5 ms·

Ketogenic diets were originally proposed as an epilepsy treatment because it was known to be effective against certain types of seizures. To be clear, a ketoge

Ketogenic diets were originally proposed as an epilepsy treatment because it was known to be effective against certain types of seizures. To be clear, a ketogenic diet is not as effective as modern anti-seizure medications. It can come close in about 1/3 of patients (~90% reduction in seizure frequency) but it's not effective for all patients and shouldn't be viewed as an alternative to medication for everyone. A secondary problem is that the modern definition of a ketogenic diet has become muddied as it has entered mainstream dieting culture. Many people who claim to be on ketogenic diets aren't actually consuming enough fat, or are consuming too much protein, to technically pass the thresholds required to reach the ketone levels used in these studies. The most common mistake is consuming too much protein. Contrary to popular belief, even fatty foods like bacon are not strictly ketogenic. In fact, it's difficult to reach classic ketogenic thresholds without augmenting with MCT oil, heavy whipping cream, or very large amounts of nuts. Most "keto" recipes online barely meet Atkins criteria, let alone full ketogenic diet ratios. Once people realize they have to literally drink heavy whipping cream or oils to stay in the levels of ketosis required for therapeutic effect, the medications don't sound so bad.

seaorg 5y ago
A bowl of 25% ground beef and 75% beef tallow is quite good.
staticassertion 5y ago
> Once people realize they have to literally drink heavy whipping cream [..] the medications don't sound so bad. sounds great tbh
- deeviant 5y ago
  Sounds great until you realize that although some health markers improve on a ketogenic diet, all cause mortality significantly increases: https://www.escardio.org/The-ESC/Press-Office/Press-releases/Low-carbohydrate-diets-are-unsafe-and-should-be-avoided https://www.escardio.org/The-ESC/Press-Office/Press-releases...
  - staticassertion 5y ago
    > Regarding the mechanisms underlying the correlation between low carbohydrate diets and death, Professor Banach noted that animal protein, specifically red and processed meat, has already been linked with an increased risk of cancer. He said: “The reduced intake of fibre and fruits and increased intake of animal protein, cholesterol, and saturated fat with these diets may play a role. Differences in minerals, vitamins and phytochemicals might also be involved.” I wouldn't be surprised if most people doing keto have way, way less fiber than they should.
  - amanaplanacanal 5y ago
    Another crappy diet study. Correlation does not equal causation, etc. etc. It’s well known that these sorts of studies have innate problems, but they are easy to do, and the researchers get a published paper out of the deal, so why not?
    - deeviant 5y ago
      > Another crappy diet study. Correlation does not equal causation, etc. etc. It’s well known that these sorts of studies have innate problems If you think scientists don't know that correlation does not imply causation, I'm happy to report to you that they, in fact, do. Separating out incidental correlation from causation is actually kind of the point of science, and by extension, medicine. The primary population that gets it wrong is the people that read a single study, and immediately conclude something based on that one study, like "oh hey ketogenic diets reduces bad cholesterol, it must be super good." And it's simply intellectually dishonest (at best) to state that the motivation of the researcher is only to increase their paper count with presumable producing junk science, without presenting a shred of evidence to support such a claim(talk about bad science).
      - amanaplanacanal 5y ago
        All this sort of study can do is to point to where there might be connections to follow up on by doing the real research: randomly assign people to diets and watch the results. But that step never seems to get done. Instead we have this endless series of “studies” which show us absolutely nothing. You said that all cause mortality increases on a ketogenic diet, and this study shows no such thing.

seaorg 5y ago

A bowl of 25% ground beef and 75% beef tallow is quite good.

staticassertion 5y ago

> Once people realize they have to literally drink heavy whipping cream [..] the medications don't sound so bad. sounds great tbh

deeviant 5y ago
Sounds great until you realize that although some health markers improve on a ketogenic diet, all cause mortality significantly increases: https://www.escardio.org/The-ESC/Press-Office/Press-releases/Low-carbohydrate-diets-are-unsafe-and-should-be-avoided https://www.escardio.org/The-ESC/Press-Office/Press-releases...
- staticassertion 5y ago
  > Regarding the mechanisms underlying the correlation between low carbohydrate diets and death, Professor Banach noted that animal protein, specifically red and processed meat, has already been linked with an increased risk of cancer. He said: “The reduced intake of fibre and fruits and increased intake of animal protein, cholesterol, and saturated fat with these diets may play a role. Differences in minerals, vitamins and phytochemicals might also be involved.” I wouldn't be surprised if most people doing keto have way, way less fiber than they should.
- amanaplanacanal 5y ago
  Another crappy diet study. Correlation does not equal causation, etc. etc. It’s well known that these sorts of studies have innate problems, but they are easy to do, and the researchers get a published paper out of the deal, so why not?
  - deeviant 5y ago
    > Another crappy diet study. Correlation does not equal causation, etc. etc. It’s well known that these sorts of studies have innate problems If you think scientists don't know that correlation does not imply causation, I'm happy to report to you that they, in fact, do. Separating out incidental correlation from causation is actually kind of the point of science, and by extension, medicine. The primary population that gets it wrong is the people that read a single study, and immediately conclude something based on that one study, like "oh hey ketogenic diets reduces bad cholesterol, it must be super good." And it's simply intellectually dishonest (at best) to state that the motivation of the researcher is only to increase their paper count with presumable producing junk science, without presenting a shred of evidence to support such a claim(talk about bad science).
    - amanaplanacanal 5y ago
      All this sort of study can do is to point to where there might be connections to follow up on by doing the real research: randomly assign people to diets and watch the results. But that step never seems to get done. Instead we have this endless series of “studies” which show us absolutely nothing. You said that all cause mortality increases on a ketogenic diet, and this study shows no such thing.