Low Carb Eating

Acg67

These sorts of debates are always amusing to watch unfold. I'm sure this one will go on for a while yet, but I'd just like to interject if I may.

Acg and others DID NOT SAY THAT LOW CARB DIETS WERE BOGUS, so I'm not sure why some of you are getting so defensive. He and others said that they weren't any better than a myriad of other "diets" one could undertake.

Translation: Congratulations on your weight loss! Of course you are losing weight, but low carb is not the ONLY way.

Carry on...

(BTW, I've decreased my carb intake to 100-120g/day with few ill effects. )

I assume this is directed at me. Personally I don't care about what they think about the science of low carb diets because it is largely irrelevant to my reasons for thinking that low carb diets are superior to other diets. The most compelling argument for a low carb diet in my eyes is that they are closer to a natural diet than most higher carb diets.

What exactly constitutes a natural diet?

What a human being would've eaten prior to agriculture.

And that would be?

grinch031

These sorts of debates are always amusing to watch unfold. I'm sure this one will go on for a while yet, but I'd just like to interject if I may.

Acg and others DID NOT SAY THAT LOW CARB DIETS WERE BOGUS, so I'm not sure why some of you are getting so defensive. He and others said that they weren't any better than a myriad of other "diets" one could undertake.

Translation: Congratulations on your weight loss! Of course you are losing weight, but low carb is not the ONLY way.

Carry on...

(BTW, I've decreased my carb intake to 100-120g/day with few ill effects. )

I assume this is directed at me. Personally I don't care about what they think about the science of low carb diets because it is largely irrelevant to my reasons for thinking that low carb diets are superior to other diets. The most compelling argument for a low carb diet in my eyes is that they are closer to a natural diet than most higher carb diets.

What exactly constitutes a natural diet?

What a human being would've eaten prior to agriculture.

And that would be?

Not whole grain pasta or bread. Save your energy, I'm done arguing my point.

tisha_rae

The diet I am on (17dd) is also low carb – actually for the first cycle it is almost none – and then you gradually add them back- I think carbohydrates get a bad rap, maybe instead of eliminating them completely you can make sure to choose better ones. My diet plan allows you to gradually add back healthier ones….brown rice, whole grains in your bread and pasta instead of bleached flour.

I felt horrible for about a week, and now after 23 days I feel amazing and have more energy than I have EVER had.

You might also consider bulking up on your protein (also the good kind) nuts, eggs, lean meats…like turkey, fish, chicken, it should provide you more energy and make you feel full.

Whatever you decide Good Luck!!!!

hbunting86

Hmmm the carb/no carb/low carb debate is so frustrating!

Here's my take on it - everything in moderation.

I don't eat bread, pasta, rice etc (or very rarely do) as it upsets my stomach massively - I'll be in pain and therefore generally not a great person to be around. Making a point of giving these things up for health reasons was a big deal to me, particularly as my other half is Italian (cue much bread and pasta and general yumminess) and to make matters worse, a chef at that!

I don't really have an issue with workouts, I can do them without issue and find that protein fills me up longer. Probably because previously my body wasn't able to absorb food and nutrients properly due to the wheat and gluten issue.

If you're struggling with workouts, add in a few carbs - your body is telling you something! If you're worried about carbs being 'bad' don't - maybe eat them earlier in the day to fuel your workouts.

Keep the body happy and healthy

cashnhaydensmama

I've done low carb strictly because my whole family has done it and my mom has done it in the past on lost about 180lbs in 6 months and she looked amazing. I did it before and dropped weight pretty quick. I am on it now and haven't really noticed too much of a change in energy. I go to the gym every weekday and I have a trainer so he doesn't let me slack off. I actually think the gym needs to get harder so that I lose faster and tone quicker. Good Luck!

That is A LOT to lose in just 6 months. Roughly 7.5 lbs/week! I'm hoping she was followed by a doctor for this!

RonSwanson66

Not whole grain pasta or bread. Save your energy, I'm done making **** up

FYP.

grinch031

Not whole grain pasta or bread. Save your energy, I'm done making **** up

FYP.

I see somebody's feelings got hurt so they had to resort to childish behavior. Boo hoo.

happylurker

Normally, I'm happy to lurk. However I love science. I also hate when scientific studies are twisted. I looked at your studies and came up with this:

http://www.ajcn.org/content/20/10/1104.full.pdf 1967 – N=10, freak liquid diet

http://www.ajcn.org/content/21/11/1291.full.pdf 1968 – N=9, freak liquid diet

http://jcem.endojournals.org/content/92/11/4480.full 2007-N=17,

study conclusion - In these obese men, a low-carbohydrate diet reversed the increase in metabolic clearance of cortisol (3), increase in 5α- and 5β-reductase (4), and decrease in hepatic 11β-HSD1 (5, 6) previously described in obesity. Thus, chronic changes in dietary macronutrients may be a primary driver for altered hepatic, but not adipose, cortisol metabolism in obesity. The increase in 11β-HSD1 activity, and hence intrahepatic cortisol concentrations, caused by a ketogenic low carbohydrate diet has implications for the efficacy of different dietary strategies in reversing the metabolic consequences of obesity.


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8968851 1996-N=68, I could not find the number of carbs given to participants.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8561057 1996-N=43, “low carb” group ate 150 carbs/day.


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2319073 1990-N=around 33, “low carb” group ate 250 carbs/day

I would also like to point out that only the oldest of these studies took place in a “metabolic ward”, and that those participants were given freaky liquid diets that had no potassium and other random stuff. So far away from how normal people eat every day that its almost useless stuff.

Many of the above cited studies say that there are insulin advantages to a low carb diet. But what about metabolic advantages? Here is a study that shows a metabolic advantage to a low carb diet.

Ketogenic diets have been used as an approach to weight loss on the basis of the theoretical advantage of a low-carbohydrate, high-fat diet. To evaluate the physiological and metabolic effects of such diets on weight we studied mice consuming a very-low-carbohydrate, ketogenic diet (KD). This diet had profound effects on energy balance and gene expression. C57BL/6 mice animals were fed one of four diets: KD; a commonly used obesogenic high-fat, high-sucrose diet (HF); 66% caloric restriction (CR); and control chow (C). Mice on KD ate the same calories as mice on C and HF, but weight dropped and stabilized at 85% initial weight, similar to CR. This was consistent with increased energy expenditure seen in animals fed KD vs. those on C and CR. Microarray analysis of liver showed a unique pattern of gene expression in KD, with increased expression of genes in fatty acid oxidation pathways and reduction in lipid synthesis pathways. Animals made obese on HF and transitioned to KD lost all excess body weight, improved glucose tolerance, and increased energy expenditure. Analysis of key genes showed similar changes as those seen in lean animals placed directly on KD. Additionally, AMP kinase activity was increased, with a corresponding decrease in ACC activity. These data indicate that KD induces a unique metabolic state congruous with weight loss.

http://ajpendo.physiology.org/content/292/6/E1724.abstract


This is a very controversial subject, folks. Billions of dollars are riding on people continuing to eat high carb, sugary, starchy foods. Do not think that the industries associated with those foods (both foodstuffs and healthcare) are going down without a fight. That's my opinion.

On the factual side we see that:
Many, many studies have proven the efficacy of low carb diets to improve insulin resistence.
A few studies have shown the metabolic advantage of low carb diets
Many, many anecdotal stories show different results of low carb diets.

Many, many people just want to throw dirt in the water to muddy things up. Personally I have lost weight on both a low carb and a "standard weight watchers' diet". My physician prefers my "stats" (less cholesterol, etc) when I eat less carbohydrates. He likes me to keep it lower carb.

If you are considering a low carbohydrate diet, DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH. Recognize that if a study says low carb but gave participants 250 carbs a day, that is dramatically different from low carb and 40 carbs/day. Dramatically different.

In the end you make the call. And in the end, if you have done enough of your own research, you will not be easily swayed by the throngs of people who crazily say "a pound of bacon will kill you!" When most people on a low carb diet ARE NOT eating a pound of bacon, rather a serving of salmon and some green beans.

Peace.

grinch031

Normally, I'm happy to lurk. However I love science. I also hate when scientific studies are twisted. I looked at your studies and came up with this:

http://www.ajcn.org/content/20/10/1104.full.pdf 1967 – N=10, freak liquid diet

http://www.ajcn.org/content/21/11/1291.full.pdf 1968 – N=9, freak liquid diet

http://jcem.endojournals.org/content/92/11/4480.full 2007-N=17,

study conclusion - In these obese men, a low-carbohydrate diet reversed the increase in metabolic clearance of cortisol (3), increase in 5α- and 5β-reductase (4), and decrease in hepatic 11β-HSD1 (5, 6) previously described in obesity. Thus, chronic changes in dietary macronutrients may be a primary driver for altered hepatic, but not adipose, cortisol metabolism in obesity. The increase in 11β-HSD1 activity, and hence intrahepatic cortisol concentrations, caused by a ketogenic low carbohydrate diet has implications for the efficacy of different dietary strategies in reversing the metabolic consequences of obesity.


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8968851 1996-N=68, I could not find the number of carbs given to participants.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8561057 1996-N=43, “low carb” group ate 150 carbs/day.


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2319073 1990-N=around 33, “low carb” group ate 250 carbs/day

I would also like to point out that only the oldest of these studies took place in a “metabolic ward”, and that those participants were given freaky liquid diets that had no potassium and other random stuff. So far away from how normal people eat every day that its almost useless stuff.

Many of the above cited studies say that there are insulin advantages to a low carb diet. But what about metabolic advantages? Here is a study that shows a metabolic advantage to a low carb diet.

Ketogenic diets have been used as an approach to weight loss on the basis of the theoretical advantage of a low-carbohydrate, high-fat diet. To evaluate the physiological and metabolic effects of such diets on weight we studied mice consuming a very-low-carbohydrate, ketogenic diet (KD). This diet had profound effects on energy balance and gene expression. C57BL/6 mice animals were fed one of four diets: KD; a commonly used obesogenic high-fat, high-sucrose diet (HF); 66% caloric restriction (CR); and control chow (C). Mice on KD ate the same calories as mice on C and HF, but weight dropped and stabilized at 85% initial weight, similar to CR. This was consistent with increased energy expenditure seen in animals fed KD vs. those on C and CR. Microarray analysis of liver showed a unique pattern of gene expression in KD, with increased expression of genes in fatty acid oxidation pathways and reduction in lipid synthesis pathways. Animals made obese on HF and transitioned to KD lost all excess body weight, improved glucose tolerance, and increased energy expenditure. Analysis of key genes showed similar changes as those seen in lean animals placed directly on KD. Additionally, AMP kinase activity was increased, with a corresponding decrease in ACC activity. These data indicate that KD induces a unique metabolic state congruous with weight loss.

http://ajpendo.physiology.org/content/292/6/E1724.abstract


This is a very controversial subject, folks. Billions of dollars are riding on people continuing to eat high carb, sugary, starchy foods. Do not think that the industries associated with those foods (both foodstuffs and healthcare) are going down without a fight. That's my opinion.

On the factual side we see that:
Many, many studies have proven the efficacy of low carb diets to improve insulin resistence.
A few studies have shown the metabolic advantage of low carb diets
Many, many anecdotal stories show different results of low carb diets.

Many, many people just want to throw dirt in the water to muddy things up. Personally I have lost weight on both a low carb and a "standard weight watchers' diet". My physician prefers my "stats" (less cholesterol, etc) when I eat less carbohydrates. He likes me to keep it lower carb.

If you are considering a low carbohydrate diet, DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH. Recognize that if a study says low carb but gave participants 250 carbs a day, that is dramatically different from low carb and 40 carbs/day. Dramatically different.

In the end you make the call. And in the end, if you have done enough of your own research, you will not be easily swayed by the throngs of people who crazily say "a pound of bacon will kill you!" When most people on a low carb diet ARE NOT eating a pound of bacon, rather a serving of salmon and some green beans.

Peace.

Thanks for the info. See this is exactly why I don't try to argue science with posters like 'Acg'. First off there are always studies that show alternate conclusions. Some studies are more flawed then others, but most are flawed. I'm not a scientist so I'm certainly not going to draw any more accurate conclusions than any trained scientist who still can't draw accurate conclusions.

Acg67

Normally, I'm happy to lurk. However I love science. I also hate when scientific studies are twisted. I looked at your studies and came up with this:

http://www.ajcn.org/content/20/10/1104.full.pdf 1967 – N=10, freak liquid diet

http://www.ajcn.org/content/21/11/1291.full.pdf 1968 – N=9, freak liquid diet

http://jcem.endojournals.org/content/92/11/4480.full 2007-N=17,

study conclusion - In these obese men, a low-carbohydrate diet reversed the increase in metabolic clearance of cortisol (3), increase in 5α- and 5β-reductase (4), and decrease in hepatic 11β-HSD1 (5, 6) previously described in obesity. Thus, chronic changes in dietary macronutrients may be a primary driver for altered hepatic, but not adipose, cortisol metabolism in obesity. The increase in 11β-HSD1 activity, and hence intrahepatic cortisol concentrations, caused by a ketogenic low carbohydrate diet has implications for the efficacy of different dietary strategies in reversing the metabolic consequences of obesity.


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8968851 1996-N=68, I could not find the number of carbs given to participants.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8561057 1996-N=43, “low carb” group ate 150 carbs/day.


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2319073 1990-N=around 33, “low carb” group ate 250 carbs/day

I would also like to point out that only the oldest of these studies took place in a “metabolic ward”, and that those participants were given freaky liquid diets that had no potassium and other random stuff. So far away from how normal people eat every day that its almost useless stuff.

Many of the above cited studies say that there are insulin advantages to a low carb diet. But what about metabolic advantages? Here is a study that shows a metabolic advantage to a low carb diet.

Ketogenic diets have been used as an approach to weight loss on the basis of the theoretical advantage of a low-carbohydrate, high-fat diet. To evaluate the physiological and metabolic effects of such diets on weight we studied mice consuming a very-low-carbohydrate, ketogenic diet (KD). This diet had profound effects on energy balance and gene expression. C57BL/6 mice animals were fed one of four diets: KD; a commonly used obesogenic high-fat, high-sucrose diet (HF); 66% caloric restriction (CR); and control chow (C). Mice on KD ate the same calories as mice on C and HF, but weight dropped and stabilized at 85% initial weight, similar to CR. This was consistent with increased energy expenditure seen in animals fed KD vs. those on C and CR. Microarray analysis of liver showed a unique pattern of gene expression in KD, with increased expression of genes in fatty acid oxidation pathways and reduction in lipid synthesis pathways. Animals made obese on HF and transitioned to KD lost all excess body weight, improved glucose tolerance, and increased energy expenditure. Analysis of key genes showed similar changes as those seen in lean animals placed directly on KD. Additionally, AMP kinase activity was increased, with a corresponding decrease in ACC activity. These data indicate that KD induces a unique metabolic state congruous with weight loss.

http://ajpendo.physiology.org/content/292/6/E1724.abstract


This is a very controversial subject, folks. Billions of dollars are riding on people continuing to eat high carb, sugary, starchy foods. Do not think that the industries associated with those foods (both foodstuffs and healthcare) are going down without a fight. That's my opinion.

On the factual side we see that:
Many, many studies have proven the efficacy of low carb diets to improve insulin resistence.
A few studies have shown the metabolic advantage of low carb diets
Many, many anecdotal stories show different results of low carb diets.

Many, many people just want to throw dirt in the water to muddy things up. Personally I have lost weight on both a low carb and a "standard weight watchers' diet". My physician prefers my "stats" (less cholesterol, etc) when I eat less carbohydrates. He likes me to keep it lower carb.

If you are considering a low carbohydrate diet, DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH. Recognize that if a study says low carb but gave participants 250 carbs a day, that is dramatically different from low carb and 40 carbs/day. Dramatically different.

In the end you make the call. And in the end, if you have done enough of your own research, you will not be easily swayed by the throngs of people who crazily say "a pound of bacon will kill you!" When most people on a low carb diet ARE NOT eating a pound of bacon, rather a serving of salmon and some green beans.

Peace.

The study you posted to show that keto diets have a metabolic advantage was done on mice, are mice metabolic pathways the same as humans, in particular how to rates of DNL differ in mice vs humans and how might that effect such a study?

Controlled metabolic ward studies showing no advantage,

http://www.ajcn.org/content/20/10/1104.full.pdf

http://www.ajcn.org/content/21/11/1291.full.pdf

http://jcem.endojournals.org/content/92/11/4480.full

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8968851

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8561057

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2319073

Here's another study that is more recent

Ketogenic low-carbohydrate diets have no metabolic advantage over nonketogenic low-carbohydrate diets. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Vol. 83, No. 5, 1055-1061, May 2006
www.ajcn.org/content/83/5/1055.full.pdf

happylurker

I am not going to do anymore research for you, or anyone else for that matter. I only wanted to show casual readers that you posted 7 studies as "proof" that there are no metabolic advantages to a low carb diet and five of those studies didn't even address that question.

I'm going back to HappyLurkville

Cheers

Kilotango55

I try generally to eat Lowish carb....but mainly wheat free! Since getting on this diet and counting calories I have eaten more carbs...but within my 1200 cal range and guess what ...in my first week here I have gained 4lbs!!! So what is that all about? Do you think it is an intolerance to carbs, wheat, food???? It hasn't made me a very happy bunny I can tell you!!

grinch031

I try generally to eat Lowish carb....but mainly wheat free! Since getting on this diet and counting calories I have eaten more carbs...but within my 1200 cal range and guess what ...in my first week here I have gained 4lbs!!! So what is that all about? Do you think it is an intolerance to carbs, wheat, food???? It hasn't made me a very happy bunny I can tell you!!

Since carbs fill up your glycogen stores with glucose, they also add a lot of water weight. It is completely normal to see massive weight increases and decreases whenever changing from low carb to high carb and vice versa over a few days. I was low carb for a while and cheated on New Year's and gained 8 lbs in 2 days. 3 days later the 8 lbs came right off again.

grinch031

Below is pulled from a website that Acg67 has cited previously, so it must be trustworthy right?

Carb-based diets make some people hungry even if they follow all the ‘rules’; so they eat more and don’t lose fat effectively. For many of those people, reducing carb intake allows better calorie control in the long-term.

Fact or fiction?

With regards to fat intake, studies have identified what researches call low and high-fat phenotypes (phenotype is just a technical word for the interaction between your genetics and your environment) (1). Some people appear to be better able to increase fat burning in response to higher fat intakes; they stay lean in the face of such an intake. Others, however, do no such thing. Other aspects of metabolism and appetite were associated with being either a high- or low-fat phenotype.

But the point still stands, biologically, some people seem better able to increase fat oxidation in response to higher fat intakes than others. I think this goes part of the way to explaining the response (good or bad) to high-fat ketogenic diets. People who upregulate fat oxidation well tend to thrive on them; people who don’t just get bloated and don’t lose fat well.

What really? I thought a calorie is a calorie when it comes to intake and fat burning?

One huge confound in all of this, mind you, is that high insulin secretion tends to make people eat more. Studies of diabetics find that decreasing insulin secretion with drugs tends to cause a spontaneously lower food intake (2).

Wow I swore somebody on this forum told me that carbs don't induce hunger.

The results were intriguing: insulin sensitive women on the high carb diet lost nearly double the weight as insulin sensitive women on the low-carb diet. Similarly, insulin resistant women lost twice the weight on the low-carb diet as on the high carb diet. Unfortunately, it’s not clear what caused the divergent results. The researchers mentioned a gene called FOXC2 which is involved in energy expenditure and found that it was upregulated in the individuals who responded best to diet; further research into this topic is needed (3).

...

In that study, subjects were given either a high glycemic load (60% carbs, 20% protein, 20% fat) or a low GL diet (40% carbs, 30% protein, 30% fat diet) and weight loss was examined relative to baseline insulin secretion. In that study, subjects with high insulin secretion lost more weight on the low glycemic load diet while subjects in the low insulin secretion group lost slightly more on the high glycemic load diet.

Wow so there is a relationship between insulin resistance/sensitivity and intake of carbs in the diet that actually affects weight loss? Really? How is that possible? A calorie is a calorie. No metabolic advantage whatsoever.

Unfortunately, there’s no easy way to see if you’re a high or low fat phenotype so I’ll focus on insulin sensitivity. There are a lot of complicated and impractical ways to determine insulin sensitivity and insulin secretion. All involve blood work and looking at either baseline insulin or blood glucose or how insulin changes in response to a meal.

Moral of the story, don't knock what you don't understand. Let's all agree that its no coincidence that some people have amazing results on low carb diets, results they couldn't dream of having on a high-carb diet.

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/insulin-sensitivity-and-fat-loss.html

laurelderry

There is truth in calories in and calories out, but most people do not take into account the inefficency of burning ketones vs glucose. Ketobodies have fewer available calories by weight than fat, so it takes more to yield the same number of burnable calories. That is why low carb dieting is so fast. Often faster than fasting, which your body will go after muscle tissue first.

Too bad low carb/keto diets have no metabolic advantage. Any initial faster weight loss vs a mixed diet is water weight, and studies have shown greater fat loss on a mixed diet vs low carb diet holding calories constant

do you get off on trolling the low carb threads?

I think he does- I see him in all of them.

laurelderry

generally, i think its best to listen to someone when they offer dieting advice and have a midsection like that.
He isn't trying to hurt you, and clearly, what he does works. If someones in better shape then you listen to them, they might have something to offer........

I'll agree with you on this, and it's admirable that you're defending him- but also consider that I have seen plenty of people on this site with an avatar of someone else (be it for motivational purpose or to remain anonymous). Also- this guy has probably lost that midsection at this point because there's no way he can be spending any time in the gym with all the time he spends on the boards low carb bashing.

I think someone should ask him about his food diary and the crap brands he's eating. Apparently he's not a farm to table advocate, either. But whatever.

grinch031

generally, i think its best to listen to someone when they offer dieting advice and have a midsection like that.
He isn't trying to hurt you, and clearly, what he does works. If someones in better shape then you listen to them, they might have something to offer........

I'll agree with you on this, and it's admirable that you're defending him- but also consider that I have seen plenty of people on this site with an avatar of someone else (be it for motivational purpose or to remain anonymous). Also- this guy has probably lost that midsection at this point because there's no way he can be spending any time in the gym with all the time he spends on the boards low carb bashing.

I think someone should ask him about his food diary and the crap brands he's eating. Apparently he's not a farm to table advocate, either. But whatever.

But some know-it-all who has six pack abs is unlikely to relate to someone who has battled lifelong obesity. If you haven't been through it, how can you really understand it?

If you want to hear advice from someone who put their money where their mouth is, check this guy out:

http://www.fit2fat2fit.com/

laurelderry

Normally, I'm happy to lurk. However I love science. I also hate when scientific studies are twisted. I looked at your studies and came up with this:

http://www.ajcn.org/content/20/10/1104.full.pdf 1967 – N=10, freak liquid diet

http://www.ajcn.org/content/21/11/1291.full.pdf 1968 – N=9, freak liquid diet

http://jcem.endojournals.org/content/92/11/4480.full 2007-N=17,

study conclusion - In these obese men, a low-carbohydrate diet reversed the increase in metabolic clearance of cortisol (3), increase in 5α- and 5β-reductase (4), and decrease in hepatic 11β-HSD1 (5, 6) previously described in obesity. Thus, chronic changes in dietary macronutrients may be a primary driver for altered hepatic, but not adipose, cortisol metabolism in obesity. The increase in 11β-HSD1 activity, and hence intrahepatic cortisol concentrations, caused by a ketogenic low carbohydrate diet has implications for the efficacy of different dietary strategies in reversing the metabolic consequences of obesity.


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8968851 1996-N=68, I could not find the number of carbs given to participants.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8561057 1996-N=43, “low carb” group ate 150 carbs/day.


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2319073 1990-N=around 33, “low carb” group ate 250 carbs/day

I would also like to point out that only the oldest of these studies took place in a “metabolic ward”, and that those participants were given freaky liquid diets that had no potassium and other random stuff. So far away from how normal people eat every day that its almost useless stuff.

Many of the above cited studies say that there are insulin advantages to a low carb diet. But what about metabolic advantages? Here is a study that shows a metabolic advantage to a low carb diet.

Ketogenic diets have been used as an approach to weight loss on the basis of the theoretical advantage of a low-carbohydrate, high-fat diet. To evaluate the physiological and metabolic effects of such diets on weight we studied mice consuming a very-low-carbohydrate, ketogenic diet (KD). This diet had profound effects on energy balance and gene expression. C57BL/6 mice animals were fed one of four diets: KD; a commonly used obesogenic high-fat, high-sucrose diet (HF); 66% caloric restriction (CR); and control chow (C). Mice on KD ate the same calories as mice on C and HF, but weight dropped and stabilized at 85% initial weight, similar to CR. This was consistent with increased energy expenditure seen in animals fed KD vs. those on C and CR. Microarray analysis of liver showed a unique pattern of gene expression in KD, with increased expression of genes in fatty acid oxidation pathways and reduction in lipid synthesis pathways. Animals made obese on HF and transitioned to KD lost all excess body weight, improved glucose tolerance, and increased energy expenditure. Analysis of key genes showed similar changes as those seen in lean animals placed directly on KD. Additionally, AMP kinase activity was increased, with a corresponding decrease in ACC activity. These data indicate that KD induces a unique metabolic state congruous with weight loss.

http://ajpendo.physiology.org/content/292/6/E1724.abstract


This is a very controversial subject, folks. Billions of dollars are riding on people continuing to eat high carb, sugary, starchy foods. Do not think that the industries associated with those foods (both foodstuffs and healthcare) are going down without a fight. That's my opinion.

On the factual side we see that:
Many, many studies have proven the efficacy of low carb diets to improve insulin resistence.
A few studies have shown the metabolic advantage of low carb diets
Many, many anecdotal stories show different results of low carb diets.

Many, many people just want to throw dirt in the water to muddy things up. Personally I have lost weight on both a low carb and a "standard weight watchers' diet". My physician prefers my "stats" (less cholesterol, etc) when I eat less carbohydrates. He likes me to keep it lower carb.

If you are considering a low carbohydrate diet, DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH. Recognize that if a study says low carb but gave participants 250 carbs a day, that is dramatically different from low carb and 40 carbs/day. Dramatically different.

In the end you make the call. And in the end, if you have done enough of your own research, you will not be easily swayed by the throngs of people who crazily say "a pound of bacon will kill you!" When most people on a low carb diet ARE NOT eating a pound of bacon, rather a serving of salmon and some green beans.

Peace.

Thank you for this

laurelderry

generally, i think its best to listen to someone when they offer dieting advice and have a midsection like that.
He isn't trying to hurt you, and clearly, what he does works. If someones in better shape then you listen to them, they might have something to offer........

I'll agree with you on this, and it's admirable that you're defending him- but also consider that I have seen plenty of people on this site with an avatar of someone else (be it for motivational purpose or to remain anonymous). Also- this guy has probably lost that midsection at this point because there's no way he can be spending any time in the gym with all the time he spends on the boards low carb bashing.

I think someone should ask him about his food diary and the crap brands he's eating. Apparently he's not a farm to table advocate, either. But whatever.

But some know-it-all who has six pack abs is unlikely to relate to someone who has battled lifelong obesity. If you haven't been through it, how can you really understand it?

If you want to hear advice from someone who put their money where their mouth is, check this guy out:

http://www.fit2fat2fit.com/

This is fantastic!! I can't believe that his "fit" to "fat" is only a 5 month difference- amazing how quickly "fit" can be undone! BTW, I wasn't agreeing with the "if someone is more fit than you" portion I was agreeing with the "someone who looks like that probably knows something". I don't discount that whatever that guy does works for him- but he's always posting in low carb forums throwing research around. I WORK in clinical research for God's sake and he wanted to argue with me when I posted a Primal/Paleo question- only asked to those who eat Primal/Paleo and the guy made my head hurt with all his incessant rambling. And yes AG whatever the hell your dumb *kitten* screen name is- I'm talking about you.

Acg67

There is truth in calories in and calories out, but most people do not take into account the inefficency of burning ketones vs glucose. Ketobodies have fewer available calories by weight than fat, so it takes more to yield the same number of burnable calories. That is why low carb dieting is so fast. Often faster than fasting, which your body will go after muscle tissue first.

Too bad low carb/keto diets have no metabolic advantage. Any initial faster weight loss vs a mixed diet is water weight, and studies have shown greater fat loss on a mixed diet vs low carb diet holding calories constant

do you get off on trolling the low carb threads?

I think he does- I see him in all of them.

Good to know that you understand what a troll is, someone who refutes someone's point is not a troll

I think someone should ask him about his food diary and the crap brands he's eating. Apparently he's not a farm to table advocate, either. But whatever.

This coming from someone who's eaten more pizza in the last week then i have in the last few months, but go ahead and ask away

This is fantastic!! I can't believe that his "fit" to "fat" is only a 5 month difference- amazing how quickly "fit" can be undone! BTW, I wasn't agreeing with the "if someone is more fit than you" portion I was agreeing with the "someone who looks like that probably knows something". I don't discount that whatever that guy does works for him- but he's always posting in low carb forums throwing research around. I WORK in clinical research for God's sake and he wanted to argue with me when I posted a Primal/Paleo question- only asked to those who eat Primal/Paleo and the guy made my head hurt with all his incessant rambling. And yes AG whatever the hell your dumb *kitten* screen name is- I'm talking about you.

I'm glad you work in clinical research and yet still manage to make asinine statements like "This isn't a "keto" diet, dear. As you aren't in ketosis regularly unless you choose to place yourself into IF. " Maybe you'd care to explain what IF has to do with ketosis?