Proponents of low carb diets, whether it is a ketogenic diet or some more advanced form of carbohydrate restriction, believe that reduced insulin production would lead to less fat storage; and so, even if you eat more fat, you will stick less. That way we will burn more and accumulate less, the perfect combination to remove excess fat – or at least according to this theory. In fact, instead of just speculating about it, they decided to test whether that was the case.
Gary Taubes creates the Nutrition Science Initiative, to sponsor research to demonstrate the carbohydrate-insulin model. He is the journalist who wrote the controversial a 2002 article in the New York Times magazine “What if it’s all a big fat lie?” which tries to turn the dogma of nutrition upside down arguing in support of the Atkins diet with his cheeseburgers with bacon without bread, based on a carbohydrate-insulin model. (Much of Nina Teiholz’s book, The Big Fat Surprise, is simply a reproduction of Taubes’ earlier work). In response, some of the Taubes researchers themselves were quoted as supporting his thesis, they accuse him of distorting their words. “The article is incredibly misleading,” says one.
“I was terrible.” “This strange little idea came to him, then he spread it and people believed him, â€says another. What a disaster. But it doesn’t matter what people say. All that matters is science. Taubes raised $ 40 million in funding for his Nutrition Science Initiative to prove to the world, that a person can lose more body fat on a ketogenic diet. They agreed with a well-known researcher from the National Institutes of Health, Kevin Hall, to conduct the study. Seventeen overweight men were effectively locked up in something called the metabolic compartment, for two months, to allow researchers complete control over their diet. For the first month they were placed on a typical high-carbohydrate diet (50% carbohydrates; 35% fat; 15% protein), and then switched to a low-carbohydrate ketogenic diet (only 5% calories from carbohydrates; 80% from fat) for the second month.
Both diets have the same number of daily calories. So if calories are calories when it comes to losing weight, then there should be no difference in body fat loss of your usual diet, compared to the ketogenic diet. If Taubes was right, however, if the calories from fat are somehow less fatty, then fat loss will accelerate. What happened instead, in this study funded from the Nutrition Science Initiative, is that the loss of body fat slows down when switching on a ketogenic diet. Wait a minute, why do people think the keto diet works, if it actually slows down fat loss? Well, if you just look at the readings on the scales in the bathroom, a ketogenic diet would seem like a crushing success. They began to lose less than a pound a week on your usual diet in the two weeks before they pass to weight loss by 1.5 kg.
Within seven days after switching to a ketogenic diet. But what happens is their body, tells a completely different story. The rate of fat loss has slowed by more than half. So, most of what he lost was just water. (The reason you started burning less fat on a ketogenic diet, probably because without the preferred fuel, carbohydrates, their bodies began to burn more of their own protein.) And that’s exactly what happened. Switching to a ketogenic diet has led to them losing less fat and more fat-free mass; also lost more muscle mass. This can help us explain why the leg muscles of people who train cross-fit, when placed on a ketogenic diet, they can be reduced by up to 8%. Vastus lateralis is the largest muscle in your leg, reduced in thickness by 8% on a ketogenic diet. Yes, study participants began to burn more fat on a ketogenic diet, but they ate so much more fat on a ketogenic diet that eventually began to retain more fat in your body, despite lower insulin levels.
This is “diametrically opposed” to what the keto crowd predicts, and that from the man they paid to support their theory. In scientific terms, the carbohydrate-insulin model “Fails our experimental exam.” In the light of this “experimental falsification” of the low-carbohydrate theory, The food science initiative has effectively disintegratedâ€¦ but on the basis of their tax returns, not before Taubes and his co-founders to have personally invested millions of dollars in compensation..
Are keto diets safe? Given the decades in which ketogenic diets have already been used to treat certain types of childhood epilepsy, a lot of safety data have been accumulated. Nutrient deficiencies seem to be an obvious problem. Insufficient intake of 17 micronutrients – vitamins and minerals – has been reported in people on a strict ketogenic diet. Diet is a particularly important point to make sure that you get all the essential nutrients, as you may be eating less. The ketogenic diet is usually so nutritionally restricted that that one review calculates that to get enough amount of daily intake of vitamins and minerals, you will need to eat over 37,000 calories a day. This is one of the advantages of herbal approaches. As the editor – in – chief of The Journal of the American Dietetic Association says “Is there a diet richer in nutrients than a vegetarian diet?” Choosing a healthy diet can be easier than stuffing 50 sticks of butter into your coffee.
And here we are not just talking about not reaching your daily needs. Children on a ketogenic diet get scurvy, and some even died of selenium deficiency (which can cause sudden cardiac death). Deficiency of vitamins and minerals can be solved with supplements, but what about the weakness of prebiotics, dozens of types of fiber and resistant starch, contained in whole grains and beans, which you will not consume? Not surprisingly, constipation is common in keto diets, but as we have seen before, the restriction of our microbiome by prebiotics there can be a whole range of negative consequences. ketogenic diets have been shown to decrease the richness and diversity of our intestinal flora. Microbiome changes can be detected within 24 hours after switching to a high-fat, low-fiber diet.
The lack of fiber makes our beneficial intestinal bacteria starve, but before we thought that almost all the fiber from food are absorbed entirely in the small intestine. But based on research using radioactive tracking devices, we now know that about 7% of saturated fat in a high-fat meal can reach the colon, which can lead to detrimental changes in our intestinal microbiome, weight gain, increased intestinal permeability, inflammatory changes. For example, the decline in beneficial bifidobacteria and reducing the overall production of short-chain fatty acids, both of which are expected to increase the risk of gastrointestinal disorders. Okay, but let’s see the point what could all this saturated fat do if it reached our heart? If you look at low-carb diets and overall mortality, people who eat low carbs have a significantly higher risk of to die, regardless of the cause, they have an average significantly shorter life. However, in terms of cardiovascular disease, it matters whether it is animal or vegetable fat. Based on the famous cohorts from Harvard, the intake of more animal Low carb foods are associated with higher mortality than cardiovascular disease – 50% higher risk from death from heart attack or stroke – but no such connection was found for low-carbohydrate diets based on plant sources.
And it’s not just Harvard. Low-carbohydrate dietary models that favor animal proteins and fats from sources such as red meat and chicken, are associated with higher mortality; while those favoring vegetable proteins and fats from things like vegetables, nuts, peanut butter, whole grains, are associated with lower mortality. The production of cholesterol in the body is directly related to body weight. Every pound of weight loss by any means is associated with about a drop point of blood cholesterol levels. But if you put people on a very low-carb ketogenic diet, the beneficial effect on LDL bad cholesterol dulls or even completely neutralizes. Balancing changes in LDL or HDL (what we thought was good cholesterol) are considered sufficient to offset this risk. You don’t have to wait for cholesterol to build up in the arteries, however, to have adverse effects. Within three hours of eating something rich in saturated fat, you may see a significant impairment of arterial function. Even with 5 pounds of weight loss, arterial function deteriorates with a ketogenic diet, as seems to be the case with low-carb diets in general.
“Results of the keto diet for weight loss” The carbohydrate-insulin pattern of obesity, the basic theory that ketogenic diets have some metabolic advantage, is experimentally falsified. Own studies by advocates of keto diets show just the opposite: the ketogenic diet actually puts you in a metabolic deficiency and slows down the loss of body fat. Exactly how much does fat loss reduce with a low carb diet? If you eliminate about 800 calories a day from carbohydrates in your diet, you will lose 53 grams of fat a day, but if you remove the same amount of calories from fat, you will lose 89 grams per day. The same number of calories, but excess fat equal of nine parts oil that melts from your body every day on a low-fat diet, compared to a low-carb diet. The same number of calories, but about 80% more fat loss, when you reduce fat instead of carbohydrates.
Here is the graph. Reduce 800 calories from your carbohydrate diet and you will lose body fat, but if you reduce the same number of calories from fat, you will lose even more body fat – 80% more fat. The title of the study speaks for itself: “Calorie for calorie, limiting fat from food leads to greater loss of body fat from restriction of carbohydrates in obese people. ” But just by looking at the scales in the bathroom, though, it would mislead us to think otherwise. After six days of a low-carbohydrate diet, the subjects lost 1.8 kg. With a low-fat diet, they lost less than 1.3 kg. So, when you step on the scales, it looks as if the low carb diet wins. So, you can see why low carb diets are so popular. But what happens inside people’s bodies shows the true story. The low-carb group lost mostly lean mass – water and protein. Water loss helps explain why low carb diets have been such a money machine for publishers for the past 150 years. This is their secret.
As one weight-loss expert points out, “Rapid water loss is the trick of the $ 33 billion diet.” When you eat carbohydrates, your body supplies the muscles glycogen for fast energy. If you eat a high carb diet for three days, you will be able to add about 1.3 kg. muscle mass in his arms and legs. These glycogen stores are depleted on a low carb diet and they take water with them. And ketones must also be excreted by the kidneys, discarding even more water. On the scales this can be depicted as 1.8 kg., which are downloaded within 10 days, but all this can be accounted for in the loss of water. The bottom line: keto diets just don’t hold water. But the thrill of losing weight so fast the scales continue to make people come back. When dieting fails, people often blame themselves. But the intoxication of this initial rapid weight loss it can tempt them again, as when one gets drunk after forgetting how horrible the last hangover was.
This is called the ‘false hope syndrome’. The diet industry is thriving with repeat customers, something that created low carb diets, given this rapid initial water loss. But what we are interested in is body fat. In six days, the low-fat diet is extracted a total of 80% more body fat than a low-carb diet. And this is not just a study. If you look at all the controlled nutrition studies, where scientists compare low-carb diets to low-fat diets, changing the same number of calories from carbohydrates with calories from fat or vice versa. If a calorie is just a calorie, then all these studies they should have crossed that zero line in the middle, and indeed six of them succeeded.
One study showed more fat loss on a low carb diet, but any other study prefers a low-fat diet, more body fat loss with the same calorie intake. If we take all the studies togetherâ€¦ here we are talking about 16 grams more daily fat loss in low fat diets, that’s four pieces more butter, melting from your body daily. Less fat in the mouth means less fat on the thighs, even when consuming the same number of calories..
“Does a ketogenic diet help with diabetes or make it worse?” A ketogenic diet can certainly lower blood sugar better than conventional diets, so much the better that there is a company that produces a keto product and that claims that ketogenic diets can cure diabetes. But here they confuse the symptoms – high blood sugar – with the disease intolerance to carbohydrates. People with diabetes cannot handle carbohydrates properly and this is expressed in high blood sugar. Of course, if you stick to eating only fat, your blood sugar will stay low, but you will actually make the underlying disease worse while. We have known for nearly a century that if we put people on a ketogenic diet, their intolerance to carbohydrates can increase in just two days. Here is the blood sugar reaction of a person who eats sugar after two days of a high-carbohydrate diet. Here is the exposure to the same amount of sugar after eating a high-fat diet for two days.
Their intolerance to carbohydrates increased with a high-fat diet. One week of dieting with 80% fat can lead to 4 times higher blood sugar levels as a reaction to the same carbohydrate load, compared to a week on a low-fat diet. Even a day’s intake of excessive amounts of fat can do it. If you are being tested for diabetes, eating a greasy dinner the night before may adversely affect your results. A meal high in saturated fat can worsen the cause of diabetes. carbohydrate intolerance, within four hours. Now, with enough weight loss, no matter what means, whether from cholera or bariatric surgery, type 2 diabetes can be cured, but the keto diet for diabetes can not only fill the cracks, but also to actively throw wood into the fire. I’m trying to come up with a good metaphor. It’s easy to come up with things that just cure the symptoms without helping the underlying disease, such as when giving to a person with pneumonia aspirin for fever instead of antibiotics. But the keto diet for diabetes is worse than because it can cure symptoms while actively exacerbating the disease.
So it may be more like treating a fever by throwing the patient with pneumonia outside in a snowdrift. Or maybe “cure” your amputated finger by amputating your hand. No more ugly soil! One of the co-founders of masteringdiabetes.org considers that, like the CEO, who corrects a bad conclusion, it looks better, just by taking tons more money. External numbers look better, but inside, the company is simply burying itself in a deeper and deeper hole. Do you remember the Club? Maybe I just watched too much TV late at night as I was growing up, but it’s a car device that attaches to the steering wheel and locks it in place, so that the steering wheel can only be turned a few millimeters. Imagine you are in a car on top of a hill with your steering wheel locked. Then the car starts rolling down the hill.
What are you doing? Oh, did I mention there’s also something tucked under the brake pedal too? The equivalent of the keto diet in this situation is who cares do you drive down to traffic without any brakes and with the steering wheel locked? Just stick strictly to straight deserted roads without any stop signs or traffic lights. If you do, the problem is solved! Yes, the longer you drive, the higher the speed you gain, so if you hit in a diet hole on the road or deviate from the road, over time, the consequences can become even more catastrophic. But if you stick to the keto regime strictly, you will be fine. In contrast, the reaction without keto would be simply unlocking the steering wheel and pushing out anything that got stuck under the brake. In other words, solve the main problem instead of just whistling past (and then into) the cemetery. The reason why proponents of the keto diet claim that they can “cure” diabetes is that they can successfully discontinue insulin in diabetics with type 2 diabetes.
But it’s like believing that someone can be cured of the need for a wheelchair making them lie in bed for the rest of their lives. You don’t need a wheelchair if you never move. Their intolerance to carbohydrates has not disappeared; their diabetes has not disappeared. It can get just as bad or even worse. Type 2 diabetes is treated when you can eliminate insulin in people as they continue to eat a normal diet like everyone else; then and only then do you no longer have diabetes. A real diet to treat diabetes is almost the opposite on a ketogenic diet: diabetics stop insulin within several weeks, eating more than 300 grams of carbohydrates per day. The irony doesn’t stop there. One of the reasons why diabetics suffer from such nerve and arterial damage due to an inflammatory metabolic toxin known as methylglyoxal, which is formed at high blood sugar levels.
Methylglyoxal is the most potent creator of advanced glycation end products, so-called AGEs, which are involved in degenerative diseases, from Alzheimer’s disease and cataracts to kidney disease and stroke. You get AGE in your body from two sources: by eating them from your food or by making them internally of methylglyoxal if you have high blood sugar levels. On a keto diet, one would expect high exposure to pre-formed AGEs, as they are concentrated in foods of animal origin high in fat and protein, but we would expect less internal new formation due to supposedly low levels of methylglyoxal, given the lower blood sugar after not eating carbohydrates.
However, Dartmouth researchers were surprised to find more methylglyoxal. A few weeks of the Atkins diet led to a significant increase methylglyoxal levels, and those in active ketosis worsened further, doubling the level of this glycotoxin in your blood. It turns out that high blood sugar levels may not be the only way to produce this toxin. One of the ketones that are produced on a ketogenic diet is acetone, known for its main role as a nail polish remover. Acetone does more than fail people on a keto diet when testing their breath and to develop the so-called “smell of a rotten apple.” Acetone can be oxidized in the blood to acetol, which may be a precursor to methylglyoxal.
This may be the reason why people on a keto diet may end up with high levels of this glycotoxin, as high as those of people with uncontrollable diabetes, which can cause nerve damage and damage to blood vessels, which you also see in diabetics. This is another way that people on a keto diet can eventually get a heart attack. So the irony of treating diabetes with a keto diet can be extended beyond the simple worsening of diabetes, but also by mimicking some of the severe consequences of diabetes..
ketogenic Diets: Muscle Growth and Bone Density An official document of the International Society of Nutrition and Sport on keto diets notes the ergolytic effects of keto diets for both high and low intensity training. Ergolytic is the opposite of ergogenic. Ergogenic means performance enhancer, while ergolytic means a deterioration in the performance of athletes. For non-athletes, ketosis can also undermine training efforts. ketosis is associated with an increased sense of perceived effort, fatigue and mood swings during physical activity, suggesting that ability and the desire to maintain regular exercise can be adversely affected in people who follow a ketogenic diet to lose weight.
I have already mentioned the reduction of the measured muscle size after training cross fit. So a ketogenic diet can not only impair endurance of athletes, but also their strength during training. If you make people do all the standard upper and lower body exercises for eight weeks – lifting weights from a bench, pull-ups, squats, lifting weights in an upright position, It’s no surprise that you will increase your muscle mass unless you are on a keto diet, in which case there was no significant change in muscle mass after all these efforts. This group, randomized to a non-ketogenic diet, increased their muscle mass by about 1.3 kg. while with the same amount of weight lifting on the keto diet led to a decrease in muscle mass by an average of about 1.5 kg. How else will you lift weights for 8 weeks and you will not get a gram more muscle mass on a ketogenic diet? Even proponents of keto diets call bodybuilding a ketogenic diet oxymoron.
What about bone loss? Unfortunately, bone fractures are one of the side effects which indiscriminately affects children on a ketogenic diet along with stunted growth and kidney stones. ketogenic diets can cause permanent bone loss, measured in the spine, the presumed cause being because ketones are acidic, and so keto diets can put people in a so-called chronic acidotic state. Some of the reported cases of children on keto diets are really heartbreaking. A 9-year-old girl seems to have gotten everything – osteoporosis, bone fractures, kidney stones, then she got pancreatitis and died. Pancreatitis can be caused by the presence of too much fat in the blood. Just one high-fat meal can cause four times as many triglycerides in your blood only within hours of consumption, which may put you at risk for inflammation of the pancreas.
She had a rare genetic condition called glucose transporter deficiency syndrome, in which a person is born with a defect in the transfer of blood sugar to the brain. This can lead to daily seizures that start in early childhood, but the ketogenic diet can be used as a way to add fuel to the brain. So a ketogenic diet can be a gift from God to 1 in 90,000 families, affected by this disease. As with everything else in medicine, it’s all a matter of risks versus benefits. About 30% of patients with epilepsy do not respond to seizure medications, and the alternatives aren’t very good, including things like brain surgery. This may mean implanting deep electrodes through the skull or even removing a lobe from your brain. This can obviously lead to serious side effects, but the same goes for getting seizures every day. So if a ketogenic diet helps with seizures, the benefits far outweigh the harms. For those who choose a diet to lose weight, however, the benefit / harm analysis will really look different.
Fortunately, you don’t have to mortgage your health in the long run due to short-term weight loss. You can get the best out of both by choosing a healthy diet. Do you remember this study showing that weight loss after following Atkins’ low-carb diet for one year was almost identical to that of those who follow Ornish’s low-fat diet? The authors come to the conclusion: this supports the practice of recommending any diet, to which the patient will adhere in order to lose weight. This seems like terrible advice. There are regimens, such as the last chance diet, which apparently consists of a liquid formula made from residual products from the slaughterhouse, which is also associated with approximately 60 deaths. Well, she really promised to change people’s lives. The subsequent unsuccessful case of a widower set a precedent to protect the First Amendment for deadly diet books. It is possible to make a healthy low carb diet or an unhealthy low-fat diet – a diet with cotton candy would be without any fat – but the health consequences from a typical low-carb ketogenic diet, such as that of Atkins, differ significantly from the low-fat plant diet, such as that of Ornish.
They will not only have diametrically opposite effects on cardiovascular risk factors in theory, based on fiber and saturated fat and the cholesterol content of the respective daily menus, when in fact on inspection, low carb diets turn out to be that they impair arterial function. Over time, blood flow to the heart muscle itself improves with the Ornish diet and reduced with a low-carb diet. Heart disease tends to progress with typical weight-loss diets.
as it is actively aggravated by low-carbohydrate diets, but can be stopped with an Ornish-style diet. Given that cardiovascular disease is the number one killer of men and women, “The recommendation of any diet that the patient will adhere to in order to lose weight,” seems irresponsible. Why not tell people to smoke? Cigarettes can also lead to weight loss, as well as tuberculosis and amphetamines, but the purpose of losing weight is not to lighten the weight of your coffin during the funeral.
“Is the keto diet an effective way to fight cancer?” Blood sugar, also known as blood glucose, is the universal fuel for the cells in our bodies. Our brain burns 113 grams of sugar a day, this is his preferred metabolic fuel. Our body can break down proteins and make glucose from scratch, but most come from our food in the form of sugars and starches. If we stop eating carbs or stop eating at all, most of our cells switch to burning fat, but fat is difficult to cross the blood-brain barrier.
But our brains have this constant huge need for fuel, an organ that consumes half of our energy needs. Without it, the lights go out forever. To make so much sugar out of nothing, our body must break down about a pound of protein a day. That means we could be destroyed in two weeks, but people can starve for months. The answer to the mystery was discovered in 1967. Harvard researchers inserted catheters in the brains of obese people who were starving for more than a month and have found that ketones have replaced glucose as the preferred fuel for the brain. The liver can convert fat into ketones, which can then cross the blood-brain barrier and support the brain if you don’t get enough carbs.
Changing fuels has such an effect on brain activity, that it has been used to treat epilepsy since ancient times. Prescribing fasting to treat epileptic seizures dates back to the time of Hippocrates. In the Bible, Jesus seems to have agreed. To this day, it is not clear why the shift from blood sugar to ketones as the main source of fuel has such an effect of reducing brain overactivity.
But how long can a person starve? To prolong starvation therapy, in 1921 a famous doctor a scientist from the Mayo Clinic offered to try what he called the “ketogenic diet”, a high-fat diet with such a high carbohydrate deficiency, that it can effectively mimic the state of starvation. “Significant improvement” was noted for the first time, in which it was studied – efficacy, which was later confirmed in randomized controlled trials. ketogenic diets began to go out of fashion in 1938, with the discovery of the drug against epileptic seizures, which later became known as Dilantin, but ketogenic diets are still used today as a third or fourth line of treatment for drug-refractory epilepsy in children.
Strangely, the success of the ketogenic diet against childhood epilepsy seems to be confronting proponents of the keto diet, according to which the ketogenic diet is beneficial for everyone. But do you know what else sometimes works in incurable epilepsy? Brain surgery. But I don’t hear people in the gym screaming, that they want their skulls opened. Since when medical therapies mean healthy lifestyle choices? Mixing brain activity with electroshock therapy may be helpful in some cases of major depression. And what of thatâ€¦ give the electrodes? ketogenic diets are also being studied to see whether they can slow the growth of some brain tumors.
Even if it works, you know what else can help slow the growth of cancer? Chemotherapy. So why undergo keto when we can get chemotherapy? Advocates of ketogenic diets for cancer, who are paid by so-called “ketone technology” companies, will send you bone broth powder with a taste of salted caramel for a hundred dollars per kilogram. Or companies that sell ketogenic dishes, report “unusual” anecdotal responses in some cancer patients, but more concrete evidence is simply lacking. Even the theoretical foundations can be questioned. A common refrain is that “cancer feeds on sugar.” But all cells feed on sugar.
The defense of ketogenic diets for cancer is by saying that Hitler breathed air – so let’s boycott oxygen. Cancer can also feed on ketones. ketones have been shown to stimulate the growth of human breast cancer and drive metastases to an experimental model, double tumor growth. Some even speculate that this may be the reason why breast cancer often metastasizes to the liver, the main place for the production of ketones. If you instill ketones on breast cancer cells in a Petri dish directly, the genes that are turned on and off, contribute to the development of much more aggressive cancer, associated with significantly lower five-year survival in breast cancer patients.
Researchers are even considering designing drugs that block ketones, to prevent further cancer growth by stopping ketone production. And think about what a ketogenic diet might include. High animal fat intake can increase the risk of mortality among breast cancer survivors and potentially play a role in its development primarily through oxidative stress, hormonal disorder or inflammation. Men too. A strong connection has been established between saturated fat intake and the development of prostate cancer.
Those that are in the first one-third of consumption of these high-fat animal foods, seem to triple their risk of dying from prostate cancer. Not necessarily fat in general – there is no difference in mortality from breast cancer based on total fat intake – but the intake of saturated fats can have a negative effect breast cancer survival, with a 50% increased risk from death from breast cancer. There is a reason why the official American Cancer Society and the American Society of Clinical Oncology and Guidelines for the Care and Survival of Breast Cancer recommend a diet for patients with breast cancer, which is actually the exact opposite of the ketogenic diet: “High in vegetables, fruit, whole grains and legumes, beans, peas, chickpeas and lentils, and low in saturated fat.
” To date, there has been no clinical study to show significant benefits of the ketogenic diet for any type of human cancer. There are currently at least a dozen studies that are about to come out, however, and the hope is that at least some cancers will respond. But still, even that would not serve as a basis to recommend ketogenic diets to the general population more than recommending everyone to go out and do radiation, surgery, and chemotherapy for pleasure..
“Is weight loss resistant to ketosis?” The new data is believed to expose “some, if not all.” popular claims made with extreme carbohydrate restriction. ” What about the fact that ketones suppress hunger? In a strictly controlled study of the metabolic compartment, where the ketogenic diet made things worse, everyone was forced to eat the same amount of calories. So yes, if you eat the same amount of calories on a keto diet, you will lose less body fat, but in the real world maybe all these ketones will spoil your appetite enough, so you will end up eating significantly less overall. On a low-carb diet, people started storing 300 calories more fat every day.
But outside the lab, if you are in a state of ketosis, maybe you could make up for that if you can to constantly eat significantly less. Paradoxically, people may experience less hunger on a full fast, compared to an extremely low-calorie diet. This may be due to ketones; in this state of ketosis when you have high levels of ketones in the blood, your hunger is suppressed. How do we know that the cause is ketones? Because if you inject ketones directly into people’s veins, even those who do not starve lose their appetite, sometimes even to the point of nausea and vomiting. So ketones can explain why in a few days you may feel hungrier on a low calorie diet than on a calorie-free diet (fasting). Can we then use the appetite suppressant effect? of ketones by eating a ketogenic diet? If you eat only enough carbohydrates to maintain brain function, could you not deceive your body that you are starving and make your liver start pumping ketones? Definitely! But is it safe and effective? A meta-analysis of 48 randomized trials of different diets found that those who were advised to eat low in carbohydrates and those who are told to eat low-fat lost almost the same amount of pounds after a year.
Now, obviously, the high levels of exhaustion and poor adherence to the diet complicate the comparison of efficiency – I mean, they weren’t actually on these diets; they were just told to eat that way. But you can see how even just moving in any respective direction can get rid of a lot of crap, which is Jeff Novik’s favorite acronym for high-calorie and processed foods. After all, the four types of foods that contribute the most to a lot of calories the American diet includes refined grains, added fat, meat, and added sugar. Low carb diets reduce the intake of 1 and 4, and low-fat diets usually reduced by 2 and 3. So they both tell people to cut down on donuts. Any diet that does this has a plus. It suggests that a no-eat-nothing-that-starts-with-letter-e diet can also successfully lead to weight loss if it makes people reduce their intake of donuts, Danish snacks, and Dorito chips, even if it makes no sense to exclude foods such as dill.
The secret to long-term successful weight loss with any diet is adherence. Adhering to a diet is difficult because every time tries to reduce calories, your body rises your appetite to try to compensate. That is why traditional approaches to weight loss such as portion control usually fail. For long-term success, not measured in weeks or months, and in years and decades, this daily problem of hunger must be overcome. This can be achieved with a completely plant-based diet thanks in part to caloric density – just that you eat a lot of food.
A ketogenic diet can be achieved with ketosis. In a systematic review and meta-analysis entitled “Do ketogenic diets really suppress appetite?” The answer that scientists find is yes. Also, ketogenic diets offer a unique advantage to monitor diet compliance in real-time with ketone test strips on which you can pee to see whether you are still in ketosis. There is no urine strip to tell you whether you eat enough fruits and vegetables. All we have is the scales in the bathroom. Adherence to the keto diet may be more in theory than in practice, however. Even in studies using ketogenic diets to control seizures, after a few months, adherence to the diet may drop below 50%. This can be tragic for those with incurable epilepsy, but for everyone else the difficulty of adhering to ketogenic diets, in the long run, it can actually be life-saving. We will talk about the safety of the keto diet in the next blog post.
“Recommended daily intake of added sugar” If we go back to the first “Nutrition Goals” of the Americans in 1977 – the so-called McGovern report – the leading nutritionists not only called for a reduction in the consumption of meat and other sources of saturated fats and cholesterol, such as dairy products and eggs, but also sugar. The goal was to reduce America’s sugar intake by up to no more than 10% of the daily diet. “The latest findings will hang sugar,” reported by the President of the Sugar Association, “The McGovern report is being neutralizedâ€¦” Fear not, however, we have the National Association of Cattle Breeders on our side and like the sugar industry, they appealed to the Senate Electoral Committee to withdraw the report.
The “sugar industry empire” is retaliating, and that seems to be working. When the official dietary recommendations were published in 1980, and then in 1985, they did not contain any set limit, such as 10%, just the vague “avoid too much sugar,” whatever that means. By 1995, it became even more unclear: “Choose a diet with a moderate sugar intake.” In 2000, they returned to at least the word “limit”, but even that is too much. Under the influence of the sugar lobbies, however, they returned again “Moderate sugar intake” before the 2005 Nutrition Guidelines Committee. to remove the word “h” completely, encouraging Americans to “Choose their carbs wisely,” whatever that means. If only there were some committee on nutrition guidelines, to help usâ€¦ The Sugar Association has been optimistic about this committee since 2005. The Sugar Association is “committed to the protection and promoting the consumption of [table sugar], ” and will not allow “underestimation of sugar.” And they’re not kidding. In 2003, the World Health Organization published a report “Diets, nutrition and prevention of chronic diseases”, which, for the first time since the McGovern report, calls for reducing sugar intake below 10%.
The Sugar Association responded by threatening to force the United States to withdraw all funding to the WHO. Here it is, black and white. The Sugar Association is threatening to pressure Congress to withdraw its funding from the World Health Organization – polio vaccines, AIDS drugs, go to hell, you will not interfere in the work of sweets. The threat was described as tantamount to extortion and worse than any pressure they have experienced from the tobacco industry. But now, 15 years later, and 40 years after the first proposal of the McGovern report, the current nutrition guidelines for 2015-2020. set as a key recommendation a limit of 10%, which is currently exceeded by any age group in the United States, from 1-year-olds to teenagers who eat an average of 87 grams of sugar a day, which means that the average teenager effectively eats 29 packets of sugar a day.
The Sugar Association describes the 10% limit as “extremely low”, just a few tablespoons a day. But of course, there are no dietary requirements for added sugar and every single calorie we get from added sugar is a wasted opportunity to get calories from sources that actually supply nutritional value. Thanks to the American Heart Association, they went on, trying to reduce the intake of added sugar to about 6% of calories, for which a single pitcher of soda can send you beyond that limit, the limit for intake of added sugar, exceeded by 90% of Americans. In 2017, the American Heart Association published its guidelines for children, recommending that they take no more than about 6 teaspoons of sugar a day, which means that there are almost a hundred cereals on the market in the United States, in which a single portion exceeds the entire recommended daily limit. And the Heart Association does not recommend any added sugar to children under 2 years of age, young toddlers should avoid any added sugar, recommendation, which is violated in 80% of children. The United States is one of at least 65 countries that have accepted nutrition guidelines or a policy to reduce sugar consumption.
In England, the Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition made new recommendations to reduce added sugar to 5%, which direction the World Health Organization is striving for. They always seem to be ahead of their time. Why? Because their political decision-making process is at least partially protected from the influence of industry. Unlike governments, which may have competing interests in trade, the World Health Organization is completely concerned about health.
Is the obesity dilemma real or myth? Translation: Wejdan Al-Wediani Martin Luther King Jr. has warned. From that human evolution Not automatic or deterministic, So is the case for longevity. In the last century, people were under the age of 40, but it is increasing Over the past 200 years, it has increased by two years per decade. Until recently, the increase in age has slowed or even reversed. Thanks to the obesity epidemic, we may be able to raise the American generation The first is to live shorter lives than their parents.
As the rate of age decline is expected to increase As the current generation (who enjoyed heavy weights since their childhood) They age when they reach puberty. If the obesity epidemic continues unattended, current trends refer to the potential for a “social and economic disaster”. And in the coming decades, some predict our lifespan will increase by 2-5 years in the United States. I mean, to make this in mind, it’s a magic cure for all types of cancer It might add 3.5 years to the average lifespan of Americans. Meaning, the reversal of the obesity epidemic might save more lives than treating cancer. The evidence that being overweight increases your risk The incidence of debilitating diseases like diabetes is indisputable Surprisingly, however, there is a debate about body weight Overall mortality rate. In 2013, CDC scientists published A descriptive analysis in the Journal of the American Medical Association And who reported that weight gain actually has benefits.
Yes, obesity is grade 2 or 3, in people with an average length of 1.5-1.8 meters And those weighing 97.5 kg and over were associated with shorter ages. Grade 1 obesity, between 84-97.5 kg and the same height, was not associated with shorter ages Just because a person is obese (70-84 kg) this appears to be preventive Compared to those with normal weights (52-70 kg). Obese people with a BMI of 25-30 seem to live longer. Where reckless headlines appeared in a way that “obesity can prolong your life.” Are you afraid of diets? Don’t worry, obese people live longer. “More kilos could mean less chance of death” It is not surprising that the study sparked widespread controversy In the public health community. The study has been described as funny, flawed and misleading. The head of the Department of Nutrition at Harvard University lost his nerve as he described the study As a “garbage heap”, due to his fear of the food sector being exploited for this study In the same way the oil sector exploits the climate change debate. And public health advocates couldn’t ignore the data Which they considered inappropriate.
I mean, science is science. But how can obesity It increases your risk of developing life-threatening diseases, but at the same time Make you live longer? This has become known as the obesity paradox. The solution to the puzzle appears to be between two major sources of bias The first: it is related to smoking. The nicotine in tobacco can cause weight loss. If you’re skinny for being a smoker, well, no wonder To live a shorter life with a slimmer waist. The failure to control smoking outcomes in the studies that claim They show the paradox, leading to excessive complacency of Sunni risks For the second major source of bias, it is reverse causation.
Instead of weight loss leading to life-threatening diseases, Couldn’t it be that life-threatening diseases cause weight loss? Diseases such as hidden tumors, chronic heart and lung diseases, alcoholism, Depression can all unintentionally cause weight loss Months or even years before it’s diagnosed. It is normal to be obese in this country. So, people who are abnormally thin – that is, those with perfect weight – may take care of themselves, but they may be heavy smokers.
They are elderly, frail, or have a lot of weight loss as a result of their illness. To put the issue of the obesity paradox on the final test, The BMI Global Mortality Collaboration was formed to review data More than 10 million people from hundreds of studies In many countries, The largest study of its kind in history on BMI. To reduce prejudice, they excluded smokers and those suffering from Chronic diseases, and they excluded the first five years of follow-up To exclude people who have not been diagnosed Those who lost weight as a result of imminent death. The results were clear: Obesity in all its degrees was associated with a higher risk of sudden death. Therefore, controlling that neutrality leads to the elimination of the obesity paradox completely. Meaning, the obesity paradox is just a myth.
In fact, when deliberate weight loss was put to the test, people have lived longer. There are studies of bariatric surgery such as those tried in obese Swedes which indicates that losing weight reduces mortality, in the long run, A random sample that lost weight with a lifestyle change reported the same results. Losing a few kilos through diet and exercise has been linked to a 15% decrease in the total number of deaths. Now, exercise alone may extend life without losing weight. However, there is a benefit to longevity as a result of weight loss By dieting only.
If you enjoyed our content, we'd really appreciate some "love" with a share or two.
And ... Don't forget to have fun!