What can low-carb (ketosis) do for you?

[Bill M. Hesse]

You totally missed the point of me posting those. The main reason was to demonstrate PUFA as not being dangerous because there isn't any evidence to really suggest they are any different from other nutrients in their required quantities. I wasn't posting those to show SFA was bad, I was posting to show PUFA isn't evil. Those n-3's man, they will kill you....

[Todd Neal]

Originally Posted by Darryl Shaw

Ketogenic diets and physical performance.
Stephen D Phinney, Nutr Metab (Lond). 2004; 1: 2.

Ketogenic diet does not affect strength performance in elite artistic gymnasts.
Paoli et al. Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition 2012, 9:34

*All links wfs*

Thanks, I'll look into these right now

Update:
Darryl, are you sure you linked the correct studies to me? I thought you were against keto diets, but both studies are pro-keto. Or maybe that's the way I'm interpreting them? I'd like to post some results here for discussion:

Study1- "Impaired physical performance is a common but not obligate result of a low carbohydrate diet.
Lessons from traditional Inuit culture indicate that time for adaptation, optimized sodium and
potassium nutriture, and constraint of protein to 15–25 % of daily energy expenditure allow
unimpaired endurance performance despite nutritional ketosis."

Study2- "Despite concerns of coaches and doctors about the possible detrimental effects of low carbohydrate diets on athletic performance and the well known importance of carbohydrates there are no data about VLCKD [very low carb keto diet] and strength performance. The undeniable and sudden effect of VLCKD on fat loss may be useful for those athletes who compete in sports based on weight class. We have demonstrated that using VLCKD for a relatively short time period (i.e. 30 days) can decrease body weight and body fat without negative effects on strength performance in high level athletes."

The take away for me is that I can go keto to get a 6-pack without losing strength or endurance IF (and that's a big if) I do it correctly. So I guess it's just more reading and research on how to do it correctly. Thanks, Darryl!

[Alexander Dreyzen]

Originally Posted by Todd Neal

Thanks, I'll look into these right now

Update:
Darryl, are you sure you linked the correct studies to me? I thought you were against keto diets, but both studies are pro-keto. Or maybe that's the way I'm interpreting them? I'd like to post some results here for discussion:

Study1- "Impaired physical performance is a common but not obligate result of a low carbohydrate diet.
Lessons from traditional Inuit culture indicate that time for adaptation, optimized sodium and
potassium nutriture, and constraint of protein to 15–25 % of daily energy expenditure allow
unimpaired endurance performance despite nutritional ketosis."

Study2- "Despite concerns of coaches and doctors about the possible detrimental effects of low carbohydrate diets on athletic performance and the well known importance of carbohydrates there are no data about VLCKD [very low carb keto diet] and strength performance. The undeniable and sudden effect of VLCKD on fat loss may be useful for those athletes who compete in sports based on weight class. We have demonstrated that using VLCKD for a relatively short time period (i.e. 30 days) can decrease body weight and body fat without negative effects on strength performance in high level athletes."

The take away for me is that I can go keto to get a 6-pack without losing strength or endurance IF (and that's a big if) I do it correctly. So I guess it's just more reading and research on how to do it correctly. Thanks, Darryl!

I was surprised too that Darryl linked these. Maybe he is giving keto a second look? But to answer, your question about doing it correctly, for me, 95% of all the questions were answered in the "JumpstartMD Full Interview with Drs. Stephen Phinney & Jeff Volek" video that I linked (WFS). I really recommend everybody, invest 90 minutes of their time.

These guys also wrote a book: "The Art and Science of Low Carbohydrate Living"

[Alexander Dreyzen]

PS.

There are three phosphate transports into cells (to make ATP), creatine (1 rep max) , anaerobic (100m sprint) and aerobic (everything else). The only one that may take a hit in keto is anaerobic, because it requires glycogen, although, in my experience, I didn't lose anything in 400m sprints (I didn't time myself in 100m).

[Todd Neal]

Originally Posted by Alexander Dreyzen

PS.

There are three phosphate transports into cells (to make ATP), creatine (1 rep max) , anaerobic (100m sprint) and aerobic (everything else). The only one that may take a hit in keto is anaerobic, because it requires glycogen, although, in my experience, I didn't lose anything in 400m sprints (I didn't time myself in 100m).

Yes, that seems to be the consensus, although it seems that many here are also worried about 1) long-term effects of keto and 2) building strength and increasing overall fitness in keto. Admittedly, both of those would be difficult (you've got experience at least with number 1) but I think they could be done; IF approached correctly.

Now I'm off to watch that vid.

[Darryl Shaw]

Originally Posted by Todd Neal

Thanks, I'll look into these right now

Update:
Darryl, are you sure you linked the correct studies to me? I thought you were against keto diets, but both studies are pro-keto. Or maybe that's the way I'm interpreting them? I'd like to post some results here for discussion:

I posted those studies because it would be unfair not to. I wouldn't get too excited if I were you though because they don't provide much in the way of support for ketogenic diets.

Study1- "Impaired physical performance is a common but not obligate result of a low carbohydrate diet.
Lessons from traditional Inuit culture indicate that time for adaptation, optimized sodium and
potassium nutriture, and constraint of protein to 15–25 % of daily energy expenditure allow
unimpaired endurance performance despite nutritional ketosis."

Scroll down to the bottom of the page and read the very last sentence. People always miss that bit.

Study2- "Despite concerns of coaches and doctors about the possible detrimental effects of low carbohydrate diets on athletic performance and the well known importance of carbohydrates there are no data about VLCKD [very low carb keto diet] and strength performance. The undeniable and sudden effect of VLCKD on fat loss may be useful for those athletes who compete in sports based on weight class. We have demonstrated that using VLCKD for a relatively short time period (i.e. 30 days) can decrease body weight and body fat without negative effects on strength performance in high level athletes."

This is a small scale study (n=9) of limited duration (30 days) which failed to control for differences in energy intake (1971.55 kcal VLCKD vs 2273.98 kcal WD). So were the results due to the diet, differences in energy intake, or chance? And how might this ketogenic diet affect health or performance over the long term? Who knows?

The take away for me is that I can go keto to get a 6-pack without losing strength or endurance IF (and that's a big if) I do it correctly. So I guess it's just more reading and research on how to do it correctly. Thanks, Darryl!

The take away from this is that performance will be almost certainly suffer while on a ketogenic diet, and any reduction in BF% will be the result of a negative energy balance not a direct consequence of being in ketosis.

Composition of weight lost during short-term weight reduction. Metabolic responses of obese subjects to starvation and low-calorie ketogenic and nonketogenic diets.
M U Yang and T B Van Itallie. J Clin Invest. 1976;58(3):722–730. (wfs)

[Todd Neal]

Originally Posted by Darryl Shaw

The take away from this is that performance will be almost certainly suffer while on a ketogenic diet, and any reduction in BF% will be the result of a negative energy balance not a direct consequence of being in ketosis

I'm truly astounded that you could come to this conclusion.

You can't just say performance will suffer:
"...unimpaired endurance performance..."
"...without negative effects on strength performance..."
For the sake of those who won't read the study, please be clear and say that anaerobic performance will suffer. I even said in my post that my conclusion is that I wouldn't lose endurance or strength. For someone who seems like they read a lot of these studies, you should know better than to spread misinformation.

I agree with the negative energy balance, but who gives a sh*t? If being in ketosis causes you to eat less calories, keep insulin low to promote fat burn, reduce fat creation, or otherwise promote weight loss, then that's a helluva lot better than your typical caloric reduction of the western diet.

[Alexander Dreyzen]

Originally Posted by Todd Neal

...
I agree with the negative energy balance, but who gives a sh*t? If being in ketosis causes you to eat less calories, keep insulin low to promote fat burn, reduce fat creation, or otherwise promote weight loss, then that's a helluva lot better than your typical caloric reduction of the western diet.

It is amazing that a simple truth is so hard for people to accept. Higher insulin, which is caused by dietary carbs, creates asymmetry between fat burn and fat storage, by blocking fat burn and promoting fat storage. On top of that, there are numerous studies showing that when we are in the fat storage pathway, our brain wants us to eat more, than when we are in the fat burning pathway. There are just so many arrows pointing away from the "calorie is a calorie" dogma, that it's exasperating at times, trying to explain the same thing over and over again.

[Alexander Dreyzen]

Originally Posted by Darryl Shaw

Composition of weight lost during short-term weight reduction. Metabolic responses of obese subjects to starvation and low-calorie ketogenic and nonketogenic diets.
M U Yang and T B Van Itallie. J Clin Invest. 1976;58(3):722–730. (wfs)

Note that low-calorie ketogenic diet is not what is being discussed. I am assuming we are talking about nutritional ketosis which assumes the normal caloric intake.

[Todd Neal]

Originally Posted by Alexander Dreyzen

It is amazing that a simple truth is so hard for people to accept. Higher insulin, which is caused by dietary carbs, creates asymmetry between fat burn and fat storage, by blocking fat burn and promoting fat storage. On top of that, there are numerous studies showing that when we are in the fat storage pathway, our brain wants us to eat more, than when we are in the fat burning pathway. There are just so many arrows pointing away from the "calorie is a calorie" dogma, that it's exasperating at times, trying to explain the same thing over and over again.

Yes. It's one thing to argue whether or not ketosis is right for athletes or diabetics, but another thing to say that weight loss caused by a change in diet couldn't possibly have anything to do with the composition of the diet. While I might have been on that train for a short period 10 years ago, it just seems so ludicrous now.

I'll add that everyone seems to love the idea that fat makes you fat, but carbs making you fat is like saying there is no god.