Why would anyone do keto?

Why would anyone do keto?

Ape Out, Gorilla Mindset Shirt $21.68

Rise, Grind, Banana Find Shirt $21.68

Ape Out, Gorilla Mindset Shirt $21.68

  1. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >SUGAR IS.. LE BAD!!
    No.
    >SATURATED FAT IS.. LE BAD!!
    No.
    >CARBS ARE.. LE BAD!!
    No.
    >CHOLESTEROL IS.. LE BAD!!
    No.
    >STARCH IS.. LE BAD!!
    No.
    >GLUTEN IS.. LE BAD!!
    No.
    >LACTOSE IS.. LE BAD!!
    No.
    >RED MEAT IS.. LE BAD!!
    No.
    >EGGS ARE.. LE BAD!!
    No.
    >FISH IS.. LE BAD!!
    No.
    >DAIRY IS.. LE BAD!!
    No.
    >FRUIT IS.. LE BAD!!
    No.
    >VEGETABLES ARE.. LE BAD!!
    No.
    >POULTRY IS.. LE BAD!!
    No.
    >GRAINS ARE.. LE BAD!!
    No.
    >ORGAN MEAT IS.. LE BAD!!
    No.
    >WATER IS.. LE BAD!!
    No.

    God made all this tasty food for me to eat, therefore I'm going to eat it. Simple as

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      All of those are good as long as you don't consume too much. Sugar is especially easy to overeat considering how much of it is in a lot of modern food.
      >WATER IS.. LE BAD!!
      Who says this

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >Who says this
        The hardcore raw meat crowd. Sv3rige and Aajonus.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >Who says this
        Your water is full of fluoride, microplastices, and estrogen. Just start making water at home. I buy ice from eskimos and cook my own water at home.

      • 12 months ago
        Anonymous

        That's the thing. Sugar is normally never a problem if you only consume whole foods.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      kys schizo

    • 12 months ago
      Anonymous

      baseado

    • 12 months ago
      Anonymous

      >simple as
      british people aren't real. No wonder you're such a butterball

    • 12 months ago
      Anonymous

      /MCG/ - Midwit Coping General

    • 12 months ago
      Anonymous

      > God made all this tasty food for me to eat,
      so you agree, processed food is bad

      • 12 months ago
        Anonymous

        >so you agree, processed food is bad
        Yes, that's why processed food is not on that list. Eat whole foods instead

  2. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Guide in pinned already has all macronutrient/calorie intake amounts in relation to weight, why don't people just follow that?

    • 12 months ago
      Anonymous

      Because you are unironically in the top 1% of posters here who actually read the sticky. Respect.

    • 12 months ago
      Anonymous

      The inclusion of something as gay and baseless as a TDEE calculator invalidates the sticky
      >here's your totally scientific BMR
      >and here's one of 3 nice round, magic numbers to add on to that, depending on how active you say you are :*~~

      • 12 months ago
        Anonymous

        Yeah individuals vary massively, which is why you should use a smartwatch. Knowing your HR + respiration rate = extremely useful estimate of total calorie expenditure each day, much more accurate than just inputting your numbers and "activity level" to some website.

    • 12 months ago
      Anonymous

      Human metabolism can be closely equated to a car engine. Does a car always get the same mileage?

  3. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >eat vegetables and meat
    >some berries or an apple for desert
    >HOLY FRICK YOU LITERAL moron DIE COMMIT SUICIDE YOU'RE KILLING YOURSELF SCHIZO
    uhhh based

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Or be like my dad:
      >use keto as excuse to eat way too large proportions of meat.
      >Still fat

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >be moronic
        >do moronic stuff
        Correct.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      You won't reliably stay in ketosis eating like the primitive humans that ate all vegetables and fruit they could find. Average apple alone is about 10 grams of carbs. You really think your ancestors would find an apple tree with dozens of apples on it after starving for 3 days and go
      >yeah I'm only gonna have 1 or 2, wouldn't want to kick myself out of ketosis lmao

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        The original wild versions of a number of fruits and vegetables were nearly inedible and only became palatable through years and years of cultivation. Primitive man mostly subsisted on wild game.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >nearly inedible
          >nearly
          So they were edible and hunter-gatherers did eat them.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            They were extremely fibrous, full of seeds, and in the case of the fruits, no sweeter than a modern carrot. There was barely anything to eat.

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              >yes fruits were edible back then and our ancestors did eat them but but but but
              Okay, I accept your concession anon, calm down.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                If you can call that edible, sure.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                They were obviously edible since they were cultivated for centuries and became what they are today.
                Lmao you fricking moron.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                If they were already edible, why were they cultivated and selectively bred in the first place? You're not very smart.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >why were they cultivated and selectively bred in the first place?
                To bear more fruit due to increasing requirements for food. This is an issue even nowadays, we are modifying plants to bear more fruit.
                You're an actual moron lmfao.

                >omg if dogs were domesticated, then why did we breed them selectively??????
                kek

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >To bear more fruit due to increasing requirements for food

                https://i.imgur.com/ZXoc2Q3.png

                yeah pretty much

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >literally points towards vegetables/fruit that were selectively cultivated to bear more fruit due to increases in population size
                Okay? Thanks for agreeing with me I guess lol

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                And selectively cultivated to be more edible since they were barely edible as is. You want to ignore that part but anybody with a brain can see it.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >barely edible
                Then they wouldn't become the backbone of multi-billion dollar industries, moron.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Is this a bot? We're talking about the original wild forms of fruits and vegetables. "Dollars" didn't even exist when the wild versions were all there was.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >original wild forms
                Yeah, which were edible to the point humans decided to harvest them on a mass scale.
                Do you have a hole in your brain ketoschizo?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                AFTER they were domesticated to be palatable to anybody outside of an extreme survival situation. Once again, you're not very good at this.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                They were domesticated because they were a good source of food, not the other way around.
                You're coping hard, ketotard.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                https://i.imgur.com/ZXoc2Q3.png

                yeah pretty much

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >points back again at an image showing fruits that were domesticated because they were a good source of food to the point that they became the backbone of civilisation
                I accept your concession yet again, anon.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Domesticated because they were barely edible as-is. You keep tiptoeing around that.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >barely edible
                Headcanon.
                They were edible to the point they were a good source of food on which civilisation could thrive.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                People were growing them because they were eating them. Occasionally, a mutation would generated a larger or flesher or sweeter variety which was eminently preferable, but this was a side-effect of cultivation, not the reason for it.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >People were growing them because they were eating them.
                Nobody is disputing that they were eaten, but the fact of the matter is that they were nothing like how we know them today and were selectively bred over thousands of years to reach the forms we are familiar with (not even getting into the GMO issue which is its own can of worms). The idea that they were eaten in the hunter-gatherer days anywhere near as often as they are eaten now is ludicrous simply because hunter-gatherers primarily subsisted on animal products and would only have resorted to eating wild fruits and vegetables out of desperation, especially considering that they were fibrous, full of seeds, and lacking in flavor compared to modern variations.

                https://i.imgur.com/H6xMpLO.png

                [...]
                [...]
                [...]
                Hunter-gatherers had no concept of selective breeding and genetics, you fricking schizo.
                You literally don't know shit about biology.
                Also this [...]

                >Hunter-gatherers had no concept of selective breeding and genetics, you fricking schizo.
                And they barely ate fruits and vegetables. That became more common later when the age of agriculture began.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >when the age of agriculture began
                So they were edible to the point of allowing the age of agriculture to happen.
                Thanks for your concession yet again anon.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Edible after agriculture, yes. Thank you for continuing to play dumb to try to score points in a petty Internet argument.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >after agriculture
                Before agriculture, thus allowing agriculture.
                See

                https://i.imgur.com/lGq9ExO.jpg

                If chickens in the 1950s were already edible, why did we selectively breed them to grow larger and fatter?!

                for reference.
                Too easy, ketoschizo.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >agricultural society selectively breeding fruits and vegetables to make them edible and not purely fibrous, tasteless, and full of seeds is comparable to selectively breeding chickens to be larger
                Alright, we're done here.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Unironically yes. The old chickens werent just smaller, they had far less meat on them, they were lot more sinewy and cartiligenous, ie less edible.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                society selectively breeding fruits and vegetables to make them edible
                They were already edible.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >purely fibrous
                Brainlet take, they had macronutrients, otherwise they wouldn't become staple food.

                >is comparable to selectively breeding chickens
                The principle is the same. Chickens back then were barely useful for meat and eggs, they were selectively bred for it.

                Ketoschizo shenanigans.

              • 12 months ago
                Anonymous

                nta, are you aware that fiber can ferment in the gut into short chain fatty acids? also, chicken and eggs didn't change their macronutrient ratios as much as fruits and grains did. therefore, our ancestors ate less carbohydrates overall.

              • 12 months ago
                Anonymous

                >chicken and eggs didn't change their macronutrient ratios as much as fruits and grains did
                why are you lying? modern frankenchickens have more fats compared to the non crossbred species, at least that's the case at where i'm from

              • 12 months ago
                Anonymous

                I said not as much. Besides, that's not the point. The point is that man made fruits have a lot of carbs. Wild fruits have a lot of fiber. That means that ancestral diet had less carbohydrates than the modern one.

              • 12 months ago
                Anonymous

                modern broilers have much more fat, just try making schmaltz from wild chickens or even non factory farmed broilers, the yields are quite pathetic compared to factory farmed broilers

              • 12 months ago
                Anonymous

                >chicken and eggs didn't change their macronutrient ratios
                Black person have you seen how much trash is in mass produced chicken meat?

                >our ancestors ate less carbohydrates
                They ate less in general. Malnutrition is running through your and my genes.

              • 12 months ago
                Anonymous

                What is your point? Yes, our modern diet is shit, I am aware.

              • 12 months ago
                Anonymous

                >city dweller trying to talk about chicken
                Lmao.
                Even small farm chickens tend to have tougher meat than mass farm chickens. A lot of factors go into it.
                You wouldn't get even half of the amount of meat out of them all those centuries ago.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                post body

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                look up Charles Bronson, that's me

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >hunter-gatherers primarily subsisted on animal products
                Read this
                https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/ajpa.23148

                >Outside of circumpolar regions, where animal products make up the bulk of nutrition (Bang, Dyerberg, & Sinclair, 1980; Draper, 1977; Kuhnlein, Appavoo, Morrison, Soueida, & Pierrot,1994; Kuhnlein et al., 1996), many of the diets are dominated by plant resources. The two most extreme examples are the !Kung, who are reported to have obtained 60–80% of their diet from wild plants when small bands were still foraging full time (Lee, 1968), and the Hadza, who consume approximately 50–65% of their diet from plant foods (Marlowe et al., 2014).

              • 12 months ago
                Anonymous

                Hadza eat 600 different plants/yr and have excellent microbiome diversity. Our microbes break plant material down into fatty acids just like monke

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                You are being disingenuous. It doesn't matter if we ate them, the first point you made is that prehistoric man ate fruits full of sugar, which anon is saying is incorrect since it was mostly fiber. You are fixating on the wrong part of the argument.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >the first point you made is that prehistoric man ate fruits full of sugar
                No. Learn to read Black person.

                >wrong part of the argument
                No, ketotard is trying to say people somehow didn't eat fruit because it was inedible and then somehow it evolved overnight to its current form lmao

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                You won't reliably stay in ketosis eating like the primitive humans that ate all vegetables and fruit they could find. Average apple alone is about 10 grams of carbs. You really think your ancestors would find an apple tree with dozens of apples on it after starving for 3 days and go
                >yeah I'm only gonna have 1 or 2, wouldn't want to kick myself out of ketosis lmao

                >You won't reliably stay in ketosis eating like the primitive humans that ate all vegetables and fruit they could find. Average apple alone is about 10 grams of carbs. You really think your ancestors would find an apple tree with dozens of apples on it after starving for 3 days and go
                I was referencing this argument. I thought that was you. What is your point then?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                My point is that you're moronic.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Gotcha. Can't say I am surprised by lack of intelligent response.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                You're fat, so by default you're not intelligent.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >What is your point then?
                To antagonize people and shit up the site, like every other bot and shill that makes up the majority of active users on this shithole.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                *every other bot and shill that make up

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Just keep it short with people/bots like that. It's of no use to argue in circles.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                It's always the same thing on this site nowadays. There's no real discussion, it's nothing more or less than demoralization, shilling, shitposting, social engineering, and/or useless static to prevent anything productive from happening since the site is too useful as a honeypot to be shut down outright. It's too bad because it used to be a really special place to me but now it's a toilet like every all 3 other sites that people use now.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                That ketard has no capability of logical thinking whatsoever. He literally doesn't recognize backwards logic. Then again if he is who I think it is, it's an uneducated developmentally impaired guy living on a family farm as a farm-hand

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                If chickens in the 1950s were already edible, why did we selectively breed them to grow larger and fatter?!

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Dietary fiber is metabolized as fat, and very poorly at that. No one is enjoying that shit beyond a survival situation.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >but but but but x2
                It's alright anon, we already concluded that you admit I'm right.

                >survival situation
                So you mean 99.9% of human history?

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          And then, out of nowhere, humanity just one day decided to put in 10 000 year continuous collective effort to selectively breed plants absolutely nobody ever ate, for no reason at all.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            yeah pretty much

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              You're not very bright.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                ironic coming from an actual midwit

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              >banana
              The banana we know today was only created in the 19th century, people were eating bananas for thousands of years prior. What's the source for this stupid shit anyway?

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              And selectively cultivated to be more edible since they were barely edible as is. You want to ignore that part but anybody with a brain can see it.

              Is this a bot? We're talking about the original wild forms of fruits and vegetables. "Dollars" didn't even exist when the wild versions were all there was.

              You are being disingenuous. It doesn't matter if we ate them, the first point you made is that prehistoric man ate fruits full of sugar, which anon is saying is incorrect since it was mostly fiber. You are fixating on the wrong part of the argument.

              Hunter-gatherers had no concept of selective breeding and genetics, you fricking schizo.
              You literally don't know shit about biology.
              Also this

              https://i.imgur.com/lGq9ExO.jpg

              If chickens in the 1950s were already edible, why did we selectively breed them to grow larger and fatter?!

              • 12 months ago
                Anonymous

                Yeah corn just one day showed up as a 7' tall grass with seeds the size of entire heads of wheat, magically on their own.

              • 12 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Hunter-gatherers had no concept of selective breeding and genetics
                This is debatable as the selection and breeding of more docile animals was an integral part of domestication. The same thing with purposely culling plants based upon their fruit size, seed size, or edible mass. They didn't have a system until Mendel and relied more on an intuitive understanding of heritability. But the practice of intentional breeding goes back to the later eras of hunter gatherers that began to domesticate animals like wolves with traits that were more favorable to supporting them in their hunts. Early agriculturalists did intentionally breed plants based on desirable traits like dogs for herding or grasses for seed size and this is undeniable.

            • 12 months ago
              Anonymous

              Pretty sure there are a lot of fruits and berries that had quite a lot carbs in their ancestral form and did not change much to this day, like dates, plums (e.g. acai plum), figs, etc. Somebody correct me if I am wrong

              • 12 months ago
                Anonymous

                Correct. There is a reason that the picture has selected those examples - they are among the most extreme transformations compared to the wild ancestral forms.
                That poster will never post comparisons of wild animals to their domesticated counterparts.

              • 12 months ago
                Anonymous

                There are some that are fairly similar yes, but ancient forms were smaller with lower yields. For example figs are ancient and one of the highest calorie fruits but only have 20-30 calories per fig. An ancient human would have to eat 100-150 figs per day. Roughly one every 5 minutes while awake.

                On the flip side if they hunted one mammoth it would feed more than 1000 people. What's easier, gathering 150,000 figs every day, or hunting 1 mammoth?

              • 12 months ago
                Anonymous

                >What's easier, gathering 150,000 figs every day, or hunting 1 mammoth?
                It's easier not being a brainlet that can only think in polar opposites.
                Hunter gatherer societies were doing everything at once. Some hunted game, some were fishing, some gathered fruits and vegetables, etc.

              • 12 months ago
                Anonymous

                yeah, things like dates have been around since like forever

            • 12 months ago
              Anonymous

              I've eaten little wild carrots like that and they were tasty as fuark.

      • 12 months ago
        Anonymous

        Primitive humans are almost exclusively meat.

        Google what ancient cultivars of fruits and veg looked like, you would literally have to eat 100 ancient potatoes per day to hit 3000cal. It would be absurd. Or hunt one deer and the tribe is fed for 3 days. Ancient humans were almost pure carnivores, the myth of hunter gatherers was dispelled a long time ago.

        • 12 months ago
          Anonymous

          A handful of walnuts provides ~500kcal
          A single mature walnut tree produces anywhere from 80-160kg of nuts every year.
          That's over 100,000,000kcal from a single tree. Nuts don't need to be cooked or processed before eating, and when kept dry they will stay edible for years.
          Archaeological evidence shows evidence of acorn consumption as old as 30,000 years, and there is no reason to think tlit was a new behaviour at that point in time.

          Amylase is the enzyme that digests starch. Chimpanzees and other great apes have 2 copies. Most humans have 4-10 copies. Anatomically modern humans that lived 400,000 years ago already had these extra copies of the amylase gene.

          Why did they evolve this trait of they weren't consuming a significant quantity of starchy plant foods along with their animal foods?

          • 12 months ago
            Anonymous

            Yah, I think it is very reasonable to think that big part of calories came from starchy stuff then fruits/berries/nuts and then meat.

        • 12 months ago
          Anonymous

          They did not. People who parrot this re easily duped. If you think carefully for a minute bout how the mechanics of this world work it falls apart

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      You forgot the part when these people put butter in their coffee and eat 70% of their diet as fat

      • 12 months ago
        Anonymous

        most people just eat less carbs dude

        • 12 months ago
          Anonymous

          Yeah thats not keto so

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >an apple
      >keto
      Thats more than a days worth of carbs bro

  4. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >Actually it's ok to eat as much sugar you want as long as it is under or at your TDEE
    t. CICO gays

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Factual and heterosexual

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >Actually it's ok to eat as many whole foods as you want as long as it is under or at your TDEE
      ftfy

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      noone ever says that not even in the /fat/ thread we say that if your gonna eat shit in a moment of weakness, at least make sure you eat less shit and adjust your meals later

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >adjust your meals later
        sorry buddy that isn't how it works. If you eat a bunch of sugar on a regular basis, reducing the calories of your later meal isn't going to save you.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Yes. Don't ketolards claim the same about butter?

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        no. people generally spontaneously reduce caloric intake on high fat diets and can eat to satiety while losing weight. but its still possible to gain weight eating too much on fat/protein foods

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >spontaneously reduce caloric intake on high fat diets
          >eat to satiety while losing weight
          Translation: the average amerimutt treats sweets like an actual meal and wonders why he can eat hundreds of grams of them at a time.

          • 12 months ago
            Anonymous

            >nobody
            >not a single soul
            >you: HAAA AMERICANS

            • 12 months ago
              Anonymous

              The main consumers of mental illness such as veganism or keto are amerimutts.
              Even most of the schizos in this threads are mutts.

              • 12 months ago
                Anonymous

                >nobody
                >not a single soul
                >you: HAAA AMERICANS

              • 12 months ago
                Anonymous

                The main consumers of mental illness such as veganism or keto are amerimutts.
                Even most of the schizos in this threads are mutts.

              • 12 months ago
                Anonymous

                >nobody
                >not a single soul
                >you: HAAA AMERICANS

                Your obsession is depressing

              • 12 months ago
                Anonymous

                Are you an amerimutt?

  5. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Seizures.

  6. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >organic human bodies are the same as cars because they use synonymous terms such as “fuel” despite being completely different
    Do actual keto haters exist besides vegans who don’t even hate it for its metabolic properties?

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      You know why cars are the way they are?

      • 12 months ago
        Anonymous

        Because they have engines that don’t rely on organic hormones and weight variables

        https://i.imgur.com/skziSeX.gif

        TIL the laws of thermodynamics did not exist until cars were invented

        >thermodynamics exist that means organic systems and a machine are the same despite the numerous variables
        If I only fill up my car with 1 gallon a day instead of a full tank my car will lose weight?

        • 12 months ago
          Anonymous

          >If I only fill up my car with 1 gallon a day instead of a full tank my car will lose weight?
          I don't understand where you're going with this analogy...
          If you're equating fuel with calories and the fuel in the tank with fat reserves and your goal is to make the car as light as possible (having the tank near-empty without removing parts of the car since that's basically your LBM) then it does make sense to put less fuel in the tank per day than your daily fuel consumption (if you have 20 gals in your tank, used 6 and refueled with 3 then you will start the following day with 17 gals in the tank).
          And please don't give me that "le hormones, le thyroid" spiel because that's a (you) problem if you have such a cursed body. If you're moving your body then you will use calories no matter where they are in your body or their form. Your body is not powered by the power of love and friendship like some sort of shounen animu.

          • 12 months ago
            Anonymous

            >pic related
            I’m not debunking CICO it is tried and true science as it gets but this extreme example is only as effective for morbidly obese, yes you will lots of weight but once you get to a healthy composition your hormonal balances will change as well as electrolyte requirements this is not just for people with endocrine dysfunction it goes for everybody, if you get even to a healthy bmi your body will suffer if you only apply a caloric deficit while not paying close attention to macro and micro needs, I don’t know if you think differently but that just needed to be said may it be common sense

            • 12 months ago
              Anonymous

              >fuel in the tank with fat reserves
              I did not mean this I meant the opposite in that car engines do not have secondary energy sources like humans do, we have adipose storages that can be used if not given direct fuel for the day or a period of time while cars do not, this is the justification for the existence of hormones as the body is designed to prolong itself in the absence of food
              A car has a set fuel requirement that will not change and must be met or it will not run, a human however has a changing set of requirements and factors that alter the baseline for homeostasis, hormones do not solely effect people with health problems they effect everybody

              That is understandable, it does make sense that the lower your BF% the harder it is to lose fat, your body will not choose to tap from a dwindling source of emergency fuel that has the potential to save your life in case of prolonged periods of absolutely zero caloric intake.
              For me, I don't care what your diet is be it keto, paelo or vegan. But I really don't believe that certain diets that have an inherent magical property that allows you to eat +500 calories over your expenditure and you body will be like "gee thats a lovely selection of macros, better dump those extra 500 calories down the poop chute for I have no need for them and burn fat instead".

          • 12 months ago
            Anonymous

            >fuel in the tank with fat reserves
            I did not mean this I meant the opposite in that car engines do not have secondary energy sources like humans do, we have adipose storages that can be used if not given direct fuel for the day or a period of time while cars do not, this is the justification for the existence of hormones as the body is designed to prolong itself in the absence of food
            A car has a set fuel requirement that will not change and must be met or it will not run, a human however has a changing set of requirements and factors that alter the baseline for homeostasis, hormones do not solely effect people with health problems they effect everybody

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      TIL the laws of thermodynamics did not exist until cars were invented

  7. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Friendly reminder that you are NOT ALLOWED to drink water is you're doing keto

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      this dude is a moron shill who is only interested in clicks. probably not even a doctor.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        He's a chiropractor unironically. It's what most "Doctors" on youtube actually are.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Real doctors on YouTube would be shilling pills.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            Ironically that's exactly what Paul Saladino does while claiming meat is all you need.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >trusting anyone with berg in their last name
      NGMI

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Hes literally right about this, moron. Look up WHO rehydration formula

    • 12 months ago
      Anonymous

      Not exactly wrong, that's why an IV is saline and not just water

    • 12 months ago
      Anonymous

      >not the BEST way"
      >moron reads it as "DONT DRINK WATER AT ALL"
      you homosexuals are so dishonest you'd lie about anything.

  8. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    I've been doing keto since January and I feel good so I'm just going to keep doing keto. I know, I know.. You're upset because you don't have enough discipline to cut out goyslop.. but I do and I'm just going to keep eating keto. Hahaha lmao.

    • 12 months ago
      Anonymous

      >you don't have enough discipline to cut out goyslop
      You are eating corn and ꜱoy fed beef pumped with hormones.
      >I eat grass fe--
      You don't

    • 12 months ago
      Anonymous

      >. but I do and I'm just going to keep eating keto.
      Not for long you aren't. Your kidneys and intestines are currently being irreversibly damaged.

      • 12 months ago
        Anonymous

        Maybe yours are but I'm not b***h made so I'll be alright. homosexual.

        • 12 months ago
          Anonymous

          You sound incredibly defensive.

          • 12 months ago
            Anonymous

            You'll have to excuse my angry outbursts. It's from raised T levels while being on keto.

            • 12 months ago
              Anonymous

              Being unable to control yourself is the lowest T thing ever

  9. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    why do people get mad at keto? theres nothing wrong with cutting out some of the basically useless carbs. wow not eating 1400 calories a day of white rice is mocked

    • 12 months ago
      Anonymous

      >why do people get mad at keto?
      They constantly shit up this board with moronic facebook-mom tier dietary advice that does long-term harm to your body
      > theres nothing wrong with cutting out some of the basically useless carbs
      Carbohydrates are essential for brain function and muscle growth
      > wow not eating 1400 calories a day of white rice is mocked
      If you're replacing those rice calories with butter and meat in the name of health then you're a moron who deserves ridicule

      • 12 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Carbohydrates are essential for brain function and muscle growth
        Is that why Ric Draisin and Arnold ate primarily protein and shied away from bread and sugar?

        • 12 months ago
          Anonymous

          This is hilarious because its so wrong

          • 12 months ago
            Anonymous

            Nope.

  10. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >taking off one of my tires
    so what is this supposed to be equivalent to? restricting a single macronutrient? the implication that it is correct and true that human being require all three macronutrients to survive. well that's fricking stupid.
    >so I can increase the longevity of my car's engine
    implying that removing a tire (an essential component of your vehicle) is equivalent to burning only ketones. also very fricking stupid. the better analogy here is
    >I'm using X fuel because I'm already hauling around a frickton of it.
    >why should I go to the gas station when I could instead use all the fuel I'm already hauling around?
    >It's my fricking fuel, might as well use it. I might consider going to a gas station at some point, one said fuel reserves start dwindling, but for now I don't have to worry about that.
    >It's more efficient because I can keep moving without worrying about a fuel stop.
    >Also I'm not going to say that gas station fuel is tainted or whatever, but I seem to get better fuel mileage on the fuel I'm currently using. Don't have to change my filter as often, either.
    I mean I know you're shitposting but could you maybe be less moronic?

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >the implication that it is correct and true that human being require all three macronutrients to survive.
      It is true. If you don't get enough dietary glucose, your body spends valuable energy converting glucogenic amino acids into glucose instead.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        He clearly means exogenous macronutrients, you pedantic frick

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >spends valuable energy
        doesn't your body "spend valuable energy" creating vitamins, amino acids, and peptides from precursors that you could otherwise consume directly?

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Yes! It does! Thank you for clarifying that a diverse diet composed of many different kinds of plant and animal food is optimal for human health.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            no need to get too excited veganboi i'm already omnivore

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              >advocating a diverse diet of plant and animal food
              >vegan
              Hmmm

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                hmmmmmm

                really, really made me think

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Imagine needing to take a b12 supplement because your diet is so moronic it wouldn't keep you alive without modern technology.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Imagine conflating carbohydrate consumption with veganism. Omnivores mog keto fats and vegans. Every champion athlete, every world-recording sportsman, every great outdoorsman, have all been omnivores.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            Keto diet is omnivorous you fricking tard.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            >Every champion athlete, every world-recording sportsman, every great outdoorsman
            I'm an omnivore myself but what you're saying is not really true. People have achieved similar performance on both a carnivore diet and vegan diet.
            For example Dave Mcleod could be described as the greatest living all-round climber (if by all-round you include sport, trad, ice, free solo, boulder).
            Here's him performing the highest-graded free solo ever performed: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvJOCJh1vpY
            And here's him ranting like an autist about his positive experiences with the carnivore diet: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ey93GV-oKQY
            Conversly, Alex Megos is a very successful sport/boulder climber. He was the first person in the world to onsite a 9a route. He has climbed two 9b+ routes (for context there are less than 20 people in history who have climbed a 9b+ route). He also came 9th at the last olympics. He did all of this on a vegan diet.

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              >two literally WHO climbers
              Lmao

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Not my fault you don't follow the sport.
                I'm sure you can find similar examples of high performing vegan or keto/carnivore athletes in many other sports.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                both of those people have acheived more than you will in your entire life

              • 12 months ago
                Anonymous

                What does using Zoomer Judeo Blackfied slang do to prove your point? They reached the pinnacle of physical human capabilities within their discipline. There is knowledge to be gained from looking at it. Your remedial homosexual logic would have you worshipping Billy Herrington as a world class athlete.

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              >People have achieved similar performance on both a carnivore diet and vegan diet
              After a lifetime of being omnivores and reaping the benefits of being omnivorous.

              >Dave McLeod
              He's 44 years old.

              >him performing
              That was 3 years ago, he was 3-4 years on keto at that point. Again, a lifetime as an omnivore led to him being able to do this.

              >Alex Megos
              29 years old, went vegan in 2021.

              Also all top climbers like Ondra, Megos and others are on roids.

              What the frick is your argument here?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >He's 44 years old.
                And still performing at an elite level and continuing to make strength gains (after 7 years of on/off carnivore dieting). How many 44 year olds can say the same? If you skim the video I linked he even compares strength gains on his carnivore diet vs off it (although I suspect for him there is a bit of a placebo/confirmation bias, given how the diet helped him in other ways).

                >Also all top climbers like Ondra, Megos and others are on roids.
                Lol. Lmao even.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >NOOOOO, CLIMBERS CAN'T BE ON GEAR
                lol, so your opinion is trash after all

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            Actually the greatest distance runner of all time Paavo Nurmi was mostly vegan vegetarian. 9 olympic golds and 3 silvers.

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              Fake news. He was vegetarian from age 15-21 but not when he was setting records.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >valuable energy
        energy isn't that valuable when you're covered in 200+ pounds of it

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Funny, all the fat fricks seem to be the ones promoting keto

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            yeah
            normal sized people don't need to lose weight

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              But all these normal sized people are eating loads of carbs, why aren't they getting fat?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                they didn't eat as much as the guys who got fat, who were also eating carbs when they got fat in the first place

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                So if fat people and regular sized people both eat carbs, but it was the amount of food that made the former group fat, is it fair to say that how much you eat is at least as important as what you eat?
                Is there some way of measuring the energy value of different food stuffs? Some way to compare the available energy in different foods...
                We could derive some kind of principle.. Energy In vs Energy Out.. Hmmm....

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >is it fair to say that how much you eat is at least as important as what you eat
                yeah
                nothing I said was against CICO, just a statement that "burning valuable energy" is that CO part

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            Fat vegans (or any other plant-based fad diet enjoyers) are unable to offer cutting advice, only bulking.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            That is a product of psychology - the people who are just starting x are more likely to talk about x. The people just start diet are more likely to be fat. Therefore the people talking about keto are most likely to be fat. It is not related to whether keto is good or bad. Unfortunately, takes a slightly higher than room temperature IQ to figure these things out.

  11. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    for those of us who struggle with sugar cravings, keto gives us an option so we can live for a few weeks and not feel the highs and lows of glycogen levels. it's nice, after a week of being on keto i don't crave sweets or any unhealthy.

  12. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Vegans hate keto because their entire "salads are healthy" platform relies on the assumption that humans have to eat plants in order to live optimally, while the natural progression of a ketogenic diet might lead someone to experiment with cutting out all carbs and finding they actually feel better than with carbs. It's evidence-based philosophy that the religious diet preachers hate.

    It costs you nothing to stop eating carbs

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >finding they actually feel better than with carbs
      Yet nobody, absolutely nobody, sticks with keto long-term. The only people famous for claiming to do so are people selling that diet.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        There are plenty of people throughout history who have been on ketogenic diets. The longevity of the ketogenic diet hasn't been disproven and there are strong evidences for people living longer and outcompeting the dumber and slower carb eaters.
        Non argument, but then again, that's all IST ever throws my way. I'm waiting for the day someone can convince me otherwise, but it's all terrible research or anecdotal

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >plenty of people
          Such as...?

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            Everyone who has ever been born, including you, but that's a given.
            Anyone who has ever fasted enters a ketogenic state to sustain themselves. Ketone bodies are created from stored fat to fuel the cells in your body that can use it.
            Being afraid of ketosis is very childish, since it's the primary metabolic state.
            Just stop eating plants, okay?

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              >Everyone who has ever been born
              I'm asking about lifelong keto.
              Who is this "plenty of people"?

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >plenty of people throughout history who have been on ketogenic diets
          Who? Also, how long and why didn't they stick to it and was it verified and why is it that after 50 years of nonstop pushing of that bullshit counting from Atkins with millions keto books sold and millions of youtube views and 3 million subs on r/keto long-term population studies on effect of keto are impossible to do BECAUSE NOBOBY STICKS TO IT with quit percentage at 2 year mark on Virta Health own studies being 70% WITH ACTIVE COACHING AND PROVIDED MEALS.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            Atkins diet fails because it includes carbohydrates. This should be apparent if you read the thread. Atkins is not inherently ketogenic and fails for those who wander into insulin spikes.
            There is no long-term data on ketogenic diets in the modern sense, simply because insulin was only discovered in America less than 80 years ago. Ketogenic diets have existed prior with persons who eat only meat. Obviously.
            Without ketosis, humanity in the ice age would've not fared so well. Can't quite pick apples from nothing.

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              Humans did NOT live ATOP the CONTINENTAL GLACIER you fricking moron

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >humans can't exist in cold because... because I said so!
                Eskimo denialism. Plant-basedboys are so pathetic.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Okay you're an actual moron, let's make this simple: tell me what did mammoths and other animals eat atop 2km high continental ice shelf?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Think your statement through for a bit more, you might understand why you sound brain damaged.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Your brain is astonishingly defective. Let me walk you through this really simple
                >you claim humans totally lived without any carbohydrates atop continental ice shelf eating only meat which comes from animals
                >however animals also have to eat something
                >but nothing grows atop 2km of ice
                >animals can't live there
                What meat did the humans eat there then?

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              >not real keto
              You people are exactly like communists, first cheering in full psychosis how it or latest rebranding of it is the best thing ever that totally works, then it doesn't work as always, and you start saying every time it wasn't real keto

  13. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    go to bed grandma

  14. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Why would anyone eat a high carb diet? They must have put absolutely no thought into the topic themselves and merely trust the government.

    I mean, have you ever wondered why we need to brush our teeth? There is literally only one substance that causes tooth decay - carbohydrate rich foods. There is also only one macronutrient that the body doesn't need - carbohydrates. There is also only one macronutrient that causes blood sugar spikes and insulin resistance - carbohydrates.

    It is pretty fricking obvious, not necessarily that you should do keto, but you should avoid high carb diets like the fricking plague. You should try to limit high carb foods as much as you fricking can. Holy frick you would have to be stupid to think anything else.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      As far I know, predators also get shitty teeth later in life.

    • 12 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Why would anyone eat a high carb diet? They must have put absolutely no thought into the topic themselves and merely trust the government.
      The government advises a mixed macro diet

  15. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    keto is good if you are sedentary
    the people who try to pretend its IST are stupid though

  16. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >eat enough protein to maximize muscle growth
    >eat enough fat for hormonal production while favoring SFAs and MUFAs and avoiding PUFAs
    >fill in the rest of my caloric budget with carbs
    No more schizo nonsense, this is the truth.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >activates the randle cycle like a boss and glycates his tissues
      Hello, me from 10 years ago. Don't do it

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >the body's normal function is somehow bad
        Sure, deplete your glycogen stores while you're at it too. I eat over 100g carbs with my breakfast and I have a full six pack with some minor oblique definition. You're just as delusional as the vegantards

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        The randle cycle isn't something that "activates" because it's never switched off.
        Your body is constantly in a state of using fatty acids, ketones and glucose for energy. It's in a constant state of dynamic flux. You don't switch from 100% carb burning to 100% fat burning.
        Stop getting your microbiology from chiropractors.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Yes, that's what I said. If you were familiar with the randle cycle you'd know that long chain fatty acids and glucose shut out glucose absorption, leading to glycation when there is an over abundance of glucose in the blood. This happens readily and easily when you consume carbohydrates. What you've said is meaningless unnecessary static to me, as the existence of the randle cycle shows preferential treatment towards fatty acids against glucose absorption into the cell.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            to glycation when there is an over abundance of glucose in the blood.
            >my muscles seeing all this free glucose that they can eat

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              Your muscles are hardly given a choice.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >hey thanks for all the glucose big guy, when's the next workout? our glycogen stores are full, let's get to it

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            >glucose shut out glucose absorption
            Well our cells can't hold an infinite amount of glucose anon

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              I know that. That's why the steady stream of glucose your body produces in lieu of exogenous carbohydrates is balanced out so as to not glycate your tissues. Throwing more glucose into the mix just unbalances this act for no real reason.
              Steady blood glucose is a good thing

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                It's quite simple. You consume exogenous glucose and your body reduces glucagon and reduces gluconeogenesis.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                And then my body releases insulin which shuttles all of that glucose to my hungry muscles. Yum yum, thank you based body

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                get a play-pen, you two

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                And then your eventual hyperinsulinemia causes insulin resistance on top of glycation. This is why we check our HbA1c

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Reducing gluconeogenesis won't remove the hyperglycemia. Gluconeogenesis isn't the issue here.

                I'm athletic and metabolically healthy so I have good insulin sensitivity. Sedentary people shouldn't give diet advice to people that actually use their bodies.
                Love me carbs, love me sprinting, love me cycling, love me weightlifting. Simple as.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                That's not how insulin works, buddy. Your blood tests won't reveal the truth unless your doctor orders a C-peptide test, which he won't, since you're not complaining of any symptoms. You will pay the price in your later years, as insulin resistance is a slow killer.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                I'm not complaining of any symptoms because I'm not prediabetic. The majority of people AREN'T diabetic despite consuming carbohydrate. The vast majority of T2D are overweight and sedentary.
                The number of lean, athletic people with T2D is so low as to be virtually nonexistent.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                No, this is a misattribution thanks to the HbA1c tests commonly used to diagnose diabetes after hyperglycemia is discovered. You can detect the presence of insulin-resistance (prediabetes) a decade sooner using a C-peptide test. Measure hyperinsulinemia, not hyperglycemia. Only when there's a critical point will there be hyperglycemia, although without a significant dietary change, it's practically certain.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Lol whatever dude, keep trying to diagnose me based on literally zero information all you want, it doesn't change reality - lean, athletic people develop T2D so rarely that it is practically a non event. In the few cases that it does happen there is generally a family history of it, indicating some genetic predisposition.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                It's not tested for, simply because of the assumption that athletes are healthy. Tracking athletes and their later life health tells the full story, one you'll have to live through, I'm afraid.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                No, this is a misattribution thanks to the HbA1c tests commonly used to diagnose diabetes after hyperglycemia is discovered. You can detect the presence of insulin-resistance (prediabetes) a decade sooner using a C-peptide test. Measure hyperinsulinemia, not hyperglycemia. Only when there's a critical point will there be hyperglycemia, although without a significant dietary change, it's practically certain.

                >j-just you wait, only two more weeks and the carbs will kill you this time FOR SURE

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                [...]
                [...]
                Not him, but I'm 29 and I eat a shitload of carbs, always been leading an active lifestyle, played a bunch of sports, lift weights and literally never had problems with insulin or blood sugar levels.
                A sedentary lifestyle is literally your biggest enemy.

                The advice to get your c-peptides tested is there for you to take. I think it's a good thing that there are people leading an active lifestyle with type 2 diabetes or prediabetes. The separation of the myth of active lifestyle allowing for the safe consumption of a poisonous diet from the minds of the masses is a good thing.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >limp wristed sedentary b***h cope
                Only 5% of sumo wrestlers have diabetes.
                Over 10% of the US has diabetes.
                Sumo wrestlers are fat as frick and eat boatloads of carbs.
                A sedentary lifestyle will drag you down no matter the diet, we are designed to move.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                There isn't an exercise in the world that will get rid of your insulin, anon. You fundamentally don't understand your disease, yet.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                [...]
                The advice to get your c-peptides tested is there for you to take. I think it's a good thing that there are people leading an active lifestyle with type 2 diabetes or prediabetes. The separation of the myth of active lifestyle allowing for the safe consumption of a poisonous diet from the minds of the masses is a good thing.

                in reality even with zerocarb you don't even have low glucose, hba1c or insulin compared to people in great metabolic health, so acting smug about it makes you look even dumber

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >get rid of your insulin
                Your body constantly produces insulin, moron.
                You fundamentally don't understand what you're talking about.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Hyperinsulinemia, which is what you're seeking, implies that you have more insulin than a healthy individual. You're not going to beat me with words, so just keep seething.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >Hyperinsulinemia
                Exercise has been proven to reduce and prevent it.

                >You're not going to beat me with words
                ???
                Reddit's the other way, kid.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                No exercise in the world gets rid of insulin, which your sick body overproduces in response to carbohydrates being crammed into your belly to fuel your activities with short bursts of dirty energy. Insulin resistance comes next, as your body can't use the insulin it has effectively thanks to glucose being blocked out. I've already explained this, so you're just trying too hard and coming back to earlier points. Eat meat.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >gets rid of insulin
                You won't get rid of insulin in any way.

                >overproduces
                Oh no, when you eat a bunch of carbs, your body temporarily produces more insulin to be able to absorb carbs effectively, this is absolute insanity, you will die!
                lmao

                >Insulin resistance comes next
                Because...?

                >glucose being blocked out
                ???

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >body can't use the insulin it has effectively thanks to glucose being blocked out
                Actually insulin is blocked out from cells preventing its normal operation (enabling glucose to enter cell) and the one and only thing doing that blocking is intramyocellural lipids (fat inside cells) which is why people doing keto start reporting abnormally high blood sugar levels and which is also why weight-loss reverses T2 diabetes.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Cool head-canon. However that's extremely moronic when you think about it for a minute.
                Like, everything you assumed was false and illogical. Insulin can be blocked without resistance, otherwise cells would be overwhelmed with glucose and die. This is not a defect. Jesus Christ, I'm talking to robots, I have to be.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >source: my ass

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                You don't understand the difference between normal receptor regulation ("blocking") and abnormal diseased blocking (excess fat in place where it should not be). Because you're a fricking moron, just like every single keto fanatic I've ever talked to.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                No, seriously, think about it. How would that even work? That would kill everyone who stored fat. Why would we store fat if it were lethal? Please, think hard on this.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Jesus you're a fricking idiot holy shit. We store fat in ADIPOSE TISSUE but when it is inside MUSCLE CELLS it's in the WRONG PLACE

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >consumes fat and carbs
                >insulin gets released to feed cells
                >fat enters cell and locks carbohydrate from entering the cell
                >insulin released from consuming carbohydrate fails to work and the body produces more insulin
                >this preferential treatment towards fat is seen as the reason for insulin resistance rather than the needless consumption of carbohydrate when the body already has fat

                Okay. You're feral. I've already gone through this. What point is there in consuming exogenous carbohydrates if they're going to release insulin? It's not fat that causes insulin to spike. Get over it.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                post body

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Fat enter cells without insulin. Insulin has nothing to do with it. Goddamnit thats the entire point of keto diet, you should fricking know at least that much?! And that has the side effect of impaired glucose tolerance and insulin response, aka diabetes.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Meanwhile in reality, literally any exercise had benefits on your insulin sensitivity and allows muscle utilisation of glucose regardless of insulin state. Exercise is consistently and universally recommended as the primary mitigation strategy for T2D.

                https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10683091/

                >Up to two hours after exercise, glucose uptake is in part elevated due to insulin independent mechanisms, probably involving a contraction-induced increase in the amount of GLUT4 associated with the plasma membrane and T-tubules.

                >However, a single bout of exercise can increase insulin sensitivity for at least 16 h post exercise in healthy as well as NIDDM subjects

                >It is concluded that physical training can be considered to play an important, if not essential role in the treatment and prevention of insulin insensitivity.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                There isn't an exercise in the world that will get rid of your insulin, anon. You fundamentally don't understand your disease, yet.

                Hyperinsulinemia, which is what you're seeking, implies that you have more insulin than a healthy individual. You're not going to beat me with words, so just keep seething.

                >humans can't exist in cold because... because I said so!
                Eskimo denialism. Plant-basedboys are so pathetic.

                Cool head-canon. However that's extremely moronic when you think about it for a minute.
                Like, everything you assumed was false and illogical. Insulin can be blocked without resistance, otherwise cells would be overwhelmed with glucose and die. This is not a defect. Jesus Christ, I'm talking to robots, I have to be.

                No, seriously, think about it. How would that even work? That would kill everyone who stored fat. Why would we store fat if it were lethal? Please, think hard on this.

                post body

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                That's not how insulin works, buddy. Your blood tests won't reveal the truth unless your doctor orders a C-peptide test, which he won't, since you're not complaining of any symptoms. You will pay the price in your later years, as insulin resistance is a slow killer.

                No, this is a misattribution thanks to the HbA1c tests commonly used to diagnose diabetes after hyperglycemia is discovered. You can detect the presence of insulin-resistance (prediabetes) a decade sooner using a C-peptide test. Measure hyperinsulinemia, not hyperglycemia. Only when there's a critical point will there be hyperglycemia, although without a significant dietary change, it's practically certain.

                Not him, but I'm 29 and I eat a shitload of carbs, always been leading an active lifestyle, played a bunch of sports, lift weights and literally never had problems with insulin or blood sugar levels.
                A sedentary lifestyle is literally your biggest enemy.

              • 12 months ago
                Anonymous

                These seem to be exceptions rather than rules. The majority of people are fat, and get diabetic as they become older.

              • 12 months ago
                Anonymous

                Even the majority of fat old people don't become diabetic.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Reducing gluconeogenesis won't remove the hyperglycemia. Gluconeogenesis isn't the issue here.

          • 12 months ago
            Anonymous

            >just thinking about carbs too hard causes you to get kicked out of ketosis
            >obviously nature intended man to stay in ketosis 24/7
            makes sense

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >microbiology
          ??

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        it's only a fricking problem if you eat a dessert after a really fatty meal

  17. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >be typical ketolard
    >lose 10lbs of water weight in a week from no more glycogen storage
    >forever proclaim the magic of the keto diet constantly to the point of annoyance and still be fat 10 years later anyway despite le low insulin

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      So Dana White just lost water weight huh? hahaha. You dumb head. I don't do keto, just low carb, and don't need to lose any weight, but it is quite obvious that low carb diets have worked for people more than just water weight.

  18. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    This... but unironically

  19. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Makes me feel good
    I get more foggy when not running off ketones and crash. I also perform well in the gym even with low carb, my lifts stay above 90% of my typical carbed out lifts, and Im doing olympic lifts just fine off of ketones even if not optimal. I just like the mental edge. I still eat rather lean (140g protein, medium fat, high fiber) and keep a moderate deficit.

  20. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    a reminder that jimmy moore nuked his metabolism for good after going keto for more than a decade yet shills will tell you that keto is a lifestyle

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >keto was this man's lifestyle
      >yet shills will tell you that keto is a lifestyle

      what did she mean by this

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >the failure of a single person is representative of the failure that the entirety of humanity will endure if they choose a similar path
      if that's your logic there are plenty of people out there who went vegan and went back once they realized that it wasn't all it's cracked up to be.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        ah but i don't advocate for veganism my fat friend, in fact i loath it so much, perhaps even more than i hate keto

  21. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Carbs are so bad for you that a diet entirely of rice, fruit, sugar, fruit juice can completely reverse and CURE type 2 diabetes.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Inb4 a keto lard tries to claim that this is evidence that carbs are bad for you because these poor people wasted away and atrophied their bodies on the rice diet.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Notice the lack of fats. This is unsustainable for a lifestyle, but works because it doesn't wienerblock the sugar as hard as mixing fats and carbs tends to.

    • 12 months ago
      Anonymous

      Where's the source that this meme diet works?

      • 12 months ago
        Anonymous

        Google kempner rice diet

  22. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    I know this is a bot thread on a bot site but I would just like to say that grains are shit and carbs in general are useless and only good for staying ravenously hungry and gaining weight. Thanks.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >carbs in general are useless and only good for staying ravenously hungry and gaining weight.
      I love it when fatties start projecting

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Nah, just stating the obvious.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Funny then how I was swimming yesterday as usual (1,5km constant speed nonstop, 200m rapid max force intervals), came back ravenously hungry as usual, and blunted that hunger with some bread, low-fat spread and thin turkey deli and rice and tofu, as usual. Maybe it was all about that 20g of turkey slices for taste hmm.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >low-fat spread
        Yikes

  23. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >excercise

    >I'm redlining my car for half an hour 6 days a week
    >why? that's insane
    >nah that'll make it more powerful if I do it for years

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Rigorous exercise decreases test and wears out your body long term, so it actually does fit the analogy.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >excercise bad

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Learn to read Black person. Going ham during training every time drops your test and fricks your shit up.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            >excercise must mean overtraining
            sub 90iq detected
            You need to insert shit I didn't say, because my actual point is correct and you know it.

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              I already told you to learn how to read, you chimp.

              >redlining car
              >rigorous exercise
              Think for a bit and come back to me, kid.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                you pretend rigorous excercise is the same as severe overtraining, so you have an excuse for your fat ass never leaving the couch.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >you pretend rigorous exercise is the same as severe overtraining
                No.

                >never leaving the couch
                I'm bigger and lift more than you though.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                post body. make claim prove claim.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                post body ketotard

  24. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >not going for monke diet
    >fruits for carbs and fiber
    >flesh of lesser beings for protein and fat
    Simple as

  25. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    I remember a time when this site had more than demoralization and social engineering threads. What a time it was.

  26. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    what the frick is up with these meme diets? Every five years or so some new fad diet pops up, gets shilled to death, and then fades into obscurity after nobody loses weight on it. Just eat less you fat fricks

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      NOOOOO, CICO LITERALLY DOESN'T WORK BECAUSE... BECAUSE I SAID SO
      MOM WHERE THE FRICK IS MY BACON

  27. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >ketolards coping throughout whole thread
    >nobody posted body
    Sasuga, ketoschizo-chan.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      you're not posting body either though

  28. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    people will do anything to get fit except work out

  29. 12 months ago
    Anonymous

    Keto made it easier for me to do IF and eventually multiple day fasting. Some people are simply addicts. Sugar is a useful tool. So are amphetamines. Overuse is a fine line and varies between individuals.

  30. 12 months ago
    Anonymous

    Keto works really well for people that want to target FAT only and keep muscle. Its literally been working for years. It's what every single competition body builder does.

    here is the problem tho. People are weak and some cant do it so they try to dispute it. Just like a cold plunge. You can hate on it all you want but it works when you cycle it.

  31. 12 months ago
    Anonymous

    Never has a food choice recommendation caused so much gay lisping seethe to establishmentarianists. For that reason alone I started doing it, I keep doing it because I was pleasantly surprised with the results.

    • 12 months ago
      Anonymous

      Keto is a multibllion dollar diet industry. Stop deluding yourself youre some edgy contrarian fighting the system.

      • 12 months ago
        Anonymous

        Well yeah, it's the multibillion dollar industry of meat, eggs, and green vegetables. Don't pretend like you need to be a moron and eat food with "keto" on the label.

        • 12 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Keto is a multibllion dollar diet industry.
          Somebody tell him about the wheat and seed oil industries.

          Diet industry as in selling a diet and related products, not food production. It's a fricking huge business.
          www.grandviewresearch.com/industry-analysis/ketogenic-diet-market
          >USD 9.57 billion

      • 12 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Keto is a multibllion dollar diet industry.
        Somebody tell him about the wheat and seed oil industries.

  32. 12 months ago
    Anonymous

    I don’t intentionally do Keto but I just realized that in the past week the only carbs I have had are 5 apples and 2 potatoes. Baked chicken thighs are just too OP for a cut.

  33. 12 months ago
    Anonymous

    Keto is inherently biologically flawed for fat loss Black folk. You have literally but your body into overtime mode by tricking it into thinking that it's in a survival mode where it needs to burn what ever auxiliary energy source it can to survive. However, in order to keep this going you need to constantly be eating fat and protein. Using it for weight loss doesn't make sense because your body is really fighting to keep the fat on while still trying to use as little as possible to survive off of. You are pretty much driving on a spare tire and slowly removing each lug nut until the whole wheel comes off.

  34. 12 months ago
    Anonymous

    idk my fat dad is doing keto again and basically starving himself and is compeltely in denial thinking he's doing anything significant, like a week into the diet

    I know he will fail it once again, and this is like the 4th time he will be on this shitty diet

    I knew that he would stay fat forever when he told me point black once that nearing the end of the keto diet he was on, he said he started dreaming nightly about food and drooling about it

    like come on man

    • 12 months ago
      Anonymous

      Have him switch to low carb high protein and start IF
      You can’t expect somebody to get their diet in control on the first time it took me probably 10 times trying to diet before getting it right and learning consistency

  35. 12 months ago
    Anonymous

    Low carb diets gets normies who only half care to the right sort of results without them having to learn anything, and it appeals because it let's them have shit that other diets restrict.

    Smart people who do it gradually just learn nutrition and end up with something more sustainable and less dogmatic.

    So in that sense it's just another filter.

  36. 12 months ago
    Anonymous

    As a based Omnivore on a 75%+ plant based diet, with animal products in the rest (including meat), I hope that you understand that Ketotards and Vegans are both moronic.

    • 12 months ago
      Anonymous

      >As a based Omnivore on a 75%+ plant based diet
      So the standard american diet?

      • 12 months ago
        Anonymous

        Whole foods only, sorry I forgot that part.

  37. 12 months ago
    Anonymous

    Keto is good if you have a lot of fat to burn. It's not magic. It just keeps you from having insulin spikes so you don't want to snack. You naturally eat at a calorie deficit and you loose weight.

    I don't know what is hard about that for some people to understand. You don't get cravings. You don't snack. You eat a normal meal of broccoli and grilled chicken and the weight just comes off.

  38. 12 months ago
    Anonymous

    Keto bad

  39. 12 months ago
    Anonymous

    I'm going to repeat, keto works because you naturally don't want to snack and you naturally eat at below your cal needs.

    Why do we have to keep talking about this?

    • 12 months ago
      Anonymous

      >keto works because you naturally don't want to snack and you naturally eat at below your cal needs
      We hear of people "falling off the keto wagon" all the time going on uncontrolled binges.

  40. 12 months ago
    Anonymous

    >eat animal products and green vegetables in the form of whole foods
    >YOU'RE GOING TO LITERALLY DIE IF YOU DO THAT

    The carbohydrate and processed food shills are nuts.

  41. 12 months ago
    Anonymous

    I don't know why we have to keep talking about this. Everyone's healthy meals look the same. Baked or grilled chicken with veggies. Nuts. Eggs. Cheese.

    If you're not on a cut, eat more fruit, sweet veggies. Sometimes eat pastas and rice. Avoid sugar and soda.

    It's literally the same shit. Most cut diets look like what keto guys eat. No one on fit is easy butter wrapped bacon.

  42. 12 months ago
    Anonymous

    Plant based diets are the healthiest period. Look at traditional jap diet, nothing but rice and vegetables with a little bit of fish here and there, and they have the most centenarians. Same with every single place where people live the longest and healthiest.

    Yes, keto has it's place if you want to lose weight or have untreatable seizures, or to mimic fasting to induce autophagy, but for a maintaining kind of everyday diet, plant based is the way to go.

    Why is that so hard to grasp and understand for so many people? g

    Thanks to plants and agriculture humans ascended from only being hunter gatherers, making way for modern civilization, enlightenment, science, medicine you name it.

    • 12 months ago
      Anonymous
      • 12 months ago
        Anonymous

        this is more from the lack of chewing due to soft food

      • 12 months ago
        Anonymous

        Nice picture of more robust skulls from a time where you needed to be more robust.

        >Plant based diets are the healthiest period.
        Stopped reading there
        Vegantards, carnitards, and ketotards all get the rope
        Omnivorechads rule this earth

        Plant based doesn't mean vegan moron..it means the majority of food should come from whole plant based sources

        • 12 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Plant based doesn't mean vegan moron..it means the majority of food should come from whole plant based sources
          I prefer half and half, especially because I'm very big on eggs and dairy, but if that works for you then fine

          • 12 months ago
            Anonymous

            how are eggs not plant based it's not meat

            • 12 months ago
              Anonymous

              What

              • 12 months ago
                Anonymous

                re-read my question again then, eggs are not meat, they're as close to a plant as you can get without being a plant

              • 12 months ago
                Anonymous

                ????

              • 12 months ago
                Anonymous

                if it looks like a seed and it cracks like a seed it's a seed is what I'm saying I hope I was clear and I wish you a good night I have to attend to some personal stuff now think about it!

              • 12 months ago
                Anonymous

                It's an egg not a seed but okay bro

              • 12 months ago
                Anonymous

                thank you have a good one

        • 12 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Plant based doesn't mean vegan moron..it means the majority of food should come from whole plant based sources
          Sounds moronic, gay, and inconsistent with the diet human beings were designed for (60% animal derive + 40% everything else).

    • 12 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Plant based diets are the healthiest period.
      Stopped reading there
      Vegantards, carnitards, and ketotards all get the rope
      Omnivorechads rule this earth

  43. 12 months ago
    Anonymous

    I’ve long given up arguing with keto cultists. A huge waste of time, they are fundamentally misinformed about so many things.

    • 12 months ago
      Anonymous

      What are you even supposed to do anyway? At this point it feels like there's a coordinated effort to mess with people or something, because whenever you BTFO the vegans or whatever, ketogays/carnigays enter the thread and start fighting you as well instead of fighting the vegans. You'd think that the different camps of diet cultists would fight each other but no they're always arguing with the normal people in the threads for some reason. It just gets annoying when you spend half an hour grabbing all the relevant data to BTFO some stupid vegan, then a ketogay enters the thread and now you're supposed to spend another half hour going over studies to BTFO the ketogay as well? It's just a waste of time

      • 12 months ago
        Anonymous

        Anon, I don't know if you're still there, but this is a demoralization website now. It's not a place for discussion and I'm not kidding or exaggerating when I say that. There is no active board on this site where you can have a real discussion anymore without this kind of shit happening. I spent so much time watching the decline before I had enough and the longer you stay away from the site the more obvious it is (and the worse it gets). I don't even know why I'm back here now but I wish you well and hope you can find a better place to speak to people, anon.

        • 12 months ago
          Anonymous

          >I don't know if you're still there, but this is a demoralization website now. It's not a place for discussion and I'm not kidding or exaggerating when I say that.
          I understand that perfectly, but I'm trying to brute-force good threads into existence regardless. For reference, the whitepill and redpill threads that are up rn were both posted by me, and I think the discussion in both of those is infinitely better than 99% of the threads on this board (and IST in general). I should probably stop posting in threads like these tbh, you're right in that nothing of value gets posted here. I mean just look at this thread, most of it is just strawmanning and shitflinging dumbasses fighting eachother instead of having an actual discussion.
          >I don't even know why I'm back here now but I wish you well and hope you can find a better place to speak to people, anon.
          Thanks bro, I try my best. In spite of all the issues I mentioned about this place though, every other place on the internet is even more insufferable to me so my only choice is to figure out something here. It is possible to have good conversations and discussions here, you just have to work really hard for it and I'm willing to do that.

          • 12 months ago
            Anonymous

            Best of luck, anon. I know it sounds stupid, but I unironically saw my life changed in multiple ways for the better because of this website and it has pained me to see it rapidly deteriorate since 2016 and the rise of the culture war and other mind-warping nonsense. So I'd love to see it kept alive in some form or fashion, too, and I admire you for keeping up the good fight. You're a real one.

            • 12 months ago
              Anonymous

              >I know it sounds stupid, but I unironically saw my life changed in multiple ways for the better because of this website
              Same, diving into the sea of piss and shit to grab the diamonds is worth it IMO. Despite all the BS I've gained so much from this place it's unreal
              >So I'd love to see it kept alive in some form or fashion, too
              That's the idea, even if you can't fix the website or the board as a whole, you can carve out your own little area that still has high quality discussion. It makes the most sense since there's no way to easily fix all of IST or something along those lines, it's just not tenable
              >and I admire you for keeping up the good fight. You're a real one.
              Thanks brother

  44. 12 months ago
    Anonymous

    most meme diets work in the short term by limiting goyslop, but they all have problems that adherents ignore because they get emotionally attached to their consumer choices from decades of brainwashing. I do mostly wfpb but thats only bc of my genetics.

    • 12 months ago
      Anonymous

      >wfpb but thats only bc of my genetics
      do you have the genetics of a chimp lmao

  45. 12 months ago
    Anonymous

    A realistic version of that comic would be asking why a person is using ethanol free fuel and then the other person saying that the car runs more efficiently on ethanol free fuel.

  46. 12 months ago
    Anonymous

    >someone actually spent time “drawing” this shit

  47. 12 months ago
    Anonymous

    Either to lose body fat while not being hungry. Or to deal with blood sugar issues.

  48. 12 months ago
    Anonymous

    my buddy had to get impacted feces surgically removed after going full ketard

Leave a Reply to Anonymous Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *