5 ms·

> This same condition, ketosis, occurs naturally when people are literally starving to death or seriously ill. During starvation this metabolic state is a kindn

by noondip 11y ago

> This same condition, ketosis, occurs naturally when people are literally starving to death or seriously ill. During starvation this metabolic state is a kindness of nature allowing the victim to suffer much reduced pains of hunger while dying. During illness the suppression of the appetite frees the person to rest and recuperate, rather then be forced by hunger to gather and prepare food. Because ketogenic diets simulate this metabolic state seen with serious illness, I refer to them as “the make yourself sick diets.” As we will see below, another reason low-carbohydrate, high-protein diets deserve this title is they contain significant amounts of the very foods — the meats — that the American Cancer Society and the Heart Association tell us contribute to our most common causes of death and disability. https://www.drmcdougall.com/health/education/health-science/featured-articles/articles/high-protein-diets/ https://www.drmcdougall.com/health/education/health-science/... > A plant-based diet beat out the conventional American Diabetes Association diet in a head-to-head randomized controlled clinical trial, without restricting portions, no calorie or carb counting. A review of all such studies found that individuals following plant-based diets experience improved reductions in blood sugars, body weight, and cardiovascular risk, compared with those following diets that included animal products. http://nutritionfacts.org/video/plant-based-diets-for-diabetes/ http://nutritionfacts.org/video/plant-based-diets-for-diabet...

nitrogen 11y ago
What appears to work best on the scale of a clinical study may not work so well for some subsets of the population. I've yet to find any sort of plant-based meal that makes me nearly as energetic and satisfied as one that includes animal protein of some kind.
- noondip 11y ago
  Please check my related comment below about adjusting taste preferences. While it's true a greater amount of non-animal foods are necessary on account of them being generally less calorically dense (while at the same time being more nutrient dense), you can certainly find meals to satisfy your desires with patience and resolve. Start small - replace the beef patty with a black bean patty, for instance.
  - voidlogic 11y ago
    Do you realize that most people that "do keto" end up eating more veggies that they did before? There are tons of keto friendly veggies. You can eat a ketogenic diet and eat nearly unrestricted amounts (except by satiety) amounts of things like cabbage, cauliflower, radishes (great cooked btw), brussel sprouts, spinach, green onions, broccoli, kohlrabi, lettuce, avocado, sprouts, green beans, rutabaga, leeks, yellow squash, zucchini, mushrooms, herbs. Add that with some fish, meat, nuts and/or cheese and you have a very healthy diet. Between the satiety of fat/protein and high-fiber foods above, its very easy to hit one's caloric goals and have a minimal blood glucose level.
    - noondip 11y ago
      Thanks - I wasn't aware of such diets, and I'm glad to hear people are eating their greens regardless of which diet they follow. However, you're incorrect to assume adding meats and dairy products - even so-called "lean" ones - which are laden with cholesterol, saturated and trans fats - is at all healthy. All credible evidence suggests quite the opposite. If you have any studies which contradict my assertion, I would love for us to examine them together.
      - voidlogic 11y ago
        I mean you no offense, but to me it sounds like your understanding of nutrition science is 10 years in the past. I do want to point out naturally occurring transfat has very different properties than the artificial common forms. I have never seen a well designed study show a low-fat diet to be superior to a high-fat-moderate-protien-very-low-carb one (usually referred to as VHFLC). I'd be interested if you know of any. It is no longer generally accepted that dietary cholesterol is dominate factor unless you have mutation such as some of the PCSK9 mutations. Your body syntheses much more cholesterol everyday than you actually eat. The latest US government dietary guidelines has drastically shifted its position on cholesterol, write-up: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/02/10/feds-poised-to-withdraw-longstanding-warnings-about-dietary-cholesterol/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/02/10/feds-... We have since learned many things such as the importance of HDL/LDL ratio as being predictive over just LDL for example. This is a very complex topic and I would recommend this series written by a MD: http://eatingacademy.com/nutrition/the-straight-dope-on-cholesterol-part-i http://eatingacademy.com/nutrition/the-straight-dope-on-chol... This is a 5 part series befitting the complexity of the issue at hand.
voidlogic 11y ago
The diets most keto advocates support is not high protein; rather, it is high fat, moderate protein, very low carb (< 25 net grabs daily). The science to date supports that as being a very healthy diet, especially if your fat source is not omega-6 polyunsaturated fat, but is instead dominated by monounsaturated, omega-3 polyunsaturated and yes, saturated fat. http://authoritynutrition.com/23-studies-on-low-carb-and-low-fat-diets/ http://authoritynutrition.com/23-studies-on-low-carb-and-low...
- noondip 11y ago
  Oh, dear. First study: > Dr. Hill reports having received consulting fees from HealtheTech, Johnson & Johnson, Procter & Gamble, Coca-Cola Second study: > This study proves a principle and does not provide clinical guidance; given the known benefits of fat restriction, future studies evaluating long-term cardiovascular outcomes are needed before a carbohydrate-restricted diet can be endorsed. Third study: > The study was designed to compare weight loss and cardiovascular risk in the short term; our long-term results, although appearing successful, must be considered as anecdotal, and further long-term follow-up studies must be conducted to confirm these findings. Fourth study: > Although advocates for very low carbohydrate diets are likely to embrace the results of this study, several points of caution need to be emphasized. First, a single study of a specific dietary regimen cannot provide a full assessment of safety and efficacy. Despite this study being the longest randomized, controlled trial of a very low carbohydrate diet reported, our results are still limited by the 6-month time frame. Whether the very low carbohydrate diet will produce sustained weight loss and continued improvement in cardiovascular risk factors over longer periods of time remains to be determined; the gradual increase in carbohydrate consumption in the final 3 months of the study suggests that some degree of recidivism is likely in persons on this diet. In addition, increased dietary fat has been linked to certain types of cancer and may have effects on cardiovascular health beyond the risk factors assessed in this study. Fifth study: > Financial Interest: Dr Hennekens is funded by the Agatston Research Institute, a nonprofit foundation, as Director of Research. Sixth study: > Participants were healthy and were followed for only 24 weeks, factors that limit generalization of our results. The low-carbohydrate diet has not been studied extensively in patients with chronic illness, and certain patients may require close medical supervision when following this diet. Furthermore, weight loss resulting from the low-carbohydrate diet may be difficult to maintain after 24 weeks. > Potential Financial Conflicts of Interests: Grants received: E.C. Westman (Robert C. Atkins Foundation); Grants pending: E.C. Westman and W.S. Yancy Jr. (Robert C. Atkins Foundation) Seventh study: > This study was supported by a grant from The Dr. Robert C. Atkins Foundation, New York, NY. Eight study: > There were initially 20 subjects enrolled in each experimental group [...] Over the course of the study, four subjects dropped out of the LF group and five dropped out of the LC group. Ninth study: > 28 overweight premenopausal women consumed either a low-carb or a low-fat diet for 6 weeks. The low-fat group was calorie restricted. [calorie restriction does not work in the long term, period] Tenth study: > Carbohydrate restriction was an effective method of achieving short-term weight loss compared with standard advice, but this was at the expense of an increase in relative saturated fat intake. [saturated fat causes CVD and other chronic illness] Eleventh study: > Mood and other symptoms were evaluated by participant self-report using the Atkins Health Indicator Test [I'm sure that's not at all biased /s] Twelfth study: > Limitations included the lack of a valid and comparable assessment of individual adherence to the 4 different diets, the lack of data on whether participants had familiarity using any of the specific study diets prior to enrolling in the trial, and the lack of assessment of satiety. Thirteenth study: > Whether either of these diets would produce similar outcomes over longer periods and under ad libitum conditions or in populations that are more vulnerable to adverse effects, such as persons with specific psychological difficulties, requires further investigation. Seriously, I had to stop at that. I'm sure the rest are also short-sighted and cannot be generalized as a healthful diet.
DrScump 11y ago
"During starvation this metabolic state is a kindness of nature allowing the victim to suffer much reduced pains of hunger while dying." I hope you have a cite for that, as it ignores the basics of natural selection. There is no way "nature" would select for a means to reduce the discomfort of starving to death, as death would remove that being from the gene pool, leaving that mechanism out of the gene pool as well.

by noondip 11y ago

nitrogen 11y ago

What appears to work best on the scale of a clinical study may not work so well for some subsets of the population. I've yet to find any sort of plant-based meal that makes me nearly as energetic and satisfied as one that includes animal protein of some kind.

noondip 11y ago
Please check my related comment below about adjusting taste preferences. While it's true a greater amount of non-animal foods are necessary on account of them being generally less calorically dense (while at the same time being more nutrient dense), you can certainly find meals to satisfy your desires with patience and resolve. Start small - replace the beef patty with a black bean patty, for instance.
- voidlogic 11y ago
  Do you realize that most people that "do keto" end up eating more veggies that they did before? There are tons of keto friendly veggies. You can eat a ketogenic diet and eat nearly unrestricted amounts (except by satiety) amounts of things like cabbage, cauliflower, radishes (great cooked btw), brussel sprouts, spinach, green onions, broccoli, kohlrabi, lettuce, avocado, sprouts, green beans, rutabaga, leeks, yellow squash, zucchini, mushrooms, herbs. Add that with some fish, meat, nuts and/or cheese and you have a very healthy diet. Between the satiety of fat/protein and high-fiber foods above, its very easy to hit one's caloric goals and have a minimal blood glucose level.
  - noondip 11y ago
    Thanks - I wasn't aware of such diets, and I'm glad to hear people are eating their greens regardless of which diet they follow. However, you're incorrect to assume adding meats and dairy products - even so-called "lean" ones - which are laden with cholesterol, saturated and trans fats - is at all healthy. All credible evidence suggests quite the opposite. If you have any studies which contradict my assertion, I would love for us to examine them together.
    - voidlogic 11y ago
      I mean you no offense, but to me it sounds like your understanding of nutrition science is 10 years in the past. I do want to point out naturally occurring transfat has very different properties than the artificial common forms. I have never seen a well designed study show a low-fat diet to be superior to a high-fat-moderate-protien-very-low-carb one (usually referred to as VHFLC). I'd be interested if you know of any. It is no longer generally accepted that dietary cholesterol is dominate factor unless you have mutation such as some of the PCSK9 mutations. Your body syntheses much more cholesterol everyday than you actually eat. The latest US government dietary guidelines has drastically shifted its position on cholesterol, write-up: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/02/10/feds-poised-to-withdraw-longstanding-warnings-about-dietary-cholesterol/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/02/10/feds-... We have since learned many things such as the importance of HDL/LDL ratio as being predictive over just LDL for example. This is a very complex topic and I would recommend this series written by a MD: http://eatingacademy.com/nutrition/the-straight-dope-on-cholesterol-part-i http://eatingacademy.com/nutrition/the-straight-dope-on-chol... This is a 5 part series befitting the complexity of the issue at hand.

voidlogic 11y ago

The diets most keto advocates support is not high protein; rather, it is high fat, moderate protein, very low carb (< 25 net grabs daily). The science to date supports that as being a very healthy diet, especially if your fat source is not omega-6 polyunsaturated fat, but is instead dominated by monounsaturated, omega-3 polyunsaturated and yes, saturated fat. http://authoritynutrition.com/23-studies-on-low-carb-and-low-fat-diets/ http://authoritynutrition.com/23-studies-on-low-carb-and-low...

noondip 11y ago
Oh, dear. First study: > Dr. Hill reports having received consulting fees from HealtheTech, Johnson & Johnson, Procter & Gamble, Coca-Cola Second study: > This study proves a principle and does not provide clinical guidance; given the known benefits of fat restriction, future studies evaluating long-term cardiovascular outcomes are needed before a carbohydrate-restricted diet can be endorsed. Third study: > The study was designed to compare weight loss and cardiovascular risk in the short term; our long-term results, although appearing successful, must be considered as anecdotal, and further long-term follow-up studies must be conducted to confirm these findings. Fourth study: > Although advocates for very low carbohydrate diets are likely to embrace the results of this study, several points of caution need to be emphasized. First, a single study of a specific dietary regimen cannot provide a full assessment of safety and efficacy. Despite this study being the longest randomized, controlled trial of a very low carbohydrate diet reported, our results are still limited by the 6-month time frame. Whether the very low carbohydrate diet will produce sustained weight loss and continued improvement in cardiovascular risk factors over longer periods of time remains to be determined; the gradual increase in carbohydrate consumption in the final 3 months of the study suggests that some degree of recidivism is likely in persons on this diet. In addition, increased dietary fat has been linked to certain types of cancer and may have effects on cardiovascular health beyond the risk factors assessed in this study. Fifth study: > Financial Interest: Dr Hennekens is funded by the Agatston Research Institute, a nonprofit foundation, as Director of Research. Sixth study: > Participants were healthy and were followed for only 24 weeks, factors that limit generalization of our results. The low-carbohydrate diet has not been studied extensively in patients with chronic illness, and certain patients may require close medical supervision when following this diet. Furthermore, weight loss resulting from the low-carbohydrate diet may be difficult to maintain after 24 weeks. > Potential Financial Conflicts of Interests: Grants received: E.C. Westman (Robert C. Atkins Foundation); Grants pending: E.C. Westman and W.S. Yancy Jr. (Robert C. Atkins Foundation) Seventh study: > This study was supported by a grant from The Dr. Robert C. Atkins Foundation, New York, NY. Eight study: > There were initially 20 subjects enrolled in each experimental group [...] Over the course of the study, four subjects dropped out of the LF group and five dropped out of the LC group. Ninth study: > 28 overweight premenopausal women consumed either a low-carb or a low-fat diet for 6 weeks. The low-fat group was calorie restricted. [calorie restriction does not work in the long term, period] Tenth study: > Carbohydrate restriction was an effective method of achieving short-term weight loss compared with standard advice, but this was at the expense of an increase in relative saturated fat intake. [saturated fat causes CVD and other chronic illness] Eleventh study: > Mood and other symptoms were evaluated by participant self-report using the Atkins Health Indicator Test [I'm sure that's not at all biased /s] Twelfth study: > Limitations included the lack of a valid and comparable assessment of individual adherence to the 4 different diets, the lack of data on whether participants had familiarity using any of the specific study diets prior to enrolling in the trial, and the lack of assessment of satiety. Thirteenth study: > Whether either of these diets would produce similar outcomes over longer periods and under ad libitum conditions or in populations that are more vulnerable to adverse effects, such as persons with specific psychological difficulties, requires further investigation. Seriously, I had to stop at that. I'm sure the rest are also short-sighted and cannot be generalized as a healthful diet.

DrScump 11y ago

"During starvation this metabolic state is a kindness of nature allowing the victim to suffer much reduced pains of hunger while dying." I hope you have a cite for that, as it ignores the basics of natural selection. There is no way "nature" would select for a means to reduce the discomfort of starving to death, as death would remove that being from the gene pool, leaving that mechanism out of the gene pool as well.