by Tanada » Fri 24 Aug 2018, 10:44:00
Nice write up on how bad science and especially bad reporting on science lead to bad decisions by the general public. Much more at link below the quote.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '[')size=150]2. OMG, keto will make you diabetic!!!ARGLE BARGLE!!![/size]
Short answer: No, it won’t.
Long answer: The Journal of Physiology published a paper that claimed a significant increase in risk for diabetes and insulin resistance was found in mice after two weeks on a Ketogenic protocol.
The study itself seems to be decently designed on its face. There were two groups of mice, one was fed a high carb chow for the duration and the other was fed a low carb, high fat chow. All well and good, thus far.
So, what’s wrong with it? A few things.
To start, I want to very briefly touch on the fact that we are studying mice and applying the findings to human beings. I realize that this isn’t considered outside of the realm of good science and, in fact, clinical trials in humans for pharmaceuticals or cosmetics, for example, typically don’t progress until it’s been tested on animals. The reasons for this should be fairly obvious, and are understandable. If a products kills off the rats, it’s probably not a good idea to give it to the humans.
However, rodents are not humans. Yes, we are both omnivores, and our digestive systems are a similar make up and function in a similar fashion. Rodents, however, are scavengers, and their dietary needs aren’t identical to that of human beings. Now, I want to clarify that this is not even remotely as bad as feeding herbivores a diet designed for humans and then extrapolating the devestating consequences out to the general human population (Hello, trials testing high fat diets on rabbits. Yes, I’m looking at you.). In my opinion, however, making direct dietary outcome comparisons between rodents and humans seems sketchy, at best. So, that’s something to keep in mind when evaluating any dietary study.
The next issue that should be a problem for anyone is that the trial was very short-term, and the results were measured after only a few weeks. Anyone who has been or has hung around the low carb and keto community for any period of time has heard of things like fat adaptation and the keto “flu.” As concisely as I can make this, keto “flu” are the typically flu-like symptoms that many people experience in the first few weeks of drastically lowering carbs. Your kidneys stop holding on to excess salt and water, and without adequate replacement (and sometimes even with it), headaches, fatigue, and shakiness can occur. Your muscles will run through their glycogen stores, and you might experience weakness and decreases in endurance in relation. Your body eventually, after a few weeks, stops operating in a way that relies on glucose for energy and begins to shift metabolism so that you can run on both body and dietary fat instead. Blood sugar and insulin stabilize, and energy levels tend to come roaring back as you start using fatty acids efficiently. This shift is the beginnings of keto adaptation, wherein your body adapts to ketosis for the long term.
The problem with this study in regards to keto and fat adaptation is that it was so short-term neither one is likely to have occurred. Therefore, it is highly likely that what these researchers observed is more related to the early keto adaptation period, and is not necessarily representative of a longer-term maintenance of ketosis. Would the results have been the same had the study gone on longer? We don’t know, but the important thing is that neither do they.
The last thing I want to touch on in regards to this study is what I would consider to be the real “clincher.” When designing an experiment to look at how a specific dietary protocol affects an organism, one would expect the food to actually resemble what a typical adherent regularly eats. And, on the surface, the macronutrient composition of the high fat mouse chow seems to meet this standard. The food was just at 90% calories from fat, and while most of us would probably classify that ratio as somewhat more akin to keto for medical therapy, it’s within the generally accepted guidelines. Not the most common ratios, by any means, but not outside of the realm of possibility.
When you look deeper, however, what you find is that the high fat mouse chow was made up of mostly hydrogenated vegetable oil, corn oil, and cellulose. That’s right, folks. They fed these poor rodents a diet of Crisco for a few weeks and then wrote a paper attributing the predictably awful result to keto.
Science, y’all.
LINK