Low carb dieting (CKD) debate!

[I'mThatFitGuy]

Also curious as to your thoughts on active people, who need large amounts of carbohydrate to support highly glycolytic exercise. Are they insulin resistant too and on their way to obesity and/or type 2 diabetes, or is their insulin sensitivity actually high because their body is using the carbohydrate efficiently for fuel?

Yes, while very active people can delay the onset of type 2 due to their high levels of activity, it doesn't seem to prevent anything. Read about Dr. Timothy Nokes and his and his dad's history with type 2. Nokes is an ultramarathoner, but still developed type 2, then went keto because he read an article by peers that he highly respected. A quote from one of his articles that I read once, "I learned more about human physiology in my first year of being keto than in 40 years of being an MD."

 

[I'mThatFitGuy]

Quick article outlining a meta analysis of calorie and protein equated, high carb low fat vs low carb high fat diets...

https://www.stephanguyenet.com/meta...ories-on-energy-expenditure-and-body-fatness/

And a link to the actual study for a deeper dive...

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5568065/

Quote from the study.. "These results are in the opposite direction to the predictions of the carbohydrate-insulin model, but the effect sizes are so small as to be physiologically meaningless. In other words, for all practical purposes “a calorie is a calorie” when it comes to body fat and energy expenditure differences between controlled isocaloric diets varying in the ratio of carbohydrate to fat."

So, I read thru the article and part of the abstract. Nowhere did I see any macro breakdown. What I talk about is low carbs where the body reaches a state of ketosis. Otherwise, subbing fat for carbs is almost meaningless. Then, a calorie basically is a calorie.

I also read this in the abstract.

Obesity is often described as a disorder of energy balance arising from consuming calories in excess to the energy expended to maintain life and perform physical work. While this energy balance concept is a useful framework for investigating obesity, it does not provide a causal explanation for why some people have obesity or what to do about it.

In particular, obesity prevention is often erroneously portrayed as a simple matter of bookkeeping whereby calorie intake must be balanced by calorie expenditure.[SUP]1[/SUP] Under this “calories in, calories out” model, treating obesity amounts to advising people to simply eat less and move more, thereby tipping the scales of calorie balance and resulting in steady weight loss that accumulates according to the widely known, but erroneous, 3500 kcal per pound rule.[SUP]2,3[/SUP] Therefore, failure to experience substantial weight loss implies that an individual lacks the willpower to adhere to a modest lifestyle intervention over a sufficient period of time.

However, this naïve view is incorrect because it considers energy intake and expenditure to be independent parameters that can be adjusted at will and thereafter remain static without being influenced by homeostatic signals related to weight loss.[SUP]3[/SUP] We now understand that energy intake and expenditure are interdependent variables that are dynamically influenced by each other and body weight.[SUP]4[/SUP] Attempts to alter energy balance through diet or exercise are countered by physiological adaptations that resist weight loss.[SUP]5[/SUP]

 

[Jin]

I have a reminder set for this weekend and 2 hours set aside. Once I actually read this thread maybe I can contribute something.

 

[I'mThatFitGuy]

This reminds me of the vegetarian converts .. my new way is the best way .. which there is now science to back up vegan lifestyle is no healthier ... same with low carb ... intermittent fasting .. basically you are are selling something ...

You look at Pro bodybuilders or Pro athletes at any very high level and the great majority are eating a health - well balanced diet low in sugar but not low carbs overall ...

Again if it works for you and allows you a successful business .. great .. but overall as snake said sustainability trumps everything ... doing something for a year or 5 years is great ... what about doing it for 80 years which is what a healthy lifestyle in all about .... I don't need the latest fad ... I'll take a sensible higher protein diet similar to the Zone for life.

In fact, if people are just going to be assholes because of the thread because it threatens their belief system and they can't be that open minded about anything that does, just delete it and I'll end the discussion now. I'm doing this to spread, what I believe to be, very good information. If you're not interested, but still wanna feed me shit about it, then You're the one with the issue. And, I don't need your shit.

You look at Pro bodybuilders or Pro athletes at any very high level and the great majority are eating a health - well balanced diet low in sugar but not low carbs overall ...

Again if it works for you and allows you a successful business .. great .. but overall as snake said sustainability trumps everything ... doing something for a year or 5 years is great ... what about doing it for 80 years which is what a healthy lifestyle in all about .... I don't need the latest fad ... I'll take a sensible higher protein diet similar to the Zone for life.

IDK, but from where I'm sitting, it's you who thinks you know the best way. As I said in a post you obviously didn't read, "Look, I'm not trying to convert anyone. You do you, I'll do me." You can do whatever you want to.

 

[I'mThatFitGuy]

I dont think everyone is born pre-diabetic b/y saying everyone is insulin resistant to a certain point...that argument could be said with just about anything out there as everyone is going to be, to some degree, resistant to a lot of different scenarios medically.

I say that because I think everyone sits at some level of insulin sensitivity, high, low, in between. I shouldn't have said EVERYONE is pre-daibetic, because there are some very insulin sensitive people. My brother is one of them. Body like Bruce Lee, 54 in Feb. But, for 90% of the population, there's some level of insensitivity. Enough where with the wrong diet, for a long enough period of time, receptors will start to shut down.

So, IDK if you've heard these pre-diabeties ads on the radio. I hear them on the local sports talk station. 1 in 3 Americans has what has been termed "pre-diabetes". And that's just based on the current "definition" of pre-diabeties, which is an arbitrary line that was decided by some people with maybe not your best interests in mind. We have what, 250-300 million people? That's 80-100 MILLION people! That's scary. And as you said, it's pretty much diet related.

 

[I'mThatFitGuy]

These are some bold statements by you, do you have anything to back up these claims?..... "I think that most of us are born "pre-diabetic" because most of us are insulin resistant to a certain point. Insulin insensitivity is a natural state."

Just my opinion, based on mine and my clients' and friends' experiences with switching to low carbs, seeing the lack of results that the vast majority of people got in gyms over the years, even if they worked really hard and ate "right", observing the public and how fat EVERYONE seems to be these days...eating less meat and fat and eating more grains, fruits and veggies. I'm an INTJ, so I naturally want to find answers to my questions and I'm constantly analyzing and putting together big pictures so that I understand the way things work and how they're inter-related. I do it all the time, not realizing that I'm even doing it. I've thought long and hard about my opinions. Show me something really convincing, and if I believe it to be factually correct, I'll change my mind. But, since reading Body Opus in like '99, nothing has done that yet. In fact, as time has gone by, everything I read and observe just reinforces my beliefs.

I read that a large group of Dr's in Canada want their Ministry of Health to basically turn the the food pyramid upside down to reflect what the latest studies are saying. That high fat, low carb is just healthier for you than what the current pyramid reflects.

For all of you with open, curious minds...read the book. It contains 3 diets. Just read about CKD's and the physiology behind it. Or the Anabolic Diet by DiPasquale is the cheater's version Lol Much easier than Duchaine's, but still very effective. Then, let's talk about it.

 

[I'mThatFitGuy]

I mean, that’s basically what we’re talking about with insulin sensitivity, how well does your body utilize glucose for energy vs. storing it as fat.

I should have said "carbs" here, not "glucose".

 

[CJ]

It's early morning and I'm getting read for work, so I can't address all your points right now. But I'll hit a few really quickly...

Your quote... "So, if my body is physiologically limited in its ability to use carbs for energy, and all I eat is carbs, what do you think will happen with any carbs that I can't utilize for energy? Maybe converted to a different form of energy...like fat?"

Respose: yes, unused blood glucose will eventually be turned to fat if not used, nobody is saying otherwise. But what happens a dew hours after the meal, when blood sugar and insulin is back to normal, and the body needs energy? You got it, it'll use bodyfat for fuel to make up the energy required. It's human physiology.

Think of it as a revolving door in an office building, the people are fat in this example. If you have more people going into the building over time than you do leaving, you'll gain bodyfat over time. If more are leaving than are entering, you'll lose bodyfat. There's always fat moving in and out of adipose tissue throughout the day,

Which rings me to your claim that if one were to eat only 2000 calories of carbs per day, (other nutrient requirements aside), that they'd die of starvation. Where do those calories go though? Oh yes, you stated that since they're insulin resistant, they'll all turn to fat. Ok, say you're right. Why won't the body then use that fat as fuel? Are you now claiming that they can't usd carbs OR fat as fuel? Because you also claimed that one would lose bodyfat if they ate 5000 Cals of fat per day.

If that were really how our bodies systems work, our species surely would've died off long ago.

 

[CJ]

Also had to comment on this:

Your quite: "Think about this…if food and shelter are limited, the LAST thing you want is to be very insulin sensitive and not be able to store fat. You’d be more likely to die off."

That is ABSOLUTE WRONG!!! You'd 100% want to be insulin sensitive, so your body could efficiently use every bit of food that it came across, both carb and fat, so it could survive. Do you really think that if one were to come across only apples in your scenario, they'd be shit out of luck because they only found carbs and not fats? That's absurd!!!

 

[Trump]

What CJ said

 

[CJ]

Some things about the study I linked:

This research was supported by the Intramural Research Program of the National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Diabetes & Digestive & Kidney Diseases.

Not funded by "Big Sugar" or any other lobby group.

Also, about one of the study authors:

K.D.H. has received funding from the Nutrition Science Initiative to investigate the effects of ketogenic diets on human energy expenditure. K.D.H. also has a patent pending on a method of personalized dynamic feedback control of body weight (US Patent Application No. 13/754,058; assigned to the National Institutes of Health). J.G. has no conflicts of interest to disclose.

The National Science Initiative was created by Gary Taubes, who like you believes in the insulin hypothesis and not calories in vs calories out. His foundation was responsible for funding this study, which came to a conclusion IN OPPOSITION to Taubes beliefs, so we can assume that there's probably no funny business going on with this Mera analysis.



Now if you want to dismiss this peer reviewed and published study of peer reviewed and published studies, then surely your claims of 'it worked for my clients' has to be dismissed too.

Again, I'm not saying that ketogenic diets don't work, I'm only saying that the reason why you think they do is wrong. It's Cals in vs Cals out, and that's why MANY diet interventions work. It's not the insulin.

 

[CJ]

Your quote.... "I believe you’re either burning primarily sugar or fat. Have you ever "bonked"? No, not that kind of bonking. If you're not familiar with the term, it's when you run out of glucose in the middle of a long distance event or workout of some sort, running, biking. I did short course triathlons in the mid '80's. Bonked a few times in training. No fun at all. Once, I could barely ride my bike back to the car to scrounge up enough change from the floor to buy a candy bar at the store where I'd parked! If we could switch back and forth as you seem to imply, bonking would never happen."

Response: It's not an either or, it's a spectrum. One can easily walk a marathon, because it's primarily fat being burned at that pace. As one speeds up, the percentage of glucose/fat being burned slides over to the glucose side. When one is all out sprinting, it's almost all glucose as a fuel.

If I recall correctly, the body can absorb 1 gram of glucosee per minute, and 0.8 grams of fructose per minute. That's why elite marathon runners use glucose gels and tabs and NOT shots of olive oil or tabs of butter. Glucose us the preferred energy source at their fast pace. That's why one can walk basically for forever, have a sustainable jogging pace, but can only sprint short distances.

When one BONKS, it's because their glucose needs are outpacing their ability to digest and utilize any they're taking in, and their stores are getting depleted. But they're still able to walk at this point, correct? Or in your case barely ride your bike back to your car. Did you or they shrivel up and die? Absolutely not, because your body is still able to use fats at that point to sustain a lower level of activity. So YES, it can switch back and forth which fuel source is primarily used.

 

[Straight30weight]

What CJ said

You always have all the answers

 

[CJ]

Your quote.... "So, over time, I’ve concluded that body fat loss, while in ketosis, happens primarily/only when the body needs fuel and there are no ingested fats available to satisfy this need. (I’m hesitant to say only because I don’t care to know the minute details of all the physiology."

Response: The" minute details" of human physiology that you don't care to know is that the body will store excess calories from both carbs AND FAT as stored bodyfat, and NOT "Basically piss out fat" as you state. That's another bold claim that I'm sure people would love to see proof of.

 

[CJ]

You bring up Ben Roethlisberger as evidence of the ketogenic diet being superior? He's a fat slob.

How about Michael Phelps and Ryan Lochtes diets then? Not keto, in fact they eat high carbohydrate. Both have a MUCH better body than Big Ben.

https://qz.com/753956/how-olympic-swimmers-can-keep-eating-such-insane-quantities-of-food/

I freely admit that both our examples are ridiculous, n=1 doesn't make the rules. Just wanted to point out the flaw in your insulin hypothesis argument.

 

[CJ]

Your quote:
You eat a meal of carbs and fat, say a half dozen donuts (I know ALL of you have done this!! LMAO) I’m joking. It could be any carb and any fat. Carbs come out of the stomach first and spike your glucose. Body releases insulin to clear glucose from the blood. Insulin sweeps water and glucose (I read 3/1 in someone’s post) into ALL your muscle cells (think organs, too, like your heart) to the extent that your sensitivity allows insulin to act. There, it eventually gets converted into ATP to provide the cell energy. Very simplified, but I believe accurate. Then, some gets stored in the liver. The rest of the glucose, if any, will be converted to fat.

Response: not much wrong here, except you skipped an important detail. The body doesn't IMMEDIATELY turn any glucose not needed by the muscles or liver to fat. It will store it in all sorts of places first, because it doesn't WANT to store the glucose as fat, but it will if it HAS TO. That's what happens when people overeat carbs, the bloat. That's the body shuttling the glucose around, attached to water, to hopefully be used. What usually happens is the body will try to use this fuel source first, to clear it, and store any dietary fats ingested as bodyfat, since it's already in a fatty acid form, no conversion necessary to become bodyfat.

If the need to use this fuel(excess glucose) arises, it's right there, easily shuttled back into the blood. If it's NOT needed, due to CHRONIC over eating, then the body will convert the excess to fatty acids to be used or stored in adipose tissue.

Calories ingested vs calories utilized.

 

[CJ]

Your quote:
"So, first…while there were early humans in tropical or other climates where vegetation was available year 'roud, would you say that it was more than ALL other early humans living in temperate or colder climates. Maybe very early man, but homo sapiens left Africa 90,000 years ago. Eventually they were everywhere. And although there have been examples of differences in evolution due to regional pressures (think how some cultures aren’t lactose intolerant), I doubt highly that homo sapiens that left Africa were physiologically different from homo sapiens who eventually ended up in Alaska, or even us now."

Response:
I agree that over time, due to where our particular ancestors lived, some will do better with a higher fat diet, like the inuits for example. The same can also be said for those whose ancestors evolved eating more carbohydrate from vegetation, plants, roots, etc.

A perfect example of how the ketogenic diet, OR ANY DIET, might not be the best for someone.

 

[CJ]

Your quote:
,I’ve done pre and post-meal blood tests. My normal glucose level is like 80-90 whatever units Lol But, if I eat even a very keto, high fat meal, I’ll get a spike to 100-110. Blood ketones levels thru the roof. I found the rise in glucose very interesting. One of my former clients runs diabetic clinics for one of the hospital chains in Baltimore. She experienced the same thing.

Mine is very similar with a mixed meal, plenty of carbohydrate. Minus the ketones, obviously. I've spent soooo much money on test strips! :32 (18):

Not sure what your point is here.

 

[CJ]

Something you quoted:
"The keto diet can be a great way to get in shape, but should always be done under the supervision of a medical professional."

Really sounds like a reasonable, sustainable approach to nutrition. Please note my sarcasm

 

[CJ]

Did I miss anything? I don't want you to think that I'm dodging any of your points, but it's entirely possible that I missed something due to the length of our texts, and the fact that I'm at work right now. :32 (18):