Add a Comment
Save my information
Best summary ever on the subject.
I have been experimenting with low carb diets for about 5 years now. I find that on a high fat moderate proteine diet (and obviously low carbs ie less than 40g per day) one simply becomes less hungry, not having to deal with the high insulin-induced glucose crashes and hunger rages. In addition, from what I have read, a low carb diet greatly reduces inflammatory processes, which is a great plus.
I can only attest my experience on the two times I have done the low carb diet..Each time easily achieved goal of losing 9kg. So easy and certain that I find it that I now use as a bit of a yoyo.
Something neglected by the study is that it needed to be done in the wild, uncontrolled environment where hunger plays a major role in weight loss. A major factor in low carb diets is that you can eat as much as you like and what then happens is that your appetite disappears, I believe you end actually end up eating less, with no desire got snackng.
Aloha, outside of controlled in-patint studies, people choose what they eat. Things with sugar added taste better (and are often cheaper to make) then things with no sugar added. Humans have a taste affinity doe sugar and for fat. Given disproportionate access to either they will gain weight. Manufacturers hit upon this aages ago, and they are always aware of costs. Add a little sugar to french fries and a pound of the combination costs the manufacturers less than a pound of fries without sugar. And, people LIKE sugared fries (and corn, and peanuts and bread and …). Hence, manufacturers can lower the price of a product, and increase peoples “liking of if” by adding sugar.
Kool-Aid is the supreme success in this endeavor – all sugar! Sold as if it were juice!
Sugar does ot add anything but cals., so, people have to each proportionally more of other things to get the correct totals 0f nutrients. And those other things include cals, too. Total cals chosen to be eaten increases. Fat is stored.
Obesity, in this view,is based on (1) Humans like the tase of sugar and will eat more of foods that are sweet (2) artificially sweetened foods have proportionally less nutrients per cal than foods that are not artificially sweetened. (3) People then need to eat more total cals from the other sources to get the minimum of the total other
nutrients needed. Those added cals are converted to fat. (assuming energy burned is equal.
Discussion omits the major problem with sugar: Fructose, which comprises half the content of sugar. As to glucose being just glucose, the issue is not glucose alone, but the metabolic reaction to high insulin and its long term effects. These are very different things. Regarding so-called “Nutritionists”, they were wrong on saturated fat, eggs, grains, cholesterol and a host of other things and cannot be relied upon for anything but parroting what they learned. Science is factual, but all people defend what they believe.
This is just the same, Jessica Bishop also mentioned in her article. Very well researched, thanks for that. There are also a lot of other aspects which affects your health directly. She wrote some great blog posts on her site, it is really worth it to check her out: jessyreviews-dot-com.
Also, I believe the author is patently incorrect in his assertions. Here is a study done by NIH (I believe Duke U was involved) that states clearly the low-carb diets are not only more effective at losing weight, they are easier to maintain, and all the while are more effective at decreasing triglyceride levels and increasing – yes, increase- LDL levels (the “good” cholesterol).
I am certainly aware that one study may not prove anything. But since I started this in 1998, I have followed every news article or study I have heard of and have not seen one that contradicts this. If anyone is aware of a contradictory study from a non-food producing company within the last ten years, I would like to see a link.
Long ago, before the Atkins craze, my wife suggested a low-carb diet based on a book titled “The Carbohydrate Addicts Life-Span Program.” I sucked down bacon, eggs, hamburger patties – lots and lots of calories, and vegetables. Dipping vegetables in ranch dressing or mayo became my daily go-to snack and I lost 30 lbs in 6 weeks, and another 20 over the next 6 months – never hungry. I got complacent about it and some of the wait came back. Nevertheless, I pay attention to carb intake and my weight has never gotten back to previous levels. Now, I agree with Fresno Dan above about satiety. I start eating carbs and simply can’t stop. Eating fats, protein and green veggies makes me feel great with lots more energy, and keeps my weight controllable.
In my opinion, the low-fat push by the govt, health industry, and food manufacturers is criminal. If a low-carb focus were the predominant philosophy, there would be many more products in stores and restaurants that would make a low-carb diet easier to do and obesity would be minimal.
Like others, I only have personal experience to share. For the past twelve years I have paid close attention to my diet and fitness. Whatever the the science may say about calories in/calories out, there is a remarkable difference in energy and satisfaction between a low carb and low fat diet. Sugar makes my energy levels crash, and consuming sugar gives me immediate cravings for more sugar. High protein meals or snacks satisfy me and give me more power and stamina. The choice for this man is simple. What I like about nutritional science is that we don’t end to trust the authors of books. Each of us carries our own portable laboratories with us. If we choose, we can conduct our own experiments and look at the results in the mirror.
From 1996 to 2013 I put on 60 lbs following a low-fat, whole-wheat diet. From 2013 to 2017 I lost 77lbs on a no-carb, all I could eat meat and green vegetable diet. My weight is still going down, I am off all diabetes meds. Rice and pasta and potatoes kill.
I can only relate my own experience, and that using a low carb diet resulted in weight loss of 35 pounds (from 185 to 150). My view is that the elephant in the room never, ever discussed is satiety. On a diet with carbs, I FEEL hungry – I feel as compelled to eat something as I do to breathe. On a very low carb diet I have a completely non nonchalant attitude toward eating and skip lunch and sometimes dinner as well, as well as the portions being considerably smaller too.
I believe the issue isn’t the glucose in sugar, but the fructose fraction that presents the metabolic challenge. Pure glucose is THE fuel for the body and causes no hard. Fructose on the other hand is mostly converted to fat.
Years ago I asked my Primary Care doc what diet to use to lose weight. He told me the best diet is to eat what I like as long as it’s balanced and of the right amount. No fat-free anything because carbs are added to make it taste good-just eat less. Get exercise in moderate amounts on a steady basis.
In the same manner that Jung criticized Freud, Taubes sounds like a man “obsessed with fixed ideas.”
The end of this article is so disconcerting. The cardiologist “needs a story”-but what happens when that story is wrong? People will continue to distrust science.
And Gary Taubes conflict of interest? Promote a falsehood to put your kids through college? Guess truth isn’t the important lesson anymore