[Zone] Zone vs. Ketosis?

[Mila]

hi!

with Jenny's permission I am piping in, lol

Rustpot, here are some responses to your statements/questions.

the main differences between the plan(s) you are on and the fat flush is that the fat flush is not a ketogenic diet and that the fat flush targets nearly all hormones at once, not just insulin. in addition, the fat flush plan recognizes the importance of healthy digestive system, including liver for the maximum fat loss and addresses that as well.

there is no 40:30:30 ratio to pursue on this diet, although Gittleman mentions once in her book that by the end of the day the breakdown of the macronutrients will be approximately that. since this plan allows unlimited veggies, it is easy to have way fewer than 40% from carbs, or sometimes higher, if you have vegetable juices instead of vegetable salads, soups, and stews. Barry Sears originated the 40:30:30 movement, or so it seems. his reasoning was that we evolved in africa, eating mostly lean game for meat and whatever for carbs, but not grains. so this gives about 40:30:30. then he reasons that the major spurt in human evolution happened when the wild game became scarce due to the growth and migration of human population and humans turned to fish and algae as a food source as well. this brought with it a steady supply of omega-3's and human development sped up, especially brain evolution.

the terms fat flush and cleanse are pretty accurate, if you spend a week on that diet, you'll know why, lol. the "fat' in our bodies, Gittleman points out, is not only white fat, but 'false fat' as well. false fat is waterlogging, old crap in our intestines, and some other sources of excess of weight that we need not have. her diet 'melts' white fat because of the food choices and the way of eating, and gets rid of the 'false fat' because of it being lowsalt diet with gut cleansing and lymphatic system shaking measures recommended as well.

waterfast is not the most effective detox diet, in fact, but it was 40-50years ago. there are much more effective plans as far as I know from reading and from experience (I had lived through two 20 and 30 day waterfasts and several other detox plans. water fast is the weakest of all, although the easiest in terms of implementation, especially if you do not mind having enemas or god forbid colonics twice per day).

Wa'il, in terms of metabolism, 'fast' doesn't always mean 'better' in terms of bodyfat loss. people with naturally slow metabolism lose bodyfat as fast as people with fast metabolism, if they are on a proper for them diet. the only goal any fat-burning diet has to achieve is to direct the body to spending its fat reserves. this can be done by low cal, by moderate cal, or by high cal, there are many strategies, as you know. on fat flush specifically there is no rebound from low calories, since veritably low calories (below 1200) are recommended only for the first 2 weeks, after that higher glycemic foods are 'allowed' which most of the dieters grab as soon as they can, so the body never gets the chance to get into starvation mode fully. once people realize that they lose slower on higher glycemic foods, they go back to 'induction' choices of carbs, and lose faster again. this cycle tends to repeat itself, and the horrible damage to metabolism is never taking place.

Mila

[tamarian]

Hi Mila,

I've seperated this post, since it's merits it's own discussion thread, and to not lost inside a journal.

Wa'il

[Bloom]

As I said in my journal before Wa'il deemed fit to snitch your post ;) , thanks for all the info you provide, you have quite a way with words :thup:

[tamarian]

Originally posted by Mila
the main differences between the plan(s) you are on and the fat flush is that the fat flush is not a ketogenic diet and that the fat flush targets nearly all hormones at once, not just insulin.
.....
there is no 40:30:30 ratio to pursue on this diet, although Gittleman mentions once in her book that by the end of the day the breakdown of the macronutrients will be approximately that.


Ummm, this is more like a marketing slogan. Low-carb, "none-ketogenic" plans work in the same way, they just acheive a higher carbs percentage (to appear healthier for the masses) by lowering their calories.

The Zone seems to work, Montignac too, Schwarzbein, Protein Power, Atkins etc. They are all based on the simple low-carb idea. Each has it's own flavour to it, some tweaks here, extra supplements there, etc.. What works for you, and appear best suited for your taste, and livable for the rest of your life as maintenance, should work.

Some authors may denounce other LC plans for the sake of marketing. Dr Sears has a strong biochemical background, and uses it quite well. However, he made some compromises (possibly due to publishers recommendations) by making some un-scientific claims.

Example, he claims eating more protein cause muscle loss (very funny for athletes), and all high-protein low-carb plans represent water-loss (I lost 110 lbs of water :( ). While the good Dr. offer extensive references throughout his book, he fails to give a reference for this claim. Why? Because there isn't, or he'd add that.

Another claim (targeted to distinguish his plan from other LC plans) is that ketones are "abnormal", and the body has "no use for them", all are bogus claims, that he couldn't substantiate with any single reference to a scientific study. It also contradicts his claims that even bad eicosanoids have use, bad cholesterol (LDL) has use, but ketone have no use and are abnormal! Even LC critics couldn't go that far :)

No I'm not saying 40/30/30 is bad, or it won't work, I'm simply trying to point out the marketing ploys used to scare people from other LC plans. This leads none-critical readers to assume all these claims are true, and generates a zealousy towards 40/30/30 as the only LC way, and all others are unhealthy.

so this gives about 40:30:30. then he reasons that the major spurt in human evolution happened when ....

All good and dandy. Same for all low-carb plans, they all use the hunter-gatherer argument to support their plan. And for the next to come low-carb plan, 50/30/20, or 34/33/33, that would be a valid argument as well.


the terms fat flush and cleanse are pretty accurate, if you spend a week on that diet, you'll know why, lol. the "fat' in our bodies, Gittleman points out, is not only white fat, but 'false fat' as well. false fat is waterlogging, old crap in our intestines, and some other sources of excess of weight that we need not have. her diet 'melts' white fat because of the food choices and the way of eating, and gets rid of the 'false fat' because of it being lowsalt diet with gut cleansing and lymphatic system shaking measures recommended as well.

Sounds good, we all detest water retention, affectionately known as bloating. :)


Wa'il, in terms of metabolism, 'fast' doesn't always mean 'better' in terms of bodyfat loss.


That's exactly my point. I'd even say it's worst. Didn't Dr. Sears say in "Enter the Zone" that you cannot lose more than 1.5 lbs of fat per week?

With plans claiming faster rates, through low-calories, you are losing more than fat, you lose muscles. So you might drop from 200 to 150, yet remain at 40% body fat, if you lose your muscles.

Again, this is not denounciation of the Zone or Fat Flush, just pointing out some issues that fuels diet wars due to marketing, unfortunately LC authors are getting into it as well, and their marketing efforts may mislead the average reader who just wants the facts.

Wa'il

[Bloom]

I enjoyed your reply Wa'il especially this bit
What works for you, and appear best suited for your taste, and livable for the rest of your life as maintenance, should work.
You hit the nail on the head :thup:

[Bloom]

These discussions could be likened to those on religion (I am not looking to start something :rolleyes: ) in that there is one God, he is the hub with many spokes to the wheel.
.. or another, LC'ing is like a cake ;) and we cut it into pieces.

[tamarian]

Originally posted by Bloom
These discussions could be likened to those on religion

I totally agree. When we follow ideas and theories based on our faith in them, or their authors, then it's a matter of faith :)

That's why I think a good mental filter on what is a fact, is clinical and scientific proof.

Wa'il

[rustpot]

What is so good about this site is that we can compare and contrast the different aspects of low carb in a rational informative way. I agree with bloom, in whatever "plan" we follow we are not trying to be messianic or preach to anyone and we should not get religious about it.

It would be terrible if the low carb community started to suffer from intenicene strife. We would have ketostix at dawn.There would be battles for the detox high ground.

Wai'l has touched on my main concern and that is the marketing of low carb and the tag lines on the book sales. The book publishers do not mean to pit low carb against low carb but the titles have to grab the attention.

We have "revolution", "power" "busters" to denote a radical approach. We have all the "healthy" words that are currently fashionable "detox" "Flush" "cleansing".

That's why I think a good mental filter on what is a fact, is clinical and scientific proof.

My sentiments entirely

[TeriDoodle]

If there's anything I've learned from this board is that every human body is unique. If you're smart you'll find a plan that you can live with and just stick to it for life. I know for a fact that I wouldn't be able to stick to FF because of the limited calories and other restrictions. BUT I do like the ideas she presents about having a clean, healthy liver to help my poor body metabolize fats and rid my body of toxins (I live in the 2nd most pollluted city in the country) .... so I just made a visit to the ol' health store and had a chat with the manager. Now I have an herbal regimen that at least HELPS my liver be the best it can be. I'm content with that compromise.

By far the most important decision a "dieter" can make is to determine which plan will work best for them over the VERY long term. The RATE of fat loss should be way down the list of priorities.... but I keep forgetting that not everyone thinks the way I do :lol:

[Natrushka]

No one publishes a LC book, or any other book, out of the goodness of their hearts. From Atkins to Schwarzbien, they all gain something when we slap down our money. They are in the business of making money.

We all have our darlings. My choice doesn’t make yours any less valid, and vice versa. However, there are some choices out there that verge on the desperate.

While the intentions of the authors of our LC plans are not wholly magnanimous, those of this community are. We are here to support and help one another. We aren't being paid for our services; it's all done on a voluntary basis. We have rules and regulations we follow, not unlike other communities. And we have a flavour, not unlike other communities. We promote, above all, a healthy lifestyle, achieved through low carbohydrate eating. Some of us are here to lose fat. Some are here to control diabetes, Crohn's, IBS, PCOS, fibromyalgia, eating disorders and the list goes on. What is the flavour of lowcarb.ca? Low carb isn't a quick fix, it's a chosen way of eating for life - this is a message you read over and over every day here.

Yes, all non-proprietary LC plans are open for discussion here, but does that mean all are open for support? How can you support something you don't believe in? Is a plan that is low carb only by virtue of the fact that it is low calorie really low carb?

Nat

[Akiwican]

I dont think I would be wrong in assuming that most people on this forum have tried "dieting" over and over again... WITHOUT long term success. :thdown: That's why I think the message is so strong on here that this is a WAY OF LIFE :thup: It may take a bit longer but we all know who won the race between the tortose {or maybe turtle would be a more appropriate term on here} and the hare. ;)

:wave: Akiwican

[Mila]

Hello!!!

:D :D :D

Wa'il, Jenny's journal with hits number rapidly approaching 4000 is not a place where this post of mine would've been easily lost :)

I have no problems with marketing strategies publishing houses or the authors of the dieting books use. so I do not really feel like participating in that line of discussion. besides, people who publish books are just people, even gods are biased. I do not see any problem with 'inflammatory' or warning statements if they spark curiosity and further research, the problem is when they ignite wars. people are born with tendency to confirmatory bias (seeking facts that confirm their beliefs and dismissing other facts), we cannot forget about it when we read books and posts on the board like this one.

I cannot speak for dr.sears. where in his books or public statements does he state that increased protein intake leads to the muscle mass loss? high protein diets do cause initial water loss, because of increased urination, as the body tries to get rid of the excess of the ketone bodies. since you haven't provided references to this statement of dr. sears's I do not know if he indeed referred to the initial water weight loss or was unwise enough to say that all loss on ketogenic diets is due to reduction in bodywater %.

ketosis is normal body reaction to abnormal health status (e.g. the one that arises in diabetes) or to abnormal nutrition ( extremely low carbs, either intentionally or not intentionally achieved by the individual), you know that. that's the meaning of the 'abnormal' in dr.sears's statement.

dr. sears indeed states in one or more of his books that one cannot lose more than 1-1.5lbs of bodyfat per week. I do not know the meaning of the word 'cannot' here, however, or the scope of that statement (to which portion of the general population he was referring). there are published records, medical and of other kind that this feat (losing more that 1.5lbs of fat per week) is indeed possible.

as a side note, why be so hot about 'clinical and scientific proof'? science doesn't prove anything, the way it works is by discovering new phenomena, by refining the detail, and by rejecting false hypotheses. it is not possible to prove anything by scientific means, that 'fact' scientists themselves, philosophers, and methodologists of science have discovered long time ago. rejecting false hypotheses doesn't prove alternative hypotheses either, just gives them somewhat more weight.

TeriDoodle, I am happy to hear that you are taking care of your liver! way to go!!! ... I must confess that I belong to that 'not everyone' that you mentioned group of people. I care about poundage loss dearly, lol. it's number one on my list :)

Nat, I can support something I do not currently believe in, maybe not by cheering them, but at least by staying silent and/or neutral, sometimes by encouraging them in very general terms, exploration is good. :) we all can, if we remind ourselves that what others are doing dietwise is not a threat to us and that what we are doing may be a threat to them.

I see you point in bringing up the issue of definition. what exactly is lowcarb? what is a lowcarb way of life? why can't lowcarb be used as a quick fix, if once it cures the disease, moderate to higher carbs can be easily handled by the body? again, in discovery, definitions are not useful at all. they are always operational. rhetoric/arguments from definition (e.g. did Prez Clinton really have sex when he had oral sex) again aim at proving some point, not at discovery.

Mila
:D

[Mila]

hi again!

here are some abstracts from my collection, I think they may be relevant to the discussion here.

Ok, these authors state that ketosis is body’s response to starvation. Should we widen up our definition of ‘starvation diets’, to include high calorie low carb intake diets, not only low calorie intake, into that category? This article is excellent in its overview of the goodness of ketosis.

Ketone bodies, potential therapeutic uses.

Veech RL, Chance B, Kashiwaya Y, Lardy HA, Cahill GF Jr.

Unit on Metabolic Control, LMMB/NIAAA, Rockville, Maryland, USA.

Ketosis, meaning elevation of D-beta-hydroxybutyrate (R-3hydroxybutyrate) and acetoacetate, has been central to starving man's survival by providing nonglucose substrate to his evolutionarily hypertrophied brain, sparing muscle from destruction for glucose synthesis. Surprisingly, D-beta-hydroxybutyrate (abbreviated "betaOHB") may also provide a more efficient source of energy for brain per unit oxygen, supported by the same phenomenon noted in the isolated working perfused rat heart and in sperm. It has also been shown to decrease cell death in two human neuronal cultures, one a model of Alzheimer's and the other of Parkinson's disease. These observations raise the possibility that a number of neurologic disorders, genetic and acquired, might benefit by ketosis. Other beneficial effects from betaOHB include an increased energy of ATP hydrolysis (deltaG') and its linked ionic gradients. This may be significant in drug-resistant epilepsy and in injury and anoxic states. The ability of betaOHB to oxidize co-enzyme Q and reduce NADP+ may also be important in decreasing free radical damage. Clinical maneuvers for increasing blood levels of betaOHB to 2-5 mmol may require synthetic esters or polymers of betaOHB taken orally, probably 100 to 150 g or more daily. This necessitates advances in food-science technology to provide at least enough orally acceptable synthetic material for animal and possibly subsequent clinical testing. The other major need is to bring the technology for the analysis of multiple metabolic "phenotypes" up to the level of sophistication of the instrumentation used, for example, in gene science or in structural biology. This technical strategy will be critical to the characterization of polygenic disorders by enhancing the knowledge gained from gene analysis and from the subsequent steps and modifications of the protein products themselves.

This article overviews bruising side effect of the ketogenic diets. I experienced it myself.

Bruising and the ketogenic diet: evidence for diet-induced changes in platelet function.

Berry-Kravis E, Booth G, Taylor A, Valentino LA.

Department of Pediatrics, RUSH-Presbyterian-St Luke's Medical Center, Chicago, IL 60612, USA. eberrykr~rush.edu

Excessive bruising is a symptom noted by parents of some children treated with the ketogenic diet for epilepsy control, although this side effect is not reported in the literature. We evaluated our cohort of current and past diet-treated patients for symptoms of bruising or bleeding through chart review and prospective screening at clinic follow-up visits. A significant increase in bruising or other minor bleeding was reported and/or observed in 16 of 51 patients (31.4%). There were no differences in sex distribution or number of anticonvulsants used between patients with bruising/bleeding and those without this symptom, although the group with bruising/bleeding was significantly younger. No specific anticonvulsant was associated with bruising/bleeding. Six patients with diet-induced bruising/bleeding underwent an investigation for bleeding diathesis. Five of these patients had prolonged bleeding times and all had diminished responsiveness to various platelet aggregating agents, with no evidence of a release defect. The abnormalities all normalized in the 1 patient tested after ceasing the diet. No patients had serious hemorrhage. One patient had mild von Willebrand disease, which had been asymptomatic before diet initiation. Some patients were Stimate responsive, suggesting a treatment for more severe bouts of symptoms. These data suggest that a ketogenic diet-related bleeding tendency occurs in about one third of treated patients owing to preexisting factors defining susceptibility in combination with diet-induced depression of platelet responsiveness, possibly related to changes in platelet membrane lipid composition and/or concentration and resultant effects on function of membrane-embedded proteins. Patients on the diet undergoing anticoagulation or surgery should be evaluated carefully for symptoms of bleeding tendency.

I post this abstract here only because I mentioned this article in another post of mine on this board, didn’t want to leave that info unreferenced.

Acute pancreatitis causing death in a child on the ketogenic diet.

Stewart WA, Gordon K, Camfield P.

Department of Pediatrics, Dalhousie University, IWK Health Centre, Halifax, Nova Scotia. wastewar~is.dal.ca

The ketogenic diet has demonstrated good efficacy in children with pharmacologically resistant seizures. Relatively few serious complications have been reported in the more than 70 years in which the diet has been used. We report a child who developed acute pancreatitis and died. A 9-year-old girl had a seizure disorder with associated developmental delay owing to glucose transport protein deficiency. The ketogenic diet with medium chain triglyceride oil had been initiated shortly after diagnosis in infancy. She was not on anticonvulsants. She presented in coma with decreased respiratory effort and shock, requiring resuscitation. Investigations were consistent with pancreatitis. Despite fluid resuscitation and inotropic support, she had prolonged hypotension and acidosis. She subsequently had a cardiac arrest and died. A postmortem examination confirmed hemorrhagic pancreatitis. Hypertriglyceridemia is a risk factor for developing acute pancreatitis. The high fat content of the ketogenic diet often causes hyperlipidemia. The outcome for this patient raises concern regarding a potential consequence of the ketogenic diet.

Authors of this article do not seem to think that higher carbohydrates diets are bad as long as carbs come from the low glycemic sources, they believe that the caloric excess is to blame. They also engage in evolutionary speculations, gosh, everyone is suddenly interested in using evolutionary statements to support their arguments!

The 'carnivore connection'-evolutionary aspects of insulin resistance.

Colagiuri S, Miller JB.

Department of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism, Prince of Wales Hospital, Sydney, Australia.

Insulin resistance is common and is determined by physiological (aging, physical fitness), pathological (obesity) and genetic factors. The metabolic compensatory response to insulin resistance is hyperinsulinaemia, the primary purpose of which is to maintain normal glucose tolerance. The 'carnivore connection' postulates a critical role for the quantity of dietary protein and carbohydrate and the change in the glycaemic index of dietary carbohydrate in the evolution of insulin resistance and hyperinsulinaemia. Insulin resistance offered survival and reproductive advantages during the Ice Ages which dominated human evolution, during which a high-protein low-carbohydrate diet was consumed. Following the end of the last Ice Age and the advent of agriculture, dietary carbohydrate increased. Although this resulted in a sharp increase in the quantity of carbohydrate consumed, these traditional carbohydrate foods had a low glycaemic index and produced only modest increases in plasma insulin. The industrial revolution changed the quality of dietary carbohydrate. The milling of cereals made starch more digestible and postprandial glycaemic and insulin responses increased 2-3 fold compared with coarsely ground flour or whole grains. This combination of insulin resistance and hyperinsulinaemia is a common feature of many modern day diseases. Over the last 50 y the explosion of convenience and takeaway 'fast foods' has exposed most populations to caloric intakes far in excess of daily energy requirements and the resulting obesity has been a major factor in increasing the prevalence of insulin resistance.

Well, athletes, you are safe with your higher protein consumption, according to this study.

Do regular high protein diets have potential health risks on kidney function in athletes?

Poortmans JR, Dellalieux O.

Department of Physiological Chemistry, Institute of Physical Education and Kinesiotherapy, Free University of Brussels, Belgium.

Excess protein and amino acid intake have been recognized as hazardous potential implications for kidney function, leading to progressive impairment of this organ. It has been suggested in the literature, without clear evidence, that high protein intake by athletes has no harmful consequences on renal function. This study investigated body-builders (BB) and other well-trained athletes (OA) with high and medium protein intake, respectively, in order to shed light on this issue. The athletes underwent a 7-day nutrition record analysis as well as blood sample and urine collection to determine the potential renal consequences of a high protein intake. The data revealed that despite higher plasma concentration of uric acid and calcium, Group BB had renal clearances of creatinine, urea, and albumin that were within the normal range. The nitrogen balance for both groups became positive when daily protein intake exceeded 1.26 g.kg but there were no correlations between protein intake and creatinine clearance, albumin excretion rate, and calcium excretion rate. To conclude, it appears that protein intake under 2. 8 g.kg does not impair renal function in well-trained athletes as indicated by the measures of renal function used in this study

This article supports high protein intake as long as alkali buffers are included in one’s diet.

Excess dietary protein can adversely affect bone.

Barzel US, Massey LK.

Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Department of Medicine, Montefiore Medical Center and The Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY 10467, USA.

The average American diet, which is high in protein and low in fruits and vegetables, generates a large amount of acid, mainly as sulfates and phosphates. The kidneys respond to this dietary acid challenge with net acid excretion, as well as ammonium and titratable acid excretion. Concurrently, the skeleton supplies buffer by active resorption of bone. Indeed, calciuria is directly related to net acid excretion. Different food proteins differ greatly in their potential acid load, and therefore in their acidogenic effect. A diet high in acid-ash proteins causes excessive calcium loss because of its acidogenic content. The addition of exogenous buffers, as chemical salts or as fruits and vegetables, to a high protein diet results in a less acid urine, a reduction in net acid excretion, reduced ammonium and titratable acid excretion, and decreased calciuria. Bone resorption may be halted, and bone accretion may actually occur. Alkali buffers, whether chemical salts or dietary fruits and vegetables high in potassium, reverse acid-induced obligatory urinary calcium loss. We conclude that excessive dietary protein from foods with high potential renal acid load adversely affects bone, unless buffered by the consumption of alkali-rich foods or supplements.

This article may explain why those who are on a ketogenic diet have trouble maintaining the state of ketosis, it’s the butter, folks! Up your omega-3’s intake!

Dietary fat, ketosis, and seizure resistance in rats on the ketogenic diet.

Likhodii SS, Musa K, Mendonca A, Dell C, Burnham WM, Cunnane SC.

Departments of Nutritional Sciences and Pharmacology and Bloorview Epilepsy Research Program, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada. sergei.likhodi~utoronto.ca

PURPOSE: Fat is the major component of the ketogenic diet (KD), yet no studies have examined whether the type of fat used in the diet can be optimized to provide additional benefits. The purpose of the present experiments was to compare the efficiency of different fats in inducing ketosis and affording seizure resistance. METHODS: The effects of KDs that incorporate lard, butter, medium-chain triglycerides (MCT), or flaxseed oil or a mixture of the latter three fats were examined in rats fed KD for up to 98 days. The maximal electroshock (MES) or pentylenetetrazole (PTZ) threshold tests were used to assess seizure susceptibility in two separate experiments. RESULTS: The rank order of induced ketosis was MCT > mixture > or = flaxseed oil > or = lard = butter > or = control. MES failed to reveal anticonvulsant effects, but the PTZ test indicated that up to 50% of rats fed the KD were seizure protected (p < 0.05). The measures of seizure protection, seizure incidence and score, did not correlate, however, with the level of ketosis in the range of 0. 7-5.2 mmol/L for beta-hydroxybutyrate. In the long-term study, flaxseed oil KD maintained stable ketosis throughout 98 days, whereas ketones declined with lard and butter KD to the control level. CONCLUSIONS: Seizure protection with the versions of the KD did not improve with the higher level of ketosis. The focus of the KD improvement, therefore, is not the achievement of higher ketosis per se but rather designing a diet that provides steady ketosis, exploits advantages of certain fats for neurological development or seizure protection via a nonketogenic mechanism, and is nutritionally balanced.

[tamarian]

Originally posted by Mila
I have no problems with marketing strategies publishing houses or the authors of the dieting books use.


Me neither. Marketing is one thing, integrity is something else. The problem arises when they are in conflict, and they don't have to be.

I cannot speak for dr.sears. where in his books or public statements does he state that increased protein intake leads to the muscle mass loss? high protein diets do cause initial water loss, because of increased urination, as the body tries to get rid of the excess of the ketone bodies. since you haven't provided references to this statement of dr. sears's I do not know if he indeed referred to the initial water weight loss or was unwise enough to say that all loss on ketogenic diets is due to reduction in bodywater %.

Enter the Zone, pages 18-20. I frankly didn't think his views were unknown, but glad to know you think it's unwise.

ketosis is normal body reaction to abnormal health status (e.g. the one that arises in diabetes) or to abnormal nutrition ( extremely low carbs, either intentionally or not intentionally achieved by the individual), you know that. that's the meaning of the 'abnormal' in dr.sears's statement.

That's exactly the type of misinformation you get into, when science is irrelevant. When ketosis and ketoacidosis are treated as one and the same. .

as a side note, why be so hot about 'clinical and scientific proof'? science doesn't prove anything,

Well, for starters, it's under the guise of "scientific proof" that these claims are made, and Dr. Sears presents tons of scientific papers to quote from, except on the marketing aspect attacking other LC plans.

In addition, with all of it's limitations, science leaves no room for pure emotions towards what's right and what's not.

I'd rather be "hot" on science, than "hot" on "my plan is best". For a while, you were "hot" on the zone and advising others to switch to the zone. Now it's Fat Flush, not the Zone, tomorrow it might be something else. Not to dismiss the role of emotions though, but why is it placed higher than science? From what I've seen, it leads to zealousy, where if your latest plan becomes an emotional attachement, you end up as an evangelist to your plan as the way, they only way, and no one loses fat except through your way (the others just lose water and muscle)...

What's worst, under the emotional embrella, it's hard to see this taking place. So, to me science is a better alternative, not perfect, but the best we have.

Wa'il

[tamarian]

Excellent list or articles, Mila :thup:

The list has an objective collection pro- and anti-. We have a similar collection in our studies pages.

But first, I take it that you are of the opinion that 40/30/30 with 0.6 grams protein for every pound of LBM is not a ketogenic diet?

If so, why not? This formula may yield 20-50 grams of carbs above ones Atkins/PP limit (but not always) for individuals, but that won't stop ketones by itself.

While reading the Zone, I decided to follow it for a week, and I was still in ketosis. Very mild though, but it was visible. Even if your ketostix doesn't indicate ketones, it may still be there. and for many people, they have to eat much more carbs to avoid ketone production, it they really though it's unhealthy.

Just some food for thought.

Wa'il

[Mila]

Wa'il, if 0.6g of protein per pound of LBM sends one in a starvation mode, then even the zone becomes a ketogenic diet for them. the zone recommends anywhere from 0.6 to 1.25g of protein per pound of LBM, depending on level of activity and other metabolic demands. My LBM is about 90lbs, my protein intake is about 75g per day or higher(0.8-1g of protein per pound of LBM). I am not in ketosis, therefore I conclude that my sometimes 900cal per day zone diet is not a starvation diet and not a ketogenic one.

I am not sure why exactly you were in ketosis... something might have brought your blood sugar levels too low for your body to secret ketones as fuel for the brain. do you have reason to think that you have been producing ketone bodies as part of hormonal/metabolic imbalances, not only because 0.6g of protein were too few for you and sent you into starvation mode?

the solution for ketosis on the zone, if one wants to avoid it, is not just upping carbs, for many people are sensitive to carbs and stay on the zone precisely for diabetes control, etc. but
1) finding your own zone, as you've seen from the graph, the zone is wide, and 40/30/30 is only the point of entrance, but not everyone's sweet spot
2) gradually increasing total caloric intake (up to 10 times total body weight in calories) while monitoring bodyfat loss and supplementing with up to 5g of long-chain omega-3 fatty acids from various sources daily, exact amount of supplementation depends on the person's TG/HDL ratio. usually the problem resolves itself within one month and one can return to the lower caloric and omega-3's intake for enhanced bodyfat loss.

:wave:

[tamarian]

Originally posted by Mila
the zone recommends anywhere from 0.6 to 1.25g of protein per pound of LBM, depending on level of activity and other metabolic demands.

Hmmm. In "Enter the Zone", Dr. Sears says from 0.6 gram to a maximum of 1 gram, and this is only for weight-lifters, training twice a day, 5 days a week.


My LBM is about 90lbs, my protein intake is about 75g per day or higher(0.8-1g of protein per pound of LBM). I am not in ketosis,


Maybe not in "visible" ketosis, where there's heavy excess of ketones.


I am not sure why exactly you were in ketosis... something might have brought your blood sugar levels too low for your body to secret ketones as fuel for the brain. do you have reason to think that you have been producing ketone bodies as part of hormonal/metabolic imbalances, not only because 0.6g of protein were too few for you and sent you into starvation mode?


See, this is why I whished Dr. Sears gave a scientific reference to his ketosis claims, so his readers can be sure if ketones really are unhealthy, not just because his marketing department said so. :)

Yes, starvation does induce ketosis, and that's a healthy body function (an irony lost on Dr. Sears). But it's quite illogical to assume that ketosis without starvation is bad?

If your body has a defense mechanism, such as ketosis, to fight against starvation by burning it's fat for energy, does that mean it's unhealthy to use it to burn excess fat? Hello! :)


2) gradually increasing total caloric intake
(up to 10 times total body weight in calories) while monitoring bodyfat loss and supplementing with up to 5g of long-chain omega-3 fatty acids from various sources daily, exact amount of supplementation depends on the person's TG/HDL ratio. [/B]

You know, this is definitly starting to sound better than the book I have (Enter the Zone). Which book added that? I might check it out. :thup:

Wa'il

[tamarian]

O.k., I took a close look on these studies, supposedly referring to ketones as unhealthy. Let's take a close look, shall we?

Originally posted by Mila
Ok, these authors state that ketosis is body?s response to starvation. Should we widen up our definition of ?starvation diets?, to include high calorie low carb intake diets, not only low calorie intake, into that category? This article is excellent in its overview of the goodness of ketosis.

Ketone bodies, potential therapeutic uses.

Veech RL, Chance B, Kashiwaya Y, Lardy HA, Cahill GF Jr.

Unit on Metabolic Control, LMMB/NIAAA, Rockville, Maryland, USA.


They did not imply it's the only function of ketosis (i.e. no reference to ketosis=starvation) Here's part of that quote:

Ketosis, meaning elevation of D-beta-hydroxybutyrate (R-3hydroxybutyrate) and acetoacetate, has been central to starving man's survival by providing nonglucose substrate to his evolutionarily hypertrophied brain, sparing muscle from destruction for glucose synthesis.

Yes, ketones are central to surviving starvation. That should be a healthy function, I think. But in no way did they conclude, or imply, that it's only under starvation that you become in ketosis.

Interestingly, the study is regarding potential therapeutic uses of ketones. I'd say this is a blow to anyone who claims ketone bodies are "abnormal" or "unhealthy".


This article overviews bruising side effect of the ketogenic diets. I experienced it myself.

Bruising and the ketogenic diet: evidence for diet-induced changes in platelet function.

Berry-Kravis E, Booth G, Taylor A, Valentino LA.

Department of Pediatrics, RUSH-Presbyterian-St Luke's Medical Center, Chicago, IL 60612, USA. eberrykr~rush.edu


If you read the contents of that paper, it is is specifically for epeleptic children.

We're talking about very high-fat, very low-carb plans designed for children with epelepsy, not as a treatment for excess fat. So the claim is not that it's due to ketosis, it's a specific scenario, where many side effects take place for a pre-existing illness.

Fortunately, this has proved as the most effective treatment for epeleptic children. :thup: for Ketosis.


I post this abstract here only because I mentioned this article in another post of mine on this board, didn?t want to leave that info unreferenced.

Acute pancreatitis causing death in a child on the ketogenic diet.

Stewart WA, Gordon K, Camfield P.

Department of Pediatrics, Dalhousie University, IWK Health Centre, Halifax, Nova Scotia. wastewar~is.dal.ca


Again, with a close look, you'll see the discussion is about:
A 9-year-old girl had a seizure disorder with associated developmental delay owing to glucose transport protein deficiency.

Nothing here refutes that Ketosis is a normal body funtion to lose excess fat. It's silly to expect something to cure everything, otherwise it's unhealthy?

If a cancer patient takes multi-vitamins and die, should multi-vitamins be declared unhealthy?


Authors of this article do not seem to think that higher carbohydrates diets are bad as long as carbs come from the low glycemic sources

Good, me neither :)

Well, athletes, you are safe with your higher protein consumption, according to this study.

Wonderful news. :thup:

This article supports high protein intake as long as alkali buffers are included in one?s diet.

Sounds good to me..

This article may explain why those who are on a ketogenic diet have trouble maintaining the state of ketosis, it?s the butter, folks! Up your omega-3?s intake!


Read you books folks, almost all LC authors recommend EFA's. Some of us sip it up straight! :thup: We don't need experiments on rats with seizures to tell us that :)

Wa'il

[Bloom]

Woah is me :eek: where has this topic gone.

Everyone seems to have there knickers in a twist for some reason :confused:

Maybe 'you' have not heard of Anne Louise Gittlemen M.S.,C.N.S. That doesnt make her any the less worthwhile and she sure aint no fad!

She wrote her first book 'Beyond Pritkin' in 1988 after being the chief nutrionist at the pritkin institute and finding that infact people need more fat (the right fats) in there diet than the Pritkin way provided. This book introduced the first of todays FFP and it has been improved and refined from there.

Im not about to type out the whole story for you but here are some words about the FFP that may gain your repect.

"Anne Louise Gittleman once again leads the crusade for better nutrition. She exposes the pervasive myths that all fats are bad and that unlimited carbohydrates are good. Sensible and thorough, her Fat Flush Plan is a terrific primer for anyone wanting to lose weight and regain vitality. We recommend it enthusiastically!"
-Michael R. Eades, MD & Mary Dan Eades, M.D.
authors of Protein Power

"What a great program! Whether your starting a diet with a bang or trying to budge the scales after a binge or just tuning your body and hoping to lose some stubborn inches , this is a great , safe low carb way to do it."
-Fran Mc Cullough,
author odf The Low-Carb Cookbook

"In my Fit Camps, we work on lifestyle changes involving both nutrion and exercise. The Fat Flush Plan (phase 1) has inspired my campers to initiate the dietary changes necessary for weight loss and better health."
-Joanie greggains author of Fit Happens

"Weight loss programs are often long on claims and short on results. Ann Louise gittleman's Fat Flaush Plan offers great information and great strategies for weight management. A healthy, smart, safe, effective weight-loss program. What could be
better?".
Tori Hudson, N.D.
Professor, National College of Naturopathic Medicine and Author of Womens Encylopedia of natural medicine

"If you care about your life and state of health, this book will be a valuable resourse for you".
-Bernie Siegel, M.D.
Author of Love, Medicine & Miracles

"The fat Fush is the healthiest and safest way i know to drop weight quickly. Ann louise Gittleman has once again used her enourmous talents and encyclopedic knowledge of nutrition and health to come up with a winning formula. Ann Louise has been one of the great influences on my professional life and one of the first people I turn to when i want a 'second opinion.'"
-Jonny Bowden, M.A.,C.N.,C.N. S.
author of Shape Up, the eight week program to transform your body, health and your life.

[tamarian]

Originally posted by Bloom
Maybe 'you' have not heard of Anne Louise Gittlemen M.S.,C.N.S. That doesnt make her any the less worthwhile and she sure aint no fad!


Actually, I have a lot of respect for her, and got her latest book.

You can see from my first reply in this thread, I'm not attacking her plan, nor the Zone.

I'm addressing the attack against Ketogenic diets. All low-carb plans work

The problem is when we beleive the fallacies/attacks used for promotion, and confuse them with science. If FFP work, and the Zone works (I think they both do), that doesn't mean other LC plans don't.

Wa'il

[Bloom]

Actually, I have a lot of respect for her, and got her latest book.
Alright then :D :thup:

Thing is why did the argument for/against Ketogenic diets even come into the equation :confused: .
I havnt finished the book yet but still havnt come across any mention of ketosis? and its not listed in the index.

The way mouth felt yesterday even with all the water I was drinking was no different to how it was on induction. I dont even test for ketones myself have never bought the sticks and havnt intended to so far.

[tamarian]

Originally posted by Bloom

Thing is why did the argument for/against Ketogenic diets even come into the equation :confused: .
I havnt finished the book yet but still havnt come across any mention of ketosis? and its not listed in the index.


Actually she didn't (very wise of her :thup: ) The claims of dangers of ketosis is from the Zone, and is the basis of Mila's arguments here that ketosis = starvation = unhealthy. This is a common mistake confusing ketosis with 3 different kinds ketoacidosis.

I hope I'm not offending anyone, I'm sincerely hoping for an open-minded debate, based on facts and science, not emotion and half-facts.

Wa'il

[Bloom]

Jolly good then, just so long as all this doesnt cloud anyones judgement of FFP.
Unfortunate thread title maybe?

Jenny :)

[tamarian]

Originally posted by Bloom

Unfortunate thread title maybe?


Good point. Maybe now it's better :)

Wa'il

[Bloom]

:cool: Man you are quick :thup:

[Mila]

Hello Wa'il,

answering your question "which book added that?"...

the latest books on zone strategies for enhanced bodyfat loss and overall health are (besides The Fat Flush Plan by Ann Louise Gittleman)

The Omega Rx Zone (2002) by Barry Sears, Ph.D.

Fat Wars (2002) by Brad J. King, M.S., M.F.S.

The Ultimate Fat Burning Diet Primer (1999) by Paul Crane

for variants of the zone eating, (various proportions of carbs to protein, 30/50, 50/30, 40/40, etc. all moderate fat, of course) with quizzes which will help one determine their own 'zone' see

Hollywood's Healthiest Diets (1999) by Tony Perrone, Ph.D.

best wishes
Mila

[tamarian]

I take it that my earlier points re: ketosis vs. Ketoacidosis have made sense, and clarified things a bit. But I'll summarize for the benefit of those not familiar with these terms.

1. Ketones: Ketones are a byproduct of fat metabolism (the breaking down of fat into energy).

If you lose 1 lb of fat, you will produce ketones. This will happen if you follow any diet, Atkins, the Zone, Slim Fat or Jenny Craig.

You don't have to be on a low-carb diet to get them!

The whole process of muscle protein catabolism and liver gluconeogenesis is regulated principally by glucocorticosteroids and glucagon and a relative lack of insulin. Early in fasting glycogen reserves are depleted, and protein (mainly from muscle) becomes the major source of carbon for glucose production. Glucose is required in substantial amounts by blood cells and the central nervous system on a daily basis. There is also an initiation of ketone body production by the liver to provide a more water soluble form of fat-derived fuel.
Nutritional Biochemistry and Metabolism: with clinical applications", Maria C. Linder

More reading here: http://www.lowcarbretreat.com/ketosis.html


2. Ketosis: Ketosis is the presence of excess ketones in the body. It's is the cotinious state of fat metabolism. A healthy mechanism that "kicks-in" when there is not enough dietary sugar.

"A very similar adaption of protein and energy metabolism occurs in persons consuming diets very low in carbohydrates, where there is little or no glycogen reserve. However, in this instance, dietary protein largely or fully substitutes for muscle protein in gluconeogenesis.

2A Starvation-Ketosis: Lack of dietary sugar also occures under starvation, resulting in ketosis. (DUH!) This has been mentioned earlier (quoted above) in the "Ketone bodies, potential therapeutic uses." study

3. Ketoacidosis: The polar opposite to Ketosis, excess of ketones, even with excess dietary sugar.

3A Diabetic Ketoacidosis (DKA): Diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) is a state of absolute or relative insulin deficiency aggravated by ensuing hyperglycemia, dehydration, and acidosis-producing derangements in intermediary metabolism. The most common causes are underlying infection, disruption of insulin treatment, and new onset of diabetes. DKA typically is characterized by hyperglycemia over 300 mg/dL, low bicarbonate (<15 mEq/L), and acidosis (pH <7.30) with ketonemia and ketonuria.
http://www.emedicine.com/emerg/topic135.htm

3B. Alcoholic Ketoacidosis (AKA): Alcoholic ketoacidosis (AKA) is an uncommon and frequently missed condition. Many of the signs and symptoms of AKA are present with other conditions associated with alcohol abuse. AKA often is overlooked as the cause of the patient's presenting complaints. AKA most commonly occurs when an alcoholic has been on a binge and abruptly ceases drinking.
http://www.emedicine.com/emerg/topic21.htm

.

[Mila]

:thup: :thup: :thup:

excellent post, Wa'il!!! my physiology textbook doesn't explain it as good!

this 'ketone' post of yours is a keeper! a mighty excellent explanation... you are the best :D

Mila

P.S. could you explain me how to post a link from another board to this specific post of yours, or any other post on this board? I have no idea, if it has been explained in the technical section, please direct me there.

[tamarian]

Glad you liked it! :wave:

my physiology textbook doesn't explain it as good!

It's probably because your text book was written by a professional :)

The post reflects my understanding and reading on the issue, and I'm certainly no expert. Any additional elaboration, correction or education on this issue will always be appreciated and welcome.

P.S. could you explain me how to post a link from another board to this specific post of yours, or any other post on this board? I have no idea, if it has been explained in the technical section, please direct me there.
Here's the link to the "ketone" post:

http://forum.lowcarber.org/showthread.php?s=&postid=383689#post383689

You can obtain the link to any specific post by pointing your mouse to the symbol next to the post's date, and righ-click, selecting "copy shortcut" or "copy link address" depending on your browser.

Wa'il