Here is another "bacon" video, funny but not so "deep":
_http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wSReSGe200A (Rub Some Bacon On It)
I have been taking time lately to explore the "Paleosphere," and it is helping me to make sense of what I have experienced over the past year. The information sources we have used here, including Life Without Break and Primal Body, Primal Mind are good, but they don't cover every possibility and I have had to continue to read, listen, and learn. The good results that I have seen consist mainly of four things:
[list type=decimal]
[*]No more hypoglycemia
[*]Steady weight (more or less)
[*]Gradual reversal of arthritis symptoms
[*]Gradual healing of anal/rectal damage caused by bran in my former diet
[/list]
My present diet has not led, however, to the kind of gut healing or weight loss that I had hoped for, and it is becoming apparent from my reading and listening (blogs and podcasts, mostly, not books) that this is not unusual for people with inflammation/autoimmune issues that are following this kind of diet.
Here in the Life Without Bread forum topic we arrived at this diet coming from what is known as the "very low carbohydrate" (VLC) approach. I have not encountered any definite threshold for what constitutes VLC. Some might say 30 grams/day, while others might say 100 grams/day or more. In other words VLC might or might not be ketogenic, but in a recent (a few minutes ago) unscientific random sample I found that most of the references to VLC that I encountered were indeed ketogenic levels. There is also ZC (zero carbs), which some here have tried. Quite a few people seem to have been successful with VLC; not so many with ZC. And a lot of people seem to have run into trouble with VLC after six months or so. I am one of those (my encounter with ZC lasted only a few weeks and I am not going back there!).
A common problem for people eating VLC to lose weight is that after so long they may cease to lose weight and may even start to gain again. There are other potential issues that I don't understand very well yet. Some people may experience an increase in insulin resistance, for example.
The New Atkins VLC approach presents the idea that when you greatly restrict carb intake and don't restrict fat intake, your body should shift into lipolysis and your appetite should respond positively to the fat and stop inducing you to eat all the time, and you should lose weight if that is what you need/want to do. You might even experience the "Atkins Edge." A number of other authors echo similar themes. It is a good plan, and it seems to work for some people, though I don't have a good feeling for how many. Even here in the forum it would be pretty hard to measure success. A poll might provide interesting feedback.
From what I can tell, the mechanisms for throwing a body out of whack by eating processed foods, excess carbs, and so on, are fairly well understood. How to reverse the damage, lose weight, and heal are not so clear, and seem to depend a lot on the individual. If you "plateau" on Atkins, in Ongoing Weight Loss (OWL), the remedy is simple: just keep the carbs low, indefinitely if necessary. It's a sacrifice some people just have to make. The trouble with this advice is that the plateau could be a warning sign, and there could be significant consequences for disregarding it.
When I hit that point, near the end of last year and about 6 months into VLC, I followed my instincts and reintroduced additional carbs, including one item that Atkins says to avoid during OWL -- sweet potatoes. Oddly enough, doing so restarted my weight loss (temporarily). It turns out that sweet potatoes have some pretty special properties, at least for some people, and that the Atkins approach is just plain wrong for some people! I wish I could lay out for you how it really works, but some pretty smart people are still working on that one. It's hard to figure out. If you are having problems, you have to experiment and to read, read, read.
As I have read, a central theme has emerged -- "It's the wheat!" By that I mean that in my personal history, the principle culprit (apart from congenital issues) seems to have been the consumption of wheat. It can damage you in SO many different ways, doing so slowly and subtly, so that you don't recognize the cause. Or you don't see it because everyone around you "knows" that wheat and its products are good to eat. (By the way, all fiber is not created equal -- wheat bran is an especially abrasive and damaging form of fiber. You may find that you tolerate fiber not from grains just fine, even if you thought that you needed to avoid it.)
Here is the thing: the Paleo community has its share of VLC advocates, but Paleo is not (exclusively) VLC. You can eat a healthy Paleo diet that is not VLC, and many people do. I have been afraid to try it, because I didn't want my hypoglycemia to return, and because I believed what I read in the Atkins book and other sources. But it is starting to look as though the real answer for me may not be a ketogenic diet but rather a grain free diet, totally eliminating wheat. Wheat may be where the hypoglycemia came from.
What really bugs me about ketogenic diet is the skin problems it has triggered. I have had some such problems for a very long time, but they tended to appear in the warmer months and disappear in winter, and it was just small patches around my waist. With lipolysis, though, I am a mess all the time. Fortunately it hasn't spread to where it shows. It goes from about my knees to my shoulders, in patches. On my torso it forms huge splotches, in places. I have made some progress with it, but this is not a good development.
I am probably not going to just go off and try a higher-carb diet. I need to know more about what is happening to me individually, so that I can make informed decisions instead of constantly guessing. I have been paying special attention to Chris Kresser lately and his blogs and podcasts. This is not because I think he has all the answers (he sure doesn't claim to), but because I like his approach to research, and because his office is less than two hours from my house. He is not an author so much as a trained health practitioner (not an MD) who actually sees patients. And he is apparently very familiar with the problems that VLC diet can induce.
The paleolithic period was not dominated by eskimos, as best we can tell. Some people ate VLC, but many did not. Some populations may have thrived on high-carb diets. Some lived in cold climates, some did not. None of them lived in the world that we do, with the food choices that we have now. You can be guided to some degree by what worked in the past, but you are going to have to choose according to what you can find now. If VLC or ZC works for you, do it (or not; your choice, but notice and respond if problems develop, right away or later on). If it doesn't work for you, don't just keep trying it, hoping that things will get better. You might pay quite a price for that. Don't get stuck on the idea that one approach is "optimal" above all others, for everyone. What is important is objective reality, not what seems important.
Whatever approach you try, I think it's pretty important to continue to network. There is so much that still isn't understood, and it is pretty difficult to go it alone. Each of us is different, but there are always things we have in common that enable us to learn from each other.