htone

I spent a week in JNB without my regular fat shake and only had cream there to whip up breakfast. Upon my return I chugged down my regular fatshake, albeit without flaxseed oil, and lo and behold - about an hour later the nausea hit me ! I think one really has to "ease" into that amount of fat, clearly I became unadapted in a week ! PS. We used to add flaxseed oil because my wife is allergic to fish, and that was the only real other source of Omega 3. However, she has since had more extensive allergy tests done and she is only allergic to shellfish - she has been happily adding Omega 3 fish oil tabs to her diet for the last month without any probs !

Below the fat and carb values for dairy, in the format Product, Fat, Carbs (based on about 250 ml / 250 g / 1 cup): (all products are full fat) Milk, 9g, 11g Cream, 88g, 6g Cream Cheese, 80g, 9g Cottage Cheese, 10g, 8g Cheddar Cheese, 88g, 4g Yogurt (plain), 8g, 11g Butter, 184g, 0g Just for sh1ts and giggles, no-fat milk has 1g of fat and 14g of Carbs - the equivalent of 3 teaspoons of sugar. Now decide if you still want to buy the low-fat products....

On NNS - the longer you are on LCHF, the less your need for that will become. I still sit with two full containers of Xylitol that I bought when I started this, because I thought I would need to sweeten things up. Interestingly enough, we now eat Bulgarian Yogurt and Nommu Skinny as a choc mousse substitute for desert, but when we had friends around for a meal the other day and offered them that as pudding, their consensus was that it was "not sweet enough to their taste" ! Work through the dietdoctor site, he has plenty of experiments to prove that although NNS (diet Pepsi in his case) did not raise blood sugar, it did suppress ketones, thereby proving that the modern NNS is sweet enough to trick the body into having an insulin-like response. Try and avoid it, you will look back at this conversation later and remember that it was just the last part of your sugar addiction fooling with you.

Just watch that P number, from own experience I tweaked that too low and suffered overtraining symptoms from it. Keep protein to around 1.2g/kg bodyweight and work the rest from there, it should work out to about 20% protein. Remember if you embark on any physical training programme you are going to need that protein to rebuild muscle... and your heart is all muscle as well. Just as an aside, don't confuse performance improvements due to a changing training regime with performance enhancements due to a change in diet. I am still loathed to ascribe any performance benefits (in terms of max performance) to LCHF. The benefits for me were broader health improvements and the ability to train without carbs. If I think back to when this thread originally started I recall many people first wanting to know if LCHF would make them FASTER rather than looking at the overall health benefits. Just saying

Been out of IT for 10+ years, so looking at other options around sales or team management... don't worry too much, if the going gets tough I am going to start charging for LCHF advice . Thanks for the wishes everyone, much appreciated.

Probably hugely inappropriate post to put here, but you guys and gals feel like my Hub family. I was told towards the latter end of May that I would be retrenched at the beginning of June due to some aggressive restructuring of the company (in certain areas). So I find myself at the wrong side of 50 looking for something new to put bread on the table and that has been absorbing all of my energy - hence my absence on this thread. I do check in from time to time, but have not had enough time and mental resources to contribute. I know every dark cloud has a silver lining, so I just need to get out of the cloud in order to see that. Early days, lots of conversations with many people but nothing concrete in terms of an offer yet. I will keep eating loads of fat, as I find that this gives me an edge in interviews (I am actually serious here). Keep going, in the words of Arnie : "I will be back".

Just on a previous comment re Ketosis during labour - here's the study that actually found that intervening with drips, etc. during childbirth when the mother is in ketosis, could actually have detrimental effects on the baby. Perhaps this again proves that where man interferes with natural processes we tend to botch things up.... Interventions for ketosis during labour Toohill J, Soong B, Flenady V Published Online: February 15, 2012 Physical stress compounded by reduced food intake during labour can lead to raised levels of ketones in the blood and urine (ketosis). Ketone bodies transport fat-derived energy from the liver to other organs to provide an alternative source of energy. They also cross the placenta and the effect of ketosis on mother and baby is not clear. It is not clear whether ketosis during labour is a normal physiological response, or if women with ketosis in labour require intervention (such as intravenous and oral fluids). This uncertainty has resulted in differences in opinion and practice. Adverse effects of ketosis for the mother include increased likelihood of augmentation of labour, forceps-assisted delivery and postpartum blood loss. Yet intravenous therapies can have adverse effects, either by interfering with glucose and insulin levels for the mother and infant (causing neonatal hypoglycaemia) or lowering sodium level, for example. Other reported adverse effects include headache, nausea, maternal fluid overload, slowing of labour and difficulty in establishment of breastfeeding, as well as local pain and discomfort and interference with the woman's freedom of movement in labour. The newborn may have acidic blood and increased lactate levels. This review found no information on which to base practice in the treatment of women with ketosis during labour. The authors looked for studies comparing oral intake or intravenous fluids with no intervention (defined as no oral intake, ice chips only or oral intake on demand) and pregnancy outcomes. The only six studies identified focussed on maternal biochemical measures during or shortly after labour and could not be included in the review. The studies were conducted in the late 1970s to mid-1980s. Future trials should examine the use of different types of intravenous and oral fluids on clinically important outcomes and include women's perception and satisfaction with care during labour and birth. - See more at: http://summaries.coc...s-during-labour

TLW, here's a little known fact. You have already been in full ketosis at least twice in your life ! Each time you gave birth is when that happened !!! Google it, a woman goes into ketosis during labour and childbirth - now why would one's body do such an unnatural thing ??? Go on, stay on LCHF - you may even find falling pregnant is a lot easier (that seems to be the consensus from many females on Paleo/LCHF diets) and your child will thank you for it later !

Yeah Dave, it think it was Dietdoctor who said "Fruit is Nature's Candy". And I think we would probably look at fruit a lot differently if we knew just exactly how modified the stuff is that we buy nowadays, be that from the Monsanto type GMO process or via selective cultivation. Scary stuff...

Martin, I am not picking on you today , but this is just such an interesting observation ! I have friends who are Italian with relatives in the rural areas in Italy and they eat almost no pizza or pasta. In fact it is probably eaten once a week at most. The diet that the guys on the working farms eat is much closer to the mediterranean diet as it has become popularly known, which is high in oils and fats (like cheeses, cream and milk), fresh fruits and vegs, but it also contains a fair amount of bread and of course, Vino ! When you move closer to the cities and the touristy areas, you suddenly find that pizza and pasta have become the staple dishes - definitely influenced by the American fast-food market and the commercialisation of what people expect the Italian diet to be !

Martin, I partially agree with you, but as with everything, we need to keep perspective. In essence this discussion will boil down to availability of food (then and now). For cavemen to get fruit back then when there was no agriculture and hence no orchards, it would have meant that they would stumble across a fruit tree somewhere. That fruit tree would have borne fruit that was much smaller and much less sugary than any of the fruit we can buy in the shops today, because they have not been genetically modified or bred from selected cultivars to produce high-sugar, large (similarly) shaped fruit. Equally, for them to get honey, they would have had to risk an almost certain death to get the honey out of a wild beehive as I am pretty sure they wouldn't have mastered bee-keeping back then. So yes, maybe they did occasionally pig out on these things when they could get their hands on it, but not to the extent that "we" have been doing it in the last 5 or 6 decades. And I think this is where the danger lies, is when we bend the reality to fit our perception. They maybe pigged out once a year or at best, once per "season" while we do it all the time. Always remember that in any given group of people (this eclectic group on the forum is an excellent example) you will have those that can eat high amounts of carbs and not see any negatives from it, whilst others (and that's where I am standing) nearly killed myself by overdoing carbs and sugars specifically. Moderation is the key. And you have just explained exactly what has happened to most of us on LCHF who attempt a high-sugar food source - you cannot stand the taste and form an aversion to it. Why would your body do that if it is ok with eating whatever is around ?

Do a search for Jimmy Moore ("Livin' la vida low-carb" is his podcast series and website name) and his year-long experiment w.r.t. weight loss in nutritional ketosis. Although this is an n=1 experiment, his methodology and results are rock-solid. Also remember that many people on LCHF only start losing weight 6 - 8 months into it, whilst other drop their weight very early on. We are all different, so if you are a slow weight loser, hang in there and keep off the carbs, you will eventually see your bodyfat drop, even if you weight does not.

Because you had been on a fairly strict LCHF regime prior to this, it means that you became properly adapted. Your "second engine" is built and ready, you just needed to switch it on again. I have had some horror weekends w.r.t. carbs and I am back into ketosis in under 3 days every time. Just shows that being a little strict initially does pay dividends in the long run - now you can have those "cheat days" and you don't have to go through re-adaptation. Just keep the cheat days to days and not weeks....

Kaaiings or Kaiings are usually small square pieces of deep-fried fat. In essence the same as crackling, just presented slightly differently. Interestingly because kaaiings are saturated animal fat, they can last for a long time outside of a refrigerator without going rancid, which makes them really handy as a carry-along source of fat. You can get them from Winelands Pork in Stikland, Bellville. http://www.wlpork.co.za/

My Resting HR shot up to eventually settling around 104, when I decided to go see a cardiologist. The consensus at the end was that it could have been the result of a few things happening at around the same time for me: 1. Constant nutritional ketosis. Ketones have an adrenalin-like effect and could result in higher HR overall (resting and Max). 2. Overtraining. I started road cycling about 2 months into LCHF and went a little OTT on the training, not allowing adequate rest days and running my HR very high at almost every training session. 3. Too low protein intake. I unintentionally dropped my protein intake too low over time, as I wasn't supplementing with Whey and was relying basically on my meat intake alone to make up my protein requirements. Coupled with the hard training this put my heart into "panic mode". Now, 2 months after my visit to the cardiologist, I am on short-term beta blockers and statins and I run my protein intake around 1 - 1.2g protein per kg bodyweight (not lean weight). Because I did not adjust my fat intake down, I have picked up about 3kg in weight, but I am now stable again. I will begin tweaking my overall caloric intake once I have my HR and training issues waxed. I have cut down my training to about 30% of what I did previously and I allow plenty of rest time and make sure I get enough sleep. My resting HR is now back down to about 76 on a good day, but I have noticed that the slightest stress (good or bad), gets me into the 80's or low 90's. I am seeing another cycling-oriented cardiologist in two weeks to get yet another opinion. I know I am a little over-eager and impatient as the recovery from exercise-induced high HR is 3 - 4 months where you keep your average training HR at not more than 70% of MaxHR during exercise (Maffetone, anyone ?), so this is really just to rubber-stamp that what I am doing now is the right thing. I have said this many times before, if you are in ANY doubt, please have your heart checked by a reputable cardiologist. Being rushed to the ER in the back of an ambulance with a failing heart is not how you want to spend your day.

The below from Authority Nutrition's FB page: Authority Nutrition Have you ever heard someone say that people should eat 5-6 small meals per day to "boost metabolism" and "stoke the metabolic flame"? I'm here to tell you that this MYTH is complete nonsense. Studies that compare eating many smaller vs. fewer larger meals conclude that there is NO statistically significant effect on either metabolic rate or total amount of fat lost (1, 2). Eating fewer meals may help balance blood sugar slightly, but studies still show that more frequent eating leads to higher overall blood sugar levels - which is bad (3). Additionally, eating fewer, larger meals can also reduce hunger levels and increase feelings of fullness (4). ... If anything, the evidence shows that it's much better for you to eat fewer larger meals per day. Splitting them up into 5-6 meals is inconvenient and totally unnecessary for most people. If you want to know how often you should eat, follow these rules: 1. When hungry, eat. 2. When full, stop. 3. Repeat indefinitely. Authority Nutrition Sources: 1 - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9155494 2 - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19943985 3 - http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751499110000545 4 - http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0038632

Nothing wrong with those numbers and that HDL is brilliant ! If you don't believe me, email Prof Noakes and he will confirm - when on LCHF you want those numbers around where you are. Study after study has shown that people with low cholesterol die before people with high cholesterol. So there. What do your Triglycerides look like djembe ?

This is perfectly normal for about 2 - 3 weeks for a lot of people who move to a LCHF lifestyle, but you should feel a sudden "zing" one morning when you start waking up before your alarm clock, with an intense desire to train or just do stuff (that's how it was for me). If this has been going on for some time you need to be honest with yourself and assess whether you are really in the LCHF "zone" (dietary ketosis) or whether you have made a very gradual move to LCHF which probably means your body is in that grey area between being a carb burner and beginning to use ketones as fuel (when they are available). This is most often the reason for this feeling - you are effectively experiencing a very long and drawn out carb flu as your body is slowly detoxing. If this is the case, go strict LCHF for a week or two and force your body into ketosis (or as close as you can get to it), this will force some of the adaptation to happen sooner and therefore that lack of energy or zest should soon pass. Over to you ?

Hi Snytjie - I just need to point out that the whole point of staying on LCHF while training is to "force" your body to adapt to use fat (ketones) for fuel, rather than glucose or carbs. If you continue to feed carbs during training, you will inhibit this adaptation from happening, or at the very least prolong it. One has to keep this in mind when you move to a LCHF lifestyle - you may not perform at your peak during races for the first few months, but the overall health benefits should offer a compelling reason to allow time to adapt fully. If however you are one of those who does not have the patience, then accept that you may forever rely on some source of carbs for fuel during strenuous exercise. But this is a personal choice that should not influence living a low-carb lifestyle or at the very least enjoy some form of paleo diet. If I look at Maffetone's writings I am convinced that he "almost" got to the point of saying that you could adapt completely but then left that out because it may have been controversial. But that's just how I like to read it

Team UCAN:: Daneel :: Mobile :: 082 336 9462 :: Mail :: GenUCAN.SA@gmail.com :: Follow us on Twitter for product specials and training/nutrion tips @GenUCAN_SA :: Visit us at www.generationucan.com

If you go super strict LCHF and keep the carbs well below 50g, you should be back in ketosis within a week. Your muscle adaptation has happened, it doesn't just disappear, so it is a matter of just "switching" back. Depending on the time you were on high carb, this could be from 1 - 3 weeks usually. Guys, the KEY is to train, train, train the way you want to race. You need to allow time for this adaptation to happen. It takes anywhere from 4 - 6 months to fully adapt, as in grow new mitochondria in your muscles. If LCHF does not work for you or you don't have the patience to go through this rather lengthy adaptation, then revert to a Paleo type diet as has been suggested. Whatever you do, don't go back to a high carb lifestyle and avoid Coke like the plague (@Pastapouch).

@DaleE : This should make you feel better :-> New Analysis: LCHF Best For Long-Term Weight and Health Markers Yesterday 16:52 in Cholesterol, High Blood Pressure, Weight loss studies http://www.dietdoctor.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/goldencup2.jpgWhich diet works best long-term for weight loss and improved health markers? Some say: eat fewer calories and go hungry. Others say: eat fewer carbohydrates. Many 21st Century studies have compared the effect of these two popular pieces of advice. At least 18 studies of the highest quality have clearly shown a better weight loss result from a low-carb diet. Low-fat and low-cal diets have not won in any comparison. Now, a new analysis selecting 13 of the most well-designed and reliable long-term studies, summarizes the results. The winner? You probably guessed right. The same as usual. Reality now becomes increasingly difficult for opponents to explain away. The Comparison The analysis summarizes the results from all long-term (at least 1 year long) studies that compared the following advice: LCHF-like food (up to 50 g carbohydrates per day) or Low-fat and low-calorie food Participants must also have been randomized to their groups for a fairer comparison and a more reliable result. A total of 13 long-term studies met the requirements. The analysis is based on the results from these studies. Results for Weight Advice on a low-carbohydrate diet resulted on average in statistically significant more weight loss in the long run. The winning margin was 0.91 kg more weight lost than in the group that received advice on low-fat and low-calorie food. Three comments on the size of the winning margin: 1. The number only shows the advantage as compared to the other group, that also lost weight. The total weight loss was of course more. It is not mentioned here, but in another new review of studies on LCHF-like food, one found on average more than seven kilos of weight loss in a time-period during which advice on a low-carbohydrate diet was provided. 2. People in the studies lived at home and shopped, cooked and ate the food on their own during a year or more. In the study, only advice on following different diets are given. Adherence to dietary advice (regardless of type) is usually terrible in long-term studies – most people soon revert to old habits. This obviously greatly reduces the effect. For example, the weight loss of 7 kilos (15 lbs) is the average for all, including people who didn’t follow the advice. How much weight was lost by those who followed the advice is not obvious, but it has to be more. The same may apply to the difference between the groups. 3. In the majority of studies the LCHF-group was allowed to eat until satisfied. The fact that they still clearly lost MORE weight than those that were to count calories and go hungry is impressive. Results on Health Markers The LCHF groups on average improved blood lipid numbers in the form of lower triglycerides and more of the good HDL cholesterol, two positive changes that are seen more or less clearly in all the 13 included studies. They also showed a slightly higher LDL cholesterol (which the article mentions can be offset by the LDL particles becoming larger and fluffier on a low-carbohydrate diet). The LCHF groups on average improved their blood pressure, and this was statistically significant for the diastolic pressure. Summary Advice to overweight people on an LCHF-like diet will, even in the long run, produce more weight loss and better health markers than advice on low-fat and low-calorie foods. Time for the health care system to wake up? Interestingly enough, a Swedish expert review on diet for obesity will soon be released. I have already read the preliminary work that is not yet official. However, I can reveal that the investigation is looking at more or less the same studies on low-carbohydrate diets that this analysis does, and they will not surprisingly reach similar conclusions. Towards the Future Of course, opponents will try to find excuses for ignoring this study too. But it doesn’t matter. It is only a matter of time until reality catches up with them. There are now at least 18 RCT studies and several meta analyses (both short-term and long-term) finding better weight and health markers with advice on LCHF. It is becoming more and more unlikely that future studies will point in an entirely different direction. It is more likely that for every year there will be more and more studies showing the same thing, with increasing certainty. Like constantly dripping water wears away a stone, the opposition will be worn away. To speed up the inevitable we can send the doubters the link to the new analysis (below). Then more overweight people may dare to eat themselves thin and satisfied with real food. The Study The new analysis (the abstract is free): Bueno NB, et al. Very-low-carbohydrate ketogenic diet v. low-fat diet for long-term weight loss: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Br J Nutr. 2013 May 7:1-10. [Epub ahead of print] Previously “I Was Wrong, You Were Right” A Low-Carb Diet Superior for Overweight Children Once Again Warnings Against the Atkins Diet “Outdated” LCHF Seems to be Healthful in All Ways The Science of Low-Carb Vegetarian: Atkins Best for Weight Control (Google translated from Swedish) 18 studies: A Low-Carbohydrate Diet Best for Weight Loss

Yes, the cardiologist was of the opinion that I dropped my protein intake too low and that my heart muscle therefore did not have enough protein for muscle repair (I was on a high volume / high intensity training regime). I have upped my protein intake significantly and I lowered my training intensity and volume, but sadly my resting HR is still floating around the mid 80's so I am going back to see another cardiologist on 13 June.. I am thus beginning to doubt if too low protein was the real cause of my high HR.... For reference I will try to repost my link to "Fat of the Land" - the story of the anthropologist who spent years with the Eskimos - and they survived basically on blubber with very low protein intake.... go figure.

Thirty Grams of Carbs in Two Ways April 17 8:02 in Low Carb High Fat http://www.kostdoktorn.se/wp-content/2013/04/301.jpg Both pictures contain 30 grams of carbs – a daily intake while eating moderately strict LCHF. Which would you choose? In other words: avoid the major sources of carbs (sweets, bread, pasta, rice and potatoes). Then you can enjoy plenty of other good food and still get a good effect on your weight and health. Pictures from this Swedish blog PS Really carb-sensitive people and those who want the maximum effect of LCHF can benefit from keeping the carb intake below 20 grams a day (maybe even lower). They need to be careful not to eat too much carrots, nuts or berries. Read more: LCHF for beginners

For me a carb is a carb is a carb... But then again, I drink fat for breakfast, so what do I know ? Spare yourself the trouble, just count total carbs !