Low Carb High Fat

[srw]

It's rather ironic that you raise the issue of daft diets, when you consider how things change over the years. Consider the humble egg. Fifty years ago, they were deemed to be healthy - "Go to work on an egg". Then around the turn of the century, "evidence" popped up showing they were unhealthy, and raised cholesterol levels. But now they're healthy again and don't raise cholesterol , and so you're encouraged to eat them again.

Another example is the "Five a day" campaign, launched in 2003. Earlier this year, they started back-pedalling on the inclusion of fruit juice, highlighting that you shouldn't drink too much.

So I wouldn't put too much stock in what you're being told is currently healthy.

I'm not sure either are good examples to support an extreme diet. The changing status of eggs is an example of science in action - operating on a small part of a diet. I believe eggs do raise cholesterol, but science's understanding of the impacts of different kinds of cholesterol has changed.

The fruit juice thing isn't really new - there's only ever been a maximum of one portion of fruit juice in the "five a day", which is itself a significant dumbing down of some reasonably speculative science. The recent publicity reminds us that fruit juice is sugar water with a few extra nutrients.

Too many carbs then!

Errrmmm - I'm responding to your citation of the Inuit to support your chosen lifestyle. Feel free to try whatever diet you like - but accept that if it's novel others will question it!

 

[brand]

Indeed he is. There are certain genetic conditions that make people more prone.

So maybe they shouldn't be on the lard diet?

 

[brand]

By the way in what form does the fat in your diet take?
And how often do you evacuate your bowls?

 

[brand]

Oh my god you are suggesting I give up Brussel sprouts!

 

[brand]

I think your user name may be appropriate for ketogenic diet and it is diet not a life style.

 

[velovoice]

No one at all is "prone to be type-2 diabetics"

"What a load of rubbish" - back atcha.

I for one was born with carbohydrate intolerance. Yes, born with it. Yes, totally intolerant. To ALL carbs. Coupled to that is a tendency to hyper-insulinism... which is related to hypoglycemia... which is related to -- guess what -- type 2 diabetes.

You are talking absolute rot and don't even know it because you're so convinced your opinions are correct, you haven't -- and, I'll bet, WON'T -- bother to research the facts.
Excuse me, my temper got away with me. I just can't tolerate the intolerance (irony intended) and judgemental attitude you are showing here. I have lived 45+ 42 years of varying degrees of hell due to carbohydrate intolerance, so this is really really making me angry.

**ETA to deduct the 3 years of BLISS attributable entirely to a LCHF lifestyle.

 

[Flying Dodo]

There is to counter view to yours, made up of the vast majority of doctors. That the only qualifications I need.
Herbivore
Insectivore
Carnivore
Omnivore
Fatavore .....yeah right
Human = OMNIVORE

Chickens receive a different diet nowadays and I have never read anything about drinking fruit juice is good for you. It is basically pure sugar (fructose). 5 a day diet advise hasn't changed. Other than to say it could be worth increasing it.

Yes chickens' diet has changed. However that's not what has changed medical evidence to revert to saying eating eggs is OK. What has changed is the realisation that even though eggs are high in cholesterol, it doesn't actually affect cholesterol levels in the blood. 15 years ago they were saying the opposite, and you don't seem to appreciate the changing face of advice.

Just because you don't have any knowledge of something doesn't actually mean it's not true. The 5 a day campaign has always included fruit juice - attached is one of the original DEFRA publications from 2003. For example, Innocent Smoothies have always advertised that 250 ml of their drinks counts as 2 of the 5-a-day.

And this year, as well as highlighting that really it should be more than 5 a day, but that it should be more vegetables rather than fruit due to the higher sugar content, so again the advice message is changing, and yet you say you'll agree with the majority of doctors. Do you mean the majority of doctors now, or 15 years ago, or 5 years in the future?

The whole point is that science is always playing catch up and bringing out "corrections" to previous truths. Here in the UK we're a few years behind the USA as in the States they're far more aware that it's carbs and especially sugar that is the main driver for obesity in the last 50+ years.

As I've previously said, the fat I eat doesn't get deposited on my arteries, as it's being used for fuel, as my body is keto-adapted to use fat rather than the more inefficient carbohydrates.

 

[Flying Dodo]

By the way in what form does the fat in your diet take?
And how often do you evacuate your bowls?

Normal meats, cheese, cream, butter. Whatever takes my fancy. For example on Saturday I had strawberries and cream for breakfast, then went shopping and cycled a few more miles with 30 kg of shopping. Then I went out & did some more cycling before coming back to spend a few hours working on bikes. Had a couple of handfuls of peanuts around 3 pm, and then about 6pm pan fried some chicken fillets with chillies, which I then ate with some vegetables smothered in molten cheese. Then I had some blueberries with cream.

I evacuate my bowels normally once a day, occasionally twice, but perhaps once or twice a week it might go to a second day between movements. There's far less waste material, as the body isn't being bulked up with stuff it can't fully use. So less toilet paper is used as well.

 

[Flying Dodo]

Errrmmm - I'm responding to your citation of the Inuit to support your chosen lifestyle. Feel free to try whatever diet you like - but accept that if it's novel others will question it!

I was in fact refuting brand's assertion that a high fat lifestyle causes heart attacks, and the Inuit paradox is that it doesn't.

 

[400bhp]

Bit of a vague, sweeping assumption.

Well of course. There's nothing to be gained writing a thesis on here apart from willy waving.

 

[The Jogger]

Yesterday I weighed myself on scales down at the local gym that read body fat, fat percentage etc etc. It will be interesting to see the results in maybe two or three weeks to see if my fat percentage has gone up or down. I really had an open mind on this but from what I've read and seen I am certainly leaning towards the LCHF argument, so we'll see,

 

[srw]

I was in fact refuting brand's assertion that a high fat lifestyle causes heart attacks, and the Inuit paradox is that it doesn't.

OK - my misunderstanding.

But given the 50-30-20 ratio of the Inuit diet, and the 30-50-20 ratio of a "recommended" diet, isn't a more likely explanation for the apparent paradox that the 50-30-20 ratio is rather more like the *typical* diet than doctors would like? That wouldn't explain the preponderance of strokes, but there will be other micro-nutrient differences; I suspect the Inuit diet is very high insalt, for instance.

Out of interest, what does the HFLC actually look like - is LC as in as close to zero as possible?

 

[The Jogger]

OK - my misunderstanding.

But given the 50-30-20 ratio of the Inuit diet, and the 30-50-20 ratio of a "recommended" diet, isn't a more likely explanation for the apparent paradox that the 50-30-20 ratio is rather more like the *typical* diet than doctors would like? That wouldn't explain the preponderance of strokes, but there will be other micro-nutrient differences; I suspect the Inuit diet is very high insalt, for instance.

Out of interest, what does the HFLC actually look like - is LC as in as close to zero as possible?[/QUOTE]

Low carb for me is under 50 grams of carbs a day, I try and keep it well under the 50. I try and get more fat than protein but am not too bothered about the exact percentages, which is what makes this way of eating easy to do. It's not weighing and measuring, it's more common sense and reading the odd label.

 

[The Jogger]

Low carb for me is under 50 grams of carbs a day, I try and keep it well under the 50. I try and get more fat than protein but am not too bothered about the exact percentages, which is what makes this way of eating easy to do. It's not weighing and measuring, it's more common sense and reading the odd label.

Not sure what happened there.

 

[Flying Dodo]

OK - my misunderstanding.

But given the 50-30-20 ratio of the Inuit diet, and the 30-50-20 ratio of a "recommended" diet, isn't a more likely explanation for the apparent paradox that the 50-30-20 ratio is rather more like the *typical* diet than doctors would like? That wouldn't explain the preponderance of strokes, but there will be other micro-nutrient differences; I suspect the Inuit diet is very high insalt, for instance.

Out of interest, what does the HFLC actually look like - is LC as in as close to zero as possible?

A traditional Inuit diet would have been 15% protein, 80+% fat, with under 5% carbohydrate (and that only coming from glycogen taken directly from eating seal & polar bear meat).

Salt is an interesting one. With HFLC, one of the many changes in the way the body functions is how it handles salt, in that the kidneys switch to removing more sodium than when burning carbohydrate. This means you have to actually add salt to things to avoid becoming light headed, fatigue or suffering from constipation.

Once you've become keto-adapted to run on fat (which takes up to 8 weeks), it is important to restrict carbs, as too high an intake takes you out of ketosis and back onto the treadmill of running on carbs. I've found by trial & error I can go up to around 100g per day of carbs before reaching the tipping point, but others will have lower levels. I'd be happy with lower intake or zero, but I enjoy the taste of things like strawberries (with cream). Generally though I stick to no more than 60g per day.