The person in that chart only eats 90 grams of protein per day. I eat more than that, sometimes double that, for LUNCH. I also eat way, way more calories than that.
It’s really an innacurate depiction for me of what happens in my own life.
Pro Tips from Ted Naiman MD and Virta Health
ctviggen
(Bob M)
#49
No, but this reliance on “macros” and treating everyone the same is idiotic. I have been low carb/keto since 1/1/14 and have never counted a macro. Ever. I just eat real food.
I hope to fast 36 hours this week on Monday. I will workout Tuesday morning, then have blunch as late in the day as possible. I’ll eat at least 12 ounces of london broil, top round:
https://www.menshealth.com/nutrition/a19527784/london-broil-nutrition-facts/
That’s 712 calories, 120 grams of protein.
I’ll eat at least 4 ounces of beef liver:
That’s 216 calories, 33 grams protein.
A total of about 928 calories, 153 grams of protein. For lunch.
So, when I see the chart above, I know it’s completely wrong. It’s wrong. It’s never been correct. At least for me.
Janie
(Jane)
#50
Fair enough. I’m not going to criticize a group that is using keto to treat their patients and collecting data nobody else is on effects of the ketogenic diet.
I’ve been keto 18 months and never tracked macros either. But I will say the intent of the graph worked for me. In other words I started out eating a lot more fat to keep from being hungry in between meals and be tempted to snack. As I became more fat-adapted and my hunger dropped I also cut back on the plate fat.
I was putting butter in my coffee 3 times a day - now only once in the morning.
The amount of protein I eat now compared to when I started is about the same and I also eat more carbs on maintenance than when I was trying to burn body fat so those parts of the graph are also accurate for me.
The numbers are meaningless and are used as an example to display the graph but the intention makes sense to me.
Question @ctviggen - has the amount of protein you eat changed much from when you started keto? What about the amount of fat and carbs? I know you said you never tracked macros but you should have a good idea of what you eat today vs when you stated keto since you’ve been at this so long.
PaulL
(You've tried everything else; why not try bacon?)
#53
I had a very powerful experience soon after going full-bore keto (I had started by eliminating sugar and didn’t progress to limiting all carbohydrate until some time later), in which my leptin signaling suddenly reasserted itself. Two years later, I find myself skipping breakfast and not eating until mid-afternoon most days, though there are days in which I feel the need for more food, especially fat.
I definitely eat a lot more protein now than I did before changing my diet, because there were many days when I ate (and ate and ate and ate and ate) only carbohydrate. The difference now is that I stop being hungry, and when I stop being hungry I stop eating. No more eating until my stomach feels that it would burst if I ate even “wan waffer-theen meent.” I start gagging long before reaching that point.
Another difference now is that on the days that I eat more, my weight doesn’t change. I have been cycling within the same 10-pound range for the past 18 months. Sure, I’d be happy to lose another 60 pounds, and I’d love it if the sugar cravings went away, but on the whole, I’ll take what I’ve got, thank you very much.
CaptainKirk
(Kirk Wolak)
#54
Regina,
Do what you feel works for you… But before you go, read the post I did on the Levers of Weight Loss.
My view is that we all have different levers that work to different degrees. And it is a LOT like flying an airplane. You have to find the right combination of levers that works for you, and the ones that make it bearable. I still eat bacon because I LOVE bacon. (Cooking up 3lbs right now), but I know I should cut back on it.
The constant cravings for sugars are USUALLY a side effect from using Artificial Sweeteners (keeps addictions alive), and/or allergens (all of those seed flowers), as opposed to finding a path that works for you… Trying to hold on to the things you used to love eating… Anyways, throw comments on that Levers article as you see fit, I am hoping you find the path that works for you!
The Levers of Power (What to Measure, What to Control) to avoid stalling/stalls
SlowBurnMary
#55
More thoughts…
The sheer wall of environmental & social stress facing many of us face - in cities and a frenetic industrial culture often disconnected from the natural world and its rhythms - seems to be mitigated to some degree by nutrient density in the right amount that allows for a healthy waistline and waist-to-height ratio. This is quite apart from physical weight - as apparently midlife and older folks do better stress-wise to maintain a non-obese but nonetheless substantial healthy mass weight (even when officially overweight, if biomarkers have improved and continue to do so). Apparently the body of even elders ca restores muscle mass and bone density through dietary formulation and/or strength training.
Our brains - as conductors of all this - thrive on MCTs, and I’ve advised myself to eat a tablespoon of coconut oil per day along with other fats in foods - and likewise use ghee for cooking when I can make it and have it on hand. But I’m less-casually slinging fat into smoothies or slathering my cooked meals in it, even when I have an OMAD day. As a 100% fat-adapted gal, am no longer having sides of sour cream or mayo for fun, etc. Finding the joy in slightly smaller portions (French style) is a new thing for me, that I feel happy to do, as culturally I can’t help but clean my plate. I avoid restaurants, but if in one, due to their typically huge servings, I will often reserve half my main dish to-go before I start - unless it’s a CELEBRATION in which case I feast LCHF with abandon. Key is to limit those celebrations to once a week or so - though the SAD tells us every day is a good day to supersize, lolol/sob.
Being that I’m particularly interested midlife female metabolic healing and recompostion, it’s apparent from many if not most midlife female LCHF/keto voices I’ve heard around here and elsewhere that 100% fat-adapted satiated not stagnated “undereating” calorically as a group norm may be a natural process due to slower metabolism and increased hormonal health - and a process that is helpful for continued fat recomp post-menopause. The many benefits for midlife females of naturally lowered but nutrient-dense energy intake and keeping protein on the low side with TMAD and/or fasting (as admin Brenda has done with remarkable evidence of no muscle loss) have yet to be thoroughly studied ofc. We’re not being told that if we’re sedentary, satiated well-formulated intake somewhere between 900-1200 is perfectly fine - but it really puts into play the ‘eat to satiety’ adage. I think the Westman/Phinney/Volek and Gittleman encouragement towards a base foundation that blesses leafy greens/salads/fruit is music to the ears of many a midlife woman who instinctively desires the antioxidants and alkalinization in the lowered metabolic state. And until controlled studies exist on this category of human, we are finding our own way, together.
In some other reading today I was reminded of the link between satiated undereating (via daily low protein and regular fasting) and longevity, as opposed to disease and earlier death associated with constant feasting/nutrient density for those midlife and older.
It’s pretty amazing how LCHF/keto satiation - for the fat-adapted and hormonally healed - lends itself to natural energy intake reduction, and being informed about it can make this path more fun and less worrisome. Seems to me that the older we are, the more frequently we can enjoy reduced energy intake and its recomp leveraging, in between times of feasting. As far as protein needs and levels go - for sedentary midlife folks who aren’t doing much weight-bearing physical work (going up and down a flight of stairs throughout the day is an excellent weight-bearing activity, it needn’t involve dumbells necessarily) it seems we are well equipped to reduce protein to minimal levels when not fasting. The less protein, the less acidic we are - which preserves bone density, especially in females.
SlowBurnMary
#56
Re menopausal/post-menopausal females and what is acceptable “less protein” when not fasting and when not doing extended intensive strength training… Something like 70g or much less apparently (admin Brenda has experienced no muscle mass loss at an average of around 45g per eating day combining w/ frequent fasting) - assuming one has sufficiently restored one’s health if one was chronically protein-deficient in previous decades. It could be that we are more efficient with the protein, due to the body’s conservation of… practically everything! In a 100% fat-adapted midlife female, satiation and easy fasting are indicators of that.
Midlife females who aren’t menstruating (as well as not-lactating) conserve a significant amount of energy/cals and minerals for starters. For this reason, we have a tendency towards excess or stubborn fat with even LCHF/keto nutrient density. Then there’s the fascinating female corpus callosum, which optimizes brain connectivity and BDNF when eating sufficient fat apart from water fasting (sufficient meaning prob more like 2-4 tblsp per day depending on how many meals - and not mindlessly gorging/slathering the equivalent of 10 tblsp fat just because one can).
All of this is mediated and optimized by stress coping skills of course, and the adaptogens that we consume and/or create, including the extent of additionally satiating oxytocin and Nitric Oxide in our physiologies (whether through meditation, sexual intimacy, laughter, singing and/or keeping up with longtime nurturing friendships) - which are so good for health when ones spirit is nourished! 
There are no quick fixes, but finding one’s way to sustainable health is a privilege and a tasty joy.
Tulip
(Patricia)
#57
I am pretty much confused now . First, I am probably one of the older people on this board at 67, and I am female. I have spent decades abusing my body with one diet or another and would be diabetic now if it weren’t for keto, so I am metabolically challenged. I started keto a little over 3 years ago and slowly lost about 55 pounds, but I feel I am still 20-30 pounds away from my goal. I have tried fasting, and it is really hard for me - even skipping lunch one day made me ravenously hungry at dinner, and I ate way too much. I have found that just watching macros is not enough for me to continue to lose weight, so I also count calories and try to stay under 1300 calories a day. However, I am frequently hungry doing this. I have also switched from counting net carbs to counting total carbs, and I still have plateaus for months at a time.
I have a lot of sagging skin now (that should be incentive for you youngsters to lose the weight now!), but I also have a large midsection, so I know that is not healthy and means I have to lose more.
So what now? More fat, less fat, a few more carbs, less protein, more protein? I am at a loss at how to proceed.
SlowBurnMary
#58
It would be ideal for you to work closely with a LCHF/keto medical case manager. There are various lab tests that can explain where your metabolic tendencies are at these days, and it can be so encouraging to work with a functional medicine MD and a peer support program like what Virta Health and Dr. Fung’s IDM provide.
Yes, after decades of abusing/malnourished the body there can be a lot of havoc - but the fact that you lost 55 pounds slowly would indicate that you are a champion!
The being 20-30 pounds away from one’s “goal” in the midlife and post-midlife years is a common refrain. The body’s set point of mass is real - and especially dug in if the body had decades of SAD dieting - and the only thing that seems to disrupt that is fasting from what I’ve read around here. Otherwise, Phinney/Volek/Westman in the New Atkins New You book (if you’ve not read, check it out! Along with Dr. Fung’s books and website) do encourage folks to accept that their midlife+ body may have a new set point and much slower change, and one that is healthy from the inside out for enjoying life!!!
If you’re frequently hungry, it’s def a sign that you’re recalibrated - and from what I’ve read, from age 65 on higher protein is needed, and along with the protein, a bit more fat? But if you can master small fasts (and appropriate refeeding feasts) it could be the special sauce you need.
There needs to be more LCHF/keto books just for midlife and beyond. I know the Drs Eades wrote “Losing the Midlife Middle” which involves a smoothies twice a day plus one meal - to lighten the digestive load, along with a number of nutritional supplements to boost recomp.
SlowBurnMary
#59
Also - since you’re post-post menopausal, you might do well with both INCREASING your LCHF energy intake along with carbs to pre-maintenance level, and also work with times of fasting. As Megan Ramos says, “change it up and keep the body guessing”.
Longer water fasts of 3 days help with loose skin recomposition via autophagy - and a few years hence you might well find yourself with another new body!
Keto6468
(Karen)
#60
You know I wonder on the need for higher protein as we age. Is it because we’re not absorbing enough protein. Is it because our guts are leaky and the amount of protein we used to eat is no longer getting to where it needs to be. Dr. Gundry had some thoughts on this.
Tulip
(Patricia)
#61
I have definitely been getting the fasting vibe, so I will have to try that. As far as my goal weight, I wouldn’t be that concerned if it weren’t for the still large mid-section. My waist circumference is not what it should be, and clothes don’t fit well when one is round in the middle.
Tulip
(Patricia)
#62
I have also read that seniors need more protein in order to preserve muscle mass, but I want to be careful not to eat too much protein that would then produce glucose. What’s an old gal to do? 
amwassil
(Michael - When reality fails to meet expectations, the problem is not reality.)
#63
@Tulip Gluconeogenesis is demand driven, not supply driven. Your liver can make glucose out of fat just as happily as from protein. So don’t worry about it.
KetoKnitterNZ
(Michele)
#64
Such an awesome read. Long but worth reading and should be compulsory for anyone committed to good health. Like many things keto is a tool on a path. Make sure you understand the tool and use it as it could be used to maximise the best outcome.
Janie
(Jane)
#65
I can attest to that!
Measured my blood glucose when water fasting only and have seen it go up 50 units with no intake of glucose so my liver made it from my fat.
RightNOW
(PJ)
#66
So don’t eat fat calories just to eat it
But don’t eat too few calories or you screw up your RMR
But just eat to satiation
Except if satiation is too few calories
This is a catch-22 cycle that must be brain-crunching especially for new people.
The underlying question I think most people would have, after wading through the minutae, is: “For me, what is my RMR, and once I have that approximate magical number, how many calories UNDER that can I eat, without reducing my RMR – yet still lose at least some fat?”
(For simplicity we will assume that the Cosmic Nexus of Menopause is within the Great RMR Mystery.)
(An aside: This idea that people should just eat intuitively is hilarious. I’m sure it probably works for some normal people. Lots of people who come to keto eating do it because they are not normal and often haven’t been for eons – their appetite, as well as their metabolism, is totally deranged. There needs to be some better guideline than “satiety” for people who either are almost never satiated until they’re so overstuffed they’re vomiting, or who have so little appetite that satiation at 600 calories every few days seems ok.)
So, protein. One guy says 120g protein is a fair middling amount for a normal person. Also says you should eat 70% fat. 120*4=480 calories. Since even spices and garlic and such have carbs, we’ll allot 5% carbs. That leaves 70% exactly. If 120g is 25% protein then the diet has 1920 calories a day, of which 1344 are for fats. 1,344 calories is ~150 grams fat (rounding). That is A LOT OF fat. Now maybe everyone else chews on gigantic strips of fat surrounding every piece of meat they have, or eats 20 strips of bacon a day, but holy crap, I love fats but getting that many down my throat regularly is a massive PITA. So far I only manage it with garlic cheese spread, and while I’m on that topic, if it wasn’t for cheese my ‘high fat’ diet would be completely screwed.
But if I weren’t “intentionally and deliberately” eating more fat, in order that I would have enough calories, I would be undereating. At least, we assume, since I still weigh 380 and while much lighter than I began, that’s still more than my refrigerator. And it was great to lose weight while eating minimal calories and decent protein, except I’m pretty sure I lost more hair than fat, and I’d frakkin like it back again.
And what is under eating, anyway. I know people living on 1200 calories a day and keto and they cannot seem to lose weight. Is that because they under-ate for all that time and now there is “nowhere lower to go.” Ah, ok, so keep the calories up to a decent number because as noted above, the body can only pull so much from your own fat at once, so exogenous fat makes up the difference. Great. What difference is that, precisely? 50 calories? 1000 calories? Does someone have any kind of number? I mean sure we’d have to have an RMR to begin with but say we do (I ‘kind of’ do). How much under that can one eat without causing problem adaptations in the metabolic rate?
Or maybe it’s just not about calories. Maybe it’s always about nutrients and if we lived on mostly ruminants and a randomly unpredictable assortment of additions – some of which are slightly carby, just not insanely so and always brief – maybe that’s the ticket.
Perhaps it should be some consolation that as black-box-mystery as women in menopause seem to be (I’m 54 in Sep and clearly in the early stages of it), apparently ‘metabolism’ is nearly as mysterious for the world at large.
SlowBurnMary
#67
LOVE that.
Yes, and it’s a whole extra mystery too lolol.
I agree that there’s a catch 22 element to the intake/satiation/nutritional reqs thing. Fortunately new people needn’t worry about such nuances though, they can, and should, just eat fat and keto foods ad libitum.
It’s the fat-adapted oldies that this catch 22 really takes over the edge, lol. Especially for the obese - when 100% fat-adapted and the body is eating your own fat, you’re not actually undereating!
Another aspect to the topic is “what is a high fat body?” If you ask most menopausal gals who are staring at/holding their two extra handfulls of insta-belly fat, we might feel like we qualify for a high fat body - even those of us whose waist measurements and waist-to-height ratios are not technically overweight or obese. A degree of extra subcutaneous fat is not unhealthy for midlife folks - and some studies even proclaim that more subcutaneous fat at ages 50+ is a sign of health! 
I’m arriving more and more to an opinion that midife females once officially menopausal aren’t likely to speed recomp without strength training and/or fasting… and that - for the non-obese/non-IR at least - recomp can naturally speed up a couple of years post-menopause anyway once the hormonal havoc settles…
SlowBurnMary
#68
The mid-section takes time, many seasons. The science behind it is that we don’t burn subcutaneous belly fat directly. First the fat in the fat cells is swapped out with water and re-purposed - moved to replace the visceral fat that we do burn. This means that after initial belly shrinkage on keto, the measurements may actually go up before they go down again. I’ve been pondering this lately… The belly is the last to go, and it doesn’t have much to do with weight - it’s about recomposition.