It’s the funniest and most prescient question

First, let’s scale that.

Human infants drink about 150mL (5oz) of mamma milk per day per kilogram of body weight (2.2 pounds). So a 5 kilo baby (11 pounds) drinks 750ml mom’s milk per day.

It comes out, roughly, to 7 grams of protein, 30 grams of fat, and 50 grams of carbohydrate.

(Take it up with “God” that the carbohydrates are not “essential.” Go ahead.)

That’s for a 10-pounder. Scale that to 100 pounds, 200 pounds (multiply by 10 and by 20…it’s 500 grams and 1000 grams of CARBOHYDRATES!!! respectively).

In terms of energy—because fat energy is more than 2x per gram—the diet of an infant that is breastfeeding is about 5% protein, 55% fat, and 40% carbohydrate.

So far, this is not controversial.

Controversy lies in what the best or proper diet for adult humans might be.

But those are muddy waters too. Because, you will have people say, ‘well, that’s necessary because infants are growing.’

OK, granted. But growing doesn’t stop at weaning. It’s only just begun. Human gals reach stature at 16-18 and males, 18-21. But “filling out” with lean and fat tissue continues to mid-20s. But growth speaks more to total energy intake, with excess energy intake required for growth that’s properly distributed by hormones like HGH and insulin. It says absolutely nothing about the macronutrient ratios of protein, fat, and carbohydrate…unless perhaps you integrate oxidative priority—which almost zero people do, but I do 100%—and the corollary integration that it’s only mother’s milk in nature that combines a lot of fat and carbohydrate in the same package.

Almost zero diet advocates talk about these integrations.

Why?

Oh, that’s too easy: because it’s very bad for business. Think about it. Deeply.

So I must ask all low-carb diet advocates:

At exactly what point do carbohydrates become inessential in practical terms?

I’m wondering because I see post after post on social media everywhere about how:

THERE IS NO ESSENTIAL CARBOHYDRATE!!!

This, of course, is meant to package up the implication that you should not eat many, if any, carbohydrates, sinner…and you’ll be totally right with God if you don’t, and you too can feel self-righteous and virtuous.

(It amazes me how so many a-theist folks are the most moralizing and religious-like people I know…and I digress.)

Where is the bright line? At what clear point in a human life do carbohydrates go from God’s nectar to Satan’s piss?

It would be easy enough to take human breast milk, make it lactose free (zero carb) and feed it to infants in a bottle (lactose-free cow’s milk lines supermarket dairy shelves). And sure, they’d have to drink more volume to get to the same level of energy intake, so more protein and more fat to make up for the 40% of energy from carbohydrates.

[Correction: an astute reader points out the lactose-free milk still has the carbs, just that the sugar molecules are manipulated. Of course, my intent is to propose a what-if putting an infant on a no-carb diet by whatever means.]

I’d love to see low-carb peeps make an argument for that.

Would you?

Then make them.