All in all, just another brick in the (CICO) wall

Azdak

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2673150
Question: What is the effect of a healthy low-fat (HLF) diet vs a healthy low-carbohydrate (HLC) diet on weight change at 12 months and are these effects related to genotype pattern or insulin secretion?

Findings In this randomized clinical trial among 609 overweight adults, weight change over 12 months was not significantly different for participants in the HLF diet group (−5.3 kg) vs the HLC diet group (−6.0 kg), and there was no significant diet-genotype interaction or diet-insulin interaction with 12-month weight loss.

Meaning There was no significant difference in 12-month weight loss between the HLF and HLC diets, and neither genotype pattern nor baseline insulin secretion was associated with the dietary effects on weight loss.

diannethegeek

It's funny how wildly different each thread on this study has been today.

Tacklewasher

diannethegeek wrote: »

It's funny how wildly different each thread on this study has been today.

No kidding.

I'm still pretty steamed at the headlines in the one thread.

JeromeBarry1

I read the source article this morning and decided to just let this one play itself out.

L1zardQueen

JeromeBarry1 wrote: »

I read the source article this morning and decided to just let this one play itself out.

It didn’t ruffle any feathers

OldAssDude

sounds like scientific mumbo jumbo to me.

Azdak

diannethegeek wrote: »

It's funny how wildly different each thread on this study has been today.

Sorry—I didn’t get a chance to look through the forums today.

diannethegeek

Azdak wrote: »

diannethegeek wrote: »

It's funny how wildly different each thread on this study has been today.

Sorry—I didn’t get a chance to look through the forums today.

Don't worry about it. I didn't mean anything by the comment. None of the other posts got much attention so they'd be easy to miss and one of them tried to make the point that the study says calorie counting is useless, which was entertaining for a second.

Just one of those things that happens when a new study pops up :drinker:

Azdak

diannethegeek wrote: »

Azdak wrote: »

diannethegeek wrote: »

It's funny how wildly different each thread on this study has been today.

Sorry—I didn’t get a chance to look through the forums today.

Don't worry about it. I didn't mean anything by the comment. None of the other posts got much attention so they'd be easy to miss and one of them tried to make the point that the study says calorie counting is useless, which was entertaining for a second.

Just one of those things that happens when a new study pops up :drinker:

I didn’t take it negatively—just mildly peeved at myself.

Kind of like when I respond to a zombie thread without realizing it.

cmriverside

But we listen to YOU.

At least I do. I know you know what you know so I know I can.

:huh:

AnvilHead

Azdak wrote: »

diannethegeek wrote: »

Azdak wrote: »

diannethegeek wrote: »

It's funny how wildly different each thread on this study has been today.

Sorry—I didn’t get a chance to look through the forums today.

Don't worry about it. I didn't mean anything by the comment. None of the other posts got much attention so they'd be easy to miss and one of them tried to make the point that the study says calorie counting is useless, which was entertaining for a second.

Just one of those things that happens when a new study pops up :drinker:

I didn’t take it negatively—just mildly peeved at myself.

Kind of like when I respond to a zombie thread without realizing it.

FWIW, yours was the most sensible, rational take on it.