When strength athletes cut out most of the carbohydrates out of their diet, but remain high in their calories, their fat mass decreases and their muscle mass remains constant. According to sports scientists at the University of Malaga in Spain, this means that a high-caloric but low-carbohydrate diet can help strength athletes to lose body fat while retaining muscle mass. But it also means that a low-carbohydrate diet is not effective when strength athletes want to build muscle mass. Study The researchers had 24 healthy men, who had been training with weights for at least 2 years, train for 8 weeks in an identical manner. The researchers gave the men a schedule that was designed to stimulate hypertrophy. The researchers divided the men into 3 groups, and gave each group a different diet. The men in the control group continued to eat as they used to be. [CG] Another group of men received a protein-rich - 2 grams of protein per kilogram of body weight per day - but low-carbohydrate diet - the men ate a maximum of 42 grams of carbohydrates per day. [KD] The caloric intake was high. Every day the men ate more than 3000 kilocalories. A third group of men received a more or less 'normal' protein-rich diet. [NKD] These men also ate more than 3000 kilocalories per day. Results The low-carbohydrate diet reduced the fat mass of the subjects, including the fat mass in the abdominal cavity. Especially the latter type of fat can be dangerous to health. The fat-free mass remained constant. Conclusion "According to our results, we concluded that subjects who underwent resistance training during a ketogenic diet experienced a greater reduction in fat mass and visceral adipose tissue, when compared to the non-ketogenic diet group", write the researchers. "The greater reduction in visceral adipose tissue may have some clinical relevance due to its inverse association to cardio-metabolic risk." "Further studies are necessary to evaluate the advantages of this combination (resistance training and ketogenic diet) in subjects with excess of body fat mass, with particular attention to the reported significant reduction in visceral adipose tissue, which might be highly beneficial to this population given that lean body mass is maintained." "Indeed, this research showed no significant changes nor effect size on lean body mass, despite hyperenergetic condition and high protein intake (2.0 g/kg/d) in resistance-trained men of the ketogenic diet group. Thus, we conclude that low-carbohydrate dietary approaches would not be an optimal strategy for building muscle mass in trained men under the training conditions of this study (mechanical tension-focused resistance training protocol during 8 weeks)." Source: J Int Soc Sports Nutr. 2018 Jul 9;15(1):31.
I just think it is hard to apply these principles to us when a study refers to strength athletes. These are guys lifting professionally for way more hours and time then we would ever come close to. Their dietary requirements alone would not be appropriate for us whatever approach they chose. Although ketogenic would not be optimal for strength ATHLETES, regular lifters can still build lean body mass using an adjusted ketogenic approach.
Not exactly: If those were the only criteria, then they're neither necessarily "professional" nor truly athletes. Whether or not they are actually athletes, if the study results are indeed valid, then I think the findings would apply across the board.
Studies can show differently: https://jissn.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1550-2783-11-S1-P40 These results indicate that VLCKD (Very Low Carb Ketogenic Diet) may have more favorable changes in LBM, muscle mass, and body fatness as compared to a traditional western diet in resistance trained males. Results Lean body mass increased to a greater extent in the VLCKD (4.3 ± 1.7 kgs ) as compared to the traditional group (2.2 kg ± 1.7). Ultrasound determined muscle mass increased to a greater extent in the VLCKD group (0.4 ± 0.25 cm) as compared to the traditional western group (0.19 ± 0.26 cm). Finally fat mass decreased to a greater extent in the VLCKD group (-2.2 kg ± 1.2 kg) as compared to the (- 1.5 ± 1.6 kg).
What, exactly, is a "traditional western diet?" From the appearance of a lot people on the street, it must be dangerous.
The study I linked highlights what the non-Keto diet was = 55 % CHO, 25 % fat, 20 % pro. Guess what the non-Keto diet macros were in the study Baron cited: 55% CHO; 20% PRO and 25% FAT. Both studies gave the non-keto group identical macros but in one study the keto group gained more LBM (my study) and in another study (Baron's) the keto group did not gain as much LBM. Conclusion....you CAN gain LBM on keto diet if done properly.
Okay, then pending a definitive study, that would suggest to each his own. I don't know what percentage of my own caloric intake is in the form of carbs, but I do like some "balance" in my diet. It makes it sustainable, and prevents the need to "cheat" and then mostly with the wrong kind of foods. If it's not sustainable then you have a yo-yo on your hands, wouldn't you say? And I wonder what the carb component in each of those studies looked like.
You hit the nail on the head. An approach that is "not your cup of tea" does not mean it does not WORK. It just means the requirements don't fit your lifestyle. But whether something works is not a matter of taste .
That's true. And my "knowledge" of this subject is no better than that of a layman, because that's exactly what I am. But, if the diet is not sustainable in the longer term, then it may work in theory but not in the real world of application. As with workout routines, about which we all have our own opinions and convictions, at the end of the day the "best" one is the one you will continue to do. Personally, I couldn't maintain a very carb-restricted diet, but I can easily limit it to a reasonable amount of "good" carbs and not feel the need to stray. Do you have trouble with a very restricted carb intake? Because if you didn't, then your "cheat" days would be very few and far between.
The diet is sustainable, it is the person that just does not want to sustain it more than anything. it is not easy if you are someone who needs gluten/sugars. My cheat days are very few and far in between and they are not as enjoyable as you think they would be. Also, when you are at a goal weight range you can have your carbs when you want as long as you stay in your range (or be fine with gaining the weight if you don't control it) and maintain. There is no value to drop 40 pounds and then simply put it back on by abandoning it completely. Within the realm are modified keto approaches but most people think it is all bacon or else. If I eat a piece of cake on Sunday, really does not matter for me because I have no issues M-Sat maintaining the lifestyle. Your tastes change dramatically. Bread does nothing for me now and pasta even less. Once in a blue moon a cookie or dessert for some craving but overall I am happier without them due to the benefits I receive. In fact the low sugar protein bars I eat put most people off but I am so used to them now haha. Obviously this is not a lifestyle I promote, I simply provide information on it. I don't advocate this for people because we all have to make our own choices. If someone is "I will never live without bread and pasta!" I don't try and convince them but happy to share when they as me about it. I do enjoy dispelling myths based on the research I have done (almost a year before I attempted to do it). I only defend Keto because I have put in a lot of time studying and researching through medical journals and books as well as materials out there. I am not a supporter of the eat all the butter and bacon that you want or butter coffee either...to extreme for me and there is data that does not support that approach (ad lib eating without quality).