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.
How does the body fuel itself?
Replies
-
cwolfman13 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »johnslater461 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »johnslater461 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »Here's my analogy:
You have a car that's engineered and built to run on premium gasoline.
There's a gas shortage, and the only thing available at the pumps is the cheap crap, so you switch to that instead.
Will your car run?
Of course it will.
Will it run at peak efficiency and performance?
Not a chance.
Do you have scientific evidence that the brain operates less optimally on a fuel mixture of glucose, ketones and lactate, or are you just stating opinion?
Not scientific evidence, but I note that the arguments posed by the keto-evangelists are distinctly lacking in rationale and objective evidence.
Commonplace where one allows agenda to drive the process.
The argument that the brain is NOT Exclusively fuelled by glucose has been supported by evidence.
no evidence has been given put forward that the brain is exclusively fuelled by glucose has been put forward or that the brain operates in a less than optimal capacity if it is not exclusively fuelled by glucose.
The statement that started this particular discussion about glucose being the only fuel the brain can use is false and misleading.
I believe it was thr preffered source of fuel from the brain was glucose over ketones, since ketones only are used as fuel when deprived of glucose.
Yep that’s my understanding of how the brain is fuelled also, that if glucose is readily available it is the preferred option.
I am also of the understanding that when glucose is restricted that the brain will function just as optimally on a mixture of ketones, glucose and lactate.
Also that even when glucose is in ample supply the brain will also draw upon lactate for fuel when the body is undertaking vigorous exercise.
All of the above is very different factually from the brain only being able to use glucose for fuel - wouldn’t you agree?
It is. Which is why nobody made that assertion in the first place.
“The brain is fueled exclusively by glucose.”
Page one. Maybe you just hadn’t scrolled back that far?
Selective quote is selective"Glucose is virtually the sole fuel for the human brain, except during prolonged starvation. The brain lacks fuel stores and hence requires a continuous supply of glucose. It consumes about 120 g daily, which corresponds to an energy input of about 420 kcal (1760 kJ), accounting for some 60% of the utilization of glucose by the whole body in the resting state...
...Fatty acids do not serve as fuel for the brain, because they are bound to albumin in plasma and so do not traverse the blood-brain barrier. In starvation, ketone bodies generated by the liver partly replace glucose as fuel for the brain."[/i]
You must have missed the part about alternate fuel sources in the absence of glucose.
Great so we are all in agreement then that statement that the brain exclusively uses glucose for fuel is false?
Because so far there’s been lots of deflecting from answering this question.
It's just as false as there being many low carb and keto athletes that thrive, while considering the population of athletes. That being, that might be one or two in a population of thousands of professional athletes.
Another great deflection. I hope your day job is in politics
It kind of is. But it's also recognizing that both sides make wild accusations. Both of which should concede some of their non valid points. The data on keto and sports shows significant variations in individual performance. So yes, while there are a few that can thrive on low carb or keto while playing some sports, it certainly isn't the major like those who carb load. Preferentially, athletes can benefit from training carb load and have periods of training with lower carbs. No different than one should lift and do cardio.
The data for LCHF really does show significant variations, it shows decreases in performance for high intensity athletes and an increase in performance for endurance athletes.
Do you have the studies? Were they on trained or untrained individuals? Did you compare individual performance or just the mean values? Or did you read it and take the interpretation at face value?
Here is one of the latest meta analyses on ketogenic performance.
https://sci-fit.net/ketogenic-diet-fat-muscle-performance/
The interesting quote is the 'growing popularity with endurance athletes'. Who knows they might be close enough soon to the figure we can refer to as many? Not sure anyone will ever defy the laws of physiology enough that we can start using the term 'exclusive'
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29108901
All of the endurance athletes I've read about doing keto are not doing keto full time...they do keto for certain parts of their training protocol, just as they do some fasted training...they still carb load before races.
Exactly. From what I understand, having keto as part of their training protocol can extend the period of time before an endurance athlete "hits the wall".3 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »johnslater461 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »johnslater461 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »Here's my analogy:
You have a car that's engineered and built to run on premium gasoline.
There's a gas shortage, and the only thing available at the pumps is the cheap crap, so you switch to that instead.
Will your car run?
Of course it will.
Will it run at peak efficiency and performance?
Not a chance.
Do you have scientific evidence that the brain operates less optimally on a fuel mixture of glucose, ketones and lactate, or are you just stating opinion?
Not scientific evidence, but I note that the arguments posed by the keto-evangelists are distinctly lacking in rationale and objective evidence.
Commonplace where one allows agenda to drive the process.
The argument that the brain is NOT Exclusively fuelled by glucose has been supported by evidence.
no evidence has been given put forward that the brain is exclusively fuelled by glucose has been put forward or that the brain operates in a less than optimal capacity if it is not exclusively fuelled by glucose.
The statement that started this particular discussion about glucose being the only fuel the brain can use is false and misleading.
I believe it was thr preffered source of fuel from the brain was glucose over ketones, since ketones only are used as fuel when deprived of glucose.
Yep that’s my understanding of how the brain is fuelled also, that if glucose is readily available it is the preferred option.
I am also of the understanding that when glucose is restricted that the brain will function just as optimally on a mixture of ketones, glucose and lactate.
Also that even when glucose is in ample supply the brain will also draw upon lactate for fuel when the body is undertaking vigorous exercise.
All of the above is very different factually from the brain only being able to use glucose for fuel - wouldn’t you agree?
It is. Which is why nobody made that assertion in the first place.
“The brain is fueled exclusively by glucose.”
Page one. Maybe you just hadn’t scrolled back that far?
Selective quote is selective"Glucose is virtually the sole fuel for the human brain, except during prolonged starvation. The brain lacks fuel stores and hence requires a continuous supply of glucose. It consumes about 120 g daily, which corresponds to an energy input of about 420 kcal (1760 kJ), accounting for some 60% of the utilization of glucose by the whole body in the resting state...
...Fatty acids do not serve as fuel for the brain, because they are bound to albumin in plasma and so do not traverse the blood-brain barrier. In starvation, ketone bodies generated by the liver partly replace glucose as fuel for the brain."[/i]
You must have missed the part about alternate fuel sources in the absence of glucose.
Great so we are all in agreement then that statement that the brain exclusively uses glucose for fuel is false?
Because so far there’s been lots of deflecting from answering this question.
It's just as false as there being many low carb and keto athletes that thrive, while considering the population of athletes. That being, that might be one or two in a population of thousands of professional athletes.
Another great deflection. I hope your day job is in politics
It kind of is. But it's also recognizing that both sides make wild accusations. Both of which should concede some of their non valid points. The data on keto and sports shows significant variations in individual performance. So yes, while there are a few that can thrive on low carb or keto while playing some sports, it certainly isn't the major like those who carb load. Preferentially, athletes can benefit from training carb load and have periods of training with lower carbs. No different than one should lift and do cardio.
The data for LCHF really does show significant variations, it shows decreases in performance for high intensity athletes and an increase in performance for endurance athletes.
Do you have the studies? Were they on trained or untrained individuals? Did you compare individual performance or just the mean values? Or did you read it and take the interpretation at face value?
Here is one of the latest meta analyses on ketogenic performance.
https://sci-fit.net/ketogenic-diet-fat-muscle-performance/
The interesting quote is the 'growing popularity with endurance athletes'. Who knows they might be close enough soon to the figure we can refer to as many? Not sure anyone will ever defy the laws of physiology enough that we can start using the term 'exclusive'
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29108901
All of the endurance athletes I've read about doing keto are not doing keto full time...they do keto for certain parts of their training protocol, just as they do some fasted training...they still carb load before races.
Exactly. From what I understand, having keto as part of their training protocol can extend the period of time before an endurance athlete "hits the wall".
^ Emphasis on the important part of that phrase. 5 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »johnslater461 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »johnslater461 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »Here's my analogy:
You have a car that's engineered and built to run on premium gasoline.
There's a gas shortage, and the only thing available at the pumps is the cheap crap, so you switch to that instead.
Will your car run?
Of course it will.
Will it run at peak efficiency and performance?
Not a chance.
Do you have scientific evidence that the brain operates less optimally on a fuel mixture of glucose, ketones and lactate, or are you just stating opinion?
Not scientific evidence, but I note that the arguments posed by the keto-evangelists are distinctly lacking in rationale and objective evidence.
Commonplace where one allows agenda to drive the process.
The argument that the brain is NOT Exclusively fuelled by glucose has been supported by evidence.
no evidence has been given put forward that the brain is exclusively fuelled by glucose has been put forward or that the brain operates in a less than optimal capacity if it is not exclusively fuelled by glucose.
The statement that started this particular discussion about glucose being the only fuel the brain can use is false and misleading.
I believe it was thr preffered source of fuel from the brain was glucose over ketones, since ketones only are used as fuel when deprived of glucose.
Yep that’s my understanding of how the brain is fuelled also, that if glucose is readily available it is the preferred option.
I am also of the understanding that when glucose is restricted that the brain will function just as optimally on a mixture of ketones, glucose and lactate.
Also that even when glucose is in ample supply the brain will also draw upon lactate for fuel when the body is undertaking vigorous exercise.
All of the above is very different factually from the brain only being able to use glucose for fuel - wouldn’t you agree?
It is. Which is why nobody made that assertion in the first place.
“The brain is fueled exclusively by glucose.”
Page one. Maybe you just hadn’t scrolled back that far?
Selective quote is selective"Glucose is virtually the sole fuel for the human brain, except during prolonged starvation. The brain lacks fuel stores and hence requires a continuous supply of glucose. It consumes about 120 g daily, which corresponds to an energy input of about 420 kcal (1760 kJ), accounting for some 60% of the utilization of glucose by the whole body in the resting state...
...Fatty acids do not serve as fuel for the brain, because they are bound to albumin in plasma and so do not traverse the blood-brain barrier. In starvation, ketone bodies generated by the liver partly replace glucose as fuel for the brain."[/i]
You must have missed the part about alternate fuel sources in the absence of glucose.
Great so we are all in agreement then that statement that the brain exclusively uses glucose for fuel is false?
Because so far there’s been lots of deflecting from answering this question.
It's just as false as there being many low carb and keto athletes that thrive, while considering the population of athletes. That being, that might be one or two in a population of thousands of professional athletes.
Another great deflection. I hope your day job is in politics
It kind of is. But it's also recognizing that both sides make wild accusations. Both of which should concede some of their non valid points. The data on keto and sports shows significant variations in individual performance. So yes, while there are a few that can thrive on low carb or keto while playing some sports, it certainly isn't the major like those who carb load. Preferentially, athletes can benefit from training carb load and have periods of training with lower carbs. No different than one should lift and do cardio.
The data for LCHF really does show significant variations, it shows decreases in performance for high intensity athletes and an increase in performance for endurance athletes.
Do you have the studies? Were they on trained or untrained individuals? Did you compare individual performance or just the mean values? Or did you read it and take the interpretation at face value?
Here is one of the latest meta analyses on ketogenic performance.
https://sci-fit.net/ketogenic-diet-fat-muscle-performance/
The interesting quote is the 'growing popularity with endurance athletes'. Who knows they might be close enough soon to the figure we can refer to as many? Not sure anyone will ever defy the laws of physiology enough that we can start using the term 'exclusive'
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29108901
All of the endurance athletes I've read about doing keto are not doing keto full time...they do keto for certain parts of their training protocol, just as they do some fasted training...they still carb load before races.
Exactly. From what I understand, having keto as part of their training protocol can extend the period of time before an endurance athlete "hits the wall".
^ Emphasis on the important part of that phrase.
Is this anacdotal or do you have some documented examples?
10 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »johnslater461 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »johnslater461 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »Here's my analogy:
You have a car that's engineered and built to run on premium gasoline.
There's a gas shortage, and the only thing available at the pumps is the cheap crap, so you switch to that instead.
Will your car run?
Of course it will.
Will it run at peak efficiency and performance?
Not a chance.
Do you have scientific evidence that the brain operates less optimally on a fuel mixture of glucose, ketones and lactate, or are you just stating opinion?
Not scientific evidence, but I note that the arguments posed by the keto-evangelists are distinctly lacking in rationale and objective evidence.
Commonplace where one allows agenda to drive the process.
The argument that the brain is NOT Exclusively fuelled by glucose has been supported by evidence.
no evidence has been given put forward that the brain is exclusively fuelled by glucose has been put forward or that the brain operates in a less than optimal capacity if it is not exclusively fuelled by glucose.
The statement that started this particular discussion about glucose being the only fuel the brain can use is false and misleading.
I believe it was thr preffered source of fuel from the brain was glucose over ketones, since ketones only are used as fuel when deprived of glucose.
Yep that’s my understanding of how the brain is fuelled also, that if glucose is readily available it is the preferred option.
I am also of the understanding that when glucose is restricted that the brain will function just as optimally on a mixture of ketones, glucose and lactate.
Also that even when glucose is in ample supply the brain will also draw upon lactate for fuel when the body is undertaking vigorous exercise.
All of the above is very different factually from the brain only being able to use glucose for fuel - wouldn’t you agree?
It is. Which is why nobody made that assertion in the first place.
“The brain is fueled exclusively by glucose.”
Page one. Maybe you just hadn’t scrolled back that far?
Selective quote is selective"Glucose is virtually the sole fuel for the human brain, except during prolonged starvation. The brain lacks fuel stores and hence requires a continuous supply of glucose. It consumes about 120 g daily, which corresponds to an energy input of about 420 kcal (1760 kJ), accounting for some 60% of the utilization of glucose by the whole body in the resting state...
...Fatty acids do not serve as fuel for the brain, because they are bound to albumin in plasma and so do not traverse the blood-brain barrier. In starvation, ketone bodies generated by the liver partly replace glucose as fuel for the brain."[/i]
You must have missed the part about alternate fuel sources in the absence of glucose.
Great so we are all in agreement then that statement that the brain exclusively uses glucose for fuel is false?
Because so far there’s been lots of deflecting from answering this question.
It's just as false as there being many low carb and keto athletes that thrive, while considering the population of athletes. That being, that might be one or two in a population of thousands of professional athletes.
Another great deflection. I hope your day job is in politics
It kind of is. But it's also recognizing that both sides make wild accusations. Both of which should concede some of their non valid points. The data on keto and sports shows significant variations in individual performance. So yes, while there are a few that can thrive on low carb or keto while playing some sports, it certainly isn't the major like those who carb load. Preferentially, athletes can benefit from training carb load and have periods of training with lower carbs. No different than one should lift and do cardio.
The data for LCHF really does show significant variations, it shows decreases in performance for high intensity athletes and an increase in performance for endurance athletes.
Do you have the studies? Were they on trained or untrained individuals? Did you compare individual performance or just the mean values? Or did you read it and take the interpretation at face value?
Here is one of the latest meta analyses on ketogenic performance.
https://sci-fit.net/ketogenic-diet-fat-muscle-performance/
The interesting quote is the 'growing popularity with endurance athletes'. Who knows they might be close enough soon to the figure we can refer to as many? Not sure anyone will ever defy the laws of physiology enough that we can start using the term 'exclusive'
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29108901
All of the endurance athletes I've read about doing keto are not doing keto full time...they do keto for certain parts of their training protocol, just as they do some fasted training...they still carb load before races.
Exactly. From what I understand, having keto as part of their training protocol can extend the period of time before an endurance athlete "hits the wall".
^ Emphasis on the important part of that phrase.
Correct. Too bad lemurcat is no longer around. She was really knowledgeable in this area!7 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »Is this anacdotal or do you have some documented examples?
I've gotten the impression from the keto proponents in this thread that anecdotes are all that are needed, and are more than enough proof. Does that standard only apply in one direction?16 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »Is this anacdotal or do you have some documented examples?
I've gotten the impression from the keto proponents in this thread that anecdotes are all that are needed, and are more than enough proof. Does that standard only apply in one direction?
I’ve posted studies, so no that standard does not only apply in one direction.
So is there any documented examples or like your exclusive brain fuel comment, is it just anecdotal?
11 -
stevencloser wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »Any athlete participating in a high-intensity sport wouldn't seek ketosis in the first place if they've done enough research to understand how it impairs ATP replenishment. Fat adapted = carb impaired.
There is also some evidence indicating that LCHF is sub-optimal for endurance sports (study referenced in the infographic):
I think your graph is the study Nvmomketo referenced (3 week trial).
Yep. That's the one. Funnily enough, the info graphic says that adaptation to a ketogenic diet impaired racing performance. So it's the adaptation phase that hurt their performance.... Most who have switched to low carb would agree that racing while adapting to a new fuel source is a dumb choice. Eat keto at least 3 months and then race...
It's a shame they didn't test the athletes AFTER fat adaptation.
It seems to me like the time you claim adaptation takes is longer the longer the study times are that say people on keto diets have decreased performance.
Really? From what?
There is no exact adaptation time. I've seen as long as 6 months recommended, although 2-4 is more common. My guess is that the amount of time to adaptto a primary fuel of fat will vary between individuals, as will the effect on performance during that time.8 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »Is this anacdotal or do you have some documented examples?
I've gotten the impression from the keto proponents in this thread that anecdotes are all that are needed, and are more than enough proof. Does that standard only apply in one direction?
I’ve posted studies, so no that standard does not only apply in one direction.
So is there any documented examples or like your exclusive brain fuel comment, is it just anecdotal?
LOL. You still hung up on that?
It's already been addressed. Several times by several people. And read the quoted material in my OP - which has also already been quoted back to you. In case you didn't notice, that word was used in peer-reviewed research. Sorry it was so triggering for you, it wasn't my intent to traumatize anybody.13 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »Is this anacdotal or do you have some documented examples?
I've gotten the impression from the keto proponents in this thread that anecdotes are all that are needed, and are more than enough proof. Does that standard only apply in one direction?
I’ve posted studies, so no that standard does not only apply in one direction.
So is there any documented examples or like your exclusive brain fuel comment, is it just anecdotal?
LOL. You still hung up on that?
It's already been addressed. Several times by several people. And read the quoted material in my OP- which has also already been quoted back to you.
Well I know you guys are sticklers for people being accurate - or does that standard only apply in one direction?
Are we agreeing then that your comment at the being of this post (page one) was just a poorly phrased contradiction?
Clearly the brain is not exclusively fueled by glucose.
So any documented examples or was your comment anecdotal?
13 -
Really? From what?
There is no exact adaptation time. I've seen as long as 6 months recommended, although 2-4 is more common. My guess is that the amount of time to adaptto a primary fuel of fat will vary between individuals, as will the effect on performance during that time.
So in other words, since there's no quantifiable adaptation time, and adaptation and performance will vary between individuals, any study result of any time period not showing favorable results to a ketogenic diet simply means that they didn't give long enough for the athletes to be fat adapted - because we don't know how long that would really take. And as a backup, if they didn't perform as well, that's just due to individual variations.
Got it.13 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »Is this anacdotal or do you have some documented examples?
I've gotten the impression from the keto proponents in this thread that anecdotes are all that are needed, and are more than enough proof. Does that standard only apply in one direction?
I’ve posted studies, so no that standard does not only apply in one direction.
So is there any documented examples or like your exclusive brain fuel comment, is it just anecdotal?
LOL. You still hung up on that?
It's already been addressed. Several times by several people. And read the quoted material in my OP - which has also already been quoted back to you. In case you didn't notice, that word was used in peer-reviewed research. Sorry it was so triggering for you, it wasn't my intent to traumatize anybody.
Not traumatized, just concerned for you, that you are coming across to people as misinformed.
14 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »...So any documented examples or was your comment anecdotal?
Shall we start with Chris Froome, who is often held up as a keto hero?: https://www.welovecycling.com/wide/2017/07/04/world-class-cyclists-special-diets-chris-froome/...Reaching his ideal racing weight was just the first step. Another important change in nutrition came along as a part of the team Sky strategy. James Morton, the current head of nutrition for team Sky, summed up the basics:
“In our research at Liverpool John Moores University, we now know that deliberately restricting carbs around carefully chosen training sessions can actually enhance training adaptations. But then of course we must ensure higher carbohydrate intakes for key training sessions and hard stages in racing. I believe this concept of periodising daily carbohydrate intake is the most exciting part of sports nutrition in the last decade.”...
...During races like the Tour de France or hard training sessions, he will of course go back to a higher proportion of carbs in his diet to top off his glycogen reserves and perform at his best. It seems that this approach allows him to get the best out of both worlds, he keeps his race weight without starving himself, and he has all the energy he needs for putting out big efforts.6 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »Is this anacdotal or do you have some documented examples?
I've gotten the impression from the keto proponents in this thread that anecdotes are all that are needed, and are more than enough proof. Does that standard only apply in one direction?
I’ve posted studies, so no that standard does not only apply in one direction.
So is there any documented examples or like your exclusive brain fuel comment, is it just anecdotal?
LOL. You still hung up on that?
It's already been addressed. Several times by several people. And read the quoted material in my OP - which has also already been quoted back to you. In case you didn't notice, that word was used in peer-reviewed research. Sorry it was so triggering for you, it wasn't my intent to traumatize anybody.
Not traumatized, just concerned for you, that you are coming across to people as misinformed.
Only certain people with certain unshakeable beliefs. And I'm okay with that.10 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »Is this anacdotal or do you have some documented examples?
I've gotten the impression from the keto proponents in this thread that anecdotes are all that are needed, and are more than enough proof. Does that standard only apply in one direction?
I’ve posted studies, so no that standard does not only apply in one direction.
So is there any documented examples or like your exclusive brain fuel comment, is it just anecdotal?
LOL. You still hung up on that?
It's already been addressed. Several times by several people. And read the quoted material in my OP - which has also already been quoted back to you. In case you didn't notice, that word was used in peer-reviewed research. Sorry it was so triggering for you, it wasn't my intent to traumatize anybody.
I don't think you read the study correctly! Where in the study does it mention the word exclusive in regards to glucose as its fuel source. I think you are imagining things.7 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »Is this anacdotal or do you have some documented examples?
I've gotten the impression from the keto proponents in this thread that anecdotes are all that are needed, and are more than enough proof. Does that standard only apply in one direction?
I’ve posted studies, so no that standard does not only apply in one direction.
So is there any documented examples or like your exclusive brain fuel comment, is it just anecdotal?
LOL. You still hung up on that?
It's already been addressed. Several times by several people. And read the quoted material in my OP - which has also already been quoted back to you. In case you didn't notice, that word was used in peer-reviewed research. Sorry it was so triggering for you, it wasn't my intent to traumatize anybody.
Not traumatized, just concerned for you, that you are coming across to people as misinformed.
Only certain people with certain unshakeable beliefs. And I'm okay with that.
And there are a fair few on here that's for sure.
7 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »Is this anacdotal or do you have some documented examples?
I've gotten the impression from the keto proponents in this thread that anecdotes are all that are needed, and are more than enough proof. Does that standard only apply in one direction?
I’ve posted studies, so no that standard does not only apply in one direction.
So is there any documented examples or like your exclusive brain fuel comment, is it just anecdotal?
LOL. You still hung up on that?
It's already been addressed. Several times by several people. And read the quoted material in my OP - which has also already been quoted back to you. In case you didn't notice, that word was used in peer-reviewed research. Sorry it was so triggering for you, it wasn't my intent to traumatize anybody.
Not traumatized, just concerned for you, that you are coming across to people as misinformed.
Only certain people with certain unshakeable beliefs. And I'm okay with that.
And there are a fair few on here that's for sure.
At least we agree on something.6 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »...So any documented examples or was your comment anecdotal?
Shall we start with Chris Froome, who is often held up as a keto hero?: https://www.welovecycling.com/wide/2017/07/04/world-class-cyclists-special-diets-chris-froome/...Reaching his ideal racing weight was just the first step. Another important change in nutrition came along as a part of the team Sky strategy. James Morton, the current head of nutrition for team Sky, summed up the basics:
“In our research at Liverpool John Moores University, we now know that deliberately restricting carbs around carefully chosen training sessions can actually enhance training adaptations. But then of course we must ensure higher carbohydrate intakes for key training sessions and hard stages in racing. I believe this concept of periodising daily carbohydrate intake is the most exciting part of sports nutrition in the last decade.”...
...During races like the Tour de France or hard training sessions, he will of course go back to a higher proportion of carbs in his diet to top off his glycogen reserves and perform at his best. It seems that this approach allows him to get the best out of both worlds, he keeps his race weight without starving himself, and he has all the energy he needs for putting out big efforts.
Where does this suggest he comes out of ketosis? Is there any data to go with this?
If anything this supports the use of a low carb life style for his sporting career.8 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »Is this anacdotal or do you have some documented examples?
I've gotten the impression from the keto proponents in this thread that anecdotes are all that are needed, and are more than enough proof. Does that standard only apply in one direction?
I’ve posted studies, so no that standard does not only apply in one direction.
So is there any documented examples or like your exclusive brain fuel comment, is it just anecdotal?
LOL. You still hung up on that?
It's already been addressed. Several times by several people. And read the quoted material in my OP - which has also already been quoted back to you. In case you didn't notice, that word was used in peer-reviewed research. Sorry it was so triggering for you, it wasn't my intent to traumatize anybody.
Not traumatized, just concerned for you, that you are coming across to people as misinformed.
Only certain people with certain unshakeable beliefs. And I'm okay with that.
And there are a fair few on here that's for sure.
Oh the irony11 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »Is this anacdotal or do you have some documented examples?
I've gotten the impression from the keto proponents in this thread that anecdotes are all that are needed, and are more than enough proof. Does that standard only apply in one direction?
I’ve posted studies, so no that standard does not only apply in one direction.
So is there any documented examples or like your exclusive brain fuel comment, is it just anecdotal?
LOL. You still hung up on that?
It's already been addressed. Several times by several people. And read the quoted material in my OP - which has also already been quoted back to you. In case you didn't notice, that word was used in peer-reviewed research. Sorry it was so triggering for you, it wasn't my intent to traumatize anybody.
Not traumatized, just concerned for you, that you are coming across to people as misinformed.
Only certain people with certain unshakeable beliefs. And I'm okay with that.
And there are a fair few on here that's for sure.
At least we agree on something.
We certainly do!6 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »...So any documented examples or was your comment anecdotal?
Shall we start with Chris Froome, who is often held up as a keto hero?: https://www.welovecycling.com/wide/2017/07/04/world-class-cyclists-special-diets-chris-froome/...Reaching his ideal racing weight was just the first step. Another important change in nutrition came along as a part of the team Sky strategy. James Morton, the current head of nutrition for team Sky, summed up the basics:
“In our research at Liverpool John Moores University, we now know that deliberately restricting carbs around carefully chosen training sessions can actually enhance training adaptations. But then of course we must ensure higher carbohydrate intakes for key training sessions and hard stages in racing. I believe this concept of periodising daily carbohydrate intake is the most exciting part of sports nutrition in the last decade.”...
...During races like the Tour de France or hard training sessions, he will of course go back to a higher proportion of carbs in his diet to top off his glycogen reserves and perform at his best. It seems that this approach allows him to get the best out of both worlds, he keeps his race weight without starving himself, and he has all the energy he needs for putting out big efforts.
Just as a side note - what fuel do you think Chris Fromes brain is using in those gruelling hill climbs when his muscles are fully carb loaded and glucose is readily available?
1) only glucose
2) glucose and lactate
Answers on a post card!9 -
stevencloser wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »Any athlete participating in a high-intensity sport wouldn't seek ketosis in the first place if they've done enough research to understand how it impairs ATP replenishment. Fat adapted = carb impaired.
There is also some evidence indicating that LCHF is sub-optimal for endurance sports (study referenced in the infographic):
I think your graph is the study Nvmomketo referenced (3 week trial).
Yep. That's the one. Funnily enough, the info graphic says that adaptation to a ketogenic diet impaired racing performance. So it's the adaptation phase that hurt their performance.... Most who have switched to low carb would agree that racing while adapting to a new fuel source is a dumb choice. Eat keto at least 3 months and then race...
It's a shame they didn't test the athletes AFTER fat adaptation.
It seems to me like the time you claim adaptation takes is longer the longer the study times are that say people on keto diets have decreased performance.
Really? From what?
There is no exact adaptation time. I've seen as long as 6 months recommended, although 2-4 is more common. My guess is that the amount of time to adaptto a primary fuel of fat will vary between individuals, as will the effect on performance during that time.
According to KH, fat adaptation can occur within days and fully adapted in a few weeks. Thomas DeLauer also shares that sediment; at least according to the few YouTube vids I have watched.5 -
stanmann571 wrote: »PaulChasinDreams wrote: »
No, I basically did not. For you to think that indicates that you either have severe reading comprehension problems or your confirmation bias has made you so delusional that you hear what you want to hear.what you said basically agrees with what I've said. Whatever fuel the body is used to using is the preferred fuel.
From AnvilHeadIf glucose is available, the brain will not utilize ketones. Glucose is the preferred fuel and if it's available, the brain will use it exclusively.
This is essentially what I said. If both fuel substrates are available, the brain will use glucose. Full stop.
That is defined as preferential. It's not what one the body is used to using. That is a misinterpretation of physiology at best and a blatant misrepresentation at worst. This is where some of you who are practitioners of keto go off the deep end and lose all credibility for what could be a potentially valuable dietary tool for some. You twist the truth. Or, lose site of it.
Glucose is ALWAYS available in the body for use. Full stop.
Despite the fact that glucose is always present in the body, the brain does not always rely on glucose for fuel even though both fuels are available... well, all three fuels if you consider what @tennisdude2004 pointed out. It comes down to the main fuel source - your body is not making ketones from dietary or body fat for brain fuel purposes when you are providing it with lots of glucose.
I do not have less glucose circulating in my body than someone else of the same size who uses carbs as their primary fuel; we might even have the same blood glucose measurements - mine's around a 5.3. My brain is not preferentially using glucose as its main fuel though.
The basic glucose needs of the body is around 130g, but the basic glucose needs of someone who is fat adapted is closer to 40g. Someone on a higher carb diet could stop eating, completely, and not die before fat adapted (or within a day) because the liver can make at least 130g of glucose a day... that should be enough for the brain.... but the brain is not always using glucose for it's fuel. Even though it is always available.
And no need to start being insulting. I understand what you are trying to say. I just don't agree with you. It's not that horrible of a thing. Really.
Basal glucose requirements are always available. And when depleted to that level, your body will use a secondary fuel source for your brain..... Its cheaper than the energy required to create more glucose through glucenogenesis.
Its the difference between minimal levels for optimal levels.
I sort of agree. Basal glucose is always available and it can more than meets our basic needs. You can see that in some people who eat keto, train keto, and still have a bit high fasting glucose the next day. I just meant to point out that when fat or ketones are used in a fat adapted individual , it's not because you've run out of glucose. Eventually fat and ketones is a well used fuel for the body.
And when did glucose become the primary fuel source for humans? I'm not really asking you, just wondering in general. Is it just because of what north Americans mostly eat for fuel? I think infants and exclusively breast fed babies are mildly ketogenic, aren't they?
IDK, I'm still of the opinion that whatever fuel your body is adapted to is the primary and "preferred" fuel for that individual. I don't think I'm stressing my body out by having it rely on fat and ketones for most fuel (even though glucose is present), nor do I think your body is unhealthy for relying on glucose most of the time (even though fat is present).Also, having huge carb refeeds prior to an event is more CKD.
Huge carb refeeds (with depleted glycogen between carb loads) is definitely more CKD. TKD is typically used more by endurance athletes - a topping off of glycogen as it were - about 30 minutes before activity. CKD is more often used for lifters trying to make gains... As I understand it.
This is the most accurate post on this thread. And other posts here by nvmomketo and tennisdude2004. The other attempts of rebuttal by the anti keto posse is just more typical glucose/cico/anti keto brainwashing attempts and old, weak, disproved theories. Get with the times and new proven science lol.... so obvious it's laughable some of the arguments people try to use against it here. Glucose is exactly that...one energy source that a lot of people's body uses cause that is what most people stuff themselves with all day long. Do you think that was humans main energy source was back in the day when you all didn't have such easy access to the garbage carbs you are feeding yourselves with now days. Do you think when humans ate mostly fat and protein their bodies metabolisms ran the same as your high carb metabolism does?? No, give your heads a shake. Common sense and common knowledge. Keeping your heads in the sands won't get rid of the truth. Give your body another source of energy/nutrition and that's what it uses for the energy. Proven by millions of low carb/keto eating people all over the world every day of the year. Time to get over it forum posse bullies lol. Glad to see so many people on this forum showing up from all over the world learning about and living keto and how glucose has been killing people all over the world in astronomically rising numbers every day. Type 2 Diabetes has never been higher and not just in adults and the elderly anymore; children and teens with it are increasing in crazy numbers like never before.
And 'there's no high performance athletes that are low carb' LOL!!! Do you not read, or do you not have a computer?
Rather than be the one to ask for sources, irony of your insults, etc....etc...etc...
I've become more interested in....how in the hell were you able to edit your post 6 hours after initially posting it?
Editing to verify that indeed, mine says we have an hour.
More likely case is that it wasn't he who edited it.
Strange, I'm not sure why....or the bigger how anyone could go in and anonymously edit user posts.
Any of the Mods could do it to remove content not deemed kosher for the site, but they usually leave a footprint that says it was edited to remove said content.
I find it strange there is no footprint or note from a mod....
Also editing to quit the obtuseness, I saw the post before going to the gym. After getting to work and catching back up on MFP shenanigans, I noticed that, from what I remember, post is basically completely re-written. Still kind of wondering how the OP edited it 6hrs later.
That is odd. I used to be a mod on a programming forum. If I edited a user's post for any reason it was required to leave a tag, or I would have gotten some major stink eye from the admins or been demoted.
Yeah, that's basic Forum101. You do not edit someone else's post without leaving a time stamp and an edit signature displaying who made the edit. Waaaaay too easy to anonymously change someone else's words to something they never said.
Transparency. It's important.
5 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »...So any documented examples or was your comment anecdotal?
Shall we start with Chris Froome, who is often held up as a keto hero?: https://www.welovecycling.com/wide/2017/07/04/world-class-cyclists-special-diets-chris-froome/...Reaching his ideal racing weight was just the first step. Another important change in nutrition came along as a part of the team Sky strategy. James Morton, the current head of nutrition for team Sky, summed up the basics:
“In our research at Liverpool John Moores University, we now know that deliberately restricting carbs around carefully chosen training sessions can actually enhance training adaptations. But then of course we must ensure higher carbohydrate intakes for key training sessions and hard stages in racing. I believe this concept of periodising daily carbohydrate intake is the most exciting part of sports nutrition in the last decade.”...
...During races like the Tour de France or hard training sessions, he will of course go back to a higher proportion of carbs in his diet to top off his glycogen reserves and perform at his best. It seems that this approach allows him to get the best out of both worlds, he keeps his race weight without starving himself, and he has all the energy he needs for putting out big efforts.
Where does this suggest he comes out of ketosis? Is there any data to go with this?
If anything this supports the use of a low carb life style for his sporting career.
He isn't in ketosis - that's just more wishful thinking. He isn't a low carb athlete - quite the opposite.
There was a disgraceful and dishonest hatchet job by a journalist which only the gullible keto evangelists believed.
Yet when you read about the same interview on a cycling site it's plain that he isn't low carb let alone in ketosis.
His improvement in performance came from losing weight while maintaining the power he already produced (improved power to weight ratio). He trains to utilise all fuels as efficiently as possible not from restriction of the most valuable fuel for sporting performance.
He has a few low carb training sessions - not days of low carb. Guess what he does immediately after the morning low carb session? He carbs up for the afternoon training session, when the intense work is done.
Claiming any athlete who has an occasional breakfast of eggs and avocado as a keto standard bearer is rather silly.
17 -
Really? From what?
There is no exact adaptation time. I've seen as long as 6 months recommended, although 2-4 is more common. My guess is that the amount of time to adaptto a primary fuel of fat will vary between individuals, as will the effect on performance during that time.
So in other words, since there's no quantifiable adaptation time, and adaptation and performance will vary between individuals, any study result of any time period not showing favorable results to a ketogenic diet simply means that they didn't give long enough for the athletes to be fat adapted - because we don't know how long that would really take. And as a backup, if they didn't perform as well, that's just due to individual variations.
Got it.
I'm not the one who quoted the study about how
"...adaptation to a ketogenic (LCHF) diet impaired racing performance, compared with higher carbohydrate diets."
They said the problem was adaptation to a ketogenic diet. Not me. Don't put words in my mouth to redirect.
Fat adaptation takes a while. It isn't just about making ketones. It takes time for fuel needs to change and for the body to adjust.
This is a discussion on fat adaption on why it may take so long:
https://blog.virtahealth.com/keto-adapted/9 -
stevencloser wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »Any athlete participating in a high-intensity sport wouldn't seek ketosis in the first place if they've done enough research to understand how it impairs ATP replenishment. Fat adapted = carb impaired.
There is also some evidence indicating that LCHF is sub-optimal for endurance sports (study referenced in the infographic):
I think your graph is the study Nvmomketo referenced (3 week trial).
Yep. That's the one. Funnily enough, the info graphic says that adaptation to a ketogenic diet impaired racing performance. So it's the adaptation phase that hurt their performance.... Most who have switched to low carb would agree that racing while adapting to a new fuel source is a dumb choice. Eat keto at least 3 months and then race...
It's a shame they didn't test the athletes AFTER fat adaptation.
It seems to me like the time you claim adaptation takes is longer the longer the study times are that say people on keto diets have decreased performance.
Really? From what?
There is no exact adaptation time. I've seen as long as 6 months recommended, although 2-4 is more common. My guess is that the amount of time to adaptto a primary fuel of fat will vary between individuals, as will the effect on performance during that time.
According to KH, fat adaptation can occur within days and fully adapted in a few weeks. Thomas DeLauer also shares that sediment; at least according to the few YouTube vids I have watched.
Kevin Hall is more of an anti-keto expert. I wouldn't trust his opinion. I'm assuming he means constant ketosis can occur in a few days.
I'd never heard of DeLauer. The first thing I looked at said:
"Now the thing is, studies are starting to show that you can remain fat adapted even when you're not in ketosis. So like I've said before, ketosis can be a tool for six to eight, ten weeks of being consistently in keto, to get your body optimized to using those fats as a source of fuel. Even Dr. Dom D'Agostino in the University of South Florida was talking about how people that have been in ketosis for a long period of time can usually get into ketosis much faster the second, third, fourth, et cetera, et cetera time around. They can just pop right back into keto 'cause their body already has the mitochondrial machinery and the cellular efficiency to utilize those ketones. So that's really cool stuff. That means even if you start consuming carbs and you come out of keto, your body still wants to use fats."
http://www.jigsawhealth.com/blog/fat-adaptation-vs-ketosis-sciencesaturday/
So he estimates fat adaptation (at least the first time) take 1.5-2.5 months.
For their FASTER study, Phinney and Volek went with athletes that were at least 20 months into their diets to ensure they were fat adapted.13 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »...So any documented examples or was your comment anecdotal?
Shall we start with Chris Froome, who is often held up as a keto hero?: https://www.welovecycling.com/wide/2017/07/04/world-class-cyclists-special-diets-chris-froome/...Reaching his ideal racing weight was just the first step. Another important change in nutrition came along as a part of the team Sky strategy. James Morton, the current head of nutrition for team Sky, summed up the basics:
“In our research at Liverpool John Moores University, we now know that deliberately restricting carbs around carefully chosen training sessions can actually enhance training adaptations. But then of course we must ensure higher carbohydrate intakes for key training sessions and hard stages in racing. I believe this concept of periodising daily carbohydrate intake is the most exciting part of sports nutrition in the last decade.”...
...During races like the Tour de France or hard training sessions, he will of course go back to a higher proportion of carbs in his diet to top off his glycogen reserves and perform at his best. It seems that this approach allows him to get the best out of both worlds, he keeps his race weight without starving himself, and he has all the energy he needs for putting out big efforts.
Where does this suggest he comes out of ketosis? Is there any data to go with this?
If anything this supports the use of a low carb life style for his sporting career.
He isn't in ketosis - that's just more wishful thinking. He isn't a low carb athlete - quite the opposite.
There was a disgraceful and dishonest hatchet job by a journalist which only the gullible keto evangelists believed.
Yet when you read about the same interview on a cycling site it's plain that he isn't low carb let alone in ketosis.
His improvement in performance came from losing weight while maintaining the power he already produced (improved power to weight ratio). He trains to utilise all fuels as efficiently as possible not from restriction of the most valuable fuel for sporting performance.
He has a few low carb training sessions - not days of low carb. Guess what he does immediately after the morning low carb session? He carbs up for the afternoon training session, when the intense work is done.
Claiming any athlete who has an occasional breakfast of eggs and avocado as a keto standard bearer is rather silly.
Re: the bolded above. Competitive athletes at that level don't get hung up on "lifestyles" like keto or not. It's all about maximal performance. Training to utilize all fuel substrates efficiently only makes sense. It's about winning, not some philosophical debate.10 -
stevencloser wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »Any athlete participating in a high-intensity sport wouldn't seek ketosis in the first place if they've done enough research to understand how it impairs ATP replenishment. Fat adapted = carb impaired.
There is also some evidence indicating that LCHF is sub-optimal for endurance sports (study referenced in the infographic):
I think your graph is the study Nvmomketo referenced (3 week trial).
Yep. That's the one. Funnily enough, the info graphic says that adaptation to a ketogenic diet impaired racing performance. So it's the adaptation phase that hurt their performance.... Most who have switched to low carb would agree that racing while adapting to a new fuel source is a dumb choice. Eat keto at least 3 months and then race...
It's a shame they didn't test the athletes AFTER fat adaptation.
It seems to me like the time you claim adaptation takes is longer the longer the study times are that say people on keto diets have decreased performance.
Really? From what?
There is no exact adaptation time. I've seen as long as 6 months recommended, although 2-4 is more common. My guess is that the amount of time to adaptto a primary fuel of fat will vary between individuals, as will the effect on performance during that time.
According to KH, fat adaptation can occur within days and fully adapted in a few weeks. Thomas DeLauer also shares that sediment; at least according to the few YouTube vids I have watched.
Kevin Hall is more of an anti-keto expert. I wouldn't trust his opinion. I'm assuming he means constant ketosis can occur in a few days.
I'd never heard of DeLauer. The first thing I looked at said:
"Now the thing is, studies are starting to show that you can remain fat adapted even when you're not in ketosis. So like I've said before, ketosis can be a tool for six to eight, ten weeks of being consistently in keto, to get your body optimized to using those fats as a source of fuel. Even Dr. Dom D'Agostino in the University of South Florida was talking about how people that have been in ketosis for a long period of time can usually get into ketosis much faster the second, third, fourth, et cetera, et cetera time around. They can just pop right back into keto 'cause their body already has the mitochondrial machinery and the cellular efficiency to utilize those ketones. So that's really cool stuff. That means even if you start consuming carbs and you come out of keto, your body still wants to use fats."
http://www.jigsawhealth.com/blog/fat-adaptation-vs-ketosis-sciencesaturday/
So he estimates fat adaptation (at least the first time) take 1.5-2.5 months.
For their FASTER study, Phinney and Volek went with athletes that were at least 20 months into their diets to ensure they were fat adapted.
KH isn't anti keto, even Gary Taubes doesn't believe that. Its biased sites that assert that. Hell, KH has promoted LCHF for many things, especially for those with IR, non active individuals and those with diabetes. In fact, his last diabetes paper suggested it.
I feel the bigger problem is, when people don't hesr what they want, they assume someone is biased.10 -
I skipped breakfast this morning and then had coffee with oil and whipping cream in it for lunch. I guess I'm keto now and because I went to the gym, I'm also a keto athlete who is fat adapted.
After the gym I had a huge salad and a protein shake with banana but that doesn't count. Im Still a keto athlete because one time I happened to eat low carb.16 -
stevencloser wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »Any athlete participating in a high-intensity sport wouldn't seek ketosis in the first place if they've done enough research to understand how it impairs ATP replenishment. Fat adapted = carb impaired.
There is also some evidence indicating that LCHF is sub-optimal for endurance sports (study referenced in the infographic):
I think your graph is the study Nvmomketo referenced (3 week trial).
Yep. That's the one. Funnily enough, the info graphic says that adaptation to a ketogenic diet impaired racing performance. So it's the adaptation phase that hurt their performance.... Most who have switched to low carb would agree that racing while adapting to a new fuel source is a dumb choice. Eat keto at least 3 months and then race...
It's a shame they didn't test the athletes AFTER fat adaptation.
It seems to me like the time you claim adaptation takes is longer the longer the study times are that say people on keto diets have decreased performance.
Really? From what?
There is no exact adaptation time. I've seen as long as 6 months recommended, although 2-4 is more common. My guess is that the amount of time to adaptto a primary fuel of fat will vary between individuals, as will the effect on performance during that time.
According to KH, fat adaptation can occur within days and fully adapted in a few weeks. Thomas DeLauer also shares that sediment; at least according to the few YouTube vids I have watched.
Kevin Hall is more of an anti-keto expert. I wouldn't trust his opinion. I'm assuming he means constant ketosis can occur in a few days.
I'd never heard of DeLauer. The first thing I looked at said:
"Now the thing is, studies are starting to show that you can remain fat adapted even when you're not in ketosis. So like I've said before, ketosis can be a tool for six to eight, ten weeks of being consistently in keto, to get your body optimized to using those fats as a source of fuel. Even Dr. Dom D'Agostino in the University of South Florida was talking about how people that have been in ketosis for a long period of time can usually get into ketosis much faster the second, third, fourth, et cetera, et cetera time around. They can just pop right back into keto 'cause their body already has the mitochondrial machinery and the cellular efficiency to utilize those ketones. So that's really cool stuff. That means even if you start consuming carbs and you come out of keto, your body still wants to use fats."
http://www.jigsawhealth.com/blog/fat-adaptation-vs-ketosis-sciencesaturday/
So he estimates fat adaptation (at least the first time) take 1.5-2.5 months.
For their FASTER study, Phinney and Volek went with athletes that were at least 20 months into their diets to ensure they were fat adapted.
KH isn't anti keto, even Gary Taubes doesn't believe that. Its biased sites that assert that. Hell, KH has promoted LCHF for many things, especially for those with IR, non active individuals and those with diabetes. In fact, his last diabetes paper suggested it.
I feel the bigger problem is, when people don't hesr what they want, they assume someone is biased.
+1!5
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 394.1K Introduce Yourself
- 43.9K Getting Started
- 260.4K Health and Weight Loss
- 176.1K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 437 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.1K Motivation and Support
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.9K MyFitnessPal Information
- 15 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.7K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions