I’m open to it. Or the combination of high fat-high carb. It seems counterintuitive (to laymen like myself) that one could get fat eating high fat and then lose weight also eating high fat.What if type 2 diabetes were induced more reliably by excessive fat intake than by excessive carb intake?
I know you’re joking but what’s interesting about this debate is for most of us in here it doesn’t matter - we either were or are fat. They are debating what makes us fat - most of us are trying to stop being fat. Unless I haven’t followed correctly, Maurile and Guyenet both see no big issue with Keto as a strategy to lose weight- just don’t demonize (good) carbs as evil for everyone.Why does Maurile hate skinny people
I watched some of Rogan's debate with Kahn (vegan) vs. Kresser (low carb). One thing that I think both agreed to is not being fooled in to thinking one size fits all. I think there's no doubt there's multiple ways to skin the cat and I wish most of these guys would emphasize that finding something that you can live with and follow is probably more important than whether you eat some meat or a little natural sugar or some rice/potato or a little healthy fat. Nobody is going to eat a perfect diet even if it existed AND we could all agree on it (which I don't think it does and I don't think we will). I think those of us who have been big proponents of Keto are saying is - hey, this seems to work really well and some/most of you can probably follow it. There's zero chance I could do a vegan diet and be happy and get the results (because I would fall off the wagon).I'll be checking out the JRE show with them, too, now. Thanks for the heads up. I went from the potato diet and vegan to keto. Keto is way easier to maintain for me, because it fits how I want to eat and I don't feel like I am depriving myself.
Both work. Both gave me a lot of energy and less soreness/inflammation in my body. Both helped me lose weight in big chunks. Reading the proponents of both sides, I kind of suspected for a while that it's the combination of excessive protein, too much fat (especially bad fats) and bad carbs (processed, simple carbs and sugars) that has caused the spike in obesity and diabetes and all the other maladies that are epidemics in the USA. Both sides have merit.
what I have to do is get over the inherent bias I have that somehow a plant-based approach is "better" and figure out the science of it all. Or at least, keep up to speed on who is leading the debate for each side. I think there's a lot of hyperbole and marketing involved from people on both sides, as well as a lot of well-meaning inflammatory passion.
You've read more on this than me, but the thing I am concerned about with people going on Keto is if there will be a findings eventually of long term health problems correlated with the diet. Even skinny people get heart disease and cancers, for example. My understanding (I could be wrong) is this is a bit of an unknown for Keto.I watched some of Rogan's debate with Kahn (vegan) vs. Kresser (low carb). One thing that I think both agreed to is not being fooled in to thinking one size fits all. I think there's no doubt there's multiple ways to skin the cat and I wish most of these guys would emphasize that finding something that you can live with and follow is probably more important than whether you eat some meat or a little natural sugar or some rice/potato or a little healthy fat. Nobody is going to eat a perfect diet even if it existed AND we could all agree on it (which I don't think it does and I don't think we will). I think those of us who have been big proponents of Keto are saying is - hey, this seems to work really well and some/most of you can probably follow it. There's zero chance I could do a vegan diet and be happy and get the results (because I would fall off the wagon).
Definitely something I have thought about and do think about - my reasoning at this point is that my diet was so bad it's almost impossible for someone to convince me that what I'm doing isn't better and probably a whole lot better. I've lost 80 pounds, my blood work all looks good, my BP is 110/70, I feel great and have tons of energy (except I've been sick lately). However, I could drop dead of a heart attack tomorrow. I've mentioned that there's two tests I want to do to get an idea of how likely I am for a heart attack - I mentioned them both in Otis' thread - Lipoprotein A and a CACS score. Those are two things that can answer some questions around heart disease. Cancer is always a concern but again, my diet was so bad previously that I'm again assuming that what I'm doing has to be better. I was on the path to diabetes - for folks that either aren't overweight or have never been overweight then I think a balanced diet that you mention does make the most sense.You've read more on this than me, but the thing I am concerned about with people going on Keto is if there will be a findings eventually of long term health problems correlated with the diet. Even skinny people get heart disease and cancers, for example. My understanding (I could be wrong) is this is a bit of an unknown for Keto.
Perhaps a more balanced diet based on lean meats, legumes, whole grains, fruits, vegetables, nuts, seeds, healthy oils, etc. would be better. I'm interested in your thoughts on this. Of course, as you mention, finding something that works to achieve and maintain a healthy weight is a consideration regardless.
It is unknown because, as with veganism, there are no cultures that have traditionally subsisted on ketogenic diets. (Not even the Inuits.) So the long-term effects are somewhat unknown.You've read more on this than me, but the thing I am concerned about with people going on Keto is if there will be a findings eventually of long term health problems correlated with the diet. Even skinny people get heart disease and cancers, for example. My understanding (I could be wrong) is this is a bit of an unknown for Keto.
This shouldn't be surprising. It's obviously true with carbohydrate as well: plenty of people gain weight eating high-carb diets, but extremely high-carb diets are also among the most successful for weight loss as well (e.g., the rice diet, the potato diet, a vegan diet...).It seems counterintuitive (to laymen like myself) that one could get fat eating high fat and then lose weight also eating high fat.
In rats, I think the easiest way to induce type 2 diabetes is to give them unlimited access to human junk food, which is high fat and high carb. If we stick to rat chow rather than human food, I believe the high-fat chow is the preferred way to do it.I’m open to it. Or the combination of high fat-high carb.What if type 2 diabetes were induced more reliably by excessive fat intake than by excessive carb intake?
Agree - I think for me this is where the sustainability part comes in - there's lots of people who just can't do low carb, it's easy for me. Low fat would be difficult for me, low protein would be the hardest of the 3 - just based on how I eat. Since I've started I think I've been too high protein and not high enough fat (for doing Keto that is). I was to decrease my fat intake and increase my good carbs and keep protein down. My concern is getting that balance right and eating enough calories.This shouldn't be surprising. It's obviously true with carbohydrate as well: plenty of people gain weight eating high-carb diets, but extremely high-carb diets are also among the most successful for weight loss as well (e.g., the rice diet, the potato diet, a vegan diet...).
Thanks. I listened to three clips that were on YouTube last night totaling only about 45 minutes. I hope to watch the rest at some point.@Juxtatarot - as Maurile mentions in the Rogan thread the podcast has been posted. I've listened to about 2/3 of it so far. My takeaways:
I think you should post more in here (if you want). Nothing wrong with having things challenged, especially if we find out we are doing more harm than good.Thanks. I listened to three clips that were on YouTube last night totaling only about 45 minutes. I hope to watch the rest at some point.
It's funny that I had a different impression of the participants from the parts I saw. Although Guyenet certainly came across as smug, it seemed to me that he had a much better understanding of the science than Taubes. I wasn't impressed by Taubes at all. Of course, I quite likely am at least a little bit biased since I'm skeptical about the demonization of whole grains and, to a lesser degree, fruit that the Keto diet can lead to.
This will probably be my last post in this thread because I feel uncomfortable posting about this topic here. There is obvious value in losing weight and I see the advantages that a Keto diet could have for many people. This thread should be encouraging, not discouraging.
One last point. The parts that I saw really made it clear how difficult it must be for people to avoid obesity who have the genes to make obesity more likely and live in the American culture with its standard diet and lifestyle . Their brains and bodies are wanting them to be heavier and it will be a difficult struggle to fight against. I have a lot of respect for people who take on that challenge.
To be fair to Rogan, I think he asked some decent questions for a laymen and asked for clarification when warranted. He definitely seemed to want things to be fair even if he obviously isn’t an expert.That wasn't a good format for that kind of debate. This kind of discussion really needs to be written so that sources can be cited easily, thoughts organized better, etc. And while I think Joe Rogan is generally an excellent interviewer, this discussion needed to be refereed by somebody with better expertise himself. Many people don't like reading, but oral arguments are an inherently poor substitute in some contexts, and I think this was one of them.
I don't specifically remember that part, but does this sound like what they were referring to?To be fair to Rogan, I think he asked some decent questions for a laymen and asked for clarification when warranted. He definitely seemed to want things to be fair even if he obviously isn’t an expert.
Im curious your take on the insulin gene comment and how Guyenet admitted that can be a source of problem for some people, that originates not in the brain but the body. That seemed to be an acknowledgement that Taubes theory may be true for some people. Maybe I’m too dumb to understand what he was saying or maybe I misinterpreted it but seemed significant to me. If you don’t recall the part I’m taking about I will see if I can find it although it may take me listening to the whole thing again.
I tried to skim this and it doesn’t seem the same but I have a feeling it’s my ignorance. I will try to identify the time in the podcast and also do a better job of summarizing.I don't specifically remember that part, but does this sound like what they were referring to?
This is a huge concern for me as well, I am also uncomfortable with how much saturated fat often gets used in keto recipes. I posted a couple weeks ago about the effort I put in prior to starting a ketogenic diet to ensure that I maximized my fiber intake. I spent several weeks pulling recipes from Leanne Vogel's book (regarding SFA intake I often used far less fat than she calls for and I started substituting avocado oil and olive oil where possible as well) and other sources , with a clear focus on choosing recipes that maximize vegetables and fiber intake. I spent an additional week or so purchasing all the ingredients, preparing and vacuum sealing dozens of freezer ready meals and snacks and that was all before eating my first keto bite.It is unknown because, as with veganism, there are no cultures that have traditionally subsisted on ketogenic diets. (Not even the Inuits.) So the long-term effects are somewhat unknown.
My biggest concern with long-term keto would be the (usual) lack of fiber and resistant starch. It is possible to eat a ketogenic diet that includes plenty of fiber, but my anecdotal impression is that many people don't.
That was a concern I had too. I’ve done low-carb numerous times for periods of time with the intention of losing weight. Weight always came off temporarily - it would come back when I returned to my old ways but this time I wasn’t on a diet and I intentionally did it for 6 months to then have my bloodwork done. It was remarkable - I posted the details somewhere around here or the Otis thread but basically everything was better and most drastically better. BP was better, sleep apnea went away, this annoying pain I had in my side went away (until I drink beer again). I’m waiting until I hit the 12 months mark and plan to redo the blood panel and get my CACS score and Lipoprotein A all done.I have some blood work coming in next week (cardiac, cholesterol, metabolic, hormonal and vitamin D), while I think any results will be far more related to how I was living prior to the past couple weeks. I like keto but if the numbers aren't good I will absolutely drop any keto principles necessary if the doctor and I think it could help.
Nice job Gator. Curious - what are you typically eating? You LDL numbers are much bettter than mine and that's one number my dietician was concerned with and told me to watch my SFA.Notes from @The Gator
Been keto since the weight loss comp two years ago. Started that at 308 iirc after being up to 320.
Results from a recent doc visit / blood work
6'2 230
Cholesterol 138
HDL 52
Triglycerides 60
LDL 72
Chol/HDLC RATIO 2.7
LDL/HDL Ratio 1.4
Non HDL cholesterol 86
@culdeus let me know when I'm going to die
What’s this crap about?Just want to say good luck to everyone.
I cheated last friday with some pizza and beer.
Looks like I'll be down only 1 pound this week but that was after I "gained" 3 back after this past Friday.
I wont be visiting FBG much anymore.
Maybe I'll check in time to time.
GL to all my fat brothers trying to get fit!!
Thanks.Nice job Gator. Curious - what are you typically eating? You LDL numbers are much bettter than mine and that's one number my dietician was concerned with and told me to watch my SFA.
Got a call from the doctor earlier in the week and he said he wanted me to set up an appointment to talk about the results of the blood test, specifically the lipid panel. He specializes as a cardiologist so he is always acutely aware of any symptoms that may increase the likelihood of heart disease.Started the first of December at 6'1", 236 lbs with the intent on losing some weight prior to my annual blood test that I had schedule for the week of my 49th birthday.
Yesterday, my 49th birthday, I weighed in at 216.
20 lbs since I started. Have gone down a couple of pants sizes 40 --> 36 and am looking at a target of around 200. Need to buy some pants/slacks/shorts and another belt because I'm down to one or two that actually fit without them looking stupidly baggy on me.
It's pretty much been lazy keto to this point however having my wife also partake in this diet, it's been a little easier.
Yesterday was the first time I fully, outright, blatantly cheated. Had a 1/2 piece of Dutch Apple pie and a scoop of Halo-Top Vanilla ice cream as a bit of a birthday celebration. It was heavenly but no more until I get to 200.
Looking forward to seeing the affect of Keto when I get my results back this week, specifically A1C and Triglyceride levels.
Been testing every AM when I wake up. I will taper off once I have enough data (MyFitnessPal+Smart Scale+Keto-Mojo) to lock in my carb intake relative to my ketone level. I would like to stabilize at around 3 ug/mmol (or whatever it is) but I have overshot and was at 4.4 is my high. I figure I will need at least 30 days and maybe 60 max.Those keto test strips are expensive. How often are you testing?
Careful with this. Those scales are known to really swing a lot when in a rapid weight loss. The more likely situation if you accept the current numbers as realistic is that the fat % before was overstated.Chaka said:Started going full Keto on 3/1/2019 so I figure a 30 update is in order.
If I wasn't completely anal retentive (do people still use that term or has porn completely corrupted it?) I would probably quit after my first glance at my 30 day numbers.
I have averaged 1360 calories per day with 90g fat, (61.5%) 87g pro (26.3%) & 40g carbs (12.2%) (with 19g fiber so 21g net carbs). Which is pretty spot on for Keto.
I have averaged 2.2 mmol/L of Ketones in my blood, which is also spot on as most research says there are no additional weight loss benefits for ketone levels above 3 mmol/L.
I have averaged ~6,500 steps per day and I have done TRX suspension training 17 times in 30 days (medium to high intensity), just under four days/week, for an average of 44 minutes and ~440 calories burned.
So you look at all these numbers and you have to say CHAKA, YOU'RE KILLING IT!!! RIGHT???!!
Total weight loss: 2.5 lbs WTMFF?!?!?!?!?!
So amidst my preparations for seppuku by pancake I decided to take a look at one other number that I have collected over the past month (thank you smart body analyzer).
I don't put a lot of stock in the absolute numbers for body fat % from "smart" scales but I do pay attention to trends.
My starting body fat was 29.4% and my current body fat is 26.2% (the trendline has been consistent as well) which means, and it's the biggest shocker of all for me, my lean muscle mass has increased by 5.3 lbs, in 30 days? Even if the measurement is off by as much as 30% that is still a 3.7 lb muscle gain along with a 2.5 lb weight loss. In only 30 days. That is huge for a dude my age. I now wish I had done a DEXA scan prior to starting.
This gels with what I have just been feeling in general lately, my body just feels different (in a good way), stronger and I had even been noticing that I look different in the mirror (although I typically attribute that to delusional thinking) as has my wife (also delusion thinking).
It also gels with my own personal belief that exercise is not the best path if your exclusive goal is weight loss.
So, I think I am going to stay on board with this program for another 30 days and see where it takes me.
Well, after I have a well deserved Cheat Like You Stole It Sunday!!!!
Totally agree, and appreciate the input, but there hasn't been a rapid weight loss, in fact there has been an almost zero weight loss, which in and of itself is an interesting outcome considering the inputs.Careful with this. Those scales are known to really swing a lot when in a rapid weight loss. The more likely situation if you accept the current numbers as realistic is that the fat % before was overstated.
They lean very heavily on just a simple lookup table with a range of values they fit you in. Calipers are much more accurate.
Well yeah. I mean as we start to get into meta analysis mode on macros there are starting to be some trends developing. One of the newer ones is highlighting how in certain cases (for reasons we don't quite understand) some people simply don't respond to HFLC. Genetics can play a huge role in this. There are entire societies built around macro breakdowns of like 85/10/5. Maybe those genetics have wormed their way into the biome.Totally agree, and appreciate the input, but there hasn't been a rapid weight loss, in fact there has been an almost zero weight loss, which in and of itself is an interesting outcome considering the inputs.
Personally I'm baffled by the results, and I'm no newb at this (a PhD in genetics and a long history in this space feels like a solid foundation) but I'm at a loss to explain the outputs relative to the more than reasonably well defined inputs (I am awaiting a battery of blood test results, because I don't ###$ around with this ####, and will update to let you all know if I'm dying when I get the results hopefully this week).
Try this thought experiment on paper: What is your expectations for a dude 6'1", ~220 lbs, 2.2 mmol/L ketones, 1360 Cal/day, 12% carbs (less if you do the net carbs thing), moderate/high intensity exercise for 45 min per session 4 of 7 days/week. After 31 days what would you expect to see for that dude? Would you honestly expect 2.5 lbs weight loss?
Obviously it can happen but what are the explanations? Are they more or less likely than a small decrease in weight coupled with an increase in lean muscle mass?
Oooooffff...I hate spudzilla. It works but it's sooooooooooo tedious.Well yeah. I mean as we start to get into meta analysis mode on macros there are starting to be some trends developing. One of the newer ones is highlighting how in certain cases (for reasons we don't quite understand) some people simply don't respond to HFLC. Genetics can play a huge role in this. There are entire societies built around macro breakdowns of like 85/10/5. Maybe those genetics have wormed their way into the biome.
What isn't clear is that if someone doesn't respond to HFLC would they respond to a LF-CICO approach more? Or simply just CICO.
Jeff Nippard hosted a good discussion of this topic over the weekend if you want to listen:
https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/wwwstitchercompodcasticecream4prs/icecream4prs-podcast
As far as muscle gain on a cut. You have seen in recent history some people trying to sort of curve fit data to imply that if someone was going low fat for a long time, they might have de-regulated testosterone. So swapping to a HF diet and throwing in some good leg days you could get massive gainz bro. That amount you quote seems far fetched to me. A natural lifter is really going to have a hard cap of lean gains to the tune of maybe 1# a month, maybe if you bulk hard core 2# a month for 6 months then taper off. Anyone quoting more than that I would want to see Dexa or tank data. I mean it's possible on people that are like 6-4" so you have to scale for height to some extent, I get it.
I mean the obvious split is if you get out to 6 more weeks and haven't seen any meaningful loss, swap to full spudzilla diet. Would be interesting to see the results there.
1. Who's to say we did?I’m new to this board and the Keto world. There’s a lot of interesting background information in the thread, but I can’t help thinking the diet is somewhat of a fad. Some questions I have for the low carb crowd:
1. Why do you think humans would evolve to preferentially use carbohydrates as fuel if they aren’t healthy?
2. Are there any long term adverse effects of a ketogenic diet?
3. Why should I choose the diet over those advocated by the medical community, esp. the Mediterranean diet?
1. Well, our metabolism sure seems pretty glucose-centered, and carbohydrates readily provide it. Many tissues won’t burn ketones until you’ve adapted, esp. the brain. Hence the ketone fog and other symptoms people experience when transitioning to a very low carb diet.1. Who's to say we did?
2. No longitudinal studies that I am aware of exist to answer this.
3. All you can do is look at what we know and make up your mind.
The Mediterranean diet has some junk science backing it and is starting to show cracks in it's support mechanism3. Why should I choose the diet over those advocated by the medical community, esp. the Mediterranean diet?
And honestly, any diet is subjective to what the person wants out of it.The Mediterranean diet has some junk science backing it and is starting to show cracks in it's support mechanism
1. That is an overly simplistic. Why are we able to process ketones as energy in the first place? If it was as simple as being evolutionarily adapted to glucose we wouldn't be facing an epidemic of obesity.1. Well, our metabolism sure seems pretty glucose-centered, and carbohydrates readily provide it. Many tissues won’t burn ketones until you’ve adapted, esp. the brain. Hence the ketone fog and other symptoms people experience when transitioning to a very low carb diet.
2. I agree, and this concerns me.
3. Right, and there’s a lot more data supporting alternative diets. Makes me wonder why so many are willing to take the Keto plunge. I suspect rapid short term weight loss is the answer, but that doesn’t necessarily make it a great long term investment in health.
Great question, not facts just my opinions.I’m new to this board and the Keto world. There’s a lot of interesting background information in the thread, but I can’t help thinking the diet is somewhat of a fad. Some questions I have for the low carb crowd:
1. Why do you think humans would evolve to preferentially use carbohydrates as fuel if they aren’t healthy?
2. Are there any long term adverse effects of a ketogenic diet?
3. Why should I choose the diet over those advocated by the medical community, esp. the Mediterranean diet?
Welcome to the conversation. Good questions.I’m new to this board and the Keto world. There’s a lot of interesting background information in the thread, but I can’t help thinking the diet is somewhat of a fad. Some questions I have for the low carb crowd:
1. Why do you think humans would evolve to preferentially use carbohydrates as fuel if they aren’t healthy?
2. Are there any long term adverse effects of a ketogenic diet?
3. Why should I choose the diet over those advocated by the medical community, esp. the Mediterranean diet?
Can you elaborate?culdeus said:The Mediterranean diet has some junk science backing it and is starting to show cracks in it's support mechanism