Re: Ketosis strips

x-no-archive: yes

Papa Joe said:

Quoted message said:

And the poser who said being under 100g of carbs means you'll be in
ketosis is wrong. There is no one number that fits all. For most
people, it's a lot less than 100g.

I agree.

No medical knowledge here, but, personally, if I get near the 50 cpd
limit I imposed, the stix nudge near a trace...everything else being
about equal. 100 would be just, well, like a daily big dish of
pineapple--in heavy syrup of course.

...IMHO naturally.

What you're describing is the absence of ketonuria, ketones in the
urine. This has nothing to do with proving whether or not you're in
ketosis.

Susan

Susan said:

x-no-archive: yes

Papa Joe said:

Quoted message said:

And the poser who said being under 100g of carbs means you'll be in
ketosis is wrong. There is no one number that fits all. For most
people, it's a lot less than 100g.

I agree.

No medical knowledge here, but, personally, if I get near the 50 cpd
limit I imposed, the stix nudge near a trace...everything else being
about equal. 100 would be just, well, like a daily big dish of
pineapple--in heavy syrup of course.

...IMHO naturally.

What you're describing is the absence of ketonuria, ketones in the
urine. This has nothing to do with proving whether or not you're in
ketosis.

Susan

Thanks Susan.

I thought I understood that when there is a raised level of ketones in
the urine(color of stix, in my example) then there must either have been
or is an excess amount of ketones in the blood and, conversely, when
there is not a raised level in the blood, the stix reading would
indicate a trace or none-- then the level is considered to be 'normal'.

Incorrect?

In my post I stated that if I was at 100 cpd I am pretty sure I would
not 'show' on the stix and, accordingly, not reflecting an excess of
ketones in the blood....not in ketosis.

Joe

x-no-archive: yes

Papa Joe said:

I thought I understood that when there is a raised level of ketones in
the urine(color of stix, in my example) then there must either have been
or is an excess amount of ketones in the blood and, conversely, when
there is not a raised level in the blood, the stix reading would
indicate a trace or none-- then the level is considered to be 'normal'.

Incorrect?

According to the book on ketogenic dieting the second half of the above
is incorrect. Ketones turn up in the blood first, and may well be
present with no ketonuria. Excess ketones will show up in the urine if
they're present in excess of your need for them asfuel and/or you
haven't hydrated enough to dilute them into being undetectable. But you
can very easily be in sustained ketosis without registering anything on
your ketostix, due to any of those factors, or a combination thereof.

Many posters to this group have reported sustained ketosis without
registering on the ketostix. They're probably not eating in excess of
their needs.

Quoted message said:

In my post I stated that if I was at 100 cpd I am pretty sure I would
not 'show' on the stix and, accordingly, not reflecting an excess of
ketones in the blood....not in ketosis.

At 100 grams I think many folks would not register on the sticks, but
they would still be in ketosis. In initial ketosis, the brain would use
all 100 of those grams of easy to burn glucose daily. After a few weeks
of sustained ketosis, the brain would use ketones for some fuel, and
only 40 grams of glucose per day for fuel. That leaves only 60 grams of
glucose for your body to operate on the rest of the day. Even at rest
your cells would use the rest and then switch back to ketones.

Hence, the 100 gram threshold for a diet to be ketogenic. Excess
ketones in the blood may be the result of overeating dietary fat, not
the result of burning body fat via ketosis.

Susan

Here we go with the focus on the brain again, like that's the core of
ketosis and metabolism related issues and from which the magic 100
derives. LOL

x-no-archive: yes

Quoted message said:

Here we go with the focus on the brain again, like that's the core of
ketosis and metabolism related issues and from which the magic 100
derives. LOL

It is a functioning, glucose metabolizing part of the body for the rest
of us.

Susan

Susan said:

x-no-archive: yes

Papa Joe said:

I thought I understood that when there is a raised level of ketones in
the urine(color of stix, in my example) then there must either have
been or is an excess amount of ketones in the blood and, conversely,
when there is not a raised level in the blood, the stix reading would
indicate a trace or none-- then the level is considered to be 'normal'.

Incorrect?

According to the book on ketogenic dieting the second half of the above
is incorrect. Ketones turn up in the blood first, and may well be
present with no ketonuria. Excess ketones will show up in the urine if
they're present in excess of your need for them asfuel and/or you
haven't hydrated enough to dilute them into being undetectable. But you
can very easily be in sustained ketosis without registering anything on
your ketostix, due to any of those factors, or a combination thereof.

Many posters to this group have reported sustained ketosis without
registering on the ketostix. They're probably not eating in excess of
their needs.

Quoted message said:

In my post I stated that if I was at 100 cpd I am pretty sure I would
not 'show' on the stix and, accordingly, not reflecting an excess of
ketones in the blood....not in ketosis.

At 100 grams I think many folks would not register on the sticks, but
they would still be in ketosis. In initial ketosis, the brain would use
all 100 of those grams of easy to burn glucose daily. After a few weeks
of sustained ketosis, the brain would use ketones for some fuel, and
only 40 grams of glucose per day for fuel. That leaves only 60 grams of
glucose for your body to operate on the rest of the day. Even at rest
your cells would use the rest and then switch back to ketones.

Hence, the 100 gram threshold for a diet to be ketogenic. Excess
ketones in the blood may be the result of overeating dietary fat, not
the result of burning body fat via ketosis.

Susan

Susan
Thanks for the update. How do the posters who report sustained ketosis
know they are in that process?

Your phrase 'only 60 grams...' is somewhat misleading as, to a lot of
people, it is certainly above their practical limit and they may see
changes on their scale, which in the end is the real measuring stick.

I have read that when ketone bodies are released, they enter the
bloodstream, acidify the blood, and are eventually excreted mostly in
urine. (One type of ketone body exits via the lungs.) If that is true,
then I assume(bad word here?) that they would wind up in the urine, all
else being equal--no diabetes, liver or pancreas problems, etc.

I do not see how the first half of my statement can be so correct and
the 2nd half be considered as incorrect.

I know that when I eat too many carbs in a day from most sources, the
stix will not register a color the next day, which, up to your post, I
thought meant there were not enough ketones in the urine to do the
registering deed. For sure, in my case, 100 Carbs a day would certainly
lead to the scale changing numbers.

I listened to Dr Atkins tapes over and over and over and feel that I
have arrived at the knowledge base I am at is, to the best of my memory
accurate with regard to ketones and their residual in the urine.
I cannot remember him ever using 100 carbs per day as a reference point
anyplace in the presentation. However, I believe he did mention 50 and
moving towards that number a bit at a time after induction.

I obviously do not have the medical knowledge you do, hence I have read
and listened and am here doing both....and using the stix as a gauge to
eating habits...and they/I find them helpful, albeit a sort of training
wheels(as noted in another post) that I need to hang on to.

FWIW and IMHO.
Joe

PJ, you're right, Atkins never mentioned a 100g carb=ketosis . Susan
came up with this magic 100g=ketosis, one size fits all number which
she says is based on a book by Lyle McDonald, who's advice she holds in
high esteem. In fact, the guy has a BS degree that qualifies him to
be a gym teacher. But Susan considers Atkins to have written thin
books. LOL

If you go back in the thread, you'll see I even cited an article by
McDonald, where he talks about 30g or less being needed to induce
ketosis. And he indicated there is variability in that number among
people. Susan also claimed that this 100g limit was well known and all
over the internet, yet she can't provide a single link.

x-no-archive: yes

Papa Joe said:

Susan
Thanks for the update. How do the posters who report sustained ketosis
know they are in that process?

They continue to lose body fat, or they continue to feel other benefits
of the diet. Or they've read the scientific literature and they know
they're eating in a way that is inevitably ketogenic.

Quoted message said:

Your phrase 'only 60 grams...' is somewhat misleading as, to a lot of
people, it is certainly above their practical limit and they may see
changes on their scale, which in the end is the real measuring stick.

No, I gained weight while getting moderate readings on the sticks and my
pee smelling like nail polish remover. That was dietary fat.

Quoted message said:

I have read that when ketone bodies are released, they enter the
bloodstream, acidify the blood, and are eventually excreted mostly in
urine.

I may be wrong, but I don't think that acidification takes place except
in the context of sustained high blood sugars, as with ketoacidosis.

(One type of ketone body exits via the lungs.) If that is true,

Quoted message said:

then I assume(bad word here?) that they would wind up in the urine, all
else being equal--no diabetes, liver or pancreas problems, etc.

The ones excreted by the lungs wouldn't end up in the urine, is that
what you meant, or did I misunderstand you?

Quoted message said:

I do not see how the first half of my statement can be so correct and
the 2nd half be considered as incorrect.

I can see that.

Quoted message said:

I know that when I eat too many carbs in a day from most sources, the
stix will not register a color the next day, which, up to your post, I
thought meant there were not enough ketones in the urine to do the
registering deed. For sure, in my case, 100 Carbs a day would certainly
lead to the scale changing numbers.

Which doesn't mean you're not in ketosis. You may have eaten too much
to lose, and if it was carbs and your scale registered in only one day,
it was water weight, in all likelihood, stuck to all those restored
glycogen molecules. I gained while deeply ketotic. I was still in ketosis.

Quoted message said:

I listened to Dr Atkins tapes over and over and over and feel that I
have arrived at the knowledge base I am at is, to the best of my memory
accurate with regard to ketones and their residual in the urine.
I cannot remember him ever using 100 carbs per day as a reference point
anyplace in the presentation. However, I believe he did mention 50 and
moving towards that number a bit at a time after induction.

If Atkins' books helped you with your diet, that's great, but they are
not a good source for reliable interpretation of the science of low
carbing. His books were bombastic and made untrue and exaggerated claims.

Quoted message said:

I obviously do not have the medical knowledge you do, hence I have read
and listened and am here doing both....and using the stix as a gauge to
eating habits...and they/I find them helpful, albeit a sort of training
wheels(as noted in another post) that I need to hang on to.

FWIW and IMHO.
Joe

You do whatever works for you. If you need the ketostix for some sense
of security, that's fine. But if they don't detect ketones, it doesn't
mean you're not losing, and if they do register ketones, you can still
gain weight.

Susan

x-no-archive: yes

Papa Joe said:

Susan said:

x-no-archive: yes

Papa Joe said:

I thought I understood that when there is a raised level of ketones
in the urine(color of stix, in my example) then there must either
have been or is an excess amount of ketones in the blood and,
conversely, when there is not a raised level in the blood, the stix
reading would indicate a trace or none-- then the level is considered
to be 'normal'.

Incorrect?

According to the book on ketogenic dieting the second half of the
above is incorrect. Ketones turn up in the blood first, and may well
be present with no ketonuria. Excess ketones will show up in the
urine if they're present in excess of your need for them asfuel and/or
you haven't hydrated enough to dilute them into being undetectable.
But you can very easily be in sustained ketosis without registering
anything on your ketostix, due to any of those factors, or a
combination thereof.

Many posters to this group have reported sustained ketosis without
registering on the ketostix. They're probably not eating in excess of
their needs.

Quoted message said:

In my post I stated that if I was at 100 cpd I am pretty sure I would
not 'show' on the stix and, accordingly, not reflecting an excess of
ketones in the blood....not in ketosis.

At 100 grams I think many folks would not register on the sticks, but
they would still be in ketosis. In initial ketosis, the brain would
use all 100 of those grams of easy to burn glucose daily. After a few
weeks of sustained ketosis, the brain would use ketones for some fuel,
and only 40 grams of glucose per day for fuel. That leaves only 60
grams of glucose for your body to operate on the rest of the day.
Even at rest your cells would use the rest and then switch back to
ketones.

Hence, the 100 gram threshold for a diet to be ketogenic. Excess
ketones in the blood may be the result of overeating dietary fat, not
the result of burning body fat via ketosis.

Susan

Susan
Thanks for the update. How do the posters who report sustained ketosis
know they are in that process?

Your phrase 'only 60 grams...' is somewhat misleading as, to a lot of
people, it is certainly above their practical limit and they may see
changes on their scale, which in the end is the real measuring stick.

I have read that when ketone bodies are released, they enter the
bloodstream, acidify the blood, and are eventually excreted mostly in
urine. (One type of ketone body exits via the lungs.) If that is true,
then I assume(bad word here?) that they would wind up in the urine, all
else being equal--no diabetes, liver or pancreas problems, etc.

I do not see how the first half of my statement can be so correct and
the 2nd half be considered as incorrect.

I know that when I eat too many carbs in a day from most sources, the
stix will not register a color the next day, which, up to your post, I
thought meant there were not enough ketones in the urine to do the
registering deed. For sure, in my case, 100 Carbs a day would certainly
lead to the scale changing numbers.

I listened to Dr Atkins tapes over and over and over and feel that I
have arrived at the knowledge base I am at is, to the best of my memory
accurate with regard to ketones and their residual in the urine.
I cannot remember him ever using 100 carbs per day as a reference point
anyplace in the presentation. However, I believe he did mention 50 and
moving towards that number a bit at a time after induction.

I obviously do not have the medical knowledge you do, hence I have read
and listened and am here doing both....and using the stix as a gauge to
eating habits...and they/I find them helpful, albeit a sort of training
wheels(as noted in another post) that I need to hang on to.

FWIW and IMHO.
Joe

Nevermind.

Susan

Susan said:

x-no-archive: yes

Papa Joe said:

Susan said:

x-no-archive: yes

Papa Joe wrote:

> I thought I understood that when there is a raised level of ketones
> in the urine(color of stix, in my example) then there must either
> have been or is an excess amount of ketones in the blood and,
> conversely, when there is not a raised level in the blood, the stix
> reading would indicate a trace or none-- then the level is
> considered to be 'normal'.
>
> Incorrect?

According to the book on ketogenic dieting the second half of the
above is incorrect. Ketones turn up in the blood first, and may well
be present with no ketonuria. Excess ketones will show up in the
urine if they're present in excess of your need for them asfuel
and/or you haven't hydrated enough to dilute them into being
undetectable. But you can very easily be in sustained ketosis
without registering anything on your ketostix, due to any of those
factors, or a combination thereof.

Many posters to this group have reported sustained ketosis without
registering on the ketostix. They're probably not eating in excess
of their needs.

> In my post I stated that if I was at 100 cpd I am pretty sure I
> would not 'show' on the stix and, accordingly, not reflecting an
> excess of ketones in the blood....not in ketosis.

At 100 grams I think many folks would not register on the sticks, but
they would still be in ketosis. In initial ketosis, the brain would
use all 100 of those grams of easy to burn glucose daily. After a
few weeks of sustained ketosis, the brain would use ketones for some
fuel, and only 40 grams of glucose per day for fuel. That leaves
only 60 grams of glucose for your body to operate on the rest of the
day. Even at rest your cells would use the rest and then switch back
to ketones.

Hence, the 100 gram threshold for a diet to be ketogenic. Excess
ketones in the blood may be the result of overeating dietary fat, not
the result of burning body fat via ketosis.

Susan

Susan
Thanks for the update. How do the posters who report sustained ketosis
know they are in that process?

Your phrase 'only 60 grams...' is somewhat misleading as, to a lot of
people, it is certainly above their practical limit and they may see
changes on their scale, which in the end is the real measuring stick.

I have read that when ketone bodies are released, they enter the
bloodstream, acidify the blood, and are eventually excreted mostly in
urine. (One type of ketone body exits via the lungs.) If that is true,
then I assume(bad word here?) that they would wind up in the urine,
all else being equal--no diabetes, liver or pancreas problems, etc.

I do not see how the first half of my statement can be so correct and
the 2nd half be considered as incorrect.

I know that when I eat too many carbs in a day from most sources, the
stix will not register a color the next day, which, up to your post, I
thought meant there were not enough ketones in the urine to do the
registering deed. For sure, in my case, 100 Carbs a day would
certainly lead to the scale changing numbers.

I listened to Dr Atkins tapes over and over and over and feel that I
have arrived at the knowledge base I am at is, to the best of my
memory accurate with regard to ketones and their residual in the urine.
I cannot remember him ever using 100 carbs per day as a reference
point anyplace in the presentation. However, I believe he did mention
50 and moving towards that number a bit at a time after induction.

I obviously do not have the medical knowledge you do, hence I have
read and listened and am here doing both....and using the stix as a
gauge to eating habits...and they/I find them helpful, albeit a sort
of training wheels(as noted in another post) that I need to hang on to.

FWIW and IMHO.
Joe

Nevermind.

Susan

Oh OK.

x-no-archive: yes

Papa Joe said:

OK, let's say the 100 is the minimum number for the brain to work with
on a daily basis.

What (kind of)issues are we looking at if the number consumed is
regularly in the 50 range?

What would the other organs be doing with zero to work with?
Would they be absorbing needed energy from dissolving fat?

They don't have zero to work with; 58% of the protein we eat is
converted to glucose. Fat is burnt for energy from ketones for the
balance.

Susan