Again, not desiring a war, just figured I'd be safe and put this topic here.

Q: how am I losing fat without ketosis?

I started at 309 this April, and am 233 today. 76lbs. I didn't even try to control carbs for the first two months as I was following WW. I got the bug for low carb, but chose to limit my carbs over time rather than start with induction.

My low days are in the 60g range, with most days closer to 100.

It is unlikely that I'm ever in Ketosis...and it's equally unlikely that I've lost 76lbs of muscle and water.

No, ketosis is not required to lose weight (did anyone say it is?). For me, it's a much easier and sustainable way to lose weight, without all that nagging hunger. Furthermore, the benefits of reduced carbs are more than just ketosis.

Just trying to understand the notion that the body can't burn fat in the presence of insulin. That one has to convert to ketosis to burn fat instead of sugar.

It takes a couple of days to weeks to get into ketosis, and carbs have to be less than 50g. From what I understand from the books I'm reading.

I've lost 10.5 inches off my belly...some of that is surely fat loss. I'm making progress in lowering carbs, but I'm still in the 80's on a normal day, and fluctuate 20g up and down from there.

By what mechanism is my fat being burned in the presence of a diet too high in carbs for the ketosis presses? This is not a knock on low carb, or a debate that calorie counting is better. Just trying to gel my experience with the principles I'm reading about.

Found a good article describing beta oxidation vs ketosis http://www.gnolls.org/tag/beta-oxidation/

So cutting calories can lead to fat burning without ketosis. However ketosis brings the benefit of lowered hunger and a more efficient use of fat for fuel.

True, fat is not burned when insulin levels in the blood stream are high. For those who are not insulin resistant, insulin levels go up when carbs are eaten, the carbs are converted to fat to reduce the toxic effects, at which point insulin levels go down and stay down till the next meal. However if one is insulin resistant, the body does not recognize that insulin has been released, the pancreas produces more insulin in an attempt to reduce toxicity, resulting in high levels of circulating insulin for a long period of time.

For those of us who are insulin resistant, lowering consumption of carbs and the subsequent insulin response allows us to avoid constantly elevated insulin, reducing hunger and giving our bodies the opportunity to burn fat.

I think it is fairly well known that those who are not insulin resistant can lose weight either by eating fewer calories or by reducing carbs, but for the insulin resistant reducing carbs is much more effective and may in fact be the only way to lose weight without intolerable hunger.

How few carbs can result in weight loss is a matter of degree and it is a reflection of one's tolerance/intolerance to carbs. It will vary among individuals and for each individual it may well vary over time. Insulin resistance is a progressive condition.

I doubt many non-insulin resistant folks get to morbidly obese 309lbs.

What you get with more carbs is a sugar spike followed by a drop and then hunger. But if you don't eat (calorie restriction) your body will go to the fat stores...beta oxidation.

My lowered carb intake, with higher fat, has lessened the hunger, just not to the amount those in ketosis benefit from.

You might have a high CCLL - meaning you can eat more carbs than some of us and lose weight.

Don't confused detecting ketones via urine with ketosis. You can be in ketosis and never produce measurable ketones in your urine.

So definitely, you can lose fat without detectable levels of ketones in your urine. People do it all the time on low calorie diets that aren't low in carbs.

So, leemack, why the continuing series of questions on ketosis? Are you trying to suggest ketosis does not work as an aid to weight loss? Are you trying to prove it is unhealthy? Are you trying to prove that good old reduction of calories is just as good? Is this simply your way of pointing out you've lost weight? Is it a way to attract people to your blog?

If there is anything you should pick up from these forums, it is that we are all individuals and tolerate different foods differently. I don't think anyone here believes that no one can lose weight by a method other than ketosis. If WW works for you, that's great, but it by no means makes ketosis less effective for someone else. It's a personal choice. And as I said above, the benefits of ketosis are greater than just weight loss. I've lost weight in the past by cutting back on everything (which also lowers total carb consumption), but I choose to eat low carb now for weight loss and maintenance. These are good healthy foods; carbs seem extraneous.

Peter Attia has a detailed discussion of ketosis in today's blog. I haven't read it yet, but it is sure to be in depth.

I'm just trying to understand, and talking to folks likely to have some knowledge and opinions. From my reading, talking, experience so far -- I'd say I see calorie restriction principles that are good and true that low carb people don't seem to get, and vice versa.

Can you elaborate on that? What don't we get about calorie restriction? If you are talking to older women, they know that carb restriction is not enough. We cannot eat unlimited fats and protein. But eating high fat and entering ketosis suppresses appetite, making it possible to restrict calories. I can't imagine there are many people here who have not at one time tried calorie restriction. What are we missing?

I'm not here trying to tell anyone else what they should do. Just trying to work my own journey.

I have bought into the low carb philosophy/science. It's the practical application that I'm working out. Strict Atkins, I've done before, and just wouldn't stick with it. That's me...my problem...but still, I have to find a way that I can live with.

Even as calorie restriction worked for me, I came to realize that I wanted the health benefits of low carb...improved chlorestoral and the like. But I had learned some principles from WW that were working for me, so no reason to just give them up.

So, 7 months later, 76lbs lighter, I'm more in the fine tuning phase. I have reduced carbs quite bit, but I also know that the convenience of popping open a can of soup, or putting rice in the rice cooker, or ordering a pizza will simply win. Not because I think it's better, but because it's Sunday night, I wife doesn't feel like cooking, I don't feel like cooking, and the fridge is empty anyway. So I order a pizza and just use portion control.

Yes, I could simply improve my planning and discipline...and we've made progress. But I'm just being honest about how life goes for me at this point.

Some of the folks here treat carbs like heroine. Ok...maybe for them it is. I don't want to be the guy who crashes an AA meeting and talks about the great drinking party he went to the night before. But I've yet to find a decent actively participated forum with low carbers yet where folks aren't like that.

So where do _I_ go to talk about managing my way of eating that is working on reducing carbs but DOESN'T need to adopt the addiction paradigm? I use this subforum, but not because I'm really looking for a war. I'm just trying to be respectful of folks who can't hear "I eat toast fro breakfast" or "I enjoyed a delicious slice of NYC pizza" or "I ate a traditional Thanksgiving meal" without it being like I farted in church.

I think the "calorie is a calorie" folks really miss the difference in how foods are metabolized. I think the "calories don't matter" folks fail to understand that it's the calorie restriction part of the low carb diet that is losing them the weight. I think folks are confused and believe it's carbs themselves that control weight. I believe if you eat only twinkies, but few enough of them, you'd lose weight, including fat, no matter how insulin resistant you are. It wouldn't be healthy, and you'd be dealing with raging hunger....and you'd lose muscle along with fat.

At least...that's my current thought. And the question at hand, what I've been trying to understand, is how fat is burned outside of ketosis. I can't talk to this with the WW crowd because they are stuck with the "calorie is a calorie" mindset. I ask here, because low carbers are the ones more likely to be reading the same books I am.

Thanks for taking the time to articulate your ideas. I happen to agree with many of them. I personally think for me there is a continuum of of how many carbs you can eat vs. how many calories. I have no idea if this is true for everyone and would never suggest that anyone else on this board try it because it works for me. I started low carb 9 years ago this month with South Beach. I ate probably 50-75 g. carbs the first year, losing 22 lbs, then increased to maybe 60-100 g per day over the next 6 years. I very slowly gained weight over those 6.5 years and ended up 5 lbs lower than my starting weight. Just short of 6years I switched to Atkins (NANY), eating anywhere from 40-50 carbs per day. And I tracked them "religiously". Eventually I had to drop carbs lower (20-40) to lose weight and then I had to drop carbs AND calories (1350 cal/day). That's as low as I'm willing to go, I'd rather carry 10-15 extra pounds than eat less. So be it.

Everyone is different in how many carbs they can eat, and yes, for some, it is exactly like heroin. Except that heroin users don't have to take it 3x/day and somehow control their body's physiological response.

This is a very intelligent and well-read group of people on this board. They have probably all had ideas of what might work for them. But the focus here is low carb, and supporting others who choose to eat low carb. I'd hate to think that something that works for me might derail someone else.

I probably go in and out of ketosis, if such a thing is possible. Some days I eat 60-80 or more and other days I eat less than that. Some days I eat nothing and fast for 24 hours. I am maintaining nicely so I don't really care either way.

It's all about calorie restriction to lose weight anyway.

leebase, if you are fine-tuning, you might want to check out the Cron-o-Meter to track your nutrient intake. It was one of the final steps I took in my journey after becoming an adherent of CRON.

I read a post of a CRON follower about how if you are overweight then the dangers of large amounts of saturated fat (Atkins, zero carb, whatever) are temporarily mitigated because cutting back on carbs to repair insulin sensitivity is more important.

When you reach a normal weight, the saturated fat again becomes more dangerous because your insulin sensitivity actually returns at a normal or low BMI weight. So the damage of the carbs has retreated.

I've pretty much cut out meat though still eat egg whites. I'm focused more on PUFAs and MUFAs at adequate levels than SFA.

Good luck whatever plan you are using - and I always enjoy your thought provoking posts.