Newbie question

[yanton]

I am an established vegan in the UK, trying my reasonable best to eat WFPB (whole food plant based) ... and loving it.
Motives for me are animal cruelty, followed by health. Life is slighlty complex due to wheelchair use as a long term paraplegiac.

So after coming across this HCLF (high carb low fat) approach, which is logical and appealing, if I understand correctly, half or more of our meals should be starch based. Easy, I love potatoes, legumes (tempeh is favourite) and rice.

The premise for this in the Starch Solution book p46 as follows:
"If you eat more carbohydrate than you can use (as your daily energy) and store (as glycogen), you’ll burn the remainder off as body heat and through physical movement other than sports, such as walking to work, typing, yard work, and fidgeting."

The footnote reference states:
"Physiological studies demonstrate, intriguingly, that NEAT is modulated with changes in energy balance; NEAT (Non-exercise Activity Thermogenesis) increases with overfeeding and decreases with underfeeding. Thus, NEAT could be a critical component in how we maintain our body weight and/or develop obesity or lose weight."

This seems crucial to the weight loss side of the matter. Any surplus starch consumed is not stored as fat but burnt off as waste metabolic heat and muscle use. One of the lectures mentioned that the body can just turn up the thermostat to burn up body heat doing no activity. So in a sense, we are buffering / padding out our meal plates with 'neutral' (when it comes to gaining weight) starches.

Do i understand this basic concept correctly?

[Mark Cooper]

Hi, yanton!

The weight loss aspect from this way of eating has more to do with consuming an overall diet that is relatively calorie dilute - voluminous and satiating, but low in calorie density. So an equal or greater volume of food than the "baseline diet" but overall fewer calories.

This thread provides an excellent foundation in the the concept. For a thorough look into the specifics of what happens to excess calories from carbs, check out this thread. The short answer is -

If you create a calorie balance excess, over time, you will gain weight.

The calories balance equation, which includes the "thermal effect of food" already takes into consideration heat loss from food.

[yanton]

Thanks for your reply Mark, much appreciated.

There does seem some uncertainty remaining however on a scenerio such as the following:

Identical person A consumes 300 calories daily, more than his requirements by consuming a typical standard American diet.

Identical person B consumes 300 calories daily, more than his requirements but 50% of all he eats is starch based.

Both undertake exactly the same level of exercise etc, identical in every way except for what is eaten.

Therefore, would our over-consuming starch eater, person B, gain the same extra weight as person A over the months? Please set aside the obvious variables of increased/decreased fibre, water retention because of inflamation responses to dairy, etc.

Simiarly, applying the same personally, if all variables were the same, fibre and inflammation aside, if I consume those 300 extra calories on starch based diet, would I increase body weight as much as if I had same but on a typical mixed diet?

Would love to see a definitive reply on this core issue. Most comments sidetrack the question by reasoning that we would eat less calories on starch based diets. How about calorie to calorie?

Thanks again.

[Mark Cooper]

I think a thorough read through these two threads should answer your question.

Is a Calorie a Calorie?

Carbs to fat

They were cited in the previous reference I suggested.

[yanton]

Thanks again, will do .... I speed read them but need to study more carefully.

PS: This was very informative:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7598063/

"The purpose of this study was to determine whether and by what mechanism excess dietary fat leads to greater fat accumulation than does excess dietary carbohydrate. We overfed isoenergetic amounts (50% above energy requirements) of fat and carbohydrate (for 14 d each) to nine lean and seven obese men. A whole-room calorimeter was used to measure energy expenditure and nutrient oxidation on days 0, 1, 7, and 14 of each overfeeding period. From energy and nutrient balances (intake-expenditure) we estimated the amount and composition of energy stored.
Carbohydrate overfeeding produced progressive increases in carbohydrate oxidation and total energy expenditure resulting in 75-85% of excess energy being stored. Alternatively, fat overfeeding had minimal effects on fat oxidation and total energy expenditure, leading to storage of 90-95% of excess energy. Excess dietary fat leads to greater fat accumulation than does excess dietary carbohydrate, and the difference was greatest early in the overfeeding period."

So this study does indeed eport that carbs overfeeding has much more oxidation (transformed to energy) that the same calories when eaten as fats, which are pushed into storage. Other studies show SOME is turned to fat, but only a lower %.

[PJK]

The basic idea here is that you can eat fewer calories while still being quite satisfied. While also avoiding unhealthy fats.

Just as an example, a big green salad topped with beans can be quite filling, yet it's moderate in its calorie density. It's also healthy, with lots of vitamins, minerals, protein, fiber, etc. And free of unhealthy things like saturated fat, too much sodium, etc.

Anyone who eats your example of 300 calories more than they need will store some of those excess calories as fat. And gain weight. Are there differences in how much is stored as fat depending on the type of food? Maybe. But too many calories is still too many.

So the idea here is to eat only as many calories as you need to either lose or maintain weight, yet still feel satiated.

And it turns out that the solution is to eat a diet based on starch.

Hope that's helpful.

[yanton]

Yes thanks. After pondering on the question I realised the focus was incorrect.
The whole point is that by eating more low calorie density foods we would tend to feel full and content, and in all likelihoods in the end consume far fewer calories day by day than a normal diet (even compared to standard vegan diet).

[viv]

As Dr. McDougall says, "The fat you eat is the fat you wear."

[Grammy Ginger]

Sorry, if I'm late to the game commenting on this post. I've been more of a lurker lately but feel my experience might be helpful to some. Forgive me if it offends.

I'm in my mid-50s and have been eating this way for almost 12 years. I stick with my own version of Dr. M's Maximum Weight Loss and simply refuse to go hungry. I eat huge amounts of food.

1. I weigh myself first thing each morning. And strive to keep my weight within 2 lbs of 98. I am heavier than the weight charts but look skeletal and feel very weak when I get down anywhere near my height's recommended 91 lbs. In fact, I have to starve myself and live on nothing but salad to get to 95 lbs. I simply won't do it.

2. If I am up even a pound, I eat a gigantic salad or pile of veggies before my starches.

3. If I am down more than a pound, I less veg and eat more starch: legumes, grains, pasta, or tubers.

4. Since I grow a large variety of fruit in my backyard, I don't limit fruit. It's too full of vitamins and fiber to limit IMO, but I'm also not a pig about it.

4. IMO, exercise is nearly as important as what I put in my mouth. I walk my three dogs 2-4 miles every day before dawn without fail. I study and do sedentary things at my bike desk. In summer, I kayak most days and hike about once a week. We're now strong enough to get back into backpacking and are currently dabbling in ultra-light packing. In winter, I dance most days and peddle some days sometimes indoors and sometimes out depending on the weather. Sometimes I add resistance training or yoga. Building muscle through exercise helped me feel more energetic and strong. Moving outdoors in fresh air and sunshine helps my mental health.

Have a lovely day.

[Grammy Ginger]

[quote="PJK"]Research is pretty good that exercise is *not* the most effective way to lose weight.

What is? Diet.

Sure, exercise is good for you. But you probably can't exercise your way into losing weight and (important) maintaining that weight loss.

With diet, you can.

Some of the research even shows that exercise *increases* your appetite. And often, that what people eat as a result of that increased hunger brings in way more calories than their exercise expended. Result? Weight gain.

So, yes, get your exercise. It's good for your heart, the way you look, etc. Just don't expect it to result in serious and consistent weight loss.[/quote]

I never said I exercised to lose weight. I exercise to stay strong, toned, heart-healthy, smart, and happy. These are just as important as the skinny part. I've been the super skinny anorexic young woman. I feel younger being the super fit, healthy, toned, strong, active, and happy grandma. My diet is perfect and has been perfect for nearly 12 years.

Why has telling people off become a thing on this forum? That's why I quit commenting and probably won't comment again for some time if ever.

Have a lovely day.

[Daydream]

Grammy Ginger, I enjoy reading your posts and I find your posts helpful! I hope you don't stop posting.

[landog]

Grammy Ginger, I enjoy reading your posts and I find your posts helpful! I hope you don't stop posting.

Indeed - more Grammy Ginger posts!