Low Carb/High Fat Diet Study Results

SueInAz

http://health.usnews.com/health-news/diet-fitness/heart/articles/2011/06/02/low-carb-high-fat-diets-may-not-pose-risk-to-arteries

An interesting excerpt:

At the meeting, Stewart will report on 46 dieters, 23 from each group, who lost 10 pounds. "In the low-carb group, they reached the 10-pound loss at 45 days," he said. The low-fat group needed 70 days to shed 10 pounds. Their calorie intake was similar, whichever diet they were on

The full text of this article is as follows:

By Kathleen Doheny
HealthDay Reporter

THURSDAY, June 2 (HealthDay News) -- New research suggests that low-carbohydrate diets, with regular exercise as part of the plan, don't appear to harm the arteries, as some experts have feared.

"It's pretty clear low-carb is effective for weight loss," said study author Kerry J. Stewart, director of clinical and research exercise physiology at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine and its Heart and Vascular Institute. "The concern has been that because you are eating more fat this is going to put stress on your blood vessels."

So, Stewart and his team evaluated the short-term effects of a low-carb, higher-fat diet after a single meal. The researchers also compared a low-carb diet with a low-fat diet in dieters. In each case, they found no ill effects on blood vessel health.

Stewart is due to present his findings Friday at the American College of Sports Medicine meeting in Denver.

However, one nutrition expert said longer-term research is needed before concluding that high fat intake doesn't hurt blood vessel health.

For the first study, Stewart's team looked at the effects of eating an extremely high-fat McDonald's breakfast. The breakfast had more than 900 calories and 50 grams of fat. "That's half of what you should eat in a whole day," Stewart said.

The researchers then evaluated a marker of arterial stiffness and another measure of blood vessel health, known as endothelial function. "Even after eating this one meal, we didn't find any vascular changes from before to after," he said.

The arterial stiffness, in fact, improved, he noted, although he is not sure why.

Neither study had industry funding; both were financed by the U.S. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute.

For the diet study, Stewart assigned 55 men and women who were overweight or obese to the low-carb diet or a low-fat diet. They also had abdominal obesity and a large waist circumference (35 inches or more for women, 40 or more for men). Both are risk factors for heart disease.

The low-carb plan included up to 55 percent fat at the beginning, and phased down to about 40 percent. It had about 15 percent carbs initially, and then went to 40 percent. The other dieters followed the American Heart Association's low-fat diet, with no more than 30 percent fat a day.

Both groups had supervised exercise three times a week.

At the meeting, Stewart will report on 46 dieters, 23 from each group, who lost 10 pounds. "In the low-carb group, they reached the 10-pound loss at 45 days," he said. The low-fat group needed 70 days to shed 10 pounds.

Their calorie intake was similar, whichever diet they were on.

Stewart performed the same blood vessel measures as in the breakfast study. "There were no differences in any of the vascular measures," he said.

The researchers will continue the study for six months. While Stewart cautioned that these are initial findings, he added, "We are pretty confident this is a real result. At the 10-pound weight-loss mark, we don't see any harm to the vasculature."

Stewart said he put on weight a few years ago, went on a low-carb plan while also exercising and dropped 40 pounds. He has kept if off for four years.

While the study is intriguing, long-term research is crucial, said Connie Diekman, director of university nutrition at Washington University in St. Louis and past president of the American Dietetic Association.

"When it comes to the impact on blood vessel functioning, as a registered dietitian I would like to see more studies in healthy and unhealthy subjects and longer-duration studies before concluding that this high-fat intake does not impact blood vessel health," she said, although the study does show that exercise is important. The breakfast study, with its one-time test, does not provide much information about what impact these diets will have long-term, she added.

PeachyKeene

Bump, thanks for the information

Rhodium1976

Carbohydrates hold water; hence, carboHYDRATES and will make you weight more. Losing weight is simply calories in versus calories out. There is no benefit to doing low carb over a typical low calories diet. These fad, low fat or low carb diets have made America the fattest nation on earth. Keep it simple.

mapexdrummer69

Carbohydrates hold water; hence, carboHYDRATES and will make you weight more. Losing weight is simply calories in versus calories out. There is no benefit to doing low carb over a typical low calories diet. These fad, low fat or low carb diets have made America the fattest nation on earth. Keep it simple.

This x2.


Short term results from a low carbohydrate diet can be explained by the simple fact that carbohydrates are water binding, so restricting them will lower body weight from glycogen and water.


If all you are looking for is the number on a scale to move quickly in two weeks, by all means, do a LCD. I'm in it for LONG TERM fat loss.

lizzil0

People want to believe what they've always believed. They don't want to be told the earth is round. Here's some more actual research done by scientists and doctors about how fat isn't the devil-

http://www.menshealth.com/health/understanding-cholesterol-and-heart-disease

http://www.drbriffa.com/2010/01/15/two-major-studies-conclude-that-saturated-fat-does-not-cause-heart-disease/

mapexdrummer69

I don't believe the argument is that fats are bad. I think it is the fact that LCD does accelerate weight loss outside of the context of lowering overall caloric intake.


I agree, fats are far from the devil. They are an essential macronutrient.

SueInAz

I don't believe the argument is that fats are bad. I think it is the fact that LCD does accelerate weight loss outside of the context of lowering overall caloric intake.

Our bodies definitely need fat, but the actual point is that a lower carb diet doesn't necessarily cause vascular problems as people theorized.

For the ones who immediately jumped on the "low carb diets are a fad and bad" soapbox, I never said I was on one. I just found this study interesting. I thought these forums were a place to discuss ALL diet and nutrition information. Apparently not, if you post something against the "accepted" diet dogma.

jknops2

And here a similar "very limited" study showing that high fat increases, and low fat decreases Alzheimer’s disease risk.


http://www.christianpost.com/news/low-fat-diet-may-reduce-alzheimers-risk-study-shows-51144/

Basically you can find a simple limited study that supports all kind of things. It is better to not let you guide by this, but look at scientific concensus.

jujubean1992

I'm SOOO glad i came across this! i've unintentionally been going over my a couple grams of fat and always way under on carbs! that's just the way the foods i like are, it seems like the more carbs i have at the end of the day the crappier i feel too.