Could you recommend some useful links about this? In particular it is interesting to know if there is some range with fat/carbo ratio when the result is particularly bad.
This is a nice digest of a lot of the science around fats, that while somewhat biased, is a pretty good summary and includes links to studies should you want to dig deeper.
That mostly defends high-fat/low-carbo diet. What I am looking for is where exactly should one put boundaries.
For example, if both high-fat/low-carbo and very-high-carbo/no-fat are good, can one combine them? If one eats very high fat meal, how long one has to wait before eating carbos-without-fat? Is it just few hours? Or should it be 16 hours? Or should one just not do that?
I think those are great questions and anyone who gives you a confident answer on them is kind of full of shit. The bottom line is nutrition is just not that well understood scientifically, and since there is so much evidence emerging showing people reacting pretty differently to the same dietary inputs I think it's that much harder to answer nutritional questions that precisely and build nutritional models that work broadly.
Yeah, I think this post is good at explaining the nuance that there are thresholds at which "things become different," but I'm not sure the thresholds he provides are well supported, which is what I thought you were looking for. No one is going to be able to say 30g fat / 100 g of carbs is ok but 30g fat / 110g carbs is not.
Please don't trust your health to people selling Paelo diet t-shirts, books, and diet bars... A high fat diet will kill you in the long term. Idea: Call 10 cardiologists, ask them if you should increase your fat consumption... then call 10,000 more and hear the same thing.
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=fat+causes+diab...
I totally agree, which I why I encourage you to read the numerous studies linked in the post. Note that you've basically said: don't trust your bullshit experts, trust this random youtube search. I'm asking you to read the bullshit expert's digestion of the science, and then read the science, and then tell me where the bullshit expert has gotten it wrong.
I totally agree that the nutritional "science" community is filled with snakeoil salesmen and that you have to careful.
But also, note that there is a difference between increasing your fat consumption absent of any other changes to your diet, and moving to a diet based mostly on fats, and that those changes have been pretty well described by me, to you, in our previous posts. I would agree that if you make no other changes, for the every day person increasing fat is bad. But literally no one is telling you to do that. NO ONE.
Here is a simple way to see the results for yourself.
1)Spend 30 days eating paleo.
2)Monitor your blood pressure, energy levels, bowel movements, sleep quality
3)Get a fasting glucose test and complete blood lipid profile including HDL/LDL. Research how to read it or ask your dr to interpret the results.
4)Do the same for a very low fat diet (about 10% total calories from fat)
Prediction: You will notice the difference in your body and your energy levels. Your Dr will like the results of the low fat diet much better. (Spoiler: I went through a Paelo/Crossfit phase too so I have already tried this and I personally know many others who have so it is fairly easy to predict what will happen. )
This is the last comment that I will make... I don't want to offend anybody. Rather, I hope somebody finds this useful and starts on a path to being much healthier...
Remember: Fat+Carbs, not just carbs, causes insulin resistance and leads to type 2 diabetes. If you eliminate the fat your diabetes will improve. If you eliminate the carbs your diabetes will also improve... but you will reduce your energy levels by forcing your body into ketosis and greatly increase your odds of high blood pressure, stroke, heart disease, digestive problems and more.
So I mean that is basically useless because I'm definitely not here to argue that if something works in me it will work in everyone. Diet is a really hard thing to create broad models that works for everyone, and that's sort of my major point: there are many ways to make a diet that works and saying "this is the best and only diet" pretty much is definitionally wrong.
> This is the last comment that I will make... I don't want to offend anybody.
No offense taken, I greatly appreciate the conversation and apologize if I've implied otherwise.
> Remember: Fat+Carbs, not just carbs, causes insulin resistance and leads to type 2 diabetes. If you eliminate the fat your diabetes will improve. If you eliminate the carbs your diabetes will also improve... but you will reduce your energy levels by forcing your body into ketosis and greatly increase your odds of high blood pressure, stroke, heart disease, digestive problems and more.
I would totally agree except that all of the things you mentioned as bad effects of a ketogenic diet are well studied bad effects of moderate fat moderate carb diet, not a high fat low carb (ie: keto) diet. I'm not here to argue for keto, just to say that there are many roads to the same place. A vegan diet may even be the best one for the most people, but if you believe that science is the best way to understand this stuff (and I do) then there isn't science to support that position.
This is a nice digest of a lot of the science around fats, that while somewhat biased, is a pretty good summary and includes links to studies should you want to dig deeper.