Re: Re: Atkins and kidneys

[Guest guest]

-

I should be able to answer all your questions, but with one caveat -- I've

heard that Atkins has backed off some from his recommendations to eat a

good deal of fat and to not worry about saturated meat fat in particular;

if this is true, his program and views may have changed.

>a) Is ketosis a real concern for Atkins, or even NT/WAP?

> Or is it true that it causes ketosis, but that's not such a bad

>thing?

>c) Or is it precisely what you're getting at with your last post,

Eating a lot of fat while severely restricting carbs will in fact induce

ketosis, and this is a perfectly acceptable state: it means you're burning

fat and producing ketone bodies as a product of that fat

metabolism. Conventional low-fat authorities warn that this is a disaster

because people in a diabetic crisis will enter a dangerous, potentially

life-threatening condition called ketoacidosis, but they're conflating a

moderate, controlled dietary ketosis in which the acidity of your blood is

affected very little with the out-of-control condition of

ketoacidosis. Atkins calls intentional low-carb ketosis " benign dietary

ketosis " , and indeed it's very different from ketoacidosis. In fact, he

suggests buying ketone test strips so you can check your urine for ketones

to make sure you're in the proper metabolic state for weight loss.

Bear in mind also that a lot of low-fat types pretend that the two-week

induction phase of the Atkins diet, in which carbs are all but eliminated

to kick-start weight loss and get the body moving into a different

metabolic mode, is the entire Atkins diet. Not true.

The advice to Atkins dieters in the current Wise Traditions is excellent --

eat liver at least once a week and make and consume plenty of bone broths

-- but Atkins is (or used to be) fundamentally a high-fat diet. Or rather,

high-fat by modern low-fat standards.

-

[Guest guest]

-

>1) How could one tell whether they're in " controlled dietary ketosis "

>or ketoacidosis? Only by buying ketone strips?

I don't think there's any way to induce ketoacidosis except by getting

diabetes and then continuing to treat your body abominably until it

completely breaks down and loses all control, entering ketoacidosis. AFAIK

there's zero danger of ketoacidosis on a low-carb diet.

You can also tell the difference because you can enter and exit ketosis at

will by controlling your carb intake -- and, in fact, finding your ketosis,

weight loss and weight maintenance thresholds of carb consumption is part

of the process of losing weight on the Atkins diet.

>What would keto

>acidosis look like if one had it?

Well, you might enter a coma, for one thing. <g>

>How would a diet inducing

>ketoacidosis differ from a diet inducing controlled dietary ketosis?

It would be a diet that would promote diabetes -- high in refined carbs,

low in meat and saturated fat -- rather than a low-carb diet that actually

treats and even stops diabetes. Basically, you stress the body out with

sugar and polyunsaturated vegetable oils until it can't regulate itself at

all anymore.

>2) Critics have said that ketosis is an inferior fat-burning system,

>that the body would prefer slightly more carbs, as I understand it.

>Would an NT perspective/you disagree with that?

I don't know whether NT itself has anything much to say on the subject, but

I will tell you that it's a giant, steaming pile of s***. As I understand

it, medical students are taught that fat burns in the flame of

carbohydrates. Well, in a sense this is true, but by entering ketosis

you're actually incompletely burning fat, so you're getting fewer calories

per gram of fat.

>That if whenever after that you add any

>carbs whatsoever, you'll get fat. And there are stories of exactly

>that happening to people. Is it safe to assume that these people got

>fat because their preference for carbs was refined carbs (grains,

>cereals, rice, and pasta) as opposed to vegetables and fruit?

There are two things to consider. First, yes, grains, cereals, rice,

pasta, bread, etc., will always be a problem for just about anyone who

needs to lose a lot of weight. I'll never be able to eat any of them,

that's for sure, not even the healthy NT-style grain-based foods. And

second, once you've lost the weight you want to lose, you can't just add a

bunch of carbs to your diet, not even if they're healthy carbs like spinach

and berries. You have to add a few grams at a time so that your body

adjusts. In fact, if you do the diet correctly, you start adding small

amounts of good carbs near the end of your weight loss so that you slow

down and sort of coast into your final position. And yes, most people will

have to limit carbs all their lives in order to maintain their new

weight. You'll be on a " diet " for the rest of your life -- perhaps a diet

that's the intersection of WAP/NT and Atkins, and that intersection makes

for a pretty darned healthy diet.

-

[Guest guest]

-

>My comment is that it seems very strange that authorities (even not-

>so low fat authorities) would conflate 2 terms that derive from 2

>very different ways of eating.

I agree, it is strange, but almost everything in the sphere of health and

diet in the modern world is strange. How the hell is the lipid hypothesis

still dominant when there's virtually no real evidence supporting it and

tons of evidence against it? How is soy so favored when it's destroying so

many lives? Etc. All these authorities have different vested interests

and have staked out their professional reputations and their very fortunes

on various incorrect positions.

Even Atkins, who's a heck of a lot closer to the truth than most, has his

blind spots, and they've gotten bigger as he's expanded his commercial

interests into pre-prepared fake foods like protein bars and milk shake

mixes. Years ago he said soy was OK if you insisted on being a vegetarian

since it would be almost impossible to find enough protein without it, but

now I gather he says soy is practically the second coming. And notice that

while he wrote an extremely favorably introduction to NT, which above all

else opposes fake foods and soy, he nonetheless profits off fake foods and soy.

>Also, I was wondering whether you consider controlled dietary ketosis

>a necessary condition for fat burning?

Depends what you mean by fat burning. If you mean substantial weight loss,

while it's not absolutely essential, it's very valuable.

-

[Guest guest]

Jo-

>Protein doesn't have anything to do with ketosis. Too

>much protein will prevent fat-burning, and therefore

>ketosis,

Good catch! I missed him saying the bit about a diet high in protein. As

you say, too much protein will interfere with ketosis.

-