Daily Log

Day 1

Day 2

Day 3

Day 4

Day 5

Day 6

Day 7

Day 8

day 9

Day 10

Day 11

Day 12

Day 13

Day 14

Day 15

Day 16

day 17

day 18

Day 19

Day 20

Day 21

Day 22

Day 23

Day 24

Day 25

Day 26

Day 27

Day 28

Day 29

Day 30

Body Transformation Experiment Nutritional Ketosis Program™ 

Body Transformation Experiment Nutritional Ketosis Program™  calls for a very low intake of carbohydrates, usually less than 50 g a day. On a standard American diet, glucose, which is obtained from digesting carbohydrates, supplies most of the energy required. However, when severely limiting your carbohydrates, your body starts using fat and ketone fuels, which are a byproduct of fat burning, a nutrient-digestive process described as being in nutritional ketosis, as its main source of energy. Body Transformation Experiment Nutritional Ketosis Program not only helps you feel more satiated with less calories; it also burns fat, both from your diet and your own body fat stores, more easily, therefore facilitating weight loss.

Low Carb
The key to a Body Transformation Experiment Nutritional Ketosis Program™ is to keep your carbs low, usually as low as 50 g a day, although some plans would hold you below 20 g a day, to stay in ketosis. Eliminate all grains, including bread, pasta, rice, breakfast cereals, granola bars, crackers, muffins and baked goods; as well as starchy foods, such as potatoes, sweet potatoes and corn, sugar from soft drinks, candies, jams, syrups and desserts; in addition to fruits, milk and yogurt. You can obtain your limited amount of allowed carbohydrates, between 20 and 50 g a day, from non-starchy vegetables. Track your carb intake to ensure they stay within your target.

Non-Starchy Vegetables
Non-starchy vegetables are among the most nutrient-dense foods and can provide you with all the vitamins, minerals, antioxidants and fiber you need, while containing very little carbohydrate content to help you stay in ketosis. You can include 1 to 2 cups of non-starchy vegetables at each of your meals, whether you choose green beans, onions, leafy greens, cucumber, tomatoes, broccoli, mushrooms or cauliflower. Keep track of your carb intake to ensure you stay below your daily carb limit. For example, you could include mushrooms and spinach in your morning omelet, have a big salad of leafy greens for lunch and accompany your dinner with broccoli.

Eat Proteins
A diet should provide a moderate amount of protein at each of your meals. The best sources of protein are found in animal products, such as poultry, fish, seafood, meat, eggs and cheese. Include 4 to 6 oz. at each of your meals, or up to 8 oz. if you have a large appetite, on your Body Transformation Experiment Nutritional Ketosis Program™   For example, you could have 2 to 4 eggs with 1 to 2 oz. of cheese for breakfast, 4 to 6 oz. of stir-fried beef slices in your salad at lunch and 4 to 6 oz. of salmon or chicken at dinner.

Fat Intake Body
Body Transformation Experiment Nutritional Ketosis Program™  comprises very few carbohydrates and a moderate amount of protein, but a high amount of fat. Fat intake will help you maintain your state of ketosis, where your body is burning fat as its main source of energy. Avoid low-fat products and go for full-fat foods, such as full-fat cheese, full-fat mayonnaise and salad dressings, as well as fatty meats, such as sausages and bacon. Avocado, nuts and nut butters are also high-fat foods that you can add to your diet plan. In addition, your Body Transformation Experiment Nutritional Ketosis Program™  should include about 1 to 2 tbsp. of extra fat, such as butter, cream, olive oil, coconut oil, mayonnaise or salad dressings. Coconut oil is a good choice because it contains medium-chain triglycerides that promote a ketogenic state. For example, you can cook the vegetables for your morning omelet in coconut oil, drizzle your salad with olive oil and serve your broccoli with butter at dinner.

Step 1: Kitchen Purge (click here)

Step 2: Go Shopping Food List

Tools

Tips and Tricks

References

Saturated Fat is Bad for you

If we were to focus on the largest (i.e. > 100 subjects), randomized, most famous trials ever done lasting longer than 1 year, we are left with very few to assess that meet the following 2 criteria:

1) The only significant intervention involved a reduction in fat and saturated fat and an increase in polyunsaturated fats
2) They ask the question: does this diet reduce heart disease? (defined as heart attacks or death from heart disease)

Listed in reverse chronological order:
Women’s Health initiative (2006) – 48,835 women, 8 years, no significant difference between intervention and control.

Diet and Reinfarction trial (1989) – 2,033 men, 2 years, no significant difference between the groups given and not given fat and fiber advice. No significant differences in ischaemic heart disease between intervention and control (intervention was only advice in this trial)

Minnesota Coronary Survey* (1989) – 4,393 men and 4,664 women, double-blind, 4 years, no significant reduction in cardiovascular events or total deaths from the treatment diet

Finnish Mental Hospital (1972) – 12 years, physicians not blinded, significant decrease in coronary heart disease (CHD) death in men ( 5.7 deaths /1000 person-years vs 13 deaths /1000 person-years in the control. Non-significant decrease in CHD in women. (Not randomized, although included here because this is main experiment cited in support of diet-heart hypothesis)

Los Angeles Veteran’s Trial* (1969) –  846 subjects, up to 8 years, non significant difference in primary endpoints –  sudden cardiac death or myocardial infarction. More non-cardiac deaths in experimental group, resulting in near identical rates of total mortality

Oslo Heart Study (1968) – 412 men, 5 year, slight decrease in CHD with intervention. Many dietary interventions accompanied the low saturated fat diet. When stratified by age, the results were significant only in subjects younger than 60.

* Double blind

A full list of all the trials done supporting and refuting the saturated fat-heart-disease relationship, and a more in depth description of each, can be found here. 

Meta-analyses
If we instead focus on the recent meta-analyses of clinical trials testing this relationship, the majority have failed to elucidate a benefit associated with a low saturated fat diet:

• In 2010, Ramsden et al. published a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials, including trials where polyunsaturated fats (PUFAs) were increased in place of saturated fats (SFAs) and/or trans fatty acids (TFA), and non-fatal heart attacks, coronary heart disease related deaths, and/or total deaths were reported.  In the nine studies included, there was a non-significant increased pooled risk of 13% for n-6 PUFA intake (RR=1.13, CI: 0.84, 1.53) and a decreased risk of 22% (RR=0.78, CI: 0.65, 0.93) for mixed n-3/n-6 PUFA diets. In other words, increasing polyunsaturated fats in the diet provides no benefit, and may be harmful according to this study.        

• Also in 2010, Mozaffarian et al published a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials investigating the effects of increasing PUFAs in place of other nutrients.  Among the seven studies included, an overall pooled risk reduction of 19% (RR= 0.81, CI=0.83-0.97) was observed for each 5% of energy of increased PUFA in the diet.      

• In 2009, Mente et al. published a systematic review of the randomized clinical trial (RCT) evidence that supports a causal link between various dietary factors and coronary heart disease.  The pooled analysis from 43 RCTs showed that increased consumption of marine omega-3 fatty acids (RR=0.77; 95% CI: 0.62-0.91) and a Mediterranean diet pattern (RR=0.32, 95% CI: 0.15-0.48) were each associated with a significantly lower risk of CHD. Higher intake of polyunsaturated fatty acids or total fats were not significantly associated with CHD, and the link between saturated fats and CHD received a Bradford Hill score of only 2 (out of a maximum score of 4), signifying weak evidence of a causal relationship.

• Also in 2009, the Cochrane Collaboration, an international not-for-profit organization, published a meta-analysis of clinical trials that either reduced or modified dietary fat for preventing cardiovascular disease. Twenty-seven studies met the inclusion criteria, and no significant effect on total mortality (RR = 0.98, 95% CI: 0.86-1.12) or cardiovascular mortality (RR = 0.91, 95% CI: 0.77-1.07) was found between the intervention and control groups 

The only study above showing a benefit to replacing saturated fats with polyunsaturated fats was the Mozaffarian meta-analysis. The authors of the study claim to have only included randomized clinical trials in their meta-analysis. Surprisingly, the Finnish Mental Hospital Study was included twice – split into separate analytical pools of male and female subjects. It is unclear why this study was even included to begin with, since it was not randomized and contained a disproportionate number of control subjects who were taking cardio-toxic medications and consuming higher levels of trans fats than the experimental group. 

Inclusion of male and female Finnish data separately further raises concern since it clearly exaggerates the apparent cardio-protective effect of PUFAs demonstrated in this meta-analysis. Excluding the Finnish data from their pooled analysis would diminish the observed results and elicit a null finding, since all other included studies apart from the Oslo heart study (RR=0.75, CI 0.57-0.99) were null:    
From Mozaffarian et al. 2010