Ketogenic diets extend lifespan, improve memory and health in mice

For Christopher or others interested in performce nutrition as a keto athlete under glycloytic conditions (i.e. hills, intervals, race), go to 28:10:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MQpsFTVAqpA

He says that for the first hour or so, run off body stores, THEN add in carbs (maltodexrin/glucose) at a rate of 30g/hour. This jives with how successful ultra runners refuel. If I was doing something a bit more intense like a race of 90 min duration or a session of VO2max intervals, I would try to introduce a bit sooner, to see the effect. It is probably very individualistic. He says that if you do not eat after a session for a few hours, it reduces inflammation and speedds up overall recovery. If however you are trying to increase power or hypertrophy gains (not distance runners), he says carbs right after will enhance inflammation which enhances those processes.

Another avenue might be to add exogenous ketones pre-race, but the jury seems to be out on that.

Interesting fueling measurement for Ironman, which at 9-17 hours is similar to ultras:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DJ6MmUVUMAAQ54h.jpg:large

O P wrote:

He says that for the first hour or so, run off body stores, THEN add in carbs (maltodexrin/glucose) at a rate of 30g/hour. This jives with how successful ultra runners refuel.

What does "body stores" mean? Do you mean your breakfast and night before?

Some runners are too nervous to eat much for breakfast, but there's no reason to not eat as early and as often as possible unless your stomach can't handle it.

Expected result. True fat-adapted athletes are VERY rare in triathlons (and still fairly rare in ultras). Therefore it becomes a matter of who can tolerate shoving the most sugar into the system. If they get stomach issues, they slow down and consume less, hence the downward curve. To see the effect of true ketoadaption, under controlled conditions, look at the FASTER study by Volek and Phinney:http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0026049515003340Note that the two groups were both high-level performers, but with vastly different pathways, requiring much less intake amongst the fat-adapted athletes, who were running off their intrinsic fuel stores (bodyfat). Tim Olson, course record holder at Western States, and Zack Bitter, 100 mile AR holder, were amongst the keto athletes in this study.

tri me wrote:

Interesting fueling measurement for Ironman, which at 9-17 hours is similar to ultras:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DJ6MmUVUMAAQ54h.jpg:large

O P wrote: Tim Olson, course record holder at Western States, and Zack Bitter, 100 mile AR holder, were amongst the keto athletes in this study.

Neither one races low-carb.

Heard an interview with Tim Olsen. He said in the past he trained lower carb than most but, contrary to what some people think, he never was super low or in ketosis. He ascribes to the "primal" approach. He says "carbs are very important for training and racing and overall health" and that "ketogenic is too low carb and doesn't work for me". He now eats more carbs including some grains like tortillas, but he still is not super high carb. Says he's feeling good now after a couple bad years.

Of course neither races low-carb. A race is a race, an exceptional event, you need to add carbs after an hour to keep the fat burning in the flame of carbohydrate. It is the icing, LCHF is the (low-carb) cake. Tim isn't keto, but is definitely LCHF. Zack and Jeff Browning are primarily keto, but use targeted carbs to compete. If you want to put health first, keto will be the best for many/most. For racing, especially younger, more insulin-sensitive athletes, targeted carbs add the final peak to the low-carb base. You do things in races you don't do day-to-day.I have said over and over and many still don't understand: LCHF is a tool, albeit a powerful one, use to your discretion and benefit. The more aerobic your event and lifestyle, the more you will benefit. Anaerobic/glycolytic is optional, for those who want to squeeze out the final seconds and minutes.

ultramight wrote:

O P wrote: Tim Olson, course record holder at Western States, and Zack Bitter, 100 mile AR holder, were amongst the keto athletes in this study.

Neither one races low-carb.

Heard an interview with Tim Olsen. He said in the past he trained lower carb than most but, contrary to what some people think, he never was super low or in ketosis. He ascribes to the "primal" approach. He says "carbs are very important for training and racing and overall health" and that "ketogenic is too low carb and doesn't work for me". He now eats more carbs including some grains like tortillas, but he still is not super high carb. Says he's feeling good now after a couple bad years.

That is an excellent summary of current research. Let me ask you this 1) is regression of atherosclerotic lesions common when ldl is below 100 or is that a rare occurrence? 2) most statin studies involve a 5 year trial and a 30 percent reduction in cv events. Do you think (i am asking for conjecture) that this effect will be magnified when patients are followed over a longer period, especially if a statin is started on a younger person? And finally, how contributory is systolic hypertension under 150 mm, is it of major significance or just background noise relative to ldl cholesterol?

Oh, and can you eat too many nuts?

Crimea River wrote:

I have said over and over and many still don't understand: LCHF is a tool, albeit a powerful one, use to your discretion and benefit.

No, according to previous posters, it's a "lifestyle" and you cannot just do it for several months or for a training cycle, you have to commit your whole life to it.

keto this wrote:

Crimea River wrote:

I have said over and over and many still don't understand: LCHF is a tool, albeit a powerful one, use to your discretion and benefit.

No, according to previous posters, it's a "lifestyle" and you cannot just do it for several months or for a training cycle, you have to commit your whole life to it.

And even then, the basis of it is scientifically unsound, particularly as a long term lifestyle approach. Unless of course you want to be at high risk of degenerative, western style diseases later in life. No studies looking at the lone term consequences as far as i'm aware, I'm also still waiting for evidence of Dr. Gerber's clean arteries.

Dr. Gerber's calcium score from imaging was zero, after 17 years of keto, despite a family history of CHD. He lost 40 lbs when going keto 17 years ago and his LDL-C went from 160 to 140. Of course that probably isn't low enough for the cholesterolphobe, and 17 years isn't "long-term" enough either. Dr. Mark Cuccuzzellla has had very similar results (he was formerly pre-diabetice despite being lean, runnig 60+ miles/week and in sub-2:40 marathon shape at the time).Because CHD is a disease of inflammation and not "cholesterol blocking", Gerber does an in-house two hour insulin response test in lieu of glucose fasting test to diagnose hidden diabetes and pre-diabetes, which is associated with CHD (revealed by subsequent calcium scores). This is an example of a physician putting the concerns of his patients above the dogma that inevitably leads to pointless overmedication.

OLD SMTC SOB wrote:

keto this wrote:

No, according to previous posters, it's a "lifestyle" and you cannot just do it for several months or for a training cycle, you have to commit your whole life to it.

And even then, the basis of it is scientifically unsound, particularly as a long term lifestyle approach. Unless of course you want to be at high risk of degenerative, western style diseases later in life. No studies looking at the lone term consequences as far as i'm aware, I'm also still waiting for evidence of Dr. Gerber's clean arteries.

judge holden wrote:

That is an excellent summary of current research. Let me ask you this 1) is regression of atherosclerotic lesions common when ldl is below 100 or is that a rare occurrence? 2) most statin studies involve a 5 year trial and a 30 percent reduction in cv events. Do you think (i am asking for conjecture) that this effect will be magnified when patients are followed over a longer period, especially if a statin is started on a younger person? And finally, how contributory is systolic hypertension under 150 mm, is it of major significance or just background noise relative to ldl cholesterol?

Oh, and can you eat too many nuts?

Whether its common or not is unknown from a scientific perspective, but I suspect its common in those moving from a high LDL to a low one, 100 or below. The fact of the matter is that while Ornish et al was able to show regression using a vegetarian diet with corresponding large reductions in TC and LDL, the only way to really determine if regression has taken place is to do angiography both before and after. Most study subjects don't want to do that merely for the sake of proving a point, particularly with some of the risks involved. And yes, I do believe that the impact of the LRC study design would be magnified over time. Also remember that the effect on blood flow is to the 4th power of the radius. So small reductions in stenosis would have much more impact on blood flow and the manifestation of clinical symptoms (angina for instance). I wouldn't use a statin unless the LDL was quite high, and if so, the individual does not respond favorably to a 10% to 15% fat diet. As far as SBP, its a primary risk factor. The issue is that the chronic high pressure damages the arterial wall, particularly around areas of bifurcation (coronaries, renals, femorals, carotids etc) and denudes the endothelium, the primary barrier to the infiltration of LDL carried cholesterol. The more risk factors one has, and the magnitude of each not only speeds the atherosclerotic process, but the age at which one would be expected to exhibit clinical signs and symptoms. And yes, one can eat to many/much of anything :)

A calcium score is not an angio. And just because the calcium score may me zero, thats not proof that the arteries are "clean".

It is the gold standard. And yes a score of zero means there is not plaque accumulation. Given that you are unable to understand the difference between ketosis and ketoacidosis, I am certain you will continue to struggle at every level of comprehension here.

Of course longevity and health are far more than just "carbs v. fats", it includes issues such as epigenetics, gut biome and environmental toxins. Here Dr. Perlmutter does an excellent survey of the issues that can be improved through a healthier, whole-foods ketogenic diet:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2hR9sD9eX-A

Thank you. I feel a sense of doom

O P wrote:

It is the gold standard. And yes a score of zero means there is not plaque accumulation. Given that you are unable to understand the difference between ketosis and ketoacidosis, I am certain you will continue to struggle at every level of comprehension here.

OLD SMTC SOB wrote:

A calcium score is not an angio. And just because the calcium score may me zero, thats not proof that the arteries are "clean".

Hardly. Calcification typically occurs at the final stages, may not be present in stenosis up to and including 75%. Additionally, in stenosis of 75% or greater (hemodynamically significant), 16% have been shown to have a calcium score of zero.

judge holden wrote:

Thank you. I feel a sense of doom

And why might that be?

OLD SMTC SOB wrote:

O P wrote:

It is the gold standard. And yes a score of zero means there is not plaque accumulation. Given that you are unable to understand the difference between ketosis and ketoacidosis, I am certain you will continue to struggle at every level of comprehension here.

Hardly. Calcification typically occurs at the final stages, may not be present in stenosis up to and including 75%. Additionally, in stenosis of 75% or greater (hemodynamically significant), 16% have been shown to have a calcium score of zero.

And a fine point here, but one none the less.........no non invasive test is a "gold standard". The non invasive testing, when done appropriately, and evaluated in the context of the presence or absence of other risk factors, genetic history, lifestyle etc. are an adjunct.

I am sure Dr. Gerber is going to turn into a solid lipid molecule and keel over dead tomorrow. At least he is someone who is forthright in presenting his stats and history, unlike the authoritarian stuffed-shirts who dole out statins like they are M&Ms.