'The Obesity Code: Unlocking the Secrets of Weight Loss' by Jason Fung

carolyn000000

rankinsect wrote: »

Well, I will say I haven't read the book, but in general my thoughts on the "insulin hypothesis":

1. CICO always applies. A diet may help you lose weight without actively monitoring your calories, but any successful diet does so by helping you create a calorie deficit. The way of eating may make it easier or harder for you to stick to a deficit, but in the end it's the deficit that creates loss.

2. There's nothing wrong with trying low carb, or low fat, or whatever other way of eating you like. But realize there is no single "right answer". Low carb works very well for some people - there are many testimonials here that can show that. Low carb works very poorly for others - I think it was my single worst diet attempt ever.

3. I don't think it's actually demonstrated that low carb leads to decreased hunger in the population at large. In studies that looked at hunger and satiety, while there was a definite link between protein and satiety, there was no real correlation between either fat or carbohydrate and satiety. In fact the single most sating food in one study was a baked potato. Satiety is a lot more complex than just a macronutrient, or one macronutrient and one hormone.

4. Even if there was a real link between low carb and hunger, hunger is only one of the reasons we want to eat. If we were eating purely to satisfy hunger, you'd expect that we'd all be okay with eating exactly the same thing every day, a prospect that most of us actually find very unappealing. Besides hunger, there are cravings and preferences to consider, and then there are the social and pleasurable aspects of food. A way of eating that you will stick to for your whole life needs to be something you are comfortable doing forever, and not just tolerate but enjoy. That means it needs to do more than just keep your hunger down.

You should write a book!

Tacklewasher

carolyn000000 wrote: »

rankinsect wrote: »

Well, I will say I haven't read the book, but in general my thoughts on the "insulin hypothesis":

1. CICO always applies. A diet may help you lose weight without actively monitoring your calories, but any successful diet does so by helping you create a calorie deficit. The way of eating may make it easier or harder for you to stick to a deficit, but in the end it's the deficit that creates loss.

2. There's nothing wrong with trying low carb, or low fat, or whatever other way of eating you like. But realize there is no single "right answer". Low carb works very well for some people - there are many testimonials here that can show that. Low carb works very poorly for others - I think it was my single worst diet attempt ever.

3. I don't think it's actually demonstrated that low carb leads to decreased hunger in the population at large. In studies that looked at hunger and satiety, while there was a definite link between protein and satiety, there was no real correlation between either fat or carbohydrate and satiety. In fact the single most sating food in one study was a baked potato. Satiety is a lot more complex than just a macronutrient, or one macronutrient and one hormone.

4. Even if there was a real link between low carb and hunger, hunger is only one of the reasons we want to eat. If we were eating purely to satisfy hunger, you'd expect that we'd all be okay with eating exactly the same thing every day, a prospect that most of us actually find very unappealing. Besides hunger, there are cravings and preferences to consider, and then there are the social and pleasurable aspects of food. A way of eating that you will stick to for your whole life needs to be something you are comfortable doing forever, and not just tolerate but enjoy. That means it needs to do more than just keep your hunger down.

You should write a book!

Nah. All the info is reasonable so it would never sell. Can't compete with the whackjobs out there.