Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Fat-fueled brain: unnatural or advantageous?

blogs.scientificamerican.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 319 posts

Re: Fat-fueled brain: unnatural or advantageous?

#271

Post by poppysan »

rotwoof wrote: post #62

I've been doing Keto since Feb 25 2016. My primary goal when switching over was weight loss, which turned out to be easy. I'm 25, male and was experiencing growing health complications related to obesity. I've lost well over 60 lbs since making the switch despite the fact that I maintain a primarily sedentary lifestyle though I now work out weekly as well as take bi-daily walks. There are downsides though. It's not c…

Not to nit-pick, but Sweet Potatoes are not Keto friendly. They will knock you out of ketosis pretty quick, even if you are keto-adapted.

A better alternative is cauliflower. It can be used in most of the same places as potatoes, but is an acquired taste for some.

Edit: There are 27g of carbs in a sweet potato. That's more than my entire daily allowance on Keto.

Re: Fat-fueled brain: unnatural or advantageous?

#272

Post by nitrogen »

gnaritas wrote: post #228
AJ007 wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is wrong, the ketogenic diet is prescribed by doctors to patients suffering from seizures and it works. There are long term studies and the NYTimes has been reporting about this since the 90s. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/21/magazine/21Epilepsy-t.html Everyone picks a diet. If you just randomly eat anything thats available to you, in the developed world, you are most likely significantly overweight and at very…

Your argument is flawed, doctors prescribe lots of things that aren't good for you because for that person, they're better than the alternative, chemo for example. That something is done by doctors does not make it good. > but the rest of the details are finally getting fleshed out and accepted by mainstream science. Uh, no, mainstream science is the only one doing the fleshing out; you're implication that they're be…

"Mainstream" science is regularly hijacked by corporate and other interests. Dietary science is one area that was strongly influenced by producers of refined carbohydrates.

Re: Fat-fueled brain: unnatural or advantageous?

#273

Post by heimatau »

vannevar wrote: post #221
heimatau wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been doing Intermittent Fasting [1] for about 2-3 months now. I didn't realize the electrolytes issue when the body switches into ketosis. One thing I LOVE about IF is that my cravings have naturally leaned me in these directions. 1) I've been drinking more Gatorade because I craved it. 2) I've added salt, mayo, cheese to my sandwiches to 'make it taste better' even though prior to this diet, I'd have a fairly b…

Nutella might be bad...but it's keto-friendly. In what sense is Nutella 'keto-friendly'? Out of a 37g serving, 20g are refined sugar.

You're right. I forgot about the sugar. I was just thinking about the protein and fat content. Keto is all about low sugar/carbs. But with my IF diet, it works well as a nice pick me up snack with little drawbacks.

Re: Fat-fueled brain: unnatural or advantageous?

#274

Post by heimatau »

mmmpop wrote: post #234
heimatau wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been doing Intermittent Fasting [1] for about 2-3 months now. I didn't realize the electrolytes issue when the body switches into ketosis. One thing I LOVE about IF is that my cravings have naturally leaned me in these directions. 1) I've been drinking more Gatorade because I craved it. 2) I've added salt, mayo, cheese to my sandwiches to 'make it taste better' even though prior to this diet, I'd have a fairly b…

Nutella? Gatorade? I don't trust a word you said.

There are healthier ways to get high fat/protein as a snack (vs nutella) and better ways to get electrolytes than a sugar drink. But they've been helpful on the go and I don't eat many sweets anymore due to my cravings being changed. Sweets seem repulsive to me. If the worst in my diet is a chocolate hazelnut snack and a sugar energy drink, I'm ahead of the game.

But...I had to upvote you because it made me laugh. I like the idea that my 'diet' isn't the "healthiest" way to lose weight but it sure is ENJOYABLE and that's 95% of the battle, imho.

Re: Fat-fueled brain: unnatural or advantageous?

#275

Post by heimatau »

rotwoof wrote: post #213
heimatau wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been doing Intermittent Fasting [1] for about 2-3 months now. I didn't realize the electrolytes issue when the body switches into ketosis. One thing I LOVE about IF is that my cravings have naturally leaned me in these directions. 1) I've been drinking more Gatorade because I craved it. 2) I've added salt, mayo, cheese to my sandwiches to 'make it taste better' even though prior to this diet, I'd have a fairly b…

For me the primary motivation for switching over was as I said, the weight loss and ease of staying calorie-deficient. I can eat 1500 calories or less every day no problem on Keto. If I'm off Keto I get insanely hungry and experience blood sugar crashes frequently on a calorie-deficient diet. Not gonna lie, the lure of Keto was the promise that it's easy to stick with in terms of how your body reacts to it. I just ge…

That's a bummer. IF has given me a lot of flexibility. Provided I don't over consume in calories, I can eat whatever I desire, keto or not. Although not having the same cravings does change/limit my choices but...they are happily followed. I.e. it's easier for me to stick with it since I choose my next meal, my cravings dictate my next meal, not some 'plan' or 'diet'.

Re: Fat-fueled brain: unnatural or advantageous?

#276

Post by schrodinger »

danielvinson wrote: post #253
ars wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> proved to be absolutely false I'm perfectly willing to be shown that I'm wrong, but I'll need more than just a sentence from you saying so. You said "proved" - can you show me the proof?

A quick google search results in multiple well cited articles discussing it.

I'm sure it could also yield multiple well-cited articles on the other side as well. It would be much more helpful to actually provide some research that you stand behind.

Re: Fat-fueled brain: unnatural or advantageous?

#277

Post by schrodinger »

jsprogrammer wrote: post #243
rayiner wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The physics is that exercise burns so few calories it's not worthwhile from a weight loss point of view.

Where have those physics been documented? I want to see the same person: 'immobile 'sitting most of the time, with short commutes and shopping trips 'intensely exercising 1 hr a day 'actively working out throughout the day while maintaining their current diet and weight.

These aren't independent variables. The point is that a half an hour run only burns around 300-400 calories, a deficit which could more easily be accomplished by diet. Also, it's possible that the run would increase your appetite.

The point isn't that exercise _can't_ work, it's that aiming for dietary changes has a higher average ROI than exercise.

Re: Fat-fueled brain: unnatural or advantageous?

#278

Post by shanusmagnus »

serg_chernata wrote: post #220
johnward wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I take ZMA and potassium daily. I will drink electrolyte water too. When I get home from the gym and feel drained I will drink 8oz of chicken broth for the salt. I had some severe cramps before starting this.

Potassium in pill form is only sold in very small doses, correct? How do you reach the high daily minimum?

I buy potassium bicarbonate from Amazon in bulk -- ten bucks a pound. Winemakers use it to reduce acidity in their product, but it's easy enough to mix half a tsp in water twice a day. Lot of research on bicarb, too, so useful outside of keto issues.

Re: Fat-fueled brain: unnatural or advantageous?

#279

Post by BlackJack »

schrodinger wrote: post #276
danielvinson wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A quick google search results in multiple well cited articles discussing it.

I'm sure it could also yield multiple well-cited articles on the other side as well. It would be much more helpful to actually provide some research that you stand behind.

Lyle McDonald: http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/research-review/meal-freque...

Probably the best and most researched article on this.

Bullet point 4 here: http://www.leangains.com/2010/10/top-ten-fasting-myths-debun... has an article reference.

Basically, you can certainly go into starvation mode, but not in any reasonable amount of time. Skipping meals or even fasting for a whole day will not cause "starvation mode". Prolonged calorie restriction can affect hormones like Leptin and affect energy expenditure.

Re: Fat-fueled brain: unnatural or advantageous?

#280

Post by alecco »

zizzles wrote: post #127

Nutritional information is laughably conflicting. Example: Eat meat, it's essential! Don't eat meat, it will sky rocket your cholesterol! Buy organic, it is much healthier! Organic is over-priced and isn't proven to be healthier, don't buy into it! Fruit is so healthy, you should eat plenty of it! Fructose is bad for you, don't eat too much fruit! Every piece of information you end up reading, there is another piece…

Of course the internet people and journalists are in the right.
Post reply on HN