Misrepresenting much? We don't count carbs in lettuce. We generally don't count carbs at all. We just stick to eating lots of above ground vegetables, lots of fat, and only slightly increased levels of protein compared to a regular "balanced" diet.
Oh, and we avoid refined sugar for the plague it is.
But it might work differently in your part of the world.
The typical advice I've seen is to limit 'net carbs' which is the difference between the total carbohydrates and 'dietary fiber'.
Also, a serving of lettuce contains a very small amount of carbs, e.g. 1.2 g per cup for butterhead lettuce. Low carb diets seem to usually consist of less than 50 g of 'net carbs' per day so eating even lots of lettuce seems entirely compatible with them.
Overall tho, nutrition just seems like an inherently 'causally dense' subject, i.e. there are lots of seemingly plausible explanations for any phenomenon. Maybe there is no one simple explanation for everyone everywhere, in general.
Not a ton of carb calories in lettuce, kale, spinach, broccoli, etc. They’re mostly composed of insoluble fiber (from which ruminants can extract calories but humans can’t) and water.
A “low carb” diet doesn’t exclude high amounts of insoluble fiber. It excludes high amounts of carbohydrate calories.
Thing is, vegetables have varying amounts of carbs that can set back your low-carb diet.
For example, celery, broccoli and lettuce are very fibrous and humans don't really digest the carbs, so they have little impact. Probably only ruminants can extract significant nutrition.
On the other hand, in roughly increasing order of carb content, tomato (technically a fruit), onion, carrots, potatoes, corn, wheat products, and rice will reduce the effectiveness of a low carb diet, especially if dieters are told it's ok to eat vegetables all day long without specific guidance on what to avoid.
I agree that ultimately it comes down to the rate at which we put energy into our bodies vs the rate at which our bodies use the energy and don't store it as fat.
Unfortunately, there are confounding factors that make this a simplistic heuristic. Things like underactive thyroids, insulin response to blood glucose fluctuations, our basal metabolic rate, and similar things, many of which are often genetically determined.
I believe that a really important reason to do a low-carb diet with moderate protein and enough fat for satiation is that it is much easier to sustain as a permanent lifestyle change than a low-fat diet, which in my experience leaves one often feeling hungry and unsatisfied. And the permanent change is what is needed for long-term success.
It's true that fruit is heaps of carbs. But, in aggregate we probably eat less than we used to. and the veg component of carbs compared to potato is lower, if not zero. Spuds are 20%+ carbs by weight. green beans or fennel or cauli more like 7%. Carrot is 10%. Parsnip probably closer to a potato.
We upped the veg part of fruit and veg more than we upped the fruit part. Pulses too. Which of course are also carbohydrate rich, but with more protein.
Pasta indeed meant a lot of cheese and oil. It still does, but far less frequently. The mediterranean diet actually is ok with olive oil and cheese, oils ain't oils (the whole 'its just energy in: energy out thing is gross oversimplification. convert pasta or spuds to cold pasta and spuds, you get resistant starch, it becomes more beneficial for lower gut health)
Mainly now I just eat small portions of food my grandmother would complain didn't come with ration stamps or have enough salt in, but recognize, which is what Michael Pollan says counts: Hit your grandmother with it, and if she doesn't die and says its a carrot, its ok to eat.
> Also, 5% carbs? How are you getting any nutrition in, since fruit and vegetables are almost all carbs?
Vegetables are often relatively high in carbs but low in total calories, and so the contribution of their carbs to your total calories can be low even if you have a lot of vegetables in your diet.
For instance, I recently had a steak and corn for dinner. The corn was 80 calories per serving, 15 g of carb, so 75% of calories from carbs. The steak was 600 calories, 3 g of carb (from the steak sauce I used, not the steak itself), with is 2% calories from carbs. I had two servings of corn with my steak, so the total meal was 760 calories, 33 g carbs, which is 17% calories from carbs.
If I had not chosen corn I probably would have chosen a can of green beans (70 calories, 7 g of carbs, which is 40% calories from carbs) which would have made the total meal 6% calories from carbs. Heck, double the green beans...two full 14.5 oz cans (almost a kilogram of green beans!), and the total for the meal would only rise to 9% calories from carbs.
Or consider salads. I use a pre-made salad mix [1] (I'm lazy). One bowl of this is 20 calories, 3 g carbs. That's 60% of calories from carbs. I use a dressing on this that is 240 calories, 4 g of carbs, so 7% calories from carbs. The salad mix combined with the dressing gives me 26 calories, 7 g carbs, so 11% calories from carbs. Recently I add some chopped up ham to this that added 200 calories, 0 g carbs, making the total salad 6% calories from carbs.
[1] http://www.freshexpress.com/product/refreshing-mixes/iceberg... and yes, the nutrition values I gave above do not match what they give on the site. I'm going by what is printed on the actual package rather than the web site, although it is a little disturbing that they are different.
Maybe they mean no starch because vegetables certainly have carbs. For example, a cup of broccoli has 6g of carbs, a cup of kale has 1g, and about 5g in a tomato. Certainly a low-carb diet, but not no carbs.
Wrong. The problem is that people think low-carb equals bacon grease and no vegetables. It really just means little to no bread, grains, rice or potatoes. A low carb diet is predominantly fruits and vegetables, but for some reason, people really like to focus on the meat and fat aspect.
Potatoes, rice and bananas are whole-food, plant based, and are pretty much the highest carb you can go. And plants without starches and sugars simply don't have many calories at all. You can't survive on broccoli alone.
If you're doing low-carb and getting the calories you need, there's no physically possibly way to get those calories except through protein and fat -- they're literally the only other 2 macronutrients.
So yes, low carb always means lots of meat, cheese and/or fat. Or else you'd basically just be fasting.
May be 5% carbohydrate in most veg, but there's only 10% in potatoes anyway.
My issue is with the term "carbohydrates" being used as shorthand for "bad stuff".
It does seem that simple carbohydrates should be consumed in moderation, maybe not at all. But generally any diet should include carbohydrates. The term "avoiding carbohydrates" is ambiguous and usually means "avoiding starches and/or refined sugar".
Even the veggies with a very high carb content (potatoes, corn) are low (~15-20%). Bread has about 50%, maccaroni about 35%, while other veggies (broccoli, carrots) usually have less than 10% carbs.
Although a good percentage of those eat white carbs like bread and potatoes that easily convert to sugar in the body. Those on the salads without bread/chips tend to do quite well weight wise.
Oh, and we avoid refined sugar for the plague it is.
But it might work differently in your part of the world.
reply