I am tired of people pushing low carb/keto type diets

Page 4 of 6 [ 83 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

badRobot
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jan 2011
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 824

09 Mar 2018, 4:01 am

RetroGamer87 wrote:
Then how come I consistently lose weight on 1,500 calories per day?

You have more willpower to exercise or your lifestyle requires more energy, e.g. your job has slightly stressful environment, requires you to move around and you can't take a nap there, so your body needs to burn energy.

I didn't claim it's impossible to lose weight with caloric restriction on normal diet. I said your body needs to walk an extra mile to start using fat in this metabolic state.

You question was "isn't it better?".

Let's assume I agree, you need caloric restriction in both cases. Why do you think caloric restriction on normal diet is better than caloric restriction on keto?



Closet Genious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Jan 2017
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,225
Location: Sweden

10 Mar 2018, 1:27 am

We need to keep in mind, that our bodies metabolism runs 24 hours of the day, not just the second you eat something. so it doesn't really matter if something gets stored or not, your body is going to use it later regardless, if it is in a caloric deficit.

It's also a ridiculous point, because it's actually alot easier for the body store dietary fat directly, compared to carbohydrates, but again, it doesn't matter.

Also, saying your body burns more fat in ketosis... DUH.. of course you are burning more fat when you are eating more fat!. I swear that's the dumbest point of all time.

You will NOT lose more weight however, except for water weight, since water binds to glucose.



badRobot
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jan 2011
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 824

10 Mar 2018, 3:11 am

Closet Genious wrote:
We need to keep in mind, that our bodies metabolism runs 24 hours of the day, not just the second you eat something. so it doesn't really matter if something gets stored or not, your body is going to use it later regardless, if it is in a caloric deficit.

Scientific research studies show it does matter. In glycolysis our body biased to store fat, but hesitant to use it.

Closet Genious wrote:
It's also a ridiculous point, because it's actually alot easier for the body store dietary fat directly, compared to carbohydrates, but again, it doesn't matter.

No it is not. Yes, it is easier to store dietary fat, but what triggers this process is insulin. What triggers dramatically higher insulin secretion levels? Glucose.

Closet Genious wrote:
Also, saying your body burns more fat in ketosis... DUH.. of course you are burning more fat when you are eating more fat!. I swear that's the dumbest point of all time.

No, your sentence is the dumbest point of all time. Ketosis is a metabolic state when your body burns fat as energy source. It keeps burning your body fat even when you don't eat more fat. You are not required to eat tons of fat on ketogenic diet to stay in ketosis. For example when you fast your body switches to ketosis to use body fat as source as well.

Closet Genious wrote:
You will NOT lose more weight however, except for water weight, since water binds to glucose.

Studies show usually you will lose more. Just due to how fat flux is affected by insulin.

I repeat, I didn't switch to keto to lose weight. After a lot of research I believe ketogenic diet is very beneficial for health in general.

For me it was really helpful to cope with AS. After several years on keto my functioning improved, I have more mental energy to deal with challenging interactions and situations.



badRobot
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jan 2011
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 824

10 Mar 2018, 3:23 am

What really surprises me is how many people are against the mere idea of ketogenic diet.

Don't be stupid. Do some research. Don't just repeat BS myths about nutrition made up in the "fat is evil" era, this BS was debunked many ears ago.



SabbraCadabra
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Apr 2008
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,501
Location: Michigan

10 Mar 2018, 4:13 am

I've been trying to stick with a neo-paleo style diet, but for health reasons, and not because I'm trying to lose weight (because I don't need to).

I've cut out a lot of carbs since going gluten-free. I've got Sjogren's Syndrome and LPR, so cutting down on the carbs cuts down my reflux immensely. I really need to cut down on inflammatory foods like nightshades, but I'm having a real hard time giving up potatoes, tomatoes, and peppers. Gluten was easy; it's hard to say no to that kind of pain.

I was looking into a blood type diet not long ago (Eat Right 4 Your Type). A lot of reviews claim it's just pseudo-science bunk, but I'm really tempted to buy into it when all of the sample information on the website fits me.


_________________
he had a lot to say, he had a lot of nothing to say
we'll miss him


auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 111,704
Location: the island of defective toy santas

10 Mar 2018, 5:07 am

speaking of blood type, it seems type O's have the king's genes as far as being able to eat a beastly [literally] diet for decades with relatively few ill effects. the rest of us have to watch what we eat with care.



SabbraCadabra
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Apr 2008
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,501
Location: Michigan

10 Mar 2018, 5:57 am

The blood type diet website kept mentioning that Type O is very "hunters and gatherers", so I had a theory that there could be some correlation between blood type and ASD (since they make the same analogy there), but I found polls here that show no correlation at all.

And I wouldn't say "few ill effects". Wheat gives me pretty ill effects, and it's very difficult to avoid in modern America. I'm supposed to be lactose intolerant too, but I'm not sure I've ever noticed any symptoms.


_________________
he had a lot to say, he had a lot of nothing to say
we'll miss him


auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 111,704
Location: the island of defective toy santas

10 Mar 2018, 6:06 am

^^^that's why I said "beastly" - you can eat meat and it won't gum up your works like it did me.



RetroGamer87
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Jul 2013
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,397
Location: Adelaide, Australia

10 Mar 2018, 8:19 am

badRobot wrote:
What really surprises me is how many people are against the mere idea of ketogenic diet.

Don't be stupid. Do some research. Don't just repeat BS myths about nutrition made up in the "fat is evil" era, this BS was debunked many ears ago.

We didn't say fat is evil. You're strawmanning us.

We're just saying that if you lose weight on a low carb diet, it's because you ate less calories than you used, which is the same way you lose weight on a normal diet.

We're not saying you get fat from eating fat, we're saying you get fat from eating more calories than you use.

Asians are skinny and they live on rice and noodles. Carbs aren't bad for your health. They eat a lot of carbs in Japan and they have a lower rate of obesity than western countries. They also have more centenarians than western countries.


_________________
The days are long, but the years are short


RetroGamer87
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Jul 2013
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,397
Location: Adelaide, Australia

10 Mar 2018, 8:56 am

badRobot wrote:
Closet Genious wrote:
Also, saying your body burns more fat in ketosis... DUH.. of course you are burning more fat when you are eating more fat!. I swear that's the dumbest point of all time.

No, your sentence is the dumbest point of all time. Ketosis is a metabolic state when your body burns fat as energy source. It keeps burning your body fat even when you don't eat more fat.

Right. So if I eat a lot of fat my body will burn the fat I just ate and I eat a small amount of fat I'll subsist on body fat.

That's the same as a normal diet. Fat or carbs, either way I have to eat less than I use.


_________________
The days are long, but the years are short


badRobot
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jan 2011
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 824

10 Mar 2018, 9:49 am

RetroGamer87 wrote:
badRobot wrote:
What really surprises me is how many people are against the mere idea of ketogenic diet.

Don't be stupid. Do some research. Don't just repeat BS myths about nutrition made up in the "fat is evil" era, this BS was debunked many ears ago.

We didn't say fat is evil. You're strawmanning us.

We're just saying that if you lose weight on a low carb diet, it's because you ate less calories than you used, which is the same way you lose weight on a normal diet.

We're not saying you get fat from eating fat, we're saying you get fat from eating more calories than you use.

Asians are skinny and they live on rice and noodles. Carbs aren't bad for your health. They eat a lot of carbs in Japan and they have a lower rate of obesity than western countries. They also have more centenarians than western countries.


Same math doesn't mean same way. This stuff is more nuanced than that. Macro composition of calories is as important as total amounts.

Super-healthy asians is a debunked myth. They are in fact healthier, the reason is they eat LESS CARBS and MORE FAT, especially more omega-3 from fatty fish. But due to all the carbs there is still a lot of "lean diabetes" going on in Japan.

I repeat, my point is there are a lot of health benefits of ketogenic diet, besides weight loss. Less inflammation, better insulin sensitivity, better brain function, less likely to develop dementia and so on.

Cutting curbs is not dangerous or unhealthy, there are essential fatty acids, there are essential microelements, there are essential amino acids/proteins. There are no essential digestable carbs. You need fiber for gut microbiota. But all glucose need of your body are easily covered by cluconeogenesis.

Even if weight loss is the same as you insist, ketogenic is better for health.

What is your point, again? What are you arguing about? What are you trying to prove and why?



SabbraCadabra
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Apr 2008
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,501
Location: Michigan

10 Mar 2018, 6:20 pm

auntblabby wrote:
^^^that's why I said "beastly" - you can eat meat and it won't gum up your works like it did me.

I've always preferred white meats, too much beef always makes my stomach cramp up later. I hate the gristle, too.

I've heard this could be Chrones, but I don't have any of the other symptoms.


_________________
he had a lot to say, he had a lot of nothing to say
we'll miss him


RetroGamer87
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Jul 2013
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,397
Location: Adelaide, Australia

11 Mar 2018, 7:41 am

badRobot wrote:
Super-healthy asians is a debunked myth. They are in fact healthier, the reason is they eat LESS CARBS and MORE FAT, especially more omega-3 from fatty fish. But due to all the carbs there is still a lot of "lean diabetes" going on in Japan.
Yes they do eat fish. Just because they eat fish that doesn't mean they don't eat carbs. You're surely aware that they don't eat only fish.

Look at their meals. They contain vegetables, fish or other meat and lots and lots of rice. More than 50% rice. Just as an example, look at how much rice is in sushi? Of course don't live on sushi. Look at how many carbs is in their ramen?

The fact is that the average East Asian person's diet would not be considered a low carb diet. Whatever carb limit you have, the majority of Asians have most lightly exceeded that by eating rice with their fish.

badRobot wrote:
Cutting curbs is not dangerous or unhealthy, there are essential fatty acids, there are essential microelements, there are essential amino acids/proteins. There are no essential digestable carbs. You need fiber for gut microbiota. But all glucose need of your body are easily covered by cluconeogenesis.
I never said it was unhealthy. You certainly like strawmanning me. Cutting carbs isn't unhealthy, it's just unnecessary. And for those seeking to lose weight cutting carbs is not substitute for cutting calories.

I'm sure people who cut both carbs and calories will lose weight but it was the cutting of calories that caused the actual weight loss.

Yes, you can get various proteins and amino acids from meat and fat you require to live. You would surely die without them but they don't need to be present in 100% of your food. If some of your food contains it, you'll get enough of it to live.

badRobot wrote:
What is your point, again? What are you arguing about? What are you trying to prove and why?
My, I certainly seem to have struck a nerve with you. I'm arguing that the low carb diet is necessary for weight loss and that whatever weight loss people experience on the low carb diet was caused by reduced calories.

No wonder they consume less calories when there are less types of food available that fit within their diet. It's even more extreme with vegans. I've met some extremely thin vegans (some of them were actually underweight). I'm not saying the vegan diet is healthy but the reason why many of them get thin is because there are less types of food that fit into their extremely restrictive diet.

Any diet that restricts the types of food people can eat will probably cause some weight loss just because they can no longer eat anything that's offered to them. Hell, a fat guy could probably lose some weight if he went on a diet where he's forbidden from eating foods with the letter O in the name.


_________________
The days are long, but the years are short


badRobot
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jan 2011
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 824

11 Mar 2018, 8:03 am

RetroGamer87 wrote:
badRobot wrote:
Super-healthy asians is a debunked myth. They are in fact healthier, the reason is they eat LESS CARBS and MORE FAT, especially more omega-3 from fatty fish. But due to all the carbs there is still a lot of "lean diabetes" going on in Japan.
Yes they do eat fish. Just because they eat fish that doesn't mean they don't eat carbs. You're surely aware that they don't eat only fish.

Look at their meals. They contain vegetables, fish or other meat and lots and lots of rice. More than 50% rice. Just as an example, look at how much rice is in sushi? Of course don't live on sushi. Look at how many carbs is in their ramen?

The fact is that the average East Asian person's diet would not be considered a low carb diet. Whatever carb limit you have, the majority of Asians have most lightly exceeded that by eating rice with their fish.

badRobot wrote:
Cutting curbs is not dangerous or unhealthy, there are essential fatty acids, there are essential microelements, there are essential amino acids/proteins. There are no essential digestable carbs. You need fiber for gut microbiota. But all glucose need of your body are easily covered by cluconeogenesis.
I never said it was unhealthy. You certainly like strawmanning me. Cutting carbs isn't unhealthy, it's just unnecessary. And for those seeking to lose weight cutting carbs is not substitute for cutting calories.

I'm sure people who cut both carbs and calories will lose weight but it was the cutting of calories that caused the actual weight loss.

Yes, you can get various proteins and amino acids from meat and fat you require to live. You would surely die without them but they don't need to be present in 100% of your food. If some of your food contains it, you'll get enough of it to live.

badRobot wrote:
What is your point, again? What are you arguing about? What are you trying to prove and why?
My, I certainly seem to have struck a nerve with you. I'm arguing that the low carb diet is necessary for weight loss and that whatever weight loss people experience on the low carb diet was caused by reduced calories.

No wonder they consume less calories when there are less types of food available that fit within their diet. It's even more extreme with vegans. I've met some extremely thin vegans (some of them were actually underweight). I'm not saying the vegan diet is healthy but the reason why many of them get thin is because there are less types of food that fit into their extremely restrictive diet.

Any diet that restricts the types of food people can eat will probably cause some weight loss just because they can no longer eat anything that's offered to them. Hell, a fat guy could probably lose some weight if he went on a diet where he's forbidden from eating foods with the letter O in the name.


I didn't say asians don't eat carbs. They eat less carbs, especially less refined wheat. They eat more fat. They are healthier. You just prove my point repeating this. Less carbs == Healthier.

I repeat for the 3rd time. I think ketogenic is better due to health benefits even besides weight loss.

You keep ignoring my simple straightforward question. Fine, let's pretend for a second I agree about your points on weight loss, let's assume weight loss is the same.

Why do you think "normal" diet would be better? Is there any scientific evidence of your claims, beyond debunked misleading guidelines about "balanced diet"?



RetroGamer87
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Jul 2013
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,397
Location: Adelaide, Australia

11 Mar 2018, 9:29 am

badRobot wrote:
I didn't say asians don't eat carbs. They eat less carbs, especially less refined wheat. They eat more fat. They are healthier. You just prove my point repeating this. Less carbs == Healthier.
Yes they eat less of everything. That's why they're thin.

They're not thinner or healthier specifically because they eat less carbs but because they don't overload on food in general.

badRobot wrote:
Why do you think "normal" diet would be better? Is there any scientific evidence of your claims, beyond debunked misleading guidelines about "balanced diet"?
When did I say a normal diet was better? Why should I provide evidence for a claim I never made?

Again you're strawmanning me. This is becoming a habit for you.

badRobot wrote:
You keep ignoring my simple straightforward question.
You mean I keep ignoring your question about "is there any scientific evidence" for a claim I never made? Yes the reason I ignore that question is because I never made that claim.

Perhaps you're getting me confused with someone else you argued with who claimed the low-carb diet is extremely unhealthy. I never made that claim and I don't believe it's true so why should I prove it?

My claim was that people who lose weight on a low carb diet lose weight as a result of consuming less calories in total, which is the same thing that would happen if they were on a normal diet with less calories than they're using. I just don't think that low carb diet is a magic bullet or necessary for weight loss.

Again, I don't think the low carb diet is unhealthy. I never claimed that eating a low carb diet will cause health problems.


_________________
The days are long, but the years are short


badRobot
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jan 2011
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 824

11 Mar 2018, 10:02 am

RetroGamer87 wrote:
Yes they eat less of everything. That's why they're thin.

They're not thinner or healthier specifically because they eat less carbs but because they don't overload on food in general.

I believe they don't overload on food in general because they eat less carbs and more fat and therefore their insulin spikes and hunger are in more control. If they would start consuming the same amount of calories with more carb calories, this would lead to them consume more calories total. This is exactly what's slowly happening in Japan due to westernisation of their food industry.


RetroGamer87 wrote:
badRobot wrote:
Why do you think "normal" diet would be better? Is there any scientific evidence of your claims, beyond debunked misleading guidelines about "balanced diet"?
When did I say a normal diet was better? Why should I provide evidence for a claim I never made?


RetroGamer87 wrote:
Instead of keto wouldn't it be better for me to just lose weight by eating less calories than I burn?

Who said this? Someone hacked your account? Or did you mean something else by saying "Instead of keto wouldn't it be better..."

RetroGamer87 wrote:
Again, I don't think the low carb diet is unhealthy. I never claimed that eating a low carb diet will cause health problems.


What the hell are you arguing about then? What is your point?