Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Vegetarian Diet Forum' started by JohnyT2, Aug 23, 2019.
They say you can’t run off a bad diet. Dietary control works but exercise helps too, it would seem.
I might be wrong, but when I have excess of vegetables, i chop them, make some gravy or prepare something from them and then deep freeze them so that I can use it when the vegetables are not available. So i dont think deep frezeer should be the best source of foods for me, its still the fresh fruits and veggies. I would go to them only when I dont have ample fresh ones available.
If glucose was suppose to be toxin generated after consumption of food, then there should have been a natural way to excrete it out instead of using it as primary source of energy. What comes second to my mind is why does even plants produce glucose after photosynthesis? And then plants again convert fat back into glucose for energy. Similarly even animals produces glucose.
Nature has some fine management system, we might have wrong understanding of it, but there has to be some reason why nature uses it as primary energy provider in all the systems.
Humans cannot convert stored fats to glucose hence ketones comes into picture. No doubt if we reduce intake of carbs formation of glucose will be reduced, that will reduce the blood sugar levels, as when fats are used for energy we as humans dont convert it into glucose. And thats why LCHF works well, because the intake is reduced and we are powering the system with fat, so body goes into a state where it using its is made to belive that its using stored energy, hence it tries to implement the efficient ways to utilize the available energy..
Alternately if fat was such a good source of energy, carbs would not have been the preferred choice of energy when its required instantly.
This are just my observation, I may be wrong, but I am trying to understand and figure out whats happening. I still agree for time being LCHF is kind of magic bullet for those who want quick resolution to the issue without taking much of physical efforts. And glad to see many have been able to make there life much better for now using the approach.
Obviously, like in computers world GIGO works, that is Garbage In Garbage Out, similarly if the diet is not as per body requirements then its going mess up the system. Diet has to be combination of all the elements that body needs to maintain a healthy state of body in the given usage pattern of the body.
Glucose IS a toxin, if levels rise too high in the bloodstream or in cells.
High glucose is one reason why beta cells (the ones that produce insulin) die in T2s to the point that they eventually need exogenous insulin. It isn’t ALL about a fatty liver.
The body tries to avoid damagingly high glucose levels by storing the excess glucose at fat, using insulin. Or shorter term storage in the liver and large muscles, as glycogen.
And when that system goes wonky (hello diabetes) and the blood glucose rises above 10-11mmol/l then the kidneys filter it out into the urine and disposes of it that way, in an attempt to prevent cell damage and death from glucose poisoning.
And yes, fat is a superb source of energy. Much more concentrated energy storage than glycogen, and without needing all the additional water that is necessary for the glycogen molecules. Endurance athletes on keto can do ultra marathons without the hassle of ‘carbing up’ and ‘bonking’ and their recovery time is much shorter. That makes fat and ketones a superb energy source, with a number of clear advantages over carbs in the same situation.
The point you make about ‘needing energy instantly’ holds true for short term urgent energy use and some sports (such as sprints and power lifting, although even that is up for debate nowadays), and the limited stores of glycogen in the liver and large muscles can cover short term energy demands easily. But that doesn’t mean it is ‘necessary’, or ‘superior’ for other energy supply - especially in the ageing or epileptic brain, endurance athletics, or (in my case) daily life.
@Brunneria Of course, ketones, many vitamins, and the vast majority (or all?) minerals are toxic to the body in excess, yet they are all necessary for life...so I’m not clear what being a toxin at high levels has to do with glucose being a preferred energy source.
If you look at the two points by johny that I quoted, and the respective two points that I made, you will see that they are actually two distinct points. Not a crossover/merge. Nowhere did I say that glucose being a toxin (at high levels) has anything to do with the body’s energy source selection.
In addition, if you read my post carefully, you will notice that I did not use the phrase ‘preferred energy source’ with reference to fat, ketones or glucose. This was a deliberate choice, since i consider the phrase to be inappropriate and misleading. The body uses different energy sources in different situations, depending on availability, convenience, habit and many other factors. In my opinion, the word ‘preferred’ is not a useful description, and places a false value on one energy source over another.
Any substance in body that goes in excess not beneficiary for body. As a result some or other part of body will have to work harder to overcome the situation, which might result into failure or reduction of capability of that system. This could be Pancreas or could be kidneys in this case.
The natural process of body is keep converting glucose into fat and yet maintaining required glucose in body, this not necessarily mean that it will only happen when there is excess of glucose.
Thats the reason why even people with lean body also get diabetes, its not that they have overloaded there fat deposits but there ability to convert glucose to fat is hampered at even nominal level and hence the glucose keeps rising up.
Yups that natural process of ensuring the system get balanced, either store it or through it out. And like I previously said, anything in extra which body is unable to adpat becomes unhealty for body.
Indeed stored FAT is superb source of energy, thats why body had developed a mechanism to store the energy in most efficient way so that when needed it can be used. And if the situation arises to use it, that means the situation outside is not that great, hence efficiency is must in order to use this source. Having said that, there must have been a reason why nature has not used it as default system in all form of lives. Probably its best suitable only if used as backup system.
Again I am here not saying anything against Keto diet of using FAT as source of energy. I am just sharing views for constructive and logical discussion. Every one is free to make his on deductions and chose what best suitable for him/her.
Every one can use both sources of energy, the glucose and Ketones and not to say many other forms available in the body.
Endurance athletes have trained there system in much better way to switch between various sources without a blip or bonking.
While many others who have not developed this fast change of energy resource with high demand hit the wall.
Benefit of being on Keto from starting for endurance athletes that we see today are because now they dont have to train the switching mechanism, they already on keto mechanism and supply of which is abundant in body so Endurance athletes get a performance benefit by bypassing that mechanism all together which should have been trained to be efficient to switch the sources.
Yes, I agree no single form for energy is superior, every form of energy has its own role and thats why see billions of people are having good time using all those energies in the way nature has configured.
Looks like we are in agreement then.
Yup, a heck of a lot more agreement than disagreement, and the quibbles aren’t worth arguing about - in my opinion.
The only way to really ‘get’ keto as an energy source is to experience it.
Until that point it is like trying to explain the sound of chocolate or the scent of Bohemian Rhapsody.
But that’s OK, I didn’t get it either til it turned out much better for me than relying glucose all the time, but I still value glucose highly, where appropriate, and my body couldn’t function without it.
Interesting comments all around.
a nice lively debate.
While not an expert on the prehistory of man, arable farming or the like.
i liked your point that we worked harder.and now it's a much more sedentary work force, albeit with Gyms galore and many taking exercise after work etc.
IS it possible, that the Low Carb works in combo with the Higher Fats..(better fats as i prefer)
....because that just how it's ALWAYS worked.?
i wonder if whatever era of history, mankind survived on what was available and little of that was in abundance all year round.
So for millennia we ate carbs and used them to toil in the fields or hunt our game
ALL within a balance and tolerance level we COULD manage.
So carbs for that instant power and ready fuel, Fats for storage when time were harder.
However, we upset that balance when we went all in on LOW fat / HIGH carbs.
so we are geared to utilise the fats as fuel, and i would imagine many would have used them exclusively over many a hard winter..
maybe it's more the champagne last the cheap wine first, mentality.
Especially now, as we seem to encourages the body to use carbs first because there is SO much of it being poured in Daily
All easily identifiable, when we consider the prevalence of eating fast foods and how many seem to eat constantly.
all actively encouraged by advertising, and the damage being done can be clearly seen by the growth is so many illnesses inc Diabetes, particularly T2.,, .
To my mind, i eat Low carbs and better fats, i'm not on keto diet, so can't speak of benefits.
but it does strike me that the WAY we eat has changed as has the FOOD we eat.
For me, i have gone back to a one maybe 2 meals a day..i rarely snack as my food keeps me satisfied longer.
what if the Carb overload IS toxic as @Brunneria describes, but particularly in a kind of drip, drip drip way.
No other era of humanity has imposed such a synthetic way of eating n the masses, as the American century did.
Hard to not to notice the coincidence of the obesity / Diabetes / Metabolic Syndrome/ NAFLD, with the very changing OF our diet.
So while it's a long preamble... i think you have a point,
But i also think the rowing back of what and how we eat, aka Low Carb and perhaps Keto as well,
ISN'T taking us away from where we SHOULD be food wise.
I think it's taking us BACK to where we are MEANT to be.
A place where we CAN balance our intake with output, a place where the carbs can make glucose in quantities our bodies CAN handle..WITHOUT the need to stress it's self finding imaginative ways to... Stash, Store or Hide the excess fat that produces.
by packing it around our organs or withing our bodies.
Using carbs for NOW food and FATS for when times are leaner
DOES mean Being Dual fuel, ..it just makes sense, imho.
It's just a shame so many have had to suffer the terrible consequences, over the years, for that to become apparent.
Low Carb High Fat is an alternate route that body uses when it doesnt have readily available simple form of energy.
Thus for those who are unable to process the available glucose, they obviously need to cut down the intake of glucose producing component in diet, that is carbs and proteins to certain extend, now if both of them are absent then body relies on using body fats for energy. Hence we see there is good results for people with Diabetes using LCHF diet. But one need to understand that this is just an alternate method that body developed for the time of crisis majorly and not for normal usage.
We also need to understand, that our body need to do a lot of processing to in order to first absorb fat from food. As you would have seen if you put a drop of oil in water it doesnt mix similarly the fat from food doesnt mix directly in the water available in intestine for simple absorption, thus a complex process has to be followed to absorb the fats. Thats why if you eat a fat heavy food you would feel heavies in stomach for long time as it takes time to absorb. Similarly how its been provided as energy to body is again a complex process as compared to glucose transfer and consumption.
Now with that in hand, i think approach to manage or go towards remission should be by allowing normal body energy processing methodology. Reduction of carb is just one aspect. The other aspect is what can we do so that the glucose that is in the body gets consumed and our body becomes efficient to utilize the excess glucose.
Important thing to consider is that one gets into state of diabetes type 2 because of excess of glucose in blood that happened because we use to consumed High Carb and Low Fat, which somehow looks similar to what we are now doing with LCHF, its just instead of Carbs this time FAT is high and we are thinking we are found the solution. Well it does work for now in given situation, but at the same time we should also think arent we now making problem for second system. What if now like Carb if Fat starts becoming excess we will have something like of Diabetes but thats based out of Fat. So we not only closed the gates for Carb, with new issue we will be closing the energy gates for Fat too...
These are just my thoughts, I am just trying to see where things are headed or could. I might be 100% wrong, but just sharing the concerns so that we can have healthy discussions.
Interesting points @JohnyT2 .
took liberty of rearranging one or two so my reply makes some sense.
I suppose, i now see the alternate route as something we have done as humans over millennia,
so not sure it is JUST emergency use only ..are my thoughts, though i see what you mean.
And while it is for THOSE affected, as in NOW..me n you and this happy band we call brothers and sisters
the prediction However is many more will follow... so the LCHF hypothesis then should, no MUST be established clinically
so if there are to be issues further down the road, then we should explore that possibility.ASAP
I believe Dr Unwin has a patient he monitors quite well at 6 years of lchf,
so perhaps, data while not on the massive side (wonder why )..IS actually there
And with an abundance of willing guinea pigs on here (ok just me ) willing to continue how we eat
AND be more closely monitored, that to me spells BIG progress...
But do THEY <> want that ?
Not too sure to how to power up our bodies except to do what we currently do,
decrease the Toxin that is clearly causing an issue.,
extend the time for our bodies to recover (I.F.)
And ensure the Glucose we DO take in is balanced with exercise of SOME sort
to utilise it rather then store it...( i usually just run on the spot with a bit of music, just to do SOMETHING after i've eaten if i can't hit the gym or get out for a walk)
Buy THE Most interesting point.
"What IF ( like Carb is ) Fat starts becoming excess ..will we have something like of Diabetes but that's based out of Fat ?"
i do consider that ..and i have no answers except for those that CAN be trusted as organisations..(DCUK springs to the top, mind)
should maybe open up a program similar to their Low carb one,
but more dedicated to the analysis of HOW our bodies react over time on this way of eating (LCHF or Keto)..
and i do mean years /decades..after all that is the Timeline the T2D epidemic has rippled out into society as whole worldwide.
( i do mean those who eat the western diet )
I understand the thinking behind your words, and while i may disagree slightly on some points, i think on the whole, the issues you raise are of merit and should be considered.
we turned blindly as ONE to face a different direction back when FAT became BAD.
I for one won't be falling for that again, So do not want to make the same mistake a 2nd time,
but for now, without any authoritative figures i trust, telling me truthful information
AS they KNOW IT to be..Right NOW,
rather then regurgitating a FAILED, Corrupt way of eating.
I see no alternative BUT to follow a select band of others, trying AND finding a way that suits their immediate needs TODAY.
And i SEE it work, in my HBA1c, in my daily mater reading, in my Blood tests
(whoever thought blood tests could be SO interesting ) and on the scales.
I do worry about the distant future, but i worry more about the near future, so it's a No brainer for me..
today, this Month, this year, THEN worry about next year.
An alternative (and in my view more correct) way of looking at it is to say that our bodies are designed to work most efficiently when eating low carb high fat but can cope with some carbs. However when we overload with carbs or our bodies start to become unable to process them effectively we develop T2 because we have overworked things.
High carb diets (grains etc) have been around for a relatively brief period in human history. Animal foods for millennia.
Highly processed foods for a few decades conveniently coinciding with the current crisis in obesity and T2.
You are making a lot of statements that are your opinions, yet you are presenting them as facts.
I think you would do far better to express yourself differently.
If you continue to make statements then you are going to be asked to provide references to those statements.
No. LCHF is a way of eating, not a bodily process.
Please provide references for this claim.
There are now numerous, longer term studies on ketosis that do not support your opinion.
My body is not in crisis when I use ketones for energy. It functions better than when I am fuelled primarily by glucose. I have more energy, more stamina, better concentration and my appetite no longer rules me. Doesn’t sound like a crisis, does it?
You are referring to an alternate pathway, not a crisis pathway.
Yes. This is great. It means that there is no rapid dump of glucose in the body, and energy release is slow and steady. I consider this a major advantage of eating no carbs. And because ketosis is a slow, long term energy release, there are no energy highs and lows like there can be with carbs. No worries if we skip a meal. No need to ‘carb up’. No need to endlessly snack.
Please explain why you consider this to be a problem.
I don’t. I eat high fat, and have done so for years. My body and my digestive tract enjoy this way of eating and cope with it far better than if there were carbs in the meal. No flatulence, no indigestion, no overly full feelings. No sudden hunger. No urgent need to eat. No sleepiness after meals. All those symptoms disappeared when I gave up carbs and my body didn't have to cope with carbs, proteins and fats at the same time.
It sounds to me as if you are talking about a way of eating that you do not understand and have not experienced - you certainly don’t seem to be talking from personal experience of a well formulated LCHF way of eating and a fat adapted lifestyle.
You are entitled to your opinion, but my body, and years of experience eating LCHF, keto and Zero Carb convince me that your opinions (presented as statements of fact) are not appropriate to me. I see no need to stress my liver, my pancreas and build insulin resistance for no good reason.
You seem to believe that because your body can burn glucose as the main fuel, it should.
Yet you state that because the body can burn ketones as the main fuel, it shouldn’t.
This is illogical.
Please provide references to support your opinion.
You seem to be telling us that eating LFHC causes T2.
It is nowhere near as simplistic as that.
And it is certainly not the case for me. And not in the case of many people on this forum. I suggest that you do further reading on the various reasons why people develop T2. In my case I have never been able to eat high carb, and I never fell for the low fat thinking. My glucose dysregulation and T2 blood glucose levels were not ‘caused’ by HCLF.
Please explain this theory, with references.
In 30+ years of eating low carb I have not encountered this problem in myself or in others.
Unless you can substantiate this with evidence, it sounds like scaremongering.
Yes. In this post, I think you are.
Let me share this again, just for you @Brunneria
I hope this helps clears base for your given below statement and the arguments there after.
Yes LCHF is a way of eating, that makes use of alternate route that body uses when it doesnt have readily available simple energy form. I hope this makes it more clear.
Your body is not in crises in term of failing to full fill its duty. But it is using a system that it developed to be used when there is crises of simple energy sources and it has to use the stored energy or equivalent provided from food.
Your whole analaysis assumes that a normal human body only runs on carbs for other who dont use LCHF which is not true, body switches in various modes based on availability of energy and its consumption requirements.
And its your assumption that I am considering it as problem If you try to look both sides you would only find it as point mentioned and not problem mentioned.
The example i gave was of a scenario where carb and fats are consumed together as a normal diet and not LCHF, obviously since you have low carb and high fat, the system has adapted towards it.
You have every right to assume
There are million if not billions who have lived 60+yrs of life without having diabetes even though they had high carb diets.
If you think putting up questions for discussion is scaremongering then there could not be discussion on the topic.
Majority of obese people fall into Diabetes Type 2 took like 30-40 or even 50yrs of high carb eating and not using up all the available energy in efficient way to endup into this situation. There could be 100s of other reason for type 2, no denial of that, its just generic statement. Stretching the same view point...it might be to early to come to any analysis of saying Keto or LCHF is right diet..
And finally I dont have a problem in being 100% wrong, at least i will learn something better from you guys which would be very helpful. But what if there are certain realities in what I am trying to discuss.....
Yes, in case where high glucose is in body is a problem, going low carb is one approach to reduce the issue due to high glucose.
Do you think there could be similar issues in future in we overload FAT by going LCHF and had overworked the things that process fats?
One more thing to consider is that when the high carb diets where consumed there where equivalent hardwork to burn that excess glucose. We somehow have messed up that ratio energy in and energy used. Some of the eating habits of ancient world for various age groups are very interesting reads, like for Japan, India, Central Asia etc.
It took our bodies decades of time to fail due to overloading or due to presence of certain form of energy.
Any thin excess in body is always going to create problems. This is a very complex scientific system that we carry and which is smart to adapt. So we surely need to give a long term studies to understand thing, there has been 1000s of year of diet adaptation across the globe to suit the body. Every region has different dietary habits, different type of foods and pattern. Every region had a diet that was adapted to regional availability of food materials, requirements of the body based on regional geography, demography and work habbits and it took ages to develop right food for right time of year in a given place.
Come new age, we made it global village and took food everywhere as means of convenience and taste and whole industry got developed to cater that convenience and taste and the science behind food for region, body type or natural adaptation of body in given region gone for toss.