Rodja
Board Sponsor
Hate to burst that bubble of yours, but that's still not a zero carb diet.
12 good reasons a keto diet blows!!
- Thread starter CoorsLight126
- Start date
Hate to burst that bubble of yours, but that's still not a zero carb diet.
Rodja
Board Sponsor
Does this suit you better?
Invalid Link Removed
Acidosis is a huge problem. Combined with the phytates found in grains, you have a dual-pronged attack against the bodies ability to absorb micronutrients. Acidosis is one of the main things that can cause hypercalcemia.
BTW, that much sodium bicarbonate would cause you to **** for hours.
jlinteris
Member
Trace carbs. Still not enough to allow your body to use glycogen as energy. Still a huge diff between a low carb, and a trace carb diet.
jlinteris
Member
Thanks for posting that! I picked up on a few changes I can make.
JudoJosh
Pro Virili Parte
Have you read any of his work? Specifically Precision Nutrition or Grapplers guide to sports nutrition? I have wondered if he was any good or not. Since his name usually comes up in the bodybuilding world I have always brushed him off as another guy promoting high carb low fat diets but I never really honestly looked into his work. I have seen you post about him a couple times now, so I am wondering. Have you read his work?
Rodja
Board Sponsor
Alas, it still provides the body with some glucose without having to go into extreme gluconeogenesis. Most don't know this, but you really only need about 5g of glucose circulating in your blood at any given time.
Rodja
Board Sponsor
I've read a lot of his work. I'm not a huge fan of all of it (he does have a Paleo-style article), but he's one of the better guys out there right now. Hell, just what he did with Dave Tate alone is impressive.
JudoJosh
Pro Virili Parte
Im reading the Dave Tate project articles now. Looks like this whas when he was working with Cosgrove. Ever read his Glute Amnesia book?
Rodja
Board Sponsor
No, but I can take a guess as to what it's about just by the title.
bakerderek0
Active member
Let me clear some things up here guys....
Keto diets blow.:afro:
Keto diets blow.:afro:
bakerderek0
Active member
jk, but after reading this thread: Invalid Link Removed I decided to give it a go yesterday. wow, that was rough, which I understand it is starting out. I ate eggs & spinach for breakfest then tried to go in for shoulders. holy smokes, I was lacking all & any energy to do much. I got through shoulder press & 3 sets of abs before leaving. I'm going to have to taper into it if a keto diet will work for me.
My point is: it is very hard to start out, but looks very beneficial once you get used to it.
My point is: it is very hard to start out, but looks very beneficial once you get used to it.
jlinteris
Member
Keeping pretty breif I will say that I experienced minimal energy for 3 days as well. Into the 4th day I got a headache, then it was almost like a switch was thrown (apparently the headache is the body switching to ketones as an energy source). I was energetic and make my way through intense/high volume workouts effortlessly. If you can dedicate three strict days to this then the rest is a piece of cake.
MrKleen73
Legend
"PSSST! Over here, I am gonna tell you a secret, have any of you ever met a cow, deer, or any other grazing animal, which is typically what our meat sources come from Nope, Now unless we assume the someone put the animals on a completely ketogenic diet, then exercised them to the pint of total carb depletion that there is not already COMPLETELY USABLE GLYCOGEN STORED IN THE MUSCLE YOU ARE EATING ON ANY DIET???? Wait a minute and let that settle in for a second. There is glycogen just stored right there in that meat, aka MUSCLE. You can estimate a good 4-7 grams of glycogen stored in the muscle per ounce of meat." <<<< (You ever put your foot in your mouth after spouting off? Just what I did here. LOL) I am just basing that off of the fact that muscle is 70-80% water, and that water is pulled into the muscle by, you guessed it glycogen at a rate of 3 grams per gram of carbs not a medical study.However common sense dictates the obvious. Do you honestly think the glycogen stores are depleted before you put that meat into your mouth. That is just laughable. So there is more than enough for the brain to run on first since it will get dibs on the glycogen before your muscles.
I am not discounting that this diet works for the OP but there are a lot of people out there Keto works for. In reality I don't think any human, paleo or not ever naturally eating what was available to them was ever on a keto diet. However for sure they were taking in WAY LESS carbs than the average person does now. Trust me foragers/hunters were getting in more than 50 grams of carbs daily in fruits, nuts & roots alone.
Dietary extremes pushing one or the other are basically just like being a fan of a football team. They all have there fanatics and more level headed people in the group. However trust me no no cave man ever snubbed a piece of fruit when hungry because it had carbs in it. Nor did they have enough of an abundance of these carb sources around to cause insulin sensitivity issues that run rampant today since we have an abundance of them available to us and they are typically overeaten due to the low blood sugar that results after an insulin spike telling you that you need to increase blood sugar since you have deconditioned the body to the point it does not have the ability to use fat for a primary souce of energy causing shock to the body that the OP describes during the intial parts of a Keto diet.
As far as life expectancy the introduction of antibiotics was the single biggest factor in increasing life expectancy of humans that and technology making us better hunters than we are prey. Yeah we were prey back in they day guys, that is why we smell like spanked ass without deodorant, because we stunk so bad the animals did not want to have a bite unless no other alternatives... It was our equivalent to the monarch butterfly wings looking like the eyes of a larger predatory animal instead of a tiny insect.
Keto is not the best way to go and niether is high carb but out of the two the high carb is far more unhealthy than a keto diet.
I am not discounting that this diet works for the OP but there are a lot of people out there Keto works for. In reality I don't think any human, paleo or not ever naturally eating what was available to them was ever on a keto diet. However for sure they were taking in WAY LESS carbs than the average person does now. Trust me foragers/hunters were getting in more than 50 grams of carbs daily in fruits, nuts & roots alone.
Dietary extremes pushing one or the other are basically just like being a fan of a football team. They all have there fanatics and more level headed people in the group. However trust me no no cave man ever snubbed a piece of fruit when hungry because it had carbs in it. Nor did they have enough of an abundance of these carb sources around to cause insulin sensitivity issues that run rampant today since we have an abundance of them available to us and they are typically overeaten due to the low blood sugar that results after an insulin spike telling you that you need to increase blood sugar since you have deconditioned the body to the point it does not have the ability to use fat for a primary souce of energy causing shock to the body that the OP describes during the intial parts of a Keto diet.
As far as life expectancy the introduction of antibiotics was the single biggest factor in increasing life expectancy of humans that and technology making us better hunters than we are prey. Yeah we were prey back in they day guys, that is why we smell like spanked ass without deodorant, because we stunk so bad the animals did not want to have a bite unless no other alternatives... It was our equivalent to the monarch butterfly wings looking like the eyes of a larger predatory animal instead of a tiny insect.
Keto is not the best way to go and niether is high carb but out of the two the high carb is far more unhealthy than a keto diet.
BigBlackGuy
Well-known member
Protein turnover makes up for the lack of carbohydrates to a certain extent anyway. It's not like the muscles have 0 glycogen to run with. Or else you simply wouldn't be able to do any high intensity exercise.
ZiR RED
Well-known member
Interesting thought...however,
Actually they are, so long as the meat is aged, which nearly all meat is. The cells strive to maintain function as long as possible, and the only way for them to do this is to use the glycogen to undergo anaerobic respiration (since there is no blood supply providing oxygen). The end result, is nearly a full depletion of glycogen.
Br
ZiR RED
Well-known member
ZiR RED
Well-known member
That was the dose I used in my thesis study. None of the subjects **** themselves, but most of them had "baking soda) burps. Slightly compromised the double-bind nature of the study i suppose.
Br
MrKleen73
Legend
Wow, that makes sense I have never heard this before. I stand corrected then. Thanks for the info. So the secret I let people in on is my ignorance of that fact. LOL That's okay I still had a secret at least.
I would have never thought of that figuring once the oxygen supply was gone the function would cease. Where did you find that out, I love to learn stuff like this.Thank goodness I underlined the part about how I came to the conclusion, and it did seem pretty obvious, but I am mistaken.
rochabp
Well-known member
i would only cut fats out if i was on anabolics otherwise no way in hell. Fats are essential for hormone synthesis.
As for fat loss i think less insulin=more HGH...more hgh=more fat burning.
so ill stick with my diet that keeps my body full of hormones that do nothing but build muscle and burn fat.
As for fat loss i think less insulin=more HGH...more hgh=more fat burning.
so ill stick with my diet that keeps my body full of hormones that do nothing but build muscle and burn fat.
ZiR RED
Well-known member
i would only cut fats out if i was on anabolics otherwise no way in hell. Fats are essential for hormone synthesis.
As for fat loss i think less insulin=more HGH...more hgh=more fat burning.
so ill stick with my diet that keeps my body full of hormones that do nothing but build muscle and burn fat.
Insulin gets such a bad rap.
Does insulin increase lypogensis (uptake of energy by adipose cells and conversion to fat stores in adipose).. yes
Are CHO the only macronutrient that results in an insulin response?? Does the consumption of a steak result in a greater insulin release than consumption of a bowl of oatmeal... Yes
However, is inuslin the most anabolic and anti-catbolic hormone produced by the body...yes
If you understand how to manipulate insulin levels, then you can use this to your advantage to preserve muscle while decreasing fat.
Br
Torobestia
Well-known member
It's just that the enzymes are already there and made in the cells. And there are processes already running in our cells right before we die. Once we die, there's a little pocket of time where cells, the unconscious "beings" that they are, want to continue the processes that they or we had already initiated, so they continue churning out energy via glycolysis-lactic acid cycle until glycogen is used up. If we take a human body as an example, you actually know around the time that cycle comes to a conclusion - when rigor mortis has set in. ATP no longer exists to allow the muscles to relax (ATP generated through anaerobic processes as explained by Zir and me) and the body stiffens.
Rodja
Board Sponsor
At 3g/kg? I find it extremely hard to believe that there were not major GI side effect from that dosage.
JudoJosh
Pro Virili Parte
Kudos Br! The bold part of your statement really sparked some interest since it is the first time I have heard about meat causing a "high" insulin release so it lead me to some fun reading. I am not an expert but from what my brief reading leading me to believe is the following:
First let me say I think insulin gets a bad rap too. While excess insulin that is unused and left free to roam throughout the body can cause havoc and lead to insulin resistance, it is needed for the storage of nutrients. If it wasn't for insulin we couldn't drive the amino acids into our muscle cells.
Are you basing this off of this study - Invalid Link Removed ?
If so I would think that the fact they used a very lean cut of meat to be an issue. If it were a fattier piece of beef, the higher fat would have mitigated the insulin response, correct? I could be wrong here though :dunno:
Another point I see is, what about glucagon? Eating foods high in protein result in a release of glucagon, which would mitigate the response of insulin.
Glucagon raises blood sugar levels which would allow for the absorption of amino acids in the liver which would lead to their transformation to glucose.
If anything I would think this would support the fact that we don't need carbs in our diet really. If protein causes the insulin response needed to store the essential amino acids and also causes a glucagon response to keep the blood sugar stable, all while in the absence of carbs, then why do we need them? I think this argument just further proves that carbs aren't essential or needed in our diet, especially in high amounts.
Also this may be relevant since we are on the topic of steak causing a insulin release - Invalid Link Removed
Doesn't this suggest that protein doesn't cause increased insulin levels by stimulating its release by the pancreas, but by decreasing the rate at which the liver removes insulin from the blood?
Again I am no expert or even a biology major, the human body is very confusing and very interesting all at once. Just trying to understand your statement.
bdcc
Legend
Good discussion going on here. Highly recommend people here to look into insulin index (II) rather than glycemic index (GI) for food ratings.
GI doesn't take into account serving size, carrots being a very good example. 50g of carbs from carrots is a lot harder to get through than 50g of carbs from grains.
GI doesn't take into account serving size, carrots being a very good example. 50g of carbs from carrots is a lot harder to get through than 50g of carbs from grains.
EasyEJL
Never enough
And yet I still haven't seen a link to a medical study showing at same caloric deficit a keto diet is better for body composition than a non-keto diet. I can point to studies however that show enhance lipolysis after doing cardio while consuming carbs vs not consuming them...
CoorsLight126
Member
**** yeah bro, really happy with the way this is going. If keto works for you guys great, I myself dont like it, but this thread has given me a much more open mind to manipulating insulin sensitivity with my body
ZiR RED
Well-known member
Double check that..my error
.3 g/kg
So, the mean weight in my experiment was 80kg, and the average NaHCO3 dosage was 24 g
Glad you caught that, wouldn't want someone on here consuming an entire box of baking soda then doing some prowler pushes.
Br
ZiR RED
Well-known member
One day we'll be able to take a blood sample, pin point certain genes, and precisely prescribe a macro and micronutrient nutrition profile for optimal health, weight loss, performance, etc.
But for now, a lot of experimentation and trial and error go into figuring out whether you are a fast or slow oxidizer, and what type of macro-profile you'll respond best to.
ZiR RED
Well-known member
Yes, that is one such article that has established an insulin index. There are other indexes available that have similar results.
You'll notice also that cheese has a slightly higher II than oatmeal as well, and the cheese fed to the subjects was full fat. According to the second article you posted, fat has no effect on insulin secretion or hepatic extraction when consumed with 50g of cho.
The amino acid profile, and the specific amino acids play a role in the insulin response as well. Certain amino acids, such as luecine, are very insulogenic and will trigger a large insulin response.
Glucagon is released when blood sugar is low, and results in the release of glycogen by the liver into the blood stream. Once glucose is stored as glycogen in skeletal muscle it cannot leave the muscle cell.
WRT to the comment about the second article, I think this is an interesting quote from the discussion:
The question becomes however, why is there is a prolonging of elevated insulin concentrations in the blood following whey protein consumption? And, perhaps does this prolongation of insulin concentrations in the blood help explain why a protein + CHO post workout meal is so much more effective at stimulating protein synthesis than pro or cho alone.
Br
EasyEJL
Never enough
Does it actually stimulate protein synthesis more though? the only conclusive study i've seen showing that was done with fasted training in the mornings, and studies that did it later in the day weren't so conclusive. mind you I train fasted, so it does apply for me
Rodja
Board Sponsor
That makes a lot more sense. 3g/kg would be an ungodly amount of sodium bicarbonate.
oufinny
Well-known member
Lots of good information in here. I agree that the very low fat diet is not conducive to long term health, at least from my own experience, higher fat intake even with carbs has me feeling better and looking better than low fat. Right now I am working on moving to primal eating and am moving away from any complex carbs less some rice or potatoes once in a while. I don't have science to support what I know works for me, I let a lot of smarter people write the books and I test their theories to see if they work for me. The goal is to be open minded and realize there are many ways to skin a cat, they all don't work for each person though. Great info, I will have a lot of reading for weeks from this thread.
Wilderbeast
Member
I call bull**** on every reason you posted. You should have a listen to Dr. Scott Connelly, and you'll hear the true scientific evidence for why what you are saying is complete and utter nonsense. Nevermind the countless practical trials that have been done by me and others on keto diets of countless variety, but take a look at as you said what our ancestors really ate. You think they were eating 400 grams of carbs a day EVER??? (even 100 grams would have been hard to come by) ... If you believe that I have a few bridges I want to sell you in Brooklyn and San Francisco. Early humans ate what they were intended to eat... proteins and fats along with the VERY few natural grains (sprouted grains), fruits, and roots that were naturally growing. Modern agriculture has drastically changed the actual nature of grains to the extent that they do not even remotely resemble their naturally occurring varieties.
BEAST
EasyEJL
Never enough
please point to any medical studies that show a restricted calorie ketogenic diet vs a restricted calorie non-ketogenic diet having superior fat loss or muscle retention. I've repeated looked and can't find any. I can find studies that show hormonal markers to be "better" on the ketogenic diet, but not actual body comp.
And you seriously think 4 apples or bananas was harder to come by than a meat meal? be serious.
oufinny
Well-known member
To your last comment, think about that for a second. It is March, you live in the termperate regions of North America, there are no fresh anythings growing, heck you would be lucky to find leaves on trees. Say you are in the tropics, you might be able to find a banana but you can't eat them when they are very green as they are so alkaline it can make you sick (they have to be cooked). So maybe for those in tropical areas your argument does hold water (heck you could get a damn coconut worst case) but north of say Texas (using the US as my example), there are harsh winters and no winter/spring or even early summer fruits growing with the exception of a few wild berries.
As for the study you propose, I agree it would be nice to see as it would add validity to the keto diet being useful in a calorie restricted environment.
JudoJosh
Pro Virili Parte
You have asked this question several time Easy so I did a quick search and came up with some studies for you. I have not read them all, I have skimmed there most though, but I am sure you will read them and let me know if they are applicable to your question of a low carb diet
Invalid Link Removed
(A greater proportion of the low-carbohydrate group than the low-fat group completed the study. At 24 weeks, weight loss was greater in the low-carb diet group than in the low-fat diet group (-12.9% vs. -6.7%). Patients lost more fat mass ( -9.4 kg with low-carb diet vs. -4.8 kg with low-fat diet) than fat-free mass ( -3.3 kg vs. -2.4 kg)
Invalid Link Removed
(Study reports the Low Carb Ketogenic diet, even though it has more calories, had greater fat loss in patients.)
Invalid Link Removed
(Compares a ver low carb diet to orlistat therapy combined with a low-fat diet. While the weight loss was similar for the LCKD and the O + LFD groups, the LCKD had a more beneficial impact than O + LFD on systolic and diastolic blood pressures. Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels improved within the LCKD group only.)
And a couple more
Invalid Link Removed
Invalid Link Removed
Invalid Link Removed
Invalid Link Removed
Invalid Link Removed
Invalid Link Removed
Invalid Link Removed
Invalid Link Removed
Invalid Link Removed
Invalid Link Removed
Please note: While not every study shows a greater weight loss with a low carb approach most do show a greater health benefit (i.e cholesterol, triglycerides, blood pressure, etc) Weight loss isn't everything so if a low carb approach can yield the same if not more weight loss AND offer greater health benefits, than my question is what is your argument against it?
Invalid Link Removed
(A greater proportion of the low-carbohydrate group than the low-fat group completed the study. At 24 weeks, weight loss was greater in the low-carb diet group than in the low-fat diet group (-12.9% vs. -6.7%). Patients lost more fat mass ( -9.4 kg with low-carb diet vs. -4.8 kg with low-fat diet) than fat-free mass ( -3.3 kg vs. -2.4 kg)
Invalid Link Removed
(Study reports the Low Carb Ketogenic diet, even though it has more calories, had greater fat loss in patients.)
Invalid Link Removed
(Compares a ver low carb diet to orlistat therapy combined with a low-fat diet. While the weight loss was similar for the LCKD and the O + LFD groups, the LCKD had a more beneficial impact than O + LFD on systolic and diastolic blood pressures. Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels improved within the LCKD group only.)
And a couple more
Invalid Link Removed
Invalid Link Removed
Invalid Link Removed
Invalid Link Removed
Invalid Link Removed
Invalid Link Removed
Invalid Link Removed
Invalid Link Removed
Invalid Link Removed
Invalid Link Removed
Please note: While not every study shows a greater weight loss with a low carb approach most do show a greater health benefit (i.e cholesterol, triglycerides, blood pressure, etc) Weight loss isn't everything so if a low carb approach can yield the same if not more weight loss AND offer greater health benefits, than my question is what is your argument against it?
MrKleen73
Legend
Unfortunately we probably won't see medical studies proving anything regarding body composition and what diet is best because that is not considered medical so much as vanity even though there are a myriad of health benefits to being lean adding muscle is considered a drain on health for already "healthy" individuals because the body has to work harder to support that muscle.
EasyEJL
Never enough
its not anything against a ketogenic diet, its me being against so many people spouting off a ketogenic diet as the first choice and many as the only valid choice for a diet, which just isn't true. And people saying that they retain more lean mass on the ketogenic diet when there isn't any data that supports that.
I'm reading through those now.
Looking at this study you mentioned
Invalid Link Removed
although there was greater fat loss in the low carb in males (8lbs vs 4lbs) there was also a greater lean mass loss (2.5lbs vs less than .5lbs).... So that directly refutes greater lean mass retention on a ketogenic diet.
Keto diets do have their place, and can be an effective tool. People saying its the end all be all are just plain nuts though
Outside of last 4 weeks precontest specifically to help ensure minimal water retention, I just don't see any significant benefit and for some people its harder to manage in day to day living to do a ketogenic diet. I'm still reading the rest, that one just caught my eye
jlinteris
Member
EasyEJL, I was always curious about trying this diet since whenever I ran a lower carb diet, or a medium carb diet, did a lot of cardio, did none, whatever I did I always burned off just as much muscle as fat. I certainly leaned out with carbs... no denying that. So far I am 38 days (i think, lol) into this cyclical keto diet and I have held almost ALL my muscle. I will even go as far as to say I have ADDED muscle during this experiment. The first 30 days I used zero supplements and did no cardio. I lost more fat in the first 30 days than low carb with cardio and fatburners. The most important part of this diet so far is I have continually increased strength during these 38 days. On a low carb diet I would get weaker by the day, literally. As for the data to back this up I too have none. All I can tell you is what I have learned along the way and it is by far the most effective thing I have ever done. It is also the easiest diet I have ever used since I don't constantly starve like on a low-carb diet. Just my .002 cents.
MakaveliThaDon
Well-known member
So I'm a little late to the party here I know. Fashionably I promise. But I'm just going to add a general opinion.
I've done A LOT of different diets. I've done TKD's, CKD's, high carb low fat, caloric cycle diets, you name it.
However, every single one of them that I did, I stuck to it 110 percent, put in the time in the gym, put in the hour of cardio a day (if cutting) didn't cheat. And you know what...EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM WORKED.
There are a lot of different kind of diets out there. And everyone will swear by only one or two of them working. But the truth, IMO is that most all of them do work, regardless of which one you choose as long as you STICK TO IT 110 percent and put in the work in the gym and the cardio.
Take that for what it's worth, but like I said, I've tried all of those diets, and every single one of them worked for me as long as I busted my ass in the gym like you are supposed to. And stuck to the diet 110 percent day in and day out.
I've done A LOT of different diets. I've done TKD's, CKD's, high carb low fat, caloric cycle diets, you name it.
However, every single one of them that I did, I stuck to it 110 percent, put in the time in the gym, put in the hour of cardio a day (if cutting) didn't cheat. And you know what...EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM WORKED.
There are a lot of different kind of diets out there. And everyone will swear by only one or two of them working. But the truth, IMO is that most all of them do work, regardless of which one you choose as long as you STICK TO IT 110 percent and put in the work in the gym and the cardio.
Take that for what it's worth, but like I said, I've tried all of those diets, and every single one of them worked for me as long as I busted my ass in the gym like you are supposed to. And stuck to the diet 110 percent day in and day out.
JudoJosh
Pro Virili Parte
Can you post these other studies? All I found was this one establishing a Insulin index which was done by a Susanne Holt who was a graduate student at the time and since receiving her doctorate has never followed up on her studies preliminary results.
We are talking about a keto diet so the 50g cho consumptions would apply here. We are comparing the insulin response of a bowl of oatmeal to a piece of steak not a piece of steak with 50g cho.
My point was the meat used the study (the one I posted) was 70% protein and 30% fat. The question I had was what would happen when the meat had a higher fat content and higher percent of the calories. That hasn't been addressed.
So as to your comparison to the oatmeal, when you say the steak would make a greater insulin response, I think fat would make a difference.
For one you say fat has no effect on insulin, than if that steak had 40% fat the amount of protein would be decreased and so the insulin response would be decreased correct?
Also the idea that fat effects the insulin response I based off this:
So consuming fat with you meal should slow down gastric emptying which should help mitigate the insulin response correct?
This is my understanding of glucagon is that one of the ways it is released, in addition to its release when blood sugar dips too low to bring it back up, is when protein rich food is consumed glucagon is also released which will raise blood sugar levels to allow for absorption of amino acids in the liver and their transformation there to glucose. If what I said is true than wouldnt the insulin and glucagon responses mitigate each other?
As I said in my previous post "If anything I would think this (The insulin index report) would support the fact that we don't need carbs in our diet really. If protein causes the insulin response needed to store the essential amino acids and also causes a glucagon response to keep the blood sugar stable, all while in the absence of carbs, then why do we need them?
I think this argument just further proves that carbs aren't essential or needed in our diet, especially in high amounts. "
As for the second study I posted - Invalid Link Removed
You didn't answer and I am interested to see if I am reading it right. The way I see it is that protein may not be the cause of increased insulin levels by stimulating its release by the pancreas, but by decreasing the rate at which the liver removes insulin from the blood?
Again you seem like this is the area of your career and I am just an joe schmo trying to decipher it all.
JudoJosh
Pro Virili Parte
its not anything against a ketogenic diet, its me being against so many people spouting off a ketogenic diet as the first choice and many as the only valid choice for a diet, which just isn't true. And people saying that they retain more lean mass on the ketogenic diet when there isn't any data that supports that.
I'm reading through those now.
Looking at this study you mentioned
Invalid Link Removed
although there was greater fat loss in the low carb in males (8lbs vs 4lbs) there was also a greater lean mass loss (2.5lbs vs less than .5lbs).... So that directly refutes greater lean mass retention on a ketogenic diet.
Keto diets do have their place, and can be an effective tool. People saying its the end all be all are just plain nuts though
I agree 100% bro! I think we have just been misunderstanding each other. A keto diet is not the be all end all to dieting and shouldn't be the first thing people turn to. I thought I conveyed this in my very first post but I guess not. The way I view a keto diet is it is most applicable for someone who has an already low body fat percent and is using keto to FORCE their body to loose that last little bit of fat since the body doesn't willing let go of fat when your BF is too low, but for the everyday guy looking to drop weight I think a 40/40/20 with 20 being the carb intake. I usually average around 100-150g of carbs.
I am somewhat against keto diets being prescribed to everyone posting a question on weight loss
Wilderbeast
Member
EASY,
I never stated that a ketogenic diet was superior to a more moderate carb diet in all cases; I was simply stating my disagreement with the OP's "12 reasons." I happen to utilize carbohydrate and non carbohydrate diets as a competitive bodybuilder myself at different times. There are, as others have already posted, a large volume of studies that show the efficacy and health benefits of a ketogenic diet. There is so much variance on a person to person basis no one can claim they have the "magic diet" for anyone. However, there is more than enough evidence, both scientific and anecdotal, to completely refute all of the OP's arguments. I am a believer in ketogenic diets as I am sure you can tell from my various posts on diets in general, but that does not change the fact that I do not blindly say "this diet sucks" ... unless its something ridiculous like a 100g pro, 400g carbs, low to no fat diet.
BEAST
I never stated that a ketogenic diet was superior to a more moderate carb diet in all cases; I was simply stating my disagreement with the OP's "12 reasons." I happen to utilize carbohydrate and non carbohydrate diets as a competitive bodybuilder myself at different times. There are, as others have already posted, a large volume of studies that show the efficacy and health benefits of a ketogenic diet. There is so much variance on a person to person basis no one can claim they have the "magic diet" for anyone. However, there is more than enough evidence, both scientific and anecdotal, to completely refute all of the OP's arguments. I am a believer in ketogenic diets as I am sure you can tell from my various posts on diets in general, but that does not change the fact that I do not blindly say "this diet sucks" ... unless its something ridiculous like a 100g pro, 400g carbs, low to no fat diet.
BEAST
EasyEJL
Never enough
Whats funniest is through all this, I had decided sunday to go ketogenic again just for laughs, although i'm doing it as a ketogenic bulk. More or less felt myself hitting ketogenic state yesterday (i've tried it sooooo many times before I know the feelings that go along with it) and even picked up some low carb cinnamon raisin bread to smear almond butter on. So no, definitely not against it, but at the same time I can say they definitely suck too. BTW here is the bread
so 3g net carbs per slice they are small slices but still not bad. And taste/feel good.
so 3g net carbs per slice
they are small slices but still not bad. And taste/feel good.
ZiR RED
Well-known member
Rodja
Board Sponsor
Zir,
I'm not sure if you're familiar with Layne Norton, but he is one of the few people that is both a scholar and in the industry. He has his pro card and, I believe, has the highest PL'ing total in his weight class (IPF). His main area of research is leucine and mTOR and he received his PhD for this work.
I'm not sure if you're familiar with Layne Norton, but he is one of the few people that is both a scholar and in the industry. He has his pro card and, I believe, has the highest PL'ing total in his weight class (IPF). His main area of research is leucine and mTOR and he received his PhD for this work.
ZiR RED
Well-known member
I'm quite familiar with him, actually. I went to one of his first shows back in 2002, and we've trained together a few times back in the day while I was on vacation in florida. Stand up guy, very bright... I hold him in high regard.
Br