• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans

Photo
* * * * * 4 votes

Ketogenic diets


  • Please log in to reply
410 replies to this topic

#241 Skötkonung

  • Guest
  • 1,556 posts
  • 33
  • Location:Västergötland, SE

Posted 04 November 2009 - 07:41 PM

At this point, I believe the science points to this dietary model (high-fat, high-sat-fat) as the lowest risk approach. I truly and deeply understand that that doesn't mean zero-risk.

What science? Clearly the posted evidence - and only if I am in generous mood - supports the notion that we're clueless, but generally, yes, it does support high fat, high MUFA, low SFA diets. OTOH maybe I missed some of the high quality evidence (or maybe the rope will really snap?)

I think there has been quite a few good discussions on the merits of such a diet. Perhaps you have been avoiding those threads? :)

#242 kismet

  • Guest
  • 2,984 posts
  • 424
  • Location:Austria, Vienna

Posted 04 November 2009 - 11:20 PM

I think there has been quite a few good discussions on the merits of such a diet. Perhaps you have been avoiding those threads? :)

I cant' remember reading much of this thread, no. But IAC it must have been helluva study to convince rabagley so deeply of this idea that - one wonders - I should have seen it, it should have been really in your face, in one of the (dozens? or at least several) keto threads I did read. Does not at all sound like the conflicting evidence I've read over the course of the last month in those threads.

Edited by kismet, 04 November 2009 - 11:21 PM.


sponsored ad

  • Advert
Click HERE to rent this advertising spot for NUTRITION to support LongeCity (this will replace the google ad above).

#243 DukeNukem

  • Guest
  • 2,009 posts
  • 145
  • Location:Dallas, Texas

Posted 05 November 2009 - 02:48 AM

Since the brain prioritizes glucose above all other fuels when it's available, it probably prefers glucose. Now, you'll get a lot of people saying that they have better mental acuity while in ketosis after a while.

Lactate is a byproduct of glucose metabolism. Astrocytes shuttle lactate to neurons (and maybe elsewhere) for fuel. The full extent of lactate oxidation in the brain is still unknown (at least I don't know about it), but seems to happen largely during brain activation and to spare glucose for other purposes.


I'm not so sure the brain prefers glucose. Yes, glucose is required by the brain -- in fact, it's the only organ that needs it. (The heart prefers fatty acids for fuel.) For the brain, it appears to run just fine using glucose for ~60% of its energy, while the other ~40% comes from ketones. IMO, this is optimal for the brain, versus a glucose-saturated brain (and thus, more metabolic debris, and more glycation damage).

IMO, a ketogenic diet is one of the healthiest diets, and likely the best diet for practically any chronic or metabolic condition like diabetes, heart disease, cancer, and most neurological diseases (like Alzheimer's). To combat any of these "diseases" (most are really self-infected conditions), I'd immediately go hardcore on a ketogenic diet, as well as episodic fasting twice a week.
  • Good Point x 1

#244 Skötkonung

  • Guest
  • 1,556 posts
  • 33
  • Location:Västergötland, SE

Posted 05 November 2009 - 03:21 AM

I think there has been quite a few good discussions on the merits of such a diet. Perhaps you have been avoiding those threads? :)

I cant' remember reading much of this thread, no. But IAC it must have been helluva study to convince rabagley so deeply of this idea that - one wonders - I should have seen it, it should have been really in your face, in one of the (dozens? or at least several) keto threads I did read. Does not at all sound like the conflicting evidence I've read over the course of the last month in those threads.

What are you implying? That we should all be agnostic until definitive scientific evidence illuminates the correct dietary regimen? I agree that it is important to remain agnostic without clear evidence. However, it is not as if we can't possibly apply probability to our agnosticism. People do this with religion all the time. I, for instance, don't know if God exists or not -therefor I am agnostic. However, based on the lack of available scientific evidence supporting God's existence, I think it is probable that he doesn't. The same goes for a high-fat, carbohydrate restricted diet. There is certainly no definitive evidence proving it superior to all other diets. However, based on the available scientific research, I believe probability is weighted in it's favor.

Since I started posting here, I have accumulated a list of over 65 studies demonstrating positive features of a carbohydrate restricted or ketogenic diet. I keep this list in a Word document. If you would like to see this list, to understand why I and others believe as we do, I would be more than happy to send it to you.

#245 daetake

  • Guest
  • 38 posts
  • 1

Posted 06 November 2009 - 01:35 AM

How feasible is a ketogenic diet without any dairy or eggs? Is it even remotely possible?

#246 Skötkonung

  • Guest
  • 1,556 posts
  • 33
  • Location:Västergötland, SE

Posted 06 November 2009 - 02:01 AM

How feasible is a ketogenic diet without any dairy or eggs? Is it even remotely possible?

It is completely feasible, it will just require more planning.

For instance, you will need to get most of your fats from MCTs. That includes coconut milk. Alternatively, you could also render fat from meat.

#247 Saber

  • Guest
  • 110 posts
  • 1

Posted 06 November 2009 - 03:18 AM

How feasible is a ketogenic diet without any dairy or eggs? Is it even remotely possible?


It's possible if you can stand eating pork belly, pork jowl or afford rib-eye and filet. MCT is just....no. It taste very good at first but now even the scent gives me goosebump.

#248 Sillewater

  • Guest
  • 1,076 posts
  • 280
  • Location:Canada
  • NO

Posted 06 November 2009 - 07:56 AM

Carbohydrate restriction, prostate cancer growth, and the insulin-like growth factor axis.
Freedland SJ, Mavropoulos J, Wang A, Darshan M, Demark-Wahnefried W, Aronson WJ, Cohen P, Hwang D, Peterson B, Fields T, Pizzo SV, Isaacs WB.

Department of Surgery, Durham VA Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina 27710, USA. steve.freedland@duke.edu
BACKGROUND: Recent evidence suggests carbohydrate intake may influence prostate cancer biology. We tested whether a no-carbohydrate ketogenic diet (NCKD) would delay prostate cancer growth relative to Western and low-fat diets in a xenograft model. METHODS: Seventy-five male SCID mice were fed a NCKD (84% fat-0% carbohydrate-16% protein kcal), low-fat (12% fat-72% carbohydrate-16% protein kcal), or Western diet (40% fat-44% carbohydrate-16% protein kcal). Low-fat mice were fed ad libitum and the other arms fed via a modified-paired feeding protocol. After 24 days, all mice were injected with LAPC-4 cells and sacrificed when tumors approached 1,000 mm(3). RESULTS: Despite consuming equal calories, NCKD-fed mice lost weight (up to 15% body weight) relative to low-fat and Western diet-fed mice and required additional kcal to equalize body weight. Fifty-one days after injection, NCKD mice tumor volumes were 33% smaller than Western mice (rank-sum, P = 0.009). There were no differences in tumor volume between low-fat and NCKD mice. Dietary treatment was significantly associated with survival (log-rank, P = 0.006), with the longest survival among the NCKD mice, followed by the low-fat mice. Serum IGFBP-3 was highest and IGF-1:IGFBP-3 ratio was lowest among NCKD mice while serum insulin and IGF-1 levels were highest in Western mice. NCKD mice had significantly decreased hepatic fatty infiltration relative to the other arms. CONCLUSIONS: In this xenograft model, despite consuming more calories, NCKD-fed mice had significantly reduced tumor growth and prolonged survival relative to Western mice and was associated with favorable changes in serum insulin and IGF axis hormones relative to low-fat or Western diet. © 2007 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

PMID: 17999389 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

IGF-1 was lower on the No-carb Ketogenic diet for these rats. Also provides some evidence of a metabolic advantage. Anyone have access to the full paper?

Edited by Sillewater, 06 November 2009 - 07:57 AM.

  • Informative x 1

#249 HaloTeK

  • Guest
  • 254 posts
  • 7
  • Location:chicago

Posted 07 November 2009 - 07:56 AM

Carbohydrate restriction, prostate cancer growth, and the insulin-like growth factor axis.
Freedland SJ, Mavropoulos J, Wang A, Darshan M, Demark-Wahnefried W, Aronson WJ, Cohen P, Hwang D, Peterson B, Fields T, Pizzo SV, Isaacs WB.

Department of Surgery, Durham VA Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina 27710, USA. steve.freedland@duke.edu
BACKGROUND: Recent evidence suggests carbohydrate intake may influence prostate cancer biology. We tested whether a no-carbohydrate ketogenic diet (NCKD) would delay prostate cancer growth relative to Western and low-fat diets in a xenograft model. METHODS: Seventy-five male SCID mice were fed a NCKD (84% fat-0% carbohydrate-16% protein kcal), low-fat (12% fat-72% carbohydrate-16% protein kcal), or Western diet (40% fat-44% carbohydrate-16% protein kcal). Low-fat mice were fed ad libitum and the other arms fed via a modified-paired feeding protocol. After 24 days, all mice were injected with LAPC-4 cells and sacrificed when tumors approached 1,000 mm(3). RESULTS: Despite consuming equal calories, NCKD-fed mice lost weight (up to 15% body weight) relative to low-fat and Western diet-fed mice and required additional kcal to equalize body weight. Fifty-one days after injection, NCKD mice tumor volumes were 33% smaller than Western mice (rank-sum, P = 0.009). There were no differences in tumor volume between low-fat and NCKD mice. Dietary treatment was significantly associated with survival (log-rank, P = 0.006), with the longest survival among the NCKD mice, followed by the low-fat mice. Serum IGFBP-3 was highest and IGF-1:IGFBP-3 ratio was lowest among NCKD mice while serum insulin and IGF-1 levels were highest in Western mice. NCKD mice had significantly decreased hepatic fatty infiltration relative to the other arms. CONCLUSIONS: In this xenograft model, despite consuming more calories, NCKD-fed mice had significantly reduced tumor growth and prolonged survival relative to Western mice and was associated with favorable changes in serum insulin and IGF axis hormones relative to low-fat or Western diet. © 2007 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

PMID: 17999389 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

IGF-1 was lower on the No-carb Ketogenic diet for these rats. Also provides some evidence of a metabolic advantage. Anyone have access to the full paper?


I love this STUDY!!! Can't wait to post why I actually think this study will vindicate low fat diets -- Even if it also shows Keto diets in a good light.

here's full access:

http://www.filefacto...er-igf-axis_pdf

Edited by HaloTeK, 07 November 2009 - 07:58 AM.


#250 JLL

  • Guest
  • 2,192 posts
  • 161

Posted 07 November 2009 - 11:43 AM

I think there has been quite a few good discussions on the merits of such a diet. Perhaps you have been avoiding those threads? :|?

I cant' remember reading much of this thread, no. But IAC it must have been helluva study to convince rabagley so deeply of this idea that - one wonders - I should have seen it, it should have been really in your face, in one of the (dozens? or at least several) keto threads I did read. Does not at all sound like the conflicting evidence I've read over the course of the last month in those threads.

What are you implying? That we should all be agnostic until definitive scientific evidence illuminates the correct dietary regimen? I agree that it is important to remain agnostic without clear evidence. However, it is not as if we can't possibly apply probability to our agnosticism. People do this with religion all the time. I, for instance, don't know if God exists or not -therefor I am agnostic. However, based on the lack of available scientific evidence supporting God's existence, I think it is probable that he doesn't. The same goes for a high-fat, carbohydrate restricted diet. There is certainly no definitive evidence proving it superior to all other diets. However, based on the available scientific research, I believe probability is weighted in it's favor.

Since I started posting here, I have accumulated a list of over 65 studies demonstrating positive features of a carbohydrate restricted or ketogenic diet. I keep this list in a Word document. If you would like to see this list, to understand why I and others believe as we do, I would be more than happy to send it to you.


A little off-topic, but agnosticism is not the same as "we don't currently know anything/everything about X; therefore I am agnostic about X". Agnosticism is the idea that we can never know anything about X. In the case of religion, agnosticism is the idea that the concept of god is so far beyond our comprehension that we simply can't say anything about whether god(s) exist or not.

Atheism is the idea that "I haven't seen any evidence of god; therefore I don't believe he exists until evidence appears". Many people mistakenly think this is agnosticism, but it's not. Atheism is the scientific method applied to god.
  • Informative x 1

#251 Blue

  • Guest
  • 1,104 posts
  • 11

Posted 07 November 2009 - 12:29 PM

There are a lot of evidence for that a true ketogenic diet (not simply a high fat or low carbohydrate or "paleo" diet) has many harmful effects. Just look at the hamful effects seen in children using this diet against epilespy: osteoporosis, fractures, heart abnormalities, kidney stones...

#252 Mind

  • Life Member, Director, Moderator, Treasurer
  • 19,247 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Wausau, WI

Posted 07 November 2009 - 02:38 PM

There are a lot of evidence for that a true ketogenic diet (not simply a high fat or low carbohydrate or "paleo" diet) has many harmful effects. Just look at the hamful effects seen in children using this diet against epilespy: osteoporosis, fractures, heart abnormalities, kidney stones...



Maybe you should share some of that evidence.

#253 Blue

  • Guest
  • 1,104 posts
  • 11

Posted 07 November 2009 - 03:16 PM

"PURPOSE: This study was undertaken to evaluate the exact limitations of the ketogenic diet (KD) and to collect data on the prevention and management of its risks.
METHODS: Patients (129) who were on the KD from July 1995 to October 2001 at our epilepsy center were assessed in the study. Early-onset (within 4 weeks of the commencement of the KD until stabilization) and late-onset complications (occurring after 4 weeks) were reviewed.
RESULTS: The most common early-onset complication was dehydration, especially in patients who started the KD with initial fasting. Gastrointestinal disturbances, such as nausea/vomiting, diarrhea, and constipation, also were frequently noted, sometimes associated with gastritis and fat intolerance. Other early-onset complications, in order of frequency, were hypertriglyceridemia, transient hyperuricemia, hypercholesterolemia, various infectious diseases, symptomatic hypoglycemia, hypoproteinemia, hypomagnesemia, repetitive hyponatremia, low concentrations of high-density lipoprotein, lipoid pneumonia due to aspiration, hepatitis, acute pancreatitis, and persistent metabolic acidosis. Late-onset complications also included osteopenia, renal stones, cardiomyopathy, secondary hypocarnitinemia, and iron-deficiency anemia. Most early- and late-onset complications were transient and successfully managed by careful follow-up and conservative strategies. However, 22 (17.1%) patients ceased the KD because of various kinds of serious complications, and 4 (3.1%) patients died during the KD, two of sepsis, one of cardiomyopathy, and one of lipoid pneumonia.
CONCLUSIONS: Most complications of the KD are transient and can be managed easily with various conservative treatments. However, life-threatening complications should be monitored closely during follow-up."
http://www.ncbi.nlm....les/PMC1198735/

"Cardiac complications of the ketogenic diet, in the absence of selenium deficiency, have not been reported. Twenty patients on the ketogenic diet at one institution were investigated. Prolonged QT interval (QTc) was found in 3 patients (15%). There was a significant correlation between prolonged QTc and both low serum bicarbonate and high beta-hydroxybutyrate. In addition, three patients had evidence of cardiac chamber enlargement. One patient with severe dilated cardiomyopathy and prolonged QTc normalized when the diet was discontinued."
http://www.neurology...ract/54/12/2328

"Long-term outcomes of the ketogenic diet in the treatment of epilepsy have not previously been reported. A retrospective chart review of children treated with the ketogenic diet for more than 6 years at the Johns Hopkins Hospital was performed. The response was documented at clinic visits and by telephone contacts; laboratory studies were obtained approximately every 6 to 12 months. Satisfaction and tolerability were assessed by means of a brief parental telephone questionnaire. In all, 28 patients (15 males, 13 females), currently aged 7 to 23 years, were identified. The median baseline seizure frequency per week at diet onset was 630 (range 1-1400). Diet duration ranged from 6 to 12 years; 19 remain on the diet currently. After 6 years or more, 24 children experienced a more than 90% decrease in seizures, and 22 parents reported satisfaction with the diet's efficacy. Ten children were at less than the 10th centile for height at diet initiation; this number increased to 23 at the most recent follow-up (p=0.001). Kidney stones occurred in seven children and skeletal fractures in six. After 6 years or more the mean cholesterol level was 201mg/dl, high-density lipoprotein was 54mg/dl, low-density lipoprotein was 129mg/dl, and triglycerides were 97mg/dl. Efficacy and overall tolerability for children are maintained after prolonged use of the ketogenic diet. However, side effects, such as slowed growth, kidney stones, and fractures, should be monitored closely."
http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/17109786

"Purpose: We wished to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the ketogenic diet (KD), and we also evaluated the prognosis of the patients after successful discontinuation of the diet in infants, children, and adolescents with refractory epilepsy. Methods: This was a retrospective study of epilepsy patients treated with the KD during 1995 through 2003 at the Korean multicenters. Outcome measures included seizure frequency, electroencephalography (EEG), adverse reactions, and antiepileptic drug (AED) number. The variables related to the efficacy and prognosis also were analyzed. Results: The outcomes of the 199 patients enrolled in this study at 6 and 12 months after the diet were revealed; 68% and 46% of patients remained on the diet, 58% and 41% showed a reduction of seizure frequency of >50%, including 33% and 25% who became seizure free, respectively. Finally, 66 (34%) of 199 patients successfully completed or maintained the diet. EEGs showed an improvement in background in 40 (72.7%) of 55 patients and a reduction in generalized and focal discharges in 41 (57.7%) of 71 and 15 (33.3%) of 45 patients. Most complications were mild, but five patients died during the KD. No significant variables were related to the efficacy, but those with symptomatic (p = 0.047) and partial epilepsies (p = 0.073) showed more frequent relapse after completion of the diet. Conclusions: The KD is a safe and effective alternative therapy for intractable childhood epilepsy in Korea, although the customary diet contains substantially less fat than traditional Western diets, but life-threatening complications should be monitored closely during follow-up."
http://www.ingentaco...000002/art00012

"Movement disorders or basal ganglia injury have not been reported as complications of the ketogenic diet, an alternative treatment for intractable epilepsy. We report on a novel complication of the ketogenic diet manifesting as a severe extrapyramidal movement disorder and bilateral putaminal lesions. A single case is described. A video demonstrating the movement disorder is included. A 5-year-old girl with a cryptogenic epileptic encephalopathy developed focal dystonia, diffuse chorea, and ataxia after starting the ketogenic diet. Cranial magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) demonstrated bilateral putaminal lesions that were not present before starting the diet. MR spectroscopy showed a lactate peak in the basal ganglia, suggesting a failure of mitochondrial energy metabolism as the mechanism of cerebral injury. The radiographic abnormalities resolved after stopping the diet, although the movement disorder persisted. Basal ganglia injury and extrapyramidal movement abnormalities are potential complications of the ketogenic diet. Concomitant use of valproate or a latent inborn error of metabolism may be risk factors for these rare complications."
http://cat.inist.fr/...cpsidt=14716929

As seen, although usually the ketogenic diet for children is only followed for a few years until the epilepsy improves, there are numerous possible complications. Studies above using a longer period also find problems. As comparison, all the human studies that ketogenic diet advocates like to cite have lasted only for a few months or at most a year. Now some these problems may be due to general vitamin and mineral deficiencies from this very demanding diet. Although if one uses a completely synthetic diet such as Ketocal one should get all the essentials in correct amounts. Another possibility is that some of these complications are due to the epilepsy itself or its medications, even if one the successes of the diet is a dramatic decline in epileptic attacks and need for medication. Still, there are certainly great potential dangers and very little, if any, knowledge regarding what this diet will do to healthy adults long-term.

#254 Blue

  • Guest
  • 1,104 posts
  • 11

Posted 07 November 2009 - 04:07 PM

I should add that the ketogenic diet for children with epilepsy is not an ordinary Atkins diet, or a no-grain diet, or a low carbohydrate diet, or a paleo diet. It is a diet intended to maximize ketone bodies by restricting carbohydrates and protein.
http://www.shsna.com/pages/ketocal.htm

Lots of the popular so called "ketogenic" diets may not be ketogenic, or only weakly ketogenic, at least long-term after weight has stabilized, if they allow a high or medium protein intake.

Edited by Blue, 07 November 2009 - 04:08 PM.


#255 DukeNukem

  • Guest
  • 2,009 posts
  • 145
  • Location:Dallas, Texas

Posted 07 November 2009 - 04:30 PM

I reviewed a few of these types of ketogenic studies on kids a few weeks ago, and some use these products:
http://www.epilepsy....keto_news_jul09

KetoCal, for example, is patently unhealthy -- here's the top five ingredients: Hydrogenated Soybean Oil, Dry Whole Milk, Refined Soybean Oil, Soy Lecithin, Corn Syrup Solids. Soybean oil is entirely unhealthy, and hydrogenated soybean oil is flat-out deadly (it's trans-fat). Corn syrup solids are seriously unhealthy, too.

So, when victims, err..., I mean, patients are used in these studies and fed this utter crap, I'm surprised there aren't deaths! Unless the study period is mercifully short and these kids can get back to eating something far more healthy, like Happy Meals.

I don't know if the above studies use these horribly designed products, but I have seen others that do.

Edited by DukeNukem, 07 November 2009 - 07:26 PM.


#256 Blue

  • Guest
  • 1,104 posts
  • 11

Posted 07 November 2009 - 04:55 PM

I reviewed a few of these types of ketogenic studies on kids a few weeks ago, and some use these products:
http://www.epilepsy....keto_news_jul09

KeoCal, for example, is patently unhealthy -- here's the top five ingredients: Hydrogenated Soybean Oil, Dry Whole Milk, Refined Soybean Oil, Soy Lecithin, Corn Syrup Solids. Soybean is entirely unhealthy, and hydrogenated soybean oil is flat-out deadly (it's trans-fat). Corn syrup solids are seriously unhealthy, too.

So, when victims, err..., I mean, patients are used in these studies and fed this utter crap, I'm surprised there aren't deaths! Unless the study period is mercifully short and these kids can get back to eating something far more healthy, like Happy Meals.

I don't know if the above studies use these horribly designed products, but I have seen others that do.

That is a very good point. Regarding those not using Ketocal or another prefabricated diet I think the children are at serious risk for for vitamin and mineral deficiencies if the diet is not closely monitored by nutritionist. But still, I think these studies should make one careful with a true ketogenic diet. As far as I know there are no long-term studies on the effects of a true ketogenic diet, better composed or not, on healthy adults.

A high-protein paleo or Atkins diet not causing ketonemia is something very different and I think the ketogenic diet for children with epilepsy say little regarding these diets.

#257 Blue

  • Guest
  • 1,104 posts
  • 11

Posted 07 November 2009 - 05:35 PM

I found a (dubious) long-term study on a true ketogenic diet. Although it looks like a non-placebo, non-controlled, non-prospective study of persons stating that they had adhered to such a diet in the past. So those with possible adverse effects who stopped the diet are not counted and we do not know if the diet improved anything since we have no baseline values.

"Carbohydrate (CHO)-restricted diets have been recommended for weight loss and to prevent obesity, but their long-term effects have not been fully elucidated. This study was designed to evaluate the effect of long-term (>1 year) consumption of a low-CHO high-fat diet ("The optimal diet," developed by Dr Kwaśniewski referenced herein) on lipid profile, glycemic control, and cardiovascular disease risk factors in healthy subjects. Of 31 "optimal" dieters enrolled in the study (17 women and 14 men, aged 51.7+/-16.6 years), 22 declared adherence to the diet for more than 3 years. Average energy intake and principal nutrients consumed were assessed from 6-day dietary records provided by the participants. In most dieters, concentrations of beta-hydroxybutyrate, free fatty acids, total cholesterol, and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol exceeded the upper limits of the reference ranges for nonstarved subjects. The metabolic profiles of most subjects were positive for several indicators, including relatively low concentrations of triacylglycerols, high levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), and normal ratios of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol/HDL-C and total cholesterol/HDL-C. In most subjects, plasma concentrations of glucose, insulin, glucagon, cortisol, homocysteine, glycerol, and C-reactive protein were within reference ranges. Notably, in all but one subject, the homeostasis model assessment index of insulin resistance remained below the threshold for diagnosis of insulin resistance. These results indicate that long-term (>1 year) compliance with a low-CHO high-fat "optimal diet" does not induce deleterious metabolic effects and does not increase the risk for cardiovascular disease, as evidenced by maintenance of adequate glycemic control and relatively low values for conventional cardiovascular risk factors."
http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/19083495

The "Optimal Diet" seems to be a a high fat, low carbohydrate, somewhat protein restricted diet:
http://homodiet.netf....com/index.html

Edited by Blue, 07 November 2009 - 05:44 PM.


#258 TheFountain

  • Guest
  • 5,363 posts
  • 259

Posted 12 November 2009 - 12:17 AM

The "Optimal Diet" seems to be a a high fat, low carbohydrate, somewhat protein restricted diet:
http://homodiet.netf....com/index.html

And your belief in this is precisely why you are spewing unsubstantiated bullshit on the thread about CR/lifespan. Unsubstantiated in that the 'study' you pointed out did not use actual CR practitioners but people deprived of nutrients.
  • Unfriendly x 1

#259 Skötkonung

  • Guest
  • 1,556 posts
  • 33
  • Location:Västergötland, SE

Posted 12 November 2009 - 01:34 AM

I think there has been quite a few good discussions on the merits of such a diet. Perhaps you have been avoiding those threads? ;)

I cant' remember reading much of this thread, no. But IAC it must have been helluva study to convince rabagley so deeply of this idea that - one wonders - I should have seen it, it should have been really in your face, in one of the (dozens? or at least several) keto threads I did read. Does not at all sound like the conflicting evidence I've read over the course of the last month in those threads.

What are you implying? That we should all be agnostic until definitive scientific evidence illuminates the correct dietary regimen? I agree that it is important to remain agnostic without clear evidence. However, it is not as if we can't possibly apply probability to our agnosticism. People do this with religion all the time. I, for instance, don't know if God exists or not -therefor I am agnostic. However, based on the lack of available scientific evidence supporting God's existence, I think it is probable that he doesn't. The same goes for a high-fat, carbohydrate restricted diet. There is certainly no definitive evidence proving it superior to all other diets. However, based on the available scientific research, I believe probability is weighted in it's favor.

Since I started posting here, I have accumulated a list of over 65 studies demonstrating positive features of a carbohydrate restricted or ketogenic diet. I keep this list in a Word document. If you would like to see this list, to understand why I and others believe as we do, I would be more than happy to send it to you.


A little off-topic, but agnosticism is not the same as "we don't currently know anything/everything about X; therefore I am agnostic about X". Agnosticism is the idea that we can never know anything about X. In the case of religion, agnosticism is the idea that the concept of god is so far beyond our comprehension that we simply can't say anything about whether god(s) exist or not.

Atheism is the idea that "I haven't seen any evidence of god; therefore I don't believe he exists until evidence appears". Many people mistakenly think this is agnosticism, but it's not. Atheism is the scientific method applied to god.


Semantics, I don't agree with that definition.

Main Entry: 1ag·nos·tic Pronunciation: \ag-ˈnäs-tik, əg-\Function: noun Etymology: Greek agnōstos unknown, unknowable, from a- + gnōstos known, from gignōskein to know — more at knowDate: 1869 1 : a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and probably unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god
2 : a person unwilling to commit to an opinion about something <political agnostics>

#260 Skötkonung

  • Guest
  • 1,556 posts
  • 33
  • Location:Västergötland, SE

Posted 12 November 2009 - 01:38 AM

Study: Long Term Effects of Ketogenic Diet in Obese Subjects with High Cholesterol Level

“This study shows the beneficial effects of ketogenic diet following its long term administration in obese subjects with a high level of total cholesterol. Moreover, this study demonstrates that low carbohydrate diet is safe to use for a longer period of time in obese subjects with a high total cholesterol level and those with normocholesterolemia.”



Study: Long-term effects of a ketogenic diet in obese patients
"The present study shows the beneficial effects of a long-term ketogenic diet. It significantly reduced the body weight and body mass index of the patients. Furthermore, it decreased the level of triglycerides, LDL cholesterol and blood glucose, and increased the level of HDL cholesterol. Administering a ketogenic diet for a relatively longer period of time did not produce any significant side effects in the patients. Therefore, the present study confirms that it is safe to use a ketogenic diet for a longer period of time than previously demonstrated."





Granted these individuals were obese, it is probably more relevant than children with neurological conditions.

#261 HaloTeK

  • Guest
  • 254 posts
  • 7
  • Location:chicago

Posted 13 November 2009 - 08:05 AM

Quick question -- If the ketogenic diet is supposedly so healthy, should we tell heart attack survivors that the minute they get home from the hospital they should start eating eggs, bacon, red meat, and tons of coconut oil and heavy cream to top it off. And stay in Ketosis?

Oh yeah, forget the veggies, they add carbs and are a net-negative <--------and have no "magic"

ARE PEOPLE OUT OF THERE MINDS?

#262 Blue

  • Guest
  • 1,104 posts
  • 11

Posted 13 November 2009 - 08:57 AM

Study: Long Term Effects of Ketogenic Diet in Obese Subjects with High Cholesterol Level

"This study shows the beneficial effects of ketogenic diet following its long term administration in obese subjects with a high level of total cholesterol. Moreover, this study demonstrates that low carbohydrate diet is safe to use for a longer period of time in obese subjects with a high total cholesterol level and those with normocholesterolemia."



Study: Long-term effects of a ketogenic diet in obese patients
"The present study shows the beneficial effects of a long-term ketogenic diet. It significantly reduced the body weight and body mass index of the patients. Furthermore, it decreased the level of triglycerides, LDL cholesterol and blood glucose, and increased the level of HDL cholesterol. Administering a ketogenic diet for a relatively longer period of time did not produce any significant side effects in the patients. Therefore, the present study confirms that it is safe to use a ketogenic diet for a longer period of time than previously demonstrated."





Granted these individuals were obese, it is probably more relevant than children with neurological conditions.

"Abstract Objective: Various studies have convincingly shown the beneficial effect of ketogenic diet (in which the daily consumption of carbohydrate is less than 20 grams, regardless of fat, protein and caloric intake) in reducing weight in obese subjects. However, its long term effect on obese subjects with high total cholesterol (as compared to obese subjects with normal cholesterol level is lacking. It is believed that ketogenic diet may have adverse effect on the lipid profile. Therefore, in this study the effect of ketogenic diet in obese subjects with high cholesterol level above 6 mmol/L is compared to those with normocholesterolemia for a period of 56 weeks. Materials and methods: In this study, 66 healthy obese subjects with body mass index (BMI) greater than 30, having high cholesterol level (Group I; n = 35) and those subjects with normal cholesterol level (Group II; n = 31) were selected. The body weight, body mass index, total cholesterol, LDL-cholesterol, HDL-cholesterol, urea, creatinine, glucose and triglycerides were determined before and after the administration of the ketogenic diet. Changes in these parameters were monitored at 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56 weeks of the treatment. Results: The body weight and body mass index of both groups decreased significantly (P < 0.0001). The level of total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, triglycerides and blood glucose level decreased significantly (P < 0.0001), whereas HDL cholesterol increased significantly (P < 0.0001) after the treatment in both groups. Conclusion: This study shows the beneficial effects of ketogenic diet following its long term administration in obese subjects with a high level of total cholesterol. Moreover, this study demonstrates that low carbohydrate diet is safe to use for a longer period of time in obese subjects with a high total cholesterol level and those with normocholesterolemia."
http://www.springerl...1l10803t1j9621/

We do not know if the diet was ketogenic since ketone bodies were not measured. Certainly false that a ketogenic diet is a "daily consumption of carbohydrate is less than 20 grams, regardless of fat, protein and caloric intake".

Edited by Blue, 13 November 2009 - 09:01 AM.


#263 Blue

  • Guest
  • 1,104 posts
  • 11

Posted 13 November 2009 - 08:58 AM

Quick question -- If the ketogenic diet is supposedly so healthy, should we tell heart attack survivors that the minute they get home from the hospital they should start eating eggs, bacon, red meat, and tons of coconut oil and heavy cream to top it off. And stay in Ketosis?

Oh yeah, forget the veggies, they add carbs and are a net-negative <--------and have no "magic"

ARE PEOPLE OUT OF THERE MINDS?

A true ketogenic diet is at least potentially very unhealthy considering the long-term studies on a true ketogenic diet for children with epilepsy.

#264 Skötkonung

  • Guest
  • 1,556 posts
  • 33
  • Location:Västergötland, SE

Posted 13 November 2009 - 06:50 PM

We do not know if the diet was ketogenic since ketone bodies were not measured. Certainly false that a ketogenic diet is a "daily consumption of carbohydrate is less than 20 grams, regardless of fat, protein and caloric intake".

Are you calling the researchers liars? Wow, you should really get into the world of peer reviewing studies. It sounds like they could use your help.
  • Unfriendly x 1

#265 kismet

  • Guest
  • 2,984 posts
  • 424
  • Location:Austria, Vienna

Posted 13 November 2009 - 06:54 PM

Granted these individuals were obese, it is probably more relevant than children with neurological conditions.

Why? Obesity is a metabolic condition, the latter not. If you want to assess metabolic markers the latter population is generally superior (if we're looking at nootropics vice versa). If I looked at CR I'd also prefer to look at the latter group...

#266 Skötkonung

  • Guest
  • 1,556 posts
  • 33
  • Location:Västergötland, SE

Posted 13 November 2009 - 07:34 PM

Granted these individuals were obese, it is probably more relevant than children with neurological conditions.

Why? Obesity is a metabolic condition, the latter not. If you want to assess metabolic markers the latter population is generally superior (if we're looking at nootropics vice versa). If I looked at CR I'd also prefer to look at the latter group...


We're not only looking at metabolic markers. Did you read some all of the issues that arose during the trials with the epileptic children?

#267 Blue

  • Guest
  • 1,104 posts
  • 11

Posted 13 November 2009 - 07:38 PM

We do not know if the diet was ketogenic since ketone bodies were not measured. Certainly false that a ketogenic diet is a "daily consumption of carbohydrate is less than 20 grams, regardless of fat, protein and caloric intake".

Are you calling the researchers liars? Wow, you should really get into the world of peer reviewing studies. It sounds like they could use your help.

Since they did not measure ketone bodies they cannot know if the diet was ketogenic. Just another example of "ketogenic" used as a synonym for "low-carbohydrate" which is incorrect. I have cited another study where the researchers called their diet "ketogenic" despite measuring ketone boides and almost none had ketone bodies on the diet.

Edited by Blue, 13 November 2009 - 07:39 PM.

  • Informative x 1

#268 Skötkonung

  • Guest
  • 1,556 posts
  • 33
  • Location:Västergötland, SE

Posted 13 November 2009 - 07:45 PM

We do not know if the diet was ketogenic since ketone bodies were not measured. Certainly false that a ketogenic diet is a "daily consumption of carbohydrate is less than 20 grams, regardless of fat, protein and caloric intake".

Are you calling the researchers liars? Wow, you should really get into the world of peer reviewing studies. It sounds like they could use your help.

Since they did not measure ketone bodies they cannot know if the diet was ketogenic. Just another example of "ketogenic" used as a synonym for "low-carbohydrate" which is incorrect. I have cited another study where the researchers called their diet "ketogenic" despite measuring ketone boides and almost none had ketone bodies on the diet.

Maybe they know, like most people familiar with human physiology, that ketones can be expelled through the breath, sweat, and urine. The dominant method of expulsion is thought be genetic. And perhaps they also know that ketone bodies can be expelled disproportionately throughout the day, making occasional urine testing unreliable at best.

I think you are making the assumption that these researchers, who happen to be published in a major peer reviewed journal, are too stupid to get their terminology correct. I think the more likely explanation is that the guy with little formal education in nutrition doesn't know what he is talking about. If these researchers are calling the diet ketogenic, then it is probably ketogenic.

Edited by Skotkonung, 13 November 2009 - 07:58 PM.

  • Pointless, Timewasting x 1

#269 Blue

  • Guest
  • 1,104 posts
  • 11

Posted 13 November 2009 - 07:54 PM

Maybe they know, like most people familiar with human physiology, that ketones can be expelled through the breath, sweat, and urine. The dominant method of expulsion is thought be genetic. And perhaps they also know that ketone bodies can be expelled disproportionately throughout the day.

I think you are making the assumption that these researchers, who happen to be published in a major peer reviewed journal, are too stupid to get their terminology. I think the more likely explanation is that the guy with little formal education in nutrition doesn't know what he is talking about. :|?

If they have no evidence of ketone bodies being produced, then they are incorrect in calling their diet ketogenic. The golden standard regarding ketogenic diet, the research on ketogenic diet for chlidren with epilepsy, 1) do use ketone sticks to measure compliance and effect, 2) also take protein into account when formulating the diet.

Are you talking about yourself considering your displayed knowledge about hyman metabolism in other threads?

Here is the study I was talking about:

"At the first visit, participants were instructed how to fol-low the LCKD as individuals or in small groups, with an initial goal of ≤20 g carbohydrate per day. Participants were taught the specific types and amounts of foods theycould eat, as well as foods to avoid. Initially, participants were allowed unlimited amounts of meats, poultry, fish,shellfish, and eggs; 2 cups of salad vegetables per day; 1cup of low-carbohydrate vegetables per day; 4 ounces of hard cheese; and limited amounts of cream, avocado,olives, and lemon juice. Fats and oils were not restricted except that intake of trans fats was to be minimized."

This study actually measured ketone bodies:
"The proportion of participants with a urine ketone reading greater than tracewas 1 of 17 participants at baseline, 5 of 17 participants at week 2, and similar frequencies at subsequent visits until week 14 when 2 of 18 participants had readings greater than trace and week 16 when 2 of 21 participants had readings greater than trace. During the study, only 27 of 151 urine ketone measurements were greater than trace, with one participant accounting for all 7 occurrences of the highest urine ketone reading."

Despite this, the title of the study proudly proclaims that it was a ketogenic diet: "A low-carbohydrate, ketogenic diet to treat type 2 diabetes""!!!
http://srv9.louhi.ne...3-7052-2-34.pdf

Edited by Blue, 13 November 2009 - 07:58 PM.

  • Informative x 1

#270 kismet

  • Guest
  • 2,984 posts
  • 424
  • Location:Austria, Vienna

Posted 13 November 2009 - 08:01 PM

We're not only looking at metabolic markers. Did you read some all of the issues that arose during the trials with the epileptic children?

Kidney stones, skelettal abnormalities, prolonged QTc interval, "cardiomyopathy, secondary hypocarnitinemia, and iron-deficiency anemia", beta-hydroxybutyrate metabolism. So, yes, metabolically healthy subjects should be the better population to study those effects (& ignoring the neural side-effects just to be sure)?
  • Informative x 1




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users