LCHF & DS

[kirstabelle]

Discussing LCHF with someone and they said if fat isn't a bad thing then how come the DS works through malabsorption of fat but not carbs? Why not just get a sleeve and then follow low carb if that's what you have to do anyway? I certainly explained it from my point of view but not very well. Any one have any clear and concise opinions.....

 

[ProteinSnob]

Assuming that LCHF=Low Carb High Fat? From the perspective of a long-term RNY vet and new DS revisionista, here's my $.02:

I had to eat a Low Carb, Low Fat, Low Sugar diet just to maintain the RNY for many years. The thing is, you often end up eating a lot of "fake" food (eg: laughing Cow cheese, Walton Farms sugar free, etc.). It doesn't taste very good, isn't satisfying, and the food is often lacking in nutritional value and can have a high amount of undesirable ingredients. Anyone can eat this way for a while, but let me tell you that it gets old after a decade and it can be worrisome to be so limited during pregnancy or during health challenges. Specific to the RNY, I was limited as to the kinds of protein I could tolerate without throwing up.

The nice thing about being able to eat fat is that we are able to eat whole foods, like meat and cheeses. Fat makes things taste better and is more satisfying (which I believe makes us eat less).

 

[Spiky Bugger]

I might not be understanding the question, but here we go...

Fat isn't a bad thing, but there are not-so-good fats and better than average fats. But along with the fat we don't absorb, we also don't absorb the calories contained in the fats...or any important nutrients. So, if my sleeved sister and I each consume 8 ounces of ribeye steak, she absorbs almost 600 calories from that steak and I absorb about 120.

And we don't HAVE TO live a total low carb lifestyle, although it sure helps to lose weight and to keep it off.

Anyway, if I "get" the question, it's not just +/- 80% the fat in a ribeye...or a ton of whipped cream...that "doesn't count," but but 80% of everything that is packed into that fat. (Including calories and even iron...so if you've also been borderline on anemia, you can have it for real now.)

It still doesn't say what I want it to. But...how about...if my sister and I both want to lose weight by eating only 1000 calories of steak every day and nothing else, she could eat 12-13 ounces of ribeye...and I could eat 60 ounces of ribeye...and our bodies would think we had eaten the same amount.

 

[kirstabelle]

They were questioning the LCHF rather than DS. They are struggling to buy into the LCHF because they say I lost weight by restriction initially then fat malabsorption and zero simple carb malabsorption. Therefore this contradicts all that is said in LCHF...

 

[Spiky Bugger]

I'm too dense to understand their position.

 

[Spiky Bugger]

Except...that the malabsorption doesn't "kick in" later.

 

[kirstabelle]

Sorry - don't think I am explaining very well. If fat malabsorption is the key to a DSers weightloss/maintenance then how does that equate to LCHF? They are told to eat high fat as are we but we don't absorb 80% of it!
I am trying to get someone to stop following LF diet group and go LCHF but they are using DS surgery to argue against it.
I totally understand why LCHF works due to insulin issues, however how do I justify DS anatomy whilst being passionate about LCHF when DS is based on fat malabsorption?

 

[Joanne]

I dont think I understand your questions, either. I'll take a shot at what I think you mean?

Why is the DS designed to malabsorb fat and not carbs?
Because of the way our anatomy works. Simple carb digestion starts in your mouth and throughout your digestive tract. The DS works by diverting enzymes necessary for FAT digestion / absorption to a short common channel. I don't know how else to answer that. It's the way the surgery works, and the way our bodies are designed.

Why shouldn't you get the sleeve and eat a low carb diet, isnt it the same thing?
You have to pick the surgery that is right for you. People are successful with the sleeve, but for me, I needed the malabsorption. We dont absorb the full amount calories in what we eat - not just fat, but also to a lesser extent protein and complex carbs. I eat about 2500 calories a day, sometimes more. If I did that with a sleeve I would certainly gain weight. Out of those 2500 calories, I probably absorb 1200. That means to have the same maintenance with a sleeve, I'd probably have to eat 1200 calories a day, or exercise a hell of a lot more. I know I would not be happy / able to do either. That's also putting it into very simple terms. There is synergy in the "DS" switch part beyond simple malabsorption, it changes the way you metabolize. That's the long answer. Short answer is we can eat more food and stay more satisfied.

Does that answer what you're asking?

 

[Joanne]

Sorry - don't think I am explaining very well. If fat malabsorption is the key to a DSers weightloss/maintenance then how does that equate to LCHF? They are told to eat high fat as are we but we don't absorb 80% of it!
I am trying to get someone to stop following LF diet group and go LCHF but they are using DS surgery to argue against it.
I totally understand why LCHF works due to insulin issues, however how do I justify DS anatomy whilst being passionate about LCHF when DS is based on fat malabsorption?

I think you are trying to equate the DS to some type of surgically induced LCHF diet. It's not that. That type of eating helps us maximize our weight loss and maintenance - but it's mot the same.

 

[kirstabelle]

That's their whole point, If LCHF is the way to go then that doesn't equate to how I have lost weight. I guess they just have to accept that I am 'special' and DS is what I needed and what worked for me. For normies LCHF is still what I would encourage.

Thanks for taking the time to answer my post

 

[DuodenalSwitchaRoo]

LCHF does work for weight loss....the DS makes sure that weight loss stays lost (mostly). I have lost weight LCHF, but I had rebound as soon as I fell off the wagon (and it was easy to fall off!) The DS gives you some bounce room. Also the DS isn't great because of FAT malabsorption but the CALORIES that come with the fat.

But people will do what ever the hell they want to do. There is tons of evidence out there if they seek it out.

 

[Joanne]

It's not the same because of the malabsorption. Let's say you did an Atkins diet - you still absorb all the calories in what you eat. And the minute you eat ANY carbs, you go out of ketosis and gain weight.

The DS is more forgiving. High fat / low carb is what we eat to maximize our weight loss, but you don't have to be that strict about it every day. It's a balance. One cheat on Atkins, going out of ketosis,and game is over. With the DS, you will abosrb more calories with your carbs, but tomorrow is another day.

Does that make sense? Look at some of the threads here to see what people are eating, and it will give you a better idea about how it works.

 

[kirstabelle]

You are right. Even in I follow LCHF then I malabsorb the HF and protein and complex carbs so I benefit more. It wont stop me recommending LCHF to my normie friends though.

 

[Joanne]

There's also the issue of once you become morbidly obese, the only effective solution is surgery. 95% of diets don't work in morbidly obese people. If your friends are eating that way, it may be good for them, and may help them maintain their normal weights. But once you become obese / morbidly obese, the odds are very against you losing weight via diet and exercise.

 

[Spiky Bugger]

Sorry - don't think I am explaining very well. If fat malabsorption is the key to a DSers weightloss/maintenance then how does that equate to LCHF? They are told to eat high fat as are we but we don't absorb 80% of it!
I am trying to get someone to stop following LF diet group and go LCHF but they are using DS surgery to argue against it.
I totally understand why LCHF works due to insulin issues, however how do I justify DS anatomy whilst being passionate about LCHF when DS is based on fat malabsorption?

Aha...because they do not apparently understand that each gram of fat contains 9 calories. You and they can eat the same steak and eggs breakfast and they will consume four times more calories because there are 9 calories in each gram of fat THEY eat and only 1.8 calories in each gram of fat YOU eat. You don't absorb all the fat and therefore you absorb far fewer calories.