Notices
Results 1 to 31 of 31
Like Tree2Likes
  • 1 Post By scheherazade
  • 1 Post By LuciDreaming

Thread: How dangerous is Cyclical Ketogenic diet?

  1. #1 How dangerous is Cyclical Ketogenic diet? 
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    926
    Cyclic ketogenic diet - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaabout using fats and oils as fuel, instead of the usual carbohydrates.

    im planning on this diet for about 1-3 months.
    the websites that introduced me to it states the PROs and CONs, but, of course they would be biased.

    so im asking here on a science forum. anyone help please!

    how dangerous is cyclical ketogenic diet, technically?



    p.s.
    im going on this diet to lost fats and build muscle

    anyone also, knows:
    1) how does the diet affect my blood pressure?
    2) the accumulation/disseminate of fats in my arteries?


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Northern Horse Whisperer Moderator scheherazade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Yukon, Canada
    Posts
    4,066
    Interesting link. It appears that I may be inadvertently following a dietary regime very similar to this because of my schedule which is half the week on days and the other half on graveyards, a regime that I have been following for the past 3 1/2 years. My blood pressure has remained very good to optimum during that time although I suppose that I should remember to check it again soon. I cannot answer your second question though, as I have no measure for that.

    I am also exploring a predominantly gluten free diet for the last couple of months and I seem to have more energy and my muscle tone is becoming more pronounced which is rather remarkable only for the fact that I am not dieting, body building or a young person.

    Therefor I hypothesize that these observable changes are most probably the result of my diet which is almost devoid of the influence of wheat and many other common grains and carbohydrates. I do add some extra sugars to my diet when I am working graveyard shift, often in the form of fruit and chocolate.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope skeptic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    4,843
    The best diet always, always, always, is one that is properly balanced.

    Diets that deprive the body of one kind of food, by stoking up on another are normally not good.
    This type of diet devolves on the fallacy that carbohydrates are bad for you. This is only true for people with certain genetic diseases. For the rest of us, carbohydrates are an important part of a balanced diet.

    Instead of going on a fad diet, I suggest you make sure all starchy foods are fibre rich, rather than fibre free. White bread and white rice, and potatoes are low fibre starch foods, and should be consumed in small amounts only. Keep sugar consumption minimal.

    A balanced diet requires a mix of as many kinds of food as possible, including carbohydrate, some fats, a small amount of sugar, protein, and various vegetables and fruits to give good vitamin/mineral/antioxidant intake.

    On gluten.
    This is a vegetable protein. It is totally healthy to anyone who does not suffer from celiac disease. If you do not suffer this nasty illness, then gluten is a valuable addition to your diet - not something to be avoided.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Northern Horse Whisperer Moderator scheherazade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Yukon, Canada
    Posts
    4,066
    There are plenty of sources of carbohydrates that do not contain wheat or gluten. Tonight's dinner used Spinach Rice pasta with 200 calories per serving, 44 gr of gluten free carbohydrate.

    Interestingly, more people are being identified as having a sensitivity to wheat, which is completely different from being allergic to wheat. Inflammation response in the body also seems to have a correlation to wheat so I am finding my personal experiments to be of interest.

    For the record, any of my comments are personal observations only. I lead a very physical life style with the additional challenges of working graveyard shift three nights a week and I am always examining the changing ideas of nutrition, seeking that which is optimal for my personal needs.

    I would suggest that all others need to do their own research and consult whatever 'authorities' they may have confidence in.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope skeptic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    4,843
    scheherazade

    Obviously, what you eat is your business. But I think the nutty recommendation given by lots of unscientific foodists to avoid gluten is something we should discourage. Obviously, if you have celaic disease - the sensitivity to gluten - you should not eat it. But if you do not have that condition, and there is a 99% chance you do not, then you should not be supporting the bullsh!t ideas of those food nutcases.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Northern Horse Whisperer Moderator scheherazade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Yukon, Canada
    Posts
    4,066
    Quote Originally Posted by skeptic View Post
    scheherazade

    Obviously, what you eat is your business. But I think the nutty recommendation given by lots of unscientific foodists to avoid gluten is something we should discourage. Obviously, if you have celaic disease - the sensitivity to gluten - you should not eat it. But if you do not have that condition, and there is a 99% chance you do not, then you should not be supporting the bullsh!t ideas of those food nutcases.
    Ah, but I have identified that when I eat wheat or gluten containing foods that my digestion functions quite differently, just as I have identified that every time I ingest tartrazine I experience aching and/or tingling in my fingers. My mother has a condition that medicine cannot cure and the two of us have spent many years in examining all the latest 'science' of scleroderma and she has quite amazed the doctors by managing her condition mainly through diet.

    I recognize that you are a strong advocate of 'scientific data' yet in many arenas that 'data' is contaminated by the taint of money. In other cases, only a small percentage of the population is affected therefor it is not financially viable to invest the resources for research and treatment.

    You seem to enjoy following my posts in an effort to make me look like a nutbar. The science does not agree on what constitutes 'good nutrition' save in generalities so the discussion can go on until the cows come home. Kindly keep your language regarding the elimination of bovines to yourself!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope skeptic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    4,843
    scheherazade

    Celiac disease has very potent symptoms - not something as mild as you describe. Without trying to describe you as nutty, I would suggest that if you have a mild response to gluten, it is probably psychological.

    Please note that his is not intended as insult. I have a response to certain seafoods that I am sure is purely psychological. That does not help me to eat those foods, but I am not going to tell anyone that those foods are in any way unhealthy. It is just something inside my head.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Northern Horse Whisperer Moderator scheherazade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Yukon, Canada
    Posts
    4,066
    Quote Originally Posted by skeptic View Post
    scheherazade

    Celiac disease has very potent symptoms - not something as mild as you describe. Without trying to describe you as nutty, I would suggest that if you have a mild response to gluten, it is probably psychological.

    Please note that his is not intended as insult. I have a response to certain seafoods that I am sure is purely psychological. That does not help me to eat those foods, but I am not going to tell anyone that those foods are in any way unhealthy. It is just something inside my head.

    There is a study that demonstrates that a significant percentage of the North American population may be sensitive to gluten. This is entirely different than celiac disease.

    A new study in the journal BMC Medicine may shed some light on why. It shows gluten can set off a distinct reaction in the intestines and the immune system, even in people who don't have celiac disease.

    "For the first time, we have scientific evidence that indeed, gluten sensitivity not only exists, but is very different from celiac disease," says lead author Alessio Fasano, medical director of the University of Maryland's Center for Celiac Research.


    I would sincerely appreciate if you took the time to read the article posted at the following link.

    Study Sheds Light On Gluten Sensitivity - WSJ.com

    The Wall Street Journal used to be considered a fairly respectable source.

    The following article is fairly lengthy but comes with a respectable list of references. Gluten sensitivity is a real condition, not a psychological one.

    Non-coeliac gluten sensitivity | BMJ

    I have no need for psychological illnesses for I value health and productivity.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope skeptic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    4,843
    Scheherazade

    Perhaps.
    However, the majority of people have no celiac disease or any sensitivity to gluten, no matter how real or imaginary that sensitivity may be. For this reason, it is not a good thing to be telling people gluten is bad. It is a valuable protein addition to the diet of most people.

    Gluten free foods have become a multi-billion dollar industry, and they are bought mainly by people with imaginary views on the subject - not just celiac disease people and any who might or might not have a sensitivity. That industry is promulgated mostly by misleading advertising. Not by any real need for these foods by most of those who buy them.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Administrator KALSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,231
    Quote Originally Posted by skeptic View Post
    Scheherazade

    Perhaps.
    However, the majority of people have no celiac disease or any sensitivity to gluten, no matter how real or imaginary that sensitivity may be. For this reason, it is not a good thing to be telling people gluten is bad. It is a valuable protein addition to the diet of most people.

    Gluten free foods have become a multi-billion dollar industry, and they are bought mainly by people with imaginary views on the subject - not just celiac disease people and any who might or might not have a sensitivity. That industry is promulgated mostly by misleading advertising. Not by any real need for these foods by most of those who buy them.
    Would you at least acknowledge that your initial reaction to Scheherazade's post was a little uncalled for? She was very clear about doing one's own research and provided some evidence of her claims, no?
    Disclaimer: I do not declare myself to be an expert on ANY subject. If I state something as fact that is obviously wrong, please don't hesitate to correct me. I welcome such corrections in an attempt to be as truthful and accurate as possible.

    "Gullibility kills" - Carl Sagan
    "All people know the same truth. Our lives consist of how we chose to distort it." - Harry Block
    "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Northern Horse Whisperer Moderator scheherazade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Yukon, Canada
    Posts
    4,066
    Quote Originally Posted by skeptic View Post
    Scheherazade

    Perhaps.
    However, the majority of people have no celiac disease or any sensitivity to gluten, no matter how real or imaginary that sensitivity may be. For this reason, it is not a good thing to be telling people gluten is bad. It is a valuable protein addition to the diet of most people.

    Gluten free foods have become a multi-billion dollar industry, and they are bought mainly by people with imaginary views on the subject - not just celiac disease people and any who might or might not have a sensitivity. That industry is promulgated mostly by misleading advertising. Not by any real need for these foods by most of those who buy them.
    I agree that the majority of people are not adversely affected by gluten. I posted the numbers. Still, 6-8% of the population is not insignificant.

    I have not stated anywhere that gluten is bad. I have made the case that it may be problematic for some people based on an increasing body of evidence.

    Please provide references for your statement in red above.

    All food is an industry, not only the gluten free and the organic sectors. Each group happily attacks the others (dairy, meat, grains, processed) in an effort to gain more market share. I work in grocery and the claims and pricing are a three ring circus.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope skeptic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    4,843
    I have met a number of people who buy gluten free foods, and I have challenged their views. None, so far, have told me they suffer celiac disease or even gluten sensitivity. They just respond to the bullsh!t of the advertisers of gluten free food, and eat that more expensive food for no rational reason.

    I am not totally convinced by Scheherazades references. One from the Wall Street Journal, and the other just an anecdote. I am prepared to accept that gluten sensitivity, as opposed to celiac disease, is a reality, but I am skeptical of the incidence. 6% seems very high.

    That level might make sense with other ethnic peoples. Europeans have been utterly dependent on gluten containing foods for 12,000 years, except for the last several hundred years. Any serious incidence of gluten problem should have been weeded out long since, and celiac disease is, in fact, quite rare. A person of (say) Chinese ancestry might be more at risk, since his ancestors have not depended on gluten containing foods.

    We have seen this kind of natural selection on several other types of food. Lactose intolerance is rare among Europeans - though common among Asians - and alcohol intolerance is also far more common among Asians. All these variations are explainable by the differences in what we eat and drink, and have eaten and drunk for a long enough period for simple evolution to have its impact. Gluten tolerance should be the norm in today's world for Europeans, and I believe that is correct.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Northern Horse Whisperer Moderator scheherazade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Yukon, Canada
    Posts
    4,066
    @skeptic

    Here is the abstract and the link takes you to the entire study which is provided by open access. I do not expect you to agree with it but I believe this to be a credible study.

    (For what it's worth, I don't buy a lot of processed gluten free foods. I just avoid most processed food and limit my intake of baked goods to things that I make myself using flours from nuts and gluten free grains. I do agree with your claim that some people may be buying gluten free processed food because it is currently 'trendy' yet processed food is still processed food and as such does not fit my idea of a ntritional diet.)


    A decade ago celiac disease was considered extremely rare outside Europe and, therefore, was almost completely ignored by health care professionals. In only 10 years, key milestones have moved celiac disease from obscurity into the popular spotlight worldwide. Now we are observing another interesting phenomenon that is generating great confusion among health care professionals. The number of individuals embracing a gluten-free diet (GFD) appears much higher than the projected number of celiac disease patients, fueling a global market of gluten-free products approaching $2.5 billion (US) in global sales in 2010. This trend is supported by the notion that, along with celiac disease, other conditions related to the ingestion of gluten have emerged as health care concerns. This review will summarize our current knowledge about the three main forms of gluten reactions: allergic (wheat allergy), autoimmune (celiac disease, dermatitis herpetiformis and gluten ataxia) and possibly immune-mediated (gluten sensitivity), and also outline pathogenic, clinical and epidemiological differences and propose new nomenclature and classifications.
    The portion specific to gluten sensitivity will be found in the latter half of the document.

    BMC Medicine | Full text | Spectrum of gluten-related disorders: consensus on new nomenclature and classification


    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope skeptic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    4,843
    Scheherazade

    That is a better reference. However, it does not go into the incidence of gluten sensitivity.

    It might be difficult, of course, to get valid numbers here. It is very likely that many of the claims for gluten sensitivity are, in fact, psychosomatic. Especially with the 'fashionable' nature of the gluten free diet.

    It would be necessary to do a kind of double blind test on each claimant to make sure they are actually gluten sensitive. That might be tricky. In the mean time, I remain skeptical of the claimed high incidence of this sensitivity.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Northern Horse Whisperer Moderator scheherazade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Yukon, Canada
    Posts
    4,066
    Hmmm...

    It is the same study that I mentioned in my first posts but did not link directly to. Did you read far enough down the page? Here is the part on gluten sensitivity from the link above. I accept that you remain skeptical and have no problem at all with that. Unless a person has experienced a thing first hand, they cannot truly comprehend the circumstances in their entirety and there are indeed many facets to the topic of gluten. The bold, underline and color were added by myself.

    Immune-mediated form (onset: hours to days after gluten exposure)Gluten sensitivity The recent rise of the gluten-free market in the USA (Figure 3), partially sustained by individuals who claim a medical necessity to undertake a GFD, raises questions about possible gluten reactions alternative to CD and WA. It is now becoming clear that, besides CD and WA, there are cases of gluten reactions in which neither allergic nor autoimmune mechanisms can be identified. These are generally defined as non-celiac GS or more simply, GS. Some individuals who experience distress when eating gluten-containing products and show improvement when following a GFD may have GS instead of CD. GS is a condition distinct from CD and is not accompanied by the concurrence of anti-tTG autoantibodies or other autoimmune comorbidities [44]. The small intestine of GS patients is usually normal [44]. However, the two conditions cannot be distinguished clinically, since the symptoms experienced by GS patients are often seen in CD. We propose as a definition of GS those cases of gluten reaction in which both allergic and autoimmune mechanisms have been ruled out (diagnosis by exclusion criteria). More specifically, these are cases with negative immuno-allergy tests to wheat or negative CD serology (anti-EMA and/or anti-tTG); where IgA deficiency has been ruled out; with normal duodenal histopathology; with the possible presence of biomarkers of native gluten immune-reaction (AGA+); with clinical symptoms that can overlap with CD or WA symptoms; and patients who show a resolution of symptoms when started on a GFD, implemented in a blinded fashion to avoid a possible placebo effect of the dietary intervention.
    Figure 3. Trend of three different diets (low carbohydrate diet, fat-free diet, and gluten-free diet), in the USA during the period 2004 to 2011. For the American general population, adopting a gluten-free diet is becoming an increasingly popular option. The market for gluten-free food and beverage products grew at a compound annual growth rate of 28% from 2004 to 2011, eclipsing the low carbohydrate diet and the fat-free diet in 2008, to finish with almost $1.6 billion in retail sales in 2010. By 2012 the market is expected to reach about $2.6 billion in sales. The fact that approximately three million Americans suffer from celiac disease and only a fraction of these patients have been diagnosed implies that patients suffering other forms of proven gluten reaction, including gluten sensitivity and wheat allergy, contribute to this market growth. The rest of the market is filled either by people who undertake the diet as occasional consumers (no medical necessity) or by individuals affected by maladies that have been claimed to be affected by gluten exposure, including autism spectrum disorder, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, multiple sclerosis and irritable bowel syndrome, but for which there is no evidence of the effectiveness of the diet.


    The symptoms in GS may resemble those associated with CD but with a prevalence of extraintestinal symptoms, such as behavioral changes, bone or joint pain, muscle cramps, leg numbness, weight loss and chronic fatigue. Between 2004 and 2010, 5,896 patients were seen at the Center for Celiac Research, University of Maryland. The criteria for GS were fulfilled by 347 (1:17; 6%) of the patients seen. Their symptoms included abdominal pain (68%); eczema and/or rash (40%); headache (35%); 'foggy mind' (34%); fatigue (33%); diarrhea (33%); depression (22%); anemia (20%); numbness in the legs, arms or fingers 20%; and joint pain (11%).
    While the class II MHC haplotype HLA-DQ2 and HLA-DQ8 are present in almost all CD patients, these genes are present in only about 50% of patients with GS, a percentage still higher compared to the general population [45,46]. Similarly, an association of HLA-DQ2 with GS in diarrhea-predominant irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) has been reported [47]. Therefore the involvement of an MHC-dependent, adaptive immune response in GS is currently unclear and requires further research. During the last decade, several studies have identified signs and symptoms associated with non-celiac GS, particularly concerning neuropsychiatric disorders. Patients with schizophrenia have higher than expected titers of AGA, which are related to CD and GS, whereas the implementation of a GFD seems to improve the behavior of a subset of children with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) [48,49]. However, currently there are no laboratory biomarkers specific for GS. Usually the diagnosis is based on exclusion criteria; an elimination diet of gluten-containing foods followed by an open challenge is most often used to evaluate whether health improves with the elimination or reduction of gluten from the patient's diet.
    There is considerably more on GS or gluten sensitivity at the link above. The study also acknowledges that some people may be following the gluten free diet because it is trendy yet they have observed that Gluten Sensitivity is a real condition that presents in a variety of ways.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope skeptic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    4,843
    Scheherazade

    There is nothing in the reference above that excludes psychosomatic disorders from what is called gluten sensitivity.

    What is needed is for those who believe they are gluten sensitive to enter a blinded trial, in which they are given a diet which is gluten free, or containing gluten, but double blinded so that neither those who receive the food or those who dispense it know which is which. Then, the development or remission of symptoms can be recorded and related back to diet.

    Has this vitally important piece of research been done?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Northern Horse Whisperer Moderator scheherazade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Yukon, Canada
    Posts
    4,066
    Quote Originally Posted by skeptic View Post
    Scheherazade

    There is nothing in the reference above that excludes psychosomatic disorders from what is called gluten sensitivity.

    What is needed is for those who believe they are gluten sensitive to enter a blinded trial, in which they are given a diet which is gluten free, or containing gluten, but double blinded so that neither those who receive the food or those who dispense it know which is which. Then, the development or remission of symptoms can be recorded and related back to diet.

    Has this vitally important piece of research been done?
    Yes, the research has been done. Once again, the following is from the link I posted. Did you read it in it's entirety?

    Recently, to test the hypothesis that gluten can cause gastrointestinal symptoms in patients without CD, a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled re-challenge trial was undertaken in patients with IBS fulfilling the Rome criteria III, who had CD excluded by best practice methods and who reported a symptom response to a GFD [63]. Patients were randomized according to a computer-generated list of random numbers held by an independent observer to either the gluten or the placebo treatment group. Over the entire study period, the severity scores of pain, satisfaction with stool consistency and tiredness were significantly higher for those consuming the gluten diet compared to the placebo group, while no evidence for intestinal inflammation or damage or for latent CD was found to offer an explanation for symptom deterioration caused by gluten. Therefore, this study further supports the notion that non-celiac GS is part of the spectrum of gluten-related disorders and confirmed similar findings reported more than 30 years ago [64].
    KALSTER likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    9
    Quote Originally Posted by ryanawe123 View Post

    p.s.
    im going on this diet to lost fats and build muscle

    anyone also, knows:
    1) how does the diet affect my blood pressure?
    2) the accumulation/disseminate of fats in my arteries?
    I simply suggest you that 1st consult a dietisian before using this.I am not a Dietisian otherwise surelly suggest you proper information about it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope skeptic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    4,843
    To scheherazade

    No I did not read the report in its entirety.
    Nor do I normally do this, since I have other things to do.
    Do you have a reference to the original report of the double blind trial?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Northern Horse Whisperer Moderator scheherazade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Yukon, Canada
    Posts
    4,066
    Quote Originally Posted by skeptic View Post
    To scheherazade

    No I did not read the report in its entirety.
    Nor do I normally do this, since I have other things to do.
    Do you have a reference to the original report of the double blind trial?
    Thank you, skeptic, for admitting that you did not read the material I provided in support of my opinion, yet you were critical of it nonetheless.

    Those 'little numbers' in the parts I did cut and paste are the references, which are all at the bottom of the study which I provided in the first link.

    Biesiekierski JR, Newnham ED, Irving PM, Barrett JS, Haines M, Doecke JD, Shepherd SJ, Muir JG, Gibson PR: Gluten causes gastrointestinal symptoms in subjects without celiac disease: a double-blind randomized placebo-controlled trial. Am J Gastroenterol 2011, 106:508-514. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
    I am quite done providing you with 'entertainment' since you do not seem to be capable of discussion, only criticism. Have a nice day.

    My apologies to the thread starter. Your original questions remain unanswered.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope skeptic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    4,843
    To scheherazade

    I read those portions you choose to quote. If you fail to post a vital part of a reference, and I do not read it, then I make no apology to you for that. I cannot read every reference I see in its entirety. Life is too short.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Northern Horse Whisperer Moderator scheherazade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Yukon, Canada
    Posts
    4,066
    Quote Originally Posted by skeptic View Post
    To scheherazade

    I read those portions you choose to quote. If you fail to post a vital part of a reference, and I do not read it, then I make no apology to you for that. I cannot read every reference I see in its entirety. Life is too short.
    This is a science forum. It is customary to post links and excerpts, not whole reports, with the understanding that those who wish to engage in debate will read those references prior to asking questions which are answered in the linked material.

    Apologies are frequently an excuse to repeat past behavior. I seldom offer or accept them for that reason.

    Thank you for the exchanges. They have been most enlightening.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    Forum Masters Degree LuciDreaming's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Cambridgeshire
    Posts
    656
    I have been on a ketogenic diet for health reasons for the last 3 years (I have cirrhosis of the liver due to the Hep C virus and its left my digestive system fairly non-functional). The effects of cirrhosis are quite severe but since I changed my diet at the end of my treatment I have no problems working full time, studying part-time and I can swim a mile without breaking a sweat (and do so three times a week). The only carbs I get are from root veg and the occasional handful of berries (about twice a month). I take a multi vitamin supplement once a week.
    Because I have cirrhosis I am monitored every 6 months and all my bloods are textbook perfect. But a word of caution – you must avoid sugar and grains if you are on a ketogenic diet. Animal fats on their own do not clog arteries but added with sugars and grains you have a recipe for a heart attack. (see here for further info - Sugar: The Bitter Truth - YouTube).
    I may be wrong but my personal opinion is that if a ketogenic diet is suitable for a person with a liver as damaged as mine then a healthy person shouldn’t encounter any problems with it.
    Just a couple of disclaimers though – in no way am I suggesting a ketogenic diet is a cure for cirrhosis – it isnt. And…..check with your doctor before you radically alter your diet.
    scheherazade likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Northern Horse Whisperer Moderator scheherazade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Yukon, Canada
    Posts
    4,066
    Thank you for sharing your experiences, Lucidreaming. I live in the Yukon, Canada, and there are a number of First Nations people who still eat a traditional diet of mainly lake trout, salmon, whitefish, caribou, moose, wild sheep, berries and wild forage supplemented with salt, tea and bannock. Further north, the Inuit derive most of their nutrition from sea mammals. These peoples seem adapted to their diets and interestingly, there appears to be a correlation of their health declining when they switch to eating a lot of carbohydrates and processed convenience foods.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    Forum Masters Degree LuciDreaming's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Cambridgeshire
    Posts
    656
    Taking into account that humans have been hunter-gatherers for 96% of our existence I think a diet high in animal fats is good. The optimal macronutrient ratio for humans is roughly 65% fat, 20 ish % protein and 15 ish carbs and I believe the Inuit diet is about 80% animal fats (as is mine a lot of the time). But everything in nature is cyclical and so its good to switch it about a bit. My health declines considerably on eating carbs/sugars and very quickly-for me the outcome is blocking of nutrient uptake, it seems to block absorption of the B vitamins firstly, then K2, D3 and calcium. I don't actually believe that carbs are bad at all and if you are healthy and can eat them go ahead but I do believe that its the amounts that are consumed in a Western diet that are causing many of the metabolic disorders that are so prevalent now. Some studies show the av. Western diet contains about 60% carbs in the forms of sugars and grains and its too much.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    Northern Horse Whisperer Moderator scheherazade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Yukon, Canada
    Posts
    4,066
    I'm inclined to agree that the problem lies predominantly in the quantities as well as their refinement and addition of sugars to the majority of processed foods that poses a challenge for the metabolism of many.

    The science of nutrition is frequently drawn and quartered by the various sectors of the food industry which results in a trail of confusion for the average consumer in deciding which foods to buy for optimum health. I've worked in retail grocery for 8 years and watching the antics of resizing, repackaging, re-branding and nutritional claims and certifications that are ongoing is quite fascinating.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #27  
    Forum Masters Degree LuciDreaming's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Cambridgeshire
    Posts
    656
    I must admit to a passionate hatred of the supermarket/food industry. I avoid supermarkets at all costs I just feel so insulted that they think I cant work out how they are doing me out of my money..... I think some of these big corporations need to find some moral responsibility too - we have a cereal brand here that has built its reputation as being a healthy breakfast option that now produces a variety with chocolate in it. I don't understand how it became acceptable to eat chocolate for breakfast on a daily basis but here we are anyway..... You've got me off on a rant now ..... I'll stop here.
    "And we should consider every day lost on which we have not danced at least once. And we should call every truth false which was not accompanied by at least one laugh" Nietzsche.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #28  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope skeptic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    4,843
    Luci.

    Caveat emptor.
    Anyone with a few smarts will work out that fruit, veges, nuts, wholemeal flour, brown rice, low fat dairy products, lean meats, and fish are the way to go. There is ample solid lierature on the subject. I do not have much sympathy for anyone who thinks chocolate covered cereal is the way to go. Supermarkets are not at fault. The idiot consumer is.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  30. #29  
    Forum Freshman Alex009988's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    33
    Quote Originally Posted by ryanawe123 View Post
    Cyclic ketogenic diet - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaabout using fats and oils as fuel, instead of the usual carbohydrates.im planning on this diet for about 1-3 months.the websites that introduced me to it states the PROs and CONs, but, of course they would be biased.so im asking here on a science forum. anyone help please!how dangerous is cyclical ketogenic diet, technically?p.s.im going on this diet to lost fats and build muscleanyone also, knows:1) how does the diet affect my blood pressure?2) the accumulation/disseminate of fats in my arteries?
    A kind of diet can help, the other can't. But on my humble opinion the best diet is sport otherwise you body will emaciated and decrepit with effective food diet.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  31. #30  
    Forum Masters Degree LuciDreaming's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Cambridgeshire
    Posts
    656
    Quote Originally Posted by skeptic View Post
    Luci.

    Caveat emptor.
    Anyone with a few smarts will work out that fruit, veges, nuts, wholemeal flour, brown rice, low fat dairy products, lean meats, and fish are the way to go. There is ample solid lierature on the subject. I do not have much sympathy for anyone who thinks chocolate covered cereal is the way to go. Supermarkets are not at fault. The idiot consumer is.
    I agree with you to a point skeptic. I would take out the wholemeal flour completely - substitute brown rice for white and low fat for full fat and fatty meats and I do have some sympathy for people who are either duped into buying this food or cant afford to eat healthily. The food industry has paid very close attention to psychological research and know exactly how to press people's buttons. Mere association is one thing-so a company that is recognised through the Western world as producing healthy breakfast foods can introduce a blatantly unhealthy one and people will unerringly transfer the health association to the new product. Steve Jobs understood these concepts very well too - ask anyone what they like about Apple products and they will say simple, clean lines, easy to use (normally) and that isn't an accident, that's a product of the way he chose to make his products and stores look. The supermarket strategies take advantage of people who are thinking about other things like picking their kids up on time, getting to work on time, paying the bills. The ones that don't have time to sit back and ponder on life, the universe and everything. I don't think they are idiots at all really, just taken advantage of.
    "And we should consider every day lost on which we have not danced at least once. And we should call every truth false which was not accompanied by at least one laugh" Nietzsche.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  32. #31  
    Goddess of Eternity rmbettencourt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Beverly Hills
    Posts
    221
    Quote Originally Posted by skeptic View Post
    Luci.

    Caveat emptor.
    Anyone with a few smarts will work out that fruit, veges, nuts, wholemeal flour, brown rice, low fat dairy products, lean meats, and fish are the way to go. There is ample solid lierature on the subject. I do not have much sympathy for anyone who thinks chocolate covered cereal is the way to go. Supermarkets are not at fault. The idiot consumer is.
    Unless of course they are on a mono-diet.
    avec amour,
    RM
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. Diet, size and longevity.
    By ox in forum Health & Medicine
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: September 2nd, 2012, 03:20 PM
  2. Calorie-Restricted Diet
    By Obviously in forum Health & Medicine
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: January 2nd, 2010, 11:00 AM
  3. Superfood diet
    By Darius in forum Health & Medicine
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: March 21st, 2009, 09:31 AM
  4. The -IDEAL- diet for every day
    By Inevidence in forum Health & Medicine
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: July 27th, 2008, 01:40 PM
  5. An ultimate diet?
    By Modern_Hero in forum Health & Medicine
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: October 25th, 2007, 06:44 AM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •