Hacker News Reader

Comment by espeed | Hacker News Reader

No, I wasn't in ketosis -- my carbs were well over what it would take to go into ketosis.

I was thinking part of it may have been the wheat/yeast throwing my intestinal microbes out of balance (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/28/health/studies-focus-on-gu...) and so when I cut it out, things returned to homeostasis.

View on HN

Have you been tracking calorie intake, both before and after the diet change? That's the deciding factor for your weight. Metabolism, wheat/yeast sensitivity or even normal exercise only has a minor impact.

I would think dropping something as common as wheat would have significant impact on your diet, or?

This isn't entirely true. If you take in the same amount of calories but something changes your metabolism, you can switch from using all the calories and entering a deficit, or storing the calories as fat. This is partly what happens with ketosis. You can eat the same amount of calories overall, but with almost no carbohydrates, and this changes your metabolism. You will lose weight in keto without excercising more if you are so inclined. Like many things, it's a good rule of thumb to say that less calories == less weight, but it's a nuanced situation. That's not always true.

I'm not saying that metabolism has no effect, I'm saying the effect is small relative to calorie intake. I'm well aware of how a keto diet works, and that it can be useful for people looking to lose weight. It's no guarantee, though. There are actually people out there bulking on keto as well.

As for the parent poster, I haven't seen any evidence of calorie tracking. To me that means he doesn't really know how much he's eating, and I think you're just encouraging his flawed metabolism theory when you should know better.

That's really interesting. I've read about intestinal fauna having big impacts on how food is processed.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com