We are pleased to announce that on March 4, 2025, an updated Rich Text Editor will be introduced in the MyFitnessPal Community. To learn more about the upcoming changes, please click here. We look forward to sharing this new feature with you!
so, zero carb folks...
tmdalton849
Posts: 178 Member
how does it work for you? what do you typically eat in a day? how much meat? how does your grocery bill compare? how do you feel? is there a transition period?
i am considering taking the plunge. i have been primal/paleo for a while now so i mostly eat only whole foods and have been whittling down to 20 net carbs over the past few months, but i honestly feel like i am forcing myself to eat kale sprouts and salad.
thanks in advance for any info you can share!
i am considering taking the plunge. i have been primal/paleo for a while now so i mostly eat only whole foods and have been whittling down to 20 net carbs over the past few months, but i honestly feel like i am forcing myself to eat kale sprouts and salad.
thanks in advance for any info you can share!
0
Replies
-
I'm under 20g a day. Some days under 10g. I pretty much eat meat and eggs. Not much in the way of veges. Cheese, butter, cream, mayo. I don't have much trouble doing it, but I seem to eat alot of eggs due to the fact that they are cheap.0
-
What benefits does 0 carb over? I also wonder why not eat any veggies?0
-
hi @Stbarber1 i am curious about this version of lc so i am looking for tips and info, not necessarily interested in justifying my reasons for considering it.
perhaps others who are more seasoned in the approach might be able/willingbto share their rationale with you.0 -
Oh my apologies, the other poster had mentioned they were going that low and no veggies, I was curious about it. I wasn't asking you to justify your reasons for it.0
-
Works fine for me.
Lately my meals have been
Breakfast: 1/2 pound 75/25% ground beef plus 2-slices of bacon (plus some grease)
Lunch: 1/2 pound 75/25% ground beef plus 2-slices of bacon (plus some grease)
Dinner: 12oz - 1.5 pounds of chuck steak/beef.
My bill isn't bad, in my eyes. A day like that runs me $7.75 a day or about $55 a week. I could get it lower. Eating more bacon and/or eggs would make it cheaper for me. But, this is well within my budget.
I feel great.
Yes, there is a transition period. Even going from keto to zero. But, it's mild and short.
Sorry I am not more detailed right now. Just on my way to bed. I'll probably elaborate more tomorrow.0 -
-
thanks goat!0
-
tmdalton849 wrote: »
I tried to word things as best I can, it can be so difficult to come across the right way in these posts.
Best of luck on your journey0 -
tmdalton849 wrote: »
I tried to word things as best I can, it can be so difficult to come across the right way in these posts.
Best of luck on your journey
thanks! and don't worry about it. i was worried my own reply had come across as snippy, though i certainly didn't intend for it to!0 -
Besides Mr Goat... Is anyone else zero carb?0
-
Goat is special. You can find more like him here:
http://www.reddit.com/r/zerocarb0 -
I have read about it but just staying in ketosis at this point in time works for me. To go zero would require to much attention and I would be to 'counting'.
0 -
i hear you, gale. but there's really nothing to count on zc, as you pretty much just eat meat. (:0
-
Three reasons why zero carbs is easier than low carb
myzerocarblife.jamesdhogan.com/wp/2015/02/three-reasons-zero-carb-easier-low-carb/0 -
What benefits does 0 carb over? I also wonder why not eat any veggies?
The benefits are different for everyone. Most people quickly lose any desire for sweets. Your hunger signals are more in check. Weight tends to normalize. Some have reported reduction in allergies. I seem to be experiencing that, but I can't be sure that it's not just because there aren't low allergens right now. You stop tracking anything. I don't count carbs. I don't count anything. There's no macros to worry about, no fiber to subtract, no ketones to consider. You eat meat until you're full. Meal planning is simple and cooking is quick. I'm having a meat. There's nothing with it. There's really no fancy preparation to do to it either. It sounds boring, and in a way it isn't exciting, but it's also strangely comfortable and easy to accept. A lion doesn't get bored with zebra meat. You don't crave variety because your body isn't missing anything it needs. A lot of craving comes from the fact that you're lacking some nutrient and your body wants more, and/or different, food until that need it met.
Why not eat any vegetables? This is a good question. Personally, it is because my opinion of vegetables has shifted radically from the standard. While most people see vegetables as falling on a range from "healthy to not so healthy" (say for example spinach would be healthy and corn would be not so healthy but still better than nothing), I see vegetables ranging from, at best, "neutral" down to, "harmful." While most people would class a baked potato as "fairly" healthy, I consider it down with the harmful. Actually, my list of "neutral" vegetables seems to grow smaller and smaller the more I investigate them. It used to include spinach and the cruciferous veggies (the keto approved ones), but based on their metabolic and digestive effects, I currently think they're less harmful than many vegetables (like corn) but probably aren't harmless.
Vegetables are not required for health. We can get all the nutrients we need for health from meat, even if we don't resort to eating organ meats. While it appears that some nutrients are less plentiful in meat, what amount is there is highly absorbable and easily utilized by the body. Those vegetables which have seemingly high sources of nutrients, often include substances which hinder absorption and what is absorbed often requires inefficient conversion to make it useful. Take iron, for example. Trying to get all your iron from spinach alone would be asking for trouble unless you carefully adhered to some best practices. You would want to eat a source of vitamin C with that spinach, because that's going to make the iron more absorbable. Without the vitamin C (or eating meat with the spinach), you'll get almost no usable iron absorbed. What little does make it into your blood will be nonheme iron, which is only 10% as useful as heme iron (from meat). The same holds true for most other nutrients.
While meat does appear to be low on some of the RDAs, those are based on a mixed diet and the assumption that you're getting some of that amount from plants. A meat diet also reduces the need for some nutrients. B1 requirements, for example, are lower because a large quantity of B1 is used for carbohydrate metabolism.
What about the two biggies, vitamin C and fiber, both of which are nonexistent in animal sources? We are convinced that both of these are essential for health. If you don't consume enough vitamin C, you'll quickly develop scurvy. But, that's only partly true. If you don't consume enough vitamin C, while eating carbohydrates and unfresh foods, you will quickly develop scurvy. Scurvy can be prevented, and even cured, with nothing but fresh meat. While fresh meat doesn't have vitamin C in it, it has an antiscorbutic (as in it prevents/cures scurvy) effect. Wikipedia suggest that fresh meat does contain trace amounts of vitamin C, I've found little support for that. In any case, whether it does or does not, the effect is the same. Eating fresh meat, not heavily cooked, is enough to avoid scurvy.
Fiber is classed as an antinutrient. Not only does it provide no nutrition for us, it can hinder the absorption of other nutrients. It also can irritate the bowel, cause or worsen constipation, and often has other unpleasant side effects (it's not a coincidence that I no longer fart). It is not required for regularity, it can even cause problems with it. There's been studies that show removing all sources of fiber can help improve/cure some forms of constipation. I have had, essentially, no fiber for 3/4s of a year, and I am as regular as I have ever been.
Alright, I think I've rambled enough for the time being. You're welcome to reject any or all of this as crazy ramblings of a lunatic. "Broccoli is bad for you?! What a madman!"
0 -
I want to know about your breath and sweat. Ammonia?0
-
What benefits does 0 carb over? I also wonder why not eat any veggies?
A lot of people are driven to it for health purposes. Goat talked about his own journey in another post (basically, even veggies turn his gut into a toxic waste dump). Some still have GI, health, or craving issues even on 20g or less per day, so "zero" carb is easier to stay compliant on than non-zero.
The same largely goes for why they don't eat veggies, but you don't actually need veggies. Most of the nutrients in veggies aren't very bioavailable, anyway (locked up in fiber and phytates, so we have access to less than 10% of most of the nutrients, and most of that needs to be converted to the kind our bodies actually use, which results in further loss). In fact, veggies are a double-edged sword, because most contain natural chemicals the plants use for defense mechanisms. These chemicals are toxic to varying degrees (the ones we generally eat don't usually have enough to overwhelm our systems, and our liver and kidneys take care of them, but the toxins are still there). Some people are more sensitive to these chemicals, and so do better without them.
Compliance is also another big reason. What do you eat? Anything from an animal. No need to worry if this thing or that thing puts you over your carb allotment, or if this item has hidden sugar in it, or whether to count fiber. If it didn't come off or out of an animal, then it's not on the menu (spices generally notwithstanding, since you don't generally use enough for it to really matter).0 -
I want to know about your breath and sweat. Ammonia?
Nope. Breath is mostly coffee unless it's evening after I've brushed and switched to just drinking water. No noticeable ammonia or anything in my breath. I do sometimes blow detectable ketones (I have a breath meter), but not enough that you can smell them, and my wife would tell me.
Sweat is also a negative for ammonia smell. My wife says I was much more stinky during my early days of keto. It had mostly passed by the time I switched to zero carb and hasn't returned. It is also something I would notice, myself, pretty quickly as I do my best to use the least amount of deodorant required (sensitive skin issues) and switch things up fairly often, with an unscented powder on some days to give my skin a break.0 -
I want to know about your breath and sweat. Ammonia?
Only if you're eating a bunch of lean meats. If you go with the kinds of meats that Goat eats, you end up with a roughly 60/40 f/p split. Not far off from most LC ways of eating, really (though a little high protein for keto). That's because the mantra is still "fat first, then protein."0 -
What benefits does 0 carb over? I also wonder why not eat any veggies?
The benefits are different for everyone. Most people quickly lose any desire for sweets. Your hunger signals are more in check. Weight tends to normalize. Some have reported reduction in allergies. I seem to be experiencing that, but I can't be sure that it's not just because there aren't low allergens right now. You stop tracking anything. I don't count carbs. I don't count anything. There's no macros to worry about, no fiber to subtract, no ketones to consider. You eat meat until you're full. Meal planning is simple and cooking is quick. I'm having a meat. There's nothing with it. There's really no fancy preparation to do to it either. It sounds boring, and in a way it isn't exciting, but it's also strangely comfortable and easy to accept. A lion doesn't get bored with zebra meat. You don't crave variety because your body isn't missing anything it needs. A lot of craving comes from the fact that you're lacking some nutrient and your body wants more, and/or different, food until that need it met.
Why not eat any vegetables? This is a good question. Personally, it is because my opinion of vegetables has shifted radically from the standard. While most people see vegetables as falling on a range from "healthy to not so healthy" (say for example spinach would be healthy and corn would be not so healthy but still better than nothing), I see vegetables ranging from, at best, "neutral" down to, "harmful." While most people would class a baked potato as "fairly" healthy, I consider it down with the harmful. Actually, my list of "neutral" vegetables seems to grow smaller and smaller the more I investigate them. It used to include spinach and the cruciferous veggies (the keto approved ones), but based on their metabolic and digestive effects, I currently think they're less harmful than many vegetables (like corn) but probably aren't harmless.
Vegetables are not required for health. We can get all the nutrients we need for health from meat, even if we don't resort to eating organ meats. While it appears that some nutrients are less plentiful in meat, what amount is there is highly absorbable and easily utilized by the body. Those vegetables which have seemingly high sources of nutrients, often include substances which hinder absorption and what is absorbed often requires inefficient conversion to make it useful. Take iron, for example. Trying to get all your iron from spinach alone would be asking for trouble unless you carefully adhered to some best practices. You would want to eat a source of vitamin C with that spinach, because that's going to make the iron more absorbable. Without the vitamin C (or eating meat with the spinach), you'll get almost no usable iron absorbed. What little does make it into your blood will be nonheme iron, which is only 10% as useful as heme iron (from meat). The same holds true for most other nutrients.
While meat does appear to be low on some of the RDAs, those are based on a mixed diet and the assumption that you're getting some of that amount from plants. A meat diet also reduces the need for some nutrients. B1 requirements, for example, are lower because a large quantity of B1 is used for carbohydrate metabolism.
What about the two biggies, vitamin C and fiber, both of which are nonexistent in animal sources? We are convinced that both of these are essential for health. If you don't consume enough vitamin C, you'll quickly develop scurvy. But, that's only partly true. If you don't consume enough vitamin C, while eating carbohydrates and unfresh foods, you will quickly develop scurvy. Scurvy can be prevented, and even cured, with nothing but fresh meat. While fresh meat doesn't have vitamin C in it, it has an antiscorbutic (as in it prevents/cures scurvy) effect. Wikipedia suggest that fresh meat does contain trace amounts of vitamin C, I've found little support for that. In any case, whether it does or does not, the effect is the same. Eating fresh meat, not heavily cooked, is enough to avoid scurvy.
Fiber is classed as an antinutrient. Not only does it provide no nutrition for us, it can hinder the absorption of other nutrients. It also can irritate the bowel, cause or worsen constipation, and often has other unpleasant side effects (it's not a coincidence that I no longer fart). It is not required for regularity, it can even cause problems with it. There's been studies that show removing all sources of fiber can help improve/cure some forms of constipation. I have had, essentially, no fiber for 3/4s of a year, and I am as regular as I have ever been.
Alright, I think I've rambled enough for the time being. You're welcome to reject any or all of this as crazy ramblings of a lunatic. "Broccoli is bad for you?! What a madman!" thank you for taken the time to explain all of this.
I'm new to all of this so any information helps me gain a perspective to begin research.
I looked into it a little more last night and saw some articles that it is not a long term plan but can be used in the short term. Is that your experience as well or do you feel this can be a long term method.
(please don't take any of my questions as judgement)0 -
-
What benefits does 0 carb over? I also wonder why not eat any veggies?
The benefits are different for everyone. Most people quickly lose any desire for sweets. Your hunger signals are more in check. Weight tends to normalize. Some have reported reduction in allergies. I seem to be experiencing that, but I can't be sure that it's not just because there aren't low allergens right now. You stop tracking anything. I don't count carbs. I don't count anything. There's no macros to worry about, no fiber to subtract, no ketones to consider. You eat meat until you're full. Meal planning is simple and cooking is quick. I'm having a meat. There's nothing with it. There's really no fancy preparation to do to it either. It sounds boring, and in a way it isn't exciting, but it's also strangely comfortable and easy to accept. A lion doesn't get bored with zebra meat. You don't crave variety because your body isn't missing anything it needs. A lot of craving comes from the fact that you're lacking some nutrient and your body wants more, and/or different, food until that need it met.
Why not eat any vegetables? This is a good question. Personally, it is because my opinion of vegetables has shifted radically from the standard. While most people see vegetables as falling on a range from "healthy to not so healthy" (say for example spinach would be healthy and corn would be not so healthy but still better than nothing), I see vegetables ranging from, at best, "neutral" down to, "harmful." While most people would class a baked potato as "fairly" healthy, I consider it down with the harmful. Actually, my list of "neutral" vegetables seems to grow smaller and smaller the more I investigate them. It used to include spinach and the cruciferous veggies (the keto approved ones), but based on their metabolic and digestive effects, I currently think they're less harmful than many vegetables (like corn) but probably aren't harmless.
Vegetables are not required for health. We can get all the nutrients we need for health from meat, even if we don't resort to eating organ meats. While it appears that some nutrients are less plentiful in meat, what amount is there is highly absorbable and easily utilized by the body. Those vegetables which have seemingly high sources of nutrients, often include substances which hinder absorption and what is absorbed often requires inefficient conversion to make it useful. Take iron, for example. Trying to get all your iron from spinach alone would be asking for trouble unless you carefully adhered to some best practices. You would want to eat a source of vitamin C with that spinach, because that's going to make the iron more absorbable. Without the vitamin C (or eating meat with the spinach), you'll get almost no usable iron absorbed. What little does make it into your blood will be nonheme iron, which is only 10% as useful as heme iron (from meat). The same holds true for most other nutrients.
While meat does appear to be low on some of the RDAs, those are based on a mixed diet and the assumption that you're getting some of that amount from plants. A meat diet also reduces the need for some nutrients. B1 requirements, for example, are lower because a large quantity of B1 is used for carbohydrate metabolism.
What about the two biggies, vitamin C and fiber, both of which are nonexistent in animal sources? We are convinced that both of these are essential for health. If you don't consume enough vitamin C, you'll quickly develop scurvy. But, that's only partly true. If you don't consume enough vitamin C, while eating carbohydrates and unfresh foods, you will quickly develop scurvy. Scurvy can be prevented, and even cured, with nothing but fresh meat. While fresh meat doesn't have vitamin C in it, it has an antiscorbutic (as in it prevents/cures scurvy) effect. Wikipedia suggest that fresh meat does contain trace amounts of vitamin C, I've found little support for that. In any case, whether it does or does not, the effect is the same. Eating fresh meat, not heavily cooked, is enough to avoid scurvy.
Fiber is classed as an antinutrient. Not only does it provide no nutrition for us, it can hinder the absorption of other nutrients. It also can irritate the bowel, cause or worsen constipation, and often has other unpleasant side effects (it's not a coincidence that I no longer fart). It is not required for regularity, it can even cause problems with it. There's been studies that show removing all sources of fiber can help improve/cure some forms of constipation. I have had, essentially, no fiber for 3/4s of a year, and I am as regular as I have ever been.
Alright, I think I've rambled enough for the time being. You're welcome to reject any or all of this as crazy ramblings of a lunatic. "Broccoli is bad for you?! What a madman!" thank you for taken the time to explain all of this.
I'm new to all of this so any information helps me gain a perspective to begin research.
I looked into it a little more last night and saw some articles that it is not a long term plan but can be used in the short term. Is that your experience as well or do you feel this can be a long term method.
(please don't take any of my questions as judgement)
Four words: Owsley "The Bear" Stanley0 -
The body will still produce insulin for assimilation of protein, and for regulating internal ketone and glucose production (provided you don't have Type 1 Diabetes or advanced Type 2 Diabetes). It will (or should) be far lower levels than someone with more carbs in their diet.0 -
Dragonwolf wrote: »Only if you're eating a bunch of lean meats. If you go with the kinds of meats that Goat eats, you end up with a roughly 60/40 f/p split. Not far off from most LC ways of eating, really (though a little high protein for keto). That's because the mantra is still "fat first, then protein."
I usually end up around 73% fat / 27% protein and often it's closer to 80% / 20%. I focus on fatty meats and don't drain fat off. I eat all the fat from any cut. I will even pour my bacon drippings back over my burgers (or spread some on my burgers) if they're particularly dry. thank you for taken the time to explain all of this.
I'm new to all of this so any information helps me gain a perspective to begin research.
I looked into it a little more last night and saw some articles that it is not a long term plan but can be used in the short term. Is that your experience as well or do you feel this can be a long term method.
(please don't take any of my questions as judgement)
Long term 100%. I am following the advice of a guy who went by the name Bear. He ate this way for over 50 years. There are others who have done it for almost two decades and many who are around a decade that I talk with. Actually, almost all the serious people about this way of eating consider me a relative newb. The general experience groups break down as:- Totally new: Less than 30 days
- Pretty new: Less than 6 months
- Has the basics: Less than a year
- Experienced: Less than 5 years
- Long term veterans: 5+ years
These are my categorizations, but generally, those are the big groups people tend to fall in. I'm still in the "Has the basics" grouping. In a few months, I'll have completed my first full year.
I intend on eating this way for the rest of my life, or until the "Great Bovine Uprising" where I am sentences to life as a vegan for crimes against cow-manity.
Thats an interesting question too. I know that the ammonia breath comes from ketoacidosis which is different from ketosis. However if you are ingesting only meats does your body still produce insulin in the same manner?
This is interesting and needs more research. Bear was convinced that you didn't produce insulin eating this way. I am not convinced. Protein has a well established insulinogenic effect. It's considerably less than the effect of carbs, but it does exist. It isn't something that I consider significant enough to worry about. Honestly, there's no way to live and avoid eating foods that will stimulate insulin production in some manner.0 -
Dragonwolf wrote: »What benefits does 0 carb over? I also wonder why not eat any veggies?
The benefits are different for everyone. Most people quickly lose any desire for sweets. Your hunger signals are more in check. Weight tends to normalize. Some have reported reduction in allergies. I seem to be experiencing that, but I can't be sure that it's not just because there aren't low allergens right now. You stop tracking anything. I don't count carbs. I don't count anything. There's no macros to worry about, no fiber to subtract, no ketones to consider. You eat meat until you're full. Meal planning is simple and cooking is quick. I'm having a meat. There's nothing with it. There's really no fancy preparation to do to it either. It sounds boring, and in a way it isn't exciting, but it's also strangely comfortable and easy to accept. A lion doesn't get bored with zebra meat. You don't crave variety because your body isn't missing anything it needs. A lot of craving comes from the fact that you're lacking some nutrient and your body wants more, and/or different, food until that need it met.
Why not eat any vegetables? This is a good question. Personally, it is because my opinion of vegetables has shifted radically from the standard. While most people see vegetables as falling on a range from "healthy to not so healthy" (say for example spinach would be healthy and corn would be not so healthy but still better than nothing), I see vegetables ranging from, at best, "neutral" down to, "harmful." While most people would class a baked potato as "fairly" healthy, I consider it down with the harmful. Actually, my list of "neutral" vegetables seems to grow smaller and smaller the more I investigate them. It used to include spinach and the cruciferous veggies (the keto approved ones), but based on their metabolic and digestive effects, I currently think they're less harmful than many vegetables (like corn) but probably aren't harmless.
Vegetables are not required for health. We can get all the nutrients we need for health from meat, even if we don't resort to eating organ meats. While it appears that some nutrients are less plentiful in meat, what amount is there is highly absorbable and easily utilized by the body. Those vegetables which have seemingly high sources of nutrients, often include substances which hinder absorption and what is absorbed often requires inefficient conversion to make it useful. Take iron, for example. Trying to get all your iron from spinach alone would be asking for trouble unless you carefully adhered to some best practices. You would want to eat a source of vitamin C with that spinach, because that's going to make the iron more absorbable. Without the vitamin C (or eating meat with the spinach), you'll get almost no usable iron absorbed. What little does make it into your blood will be nonheme iron, which is only 10% as useful as heme iron (from meat). The same holds true for most other nutrients.
While meat does appear to be low on some of the RDAs, those are based on a mixed diet and the assumption that you're getting some of that amount from plants. A meat diet also reduces the need for some nutrients. B1 requirements, for example, are lower because a large quantity of B1 is used for carbohydrate metabolism.
What about the two biggies, vitamin C and fiber, both of which are nonexistent in animal sources? We are convinced that both of these are essential for health. If you don't consume enough vitamin C, you'll quickly develop scurvy. But, that's only partly true. If you don't consume enough vitamin C, while eating carbohydrates and unfresh foods, you will quickly develop scurvy. Scurvy can be prevented, and even cured, with nothing but fresh meat. While fresh meat doesn't have vitamin C in it, it has an antiscorbutic (as in it prevents/cures scurvy) effect. Wikipedia suggest that fresh meat does contain trace amounts of vitamin C, I've found little support for that. In any case, whether it does or does not, the effect is the same. Eating fresh meat, not heavily cooked, is enough to avoid scurvy.
Fiber is classed as an antinutrient. Not only does it provide no nutrition for us, it can hinder the absorption of other nutrients. It also can irritate the bowel, cause or worsen constipation, and often has other unpleasant side effects (it's not a coincidence that I no longer fart). It is not required for regularity, it can even cause problems with it. There's been studies that show removing all sources of fiber can help improve/cure some forms of constipation. I have had, essentially, no fiber for 3/4s of a year, and I am as regular as I have ever been.
Alright, I think I've rambled enough for the time being. You're welcome to reject any or all of this as crazy ramblings of a lunatic. "Broccoli is bad for you?! What a madman!" thank you for taken the time to explain all of this.
I'm new to all of this so any information helps me gain a perspective to begin research.
I looked into it a little more last night and saw some articles that it is not a long term plan but can be used in the short term. Is that your experience as well or do you feel this can be a long term method.
(please don't take any of my questions as judgement)
Four words: Owsley "The Bear" Stanley
You know what I'm finding interesting so far in my journey on this. Its becoming more apparent that our digestive systems may be more closely linked with the feline digestive system. I'm curious to learn more because there has also been a sharp increase of the instances of diabetes and inflammatory bowl diseases in cats, linked to the low quality high carbohydrate foods produced by the pet food companies. I remember reading an article a couple of years ago about two of the oldest living cats and that their owner fed them a diet of bacon, and eggs.
Also interesting to me is how I've read in several different places that cancer tumors thrive off of glucose, is this commonly accepted in the scientifice community? If so, then why is it not recommended to reduce glucose as part of a treatment plan for those with cancer?
Could it be that eating the SAD we are actually causing the rate of the occurences of these illnesses to increase? Have there been studies done on cultures that do not eat the same way we do, that would provide more insight?
Off to Google 0 -
The lack of ammonia is intriguing. All of your glucose needs have to be met by gluconeogenesis. Where's all the waste ammonia going? Your body must up regulate some processes to deal with it. Freaky.
OK, I know you don't want to hear it, but my biggest long-term concern would be cancer. Even Bear got cancer. Your IGF-1 must be high, not to mention the potential toxins in animal fat. And lack of antioxidants in your diet. But your risks probably aren't much different than the general population.0 -
Dragonwolf wrote: »What benefits does 0 carb over? I also wonder why not eat any veggies?
The benefits are different for everyone. Most people quickly lose any desire for sweets. Your hunger signals are more in check. Weight tends to normalize. Some have reported reduction in allergies. I seem to be experiencing that, but I can't be sure that it's not just because there aren't low allergens right now. You stop tracking anything. I don't count carbs. I don't count anything. There's no macros to worry about, no fiber to subtract, no ketones to consider. You eat meat until you're full. Meal planning is simple and cooking is quick. I'm having a meat. There's nothing with it. There's really no fancy preparation to do to it either. It sounds boring, and in a way it isn't exciting, but it's also strangely comfortable and easy to accept. A lion doesn't get bored with zebra meat. You don't crave variety because your body isn't missing anything it needs. A lot of craving comes from the fact that you're lacking some nutrient and your body wants more, and/or different, food until that need it met.
Why not eat any vegetables? This is a good question. Personally, it is because my opinion of vegetables has shifted radically from the standard. While most people see vegetables as falling on a range from "healthy to not so healthy" (say for example spinach would be healthy and corn would be not so healthy but still better than nothing), I see vegetables ranging from, at best, "neutral" down to, "harmful." While most people would class a baked potato as "fairly" healthy, I consider it down with the harmful. Actually, my list of "neutral" vegetables seems to grow smaller and smaller the more I investigate them. It used to include spinach and the cruciferous veggies (the keto approved ones), but based on their metabolic and digestive effects, I currently think they're less harmful than many vegetables (like corn) but probably aren't harmless.
Vegetables are not required for health. We can get all the nutrients we need for health from meat, even if we don't resort to eating organ meats. While it appears that some nutrients are less plentiful in meat, what amount is there is highly absorbable and easily utilized by the body. Those vegetables which have seemingly high sources of nutrients, often include substances which hinder absorption and what is absorbed often requires inefficient conversion to make it useful. Take iron, for example. Trying to get all your iron from spinach alone would be asking for trouble unless you carefully adhered to some best practices. You would want to eat a source of vitamin C with that spinach, because that's going to make the iron more absorbable. Without the vitamin C (or eating meat with the spinach), you'll get almost no usable iron absorbed. What little does make it into your blood will be nonheme iron, which is only 10% as useful as heme iron (from meat). The same holds true for most other nutrients.
While meat does appear to be low on some of the RDAs, those are based on a mixed diet and the assumption that you're getting some of that amount from plants. A meat diet also reduces the need for some nutrients. B1 requirements, for example, are lower because a large quantity of B1 is used for carbohydrate metabolism.
What about the two biggies, vitamin C and fiber, both of which are nonexistent in animal sources? We are convinced that both of these are essential for health. If you don't consume enough vitamin C, you'll quickly develop scurvy. But, that's only partly true. If you don't consume enough vitamin C, while eating carbohydrates and unfresh foods, you will quickly develop scurvy. Scurvy can be prevented, and even cured, with nothing but fresh meat. While fresh meat doesn't have vitamin C in it, it has an antiscorbutic (as in it prevents/cures scurvy) effect. Wikipedia suggest that fresh meat does contain trace amounts of vitamin C, I've found little support for that. In any case, whether it does or does not, the effect is the same. Eating fresh meat, not heavily cooked, is enough to avoid scurvy.
Fiber is classed as an antinutrient. Not only does it provide no nutrition for us, it can hinder the absorption of other nutrients. It also can irritate the bowel, cause or worsen constipation, and often has other unpleasant side effects (it's not a coincidence that I no longer fart). It is not required for regularity, it can even cause problems with it. There's been studies that show removing all sources of fiber can help improve/cure some forms of constipation. I have had, essentially, no fiber for 3/4s of a year, and I am as regular as I have ever been.
Alright, I think I've rambled enough for the time being. You're welcome to reject any or all of this as crazy ramblings of a lunatic. "Broccoli is bad for you?! What a madman!" thank you for taken the time to explain all of this.
I'm new to all of this so any information helps me gain a perspective to begin research.
I looked into it a little more last night and saw some articles that it is not a long term plan but can be used in the short term. Is that your experience as well or do you feel this can be a long term method.
(please don't take any of my questions as judgement)
Four words: Owsley "The Bear" Stanley
You know what I'm finding interesting so far in my journey on this. Its becoming more apparent that our digestive systems may be more closely linked with the feline digestive system. I'm curious to learn more because there has also been a sharp increase of the instances of diabetes and inflammatory bowl diseases in cats, linked to the low quality high carbohydrate foods produced by the pet food companies. I remember reading an article a couple of years ago about two of the oldest living cats and that their owner fed them a diet of bacon, and eggs.
Also interesting to me is how I've read in several different places that cancer tumors thrive off of glucose, is this commonly accepted in the scientifice community? If so, then why is it not recommended to reduce glucose as part of a treatment plan for those with cancer?
Could it be that eating the SAD we are actually causing the rate of the occurences of these illnesses to increase? Have there been studies done on cultures that do not eat the same way we do, that would provide more insight?
Off to Google
I have a cat currently on a grain free diet. By that I mean he eats people tuna because grain free cat food is ridiculously expensive and I have 2 cats.0 -
Dragonwolf wrote: »What benefits does 0 carb over? I also wonder why not eat any veggies?
The benefits are different for everyone. Most people quickly lose any desire for sweets. Your hunger signals are more in check. Weight tends to normalize. Some have reported reduction in allergies. I seem to be experiencing that, but I can't be sure that it's not just because there aren't low allergens right now. You stop tracking anything. I don't count carbs. I don't count anything. There's no macros to worry about, no fiber to subtract, no ketones to consider. You eat meat until you're full. Meal planning is simple and cooking is quick. I'm having a meat. There's nothing with it. There's really no fancy preparation to do to it either. It sounds boring, and in a way it isn't exciting, but it's also strangely comfortable and easy to accept. A lion doesn't get bored with zebra meat. You don't crave variety because your body isn't missing anything it needs. A lot of craving comes from the fact that you're lacking some nutrient and your body wants more, and/or different, food until that need it met.
Why not eat any vegetables? This is a good question. Personally, it is because my opinion of vegetables has shifted radically from the standard. While most people see vegetables as falling on a range from "healthy to not so healthy" (say for example spinach would be healthy and corn would be not so healthy but still better than nothing), I see vegetables ranging from, at best, "neutral" down to, "harmful." While most people would class a baked potato as "fairly" healthy, I consider it down with the harmful. Actually, my list of "neutral" vegetables seems to grow smaller and smaller the more I investigate them. It used to include spinach and the cruciferous veggies (the keto approved ones), but based on their metabolic and digestive effects, I currently think they're less harmful than many vegetables (like corn) but probably aren't harmless.
Vegetables are not required for health. We can get all the nutrients we need for health from meat, even if we don't resort to eating organ meats. While it appears that some nutrients are less plentiful in meat, what amount is there is highly absorbable and easily utilized by the body. Those vegetables which have seemingly high sources of nutrients, often include substances which hinder absorption and what is absorbed often requires inefficient conversion to make it useful. Take iron, for example. Trying to get all your iron from spinach alone would be asking for trouble unless you carefully adhered to some best practices. You would want to eat a source of vitamin C with that spinach, because that's going to make the iron more absorbable. Without the vitamin C (or eating meat with the spinach), you'll get almost no usable iron absorbed. What little does make it into your blood will be nonheme iron, which is only 10% as useful as heme iron (from meat). The same holds true for most other nutrients.
While meat does appear to be low on some of the RDAs, those are based on a mixed diet and the assumption that you're getting some of that amount from plants. A meat diet also reduces the need for some nutrients. B1 requirements, for example, are lower because a large quantity of B1 is used for carbohydrate metabolism.
What about the two biggies, vitamin C and fiber, both of which are nonexistent in animal sources? We are convinced that both of these are essential for health. If you don't consume enough vitamin C, you'll quickly develop scurvy. But, that's only partly true. If you don't consume enough vitamin C, while eating carbohydrates and unfresh foods, you will quickly develop scurvy. Scurvy can be prevented, and even cured, with nothing but fresh meat. While fresh meat doesn't have vitamin C in it, it has an antiscorbutic (as in it prevents/cures scurvy) effect. Wikipedia suggest that fresh meat does contain trace amounts of vitamin C, I've found little support for that. In any case, whether it does or does not, the effect is the same. Eating fresh meat, not heavily cooked, is enough to avoid scurvy.
Fiber is classed as an antinutrient. Not only does it provide no nutrition for us, it can hinder the absorption of other nutrients. It also can irritate the bowel, cause or worsen constipation, and often has other unpleasant side effects (it's not a coincidence that I no longer fart). It is not required for regularity, it can even cause problems with it. There's been studies that show removing all sources of fiber can help improve/cure some forms of constipation. I have had, essentially, no fiber for 3/4s of a year, and I am as regular as I have ever been.
Alright, I think I've rambled enough for the time being. You're welcome to reject any or all of this as crazy ramblings of a lunatic. "Broccoli is bad for you?! What a madman!" thank you for taken the time to explain all of this.
I'm new to all of this so any information helps me gain a perspective to begin research.
I looked into it a little more last night and saw some articles that it is not a long term plan but can be used in the short term. Is that your experience as well or do you feel this can be a long term method.
(please don't take any of my questions as judgement)
Four words: Owsley "The Bear" Stanley
You know what I'm finding interesting so far in my journey on this. Its becoming more apparent that our digestive systems may be more closely linked with the feline digestive system. I'm curious to learn more because there has also been a sharp increase of the instances of diabetes and inflammatory bowl diseases in cats, linked to the low quality high carbohydrate foods produced by the pet food companies. I remember reading an article a couple of years ago about two of the oldest living cats and that their owner fed them a diet of bacon, and eggs.
Also interesting to me is how I've read in several different places that cancer tumors thrive off of glucose, is this commonly accepted in the scientifice community? If so, then why is it not recommended to reduce glucose as part of a treatment plan for those with cancer?
Could it be that eating the SAD we are actually causing the rate of the occurences of these illnesses to increase? Have there been studies done on cultures that do not eat the same way we do, that would provide more insight?
Off to Google
I have a cat currently on a grain free diet. By that I mean he eats people tuna because grain free cat food is ridiculously expensive and I have 2 cats.
I have 5 on grain free, it's expensive for sure. after losing one of mine to ketoacidoses after four years of treating his diabetes that was caused by feeding him garbage, I can't let them eat anything else.
Make sure your's is getting the other nutrients needed, especially taurine.0 -
Also interesting to me is how I've read in several different places that cancer tumors thrive off of glucose, is this commonly accepted in the scientifice community? If so, then why is it not recommended to reduce glucose as part of a treatment plan for those with cancer?
Could it be that eating the SAD we are actually causing the rate of the occurences of these illnesses to increase? Have there been studies done on cultures that do not eat the same way we do, that would provide more insight?
Off to Google
The fact that cancer tumors thrive off glucose is commonly accepted, but not acknowledged. By which I mean that they use a test that uses radioactive markers in sugar to look for tumors, but if you ask most of them if glucose intake fuels tumor growth, they'll tell you no. It isn't recommended to reduce glucose as part of the treatment plan because a low carb diet can't be patented. (I'll refrain from going off on the full rant of medicine as a business)
As for question 2, search for Weston A. Price.
0
This discussion has been closed.