Keto to carnivore and back to keto


(Lynne Kersh) #21

Well all I can do is try! I’ve been researching, assiduously following all sorts of advice, really sticking to and trying whatever suggestions I was going with and here I am 11 months later, feeling despondent but still willing to try something which sort of sounds like it makes sense (no offence meant Septimus!).

I just keep my mind of that wonderful feeling when I started Keto last Spring and I lost a little weight every week, 12 lbs in total and looked great (in my eyes anyway!), my clothes were swimming on me, I felt empowered and confident which was reflected in the way I walked and held myself and I didn’t shy away from looking at myself in the mirror!! !:joy:!:joy:

I want that back and only want to lose 14 lbs for this summer.

Can’t be that impossible as other folk are losing oceans of fat!!


#22

Oh but we aren’t other folk :slight_smile: I almost never lost any weight on keto… Only a very little and it came back anyway. But I know the reason, I eat way too much. Our numbers are very similar except I am younger and eat WAY more than you do. I can’t always just stop at 2000 kcal, it’s so little food, a decent but not big meal to me… But good timing and food choices help. If I just can stick to them but I trained and changed enough so I think 2022 will be my year!

Yeah, sometimes it’s not easy at all. But don’t look at other people. You aren’t them. We must find our own individual way and our individual hindrances.


#23

It should be pretty simple to lose the weight if you are already in ketosis. Any calories you do not eat should come from body fat. However, for practicality it would be best to eat the same things every day that way you know the amounts you eat each day are the same.

As soon as the weight stops dropping (assuming there is still excess bodyfat) just start eating less calories and your body will use up the bodyfat stores to make up the difference. Just try to keep the same amount of protein to fat ratio whilst reducing calories and you should be fine.

So long as you do not eat in such a way that nutritional deficiencies develop, the weight will keep dropping until bodyfat percentages drops to very low levels (sub 5% will result in death). But most people feel and look best well above this level. 15%-20% bf is ideal for a woman. Once at your required condition, just keep eating the same amount and you should stay the same weight.

Just know that to keep at the same weight long term and not yo-yo it needs to be a long-term commitment even after reaching your goal.


(Robin) #24

If you only have 14 pounds to lose, you’ll lose slower than those with much to lose.


(Bacon is better) #25

Or alternatively, our body may decide there’s a famine going on, and it should hold on to all its resources. The lowering of the metabolic rate alone makes it difficult to eat less and shed fat. Dr. Phinney has data to show that a well-formulated ketogenic diet eaten to satiety causes the metabolism to speed up, and the amount of fat metabolised is actually greater than on an equal-calorie carbohydrate diet.


#26

I try to do that since a decade myself and find it impossibly hard… Simple but borderline impossibly hard.
It’s not THAT simple for all anyway, it is for me personally, though, as far as I know.

But when one lowers their calorie intake, I consider it (at least often) a pretty bad idea to keep the fat:protein ratio. We don’t need less protein just because we eat less calories… I would think eating more protein may be very useful but LESS? Nope. Just when one eats plenty of it to begin with and the ratio stays similar automatically due to food choices or something.
As I tend to have a similar ratio myself (especially in the past when all my preferred food had the same ratio) but I eat twice as much protein as I need on my normal days so I can afford going lower on my rare low-cal ones (and my ratio still changes a bit. ratio doesn’t matter so I don’t care about it at all, I care about calories and protein, my fat intake can do whatever it wants as long as I don’t overeat it. sometimes my ratio is 1:2, sometimes it’s 2:1 and sometimes it’s even more extreme but all may work, it depends on the actual grams).


#27

Which is true, but then you just need to consume even less calories. There is a limit to how efficient the body can become, it’s physically impossible to make something out of nothing. If you start regaining weight when you are eating the same amount of food, your body has just become more efficient and just requires less calories for maintenance. Which is all good it means insulin sensitivity and cheaper on the wallet!


#28

You make a good point. There is certainly a minimum requirement for protein to sustain lean mass for each individual.

Morton et al. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4558471/, who concluded that 0.4 g/kg/meal would optimally stimulate muscle protein synthesis. This was based on the addition of two standard deviations to their finding that 0.25 g/kg/meal maximally stimulates muscle protein synthesis.

Edit: This study was on individuals who are resistance training and implies that OP who is sedentary could require less.

If this study holds any truth, then any protein in excess of 0.25-0.4g/kg of lean body mass could just be extra calories. It would be better to reduce extra protein rather than extra fat for the same amount of calories as fat metabolism is far cleaner.

However, lean mass shouldn’t change that much when losing weight whilst in ketosis. Almost all of it should be bodyfat. So you are correct in that for optimum health protein should not be reduced below the minimum requirement (whatever that would be).

Whilst there is no upper limit to how much protein we can eat in ketosis, over a certain amount is futile as you gain nothing but empty calories and overwork the kidneys. It can be a tool to lose weight in the short term for sure, but the method I outlined in my post was not a yo-yo approach but could be done by someone who wants to be in ketosis for the foreseeable future and a ‘‘set it and forget it’’ macros for simplicity.


(Bacon is better) #29

There’s a limit here, because as we keep reducing calories, the body keeps reducing the metabolic rate, requiring a further reduction in caloric intake, which results in a further lowering of the metabolic rate, and so forth. Various studies have shown that this is the reason weight loss is never as great as the supposed calorie deficit would have us expect. Rather than intentionally restrict calories, it’s better to eat to satiety and let the appetite hormones regulate our intake. Kevin Hall’s follow-up study of Biggest Loser contestants showed that, even several years on, their extreme calorie reduction had resulted in an apparently permant 500-calorie decrease in their metabolic rate.

The government’s minimum daily recommendation is 0.8 g of protein per kg of lean body mass. This is because the definitive study measured an average daily nitrogen loss equivalent to 0.6 g of protein/kg of LBM. Though if you look at the data plot, participants’ nitrogen loss was all over the place, so some people can get away with less protein, while others need more.

Our recommendation for a ketogenic diet is 20 g/day max of carbohydrate, 1.0-1.5 g protein/kg of lean body mass/day, and enough fat to reach satiety. Some experts recommend going as high as 2.0 g/kg, especially if one is trying to add muscle mass.

I don’t know why you are counting protein as metabolic fuel. There is a high cost of metabolising amino acids, because they have to be deaminated, then converted to either glucose or a fatty acid (depending on whether they belong to the glucogenic or the lipogenic type), and then metabolised. Glucose and fatty acids both yield far more net ATP per gram than protein does, because of the extra energy cost of proteolysis. Excess amino acids beyond the capacity of the labile pool cannot be stored, and must therefore be disposed of.

This is true if (a) protein intake is sufficient to replenish proteins lost to autophagy and amino acids lost to deamination (the body needs the nitrogen elsewhere, and the liver needs substrate for gluconeogenesis), and (b) so long as there is abundant caloric intake, to encourage the body to part with its excess fat. In famine/starvation mode, the body actually hangs on to its fat store until quite late in the process, and will metabolise protein for a while before starting in on the fat. If you look at photographs of the survivors of the Nazi concentration camps, you can tell that they were in the late stages of starving to death, because they had lost most of their body fat. By contrast, many forum members have reported that their fat loss did not commence until they increased their caloric intake sufficiently. By comparison with starvation, this is a much more comfortable way to lose fat.

Actually, at some point, ammonia toxicity becomes a problem. I believe Richard Morris calculated that protein intake of 3.1 g/kg is the point where the uric acid cycle starts to get overwhelmed. If people tell you that you smell of ammonia, then you have exceeded the capacity of your uric acid cycle and should reduce protein intake.


#30

I am absolutely boggled at the idea that someone would come into a thread where the OP is eating 1100 calories and tells them to eat fewer calories.

This is dangerous advice in the context of this person’s statistics.


(Allie) #31

Agreed, absolutely ridiculous thing to say.


#32

What happens to ammonia in the body when you eat protein?

Your liver, when healthy, will rapidly convert ammonia to urea, a nontoxic byproduct. The conversion to urea also takes place in part in the kidneys. Protein, and the amino acids that comprise it, is the primary source of nitrogen for your body. Ammonia is produced during the breakdown of amino acids and other molecules in your body that contain nitrogen.

NEVER fear protein intake. It is life. Simple as that.
NOW anyone with massive health issues that concern liver and/or kidney functions on their health and more and on meds, --diff. angle here…but geez…the rampant useless scare info out on this planet is most scary when others repeat nonsense.

and eat less…omg


#33

I disagree, 5’3 and 167lbs. And they want to lose another stone to be their ideal weight after having not lost a pound since starting keto. It’s time to lower calories. I’m a fairly muscular guy at 5’10 and I only weight 5 more pounds. Their weight has been stable for the past 6 months and they have some bodyfat to tap into, that’s an indicator that they are not malnourished or wasting away and no mention of any health issues due to deficiencies in the past 6 months. 1100 calories a day could be a low estimate or it could be true, either way they are stable at the current weight. Not sure how that would equal dangerous advice?


(Bacon is better) #34

There are two requirements for shedding excess fat: a low serum insulin, and a caloric intake sufficient to convince the body it’s safe to dispose of resources. There are plenty of posts on these forums discussing this matter, if you would care to search. “Not losing weight” would be a good search term.

Eleven hundred calories is below starvation level. Your body is not going to want to part with excess fat, even if you have lowered your insulin by eating a low-carb/ketogenic diet. There are quite a few posts on this site about how people tried to restrict calories but found their fat loss didn’t start until they started eating more.


#35

Nope, I need 1.5 at least but you wrote about muscles. We need protein for zillion other stuff as well… And not everyone has many meals a day. To me, only OMAD works well enough, hence my 1.5-2g/kg/meal protein. I can’t go lower as it won’t end well. It’s perfect. I can mess up various things but my protein intake is usually not one of them.

Burden, yep, if we go too high. Most of us can’t even do that.
High-protein isn’t just a tool to fat-loss, it’s a tool to feel satiated and avoid overeating for me and clearly for many others. Most fat satiates many of us poorly. We need protein. Or we just dislike eating pure fat. I have both but mostly the satiation thing, I can eat fatty, that’s how I can MASSIVELY overeat fat and consume 1.5-2 times my energy need. With more protein (and doing everything else right) it doesn’t happen. 0.4g/kg/meal protein would lead to inevitable overeating and starving at the same time (I would eat 1.5-4g/kg protein for that day as always but I wouldn’t feel so great. Or… Can I eat a meal every 30 minutes? No big problem then but it’s more convenient to eat my protein in 30 mins and not 2 hours). Nope, never. I am fine with wasteful protein intake, it’s not like I can help it and it’s the best I can do, it’s quite fine.

I talked about me as I have extensive experience with myself but I know many other people need WAY more protein per meal. Do you really think that a tiny piece of meat or a few eggs is a good meal for many of us? It isn’t.

And starving is bad, I don’t even want to go there. 1100 kcal is starving for the vast majority of people.


#36

Someone restrain me, oh that has to be me :crazy_face:
off thread but good luck everyone here!!


#37

We’re not talking about the majority, I was replying to OP. Her weight is stable at 1100 kcal (if that measurement is even accurate). If she were truly starving and in ketosis then the bodyfat would be dropping and she wouldn’t be asking for advice to lose weight. Telling her to eat the same or more is not going to achieve anything positive.


#38

Please can you post some studies which back up your stance, which show:

  • Female participants
  • Who are close to goal (within 14lbs)
  • Who consume fewer than 1100 calories
  • Who lose fat
  • And maintain that fat loss over a significant period of time

If you can’t provide the science to back up your position, please stop posting such assertions.


(Robin) #39

Oh Lordy, I would be in trouble if I couldn’t give an opinion based on my own experience and others forum members experiences.


#40

Do you genuinely think eating fewer than 1100 calories is reasonable?

We are not discussing the merits of some calorie restriction, starting at 2000 or 1800 or 1600 - but 1100, which is insanely low.

I really think we are treading into unsafe territory if we are advocating for fewer than 1100 calories.

I have checked and I cannot find any science which backs up this assertion for the levels that we are discussing. Very low calorie may be ok in the short term for those with hundreds of lbs to lose, but not 14lbs.

I’m fine with n=1 to a degree, but again, are there lots of posts here to back up this sort of statement? Is this poster speaking from experience of eating sub 1100 calories?

It’s not often that I disagree so vehemently but I think this is dangerous advice with no substantiation.