keto is the best way to lose weight, period. You lose weight while not even trying ... it really is the miracle diet, for most people anyway. Gives great mental energy as well. (yeah, sounds like bullshit, but turns out to be true for lots of people)
I agree that, for a given caloric deficit, a ketogenic diet produces less perceived hunger, so you "lose weight while not even trying". However, keto also keeps your glycogen stores low, which reduces cardiovascular performance while the diet persists. This makes keeping muscle harder, especially if you have a lifestyle with requisite cardio (e.g. bicycle commuting). I don't think high-intensity cardio + keto is a good idea because, in the absence of glycogen, the body can tap muscle protein as a peak-power energy source.
I have much experience with keto. For loosing fat it can be a tool in the arsenal but it is not everytime goto tool that it better than anything in every situation that some people try to make it is. As for the mental clariness, my experience is that I constantly have some kind of mental fatigue on keto, sometimes so much (after training) that I am funny to speak with (bugging out to much). That persists even after 1-2months on ketosis, cyclic or not, does not matter.
yes I've heard about other people in your case. I probably shouldn't have overstated that point. Do you eat enough fat? It's easy not to eat enough I find.
On my first attempt of ketosis I underate fat. But that was many years ago. Now I eat about 1:1 ratio of protein and fats in grams. About 150gr each. And 10-20gr max carbs all from veggies.
Are there any peer reviewed (or not) evidence that the keto diet provides additional weight losses beyond that which can be explained by calorie deficiencies?
Anecdotically you'll find lots of testimonies (including mine) arguing that it's much easier to control hunger on keto. I don't have food craving since I started and I get to eat as much as I want. So it's a lot easier to not overeat. Scientifically it's well known that eating carbs (especially fast acting carbs like sugar) triggers storage of fat.
Both. For the former you can start with success stories on the keto subreddit. For the latter there is decades of research on the subject. You can start with this talk: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tC_qBC1EEvw
> Not necessarily talks by professors, but scientific papers published in respectable journals or on NCBI
well the professor in the talk has published dozens of papers so it's a good way to start. I'm not going to provide you with a literature review sorry :)
That the TTIP-like deals take years is not by accident, but by design: the nasty stuff is to be included in one big package and obscured, to be accepted "by the democracy" only because it's a part of the whole "and look, there's some pork there too." Otherwise the smaller deals, which would actually be in the clear interest of both sides would happen much more often.
Elected representatives could not negotiate the deal themselves because it is way too technical. So the actual negotiators were given a mandate by the elected representatives. Elected representatives then get to decide whether they will vote for the deal. TTIP is dead because it's become clear the deal will not get approval from all representatives, in part because of public disapproval. In conclusion, TTIP _is_ democratic.
If the deal is too technical to negotiate how can the elected representative possibly decide if they should vote for it as they by definition can't understand it?
Ah, right, I took the section above to imply that they only send the e-mail to the affected users (which would make sense...). It doesn't specifically say that though.
But latex and word are usually for printing a document. For something that will later be printed, you would want some sort of control over the actual look as the appearance is a large part of what is being communicated. Printing is also much more expensive than sending electrons so you would expect a much more developed medium for this.
I have never printed an email in my life. The appearance of the text is not essential to what is being communicated. Here a certain consistency is more important that variety - or rather the variety comes through the vocabulary and written expressions, not the font shape.
The same could be said for IM clients or IRC. Except for a few minor tweaks such as html links there is no real need for text formatting in these mediums, and very few clients even make the effort to do this.
it's not the search engine's fault, it's the contents. R is associated to xlispstat as the credible alternative. E.g. Jan de Leeuw JStat's paper. Also the author of xlispstat is one main contributor to R.
廢話。How many native speakers of various Chinese languages do you know how converse with you regularly in Esperanto? The phonological system of Esperanto is noticeably worse than that of English for native speakers of Chinese to acquire.
What does that even mean? Have you tried pronouncing any Khoisan languages (or other languages with clicks) for example? If your native language is English, you'll have a much harder time than a native Zulu speaker would have.
Whether a target language is easy to pronounce depends on your native language (and other languages you can pronounce accurately). If you're a native Chinese speaker (whichever variety, but particularly Mandarin), English isn't anything like as difficult as French to pronounce.
Question: Are you referring to the spelling<->phonetic consistency of the language or to the sounds the language use? I think you and tokenadult may be speaking about different things here.
I only have second-hand accounts from proselytes, and they say esperanto is nowhere as bad as English for Chinese, Japanese and Koreans. Just google around if you want to read from them. English is so difficult to pronounce correctly than my prior is to believe them.
