Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.

Now carbs are bad and fat is good

stanmann571
stanmann571 Posts: 5,727 Member
edited November 21 in Debate Club
Cue the inevitable wailing and gnashing of teeth.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/large-study-suggests-carbs-not-fats-bad-for-you/
«1

Replies

  • AlabasterVerve
    AlabasterVerve Posts: 3,171 Member
    Here are a few reactions from people who generally seem to favor the current dietary guidelines about PURE. Lots to critique, lots of confounders:

    Little naysaying/questioning or even much of a reation from the low carb community from what I've seen but here were a few take aways from Twitter:
    • PURE distilled - Eat fruits, veges, and legumes regularly, get enough animal protein, and enjoy plenty of "total fat". With some salt. -George Henderson
    • Epi studies are useful to REFUTE previous unsubstantiated hypothesis. Causality is unlikely when inverse association -Jose C Souto, M.D.
    • No I genuinely believe that dietary glycemia is currently the single greatest threat to human health — this is why I am a low carb advocate. -Ted Naiman

    All in all it looks like business as usual to me. I think Stephan Guyenet, PhD summed it up best:
    One observational study, however large, is not going to rewrite our understanding of nutrition and health.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    I really like NutritionWonk and her reaction was worth reading.

    Thanks for those links, AlabasterVerve.

    I continue to think that beyond getting adequate protein, some fat, not overeating, and having an overall nutrient dense diet, macros don't matter much. They matter more (for some) when food is abundant because for some of us they might affect how much we eat when not logging.
  • Psychgrrl
    Psychgrrl Posts: 3,177 Member
    A different review of the study I read also talked about a number of the participants being low income and there being a relationship to that and this study regarding the number of pre-packaged, high-carb foods eaten. According to what was reported by the participants.

    Though, as another poster said, I think the self-reporting can be an issue as even folks paying attention to macros struggle at times to see what's what. Imagine folks living paycheck to paycheck and just being happy to have food to eat. Someone in my office asked the other day, "What's a trans fat? Why should I care about that?"

    This study also doesn't account for Blue Zones, with the healthiest people in the world and a 70% or higher diet in carbohydrates. But Blue Zone people don't typically eat a lot of pre-packaged foods where there might be other things in them they didn't know they were eating. Like fat.
  • janejellyroll
    janejellyroll Posts: 25,763 Member
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    I really like NutritionWonk and her reaction was worth reading.

    Thanks for those links, AlabasterVerve.

    I continue to think that beyond getting adequate protein, some fat, not overeating, and having an overall nutrient dense diet, macros don't matter much. They matter more (for some) when food is abundant because for some of us they might affect how much we eat when not logging.

    I just finished reading that Nutrition Wonk piece and I found it really helpful in putting this study in context.
  • GottaBurnEmAll
    GottaBurnEmAll Posts: 7,722 Member
    edited August 2017
    janejellyroll wrote: »
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    I really like NutritionWonk and her reaction was worth reading.

    Thanks for those links, AlabasterVerve.

    I continue to think that beyond getting adequate protein, some fat, not overeating, and having an overall nutrient dense diet, macros don't matter much. They matter more (for some) when food is abundant because for some of us they might affect how much we eat when not logging.

    I just finished reading that Nutrition Wonk piece and I found it really helpful in putting this study in context.

    Same here. Shocking that media science reporting misses the finer points of things.
  • LiftHeavyThings27105
    LiftHeavyThings27105 Posts: 2,086 Member
    I find this conversation interesting.

    I was working with a 53yo woman who was 5'3" and weighed in at 200lbs. She was eating 700 calories a day and easily 70% of that was carbs. More likely 85%.

    Anyway, she had a lot of issues. Over the course of a few weeks we did several things that radically changed her situation:

    1. stopped drinking energy drinks (period)
    2. stopped drinking soda (Mountain Dew!!!!)
    3. increased her water consumption (from two glasses a day to seven glasses a day)
    4. increased her caloric intake (up to 1050 calories a day via about 70 calories a week increase over five weeks)

    In that time frame her energy level went through the roof (she had no energy when we started), she lost eight pounds and her urine went from dark to barely visible (sorry if that is TMI....but we are all adults here).

    Now, interesting point is....we did not work on her macros at all during this time frame. She continued to eat the same type of food...just more of it.

    In a few more weeks we were going to completely restructure her macros. We did not get that far. Anyway, still find that very interesting.

    Her lack of protein was the biggest surprise to me. I am confident that once we started the training that we would have needed to address that question. She decided that she could do this on her own (read: she did not want to pay me....) so I will never know the rest of the story.

    And, I guess that with the additional water intake we increased her likelihood of dying! :smiley:
  • Gallowmere1984
    Gallowmere1984 Posts: 6,626 Member
    janejellyroll wrote: »
    "The research also found that eating fruits, vegetables and legumes can lower your risk of dying prematurely."

    All those foods have carbohydrates.

    "The investigators found that high-carbohydrate diets are common, with more than half of the people deriving 70 percent of their daily calories from carbs."

    This just blew my mind. I consider myself to eat fairly high carbohydate and I'm usually in the 55-60% range. I can't imagine regularly getting 70% from carbohydrates. These are almost Freelee levels of carbs.

    You would think, but given the absurd levels of soda and juice consumption, it actually doesn't shock me, IF accurate.

    However, given that most people just seem to think along the "meat=protein, oil=fat, everything else=carbs" mentality that I see among most of the population that I have spoken with, it's likely waaaay off.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    This content has been removed.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    CWShultz27105 wrote: »
    I find this conversation interesting.

    I was working with a 53yo woman who was 5'3" and weighed in at 200lbs. She was eating 700 calories a day and easily 70% of that was carbs. More likely 85%.

    So she was an outlier. The typical American eats nowhere near 85% carbs. It is hard for me to imagine how someone could, without having a careful diet aiming at that, kind of like the 80-10-10 vegans.

    I also am quite skeptical she was doing so at 700 calories per day with the sources identified above playing a significant role. To be completely forthcoming, I don't believe it, it doesn't pass my you-know-what meter. Not saying she didn't tell you she was eating 700 calories or maybe think she was, I dunno.
  • LiftHeavyThings27105
    LiftHeavyThings27105 Posts: 2,086 Member
    I was very skeptical as well.

    She logged everything for more than one week. Sure enough. She was legit eating 700 calories a day. Now, that assumes that she was logging correctly. That assumes that she was correct with her serving size. That assumes that she was 100% honest.

    I honestly believe that she was. She was very desperate to fix her issues and I stressed the importance of being honest with me as everything that we were going to do was predicated upon her being 100% complete and honest. And, when I saw her daily log it did not pass my bs detector, either.

    Anyway, that was my experience with her. I fully believe everything that she told me. I do not work with her any more so I do not know what has happened since we went different ways.

    I honestly was amazed that she was still alive......she was definitely alive. I spent hours on the phone with her each day.
  • amusedmonkey
    amusedmonkey Posts: 10,330 Member
    edited September 2017
    Yeah, wonder what's the next bad food/macro/component is going to be. It could be something completely unexpected or maybe something half the population has never heard of (like who would have guessed gluten would get its time in the naughty chair). There's always tilting at windmills when it comes to nutrition and lately I'm just tired of all of it that I don't even want to engage. Kudos to those who don't get drained easily.

    Edited: because as usual, my brain moves faster than my typing fingers and words keep going missing somehow.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    This content has been removed.
  • jdlobb
    jdlobb Posts: 1,232 Member
    I'm not sure what "now" means in the thread title. I feel like the push has been away from carbs and toward fats for at least the last 10 or 15 years, and only recently has it started the swing back the other way, or at least toward more "pure CICO" type thinking.
  • stevencloser
    stevencloser Posts: 8,911 Member
    CWShultz27105 wrote: »
    I was very skeptical as well.

    She logged everything for more than one week. Sure enough. She was legit eating 700 calories a day. Now, that assumes that she was logging correctly. That assumes that she was correct with her serving size. That assumes that she was 100% honest.

    I honestly believe that she was. She was very desperate to fix her issues and I stressed the importance of being honest with me as everything that we were going to do was predicated upon her being 100% complete and honest. And, when I saw her daily log it did not pass my bs detector, either.

    Anyway, that was my experience with her. I fully believe everything that she told me. I do not work with her any more so I do not know what has happened since we went different ways.

    I honestly was amazed that she was still alive......she was definitely alive. I spent hours on the phone with her each day.

    You'd be surprised how much people can be deluding themselves. Check Secret Eaters for example.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    stevencloser wrote: »
    CWShultz27105 wrote: »
    I was very skeptical as well.

    She logged everything for more than one week. Sure enough. She was legit eating 700 calories a day. Now, that assumes that she was logging correctly. That assumes that she was correct with her serving size. That assumes that she was 100% honest.

    I honestly believe that she was. She was very desperate to fix her issues and I stressed the importance of being honest with me as everything that we were going to do was predicated upon her being 100% complete and honest. And, when I saw her daily log it did not pass my bs detector, either.

    Anyway, that was my experience with her. I fully believe everything that she told me. I do not work with her any more so I do not know what has happened since we went different ways.

    I honestly was amazed that she was still alive......she was definitely alive. I spent hours on the phone with her each day.

    You'd be surprised how much people can be deluding themselves. Check Secret Eaters for example.

    Yes, that really is eye-opening.
  • alteredsteve175
    alteredsteve175 Posts: 2,725 Member
    GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »
    janejellyroll wrote: »
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    I really like NutritionWonk and her reaction was worth reading.

    Thanks for those links, AlabasterVerve.

    I continue to think that beyond getting adequate protein, some fat, not overeating, and having an overall nutrient dense diet, macros don't matter much. They matter more (for some) when food is abundant because for some of us they might affect how much we eat when not logging.

    I just finished reading that Nutrition Wonk piece and I found it really helpful in putting this study in context.

    Same here. Shocking that media science reporting misses the finer points of things.


    @GottaBurnEmAll - thanks for the chuckle.
  • KANGOOJUMPS
    KANGOOJUMPS Posts: 6,474 Member
    carbs are good, they are my fuel to burn 1000 a day.
  • ccruz985
    ccruz985 Posts: 646 Member
    OH MY GOD. BALANCED DIET, YES. EVERYTHING ELSE, NO.
  • VeronicaA76
    VeronicaA76 Posts: 1,116 Member
    amusedmonkey wrote: »
    Yeah, wonder what's the next bad food/macro/component is going to be. It could be something completely unexpected or maybe something half the population has never heard of (like who would have guessed gluten would get its time in the naughty chair). There's always tilting at windmills when it comes to nutrition and lately I'm just tired of all of it that I don't even want to engage. Kudos to those who don't get drained easily.

    Edited: because as usual, my brain moves faster than my typing fingers and words keep going missing somehow.

    I'm hoping for kale to be the next thing. Hopefully my bf will quit trying to make me drink her disgusting kale smoothies. (Kale, onion, garlic & lemon.. ugh)
  • buffgrl
    buffgrl Posts: 32 Member
    Different diets work for different people depending on genetics and lifestyle. Carbs aren't necessarily bad and some people can still get lean on a higher carb diet. Take me for example- leaning out while eating 200-300 carbs per day, while going a bit lower on the fat and moderate protein. (not LOW fat, but low-er fat, it's controlled) I have abs and cuts now! How was I able to eat all these carbs and still get lean? 1.)I lift weights very intensely (heavy weights) 4 days a week and go for long trail runs on Sundays 2.)My genetics- without carbs I my immune system and energy levels suffer, can't sleep, etc. 3.)And most importantly...I keep my OVERALL CALORIES within a certain range 6 days per week. But what works for me might not work for you! Some people really do best and feel best on a low-carb high-fat diet, or something in between! With weight loss, there's more than one way to get there, each as individual as you are! When you find the right balance for yourself you will: 1.)Lose weight 2.)Feel good and have energy for your workouts and life in general. 3.)Glow with health! Find something that you can maintain as a lifestyle, not just a quick fix. Good luck!
  • Orphia
    Orphia Posts: 7,097 Member
    AlabasterVerve wrote: »
    Nutrition Wonk: The 5 Continent (PURE) Study: A Prospective Cohort Study

    That's awesome.

    I'd just like to add that the PURE study produced many, many more recommendations for global health that did not focus on carbs or macros.

    http://www.phri.ca/pure/pure-study-publications/

    It's disappointing that such a wide-ranging study only gains traction due to the media's neophilia and the current keto fad / carb-bashing.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories