If keto works, why don't more people do it?

[Catalyst]

I know this isn't the keto forum, but since keto seems to be a diet geared towards those wanting to lose fat, I thought I'd ask here--plus, this is a much more frequented forum.

I'm looking for a new way of eating to lose fat, I know the 40/40/20 ratio seems to be a popular choice here, but WHY do that if keto melts the fat?

I'm sorry, could anybody please help me out. I have a lot of fat to lose, I'm about 30%, I'm looking for some insight. Thanks.

[likeke34]

I am speaking for myself here and not trying to spark a debate, but i have had success with keto and lost fat pretty fast, but when i start eating carbs again the weight comes back pretty fast... Also I end up bingeing because I end up craving carbs very bad... But that's just me and I have bingeing problems

In my opinion i think it's because 40/40/20 is more of a lifestyle change... I'm not too sure but I don't think people want to be in ketosis forever... I'm not sure though...

Also there's a lot of controversy, because you are consuming so much fat. We have been raised or socialized to think fat is bad and fat makes you fat. so a lot of people still keep this mentality...

I admit when I first did keto I felt funny with the amount of fat I was eating.

But yah, just my .02

[Catalyst]

I definitely agree on the lifestyle change part. I really have fears of my cholesterol sky-rocketing if I do the keto thing. I mean, if I did keto, along with working out of course, keep losing 2lbs. of fat a week, and once I get more in the range of 12-15% BF, went straight to a 40/40/20 diet, kept working out, same amount of calories, would I be alright? Sorry for so many questions, the keto board seems dead so I thought I'd ask here.

[The Brotherhood]

keto is very unsparing on muscles, and people on ketogenic diets almost always lose more strength and muscle than they would on a traditional reduced calorie high protein diet.

[LightCrow]

I'm looking for a new way of eating to lose fat, I know the 40/40/20 ratio seems to be a popular choice here, but WHY do that if keto melts the fat?

Keto does work, but so does a higher carb diet like the 40/40/20. There's no big magical diet to weightloss, you just have to consume less than your body uses in a day. To say a keto diet "melts" the fat away is a bit of an over exageration.

[JustLost]

Keto does work, but so does a higher carb diet like the 40/40/20. There's no big magical diet to weightloss, you just have to consume less than your body uses in a day. To say a keto diet "melts" the fat away is a bit of an over exageration.

Yep. The fact that one thing works doesn't mean that nothing else does.

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to LightCrow again.

[skelooth]

I hate the misconceptions and misinformation being spread in this topic. Why don't more people do keto? Because they KNOW NOTHING ABOUT.

To say a keto diet "melts" the fat away is a bit of an over exageration.

Perhaps you didn't realize that many competitive bodybuilder use a form of keto/carb restriction to get to competition bf% levels. You have no idea about the effects of keto, your opinion is void.

keto is very unsparing on muscles, and people on ketogenic diets almost always lose more strength and muscle than they would on a traditional reduced calorie high protein diet.

Do you like to make things up much? Go ahead, back it up with references. Oh wait, you can't. The fact is most people gain strength their first time on CKD. CKD is also VERY muscle sparing. You don't know anything about doing proper keto either, your opinion is void.

but when i start eating carbs again the weight comes back pretty fast..

That's your own fault bro





-------------

More people do not do keto/CKD because it is "against social norms". But I'll tell you something funny. UD2.0, Bodyopus, and NHE are pretty popular diets right? THEY'RE CYCLIC KETO DIETS! Just like CKD and TKD.

Current medical literature concerning nutrition is WRONG. Period.

[coach Hale]

a bunch of people never enter ketosis (blood levels of kbodies reach .2 mmol dl) and still lose fat

ketogenic diets are great for some people while others seem to feel horrible just depends

ketosis, occurs when an inordinate amount of kbodies are produced in liver and released into bloodstream and utilizied by a large portion of the body for energy

refer to Low carb dieting the truth part one and two to learn a little more about ketosis http://maxcondition.com/page.php?17

also refer to low carbs for fat loss post at nutrition forum for futhrer discussion hope this helps


coach hale
www.maxcondition.com
www.coachhale.com sign up nletter receive 2 free ebooks

[AceRx]

I did a keto/carb restricting diet a while back and yes, the weight comes off quickly. My eating habits are too carb-based to stick to something like that drastic so as soon as I started eating carbs again the weight came back quickly and more than before. I think the key is moderation and sticking to a solid exercise/diet program.....not some drastic alteration to life that you won't stick with...

Just my 2 cents...

[lnvictus]

why don't u guys do three low carb day and one high carb day besis( carb cycling)?

[EMISGOD]

The main two reasons I have seen people fail to keep the keto diets are 1) because it is very difficult to maintain. People generally seem to really like carbs a great deal and for some, they get thrown out of ketosis with only 50 or 60 grams of carbs a day. 2) It tends to be very hard on the internal organs, liver and kidneys especially. The maintenance alone tends to involve a great deal more of water and many people will have their body sending crave signals that are impossible for them to ignore. Most people that I know of seem to have no trouble doing this for a couple weeks or a month. I can't think of anyone that stays on this long term. In many ways, the body is not especially designed for it.

[Buffalohed]

I tell you what, I have a difficult enough time staying on a diet including carbs. When I tried keto, the first week had the often-heard effect of suppressing my appetite. But when I did it for two more weeks, it was absolute hell - I was so hungry I thought I was going to die of starvation. I can't handle that. I would rather lose weight 10% slower and not be so damn uncomfortable and hungry all the time.

Different strokes for different folks. If you can do a CKD and not have any problems with cravings, more power to you.

[LightCrow]

Perhaps you didn't realize that many competitive bodybuilder use a form of keto/carb restriction to get to competition bf% levels. You have no idea about the effects of keto, your opinion is void.

Your opinion is void for being a dumbass and drawing conclusions too quickly. Sure many competition BBer's use a keto diet to get ready for a contest, but just as many probably use a higher carb diet, too. Keto diets are effective because they cause people to eat less. Studies show no great metabolic advantage of keto diets over others in fat loss (some studies are below).

Also, I *do* have an idea about the effects of a keto diet. I've used the Ultimate Diet 2.0 to get down to 7% before. I just find that I tend to function better on higher carbs when dieting, so for me I prefer a higher carb diet.

Am J Clin Nutr. 2006 May;83(5):1055-61.Click here to read Links
Ketogenic low-carbohydrate diets have no metabolic advantage over nonketogenic low-carbohydrate diets.

* Johnston CS,
* Tjonn SL,
* Swan PD,
* White A,
* Hutchins H,
* Sears B.

Department of Nutrition, Arizona State University, Mesa, AZ 85212, USA. carol.johnston@asu.edu

BACKGROUND: Low-carbohydrate diets may promote greater weight loss than does the conventional low-fat, high-carbohydrate diet. OBJECTIVE: We compared weight loss and biomarker change in adults adhering to a ketogenic low-carbohydrate (KLC) diet or a nonketogenic low-carbohydrate (NLC) diet. DESIGN: Twenty adults [body mass index (in kg/m(2)): 34.4 +/- 1.0] were randomly assigned to the KLC (60% of energy as fat, beginning with approximately 5% of energy as carbohydrate) or NLC (30% of energy as fat; approximately 40% of energy as carbohydrate) diet. During the 6-wk trial, participants were sedentary, and 24-h intakes were strictly controlled. RESULTS: Mean (+/-SE) weight losses (6.3 +/- 0.6 and 7.2 +/- 0.8 kg in KLC and NLC dieters, respectively; P = 0.324) and fat losses (3.4 and 5.5 kg in KLC and NLC dieters, respectively; P = 0.111) did not differ significantly by group after 6 wk. Blood beta-hydroxybutyrate in the KLC dieters was 3.6 times that in the NLC dieters at week 2 (P = 0.018), and LDL cholesterol was directly correlated with blood beta-hydroxybutyrate (r = 0.297, P = 0.025). Overall, insulin sensitivity and resting energy expenditure increased and serum gamma-glutamyltransferase concentrations decreased in both diet groups during the 6-wk trial (P < 0.05). However, inflammatory risk (arachidonic acid:eicosapentaenoic acid ratios in plasma phospholipids) and perceptions of vigor were more adversely affected by the KLC than by the NLC diet. CONCLUSIONS: 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.

PMID: 16685046 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

Int J Obes (Lond). 2005 Sep;29 Suppl 2:S26-30. Links
The effect of low carbohydrate on energy metabolism.

* Erlanson-Albertsson C,
* Mei J.

Section of Metabolism, Endocrinology and Diabetes, Department of Experimental Medicine, University of Lund, Lund, Sweden. Charlotte.Erlanson-Albertsson@med.lu.se

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether low-carbohydrate diets are efficient for reduction of body weight and through which mechanism. DESIGN: A couple of studies using low-carbohydrate diets in the treatment of obesity are reviewed. Mechanisms for explaining the reduced appetite are described in relation to knowledge on regulation of appetite for fat and carbohydrate. RESULTS: Studies with low-carbohydrate diets demonstrate a rapid weight loss, being more pronounced after 3 and 6 months compared to low-fat diets. After 12 months there is no difference between the low-carbohydrate and the conventional low-fat diet on weight loss. Both diets lead to improvements in risk factors for coronary heart disease, the low-carbohydrate diet leading to a greater decrease in serum triglycerides and increase in HDL cholesterol compared to the low-fat diet. Blood pressure, insulin sensitivity and LDL cholesterol were improved to a similar degree by the two diets. The mechanism for the rapid weight loss with the low-carbohydrate diet is a suppressed appetite, first through the high-protein content of the diet, second through the ketogenic nature of the diet with satiety signals for fat being active and third through the absence of hunger-promoting carbohydrate components like sucrose and/or fructose. CONCLUSION: A rapid initial weight loss occurs with a low-carbohydrate diet due to a suppressed appetite. There is as yet no indication of an increased metabolic rate and an increased thermogenesis by the low-carbohydrate diet. The safety and efficacy of low-carbohydrate diets have to await further studies.

PMID: 16385748 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

[willbird]

Personally I do not do it because I am now eating the TYPES of foods I will always eat as a bodybuilder, only the qty of the things I eat will change when I switch from cut to bulk, or maint.

I have nothing AGAINST keto, the people that brag about eating a dozen eggs and an lb of bacon for breakfast are not in the same catagory IMHO as those that eat clean but just limit carbs enough to enter ketosis.


Bill

[skelooth]

As i said, current medical literature concerning nutrition is still in it's infancy. Pubmed is not absolute.

[LightCrow]

As i said, current medical literature concerning nutrition is still in it's infancy. Pubmed is not absolute.

The traditional comeback when someone gets pwned.

[CelticDeath]

Am J Clin Nutr. 2006 May;83(5):1055-61.Click here to read Links
Ketogenic low-carbohydrate diets have no metabolic advantage over nonketogenic low-carbohydrate diets.

* Johnston CS,
* Tjonn SL,
* Swan PD,
* White A,
* Hutchins H,
* Sears B.

Department of Nutrition, Arizona State University, Mesa, AZ 85212, USA. carol.johnston@asu.edu

BACKGROUND: Low-carbohydrate diets may promote greater weight loss than does the conventional low-fat, high-carbohydrate diet. OBJECTIVE: We compared weight loss and biomarker change in adults adhering to a ketogenic low-carbohydrate (KLC) diet or a nonketogenic low-carbohydrate (NLC) diet. DESIGN: Twenty adults [body mass index (in kg/m(2)): 34.4 +/- 1.0] were randomly assigned to the KLC (60% of energy as fat, beginning with approximately 5% of energy as carbohydrate) or NLC (30% of energy as fat; approximately 40% of energy as carbohydrate) diet. During the 6-wk trial, participants were sedentary, and 24-h intakes were strictly controlled. RESULTS: Mean (+/-SE) weight losses (6.3 +/- 0.6 and 7.2 +/- 0.8 kg in KLC and NLC dieters, respectively; P = 0.324) and fat losses (3.4 and 5.5 kg in KLC and NLC dieters, respectively; P = 0.111) did not differ significantly by group after 6 wk. Blood beta-hydroxybutyrate in the KLC dieters was 3.6 times that in the NLC dieters at week 2 (P = 0.018), and LDL cholesterol was directly correlated with blood beta-hydroxybutyrate (r = 0.297, P = 0.025). Overall, insulin sensitivity and resting energy expenditure increased and serum gamma-glutamyltransferase concentrations decreased in both diet groups during the 6-wk trial (P < 0.05). However, inflammatory risk (arachidonic acid:eicosapentaenoic acid ratios in plasma phospholipids) and perceptions of vigor were more adversely affected by the KLC than by the NLC diet. CONCLUSIONS: 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

Conclusion: We're not sedentary like their sample. This study has no application to bodybuilders.

PMID: 16685046 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

Int J Obes (Lond). 2005 Sep;29 Suppl 2:S26-30. Links
The effect of low carbohydrate on energy metabolism.

* Erlanson-Albertsson C,
* Mei J.

Section of Metabolism, Endocrinology and Diabetes, Department of Experimental Medicine, University of Lund, Lund, Sweden. Charlotte.Erlanson-Albertsson@med.lu.se

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether low-carbohydrate diets are efficient for reduction of body weight and through which mechanism. DESIGN: A couple of studies using low-carbohydrate diets in the treatment of obesity are reviewed. Mechanisms for explaining the reduced appetite are described in relation to knowledge on regulation of appetite for fat and carbohydrate. RESULTS: Studies with low-carbohydrate diets demonstrate a rapid weight loss, being more pronounced after 3 and 6 months compared to low-fat diets. After 12 months there is no difference between the low-carbohydrate and the conventional low-fat diet on weight loss. Both diets lead to improvements in risk factors for coronary heart disease, the low-carbohydrate diet leading to a greater decrease in serum triglycerides and increase in HDL cholesterol compared to the low-fat diet. Blood pressure, insulin sensitivity and LDL cholesterol were improved to a similar degree by the two diets. The mechanism for the rapid weight loss with the low-carbohydrate diet is a suppressed appetite, first through the high-protein content of the diet, second through the ketogenic nature of the diet with satiety signals for fat being active and third through the absence of hunger-promoting carbohydrate components like sucrose and/or fructose. CONCLUSION: A rapid initial weight loss occurs with a low-carbohydrate diet due to a suppressed appetite. There is as yet no indication of an increased metabolic rate and an increased thermogenesis by the low-carbohydrate diet. The safety and efficacy of low-carbohydrate diets have to await further studies.

Conclusion: NO evidence supporting the "conclusion" above is offered in the data above. If anything, the evidence appears to favor keto. Also, the analysis refers to weight loss and not specifically to fat loss, which is the goal of the bodybuilder. What you have offered is yet another poor example.

PMID: 16385748 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

I think you need to go back and do some more research. Your examples were poorly selected.

[eatingisfun]

There was a study done on the Atkins diet and they found that protein reduces the person's appetite and keytosis didn't have any affect on the fat loss besides the reduced appetite. The people were in 2 groups. One group was on the ketogenic diet, the other were on the regular 40/40/20 diet. They were allowed to eat as much as they wanted without limits. The people on the ketogenic diet lost more weight because on average they were eating less calories than the other group.

I think this is the main reason why it works which is suppression of appetite.

[skelooth]

You guys are talking about one experiment that was only 6 weeks long with sedentry people, and another experiment where people were allowed to eat as much as they wanted.

[EMISGOD]

As i said, current medical literature concerning nutrition is still in it's infancy. Pubmed is not absolute.

The traditional comeback when someone gets pwned.

Be that as it may, there is still a decided lack of information and there are clearly no absolutes in fitness or nutrition. More research is clearly needed.

[likeke34]

lol, this is why I always put, "Not trying to spark a debate but in MY personal experience," before threads like this...

ne ways, I say the best thing to do is try different diets for yourself... Experiment with different diets and see what works best for you...

For me, Keto works wonders, BUT, I can't maintain it because I lack the will power, damn, in fact I can't even maintain 40/40/20 for that matter, haha...

You will learn what works with your body and what you can maintain and what you can't... Just make sure you give whatever eating plan your trying a fair shot...

I can't remember where but I read somewhere that Lee priest says to give a diet 3months to see how it works with your body.

My .02 again

[EMISGOD]

Everything works for 6 weeks...

[Catalyst]

I didn't mean to start an argument. I was simply trying to ask a question. Maybe I should have seen it coming. I don't like to see bashing going on. Aren't we all here for the same reason?

Thanks to everybody that has responded! I am pleased to have learned more about the differences between a ketogenic and a more balanced diet. But then again, what really IS balance? Seriously, and this isn't related to my last comment, but on the keto board, some people are talking about how they're losing fat like it's nothing and they're eating all they want. Well isn't it all about calories? I mean, body composition is determined by WHAT you eat, but I don't see how eating 4,000 calories a day is going to force your body to lose fat.

[eatingisfun]

You guys are talking about one experiment that was only 6 weeks long with sedentry people, and another experiment where people were allowed to eat as much as they wanted.

Actually that was only one of the studies they were showing on the tv show I watched. It was looking at studies on the Atkins diet to see whether it worked or not. Another study they did was with twins. They were in separate hermetically sealed rooms with controlled food amounts. One ate keto the other did not. They measured everything down to the amout of CO2 expelled by the subjects and measured all their waste that flushed down the toilet. The result was that there was no difference greater than 1% in the 2 diets.

The subjects were also exercising on an exercise bike every day.

[LightCrow]

The whole point of the two studies I posted was to compare the BMR adaptions due to dieting in keto vs. non-keto. If a keto diet is superior, we should see the BMR shutdown due to dieting, come slower than non-keto. The participants' starting weight won't make much difference. Your body is not that significantly different from someone overweight when you both diet.

In the first study, if you throw in equal amounts of exercise what are you going to see? Keto diets don't magicly make you defy the laws of thermodynamics and burn calories you really didn't. 500 kcal burned in the gym, is still 500 kcal on both diets.

[ironman1964bc]

People do keto because muscle is maintained on a high fat/moderate protein diet and the other reason is you must eat fat to burn fat. If you eat carbs, you burn carbs. Once the fat burning enzymes are working at 100% and the insulin levels remain low, there is no need to cycle carbs whatsover, although at first it probably is a good idea to cycle them. Just start at every 3 days, then go to 4 days, then 5 until eventually you cut them out altogether. It has been proven that glycogen levels will remain filled on a no carb diet, so that is not a concern.

The problems arise when keto is used as a diet, not a way of eating. If you are happy with your weight loss on keto and then go back to "regular" eating, I guarantee you won't be happy for long. If you do not think that you can follow this way of eating, then the next best thing is to do the pre and post workout carb thing. That is not ideal but it still will work. I have found though that easy weight gainers should reduce carbs as much as possible. If you are naturally lean but recently put on a few, then you may be able to eat more carbs. If you are like me (I weighed 200lb in 6th grade) then the carbs should be reduced as much as possible.

Generally, there are 3 types of people...
1) always have been fat since childhood
2) was lean when younger but started gaining weight as they got older
3) always has been lean

#3 can eat the most carbs, followed by #2, and I am afraid #1 cannot eat any carbs or they will never get lean. Its not fair but that is the way it is. I should know because I belong in the #1 category. The only way I stayed lean before is by doing tremendous amounts of biking and running, but my strength levels took a beating as did my muscle levels. Besides that, if I got injured for a few months, the weight would come back fast. The only way that I could keep muscle and lean up is by doing keto all the time. I still eat a pizza or have a few beers once in awhile, but it is not every 3 days, it is more like once a month. I would say that 28 days a month I am under 25gms of carbs.

By the way, I am hardly ever in ketosis anymore because once you are adapted, the body will be burning ketones for fuel, leaving little left in the urine. I belong to a 100% meat eating forum and none of them show ketones in the urine. One guy has ate nothing but meat for 47 years. The reason cyclical keto diets put ketones in your urine is because that mass of carbs you are eating every 3 days is keeping your body from becoming fully fat adapted.

[rotlex]

I tell you what, I have a difficult enough time staying on a diet including carbs. When I tried keto, the first week had the often-heard effect of suppressing my appetite. But when I did it for two more weeks, it was absolute hell - I was so hungry I thought I was going to die of starvation. I can't handle that. I would rather lose weight 10% slower and not be so damn uncomfortable and hungry all the time.

Different strokes for different folks. If you can do a CKD and not have any problems with cravings, more power to you.

I find the main reason people have these issues with Keto\Low carb, is they also attempt to eat low fat while doing it. I'm not saying this is\was your case, but most, especially within the bodybuilding community, start a Keto, Low carb diet, and attempt to eat nothing but what they consider "healthy" fats. Sorry - this does not work for keeping you full, in ketosis, or anything else for that matter. Gotta replace those carbs with something, and fat is where it's at. In a nutshell, eat some whole eggs, whole milk, cheese, meat, without trimming the fat, chicken, WITH THE SKIN LEFT ON IT, etc. etc. You will be full, satisfied and probably have more energy than thought possible on a "high carb" diet.

[LightCrow]

It has been proven that glycogen levels will remain filled on a no carb diet, so that is not a concern.

I would love for you to find a study on this. Unless you mean the glucose produced by ketoacidosis. Which isn't exactly the same thing.

The problems arise when keto is used as a diet, not a way of eating. If you are happy with your weight loss on keto and then go back to "regular" eating, I guarantee you won't be happy for long.

Keto diets are like any other, the transition back to maintenance eating must be gradual and careful to avoid regaining some fat. It's a misconception from the Atkins people that "OMG you'll get fat again if you start eating carbs."

I should know because I belong in the #1 category. The only way I stayed lean before is by doing tremendous amounts of biking and running, but my strength levels took a beating as did my muscle levels. Besides that, if I got injured for a few months, the weight would come back fast. The only way that I could keep muscle and lean up is by doing keto all the time.

That's the thing about n=1 data, you can't draw conclusions for the general population. But you're not some freak of nature that defies the laws of thermodynamics. You get fat on carbs because you over eat on them. Which is one of the big advantages of keto, if you do a carb binge, you get to call it a refeed.

By the way, I am hardly ever in ketosis anymore because once you are adapted, the body will be burning ketones for fuel, leaving little left in the urine. I belong to a 100% meat eating forum and none of them show ketones in the urine. One guy has ate nothing but meat for 47 years. The reason cyclical keto diets put ketones in your urine is because that mass of carbs you are eating every 3 days is keeping your body from becoming fully fat adapted.

I'm not sure what you're getting at here, but ketones in urine are not a good indicator of ketosis.

[Felix5]

I would tend to agree with Light Crow.

I suppose I'm a 'vet' of a number of cutting cycles, and the few times I did keto the results weren't really any better than a standard carb cut. What I disliked most was the loss of strength lifting weights, and the reduced capacity to hit up some intense cardio. If keto dieters can maintain strength and cardio intensity, all the more power to them. I never managed to make it work for me.

In short, keto can work, but it's no magic bullet and I think you're unlikely to see any benefits unavailable to standard dieters. Still, for newbies it provides the structure many of them are looking for and demands (and teaches) discipline, so it's not that bad an idea either.

[lgnorant]

As a fellow keto'er myself i tried keto a while back and lost a good amount of pure fat in a 4 week time period, initially your body flushes ALOT of water out (seeing as carbs need water to work, no carbs=no water) so the first weeks fat loss is usually the most youll get.

Keto is great as a weight loss shocker but if someone is looking to diet i would rather then taper down there carbs.

Eg; someone eating 300g Carbs daily
Week- 1- 250g Carbs
Week- 3- 150g Carbs
Week- 5- 50g Carbs
Week- 7- KETO

Then after few weeks of keto you carb cycle, that will get you very shredded and spare alot of muscle rather then going from 300g Carbs daily and shooting down to <20g Carbs (Which is why people get SO hungry).