Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 39

Thread: Study: Low-carb diet linked to increased cortisol & inflammation page 3

  1. #21
    sting's Avatar
    sting is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    176
    Shop Now
    Quote Originally Posted by Dragonfly View Post
    Sting~ You may like this blog. Intelligent science & they do address the cortisol issue:
    The Ketogenic Diet for Health
    Thanks Dragonfly i actually was reading their blog today for the first time and actually read that article link you posted did you agree that protein don't turn into glucose?

    Nearly every diabetic seems to think it does Hmm

  2. #22
    Dragonfly's Avatar
    Dragonfly is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Port Townsend, Washington
    Posts
    3,736
    Quote Originally Posted by sting View Post
    Thanks Dragonfly i actually was reading their blog today for the first time and actually read that article link you posted did you agree that protein don't turn into glucose?

    Nearly every diabetic seems to think it does Hmm
    This blog post explains things:The Ketogenic Diet for Health: If You Eat Excess Protein, Does It Turn Into Excess Glucose?

  3. #23
    sting's Avatar
    sting is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    176
    Quote Originally Posted by Dragonfly View Post
    If You Eat Excess Protein, Does It Turn Into Excess Glucose?
    We have seen the claim that any protein you eat in excess of your immediate needs will be turned into glucose by spontaneous gluconeogenesis ¹. (Gluconeogenesis (GNG) is the process by which glucose is made out of protein in the liver and kidneys.) Some people think that because protein can be turned into glucose, it will, once other needs are taken care of, and that therefore keto dieters should be careful not to eat too much protein.
    While we believe there are valid reasons for limiting protein intake, experimental evidence does not support this one. In our opinion, it makes sense physiologically for GNG to be a demand-driven rather than supply-driven process, because of the need to keep blood glucose within tight bounds.

    This is what i meant in the above post, there saying it dont while most diabetics say it does?

  4. #24
    Neckhammer's Avatar
    Neckhammer is online now Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    7,729
    Quote Originally Posted by sting View Post
    If You Eat Excess Protein, Does It Turn Into Excess Glucose?
    We have seen the claim that any protein you eat in excess of your immediate needs will be turned into glucose by spontaneous gluconeogenesis ¹. (Gluconeogenesis (GNG) is the process by which glucose is made out of protein in the liver and kidneys.) Some people think that because protein can be turned into glucose, it will, once other needs are taken care of, and that therefore keto dieters should be careful not to eat too much protein.
    While we believe there are valid reasons for limiting protein intake, experimental evidence does not support this one. In our opinion, it makes sense physiologically for GNG to be a demand-driven rather than supply-driven process, because of the need to keep blood glucose within tight bounds.

    This is what i meant in the above post, there saying it dont while most diabetics say it does?
    Yeah. Most diabetics aren't up on the research. Perhaps just regurgitating what they have been told. Again, they do say that there are valid reasons for limiting protein, this just isn't one of em.

  5. #25
    Black Timber's Avatar
    Black Timber is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    174
    Quote Originally Posted by Neckhammer View Post
    Without getting into a discussion of VLC specifically this logic kinda doesn't make sense to me. And I've seen it a hundred times.

    Just replace "carbs" with "vitamin c" and see how that plays out. Of course we have to also change "humans" to "cats and dogs".

    So it goes something like this now.... If vitamin c is sooo important that dogs and cats bodies figured out how to make it on its own then I would think that restricting vitamin c beneath the minimum required quantity would be a mistake in the long run. Seems like....

    See what I mean? Kind of a logic fail considering a diet without vitamin c can be quite natural and healthy for those animals.

    So maybe just cause we can produce it doesn't necessarily mean anything in terms of it being optimal to ingest it or not. Basically a dead end in trying to make an argue for or against.
    That is an excellent example. Thanks. But aren't you ignoring the "consume carbs to your activity level" statement in your post above?
    Some of you may die, but that is a risk I'm willing to take.

  6. #26
    Cryptocode's Avatar
    Cryptocode is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Norco, California
    Posts
    1,341
    Quote Originally Posted by sting View Post
    Although participants burned the most energy on the low-carb diet, researchers found that it came at a cost of "increases in cortisol, a stress hormone, and a measure of inflammation called CRP, which can raise the risk of developing heart disease and diabetes.


    JAMA Network | JAMA | Effects of Dietary Composition on Energy Expenditure During Weight-Loss Maintenance
    One of their better studies. It has a few problems but it's still better than most. In my experience I definately have more energy and the level is still increasing. Muscles are growing. But my cortisol is high (23.9), unfortunately that is a recent measurement and I have nothing previous to compare it to. Interesting that they found differences in cholesterol to be not significent. Hurray for GRIFF.

    I sent a link to my doctor. Wonder if he'll reply.

    A BIG positive outcome of the study was that calories in = calories out is wrong. Low carb has a definate metabolic advantage.
    Last edited by Cryptocode; 06-20-2013 at 01:01 PM.
    "When the search for truth is confused with political advocacy, the pursuit of knowledge is reduced to the quest for power." - Alston Chase

  7. #27
    sting's Avatar
    sting is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    176
    Quote Originally Posted by Neckhammer View Post
    Yeah. Most diabetics aren't up on the research. Perhaps just regurgitating what they have been told. Again, they do say that there are valid reasons for limiting protein, this just isn't one of em.
    Hmm these diabetics from the diabetesforum.com are pretty hard core into their studying of diabetes and foods etc, take this thread for a example have a read you will be surprised Excess protein

  8. #28
    pklopp's Avatar
    pklopp is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    London
    Posts
    529
    It often seems to me like researchers just cannot get over their biases against certain dietary approaches and go beating the bushes for something negative to say that aligns with their prejudices.

    Case in point:

    Quote Originally Posted by Ebbeling et al
    However, CRP tended to be higher with the very low-carbohydrate diet (median [95% CI], 0.78 [0.38-1.92] mg/L for low-fat diet; 0.76 [0.50-2.20] mg/L for low–glycemic index diet; and 0.87 [0.57-2.69] mg/L for very low-carbohydrate diet; P for trend by glycemic load = .05).
    Indeed, and what of it? CRP was at a mean value of 0.87 mg/L in the VLC diet, still in the low risk category for heart disease of less than 1.0 mg/L. All three diets took the subjects from having average risk, between 1.0 to 3.0 mg/L into the low risk category. The lowest level recorded with the low glycemic diet only differs from the VLC diet by 0.11 mg/dL.

    Meanwhile, the VLC diet crushes triglyceride levels which correlate much more closely with heart disease.

    As for cortisol ... well, let's let the results speak for themselves:



    So I cheated a bit to help the results speak by drawing your attention to the footnotes which say, effectively, that urinary cortisol did not differ in the three dietary approaches in a statistically significant way, i.e. it was not possible to rule out the alternative conclusion that any differences observed were strictly due to chance.

    -PK
    Last edited by pklopp; 06-20-2013 at 02:17 PM.
    My blog : cogitoergoedo.com

    Interested in Intermittent Fasting? This might help: part 1, part 2, part 3.

  9. #29
    Neckhammer's Avatar
    Neckhammer is online now Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    7,729
    Quote Originally Posted by Black Timber View Post
    That is an excellent example. Thanks. But aren't you ignoring the "consume carbs to your activity level" statement in your post above?
    Oh, well not completely . It was more a practice in looking at the logic of this argument than the argument itself. Know what I mean?

  10. #30
    Neckhammer's Avatar
    Neckhammer is online now Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    7,729
    Quote Originally Posted by sting View Post
    Hmm these diabetics from the diabetesforum.com are pretty hard core into their studying of diabetes and foods etc, take this thread for a example have a read you will be surprised Excess protein
    Don't take my response to mean that they aren't smart or anything. If you read that thread there is more than a couple of instances where people make observations on how hormonal dysfunction could create such glucose spikes in relation to higher amounts of protein in the diet.

    The point of the article that Dragonfly and you were discussing is that this is not due to gluconeogenesis that they get these spike and that gluconeogenesis rate is limited and dependent on demand rather than supply. Its a different mechanism still associated with high protein intake though.

    For instance this response from the forum you linked seems up that alley:

    "So, when you consume protein it triggers an insulin release. It also triggers a simultaneous glucagon release. On balance, in a normal system, glucose stays about the same with the balance of those two forces. No glucose is produced from the protein or from the glucagon. Rather, it relies on glucose stored (as glycogen) in the liver. Insulin stops the liver from releasing it, glucagon commands the liver to release it. So, it relies on there being glycogen stored in the liver. Barring that, no spike can result from glucagon.

    As was pointed out, the glucose in question cannot come from protein you just ate because it can't happen that fast. But, if the glucagon/insulin ratio is out of wack and/or the liver is unresponsive to insulin in particular (that's called "hepatic insulin resistance"), the liver can dump its stored glucose more than it should (obeying the glucagon but ignoring the insulin which should compensate), raising blood sugar.

    What works for many is depleting those glycogen stores in the liver. This can be done via VLCK (note the 'K') eating. Getting BOTH dietary sources of glucose (carbs and protein) low enough will still getting ample energy from food (fats are all that's left), you should be able to deplete those stores. You can get a blood ketone meter for free with 2 strips. If your ketones are always above 0.5 and mostly above 1.0, you're in.

    So, since your carbs are very low, the glycogen you are storing must have come mostly from protein you ate. That means that the spike you witnessed was indeed from protein, but protein you ate BEFORE (which got converted to glucose and stored), not the one you just ate. The one just eaten may have just contributed to it being incorrectly released from the liver. "
    Last edited by Neckhammer; 06-20-2013 at 02:41 PM.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 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
  •