Ketosis and nutrient-intake
Replies
-
^^^this.Yikes so much misinformation in here...
Especially with the 'toxicity' crap+gluconeogenesis=generation of gluc from non CARb sources and not just AAs as a poster put it.
Is glycerol an AA?0 -
I like Chris Masterjohn, I really do - but what he explains in this post is theoretical, and isn't currently accepted as anything other than that. There is controversy and debate in the field of biochemistry about this, and Chris provides compelling evidence (as do other authors) but ONLY evidence, not concrete proof. Chris himself states:I don't agree that the body can't create glucose from fatty acids. Here's an article that explains it: http://blog.cholesterol-and-health.com/2012/01/we-really-can-make-glucose-from-fatty.html ...As I've pointed out above, your research has led you to an incorrect conclusion. The only way the process of gluconeogenesis can do so is using the glyoxylate cycle. And that only happens if you're a plant. I'm pretty sure I'm NOT a plant, are you?
The link I provided above explains how humans create glucose from fatty acids, therefore I don't need to be a plant.
You'll notice he doesn't state what he wrote is factual, simply evidence supporting an opposing view. That's all it is at this point. It's interesting, certainly, but most certainly cannot be accepted at this point in time."What is most striking is that these textbooks do not even alert us to any controversy about this topic, let alone to the strong evidence supporting the opposing view. "
BTW Chris directly took much of his information from studies published over six months earlier, here: http://www.ploscompbiol.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002116 ... if you take the time to study the research, you'll see it's theoretical.
The study authors also acknowledge the potential limitation of this pathway in vivo.
First, it's well known that under keto-adaptation the brain utilizies ketones for fuel instead of glucose (with the exception of a limited amount, usually under 20g) - so yes, there is just in the brain "evidence that glucose needs actually decrease". Also, it's well-established that when keto-adapted both blood-glucose levels and insulin-secretion is lowered. If the glucose needs stayed the SAME, both of these wouldn't change in the keto-adapted individual, yet they do. This argument is more compelling for insulin levels than glucose.Again, I've addressed this already, but this again seems to contradict what you said before. If the body produces glucose when needed and does not have any carbohydrate to get it from then what you are saying is that it can only be created from protein and this would then suggest that a ketogenic diet would lead to more muscle loss than other diets since protein consumption is typically low too. Granted 20g is not much but that's not really the point I'm trying to make. I still don't see any evidence that glucose needs actually decrease once one becomes keto adapted. The body switches to burning more fat for fuel during aerobic exercise in everybody, but someone who hasn't adapted to this and has relied too heavily on fuelling exercise through glucose may suffer physically until they have adapted. This has no bearing on the body's need for glucose, just what it has become used to as a result of fuelling training and that is very different to burning fat as part of a weight loss plan.
I will take a look at the book you mention anyway. I'm always interested to learn more, but I think we are getting mixed up in different issues here. I have been talking in context of a weight loss plan and you are talking in terms of athletic performance which are 2 very different issues.
FYI, I'm not just looking at this from terms of athletic performance. I look at all components of it. I look primarily at FAT LOSS, however, in the terms of this argument.
You seem to be ignoring considerable research if you think that the ketogenic diet doesn't provide greater fat loss than others, as a huge body of research has concluded otherwise. Almost every randomized, controlled trial of a VLCKD compared to low-fat or other diets shows the VLCKD group loses more weight.
A recent meta-analysis is here: http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/crdweb/ShowRecord.asp?ID=12013025253#.U1Q-SldjL7k0 -
As far as I'm concerned, Chris Masterjohn makes some pretty compelling arguments about the conversion of fats to glucose. If you wish to believe there is not enough evidence of what he says then that is your stance. I prefer to have an open mind and look at what the evidence suggests and to me it suggests that we can indeed convert fat to glucose. Facts are based on evidence but as with many things you can choose to look at what fits with your beliefs and stick with that or you can look outside of your beliefs and make decisions based on that. Science changes all the time and it may not be widely accepted yet but that doesn't mean it's not true.
I'm still not convinced that just because the brain uses less glucose in the absence of glucose that this means its needs change. You have already stated the body needs around 20g a day of glucose. If you eat more than that yes you will use it, but that doesn't mean you NEED it. And again, just because insulin and blood glucose levels lower this doesn't prove that the body's glucose needs have changed. Our bodies adapt to what they are given. If it doesn't have the need to release large amounts of insulin because there is a lack of carbohydrate in the diet, this is just the body adapting. This means the need for insulin lowers, but it still doesn't change how much glucose the body actually needs. I don't see how lowering of blood sugar proves the body has a lowered need for glucose either. Blood sugar is regulated both by insulin and glucagon and glucagon is stimulated by protein, not carbohydrate. Also, protein stimulates insulin as well so I don't see how you can use that as an example of lowered need for glucose. This is where I would consider lowered insulin a result of both low carb intake and low protein intake.
You haven't proven that the body will use fat preferentially over carbohydrate when carbohydrate is present and this is what the whole debate has been about. In aerobic activity, yes, but this has nothing to do with glucose needs changing - it is just how the body's energy system works.
I'm not debating that a ketogenic diet is not good for weight loss, just not for the reasons you've stated. I have seen nothing to suggest that fat burning is more effective but that the success is rather down to protein content and lowered appetite. I have nothing against a ketogenic diet, I follow a low carb diet myself. However, aside from the appetite supressing effects and the thermogenic effect of protein I have seen no evidence that ketogenic diets make fat loss in itself more effective. I used myself as an experiment and I gained weight following a ketogenic diet and all you need is one to disprove a theory.
I really am getting a little tired of this debate as there doesn't seem to be much point to it other than you trying to prove me wrong and I'm afraid a lot of the discussion cannot be absolutely proven one way or the other so we may as well leave it as you interpret the evidence your way and I'll interpret it my way.0 -
Fat is never the "preferred" source of fuel. When you eat a ketogenic diet, your body runs off dietary fat because it has no other option, not because it suddenly develops a preference for it.
Sure, anyone on any diet can burn fat ... HOWEVER, fat doesn't become the body's PREFERRED source (ie: what it uses FIRST) until keto-adapted.I'm really not sure what you're suggesting the difference between ketosis and burning fat for fuel is. Yes ketosis occurs when blood ketone levels are elevated, and ketone levels are elevated when the body is turning fat into ketones for use as fuel. If what you're saying about burning fat for fuel only happens once keto adapted, then anyone on a high carb diet wouldn't be able to burn off body fat and we know that isn't true so of course you don't have to be keto adapted in order to use fat stores for fuel.
For the vast-majority of people in the world right now (even many low-carbers), their PREFERRED source of fuel is glucose - because they're not keto-adapted. Simply getting into ketosis doesn't make you keto-adapted, it's a physiological / biochemical shift that comes AFTER a period of ketosis. Once keto-adapted, however, that's when the metabolism shifts to PREFER fatty-acids/lipids/ketones for fueling cellular respiration.
So yes, if you want the body to primarily use FAT for fuel instead of glucose, you need to be keto-adapted, NOT just in ketosis.
Glucose is always the preferred energy source. There's a reason that fat burning and glucose burning occur simultaneously at all times during normal human metabolism. It's because the body runs most efficiently using glucose, and the fat oxidization process is also most efficient when it utilizes glucose during the process.
The whole "keto adapted" phrase is really just pseudoscientific junk. Saying your body suddenly prefers fat for fuel after you've cut out almost all of its glucose is like saying someone who loses their legs in a horrific accident prefers to use a wheelchair instead of walking. It makes no sense.
I mean let's use logic. Once you become "keto adapted" and fat supposedly becomes the preferred source of fuel, that means you can increase all the carbs you want, and the body will still burn fat first, as it "prefers it," right? Oh wait, no, it immediately goes back to burning glucose... Because glucose is what the human body prefers.
Thanks for this, it's helped to clarify something I've been pondering for a while. I think making the body burn dietary fat during workouts is terribly stressful for it, but was trying to understand why. Also, isn't there a limit to the amount of fat one can burn before other things get broken down? Sounds risky and inefficient. I couldn't do sports when I was low carb, and I did it for years....0 -
Tiger, save your energy. He argues for the sake or arguing. Not because he has a specific stance on a subject. He debates just to debate....you'll see that soon enough
No I argue because people like you, tiger, ndj are incorrect.
I definitely have a stance.
Low carb high fat works - for some not all (in regards to sustainability). Is it healthy - yes
IIFYM and calorie counting works - for some not all ( in regards to sustainability). Is it healthy - yes
You guys seem to think that I size fits all and that's just a bit too narrow minded.
Also I tend to to enjoy debating stupid statements like - the brain only uses glucose, your body needs carbs to survive, cutting out food groups is unsustainable, no one in the world can suffer from an addiction to food Etc and many other statements made.
So whilst you guys continue to set off the derp alert, I'll continue to argue.
Besides these forums wouldn't be as much fun without opposing view points.
how the hell did I get dragged into this thread? I have not even commented…
I love how you say we are "incorrect' and then provide no examples as back up.
and I do not practice IIFYM so you have me confused with another NDJ…0 -
Albertabeefy, I wonder could I ask you a couple of questions.
You can cycle at 33kph for 3 hours which is great. Do you use heart rate zones?
If so are you able to do this speed under lactate threshold?
What happens during sprints and hills when you're going anaerobic- zones 4-5c? Do you bonk then?
Also, if you're happy with your weight,why not follow the athletes lead and go to carbs to get more fire power?
Or are you still trying to lose weight?
I'm not a world class athlete by any stretch of the imagination but I've used my 50% carb diet during triathlon season to reach the top 1 percentile of my age group for VO2 max by sustaining over lactate threshold for long periods.
There was no way on earth I could do that sort of thing when I was running on ketones for most of my 30s.
I just wonder why you are using a slower fuel source that takes a lot of processing when you could use the 90 min glycogen stores and top up with gels etc. and get better sprints and power surges....
Edit, your story is amazing by the way. What a rehab! I can see where you're coming from.0 -
Tiger, save your energy. He argues for the sake or arguing. Not because he has a specific stance on a subject. He debates just to debate....you'll see that soon enough
No I argue because people like you, tiger, ndj are incorrect.
I definitely have a stance.
Low carb high fat works - for some not all (in regards to sustainability). Is it healthy - yes
IIFYM and calorie counting works - for some not all ( in regards to sustainability). Is it healthy - yes
You guys seem to think that I size fits all and that's just a bit too narrow minded.
Also I tend to to enjoy debating stupid statements like - the brain only uses glucose, your body needs carbs to survive, cutting out food groups is unsustainable, no one in the world can suffer from an addiction to food Etc and many other statements made.
So whilst you guys continue to set off the derp alert, I'll continue to argue.
Besides these forums wouldn't be as much fun without opposing view points.
how the hell did I get dragged into this thread? I have not even commented…
I love how you say we are "incorrect' and then provide no examples as back up.
and I do not practice IIFYM so you have me confused with another NDJ…
No I was generalising as you seem to be incorrect about a lot of things!0 -
I'm totally good with leaving it that way. FYI - I'm pretty old school, my biochemistry courses started (I hate to admit this) 30 years ago. I'll be the first to admit that much of what I know about both science and medicine needed to be "re-learned" because of misinformation over the course of my schooling. On this topic though, until I see very compelling evidence, and concrete proof of fatty-acids being metabolized into glucose - in the human organism - I simply won't change my stance.I really am getting a little tired of this debate as there doesn't seem to be much point to it other than you trying to prove me wrong and I'm afraid a lot of the discussion cannot be absolutely proven one way or the other so we may as well leave it as you interpret the evidence your way and I'll interpret it my way.
Thank you for agreeing to disagree.0 -
Happy to ...Albertabeefy, I wonder could I ask you a couple of questions.
Yes and no. The effort I output on a ride at is totally dependent upon the length of the ride, but I don't specifically monitor my heart rate during rides, as it's much-higher than normal and tends to not be accurate on monitors. (The last ride I did with my monitor was to test my own max heart rate - coming over the top of a grade that varied from 8.5 - 14% and was 3.4km long I reached 208bpm shortly before I hurled, LOL... but the monitors I've tried just aren't overly accurate for me when riding at anywhere over 80% of my maximum, so I no longer bother when I ride.)You can cycle at 33kph for 3 hours which is great. Do you use heart rate zones?
I do use one for interval training at the gym - to be sure I'm pushing myself into at least the low 190's. I don't consider it HIIT unless I hit > 95% of my maximum heart rate. It's much-more accurate for me in the gym than it is out on the road ...
Yes, easily. If I do push closer to the anaerobic effort I can do just over a one hour 40km time trial (1:05:48 last year), but I cannot maintain that pace ANY longer than that, and need approximately 60g of moderately-quick digesting dietary carbohydrate prior to the effort. However on longer rides with less effort, I can go for 5 or 6 hours with little-to-no dietary carbohydrate - typically averaging only around 27-28km/h.If so are you able to do this speed under lactate threshold?
I never have issues during sprints as they're something I prepare / plan-for. Even at my age and with my spinal condition, I can still hit 70+ km/h on my own if given a 50 km/h lead out. On a solo ride with no tailwind or lead-out I seem to max at 67 km/h, or at-least I've yet to get past that unassisted.What happens during sprints and hills when you're going anaerobic- zones 4-5c? Do you bonk then?
Hills are another story, because you can't really control them...
With hills (mountains here, I live only an hour drive from some incredible scenery and climbs) it all depends on the length of the ride and the amount of carbohydrate I've ingested and when I've ingested it. I do a few very mountainous rides each year (near where I live I do the Highwood Pass century ride at least once a year, and lots of climbing rides from Calgary to Elbow Falls and/or Forget-me-not Ponds and back) and without adequate carbohydrate intake, yes I will absolutely bonk on anything over a 8% grade if it's very long... At 207lbs currently I'm a fantastic sprinter and "OK" time-trialist, but obviously not the most-efficient climber.
The Highwood Pass century ride I do, as an example, has five Category5, two Category4, two Category3 and one Category2 climb. Doing it over and back you end up with approximately 15,000 feet of climbing over the course of 163km. Yes, I've bonked horribly on it on my earlier rides as a low-carber, absolutely. I now plan-for and target my dietary carbohydrate intake carefully to prevent that.
Regarding the weight - I'm quite happy with it, yes, but not necessarily my body composition - so I do two 'bulking phases' during each year to try to add muscle to my frame right now, but otherwise I'm very happy anywhere under 215lbs but would like to regain about 5lbs of lost muscle over the next two years.Also, if you're happy with your weight,why not follow the athletes lead and go to carbs to get more fire power?
Or are you still trying to lose weight?
As for why the low-carb? I'm a Type I diabetic controlling it with a targeted ketogenic diet and basal insulin only. (I do NOT bolus for meals, ever). My most-recent HbA1c was 5.2%, which is perfectly normal. Because I do not bolus for meals I haven't experienced a hypoglycaemic episode in two years. The diet is vastly superior for diabetics in terms of glycaemic control and, by extension all possible diabetic complications.
I'm not world-class either. I'm occasionally told by those I ride with that I'm "really strong ... for an old guy." ... OUCH. (Most of the guys I ride with are 15-20 years younger than me, and they're often surprised at the endurance and power I have.)I'm not a world class athlete by any stretch of the imagination but I've used my 50% carb diet during triathlon season to reach the top 1 percentile of my age group for VO2 max by sustaining over lactate threshold for long periods.
There was no way on earth I could do that sort of thing when I was running on ketones for most of my 30s.
Type 1 diabetes, as-mentioned. If I ate the amount of carbohydrate I used to when I was a sprint specialist, I'd be bolusing 30 units a day and probably experiencing hypoglyaemia at least once a week if not more ... and my glycaemic control would be horrible.I just wonder why you are using a slower fuel source that takes a lot of processing when you could use the 90 min glycogen stores and top up with gels etc. and get better sprints and power surges....
Thank you. FYI if I didn't have the spinal issues I do, I would likely be faster in longer distances. As someone who deals with chronic pain, I have to constantly monitor my pain levels, and adjust my output to prevent exacerbating things. This keeps me from doing the all-out efforts I used to do in my old velodrome days - so I have no illusions that I'll ever be world-class, and no need to change my diet as such. It works for me, and although I miss being more competitive, I am very happy with where I currently am.Edit, your story is amazing by the way. What a rehab! I can see where you're coming from.0 -
Thanks for your insightful reply, I hope it sheds some light for people with similar issues.
I'm glad you've found a way to do what you love, with the adversities you have.0 -
I'd go with a multivitamin to be safe, and try to include leafy greens. You may be getting enough iron to not need it in your multi.0
-
This content has been removed.
-
can anyone tell me if a keto diet would hurt running performance? i'm not running huge distances, about 3 miles per session a few times a week
As a latecomer to running (I'm 53) I have run 5k and 10k having been low carb / keto for a few years. Under 30 mins 5k, a sniff over an hour 10k. HTH.0 -
can anyone tell me if a keto diet would hurt running performance? i'm not running huge distances, about 3 miles per session a few times a week
As a latecomer to running (I'm 53) I have run 5k and 10k having been low carb / keto for a few years. Under 30 mins 5k, a sniff over an hour 10k. HTH.
You could do the 5k under 20 mins if you carbed!0 -
Tiger, save your energy. He argues for the sake or arguing. Not because he has a specific stance on a subject. He debates just to debate....you'll see that soon enough
No I argue because people like you, tiger, ndj are incorrect.
I definitely have a stance.
Low carb high fat works - for some not all (in regards to sustainability). Is it healthy - yes
IIFYM and calorie counting works - for some not all ( in regards to sustainability). Is it healthy - yes
You guys seem to think that I size fits all and that's just a bit too narrow minded.
Also I tend to to enjoy debating stupid statements like - the brain only uses glucose, your body needs carbs to survive, cutting out food groups is unsustainable, no one in the world can suffer from an addiction to food Etc and many other statements made.
So whilst you guys continue to set off the derp alert, I'll continue to argue.
Besides these forums wouldn't be as much fun without opposing view points.
how the hell did I get dragged into this thread? I have not even commented…
I love how you say we are "incorrect' and then provide no examples as back up.
and I do not practice IIFYM so you have me confused with another NDJ…
No I was generalising as you seem to be incorrect about a lot of things!
Nope. The sad part is you don't know enough to know that you just don't know enough. You've somehow become an expert after 4 months and having minimal results through application. Guys like you come around all the time, you just happen to spend more time posting than most. However, you keep telling yourself whatever you want to make yourself feel successful especially by attempting to discredit people who have actually shown results.
Yes you are right I do not have a degree from the university of shirtless.
And you are correct 4 months is not nearly enough time to read up and research things, I'm sure there's a peer reviewed study out there somewhere to prove that.
Whats your qualifications on human biology on a low carb diet by the way. As based on your previous posts you have achieved your results on a high/medium carb diet?0 -
This content has been removed.
-
can anyone tell me if a keto diet would hurt running performance? i'm not running huge distances, about 3 miles per session a few times a week
As a latecomer to running (I'm 53) I have run 5k and 10k having been low carb / keto for a few years. Under 30 mins 5k, a sniff over an hour 10k. HTH.
You could do the 5k under 20 mins if you carbed!
Timothy Olsan won the 2012 western states 100 mile endurance race on a low carb diet his time was 14hrs 46 mins (it was a new course record) and faster than his previous time the year before when he was high carb!0 -
Oh, now now.......don't be upset because I worked hard and am comfortable enough to not have a shirt on. Don't worry maybe one day your work will pay off.Tiger, save your energy. He argues for the sake or arguing. Not because he has a specific stance on a subject. He debates just to debate....you'll see that soon enough
No I argue because people like you, tiger, ndj are incorrect.
I definitely have a stance.
Low carb high fat works - for some not all (in regards to sustainability). Is it healthy - yes
IIFYM and calorie counting works - for some not all ( in regards to sustainability). Is it healthy - yes
You guys seem to think that I size fits all and that's just a bit too narrow minded.
Also I tend to to enjoy debating stupid statements like - the brain only uses glucose, your body needs carbs to survive, cutting out food groups is unsustainable, no one in the world can suffer from an addiction to food Etc and many other statements made.
So whilst you guys continue to set off the derp alert, I'll continue to argue.
Besides these forums wouldn't be as much fun without opposing view points.
how the hell did I get dragged into this thread? I have not even commented…
I love how you say we are "incorrect' and then provide no examples as back up.
and I do not practice IIFYM so you have me confused with another NDJ…
No I was generalising as you seem to be incorrect about a lot of things!
Nope. The sad part is you don't know enough to know that you just don't know enough. You've somehow become an expert after 4 months and having minimal results through application. Guys like you come around all the time, you just happen to spend more time posting than most. However, you keep telling yourself whatever you want to make yourself feel successful especially by attempting to discredit people who have actually shown results.
Yes you are right I do not have a degree from the university of shirtless.
And you are correct 4 months is not nearly enough time to read up and research things, I'm sure there's a peer reviewed study out there somewhere to prove that.
Whats your qualifications on human biology on a low carb diet by the way. As based on your previous posts you have achieved your results on a high/medium carb diet?
Hey don't get me wrong, more power to your elbow on your results.
My comment was aimed at the fact that because you have had success doing something a certain way you believe that it qualifies you every area (a bit delusional IMO).
I have no doubt that if I were seeking to get the same result and was eating med / high carbs you would be the go to guy.
But when it comes to low carbs - you're not that guy, because you lack a bit of understanding (but that's fine, low carbs isn't your bag).0 -
And make sure your gallbladder and kidneys are functioning very well if you plan to do it long-term.I'd go with a multivitamin to be safe, and try to include leafy greens. You may be getting enough iron to not need it in your multi.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
can anyone tell me if a keto diet would hurt running performance? i'm not running huge distances, about 3 miles per session a few times a week
As a latecomer to running (I'm 53) I have run 5k and 10k having been low carb / keto for a few years. Under 30 mins 5k, a sniff over an hour 10k. HTH.
You could do the 5k under 20 mins if you carbed!
Timothy Olsan won the 2012 western states 100 mile endurance race on a low carb diet his time was 14hrs 46 mins (it was a new course record) and faster than his previous time the year before when he was high carb!
LOL, low carb propaganda
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/815108-fat-adaptation-theory-is-still-a-low-carb-fantasy0 -
Man, what a fun thread. :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
I like my carbs.
0 -
Oh, now now.......don't be upset because I worked hard and am comfortable enough to not have a shirt on. Don't worry maybe one day your work will pay off.Tiger, save your energy. He argues for the sake or arguing. Not because he has a specific stance on a subject. He debates just to debate....you'll see that soon enough
No I argue because people like you, tiger, ndj are incorrect.
I definitely have a stance.
Low carb high fat works - for some not all (in regards to sustainability). Is it healthy - yes
IIFYM and calorie counting works - for some not all ( in regards to sustainability). Is it healthy - yes
You guys seem to think that I size fits all and that's just a bit too narrow minded.
Also I tend to to enjoy debating stupid statements like - the brain only uses glucose, your body needs carbs to survive, cutting out food groups is unsustainable, no one in the world can suffer from an addiction to food Etc and many other statements made.
So whilst you guys continue to set off the derp alert, I'll continue to argue.
Besides these forums wouldn't be as much fun without opposing view points.
how the hell did I get dragged into this thread? I have not even commented…
I love how you say we are "incorrect' and then provide no examples as back up.
and I do not practice IIFYM so you have me confused with another NDJ…
No I was generalising as you seem to be incorrect about a lot of things!
Nope. The sad part is you don't know enough to know that you just don't know enough. You've somehow become an expert after 4 months and having minimal results through application. Guys like you come around all the time, you just happen to spend more time posting than most. However, you keep telling yourself whatever you want to make yourself feel successful especially by attempting to discredit people who have actually shown results.
Yes you are right I do not have a degree from the university of shirtless.
And you are correct 4 months is not nearly enough time to read up and research things, I'm sure there's a peer reviewed study out there somewhere to prove that.
Whats your qualifications on human biology on a low carb diet by the way. As based on your previous posts you have achieved your results on a high/medium carb diet?
Hey don't get me wrong, more power to your elbow on your results.
My comment was aimed at the fact that because you have had success doing something a certain way you believe that it qualifies you every area (a bit delusional IMO).
I have no doubt that if I were seeking to get the same result and was eating med / high carbs you would be the go to guy.
But when it comes to low carbs - you're not that guy, because you lack a bit of understanding (but that's fine, low carbs isn't your bag).
epic backtrack ….
You try to insult someone for having gone to "university of shirtless" then when you get called on it, walk the whole thing back and say "yea, you look great more power to you" and then go on to say that they are delusional…..
I would rather have gone to the university of shirtless than the university of derp ….
based on your previous posting history, I would say that you are the expert on nothing….
ETA - I have always said that low carb, keto, IF, IIFYM, et al are just tools that someone uses to create a calorie deficit. My contention has always been that none of these tools are superior to the others, and I only have an issue when someone says "well I ate in a deficit and did not lose weight, but once I switched to low card the weight came off and calorie deficit does not work for me…"0 -
ETA - I have always said that low carb, keto, IF, IIFYM, et al are just tools that someone uses to create a calorie deficit. My contention has always been that none of these tools are superior to the others, and I only have an issue when someone says "well I ate in a deficit and did not lose weight, but once I switched to low card the weight came off and calorie deficit does not work for me…"
At this point, that is my general view in all this.
If it works for you, then do it.
But if weight loss is your goal, you are in some form of deficit....0 -
can anyone tell me if a keto diet would hurt running performance? i'm not running huge distances, about 3 miles per session a few times a week
As a latecomer to running (I'm 53) I have run 5k and 10k having been low carb / keto for a few years. Under 30 mins 5k, a sniff over an hour 10k. HTH.
You could do the 5k under 20 mins if you carbed!
Timothy Olsan won the 2012 western states 100 mile endurance race on a low carb diet his time was 14hrs 46 mins (it was a new course record) and faster than his previous time the year before when he was high carb!
LOL, low carb propaganda
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/815108-fat-adaptation-theory-is-still-a-low-carb-fantasy
Sorry are you saying he didn't run the western 100 in what was probably a mostly keto state?
Also I read the blog/article from Anthony Colpo. Didn't prove anything and came across as a typical piss and whine blog from and anti low carber.
If you have any actual proof this runner didn't complete the race in a mainly keto state (scientific proof) then pass it down the line.0 -
can anyone tell me if a keto diet would hurt running performance? i'm not running huge distances, about 3 miles per session a few times a week
As a latecomer to running (I'm 53) I have run 5k and 10k having been low carb / keto for a few years. Under 30 mins 5k, a sniff over an hour 10k. HTH.
You could do the 5k under 20 mins if you carbed!
Timothy Olsan won the 2012 western states 100 mile endurance race on a low carb diet his time was 14hrs 46 mins (it was a new course record) and faster than his previous time the year before when he was high carb!
LOL, low carb propaganda
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/815108-fat-adaptation-theory-is-still-a-low-carb-fantasy
Sorry are you saying he didn't run the western 100 in what was probably a mostly keto state?
Also I read the blog/article from Anthony Colpo. Didn't prove anything and came across as a typical piss and whine blog from and anti low carber.
If you have any actual proof this runner didn't complete the race in a mainly keto state (scientific proof) then pass it down the line.
Yet you have no actual proof he did run it in a keto state and since you made the claim, go ahead and support that he did indeed run it in mainly a keto state0 -
My contention has always been that none of these tools are superior to the others
Insulin resistant people (many obese fit the bill) do better on low carb, insulin sensitive on high carb low fat.
Use the right tool for the job ?
0 -
You could do the 5k under 20 mins if you carbed!
How do you work that out, Einstein ? Didn't seem to work for the carb eaters around and behind me.
20 mins would have put me in about 20th position out of 350, amongst club runners. Given I've only done any running in the last 2 years and am very non-athletic your suggestion is delusional.0 -
Oh, now now.......don't be upset because I worked hard and am comfortable enough to not have a shirt on. Don't worry maybe one day your work will pay off.Tiger, save your energy. He argues for the sake or arguing. Not because he has a specific stance on a subject. He debates just to debate....you'll see that soon enough
No I argue because people like you, tiger, ndj are incorrect.
I definitely have a stance.
Low carb high fat works - for some not all (in regards to sustainability). Is it healthy - yes
IIFYM and calorie counting works - for some not all ( in regards to sustainability). Is it healthy - yes
You guys seem to think that I size fits all and that's just a bit too narrow minded.
Also I tend to to enjoy debating stupid statements like - the brain only uses glucose, your body needs carbs to survive, cutting out food groups is unsustainable, no one in the world can suffer from an addiction to food Etc and many other statements made.
So whilst you guys continue to set off the derp alert, I'll continue to argue.
Besides these forums wouldn't be as much fun without opposing view points.
how the hell did I get dragged into this thread? I have not even commented…
I love how you say we are "incorrect' and then provide no examples as back up.
and I do not practice IIFYM so you have me confused with another NDJ…
No I was generalising as you seem to be incorrect about a lot of things!
Nope. The sad part is you don't know enough to know that you just don't know enough. You've somehow become an expert after 4 months and having minimal results through application. Guys like you come around all the time, you just happen to spend more time posting than most. However, you keep telling yourself whatever you want to make yourself feel successful especially by attempting to discredit people who have actually shown results.
Yes you are right I do not have a degree from the university of shirtless.
And you are correct 4 months is not nearly enough time to read up and research things, I'm sure there's a peer reviewed study out there somewhere to prove that.
Whats your qualifications on human biology on a low carb diet by the way. As based on your previous posts you have achieved your results on a high/medium carb diet?
Hey don't get me wrong, more power to your elbow on your results.
My comment was aimed at the fact that because you have had success doing something a certain way you believe that it qualifies you every area (a bit delusional IMO).
I have no doubt that if I were seeking to get the same result and was eating med / high carbs you would be the go to guy.
But when it comes to low carbs - you're not that guy, because you lack a bit of understanding (but that's fine, low carbs isn't your bag).
epic backtrack ….
You try to insult someone for having gone to "university of shirtless" then when you get called on it, walk the whole thing back and say "yea, you look great more power to you" and then go on to say that they are delusional…..
I would rather have gone to the university of shirtless than the university of derp ….
based on your previous posting history, I would say that you are the expert on nothing….
ETA - I have always said that low carb, keto, IF, IIFYM, et al are just tools that someone uses to create a calorie deficit. My contention has always been that none of these tools are superior to the others, and I only have an issue when someone says "well I ate in a deficit and did not lose weight, but once I switched to low card the weight came off and calorie deficit does not work for me…"
I use the term university of shirtless (probably because it get your goat).
Plus it's also funny as in past threads when people have asked what someone's qualification is they have responded 'just look at my profile pick, that's my qualification (ref captainspaz)' - sorry but it just seemed a bit ridiculous.
Why would I not congratulate someone on how they look. I have very differing views to geeksuk, he posted a new profile pic and I complemented him on his hard work.
I don't think many people on theses threads push low carb down anyone's throats or claim them to be better.
What I see time and again is you guys hijacking these threads, claim low carb either doesn't work it is unnecessary.
Well both of those opinions are incorrect.
I will agree that low carb is as unnecessary (for some) just as counting calories is (for others).
It would be nice if people asking to low carb advice or people's experience with it could get the feedback without you guys trying to recruit them for the moderation brigade.
Still that's not going to happen, so we shall have to continue debating.0 -
can anyone tell me if a keto diet would hurt running performance? i'm not running huge distances, about 3 miles per session a few times a week
As a latecomer to running (I'm 53) I have run 5k and 10k having been low carb / keto for a few years. Under 30 mins 5k, a sniff over an hour 10k. HTH.
You could do the 5k under 20 mins if you carbed!
Timothy Olsan won the 2012 western states 100 mile endurance race on a low carb diet his time was 14hrs 46 mins (it was a new course record) and faster than his previous time the year before when he was high carb!
LOL, low carb propaganda
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/815108-fat-adaptation-theory-is-still-a-low-carb-fantasy
Sorry are you saying he didn't run the western 100 in what was probably a mostly keto state?
Also I read the blog/article from Anthony Colpo. Didn't prove anything and came across as a typical piss and whine blog from and anti low carber.
If you have any actual proof this runner didn't complete the race in a mainly keto state (scientific proof) then pass it down the line.
Yet you have no actual proof he did run it in a keto state and since you made the claim, go ahead and support that he did indeed run it in mainly a keto state
He said he did and I have no reason to doubt his honesty.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions