Here's "the Bear"'s reply:
1 - If muscle glycogen doesn't vary with exercise, why do we "hit the wall" ?
That is the liver, which on carbs fills with glycogen while removing it from the blood. the bloating then interferes with blood transit and slows furnishing fat on demand. After ketoadaptation, fat moves freely and the liver does not act as a first line of action (sweeper) to remove the glucose from the blood, first as glycogen, and then converting it into fatty acids..
- A long adatpation period is needed to zero carb adaptation. What will happen if, after adaptation it happens to eat some carb ? Shall we wait for that long adaptation period after just one carb meal ?
Takes from two to four weeks only to keto-adapt. Eating carbs will interfere with adaptation for the simple reason that glucose is so toxic it will kill you very quickly (diabetic coma) if not removed from the blood- thus the adaptation is quenched, insulin floods out and the carbs stored as fat... and you must start over.
2 - In a 2 minutes high intensity effort, after ATP depletion (ATP stoks endure just some 10 seconds) glycogen is needed to provide energy via the chain: glycogen - glucose - pyruvic acid - lactic acid
This is what we know. It that chain wrong ? Is there a study that proves it wrong ?
It does not happen. ONLY ATP provides the energy for muscular contractions, and is renewed by an enzymatic process involving n-carnityl-FFA complex. You are completely wrong about the ATP supply. What you have partially described (pyruvic/Krebs) is part of the conversion process for making fat from glucose.
3 - You say that you never get muscle soreness, but later you say that if you train hard you get doms. This is a contraddiction. What about a serious athlete who trains hard almost everydays ? I agree that one can train moderately with zero carb. But it's impossible to have big training volume with zero carb (recovery time will be too long)
Quite simple- if you train every day you will become weaker and smaller. NO 'serious' athlete trains more than two or three days/week. Your body does NOT grow from exercise, which actually damages it. Working too heavy or for too long causes enough damage to make you sore, the proper level does not. You only grow or improve in strength and fitness while resting and recovering from exercise.
4 - I agree with you that both muscle fibre type work on ATP-ADP, that is produced from fat, but when you have to resinthetize ATP quickly and in oxygen debt (anaerobically) glucose is needed to provide the required energy. This is chemistry. I agre that ADT-ATPis done with FFA (if there is enough oxygen). Where is the required energy taken, if there's not enough oxygen to oxidize FFA ? (i.e. working at an anaerobical regime)
No you are wrong again, as you have been from your first paragraph.
5 - You say you are a very active person, ok. But there's dofference between dancing and training just for hobby, or training hard everyday (someone twice a day) for racing and possibly get some good results. For instance I am a cyclist and my long rides are 4-5 hours at medium-high intensity. Do you see what I mean ?
I see that you have nothing to contribute, and like to make a lot of 'noise' about bullshit. You haven't a clue as to my level of activity OR my fitness. Only fools train twice a day. Overtraining is not worthy of braggadocio.
6 - Again, glycogen is not the fuel, it's the energy source to produce ATP from FFA via lactic acid formation.
Wrong.
- You say that glycogen only serves as a storage to regulate blood sugar levels. So, what's the purpose of sugar in blood, is we don't use it?
SOME tissues do use it- tendons, cartilage and dense nervous tissues for instance.
On a zero carb regime, we use a very small amount of glucose- <5gm/day in the presence of ketone bodies, a fat metabolite which substitutes for glucose and provides the major energy source for the few tissues unable to utilise fat. The normal blood level is ~100 mg/dl, or a total in an average person of less than 5 gms. Glucose is VERY toxic, only insulin is somewhat more damaging- but won't kill you quite so rapidly as excess blood glucose.
Take my advice, don't believe what you hear about diet and biomechanics- it is all rubbish.
If you like meat and love fat, and can eat it rare and without salt, and want to eat the all meat way, and are happy doing that, then go for it. If not- then stay where you are.
I know it is the right way, but I really have no interest in arguing with anyone who can't accept what I have to say, and trust me, after 50 years eating this regime, there is no question whatsoever about what is real and what is nonsense. Science? All lies- told for money.
I am including my simple rules. Be careful and don't obsess over the food- if you can't eat it with pleasure and without thinking much about it you should stay where you are dietary wise.
--
Cheers.
Well, it seems to me that he took my objections as an attack to his eating style. I was only trying to undestand what's beneath...
But I see that there's no science, it's a sort of "if you blind believe it, take it without proofs nor explanations".
Sincerely, I don't believe this is a fully safe regimen. Moreover it's practcically unaffordable for me.
I am forced to lunch out, and it is impossible to have a lunch that is 100% meat and fat (possibly raw). I would mean no possibily of going out with friends. Too sad for me.
The bear believes that glucose is evil and insuline too, I think insulin is the more powerful anabolic hormone and glucose (carbos) must be used to stimulate il at the right moment.
