insuline does not make you fat, excessive calories do. Insuline role is one of the most complex and misunderstood ones in our physiology yet plenty of people keep repeating the same nonsense over and over again. The best diet is the one you can follow for life, so if a certain approach makes you feel deprived and looking forward to the day when you can finally eat " normally" that is a sign that it might not be right for you. It is way more important for long term success to find a sustainable approach than shedding pounds very quickly, it is the only suggestion I feel comfortable giving to anybody. Then finding out what works for you is part of your personal journey, just avoid fad diets and people trying to sell you their Truth

[quote=Theo166]I'm thinking what you've proven is your addiction to sugar. Atkins might be better for you because it squeezes out all the bad sugar. On WW, you are more likely to have sugar, and relapse. It takes many tries to quit bad habits, like smoking etc. DON'T give up.[/quote] and yet she failed after doing atkins ! failure rates are high for all diets and do not depend on the carbs or proteins. Atkins is in my opinion a terrible diet because there are very few people who are likely to refrain from eating sugars for ever, it is unsustainable.Of course it works as long as you follow it, all diets do, but that is not the point. The point is to find a lifestyle change that you can adopt for life, not for 1 week, not for 1 month and not even for 1 year. Can you reasonably follow atkins and other approaches like that for life, I doubt it. I am sure there are a few who can but it is probably even less than the already low number of those who on average can maintain their weight. Don't look for a diet book, but for a way of eating and monitoring what you eat that you can be happy with the rest is mostly BS repeated over and over again.

I think that a lot of the confusion in good or bad faith is caused by this rule of the 3500 kcal per pound of fat. I have been implementing the calorie counting approach for almost 17 months now and obviously it works, but the progression is never linear and most of all what is most important to monitor is the fat% rather than just weight. This is because weight can be affected by several other aspects that do not affect the success of lack of thereof of a particular fat loss strategy. What I can tell is that in terms of fat loss calories are just calories and a lot of the nonsense spread around by the usual suspects really annoys me. Of course in terms of general well being it is important also to monitor the quality of the calories and not only its quantity and composition, but that does not mean that a high protein or high carbs approach is inherently better. Proteins have several good features that make them particularly useful in a calorie controlled diet, without having to buy all the BS about our ancestors and the supposedly better diet of the hunters gatherers that did not have a lot of strokes or cancers for the simple reason that they died young. The main positive side is that proteins get digested slowly so along with fiber rich foods such as beans (also rich in proteins) they keep you full for longer which helps when trying to eat less. Other than that for fat loss purposes 2000 kcal of chocolate is almost exactly like 2000 kcal of chicken breast. Another good feature is that when coupled with resistance training they help to retain and increase muscles. With regards to my personal strategy I do not weigh in any more at fixed intervals (they used to be 2-4 weeks) but whenever I achieve a calorie deficit goal, generally between 20 and 30000 kcal deficit. When I account for my bodymedia 10% accuracy it always predicts very well my weight/fat trends. Of course there is always some aproximation in the short term. That is the reason why the weigh in intervals are growing considerably, because it is way harder to generate deficits now that I have lost 70 pounds and I almost never eat less than 2200-2500 kcal (often more). Still monitoring the calories has put me in control and while I eat (and a few times overeat) everything there is one rule that I never break that is to log my food (all). Doing this has allowed me to basically get rid of the scale in the last 10 months during which I only used it 3-4 times and still loose fat and weight (albeit at a slower pace of course), but at the end of every day I always know where my deficit stands vs the last time I weighed in, so if for instance I have had 1 or 2 days of overeating I just need to budget for them. Since October I moved my food log to my fitness pal since FS does not sync with bodymedia, although I still prefer FS log in absolute terms, but being able to log and sync calories burnt and eaten make the whole process quite easy and allows me to keep in check.

I do not know Insanity but have started P90 and done it for 51 days with a break now of 2 weeks and I will try to resume it next week. It is very well designed and allow to progress at one's own pace with alternative options depending on the fitness level. It definetly requires commitment since you need to do it 6 times a week, but I think it is way better than a DIY workout as it is balanced and has tons of resources online. Overall although I was skeptical at the start I think that if you are not already very well versed in training program and do not want to invest in a personal trainer, these BB products are quite a good alternative, but as usual the most important thing is the personal commitment

sounds about right

a good resistance a aerobic workout program is P90 and can be adapted to one's needs and ability via low impact exercises but there are many others out there. Bear in mind that if you have lost weight very rapidly after several years of carrying extra weight, sagging skin is inevitable. Over time it slowly adapts to some extent but in some cases the only way to correct that is via surgery. That's one of the many reasons why it is better not to loose weight too fast.

[quote=koreainsincere]Sounds good but be aware that muscle weighs more than fat![/quote] no it doesn't :) and it is perfectly possible to loose fat (not lbm)with a high carb diet, and I am saying from experience. What affects the lbm loss proportion is the entity of the calorie deficits and the lack of strenght training but with training and a normal not extreme calorie deficit it is possible to loose fat and keep lbm even with a high proportion of carbs, maybe using some care in assuming protein and carbs after a very heavy training. Protein have one good effect in terms of appetite control but for all other purposes their calories count in the same way as carbs

i have had a similar journey, with a higher loss and I am finding P90 a good program to improve fitness at home with 6 training sessions a week that alternate resistance and aerobic and do not require a lot of tools other than a mat and a couple of dumbbells. Supplements after resistance training can be useful but not necessary at least until you reach a very high intensity

I have been eating all those things and still lost weight consistently and viceversa. What counts is that you eat less calories than you consume not what type of calories you eat. You might well stop eating pizza, pasta and cakes and still go overboard on other foods. Be sure to login all what you eat and burn and the results will come

I think it is a good strategy and it is also the reason why counting calories increases the chances of success. I have been using bodymedia and that helped me a lot. For instance yesterday I pigged out unfortunately, but the fact that I know more or less exactly how many calories surplus I had puts me in control and I know that over the next 3 days I will have to work out those many extra calories had yesterday. At least from a fat loss/control point of view it is a great strategy. Then there is the other issue that is to achieve a balanced and healthy diet to build muscle and be healthier in general which requires way more discipline than simple calorie control, and for me it is tougher because I still eat too much sugar and sweet treats, despite being able to control the overall calorie budget. So offsetting is a good strategy but can't substitute the need for a better diet with less junk food if you want to be healthy and not just slim.

I was thinking of starting P90x but looked too tough, especially coming out of an injury, so I have decided to go for P90 which should be considerably easier. I will start tomorrow, hopefully I can keep doing it, since I never completed a home workout program. Last year I tried for a couple of months Convict Conditioning which is quite good but has no videos

I have been using that approach for a year now. I have been almost always above 2100 kcal per day and during some months I have averaged 2700 kcal per day, still managing to loose fat, obviously at a lower rate. I use body media and it is quite accurate. The challenge is to gradually integrate better food habits not just loosing fats. Over time resting metabolism has gone down quite a lot, but thanks to my BM and calorie counter managing my fat loss is possible. In the end by trying to generate a deficit and having a clear calorie budget goal I had to learn more and more about food and nutritions to make sure that I could eat without feeling deprived. So to sum up, based on my experience, it is definetly possible but not enough to rely on the calorie deficit. The most important thing is to learn a new lifestyle

just stop weighing so often. If you are tracking consistently your calories eaten and burnt just weigh in every few weeks and use a fat analyser to check your fat loss trend rather than just your weight.

[quote=erika2633] Yes, that is very very well said, Mike. I agree very much and think it's important to keep in mind. In an extremely controlled environment, calories and calories and it doesn't matter. In the real world, where some certain foods can "trigger" different emotions and cravings for people, some things are better avoided. This is also why I tend to try to avoid liquid calories (as far as juice, pop, sports drinks, high cal liquor, etc) because they can provide a lot of calories without much satiety at all. [/quote] This is absolutely true and that is why even for high or medium carbs diets it is important to eat foods rich in fibers and proteins. That is a strategy that everybody can agree with, but it is very different from saying that carbs by themselves do make fat certain people for some strange metabolic reason that make them unique and different from anybody else. This is simply not true and while we have obviously different caloric needs depending on lbm and lifestyle the way our body works is the same.

again I think there is some confusion probably in good faith in the way this discussion is handled. I believe that there is an overwhelming evidence that the only thing that can make achieve fat loss is calorie deficit. There are as many ways of achieving calorie deficit as there are people. Proteins and fibre takes longer to be digested than carbs therefore they increase satiety and might be helpful for calorie control, but that does not mean that a high carb diet with the same calories can't achieve the same goal. It depends on one's preferences, if one finds that low carb diet works better than by all means that what he/she should follow, but trying to generalize what is essentially a personal preference into a rule or claim that everybody is different so supposedly the calorie deficit should work differently is misleading to say the least.

I think that a lot of the arguments and confusions that are made every time there is a topic about good calories vs bad calories is down to the fact that many people base their judgements on short term weight fluctuations rather than fat loss. There is no doubt that from a nutrition standpoint and therefore in terms of their effect on health certain calories are better than others, but from a fat loss (not necessarily weight loss although in the long term they should tend to coincide) point of view there is no noticeable difference between calories depending on macrocomposition. This is one of the most researched topics in nutrition science and if there is only one thing we can be certain of is that calorie deficits will generate fat loss no matter what is the source of the calories. The difference in weight loss or gain among individuals and type of nutrients almost always comes down to fluid retention or wrong calorie counting. Whenever people have been observed under controlled conditions the macro composition has never made any difference in terms of fat loss or gain.

i am not a low carb person, quite the opposite and my overall weekly calorie intake has not changed I just redistributed them with two days very low and the rest higher so I am not entirely sure that glycogen is the cause

on humans I am not aware of any long term and reliable study if you know some I would be very interested in reading them. It is not easy and quite expensive to do studies of this type because they would require quite a lot of people and some degree of control over their intake. I have just completed 2 weeks and my first remarks are that it is relatively easy to eat around 600kcal especially when I am busy, but the following day I tend to overeat. Still overall so far I managed to keep a modest deficit. I have not yet checked my blood because I want to wait 8-10 weeks if possible, but this week for the first time my blood pressure has gone consistently below 90 (diastolic). Maybe it is just a coincidence but so far so good.

personally I prefer to keep track also on days in which I allow myself to go over my calorie budget, it is a habit that keeps me on track and let me know how much I need to recover later

Well that is true and false in the same time. It is true that some individuals get fatter or slimmer more easily and that everybody can think of a friend who seemed to eat anything and not gain weight, but that 99 times out of 100 has nothing to do with a supposedly faster metabolism per se, but rather with the fact that these people tend to self regulate more easily by increasing their activity naturally and by reducing calories eaten with snacks or at following meals. I am not aware of any study that under controlled conditions has found people that eating the same calories and consuming the calories via their normal activity obtained noticeably different results. Chances are that those people that seem to overeat without getting fat do not snack as much outside meals and are way more active than we are, which does not necessarily imply more sport.