Active Low-Carber Forums
Atkins diet and low carb discussion provided free for information only, not as medical advice.
Home Plans Tips Recipes Tools Stories Studies Products
Active Low-Carber Forums
A sugar-free zone


Welcome to the Active Low-Carber Forums.
Support for Atkins diet, Protein Power, Neanderthin (Paleo Diet), CAD/CALP, Dr. Bernstein Diabetes Solution and any other healthy low-carb diet or plan, all are welcome in our lowcarb community. Forget starvation and fad diets -- join the healthy eating crowd! You may register by clicking here, it's free!

Go Back   Active Low-Carber Forums > Main Low-Carb Diets Forums & Support > Daily Low-Carb Support > General Low-Carb
User Name
Password
FAQ Members Calendar Mark Forums Read Search Gallery My P.L.A.N. Survey


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #46   ^
Old Tue, Apr-23-24, 13:18
CMCM's Avatar
CMCM CMCM is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 4,295
 
Plan: Keto / Atkins VLC
Stats: 173/147.4/135 Female 5'6"
BF:23.9
Progress: 67%
Location: N. Calif. Sierra Nevadas
Default

I went to Saladino's site and filled in my stats, and his projections for what I should eat was crazy! No way could ever eat that much protein and fat, nor could I eat a lot of veg and fruit. Fruit in particular is something I have always had to watch...even the "natural" sugars make me feel sick. I adore a good mixed fruit salad, but would always feel a bit sick after eating it. I think I must be very sugar/carb sensitive. Anyhow, I'm not sure males can totally predict what females should eat. And you're right...we're all very different. Actually, I'm very different in what I can eat compared to what I could eat 25. years ago. Up until I was nearly 50, I could pretty much eat what I wanted and not gain weight. But even a long time ago I knew I was sugar sensitive so despite having an incorrigible sweet tooth, I've always had to "watch out" in that regard.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #47   ^
Old Thu, Apr-25-24, 05:03
JEY100's Avatar
JEY100 JEY100 is offline
Posts: 13,509
 
Plan: P:E/DDF
Stats: 225/150/169 Female 5' 9"
BF:45%/28%/25%
Progress: 134%
Location: NC
Default

Carole, a short guide to Menopausal Weight Loss. https://optimisingnutrition.com/menopausal-weight-loss/
Optimising Nutrition has a large sub-set of women who found Marty Kendall's blog after he wrote, Menopausal Weight Gain based on Professors Raubenheimer and Simpson work.
https://optimisingnutrition.com/menopausal-weight-loss/

This has been a wild week on X for HAVA! This Q &A video caused the craziness: https://forum.lowcarber.org/showpos...59&postcount=42

Everyone who has a horse in the race (it’s all about carbs, no fat, no seed oils, no fasting, etc) is upset. These threads are long, with posters misreading what was said, and not helpful at all to readers who want to fix their metabolic health.
"Dr Naiman:
I recently triggered the entire paleo/low carb/keto/carnivore community by expressing my opinion that magically replacing all of our seed oils with saturated fat might not improve outcomes"...followed by a seed oil rant that goes on numerous posts.
"So here I am, equally blaming diet AND exercise. And refined carbs AS WELL AS refined fats. And treating isolated subsets--like fructose, PUFA, and saturated fat--in a similar fashion; the dose makes the poison."

Last edited by JEY100 : Thu, Apr-25-24 at 05:12.
Reply With Quote
  #48   ^
Old Thu, Apr-25-24, 14:45
Nancy LC's Avatar
Nancy LC Nancy LC is offline
Experimenter
Posts: 25,881
 
Plan: DDF
Stats: 202/185.4/179 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 72%
Location: San Diego, CA
Default

I didn't see value in the app for me. I'm familiar with the P:E diet and I've got a pretty good idea of which foods keep me from being hungry. But I must say that eating low carb, high protein, low fat is working better for me than low carb/high fat did. I feel better too!

Also, a recent liver scan tells me I don't have fatty liver and I think I can credit the new diet to that. One loses fatty liver pretty quickly when you cut down on energy.
Reply With Quote
  #49   ^
Old Fri, Apr-26-24, 04:21
JEY100's Avatar
JEY100 JEY100 is offline
Posts: 13,509
 
Plan: P:E/DDF
Stats: 225/150/169 Female 5' 9"
BF:45%/28%/25%
Progress: 134%
Location: NC
Default

Glad you hear you are doing well Nancy! A slight energy deficit over the long term and improved metabolic health.

The low carb/ketoverse still gets hung up on the word calories. Replacing it with ENERGY when starting The P:E Diet works great. There is a bit more nuance in HAVA's SPC, it fixes a few minor problems with the hedonic factor… but easy to understand that bacon, 80% ground beef, cream cheese or ANY type of fat to satiety in a hypercaloric diet, has too many calories for weight loss with the PE Diet infographic.

Dr. Ted Naiman responded to a comment that a body does not burn calories with:
Quote:
Feel free to replace the word “calories” with “actual physical carbon atoms containing high-energy bonds that, once ingested, reside in body energy stores until oxidized in mitochondria in response to energy demand and are then exhaled as carbon dioxide.”
But I prefer brevity. 😁”


Yet another Bro Bodybuilder podcast, Grow or Die, interviewing Dr Ted Naiman, about the HAVA app, Satiety and the PE Diet. Basic questions, there have been better interviews but it does explain the HAVA approach and even gets into a PUFA / Saturated fat explanation. https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podca...i=1000653435945

Last edited by JEY100 : Fri, Apr-26-24 at 09:38.
Reply With Quote
  #50   ^
Old Fri, May-17-24, 02:52
JEY100's Avatar
JEY100 JEY100 is offline
Posts: 13,509
 
Plan: P:E/DDF
Stats: 225/150/169 Female 5' 9"
BF:45%/28%/25%
Progress: 134%
Location: NC
Default

HAVA shares sample graphics on the HAVA FB page with explanations, the milk graphic is posted today with instructions how to use it.

Quote:
"What's the best milk for weight loss, body composition, and metabolic health? Note that the goal is not to get as high a score as possible on everything you eat or drink. The goal is to end up with an average score for the day that is in a good range for you.
Most people, however, would do well to increase their average daily satiety score, at least if they want to lose body fat or improve metabolic health. Switching to a higher-scoring milk may be a simple way to achieve this.
*The low scores*
Very high-fat milk, like heavy cream, half-and-half, and coconut milk, score low.
For most people, these may not even be ideal for coffee.
Oat milk (38) and chocolate milk (40) score a bit low, too.
For context, oat milk contains refined carbohydrates and is low in protein—not what most people need. Even if you want plant-based milk, there are better options.
*The middle scores*
Regular full-fat milk (51) or 2% milk (61) get balanced scores.
Decent plant-based options include almond milk (54) and soy milk at 68.
Note that unsweetened brands of almond milk may score even higher, sometimes up to the 90s.
*The highest scores*
At the top, you find ultrafiltered milk, especially fat-free ultra-filtered milk (100).
What are these ultra-filtered milks? They are simply filtered milk that is significantly higher in protein and lower in milk sugar than regular milk.
The commonly available brands are from a company called Fairlife, and these kinds of milk can be worth testing (note that we're not sponsored by any food company).
Regular skim milk also scores high.

The switch from heavy cream to 2% Fairlife was not noticeable to me taste-wise, and I make an awesome ice cream with it. Little tweaks add up to a high satiety diet. HAVA is sharing many FREE graphics that describe how it works. Milk is a subset of the Dairy Graphic. The scores for every food can be easily filtered. Like Nancy, I already know the P:E ratios and Satiety scores of the foods I eat, but if looking for a high satiety food list for your preferred diet, these are pretty cool.

Last edited by JEY100 : Fri, May-17-24 at 03:08.
Reply With Quote
  #51   ^
Old Sat, May-18-24, 03:49
JEY100's Avatar
JEY100 JEY100 is offline
Posts: 13,509
 
Plan: P:E/DDF
Stats: 225/150/169 Female 5' 9"
BF:45%/28%/25%
Progress: 134%
Location: NC
Default

Dr Eenfeldt is sharing free on the HAVA blog … more cool visual graphics.
"Are you enjoying our visual #satiety guides? Find all 17 on our website: https://www.hava.co/blog"
Reply With Quote
  #52   ^
Old Mon, May-20-24, 04:11
JEY100's Avatar
JEY100 JEY100 is offline
Posts: 13,509
 
Plan: P:E/DDF
Stats: 225/150/169 Female 5' 9"
BF:45%/28%/25%
Progress: 134%
Location: NC
Default

Using the free HAVA blog, these visual Satiety Scores each have a table of contents with sub-sets, if you want the scores for example, ground beef, not all meats.
When I only had the P:E vector, to lose weight, I ate foods above 50. A women on FB wrote that if she needs to lose fat, she eats only food in the"blue zone". Good idea! Not for the long term, but it is similar to adding a few days of PSMF. Another explanation how to use these free visual guides:
Quote:
Is ground meat good for weight loss and metabolic health? What's the best and the worst kind?

There's quite a big difference in how much protein different kinds contain, which makes a big difference to satiety and food intake. Less protein means more fat, and more energy density.

Most brands score decent or high, possibly with the exception of ground sausage (30). If you count spam as ground meat it scores even lower (28).

Higher-fat ground pork is the next lowest score at 43.

Ground beef generally scores high (66), and leaner versions can score as high as 80.

Ground chicken and ground turkey scores in the mid-70s.

Why this matters

Note that the goal is not to score as high as possible on everything you eat or drink. The goal is to end up with an average score for the day that is in a good range for you.

Most people, however, would do well to increase their average daily satiety score, at least if they want to lose body fat or improve metabolic health. Switching to a higher-scoring ground meat may be a simple way to achieve this without much effort.

The information needed to lose weight using Satiety is all here …Free.
But if you Hate tracking with MFP, etc. and want to use the latest AI technology to track the nutrition in your foods, then join for a trial of "Snap and Track". Snap a photo of your meal and it does all the calculation for you…macros, amounts on plate, etc.

Last edited by JEY100 : Mon, May-20-24 at 04:24.
Reply With Quote
  #53   ^
Old Mon, May-20-24, 05:11
WereBear's Avatar
WereBear WereBear is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 14,781
 
Plan: EpiPaleo/Primal/LowOx
Stats: 220/130/150 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 129%
Location: USA
Default

It has helped me so much to see my animal protein (the only kind my body recognizes) as my bottom line.

The other two macros are what we must negotiate. The best place to start in terms of nutrition, too. Maybe UPF-4 content should be regarded as a negative number in these calculations, too.

Like comparing snack foods to real foods, no matter what the label says it contains, in terms of macros.

Simply as an example, I've been vlogging on TikTok about how we can't trust the amount of protein listed for the cat food on the label, because there's all kinds of vegetables in it, and cats in nature consume around 5%. When it comes to my cats, I avoid all labels with vegetables on the cover.

Myself, I consider my vegetable protein intake to work best as "not counting." I couldn't get enough on fish, eggs, and dairy when I tried adding those to my vegetarian diet.

Possibly, if that's all I ate, but where's my heme iron going to come from?
Reply With Quote
  #54   ^
Old Mon, May-20-24, 07:26
JEY100's Avatar
JEY100 JEY100 is offline
Posts: 13,509
 
Plan: P:E/DDF
Stats: 225/150/169 Female 5' 9"
BF:45%/28%/25%
Progress: 134%
Location: NC
Default

Satiety Scores are simple to use for Weight Loss, what most people are seeking here. HAVA has the macros but only basic nutrients in their formula. Optimising nutrition to correct health issues, or to regain weight may require more data than even the 80+ nutrients tracked by Cronometer. I watch iodine and boron which are not included. Iron is, but not just heme iron. We have the calcium to oxalate ratios but is that enough? What we don’t know about micronutrients could fill books.
Even with the macros, Dr Naiman has said the calories in protein should not be included. Right off the top, the thermic effect of protein uses up about 25% of the 4 calories per gram. Much of the rest is for building muscle and bone…not used for energy. I like the idea of subtracting UPF calories…but all so complicated!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 00:52.


Copyright © 2000-2024 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.