Very slow results / confusion

(Bob M) #21

Pork, unless there’s a religious restriction.

Personally, I’m anti-high-fat, so would only eat what Marianne suggested periodically. Every time I’ve tried a high fat diet, I never got satiety. I had to switch to high protein, lower fat. I still eat fat sometimes, just nowhere near what most “macros” recommend.

I also think the highest quality of meat, in terms of nutrition and fewer PUFAs, is meat from ruminants. Primarily beef, but lamb or even goat if you can find it. I’ve switched to eating a lot of beef.

#22

What I find really interesting is that everyone has a different take on this.

Ken Berry and Amber O’Hearn talk about a ratio where fat is far higher than protein - in Ken’s case, he talks about this a lot for people seeking fat loss; he openly states that his mentees have better results losing fat if they eat more fat.

On the opposite side of the coin, Ted Naiman and Maria & Craig Emmerich seem to suggest that protein should be higher in the ratio, and PSMF-esque days are the key to losing more fat.

I find it really interesting that different people advocate for different approaches, and have all seen success with their clients - and it makes it really tough to decide which approach to follow.

n=1 all the time, it seems.

#23

yea for us it is eat as your body directs, which is not hard to do on our plan in that we are wanting very high fat days or sometimes we learn towards less and sometimes we just have that fall in between but when one is ‘keto plan’ or ‘general low carb’ or ‘paleo’ or whatever ya call it, one can’t truly ‘feel those feelings’ as tightly as we can on our plan, now that is just my opinion on it cause I did walk ALL plans down to me now, but on my plan I now ‘feel’ as the body wants to eat and I know my fat intake as from which my body directs.

I think it is very N1 on what plan one is one and what one is eating and all that stuff per the individual for sure.

(Robin) #24

Actually, my whole life is n=1.
So far, so good.

(Bacon is a many-splendoured thing) #25

The study that was used to define the recommended daily allowance of protein (0.8 g per kg of lean mass a day) showed that people’s nitrogen loss was quite variable from individual to individual. It worked out to an average amount equivalent to 0.6 g day of protein per kg of lean mass. The RDA was set at a slightly higher level, so that most people would get enough protein. So one has to start with the recommendations for what is enough protein and work from there. If you are protein deficient, you are going to be hungry, no matter how much energy (fat) you eat. If you are getting enough protein, then you will find yourself no longer being hungry after eating a certain amount of fat.

But everyone needs a certain amount of energy, and on a ketogenic diet, that energy is supplied by fat. We also all need a certain amount of protein, but the protein, under normal circumstances provides no energy to the body; it is instead used to build or maintain lean mass, especially muscle and bone. The fact that protein is included in calorie intake totals is a holdover from the days, over a century ago, when calories were all we knew how to measure. The fact that we still use the terms “protein” and “carbohydrate” instead of “amino acids” and “glucose” is yet another holdover from those days.

I believe it is time to get away from calories altogether. If we are still going to measure energy intake, then it should be in terms of the ATP generated, since that is the essential consideration. So amino acids (protein macro) under normal circumstances yield 0 ATP molecules, glucose (carbohydrate macro) yields so much per gram (don’t remember the figures; too lazy to look it up), and fatty acids (fat macro) yield a slightly larger number of molecules of ATP per gram, depending on which fats we are talking about.

If we were to look at matters from this perspective, I suspect it would change our thinking considerably.

(Robin) #26

Hmmm… good point. I tend to ask folks if they are getting enough calories. I should ask if they are getting enough food/fuel.

#27

quoting carnivore plan eaters in general and how they are advocating it is OFF all plants and TIME on this plan and changes that come into play doing just that. This is not a ‘chat about’ anyone being ketogenic if you know what I mean…20g carbs in plants per day will never equal what info is recommended out there by carnivore plan veterans.

So there can be some crossover that can get very confusing in a way and how this chat is being applied to other plans and food intake…so…just thoughts on it. Chat about fat and protein intake and more from Dr K and from Amber is all about eating a zc menu and is based on that, you add back in plants and ‘other stuff’ it isn’t the same game and won’t ever be.

#28

Yeah, that’s a good point. Amber’s definitely carnivore, although I think Ken was talking more generally about people on any of his recommended ways of eating (keto, ketovore, carnivore).

Interesting to think about Ted / Maria / Craig - I wonder if their more keto-than-carnivore approach is having an impact.

Or if it is just n=1.

#29

one on carnivore is never one on ANY other plant related crap SO key being Dr Ken says he must be carnivore while his wife can 'jump that plant intake line carefully and does extremely well and I get that.

but IF carnivore vets like Amber are quoted, she is full on carnivore and info pretains to that lifestyle and I agree, Dr Ken was kinda go ‘into carnivore’ and very lc like a keto plan is fab and more and he walks the ‘fence on his chats’ but he actually is all in zc himself.

fine lines, I get that definitely…but carnivore is never ‘the other’ and won’t ever be but those damn fine lines on what some educated eating this lifestyle and on this plan poster brings to the table.

US carnivores get it :wink:, others will never on it all from my standpoint cause once here, ya see the huge differences that others don’t get but hey. again, fine lines of it all for each of us!

#30

Oh yeah, 100% - he’s full blown carnivore and very positive about it.

What I meant was that when he’s asked about fat loss - usually in the form of a stall - whether the person is eating keto or carnivore, he always says to increase fat.

So if we ignore carnivore for a second (I know, I know :joy:) and focus on keto, you’ve got Ken and Neisha advocating for higher fat for fat loss, whilst you’ve got Ted/Maria/Craig advocating for higher protein for fat loss.

I just find it interesting that there are two distinct groups arguing in different directions.

(Allie) #31

Mine too.

#32

oh yea eat more fat is always good, I get that LOL

I also know that almost all people with their personal TIME on plan and coming into this should never tweak plans to ‘ratio’ stuff being read out there and ‘newer’ zc people SHOULD never ‘do this how much fat and lean protein’ ratio stuff…this is for more seasoned zc people.

when we transition we EAT ALL WE need at all times. big fat, lower fat, whatever between seafood/meat/ fish and fowl and we NEVER EVER control coming into this way of lifestyle cause that is the healing…the healing and body repair directs us on what to eat so IF we monkey’ before we ever have time to change us on ;just eat as we see fit’ then we are not going to handle the change well.

So new people…eat any animal and all you love and want and need…and then IF YOU GOT A YEAR OR MORE UNDER YOUR BELT with time on this lifestyle then you can ‘experiment more on yourself’ and not ‘do bad’ to yourself.

Key being we know Shawn Baker is trying to do ‘real studies’ and fund studies of those on this lifestyle but they will be small obvy vs. the real ol’ big world out there where life on this lifestyle is just not documented any big strength and truths, it is our experiences and word of mouth thru our changes and what people feel in being all in zc do we succeed. Life experiences per individual and those who rant and rave how great it is trumps some small studies we zc people are trying to fund ya know.

ok again just a fun chat on it all but darn you know I am all in zc and an advocate for truths to be shown out there on it and how zc veterans put forth their info :sunny: sorry all this is now a zc chat here HA

#33

“Ideal” fat/protein ratio (or even grams) are very individual, of course. We need a very different amount of food, we have different bodies and goals and everything, of course one may need 50% fat and the other 95% though I am aware these are extreme cases :smiley: 55 and 80, then, still quite different. One may handle both very well…
My ideal fat-loss ratio is still a range but probably a small one. Too lean food and I don’t only lose variety and get bored of all my food immediately but I stay hungry and start to desire fat like crazy. Too fatty food and I need to overeat to reach satiation and satisfaction (unless it’s fat fast but that’s special, temporal, not sustainable at all due to almost no protein). I need both, in similar amounts (now, with my current energy need. if I suddenly got super active, I would need more fat as my protein need wouldn’t change much. I already eat over 2g/kg protein for LBM, after all). While others may feel right with more protein or more fat. (I feel okay in a bigger range, I just overeat if my ratio is off. Every dietary mistake of mine results in overeating fat.)

We should figure out what works for us. My ideal approach is minimizing fat as I tend to eat way too much of it (but I shouldn’t try to focus on the others either as I should keep them at a comfortable minimum as well. it’s hard to be one with overeating tendencies). But it’s probably a bad idea for most people especially on keto (and even I do it nicely, listening to my body, not enforcing things, not even for very indulgent limits). They should figure out their own best approach. Or second best. Or whatever they can.

I can’t judge this but it was true for me. My fat ratio was quite low in the beginning… It went up later and then it went down again in leaner meat phases… It’s so odd to me seeing people trying to stick to 75% or 70%, no matter what because that is keto. Nope. Keto may be low-fat too, actually (not good for long term for most people but ketosis happens), it’s all about the carb intake but even that isn’t totally fixed, still, 20g is a good number as a start.
And 70% is waaaaaay too high for me most of the time, let alone 75… And I don’t eat little (yeah, that’s why my protein is so high in grams but what can I do? Food with 60-65% fat content is so awesome :D). But it varies, sometimes much and it’s fine.

(Bacon is a many-splendoured thing) #34

A lot of prominent carnivores, Amber and Dr. Georgia Ede among them, eat that way because they have to for the sake of their health, not because they don’t like vegetables.

(Bacon is a many-splendoured thing) #35

Dr. Jason Fung says something similar: “If you want to burn sugar, eat carbohydrates; if you want to burn fat, eat fat.”

#36

Oh, I know. I listen to them on podcasts a lot, and they’re very clear on this point. I feel the same, really - I loved vegetables and didn’t embark on carnivore because I didn’t enjoy them.

I feel as if I didn’t explain my point very well, because these are all quite different discussions to what I was raising. I’ll do better in the future. :joy:

I was just interested in it because I’ve watched convincing arguments from both camps (higher fat, lower protein vs lower fat, higher protein) - and I’m always curious when @ctviggen shares his story, because I know he falls in the opposite camp to me.

I find it fascinating. Although I suppose there’s not a lot to discuss - if both camps do the opposite and both camps get results, then it really does come down to what works for you. I suppose it’s being aware that if you’re 2 years on plan and something isn’t working, if you try higher fat, lower protein for 3 months and it’s still not working, it might be worth your whilst swapping to lower fat, higher protein.

But also, I totally appreciate this was the wrong topic to raise it in. Apologies @Rhyseee - for your circumstances, just do the basics that others have described. This % stuff is for many many months down the line.

#37

I am not even sure what these mean. There are various ratios, these two either touches or there is something in-between…
Or it’s not about ratios? But if it is, high-protein is unhealthy for everyone with a very high energy need. And lower-protein is unhealthy for everyone with a very small energy intake (not need, maybe they just unable to eat enough on keto, at least in the beginning).
Of course, some people can’t eat high-protein (in grams) without problems but that’s a special case, high-protein isn’t for them.

Yeah, maybe a separate topic would be better, I have so many questions :smiley: Even though I can’t change my ratio, it clings to me and I can’t stray too far… I am curious and try but my body must be on board with my experiments. I already accepted I only can do high-protein high-fat but I still can try 55% and 80% fat alike (for a day. 80% fat is serious overeating for me, usually as I can’t not eat much protein. these are other things to be considered. I surely wouldn’t enjoy very high-fat as overeating isn’t good).

It even matters what is the fat and protein we eat. Some are more satiating than the others… So, so many factors, no wonder experiences are different, they would be even for the same person if they changed too many things (and when I try to lower my fat percentage, I can’t do it changing only that, I need different food choices).