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 Mark Forums Read Search Gallery My P.L.A.N. Survey


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #16   ^
Old Sat, Jan-02-21, 04:18
JEY100's Avatar
JEY100 JEY100 is offline
To Good Health!
Posts: 11,664
 
Plan: P:E/DDF/LC-DrWestman
Stats: 225/165/169 Female 5' 9"
BF:45%/31.1%/25%
Progress: 107%
Location: NC
Default

Dr Westman's new book has 2+ pages titled, "Do I have to measure ketones? No." With a long explanation, including the studies that show, after adjusting to fat-burning, ketones are often below .5 while you are still seeing health improvements and losing weight. High ketones are short-term, results speak for themself.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #17   ^
Old Sat, Jan-02-21, 06:52
BawdyWench's Avatar
BawdyWench BawdyWench is offline
Posts: 8,278
 
Plan: High-Protein Keto
Stats: 212/197/170 Female 5'6"
BF:
Progress: 36%
Location: Rural Maine
Default

I wish I'd known before about how ketones go down after a while. Lately, probably because I just had a yearly physical, I've been testing blood glucose and ketones in the morning. BG usually comes in from the high 70s to the very low 90s, so I'm fine there. I can't seem to get above 0.1 for ketones, though. Now I'm not going to stress over that.

I love this forum for being able to cut through the haze to get to the facts.
Reply With Quote
  #18   ^
Old Sat, Jan-02-21, 07:10
JEY100's Avatar
JEY100 JEY100 is offline
To Good Health!
Posts: 11,664
 
Plan: P:E/DDF/LC-DrWestman
Stats: 225/165/169 Female 5' 9"
BF:45%/31.1%/25%
Progress: 107%
Location: NC
Default

You may find Marty Kendall's new book, Big Fat Keto Lies, of interest.
https://www.bigfatketolies.com/big-fat-keto-lies

It's an on-line .pdf with 200 pages of thought-provoking alternative explanations. I have been following his Optimizing Nutrition blog for years, and in August started following his Data Driven Fasting program. Combined with Ted Naimans P:E diet, I'm headed to a new health goal. https://forum.lowcarber.org/showthread.php?t=473285. (restart with post #48)
Reply With Quote
  #19   ^
Old Sat, Jan-02-21, 07:23
BawdyWench's Avatar
BawdyWench BawdyWench is offline
Posts: 8,278
 
Plan: High-Protein Keto
Stats: 212/197/170 Female 5'6"
BF:
Progress: 36%
Location: Rural Maine
Default

Thanks, Jey! I'll take a look. I've been reading a lot lately about how keto is NOT all Bulletproof coffee and 90% fat. It makes sense to me that if you have fat to lose, overeating fat (even while very low carb) would be detrimental. I can't eat a lot of veggies or fiber, though, so the recommendations from Marty that I've read in the past wouldn't work for me. But, I'm always willing to learn more and see what the current thinking is. Thanks again!
Reply With Quote
  #20   ^
Old Sat, Jan-02-21, 07:52
JEY100's Avatar
JEY100 JEY100 is offline
To Good Health!
Posts: 11,664
 
Plan: P:E/DDF/LC-DrWestman
Stats: 225/165/169 Female 5' 9"
BF:45%/31.1%/25%
Progress: 107%
Location: NC
Default

Thank goodness I always went back to Dr. Westman's program, based on Dr. Atkins, Dr. Bernstein and other early LC researchers...it was never about adding fat. "Page 4" always had strict limits on added fats and cheeses. Even the phase 3 in the new book ...very limited. He has talked about the mistakes in "Internet Keto" for years.

Marty's program is "Diet Agnostic" he has recipe books for every style, including Carnivore.
Reply With Quote
  #21   ^
Old Sun, Jan-03-21, 09:19
Demi's Avatar
Demi Demi is offline
Posts: 23,407
 
Plan: Low Carb
Stats: 217/205/160 Female 5'10"
BF:
Progress: 21%
Location: UK
Default

Joanna Blythman's review in today's Observer:

Quote:
The Case for Keto review – why a full-fat diet should be on the menu

Gary Taubes argues persuasively that ‘those who fatten easily’ should abandon carbs altogether

The investigative journalist Gary Taubes is known for his painstakingly researched and withering demolitions of the “eat less, move more” diet orthodoxy, but his latest book is personal. The Case for Keto is aimed at “those of us who fatten easily”. Taubes locates himself in this beleaguered group, “despite an addiction to exercise for the better part of a decade” and a diet of “low-fat, mostly plant ‘healthy’ eating”. “I avoided avocados and peanut butter because they were high in fat and I thought of red meat, particularly steak and bacon, as an agent of premature death. I ate only the whites of egg.” Yet still he remained overweight.

Taubes started to shed those pounds when he realised that one-size-fits-all diet advice fails, among other reasons, because people are metabolically different. Some of us can eat fattening carbohydrates and sugar and get away with it; others can’t.

Those who claim to have “a sluggish metabolism” are too often seen as making lame excuses for their weakness and indulgence. This punitive view – that fat people could easily be thin people if only they would eat less and exercise more diligently – is wrong, says Taubes. It amounts to what the philosopher Francis Bacon called “wishful science”, based on “fancies, opinions and the exclusion of contrary evidence”.

More likely, people who are perpetually fighting to lose weight have “a metabolic disorder of excess fat accumulation”. They store fat when they ought to burn it for energy. They become “insulin-resistant”, meaning that their insulin levels stay higher for longer in a day than is ideal. These people are predisposed to hold on to fat, notably above the waist, rather than to mobilise it. The only solution for them, Taubes says, is keto. “Lean folks aren’t like us. They don’t get fat when they eat carbohydrates; they may not hunger for them just thinking about them. They have a choice to live with carbs or not. We don’t.”

Keto is not a short-term diet “fix”, but a way of eating for life. It keeps you in a metabolic state – ketosis – whereby your body stops using sugar for energy and starts to break down stored fats instead. The liver converts these fats to molecules known as ketones, which the body uses for energy. Taubes argues persuasively that people who are prone to the metabolic disorder of excess fat accumulation must embrace this approach even though it means the entire carbohydrate food group is off-limits. “It is that simple. Just like smokers who quit cigarettes and drinkers who abstain from alcohol, fixing the condition requires a lifetime of restriction” because they have to “remove the cause of the excess body fat from their diet”.

The idea that carbohydrate is fattening, dangerously so for some people, is not new. In 1825, the French gastronomy writer Brillat-Savarin, who spent 30 years struggling with his weight and called his paunch his “redoubtable enemy”, noted that in more than 500 conversations he had held with “dinner companions who were threatened or afflicted by obesity”, the foods they craved were breads, starches and puddings. He gave short shrift to those desperate to lose weight, but appalled by the idea of forsaking carbs for life: “Then eat these foods and get fat and stay fat!” Taubes is more diplomatic, but his underlying message is essentially the same.

The very notion that carbohydrate restriction is vital for some people is currently contentious. The UK government’s healthy eating script still tells us all to base our meals on starchy food and in some conventional public health circles, a diet that eliminates carbohydrates is considered potentially dangerous, a contention that Taubes does a good job of dispelling by referring to up-to-date nutritional science.

Adherents to the conventional low-fat gospel will splutter into their skimmed milk when Taubes points out that those who cut out carbs need to eat more fat and, in particular, “vintage fats”, including cold-pressed olive and coconut oil, and all animal fats, and to eschew modern fats, such as industrially refined “vegetable” oil and margarine. “Eating foods that humans have been eating for thousands, or hundreds of thousands of years, and in the form in which these foods were originally eaten, is likely to have fewer risks and so be more benign than eating foods that are relatively new to human diets or processed in a way that is relatively new.”

Taubes’s advice is directly at odds with the stale paradigm entrenched in public health circles for the last 60 years. But he is one of a growing band of medics and nutritional experts whose results show that dietary thinking should move on. Those who feel doomed to be fat would be well advised to digest every word of Taubes’s cogently argued, agenda-shifting book. It could be a life-changer for some.

Joanna Blythman is an investigative journalist and author. Her most recent book is Swallow This: Serving Up the Food Industry’s Darkest Secrets (Harper Collins)


https://www.theguardian.com/books/2...-be-on-the-menu
Reply With Quote
  #22   ^
Old Sun, Jan-03-21, 11:26
Calianna's Avatar
Calianna Calianna is online now
Senior Member
Posts: 1,508
 
Plan: Atkins-ish (hypoglycemia)
Stats: 000/000/000 Female 63
BF:
Progress: 50%
Default

Quote:
The idea that carbohydrate is fattening, dangerously so for some people, is not new. In 1825, the French gastronomy writer Brillat-Savarin, who spent 30 years struggling with his weight and called his paunch his “redoubtable enemy”, noted that in more than 500 conversations he had held with “dinner companions who were threatened or afflicted by obesity”, the foods they craved were breads, starches and puddings. He gave short shrift to those desperate to lose weight, but appalled by the idea of forsaking carbs for life: “Then eat these foods and get fat and stay fat!” Taubes is more diplomatic, but his underlying message is essentially the same.




Our grandparents and great grandparents and generations before them knew that starches and sugars made you fat. They knew that in order to lose weight, you needed to cut out the starches and sugars.



I'm old enough to remember the "diet plate" restaurants used to serve - it was a hamburger patty (no such thing as 90% lean ground beef back then, so it's unlikely it was less than 20%-30% fat), cottage cheese (again, no low fat cottage cheese available - it was at least 4% milk fat), served on a lettuce leaf, usually with a side of a slice of tomato, perhaps a pickle. No crackers, no bread, no sugary dessert. Just full fat meat, full fat cheese, and a couple of veggies...



Now if you ordered a diet plate, it's all based on sugar and starch, and would consist of fat free this, low fat that, served on a huge bed of pasta or rice. Then you can top that off with a sugary, starchy, fat-free dessert.


Which one worked best? If you look at typical photos of people back then and compare that with typical photos now, its pretty clear which way of eating kept people at a healthy weight.
Reply With Quote
  #23   ^
Old Thu, Jan-07-21, 12:27
kdc01's Avatar
kdc01 kdc01 is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 46
 
Plan: Atkins
Stats: 339.8/309.2/200 Male 71 inches
BF:
Progress: 22%
Location: virginia
Default

I read the Taubes book. It is much easier reading than his other books, sorta Taubes lite. He skims over the historical background of low carb, mentioning all the players and covering the hormonal process without doing a deep dive. He gives props to current advocates, Phinney, Volek, Westman and others with a small nod to the keto crowd. His focus is still low carb high fat.

The latter part of the book is sort of a how and why to do low carb with lots of tips and anecdotes from current medical and dietary practitioners.

All in all an easy read with a different slant from his previous books.
Reply With Quote
  #24   ^
Old Fri, Jan-08-21, 09:25
BawdyWench's Avatar
BawdyWench BawdyWench is offline
Posts: 8,278
 
Plan: High-Protein Keto
Stats: 212/197/170 Female 5'6"
BF:
Progress: 36%
Location: Rural Maine
Default

I'm about halfway through this book and love it! The way he writes and explains things just resonates for me. I love that he keeps using the expression "those of us who fatten easily." Early on in the book he says that his highest adult weight was 240 and he had a BMI of 32, which put him in the obese category. Practicing what he writes about, he now weighs 210, which he considers a good weight for him.

He explains the metabolic differences between those who don't need to worry about what they eat because their internal processes are so efficient, and then people like me who have to watch every last bite. I have a friend like this. Always been athletic, never been overweight. She's forever posting on Facebook things she makes, like muffins, cakes, quiches, pies. If I ate those things as regularly as she does, I'd balloon up uncontrollably. She doesn't understand that. She's also a runner (always lean, boy-like figure with small breasts and narrow hips), so she thinks she has it all figured out and that if people only did what she does, they wouldn't have issues, either.

Sadly, that's just not true.
Reply With Quote
  #25   ^
Old Fri, Jan-08-21, 12:39
Zei Zei is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,569
 
Plan: Carb reduction in general
Stats: 230/185/180 Female 5 ft 9 in
BF:
Progress: 90%
Location: Texas
Default

Vegetables would make me balloon up. Not even starchy ones. Gained ten pounds really quick eating those little guys. That's how carb weight gain sensitive my body is.
Reply With Quote
  #26   ^
Old Fri, Jan-08-21, 15:02
Demi's Avatar
Demi Demi is offline
Posts: 23,407
 
Plan: Low Carb
Stats: 217/205/160 Female 5'10"
BF:
Progress: 21%
Location: UK
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BawdyWench
Thanks, Jey! I'll take a look. I've been reading a lot lately about how keto is NOT all Bulletproof coffee and 90% fat. It makes sense to me that if you have fat to lose, overeating fat (even while very low carb) would be detrimental. I can't eat a lot of veggies or fiber, though, so the recommendations from Marty that I've read in the past wouldn't work for me. But, I'm always willing to learn more and see what the current thinking is. Thanks again!
You may find this Diet Doctor article, How to lose weight fast: 5 easy evidence-based steps, an interesting read.
Quote:
Even on a very-low-carb diet, eating more fat than your body needs can slow down rather than speed up weight loss.
Reply With Quote
  #27   ^
Old Sat, Jan-09-21, 04:27
JEY100's Avatar
JEY100 JEY100 is offline
To Good Health!
Posts: 11,664
 
Plan: P:E/DDF/LC-DrWestman
Stats: 225/165/169 Female 5' 9"
BF:45%/31.1%/25%
Progress: 107%
Location: NC
Default

Quote:
Even on a very-low-carb diet, eating more fat than your body needs can slow down rather than speed up weight loss.


And to hammer home that message one more time .... here is one of my favorite Ted Naiman meme's and Amy Berger's longer explanation of why you my want to cut down on fat. Thanks to Amy being a co-author on Dr Westman's new book, there are specific tips to eliminate all nuts, nut butters, cheese, etc. That restriction on nuts made it into The Case for Keto. And I heard the advice to eliminate cheese directly from Jackie Eberstein.


How to Cut Fat on a Ketogenic or Low Carb Diet (and Why You Might Want To)
http://www.tuitnutrition.com/2017/0...at-on-keto.html

Last edited by JEY100 : Sat, Jan-09-21 at 04:38.
Reply With Quote
  #28   ^
Old Sat, Jan-09-21, 04:46
WereBear's Avatar
WereBear WereBear is offline
Posts: 13,149
 
Plan: Epi-Paleo/IF
Stats: 220/123/150 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 139%
Location: USA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zei
Vegetables would make me balloon up. Not even starchy ones. Gained ten pounds really quick eating those little guys. That's how carb weight gain sensitive my body is.


I had a similar reaction. Turns out I'm very sensitive to fiber, and lectins.
Reply With Quote
  #29   ^
Old Sun, Jan-10-21, 07:23
BawdyWench's Avatar
BawdyWench BawdyWench is offline
Posts: 8,278
 
Plan: High-Protein Keto
Stats: 212/197/170 Female 5'6"
BF:
Progress: 36%
Location: Rural Maine
Default

Now that I've finished the book, I can say there are some things I don't agree with, based on my other reading. Janet, I fully agree with you and others on the fact that some people can't do high-fat keto because the body will most likely burn the fat you eat (an easy process) rather than burn your body fat (a more complex process). I also find that I simply can't eat that much fat. When fat gets up to around 70% I start having trouble getting it all in without drinking melted butter.

I also question his ideas about gluconeogenesis (GNG) and eating "too much" protein (whatever that is). I'm no scientist, but what I've read recently is that GNG is NOT supply driven, but rather "need" driven. Just because there's a surplus of protein coming in doesn't mean it will automatically be metabolized as glucose. Your body will only convert the protein to glucose if there is a need -- that is, there is less than the 2 teaspoons of glucose required by bodily processes circulating in your bloodstream. (I think it's 2 teaspoons, so if I'm wrong on that please correct me.)

Yesterday I tested my blood sugar when I woke up. It was 94. About an hour later I had about 5 oz of chicken breast with a Tablespoon of butter. An hour after that I tested again and it was 91. I took this to mean that the protein did not raise my blood sugar. Did I do that correctly? Was the timing right to get accurate results?
Reply With Quote
  #30   ^
Old Sun, Jan-10-21, 13:19
Zei Zei is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,569
 
Plan: Carb reduction in general
Stats: 230/185/180 Female 5 ft 9 in
BF:
Progress: 90%
Location: Texas
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BawdyWench
Now that I've finished the book, I can say there are some things I don't agree with, based on my other reading. Janet, I fully agree with you and others on the fact that some people can't do high-fat keto because the body will most likely burn the fat you eat (an easy process) rather than burn your body fat (a more complex process). I also find that I simply can't eat that much fat. When fat gets up to around 70% I start having trouble getting it all in without drinking melted butter.

I also question his ideas about gluconeogenesis (GNG) and eating "too much" protein (whatever that is). I'm no scientist, but what I've read recently is that GNG is NOT supply driven, but rather "need" driven. Just because there's a surplus of protein coming in doesn't mean it will automatically be metabolized as glucose. Your body will only convert the protein to glucose if there is a need -- that is, there is less than the 2 teaspoons of glucose required by bodily processes circulating in your bloodstream. (I think it's 2 teaspoons, so if I'm wrong on that please correct me.)

Yesterday I tested my blood sugar when I woke up. It was 94. About an hour later I had about 5 oz of chicken breast with a Tablespoon of butter. An hour after that I tested again and it was 91. I took this to mean that the protein did not raise my blood sugar. Did I do that correctly? Was the timing right to get accurate results?

Sounds correct to me. When a low carber eats a meal of protein without carbohydrate both insulin (required to process protein) and glucagon (to counterbalance insulin's glucose lowering effect by releasing glucose from liver glycogen storage to prevent hypoglycemia) are both simultaneously released from the pancreas. Thus any potential rise in blood sugar after protein without carb meal is from liver glucose release and not gluconeogenesis, which it sounds to me like you have the correct information on (demand and not supply driven).
https://articles.mercola.com/sites/...&rid=1055629867
Dr. Mercola posted an interview with Gary Taubes about his new book. I found the discussion of excess linoleic acid interesting. It's something I've been recently delving into and finding is a likely source of dietary harm. A lot more on that subject available from Brad Marshall's TCD diet website as a simplified explanation for lay audiences of Peter of Hyperlipid's protons theory for those more scientifically inclined about the negative effect of excess linoleic acid (think processed omega 6 seed oils so cheaply abundant nowadays in foods) compared to the much maligned but healthier saturated fats. Too much to try to mention here but good stuff there for those interested.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

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 00:02.


Copyright © 2000-2021 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.