KETONE DIET- what are youir thoughts on it????

The Huffington Post had an article about Keytones. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/becky-hand/raspberry-ketones_b_2727943.html

It's a superior diet for many reasons. It's how we all got here; that is to say, as a matter of evolutionary biology, it saved our ancestors from every major blight and famine in human history.

The diet provides a huge metabolic advantage. Compared to other diets, you can maintain all of your essential body functions while eating 8,400 fewer calories each month -- a 2.5 lb. advantage every single month.

As I've written in another post:

"[T]he reason why fat loss is so much easier for those on low carbohydate diets, especially a ketogenic diet (< 50 grams of carbs a day for most people), is because they have to eat 300 fewer calories each day, compared to everyone else trying to lose weight. Over just one week's time, that's 2,100 calories: a huge "metabolic advantage."

In that regard, the brain is unlike any other part of the body. It can only run off of two types of fuel: glucose or the ketone body beta-hydroxybutyyrate combined with a relatively small amount of glucose. Everyone's brain, regardless of his or her height and weight, uses roughly the same amount of calories.

When a person is eating less than 50 grams of carbohydrates a day, they produce sufficient amounts of the ketone body beta-hydroxybutyrate to fuel the majority of the brain's energy needs -- roughly 75%. By limiting carbohydrates and not spiking insulin all day long, ketogenic dieters are always in so-called "fat burning mode": hormone sensitive lipase is upregulated all the time, resulting in the constant breakdown and mobilization of triglycerides. As those triglycerides are broken down, the liver immediately grabs its share of the fatty acids and glycerol to fuel the brain. The liver does so by making beta-hydroxybutyrate out of the fatty acids and uses the glycerol to make glucose in a process called "gluconeogenesis."

People who simply cut calories never produce enough beta-hydroxybutyrate to sufficiently fuel their brains. As a result, they are invariably subject to hypoglycemia and have to eat carbohydrates every time their glycogen runs low. On a ketogenic diet, the brain is always taken care of endogenously through the process above. Consequently, ketogenic dieters never experience hypoglycemia and can effortlessly eat less and stick to their daily calorie goals while rarely even thinking about food. When the brain is fed, the overwhelming majority of the body's cells can function using fatty acids.

The ketogenic diet is the reason all of us are here posting in this thread. It's how our ancestors overcame every major blight and famine in human history. It's why I cringe when I hear those who never took high school biochemistry call it a 'fad'."

ETA: When people talk about the life-extension benefits of "calorie restriction," it's just a polite way of saying "carbohydrate restriction." Even then, however, most people don't really know what it works, but I'd bet a brick house against a bag of sugary donuts that it's because of the powerful attenuating effects of beta-hydroxybutyrate on oxidative stress.

This makes a fantastic amount of sense, however, let me ask you this. Our ancestors ate ketgenic diets - not out of choice, but out of necessity. They also, once given the opportunity, returned to eating more carbs when available. Essentially keto is our biochemical hibernation to help us survive the less plentiful winter. My argument continues to be the same. Those people returned to eating carbs when available, because keto is NOT optimal long term! It's great for short periods of time, but eventually unless you cycle off it, you risk some dangerous side effects including loss of muscle mass which will slow your metabolism and spiral downward from there. Other side effects have all already been mentioned so I won't rehash. But if you're using the evolutionary argument - which is a good one - then you also have to recognize that it isn't meant to be long term.

It's a superior diet for many reasons. It's how we all got here; that is to say, as a matter of evolutionary biology, it saved our ancestors from every major blight and famine in human history.

The diet provides a huge metabolic advantage. Compared to other diets, you can maintain all of your essential body functions while eating 8,400 fewer calories each month -- a 2.5 lb. advantage every single month.

As I've written in another post:

"[T]he reason why fat loss is so much easier for those on low carbohydate diets, especially a ketogenic diet (< 50 grams of carbs a day for most people), is because they have to eat 300 fewer calories each day, compared to everyone else trying to lose weight. Over just one week's time, that's 2,100 calories: a huge "metabolic advantage."

In that regard, the brain is unlike any other part of the body. It can only run off of two types of fuel: glucose or the ketone body beta-hydroxybutyyrate combined with a relatively small amount of glucose. Everyone's brain, regardless of his or her height and weight, uses roughly the same amount of calories.

When a person is eating less than 50 grams of carbohydrates a day, they produce sufficient amounts of the ketone body beta-hydroxybutyrate to fuel the majority of the brain's energy needs -- roughly 75%. By limiting carbohydrates and not spiking insulin all day long, ketogenic dieters are always in so-called "fat burning mode": hormone sensitive lipase is upregulated all the time, resulting in the constant breakdown and mobilization of triglycerides. As those triglycerides are broken down, the liver immediately grabs its share of the fatty acids and glycerol to fuel the brain. The liver does so by making beta-hydroxybutyrate out of the fatty acids and uses the glycerol to make glucose in a process called "gluconeogenesis."

People who simply cut calories never produce enough beta-hydroxybutyrate to sufficiently fuel their brains. As a result, they are invariably subject to hypoglycemia and have to eat carbohydrates every time their glycogen runs low. On a ketogenic diet, the brain is always taken care of endogenously through the process above. Consequently, ketogenic dieters never experience hypoglycemia and can effortlessly eat less and stick to their daily calorie goals while rarely even thinking about food. When the brain is fed, the overwhelming majority of the body's cells can function using fatty acids.

The ketogenic diet is the reason all of us are here posting in this thread. It's how our ancestors overcame every major blight and famine in human history. It's why I cringe when I hear those who never took high school biochemistry call it a 'fad'."

ETA: When people talk about the life-extension benefits of "calorie restriction," it's just a polite way of saying "carbohydrate restriction." Even then, however, most people don't really know what it works, but I'd bet a brick house against a bag of sugary donuts that it's because of the powerful attenuating effects of beta-hydroxybutyrate on oxidative stress.

This makes a fantastic amount of sense, however, let me ask you this. Our ancestors ate ketgenic diets - not out of choice, but out of necessity. They also, once given the opportunity, returned to eating more carbs when available. Essentially keto is our biochemical hibernation to help us survive the less plentiful winter. My argument continues to be the same. Those people returned to eating carbs when available, because keto is NOT optimal long term! It's great for short periods of time, but eventually unless you cycle off it, you risk some dangerous side effects including loss of muscle mass which will slow your metabolism and spiral downward from there. Other side effects have all already been mentioned so I won't rehash. But if you're using the evolutionary argument - which is a good one - then you also have to recognize that it isn't meant to be long term.

A person doesn't lose muscle mass on a properly constructed ketogenic diet. Fortunately, technology has provided us with an infinite number of ways to advance evolution, from a nutritional standpoint and otherwise; needless to say, we could literally list about a million things. I'll just list a few: table salt, potassium chloride, and magnesium citrate. Anyone on a ketogenic diet who supplements with those three minerals won't lose any more muscle mass than anyone else.

What's more, beta-hydroxybutyrate is undoubtedly one of the most powerful protein sparing substances in our body. My numbers are incomparable from 42% down to 13%. Currently, I incorporate carbs because I recognize the body is dynamic. Toward that end, contrary to the other myth about the problems of reintroducing carbs, a simple 14-day rolling correlation study shows my body responding favorably to carbs since going under 13% body fat. In fact, it's my body's most preferred macronutrient since I've gone under 10% body fat.

"Slowing metabolism" as a dangerous side effect is positively bizarre to me. The entire goal of life-extension is to get to your ideal body compositon and crash your metabolism. A high metabolism equals greater pathology. I should mention, however, that I haven't been fortunate enough to crash my metabolism: my TDEE is still 3,300, even after 14 months of a ketogenic diet.

explain the slow metabolism being an advantage over a fast one. I've got a high metabolism genetically, and everything conventional wisdom tells you is that you should eat well and exercise to raise your metabolism. I'm definitely one to question conventional wisdom and it's usually a bunch of BS, but I wasn't aware that tidbit was potentially incorrect.

honestly we probably agree on pretty much everything here - I'm currently eating primal to see if it will help with my reflux/inflammation issues. I think the difference between us philosophically is about 100g of carbs give or take. lol

Exercise, eat healthy. It is really just that simple. TDEE -20% and lift weights. Don't subscribe to gimicky diets, they may have short term loss but are not sustainable over a long term.

Sorry, but this is simply not true for everyone.

Exercise, eat healthy. It is really just that simple. TDEE -20% and lift weights. Don't subscribe to gimicky diets, they may have short term loss but are not sustainable over a long term.

Sorry, but this is simply not true for everyone.

Which part? TDEE-20% is true. That's just simple math.
Lifting weights- ok you don't HAVE TO
Gimmicky diets - ok every now and then some does a gimmicky diet and keeps the weight off. This typically means they used the gimmick diet as a stepping stone to a new lifestyle.

Exercise, eat healthy. It is really just that simple. TDEE -20% and lift weights. Don't subscribe to gimicky diets, they may have short term loss but are not sustainable over a long term.

Sorry, but this is simply not true for everyone.

Which part? TDEE-20% is true. That's just simple math.
Lifting weights- ok you don't HAVE TO
Gimmicky diets - ok every now and then some does a gimmicky diet and keeps the weight off. This typically means they used the gimmick diet as a stepping stone to a new lifestyle.

You can't tell me what works regardless. That is insane at best.

I have lived through this with undiagnosed metabolic disorders and was unexplainably gaining weight, even though I was correctly measured and was told to eat x amount of calories and was even given a meal plan, which I adhered to 100% and gained weight.

Try living with metabolic and endocrine disorders and try to lose weight with your so simple reasoning and get back with me when you find it difficult or impossible to lose weight.

Don't tell me unless you have been in MY shoes, which it is so obvious that you haven't.

TDEE stands for Total Daily Energy Expenditure.

If you consume less than that, you lose weight.

Sorry but this is true.

In your case, it sounds like your actual TDEE was lower than calculated.

If I screwed up how I balance my checkbook, does that invalidate mathematics?

Exercise, eat healthy. It is really just that simple. TDEE -20% and lift weights. Don't subscribe to gimicky diets, they may have short term loss but are not sustainable over a long term.

Sorry, but this is simply not true for everyone.

Which part? TDEE-20% is true. That's just simple math.
Lifting weights- ok you don't HAVE TO
Gimmicky diets - ok every now and then some does a gimmicky diet and keeps the weight off. This typically means they used the gimmick diet as a stepping stone to a new lifestyle.

You can't tell me what works regardless. That is insane at best.

I have lived through this with undiagnosed metabolic disorders and was unexplainably gaining weight, even though I was correctly measured and was told to eat x amount of calories and was even given a meal plan, which I adhered to 100% and gained weight.

Try living with metabolic and endocrine disorders and try to lose weight with your so simple reasoning and get back with me when you find it difficult or impossible to lose weight.

Don't tell me unless you have been in MY shoes, which it is so obvious that you haven't.

TDEE stands for Total Daily Energy Expenditure.

If you consume less than that, you lose weight.

Sorry but this is true.

In your case, it sounds like your actual TDEE was lower than calculated.

If I screwed up how I balance my checkbook, does that invalidate mathematics?

For the last time, if you are not factoring in hormonal imbalances and such (which was my case) it doesn't matter.

My TDEE was factored by professionals and they developed a meal plan for me to follow to only watch me gain weight. I was given a hospital grade food scale, everything was weighed, measured, etc.

I was following it correctly.

And for the record, I know what TDEE stands for.

Sorry, but sometimes when there are METABOLIC AND ENDOCRINE disorders - the human body does NOT follow simple mathemathics............it is much more complex than that.

Stop telling people that its so simple when there are medical issues to consider most times.

Most times? Sorry no. For most folks, it's really just that simple.

You may well be a special snowflake, but you are in the minority. And again, just because you are a special snowflake doesn't invalidate simple tautologies like calories in minus calories out. Your calories in was just trickier to figure out.

Don't go trying to apply specifics about your special case to the general public. It makes no sense.

Guys just ignore taso and acg. They think they have all the answers and aren't willing to discuss anything unless a peer reviewed study is attached to it. Maybe if we ignore them they'll go away.

Guys just ignore taso and acg. They think they have all the answers and aren't willing to discuss anything unless a peer reviewed study is attached to it. Maybe if we ignore them they'll go away.

LMAO!

Don't let anyone tell you you're not a funny guy.

Guys just ignore taso and acg. They think they have all the answers and aren't willing to discuss anything unless a peer reviewed study is attached to it. Maybe if we ignore them they'll go away.

Guys just ignore taso and acg. They think they have all the answers and aren't willing to discuss anything unless a peer reviewed study is attached to it. Maybe if we ignore them they'll go away.

Now that's rich! Talking like you think there are a bunch of people that are going to ignore anyone on your say so. :laugh:


So let's see. A couple of days ago you are lumping people together as cliques and calling them lackys because they didn't agree with you. Now you want a couple of people to be ignored because they don't agree with you (Acg67, you are the winner! You made both groups) What is the common denominator here? (besides Acg67 lol)