The keto diet is certainly no fad; it has been tried and tested by many, most of whom will tell you of its fat-annihilating power. However, would a high protein, low/moderate fat, low/zero carb approach be more effective for fat-loss than the high fat, moderate protein, low/zero carb method of keto? Wouldnâ??t such liberal amounts of fat be stored as, wellâ?¦ fat, even with such low amounts of carbs?
Go ahead and try it, but I guarantee that you will hate it and it won't work in the long run.
You have to have some type of "energy nutrient" in your diet; either carbs or fat. If not, your energy will suffer, work outs will suffer and progress will suffer.
I do, however, incorporate moderate/high protein and low carbs/fat into my diet one day out of 7. Not the same, but somewhat similar to the MAG-10 pulse. This can be highly effective, but you sure won't want to eat like it all of the time.
You could try it for a few days at a time, once you've done a few days of low/zero carbs to burn some extra fat..but you would run low on energy.
Plus, it might encourage your body to burn protein for energy....is that good!?
You will lose weight, and sometimes, cyclical near-keto approaches are helpful during runs at single digit bodyfat levels, BUT I would never recommend long term keto or even near-keto level diets. They are the anti-prep approach (IMO) of optimal muscle retention (which is the goal of anyone who is training for aesthetic purposes).
Same as above. There's alot of people and I believe Thibs is one of them that feel you need the fat in order to burn the fat otherwise you burn protein for fuel. According to Lyle McDonald he says who cares because it's minimal and to just eat more protein. He feels this is the fastest way to lose weight. I tried it both ways and without fat I didn't do as well. But I will do it sporadically for a fat loss boost like the above poster.
What you're describing is essentially a protein sparing modified fast. They work extremely well for losing fat very quickly, but are not appropriate for long term usage. As Stu mentioned, if implemented as a part of a cyclical approach, it is very effective for getting very lean. See: Ultimate Diet 2.0.
THis kind of sounds like the example Taubes uses in Good Cal Bad Cal about the Harvard guy, Steffinson (SP?), who got trapped with Inuits and adopted there way of eating (shit loads of fish, damn near zero carbs, for like 9 months). When he came back with his results Harvard boasted that it was impossible and he said he would replicate the study, along with a partner, for a year in a dorm room. His partner at some point tried to do it without fat (I think to drop total cals down a bit) and "almost died" or at least felt like he was gona die.
I dont think Tom Hanks would have made it through Castaway without the coconuts as well. I think the fat has to be there after a short period of time. If you love your hormones anyways.
Uhh so basically you want to do a Protein Sparing Modified Fast. Cool.
It's fine and it's extremely effective for fat loss. Good luck doing anything while you are on it though and please don't kill yourself.
So what do you guys considedr a high protein mod fat low carb to be in terms of numbers?
You can actually knock yourself out of ketosis by not eating enough fat... your body will breakdown protein and make glucos through gluconeogenesis... you need the fat.