Why would my metabolism slow down if I’m getting cals from fat stores?

(Parker the crazy crone lady) #141

But if you control your carbs, and focus on protein, then you don’t have to eat a lot of fat, and let your own stores help fuel you, yes?

(Bunny) #142

I just wanted to point out what I think the problem is with this?

You cannot be sedentary and expect anything to happen?

Here is why it is not working (if that is the issue?):

You have to get your muscle mass increased, even though your doing everything right, counting calories is to help recognize portion size but actual numbers is not happening because they are not even close to being actuarial.

Even though your eating fat and your in ketosis and doing everything right, your still burning sugar when you eat protein and/or carbohydrates, there is no possible way of explaining that away.

The more muscle mass you have, the more you will oxidize sugar/glucose before it is turned to lipids (body fat), the only other way around that is cold thermal adaption where you get brown adipose tissue to act as if it were muscle tissue which burns up sugars/carbs as soon as you eat it!

You must burn through a wall of glycogen before you can even come close to burning up actual body fat!

The larger your muscle mass is in ratio to adipose mass, the more successful at burning actual body fat you will be (high fat, low fat, high carb, low carb or no carb…it does not matter)!

Another good question is why are we so thin when we are young? It is because we have more muscle mass than adipose fat, once you exceed that ratio in body fat with time (not age) then you get fatter because your no longer oxidizing sugar/carbs as soon as you eat it!

References:

[1] “…Whether fed or fasted, the body is always releasing, burning, and storing fat. When insulin is high, storage predominates, but turnover continues. When insulin is low, release and oxidation predominate. If you eat fat along with a lot of carbohydrates, it is prone to be stored. When fat is consumed in the context of a well formulated ketogenic diet, it — along with fat released from adipose stores — is prone to be burned. But once digested and absorbed, dietary fat and stored fat enter the ‘turnover pool’ and are in a constant state of mixing. …” …More

[2] Dynamics of human adipose lipid turnover in health and metabolic disease

[3] Fat Tissue Growth and Development in Humans.

[4] Impact of fat mass and distribution on lipid turnover in human adipose tissue

[5] Dynamics of Adipocyte Turnover in Humans

[6] Fat cell number is set in childhood and stays constant in adulthood

[7] The Glycogen Depletion Workouts to Do Before Feasting

(mole person) #143

Not at all. 1300 calories is the maximum your body can take from your fat a day without needing to slow down your metabolism. You don’t actually want to try to “hit” that target or you risk overshooting it. Any net amount of fat taken from your cells will result in losses. Even 100 calories a day, but it will be slow.

(Bunny) #144

”…Here’s why: One of the variables that affect your resting metabolic rate is the amount of lean muscle you have. At any given weight, the more muscle on your body, and the less fat, the higher your metabolic rate. That’s because muscle uses a lot more energy than fat while at rest (see the graphic in section one/below). …” …More

image

Contribution of organs and tissues to bodyweight and basal metabolic rate. | European Childhood Obesity Group: Metabolic And Mechanical Cost Of Sedentary And Physical Activities In Obese Children And Adolescents

And also: …the resetting (re-distribution) of GLUT4 transports and Leptin & Ghrelin signaling in salivary amylase breakdown of carbohydrates e.g. basal and resting metabolic synchronization; all controlled by muscle mass to adipose ratios etc…

For example: let’s take the case of Jane & John Doe? Using the 1300 calories as an example; both Jane & John Doe; a happily married couple decide to go on a ketogenic diet together at 1300 calories each, John is losing weight (real body fat) like crazy and Jane is not losing any weight at all (stall/plateau) and she cannot figure out why? It is because John already has more muscle mass (and not lifting any weights) and Jane does not? So she would have to lift some weights and do a little weight training to keep up with John? If John wanted to lose weight even faster than Jane then he could outpace Jane’s efforts by lifting weights!

Weight Loss Stalling Plateaus: It is not a female hormone or thyroid thing as popularly assumed; that is, if you really examine the research closely and deeply enough?

Why fasting and/or dieting is futile for the purposes of trying to lose weight: a lot of people believe this a way to lose body fat, that is an assumption and severe error in logic, you may lose a little body fat and visceral fat but the problem is as soon as you start eating you will gain it all back if you have more body fat in contrast to muscle mass. A small increase in muscle mass makes a big (huge) difference in maintaining a desired weight (muscle body weight is not the same as body fat weight) or body composition (if you have lots of loose skin cut back on protein intake; cycle it meaning don’t eat protein everyday)!

(Bacon is a many-splendoured thing) #145

Most people’s energy expenditure is in the range of 2000 to 28000 calories. Those calculators are set by default to tell you to eat at a caloric deficit, which is why we recommend changing the setting to “maintenance,” even when you are just starting out on keto.

My point is that we don’t know, with any real accuracy, what our daily energy expenditure is, nor do we have truly accurate information about the energy content of our food (we say a gram of carbs or protein contains 4 calories, but that’s rounded, not the precise figure; and the figure for fat is not precisely 9 cal/g, either). So doesn’t it make sense to trust that our body knows what it wants? Especially since, as Gary Taubes points out, that if intake exceeds expenditure by less than 20 calories each and every day, that will still theoretically add up to a twenty-pound weight gain in a year’s time.

Fortunately, the hormonal situation is more complex than that, and we don’t need to be precise in our calculations, because our bodies evolved to handle that for us. It can lower metabolism to meet a restricted intake, and it can increase metabolism to handle abundance.

My big problem with the energy-balance hypothesis is that it makes certain assumptions that don’t appear to be valid. For instance, it is assumed that any caloric deficit will be met only from the fat store, but we know that fat can be mobilised for use only in the case of low insulin, leaving lean tissue as the only source of calories. The hypothesis also assumes that a caloric deficit is the cause of weight-loss, whereas actual experience shows that it is putting the body into weight-loss mode that causes the caloric deficit. Another assumption is that energy expenditure is fixed and invariable, and we know that’s not true. Numerous studies have demonstrated that the long-term effect of trying to use caloric deficit as a lever on the body has deleterious effects. Kevin Hall’s study of the “Biggest Loser” contestants comes to mind in this connexion.

On the other hand, eating in a way that allows the body to re-establish the proper hormonal balance seems like a more sensible approach. After all, our ancestors managed quite nicely on meat and whatever small amount of plant food they could forage, and all without knowing what a calorie is. Mike Eades’s lecture on the health problems encountered when the race began eating agricultural produce is fascinating in this regard.

(Doing a Mediterranean Keto) #146

Is it known at which BMI the fat tissue stops secreting leptin, leading to the brain secreting ghrelin to make us hungry again?

#147

It would be a bodyfat % rather than a BMI but there are so many individual variables that I can’t imagine there’s one answer to this!