Medical How does a dietary intake of 100% animal fat mimic fasting?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Vintageliving
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Animal
Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around the potential benefits and drawbacks of ketogenic diets, particularly in relation to fasting and nutrient intake. Participants reference historical experiments and modern research linking low-carbohydrate, high-fat diets to various health benefits, including weight loss and management of conditions like cancer and epilepsy. There is a debate on whether a diet consisting solely of animal fat could replicate the benefits of fasting without its negative aspects, raising questions about nutrient sufficiency and hydration.Key points include the body's need for carbohydrates, the role of gluconeogenesis in glucose production, and the distinction between dietary ketosis and ketoacidosis. Participants emphasize that while ketosis can be a natural metabolic state, prolonged high-fat diets without proper nutrient balance may lead to health issues. The conversation also touches on the importance of understanding fundamental physiology and the potential risks associated with high-protein diets, particularly for those with preexisting kidney conditions. Overall, the dialogue highlights the complexity of dietary science and the need for a balanced approach to nutrition.
  • #31
Last comment from me in this thread and I'm done because this particular conversation may turn ugly at any moment.

I have not, and doubtfully ever will, read the Taubes book. See he, and all the other paleo/low carb nuts, make money doing this. It is their career. I cannot afford myself the time to sit around reading papers all day to refute all the evidence put forth by them. That is not my job, I don't make any money doing it, it will not further my career, therefore I am not going to start throwing papers, blogs and abstracts around with you (I have to do some experiments which are new to me, as well as study for midterms/finals, spend time with the better half and try to squeeze sleep in there somewhere).

The bottom line is that what these guys are saying is not really 100% wrong therefore you can't exactly refute everything they say. I mean think about it. How many overweight/obese or even regular people do you know that won't benefit from eating less processed foods, increasing vegetable intake and doing some consistent exercise?

The problem I have with these guys is the fact that they attribute half of the world's problems to a single food group. It is just unforgivable for a scientist to go around saying that X causes cancer, obesity, laziness, global warming, war, poverty etc. I've seen too many of these "eat this, not that" "this is good, that is bad" types of books. The former is actually a book mind you, my buddy has it and it tells you to eat McDonalds hamburgers over Burger King (or something like that) because they have something like 5g less fat.

If you want to live your life "paleo style," go get a spear and a loincloth and live in the forest, eating whatever you can catch and gather.

See the thing that most of these gurus don't tell you is that losing weight and maintaining a healthy lifestyle has to include a multitude of factors. They include eating less in general (I'm speaking of overweight people here, obviously someone who is 6 foot and 100 pounds probably needs to eat up!), staying away from processed foods, eating more fruits and vegetables, getting consistent exercise, staying hydrated, coping appropriately with stress and the list goes on and on, though I think I got the big ones.

One of the most important things, IMO, is really the ability to let go every so often and just enjoy yourself. Drink some booze, eat a pizza, slurp down HFCS if that is your thing. Do whatever it is that makes you feel good and allows you to blow off some steam and relax. Because honestly, if there is truly one factor that slowly kills everyone, that is the stress response. You can go read "Why Zebras Get Ulcers" by Dr. Robert Sapolsky. Now that's an amazing book! The important thing about 'letting go' though is that you have to be able to control yourself and make that a minor occurrence in your life.

This is getting into the realm of psychology/philosophy but I'll leave you with this little tidbit of info, which took me about a decade of extreme behavior to realize (and in some ways I'm still trying to apply it). Everything in life has its place. The key to living healthy and happy is finding a balance between the almost infinite amount of variables which affect your life. That's all I have to say on this subject.

EDIT to add: If you really want to learn some physiology as it relates to nutrition, you should check out Lyle McDonald. That guy really knows his stuff, stays on top of the latest research in weight management and, my favorite part about him, is not afraid to admit that his views change when the scientific landscape changes (he's pretty straight forward about it too, sometimes a bit too straight forward [anyone who frequents or used to frequent his site(s) knows what I'm talking about]).
 
Last edited:
Biology news on Phys.org
  • #32
One word Yanick. Evidence.
 
  • #34
Hey, thanks Greg.

Here's one more recent article from Dana Carpender's blog

http://www.foodnavigator-usa.com/Sc...ase-heart-disease-risk-say-nutrition-experts/

Excerpts:
During a symposium called “The Great Fat Debate: Is There Validity In the Age-Old Dietary Guidance?” at the American Dietetic Association’s (ADA) Food and Nutrition Conference and Expo, four leading experts presented evidence suggesting that low fat diets may be less healthy than those containing at least a moderate amount of fat. In particular, all four agreed that replacing saturated fat with carbohydrates – as has been widely recommended in the United States – is likely to raise the risk of cardiovascular disease.
Chair of the Harvard School of Public Health’s nutrition department Dr. Walter Willett takes this even further.


“If anything, the literature shows a slight advantage of the high fat diet,” he said. “The focus on fat in dietary guidelines has been a massive distraction…We should remove total fat from nutrition facts panels on the back of packs.”

He added that while the pervasive dietary guidance given to consumers has been to eat fats sparingly, to load up on starch and eat non-fat products, “the food industry quickly realized sugar was cheaper than fat and laughed all the way to the bank.”

Its time for more research into the subject. Lots more open-minded research. Not funded by the food or drug industry.
 
  • #35
I don't know why there is even a low-carb/high-carb debate! The large majority of studies I have seen point to a balanced diet of carbs, fats, and proteins. As a general rule, extremes are never good. Naturally we want to intake the foods that science has found to be the healthiest for us to eat. Now when you look at a steak and compare it to an orange, you see a protein and a carb. But you also see the nutrients contained in those calories. An orange has many more vitamins, minerals than the steak does, and also contains fiber and phytochemicals, both of which have a long history of promoting human health.

So what is healthier, a carb or a protein? Well obviously you don't want to eat just one, but I would certainly suggest eating many more oranges than steaks...
 

Similar threads

  • Poll Poll
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
6K
  • · Replies 78 ·
3
Replies
78
Views
13K