Talk:Ketogenic diet

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Ketogenic diet article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6: 90 days

Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Ketogenic diet.

PubMed provides review articles from the past five years (limit to free review articles)
The TRIP database provides clinical publications about evidence-based medicine.
Other potential sources include: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and CDC

view · edit

Frequently asked questions

Isn't this the trendy keto diet that's in the news?

No. The typical minimum fat content for most kids on this diet is more than the maximum fat content for adults who are on the very most extreme keto diets for weight loss and other goals. Most adults on a "keto" diet plan for 60% to 80% of calories from fat (and then they cheat). Most kids on this diet get 90% of their calories from fat (80% of their food by weight), and cheating has potentially deadly consequences. The sample menu shown at Ketogenic diet#Classic contains about 150 grams of fat, 25 grams of protein, and 10 grams of carbohydrates (including fiber). The very low-carbohydrate ketogenic diet typically recommends up to 50 grams of total carbohydrates per day, with 50 to 100 grams of protein.

Why doesn't this article talk about weight-loss or bodybuilding diets? Bodybuilders call their diets "ketogenic".

Any diet that metabolizes any fat at all is "ketogenic", because ketones are the natural, unavoidable metabolic byproduct of eating fat. Even everyday, normal diets are "ketogenic" at some level. This article is not about weight loss or body building, which produce higher levels of ketones than typical diets, but far lower levels than this medically supervised treatment for epilepsy. The average diet for epilepsy usually produces 150% of the ketones that even an extreme diet for weight loss or bodybuilding does. If you are interested in those diets, please read Low-carbohydrate diet.

Why doesn't this article talk about Inuit dietary practices? They ate a lot of fat during part of the year.

This article is not about the Inuit diet. This article is only about the medical diet for treating epilepsy. The diet for epilepsy eats far more fat than even the highest estimates for the Inuit diet. The Inuit diet is estimated to have included high levels of fat, amounting to 25% to 35% of the food by weight. A typical diet to treat epilepsy is 80% fat by weight, which is more than double the amount in the Inuit diet.

Lots of diets have been called "ketogenic" since 2015. Why did you pick this name for an epilepsy treatment?

The process for writing articles on Wikipedia is:

Pick a subject – in this case, an extremely strict dietary treatment for epilepsy.
Look at high-quality reliable sources about your subject to identify possible names for the subject – in this case, "ketogenic diet" is the most widely used name for this treatment for epilepsy, and has been for the last century.
Determine whether the common name used by sources is already used for another article – it wasn't, so we used it. Note that this article was named in 2004, a full decade before the "keto" diet trend started.

Medicine: Neurology Mid‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Neurology task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Food and drink Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Food and drinkWikipedia:WikiProject Food and drinkTemplate:WikiProject Food and drinkFood and drink articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Food and Drink task list:

To edit this page, select here

Here are some tasks you can do for WikiProject Food and drink:

Help bring these Top Importance articles currently B Status or below up to GA status: Agaricus bisporus (i.e. mushroom), Beef, Bread, Curry, Drink, Food, Ham and eggs, Soy sauce, Sushi, Yogurt
Bring these Top Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Beer, French cuisine, Sugar
Bring these High Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Apple, Burger King, Fish
Participate in project-related deletion discussions.
Delete unrelated trivia sections found in articles. Please review WP:Trivia and WP:Handling trivia to learn how to do this.
Add the {{WikiProject Food and drink}} project banner to food and drink related articles and content to help bring them to the attention of members. For a complete list of banners for WikiProject Food and drink and its child projects, select here.
Provide photographs and images for Category:Wikipedia requested images of food
Consider joining this project's Assessment task force. List any project ideas in this section

Note: These lists are transcluded from the project's tasks pages.

Epilepsy Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Epilepsy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of epilepsy and epileptic seizures on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EpilepsyWikipedia:WikiProject EpilepsyTemplate:WikiProject EpilepsyEpilepsy articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Autism Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Autism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of all aspects of autism and autistic culture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AutismWikipedia:WikiProject AutismTemplate:WikiProject AutismAutism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Article history

Ketogenic diet is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.

This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on January 17, 2010.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
July 9, 2008	Good article nominee	Listed
November 12, 2009	Peer review	Reviewed
December 16, 2009	Featured article candidate	Promoted

Current status: Featured article

First umbrella review published

The first umbrella review of 68 randomized clinical trials on the effects of the ketogenic diet has been published. The results of high-quality evidence were a reduction in seizure frequency, triglycerides and a significant increase in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol. Moderate-quality evidence included a decrease in weight and an increase in total cholesterol. If the review is to be cited it would be worth citing the high-quality results. There is no long-term clinical data because the trials were between 8weeks and 9 months. But these findings suggest that the ketogenic diet is not heart healthy long-term, as they raise LDL-c and total cholesterol which will increase the risk of cardiovascular disease and events. Here is a link to the paper [1], in full [2]. High-quality evidence supports a reduction in seizure frequency but this is already stated on the article. If anyone wants to add this umbrella review to the article please add it. I wouldn't say there is anything new here that we did not know already but this is the biggest review to date that has looked at 68 trials. Psychologist Guy (talk) 11:05, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like the research included is mostly about adults, and mostly not about epilepsy. WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:01, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

harms or dietary intolerance in young children

This edit by User:FULBERT added the text "while harms or dietary intolerance in young children were rarely reported in the literature." The relevant text I can find in the source (Pharmacologic and Dietary Treatments for Epilepsies in Children Aged 1–36 Months) is "Dietary harms were not well-reported." There is a section in the source called "Harms of Dietary Treatments" It discusses four trials that report various harms along with their other findings. It isn't clear what led them to conclude "Harms of diets were rarely reported, so we drew no conclusions about harms or dietary intolerance." Possibly the wide range of occurrence reported, type of side-effect or lack of specifics of side effects mean they were unable to draw conclusions. But I think the text added to our article suggests harm or intolerance is rarely reported because it rarely occurs, rather than that details of harm or intolerance are rarely adequately collected during studies. Often there is just a non-specific rate of drop-out without going into details of why. The review is critical of current studies in this population group ("the lack of reporting on treatment outcomes beyond seizure frequency"). I would be surprised if the infant population was significantly better at tolerating this diet compared to slightly older children.

My conclusion is this is a review critical of the lack of knowledge in this field (epilepsy treatment of very young children) and a comment that they so lack information in one aspect (harm caused by diet) they can't draw any conclusions is probably not encyclopaedically relevant to this article. We certainly shouldn't give the impression that side-effects or harm is rare in infants, because it doesn't say that. If you agree, I'll remove the sentence. Perhaps there is something else we can draw from this source? -- Colin°^Talk 08:29, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am finding that sentence confusing, and now that I've read your comment, I'm even more confused about what was meant. WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:01, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Revert of addition of immunomodulatory effect

bon courage reverted my addition of what I thought was a pretty interesting finding, published by folks from the NIAID. He said in his revert the edit needed a Med RS. -:) Oh well , I am not sure what more of a medical resource it would need, if he had cared to look it up ( or my credentials -:). It is a medical resource. This entire page doesnt have anything about immune modulation (yet) and this new finding is cutting edge, might explain why ketogenic diet works in epilepsy. I will restor emy edit as I think this was a frivolous revert of a well sourced good faith edit. Wuerzele (talk) 21:26, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You added this paper [3], a 2-week primary study. It doesn't pass WP:MEDRS. No dispute that you added this in good faith but this is not well sourced content. It doesn't belong on Wikipedia. Psychologist Guy (talk) 21:41, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

“No dispute that you added this in good faith but this is not well sourced content”

I agree. It seems too early. Let’s wait for better sources (MEDRS-compliant-reviews). --Dustfreeworld (talk) 05:12, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

... if he had cared to look it up ( or my credentials -:). It is a medical resource ... I think this was a frivolous revert ← this combination of cluelessness about the basics of our medical sourcing guidelines, assumption of bad faith, and "don't you know who I am!?" argumentation is pretty alarming in an editor with a non-trivial contribution history. Bon courage (talk) 03:44, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The ketogenic diet FAQ is wrong according to published papers and this article should be expanded to include weight loss uses

Summary: Like it or not, not only the common usage of the term "ketogenic diet", but also the use of that term in scientific literature has evolved to mean a diet which produces measurably elevated levels of blood ketones.

There is also a significant amount of emerging research that shows ketogenic diets for weight loss are not a "fad diet" but rather have proven scientific evidence showing that they work also for treatment of fatty liver disease (as one example). The use of a keto diet for weight loss should be merged into this page as the accepted medical definition of a ketogenic diet is one that produces elevated levels of blood ketones in non-diabetics. Even if those diets are not as extreme as the ones for treatment of epilepsy, words and phrases change meaning over time and this definition has been used by many peer reviewed articles and should be accepted.

I'm not going to provide an exhaustive list of sources showing this is the accepted scientific definition, but a few for example are listed below, e.g.

Bueno NB, de Melo IS, de Oliveira SL, da Rocha Ataide T. Very-low-carbohydrate ketogenic diet v. low-fat diet for long-term weight loss: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Br J Nutr. 2013 Oct;110(7):1178-87.

Paoli A, Rubini A, Volek JS, Grimaldi KA. Beyond weight loss: a review of the therapeutic uses of very-low-carbohydrate (ketogenic) diets. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2013 Aug;67(8):789.

Masood W, Annamaraju P, Khan Suheb MZ, et al. Ketogenic Diet. [Updated 2023 Jun 16]. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2024 Jan-. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK499830/

A quick google search will find the plethora of other papers that does not consider the definition to be a diet used only for epilepsy treatment or 90% fat content. 2001:558:6045:10D:EC97:D297:9502:B579 (talk) 04:30, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is not correct. Medical organizations do not recommend the keto diet for weight loss, nor do any health guidelines. The StatPearls source you cited admits that there is no long-term health outcome data on keto and weight loss. The evidence is only short term, much more clinical data is needed if you are going to make those claims. The same source says that a ketogenic diet increases the risk of heart disease and kidney stones. Due to the increased CVD risk, cardiology organizations do not recommend keto. As for your claims about keto improving liver disease, there is not any good clinical evidence for this. Your source does list some papers but there are no good systematic reviews on this because again the evidence is limited and not conclusive. Harvard Health says that keto could be worse for the liver [4]. Psychologist Guy (talk) 08:29, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's the usual Wikipedia:Article titles and scopes problem.

You could just as easily write "Like it or not, not only the common usage of the term influenza, but also the use of that term in scientific literature has evolved to mean not just the influence of astrology on the body, but also a contagious disease, so we should merge Astrology into Influenza virus" – because "the accepted medical definition", and the original source of the word, was astrology, and only later did it come to mean a disease caused by a particular group of viruses, so they're all the same thing, right?

A voluntarily chosen diet for adults hoping to lose weight is not a diet for kids who are at risk of dying from uncontrolled seizures. These are different subjects. Therefore, they get separate articles. If you are jealous because the article about the pediatric epilepsy treatment got written first, and thus got this name, then that's entirely understandable but not a reason to think that kids who could die are the same as adults who want to shed a few pounds.

It might interest you to know that the names of articles can change. This one could be renamed, e.g., to Ketogenic diet (epilepsy treatment). Maybe that would stop people from thinking that "their" title is used on the "wrong" subject, or that epilepsy treatments and weight loss are the same thing. In the meantime, the information you seek is at Low-carbohydrate diet#Ketogenic diet. There is a link to this at Keto diet. WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:51, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This has been discussed many times on this page (see archive). I don't think a name change is likely to win approval because nobody has shown any inclination to write a proper article on e.g. ketogenic diet for weight loss. It's all well and good saying Wikipedia should have an article about X(a) that should be called X, if nobody in the history of Wikipedia has written such an article. Write that article and we can discuss names. It has been noted many times that the professional literature does not discuss epilepsy treatments and weight loss treatments together (vs mentioning one in passing). Wrt Psychologist Guy's comments, I think one of the problems is the hostility shown towards weight loss options, as demonstrated by the carb article calling it a fad diet. Pejorative terms just inflame things unnecessary and there are no weight loss treatments (outside of drugs and surgery) that work long term on a reliably significant number of people, so I think pulling out KD as one option to scorn is hypocritical. The American Heart Association can recommend certain diets all it likes, but there isn't really evidence people choose them and stick to them any more than any other diet. -- Colin°^Talk 08:45, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confusion on grammar.

@Psychologist Guy "This article is about a dietary therapy for epilepsy. For information on ketogenic diets as a lifestyle choice or for weight loss, see Very low-carbohydrate ketogenic diet."

The problem is, why the word "or" should not in be case when the 2 choice available? Heres my choice:

"For information on ketogenic diets as a lifestyle choice or for weight loss, see Very low-carbohydrate ketogenic diet."

Means there are two choice

"For information on ketogenic diets as a lifestyle choice" "For information on ketogenic diets asfor weight loss," help me for the problem. 203.190.54.67 (talk) 09:53, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"As for" is not correct grammar. The first part of the sentence as written is structured like this:

For information on ketogenic diets
- as a lifestyle choice or
- for weight loss...

Some adults follow a high-fat diet as a lifestyle choice, and some other adults follow a high-fat diet for weight loss. There are two main reasons why adults follow a high-fat diet. The word or is used to indicate that different adults have different reasons. WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:29, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]