Yet another study shows no weight loss benefit for low-carb

Azdak

Another nail in the Keto Koffin, so to speak.

(Seriously I am not anti-keto--I just really, really wanted an excuse to type Keto Koffin)

https://www.bemorenutrition.com/2017/01/20/low-fat-vs-low-carb-which-is-better-for-fat-loss-research-review/

If you don't want to follow the link--study showed (again) no weight loss difference between high fat/low carb and high(ish) carb/low fat when calorie/protein intake the same.

CafeRacer808

"Keto Koffin" = Win!

mjames1319

Didn't read the study .....but my theory on Keto is that maybe you don't lose more on the scale but I feel like those on the diet lose more inches. I realize there's the loss of water/bloat weight, but even longer term keto dieters always look like they have lost a ton of inches compared to when I look at cico dieters' before and afters.

nvmomketo

Full article: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/311279409_Visceral_adiposity_and_metabolic_syndrome_after_very_high-fat_and_low-fat_isocaloric_diets_a_randomized_controlled_trial_12

Many, if not most, low carbers find that the improved weight loss rate on a LCHF diet is simply due to appetite reduction. They are less hungry and are able to eat less with not as much effort.

The studies that have found an increase in weight loss have found that it mostly equalizes within a year. There may be a slight benefit in the first few months (by slight I mean just a few pounds) but the gap narrows by 12 months. If there is a metabolic advantage, it doesn't happen in everyone (those with IR seem to slightly benefit) and it isn't much.

NewGemini130

Whoohoo! Vegan here, I heart carbs!

crzycatlady1

mjames1319 wrote: »

Didn't read the study .....but my theory on Keto is that maybe you don't lose more on the scale but I feel like those on the diet lose more inches. I realize there's the loss of water/bloat weight, but even longer term keto dieters always look like they have lost a ton of inches compared to when I look at cico dieters' before and afters.

I haven't seen a lot of before /after pictures of keto and low carbers because so many of them don't actually have pictures of themselves in their profile areas? Maybe their sharing them in the low carb group that I don't have access to or something. I'd be curious to see this difference that you're talking about though.

Gallowmere1984

crzycatlady1 wrote: »

mjames1319 wrote: »

Didn't read the study .....but my theory on Keto is that maybe you don't lose more on the scale but I feel like those on the diet lose more inches. I realize there's the loss of water/bloat weight, but even longer term keto dieters always look like they have lost a ton of inches compared to when I look at cico dieters' before and afters.

I haven't seen a lot of before /after pictures of keto and low carbers because so many of them don't actually have pictures of themselves in their profile areas? Maybe their sharing them in the low carb group that I don't have access to or something. I'd be curious to see this difference that you're seeing though.

I'll see if I can dig up my old CKD pictures. Basically, though I was a similar weight, I always looked better after a long keto run. The amount of subcutaneous water that carbs will make you hold is notable.

No, my fatloss wasn't any faster after the initial water drop, but I was definitely leaner looking. However, this was of course, due to being "dry", not because I had less fat. Same reason bodybuilders cut carbs during peaking.

nvmomketo

crzycatlady1 wrote: »

mjames1319 wrote: »

Didn't read the study .....but my theory on Keto is that maybe you don't lose more on the scale but I feel like those on the diet lose more inches. I realize there's the loss of water/bloat weight, but even longer term keto dieters always look like they have lost a ton of inches compared to when I look at cico dieters' before and afters.

I haven't seen a lot of before /after pictures of keto and low carbers because so many of them don't actually have pictures of themselves in their profile areas? Maybe their sharing them in the low carb group that I don't have access to or something. I'd be curious to see this difference that you're talking about though.

Many low carbers don't venture onto the main forums very often due to the older bias against low carbs. The comparison pics are shared in the LCD.

Low carb leads to low insulin which leads to water and electrolyte losses. Losing a few pounds of water can reduce the "puffiness".

TimothyFish

Azdak wrote: »

Another nail in the Keto Koffin, so to speak.

(Seriously I am not anti-keto--I just really, really wanted an excuse to type Keto Koffin)

https://www.bemorenutrition.com/2017/01/20/low-fat-vs-low-carb-which-is-better-for-fat-loss-research-review/

If you don't want to follow the link--study showed (again) no weight loss difference between high fat/low carb and high(ish) carb/low fat when calorie/protein intake the same.

That shouldn't surprise anyone. The attraction of the low carb diet has more to do with people being able to maintain lower calorie intake, so I'm not sure that the study adds any value since it set the calorie level.

snowflake954

This doesn't surprise me since I live in Italy, and they eat alot of carbs. Low carbing isn't necessary for weightloss.

Gallowmere1984

TimothyFish wrote: »

Azdak wrote: »

Another nail in the Keto Koffin, so to speak.

(Seriously I am not anti-keto--I just really, really wanted an excuse to type Keto Koffin)

https://www.bemorenutrition.com/2017/01/20/low-fat-vs-low-carb-which-is-better-for-fat-loss-research-review/

If you don't want to follow the link--study showed (again) no weight loss difference between high fat/low carb and high(ish) carb/low fat when calorie/protein intake the same.

That shouldn't surprise anyone. The attraction of the low carb diet has more to do with people being able to maintain lower calorie intake, so I'm not sure that the study adds any value since it set the calorie level.

Well no, it does have some value. I am a huge keto fan for cutting, but some of the keto martyrs really did need a reality check. Most of us that you see post on the main forum grasp that it is about easier portion control, better satiety, etc. and that the only ones who see a definite physiological benefit are those with various diseases. However, there are still many who swear "fat doesn't make you fat, carbs do."

Those are the deluded who need a gut check.

Gallowmere1984

Noel_57 wrote: »

Keto Martyr = Burned at the Steak?

I hate puns so bad, but this one was actually pretty good. Excellent job sir.

I almost said "well done sir", but then realized what I almost did, and contemplated Seppuku for nearly shaming my family.

snowflake954

Noel_57 wrote: »

Keto Martyr = Burned at the Steak?

You outdid yourself Noel.

mjames1319

I don't know how to quote directly to reply to a specific person, but Reddit keto is a great place to see a ton of before and afters also the low carb groups here.

Psychgrrl

It's a WOE that has obviously worked for some folks here. If that's how people achieve their calorie deficit, why knock it.

I don't think it's magic, or a cure-all, but it seems to have made weight-loss possible for some MFPers. Just like my WOE has for me.

PokeyBug

Just my 2¢. Low carb diets really work, have worked for me in the past. However, at least for me, they're not sustainable. But they're like any other diet that eliminates a food group (low fat, gluten free, etc.). They take a lot of effort to become a WOL. And I'm weak. I like ramen noodles. I like cake. So, they don't work for me long term. But if that's how you want to eat and you think you can do it healthily, go for it. There is no such thing as the Nutrition Police. Thank God, 'cause I'd be serving a life sentence if there were.

Christine_72

When i did keto my appetite and cravings lowered, and along with that so did my calories, so yeah it still comes down to calories/calories out. Dieting was a breeze on low carb, if i didn't get a certain side effect I'd probably still be doing it.

Gallowmere1984

Psychgrrl wrote: »

It's a WOE that has obviously worked for some folks here. If that's how people achieve their calorie deficit, why knock it.

I don't think it's magic, or a cure-all, but it seems to have made weight-loss possible for some MFPers. Just like my WOE has for me.

It's not the diet itself that tends to get kicked. It's the absurd beliefs that some have that stem from it.

As I said, I am actually a huge keto fan, but even I get irritated pretty often by the total lack of understanding about biology that some of it's loudest proponents spew forth. I actually recently had to break down de novo lipogenesis (and explain why it's fairly uncommon) to someone to get them past the whole "carbs make you fat" thing.

I still don't know if I was successful, because they eventually stopped responding.

jre01

Azdak wrote: »

Another nail in the Keto Koffin, so to speak.

(Seriously I am not anti-keto--I just really, really wanted an excuse to type Keto Koffin)

https://www.bemorenutrition.com/2017/01/20/low-fat-vs-low-carb-which-is-better-for-fat-loss-research-review/

If you don't want to follow the link--study showed (again) no weight loss difference between high fat/low carb and high(ish) carb/low fat when calorie/protein intake the same.

I don't understand how this nails shut the keto koffin? If it did anything, it solidifies that LCHF is a sustainable alternative to the LFHC weight loss push. Additionally these subjects were eating > 50 carbs which may mean keto levels were never truly obtained, and this was specific to men.