Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Effect of Low-Fat vs. Low-Carb Diet on 12-Month Weight Loss in Overweight Adults

jamanetwork.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–68 of 68 posts

Re: Effect of Low-Fat vs. Low-Carb Diet on 12-Month Weight Loss in Overweight Adults

#61

Post by cageface »

blueblimp wrote: post #57
cageface wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Meat and animal protein is actually more insulinogenic than many common carbohydrates. https://www.drcarney.com/blog/entry/low-carb-theory-regardin... Pretty much everybody agrees that eating a lot of sugar or processed simple carbs is a bad idea but the demonization of high fiber, complex carbs has no basis in science.

Isn't this why ketogenic diets also limit protein? I think you're right that if someone is eating a low-carb diet but also eating excessive protein, they wouldn't be adhering to an insulin-based theory. Ketogenic diets seem best understood as diets that put fat intake as high as possible. Some protein intake is necessary, to obtain essential amino acids, but ideally not more than that. Carb intake can almost entirely…

The keto diets most people follow are loaded with animal proteins and fats, although they don't have to be that way. There are some benefits to a healthy keto diet but there are also some serious risks, particularly in the longer term.

https://www.thepaleomom.com/adverse-reactions-to-ketogenic-d...

Re: Effect of Low-Fat vs. Low-Carb Diet on 12-Month Weight Loss in Overweight Adults

#62

Post by headsoup »

taneq wrote: post #55
headsoup wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if you're gaining fat instead of muscle? I think your version only works if the only metric required is purely -Kg over time, and doesn't factor in anything else that people might want to call it 'healthy weight loss/gain.'

OK, so which goalposts would you like us to aim for here? If you want to be healthy, eat a balanced diet. If you want weight loss, then eat less food than you burn, using a feedback loop to adjust our dietary intake. If you want fitness, do some cardio. If you want strength, lift some weights. If you want all of these things, then do all of these things.

The goalpost that is in some way meaningful, which adjusting total consumption of 'whatever' for the sake of purely moving a number up or down isn't.

Re: Effect of Low-Fat vs. Low-Carb Diet on 12-Month Weight Loss in Overweight Adults

#63

Post by lucidguppy »

testuser312 wrote: post #43
lucidguppy wrote: post #34

29% cal from fat isn't really low fat. It would be interesting to see a study on lower fat diets.

Also, 30% of calories from carbs (on the so-called low-carb diet) is not really low-carb. As mentioned in another comment, for a 2,000 calorie diet, that's 600 calories from carbs! Most low-carb diets aim way lower than that because they aim at reaching a state of ketosis, where your body is essentially burning fat instead of sugar for energy. This might be something like 20-50 grams per day, depending on a lot of fa…

I've done both keto and whole-foods-plant-based diets.

Both lose weight - but I feel a lot more energy on a starch based diet. Whole plant foods contain the right amount of fat (10%). Who cares about farts when I never get constipated. With a little exercise and a starch based diet I was able to lose 80lbs. When I started introducing fats and added refined sugars - the weight came back. The fat you eat is the fat you wear.

Long term ketosis is not optimal health.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22850317

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11108325

Look at cheese consumption and it tracks national weight gain. We're taking in way more fat today than long ago.

http://www.pcrm.org/images/media/blog/cheese_consumption.jpg

But we're taking more calories overall - so people get to blame whatever they want.

Starches powered all civilizations up to the 20th century. Only when we started consuming lots of meat and purified sugars and white flour did we really gain weight.

Re: Effect of Low-Fat vs. Low-Carb Diet on 12-Month Weight Loss in Overweight Adults

#64

Post by elhudy »

cageface wrote: post #60
elhudy wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you want me to take the claim that "a high protein diet is unhealthy" seriously, then you're going to have to provide something better than that article. "Weight Gain" due to increased protein consumption is disputed[1]. In fact the premise itself can be disputed just by noting that weight gain can present itself in the form of muscle gain. Bad breath: ...really? Constipation: "This is because high-protein diets t…

The dangers of excessive protein intake are very well documented. A simple Google search turns up so many references. Here's one from the Mayo clinic: https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/nutrition-and-h... Saturated fat intake has been shown to boost serum cholesterol and increase risk of CVD in literally hundreds of direct feeding mechanistic trials. Genetic variability of cholesterol is high enough that cr…

The mayo clinic link is actually reaffirming my opinion:

>For most healthy people, a high-protein diet generally isn't harmful, particularly when followed for a short time. Such diets may help with weight loss by making you feel fuller. However, the risks of using a high-protein diet with carbohydrate restriction for the long term are still being studied.

They are still being studied - poorly at that.

The second link is hilarious in that it fails to even describe the two types of LDL cholesterol, but lumps them both in as "bad" - which is typical of the "cholesterol is bad" crowd. In fact - the first study I clicked on in the nutritionfacts.org fails to mention the same. How can you do a study on cholesterol without even testing the two types of LDL? Frankly, it's embarrassing and is absolutely not mechanistic as you say.

Once again, these meta studies are attempting to show that a diet with lowered saturated fat intake is better in the long run than your average diet. This is not something that anyone is debating. However, it absolutely can not be misinterpreted as proof that high protein/saturated fat intake, in all cases, is bad. Which is exactly the mistake all of these authors are making, and is why there are many intelligent people on the other side of this discussion as well.

Re: Effect of Low-Fat vs. Low-Carb Diet on 12-Month Weight Loss in Overweight Adults

#65

Post by fredrik-j »

dieterrams wrote: post #5

Missing from the title is the qualifier "healthy", as in "healthy low-fat" diet vs "healthy low-carb" diet. What does "healthy" mean, here? It's not defined in the abstract.

The closest I got to definition of "healthy low X" was a general description of the approach in the paper:

"Briefly, the main goals were to achieve maximal differentiation in intake of fats and carbohydrates between the 2 diet groups while otherwise maintaining equal treatment intensity and an emphasis on high-quality foods and beverages.

Thus, participants were instructed to reduce intake of total fat or digestible carbohydrates to 20 g/d during the first 8 weeks. Higher priorities for reduction were given to specific foods and food groups that derived their energy content pri- marily from fats or carbohydrates. For example, the reduction of edible oils, fatty meats, whole-fat dairy, and nuts was prioritized for the healthy low-fat group, whereas the reduction of cereals, grains, rice, starchy vegetables, and legumes was prioritized for the healthy low-carbohydrate group.

Then individuals slowly added fats or carbohydrates back to their diets in increments of 5 to 15 g/d per week until they reached the lowest level of intake they believed could be maintained indefinitely. No explicit instructions for energy (kilocalories) restriction were given. Both diet groups were instructed to (1) maximize vegetable intake; (2) minimize intake of added sugars, refined flours, and trans fats; and (3) focus on whole foods that were minimally processed, nutrient dense, and prepared at home whenever possible."

I find the last sentence interesting, reminds me of Michael Pollan's quip: "Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants."

Re: Effect of Low-Fat vs. Low-Carb Diet on 12-Month Weight Loss in Overweight Adults

#66

Post by nradov »

taneq wrote: post #44
headsoup wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So all food/non-food is useful to the body in the same way? Just so long as you burn it off? Is all energy expenditure by the human body the same?

Micronutrients, obviously not. You have to get your required vitamins and minerals etc. or you'll get sick. But for macronutrients (basically carbs/fats) then yes, basically. Maybe you'll be slightly more or less efficient with some types of food, but in the end, if you eat a calorie you have to burn a calorie or you'll put on weight. The key factor is to realise that it's relative to your body . Maybe for you, perso…

For a given level of energy output, metabolizing fat requires more oxygen than metabolizing carbohydrates. There are some minor individual differences in efficiency but the basic relationship is true for everyone. That's why you don't see low-carb diets consumed by athletes who compete at the top levels of sports in which VO₂max is a limiting factor.

Re: Effect of Low-Fat vs. Low-Carb Diet on 12-Month Weight Loss in Overweight Adults

#67

Post by cageface »

elhudy wrote: post #64
cageface wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The dangers of excessive protein intake are very well documented. A simple Google search turns up so many references. Here's one from the Mayo clinic: https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/nutrition-and-h... Saturated fat intake has been shown to boost serum cholesterol and increase risk of CVD in literally hundreds of direct feeding mechanistic trials. Genetic variability of cholesterol is high enough that cr…

The mayo clinic link is actually reaffirming my opinion: >For most healthy people, a high-protein diet generally isn't harmful, particularly when followed for a short time. Such diets may help with weight loss by making you feel fuller. However, the risks of using a high-protein diet with carbohydrate restriction for the long term are still being studied . They are still being studied - poorly at that. The second lin…

"Large" LDL is marginally less dangerous than "small" LDL but it still significantly raises your risk of CVD:

https://nutritionfacts.org/video/does-cholesterol-size-matte...

Re: Effect of Low-Fat vs. Low-Carb Diet on 12-Month Weight Loss in Overweight Adults

#68

Post by elhudy »

cageface wrote: post #67
elhudy wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The mayo clinic link is actually reaffirming my opinion: >For most healthy people, a high-protein diet generally isn't harmful, particularly when followed for a short time. Such diets may help with weight loss by making you feel fuller. However, the risks of using a high-protein diet with carbohydrate restriction for the long term are still being studied . They are still being studied - poorly at that. The second lin…

"Large" LDL is marginally less dangerous than "small" LDL but it still significantly raises your risk of CVD: https://nutritionfacts.org/video/does-cholesterol-size-matte...

>"Large" LDL is marginally less dangerous than "small" LDL

Neither large nor small cholesterol are "dangerous" - it's black-and-white opinions like this that make the nutrition industry so difficult for laymen to follow. They are both healthy, in that without cholesterol you would die. Excessive amounts of certain cholesterols in ratio to others just happen to be symptoms of underlying eating disorders. The author states that:

"She ... argues that HDL, so-called good cholesterol, also rises maintaining the ratio of bad to good. This is the study she cites to support that assertion. But instead of cherry-picking this one study that she performed with Egg Board money, involving 42 people, if you look at a meta-analysis, if you look at the balance of evidence, the rise in bad with increasing cholesterol intakes is much more than the rise in good."

However, it is known that the ratio of HDL to total cholesterol is a just as good as if not a better predictor of heart health. That's why it is generally used... [1]

There are many documented cases of high protein diets (or more specifically - low carb) achieving better cholesterol ratios [2][3][4]. There are also many more studies that address the significance of LDL size, than what the author you linked addresses [4][5][6]

[1] Mensink, Ronald p., et al. “Effects of dietary fatty acids and carbohydrates on the ratio of serum total to HDL cholesterol and on serum lipids and apolipoproteins: a meta-analysis of 60 controlled trials” The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 77.5 (2003): 1146-1155.

[2] Bueno, Nassib Bezerra, et al. “Very-low-carbohydrate ketogenic diet v. low-fat diet for long-term weight loss: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.” British Journal of Nutrition 110.07 (2013): 1178-1187.

[3] Brinkworth, Grant D., et al. “Long-term effects of a very-low-carbohydrate weight loss diet compared with an isocaloric low-fat diet after 12 mo.” The American journal of clinical nutrition 90.1 (2009): 23-32.

[4] Merchant, Anwar T., et al. “Carbohydrate intake and HDL in a multiethnic population.” The American journal of clinical nutrition 85.1 (2007): 225-230.

[4] Otvos, James D., et al. “Clinical implications of discordance between low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and particle number.” Journal of clinical lipidology 5.2 (2011): 105-113.

[5] Meisinger, Christa, et al. “Plasma oxidized low-density lipoprotein, a strong predictor for acute coronary heart disease events in apparently healthy, middle-aged men from the general population.” Circulation 112.5 (2005): 651-657.

[6] Parthasarathy, Sampath, et al. “Oxidized low-density lipoprotein.” Free Radicals and Antioxidant Protocols. Humana Press, 2010. 403-417.

Post reply on HN