The 0 carb diet

Status
Not open for further replies.
I thought I made this perfectly clear, maybe you just didn't comprehend....On a zero-carb diet(5g or less a day), a fully "keto-adapted" body will show no ketones in urine. Why? Because the ketones are burned as fast as they are produced, plain and simple. That's all there is too it. In the first 2-3 weeks or so while the body is still adapting to zero-carb, there will be a very high reading of ketones in the urine. When the body is completely adapted to using ketones efficiently, there will be NO ketones in urine. This is to answer Jodka's question too....you just weren't fully adapted yet. Two weeks is the normal amount of time but it may even take up to 3-4 weeks with some people.

If you don't believe me Kabuki then take the challenge and do it yourself. That is the only way we can solve this little debate, right?. Or are you just going to believe what some internet article says about the early stages of ketosis and think it lasts forever? I think you can do it, it's not so bad, just make sure it's all meat and fat. When you read the keto-stick afterwards you may realize that this guy might actually know what he's talking about.

Don't give me that old "try it" crap. That's the ever-present cop-out of people who have no substance behind their theories.

And no, it's not what I've read about the early stages of the body being ketogenic, it's the very nature of being ketogenic in the first-place, and how to tell at ANY time the body is in the ketogenic state.

It's a very basic thing, that you're saying is false, with no proof and no basis other than "well I did, so you should do it."

As I have said multiple times, I don't agree w/ everything that solk says. However, dismissing what he's saying simply because it doesn't go with what you've read is plain wrong. In fact, much of what he's saying is in direct opposition to the things you've read (and no, I'm not talking about his claim about fiber or insulin, I'm talking about the fact that he says he shows no nutrient defiencies and claims to feel better than before). Unless you honeslty believe he's lying, this should make you excited about the possibilities, not condemn what he's saying as useless and false. And if you do think he's lying, I'd advise you to go back and check out how this whole thing started. Combined with the fact that solk has been a contributor to this board and had over 1000 posts before this even came up makes me alot less likely to believe he just decided to say he's been doing this for 4 years, is in good health (his wifes a fucking doc), he doesnt test positive on ketone strips, etc.

I read this thread since the beginning. And for the umpteenth time it's not about dimissing what he's saying because it "doesn't agree with what I'm reading." It's dismissing it because most of the stuff he says is equivalent to trying to convince someone that 2 + 2 = 8.

When a person's theories go against common knowledge you can learn in any first year class regarding human biology or physiology, again the burden of substantial proof is on them, not on science to re-prove what is already known.

And the reason I'm so interested in this, is that he claims it pretty much eliminates the need for insulin and glucagon, two very, very powerful hormones (I don't think this can be disputed as ketones don't need insulin). Again, the very basis of life is to maintain homeostasis, making your body just as efficient, yet simpler would be a positive thing, IMO.

For the last time you would absolutely positively die without insulin in the body doing what it's supposed to do.
 
Don't give me that old "try it" crap. That's the ever-present cop-out of people who have no substance behind their theories.

And no, it's not what I've read about the early stages of the body being ketogenic, it's the very nature of being ketogenic in the first-place, and how to tell at ANY time the body is in the ketogenic state.

It's a very basic thing, that you're saying is false, with no proof and no basis other than "well I did, so you should do it."

So what exactly do you want him to do? Perform a giant ass study and publish so you will believe him? Basically, you're just calling him a liar, right? Would a video of him using the strip and then showing it prove it?

I read this thread since the beginning. And for the umpteenth time it's not about dimissing what he's saying because it "doesn't agree with what I'm reading." It's dismissing it because most of the stuff he says is equivalent to trying to convince someone that 2 + 2 = 8.

When a person's theories go against common knowledge you can learn in any first year class regarding human biology or physiology, again the burden of substantial proof is on them, not on science to re-prove what is already known.

I disagree, the only thing that really matters here is that he eats NO CARBS, supplements no micronutrients, and is still alive, well, and actually says he feels better. Ya, that does go against common knowledge of what you I was taught in my basic nutrition class. But for the "umpteenth" time, nothing about solk's past or entrance to this thread makes me think he just decided to make up his experience. And for the umpteenth time, why are you so caught up on his claims that really CANNOT be tested? I mean how would anyone test his claims on cancer, you'd have to have a lifelong study of a vegetarian vs. omnivore vs. a carnivore. You bringing up studies that say cancer is linked to something else doesn't change anything, just as bringing up studies on the effect of fiber in the western has no bearing on this topic.

For the last time you would absolutely positively die without insulin in the body doing what it's supposed to do.

I said pretty much eliminates the need for insulin in the body not eliminates it. Which is a true statement, why else are keto diets good for diabetics.

Here I found what we've learned in human nutrition so far. Fat is broken into triglycerides by lipase. Lipase production is increased by the presence of glucagon and is decreased when insulin is released (so the very first stage of burning fat is halted by insulin, clearly there must not be much insulin when your only burning fat for energy). Fat is also far more efficient as fuel: it has 16 carbons per molecule and 7 ATP/carbon are formed compared to 6 carbons on glucose and 5 ATP/Carbon are formed.
 
Fat is also far more efficient as fuel: it has 16 carbons per molecule and 7 ATP/carbon are formed compared to 6 carbons on glucose and 5 ATP/Carbon are formed.

far more efficient? or far more energy dense?

get your terminology right, fat is not more efficient, its used at a much slower rate.

fat = 7atp/16carbons = .4375
carb = 5/6 = .83

carb in this case seems to nearly double the efficiency of fat. it uses less to create more.
*wonders why he has to explain this*
 
Fat is also far more efficient as fuel: it has 16 carbons per molecule and 7 ATP/carbon are formed compared to 6 carbons on glucose and 5 ATP/Carbon are formed.

far more efficient? or far more energy dense?

get your terminology right, fat is not more efficient, its used at a much slower rate.

fat = 7atp/16carbons = .4375
carb = 5/6 = .83

carb in this case seems to nearly double the efficiency of fat. it uses less to create more.
*wonders why he has to explain this*

No, you get your damn shit straight. it is more efficient and energy dense. 7atp per 16 carbon is 112 atp. 5 atp per 6 carbon is 30 atp.

*laughs at how you actually thought you were on to something*
 
Yeah also I read an article that said fat is more nutritionally dense. I'm not saying this guy is a credible source(I haven't research anything) but just throwing it out there....article about Ketogenic Diets

http://www.bodybuilding.com/fun/dorian6.htm


Increased Energy Levels

Believe it or not glucose is not the preferred fuel source for the body. We subject it to carbs constantly and the problem is carbs are not efficient and clean burning. You can compare it to your car. Would you want to put the lowest grade octane in the tank when it calls for the higher grade? What would happen? Pinging, lousy gas mileage, dirty valves, soon the available power would slow down. Same with the body, after a few days of carb withdrawal, many of Fitnessman's case studies report increased energy to the point where they are bouncing off the walls. With the dense nutritional energy in a gram of fat (stored or dietary) is it any wonder? Free form fatty acids are the actual preferred source of fuel. But with carb based diets the body rarely gets to use them due to the fact that glucose is not only more readily available but is easier to utilize. The body will assume the easiest method but not always the best method for energy. It is really simple. If we feed it carbs, it will use carbs. If we feed it fats, it will use fats. It actually takes less energy to burn carbs which is 4 calories per gram, versus the 9 calories per gram for fats. So unless the body is forced at first to utilize fatty stores it will not. This will be covered more in the next installment.

Decreased Hunger While Cutting

It's pretty simple really. Fat is more nutritionally dense than carbs. Fat will take longer to digest and therefore a fuller feeling for a longer period of time. When you feed the body fats tells you that it is happy and satisfied.

When you eat a carb-based meal you sort of feel hungry a bit later on. You can compare it to the old saying, "Like eating Chinese take out, one hour later you are hungry again." The rapid rise in insulin will actually do a few things. It will cause increased lethargy (being excessively tired) and cause you to be hungry again soon afterwards. Ever notice right after a meal with carbs, like a big boal of pasta, you feel tired immediately after? How about one hour later you find yourself snacking again? This is common with a carb-based diet. It all comes down to the same thing: insulin. To be more precise it's a chemical disorder we talked about previously called hyper-insulinism. It's due largely to the sugar and more simple carbs we consume today. Again, man was not intended to eat the sugar and highly refined stuff we eat today, and in this authors opinion it is that which is slowly poisoning us all.
 
Don't give me that old "try it" crap. That's the ever-present cop-out of people who have no substance behind their theories.

And no, it's not what I've read about the early stages of the body being ketogenic, it's the very nature of being ketogenic in the first-place, and how to tell at ANY time the body is in the ketogenic state.

It's a very basic thing, that you're saying is false, with no proof and no basis other than "well I did, so you should do it."

Theory? All I would need is a few hierarchy of scientists in my proximity to witness the absence of ketones in my urine and then it would be considered
 
I thought I felt the need to mention again that the Inuit can be taken as an example in nature that there are no nutritional deficiencies under an all meat diet: All examinations and tests done by Stefansson amongst others back when they still lived the traditional life showed perfect health, no dental caries, no CAD, no obesity and no diabetes, plus- barring accidents and severe bouts of starvation and parasites, a very long life to ~90+ yrs..
 
I'm curious of one thing. We keep talking about these damn Inuits, and what not. Doesn't adaption play a role, and the fact they are a little more acclimated to that way of eating? I mean, the people in Tibet hike and summit Mt. Everest for their daily exercise, ha! Doesn't mean I can just run out and do it. Solk - once again, not saying you're not doing what you do just fine, just throwing this out there.
 
it supposeably takes 2-3 weeks to adapt noise. mt. everest takes longer

i just thought id give an update. i had a crazy amount of energy today. i dont know if its because of the raw meat and just meat in general but holy fuck. im normally hypoglecemic and always hungry with no energy but i haven't been hungry since i started this and actually had to remind myself to eat when i got home from school. i just weighed my self a lil whilee ago and im down to 218 already after three days. my stomach is really tightening up and im starting to see some muscle tone w/o working out, i think i will end up losing more than 20 ponds, maybe close to 30. my complexion is also really starting to look clear. i stopped taking my acne medication my dermatologist prescribed. he told me that food has no effect on acne, fucken bullshit. when i go back to him ill tell him i stiopped taking those stupid pills and creme and cured my skin with food, seriously waht a fucken jerk. i havent taken a shit yet but im sure i will in a couple of days. ill update again 2morrow. hopefully some people are actually interested lol
 
it supposeably takes 2-3 weeks to adapt noise. mt. everest takes longer

i just thought id give an update. i had a crazy amount of energy today. i dont know if its because of the raw meat and just meat in general but holy fuck. im normally hypoglecemic and always hungry with no energy but i haven't been hungry since i started this and actually had to remind myself to eat when i got home from school. i just weighed my self a lil whilee ago and im down to 218 already after three days. my stomach is really tightening up and im starting to see some muscle tone w/o working out, i think i will end up losing more than 20 ponds, maybe close to 30. my complexion is also really starting to look clear. i stopped taking my acne medication my dermatologist prescribed. he told me that food has no effect on acne, fucken bullshit. when i go back to him ill tell him i stiopped taking those stupid pills and creme and cured my skin with food, seriously waht a fucken jerk. i havent taken a shit yet but im sure i will in a couple of days. ill update again 2morrow. hopefully some people are actually interested lol

How is your cardio? Your stamina in boxing/MT/BJJ/wrestling?
How is your strength training?
 
How is your cardio? Your stamina in boxing/MT/BJJ/wrestling?
How is your strength training?

my cardio is good. i can run the 3-mile in 19:28 and the 40 yard in 5.1. i dont do martial arts or wreslting just football in the fall,i play noseguard. my strentgh is okay i guess for a 15 year old. bench - 135 x 12 deadlift 185 x 10 squat 185 x 12. i dont know if your jus trying to be a prick or what but i feel real strong and energetic. im definitely liking the fat for energy instead of carbs
 
lol...i'll bet money that Pap Smear is a grade A troll.
 
lol...i'll bet money that Pap Smear is a grade A troll.

I agree.

Pap, everyone, including Solkanar, agree that you will suffer for at least a few weeks while adapting to this diet due to ketosis, leaving you feeling not so well. You can refer to the very first post of this thread for example. You aren't just going to drastically change your diet to eating raw meat only and then suddenly feel like the champion of the world. It's very basic biochemistry. Can a couple other people chime in here so we can stop this nonsense? It's cluttering up the thread with misinformation.

Either you are trolling (lying), or you aren't truly sticking to an all meat, 0 carb, high fat diet.
Plus, if you are 15, are you spending all your allowance on the flank steak? If I was 15, I'd be spending it on action figures and candy since my mom would never let me eat raw meat.
 
Increasing fat intake substanicialy can cause diarrhea before body adapts. One theory to the keto stick not showing ketons is that the huge amount of protein he's eating is going thru a gluconeogenesis, whitch in turns "kicks" the body out of ketosis... protein can also be an energy source but if he's eating fat four times as much as protein in calories then that is probably not the chase...
 
I think most of solkanar's arguments come directly from here.
http://zerocarbpath.blogspot.com/
The blogger also accuses insulin of a couple crimes. I'd like to hear someone knowledge analyze the claims in the blog. Sorry if this has already been brought up.

On a side note, there are studies that suggest fiber works by scarring your intestines, which stimulates mucus production. For more info, Google "fiber" and "mucus"
http://www.localforage.com/local_forage/2007/04/roughage_and_go.html
http://www.livescience.com/health/060822_regular_mechanism.html
I don't know if that necessarily means lower nutritional absorption in the long run, but I don't think anyone should doubt that fiber scratches the insides.
 
I agree.

Pap, everyone, including Solkanar, agree that you will suffer for at least a few weeks while adapting to this diet due to ketosis, leaving you feeling not so well. You can refer to the very first post of this thread for example. You aren't just going to drastically change your diet to eating raw meat only and then suddenly feel like the champion of the world. It's very basic biochemistry. Can a couple other people chime in here so we can stop this nonsense? It's cluttering up the thread with misinformation.

Either you are trolling (lying), or you aren't truly sticking to an all meat, 0 carb, high fat diet.
Plus, if you are 15, are you spending all your allowance on the flank steak? If I was 15, I'd be spending it on action figures and candy since my mom would never let me eat raw meat.

Yep.. I've done low carb (less than 30g a day) and it takes a while before your body adjusts and u really start getting the extra energy. I don't think Pap is eating enough fat either.

Do you honestly like the taste of raw steak Pap Smear?
 
lol...i'll bet money that Pap Smear is a grade A troll.

Yeah, I agree. Having done Keto, I certainly felt like shit for awhile.

Also, quoting off bench and running times when you've been zero carbing for like 2 minutes makes no sense.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top