Review of recent low-fat research that makes sense (well, uhm, to me... ;)
st7 wrote:
Enrico C wrote:
The important thing the new study DOES actually suggest, as I
understand it, is that the old myth "the lesser fat, the better" is
not true any longer.
Correct me if I am wrong.
Did anyone actually read the study?
It showed nothing. $415 million down the toilet.
They asked a subset of women to adhere to 20% fat diets. The
women reported 29%, but they probably actually ate more like
39% fat.
The low-fat group reported a daily kcal intake of 1500 (down from
the 1800 initial) and yet their weights went down only 2.2 kg that
year. With such a deficit, they should have lost about 14 kg (mean)
after the first year. Do the math: -300*365/3500/2.2 = -14.2 kg
[details in table 2 of the paper]. Where are the other 12 kg
these woman should have lost?
Since when does TC 'The Complainer' read anything?
|