Message Boards Debate: Health and Fitness
You are currently viewing the message boards in:

Keto diet= good or bad



  • nvmomketonvmomketo Member Posts: 12,020 Member Member Posts: 12,020 Member
    jremy69 wrote: »
    jremy69 wrote: »
    jremy69 wrote: »
    lemurcat2 wrote: »
    jremy69 wrote: »
    lemurcat2 wrote: »
    jremy69 wrote: »
    I am 36. I've lost 85 pounds in 9 months. Every single marker of inflimation is gone. All of my aches and pains are gone. My mind is magnitudes more focused and clear. I have energy all day and jump out of bed with more vigor than when I was a kid. My grocery bill has been cut by 75%. I can smell now, which I could never do for my entire life. And, everything tastes better. My sexy drive is amazing. I haven't been sick since starting, yet everyone around me has been sick mutiple times. All of these wonderful side effect with NO EXERCISE!

    Technically "keto" is any intake in nutrients that puts you in a state of ketosis. Which is pretty hard to do sometimes with carbohydrates. As far as I'm concerned, through my experience and personal research, being in ketosis or even having more metabolic flexibility is probably the most optimal way of being for 90% of humans.

    Other than the smell thing, which is odd, that all sounds normal and common for people who need to and lose 85 lbs.

    If you had a lot to lose or are a big guy, 85 in 9 months isn't that surprising either -- although great job!

    Point is that there are lots of ways people do that besides keto. Keto may have been the easiest way for you, but for many of us it wouldn't be, or we tend to eat healthier diets not doing keto. So once again, keto is neither good nor bad. It's a way of eating that works well for some people, but likely not most people.

    I agree that it may not be for everyone. With that said. There are many factors that come into play when trying to optimize yourself in any way. Emotions, habits, cravings, schedules, social cues, medical problems, etc. If we take the weight lose aspect out of it right, and only focus on what happens to our bodies when we are using minimal glucose, then there isn't any evidence left that we need any sort of carbohydrates for any reason.

    I agree that one can eat a no, or essentially no carb diet and not die. I don't personally believe that is healthy because I don't agree that it would be a healthy choice to cut out vegetables, and most would not eat the variety of organ meats necessary for adequate nutrition (which doesn't mean they'd die as a result, but I think has longer term effects). However, I also believe this is rather irrelevant, as most who do keto eat some carbs (ideally vegetables), and one can get adequate veg doing keto -- I just found it more stressful than necessary and did not like that I was cutting out a variety of healthy foods I normally eat, having to cut back on veg (I eat a lot of servings of non starchy veg normally, and not just leafy ones), and more meat than I prefer.
    Through the research I've done, fueling the human body on fat and ketones seems to be optimal for the majority of the human population in almost every aspect.

    I don't believe this claim is grounded in anything credible, and it's inconsistent with the evidence about traditional human diets, blue zones, and the fact that those few cultures who were necessarily eating very low carbs regularly have a genetic modification that means they are NOT in ketosis when most of us would be.

    But it might be the easiest way for you to eat in a healthful, calorie-appropriate manner, so carry on.

    You're right. It is irrelevant. Check out Paul Saladino.

    You shouldn't have had to cut out many veggies other than starches. And, there are vegan ketoers so too much meat for you shouldn't have been an issue either.

    Finding it frustrating and giving up is an emotional response as stated before.

    Our species has survived for around 500k years mostly in a state of ketosis with few exceptions. There is tons of evidence. Start with Mike Eades, Tim Noakes, Stephen Phinney, Paul Mason, Nina Teicholz, and Ken Berry.

    For people who eat a lot of vegetables, it's possible to eat enough to interfere with ketosis even if they're non-starchy. Based on what I've read about keto, I would probably have to personally limit my vegetable consumption if I wanted to try it.

    When I Google those names, I get a lot of YouTube links and non-historical nutritional advice. What research in particular are you citing for the claim that our species has been in ketosis for the past 500,000 years? None of them appear to be anthropologists or associated with research documenting this particular claim.

    Peter S. Kaufman
    Mark Mathan Cohen, PH. D.
    Dr. Mike Eades
    Blake Donaldson, M. D.
    Max Klieber (Kleiber's Law)
    Leslie Aiello & Wheeler
    Lierre Keith
    Michael Richards
    Claire Cassidy
    Armand Ruffer


    "Generations in the evolution of humanity"

    " The expensive tissue hypothesis"

    "Stable isotope ratios as biomarkers for health resesrch" O'Brien DM

    "Richards, MP et al (2000) PNAS 97(13):7663-66"

    "Nutrition and health in agriculturalists and hunter-gatherers: a case study of two populations, Nutritional Anthropology, Redgrave publishing Co. 117-145"

    "Warner C(2015) Ancient Human Microbiomes, J Hum Evol 79:125-136"

    I don't see how the expensive tissue hypothesis would show humans being in ketosis. In general, the limitations of the cost of intestinal tissues to eat carnivorously, and particularly that humans don't have them, suggests brains large enough to manipulate fire had to predate appreciable amounts of meat eating.

    I would think that a mostly meat and fat diet would naturally put them into ketosis. From what I understand, we may have developed a bigger brain by trading the energy it takes to digest plants. Nutrients in meat are more bioavailable and the energy in fat provides more than twice as many calories per gram than carbohydrates. Less energy for digestion means more for a bigger brain. Just my thoughts.

    It looks as though the neanderthals ate mostly meat. Neanderthals may not be ancestors of all, but as someone of northern European heritage, it is possible. It's also likely that my ancestors only ate plants seasonally since there is not a large amount of fresh fruit and vegetables available year round in the north.

    The fairly recent article on neanderthal diet:

  • magnusthenerdmagnusthenerd Member Posts: 1,198 Member Member Posts: 1,198 Member
    savithny wrote: »
    jremy69 wrote: »

    I would think that a mostly meat and fat diet would naturally put them into ketosis. From what I understand, we may have developed a bigger brain by trading the energy it takes to digest plants. Nutrients in meat are more bioavailable and the energy in fat provides more than twice as many calories per gram than carbohydrates. Less energy for digestion means more for a bigger brain. Just my thoughts.

    Armchair paleontology is fun, but there are plenty of people out there doing all kinds of research.

    1) Another very strong contender for the "bigger brain" theory is that we developed cooking, and we applied heat to meat, tubers, and seeds -- increasing bioavailability and allowing us to spend less time procuring and consuming food.. Interestingly, tubers don't show up in isotope analyses of protein intake, but are an important source of calories in populations that consume them.

    2) Both tooth plaque analysis and coprolite analysis has found strong evidence that neanderthals were eating plants as well as meat. While the isotopic evidence shows most of their protein came from animal sources, it can't tell us what non-protein foods were consumed, and their teeth and poop both suggest they were in fact they were not carnivores, but omnivores.

    3) Interestingly, while neanderthals appear to have gotten most of their protein from animal sources? The modern humans who replaced them show "A wider range of isotopic values," suggesting that they were more adaptable omnivores than their neanderthal cousins -- from whom they had been separated by hundreds of thousands of years. This very adaptability is theorized to be one reason modern humans succeeded in colonizing every ecological niche on every continent except antartica.

    4) Neanderthals are not the greatest model for ideal *anything* for sapiens. Their ancestors diverged from ours between 400,000 and 800,000 years ago and the northern european neanderthals became an isolated population that was increasingly adapted for an environment that then disappeared as the ice age ended.

    That last one would suggest that even in people carrying neanderthal genes, there would be selection pressure against retaining their genes related to diet adaptation.
  • lkpduckylkpducky Member Posts: 13,069 Member Member Posts: 13,069 Member
    carakirkey wrote: »
    No cheat days on Keto. New research suggests that consuming glucose while on Keto diet can damage blood vessels.

    Full text here:

    It appears that the problems were from a combination of the short-term high fat diet immediately followed by the dose of glucose. Meaning that the glucose might not have caused this effect in someone not on said high fat diet. Also, this was only in 9 people (healthy young men).

    Note the beginning of the Discussion "The main findings of the present study are that the one-week low-carbohydrate high-fat diet, which causes relative glucose intolerance..." My question is whether the vessel damage would have occurred in people after the glucose but without the high fat diet.
    edited April 2019
  • amaykamayk Member Posts: 42 Member Member Posts: 42 Member
    I lost 140 pounds doing lowcarb/keto through the past 9 years. I have no longer pains in my stumack because of ibs, my mucle and bone-pains due to fibro are allmost gone, alot fewer infections, I have no migrains anymore, my body absorbs vitamins/minerals much better, I sleep better, I don't have that much anxiety as I used to. For me, this is the perfect way of eating, I'm so much healthier. My doctor advised me to start, I hadn't heard of it before I started, and I was very surprised of how fast the healthbenefits happened. The weightloss has gone slower, but steadily, still losing. :)
This discussion has been closed.