Look kid....the point I was making is you’re downing a diet that you don’t like for what ever reason and either you or the other guy responding to me mentioned research saying keto is bad. I said there’s been research saying creatine was bad. That was back when I first started taking creatine. I know creatine is safe and I know there’s ton of research now saying creatine is safe unless you have underlying kidney issues. I also mentioned research is like statistics. Have you ever heard the quote “there’s lies, there’s damn lies, then there’s statistics”? So back to my point....research can be manipulated to have the outcome you want, just like statistics. There’s not a damn thing wrong with keto. If you don’t want to eat it, you don’t have to.
First off, if you want to do keto, have at it. It isn't a diet I "don't like for whatever reason". It is a diet that I think is WAY over hyped and misunderstood - FOR REASONS. Such as the research provided. Many people no such diets don't fully grasp the consequences and are just believing what they choose to believe, usually with an emotional basis because they went keto or someone they care about did, and it was the only thing that seemed to work for them. I get it, but it is misplaced and emotional - not rooted in logic and reason.
It isn't good or bad. It has flaws and health issues. It also can be a tool in the dieting toolbox. With enough research into obesity you will realize that metabolic flexibility is a big determining factor in how "healthy" someone is. People who are metabolically flexible can burn both fat and carbs easily.
A simple 101 course in biology will discuss the TCA cycle, how energy is made, and the fact that your cells have to choose what substrate to turn into energy through an enzymatic reaction known as the Pyruvate Dehydrogenase Complex. The metabolic switch for this complex is Pyruvate Dehydrogenase Kinase (PDK). PDK is like a train track switch - if it is present, the train tracks shift toward fat burning for fuel, if it is low, the train track switches over to using carbohydrates. If you have elevated levels of PDK you will burn fat more easily and carbs less easily.
Fat people have elevated PDK - which makes sense - if you have a ton of fat in your system, you will swap over to trying to burn it as efficiently as possible. Problem is, in chronic caloric overload, you are burning all this fat and you cannot burn carbs effectively. This causes your blood sugars to elevate as carbohydrates fill cells, burn slowly, and then become backlogged and have to then be stored as fat to get them out of the blood stream. Fat people are not metabolically flexible enough to burn the carbs, that is their real underlying issue.
So, along comes this idea - let's go keto. Great. Now there are no carbs to burn - which is great, because you've really been having a problem burning them, and now you can use up some of this fat. Problem is, now there are no carbs at all so you have no need for the Pyruvate Dehydrogenase Complex (which converts carbs to energy) - so you just ramp up PDK even more and totally shut down the carbohydrate machinery. Thank god you don't need that anymore, it wasn't working very well with all this fat you have to burn anyway.
And if you're in a caloric deficit, great! Now you don't have a problem with the carbs, and you can burn this fat and since you're full on this fat you are in a caloric deficit and you can lose some weight and even drop your lipids, etc. because you're burning all this fat. Of course, this would happen in any deficit.
But in the end, you've taken the underlying problem - elevated PDK and a lack of metabolic flexibility - and ramped it up. So much for treating the root cause of the problem with your integrative medicine. You didn't treat it, you just avoided the problem and ignored it.
And all of this is backed by decades of science and is taught, literally, in 101 level biology courses. And go read up on any study on diabetes where they grab a rat, or a mouse, or a pig, or a monkey, or any animal and watch how they induce diabetes. Find me ONE study that uses ONLY carbohydrates. Nope, they are ALWAYS either high fat or high fat and high carb. High fat is always a component. Sorry. It's tried and true. Carbohydrates are not necessary to induce diabetes.
And the study I linked is just one of many that backs all of this up.
Is keto bad? maybe. Is a vegan diet bad? Maybe. Is carnivore bad? Maybe. For every study that supports one you can find another that rips it apart.
It probably isn't a "good" or "bad" thing. It is probably more along the lines of - can it be used for a specific situation. We aren't designed to eat one way forever. We are designed to adapt to a changing environment, not remain static.
As far as studies - the world is full of conflicting ideas. How do you choose what is true and what is false if every study is wrong because there is another study saying the opposite? What criteria do you use to find truth if you are throwing away ALL studies because another one might say something different?
My mum started keto when I did about 5 or 6 months ago, after trying many other options to treat her obesity, fatty liver disease and elevated blood sugar (she is classified as t2 diabetic). Normally, she is not very disciplined and, like me, has a propensity to become addicted to high sugar foods, however she found it easy to adhere to the keto protocol and remains on it to this day.
One month in, she had bloodwork done (she has been doing this with her doctor the whole way through), which indicated her cholesterol was rising, with both HDL and LDL were elevated. Blood gluose remained high, around 14nmol. 3 months in, LDL had decreased, blood glucose remained high. Last blood test done just before christmas: HDL and LDL had both decreased, blood sugar down from 14 to 5.8, and Liver enzymes were in range for the first time in a decade. She has lost 12kg (26Ib), but has gone from being fat and stocky to being absolutely jacked - you can see the striations in her quads and she apparently is becoming a bit of a weapon at pilates.
Point is, if you only interpret the one month markers, you would conclude keto is an unhealthy option for her, and be completely wrong.
I'm pretty stoked for my mum.
That's awesome for your mom! And this is the thing - it's not always about good or bad. It's a diet she can stick to and stay in a deficit and it serves a purpose to that end. It got her lean. The issue is - can she eat that way forever? Will she never eat fruit, or pasta, or pizza, or oatmeal again? Because, someday, she may want to again...then what? Once you start eating pasta on the regular, your entire diet is blown. Maybe your mom can do this forever...maybe it just works for her. But for a lot of people it doesn't work forever, and rather than have the flexibility to say, "I'm not on keto anymore, but I can still eat healthy" - they are so fixated on "Keto is the only healthy way" and it is really an all-or-nothing diet. Once you're out of keto, you're out of keto and you either go back or you blow up the diet.
Either way, if it works for your mom, I can't argue with that and I am happy. I mean, I went on a PSMF and that worked for me and a lot of people are against that too - so I'm not trying to tell anyone how they should eat. Just that they shouldn't be so gung-ho about any one diet style.
Also, see the study above - it applies to fatty liver disease when you follow the logic as well. Glad your mom is doing so much better though. Seeing people you care about make that change is truly a great feeling!
