Ketosis
Kellyfitness128
Posts: 194 Member
I really want to further discuss the topic of ketosis from the other thread (which appears to have been closed). A lot of you thought that I was wrong when I said that it is unhealthy to be in a state of ketosis. Here is some information that I'd like to share that is straight from my nutrition text book titled "Perspectives in Nutrition: A Fundamental Approach" by Carol Byrd-Bredbenner, Gaile Moe, Donna Beshgetoor, Jacqueline Berning, and Danita Kelley...published in 2014.
"Most of the digestible carbohydrates in our diets are broken down to glucose. As glucose, they provide a primary source of energy, spare protein from use as an energy source, and prevent ketosis.
The main function of glucose is to act as a source of energy for body cells. In fact, red blood cells and cells of the central nervous system derive almost all of their energy from glucose. Glucose also fuels muscle cells and other body cells." (Hence, carbs are important.)
"The amino acids that make up dietary protein are used to build body tissues and to perform other vital functions only when carbohydrate intake provides enough glucose for energy needs. If you do not consume enough carbs to yield glucose, your body is forced to break down amino acids in your muscle tissue and other organs to make glucose. However, when dietary carb intake is adequate to maintain blood glucose levels, protein is "spared" from use as energy." (However, most of us consume enough protein so sparing proteins isn't necessarily an important role of carbs, but I wanted to include this for some of us who might not be eating enough).
"A minimal intake of carbs (50-100g per day) is necessary for the complete breakdown of fats to CO2 and H2O. When carb intake falls below this level, the release of hormone insulin decreases, resulting in the release of large amount of fatty acids from adipose tissue to provide energy for body cells. These fatty acids travel in the bloodstream to the liver. The subsequent incomplete breakdown of these fatty acids in the liver result in the formation of acid compounds called ketone bodies.
The brain and other cells can adapt to use ketones for energy when carb intake is inadequate. This is an important survival mechanism during starvation.
Many low-carb/high-fat weight-reduction diets (Atkins, South Beach) and fasting regimens promote ketosis as a beneficial state for successful weight loss. Ketosis can suppress one's appetite, resulting in a lower calorie intake. It also can cause increased loss of water from the body, which may be reflected in lower body weight. However, over time, ketosis can lead to serious consequences, such as dehydration, loss of lean body mass, and electrolyte imbalances. If severe, ketosis can even cause coma and death."
If you're eating low-carb and feel great, then I'm not saying you should change that. I just want to make people aware of the potential risks if you're doing it for too long, not drinking enough water, not maintaining body protein mass, etc. The low-carb diet just seems like another fad diet to me... Sure, you will absolutely lose weight (and lots of water weight) but is it healthy? Well, I provided you with this information, so now it's up to you to decide.
"Most of the digestible carbohydrates in our diets are broken down to glucose. As glucose, they provide a primary source of energy, spare protein from use as an energy source, and prevent ketosis.
The main function of glucose is to act as a source of energy for body cells. In fact, red blood cells and cells of the central nervous system derive almost all of their energy from glucose. Glucose also fuels muscle cells and other body cells." (Hence, carbs are important.)
"The amino acids that make up dietary protein are used to build body tissues and to perform other vital functions only when carbohydrate intake provides enough glucose for energy needs. If you do not consume enough carbs to yield glucose, your body is forced to break down amino acids in your muscle tissue and other organs to make glucose. However, when dietary carb intake is adequate to maintain blood glucose levels, protein is "spared" from use as energy." (However, most of us consume enough protein so sparing proteins isn't necessarily an important role of carbs, but I wanted to include this for some of us who might not be eating enough).
"A minimal intake of carbs (50-100g per day) is necessary for the complete breakdown of fats to CO2 and H2O. When carb intake falls below this level, the release of hormone insulin decreases, resulting in the release of large amount of fatty acids from adipose tissue to provide energy for body cells. These fatty acids travel in the bloodstream to the liver. The subsequent incomplete breakdown of these fatty acids in the liver result in the formation of acid compounds called ketone bodies.
The brain and other cells can adapt to use ketones for energy when carb intake is inadequate. This is an important survival mechanism during starvation.
Many low-carb/high-fat weight-reduction diets (Atkins, South Beach) and fasting regimens promote ketosis as a beneficial state for successful weight loss. Ketosis can suppress one's appetite, resulting in a lower calorie intake. It also can cause increased loss of water from the body, which may be reflected in lower body weight. However, over time, ketosis can lead to serious consequences, such as dehydration, loss of lean body mass, and electrolyte imbalances. If severe, ketosis can even cause coma and death."
If you're eating low-carb and feel great, then I'm not saying you should change that. I just want to make people aware of the potential risks if you're doing it for too long, not drinking enough water, not maintaining body protein mass, etc. The low-carb diet just seems like another fad diet to me... Sure, you will absolutely lose weight (and lots of water weight) but is it healthy? Well, I provided you with this information, so now it's up to you to decide.
0
Replies
-
Here is some information to consider as well:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2716748/
"The present study shows the beneficial effects of a long-term ketogenic diet. It significantly reduced the body weight and body mass index of the patients. Furthermore, it decreased the level of triglycerides, LDL cholesterol and blood glucose, and increased the level of HDL cholesterol. Administering a ketogenic diet for a relatively longer period of time did not produce any significant side effects in the patients. Therefore, the present study confirms that it is safe to use a ketogenic diet for a longer period of time than previously demonstrated."0 -
This content has been removed.
-
Ketoacidosis = dangerous
Ketosis not so much0 -
MrM27, The information I provided above may be exaggerated, you're right. I'm sure it would take a long time for the body to actually be at risk, but still.... if that is what ketosis eventually can lead to, it doesn't sound healthy to me. One can still achieve weight loss in a healthy way and avoid ketosis by eating only 50g of carbs a day
Can I ask then why you aren't a fan of keto?
baconslave, I'm assuming those positive results are merely from the weight loss itself rather than being in a ketogenic state...and 6 months isn't exactly long-term. Interesting info though. At least we know it's safe for a 6 month period of time!0 -
safe after 14 months on my WOE.0
-
Something else interesting:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2129159/
And also, there are varying levels of ketosis which correspond to different levels of ketones in the blood.
blood concentration (millimolar)
< 0.2 not in ketosis
0.2 - 0.5 slight/mild ketosis
0.5 - 3.0 nutritional ketosis
2.5 - 3.5 post-exercise ketosis
3.0 - 6.0 starvation ketosis
15 - 25 ketoacidosis
The majority of fat-adapted people in nutritional ketosis couldn't reach starvation ketosis if they tried. And I know people who have tried to get above 4 mmol/L. Ketoacidosis occurs mainly in diabetics whose diabetes has been uncontrolled to the point that the body no longer produces insulin AT ALL. Also it's found in severe alcoholics. You'll also note that the gap between "starvation ketosis" and ketoacidosis is quite large. A great number of conditions must be met for these extreme conditions to occur.
So you might want to research the difference between nutritional ketosis, starvation ketosis, and genuine ketoacidosis. Ketoacidosis is the extreme side of the ketosis spectrum and is bad news. But as I said, it is usually only found under extreme circumstances. Not the run-of-the-mill low-carb diet.0 -
"Most of the digestible carbohydrates in our diets are broken down to glucose. As glucose, they provide a primary source of energy, spare protein from use as an energy source, and prevent ketosis.
The main function of glucose is to act as a source of energy for body cells. In fact, red blood cells and cells of the central nervous system derive almost all of their energy from glucose. Glucose also fuels muscle cells and other body cells." (Hence, carbs are important.)
"The amino acids that make up dietary protein are used to build body tissues and to perform other vital functions only when carbohydrate intake provides enough glucose for energy needs. If you do not consume enough carbs to yield glucose, your body is forced to break down amino acids in your muscle tissue and other organs to make glucose.
Glucose also inhibits the use of fats for energy, and "When carb intake falls below this level, the release of hormone insulin decreases, resulting in the release of large amount of fatty acids from adipose tissue to provide energy for body cells." is precisely why people choose to restrict carbs.
Why would the amino acids from food not be used in glucose production in the absence of dietary carbs ? I suggesting it will break down muscles and organ tissue just FUD ?0 -
If you're eating low-carb and feel great, then I'm not saying you should change that. I just want to make people aware of the potential risks if you're doing it for too long, not drinking enough water, not maintaining body protein mass, etc. The low-carb diet just seems like another fad diet to me... Sure, you will absolutely lose weight (and lots of water weight) but is it healthy? Well, I provided you with this information, so now it's up to you to decide.
I can make the argument that IIFYM or even general "healthy eating" can result in loss of lean body mass, kidney problems, liver problems, and the like - and that would be a true statement. IIFYM or even "healthy eating" do not ensure adequate protein (although most people recommend you set your protein macro at such a level as a starting point), nor do they require resistance training. As neither requires a strict minimum protein intake, you can thus you can see an elevated loss of lean body mass from such a diet. But just because it's possible, that doesn't mean it will necessarily happen and there are definitely steps you can take to prevent it. If you want to talk about a loss of lean body mass though, you realize you quoted 80/10/10 in the other thread, and that sort of diet is almost certain to lead to an increased loss of lean body mass relative to a standard IIFYM recommendation or a low carb diet... but I digress.
On the other hand, someone that is predisposed to kidney or liver problems may be exposed to a greater risk of kidney or liver problems if their protein intake is on the high side, and the average protein intake recommended for a healthy individual on these forums and pretty much in any fitness community would expose that the individual predisposed to kidney/liver problems to a higher degree of risk. Thus, one could conclude that even the recommended IIFYM protein intake can (in some rare situations) lead to a greater risk of kidney and liver failure.
My point is... you can concoct such general arguments about any way of eating. But there's a difference between something being true for the average person and something being true for a very small subset of individuals. Add to that, you also have to account for things that can be mitigated (e.g., electrolytes can be supplemented as necessary on a ketogenic diet, which is actually pretty common). You need a bit more specificity to your language if you're going to accurately critique any particular diet (or really anything for that matter).0 -
This content has been removed.
-
Correct me if i am wrong but aren't most keto diets have protein levels equivalent to around 1g per lb of lean body mass? Most keto macros i have seen are 5/65/30.
I dont do low carb because my body doesnt respond well. If i go below 200gs of carbs i am very sluggish and struggle to exercise. And cutting foods cause me to binge.
0 -
"A minimal intake of carbs (50-100g per day) is necessary for the complete breakdown of fats to CO2 and H2O. When carb intake falls below this level, the release of hormone insulin decreases, resulting in the release of large amount of fatty acids from adipose tissue to provide energy for body cells. These fatty acids travel in the bloodstream to the liver. The subsequent incomplete breakdown of these fatty acids in the liver result in the formation of acid compounds called ketone bodies.
There are people who are unable to consume 50-100g of carbs a day and would also benefit from a decrease in insulin. They have to eat low carb in order to be healthier. That doesn't mean they're doomed to suffer from dehydration, loss of lean body mass, and electrolyte imbalances (which can actually occur from any diet if the person isn't taking proper care of their body).
"If you do not consume enough carbs to yield glucose, your body is forced to break down amino acids in your muscle tissue and other organs to make glucose." This is exactly why the keto diet gives specific protein amounts that a person must consume..to avoid this. If you aren't getting you're protein and fat in the necessary amounts you're not properly following the diet.
People on keto also closely pay attention to their sodium, magnesium and potassium levels on top of watching their macros. Or at least they should be.
0 -
Correct me if i am wrong but aren't most keto diets have protein levels equivalent to around 1g per lb of lean body mass? Most keto macros i have seen are 5/65/30.
I dont do low carb because my body doesnt respond well. If i go below 200gs of carbs i am very sluggish and struggle to exercise. And cutting foods cause me to binge.
That is correct.
0 -
Thank you for preaching about something that most doing keto/low carb for longer than a month already researched.
You should probably consider doing more research before you decide to tell people that they shouldn't be eating a certain way...even to go out of your way to create a whole thread about it. People that do keto diets learn that drinking water and marking sure they get in enough magnesium, calcium, sodium, and potassium.0 -
baconslave, I'm assuming those positive results are merely from the weight loss itself rather than being in a ketogenic state...and 6 months isn't exactly long-term. Interesting info though. At least we know it's safe for a 6 month period of time!
But the study also said that "Administering a ketogenic diet for a relatively longer period of time did not produce any significant side effects in the patients."
I'll agree that the weight loss itself could have produced the good results. But this also shows, since the diet did produce good results in those areas, that the ketogenic diet did not make those factors worse nor kept the usual improvements from occurring. The study determined that ketogenic diets were SAFE. Not specifically better than anything else. As far as a more extended time period, the piece said they are working on longer term studies. I'm approaching the 6 mo mark soon myself so time will tell. Though there are many people who have done it for a year or more.
0 -
Correct me if i am wrong but aren't most keto diets have protein levels equivalent to around 1g per lb of lean body mass? Most keto macros i have seen are 5/65/30.
I dont do low carb because my body doesnt respond well. If i go below 200gs of carbs i am very sluggish and struggle to exercise. And cutting foods cause me to binge.
That's on the higher end of keto macros, but yes. And personally I find this criticism a bit comical. On one hand, we've got a suggestion that you will lose lean body mass in this thread, yet studies show that LBM retention is predominantly controlled by protein intake and resistance training (assuming a calorie deficit that isn't extreme) and 1/g per lb of LBM is a perfectly adequate protein recommendation - carb intake is simply not on the list. Yet, her suggestion that you are likely to lose lean mass on such a diet appears to suggest she thinks you don't get enough protein on a low carb diet. On the other hand, we just came from a now-locked thread where the "deadly diet" was reputed to cause kidney and liver damage, presumably because of the protein intake which can adversely affect people that are predisposed to kidney and liver problems. The implication there is that you get too much protein on a low carb diet... yet I thought we were losing lean body mass because of inadequate protein?
Hopefully in the next thread baby bear's protein intake will be just right, but in the meantime it seems a bit contradictory to me.0 -
That's on the higher end of keto macros, but yes. And personally I find this criticism a bit comical. On one hand, we've got a suggestion that you will lose lean body mass in this thread, yet studies show that LBM retention is predominantly controlled by protein intake and resistance training (assuming a calorie deficit that isn't extreme) and 1/g per lb of LBM is a perfectly adequate protein recommendation - carb intake is simply not on the list. Yet, her suggestion that you are likely to lose lean mass on such a diet appears to suggest she thinks you don't get enough protein on a low carb diet. On the other hand, we just came from a now-locked thread where the "deadly diet" was reputed to cause kidney and liver damage, presumably because of the protein intake which can adversely affect people that are predisposed to kidney and liver problems. The implication there is that you get too much protein on a low carb diet... yet I thought we were losing lean body mass because of inadequate protein?
Hopefully in the next thread baby bear's protein intake will be just right, but in the meantime it seems a bit contradictory to me.
Well technically all diets will have some level or lean body mass loss because one inherently doesnt need to have as much when they are smaller. But that is besides the point.
The main point of my question was that these levels of protein are equivalent to many plans. So this would suggest a program like IIFYM would inherently have the same potential kidney issues.0 -
I lost all my weight by being in a state of ketosis, low carbohydrate, moderate protein, high fat. and I was for almost 3 1/2 years. It worked for me.0
-
That's on the higher end of keto macros, but yes. And personally I find this criticism a bit comical. On one hand, we've got a suggestion that you will lose lean body mass in this thread, yet studies show that LBM retention is predominantly controlled by protein intake and resistance training (assuming a calorie deficit that isn't extreme) and 1/g per lb of LBM is a perfectly adequate protein recommendation - carb intake is simply not on the list. Yet, her suggestion that you are likely to lose lean mass on such a diet appears to suggest she thinks you don't get enough protein on a low carb diet. On the other hand, we just came from a now-locked thread where the "deadly diet" was reputed to cause kidney and liver damage, presumably because of the protein intake which can adversely affect people that are predisposed to kidney and liver problems. The implication there is that you get too much protein on a low carb diet... yet I thought we were losing lean body mass because of inadequate protein?
Hopefully in the next thread baby bear's protein intake will be just right, but in the meantime it seems a bit contradictory to me.
Well technically all diets will have some level or lean body mass loss because one inherently doesnt need to have as much when they are smaller. But that is besides the point.
The main point of my question was that these levels of protein are equivalent to many plans. So this would suggest a program like IIFYM would inherently have the same potential kidney issues.
Well the implication was that we're talking about a greater amount of LBM loss (a conclusion which the majority of relevant studies do not support) since she's critiquing a particular way of losing weight relative to other weight loss programs, but of course there will be some lost regardless. And yes, IIFYM's default protein macro are typically at least as high as low carb macros and I stated as much in my first post in this thread - yet it's pretty rare to see people warning flexible dieters about how deadly their diet is. Actually I think the average low carb'er eats quite a bit less protein than the average lifter, since the supplement companies have convinced a lot of 160 lb guys they need to eat 250g-300g of protein per day for gains, which is way beyond the level any non-enhanced lifter will benefit from... but I digress.0 -
So much misinformation in the OP.0
-
I've been doing keto for over a year. I'm still alive and healthy and doing great. Am I just an anomaly? Are the others who are also still alive and healthy just anomalies?0
-
baconslave wrote: »
baconslave, I'm assuming those positive results are merely from the weight loss itself rather than being in a ketogenic state...and 6 months isn't exactly long-term. Interesting info though. At least we know it's safe for a 6 month period of time!
But the study also said that "Administering a ketogenic diet for a relatively longer period of time did not produce any significant side effects in the patients."
I'll agree that the weight loss itself could have produced the good results. But this also shows, since the diet did produce good results in those areas, that the ketogenic diet did not make those factors worse nor kept the usual improvements from occurring. The study determined that ketogenic diets were SAFE. Not specifically better than anything else. As far as a more extended time period, the piece said they are working on longer term studies. I'm approaching the 6 mo mark soon myself so time will tell. Though there are many people who have done it for a year or more.
Interestingly enough, I've read a few studies that suggest low carb is superior to just cutting calories in the cases of people using it for blood sugar related problems. It has shown that it is more effective at lowering a1c and cholesterol levels. I'll have to find them again. I think I originally got my sources on ebscohost.0 -
blktngldhrt wrote: »baconslave wrote: »
baconslave, I'm assuming those positive results are merely from the weight loss itself rather than being in a ketogenic state...and 6 months isn't exactly long-term. Interesting info though. At least we know it's safe for a 6 month period of time!
But the study also said that "Administering a ketogenic diet for a relatively longer period of time did not produce any significant side effects in the patients."
I'll agree that the weight loss itself could have produced the good results. But this also shows, since the diet did produce good results in those areas, that the ketogenic diet did not make those factors worse nor kept the usual improvements from occurring. The study determined that ketogenic diets were SAFE. Not specifically better than anything else. As far as a more extended time period, the piece said they are working on longer term studies. I'm approaching the 6 mo mark soon myself so time will tell. Though there are many people who have done it for a year or more.
Interestingly enough, I've read a few studies that suggest low carb is superior to just cutting calories in the cases of people using it for blood sugar related problems. It has shown that it is more effective at lowering a1c and cholesterol levels. I'll have to find them again. I think I originally got my sources on ebscohost.
That would be interesting reading.0 -
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/706139
Here's one that I just randomly found on the Internet. It's along the same lines as the previous ones I've read.
This is my favorite part: Diabetes medications were reduced or eliminated in 95.2% of LCKD vs. 62% of LGID participants (p < 0.01). .. 95.2%!0 -
blktngldhrt wrote: »http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/706139
Here's one that I just randomly found on the Internet. It's along the same lines as the previous ones I've read.
This is my favorite part: Diabetes medications were reduced or eliminated in 95.2% of LCKD vs. 62% of LGID participants (p < 0.01). .. 95.2%!
Thanks.
My mother is currently on a lower-carb diet,120g/day, and her A1C has dropped to 5.4. I'm pretty sure she's barely taking any insulin now. I think she'll need to drop lower to decrease her meds any further though.0 -
I hope that this isn't considered a derail of the thread, but I'm coming at this from a completely different perspective. I have no idea at all what a keto diet is. This topic caught my eye because I really enjoy human acid base physiology--Yeah, I know how nerdy that sounded. Anyway, my experience with ketosis comes solely from that perspective not from the diet or weight loss world.
So, why do the diet plan authors recommend ketosis above and beyond the simple notion of taking in fewer calories than you expend? How do followers of these diet plans determine if they are in the state of ketosis? Is it just a basic assumption that if you follow the prescribed diet you will be in a ketotic state or are people actually monitoring their urine or doing blood tests?
0 -
in….because this seems like fun…
for the record, I do not care what people do IF, low carb, ketosis, etc…just don't try to say that one is superior to "boring calorie deficit" and we are good to go ...0 -
MrM27, The information I provided above may be exaggerated, you're right. I'm sure it would take a long time for the body to actually be at risk, but still.... if that is what ketosis eventually can lead to, it doesn't sound healthy to me. One can still achieve weight loss in a healthy way and avoid ketosis by eating only 50g of carbs a day Can I ask then why you aren't a fan of keto?
baconslave, I'm assuming those positive results are merely from the weight loss itself rather than being in a ketogenic state...and 6 months isn't exactly long-term. Interesting info though. At least we know it's safe for a 6 month period of time!
If we thought about things in the sense of it might take a very long time for something to become a risk, possibly, then we wouldn't do anything in life.
I'm not a fan of Keto for myself because:
I don't find it necessary to burn fat.
I love eating pizza, ice cream, bagels, pancakes, waffles, cookies, cereal, brownies on a regular basis.
I like to cut with my calories and carbs as high as possible to allow for as much variety as possible and also to allow myself as much room as possible to adjust calories and macros towards the end of my cut as needed without having to do cardio.
what is that quote from fight club .."the survival timeline for everyone is eventually zero" or something like that…????0 -
I hope that this isn't considered a derail of the thread, but I'm coming at this from a completely different perspective. I have no idea at all what a keto diet is. This topic caught my eye because I really enjoy human acid base physiology--Yeah, I know how nerdy that sounded. Anyway, my experience with ketosis comes solely from that perspective not from the diet or weight loss world.
So, why do the diet plan authors recommend ketosis above and beyond the simple notion of taking in fewer calories than you expend? How do followers of these diet plans determine if they are in the state of ketosis? Is it just a basic assumption that if you follow the prescribed diet you will be in a ketotic state or are people actually monitoring their urine or doing blood tests?
I would recommend it to people who have trouble just lowering calories because it tends to more filling. I would also recommend it above a calorie deficit to those who have the medical conditions that this seems to help. Diabetes, reactive hypoglycemia, metabolic syndrome, seizure disorders, and even some cancer all benefit further from cutting down on carbs as opposed to just cutting calories.
Some people do actually monitor their state with ketostyx and /or blood testing devices. I personally check my blood glucose and use ketostyx. The sticks are usually just to make sure I'm getting enough water. If it's too dark I drink more and up my electrolytes.0 -
I hope that this isn't considered a derail of the thread, but I'm coming at this from a completely different perspective. I have no idea at all what a keto diet is. This topic caught my eye because I really enjoy human acid base physiology--Yeah, I know how nerdy that sounded. Anyway, my experience with ketosis comes solely from that perspective not from the diet or weight loss world.
So, why do the diet plan authors recommend ketosis above and beyond the simple notion of taking in fewer calories than you expend? How do followers of these diet plans determine if they are in the state of ketosis? Is it just a basic assumption that if you follow the prescribed diet you will be in a ketotic state or are people actually monitoring their urine or doing blood tests?
I personally can't tell when I am in keto or not (aside from that my appetite seems to be a lot lower). I do have ketostix but I question their reliability. But every time I check it it says im in ketosis. I know some people can based off of certain factors.
However a week ago we had thanksgiving dinner, and I cheated with my carb intake I had mashed potatoes, dressing, cranberry sauce, carrots, a little bit of sweet potato, however I did not have dessert except for 1 small spoonful from my moms plate.. I was still below my daily calories, but had a guestimated 100-150 or so carbs than my usual 25. I gained 2-3lbs of water weight the next day. Sure I lost it all a couple days later, but still. The next day I was also more hungry than usual. I tested with ketostix and still said I was in ketosis but not sure if I believed it or not.
I find if I stick to <20 grams carbs I have almost no appetite and find it difficult to eat enough calories (I have my calorie deficit set to 35%). 20-25carbs I find I have a good enough appetite to get all of my calories in. When I start creeping up to the 30+ range I find I still am hungry at end of the day with no calorie budget left
I have tested this theory multiple times, different days of the weeks, different weeks, pretty much always seems to be this way.
I tried pure calorie counting in the past, but I was always ravenous and miserable because I couldn't satiate my hunger. This is first time ever where I am not always hungry without eating enough food to feed a hippopotamus.,0 -
I am not a Keto fan but I am not sure of it being any more dangerous than any other diet as long as you supliment calcium etc. Keto diets have been in use since the 20s to treat epilepsy and ADHD and to my knowledge these did not cause serious long term effects other than the fact that those diets generally sucked.
The jury is still out on long term efftects but I don't think Ketosis is either more dangerous or more beneficial than other diets if done properly except that I wont give up my carbs.
ETA I also wouldn't recommend it for endurance athletes since your body would need to generate all glocouse via gluconeogenesis and I am not aware of any top performers who have been successful on Keto diets but if anyone has a study I would be interested.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.2K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.1K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 420 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.9K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.5K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions