Good news for people who like eating fat!

Dragonwolf wrote: »

BlackTimber wrote: »

rprussell2004 wrote: »

BlackTimber wrote: »

The insulin/carbohydrate argument is not accurate. Your body has an strong insulin response to protein as well.

And this will become an issue when people pound down the protein the way they do sugar and starch. Happily, this is already on the no-no list because it'll destroy your kidneys.

What are you more likely to snack on several times a day - a supersize coke and bag of chips, or a pound of beef sticks?

What's at the base of the food pyramid and the proposed major component of most meals?

What do they add to "LOW FAT!!!" foods to make them palatable?

Sure, insulin also shuttles protein to its destination - all that means is that a diabetic is extra-screwed when their pancreas goes belly up (hurr).

What I was responding to was your quote:

Eating low-carb (from a physiological sense) also (a) stops excess insulin from keeping leptin from telling you you're full and should, Idunno, maybe STOP EATING NOW, and (b) keeps your blood sugar levels smooth so you don't have spikes and crashes.

My point is that eating low carb does not eliminate an insulin response. If all you ate was fat, only then the insulin would be significantly reduced. Insulin is not the enemy. It has been demonized by many who now have faded into the woodwork.

Type one diabetics do have a tough time of it. While it is much easier to control the BG swings by eating a low carb diet, I fear that they may not be benefiting from the other food components due to the lack of insulin needed to assimilate them.

One of the biggest issues I have with most studies and articles (and pretty much every criticism I've come across of low carb) is that they all conflate low carb and low fat. When you stay stuck in the mindset that fat is bad, then reduce carbs on top of that, all you're left with is protein. This is actually very bad for a variety of reasons, and for purposes of insulin and blood sugar control, counterproductive.

Thankfully, low carb does not necessitate high protein (nor should it). A proper low carb diet, especially for insulin control, is low carb, high fat, adequate protein. And yes, that means getting nearly all your calories from fat (a full ketogenic diet can be upwards of 80-90% fat). Generally speaking, the recommendations are only enough protein to maintain or build muscle (generally, around 100g, give or take), enough carbs to get necessary micronutrients that are difficult to obtain from non-plant sources (and to account for glycogen consumption from meats), and the rest from various fats. This setup minimizes the insulin response from food to only what's needed to handle the protein and muscle building/retention needs and the little bit of carbohydrates from non-starchy vegetables and incidental sugars and glycogen.

Also, protein generates an insulin response, yes, but unless you're getting all your protein from whey, that insulin response is a fraction of what it is from starches and sugars. This drastically reduces the amount of insulin in the body at any given time, even after eating.

I've never seen even the most adamant low-carb/keto proponents "demonize" insulin. In my experience, they've all acknowledged that its role is largely for building mass and that when insulin levels are elevated, it prevents the reduction of mass. They acknowledge that this is a double-edged sword -- on the one hand, it helps retain muscle, but on the other, excess insulin hinders fat loss. (It's possible that there have been people who demonize insulin, just as there are people who demonize animal products and fat and just about any other thing. However, the big names in LCHF -- the ones that people who follow this WOE follow and recommend -- do not.)

Also, it's not possible to completely eliminate insulin from the body, short of removing or killing the pancreas. Ketone production is regulated by insulin, as well, and the body can create the sugar it needs even in a diet completely devoid of carbs, and that production is regulated by insulin, as well. This is why ketone production goes down as carb (and to a lesser extent, protein) ingestion goes up, and why ketoacidosis doesn't happen in people who can create sufficient amounts of insulin (ie - the people who go on such diets in order to reduce their insulin levels).

And don't worry, there is still sufficient insulin in the body to assimilate protein (from what I've seen in my T1D friends who are keto, their basal or little bit of bolus insulin is sufficient -- none have reported loss of muscle mass or inability to gain muscle -- though I don't have exact figures to back it up, as to my knowledge, keto for T1D hasn't been studied much, and such specifics even less). A ketogenic diet is actually quite protein-sparing in the long run (there is a period where protein is catabolized, but it's during the transition period, when the body hasn't yet reached its full efficiency at relying on fat metabolism for fuel), in no small part due to using fat for the primary fuel, instead of sugar. Dr. Peter Attia has some awesome charts on his intake, weight, and athletic performance as he transitioned to a ketogenic diet.

Thanks for the excellent response! You're definitely a bit ahead of me in the diet study.

This is where I am coming from. I feel that a lot of the disagreement between individuals with different diet approaches is because they all work, at least some of the time. I personally am ketogenic for a month or two and then swing between levels of carbohydrates depending on the seasonal availability. At least that is my goal. It just seems absurd to me to eliminate a food source that your body is obviously well equipped to handle and toss is out the window.

Para 1. I never said that fat is bad. Do you mean insulin control for a Type II diabetic? It doesn't matter to anyone with a normal insulin response and glucose control.

Para 2. As you can see above I am familiar with ketogenic diets. And I personally feel that there is a lot of good there. You again are trying to minimize the insulin response. Why?

Para 3. Pretty much correct as far as I know.

Para 4. Gary Taubes may have been the first and many others followed. And you are doing it here. As you said, without insulin you're dead. If you are insulin resistant and consume a lot of insulin producing foods then you will tend to gain weight.

Para 5. No questions

Para 6. my daughter has been a type 1 for about 7 years. We have found that a low carb diet definitely makes it easier to have decent control. We have not tried a ketogenic diet yet. Maybe we will over the summer.

cloggsy71 wrote: »

What a load of rot!

The fat you eat is the fat you wear!

I'm wearing smart balance butter. A lot!

I also feel I should confess I was eating cracked wheat sourdough toast while reading this thread. A lot.

tennisdude2004 wrote: »

cloggsy71 wrote: »

What a load of rot!

The fat you eat is the fat you wear!

Lol .......... you were joking right???

I sure hope so.

I eat about 120 grams of fat a day and I weight 55 kilos, I am very under weighted for my height (1.8m), when I was in higher carbs I was just creating some fat layer around my waist but keeping weight, when I switched to high fat I lost weight lol

BlackTimber wrote: »

Dragonwolf wrote: »

BlackTimber wrote: »

rprussell2004 wrote: »

BlackTimber wrote: »

The insulin/carbohydrate argument is not accurate. Your body has an strong insulin response to protein as well.

And this will become an issue when people pound down the protein the way they do sugar and starch. Happily, this is already on the no-no list because it'll destroy your kidneys.

What are you more likely to snack on several times a day - a supersize coke and bag of chips, or a pound of beef sticks?

What's at the base of the food pyramid and the proposed major component of most meals?

What do they add to "LOW FAT!!!" foods to make them palatable?

Sure, insulin also shuttles protein to its destination - all that means is that a diabetic is extra-screwed when their pancreas goes belly up (hurr).

What I was responding to was your quote:

Eating low-carb (from a physiological sense) also (a) stops excess insulin from keeping leptin from telling you you're full and should, Idunno, maybe STOP EATING NOW, and (b) keeps your blood sugar levels smooth so you don't have spikes and crashes.

My point is that eating low carb does not eliminate an insulin response. If all you ate was fat, only then the insulin would be significantly reduced. Insulin is not the enemy. It has been demonized by many who now have faded into the woodwork.

Type one diabetics do have a tough time of it. While it is much easier to control the BG swings by eating a low carb diet, I fear that they may not be benefiting from the other food components due to the lack of insulin needed to assimilate them.

One of the biggest issues I have with most studies and articles (and pretty much every criticism I've come across of low carb) is that they all conflate low carb and low fat. When you stay stuck in the mindset that fat is bad, then reduce carbs on top of that, all you're left with is protein. This is actually very bad for a variety of reasons, and for purposes of insulin and blood sugar control, counterproductive.

Thankfully, low carb does not necessitate high protein (nor should it). A proper low carb diet, especially for insulin control, is low carb, high fat, adequate protein. And yes, that means getting nearly all your calories from fat (a full ketogenic diet can be upwards of 80-90% fat). Generally speaking, the recommendations are only enough protein to maintain or build muscle (generally, around 100g, give or take), enough carbs to get necessary micronutrients that are difficult to obtain from non-plant sources (and to account for glycogen consumption from meats), and the rest from various fats. This setup minimizes the insulin response from food to only what's needed to handle the protein and muscle building/retention needs and the little bit of carbohydrates from non-starchy vegetables and incidental sugars and glycogen.

Also, protein generates an insulin response, yes, but unless you're getting all your protein from whey, that insulin response is a fraction of what it is from starches and sugars. This drastically reduces the amount of insulin in the body at any given time, even after eating.

I've never seen even the most adamant low-carb/keto proponents "demonize" insulin. In my experience, they've all acknowledged that its role is largely for building mass and that when insulin levels are elevated, it prevents the reduction of mass. They acknowledge that this is a double-edged sword -- on the one hand, it helps retain muscle, but on the other, excess insulin hinders fat loss. (It's possible that there have been people who demonize insulin, just as there are people who demonize animal products and fat and just about any other thing. However, the big names in LCHF -- the ones that people who follow this WOE follow and recommend -- do not.)

Also, it's not possible to completely eliminate insulin from the body, short of removing or killing the pancreas. Ketone production is regulated by insulin, as well, and the body can create the sugar it needs even in a diet completely devoid of carbs, and that production is regulated by insulin, as well. This is why ketone production goes down as carb (and to a lesser extent, protein) ingestion goes up, and why ketoacidosis doesn't happen in people who can create sufficient amounts of insulin (ie - the people who go on such diets in order to reduce their insulin levels).

And don't worry, there is still sufficient insulin in the body to assimilate protein (from what I've seen in my T1D friends who are keto, their basal or little bit of bolus insulin is sufficient -- none have reported loss of muscle mass or inability to gain muscle -- though I don't have exact figures to back it up, as to my knowledge, keto for T1D hasn't been studied much, and such specifics even less). A ketogenic diet is actually quite protein-sparing in the long run (there is a period where protein is catabolized, but it's during the transition period, when the body hasn't yet reached its full efficiency at relying on fat metabolism for fuel), in no small part due to using fat for the primary fuel, instead of sugar. Dr. Peter Attia has some awesome charts on his intake, weight, and athletic performance as he transitioned to a ketogenic diet.

Thanks for the excellent response! You're definitely a bit ahead of me in the diet study.

This is where I am coming from. I feel that a lot of the disagreement between individuals with different diet approaches is because they all work, at least some of the time. I personally am ketogenic for a month or two and then swing between levels of carbohydrates depending on the seasonal availability. At least that is my goal. It just seems absurd to me to eliminate a food source that your body is obviously well equipped to handle and toss is out the window.

Para 1. I never said that fat is bad. Do you mean insulin control for a Type II diabetic? It doesn't matter to anyone with a normal insulin response and glucose control.

I'm sorry for the confusion. The "you" in that paragraph is a general you, though you did bring up the whole "protein causes an insulin response, too" thing in your previous comment, which spurred my response, since -- as I mentioned -- most criticisms I come across of low carb run on the assumption that low carb = high protein, and that's not really the case.

For anyone who goes ketogenic as a means of controlling or reducing insulin and glucose. One does not need to be diabetic in order to have this goal. I, for example, am not diabetic, but I have PCOS with hyperinsulinemia/insulin resistance (in other words, my insulin is close to "prediabetic" levels even when fasting, even though my glucose is normal). I use it not for glucose control in the usual diabetic sense, but as a way to bring my insulin down. I also know a number of people who do it to maintain the glucose/insulin control they have in order to prevent the diabetes that the rest of their family has.

BlackTimber wrote: »

Para 2. As you can see above I am familiar with ketogenic diets. And I personally feel that there is a lot of good there. You again are trying to minimize the insulin response. Why?

There are a few reasons (not all to directly due to insulin).

For those without a specific clinically diagnosable reason (ie - Diabetes), the theory is that while insulin is pretty unquestionably a good thing, too much insulin is not. The same is true for glucose.

The studies of keto for epilepsy, for example, suggest that glucose is too volatile an energy source to be relied on solely and maintain health. We already know that when blood glucose rises too high, a large chunk of the damage done is to the nervous system. What we don't totally know is what level "too high" actually is. A ketogenic diet has shown promise in other neurological issues besides epilepsy (such as migraines), which suggests that "too high" is lower than previously thought (at least for some people), and even those that aren't Diabetic can benefit from keeping their glucose levels lower. (Insulin's relevance here is more to do with the fact that glucose levels currently/previously considered "normal" may actually be the beginnings of insulin resistance and the body's failure to keep post-meal glucose below the damaging threshold, which is one of insulin's major roles.)

Additionally, levels of insulin chronically elevated beyond the body's tolerance level, even below what's considered diabetic (and even with normal levels of glucose) can interfere with weight loss, when they're too high for the body to switch to fat store burning mode. Because glucose is toxic at higher levels, and the presence of elevated insulin sends the signal that there's glucose to be dealt with, the body burns it instead of fat (or tries to). In my experience, when the insulin chronically runs high, the body thinks there's glucose to be burned even while the stomach is sending signals that it's empty. As a result, the body resists burning stored fat (in the case of what should be a caloric deficit, it reduces output to match the input), and it's not until that insulin is brought down through one means or another, that the body returns to burning its fat stores.

Also for those without any conditions, many have found that the metabolic/endocrine effects of a LCHF/ketogenic diet help with hunger management. It's possible that this hunger control has to do with insulin/glucose stabilization, but it's harder to verify that, since I don't think studies have been done on it in people without known metabolic issues, and the effect is likely more subtle due to the smaller glucose/insulin swings that metabolically healthy people undergo when consuming a high-carb meal/diet.

(Note: not everyone reaches the threshold of "too much," and thus, can still operate on a high carb diet to no detectable ill effect. Additionally, carbs may not be the only or even primary trigger for the above dysfunction. There are simply too many variables to pinpoint the cause of this dysfunction on any one thing. Of course, once in that dysfunctional state, reducing carb intake is a viable and sensible course of action.)

BlackTimber wrote: »

Para 4. Gary Taubes may have been the first and many others followed. And you are doing it here. As you said, without insulin you're dead. If you are insulin resistant and consume a lot of insulin producing foods then you will tend to gain weight.

I haven't read Gary Taubes' works, but from what I've seen of the idea/hypothesis, it's not "demonizing" insulin any more than calorie counting "demonizes" calories. It's possible that specific statements of his may give such an impression, but I can't speak on that one way or the other (my guess is a certain amount of effects from marketing and journalism, which both thrive on sensationalism, even to the point of pulling things out of context and outright twisting words/ideas). It can probably be argued that the hypothesis that Taubes stands behind doesn't necessarily apply to every single person, but for the portion of the population that has had issues (both weight and health related) with the standard high-carb USDA recommendations, it can shed some light on the matter and provide an alternate way of managing both/either without resorting to absurdly low caloric intakes.

cloggsy71 wrote: »

What a load of rot!

The fat you eat is the fat you wear!

I'm eating 100+ grams of fat per day and losing weight steadily (101.7lbs to date).

The excess calories you eat, whether from fats, proteins or carbs, create the fat you wear.

Oh, and my health markers (cholesterol, HR, BP) are markedly improved as well. l

libbydoodle11 wrote: »

Check back with people that have followed this exact diet for twenty years and see what their health is like then.

We have seen what 40 years of low fat high carb diet has done to the Western World...It isn't good. Obesity is everywhere as is metabolic disease.