I recently found something out yet I rarely see it discussed. Carbs are not the problem.
>More and more people swear by keto
>They say it cured their mental illness, physical illness, helped them lose a ton of weight, whatever.
>Everyone claims carbs and sugar are the culprit as seen by their switch to keto.
>The reason being keto relies on fat as fuel, so relying on carbs as fuel must have been the problem.
But it is not inherently carbs. The problem is both carbs and fat together. When consuming fat, it enters your cells and this prevents glucose from entering. So the glucose is just hanging out waiting for a chance to enter your cells to be used. While this is taking place, it causes your insulin to spike because your body can't properly utilize the carbs. Simply put, you're eating 2 different sources of fuel, fat and carbs, and they're conflicting with each other. If you only eat carbs, your body can process them just fine without fat interfering with the process.
So basically do either keto or reverse keto. In a study, a guy took a bunch of overweight people and fed them nothing but rice, sugar, honey, juice, and other sources of pure carbs. They ended up losing a ton of weight. If you think about it, most overweight people gain weight because of cookies, cake, pizza, hamburgers, and so on - all of which are both high in fat and carbs. You don't hear about people getting fat off toast with honey and juice.
Unless I'm missing something, it makes perfect sense. Why does nobody talk about it? Just choose one fuel source and you'll be fine.
Because you need fat to survive, so only eating carbs and protein is going to kill you from rabbit starvation if you are strict about it. Also it has been talked about, even the woman nicknamed "The Keto Queen" presented those findings at a keto conference years ago and no one really disputed it. For various reasons, It's simply easier to eat and stick to a high fat diet, low carb diet than it is to eat a high carb, low fat diet.
This. A keto diet requires minimal nutritional supplementation to stay healthy. A high carb low fat diet would require extensive vitamin supplements and plant proteins to keep you from withering.
Rabbit starvation is due to excessive protein. Very low fat diets were successful in the past to cause weight loss and reverse T2 diabetes.
Disruptive of steroidogenesis. Not smart for long-term.
Well yeah, I can agree with that. The patients who were placed on the diet in the past were in very bad shape, so it made sense for them to try it. Actually, I think they ended up adding 1-2 tablespoons of oil to the diet, which didn't seem to cause problems and in fact helped. But it was still <10% fat.
Doesn't the whole deal with macro comps boils down to fat and carb combo heavy food stimulate hunger so you keep eating while giga high fat or carb with sufficient protein kills hunger?
You missing the point, "rabit starvation" is protein poisoning from too much protein hence why you can't make it main source of energy nor is there much reason to (satiety fron protein levels out at around 30% of caloric intake)
He means (I think) eating them in the same meal. Obviously it's not easy to eat only one of them in a meal, but you can try to make each meal very dominant in one or the other. So ice cream or tiramisu would be very fattening, while eating half a stick of butter or a bowl of rice wouldn't be.
You need a certain amount of dha and epa but any other fat the body can create through de novo lipidgenesis
This is TOTAL PYSOP TROLLLING to make people fatter and Type 2 Diabetic.
Fat slows the release of insulin, making the spikes slower and smaller, decreasing the damage done by carbs.
Eating a diet of nothing but carbs = early death. Certain Native American tribes and islanders in the Pacific ate a 90% carb diet from grains and fruit, and would only live to an average age of late 20s before dying of various diseases and tooth decay.
So what's the deal glowies, too many people getting diabetes and other diseases now from the "vaccines"?
>So what's the deal glowies, too many people getting diabetes and other diseases now from the "vaccines"?
Type 1 Diabetes has almost doubled in the last few years since the shots.
>Fat slows the release of insulin, making the spikes slower and smaller, decreasing the damage done by carbs.
The extra fat causes far more insulin to be released overall.
>Why does nobody talk about it? Just choose one fuel source and you'll be fine.
As I'm sure you'll see in this thread, even people who are ostensibly intelligent are complete retards when it comes to even the slightest nuance regarding nutrition. All they can understand is "macro good" or "macro bad".
As far as your post goes, you are completely correct and this is recognized as one of the most likely explanations for why people develop insulin resistance and diabetes.
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randle_cycle
>The Randle cycle, also known as the glucose fatty-acid cycle, is a metabolic process involving the competition of glucose and fatty acids for substrates.
> The problem is both carbs and fat together. When consuming fat, it enters your cells and this prevents glucose from entering. So the glucose is just hanging out waiting for a chance to enter your cells to be used. While this is taking place, it causes your insulin to spike because your body can't properly utilize the carbs
It doesn't work that way. Insulin is necessary for glucose transportation into cells regardless of how much fat you eat. A large insulin spike is simply caused by your body needing to manage too many carbs at once.
The reality is that people are fat because:
1. They eat too much (most people are bad at calculating how much energy is in their food and how much energy they mean so they don't even realize they're overeating until it's too late)
2. They eat too frequently
3. They eat a bunch of junk food like candy bars, deep fried McDonalds items instead of real food like what you find in the produce section or meat section and don't have any sense about what THEIR (given ancestry, level of activity, etc.) body actual needs
4. They are too sedentary. The human body is one designed function properly when a person is sufficiently active.
>Insulin is necessary for glucose transportation into cells regardless of how much fat you eat.
That's not true, anon.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7657800/
>In isoglycemic patients, the 40-50% inhibition of total stimulated glucose uptake was due to near complete inhibition of the insulin-stimulated part of glucose uptake. Proportional inhibition of glucose uptake, glycogen synthesis, and glycolysis suggested a major FFA-mediated defect involving glucose transport and/or phosphorylation. In summary, fat produced proportional inhibitions of insulin-stimulated glucose uptake and of intracellular glucose utilization. We conclude, that physiologically elevated levels of FFa could potentially be responsible for a large part of the peripheral insulin resistance in patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus.
This does not render his statement false. Your excerpt seems to suggest the insulin need increases upon increase of fat intake, but even at zero fat intake you still need insulin. It's necessary, always.
What you cited is interesting, though I can't make any sense of it. As a type 1 diabetic, on low carb, I need ~40u/day of insulin, on standard high carb years ago it was more like 80u/day. Even if there may be competition between fatty acids and glucose, the vastly decreased insulin requirement on low-carb diets seems worth it to me, from a perspective of wanting to avoid insulin resistance and its complications. Which is warranted, since apparently more and more T1Ds are developing T2D as well/double diabetes, while on the standard (high carb) diet doctors recommended for decades.
You're correct that insulin is always required to some degree, but fat raises the need. The more free fatty acids in circulation, the higher the insulin demand will be to get the glucose into cells.
>As a type 1 diabetic, on low carb, I need ~40u/day of insulin, on standard high carb years ago it was more like 80u/day.
When you shift into ketosis, serum glucose is maintained by the liver. You're actually very insulin resistant when in ketosis, but circulating glucose is low and there's not much need to drive it into cells because the majority are relying on burning fat (beta oxidation). It's a different matter when you consume 100 grams of glucose at a meal, which then flood into the bloodstream. So with that 100 g meal, you can consume no fat or a lot of fat. The first will probably result in a higher glucose spike, but the latter will cause insulin to remain very high for a long time because the FFA are competing with the glucose (remember, there's little competition in ketosis, most of your body is relying on ketones and fatty acids, but there's still a small need for glucose which the liver regulates).
I made this post here
. There's a selection of the population who appears insulin resistant, but when they stop consuming fat, become very insulin sensitive. Another portion of the population has trouble burning glucose even on low fat and may do better with ketosis. Some of it has to do with impaired beta oxidation, where their body has trouble switching between glucose and fat oxidation, which is required when going from a fed to fasted state. They work around it by simply keeping their body in beta oxidation so there's no longer a need to switch.
Your problem as a Type 1 is purely having enough insulin, and you've established low carb works for you. That's great, there's no one size fits all. I'm not an advocate for any particular diet, everyone needs to find what works for them.
/thread
Humans are designed to walk/run/exercise for 3+ hours / day. Current obsessions with diets are because people don't move.
Look up mikey musumeci. His diet is literally 6000 calories of pizza and pasta every day, and he doesn't look very unhealthy.
>Look up mikey musumeci. His diet is literally 6000 calories of pizza and pasta every day, and he doesn't look very unhealthy.
Easy to do when you are in your 20s. I could drink 10 beers and eat tacos and pizza all day when young and still maintain a 6 pack abs. Not as easy when in your 30s.
the thing is, he trains like 10 hours per day
you will burn every single calorie, even in your 30s
People get fat because of (methyl)mercury deficiency. It isn't really an energy storage, it's like kwashiorkor, only that you get filled with fat when you eat fat. The correlation with diabetes is purely coincidental.
I thought people get fat because they eat more calories than they expend in a day. What are you talking about?
>What are you talking about?
The obesity we see is not fat storage. Our closest ape relatives don't have any either. The lack of methyl mercury causes kwashiorkor. The swelling fills up with fat when you eat enough fat to do so. You can't get rid of it by eating less, as it's a nutrient deficiency. The diet high in fish combined with a lax regulation is the reason why Japan suffers very little.
>600lb obese people just have a distended stomach due to malnutrition and it has nothing to do with the amount of calories they consume
gotta love LULZ schizos
Why do you stick to an obviously false hypothesis? Not only people can't lose, they often fail to gain either.
>Why do you stick to an obviously false hypothesis?
Meant this for
?
I'm the same anon. If it's just overeating:
Why have people started overeating all of sudden?
Why do so few people manage to lose weight by eating less?
Why do people fail to gain in spite of trying?
I'm seeing people for and against the original post.
>actually fat is needed to slow down insulin
>well that may be true, but in the end more insulin ends up being released
Which is true? It seems like high carb would work as long as you get a small portion of healthy fat and protein.
If you're relatively healthy and don't eat like crap, then the macros may not be that important. It's when you start developing problems that you need to push toward either ketosis or carbosis. There was a study that I can no longer find, but they rotated diabetics between two extreme diets. Some of the group became very insulin sensitive on the high carb, others struggled on it but did well with low carb. So it may be a combination of how do you prefer to eat and how does your body respond that decides which is better.
I found this, it covers some of the high carb diets tried in the past:
https://deniseminger.com/2015/10/06/in-defense-of-low-fat-a-call-for-some-evolution-of-thought-part-1/
Anyone that has ever told me to try keto was fatter than me.
A random sample of your posting showed that you were of no more than average IQ.
The problem is lead deficiency. It makes glycolysis impossible (you can neither burn it nor convert it into fat) so it gets stuck on that. Tired and hungry as if you were starving.
OP is mostly right, save for the type of carbs as well. Biological processes and reactions can clash with one another, this is clear to anyone who's seen what happens to people when exposed to unnatural concentrations of every chemical ever. Something that almost everybody forgets is that everything is correlated. This is precisely the reason human biology is so hard to figure out, shit affects other shit. You see it in headlines and scientific journals everywhere:
"THIS JUST IN: SIDE EFFECT THAT MAKES PERFECT SENSE WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT IT HAS BEEN DISCOVERED DUE TO (insert event/industrial process/industry practice here)"
It's the midwits like you who think dunking on people on a board where information is to be processed by those interested in science is a good use of anyone's time, much less yours. Your insecurity is screaming and your inferiority complex is played out. Now fuck off.
Pic rel, one of my last posts. The one you're reading right now is 126, just to save you time. I didn't know about that site, nice novelty.
That's some great globohomo propaganda you got there champ.
Just the sort of stuff that world work on Reddit. Why aren't you there instead of here?
is the Mediterranean diet( eating low glycemic Index carbs like sweet-potators and very little fish or pork) a good middle ground between keto and low-fat?
I got type 2 diabetes out of nowhere(my BMI is 18.5) and i would prefer to play safe considering that nutrition science is a clausterfuck.
It's supposed to be well balanced. Did they fo a little research as to why you would have type 2 diabetes with a BMI that low? Were you on a medication that put insulin resistance on hyperdrive?
my dad have diabeetus and my mother have pre-diabetic morning blood sugar levels sometimes.
funny thing is that i am only 20yo and my HbA1c was a whooping 14%(now 10% after 1 month of metformin and glicazide), my morning blood sugar was 500(now 130) and i was peeing straight sugar.
>Were you on a medication that put insulin resistance on hyperdrive?
Nope. i did got vaxxed(only 1 dose) but i dont think it was the cause lol.
>Nope. i did got vaxxed(only 1 dose) but i dont think it was the cause lol.
I mean...
What were you eating?
>I got type 2 diabetes out of nowhere(my BMI is 18.5) and i would prefer to play safe considering that nutrition science is a clausterfuck.
That's suspicious for something like LADA or MODI. Have they checked your insulin levels?
Jesus dude, I see no way in hell someone with a BMI of 18.5 is simply insulin resistant. I think something more is going on, like pancreatic failure. Ask for tests to check C-Peptide and Insulin at a minimum.
>out of nowhere
>(my BMI is 18.5)
>morning blood sugar was 500(now 130) and i was peeing straight sugar.
>retard medic diagnoses "type 2 diabetes"
I strongly urge you to get a re-diagnosis. Sounds very much like Type 1 to me.
The metformin and all that might work as a band-aid for as long as you're in the honeymoon phase, but once your pancreas (most likely) stops making insulin, you'll be kill kiddo. Did they do a C-peptide test? If not get it ASAP. If C-Peptide is low, you have T1D, which means you have no choice but to get on insulin. Please don't ignore this, anon.
wew lad
fat, carbs, and protein are all required to keep all your hormones and bodily functions going regularly. Just eat unprocessed stuff and exercise, you don't need to worry about keto or low fat or whatever other diet crap. If you have diabetes stop eating a bunch of processed carbs. If you are fat stop eating so much crap. It's that simple. If you are talking about getting a super toned look in some bodybuilding competition, or being the next usain bolt, then I'm sure you'd have to get to the specifics of all your macros and vitamins and all that, but for just about any regular person, it's irrelevant. Just eat healthy and exercise
>The problem is both carbs and fat together.
Nice aspect to consider is a calorie bomb. See, you need fat to push over the 400calories/100grams density. The worst thing about the fastfood is the density of calories, which is being caused by a high amount of sugar, prepped by fat to 500/100 levels. You have lots of sweets available at 200-250 calories per 100 grams. Even pizza has some veggies on it, hence the fat+sugar combo is not yet achieved thus the calories can be capped at about 300 calories per 100 grams of pizza.
Im still on the face about nuts, they usually come at levels of 600 calories/100, I love those but Im gonna substantionally limit my intake of these kind of foods
Diets with unnatural amounts of pufa (>6-8%) cause you to become too insulin sensitive, inhibiting lipolysis and causing weight gain. Eventually you become overfat (there's an ethnic component here) and start leaking fatty acids from your adipose tissue. The resulting 24/7 insulin resistance obviously interferes with glucose metabolism.
Indeed pufa is bad, but this hclf also applies to saturated fat. While sat fat is healthy and contains valuable nutrients, we likely don't need a whole lot of it, at least not every day.
The real solution is a high whole food diet consisting of animal products and vegetables/fruit and other high carb plants in moderation.
How can you gain muscle on hclf diet? You wouldn't be getting too much protein.
I've heard that we actually don't need as much protein for muscle building as we think, but I didn't know if that was true. Most people who work out ingest like 100g+ of protein but I've heard even half that is acceptable. Not to become a bodybuilder but you know what I mean. Can someone get reasonably toned/have decent muscle while keeping their protein moderate to low?
Carbs spare protein. If the body's not getting enough glucose, the body starts breaking down muscle for gluconeogenesis.
Interesting. Then on a hclf diet, as long as I'm getting enough carbs, how much protein would a thin person need to build muscle?