Keto--what are your thoughts?
Options
Replies
-
AlabasterVerve wrote: »_Terrapin_ wrote: »And Dr Phinney has been quoted repeatedly when someone who consumes higher then 50 grams of carbs is out nutritional ketosis and it takes a minimum of 7 to 14 days to recover. He exercises regularly and has been in nutritional ketosis for 10 plus years. It seems many who think they understand the diet and the needed grams of carbs do not understand the parameters.
If he said that he's wrong. All that's necessary for ketosis is the absence of glucose and depleted liver glycogen. It's normal to go in and out of ketosis; it's certainly not an ordeal you need to recover from. The liver can only hold a limited amount of glycogen -- you would die in the meantime if it took 7 to 14 days to enter ketosis.
"As most of you reading this know, if one restricts carbohydrate intake, typically to less than about 20-50 gm/day (dependent on timing and carbohydrate composition), and maintains modest but not high protein intake (because protein is gluconeogenic – i.e., protein in excess will be converted to glycogen by the liver), one can induce a state referred to as “nutritional ketosis”"
Ketosis – advantaged or misunderstood state? (Part I)
Peter Attia put together a series of blog posts on Ketosis if anyone is interested the science.
I remember listening to an interview where he (Phinney) discusses the nutritional ketosis and carb ratio and on a panel in at a Keto conference. He also cycles regularly with some distance(I forget. . . .40 or 50 miles at a clip). I wonder if Attia and Phinney are just looking at it from different perspectives. I have read and listened to Attia discuss his ultra work and I thought he was moving away from carb restriction, then again, I could be completely wrong.
0 -
stevencloser wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »The point is that in ketosis, there is no such thing as hunger or cravings. That's why in ketosis you don't need to count calories - you are going to eat less.
This is not true for everyone, that they eat less on keto. Some people also manage to maintain or gain on keto -- it's supposed to be a lifestyle, not a diet, after all.
I think keto works great for some people. Not everyone struggles with hunger (at least not physical hunger) or cravings, though, or wants their appetite to go away. And in that I've seen people fail on keto, it doesn't work for everyone.
I love fat and protein (and veggies cooked in fat), so I am pretty sure that after an adjustment period I could overeat on keto as easily as with any other eating style. I also believe that I feel better eating a more balanced diet with a good mix of less processed carbs (and some carb and fat based treats, sure), so that works for me.
I think people who enjoy keto should do what works for them and those who want to try it should. I only ever comment when people insist it works for everyone or that it's a superior approach in general or that it means that calories don't matter.
Off course you can gain on keto... Actually, I'm in bulk phase.
And I've lose the most part of my fat on a standard hypocaloric diet (14kg).
That's why I know how I felt during calories restriction during a high carb diet and during a high fat diet. It is quite simpler to limit food intake if you don't feel hungry.
Then there are other things to consider... But the point is simple: you cannot choose keto if you enjoy eating foods that are not compatible with it.
Any food is compatible with keto in the right quantity.
No not really, because of the strict upper limit on carbs, choosing to eat one thing that's higher in carbs would necessarily come at the detriment of stuff like veggies. Unless you're gonna call "half a slice of pizza and the rest of your day has to be entirely meat and fats so you're not over your carbs" compatible.
Most people can stay in ketosis somewhere in the range of under 50-100 grams depending on activity levels. Sedentary under 50 and higher for more active. The amount of a carb based 'treat' food needed for a fix is pretty small when you are not regularly eating starch and sugar in quantity. In the past I ate huge portions, so this is a noticeable change in my habits.
It is kind of alien to me how you are elevating vegetables nutritionally over fats and proteins. Fats an proteins are the essential macronutrients and contain all the micronutrients required. You can build a nutritional diet with minimal carbohydrates.
Citation needed on those.
OK, for the normal human carb restriction levels- http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0899900714003323#tbl1
Very low-carbohydrate ketogenic diet (VLCKD)
•
Carbohydrate, 20–50 g/d or <10% of the 2000 kcal/d diet, whether or not ketosis occurs. Derived from levels of carbohydrate required to induce ketosis in most people.
For the active athlete, the best quick find - http://eatingacademy.com/sports-and-nutrition/ketones-carbohydrates-can-co-exist
What did this amount to?I
Fat – 351 gm, or 3,160 kcal of fat
Protein – 245 gm, or 980 kcal of protein
Carbohydrate – 321 gm, or 1,284 kcal of carbohydrate
(I used package information and Nutritionist Pro software to calculate this.)
Hence, on this day I consumed about 5,400 kcal in total at the following ratio:
Fat – 58%
Protein – 18%
Carbohydrate – 24%
By all conventional wisdom I should not have been in ketosis the next morning, right?
The following morning, my BHB level was 2.2 mM and blood glucose was 5.1 mM.
Ah, now I'm seeing some disparity. It has more to with activity then it does with consumption. Makes sense if someone is active and consuming over 5,000 calories that they'd need to consume at a ratio as stated above. I wonder if they differentiate between good versus bad saturated fat or if they just get in as much as possible? I recognize in MFPland using good and bad is not viewed favorably unless referencing a Clint Eastwood movie.
0 -
I'm curious about the mechanics but I don't believe it's healthy for everyone. I actually asked about it lately trying to think of ways to give a better carb leeway without going out of ketosis, because I know a relative who has become very mentally unstable on it, obsessing about every single food, refusing to eat cold cuts because she doesn't know the carb content and taking care not to drink more than 1-3 cups of coffee a day because she could "use those carbs" (apparently each cup of coffee has 1 gram of carbs). This is her 5th month in and she has fallen into deep depression. I admit it's just a tool and may not be the cause of her instability, but it's just obvious that's not a good approach to weight loss for her.
She was not like that when she was counting calories. She says that with calories you can generally estimate something every once in a while, slip up without consequences that take too long to fix, and just tighten or relax your calories whenever you want. With keto this is not the case because it's a very delicate balance and anything has the ability to throw you out of ketosis. Why anyone would put themselves through something that isn't working for them just because you lose slightly more on it is just beyond me.
I Learned my lesson right away when I tried it two years ago and quit after a month of erratic blood sugar, IBS coming back, weakness, extreme hunger, and general suckiness of the food choices to me.
My take: try it for a month. Some people thrive on it and you might be one of them. If you find yourself having a hard time there is absolutely no need to drag it on any further and ANY diet that induces a deficit will help you lose weight no matter what it is, so you have a world of choices to pick from.
One more thing, if you do decide to go on it make sure to get a good multi vitamin and a good electrolyte replacement, because messing with electrolytes can be scary and may cause death in some people. Also remember you might become a little bit more prone to infections so just keep a general eye on your health. Complications are rare but worth mentioning.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15329077
0 -
stevencloser wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »The point is that in ketosis, there is no such thing as hunger or cravings. That's why in ketosis you don't need to count calories - you are going to eat less.
This is not true for everyone, that they eat less on keto. Some people also manage to maintain or gain on keto -- it's supposed to be a lifestyle, not a diet, after all.
I think keto works great for some people. Not everyone struggles with hunger (at least not physical hunger) or cravings, though, or wants their appetite to go away. And in that I've seen people fail on keto, it doesn't work for everyone.
I love fat and protein (and veggies cooked in fat), so I am pretty sure that after an adjustment period I could overeat on keto as easily as with any other eating style. I also believe that I feel better eating a more balanced diet with a good mix of less processed carbs (and some carb and fat based treats, sure), so that works for me.
I think people who enjoy keto should do what works for them and those who want to try it should. I only ever comment when people insist it works for everyone or that it's a superior approach in general or that it means that calories don't matter.
Off course you can gain on keto... Actually, I'm in bulk phase.
And I've lose the most part of my fat on a standard hypocaloric diet (14kg).
That's why I know how I felt during calories restriction during a high carb diet and during a high fat diet. It is quite simpler to limit food intake if you don't feel hungry.
Then there are other things to consider... But the point is simple: you cannot choose keto if you enjoy eating foods that are not compatible with it.
Any food is compatible with keto in the right quantity.
No not really, because of the strict upper limit on carbs, choosing to eat one thing that's higher in carbs would necessarily come at the detriment of stuff like veggies. Unless you're gonna call "half a slice of pizza and the rest of your day has to be entirely meat and fats so you're not over your carbs" compatible.
Most people can stay in ketosis somewhere in the range of under 50-100 grams depending on activity levels. Sedentary under 50 and higher for more active. The amount of a carb based 'treat' food needed for a fix is pretty small when you are not regularly eating starch and sugar in quantity. In the past I ate huge portions, so this is a noticeable change in my habits.
It is kind of alien to me how you are elevating vegetables nutritionally over fats and proteins. Fats an proteins are the essential macronutrients and contain all the micronutrients required. You can build a nutritional diet with minimal carbohydrates.
Citation needed on those.
OK, for the normal human carb restriction levels- http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0899900714003323#tbl1
Very low-carbohydrate ketogenic diet (VLCKD)
•
Carbohydrate, 20–50 g/d or <10% of the 2000 kcal/d diet, whether or not ketosis occurs. Derived from levels of carbohydrate required to induce ketosis in most people.
For the active athlete, the best quick find - http://eatingacademy.com/sports-and-nutrition/ketones-carbohydrates-can-co-exist
What did this amount to?I
Fat – 351 gm, or 3,160 kcal of fat
Protein – 245 gm, or 980 kcal of protein
Carbohydrate – 321 gm, or 1,284 kcal of carbohydrate
(I used package information and Nutritionist Pro software to calculate this.)
Hence, on this day I consumed about 5,400 kcal in total at the following ratio:
Fat – 58%
Protein – 18%
Carbohydrate – 24%
By all conventional wisdom I should not have been in ketosis the next morning, right?
The following morning, my BHB level was 2.2 mM and blood glucose was 5.1 mM.
First link
So this says that even at less than 50 grams you might not get into ketosis. You said below 50-100 is good.For example, a very low-carbohydrate ketogenic diet (VLCKD) is defined as comprised of 20 to 50 g/d carbohydrate, but because of individual variability, ketosis (blood ketone bodies >0.5 mM) may not occur.
Second link, alright. But obviously that's n=1, 1 day, and he titled the paragraph you quoted "Extreme example".0 -
Still looking for the micronutrient evidence?
posted a while back http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/23/7/948.full.pdf+html
(image also posted earlier)
That's a two week study. I'm talking long term. Sorry for the confusion.
Don't understand. The nutrient content of a diet isn't a function of how long you eat it for.0 -
stevencloser wrote: »
Not in ketosis, and from the text it becomes evident the subjects made an effort to eat just as much vegetables as before.
No measurement of ketosis that I can see. They speculate that ketosis is avoided by the dietary ratios, but offer no data. At 65g of carbohydrate, moderate protein and calorie restriction I wouldn't bet either way.
So what if they ate vegetables ? {edit - I see now the claim that only fat and protein was needed for complete nutrition}
LOL.We conclude, therefore, that the low carbohydrate diet presents no health hazard, either generally or in regard to its nutritional value. The nutrient content is appreciably higher than could be achieved by a diet in which the same caloric reduction was effected by a general restriction in all foods.0 -
stevencloser wrote: »
Not in ketosis, and from the text it becomes evident the subjects made an effort to eat just as much vegetables as before.
No measurement of ketosis that I can see. They speculate that ketosis is avoided by the dietary ratios, but offer no data. At 65g of carbohydrate, moderate protein and calorie restriction I wouldn't bet either way.
So what if they ate vegetables ? {edit - I see now the claim that only fat and protein was needed for complete nutrition}
LOL.We conclude, therefore, that the low carbohydrate diet presents no health hazard, either generally or in regard to its nutritional value. The nutrient content is appreciably higher than could be achieved by a diet in which the same caloric reduction was effected by a general restriction in all foods.
It matters that they ate vegetables because Umayster said you can get enough of all micronutrients entirely from proteins and fats.
Also obviously that would be the conclusion if they think you'd eat less vegetable on a "general restriction in all foods".0 -
False. Calorie deficit empties adipocytes, regardless of macro ratio. The only reason people seem to think keto diets burn more fat is because there's a mental disconnect where they don't pay attention to the fact that they are consuming such a high level of fat, which the body digests before turning to fat stores. With a 2000 calorie TDEE (for example) eating 1500 calories worth of carbs or eating 1500 calories worth of fat would both result in exactly 500 calories of stored fat burned to make up the deficit. Honestly, the carbs might even burn a bit more, as TEF for carbs is between 10 and 15%, while TEF for fat is only 2-3%.This diet sounds soooooooo hard and not quick and convenient
If you mean "quick to empty adipocytes", it is the quicker diet I think. It is the only dietary approach that turns your body into a fat-burning machine (most part of enrgy will come from fat), forming ketones from fatty acids and using them instead of glucose (there remains cells that still need glucose, but all the muscolar works and up to 70% of brain energy can come from ketones).
0 -
piperdown44 wrote: »Serious question here because I have not read much on keto diets. Do the fats really have to be the majority? Was looking at a couple sites and they have fats listed between 60-75% of total calories. What would happen if the ratios of fats and proteins were equal? Or slightly favored towards protein?
Mine are:
Protein 40%
Fat 46%
Carbs 14%
That works out to protein 101g, fat 51g, carbs 35g on 1003 calories per day. Granted, those numbers were decided upon by my doctor, but I plan to keep the same basic breakdown once he's done with me, just up my calories to an un-psychotic level! I'll lower carbs slightly, as he has me at 35g a day and I prefer closer to 15g, and raise my protein, which will put fat and protein about even.
Someone said that going in and out of ketosis isn't a big deal. It isn't for some, but it can be for others. It's a big deal for me, but the effects are based on each individual. My bf went from 150g to 30g of carbs in a week without a single hiccup. I dislike her greatly for this! I love this diet and it's really working well for me. Keto isn't for everyone. Like everything else diet, something that works for me may not work for you. Good luck!0 -
stevencloser wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »The point is that in ketosis, there is no such thing as hunger or cravings. That's why in ketosis you don't need to count calories - you are going to eat less.
This is not true for everyone, that they eat less on keto. Some people also manage to maintain or gain on keto -- it's supposed to be a lifestyle, not a diet, after all.
I think keto works great for some people. Not everyone struggles with hunger (at least not physical hunger) or cravings, though, or wants their appetite to go away. And in that I've seen people fail on keto, it doesn't work for everyone.
I love fat and protein (and veggies cooked in fat), so I am pretty sure that after an adjustment period I could overeat on keto as easily as with any other eating style. I also believe that I feel better eating a more balanced diet with a good mix of less processed carbs (and some carb and fat based treats, sure), so that works for me.
I think people who enjoy keto should do what works for them and those who want to try it should. I only ever comment when people insist it works for everyone or that it's a superior approach in general or that it means that calories don't matter.
Off course you can gain on keto... Actually, I'm in bulk phase.
And I've lose the most part of my fat on a standard hypocaloric diet (14kg).
That's why I know how I felt during calories restriction during a high carb diet and during a high fat diet. It is quite simpler to limit food intake if you don't feel hungry.
Then there are other things to consider... But the point is simple: you cannot choose keto if you enjoy eating foods that are not compatible with it.
Any food is compatible with keto in the right quantity.
No not really, because of the strict upper limit on carbs, choosing to eat one thing that's higher in carbs would necessarily come at the detriment of stuff like veggies. Unless you're gonna call "half a slice of pizza and the rest of your day has to be entirely meat and fats so you're not over your carbs" compatible.
Most people can stay in ketosis somewhere in the range of under 50-100 grams depending on activity levels. Sedentary under 50 and higher for more active. The amount of a carb based 'treat' food needed for a fix is pretty small when you are not regularly eating starch and sugar in quantity. In the past I ate huge portions, so this is a noticeable change in my habits.
It is kind of alien to me how you are elevating vegetables nutritionally over fats and proteins. Fats an proteins are the essential macronutrients and contain all the micronutrients required. You can build a nutritional diet with minimal carbohydrates.
Citation needed on those.
Here is another extreme - this example is nutritional details on a meat only eater. Vegetarians are the other extreme of food restriction and getting proper nutrients takes high levels of education, work and attention.
http://mostlymeatiswhatieat.blogspot.ca/2012/01/nutritionally-perfect-carnivorous-diet.html
This guys all meat nutrition probably beats many mfp diary's, meat is nutritionally dense and complete. All you have to do is use a complete nutrition calculator like the one at nutritiondata.self.com which show all the nutrient. The following lamb example is 3 little ounces.
http://nutritiondata.self.com/facts/lamb-veal-and-game-products/4669/2
I felt like you were playing me asking for citations, isn't it obvious that you can make a nutritionally complete diet out of a wide variety of food choices? In my reading on nutrition it seems like many extreme examples of food limitation in different groups from around the world can be made to work nutritionally.0 -
piperdown44 wrote: »Serious question here because I have not read much on keto diets. Do the fats really have to be the majority? Was looking at a couple sites and they have fats listed between 60-75% of total calories.
What would happen if the ratios of fats and proteins were equal? Or slightly favored towards protein?
It does seem very weird at first look, but you are changing your diet from running on glucose from carbs to running on ketones from fats - so the fats are your energy. Proteins have a specific use and you don't need an excess (except the bodybuilders use manipulations in protein levels)
0 -
Interesting blog. I'm going to look through that. Thanks.0
-
_Terrapin_ wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »The point is that in ketosis, there is no such thing as hunger or cravings. That's why in ketosis you don't need to count calories - you are going to eat less.
This is not true for everyone, that they eat less on keto. Some people also manage to maintain or gain on keto -- it's supposed to be a lifestyle, not a diet, after all.
I think keto works great for some people. Not everyone struggles with hunger (at least not physical hunger) or cravings, though, or wants their appetite to go away. And in that I've seen people fail on keto, it doesn't work for everyone.
I love fat and protein (and veggies cooked in fat), so I am pretty sure that after an adjustment period I could overeat on keto as easily as with any other eating style. I also believe that I feel better eating a more balanced diet with a good mix of less processed carbs (and some carb and fat based treats, sure), so that works for me.
I think people who enjoy keto should do what works for them and those who want to try it should. I only ever comment when people insist it works for everyone or that it's a superior approach in general or that it means that calories don't matter.
Off course you can gain on keto... Actually, I'm in bulk phase.
And I've lose the most part of my fat on a standard hypocaloric diet (14kg).
That's why I know how I felt during calories restriction during a high carb diet and during a high fat diet. It is quite simpler to limit food intake if you don't feel hungry.
Then there are other things to consider... But the point is simple: you cannot choose keto if you enjoy eating foods that are not compatible with it.
Any food is compatible with keto in the right quantity.
No not really, because of the strict upper limit on carbs, choosing to eat one thing that's higher in carbs would necessarily come at the detriment of stuff like veggies. Unless you're gonna call "half a slice of pizza and the rest of your day has to be entirely meat and fats so you're not over your carbs" compatible.
Most people can stay in ketosis somewhere in the range of under 50-100 grams depending on activity levels. Sedentary under 50 and higher for more active. The amount of a carb based 'treat' food needed for a fix is pretty small when you are not regularly eating starch and sugar in quantity. In the past I ate huge portions, so this is a noticeable change in my habits.
It is kind of alien to me how you are elevating vegetables nutritionally over fats and proteins. Fats an proteins are the essential macronutrients and contain all the micronutrients required. You can build a nutritional diet with minimal carbohydrates.
Citation needed on those.
OK, for the normal human carb restriction levels- http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0899900714003323#tbl1
Very low-carbohydrate ketogenic diet (VLCKD)
•
Carbohydrate, 20–50 g/d or <10% of the 2000 kcal/d diet, whether or not ketosis occurs. Derived from levels of carbohydrate required to induce ketosis in most people.
For the active athlete, the best quick find - http://eatingacademy.com/sports-and-nutrition/ketones-carbohydrates-can-co-exist
What did this amount to?I
Fat – 351 gm, or 3,160 kcal of fat
Protein – 245 gm, or 980 kcal of protein
Carbohydrate – 321 gm, or 1,284 kcal of carbohydrate
(I used package information and Nutritionist Pro software to calculate this.)
Hence, on this day I consumed about 5,400 kcal in total at the following ratio:
Fat – 58%
Protein – 18%
Carbohydrate – 24%
By all conventional wisdom I should not have been in ketosis the next morning, right?
The following morning, my BHB level was 2.2 mM and blood glucose was 5.1 mM.
Ah, now I'm seeing some disparity. It has more to with activity then it does with consumption. Makes sense if someone is active and consuming over 5,000 calories that they'd need to consume at a ratio as stated above. I wonder if they differentiate between good versus bad saturated fat or if they just get in as much as possible? I recognize in MFPland using good and bad is not viewed favorably unless referencing a Clint Eastwood movie.
My go to fats have always been saturated - against all the hooey of the last 40 years nutritional advice. Over the last 10 or so years the science 'judgement' on saturated is improving. Many of the earlier studies were bad. The following blog has a good summary and a great list of studies cited at the end on meat/fat.
http://www.diagnosisdiet.com/food/meats/0 -
In ketosis you can have a higher deficit than in a standard hypocaloric diet, that's why is quicker.tigersword wrote: »
False. Calorie deficit empties adipocytes, regardless of macro ratio. The only reason people seem to think keto diets burn more fat is because there's a mental disconnect where they don't pay attention to the fact that they are consuming such a high level of fat, which the body digests before turning to fat stores. With a 2000 calorie TDEE (for example) eating 1500 calories worth of carbs or eating 1500 calories worth of fat would both result in exactly 500 calories of stored fat burned to make up the deficit. Honestly, the carbs might even burn a bit more, as TEF for carbs is between 10 and 15%, while TEF for fat is only 2-3%.This diet sounds soooooooo hard and not quick and convenient
If you mean "quick to empty adipocytes", it is the quicker diet I think. It is the only dietary approach that turns your body into a fat-burning machine (most part of enrgy will come from fat), forming ketones from fatty acids and using them instead of glucose (there remains cells that still need glucose, but all the muscolar works and up to 70% of brain energy can come from ketones).
0 -
stevencloser wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »The point is that in ketosis, there is no such thing as hunger or cravings. That's why in ketosis you don't need to count calories - you are going to eat less.
This is not true for everyone, that they eat less on keto. Some people also manage to maintain or gain on keto -- it's supposed to be a lifestyle, not a diet, after all.
I think keto works great for some people. Not everyone struggles with hunger (at least not physical hunger) or cravings, though, or wants their appetite to go away. And in that I've seen people fail on keto, it doesn't work for everyone.
I love fat and protein (and veggies cooked in fat), so I am pretty sure that after an adjustment period I could overeat on keto as easily as with any other eating style. I also believe that I feel better eating a more balanced diet with a good mix of less processed carbs (and some carb and fat based treats, sure), so that works for me.
I think people who enjoy keto should do what works for them and those who want to try it should. I only ever comment when people insist it works for everyone or that it's a superior approach in general or that it means that calories don't matter.
Off course you can gain on keto... Actually, I'm in bulk phase.
And I've lose the most part of my fat on a standard hypocaloric diet (14kg).
That's why I know how I felt during calories restriction during a high carb diet and during a high fat diet. It is quite simpler to limit food intake if you don't feel hungry.
Then there are other things to consider... But the point is simple: you cannot choose keto if you enjoy eating foods that are not compatible with it.
Any food is compatible with keto in the right quantity.
No not really, because of the strict upper limit on carbs, choosing to eat one thing that's higher in carbs would necessarily come at the detriment of stuff like veggies. Unless you're gonna call "half a slice of pizza and the rest of your day has to be entirely meat and fats so you're not over your carbs" compatible.
Most people can stay in ketosis somewhere in the range of under 50-100 grams depending on activity levels. Sedentary under 50 and higher for more active. The amount of a carb based 'treat' food needed for a fix is pretty small when you are not regularly eating starch and sugar in quantity. In the past I ate huge portions, so this is a noticeable change in my habits.
It is kind of alien to me how you are elevating vegetables nutritionally over fats and proteins. Fats an proteins are the essential macronutrients and contain all the micronutrients required. You can build a nutritional diet with minimal carbohydrates.
Citation needed on those.
OK, for the normal human carb restriction levels- http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0899900714003323#tbl1
Very low-carbohydrate ketogenic diet (VLCKD)
•
Carbohydrate, 20–50 g/d or <10% of the 2000 kcal/d diet, whether or not ketosis occurs. Derived from levels of carbohydrate required to induce ketosis in most people.
For the active athlete, the best quick find - http://eatingacademy.com/sports-and-nutrition/ketones-carbohydrates-can-co-exist
What did this amount to?I
Fat – 351 gm, or 3,160 kcal of fat
Protein – 245 gm, or 980 kcal of protein
Carbohydrate – 321 gm, or 1,284 kcal of carbohydrate
(I used package information and Nutritionist Pro software to calculate this.)
Hence, on this day I consumed about 5,400 kcal in total at the following ratio:
Fat – 58%
Protein – 18%
Carbohydrate – 24%
By all conventional wisdom I should not have been in ketosis the next morning, right?
The following morning, my BHB level was 2.2 mM and blood glucose was 5.1 mM.
First link
So this says that even at less than 50 grams you might not get into ketosis. You said below 50-100 is good.For example, a very low-carbohydrate ketogenic diet (VLCKD) is defined as comprised of 20 to 50 g/d carbohydrate, but because of individual variability, ketosis (blood ketone bodies >0.5 mM) may not occur.
Second link, alright. But obviously that's n=1, 1 day, and he titled the paragraph you quoted "Extreme example".
I said under 50 for sedentary - the 20-50 range should cover most sedentary folks with calories in the 1200-2000 range and account for individual variability.
My upper limit for more active was 100 and actually a conservative number as illustrated by the linked athlete eating 321gr carbs and maintaining ketone levels in the ketosis range on a day with extreme levels of activity.0 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »I'm curious about the mechanics but I don't believe it's healthy for everyone. I actually asked about it lately trying to think of ways to give a better carb leeway without going out of ketosis, because I know a relative who has become very mentally unstable on it, obsessing about every single food, refusing to eat cold cuts because she doesn't know the carb content and taking care not to drink more than 1-3 cups of coffee a day because she could "use those carbs" (apparently each cup of coffee has 1 gram of carbs). This is her 5th month in and she has fallen into deep depression. I admit it's just a tool and may not be the cause of her instability, but it's just obvious that's not a good approach to weight loss for her.
She was not like that when she was counting calories. She says that with calories you can generally estimate something every once in a while, slip up without consequences that take too long to fix, and just tighten or relax your calories whenever you want. With keto this is not the case because it's a very delicate balance and anything has the ability to throw you out of ketosis. Why anyone would put themselves through something that isn't working for them just because you lose slightly more on it is just beyond me.
I Learned my lesson right away when I tried it two years ago and quit after a month of erratic blood sugar, IBS coming back, weakness, extreme hunger, and general suckiness of the food choices to me.
My take: try it for a month. Some people thrive on it and you might be one of them. If you find yourself having a hard time there is absolutely no need to drag it on any further and ANY diet that induces a deficit will help you lose weight no matter what it is, so you have a world of choices to pick from.
One more thing, if you do decide to go on it make sure to get a good multi vitamin and a good electrolyte replacement, because messing with electrolytes can be scary and may cause death in some people. Also remember you might become a little bit more prone to infections so just keep a general eye on your health. Complications are rare but worth mentioning.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15329077
Your post is very interesting. Possibly for your aunt with mood issues, maybe controlling diet gives her some satisfaction when her moods are out of control? Also, sodium needs double on low carb and low sodium effects can be very negative - it may be worth investigating with her.
Be careful with using epilepsy ketogenic diet studies for information to apply to food based ketogenic diet with generally healthy people unless you can see what they were feeding them and the health of the people on them. Some of the medical ketogenic diets were based on using oils to replace foods. Also ketogenic medical diets were generally reserved for those who did not respond to drugs for epilepsy, so the toughest cases.
Also, old school epilepsy ketogenic diet goals are to stop seizures, not really for long term nutrition - newer epilepsy keto diets & studies may be more relevant to normal keto, but with dist research you always have to keep the perspective of the researcher in mind. eg athletic vs normal vs medical nutrition.0 -
From one of Juimmy Moore's blogs or posts:
As you can see, within four days I was in nutritional ketosis (Volek and Phinney says it can take as much as two weeks to become fully keto-adapted) and I’ve stayed at 1.2 millimolar and above ever since averaging around 2.0 millimolar daily. While I started at an anemically low level, you’ll notice my blood ketones got as high as 5.0 millimolar at around the two-week mark. I gave blood on Day 2 of this experiment which may or may not have made an impact on the numbers. Honestly, I don’t know why the ketones went that high. And I didn’t “feel” any different with the blood levels of ketones above 3.0.
He goes on to discuss eating carbs at 1-3% of intake which is extreme in order to get back to nutritional ketosis. I do not think Volek or Phinney recommend this; as for Attia it seems he consumes larger quantities of carbs and then has a long workout to burn the carbs off. IDK, seems like Attia is an extreme example of someone who admits to not staying in ketosis and it seems Moore went very low for his carb intake, and Phinney/Volek seem to be accurate that it takes 7-14 days to get back to ketosis when you consume 50g of carbs or more.
I think the vast majority of people attempting keto would say they do not go as low as Moore and certainly do not work out to the level of Attia.
I'll post the Attia example from the begnning of 2014 and he does state not eating or training like him due to genetics and a few other attributes.0 -
From Attia's blog What I actually eat Part 3:
He asked, “How are you able to stay in ketosis with all of those carbs?” I responded, basically, that for the past few months I have not been consistently in ketosis, and when I am it’s only following a long bike ride where my BHB levels may get back into the 2-3 mM range. Most days, however, I live in the 0.3 to 0.8 mM range, depending on the time of day. (In my mind, to reap the benefits of nutritional ketosis, one probably needs to consistently be in the 1-3 mM range, and for some “applications” 3-4 mM is probably ideal.)
It seems Attia can move in and out of ketosis with greater ease due to intense workout sessions. Extremely rare for someone to work the way he does physically. It is sort of funny reading how he perceives being sedentary and eating 3,800 calories for maintenance. Again, the physical workouts are the difference maker for his caloric needs and openly states he does not stay in ketosis.0 -
Someone said that going in and out of ketosis isn't a big deal. It isn't for some, but it can be for others.
I'm in at least light ketosis more often than not but I "knock myself out" on a fairly regular basis by eating 20g-40g of carbs in a single meal but that's short lived and I'm often back in ketosis before the day is out or by morning if it was dinner. When I actually eat high carb (and not just highish carb for one meal) it's the exact same process, it just takes a few days instead of a few hours.
Like a lot of people I eat low carb for reasons beyond weight loss so I'll often speed up the process of getting back into ketosis by fasting and/or exercising intensely to get back to feeling "normal" -- that ketosis provides and the reason I choose to eat this way.
So I can easily see that if ketosis is negating an underlying pathology, if there's addictive behaviors around carbohydrate or perhaps if there's a food intolerance that's eliminated by a low carb diet it might be a very big deal to the individual. But the process of ketosis itself (in my experience and everything I've read about it) is predictable and straight forward once your body is producing the necessary enzymes.
ETA: I've also been eating this way for at least 3 years which may make a difference? I don't know.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 393 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 931 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions