A dietitian weighs in on the Ketogenic diet for weight loss
- Thread starter Frederick Foresight
- Start date
really? you believe someone just because they have an M.D. even though there own comments indicate they make several incorrect statements? You think this woman is NOT an outlier expert when Viz and I can pull up many peer reviewed research that shows she is flat out wrong.
No one here mentioned any book to sell, I quote well respected studies or M.D. Ph.ds that have put in actual research and study. This bish is a holistic healer who likes to punch needles in your skin. You dont even know what she did her Ph.d in or has she even practiced medicine in the field of diet and disease
or just a professional research/article writer.
EDIT: let us not forget it was M.D.s that went before Congress to convince them that fat was the culprit in heart disease and when the low fat high sugar/carb diet was pushed, diabetes and heart disease rates grew even worse. You don't just cite an article as dogma, you dig deeper and look at what is being said and question the veracity.
Last edited:
In case you think you are gonna have heart disease from all the fat:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12097663
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12097663
Last edited:
Thinking about this, it's more likely that this is due to bad food choices e.g. unnecessarily restricting vegetables or eliminating them from the diet. @El OchoCinco Constipation is likely to result from lack of fibre rather than water. Vitamin deficiencies from lack of veg again. Elevated cholesterol and triglycerides are unlikely but could result from dumb fat intake like eating margarine and vegetable oils i.e. the fatty acid profile intake is unbalanced towards omega 6 and has trans fat in it.
Glycogen re-synthesis is complete with 24 hrs regardless of what you eat.
As for performance on low carb, try this:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3411406/
First of all, it's not regardless of what you eat. Glycogen resynthesis and full replenishment of muscles is ONLY complete in 24 hours provided sufficient carbs are ingested. Without carbs you are, unnecessarily, running the risk of protein/muscle breakdown to meet energy needs. And secondly, 8 athletes dropping whole 2 pounds during the diet didn’t suffer a performance drop? Wow, some study. I am sold. Seriously, just stop. Your argument is laughable.
Have you(or anyone else reading this for that matter) actually done a Keto diet where you have lost a meaningful amount of fat and still be able to perform at 100%? Or do you just like to post meaningless studies and regurgitate theory as if that would make your point valid.
If so, and your mind is still closed and stuck on theory then YOU can try this meaningless study:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17904939
Last edited:
Touche...
The study states: fatigue and perceived effort during exercise were compared in untrained, overweight adults adhering to a ketogenic low-carbohydrate diet or to a control diet low in carbohydrate, but not ketogenic (5%, 65%, and 30% or 40%, 30%, and 30% of energy from carbohydrate, fat, and protein, respectively).
It was a 2 week study!!! Seriously...2 weeks for obese untrained adults to adapt to a ketogenic diet? It is well known that 1-2 weeks is what it takes for people to switch over. All people who go ketogenic face the keto flu symptoms but if thye stick with it through adaptation all those symptoms go away. So SURPRISE..keto test subjects were tired and in bad moods during the whole 2 weeks of the study.
Obese people on restricted calorie diet means BOTH groups will be fatigued. Study never said control group was not fatigued.
That alone before i looked at the data showed the study was shit.
lets look at the summary of the data:
correlated significantly with perceived exercise effort (r2=0.22, P=0.049). Blood beta-hydroxybutyrate was also significantly correlated to feelings of "fatigue" (r=0.458, P=0.049) and to "total mood disturbance" (r=0.551, P=0.015) while exercising.
R-squared score of .22? R-scores of .45 to .55? If you studied statistics, these figures prove low to moderate correlation. If I got an R-squared score of .22 on a correlation/regression analysis I would throw it in the trash.
Despite the P-scores, the conclusions cannot be fully supported by the data in any statistical analysis. In fact I could just as easily explain the results by the fact that you took untrained obese adults and subjected them to 2 weeks of calorie restrictions and exercise, and some of them you told them no carbs.
This is my point, do not just cite a study, dig in to it to see the methodology and the statistical data to check for significance or proper development of a conclusion from the data.
Just because it is a university or someone with a ph.d, don't assume the methodology is accurate or the hypothesis and conclusions are supported by the data.
Precisely. Which is why i said meaningless. In the study where the low carb diet did not effect performance the individuals were not even in a caloric deficit and yet we are supposed to believe carbs don't matter. Hell, going from 45% carbs to 5% carbs a person would lose more pounds in water weight than the study participants showed at the end of the study, which leads me to believe they actually gained dry tissue.
Let's be real here. If you are eating at maintenance or surplus and just swap out carbs for protein/fats you may not see a noticeable performance drop because your body will adjust after some time but if you are restricting calories and eating at a deficit in an effort to lose fat there is just no way for your body to replenish glycogen without shredding muscle tissue. and, the leaner you get the more muscle you will destroy. So, if your goal is to merely lose weight disregarding body composition then by all means do keto.
Last edited: