Starving on Keto!

To each their own. I happen to believe that carbohydrates have a direct relationship to the increased in heart disease, cancers, and diabetes among humans. Man has consumed fats, proteins, and low glycemic carbohydrates, when in season, for over 2 million years with no known outbreak of heart disease, cancers, or diabetes. Only in the last 30 years has obesity, cancers, heart disease and diabetes have become an epidemic. What has changed in our society? Processed fried foods in vegetable oil and processed carbohydrates (sugar). And don;t give me this crap about people not exercising anymore and we move less. That's nonsense.

This fairy tale that the government has been feeding us for the last 30 years that fat is bad is absolutely ridiculous.

Man's average life expectancy has increased significantly in recent years, and we're talking about conditions that generally are found in older populations. If on average, a human being only lives to be 40 or 50, chances are good they haven't lived long enough to develop these problems. Diagnostics have also seen significant advances in the last 100 years ago, so we in all likelihood really have no way of telling what it is people died of all those years ago.

Another thing to consider. About 2/3rds of the world's population live in Asia, where the diets tend to be heavily carb based, and in places where the traditional diets have been followed, the incidence of these diseases is generally low. Introduction of "western" diet does tend to increase risks however (along with weight).

A lot has changed in the last 100 years. Our environment is not what it used to be. We're breathing more polluted air, drinking more polluted water, are not required to be as physically active, or cook and eat foods where we know what exactly is going into our bodies. I believe that it is rather simplistic to point the finger at carbs as the great villain.

Asian are smaller framed usually. They handle carbs better, less insulin resistance. The addition of a western diet, which the other guy said is high in carbs. If they handle carbs well, then there would be no issue introducing a western diet.

Many of the issues the guy has said are now in children. I do agree environmental factors can play a big role.

To each their own. I happen to believe that carbohydrates have a direct relationship to the increased in heart disease, cancers, and diabetes among humans. Man has consumed fats, proteins, and low glycemic carbohydrates, when in season, for over 2 million years with no known outbreak of heart disease, cancers, or diabetes. Only in the last 30 years has obesity, cancers, heart disease and diabetes have become an epidemic. What has changed in our society? Processed fried foods in vegetable oil and processed carbohydrates (sugar). And don;t give me this crap about people not exercising anymore and we move less. That's nonsense.

This fairy tale that the government has been feeding us for the last 30 years that fat is bad is absolutely ridiculous.

Man's average life expectancy has increased significantly in recent years, and we're talking about conditions that generally are found in older populations. If on average, a human being only lives to be 40 or 50, chances are good they haven't lived long enough to develop these problems. Diagnostics have also seen significant advances in the last 100 years ago, so we in all likelihood really have no way of telling what it is people died of all those years ago.

Another thing to consider. About 2/3rds of the world's population live in Asia, where the diets tend to be heavily carb based, and in places where the traditional diets have been followed, the incidence of these diseases is generally low. Introduction of "western" diet does tend to increase risks however (along with weight).

A lot has changed in the last 100 years. Our environment is not what it used to be. We're breathing more polluted air, drinking more polluted water, are not required to be as physically active, or cook and eat foods where we know what exactly is going into our bodies. I believe that it is rather simplistic to point the finger at carbs as the great villain.

Asian are smaller framed usually. They handle carbs better, less insulin resistance. The addition of a western diet, which the other guy said is high in carbs. If they handle carbs well, then there would be no issue introducing a western diet.

Many of the issues the guy has said are now in children. I do agree environmental factors can play a big role.

Actually, I believe that the problem with introducing a "Western" diet isn't so much carbs, but the higher amounts of fats and protein. IME (I grew up in India), what has been popularized are things like fried chicken, burgers, fries and pizza, not so much donuts and other sugary sweets (as a culture we have *extremely* sugary, sweet, traditional dishes).

My main problem with picking one thing as the great evil is that there are generally so many contributing factors that it's pretty nearly impossible to say 'It's because we eat X that we now have higher incidence of cancer, diabetes and heart disease'.

To each their own. I happen to believe that carbohydrates have a direct relationship to the increased in heart disease, cancers, and diabetes among humans. Man has consumed fats, proteins, and low glycemic carbohydrates, when in season, for over 2 million years with no known outbreak of heart disease, cancers, or diabetes. Only in the last 30 years has obesity, cancers, heart disease and diabetes have become an epidemic. What has changed in our society? Processed fried foods in vegetable oil and processed carbohydrates (sugar). And don;t give me this crap about people not exercising anymore and we move less. That's nonsense.

This fairy tale that the government has been feeding us for the last 30 years that fat is bad is absolutely ridiculous.

Man's average life expectancy has increased significantly in recent years, and we're talking about conditions that generally are found in older populations. If on average, a human being only lives to be 40 or 50, chances are good they haven't lived long enough to develop these problems. Diagnostics have also seen significant advances in the last 100 years ago, so we in all likelihood really have no way of telling what it is people died of all those years ago.

Another thing to consider. About 2/3rds of the world's population live in Asia, where the diets tend to be heavily carb based, and in places where the traditional diets have been followed, the incidence of these diseases is generally low. Introduction of "western" diet does tend to increase risks however (along with weight).

A lot has changed in the last 100 years. Our environment is not what it used to be. We're breathing more polluted air, drinking more polluted water, are not required to be as physically active, or cook and eat foods where we know what exactly is going into our bodies. I believe that it is rather simplistic to point the finger at carbs as the great villain.

^^this

In addition, most of the food 'back in the day' or the 'hunter/gatherer" times which I think is what is being referred to with the 2 million years ago comment (although the first recorded Homo Sapiens were actually from only about 200,000 years ago) was actually from the gatherers not the hunters. Approximately 90% of the food actually came from nuts and berries and the like - not particularly low in carbs and not necessarily high in fats (if mainly fruit). Only about 10% actually came from meat sources.

He's not talking about homo-sapiens he's talking about homo-neanderthal

Who were around less than a million years ago and are argued not even to be of the same species as homo-sapiens. I sort of assumed we were not discussing different species.

I did a bit of research on this myself. There was virtually no diseases before agriculture, The oldest found mummy with diseases was found in egypt, this was in Egypt, after agriculture was developed.

To each their own. I happen to believe that carbohydrates have a direct relationship to the increased in heart disease, cancers, and diabetes among humans. Man has consumed fats, proteins, and low glycemic carbohydrates, when in season, for over 2 million years with no known outbreak of heart disease, cancers, or diabetes. Only in the last 30 years has obesity, cancers, heart disease and diabetes have become an epidemic. What has changed in our society? Processed fried foods in vegetable oil and processed carbohydrates (sugar). And don;t give me this crap about people not exercising anymore and we move less. That's nonsense.

This fairy tale that the government has been feeding us for the last 30 years that fat is bad is absolutely ridiculous.

Man's average life expectancy has increased significantly in recent years, and we're talking about conditions that generally are found in older populations. If on average, a human being only lives to be 40 or 50, chances are good they haven't lived long enough to develop these problems. Diagnostics have also seen significant advances in the last 100 years ago, so we in all likelihood really have no way of telling what it is people died of all those years ago.

Another thing to consider. About 2/3rds of the world's population live in Asia, where the diets tend to be heavily carb based, and in places where the traditional diets have been followed, the incidence of these diseases is generally low. Introduction of "western" diet does tend to increase risks however (along with weight).

A lot has changed in the last 100 years. Our environment is not what it used to be. We're breathing more polluted air, drinking more polluted water, are not required to be as physically active, or cook and eat foods where we know what exactly is going into our bodies. I believe that it is rather simplistic to point the finger at carbs as the great villain.

Asian are smaller framed usually. They handle carbs better, less insulin resistance. The addition of a western diet, which the other guy said is high in carbs. If they handle carbs well, then there would be no issue introducing a western diet.

Many of the issues the guy has said are now in children. I do agree environmental factors can play a big role.

Actually, I believe that the problem with introducing a "Western" diet isn't so much carbs, but the higher amounts of fats and protein. IME (I grew up in India), what has been popularized are things like fried chicken, burgers, fries and pizza, not so much donuts and other sugary sweets (as a culture we have *extremely* sugary, sweet, traditional dishes).

My main problem with picking one thing as the great evil is that there are generally so many contributing factors that it's pretty nearly impossible to say 'It's because we eat X that we now have higher incidence of cancer, diabetes and heart disease'.

The hole in your argument however is the right there in your argument though. Notice all the western foods that you mention. Fried Chicken = breaded in wheat, Burgers = Buns made of wheat, Fries = likely fried in high trans-fat vegtable oils, Pizza = wheat based dough, etc, etc.

India also has one of the highest rates of heart disease in the world, even before the heavy introduction of western cuisine, yet also has one of the highest vegitarian populations in the world. This is NOT a coincidence.

Compared to the amount of protein and fat, how much carb is there in a fried chicken? Considering the amount of carbs an average Indian consumes on a daily basis (idli, dosa, poori, etc. for breakfast), rice or chapati/paratha for lunch and dinner, What you've mentioned would be a drop in the bucket.

It is true that India has high incidence of cardiovascular diseases. We have a gene that predisposes people towards heart disease (1 in 25). 4% of a billion people is A LOT of people. We also have high rates of nicotine use, and people have become more sedentary over time. ALL are contributing factors. Just because someone is vegetarian does not mean that they have a healthy lifestyle.

The hole in your argument however is the right there in your argument though. Notice all the western foods that you mention. Fried Chicken = breaded in wheat, Burgers = Buns made of wheat, Fries = likely fried in high trans-fat vegtable oils, Pizza = wheat based dough, etc, etc.

India also has one of the highest rates of heart disease in the world, even before the heavy introduction of western cuisine, yet also has one of the highest vegitarian populations in the world. This is NOT a coincidence.

Correlation =/= causation.

To each their own. I happen to believe that carbohydrates have a direct relationship to the increased in heart disease, cancers, and diabetes among humans. Man has consumed fats, proteins, and low glycemic carbohydrates, when in season, for over 2 million years with no known outbreak of heart disease, cancers, or diabetes. Only in the last 30 years has obesity, cancers, heart disease and diabetes have become an epidemic. What has changed in our society? Processed fried foods in vegetable oil and processed carbohydrates (sugar). And don;t give me this crap about people not exercising anymore and we move less. That's nonsense.

This fairy tale that the government has been feeding us for the last 30 years that fat is bad is absolutely ridiculous.

Man's average life expectancy has increased significantly in recent years, and we're talking about conditions that generally are found in older populations. If on average, a human being only lives to be 40 or 50, chances are good they haven't lived long enough to develop these problems. Diagnostics have also seen significant advances in the last 100 years ago, so we in all likelihood really have no way of telling what it is people died of all those years ago.

Another thing to consider. About 2/3rds of the world's population live in Asia, where the diets tend to be heavily carb based, and in places where the traditional diets have been followed, the incidence of these diseases is generally low. Introduction of "western" diet does tend to increase risks however (along with weight).

A lot has changed in the last 100 years. Our environment is not what it used to be. We're breathing more polluted air, drinking more polluted water, are not required to be as physically active, or cook and eat foods where we know what exactly is going into our bodies. I believe that it is rather simplistic to point the finger at carbs as the great villain.

Asian are smaller framed usually. They handle carbs better, less insulin resistance. The addition of a western diet, which the other guy said is high in carbs. If they handle carbs well, then there would be no issue introducing a western diet.

Many of the issues the guy has said are now in children. I do agree environmental factors can play a big role.

Actually, I believe that the problem with introducing a "Western" diet isn't so much carbs, but the higher amounts of fats and protein. IME (I grew up in India), what has been popularized are things like fried chicken, burgers, fries and pizza, not so much donuts and other sugary sweets (as a culture we have *extremely* sugary, sweet, traditional dishes).

My main problem with picking one thing as the great evil is that there are generally so many contributing factors that it's pretty nearly impossible to say 'It's because we eat X that we now have higher incidence of cancer, diabetes and heart disease'.

The hole in your argument however is the right there in your argument though. Notice all the western foods that you mention. Fried Chicken = breaded in wheat, Burgers = Buns made of wheat, Fries = likely fried in high trans-fat vegtable oils, Pizza = wheat based dough, etc, etc.

India also has one of the highest rates of heart disease in the world, even before the heavy introduction of western cuisine, yet also has one of the highest vegitarian populations in the world. This is NOT a coincidence.

Compared to the amount of protein and fat, how much carb is there in a fried chicken? Considering the amount of carbs an average Indian consumes on a daily basis (idli, dosa, poori, etc. for breakfast), rice or chapati/paratha for lunch and dinner, What you've mentioned would be a drop in the bucket.

It is true that India has high incidence of cardiovascular diseases. We have a gene that predisposes people towards heart disease (1 in 25). 4% of a billion people is A LOT of people. We also have high rates of nicotine use, and people have become more sedentary over time. ALL are contributing factors. Just because someone is vegetarian does not mean that they have a healthy lifestyle.

Part of the point is that while the Indian diet tends to be very carb heavy, until recently there wasn't as much wheat in the diet, nor refined sugar to the point that there is today. Overly processed foods that are high in grains (rice not always included) are much more common now the world around. Combine that with a vegitarian lifestyle and a genetic predisposition for heart disease and you're just asking for trouble. If people were eating more traditionally prepared foods, even higher in carbs than what would be ideal, I'd be willing to bet that the corresponding rates of disease drop as well.

The hole in your argument however is the right there in your argument though. Notice all the western foods that you mention. Fried Chicken = breaded in wheat, Burgers = Buns made of wheat, Fries = likely fried in high trans-fat vegtable oils, Pizza = wheat based dough, etc, etc.

India also has one of the highest rates of heart disease in the world, even before the heavy introduction of western cuisine, yet also has one of the highest vegitarian populations in the world. This is NOT a coincidence.

Correlation =/= causation.

Shall you go back and add Correlation =/= causation to his post as well linking dietary fat increase to the issues at hand? Oh right, didn't think so, typical conventional wisdom at work there....

I'll stay on record as believing this to be madness. I personally have hurt myself by dieting like a dope. While my doctor says I'm not responsible for crushing my thyroid, I know that eating 1200 calories, and training for a half marathon without eating back my exercise calories surely didn't help. My thyroid died, and my weight came back on, on a 1400 calorie diet.

This is for life, people-- it's a journey, not a destination. Sure, you can eat like an idiot and put your body into ketosis-- but can you sustain that forever? Lose your weight sensibly, in a way you can live with for the rest of your life.

This is your public service announcement.

I agree with you that you need to do whatever you can sustain, if you treat Atkins like a fad diet, it will be a fad diet.

THAT SAID, I understand that YOU think that it's madness but ketosis is not harmful, ketones in your urine is not harmful... you can get ketones in your urine even if you're not on a low carb diet. Some people go into ketosis every night while they sleep, people can slip in and out of ketosis during the day even without trying. If ketones were dangerous, doctors would tell us to wake up in the middle of the night to eat something or risk going into ketosis.

Anyways, there have been plenty of studies that have shown that low carb/ketogenic diets are safe. A ketogenic diet to me might be... in the morning I eat an egg omelette, cooked in a little bit of butter. I slice some tomato to eat on the side, maybe with a bit of mayo. For lunch, I have a hamburger patty, a dill pickle spear, and a salad. For supper, I eat two chicken breasts, a few cups of broccoli, and some cheese. Dessert if I am hungry for it is a handful of fresh strawberries.

I'm not sure what about that diet would be so scary to cause people to think that it's dangerous, in fact it seems to be a way that people might eat normally without ever stopping to think that it's low carb or ketogenic at all.