In this case it means that when a sufficient amount is available then it will be used preferentially. Contrary to your implication, glucose is so important that ketosis is maintained through evolution to prevent excessive depletion of glucose. Ketosis is an emergency backup system, not the preferred one.
From my understanding, and how it’s been for 99.99% of our evolution, is glucose has been the backup/ alternative fuel source, and isn’t as healthy of a fuel source for all the functions of the body, as ketones are, almost like a dirty fuel source, if u will, so the body tries to use the glucose up/ burn it/ get rid of it as quick as possible, once ingested, and preferably get back to using ketones as a fuel source, as soon as possible
The psychophysiological and metabolic milieu that triggers the secretion of ketone bodies includes (i) starvation; (ii) severe injuries; (iii) acute infections or viral illnesses [89] (iv) physical exhaustion, and (v) in the presence of harsh ecological stressors.[
R]
You’re proving my point, not urs. This clearly shows that ketones are more beneficial for the body, and have better healing properties than glucose does. That’s amazing that ketones can help in all these situations.
But there is obv a difference between the body secreting ketones, vs being in ketosis and using ketones as a fuel source. Obv nobody is going into ketosis and using ketones as a fuel source simply because they’re physically exhausted, or because they’ve had an injury, or illness, or have an infection, etc. People do go into ketosis, when “starving” and going a long time without food, however. The body will start to breakdown fat, and turn it into ketones for the body to use as fuel.
Evidence, please. If ketosis were clearly superior from an evolutionary standpoint then it would be preferred even when glucose is plentiful. This is clearly not the case.
Again, ketones are the superior fuel source for the body, if u simply look at what ketones do for the brain, organs, mitochondria, and every cell in the body, vs what glucose does to all these parts of the human body, it’s not even close, in regards to how beneficial ketones are, vs what glucose does. Human biology is human biology, and it’s not going to change any time soon. Plus just look at anecdotes from thousands of people that used to eat the hefty majority of their calories from carbs, and then decided to do carnivore or the lion diet. Simply see what they report, as far as how well their brains work, how high their energy levels are, how good their sexual function is, how easy it is to retain muscle and keep fat off, and just how well their bodies function as a whole, on moderate to high fat and protein diets, like carnivore and the lion diet, compared to when they consumed a diet that primarily consisted of carbs. We can do all the research we want, but at the end of the day, the best thing we can do is listen to our bodies, and if everything within it is functioning optimally, on a long and consistent basis, whatever foods ur consuming are probably what is best for it
I'd also like to see evidence that ketones are "preferred" in a normal heart rather than a diseased one.
During heart failure, the heart undergoes a metabolic switch favoring ketone metabolism in cardiomyocytes, which are more efficiently used than in the normal heart. Moreover, ketone body oxidation is a more efficient energy substrate than terminal fatty acid oxidation [88]. Significant improvement in the cardiac output of about 24% was observed after ketone infusion in both chronic heart failure patients and animal models with heart failure [84,89].[
R]
Come on man, use a little common sense/ critical thinking skills here. If ketones have these amazing effects on a compromised heart, isn’t it obvious that ketones would be just as beneficial for a healthy heart, as far as optimizing it goes? U think ketones just have these amazing properties to heal/ improve the function of a compromised heart, but then glucose is more beneficial for a non-compromised heart? Again, use just a little bit of critical thinking skills/ common sense here
I figured that article would trigger you. But if you want to be taken seriously yourself then support some of your statements. You haven't tried to qualify your statements about ketones being preferred, so they cannot be given much credence.
The various references say that the long-term safety of a ketogenic diet is not established. You're free to speculate that it is safe, but I am likewise free to suggest that using an emergency backup system indefinitely may not be a good idea....
I agree, I don’t think using a backup fuel source is ideal long term, or even short term. If humans did this, we most likely would never have survived for as long as we have, and went extinct a long time ago due to various diseases that we’re experiencing currently. Ketones have been the primary fuel source for millions of years. Glucose has always been the backup fuel source, up until around 8-12k years ago, where it became more common for carbs/ glucose to be the fuel source most people chose to run their bodies with.
I honestly don’t need to backup any of my statements. Evolution does that for me. Thousands of anecdotes of people doing drastically better, health wise, on carnivore and/ or the lion diet do that for me, biology 101 does that for me. The facts are all there already. I’m simply just trying to point people in the right direction so they can hopefully do the research for themselves. The more research people do into this subject, the more they’ll realize that carbs are not necessary for optimal health. There’s a reason why fats and proteins are essential, and carbs are not.
How could glucose be our optimal fuel source, when carbs aren’t even essential?? This alone proves that ketones are, and have been for the majority of our evolution, the main/ optimal/ primary fuel source for the human body
You should not be promulgating this bit of
misinformation. It is a myth.
Each 100 mL of breast milk (produced within this time frame) yields approximately
- 65 calories
- 6.7 g carbohydrates (primarily lactose)
- 3.8 g fat
- 1.3 g protein
[
R]
Yes, breast milk has carbs in it. But the majority of the calories still come from fats. Ironically enough, in the second link, they reference a Raypeat forum post to go over babies being in ketosis while breastfeeding. This discussion has come full circle lol
Prof Noakes is on trial for ‘advising’ a mom to wean her baby onto low carb, high fat foods. Could babies’ innate ketosis – a state more often associated with low-carb, high-fat diets - be an arrow in Prof Noakes’ defence’s quiver?
realmealrevolution.com
