/ck/ - Food & Cooking

>>13327310
No, also, veganism is an eating disorder.

>>13327310

Been like 2 years on keto, yeah it works. Though I didn't do any blood tests and shit.
But it's boring, carbs are tasty, just have a balanced diet and limit your calories.

>>13327310
Yes. I do it once a day, and it works every time!

>>13327310
It works. I lost 70lbs in under a year. And theres plenty to experiment with to keep it interesting so you dont get bored. Filet with a cauliflower puree, etc.

>>13327310
It works pretty well for weight loss. I lost 50 pounds in 3 months doing it, with a bit of bike riding. Everything starts tasting better, too.
Be warned that the first 3 weeks will make you feel like absolute shit as your body adapts. It's worth it, though.

No, stop being a lazy fat shit and go for a jog.

>>13327310
Heh

>>13327315
Listen Joe, egg jalapeno sandwiches aren't keto.

>>13327310
Ketogenic diet can help children with drug resistant epilepsy not have as many seizures. It still isn't used very often though because it's one of the least tolerable treatments in existence when you're actually doing it right and almost everyone ends up dropping it for that reason.
e.g. If you look at the data on the kids who've been placed on the ketogenic diet as a treatment for childhood epilepsy, the normal annual incidence of pediatric kidney stones is something like 3.7 per 100,000 kids, compared with 1 in 10 kids on the ketogenic diet:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2852806/
That's an increase in annual kidney stone risk by a factor of 2,700.
For weight loss as a meme diet it doesn't do anything.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19246357
>Comparison of weight-loss diets with different compositions of fat, protein, and carbohydrates.
>CONCLUSIONS: Reduced-calorie diets result in clinically meaningful weight loss regardless of which macronutrients they emphasize.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/7096307_Ketogenic_low-carbohydrate_diets_have_no_metabolic_advantage_over_nonketogenic_low-carbohydrate_diets
>Ketogenic low-carbohydrate diets have no metabolic advantage over nonketogenic low-carbohydrate diets
>KLC and NLC diets were equally effective in reducing body weight and insulin resistance, but the KLC diet was associated with several adverse metabolic and emotional effects. The use of ketogenic diets for weight loss is not warranted.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27385608
>Energy expenditure and body composition changes after an isocaloric ketogenic diet in overweight and obese men.
>CONCLUSION: The isocaloric KD was not accompanied by increased body fat loss but was associated with relatively small increases in EE that were near the limits of detection with the use of state-of-the-art technology.

>>13327374
Perhaps the problem isn't keto itself but one of the popular keto-friendly foods causing kidney stones.
>nonketogenic low carb diet
Like what?

>>13327310
It will if your problem is currently drinking too much soda, eating too many cookies, etc. because it forces you to cut that stuff out. If you're mostly getting your carbs from fruit, lentils, whole grains, and other unprocessed foods, which you should be doing anyway, it probably won't have much benefit.

You can also lose weight by eating nothing but junk food as long as you count calories.

>>13327372
wow, that's crazy. You ever try DMT? Jamie, pull that shit up.

Yes but the catch is that you have to continue following it forever

>>13327310
Yeah, your Mom said keto works really well (she calls my dick keto) lol

>>13327310
calories in < calories out
yes it works cause you will be fuller longer and meat is often less calories/oz compared to carb based foods, but if you go full no carbs, you will want to kill yourself out of lack of variety in food

no you cant be on keto eternally unless you want a liver failure

>>13328094
fucking kek

>>13327374
>ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2852806/
>based on a single case
kek you can't even deduce a causal link with that shit

>>13327311
No

>>13328866
>fuller longer
no you keto retard. u are a disgrace to the human race spreading disinfo like this.

I went from 300 to 170 on keto. Four years later I've maintained my weight give or take a handful of pounds, though at one point I got down as low as 155 and looked like a malnourished skeleton despite sucking down fat and protein all day. Being in ketosis makes me feel shitty and excessively energized and I hate it so I eat just enough carbs to stay out of it. Feeling much better these days.

>>13327310
yes. Ignore these spergs that consume highly processed carb rich foods and complain they can't lose weight. Keto is fun, yummy, and great for weight loss!

>t.ketoer

>>13327374
>source: your ass and obscure internet retardation
Got it.

>>13329438
>based on a single case
No it isn't.

>>13329467
>so I eat just enough carbs
You're not doing keto. You're just eating less. Stupid fat fuck. You could have lost weight by cutting your intake of any part of your diet. Or you know, exercise. But I'm sure you're too much of a worthless piece of shit fat fuck to get off your ass and do that.

>>13329438
>based on a single case
Ketotards confirmed illiterate.
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2852806/
>There have been several reports about renal calculi developing in children on the ketogenic diet since the first report more than 30 years ago.9-11 The prevalence of renal caculi in people on the ketogenic diet is 3-10%, compared with 1 in several thousand in the general population.12 Chronic acidosis, dehydration, low urine pH, and fat malabsorption all contribute to the formation of uric acid and calcium oxalate stones.9,10

>>13330378
f͓͕͇̜̗̈́̇̏ͨ͆ͧ̽̿̄̓̆̑u̳̥̝̮̘̪͙̩̳̳̠͍͙͚̦̹͒̾̾ͤ͑ͣ̓ͫͮ̽c̙̻͖̠͙̟̪̦̪̹͚͛ͧ͗͑ͭ̐̿̐̆̎̂ͅk̼̝̜̱̤͖͌͆̓ͅ

>>13330370
>Three separate peer reviewed and published formal studies demonstrating how changing the macronutrient ratio while keeping calories kept the same has no impact on weight is "obscure" and an ass pull

>>13327310
No but carnivore does.

>>13327310
>do keto
>do

you mean "DOES keto actually work"
its DOES not DO

>>13327362
overweight people should never jog

you can allways lose weight but knee damage is permanent

>>13330991
Anon, be nice, he's clearly melaninly challenged

>>13327311
"Insulin is fat-sparing."

..

>>13327310
The theory behind it has no empirical support, but it will work just like most other decent diets. Watch what you eat, cut out junk, and up your protein intake because most western diets have leaned so heavy on instant eat carbs. It might even do more harm than good. Putting your body into that "ketogenic state" doesn't melt calories off or anything, all it does is put stress on your body. You're cortisol will raise, and then your TSH will raise and then next thing you know, you've got a metabolic disorder. Most westerners could benefit from switching out like 20-30 percent of their carb intake with mostly protein with some good fat. though.

>>13331091
>cortisol
A). http://aboutlifting.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/lowcarbmusclegain.pdf
>There were no significant changes in glucagon, total or free testosterone, sex hormone binding globulin (SHBG), insulin-like growth factor-I (IGF-I), cortisol, or triiodothyronine (T(3)) uptake ..
B). Ashwagandha.

>>13331190
>aboutlifting.com
cool source bro

>>13331198
>[Not an argument].

>>13331209
Here's one quick case study done that's from something better than some PDF 20-30 year old "study" from a fucking bodybuilding website

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28076316

>>13330353
Carbs don't break the rules of thermodynamics, you fat retard.

Shit, going carnivore now to darken my glasses and change my hairstyle

>>13330353
Actually never had problems with weight because not a retard

>>13331231
That had/has a pubmed also (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12077732))

.>https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28076316
>20/120 developed hypothyroidism
>[No further statistics .. because it's gateway'd].
>[Nothing on cortisol, which is what I was actually discussing].
>[Correlation != causation; and it's statistically likely that they weren't getting proper diets – "full nutrition" being an extreme rarity, some 1% of demographics – and keto is technically *not* fasting].
..

>>13327374
all this says is that keto (very low carb) has no more effect than low-carb. most people who do keto as a fad are just doing low carb, not the real keto. it's become a synonym for low-carb diet, the way atkins used to be.

low-carb diets are undeniably and demonstrably better than just calorie restriction alone, especially for people with type ii diabetes or who are close to getting it. carb restrictions reduce insulin resistance and facilitate weight-loss faster while not requiring them to give up some of the "junk" food that a low-fat diet would.

>>13330996
No reason they can't go for a walk or lift weights.

>>13331263
>20% developed negative side effects to the point of being recommended to discontinue the diet
>correlation doesn't equal causation lol
what's it like to be this stupid?

>>13331325
"Hey, with how rare proper nutriments are, maybe they're simply not getting iodine."

..

>>13327310
Fasting is fastest
Carni is easiest

If you're not doing explosive cardio or weightlifting, you can easily get away with less than 50g net carbs a day

and no, there is no risk of deficiency if you eat like an adult (plenty of cruciferous vegetables and balanced fats)

in fact, if you a big brain and incorporate canned fish (sardines, mackarel, oysters) and organ meats (collagen rich nose to tail eating and beef liver especially) you will actually pretty much knock out the risk of any major deficiency and be far healthier than any other meal plan

fact is people are retarded, not actually informed, and dont know how to eat.

if even one person reads this and their lives improves even half as much as mine has, i will be glad.

you dont have to give up carbs, you just have to earn them with exercise and stop eating them in every fucking meal because they are energy rich and nutrient poor (this is the rule, exceptions exist)

the only difficult part with a LCHF diet is deciding whether or not you will purchase organic veg and GFGF (i.e. pasture raised) animal products because the science simply isnt there yet and the economics can be hard to balance

>>13331232
Nah they just mitigate how effectively you can utilise such rules

>>13331325
Seriously, its so hilarious seeing an autist cry about correlation for a study that is directly investigating the metabolic interactions lmao. Its the pseud cop out to having to directly address an argument

>>13331560
>please follow my retarded cult!!!!

>>13331637
Aren't epileptic keto diets for more restrictive of protein

>>13331637
+ you're lookin' at children with herpes siezures & shit in there kek

>>13331637
>>13331656
>>13331659
I mean, if someone wants to provide a better source supporting it, I'll wait. I have to go with what's free online since I'm at home and don't have access to the journal library from work. I have to go off of whatever NIH or WHO has available because anything else free on the internet is suspect at best.

>>13331091
>The theory behind it has no empirical support
>Carbs raise insulin significantly
>Insulin stores fat
>Body better utilises stored fat after carb abstinence
>Browning of adipose tissue
>Net antioxidant
>BDNF

Femanon here, can confirm that it works

>>13331725
Ooh I can leverage fancy sounding biomarkers without support as well
>muh elevated CRP
>muh elevated LDL:HDL ratio
>muh elevated VLDL
>muh elevated TSH
>muh elevated cortisol
>muh lipolysis that leads to net free radicals

>>13331264
>all this says is that keto (very low carb) has no more effect than low-carb.
Once again, ketotards can't read. I'll post the ones you didn't understand again (they aren't limited to non-keto low carb vs. keto):
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19246357
>Comparison of weight-loss diets with different compositions of fat, protein, and carbohydrates.
>CONCLUSIONS: Reduced-calorie diets result in clinically meaningful weight loss regardless of which macronutrients they emphasize.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27385608
>Energy expenditure and body composition changes after an isocaloric ketogenic diet in overweight and obese men.
>CONCLUSION: The isocaloric KD was not accompanied by increased body fat loss but was associated with relatively small increases in EE that were near the limits of detection with the use of state-of-the-art technology.

>>13327374
Maybe they should drink water.

>>13327310
Depends.
It’s all about calories in v calories out.

>>13327310
>do keto actually work?
No. If you're eating the same amount of calories you will lose the same amount of weight. Getting fewer of your calories from carbohydrates doesn't change this. "Keto" for weight loss (as opposed to epilepsy) is another retarded fad diet like the low-fat craze of the 90s.

>>13331780
Well, it was a study of a dozen people for a month, so ehh.

I think keto people are off and on dieters, crash dieting. The true keto diet ignores the ordinary starvation hunger pangs which is exactly what some people want and need.to stick to their goal of x number of pounds.

I'm convinced that carbs help the brain chem replenishment and balance, and low carb dieters are depressed as shit. They feel bad all the time and don't even know why. The risks to the kidneys are very real on a high protein diet and these risks outweigh any hunger pangs or weird obsessing over optimal nutrition all the time. If you're training for the olympics or have an othrewise hectic and high demand life, gather all your facts together, and graze across all the the medical ideas, but stay away from anything extreme. If you move more, you can eat more.

>>13331828
>Well, it was a study of a dozen people for a month, so ehh.
There are two different studies there. Why do you keep reading the first link on every post you respond to and then somehow fail to understand there are other links in the post? This is the second time now.

>>13331805
>Maybe they should drink water.
Those are children with drug resistant epilepsy who were on strictly monitored medical diets you idiot. They didn't forget to give the kids water.

>>13331748
not him but that's not fancy terminolgoy at all, he's referring to new research on LCHF and CIM

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6082688/

you sound pretty uninformed as you see to be simply mentioned basic blood panel metrics for some reason.

since i know you're lazy, ill go ahead and summarize the article above for you

CIM - a new way of looking at macronutrient philosphy -- its a physiological look at carbs, not a physics approach to diet (which is the classic calories in:calories out. Basically, carbs, especially as a proportion of overall calories and lifestyle have a deleterious effect on your hormones which reduce overall health and QoL in many people.
it also tackles why trying to lose weight through CRaP (caloric reduction as a practice) rather than true lifestyle overhaul is overwhelmingly unsuccessful. In fact, CRaP conducted on participants by professionals has been shown to induce metabolic disorder in metabolic ward studies (considered the gold standard in nutrition science, it's not shitty epidemiology). it's even worse when you engage in CRaP with a significant portion of calories coming from carbs. These studies are carried out over months, not weeks like your average low quality study

it's a major thorn in the side of medical professionals right now and it explains the primary mechanism on why the diet guidelines and AHA/big food macro nutrient recommendations dont work well for the general population.

this post was longer than expected, but I hope you learn more about the world, food, and what you put in your body before you start having an opinion on this stuff.

>>13331725
Protein raises insulin significantly too. So why are these people starving on rabbits? Oh that's right insulin doesnt fucking magically make you fat and you can store fat while insulin levels are low! How incredible!

>>13331843
Nobody actually complying with calorie reduction fails to lose weight. What you're talking about is people who stop eating fewer calories. That'd be their fault, not the diet's fault.

>>13331843
Have fun with your experimental diet philosophy. Unless I missed something, do you want to point out anything bleeding edge in that NIH study? It seems to parrot the basic CICO philosophy which has been known for decades and wasn't a point of debate here.

>>13331748
>muh elevated CRP
You can drop it right down if you go full carni
>muh elevated LDL:HDL ratio
>muh elevated VLDL
'Cholesterol' meme
>muh elevated TSH
Inconclusive effects unless you already have shit thyroid function
>muh elevated cortisol
https://sci-hub.se/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fpubmed%2F12077732
"There were no significant changes in glucagons, testosterone, SHGB, cortisol, IGF-I, or T3 uptake."
>muh lipolysis that leads to net free radicals
>Net antioxidant
Means more of an antioxidant effect than otherwise

>>13331843
>hey if i editorialize this then people will believe me!
Lol. The actual evidence posted shows NO difference across the board in weight and fat loss REGARDLESS of macronutrient ratio. The highest quality of life which has only been quantified in this "shitty epidemiology" (top kek absolute fucking pseud you are) has shown higher carb intake is SIGNIFICANTLY associated with better health outcomes and quality of living

>major thorn in the side of medical professionals right now and it explains the primary mechanism on why the diet guidelines and AHA/big food macro nutrient recommendations dont work well for the general population.
Because the triple cheeseburgers and cokes they slurp down fill an emotional void in their life but not enough to fully satiate them and combined with their inactivity lead to a cocktail of disastrous health outcomes

>>13331888
>You can explode it right now if you go full carni
Ftfy

>Cholesterol meme
[Not an argument]

>>13331888
yeah, not really answering anything, and I'd love to look at that source, but it's Russian and password protected, so yikes, that a no from me. Looks like it the same NIH study linked earlier though which was like an n=20 group of type 2 diabetics following a low carb, but not keto diet.

>>13331899
>>13331899
Native LDL ain't a problem
Glycated and Oxidised LDL is

>Glycation
I'm sure you can figure that one out
>Oxidation
Gee if only we had a metabolic state in which we could more effectively combat such things endogenously

>>13331870
you've misunderstood.
the key premise is the under eating on a diet of carbs is a recipe for metabolic disorder and is a fundamentally wrong approach to weightloss
It explains why people lose weight, cant keep it off, and feel like shit all the time when they do

>>13331884
exactly what is experimental about eating a diet high in vegetables and animals products rather than highly processed carbs and cooking oils that have only existed for that last few generations? all you need to make bread is flour, water, yeast (pref wild AKA sourdough), and salt.

yet when you look at the ingredients on a bakery loaf (or worse, the bread aisle) they're full of additives and oils (like soybean or canola oil, to reduce cost and improve shelf, which is the objectively worst oil you can ever use)

>>13331890

>Lol. The actual evidence posted shows NO difference across the board in weight and fat loss REGARDLESS of macronutrient ratio.

And for each study that shows this, a follow up study shows they gain it back or worse gain even more weight due to inducing metabolic disorder. you need to review the entire body of evidence, not just cherry pick studies.

cont 1/2

>>13331900
Quality bait

>>13331951
>>13331890

>The highest quality of life which has only been quantified in this "shitty epidemiology" (top kek absolute fucking pseud you are) has shown higher carb intake is SIGNIFICANTLY associated with better health outcomes and quality of living

epidemiology is trash. it only tells us where to search and understand more. it doesnt explain mechanistic cause and effect, and should not be construed to imply a fact. we need proper studies to do that

the current guidelines on carbs and calories are so ineffective in the states 2/3 of us are overweight or obese (even controlling for the flaws in BMI) and at least 1/3 of us have diabetes or prediabetes (which, if you ask me, is essentially diabetes. the only difference is magnitude)
how anyone can think the higher carb intake (regardless of hamburgers or handmade pasta) leads to a better health outcome is beyond me. just look around you, fatties. fucking. everywhere. I agree with you on the food disorders, but we need to change the food and health industry too with its subsidies on corn and soy and its guidelines. modern highly process carbs are a plague.

2/2

>>13331940
Except it is a problem, what the fuck do you think happens to it? It just sits there benign? It clogs your arteries and is EXACERBATED by oxidation which is caused by just living and EXACERBATED by further refined lipid consumption and other oxidative effects. What are you shifting to next? Ketosis doesn't stop oxidation and unless you're a whole foods vegan keto you're not stopping lipid perioxidation.

>>13331831
>the first link on every post y
I only read the second link. It was a dozen men. That's it. It's not a quotable study, it's a means to an end to get more funding for a handful of investigators who need to make themselves relevant in a university setting that requires them to do research. It might as well have been called a Pilot study. Dropping random links of very small studies to gain an air of authority is as bad as accusing people of something not true.

Your assertions in >>13331843
is all very informative, intriguing, or else food for thought but your conclusions suck and aren't logical. Studying humans has far too many variables, and it doesn't mean we should stop doing studies, just that you should drop phrases like "it explains...." or "explains the primary mechanism.." because it does not. Because, no, it doesn't explain the overall cause or explanation or big picture, nor all the variables, from stress to activity, to genes.

I'm going to remind everyone that when Dr. Atkins died he had heart disease. What the AHA recommends has been to play it safe, not reckless, nor to follow fads. The people who make their guideline decisions are well informed.

>>13331951
>exactly what is experimental about eating a diet high in vegetables and animals products rather than highly processed carbs and cooking oils that have only existed for that last few generations? all you need to make bread is flour, water, yeast (pref wild AKA sourdough), and salt.
>yet when you look at the ingredients on a bakery loaf (or worse, the bread aisle) they're full of additives and oils (like soybean or canola oil, to reduce cost and improve shelf, which is the objectively worst oil you can ever use)
A lot of this kind of talk is just obfuscation though. You could say that (unless your doing that all raw meat thing which is weird, but there seems to be some observational data that suggests that inuits with all their organ meat eating are actually really "healthy") that you are processing the meat heavily when cooking it. Most of those scary sounding ingredients even in more shelf stable breads aren't all that scary when you know what they are, but if you look at fresh bakery products, they are usually pretty simple in the ingredients list.

>>13331960
interesting how ketards can only link trials with less than 30 participants or meaningless case studies

>>13331958
>what the fuck do you think happens to it
It gets recycled, fuckwit
>It clogs your arteries
Find a study showing Native LDL doing such a thing.

>>13331971
you do know that case studies aren't seen as credible in any research industry, right?

>>13331958
>Ketosis doesn't stop oxidation
Never claimed it does u mong

>>13331965
So have the countertards

>>13331953
>epidemiology is trash.
Yeah no one cares about your uninformed shitty opinion. Those are the studies which are the foundation for quality of life studies you dumb turd

>it doesnt explain mechanistic cause and effect, and should not be construed to imply a fact
They can and usually do, usually because it is statistically significant enough. But you wouldn't know that since you but I dont learn more about the world, food, and what you put in your body before you start having an opinion on this stuff.

>current guidelines on carbs and calories are so ineffective in the states 2/3 of us are overweight or obese (even controlling for the flaws in BMI) and at least 1/3 of us have diabetes or prediabetes (which, if you ask me, is essentially diabetes. the only difference is magnitude)
how anyone can think the higher carb intake (regardless of hamburgers or handmade pasta) leads to a better health outcome is beyond me. just look around you, fatties. fucking. everywhere
THATS BECAUSE PEOPLE DONT FOLLOW THE GUIDELINES
Where are you seeing these fatties substituting their McDonalds meals for a dozen servings of fruits and vegetables?

>>13331958
not that guy BUT

cholesterol doesnt just sit there -- it's used in various areas and they're lipid transporters. so if you IF everyday and/or eat a diet higher in fats, your levels go up because your blood needs to move around more fats -- it isnt a problem, its a logical adaptation.
recommend the "lipid energy model" if you want to learn more about the cutting edge of this

Heart disease (all 14 versions) are fundamentally linked to arterial walls not recovering from inflammation.

i think we poorly understand cholesterol and heart disease. blaming it on cholesterol is ridiculous at this point

>>13331951
>And for each study that shows this, a follow up study shows they gain it back or worse gain even more weight due to inducing metabolic disorder. you need to review the entire body of evidence, not just cherry pick studies
Lol thats because they're not adhering the diet you absolute fucking retard. They aren't just magically ballooning up. They're overeating even more. Their metabolic disorder is a lack of control. You literally have cherrypicked AN OPINION piece over MULTIPLE metabolic ward studies

>>13331976
except people making fun of ketards have every single government research institution and food scientists behind them
you have youtubers and "case studies" done by one person in a third world country with no publications

>>13331990
>Appeal to authority
Huge brain

>>13331996
>every country is secretly conspiring against you despite publishing the trillion dollar research (including trials done with keto)
>btw heres a case study i found from Bangladesh that says keto is good

>>13331971
It gets recycled into your arteries. It clogs your arteries and damages the endothelial lining. Its fucking heart disease. Like what?
https://www.heart.org/en/health-topics/cholesterol/about-cholesterol/atherosclerosis

>>13331976
So then your metabolic state bullish was a non sequitur and lipid perioxidation does in fact exacerbate heart disease, gotcha

>>13331983
Yes, from your liver, not from your fucking arteries. You didn't disprove a single thing I said and youre just obfuscating the issue to protect your cult

>>13332005
Which 3rd world study are you even referring to?

>>13331960
my friend...I didn't make the ...831 post

anyways
they ARE explaining the mechanistic cause and effect of carbs on the human body.
it's a lot to unpack but it's connected to insulin and hormone secretion, both of which are completely different when compared to a diet lower in carbs (10-25% or less, depending on activity). basically, consuming carbs in a caloric deficit wreaks havoc on your hormones & mitochondria, the same havoc is not replicated when you do LCHF

>>13331963
organ meats are totally healthy. just look at the micro nutrient composition
https://nutritiondata.self.com/facts/beef-products/3469/2
https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/why-liver-is-a-superfood

historically, animals took significant resources to cultivate/hunt. we would use every part possible and be better for it. recommend you look into "nose to tail eating" and the culinary book "offal good". organ meats (esp. bones from fish) are very high in all the micronutrients that become common deficiencies and are notably lower than vegetables in phytates and other anti nutrients. I AM NOT SAYING VEGETABLES ARE BAD, I CONSUME MORE VEG THAN MEAT ON ALMOST EVERY PLATE.

Also, i am not saying we shouldnt study, I am simply saying that epidemiology is not a substitute for proper research. it really is trash. if you really think there are "too many variables" in explaining biophysics? then epidemiology and Mendelian regression shouldn't even be on your list of "things i will consider as likely-to-be-true"

>>13332008
>LDL is heart disease
Top kek

>So then your metabolic state bullish was a non sequitur and lipid perioxidation does in fact exacerbate heart disease, gotcha
It means u're under fuckin' less oxidative stress than if you were on a carb based diet

>>13332033
LDL buildup in your arteries is a form of heart disease yes. Any other lessons you'd like to learn today?

>means u're under fuckin' less oxidative stress than if you were on a carb based diet
Yeah nothing spells not oxidation like eating more saturated fat and cholesterol to cause lipid perioxidation of your sky high LDL.

>>13332024
What's funny is you still cant actually post a metabolic study proving this, you are just filling in the blanks with mechanisms which are hilariously even sensationally lower on the evidence hierarchy than "shitty epidemiology"

You are a complete fucking pseud talking out of your fat ass.

>>13332024
>basically, consuming carbs in a caloric deficit wreaks havoc on your hormones & mitochondria, the same havoc is not replicated when you do LCHF
Oh and youre again blatantly lying and obfuscating the issue when you just literally said it was AFTER they stopped diet adherence >>13331951

>>13332043
>LDL buildup in your arteries
Glycated and oxidised LDL is what builds up in your arteries m8, not Native

>Yeah nothing spells not oxidation like eating more saturated fat
Do you not know what "Net antioxidant" means?

"The main activity of the ketogenic diet has been related to improved mitochondrial function and decreased oxidative stress"
"B-Hydroxybutyrate, the most studied ketone body, has been shown
to reduce the production of reactive oxygen species (ROS), improving mitochondrial respiration:
it stimulates the cellular endogenous antioxidant system with the activation of nuclear factor
erythroid-derived 2-related factor 2 (Nrf2), it modulates the ratio between the oxidized and reduced
forms of nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide (NAD+/NADH) and it increases the efficiency of
electron transport chain through the expression of uncoupling proteins. "

>>13332083
"NRF2 is a basic leucine zipper (bZIP) protein that regulates the expression of antioxidant proteins that protect against oxidative damage"

>>13332083
The LDL oxidizes from your arteries. It comes from "Native" because you are building up more cholesterol. All you continue to do is prove the point that cholesterol is in fact a problem. Especially when you eat more and more of it. And eat more and more of the foods that cause lipid perioxidation like lipids
>you not know what "Net antioxidant
Do you not know your conjecture is irrelevant and that lipid perioxidation will occur if you eat lipids? You aren't posting these magical metabolic ward studies. You are just appealing to bottom tier evidence mechanisms.

>>13332083
Oh and lol here you are contradicting yourself yet again >>13331976
>I never claimed ketosis stops oxidation you mong

Kek, all over the fucking place.

>>13332108
>The LDL oxidizes from your arteries. It comes from "Native" because you are building up more cholesterol
Nigga what, you're so close to saying random shit stg

It get's glycated by sugars in ya blood stream
Or it gets oxidised by fuckin' many things

>oxidizes from your arteries
What?

Athersclerosis follows roughly as such

Oxidation/mechanical Endothelial damage/Inflammation > VLDL transports materials to signaling cells > VLDL offloads and becomes LDL > LDL if glycated or oxidised sticks to cell receptor (Open to further exposure) (Also shrinks to a size capable of permeating the endothelium) > glycated/oxidised LDL recognised as foreign body > white blood cells spew peroxide everywhere > further endothelial damage signals for more repairs

U gotta remove what's causing the damage to the endothelium which 'd either be HBP as a result of obesity, hyperglycemia, etc or oxidation from whatever
Or a mix

>>13332111
You're officially retartet if you can't understand that metabolic processes require oxidation and that reducing ROS via net positive antioxidant capacity (And metabolic efficiency) is superior to not doing so

>>13332066
Pending definitive studies, the principles of a low-glycemic load diet offer a practical alternative to the conventional focus on dietary fat and calorie restriction.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29971406

Effects of a low carbohydrate diet on energy expenditure during weight loss maintenance: randomized trial
https://www.bmj.com/content/363/bmj.k4583

Weight loss with a low-carbohydrate, Mediterranean, or low-fat diet. Better blood panels than higher carb approach
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18635428

Metabolic rate plummets with CRaP + carb intake
Effects of dietary composition on energy expenditure during weight-loss maintenance.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22735432

Long term weightloss is better with a low carb approach
Effect of low-fat diet interventions versus other diet interventions on long-term weight change in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26527511

CRaP and the guidelines are ineffective
https://www.nature.com/articles/ijo201094

>>13328074
this is the most sane opinion on here.
I admit I'm a fan of low carb, because you feel satiated longer, but going zero carb is stupid.

>>13330378
>reading comprehension

>>13332168
>going zero carb is stupid
Not if you get migraines bucko
Sure helped me there

>>13332147
What are you having trouble understanding? You have LDL causinf buildup in your arteries independent of oxidation. You keep ad hom'ing this as "Native" as if that means anything. Oxidation further exacerbates the damage and complications.

>
U gotta remove what's causing the damage to the endothelium which 'd either be HBP as a result of obesity, hyperglycemia, etc or oxidation from whatever
Or a mix.
Yes like, like dietary lipid consumption

>>13332157
clicked one link, saw sample size of 21 people, closed link

>>13332175
>You have LDL causinf buildup in your arteries
False
You have a buildup of damaged LDL caused by oxidation & glycation

>>13332154
Officially retartet yes thank you Dr. Metabolic Ward study only giving bottom rung mechanism

>>13332181
Or ultimately caused by inflammation if you want to adress why it's so prevalent there

>>13332185
Inflammation caused by many things but often high BP

I think most people are retarded and look at the wrong place. Yes calories in calories out, doesn't matter if protein, carbs or fats, that is true.
But the thing with keto is, that you are way more satiated. That it, nothing else. And therefore you eat less because you're less hungry. Protein satiates you. And in Keto you protein intake is higher than in other diets.
That literally it, I don't get why people shittalk on keto here and say "ketosis" is shit. The whole thing is not about going into ketosis, it is about being less hungry (which also includes cutting out most sugar trash etc. which is probably even more oif a reason this dieat works).

>>13332157
You just reposted the exact same opinion piece. The remainder primarily show differences in follow up. Which again isnt a magic thermodynamics breaker as opposed to diet adherence. I dont see many arguing against something like keto CAN make adherence easier due to satiety through hormonal interaction. That relationship is in fact purely epidemiological in nature hilariously enough but you appeal to the mechanisms behind it which again is lower on the evidence hierarchy

>>13332181
Not false, dietary lipids increase blood lipids. These are inflammatory oxidative which increases plaque and oxidation of. You're yet again not denying anything im actually saying especially wrt to cholesterol consumption or its exogenous derived buildup

>>13332206
Also by refined lipids

>>13332240
>blood lipids. These are inflammatory oxidative
Sauce

>>13332244
>refined lipids
Such as what? I don't endorse seed oils if that's what you mean
PUFAs are prone to oxidation

>>13332256
And rancid oils are no bueno obviously

>>13330353
Low carb diets are associated with an increase in all cause mortality. Darwinism at its finest.

>>13332286
>associated

>>13332256
Oils, butter, lard, meat. Literally all lipids are prone to oxidation from exposure, thats not reductionism either. Thats matter of fact. You dont eat these in a vacuum you eat them in the open with other things

>>13332232
as I mentioned here >>13331560

The science isnt completely there yet. In humans, these studies are basically difficult to fund & conduct (lots of animal models tho). There are more, im sure of it but im on the run right now, recommend you look for a few yourself as an exercise to learn more about their alternative viewpoint

i think it's important to note that im not advocating a true ketogenic approach here (which is sub 5% carbs and low protein, appropriate really only for epileptics), simply LCHF. I think the incidence of metabolic disorder and obesity is directly related to carbohdyrate intake and american lifestyle. that simple. recommending a 40-50% carb approach to fucking desk workers is wrong as far as I can tell. it been shown that low fat diets fuck with hormones in men and women, even when keeping protein at moderate levels. the effect is amplified when combined with CRaP. In conjunction with the insulin response to carbs just makes the cycle even worse. and let me tell you, with the advent of automation and desk work, humans arent going to get anymore active

this article puts it out really cleanly in two paragraphs:
https://medium.com/@davidludwigmd/genetic-study-supports-carbohydrate-insulin-model-of-obesity-327d84be6d2b

>>13332294
You're such a mong
>Beef fat is refined
No
>all lipids are prone to oxidation from exposure
No fucking shit you dunce nigger, PUFAs exceptionally so

>>13332299
>a true ketogenic approach
Diet that results in ketones above ~0.5 mmol/L.
Doesn't require epileptic levels of restriction

>>13332294
not that guy but
magnitude and chemical reactions play roles too

a stick of butter oxidizing at room temp over the course of a week is very different than omega 6 PUFAs denaturing at high temps on a stove

even if you don't expose them to high heat ALL OMEGA 6 are pro-inflammatory (literally just google, this is not contentious), they're just even worse when exposed to high heat

people who live the longest have a ratio between 1:1 and 1:4 omega3:omega6. the american diet averages somewhere between 1:16 and 1:24. NO ONE should consume seed oils. highly processed vegetable oils are america's biggest and most dangerous public experiment, only to be challenged by the upcoming 5G revolution

>>13332251
On what?
>>13332293
Associations are stronger than mechanisms which you keep deferring to
>>13332299
>no true scotsman
Keto can have fats as low as 60% of calories, as long as it induces ketosis. Ketones in your pee and so on.

>think the incidence of metabolic disorder and obesity is directly related to carbohdyrate intake and american lifestyle. that simple.
Fats are the only food consumption going up. You keep perpetuating this myth about how only laborers can eat carbs without any actual evidence other than people overeating AFTER a diet. Obviously simple carbs are calorically dense, insatiable, etc. Not an excuse to blame fruits, vegetables, whole grains, tubers, legumes etc.
Again, insulin levels can be low and you can gain weight easily, insulin can be high and you can be satiated ie protein. Youre appealing to a SINGLE mechanism whilst ignoring subsequent blood sugar spikes and how they gradually (or not) regress and subsequent triglycerides. Genetics dont make you fat, you do.

>>13332339
>On what?
Sauce on blood lipids being inflammatory and oxidative in nature, that's the only content mentioned in the post
>Associations are stronger
Then you'll love the associations in the pic related to that post

>>13332306
Yes, straight beef tallow is refined like oil from an olive you straw grasping faggot.
>No fucking shit you dunce nigger, PUFAs exceptionally so
Obviously not, you seem to think tallow is protecting your heart when its clogging the blood flow to your brain making you such an omitting doublespeaking tard

>>13332326
Correct, butter skyrockets your LDL even more
https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/8/3/e020167

>>13332348
>beef tallow
I didn't say beef tallow
I said beef fat
Fat on beef
You said meat is refined
Fat on cow meat m8
Simple as
Get a clue m8

>>13332347
I said dietary lipids were. I can understand the confusion but that was clearly not the "only content"

>Then you'll love the associations in the pic related to that post
Sure. Doesn't disprove my point about appealing to mechanisms then whining about associations.

>>13332359
Beef tallow is beef fat. You really are desperate at this point aren't you? That is fat refined from the source itself much like oil from an olive. Maybe you should get some testosterone so you lose the prose of a menopausal whale

>>13332373
Oy vey, stay ignant m8
More for me

>>13332387
Oh yeah cool that was my default fallback at fourteen after literally everything I said was completely squashed. Difference is I wasn't a virgin then but you still are. Tragic.

>refined lipids
Such as what?
>Oils, butter, lard, meat.
>Meat
Meat lipids? (fat on meat?)
Meat is refined lipids?
Excuse me for assuming you're trying to say anything coherent

>>13331232
Laws of thermodynamics only apply to closed systems. The human body is not a closed system. You don't understand the laws of thermodynamics don't pretend you do

>>13332396
The fat from the meat, yes. I can understand your confusion since you thought beef tallow wasnt beef fat

>>13332402
Oh cool. Brb gaining weight while eating 500 calories of table sugar cuz insulin lol

>>13332392
Me and the other nice chap that was in here already know every claim you've made so far
We're not trying to debate as a contrarian
We've seen all the associative memes you've shared "completely squashed" and more accurate, consistent, logical evidence provide in place

You are being fed bullshit by the gov no joke

Correlation IS NOT causation
Associations are WORTHLESS
not science, get a clue

>I didn't say beef tallow
>I said beef fat

>I didn't say water
>I said dihydrogen monoxide

Lol

>>13332409
> thought beef tallow wasnt beef fat
Strawman
I have garbage to watch n it's 3am
Enjoy the other dude if he's still around

>>13332339
the "ketogenic" diet is classically as I mentioned and is a protocol for the treatment of epi blah blah blah

you can eat lots of carbs, fast for 22h everyday (i.e. OMAD) and you can test positive for minor level of ketosis in urine. that doesnt mean your diet is ketogenic.
speaking from experience here.

im not making a no true scots man fallacy, im simply clarifying my position as LCHF. the more active you are (or individual SNP locations predispose you), the more carbs you can/should consume.

Yes - fats from seed oils and other processed foods which ive laid out is the devil in multiple omega 6 related posts. it's no wonder that heart disease (all 14 versions) incidence (an inflammatory condition that is not directly caused by chloesterol) continues to rise as we consume pro inflammatory oils

not fats from almost anything else low in omega6:
fish
avocados
beef
etc.

>>13332358
many people have repeatedly referenced the lipid energy model and the irrelevance of total LDL. multiple panels from various countries have shown that cholesterol is not as harmful as ancel keys's fraudulent (at a minimum, disingenuous) studies indicated

if you're not going to review studies on cholesterol, stop talking about this.

>>13332416
I didnt say you and the """other chap""" didnt know of it. You just dont understand it.

>We've seen all the associative memes you've shared "completely squashed" and more accurate, consistent, logical evidence provide in place
Ive only posted metabolic ward studies. You've posted metabolic wards on weight loss but then infer something from post adherence WITH an association! While risibly shitting on epidemiological studies! And simultaneously appealing to even lower rung evidence of mechanisms!! Its madness!! Then you just opined conjecture about cholesterol with a couple other mechanisms. By all means pat yourself on the back though since thats all you care about obviously.

>are being fed bullshit by the gov no joke
Yes. Its such bullshit im fattening myself up and killing my arteries with vegetables, oats, and fruit instead of curing myself with butter and bacon. Clearly your messengers have no industrial interest.

>Correlation IS NOT causation
Thanks, seventh grade, Dr. Did I say otherwise? You can statistically find causation if the correlation is strong enough but you don't know that yeah?

>Associations are WORTHLESS
Of in itself yeah. Still worth more than the mechanism inferences you keep making. Or the strawmans you also make for that matter

If you'd like any other lessons please do comeback!

>>13332424
>I didnt say beef tallow. I said beef fat
Lol. Yet another contradiction. Dodgy Dickhead ill call you, Dodgy Dick for short.

>other dude
Lol just stop you embarrassing fucking virgin.

>>13332436
A ketogenic diet is ketogenic if it induces ketosis.

>incidence (an inflammatory condition that is not directly caused by chloestero
But it is. Its not the only cause but its one of the primary ones. An omega ratio isnt going to cure a diet high in saturated fats and cholesterol such as beef

>>13332444
>many people have repeatedly referenced the lipid energy model and the irrelevance of total LDL.
Yeah and youre still an idiot for thinking that disproves anything. Remember that whole discussion we had where you said it was irrelevant than said oxidation was the issue therefore implying cholesterol is an issue?

>multiple panels from various countries have shown that cholesterol is not as harmful as ancel keys's fraudulent (at a minimum, disingenuous) studies indicated
Lol yeah okay. Thanks for your certified input! You do realize we've conducted metabolic ward studies since then right? Repeatedly? Like the one I just posted?

It’s probably hard on your organs and will cause kidney stones later in life but the weight loss is real

>>13332383
Tallow =\= straight beef fat though

>>13332492
I mean tallow is usually put in a cute little jar

>>13332462
it isn't -- that's not the technically correct or classical usage of the term
>A ketogenic diet is ketogenic if it induces ketosis.

I just pointed out to you how if you adopt an extended TRF protocol with moderate total caloric intake (too many calories will take longer to process and thus you wont enter ketosis). Natural fasting mechanisms take over in the presence of low insulin and mobilize body fat for feed, which releases three types of ketones BUT it takes a significant fasting stretch (usually at least 18h for men, 16h for women)

a ketogenic diet is different and plays with macronutrient that lets you slip back into ketosis due to very low carb intake (usually sub 40g net carbs and very high in fat, even at the expense of some protein for true epileptics) where the body can dip right back into ketosis just a few hours after eating.

the terms are different and specificity is important.

LCHF =/= ketogenic =/= "keto" =/= atkins =/= paleo

>>13332500
It is. There is no set definition on how little carbs or protein you can take, it is or it isnt.

me the ketovegan raw soymeat eater

>>13331560
>Claims eating organ meats loaded with heavy metals is healthy
Keep on believing, retard

>>13332172
The only thing I've found that gives me migraines is if I have caffeine when I'm tired for some reason. No issues when eating carbs, or when I have caffeine if I'm already fully rested and not sleepy.

>>13332416
>Muh government is lying to me!!!
*Cites government studies to support claim*

>>13327310
Any diet that gets your input calories less than you output calories works if your goal is to lose weight.

>>13330987
He grew facial hair and got a tan. Inspiring.

>>13327310
keto is supposed to make you feel fuller with less
keeping the same amount of calories over other food won't do much aside form maybe providing more different nutrients depending on what you're eating instead of carbs

>>13327310
A friend of mine went keto/carnivore to try to fix health problems, wasn't fat. It seemed to help him a little but then he decided to stop doing it and included a little carbs and sugar. Got his bloodwork done and doctor said he might be diabetic now lmao

Keto to lose weight is pretty dumb. Jumping into any extremely restrictive diet with no preparation will make anyone lose weight because they just go "oop can't eat this, can't eat that" etc. so they just starve themselves. But with proper planning and grocery shopping then you'll just remain fat...

>>13330987

>>13327310
yes, but not for the reasons the ketards claim.

>>13328066
it isn't even that. the keto diet dissolves several types of kidney stones. unfortunately this loosens them from the kidney wall so they pass out the urinary tract.

>>13331637
>>13331694
"You weren't even providing a logical correlation."

>>13332413
rip teeth

>>13333403
>namefag doesn't understand how to use
greentext
Go figure.

>>13331996
>Fallacy fallacy

>>13332210
>The whole thing is not about going into ketosis
Except that's literally the advertised benefits of the keto diet. That's why it's CALLED keto.

>>13327310
yes, all I eat are eggs with jalapeno

>>13327310
Yeah it "works"

I was on keto for 6 months give or take a week and I lost an average of 9 pounds per month.

Went from 250 to 192.

Not if you eat an entire fucking chicken per meal like me

>>13335857
That doesn't mean keto made you lose weight. It means you eat fewer calories.

>>13333007
Plus the dope shades, sick hairdo and gun show

>>13336336
You're insane.
I just want you to know that

Like everyone else that went on Keto I lost weight.
As a consequence I also started working out for the first time in my life so thats nice. My physical and mental well being is much greater thanks to listening to Jordan peterson on joe rogan and testing it out.

>>13336415

Did you also start to make your bed and take regular showers? Never too late. Your mom must be proud!

>>13336413
I'm insane because I'm pointing out what's been proven a thousand times over about calories determining weight? Fuck off, retard.

>>13336439
No you're insane because of your brain being constructed wrong.
Your posts on 4chan are simply a symptom, normal people wouldn't make posts you make.

>>13336446
Calories determine weight you idiot. Deal with it.

>>13336462
Yeah, Im sure you believe other people don't know that when you decide to type your posts.

>>13336465
If you're claiming keto is making you lose weight then yes, you're revealing you don't believe that. If you did believe calories determined weight you'd know keto has nothing to do with it.

>>13336470
Sad case, really.
Well lets hope he gets the medical attention he so clearly requires.

>>13336472
I'll try to help you through this, anon-chan.
If you lose X lbs by eating Y calories with a non-keto diet and you lose the same X lbs by eating the same Y calories but with keto diet foods instead, this means keto has nothing to do with your results.
You're welcome.

>>13336484
It seems to have entered an endless loop.

>>13336484
i would also like to see his reaction when he drops keto and retains 20 pounds from his glycogen storages

>>13336486
Stop being wrong and maybe people will stop explaining why you're wrong.

>>13336504
Im sure crazy anons fitness guide book that says "cico" 20 thousand times is going to be an instant hit. You'll be a millionaire. Congrats!

>>13336517
it is a hit
every governments health department decided to take this cico concept and publish recommended caloric intakes based on the weight of a regular sized person

>>13336517
Instead of seething and dismissing everyone with misplaced superiority, can you answer one question?
Why does a girl eating 600 calories a day lose weight?

>>13336517
>Being able to sell magic solution books for delusional landwhales is a sign your idea is correct
Or maybe the truth that fat people need to eat fewer calories isn't very appealing and lies about how you can "transform your metabolism into a fat burning furnace" sell like hotcakes to fat idiots like yourself.

>>13336525
>>13336530
>>13336531
>You know everyone knows about cico
>You know half of the population is overweight and wants to lose weight
>You want to help people to lose weight
>You decide the best way to get people to lose weight is tell them about cico
>????
>The population is now normal weight

What is that ???? step in your master plan?

>>13336545
if people want to lose weight they have to eat less calories
you aren’t even making an argument, or denying that it’s true. you’re claiming people are too stupid and gluttonous to do cico just because you were
just three years ago “if it fits your macros” was a much bigger trend than keto, which proves you wrong
it was so big that it led to my fitness pal being purchased by underarmour

>>13336556
Great, they'll prob give you a nobel price for your insight into saving so many people.
Humanity is in your eternal debt.

>>13336591
seething keto fat boy

>>13336545
Keto fad dieting doesn't do anything for weight loss. It doesn't even help people with compliance better than other diets. Fat people who lose weight while eating fewer calories and calling it "keto" end up going back to eating more calories and gaining weight again later on at a very high rate like every other diet in existence.

>>13336618
>1. you cant lose weight by doing keto
>2. some of those who lose weight by doing keto will gain weight back
>3. this is why you should lose weight by being told about cico and then gain weight back because thats what happens with all possible diets

Anything else to add?

>>13336490
Why? Ketards are quite aware of this phenomenon, since they pissed that same weight out the first 2 days of keto, and regain/piss it every thanksgiving and christmas. Is isnt 20 lbs though, more like 5-6.

>>13336647
What is the point to "keto" dieting if we've established:
A) You don't lose more weight compared to other diets with the same calories and
B) You don't get better adherence results compared to other diets?

>>13336663
As long as it works its fine?
I mean you can do any diet you can follow, keto is an easy diet to follow.

>>13336668
It isn't though. It has no adherence advantage, which means it's just as easy or not easy as other diets are.

>>13336674
Well theres the lack of feeling hunger and being able to eat tasty food.

>>13336675
can you prove that keto makes you feel less hungry without saying "well everyone knows that...." or using anecdotes?

>>13336675
You could just eat good tasting food with better satiation profiles then. Neither of those two attributes are specific to trying to put your body into ketosis.

>>13336685
Not without googling. Protein and fat just seem to make people satiated better and for longer than say pure sugar water. You can test it by eating some noodles and see how well that works out.
>>13336686
Sure, keto benefits from not being tempted by eating a little of carbs that give you dopamine hits and dont fill you. Its easier to not eat any than it is to eat a little. The easiness and rules to follow are what make the diet so effective. You know when you're cheating yourself.

>>13336698
>Not without googling. Protein and fat just seem to make people satiated better and for longer than say pure sugar water. You can test it by eating some noodles and see how well that works out.
ok so you have no scientific evidence that keto makes you less hungry but you're still trying to argue with everyone that it does

>>13336685
There's a satiety index for how much different foods satisfy hunger. Some of these foods might be things keto dieters eat, but many aren't. Keto's supposed to be a high fat low carb diet, and high fat foods don't have good satiety index scores (meanwhile potatoes, porridge, apples, and whole grain pasta are all very high satiety):
https://www.glycemic-index.org/satiety-index.html

>>13336698
>Protein and fat just seem to make people satiated better
High fat foods have poor satiation.

>>13336709
what a surprise you don't link a clinical trial

Keto is trying to get the benefits of fasting while jamming your face full of bacon all day. Food addicts who don't want to quit.

Get some self control and JUST DON'T EAT. Then have a balanced meal when you break the fast.

Extended fasting until you get where you want to be. Then OMAD or a weekly 48 for maintenance.

>>13336714
Satiety index comes from this:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/7498104/

>>13336723
not a scientific sample size
seems to be a recurring problem with pro-ketard studies

>>13336723
>The highest satiety score was produced by boiled potatoes

>>13336728
It's not pro-ketard (it says potatoes are extremely satiating) and it is a scientific sample size.

Studies about satiety are completely irrelevant. Not being hungry is simply an explanation for why keto is so effective. It's true whether theres studies about it or not. If it wasn't true people wouldn't lose weight on keto.

>>13336728
>>13336734
Anon, are you retarded? That post is anti-keto, not pro-keto.

>>13336735
>it is a scientific sample size
>10-13 people

>>13336738
Keto is not "so effective." It has the same success with the same poor adherence as every other mainstream diet.

>>13336741
"Groups of" you retard.

>>13336744
>adherence
more people adhere to it than other diets thanks to the benefits of the diet mentioned before

>>13336758
No, they don't. See:
>>13336663

>>13336758
what benefits?

>>13336761
See what.

>>13336772
>keto shill cant read

>>13336772
The chart of a variety of studies showing keto dieters fail to adhere to their diet at the same rate as non-keto dieters.

>>13336786
In what context

>>13336792
I have no idea what you mean here. You want a context for keto dieting not having better compliance than other forms of dieting? The context is this argument.

>>13336802
What the study says the screenshot was taken from.

>>13336830
It's not one study. It's a comparison of the number of dropouts vs. adherers for 30 different studies.

>>13336830
>>13336847
Also the names of the different studies are all there in the leftmost column.

>>13336850
Right, I agree it is annoying to not eat carbs, they're fast, cheap, easy to make and are a part of the culture so in a study you should expect people to eventually to stop adhering to it like say after 6 months-1year.

>>13336336
Not at all.

I ate the same amount of calories, i had to eat more than normal to make up for it.

but sure, go ahead on your jewish tangents that it doesn't work.

>>13336928
Supposedly this works with insulin sensitivity and how efficiently fat is stored into the cells.