If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Vegetable-rich low-carb cuts heart disease risk, says study
Vegetable-rich low-carb cuts heart disease risk, says study
By Stephen Daniells 09/11/2006- Low-carb diets, like the once fashionable Atkins diet, do not increase the risk of heart disease, says new research from Harvard - and if vegetables rather than meat are the source of fat and protein then the risk of heart disease may be cut by 30 per cent. Low carbohydrate diets, high in protein and fat, have lost popularity amongst the public with critics saying that the approach puts followers at a higher risk of clogged arteries and heart attack in the long-term. But the new research, published in the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine (Vol. 355, pp. 1991-2002), reports that, after evaluating data collected over 20 years on 82,802 women, that there is no link between low-carb diets and an increased risk of coronary heart disease (CHD). "Our findings suggest that diets lower in carbohydrates and higher in protein and fat are not associated with increased risk of coronary heart disease in women," wrote lead author Thomas Halton from Harvard School of Public Health. The results, while they indicate no risk with the diet, do not show a positive effect on heart health, said Halton in a statement. "This study suggests that neither a low-fat dietary pattern nor a typical low-carbohydrate dietary pattern is ideal with regards to risk of CHD; both have similar risks. However, if a diet moderately lower in carbohydrates is followed, with a focus on vegetable sources of fat and protein, there may be a benefit for heart disease," he said. Indeed, the authors found that, when vegetable sources of fat and protein were chosen instead of animal sources, the low-carb-diet score was associated with a 30 per cent lower risk of CHD - the cause of 20 per cent of deaths in the US and 17 per cent of deaths in Europe. The researchers used dietary data from the Nurses' Health Study (started in 1976), collected by validated food frequency questionnaires (FFQ). After 20 years of follow-up, Halton and his colleagues report that 1994 cases of CHD were recorded. After adjusting for potential confounding factors, such as age, BMI, smoking status, physical activity levels, multivitamin use, and so on, the researchers report that the difference between women with the highest adherence to a low-carb diet (highest fat and protein intake and lowest carbohydrate intake) had no statistically difference in the risk of CHD than those who did not consume a low-carb diet (lowest fat and protein intake and highest carbohydrate intake). The Harvard researchers also considered the relative CHD risk as a function of the percentages of energy from carbohydrate, animal protein and animal fat, or from carbohydrate, vegetable protein and vegetable fat. For those who consumed protein and fat from animal sources, no significant difference in relative CHD risk was observed, regardless of carbohydrate consumption. However, the women who consumed protein and fat from predominantly animal sources and who adhered most closely to the low-carb diet, the relative risk of coronary heart disease was cut by 30 per cent, compared to those who followed a more low-fat-type diet. "When vegetable sources of fat and protein were chosen, the low-carbohydrate-diet score was associated with a moderately lower risk of coronary heat disease than when animal sources were chosen," the researchers said. Also, they note that adherence to the low-carb diet had no effect on body weight. Senior author Frank Hu added a note of caution, saying that the results did not mean people should "load [their] plate with steak and bacon." "One likely explanation that we did not see increased risk of CHD with low-carbohydrate diets is that the adverse effects of animal products might be counterbalanced by reducing refined carbohydrates. The quality of fat and carbohydrate is more important than quantity. A heart-healthy diet should embrace healthy types of fat and carbohydrates," he said. Indeed, the authors did note a link between glycaemic load and CHD. The use of glycaemic index (GI) ranks carbohydrates according to their ability to affect blood glucose. To measure of the quality and quantity of carbohydrate intake, the concept of glycaemic load (GL) was created. "A low-carbohydrate diet tends to have a lower dietary glycaemic index and glycaemic load than a high-carbohydrate diet," explained the researchers. "We found that the direct association between glycaemic load and coronary heart disease was much stronger than the association between carbohydrate and coronary heart disease, probably because glycaemic load reflects both the quantity and quality of carbohydrates," they said. Other criticisms of the low-carb diet, like the effects on bone health, kidney function, and a decrease in fibre intake were not investigated, said the researchers. Halton and colleagues called for longer-term investigations on the effects of low-carb, high-protein diets on kidney function, especially for people with poor kidney function. In terms of bone health, however, a recent study, published in the journal Osteoporosis International (Vol. 17, pp. 1398-1403), reported that 15 volunteers eating a low-carb diet for three months did not have higher levels of bone turnover markers than the 15 controls eating a normal diet. Concerns were raised since consumption of high-protein diets alters the body's acid balance, which could lead to increased bone turnover (bone depletion is faster than formation). -- Bubba Do Wah Ditty |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Vegetable-rich low-carb cuts heart disease risk, says study
Actually, read the abstract he
http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/short/355/19/1991 They're much, much less enthused: "Conclusions[:] Our findings suggest that diets lower in carbohydrate and higher in protein and fat are not associated with increased risk of coronary heart disease in women. When vegetable sources of fat and protein are chosen, these diets may moderately reduce the risk of coronary heart disease." They also state that "A higher glycemic load was strongly associated with an increased risk of coronary heart disease". One would think that low carB = low glycemic load. On Thu, 09 Nov 2006 07:40:32 -0500, Bubba Do Wah Ditty wrote: Vegetable-rich low-carb cuts heart disease risk, says study By Stephen Daniells 09/11/2006- Low-carb diets, like the once fashionable Atkins diet, do not increase the risk of heart disease, says new research from Harvard - and if vegetables rather than meat are the source of fat and protein then the risk of heart disease may be cut by 30 per cent. Low carbohydrate diets, high in protein and fat, have lost popularity amongst the public with critics saying that the approach puts followers at a higher risk of clogged arteries and heart attack in the long-term. But the new research, published in the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine (Vol. 355, pp. 1991-2002), reports that, after evaluating data collected over 20 years on 82,802 women, that there is no link between low-carb diets and an increased risk of coronary heart disease (CHD). "Our findings suggest that diets lower in carbohydrates and higher in protein and fat are not associated with increased risk of coronary heart disease in women," wrote lead author Thomas Halton from Harvard School of Public Health. The results, while they indicate no risk with the diet, do not show a positive effect on heart health, said Halton in a statement. "This study suggests that neither a low-fat dietary pattern nor a typical low-carbohydrate dietary pattern is ideal with regards to risk of CHD; both have similar risks. However, if a diet moderately lower in carbohydrates is followed, with a focus on vegetable sources of fat and protein, there may be a benefit for heart disease," he said. Indeed, the authors found that, when vegetable sources of fat and protein were chosen instead of animal sources, the low-carb-diet score was associated with a 30 per cent lower risk of CHD - the cause of 20 per cent of deaths in the US and 17 per cent of deaths in Europe. The researchers used dietary data from the Nurses' Health Study (started in 1976), collected by validated food frequency questionnaires (FFQ). After 20 years of follow-up, Halton and his colleagues report that 1994 cases of CHD were recorded. After adjusting for potential confounding factors, such as age, BMI, smoking status, physical activity levels, multivitamin use, and so on, the researchers report that the difference between women with the highest adherence to a low-carb diet (highest fat and protein intake and lowest carbohydrate intake) had no statistically difference in the risk of CHD than those who did not consume a low-carb diet (lowest fat and protein intake and highest carbohydrate intake). The Harvard researchers also considered the relative CHD risk as a function of the percentages of energy from carbohydrate, animal protein and animal fat, or from carbohydrate, vegetable protein and vegetable fat. For those who consumed protein and fat from animal sources, no significant difference in relative CHD risk was observed, regardless of carbohydrate consumption. However, the women who consumed protein and fat from predominantly animal sources and who adhered most closely to the low-carb diet, the relative risk of coronary heart disease was cut by 30 per cent, compared to those who followed a more low-fat-type diet. "When vegetable sources of fat and protein were chosen, the low-carbohydrate-diet score was associated with a moderately lower risk of coronary heat disease than when animal sources were chosen," the researchers said. Also, they note that adherence to the low-carb diet had no effect on body weight. Senior author Frank Hu added a note of caution, saying that the results did not mean people should "load [their] plate with steak and bacon." "One likely explanation that we did not see increased risk of CHD with low-carbohydrate diets is that the adverse effects of animal products might be counterbalanced by reducing refined carbohydrates. The quality of fat and carbohydrate is more important than quantity. A heart-healthy diet should embrace healthy types of fat and carbohydrates," he said. Indeed, the authors did note a link between glycaemic load and CHD. The use of glycaemic index (GI) ranks carbohydrates according to their ability to affect blood glucose. To measure of the quality and quantity of carbohydrate intake, the concept of glycaemic load (GL) was created. "A low-carbohydrate diet tends to have a lower dietary glycaemic index and glycaemic load than a high-carbohydrate diet," explained the researchers. "We found that the direct association between glycaemic load and coronary heart disease was much stronger than the association between carbohydrate and coronary heart disease, probably because glycaemic load reflects both the quantity and quality of carbohydrates," they said. Other criticisms of the low-carb diet, like the effects on bone health, kidney function, and a decrease in fibre intake were not investigated, said the researchers. Halton and colleagues called for longer-term investigations on the effects of low-carb, high-protein diets on kidney function, especially for people with poor kidney function. In terms of bone health, however, a recent study, published in the journal Osteoporosis International (Vol. 17, pp. 1398-1403), reported that 15 volunteers eating a low-carb diet for three months did not have higher levels of bone turnover markers than the 15 controls eating a normal diet. Concerns were raised since consumption of high-protein diets alters the body's acid balance, which could lead to increased bone turnover (bone depletion is faster than formation). -- Bob in CT |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Vegetable-rich low-carb cuts heart disease risk, says study
I recently read a lot of the Harvard Guide to Men's Health, that is
based on three large studies of men, similar to the nurses study that looks at women. Similar group of people running it with similar methodology. I mention this because that book was very much in the low fat-low cal, high veggie, fish protein diet camp. Very invested. I think it's inferable that Harvard Health is fairly invested in this diet paradigm. So, their conclusions might be swayed a little by 40 years of Low-Fat-Low-Cal-High-Veg-Lean-Protein thinking. Their finding is basically that if you drop your glycemic load, you drop your risk of heart attack. I think they are not ready to accept that you might be able to eat a good deal of fatty beef and improve your health. I don't think my doctor was ready to believe it. I'm doing fitday just so I can show him a journal of what I've been eating to lower my cholesterol so drastically (3 times his high range expectation at the last check). I think it will be amusing. Any rate, news from Harvard is nice, but we can pick the study apart and pick their motives apart till there's nothing left. -Hollywood Bob in CT wrote: Actually, read the abstract he http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/short/355/19/1991 They're much, much less enthused: "Conclusions[:] Our findings suggest that diets lower in carbohydrate and higher in protein and fat are not associated with increased risk of coronary heart disease in women. When vegetable sources of fat and protein are chosen, these diets may moderately reduce the risk of coronary heart disease." They also state that "A higher glycemic load was strongly associated with an increased risk of coronary heart disease". One would think that low carB = low glycemic load. On Thu, 09 Nov 2006 07:40:32 -0500, Bubba Do Wah Ditty wrote: Vegetable-rich low-carb cuts heart disease risk, says study By Stephen Daniells 09/11/2006- Low-carb diets, like the once fashionable Atkins diet, do not increase the risk of heart disease, says new research from Harvard - and if vegetables rather than meat are the source of fat and protein then the risk of heart disease may be cut by 30 per cent. Low carbohydrate diets, high in protein and fat, have lost popularity amongst the public with critics saying that the approach puts followers at a higher risk of clogged arteries and heart attack in the long-term. But the new research, published in the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine (Vol. 355, pp. 1991-2002), reports that, after evaluating data collected over 20 years on 82,802 women, that there is no link between low-carb diets and an increased risk of coronary heart disease (CHD). "Our findings suggest that diets lower in carbohydrates and higher in protein and fat are not associated with increased risk of coronary heart disease in women," wrote lead author Thomas Halton from Harvard School of Public Health. The results, while they indicate no risk with the diet, do not show a positive effect on heart health, said Halton in a statement. "This study suggests that neither a low-fat dietary pattern nor a typical low-carbohydrate dietary pattern is ideal with regards to risk of CHD; both have similar risks. However, if a diet moderately lower in carbohydrates is followed, with a focus on vegetable sources of fat and protein, there may be a benefit for heart disease," he said. Indeed, the authors found that, when vegetable sources of fat and protein were chosen instead of animal sources, the low-carb-diet score was associated with a 30 per cent lower risk of CHD - the cause of 20 per cent of deaths in the US and 17 per cent of deaths in Europe. The researchers used dietary data from the Nurses' Health Study (started in 1976), collected by validated food frequency questionnaires (FFQ). After 20 years of follow-up, Halton and his colleagues report that 1994 cases of CHD were recorded. After adjusting for potential confounding factors, such as age, BMI, smoking status, physical activity levels, multivitamin use, and so on, the researchers report that the difference between women with the highest adherence to a low-carb diet (highest fat and protein intake and lowest carbohydrate intake) had no statistically difference in the risk of CHD than those who did not consume a low-carb diet (lowest fat and protein intake and highest carbohydrate intake). The Harvard researchers also considered the relative CHD risk as a function of the percentages of energy from carbohydrate, animal protein and animal fat, or from carbohydrate, vegetable protein and vegetable fat. For those who consumed protein and fat from animal sources, no significant difference in relative CHD risk was observed, regardless of carbohydrate consumption. However, the women who consumed protein and fat from predominantly animal sources and who adhered most closely to the low-carb diet, the relative risk of coronary heart disease was cut by 30 per cent, compared to those who followed a more low-fat-type diet. "When vegetable sources of fat and protein were chosen, the low-carbohydrate-diet score was associated with a moderately lower risk of coronary heat disease than when animal sources were chosen," the researchers said. Also, they note that adherence to the low-carb diet had no effect on body weight. Senior author Frank Hu added a note of caution, saying that the results did not mean people should "load [their] plate with steak and bacon." "One likely explanation that we did not see increased risk of CHD with low-carbohydrate diets is that the adverse effects of animal products might be counterbalanced by reducing refined carbohydrates. The quality of fat and carbohydrate is more important than quantity. A heart-healthy diet should embrace healthy types of fat and carbohydrates," he said. Indeed, the authors did note a link between glycaemic load and CHD. The use of glycaemic index (GI) ranks carbohydrates according to their ability to affect blood glucose. To measure of the quality and quantity of carbohydrate intake, the concept of glycaemic load (GL) was created. "A low-carbohydrate diet tends to have a lower dietary glycaemic index and glycaemic load than a high-carbohydrate diet," explained the researchers. "We found that the direct association between glycaemic load and coronary heart disease was much stronger than the association between carbohydrate and coronary heart disease, probably because glycaemic load reflects both the quantity and quality of carbohydrates," they said. Other criticisms of the low-carb diet, like the effects on bone health, kidney function, and a decrease in fibre intake were not investigated, said the researchers. Halton and colleagues called for longer-term investigations on the effects of low-carb, high-protein diets on kidney function, especially for people with poor kidney function. In terms of bone health, however, a recent study, published in the journal Osteoporosis International (Vol. 17, pp. 1398-1403), reported that 15 volunteers eating a low-carb diet for three months did not have higher levels of bone turnover markers than the 15 controls eating a normal diet. Concerns were raised since consumption of high-protein diets alters the body's acid balance, which could lead to increased bone turnover (bone depletion is faster than formation). -- Bob in CT |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Vegetable-rich low-carb cuts heart disease risk, says study
I wouldn't worry too much about "high cholesterol", as I don't think such
a thing is worrisome at all. As for the study, they can't on the one hand say that high glycemic load is bad yet say that low carb (which is, by definition, low glycemic load) isn't good. Plus, they state, "the relative risk on the basis of the percentage of energy from intake of carbohydrates, vegetable protein, and vegetable fat" and give this a good relative risk. How can that be, when this flies in the face of high glycemic load? On Thu, 09 Nov 2006 14:08:30 -0500, Hollywood wrote: I recently read a lot of the Harvard Guide to Men's Health, that is based on three large studies of men, similar to the nurses study that looks at women. Similar group of people running it with similar methodology. I mention this because that book was very much in the low fat-low cal, high veggie, fish protein diet camp. Very invested. I think it's inferable that Harvard Health is fairly invested in this diet paradigm.. So, their conclusions might be swayed a little by 40 years of Low-Fat-Low-Cal-High-Veg-Lean-Protein thinking. Their finding is basically that if you drop your glycemic load, you drop your risk of heart attack. I think they are not ready to accept that you might be able to eat a good deal of fatty beef and improve your health. I don't think my doctor was ready to believe it. I'm doing fitday just so I can show him a journal of what I've been eating to lower my cholesterol so drastically (3 times his high range expectation at the last check). I think it will be amusing. Any rate, news from Harvard is nice, but we can pick the study apart and pick their motives apart till there's nothing left. -Hollywood Bob in CT wrote: Actually, read the abstract he http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/short/355/19/1991 They're much, much less enthused: "Conclusions[:] Our findings suggest that diets lower in carbohydrate and higher in protein and fat are not associated with increased risk of coronary heart disease in women. When vegetable sources of fat and protein are chosen, these diets may moderately reduce the risk of coronary heart disease." They also state that "A higher glycemic load was strongly associated with an increased risk of coronary heart disease". One would think that low carB = low glycemic load. On Thu, 09 Nov 2006 07:40:32 -0500, Bubba Do Wah Ditty wrote: Vegetable-rich low-carb cuts heart disease risk, says study By Stephen Daniells 09/11/2006- Low-carb diets, like the once fashionable Atkins diet, do not increase the risk of heart disease, says new research from Harvard - and if vegetables rather than meat are the source of fat and protein then the risk of heart disease may be cut by 30 per cent. Low carbohydrate diets, high in protein and fat, have lost popularity amongst the public with critics saying that the approach puts followers at a higher risk of clogged arteries and heart attack in the long-term. But the new research, published in the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine (Vol. 355, pp. 1991-2002), reports that, after evaluating data collected over 20 years on 82,802 women, that there is no link between low-carb diets and an increased risk of coronary heart disease (CHD). "Our findings suggest that diets lower in carbohydrates and higher in protein and fat are not associated with increased risk of coronary heart disease in women," wrote lead author Thomas Halton from Harvard School of Public Health. The results, while they indicate no risk with the diet, do not show a positive effect on heart health, said Halton in a statement. "This study suggests that neither a low-fat dietary pattern nor a typical low-carbohydrate dietary pattern is ideal with regards to risk of CHD; both have similar risks. However, if a diet moderately lower in carbohydrates is followed, with a focus on vegetable sources of fat and protein, there may be a benefit for heart disease," he said. Indeed, the authors found that, when vegetable sources of fat and protein were chosen instead of animal sources, the low-carb-diet score was associated with a 30 per cent lower risk of CHD - the cause of 20 per cent of deaths in the US and 17 per cent of deaths in Europe. The researchers used dietary data from the Nurses' Health Study (started in 1976), collected by validated food frequency questionnaires (FFQ). After 20 years of follow-up, Halton and his colleagues report that 1994 cases of CHD were recorded. After adjusting for potential confounding factors, such as age, BMI, smoking status, physical activity levels, multivitamin use, and so on, the researchers report that the difference between women with the highest adherence to a low-carb diet (highest fat and protein intake and lowest carbohydrate intake) had no statistically difference in the risk of CHD than those who did not consume a low-carb diet (lowest fat and protein intake and highest carbohydrate intake). The Harvard researchers also considered the relative CHD risk as a function of the percentages of energy from carbohydrate, animal protein and animal fat, or from carbohydrate, vegetable protein and vegetable fat. For those who consumed protein and fat from animal sources, no significant difference in relative CHD risk was observed, regardless of carbohydrate consumption. However, the women who consumed protein and fat from predominantly animal sources and who adhered most closely to the low-carb diet, the relative risk of coronary heart disease was cut by 30 per cent, compared to those who followed a more low-fat-type diet. "When vegetable sources of fat and protein were chosen, the low-carbohydrate-diet score was associated with a moderately lower risk of coronary heat disease than when animal sources were chosen," the researchers said. Also, they note that adherence to the low-carb diet had no effect on body weight. Senior author Frank Hu added a note of caution, saying that the results did not mean people should "load [their] plate with steak and bacon." "One likely explanation that we did not see increased risk of CHD with low-carbohydrate diets is that the adverse effects of animal products might be counterbalanced by reducing refined carbohydrates. The quality of fat and carbohydrate is more important than quantity. A heart-healthy diet should embrace healthy types of fat and carbohydrates," he said. Indeed, the authors did note a link between glycaemic load and CHD. The use of glycaemic index (GI) ranks carbohydrates according to their ability to affect blood glucose. To measure of the quality and quantity of carbohydrate intake, the concept of glycaemic load (GL) was created.. "A low-carbohydrate diet tends to have a lower dietary glycaemic index and glycaemic load than a high-carbohydrate diet," explained the researchers. "We found that the direct association between glycaemic load and coronary heart disease was much stronger than the association between carbohydrate and coronary heart disease, probably because glycaemic load reflects both the quantity and quality of carbohydrates," they said.. Other criticisms of the low-carb diet, like the effects on bone health, kidney function, and a decrease in fibre intake were not investigated, said the researchers. Halton and colleagues called for longer-term investigations on the effects of low-carb, high-protein diets on kidney function, especially for people with poor kidney function. In terms of bone health, however, a recent study, published in the journal Osteoporosis International (Vol. 17, pp. 1398-1403), reported that 15 volunteers eating a low-carb diet for three months did not have higher levels of bone turnover markers than the 15 controls eating a normal diet. Concerns were raised since consumption of high-protein diets alters the body's acid balance, which could lead to increased bone turnover (bone depletion is faster than formation). -- Bob in CT -- Bob in CT |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Vegetable-rich low-carb cuts heart disease risk, says study
Bob in CT wrote: I wouldn't worry too much about "high cholesterol", as I don't think such a thing is worrisome at all. I wouldn't be so sure that high cholesterol isn't worrisome at all. There is a lot of data that says otherwise. It's possible that they are wrong, but studies like Framingham, sure seem to suggest that there is a correlation between high cholesterol and CHD. As for the study, they can't on the one hand say that high glycemic load is bad yet say that low carb (which is, by definition, low glycemic load) isn't good. In the excerpts I read, I didn't see where the study said LC isn't good. They said LC and low fat had the same incidence of CHD in women. Plus, they state, "the relative risk on the basis of the percentage of energy from intake of carbohydrates, vegetable protein, and vegetable fat" and give this a good relative risk. How can that be, when this flies in the face of high glycemic load? On Thu, 09 Nov 2006 14:08:30 -0500, Hollywood wrote: I recently read a lot of the Harvard Guide to Men's Health, that is based on three large studies of men, similar to the nurses study that looks at women. Similar group of people running it with similar methodology. I mention this because that book was very much in the low fat-low cal, high veggie, fish protein diet camp. Very invested. I think it's inferable that Harvard Health is fairly invested in this diet paradigm. So, their conclusions might be swayed a little by 40 years of Low-Fat-Low-Cal-High-Veg-Lean-Protein thinking. Their finding is basically that if you drop your glycemic load, you drop your risk of heart attack. I think they are not ready to accept that you might be able to eat a good deal of fatty beef and improve your health. I don't think my doctor was ready to believe it. I'm doing fitday just so I can show him a journal of what I've been eating to lower my cholesterol so drastically (3 times his high range expectation at the last check). I think it will be amusing. Any rate, news from Harvard is nice, but we can pick the study apart and pick their motives apart till there's nothing left. -Hollywood Bob in CT wrote: Actually, read the abstract he http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/short/355/19/1991 They're much, much less enthused: "Conclusions[:] Our findings suggest that diets lower in carbohydrate and higher in protein and fat are not associated with increased risk of coronary heart disease in women. When vegetable sources of fat and protein are chosen, these diets may moderately reduce the risk of coronary heart disease." They also state that "A higher glycemic load was strongly associated with an increased risk of coronary heart disease". One would think that low carB = low glycemic load. On Thu, 09 Nov 2006 07:40:32 -0500, Bubba Do Wah Ditty wrote: Vegetable-rich low-carb cuts heart disease risk, says study By Stephen Daniells 09/11/2006- Low-carb diets, like the once fashionable Atkins diet, do not increase the risk of heart disease, says new research from Harvard - and if vegetables rather than meat are the source of fat and protein then the risk of heart disease may be cut by 30 per cent. Low carbohydrate diets, high in protein and fat, have lost popularity amongst the public with critics saying that the approach puts followers at a higher risk of clogged arteries and heart attack in the long-term. But the new research, published in the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine (Vol. 355, pp. 1991-2002), reports that, after evaluating data collected over 20 years on 82,802 women, that there is no link between low-carb diets and an increased risk of coronary heart disease (CHD). "Our findings suggest that diets lower in carbohydrates and higher in protein and fat are not associated with increased risk of coronary heart disease in women," wrote lead author Thomas Halton from Harvard School of Public Health. The results, while they indicate no risk with the diet, do not show a positive effect on heart health, said Halton in a statement. "This study suggests that neither a low-fat dietary pattern nor a typical low-carbohydrate dietary pattern is ideal with regards to risk of CHD; both have similar risks. However, if a diet moderately lower in carbohydrates is followed, with a focus on vegetable sources of fat and protein, there may be a benefit for heart disease," he said. Indeed, the authors found that, when vegetable sources of fat and protein were chosen instead of animal sources, the low-carb-diet score was associated with a 30 per cent lower risk of CHD - the cause of 20 per cent of deaths in the US and 17 per cent of deaths in Europe. The researchers used dietary data from the Nurses' Health Study (started in 1976), collected by validated food frequency questionnaires (FFQ). After 20 years of follow-up, Halton and his colleagues report that 1994 cases of CHD were recorded. After adjusting for potential confounding factors, such as age, BMI, smoking status, physical activity levels, multivitamin use, and so on, the researchers report that the difference between women with the highest adherence to a low-carb diet (highest fat and protein intake and lowest carbohydrate intake) had no statistically difference in the risk of CHD than those who did not consume a low-carb diet (lowest fat and protein intake and highest carbohydrate intake). The Harvard researchers also considered the relative CHD risk as a function of the percentages of energy from carbohydrate, animal protein and animal fat, or from carbohydrate, vegetable protein and vegetable fat. For those who consumed protein and fat from animal sources, no significant difference in relative CHD risk was observed, regardless of carbohydrate consumption. However, the women who consumed protein and fat from predominantly animal sources and who adhered most closely to the low-carb diet, the relative risk of coronary heart disease was cut by 30 per cent, compared to those who followed a more low-fat-type diet. "When vegetable sources of fat and protein were chosen, the low-carbohydrate-diet score was associated with a moderately lower risk of coronary heat disease than when animal sources were chosen," the researchers said. Also, they note that adherence to the low-carb diet had no effect on body weight. Senior author Frank Hu added a note of caution, saying that the results did not mean people should "load [their] plate with steak and bacon." "One likely explanation that we did not see increased risk of CHD with low-carbohydrate diets is that the adverse effects of animal products might be counterbalanced by reducing refined carbohydrates. The quality of fat and carbohydrate is more important than quantity. A heart-healthy diet should embrace healthy types of fat and carbohydrates," he said. Indeed, the authors did note a link between glycaemic load and CHD. The use of glycaemic index (GI) ranks carbohydrates according to their ability to affect blood glucose. To measure of the quality and quantity of carbohydrate intake, the concept of glycaemic load (GL) was created. "A low-carbohydrate diet tends to have a lower dietary glycaemic index and glycaemic load than a high-carbohydrate diet," explained the researchers. "We found that the direct association between glycaemic load and coronary heart disease was much stronger than the association between carbohydrate and coronary heart disease, probably because glycaemic load reflects both the quantity and quality of carbohydrates," they said. Other criticisms of the low-carb diet, like the effects on bone health, kidney function, and a decrease in fibre intake were not investigated, said the researchers. Halton and colleagues called for longer-term investigations on the effects of low-carb, high-protein diets on kidney function, especially for people with poor kidney function. In terms of bone health, however, a recent study, published in the journal Osteoporosis International (Vol. 17, pp. 1398-1403), reported that 15 volunteers eating a low-carb diet for three months did not have higher levels of bone turnover markers than the 15 controls eating a normal diet. Concerns were raised since consumption of high-protein diets alters the body's acid balance, which could lead to increased bone turnover (bone depletion is faster than formation). -- Bob in CT -- Bob in CT |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Vegetable-rich low-carb cuts heart disease risk, says study
Bob in CT wrote:
I wouldn't worry too much about "high cholesterol", as I don't think such a thing is worrisome at all. As for the study, they can't on the one hand say that high glycemic load is bad yet say that low carb (which is, by definition, low glycemic load) isn't good. Plus, they state, "the relative risk on the basis of the percentage of energy from intake of carbohydrates, vegetable protein, and vegetable fat" and give this a good relative risk. How can that be, when this flies in the face of high glycemic load? Please don't forget that Cardiologist Dr. Atkins promoted Low Carb in direct opposition to the AHA political attempts in the 1970's to get "Low Fat" as the official position to cure and prevent heart disease. Dr. Atkins was a TRAITOR to his profession. And he still is, in many circles, a TRAITOR to the cardiology profession - or at least many of the now senior and aging members. Expect very little objectivity from cardiologists on Low Carb until the contemporaries of Atkins all die out, and about a half a generation of the early inductees of that period also die out. The younger cardiologists may be less brainwashed and less inclined to remember Atkins as the TRAITOR he was. And frankly, he was indeed a TRAITOR - to the group pushing the LOW FAT mentality - who lacked the scientific basis to recommend Low Fat as the cure.... and the data still doesn't conclude that Low Fat will dramatically reduce the incidence of heart disease. You may be witnessing some reviewers lasso themselves or paint themselves into corners with subtle evasions. Jim |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Vegetable-rich low-carb cuts heart disease risk, says study
"Bob in CT" wrote
"As for the study, they can't on the one hand say that high glycemic load is bad yet say that low carb (which is, by definition, low glycemic load) isn't good. Plus, they state, "the relative risk on the basis of the percentage of energy from intake of carbohydrates, vegetable protein, and vegetable fat" and give this a good relative risk. How can that be, when this flies in the face of high glycemic load?" *********************************************** Not necessarily, IMO. I agree that low carb must equate with a low glycemic load. But a relatively low CHO diet can be accomplished lots of different ways. The classic media portrait, of course, is the guy wolfing down a pound of bacon and eggs for breakfast, beef patties with melted cheese for lunch, and a big steak with a lettuce leaf or two for dinner. That's definitely low carb, but most of us eat diets that include a lot more vegetables, a bit of fruit, a fair amount of fat, but quite a bit less protein. And we've had people here at asdl-c who have been successful eating low carb while staying completely strict vegetarian, or ovo-lacto vegetarian. Induction-level low carb would be difficult to do, healthfully, using only vegetable protein sources. But if you are doing something that is at the high end of ketogenic (100 g), or even a bit higher, you've still got a relatively low glycemic load and can do this without consuming much animal protein or fat. Beans are very doable on lc if your carb limit is high, and there are lots of vegitarian sausages and other meat analogues that are pretty tasty and low in carbohydrates. And of course, mayonnaise and olive oil are vegetable fats. Olive oil can be used in cooking in many instances where you'd use butter. Soy milk and soy creamers can sub for dairy products and are fairly low in carbs. I don't think this study's finding of lowered heart disease risk associated with higher intake of vegetable protein and fat necessarily indicates causality, however. I'm assuming confounding factors here, because those who eat more vegitarian stuff are often more health-focused, and could be expected to have other habits that might be responsible for reduction in heart disease risk. However, I don't think that lowered glycemic load and increased proportion of vegetable protein and fat are mutually exclusive. HG |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Vegetable-rich low-carb cuts heart disease risk, says study
Jbuch wrote: wrote: Bob in CT wrote: I wouldn't worry too much about "high cholesterol", as I don't think such a thing is worrisome at all. I wouldn't be so sure that high cholesterol isn't worrisome at all. There is a lot of data that says otherwise. It's possible that they are wrong, but studies like Framingham, sure seem to suggest that there is a correlation between high cholesterol and CHD. In statistics classes, correlations are not the same as causes. Proving cause and effect isn't even a part of statistics classes. And if you read what I said above, I said the data suggests a correlation, not that it conclusively proves it. There is a high correlation between the number of fire engines a community has, and the number of fires it has. Would you conclude that fire engines are dangerous because they cause fires.... from this data correlation? No, but fire engines aren't found inside burned out buildings either, are they? But cholesterol is found in the plaque of clogged arteries, which is what brought it to attention in the first place. And people with high cholesterol levels do have a much higher rate of CHD. And statins have been shown in studies to reduce cholesterol and reduce heart attacks and strokes. Now, is that absolutely conclusive? No. But it's more than enough for me to not dismiss high cholesterol as not being worrisome at all. Not me. In the early part of the 20th century there was a very good correlation between (the number of new radios and TV's sold) and (the number of cases of heart disease). This correlation was really quite good. But TV's weren't found clogging arteries in people with heart disease. And reducing the number of TV's with drugs wasn't shown to reduce the incidence of heart disease either. The correlation over the same time period between the saturated fat available for consumption (USA) and heart attacks (USA)was incorrect... saturated fat available decreasing and heart attacks increasing. Saying that the lipid hypothesis was inconsistent with the USA data then available. Both correlations taken from "The Cholesterol Myths" by Uffe Ravnoskow, MD PhD copyright 2000. Jim As for the study, they can't on the one hand say that high glycemic load is bad yet say that low carb (which is, by definition, low glycemic load) isn't good. In the excerpts I read, I didn't see where the study said LC isn't good. They said LC and low fat had the same incidence of CHD in women. Plus, they state, "the relative risk on the basis of the percentage of energy from intake of carbohydrates, vegetable protein, and vegetable fat" and give this a good relative risk. How can that be, when this flies in the face of high glycemic load? On Thu, 09 Nov 2006 14:08:30 -0500, Hollywood wrote: I recently read a lot of the Harvard Guide to Men's Health, that is based on three large studies of men, similar to the nurses study that looks at women. Similar group of people running it with similar methodology. I mention this because that book was very much in the low fat-low cal, high veggie, fish protein diet camp. Very invested. I think it's inferable that Harvard Health is fairly invested in this diet paradigm. So, their conclusions might be swayed a little by 40 years of Low-Fat-Low-Cal-High-Veg-Lean-Protein thinking. Their finding is basically that if you drop your glycemic load, you drop your risk of heart attack. I think they are not ready to accept that you might be able to eat a good deal of fatty beef and improve your health. I don't think my doctor was ready to believe it. I'm doing fitday just so I can show him a journal of what I've been eating to lower my cholesterol so drastically (3 times his high range expectation at the last check). I think it will be amusing. Any rate, news from Harvard is nice, but we can pick the study apart and pick their motives apart till there's nothing left. -Hollywood Bob in CT wrote: Actually, read the abstract he http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/short/355/19/1991 They're much, much less enthused: "Conclusions[:] Our findings suggest that diets lower in carbohydrate and higher in protein and fat are not associated with increased risk of coronary heart disease in women. When vegetable sources of fat and protein are chosen, these diets may moderately reduce the risk of coronary heart disease." They also state that "A higher glycemic load was strongly associated with an increased risk of coronary heart disease". One would think that low carB = low glycemic load. On Thu, 09 Nov 2006 07:40:32 -0500, Bubba Do Wah Ditty wrote: Vegetable-rich low-carb cuts heart disease risk, says study By Stephen Daniells 09/11/2006- Low-carb diets, like the once fashionable Atkins diet, do not increase the risk of heart disease, says new research from Harvard - and if vegetables rather than meat are the source of fat and protein then the risk of heart disease may be cut by 30 per cent. Low carbohydrate diets, high in protein and fat, have lost popularity amongst the public with critics saying that the approach puts followers at a higher risk of clogged arteries and heart attack in the long-term. But the new research, published in the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine (Vol. 355, pp. 1991-2002), reports that, after evaluating data collected over 20 years on 82,802 women, that there is no link between low-carb diets and an increased risk of coronary heart disease (CHD). "Our findings suggest that diets lower in carbohydrates and higher in protein and fat are not associated with increased risk of coronary heart disease in women," wrote lead author Thomas Halton from Harvard School of Public Health. The results, while they indicate no risk with the diet, do not show a positive effect on heart health, said Halton in a statement. "This study suggests that neither a low-fat dietary pattern nor a typical low-carbohydrate dietary pattern is ideal with regards to risk of CHD; both have similar risks. However, if a diet moderately lower in carbohydrates is followed, with a focus on vegetable sources of fat and protein, there may be a benefit for heart disease," he said. Indeed, the authors found that, when vegetable sources of fat and protein were chosen instead of animal sources, the low-carb-diet score was associated with a 30 per cent lower risk of CHD - the cause of 20 per cent of deaths in the US and 17 per cent of deaths in Europe. The researchers used dietary data from the Nurses' Health Study (started in 1976), collected by validated food frequency questionnaires (FFQ). After 20 years of follow-up, Halton and his colleagues report that 1994 cases of CHD were recorded. After adjusting for potential confounding factors, such as age, BMI, smoking status, physical activity levels, multivitamin use, and so on, the researchers report that the difference between women with the highest adherence to a low-carb diet (highest fat and protein intake and lowest carbohydrate intake) had no statistically difference in the risk of CHD than those who did not consume a low-carb diet (lowest fat and protein intake and highest carbohydrate intake). The Harvard researchers also considered the relative CHD risk as a function of the percentages of energy from carbohydrate, animal protein and animal fat, or from carbohydrate, vegetable protein and vegetable fat. For those who consumed protein and fat from animal sources, no significant difference in relative CHD risk was observed, regardless of carbohydrate consumption. However, the women who consumed protein and fat from predominantly animal sources and who adhered most closely to the low-carb diet, the relative risk of coronary heart disease was cut by 30 per cent, compared to those who followed a more low-fat-type diet. "When vegetable sources of fat and protein were chosen, the low-carbohydrate-diet score was associated with a moderately lower risk of coronary heat disease than when animal sources were chosen," the researchers said. Also, they note that adherence to the low-carb diet had no effect on body weight. Senior author Frank Hu added a note of caution, saying that the results did not mean people should "load [their] plate with steak and bacon." "One likely explanation that we did not see increased risk of CHD with low-carbohydrate diets is that the adverse effects of animal products might be counterbalanced by reducing refined carbohydrates. The quality of fat and carbohydrate is more important than quantity. A heart-healthy diet should embrace healthy types of fat and carbohydrates," he said. Indeed, the authors did note a link between glycaemic load and CHD. The use of glycaemic index (GI) ranks carbohydrates according to their ability to affect blood glucose. To measure of the quality and quantity of carbohydrate intake, the concept of glycaemic load (GL) was created. "A low-carbohydrate diet tends to have a lower dietary glycaemic index and glycaemic load than a high-carbohydrate diet," explained the researchers. "We found that the direct association between glycaemic load and coronary heart disease was much stronger than the association between carbohydrate and coronary heart disease, probably because glycaemic load reflects both the quantity and quality of carbohydrates," they said. Other criticisms of the low-carb diet, like the effects on bone health, kidney function, and a decrease in fibre intake were not investigated, said the researchers. Halton and colleagues called for longer-term investigations on the effects of low-carb, high-protein diets on kidney function, especially for people with poor kidney function. In terms of bone health, however, a recent study, published in the journal Osteoporosis International (Vol. 17, pp. 1398-1403), reported that 15 volunteers eating a low-carb diet for three months did not have higher levels of bone turnover markers than the 15 controls eating a normal diet. Concerns were raised since consumption of high-protein diets alters the body's acid balance, which could lead to increased bone turnover (bone depletion is faster than formation). -- Bob in CT -- Bob in CT -- 1) Eat Till SATISFIED, Not STUFFED... Atkins repeated 9 times in the book 2) Exercise: It's Non-Negotiable..... Chapter 22 title, Atkins book 3) Don't Diet Without Supplemental Nutrients... Chapter 23 title, Atkins book 4) A sensible eating plan, and follow it. (Atkins, Self Made or Other) |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Vegetable-rich low-carb cuts heart disease risk, says study
Jbuch wrote: Bob in CT wrote: I wouldn't worry too much about "high cholesterol", as I don't think such a thing is worrisome at all. As for the study, they can't on the one hand say that high glycemic load is bad yet say that low carb (which is, by definition, low glycemic load) isn't good. Plus, they state, "the relative risk on the basis of the percentage of energy from intake of carbohydrates, vegetable protein, and vegetable fat" and give this a good relative risk. How can that be, when this flies in the face of high glycemic load? Please don't forget that Cardiologist Dr. Atkins promoted Low Carb in direct opposition to the AHA political attempts in the 1970's to get "Low Fat" as the official position to cure and prevent heart disease. Dr. Atkins was a TRAITOR to his profession. And he still is, in many circles, a TRAITOR to the cardiology profession - or at least many of the now senior and aging members. Expect very little objectivity from cardiologists on Low Carb until the contemporaries of Atkins all die out, and about a half a generation of the early inductees of that period also die out. The younger cardiologists may be less brainwashed and less inclined to remember Atkins as the TRAITOR he was. And frankly, he was indeed a TRAITOR - to the group pushing the LOW FAT mentality - who lacked the scientific basis to recommend Low Fat as the cure.... and the data still doesn't conclude that Low Fat will dramatically reduce the incidence of heart disease. You may be witnessing some reviewers lasso themselves or paint themselves into corners with subtle evasions. Jim You make it sound like Atkins stated that high cholesterol was of no concern. In his later books, he talked about having your cholesterol tested, how LC could improve it, especially the ratios and triglycerides, and suggested supplements that could lower it if it was too high. He also advocated using polyunsaturated oils that were believed to be heart healthy, where possible. And BTW, the notion to use healthy oils, which most folks agree with, is supported by what? Is there any conclusive proof? In fact, it has less evidence than that there is a link between high cholesterol and CHD. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Weight Loss Surgery Cuts Heart Disease By Half | Sweet Zombie Jesus! | General Discussion | 0 | July 6th, 2006 01:43 PM |
Study Shows Drug Reverses Heart Disease | Nunya B. | General Discussion | 11 | March 15th, 2006 06:59 PM |
Study Finds Low-Fat Diet Won't Stop Cancer or Heart Disease | Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 0 | February 8th, 2006 12:52 PM |
Study Finds Low-Fat Diet Won't Stop Cancer or Heart Disease | Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 0 | February 8th, 2006 12:52 PM |
Exercise Cuts Men's Heart Death Risk by 50%, Regardless of Cholesterol Levels | Roger Zoul | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 0 | September 11th, 2005 08:14 PM |