You seem to want links so I will provide some of them. But from here on out if you really want to know more then do feel free to do more research. It would be easier for both of us if my textbooks were available online, but if they did that then they couldn't sell them to the students at $250 a pop. But this is a little "food for thought" haha!
per your usda link:
An RDA is the average daily dietary intake level sufficient to meet nutrient requirements of nearly all healthy individuals in a group. It is calculated from an Estimated Average Requirement.
Definition of EAR:http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictio ... equirement
This PDF is from the European Food Safety Authority that discusses the need for 130g of carbs for proper brain function:http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q= ... _8SXr9AYOQ
This is from the US National Library of medicine that explain the difference between non-glycaemic carbohydrates and
just an FYI, generally speaking- "fiber" is what non-glycaemic carbs are high in. The "fiber" is the non digestible part of the food that provides other functions in our large intestine.
My link from before at Mayo clinic described what a non-dieting person would eat regarding carbs. But yeah, if a person was consuming fewer calories then yes, that number would go down because the number provided was based on a non-reduction diet of 2000 calories. The truth is you can lose weight by simply reducing calorie intake too. So theoretically you could have double your current carbs (250 grams of carbs) and still lose weight because glycaemic carbs are 4 calories a gram= 1000 calories. The minimum calorie recommended to lose weight healthily is 1200 calories. Meaning no one should consume less than that because it is dangerous. So if you took the minimum calorie needs of the most drastic reduction of calories a person should attempt to lose weight healthily then took the minimum percentage of those calories at the 45% level then that results in 540 calories from carbs which equals 135g of carbs. This calculation shows that a healthy reduction diet minimum level needed of carb grams to be right about were SB is. Although this diet doesn't require calorie counting, or carb counting, that doesn't mean there hasn't been a reduction of them. There in fact HAS been a reduction in those numbers, whether we count them or not. That's just the way reduction diets work. You have to be deficient in weight maintenance food intake in order to lose weight. As I explained before though, the low and slow carb supply of the Phase1 portion of the SB diet is what promotes the rapid fat burn and loss of belly fat. Phase1 meets the required
amount of carbs for proper body maintenance, and nothing more. It's as low on the carb scale as one should go to maintain a healthy body function. Going lower compromises a person's health. It's my personal opinion that when a person isn't at an average but rather they are only meeting a minimum standard then that would be a low amount. Being that it isn't high and it isn't average, thus I describe it as low. So thus, I would describe Phase 1 as low carb. It's not stupidly or dangerously low, but in my book it's low since by default it can't be slotted in the other 2 levels. I hope this post now adequately explains why I would categorize Phase1 SB diet as low carb.