Hacker News Reader

Comment by rotwoof | Hacker News Reader

I've been doing Keto since Feb 25 2016. My primary goal when switching over was weight loss, which turned out to be easy. I'm 25, male and was experiencing growing health complications related to obesity. I've lost well over 60 lbs since making the switch despite the fact that I maintain a primarily sedentary lifestyle though I now work out weekly as well as take bi-daily walks.

There are downsides though. It's not cheap, it's restrictive and it requires you to build a fairly sizeable knowledge base in order to successfully maintain the diet and your own health. For instance your body consumes more water in order to burn fat stores which leads to the body burning through electrolytes more rapidly. It is very common to supplement electrolytes every day. It is common to drink broth while on Keto in order to cover the daily salt intake requirements of Keto, ~5000-7000mg every day on top of normal dietary salt intake. Failure to cover the daily electrolyte requirement will lead to muscle cramps and more severe symptoms brought on by electrolyte deficiency in the body. Prior to supplementing magnesium I experienced leg cramps and quickly realized what was going on.

However there are significant health benefits. Weight loss, improved mental clarity and better energy levels throughout the day, as well as less need for frequent meals are positive effects that a lot of people experience on Keto. It is also a useful tool for reversing lifestyle diseases such as diabetes type 2 and pre-diabetes.

When it comes to the stuff you "have to give up" while on Keto it's mostly a case of strict moderation rather than completely cutting things out. The things you do try to cut out though like bread, sugar, potatoes, pasta, corn-syrup etc have good alternatives available in most grocery stores. You can bake bread out of almond flour, make pasta out of almond flour (or have someone make it for you), replace potatoes with sweet potatoes and so on.

If you're thinking that keto sounds like it's too much hassle please leave me a reply and I'll gladly talk about whatever you're unsure about.

View on HN

I also lost a bunch of weight on keto after several failed attempts at simply cutting calories. 235 lbs to about 185 and it all happened pretty rapidly (about half a year) considering I barely exercised. Lots of salads, chicken breasts, eggs & bacon, lettuce wraps, and quest bars. Regular coffee though, never was a fan of throwing butter in there. I mean I did do light cardio on and off, but I think it was mostly the diet that did it for me. Tried to stay under 20 daily grams of carbs.

> I mean I did do light cardio on and off, but I think it was mostly the diet that did it for me.

Most likely. The amount of calories burnt by exercising is surprisingly low. Unless you really do a lot of it simply eating a bit less may be easier, esp. because you get hungry after exercising which easily leads to more intake than you have burned before.

That being the case, isn't exercise still very important to overall health - even if you're at a healthy weight? (Personally, I've never had any weight problems regardless of diet, but regular exercise makes a big difference in how I feel.)

Exercise is incredibly important for our health. It mitigates or even reverses ailments tied to lifestyle choices. To use myself as an example I have a bad shoulder as a result of stupid amounts of online video games (MMOs...) and every Thursday for the past two months I have specifially worked out the muscle group that's causing me pains in my right shoulder. And what do you know, after the initial muscle soreness goes away I feel slightly better and less sore. If I stop my regular exercise, the pain comes back.

I used to suffer from depression and anxiety. Meds didn't really help and I changed my lifestyle around. It helped. I do agree with you, exercise as well as diet is incredibly important if you want to feel normal.

Sure it is good for your health. If you are obese I think it may nevertheless often be better for your health to direct will power onto your eating habits to loose weight instead of using using that willpower to force yourself into exercising thinking it might help you achieving the former.

Keto (and any diet change really) will have effect on the microbio in our guts. That's also a likely large source of weight loss.

Are you blending the butter or just stirring? I make mine with butter, coconut/almond milk from califia and a bit of vanilla extract. Blended in bullet mixer for about 20 seconds and it comes out like an unsweetened latte.

Stirring. Oh well, I was getting enough fat from bacon I think.

Yeah the point here is that when you blend the butter it turns from oily sludge into an actual fluffy cap of foam.

What is the logic behind putting butter in your coffee? If your goal is to lose weight, wouldn't not eating that butter still be better than eating it?

Fat takes a long time to digest in your stomach, as such you feel satiated for a much longer period of time. Butter can be used somewhat to sweeten coffee, and unlike using sugar won't invoke an insulin response and a subsequent crash.

Might as well use heavy cream. 20% or more, just an unsweetened version. Pity the diet trashed my liver long term. Not sure why (the actual dietetician had no idea either), but lab numbers do not lie. (Aspartate, alanine, cholesterol, no inflammation in CRP) It was the only thing effective so far. Long term was around 2 years thereof.

Moral is, diet responsibly and pay for the metabolic panels when dieting.

What exactly did it do to your liver (what's the diagnosis so to speak), did you have alcohol, what carbs did you have, and how do you treat the issue now?

Could you please elaborate what kind of damages you go by following this diet to your liver?

You're stuck in the mindset that fat makes you "fat". This is the whole point of ketosis, and a rethinking of wrong dietary guidelines that have persisted for decades.

The butter in the coffee supplies fat for fuel / energy, suppresses appetite, and does not contribute to weight gain or more specifically an increase in adipose fat tissue.

Simply cutting all calories is futile. Your body needs energy to sustain itself. The point of keto diet is replacing carbs with a significant increase in fat (~70% give or take) as a percentage of calories consumed.

But it is crucial to actually consume a lot of fat, not just try to cut overall calories.

But adding calories in whatever form still means more calories in than not eating them.

Edit: I get the point that it stops hunger, but my point still stands, and the parent posters still doesn't make a great deal of sense.

Who says it's an addition of calories? For many people breakfast is just coffee with coconut oil and butter. It's not adding calories it's just consuming them at a different time. You're still going to be at a deficit at the end of the day.

For me it would be compared to just black coffee and no breakfast, so of course it would be additional calories if I force myself to drink coffee with butter in it.

I have said exactly that in the past. I was wrong! It turns out morning me doesn't have the willpower to truly stick to just coffee.

In that case it probably doesn't make sense. Unless you find that adding it to your coffee allows you to not eat additional calories for a longer period of time.

People often have bullet-proof coffee (as it is called) as a meal replacement. Those calories make them full for a long time, as fat is very filling.

The point of putting butter in your coffee is to extend your natural faste. The faste that you enter every night during sleep. It is done in tandem with also skipping breakfast on keto.

The reason you put butter in your coffee instead of a spoonful of say, sugar, is that fat takes a long time to digest and even a fairly small amount of it (a table spoon of butter in your coffee) takes a while to digest. During that time period your hunger sensation is suppressed.

Coffee also promotes weight loss because it speeds up your metabolism. The idea behind buttered coffee is fairly simple. Put enough fat in your coffee so that you don't get hungry and eat a meal and you help extend your natural faste - and your morning coffee helps speed up your metabolism.

http://paleonick.com/articles/Bullet-Proof-Coffee

There are good reasons for drinking buttered coffee even if you're deliberately trying to avoid weight loss i.e you are following a net neutral or net positive caloric intake diet. When you're fasting your body isn't spending energy digesting food which means less of your body's immediately available resources aren't spent digesting food.

Even if you're getting calories from your coffee it doesn't impact your weight loss because you're still eating less calories than your body needs to maintain the weight.

I've been reading about bulletproof coffee, and the more I read, the more unsure I am about it. I think the following article makes good points:

https://authoritynutrition.com/3-reasons-why-bulletproof-cof...

I guess it might seem specifically OK for people on Keto diets only, but still, it seems worrisome longterm.

> Even if you're getting calories from your coffee it doesn't impact your weight loss because you're still eating less calories than your body needs to maintain the weight.

This is completely dependent on other factors. Weight loss is dependent on a hell of a lot of things in tandem. It is mathematically strictly better to say, drink only black coffee or sugar-free energy drinks in the morning. Caffeine is an appetite suppressant. The difference is that most people don't have the personal willpower to stick to the fasting without a few calories to help them along.

Weight loss in general is precisely mathematical in pacing and it will absolutely make you lose weight faster if you consume less calories.

> The difference is that most people don't have the personal willpower to stick to the fasting without a few calories to help them along.

You are ignoring an important factor: If you don't have enough calories the body will switch to starvation mode, you'll have low energy, be cold, etc.

The net result is that, unless you are actually starving (which is bad for you), you'll actually lose less weight that way!

> If you don't have enough calories the body will switch to starvation mode

This is a myth which has been proved to be absolutely false. You are simply wrong if you are basing any conclusions at all of of this.

> proved to be absolutely false

I'm perfectly willing to be shown that I'm wrong, but I'll need more than just a sentence from you saying so.

You said "proved" - can you show me the proof?

A quick google search results in multiple well cited articles discussing it.

I'm sure it could also yield multiple well-cited articles on the other side as well. It would be much more helpful to actually provide some research that you stand behind.

Lyle McDonald: http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/research-review/meal-freque...

Probably the best and most researched article on this.

Bullet point 4 here: http://www.leangains.com/2010/10/top-ten-fasting-myths-debun... has an article reference.

Basically, you can certainly go into starvation mode, but not in any reasonable amount of time. Skipping meals or even fasting for a whole day will not cause "starvation mode". Prolonged calorie restriction can affect hormones like Leptin and affect energy expenditure.

Bear in mind that Lyle believed in "starvation mode" 10-17 years ago; I believe he mentions it in his first book. He was also a firm believer in strict caloric arithmetic and that microbiome didn't matter. His content is only as good as the current scientific literature is, and that has changed a lot in the past 20 years.

A quick Google search also shows several well cited articles supporting the flat earth theory.

Dr. Jason Fung has done extensive research and experiments on this topic including fasting. You can read his research in his book obesity code. Very eye opening.

This assumes calories are all equal and the best measuring stick. Do we know this to be a fact?

why do you use the word faste? Does it mean something different from the usual word related to not eating, "fast"?

Yes, cutting all calories works best. Just don't eat anything at all.

Not all calories are the same. For example, body excretes excess dietary fat, but stores excess carbohydrates adding 4 times the amount of water to it. You can find the details in any Paleo Diet related site.

I prefer to stick to something published on pubmed.

It's hard for me to explain why the "calories in, calories out" theory is incorrect in so far as it's not useful to structure your diet around to prevent getting fat.

Gary Taubes was the person who I learned from the most, many years ago about high fat, low carb diet, and I have been following his advice ever since, to great success.

He has MANY videos on the internet, here is a recent one:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mA4a5fjMR74

His book "Why we get fat" is also a great, clearly written explanation of all this, and I highly advise you to look into the subject, with an open mind. You may be surprised.

If you don't eat a lot of carbs, that means you need to eat fat during the day to replace it. Would you rather eat the butter raw, or with a cup of coffee?

Um, either is fine IMO :)

Just to get in calories by fat, which generally hold you over longer. I have coffee with coconut oil every morning. I've tried doing on coffee with coconut oil and butter but it's not for me. I'd rather have eggs and bacon.

"Low carb, adequate protein, high fat" is a more accurate description of this diet.

The other Keto adage is "calories count, but don't count calories". Meaning, if you eat a high fat diet, you naturally will feel full.

When I tried keto a few years back (an interesting experience, to say the least), and I eliminated almost all carbs from my diet, estimated the calories that are left, I found I needed to eat a LOT more fat to reach a sensible daily amount of calories. Like heaping a few big tablespoons of mayo on a bowl of broccoli lots (being Dutch, cue the Pulp Fiction references :) ). Maybe it's just that I've never been a very big eater, but yeah I found it a bit of a struggle to keep up. So adding some butter and coconut fat to the coffee helps. Plus fat lasts longer, it doesn't quite spike like sugars do, so getting a whole lot of it in the morning is a great way to start the day.

I kinda want to try and start again, it definitely had some benefits, as long as I managed to get enough calories and vegetables/nutrients (sorry I'm one of those persons that needs to take care they eat enough).

The big problem, however, is that in the mean time I've greatly reduced the amount of animal products from my diet--for environmental and ethical reasons, not health. And I'm not really sure how to do both.

I would need to spend a lot of money on almonds and other foods that may not seem that expensive until you need to consume them in bulk to replace the cheap, cheap carbs :) Being nearly-vegetarian is very cheap.

And even though I could probably hack the costs (or figure out something clever to do so), I'm not at all sure if it's even possible to live on a healthy keto diet while keeping my environmental impact footprint to a reasonable size that I can consider myself a responsible inhabitant of this planet. I don't think I can bring myself to eat very large amounts of meat again, even if they're organic certifiably happy cows. Tempeh has slightly more proteins anyway :p (also tastier than tofu, which is not a very high bar, I know)

I'm on a similar boat. Vegan for +10 years, I fast one day a week and aim to keep carbs under 20 grams the day after, I feel my great during those 2 days. I would like to make the switch into full vegan keto, but I've yet to find a plan that I feel would cover my nutritional bases and that I could maintain on a low-budget.

Let me know if you make any headway! /r/veganketo helps.

p.s. I recently found that dumpster diving asian supermarkets I can get infinite supply of still-fresh packaged tofu, that has sure been helping!

If you are not opposed to eating sea food, there are many fish that are good on keto. Mackerels, Sardines, Anchovies, and Salmon come to mind, plus they have a high ratio of omega 3 vs omega 6 and 9. I eat lots of Avacado and use a lot of olive oil you can cook vegetables in. You honestly want to go light on the nuts, because even many of the fatty ones still have quite a few carbs, and the omega fat ratio is not great. Also flax is a big deal. I get what you are saying though; I think it would be difficult to be vegetarian on this diet, though ironically I probably eat less meat than I did before keto.

I don't disagree with what you've said, with maybe the exception of the amount of salt... That's a lot. I'll periodically eat a pickle or have some garlic stuffed olives and that works for me. People should probably supplementing magnesium regardless, but in tablet form it can cause diarrhea.

I'm replying mainly to raise the point that, in my experience, there are people who can moderate successfully, and there are people that it is better to abstain completely. I fall into the latter. I will fall off the wagon if I don't abstain from the "forbidden fruits."

My wife on the other hand is very capable of moderation. I simply am not, and I suspect I'm not alone.

So it's good to know why type of person you are in this regard.

I definitely am with you. If I'm eating any carbs then I'm eating all the carbs. If I'm on keto I don't crave those foods anymore.

If there are bad snack items available, I will eat as many as I can stuff into my facehole as quickly as I can. I have no willpower.

The best way I've found to combat this is to not buy bad snack items.

Has there been any more research into the long term health effects of Keto?

I tried it years ago, but found it to be more of a pain than it's worth (I seem to have better luck with intense exercise 3x per week and avoiding sugar). And it seems like tons of meat and cheese is actually bad long term, in the sense it clogs your arteries or increases cancer risk.

Atkins did not look like he was in good shape inside when he died.

It strikes me as a body hack that bypasses a lot of bodily processes evolution may have counted on as we developed. But it seems like we know a fair amount about the chemistry and processes involved, so I'm curious.

If by "meat and cheese" you mean "saturated fat," that myth has been thoroughly debunked.

http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/early/2010/01/13/ajcn.2009...

>And it seems like tons of meat and cheese is actually bad long term, in the sense it clogs your arteries

This is an inaccurate conclusion based on old studies where the subjects underwent a high-carbohydrate high-fat diet. Recent studies on ketogenic diets (low-carbohydrate, medium-protein, high-fat intake) shows that dietary fats and dietary cholesterol barely make any sort of impact on the subject's cholesterol. Rather it is dietary carbohydrates and genetics which are the primary contributor to raised cholesterol and arterial blockage. When it comes to arterial blockage, studies have found that there is no significant correlation between high dietary fat intake and cardiovascular disease.

>or increases cancer risk

Keto is primarily a high-fat diet, not a high-protein or high-carb diet. Studies have showed that a sugar found in red meats called Neu5Gc is primarily correlated with inflammation in the body and the development of certain cancers.

If you're on keto you're less likely to develop cardiovascular disease, and while there is not enough data yet to draw a scientific conclusion preliminary research indicates that individuals who follow keto are at less risk of developing cancer due to restricting sugar intake.

See: https://www.reddit.com/r/ketoscience/search?q=cancer&restric...

All of these posts link to multiple, verified studies which go into details about what I just said.

What you said about cancer risk or long term safety of the whole class of those diets. Especially anything related to mortality and morbidity endpoints.

Cholesterol numbers are nowhere near the end of story, they're just markers. Rat and mice studies are useless for this purpose.

Please correct me if I am wrong. Preferably with published larger studies. In humans.

>shows that dietary fats and dietary cholesterol barely make any sort of impact on the subject's cholesterol.

>Rather it is dietary carbohydrates and genetics which are the primary contributor to raised cholesterol and arterial blockage. So what about APOE4 individuals, which compose at least 20% of the population, who will see massively spiking LDL with higher saturated fat intake?

Yes, it's based on genetics, but also intrinsically tied to dietary (saturated) fat intake.

1. Atkins died from slipping and falling on ice, not a heart attack.

2. He did have a heart attack based from a genetic predisposition. His cardiologist said his condition was impeccable, considerint his diet.

Some epileptics do keto long term, so I imagine there must be information out there. Rather than searching for it in the context of weightloss, searching in the context of epilepsy might give better and more studied results.

For a nudge in that direction, here's info from my doctor's charity:

http://faces.med.nyu.edu/events-programs/keto-kids-club

Keto is not a body hack that bypasses evolution. Almost all humans are descended from populations with seasonal eating patterns. Carb rich diet in spring/summer/fall, keto diet in winter.

The paradox is that keto diets, in the short term, seem to have a lot of great health benefits, yet all the blue zone diets are carb rich. My gut feeling is that for most people, the optimal diet in terms of health would be primarily high carb diet (with an emphasis on fermented foods and legumes), with occasional periods of keto dieting.

The reason I don't really buy into the paleo theory (yet) is that people have lived in all parts of the world, with vastly varying diets. I haven't seen any conclusive scientific evidence on it yet (to be fair I haven't been searching).

Intermittent fasting would be something that I imagine that most humans experienced wherever they lived however, and rat studies seem promising.

> people have lived in all parts of the world, with vastly varying diets

Yes, though all of them ate animal products and highly valued various animal fats.

That being said, we can find evidence of people eating all-meat diets in every corner of the globe, and often times if there were more agricultural people nearby, the carnivores were healthier and stronger (such as the Masai vs. the Kikuyu, the Sami vs. southern agricultural Swedes, etc.). Just because people were healthy eating one type of food does not mean they could have been even healthier eating another food if they had access to it.

Paleo diet is not necessarily Keto, though.

Research? Sort of. Experience? Yes.

Owsley "The Bear" Stanley, the famous LSD manufacturer and Grateful Dead sound engineer, lived very healthily on an all-meat diet for over 50 years. (Note: he did have cancer, though likely due to HPV and years of secondhand cigarette smoke and firsthand marijuana smoke, and his diet probably helped him survive it, and he had a heart attack, but that was likely due to complications from his youth that became noticeable after putting on 30 pounds of muscle weightlifting in his 50s.) He posted all about it on a forum years ago. It's a very interesting read: http://activenocarber.myfreeforum.org/ftopic22-0-0-asc-.php

Traditional Inuit also eat an all-meat diet with lots of fat. See Weston Price's Nutrition and Physical Degeneration (http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks02/0200251h.html#ch5), as well as the writings of Vilhjalmur Stefansson (http://highsteaks.com/carnivores-creed/vilhjalmur-stefansson... ).

The Plains Indians, as well. See "Guts and Grease: The Diet of the Native Americans" (http://www.westonaprice.org/health-topics/guts-and-grease-th...) and this talk by Stephen Phinney, "The Aboriginal Argument" (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ayf4R-y_RYo). Phinney himself has been on a very low carb, ketogenic diet for, I believe, two decades.

Some argue the Inuit were not ketogenic (http://freetheanimal.com/2014/03/reiterate-elevated-ketone.h...), but they tend to overestimate how long glycogen remains in muscles after death, as well as mistaking a lack of elevated ketones as meaning they weren't ketogenic (it's actually because they just use ketone bodies more effectively, which is why urine tests for ketosis only work during keto-adaptation). Dr. Michael Eades had a good article on this: https://proteinpower.com/drmike/2014/04/18/beware-confirmati...

Anyway, there's a lot more out there, but that'll get you started. I tend to believe an all-meat, ketogenic diet is the natural human diet, and I've had great success on it for the past year.

Other sites of note: http://www.ketotic.org/ http://www.empiri.ca/ https://zerocarbzen.com/ (There used to be an interview on this one with a family that has eaten nothing but ribeyes for the past 18 years. The whole family had tremendous health, and it even helped the mother overcome lyme disease. I thought it was fake the first time I read it. They unfortunately had to take it down because they were getting angry mail from angry vegans.)

Holy shit, lyme disease! How could I forget posting about this! My friend had lyme disease and was told to look into keto by his doctor to help fight the disease. He's cured as of March this year.

That's so wonderful.

Thanks for the links. I went deep into the Bear thread, definitely an interesting man. Funny enough as I began reading I was thinking, "I would only do this if I had access to cheap Australian grass-fed beef," and it turns out he lived there. Commercially available beef in the US is plain awful; Whole Foods carries grass-fed Australian but it's expensive. Fortunately I'll be moving there soon.

Now, I've been doing a lot of thinking about my evolutionary history. My immediate ancestors are from central Asia / mideast but really don't know about anyone beyond great-grandparents. Observing myself, I seem to thrive in dry weather and feel horrible in humid weather (regardless of temp; winter moisture doesn't feel good either). This has led me to believe my "genetic preference" is for dry climates and possibly the foods found in arid places, which would probably be animals that feed on dry grasses and such.

I love fruits and vegetables, I have grown up eating lots of them, and salad everyday. However, I am open to skepticism, as right now in the last few days I've stayed home and eaten nothing but very fresh, healthy vegetables and fruit all day and yet still could not prevent this cold / congestion from taking root. I could not imagine eating zero vegetables for the rest of my life, though, it sounds ridiculous.

I'm fed up with generally being a low energy person, with chronic nasal congestion (inflammation, not mucous) maybe I will give this a shot. I don't need to lose weight, but I do want mental clarity and energy. I'm quite healthy "by the numbers," but a recent finding of almost deficient levels of Vit D and B12 leads me to believe that I require a high meat diet.

Start here: http://www.empiri.ca/p/eat-meat-not-too-little-mostly-fat.ht... (And check out the other posts on the blog, too.)

As for grass-fed vs. grain-fed, most of the arguments seem to center around omega-3, omega-6 ratios. The difference between grass-fed and grain-fed are negligible when you compare them to chicken and pork, let alone nuts and vegetable oils. If I could afford grass-fed beef, I'd eat it, but I think grain-fed beef is fine, especially in the United States. If anything, it has more marbling, so yum! For what it's worth, the Bear argued there was little difference nutritionally and that it had more to do with texture and flavor.

You eat sweet potatoes and stay in ketosis? Those are full of carbs. I have been keto for about a year and would love to eat sweet potatoes.

The digestibility of the carbs in sweet potatoes is highly dependent on the way they're cooked. Boiling them leads to a fairly low glycemic index and glycemic load, whereas baking them essentially turns them into candy: http://www.livestrong.com/article/295025-the-glycemic-index-...

It is also possible to reduce the glycemic index of food by ingesting acetic acid (apple vinegar).

See: http://www.jbc.org/content/135/1/157.full.pdf

TL;DR Apple cider vinegar will decrease the glycemic index of food by interfering with carbohydrate digestion.

Acetic acid is vinegar, not apple cider vinegar in particular.

I should probably have specified that when it comes to foods like that which are high in carbohydrates I won't eat a significant amount or I'll get knocked out of ketosis just like everyone else would.

I rarely eat foods that are primarily carbohydrate based since that defeats the purpose of going keto, but if I do I try to find alternatives (sweet potato replacement for regular potatoes) and even then I severely restrict the amount that I eat. Sweet potatoes have important nutrients in them like beta-carotene, vitamin A, manganese and copper. It is as far as I'm aware always preferable to get vitamins and minerals directly from your diet rather than supplementation.

See http://www.yummly.com/recipe/Low-Carb-Potato-Salad---paleo_-... for an example of a keto friendly sweet potato salad.

For me at least it's important to get creative with what I eat. Staying Keto is a long term goal for me and while I started off doing Keto as a means to lose weight the immediate health benefits convinced me to stay Keto for the foreseeable future. While it's possible to do keto off nothing but cheese, bacon, avocadoes, eggs and low-carb greens such as spinach and broccoli it can get boring.

As long as my body stays in ketosis and I'm covering my body's nutritional needs I believe strict moderation rather than completely cutting all carbs is an acceptable way to diet. While it is completely possible to eliminate all carbs from your diet it is not requisite for staying in ketosis, though you of course do not have much margin for error before you knock yourself out of ketosis. Good news is it's much easier to get back into ketosis if you overshoot your daily carb allowance compared to the initial adaption period where you have to be very strict in order to adapt your body to keto.

For people who are dealing with insulin resistant type health conditions like diabetes type 1, 2 or even pre-diabetes there might be entirely different dietary requirements and a very strict emphasis on eliminating all carbs may be appropriate. When it comes to carefully managing health conditions with potentially severe health ramifications that's something which requires cooperation with a physician.

For most people, as long as you stay beneath the protein and carb limit you're completely fine.

I don't see any potato in that salad.

Not to nit-pick, but Sweet Potatoes are not Keto friendly. They will knock you out of ketosis pretty quick, even if you are keto-adapted.

A better alternative is cauliflower. It can be used in most of the same places as potatoes, but is an acquired taste for some.

Edit: There are 27g of carbs in a sweet potato. That's more than my entire daily allowance on Keto.

I know it's mentioned in the article for long term but for the first couple weeks was there any difference in brain functioning? I'm not talking about anything severe, but if you have a job where you are using a lot of brain power, I'd imagine very low carb diet seems to be a little counter-intuitive. Like the article said the brain gets energy from ketones but is it the same amount/enough energy as regular carbs? Do you feel slightly slower, possibly more tired when performing longer challenging tasks? I've dieted very strictly before with a lack of carbs but also a huge deficit of calories and couldn't think nearly as quick. I agree lack of calories was the primary reason for this but it also seems very low carbs could contribute to constraining optimal brain output.

If anything it's easier to stay mentally alert for longer periods of time on Keto. The body manufactures enough glucose to supply the brain with what it needs on its own, the remaining nutrient needs are covered by ketones which are produced in the liver.

If you have any significant stores of body fat (15-18% body fat is the ideal for males, ~18-20% for females) your body is expending those fat stores in order to supply itself with the energy it needs. This makes it easier to stay calorie-deficient while on keto. During the past 7 months I've easily stayed calorie-deficient 80% of the time or more. I never go hungry, I eat whenever I'm hungry, I eat until I'm full and when I tally up the calories that usually puts me at or below 1500 daily calories.

Now this was the weirdest part of keto for me: When I'm doing intermittent fasting regularly I experience the most significant cognitive improvements.

There's something called 'keto flu' where for the first week or two you can feel a little off while adjusting, but afterwards you have plenty of mental energy, as long as you keep your electrolytes up.

All previous diets for me failed because I always felt like I couldn't think and do my job and needed to flood my system with calories in order to keep going... on keto I haven't had that feeling even once.

When I first went keto, I didn't experience any brain fog, but what was distinctly different was that I had a crazy amount of nervous energy, slept really well for the first time in years, and felt refreshed on 4-5 hours' sleep for the first couple of weeks. I lost 13 lbs. (probably 90% fluids) in the first 2 days... then nothing more for a month.

I've been doing Intermittent Fasting [1] for about 2-3 months now. I didn't realize the electrolytes issue when the body switches into ketosis.

One thing I LOVE about IF is that my cravings have naturally leaned me in these directions. 1) I've been drinking more Gatorade because I craved it. 2) I've added salt, mayo, cheese to my sandwiches to 'make it taste better' even though prior to this diet, I'd have a fairly bland sandwich (no mayo, salt, cheese). 3) I also tend to crave high fatty/protein foods. Like burgers. (I don't tend to crave bad foods for me, Nutella might be bad...but it's keto-friendly. And I only eat it in moderation.)

I also added magnesium to my diet due to my nerves becoming unsettled.

It's remarkable. The things you suggest, my body has pushed me in the direction of your suggestions. One thing I noticed, is that I crave more Gatorade and now I know why. At first, I thought it was one of those 'unhealthy' cravings that pop up from time to time but...I think you're right, that my body needs it to aid in burning fat.

[1] - I know this is about a Keto diet. But IF (Intermittent Fasting) showed a lot of promise after I did a bunch of research on it and it's fairly similar to Keto but without restrictions. It's more convenient for my lifestyle (it exercises my willpower on fast days/times, quicker meals, condensed feeding times).

Namely, in my research, IF showed similar benefits as Keto but without the added hassle of changing the entire diet and learning a new menu. It also simplified mealtimes.

I do a hybrid of two different IF diets. 1) Saturday through Wednesday, I eat 'normally' without going overboard with foods. Also during this five day stretch, I only eat between 10am-3pm, so I'll be fasting from 3pm to 10am (19 hours every day). I'll eat ~3000 calories in that 5 hour window. 2) Thursday and Friday I eat only ~700 calories. I don't 'count', I just estimate one meal and it's eaten between 10am-3pm.

Heck, even Wolverine (Hugh Jackman) used IF to get ripped. http://www.vox.com/2014/12/22/7403247/wolverine-diet-hugh-ja...

P.S. I'm 29. Lost 30 lbs (in 2-3 months). I have 40 lbs more to go. I might get there by the new year. I hope the info is helpful as it has been for me.

I have been impressed with the effects of IF as well, though my problem is that I am naturally skinny, and it was difficult to keep my weight up, so I do it some times. (I stop when I am planning on exercising more during the seasonal outdoor that sports I do). I notice that when I am doing it, I crave the really fatty parts of steaks, which I used to avoid.

For me the primary motivation for switching over was as I said, the weight loss and ease of staying calorie-deficient. I can eat 1500 calories or less every day no problem on Keto. If I'm off Keto I get insanely hungry and experience blood sugar crashes frequently on a calorie-deficient diet.

Not gonna lie, the lure of Keto was the promise that it's easy to stick with in terms of how your body reacts to it. I just get so much more hungry when I'm off Keto even if my caloric intake is the same.

That's a bummer. IF has given me a lot of flexibility. Provided I don't over consume in calories, I can eat whatever I desire, keto or not. Although not having the same cravings does change/limit my choices but...they are happily followed. I.e. it's easier for me to stick with it since I choose my next meal, my cravings dictate my next meal, not some 'plan' or 'diet'.

Nutella might be bad...but it's keto-friendly. In what sense is Nutella 'keto-friendly'? Out of a 37g serving, 20g are refined sugar.

You're right. I forgot about the sugar. I was just thinking about the protein and fat content. Keto is all about low sugar/carbs. But with my IF diet, it works well as a nice pick me up snack with little drawbacks.

Nutella? Gatorade? I don't trust a word you said.

There are healthier ways to get high fat/protein as a snack (vs nutella) and better ways to get electrolytes than a sugar drink. But they've been helpful on the go and I don't eat many sweets anymore due to my cravings being changed. Sweets seem repulsive to me. If the worst in my diet is a chocolate hazelnut snack and a sugar energy drink, I'm ahead of the game.

But...I had to upvote you because it made me laugh. I like the idea that my 'diet' isn't the "healthiest" way to lose weight but it sure is ENJOYABLE and that's 95% of the battle, imho.

Replacing some meat with veggies, flax seeds, and olive oil can help cost-wise. Trader Joes has olive oil from about $7 a liter.

Not aiming this at you but just people in general, but I'm pretty sure one could lose weight in a much healthier way by just eating a balanced diet (eating REAL food, not processed junk), not overeating, cutting out as much added sugar as possible (under 30g a day is recommended) and getting a little light exercise regularly. Sorry but I hate these fad diets.

> cutting out as much added sugar as possible

Why do you count this separately from "not overeating"? The important thing is to be calorie-negative to lose weight.

Foods with a lot of added sugar tend to be foods that aren't very good at keeping you feeling full, so if you have too many of them in your calorie-negative diet you can easily find yourself quite hungry so often that it takes a lot of willpower to stay calorie-negative...maybe more than you have and the diet falls apart.

Keto isn't a fad diet at all, if a fad diet is one that you do for a while to drop weight quickly.

I've been on Keto for about two years now, and plan to eat this way for the rest of my life. I've gone from 235 to 180. Going from 245 to 235 took forever on a "normal" low fat diet.

My A1C and cholesterol have greatly improved.

He said eat normal and healthy, not eat low fat; low fat is also a fad diet. And yes, keto is a fad diet with no empirical evidence to support its claims, testimonials are not evidence. There was actually a recent scientific study done and it found keto claims lacking. I've done keto, I'm well aware of what it is, but the weight loss is far more likely to come from eating less than from not eating carbs because it's fucking hard to consume a lot of calories once you cut out carbs so most people on a keto diet are actually on a calorie restricted diet as well which is why they're losing weight.

You want to lose weight, don't eat anything in a box, buy fresh whole food, plenty of veggies and fruits, and meat, cut out sugar, and it'll happen automatically. We're fat because of processed foods that have far too many calories in far too small a bulk that makes overeating so easy you don't even know you're doing it.

You're also neglecting another benefit of keto for maintaining a low-caloric intake, it encourages you to eat fat. Fat takes a substantially longer amount of time for the stomach to process, meaning you feel satiated for a longer period of time. Whenever I eat carbs I try to supplement them with a good amount of fat to avoid this, yesterday I had a 300cal snack of 5 saltines topped with roughly 3tbsp of peanut butter and felt great for 4 hours, meanwhile this morning I had a single 240cal croissant for breakfast at 8:30 and have been dying for lunch since 10:00AM.

Normal and healthy diets are balanced; most people's diets are excessively heavy in carbs, so no, I didn't neglect that at all. People should eat less carbs and more fat until they're somewhat of a balance, going in either direction by cutting out one or the other is not eating healthy. Keeping your body in long term ketosis is neither healthy nor particularly pleasant. Yea, eating a pure carb snack is going to make you crash, so don't do that, eat something balanced and made of real whole food, not processed crap.

The tricky part is that it isn't clear what "balanced" means. Our bodies can survive on vastly different allocations of the three macronutrients. Carbohydrates are not required at all to my knowledge, while some amino acids and fatty acids are essential and cannot be synthesized from other foodstuffs.

Its possible to get most of your calories from carbohydrates, protein, or fat. The question is what is the right balance for optimum health? How much does this value change across different people (and possibly at different stages of life)? If you have epilepsy then a ketogenic diet might well be best. How about for other people?

What macronutient profile is "balanced"? What do you even base it on? Should it be 33% of each? Should we eat protein and fat in just a little in excess of what we need (to get the essential fatty acids and amino acids) and get the rest from carbohydrates? I don't think we have clear answers to those questions yet. Although, I think we have ruled out some diets as unhealthy (e.g. eating a lot of refined carbohydrates can cause diabetes). Since eating too many refined carbohydrates is bad does that rule them out as a primary calorie source? Probably not, but we need more research.

Personal Note: I've eaten a low carb, high fat, moderate protein diet for about 4 years. All my blood markers (cholesterol, triglycerides, etc) have improved significantly over that time period. Additionally, I used to get incredibly hungry all the time and feel bad if a meal was delayed. Now I can go much longer without eating and still feel well.

You don't have to be able to define balance, to point out unbalanced, and any diet largely cutting out one of the 3 is unbalanced.

> I've eaten a low carb, high fat, moderate protein diet for about 4 years. All my blood markers (cholesterol, triglycerides, etc) have improved significantly over that time period.

That's like saying I've been smoking for 4 years and I don't have cancer so smoking must not have any long term adverse effects; bad logic and insufficient sample size.

> You don't have to be able to define balance, to point out unbalanced

Yes, you actually have to be able to define what range of mixes counts as "balanced" before you can label anything as outside of that range. (And, moreover, if you want to credibly assign significance to that label, you probably also need to be able to provide evidence that your definition of "balanced" corresponds to a range outside of which there are serious negative consequences.)

> Yes, you actually have to be able to define what range of mixes counts as "balanced" before you can label anything as outside of that range.

No, you don't; for example, eliminating one is not balanced now matter what numbers you assign to balance.

It's unbelievable what kind of hive mind exists behind this anecdotal unscientific community.

Absolutely every thread on fat, sugar is filled with huge amounts of anecdotal evidence that is entirely worthless and delusional.

Fat people comment that they've lost weight by planning their diets more carefully (what a luck that it was keto), what a surprise.

I'm aware that being overweight is a huge issue in developed world and that most people easily lose weights on restrictive diets but it's all a fad.

That is wrong, the ketogenic diet is prescribed by doctors to patients suffering from seizures and it works. There are long term studies and the NYTimes has been reporting about this since the 90s. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/21/magazine/21Epilepsy-t.html

Everyone picks a diet. If you just randomly eat anything thats available to you, in the developed world, you are most likely significantly overweight and at very high risk of diabetes. With rare exceptions, most fad diets will leave you better off than with no guidance whatsoever. Sometimes pointing someone in the wrong direction is better than them walking off a cliff.

Diet science is definitely progressing and getting better. We knew the basics, like what happened when you didn't get enough vitamin C, but the rest of the details are finally getting fleshed out and accepted by mainstream science.

That said, people following the ketogenic diet need to be doing it correctly and under a doctor's supervision. If you half ass it you can end up just eating a shitload of bad fats and miss nutrients while not actually being in ketosis. That will not lead to a good outcome.

Prescribing it for epilepsy doesn't necessarily make it a healthy diet for your average individual as you are looking for different effect from the diet.

Your argument is flawed, doctors prescribe lots of things that aren't good for you because for that person, they're better than the alternative, chemo for example. That something is done by doctors does not make it good.

> but the rest of the details are finally getting fleshed out and accepted by mainstream science.

Uh, no, mainstream science is the only one doing the fleshing out; you're implication that they're behind and only now accepting what diet science already knows is anti-intellectual bunk. If it isn't mainstream science, it isn't science.

"Mainstream" science is regularly hijacked by corporate and other interests. Dietary science is one area that was strongly influenced by producers of refined carbohydrates.

"plenty of veggies and fruits" "cut out sugar"

You can't do both.

checkout studies on fructose/glucose in a glass that is consumed, and the equivalent in fruits.

good thing that the physical reaction isn't equivalent despite the fact that calorical intake of that sugar is the same.

it's a huge shame not to consume fiber, or berries, or other fruits.

fruits were made by plants to prolong the life of the consumer, it's absolutely impossible to overdose on bananas if you aren't deliberately consuming huge amounts and aren't prepared to sit for hours on the bathroom.

Every digestable carb will turn into glucose eventually, all that matters is how fast this happens because you want to minimize time spent at high blood glucose levels.

Sugars generally digest faster than starches but this is not always true. Oranges (as in the whole fruit with its structure and fiber intact) raise blood glucose more slowly than potatoes, even though oranges are mostly sugar and potatoes are mostly starch.

This also means that slowly eaten sugar is healthier than quickly devoured complex carbs (if dental health is ignored). E.g. eating 50g carbs worth of candy steadily over 4 hours will result in stabler blood glucose than devouring 50g carbs worth of rice in 5 mins.

On a keto diet you can still consume a good amount of fiber (in the form of green veggies or supplements) and a serving or two of berries. Most other fruits contain too much sugar though.

To the original point, if you consume fruit you're not really cutting out "sugar". The OP probably means added sugar.

Psyllium fiber is your friend. It even adds a nice texture to eggs and such.

> You can't do both.

Yes you can, because unless you're being obtuse, I'm obviously talking about processed white sugar, not fructose found in real food.

"processed white sugar" is half fructose.

Yes, but it's also not diluted with a ton of fiber like fruit; don't be obtuse.

There is at least one person in these comments extolling the virtues of keto viz a viz quick weight loss without exercise.

I don't know what a normal low fat diet is, but the overruling factor in weight loss/gain is the ratio of work (exercise) to energy input (calories).

Calories_out = Calories_in - Calories_stored.

Caloric source matters, your body does different things with different sources.

Your metabolism will be reduced by reducing calories in. They are not independent variables.

>but the overruling factor in weight loss/gain is the ratio of work (exercise) to energy input (calories).

I don't think you are off, but the key is not weight loss/gain...the key is healthy weight loss/gain and that has everything to do with what you consume.

Physics, years of evidence and common sense down voted on HN where solyent is seen as a good thing.

The physics is that exercise burns so few calories it's not worthwhile from a weight loss point of view.

Where have those physics been documented?

I want to see the same person:

    'immobile
    'sitting most of the time, with short commutes and shopping trips
    'intensely exercising 1 hr a day
    'actively working out throughout the day

while maintaining their current diet and weight.

These aren't independent variables. The point is that a half an hour run only burns around 300-400 calories, a deficit which could more easily be accomplished by diet. Also, it's possible that the run would increase your appetite.

The point isn't that exercise _can't_ work, it's that aiming for dietary changes has a higher average ROI than exercise.

"these"? I don't know what that refers to.

No one has argued that there is a lower than average ROI (you get paid for not eating?) from exercise.

It's not physics, it's biochemistry.

But it's more complicated than that. Genetics cause one's predisposition as to how responsive a person is to cardio; see the University of Bath study and/or Michael Mosley's "The Truth About Exercise".

What are some good links to learn more about it? And what's the difference between keto and paleo? Just asking out of interest.

https://www.reddit.com/r/keto/wiki/keto_in_a_nutshell

Cool, thanks.

My biggest problem with keto was issues with getting enough potassium. There's no easy way to supplement it in the US, unless you get a prescription for supplements. I tried using No Salt, but I hate the taste. Lite Salt was tolerable, but I'd end up exceeding my recommended amount of daily sodium.

I use no-salt, but not as a salt substitute. I just add it to water and coffee. Not enough to taste.

Potassium is easy to get [1]. If you don't want to supplement with a vitamin/power, you can just eat a potato. Although that would go against 'keto diet'. I'm doing a IF (intermittent fasting) diet and I'm not restricted, so I could eat them if I wanted. IF is similar to keto, both put the body into a ketosis state.

[1] - All you need is one teaspoon a day. https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00ENSA93S/ref=oh_aui_sear...

That product looks great, thanks for the link. I'll probably end up using it even if I don't try keto again :)

I'll also check out IF.

What? Amazon lists dozens of types of potassium supplements.

Do you have some resources you'd recommend to get started?

I first started learning about keto on reddit - reddit.com/r/keto (although I initinally learned about it elsewhere)

In the sidebar on the right there are two very useful sections labeled "useful links" and "related subs". I personally recommend the ketoscience, ketogains and ketorecipes subreddits depending on your goals. I guess I can't leave out ketoxx either if you're a girl.

In addition to that I recommend reading anything written by Dom D'Agostino who is widely considered the #1 authority on the ketogenic diet. Also read Mark Sisson's books. And finally I recommend Joe Rogan Podcast Ep. 752 - Mark Sisson. Rogan can be somewhat of a pothead/hippie but if you can look past that his guests are often very informative.

I liked Why We Get Fat, by Gary Taubes as background

https://www.amazon.com/Why-We-Get-Fat-About/dp/0307474259

then, as others have said, reddit.com/r/keto is good for "how to"

I used Ferris' 4 Hour Body, and did a cheat day and then learned more from resources online. Highly recommend. Lost 19 lbs in 9 weeks with a cheat day on keto.

What is your daily carb limit?

Why sweet potatoes, they have more carbs than regular potatoes.

How do you achieve an adequate fiber intake?

20 grams.

Sweet potatoes have important nutrients. I do not eat significant amounts of sweet potatoes, and only eat them for the nutrients. A typical meal with sweet potatoes in them has far less than 100 grams of sweet potatoes in total. There's also things you can do to interfere with carbohydrate metabolization such as ingesting apple cider vinegar which contains acetic acid. See: https://www.reddit.com/r/ketoscience/comments/53kejq/acetic_...

I eat greens with fiber as well as psyllium seed husks. Broccoli and avocados are staples in my everyday diet.

Is something like Ensure allowed on keto? Its awfully convenient mid day.

You want to maintain a healthy amount of fat, usually 50-70% of calories from fat. If you eat too much protein, it is converted to glucose and you won't reach higher levels of ketosis.

Protein is a big scale that varies a lot - if you're working out or need it to sustain your muscle mass, then it's fine. It's the leftover protein that becomes a problem.

Check out Keto Chow. https://www.thebairs.net/

I have no affiliation with them and don't drink it often but I can tell you that it tastes awesome.

tried it, tastes like garbage in my opinion. tried like 3 flavors

wow. it is literally one of the most delicious things I've ever consumed. Interesting how significantly tastes can differ.

> Is something like Ensure allowed on keto? Its awfully convenient mid day.

A regular Ensure looks to have around 15g of sugars per serving, so it would not be conducive to a keto-type diet. For similar convenience there is a product called Ketochow - https://www.thebairs.net/ which I've found quite tasty.

15 grams of sugar is above the daily recommended sugar intake for adults. Recent research indicates that 10 grams daily is a more realistic limit for maintaining health.

I used the Keto Fuel soylent for all my food for about four months on keto. It's much more delicious than Soylent (chocolate, cinnamon, vanilla). You add MCT oil and heavy whipping cream to it for the fats needed. Strongly recommended and you can even do local pickup in SF.

There are Atkins brand shakes that are low carb and achieve the same effect. The chocolate flavor is actually really good.

KetoSoy, KetoLent, Keto Meal Shake, Keto Chow, KetoFuel

Reply on news.ycombinator.com