I'm panicking, probably for nothing

(Sid) #43

Not at all, Mark, I really do appreciate your insight into this! :slight_smile:

Thanks for the link, I think I might actually try something like that!


(Edith) #44

Once your body gets fat adapted and used to the new fuel source, fat, you may find your appetite increases.

One thing to note is that hunger signals change on keto. Before keto I got the typical hunger pangs, headache, shakey (if I was REALLY hungry), hangry. Early keto, I wouldn’t think I was hungry but I would feel a little nauseous. Hunger now is more of a thought, but a thought that can sometimes get pushed aside for a few more hours if I’m busy. It’s hard to explain, but in time you’ll figure out what your new hunger signals are.

(Sid) #45

Hi Edith!

Thanks for the input, I value personal experiences a lot!



But how? I would grab a tiny fatty thing, 100g and bam, 700 kcal. It’s so easy to eat! Unless your body just rejects food but why would it do it longer term…? Very odd. Mine demands food every day, a lot. Subtly on carnivore while fat adapted but still, I feel I need fuel.

If I have serious appetite problems, I usually still can consume creamy or liquid calories galore.

I never needed hunger or appetite to eat at all but it seems some people just don’t want to eat without those… Maybe some can’t eat without those…? The lack of them poses zero problem for me, being turned off from food (negative appetite) is the case when I can’t eat. But need for fuel always wins eventually.

(Bob M) #47

100% True. The book Burn has an interesting graph about this. I’ll see if I can find it. Anyway the common theory is that the more you exercise, the more overall calories you’ll burn. But they did studies on both humans and mice where increasing exercise leads to no or very little increase in overall calories burnt. Why? Because your body reduces calorie expenditure at other times, so your overall calories per day doesn’t really increase.

And then if you reduce calories, your body can also reduce its basal metabolic rate.

After seeing this info, I’ve actually gotten to the point where I have no idea how we lose weight.

(Mark Rhodes) #48
  1. Few look at the BMR for sitting on a couch. Say thats 85% of what running a mile is. So running a mile isn’t 100 kcals its 15. Awful hard to create energy deficiets.
  2. The body adapts to repetition. Think of how high your BHB was early on compared to now. I have a hard time, even fasting, to hit 0.6 mmol. The body understands its needs.
  3. The opppsite is also true. Overeat on any given day. My temperature goes up. I start to sweat
    …whoa whoa, too much energy there big boy, In ketosis we are not required to store energy as fat. The body chooses to regulate to stay homeostatic.


Not if one already eats just enough to maintain. Any tiny help is welcome! :smiley: Okay, you meant it’s hard to make a significant deficit like this, right? Indeed, that’s much work, theoretically it’s quite possible but most of us just don’t do that. I never noticed exercise ever helped me with fat-loss myself but some people do. My SO needs his activity to keep his figure, he immediately starts to fatten up if he stops. But he can’t just exercise more to lose fat, diet is always the key but lack of exercise can ruin his progress. So exercise can be useful but it’s too easy to eat the calories back if we are that kind of person… Probably most of us with weight problems (even just in the past) are like that…?
And indeed, the body is good at using little extra energy for some little activity it does all the time, at least I have read that too and it makes perfect sense, the body likes to be effective. People (and calculators) often extremely overestimate the energy need of some activity. If the big numbers would be true, heavy physical workers would need A TON of food and while they do need more, that’s a lot of heavy work and not just doing some exercise that a couch potato considers significant. But it is something. Even my walking is something just very very tiny and my diet matters loads more. But as I can’t eat little, I need every tiny help or else I am doomed. But I exercise for other reasons, there are so many benefits.

And of course, even if I am very sure my exercise raises my CO, I couldn’t have any idea what it is or by how much. I don’t use that non-existing info, just eat right and hope for the best and possibly change my diet if I don’t have success.

I heard about this quite a few times. Some people are like this, some don’t have it. I don’t feel any different if I overeat even if I eat more than twice my normal food. But I don’t get cold if I don’t eat either while some get it even just on IF! It must be an individual trait.

(Bacon is a many-splendoured thing) #50

This is an excellent point. Yes, if you burn 100 kilocalories (food calories) of sugar and 100 kilocalories of meat, they will raise the temperature of the same quantity of water by the same number of degrees. However, the amount of ATP derived will vary greatly, not to mention the hormonal effect on the body.

(Bacon is a many-splendoured thing) #51

Or alternatively, if our body is in weight-gaining mode, it will require us to eat more. The arrow of causality can point in either direction.

This is an excellent way of making the point.

Another important aspect of the foods we consume, of which I am becoming more aware, is the effect of the foods we eat on mitochondrial functioning. If the mitochondria become damaged, that affects not only our energy levels but the health of the organs affected, and in fact the overall health of our body.

(Bacon is a many-splendoured thing) #52

Another complicating factor is detailed in a study I read a year or two ago, and which I failed to bookmark, unfortunately, but the point was that the authors studied caloric intake versus output in a fair number of subjects on an ad libitum diet, and what they found was that, in any given 24-hour period, their food intake and energy expenditure usually did not match very well. They found, however, that over any given seven- or eight-day period, the intake and the expenditure matched “astonishingly precisely” (their words).

(Bob M) #53

@marklifestyle and @PaulL You two might enjoy the book Burn:

In it, he does a lot of experiments with doubly-labeled water, which provides a good relationship with calories burnt. What he (and others) find is that calories are about the same. For everyone. No matter what you do.

The calories burnt per day for Hazda men who go hunting for hours for animal meat versus calories per day for male office workers? The same.

Now, there’s a ton of cognitive dissonance in this book, but it was eye opening for me to see that “calories out” is basically meaningless.

(Robin) #54

Whaaat? Calories out is meaningless?
I don’t understand that…


People never will understand each other about it. I know it matters, at least for many whose weight is very sensitive to their activity… When the eating part is the same.

(Bacon is a many-splendoured thing) #56

I think Bikman puts it best: there is no way to account for all the myriad ways in which the body can expend or store energy, so comparing energy in to energy out is not helpful.

He also contends that since the human body is not a closed system, invoking the first law of thermodynamics is pointless to begin with, since it only applies to closed systems.

(Robin) #57

Anyone who “invokes the first law of thermodynamics” is speaking way above my head.
I’m just gonna take your word for it. :thinking:


Our body definitely can’t make energy from nothing, I trust that :smiley: It’s not particularly helpful regarding fat-loss, of course. (Makes some people’s claim obviously wrong or their worries unnecessary though. Like the ones who think they gained 2 kg fat from basically nothing in 1 day. They must have some weird ideas about how things work.) Some people really can’t tell if their actual eating is right for fat-loss, others can tell they WILL smoothly slim down if they eat in some way. I just try to eat the right items and hope for the best :wink: I pretty much know what I need for fat-loss (I can’t KNOW as I haven’t lost fat since years and one can change during that much time but I am moderately sure…?), I just refuse to be hungry (or feeling not okay in other ways) so it’s all about the right food and timing for me. And if I don’t have success, I still ate the best I could that makes me feel fine.

(Jane) #59

Sweden, huh?

Prior to COVID I used to travel to Gothenburg, Alby, Bohus and Stenungsund.

We ate lunch in the cafeteria and I remember fish and potatoes nearly every day, along with veggie side dishes.

When I first started going there I wasn’t keto so didn’t pay attention to my food choices. After keto it wasn’t difficult - just passed up the bread and potatoes and loaded up on the fish and veggies.


And did it work for you? I feel fish just isn’t substantial enough but I never ate enough fish to test it. I only could test it with chicken and that didn’t work.
Sometimes I wonder WHY I am like this (and many others, the carnivores in the carni thread often find anything but red meat being not as satiating. sometimes even pork doesn’t work. it does for me). Aren’t we supposed to function fine if we get what our body needs and even if someone is lacking, if protein and fat is right, it should satiate us for a day? But it just doesn’t happen to me. It’s not the fat, I eat enough fat and it still not enough if my protein source isn’t right. What have evolution done with me and many others? Doesn’t seem to make sense.

(Sid) #61

Hey Jane,

Sweden indeed, how fun to meet someone on here who’s visited! Hope you liked your stays! :slight_smile:


(Jane) #62

I loved visiting your country and my Swedish colleagues were so nice.

One makes his own whiskey and invited me over on the weekend to taste but then his kid got sick. When he came to the US he brought me 3 mini bottles :grin:

So thoughtful of him to remember!