I call BS on this - what do you guys think?

[MamaJ]

Having decades of experience in medicine (research not clinical practice) I can state with confidence that everything is case by case. Everything.
There are no absolutes in medicine and the better clinicians know this and treat case by case, not by protocol.

Seriously, this needs to be shouted every day, from every rooftop.

[240lbfatloss]

There’s a couple of obvious points that need to be made.

You have to be Lipolytic (Keto) to burn body fat and to normalize things if you’re metabolically deranged.

You do not have to be constantly Lipolytic in order to prevent fat gain and derangement.

Chronic lipolysis can eventually lead to metabolic issues, the severity of which is usually tied to activity level. The higher activity level, the quicker the onset as well as the severity of the symptoms, allowing for specific genetics.

[BlueViolet]

You do not have to be constantly Lipolytic in order to prevent fat gain and derangement.

This doesn’t seem to be well understood by folk who measure ketones daily and bemoan not being “in ketosis”.

I’m a fan of your posts big time.
Signed,
a scientist by both nature and training

[KidKeto]

Are you emplying that being in ketosis long term is metabolically damaging??

[240lbfatloss]

It depends. I would characterize it more as potentially “Suboptimal”., depending on the individual’s lifestyle. Mankind did evolve on limited and occasional carb intake. It’s more an issue of hormone normalization, when someone can use both fat and carbs with equal efficiency, without any type of derangement.

[KidKeto]

I have a question for you? consider this, I by swear keto for the rest of my life, I periodically 3 times a year) plan a day where I flip my fats with carbs and enjoy antioxidant containing berries and sweet potato to reset my leptin since Im at such a low body fat.
(

Assuming your hypothesis about prolonged ketosis causing metabolic damage, Does this satisfy a long enough period (24 hours) 3 times a year burning glucose to prevent that?

[240lbfatloss]

It depends. But probably not. More like once a week. With only a day you won’t be able to refill glycogen.

Metabolic effects can also take a long time to show up. Mine took two years to occur, and even then it was nothing more than a fat loss stall. It took me a year to figure it out. I started training again, intensified the effects, then started experimenting with carbs to kick up fat loss and gain muscle. I could have been just fine if I didn’t want to lose more fat and gain muscle. It would have been harder to train, though.

“Swearing by Keto”, if you mean eating less than 20 carbs a day perpetually is not really scientific. However, I was also fanatical at first because of the huge benefits, hence the one year stall.

Eventually, you get relaxed about things, and once you really realize how difficult it is to gain fat, it gets much easier.

[PaulL]

To insure metabolic health. That way you can avoid things like the One Year Stall

Since my keto/LCHF diet has restored all my metabolic numbers to normal, I am not particularly interested in messing that up by eating more carbohydrate. I like not be being diabetic, since I’m attached to my fingers and toes and would like to remain so, lol. The salad greens and the vegetables that I do eat are enough, thanks.

[PaulL]

The body processes alcohol before carbs because alcohol is toxic and it wants to get the alcohol processed as soon as possible. Maybe it’s the same with carbs, particularly excess carbs. Maybe we process carbs before fat to clear the toxin (blood sugar) as quickly as possible.

Excessive levels of ethanol and glucose in the blood are both toxic and therefore constitute metabolic emergencies. I believe you are right about the body’s priorities. Ethanol is toxic both in the short and in the long terms, whereas glucose is more of a long-term toxin, so ethanol gets first priority. But whereas the body can tolertate high quantities of dietary fat over the long term, hyperglycemia is potentially fatal and chronic hyperglycemia does damage in its own right (advanced glycation end-products are very damaging), quite apart from the damage done by chronic hyperinsulinemia. This is why glycolosis and lipogenesis are given priority over fatty-acid metabolism.

But as you mention, being given priority is not necessarily an indication of “preference.” Unless, of course, we are using the term in the sense of “the body prefers to keep toxins out of the bloodstream,” lol!

I believe that we have now accumulated enough evidence to show that fatty acids and ketone bodies are far better fuels than glucose, and far healthier for the body, to boot.

ETA: I think the fact that, left to its own devices, the body maintains only about a U.S. teaspoon of glucose circulating in the bloodstream means that its need for glucose is quite low. Jeff Volek’s team recently came out with a study indicating that the glycogen stores of fat-adapted athletes are identical to those of carb-burning athletes, so I think that we have no real need to worry about “replenishing” glycogen by eating carbohydrate—the body seems to take care of that quite handily on its own, without intervention. Dietary carbohydrate is simply unnecessary.

[240lbfatloss]

Yet your fat loss has stalled.

If you’re happy with that, fine… It’s not an uncomfortable State, when it happened to me the only downside was I still significantly overweight. I don’t think it’s unhealthy, just a State of Lipostasis.

However, you’re advocating it to people who have Stalled and still desire to lose more fat. That removes a valuable tool for breaking a Stall. I don’t consider adding in some periodic carbs to be the only, or even the first solution for Stalls, but it is certainly one possibility for some. To demonize it is unscientific misinformation. I’d still be 60 lbs. heavier if I had not tried it. Nor would I have the ability to experience Maintenance very comfortably.

[PaulL]

Since I began this way of eating to combat diabetes and sugar addiction, and the fat I’ve lost has allowed me to start doing things again that I had lost the ability to do, I’m perfectly happy. I may not be losing, but I’m not gaining, either. And I’m doing it without going hungry, to boot.

Sure, I’d look hotter if I lost another sixty pounds, but I’m at an age where romance has lost its appeal. At this point I’m more interested in making more friends than in finding another husband.

[SporkyDonkey]

I recently broke a six month stall. Turns out I was still eating like I was 400 pounds. I cut back on my total food intake and I’m losing weight quickly again.

[240lbfatloss]

Congratulations. That’s the “Occam’s Razor” answer for Stalls. Simple overeating.