/ck/ - Food & Cooking

How about you ask a real nutritionist for important health information instead of fat fucks at /ck/.

>>11133559
Real nutritionists have been mostly brainwashed into CICO and think salt is bad for you even though there's no evidence for that.

>>11133512
Follow your doctor's advice. Then when he kills you, your survivors can sue him for malpractice.

>>11133568
implying a bunch of random fucks on /ck/ know better and or are willing to give you proper advice. CICO isn't a diet anyway, it's just one of the universal rules of most diets. obviously different people with different conditions will need to tune their diets accordingly. also no real nutritionist thinks salt is inherently bad for you, only excess in salt, which is what amerifats indulge in very often anyway. anything can be bad for you if you take too much of it.

>>11133594
>suing a doctor
Better have some $$$ before you go.

Keto is actually a form of suicide marketed as a diet

>>11133631
CICO is the only rule that matters. Everything else is just shilling for products and supplements.

>>11133631
Salt being bad is a myth. Carbs are what's fucking up everyone's health. People didn't get heart attacks or cancer back when they lived like eskimos and only ate meat. Agriculture has been the biggest mistake in human history.

>>11133657
People didn't get heart attacks or cancer when they lived off bread or rice. Medicine is the real killer.

>>11133512
>carbs are actually worse for you
Insulin is the real killer, it causes inflammation and it is arterial inflammation that triggers plaque buildup. But carbs raise your blood sugar which spikes your insulin, and some carbs cause insulin resistance which chronically elevates your levels.

>>11133657
Both are bad when taken in excess for different reasons. Just cause one's worse doesn't make the other better

>>11133512
In the short term nearly all biomarkers get worse with ketogenic diet, including the fashionable high density LDL particles. After a year or 2 it gets better again, but that seems a rather poor horse to bet on.

Whole Food Plant Based will immediately improve the biomarkers and unlike a vegan you can have cheat days ...

>>11133559
>hurr butter is bad because its solid in room temp so its going to be solid in your veins
>hurr eggs are bad because they contain cholesterol
>hurr eat sugar, eat more sugar, sugar is the most important part of the diet
>hurr eat 5-10 meals a day because that way your carb induced hunger is more easily tolerated
>hurr drink skim milk and avoid using oil during cooking so that you can stay hungry and eat sugar snack 30 mins after a meal
>hurr smoking tobacco is perfectly healthy and doesnt cause cancer, its good for your nerves
>hurr led in fuel makes the engines run more smoothly, who cares if it makes kids mentally retarded

The pathway to hell is paved by good intentions and lobbyist dollars given to the right expert.

>>11136232
>get worse with ketogenic diet
This shit again
There have been a shitton of studies done the last few decades trying to prove this in an attempt to kill the Atkins diet, and they keep proving the opposite, even the Atkins diet, as bad as it is, actually improves health markers both short and long term.

>>11136369
>hurr eat sugar, eat more sugar, sugar is the most important part of the diet
Said nobody ever

>>11136380
Google "food triangle"

>>11133720
fat causes insulin resistance when mixed with carbs. either eat all fat, or all carbs. but don't eat a mix of both in a meal.

>>11133512
>carbs are actually worse for you than salt or fat.
your heart attack was Gods way of telling you to stop being a retard.

>>11136369
>>hurr butter is bad because its solid in room temp so its going to be solid in your veins
Most the hard fats except stearic are hypercholesterolemic.
>>hurr eggs are bad because they contain cholesterol
Wether it's because they contain cholesterol or because of some other reason, the evidence still firmly points to egg yolks being hypercholesterolemic as well.

All including small LDL particles.

>>11136374
>There have been a shitton of studies done the last few decades trying to prove this in an attempt to kill the Atkins diet, and they keep proving the opposite, even the Atkins diet, as bad as it is, actually improves health markers both short and long term.
Okay, show me a study where it doesn't raise total cholesterol and apolipoprotein B (the core of the LDL particles, the more of it the more/smaller particles).

I said biomarkers, not health markers ... I meant biomarkers for atherosclerosis. The accuracy of those biomarkers for ketogenic diet sufferers is somewhat of an open question.

>>11133568
Nonsense. I'm working with a real nutritionist, well, ex-nutritionist, because it pays crap, so he switched jobs, anyway he's a big fan of keto and fasting.

>>11133642
Listen to this guy, his evidence is based on feels.

>>11133648

>>11133657
HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA

Neck yourself

>>11136498
total cholesterol hasn't been considered a biomarker for anything in particular in four decades anon, as soon as we started figuring out how to separate out the various densities we discovered that total cholesterol wasn't correlated with anything. LDL hasn't been considered significant in at least 25 years. The biomarker for atherosclerosis is the triglyceride/HDL ratio (should be low - i.e triglycerides low and HDL should be high).

>https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15148063
> Compared with recipients of the low-fat diet, recipients of the low-carbohydrate diet had greater decreases in serum triglyceride levels (change, -0.84 mmol/L vs. -0.31 mmol/L [-74.2 mg/dL vs. -27.9 mg/dL]; P = 0.004) and greater increases in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels (0.14 mmol/L vs. -0.04 mmol/L [5.5 mg/dL vs. -1.6 mg/dL]; P < 0.001).

>https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/217514
>There were significantly favorable changes in all lipid levels within the MLC [Modified Low Carb] but not within the NCEP [National Cholesterol Education Program] group.

>http://annals.org/article.aspx?articleid=1900694
> At 12 months, participants on the low-carbohydrate diet had greater decreases in weight (mean difference in change, −3.5 kg [95% CI, −5.6 to −1.4 kg]; P = 0.002), fat mass (mean difference in change, −1.5% [CI, −2.6% to −0.4%]; P = 0.011), ratio of total–high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol (mean difference in change, −0.44 [CI, −0.71 to −0.16]; P = 0.002), and triglyceride level (mean difference in change, −0.16 mmol/L [−14.1 mg/dL] [CI, −0.31 to −0.01 mmol/L {−27.4 to −0.8 mg/dL}]; P = 0.038) and greater increases in HDL cholesterol level (mean difference in change, 0.18 mmol/L [7.0 mg/dL] [CI, 0.08 to 0.28 mmol/L {3.0 to 11.0 mg/dL}]; P < 0.001) than those on the low-fat diet.

>>11137084
Tell me more about how all calories are the same.

>>11137912
>LDL hasn’t been significant in the past 25 years
Why do you blatantly lie? And none of your links speak to anything you’re even talking about which don’t even reveal baseline counts of triglyceride levels and two of which were calculated from questionnaires and not controlled. The authors in one of the studies even emphasize complex carb consumption increase and an increase in mono and polyunsaturated fat consumption, because of the lack of reliability in distincting the types of carbs and fats consumed in the study

>densities
Ah yes the old soccer mom myth that large fluffy cholesterol particles are a panacea

The progression of cholesterol alongside atherosclerotic plaque buildup
https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1161/01.cir.0000103664.47406.49

Dietary cholesterol increases oxidation of LDL cholesterol
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/10704618/

Saturated impairs anti-inflammatory properties of HDL
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/16904539/

>>11136498
>worried about LDL instead of VLDL
>doesn't know that LDL isn't actually measured during a lipid panel analysis

>>11137992
>https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1161/01.cir.0000103664.47406.49
Established correlation but not causation, and didn't even look at VLDL which is the bad component of LDL. weak sauce anon, truly high school level stuff

>https://boards.4chan.org/ck/thread/11133512#bottom
>susceptibility of LDL to oxidation was assessed with hydrogen peroxide
>hydrogen peroxide
you should try reading the articles next time. very few people drink hydrogen peroxide, if you do then your LDL is the least of your worries

>https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/16904539/
>may influence
>may
>influence
strong stuff anon. truly compelling hedging.

>>11138068
>very few people drink hydrogen peroxide

>Go Keto
>Only eat vegetables and chicken
>Haven't had bacon in a month
am I doing it wrong?

>>11137016
Keep enjoying your meme diets I guess.... FUCKIND REDDITOR DIE MOTHER FUCKER DIE MUAHAHAHAHA PWNED NEWFAG!

>>11138068
>established correlation but not causation
Lol you didn’t even read the study

>MUH DENSITY
Try harder, soccer mom, pic related.

Weak sauce!!!

>you should try reading the articles next time. very few people drink hydrogen peroxide, if you do then your LDL is the least of your worries

Lol what? Try ACTUALLY reading the article, oxidation susceptibility was ASESSED with hydrogen peroxide after the participants consumed corn oil or beef tallow, and egg yolks. Did you actually think they just made them chug hydrogen peroxide and nothing else?

>may
Really grasping arent you? This isn’t going like you thought it would, is it?

>>11138104
Nutrition-wise I don't know, but certainly you fucked up in terms of taste.

>>11136498
LDL isn't a biomarker. It might be if it were actually measured, but it is only estimated using a heuristic function that was derived from subjects eating a high carbohydrate diet, and even for them it has very high error bars.

>>11138130
>that picture
>hazard ratio
>he doesn't know that hazard ratio is a measure of correlation
muh sides

>oxidation susceptibility was ASESSED with hydrogen peroxide
oxidation susceptibility was assessed by removing the lipoproteins from the subjects then exposing them to hydrogen peroxide and measuring the time to oxidation. Please explain why this has any real-world relevance to the non-peroxide-chugging population, whose liproproteins will never be exposed to hydrogen peroxide.

>>11138285
>he doesn't know that hazard ratio is a measure of correlation
You realize youre not even arguing against any of the points, right?

>please explain
Because this is how oxidation was ASSESSED, it has NOTHING to do with humans consuming hydrogen peroxide. What part of this are you attempting to move the goalposts on?

>>11138285
Are you saying hydrogen peroxide wouldn't give you good information on oxidation? Do you have a source that backs up the claim this method doesn't produce valid results?

>>11138285
Literally Google the word “peroxisome”. Embarrassing.

>>11136369
this anon knows

>>11136380
lel

>>11138022
>>worried about LDL instead of VLDL
>apolipoprotein B (the core of the LDL particles, the more of it the more/smaller particles).

Or you could learn to read.

>>11137912
Okay, you got me ... my mistake. I meant for non fat fucks.

As for the papers. The ncbi abstract doesn't have the perspective section of the paper :
>The decrease in triglycerides and increase in HDL-C without a major increase in mean LDL-C is often found with the ketogenic diet. The initial high-fat intake during the first 2 weeks of the low-carbohydrate diet can adversely effect the LDL-C and possibly endothelial function. There is no role for the high-fat low-carbohydrate diet in nonobese persons and in those with coronary disease. Limiting simple sugars and starches
and increasing monounsaturated fats in the traditional low-fat diet is becoming the centrist view.

Second paper. MLC is not a traditional ketogenic diet, it has around 100 gram of carbs for 1600 calories. Also it specifically embraces MUFAs and lean meat and thus doesn't recommend saturated animal/dairy fats, rather different from the standard /ck/etogenic religion.

Third paper, again not traditionally ketogenic (~100g of carbs on average). Also they lost weight ... so that says nothing about the lipid levels at maintenance weight.