Jun 8, 2023·edited Jun 8, 2023Liked by Experimental Fat Loss
What happens if you agree and amplify? I haven't tried arguing with anyone about this so I don't know what happens next. If you say "yes of course calories in has to be lower than calories out, that's why satiety is so important for me on my whipping cream diet: so I don't eat more, because satiated. Now, as I was saying, the way to increase bioavailability of stored fat is [...]", how do they reply?
House-value analogy seems useful for capturing the indirectness, slowness, and uncertainty of the relationships here. But it feels like all the signs are reversed, sort of. It would be good if the end goal in the analogy were something that we want *less* of, like student-loan debt. Every lifestyle adjustment you make can harmfully widen your debt (e.g., leaving a window open in winter causes you to waste $ in heating costs) or helpfully narrow it (e.g., cancelling a useless subscription). Per our exchange on an earlier post about CGMs and whether glucose spikes really matter, this is about whether you can closely watch and manage some intermediate variable—like the temperature of your house relative to the air outside—and confidently predict how it will affect the end metric we really care about.
I think I just made everything more confusing. Carry on.
The fairly recent human intervention study with protein restriction vs caloric restriction (duration 27 days) noticed similar biomarkers improving with both diets. We're interested in the protein restriction here.
In the conclusion of the study the researchers are puzzled by the weight loss in PR group because the metabolic chamber showed no increase in REE, yet they ate more calories. Where does the lost fat go to? (discussion at the end of study https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/14/13/2670 )
You may remember that I mentioned a few days ago that when I was obesity resistant, I had increased sebum production and what I perceived as sweating, was at least partly grease excreted through the skin on my back and face. I was perpetually oily to the point of noticing how heavy my worn clothes were before laundering them)
Lastly, I ran into this study comparing the inflammatory markers of very low calorie ketogenic diet, low calorie diets and bariatric surgery. Markers include TSLP when you enlarge each figure and observe. Study indicates profound shift in cytokine profile during VLCKD.
The effect was observed in "maximum ketosis" ie it was not sufficient to just restrict calories and heaven knows if it was due to ketones or could it be the protein restriction - we don't know.
But the point is, TSLP had a 50% increase in the maximum ketosis -group. (The same TSLP that induced sebum hyperproduction in other studies)
I'm just throwing this out there, but it might be a fun hypothesis that the missing fat loss that was undetectable in the metabolic chamber, could've ended up in the laundry baskets of the study participants.
As always, this is a good read and I totally get this whole thing. The last comment I made on your blog, I said I had lost a little bit by eating lots of cheese, butter etc. Well, I was away with pals last weekend and just ate and drank anything. I didn't quite get back onto the low carb yet, and I ate lots of bread, pasta and soup yesterday. I didn't note any calories until I realised that a pot of pesto pasta that I ate said 222 kcals. After I finished I realised that was for 1/4 pot. It wasn't even that big. I have just weighed myself and I lost 1/2 kg! How's that for a surprise.
I have just started with the ZOE study https://joinzoe.com/ and I am intrigued to see the results of that.
I joined a few months ago, but had to wait until now to get my testing kit which arrived yesterday. So, I applied my CGM yesterday and am suprised to see that my blood glucose levels are actually ok. I applied the CGM about 2-3 hours after eating and once the sensor had calibrated (Libre 3) it showed 6.9/7 mmol/L and this morning it is 5.8 mmol/L. I think that's ok considering how much bread and pasta I ate yesterday.
Today is testing day, and I have to eat 3 rather large looking muffins for breakfast, then another 2 4 hours later for lunch.
I also have to get a poo sample to send, and some finger prick bloods as well.
They will test all the biomarkers they have gathered from previous studies and also analyse my microbiome. They personalise the results to inform you about which foods you burn best, and give you food scores based on those results. I think it takes about 3 weeks to get those results in, but meantime I have 2 weeks of CGM to 'experiment' with different foods to see how they affect my blood glucose.
What happens if you agree and amplify? I haven't tried arguing with anyone about this so I don't know what happens next. If you say "yes of course calories in has to be lower than calories out, that's why satiety is so important for me on my whipping cream diet: so I don't eat more, because satiated. Now, as I was saying, the way to increase bioavailability of stored fat is [...]", how do they reply?
House-value analogy seems useful for capturing the indirectness, slowness, and uncertainty of the relationships here. But it feels like all the signs are reversed, sort of. It would be good if the end goal in the analogy were something that we want *less* of, like student-loan debt. Every lifestyle adjustment you make can harmfully widen your debt (e.g., leaving a window open in winter causes you to waste $ in heating costs) or helpfully narrow it (e.g., cancelling a useless subscription). Per our exchange on an earlier post about CGMs and whether glucose spikes really matter, this is about whether you can closely watch and manage some intermediate variable—like the temperature of your house relative to the air outside—and confidently predict how it will affect the end metric we really care about.
I think I just made everything more confusing. Carry on.
wide INTERVAL factors ( add ADHD to limitations of comments)
I have something of possible interest;
The fairly recent human intervention study with protein restriction vs caloric restriction (duration 27 days) noticed similar biomarkers improving with both diets. We're interested in the protein restriction here.
In the conclusion of the study the researchers are puzzled by the weight loss in PR group because the metabolic chamber showed no increase in REE, yet they ate more calories. Where does the lost fat go to? (discussion at the end of study https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/14/13/2670 )
You may remember that I mentioned a few days ago that when I was obesity resistant, I had increased sebum production and what I perceived as sweating, was at least partly grease excreted through the skin on my back and face. I was perpetually oily to the point of noticing how heavy my worn clothes were before laundering them)
Now, hypersecretion of sebum and subsequent weight loss can be induced by inflammatory/proinflammatory cytokines, namely TSLP (thymic stromal lymphopoietin). https://jrnlclub.org/research-films/tslp-adipose-sebum
Lastly, I ran into this study comparing the inflammatory markers of very low calorie ketogenic diet, low calorie diets and bariatric surgery. Markers include TSLP when you enlarge each figure and observe. Study indicates profound shift in cytokine profile during VLCKD.
The effect was observed in "maximum ketosis" ie it was not sufficient to just restrict calories and heaven knows if it was due to ketones or could it be the protein restriction - we don't know.
But the point is, TSLP had a 50% increase in the maximum ketosis -group. (The same TSLP that induced sebum hyperproduction in other studies)
https://www.clinicalnutritionjournal.com/article/S0261-5614(22)00157-1/fulltext
I'm just throwing this out there, but it might be a fun hypothesis that the missing fat loss that was undetectable in the metabolic chamber, could've ended up in the laundry baskets of the study participants.
As always, this is a good read and I totally get this whole thing. The last comment I made on your blog, I said I had lost a little bit by eating lots of cheese, butter etc. Well, I was away with pals last weekend and just ate and drank anything. I didn't quite get back onto the low carb yet, and I ate lots of bread, pasta and soup yesterday. I didn't note any calories until I realised that a pot of pesto pasta that I ate said 222 kcals. After I finished I realised that was for 1/4 pot. It wasn't even that big. I have just weighed myself and I lost 1/2 kg! How's that for a surprise.
I have just started with the ZOE study https://joinzoe.com/ and I am intrigued to see the results of that.
I joined a few months ago, but had to wait until now to get my testing kit which arrived yesterday. So, I applied my CGM yesterday and am suprised to see that my blood glucose levels are actually ok. I applied the CGM about 2-3 hours after eating and once the sensor had calibrated (Libre 3) it showed 6.9/7 mmol/L and this morning it is 5.8 mmol/L. I think that's ok considering how much bread and pasta I ate yesterday.
Today is testing day, and I have to eat 3 rather large looking muffins for breakfast, then another 2 4 hours later for lunch.
I also have to get a poo sample to send, and some finger prick bloods as well.
They will test all the biomarkers they have gathered from previous studies and also analyse my microbiome. They personalise the results to inform you about which foods you burn best, and give you food scores based on those results. I think it takes about 3 weeks to get those results in, but meantime I have 2 weeks of CGM to 'experiment' with different foods to see how they affect my blood glucose.
Exciting :)