cutting carbs

tennisdude2004

Let's go look at some of the actual research on cognition and low fat or low carb diets....

Short term
http://ase.tufts.edu/psychology/spacelab/pubs/Atkins_Appetite_inpress.pdf
Apparently leads to memory impairment but less confusion and faster attention response with low carbing.

To examine how a low-carbohydrate diet affects cognitive performance, women participated in one of two weight-loss diet regimens. Participants self-selected a low-carbohydrate (n=9) or a reduced-calorie balanced diet similar to that recommended by the American Dietetic Association (ADA diet) (n=10). Seventy-two hours before beginning their diets and then 48 h, 1, 2, and 3 weeks after starting, participants completed a battery of cognitive tasks assessing visuospatial memory, vigilance attention, memory span, a food-related paired-associates a food Stroop, and the Profile of Moods Scale (POMS) to assess subjective mood. Results showed that during complete withdrawal of dietary carbohydrate, low-carbohydrate dieters performed worse on memory-based tasks than ADA dieters. These impairments were ameliorated after reintroduction of carbohydrates. Low-carbohydrate dieters reported less confusion (POMS) and responded faster during an attention vigilance task (CPT) than ADA dieters. Hunger ratings did not differ between the two diet conditions. The present data show memory impairments during low-carbohydrate diets at a point when available glycogen stores would be at their lowest. A commonly held explanation based on preoccupation with food would not account for these findings. The results also suggest better vigilance attention and reduced self-reported confusion while on the low-carbohydrate diet, although not tied to a specific time point during the diet. Taken together the results suggest that weight-loss diet regimens differentially impact cognitive behavior.

Long term
http://archinte.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=1108558

No difference - actually losing weight helps cognitive function independent of low fat or low carb.

Background Very low-carbohydrate (LC) diets are often used to promote weight loss, but the long-term effects on psychological function remain unknown.

Methods A total of 106 overweight and obese participants (mean [SE] age, 50.0 [0.8] years; mean [SE] body mass index [calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared], 33.7 [0.4]) were randomly assigned either to an energy-restricted (approximately 1433-1672 kcal [to convert to kilojoules, multiply by 4.186]), planned isocaloric, very low-carbohydrate, high-fat (LC) diet or to a high-carbohydrate, low-fat (LF) diet for 1 year. Changes in body weight, psychological mood and well-being (Profile of Mood States, Beck Depression Inventory, and Spielberger State Anxiety Inventory scores), and cognitive functioning (working memory and speed of processing) were assessed.

Results By 1 year, the overall mean (SE) weight loss was 13.7 (1.8) kg, with no significant difference between groups (P = .26). Over the course of the study, there were significant time × diet interactions for Spielberger State Anxiety Inventory, Beck Depression Inventory, and Profile of Mood States scores for total mood disturbance, anger-hostility, confusion-bewilderment, and depression-dejection (P < .05) as a result of greater improvements in these psychological mood states for the LF diet compared with the LC diet. Working memory improved by 1 year (P < .001 for time), but speed of processing remained largely unchanged, with no effect of diet composition on either cognitive domain.

Conclusions Over 1 year, there was a favorable effect of an energy-restricted LF diet compared with an isocaloric LC diet on mood state and affect in overweight and obese individuals. Both diets had similar effects on working memory and speed of processing.

So far, the hypothesis that the brain "functions optimally on ketones" ie a low carb diet - can be tossed out from this research.
My other reading does suggest that low carb diets do have some possible value in certain disease states but that's not really the subject here.

There is also some evidence that low carb diets are a bad idea during brain development and for rats ...take that as you will.
Detrimental Effects of the Ketogenic Diet on Cognitive Function in Rats http://www.nature.com/pr/journal/v55/n3/full/pr200478a.html
I would not claim from that that low carbing is bad - but it does point out that when people tend to take religious positions around diet - low carb good anything else bad - fail to consider context.

I think for yourself and other argumentative members of MFP my stance has been clear from my first post.

A brain fuelled by ketones, lactate and glucose operates just as optimal as a brain fuelled mainly or solely on glucose.

Additionally ketones are beneficial for helping slow the onset of certain brain deterioration diseases

If you are unable to provide any studies which show that subjects who are ketone adapted do not have brain function to the same optimal ability then that shall remain my stance.

Your moving the goal post.
You stated "low carb diet the brain works at an optimal level!"

Optimal means best or most favorable versus other options. "Just as optimal as" is nonsense. You inferenced that low carb was better for brain function. It's not. Short term it's possibly worse depending which factor you want to focus on. Long term there is no significant cognitive difference. I'm not claiming it's worse for cognitive function - why would I?

As to the AC1202 study it shows that the patients generally got worse - independent of diet, less worse on the drug but this has nothing to do with a low carb diet. It was a drug induced process. It might be worth doing with a diet induced ketosis but it's non conclusive. Just like the study I posted that shows low carb diets are bad for brain development, non conclusive in humans. And certainly not evidence that supports the diet in someone that doesn't have the disease. Low carb might be disease preventive but the links you've provided don't show that.

There might be research out there on the carbohydrate role and preventive nature of one type or another type of diet but frankly everything I've read to date suggests that losing weight and remaining physically active are more important in this disease, even that evidence is uncertain. Again context and big picture.

Watch and observe how many time he actually tries to do that, change what he's arguing to a different point when he doesn't have a way out. Pretty damn funny.

Watch and observe how many times you bully people!

So calling out people on their bull**** is "bullying" now?

How have I been called out?

(post above) In regards to bullying - I think some people just have communication issues.

If you really want to call me out drop down some studies showing I'm wrong that the brain fuelled on ketones, lactate and glucose (over an extended period of time and not just 3 or 4 weeks) cannot perform optimally!

After all you guys love the burden of proof and as you know lack of evidence to support my claim does not make my claim wrong - all it does is make you guys the holder of the burden to prove me wrong!

tennisdude2004

People who are keto adapted don’t go through these fluctuations of glucose concentration as much if any at all.

That's not particularly a positive, as it is precisely "fluctuations" that allow for high intensity activities by allowing higher energy peaks. There is a reason there are no elite ketogenic athletes in the vast majority sports.

Also, I have one of those ADHD kids, and saw first hand the complete lack of improvement from either ketogenic or gluten-free diets.

Stop looking for a magic bullet....the "right" diet depends on who you are and what you do...

How is eating the correct nutrition for that particular person a magic bullet?

Diets help achieve 3 goals and most (not all) people will be aiming for one or at best two of the goals, as opposed to all of them.

Weight loss / weight gain
Health
Fitness

The average MFP punter will be looking at weight loss (yes I mean the 'cals in vs cals out' brigade) and will probably not be thinking much about health or fitness.

A fair amount of the MFP'ers following LCHF or clean eating will likely be more interested in health and weight loss.

Some of the MFP'ers who are lifting and looking to bulk and carry additional muscle will be focusing on weight gain and fitness and probably not much about health!

Your elite athlete that you mentioned will definitely be focusing on fitness and will achieve that at the cost of health!

My point is we all have different goals and motivations, which is why there is a need for a multitude of different eating strategies!

If you are lifting heaving every other day then you need your carbs, if you are doing moderate cardio everyday, then you don't!

If you've got diabetes then you need to eat low carbs. If you've got a weird fixation on bagels you need to eat high carb.

And so on and so on!

chrisdavey

Ketogenic Diet has much more benefits than just weight loss:
• Reduction on Triglycerides
• Improved HDL
• Decrease Saturated Fat (in your body)
• Improved insulin sensitivity (glucose, insulin, HbA1C)
• Decrease Blood Pressure
• Decrease inflammation
• Improved atherogenic dyslipidemia

Please watch Dr. Jeff Volek's lecture (1hr) on "The Many Facets of Keto-Adaptation: Health, Performance, and Beyond" http://youtu.be/GC1vMBRFiwE

Volek got smoked by Alan aragon at a conference last year. Taubes is coming up soon.

yarwell

I did low carb yesterday, trained and was literally falling asleep between sets. The week earlier I was still making pbs on 5/3/1. Anaerobic activity and low carb is ****. (for me)

You did low carb for a day. LOL.

yarwell

And there is this appropriately timed article...Cut those carbs and eat that fat!!!!!!

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/02/health/low-carb-vs-low-fat-diet.html?_r=0

http://annals.org/article.aspx?articleid=1900694 is the RCT quoted. No correlation epidemiology, comparison of two diets in practice.

yarwell

I don't see how this counters what I've said. If there is an increase in plasma concentration then utilization is lower than production.

General normal plasma levels are about 1 mg/dl (quick check) or ~0.1 mmol/l so from your quote that's a 400% increase in plasma levels available during 12 hours of sleep. That's being used by tissue + respiration, since we general do not excrete measurable levels of ketones (as I understand it). While ketones transport will certainly "take off" at high concentrations it is still going on during long inter-meal fasting.

You said that "even someone on a high carb diet will be producing ketones in considerable quantities during the fasting sleep cycle" and yet the fasting level I quoted in the moderate carb case was <0.1 mmol/l.

Is you view of "considerable quantities" compatible with a concentration of 0.1 mmol or less ?

tennisdude2004

Ketogenic Diet has much more benefits than just weight loss:
• Reduction on Triglycerides
• Improved HDL
• Decrease Saturated Fat (in your body)
• Improved insulin sensitivity (glucose, insulin, HbA1C)
• Decrease Blood Pressure
• Decrease inflammation
• Improved atherogenic dyslipidemia

Please watch Dr. Jeff Volek's lecture (1hr) on "The Many Facets of Keto-Adaptation: Health, Performance, and Beyond" http://youtu.be/GC1vMBRFiwE

Volek got smoked by Alan aragon at a conference last year. Taubes is coming up soon.

But to be fair that was not on ketogenic diets in general, that was a debate specifically discussing the pro's and con's of ketogenic diets for competing elite athletes - big difference!

Plus the debate was not discussing health, it was discussing fitness and the most effective way for athletes to fuel themselves.

FunkyTobias

Let's go look at some of the actual research on cognition and low fat or low carb diets....

Short term
http://ase.tufts.edu/psychology/spacelab/pubs/Atkins_Appetite_inpress.pdf
Apparently leads to memory impairment but less confusion and faster attention response with low carbing.

To examine how a low-carbohydrate diet affects cognitive performance, women participated in one of two weight-loss diet regimens. Participants self-selected a low-carbohydrate (n=9) or a reduced-calorie balanced diet similar to that recommended by the American Dietetic Association (ADA diet) (n=10). Seventy-two hours before beginning their diets and then 48 h, 1, 2, and 3 weeks after starting, participants completed a battery of cognitive tasks assessing visuospatial memory, vigilance attention, memory span, a food-related paired-associates a food Stroop, and the Profile of Moods Scale (POMS) to assess subjective mood. Results showed that during complete withdrawal of dietary carbohydrate, low-carbohydrate dieters performed worse on memory-based tasks than ADA dieters. These impairments were ameliorated after reintroduction of carbohydrates. Low-carbohydrate dieters reported less confusion (POMS) and responded faster during an attention vigilance task (CPT) than ADA dieters. Hunger ratings did not differ between the two diet conditions. The present data show memory impairments during low-carbohydrate diets at a point when available glycogen stores would be at their lowest. A commonly held explanation based on preoccupation with food would not account for these findings. The results also suggest better vigilance attention and reduced self-reported confusion while on the low-carbohydrate diet, although not tied to a specific time point during the diet. Taken together the results suggest that weight-loss diet regimens differentially impact cognitive behavior.

Long term
http://archinte.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=1108558

No difference - actually losing weight helps cognitive function independent of low fat or low carb.

Background Very low-carbohydrate (LC) diets are often used to promote weight loss, but the long-term effects on psychological function remain unknown.

Methods A total of 106 overweight and obese participants (mean [SE] age, 50.0 [0.8] years; mean [SE] body mass index [calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared], 33.7 [0.4]) were randomly assigned either to an energy-restricted (approximately 1433-1672 kcal [to convert to kilojoules, multiply by 4.186]), planned isocaloric, very low-carbohydrate, high-fat (LC) diet or to a high-carbohydrate, low-fat (LF) diet for 1 year. Changes in body weight, psychological mood and well-being (Profile of Mood States, Beck Depression Inventory, and Spielberger State Anxiety Inventory scores), and cognitive functioning (working memory and speed of processing) were assessed.

Results By 1 year, the overall mean (SE) weight loss was 13.7 (1.8) kg, with no significant difference between groups (P = .26). Over the course of the study, there were significant time × diet interactions for Spielberger State Anxiety Inventory, Beck Depression Inventory, and Profile of Mood States scores for total mood disturbance, anger-hostility, confusion-bewilderment, and depression-dejection (P < .05) as a result of greater improvements in these psychological mood states for the LF diet compared with the LC diet. Working memory improved by 1 year (P < .001 for time), but speed of processing remained largely unchanged, with no effect of diet composition on either cognitive domain.

Conclusions Over 1 year, there was a favorable effect of an energy-restricted LF diet compared with an isocaloric LC diet on mood state and affect in overweight and obese individuals. Both diets had similar effects on working memory and speed of processing.

So far, the hypothesis that the brain "functions optimally on ketones" ie a low carb diet - can be tossed out from this research.
My other reading does suggest that low carb diets do have some possible value in certain disease states but that's not really the subject here.

There is also some evidence that low carb diets are a bad idea during brain development and for rats ...take that as you will.
Detrimental Effects of the Ketogenic Diet on Cognitive Function in Rats http://www.nature.com/pr/journal/v55/n3/full/pr200478a.html
I would not claim from that that low carbing is bad - but it does point out that when people tend to take religious positions around diet - low carb good anything else bad - fail to consider context.

I think for yourself and other argumentative members of MFP my stance has been clear from my first post.

A brain fuelled by ketones, lactate and glucose operates just as optimal as a brain fuelled mainly or solely on glucose.

Additionally ketones are beneficial for helping slow the onset of certain brain deterioration diseases

If you are unable to provide any studies which show that subjects who are ketone adapted do not have brain function to the same optimal ability then that shall remain my stance.

Your moving the goal post.
You stated "low carb diet the brain works at an optimal level!"

Optimal means best or most favorable versus other options. "Just as optimal as" is nonsense. You inferenced that low carb was better for brain function. It's not. Short term it's possibly worse depending which factor you want to focus on. Long term there is no significant cognitive difference. I'm not claiming it's worse for cognitive function - why would I?

As to the AC1202 study it shows that the patients generally got worse - independent of diet, less worse on the drug but this has nothing to do with a low carb diet. It was a drug induced process. It might be worth doing with a diet induced ketosis but it's non conclusive. Just like the study I posted that shows low carb diets are bad for brain development, non conclusive in humans. And certainly not evidence that supports the diet in someone that doesn't have the disease. Low carb might be disease preventive but the links you've provided don't show that.

There might be research out there on the carbohydrate role and preventive nature of one type or another type of diet but frankly everything I've read to date suggests that losing weight and remaining physically active are more important in this disease, even that evidence is uncertain. Again context and big picture.

Watch and observe how many time he actually tries to do that, change what he's arguing to a different point when he doesn't have a way out. Pretty damn funny.

Watch and observe how many times you bully people!

So calling out people on their bull**** is "bullying" now?

How have I been called out?

Read the bolded above

(post above) In regards to bullying - I think some people just have communication issues.

If you really want to call me out drop down some studies showing I'm wrong that the brain fuelled on ketones, lactate and glucose (over an extended period of time and not just 3 or 4 weeks) cannot perform optimally!

After all you guys love the burden of proof and as you know lack of evidence to support my claim does not make my claim wrong - all it does is make you guys the holder of the burden to prove me wrong!

Methinks you don't understand the burden of proof.

tennisdude2004

Let's go look at some of the actual research on cognition and low fat or low carb diets....

Short term
http://ase.tufts.edu/psychology/spacelab/pubs/Atkins_Appetite_inpress.pdf
Apparently leads to memory impairment but less confusion and faster attention response with low carbing.

To examine how a low-carbohydrate diet affects cognitive performance, women participated in one of two weight-loss diet regimens. Participants self-selected a low-carbohydrate (n=9) or a reduced-calorie balanced diet similar to that recommended by the American Dietetic Association (ADA diet) (n=10). Seventy-two hours before beginning their diets and then 48 h, 1, 2, and 3 weeks after starting, participants completed a battery of cognitive tasks assessing visuospatial memory, vigilance attention, memory span, a food-related paired-associates a food Stroop, and the Profile of Moods Scale (POMS) to assess subjective mood. Results showed that during complete withdrawal of dietary carbohydrate, low-carbohydrate dieters performed worse on memory-based tasks than ADA dieters. These impairments were ameliorated after reintroduction of carbohydrates. Low-carbohydrate dieters reported less confusion (POMS) and responded faster during an attention vigilance task (CPT) than ADA dieters. Hunger ratings did not differ between the two diet conditions. The present data show memory impairments during low-carbohydrate diets at a point when available glycogen stores would be at their lowest. A commonly held explanation based on preoccupation with food would not account for these findings. The results also suggest better vigilance attention and reduced self-reported confusion while on the low-carbohydrate diet, although not tied to a specific time point during the diet. Taken together the results suggest that weight-loss diet regimens differentially impact cognitive behavior.

Long term
http://archinte.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=1108558

No difference - actually losing weight helps cognitive function independent of low fat or low carb.

Background Very low-carbohydrate (LC) diets are often used to promote weight loss, but the long-term effects on psychological function remain unknown.

Methods A total of 106 overweight and obese participants (mean [SE] age, 50.0 [0.8] years; mean [SE] body mass index [calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared], 33.7 [0.4]) were randomly assigned either to an energy-restricted (approximately 1433-1672 kcal [to convert to kilojoules, multiply by 4.186]), planned isocaloric, very low-carbohydrate, high-fat (LC) diet or to a high-carbohydrate, low-fat (LF) diet for 1 year. Changes in body weight, psychological mood and well-being (Profile of Mood States, Beck Depression Inventory, and Spielberger State Anxiety Inventory scores), and cognitive functioning (working memory and speed of processing) were assessed.

Results By 1 year, the overall mean (SE) weight loss was 13.7 (1.8) kg, with no significant difference between groups (P = .26). Over the course of the study, there were significant time × diet interactions for Spielberger State Anxiety Inventory, Beck Depression Inventory, and Profile of Mood States scores for total mood disturbance, anger-hostility, confusion-bewilderment, and depression-dejection (P < .05) as a result of greater improvements in these psychological mood states for the LF diet compared with the LC diet. Working memory improved by 1 year (P < .001 for time), but speed of processing remained largely unchanged, with no effect of diet composition on either cognitive domain.

Conclusions Over 1 year, there was a favorable effect of an energy-restricted LF diet compared with an isocaloric LC diet on mood state and affect in overweight and obese individuals. Both diets had similar effects on working memory and speed of processing.

So far, the hypothesis that the brain "functions optimally on ketones" ie a low carb diet - can be tossed out from this research.
My other reading does suggest that low carb diets do have some possible value in certain disease states but that's not really the subject here.

There is also some evidence that low carb diets are a bad idea during brain development and for rats ...take that as you will.
Detrimental Effects of the Ketogenic Diet on Cognitive Function in Rats http://www.nature.com/pr/journal/v55/n3/full/pr200478a.html
I would not claim from that that low carbing is bad - but it does point out that when people tend to take religious positions around diet - low carb good anything else bad - fail to consider context.

I think for yourself and other argumentative members of MFP my stance has been clear from my first post.

A brain fuelled by ketones, lactate and glucose operates just as optimal as a brain fuelled mainly or solely on glucose.

Additionally ketones are beneficial for helping slow the onset of certain brain deterioration diseases

If you are unable to provide any studies which show that subjects who are ketone adapted do not have brain function to the same optimal ability then that shall remain my stance.

Your moving the goal post.
You stated "low carb diet the brain works at an optimal level!"

Optimal means best or most favorable versus other options. "Just as optimal as" is nonsense. You inferenced that low carb was better for brain function. It's not. Short term it's possibly worse depending which factor you want to focus on. Long term there is no significant cognitive difference. I'm not claiming it's worse for cognitive function - why would I?

As to the AC1202 study it shows that the patients generally got worse - independent of diet, less worse on the drug but this has nothing to do with a low carb diet. It was a drug induced process. It might be worth doing with a diet induced ketosis but it's non conclusive. Just like the study I posted that shows low carb diets are bad for brain development, non conclusive in humans. And certainly not evidence that supports the diet in someone that doesn't have the disease. Low carb might be disease preventive but the links you've provided don't show that.

There might be research out there on the carbohydrate role and preventive nature of one type or another type of diet but frankly everything I've read to date suggests that losing weight and remaining physically active are more important in this disease, even that evidence is uncertain. Again context and big picture.

Watch and observe how many time he actually tries to do that, change what he's arguing to a different point when he doesn't have a way out. Pretty damn funny.

Watch and observe how many times you bully people!

So calling out people on their bull**** is "bullying" now?

How have I been called out?

Read the bolded above

(post above) In regards to bullying - I think some people just have communication issues.

If you really want to call me out drop down some studies showing I'm wrong that the brain fuelled on ketones, lactate and glucose (over an extended period of time and not just 3 or 4 weeks) cannot perform optimally!

After all you guys love the burden of proof and as you know lack of evidence to support my claim does not make my claim wrong - all it does is make you guys the holder of the burden to prove me wrong!

Methinks you don't understand the burden of proof.

So do you have any studies?

I bet you do, I bet you have loads, but won't share just because you have principles and no-one (NO-ONE) disrespects the burden of proof!

I tip my hat to you sir, you are a man of honor!

parkscs

And there is this appropriately timed article...Cut those carbs and eat that fat!!!!!!

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/02/health/low-carb-vs-low-fat-diet.html?_r=0

Yeah Nah.

Correlation =/= causation.

I thought we had already worked out that calorie deficit matters. Low carb vs low fat is personal preference depending on health and activity levels.

I did low carb yesterday, trained and was literally falling asleep between sets. The week earlier I was still making pbs on 5/3/1. Anaerobic activity and low carb is ****. (for me)

You post a lot of good stuff man but you can't be serious in thinking that doing low carb for 1 day is not going to affect your lifts. Most people take a hit for the first few months before their lifts stabilize and even then people tend to follow a TKD/CKD to mitigate the decrease in anaerobic performance. Just arbitrarily doing low carb for 1 day is meaningless.

But to be fair that was not on ketogenic diets in general, that was a debate specifically discussing the pro's and con's of ketogenic diets for competing elite athletes - big difference!

Plus the debate was not discussing health, it was discussing fitness and the most effective way for athletes to fuel themselves.

Spot on. There's a big difference between someone looking to cut weight and an elite athlete going into a competition. I don't know anyone, anywhere, that advocates you should run a ketogenic diet into a powerlifting competition, but it's a different story for someone just looking to cut weight and preserve LBM. Not to mention, it's my understanding that Alan isn't even necessarily against some of his clients following a low carb approach, if that particular client responds better to a low carb macro. To me it's just a matter of picking the right tool for the job, and low carb is a useful tool in some situations for some people. Nothing magical, but still useful in some circumstances. Beyond that, I've never understood why this subject is so hotly debated.

tennisdude2004

Your moving the goal post.
You stated "low carb diet the brain works at an optimal level!"

Optimal means best or most favorable versus other options. "Just as optimal as" is nonsense. You inferenced that low carb was better for brain function. It's not. Short term it's possibly worse depending which factor you want to focus on. Long term there is no significant cognitive difference. I'm not claiming it's worse for cognitive function - why would I?

You are correct my use of the phrase 'as optimal as' was wrong, I should have used the phrase 'alternative optima'.

I can see how my wording 'just as optimal as' would lead you to believe I meant that it was 'better than'!

Also on page 3 when I said that I meant the brain function was the same on ketone fuelled compared to glucose fuelled - I can see how that would be taken that I was inferring Ketone fuelled was better.

Hopefully this clears things up!

EvgeniZyntx

I don't see how this counters what I've said. If there is an increase in plasma concentration then utilization is lower than production.

General normal plasma levels are about 1 mg/dl (quick check) or ~0.1 mmol/l so from your quote that's a 400% increase in plasma levels available during 12 hours of sleep. That's being used by tissue + respiration, since we general do not excrete measurable levels of ketones (as I understand it). While ketones transport will certainly "take off" at high concentrations it is still going on during long inter-meal fasting.

You said that "even someone on a high carb diet will be producing ketones in considerable quantities during the fasting sleep cycle" and yet the fasting level I quoted in the moderate carb case was <0.1 mmol/l.

Is you view of "considerable quantities" compatible with a concentration of 0.1 mmol or less ?

Copy pasting what you wrote: "but should not exceed 0.4 mmol/L following an overnight fast (up to 12 hours)" of one primary type of ketone bodies (from a baseline of 0.1 mmol/L ).

That's a 4x increase in available plasma concentration which exceeds tissue utilization rates at that point. 4x seems considerable - even if it's not dietary ketosis levels or 10 days of starvation. And, of course, that's assuming a normal individual and not someone with diabetic hyperketonemia or pre-diabetic states. But tissue infusion studies do show proportional increase in ketone utilization with a rate limiting step is the transport into the brain. (Frankly I'm not up to speed on MCA transport...)

Given that significant uptake changes in the brain are measured in pmol/g/min levels during extensive exercise bouts, yes, I consider going from baseline to 0.2 or 0.35 mmol/L to be "considerable". Perhaps the term was vague in my first use. C'est la vie.

chrisdavey

I did low carb yesterday, trained and was literally falling asleep between sets. The week earlier I was still making pbs on 5/3/1. Anaerobic activity and low carb is ****. (for me)

You did low carb for a day. LOL.

5 days at a time. Lyle McDonald's ud2.

chrisdavey

And there is this appropriately timed article...Cut those carbs and eat that fat!!!!!!

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/02/health/low-carb-vs-low-fat-diet.html?_r=0

Yeah Nah.

Correlation =/= causation.

I thought we had already worked out that calorie deficit matters. Low carb vs low fat is personal preference depending on health and activity levels.

I did low carb yesterday, trained and was literally falling asleep between sets. The week earlier I was still making pbs on 5/3/1. Anaerobic activity and low carb is ****. (for me)

You post a lot of good stuff man but you can't be serious in thinking that doing low carb for 1 day is not going to affect your lifts. Most people take a hit for the first few months before their lifts stabilize and even then people tend to follow a TKD/CKD to mitigate the decrease in anaerobic performance. Just arbitrarily doing low carb for 1 day is meaningless.

But to be fair that was not on ketogenic diets in general, that was a debate specifically discussing the pro's and con's of ketogenic diets for competing elite athletes - big difference!

Plus the debate was not discussing health, it was discussing fitness and the most effective way for athletes to fuel themselves.

Spot on. There's a big difference between someone looking to cut weight and an elite athlete going into a competition. I don't know anyone, anywhere, that advocates you should run a ketogenic diet into a powerlifting competition, but it's a different story for someone just looking to cut weight and preserve LBM. Not to mention, it's my understanding that Alan isn't even necessarily against some of his clients following a low carb approach, if that particular client responds better to a low carb macro. To me it's just a matter of picking the right tool for the job, and low carb is a useful tool in some situations for some people. Nothing magical, but still useful in some circumstances. Beyond that, I've never understood why this subject is so hotly debated.

As I said, it's 5 low days at a time. Yes, I can tell you that it definitely affected my lifts and energy levels in general. Hence, why I stick to lower fat, higher carbs wherever possible.

Yes, it's true that some people "may" perform better on lchf diets and I think people should experiment objectively.

And tennisdude, yes I care about the debate as I'm more interested in athletes being a strength and conditioning coach.

Oh and the only reason I'm low carb at the moment is because I'm doing a Body building comp and right now a larger deficit is required. Currently, fat loss is more important than gym performance. (not usually the case)

parkscs

For 5 days at a time, I'm not surprised it makes you feel like a zombie... but then again, I never thought of UD2 as being fun, haha. Very useful in some circumstances, but not fun.

chrisdavey

For 5 days at a time, I'm not surprised it makes you feel like a zombie... but then again, I never thought of UD2 as being fun, haha. Very useful in some circumstances, but not fun.

Totally. Miserable! Just got to get through it. I don't know how anyone does it long term. I've never made it more than 2 weeks. But yeah, that was my first day on it on Monday for gym. Total cals before workout would have been about 300 less than normal so not a great deal for me.