If its really about calories then explain to me why.....
Options
Replies
-
I consider losing half my intelligence and not enjoying the vast majority of my favorite foods ever again to be significant consequences.No one is talking about a "starvation diet." The point is that a person on a ketogenic diet can more easily maintain an aggressive calorie deficit with very little consequence.0 -
That's rich. Literally, every single one of your posts has been a non-sequitur.
Maybe it seems that way to you because of your aforementioned struggles. :laugh:
I figure if I hang out here long enough, I too will become a wizard:
1. 50% of calories from carbs;
2. Calorie deficits and resulting lipolysis rivaling that of the ketogenics without much, if any, glycolytic activity; and
3. No de novo lipogenesis.0 -
I consider losing half my intelligence and not enjoying the vast majority of my favorite foods ever again to be significant consequences.No one is talking about a "starvation diet." The point is that a person on a ketogenic diet can more easily maintain an aggressive calorie deficit with very little consequence.
All of which has as much to do with the biochemical and evolutionary basis of ketogenic diets as knowing your favorite football team. I'm pretty sure principles of natural selection wouldn't have led to the ketogenic diet as our way to survive every famine in human history if it decreased your intelligence. On the contrary, the benefit of it is that it keeps the brain on all day long, thereby having allowed our ancestors to have a heightened level of consciousness during the most difficult of times.
What's hopelessly obnoxious, though, is how some people believe that people on ketogenic diets don't have any cultural attachment to carbohydrates and that their nutritional protocol couldn't possibly be part of a lifestyle change.0 -
Don't care. It's a fact. It makes me stupid. That's not a hypothesis it's observed reality. I'm certain my ancestors didn't live in the same environment I do.
I consider losing half my intelligence and not enjoying the vast majority of my favorite foods ever again to be significant consequences.No one is talking about a "starvation diet." The point is that a person on a ketogenic diet can more easily maintain an aggressive calorie deficit with very little consequence.
All of which has as much to do with the biochemical and evolutionary basis of ketogenic diets as knowing your favorite football team. I'm pretty sure principles of natural selection wouldn't have led to the ketogenic diet as our way to survive every famine in human history if it decreased your intelligence. On the contrary, the benefit of it is that it keeps the brain on all day long, thereby having allowed our ancestors to have a heightened level of consciousness during the most difficult of times.
I don't really care whether it's cultural or not. What I care about is enjoying my life, part of which involves eating foods I like. What's hopelessly obnoxious is suggesting I should want to change my lifestyle to something I don't enjoy, not for my own benefit, but so that you can feel like you won an argument on the internet.What's hopelessly obnoxious, though, is how some people believe that people on ketogenic diets don't have any cultural attachment to carbohydrates and that their nutritional protocol couldn't possibly be part of a lifestyle change.0 -
Don't care. It's a fact. It makes me stupid. That's not a hypothesis it's observed reality. I'm certain my ancestors didn't live in the same environment I do.
I consider losing half my intelligence and not enjoying the vast majority of my favorite foods ever again to be significant consequences.No one is talking about a "starvation diet." The point is that a person on a ketogenic diet can more easily maintain an aggressive calorie deficit with very little consequence.
All of which has as much to do with the biochemical and evolutionary basis of ketogenic diets as knowing your favorite football team. I'm pretty sure principles of natural selection wouldn't have led to the ketogenic diet as our way to survive every famine in human history if it decreased your intelligence. On the contrary, the benefit of it is that it keeps the brain on all day long, thereby having allowed our ancestors to have a heightened level of consciousness during the most difficult of times.
I don't really care whether it's cultural or not. What I care about is enjoying my life, part of which involves eating foods I like. What's hopelessly obnoxious is suggesting I should want to change my lifestyle to something I don't enjoy, not for my own benefit, but so that you can feel like you won an argument on the internet.What's hopelessly obnoxious, though, is how some people believe that people on ketogenic diets don't have any cultural attachment to carbohydrates and that their nutritional protocol couldn't possibly be part of a lifestyle change.
Nobody is suggesting that you should do anything. What's obnoxious is thinking this is about you. It's a thread discussing basic science and you, and a few others, have interjected your anecdotes and food preferences, for whatever reason.
Even those in this thread who don't believe there is any particular advantage to a ketogenic diet haven't been evangelical regarding what other people should do. I certainly couldn't care less what you do.
What I can say is that most people who fail at a ketogenic diet have no idea how to properly set it up.0 -
You're still missing the point. The purpose of a diet is what? Fat loss -> good health -> happiness. Ultimately it's about quality of life. If sticking to a diet makes people miserable, it is not fulfilling its purpose. In order for a diet to be 'good' it must make someone healthy AND happy. A ketogenic diet may do the former, but the latter is not universal.
Don't care. It's a fact. It makes me stupid. That's not a hypothesis it's observed reality. I'm certain my ancestors didn't live in the same environment I do.
I consider losing half my intelligence and not enjoying the vast majority of my favorite foods ever again to be significant consequences.No one is talking about a "starvation diet." The point is that a person on a ketogenic diet can more easily maintain an aggressive calorie deficit with very little consequence.
All of which has as much to do with the biochemical and evolutionary basis of ketogenic diets as knowing your favorite football team. I'm pretty sure principles of natural selection wouldn't have led to the ketogenic diet as our way to survive every famine in human history if it decreased your intelligence. On the contrary, the benefit of it is that it keeps the brain on all day long, thereby having allowed our ancestors to have a heightened level of consciousness during the most difficult of times.
I don't really care whether it's cultural or not. What I care about is enjoying my life, part of which involves eating foods I like. What's hopelessly obnoxious is suggesting I should want to change my lifestyle to something I don't enjoy, not for my own benefit, but so that you can feel like you won an argument on the internet.What's hopelessly obnoxious, though, is how some people believe that people on ketogenic diets don't have any cultural attachment to carbohydrates and that their nutritional protocol couldn't possibly be part of a lifestyle change.
Nobody is suggesting that you should do anything. What's obnoxious is thinking this is about you. It's a thread discussing basic science and you, and a few others, have interjected your anecdotes and food preferences, for whatever reason.
Even those in this thread who don't believe there is any particular advantage to a ketogenic diet haven't been evangelical regarding what other people should do. I certainly couldn't care less what you do.0 -
You're still missing the point. The purpose of a diet is what? Fat loss -> good health -> happiness. Ultimately it's about quality of life. If sticking to a diet makes people miserable, it is not fulfilling its purpose. In order for a diet to be 'good' it must make someone healthy AND happy. A ketogenic diet may do the former, but the latter is not universal.
Don't care. It's a fact. It makes me stupid. That's not a hypothesis it's observed reality. I'm certain my ancestors didn't live in the same environment I do.
I consider losing half my intelligence and not enjoying the vast majority of my favorite foods ever again to be significant consequences.No one is talking about a "starvation diet." The point is that a person on a ketogenic diet can more easily maintain an aggressive calorie deficit with very little consequence.
All of which has as much to do with the biochemical and evolutionary basis of ketogenic diets as knowing your favorite football team. I'm pretty sure principles of natural selection wouldn't have led to the ketogenic diet as our way to survive every famine in human history if it decreased your intelligence. On the contrary, the benefit of it is that it keeps the brain on all day long, thereby having allowed our ancestors to have a heightened level of consciousness during the most difficult of times.
I don't really care whether it's cultural or not. What I care about is enjoying my life, part of which involves eating foods I like. What's hopelessly obnoxious is suggesting I should want to change my lifestyle to something I don't enjoy, not for my own benefit, but so that you can feel like you won an argument on the internet.What's hopelessly obnoxious, though, is how some people believe that people on ketogenic diets don't have any cultural attachment to carbohydrates and that their nutritional protocol couldn't possibly be part of a lifestyle change.
Nobody is suggesting that you should do anything. What's obnoxious is thinking this is about you. It's a thread discussing basic science and you, and a few others, have interjected your anecdotes and food preferences, for whatever reason.
Even those in this thread who don't believe there is any particular advantage to a ketogenic diet haven't been evangelical regarding what other people should do. I certainly couldn't care less what you do.
I'm not missing any point. The purpose of a "diet" is whatever someone wants it to be. The discussion here was largely centered around "metabolic advantage," as variously defined. I'm happier giving up soft pretzels, pizza, and some other good stuff, but who cares about my autobiography. You shouldn't give up anything that you don't feel like giving up, to belabor the obvious.0 -
Spartan_Maker, you keep pushing the ketogenic diet as the way humans evolved. Do you have evidence of that? Because according to the studies I've read, from the archeological records, humans ate a very carb heavy diet. They actually worked out Paleolithic era humans as eating a 50%c/20%p30%f ratio, at about 3000 calories per day. That's about the exact opposite of a ketogenic diet. In fact, the only culture that really ate a ketogenic type diet was the Inuit culture, and they have long been known to have shorter lifespans and higher rates of disease.
Ketosis is an adaptation for short term survival. It's not the optimal way for the body to function. The advantage of human beings is that we are endlessly adaptable to our environments. That's what allows us to survive.0 -
An excerpt from this article http://www.webmd.com/diet/high-protein-low-carbohydrate-diets
"How Do Low-Carb Diets Work?
By restricting carbohydrates drastically to a mere fraction of that found in the typical American diet, the body goes into a different metabolic state called ketosis, whereby it burns its own fat for fuel. Normally the body burns carbohydrates for fuel -- this is the main source of fuel for your brain, heart ,and many other organs. A person in ketosis is getting energy from ketones, little carbon fragments that are the fuel created by the breakdown of fat stores. When the body is in ketosis, you tend to feel less hungry, and thus you're likely to eat less than you might otherwise. However, ketosis can also cause health problems, such as kidney failure (see below).
As a result, your body changes from a carbohydrate-burning engine into a fat-burning engine. So instead of relying on the carbohydrate-rich items you might typically consume for energy, and leaving your fat stores just where they were before (alas, the hips, belly, and thighs), your fat stores become a primary energy source. The purported result is weight loss.
What Are the Risks Linked to High Protein, Low-Carb Diets?
High protein, low-carb diets can cause a number of health problems, including:
Kidney failure. Consuming too much protein puts a strain on the kidneys, which can make a person susceptible to kidney disease.
High cholesterol . It is well known that high-protein diets (consisting of red meat, whole dairy products, and other high fat foods) are linked to high cholesterol. Studies have linked high cholesterol levels to an increased risk of developing heart disease, stroke, and cancer.
Osteoporosis and kidney stones. High-protein diets have also been shown to cause people to excrete a large amount of calcium in their urine. Over a prolonged period of time, this can increase a person's risk of osteoporosis and kidney stones. A diet that increases protein at the expense of a very restrictive intake of plant carbohydrates may be bad for bones, but not necessarily a high-protein intake alone.
Cancer. One of the reasons high-protein diets increase the risks of certain health problems is because of the avoidance of carbohydrate-containing foods and the vitamins, minerals, fiber, and antioxidants they contain. It is therefore important to obtain your protein from a diet rich in whole grains, fruits, and vegetables. Not only are your needs for protein being met, but you are also helping to reduce your risk of developing cancer.
Unhealthy metabolic state (ketosis). Low-carb diets can cause your body to go into a dangerous metabolic state called ketosis since your body burns fat instead of glucose for energy. During ketosis, the body forms substances known as ketones, which can cause organs to fail and result in gout, kidney stones, or kidney failure. Ketones can also dull a person's appetite, cause nausea and bad breath. Ketosis can be prevented by eating at least 100 grams of carbohydrates a day."0 -
because they put their bodies in ketosis, google Ketosis.0
-
It isn't about calories in and calories out so much as it is the value of the calories you eat. Certain foods work to help your body burn fat and to expel fat. It is science. Too much to explain here, but you can read for yourself what low carbs do for the body. However, many ppl forget to count processed sugar as their carb count, it can sabotage your efforts. 6g of processed sugars a day, 100g of natural sugars.You can have 1500 calories consisting of bread and gain weight due to the way it processes in your body or you can have 1500 calories of veggies and fruits which many actually work to burn fat (mushrooms and onions for example) and do not process as a sugar, etc. It is truly about WHAT you eat vs the calories consumed.
Carbs sit in your body (in your tummy mostly) and hold three times its weight in water). When you don't eat carbs and burn carbs via activity and exercise, your body will burn all the carbs and then tap into fat stores as fuel. That is how they lose. Also, each gram of carb holds three times its weight in water. You will lose water weight when you lose the carbs. You can tell when this change happens, you'll pee a lot. AT first on a low carb diet, you'll feel sick bc your candida in your body is dying, which is good. It feeds off of sugars/carbs. many overweight ppl have too much candida. Not all of it will die, but the excess will. This will reduce stomach bloat. The candida die off (ppl call it "carb flu") But it is really die off, will release about 79 toxins into your body which makes you feel sick. Hang in there, bc it will flush out of your system in about three days and then you'll feel like a million dollars and have tons of energy.
I try to eat low carb, but my carbs are all from fruits and veggies. I do not eat a high protein diet in its place bc it is very toxic and unhealthy (my opinion) but is controversial. I only eat chicken and eggs in moderation. The veggies I choose are the higher protein ones. I drink a few protein shakes too.0 -
If you look at the food groups that are available that literally have no carbs, they are almost the most healthiest foods, and it's a very serious task to eat only 20 grams of protien a day. The reason the weight loss is so great, is because you are literally creating a deficit by eating those food groups. I applaud anyone that can only consume 2grams of carbs a day.............In any event creat a deficit and the weight will come off period........the trick is to create the biggest deficit your body can tolerate on a week to week basis.0
-
Um, no. That's not science, that's mythology. For one thing ALL carbs,regardless of source, are converted into sugar, as that's what carbs are, long chains of glucose, aka sugar. Processed vs natural sugar is irrelevant, as your body processes sugar molecules as sugar molecules, no matter what the source. As for candida, too much candida has way more to do with antibiotics than diet. And carbs aren't really stored in the belly, they are mostly stored in muscles, with a small reserve in the liver. Belly fat is fat, not carbs.It isn't about calories in and calories out so much as it is the value of the calories you eat. Certain foods work to help your body burn fat and to expel fat. It is science. Too much to explain here, but you can read for yourself what low carbs do for the body. However, many ppl forget to count processed sugar as their carb count, it can sabotage your efforts. 6g of processed sugars a day, 100g of natural sugars.You can have 1500 calories consisting of bread and gain weight due to the way it processes in your body or you can have 1500 calories of veggies and fruits which many actually work to burn fat (mushrooms and onions for example) and do not process as a sugar, etc. It is truly about WHAT you eat vs the calories consumed.
Carbs sit in your body (in your tummy mostly) and hold three times its weight in water). When you don't eat carbs and burn carbs via activity and exercise, your body will burn all the carbs and then tap into fat stores as fuel. That is how they lose. Also, each gram of carb holds three times its weight in water. You will lose water weight when you lose the carbs. You can tell when this change happens, you'll pee a lot. AT first on a low carb diet, you'll feel sick bc your candida in your body is dying, which is good. It feeds off of sugars/carbs. many overweight ppl have too much candida. Not all of it will die, but the excess will. This will reduce stomach bloat. The candida die off (ppl call it "carb flu") But it is really die off, will release about 79 toxins into your body which makes you feel sick. Hang in there, bc it will flush out of your system in about three days and then you'll feel like a million dollars and have tons of energy.
I try to eat low carb, but my carbs are all from fruits and veggies. I do not eat a high protein diet in its place bc it is very toxic and unhealthy (my opinion) but is controversial. I only eat chicken and eggs in moderation. The veggies I choose are the higher protein ones. I drink a few protein shakes too.0 -
There's only one food group that has literally zero carbs, and that's meat. If it isn't meat, it has carbs.If you look at the food groups that are available that literally have no carbs, they are almost the most healthiest foods, and it's a very serious task to eat only 20 grams of protien a day. The reason the weight loss is so great, is because you are literally creating a deficit by eating those food groups. I applaud anyone that can only consume 2grams of carbs a day.............In any event creat a deficit and the weight will come off period........the trick is to create the biggest deficit your body can tolerate on a week to week basis.0 -
That's rich. Literally, every single one of your posts has been a non-sequitur.
Maybe it seems that way to you because of your aforementioned struggles. :laugh:
I figure if I hang out here long enough, I too will become a wizard:
1. 50% of calories from carbs;
2. Calorie deficits and resulting lipolysis rivaling that of the ketogenics without much, if any, glycolytic activity; and
3. No de novo lipogenesis.
You are a trip! I get about 50% of my calories from carbs, lose fat, and yet I'm not a wizard at all. Hmmmmm0 -
I don't really care whether it's cultural or not. What I care about is enjoying my life, part of which involves eating foods I like. What's hopelessly obnoxious is suggesting I should want to change my lifestyle to something I don't enjoy, not for my own benefit, but so that you can feel like you won an argument on the internet.What's hopelessly obnoxious, though, is how some people believe that people on ketogenic diets don't have any cultural attachment to carbohydrates and that their nutritional protocol couldn't possibly be part of a lifestyle change.
[/quote]
^^ This is classic.0 -
Spartan_Maker, you keep pushing the ketogenic diet as the way humans evolved. Do you have evidence of that? Because according to the studies I've read, from the archeological records, humans ate a very carb heavy diet. They actually worked out Paleolithic era humans as eating a 50%c/20%p30%f ratio, at about 3000 calories per day. That's about the exact opposite of a ketogenic diet. In fact, the only culture that really ate a ketogenic type diet was the Inuit culture, and they have long been known to have shorter lifespans and higher rates of disease.
Ketosis is an adaptation for short term survival. It's not the optimal way for the body to function. The advantage of human beings is that we are endlessly adaptable to our environments. That's what allows us to survive.
Well, since everyone is pursuing tangential topics, I'll digress.
As a matter of clarification, I wrote that humans evolved because of a ketogenic diet; that is, it allowed them to survive the harshest periods in human history. As you acknowledge: "Ketosis is an adaptation for short term survival." I would agree with that statement from an evolutionary standpoint, although the word "is" and the phrase "short term" should be replaced. It has more context to say: "Throughout human history, ketosis has been an adaptation for survival during times when carbohydrates were unavailable, due to blights, seasonal weather, severe weather, and war, among other things." If either of us thought about it long enough, we could probably give it a more elegant and eloquent defintion. Good enough for now.
The above clarification, of course, makes the balance of your post a non-sequitur, but I'll still address it anyway, because it brings up a more important topic. First of all (no offense to Paleo types who I deeply respect), but I couldn't care less about the macronutrient percentages of our early ancestors during good times, when they could frolic through the forests eating blackberries and waving at bunny rabbits. What I want to know is what they did and how their bodies reacted during bad times, when things were rough and extremely challenging. Other than those who know something about anti-aging, few people restrict calories (or carbohydrate calories specifically) by choice.
So, with the above in mind, I'd say that your thinking is counterintuitive. "Optimal" is what our bodies do when we don't have a choice. As a prelude to the rest of this post, it shouldn't come as any surprise that evolution has decided that carbohydrates aren't necessary for survival (we don't need a single gram), but that we'd die without protein and fat.
Why do I care about what the body chooses to do during really tough times rather than easy times? Because I want to know what natural selection has decided on as our way to survive during scarcity -- the operative word being "survive." It doesn't take a logician to figure out that there is a causal relationship between survival mechanisms during scarcity and longevity generally -- it's axiomatic. The converse to that statement, of course, is that it doesn't take a logician to figure out that there is a causal relationship between bountiful indulgence and death. Along these lines, every bit of top level longevity research supports the theory that insulin suppression (carbohydrate restriction and to a lesser degree, protein limitation), is among the most powerful way to extend life. Reducing blood glucose levels and increasing beta-hydroxybutyrate (which attenuates oxidative stress) appears to have a lot to do with slowing down the Hayflick limit and protecting the length of our telomeres. Dr. Elizabeth Blackburn from UCSF et als. won the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 2009 for their work on telomeres and Dr. Cynthia Kenyon from UCSF (among others) have done lots of work on the relationship between insulin, telomeres, and longevity. Since 2009, many of the world's top molecular biologists and biochemists are almost singularly focused on this topic.
So, as for ketosis, whatever definition you or I choose to give it as a matter of evolutionary biology, why wouldn't any smart person use modern scientific advancements in combination with it, to exploit its benefits and perfect it. I left out the question mark because it's rhetorical. That's evolutionary advancement.
DISCLAIMER FOR ANYONE READING THIS POST: So that we don't waste 10 posts addressing fragile egos, this isn't intended to be evangelical or advice of any sort. I couldn't care less what anyone else does or doesn't do. I couldn't care less that you love your carbs, sunsets, and taking long walks in the park. I couldn't care less if you tried low carb or ketosis and found it insufferable. It's immaterial. I will say, however, that if someone did find it insufferable, it's highly likely that it's because they didn't spend enough time fiinding out how to properly construct the diet generally and/or according to their specific needs. If it's properly constructed (getting serum BHB levels correct and making sure adequate amounts of sodium, potassium, and magnesium are consumed), it's simple.0 -
I don't really care whether it's cultural or not. What I care about is enjoying my life, part of which involves eating foods I like. What's hopelessly obnoxious is suggesting I should want to change my lifestyle to something I don't enjoy, not for my own benefit, but so that you can feel like you won an argument on the internet.What's hopelessly obnoxious, though, is how some people believe that people on ketogenic diets don't have any cultural attachment to carbohydrates and that their nutritional protocol couldn't possibly be part of a lifestyle change.
You wrote: "^^ This is classic."
[/quote]
You're easily impressed. For various reasons, it doesn't surprise me.0 -
There is a very simple answer OP.
Carbs spike insulin and insulin causes the body to store bodyfat.
It's all there on Wikipedia, or in ANY book on human digestion/metabolism.
Or go to Youtube and type in "insulin obesity"0 -
There is a very simple answer OP.
Carbs spike insulin and insulin causes the body to store bodyfat.
It's all there on Wikipedia, or in ANY book on human digestion/metabolism.
Or go to Youtube and type in "insulin obesity"
Protein spikes insulin too, oh noes!0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 403 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 999 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions