On Sun, 23 Jan 2000, Robert McGlohon wrote:

> I had thought that ketosis was *THE* reason a high protein diet worked as a
> method of weight loss.

Well, Protein Power is no more "high protein" than the Zone,
although both are higher in protein than typical civilized diets.
That is, both books recommend about 30% of calories from carb;
they differ somewhat on the other 70% of calories.

> According to the Eades, the way to lose weight on an a low-carb diet is to
> cut calories, primarily by cutting fat (since carbs are already low and you
> don't want to fall below minimum protein levels).  This contradicts the
> advice I've seen here and elsewhere, which is to *increase* fat consumption
> in order to promote ketosis.
>
> I am so confused!

When the Eades say that you cut calories by cutting fat, they
don't mean that you go on a low-fat diet.  They mean only that
once you are eating enough protein and little enough carbs you
still need to create a caloric deficit to lose weight.  This
requires you to reduce your fat intake *somewhat* to create that
deficit, even though the bulk of your calories will still be from
fat.

Suppose you need about 100 grams of protein a day.  That's about
400 calories.  Now suppose that for you a moderately reduced
calorie diet is 1,800 calories per day.  If you're in the strict
phase of Protein Power, you're eating 40g of carbs per day at
most, which is about another 200 calories.  You still need 1,200
more calories to get to your moderately restricted intake of
1,800 calories, and they can only come from fat.  That's about
133 grams of fat, which is hardly a low-fat diet.  It's just that
if you're not losing weight at, say, 2,000 calories per day then
to make that deficit it's the fat you must reduce.

Todd Moody
[log in to unmask]