LCHF - Low Carb High Fat Diet Ver 2

[tombeej]

One question for everyone out there...

 

Why do we say LCHF/Paleo, as if the Paleo diet is not LCHF (somehow separate)?

 

Surely there are two main branches of LCHF:

 

1. The Keto diet (who very strict/extreme version - goal is to try live permanently in ketosis)

2. The Paleo diet (more relaxed version, no need to always be in ketosis, still enjoy a relative abundance of fruits, nuts, seeds, etc.)

 

Thoughts?

Edited June 6, 2013 by tombeej

[Cois]

Just a side not. Just spotted this in a cook book.

Paleo Diet ratio:

31% Protein

38% Fats

31% Carbs...

 

Paleo Diet 2002 by Loren Cordain

[tombeej]

Just a side not. Just spotted this in a cook book.

Paleo Diet ratio:

31% Protein

38% Fats

31% Carbs...

 

Paleo Diet 2002 by Loren Cordain

 

That is just Loren Cordain's own preferred ratio; there is no prescribed fat/protein/carb ratio in Paleo.

 

For example, here's a nice summary response from someone to the same question posed elsewhere on the interwebs:

 

"The ratios depends on the person. For example, I run better on more fat and less carbs than the zone, so my ratios are around 30-35% protein, 50-60% fat, and 10-15% carbs. Tweak until you find a good ratio and wait at least 3-4 weeks until making changes, so you can see if one set of ratios works well or not."

 

(Edit: my own fat ratio ranges from 50 - 90%, doesn't follow a strict ratio at all).

 

This raises a question for me, though.... At which point can a person say they're on a HF diet - when fat intake is higher than carb intake? In other words, like in François' example, is that person on a high fat diet (38% fat vs 31% carb)??

Edited June 6, 2013 by tombeej

[davetapson]

Surely there are two main branches of LCHF:

 

1. The Keto diet (who very strict/extreme version - goal is to try live permanently in ketosis)

2. The Paleo diet (more relaxed version, no need to always be in ketosis, still enjoy a relative abundance of fruits, nuts, seeds, etc.)

 

Thoughts?

 

Yep, that's how I see it.

 

However, I think the Paleo crew (Mark Sisson etc) see it as 'eat what cavemen would have eaten' (as far as possible). So when they look at a food, they think, 'is this food something a caveman would have eaten?'

 

Keto diet LCHFers look at the label and figure out if the CPF proportions are suitable - not too fussed as to whether cavemen would have eaten it or not e.g. Ucan would probably not be a 'true' paleo food. I suspect Mark Sisson would say that it is allowable on the Paleo diet as it performs as a paleo food would.

 

Question: is Paleo really LCHF?

[DaleE]

To add my 2c here ...

 

Paleo, Keto and LCHF are similar, but they have significant differences.

 

Paleo (as mentioned by Dave) = choose real / whole foods the kind of stuff that the caveman ate. If you cant identify it as food it's not on the list. Paleo is usually (not always) lower in carbs than a standard modern diet, but certainly has carbs in it ... sometimes as much as 100g per day.

There's little talk of macronutrient ratios in the Paleo world ... its more a thought of "listen to your body, eat caveman food, eat when hungry, exercise like a caveman"

Paleo could be LCHF, but does not have to be.

 

LCHF's defining characteristic is that carbs are kept below 50g per day. More thought given to macronutrients than with Paleo, but less thought as to if the food is 'modern' or 'traditional'. By definition, is high in fat, low in carb, moderate in protein.

You may achieve some level of ketosis with this, but ketosis is not a requirement.

No guidelines on exercise, this is just diet stuff.

 

Keto is where you are trying deliberately to get the body into a state of ketosis (generally described as blood ketones between 1 and 7. Too close to 10 and you're nearing ketoacidosis) - and hold it there. This usually for some medical reason (seizure control, etc) or to promote rapid weight loss. Here carbs are even more strictly controlled, including the timing and macronutrient ratio of each and every meal, sources of fats, supplements, etc.

Also, its not unusual for keto diets to be monitored by a doc or dietician to ensure that ketosis stays at an optimal level. I heard of a kid yesterday who is seizure free with blood ketones between 3 and 6, but above or below that and the seizures start again .... ask anyone who has been in ketosis .... THAT's not easy to control.

 

My personal experience is that a true keto diet is damn hard. Any fool can get to ketosis in 2-3 weeks, staying there permanently is not for the feint hearted!

I guess that most folk here are somewhere between Paleo and LCHF. From the posts here, there is general consensus that sugar and processed foods are bad, whole foods are good, and carb restriction helps with a plethora of medical conditions. Also LCHF and Paleo allow some room for 'treats' (I prefer the term treats to cheats) ... keto does not.

Edited June 6, 2013 by DaleE

[Cois]

I see. I need to get some Ketostix. Wonder if I am in Ketosis. But I sinned against the way of LCHF... Went way over the carb intake that I want...

[tombeej]

I see. I need to get some Ketostix. Wonder if I am in Ketosis. But I sinned against the way of LCHF... Went way over the carb intake that I want...

 

AFAIK it's much better to measure blood ketones instead of trying to rely on urine count?

 

This is an interesting read: Why You Need To Stop Worrying About The Color Of Your Ketostix

[tombeej]

Ok to flip the LCHF/Paleo/Keto question around a bit - let's come in from the carb angle.

 

As someone who identifies with the Paleo lifestyle, I follow someone like Mark Sisson most actively (as opposed to a Peter Attia type). In the world of Paleo real unprocessed food is certainly central to the theme. But that doesn't mean the focus is not also a LCHF diet.

 

For example, for me Mark's Carbohydrate Curve is an excellent example of the Paleo view of Carb Intake:

 

The Primal Blueprint Carbohydrate Curve:

 

300 or more grams/day - Danger Zone!

Easy to reach with the “normal” American diet (cereals, pasta, rice, bread, waffles, pancakes, muffins, soft drinks, packaged snacks, sweets, desserts). High risk of excess fat storage, inflammation, increased disease markers including Metabolic Syndrome or diabetes. Sharp reduction of grains and other processed carbs is critical unless you are on the “chronic cardio” treadmill (which has its own major drawbacks).

 

150-300 grams/day – Steady, Insidious Weight Gain

Continued higher insulin-stimulating effect prevents efficient fat burning and contributes to widespread chronic disease conditions. This range – irresponsibly recommended by the USDA and other diet authorities – can lead to the statistical US average gain of 1.5 pounds of fat per year for forty years.

 

100-150 grams/day – Primal Blueprint Maintenance Range

This range based on body weight and activity level. When combined with Primal exercises, allows for genetically optimal fat burning and muscle development. Range derived from Grok’s (ancestors’) example of enjoying abundant vegetables and fruits and avoiding grains and sugars.

 

50-100 grams/day – Primal Sweet Spot for Effortless Weight Loss

Minimizes insulin production and ramps up fat metabolism. By meeting average daily protein requirements (.7 – 1 gram per pound of lean bodyweight formula), eating nutritious vegetables and fruits (easy to stay in 50-100 gram range, even with generous servings), and staying satisfied with delicious high fat foods (meat, fish, eggs, nuts, seeds), you can lose one to two pounds of body fat per week and then keep it off forever by eating in the maintenance range.

 

0-50 grams/day – Ketosis and Accelerated Fat Burning

Acceptable for a day or two of Intermittent Fasting towards aggressive weight loss efforts, provided adequate protein, fat and supplements are consumed otherwise. May be ideal for many diabetics. Not necessarily recommended as a long-term practice for otherwise healthy people due to resultant deprivation of high nutrient value vegetables and fruits (tombeej's underlining).

 

(Edited usual grammar issues).

Edited June 6, 2013 by tombeej

[HDW]

Very interesting, Tombeej!

 

So, this made me wonder - if you are not aiming to better a current health problem, would it make sense to aim to constantly be in the Ketosis group of

 

Edit:

 

This sucks - typed a super long msg and my phone cut it off at the above. Anyway, comes down to asking wether there are any real benefits of staying under 50g of carbs a day if not for medical reasons? Will my endurance performance be really affected if I move to the next group, lets say between 50 and 100g of carbs a day?

 

Thanks!!

Edited June 6, 2013 by HDW

[HappyMartin]

Very informative Tombeej.

[Grondpad]

If anyone is interested, here is a free ebook from authoritynutrition

 

http://authoritynutrition.com/food-addiction/

[tombeej]

Very interesting, Tombeej!

 

So, this made me wonder - if you are not aiming to better a current health problem, would it make sense to aim to constantly be in the Ketosis group of

 

Edit:

 

This sucks - typed a super long msg and my phone cut it off at the above. Anyway, comes down to asking wether there are any real benefits of staying under 50g of carbs a day if not for medical reasons? Will my endurance performance be really affected if I move to the next group, lets say between 50 and 100g of carbs a day?

 

Thanks!!

 

And that's been my question too, even through the old version of this thread, i.e. if you do not have a medical condition that calls for such strict carb restrictions, why the need to go so low over the long term? (Note: I still see a lot of value in going very low in s/t bursts).

 

Noakes himself says he eats around 50-75 grams of carbohydrates a day in general.

 

We have discussed at length the benefit of starting very strict in the beginning. The stricter the better for some of us (I did the same). To get over any sugar addictions/bad habits developed, to accelerate the adaptation process that your body must initially go through, etc. Say, for the first few months (and no cheats!). But racing performance does suffer.

 

Some of us find that after 6 months or so, we benefit from adding back certain carbs into our diet, like low GI fruit, more low carb vegies with our main meals (like broccoli, cauliflower, cabbage, spinach, etc), certain nuts/seeds (macadamias, walnuts, almonds, etc.).

 

It's a personal experiment to see where your happy equilibrium lies. You might find that if you go over 70 - 80 grams of carbs a day, you start to go backwards (old habits creeping back, the carb monster starts to wake up in the evenings, etc.). Another person might be very comfortable at around 100 - 120 grams of carbs a day. Then again, you might very well thrive at very low levels, i.e. below 50 grams a day.

 

My point, which I've raised a few times before (my apologies if I'm being repetitive) is that we shouldn't just see carbs as some kind of enemy. Just as not all fats are good, certainly not all carbs are bad. And the amount of carbs we eat a day is also not set in stone.

 

Have a super Friday

[Grondpad]

A quick question on Ketones and Maffetones technique

 

The last week I have done all my training in the 180 – age zone. On the weekend I tested with the Ketostix and it was dark purple. During the week it stopped and today there isn’t even ‘trace’. Can this be due to training in the aerobic zone? We know that your it’s better to test ketone levels in the blood and that the body does become more efficient in using the ketones over time so less will be excreted. Am I correct in saying that his might be the cause of the change in testing with Ketostix? My diet was 80:15:5 (FPC) this week thus far

[TLW]

Guys, you are freaking me out... do you SERIOUSLY check out the ratios of what you eat on a DAILY/Meal-by-meal basis? no frigging way... that's too hard for me. So I guess I can't really say that I am LCHF then?

 

Anyway, someone asked why we would do LCHF if it wasnt to remedy a health situation... I dont have a health issue (other than carb intolerance), but even so - I feel SO much better (and am enjoying the fat on my rump steak AND I am eating lamb for the first time in donkey's years )

[davetapson]

Ok to flip the LCHF/Paleo/Keto question around a bit - let's come in from the carb angle.

 

As someone who identifies with the Paleo lifestyle, I follow someone like Mark Sisson most actively (as opposed to a Peter Attia type). In the world of Paleo real unprocessed food is certainly central to the theme. But that doesn't mean the focus is not also a LCHF diet.

 

For example, for me Mark's Carbohydrate Curve is an excellent example of the Paleo view of Carb Intake:

 

The Primal Blueprint Carbohydrate Curve:

 

300 or more grams/day - Danger Zone!

Easy to reach with the “normal” American diet (cereals, pasta, rice, bread, waffles, pancakes, muffins, soft drinks, packaged snacks, sweets, desserts). High risk of excess fat storage, inflammation, increased disease markers including Metabolic Syndrome or diabetes. Sharp reduction of grains and other processed carbs is critical unless you are on the “chronic cardio” treadmill (which has its own major drawbacks).

 

150-300 grams/day – Steady, Insidious Weight Gain

Continued higher insulin-stimulating effect prevents efficient fat burning and contributes to widespread chronic disease conditions. This range – irresponsibly recommended by the USDA and other diet authorities – can lead to the statistical US average gain of 1.5 pounds of fat per year for forty years.

 

100-150 grams/day – Primal Blueprint Maintenance Range

This range based on body weight and activity level. When combined with Primal exercises, allows for genetically optimal fat burning and muscle development. Range derived from Grok’s (ancestors’) example of enjoying abundant vegetables and fruits and avoiding grains and sugars.

 

50-100 grams/day – Primal Sweet Spot for Effortless Weight Loss

Minimizes insulin production and ramps up fat metabolism. By meeting average daily protein requirements (.7 – 1 gram per pound of lean bodyweight formula), eating nutritious vegetables and fruits (easy to stay in 50-100 gram range, even with generous servings), and staying satisfied with delicious high fat foods (meat, fish, eggs, nuts, seeds), you can lose one to two pounds of body fat per week and then keep it off forever by eating in the maintenance range.

 

0-50 grams/day – Ketosis and Accelerated Fat Burning

Acceptable for a day or two of Intermittent Fasting towards aggressive weight loss efforts, provided adequate protein, fat and supplements are consumed otherwise. May be ideal for many diabetics. Not necessarily recommended as a long-term practice for otherwise healthy people due to resultant deprivation of high nutrient value vegetables and fruits (tombeej's underlining).

 

(Edited usual grammar issues).

 

Got to love Mark Sisson. Dude puts in the effort others only dream of.

 

I have to admit, I'm pretty ambivalent re the ketosis thing. Volek & Co in New Atkins for a New You say that you should start in their fairly stringent induction phase, and then slowly add back carbs until your weightloss stabilises.

 

I think that this is what Noakes did.

 

Doesn't sweat over ketosis or not.

[Wet Ears]

DaleE, you say that "where you are trying deliberately to get the body into a state of ketosis carbs are even more strictly controlled, including the timing and macronutrient ratio of each and every meal, sources of fats, supplements, etc."

Would you mind elaborating, as I simply eat what I feel like i.e. this morning had steak for breakkie and will probably have an omlette for dinner. I simply look at my daily intake. If I want to be in ketosis do I need to eat something specific at every meal?