Anyone else have issues with low carb diets?

And on the flipside:

http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-10-22/health/34652373_1_high-carb-cognitive-decline-mild-cognitive-impairment

Seniors gorging on a carb rich diet are four times more likely to develop mild cognitive impairment- an early warning of Alzheimer's disease, shows a new research.

there's nothing about the source of the carbs in that study/article. I thought I was pretty clear when I was disputing non-processed naturally occurring carbs such as fruit and vegetables.

True, but there's nothing about the sources of meat that strict followers of ketogenic diets eat, either. Or the hormones and other crap that are in most of those meats.

Like I said at first, though, I listen to my body. Not my cravings, but my body by how it is performing and how I feel, mentally, physically, and emotionally. There are times when I do think to myself, okay, this is going to be a day of more carbs because of how I wake up feeling or how I feel during or after a workout.

As for veggies, I don't like them and if I eat many, I tend to get queasy. Even when I was a 'vegetarian' of sorts for years, I didn't eat enough veggies. So nothing has changed. In fact, if anything, I eat more now than I did.

I completely agree that people are going to use what they want to use to lose weight. I'm currently on a very low carb diet, but I am also doing it with a doctor's supervision, and the way I've been told to do it is with low-cholesterol, low-fat, lean proteins. I can't eat all the eggs and bacon I want (as I had a friend yell at me before, because she thought that's what I was doing...). I'm also doing this because I'm insulin intolerant. My body simply can't process the insulin being made, so the glucose isn't getting into my cells.

I also know a bit about biology. Yes, the brain can only use glucose for energy, but pyruvate can be converted into glucose via gluconeogenesis (creation of glucose from a non-carb substance). It takes longer than just ingesting a carb with glucose, but it does the same thing.

To avoid kidney damage, most people don't know to up their water intake...by a LOT. I drink about 168oz of water a day so that the nephrons in my kidneys don't crystallize into kidney stones because of my diet. I also take vitamins for any other nutrients that I'm not getting through food. And I can eat fruits and veggies, but just the non-starchy ones.

It CAN be done in a more healthful way, but I know that most people hear low carb and think that the person only eats meat and loses weight. And you are correct...THAT is very unhealthy. But it can be done. I still have over 100lbs to lose, and my doctor is adjusting my calorie intake based on how fast I lose, so I'm still losing fast, but not in way that will be harmful to me long-term.

thanks for sharing - I think you meant "insulin resistant" not "tolerant" - your body doesn't use the insulin as efficiently as it should because of a variety of factors. it's great that your Dr has you on a low fat diet - dietary fat leads to insulin resistance. as for the kidney damage, it has more to do with ketone bodies, no mater how much water intake, but hydration is important. one thing I would recommend (and I'm sure your Dr already does) is exercise as it increases insulin sensitivity. good luck!

Lol. yes. Sorry. INtolerant or resistant. Thanks. And yes. My exercise has been upped dramatically (esp. for someone who loves her couch!)

Of course, she talked about the effect of ketosis on the kidneys, not fuel sources for the brain. Besides, the fact that the brain can use ketones doesn't change the fact that glucose is the brain's preferred source.

Not exactly. If glucose is available, the brain will use it. As far as "preferred", however, the brain has been shown to run better on ketones. The brain only truly requires about 30g to 40g glucose, which can be synthesized by the body, but it will use around 120g to 130g if available.

Thank you.

Depending on what terms you put out, I'm low carb. I admit it. I try to eat 60g of carbs a day. I also have a mild gluten intolerance (upset stomach, joint pain when I eat a lot of grains), so I kind of have to be

Ketosis is fine, with doctor supervision/permission, for people with a healthy liver/kidneys/pancreas
Ketoacidosis (diabetic version) can be deadly.

Your body NEEDS glucose for some vital organ function (including brain...)
HOWEVER, you don't NEED 400g of carbs a day.

The reason I initially looked into 'low-carb' is because when your body depletes it's glycogen/glucose store, it starts to metabolize body fat (triglycerides) for energy. IT IS LESS EFFICIENT, I will give you that. My logic is... why work off the 4 slices of bread I ate before I start working off body fat when I can just burn through a little bit of sugar and then start in on body fat.

I won't debate saturated fat/cholesterol vs carbs here, but feel free to PM me and I'll re-do the research (I've let the details slip), and give you my info with sources

I will say, that after eating 'low-carb' for a few weeks (same activity level as before), I have a lot more energy.

It is definitely not for everybody... but I like it. I won't criticize people for eating a sandwhich, but I'll be more than happy to explain my reasons why I choose to eat low-carb.

dietary fat leads to insulin resistance.

I think those studies are based off of ultra high fat diets..........which typically lead to subjects being overweight, hence the insulin resistance starting to occur.

Yes, lack of ice cream being the most significant.

^^ THIS!

I also think the lack of carbs makes them crabby. They always get their panties in a bunch when I post in a paleo thread. :laugh:

I think you are misterming this as low carb

I am on a 'low carb diet' my doctor advised it for diabetes II - to do this I limt my carbs to 45-60 g 3 times a day mostly from veg and pulses some whole grains so I eat between 120-180 g of carb a day but within my calorie goal of 1200

The diets you are talking about are really high protein diets where the carb intake in so low the dieter goes in ketosis

Would you mind not bundling us all together because I do think eat quite healthy

I would not consider 120-180 low carb. I think you're confused.

Considering the average person probably loads up on carbs to 300+ a day, 120-180 could be considered "low carb".

I'm not doing true low carb - the crazy low levels don't do well with me. I keep me levels around 50-120 (which when I tracked how i would eat before was a reduction of 60-75% of what I was eating in carbs), but since starting I have found out I'm gluten sensitive, so thus I stay away from grains. I love rice, but now notice I feel different later when I eat it, so I tend to try only for brown rice. I'm also lactose intolerant and have several other food allergies, so i have to adapt every "diet" out there just to eat.

My biggest thing is trying to avoid alot of processed foods, heavy sugars (and I found out the hard way most sugar alcohols don't set well with me), worthless starches (white tatoes - now I do & will eat sweet tatoes, sorry I refuse to give up those) and more veggies and protein. Yes I do add fats, but I try to go with the healthy ones - olive, coconut, nuts & seeds, avadcos, ect.

My goal was to avoid ketiois, I didn't want to tax my system with that. BUT... Every person is different. What works for me, may not for you - and visa versa!

to whoever said dietary fat leads to insulin resistance, please explain... because as far as I've researched, it's excessive carbohydrate intake that causes this. carbs=sugar to your digestive system... sugar causes insulin response in the body. Too much sugar = a lot of insulin. Just like staying in a smelly room for a few minutes, you get numb to the smell... too much insulin after a while and your body gets numb to it, hence a 'resistance'.

Apparently if you can put Atkins in the same category as South Beach you know nothing about South Beach. It taught me how to eat to sustain my body. Because it is not about ketosis. It is about eating lean protein, fresh foods making sure you have tons of veggies, and making proper grain choices which ultimately gets people (pre the ease of use of mfp) eating less calories and sugar and carbs and bad for you stuff and more fiber and proteins and vitamin rich food. BTW it was recommended to me by an endocrinologist and family doc and ridded me of borderline diabetes and years of insulin resistance complications.

Of course, she talked about the effect of ketosis on the kidneys, not fuel sources for the brain. Besides, the fact that the brain can use ketones doesn't change the fact that glucose is the brain's preferred source.

Not exactly. If glucose is available, the brain will use it. As far as "preferred", however, the brain has been shown to run better on ketones. The brain only truly requires about 30g to 40g glucose, which can be synthesized by the body, but it will use around 120g to 130g if available.

When did this happen? Link, or it didn't.

South Beach includes many vegetables from day one and most fruits and whole grains after 2 weeks. I really don't consider South Beach a "low carb" diet.

It's not a diet it is literally the way we are supposed to eat. Even compare it to the food pyramid (not that I put much faith in that though lol).

South Beach includes many vegetables from day one and most fruits and whole grains after 2 weeks. I really don't consider South Beach a "low carb" diet.

It's not a diet it is literally the way we are supposed to eat. Even compare it to the food pyramid (not that I put much faith in that though lol).

That is not *at all* the way I am supposed to eat. I am definitely supposed to eat plenty of carbs.

general - also, there's a great video on youtube.com if you type in "how to become diabetic in 6 hours" that explains dietary fat's role in insulin sensitivity that I think you should watch. in your case, it's not just carbs, but fat and glycemic indexes too - but since your body is still producing insulin, the best thing you can do to increase the sensitivity to the insulin you're producing is to exercise - good luck!

Force-feeding fat and then refined carbs, like Dr. Delgado did in the video, is pretty unnatural in my book. He consumes all that bread and pizza crust, showing pictures of white potatoes and then blames triglyceride rise on the olive oil? Should one really think that it's the body's instantaneous level of triglycerides that is correlated with heart problems? I always had the impression that the correlation held for long-standing triglyceride levels, and he plainly said his levels would go down within a few hours. He surely knows that eating always raises triglycerides. That’s why lipid panels are ordered AFTER an 8-hour fast.

Fats do indeed increase triglycerides – but only if triglycerides are measured after eating. They then descend rapidly - which Delgado experienced.

In contrast, carbohydrates can increase triglyceride levels many times higher, increasing levels to 300, 400, 500 mg/dl or more, even occasionally in the thousands, after weeks to months of carbohydrate-excess. But carbohydrate excess leads not just to after-eating high triglycerides, but high triglycerides all the time.

After demonstrating a perfectly normal rise in triglycerides after swallowing olive oil, Delgado continues his demonstration by chowing down on a big sandwich and some pizza. Lots more fat, of course, but now he’s also consuming a huge helping of refined flour. When he checks his blood levels awhile later, his triglycerides are up again, and so is his blood glucose level. His conclusion is sleight-of-hand. Glucose levels rose due to the heavy carbs - the rise was delayed due to the heavy fat. In diabetic circles, this is know as the "pizza effect" If he wanted to prove fat spikes blood sugar, he could’ve simply shown a glucose reading after the olive oil. But instead he guzzles olive oil, stuffs himself with white flour and then measures his glucose. His conclusion is sleight-of-hand.

As far as the glycemic index goes, I have a great deal of respect and admiration for Jenny Brand-Miller, but the Glycemic Index that she helped pioneer, like all such indices, is based on statistical averages. Individual reactions to foods, whether you have diabetes or not, can vary quite widely from those averages.

Nutritional guides on products are similar in that they can help the diabetic decide what MAY be a good food portion size for them to test. However, the acid test is that individual's meter at the peak timing after ingestion. If that result is good - great, a new item for the menu at that time of day has been discovered. But if not, trust the meter in preference to a label or a GI index. The Glycemic Index is derived by feeding 10 non-diabetic test subjects 100 grams of a particular food and then averaging out their increase in blood sugar. They use 10 because the results ARE variable. So even without diabetes you could be at the high or low end of the GI range for a certain food. And just because you are at the high end for say rice, does not mean that you might be at the low end for, say, apples. Add to that that we rarely eat a food by itself--and when you combine carbs with protein and fat and fibers in differing amounts, that affects just how much and how quickly your blood glucose will be affected. So at best the Glycemic Index can only be a rough guide, as a starting point but not a given fact.



I am diabetic. I eat a low-carb diet (less than 20% of calories) When I dropped grains, my own triglycerides dropped even with an marked increase in fat consumption (from 20% to 50%), as did my total cholesterol. In addition, my A1c dropped from 7.3 to 5.5. I determine the carb level I can handle based on what my meter says. The truly useful Glycemic Index is the personal one that you develop on your own with your meter, which tells you how your bg level responds say to 360 g of rice vs.. 30 g of pasta vs.. 30 g of bread or potatoes. Yours will be different than mine, although of course I haven't come up with a detailed personal index, but more like a general estimate of how much of each food I can eat and stay in range. I hope this type of individualization is being stressed in your CDE courses.

Virulently anti-fat proponents are every bit as dangerous as virulently anti-carb proponents.