Active Low-Carber Forums
Atkins diet and low carb discussion provided free for information only, not as medical advice.
Home Plans Tips Recipes Tools Stories Studies Products
Active Low-Carber Forums
A sugar-free zone


Welcome to the Active Low-Carber Forums.
Support for Atkins diet, Protein Power, Neanderthin (Paleo Diet), CAD/CALP, Dr. Bernstein Diabetes Solution and any other healthy low-carb diet or plan, all are welcome in our lowcarb community. Forget starvation and fad diets -- join the healthy eating crowd! You may register by clicking here, it's free!

Go Back   Active Low-Carber Forums > Main Low-Carb Diets Forums & Support > Low-Carb Studies & Research / Media Watch > LC Research/Media
User Name
Password
FAQ Members Calendar Search Gallery My P.L.A.N. Survey


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   ^
Old Tue, Feb-21-12, 22:24
RawNut's Avatar
RawNut RawNut is offline
Lipivore
Posts: 1,208
 
Plan: Very Low Carb Paleo
Stats: 270/185/180 Male 72 inches
BF:
Progress: 94%
Location: Florida
Default Ketones fuel fetal development

Quote:
Ketones fuel fetal development

Ketosis during pregnancy has been known for many years. Fetal growth depends on constant energy supply, so physiological mechanisms should have been developed during evolution to assure intra-uterine development under starvation or food scarcity. Most studies focusing on pregnancy and fetal development have been done, for obvious reasons, on animals. It is not possible to extrapolate every detail, but it gives us a great idea and explanation for the metabolic changes observed during pregnancy.

Briefly, there are two metabolic periods clearly differentiated during gestation. The first one, corresponding to the first two thirds, is the anabolic phase characterized by hyperphagia and enhanced storage of body fat (we will call it Phase I). During the last third of gestation, the catabolic phase, fetal growth is very rapid, so the energy needs of the fetus are increased (1) (we will call it Phase II). Insulin metabolism, as an acquired evolutionary mechanism, plays a key role during this process. During Phase I, there is a 3.0 to 3.5 fold increase in first-phase and second-phase insulin release in response to glucose, without an alteration in peripheral IS (2). This assures that accumulation of protein, glucose and fat is appropriate for late pregnancy. As pregnancy progresses, this increase in glucose-stimulated insulin secretion is maintained, but IS is reduced in 50-70% (3, 4) during late pregnancy (Phase II). This mechanism serves to redistribute glucose and energy to the rapid growing fetus. In addition to peripheral IR (but not hepatic), gluconeogenesis (GnG) is increased 16 to 30% to supply the placenta and fetus demand. Contrary to the main GnG precursors in non-pregnant adults, glycerol is the main glucose precursor, which represents a mechanism by which in the abscence of food, the mother is capable of producing the necessary glucose from a substrate that is readily available during fasting and not depend on external substrates. This process is accentuated by fasting, commonly known as "accelerated starvation": compared to non-pregnant, women during gestation exhibit a pronounced hypoglycemia and rapid rise in KB. GnG increases parallels the rise in KB (4). Because of its increased utilization, glucose has drawn much attention away from the importance of KB in fetal development.

bOHB is utilized in a dose-dependent manner by the rat conceptus (5) and serves to spare glucose and lactate for biosynthetic pathways (6). bOHB seems to be the main oxidative fuel to the human fetal brain, measured by the production of CO2 (7). A classic study done on rat embryos underscore the importance of both glucose and bOHB to a proper development (8). Researchers tested the effect of increasing doses of glucose, KB or both on organ teratogenesis. They first tested glucose alone. According to the authors:
[font='Trebuchet MS',sans-serif](...) we found that isosmotic supplementation of the culture medium with 12 mg/mL D-glucose during the 48-h incubations effected a generalized retardation of rat-embryo growth and lesions such as microencephaly, exencephaly, open neural tube, and pericardial edema (6). We documented specificity by demonstrating that the findings are not replicated with isosmotic equimolar additions of certain other hexoses, such as sorbitol, fructose, inositol, or galactose (6). Teratogenic potentialities of high glucose concentrations have also been demonstrated with cultured mouse embryos. Sadler elicited dysmorphogenic effects with increasing frequency by adding 5mg/mL or 8 mg/mL D-glucose to the suspending rat serum during mouse-embryo culture (33).[/font]
So high glucose concentrations are teratogenic for the embryo. They went further and examinated the effect of increasing doses.
During the period of these studies in 1980-1981, isosmotic additions of 12 mg/ mL elicited a 49% incidence of minor and a 23% incidence of major lesions. By contrast isosmotic additions of 3 mg/mL D-glucose to the incubation medium did not evoke any discernible lesions during 48 h of culture, 6mg/mL resulted in only a 2.2% incidence of minor and no major lesions, and 9 mg/mL D glucose were required to elicit 5.1% major and 17.8% minor lesions in the cultured intact embryos from our outbred strain of Charles River Sprague-Dawley rats.
They concluded:
(...) the dysmorphogenic potentialities of ambient glucose are clearly concentration dependent although the precise relationships may be quantitatively different in various species or in different strains from the same species.
So we know that hyperglicemia is teratogenic. But what about increasing doses of bOHB?
Preliminary acute incubations with 14C-labelled 14C-hydroxybutyrate indicated that cultured embryo units can oxidize ketones on day 10.4 as well as 1 1.4 of development (36) so that ketones can subserve nutrient functions in some portions of the conceptus at both times. What about the effects of ketones on embryogenesis during these intervals? As summarized in Figure 3, isosmotic additions of 2 or 4 mM buffered D,L sodium (3-hydroxybutyrate during 48-h culture of rat conceptus from day 9.5 to 1 1 .5 of development did not elicit any discernible dysmorphogenesis.
So physiological concentrations of bOHB, as in a low carbohydrate diet, ARE NOT TERATOGENIC. Problems appear only when going above this threshold, as in DK.
However, with 8 mM, 24.5% of the embryos developed minor lesions, and the inclusion of 16 mM D,L /3-hydroxybutyrate was associated with a 71% frequency of minor and 45% incidence of major lesions (36).
See the trend? With 8mM only a quarter developed minor lesions. But when levels went way up (not physiological) lesions are aggraviated.



On the left, added concentrations of glucose and on the right, added concentrations of bOHB. The trend is clear, there is no damage when KB are in the physiological range, but when levels increase to concentrations seen in DK, boom! As always, the problem arises with hyperketonemia, not ketosis. Its easier to develop hyperglycemia than hyperketonemia (except during starvation).

Lastly, what happens if we mix the minimally teratogenic amount of glucose (6mg/dL) with the minimally teratogenic amount of bOHB (8mM)? Sinergy! 66% displayed minor lesions and 27.7% major lesions. Some of the effects could not be explained by normal growth retardation.

KB are so important to normal growth that there is evidence that fetal ketogenesis occurs (9). To achieve an optimal development, the fetus must not be exposed to increased concentrations of KB nor glucose. Both sources of fuel are necessary but in the right amount. The body adapts to this situation increasing the production of glucose from glycerol, reducing the need for ingesting extra glucose. Increasing calories and carbohydrates during pregnancy predisposes the mother to hyperglycemia, GD and IR, neonatal macrosomy and teratogenesis. Reducing the GL of the diet has shown to offer benefits compared to a low-fat diet (10), even when carbohydrate intake is reduced to 40-45% of total calories (11). Controlled studies adressing the effects of less than 40% of carbohydrates are scarce (evil ketosis!). Nevertheless, going zero carb can be as dangerous as going high carb* (12). But there is no need to go up to 60%. In rats, the requirement for normal growth seems to be around 18-20% (13), comparable amount of carbohydrates eaten by most low carbers and/or paleo, while the human fetus consumes around 20-25g/glucose per day during late gestation (4)

Maintaining a proper diet with plenty of saturated fat, low carbohydrate and adequate protein/EPA+DHA is essential for a healthy pregnancy. Quality over quantity.


http://www.lucastafur.com/2011/01/k...lopment_27.html


I don't know why he recommends the PHD. After reading some of his posts, he seems to nail the benefits of ketogenic diets.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2   ^
Old Tue, Feb-21-12, 22:28
RawNut's Avatar
RawNut RawNut is offline
Lipivore
Posts: 1,208
 
Plan: Very Low Carb Paleo
Stats: 270/185/180 Male 72 inches
BF:
Progress: 94%
Location: Florida
Default

Oh, and there's this:

Quote:
In addition to peripheral IR (but not hepatic), gluconeogenesis (GnG) is increased 16 to 30% to supply the placenta and fetus demand.


If gluconeogenisis can be increase 16 - 30% in pregnancy, how can we become glucose deficient, especially when we aren't pregnant? Another reason I don't know why he supports the PHD.

Quote:
[font='Trebuchet MS',sans-serif]Nevertheless, going zero carb can be as dangerous as going high carb* (12).[/font]


This is also contradictory. I can't get the study to load either.

Last edited by RawNut : Tue, Feb-21-12 at 23:00.
Reply With Quote
  #3   ^
Old Tue, Feb-21-12, 23:26
OregonRose's Avatar
OregonRose OregonRose is offline
Wag more, bark less.
Posts: 692
 
Plan: Meat.
Stats: 216/149/145 Female 65.5 inches
BF:
Progress: 94%
Location: Eugene
Default

I believe he only supports the PHD insofar as it's lower-carb than lots of other "standard" diets. He's extremely keto-friendly, and his blog used to be titled "Ketotic." It does seem that lately he's become more interested in other aspects of dietary health than ketosis; his post on the immunological functions of fat is absolutely fascinating, even if I had to hit Google and Wikipedia a couple times in every sentence.

But this was a great find; thanks for posting it. I forget how much terrific stuff he's got in his archives.
Reply With Quote
  #4   ^
Old Tue, Feb-21-12, 23:30
LaZigeuner's Avatar
LaZigeuner LaZigeuner is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 5,065
 
Plan: ZULCA!
Stats: 353/279.2/175 Female 64 in.
BF: For now...
Progress: 41%
Location: U.S.
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RawNut
Quote:
Nevertheless, going zero carb can be as dangerous as going high carb* (12).


This is also contradictory. I can't get the study to load either.


Here's the abstract. I don't have access to the full article, unless I try for interlibrary loan.

From the abstract, it appears that on Day One, 2 things happened: (1) impregnation, and (2) withdrawal of all carbohydrate for the zero-carb group. Doesn't it take a little while for gluconeogenesis to get going? I wonder how long that takes in rats. If their pre-study diet was high-carb chow, and if rats are like humans, wouldn't that mean high insulin, so low hormone-sensitive lipase action, so low fat burning? So on starting zero carb, they're suddenly also pregnant, but metabolic machinery doesn't change suddenly, and so the rat fetuses are starved for stuff early on that otherwise they'd have access to.

Maybe?

Also, what is PHD? I figured out most of his abbreviations, except one:
Quote:
... Increasing calories and carbohydrates during pregnancy predisposes the mother to hyperglycemia, GD and IR, neonatal macrosomy and teratogenesis. ...


What's GD?

Last edited by LaZigeuner : Tue, Feb-21-12 at 23:32. Reason: 2 glaring grammatical errors
Reply With Quote
  #5   ^
Old Wed, Feb-22-12, 02:21
IvannaBFit's Avatar
IvannaBFit IvannaBFit is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 822
 
Plan: Evolving and learning
Stats: 226/144/130 Female 5'3
BF:
Progress: 85%
Location: Canada
Default

Gestational Diabetes?
Reply With Quote
  #6   ^
Old Wed, Feb-22-12, 06:57
teaser's Avatar
teaser teaser is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 15,075
 
Plan: mostly milkfat
Stats: 190/152.4/154 Male 67inches
BF:
Progress: 104%
Location: Ontario
Default

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8421229

Quote:
Restriction of maternal dietary carbohydrate decreases fetal brain indoles and glycogen in rats.


That was in the related articles. Rat fetuses on zero carb had less brain glycogen and brain weight. Eleven percent of calories were from protein, otherwise fat. Is the problem that the rats didn't eat enough (any) glucose, or that they didn't eat enough protein to make enough glucose? Or, just that they didn't eat enough protein? I think that bit about gluconeogenesis happening more from glycerol in pregnancy is probably a clue, protein requirements may be higher, so the body looks elsewhere to make glucose.

Rat studies really can't tell us whether humans can safely eat zero carb during pregnancy. There are species of whales where no food is eaten through much of pregnancy, and on into breast feeding.


Also, the fat used was soybean oil. One of the lower carb but not zero carb groups was give "food-grade" oleic acid--any results from that group would be suspect, personally I don't think there's any such thing as a "food grade" purified fatty acid, I'd count it as a pharmaceutical dose.
Reply With Quote
  #7   ^
Old Wed, Feb-22-12, 09:48
Zei Zei is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,596
 
Plan: Carb reduction in general
Stats: 230/185/180 Female 5 ft 9 in
BF:
Progress: 90%
Location: Texas
Default

Wish this had been known back when I was pregnant. Was told get off the low carb diet for your baby's safety. Of course you'll make any sacrifice to protect your child. Gestational diabetes plus many many extra pounds that don't want to leave as a result. Sigh.
Reply With Quote
  #8   ^
Old Wed, Feb-22-12, 10:53
RawNut's Avatar
RawNut RawNut is offline
Lipivore
Posts: 1,208
 
Plan: Very Low Carb Paleo
Stats: 270/185/180 Male 72 inches
BF:
Progress: 94%
Location: Florida
Default

LaZigeuner, PHD is The Perfect Health Diet. They believe people can become glucose deficient. ETA: Since we've brought this up I might as well post what I think is the best response to "safe starches." Dr. Rosedale partway down the page here.

Jay Wortman's wife was ketotic on a VLC diet during her pregnancy and breast feeding. He said that if you look at it from the baby's perspective, it's not that much different. Maternal BG is normal, insulin is low normal and there are some ketones. I'd say it's even better because BG is usually steady. You don't have the peaks and valleys that carb eaters do.

Last edited by RawNut : Wed, Feb-22-12 at 12:09.
Reply With Quote
  #9   ^
Old Wed, Feb-22-12, 15:03
LaZigeuner's Avatar
LaZigeuner LaZigeuner is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 5,065
 
Plan: ZULCA!
Stats: 353/279.2/175 Female 64 in.
BF: For now...
Progress: 41%
Location: U.S.
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RawNut
... ETA: Since we've brought this up I might as well post what I think is the best response to "safe starches." Dr. Rosedale partway down the page here. ...


Wow, thanks especially for this link, RawNut. I learned some new-to-me stuff, which is very exciting!
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:34.


Copyright © 2000-2024 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.