Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 71

Thread: Varying between >50g and <50g carbs Low Carb Flu? page 4

  1. #31
    Omni's Avatar
    Omni is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    968
    Shop Now
    I was under the impression that the Inuit type diet was an example of a Ketogenic diet, where the diet is comprised wholly of animal products, primarily fat. The link below is one of the papers I read regarding this:
    Nutrition & Metabolism | Full text | Ketogenic diets and physical performance

    Once we get down to low carb I imagine there has to be fat metabolism taking place, but surely the trigger point for pure ketolysis is when blood sugar & muscle Glycogen needs to be replenished from fat only.
    Otherwise what distinguishes a Ketogenic (Low Carb) diet from a Low Carb diet or even a Medium Carb diet? All of these would have some degree of Ketolysis taking place.

    I will do some more reading on this, as I would like to know what the distinctions are?

  2. #32
    paleo-bunny's Avatar
    paleo-bunny is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    SW England, UK
    Posts
    2,667
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleobird View Post
    Thanks. I just got my five years post cancer check-up and everything came back all clear. Just because it's in your family doesn't make it inevitable. But you do have to be more cautious about preventative exams like mammograms and pap smears. My oncologist told me that the best thing I could do to prevent a recurrence was to get the excess weight off of me. That's when I went low carb. Survival is a much stronger motivator than vanity could ever be.
    That's great news and I am very happy for you.

    I agree that cancer is not inevitable for me. I am at high risk of female cancers due to a very high 2D:4D ratio, which is in the top percentile, and apparently high histamine is a risk factor too for oestrogen dominance.

    However, two of my maternal grandmother's four siblings are still alive in their late eighties/early nineties and are going great guns, so that gives me hope. They both have a lust for life.

    Sometimes I seriously curse having knowledge about this stuff.

    I am going to find it hard to lose more body fat because I know my body doesn't want to go much below around 29% body fat. So I don't believe I can reduce my risk of cancer in that respect. I wish I could.
    F 5 ft 3. HW: 196 lbs. Primal SW (May 2011): 182 lbs (42% BF)... W June '12: 160 lbs (29% BF) (UK size 12, US size 8). GW: ~24% BF - have ditched the scales til I fit into a pair of UK size 10 bootcut jeans. Currently aligning towards 'The Perfect Health Diet' having swapped some fat for potatoes.

  3. #33
    StackingPlates's Avatar
    StackingPlates is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    456
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleobird View Post
    I think that "insidious weight gain" thing is probably true of people eating in that range if they are spending too much time watching Oprah and not exercising.
    So if I eat 160G/day of CHOs and don't exercise then I will automatically have insidious weight gain? This pseudo-scientific chart is quite possibly the worst marketing idea Sisson ever came up with.

    Screen-shot-2012-02-28-at-23.22.21.png

    Has this ever been clarified, revised, or is this still the Primal Blueprint doctrine when it comes to CHO intake?

  4. #34
    Paleobird's Avatar
    Paleobird Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by StackingPlates View Post
    So if I eat 160G/day of CHOs and don't exercise then I will automatically have insidious weight gain? This pseudo-scientific chart is quite possibly the worst marketing idea Sisson ever came up with.
    He never meant it as absolute numbers or a one size fits all. Cut the guy some slack. It is a good rule of thumb place to start.

  5. #35
    Paleobird's Avatar
    Paleobird Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Omni View Post
    I was under the impression that the Inuit type diet was an example of a Ketogenic diet, where the diet is comprised wholly of animal products, primarily fat. The link below is one of the papers I read regarding this:
    Nutrition & Metabolism | Full text | Ketogenic diets and physical performance

    Once we get down to low carb I imagine there has to be fat metabolism taking place, but surely the trigger point for pure ketolysis is when blood sugar & muscle Glycogen needs to be replenished from fat only.
    Otherwise what distinguishes a Ketogenic (Low Carb) diet from a Low Carb diet or even a Medium Carb diet? All of these would have some degree of Ketolysis taking place.

    I will do some more reading on this, as I would like to know what the distinctions are?
    The Inuit are AN example but not the only one. And no, it does not have to be zero carb intake to trigger it, just very low.

    If you would like to look into this further you might try looking at the Johns Hopkins website. They are doing some great research about keto diets and epilepsy.

  6. #36
    StackingPlates's Avatar
    StackingPlates is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    456
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleobird View Post
    He never meant it as absolute numbers or a one size fits all. Cut the guy some slack. It is a good rule of thumb place to start.
    If I am new to Sisson and the "Primal Blueprint" then how am I supposed to simply look at that diagram and determine it isn't a "one size fits all"? Is there some fine print I'm not privy to? It looks very intimidating and absolute to me?

  7. #37
    paleo-bunny's Avatar
    paleo-bunny is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    SW England, UK
    Posts
    2,667
    Quote Originally Posted by StackingPlates View Post
    So if I eat 160G/day of CHOs and don't exercise then I will automatically have insidious weight gain? This pseudo-scientific chart is quite possibly the worst marketing idea Sisson ever came up with.

    Screen-shot-2012-02-28-at-23.22.21.png

    Has this ever been clarified, revised, or is this still the Primal Blueprint doctrine when it comes to CHO intake?
    I agree that it is pseudo-scientific.

    Anyone can eat just one meal a day with however many carbs they chose to eat and be guaranteed to go into ketosis.

    Because the liver can only load around 100-120 max of carbs. And hey - guess what - if the muscles are competing for carbs the liver won't take its fill.
    F 5 ft 3. HW: 196 lbs. Primal SW (May 2011): 182 lbs (42% BF)... W June '12: 160 lbs (29% BF) (UK size 12, US size 8). GW: ~24% BF - have ditched the scales til I fit into a pair of UK size 10 bootcut jeans. Currently aligning towards 'The Perfect Health Diet' having swapped some fat for potatoes.

  8. #38
    StackingPlates's Avatar
    StackingPlates is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    456
    If he was to be less dramatic about it then I'd give him a pass but that wouldn't sell books, I suppose...

  9. #39
    sbhikes's Avatar
    sbhikes is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Santa Barbara
    Posts
    9,337
    Imagine how badly the Primal Blueprint would work if the parameters were "eat as much of all these foods as you want" without anything to rein it in. You'd have all these sugarholics chasing down their ribeyes with whole watermelons. I'm sure that would work well for effortless weightloss.

    At 100-150 carbs most people are going to a) limit the binge worthy stuff, b) maximize foods that fill you up for hours, and c) not suffer low carb flu or at least not for very long. The result is going to be weight loss for just about any adult who adheres to it.
    Female, 5'3", 49, Starting weight: 163lbs. Current weight: 135 (more or less).
    Starting squat: 45lbs. Current squat: 170 x 3. Current Deadlift: 220 x 3

  10. #40
    Omni's Avatar
    Omni is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    968
    Just did a bit of a search on "Low Carb Flu", seems this is the transition state of converting over to full Ketolysis, One link & Quote below:
    The Science Behind The “Low Carb Flu”, and How To Regain Your Metabolic Flexibility &#45; GNOLLS.ORG

    The Difference Between Beta-Oxidation and Ketosis
    Here’s where I say something that might be controversial: I think going cold-turkey VLC (very low carb) or zero-carb makes the transition much harder, particularly for people who are already physically active.

    Beta-oxidation (fat-burning) occurs nearly continually, and produces much of our energy at rest once insulin has cleared any sugar spike out of our system. However, our body does have some requirement for glucose, which it satisfies in the short-term primarily by having the liver make it—a process called gluconeogenesis.

    If we eat zero carbs, or very few, over a period of time, our body enters a state called ketosis, in which some of our tissues that used to require glucose shift over to burning ketone bodies, which are alternative products of fat metabolism. And while it is true that our brains and hearts actually run more efficiently on ketones, it takes several weeks for our bodies to fully adapt. Meanwhile, we lack energy for high-effort activities, because our muscles are depleted of glycogen, which is made from glucose.

Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •