Is low carb dangerous? possibly.
Options
Replies
-
I have a LOT of weight to lose. I have tried EVERY SINGLE DIET out there. I went back to low carb at the beginning of the year. I've lost 11.5 pounds so far. I know that will even out and lessen as time goes on. I will say that with this way of eating, I have never felt better. The first few days are the hardest as you detox from sugar/junk. Day four for me, honestly, I didn't think I was gonna make it. LOL I mean... I was beyond *kitten* to my husband, and wanted to cry. I felt nauseous. Woke up day five and felt like a new person. If you can stick it out the first few days knowing that it gets better, it's worth it. I feel amazing. No cravings...never starving. I usually have to remember to eat something...which at 150 lbs to lose you know is not something I'm used to having to remember
Definitely no brain fog. I feel more alert, focused, etc. Had blood work done a few days back and it's all great. Cholesterol, triglycerides, everything. My biggest struggle is redoing everything about how I cook for my family. I have to relearn how to cook. My husband is diabetic, and it's helped his blood sugar numbers as well. He does eat a few more carbs just so his blood doesn't go to low.
That's great! I'm not saying a low carb diet is inefficient for weight loss. I'm just wondering if low carb diets over years and years and years is ok for the brain and other body processes in the absence of glycogen.0 -
AmazonGoddessofDoom wrote: »Your body can use fat instead of carbs. Most people who go on a low carb diet and don't thrive is because they're not getting enough fat. There are a ton of studies available if you Google.
I have some friends who are low carb and her husband is a molecular biologist studying epigenetics and the science behind low carbing and how their bodies function better is why they've chosen to eat this way. They've been low carb for probably five years and they're both in amazing health.
For me, it fixes so many of my problems. I have Hashimotos, PCOS, ADHD, hidradenitis supprativa, depression, fibro... the list goes on. When I'm eating low carb, my medication works better, I sleep better, I'm not in pain and all my other issues just kind of go away. It works for me.
Also, I have a family history of diabetes and when your thyroid is giving you issues, it can affect your A1C as well. Low carb lowered my A1C and put me back in a normal range. My endocrinologist recs low carb high fat diets to most of his patients with autoimmune disorders.
Yes, I'm not saying it isn't beneficial. But I would think after years of low carb eating, your glycogen storage would be depleted. Someone above said protein can get converted into glucose, so there's that.
And congrats on feeling better!0 -
realityfades wrote: »It said that the brain alone requires 120-130 grams of carbs a day to remain healthy. To me, that implies eating a low carb diet may be starving the organs when done long enough.
Your body is able to make what it needs for that purpose if you don't provide it through diet. (My understanding is that it still needs a very small amount of carbs as it can't do gluconeogenesis [edit: ugh, always mess up the name of this process] if completely glycogen depleted, but even keto isn't no carb.)
There are long-term studies on diets (as in various ways of eating) due to things like the nurses and health professional studies, which is where we are able to see lots of correlations (and follow up on them -- they mostly seem consistent with common sense, IMO). But I doubt there's a long enough and significant enough group for low carb to be looked at, let alone something like keto. And there would be lots of things that would have to be controlled for, like if it was a disproportionately overweight population (since it's often chosen for weight loss) or a population more inclined toward certain diseases (since it gets recommended to them) or, of course, a population more likely to be thinking a lot about how they eat. It's like how studies of vegans get distorted by the fact that they are likely more health conscious and often more active.
The best place to go for a study would be traditional diets/populations, but my understanding is that there aren't any that are keto. There are some that are low carb, though -- it appears that humans can have a healthy diet with a huge range of macro mixes, so I tend to think focusing on macros as the key to health is really beside the point. As a way to help yourself make better choices it can be helpful, though.0 -
I was pretty successful on a low carb plan too, and I readily admit that I consider myself to be a "meat-a-holic", but there came a point when I craved some fruit or veg, so ultimately it was unsustainable for me. I developed kidneys stones a couple of years later, and my urologist said that low carb diets contribute to that condition - I think he was just trying to scare me, and it didnt work. Kidney stones are most often excess calcium deposits. I still have a couple of stones that are just sitting back, chillin', waiting to speak to me.0
-
I apologize if this was discussed in the article (I quickly skimmed it):
- The liver and muscles store a ton of glucose as glycogen (which are very long chains of glucose molecules). When blood glucose levels are low, the pancreas releases glucagon, which is a hormone that tells the liver to break down some of its glycogen into glucose.
- Protein can be "converted" into carbohydrates if the body has a greater need for carbs. This is why many people on a keto diet cannot eat super high amounts of protein, because that will trigger the body to stop ketosis (this is also why many diabetics on insulin need to take some insulin for low-carb high-protein foods, like chicken breasts)
- This is pretty interesting and I only found out about it a few weeks ago, but some cells don't require insulin for glucose to be transported. GLUT3, a glucose transporter in the brain, runs independent of insulin. Technically, a person can be on a low-carb diet (or be void of insulin in type 1 diabetes) and still have glucose fueling the brain. Protein can be converted into carbs (which could possibly be stored as glycogen in excess). Muscles are composed of a lot of protein, so in instances of long-term starvation the body can start to break down muscle in order to obtain glucose. The big issue with the brain and glucose metabolism is in instances of severe hypoglycemia where glycogen stores are already severely depleted. I read a study that showed the continuous-glucose-monitor data of a type 1 diabetic who died from hypoglycemia (death in bed syndrome), and the body tried to bring up his BG multiple times (glucagon is released, glycogen breaks down into glucose, BG rises... BG concentration drops again, the cycle repeats... The Somogyi effect is a great example of what happens during this process). At some point, the man's glycogen stores were completely depleted, there was still an insulin excess, and the man passed away as a result of his BG being SUPER low (I think close to zero, but I'm having issues finding the study again and am not 100% sure)
Sorry if I started to ramble (clearly, I need to do A LOT more research). I think keto is useful in some situations (especially when cutting carbs might help a person create the calorie deficit necessary for weight loss), but there are some instances where a person might find keto inappropriate. The body has numerous mechanisms in place to make sure vital organs receive adequate glucose, but some diseases might cause these mechanisms to fail.
Personally, I wouldn't follow a keto diet, because I'm very prone to going into diabetic ketoacidosis. Ketoacidosis is very different from ketosis (ketoacidosis occurs from uncontrolled ketosis as a result of insulin deficiency, hyperglycemia, and dehydration), but I would have issues determining if I am urinating moderate ketones from a keto diet (and don't need to do any interventions), or if I'm urinating moderate ketones because of an insulin deficiency because of my insulin pump failing to administer insulin (which would require me to resolve the deficiency ASAP before ketoacidosis occurs).0 -
realityfades wrote: »Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »You seem to have a bee in your bonnet about low carb diets.
Cool, thanks for assuming! Too bad you're wrong.
Your posting history suggests otherwise.0 -
During periods of low carbohydrate intake, the body begins favoring different metabolic pathways.
In such a state, the brain's demand for glucose becomes partially met by using ketones, and to a lesser extent, possibly lactic acid. In such a state, the needs go from the usual ~120g/day to around ~25g/day.
This last ~25g remains so vital, however, that your body is capable of gluconeogenesis to make glucose out of various substances: lactate, glycerol (possibly stripped from a triglyceride / fat), alanine (amino acid), and glutamine (amino acid), and about 10% other substances, many of them other amino acids.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gluconeogenesis0 -
During periods of low carbohydrate intake, the body begins favoring different metabolic pathways.
In such a state, the brain's demand for glucose becomes partially met by using ketones, and to a lesser extent, possibly lactic acid. In such a state, the needs go from the usual ~120g/day to around ~25g/day.
This last ~25g remains so vital, however, that your body is capable of gluconeogenesis to make glucose out of various substances: lactate, glycerol (possibly stripped from a triglyceride / fat), alanine (amino acid), and glutamine (amino acid), and about 10% other substances, many of them other amino acids.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gluconeogenesis
Thanks for the bit of info. I guess that's why Atkins has such a short induction phase. The amount of carbs allowed on that would certainly be detrimental if done for very long periods of time.0 -
realityfades wrote: »During periods of low carbohydrate intake, the body begins favoring different metabolic pathways.
In such a state, the brain's demand for glucose becomes partially met by using ketones, and to a lesser extent, possibly lactic acid. In such a state, the needs go from the usual ~120g/day to around ~25g/day.
This last ~25g remains so vital, however, that your body is capable of gluconeogenesis to make glucose out of various substances: lactate, glycerol (possibly stripped from a triglyceride / fat), alanine (amino acid), and glutamine (amino acid), and about 10% other substances, many of them other amino acids.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gluconeogenesis
Thanks for the bit of info. I guess that's why Atkins has such a short induction phase. The amount of carbs allowed on that would certainly be detrimental if done for very long periods of time.
People have done ketosis for years at a time. As far as I know, there have not been any reported "detrimental" affects that you keep claiming. While I think keto is encouraged too much right now as the "cure-all", it is not some horrible, evil diet that will kill everyone like you seem to be implying.0 -
realityfades wrote: »During periods of low carbohydrate intake, the body begins favoring different metabolic pathways.
In such a state, the brain's demand for glucose becomes partially met by using ketones, and to a lesser extent, possibly lactic acid. In such a state, the needs go from the usual ~120g/day to around ~25g/day.
This last ~25g remains so vital, however, that your body is capable of gluconeogenesis to make glucose out of various substances: lactate, glycerol (possibly stripped from a triglyceride / fat), alanine (amino acid), and glutamine (amino acid), and about 10% other substances, many of them other amino acids.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gluconeogenesis
Thanks for the bit of info. I guess that's why Atkins has such a short induction phase. The amount of carbs allowed on that would certainly be detrimental if done for very long periods of time.
Atkins isn't a keto diet. But lots of keto dieters eat 25 or less daily. Long term.0 -
realityfades wrote: »During periods of low carbohydrate intake, the body begins favoring different metabolic pathways.
In such a state, the brain's demand for glucose becomes partially met by using ketones, and to a lesser extent, possibly lactic acid. In such a state, the needs go from the usual ~120g/day to around ~25g/day.
This last ~25g remains so vital, however, that your body is capable of gluconeogenesis to make glucose out of various substances: lactate, glycerol (possibly stripped from a triglyceride / fat), alanine (amino acid), and glutamine (amino acid), and about 10% other substances, many of them other amino acids.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gluconeogenesis
Thanks for the bit of info. I guess that's why Atkins has such a short induction phase. The amount of carbs allowed on that would certainly be detrimental if done for very long periods of time.
People have done ketosis for years at a time. As far as I know, there have not been any reported "detrimental" affects that you keep claiming. While I think keto is encouraged too much right now as the "cure-all", it is not some horrible, evil diet that will kill everyone like you seem to be implying.
I didn't claim anything. I asked if restricting carbs to a low amount for a long amount of time causes issues with organs. Other people chimed in and said the body can metabolize protein into glucose, which was helpful to know. Like I said, the whole reason I started even wondering about this is because of the NIH article I posted above and it kind of made me change the way I view nutrition.0 -
Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »realityfades wrote: »During periods of low carbohydrate intake, the body begins favoring different metabolic pathways.
In such a state, the brain's demand for glucose becomes partially met by using ketones, and to a lesser extent, possibly lactic acid. In such a state, the needs go from the usual ~120g/day to around ~25g/day.
This last ~25g remains so vital, however, that your body is capable of gluconeogenesis to make glucose out of various substances: lactate, glycerol (possibly stripped from a triglyceride / fat), alanine (amino acid), and glutamine (amino acid), and about 10% other substances, many of them other amino acids.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gluconeogenesis
Thanks for the bit of info. I guess that's why Atkins has such a short induction phase. The amount of carbs allowed on that would certainly be detrimental if done for very long periods of time.
Atkins isn't a keto diet. But lots of keto dieters eat 25 or less daily. Long term.
I know Atkins isn't keto. I just used Atkins as one example of a low carb diet.0 -
realityfades wrote: »During periods of low carbohydrate intake, the body begins favoring different metabolic pathways.
In such a state, the brain's demand for glucose becomes partially met by using ketones, and to a lesser extent, possibly lactic acid. In such a state, the needs go from the usual ~120g/day to around ~25g/day.
This last ~25g remains so vital, however, that your body is capable of gluconeogenesis to make glucose out of various substances: lactate, glycerol (possibly stripped from a triglyceride / fat), alanine (amino acid), and glutamine (amino acid), and about 10% other substances, many of them other amino acids.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gluconeogenesis
Thanks for the bit of info. I guess that's why Atkins has such a short induction phase. The amount of carbs allowed on that would certainly be detrimental if done for very long periods of time.
It isn't detrimental. For some people it actually is almost a necessity. Some people have severe epilepsy that can't be treated by any medication or have overwhelming side effects that use ketosis as a way to reduce their incidence.
It is particularly true for some children where the medications could have severe consequences for a growing body.
That said, without a medical condition, I'd see no reason to advice anyone to be in constant ketogenic state.0 -
realityfades wrote: »realityfades wrote: »During periods of low carbohydrate intake, the body begins favoring different metabolic pathways.
In such a state, the brain's demand for glucose becomes partially met by using ketones, and to a lesser extent, possibly lactic acid. In such a state, the needs go from the usual ~120g/day to around ~25g/day.
This last ~25g remains so vital, however, that your body is capable of gluconeogenesis to make glucose out of various substances: lactate, glycerol (possibly stripped from a triglyceride / fat), alanine (amino acid), and glutamine (amino acid), and about 10% other substances, many of them other amino acids.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gluconeogenesis
Thanks for the bit of info. I guess that's why Atkins has such a short induction phase. The amount of carbs allowed on that would certainly be detrimental if done for very long periods of time.
People have done ketosis for years at a time. As far as I know, there have not been any reported "detrimental" affects that you keep claiming. While I think keto is encouraged too much right now as the "cure-all", it is not some horrible, evil diet that will kill everyone like you seem to be implying.
I didn't claim anything. I asked if restricting carbs to a low amount for a long amount of time causes issues with organs. Other people chimed in and said the body can metabolize protein into glucose, which was helpful to know. Like I said, the whole reason I started even wondering about this is because of the NIH article I posted above and it kind of made me change the way I view nutrition.
But you're using terms all over the boards like "detrimental", "dangerous" "high liability for studying this diet" as if you understand that it is bad. The article you posted does not state that not eating carbs would prevent the body from eating those energy needs. It's a straight up descriptor of how organs function (hello biochem). Why do you keep ascribing negatives to keto all over the forums?0 -
Your body runs on glucose! You need it to create energy, literally! (cellular respiration, the mitochondrial electron transport chain..). Sure your body could survive, but you'd be lethargic and moody. Simple sugar is the quickest way to up your energy (which is why athletes eat chocolate or energy drinks before a race!). If you want that energy to be slow-releasing then eat complex carbs that are harder to break down (sweet potato for example), take longer to digest and won't spike your blood sugar.
p.s. i'm a medical student xD don't know if you can tell...0 -
realityfades wrote: »realityfades wrote: »During periods of low carbohydrate intake, the body begins favoring different metabolic pathways.
In such a state, the brain's demand for glucose becomes partially met by using ketones, and to a lesser extent, possibly lactic acid. In such a state, the needs go from the usual ~120g/day to around ~25g/day.
This last ~25g remains so vital, however, that your body is capable of gluconeogenesis to make glucose out of various substances: lactate, glycerol (possibly stripped from a triglyceride / fat), alanine (amino acid), and glutamine (amino acid), and about 10% other substances, many of them other amino acids.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gluconeogenesis
Thanks for the bit of info. I guess that's why Atkins has such a short induction phase. The amount of carbs allowed on that would certainly be detrimental if done for very long periods of time.
People have done ketosis for years at a time. As far as I know, there have not been any reported "detrimental" affects that you keep claiming. While I think keto is encouraged too much right now as the "cure-all", it is not some horrible, evil diet that will kill everyone like you seem to be implying.
I didn't claim anything. I asked if restricting carbs to a low amount for a long amount of time causes issues with organs. Other people chimed in and said the body can metabolize protein into glucose, which was helpful to know. Like I said, the whole reason I started even wondering about this is because of the NIH article I posted above and it kind of made me change the way I view nutrition.
But you're using terms all over the boards like "detrimental", "dangerous" "high liability for studying this diet" as if you understand that it is bad. The article you posted does not state that not eating carbs would prevent the body from eating those energy needs. It's a straight up descriptor of how organs function (hello biochem). Why do you keep ascribing negatives to keto all over the forums?
I just ASKED if it was detrimental to do low carb for a very long amount of time after reading about carbohydrates and organ health and what your body needs. Other people have given me good bits of info that I did not even know. And I ASKED if long term studies have been done and I was told no, and then I ASKED if that was due to liability issues, which someone cleared up and said no, it's due to cost effectiveness and that NO DIETS have been studied long term.
So you know what, I will apologize if anyone misconstrued what I was saying and assumed stuff as a result.0 -
realityfades wrote: »During periods of low carbohydrate intake, the body begins favoring different metabolic pathways.
In such a state, the brain's demand for glucose becomes partially met by using ketones, and to a lesser extent, possibly lactic acid. In such a state, the needs go from the usual ~120g/day to around ~25g/day.
This last ~25g remains so vital, however, that your body is capable of gluconeogenesis to make glucose out of various substances: lactate, glycerol (possibly stripped from a triglyceride / fat), alanine (amino acid), and glutamine (amino acid), and about 10% other substances, many of them other amino acids.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gluconeogenesis
Thanks for the bit of info. I guess that's why Atkins has such a short induction phase. The amount of carbs allowed on that would certainly be detrimental if done for very long periods of time.
But even after that...you posted this... "certainly be detrimental". That doesn't sound like a question rather than a statement of fact.
0 -
realityfades wrote: »During periods of low carbohydrate intake, the body begins favoring different metabolic pathways.
In such a state, the brain's demand for glucose becomes partially met by using ketones, and to a lesser extent, possibly lactic acid. In such a state, the needs go from the usual ~120g/day to around ~25g/day.
This last ~25g remains so vital, however, that your body is capable of gluconeogenesis to make glucose out of various substances: lactate, glycerol (possibly stripped from a triglyceride / fat), alanine (amino acid), and glutamine (amino acid), and about 10% other substances, many of them other amino acids.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gluconeogenesis
Thanks for the bit of info. I guess that's why Atkins has such a short induction phase. The amount of carbs allowed on that would certainly be detrimental if done for very long periods of time.
But even after that...you posted this... "certainly be detrimental". That doesn't sound like a question rather than a statement of fact.
We all have preconceived notions regarding food & nutrition. We all hang on to them for a time while learning something new.
It's all good.
0 -
kasperwasper2016 wrote: »realityfades wrote: »During periods of low carbohydrate intake, the body begins favoring different metabolic pathways.
In such a state, the brain's demand for glucose becomes partially met by using ketones, and to a lesser extent, possibly lactic acid. In such a state, the needs go from the usual ~120g/day to around ~25g/day.
This last ~25g remains so vital, however, that your body is capable of gluconeogenesis to make glucose out of various substances: lactate, glycerol (possibly stripped from a triglyceride / fat), alanine (amino acid), and glutamine (amino acid), and about 10% other substances, many of them other amino acids.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gluconeogenesis
Thanks for the bit of info. I guess that's why Atkins has such a short induction phase. The amount of carbs allowed on that would certainly be detrimental if done for very long periods of time.
But even after that...you posted this... "certainly be detrimental". That doesn't sound like a question rather than a statement of fact.
We all have preconceived notions regarding food & nutrition. We all hang on to them for a time while learning something new.
It's all good.
Seriously. And I can't even change the thread title, MFP gives you a limit I think on how long you can edit, sigh. Thanks for understanding at least. I did learn a lot of new information, and knowledge is power.0 -
to the OP, the jury is out on long term (and I mean years and years of eating this way).. I am going to say without a shadow of a doubt (not for weight loss) eating like this will harm you.. I will also say that to be an athlete or body builder, weight lifter or an Olypian or just someone that uses their body in this manner for their profession they do not eat this way.
Is low carb for dieting temp ok, I would say yes and a low carb advised by a doctor for health, I would say ok only under a doctor supervision and it would be changed up upon the doctor opinion and recommendations.
I would hope that if there is a doctor, nutritionist or dieatician that has any background or knowledge in this area could respond here, but common sense tells me yes low carb for years and years can "possibly" harm you rather it is short term or long term, this what no one knows or is telling us.
On the other end of the spectrum, it could be that we all should be doing low carb and we are all doing it wrong..
I just choose to eat fruit, veggies, meat and oh yeah the yummy starchy carbs..
My disclaimer is this is IMHO and I am not a doctor.. Just a reagular user of MFP to diet and exercise and live healthy! LOL 0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.9K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 397 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 973 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions