero carbs, what fiber are you getting into your body? It is very important for the intestines, colon, etc. to have fiber. There could be very serious health consequences without fiber in your diet.