This page seems to have an agenda. I'm also concerned about why it was removed from cleanup with no explaination. If no one disagrees, I'm inclined to list it there again as this is not an area of expertise for me. CHL 03:43, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

This article seems to be totally about the attitudes towards this regimen. But there is no description of what the diet itself consists. A glaring omission, no? -- Cimon 16:38, 28 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Indeed. I added *the actual diet* and took out some of the more breathless prose. As well as those Silly Capitals. Mashford 16:53, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)

This is a great improvement. Good job. Cool Hand Luke (Communicate!) 06:25, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Why is mayonnaise listed as a dairy product? --Anchoress 13:04, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why no mention of the basic research that may explain how this diet actually works? There are plenty of studies out there... Maybe if I have time I will include some of them with an explanation.

MrSandman 14:59, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not expert enough in editing Wikipedia to attempt to add the reference, but re: the "reference needed" to biblical reference to fasting and epilepsy, see Mar 9:17-29 in the King James Version, which can be found at http://www.godrules.net/library/kjv/kjvmar9.htm among other locations.

Thanks for this, I have added it to the article for the moment. I have a concern that I need to research, though. Since fasting is part of the "treatment" for lots of things in the Bible, I am not sure that this really supports the Ketogenic diet in any meaningful way. If my father recommends red neckties because they don't show ketchup stains, his recommendation is hardly supporting evidence that women find red ties sexy. Mdbrownmsw 13:34, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(1) "The diet of the Inuit is similar to the Ketogenic diet. Typically Inuit diets contain 15-18% protein with the remainder being fat." First of all it is difficult to talk of an "inuit diet" because it today exists only to a very limited extent - most inuit eat a combination of traditional foods and modern foods. Ideally an article dealing with THE INUIT DIET should be included in wikipedia, mainly because the notion is so widespread in articles about medicine ("alternative medicine" in particular), and there are a lot of myths and faulty ideas surrounding this. As far as I know, based on older antropological experiences such as that of Vilhjalmur Stefansson, the inuit diet typically contained about 20% proteins and 80% of energy as fats. This translates in weight ratio into about 1:1,5 between proteins (+carbs) and fats, which is very different from the typical 1:3-4 ratio between carbohydrate+proteins: fats which constitutes the typical "ketogenic diet". Others have suggested the inuit diet contained approx 20-25% proteins, 75% fats and 0-5% carbohydrates (which would constitute a 1:1,3 ratio between proteins+carbs:fats). Furthermore, the body can convert an excess of proteins into carbohydrates (glucose) in a 2:1 ratio (2 gram protein translates to 1 gram glucose). Therefore inuits may enter only light ketosis, or no ketosis at all. Zero-carb diets does not necessarily involve ketosis.

(2) "Interestingly, despite the lack of numerous vitamins in this diet, Inuit do not appear to suffer deficiency diseases. In particualr vitamin C deficiency or Scurvy, is referred to as the white mans disease." - Animal foods is usually rich in vitamins. Although low in vitamin C (e.g. 10% of the RDA), the bioavailability is probably much higher, so that scurvy don't appear. If they don't eat bones (e.g. in the form of bone stock/soup, ground or eaten from small fish), the amount of calcium may be very low however. As the RDA/RDI's are based on a high carbohydrate diet which requires a different amount/type of vitamins and minerals, it is difficult to judge such a diet. Magnesium and B-vitamins are required for carbohydrate metabolism, for example.

I added a "See Also" section with a link to the "Low carb diet" page since that's what this is (although obviously the ketogenic diet invented for epilepsy predates the recent low carb craze by several decades). I'm curious, though, why there is not much attempt in the article to link this diet with the other low carb diets (Atkins is mentioned briefly but the article seems to try to imply that this diet is a completely different thing). Granted "low carb" is a controversial term but not avoiding discussing the relationship seems a significant omission (i.e. Wikipedia should be "above the controversy"). Note that Kossoff at Johns Hopkins (see the Journal of Neurology, 2003) has specifically been investigating the efficacy of Atkins on epileptic patients (as essentially an extension of the ketogenic diet work that JHMI has been doing for decades). I think this info needs to be explicitly brought out in the article. --Mcorazao 05:04, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That site feels spammy, but the link has been there a while. Opinions? 68.16.179.43 16:19, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi was just reading this page I am studying nutrition and the link that ketogenic diets are able to control epleptic fits are a bit hazy at best and definantly not accepted by the wider medical community. Will have a look at possibly cleaning this page up in terms of presenting information that is more neutral in its view of ketogenic diets. Will also find some literature for and against ketogenic diets.

Thanks Robert Lugton --60.242.240.173 23:17, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your offer to find more literature. I'm sure that as you read more about the diet, you will realise it is very well accepted by the medical community today. There is good evidence-based-medicine to support it. It certainly isn't a first-choice treatment, nor is it "natural" in any way. The main reason it isn't so popular is the serious lack of trained hospital nutritionists who are capable of supervising the diet. Medical supervision is essential (this isn't a do-it-yourself medication).

This isn't WP's best article and does need some serious tidying, which I keep meaning to get round to doing. I've got some literature too, including a book on the subject. I'd be very interested in reading any current literature that claims to show the diet is ineffective.

You should consider getting an account. You can be more anonymous (if you wish) or use your real name. I've removed your email to avoid spam robots finding it. You are welcome to put it back if you want, or put it on your userpage if you get one. Discussions on article-talk pages and user-talk pages are the main way Wikipedia's editors converse, rather than email. -- Colin°^Talk 06:27, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]