Ketogenic diet

1568101127

Replies

  • Sunshine_And_Sand
    Sunshine_And_Sand Posts: 1,320 Member
    Keto's definitely not for me. I wouldn't be able to give up oatmeal. Also, copious amounts of fats has never effected my digestion in a good way.
    I also find it super annoying to be told I shouldn't eat carbs...
  • nvmomketo
    nvmomketo Posts: 12,019 Member
    sarjenki wrote: »
    Keto's definitely not for me. I wouldn't be able to give up oatmeal. Also, copious amounts of fats has never effected my digestion in a good way.
    I also find it super annoying to be told I shouldn't eat carbs...

    I think the only time one should be told this is if they are trying to lower carbs. If you want to eat low carb,or should be eating low carb (for medical reasons), then you should not eat (many) carbs. If you want higher carb, you should eat higher carb.
  • nvmomketo
    nvmomketo Posts: 12,019 Member
    sijomial wrote: »
    AnvilHead wrote: »
    Wouldn't work for me. I crossfit and in order for you to perform well you need carbs, energy! Never heard of anyone who crossfit and doesn't eat carbs.

    I do not crossfit, but I do run and lift weights and eat very low carb. It takes time to become fat adapted (efficient at oxidizing fat to the level where skeletal muscles are primarily using fat for energy), but those who are normally have a lot of energy available to access... they are carrying it around right on their body.

    Utilizing fat stores on the body for energy is universal amongst humans - it's not something solely restricted to Keto Magic.

    Yes, but those of us who are "fat adapted" become efficient at using fat during endurance activities. We can use fat at a higher rate than someone who eats SAD.

    For many years, it was believed that the most elite athletes were never able to oxidize more than 1g/min. of fat for energy... and most athletes are closer to the 0.4g-0.6g range. More recent science has studied fat adapted athletes and found rates as high as 1.8g/min.; though many fat adapted athletes are oxidizing fat at rates around 1.2g/min. - 1.5 g/min. 1.8g/min. is the high end of what I've seen from study results thus far and I'm acknowledging it is an elite example. Nonetheless, even non-elite fat adapted athletes are oxidizing fat at higher levels than the level previously believed to be the max possible rate.

    You could also rephrase the bolded statement to read:
    People that do endurance activities become more fat adapted than those that don't do endurance activities. Fat adaptation isn't a yes/no thing - it's a sliding scale and it's not just your diet that influences it.

    True. It is not just diet that influences how efficiently one burns fat. Endurance sports will take you to a higher level than an inactive person. The endurance athlete who is also fat adapted will generally be the most efficient at using fat for fuel, and inactive people with a higher carb diet (possibly those who eat frequently) will be the least efficient.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    sijomial wrote: »
    AnvilHead wrote: »
    Wouldn't work for me. I crossfit and in order for you to perform well you need carbs, energy! Never heard of anyone who crossfit and doesn't eat carbs.

    I do not crossfit, but I do run and lift weights and eat very low carb. It takes time to become fat adapted (efficient at oxidizing fat to the level where skeletal muscles are primarily using fat for energy), but those who are normally have a lot of energy available to access... they are carrying it around right on their body.

    Utilizing fat stores on the body for energy is universal amongst humans - it's not something solely restricted to Keto Magic.

    Yes, but those of us who are "fat adapted" become efficient at using fat during endurance activities. We can use fat at a higher rate than someone who eats SAD.

    For many years, it was believed that the most elite athletes were never able to oxidize more than 1g/min. of fat for energy... and most athletes are closer to the 0.4g-0.6g range. More recent science has studied fat adapted athletes and found rates as high as 1.8g/min.; though many fat adapted athletes are oxidizing fat at rates around 1.2g/min. - 1.5 g/min. 1.8g/min. is the high end of what I've seen from study results thus far and I'm acknowledging it is an elite example. Nonetheless, even non-elite fat adapted athletes are oxidizing fat at higher levels than the level previously believed to be the max possible rate.

    You could also rephrase the bolded statement to read:
    People that do endurance activities become more fat adapted than those that don't do endurance activities. Fat adaptation isn't a yes/no thing - it's a sliding scale and it's not just your diet that influences it.

    Sure, and the endurance athlete who eats SAD is going to still be unable to exceed 1g/min. while the endurance athlete who is fat adapted will be beyond that.

    I don't think we know that. Trying to be more "fat-adapted" is really trendy in a lot of endurance training right now. I was following a plan where you did a number of runs, including long runs, fasted in the morning, and then alternated with practicing fueling. Supposedly it can make a difference, don't know how or how well they tested it, of course.

    The bigger question is probably why or whether it matters if your only goal is going as fast as possible and you don't have a problem fueling on the run for, say, a marathon or longer. And at a certain point you are going to need to refuel no matter how fat adapted you are, and more if you want to push the speed more. (I often do long runs or bike for more time than many recommend without refueling (including during a rather hilly series of rides in Hawaii), but I don't kid myself that it's about anything more in that case than me not pushing the intensity.)
  • jdlobb
    jdlobb Posts: 1,232 Member
    well I found one downside to keto, or low carb in general. Though it shouldn't have been unexpected if I'd thought about it.

    Last weekend I had a day where I went on a carb binge. I stayed under maintenance calories for the day, but I ate a TON of carbs compared to the 60-80g I usually eat.

    I put on so much water weight after that, it was unreal. My weight (at the scale, I'm not an idiot) went back up from 246 to 252, and I didn't get back down to 244 (where I should be based on CICO math) until. Yesterday. Brutal.
  • T1DCarnivoreRunner
    T1DCarnivoreRunner Posts: 11,502 Member
    jdlobb wrote: »
    well I found one downside to keto, or low carb in general. Though it shouldn't have been unexpected if I'd thought about it.

    Last weekend I had a day where I went on a carb binge. I stayed under maintenance calories for the day, but I ate a TON of carbs compared to the 60-80g I usually eat.

    I put on so much water weight after that, it was unreal. My weight (at the scale, I'm not an idiot) went back up from 246 to 252, and I didn't get back down to 244 (where I should be based on CICO math) until. Yesterday. Brutal.

    When people start low carb, they shed glycogen and a lot of water weight along with that. Replenishing glycogen adds a lot of water weight as well. Losing and gaining that water weight feels good (or bad), but is inconsequential. People who want to lose weight generally are aiming for body fat loss.
  • jdlobb
    jdlobb Posts: 1,232 Member
    edited September 2017
    jdlobb wrote: »
    well I found one downside to keto, or low carb in general. Though it shouldn't have been unexpected if I'd thought about it.

    Last weekend I had a day where I went on a carb binge. I stayed under maintenance calories for the day, but I ate a TON of carbs compared to the 60-80g I usually eat.

    I put on so much water weight after that, it was unreal. My weight (at the scale, I'm not an idiot) went back up from 246 to 252, and I didn't get back down to 244 (where I should be based on CICO math) until. Yesterday. Brutal.

    When people start low carb, they shed glycogen and a lot of water weight along with that. Replenishing glycogen adds a lot of water weight as well. Losing and gaining that water weight feels good (or bad), but is inconsequential. People who want to lose weight generally are aiming for body fat loss.

    yeah, obviously. Just saying, seeing the scale spike so quickly and stay up for so long is a head trip. I knew I would shed it and that my real weight loss wasn't affected, but I didn't expect it to take a week to get ride of water gain from 1 day.
  • jdlobb
    jdlobb Posts: 1,232 Member
    And if you'd carried on eating carbs the water weight would have sorted itself out too. It's the switch from one extreme to the other. I'm basically moderate carb though I don't have a number I aim for or anything and I actually don't get much carb water fluctuation. Everything else fluctuation yes!

    agreed
  • amusedmonkey
    amusedmonkey Posts: 10,330 Member
    And if you'd carried on eating carbs the water weight would have sorted itself out too. It's the switch from one extreme to the other. I'm basically moderate carb though I don't have a number I aim for or anything and I actually don't get much carb water fluctuation. Everything else fluctuation yes!

    This. I eat what many people would consider to be higher carbohydrate (averaging about 250 grams a day) and while I'm sure I've got more water in my body than someone who is doing keto, I don't carry a lot of water weight day-to-day unless it's a certain time of the month, I'm recovering from a really long run, or I've had a high sodium day.

    This. The only thing the impacts my water weight is exercise. Since I'm past menopause, I don't even have to deal with the hell of monthly fluctuations, thankfully.

    Honestly, I just wish this would stop being a debate. It doesn't need to be one at all.

    Diets are a matter of preference and what's best suited to an individual's circumstances, food likes/dislikes, personality, and goals. There's no single answer to satiety, no optimum macro mix.

    Keto would be a disaster for me. I have familial hypercholesterolemia, and not only that, after a certain point (about 40-50 grams), I don't find fat satiating. For someone who finds potatoes not very filling, my diet would be a disaster, but it's perfect for me.

    That's interesting! My fat threshold is about 40 grams as well, anything I eat above that makes no difference other than that it tastes good.
  • sevas717
    sevas717 Posts: 27 Member
    No. Unless a "diet" is something that you can do for the rest of your life, when you stop: fat generally comes right back on. That's pretty much how and why most "diets" fail, most are generally unsustainable for the long term. Now if you have an underlying medical condition where a specific diet is better for you low carb/keto, gluten-free, etc, then that's fine as it's a long term healthy solution.

    I'd argue that you probably just need a good "exit strategy", like transitioning to a Mediterranean diet. Water weight will return, because initial weight loss from keto is due to compartment shifts in water from the hypertonic effect of sugar, but there is no reason why body fat weight gain should occur if you properly transition to a whole grain, lower carb diet, while maintaining appropriate fitness.
  • janejellyroll
    janejellyroll Posts: 25,763 Member
    sevas717 wrote: »
    No. Unless a "diet" is something that you can do for the rest of your life, when you stop: fat generally comes right back on. That's pretty much how and why most "diets" fail, most are generally unsustainable for the long term. Now if you have an underlying medical condition where a specific diet is better for you low carb/keto, gluten-free, etc, then that's fine as it's a long term healthy solution.

    I'd argue that you probably just need a good "exit strategy", like transitioning to a Mediterranean diet. Water weight will return, because initial weight loss from keto is due to compartment shifts in water from the hypertonic effect of sugar, but there is no reason why body fat weight gain should occur if you properly transition to a whole grain, lower carb diet, while maintaining appropriate fitness.

    This is true, but if the Mediterranean diet is how someone wants to eat for the rest of their life, why not just lose weight eating that way?
  • jdlobb
    jdlobb Posts: 1,232 Member
    If your diet teaches you how to eat fewer calories per day, then you'll keep weight off. It doesn't matter if you go off "the diet" as long as you don't go back to eating 3000+ calories a day like most fat americans.
  • Yes for me! It has really helped with my PCOS weight gain and energy levels. PCOS makes it difficult for my body to burn carbs and sugars as energy due to a crap insulin reuptake system so making my body burn a source that is actually able to be used has decreased my risk of diabetes and I feel much better.
  • janejellyroll
    janejellyroll Posts: 25,763 Member
    sevas717 wrote: »
    sevas717 wrote: »
    No. Unless a "diet" is something that you can do for the rest of your life, when you stop: fat generally comes right back on. That's pretty much how and why most "diets" fail, most are generally unsustainable for the long term. Now if you have an underlying medical condition where a specific diet is better for you low carb/keto, gluten-free, etc, then that's fine as it's a long term healthy solution.

    I'd argue that you probably just need a good "exit strategy", like transitioning to a Mediterranean diet. Water weight will return, because initial weight loss from keto is due to compartment shifts in water from the hypertonic effect of sugar, but there is no reason why body fat weight gain should occur if you properly transition to a whole grain, lower carb diet, while maintaining appropriate fitness.

    This is true, but if the Mediterranean diet is how someone wants to eat for the rest of their life, why not just lose weight eating that way?

    Well, personally speaking, the ketogenic diet has removed my hunger cues (caused by overproduction of insulin) and has given me motivation to continue, which some will refer to pejoratively as "the diet honeymoon" but lets remember, we have actual honeymoons for a reason -- to get marriage off on a strong foot, emotionally and physically connected, so that the couple can face the real world with its problems and challenges. Unexpected benefits have been greater focus and mental acuity (due to Acetyl CoA increases in the brain). I started the diet in July, thinking I was just going to eat cheese and meat and loose weight. I lost 25 lbs in 1.5 months (225-200), which made me start thinking, "I feel like I can start doing exercise again," whereas before, it felt like too much exertion and was frustrating.

    Since then I've been doing strength training and a bit of cardio 6x a week, added intermittent fasting twice weekly (24 hrs each), now I'm swapping body fat for muscle, and slowly reducing overall weight. I don't think all of those positive changes would have happened with the Mediterranean diet alone (not a knock, it isn't designed for that, and the original NEJM paper shows no significant weight differences between it and the control group). So I credit the motivation, lack of hunger (which solved overeating for me), mental focus and confidence to begin an exercise program, all from the Keto Diet.

    Plus as a medical scientist, I appreciate that it is a physiologically sound concept which leverages actual evolutionary responses to hunger, lack of available sugar, etc. Even though it is a fad, it's not a "fad diet" in the sense of being based on someone's hunch.

    To clarify, are you planning to transition to the Mediterranean diet once you have finished weight loss? If so, do you anticipate problems once you begin feeling hungry?

    I guess to me personally, the benefit of losing weight the way I plan to maintain is that it allows me to gradually learn what works for me and what doesn't so when I began maintaining all I was changing was my calorie goal.

    It feels overwhelming to think about having to "master" a whole new way of eating and figure out satiety, meal timing, foods to prepare when transitioning into maintaining. Of course, that's just my personal impression. That doesn't mean other people couldn't make it work.
This discussion has been closed.