81–90 of 119 posts
This study is highly flawed: https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/2017/09/08/pure... Be careful making any changes to your diet based on these "findings". The healthiest populations on the planet eat plenty of carbs, but not refined sugars.
I've read a lot of, often conflicting, dietry guidance. I have realised one very important thing: humans will very easily accept that something they enjoy is bad for them (see fat, sex etc.) So listening to what people say is bad for them is stupid. Instead I have taken a simpler approach: I observe the lifestyles of people who are healthy and live a long time. I have observed that eating simply "good, old-fashioned"…
The problem is that simple home cooked food can't be commercialized. So all advice that gets published will be for something where you can buy a product. Same for exercise. We already know how to exercise but there are always people who want to make money by repackaging it.
This study is highly flawed: https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/2017/09/08/pure... Be careful making any changes to your diet based on these "findings". The healthiest populations on the planet eat plenty of carbs, but not refined sugars.
I always wonder, when nutrition studies are usually so poorly designed and controlled, why people don't just look at the blue zone diets for nutrition guidance.
[1]: http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2015/04/11/398325030/eat...
Related; I saw on Hacker News awhile back a really great website that aggregates a lot of this health research and then gives summaries of, "What's the current known truth" based on all of the varying research. They then re-market that data as a service somehow. Anyone on here recall this by chance as I'm no longer able to locate it?
Perhaps examine.com https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8138784 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9956839
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Importantly, a certain amount of carbohydrate is necessary to meet short-term energy demands during physical activity [...] Why would they make such a claim? Anyone who has done keto and worked out has probably had the experience of doing quite a lot of physical activity while having had no carbohydrate intake at all for half a day before, or more.
At most, your brain can run with 75% ketones/25% glucose. Other organs (kidneys, red blood cells, cornea) need about 15-25 grams/carb per day. If you do not get glucose from diet, your body will build it (gluconeogenesis). Must see if you want to understand/practice keto right: https://www.youtube.com/user/chrismasterjohn/videos
As far as my research into keto goes eating too much carbs kicks you out of ketosis (duh!) and eating too much protein triggers gluconeogenesis which also kicks you out of ketosis. Which is a shame because I'd be happy to eat fatty steak and fatty pork all the time!
Keto guidelines generally say 30g carbs per day and that's what I'm going to stick to (net carbs; I want to eat avocados!). So typical keto diet should work fine with what you say about carb requirement.
I don't have any particular desire to go all the way to 0 (or some really low number) and if I have some carb budget left I'm happy to get a latte. Starbucks says grande almond latte has 9g carbs (5g sugars). Perfect to tidy it up to just below 30g/day.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
„no carbohydrate intake at all for half a day before“ no way your body was in ketosis.
It takes about a week of < 20g/carbs a day for the body to go into ketosis. This is born out by buying keto strips and testing your urine.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because they explain the causal link. See the paragraph beginning with, "Most dietary carbohydrates relevant for human nutrition contain the monosaccharide D-glucose".
Countless studies show that consuming refined sugars alone has very different effects on the body than consuming complex carbohydrates along with the fiber found in natural foods. This is like saying that all protein contains glutamate so there's no difference between eating a steak or a tablespoon full of refined MSG.
I'm sure that encapsulating your carbs in a nice hard-to-unwrap cellulose structure slows the release of this D-glucose stuff and gives your body's control loop more chance to cope. But at this point we're arguing about the details of the causal link.
I’ve been living a ketogenic lifestyle for a few years now. I go in and out once and a while but seeing the “fat is bad” theory thrown out the window with research like this makes it easier to remain committed. The trouble comes with the way society has been conditioned to have carbs with every meal. Like 90% of the food my peer group eats are surrounded in carbs. Even for a company-wide lunch in the office: the go-t…
Note that this is probably not what you are thinking (low-carb, very-low carb or even keto diets are good for your healthspan). The lowest quintile in this study were consuming 46,4% of kcal from carbs (that's about 230 gram of carbs for a 2000 kcal total intake). Not even close to low carb by today's standard in the health blogosphere. The authors make this explicit in the discussion section: >>> However, the absenc…
As someone who has been on a low-carb diet for 3 years, on and off, I definitely don't notice any difference in performance, mood or productivity while on a low-carb diet. Too many people (esp. those in a desk job) over estimate their physical activity levels and think they need more carbs.
Sure, if you're an athlete, all this doesn't apply to you. But, for the vast majority (who in the present day) lead highly sedentary lifestyles, it's about time we encourage them to get off carbs as much as possible.
Note that this is probably not what you are thinking (low-carb, very-low carb or even keto diets are good for your healthspan). The lowest quintile in this study were consuming 46,4% of kcal from carbs (that's about 230 gram of carbs for a 2000 kcal total intake). Not even close to low carb by today's standard in the health blogosphere. The authors make this explicit in the discussion section: >>> However, the absenc…
There’s no such thing as necessary carbohydrates. The body is capable of producing all the glucose it needs.
"Gluconeogenesis is extremely expensive" [1]