I keep seeing this critique. Defined hypotheses in this space are crucial. It's quite frustrating that we see claims that are so vague that they're not testable and enable goal post shifting as necessary.https://twitter.com/collinpopp/status/1063182514586640385 …
-
Show this thread
-
I struggle a lot w looking at a trial testing aspects of the insulin hypoth (which itself is vague) that gets critiqued as not being keto, when being keto isn't an essential aspect of the insulin hypothesis in any def I've seen. Is there an insulin floor/ceiling aspect to it now?
1 reply 0 retweets 11 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @KCKlatt
From my understanding it should be almost entirely linear, and not necessitate ketosis at all. If the insulin hypothesis is correct, you would expect to see improvements from any reductions in carbs, irrespective of other factors
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @GidMK
Possibly. Even in this BMJ iteration there was further refinement in noting the insulin:glucagon ratio (likely addressing insulinogenic AAs). Some versions of hypothesis r abt total WL, others abt where fat is sstored.Hypoth poorly states replacement nutr 4 CHO to keep isocal
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
More variations than one can tweet. I'm sure some could find a way to work ketone production being an important aspect in all of that as well. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.