I'm sorry you get those headaches, tholian, I get migraines and can definitely relate. But 100 carbs a day can certainly be considered low-carb. Think about it.

• The average daily intake of carbs is over 300.
• The daily minimum requirement has been put at 120 for your brain (questionable).
• And it's still the type of carbs you eat that count.

If you limit your carbs to 100 to 120 and limit them to low-GI carbs (avoiding starches as much as possible IMHO), you will probably be able to maintain at the very least and maybe even continue to lose weight.

Personally, I think everyone would benefit (fit or fat) from reducing their carbs to the 100-150 gram a day range and severely limiting starches (especially wheat and corn) and sugars. It's interesting how people think that low-carb has to be the very low levels those of us who have become insulin resistant need to become healthy and fit. We are the "exception" not the rule. I know full well that if I had lived a moderately low-carb lifestyle when I was young, I would not have wound up with PCOS and all the other symptoms I got from insulin resistance.

Tholian

I posted the following in the General Low-Carb forum for 'Trinsdad' last week. You sound like one of those people described in Anthony's article:-


This is an excerpt from an article by Anthony Colpo from his site www.theomnivore.com

I suggest you read the entire article here as it may explain the way you're feeling:
http://www.theomnivore.com/how_low_should_carbs_go.html


While I think the harmful connotations made over ketosis are largely a bunch of bollocks, I also happen to think that ketogenic diets are not for everyone.

Why?

Because some people simply do not seem to do well at the carbohydrate intakes generally believed necessary for inducing ketosis. From reading the popular low-carb literature, people who fall into this category are often led to believe that they simply need to give their bodies more time to adjust to their newly-lowered carbohydrate intake. Indeed, many people feel a little hazy for the first 2 or 3 days after swapping to a ketogenic diet, then feel perfectly fine from that point on. Others, like myself, will simply feel progressively worse the longer they adhere to such low-carb intakes, becoming tired, lethargic, irritable, and mentally 'foggy'. These folks do not experience any relief until they increase their carbohydrate intake, often causing them to question the validity of the whole low-carb phenomenon. Some of these failed ketogenic dieters become so disillusioned with their experiences they go on to become fanatical diet book authors hell-bent on alerting the world to the alleged 'dangers' of low-carb diets, but I digress.
I believe that some people are simply more efficient than others at producing sufficient glucose when dietary carbohydrates are very low, a process known as gluconeogenesis. Does that mean that those who experience no joy from ketogenic diets must resign themselves to a life of rice cakes and fat-free cookies?
Of course not.

Those contemplating low-carb diets should know that low-carbing does not begin and end with ketosis. In fact, there are at least two books I am aware of that recommend adhering to a carb intake of around 70g per day. No induction periods, and no piddling on ketostix every morning! One of these is Life Without Bread by Christian Allan and Wolfgang Lutz, the latter a German physician who has successfully used low-carb diets with thousands of patients for a variety of ailments, including weight loss.

/Bump

This is a wonderfully informative thread. It deserved a bump.

Thank you.

A lot of good information. Some is just review, but I need that from time to time also.

I heard a report about kidney stones that pointed out that people who get kidney stones tend to have low bone density. This means that the body has lost the ability to absorb calcium, and whatever calcium you take in gets flushed out through the kidneys where it can cause stones. As Rosedale points out, hyperinsulinemia depresses tha body's ability to absorb calcium. He says the following:



If all that calcium is passing through the kidneys, it can cause kidney stones. Renologists tell you that if you have weakened kidneys that create stones, you should eat a low protyein diet. Since a low protein diet is also a high carbohydrate diet, they are advising people to do something which will cause increased calcium to the kidneys. Makes no sense!

parsley, hydrangea root, gravel root, marshmallow root, uva ursi, black cherry concetrate, B6. - just in case you wanted to try something natural.

I'd also list another possible negative side effect of ketosis as hampering conversion of T4 (a form of thyroid hormone) into FT3 (the most active form of thyroid hormone).

Here's a reference for that: http://www.thyroidmanager.org/Chapter5/5a-frame.htm

i'm wondering what numbers 1 and 2 on this list were. also, most of the "negative side effects" (e.g. 4,5,6,9,10 {i don't believe high serum cholesterol is unhealthy}, 11) are related to the discontinuance of a high-carb diet, not "ketosis" per se. in other words, even those not in ketosis might experience some of these effects temporarily when converting from a high-carb to low-carb diet. "will refuse to drink fluids" is something i've never heard associated with low-carbing and i'm not sure how this can be labelled an effect; it's a choice, isn't it?

also, where is the comparison to the people who experience these "negative side effects" while eating a high-carb diet?

This thread started in 6/9/2002. Few people have been on Atkins diet at that time and also few researchs have been available. The bad side effects of ketosis have been almost all you hear.

Oh yea, when I started in 03 everyone was terrified of ketosis. That was the buzzword... "ketoacidosis" and such.

It's silly because number one, as was pointed out in this thread ketones are always present in the body, the presence of ketones is not an unnatural state. All it means is fat is being metabolized.... in fact, if no ketones were in the body that would be very unnatural. Ketone concentration naturally rises (during sleep, after exercise, after a high fat meal) and wains (after eating a "normal" carbohydrate meal) depending on how conducive to fat-burning the body presently is.

Saying ketosis (defined as having measurable ketones via urinalysis) = diabetic ketoacidosis or any such complication is like saying having sugar in your blood = dangerous diabetic hyperglycemia.

Second, it's silly because MOST low carb plans and followers are not even restricting carbohydrate extremely enough to be in measurable ketosis. I know I'm very rarely in ketosis. When being careful with my food choices I CAN enter ketosis easily, however, which I don't think is such a bad thing. I like my body being very good at burning fat, it's quite nicer than shaking with hypoglycemia and feeling like a lethargic pile of crud if food is delayed . A metabolism that doesn't dip down as often or easily makes for better weight control ("metabolic advantage").

One more thing. I want to thank the omnivore for mentioning that not all people do well on deep ketogenic diets. I am able to easily achieve ketosis however, everytime I try it I fail to thrive. This is not "induction flu" since even when carbs are already low, if I attempt to induce deep ketosis I feel horrible. It gets slightly better but I never feel optimal. I also agree with his theory (of some people being very poor about making sugar from protein). From my casual observations it appears sound; I notice I am able to eat a huge quantity of protein and only lose weight faster which doesn't make sense at all. This would make sense if it is assumed my body is not getting a lot of energy (sugar) from protein so I can seemingly eat lots of it and not see it as weight. Perhaps what's going on is it takes my body a lot of energy to make energy from protein, making it a very poor choice for fueling. Like blowing air into a balloon with a hole in it, all that effort and most of it is wasted, as much of the energy in protein is consumed by the methods to synthesize it into fuel.

Either way, I don't do deep ketosis YET I still am low carb. Low carb does not mean deep ketosis and it's time this myth be put to rest. A lot of people fail to thrive in deep ketosis for numerous reasons and they assume the answer is to join weight watchers... totally not true. Ketosis is, in my experience, is extreme (the methods to achieve it that is) and entirely optional. They say concentration of ketones positively correlates with more weight loss... well is this cause or effect? Is the increase concentration of ketones a CAUSE of weight loss or is it the RESULT of losing weight? I'm more likely to believe the latter.

People are confusing ketosis with measurable ketosis. If you are metaboliziing fat, you are producing ketones--period. But remember that your body also uses ketones for fuel. Some researchers point out that ketones are the preferred fuel for heart and brain cells. So if you are eating low carb, and it's not showing up on your ketostix, it means that your body is burning up all the ketones you are producing, not that you're not producing them. The longer you stay in ketosis, the more efficient your body becomes in utilizing them for fuel, until you reach a stasis point and you are no longer getting rid of ketones in the urine.

Although ketosis is the basic subject on which low carb diets are based, Each one of us seems to have his own explanation of this subject.

Even Dr. Atkins himself despite my great respect for him has mentioned a phrase in his book about ketosis which I can't agree with. His phrase was:

"There is no lipolysis without ketosis, no ketosis without lipolysis."

If there was no lipolysis without ketosis we could have seen that the people who are on high carb low calorie diet who lose plenty of weight produce a large amounts of ketones, but this is not true.

And if there was no ketosis without liplysis we would not have seen low carb dieters who are not losing or even gaining weight while noticing high concentration of ketones in their urine. The source of theiir ketones must be dietary fat.

Here is my explanation for the subject of ketosis:

There are two methods to metabolize fats:

(1) The default method in which fatty acids go through series of processes and end with a fuel which is used for energy. After all the body's energy needs are met, the left over energy is stored as body fat.

(2) The second method in which fatty acids break into ketone bodies and a different kind of fatty acids (shorter in chain length) before they complete their journey. Ketones supply body cells with energy. After all energy needs are met, ketones can only exit the body. They cannot be stored as body fat.

To my believe, the body uses the first method alone when carb intake exceeds (100-120) carbs depending on the individual.

When carb intake is reduced below this amount, the two methods take place at the same time and method 2 share grows as the carb intake moves down twards zero.

So carb reduction acts like moving a mode switch slowly from one extreme to another. The first extreme is for a fully vegetarian human (during the pre-agriculture era) and the second extreme is for a fully meat eating human.

The vegetarian human can metabolize fats, but probably not the perfect way. The meat eating human metabolizes fats better and safer.

Ketones do not appear in the urine or saliva until they exceed the amount the body can use. This is why you don't notice them unless you eat 35 carbs or less.

Lipolysis is ketosis. Lipolysis means the destruction of fat ( lipo=fat lysis=destruction of ). This phenomenon is a natural bodily function that we associate with low carb but happens anytime fats are being burned. Losing fat is not synonomous with losing weight. Several factors team up for weightloss. You can gain weight while losing fat expecially if you are athletic or engaging in muscle building activities. If this is the case not only will you gain weight from the heavier muscle, you will retain water to keep that muscle nourished. You can gain weight easlily if you are holding onto water, the biggest complaint during TOM.

Glucagon is the basic cause of lipolysis regardless if the fats is stored or dietary.

Thanks. I was believing that lipolysis means the destruction of body fat specifically, not the destruction of both body and dietary fat. So thanks for correcting my understanding. Ketosis should be considered one kind of lipolysis using this new definition.

However, this does not change much of what I see. If someone eats 4000 calories a day while taking only 20 carbs, he will gain body fat. I mean not muscles or water.

Also according to this article:
http://www.rpi.edu/dept/bcbp/molbio...t1/fatcatab.htm

Ketone bodies are formed only under the condition of carbohydrate starvation. So, a person who is not under carbohydrate starvation does not create ketones when metabolizing fats (both dietary and body fats)

I have a question concerning the assertion that ketone bodies (or any other metabolites elevated during ketosis) act as diuretics. Is there evidence for this?

I thought the rapid loss of water in the early phase of the Atkins diet, was solely attributed to the loss of water bound to glycogen in the liver. So that when glycogen stores were depleted, the water had nowhere to stay.

I've been doing LC for well over a year now, and when I first started I got muscle cramps. The frequency has gone down with time but I still experience a cramp now and again. Using lite salt (half potassium) has helped.