Being Fat Adapted Versus "In Ketosis" (Pt.3/3)

Now that the issues of fat adaptation and fat loss versus ketosis—or the lack thereof—have been clarified, let’s move on to a related issue that drives me crazy: newbie low-carbers freaking out if they eat something that not only takes away that beloved purple, but—gasp!—causes the scale to go up a few pounds.

When a low-carber who doesn’t understand some basics about human physiology gains weight after indulging in a pile of something sweet or starchy, they go absolutely apoplectic. Not knowing any better, they step on the scale the next day, see that their weight has gone up a few pounds, and they Just. Freak. Out. I can’t count how many times I’ve seen people post to forums and message boards either in tears or in a raging anger, because they ate a donut, or a bagel, or two slices of pizza, and gained, say, four pounds the next day. They then fall into thinking that their body is so fundamentally carbohydrate intolerant that after indulging in one carbohydrate-laden meal, they gained, overnight, four pounds of fat. (Never mind that the total weight of the amount of food they consumed for the entire day probably didn't even weigh four pounds, let alone that one bit of carb splurge, so I don't see any logic to how they think this works, but I digress.)

I’m not really sure how to talk about this without expressing grave concern over these well-intentioned folks’ ignorance as to the inner workings of their own bodies. (And by “expressing grave concern,” I mean, “shaking my head at the utter lunacy out there.”)

Time for a quick lesson in glycogen storage. 

Being Fat Adapted Versus "In Ketosis" (Pt.2/3)

In the previous post, we established the difference between fat adaptation and ketosis. Now, let’s revisit the “got kicked out of ketosis” thing. 

People new to low-carbing—and also people not-so-new, but who just don’t understand how this all works—will utter that dreaded phrase when they pee on a ketostick and don’t see their beloved dark purple, or—gasp!—not even a little pink. No color change at all. They will then assume that whatever they ate sometime prior to testing “kicked them out of ketosis,” and they will summarily cross that food item off their menu forever, banishing it to their ever-growing list of forbidden foods. (They will also spread tales of woe on forums far and wide, thereby terrifying other newbie low-carbers into avoiding these foods as well.)

But here’s the thing: ketostix are fickle things. Elevated ketones in the blood, urine, and breath, are fickle things. What else was going on before testing? Was this person very acutely stressed? Did they do an intense workout? Both of these can cause a temporary rise in blood glucose (albeit a smallish one), which might trigger a temporary rise in insulin, which could put a temporary stop to ketosis. Temporary. Note: it will not put a stop to being fat-adapted; only to having excess acetoacetate in the urine or elevated beta-hydroxybutyrate in the blood at that particular moment in time.

Being Fat Adapted Versus "In Ketosis" (Pt.1/3)

UPDATE!! (9/20/2017)
I have a new post that explains how and why the body produces ketones, It will help you understand much better the difference between burning fat and having a fat-based metabolism, versus being "in ketosis." It's very long, but I think it's worth reading if you'd really like to understand this -- and if you want to stop freaking out about your ketone levels. (If you click over to that post and want to read only the section that explains the difference between ketosis and running on fat, scroll way down to where it says Ketogenesis: How and Why Do We Make Ketones? Also: Fat Adaptation versus Ketosis.) Happy reading!

“I got kicked out of ketosis.”

If I never hear or read those six words, in that order, ever again, I’ll be one happy individual.

Based on what I come across on low-carb forums, blogs, and videos, there is a lot of confusion about the correct use of urine ketone test strips (which I’ll sometimes refer to as ketostix, since “ketone test strips” is a mouthful, even when you’re only reading). So allow me to ‘splain a little bit about how to interpret these things, and what role they should play—if any—in your low-carb life.

First and foremost is the most important thing you will read in today’s post. (And it is so important that I will likely repeat it in all the posts to follow in this little series. Plus, you can tell it’s important because it’s red, bold, in italics, and all caps, hehheh.)

You can be in ketosis and not lose body fat, 

and you can lose body fat without being in ketosis.

  

80/20 Would Be An Improvement...

I have a confession to make, everyone: I have been talking the talk, but for a few months now, I have not been walking the walk.

I have always been completely forthright about the fact that I am not 100% Paleo or Primal. I don’t ascribe any particular label to the way I eat, except that, generally speaking, I’m on the lower-carb end of things. And more often than not, I buy, cook, and eat real food. I get most of my meat and eggs from local farms, although not always. During the summer, I get most of my produce from the farmers’ market, but this falls by the wayside during winter.

But I’m no saint. I have no problem going to the regular ol’ supermarket and getting regular ol’ food. Like I’ve said before, conventionally grown, pesticide-laden vegetables and grain-fed meat might not be ideal, but they’re a heckuva lot better than chocolate breakfast cereals and “organic” junk food.

I don’t stress about the details when I go to a restaurant with friends, and when life gets in the way and I don’t have a chance (or make a chance) to prepare a lunch to bring to work, I get something from the cafeteria and don’t stress too much about that, either. Is any of it organic, local, grass-fed, or pastured? No. (Not unless I choose specific restaurants, that is, but definitely not at work.) Does some of it have soybean or canola oil? Yeah, most likely. But a little bit of that here and there isn’t going to kill anybody.

I am a firm believer in the 80/20 rule, although I think most people probably fare better closer to 85/15. For me, personally, I seem to do best at more like 90/10: eating spot-on most of the time, and saving that 10% for things that are truly worth it. (Like a special trip to Junior’s for what is supposedly the world’s best cheesecake, rather than a couple of cookies grabbed on auto-pilot from the bag of Oreos on the secretary’s desk at work. Aside: I have been to Junior's, and I'm not entirely convinced...)

That being said, I haven’t been anywhere close to 90/10 for a while now. And even 80/20 would be a bit of an improvement. If I had to ballpark it, I’m probably more like 70/30, which isn’t saying much. Might as well be 50/50, which really isn’t saying anything at all. It’s not like I’m snarfing down pancakes drenched with Aunt Jemima and washing them down with a glass of ultra-pasteurized orange-strawberry-banana juice every morning, or having a side of breadsticks with my pasta dinner, followed by cookies and cake for dessert. Of course not. I haven’t completely lost my mind. But I am far enough from where I know I should be (or, rather, would like to be) that I wanted to admit it publicly.

Label Madness Monday: Why 100-Calorie Packs Piss Me Off

All right, dear readers, be honest with me: am I the only person who thinks these things are totally, completely, and utterly ridiculous?

They’re convenient. I get that. And as long as you have access to just one 100-calorie pack, they take willpower out of the equation. I get that, too.

I’m not saying the concept is ridiculous, just the way it’s executed.

My infuriation over these things is fourfold:

1. They’re wasteful.
2. They’re expen$ive. (No, really, like crazy expensive.)
3. They assume we consumers are too lazy or too stupid to divvy out reasonable portions on our own. (Unfortunately, I think they may be on to something here, but in my heart of hearts, I’d like to give the American public more credit than that, and I’m not the only one.)
4. They’re just plain ridiculous.

Label Madness Monday: Cereal Cups to Go

It’s been a while since I posted a dig at food labels. And like I mentioned recently, I’m working on a project these days that is eating a lot of my writing time, so it might be a little bit before I get another fuel metabolism post up. In the meantime, I’m trying to prevent total blog silence, so I’m posting things I can put together relatively quickly. So here goes.

I’ve posted a lot about cereal before, and that’s because it’s a perennial favorite of mine when it comes to food label bashing. I’ve said it before, and I know I’ll say it again: overt junkfood doesn’t bother me. Twinkies, cupcakes, brownies, cookies—everyone knows these things are junk, and no one’s trying to market them as anything but junk. But cereal and granola…whoo-whee, now there is some major marketing wizardry at work, my friends. Blood sugar napalm masquerading as healthy breakfast options. Whole grain health hellholes.

At the risk of beating this over people’s heads, let’s have a look at a few of these items that are supposed to be soooo good for us—not just because they’re made from whole grains, but because they’re low in fat, too. (Blood sugar napalm and an atom bomb, just in case the napalm didn’t wipe out enough life down there on the ground. Gotta cover all the bases, right? Wouldn’t want to leave a single soul with any semblance of pancreatic function when we’re done with ’em!)

The reason I wanted to take another look at these kinds of products (yes, that’s “products”—I refuse to call these “foods”) is that now, we have some context by which to evaluate these things. Now that we’ve learned a little something about fuel partitioning and how our hormonal state influences whether we primarily run on carbohydrates or fats, and how reaching an appropriate body weight and attaining good health is about far more than calories in and calories out, we can see these kinds of products for what they really are: absolute dietary disasters.

Okay, on with the show.

Label Madness Monday: Thoughts on the New Food Labels

Have you heard the news? U.S. government nutrition authorities are retooling the labels on packaged foods. That’s right: the same institutions that brought you the grain-heavy, complex-carb heavy, low-fat, low-cholesterol guidelines, calorie counting, and fat-fearing that have proven to be a an unmitigated disaster during the past six decades are up to their usual antics. Considering the current health (or lack thereof) of far too much of our population—the responsibility for which I believe we can lay in large part at the feet of these guidelines—I’m not sure we should trust these folks with things again. (Fool us once, shame on them. Fool us twice, shame on us.)

In case you don’t have time to read my usual novel-length missive today, let me sum things up for ya: the proposed new food label is a step in the right direction. However, it’s such a teeny tiny, itty bitty step that it might as well not be taken at all. In my opinion, they’re still focusing on numbers rather than nutrition, and the specific numbers they’re calling out aren’t necessarily the ones that ought to be the focus. (Please pardon me for butchering the following quote, but I’ve seen many different versions of it and am not sure which one is accurate.) Albert Einstein said something along the lines of, “You cannot solve a problem with the same sort of thinking that created it.” And since we’re in the current healthcare predicament we’re in largely due to the flawed dietary recommendations in the first place, I don’t think we need more of the same. I’d prefer to see the government get out of the nutrition business altogether, and leave things in the hands of professionals who aren’t beholden to lobbyists from food processing corporations or the grain, soy, cattle, and dairy industries. As a nutritionist, I don’t have to answer to corporate sponsors or other funders. I am responsible solely to my clients, and my income is based mostly on the success they find while following my recommendations. If those recommendations don’t produce success, I don’t insist my clients keep doing more of the same. I evaluate what’s not working well and reformulate things. (A real reformulation; not some half-arsed attempt, like these updated labels.)

It’s funny that in this label series, I’ve picked apart labels on various food products but never thought to take on the label itself. So I guess I can thank the gub’mint for sparking the idea. Here goes.

Label Madness Monday - Health Halos Strike Again

Here we are, everyone, another glorious Monday, and another not-so-glorious food label to dissect, disembowel, and otherwise lay waste to. (Speaking of disemboweling--and waste!--have you checked out the latest post in my digestion series? It’s on the large intestine, so when you’re done here, hop on over there and get edumucated about your colon.)

Today’s label falls into the category I love to hate: junk food masquerading as health food. As I’ve said many times (but most forcefully in my rant from a while back), I’m okay with treats. Treats that act like treats, and whose manufacturers aren’t trying to hoodwink us into thinking are anything but treats. What I’m not okay with is pure junk that’s marketed as pristine, healthful, nutritious fare.

If you learn just one thing from all these label posts, let it be this: organic, gluten-free, artisanal junk is STILL JUNK. Organic sugar is still sugar, and organic soybean oil is still oil they manage to squeeze out of soybeans. (And for the gluten-intolerant among you, organic, non-GMO wheat flour still contains gluten.)

Okay. Now that we’ve gotten the preliminaries out of the way, let’s jump in.

Label Madness Monday: Is Nothing Sacred?

Today’s label post takes a look at chipotle peppers in adobo sauce. Not the world’s most common ingredient, I grant you, but there’s a method to my madness. I’ll be writing a few blog posts here and there with tips on creating homemade versions of your favorite sauces, dressings, and condiments. Some will be Paleo, some will lean more toward Primal, some will be low-carb, but one umbrella they’ll all fall safely under is REAL FOOD.

So I went looking for these smoked jalapeños in an attempt to make my own chipotle aioli. (Okay, it wasn’t really an aioli because I can’t be bothered to make my own mayonnaise, so I was going to finagle something with sour cream and yogurt. Also: does anyone reading this watch Throwdown with Bobby Flay? Am I wrong in thinking that any time one of the dishes involves an aioli—especially one with jalapeños or poblanos, the judges should pretty much be able to guess it’s Bobby’s?  [Also: anything with blue corn.])

Aaaanyway, on to the label.