Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below ProteinFiend
New member
Yeah, I think my grades may have suffered also last semester. If I could go back, I'd chose a different diet. There are also other complications of a keto diet.
Why am I so fuckin' stupid?
- Thread starter Hideous Infant
- Start date
Stryc-9
New member
I've never seen or heard of any studies that would suggest a ketogenic diet is any more muscle sparing than a standard isocaloric diet. I have however heard that a ketogenic diet stands a greater chance of inducing a protein sparing effect. This is only because of a decrease in the body's need for glucose.
I like the CKD - don't get me wrong - but not because it's any "better" than other methods of dieting. I personally enjoy the food choices available on CKD (gotta love those carb-ups too!!) - and I also think people are attracted to the initial "whoosh" of weight loss when they are looking for fast results (regardless of the fact that it's primarily a loss of water and glycogen!).
Ketogenic dieting works (better for some than others) but don't fall into the trap of believing that ketogenic diets are somehow highly superior to any other methods of dieting. Check out the following studies:
Effect of weight loss plans on body composition and diet duration.
Landers P, Wolfe MM, Glore S, Guild R, Phillips L.
Department of Nutritional Sciences, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, PO Box 26901-CHB 469, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma City, OK 73190, USA.
Are low carbohydrate high protein (LCHP) diets more effective in promoting loss of weight and body fat and can individuals stay on an Atkins-like diet more easily than on a conventional weight loss diet? A pre-test/post-test randomized group design composed of three cohorts was utilized to test 1) a LCHP ketogenic diet; 2) the Zone diet; and 3) a conventional hypocaloric diabetic exchange diet that supplied < 10%, 40%, and 50% of calories from carbohydrate, respectively. Body composition was measured before and after the intervention treatment period with dual energy X-ray absorptiometry. Mean weight loss was 5.1 kg for those who completed the 12-week program. There were no significant differences in total weight, fat, or lean body mass loss when compared by diet group. Attrition was substantial for all plans at 43%, 60%, and 36% for LCHP, Zone and conventional diets, respectively.
-------------
Similar weight loss with low- or high-carbohydrate diets.
Golay A, Allaz AF, Morel Y, de Tonnac N, Tankova S, Reaven G.
Department of Medicine, Geneva University Hospital, Switzerland.
The goal of this study was to evaluate the effect of diets that were equally low in energy but widely different in relative amounts of fat and carbohydrate on body weight during a 6-wk period of hospitalization. Consequently, 43 adult, obese persons were randomly assigned to receive diets containing 4.2 MJ/d (1000 kcal/d) composed of either 32% protein, 15% carbohydrate, and 53% fat, or 29% protein, 45% carbohydrate, and 26% fat. There was no significant difference in the amount of weight loss in response to diets containing either 15% (8.9 +/- 0.6 kg) or 45% (7.5 +/- 0.5 kg) carbohydrate. Furthermore, significant decreases in total body fat and waist-to-hip circumference were seen in both groups, and the magnitude of the changes did not vary as a function of diet composition. Fasting plasma glucose, insulin, cholesterol, and triacylglycerol concentrations decreased significantly in patients eating low-energy diets that contained 15% carbohydrate, but neither plasma insulin nor triacylglycerol concentrations fell significantly in response to the higher-carbohydrate diet. The results of this study showed that it was energy intake, not nutrient composition, that determined weight loss in response to low-energy diets over a short time period.
________________
A randomized trial of a low-carbohydrate diet for obesity.
Foster GD, Wyatt HR, Hill JO, McGuckin BG, Brill C, Mohammed BS, Szapary PO, Rader DJ, Edman JS, Klein S.
University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA 19104-3309, USA. [email protected]
BACKGROUND: Despite the popularity of the low-carbohydrate, high-protein, high-fat (Atkins) diet, no randomized, controlled trials have evaluated its efficacy. METHODS: We conducted a one-year, multicenter, controlled trial involving 63 obese men and women who were randomly assigned to either a low-carbohydrate, high-protein, high-fat diet or a low-calorie, high-carbohydrate, low-fat (conventional) diet. Professional contact was minimal to replicate the approach used by most dieters. RESULTS: Subjects on the low-carbohydrate diet had lost more weight than subjects on the conventional diet at 3 months (mean [+/-SD], -6.8+/-5.0 vs. -2.7+/-3.7 percent of body weight; P=0.001) and 6 months (-7.0+/-6.5 vs. -3.2+/-5.6 percent of body weight, P=0.02), but the difference at 12 months was not significant (-4.4+/-6.7 vs. -2.5+/-6.3 percent of body weight, P=0.26). After three months, no significant differences were found between the groups in total or low-density lipoprotein cholesterol concentrations. The increase in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol concentrations and the decrease in triglyceride concentrations were greater among subjects on the low-carbohydrate diet than among those on the conventional diet throughout most of the study. Both diets significantly decreased diastolic blood pressure and the insulin response to an oral glucose load. CONCLUSIONS: The low-carbohydrate diet produced a greater weight loss (absolute difference, approximately 4 percent) than did the conventional diet for the first six months, but the differences were not significant at one year. The low-carbohydrate diet was associated with a greater improvement in some risk factors for coronary heart disease. Adherence was poor and attrition was high in both groups. Longer and larger studies are required to determine the long-term safety and efficacy of low-carbohydrate, high-protein, high-fat diets. Copyright 2003 Massachusetts Medical Society
I like the CKD - don't get me wrong - but not because it's any "better" than other methods of dieting. I personally enjoy the food choices available on CKD (gotta love those carb-ups too!!) - and I also think people are attracted to the initial "whoosh" of weight loss when they are looking for fast results (regardless of the fact that it's primarily a loss of water and glycogen!).
Ketogenic dieting works (better for some than others) but don't fall into the trap of believing that ketogenic diets are somehow highly superior to any other methods of dieting. Check out the following studies:
Effect of weight loss plans on body composition and diet duration.
Landers P, Wolfe MM, Glore S, Guild R, Phillips L.
Department of Nutritional Sciences, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, PO Box 26901-CHB 469, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma City, OK 73190, USA.
Are low carbohydrate high protein (LCHP) diets more effective in promoting loss of weight and body fat and can individuals stay on an Atkins-like diet more easily than on a conventional weight loss diet? A pre-test/post-test randomized group design composed of three cohorts was utilized to test 1) a LCHP ketogenic diet; 2) the Zone diet; and 3) a conventional hypocaloric diabetic exchange diet that supplied < 10%, 40%, and 50% of calories from carbohydrate, respectively. Body composition was measured before and after the intervention treatment period with dual energy X-ray absorptiometry. Mean weight loss was 5.1 kg for those who completed the 12-week program. There were no significant differences in total weight, fat, or lean body mass loss when compared by diet group. Attrition was substantial for all plans at 43%, 60%, and 36% for LCHP, Zone and conventional diets, respectively.
-------------
Similar weight loss with low- or high-carbohydrate diets.
Golay A, Allaz AF, Morel Y, de Tonnac N, Tankova S, Reaven G.
Department of Medicine, Geneva University Hospital, Switzerland.
The goal of this study was to evaluate the effect of diets that were equally low in energy but widely different in relative amounts of fat and carbohydrate on body weight during a 6-wk period of hospitalization. Consequently, 43 adult, obese persons were randomly assigned to receive diets containing 4.2 MJ/d (1000 kcal/d) composed of either 32% protein, 15% carbohydrate, and 53% fat, or 29% protein, 45% carbohydrate, and 26% fat. There was no significant difference in the amount of weight loss in response to diets containing either 15% (8.9 +/- 0.6 kg) or 45% (7.5 +/- 0.5 kg) carbohydrate. Furthermore, significant decreases in total body fat and waist-to-hip circumference were seen in both groups, and the magnitude of the changes did not vary as a function of diet composition. Fasting plasma glucose, insulin, cholesterol, and triacylglycerol concentrations decreased significantly in patients eating low-energy diets that contained 15% carbohydrate, but neither plasma insulin nor triacylglycerol concentrations fell significantly in response to the higher-carbohydrate diet. The results of this study showed that it was energy intake, not nutrient composition, that determined weight loss in response to low-energy diets over a short time period.
________________
A randomized trial of a low-carbohydrate diet for obesity.
Foster GD, Wyatt HR, Hill JO, McGuckin BG, Brill C, Mohammed BS, Szapary PO, Rader DJ, Edman JS, Klein S.
University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA 19104-3309, USA. [email protected]
BACKGROUND: Despite the popularity of the low-carbohydrate, high-protein, high-fat (Atkins) diet, no randomized, controlled trials have evaluated its efficacy. METHODS: We conducted a one-year, multicenter, controlled trial involving 63 obese men and women who were randomly assigned to either a low-carbohydrate, high-protein, high-fat diet or a low-calorie, high-carbohydrate, low-fat (conventional) diet. Professional contact was minimal to replicate the approach used by most dieters. RESULTS: Subjects on the low-carbohydrate diet had lost more weight than subjects on the conventional diet at 3 months (mean [+/-SD], -6.8+/-5.0 vs. -2.7+/-3.7 percent of body weight; P=0.001) and 6 months (-7.0+/-6.5 vs. -3.2+/-5.6 percent of body weight, P=0.02), but the difference at 12 months was not significant (-4.4+/-6.7 vs. -2.5+/-6.3 percent of body weight, P=0.26). After three months, no significant differences were found between the groups in total or low-density lipoprotein cholesterol concentrations. The increase in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol concentrations and the decrease in triglyceride concentrations were greater among subjects on the low-carbohydrate diet than among those on the conventional diet throughout most of the study. Both diets significantly decreased diastolic blood pressure and the insulin response to an oral glucose load. CONCLUSIONS: The low-carbohydrate diet produced a greater weight loss (absolute difference, approximately 4 percent) than did the conventional diet for the first six months, but the differences were not significant at one year. The low-carbohydrate diet was associated with a greater improvement in some risk factors for coronary heart disease. Adherence was poor and attrition was high in both groups. Longer and larger studies are required to determine the long-term safety and efficacy of low-carbohydrate, high-protein, high-fat diets. Copyright 2003 Massachusetts Medical Society
overhead
New member
I found ckd to be more effective to lose weight while maintaining muscle mass, but that is only from my personal experience, not a scientific study. My theory is it allows for a higher level of fat intake than a standard low calorie diet, and as I understanding it fats are required to keep natural test production at it peak. Also , I did not have aproblem keeping my protein intake at1 gram per pound of lean muscle mass. On a standard hgh carb low cal diet I had to eat about 2100 cals a day lose weight, while on ckd I could easily eat 2400 to 2800 cals and still drop fat with no extra cardio. The bottom line for me was that I could eat more and still lose weight.
As othes said , give it a week or so and your brain will adjust.
As othes said , give it a week or so and your brain will adjust.
Toozee
New member
Hideous Infant said:
Unfortunately, it kinda sucks the first 7-10 days. It gets dramatically better though. I found that after being on the diet about 2-3 weeks, I actually think clearer. So much so that when I got my bf down to my goal, I didn't want to stop the diet.
So, after a week you should start to be ok. I did find that if I slowly bring my carbs down week by week (350g...200g....100g...then CKD starts), it makes the transition a lot easier.
Best 2 ya,
-2Z-
Moderate_THIS
New member
I know how you feel. Exogenous androgens turned me into a Special Olympics candidate. I had the knowledge up in the brain, but the eloquence in which the thought-forms were expressed was wanting.
Similar threads
