Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
The purpose of Ketones
stevencloser
Posts: 8,911 Member
I'm reading up on metabolism things right now but I don't seem to understand what exactly Ketones are good for.
If I'm reading this right, normally, fatty acids get turned to Acetyl-CoA, which then gets turned to energy in the Krebs cycle.
During ketosis, the liver has to use the stuff that is necessary to do this for gluconeogenesis though, so it instead creates Ketones out of the Acetyl-CoA. But it looks like the only way Ketones can be used to get energy is to get turned back to Acetyl-CoA, so what exactly are the Ketones good for then if they need to get turned back into what it was before?
(Bonus non-biological question: And why do so many people strive for Ketosis if it's just an intermediate product that just gets turned back to the normal one later on?)
If I'm reading this right, normally, fatty acids get turned to Acetyl-CoA, which then gets turned to energy in the Krebs cycle.
During ketosis, the liver has to use the stuff that is necessary to do this for gluconeogenesis though, so it instead creates Ketones out of the Acetyl-CoA. But it looks like the only way Ketones can be used to get energy is to get turned back to Acetyl-CoA, so what exactly are the Ketones good for then if they need to get turned back into what it was before?
(Bonus non-biological question: And why do so many people strive for Ketosis if it's just an intermediate product that just gets turned back to the normal one later on?)
0
Replies
-
Good question. In to learn.0
-
Fair warning. My knowledge of the subject is pretty much limited to the couple of lectures I had in my university Nutrition course. Someone else can likely answer the question better.
Think of your body like a campfire. Glucose is like newspaper. It burns quickly and easily. Glycogen, which is stored glucose is like those little sticks and stuff. A little bit more work to burn, but not really difficult.
When you stop eating carbs, your body no longer has glucose to turn into acetyl-CoA, so it turns to fat. Which is like those big *kitten* logs. It's going to take some work to burn.
Now if your body has glucose available, it will act like newspaper and help to burn those big logs that are fat. When your body runs out of newspaper, or glucose, all it can do is turn to fat. Now if you've ever lit a fire before, you'll know that you can't just throw a match on a big log and expect to roast some marshmallows on there. You need to chop it up.
So your body does some stuff to break down the fat and turn it into something that can be used to make acetyl-CoA, ketones.
People strive for ketosis because it's a sign that your body is using stored fat as it's primary fuel source. Staying in this state for too long can cause a buildup of ketones in the blood stream and cause ketone acidosis. That is bad. That is dangerous.
I'm really not sure if I answered your question or just repeated stuff you already know.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
Sort of like the ATP - ADP energy cycle? Why bother right?0
-
Great question! I don't know, but I'd like to figure it out. This blog post from Scientific American is relevant. It suggests that you get more energy per unit of oxygen out of fatty acids than out of carbs, which could decrease oxidative stress. Apparently long term ketosis also increases the number of mitochondria in the brain.
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/mind-guest-blog/the-fat-fueled-brain-unnatural-or-advantageous/0 -
Oh, of course the big thing that ketones do for you is to provide fuel for the brain, which can't use fatty acids directly, and also for heart and muscle cells, thus sparing the small amount of glucose derived from the glycerol in triglycerides for cells, liver cells for example, that can't use ketones. The brain may have a small absolute glucose requirement too.0
-
@lithezebra thanks for the link. I have been in a state of ketosis for the past 18 months as a side effect of my successful by diet pain management and would like more research on living on ketones long term.0
-
punkrockgoth wrote: »Fair warning. My knowledge of the subject is pretty much limited to the couple of lectures I had in my university Nutrition course. Someone else can likely answer the question better.
Think of your body like a campfire. Glucose is like newspaper. It burns quickly and easily. Glycogen, which is stored glucose is like those little sticks and stuff. A little bit more work to burn, but not really difficult.
When you stop eating carbs, your body no longer has glucose to turn into acetyl-CoA, so it turns to fat. Which is like those big *kitten* logs. It's going to take some work to burn.
Now if your body has glucose available, it will act like newspaper and help to burn those big logs that are fat. When your body runs out of newspaper, or glucose, all it can do is turn to fat. Now if you've ever lit a fire before, you'll know that you can't just throw a match on a big log and expect to roast some marshmallows on there. You need to chop it up.
So your body does some stuff to break down the fat and turn it into something that can be used to make acetyl-CoA, ketones.
People strive for ketosis because it's a sign that your body is using stored fat as it's primary fuel source. Staying in this state for too long can cause a buildup of ketones in the blood stream and cause ketone acidosis. That is bad. That is dangerous.
I'm really not sure if I answered your question or just repeated stuff you already know.
Nope, not true.
If you stay in ketosis for an extended period of time...you won't cause a buildup and then cause ketoacidosis. Ketoacidosis is when the body stops regulating ketone production and only tends to happen in untreated diabetics and long time alcoholics. I wish people would stop fear mongering and sharing that myth that a keto diet and ketoacidosis have anything to do with one another.
I believe shel is correct on this on. Ketoacidosis is a whole other thing, unrelated to ketosis. I bet the original banting investigators and their predecessors wish they'd figured out another word, and popularized that. If memory serves, Dr. Atkins tried to "rebrand" the process.
ETA: yes, apparently Atkins and his contemporaries tried to refocus the discussion to "lipolysis".
0 -
lithezebra wrote: »Great question! I don't know, but I'd like to figure it out. This blog post from Scientific American is relevant. It suggests that you get more energy per unit of oxygen out of fatty acids than out of carbs, which could decrease oxidative stress. Apparently long term ketosis also increases the number of mitochondria in the brain.
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/mind-guest-blog/the-fat-fueled-brain-unnatural-or-advantageous/
I've always loved Scientific American. Thanks for the link.0 -
lithezebra wrote: »Great question! I don't know, but I'd like to figure it out. This blog post from Scientific American is relevant. It suggests that you get more energy per unit of oxygen out of fatty acids than out of carbs, which could decrease oxidative stress. Apparently long term ketosis also increases the number of mitochondria in the brain.
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/mind-guest-blog/the-fat-fueled-brain-unnatural-or-advantageous/
I've always loved Scientific American. Thanks for the link.
I enjoy it as well. And enjoyed this link.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
That is correct. They're good for when glucose is unavailable. As long as one's liver is healthy and otherwise under-taxed, keytones can be used as energy in a "pinch"stevencloser wrote: »
During ketosis, the liver has to use the stuff that is necessary to do this for gluconeogenesis though, so it instead creates Ketones out of the Acetyl-CoA. But it looks like the only way Ketones can be used to get energy is to get turned back to Acetyl-CoA, so what exactly are the Ketones good for then if they need to get turned back into what it was before?
The following applies to otherwise healthy individuals
So why do people (in the pursuit of weight loss) try to force ketosis? Because it has very rapid initial "gains" towards the goal of weight loss, but it still remains a sub-optimal strategy. Firstly, all things being equal, the fat-loss delta between low-carb and low fat diets disappears in 12 to 18 months. That delta is relevant because following long term low-carb, there remains a "no going back" threshold where the re-introduction of carbohydrates to a normal level will very likely lead to rapid fat gain. Secondly, just because your brain and muscles can use keytones doesn't mean that they "want" to. Glucose is always the "preferred" energy source. Mental acuity and muscular endurance suffer when glucose is not available. I'm thinking specifically of a twin study done in UK (I think) that tested that hypothesis and their results support it. Lastly, low-carb diets consequently tend to be high in fat-- of particular concern, saturated fat. Again, as stated previously, carb restriction has very rapid initial results, however long term adherence mortgages future cardiovascular health in pursuit of those results.
It remains that in either strategy, neither the low carb lost weight (excess fat) solely because he was low carb. Nor did the low fat lose weight solely because low-fat, but because of a calorie deficit.
Best bet for long term: fruits, vegetables, some whole grains here and there, and avoid high concentrations of simple sugars and saturated fats.0 -
That is correct. They're good for when glucose is unavailable. As long as one's liver is healthy and otherwise under-taxed, keytones can be used as energy in a "pinch"stevencloser wrote: »
During ketosis, the liver has to use the stuff that is necessary to do this for gluconeogenesis though, so it instead creates Ketones out of the Acetyl-CoA. But it looks like the only way Ketones can be used to get energy is to get turned back to Acetyl-CoA, so what exactly are the Ketones good for then if they need to get turned back into what it was before?
The following applies to otherwise healthy individuals
So why do people (in the pursuit of weight loss) try to force ketosis? Because it has very rapid initial "gains" towards the goal of weight loss, but it still remains a sub-optimal strategy. Firstly, all things being equal, the fat-loss delta between low-carb and low fat diets disappears in 12 to 18 months. That delta is relevant because following long term low-carb, there remains a "no going back" threshold where the re-introduction of carbohydrates to a normal level will very likely lead to rapid fat gain. Secondly, just because your brain and muscles can use keytones doesn't mean that they "want" to. Glucose is always the "preferred" energy source. Mental acuity and muscular endurance suffer when glucose is not available. I'm thinking specifically of a twin study done in UK (I think) that tested that hypothesis and their results support it. Lastly, low-carb diets consequently tend to be high in fat-- of particular concern, saturated fat. Again, as stated previously, carb restriction has very rapid initial results, however long term adherence mortgages future cardiovascular health in pursuit of those results.
It remains that in either strategy, neither the low carb lost weight (excess fat) solely because he was low carb. Nor did the low fat lose weight solely because low-fat, but because of a calorie deficit.
Best bet for long term: fruits, vegetables, some whole grains here and there, and avoid high concentrations of simple sugars and saturated fats.
This is where people who folllow low carb gurus are going to pay a heavy price.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
That is correct. They're good for when glucose is unavailable. As long as one's liver is healthy and otherwise under-taxed, keytones can be used as energy in a "pinch"stevencloser wrote: »
During ketosis, the liver has to use the stuff that is necessary to do this for gluconeogenesis though, so it instead creates Ketones out of the Acetyl-CoA. But it looks like the only way Ketones can be used to get energy is to get turned back to Acetyl-CoA, so what exactly are the Ketones good for then if they need to get turned back into what it was before?
The following applies to otherwise healthy individuals
So why do people (in the pursuit of weight loss) try to force ketosis? Because it has very rapid initial "gains" towards the goal of weight loss, but it still remains a sub-optimal strategy. Firstly, all things being equal, the fat-loss delta between low-carb and low fat diets disappears in 12 to 18 months. That delta is relevant because following long term low-carb, there remains a "no going back" threshold where the re-introduction of carbohydrates to a normal level will very likely lead to rapid fat gain. Secondly, just because your brain and muscles can use keytones doesn't mean that they "want" to. Glucose is always the "preferred" energy source. Mental acuity and muscular endurance suffer when glucose is not available. I'm thinking specifically of a twin study done in UK (I think) that tested that hypothesis and their results support it. Lastly, low-carb diets consequently tend to be high in fat-- of particular concern, saturated fat. Again, as stated previously, carb restriction has very rapid initial results, however long term adherence mortgages future cardiovascular health in pursuit of those results.
It remains that in either strategy, neither the low carb lost weight (excess fat) solely because he was low carb. Nor did the low fat lose weight solely because low-fat, but because of a calorie deficit.
Best bet for long term: fruits, vegetables, some whole grains here and there, and avoid high concentrations of simple sugars and saturated fats.
This is where people who folllow low carb gurus are going to pay a heavy price.
Well at least we know the inputs come from people who had not experienced the keto eating life style.
While I did not go LCHF to lose weight the weight loss was an accident that took place. After keto cured my cravings the weight came off without having to count calories in my case.
0 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »
That is correct. They're good for when glucose is unavailable. As long as one's liver is healthy and otherwise under-taxed, keytones can be used as energy in a "pinch"stevencloser wrote: »
During ketosis, the liver has to use the stuff that is necessary to do this for gluconeogenesis though, so it instead creates Ketones out of the Acetyl-CoA. But it looks like the only way Ketones can be used to get energy is to get turned back to Acetyl-CoA, so what exactly are the Ketones good for then if they need to get turned back into what it was before?
The following applies to otherwise healthy individuals
So why do people (in the pursuit of weight loss) try to force ketosis? Because it has very rapid initial "gains" towards the goal of weight loss, but it still remains a sub-optimal strategy. Firstly, all things being equal, the fat-loss delta between low-carb and low fat diets disappears in 12 to 18 months. That delta is relevant because following long term low-carb, there remains a "no going back" threshold where the re-introduction of carbohydrates to a normal level will very likely lead to rapid fat gain. Secondly, just because your brain and muscles can use keytones doesn't mean that they "want" to. Glucose is always the "preferred" energy source. Mental acuity and muscular endurance suffer when glucose is not available. I'm thinking specifically of a twin study done in UK (I think) that tested that hypothesis and their results support it. Lastly, low-carb diets consequently tend to be high in fat-- of particular concern, saturated fat. Again, as stated previously, carb restriction has very rapid initial results, however long term adherence mortgages future cardiovascular health in pursuit of those results.
It remains that in either strategy, neither the low carb lost weight (excess fat) solely because he was low carb. Nor did the low fat lose weight solely because low-fat, but because of a calorie deficit.
Best bet for long term: fruits, vegetables, some whole grains here and there, and avoid high concentrations of simple sugars and saturated fats.
This is where people who folllow low carb gurus are going to pay a heavy price.
Well at least we know the inputs come from people who had not experienced the keto eating life style.
While I did not go LCHF to lose weight the weight loss was an accident that took place. After keto cured my cravings the weight came off without having to count calories in my case.
Plenty of people have tried low carb/keto and paid the piper
https://www.facebook.com/180degreehealth/posts/11939898606293570 -
I wonder if the difference between a <100 carb diet and a <50 carb diet is anything.0
-
JeromeBarry1 wrote: »I wonder if the difference between a <100 carb diet and a <50 carb diet is anything.
Yes. You can be pretty sure that you're in ketosis at <50 grams of carbs/day. People trying to control seizures are likely to eat <20.0 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »
That is correct. They're good for when glucose is unavailable. As long as one's liver is healthy and otherwise under-taxed, keytones can be used as energy in a "pinch"stevencloser wrote: »
During ketosis, the liver has to use the stuff that is necessary to do this for gluconeogenesis though, so it instead creates Ketones out of the Acetyl-CoA. But it looks like the only way Ketones can be used to get energy is to get turned back to Acetyl-CoA, so what exactly are the Ketones good for then if they need to get turned back into what it was before?
The following applies to otherwise healthy individuals
So why do people (in the pursuit of weight loss) try to force ketosis? Because it has very rapid initial "gains" towards the goal of weight loss, but it still remains a sub-optimal strategy. Firstly, all things being equal, the fat-loss delta between low-carb and low fat diets disappears in 12 to 18 months. That delta is relevant because following long term low-carb, there remains a "no going back" threshold where the re-introduction of carbohydrates to a normal level will very likely lead to rapid fat gain. Secondly, just because your brain and muscles can use keytones doesn't mean that they "want" to. Glucose is always the "preferred" energy source. Mental acuity and muscular endurance suffer when glucose is not available. I'm thinking specifically of a twin study done in UK (I think) that tested that hypothesis and their results support it. Lastly, low-carb diets consequently tend to be high in fat-- of particular concern, saturated fat. Again, as stated previously, carb restriction has very rapid initial results, however long term adherence mortgages future cardiovascular health in pursuit of those results.
It remains that in either strategy, neither the low carb lost weight (excess fat) solely because he was low carb. Nor did the low fat lose weight solely because low-fat, but because of a calorie deficit.
Best bet for long term: fruits, vegetables, some whole grains here and there, and avoid high concentrations of simple sugars and saturated fats.
This is where people who folllow low carb gurus are going to pay a heavy price.
Well at least we know the inputs come from people who had not experienced the keto eating life style.
While I did not go LCHF to lose weight the weight loss was an accident that took place. After keto cured my cravings the weight came off without having to count calories in my case.
Plenty of people have tried low carb/keto and paid the piper
https://www.facebook.com/180degreehealth/posts/1193989860629357
That's an opinion piece, offering no citations, not only an opinion piece, but one intended to sell books. Do you have peer-reviewed studies that support the assertion that months or years of not eating carbs will cause "insomnia, low energy levels, depression, dry skin, constipation, sexual apathy, and so on?"
Dude is selling books on how to raise your metabolic rate: http://www.amazon.com/Matt-Stone/e/B001KIM1IA/?_encoding=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&linkCode=ur2&tag=180degr-20
0 -
JeromeBarry1 wrote: »I wonder if the difference between a <100 carb diet and a <50 carb diet is anything.
I was thinking the same... Particularly the part of what 'could' happen if one goes back to eating carbs, referenced by @dpwellman0 -
lithezebra wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »
That is correct. They're good for when glucose is unavailable. As long as one's liver is healthy and otherwise under-taxed, keytones can be used as energy in a "pinch"stevencloser wrote: »
During ketosis, the liver has to use the stuff that is necessary to do this for gluconeogenesis though, so it instead creates Ketones out of the Acetyl-CoA. But it looks like the only way Ketones can be used to get energy is to get turned back to Acetyl-CoA, so what exactly are the Ketones good for then if they need to get turned back into what it was before?
The following applies to otherwise healthy individuals
So why do people (in the pursuit of weight loss) try to force ketosis? Because it has very rapid initial "gains" towards the goal of weight loss, but it still remains a sub-optimal strategy. Firstly, all things being equal, the fat-loss delta between low-carb and low fat diets disappears in 12 to 18 months. That delta is relevant because following long term low-carb, there remains a "no going back" threshold where the re-introduction of carbohydrates to a normal level will very likely lead to rapid fat gain. Secondly, just because your brain and muscles can use keytones doesn't mean that they "want" to. Glucose is always the "preferred" energy source. Mental acuity and muscular endurance suffer when glucose is not available. I'm thinking specifically of a twin study done in UK (I think) that tested that hypothesis and their results support it. Lastly, low-carb diets consequently tend to be high in fat-- of particular concern, saturated fat. Again, as stated previously, carb restriction has very rapid initial results, however long term adherence mortgages future cardiovascular health in pursuit of those results.
It remains that in either strategy, neither the low carb lost weight (excess fat) solely because he was low carb. Nor did the low fat lose weight solely because low-fat, but because of a calorie deficit.
Best bet for long term: fruits, vegetables, some whole grains here and there, and avoid high concentrations of simple sugars and saturated fats.
This is where people who folllow low carb gurus are going to pay a heavy price.
Well at least we know the inputs come from people who had not experienced the keto eating life style.
While I did not go LCHF to lose weight the weight loss was an accident that took place. After keto cured my cravings the weight came off without having to count calories in my case.
Plenty of people have tried low carb/keto and paid the piper
https://www.facebook.com/180degreehealth/posts/1193989860629357
That's an opinion piece, offering no citations, not only an opinion piece, but one intended to sell books. Do you have peer-reviewed studies that support the assertion that months or years of not eating carbs will cause "insomnia, low energy levels, depression, dry skin, constipation, sexual apathy, and so on?"
Dude is selling books on how to raise your metabolic rate: http://www.amazon.com/Matt-Stone/e/B001KIM1IA/?_encoding=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&linkCode=ur2&tag=180degr-20
Exactly.0 -
Christine_72 wrote: »JeromeBarry1 wrote: »I wonder if the difference between a <100 carb diet and a <50 carb diet is anything.
I was thinking the same... Particularly the part of what 'could' happen if one goes back to eating carbs, referenced by @dpwellman
I think the only thing that happens is your body reverts back to whatever weight it was... If you go back to eating the way your were.
There is a transient rise in insulin resistance but that is gone within days. You'd regain up to 2-4 lbs of water weight when you start retaining water again. That's most likely it.
The body knows how to handle glucose. It won't forget. It should have no problems going back to glucose burning if moderate carbs are reintroduced. Just the like the body did't forget how to make ketones before you starting eating fewer than 120-150g of carbs per day.0 -
Thanks for the clarification @nvmomketo0
-
That is correct. They're good for when glucose is unavailable. As long as one's liver is healthy and otherwise under-taxed, keytones can be used as energy in a "pinch"stevencloser wrote: »
During ketosis, the liver has to use the stuff that is necessary to do this for gluconeogenesis though, so it instead creates Ketones out of the Acetyl-CoA. But it looks like the only way Ketones can be used to get energy is to get turned back to Acetyl-CoA, so what exactly are the Ketones good for then if they need to get turned back into what it was before?
The following applies to otherwise healthy individuals
So why do people (in the pursuit of weight loss) try to force ketosis? Because it has very rapid initial "gains" towards the goal of weight loss, but it still remains a sub-optimal strategy. Firstly, all things being equal, the fat-loss delta between low-carb and low fat diets disappears in 12 to 18 months. That delta is relevant because following long term low-carb, there remains a "no going back" threshold where the re-introduction of carbohydrates to a normal level will very likely lead to rapid fat gain. Secondly, just because your brain and muscles can use keytones doesn't mean that they "want" to. Glucose is always the "preferred" energy source. Mental acuity and muscular endurance suffer when glucose is not available. I'm thinking specifically of a twin study done in UK (I think) that tested that hypothesis and their results support it. Lastly, low-carb diets consequently tend to be high in fat-- of particular concern, saturated fat. Again, as stated previously, carb restriction has very rapid initial results, however long term adherence mortgages future cardiovascular health in pursuit of those results.
It remains that in either strategy, neither the low carb lost weight (excess fat) solely because he was low carb. Nor did the low fat lose weight solely because low-fat, but because of a calorie deficit.
Best bet for long term: fruits, vegetables, some whole grains here and there, and avoid high concentrations of simple sugars and saturated fats.
Can't say I've heard that before. Do you have any sources for that?0 -
lithezebra wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »
That is correct. They're good for when glucose is unavailable. As long as one's liver is healthy and otherwise under-taxed, keytones can be used as energy in a "pinch"stevencloser wrote: »
During ketosis, the liver has to use the stuff that is necessary to do this for gluconeogenesis though, so it instead creates Ketones out of the Acetyl-CoA. But it looks like the only way Ketones can be used to get energy is to get turned back to Acetyl-CoA, so what exactly are the Ketones good for then if they need to get turned back into what it was before?
The following applies to otherwise healthy individuals
So why do people (in the pursuit of weight loss) try to force ketosis? Because it has very rapid initial "gains" towards the goal of weight loss, but it still remains a sub-optimal strategy. Firstly, all things being equal, the fat-loss delta between low-carb and low fat diets disappears in 12 to 18 months. That delta is relevant because following long term low-carb, there remains a "no going back" threshold where the re-introduction of carbohydrates to a normal level will very likely lead to rapid fat gain. Secondly, just because your brain and muscles can use keytones doesn't mean that they "want" to. Glucose is always the "preferred" energy source. Mental acuity and muscular endurance suffer when glucose is not available. I'm thinking specifically of a twin study done in UK (I think) that tested that hypothesis and their results support it. Lastly, low-carb diets consequently tend to be high in fat-- of particular concern, saturated fat. Again, as stated previously, carb restriction has very rapid initial results, however long term adherence mortgages future cardiovascular health in pursuit of those results.
It remains that in either strategy, neither the low carb lost weight (excess fat) solely because he was low carb. Nor did the low fat lose weight solely because low-fat, but because of a calorie deficit.
Best bet for long term: fruits, vegetables, some whole grains here and there, and avoid high concentrations of simple sugars and saturated fats.
This is where people who folllow low carb gurus are going to pay a heavy price.
Well at least we know the inputs come from people who had not experienced the keto eating life style.
While I did not go LCHF to lose weight the weight loss was an accident that took place. After keto cured my cravings the weight came off without having to count calories in my case.
Plenty of people have tried low carb/keto and paid the piper
https://www.facebook.com/180degreehealth/posts/1193989860629357
That's an opinion piece, offering no citations, not only an opinion piece, but one intended to sell books. Do you have peer-reviewed studies that support the assertion that months or years of not eating carbs will cause "insomnia, low energy levels, depression, dry skin, constipation, sexual apathy, and so on?"
Dude is selling books on how to raise your metabolic rate: http://www.amazon.com/Matt-Stone/e/B001KIM1IA/?_encoding=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&linkCode=ur2&tag=180degr-20
People are reporting these experiences with long term keto everywhere! How many people have you trained and consulted with their nutrition?0 -
lithezebra wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »
That is correct. They're good for when glucose is unavailable. As long as one's liver is healthy and otherwise under-taxed, keytones can be used as energy in a "pinch"stevencloser wrote: »
During ketosis, the liver has to use the stuff that is necessary to do this for gluconeogenesis though, so it instead creates Ketones out of the Acetyl-CoA. But it looks like the only way Ketones can be used to get energy is to get turned back to Acetyl-CoA, so what exactly are the Ketones good for then if they need to get turned back into what it was before?
The following applies to otherwise healthy individuals
So why do people (in the pursuit of weight loss) try to force ketosis? Because it has very rapid initial "gains" towards the goal of weight loss, but it still remains a sub-optimal strategy. Firstly, all things being equal, the fat-loss delta between low-carb and low fat diets disappears in 12 to 18 months. That delta is relevant because following long term low-carb, there remains a "no going back" threshold where the re-introduction of carbohydrates to a normal level will very likely lead to rapid fat gain. Secondly, just because your brain and muscles can use keytones doesn't mean that they "want" to. Glucose is always the "preferred" energy source. Mental acuity and muscular endurance suffer when glucose is not available. I'm thinking specifically of a twin study done in UK (I think) that tested that hypothesis and their results support it. Lastly, low-carb diets consequently tend to be high in fat-- of particular concern, saturated fat. Again, as stated previously, carb restriction has very rapid initial results, however long term adherence mortgages future cardiovascular health in pursuit of those results.
It remains that in either strategy, neither the low carb lost weight (excess fat) solely because he was low carb. Nor did the low fat lose weight solely because low-fat, but because of a calorie deficit.
Best bet for long term: fruits, vegetables, some whole grains here and there, and avoid high concentrations of simple sugars and saturated fats.
This is where people who folllow low carb gurus are going to pay a heavy price.
Well at least we know the inputs come from people who had not experienced the keto eating life style.
While I did not go LCHF to lose weight the weight loss was an accident that took place. After keto cured my cravings the weight came off without having to count calories in my case.
Plenty of people have tried low carb/keto and paid the piper
https://www.facebook.com/180degreehealth/posts/1193989860629357
That's an opinion piece, offering no citations, not only an opinion piece, but one intended to sell books. Do you have peer-reviewed studies that support the assertion that months or years of not eating carbs will cause "insomnia, low energy levels, depression, dry skin, constipation, sexual apathy, and so on?"
Dude is selling books on how to raise your metabolic rate: http://www.amazon.com/Matt-Stone/e/B001KIM1IA/?_encoding=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&linkCode=ur2&tag=180degr-20
People are reporting these experiences with long term keto everywhere! How many people have you trained and consulted with their nutrition?
Something more than your experience would be nice though.0 -
To summarize why ketones are useful, even though they're going to be turned back into Acetyl CoA, (from sources cited earlier in this thread):
- You can make more Acetyl CoA than you can use in the TCA cycle, and the liver can make the excess into ketone bodies, to be transported to the brain, heart and other tissues that can utilize ketones.
- Unlike fatty acids, ketone bodies can cross the blood brain barrier and provide the brain with energy.
- Ketone catabolism may provide more energy per oxygen molecule used, reducing the formation of reactive oxygen species.
- Over time, a ketogenic diet increases the number of mitochondria in brain cells, which may have benefits.
- Ketones in the brain may decrease the secretion of glutamate, an exitatory neurotransmitter and increase GABA, an inhibitory neurotransmitter. This may be related to the beneficial effects that ketogenic diets have on seizures. It may also have other neuroprotective benefits. For example, much of the damage done in a stroke or a head injury is from the glutamate that is released. http://www.dana.org/Cerebrum/2007/Protecting_the_Brain_from_a_Glutamate_Storm/
0 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »
That is correct. They're good for when glucose is unavailable. As long as one's liver is healthy and otherwise under-taxed, keytones can be used as energy in a "pinch"stevencloser wrote: »
During ketosis, the liver has to use the stuff that is necessary to do this for gluconeogenesis though, so it instead creates Ketones out of the Acetyl-CoA. But it looks like the only way Ketones can be used to get energy is to get turned back to Acetyl-CoA, so what exactly are the Ketones good for then if they need to get turned back into what it was before?
The following applies to otherwise healthy individuals
So why do people (in the pursuit of weight loss) try to force ketosis? Because it has very rapid initial "gains" towards the goal of weight loss, but it still remains a sub-optimal strategy. Firstly, all things being equal, the fat-loss delta between low-carb and low fat diets disappears in 12 to 18 months. That delta is relevant because following long term low-carb, there remains a "no going back" threshold where the re-introduction of carbohydrates to a normal level will very likely lead to rapid fat gain. Secondly, just because your brain and muscles can use keytones doesn't mean that they "want" to. Glucose is always the "preferred" energy source. Mental acuity and muscular endurance suffer when glucose is not available. I'm thinking specifically of a twin study done in UK (I think) that tested that hypothesis and their results support it. Lastly, low-carb diets consequently tend to be high in fat-- of particular concern, saturated fat. Again, as stated previously, carb restriction has very rapid initial results, however long term adherence mortgages future cardiovascular health in pursuit of those results.
It remains that in either strategy, neither the low carb lost weight (excess fat) solely because he was low carb. Nor did the low fat lose weight solely because low-fat, but because of a calorie deficit.
Best bet for long term: fruits, vegetables, some whole grains here and there, and avoid high concentrations of simple sugars and saturated fats.
This is where people who folllow low carb gurus are going to pay a heavy price.
Well at least we know the inputs come from people who had not experienced the keto eating life style.
While I did not go LCHF to lose weight the weight loss was an accident that took place. After keto cured my cravings the weight came off without having to count calories in my case.
Plenty of people have tried low carb/keto and paid the piper
https://www.facebook.com/180degreehealth/posts/1193989860629357
I know. It cost me fifty pounds over a year ago and I still have not been able to eat them back yet.0 -
stevencloser wrote: »lithezebra wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »
That is correct. They're good for when glucose is unavailable. As long as one's liver is healthy and otherwise under-taxed, keytones can be used as energy in a "pinch"stevencloser wrote: »
During ketosis, the liver has to use the stuff that is necessary to do this for gluconeogenesis though, so it instead creates Ketones out of the Acetyl-CoA. But it looks like the only way Ketones can be used to get energy is to get turned back to Acetyl-CoA, so what exactly are the Ketones good for then if they need to get turned back into what it was before?
The following applies to otherwise healthy individuals
So why do people (in the pursuit of weight loss) try to force ketosis? Because it has very rapid initial "gains" towards the goal of weight loss, but it still remains a sub-optimal strategy. Firstly, all things being equal, the fat-loss delta between low-carb and low fat diets disappears in 12 to 18 months. That delta is relevant because following long term low-carb, there remains a "no going back" threshold where the re-introduction of carbohydrates to a normal level will very likely lead to rapid fat gain. Secondly, just because your brain and muscles can use keytones doesn't mean that they "want" to. Glucose is always the "preferred" energy source. Mental acuity and muscular endurance suffer when glucose is not available. I'm thinking specifically of a twin study done in UK (I think) that tested that hypothesis and their results support it. Lastly, low-carb diets consequently tend to be high in fat-- of particular concern, saturated fat. Again, as stated previously, carb restriction has very rapid initial results, however long term adherence mortgages future cardiovascular health in pursuit of those results.
It remains that in either strategy, neither the low carb lost weight (excess fat) solely because he was low carb. Nor did the low fat lose weight solely because low-fat, but because of a calorie deficit.
Best bet for long term: fruits, vegetables, some whole grains here and there, and avoid high concentrations of simple sugars and saturated fats.
This is where people who folllow low carb gurus are going to pay a heavy price.
Well at least we know the inputs come from people who had not experienced the keto eating life style.
While I did not go LCHF to lose weight the weight loss was an accident that took place. After keto cured my cravings the weight came off without having to count calories in my case.
Plenty of people have tried low carb/keto and paid the piper
https://www.facebook.com/180degreehealth/posts/1193989860629357
That's an opinion piece, offering no citations, not only an opinion piece, but one intended to sell books. Do you have peer-reviewed studies that support the assertion that months or years of not eating carbs will cause "insomnia, low energy levels, depression, dry skin, constipation, sexual apathy, and so on?"
Dude is selling books on how to raise your metabolic rate: http://www.amazon.com/Matt-Stone/e/B001KIM1IA/?_encoding=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&linkCode=ur2&tag=180degr-20
People are reporting these experiences with long term keto everywhere! How many people have you trained and consulted with their nutrition?
Something more than your experience would be nice though.
This is so true in a debate. Keep in mind not all are here to learn more. I have been living in some state of ketosis for 1.5 years due to learning in my case if I cut out sugars and all forms of grains that my pain of 40 years could be well managed by eating my macro giving me improving health/health markers.
Is it the ketones or just my new eating lifestyle that for some reason results in ketone production? I do not know and do not care. At this point in time I plan to be eating this way hopefully 50 years from now and it it produced no ketones it would not matter.
Medically it is known ketones levels in the .5-3 range (nutritional ketosis range) are not harmful and without them our gene pool would have dried up long ago in all likelihood.
Ketones are not any more magically than glucose and are not to be worshiped like some religion.
They are a natural source of energy that our bodies can both produce and use for energy. My healthcare/science background forces me to assume that is not due to just some non useful accident.
0 -
lithezebra wrote: »Great question! I don't know, but I'd like to figure it out. This blog post from Scientific American is relevant. It suggests that you get more energy per unit of oxygen out of fatty acids than out of carbs, which could decrease oxidative stress. Apparently long term ketosis also increases the number of mitochondria in the brain.
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/mind-guest-blog/the-fat-fueled-brain-unnatural-or-advantageous/
I'm going all the way back here because it seems that this thread got derailed not long after this post. (Including two mods bickering, which is fun.)
Anyways, firstly, whatever dish is pictured in the article looks absolutely delicious!!
Secondly, I would think that ketosis increases mitochondria in the brain because it's a less efficient fuel source (yes, I read that one particular ketone may be more efficient that glucose, but I believe overall it has been shown that ketones are less effective as an energy source). So, more mitochondria are produced to help up energy production in the brain. I'm curious what would happen if the "stress" of the ketogenic diet were removed?
Purely guessing, but I would think that the upregulation of the genes leading to increase mitochondria production would stop, and I'm curious if the mitochondria that were created would remain or not. I'm assuming there's turnover, and at some point they would return to "normal" levels, but no clue how long that would take.
I also find it interesting that ketogenic diets have been long used to treat seizures, but direct injection of ketones have been shown to induce seizures. Granted, too much of a good thing can always be bad, and as we mention over and over, it's about context, so inducing non-normal situations can lead to interesting results, but may not be applicable to someone on a ketogenic diet.
Something else I find interesting is the randomized, controlled trial that showed cognitive improvement with an oral supplement of ketones while keeping dietary intake the same between both groups. Many people would not be able to stick to a ketogenic lifestyle, but if a similar effect can be seen with a supplement, that might provide more options to a wider variety of individuals (I'm still not going to run to the store and buy raspberry ketones).
And I like the big take home message. There are a few loud people who claim that ketosis has helped their medical condition to the point that they don't need medication. And that's great. But those people should not tell others to stop taking medication and start a ketogenic diet instead. And there should be no shame in people continuing to take the medication prescribed to them by their doctor. I would not start up a diet and drop my medication just because a few people claimed it worked. I could see maybe trying the diet and working with your doctor to monitor progress and actual levels of medication needed, but telling someone to stop their medication and start a diet is just dangerous.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions