Is The Keto Diet Just a Fad Diet?

Smont

Smont

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
  • RockStar
There was a article in my news feed today that said keto was voted the most unhealthy diet. I didn't bother reading it because all those studies are trash. But I think it's hilarious that there switching gears. This year there will be some low fat craze and next year something else
 
HIT4ME

HIT4ME

Well-known member
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
It isn't really funny they are "switching" gears. The news and most of the diet industry thrives on selling, "Everything you know is wrong, this novel idea is the answer" and it doesn't actually have to be based in science.

Such is the case with the keto diet. The science involved is minimal and the novelty of it has allowed for all kinds of outlandish theories to be parrotted over and over again online with no basis in actual science.

For instance, people believe to diets actually can improved diabetes, and even anyone who understands a little but about the biology involved would know this is questionable. High fat diets are the most reliable way to induce diabetes, and this is obviously well accepted by scientists as any study you find that has a goal of inducing diabetes in an animal doesn't use sugar alone - they always use high fat diets.

Here is a new study that suggests a possible pathology behind this now:

 

sammpedd88

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
It isn't really funny they are "switching" gears. The news and most of the diet industry thrives on selling, "Everything you know is wrong, this novel idea is the answer" and it doesn't actually have to be based in science.

Such is the case with the keto diet. The science involved is minimal and the novelty of it has allowed for all kinds of outlandish theories to be parrotted over and over again online with no basis in actual science.

For instance, people believe to diets actually can improved diabetes, and even anyone who understands a little but about the biology involved would know this is questionable. High fat diets are the most reliable way to induce diabetes, and this is obviously well accepted by scientists as any study you find that has a goal of inducing diabetes in an animal doesn't use sugar alone - they always use high fat diets.

Here is a new study that suggests a possible pathology behind this now:

If high fat diets, ie keto were so bad, then why would integrative medicine dr’s being telling their patients to eat that way? There’s as much research out there that says high fat is much better for you. The dr’s office I go to for TRT is an integrative medicine practice. They highly recommend keto and paleo. They also recommend cycling between the two. Creatine is a staple supplement for weightlifters and there’s a ton of studies out there that say creatine is dangerous. Again research can be just like statistics.
 
muscleupcrohn

muscleupcrohn

Well-known member
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
If high fat diets, ie keto were so bad, then why would integrative medicine dr’s being telling their patients to eat that way? There’s as much research out there that says high fat is much better for you. The dr’s office I go to for TRT is an integrative medicine practice. They highly recommend keto and paleo. They also recommend cycling between the two. Creatine is a staple supplement for weightlifters and there’s a ton of studies out there that say creatine is dangerous. Again research can be just like statistics.
Yeah, that's not how it works. Just because doctors recommend something doesn't mean that it's good; that's fallacious logic, an appeal to authority. And you're irrefutably incorrect to claim that "there's a ton of studies out there that say creatine is dangerous." The OVERWHELMING consensus from literally mountains of studies is that creatine is VERY safe, and even healthy, not just for weightlifters, but for vegans/vegetarians, the elderly, etc. Frankly, you have no idea what you're talking about here. And paleo is even more of a gimmick...
 
tyga tyga

tyga tyga

Legend
Awards
4
  • Established
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • First Up Vote
Yeah, that's not how it works. Just because doctors recommend something doesn't mean that it's good; that's fallacious logic, an appeal to authority. And you're irrefutably incorrect to claim that "there's a ton of studies out there that say creatine is dangerous." The OVERWHELMING consensus from literally mountains of studies is that creatine is VERY safe, and even healthy, not just for weightlifters, but for vegans/vegetarians, the elderly, etc. Frankly, you have no idea what you're talking about here.
Bro, doctors prescribe opioids and ThEyRe SaFe!

Doctor recommendations = Trump all

/end thread
 
Resolve10

Resolve10

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
  • RockStar
If high fat diets, ie keto were so bad, then why would integrative medicine dr’s being telling their patients to eat that way? There’s as much research out there that says high fat is much better for you. The dr’s office I go to for TRT is an integrative medicine practice. They highly recommend keto and paleo. They also recommend cycling between the two. Creatine is a staple supplement for weightlifters and there’s a ton of studies out there that say creatine is dangerous. Again research can be just like statistics.
Because not all Doctors are the same and I'd also say that most aren't recommending that.

Also what studies show creatine is dangerous? Typically when I see people talk about how research is easily manipulated I tend to feel they don't have a full grasp on what they are looking at or how to interpret the research (which is fine it isn't everyones job nor desire to spend the time to fully understand how all these things may work).
 

sammpedd88

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Yeah, that's not how it works. Just because doctors recommend something doesn't mean that it's good; that's fallacious logic, an appeal to authority. And you're irrefutably incorrect to claim that "there's a ton of studies out there that say creatine is dangerous." The OVERWHELMING consensus from literally mountains of studies is that creatine is VERY safe, and even healthy, not just for weightlifters, but for vegans/vegetarians, the elderly, etc. Frankly, you have no idea what you're talking about here. And paleo is even more of a gimmick...
You totally missed my point. I know creatine is safe. I take it everyday. But there are older studies that say it’s bad for your kidneys. There’s nothing wrong with keto or paleo. I know people personally who eat these diets and have a great healthy life. You can look at just about anything and call it a gimmick. But I’m curious as to why you think paleo is a gimmick. It’s a pretty damn clean diet. Have you truly followed a keto diet? I have and I feel great on it. Lipids are fine and so is BP when I’m on it. So yeah I do know what I’m talking about. You’re just not understanding the point I was making.
And to the point you made about dr’s. No I don’t trust dr’s for ****, but I do trust the practice I go to. They treat the root cause of problems. They don’t just throw meds at symptoms and hope it works. It took me years to find a dr that I trusted for TRT and truly knew what the hell they’re doing. I don’t trust traditional dr’s for nothing.
 

sammpedd88

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Because not all Doctors are the same and I'd also say that most aren't recommending that.

Also what studies show creatine is dangerous? Typically when I see people talk about how research is easily manipulated I tend to feel they don't have a full grasp on what they are looking at or how to interpret the research (which is fine it isn't everyones job nor desire to spend the time to fully understand how all these things may work).
With a total of 10 seconds of googling, is creatine bad for you, I came up with this.


And the part about manipulation is the exact point I was trying to make. I know creatine is safe. I take it everyday. But damn, there’s nothing wrong with the keto diet. It’s just not for everybody just like anything else in life. Y’all just missed my point.
 
Last edited:
muscleupcrohn

muscleupcrohn

Well-known member
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
You totally missed my point. I know creatine is safe. I take it everyday. But there are older studies that say it’s bad for your kidneys. There’s nothing wrong with keto or paleo. I know people personally who eat these diets and have a great healthy life. You can look at just about anything and call it a gimmick. But I’m curious as to why you think paleo is a gimmick. It’s a pretty damn clean diet. Have you truly followed a keto diet? I have and I feel great on it. Lipids are fine and so is BP when I’m on it. So yeah I do know what I’m talking about. You’re just not understanding the point I was making.
And to the point you made about dr’s. No I don’t trust dr’s for ****, but I do trust the practice I go to. They treat the root cause of problems. They don’t just throw meds at symptoms and hope it works. It took me years to find a dr that I trusted for TRT and truly knew what the hell they’re doing. I don’t trust traditional dr’s for nothing.
No, you're relying on entirely fallacious logic. Doctors recommending something in no way inherently makes it good. And the overwhelming consensus is that creatine is very safe. Show me the studies that say it's bad for your kidneys...

So you're healthy on a keto diet and feel good on it. Great. You do you. I never said it's a BAD diet, or you can't succeed on it., just that it's suboptimal for building muscle, and a lot of the befits are overhyped. Plenty of people have good lipids and BP on just about every diet imaginable, so I have no idea what you're getting at there.

As for paleo, the whole thing is a bit hypocritical. "Let's eat what cavemen did; it's natural and what we're meant to do." But half the things people buy while eating keto are things that no caveman would ever have access to, and no caveman would have TRT, or supplements, etc. Again, not saying that a paleo diet is going to be bad, just that it's pretty gimmicky.

Most of the stuff touting the benefits of keto/paleo/vega/etc. is comparing it to the objectively shitty "Western diet," where there's a ton of processed foods, added sugar, etc. ANY diet that cuts down on these things and adds in natural whole foods is going to be better than an objectively **** diet with no effort put into it, but that doesn't mean any of them are "optimal" or "the best." Keto/paleo/vegan/etc. are all unnecessarily limiting, and similar benefits can be achieved without cutting out HUGE amounts of foods you can eat.
 
muscleupcrohn

muscleupcrohn

Well-known member
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
With a total of 10 seconds of googling, is creatine bad for you, I came up with this.


And the part about manipulation is the exact point I was trying to make. I know creative is safe. I take it everyday. But damn, there’s nothing wrong with the keto diet. It’s just not for everybody just like anything else in life. Y’all just missed my point.
A case report isn't exactly a study, forget a meta-analysis. It's literally n=1...
 
muscleupcrohn

muscleupcrohn

Well-known member
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
With a total of 10 seconds of googling, is creatine bad for you, I came up with this.


And the part about manipulation is the exact point I was trying to make. I know creative is safe. I take it everyday. But damn, there’s nothing wrong with the keto diet. It’s just not for everybody just like anything else in life. Y’all just missed my point.
If EVERYONE missed your point, perhaps you didn't articulate it very well. Ever consider that? No, of course not; you can't be at all to blame; surely EVERYONE else is wrong...
 

sammpedd88

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
If EVERYONE missed your point, perhaps you didn't articulate it very well. Ever consider that? No, of course not; you can't be at all to blame; surely EVERYONE else is wrong...
Like I said. My point was missed and I’ve probably been taking creatine longer than you’ve been alive.
 
muscleupcrohn

muscleupcrohn

Well-known member
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
Like I said. My point was missed and I’ve probably been taking creatine longer than you’ve been alive.
Again, if everyone missed your point, perhaps you just didn't articulate it very well...
 
muscleupcrohn

muscleupcrohn

Well-known member
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
Didn’t say that at all. Just asked a question.
You've relied on nothing but fallacious logic in every one of your posts here.

"It's good because doctors recommend it." Fallacious logic; appeal to authority.

"Studies show creatine is bad for the kidneys." No, they don't. You posted one n=1 case report, not "studies," so nice try.

"I've used creatine longer than you." Again, irrelevant.
 

sammpedd88

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
You've relied on nothing but fallacious logic in every one of your posts here.

"It's good because doctors recommend it." Fallacious logic; appeal to authority.

"Studies show creatine is bad for the kidneys." No, they don't. You posted one n=1 case report, not "studies," so nice try.

"I've used creatine longer than you." Again, irrelevant.
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.
 
Smont

Smont

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
  • RockStar
Most studies mean jack shyt and most dr.s know less about nutrition then my 11 year old
 
Smont

Smont

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
  • RockStar
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.
 

sammpedd88

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
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.
That’s what I was getting at.
 
BennyMagoo79

BennyMagoo79

Well-known member
Awards
2
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
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.
 
HIT4ME

HIT4ME

Well-known member
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
If high fat diets, ie keto were so bad, then why would integrative medicine dr’s being telling their patients to eat that way? There’s as much research out there that says high fat is much better for you. The dr’s office I go to for TRT is an integrative medicine practice. They highly recommend keto and paleo. They also recommend cycling between the two. Creatine is a staple supplement for weightlifters and there’s a ton of studies out there that say creatine is dangerous. Again research can be just like statistics.
Ok, so, I am trying to be respectful here because from what I've seen on here you seem like a good guy and you have been helpful to others and your defense of keto is not unusual. This is why I hesitate to post on here. People go on keto and it works for them and they get all excited and emotional about it and those emotions are understandable, but they cloud judgement. Look at @BennyMagoo79 and his mom. Who WOULDN'T be thrilled in that situation with those perceived results? I get it. And I'm not saying Keto is "bad" or won't work. What I am saying is, it is highly misinterpreted by almost everyone, in my opinion. Maybe I am wrong.

Having said that, your question itself is full of logical issues.

1. If Keto diets are so good, why do you have to go to an "integrative" doctor to be told to eat that way? Why wouldn't regular doctors be doing this?

2. As already pointed out, just because you have one doctor saying to do it, doesn't make them right. I know lots of doctors. Some I would listen to, some...well...not so much. And it has nothing to do with whether they are regular doctors, integrative, cardiologists, neurologists, etc. A title doesn't make what you say right or wrong. The merit of your ideas determines if they are right or wrong. A 4 year old child can pose an idea - are they always wrong because they have no credentials?

3. Show me 3 studies that say creatine is bad for you.

You totally missed my point. I know creatine is safe. I take it everyday. But there are older studies that say it’s bad for your kidneys. There’s nothing wrong with keto or paleo. I know people personally who eat these diets and have a great healthy life. You can look at just about anything and call it a gimmick. But I’m curious as to why you think paleo is a gimmick. It’s a pretty damn clean diet. Have you truly followed a keto diet? I have and I feel great on it. Lipids are fine and so is BP when I’m on it. So yeah I do know what I’m talking about. You’re just not understanding the point I was making.
And to the point you made about dr’s. No I don’t trust dr’s for ****, but I do trust the practice I go to. They treat the root cause of problems. They don’t just throw meds at symptoms and hope it works. It took me years to find a dr that I trusted for TRT and truly knew what the hell they’re doing. I don’t trust traditional dr’s for nothing.
There is a saying. If you ever feel like you're arguing with an idiot - first make sure that the other person isn't doing the same thing. I don't think Muscleupcrohn is missing your point. Honestly, I think you haven't caught up here.

I think his "paleo is a gimmick" statement is more focused on the fact that it is a gimmick. "Eating like your ancestors" is not really a thing. Even the corn we eat nowadays is different than they had. It doesn't matter if you're going organic, or whatever. Our food sources have changed. And look at all the "paleo" foods out there - like a paleo "meat bar". They're gimmicks.

Again, show me a study that says creatine is bad for your kidneys.

With a total of 10 seconds of googling, is creatine bad for you, I came up with this.


And the part about manipulation is the exact point I was trying to make. I know creatine is safe. I take it everyday. But damn, there’s nothing wrong with the keto diet. It’s just not for everybody just like anything else in life. Y’all just missed my point.
And yet, still no study. You are saying that people are missing your point and then saying you spent 10 seconds googling and don't even realize what you posted is NOT even a study. It is a case report. It has an n=1 for one thing. Second, you could make a case report saying, "This person had kidney failure and they drank 3 gallons of water a day for the past 3 months. Water may cause kidney failure."

Case reports have value, but not in the way you are trying to use them.

Maybe you should spend more than 10 seconds googling and read what you are finding.

As far as your last statement. How is it that you have come to "know" that creatine is "safe"? I am curious because you are saying a study can be used to justify anything - which I can agree with - but what is it that makes you fall on the side that creatine is safe since you point out that there are so many studies out there that say it is unsafe (yet you can't find one) and so many that say the opposite? If you have conflicting evidence, how do you decide which is true?

Like I said. My point was missed and I’ve probably been taking creatine longer than you’ve been alive.
What does the length of time you've been taking creatine have to do with anything? I really must be missing the point.

Maybe you didn’t comprehend It?
You should be a little careful about who is comprehending what here. Since you posted a case report and claimed it was a study saying creatine was bad for your kidneys - you are on shaky ground.
 
HIT4ME

HIT4ME

Well-known member
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
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!
 
BennyMagoo79

BennyMagoo79

Well-known member
Awards
2
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
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.



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?



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!

I suspect one element which may cloud the issue is the fact that keto encompasses a spectrum of eating choices. One example: I got off after 3 months because my bile ducts were playing up, but my version of keto included a lot of macdonalds burgers with patties instead of buns and not enough greens. Mum has not had any issues, but she eats food she has prepared, usually with lots of seasoning, and consumes a lot more fish and green veg than I did.

I wish I had taken bloods at 3 months, becuase I am pretty keen to do it again but this time with more home cooked food and green veg, and I would love to see if it makes a difference for me.
 
muscleupcrohn

muscleupcrohn

Well-known member
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
I suspect one element which may cloud the issue is the fact that keto encompasses a spectrum of eating choices. One example: I got off after 3 months because my bile ducts were playing up, but my version of keto included a lot of macdonalds burgers with patties instead of buns and not enough greens. Mum has not had any issues, but she eats food she has prepared, usually with lots of seasoning, and consumes a lot more fish and green veg than I did.

I wish I had taken bloods at 3 months, becuase I am pretty keen to do it again but this time with more home cooked food and green veg, and I would love to see if it makes a difference for me.
That’s largely the point. Most any diet can be made to be at least pretty healthy, or very unhealthy. People assume that keto or paleo, or vegan, or gluten free, or whatever you can think of, is inherently healthy, when this is not always the case. Some diets are just better suited to some people’s likes, schedules, habits, etc. that make following them more feasible, but that doesn’t mean they’re not generally gimmicky diets as a whole for most people. Having a sweet potato with a chicken breast isn’t going to be keto, but it’s not unhealthy by any stretch of the imagination. Whey protein isn’t paleo, but it’s quite healthy. Etc. Various medical conditions muddy the waters for various diets of course, but for normal people, most of these diets provide no real benefits beyond what just a generally balanced diet would be, and are pretty limiting. Now, some people thrive on these artificially imposed limitations, and some people really don’t. Some people do well on keto or paleo be use it “forces” them to avoid the objectively s**t unhealthy foods they otherwise eat, therefore making their diet better. That doesn’t make this diet some magic diet, or better than any other diet that would also mean avoiding objectively garbage foods. Compared to the typical “Western diet,” where the only consideration is “does it taste good,” of course any diet that puts some basic level of thought and effort is going to be preferable. Doesn’t mean it’s not gimmicky and massively overhyped. And also likely suboptimal for building muscle in the case of keto, and also much less flexible, and more prone to “failing” the diet than just a generally balanced diet is. Keto can be fine, successful even, and still be overhyped and gimmicky.
 
Smont

Smont

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
  • RockStar
@HIT4ME

I don't throw away all studies. When a study comes out you gotta take all the variables. Say a study said keto gives bad blood markers, well who was in the study, were they overweight, probably, were they smokers, maybe, was the keto meat eggs and avacados or fried chicken and cured meats, there's a million things I have to look through to believe a study.

But.... None of this conversation was I asking for. I was simply stating that I saw something saying how keto is bad now and I find it funny how ppl take on these fad diets as holy Grail and then they dissapear and those same ppl will latch on to the next diet saying it's the best then a year later there's a new diet that they think is the best. That's what I find funny, there was nothing more to my statement about the article I saw other then I think it's funny ppl know so little about something and latch on to it while it's popular and when the next big thing comes out they start over with how this new 1 is best
 
muscleupcrohn

muscleupcrohn

Well-known member
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
@HIT4ME

I don't throw away all studies. When a study comes out you gotta take all the variables. Say a study said keto gives bad blood markers, well who was in the study, were they overweight, probably, were they smokers, maybe, was the keto meat eggs and avacados or fried chicken and cured meats, there's a million things I have to look through to believe a study.

But.... None of this conversation was I asking for. I was simply stating that I saw something saying how keto is bad now and I find it funny how ppl take on these fad diets as holy Grail and then they dissapear and those same ppl will latch on to the next diet saying it's the best then a year later there's a new diet that they think is the best. That's what I find funny, there was nothing more to my statement about the article I saw other then I think it's funny ppl know so little about something and latch on to it while it's popular and when the next big thing comes out they start over with how this new 1 is best
Yeah, and that's a problem with a lot of studies that show "Diet X" is the "best diet ever." Often times it's just finding that they're superior to an objectively s**t "Western diet" full of highly processed meats and added sugar. Of course most diets where some level of effort is put into trying to be healthy is going to be better than that. It's not so much the studies are bad as it's the media and "gurus" who don't know what the studies actually found/mean that stretch the results to hyperbolic points and claim these benefits mean it's the new "best" thing, when all it showed is it's better than garbage.
 
HIT4ME

HIT4ME

Well-known member
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
@HIT4ME

I don't throw away all studies. When a study comes out you gotta take all the variables. Say a study said keto gives bad blood markers, well who was in the study, were they overweight, probably, were they smokers, maybe, was the keto meat eggs and avacados or fried chicken and cured meats, there's a million things I have to look through to believe a study.

But.... None of this conversation was I asking for. I was simply stating that I saw something saying how keto is bad now and I find it funny how ppl take on these fad diets as holy Grail and then they dissapear and those same ppl will latch on to the next diet saying it's the best then a year later there's a new diet that they think is the best. That's what I find funny, there was nothing more to my statement about the article I saw other then I think it's funny ppl know so little about something and latch on to it while it's popular and when the next big thing comes out they start over with how this new 1 is best
This is a reasonable answer, I was being sincere I'm the question.

I am sorry if you feel this is an attack - not intended. I get your point. It is funny in that light. I probably came out wrong in my response to you when I said "It's not funny" - what I meant is...it is expected. People look for new and novel ideas and the news and diet industry benefit from the back and forth uncertainty and flavor of the day.

I don't think "all this" is necessarily in response to your post, I think it is just the nature of the discussion. Some people have strong emotional ties to their beliefs, and as I said - understandably so.
 
Smont

Smont

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
  • RockStar
This is a reasonable answer, I was being sincere I'm the question.

I am sorry if you feel this is an attack - not intended. I get your point. It is funny in that light. I probably came out wrong in my response to you when I said "It's not funny" - what I meant is...it is expected. People look for new and novel ideas and the news and diet industry benefit from the back and forth uncertainty and flavor of the day.

I don't think "all this" is necessarily in response to your post, I think it is just the nature of the discussion. Some people have strong emotional ties to their beliefs, and as I said - understandably so.
Not a attack at all. Im just trying to get the point across that I wasn't questioning anything or trying to prove anything, just that I find it funny how ppl switch back and forth on stuff they really don't know anything about. For instance I have lots of friends that were treating keto like some holy Grail and when I would try to explain it's a tool but it's not magic they swear is the ultimate everything and those same friends will be on to a new craze as soon as they see a headline like this even tho they probably won't read the whole article or look at who actually was in the study or performed it
 
HIT4ME

HIT4ME

Well-known member
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
Not a attack at all. Im just trying to get the point across that I wasn't questioning anything or trying to prove anything, just that I find it funny how ppl switch back and forth on stuff they really don't know anything about. For instance I have lots of friends that were treating keto like some holy Grail and when I would try to explain it's a tool but it's not magic they swear is the ultimate everything and those same friends will be on to a new craze as soon as they see a headline like this even tho they probably won't read the whole article or look at who actually was in the study or performed it
Yeah, we are pretty much in agreement. Haha.
 
Smont

Smont

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
  • RockStar
So a guy I work with who is always out of shape and constantly talks about the one time he lost 10lbs on keto... Is doing keto again after having his gallbladder removed, don't sound too smart to me. Doesn't the gallbladder process fats?
 

DS3317

New member
Awards
0
If high fat diets, ie keto were so bad, then why would integrative medicine dr’s being telling their patients to eat that way? There’s as much research out there that says high fat is much better for you. The dr’s office I go to for TRT is an integrative medicine practice. They highly recommend keto and paleo. They also recommend cycling between the two. Creatine is a staple supplement for weightlifters and there’s a ton of studies out there that say creatine is dangerous. Again research can be just like statistics.
Well integrative medicine is quackery so I’m sure they’d recommend all sorts of horse ****. In fact I’d argue “integrative” medicine is one of the most dangerous forms of nonsense pseudoscience.
 

Derek Wilson

Active member
Awards
1
  • Established
Well integrative medicine is quackery so I’m sure they’d recommend all sorts of horse ****. In fact I’d argue “integrative” medicine is one of the most dangerous forms of nonsense pseudoscience.
Yeah,
 

Derek Wilson

Active member
Awards
1
  • Established
I’d say the major misconception about the keto diet is that it is a weight-loss diet. To my mind, it is a diet that addresses metabolic issues (by minimizing net carbs (total carbs minus dietary fiber (dietary fiber is not minimized, being important to health)). [ProvenPeptides] Calories from fats replace calories lost by minimizing carbs, and since fats are slower to digest (and thus provide a longer period of satiation), many people do in fact lose weight on a keto (low-carb high-fat) diet: because they don’t get hungry so often, they end up eating less and/or less often.
 
justhere4comm

justhere4comm

Board Sponsor
Awards
4
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
I’d say the major misconception about the keto diet is that it is a weight-loss diet. To my mind, it is a diet that addresses metabolic issues (by minimizing net carbs (total carbs minus dietary fiber (dietary fiber is not minimized, being important to health)). [SPAM KEYWORD REMOVED] Calories from fats replace calories lost by minimizing carbs, and since fats are slower to digest (and thus provide a longer period of satiation), many people do in fact lose weight on a keto (low-carb high-fat) diet: because they don’t get hungry so often, they end up eating less and/or less often.
Wrong. Where to begin...
I won't. I can't get around the fact you had to embed [keyword] into your post, and probably copy and pasted your answer.
 
BennyMagoo79

BennyMagoo79

Well-known member
Awards
2
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
I’d say the major misconception about the keto diet is that it is a weight-loss diet. To my mind, it is a diet that addresses metabolic issues (by minimizing net carbs (total carbs minus dietary fiber (dietary fiber is not minimized, being important to health)). [ProvenPeptides] Calories from fats replace calories lost by minimizing carbs, and since fats are slower to digest (and thus provide a longer period of satiation), many people do in fact lose weight on a keto (low-carb high-fat) diet: because they don’t get hungry so often, they end up eating less and/or less often.
Well said.
 

Similar threads


Top