No, keto isn't required for weight loss on lc. Many people are successful at 50gm a day! For me keto is about the feeling of well being I get from it and many do stay that low for the health benefits. But no, it's not required for weight loss.

I stay under 100g carbs and seem to be dropping 1-2 pounds a week on average and my blood sugar readings are below 100. I haven't tried Keto yet. If I hit a brick wall at some point I can see trying Keto, but for now staying under 100g carbs seems to be working. I do make sure that all of my carbs are from Fruit, vegetables and dairy. I rarely (if ever) eat wheat or grain products.

mspr1nt wrote: »

I have a small amount to lose (about 10KG which I think is around 22lbs), but just wondering if I have to force myself into keto at some point (under 20g)?

Because you have such a "small" amount to lose, "forcing" yourself into anything is not necessary or desirable. If you were 100+ lbs overweight (like me and others) it might be a different story.

I always tell folks to research, research, and research some more. My personal belief is that you have to find a Way Of Eating that you understand, that makes sense, and that works for your body.

What I'd love to see you avoid is the path I and many others have walked - I'm almost 60 and have over 20 years of yo yo dieting, gaining and losing the same 50 lbs or so and tearing my body up in the process. My insulin resistance made it an exercise (pun intended) in futility and swinging at shadows. Until I rediscovered nutritional ketosis and carbohydrate restriction and found out what was going on in my body.

You might want to try a "well-formulated ketogenic diet" (Phinney & Volek) and see how you feel. That qualifier is very important because there are a ton of people that "dance around the edges of low-carb" (my term!), conclude it "doesn't work", when in actuality they never really tried it.

wabmester wrote: »

Having said that, 50g is keto. 20g is just more keto.

It's mostly a matter of the level that works for you

And once again I will find myself slightly disagreeing with the eminent and well read Wabmester, 20 grams is not just more keto - depending on the individual. There is such a wide range of carbohydrate intolerance and insulin sensitivity that for some of us 50 grams is not keto, when 20 will be.

And of course some people just CANNOT seem to drop below 50 or even 100 grams of carbohydrate, for a hundred different reasons. And for those folks I say, GO FOR IT! Even that level of carbohydrate restriction will be a HUGE benefit for 70-80 percent of the population and is better than the 200-500 grams that most people eat.

For those who can, my recommendation is to drop to 20, note the effects on your body, stay there for 4 to 6 weeks to get the fuller effect, then start adding in carbs and see what it does to you. If you do that, then ketostix or testing is not necessary - you will be in ketosis, and most likely you will feel that metabolic change in process.

Ultimately, it's not dropping the 20 lbs, or the 50 lbs, or even 100 lbs that matters. It is MAINTAINING that weight for a year. Two. Three. Life. Any diet will work. The questions are "Is it healthy?" and "Is it sustainable for you as an individual?"

My goal was to stay under 100 grams. Most of the time I am between 40-80 grams. On days when I feel like I goofed up, I am closer to or just over 100. I have lost 15 pounds in 5 months. No, you don't HAVE to go to 20 grams to lose weight.

i personally do. when i was eating about 100 maybe less-grams of carbs. i slowly lost weight but i was sluggish and constantly craving more carbs. since i have dropped down to 20 ish carbs per day, im losing more, and i have much more energy, no cravings, and no inflammation or bloating. just my 2 cents.

Well, I said that 20g is MORE keto, but both 20g and 50g are ketogenic.

The question was whether more is better for weight loss. Nope. (Unless you're still hungry or have carb-induced cravings at 50g, of course.)

But it may be better for other things.

nicintime wrote: »

wabmester wrote: »

Well, I said that 20g is MORE keto, but both 20g and 50g are ketogenic.

The question was whether more is better for weight loss. Nope. (Unless you're still hungry or have carb-induced cravings at 50g, of course.)

But it may be better for other things.

I heard Jeff Volek say that the body will produce SOME ketones after an 8 hour sleep for just about everyone. So technically, everyone is keto when they first wake up. :-)

The issue is how many, and the process of becoming keto / fat adapted, the metabolic switch that makes this so magical!.

Volek is right, of course. You make ketones whenever glycogen gets low, including when you are sleep-fasting.

Glycogen will also be low if you eat 50g/d carbs, and you'll make ketones all day long (as long as you don't eat all 50g at once).

Fat-adaptation can be magical. For endurance athletes.

I've tried to understand how it can possibly be magical for weight loss, and I've never been able to find any evidence or even a possible mechanism. I'm very open to the idea, though.

I'm only aware of 4 studies that have looked at VLC vs moderate low-carb. 3 of them found no difference in weight loss or any correlation with ketone levels and weight loss.

I believe 1 of them did, but it also found higher cortisol levels associated with VLC.

My understanding of fat-adaptation is definitely incomplete, but as best as I can ascertain, the difference for non-athletes is pretty trivial. 93% of energy from fat for adapted. 90% of energy from fat for the non-adapted.

With all of that said, I really like the brain effects of ketosis. And the potential health effects. And the feeling that I can run as long as I want to without needing a Snickers bar.

noclady1995 wrote: »

balesalicia wrote: »

i personally do. when i was eating about 100 maybe less-grams of carbs. i slowly lost weight but i was sluggish and constantly craving more carbs. since i have dropped down to 20 ish carbs per day, im losing more, and i have much more energy, no cravings, and no inflammation or bloating. just my 2 cents.

This is what I have been wondering...is there a difference in energy, cravings, etc. when eating very low (~20 g) vs. moderately low (50-100 g)? I am still trying to do a lot of reading to figure out how I need to plan how I eat and what to expect.

I've done both, and you can only get the keto buzz by keeping carbs pretty low and/or exercising to burn off a higher carb intake.

You make ketones at all carb levels between 0-150g or so. But your brain is only fully keto-saturated at levels consistently below about 50g. It's definitely worth trying for a few weeks if you haven't done it before.

Personally, I like the eating flexibility a higher carb level gives me and my hunger/cravings are still in check at higher levels. Other diets, including variations of Paleo, seem to have similar effects even at 200g/d carbs. I think it's more about the type of carbs than the level, at least in terms of cravings.

The danger of going too low, IMHO, is mostly about feeling deprived or feeling that you've failed because you went outside of rigorous guidelines you set for yourself. The easiest way to go VLC might be to simply go carnivore.