virtualcyber
New member
My question is about ketonic diet -- my question gets a bit lengthy, so please bear with me. In brief, my question is: why does it work?
We know that if body metabolizes greater amount of calories than the calories it effectively consumes, we lose weight. It seems to me, given the preceding, t-factor diet (also known as high-carb) diet does not make any sense. The theory goes that (1) the enemy of maintaining lean body is intake of fat (2) and that any moderate over-consumption of carbs are okay. It seems to me that if one overeats carbs, then it results in suppression of fat burning process (via insulin production) -- which means you will keep the fat you consume (even if it is in the range of 40 grams / day). Again, the bottom line seems to be that one has to eat less than one consumes.
If one follows that reasoning, ketonic diet should not be effective either. Again, for the body to burn fat, the intake of calories should be lower than the amount it metabolizes. So, what difference does it make whether the body learns to burn fat rather than carb when it is in the ketosis? If you eat 200 grams of fat, then, whatever calories that do not come from the consumed amount must come from body fat. But this is not much different than high-carb diet with low calories.
So, does anyone know why ketonic diet should work?
I will be grateful for any enlightenment.
=================================
P. S.
What matters to me is _not_ whether I am heavy or light, but the ratio of muscle to body fat. So, to me, the question is: what kind of diet will promote greater muscle retention (or growth) and not as much for fat cells?
Assuming that ketonic diet works, then, is the logic here that the diet "fools" the body into not "eating" the muscle? This does not make that much sense to me -- because when the body goes into caloric deficit mode, it should try to eliminate any cells that are inefficient. That seem to be muscle cells, not fat cells.
We know that if body metabolizes greater amount of calories than the calories it effectively consumes, we lose weight. It seems to me, given the preceding, t-factor diet (also known as high-carb) diet does not make any sense. The theory goes that (1) the enemy of maintaining lean body is intake of fat (2) and that any moderate over-consumption of carbs are okay. It seems to me that if one overeats carbs, then it results in suppression of fat burning process (via insulin production) -- which means you will keep the fat you consume (even if it is in the range of 40 grams / day). Again, the bottom line seems to be that one has to eat less than one consumes.
If one follows that reasoning, ketonic diet should not be effective either. Again, for the body to burn fat, the intake of calories should be lower than the amount it metabolizes. So, what difference does it make whether the body learns to burn fat rather than carb when it is in the ketosis? If you eat 200 grams of fat, then, whatever calories that do not come from the consumed amount must come from body fat. But this is not much different than high-carb diet with low calories.
So, does anyone know why ketonic diet should work?
I will be grateful for any enlightenment.
=================================
P. S.
What matters to me is _not_ whether I am heavy or light, but the ratio of muscle to body fat. So, to me, the question is: what kind of diet will promote greater muscle retention (or growth) and not as much for fat cells?
Assuming that ketonic diet works, then, is the logic here that the diet "fools" the body into not "eating" the muscle? This does not make that much sense to me -- because when the body goes into caloric deficit mode, it should try to eliminate any cells that are inefficient. That seem to be muscle cells, not fat cells.