Help meeting macronutrient goals: 15% Carbs 25%Protein 60% Fat

JPW1990 wrote: »

show previous quotes

usmcmp wrote: »

JPW1990 wrote: »

usmcmp wrote: »

ketoindy wrote: »

usmcmp wrote: »

crazychester wrote: »

Hey JPW1990, the foggyness you mention from the Keto flu is only temporary as your body converts to using ketones as fuel - a more natural and better fuel source for your brain and other metabolic functions. Bodies running on sugar and glucose as the primary fuel source is the anomoly, not the intended fuel source for our bodies. There is a ton of excellent research out there on the Keto diet/lifestyle and legions of people who have lost weight, lowered their cholesterol, gotten off heart and high BP meds, all from the positive and healthy effects of high fat, low carb diets.

People have lost weight on ketogenic diets because they have been in a calorie deficit. Losing weight often leads to improved cholesterol and blood pressure. It's not the magic of a ketogenic diet, it's the magic of a calorie deficit and the resulting weight loss.

So in other words... it works. Regardless of the reason, in the end, it works. Perhaps it's simply a result of cutting out sugars, which are largely converted to body fat and cause insulin spikes which make you feel hungry. Perhaps it's because ketones are a cool thing. Perhaps it's just because it's easier to stay on a high fat (flavorful and filling) diet when you remove sugar than it is to stay on anything else where you remove sugar. Maybe it's something we haven't researched enough the reasons behind it.
And perhaps the reason people have such calorie deficits on it is because it makes them not WANT to eat more than what they are. Personally, when I've had to almost force myself to eat more to REACH a 1,000 calorie deficit, simply because I'm not particularly hungry most the time.
In the end, if it works, it works. Would be nice to get even more research behind it (though there has been a good bit), but whatever.
Why are you so afraid of it?

It does and doesn't work. A calorie deficit works no matter how you achieve it. People go around thinking that keto is magic. If it helps you eat less then it works, but it isn't working because of the reasons they typically claim it does (burning more fat, utilizing less of your calories, not understanding insulin and the role it plays).

I also think you don't understand everything that causes insulin spikes. Carbs aren't the only thing that cause them and there are reasons you actually do want insulin spikes.

I'm not afraid of it, I want to clear up the myths about it.

Except you perpetuated them, instead. EVERY diet will start with 5-10lbs loss the first week, mostly water weight. That's nothing unique to keto, so why bring it up like it only happens with keto? Your spiel about the electrolyte imbalance suggests it's a long term survival response. It's a 2-7 day misfortune which occurs in people who aren't paying attention to their intake, and only happens in people who are short of some combination of sodium, potassium and magnesium. People who do research in advance and know about it never experience it.

What I've found most interesting to the nearly violent reactions some people have to it around here is the glee with which they suggest it's unsustainable, unnatural, dangerous, etc etc. I've been on it 15 years, occasionally switching to low carb out of keto for a while when my other symptoms are better, going back if they get bad again, meaning I go up to 40g instead of 20g. I know very few people who use it only for weight loss. The vast majority use it for other reasons, some don't even bother with a deficit. Then they come on here looking for help, because they have questions, and instead of getting help, they get told they're ignorant, naive, doing the wrong thing, etc, usually without people even bothering to ask if a doctor or nutritionist has put them on it in the first place.

If I wasn't on it, I'd have died years ago. But, apparently, according to the "learned experts" of MFP, I don't exist, because if I'd actually done it, I'd have severe brain damage or be dead.

1. Not all diets result in a 5-10 pound loss at first. Diets with balanced macros that don't deplete glycogen do not result in water weight loss.
2. I didn't talk about electrolyte imbalance. I never once mentioned potassium, magnesium or sodium. I'm not sure where you got that from.
3. I never suggested it is volatile or dangerous. If you haven't been able to stay in ketosis you have proved that ketosis is not sustainable, even if you did switch to low carb.

Ketogenic diets are unsustainable for most people. As are most other restrictive diets. People try it and fail, then they think they are just meant to stay fat. That is why we come in here and suggest people try a balanced diet first.

By all means keep doing whatever makes you happy, you're acting like I'm attacking you personally. There is still nothing wrong with us dropping in with our suggestions. That way someone who is lurking and may have fail can find a better balance and success.

That's the part where you suggested it was some brain-starvation response. It's not. It's an electrolyte imbalance which only happens if you are low on one of those 3 things.

I'm not suggesting you're personally attacking me, simply expressing my amazement at how passionately people try to talk people out of doing things without even finding out first if it's medically supervised. As for letting people know there are other ways, can you honestly say with a straight face that you believe there's a fat person on earth who is unaware that there is more than one diet plan in existence?

No. Our brains run on glucose. Our brains require a large amount of energy to function. When you switch the brain from running on glucose to running on ketones you get decreased neural transmissions. It's not an electrolyte imbalance, it's the change in chemical reactions in the brain and the changes in expression to the neurons.

Read this before listening to "our brains run on glucose" argument.

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/mind-guest-blog/2013/10/01/the-fat-fueled-brain-unnatural-or-advantageous/

emilymean wrote: »

Read this before listening to "our brains run on glucose" argument.

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/mind-guest-blog/2013/10/01/the-fat-fueled-brain-unnatural-or-advantageous/

I've read it and it doesn't change the fact that our brains run on glucose. That's a biological fact. When you choose to cut out carbohydrates you shut off the krebs cycle, forcing your body to use something different.

There are a few studies they talk about in your link. Most of them have positive results specifically for epilepsy. Many of the others show only a slight advantage over high carb diets (versus a balanced diet like I suggest) and most of them state that they can't conclude that the diet is safe for everyone (where a balanced diet is definitely safe for everyone). Fat is definitely needed in the body, so the studies that only compare to high carb simply show that fat is important to metabolic functions, not that a high fat diet is healthier. I have read the studies and the high carb diet they put the rodents or people on were not even in line with the "Standard American Diet".

rcottonrph1 wrote: »

People realize ketosis is bad for the kidneys and not an ideal state to be in, right???

That would be ketoacidosis.

JPW1990 wrote: »

show previous quotes

rcottonrph1 wrote: »

People realize ketosis is bad for the kidneys and not an ideal state to be in, right???

15 years. I don't have epilepsy. My kidneys are fine. My brain is fine. I have an entire team of doctors on board. Think I'll listen to them over random forum posters.

And no one said you had to have epilepsy, it's why it was developed. Other people do it and enjoy it others don't. Both are fine.

emilymean wrote: »

Read this before listening to "our brains run on glucose" argument.

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/mind-guest-blog/2013/10/01/the-fat-fueled-brain-unnatural-or-advantageous/

Thanks emilymean for the link. It is a very good article without going deep into science as to why I now live in a state of nutritional ketosis full time. I will clearly state I spent 200+ hours reading and studying about nutritional ketosis before I really grasped the concept. It is very hard to get a commonly trained mind wrapped around the science behind nutritional ketosis.

I actually think the low carb diets do work in terms of weight loss, based on the anecdotal evidence of people I know plus reading up on the various studies etc. And I don't buy into the fact they work because people are unknowingly in deficit. There are an awful lot of calories in fatty foods!

That said, I am reluctant to try it myself for various reasons:

- I already lost plenty of weight using calorie deficit and what I would call a "balanced diet" which I have refined as I have gone along to decent effect ( currently 200 kcal deficit with 35C 40F 25P & 60g sugar target )
- I don't know what the long term health effects are, does anyone?
- Its not very family friendly; I am just one of 4 here including 2 kids and I want us eating a balanced nutritious diet together where possible
- I run 40-50km a week so its a choice between sufficient carbs or keto for me, and I choose carbs ;-)

What I don't like is the way certain people on here jump on anyone who dares to question that its as simple as calories in calories out. I don't think it is, but even if I did, so what if people want to try things out and understand their relationship with diet better?

GaleHawkins wrote: »

Most of us gain fat better from carbs than from fats. This is why they feed beef, swine and poultry grain instead of a high fat diet to fatten them up for the market.

Oh dear... I'm sure that, you know, biology, has nothing to do with what grass and grain eating animals are being fed?

emilymean wrote: »

On a side note, my mother has a corgie that she loves, loves, loves. He got real fat as he aged and could barely get around. After two hip surgeries he was put on a paleo diet, no more dog crunchies or bagged dog food and guess what, that dog lost a ton of weight, like a whole dog amount of weight. So, in short, GaleHawkins is correct and my little story is just an example of this.

show previous quotes

zipa78 wrote: »

GaleHawkins wrote: »

Most of us gain fat better from carbs than from fats. This is why they feed beef, swine and poultry grain instead of a high fat diet to fatten them up for the market.

Oh dear... I'm sure that, you know, biology, has nothing to do with what grass and grain eating animals are being fed?

Please go back to school and retake biology 101.

In case you had not noticed, dogs aren't cattle. And cattle aren't fed grain and not fat to make them fat. Cattle are fed grain because cattle have been eating grains for thousands of years and that is what their body has adapted for them to eat. Dogs have not been eating grains for thousands of years, and people should definitely talk to their vet about appropriate foods. And all creatures should be fed an appropriate amount of food to meet their nutritional needs (including humans).

Luckily, humans are omnivores and have adapted to eat meat, grains, vegetables, etc. It's one of the reasons we've survived so well.

emilymean wrote: »

Omg, my dad raises cattle and you're going to tell me what they feed cattle. They are fattened before slaughter with grain. If left to their own devices they graze on grass and their salt lick. Not man made grains. I'm out of here, there's no reasoning with CICO's.

So, if a cow was in a wheat field, they would not eat the wheat?

ETA: And my aunt and uncle raise cattle. You aren't special.

emilymean wrote: »

On a side note, my mother has a corgie that she loves, loves, loves. He got real fat as he aged and could barely get around. After two hip surgeries he was put on a paleo diet, no more dog crunchies or bagged dog food and guess what, that dog lost a ton of weight, like a whole dog amount of weight. So, in short, GaleHawkins is correct and my little story is just an example of this.

Gale Hawkins is correct because a dog is supposed to eat a particular way?

My cats are on low carb diets and do not drink milk. I, on the other hand, do not need to eat low carb and eat lots of dairy. The reason is that cats are not humans and humans are not cats. Cats are primarily carnivores and are lactose intolerant as adults. Humans are not primarily carnivores (we are omnivores) and a good percentage of humans (varying depending on ancestry) are lactose tolerant. For me to choose my ideal diet based on what's good for a cat would be extremely unhealthy and IMO insane.

I use Fat 30/ Protein 10/ Carb 60. Don't believe the low carb nonsense. You need carbs for energy. But you need good carbs, fruits and veggies, not refined carbs like sugar, bread and cakes

ValentineNicole wrote: »

Why is everyone on this forum always so angry about people reducing carbs or sugars?

I haven't noticed that. I certainly am not; I've reduced carbs and sugar myself.

I think people just feel compelled to correct misinformation (i.e., "Gale"'s argument that carbs are bad for people and that a diet of 1200 calories of coconut oil is healthier). In some cases, there's also a desire to fight the message that people MUST do certain things (like cut carbs) to lose and idea that on average people are worse off if they do that. I think the message that they must is bad, but I also think it works for some, so as long as people don't insist you must or it's healthier, I don't care.

Refined sugars are awful for you, and even though I eat them too, our goals shouldn't just be to get skinny. Our goals should be to get HEALTHY.

Refined sugars aren't "awful for you," they are probably pretty neutral unless you (a) overeat them, or (b) need them for quick energy. I think all the CICO people are concerned about health too, which is why it's annoying when people claim otherwise.

The recommendations to limit added sugar (which I personally do) are coming from the same sources that say the OP's planned macros are unbalanced and not ideal (I think that advice, like the advice about 25 grams of added sugar or MFP's silly sugar recommendations is too one size fits all, so I think the OP's macros are fine if they work for her). More significantly, you need to understand the reasoning behind them. It's not that sugar--or "added sugar"--is bad for you, it's that a high amount of added sugar tends to signify a high amount of calorie dense items (although the majority of the calories in those items are quite typically not from sugar, depending) and a diet that is often too high in calories for weight maintenance or too low in nutrients, or both.

If you monitor your diet to make sure it is nutrient rich and balanced and that your calories are not excessive, there's probably no reason to worry much about sugar, absence a health issue (like diabetes, although my understanding is that that's usually more about carbs as a whole).

I follow a similar macro set up as you. Yes I follow the Ketogenic Diet. I have seen improvement in my mental clarity and memory, energy levels, performance in the gym (after a month or so. It takes time to adapt.), and my hunger levels. I was tired of always feeling hungry, having highs and lows to my day. Also, diabetes runs in my family, and I want to make sure it never happens to me.

Anyway, to answer the original question, I'm pretty sure my diary is open to at least my friends (feel free to friend me). I don't eat fruit, but I include lots of leafy green veggies, broccoli, asparagus, cauliflower, or any green veggie I like. That's about it for carbs minus the few in things like cheese, cream, or nuts. I cook everything in olive oil, coconut oil, or butter to add fat. Sometimes I add a table spoon of cream or coconut oil to my tea or coffee. After you get used to which foods are good for fitting your macros, it gets easier. I don't make anything extravagant most of the time. For example, today for lunch I had a salad with spinach, basil, avocado, salmon, and olive oil.

I do know that while you are trying to adapt to keto, upping your fat to as much as 80% and lowering your carbs to 5% can be really helpful and shorten the "keto flu". I hope this answers your question, and feel free to add me!

My logging can be patchy but feel free to add me.

Part of my approach to hitting a higher % fat is to buy foods with a similar or greater amount of fat than protein (in grams) hence 20% fat beef mince, eggs, hard cheese, oily fish etc that come automatically close to my macros.