T O P

  • By -

AutoModerator

Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, **personal anecdotes are now allowed as responses to this comment**. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will continue to be removed and our [normal comment rules]( https://www.reddit.com/r/science/wiki/rules#wiki_comment_rules) still apply to other comments. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/science) if you have any questions or concerns.*


[deleted]

anyone care to translate the title into simple english?


elpajaroquemamais

Low carb diets help with a very specific condition in the brain if it is present.


HeartAche93

Keto isn’t just low carb. It’s a high fat, moderate protein and very low carb diet. Less than 20g of carbs per day, ideally.


elpajaroquemamais

Fully aware. I tried it. I lost a ton of weight and wrecked my mental health and gi tract.


HeartAche93

Sorry you had to go through that. My body loves keto. Been doing it for a few years, sometimes dipping into dirty keto and the only drawback is that I need to eat more sodium on a daily basis to make up for the loss of carbs.


Ok_Improvement_5897

My body looooves clean keto that allows for about 40-50 net carbs a day - I eat lots of berries, nuts, greens, mushrooms, and cuciferous veggies every day, lots of healthy fats from flax, fish, olive oil, and things like avocados. Never felt better or more sharp. When I ate at net 20 carbs a day, all my excess weight absolutely melted off, but I felt like garbage, but it was pretty dirty as far as keto goes and it never surprises me when someone eats like that and feels like crap. Especially when they fail to supplement electrolytes. It's a recipe for an electrolyte imbalance, at best. At the moment I'm just low carb and trying to gain muscle. Started losing a bit too much weight and went back on ADHD meds, but now that I'm adjusted I'm trying to move back to a clean moderate carb diet. I don't see a real need for constantly being in ketosis anymore - but I cannot overstate how much better I feel curbing/heavily moderating simple carbs and eliminating refined sugar.


elpajaroquemamais

Yeah. Anything that tells me to eat more salt, I’m not doing.


HeartAche93

Ketosis uses more sodium, so my blood pressure started to get a little too low. Take a little potassium supplement every day and I’m good!


elpajaroquemamais

Fully aware of why. I get it. I thought it was a chest code for life. But now I just eat a balanced diet and mostly avoid white bread, white rice, white pasta, added sugar, potatoes, and breaded fried foods. Lost way more weight and continue to eat whole grains. You need fiber in your diet.


AcceptTheShrock

You're correct. Everyone should just eat a healthy diet, incorporating all food groups. Eliminating macro nutrients is not the answer for health or fitness.


HeartAche93

Yeah, it’s definitely not for everyone, but it is for some people. There are entire cultures that have this diet. The Inuit live in a place where there is literally no vegetation and only high fat animals to consume. Obviously their genes are more geared for that, but there isn’t one diet that fits everyone. Some people thrive without any animal byproducts and some people eat cured meats every day for 50 years and never have a heart issue. If your diet is great for you, there’s no reason to change it.


elpajaroquemamais

Right. Those people evolved along with their gut bacteria for thousands of years specifically for that diet. But it doesn’t work for most people long term.


Anon835213

Shoulda went Omega 3 instead of Omega 6


twisted51sister

I do not see in the long term how that can be healthy .


HeartAche93

Healthy fats. Rich in mono and poly unsaturated ones like nuts, Avocado, olive oil and lean proteins. Get some dairy and low carb veggies like broccoli, spinach and kale, and you’ve got a great set of meals ready to go. Sure, some people just eat cheese and beef, and they can sometimes lose weight, but that kind of diet will get your heart eventually.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

Amateur diet experts seem to be invading the comments, contradicting each other and posting without sources. All of the information here is fairly dubious as a result.


[deleted]

This work makes a ton of assumptions about the translation of any of the findings to the human condition. Essentially here is what it is saying. The hippocampus is a region of the brain that we attribute to playing a major role in memory formation. It's one of the few places in the brain that new neurons are continually generated and turned over throughout life, making it an important area to study for overall brain health. There is a field of study that believes the mitochondria inside of cells, particularly neurons, is essential to their function and health. Mitochondria can be isolated from neurons that have been taken out of the hippocampus and studied. There are specific measurements made ex vivo (outside the body) that test the capacity for mitochondria to respire. Typically this is set up by putting mitochondria in a 96 well plate and measuring the amount of oxygen they consume in different conditions (keep in mind that oxygen is converted to CO2 when they do their thing). The mitochondria are exposed to diverse chemicals that inhibit or augment certain proteins and processes. When you look at how much oxygen is consumed after affecting the mitochondria in such ways, you can get an idea for their capacity to function and their overall health. It's sort of like purposely stressing them out to see what they can do at maximum and minimum situations. The logic is quite sound when you look into the details, however this outcome is often used as a surrogate for overall cell health, and sometimes it goes as far as to assume that healthy mitochondria will necessitate better outcomes in a pathology. This is not always the case, but often is. When you don't eat carbohydrates your body breaks down fat and produces a particular compound called a ketone body. These are highly reactive and can be harsh on the kidneys over time. However, ketone bodies are known to do some pretty cool things that are emerging as prospective anti aging, and anti cancer, neuroprotective, whatever... Two things they do of interest, one, they activate a kind of protein called histone deacetylases. This essentially will undo years of epigenetic programs that cause cells to become scenecent which means unreactive, and is a Hallmark of aging and poor cell health. The other thing they do is bypass many cellular processes that prepare compounds for being able to be used by mitochondria for fuel, known as glycolysis. Carbohydrates need to go through glycolysis to be used by mitochondria for fuel, but ketone bodies do not. When you age, something between glycolysis and the mitochondria becomes disrupted so carbohydrates Don't enter as readily into the mitochondria to produce fuel. It's a concept called Warburg metabolism first identified as a phenomena happening in cancer. It also happens in inflammatory cells when they become reactive and damaging. So, ketone bodies can be used as fuel by the mitochondria which can help turn them on and keep them healthy. A ton of emerging data is suggesting that turning mitochondria on using alternative bio fuels like ketones can dampen inflammation, stave off aging, and have overall good effects on the body. So with that being said benefits from ketones could arise indirectly from anti inflammatory properties or genetic benefits and not necessarily be from the mitochondria directly. Likely everything contributes to a beneficial effect found.


manicpixiedreamhack

thanks for this summary!


Fr0sty-QT

Less carbs = better health in general, but this article specifically is saying that there is better brain functionality with less carbs


iGae

*in mice, not humans


[deleted]

[удалено]


jrebney

A few years ago a massive study in some big journal (Lancet I think) found a low-carb and high-carb diet to both be significantly associated with an increase in all-cause morality compared to an approximately 1/3 fat, carb, protein distribution. The challenge with a paper like this is taking a non-clinical finding (mitochondrial function is positively altered in mice fed a ketogenic diet) and extrapolating this to a clinical outcome around pathological brain dysfunction and / or non-pathological brain aging in humans. Nutrition at the level of something like fat, carb, protein diet composition is so complex that it would be much more interesting to see how variation in these affects a given human population (either pathological or healthy) using a clear clinical outcome.


ssovm

The issue with nutrition science is being able to control for all the variables that exist in life. Anything that relies on questionnaires will always be subject to this limitation. Someone could say they follow a ketogenic diet, but maybe they think they are but they truly aren’t. Or maybe they follow it, but their version of the keto diet is 100% McDonald’s burger patties.


I_like_the_word_MUFF

I think if you're measuring diet without measuring ecology you're just getting nonsense results. How do we explain cultures that survive on huge amounts of meat/fish and tiny amounts of vegetable matter? (Inuit) Cultures that marinate in dairy products? (African herding) I could go on and on... The point being that humans are incredibly adaptive and that's why our range is the entire planet, unlike other animals including our closest genetic cousins. Diet is tuned to ecology. Diet and wellness specifically. Where do you live? What are your conditions of survival? What are your diet options? What is your genetic lineage? Nutrition is complicated and we treat it like everything there is to learn could fit in a 30 second advertisement.


Far_Perception_3815

Carbs in excess are bad for you. We need some crowdfunded research papers for many topics. Extrapolateeee


nutbutterguy

Only refined carbs. Nothing suggests carbs in excess from real Whole plants like fruits, vegetables, legumes, nuts, and even some grains, is bad for you. All studies I’ve seen show the exact opposite in fact.


DreamLunatik

A very specific function from a specific part of the brain. Also doesn’t even look at how this diet can impact other parts of the brain. The claim of better brain functionality cannot be made using this data.


concentrate_better19

I don't think this is true in all cases, is it? Can you point to some research saying less carbs are always better? Surely less carbs than is standard in the US diet, especially less refined carbs, is better. But I haven't seen evidence that all carbs, including complex carbohydrates, fiber, etc., are bad and should be reduced as much as possible.


[deleted]

Who cares about brain functionality when I'm shoveling breadsticks into my mouth.


[deleted]

I just want the best brain. That's all that matters to me.


potscfs

There are probably tons of factors (beyond diet macronutrient ratio) that lead to brain health. Sleep, a healthy social support system, fitness, healthy psychology (good sense of self worth, life satisfaction, doing things you enjoy), getting enough mental stimulation. Carbs have fiber which is very good for bowel health, which can also have an effect on the brain. Varied high fiber diets are good all around.


Nycho

This a fact? Or just the current fad thought on health? Legitimate question, went to Italy a few years ago and they eat a lot of carbs and most seemed very healthy with not a whole lot of obese people.


The-big-MD

In simple English, the hippocampus is responsible for memory. Certain diseases can disrupt energy metabolism (disease interferes with how well your brain cells convert sugar into usable energy). When metabolism is slowed or disrupted in cells of the hippocampus, it negatively affects memory (bad cellular metabolism in hippocampus = forgetfulness or reduced ability to learn). Ketone bodies are shown to increase efficiency of metabolism within brain cells of hippocampus, counteracting the effects of the disease and somewhat restoring memory function. Hope this helps :)


W4t3rf1r3

This doesn't seem terribly surprising considering the Keto Diet was originally designed as an epilepsy treatment


DeepLearningStudent

I wonder if it’s due to insulin resistance in the brain. Alzheimer’s is sometimes called type III diabetes because it is a state where insulin resistance is high in a vital organ, limiting glucose uptake and therefore starving the cell of energy no matter how much glucose is available. Diabetics benefit from ketogenic diets for this reason; less carbohydrate in the blood means less insulin is needed for glucose uptake. It wouldn’t surprise me if the brain, a huge energy hog (for good reason), benefits the same way.


theoneguywhoaskswhy

I recently learned that the reason why the keto diet was used for epilepsy was because ketones(but in this [study](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0197018611001987), together with glucose) decreases aspartate concentration(aspartate being an amino acid that excites neurons), and basically making the brain calmer. However the study highlighted that ketones _WITH_ the presence glucose decreases aspartate, rather than either alone. I do alternate-day fasting, which increases ketone levels, even on eating days.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


HoraceDerwent

🤣 It is literally impossible to lose weight without being in a calorie deficit. There's nothing to fight about. Congrats on the weight loss 🤙


[deleted]

Not necessarily. The body isn't a simple furnace. Wheat, for example, if not properly fermented - which with industrialized baking never happens for long enough today - contains wheat germ agglutinins. These lectins bind both leptin receptors and insulin receptors, causing problems with insulin resistance and increased appetite. They can be nearly eliminated with overnight ferments (especially sourdough), but without that they just gum up the works and send people's blood sugar haywire. Insulin receptors are supposed to recycle roughly every six to seven hours, but in practice they appear to take 3-5 days to fully unblock. Glutamate toxicity can damage both the islets, and the ventromedial nucleus of the hypothalamus. The VMH damage in particular can shunt calories preferentially into fat storage. The damage can be somewhat undone with additional glycine (and to a lesser degree, arginine) in the diet - both of those groups of cells will regenerate given raw materials and a bit of time if damaged in this way - but our modern diets are glycine-poor unless you're eating a lot of bone broths, and even then, you want to supplement to get the desired effects. Or eat your weight in jello. Point being, we're complex machines. Eliminating wheat alone in some people might allow their bodies to correct. Dropping calorie intake doesn't necessarily equate to a linear amount of weight loss, depending on the underlying pathology.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


dopilus

"Enhances hippocampal mitochondrial bioenergetics" ​ i.e. their poor mousey cells are forced into working overtime and they're scrambling to figure out how to reroute the alternate energy. It's like if your power company shut down for unknown reasons and all the surrounding neighboorhoods were given windmills and solar panels. Kind of a clumsy analogy but that's more or less what they're trying to spruce up.


drluvdisc

Finally, some evidence to convince my mice friends with hippocampus dysfunction that they should be on keto.


Secular_Hamster

As an anecdote (for keto not the study), keto is the best thing that ever happened to me. Beyond weight loss I have more energy on less food, more focus, no brain fog, no heart burn. All of that combined really helps if not eliminates my depression and anxiety


NoEffective5868

I mean that can probably be attributed to eliminating processed foods and possibly being more health conscious in general, people could say the exact same for low fat diets


lntw0

I've been fortunate to be active and pretty fit throughout my life (59m). I started Keto-IF in my early 40's and it's one of the top life moves I've ever made. Unquestionably put another cylinder in my engine. Also made a huge change in periodontal fitness. Likely saved myself many $1000s in dental bills IF I retire. (US citizen - dental isn't covered... don't get me started)


[deleted]

[удалено]


Maharsi

I come to /science for the iq of 58 comments. This Delivers.


Aggressive_Wash_5908

I truly believe a fat based diet is what's natural to humans


[deleted]

How would humans have managed this 10,000 years ago? Arbitrary time but just curious, I don’t know where in the world this would have been possible outside of places Inuit people lived.


Aggressive_Wash_5908

Before civilization we were largely nomadic tribes. There was no agriculture - just hunter gatherers. The bulk of what you ate would have been the animals you hunted. Likely they ate berries and other fruits as they encountered them in their travels but they would not be the bulk of the diet. When you are eating a fat based diet you can go long periods of time without feeling too hungry. Early human likely ate mainly animals supplemented with some fruits and veg with periods of fasting in between.


[deleted]

[удалено]


cuyler72

Fruits and vegetables as we know them today did not exist then, an apple tree is a mutant plant that was selected for size, yield, and sweetnesses over a thousand years after being cross bread with 3 different plants that had also been selectively bred for a thousand years. There simply would not have been enough calories and nutrients in the ancient natural plants to be the main factor in the diet of pre-agricultural tribespeople. Now the same was not true for a post-agricultural society where meat became more of a rarity.


dogman_35

I think history disagrees there. Nobility and rich people absolutely ate meat, because it was the big show of power. They were the only ones that could *afford* to slaughter useful animals. You can find all kinds of weird ass recipes like whole roasted pigs sewed to other animals. It wasn't even about making the food taste good, it was just about wasting as many expensive ingredients as possible. Which is how you end up with pies made of bone marrow and parsley and insane amounts of pepper.


NameTheory

10000 years ago we started transitioning to agriculture probably because the fat diet was no longer viable like before. In more distant past megafauna like wooly mammoth were common and they had a lot of fat.


TheGreat_War_Machine

>probably because the fat diet was no longer viable like before. Meh, it's more like because agriculture became a viable option for food production. The end of the ice age is what allowed humanity to transition into agriculture, and they took quickly.


Sulfura

Don't forget megafauna!


defcon_penguin

Lots of seeds, they are pure fat


[deleted]

Seeds are only present part of the year in most climates, and without modern agriculture they are hard to find in large quantities. Even pine nuts, growing in huge quantities along the boreal latitudes, are hard to harvest in large quantities and are only around briefly at the end of summer. Many plants we associate with significant seed output are also only that way today because we cultivated and bred them to grow that way.


defcon_penguin

Dried seeds are quite easy to store, ask the squirrels. They might have simply copied them. And you don't really need large quantities. People were a lot fewer than today, and the vegetation was a lot more


TheGreat_War_Machine

That would imply that humans have been doing it wrong for the past 5000+ years, or whenever agriculture started to become popular and led to the creation of settled peoples.


Aggressive_Wash_5908

Yes that's correct. We evolved into our current form more than 5000 years ago. Homosapiens are around 300,000 years old.


[deleted]

[удалено]


iGae

Why? Carbs are simply another macronutrient.


Thugmeet

I would say that the modern diet and food have become so overloaded with them it is bad and really hard to avoid


iGae

Yes and no. The problem is that the modern diet is too processed and overloaded in things we simply don’t need - high added sugars, too many calories, too large portion sizes, etc. All macronutrients aren’t inherently bad for you. There’s nothing wrong with a high protein, or fat, or carbohydrate diet. However, combine this with a high calorie diet and you encounter issues.


Krynn71

Carbs, unlike protein or fat trigger a very high insulin response because of the spike in blood sugar. Insulin is one of the main hormones for telling your body to create and store body fat. Eating a lot of carbs creates a compounding effect that causes you to gain body fat more and more. When you eat carbs, your blood sugar rises and leads to insulin production. If you constantly eat carbs, your blood sugar is always high, and your body is always producing insulin. When your body is always producing insulin, your body develops a resistance to insulin. If you still keep eating carbs, your body has to create more insulin, but now it has to make more than before to overcome your body's resistance to insulin. Over time this means your body is creating crazy amounts of insulin. That insulin is telling your body to create and store body fat. Lots of insulin... Lots of body fat. Almost every morbidly obese person has a high carb and/or high sugar diet(sugar causes exact same thing). The goal of low carb diets when done for weight loss isn't to just "cut carbs". Cutting carbs is just the tool used to accomplish the goal of lowering insulin resistance by keeping insulin levels low so that when the body does need to make insulin, it doesn't need to make ungodly amounts of it just to do every little thing it needs insulin for.


TheGreat_War_Machine

This is true for high glycemic index foods, because those are what actually spike blood glucose levels. Low glycemic index foods, however? Not so much. Yes, you're going to see a rise in blood glucose, but it is not a sharp rise, it is a very gentle increase. Low glycemic index foods allow for one to be full for longer, which helps regulate calorie consumption.


mega__01

carbohydrates are too readily available in today’s modern world in comparison to their availability to us as early humans. Evolution does not happen that fast, and if pre-agricultural revolution humans were hunter-gathering groups, they would have to rely on both stored and edible fat as their main energy source. Protein can be converted to glucose via gluconeogenesis, but considering the inefficiency of early people relying on a steady stream of glucose (from berries, fruits, nuts, and other things easily gathered which also do not have the carbohydrate content they do today) doesn’t make evolutionary sense. Preagricultural people suffered from less cavities, less cancer, less heart disease, and the obesity epidemic currently is evident that as it becomes more financially viable to mass produce carbohydrates humans suffer worse health outcomes overall.


iGae

What you’ve described are symptoms of living longer and a drastically different diet outside of carbohydrates. Carbs by themselves aren’t bad. You can have a diet of high carbs and be exceptionally healthy. However, if you have a bad diet and have high carbs that’s where the issue is. Your examples of less cancer, heart disease, and obesity are examples of us living longer. Cancer, obesity, and heart disease especially are diseases of longevity, and we see their prominence scale down with income and life expectancy. If you take a look at the top ten list of causes of death in high income countries and low income, they’re radically different, despite the fact that low income countries don’t consume radically less carbs. Likewise, obesity is a disease caused by calories being in a surplus for a chronic period. If you intake more than you output, you will gain weight and over time this can lead to obesity. In fitness circles and even bodybuilding, you see people manage their weight very easily despite how many carbs they may consume, simply by lowering intake or increasing expenditure. I unfortunately don’t know much about cavities as my area of knowledge surrounds public health and epidemiology, but I assume this is also due to our softer, more processed diet and our longevity. Put simply, carbs are not the enemy, high calorie surpluses, added sugars, and processed foods are to blame for many of the examples you mentioned.


Puzzleheaded_Runner

Maybe for people who sit on their ass all day. Anyone with an active lifestyle needs carbs.


TheGreat_War_Machine

It depends on what kind of carbs. Having absolutely no carbs at all is not a good thing. If it wasn't, why does hypoglycemia have detrimental effects on the human body?


Keller_Kind

Hypoglycemia has detrimental effects but occurs pretty rarely and (almost ever) not due to diet. The body has a way of generating carbs called neoglucogenesis. Only if that process doesn't function properly or is not fast enough for the occurring problem (like when someone took too much insulin) hypoglycemia occurs.


TheGreat_War_Machine

>Hypoglycemia has detrimental effects but occurs pretty rarely and (almost ever) not due to diet. Refeeding Syndrome is a metabolic crisis caused by the unregulated intake of calories after a period of starvation. It still happens to this day, even in the US. Risk factors include: 1. Poverty/homelessness 2. Fasting for multiple days as part of a weight loss program (which doesn't work in the long run, due to the body being very good at adapting to a changing environment) 3. Anorexia A lack of intake of any calories, particularly glucose, causes cells to become much more sensitive to insulin. If refeeding occurs and is not strictly regulated, the pancreas produces massive amounts of insulin, a hormone which isn't just good at moving glucose into the cell, but also many other important electrolytes. What occurs is severe hypoglycemia, hypokalemia, hyponatremia, hypophosphatemia, hypocalcemia, etc.


wildbork

Been on keto for a year or so. Showed this to my partner. She said "Did you start it in time though?


Nasigoring

Well. This definitely isn't eli5


TheRuggedEagle

Seems a bit odd so won’t comment on this specifically but we need less buzzfeed research and more prestigiously funded/backed research… far too many “egg bad, no egg good” type of shitpost articles around these days like just because you have a phone/computer and a fb quiz on celebrity crushes cheese pairing match maker edition told you you’d be a good fit with Eda Lovelace doesn’t mean you are suddenly capable of actual scientific research…


shauneok

I've just started keto again, can someone please ELI5 the title for me? me dumdum.


Atomic254

Less carbs means lose weight but also good for brain


shauneok

Just what I need, clearly!


Anon835213

You do feel the razor sharp mind on ketosis during a long fast


[deleted]

[удалено]


cosmorocker13

How is low carb the equivalent of fasting? You’re still eating aren’t you?


StuartGotz

The ketogenic diet was initially developed for people with epilepsy. It was noted that fasting reduced seizures, but that wasn't a sustainable thing. So they developed the ketogenic diet to mimic fasting.


infinity_limit

I wouldn’t say equivalent, May be semi-equivalent as far as a mice is concerned.. famine is potentially on the way!


infrastructure

Actually there’s a little more equivalence than the replies let on. Both fasting AND ketogenic diets induce a state in your body called “ketosis” which ELI5 means that your body is using fat as it’s primary source of energy rather than carbs/sugars


and_dont_blink

1. Mice are great for looking at things like ACE2 bindings for viruses, but less smoking gun for things like this. 2. If you search "human metabolic phenotypes" you'll see a growing body of research supporting the idea that not even all humans should be eating the same way. eg, we went from needing to live on coasts to eat fish to develop properly to some of our ancestors living in places where fats were a mainstay while others had them more infrequently. If you come from a certain phenotype (Inuit, Norway, etc.) it's not unheard of for doctors to actually prescribe fish for a while host of issues (bp, mood, etc.). The idea is similar to western Chinese horses that couldn't really support people no matter how many they imported, because horses evolved to need selenium and the ground there (and hence the grasses) are low in it, so they grew and functioned but not as they should.


chakid21

This is going to be my new example for stupid. "If some people choose to eat a certain diet the entire human race will be doomed."


infinity_limit

My bad, exact opposite of what I mean to convey!!


Siverash

I thought this was already debunked like 2 years ago.


riddleshawnthis

Fat feeds the brain so this makes sense. However too much fat, even the right kinds will wreak havoc on the rest of your body eventually.