Moderate-protein diet may beat high-carb diet

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090318/...derate_protein

The tested diet isn't even slightly low carb. It just trades 15%
protein
by calorie for 30% protein by calorie. As usual I wish they would
actually use a known diet plan in their studies. Bits that I found
interesting:

The findings, reported in the Journal of Nutrition, suggest that
trading in some carbs for protein may do dieters good.

Gradually the low fat steam roller is losing its force.

However, the moderate-protein former group lost more fat mass,
and had greater improvements in both HDL and triglyceride levels.

Saying low fat plans have problems. I generally point out that some
percentage of the population does well on low fat so I wonder how
that jives with this study that says lot fat is problematic. I bet
they
didn't select low fat participants based on whether they get hungry
on low fat.

The extra protein at each meal helps dieters preserve
"metabolically active" muscle mass, explained lead researcher
Dr. Donald K. Layman, of the University of Illinois in Urbana.

Nothing new to the concept that protein is beneficial.

At the same time, he told Reuters Health, the diet's lower
carbohydrate content means lower levels of the
blood-sugar-regulating hormone insulin.

Even at 30% calories from carb compared to 40% calories from
carb? Okay.

The greater improvement in triglycerides, he said, is largely the
result of cutting carbs, which can raise triglyceride levels.

There has been recent discussion that any system that triggers
fat loss lowers trigylcerides.

For example, he said, the concept of eating "lots of small
meals" throughout the day works when the diet is high-carb,
low-fat because people are hungry more often -- but it's a bad
idea with a moderate-protein diet.

Okay, there's the comment that low fat folks get more hungry
and need to use special strategies to deal with that fact.

Not a study that tells anything new.