Replies

And my guess is that you don't have many of the others that directly refute the study you reference.

Well, you guessed wrong because, unlike you, I've read all relevant studies regarding this topic. Apparently, you spend all your time at pro low-carb sites, and it shows.

Here's another study you've probably never read: Similar weight loss with low- or high-carbohydrate diets.

The goal of this study was to evaluate the effect of diets that were equally low in energy but widely different in relative amounts of fat and carbohydrate on body weight during a 6-wk period of hospitalization. Consequently, 43 adult, obese persons were randomly assigned to receive diets containing 4.2 MJ/d (1000 kcal/d) composed of either 32% protein, 15% carbohydrate, and 53% fat, or 29% protein, 45% carbohydrate, and 26% fat. There was no significant difference in the amount of weight loss in response to diets containing either 15% (8.9 +/- 0.6 kg) or 45% (7.5 +/- 0.5 kg) carbohydrate. Furthermore, significant decreases in total body fat and waist-to-hip circumference were seen in both groups, and the magnitude of the changes did not vary as a function of diet composition. Fasting plasma glucose, insulin, cholesterol, and triacylglycerol concentrations decreased significantly in patients eating low-energy diets that contained 15% carbohydrate, but neither plasma insulin nor triacylglycerol concentrations fell significantly in response to the higher-carbohydrate diet. The results of this study showed that it was energy intake, not nutrient composition, that determined weight loss in response to low-energy diets over a short time period.

This study has more power than the others because the subjects were confined to a hospital, and could only eat what was given to them. The trouble with studies that employ free-living subjects is that the researchers can never be certain that the diets were followed as prescribed.

As I said in my post above, I lost 100 pounds eating low carb. The problem with this study (and others like it) is that they make up the rules for the 'diet'. In this study they determined that a carbohydrate level of 15% was 'low carb'. Compared to an average American's diet it may be, but it is still far too high for most people to see much benefit. On this diet of 1000 calories per day, that would be 150 carbs.

Most of us who eat this way eat between 30 and 60 carbs per day on the weight loss phase of the diet. When I personally went over 35 carbs per day, I would not lose...even WITH exercise. Atkins, Protein Power, and all other successful plans limit carbs to far less than 150 grams per day in the initial diet stages. You MUST limit more so your body will begin to burn fat for fuel.

In essence, both diets tested were the SAME diet, so it is not surprising that they got the similar results. Ultimately, both these groups would fail to lose weight and keep it off because the body begins to adjust to severe calorie restriction and you have to cut down more and more to lose any weight. You just mess up your metabolism and gain weight with a vengence as soon as you let yourself eat even a little more food. Been there and done that...It's a vicious cycle. Eating this way stopped that for me. I'm eating far more that I did when I was 100 pounds heavier and keeping it off.

Well, you guessed wrong because, unlike you, I've read all relevant studies regarding this topic. Apparently, you spend all your time at pro low-carb sites, and it shows. Here's another study you've probably never read: Similar weight loss with low- or high-carbohydrate diets.

And it appears that you only heed the ones that support your predetermined viewpoint and ignore all the rest. That would explain why you can't seem to come to an intelligent conclusion. I realize that there has been intense brainwashing in favor of low fat/low calorie diets.

However, I have formed my opinion via facts and evidence, rather than popular propoganda. You are simply trying to support what you have been told, despite the fact that low fat is a dismally ineffective, unhealthy diet. You see, I used to believe in low fat so I have come full circle due to my research and personal experience.

What often happens is exactly what the studies claim. For example, I was on a 1300-1500 low fat calorie per day diet for 4 months and lost 2 net pounds. I lost all of my energy, much hair, developed low level depression and had throbbing low blood sugar headaches every day. By the end of this diet my cholesterol was 318, triglycerides 495 and I was hypoglycemic. Body fat was 43%

In desperation, I switched to Atkins and lost 40 pounds in 4 months eating 2000-2200 calories per day. Blood sugar was immediately corrected, headaches disappeared and within 6 months cholesterol was dramatically reduced. After 3.5 years on my "dangerous" high fat diet my cholesterol is 221, HDL 73, triglycerides 66 and body fat is 19.6% My doctor is thrilled with my results.

For me, I have to go with what works. When personal experience, test results and many major studies support my experience, I have to open my mind and see the truth that is right in front of me, DESPITE popular propoganda.