Ignoramus13397 wrote:

I removed extraneous lines to make sure you see which column is titled
low carb and which column is titled low fat. Apparently, low fat
dieters eat more protein and low carb dieters eat less protein.

This is counterintuitive as most protein comes packaged with
fat. Think most meats, most fish, eggs, cheese, milk, etc.

Protein without fat is more of an exception than the rule.

It seems that low-carbers ate 500 less calories per day though, likely
due to the appetite-supressant effcts of a ketogenic diet. It's hard to
say though, there just isn't enough information about what constitutes
low-fat or low-carb in this study.

But it doesn't surprise me *too* much if low-fat dieters ate more
protein since they ate more overall. They'd choose chicken breasts over
hamburger, but hunger on a low-fat diet could push the numbers up.

Also... I buy the groceries here - and I don't buy more meat since I
began doing low-carb. Surprisingly enough, I buy a whole heck of a lot
less bacon than I used to. I buy a lot less hamburger too. I don't
*limit* meat in any way, I just seem to buy less of it.

Contrary to the stereotypes of a low-carb diet, our familial dairy and
vegetable intake has increased, but our meat intake has actually
decreased. Given that I'm the only one who specifically changed diets
here, I assume that difference in grocery shopping is due to me
low-carbing.

--
As you accelerate your food, it takes exponentially more and more energy
to increase its velocity, until you hit a limit at C. This energy has
to come from somewhere; in this case, from the food's nutritional value.
Thus, the faster the food is, the worse it gets.
-- Mark Hughes, comprehending the taste of fast food