The Ketogenic Diet and Kids; aka No Such Thing As Free Treatment
Gallowmere1984
Posts: 6,626 Member
It would appear that every damned thing comes with side effects:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28778055
Basically, ketogenic dieting can have detrimental effects on a developing skeletal system.
Some things to keep in mind:
-This is the "true" keto diet that's used for treating epilepsy, so very restricted protein as well as carbohydrate.
-Whether this applies to developed skeletal systems (cell turnover is still a thing) doesn't appear to have been looked at yet.
-Increased mobility appears to make the problem worse.
Thoughts?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28778055
Basically, ketogenic dieting can have detrimental effects on a developing skeletal system.
Some things to keep in mind:
-This is the "true" keto diet that's used for treating epilepsy, so very restricted protein as well as carbohydrate.
-Whether this applies to developed skeletal systems (cell turnover is still a thing) doesn't appear to have been looked at yet.
-Increased mobility appears to make the problem worse.
Thoughts?
0
Replies
-
I didn't read the study but this is why I always say don't limit protein if you're not on a medically therapeutic keto diet. Protein is important and too much is not really a thing.1
-
Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »I didn't read the study but this is why I always say don't limit protein if you're not on a medically therapeutic keto diet. Protein is important and too much is not really a thing.
Precisely. People are terrible at understanding mechanisms.
"Studies providing total parenteral nutrition found that urinary calcium output is a direct function of amino acid intake, at least under the unique circumstance of total parenteral nutrition (1). However, studies in which diets provided 30% of energy as protein (181–214 g/d) found no increase in calciuria (10-12). In healthy adults, when protein intake was increased from 0.7 to 2.1 g · kg−1 · d−1, urinary calcium increased, but intestinal absorption increased as well (13)."
From http://m.ajcn.nutrition.org/content/87/5/1567S.full1 -
I don't think that's an equitable comparison as the first study targeted growing children and the second one aging adults.0
-
tcunbeliever wrote: »I don't think that's an equitable comparison as the first study targeted growing children and the second one aging adults.
No, it was more a point about the protein. I didn't mean for it to reflect on the first study, as that type of ketogenic diet in children is being utilized to control seizures, not for what would be considered normal dietary purposes.1 -
I wish there were more long term studies regarding keto - but carnivore cultures (inuit, masai, etc) should be similar, and they don't seem to suffer any long term ill effects...of course, they are getting tons of protein.3
-
tcunbeliever wrote: »I wish there were more long term studies regarding keto - but carnivore cultures (inuit, masai, etc) should be similar, and they don't seem to suffer any long term ill effects...of course, they are getting tons of protein.
Pretty much. Everything I have seen leans more toward them hitting a closer to 40% protein ratio. Plus they are massively physically active compared to western society, which has obvious and repeatedly proven benefits on such things.2 -
My readings indicate the Inuits had a high fat diet. Think whale, seal, salmon. Muktuk (whale blubber) was a favored food. Granted they did eat a high amount of protein also with little to no carbohydrates. I've also read that the Inuits had a larger liver than what we have today. A little genetic adaptation perhaps. I would generally concur with 40% protein though I see it more like 35%. No need to split hairs. If 40% protein, nearly 0 carb, then ~60% fat.
Disclaimer: I'm not anti carb, anti fat, anti protein. It all has benefit.3 -
My readings indicate the Inuits had a high fat diet. Think whale, seal, salmon. Muktuk (whale blubber) was a favored food. Granted they did eat a high amount of protein also with little to no carbohydrates. I've also read that the Inuits had a larger liver than what we have today. A little genetic adaptation perhaps. I would generally concur with 40% protein though I see it more like 35%. No need to split hairs. If 40% protein, nearly 0 carb, then ~60% fat.
Disclaimer: I'm not anti carb, anti fat, anti protein. It all has benefit.
Yeap. Interestingly, if we look at the Hadza people (one of the few modern hunter-gatherer tribes left), they also show no signs of the increased morbidity that "civilized" people suffer from. They also appear to run a more carb-centric diet (lots of honey and tubers).
What do they have in common with the Inuit that the west does not? It ain't genetics (they're African). Oh, right, they don't sit on their *kitten* all day, because they'd starve if they did. It's almost like humans need to move to avoid prematurely breaking down...like we evolved in an environment that required such.
5 -
Gallowmere1984 wrote: »What do they have in common with the Inuit that the west does not? It ain't genetics (they're African). Oh, right, they don't sit on their *kitten* all day, because they'd starve if they did. It's almost like humans need to move to avoid prematurely breaking down...like we evolved in an environment that required such.
Yep. Yep. Yep.0 -
I also question the kinds of fats these children may have been eating for their therapeutic ketogenic diet. Were there a lot of vegetable oils that cause inflammation and may cause intestinal absorption problems?3
-
canadjineh wrote: »I also question the kinds of fats these children may have been eating for their therapeutic ketogenic diet. Were there a lot of vegetable oils that cause inflammation and may cause intestinal absorption problems?
Haven't been able to find specifics, but given that medically prescibed keto diets usually involve far more monounsats than anything, I find it highly unlikely that they're consuming a shedload of w6 PUFAs.0 -
For infants and toddlers they make special keto drinks to use to provide nutrition with the 4:1 fat:carbs&protein ratio. For older kids it's just diet controlled, carbs in the form of leafy greens, some berries, tons of dressings and avocado, fatty meats with extra fat cuts added, etc. Plus, some kids can reduce the ratio to 3:1 or 2:1 and still keep medical issues controlled.2
-
tcunbeliever wrote: »For infants and toddlers they make special keto drinks to use to provide nutrition with the 4:1 fat:carbs&protein ratio. For older kids it's just diet controlled, carbs in the form of leafy greens, some berries, tons of dressings and avocado, fatty meats with extra fat cuts added, etc. Plus, some kids can reduce the ratio to 3:1 or 2:1 and still keep medical issues controlled.
So yeah, basically nothing that would be considered inflammatory, and a lot of monos involved. That's what I figured anyway, and thanks.0 -
I don't know about this study, specifically, but I've seen information on other studies where the intervention thing was basically specially formulated Ensure or Soylent. I immediately saw two fatal flaws:
1. It was soybean oil based. (PUFAs everywhere!)
2. The nutrients were "reconstructed" and not from whole-food sources.
Both of these are, in my opinion, the bigger culprits for issues with these studies than being ketogenic in general, second only to the fact that they're severely reducing protein in growing kids (which, pretty much by definition, need more protein for all the lean mass they're putting on).3 -
Dragonwolf wrote: »I don't know about this study, specifically, but I've seen information on other studies where the intervention thing was basically specially formulated Ensure or Soylent. I immediately saw two fatal flaws:
1. It was soybean oil based. (PUFAs everywhere!)
2. The nutrients were "reconstructed" and not from whole-food sources.
Both of these are, in my opinion, the bigger culprits for issues with these studies than being ketogenic in general, second only to the fact that they're severely reducing protein in growing kids (which, pretty much by definition, need more protein for all the lean mass they're putting on).
The protein issue was my line of thought as well. I'd imagine that the various protocols would try to take protein as high as possible, without triggering symptoms. If that's the case, then these poor kids who trigger low are well and truly screwed, as they get to choose between seizures and skeletal problems.2 -
canadjineh wrote: »I also question the kinds of fats these children may have been eating for their therapeutic ketogenic diet. Were there a lot of vegetable oils that cause inflammation and may cause intestinal absorption problems?
Bingo. Too many studies and tests don't take into account the quality of food being eaten. Even allergy testing can show reactions to "beef" when really it's because they used corn/soy-fed beef to test against. I would also care to know what standard they are comparing it to? What is normal? The bone density of kids growing up on GMO and hormone filled products? I would be curious to know what long term results are like.
That being said - I definitely don't think keto is the answer in every situation or is the end all be all.1
This discussion has been closed.