Active Low-Carber Forums
Atkins diet and low carb discussion provided free for information only, not as medical advice.
Home Plans Tips Recipes Tools Stories Studies Products
Active Low-Carber Forums
A sugar-free zone


Welcome to the Active Low-Carber Forums.
Support for Atkins diet, Protein Power, Neanderthin (Paleo Diet), CAD/CALP, Dr. Bernstein Diabetes Solution and any other healthy low-carb diet or plan, all are welcome in our lowcarb community. Forget starvation and fad diets -- join the healthy eating crowd! You may register by clicking here, it's free!

Go Back   Active Low-Carber Forums > Main Low-Carb Diets Forums & Support > Daily Low-Carb Support > Semi Low-Carb Plans
User Name
Password
Register FAQ Members Calendar Mark Forums Read Search Gallery My P.L.A.N. Survey


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   ^
Old Thu, May-23-02, 19:48
Mila Mila is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 338
 
Plan: Fat Flush Plan (Zone)
Stats: 249/133/115
BF:
Progress: 87%
Location: Toronto
Default

hi!

with Jenny's permission I am piping in, lol

Rustpot, here are some responses to your statements/questions.

the main differences between the plan(s) you are on and the fat flush is that the fat flush is not a ketogenic diet and that the fat flush targets nearly all hormones at once, not just insulin. in addition, the fat flush plan recognizes the importance of healthy digestive system, including liver for the maximum fat loss and addresses that as well.

there is no 40:30:30 ratio to pursue on this diet, although Gittleman mentions once in her book that by the end of the day the breakdown of the macronutrients will be approximately that. since this plan allows unlimited veggies, it is easy to have way fewer than 40% from carbs, or sometimes higher, if you have vegetable juices instead of vegetable salads, soups, and stews. Barry Sears originated the 40:30:30 movement, or so it seems. his reasoning was that we evolved in africa, eating mostly lean game for meat and whatever for carbs, but not grains. so this gives about 40:30:30. then he reasons that the major spurt in human evolution happened when the wild game became scarce due to the growth and migration of human population and humans turned to fish and algae as a food source as well. this brought with it a steady supply of omega-3's and human development sped up, especially brain evolution.

the terms fat flush and cleanse are pretty accurate, if you spend a week on that diet, you'll know why, lol. the "fat' in our bodies, Gittleman points out, is not only white fat, but 'false fat' as well. false fat is waterlogging, old crap in our intestines, and some other sources of excess of weight that we need not have. her diet 'melts' white fat because of the food choices and the way of eating, and gets rid of the 'false fat' because of it being lowsalt diet with gut cleansing and lymphatic system shaking measures recommended as well.

waterfast is not the most effective detox diet, in fact, but it was 40-50years ago. there are much more effective plans as far as I know from reading and from experience (I had lived through two 20 and 30 day waterfasts and several other detox plans. water fast is the weakest of all, although the easiest in terms of implementation, especially if you do not mind having enemas or god forbid colonics twice per day).

Wa'il, in terms of metabolism, 'fast' doesn't always mean 'better' in terms of bodyfat loss. people with naturally slow metabolism lose bodyfat as fast as people with fast metabolism, if they are on a proper for them diet. the only goal any fat-burning diet has to achieve is to direct the body to spending its fat reserves. this can be done by low cal, by moderate cal, or by high cal, there are many strategies, as you know. on fat flush specifically there is no rebound from low calories, since veritably low calories (below 1200) are recommended only for the first 2 weeks, after that higher glycemic foods are 'allowed' which most of the dieters grab as soon as they can, so the body never gets the chance to get into starvation mode fully. once people realize that they lose slower on higher glycemic foods, they go back to 'induction' choices of carbs, and lose faster again. this cycle tends to repeat itself, and the horrible damage to metabolism is never taking place.

Mila
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2   ^
Old Thu, May-23-02, 20:06
tamarian's Avatar
tamarian tamarian is offline
Forum Founder
Posts: 19,506
 
Plan: Atkins/PP/BFL
Stats: 400/223/200 Male 5 ft 11
BF:37%/17%/12%
Progress: 89%
Location: Ottawa, ON
Default

Hi Mila,

I've seperated this post, since it's merits it's own discussion thread, and to not lost inside a journal.

Wa'il
Reply With Quote
  #3   ^
Old Thu, May-23-02, 22:50
Bloom Bloom is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 2,181
 
Plan: Dukan
Stats: 229/185/154 Female 168cm
BF:
Progress: 59%
Location: New Zealand
Default

As I said in my journal before Wa'il deemed fit to snitch your post , thanks for all the info you provide, you have quite a way with words
Reply With Quote
  #4   ^
Old Thu, May-23-02, 22:57
tamarian's Avatar
tamarian tamarian is offline
Forum Founder
Posts: 19,506
 
Plan: Atkins/PP/BFL
Stats: 400/223/200 Male 5 ft 11
BF:37%/17%/12%
Progress: 89%
Location: Ottawa, ON
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Mila
the main differences between the plan(s) you are on and the fat flush is that the fat flush is not a ketogenic diet and that the fat flush targets nearly all hormones at once, not just insulin.
.....
there is no 40:30:30 ratio to pursue on this diet, although Gittleman mentions once in her book that by the end of the day the breakdown of the macronutrients will be approximately that.


Ummm, this is more like a marketing slogan. Low-carb, "none-ketogenic" plans work in the same way, they just acheive a higher carbs percentage (to appear healthier for the masses) by lowering their calories.

The Zone seems to work, Montignac too, Schwarzbein, Protein Power, Atkins etc. They are all based on the simple low-carb idea. Each has it's own flavour to it, some tweaks here, extra supplements there, etc.. What works for you, and appear best suited for your taste, and livable for the rest of your life as maintenance, should work.

Some authors may denounce other LC plans for the sake of marketing. Dr Sears has a strong biochemical background, and uses it quite well. However, he made some compromises (possibly due to publishers recommendations) by making some un-scientific claims.

Example, he claims eating more protein cause muscle loss (very funny for athletes), and all high-protein low-carb plans represent water-loss (I lost 110 lbs of water ). While the good Dr. offer extensive references throughout his book, he fails to give a reference for this claim. Why? Because there isn't, or he'd add that.

Another claim (targeted to distinguish his plan from other LC plans) is that ketones are "abnormal", and the body has "no use for them", all are bogus claims, that he couldn't substantiate with any single reference to a scientific study. It also contradicts his claims that even bad eicosanoids have use, bad cholesterol (LDL) has use, but ketone have no use and are abnormal! Even LC critics couldn't go that far

No I'm not saying 40/30/30 is bad, or it won't work, I'm simply trying to point out the marketing ploys used to scare people from other LC plans. This leads none-critical readers to assume all these claims are true, and generates a zealousy towards 40/30/30 as the only LC way, and all others are unhealthy.

Quote:
so this gives about 40:30:30. then he reasons that the major spurt in human evolution happened when ....


All good and dandy. Same for all low-carb plans, they all use the hunter-gatherer argument to support their plan. And for the next to come low-carb plan, 50/30/20, or 34/33/33, that would be a valid argument as well.

Quote:
the terms fat flush and cleanse are pretty accurate, if you spend a week on that diet, you'll know why, lol. the "fat' in our bodies, Gittleman points out, is not only white fat, but 'false fat' as well. false fat is waterlogging, old crap in our intestines, and some other sources of excess of weight that we need not have. her diet 'melts' white fat because of the food choices and the way of eating, and gets rid of the 'false fat' because of it being lowsalt diet with gut cleansing and lymphatic system shaking measures recommended as well.


Sounds good, we all detest water retention, affectionately known as bloating.

Quote:
Wa'il, in terms of metabolism, 'fast' doesn't always mean 'better' in terms of bodyfat loss.


That's exactly my point. I'd even say it's worst. Didn't Dr. Sears say in "Enter the Zone" that you cannot lose more than 1.5 lbs of fat per week?

With plans claiming faster rates, through low-calories, you are losing more than fat, you lose muscles. So you might drop from 200 to 150, yet remain at 40% body fat, if you lose your muscles.

Again, this is not denounciation of the Zone or Fat Flush, just pointing out some issues that fuels diet wars due to marketing, unfortunately LC authors are getting into it as well, and their marketing efforts may mislead the average reader who just wants the facts.

Wa'il
Reply With Quote
  #5   ^
Old Thu, May-23-02, 23:22
Bloom Bloom is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 2,181
 
Plan: Dukan
Stats: 229/185/154 Female 168cm
BF:
Progress: 59%
Location: New Zealand
Default

I enjoyed your reply Wa'il especially this bit
Quote:
What works for you, and appear best suited for your taste, and livable for the rest of your life as maintenance, should work.

You hit the nail on the head
Reply With Quote
  #6   ^
Old Thu, May-23-02, 23:27
Bloom Bloom is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 2,181
 
Plan: Dukan
Stats: 229/185/154 Female 168cm
BF:
Progress: 59%
Location: New Zealand
Default

These discussions could be likened to those on religion (I am not looking to start something ) in that there is one God, he is the hub with many spokes to the wheel.
.. or another, LC'ing is like a cake and we cut it into pieces.

Last edited by Bloom : Thu, May-23-02 at 23:33.
Reply With Quote
  #7   ^
Old Thu, May-23-02, 23:47
tamarian's Avatar
tamarian tamarian is offline
Forum Founder
Posts: 19,506
 
Plan: Atkins/PP/BFL
Stats: 400/223/200 Male 5 ft 11
BF:37%/17%/12%
Progress: 89%
Location: Ottawa, ON
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Bloom
These discussions could be likened to those on religion


I totally agree. When we follow ideas and theories based on our faith in them, or their authors, then it's a matter of faith

That's why I think a good mental filter on what is a fact, is clinical and scientific proof.

Wa'il
Reply With Quote
  #8   ^
Old Fri, May-24-02, 03:04
rustpot's Avatar
rustpot rustpot is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,110
 
Plan: atkins/protein power 1st
Stats: 269/278/210 Male 5 feet 10 ins.
BF:33%/30%/ ?
Progress: -15%
Location: Hertfordshire
Default

What is so good about this site is that we can compare and contrast the different aspects of low carb in a rational informative way. I agree with bloom, in whatever "plan" we follow we are not trying to be messianic or preach to anyone and we should not get religious about it.

It would be terrible if the low carb community started to suffer from intenicene strife. We would have ketostix at dawn.There would be battles for the detox high ground.

Wai'l has touched on my main concern and that is the marketing of low carb and the tag lines on the book sales. The book publishers do not mean to pit low carb against low carb but the titles have to grab the attention.

We have "revolution", "power" "busters" to denote a radical approach. We have all the "healthy" words that are currently fashionable "detox" "Flush" "cleansing".

Quote:
That's why I think a good mental filter on what is a fact, is clinical and scientific proof.


My sentiments entirely
Reply With Quote
  #9   ^
Old Fri, May-24-02, 04:58
TeriDoodle TeriDoodle is offline
Starting Over!
Posts: 3,435
 
Plan: Protein Power LifePlan
Stats: 182/178/150 Female 67 inches
BF:Jiggley mess
Progress: 13%
Location: Texas!!
Default

If there's anything I've learned from this board is that every human body is unique. If you're smart you'll find a plan that you can live with and just stick to it for life. I know for a fact that I wouldn't be able to stick to FF because of the limited calories and other restrictions. BUT I do like the ideas she presents about having a clean, healthy liver to help my poor body metabolize fats and rid my body of toxins (I live in the 2nd most pollluted city in the country) .... so I just made a visit to the ol' health store and had a chat with the manager. Now I have an herbal regimen that at least HELPS my liver be the best it can be. I'm content with that compromise.

By far the most important decision a "dieter" can make is to determine which plan will work best for them over the VERY long term. The RATE of fat loss should be way down the list of priorities.... but I keep forgetting that not everyone thinks the way I do
Reply With Quote
  #10   ^
Old Fri, May-24-02, 07:45
Natrushka Natrushka is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 11,512
 
Plan: IF +LC
Stats: 287/165/165 Female 66"
BF:
Progress: 100%
Question

No one publishes a LC book, or any other book, out of the goodness of their hearts. From Atkins to Schwarzbien, they all gain something when we slap down our money. They are in the business of making money.

We all have our darlings. My choice doesnít make yours any less valid, and vice versa. However, there are some choices out there that verge on the desperate.

While the intentions of the authors of our LC plans are not wholly magnanimous, those of this community are. We are here to support and help one another. We aren't being paid for our services; it's all done on a voluntary basis. We have rules and regulations we follow, not unlike other communities. And we have a flavour, not unlike other communities. We promote, above all, a healthy lifestyle, achieved through low carbohydrate eating. Some of us are here to lose fat. Some are here to control diabetes, Crohn's, IBS, PCOS, fibromyalgia, eating disorders and the list goes on. What is the flavour of lowcarb.ca? Low carb isn't a quick fix, it's a chosen way of eating for life - this is a message you read over and over every day here.

Yes, all non-proprietary LC plans are open for discussion here, but does that mean all are open for support? How can you support something you don't believe in? Is a plan that is low carb only by virtue of the fact that it is low calorie really low carb?

Nat
Reply With Quote
  #11   ^
Old Fri, May-24-02, 08:57
Akiwican Akiwican is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,391
 
Plan: Atkins
Stats: 1/1/1 Female 5'8"
BF:
Progress: 44%
Default Quick fix

I dont think I would be wrong in assuming that most people on this forum have tried "dieting" over and over again... WITHOUT long term success. That's why I think the message is so strong on here that this is a WAY OF LIFE It may take a bit longer but we all know who won the race between the tortose {or maybe turtle would be a more appropriate term on here} and the hare.

Akiwican
Reply With Quote
  #12   ^
Old Fri, May-24-02, 09:23
Mila Mila is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 338
 
Plan: Fat Flush Plan (Zone)
Stats: 249/133/115
BF:
Progress: 87%
Location: Toronto
Default

Hello!!!



Wa'il, Jenny's journal with hits number rapidly approaching 4000 is not a place where this post of mine would've been easily lost

I have no problems with marketing strategies publishing houses or the authors of the dieting books use. so I do not really feel like participating in that line of discussion. besides, people who publish books are just people, even gods are biased. I do not see any problem with 'inflammatory' or warning statements if they spark curiosity and further research, the problem is when they ignite wars. people are born with tendency to confirmatory bias (seeking facts that confirm their beliefs and dismissing other facts), we cannot forget about it when we read books and posts on the board like this one.

I cannot speak for dr.sears. where in his books or public statements does he state that increased protein intake leads to the muscle mass loss? high protein diets do cause initial water loss, because of increased urination, as the body tries to get rid of the excess of the ketone bodies. since you haven't provided references to this statement of dr. sears's I do not know if he indeed referred to the initial water weight loss or was unwise enough to say that all loss on ketogenic diets is due to reduction in bodywater %.

ketosis is normal body reaction to abnormal health status (e.g. the one that arises in diabetes) or to abnormal nutrition ( extremely low carbs, either intentionally or not intentionally achieved by the individual), you know that. that's the meaning of the 'abnormal' in dr.sears's statement.

dr. sears indeed states in one or more of his books that one cannot lose more than 1-1.5lbs of bodyfat per week. I do not know the meaning of the word 'cannot' here, however, or the scope of that statement (to which portion of the general population he was referring). there are published records, medical and of other kind that this feat (losing more that 1.5lbs of fat per week) is indeed possible.

as a side note, why be so hot about 'clinical and scientific proof'? science doesn't prove anything, the way it works is by discovering new phenomena, by refining the detail, and by rejecting false hypotheses. it is not possible to prove anything by scientific means, that 'fact' scientists themselves, philosophers, and methodologists of science have discovered long time ago. rejecting false hypotheses doesn't prove alternative hypotheses either, just gives them somewhat more weight.

TeriDoodle, I am happy to hear that you are taking care of your liver! way to go!!! ... I must confess that I belong to that 'not everyone' that you mentioned group of people. I care about poundage loss dearly, lol. it's number one on my list

Nat, I can support something I do not currently believe in, maybe not by cheering them, but at least by staying silent and/or neutral, sometimes by encouraging them in very general terms, exploration is good. we all can, if we remind ourselves that what others are doing dietwise is not a threat to us and that what we are doing may be a threat to them.

I see you point in bringing up the issue of definition. what exactly is lowcarb? what is a lowcarb way of life? why can't lowcarb be used as a quick fix, if once it cures the disease, moderate to higher carbs can be easily handled by the body? again, in discovery, definitions are not useful at all. they are always operational. rhetoric/arguments from definition (e.g. did Prez Clinton really have sex when he had oral sex) again aim at proving some point, not at discovery.

Mila
Reply With Quote
  #13   ^
Old Fri, May-24-02, 10:26
Mila Mila is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 338
 
Plan: Fat Flush Plan (Zone)
Stats: 249/133/115
BF:
Progress: 87%
Location: Toronto
Default

hi again!

here are some abstracts from my collection, I think they may be relevant to the discussion here.

Ok, these authors state that ketosis is bodyís response to starvation. Should we widen up our definition of Ďstarvation dietsí, to include high calorie low carb intake diets, not only low calorie intake, into that category? This article is excellent in its overview of the goodness of ketosis.

Ketone bodies, potential therapeutic uses.

Veech RL, Chance B, Kashiwaya Y, Lardy HA, Cahill GF Jr.

Unit on Metabolic Control, LMMB/NIAAA, Rockville, Maryland, USA.

Ketosis, meaning elevation of D-beta-hydroxybutyrate (R-3hydroxybutyrate) and acetoacetate, has been central to starving man's survival by providing nonglucose substrate to his evolutionarily hypertrophied brain, sparing muscle from destruction for glucose synthesis. Surprisingly, D-beta-hydroxybutyrate (abbreviated "betaOHB") may also provide a more efficient source of energy for brain per unit oxygen, supported by the same phenomenon noted in the isolated working perfused rat heart and in sperm. It has also been shown to decrease cell death in two human neuronal cultures, one a model of Alzheimer's and the other of Parkinson's disease. These observations raise the possibility that a number of neurologic disorders, genetic and acquired, might benefit by ketosis. Other beneficial effects from betaOHB include an increased energy of ATP hydrolysis (deltaG') and its linked ionic gradients. This may be significant in drug-resistant epilepsy and in injury and anoxic states. The ability of betaOHB to oxidize co-enzyme Q and reduce NADP+ may also be important in decreasing free radical damage. Clinical maneuvers for increasing blood levels of betaOHB to 2-5 mmol may require synthetic esters or polymers of betaOHB taken orally, probably 100 to 150 g or more daily. This necessitates advances in food-science technology to provide at least enough orally acceptable synthetic material for animal and possibly subsequent clinical testing. The other major need is to bring the technology for the analysis of multiple metabolic "phenotypes" up to the level of sophistication of the instrumentation used, for example, in gene science or in structural biology. This technical strategy will be critical to the characterization of polygenic disorders by enhancing the knowledge gained from gene analysis and from the subsequent steps and modifications of the protein products themselves.

This article overviews bruising side effect of the ketogenic diets. I experienced it myself.

Bruising and the ketogenic diet: evidence for diet-induced changes in platelet function.

Berry-Kravis E, Booth G, Taylor A, Valentino LA.

Department of Pediatrics, RUSH-Presbyterian-St Luke's Medical Center, Chicago, IL 60612, USA. eberrykr~rush.edu

Excessive bruising is a symptom noted by parents of some children treated with the ketogenic diet for epilepsy control, although this side effect is not reported in the literature. We evaluated our cohort of current and past diet-treated patients for symptoms of bruising or bleeding through chart review and prospective screening at clinic follow-up visits. A significant increase in bruising or other minor bleeding was reported and/or observed in 16 of 51 patients (31.4%). There were no differences in sex distribution or number of anticonvulsants used between patients with bruising/bleeding and those without this symptom, although the group with bruising/bleeding was significantly younger. No specific anticonvulsant was associated with bruising/bleeding. Six patients with diet-induced bruising/bleeding underwent an investigation for bleeding diathesis. Five of these patients had prolonged bleeding times and all had diminished responsiveness to various platelet aggregating agents, with no evidence of a release defect. The abnormalities all normalized in the 1 patient tested after ceasing the diet. No patients had serious hemorrhage. One patient had mild von Willebrand disease, which had been asymptomatic before diet initiation. Some patients were Stimate responsive, suggesting a treatment for more severe bouts of symptoms. These data suggest that a ketogenic diet-related bleeding tendency occurs in about one third of treated patients owing to preexisting factors defining susceptibility in combination with diet-induced depression of platelet responsiveness, possibly related to changes in platelet membrane lipid composition and/or concentration and resultant effects on function of membrane-embedded proteins. Patients on the diet undergoing anticoagulation or surgery should be evaluated carefully for symptoms of bleeding tendency.

I post this abstract here only because I mentioned this article in another post of mine on this board, didnít want to leave that info unreferenced.

Acute pancreatitis causing death in a child on the ketogenic diet.

Stewart WA, Gordon K, Camfield P.

Department of Pediatrics, Dalhousie University, IWK Health Centre, Halifax, Nova Scotia. wastewar~is.dal.ca

The ketogenic diet has demonstrated good efficacy in children with pharmacologically resistant seizures. Relatively few serious complications have been reported in the more than 70 years in which the diet has been used. We report a child who developed acute pancreatitis and died. A 9-year-old girl had a seizure disorder with associated developmental delay owing to glucose transport protein deficiency. The ketogenic diet with medium chain triglyceride oil had been initiated shortly after diagnosis in infancy. She was not on anticonvulsants. She presented in coma with decreased respiratory effort and shock, requiring resuscitation. Investigations were consistent with pancreatitis. Despite fluid resuscitation and inotropic support, she had prolonged hypotension and acidosis. She subsequently had a cardiac arrest and died. A postmortem examination confirmed hemorrhagic pancreatitis. Hypertriglyceridemia is a risk factor for developing acute pancreatitis. The high fat content of the ketogenic diet often causes hyperlipidemia. The outcome for this patient raises concern regarding a potential consequence of the ketogenic diet.

Authors of this article do not seem to think that higher carbohydrates diets are bad as long as carbs come from the low glycemic sources, they believe that the caloric excess is to blame. They also engage in evolutionary speculations, gosh, everyone is suddenly interested in using evolutionary statements to support their arguments!

The 'carnivore connection'-evolutionary aspects of insulin resistance.

Colagiuri S, Miller JB.

Department of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism, Prince of Wales Hospital, Sydney, Australia.

Insulin resistance is common and is determined by physiological (aging, physical fitness), pathological (obesity) and genetic factors. The metabolic compensatory response to insulin resistance is hyperinsulinaemia, the primary purpose of which is to maintain normal glucose tolerance. The 'carnivore connection' postulates a critical role for the quantity of dietary protein and carbohydrate and the change in the glycaemic index of dietary carbohydrate in the evolution of insulin resistance and hyperinsulinaemia. Insulin resistance offered survival and reproductive advantages during the Ice Ages which dominated human evolution, during which a high-protein low-carbohydrate diet was consumed. Following the end of the last Ice Age and the advent of agriculture, dietary carbohydrate increased. Although this resulted in a sharp increase in the quantity of carbohydrate consumed, these traditional carbohydrate foods had a low glycaemic index and produced only modest increases in plasma insulin. The industrial revolution changed the quality of dietary carbohydrate. The milling of cereals made starch more digestible and postprandial glycaemic and insulin responses increased 2-3 fold compared with coarsely ground flour or whole grains. This combination of insulin resistance and hyperinsulinaemia is a common feature of many modern day diseases. Over the last 50 y the explosion of convenience and takeaway 'fast foods' has exposed most populations to caloric intakes far in excess of daily energy requirements and the resulting obesity has been a major factor in increasing the prevalence of insulin resistance.

Well, athletes, you are safe with your higher protein consumption, according to this study.

Do regular high protein diets have potential health risks on kidney function in athletes?

Poortmans JR, Dellalieux O.

Department of Physiological Chemistry, Institute of Physical Education and Kinesiotherapy, Free University of Brussels, Belgium.

Excess protein and amino acid intake have been recognized as hazardous potential implications for kidney function, leading to progressive impairment of this organ. It has been suggested in the literature, without clear evidence, that high protein intake by athletes has no harmful consequences on renal function. This study investigated body-builders (BB) and other well-trained athletes (OA) with high and medium protein intake, respectively, in order to shed light on this issue. The athletes underwent a 7-day nutrition record analysis as well as blood sample and urine collection to determine the potential renal consequences of a high protein intake. The data revealed that despite higher plasma concentration of uric acid and calcium, Group BB had renal clearances of creatinine, urea, and albumin that were within the normal range. The nitrogen balance for both groups became positive when daily protein intake exceeded 1.26 g.kg but there were no correlations between protein intake and creatinine clearance, albumin excretion rate, and calcium excretion rate. To conclude, it appears that protein intake under 2. 8 g.kg does not impair renal function in well-trained athletes as indicated by the measures of renal function used in this study

This article supports high protein intake as long as alkali buffers are included in oneís diet.

Excess dietary protein can adversely affect bone.

Barzel US, Massey LK.

Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Department of Medicine, Montefiore Medical Center and The Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY 10467, USA.

The average American diet, which is high in protein and low in fruits and vegetables, generates a large amount of acid, mainly as sulfates and phosphates. The kidneys respond to this dietary acid challenge with net acid excretion, as well as ammonium and titratable acid excretion. Concurrently, the skeleton supplies buffer by active resorption of bone. Indeed, calciuria is directly related to net acid excretion. Different food proteins differ greatly in their potential acid load, and therefore in their acidogenic effect. A diet high in acid-ash proteins causes excessive calcium loss because of its acidogenic content. The addition of exogenous buffers, as chemical salts or as fruits and vegetables, to a high protein diet results in a less acid urine, a reduction in net acid excretion, reduced ammonium and titratable acid excretion, and decreased calciuria. Bone resorption may be halted, and bone accretion may actually occur. Alkali buffers, whether chemical salts or dietary fruits and vegetables high in potassium, reverse acid-induced obligatory urinary calcium loss. We conclude that excessive dietary protein from foods with high potential renal acid load adversely affects bone, unless buffered by the consumption of alkali-rich foods or supplements.

This article may explain why those who are on a ketogenic diet have trouble maintaining the state of ketosis, itís the butter, folks! Up your omega-3ís intake!

Dietary fat, ketosis, and seizure resistance in rats on the ketogenic diet.

Likhodii SS, Musa K, Mendonca A, Dell C, Burnham WM, Cunnane SC.

Departments of Nutritional Sciences and Pharmacology and Bloorview Epilepsy Research Program, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada. sergei.likhodi~utoronto.ca

PURPOSE: Fat is the major component of the ketogenic diet (KD), yet no studies have examined whether the type of fat used in the diet can be optimized to provide additional benefits. The purpose of the present experiments was to compare the efficiency of different fats in inducing ketosis and affording seizure resistance. METHODS: The effects of KDs that incorporate lard, butter, medium-chain triglycerides (MCT), or flaxseed oil or a mixture of the latter three fats were examined in rats fed KD for up to 98 days. The maximal electroshock (MES) or pentylenetetrazole (PTZ) threshold tests were used to assess seizure susceptibility in two separate experiments. RESULTS: The rank order of induced ketosis was MCT > mixture > or = flaxseed oil > or = lard = butter > or = control. MES failed to reveal anticonvulsant effects, but the PTZ test indicated that up to 50% of rats fed the KD were seizure protected (p < 0.05). The measures of seizure protection, seizure incidence and score, did not correlate, however, with the level of ketosis in the range of 0. 7-5.2 mmol/L for beta-hydroxybutyrate. In the long-term study, flaxseed oil KD maintained stable ketosis throughout 98 days, whereas ketones declined with lard and butter KD to the control level. CONCLUSIONS: Seizure protection with the versions of the KD did not improve with the higher level of ketosis. The focus of the KD improvement, therefore, is not the achievement of higher ketosis per se but rather designing a diet that provides steady ketosis, exploits advantages of certain fats for neurological development or seizure protection via a nonketogenic mechanism, and is nutritionally balanced.
Reply With Quote
  #14   ^
Old Fri, May-24-02, 10:34
tamarian's Avatar
tamarian tamarian is offline
Forum Founder
Posts: 19,506
 
Plan: Atkins/PP/BFL
Stats: 400/223/200 Male 5 ft 11
BF:37%/17%/12%
Progress: 89%
Location: Ottawa, ON
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Mila
I have no problems with marketing strategies publishing houses or the authors of the dieting books use.


Me neither. Marketing is one thing, integrity is something else. The problem arises when they are in conflict, and they don't have to be.

Quote:
I cannot speak for dr.sears. where in his books or public statements does he state that increased protein intake leads to the muscle mass loss? high protein diets do cause initial water loss, because of increased urination, as the body tries to get rid of the excess of the ketone bodies. since you haven't provided references to this statement of dr. sears's I do not know if he indeed referred to the initial water weight loss or was unwise enough to say that all loss on ketogenic diets is due to reduction in bodywater %.


Enter the Zone, pages 18-20. I frankly didn't think his views were unknown, but glad to know you think it's unwise.
Quote:
ketosis is normal body reaction to abnormal health status (e.g. the one that arises in diabetes) or to abnormal nutrition ( extremely low carbs, either intentionally or not intentionally achieved by the individual), you know that. that's the meaning of the 'abnormal' in dr.sears's statement.


That's exactly the type of misinformation you get into, when science is irrelevant. When ketosis and ketoacidosis are treated as one and the same. .
Quote:
as a side note, why be so hot about 'clinical and scientific proof'? science doesn't prove anything,


Well, for starters, it's under the guise of "scientific proof" that these claims are made, and Dr. Sears presents tons of scientific papers to quote from, except on the marketing aspect attacking other LC plans.

In addition, with all of it's limitations, science leaves no room for pure emotions towards what's right and what's not.

I'd rather be "hot" on science, than "hot" on "my plan is best". For a while, you were "hot" on the zone and advising others to switch to the zone. Now it's Fat Flush, not the Zone, tomorrow it might be something else. Not to dismiss the role of emotions though, but why is it placed higher than science? From what I've seen, it leads to zealousy, where if your latest plan becomes an emotional attachement, you end up as an evangelist to your plan as the way, they only way, and no one loses fat except through your way (the others just lose water and muscle)...

What's worst, under the emotional embrella, it's hard to see this taking place. So, to me science is a better alternative, not perfect, but the best we have.

Wa'il
Reply With Quote
  #15   ^
Old Fri, May-24-02, 11:09
tamarian's Avatar
tamarian tamarian is offline
Forum Founder
Posts: 19,506
 
Plan: Atkins/PP/BFL
Stats: 400/223/200 Male 5 ft 11
BF:37%/17%/12%
Progress: 89%
Location: Ottawa, ON
Default

Excellent list or articles, Mila

The list has an objective collection pro- and anti-. We have a similar collection in our studies pages.

But first, I take it that you are of the opinion that 40/30/30 with 0.6 grams protein for every pound of LBM is not a ketogenic diet?

If so, why not? This formula may yield 20-50 grams of carbs above ones Atkins/PP limit (but not always) for individuals, but that won't stop ketones by itself.

While reading the Zone, I decided to follow it for a week, and I was still in ketosis. Very mild though, but it was visible. Even if your ketostix doesn't indicate ketones, it may still be there. and for many people, they have to eat much more carbs to avoid ketone production, it they really though it's unhealthy.

Just some food for thought.

Wa'il
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Side-effects of Ketosis Voyajer LC Research/Media 75 Sat, Aug-20-05 16:58
New Member - Ketosis question Hambone Introduce Yourself 6 Thu, Aug-12-04 07:20
I can't stay in ketosis so I feel unwell clairefm Newbies' Questions 8 Sun, Feb-16-03 20:40
Ketosis and stalling Dave Bing Atkins Diet 1 Thu, Feb-14-02 09:03
cant get back into ketosis???!!! kkma1861 U.K. 3 Sat, Feb-09-02 00:14


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 17:39.


Copyright © 2000-2018 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.