I’m a little surprised by how much incredulity there is in the comments here. It’s amazing that anyone, let alone so many people right now, would think that taking away all the most protective foods (ie., plants in their whole, intact forms, which are almost invariably high carb), and in most cases replacing them with the very substances most strongly associated with our number one killers, cardiovascular disease and cancers, (ie., animal flesh, dairy, and insane amounts of saturated fats), and act surprised when it kills them faster.
Low carb diets do not neglect vegetables, if you’re eating a proper low carb diet then about half of your food volume should be coming from things like broccoli, cauliflower, and spinach. https://www.thekitchn.com/10-vegetables-that-are-lower-in-carbs-than-you-think-253337
Low carb diets still eat about 50-75 grams of carbs a day, and that’s a lot of broccoli.
I did a keto diet for about a year. Every meal was about 2/3 veggies. The problem with low carb diets is most people don’t do them healthy. They see that certain things are listed as ok to eat and they just eat that and don’t follow a balanced regimented diet.
That’s not good for Keto’ers
An industry-financed epidemiological study; we’re shaking in our boots I tell ya.
Where is it written that it is financed by industry? That’s not in the article or in the part of the original study I can access.
Unfortunately almost all these studies are financed by some lobbying group or food industry group. There’s a disturbing amount of misinformation and studies out there. What’s “healthy” seems to change every 5-10 years. Low fat foods just had more sugar, which all the studies show is bad for you.
The obvious answer is always that anything you know isn’t healthy, fat, sugar, simple starches, dairy should all be consumed in moderation as part of a balanced diet and people need to eat an appropriate amount of calories. Eat more vegetables and healthy fruits. Less processed food. Ignore anything that’s weird trendy bullshit.
On the other hand, among women with five years or longer of follow-up, those with a high carbohydrate intake of more than 65% had a higher risk of all-cause mortality. No clear association was observed between refined or minimally processed carbohydrate intake and the risk of mortality in women.
For fats, men with a high fat intake of more than 35% of their total energy from fats had a higher risk of cancer-related mortality. They also found that a low intake of unsaturated fat in men was associated with a higher risk of all-cause and cancer-related mortality.
In contrast, total fat intake and saturated fat intake in women showed an inverse association with the risk of all-cause and cancer-related mortality. They concluded that this finding does not support the idea that high fat intake is detrimental to longevity in women.
So, hesitantly, keto is terrible for men but fine enough for women? Like we weren’t already outliving them in general. I’d just be dying to know why, though. You don’t just casually tell me dietary requirements noticeably differ by sex and then never elaborate
The Japan Multi-Institutional Collaborative Cohort Study investigated the relationship between dietary carbohydrate and fat intakes and the risk of mortality in the Japanese population[1]. The study found that:
-
An unfavorable association with mortality was observed for low-carbohydrate intake in men and for high-carbohydrate intake in women[1].
-
High fat intake could be associated with a lower mortality risk in women among Japanese adults with a relatively high carbohydrate intake[2].
-
The Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiology study demonstrated that high-carbohydrate and low-fat intakes were associated with an increase in risk for mortality[3].
-
Extreme dietary habits involving carbohydrates and fats affect life expectancy[4].
-
Men with high fat intake had a higher risk for cancer mortality; the multivariable-adjusted HR (95% CI) for ≥35% was 1.79 (1.11-2.90) compared with 20%-<25% [5].
the study suggests that extreme dietary habits, particularly those involving carbohydrates and fats, can affect life expectancy in the Japanese population. It is important to consider these findings when making dietary recommendations and promoting a balanced diet for optimal health.
Citations: [1] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37271417/ [2] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0022316623721986 [3] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022316623721986 [4] https://omniaeducation.com/news/extreme-dietary-habits-for-carbohydrates-fats-affect-life-expectancy-findings-from-a-large-scale-cohort-study-in-japan/2452354/ [5] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/371268749_Dietary_carbohydrate_and_fat_intakes_and_risk_of_mortality_in_the_Japanese_population_the_Japan_Multi-Institutional_Collaborative_Cohort_Study [6] https://jn.nutrition.org/article/S0022-3166(23)72198-6/pdf
But what if you’re not Japanese? I know you can extrapolate out generally, but it’s one of the most ethnically homogeneous countries. We know different genetic traits can play a large impact on dietary needs. So it’s a shame this isn’t a more diverse country like some countries or parts of North and south America or some countries in Africa.
I’d say extreme dieting issues would apply to all homosapians given the bottle neck at most we’re like 6th or 7th cousins or something. so we’re actually all very genetically similar.
fine print reads: paid for by the Bakers United Association.
Is this a joke or is it actually industry financed? This article doesn’t mention that and neither does the freely accesible part of the original study (though I don’t have full access).
How much of that is them eating nothing but meat
