Does Carb Sensitivity matter in a calorie deficit?

[I ETA PI]

fact is... all diets work.

ding ding ding!

The DEGREE in which they work varies, in my opinion greatly, but the method of action does not vary.  

Lipolysis is induced by epinephrine, nor epinephrine, glucagon, and ACTH in all humans.  
These all increase 3,5 cyclic adenosine monophosphate production in all humans.  
3,4 cyclic adenosine monophosphate activated protein Kinase A (cAMP kinase) in all humans.  
cAMP activates lipases....in all humans.  

The method of action does not change.  

If you claim to be carb sensitive, surely you must have a reason for this.  

If I had a dollar for every schmuck who loads up on sugar for a bit, without lowering protein or fat intake, and CLAIMS carb sensitivity, I would be a very rich man.

[EL Mariachi]

You don't understand WHY that is the best ratio for you, and neither do the people posting about "carb sensitivity," that is what is important.  

Do not speak as an authority unless you are.  
Perhaps what works for one, WILL work for all.  It takes an understanding of physiology and the biochemical reactions in the body to understand whether or not this is true.  

yes i agree im speaking about myself personally, everybody should find their own formula what works best for them.

[I ETA PI]

I don't see how it could matter if you are in a calorie defecit. I believe TA is correct here.

in a calorie deficit, the body must 'create' energy from stored sources of energy.  
The body stores energy in 3 primary form.  
in the form of amino acids (muscle)
in the form of glucose (glycogen)
in the form of fatty acids (fat)

The method of action for catabolism of these energy forms IS DIET DEPENDANT.  
In a calorie deficit, you WILL lose weight.  
Unless you have control of your macronutrient intake (along with many other variables), you will not have control of where the catabolism of stored energy comes from.

[I ETA PI]

yes i agree im speaking about myself personally, everybody should find their own formula what works best for them.

No everyone should attempt to learn WHY said approach works for them....what can be learned from books...before they claim that is what works best for them. 

Perhaps there is a better way for you?

[EL Mariachi]

right now im eating 3 times less calories than i used to. I used to overeat in the past, i ate often 2 kg of meat in one sitting at barbecue.

We can talk about this dieting till the sun begins to shine, but all we need to know is to make a calorie deficit, and to make sure not to lose muscle in the proces to eat protein with each meal, a total a day 100 to 200 grams. What is not correct about this?

[Stark]

Guy's half of the fun of Bodybuilding is learning and getting to know your body.

[The Coach]

hahahha carb sensitivity.  What a fucking myth.

This is a thread about nutrition, not exactly your area of expertise

[Rami]

Eat---Sleep--------Train -------Its that easy

... but then why is half of America obese?

[Stark]

... but then why is half of America obese?

They are missing one vital "ingredient".... training

[Van_Bilderass]

WTF do you mean by "carb sensitive"?

If you are talking about insulin sensitivity then insulin resistance is a GOOD thing on a diet!!! Contrary to popular belief.

GH induces insulin resistance. Result? Fat loss.

Stimulants can induce insulin resistance. Result? Fat loss.

[I ETA PI]

right now im eating 3 times less calories than i used to. I used to overeat in the past, i ate often 2 kg of meat in one sitting at barbecue.

We can talk about this dieting till the sun begins to shine, but all we need to know is to make a calorie deficit, and to make sure not to lose muscle in the proces to eat protein with each meal, a total a day 100 to 200 grams. What is not correct about this?

What is NOT correct about this is that you are leaving a complex working of enzymes, catalysts, and necessary nutrients OUT OF THE EQUATION. 

100 to 200g of protein a day is NEVER a fool proof plan to "not lose muscle."  There is no fool proof plan for this. 

And I can ASSURE you that eating 100g of protein a day, in a diet void of fatty acids and carbohydrates, that you WILL lose muscle. 

The protein content is ENTIRELY dependant on intake of the other 2 macronutrients. 
You cannot differentiate them entirely.  It doesn't work. 

In a diet of sufficient essential fatty acids, you can eat 100-200g of protein, with a LOW likelyhood of muscle loss.  YOU can do that.  Someone Ronnie Coleman's size may require more protein

In a diet of sufficient carbohydrate intake, you can eat 100-200g of protein, with a LOW likelyhood of muscle loss.  Again...dependant on a number of additional factors as well. 

You have to understand the correlation between nutrients to make bold brush statements like you're making.  And if you understood that correlation, you wouldn't be making your statements.

[Dr. D]

Do you mean Insulin Sensitivity? Insulin Resistant?
You can react anyway depending on your adrenaline/ cortisol levels. Your degree of adrenal stress. It varies on:
Insulin-resistance with burned-out adrenal glands
Insulin-sensitive with burned-out adrenal glands
Insulin-sensitive with healthy adrenal glands

You ever been checked for Insulinoma?


Do yourself a a favor and just lay off sugar and refined carbs......

[Bast000]

What is NOT correct about this is that you are leaving a complex working of enzymes, catalysts, and necessary nutrients OUT OF THE EQUATION. 

100 to 200g of protein a day is NEVER a fool proof plan to "not lose muscle."  There is no fool proof plan for this. 

And I can ASSURE you that eating 100g of protein a day, in a diet void of fatty acids and carbohydrates, that you WILL lose muscle. 

The protein content is ENTIRELY dependant on intake of the other 2 macronutrients. 
You cannot differentiate them entirely.  It doesn't work. 

In a diet of sufficient essential fatty acids, you can eat 100-200g of protein, with a LOW likelyhood of muscle loss.  YOU can do that.  Someone Ronnie Coleman's size may require more protein

In a diet of sufficient carbohydrate intake, you can eat 100-200g of protein, with a LOW likelyhood of muscle loss.  Again...dependant on a number of additional factors as well. 

You have to understand the correlation between nutrients to make bold brush statements like you're making.  And if you understood that correlation, you wouldn't be making your statements.

Yes, I've read many studies that determined that low carb diets cause more muscle loss.   Muscles are fueled by carbohydrates, it makes clear sense.

[The True Adonis]

I wonder when all the myths will finally be forgotten?

The way I see it, if people still believe in an invisible man in the sky, that has concious control over everything, then the future for widespread evidence based reason is sadly somewhat dim.

The best advice for anyone reading this thread is to put personal "feeling" aside and to instead focus on concrete evidence, mechanism and methodology.

On a side note....Al Gore`s new book, Assault on Reason, offers a perspective on this downward spiral of faith induced reasoning and how it is destroying facts and reason.  

Richard Dawkins also deals with this subject heavily in his articles and books!  

[The True Adonis]

I think the majority of you need to research gluconeogenesis.  A lot of you do not realize that without carbohydrates the body can and will catabolize stored protein which is muscle as well as fat.  Muscle can be depleted to sustain metabolism or for glucose conversion for fuel.  In a caloric defecit, studies clearly indicate that eating excess protein does nothing to prevent gluconeogenesis from occurring.

[Tier]

bro seriously not, I have tested that many times on myself, If I eat carbs I gain weight, when I restrict carbs (and we are talking about the simple carbs here) I loose weight... the right weight.

I have tried low carb 5 times over the last 5 years and everytime i have consistently become the leanest and most muscular everytime.

When I eat carbs its like an uphill battle , good for gaining muscle obviously , but cutting its a flip of the coin for me , EVEN when its same calories etc , low carbs just plain old works for some.

Probly works for fat people as i used to be 114 kg fat and struggled to ever be lean.

When I first went low carb it was the 1st time I ever got abs...

Carb sensitive 

[EL Mariachi]

What is NOT correct about this is that you are leaving a complex working of enzymes, catalysts, and necessary nutrients OUT OF THE EQUATION. 

100 to 200g of protein a day is NEVER a fool proof plan to "not lose muscle."  There is no fool proof plan for this. 

And I can ASSURE you that eating 100g of protein a day, in a diet void of fatty acids and carbohydrates, that you WILL lose muscle. 

The protein content is ENTIRELY dependant on intake of the other 2 macronutrients. 
You cannot differentiate them entirely.  It doesn't work. 

In a diet of sufficient essential fatty acids, you can eat 100-200g of protein, with a LOW likelyhood of muscle loss.  YOU can do that.  Someone Ronnie Coleman's size may require more protein

thats why im supplementing with omega fatty acids, i get 50 ml a day from that, thats 360 cals of supplementation alone+ i eat fat fish everyday. so im all set for keeping muscle and burning fat?