Wed, May-04-16, 11:42
|
|
Senior Member
Posts: 15,075
|
|
Plan: mostly milkfat
Stats: 190/152.4/154
BF:
Progress: 104%
Location: Ontario
|
|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/art...t00204-0169.pdf
I like this study for looking at what urine ketones mean.
During total starvation, subjects were given between 7.5 and 15 grams of glucose. Urine ketones went down, but serum ketones stayed high. Ammonia production was reduced, less protein was degraded through gluconeogenesis. If everything else remained equal, but there had been this decrease in ammonia spilled in the urine, the urine would have become more acidic, ketones spilled in the urine decreased enough that this didn't happen. If this applies to somebody in ketosis while eating a ketogenic diet, then a person could reduce their carbs until the ketostix showed purple--and then think that adding ten grams of glucose a day keeps them out of ketosis, even if all it's doing is somehow prompting the kidneys to reabsorb ketones and spill a little less. Dr. Atkins called induction levels of carbohydrate biologically zero carbohydrate, I'd say that's what was going on here, if the carbs these guys ate just replaced glucose that would have otherwise been synthesized from protein, they spared protein without actually increasing glucose metabolism.
I have an old book on bodybuilding by Arnold Schwartzenegger. In it he uses a controlled carb diet. He advised cutting carbs as low as you need to to show ketosis on the stix--and then add just enough carbohydrate to show a negative. This was supposed to keep carbs low enough to promote weight loss, but high enough to prevent the muscle wasting that was supposed to happen if you went into ketosis. But following that advice, judging by urine ketones, some people might have actually been in ketosis.
|