View Single Post
  #1   ^
Old Thu, Jul-18-19, 08:20
teaser's Avatar
teaser teaser is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 15,075
 
Plan: mostly milkfat
Stats: 190/152.4/154 Male 67inches
BF:
Progress: 104%
Location: Ontario
Default anti-keto opinion piece

Quote:
The Ketogenic Diet for Obesity and Diabetes—Enthusiasm Outpaces Evidence


Just an opinion piece by three plant-based physicians (googled their names with PCRM to ascertain this).



https://jamanetwork.com/journals/ja...article/2737919

Quote:
Is the ketogenic diet more effective for weight loss than other diets? In a meta-analysis of 13 studies lasting longer than a year, researchers found that the ketogenic diet was associated with less than a kilogram of additional weight loss over high-carbohydrate, low-fat strategies.1 This difference, although statistically significant, may not be clinically significant. Furthermore, a meta-analysis of 32 controlled feeding studies found that energy expenditure and fat loss were greater with low-fat diets compared with ketogenic diets.2

Any diet that results in weight loss does so because it reduces calorie intake. The ketogenic diet, when used for weight loss, is no different. The salient questions are whether it is sustainable and whether it promotes long-term health. No studies, to our knowledge, have evaluated ketogenic diets for cardiovascular events or mortality, although observational studies in the broader low-carbohydrate diet literature suggest increased all-cause mortality.3


Any diet that results in weight loss does so because it reduces calorie intake... they always say this like it's a truism. Calories are hard to count in humans, the insistence is that people lie in food journals, or at least are poor chroniclers. I resemble this remark--I can journal for a few days at most before I lose interest. But then I end up just eating what I've plugged into Cronometer, the same meals every day for half a year, so I pretty much know how much I'm eating anyways. But you take animals, you know exactly what you feed them, their in a cage, you're weighing every morsel--and it doesn't work out that way, the same calories, different macros etc. very often results in different outcomes.

At any rate what isn't usually mentioned when this objection is made, or I'm biased and it just seems this way, anyways, they didn't mention at least this one time the difference between somebody holding down their food consumption while their appetite screams for more food and somebody just spontaneously eating less calories when it's bacon and bun-free hamburgers versus whole grain spaghetti with a vegan marinara sauce.

Also the broader low carb literature they refer to is the non-low carb literature. When ordering a triple cheese burger with large fries and a milkshake puts you in the lowest carb group, you're not actually low carb. You're just on a high carb diet and also eating a lot of meat. Low carb foods aren't an antidote to a sugary diet, they're a replacement.

Quote:
In terms of the risk-benefit balance of the ketogenic diet, the potential adverse effects may give one pause. A review of the literature6,7 on ketogenic diets for the treatment of pediatric epilepsy reveals multiple adverse effects, ranging from the relatively benign but inconvenient “keto flu,” an induction period of fatigue, weakness, and gastrointestinal disturbances, to the less common but deadlier occurrence of cardiac arrhythmias from selenium deficiency. Other documented adverse effects include nephrolithiasis, constipation, halitosis, muscle cramps, headaches, diarrhea, restricted growth, bone fractures, pancreatitis, and multiple vitamin and mineral deficiencies.


Formula ketogenic diets have a poor history. Purified diets are a good way to discover before unknown vitamin and mineral requirements. Go ahead and put an animal based ketogenic diet using whole foods into Cronometer. Just six ounces of beef, pork, or six eggs gives from 40 to 70 grams of protein, and from 120 to about 200 percent the daily selenium value. That's with a 2000 calorie diet--so this isn't even a problem on a very strict 4:1 ketogenic ratio--if it's with real meat or eggs as the protein source.

What if I pulled out some early formula diet studies to prove that a mixed diet is deadly? Why would you take me seriously? One misstep in baby formula used palm oil to better approach the fatty acid profile in mother's milk. Problem was there was a slight difference in the triglyceride profile. Enzymes for digesting triglycerides from mother's milk "expect" the fatty acids--say, oleic, palmitic, palmitic--to be in a certain order on the glycerin backbone. A different arrangement in palm oil made for poorer digestion, and the undigested oil tended to form undigestible soaps with calcium. Kids got rickets from this formula. This was a non-ketogenic formula. So, non-ketogenic diets are overrated and suck. Maybe I'm constructing a strawman. Let our strawman armies have at it.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links