 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / General / Nutrition / November 2004Very low-carb diets work for men and upper body fat
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2004-11/bc-vld111204.php Very low-carbohydrate diets work for men and upper body fat Scientists say that low carbohydrate diets, like the Atkins and South Beach Diets, may actually be the best option for men who want to slim. New research, published this week in the Open Access journal, Nutrition & Metabolism, shows that over 70% of men lost more weight and fat on a low carbohydrate diet, despite eating more calories. Jeff Volek and colleagues, from the University of Connecticut, also show for the first time that a low carbohydrate diet is much more effective in losing fat from the stomach and chest. Upper body fat carries "a greater health risk than fat stored in other regions of the body," say the authors. They found that fat loss in men was three-times greater in the trunk area, when they were on a low-carbohydrate regime compared to the low-fat diet. Nearly all participants in the study (12 of 15 men and 12 of 13 women) lost more fat on their upper body on the low- carbohydrate diet. Fifteen overweight or obese men, and thirteen women, were randomly assigned to a very low carbohydrate diet or a low fat diet. After fifty days, they were switched to the other diet. 11 of the 15 men did better on the low carbohydrate diet, six lost greater than 10 lbs more on the low carbohydrate diet, and one subject lost almost 25 pounds more. Similar results were found for women although the results were less dramatic. Volek and colleagues also looked at whether weight and fat loss were affected by what order the diets were done in. Their data seem to favour undertaking a low carbohydrate first, suggesting that those who have concerns about long term 'low carb' diets could follow a low carb diet first followed by a low fat diet. There is much debate about the health implications of long-term use of low carbohydrate diets. Volek's lab, whose work is the first-ever to be funded in part by the Robert C. Atkins Foundation, has previously shown that low carbohydrate diets improve cardiovascular risk factors. For more information about low carbohydrate diets read the review by well-known endocrinologist, Samy McFarlane, in Nutrition & Metabolism. Dr McFarlane reviews the new book, 'Atkins Diabetes Revolution', by Mary C. Vernon, M.D. and Jacqueline A. Eberstein, R.N. McFarlane and co-reviewer Surender Arora, M.D. found the book "sufficiently convincing to make us believe that some form of low carbohydrate intervention is worth investigating and should be considered by practitioners. The highly negative un-scientific response of critics, if anything, encourages us in this direction." This press release is based on: Comparison of energy-restricted very low-carbohydrate and low-fat diets on weight loss and body composition in overweight men and women Volek JS, Sharman MJ, Gómez AL, Judelson DA, Rubin MR, Watson G, Sokmen B, Silvestre R, French DN, and Kraemer WJ. Nutrition & Metabolism 2004, 1:12 (9 November 2004) The article is freely available at http://www.nutritionandmetabolism.com/content/1/1/12. ******* TC > http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2004-11/bc-vld111204.php > > Very low-carbohydrate diets work for men and upper body fat > Scientists say that low carbohydrate diets, like the Atkins and South > Beach Diets, may actually be the best option for men who want to slim. The South Beach Diet is not low carb. In fact, that's the very first line in the book. Although the first two weeks do restrict carbs from grains and even fruit, that's not true of the diet as a whole, which allows liberal amounts of carbs from vegetables from the onset, adds whole grains after the first two weeks, and recommends eating fruit daily. It does recommend whole grains over refined grains, most vegetables over the handful of high glycemic ones or starches such as potatoes, and fruits with fiber over ones high in sugar and low in fiber such as in juices or watermelon, but as a whole it does not limit carbs or ask you to count them, unless you consider eating normal sized portions a way of limiting carbs. The crux of the diet is not low carb, but that some carbs are better than others, and some fats (unsaturated) are better than others (trans and saturated.) I'd be wary of any report that starts off with such obvious misinformation. > > http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2004-11/bc-vld111204.php > > [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > I'd be wary of any report that starts off with such obvious > misinformation. Southbeach is low carb. It tries to look as if it is not low carb in order to appear to be more acceptable to the mainstream. When you restrict refined and high-GI carbs you cannot help but eat less overall carbs even on southbeach. TC > > > http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2004-11/bc-vld111204.php > > > [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > > TC How does buying whole grain breads or pasta instead of white bread or refined pasta force somebody to eat less carbs? While a typical dieter may indeed end up consuming fewer carbs, it's not the same as the Atkins approach that has people count carbs and intentionally limiting them. If a person ends up limiting carbs because he sticks to foods that are generally agreed to be part of a better diet, that's not the same as being on a diet that instructs and "forces" a person to limit carbs. The subject of the thread is "very low carb diets..." and I just can't see how a diet that could allow a person to eat nothing but carbs at every meal could meet that definition. A person on SB could start off the day with a big bowl of oatmeal and a glass of V8, have a salad for lunch with a few slices of whole grain bread, and have a plate of whole grain spaghetti and sauce for dinner, followed by some fruit. The person probably would not do that every day, since the diet emphasises a more balanced and varied approach to meals, but it's a far cry from the Atkins approach where limiting carbs is the specific goal and most of those things are limited strictly if allowed at all. > How does buying whole grain breads or pasta instead of white bread or > refined pasta force somebody to eat less carbs? While a typical dieter > may indeed end up consuming fewer carbs, it's not the same as the > Atkins approach that has people count carbs and intentionally limiting > them. Yes, but Atkins also advises to slowly increase your carbs, gradually adding whole grains etc... So in the end you likely to end with the same diet, eating about 80-150g of carbs per day. Atkins is just more careful about adding crabs and more annoying with the requirement to count them (btw, useless IMHO). > every meal could meet that definition. A person on SB could start off > the day with a big bowl of oatmeal and a glass of V8, have a salad for > lunch with a few slices of whole grain bread, and have a plate of > whole grain spaghetti and sauce for dinner, followed by some fruit. OK, but you would rather be on "Ornish plan" diet then :) > far cry from the Atkins approach where limiting carbs is the specific > goal and most of those things are limited strictly if allowed at all. While theory might sound different, practical experiences are almost the same. BTW, I think that one problem is definition of low-carb. Personally I consider 0-50g - very low carb, ketogenic 50-150g low carb, non-ketogenic 150-300g moderate carb >300g high carb Also, I prefer to use term "controlled-carb" (and practice) , which means 50-150g and/or GI < 40. "and/or" because in practice it is the same - if you do restrict to GI < 40, you automagically end with less than 150g carbs. Mirek > While theory might sound different, practical experiences are almost > the same. In that case, one could also call South Beach a low calorie diet on the basis that by telling people to avoid saturatated fats and refined grains, practical experience will do the same thing. Then lumping it in with Weight Watchers would be just as rational as lumping it in with Atkins. One could also lump it in with Ornish on the basis that by limiting fats to mono and polyunsaturated fats for the most part, dieters' overall fat intake will go down so it's really a low fat diet. There may be dieters who go heavy on the whole grain breads dipped in olive oil, but if what's typical among followers is a better way to summarize what a diet is about than what the diet actually says, then Ornish is perhaps the most liberal since its followers may cheat the most. Or one could concede that all diets limit things, and ultimately, consumption of many things will go down that will be common across them. I could also lump them together and say, "That's just another low pizza diet." Or I could look at diets that pronounce "you should lower your fat intake" and call them low fat diets, etc. > BTW, I think that one problem is definition of low-carb. Personally I > consider [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Mirek Agreed. When you become obese and insulin resistant, like a diabetic, the healthy way to eat, for these damaged folk, is to avoid carbohydrates which their bodies have become unable to effectively use. This has been known since diebetes was understood. >http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2004-11/bc-vld111204.php > [quoted text clipped - 57 lines] > >TC >Agreed. When you become obese and insulin resistant, like a diabetic, >the healthy way to eat, for these damaged folk, is to avoid >carbohydrates which their bodies have become unable to effectively >use. This has been known since diebetes was understood. No it hasn't. Just look at the ADA recommendations. They concluded that diabetics could eat sugar after all, since starch is just as bad. Hundreds of grams per day of carbs. I became very severely IR when quite thin. I was on a very low fat, high carb diet, though. Susan > They concluded that > diabetics could eat sugar after all, since starch is just as bad. At least there is some logic in this deadly advice :) Mirek > Agreed. When you become obese and insulin resistant, like a diabetic, > the healthy way to eat, for these damaged folk, is to avoid > carbohydrates which their bodies have become unable to effectively > use. This has been known since diebetes was understood. Dunne, that's not completely true When you're insulin resistance you need also to raise your glucose tolerance Many carbohydrates rich foods are know to raise insulin resistance so they're good for insulin resistant people Things like buckwheat, prickly pear and lentils The important point is to consume less calories than you consume, so when you eat low-absorption carbs they're indeed absorbed because the body doesn't have to avoid an excess of calories and also because esercize improve sugar absorption By letting the body absorpt suagr slowly glut4 function is slowly restored and glucose tolerance is improved Insulin resistance can be completely reversed You need exercise first, a calories deficit on the second place and consume a normal healthy diet without any strange macronutrient ratio, avoiding refined foods as hell But by letting the body absorb carbs slowly you're indeed restoring glu4 function faster than by consuming only fat and protein (protein that raise insulin more than low-absorption carbs) Daniel |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.