Keto Diet

[christulsa]

I just dropped 50 lbs in under 2 mos. eating rib eyes, wings, butter, eggs and bacon, salads, and low carb veggies (brussel sprouts, cabbage, spinach).  (I also swim but not to burn calories).  Have a ways to go.   Had done keto 5 years ago, gotten down to slender but packed it back on slowly after a nasty injury with many months of intractable pain.   But I'm convinced from experience and the science, eating a low carb-medium protein-high fat diet is the most effective way to lose weight for most people, in a sustainable way, and an optimal treatment for most illnesses caused in large part by inflammation. 

I'll share here my progress.  Planning next to add intermittent fasting.  Feel free to join the challenge.  It's almost the New Year after all.  And discuss the merits and challenges of this Way of Eating here.

[Gardener]

The most important thing about Keto is it is not a diet in the colloquial sense; it is a way of eating. Too many people starve themselves on it and that's wrong. One should not be continually hungry on Keto if doing it properly.

[Heinrich]

I have heard that it makes one energyless and inhibits robust exercising although mental clarity is enhanced.

[martin88nyc]

I have heard that it makes one energyless and inhibits robust exercising although mental clarity is enhanced.

yes it it good for people with brain issues

[Padraig]

I have heard that it makes one energyless and inhibits robust exercising although mental clarity is enhanced.

Those two things are mutually exclusive. If you're energy depleted, your metal clarity will suffer, but if your mental clarity improves, so will your energy levels.

[awkwardcustomer]

But I'm convinced from experience and the science, eating a low carb-medium protein-high fat diet is the most effective way to lose weight for most people, in a sustainable way, and an optimal treatment for most illnesses caused in large part by inflammation. 

Congratulations.  Eating low-carb, high fat foods, contrary to everything the health and government agencies say, is definitely the way to go.

The body converts carbs from your pizza, potatoes, bread, into glucose.  Glucose stimulates insulin production.  Insulin regulates fat storage.  The glucose and insulin spikes caused by high carb food mean you'll be hungry again in a couple of hours and will need more carbs to produce another energy spike.

But what about a traditional diet, meaning a non-corporate diet, which would also be low carb/high.  Why 'Keto'? 

And it's a pity about the spinach though, and any other high oxalate leafy greens recommended for the keto diet, although it's the dose that matters and a little bit of what you fancy does you good, whatever your poison.  Tobacco is mine, and has caused me less harm over the years than spinach and all the other toxic 'health' food that I ate train loads of for decades.

Back in the 1960s and 70s, the advice on losing weight was to stay off the carbs as in potatoes and bread.  And people were much thinner then.  What went wrong?  Oh, I know.  The food corporations ......

[awkwardcustomer]

I have heard that it makes one energyless and inhibits robust exercising although mental clarity is enhanced.

Why would the keto diet do that, if what you have heard is true that is?

[christulsa]

More on the Keto Diet: 

https://www.dietdoctor.com/low-carb/science

[Gardener]

I have heard that it makes one energyless and inhibits robust exercising although mental clarity is enhanced.

https://www.everydayhealth.com/fitness/what-keto-diet-will-your-workout/

You're probably thinking of carb loading for gains used by competitive lifters -- but don't they cut that out when in a "cutting" phase? They're also going harder than average garage lifters. The reason they do that is it allows their body to burn muscle glycogen, which is gained from carbs. So their intensity is higher. But the moment that drops they are doing nothing but storing it as fat - a bad thing. Even someone with a VERY low percentage of body fat has enough fat to run 2 marathons without eating (or something like that). The idea of fat reserves is something the body does very well on its own; we have no need to assist in a synthetic manner. It's also metabolism based. Someone like the Scotsman can get away with it; he actually has to eat like "crap" to maintain a weight. Myself, probably you, and others with average to slow metabolisms cannot.

One could also do the "caveman" diet as an intro to carb reduction. I think that's more of what you were doing before you hurt your knee?

The reality is, even the average "active" adult today is sedentary compared to 2 generations ago. Combine that with an increase in sugar intake since the 80's, and one has a recipe for some serious fat gain.

It's a simple formula:  intake > output = fat gain; intake < output = fat loss; intake == output = steady

[christulsa]

According to recent studies, endurance sports especially work well on keto (= low carb-medium protein-high fat), but fast, high intensity sports can as well with some carb loading.   Key is to get VERY keto-adapted, where your main source of energy is stored fat, and fat oxidation becomes quick.  There are documented keto-adapted ultra-marathoners running 100+ miles purely on stored body fat, no snacks just water.   David Goggins for example.

https://jissn.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12970-019-0284-9

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29252062

[christulsa]

Keto specifically (net carbs < 20/day) is optimal for fat loss, but I haven't concluded if that carb level is optimal for long term health.   There's arguments that say it is, others that say best to add back carbs to a maintenance level (< 100/day) for the micro-nutrients (especially plant-based phyto-nutrients protecting against cancer, heart disease, etc).   But "keto" generallyhas now also become a more general umbrella term vs "low carb."  The advantage is it describes your main source of energy:  ketones. 

https://www.doctoroz.com/episode/ultimate-keto-everything-you-need-know-about-diet-everyone

[Padraig]

It's a simple formula:  intake > output = fat gain; intake < output = fat loss; intake == output = steady

While this is true in a very strict, literalist sense, it's easily misunderstood. The "output" part is not so much exercise as it is basal metabolic rate. Body composition plays a part in this (the more muscular you are, the greater your metabolic demands), but the real key is your hormones, specifically insulin vs. glucagon, and ghrelin vs. leptin. Insulin is a growth factor and a fat storage hormone, and as long as you have high blood levels of it, you'll always have trouble losing weight, no matter how much you increase your exercise output.

[Gardener]

It's a simple formula:  intake > output = fat gain; intake < output = fat loss; intake == output = steady

While this is true in a very strict, literalist sense, it's easily misunderstood. The "output" part is not so much exercise as it is basal metabolic rate. Body composition plays a part in this (the more muscular you are, the greater your metabolic demands), but the real key is your hormones, specifically insulin vs. glucagon, and ghrelin vs. leptin. Insulin is a growth factor and a fat storage hormone, and as long as you have high blood levels of it, you'll always have trouble losing weight, no matter how much you increase your exercise output.

True, there are certainly other factors depending on specific cases. It's the difference between people who will always be "big" and relatively average people trapped in a dumpy frame.

But I have a hard time believing that the majority of the population went from being fit on average to being a meme on average; genetics and resultant issues don't change that quickly over 1-2 generations. That's why when one looks at old photographs from the 60's 70's and early 80's, as a rule the people are today's "skinny" and the exception is the fat person. It's reversed now.

The only thing that changed for most was what they ate and how much they were physically active.

[christulsa]

The Calories in/Calories out theory of weight management is a simplistic 1980's weight loss marketing tool based on a poor understanding of metabolism and biochemistry.  It's mantra of "just eat less and exercise more" is as inane as the dogma "eat low fat."   A paradigm shift in one's thinking on health and nutrition is in order.

[Gardener]

The Calories in/Calories out theory of weight management is a simplistic 1980's weight loss marketing tool based on a poor understanding of metabolism and biochemistry.  It's mantra of "just eat less and exercise more" is as inane as the dogma "eat low fat."   A paradigm shift in one's thinking on health and nutrition is in order.

It's not simplistic, it's a simplification of an otherwise complex physiological reality.

But the generational comparison doesn't lie. And only two things changed: what/how much was/is eaten and how much activity was/is done.

Some people will always be "big". Some. Most, however, eat too much and do too little.

Unless... one wants to make the argument that genetics shifted THAT much in 40 years.