Belly Fat (or Let It Be Body Fat In General)

[appleaurorae]

Well, I went lactovegetarian (vegan+diary) 3,5 years ago and full vegan about a year ago. During this 3,5 year time I lost weight from 98kg (216lbs) to 72kg (159lbs) with height of 183cm (6ft 0in). However, I still have belly fat (and my arms are slim, I can feel the bone and see veins on the forearm ). What's even worse my waist is 91cm (36in) and this is the border of abdominal obesity.

Any proven methods of removing this fat? I tried running, biking, abs workouts, dieting, drinking 2 litres of water per day, detoxifying potions and still nothing changed.

@edit: Topic also for all the things related to losing fat.

Edited April 17, 2016 by appleaurorae

[ElenaO]

I have a somewhat similar experience. Would really like to hear what others have to say.

[Algi]

@appleaurorae Also depends on your age, and body type ectomorph, mesormoph ect. You need to create small deficit of 200-300 per day to ensure a steady fat burn around the waist, however 72kg and being 183cm is very slim so it isn't your body fat percentage that it is the problem, I fact you are close to underweight. You need up the protein and do half hour of exercises on your core every other day to ensure the better body fat distribution around your waist.

[appleaurorae]

14 minutes ago, Algi said:

the better body fat distribution around your waist.

I think you meant distribution around entire body. It's that I have some superslim parts and some obese parts .-. But waist is the most fatty (chest also).

[Algi]

@appleaurorae I meant distribution around the waist, there is such thing as micro distribution. Since you are very slim, as I said core exercises every other. To get full chest definition: You need to target whole chest, upper,middle, lower, and inner. Check out the exercise for each part

[appleaurorae]

Just now, Algi said:

@appleaurorae I meant distribution around the waist, there is such thing as micro distribution. Since you are very slim, as I said core exercises every other. To get full chest definition: You need to target whole chest, upper,middle, lower, and inner. Check out the exercise for each part

But if my waist has excess of fat and I would exercise to align it in the same region, there will still be excess .

[Algi]

T@appleaurorae  that's why you exercise whole core to distribute the fat in other parts of the core, but to you it will look like you have burned it but in fact you distributed it. From diaphragm to transversus admoninis (inner abs) to visual upper,middle and lower abs as well as obliques. Check out bodybuilding.com for a specific part

[Flower]

7 hours ago, appleaurorae said:

Well, I went lactovegetarian (vegan+diary) 3,5 years ago and full vegan about a year ago. During this 3,5 year time I lost weight from 98kg (216lbs) to 72kg (159lbs) with height of 183cm (6ft 0in). However, I still have belly fat (and my arms are slim, I can feel the bone and see veins on the forearm ). What's even worse my waist is 91cm (36in) and this is the border of abdominal obesity.

Any proven methods of removing this fat? I tried running, biking, abs workouts, dieting, drinking 2 litres of water per day, detoxifying potions and still nothing changed.

@edit: Topic also for all the things related to losing fat.

well belly fat is the toughest to get rid of. By the sounds of it you are doing all the right things, it could just be a matter of time before it begins to shift. Of course you should do more core exercises and keep that up but besides that;

My mother had this problem, and she started every morning with a warm glass of water with  some fresh lemon juice ( you can add honey if you wish) and she started losing belly fat she has had for years. Also different things work depending on you body. For me, If I have my last meal before 7.00pm and avoid eating after, this tends to help.  

[Emerald]

On April 17, 2016 at 9:06 AM, appleaurorae said:

Well, I went lactovegetarian (vegan+diary) 3,5 years ago and full vegan about a year ago. During this 3,5 year time I lost weight from 98kg (216lbs) to 72kg (159lbs) with height of 183cm (6ft 0in). However, I still have belly fat (and my arms are slim, I can feel the bone and see veins on the forearm ). What's even worse my waist is 91cm (36in) and this is the border of abdominal obesity.

Any proven methods of removing this fat? I tried running, biking, abs workouts, dieting, drinking 2 litres of water per day, detoxifying potions and still nothing changed.

@edit: Topic also for all the things related to losing fat.

Weight loss always occurs relative to body type. So, if you store more fat around your waist naturally, the only way to actually decrease this in proportion of your waist to the rest of your body is to get liposuction or something of that nature. There is no way to target weight loss to a particular area. This is because (and I can't remember the sources of this, so do your research) you don't lose actual fat cells when you lose weight, they simply shrink or grow. So, you still have the same amount of fat cells in the same areas. So, body proportion remains relatively the same regardless of how much weight you lose or gain. The only way to actually remove fat cells is through liposuction or surgery. Otherwise, fat is lost in a way that is distributed based upon body type. 

[cly]

Read up on and try taking CLA supplements...

[OhHiMark]

It's all in the diet and some people just hold fat in certain places for instance, I hold fat on my bum and lower back.

It's like the saying "Abs are made in the kitchen, not in the gym"

[David1]

On 4/17/2016 at 3:06 PM, appleaurorae said:

Well, I went lactovegetarian (vegan+diary) 3,5 years ago and full vegan about a year ago. During this 3,5 year time I lost weight from 98kg (216lbs) to 72kg (159lbs) with height of 183cm (6ft 0in). However, I still have belly fat (and my arms are slim, I can feel the bone and see veins on the forearm ). What's even worse my waist is 91cm (36in) and this is the border of abdominal obesity.

Any proven methods of removing this fat? I tried running, biking, abs workouts, dieting, drinking 2 litres of water per day, detoxifying potions and still nothing changed.

@edit: Topic also for all the things related to losing fat.

72/1,83x1,83...your bmi is 21.5. Wich is low but not too low. Try to go to a gym. Don't do cardio like running and bike riding. Bulk up, get lots of proteine, and do strenght training. That means you have to gain weight, and while you do...do strenght training. You will gain fat, but that's ok. İ'd say, do this untill you weigh at least 80 kg. Then start the 'cut' to lose fat. Keep eating proteine to protect against muscle loss, but shift your workout more towards cardio to burn off fat.

[Thomas]

On 18.04.2016 at 1:46 AM, cly said:

Read up on and try taking CLA supplements...

Nope, don't waste money on supplements that don't do absolutely nothing (except placebo effect which actually works increasing You motivation), invest in quality food instead.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26402730 

Bottom line: no benefits to CLA supplementation in any of the outcomes studied. 

@Algi

There is no such thing as inner or middle chest. You've got pectoralis major (lower chest) and pectoralis minor (upper chest). 
Both are activated through performing any horizontal pressing movement, no necessity being a bro and doing flat bench, then incline, then decline and flies after

There is no such thing as body type also. The whole somatoype theory was created by a psychologist in 1945 and has no real application in real world. 

@appleaurorae

You've just reached a plateau, my friend! Huge congratulations for losing almost 60 pounds, that's quite an achievement!

Fits things first: to lose weight (whether it comes from adipose tissue or lean body mass, like You muscles) is simple. It's not easy, but it's simple.

It's caloric deficit (having energy input lower than maintenance) that You achieve by one or the other, or a combination of two things:
1) Decreasing caloric input - Consuming less calories
2) Increasing caloric output - Being more active 

The leaner, the harder it gets to lose body fat and easier to lose lean body weight, which You don't want to lose.
Fat loss is not linear curve of diminishing returns.

My advice for You is to not go on a more aggressive, crash diet by drastically decreasing calories from food or by doing huge amounts of cardio.

What I invite You to do instead is to eat reasonably above your maintenance level and include some strength training program (3 days a week, session length 45 mins is absolutely enough). What it'll do is over the course of 12-16 months You'll experience a body recomposition (probably staying at the same weight, but decreasing fat mass and increasing LBM).
It's a long term, but IMO best solution, cause You might as well decrease calories drastically just to lose that belly fat and what You'll end up is being 62-65 kg miserable, always hungry, yo-yo dieting skeleton that has to eat really small amount of food to keep not gaining fat.

You can also check out my post here: 

 

Edited April 24, 2016 by Thomas

[Thomas]

On 18.04.2016 at 4:59 PM, Emerald Wilkins said:

Weight loss always occurs relative to body type. So, if you store more fat around your waist naturally, the only way to actually decrease this in proportion of your waist to the rest of your body is to get liposuction or something of that nature. There is no way to target weight loss to a particular area. This is because (and I can't remember the sources of this, so do your research) you don't lose actual fat cells when you lose weight, they simply shrink or grow. So, you still have the same amount of fat cells in the same areas. So, body proportion remains relatively the same regardless of how much weight you lose or gain. The only way to actually remove fat cells is through liposuction or surgery. Otherwise, fat is lost in a way that is distributed based upon body type. 

I think the "body type" You're talking about is mostly related to sex (which is connected to physiology and hormones ratio).
Men tend to have more visceral fat than women as testosterone and cortisol tends to promote its growth.

The type of fat most dieters are concerned with is subcutaneous fat which is found under the skin. In men, subcutaneous fat tends to accumulate around the midsection and low-back; in women, it tends to be on the hips and thighs. This occurs under the influence of the hormones testosterone/cortisol and estrogen/progesterone in men and women respectively.
This is why kids before puberty have the same bodyfat patterns and kids after don't.

In fact, when researchers pump sex-change patients up with hormones, they see a shift in bodyfat: men take on female bodyfat patterns and vice versa. Women who don't go on hormone replacement after menopause (meaning they produce no estrogen) tend to lose the fat in their hips and thighs and gain it in their stomach area. As I've mentioned, some lucky when they're carrying a lot of fat; they are simply smooth all over.

You're right about the fact that we cannot reduce the quantity of fat cells, but the amount of them or where they are is not directly related to body proportion.

Researchers distinguish two types of subcutaneous fat: normal, which You easily lose with some kcal deficit and stubborn fat which is the other kind, that stuff that goes on first, and comes off last, if it ever comes off at all, and  it is generally abs and low back fat for men and hip and thigh fat for women.

Mobilizing bodyfat requires that we first break down the content of fat cell, and there is an enzyme that limits that process and it's called called hormone sensitive lipase (HSL) which can be either activated or inactivated by a bunch of other hormones.
The ones that activate it (=induce fat mobilization) are catecholamines (adrenaline and noradrenaline) - these hormones work through specific receptors called adrenoreceptors.

And here is the deal - we have 2 major classes of adrenoreceptors: beta and alpha, which are found all over the body. This includes the brain, liver, skeletal muscle, fat cells, heart, blood vessels, etc.

The main receptors we need to worry about in human fat cells are alpha-2 receptors and beta-1 and beta-2 receptors, both of which actively bind the catecholamine hormones. When catecholamines bind to beta-1,2 receptors, they increase cAMP levels (raise in cAMP level = raise in fat breakdown), which is good for someone who wants to lose fat.

However, when the catecholamines bind alpha-2 receptors, they decrease cAMP levels (decrease cAMP = decreased fat breakdown) which is not so great.
But it means that catecholamines, which I told you were fat mobilizers, can actually send both fat mobilizing and anti-fat mobilizing signals: by binding to either alpha-or beta-receptors.

Why does this matter? Different areas of bodyfat have different distributions of alpha-2 and beta-2 adrenoreceptors. For example, women's lower bodyfat (hips and thighs) have been found to have 9 times as many alpha-2 receptors as beta-2 receptors. Some research indicates that men's abdominal fat is similar, with more alpha-2 than beta-2 receptors. 

This is why its so difficult to reduce these stubborn fat areas (not reduce the quantity of cells!); with a greater number of alpha-2 receptors to bind catecholamines, it's that much more difficult to stimulate fat breakdown in those fat cells.

 

[Gmork]

Best way is to go keto, get gut at processing fat into ATP (3 months is minimum if you are healthy 20-30 years not obese person  less if you do a good deal of exercise), use muscle a lot, have good amount of massage into 'lose fat' area, cold showers plus some amount of calories deficiency (5%).

AND fix any information you have, fix stomach acid issue if you have one ( take acid vinegar for example, it is more important problem that any of you might think)

Be aware of how much fat can store toxic substance, and get ready to detoxify yourself if you are over 25, and heavy metal toxicity can BE a issue on itself if you want to lose fat cells so take that into account and try to detox to lose fat.

+ All normal stuff like minerals and vitamins, sun exposure, protein intake.

+ Fixing spine problems, posture problems

+ Get stand up table to work, never sit more than 1 hour

+ Good sleep 

Edited April 24, 2016 by Gmork

[Thomas]

1 minute ago, Gmork said:

Best way is to go keto (~You're one of extremist, aren't You , low carb, high carb. The best macronutrient ratio is the one You can sustain. Some people feel great on vegan, others prefer keto, but there is no such a mythical thing as a perfect, fit-to-all diet. I like keto, btw.), get gut at processing fat into ATP (~Your body creates ATP all the time, regardless of You inducing ketosis or not. Doing keto simply changes the main fuel from glucose to ketone bodies and You can easily break the ketosis if your protein intake is too high, cause it's get converted to glucose via process of gluconeogenesis) (3 months is minimum if you are healthy 20-30 years not obese person  less if you do a good deal of exercise), use muscle a lot, have good amount of massage into 'lose fat' area, cold showers plus some amount of calories deficiency (5%).

AND fix any information you have, fix stomach acid issue if you have one ( take acid vinegar for example, it is more important problem that any of you might think) 

Be aware of how much fat can store toxic substance, and get ready to detoxify yourself if you are over 25, and heavy metal toxicity can BE a issue (~So can low fiber intake lead to issues and increased risk of colon cancer) on itself if you want to lose fat cells so take that into account and

try to detox to lose fat. (~Mhm.. So what is your definition of a detox? Because your liver, kidneys, lungs, and several other organs work around the clock to remove harmful substances and excrete waste products of metabolism. They do fine job at detoxifying body. 
This is not to say that the human body does not accumulate low levels of toxicants, such as heavy metals or certain fat soluble substances. Rather, the takeaway is that detox diets or cleanses have no demonstrable effect on the removal or excretion of these toxicants.
I'd rather personally advice to focus on long-term sustainable health habits, like eating nutritious food on a daily basis such as increasing leafy greens intake and variety in the diet. Don't be the guy who eats 8 cans of tuna every day and then brags how fishes are posionous, containing heavy metals.)

+ All normal stuff like minerals and vitamins, sun exposure, protein intake. 

+ Fixing spine problems, posture problems ~100 fucking % agreed as it is one of the most crucial issues to address constantly, check out Vinnie Rehab on instagram

+ Get stand up table to work, never sit more than 1 hour ~Doing a break after 1 hour of sitting is cool, but elaborate, please why anyone should use standing desk?

+ Good sleep ~Agreed

+ Watch ~Less porn?

 

[Gmork]

3 minutes ago, Thomas said:

Some people feel great on vegan, others prefer keto

Keto = energy from fat, right amount of protein (~ 1g/1kg bodymass). So it can be Vegan to I dont care about that i know people who do high fat vegan keto and it works for them, do what is good for you . Sometimes genes dont allow you to be keto, it all depends.\

7 minutes ago, Thomas said:

Your body creates ATP all the time, regardless of You inducing ketosis or not. Doing keto simply changes the main fuel from glucose to ketone bodies and You can easily break the ketosis if your protein intake is too high, cause it's get converted to glucose via process of gluconeogenesis

Obviously, but fat is more efficient per amount and have different metabolic path, that can fix some mitochondrial issue (fungus dmg, toxic stuff etc.)

Second part is right to but i cant add those explanations everytime . Internet is to big !

12 minutes ago, Thomas said:

(~So can low fiber intake lead to issues and increased risk of colon cancer)

"For years, Americans have been told to consume a high-fiber diet to lower the risk of colon cancer - mainly on the basis of results from a number of relatively small studies. Unfortunately, this recommendation now seems mistaken, as larger and better designed studies have failed to show a link between fiber and colon cancer." (Source: Harvard School of Public Health, first original reporting in 1999) (27), (28) 

 

24 minutes ago, Thomas said:

(~Mhm.. So what is your definition of a detox? Because your liver, kidneys, lungs, and several other organs work around the clock to remove harmful substances and excrete waste products of metabolism. They do fine job at detoxifying body. 
This is not to say that the human body does not accumulate low levels of toxicants, such as heavy metals or certain fat soluble substances. Rather, the takeaway is that detox diets or cleanses have no demonstrable effect on the removal or excretion of these toxicants.
I'd rather personally advice to focus on long-term sustainable health habits, like eating nutritious food on a daily basis such as increasing leafy greens intake and variety in the diet. Don't be the guy who eats 8 cans of tuna every day and then brags how fishes are posionous, containing heavy metals.)

Yes, body do detox. But some stuff is hard to remove and our body need substance that are good transport particles, stuff like DMSO or Iodine. The rest is on point.

 

35 minutes ago, Thomas said:

Doing a break after 1 hour of sitting is cool, but elaborate, please why anyone should use standing desk?

 

[Thomas]

3 hours ago, Gmork said:

Keto = energy from fat, right amount of protein (~ 1g/1kg bodymass). So it can be Vegan to I dont care about that i know people who do high fat vegan keto and it works for them, do what is good for you . Sometimes genes dont allow you to be keto, it all depends.\

Obviously, but fat is more efficient per amount and have different metabolic path, that can fix some mitochondrial issue (fungus dmg, toxic stuff etc.)

Second part is right to but i cant add those explanations everytime . Internet is to big !

"For years, Americans have been told to consume a high-fiber diet to lower the risk of colon cancer - mainly on the basis of results from a number of relatively small studies. Unfortunately, this recommendation now seems mistaken, as larger and better designed studies have failed to show a link between fiber and colon cancer." (Source: Harvard School of Public Health, first original reporting in 1999) (27), (28) 

 

Yes, body do detox. But some stuff is hard to remove and our body need substance that are good transport particles, stuff like DMSO or Iodine. The rest is on point.

 

 

You imagine a vegan keto diet? I don't

There is always data suggesting benefits of either end of the spectrum.
I wouldn't say that ketogenic diet is particularily better at reducing any of those problems above than any other type of diet, unless we get into specifics.
What's cool about keto it totally blunts apetite which makes dieting little easier and I remember how in medical literature it was used in '70 - '80 with diabetes and some cancer cases in Cleveland.

What do You mean by fat being more efficient?
Brain runs exclusively on glucose and ATP, and uses ketones only in the case of exclusion of glucose. If You ingest a meal consisting same kcal value of carbs and fats, Your body's gonna use the carbs and store the fat. 
When You eliminate carbs the organisms adapts to use fatty acids, but it's choice based on exclusion and making use of what's avaible, not preference.

And how do genes interfere entering ketosis? - Never stumbled upon or heard of any case of healthy individual having inability to produce ketone bodies.

And yeah, of course iodine or sulfur deficiency is bad, but how does it relate to keto?

A protein rich diet (via cysteine and methionine intake) seems to adress both issues and for iodine You can always buy iodized salt or supplement in case of deficiency. No need for going extreme with diet if it doesn't fit Your lifestyle.

Fiber

Which studies exactly?

I don't promote really high fiber diet, there is no need to have 60 g intake, but tell me how many ppl You know who hit at least 20 grams of fiber a day? From my experience with people, they tend to struggle hit the bare minimum intake that gives benefits for intestinal tract and colon function. More doesn't mean better, but it's wise to hit the requirements if they don't bring any risks but benefits. 
And You'll save up on toilet paper and scrotum / anus bleeding.

This study provides additional support for a protective and independent effect of fiber on colorectal cancer, particularly for cellulose and soluble NCPs, and of fiber of vegetable or fruit origin.

There was a significant inverse relationship of total fibre intake and of its components with the risk of colorectal cancer.

This study found an inverse relationship between stomach cancer risk and various types of fiber, derived, in particular, from vegetables and fruit.

The data is not conclusive, however we know for fact that approximately 10 g of fiber per 1000 kcal is almost ideal ratio for proper digestive system functioning and possibly removing toxins too.
What I wanted to adress in the initial post, was that the people who do traditional keto rarely have their fiber intake higher than 5 grams a day.

Sitting vs Standing

There is so much nitpicking and correlating facts in this video I don't even know what to adress, there is no data to discuss, but logical fallacies like appeals to authorities, weak analogies and false causes especially - people who have sitting jobs tend to be less active, therefore they are proned to gaining weight and obesity which is a direct cause of heart diseases and issues mentioned in the video. Not sitting itself.
I don't see simply transitioning from sitting not active work to standing not active work having any benefit over the first than just being a matter of personal preference. Standing desk itself isn't enough to reverse the effects of a bad lifestyle. 
Increase activity level, maintain good bodyweight and it doesn't matter whether You work sitting or standing.

http://www.cochrane.org/CD010912/OCCHEALTH_workplace-interventions-reducing-sitting-time-work

Edited April 24, 2016 by Thomas

[Gmork]

59 minutes ago, Thomas said:

You imagine a vegan keto diet? I don't

One of guy that work on ketone esters synthesis atm is on heavy keto diet ( lots of avocados etc.)

Guy that work on ketone esters is Dr. Richard Veech dont remember other guy.

Quote

Brain runs exclusively on glucose and ATP, and uses ketones only in the case of exclusion of glucose

From my understanding of it  brain runs on lots of glucose and if it have access to ketones it use it  up to 70% of energy needed. Of course only if  blood levels of ketones are high enough to cross the blood brain barrier, check out this lecture(it explain some stuff) : ( Im not expert about any on those subject.)

 

Quote

And how do genes interfere entering ketosis?

To complex of topic to discuss on internet, specialy that i am not expert. (Inflamation, food allergy,etc...)

Quote

What do You mean by fat being more efficient?

More ATP per one unit. More efficient metabolic use. Thats biochemistry.

Quote

Brain runs exclusively on glucose and ATP, and uses ketones only in the case of exclusion of glucose. If You ingest a meal consisting same kcal value of carbs and fats, Your body's gonna use the carbs and store the fat. 

Depends on genes, how much insulin meal spiked, some times  iven 100g of netcarbs cant trigger turning fat to fat cells, some ppl always when carbs are present gone turn fat into fat cells, all depends on people and health.

But sure body always metabolized carbs first when they are present.

1 hour ago, Thomas said:

When You eliminate carbs the organisms adapts to use fatty acids, but it's choice based on exclusion and making use of what's avaible, not preference.

I think you are trying to say something about 'preference' of body, but i dont understand it. Biochemistry is simple fat is better source of energy for body.

 

1 hour ago, Thomas said:

And yeah, of course iodine or sulfur deficiency is bad, but how does it relate to keto?

Sorry i ddnt explain it good enough, those are substance for ingestion to help get rid of toxic stuff. Like Potassium-Iodine or DMSO.

I consider This site as good example of detoxification stuff.

 

About fiber. Those studies are about intake amount not about not taking any. My point is there is no correlation about need of fiber. Topic is again not really good for internet discussion. Lets not dig into it.

Quote

possibly removing toxins too.

Hell no. If anything fiber may harm you in non-direct ways like bacteria. Ok, thats it no more fiber  in post.

Sitting vs Standing

Sure, i can understand your point. From my experience/knowledge there is nothing good about siting.

[Thomas]

1 hour ago, Gmork said:

One of guy that work on ketone esters synthesis atm is on heavy keto diet ( lots of avocados etc.)

Exactly! That must be boring as hell

1 hour ago, Gmork said:

From my understanding of it  brain runs on lots of glucose and if it have access to ketones it use it  up to 70% of energy needed. Of course only if  blood levels of ketones are high enough to cross the blood brain barrier, check out this lecture(it explain some stuff) : ( Im not expert about any on those subject.)

It runs 70% of energy needed from ketones, because it's only what's available when body is in state of ketosis, while there is no sufficient glucose. 
Brain can't use fatty acids for fuel - its primary fuel is glucose. When glucose becomes unavailable, the body needs an alternate energy source, that source is ketones. In fact, after 3 weeks of ketosis, the brain will derive nearly 75% of its total energy requirements from ketones, the remaining comes from glucose which is made in the body from amino acids, pyruvate, lactate and glycerol.

If carbohydrate intake goes up, ketone bodies production goes drastically down and they are stopped being utilized as main fuel.

1 hour ago, Gmork said:

I think you are trying to say something about 'preference' of body, but i dont understand it. Biochemistry is simple fat is better source of energy for body.

Again, what I'm saying . From biochemistry standpoint, yes, fat is convenient - easy to store, easy to burn, but not necessarily better, because it really depends for what tissues.

Most tissues in the body can readily use fatty acids for fuel just as easily as glucose. There are a few tissues such as the renal medulla, red blood cells and one or two other that can only use glucose. However, those cells essentially make their own glucose by recycling lactate (produced from glucose metabolism) back into glucose.

The brain is in its own weird category. Under most conditions, it relies exclusively on glucose. And while it can’t use fatty acids directly, it can use a fatty acid derived fuel in the form of ketone bodies. After roughly three weeks of adaptation to using ketones, the brain may only need 25 grams/day of glucose or so, which can be made by the body (in the liver and kidney) from sources such as lactate, pyruvate, amino acids and glycerol.

Dietary fat is technically a triglyceride, which is a molecule of glycerol (a sugar) bound to three fatty acids.

All fatty acids are not the same, though.
They can differ in length from short to medium to long chain, depending on how many carbons are present.
They also differ in the number of double bonds which are present.
Saturated fats (found mainly in animal foods) have no double bonds, monounsaturated fats (olive oil) have a single double bond, and polyunsaturated fats (fish oils, flax oil) have multiple double bonds.

Chemical differences in fat can affect metabolism and physiology.
Unlike proteins and carbohydrates, dietary fats aren't water soluble, they have to be digested in the stomach with the help of bile acids released from the pancreas.
After a good bit of processing, most dietary fats are packaged as chylomicrons which enter the lymphatic system.
In contrast, carbohydrates and protein go to the liver, via the portal system, after digestion and absorption.
After about 3 hours, these chylomicrons will reach the fat cells. There, they are acted upon by an enzyme called lipoprotein lipase (LPL), which liberates the fatty acids from the chylomicron. Those fatty acids can either be stored in the fat cell or taken up into the bloodstream for use by other tissues such as muscle and liver.
Whether they are stored or released depends on the metabolic state of the certain individual.

The main point is that dietary fat isn't going to be readily available by tissues such as muscle and liver, even under the best of circumstances. At best it might become available 3 hours after ingestion.

 

When it comes to weight loss it really is a matter of preference, because either end of the diet spectrum doesn't have an advantage over the other - whether we take ketogenic, low carb, high carb, etc.
The mental aspect cannot be discounted. Some people just mentally cannot handle carbs. That’s fine, keto is probably better for them, but in my opinion, if you don’t absolutely have to do keto and tend to struggle sticking to it, then why not have some carbs?

About the fiber - I think we can agree on the point that it is NOT necessary, but I'll stay with my claim that it's beneficial to GI tract and quality of life. I'm serious about the toilet paper. One wipe and You're good to go, life's never been so easy   

I'll check the video later, for sure.
BTW. Here is some debate including Dr Jeff, might be fine lecture!
Thanks for discussion!

Edited April 24, 2016 by Thomas