It is all nowledge I have from the famous dr. Fung and he´s statistics...
Then you need to mention that when you make these kind of statements. And you should be explaining what kind of fasting Dr Fung is talking about (because as I said above there are different types of fasting). So that your statements have a context.
Ideally, you could put in a link to the blog post or video, since people often want to check such claims for themselves.
- Fiber is digested by bacteria in the colon, and some of it is transformed into a fat called medium-chain triglycerides. This fat can be absorbed by the body and is very effective at turning into ketones. Thus eating more fiber (but still very low carb) could result in higher ketone levels in the blood.
I think this should read "short-chain fatty acids"?<<Fiber is digested by bacteria in the colon, and some of it is transformed into a fat called medium-chain triglycerides.
Fibre acts as a lubricant in the colon which helps the medicine go down as it were. There are also soluble fibres that we do digest but not sure what they metabolise into. They do not appear to have nutrition value, but help maintain good gut flora.I think this should read "short-chain fatty acids"?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3735932/
I've heard some people say that gorillas, for example, are essentially eating a high fat diet because of their fibre intake.
Not according to that paper I quoted. The host gets energy from the SCFA's produced by the bacterial fermentation/digestion of fibre. In the case of humans the estimated daily energy uptake is ~10% of calories.Fibre acts as a lubricant in the colon which helps the medicine go down as it were. There are also soluble fibres that we do digest but not sure what they metabolise into. They do not appear to have nutrition value, but help maintain good gut flora.
Excess fat gets passed into the bile duct, and also gets excreted into the lower colon to assist in lubrication as well as helping the gut flora. Think it is just a digestion thing.
Fibre acts as a lubricant in the colon which helps the medicine go down as it were. There are also soluble fibres that we do digest but not sure what they metabolise into. They do not appear to have nutrition value, but help maintain good gut flora.
Excess fat gets passed into the bile duct, and also gets excreted into the lower colon to assist in lubrication as well as helping the gut flora. Think it is just a digestion thing.
The paper you quoted clearly states that it is a theoretical treatise and is a presentation of the authors interpretation of what MAY be going on in our gut. It is made clear that it is very much a 'work in progress' so the conclusions they offer are not set in concrete. It is forming the groundwork for further research.Not according to that paper I quoted. The host gets energy from the SCFA's produced by the bacterial fermentation/digestion of fibre. In the case of humans the estimated daily energy uptake is ~10% of calories.
The paper you quoted clearly states that it is a theoretical treatise and is a presentation of the authors interpretation of what MAY be going on in our gut. It is made clear that it is very much a 'work in progress' so the conclusions they offer are not set in concrete. It is forming the groundwork for further research.
I found a more readable article at
http://www.fao.org/docrep/w8079e/w8079e0l.htm
It says much the same things, but is easier to understand. I think one thing both papers gloss over is that most of the fermentation is of sugars and starches that get trapped in the fibre as it passes through thr upper digestive tract, and which is extracted and broken down in the large bowel and colon. Certsinly the synthesis of actyls and butyls require carbohydtrate and acid to work, and fibre alone has little CHO content by itself. This is basic school chenistry..
Certainly nutritionists have noted that increased fibre has benefits for cholesterol and glycemic control, and we know the GI index appears to have its own validity. However, the -10% quoted in the first article is, I think, a figure plucked from the air rather than a true measure.
I don't think there is anyone who has the answers yet. Even the article I found has things in it that last years published studies seem to disagree with so it is still a heaving quicksand. All we can do is read these articles, apply our knowledge and experience to it, and then decide if it gives us the confidence to make any changes in our lives. If we find it works for us, then maybe we decide to share it with others, such as on this forum. I am by no means an expert by any stretch of the imagination, but I do have a questioning mind and a good bulls**t detector.You are probably right I have no chance to tell
I don't think there is anyone who has the answers yet. Even the article I found has things in it that last years published studies seem to disagree with so it is still a heaving quicksand. All we can do is read these articles, apply our knowledge and experience to it, and then decide if it gives us the confidence to make any changes in our lives. If we find it works for us, then maybe we decide to share it with others, such as on this forum. I am by no means an expert by any stretch of the imagination, but I do have a questioning mind and a good bulls**t detector.
.. we here know that it can get blood glucose down but if our type 2 is rather a insuline kind of poisoning is it then enough just to get the glucose down....?
Indeed, IMHO it is especially relevant to those with insulin resistance. By reducing carbs, the diet reduces the triggers that increase insulin in response to a meal (Amylase enzyme) and so the body needs less insulin and this I believe leads to improvements in reducing the bad effects of excess insulin. The LCHF diet is basically the Banting diet that was first published in 1863, and was a prime treatment for diabetics and epileptics before insulin was discovered by his brother. The diet is not new, but was modernised by Professor Noakes recently. It is a popular diet in Sweden. It has had quite extensive scientific study carried out on it in Ireland, South Africa and Australia, but has met with resistance in the UK.
P.S. William Banting based his diet on ideas put forward by the eminent heart specialist William Harvey who was the first to properly chart the circulation process in the body and is the inspiration of cardiovascular specialists worldwide.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?