You do not need to be in ketosis to produce ketones. Ketosis tells you that you are burning larger amount of fats. Ketone bodies ( the scientific name for ketones ) are made when fat is broken down. As you read the words that are on this post, your body is producing ketones. The ketones become measureable on the early phase of incduction due to the low carb intake especially in the heavier person.
Not only are ketones not poisonous as described by many health professionals, but they are used as fuel by much of the body's tissues including the heart and brain. What is not used, is spilled into urine, stool and breath. This is losing unwanted fat
without having to burn it off. pp148 and 149 of Protein Power by Drs. Mary and Michael Eades.

That totally makes sense. I seemed to always have been hypo but at 39 I started getting heart palpitations and sweats.

Thank God with that genetic heritage you love lowcarb! Is there anything good about menopause, sheesh.

Nawwchem, we live so close to each other, yet so far away. We should do lunch, if it is at all possible, one day. I have not done this so I feel that I am giving you advice that I should be giving myself, but, why not have tests done to see if you are peri-menopausal? I saw a kit that detects for this at Savon. I plan to atleast see how I would fare with this test.

Yes, there is one good thing about full-blown menopause. No mo periods! It is a tad depressing tho because I would have liked
to have another baby by my second husband.

Let us study the case of 2 persons A & B, each of them needs 2000 calories per day for energy. The two have had a very big meal today.

A has eaten 4000 calories of fat and 10 carbs (giving him additional 40 calories.)

B has eaten 4000 calories of fat and 50 carbs (giving him additional 200 calories.)

A has received 2040 calories more than he needs while B received 2200 calories more than he needs. So the difference is minimum.

When both measure for ketones in their urine, A will detect a very large amount and B will detect none (I'm sure you agree) Explain to me why.

I had originally written up a very long post in response to this and didn't post it. So I'm going to try to be brief and not ramble as much :).

The reason amount of carbs and gluconeogenic fuel sources (proteins, glycerine, etc) someone eats affects ketone concentration, even if amount of ketogenic fuel sources in diet are equal, is because of the body's preference for fuels.

Think back to grade school when you were taught order of operations. You do certain operations in a certain order for efficiency or to end up with a logically correct result. The body also has a similar order, based on logic, for fuel preference. Sugar is the most efficient fuel source, metabolically speaking it is more readily available, takes less of an energy investment to make it, so on. So the body prefers to use carbohydrates first before it goes after more "complex" fuels like fats. The person who ate the 50 carbs is burning relatively more energy as sugar, therefore burning less fat and storing more of the excess energy from the other 4000 cals.

If two people eat an ounce of butter, but one of those persons eats it with nothing else meanwhile another eats it with 10 grams of glucose, the latter person has changed the order of fuel usage with the addition of the simple sugar glucose. The body will use the glucose first and use fat only as glucose is unavailable. Glucose is unavailable for many reasons, primarily due to caloric deficit (fasting/low energy/low fat diet), forcing the body to burn body fats. It can also be unavailable due to macronutrient composition ( isocaloric diet with specific carbohydrate restriction), forcing the body to burn dietary fats.
Adding carbohydrate to diet will decrease ketone concentration as the body burns more of the carbs first, decreasing the body's reliance on fats for fuels. If there is an energy surplus, the body will store the fats first before storing carbs, again for logical metabolic efficiency (it is easier to turn dietary fats into body fat). In your example, the fellow who ate the high carb meal burned more sugar and less fat than his friend, decreasing ketone concentration to a level that is not strong enough to be picked up by a crude test like urinalysis. I'm sure more sensitive tests would reveal plenty of ketones, probably much more than average.

Or to put it shortly, eating more carbs makes your body use fat less. The more carbs you eat, the less fat you are burning. So more carbs ALWAYS translates into less ketones if everything else is equal. More carbs does not always translate into less body fat burning, please note. Whether or not burning less fat translates into more fat storage/less energy deficit depends exclusively on energy balance state. Energy balance state is determined by numerous factors, of which percentage of dietary carbohydrate is one small influential factor (how important it is depends on numerous other factors as well). Either way, please note decreased ketone concentration is not one factor which determines energy balance. Ketone concentration is just a marker for energy balance state... sort of how high cholesterol and obesity are markers for syndrome x. It is a marker, but not a conclusive one, nor is it causative but rather it is symptomatic.

Again I want to stress this point: Please note I'm not saying that carbs will make your body store fat. By this statement, I mean it is a fallacy that you can eat as much fat as you want and the only time the body will store it is if you consume carbohydrate. This is not true, because ketosis is not mutually exclusive with building/storing fat. It is often mistaken that if one is in ketosis it means one can not possibly be in a fat storing state, this is illogical. It does not require the excessive amounts of insulin that carbohydrate generates to allow the body to make fat. Insulin resistance/hyperinsulinemia is a disease state which makes the body hyperlipogenic. It is unnatural and a symptom of disease.
OTOH, A normal healthy amount of insulin, produced by a healthy metabolism on a low carb diet, is sufficient to allow the body to be lipogenic as necessary. If you gorge on butter, if you take in far too much energy, you will store it as fat even if dietary carbohydrate is unavailable. Lipogenesis is a normal physiological process of a healthy body. The only way to create an insulin deficit to the point where lipogenesis is not *possible* is through some kind of disease like T1 DM (that has a whole lot of awful consequences besides the deceptively attractive one of not being able to store fat).

One more thing. How easily a body enters ketosis is also dependant upon numerous factors. Assuming one is specificially attempting to induce ketosis, the biggest factor which determines ease of entering ketosis is unique metabolic rate, if all other factors are equal (meaning they are following the diet "properly" and not eating a surplus of carbohydrate and eating plenty of ketogenic fuels).

Men, the active, the very obese, etc all have an easier time keeping ketone concentration high.
The reason this is so is because these individuals all tend to have very high metabolisms, allowing them to consume relatively more carbohydrate grams without turning off fat burning as readily. When I was hugely obese, I generated so many ketones that I could hardly eat and felt sick with nausea. It was very easy for me to stay in ketosis. It's a lot more difficult now that I am almost 1/3 my former size and my metabolism has decreased accordingly. IF I were to restrict to 20 grams of carbohydrate I would certainly enter ketosis, but it wouldn't be as deep or rapid of a ketosis as it was when I was very fat.

People with high metabolisms don't have to restrict carbohydrate grams as rigidly in order to trigger fat-based metabolism. I think this is why exercise is so important for people who struggle trying to control weight on low fat diets. 20 grams of carbohydrate, to someone who burns 3000 cals per day, is a lot smaller a percentage of their energy than it is to someone who burns 1500. If everything else is equal someone burning 3000 cals but consuming only 20 carbs has a lot higher ketone concentration than the 1500 cal metabolism, even though both are eating only 20 carbs.

Woo, please let us write short and concentrate on my example. Also consider A & B to be identical twin with same metabolic rate and everything else. There are no energy deficits in the example, so let us not talk about energy deficits.

I agree with fuel preference, but in my example there is no significant energy that comes from glucose. Glucose calories cover only 10% or less of the energy needs of each person. So at least 90% of the energy needs of each must be met from dietary fat. Let me try to analize it with your assumption:

PERSON A:
Energy required by the body = 2000 calories.
Remainder after glucose calories = 2000 - 40 = 1960
(We'll cosider that all 4000 calories of dietary fat are coverted into keyones)
Energy in all ketones produced = 4000 calories
Ketones energy surplus after covering required energy = 4000-1960=2040 Cal
So, we should have unused ketones which contain 2040 calories.

PERSON B:
Energy required by the body = 2000 calories.
Remainder after glucose calories = 2000 - 200 = 1800
(We'll cosider that all 4000 calories of dietary fat are coverted into keyones)
Energy in all ketones produced = 4000 calories
Ketones energy surplus after covering required energy = 4000-1800=2200 Cal
So, we should have unused ketones which contain 2200 calories.


This says that each of the two persons will have large amount of unused ketones in his body and that the two amounts are very close. This conflicts with what the ketosticks say.

Ok, if you really want a short explanation, it's simply this... that meal was too high in carbohydrate to maintain deep ketosis (measurable via urinalysis). The 200 calories from carbs (taken at once) placed fat burning at a lower priority than his brother's meal.


200 calories of sugar in a single dose is significant, very significant. It's more than enough to put the body in a primarily sugar-burning state at least shortly after the meal (if they cease to eat carbs the rest of the day, they will again enter ketosis quickly). It doesn't matter how much fat they ate, because metabolic rate is primarily fixed. Anything after what they need will just be stored as fat. You could eat 10000 calories of fat (theoretical example it is not possible in reality), but include just 200 calories of sugar and you will cease to be burning enough fat to be in ketosis once those carbs hit your blood.
As for all the fat, that should be churning gobs of ketones? The excess fat is just going to white adipose, it won't be broken down to fuel. The carbs didn't change HOW the body burns fat, they only changed WHEN and HOW EASILY it burns fat.


90% of energy needs may be met by dietary fats, this is an important distinction.

First, the percentage isn't that high because originally you qualified that this was what they ate in one meal. I doubt they are burning 2000 calories inbetween breakfast and lunch. The overwhelming majority of those 4000 cals would be stored as fat, again with the body favoring to store fat and use sugar.
If you meant this is what they ate in a day and those carbs were spread out, I would at this point argue the 50 grm brother would cease to be in ketosis. Most people will be in ketosis on 50 grms per day. Even if he ate those 50 carbs in one meal, if he abstained from carbs earlier and later odds are he would enter ketosis very quickly afterward.

Anyway, ignoring that for a moment, let's focus on why it is important to distinguish the "other stuff" they're eating. Fats are very ketogenic whereas protein and other foods are far less ketogenic. Type of fat matters a lot, too, some fat sources are more conducive to ketosis.

One thing is certain though... if someone eats 100 carbs spread through the day as part of a normal low carb diet, they probably won't be in measurable ketosis. On the other hand, if someone on a semi-fast eats 100 carbs spread through the day for several days, they will. Why? The answer is the body makes sugar from everything we eat. It is possible to induce ketosis by selecting foods that are ketogenic, but out and out restricting food will always be the most efficient way to get and stay in ketosis.

This is a completely false assumption. The body will break down fat for fuel only as needed, excess will be stored.


Actually it's not that simple. Metabolic rate typically increases with massive eating, but let's ignore that factor for simplicity. Any calories you eat beyond what is burned are not turned into ketones and magically wasted away. I specificially said this in my original post. IT will be stored as body fat. This is why it is inconsequential that both brothers gorged on fat. Metabolic rate between them is staying more or less the same, yet one of those brothers is burning more sugar after eating than the other, which placed using fat for fuel at a lower priority, lowering ketone concentration.

Again, your logic is wrong so that's why it doesn't make sense to you.
You are assuming anything you eat is just burned or wasted ignoring for the body's able capacity to make fat. I specifically went into how/why the body stores fat before to avoid this confusion later on. Carbohydrate is not a switch that allows the body to make fat or not make fat. The body, when working as intended, can always store excess... carbohydrate just fouls things up by messing up hormones making it abnormally easy to make fat and not use energy. Carbohydrate creates an unnatural disease state for some people. Eliminating/reducing it does not magically allow you to gorge yourself freakishly (4000 calls in a meal, even if it were possible, is definitely freakish).

If you remember that your body only has a finite need for energy, AND that the body has to use sugar before it can/will mobilize fat, you'll understand why the meal which contains 50 carbs will yeld lower levels of ketones than the meal that contained 10 carbs, assuming everything else is the same.

Before all, I did not mean that the 2 persons have eaten their food in one meal. I meant they have eaten it over 24 hours. I also meant that their 2000 calories energy requirement is for 24 hours. Let us assume that their carb intakes have been received gradually over 24 hours and that they have been from low glycemic sources to get insulin reaction out of the discussion



No. I can't understand this from what you have just said. Here is why:

(1) You have mentioned that since B gets 50 carbs, his fat intake will be stored as body fat instead of being converted into ketones. The 50 carbs will only give him 200 calories. How will he get his remaining required 1800 calories?

(2) When you say that dietary fat can turn into body fat without any further processing. How can this happen? I'm sure you don't mean that when somebody eates butter, the butter will move to the area under his skin and stay there. Do you mean that the butter turns into fatty acids then the fatty acids are directly converted into human fat?

What I used to know, is that fat must go through the entire metabolization process before it can end as body fat. This is part of what I have been calling "metabolization method #1" in my initial post.

Its the Woo, I thought your responses were clear, to the point, and helpful. Thank you very much.

Samuel, I don't see any point you are trying to make.

Let's remember a couple of other things. Insulin tends to prevent the metabolism of fat, leading, in some cases to increased gluconeogenesis from dietary protein or muscle tissue. Secondly, insulin resistance is cumiulative; most adults who have been eating high carb all their lives are going to have some degree of insulin resistance and hyperinsulinemia which is going to affect the body'e ability to metabolize fat. All things are not equal here.

Everybody, the reason I like arguments with ItsTheWooo is that she is the most nice and informative person here.

I'll be out of town for a few days starting tomorrow morning. So let us close this subject here.

side effects
 

Hi I was wondering if vaginal yeast infections has anything to do with low carb diet side effects ? Can any one give me some info ? I am not on any meds but been dealing with yeast for the first time in my life ever since May of this year. Help meeee itch itch lol sorry. :help: Also I have noticed that this seems to happen a few days after I ovulate. But never had ovulation like I have now. But have been going strong on low carb all year. Does that have any thing to do with it maybe ? Ho hum. I would appreciate any input any one has to offer. Thank you.

Chrissie

Oh and can any one tell me why the last 5 pounds will not come off for any reason what so ever. havent lost a pound in two months. thanks

It is normal for weight loss to slow down to a crawl when a person is near their normal weight. My body stalled for about 16 weeks once, and then resumed losing without me changing anything in my diet or exercise level.

Fat cells can be empty of fat, but be full of water for quite a while. Eventually the water departs and the weight goes down. So you can still be losing fat, but not have it show up on the scale or even on body measurements.

Hi thanks for the repy on those last 5 nasty pounds i will keep on with lcd. Any one have any news on the other nasty friend i was talking about ? If you did reply i just havent found the thread. Voyager you have so much infor can you email me when you have some time ? See if you have n e ideas what this could be. Doctor is no help. Thank you.