Great study on low carb diets..

[ChessGuy]

http://www.examiner.com/article/atki...-heart-disease

What go my attention is that it also reduces inflammation.

[Mr. Galaxy]

Good article, John Hopkins is no joke.

[Manimal]

Im a bit confused by the study.

Quote: "The low-carb group followed the Atkins Diet with initially, 15%, 30%, and 55% of calories coming from carbohydrates (CHO), protein, and fat. There was a gradual shift to a balance of 40%, 20%, and 40% of calories from CHO, protein, and fat."

It doesnt state why they shifted, but I dont see 40% coming from carbs as a low carb diet. Lower than the other dieters but not low carb by any means.

The study also doesnt state a calorie count anywhere, most people on a low carb diet are going to eat less calories. For that reason, I dont see these ratios being feasible for a lifter needing 3k or more calories a day. 20% of 3k in protein is only 600 calories in protein per day or 150g. The initial 30% made more sense as that would constitute an intake of 225g a day. Of course, for those eating more than 3k a day the 20% ratio would be enough protein, but then again i cant see anyone eating more than 3k a day putting down 1200-1600kcals in clean carbs.

[simonsky]

I can And have eaten at least 1200kcal of white rice without a problem along with 1800-2000kcal of pro and fat without gaining weight at 145lbs.

I agree that the study is not that reliable though.

[veryhrm]

Im a bit confused by the study.

Quote: "The low-carb group followed the Atkins Diet with initially, 15%, 30%, and 55% of calories coming from carbohydrates (CHO), protein, and fat. There was a gradual shift to a balance of 40%, 20%, and 40% of calories from CHO, protein, and fat."

It doesnt state why they shifted, but I dont see 40% coming from carbs as a low carb diet. Lower than the other dieters but not low carb by any means.

The study also doesnt state a calorie count anywhere, most people on a low carb diet are going to eat less calories. For that reason, I dont see these ratios being feasible for a lifter needing 3k or more calories a day. 20% of 3k in protein is only 600 calories in protein per day or 150g. The initial 30% made more sense as that would constitute an intake of 225g a day. Of course, for those eating more than 3k a day the 20% ratio would be enough protein, but then again i cant see anyone eating more than 3k a day putting down 1200-1600kcals in clean carbs.

i can't find a link to the study either, but i'm guessing it's the study about which this release is written: http://www.newswise.com/articles/los...y-inflammation

“Our findings indicate that you can reduce systemic inflammation, and possibly lower your risk of heart disease, no matter which diet—either low-carb or low-fat,” says Kerry Stewart, Ed.D., professor of medicine at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine and director of clinical and research exercise physiology. “The important factor is how much weight you lose—especially belly fat.”

The article the OP posted just ran w/ it in the wrong direction. In any case, a bigger question is whether either way of eating lowers inflammation markers in the long term while maintaining weight (either , obese, overweight, normal, etc.)

edit: and the video has nothing to do with the text afaict. freakin' content mills.

[MattJ.D.]

this isn't it?

http://www.virtualpressoffice.com/pu...sableHistory=Y

[veryhrm]

this isn't it?

http://www.virtualpressoffice.com/pu...sableHistory=Y

Heh. That's the press release from Atkins Nutritionals upon which the examiner.com "writer" based her story. The fact she linked to it with the word "study" is already a problem. The release isn't bad actually since the study DID show that it low-ish carb reduced inflammation markers, but my understanding from the release i linked above (which is from Hopkins itself) is that the reductions were proportional to fat loss. So it's not that LC is better than low fat... it's just not worse.

This is somewhat important because some people have claimed that even though you lose fat on LC diets it won't have health benefits because you're taking in too much dietary fat. This study suggests that that's not the issue (at least while people are losing weight), though the "LC" tested was more Zone than Atkins.

Also, even what they describe as having started as Atkins (as Manimal points out) is 15% carbs. For a modest 2000 cal a day diet that's still 300cals / 75g carbs. So that's barely keto territory... but maybe the total cals were lower. This is why i'd like to see the study itself.

[nevermind]

This just confirms that most dietary advice for active people like us is rubbish.

I think weightlifting changes the goal posts on diet to a large degree. Brb on a diet eating 2400calories a day and losing Fat, people in office and work around you nibbling rice cakes eating less than 1000 cals and complaining how hard it is to diet ^_^

[Mcpie]

This just confirms that most dietary advice for active people like us is rubbish.

I think weightlifting changes the goal posts on diet to a large degree. Brb on a diet eating 2400calories a day and losing Fat, people in office and work around you nibbling rice cakes eating less than 1000 cals and complaining how hard it is to diet ^_^

I follow Lean Gains/eat about 2800 calories on training days (and that's a "cut"). At the office our company serves us lunch and I absolutely load up on food. People wonder what the fuck I'm doing, since I've lost about 60 pounds this year yet they see me eating ~1300-1500 calories in a single sitting (well I do need to get up to refill my plate)

People just think I have a freaky metabolism, which is funny since I've always been a fat kid until recently and my genetics are average at best.

I don't think most dietary advice is rubbish to active people-- I think most dietary advice is rubbish period. It's very similar to weight training, in that a few basic principles take you 80% of the way there. The needless complication is because people want to sell shit or look like experts and shit needs to be complicated to be effective/worth money.

[sbhikes]

I didn't read the linked article, but if the people in the diet reduced consumption of refined flour and increased consumption of animal fats that might have been the source of their reduced inflammation right there. Not necessarily the macro breakdown of the diet.