I'm a keto advocate, but I live in a realistic world and am fully accepting of the fact that new research comes out every day that could prove this way of life less-than-optimal. That said, every human is different, and what may or may not work for you can depend on your ancestry, genetics, and to a greater extent, your microbiome. I am currently doing microbiome correction work and the diet while I am correcting my bacterial balances is Keto - recommended by a top health practitioner here in Australia. But, once I am finished, I have been told that re-testing will need to be done to see exactly what food types (and macros) that my "new gut" actually need to thrive....

I think what I am trying to say is that the ONLY way to truly know what works for your body is to get testing done. Because some people need more carbs (for example) and even the right types! It costs a lot, but until you do, everything is a guess and you can only apply general health advice. There's a product available in the U.S., CAN, and U.K called VIOME that sounds AMAZING. I can't wait until it comes to AUS as it sounds even more comprehensive than what I am doing. Again, this is testing to see what is happening inside, and how your body really interacts with foods.

This argument stems more from the idea that people are spoiled brats who cannot give up their comfort foods. A diet is a change in eating habits. If you revert back to the food that caused you to gain weight in the first place, obviously you will gain all the weight back. If you think of "fat" as the result of an illness which you can get better by eating one way, and will get worse (again) by eating another way, that might make you think of it differently. People who give up smoking because they develop emphasema will remain "well" if they do not smoke, and will get sick again if they start to smoke again.

At the end of the day i belive that all diets and these fads all work in some form. the key i believe to keep consistent with the changes you are making and also making it into a lifestyle change so you create good habits and dont gain the weight back. Stay strong mentally and trust the process

There are a ton of scientific studies around which conclude that a ketogenic diet (and basically ANY low carb diet) works great, don't let them distract you, they probably want to sell you Red Tea or pills or something. These days one person says one thing the other tells you it's fake news.

Keto works for a reason, we get fat because of the carbs we eat, this is a scientifically proven fact, so why try something else ? Personally I have great success with keto and I'm from planet earth so I assume it works for every human being in this world.

I mean, realistically speaking, it doesn't really matter if you go low carb or low fat - it just depends on which one you can stick with!


eg.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3530364/

https://examine.com/nutrition/low-fa...r-weight-loss/


Many of the studies that show low carb to be superior to other dieting methods do not correct for increased protein intake, which is a confounding variable which directly effects diet outcome. One of the most recent studies, that used over 600 participants, concluded that there's no statistical difference between low-carb vs low-fat so long as total calories and protein are kept consistent.

Actually, no, it does matter if you go low fat if you're still eating a high carb count. While the body can, and will, utilise both fat and protein to make glycogen, it takes significantly more effort for the body to undertake those processes. During that phase, the blood sugar (glycogen) doesn't spike and trigger the insulin response which lays excess blood sugar to fat. This is why nearly everyone on a ketogenic diet will lose weight - regardless of whether they are adherents to the high fat or moderate fat values. The important thing is to keep carbs low. How low you need to go depends on your personal physiology. Some people are extremely carb sensitive (metabolic disorder) and need to keep it under 30 net carbs, and some of us can go up to 100 carbs and still lose.

As with ALL diets, the most important aspect is to ensure that you are getting sufficient vitamins, minerals and trace minerals to support your body's functions - either through food or supplementation AND to take in sufficient fluid to flush toxins out of the body.

Protein is absolutely necessary - not just for the physical strength to carry your own body weight around, but also because the heart is a muscle and if you diet without regard for "sufficient" protein to avoid muscle loss then you are asking for an early death. The accepted rule of thumb for protein is half a pound of lean protein per pound of body weight, and more if you are strength training with the aim of building muscle rather than maintaining it.

Basically, do the research yourself and don't rely on advice given by others. There is a lot of disinformation out there, both by the food industry who do not want to lose your business AND those who "play" at dieting.

The biggest problem with going low fat is that carbs do not trigger the leptin response which tells the brain that you are full. Fat will do that, and it keeps the ghrelin (hunger hormone) under control. The great benefit to low carb versus low fat is that you lose the sugar addiction pretty quickly.

So, yes, a massive difference in how the body responds between low fat and low carb. The body has minimal need of carbs for a tiny proportion of brain function. Otherwise, humans run better on ketones.

I respect that you prefer a low-carb lifestyle, but to arbitrarily state that it is the superior option for all populations is misguided, IMO.

For one thing, losing weight comes from many different things: eating below your TDEE, losing water vapour during exhalation, voiding (either #1 or #2), changes in bone density, your body changing how it holds onto water, etc. But to lose weight in the sense that I think you mean, it has everything to do with a caloric deficit. Fat vs. carb doesn't even come into the discussion.

Yes, everyone will lose more WEIGHT initially with a low carb diet, specifically due to glycogen storage & water retention. That balances out pretty quickly though, within a month or two: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17415320

Those who display symptoms of insulin resistance do better with fewer carbs - no argument there. But in a healthy population, there is no statistical difference: A Low-Glycemic Load Diet Facilitates Greater Weight Loss in Overweight Adults With High Insulin Secretion but Not in Overweight Adults With Low Insulin Secretion in the CALERIE Trial | Diabetes Care . And in those whom are insulin sensitive, they could actually lose more weight on a low fat diet: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15897479

Insulin and of itself isn't an issue - after all, we need insulin to preserve muscle mass too. Protein is also actually quite insulinogenic - it just doesn't raise blood sugar levels. The problems come in when there is insulin resistance in muscle cells, which most commonly correlates to high bodyfat percentages. Again, insulin doesn't cause fat gain - that's entirely dependent on if you are consuming a caloric surplus or not.

And in already obese subjects, overeating fat is more likely to cause fat storage than overeating carbs: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7598063

Ironically, there is even some postulation that too much fat itself causes insulin resistance as well: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16319806 And a low carb diet doesn't necessarily improve insulin resistance: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4370345/

Those with Alzheimer's who follow a high fat diet show a slowing of cognitive decline, absolutely. But the only models that propose ketone metabolism in the brain shows protective conditions against future disease are all in rats & mice - which is to say, it hasn't been shown to have the same effect in humans. For some, a low fat diet may actually have a negative affect on moods long term - but there's no difference in cognitive function: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jam...rticle/1108558 . Ketones have also shown mixed results in terms of improving or inhibiting athletic performance. So it comes out even: no clear evidence that suggests that humans 'run better' on ketones.

Longer term low carb diets have shown to decrease T3 levels, a symptom of developing hypothyroidism - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28076316. It also results in lowered testosterone and increased cortisol - which makes you more likely to store belly fat and it's harder to build muscle: https://academic.oup.com/jcem/articl...1/4480/2598960 . There is also some new data that suggests that long term ketogenic diets can affect the rigidity/shape of arterial wall - not great: https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...59131113003397 Though I'll readily admit that more research needs to be done on this.

No, fat doesn't activate higher levels of leptin than carbohydrates: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10567012 & https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12753550

Weight loss is generally similar across any caloric deficit long term:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19246357 & https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jam...stract/2673150

On a side note, while RDA for protein is 0.8g/kg of bodyweight (0.36g/lb), newer studies suggest that if you are over 40 and sedentary that should be bumped to 1.2g/kg (0.55g/lb). For obese subjects trying to lose weight, even higher numbers (eg. 1.5g/kg, 0.68g/lb) are recommended. Pregnant women need at least double RDA, at 1.6-1.8g/kg (0.730.82g/lb). And non-obese subjects attempting to lose fat/weight should be aiming for 2.2-3.4g/kg (1-1.55g/lb) in order to preserve muscle mass. To gain muscle, the recommendations are similar to losing fat, with the suggestion that higher levels do not show any adverse affects on renal function or overall health - and may help prevent fat gain in a caloric surplus.

I think that if you do well with a low carb diet, that's great - keep with it! But it is not immediately the best choice for everyone under the sun. It all comes down to how you respond, and how you feel, with different macronutrient ratios. And what your Dr. says in terms of the results on long-term cardiovascular and endocrine health - on an individual basis. We could trade cherry-picked studies back and forth all day, but I imagine we can agree that the best judge of which system is best comes down to how the individual responds.

Defining, Wowza, thank-you for the smorgasbord of peer-reviewed articles! I love it when you share

Obviously a typo, since I'm pretty sure a 200 pound person is not supposed to eat 100 pounds of protein a day, or a week,. But now I'm curious what the accepted rule of thumb really is.

LOL, thanks. I definitely cherry picked these to make a point. But I'm glad that others enjoy digging through the numbers as well.


US RDA is 0.8g/kg of bodyweight, so it works out to around 0.36g/lb of bodyweight. But older populations, especially women, do better with a higher intake, around 1.2-1.4g/kg (0.55-0.64g/lb). And higher levels still for those trying to lose fat, between 1.8-3.4g/kg (0.82-1.54g/lb) - eating more protein the leaner you are to reduce the loss of muscle in a caloric deficit. I suspect Briael meant half a gram per pound of bodyweight, but I don't want to put words in their mouth.

Defining pretty much nailed it on the head, and if you're interested in more info (and like podcasts), check this one out: https://www.gimletmedia.com/science-...ould-you-do-it

I normally do a low-carb cycle (not at keto levels, though) for about two weeks before a track meet, but ordinarily I will do a "carb pyramid". Where I have most of them in the morning and much fewer at night.