1

Granted this question may seem quite specific to me as I'm unsure if the general public have a similar effect to these foods as I do.

When I consume basmati rice, 100g provides about 120 calories according to the back of the pack. However that 100g fills me up for a good few hours. But when I consume Avocados, I can eat 2 avocados which consist of 500 calories and still be hungry after.

So doesn't this suggest that eating carbs is better for fat loss than dietary fat, as carbs are more filling and less calories dense. However, I see several diets cut out carbs in order to aid with fat loss.

I've seen answers from propel suggesting carbs are non-filling whereas fat is, but I've not noticed this.

If anyone could please enlighten me on whether carbs are better to consume than fat for fat loss or if fat is better. Or even if neither matters as I just need to find the right balance for a caloric deficit each day.

4

One important factor is that you have to be certain that your weight caused not by sickness or disorder, i.e. doctor told you that weight gain caused only by improper food intake.

The short and general answer is that weight control is not directly intuitive link between sugar and "fat" intake and outcomes in weight measurements. E.g. wikipedia article on Glycemic index gives next suggestion:

Dietary replacement of saturated fats by carbohydrates with a low glycemic index may be beneficial for weight control, whereas substitution with refined, high glycemic index carbohydrates is not.[20] A Cochrane review found that adoption of low glycemic index (or load) diets by people who are overweight or obese leads to more weight loss (and better fat control) than use of diets involving higher glycemic index/load or other strategies.[21] Benefits were apparent even with low glycemic index/load diets that allow people to eat as much as they like.[21] The authors of the review concluded that "Lowering the glycaemic load of the diet appears to be an effective method of promoting weight loss and improving lipid profiles and can be simply incorporated into a person's lifestyle."[21]

As you may have found from same article, most of white rice (and basmati is one of them) is high GI food and hence is NOT good for your weight.

The other factor is cholesterol intake and its impact on your weight. Very short answer is - avoid animal fat and red meat, and rely on plant (olive preferably) oils as source of needed components. Red meat better be substituted by fish and poultry.

That said, ask for appointment to dietologist or nutritionist, as you get confused even on simplistic factors, while you might need professional advise.

| improve this answer | |
  • 'The other factor is cholesterol intake and its impact on your weight. Very short answer is - avoid animal fat and red meat' - no please dont. Those are extremely nutritious and satiating health foods. Especially the argument with cholesterol makes no sense, see healthline.com/nutrition/fat-and-cholesterol. – Markus Waas Jul 6 at 4:25
3

Technically, the only thing needed for weight loss is a caloric deficit.

Comparison of Weight-Loss Diets with Different Compositions of Fat, Protein, and Carbohydrates (NEJM, 2009):

Reduced-calorie diets result in clinically meaningful weight loss regardless of which macronutrients they emphasize.

The other question is, which foods are most satiating.

Diets with High or Low Protein Content and Glycemic Index for Weight-Loss Maintenance (NEJM, 2010):

In this large European study, a modest increase in protein content and a modest reduction in the glycemic index led to an improvement in study completion and maintenance of weight loss.

Here is one list of foods with glycemic index values.

Some reasoning why some macronutrients could be more satiating than others:

  • Proteins and fats can be more satiating than carbs because they stay in the stomach for a longer time, so they are more filling.
  • Slowly absorbed carbohydrates (whole grains and legumes) may be more satiating than the quickly absorbed carbohydrates (plain starch from white bread, rice and cornflakes, and potatoes), again, because they are more filling.

There are a lot of studies about the effect of low-carb/high fat and low-fat/high carbs on the satiety and weight loss, which are, in summary, very confusing, so I won't discuss this further.

These were some theories, what about practice?

  • Try to find a food pattern that will become your usual long-term diet, not just a temporary weight loss diet. Include foods you like.
  • Avoid/limit liquid calories (soda, fruit juice, alcohol) and other "quick calories" from sweets, like chocolate, and other energy-dense foods (fast food).

In conclusion, listen your body and do what works for you and do not overthink the macronutrient ratios.

| improve this answer | |
1

When you eat 100 g of basmati rice and take on 120 calories you've had a "meal/snack" that's 1.2 calories/g (calories per gram) in energy density. An avocado might be 136 grams in weight (without seed) and contain 227 calories. If you eat two avocados then you can calculate that (assuming these numbers are accurate) you've eaten 272 grams (136 g x 2) of avocados and taken on roughly 500 calories of energy. This ends up being an energy density of 1.8 calories/g. What this means is that you can eat 50% more rice (as opposed to avocados, by weight) for the same amount of energy intake. Or another way of thinking of it, if you're eating basmati rice you can eat 150% the weight of the avocados for the same energy intake.

The difference in fat intake will be 42 grams from the avocados and almost none from the rice.

I also hear often that fats and proteins are more filling than carbohydrates, but I can only say that that's something I've "heard". I don't know if the research is decisive on this topic.

Also, remember that there are many many different factors to this issue. Just to mention one when it comes to dieting, there's something called the "thermic effect of food" (also known by a number of other names, including "food-induced thermogenesis"). Basically everything you eat requires energy from your body to metabolize that food. You probably would have heard the factoid that eating celery makes your body burn more calories than are contained in the celery, making it a negative-calorie food. Leaving aside whether this is true or not, this is based on that idea of the thermic effect of food. The thermic effect of eating carbohydrates and fats that is reported will depend on which study you read, and will likely vary on the type of person (what body composition they have, age etc.) and the type of fat you're talking about.

As I said, there are many different factors, including psychological ones about what foods feel more filling to you, but one last one I'll mention is the fact that your two avocados will have about 18 grams of fiber as opposed to a maximum of 2 grams of fiber from the basmati rice. A generally accepted effect of dietary fiber, whether soluble or insoluble is that it:

Increases food volume without increasing caloric content to the same extent as digestible carbohydrates, providing satiety which may reduce appetite.
Dietary fiber - Effects of fiber intake (Wikipedia article)

and

Aids in achieving healthy weight. High-fiber foods tend to be more filling than low-fiber foods, so you're likely to eat less and stay satisfied longer.
mayoclinic.org

Here is a good site where you can compare nutrition data of different foods. Just be careful when reading information because cooked and uncooked cereals, such as pasta and rice, have a difference of "about" three times in their values (can be more or less, depending how you cook it).

| improve this answer | |

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.