But her book contained a ton of references that can be traced back. She did her research on the topic.
Nora at the Ancestral Health Symposium: http://vimeo.com/52876035
Also, this: Neuroprotective and disease-modifying effects of the ketogenic diet
Edit: And this - http://catalyticlongevity.org/prepub...;1].pdf
Edit again: This too - http://link.springer.com/chapter/10....6-4_15?LI=true
Last edited by Drumroll; 03-30-2013 at 02:36 PM.
A look at Nora Gedgaudas' website made me very very suspicious of whatever she claims. To put it briefly, she doesn't look credible. Because of that I see no reason to read her book.
In general, I'm wearing my sceptical face here because the claim that "those who run off of ketones at least occasionally tend to be at lower risk for developing Alzheimer's and dementia" is pure handwaving. Even to make it a question that can be answered requires defining what's "at least occasionally" and "tend to be at lower risk". After that you need a prospective study that would take about 20-40 years to complete -- and I'm pretty sure no one did such a study.
To give a specific example, one paper in Drumroll's links (Neuroprotective and disease-modifying effects of the ketogenic diet) explicitly talks about neuroprotective effects of ketones. And sure, ketones help with epilepsy, that's been known for quite a while. But Alzheimer's? The paper quotes another paper (Reger et al. (2004)) which has indicated (I haven't read the paper, just the abstract) that feeding people suffering from AD some fat maybe makes them perform better on cognitive tests in the immediate aftermath of that feeding. It's a VERY long jump from there to saying that going in ketosis will lower your risk of Alzheimer's...
Even if ketosis MAY improve your chances of avoiding alzheimers, so what? Constant ketosis will probably end up killing you dead years before alzheimers and dementia set in.
Yes that MAY have been an exaggeration, but still...
Four years Primal with influences from Jaminet & Shanahan and a focus on being anti-inflammatory. Using Primal to treat CVD and prevent stents from blocking free of drugs.
Eat creatures nose-to-tail (animal, fowl, fish, crustacea, molluscs), a large variety of vegetables (raw, cooked and fermented, including safe starches), dairy (cheese & yoghurt), occasional fruit, cocoa, turmeric & red wine
It is very interesting how often the assertion that ketosis is somehow bad for you keeps cropping up. Eskimos were as primal and ketotic as it gets for their entire lifespans and had low incidence of cancer. Ketosis is only bad for cereal and sugar manufacturers. I'm a doc and have been on a ketogenic diet for 9 months now. It's no miracle but it's also no problem to stick to it. It does require you to think positively, about what you CAN have rather than obsessing on what you CAN't.
My LDL has not changed much, slightly up, but triglycerides are way down (in the 30's) and HDL has gone from 50 to 77. My cardiologist could not believe it.
Of course by more recent data, the LDL-C is not very predictive anyway; Apo-B or LDL-particle count are much better. (The "large fluffy" is also less predictive than particle counts. It's just that on average if you have large fluffy's, you TEND to have lower particle counts.) Non-HDL cholesterol (total minus HDL) is better than LDL as well.
The only disadvantage I know of for ketosis is that it MIGHT lower your ability to do high intensity, anaerobic exercise because some have a bit less glycogen. What is the evidence for ketosis "killing you dead?"
By the way, the Inuit ate things that would make Hannibal Lector squeamish. They may have been in a ketogenic state most of the time but they also ate tons of stuff you dont and got nutrition that was right for them (extremely cold weather with little sunlight).
Ketosis is extremely stressful on the body. If you are loving it then go for it but dont be surprised if you start looking a bit Inuit in a few more months.