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.
Keto diet = good or bad
Options
Replies
-
snickerscharlie wrote: »And one other thing. Many people here say, oh I lost x and kept it off using X. That's great! I am so glad you could do that. Most people cannot do it. Plagued by obesity, my doctor wanted me to take some new medicine. I said no, I'll lose weight. She said most people cannot do it. I asked how many do. She said about 1 out of 100. So for the obese who have failed with every other method over and over again, keto is worth a shot! It's awesome for fat people who want to be skinny and love food.
Keto has not been proven to be any better for long term weight management adherence than any of the other plans out there. So you can include keto followers in your 1 out of 100 stat.
Actually, it has. Go back and find where we discussed this already. Thanks
Just because it may have been 'discussed' doesn't automatically make it factual. That would be the same as saying, "It's true because I said so."
Yes. But, I know you didn't look at the links I provided that support this or you wouldn't be saying that. I didn't just make it up.10 -
-
Here is a long list of keto studies. Lemon disputed the validity because it was from a keto site. Note that the site it's on has nothing to do with the places that published the studies.
https://ketovale.com/low-carb-keto-diet-studies-list/
Also, the NIH thinks keto is cool too.
https://ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2716748/3 -
Also please don't misunderstand me. I support any method anyone wants to use. And if it works for you great. In 1989, after my hip went bad, I had a book of calories. It had a mathematical formula that showed you how to calculate how many calories you ate to support your current weight and how many you had to cut to lose a pound a week. I tracked and it worked out almost exactly.
But when you get old and sick it doesn't work as well. And if you beat yourself up losing and gaining weight back it really stops working. You always lose that first 20 pounds. Then your body locks onto that fat and it stops working. Not everyone is like this I'd imagine. But I am. Keto breaks this cycle. I'll do it for the rest of my life. I have no doubt of this.19 -
Also please don't misunderstand me. I support any method anyone wants to use. And if it works for you great. In 1989, after my hip went bad, I had a book of calories. It had a mathematical formula that showed you how to calculate how many calories you ate to support your current weight and how many you had to cut to lose a pound a week. I tracked and it worked out almost exactly.
But when you get old and sick it doesn't work as well. And if you beat yourself up losing and gaining weight back it really stops working. You always lose that first 20 pounds. Then your body locks onto that fat and it stops working. Not everyone is like this I'd imagine. But I am. Keto breaks this cycle. I'll do it for the rest of my life. I have no doubt of this.
I'm 65. I have Hashimoto's Thyroiditis and Ankylosing Spondylitis. I lost 75 lbs a few years ago simply by making sure I was in a calorie deficit and by moving a bit more. Using age is an excuse. I know. I used that one for years. 14 -
And I also support any method anyone chooses to use that works for them.
But what needs to be understood here is that the reason *any* diet or way of eating may help someone lose weight is only if it also puts them in the necessary caloric deficit to facilitate that.
I know this graphic has been used a lot, but it bears repeating:
7 -
Here is a long list of keto studies. Lemon disputed the validity because it was from a keto site. Note that the site it's on has nothing to do with the places that published the studies.
https://ketovale.com/low-carb-keto-diet-studies-list/
Also, the NIH thinks keto is cool too.
https://ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2716748/
I'm not going to click on the first link because I don't trust a site with an address of ketovale to not be biased.
For the second link though, am I reading it it wrong or is the time span they're referring to is 24 weeks? How is that considered long term? Maybe in terms of a study length, but where's the proof that a keto way of eating is sustainable long term? Maintenance is for years, not weeks or months. Is there follow up with the study participants at 2 years? How about 5 years? How many of them are still managing their weight effectively using keto, at the 10 year mark?
I want to see studies/data that show keto is superior for weight management adherence at the 5 year mark, the 10 year mark, the 20 year mark etc. I've been in maintenance for 6 years and I'm looking at 40 more years ahead of me yet. I continue to be amazed at how short sighted people are when it comes to weight management. 24 weeks is nothing, in the scheme of things.
Also, the study states in its conclusion that it found that keto is safe to do long term (well, for 24 weeks at least), and doesn't say anything about keto having better long term adherence outcomes when compared to other diets. So this study doesn't actually say what you're saying it does.10 -
I'm not going to click on the first link because I don't trust a site with an address of ketovale to not be biased.
This too is a bad excuse. Try to read the whole of something. Don't just pick out one little thing to dispute as most people do. It lessens the discussion. If you clicked the link and read for a few days, then you could pass judgment.21 -
snickerscharlie wrote: »And I also support any method anyone chooses to use that works for them.
But what needs to be understood here is that the reason *any* diet or way of eating may help someone lose weight is only if it also puts them in the necessary caloric deficit to facilitate that.
I know this graphic has been used a lot, but it bears repeating:
I hate this. People keep posting it. There is more to weight loss than calories. People who believe this say things like oh your not eating enough calories. Do you need to exercise more? Are you getting enough fiber?
If you think this is true, eat 1000 calories of sugar a day for a month. Then a 1000 calories of broccoli and butter for a day for a month and go get your blood work done. Then report back.29 -
I'm not going to click on the first link because I don't trust a site with an address of ketovale to not be biased.
This too is a bad excuse. Try to read the whole of something. Don't just pick out one little thing to dispute as most people do. It lessens the discussion. If you clicked the link and read for a few days, then you could pass judgment.
Why would I waste my time on a site that I know is going to be biased towards a certain way? That would be like me posting a link to an article listed on nutritionfacts.org, to prove that a plant based diet is the best way to lose weight and keep it off. Because they link all sorts of studies that show a WFPB diet is superior. Maybe you should spend a few days reading through that site?
I did look at the second link and it did not support your claims.12 -
snickerscharlie wrote: »And I also support any method anyone chooses to use that works for them.
But what needs to be understood here is that the reason *any* diet or way of eating may help someone lose weight is only if it also puts them in the necessary caloric deficit to facilitate that.
I know this graphic has been used a lot, but it bears repeating:
I hate this. People keep posting it. There is more to weight loss than calories. People who believe this say things like oh your not eating enough calories. Do you need to exercise more? Are you getting enough fiber?
If you think this is true, eat 1000 calories of sugar a day for a month. Then a 1000 calories of broccoli and butter for a day for a month and go get your blood work done. Then report back.
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10348650/cico-still-skeptical-come-inside-for-a-meticulous-log-that-proves-it/p1
http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/index.html10 -
Oh well. Maybe I know all about plant-based diets. But, even so, I'd read your link if this was a discussion about Plant-Based diets = Good or Bad.2
-
Also please don't misunderstand me. I support any method anyone wants to use. And if it works for you great. In 1989, after my hip went bad, I had a book of calories. It had a mathematical formula that showed you how to calculate how many calories you ate to support your current weight and how many you had to cut to lose a pound a week. I tracked and it worked out almost exactly.
But when you get old and sick it doesn't work as well. And if you beat yourself up losing and gaining weight back it really stops working. You always lose that first 20 pounds. Then your body locks onto that fat and it stops working. Not everyone is like this I'd imagine. But I am. Keto breaks this cycle. I'll do it for the rest of my life. I have no doubt of this.
To the bolded: That's excellent; I agree.
If your routine posts more obviously communicated this, came across more as "here's my personal experience, and why I think it worked best for me" and less as simple cheerleading for keto for all because it's universally perfect and has All The Benefits, you'd get less argument and more support here.
I post all kinds of things about the idiosyncratic ways I choose to eat (I mean, jeepers, I drink ACV (though not for weight loss ), I've been vegetarian for decades (not weight loss magic or a religion), adore probiotic fermented veggies, don't like Oreos or Poptarts at all, and eat pounds of veggies daily (but don't evangelize for WFPB or "clean", terms I hate)). I get like zero pushback, even on the really statistically bizarre-o-ville stuff, because while it's good for me, I know I'm talking about me, not the whole flippin' world, and try to communicate accordingly.
Mega-evangelizing for keto by broad-brushing benefits is probably less likely to encourage others to try it (makes the team look bad) vs. a more even-handed, factual, pros & cons approach. Just my opinion, obviously.
I hope you continue to have much success, and that keto is the magic for keeping you healthy and happy permanently. :flowerforyou:13 -
You can't use CNN. It's fake news. I already said that calorie counting works. I still contend that keto is way better from personal experience. Still, if you did the sugar & broccoli experiment you would weight much less and wouldn't be diabetic if you ate veggies and fat instead of sugar. That is an extreme example to prove a valid point. The broccoli and butter is Keto, BTW.24
-
snickerscharlie wrote: »And I also support any method anyone chooses to use that works for them.
But what needs to be understood here is that the reason *any* diet or way of eating may help someone lose weight is only if it also puts them in the necessary caloric deficit to facilitate that.
I know this graphic has been used a lot, but it bears repeating:
I hate this. People keep posting it. There is more to weight loss than calories. People who believe this say things like oh your not eating enough calories. Do you need to exercise more? Are you getting enough fiber?
If you think this is true, eat 1000 calories of sugar a day for a month. Then a 1000 calories of broccoli and butter for a day for a month and go get your blood work done. Then report back.
Blood work is not weight loss.
Mono-diets (broccoli + butter is close enough to mono to qualify) are ludicrous. Both people are going to lose weight, probably close to the same amount (probably some effects on CO via energy level, so not identical). Both are going to have some health issues, or would if they stuck to the silly mono-diet thing long term.
At 30 days, the broccoli+butter person will of course be relatively healthier, because broccoli gets you a tiny bit of protein (incomplete, though), some fiber, and some micronutrients, and the butter includes essential fats. The sugar just has . . . carbs. The broccoli+butter provides better nutrition. It's not exactly revolutionary to say that a more nutritious diet is better for your health.
Assuming anyone would be willing to eat either of those silly ways.
Broccoli+butter may be keto, but it's not a balanced diet. Sugar is even moreso not a balanced diet, and not at all representative of how most "it's OK to eat carbs" people eat. (Heck, I'm a "calories for weight management" person, year 3 of maintenance, and eat pretty minimal added sugar, not much bread/grains/potatoes, but still get around 200g carbs daily.)
Jeesh.
ETA: I'm old (63) and obese for decades before getting serious about weight loss 4 years ago; now BMI 22.14 -
Also please don't misunderstand me. I support any method anyone wants to use. And if it works for you great. In 1989, after my hip went bad, I had a book of calories. It had a mathematical formula that showed you how to calculate how many calories you ate to support your current weight and how many you had to cut to lose a pound a week. I tracked and it worked out almost exactly.
But when you get old and sick it doesn't work as well. And if you beat yourself up losing and gaining weight back it really stops working. You always lose that first 20 pounds. Then your body locks onto that fat and it stops working. Not everyone is like this I'd imagine. But I am. Keto breaks this cycle. I'll do it for the rest of my life. I have no doubt of this.
To the bolded: That's excellent; I agree.
If your routine posts more obviously communicated this, came across more as "here's my personal experience, and why I think it worked best for me" and less as simple cheerleading for keto for all because it's universally perfect and has All The Benefits, you'd get less argument and more support here.
I post all kinds of things about the idiosyncratic ways I choose to eat (I mean, jeepers, I drink ACV (though not for weight loss ), I've been vegetarian for decades (not weight loss magic or a religion), adore probiotic fermented veggies, don't like Oreos or Poptarts at all, and eat pounds of veggies daily (but don't evangelize for WFPB or "clean", terms I hate)). I get like zero pushback, even on the really statistically bizarre-o-ville stuff, because while it's good for me, I know I'm talking about me, not the whole flippin' world, and try to communicate accordingly.
Mega-evangelizing for keto by broad-brushing benefits is probably less likely to encourage others to try it (makes the team look bad) vs. a more even-handed, factual, pros & cons approach. Just my opinion, obviously.
I hope you continue to have much success, and that keto is the magic for keeping you healthy and happy permanently. :flowerforyou:
Thank you. I so agree. It's really hard to get someone's intention from words alone. I have a lady at work that writes the meanest emails. After over a year of them, I finally met her. She was the sweetest person I ever met. I am a very nice person, but I know I write bluntly which is misinterpreted frequently. I'm not here to hurt anyone. If anything I feel like the keto people are outnumbered 10 to 1. And the true keto people believe in it. I won't go into details but death came for me. And I tricked the *kitten* with keto when every other method failed. At least for a while.12 -
You can't use CNN. It's fake news. I already said that calorie counting works. I still contend that keto is way better from personal experience. Still, if you did the sugar & broccoli experiment you would weight much less and wouldn't be diabetic if you ate veggies and fat instead of sugar. That is an extreme example to prove a valid point. The broccoli and butter is Keto, BTW.
https://www.diabetesdaily.com/blog/oh-dear-the-twinkie-diet-actually-works-268743/
https://www.rd.com/health/diet-weight-loss/yes-you-canlose-weight-with-twinkies/
https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2010-dec-06-la-he-fitness-twinkie-diet-20101206-story.html
https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/207071.php
4 -
Also please don't misunderstand me. I support any method anyone wants to use. And if it works for you great. In 1989, after my hip went bad, I had a book of calories. It had a mathematical formula that showed you how to calculate how many calories you ate to support your current weight and how many you had to cut to lose a pound a week. I tracked and it worked out almost exactly.
But when you get old and sick it doesn't work as well. And if you beat yourself up losing and gaining weight back it really stops working. You always lose that first 20 pounds. Then your body locks onto that fat and it stops working. Not everyone is like this I'd imagine. But I am. Keto breaks this cycle. I'll do it for the rest of my life. I have no doubt of this.
To the bolded: That's excellent; I agree.
If your routine posts more obviously communicated this, came across more as "here's my personal experience, and why I think it worked best for me" and less as simple cheerleading for keto for all because it's universally perfect and has All The Benefits, you'd get less argument and more support here.
I post all kinds of things about the idiosyncratic ways I choose to eat (I mean, jeepers, I drink ACV (though not for weight loss ), I've been vegetarian for decades (not weight loss magic or a religion), adore probiotic fermented veggies, don't like Oreos or Poptarts at all, and eat pounds of veggies daily (but don't evangelize for WFPB or "clean", terms I hate)). I get like zero pushback, even on the really statistically bizarre-o-ville stuff, because while it's good for me, I know I'm talking about me, not the whole flippin' world, and try to communicate accordingly.
Mega-evangelizing for keto by broad-brushing benefits is probably less likely to encourage others to try it (makes the team look bad) vs. a more even-handed, factual, pros & cons approach. Just my opinion, obviously.
I hope you continue to have much success, and that keto is the magic for keeping you healthy and happy permanently. :flowerforyou:
Thank you. I so agree. It's really hard to get someone's intention from words alone. I have a lady at work that writes the meanest emails. After over a year of them, I finally met her. She was the sweetest person I ever met. I am a very nice person, but I know I write bluntly which is misinterpreted frequently. I'm not here to hurt anyone. If anything I feel like the keto people are outnumbered 10 to 1. And the true keto people believe in it. I won't go into details but death came for me. And I tricked the *kitten* with keto when every other method failed. At least for a while.
Here in the Debate section we all tend to get a bit 'frisky'
But, it's all in good fun and it's a good exercise to go back and forth and have our ideas challenged a bit. Even as far as I am into this whole process, I learn new things from the forums here all the time!
As a side note-I completely agree with you that CNN is fake news....now I'm going to duck out before I'm flamed off the boards lol.
3 -
Also please don't misunderstand me. I support any method anyone wants to use. And if it works for you great. In 1989, after my hip went bad, I had a book of calories. It had a mathematical formula that showed you how to calculate how many calories you ate to support your current weight and how many you had to cut to lose a pound a week. I tracked and it worked out almost exactly.
But when you get old and sick it doesn't work as well. And if you beat yourself up losing and gaining weight back it really stops working. You always lose that first 20 pounds. Then your body locks onto that fat and it stops working. Not everyone is like this I'd imagine. But I am. Keto breaks this cycle. I'll do it for the rest of my life. I have no doubt of this.
To the bolded: That's excellent; I agree.
If your routine posts more obviously communicated this, came across more as "here's my personal experience, and why I think it worked best for me" and less as simple cheerleading for keto for all because it's universally perfect and has All The Benefits, you'd get less argument and more support here.
I post all kinds of things about the idiosyncratic ways I choose to eat (I mean, jeepers, I drink ACV (though not for weight loss ), I've been vegetarian for decades (not weight loss magic or a religion), adore probiotic fermented veggies, don't like Oreos or Poptarts at all, and eat pounds of veggies daily (but don't evangelize for WFPB or "clean", terms I hate)). I get like zero pushback, even on the really statistically bizarre-o-ville stuff, because while it's good for me, I know I'm talking about me, not the whole flippin' world, and try to communicate accordingly.
Mega-evangelizing for keto by broad-brushing benefits is probably less likely to encourage others to try it (makes the team look bad) vs. a more even-handed, factual, pros & cons approach. Just my opinion, obviously.
I hope you continue to have much success, and that keto is the magic for keeping you healthy and happy permanently. :flowerforyou:
Thank you. I so agree. It's really hard to get someone's intention from words alone. I have a lady at work that writes the meanest emails. After over a year of them, I finally met her. She was the sweetest person I ever met. I am a very nice person, but I know I write bluntly which is misinterpreted frequently. I'm not here to hurt anyone. If anything I feel like the keto people are outnumbered 10 to 1. And the true keto people believe in it. I won't go into details but death came for me. And I tricked the *kitten* with keto when every other method failed. At least for a while.
Communication, perhaps especially so in writing, is IMO a shared responsibility: An obligation for the writer to consider how they can best communicate their well-rounded thoughts clearly and effectively to a diverse audience, and an obligation for the reader to be generous of spirit and consider how to interpret what was written in that light. (I'm not saying I routinely succeed at either !)
In a setting like MFP, writing is also a sort of "marketing" exercise, using that term informally. We create a persona and a reputation, over time, by what and how we write, how we read and respond - whether we want to, or not. Further, we are thereby an effective (or not-so-effective) advocate and representative for the things that we believe in strongly, I think.
Trust me, I believe strongly in the things that I do, and have what I think are good (if sometimes idiosyncratic) reasons for what I choose to eat, just as you do. (Well, maybe not reasons for the "dislike Oreos" one . . . but I do dislike 'em: Not even food, in my world. ).
If I think those reasons are especially relevant on a thread, I'll share my perspectives. So, if someone's considering vegetarianism (probably worse than 10 to 1 popularity for this! ), I talk about pros and cons (it's all pros for me, but I've had long experience; it's not for everyone). I believe very strongly in the benefits of consuming much more veggies/fruits than the average person does - my veggie/fruit consumption is one reason keto isn't right for me - but I don't think it makes sense to sell that high amount of them hard here . . . though I do encourage people to get the minimum amounts that mainstream nutritional authorities suggest, beause that's the direction of improvement.)
Heck, I sometimes even encourage people to try low carb or keto, if they report having bad appetite/craving effects when they consume carbs, or are insulin resistant and don't LoveLove carb foods.
And I hear what you're saying about death coming for one: I've been in a happy remission from advanced breast cancer (6 tumors, some large; metastatic to lymph node) for longer than I would've once believed possible. Personally, I'm crediting blind luck, and regular hearty exercise, more than diet per se in my case . . . but my eating wasn't really terrible to start, except that I ate waaaay too much of everything, staying obese despite the exercise. Death in a different dress, so different ways to try to waltz away for a bit.
Best wishes.
And apologies, all, for the somewhat off-topic digression. :flowerforyou:4 -
If you think this is true, eat 1000 calories of sugar a day for a month. Then a 1000 calories of broccoli and butter for a day for a month and go get your blood work done. Then report back.
These are both ridiculous and unhealthy diets, not least because they are only 1000 cal, which would be too little for most. They also suck nutritionally, of course.
However, it's possible someone obese could have IMPROVED markers after either diet, because of the weight loss. (There are examples of people eating insane diets for periods of time and finding that to be the case.) I would never recommend either and I think both would be impossible to stick to for the vast majority of people. I also think the sugar only diet (btw, it's pretty rare to eat sugar in isolation other than with people who drink a lot of sugary soda) is worse, since it lacks protein and fat, but in that people can apparently fast for extended periods of time if extremely obese and assuming supplements, it's not at all clear how blood work would look in a month, the weight loss would likely have a positive effect.
If calories were calculated properly, neither person would lose substantially more unless there was a difference in beginning size or, of course, exercise/activity.
In the real world, obviously, no one would eat either diet. I ate moderately low carb when starting, but with a variety of fruits and starches and some desserts, lots of vegetables, dairy, other sources of protein (lots of fish), and healthy fats (olives and olive oil, avocado, nuts and seeds), and lost 95 lbs easily with no plateaus. That loss was not affected when, toward the middle of the process, I was training for half marathons and tried a more traditional training diet that went with MFPs default macros (50% carbs). I now eat moderate carb and am fine with that amount. I have maintained since early 2015.
At one point during maintenance I tried keto and found that it had no positives for me and I was finding it difficult to fit in all the veg I like and missing fruit and eating more meat than I like since beans and lentils were off limits. I also saw no point to cutting out healthful sources of carbs that for me are not foods I ever overeat (I'm much more likely to overeat higher fat foods like cheese or nuts or to be careless with how much oil I use).
I don't think this means that keto is not helpful for anyone. Obviously for some people it does make it easier. But that's not so for all, and has zero to do with the weird comparison you posted (I can fit in more broccoli and other veg without doing keto and for me I think my non keto diet is much healthier).
Oh, and the idea that one loses 20 and then stops losing because the body holds onto fat is just not a thing. What might happen is that after the first 20 one gets bored or sloppy with counting calories or starts eating more without really noticing it or was being too restrictive and starts having some hungry or binge days -- this is very common, especially if one has an idea that diet means not eating foods you enjoy (and I do think for some with that mindset keto can be freeing).9
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 389 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 918 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions