Why is the keto diet good for you?

Fat 9g Carb 4g Protein 4g

It is not good for you. If you want to lose weight in an unhealthy way, I'd recommend heroin or maybe methamfetamine

No, I am not gay and she is not attractive. Plus I can't stand being around someone so dependent for too long.

My mother in law is "doing keto" also but goes way over her carb limit.

But keto is healthy

If you're unhealthy on keto then you're doing it wrong nigger and you need to get your thyroid checked

I forget that there are women on this board

>Keto
>Not good for you

Maybe because you don't fast and eat nothing but shit?

If anything you eat is processed, contains sugar and refined carbs and starches, and if you eat corn and vegetable, canola or sunflower oil then it's not the way you're eating that's the problem, it's literally what you're eating.

Eat higher quality foods nigger

Im goin to let you in on a little secret:

If you work out at least one and a half hour 5 times a week and do a light workout the rest

And you eat only once a day(ideally all in 1 hour or more realistically within the span of 5)

You can eat WHATEVER the fuck you want (within reason, the bulk of the food should be meat/fish with vegetables and no bread )

You can be in top condition all year long. If you combine this with a weekly fasting day you can even be shredded.

That's it. It's how people ate for thousands of years.

>carbs have more calories per gram than fats

Its literally the opposite breh

Keto is a great diet but it isn't for everyone. Some people are "hyper-respondent" and cannot metabolize a high fat diet properly. Just look at all the posts on reddit about people doing keto for a year then developing astronomically high cholesterol and triglyceride levels.

Most people are better off doing a paleo-style low-carb diet.

It's for people that have fucked hormones from being very overweight. Essentially it lowers insulin levels in the body, which unblocks the leptin signal that tells fatties to stop eating. Cico doesn't fix this issue.

After the hormonal problems are addressed and corrected there is no reason to continue.

If you're a fatty, it can help you stay at a deficit without feeling hungry. And it's not going to do anything to you that being a fatty hasn't already done.

If you're a diabetic, it can help you maintain blood sugar levels.

If you're neither, then there are probably better ways to accomplish your goals.

>Essentially it lowers insulin levels in the body, which unblocks the leptin signal that tells fatties to stop eating. Cico doesn't fix this issue.
Eating satiating high-carb foods like beans, whole grains, and non-fried potatoes also keeps people from overeating. Keto doesn't help transition people to healthier diets, it just hooks them on salty, fatty foods and makes relatively bland foods like oats and beans undesirable.

Fix your triple chin before talking about health. 1kg of pork and a stick of butter a day is PEAK health.

Keto is mostly a meme, and hardly sustainable for the average normie, but one type of person it can be immensely beneficial for is epileptics. Keto diet has been shown to reduce the occurrence of seizures, especially in pediatrics.

Attached: 1537601382612.gif (309x203, 3.99M)

Wow. A simple google search would've avoided you looking so fucking retarded.

Attached: 1537926329267.jpg (583x355, 35K)

>Eating satiating high-carb foods like beans, whole grains, and non-fried potatoes also keeps people from overeating

eating like that gives you hamplanet glucose levels and constant gas/bloating. roasted chicken or a nice steak is far more satiating than a fucking potato.

Whole grains and legumes are not associated with unhealthy glucose levels at all, you retarded cultists are pulling data out of your asses.

You burn through carbs before you burn fat, if you have a healthy diet, this is not too much of an issue, in portion, and time between meals. Though if you are doing keto, it is mostly a matter of the sum of the daily calories, and not being stupid, you are cutting out the middle man in weight loss, basically. Fat, and protein keeps your hunger down. Though, like I said, don't be stupid, don't eat potted, spam, and vienna susage. Over salted, preserved, and processed is a no, no. Also, pork causes more inflammation, and blood thickening then any other meat, so it is not exactly efficient. I remeber that one person said meat should only be from ruminant animals, but I think chicken is good, and healthy. It is a great diet, it is not really a meme, and the idea that ketosis, gluconeogenesis is a secondary / less effcient mode of carb consumption, I don't think so. It works perfectly fine, and is only overlooked because nobody know about until they try these new diets. So yes, having a regular diet is also good, but that also has it's set backs, maybe even more so then keto.

>eating like that gives you hamplanet glucose levels and constant gas/bloating
Maybe some gas if you're not used to fiber (in which case you're not eating a healthy diet), but it helps bring DOWN blood glucose. In fact the gas they produce is even part of the reason they're anti-glycemic.
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3205742/
>roasted chicken or a nice steak is far more satiating than a fucking potato.
Verifiably false
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7498104

>you are cutting out the middle man in weight loss, basically
What do you mean?

i forget there are women on the internet

Dude they could be on any diet you want and they wouldn't lose weight. The diet isn't the issue.

>ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7498104

that abstract is pretty unconvincing user. nowhere does it refute that a steak or roasted chicken is less filling than a potato. in fact, they don't even list the foods in each category that are available to the test subjects.

post the complete study

Attached: mjchek.jpg (267x275, 20K)

Potato is literally the most satiating food in the world

L O N D O N
O
N
D
O
N

researchgate.net/profile/Peter_Petocz/publication/15701207_A_Satiety_Index_of_common_foods/links/00b495189da413c16d000000/A-Satiety-Index-of-common-foods.pdf
Plain potatoes are nearly twice as satiating as a steak

>Why is the keto diet good for you?
Define "good". Keto will lose you a lot of weight, but it will not form you any good habits that will help keep you slim.

I hope your picture wasn't an attempt at an example of a keto meal, because that tomato right there should be avoided.

>offered subjects lean steak with fat trimmed instead of a nice juicy ribeye or shoulder steak
>funded by Kellogg's

nope. still not buying it.

>they cut the fat off!
Which if anything should raise the SI score of the steak. "Protein correlated positively with SI scores... whereas fat content was negatively associated"
>funded by Kellogg's
Does the Kellogg company sell potatoes? You need a better excuse to deny this. I can make it easier on you though, post your own research that disproves what I've already referenced.

You do not have to metabolize carbs before utilizing fat as an energy source mainly.

I don't understand what you mean by that

In what portion are both presented. Also! what do you mean by satiation, fullness, or lack of hunger, and for what length of time. Meat, to a point of not filling, does take way longer to digest.

keto isn't healthy, it's just a very effective way of losing weight. if you're overweight you have an unhealthy lifestyle anyway so you might as well go keto for a few months, and once you have your weight under control, you'll find it easier to adapt to a healthy lifestyle

You should start by looking at what ketosis is.

I really do hate this mentality. If the diet solves the problem, that's your "good habit". It should be seen as a positive that it's easier.

If you want to shit on keto, tell people why it's unhealthy, not why it makes them philosophically weak.

>In what portion are both presented
I posted the full study for you. 240kcals of each food given with 220ml of water, satiety scores taken every 15 minutes over the course of 2 hours. Fish did pretty good, beef didn't do poorly, but white potatoes in fact are more satiating. They satisfy hunger better, calorie for calorie.

When you eat less carbs, your body runs more on fat, then carbs.

Why is it not healthy?

Well if that is the case, that I can't argue with it. In either case, it more about efficient weight loss.

I'd like to see a study like this done on people who have been eating zero carbs for a long ass time. If there's anything I noticed when I transitioned, it was how fucking hungry I was for the first week. Then it trailed off.

Though I know this is one anecdotal thing that's not worth much, and that study will probably never happen.

>When you eat less carbs, your body runs more on fat, then carbs.
How is that cutting out the middle man? Your body is running on whatever you're eating. Whether it's fat or carb, that's your first line of energy. Weight loss is about using body fat, not dietary fat. Whether you're eating mostly fat or carb, you're not burning body fat unless you're at a calorie deficit.

It's possible that the state of ketosis, not specifically steak or chicken or any particular food in a ketogenic diet, can cause a weak appetite. Many illnesses do that.

Yeah, I'm probably really sick. I just can't stop. I look at grains and I'm scared of going back. I used to love frosted mini wheats but now they make me seriously terrified. Like I think of all the worst feelings I had growing up when I medicated with sugar, or all the times I shit my pants after running three miles.

>Why is it not healthy?
it can increase risk of diabetes and heart disease if you don't know what you're doing

>If you want to shit on keto, tell people why it's unhealthy
It's unhealthy because of the stated reason.

>Which if anything should raise the SI score of the steak. "Protein correlated positively with SI scores... whereas fat content was negatively associated"
people often under-report how many calories they consume. can we really trust their judgement? plus, australia is full of people who are descended from irish prisoners, they have a genetically innate need for potatoes and respond more to them

>You need a better excuse to deny this. I can make it easier on you though, post your own research that disproves what I've already referenced.

youtube.com/watch?v=_qoyoItiB1E

Sorry, I shouldn't say "medicated" as if I was a doctor. I just felt like I would jump to high GI foods whenever I was stressed. What I'm doing now is definitely an eating disorder, though.

Amphetamines suck, got them from the pharmacy (Rx), did nothing, no added energy, just felt tired all day taking them.

I'm sorry for not eating the rice and potatoes that my fat fuck doctor says I need guys

>people often under-report how many calories they consume
They were given the food, you idiot. It's a controlled experiment.
>youtube.com/watch?v=_qoyoItiB1E
You linked an hour and 40 minute long youtube video that doesn't even look like it addresses anything brought up in this thread. Obviously I'm not going to watch that and I can't take that seriously as a source of information. Post a peer reviewed study like I did with a similar methodology. I assumed by how strong your beliefs were that you were already aware of research that you could share that would lend credibility to your claims. If this is what you're basing your objection on, you've lost the argument.

Can confirm for some people

Moderate Carb/Fat and High Protein was the best for me.

Claims that carbs are more satiating are completely bogus.

healthline.com/nutrition/23-studies-on-low-carb-and-low-fat-diets

People lose more weight on low carb diets. When high carb dieters are counting calories and low carb dieters are eating as much as they want, low carb still results in greater weight loss.

23 studies all conclusively prove a high fat low carb diet is more satiating.

>13 subjects
>subjects acted as their own controls

Did you read this you decrepit charlatanic cuckatoo?

Why wouldn't they act as their own controls? What retarded thing do you think is wrong with that?

There's many things wrong with this list. For one, most of the studies are poorly controlled, and what starts as "the effect of X diet on weight loss" turns into "the effect of telling fat people to eat X diet" which results in non-compliance that ends up destroying the experiment. Quoting the first study on the list, "Adherence was poor and attrition was high in both groups."
Secondly, although some studies may say to eat healthier forms of carbs like whole grains and fruits, when you look at the recall data, most of the carbs eaten by either group are from processed foods, refined sugars, and fiberless snacks. As we can see in this study, different sources of carbs = different effects on satiety You could argue that fat find it easier to stick to diets that are either high in fat (no surprise) or high in sugar, but you can't argue, at least with that set of data, that high fat diets are inherently more satiating than an unprocessed high carb diet.

*fat people find it easier

>taking Jow Forums this seriously

wew lad

Maybe google it first you stupid beta orbiter before you talk back to your daddy?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-subject_design#Limitations

Actually this whole study could have easily been one big carryover effect. Kill yourself.

Check out my hot posts over at /fraud/

Congrats bro, you trolled a bunch of retards with shit bait.

And which of those do you think applies to that study to render it invalid? If you're studying the effect of satiety of food, you're going to use the same people to try each food and see how the same people react to different things. It would introduce way more problems if you used a different person for each food.

For me?
Because it seems to have impacted my lifts very little, and I don't feel sleepy in class anymore.
Tastes better, too.

It helps my adhd so I don't have to take my meds.

Carryover effect applies.

Use more subjects, and/or more time between trials. Control what you can, randomize the rest.

>Carrover effect applies
"test foods were fed to the subjects in random order on separate mornings after a 10 hour overnight fast"

Any more excuses you can think up?

>increases risk of diabetes
I'm really going to need a source that isn't vegan propaganda, user. Because this shit cures Type 2 diabetes pretty easily because it regulates blood glucose and insulin.

Attached: 1511580149056.jpg (597x615, 161K)

10 hour overnight isn't enough, this is funded by Kellog, they didn't specify the order of testing or even whether it was pseudorandom. I think that's plenty.

>they haven't taken the peatpill yet
eat:
>meat and eggs
>milk/cheese/kefir
>orange juice
>liver or oysters once in a while
>carrots and sprouts and shit
avoid:
>vegetable oil
>starch
enjoy your low cortisol and high libido

because most people who go keto eat like fucking slobs before hand

then they eat like slobs after starting but they also start choking down a shit tone more vegetables and fruits than they might not otherwise while cutting way down on bread and pasta and rice

>Because this shit cures Type 2 diabetes pretty easily because it regulates blood glucose and insulin.
Weight loss does. If you lose enough weight on any diet, it could improve T2D. Just judging the diet alone without weight loss, it's not a good diet for T2D.
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26615402

>10 hour overnight isn't enough
Haha, jesus christ. Alright, there is absolutely nothing that can change your mind.

For someone who is upper range of normal BMI and wants to cut the last 15 lbs, what is a more satiating diet for ~1000 cals a day?

Low carb, high protein, moderate/high fat OR high protein, moderate fat with carbs high on the satiety index (potatoes, oats, etc..)

I just want to cut the last of the weight without feeling like I want to die. Is the satiety index thing bogus or no?

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19188683

>Is the satiety index thing bogus or no?
it's pseudoscience at best, based on the feelings of a group of people who cannot represent the entire world.

take it with a barrel of salt

Moreover consider that every day they had an opportunity to stuff their fat faces on whatever banana boo boo extract energy drinks and ho hos they wanted. Can you honestly tell me you'd function just as well tomorrow after drinking a litre of coke? If not then the study has a problem.

I obviously meant they could have waited a week without fasting or used a different subject but whatever cuck go bury yourself in tubers

weird I just read about ray peat a couple weeks ago and I've literally never seen him or his diet mentioned on Jow Forums before

>complains about carryover effect
>"the problem is they should have tested the foods after the subjects had already eaten other meals not accounted for in the experiment"
More retarded with every post.

>anything i disagree with is worthless pseudoscience false positive

>tfw you don't have to be the guy who rips apart the article for once
i wish Jow Forums could interpret empirical articles

The Satiety Index is literally based on feelings user. What are you going on about?

I only know one person IRL that does keto and he's a walking caricature of the reddit basedboy with the body of the pilsbury dough boy.

These threads always amaze me because there are so many people who get so butt blasted by the idea not eating carbohydrates.

Meanwhile you have people on the other end who are like "I tried the carnivore diet and I feel the best I've felt in 40 years. My psoriasis went away completely and my joints stopped hurting. For the first time in 10 years I can get out of bed in the morning without extreme pain. It's honestly a miracle."

And then you have these fucking retards on Jow Forums who would scream at them "WOW RETARD EAT BREAD AND POTATOES OR YOU'LL DIE!!!" Meanwhile these same Jow Forums retards probably look like complete shit, but hey, at least they eat a Balanced Diet™ unlike those other dummies who fell for Le Zero Carb Meme :pPpxXDDdd

You deserve to be put into gas chambers unironically.

Btw my advice to anyone reading this thread would be to fucking try keto, or paleo, or zero carb, or whatever fucking diet you want, and see how it works for you, and don't listen to these armchair fatfuck retards on Jow Forums and let them convince you need to eat a loaf of bread every day or you'll die of renal failure.

If you don't like eating close to no carbohydrates (or none at all) you can always drive to the grocery store and stock up the pantry. Just fucking try it for a month and see how it feel, what do you have to lose exactly?

POTATOES POTATOES POTATOES
PUB MED
POTATOES POTATOES POTATOES

That was a very good troll and I actually responded seriously first. Good shit brother

>implying psychology isn't a science
/x/ pls

It isn't if you eat like that.
Lean meats/fish/fruits/vegetables
Is what you should be eating anyway.
Add sweet potatoes, rice, oats, and whole grains and you got yourself a balanced diet.

>hurr hurr stupid user of course all 6+ billion people in the world have the same food tastes and meal preferences as a small group of australians. it's science

calories aint the problem nigger
also, no