Getting a Balanced Diet

(alex kerss) #1

The only way I can see a balanced diet can be obtained is by eating

300g avocado
100g cedder cheese
300g kale
20g sunflower seeds
40g flax seeds

Which would gives

Calories: 1279
Net carbs: 14g
Total Fat: 106g
Protein: 46g

Fats is too low, but there is some calories left to up the fat intake.

But more importantly this gives you the following vitamins and minerals intake (for a 40 year old male)

Vitamin A: 127%
Vitamin C: 128%
Vitamin E: 99%
Vitamin K: 268%
Vitamin B-1: 140%
Vitamin B-2: 105%
Vitamin B-3: 58%
Vitamin B-5: 97%
Vitamin B-6: 135%
Vitamin B-12: 102%
Potassium: 59%
Magnesium: 93%
Phosphorus: 169%
Zinc: 80%
Copper: 193%
Manganese: 112%
Selenium: 72%
Calcium: 117%
Iron: 92%

Even this is not ideal as its lacking in Potassium, Zinc, Selenium and Vitamin B-3.

If I try and add more variety into the daily diet, it only results in worsening the required daily intake of vitamins and minerals that I need.

If I was NOT on a Keto diet the huge database of food types available would make having a balanced diet so much easier and enjoyable in terms of the variety of foods I could eat.

I feel very little is really discussed in terms of getting a balanced diet.

What does everyone else do? Just ignore the whole balanced diet thing? Or am I missing something?


Yes, you’re missing something (well, two main things): RDA recommendations are rather arbitrary (you can look up how they were devised); many nutrients are absorbed differently when we need to buffer high sugar intake. We actually need less vitamin C - for example - when we’re low carb.

This doesn’t mean we don’t need nutrients; just that we don’t really have a good way of judging what we need (or what we get, for that matter).

I can see why you’re not very excited about food - your other thread - if you’re planning to eat avocado, cheddar, kale and some seeds every day!

(alex kerss) #3

are they arbitrary?

I thought the RDA was based on peer reviewed academic research?

Being a mathematics PHD graduation, I can assure you that peer reviewed academic research is anything but arbitrary, it is almost certainly accurate.

But maybe Im wrong, I hope I am, and the RDA is just arbitrary, i will go off an dig into how the RDA get their numbers


Don’t rely on the RDAs IMO. Also please look into the actual bioavailabilty of the nutrients in what you’re eating. Many so-called superfoods are worthless because the body cannot make use of them.

(alex kerss) #5

why not rely on the RDA’s? They are based on rigorous peer reviewed science?

I will look into the superfoods, but i cant really see how the body cant make use if them, if thats the case then they wont be able to make use of them from any other food source either. But I dont know that I will look into this.


Please do look into it. There’s a lot of info on the forums here and excellent info elsewhere. I think if you’re willing to dig below the surface you’ll be shocked at how little solid science went into government recommendations.
Take care and good luck with your journey!

(alex kerss) #7

Yes I will look into it, although i think if the RDA wasn’t the best estimate we currently have the academic community would have shown this and it would be common knowledge the the RDA’s would be completely discredited.

I just feel that the RDA’s are the best thing we have to rely on at the moment and we should strive to reach the targets set.

And I feel the Keto community is just brushing this aspect under the carpet and coming up with Keto recipes and daily/weekly meal plans that just dont give us the vitamins and minerals we need.

(Ken) #8

The RDA guidelines were developed within the context of a carbohydrate based diet. One fairly high in things like Phytate, that effects bioavailability of things to a great degree.

What should really happen is there should be more research done and new guidelines developed for a low carb lifestyle.

(bulkbiker) #9

Try asking some carnivores your question…


You have much more faith in the nutritional research community than I think it deserves!
Most funding for studies come from industry. If there’s not money to be made from something, there’s much less incentive to fund it. Case in point: fasting is dramatically more effective for many disorders (but let’s just pick Type 2 diabetes for simplicity) than most of the drugs on the market. There are millions of dollars that go into pharmaceutical research for diabetes. Who has the incentive to fund research on fasting?
In any case, no one is forcing you to do keto. If you don’t want to do it and aren’t happy with the nutrients you’re getting, just find another way to eat that fits your idea of a healthy diet.

(Susan) #11

Keto is a lot simpler then you think =).

(squirrel-kissing paper tamer) #12

Are you vegetarian?

Foods high in niacin (vit B3): Liver, chicken breast, tuna, turkey, salmon…

Foods high in selenium: fish, pork, beef, turkey, chicken, ham…

Foods high in zinc: dairy, eggs, shellfish, meat…

Foods high in potassium: broccoli, spinach, leafy greens, tuna, halibut, cod, trout…

This could up your fat and protein intake with minimal increase in carbs.

(The remembrance of bacon past.) #13

Sure it is—plus a lot of guesswork to make up for what we don’t know. The RDA’s are supposed to be set to give 80-90% of the population a sufficient amount. The assumption is that any nutrient from any source has equal value, whereas the research actually shows that nutrients in meat are more bioavailable than phytonutrients. It is also known science (but not integrated into the RDA’s) that the body’s need for exogenous anti-oxidants drops sharply on a ketogenic diet, because one of the principal ketone bodies acts genetically to restore the body’s built-in defences against oxidation. Three recent studies have also shown independently that the healthiest level of sodium intake is 4-6 g/day, which translates to 10-15 g/day of table salt (NaCl). The U.S. guideline is a mere 2.3 g/day of sodium, which is abysmally low for everyone but a few salt-sensitive hypertensives. It has never been shown that sodium elevates blood sugar, but several RCT’s have shown that insulin does—but carbohydrate is good for us, and sodium will kill us. And so forth.


(Joey) #14

@ubc_router First I’d like to welcome you to the community. But I must say that you seem to enjoy making arguments based solely on an “appeal to authority.” With all due respect to your PhD in math, I remain unmoved by this sophomoric approach to logic.

I encourage you to spend time exploring topics throughout the “Show Me The Science” section and read the many randomized controlled test studies for yourself.

I do wish you well on whatever nutritional journey lies ahead for you.