Is Keto Worth it?

GaleHawkins wrote: »

WinoGelato wrote: »

GaleHawkins wrote: »

snickerscharlie wrote: »

GaleHawkins wrote: »

snickerscharlie wrote: »

GaleHawkins wrote: »

snickerscharlie wrote: »

GaleHawkins wrote: »

Grambo54 wrote: »

psuLemon wrote: »

Grambo54 wrote: »

I have no means of measuring except I feel and see the difference, when I flex, my shape and overall bulk after a 15 pound loss, and I have done this many times before. But It may be I have only put 1 pound on because I havent been doing any heavy leg work. If so, that pound has gone a long way.

Its not just CNS strength gain. I cant quantify how much I think is strength gain, but its no where near as much as the muscle size gain. Perhaps too, because I know what exercises give me personally, the fastest gains, and the reps/sets/ etc to maximise that for me, that helps gain fast.

But the CNS is a really good topic, because it has a huge bearing on how effectively we recuperate from training. Cheers

I am sorry, but "feels" =/= actual results. You are making an assumption rather than making a statement based on actual data. Is there potential that you did gain some muscle? Maybe. But you don't have data to support your actual position. You have no clue if it was muscle gains, increase in blood flow (make you look pump), fat loss, muscle loss, etc...

I am glad you like what you see and have accomplished, but that in no way means you have data to support your position.

Thats the problem here on this forum. You have to have data, proof, verification. Experience means nothing! What you see in the mirror, its subjective, weights in the gym going up, oh just nervous energy, bigger biceps, oh thats easy...pump. I cant believe this. Ive been training for 45 years, 4 years as a competitive bodybuilder and you learn alot doing that. I have way more than just a "clue". You can have your science and data, I'll keep my results!

@Grambo54 you make valid points. I love science and data but in my life ONLY my n=1 has any personal medical validity. When old with failing health waiting 50 years for science and data to evolve is a death sentence.

FIFY. Personal validity =/= medical validity. Apples, oranges.

I changed it from personal to medical to be more scientifically correct.

Which shows you've entirely missed the point. Finding something personally valid does not automatically make it medically/scientifically valid.

Finding something personally valid Does automatically make it medically and scientifically valid in n=1 trials.

I guess that depends entirely on what your definition of valid is. My n=1 that the earth is flat does not make it so.

Valid = improved health markers in my life.

And many people experience similar improvements in health markers simply from losing weight. This is why the n=1 doesn’t trump direct scientific evidence.

My n=1 results that reduces my risks of a premature death TRUMPS general population scientific evidence if the general population results are not the same as my n=1 results that continues to improve my health markers over time.

This result confirms your personal bias. Evidence trumps bias. Your health markers improved as you implemented a caloric deficit and returned to a healthy weight.

This does not impact the results. It only shows flaws in your root cause analysis.

CSARdiver wrote: »

Grambo54 wrote: »

psuLemon wrote: »

Grambo54 wrote: »

I have no means of measuring except I feel and see the difference, when I flex, my shape and overall bulk after a 15 pound loss, and I have done this many times before. But It may be I have only put 1 pound on because I havent been doing any heavy leg work. If so, that pound has gone a long way.

Its not just CNS strength gain. I cant quantify how much I think is strength gain, but its no where near as much as the muscle size gain. Perhaps too, because I know what exercises give me personally, the fastest gains, and the reps/sets/ etc to maximise that for me, that helps gain fast.

But the CNS is a really good topic, because it has a huge bearing on how effectively we recuperate from training. Cheers

I am sorry, but "feels" =/= actual results. You are making an assumption rather than making a statement based on actual data. Is there potential that you did gain some muscle? Maybe. But you don't have data to support your actual position. You have no clue if it was muscle gains, increase in blood flow (make you look pump), fat loss, muscle loss, etc...

I am glad you like what you see and have accomplished, but that in no way means you have data to support your position.

Thats the problem here on this forum. You have to have data, proof, verification. Experience means nothing! What you see in the mirror, its subjective, weights in the gym going up, oh just nervous energy, bigger biceps, oh thats easy...pump. I cant believe this. Ive been training for 45 years, 4 years as a competitive bodybuilder and you learn alot doing that. I have way more than just a "clue". You can have your science and data, I'll keep my results!

Is it a problem with the forum?

The root problem is that you are attempting to persuade, but the audience wants evidence. You can either blame the want or adapt and overcome by providing evidence.

Not the whole forum but in general a toeing of the line that science, data, analysis, is only what counts, and if you cant prove what youre saying that way, your results are deemed invalid or at least unbelievable and bad advice. Science does not have all the answers.

The human body is so complex I dont believe science will ever know it all. Scientists often cant even all agree on even which methodology produces the most accurate results. its not that I believe science is wrong on everything, I just dont believe it knows enough to be right on everything. So therefore I am sceptical of scientific theories that are not fully proven nor fully endorsed by the whole scientific community. Im offering a different viewpoint to what is pushed here. One that recognises real life cases, personal experience, years competing, owning gyms and training and observing people wanting to improve. Call it broscience if you like but the bros just keep coming out of the gym looking great.

Heres something to throw out there for comment and comparison, no right or wrongs, but interesting to hear what people think. Diet quality is about 10% of results in the gym. Supplements (like protein shakes, vitamins) not worth listing. Program about 20%. Psychology (motivation,dedication,determination etc) 20%, lifting and intensity 30%, rest and recuperation 20%. And if diet is only 10 or 15% of the equation why do we spend 90% of the time on this forum talking about it

Grambo54 wrote: »

CSARdiver wrote: »

Grambo54 wrote: »

psuLemon wrote: »

Grambo54 wrote: »

I have no means of measuring except I feel and see the difference, when I flex, my shape and overall bulk after a 15 pound loss, and I have done this many times before. But It may be I have only put 1 pound on because I havent been doing any heavy leg work. If so, that pound has gone a long way.

Its not just CNS strength gain. I cant quantify how much I think is strength gain, but its no where near as much as the muscle size gain. Perhaps too, because I know what exercises give me personally, the fastest gains, and the reps/sets/ etc to maximise that for me, that helps gain fast.

But the CNS is a really good topic, because it has a huge bearing on how effectively we recuperate from training. Cheers

I am sorry, but "feels" =/= actual results. You are making an assumption rather than making a statement based on actual data. Is there potential that you did gain some muscle? Maybe. But you don't have data to support your actual position. You have no clue if it was muscle gains, increase in blood flow (make you look pump), fat loss, muscle loss, etc...

I am glad you like what you see and have accomplished, but that in no way means you have data to support your position.

Thats the problem here on this forum. You have to have data, proof, verification. Experience means nothing! What you see in the mirror, its subjective, weights in the gym going up, oh just nervous energy, bigger biceps, oh thats easy...pump. I cant believe this. Ive been training for 45 years, 4 years as a competitive bodybuilder and you learn alot doing that. I have way more than just a "clue". You can have your science and data, I'll keep my results!

Is it a problem with the forum?

The root problem is that you are attempting to persuade, but the audience wants evidence. You can either blame the want or adapt and overcome by providing evidence.

Not the whole forum but in general a toeing of the line that science, data, analysis, is only what counts, and if you cant prove what youre saying that way, your results are deemed invalid or at least unbelievable and bad advice. Science does not have all the answers.

The human body is so complex I dont believe science will ever know it all. Scientists often cant even all agree on even which methodology produces the most accurate results. its not that I believe science is wrong on everything, I just dont believe it knows enough to be right on everything. So therefore I am sceptical of scientific theories that are not fully proven nor fully endorsed by the whole scientific community. Im offering a different viewpoint to what is pushed here. One that recognises real life cases, personal experience, years competing, owning gyms and training and observing people wanting to improve. Call it broscience if you like but the bros just keep coming out of the gym looking great.

Heres something to throw out there for comment and comparison, no right or wrongs, but interesting to hear what people think. Diet quality is about 10% of results in the gym. Supplements (like protein shakes, vitamins) not worth listing. Program about 20%. Psychology (motivation,dedication,determination etc) 20%, lifting and intensity 30%, rest and recuperation 20%. And if diet is only 10 or 15% of the equation why do we spend 90% of the time on this forum talking about it

Without data, you are just making crap up. You are equivalently telling people to just trust what you are saying. That is the same line as those who tout MLM supplements, AVC, etc...

You may be fine with trusting anybody who tells you something, but i am not. I like data and science where possible. When its not I look at trusted leaders in the field to provide guidance based on experience.

Also, when people make dataless claims, it can give false hope to many noobs. I like to set realistic expectations to those who are new to dieting and training.

Grambo54 wrote: »

CSARdiver wrote: »

Grambo54 wrote: »

psuLemon wrote: »

Grambo54 wrote: »

I have no means of measuring except I feel and see the difference, when I flex, my shape and overall bulk after a 15 pound loss, and I have done this many times before. But It may be I have only put 1 pound on because I havent been doing any heavy leg work. If so, that pound has gone a long way.

Its not just CNS strength gain. I cant quantify how much I think is strength gain, but its no where near as much as the muscle size gain. Perhaps too, because I know what exercises give me personally, the fastest gains, and the reps/sets/ etc to maximise that for me, that helps gain fast.

But the CNS is a really good topic, because it has a huge bearing on how effectively we recuperate from training. Cheers

I am sorry, but "feels" =/= actual results. You are making an assumption rather than making a statement based on actual data. Is there potential that you did gain some muscle? Maybe. But you don't have data to support your actual position. You have no clue if it was muscle gains, increase in blood flow (make you look pump), fat loss, muscle loss, etc...

I am glad you like what you see and have accomplished, but that in no way means you have data to support your position.

Thats the problem here on this forum. You have to have data, proof, verification. Experience means nothing! What you see in the mirror, its subjective, weights in the gym going up, oh just nervous energy, bigger biceps, oh thats easy...pump. I cant believe this. Ive been training for 45 years, 4 years as a competitive bodybuilder and you learn alot doing that. I have way more than just a "clue". You can have your science and data, I'll keep my results!

Is it a problem with the forum?

The root problem is that you are attempting to persuade, but the audience wants evidence. You can either blame the want or adapt and overcome by providing evidence.

Not the whole forum but in general a toeing of the line that science, data, analysis, is only what counts, and if you cant prove what youre saying that way, your results are deemed invalid or at least unbelievable and bad advice. Science does not have all the answers.

The human body is so complex I dont believe science will ever know it all. Scientists often cant even all agree on even which methodology produces the most accurate results. its not that I believe science is wrong on everything, I just dont believe it knows enough to be right on everything. So therefore I am sceptical of scientific theories that are not fully proven nor fully endorsed by the whole scientific community. Im offering a different viewpoint to what is pushed here. One that recognises real life cases, personal experience, years competing, owning gyms and training and observing people wanting to improve. Call it broscience if you like but the bros just keep coming out of the gym looking great.

Heres something to throw out there for comment and comparison, no right or wrongs, but interesting to hear what people think. Diet quality is about 10% of results in the gym. Supplements (like protein shakes, vitamins) not worth listing. Program about 20%. Psychology (motivation,dedication,determination etc) 20%, lifting and intensity 30%, rest and recuperation 20%. And if diet is only 10 or 15% of the equation why do we spend 90% of the time on this forum talking about it

You're speaking past the evidence in an attempt to be right. Is it effective? Adopting fact based evidence to support facts, challenge and evolving beyond personal bias is extremely effective. There's a primal resonance when truth is spoken.

No one is claiming that science has all the answers. This is a strawman. Science is simply a process for testing, reprocibility and fact finding.

The body may be complex, but not for the topic at hand. Rather simple actually. Your viewpoint may be correct, but why not back it with evidence and serve both yourself and your audience?

You're also discussing a very different goal in this than the average person simply seeking to go from 30% bodyfat to 17%. For this diet quality is almost meaningless. From personal studies and a few other people on the forums I'm starting to question that quality is ever a meaningful variable. Diet quality only becomes a concern when other risks are minimized, so these arbitrary percentages are going to be varying wildly based upon the present status of the individual and their health goals.

Okay, first you need to know how the keto diet originated. In the olden days (1920's and such), there were no drugs to treat epilepsy. So the physicians used to prescribe Keto diet (yes, the exact same one you are talking about) as a treatment. The ketone bodies that are generated actually cause changes in the brain chemistry to slow it down. Because many of the subjects also lost weight while on this diet, the diet became a fad.


Now, while for people with epilepsy, that is a good thing (because their brain impulses are hyperactive and keto brings them in a normal range) but for normal people, it will slow down the normal functioning of the brain. Consider what would happen if people who don't have diabetes started taking insulin. (Though keto doesn't cause as immediate and as life-threatening changes as insulin overload).That is also a big part of why people feel lethargic. And the effects of keto diet on the brain chemistry of normal people has not been well studied. It is also not known if there are any permanent effects.

There is another state in which ketosis is produced - diabetes. Because of the lack of insulin, people with diabetes are unable to process carbs. This is why the body switches to fat metabolism and produces ketones. But the high amount of ketones produces severe stomach cramps, vomiting, delirium and even coma. Now, in a keto diet that would not be possible because you are eating some carbs and you will have natural cravings and desire to eat and not eat certain foods. The same 100% no carb only fat environment is hard to replicate. However, you can have milder versions of side effects like stomach pains, confusion, lethargy, nausea, diarrhoea etc. But this will give you an idea that a body running only on fat isn't such a good thing.

I am not trying to scare you but I believe you should have all the info.

Moreover, Keto claims that its main benefit is to make your body burn fat instead of carbs. It also cites some study that found that ketones are more efficiently used by the body than carbs for producing energy. However, our bodies are ingenious machines. If our bodies have been made to run on carbs, it is for a reason. Mere efficiency is not the criteria. The side effects (as mentioned above) also need to be taken into account.
Sometimes people say that we are born into ketosis so, I don't know, it is automatically better? When we are born we have fetal form of blood and muscle tissue. But the same kind in adults causes diseases and slows down movement.

Moreover, there are some systems in our body that run on carbs - like the anaerobic system which cannot work on ketones.

Another thing, theoretically you could eat only gummy bears, maintain calories and lose weight. However, you wouldn't do that right? Then why go overboard with fat and protein-laden foods. Many of the keto foods are extremely unhealthy because of the way they are made and because they are very high in fat (especially unhealthy fats).

Also, if you don't count calories on the keto diet, you can easily go overboard as keto foods are very very very high in calories. But if you count calories, that would mean that you would be starving all day long, especially since dense calorie-packed foods will have very small portions for that calorie allowance. This mostly why keto followers struggle.

Moreover, you have to see what is your priority. Do you just want to lose weight or do you want to be healthy? These are different things. Because being healthy means having a good cardio-resp strength, a good heart, no fatty liver, no cholesterol in your arteries, strong bones and muscles, strong ligaments (need protein and calcium) , a good mental health (exercise and healthy foods help a lot with that), proper vitamins for healthy blood, functioning of the body, proper vitamins for skin regeneration so that the flaps of skin are absorbed once you lose weight and much much more. Keto will not give you that. In fact, keto works in the opposite direction of many of these things.

Also, it becomes very very hard for some people to exercise while on keto. Some can manage, many can't. And exercise But it is up to you to decide.

Moreover, diets never work. Whenever you stop them, the weight comes back. If you want to lose weight and keep it off you should never follow a diet. Instead, you should make permanent changes to your eating habits and menu that will stay with you for the rest of your life. These habits have to be sustainable in the long term and compatible with your routine. If you think that keto is something you can follow until the day you die, go for it. But many people are not able to do that.

Keto will also deprive you of many essential vitamins and minerals found in different kinds of foods. While you can take supplements for some vitamins, there are so many micronutrients and antioxidants that man has not yet been able to extract and formulate into capsules. Which is why it is always better to take them from a natural source, instead of from supplements. But then again, it depends on your priorities.

While many people swear by keto because they could maintain it and they got results, there are also many people who swear by the fact that a moderate, mindful, permanent food habit modification by including all kinds of food in moderation produces the same results. The basic formula is calorie in < calorie out. For a difference of every 3500 cals, you lose a pound. You could do that on a gummy bear diet, a purple diet, a keto diet or a well-rounded diet. The key is to follow the diet that you can stick with for the rest of your life. Eg. I have a sweet tooth. If I deprive myself sweets for very long, I end up bingeing. The forbidden fruit is so much sweeter. Therefore, even though I would like protein to be in a little higher percentage, I still add something sweet every day to my menu while maintaining the calories because I cannot deprive myself of sweets till the day I die.

And as for the fat burning benefit of keto goes, let me break it down. Any kind of food habit where you are eating less than you are burning is taking energy from fat, period. While it is true that the body can burn muscle, it tends to burn fat. Moreover, you can add weight training and HIIT and good protein to maintain muscle tissue.
There are also many ways you can drive up the fat burn - eg HIIT training without energy drinks and in a calorie deficit, fasting cardio etc. These are much easier to follow than a keto diet and have less damaging effects o your body.

Ultimately, I would say that consistency is key. If you cannot stick with a food and exercise routine forever, don't start it. Every time you start it and fail, it reinforces a negative attitude towards fitness and weight management. You feel like a failure and that feeling, in turn, causes you to fail and the loop continues. So do it once, do right and do it forever. Pick the thing that you can follow forever and stick with it. Don't care if everyone around you is snuffing honey or lemons or whatever to lose weight. If keto works, go with that, if you think you can stick with paleo, go with that, if you think well rounded moderate diet is it, go with that. And start making the changes slowly. You wouldn't run 10 miles, do 100 pushups, 500 squats and lift weight for hours on the first day you decide to exercise. You would start slow - maybe 30 mins of light to moderate cardio, 10 pushups and 10 squats and maybe 10 mins of weightlifting and then adjust it as you go. So should be your food modification.

I hope this long ramble helped.

Sorry, the body is made to run on either carbs or fats, the brain runs on fats!

AnvilHead wrote: »

Fuzzipeg wrote: »

Sorry, the body is made to run on either carbs or fats, the brain runs on fats!

Incorrect. The brain's preferred fuel source is glucose (carbs) - to the point that if there isn't glucose present, fats will be converted to carbs (gluconeogenesis) to power the brain, or ketones will be produced in the liver and used as fuel in the absence of glucose.

Exactly. It's a last resort sort of fuel, a survival mechanism so we survive as long as possible in the event of a famine. When both carbs and fats are available, the brain will preferentially use glucose.