The 11 Most Destructive Nutrition Lies Ever Told

stevencloser

After extensive research into this, I believe 99% of this is fact. ESPECIALLY in persons already in the beginning phases of metabolic syndrome or with full on diabetes.

Both Low Fat/High Carb and Low Carb/High Fat diets have shown success in longitudinal studies. For those I mentioned before the benefits of a Low/Carb/High Fat diet have been shown to have far and away more long term and immediate health benefits than any Low Fat/High Carb diet ever has.

As for the saturated fats being bad for you, people honestly need to look into the composition of their anatomy. Your internal organs, ie: heart, brain, kidneys, liver, lungs and on and on and on are composed largely of saturated fats. Your body needs fats to survive.

Eggs are literally the stuff of life....if you want to get technical, they ARE life. We just refrigerate it before it can get to a viable stage.

White processed sugar and flour are poison. There is not a scrap of credible research to show that there are any health benefits from either that over ride a single negative.

Gluten sensitivity is very real. there are something like 24 proteins of Gluten. Celiacs is only triggered by one or two of them. IBS, and other inflammatory issues are caused and can be caused by ingestion of gluten. Just because you haven't seen it or experienced it doesn't mean it isn't real.

The eggs we eat aren't fertilized.

And for poison, we did a great job surviving the last 10000 ish years with agriculture.

ninerbuff

White processed sugar and flour are poison. There is not a scrap of credible research to show that there are any health benefits from either that over ride a single negative.

I would think that intake of refined sugar (through a drink let's say) helps to provide energy for an intense workout. Good workouts increase health and fitness benefits. And what about a diabetic going into shock? Why are they given fast acting processed simple sugar to survive?

Let's not make a blanket statement.

Edit: Just to say there isn't a scrap of credible evidence that shows moderate intake of processed sugar and flour will poison you.

A.C.E. Certified Personal/Group FitnessTrainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

CaitlinW19

I believe almost of all this. Everything has to be taken with a grain of salt and this article, along with the studies it's based on and the studies the misconseptions are based on do as well. For example...high protien diets. Not bad for you no. But what is bad for you is all protien diets, like Atkins. I think this is where the misconseption and the truth behind it need to meet. There is usually some middle ground where everyone should be, but people hear one thing and jump to the farthest side of the spetrum.

Achrya

Annnnnd now I want a bagel.

Bruegger's olive oil and rosemary *drools*

Don't disrespect it with a "topping"

Yessss.

Toppings, psh. I get my bagels from the bakery down the street (Or used to anyway) and even their plain bagels were worthy of just munching on as I walked back home. No cream cheese or butter dare sully my bagel.

Pearsquared

Just because some "big wigs" were bad people doesn't mean the "pee-on" author of the article is. The article is very well researched, using citations from many reputable and highly professional medical journals where scientific medical research is published. You're right that the website does not lend credence to the article, however, the 64 citations of the statements in the article do.

Did you read all 64 references? How do you know they're worth anything?

ETA: a "peon" has nothing to do with urination. It's someone of little consequence, and it derives from a Spanish "unskilled laborer" (also see peonage - involuntary servitude)

Pardon my one grammatical/spelling/phonetic error. I had a childhood friend who was murdered this week. Yes, I did read through a large portion of the citations and medical abstracts/summaries of the research. I work in medical communications. Yes, the ones I randomly read through are reputable.

HardcoreP0rk

Just because some "big wigs" were bad people doesn't mean the "pee-on" author of the article is. The article is very well researched, using citations from many reputable and highly professional medical journals where scientific medical research is published. You're right that the website does not lend credence to the article, however, the 64 citations of the statements in the article do.

Did you read all 64 references? How do you know they're worth anything?

ETA: a "peon" has nothing to do with urination. It's someone of little consequence, and it derives from a Spanish "unskilled laborer" (also see peonage - involuntary servitude)

Pardon my one grammatical/spelling/phonetic error. I had a childhood friend who was murdered this week. Yes, I did read through a large portion of the citations and medical abstracts/summaries of the research. I work in medical communications. Yes, the ones I randomly read through are reputable.

OMG my thoughts exactly!

Achrya

Just because some "big wigs" were bad people doesn't mean the "pee-on" author of the article is. The article is very well researched, using citations from many reputable and highly professional medical journals where scientific medical research is published. You're right that the website does not lend credence to the article, however, the 64 citations of the statements in the article do.

Did you read all 64 references? How do you know they're worth anything?

ETA: a "peon" has nothing to do with urination. It's someone of little consequence, and it derives from a Spanish "unskilled laborer" (also see peonage - involuntary servitude)

Pardon my one grammatical/spelling/phonetic error. I had a childhood friend who was murdered this week. Yes, I did read through a large portion of the citations and medical abstracts/summaries of the research. I work in medical communications. Yes, the ones I randomly read through are reputable.

I wasn't going to be the bad guy who said it first, but now that it's been said

Seriously. WTF. W.T.F.

HardcoreP0rk

Just because some "big wigs" were bad people doesn't mean the "pee-on" author of the article is. The article is very well researched, using citations from many reputable and highly professional medical journals where scientific medical research is published. You're right that the website does not lend credence to the article, however, the 64 citations of the statements in the article do.

Did you read all 64 references? How do you know they're worth anything?

ETA: a "peon" has nothing to do with urination. It's someone of little consequence, and it derives from a Spanish "unskilled laborer" (also see peonage - involuntary servitude)

Pardon my one grammatical/spelling/phonetic error. I had a childhood friend who was murdered this week. Yes, I did read through a large portion of the citations and medical abstracts/summaries of the research. I work in medical communications. Yes, the ones I randomly read through are reputable.

I wasn't going to be the bad guy who said it first, but now that it's been said

Seriously. WTF. W.T.F.

Seems like a pretty odd reason to lash out about your recent experience with homicide...

HardcoreP0rk

But more to the point...

It's rarely a question of whether the study is *reputable*

The issue we typically see is that the study doesn't adequately support the claim made by the author making the reference...

rml_16

After extensive research into this, I believe 99% of this is fact. ESPECIALLY in persons already in the beginning phases of metabolic syndrome or with full on diabetes.

Both Low Fat/High Carb and Low Carb/High Fat diets have shown success in longitudinal studies. For those I mentioned before the benefits of a Low/Carb/High Fat diet have been shown to have far and away more long term and immediate health benefits than any Low Fat/High Carb diet ever has.

As for the saturated fats being bad for you, people honestly need to look into the composition of their anatomy. Your internal organs, ie: heart, brain, kidneys, liver, lungs and on and on and on are composed largely of saturated fats. Your body needs fats to survive.

Eggs are literally the stuff of life....if you want to get technical, they ARE life. We just refrigerate it before it can get to a viable stage.

White processed sugar and flour are poison. There is not a scrap of credible research to show that there are any health benefits from either that over ride a single negative.

Gluten sensitivity is very real. there are something like 24 proteins of Gluten. Celiacs is only triggered by one or two of them. IBS, and other inflammatory issues are caused and can be caused by ingestion of gluten. Just because you haven't seen it or experienced it doesn't mean it isn't real.

The eggs we eat aren't fertilized.

And for poison, we did a great job surviving the last 10000 ish years with agriculture.

Hmmm.

I think I have a pretty tough time taking nutrition advice seriously from someone who doesn't realize the eggs we eat aren't fertilized ...

She might want to do a little more research. It wasn't as extensive as she thinks it was.

TattooTwinset

After extensive research into this, I believe 99% of this is fact. ESPECIALLY in persons already in the beginning phases of metabolic syndrome or with full on diabetes.

Both Low Fat/High Carb and Low Carb/High Fat diets have shown success in longitudinal studies. For those I mentioned before the benefits of a Low/Carb/High Fat diet have been shown to have far and away more long term and immediate health benefits than any Low Fat/High Carb diet ever has.

As for the saturated fats being bad for you, people honestly need to look into the composition of their anatomy. Your internal organs, ie: heart, brain, kidneys, liver, lungs and on and on and on are composed largely of saturated fats. Your body needs fats to survive.

Eggs are literally the stuff of life....if you want to get technical, they ARE life. We just refrigerate it before it can get to a viable stage.

White processed sugar and flour are poison. There is not a scrap of credible research to show that there are any health benefits from either that over ride a single negative.

Gluten sensitivity is very real. there are something like 24 proteins of Gluten. Celiacs is only triggered by one or two of them. IBS, and other inflammatory issues are caused and can be caused by ingestion of gluten. Just because you haven't seen it or experienced it doesn't mean it isn't real.

The eggs we eat aren't fertilized.

And for poison, we did a great job surviving the last 10000 ish years with agriculture.

Hmmm.

I think I have a pretty tough time taking nutrition advice seriously from someone who doesn't realize the eggs we eat aren't fertilized ...

She might want to do a little more research. It wasn't as extensive as she thinks it was.

Um..I buy farm fresh eggs; they are fertilized. There is more to food than your local Super Fail-Mart. And as to the last 10000-ish year of agriculture...yeah bc all the lovely GMO **** we've done to our food is Soooooooo healthy.

Edited bc I can't spell.

stevencloser

Pray tell what makes you think gene modification somehow makes stuff poisonous?

Or where you get actual wild fruit/veggies/chickens/eggs? Cause all of that is very different now from what it was back in the day, long, long before GMO was a thing, breeding to make them bigger/sweeter/fatter was happening.

HardcoreP0rk

After extensive research into this, I believe 99% of this is fact. ESPECIALLY in persons already in the beginning phases of metabolic syndrome or with full on diabetes.

Both Low Fat/High Carb and Low Carb/High Fat diets have shown success in longitudinal studies. For those I mentioned before the benefits of a Low/Carb/High Fat diet have been shown to have far and away more long term and immediate health benefits than any Low Fat/High Carb diet ever has.

As for the saturated fats being bad for you, people honestly need to look into the composition of their anatomy. Your internal organs, ie: heart, brain, kidneys, liver, lungs and on and on and on are composed largely of saturated fats. Your body needs fats to survive.

Eggs are literally the stuff of life....if you want to get technical, they ARE life. We just refrigerate it before it can get to a viable stage.

White processed sugar and flour are poison. There is not a scrap of credible research to show that there are any health benefits from either that over ride a single negative.

Gluten sensitivity is very real. there are something like 24 proteins of Gluten. Celiacs is only triggered by one or two of them. IBS, and other inflammatory issues are caused and can be caused by ingestion of gluten. Just because you haven't seen it or experienced it doesn't mean it isn't real.

The eggs we eat aren't fertilized.

And for poison, we did a great job surviving the last 10000 ish years with agriculture.

Hmmm.

I think I have a pretty tough time taking nutrition advice seriously from someone who doesn't realize the eggs we eat aren't fertilized ...

She might want to do a little more research. It wasn't as extensive as she thinks it was.

Um..I buy farm fresh eggs; they are fertilized. There is more to food than your local Super Fail-Mart. And as to the last 10000-ish year of agriculture...yeah bc all the lovely GMO **** we've done to our food is Soooooooo healthy.

Edited bc I can't spell.

Farm fresh eggs aren't fertilized either...and if they are, refrigeration halts that process.

pink_and_shiny

This article seems to align with the Paleo lifestyle, where you cut out all grains/legumes/dairy/sugar (what else am I forgetting?) and only eat animal proteins, vegetables, nuts, and (sparingly) fruit. Basically, if a caveman could find it, you can eat it.

While everyone has their own nutritional needs for their fitness lifestyles, I don't think that this article is all that off-base. After watching the documentary "The Perfect Human Diet" and reading The Paleo Solution, I decided to attempt to eat a Paleo diet this year. Did so for two weeks, and quickly lost 7 pounds. Yes I gained it back after I brought back the deliciousness that is cheese and carbs, but I learned valuable food detail lessons and now agree that sugar is much worse for you than fat (and by fat I mean fat found in foods like avocados and animal proteins). Heck, some Paleo folk believe that heavy whipping cream is a-ok because it is so dense in fat.

Now, back to the diction fight!

MelRC117

I don't think they're pushing paleo....true paleo people don't eat dairy so they wouldn't have said cheese is just fine. The mentioning of coconut oil was odd because I feel that's a fairly new "thing".

TattooTwinset

After extensive research into this, I believe 99% of this is fact. ESPECIALLY in persons already in the beginning phases of metabolic syndrome or with full on diabetes.

Both Low Fat/High Carb and Low Carb/High Fat diets have shown success in longitudinal studies. For those I mentioned before the benefits of a Low/Carb/High Fat diet have been shown to have far and away more long term and immediate health benefits than any Low Fat/High Carb diet ever has.

As for the saturated fats being bad for you, people honestly need to look into the composition of their anatomy. Your internal organs, ie: heart, brain, kidneys, liver, lungs and on and on and on are composed largely of saturated fats. Your body needs fats to survive.

Eggs are literally the stuff of life....if you want to get technical, they ARE life. We just refrigerate it before it can get to a viable stage.

White processed sugar and flour are poison. There is not a scrap of credible research to show that there are any health benefits from either that over ride a single negative.

Gluten sensitivity is very real. there are something like 24 proteins of Gluten. Celiacs is only triggered by one or two of them. IBS, and other inflammatory issues are caused and can be caused by ingestion of gluten. Just because you haven't seen it or experienced it doesn't mean it isn't real.

The eggs we eat aren't fertilized.

And for poison, we did a great job surviving the last 10000 ish years with agriculture.

Hmmm.

I think I have a pretty tough time taking nutrition advice seriously from someone who doesn't realize the eggs we eat aren't fertilized ...

She might want to do a little more research. It wasn't as extensive as she thinks it was.

Um..I buy farm fresh eggs; they are fertilized. There is more to food than your local Super Fail-Mart. And as to the last 10000-ish year of agriculture...yeah bc all the lovely GMO **** we've done to our food is Soooooooo healthy.

Edited bc I can't spell.

Farm fresh eggs aren't fertilized either...and if they are, refrigeration halts that process.

hence the part where I said we refrigerate them before they become viable. wow.

stevencloser

Losing 7 pounds after going lower in carbs is mostly water weight.

TattooTwinset

Pray tell what makes you think gene modification somehow makes stuff poisonous?

Or where you get actual wild fruit/veggies/chickens/eggs? Cause all of that is very different now from what it was back in the day, long, long before GMO was a thing, breeding to make them bigger/sweeter/fatter was happening.

I don't eat fruit. But yes you are right. All food is very different than it used to be. I don't eat all wild anything. I just said I eat farm fresh eggs. I feel bad for "factory chickens" and my friend happens to do sustainable living so I buy my eggs from her free range chickens and I try to buy free range meats when I can afford them. My issue with GMO is the lack of testing. They modify something utilizing chemicals and there isn't a lot of testing involved. believe me, I am a far cry from a "healthy" person. I love artificial sweetener (Splenda) and don't live in an earthship. I just feel very strongly that there are different strokes for different folks. Low Carb is very sustainable and has shown to be VERY effective and healthful in many people and especially so in people nearing diabetes or with diabetes. Low fat diets have their place and so do high carb. But the research behind that article is sound, and all that research is out there and available if you look. I never said anything was wrong with any other way of eating. personally, I don't care what you eat, I merely agreed with the article. And yes, I have done a lot of research on this. it was one of the primary things i researched when I was in school. I think you should do whatever makes you feel better. Low carb just happens to be it for me. It wasn't just a size changer, it was a life changer.

TattooTwinset

losing 7 lbs on any diet will typically be water weight. especially at the onset of the diet. But still, 7 lbs of unneeded water and the wastes that flushed out with it! I'd still be happy to see that number.

TattooTwinset

White processed sugar and flour are poison. There is not a scrap of credible research to show that there are any health benefits from either that over ride a single negative.

I would think that intake of refined sugar (through a drink let's say) helps to provide energy for an intense workout. Good workouts increase health and fitness benefits. And what about a diabetic going into shock? Why are they given fast acting processed simple sugar to survive?

Let's not make a blanket statement.

Edit: Just to say there isn't a scrap of credible evidence that shows moderate intake of processed sugar and flour will poison you.

A.C.E. Certified Personal/Group FitnessTrainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

no food in moderation will poison you. moderation being the key term. I'd have to say that the human race hasn't been notoriously good at practicing moderation, has it?

pink_and_shiny

I agree wtih you guys, that the weight I did lose was more than likely water, but it was still a smiley face moment. And I felt good eating within the Paleo parameters...my hubby did not. LOL

ninerbuff

White processed sugar and flour are poison. There is not a scrap of credible research to show that there are any health benefits from either that over ride a single negative.

I would think that intake of refined sugar (through a drink let's say) helps to provide energy for an intense workout. Good workouts increase health and fitness benefits. And what about a diabetic going into shock? Why are they given fast acting processed simple sugar to survive?

Let's not make a blanket statement.

Edit: Just to say there isn't a scrap of credible evidence that shows moderate intake of processed sugar and flour will poison you.

A.C.E. Certified Personal/Group FitnessTrainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

no food in moderation will poison you. moderation being the key term. I'd have to say that the human race hasn't been notoriously good at practicing moderation, has it?

So then you'd have to modify your statement of refined sugar and flour? Though I don't think it's poison, since poisoning someone will actually kill them and an autopsy would be able to determine what toxin actually caused death, I'd say ANYTHING in excess places a toll on the body.
As for the human race, depends on where you place the onus. I for one believe the Japanese and most Asian countries do pretty well with moderation.

A.C.E. Certified Personal/Group FitnessTrainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

MelRC117

Losing 7 pounds after going lower in carbs is mostly water weight.

Well there is this from one of the sources: Originally published in The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism

Fifty-three healthy, obese female volunteers (mean body mass index, 33.6 ± 0.3 kg/m2) were randomized; 42 (79%) completed the trial. Women on both diets reduced calorie consumption by comparable amounts at 3 and 6 months. The very low carbohydrate diet group lost more weight (8.5 ± 1.0 vs. 3.9 ± 1.0 kg; P < 0.001) and more body fat (4.8 ± 0.67 vs. 2.0 ± 0.75 kg; P < 0.01) than the low fat diet group. Mean levels of blood pressure, lipids, fasting glucose, and insulin were within normal ranges in both groups at baseline. Although all of these parameters improved over the course of the study, there were no differences observed between the two diet groups at 3 or 6 months. β- Hydroxybutyrate increased significantly in the very low carbohydrate group at 3 months (P = 0.001). Based on these data, a very low carbohydrate diet is more effective than a low fat diet for short-term weight loss and, over 6 months, is not associated with deleterious effects on important cardiovascular risk factors in healthy women.

Notice the body fat lose. Fat loss as a percentage of total weight lost: VLCarb 56.5% vs Calorie restricted 51.3%.

pink_and_shiny

I don't think they're pushing paleo....true paleo people don't eat dairy so they wouldn't have said cheese is just fine. The mentioning of coconut oil was odd because I feel that's a fairly new "thing".

When I was researching paleo chefs, bloggers, and advocates, I actually found that quite a few will use butter or ghee in their cooking (and coffee!) because it is so rich in animal fats. Interesting, huh? The cheese part...yeah, that's a stretch from the paleo prescription. But in the context that the article presents it, they're saying don't fear it for the fat content.

Coconut oil is delicious to cook in, BTW.

MysteriousMerlin

Gluten consumption has also been associated with schizophrenia and cerebellar ataxia

well I sure don't want ataxia, the lady in Whiterun won't leave me alone about it!

stevencloser

Losing 7 pounds after going lower in carbs is mostly water weight.

Well there is this from one of the sources: Originally published in The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism

Fifty-three healthy, obese female volunteers (mean body mass index, 33.6 ± 0.3 kg/m2) were randomized; 42 (79%) completed the trial. Women on both diets reduced calorie consumption by comparable amounts at 3 and 6 months. The very low carbohydrate diet group lost more weight (8.5 ± 1.0 vs. 3.9 ± 1.0 kg; P < 0.001) and more body fat (4.8 ± 0.67 vs. 2.0 ± 0.75 kg; P < 0.01) than the low fat diet group. Mean levels of blood pressure, lipids, fasting glucose, and insulin were within normal ranges in both groups at baseline. Although all of these parameters improved over the course of the study, there were no differences observed between the two diet groups at 3 or 6 months. β- Hydroxybutyrate increased significantly in the very low carbohydrate group at 3 months (P = 0.001). Based on these data, a very low carbohydrate diet is more effective than a low fat diet for short-term weight loss and, over 6 months, is not associated with deleterious effects on important cardiovascular risk factors in healthy women.

Notice the body fat lose. Fat loss as a percentage of total weight lost: VLCarb 56.5% vs Calorie restricted 51.3%.

I find it interesting that it is only faster in the short term according to this. Why is that?

TattooTwinset

White processed sugar and flour are poison. There is not a scrap of credible research to show that there are any health benefits from either that over ride a single negative.

I would think that intake of refined sugar (through a drink let's say) helps to provide energy for an intense workout. Good workouts increase health and fitness benefits. And what about a diabetic going into shock? Why are they given fast acting processed simple sugar to survive?

Let's not make a blanket statement.

Edit: Just to say there isn't a scrap of credible evidence that shows moderate intake of processed sugar and flour will poison you.

A.C.E. Certified Personal/Group FitnessTrainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

no food in moderation will poison you. moderation being the key term. I'd have to say that the human race hasn't been notoriously good at practicing moderation, has it?

So then you'd have to modify your statement of refined sugar and flour? Though I don't think it's poison, since poisoning someone will actually kill them and an autopsy would be able to determine what toxin actually caused death, I'd say ANYTHING in excess places a toll on the body.
As for the human race, depends on where you place the onus. I for one believe the Japanese and most Asian countries do pretty well with moderation.

A.C.E. Certified Personal/Group FitnessTrainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

No, I don't need to revise it. refined sugars can and will kill you. They aren't gonna strap on an ankle blade and shank you in the alley, but they do cause damage, significant damage that has been proven to contribute to death in some serious cases. Also, poisoning doesn't equate killing anyway. Poisoning can just make a person sick; even allergies are a form of poisoning and only rarely do those lead to death. So when I lay my blanket, it is a wide statement. Admittedly, but the exceptions to the rules are the minority, not the majority. And it sucks, bc sugar is tasty.

stevencloser

So what magical stuff in refined sugar kills you? The glucose or the fructose that is in literally every other non-refined sugar?

sjaplo

Just because some "big wigs" were bad people doesn't mean the "pee-on" author of the article is. The article is very well researched, using citations from many reputable and highly professional medical journals where scientific medical research is published. You're right that the website does not lend credence to the article, however, the 64 citations of the statements in the article do.

Did you read all 64 references? How do you know they're worth anything?

ETA: a "peon" has nothing to do with urination. It's someone of little consequence, and it derives from a Spanish "unskilled laborer" (also see peonage - involuntary servitude)

Pardon my one grammatical/spelling/phonetic error. I had a childhood friend who was murdered this week. Yes, I did read through a large portion of the citations and medical abstracts/summaries of the research. I work in medical communications. Yes, the ones I randomly read through are reputable.

Huh - I thought you were being sardonic - a peon as the definition attests is a slave or someone who works for another, but has no decision making power. I didn't take "pee-on" in the literal sense but in the metaphorical sense. which to me, made it amusing.

MelRC117

Losing 7 pounds after going lower in carbs is mostly water weight.

Well there is this from one of the sources: Originally published in The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism

Fifty-three healthy, obese female volunteers (mean body mass index, 33.6 ± 0.3 kg/m2) were randomized; 42 (79%) completed the trial. Women on both diets reduced calorie consumption by comparable amounts at 3 and 6 months. The very low carbohydrate diet group lost more weight (8.5 ± 1.0 vs. 3.9 ± 1.0 kg; P < 0.001) and more body fat (4.8 ± 0.67 vs. 2.0 ± 0.75 kg; P < 0.01) than the low fat diet group. Mean levels of blood pressure, lipids, fasting glucose, and insulin were within normal ranges in both groups at baseline. Although all of these parameters improved over the course of the study, there were no differences observed between the two diet groups at 3 or 6 months. β- Hydroxybutyrate increased significantly in the very low carbohydrate group at 3 months (P = 0.001). Based on these data, a very low carbohydrate diet is more effective than a low fat diet for short-term weight loss and, over 6 months, is not associated with deleterious effects on important cardiovascular risk factors in healthy women.

Notice the body fat lose. Fat loss as a percentage of total weight lost: VLCarb 56.5% vs Calorie restricted 51.3%.

I find it interesting that it is only faster in the short term according to this. Why is that?

I never claimed to say it was fast all the time. In fact I didn't claim anything...just simply showing you a study that VLCarb diets you do lose body fat, and in this one they lost more weight and a greater percentage of their weight loss was fat. I never made any claims, you made a claim.