> K.C. is a director of TdeltaS Ltd., a company spun out of the University of Oxford to develop products based on the science of ketone bodies in human nutrition.
passwordoops 8 minutes ago [-]
Thought it looked too easy and clever just from the abstract
kirykl 8 hours ago [-]
Doing keto long enough however, your kidneys might wear out before your brain
3abiton 7 hours ago [-]
It depends how you do it. My current approach relies on intermittent fasting for 18 hours (save it for coffee and salty water), and accasional 24-36 hours fast (approx every 6-8 weeks). Not a keto diet, but helps with training Ketons.
nandomrumber 6 hours ago [-]
What salt are you using?
moi2388 5 hours ago [-]
I use my tears when I see a cake I’m not allowed to have
penguin_booze 3 hours ago [-]
We now have a new demonstration of autophagy.
random3 5 hours ago [-]
why salty water?
does milk/cream in coffee make it not fasting?
eptcyka 4 hours ago [-]
Anything that kicks off your metabolism will make it not fasting.
aydyn 2 hours ago [-]
Last I read, the evidence that fasting is beneficial beyond the caloric restriction is controversial at best. I would like to see you back up the claim with strong evidence.
> A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials
>"despite these short-term benefits, FBS did not show superior long-term outcomes compared to CCR."
From what I’ve read fasting is more of an intervention for metabolic issues, helping to reduce insulin levels more dramatically. The study you linked to seems to support this.
> However, FBS improved insulin sensitivity, with significant reductions in fasting insulin
The issue, and why I think we’ve seen several high profile fasting advocates stop, is because they weren’t metabolically unhealthy, but were on extreme fasting protocols as if they were.
The way I read it, if you’re significantly overweight and have high insulin levels (type 2 diabetes or pre-diabetes), fasting can help get things under control quickly. However, once a person has regained metabolic flexibility and health, moving to something more balanced is likely a good idea. Just avoiding going back to a lifestyle that leads to chronically high insulin levels. Some amount of fasting probably makes sense, as has been practiced by most major religions in some form for thousands of years, but not to the same extreme as during the intervention.
lm28469 59 minutes ago [-]
Losing weight is only a bonus for me, you could lose weight by following a diet that exclusively consists of eating a cube of sugar every XX minutes if you wanted to. Where fasting shines is that it helps control hunger and energy levels. A normal person in the west is basically always in a fed state (bf, lunch, snack, dinner) to the point it's hard for most people to differentiate thirst from hunger from boredom.
_Algernon_ 1 hours ago [-]
From the same article abstract:
>However, [fasting-based strategies] improved insulin sensitivity, with significant reductions in fasting insulin (-7.46 pmol/L, p = 0.02) and HOMA-IR (-0.14, p = 0.02)
3abiton 3 hours ago [-]
> Anything that kicks off your metabolism will make it not fasting.
That's the key part. Black coffee is key. I also sometimes go with tea or fruit infused water.
random3 4 hours ago [-]
Isn’t a caloric deficit implicitly fasting though? Guessing there’s number of calories / time formula there.
zargon 4 hours ago [-]
Any time you eat calories, you're not fasting.
tossandthrow 2 hours ago [-]
In some paradigms they consider it fasting up to 300kcals a day.
In some paradigms you are not even allowed to drink water and call it fasting.
The word fast means multiple things.
XorNot 2 hours ago [-]
The milk in coffee is a pretty substantial number of calories, particularly if you have a programmer coffee habit.
throwcarsales 5 hours ago [-]
I hear this from barely healthy people all the time. Omg you're having too much lemon juice, too much salt, too much meat, too much butter, too much stinging nettle tea, skipping too many meals, on and on and on.
Yet anyone I finally convince to eat like be literally changes their entire life so positively their entire world view and opinions about the medical field and government changes.
Oh yes I'll worry about my kidney because I've stopped ingesting health destroying chemicals in basically all mass food, and focused on beef and fasting.
fransje26 2 hours ago [-]
Did you know that if you replace coffee with water in the morning, you can remove up to 95% of what little joy you had when you woke up?
al_borland 23 minutes ago [-]
I only recently tried coffee for the first time in my 40s. I didn’t understand the appeal, but I suppose it’s an acquired taste.
What I’ve seen over the years from occasionally being around coffee drinkers in the morning didn’t look like joy. It looked like addicts, unable to function and singularly focused, until they acquired coffee in the morning. When outside of their normal environment with quick and easy coffee, this seemed like an annoying burden to deal with.
I had a caffeine addiction from soda when I was in high school, which I broke in college. It led to chronic headaches if I didn’t have enough. In high school I didn’t put 2 and 2 together to know why I was getting the headaches and my dad was trying to push to take me to a neurologist.
Nothing about my experience with was joyful, nor has it looked like joy when someone wakes up in an unfamiliar city and is frantically looking for the nearest cup of coffee before they can talk about anything else. I’ve seen this from multiple people on multiple occasions.
rexpop 4 hours ago [-]
> the medical field and government
Nothing about industries that have captured legislature?
Bayer/Monsanto (pesticide exposure, water contamination, cancer risk), Tyson Foods (antibiotic resistance, air and water pollution, respiratory illness), American Crystal Sugar Company (obesity, diabetes, heart disease), Koch Industries (pollution, weakened environmental standards), ADM (antibiotic resistance, pollution), Bunge Ltd (antibiotic resistance, pollution), Nutrien (fertilizer runoff, water contamination, cancer risk), Corteva (pesticide exposure, water contamination, cancer risk).
carlmr 4 hours ago [-]
This is so on point, the big money in ag is pushing a lot of these conspiracies. If that's your argument for your diet, it's a shaky one.
I will go that far to admit I don't know what's the healthy diet in the end, because there's too much industry influence anywhere you look.
aydyn 1 hours ago [-]
Beyond things that are provably carcinogen and specific genetic deficiencies its just calories. Every diet looks better compared to the standard American slop, but when tested against reducing caloric intake, every diet looks like the null distribution.
Dont be fooled. Just eat sensibly in amount and composition.
al_borland 20 minutes ago [-]
The composition of those calories impacts hormones in the body. Hormones do matter. If for nothing else, making it easier or more difficult to actually stay within that caloric budget.
jajko 25 minutes ago [-]
Swinging from one extreme to another without a good research to back it up, always a sign for a good long term move for sure. But its good, please do some research on your body for the rest of mankind, we thank and salute you. I just hope you get your meat consistently in standards that pretty much surpass what we consider "bio" in say EU or Switzerland in most aspects.
You know, there is some middle ground. In southern Europe, people have consistently healthy diets without resorting to such extremes, while eating food that tastes massively better than what a general US consumers buy / are willing to spend money on.
I just returned from 1 week vacation in Italy, thats always a trip to a small universe of healthy gourmet food. That experience is unfortunately not very transferable outside country borders but can serve as great inspiration - ie pasta ins't very healthy unless cooked al dente, then it becomes much better for the body.
drawfloat 5 hours ago [-]
The government?
somenameforme 5 hours ago [-]
The FDA claims a sedentary 40 year old man needs 2400 calories a day, the same as a 17 year old incidentally. [1] Or that everybody just needs 50g of protein a day. [2] Then there's the fat vs sugar food pyramid nonsense that led to more than half a century of health degradation.
It is an average. A guideline. And most countries give an average or range. And the US isn't the highest here: The official recommended averages I found after moving to Norway were higher than in the US and much more reasonable to keep to. (I'm female, my averages are lower).
That doesn't mean that the food pyramid is a good thing or that we've been giving good health advice. It also doesn't mean that our health advice is all that good now. We know more than we did before, but nutrition science seems tricky to do and even trickier to communicate well with the general public in ways that most people can follow. And that's before the disinformation from business interests and dealing with outright scams and lies.
eisen_matrix 4 hours ago [-]
2400 calories is very rational number, considering that Americans eat around 3800 on average.
somenameforme 2 hours ago [-]
The 3800 number was from the media misunderstanding/misrepresenting the data. The 3800 is calorie availability, not consumption. With calorie availability you take absolutely all food produced/imported and then divide by the population size. There's no reduction for waste, spoilage, inedibility, etc. [1]
Americans aren't eating anywhere near 3800 calories on average. 2400 calories is already a massive amount of food. That's 15 100g servings of chicken breast (cooked weight) for some baseline of what it means in terms of healthy food. Obviously lots of people are eating lots of junk that makes it easy to bring up the consumption, but it's still nowhere near 3800 on average.
I guess the 2400 for middle aged people is not that far off if in the 60s the average was right around there and people were healthier.
2 hours ago [-]
ahartmetz 3 hours ago [-]
3800 on average?! What the hell. Makes me wonder why Americans aren't even more overweight than they already are.
J_Shelby_J 4 hours ago [-]
Hey man, we really need eight potatoes a day, ok.
ultrarunner 5 hours ago [-]
The government shapes diets both through guidance (food pyramid, “plates”, etc) and regulation. For example, a major criticism revolves around farm bill payouts that incentivize corn production, leading to cheap fructose that finds its way into everything.
rexpop 4 hours ago [-]
Where does the buck stop, in this matter?
ethbr1 1 hours ago [-]
Removing Iowa as the first state in the primary season.
snthpy 5 hours ago [-]
That has been a concern of mine. What is the latest on that?
ycombinete 3 hours ago [-]
I'm not sure what the stats are, but my anecdote is that two family members who did long term keto have both developed permanent renal problems in their 60s. They can now eat only very little protein.
The one person's Dr. told her that the main issue is that she was eating way too much protein. Which might mean she wasn't doing Keto quite right. But I don't know enough about the diet myself to say for sure.
snthpy 2 hours ago [-]
Thanks, that's very interesting.
I was concerned about that and had my liver checked a couple of years ago but it might have been too early then. I'll brush up on that.
M0x20M1 1 hours ago [-]
The kidney is the organ that deals with the nitrogen waste from proteins.
LPisGood 8 hours ago [-]
Live long enough and you turn to dust I guess.
Terr_ 6 hours ago [-]
I aspire to the "One Hoss Shay" approach. [0] Nothing is unnecessarily overbuilt, so everything works perfectly for a hundred years... then it all collapses to dust simultaneously. :P
That was nearly my great-grandfather. Completely healthy until he was 103. Didn’t need glasses, walked without support, lived alone, completely there mentally and had a fantastic memory. Then he got shingles which affected his throat so eating was painful. He was dead two weeks later. Went from completely healthy to dead practically overnight.
uoaei 8 hours ago [-]
Joni Ernst already proved just how unpopular this line of rhetoric can be.
esseph 7 hours ago [-]
Well humans don't seem to really learn anything that spans more than a generation or two, so there's plenty of time.
thatcat 5 hours ago [-]
That's just the current culture, plenty of historical society's were more stable.
pstuart 7 hours ago [-]
It's not the fact that we turn to dust -- we all understand that; but denying healthcare because you're gonna die anyway is messed up.
throwcarsales 5 hours ago [-]
You have to deny healthcare at a certain point because there will always be resources you could throw at someone to extend life span. Where do you stop? We already have the means to help people live longer than we do but don't do it for everyone because how are you going to pay for that at scale? Or do you mean you just want healthcare paid for at the level that you in particular believe it should be?
XorNot 1 hours ago [-]
You're acting like DNRs don't exist.
People aren't hanging around consuming more and more healthcare for diminishing outcomes. Instead they're suffering long term or permanent problems from the US denying prompt, proven interventions.
The problem you're talking about doesn't exist.
uoaei 5 hours ago [-]
You're not wrong. Ultimately the discussion boils down to whose values are we prioritizing by allocating society's resources. In the interest of supporting a culture of agency and self-determination the society should* be supporting the decisions of those most affected first.
* I hate the word "should" but in this case we are already contextualized within an implied value system so it is used in a simple determinative manner.
Also high protein consumption is not a problem for kidneys.
There was a lot of bad science, this "protein is bad for the kidneys" comes from people who already had kidney issues from other reason beforehand, not from healthy people.
casenmgreen 6 hours ago [-]
I'm not sure I understand the method.
Is it correct that the study looked at the effect of a single (large) dose of ketones, rather than ongoing consumption?
As I understand it, dosage was 0.395g per kilo of body weight (so about 27g for 70kg subject), and that was it - with measurements of brain activity before and after.
No indication of duration of effect?
I Googled and have found a product on Amazon, which is asking about 30 USD for that dose, which would make daily 900 USD a month (!)
casenmgreen 5 hours ago [-]
Been looking into this.
Looks like blood concentrations peak about 30 mins after ingestion, then back to normal after about 120 minutes.
No info about how this relates to effects or duration of effects on cognition.
ImHereToVote 4 hours ago [-]
You can make your own ketones by downing some MCT oil. Cheap AF. Just have to be somewhat fasted.
Kiyo-Lynn 3 hours ago [-]
I initially tried keto just to lose weight.
But to my surprise, after about three weeks, I started feeling much clearer mentally, and overall just lighter, like something had lifted.
Back then, I thought it was just a coincidence. Now, reading this paper, I’m starting to think it might really have something to do with how the brain gets its energy.
anonzzzies 5 hours ago [-]
What are those supplements as I find a keto diet impossible to maintain.
bionhoward 5 hours ago [-]
MCT oil could be one option because it’s a shorter chain saturated fat with a number of carbons divisible by 2,
I forget the reason this is better for ketogenesis than longer chain triglycerides, Google answers didn’t seem like what I had learned about it.
Avoiding high glycemic index carbs (sugar, dairy, starch) is a big factor. Also, water: beta oxidation of fat to make the ketones, is a hydrolysis reaction
> Ketone bodies are not obligately produced from fatty acids; rather a meaningful amount of them is synthesized only in a situation of carbohydrate and protein insufficiency, where only fatty acids are readily available as fuel for their production.
adaisadais 10 hours ago [-]
Can someone give me a TL;DR?
tom_ 8 hours ago [-]
If you're worried about your brain, reading the entire article might be good exercise for it.
jader201 7 hours ago [-]
So is that the TLDR of the article?
/s
aldanor 10 hours ago [-]
Keto diet makes your brain use ketones instead of glucose for fuel which results in slower brain aging when you're 40-50.
bravesoul2 8 hours ago [-]
I wonder is keto on then off better or always on.
On then off might let you get more variety in.
moi2388 5 hours ago [-]
Variety is the spicy of life, and all things in moderation.
BennyH26 10 hours ago [-]
TLDR;
• As people get older, their brain connections start to break down faster in midlife (around 40–60 years) because brain cells don’t use sugar as well.
• Giving the brain a different fuel called ketones can help keep those connections strong during this middle‐age window.
• This suggests that helping the brain get fuel in midlife could keep it healthier and slow down memory problems later on.
You can ingest ketones on their own (generally expensive supplements), but this article is more interesting in that a ketogenic diet (very low carbs) may have similar benefits.
10 hours ago [-]
_Algernon_ 54 minutes ago [-]
The article has an abstract. That is the tldr
ivape 5 hours ago [-]
Here's my regular Claude prompt:
5 bullet points, make sure I fully understand everything in 5 bullet points:
(My deliberate buzzfeedification of the Internet)
---
- Brain aging isn't linear - it follows an S-curve with key milestones: onset ~age 43, fastest decline ~age 61, then plateau.
- Insulin resistance drives it - metabolic problems (high blood sugar) appear first in midlife, before vascular or inflammatory issues.
- Neurons can't use glucose but could use ketones - gene analysis shows aging brain regions have high insulin-dependent transporters but also ketone transporters.
- Ketones reverse aging effects, but only ages 40-60 - ketone supplements significantly helped younger/middle-aged brains but did nothing for 60+ year olds.
- There's a critical intervention window - the 40s-50s appear to be when neurons are stressed but still saveable, suggesting early metabolic treatment could prevent dementia.
xk_id 5 hours ago [-]
Against site rules to post generative text
selcuka 4 hours ago [-]
Where does it say that? Besides the GP clearly discloses that it is LLM-generated.
ed 4 hours ago [-]
It doesn’t. At least not in the guidelines or FAQ (links at the bottom of the site)
1Sebastian 1 hours ago [-]
[dead]
xeonmc 9 hours ago [-]
You can also get ketones in nail polish removers.
refulgentis 9 hours ago [-]
Well, yes, but not in a way that is particularly helpful. :)
This isn't as funny or faddish or odd as it sounds at first blush.
It's a well-recognized and effect help with epilepsy. My sister went on such a diet growing up and it helped. No more 20 minute seizures.
ndesaulniers 8 hours ago [-]
[flagged]
K0balt 8 hours ago [-]
FWIW I definitely noticed a downturn in my feeling of well being when I stopped huffing acetone.
greesil 8 hours ago [-]
[flagged]
sedatk 7 hours ago [-]
[flagged]
lherron 6 hours ago [-]
I am, and don’t call me Shirley.
jagaerglad 4 hours ago [-]
The redditification of hacker news
pinoy420 4 hours ago [-]
[dead]
throwaway984393 7 hours ago [-]
[dead]
bethekidyouwant 10 hours ago [-]
“Ketones, whether produced endogenously through fasting or low-carbohydrate/high-fat diets or administered exogenously as a supplement, have been shown to improve age-related cognitive decline (23–25) and to restore insulin-resistance-induced deficits in axonal conduction velocity” - Another win for the gym bros
dottjt 9 hours ago [-]
As someone who has been weight lifting for the past few years and previously was really into keto diets, one thing I've realised is that carbs are simply necessary in order to have the energy to push very heavy weights. Fat just doesn't give you the required energy to do so.
With that said, if you're only pushing moderately heavy weights or if you're a beginner and you're starting out with low weights, then it usually can be done.
Though the compromise is usually to eat high carb/low fat on workout days, and low carb/high fat on rest days. Fasting as well helps a ton.
nkozyra 8 hours ago [-]
Carbs are extremely helpful for strength, but there's a middle ground between ketosis and the standard American diet.
Most who lift and do low carb time their carbs before and after workouts for specifically this reason. Some also do carbs before bed.
But the rest of the day is close to no carbs. This still works. You can get < 100g of carbs a day and not have strength and energy negative impacts.
dottjt 8 hours ago [-]
> Most who lift and do low carb time their carbs before and after workouts for specifically this reason. Some also do carbs before bed.
This is exactly what I do. I have a have a pre-workout carb meal to try and compensate.
Though one interesting thing I've noticed is that I've intentionally had to eat carbs as my body fat percentage has decreased. Otherwise I feel very low energy (though to be fair, I think part of it is that I'm still very active on my rest days, usually doing 20 - 30k steps). I think with higher body fat my body could simply burn that fat for energy, whereas that surplus simply isn't there.
cosmic_cheese 8 hours ago [-]
> I think with higher body fat my body could simply burn that fat for energy, whereas that surplus simply isn't there.
It’s anecdotal, but I believe I’ve experienced similar effects. During my teenage years and for most of my twenties, my body fat percentage was low because I chronically under-ate (mostly just due to bad habits, though there was a financial component too at one point) and was pretty thin. Energy peaked and valleyed quite a bit with the after-lunch crash being the worst.
After I started working out and adjusted eating habits to accommodate that, my baseline weight jumped 20lbs or so. Some of that was muscle, but body fat percentage increased too. Since then energy levels have been much more even throughout the day, even during periods where I wasn’t working out (e.g. during pandemic lockdown) and I think it’s because there’s always a bit of fat to burn where there hadn’t been before.
ludicrousdispla 4 hours ago [-]
I would rewrite your last sentence as:
You can get < 100g of carbs a day and not have negative impacts to your strength and energy.
anon291 8 hours ago [-]
Meh. I agree keto is too much ,but a standard 'low carb' diet is closer to how we should be eating instead of the carb heavy diet that is typical. You don't need THAT many carbs to feel energetic. But yeah some is nice
Marsymars 7 hours ago [-]
It’s kinda tough to get a good baseline of what people are talking about without real numbers - like I’d personally rate my carb consumption as “moderate” - I don’t eat meat so it’s tricky to meet my Calorie needs by cutting out rice and increasing my bean consumption. OTOH the added sugars in my diet are practically zero.
7e 6 hours ago [-]
White rice has a higher glycemic index (GI) than sugar (sucrose).
arvinsim 7 hours ago [-]
I wonder if that is really true globally. You can't really escape carbs in some cuisines like Asia and some of them are really doing just fine.
unnamed76ri 7 hours ago [-]
See: The China Study. They are apparently doing much better than the west.
dottjt 6 hours ago [-]
What you're saying makes no sense without context. You say "we" but someone who's extremely active vs extremely sedentary are going to require different macros to compensate.
Rendered at 09:56:18 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Vercel.
> K.C. is a director of TdeltaS Ltd., a company spun out of the University of Oxford to develop products based on the science of ketone bodies in human nutrition.
> A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials
>"despite these short-term benefits, FBS did not show superior long-term outcomes compared to CCR."
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39458528/
> However, FBS improved insulin sensitivity, with significant reductions in fasting insulin
The issue, and why I think we’ve seen several high profile fasting advocates stop, is because they weren’t metabolically unhealthy, but were on extreme fasting protocols as if they were.
The way I read it, if you’re significantly overweight and have high insulin levels (type 2 diabetes or pre-diabetes), fasting can help get things under control quickly. However, once a person has regained metabolic flexibility and health, moving to something more balanced is likely a good idea. Just avoiding going back to a lifestyle that leads to chronically high insulin levels. Some amount of fasting probably makes sense, as has been practiced by most major religions in some form for thousands of years, but not to the same extreme as during the intervention.
>However, [fasting-based strategies] improved insulin sensitivity, with significant reductions in fasting insulin (-7.46 pmol/L, p = 0.02) and HOMA-IR (-0.14, p = 0.02)
That's the key part. Black coffee is key. I also sometimes go with tea or fruit infused water.
In some paradigms you are not even allowed to drink water and call it fasting.
The word fast means multiple things.
What I’ve seen over the years from occasionally being around coffee drinkers in the morning didn’t look like joy. It looked like addicts, unable to function and singularly focused, until they acquired coffee in the morning. When outside of their normal environment with quick and easy coffee, this seemed like an annoying burden to deal with.
I had a caffeine addiction from soda when I was in high school, which I broke in college. It led to chronic headaches if I didn’t have enough. In high school I didn’t put 2 and 2 together to know why I was getting the headaches and my dad was trying to push to take me to a neurologist.
Nothing about my experience with was joyful, nor has it looked like joy when someone wakes up in an unfamiliar city and is frantically looking for the nearest cup of coffee before they can talk about anything else. I’ve seen this from multiple people on multiple occasions.
Nothing about industries that have captured legislature?
Bayer/Monsanto (pesticide exposure, water contamination, cancer risk), Tyson Foods (antibiotic resistance, air and water pollution, respiratory illness), American Crystal Sugar Company (obesity, diabetes, heart disease), Koch Industries (pollution, weakened environmental standards), ADM (antibiotic resistance, pollution), Bunge Ltd (antibiotic resistance, pollution), Nutrien (fertilizer runoff, water contamination, cancer risk), Corteva (pesticide exposure, water contamination, cancer risk).
I will go that far to admit I don't know what's the healthy diet in the end, because there's too much industry influence anywhere you look.
Dont be fooled. Just eat sensibly in amount and composition.
You know, there is some middle ground. In southern Europe, people have consistently healthy diets without resorting to such extremes, while eating food that tastes massively better than what a general US consumers buy / are willing to spend money on.
I just returned from 1 week vacation in Italy, thats always a trip to a small universe of healthy gourmet food. That experience is unfortunately not very transferable outside country borders but can serve as great inspiration - ie pasta ins't very healthy unless cooked al dente, then it becomes much better for the body.
[1] - https://www.fda.gov/media/112972/download
[2] - https://www.fda.gov/food/nutrition-facts-label/daily-value-n...
It is an average. A guideline. And most countries give an average or range. And the US isn't the highest here: The official recommended averages I found after moving to Norway were higher than in the US and much more reasonable to keep to. (I'm female, my averages are lower).
That doesn't mean that the food pyramid is a good thing or that we've been giving good health advice. It also doesn't mean that our health advice is all that good now. We know more than we did before, but nutrition science seems tricky to do and even trickier to communicate well with the general public in ways that most people can follow. And that's before the disinformation from business interests and dealing with outright scams and lies.
Americans aren't eating anywhere near 3800 calories on average. 2400 calories is already a massive amount of food. That's 15 100g servings of chicken breast (cooked weight) for some baseline of what it means in terms of healthy food. Obviously lots of people are eating lots of junk that makes it easy to bring up the consumption, but it's still nowhere near 3800 on average.
[1] - https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/food-availability-per...
It seems true. Sorry for doubting you.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2024/10/14/weight...
I guess the 2400 for middle aged people is not that far off if in the 60s the average was right around there and people were healthier.
The one person's Dr. told her that the main issue is that she was eating way too much protein. Which might mean she wasn't doing Keto quite right. But I don't know enough about the diet myself to say for sure.
I was concerned about that and had my liver checked a couple of years ago but it might have been too early then. I'll brush up on that.
[0] https://www.gutenberg.org/files/45280/45280-h/45280-h.htm
People aren't hanging around consuming more and more healthcare for diminishing outcomes. Instead they're suffering long term or permanent problems from the US denying prompt, proven interventions.
The problem you're talking about doesn't exist.
* I hate the word "should" but in this case we are already contextualized within an implied value system so it is used in a simple determinative manner.
Also high protein consumption is not a problem for kidneys.
There was a lot of bad science, this "protein is bad for the kidneys" comes from people who already had kidney issues from other reason beforehand, not from healthy people.
Is it correct that the study looked at the effect of a single (large) dose of ketones, rather than ongoing consumption?
As I understand it, dosage was 0.395g per kilo of body weight (so about 27g for 70kg subject), and that was it - with measurements of brain activity before and after.
No indication of duration of effect?
I Googled and have found a product on Amazon, which is asking about 30 USD for that dose, which would make daily 900 USD a month (!)
Looks like blood concentrations peak about 30 mins after ingestion, then back to normal after about 120 minutes.
No info about how this relates to effects or duration of effects on cognition.
Back then, I thought it was just a coincidence. Now, reading this paper, I’m starting to think it might really have something to do with how the brain gets its energy.
I forget the reason this is better for ketogenesis than longer chain triglycerides, Google answers didn’t seem like what I had learned about it.
Avoiding high glycemic index carbs (sugar, dairy, starch) is a big factor. Also, water: beta oxidation of fat to make the ketones, is a hydrolysis reaction
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ketogenesis https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beta_oxidation
> Ketone bodies are not obligately produced from fatty acids; rather a meaningful amount of them is synthesized only in a situation of carbohydrate and protein insufficiency, where only fatty acids are readily available as fuel for their production.
/s
On then off might let you get more variety in.
• As people get older, their brain connections start to break down faster in midlife (around 40–60 years) because brain cells don’t use sugar as well. • Giving the brain a different fuel called ketones can help keep those connections strong during this middle‐age window. • This suggests that helping the brain get fuel in midlife could keep it healthier and slow down memory problems later on.
You can ingest ketones on their own (generally expensive supplements), but this article is more interesting in that a ketogenic diet (very low carbs) may have similar benefits.
5 bullet points, make sure I fully understand everything in 5 bullet points:
(My deliberate buzzfeedification of the Internet)
---
- Brain aging isn't linear - it follows an S-curve with key milestones: onset ~age 43, fastest decline ~age 61, then plateau.
- Insulin resistance drives it - metabolic problems (high blood sugar) appear first in midlife, before vascular or inflammatory issues.
- Neurons can't use glucose but could use ketones - gene analysis shows aging brain regions have high insulin-dependent transporters but also ketone transporters.
- Ketones reverse aging effects, but only ages 40-60 - ketone supplements significantly helped younger/middle-aged brains but did nothing for 60+ year olds.
- There's a critical intervention window - the 40s-50s appear to be when neurons are stressed but still saveable, suggesting early metabolic treatment could prevent dementia.
This isn't as funny or faddish or odd as it sounds at first blush.
It's a well-recognized and effect help with epilepsy. My sister went on such a diet growing up and it helped. No more 20 minute seizures.
With that said, if you're only pushing moderately heavy weights or if you're a beginner and you're starting out with low weights, then it usually can be done.
Though the compromise is usually to eat high carb/low fat on workout days, and low carb/high fat on rest days. Fasting as well helps a ton.
Most who lift and do low carb time their carbs before and after workouts for specifically this reason. Some also do carbs before bed.
But the rest of the day is close to no carbs. This still works. You can get < 100g of carbs a day and not have strength and energy negative impacts.
This is exactly what I do. I have a have a pre-workout carb meal to try and compensate.
Though one interesting thing I've noticed is that I've intentionally had to eat carbs as my body fat percentage has decreased. Otherwise I feel very low energy (though to be fair, I think part of it is that I'm still very active on my rest days, usually doing 20 - 30k steps). I think with higher body fat my body could simply burn that fat for energy, whereas that surplus simply isn't there.
It’s anecdotal, but I believe I’ve experienced similar effects. During my teenage years and for most of my twenties, my body fat percentage was low because I chronically under-ate (mostly just due to bad habits, though there was a financial component too at one point) and was pretty thin. Energy peaked and valleyed quite a bit with the after-lunch crash being the worst.
After I started working out and adjusted eating habits to accommodate that, my baseline weight jumped 20lbs or so. Some of that was muscle, but body fat percentage increased too. Since then energy levels have been much more even throughout the day, even during periods where I wasn’t working out (e.g. during pandemic lockdown) and I think it’s because there’s always a bit of fat to burn where there hadn’t been before.
You can get < 100g of carbs a day and not have negative impacts to your strength and energy.