Lingering questions about the keto diet

Okay, the genesis of my new dieting thread may take some time before it sees the light of day.  It actually is an important topic for me because I want to do one slow clean bulk and one slow muscle-sparing cut, if I'm to compete successfully next summer.  I have no fewer than ten articles from Marc David, danmirage, and others recommended by DBB members regarding diet, including keto.  I know those articles may not represent peer-reviewed research in all instances, but I'm going to read them with an open mind.  All I can offer are my thoughts and questions.  I'm not a scientist.  But the view of all of this from the perspective of a "typical" less-than-totally-informed bodybuilder who wants safe results, would, in my opinion, be beneficial to at least some on this forum.

Until then, while reading an article Marc David recommends, Prepare to Win, by Layne Norton (on BulkNutrition.com) I am fascinated by two issues that may pertain to the keto diet:

*  The article mentions the side effect of dehydration while on a low-carb diet because water use is increased in the conversion of dietary protein for energy.  My question is:  How much of the perceived fat loss is actually water loss?  Does the body look leaner in part due to the reduction/elimination of the subcutaneous water layer?

*   The article also mentions that those on a low-carb diet long-term, become conditioned to the diet (If I'm reading the article right) and I wonder whether the diet has to be taken to further extremes as time goes on to achieve similar results.  Also, the article mentions that once people come off of a long-term low-carb diet, and introduce carbs back into the diet, fat gain can be considerable.  Well, let me just quote from the article:

Furthermore, it is interesting to note that long-term exposure of cells to ketones (i.e., ketogenic diet) retards insulin-induced activation of the insulin surface receptor.  This causes one to become extremely sensitive to carbohydrates when they begin ingesting them again after they finish dieting and could lead to an undesired post-diet fat gain.

Now these articles always bring up a question for me:  Are they talking about a 24/7 low-carb diet, or does the diet they're talking about include the carb-up days?  When someone says the "ketogenic diet," are the carb-up days automatically a part of it?  Or is the question moot?

Does anyone have any science, anecdotal evidence, or opinion whether the keto diet results in water loss which is perceived to be fat loss, or have undesired rebound fat gain after going off the keto diet?  Those are my lingering questions as of now.

Again, I'll read the papers I have and come up with a thread that will address my issues for best ways to diet for a slow clean bulk and a sane, safe, muscle-sparing cut.  Thanks guys!  Looking forward to a friendly discussion!  :)

When it's an article on keto for bodybuilding, I imagine it's nearly always about some carb-cycling variation.  Gotta replenish that glycogen, otherwise you'll be a zombie in the gym.

As for the water loss, yes, it can make look leaner than you "should."  The amount of water loss that results in a perceived fat loss isn't exactly quantifiable, and I imagine it's a little different for everyone.  But someone else might be able to give you a better idea.

Some strategies people use to overcome plateaus on keto are: changing the nutrient quality of food (e.g. decrease sat fat, increase unsat fat), taking a week's break from the diet, changing the length of the carb load, improving the quality of the carb load, carb loading less frequently, attempting to achieve keto more quickly... Out of those, I'm not sure what works best, I'm just pulling these from a book.

I was gonna do a little copy/paste concerning a few health issues from the book, but the formatting didn't transfer right, and I'm sleepy and don't feel like dealing with it.. so I'll do it while I have nothing better to do at work tomorrow.

rofl i just noticed your new title. 

nice.

I''l post my post Keto summery, but i am totally over extended at work right now. I finished up this Sunday, weening back onto carbs as we speak... I tool a whole host of measurements to compare, and have thoughts and observations, that can answer your questions, although they are purely from my experiance. But iti si going to take me a few days to get around to this... and at least byt them I will ahve some post keto, ransition info, observations to reflect on as well.

JMBS


Okay, the genesis of my new dieting thread may take some time before it sees the light of day.  It actually is an important topic for me because I want to do one slow clean bulk and one slow muscle-sparing cut, if I'm to compete successfully next summer.  I have no fewer than ten articles from Marc David, danmirage, and others recommended by DBB members regarding diet, including keto.  I know those articles may not represent peer-reviewed research in all instances, but I'm going to read them with an open mind.  All I can offer are my thoughts and questions.  I'm not a scientist.  But the view of all of this from the perspective of a "typical" less-than-totally-informed bodybuilder who wants safe results, would, in my opinion, be beneficial to at least some on this forum.

Until then, while reading an article Marc David recommends, Prepare to Win, by Layne Norton (on BulkNutrition.com) I am fascinated by two issues that may pertain to the keto diet:

*  The article mentions the side effect of dehydration while on a low-carb diet because water use is increased in the conversion of dietary protein for energy.  My question is:  How much of the perceived fat loss is actually water loss?  Does the body look leaner in part due to the reduction/elimination of the subcutaneous water layer?

Below 5% bodyfat (where most professional bodybuilders compete), the effect of subcutaneous water becomes more of a factor than it ever would for someone merely training to look and be fit.  I would venture to opine that it is significant enough that you could affect a visible improvement in definition equivalent to at least a full percentage point or two of body fat proper (I say that knowing full well the futility of trying to quantify a "perceived" state of anything).  I base that opinion on the sheer number of hydration-related complications you see pro BB'ers flirting with on stage -people collapsing after a posing round, or severely cramping up during it.  The answer is, yes, it plays a big part in final appearance, but a better question would be is it worth the risk?  Aparently, there are a lot of people willing to roll the dice.

As to the role of dehydration in keto, I agree that it's a consequence of the protein-for-energy conversion process, but it does not necessarily follow that one uses a keto regimen specifically to accomplish subcutaneous water loss. [edit: because there are much easier and faster ways to accomplish that]

*   The article also mentions that those on a low-carb diet long-term, become conditioned to the diet (If I'm reading the article right) and I wonder whether the diet has to be taken to further extremes as time goes on to achieve similar results.  Also, the article mentions that once people come off of a long-term low-carb diet, and introduce carbs back into the diet, fat gain can be considerable.  Well, let me just quote from the article:

Furthermore, it is interesting to note that long-term exposure of cells to ketones (i.e., ketogenic diet) retards insulin-induced activation of the insulin surface receptor.  This causes one to become extremely sensitive to carbohydrates when they begin ingesting them again after they finish dieting and could lead to an undesired post-diet fat gain.

Now these articles always bring up a question for me:  Are they talking about a 24/7 low-carb diet, or does the diet they're talking about include the carb-up days?  When someone says the "ketogenic diet," are the carb-up days automatically a part of it?  Or is the question moot?

Does anyone have any science, anecdotal evidence, or opinion whether the keto diet results in water loss which is perceived to be fat loss, or have undesired rebound fat gain after going off the keto diet?  Those are my lingering questions as of now.

Again, I'll read the papers I have and come up with a thread that will address my issues for best ways to diet for a slow clean bulk and a sane, safe, muscle-sparing cut.  Thanks guys!  Looking forward to a friendly discussion!  :)

I should think that any time you upset the balance of macronutrients in your diet to prefer one drastically over the others, you risk a backlash effect when you reverse the imbalance.  The same is true for any other metabolic function: provide enough exogenous testosterone for long enough, and your body will stop making its own.  Deprive your body of carbs often and long enough, your body will forget how to respond to a steady stream of them.  I should also think that the volume of statistics and research available on Type II diabetes would send up a great big red flag to anyone planning to mess with their insulin response on that scale.

But this goes to any kind of diet really.

My home away from DBB

So all in all this is getting to this point:

Keto should never be long term
Keto does work

I love the diet because it is so damn easy to count calories, tastes great, never hungry, and feel better without carbs. With that said, it still seems like I am setting myself up for a heart attack later on. I wish njmuscle or someone could come back and just post up. He was on like a life time keto diet. It's all he did if I recall correctly. Maybe he died prematurely.

Keto works wonders. Although eating became a chore when i was on it, i.e. i was never hungry, but i knew i had to eat. It is true however that keto tastes amazing, the statement about feeling better without carbs is false imo, but im sure that varies from person to person. All i know is i lost 25 lbs in about a month and a half, pretty damn good. My strength increased as well, however, not to the extent of bulking obviously.

BULKING LIKE A BEAST! AND IT FEELS SOOOOO GOOD!

Supps: 100% Whey protein, Creatine Ethyl Ester, Fish Oil, Jack3d

Thanks, all, for your input.  Very informative!  I can't wait to start reading my articles with better focus than I did the first time through.  Thx again!  :)

Yo vegg, would you mind posting some studies or research that links keto to type II diabetes?  If you did it in that other post, I must have missed it sifting through the junk.

I'm not trying to link Low-Carb Ketogenic Diets (LCKDs) to type II diabetes.  Perhaps I should have stated that hypothetical more clearly: I think there is enough science out there to show that chronic drastic variations in insulin release have profound implications for hyperinsulinemia.  I personally don't know how much screwing around it takes, but I am more than willing to bet money that we amplify the danger by following several days of carb depletion with a binge.

From a PRO-LCKD study (Yes, I read those too ):

"Low Carbohydrate Nutrition & Metabolism", American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Vol. 86 No.2 276-284

Insulin resistance is reduced with an LCKD, possibly by a reduction in the availability of dietary glucose, which causes hyperinsulinemia. A consideration of the physiology of very-low-carbohydrate dieting leads to a different perspective on insulin resistance. That is, rather than treating insulin resistance by increasing glucose disposal through an increase in nonstorage cellular influx (eg, by increasing either the insulin dose or its effect), it could be treated by reducing glucose availability to insulin-resistant tissue (eg, by reducing carbohydrate intake or absorption and basal hepatic glucose output), which would reduce the nonstorage cellular influx. Reductions in dietary carbohydrate should be used as a strategy to treat insulin resistance.

This is where my assertion about a backlash applies.  If you apply what most clinicians would consider an aggressive treatment for insulin resistance to a person who is not in fact insulin resistant, I should think that sets their body up to overreact to carbs when they do finally get them.

My home away from DBB

What happened to the why you shouldn't do it thread? I was gone for two days and when I  came back it disappeared.

Red PittBull's Log.

Here is an excerpt from The Ketogenic Diet: A Complete Guide for the Dieter and Practitioner by Lyle McDonald.  His opinion seems to be that keto is a safe diet for most healthy adults, but here he points out some complications that can arise for some people under certain conditions...




Like any dietary approach, the ketogenic diet is not universally applicable. Individuals
with certain preexisting medical conditions should seriously consider whether an extreme
approach such as the ketogenic diet is appropriate. Although little data is available on this topic,
some major conditions which might preclude the use of a ketogenic diet are discussed below.


Kidney problems
Although no data exists to suggest that the ‘high protein’ nature of a ketogenic diet is
problematic for individuals with normal kidney functioning, high protein intake may cause
problems for individuals with preexisting conditions. Therefore, individuals who are prone to
kidney stones should seriously consider whether the ketogenic diet is appropriate for them. The
slight dehydration which occurs coupled with a high protein intake may increase the risk of
stones. For individuals on the ketogenic diet, it is imperative to drink sufficient water and to be
aware of the potential for problems.


Diabetes
As previously discussed, Type I (insulin dependent) diabetics may have problems with
ketoacidosis if insulin levels drop too low. Since these individuals rely on injections to normalize
insulin, a ketogenic diet conceivably poses no problems. However, the lack of carbohydrates, as
well as changes in insulin sensitivity, on a ketogenic diet will affect insulin requirements (1). Any
Type I diabetic who wishes to try a lowered carbohydrate diet must consult with their physician
or health provider to determine changes in their insulin regimen.
Type II (non-insulin dependent) diabetics are frequently drawn to low carbohydrate or
ketogenic diets as they may help to control blood glucose and insulin levels (2). Individuals with
severe hyperinsulinemia and/or hypoglycemia will need to be careful when implementing a
ketogenic diet to avoid problems with blood sugar crashes and related difficulties.
Individuals with Type II diabetes may have greater difficulty establishing ketosis, as some
data suggests that liver glycogen is more difficult to deplete (3,4). Additionally, it has been found
that obese individuals, who typically suffer from insulin resistance, have greater difficulty
establishing ketosis (5). This points even more to the importance of exercise to help deplete liver
glycogen and establish ketosis.


Coronary artery disease/high cholesterol
The impact of a ketogenic diet on blood cholesterol is discussed in detail in chapter 7. For
many individuals, the ketogenic diet causes an improvement in blood lipid levels, especially in
cases where bodyfat is lost. However, this is not a universal finding. Individuals with diagnosed
coronary artery disease or high blood cholesterol must monitor their blood lipid levels for negative
changes. Individuals who show negative changes can try decreasing saturated fat intake, while
increasing unsaturated fat. Additionally, a fiber supplement may be helpful. If blood cholesterol
levels continue to respond negatively, the ketogenic diet should be abandoned.


Gout
Individuals with a past history or genetic propensity for gout should seriously consider
whether or not a ketogenic diet is appropriate. As discussed previously, a rise in uric acid levels
occurs when the ketogenic diet is started and this may trigger gout in predisposed individuals.
Since even small amounts of dietary carbohydrates (5% of total calories) appear to alleviate
problems with uric acid buildup, a less restrictive ketogenic diet may be possible for individuals
who are prone to gout.


Pregnancy
This author is unaware of any research looking specifically at the effects of the ketogenic
diet in pregnant humans. However, malformations of the neural tube occur with increased
frequency in diabetic mothers and exposure of pregnant female rats to high ketone levels can
increase the risk of these same neural tube defects, suggesting that ketones may be a cause (6).
Additionally, it appears that glucose is the primary fuel for the developing fetus (7).
Considering the above data, as well as the potential harm which might occur to an unborn
child, a ketogenic diet is not considered appropriate during pregnancy. In fact, any diet whose aim
is weight or fat loss is inappropriate during pregnancy as diet should be optimal to support the
developing fetus and the mother.


Epilepsy
Although the ketogenic diet has shown great impact in the treatment of childhood epilepsy,
the diet used for epilepsy is significantly different than the diet described in this book.
Additionally, implementation of the ketogenic diet for therapeutic purposes requires medical
supervision. Under no circumstances should individuals attempt to implement the ketogenic diet
for the treatment of epilepsy without medical supervision.


Adolescents
Although the epileptic diet is used in children under the age of 10, its use in adolescents is
less well studied. From the standpoint of fat loss, the pediatric epilepsy diet is used for weight loss
if necessary, by adjusting calories (8). Additionally, the protein sparing modified fast has shown
some benefits in treating morbid childhood obesity (9). Although adolescent obesity is increasing,
parents should be careful in self-administering diets, due to the possibility of stunted or altered
growth. Due to the lack of data on the CKD, and due to the hormonal fluctuations which occur,
its use is not recommended in adolescents.


Summary
There are certain medical conditions which either directly preclude the use of the ketogenic
diet, or that warrant serious consideration prior to beginning such a diet. While there is no data
for a majority of disease states, individuals should exercise caution prior to making any large
scale changes in diet. When in doubt, the proper medical authorities should be consulted and no
self-diagnosis should be made.

Snatchula,
    Very informative post!  Thank you!!!

A few "take aways" for me:

*  There apparently IS research on the safety of the ketogenic diet.  It would be good to find that research and scrutinize it.

*  The author of this book seems to have done his homework.  He doesn't recklessly offer up this diet as the be-all-end-all to all the world's problems.  At least that page of the book evidences a sane sobriety to the whole topic. 

*  The author recommends monitoring of cholesterol levels and the watchful eye of competent medical supervision, at least under certain conditions.  I would think that ANYONE should get at least an annual physical with blood work, not just those on an "extreme" diet (word the author used).

*  The author only seems to touch on problems that might develop for certain compromised individuals who are considering undertaking this diet.  He doesn't really go into problems that might develop for an otherwise normal and healthy individual who follows this regimen.

Does the book mention any of the following?:

#  Recommended testing and medical monitoring for those following this diet to detect any complications of following it.

#  Precautions to be taking.  Common pitfalls.  I'm guessing it does because there is a warning to stay hydrated.

#  Anything at all about whether long-term duration of the diet is condoned.  Is cycling on/off/on it recommended. 

#  Anything about problems to be anticipated when going off the diet, such as fat gain.

#  Any advice about when to stop the diet or to lessen the extremity of it, such as when body fat levels get down to a certain threshold.

#  Any advice on alternative diets for those who are not advised to follow the keto diet.  Probably beyond the scope of the book.

Thanks again, Snatchula!  I, personally, like the seriousness this thread is taking.  It has already proven educational for me, and I hope to others as well!  :)

Here ya go, Jack.  The National Center for Biotechnology Information posted the following on PubMed:

"Efficacy and Safety of Low Carbohydrate Diets: A Systematic Review" Journal of the American Medical Association, 4/9/2003, 289(14) 1837-50


CONTEXT: Low-carbohydrate diets have been popularized without detailed evidence of their efficacy or safety. The literature has no clear consensus as to what amount of carbohydrates per day constitutes a low-carbohydrate diet. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate changes in weight, serum lipids, fasting serum glucose, and fasting serum insulin levels, and blood pressure among adults using low-carbohydrate diets in the outpatient setting. DATA SOURCES: We performed MEDLINE and bibliographic searches for English-language studies published between January 1, 1966, and February 15, 2003, with key words such as low carbohydrate, ketogenic, and diet. STUDY SELECTION: We included articles describing adult, outpatient recipients of low-carbohydrate diets of 4 days or more in duration and 500 kcal/d or more, and which reported both carbohydrate content and total calories consumed. Literature searches identified 2609 potentially relevant articles of low-carbohydrate diets. We included 107 articles describing 94 dietary interventions reporting data for 3268 participants; 663 participants received diets of 60 g/d or less of carbohydrates--of whom only 71 received 20 g/d or less of carbohydrates. Study variables (eg, number of participants, design of dietary evaluation), participant variables (eg, age, sex, baseline weight, fasting serum glucose level), diet variables (eg, carbohydrate content, caloric content, duration) were abstracted from each study. DATA EXTRACTION: Two authors independently reviewed articles meeting inclusion criteria and abstracted data onto pretested abstraction forms. DATA SYNTHESIS: The included studies were highly heterogeneous with respect to design, carbohydrate content (range, 0-901 g/d), total caloric content (range, 525-4629 kcal/d), diet duration (range, 4-365 days), and participant characteristics (eg, baseline weight range, 57-217 kg). No study evaluated diets of 60 g/d or less of carbohydrates in participants with a mean age older than 53.1 years. Only 5 studies (nonrandomized and no comparison groups) evaluated these diets for more than 90 days. Among obese patients, weight loss was associated with longer diet duration (P =.002), restriction of calorie intake (P =.03), but not with reduced carbohydrate content (P =.90). Low-carbohydrate diets had no significant adverse effect on serum lipid, fasting serum glucose, and fasting serum insulin levels, or blood pressure. CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence to make recommendations for or against the use of low-carbohydrate diets, particularly among participants older than age 50 years, for use longer than 90 days, or for diets of 20 g/d or less of carbohydrates. Among the published studies, participant weight loss while using low-carbohydrate diets was principally associated with decreased caloric intake and increased diet duration but not with reduced carbohydrate content.

Sounds like these authors don't want to take sides either way, but then they do admit that the variety of published studies that are available are "highly heterogeneous" and several lacked proper scientific controls. I'm trying to find the New England Journal of Medicine study I read last night -rather interesting... the crux of it was that (for obese subjects), LCKDs resulted in more rapid weight loss in the short-term (3 to six months) than conventional diets, but they also found that LCKDs suffered from higher attrition, and the advantages completely dissipated by the 12th month, where the conventional diets ended up yielding the same results.  Finally, they concluded that the weight loss achieved on the LCKD was harder to maintain once the subject transitioned back to a more balanced macronutrient approach, and nearly all the LCKD dieters gained all the weight back.

So in other words, the LCKD may get you there faster, but it's harder to stick to it, and the results are harder to keep once you go back to a normal fat/protein/carb balance.

Again and again, when you dig into the reviews of LCKD's you see researchers hedging their bets that the weight loss was attributed to lower caloric intake (not the preponderance of protein in the discipline), and the reduced focus on processed, refined carbs (with their attendant adverse effects on insulin metabolism).  They also attribute a lot of the short-term improvements in blood lipids to the weight loss and overall improvement in body composition -not the macronutrient profile, per se.

My home away from DBB

Veg,
   Very interesting, and pretty much what my intuition was telling me.  Question:  Whenever I see "CKD," "LCKD," or "keto," they are all referring to the ketogenic diet consisting of low carbs for several days, followed by a day or two of carb loading?  Just want to make sure we're talking about apples consistently and not confusing oranges for them.

   Is a lot of the "research" biased by the interest of the "researcher," or is there independent, peer-reviewed research out there with sound foundation?

I don't think any of the "traditional" LCKDs out there include anything as outlandish as a weekly carbohydrate binge.  I think that's pretty much the exclusive domain of people who would choose this type of diet for it's mass-building properties.

As for the studies I've read, yes, all the "clinical trials" I've seen so far (both pro and against LCKD) were organized and published by researchers who were trying to prove a conclusion or premise they had already agreed to defend.  You don't see anyone setting out to prove the safety of LCKDs and finding the opposite, or vice versa.

That's where peer-review comes in -like the JAMA review cited above, where a group of (presumably) objective scientists sit down and compare the available research and look for flaws in method or conclusions.  When they do that, they find plenty of selectivity and haste on both sides, but every review like this that I've read also shows that pro-LCKD researchers take much greater liberties with their methodology and draw wilder, more far-reaching conclusions from their data than those studying conventional diets.

My home away from DBB

...and that's to be expected, frankly.  I think it is human nature to grasp at whatever justifications, conclusions, or connections one can find (no matter how tenuous or suspect) to defend something controversial or novel.

That's the whole point of peer review: to temper scientific exuberance with reason and to foster academic rigor -not to stymie enthusiasm.  There's plenty of room for enthusiasm in science, but we shouldn't be so eager to revel in it that we settle for sloppy research just to get there faster.

My home away from DBB

Off topic, but I was living in Salt Lake City (My BS is from the Univ. of Utah) when the whole Cold Fusion orgasm was going on.  What an embarrassment that turned out to be!

I'm reading that Prepare to Win article (have you read it?).  I think the thrust of the whole article concerns the final cut and preparation for doing a show, but a question:  Should nutrition principles be similar during bulk, cut, or maintenance.  Is it "what's good for the goose is good for the gander"?  At that point is it just adjustment of calories above, below, or at maintenance?

Also the article talk about re-feeding which I see as similar, if perhaps not as extreme, as the carb-up weekends of keto.  Would there be similar health concerns doing that?  Something to do with leptins.  When I get time I'll read more.  But what's your take on re-feeding?

Also goes into detail about nutrient timing at least some of which we're all familiar:  Carbs on waking up, pre-, during-, and post-workout carbs and protein, no carbs and slow-digesting protein overnight.  But it goes into detail about when to consume your allotment of macronutrients (particularly carbs) throughout the day, and different strategies for workout and non-workout days.  It all sounds pretty, well, sound.  Thoughts?

JMBS


Okay, the genesis of my new dieting thread may take some time before it sees the light of day.  It actually is an important topic for me because I want to do one slow clean bulk and one slow muscle-sparing cut, if I'm to compete successfully next summer.  I have no fewer than ten articles from Marc David, danmirage, and others recommended by DBB members regarding diet, including keto.  I know those articles may not represent peer-reviewed research in all instances, but I'm going to read them with an open mind.  All I can offer are my thoughts and questions.  I'm not a scientist.  But the view of all of this from the perspective of a "typical" less-than-totally-informed bodybuilder who wants safe results, would, in my opinion, be beneficial to at least some on this forum.

Until then, while reading an article Marc David recommends, Prepare to Win, by Layne Norton (on BulkNutrition.com) I am fascinated by two issues that may pertain to the keto diet:

*  The article mentions the side effect of dehydration while on a low-carb diet because water use is increased in the conversion of dietary protein for energy.  My question is:  How much of the perceived fat loss is actually water loss?  Does the body look leaner in part due to the reduction/elimination of the subcutaneous water layer?

*   The article also mentions that those on a low-carb diet long-term, become conditioned to the diet (If I'm reading the article right) and I wonder whether the diet has to be taken to further extremes as time goes on to achieve similar results.  Also, the article mentions that once people come off of a long-term low-carb diet, and introduce carbs back into the diet, fat gain can be considerable.  Well, let me just quote from the article:

Furthermore, it is interesting to note that long-term exposure of cells to ketones (i.e., ketogenic diet) retards insulin-induced activation of the insulin surface receptor.  This causes one to become extremely sensitive to carbohydrates when they begin ingesting them again after they finish dieting and could lead to an undesired post-diet fat gain.

Now these articles always bring up a question for me:  Are they talking about a 24/7 low-carb diet, or does the diet they're talking about include the carb-up days?  When someone says the "ketogenic diet," are the carb-up days automatically a part of it?  Or is the question moot?

Does anyone have any science, anecdotal evidence, or opinion whether the keto diet results in water loss which is perceived to be fat loss, or have undesired rebound fat gain after going off the keto diet?  Those are my lingering questions as of now.

Again, I'll read the papers I have and come up with a thread that will address my issues for best ways to diet for a slow clean bulk and a sane, safe, muscle-sparing cut.  Thanks guys!  Looking forward to a friendly discussion!  :)

The reason low carb dieters/keto dieters lose like 15-20 pounds(depending on your weight) in the first week is all due to water loss. Carbohydrates can hold a significant amount of water while fats which are hydrophobic and only hold a small amount of water. So when you stop eating carbohydrates your body does not store nearly as much water.

The other reason people piss all the time on Keto is because the body has to rid itself of the build up of ketone bodies which can be toxic if they are not excreted. This can also lead to  electrolyte imbalance and kidney strain due to the extra workload they are facing.

RJ,
   Thanks!  I am learning so much here!  This is awesome!  :)

I'm sure water loss and digestive content weight loss (stomach and intestines) are significant with any diet, no?  Since I'm bulking, I feel I've always got quite the load in my belly and gut.  But since a low-carb diet severely limits carbs, I could see how water loss would be greater with such diets.

RJ,  could the kidney strain you mention be monitored with simple blood/urine tests? 

Good info RedJeep. Props.

ACE-CPT, NASM-CPT, AFPA-Nutrition Consultant 

JMBS


RJ,
   Thanks!  I am learning so much here!  This is awesome!  :)

I'm sure water loss and digestive content weight loss (stomach and intestines) are significant with any diet, no?  Since I'm bulking, I feel I've always got quite the load in my belly and gut.  But since a low-carb diet severely limits carbs, I could see how water loss would be greater with such diets.

RJ,  could the kidney strain you mention be monitored with simple blood/urine tests? 

Hey sorry I did not see this before. From what I know, No because there wouldn't really be anything abnormal about either test. It wouldn't be like trying to detect an infection and having a high white blood cell count. Abnormalities would likely appear only after  long term stress. I wouldn't worry about it too much.

I think that carb cycling is a much better way to approach fat loss if you are intent on doing it with periods of carbohydrate deficiency.

Again, this is my opinion based on what I know about physiology and biochemistry. Others may not agree.