Indeed. I posted just such an occurrence when I started keto. I ate nothing but protein one day, and my blood glucose went from averaging near 80 all day to around 160.
Certainly it’s not proved with scientific method, but it’s one helluva coincidence. And I rarely trust in coincidences. My way of thinking is once is an accident, twice is a trend. Of course, that’s comes from a background as a aircraft weapons mechanic, but I can’t shake they way I lived for 20 years.
I think @OldDoug is absolutely correct. I’m not a scientist, but I keep thinking of how perfectly ran our bodies are. The Lord created us perfectly and we mess it up now and then with sugars, processed foods etc.
It just makes sense that our bodies would only convert protein to glucose when needed instead of just because there’s extra protein. I mean our Carnivore members would be blowing up in visceral fat if that was the case.
Maybe, or maybe it let’s it go through your urine/feces. Like excess vitamins. I think this is more likely the case, as I said we don’t have Carnivore members getting fat from eating too much protein. I mean if you ate tons extra perhaps, but just because you eat more than typical it doesn’t mean it would become sugar.
Maybe some carnivores members have some insight on their results though.
This has been linked upthread at least once, maybe three times.
A PhD with a lab, and all, doing actual work in the lab, says, sure, insulin rises, but insulin is not the only player that matters, glucagon does too. And the relative rises in insulin and glucagon are context specific. With carbs, INSULIN and glucagon. With keto, insulin and glucagon. In a protein sparing modified fast (fed lean beef), insulin and Glucagon. The difference between feeding protein in a ketogenic body and a fasting body are small, but a bit in favor of protein sparing modified fast… or maybe just straight carnivory.
Your hypocrisy is self-reported, but no more justified than anyone else’s and certainly greater than that of a clinician with hundreds of patients or a research doctor with published or in progress study.
I considered going back and editing it to make me sound a lot less moronic, but then I decided to let it stand. If I’m wrong, I’m wrong and could stand to be corrected.
I was intending to point out that even doctors make assumptions, and call it facts. I.e. Dr Keyes. So don’t blindly follow anyone that says they have the answer. Question them. Keep their feet to the fire. Get proof. We aren’t dealing with trivialities, like which is better PC or Mac, we are dealing with direct health concerns.
I wasn’t trying to make myself sound any better than anyone else, it just happened as I was writing that I had nothing to back it up with, so… thanks?
That might not be as far out there as you might think. I have read some anecdotal accounts of people consuming more protein than what people would have suggested they need and ended up with increasing muscle mass. That usually is a more effective process when accompanied by something like high intensity lifting but I’m not sure if the increase in muscle mass might be at least a potential for “protein storage” for some people.
Just the thought that comes to mind. It’s quite possible I’m a little off in my thinking.
I am not saying anything about the order. I’m saying that the body’s response to protein, like nearly everything else in life, is context specific. If you are in a state of ketosis, the glucagon will match or exceed any insulin from straight protein-fat. If you are on the SAD, having protein with carbs will spike your insulin without a matching glucagon bump. There’s nothing to do with fat here at all.
However, speaking for myself, I’m about as sedentary as I could be with out being bed ridden. So I doubt any excess protein I eat will go to build muscle. It’s my understanding that you need to tear muscle down to build muscle. Hence, no pain no gain. But I admit my understanding of building muscle is at best, novice.
In the context of the video, we are talking about feeding a portion of beef to folks who are fasted. I haven’t asked Prof Bikman about whether the fasted folks were keto, and how long, or what the portion was.
Well, I do crawl through dungeons, and join in on raids of the bad guys keeps nearly everyday. I guess that keeps some muscle tone, right?
(In an early episode of Big Bang Theory, Leonard tells Penny he once Did a “10 mile hike with a hundred pound pack, through the Redridge Mountains.” That’s near Lakeshire by the way. In case you didn’t know).
[it might have been Stargate Universe come to think of it. My excuse is memory fuzz due to high BG levels at the time]
(So much bacon . . . so little time . . .)
Even though protein has an effect on insulin secretion, it is essential to the human diet. First, because there are nine “essential” amino acids that the body needs but cannot manufacture for itself, and second, because there is always a certain minimum amount of proteolysis that needs to be counteracted by ingesting protein. So since we have to have protein, there’s no point in worrying about that insulin effect, especially since it is only half the effect that carbohydrate has on insulin secretion.
As I pointed out in my earlier post, protein in excess of this minimum requirement is used to rebuild and heal muscles and other organs, for gluconeogenesis, and can also be metabolized for energy, although this process is not as efficient as metabolizing fatty acids, ketone bodies, or glucose. (In fact, this very inefficiency appears to be one of the many ways in which the body increases the metabolic rate to compensate for extra caloric intake.)
Dr. Bikman’s point in his lectures on protein, glucagon, and insulin is that as we age, it becomes more difficult for our bodies to assimilate protein, and we need to be sure to get enough. His point about the glucagon/insulin ratio is to assure us that we need not fear “excess” protein (in a low-carb context, of course), that the level that constitutes “excess” is actually far greater than we have been telling ourselves. Since he is a researcher studying the effects of protein on the human body, I don’t dismiss his points out of hand, especially since what he says makes sense in light of what we already know with a fair degree of certainty.
It seems to me from Gary Taubes’s lectures on the subject that we lost a great deal of nutritional science because of World War II. It seems that in so many ways we are still working back to the level of understanding that the German endocrinologists had reached before the war. Moreover, from comments by Dr. Fettke in a recent Dudes podcast, it appears more and more that the Seventh-Day Adventist Church has been influencing the science (in the U.S. and Australia, at least) to match its religious agenda, for well over a century. Apparently, the Seventh-Day Adventists in Australia have pretty much admitted that fact.
Energy Substrate Competition is still in the same order no matter if sugar burner or fat adapted, based on your ability to store them safely:
(exogenous ketones) I think here, now, at the top. Correct me if I’m wrong. Must be burned first if present. Since naturally they’re a product of FFA metabolism, there’s no place to store them, is there?
Alcohol, nil. Must be metabolized immediately, acts as poison.
Sugars, -> blood sugar, small, normal physio range, or interstitial in T2DM. Also somewhat in adipose tissue.
Amino acids, the labile pool. Muscle Protein Synthesis?