Pros and cons of a Keto Diet
Replies
-
Pro: Can help you lose weight quickly, cures T2 diabetes if you stick with it, can resolve thyroid and PCOS issues. Can also be helpful if you have cancer as it tends to starve cancer cells from glucose.
Cons: Very restrictive and NOT for T1 diabetics, dangerous for them.
It can be a lifestyle/diet, or it can be used as a tool for a week or two to shed lbs after a vacation. Many tools in the toolbox.
Most of the weight that is lost quickly is at the start and is water weight not fat loss. This normalizes fairly soon and then keto does not have a fat loss advantage over other forms of calorie restriction. Agree with other points.1 -
I'm a vegan and also an RN.0
-
I was referring to too high protein as in literal hundreds of grams of protein daily that I see a lot of people in the heavy lifting community think is a healthy way to keto.4
-
I've spent quite a bit of time on several ways of eating, low carb and keto included. Keto is fantastic for so many people, and it does provide some attractive benefits that most people have already listed. For me, though, I ultimately ended my relationship with keto because it made me sad. My body would knock out of ketosis when I had more than about 20 grams of carbs. Yes, even after several months. So my carb intake had to be incredibly strict and tightly monitored. For example, going to picnics in the summer and I could not indulge in things like fresh heirloom tomatoes and watermelon and the endless bounty of garden fresh veggies and fruits that were higher carb than leafy greens and cucumbers and the like. Things that I knew were loaded with all kinds of amazing nutrients that make me feel fantastic, but nope...if I could have them at all it would only be a smidgen. It just made no sense to me. And I got sick of recipe after recipe calling for added sausage, bacon, cheese, cream, butter, etc. Yet, heaven forbid I want to have sweet potatoes or grapefruit. I just could not buy into believing that these heavy meats drowned in cream (just an example) had to take precedence over a plate of garden fresh produce (again...you can have produce on keto, a lot actually, but you have to choose the super low carb ones). You do eat a LOT of produce on keto, contrary to popular belief. But you have to be extremely selective in choosing the super low carb ones and it cuts out huge amounts of fantastic plant foods. It just wasn't for me. And yes, I still had to keep track of my calories. Maybe some people don't, but because of my body physiology, I absolutely had to or else I'd be sucking down 3000 calories a day.9
-
circularsmiles wrote: »I was referring to too high protein as in literal hundreds of grams of protein daily that I see a lot of people in the heavy lifting community think is a healthy way to keto.
No one on keto eats hundreds of grams of protein, you can't be in ketosis with too much protein.5 -
*sighs*
Ok T2 isn't cured but it can easily be managed and have good numbers and feel well. If you falter and go back the way you use to eat diabetes problems rear their head again.
Some MAY experience a fast loss the 1st week or two but that is water and glycogen stores.
Cancer. Am leaving that alone because you said *may* But I would be wary advertising this as many juries are still out about it.5 -
As I looked thru these posts I saw that most talked about the cons first and found more than pros. Well, I'm going to switch this. I lost 50 pounds in 6 months and felt better than I have in 30 years. I reversed diabetes and my blood pressure really went down. Even my arthritis got better. I ran one day and hadn't been able to run in years. I can cook and there really isn't anything I can't make low carb.
Cons - I do have to cook more and it is more expensive to cook and eat.
All in all, I love keto eating. Someone said they couldn't imagine eating that much protein would be healthy and that we need fiber. They are right. Keto isn't high protein, it's high fat. And I eat lots of green veggies... fiber.
I have eaten low fat, and low calorie and it never worked at least for very long. This has worked for years. Love it!!!3 -
Catawampous wrote: »*sighs*
Ok T2 isn't cured but it can easily be managed and have good numbers and feel well. If you falter and go back the way you use to eat diabetes problems rear their head again.
Some MAY experience a fast loss the 1st week or two but that is water and glycogen stores.
Cancer. Am leaving that alone because you said *may* But I would be wary advertising this as many juries are still out about it.
I was just reading about keto and cancer on a FB post from Chad Macias. Apparently, most of the promising outcomes from it have been demonstrated in rodent studies. There's just not enough human data beyond a week or two of added longevity to demonstrate anything significant yet.2 -
Pro: Can help you lose weight quickly, cures T2 diabetes if you stick with it.
You cannot "cure" diabetes since the disease is a malfunction of the pancreas. You CAN manage it (or go into remission, same thing with different wording) by whatever means works for the individual to keep their average blood glucose in the normal range. For most, this means losing any excess weight, exercising more, and moderating carbs at the level that works for the individual which can be anywhere on a sliding scale from keto levels (under 20 grams) to moderate levels (150-180 grams).
2 -
Pro: Can help you lose weight quickly, cures T2 diabetes if you stick with it.
You cannot "cure" diabetes since the disease is a malfunction of the pancreas. You CAN manage it (or go into remission, same thing with different wording) by whatever means works for the individual to keep their average blood glucose in the normal range. For most, this means losing any excess weight, exercising more, and moderating carbs at the level that works for the individual which can be anywhere on a sliding scale from keto levels (under 20 grams) to moderate levels (150-180 grams).
It seems like a couple of different things can happen with T2D that are positive.
(1) You manage blood sugar without having to take medication. Low carb (need not be keto) is really good at this, but there are other options if low carb does not appeal (like managed and balanced moderate carbs, and in some cases even a higher carb whole foods (so high fiber) based approach seems to work.
(2) You stop experiencing symptoms so that you can have a potato on its own and not have your readings go out of whack. This does not happen with just low carbing, and in fact extreme low carb can make this happen even for someone who is not otherwise IR. However, losing weight very, very commonly does this (not saying in 100% of cases, just like there are some who become T2D without being overweight). To the extent that someone finds low carbing or keto an easier way to lose weight, it helps with this.
Otherwise (tagging this on, not about T2D):
Pro: some find keto an easier way to maintain a deficit and more sustainable.
Con: some find keto a harder way to maintain a deficit and less sustainable.1 -
circularsmiles wrote: »I was referring to too high protein as in literal hundreds of grams of protein daily that I see a lot of people in the heavy lifting community think is a healthy way to keto.
Some in the heavy lifting community are into super high protein regardless of the approach to carbs.
Being keto does not normally involve hundreds of grams of protein and, indeed, it would be discouraged as you can't get adequate fat and the protein is likely to convert to glucose (gluconeogenesis) which is contrary to the goal.1 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »Catawampous wrote: »*sighs*
Ok T2 isn't cured but it can easily be managed and have good numbers and feel well. If you falter and go back the way you use to eat diabetes problems rear their head again.
Some MAY experience a fast loss the 1st week or two but that is water and glycogen stores.
Cancer. Am leaving that alone because you said *may* But I would be wary advertising this as many juries are still out about it.
I was just reading about keto and cancer on a FB post from Chad Macias. Apparently, most of the promising outcomes from it have been demonstrated in rodent studies. There's just not enough human data beyond a week or two of added longevity to demonstrate anything significant yet.
Yes. I work for University of Florida and there is a LOT of Keto studies on cancers and tumors. Particularly brain tumors. It is promising in rodents but its so far away for humans it bothers me. However there are some people that have adopted it along with conventional treatments and have had positive outcomes. I just dont want to see ...misinformation. Especially about that.6 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »GlassAngyl wrote: »Oh I forgot, some other pros of Keto (compared to high carbs) for:
* Epilepsy
* Alzheimers
* Parkinsons
Ketones: Metabolism's Ugly Duckling
Theodore B. Vanitallie, M D Thomas H. Nufert, BA
Nutrition Reviews, Volume 61, Issue 10, 1 October 2003, Pages 327–341, https://doi.org/10.1301/nr.2003.oct.327-341
The only choices are not just keto or high carb. False dilemma. And high carb in a person at a healthy body weight and eating a overall healthy diet had not been proven to have harmful health effects.
Didn't see where she said there is only keto or high carb. Just keto vs high carb. Again, having to use crayons to spell things out for the "in the box" crowds.
There is also low carb and vegetarian and vegan and Atkins and point system and...well, just etc etc! But woops.. silly her posting on a question about keto post and not giving honorable mentions to other woe's.
You can eat high carb and lose.
Most Americans don't eat "high carb" as that is normally defined.
Don't see anyone here arguing that people need to "high carb" (I'd not enjoy it at all).
Don't see anyone here arguing that it doesn't matter what you eat, just that keto vs. not is not the same as "nutritionally adequate" vs. not as has been incorrectly claimed by wolfruhn.
1 -
I have been doing keto a while, my hardest part following it has been lack of snack foods. I like it becauae most of the meals I would eat anyways. Being social is obviously hard, also the Keto Flu can be rough.0
-
I kind of hate snacking, so that part of it has not been an issue (there are snack foods -- some of the foods I used to snack on the most, like cheese and nuts are fine, as are raw veg, pickles -- but there are fewer options). Even when not low carbing I do better not snacking, however, so that I find it faster to adjust from snacking to not when low carbing is, IMO, a plus (or pro!) for keto for me.
Other thoughts:
I don't cook more when ketoing (I mostly cook either way).
I find keto a pretty easy way to eat when eating out, for the most part -- focusing on meat and veg is one of the easiest ways to keep calories down if you are going out, and for me usually tasty, although there are some restaurants I will make exceptions for, for sure.1 -
Pro: can help you control your epilepsy
Con: can be dangerous - pay close attention to your doctor & dietician
As far as I know, a ketogenic diet is not dangerous unless you have a problem with fat metabolism or possibly familial hypercholesterolemia. Sort of like me saying tree nuts and gluten are dangerous. They aren't really unless you have a tree nut allergy or celiac disease. Same goes for a very low carb diet.
Unless you are thinking of diabetic ketoacidosis? Thankfully that is not a risk unless one has T1D and a situation where insulin was very low so blood glucose AND ketones are very high - at the same time. Someone eating low carb will never experience that unless they are T1D and it is not well managed in an acute situation.
My doctor actually did recommemd low carb to me.
And my other doctor recommended less fat and higher carb. LOL 
There are also issues with causing/aggravating kidney disorders.
2 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »emailmehere1122 wrote: »emailmehere1122 wrote: »lisawolfinger wrote: »I am Keto, don't have bad breath, don't eat loads of meat (many things contain protein) and the fat in my diet is not all dairy (fish for example has lots of healthy fat). I eat veggies and fruit every day but as stated by another member here...you have to choose your foods and manage your diet plan and the carb by making choices. Even if your counting calories, your making decisions and choices every day about what you eat. My optimal calorie count is in the same health range recommended by many plans and even MFP at 1300-1600.
Many Keto/low carb recipes are similar to gluten free recipes. Gluten is associated with inflammation and allergies. This tends to help Keto followers to also improve similar ailments. There is not a think I eat that I cant find a keto based/log carb recipe to substitute. My family can rarely tell the difference between those recipes and other less healthy forms. This week, I have had a piece of NY Baked Cheese cake for dessert, everyday! last week it was Chocolate cookies...the week before, Peanut butter Cookies. I do use a couple of non white flower substitutes when baking but Walmart and Kroger and Publix all carry them, all the time. I had the most amazing parmesan crusted Talipa last night with green beans. I grow a 1ac organic veggie garden and eat everything from tomatoes, egg plant and cabbage from it.
20g of carbs is not required for ketosis. It can be 30-40-50. It just depends on your goals. What is required is a specific balance of carbs/fat/protein to accomplish ketosis. Just loading on protein and being low in carbs in not the process. The web contains several good calculators to help you determine the marcos that work for you height/age/body fat content and your goals. They will also tell you the calorie counts for optimal results. You can actually play with scenarios in these calculators to tweak it to something that fits your life style. In fact, as you body fat decreases, you should recalculate because it affects ketosis and your macros.
Managing my weight and building muscle (with exercise of course) has improved for me, so much on the Keto Diet.
The bold is only true in those with celiac and allergies to wheat; similar to nuts or dairy. Outside of that, it doesn't cause chronic inflammation. Even more so, whole grains has actually been shown to improve health.
She said gluten is associated with inflammation and allergies ( which is true just like nuts and diary )...not it causes inflammation and allergies... and she got wooed and you got thumbs up...just like they said it would happen. I'm not a keto person but they are right...if they try to have a thread in here they get shredded
I am very well aware of gluten. And it still not associated with inflammation (unless you take the advice from wheat belly). I have quite a bit of experience with gluten free and have done a good amount of research. My wife has an autonomic disorder called POTS. Anecdotally, people have seen improvements by going gluten free; my wife was gluten free for 4 years. Unfortunately, there is very little actual science out there for gluten free. And that may because they havent developed the correct measures or techniques to evaluate it. But for the general populous, there isnt current evidence to support that claim.
At best with all my wife's medical issues, i have had every single gastroenterologist tell my wife to start eating gluten again because it wasn't benefiting her and could potentially cause other issues with her diverticulitis.
I think you're missing the point of what I was trying to say. The main message I was attempting to convey was the keto people are unfairly treated. She had one word being inflammation that you disagreed with so you pulled your monitor ruler out of of the desk and rapped her across the knuckles for it. You received thumbs up and she got wooed...as expected... out of four paragraphs over one word.
With that being said she used the word "associated" with inflammation not "causes". That's a true statement for some people whether there's scientific evidence to support it or not.
Per google:
Associate: verb- "connect (someone or something) with something else in one's mind."
I associate chilli with cold weather...there is no scientific evidence linking them,nor does there have to be to associate things together,but when I think of eating chilli I also think of it being eaten during a cold time of the year
The only reasons for anyone to call her out over her statement about gluten was because they didn't comprehend it or to instigate
Ketoers aren't being unfairly treated. If they come and spout BS about how you will lose more, easier faster and don't even need to reduce your calories or that it prevents and heals any ailment under the heavens, that's when people call them out on their wrong, unfounded crap.
Totally agree! Keto can have application for some folks and is just preferred by others. But, it's some of the ridiculous unsubstantiated claims made by some (not all) keto proponents that draws fire.
You know what? It's not even just the unsubstantiated claims. I realized this reading the discussion.
It's also the subtle, underlying premise: that's it's the way of eating that is responsible for everything experienced by keto eaters.
The simple fact is that losing weight is responsible for a large amount of what keto proponents attribute to keto itself and that the push back they receive is because they attribute it solely to their dietary choice.
Keto itself isn't responsible for a laundry list of health improvements that a lot of you folks claim it to be. Weight loss is. If more of you stopped with that ish, I think there'd be a lot less push back AND woo voting.
I think the bolded is more of an opinion than a fact. Keto'ers often (usually) attain health benefits well before any substantial weight is lost when looking at many health issues. I found that was true for me. It's not always true but it is far from uncommon.
My osteopath would not agree with you in most cases. His mantra is that for every 10% reduction in body weight, all kinds of things improve without taking any additional steps in overweight and obese people based on blood tests. The operative word is "most" people. In some people, there are health issues that will resolve with keto even if they don't lose weight.
So I think your use of the bolded phrase above is just plain not accurate. I'd be happy to look at any statistical or study data that indicates otherwise with an open mind. Honestly though, this is the kind of unsubstantiated(so far) claim that causes non keto folks to be extremely skeptical. I just don't know how you can make claims of "often" or "usually" without data to back it up. So, it just goes into the realm of a questionable claim based on subjective opinion that gets challenged.
ETA: It makes a huge difference in terms of perception for me when these kinds of general claims across a population aren't made and someone just says something like, "keto diet seems to improve my health in the following ways that I didn't experience when eating higher carb. It works for me." Either that or back up the claims from the get go because you can pretty much count on the fact that if they sound suspicious they are going to get challenged. And that doesn't just apply to keto threads. Body fat threads with claims get the same treatment as do Vegan threads or "I've replaced fat with muscle in 2 weeks" threads. Most people prefer to deal in proof and fact and not just conjecture.
I think the one exception was be BG control in diabetes or those with IR.
Yup, these are the ones where there is actual research that proves results. I don't eat keto. But I do eat low carb due to a family history with T2D. So I keep carbs under 200 usually and between 100 and 150 gr often. Just happen to get numbers today for my annual physical on Monday. BG was in range but at the upper end. A1c was middle of good range. Depending on my doctor's recommendations, I may lower carbs.
So, a very interesting conversation with my Doctor yesterday during my physical relating to my bloodwork. He is an osteopath. They get additional training on nutrition far above and beyond what normal MDs get.
My Blood Glucose is 99 (range 65-99), My triglycerides are 60 (<150 is good) which he described as ridiculously good. Total Chol 196, Total Chol/ HDL is 3.3 (> 5.0 is good), HDL is 59 (< 40 is good). The doctor thought those results were outstanding and would be great in a 36 year old man, never mind a 66 year old man.
The interesting part though was I asked him if he had any concern about the BG number. He said absolutely not, even though its at the high end of the range. Unless there are multiple factors like elevated triglycerides and low HDL/ high LDL that would point to IR, that number by itself is no cause for concern. Then he asked about my macro mix and if I eat keto or low carb. I said mildly low carb 100-150 gr mark usually. He said, well that could explain it. When we eat lower carb, our body makes enough glucose, how ever it has to sometimes resorting to neoglucogenesis to make sure we have enough glucose for brain function. Counter intuitively, if we up carbs to nearer the 200 gram or more mark, BG number will drop more into normal range in folks who are not IR.
I don't know if this is a plus or a minus and I guess that depends on your individual situation. For those who weight train, it reinforced that adequate carbs is protein sparing. For me personally, it means I can have more carbs if I want as I have no signs of IR or pre-diabetes.4 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »emailmehere1122 wrote: »emailmehere1122 wrote: »lisawolfinger wrote: »I am Keto, don't have bad breath, don't eat loads of meat (many things contain protein) and the fat in my diet is not all dairy (fish for example has lots of healthy fat). I eat veggies and fruit every day but as stated by another member here...you have to choose your foods and manage your diet plan and the carb by making choices. Even if your counting calories, your making decisions and choices every day about what you eat. My optimal calorie count is in the same health range recommended by many plans and even MFP at 1300-1600.
Many Keto/low carb recipes are similar to gluten free recipes. Gluten is associated with inflammation and allergies. This tends to help Keto followers to also improve similar ailments. There is not a think I eat that I cant find a keto based/log carb recipe to substitute. My family can rarely tell the difference between those recipes and other less healthy forms. This week, I have had a piece of NY Baked Cheese cake for dessert, everyday! last week it was Chocolate cookies...the week before, Peanut butter Cookies. I do use a couple of non white flower substitutes when baking but Walmart and Kroger and Publix all carry them, all the time. I had the most amazing parmesan crusted Talipa last night with green beans. I grow a 1ac organic veggie garden and eat everything from tomatoes, egg plant and cabbage from it.
20g of carbs is not required for ketosis. It can be 30-40-50. It just depends on your goals. What is required is a specific balance of carbs/fat/protein to accomplish ketosis. Just loading on protein and being low in carbs in not the process. The web contains several good calculators to help you determine the marcos that work for you height/age/body fat content and your goals. They will also tell you the calorie counts for optimal results. You can actually play with scenarios in these calculators to tweak it to something that fits your life style. In fact, as you body fat decreases, you should recalculate because it affects ketosis and your macros.
Managing my weight and building muscle (with exercise of course) has improved for me, so much on the Keto Diet.
The bold is only true in those with celiac and allergies to wheat; similar to nuts or dairy. Outside of that, it doesn't cause chronic inflammation. Even more so, whole grains has actually been shown to improve health.
She said gluten is associated with inflammation and allergies ( which is true just like nuts and diary )...not it causes inflammation and allergies... and she got wooed and you got thumbs up...just like they said it would happen. I'm not a keto person but they are right...if they try to have a thread in here they get shredded
I am very well aware of gluten. And it still not associated with inflammation (unless you take the advice from wheat belly). I have quite a bit of experience with gluten free and have done a good amount of research. My wife has an autonomic disorder called POTS. Anecdotally, people have seen improvements by going gluten free; my wife was gluten free for 4 years. Unfortunately, there is very little actual science out there for gluten free. And that may because they havent developed the correct measures or techniques to evaluate it. But for the general populous, there isnt current evidence to support that claim.
At best with all my wife's medical issues, i have had every single gastroenterologist tell my wife to start eating gluten again because it wasn't benefiting her and could potentially cause other issues with her diverticulitis.
I think you're missing the point of what I was trying to say. The main message I was attempting to convey was the keto people are unfairly treated. She had one word being inflammation that you disagreed with so you pulled your monitor ruler out of of the desk and rapped her across the knuckles for it. You received thumbs up and she got wooed...as expected... out of four paragraphs over one word.
With that being said she used the word "associated" with inflammation not "causes". That's a true statement for some people whether there's scientific evidence to support it or not.
Per google:
Associate: verb- "connect (someone or something) with something else in one's mind."
I associate chilli with cold weather...there is no scientific evidence linking them,nor does there have to be to associate things together,but when I think of eating chilli I also think of it being eaten during a cold time of the year
The only reasons for anyone to call her out over her statement about gluten was because they didn't comprehend it or to instigate
Ketoers aren't being unfairly treated. If they come and spout BS about how you will lose more, easier faster and don't even need to reduce your calories or that it prevents and heals any ailment under the heavens, that's when people call them out on their wrong, unfounded crap.
Totally agree! Keto can have application for some folks and is just preferred by others. But, it's some of the ridiculous unsubstantiated claims made by some (not all) keto proponents that draws fire.
You know what? It's not even just the unsubstantiated claims. I realized this reading the discussion.
It's also the subtle, underlying premise: that's it's the way of eating that is responsible for everything experienced by keto eaters.
The simple fact is that losing weight is responsible for a large amount of what keto proponents attribute to keto itself and that the push back they receive is because they attribute it solely to their dietary choice.
Keto itself isn't responsible for a laundry list of health improvements that a lot of you folks claim it to be. Weight loss is. If more of you stopped with that ish, I think there'd be a lot less push back AND woo voting.
I think the bolded is more of an opinion than a fact. Keto'ers often (usually) attain health benefits well before any substantial weight is lost when looking at many health issues. I found that was true for me. It's not always true but it is far from uncommon.
My osteopath would not agree with you in most cases. His mantra is that for every 10% reduction in body weight, all kinds of things improve without taking any additional steps in overweight and obese people based on blood tests. The operative word is "most" people. In some people, there are health issues that will resolve with keto even if they don't lose weight.
So I think your use of the bolded phrase above is just plain not accurate. I'd be happy to look at any statistical or study data that indicates otherwise with an open mind. Honestly though, this is the kind of unsubstantiated(so far) claim that causes non keto folks to be extremely skeptical. I just don't know how you can make claims of "often" or "usually" without data to back it up. So, it just goes into the realm of a questionable claim based on subjective opinion that gets challenged.
ETA: It makes a huge difference in terms of perception for me when these kinds of general claims across a population aren't made and someone just says something like, "keto diet seems to improve my health in the following ways that I didn't experience when eating higher carb. It works for me." Either that or back up the claims from the get go because you can pretty much count on the fact that if they sound suspicious they are going to get challenged. And that doesn't just apply to keto threads. Body fat threads with claims get the same treatment as do Vegan threads or "I've replaced fat with muscle in 2 weeks" threads. Most people prefer to deal in proof and fact and not just conjecture.
I think the one exception was be BG control in diabetes or those with IR.
Yup, these are the ones where there is actual research that proves results. I don't eat keto. But I do eat low carb due to a family history with T2D. So I keep carbs under 200 usually and between 100 and 150 gr often. Just happen to get numbers today for my annual physical on Monday. BG was in range but at the upper end. A1c was middle of good range. Depending on my doctor's recommendations, I may lower carbs.
So, a very interesting conversation with my Doctor yesterday during my physical relating to my bloodwork. He is an osteopath. They get additional training on nutrition far above and beyond what normal MDs get.
My Blood Glucose is 99 (range 65-99), My triglycerides are 60 (<150 is good) which he described as ridiculously good. Total Chol 196, Total Chol/ HDL is 3.3 (> 5.0 is good), HDL is 59 (< 40 is good). The doctor thought those results were outstanding and would be great in a 36 year old man, never mind a 66 year old man.
The interesting part though was I asked him if he had any concern about the BG number. He said absolutely not, even though its at the high end of the range. Unless there are multiple factors like elevated triglycerides and low HDL/ high LDL that would point to IR, that number by itself is no cause for concern. Then he asked about my macro mix and if I eat keto or low carb. I said mildly low carb 100-150 gr mark usually. He said, well that could explain it. When we eat lower carb, our body makes enough glucose, how ever it has to sometimes resorting to neoglucogenesis to make sure we have enough glucose for brain function. Counter intuitively, if we up carbs to nearer the 200 gram or more mark, BG number will drop more into normal range in folks who are not IR.
I don't know if this is a plus or a minus and I guess that depends on your individual situation. For those who weight train, it reinforced that adequate carbs is protein sparing. For me personally, it means I can have more carbs if I want as I have no signs of IR or pre-diabetes.
As a diabetic I have learned that any single BG number is not a worry, the a1c is the important number. A BG test (even a fasting one from a blood draw) measures the glucose at one small point in time. The a1c measures the average glucose over a period of time of approximately 3 months (the life span of a red blood cell). Having an a1c in the middle of the good range is wonderful! It means your body is handling whatever carbs you give it properly.1 -
stanmann571 wrote: »Pro: can help you control your epilepsy
Con: can be dangerous - pay close attention to your doctor & dietician
As far as I know, a ketogenic diet is not dangerous unless you have a problem with fat metabolism or possibly familial hypercholesterolemia. Sort of like me saying tree nuts and gluten are dangerous. They aren't really unless you have a tree nut allergy or celiac disease. Same goes for a very low carb diet.
Unless you are thinking of diabetic ketoacidosis? Thankfully that is not a risk unless one has T1D and a situation where insulin was very low so blood glucose AND ketones are very high - at the same time. Someone eating low carb will never experience that unless they are T1D and it is not well managed in an acute situation.
My doctor actually did recommemd low carb to me. And my other doctor recommended less fat and higher carb. LOL
There are also issues with causing/aggravating kidney disorders.
No. Ketosis does not cause kidney problems. It can benefit those with kidney issues from T2D though.
Ketogenic diets are not typically high protein.0 -
So, a very interesting conversation with my Doctor yesterday during my physical relating to my bloodwork. He is an osteopath. They get additional training on nutrition far above and beyond what normal MDs get.
My Blood Glucose is 99 (range 65-99), My triglycerides are 60 (<150 is good) which he described as ridiculously good. Total Chol 196, Total Chol/ HDL is 3.3 (> 5.0 is good), HDL is 59 (< 40 is good). The doctor thought those results were outstanding and would be great in a 36 year old man, never mind a 66 year old man.
The interesting part though was I asked him if he had any concern about the BG number. He said absolutely not, even though its at the high end of the range. Unless there are multiple factors like elevated triglycerides and low HDL/ high LDL that would point to IR, that number by itself is no cause for concern. Then he asked about my macro mix and if I eat keto or low carb. I said mildly low carb 100-150 gr mark usually. He said, well that could explain it. When we eat lower carb, our body makes enough glucose, how ever it has to sometimes resorting to neoglucogenesis to make sure we have enough glucose for brain function. Counter intuitively, if we up carbs to nearer the 200 gram or more mark, BG number will drop more into normal range in folks who are not IR.
I don't know if this is a plus or a minus and I guess that depends on your individual situation. For those who weight train, it reinforced that adequate carbs is protein sparing. For me personally, it means I can have more carbs if I want as I have no signs of IR or pre-diabetes.GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »emailmehere1122 wrote: »emailmehere1122 wrote: »lisawolfinger wrote: »I am Keto, don't have bad breath, don't eat loads of meat (many things contain protein) and the fat in my diet is not all dairy (fish for example has lots of healthy fat). I eat veggies and fruit every day but as stated by another member here...you have to choose your foods and manage your diet plan and the carb by making choices. Even if your counting calories, your making decisions and choices every day about what you eat. My optimal calorie count is in the same health range recommended by many plans and even MFP at 1300-1600.
Many Keto/low carb recipes are similar to gluten free recipes. Gluten is associated with inflammation and allergies. This tends to help Keto followers to also improve similar ailments. There is not a think I eat that I cant find a keto based/log carb recipe to substitute. My family can rarely tell the difference between those recipes and other less healthy forms. This week, I have had a piece of NY Baked Cheese cake for dessert, everyday! last week it was Chocolate cookies...the week before, Peanut butter Cookies. I do use a couple of non white flower substitutes when baking but Walmart and Kroger and Publix all carry them, all the time. I had the most amazing parmesan crusted Talipa last night with green beans. I grow a 1ac organic veggie garden and eat everything from tomatoes, egg plant and cabbage from it.
20g of carbs is not required for ketosis. It can be 30-40-50. It just depends on your goals. What is required is a specific balance of carbs/fat/protein to accomplish ketosis. Just loading on protein and being low in carbs in not the process. The web contains several good calculators to help you determine the marcos that work for you height/age/body fat content and your goals. They will also tell you the calorie counts for optimal results. You can actually play with scenarios in these calculators to tweak it to something that fits your life style. In fact, as you body fat decreases, you should recalculate because it affects ketosis and your macros.
Managing my weight and building muscle (with exercise of course) has improved for me, so much on the Keto Diet.
The bold is only true in those with celiac and allergies to wheat; similar to nuts or dairy. Outside of that, it doesn't cause chronic inflammation. Even more so, whole grains has actually been shown to improve health.
She said gluten is associated with inflammation and allergies ( which is true just like nuts and diary )...not it causes inflammation and allergies... and she got wooed and you got thumbs up...just like they said it would happen. I'm not a keto person but they are right...if they try to have a thread in here they get shredded
I am very well aware of gluten. And it still not associated with inflammation (unless you take the advice from wheat belly). I have quite a bit of experience with gluten free and have done a good amount of research. My wife has an autonomic disorder called POTS. Anecdotally, people have seen improvements by going gluten free; my wife was gluten free for 4 years. Unfortunately, there is very little actual science out there for gluten free. And that may because they havent developed the correct measures or techniques to evaluate it. But for the general populous, there isnt current evidence to support that claim.
At best with all my wife's medical issues, i have had every single gastroenterologist tell my wife to start eating gluten again because it wasn't benefiting her and could potentially cause other issues with her diverticulitis.
I think you're missing the point of what I was trying to say. The main message I was attempting to convey was the keto people are unfairly treated. She had one word being inflammation that you disagreed with so you pulled your monitor ruler out of of the desk and rapped her across the knuckles for it. You received thumbs up and she got wooed...as expected... out of four paragraphs over one word.
With that being said she used the word "associated" with inflammation not "causes". That's a true statement for some people whether there's scientific evidence to support it or not.
Per google:
Associate: verb- "connect (someone or something) with something else in one's mind."
I associate chilli with cold weather...there is no scientific evidence linking them,nor does there have to be to associate things together,but when I think of eating chilli I also think of it being eaten during a cold time of the year
The only reasons for anyone to call her out over her statement about gluten was because they didn't comprehend it or to instigate
Ketoers aren't being unfairly treated. If they come and spout BS about how you will lose more, easier faster and don't even need to reduce your calories or that it prevents and heals any ailment under the heavens, that's when people call them out on their wrong, unfounded crap.
Totally agree! Keto can have application for some folks and is just preferred by others. But, it's some of the ridiculous unsubstantiated claims made by some (not all) keto proponents that draws fire.
You know what? It's not even just the unsubstantiated claims. I realized this reading the discussion.
It's also the subtle, underlying premise: that's it's the way of eating that is responsible for everything experienced by keto eaters.
The simple fact is that losing weight is responsible for a large amount of what keto proponents attribute to keto itself and that the push back they receive is because they attribute it solely to their dietary choice.
Keto itself isn't responsible for a laundry list of health improvements that a lot of you folks claim it to be. Weight loss is. If more of you stopped with that ish, I think there'd be a lot less push back AND woo voting.
I think the bolded is more of an opinion than a fact. Keto'ers often (usually) attain health benefits well before any substantial weight is lost when looking at many health issues. I found that was true for me. It's not always true but it is far from uncommon.
My osteopath would not agree with you in most cases. His mantra is that for every 10% reduction in body weight, all kinds of things improve without taking any additional steps in overweight and obese people based on blood tests. The operative word is "most" people. In some people, there are health issues that will resolve with keto even if they don't lose weight.
So I think your use of the bolded phrase above is just plain not accurate. I'd be happy to look at any statistical or study data that indicates otherwise with an open mind. Honestly though, this is the kind of unsubstantiated(so far) claim that causes non keto folks to be extremely skeptical. I just don't know how you can make claims of "often" or "usually" without data to back it up. So, it just goes into the realm of a questionable claim based on subjective opinion that gets challenged.
ETA: It makes a huge difference in terms of perception for me when these kinds of general claims across a population aren't made and someone just says something like, "keto diet seems to improve my health in the following ways that I didn't experience when eating higher carb. It works for me." Either that or back up the claims from the get go because you can pretty much count on the fact that if they sound suspicious they are going to get challenged. And that doesn't just apply to keto threads. Body fat threads with claims get the same treatment as do Vegan threads or "I've replaced fat with muscle in 2 weeks" threads. Most people prefer to deal in proof and fact and not just conjecture.
I think the one exception was be BG control in diabetes or those with IR.
Yup, these are the ones where there is actual research that proves results. I don't eat keto. But I do eat low carb due to a family history with T2D. So I keep carbs under 200 usually and between 100 and 150 gr often. Just happen to get numbers today for my annual physical on Monday. BG was in range but at the upper end. A1c was middle of good range. Depending on my doctor's recommendations, I may lower carbs.
So, a very interesting conversation with my Doctor yesterday during my physical relating to my bloodwork. He is an osteopath. They get additional training on nutrition far above and beyond what normal MDs get.
My Blood Glucose is 99 (range 65-99), My triglycerides are 60 (<150 is good) which he described as ridiculously good. Total Chol 196, Total Chol/ HDL is 3.3 (> 5.0 is good), HDL is 59 (< 40 is good). The doctor thought those results were outstanding and would be great in a 36 year old man, never mind a 66 year old man.
The interesting part though was I asked him if he had any concern about the BG number. He said absolutely not, even though its at the high end of the range. Unless there are multiple factors like elevated triglycerides and low HDL/ high LDL that would point to IR, that number by itself is no cause for concern. Then he asked about my macro mix and if I eat keto or low carb. I said mildly low carb 100-150 gr mark usually. He said, well that could explain it. When we eat lower carb, our body makes enough glucose, how ever it has to sometimes resorting to neoglucogenesis to make sure we have enough glucose for brain function. Counter intuitively, if we up carbs to nearer the 200 gram or more mark, BG number will drop more into normal range in folks who are not IR.
I don't know if this is a plus or a minus and I guess that depends on your individual situation. For those who weight train, it reinforced that adequate carbs is protein sparing. For me personally, it means I can have more carbs if I want as I have no signs of IR or pre-diabetes.
As a diabetic I have learned that any single BG number is not a worry, the a1c is the important number. A BG test (even a fasting one from a blood draw) measures the glucose at one small point in time. The a1c measures the average glucose over a period of time of approximately 3 months (the life span of a red blood cell). Having an a1c in the middle of the good range is wonderful! It means your body is handling whatever carbs you give it properly.
I agree, A1C is the test to watch.
Some people's livers make more glucose for some reason. Mine is like that over night. My morning BG is typically my highest reading of the day because I don't eat enough carbs to raise it. It usually falls as the day goes on.
Dawn phenomenon is an odd one, and not only found in those with IR, although it is often greater among those people.1 -
Interesting blog on what keto is and is not:
https://www.marksdailyapple.com/where-i-part-ways-with-the-popular-keto-movement/0 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »emailmehere1122 wrote: »emailmehere1122 wrote: »lisawolfinger wrote: »I am Keto, don't have bad breath, don't eat loads of meat (many things contain protein) and the fat in my diet is not all dairy (fish for example has lots of healthy fat). I eat veggies and fruit every day but as stated by another member here...you have to choose your foods and manage your diet plan and the carb by making choices. Even if your counting calories, your making decisions and choices every day about what you eat. My optimal calorie count is in the same health range recommended by many plans and even MFP at 1300-1600.
Many Keto/low carb recipes are similar to gluten free recipes. Gluten is associated with inflammation and allergies. This tends to help Keto followers to also improve similar ailments. There is not a think I eat that I cant find a keto based/log carb recipe to substitute. My family can rarely tell the difference between those recipes and other less healthy forms. This week, I have had a piece of NY Baked Cheese cake for dessert, everyday! last week it was Chocolate cookies...the week before, Peanut butter Cookies. I do use a couple of non white flower substitutes when baking but Walmart and Kroger and Publix all carry them, all the time. I had the most amazing parmesan crusted Talipa last night with green beans. I grow a 1ac organic veggie garden and eat everything from tomatoes, egg plant and cabbage from it.
20g of carbs is not required for ketosis. It can be 30-40-50. It just depends on your goals. What is required is a specific balance of carbs/fat/protein to accomplish ketosis. Just loading on protein and being low in carbs in not the process. The web contains several good calculators to help you determine the marcos that work for you height/age/body fat content and your goals. They will also tell you the calorie counts for optimal results. You can actually play with scenarios in these calculators to tweak it to something that fits your life style. In fact, as you body fat decreases, you should recalculate because it affects ketosis and your macros.
Managing my weight and building muscle (with exercise of course) has improved for me, so much on the Keto Diet.
The bold is only true in those with celiac and allergies to wheat; similar to nuts or dairy. Outside of that, it doesn't cause chronic inflammation. Even more so, whole grains has actually been shown to improve health.
She said gluten is associated with inflammation and allergies ( which is true just like nuts and diary )...not it causes inflammation and allergies... and she got wooed and you got thumbs up...just like they said it would happen. I'm not a keto person but they are right...if they try to have a thread in here they get shredded
I am very well aware of gluten. And it still not associated with inflammation (unless you take the advice from wheat belly). I have quite a bit of experience with gluten free and have done a good amount of research. My wife has an autonomic disorder called POTS. Anecdotally, people have seen improvements by going gluten free; my wife was gluten free for 4 years. Unfortunately, there is very little actual science out there for gluten free. And that may because they havent developed the correct measures or techniques to evaluate it. But for the general populous, there isnt current evidence to support that claim.
At best with all my wife's medical issues, i have had every single gastroenterologist tell my wife to start eating gluten again because it wasn't benefiting her and could potentially cause other issues with her diverticulitis.
I think you're missing the point of what I was trying to say. The main message I was attempting to convey was the keto people are unfairly treated. She had one word being inflammation that you disagreed with so you pulled your monitor ruler out of of the desk and rapped her across the knuckles for it. You received thumbs up and she got wooed...as expected... out of four paragraphs over one word.
With that being said she used the word "associated" with inflammation not "causes". That's a true statement for some people whether there's scientific evidence to support it or not.
Per google:
Associate: verb- "connect (someone or something) with something else in one's mind."
I associate chilli with cold weather...there is no scientific evidence linking them,nor does there have to be to associate things together,but when I think of eating chilli I also think of it being eaten during a cold time of the year
The only reasons for anyone to call her out over her statement about gluten was because they didn't comprehend it or to instigate
Ketoers aren't being unfairly treated. If they come and spout BS about how you will lose more, easier faster and don't even need to reduce your calories or that it prevents and heals any ailment under the heavens, that's when people call them out on their wrong, unfounded crap.
Totally agree! Keto can have application for some folks and is just preferred by others. But, it's some of the ridiculous unsubstantiated claims made by some (not all) keto proponents that draws fire.
You know what? It's not even just the unsubstantiated claims. I realized this reading the discussion.
It's also the subtle, underlying premise: that's it's the way of eating that is responsible for everything experienced by keto eaters.
The simple fact is that losing weight is responsible for a large amount of what keto proponents attribute to keto itself and that the push back they receive is because they attribute it solely to their dietary choice.
Keto itself isn't responsible for a laundry list of health improvements that a lot of you folks claim it to be. Weight loss is. If more of you stopped with that ish, I think there'd be a lot less push back AND woo voting.
I think the bolded is more of an opinion than a fact. Keto'ers often (usually) attain health benefits well before any substantial weight is lost when looking at many health issues. I found that was true for me. It's not always true but it is far from uncommon.
My osteopath would not agree with you in most cases. His mantra is that for every 10% reduction in body weight, all kinds of things improve without taking any additional steps in overweight and obese people based on blood tests. The operative word is "most" people. In some people, there are health issues that will resolve with keto even if they don't lose weight.
So I think your use of the bolded phrase above is just plain not accurate. I'd be happy to look at any statistical or study data that indicates otherwise with an open mind. Honestly though, this is the kind of unsubstantiated(so far) claim that causes non keto folks to be extremely skeptical. I just don't know how you can make claims of "often" or "usually" without data to back it up. So, it just goes into the realm of a questionable claim based on subjective opinion that gets challenged.
ETA: It makes a huge difference in terms of perception for me when these kinds of general claims across a population aren't made and someone just says something like, "keto diet seems to improve my health in the following ways that I didn't experience when eating higher carb. It works for me." Either that or back up the claims from the get go because you can pretty much count on the fact that if they sound suspicious they are going to get challenged. And that doesn't just apply to keto threads. Body fat threads with claims get the same treatment as do Vegan threads or "I've replaced fat with muscle in 2 weeks" threads. Most people prefer to deal in proof and fact and not just conjecture.
I think the one exception was be BG control in diabetes or those with IR.
Yup, these are the ones where there is actual research that proves results. I don't eat keto. But I do eat low carb due to a family history with T2D. So I keep carbs under 200 usually and between 100 and 150 gr often. Just happen to get numbers today for my annual physical on Monday. BG was in range but at the upper end. A1c was middle of good range. Depending on my doctor's recommendations, I may lower carbs.
So, a very interesting conversation with my Doctor yesterday during my physical relating to my bloodwork. He is an osteopath. They get additional training on nutrition far above and beyond what normal MDs get.
My Blood Glucose is 99 (range 65-99), My triglycerides are 60 (<150 is good) which he described as ridiculously good. Total Chol 196, Total Chol/ HDL is 3.3 (> 5.0 is good), HDL is 59 (< 40 is good). The doctor thought those results were outstanding and would be great in a 36 year old man, never mind a 66 year old man.
The interesting part though was I asked him if he had any concern about the BG number. He said absolutely not, even though its at the high end of the range. Unless there are multiple factors like elevated triglycerides and low HDL/ high LDL that would point to IR, that number by itself is no cause for concern. Then he asked about my macro mix and if I eat keto or low carb. I said mildly low carb 100-150 gr mark usually. He said, well that could explain it. When we eat lower carb, our body makes enough glucose, how ever it has to sometimes resorting to neoglucogenesis to make sure we have enough glucose for brain function. Counter intuitively, if we up carbs to nearer the 200 gram or more mark, BG number will drop more into normal range in folks who are not IR.
I don't know if this is a plus or a minus and I guess that depends on your individual situation. For those who weight train, it reinforced that adequate carbs is protein sparing. For me personally, it means I can have more carbs if I want as I have no signs of IR or pre-diabetes.
As a diabetic I have learned that any single BG number is not a worry, the a1c is the important number. A BG test (even a fasting one from a blood draw) measures the glucose at one small point in time. The a1c measures the average glucose over a period of time of approximately 3 months (the life span of a red blood cell). Having an a1c in the middle of the good range is wonderful! It means your body is handling whatever carbs you give it properly.
Of course you are correct. I should have included that number for a complete picture. The A1c is 5.3 (good range < 5.7)1 -
Interesting blog on what keto is and is not:
https://www.marksdailyapple.com/where-i-part-ways-with-the-popular-keto-movement/
While this is one of the more logical pieces of information I have seen from him, for some reason his writings still get to me.
1 -
Pro: Can help you lose weight quickly, cures T2 diabetes if you stick with it, can resolve thyroid and PCOS issues. Can also be helpful if you have cancer as it tends to starve cancer cells from glucose.
Cons: Very restrictive and NOT for T1 diabetics, dangerous for them.
It can be a lifestyle/diet, or it can be used as a tool for a week or two to shed lbs after a vacation. Many tools in the toolbox.
Not any more dangerous than any other diet. There are several very active T1 diabetics in the LCHF forum who have been LCHF for years and swear by this WOE.1 -
Interesting blog on what keto is and is not:
https://www.marksdailyapple.com/where-i-part-ways-with-the-popular-keto-movement/
While this is one of the more logical pieces of information I have seen from him, for some reason his writings still get to me.
I haven't read enough of him in the last 5 years to be gassed by his writing anymore. But I was at one time. I thought this article was one of the better ones he's written. He actually pokes criticism at a couple of people he used to promote like Attia.0 -
The biggest con of the Keto diet is dealing with some of it's proponents. Many of whom simply can't seem to contain themselves from advocating rank nonsense. Misleading people, especially those who are new and often do not know any better, is my biggest issue with the "diet"7
-
JustRobby1 wrote: »The biggest con of the Keto diet is dealing with some of it's proponents. Many of whom simply can't seem to contain themselves from advocating rank nonsense. Misleading people, especially those who are new and often do not know any better, is my biggest issue with the "diet"
So technically it is not the diet that bothers you, but people who are misinformed or uneducated in this specific diet? Ignorance?
You may want to consider avoiding keto threads. I find it simpler to avoid threads that I know will irritate me.
2 -
Interesting blog on what keto is and is not:
https://www.marksdailyapple.com/where-i-part-ways-with-the-popular-keto-movement/
While this is one of the more logical pieces of information I have seen from him, for some reason his writings still get to me.
I don't read him often but someone shared this in the low carb forum and it had a lot of support there.2 -
JustRobby1 wrote: »The biggest con of the Keto diet is dealing with some of it's proponents. Many of whom simply can't seem to contain themselves from advocating rank nonsense. Misleading people, especially those who are new and often do not know any better, is my biggest issue with the "diet"
So technically it is not the diet that bothers you, but people who are misinformed or uneducated in this specific diet? Ignorance?
You may want to consider avoiding keto threads. I find it simpler to avoid threads that I know will irritate me.
They normally do not get away with it for long in any event, as other people are quick to chime in also, as they have here. This is why they tend to stick with anecdotes, since they are more difficult to refute, or else vague innuendo, cherry picked or illegitimate data, or flat out subterfuge when all else fails.
Experience of threads like this has taught me that when confronted with an obvious vague falsehood the Keto crowd will just make up further vague falsehoods to obscure and detract from the original. It's like trying to have an intelligent conversation with a conspiracy theorist.3 -
JustRobby1 wrote: »JustRobby1 wrote: »The biggest con of the Keto diet is dealing with some of it's proponents. Many of whom simply can't seem to contain themselves from advocating rank nonsense. Misleading people, especially those who are new and often do not know any better, is my biggest issue with the "diet"
So technically it is not the diet that bothers you, but people who are misinformed or uneducated in this specific diet? Ignorance?
You may want to consider avoiding keto threads. I find it simpler to avoid threads that I know will irritate me.
They normally do not get away with it for long in any event, as other people are quick to chime in also, as they have here. This is why they tend to stick with anecdotes, since they are more difficult to refute, or else vague innuendo, cherry picked or illegitimate data, or flat out subterfuge when all else fails.
Experience of threads like this has taught me that when confronted with an obvious vague falsehood the Keto crowd will just make up further vague falsehoods to obscure and detract from the original. It's like trying to have an intelligent conversation with a conspiracy theorist.
Singling out one particular group shows ignorance on your part because those uniformed zealots are a part of every single diet out there. And there will be more of them as it relates to trendy diets. So if those types bother you, it might be worth not joining those threads and just let it go.8
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 427 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions