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
|
|||
|
|||
Now Harvard study backs up Atkins diet
http://www.suntimes.com/output/healt...s-fside14.html
Now Harvard study backs up Atkins diet October 14, 2003 FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. -- The dietary establishment has long argued it's impossible, but a new study offers intriguing evidence for the idea that people on low-carbohydrate diets can actually eat more than folks on standard low-fat plans and still lose weight. Perhaps nothing is more controversial in the diet world than the low-carb diet long espoused by the late Dr. Robert Atkins. Now, a small but carefully controlled study offers a strong hint that maybe Atkins was right. The study, directed by Penelope Greene of the Harvard School of Public Health and presented at a meeting here this week of the American Association for the Study of Obesity, found that people eating an extra 300 calories a day on a very low-carb regimen lost just as much during a 12-week study as those on a standard low-fat diet. Researchers are still arguing over why, and if, the Atkins diet works. ''A lot of our assumptions about a calorie is a calorie are being challenged,'' said Marlene Schwartz of Yale. ''As scientists, we need to be open-minded.'' *********************************** http://www.azdailysun.com/non_sec/na...?storyID=74896 Surprise: Low-carb dieters eat more calories, still lose weight By DANIEL Q. HANEY AP Medical Editor 10/14/2003 FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. -- The dietary establishment has long argued it's impossible, but a new study offers intriguing evidence for the idea that people on low-carbohydrate diets can actually eat more than folks on standard lowfat plans and still lose weight. Perhaps no idea is more controversial in the diet world than the contention -- long espoused by the late Dr. Robert Atkins -- that people on low-carbohydrate diets can consume more calories without paying a price on the scales. Over the past year, several small studies have shown, to many experts' surprise, that the Atkins approach actually does work better, at least in the short run. Dieters lose more than those on a standard American Heart Association plan without driving up their cholesterol levels, as many feared would happen. Skeptics contend, however, that these dieters simply must be eating less. Maybe the low-carb diets are more satisfying, so they do not get so hungry. Or perhaps the food choices are just so limited that low-carb dieters are too bored to eat a lot. Now, a small but carefully controlled study offers a strong hint that maybe Atkins was right: People on low-carb, high-fat diets actually can eat more. The study, directed by Penelope Greene of the Harvard School of Public Health and presented at a meeting here this week of the American Association for the Study of Obesity, found that people eating an extra 300 calories a day on a very low-carb regimen lost just as much during a 12-week study as those on a standard lowfat diet. Over the course of the study, they consumed an extra 25,000 calories. That should have added up to about seven pounds. But for some reason, it did not. "There does indeed seem to be something about a low-carb diet that says you can eat more calories and lose a similar amount of weight," Greene said. That strikes at one of the most revered beliefs in nutrition: A calorie is a calorie is a calorie. It does not matter whether they come from bacon or mashed potatoes; they all go on the waistline in just the same way. Not even Greene says this settles the case, but some at the meeting found her report fascinating. "A lot of our assumptions about a calorie is a calorie are being challenged," said Marlene Schwartz of Yale. "As scientists, we need to be open-minded." Others, though, found the data hard to swallow. "It doesn't make sense, does it?" said Barbara Rolls of Pennsylvania State University. "It violates the laws of thermodynamics. No one has ever found any miraculous metabolic effects." In the study, 21 overweight volunteers were divided into three categories: Two groups were randomly assigned to either lowfat or low-carb diets with 1,500 calories for women and 1,800 for men; a third group was also low-carb but got an extra 300 calories a day. The study was unique because all the food was prepared at an upscale Italian restaurant in Cambridge, Mass., so researchers knew exactly what they ate. Most earlier studies simply sent people home with diet plans to follow as best they could. Each afternoon, the volunteers picked up that evening's dinner, a bedtime snack and the next day's breakfast and lunch. Instead of lots of red meat and saturated fat, which many find disturbing about low-carb diets, these people ate mostly fish, chicken, salads, vegetables and unsaturated oils. "This is not what people think of when they think about an Atkins diet," Greene said. Nevertheless, the Atkins organization agreed to pay for the research, though it had no input into the study's design, conduct or analysis. Everyone's food looked similar but was cooked to different recipes. The low-carb meals were 5 percent carbohydrate, 15 percent protein and 65 percent fat. The rest got 55 percent carbohydrate, 15 percent protein and 30 percent fat. In the end, everyone lost weight. Those on the lower-cal, low-carb regimen took off 23 pounds, while people who got the same calories on the lowfat approach lost 17 pounds. The big surprise, though, was that volunteers getting the extra 300 calories a day of low-carb food lost 20 pounds. "It's very intriguing, but it raises more questions than it answers," said Gary Foster of the University of Pennsylvania. "There is lots of data to suggest this shouldn't be true." Greene said she can only guess why the people getting the extra calories did so well. Maybe they burned up more calories digesting their food. Dr. Samuel Klein of Washington University, the obesity organization's president, called the results "hard to believe" and said perhaps the people eating more calories also got more exercise or they were less apt to cheat because they were less hungry. ------ EDITOR'S NOTE: Medical Editor Daniel Q. Haney is a special correspondent for The Associated Press. ------ On the Net: http://www.naaso.or |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Now Harvard study backs up Atkins diet
the HARVARD study points out that low carb weight loss is apparently
NOT due to lowered calorie intake. -- read and post daily, it works! rosie happiness is not a state to arrive at, but a manner of traveling. .................................m.l. runbeck "Trent Duke" wrote in message ... I was hoping someone was gonna post this article and say such study backs the Atkins Diet. In some aspects it does, but in some ways it doesn't. First, the study found that each diet WORKED. This is no real big suprise considering everyone had their calories reduced and controlled. Second, doesn't any one else find it funny or rather disingenuous that a "low carb diet" is only 5% of total calories and that a "low fat diet" is a whopping 30%? Almost every low fat study done consists of 30% of calories. To be frank, 30% just isn't low enough IMO. Low is around 10%. Third, the study didn't give the fiber amount each group was taking. Fiber can have a profound impact on weight loss here in each group. Fourth, how do we know that the calorie reduction wasn't greater in one group over the other since people were randomly chosen? This too can have a profound impact on the overall study results. Fifth, were these people not allowed to exercise? Was this controlled too, cause the study does not say? Just my thinking behind the study Trent -- Look and Feel Great! FREE weight loss and anti-aging group. Join now @ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/weightloss_health From: (Diarmid Logan) Organization: http://groups.google.com Newsgroups: alt.support.diet.low-carb,alt.support.diet,sci.med.nutrition Date: 14 Oct 2003 09:07:44 -0700 Subject: Now Harvard study backs up Atkins diet http://www.suntimes.com/output/healt...s-fside14.html Now Harvard study backs up Atkins diet October 14, 2003 FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. -- The dietary establishment has long argued it's impossible, but a new study offers intriguing evidence for the idea that people on low-carbohydrate diets can actually eat more than folks on standard low-fat plans and still lose weight. Perhaps nothing is more controversial in the diet world than the low-carb diet long espoused by the late Dr. Robert Atkins. Now, a small but carefully controlled study offers a strong hint that maybe Atkins was right. The study, directed by Penelope Greene of the Harvard School of Public Health and presented at a meeting here this week of the American Association for the Study of Obesity, found that people eating an extra 300 calories a day on a very low-carb regimen lost just as much during a 12-week study as those on a standard low-fat diet. Researchers are still arguing over why, and if, the Atkins diet works. ''A lot of our assumptions about a calorie is a calorie are being challenged,'' said Marlene Schwartz of Yale. ''As scientists, we need to be open-minded.'' *********************************** http://www.azdailysun.com/non_sec/na...?storyID=74896 Surprise: Low-carb dieters eat more calories, still lose weight By DANIEL Q. HANEY AP Medical Editor 10/14/2003 FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. -- The dietary establishment has long argued it's impossible, but a new study offers intriguing evidence for the idea that people on low-carbohydrate diets can actually eat more than folks on standard lowfat plans and still lose weight. Perhaps no idea is more controversial in the diet world than the contention -- long espoused by the late Dr. Robert Atkins -- that people on low-carbohydrate diets can consume more calories without paying a price on the scales. Over the past year, several small studies have shown, to many experts' surprise, that the Atkins approach actually does work better, at least in the short run. Dieters lose more than those on a standard American Heart Association plan without driving up their cholesterol levels, as many feared would happen. Skeptics contend, however, that these dieters simply must be eating less. Maybe the low-carb diets are more satisfying, so they do not get so hungry. Or perhaps the food choices are just so limited that low-carb dieters are too bored to eat a lot. Now, a small but carefully controlled study offers a strong hint that maybe Atkins was right: People on low-carb, high-fat diets actually can eat more. The study, directed by Penelope Greene of the Harvard School of Public Health and presented at a meeting here this week of the American Association for the Study of Obesity, found that people eating an extra 300 calories a day on a very low-carb regimen lost just as much during a 12-week study as those on a standard lowfat diet. Over the course of the study, they consumed an extra 25,000 calories. That should have added up to about seven pounds. But for some reason, it did not. "There does indeed seem to be something about a low-carb diet that says you can eat more calories and lose a similar amount of weight," Greene said. That strikes at one of the most revered beliefs in nutrition: A calorie is a calorie is a calorie. It does not matter whether they come from bacon or mashed potatoes; they all go on the waistline in just the same way. Not even Greene says this settles the case, but some at the meeting found her report fascinating. "A lot of our assumptions about a calorie is a calorie are being challenged," said Marlene Schwartz of Yale. "As scientists, we need to be open-minded." Others, though, found the data hard to swallow. "It doesn't make sense, does it?" said Barbara Rolls of Pennsylvania State University. "It violates the laws of thermodynamics. No one has ever found any miraculous metabolic effects." In the study, 21 overweight volunteers were divided into three categories: Two groups were randomly assigned to either lowfat or low-carb diets with 1,500 calories for women and 1,800 for men; a third group was also low-carb but got an extra 300 calories a day. The study was unique because all the food was prepared at an upscale Italian restaurant in Cambridge, Mass., so researchers knew exactly what they ate. Most earlier studies simply sent people home with diet plans to follow as best they could. Each afternoon, the volunteers picked up that evening's dinner, a bedtime snack and the next day's breakfast and lunch. Instead of lots of red meat and saturated fat, which many find disturbing about low-carb diets, these people ate mostly fish, chicken, salads, vegetables and unsaturated oils. "This is not what people think of when they think about an Atkins diet," Greene said. Nevertheless, the Atkins organization agreed to pay for the research, though it had no input into the study's design, conduct or analysis. Everyone's food looked similar but was cooked to different recipes. The low-carb meals were 5 percent carbohydrate, 15 percent protein and 65 percent fat. The rest got 55 percent carbohydrate, 15 percent protein and 30 percent fat. In the end, everyone lost weight. Those on the lower-cal, low-carb regimen took off 23 pounds, while people who got the same calories on the lowfat approach lost 17 pounds. The big surprise, though, was that volunteers getting the extra 300 calories a day of low-carb food lost 20 pounds. "It's very intriguing, but it raises more questions than it answers," said Gary Foster of the University of Pennsylvania. "There is lots of data to suggest this shouldn't be true." Greene said she can only guess why the people getting the extra calories did so well. Maybe they burned up more calories digesting their food. Dr. Samuel Klein of Washington University, the obesity organization's president, called the results "hard to believe" and said perhaps the people eating more calories also got more exercise or they were less apt to cheat because they were less hungry. ------ EDITOR'S NOTE: Medical Editor Daniel Q. Haney is a special correspondent for The Associated Press. ------ On the Net: http://www.naaso.or |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Now Harvard study backs up Atkins diet
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 17:36:46 -0500, rosie read and post wrote:
the HARVARD study points out that low carb weight loss is apparently NOT due to lowered calorie intake. -- read and post daily, it works! rosie happiness is not a state to arrive at, but a manner of traveling. ................................m.l. runbeck "Trent Duke" wrote in message ... I was hoping someone was gonna post this article and say such study backs the Atkins Diet. In some aspects it does, but in some ways it doesn't. First, the study found that each diet WORKED. This is no real big suprise considering everyone had their calories reduced and controlled. Second, doesn't any one else find it funny or rather disingenuous that a "low carb diet" is only 5% of total calories and that a "low fat diet" is a whopping 30%? Almost every low fat study done consists of 30% of calories. To be frank, 30% just isn't low enough IMO. Low is around 10%. Third, the study didn't give the fiber amount each group was taking. Fiber can have a profound impact on weight loss here in each group. Fourth, how do we know that the calorie reduction wasn't greater in one group over the other since people were randomly chosen? This too can have a profound impact on the overall study results. Fifth, were these people not allowed to exercise? Was this controlled too, cause the study does not say? Just my thinking behind the study Trent -- Look and Feel Great! FREE weight loss and anti-aging group. Join now @ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/weightloss_health From: (Diarmid Logan) Organization: http://groups.google.com Newsgroups: alt.support.diet.low-carb,alt.support.diet,sci.med.nutrition Date: 14 Oct 2003 09:07:44 -0700 Subject: Now Harvard study backs up Atkins diet http://www.suntimes.com/output/healt...s-fside14.html Now Harvard study backs up Atkins diet October 14, 2003 FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. -- The dietary establishment has long argued it's impossible, but a new study offers intriguing evidence for the idea that people on low-carbohydrate diets can actually eat more than folks on standard low-fat plans and still lose weight. Perhaps nothing is more controversial in the diet world than the low-carb diet long espoused by the late Dr. Robert Atkins. Now, a small but carefully controlled study offers a strong hint that maybe Atkins was right. The study, directed by Penelope Greene of the Harvard School of Public Health and presented at a meeting here this week of the American Association for the Study of Obesity, found that people eating an extra 300 calories a day on a very low-carb regimen lost just as much during a 12-week study as those on a standard low-fat diet. Researchers are still arguing over why, and if, the Atkins diet works. ''A lot of our assumptions about a calorie is a calorie are being challenged,'' said Marlene Schwartz of Yale. ''As scientists, we need to be open-minded.'' *********************************** http://www.azdailysun.com/non_sec/na...?storyID=74896 Surprise: Low-carb dieters eat more calories, still lose weight By DANIEL Q. HANEY AP Medical Editor 10/14/2003 FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. -- The dietary establishment has long argued it's impossible, but a new study offers intriguing evidence for the idea that people on low-carbohydrate diets can actually eat more than folks on standard lowfat plans and still lose weight. Perhaps no idea is more controversial in the diet world than the contention -- long espoused by the late Dr. Robert Atkins -- that people on low-carbohydrate diets can consume more calories without paying a price on the scales. Over the past year, several small studies have shown, to many experts' surprise, that the Atkins approach actually does work better, at least in the short run. Dieters lose more than those on a standard American Heart Association plan without driving up their cholesterol levels, as many feared would happen. Skeptics contend, however, that these dieters simply must be eating less. Maybe the low-carb diets are more satisfying, so they do not get so hungry. Or perhaps the food choices are just so limited that low-carb dieters are too bored to eat a lot. Now, a small but carefully controlled study offers a strong hint that maybe Atkins was right: People on low-carb, high-fat diets actually can eat more. The study, directed by Penelope Greene of the Harvard School of Public Health and presented at a meeting here this week of the American Association for the Study of Obesity, found that people eating an extra 300 calories a day on a very low-carb regimen lost just as much during a 12-week study as those on a standard lowfat diet. Over the course of the study, they consumed an extra 25,000 calories. That should have added up to about seven pounds. But for some reason, it did not. "There does indeed seem to be something about a low-carb diet that says you can eat more calories and lose a similar amount of weight," Greene said. That strikes at one of the most revered beliefs in nutrition: A calorie is a calorie is a calorie. It does not matter whether they come from bacon or mashed potatoes; they all go on the waistline in just the same way. Not even Greene says this settles the case, but some at the meeting found her report fascinating. "A lot of our assumptions about a calorie is a calorie are being challenged," said Marlene Schwartz of Yale. "As scientists, we need to be open-minded." Others, though, found the data hard to swallow. "It doesn't make sense, does it?" said Barbara Rolls of Pennsylvania State University. "It violates the laws of thermodynamics. No one has ever found any miraculous metabolic effects." In the study, 21 overweight volunteers were divided into three categories: Two groups were randomly assigned to either lowfat or low-carb diets with 1,500 calories for women and 1,800 for men; a third group was also low-carb but got an extra 300 calories a day. The study was unique because all the food was prepared at an upscale Italian restaurant in Cambridge, Mass., so researchers knew exactly what they ate. Most earlier studies simply sent people home with diet plans to follow as best they could. Each afternoon, the volunteers picked up that evening's dinner, a bedtime snack and the next day's breakfast and lunch. Instead of lots of red meat and saturated fat, which many find disturbing about low-carb diets, these people ate mostly fish, chicken, salads, vegetables and unsaturated oils. "This is not what people think of when they think about an Atkins diet," Greene said. Nevertheless, the Atkins organization agreed to pay for the research, though it had no input into the study's design, conduct or analysis. Everyone's food looked similar but was cooked to different recipes. The low-carb meals were 5 percent carbohydrate, 15 percent protein and 65 percent fat. The rest got 55 percent carbohydrate, 15 percent protein and 30 percent fat. In the end, everyone lost weight. Those on the lower-cal, low-carb regimen took off 23 pounds, while people who got the same calories on the lowfat approach lost 17 pounds. The big surprise, though, was that volunteers getting the extra 300 calories a day of low-carb food lost 20 pounds. "It's very intriguing, but it raises more questions than it answers," said Gary Foster of the University of Pennsylvania. "There is lots of data to suggest this shouldn't be true." Greene said she can only guess why the people getting the extra calories did so well. Maybe they burned up more calories digesting their food. Dr. Samuel Klein of Washington University, the obesity organization's president, called the results "hard to believe" and said perhaps the people eating more calories also got more exercise or they were less apt to cheat because they were less hungry. ------ EDITOR'S NOTE: Medical Editor Daniel Q. Haney is a special correspondent for The Associated Press. ------ On the Net: http://www.naaso.or I think what he means is the calorie reduction of the individual dieter. According to the study, the Atkins dieters consumed more calories per day than the low fat dieters, but the question is how many calories each dieter was taking in *before* the study began. Jake -- My favorite animal is steak.--Fran Lebowitz |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Now Harvard study backs up Atkins diet
I was hoping someone was gonna post this article and say such study backs
the Atkins Diet. In some aspects it does, but in some ways it doesn't. First, the study found that each diet WORKED. This is no real big suprise considering everyone had their calories reduced and controlled. Second, doesn't any one else find it funny or rather disingenuous that a "low carb diet" is only 5% of total calories and that a "low fat diet" is a whopping 30%? Almost every low fat study done consists of 30% of calories. To be frank, 30% just isn't low enough IMO. Low is around 10%. Third, the study didn't give the fiber amount each group was taking. Fiber can have a profound impact on weight loss here in each group. Fourth, how do we know that the calorie reduction wasn't greater in one group over the other since people were randomly chosen? This too can have a profound impact on the overall study results. Fifth, were these people not allowed to exercise? Was this controlled too, cause the study does not say? Just my thinking behind the study Trent -- Look and Feel Great! FREE weight loss and anti-aging group. Join now @ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/weightloss_health From: (Diarmid Logan) Organization: http://groups.google.com Newsgroups: alt.support.diet.low-carb,alt.support.diet,sci.med.nutrition Date: 14 Oct 2003 09:07:44 -0700 Subject: Now Harvard study backs up Atkins diet http://www.suntimes.com/output/healt...s-fside14.html Now Harvard study backs up Atkins diet October 14, 2003 FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. -- The dietary establishment has long argued it's impossible, but a new study offers intriguing evidence for the idea that people on low-carbohydrate diets can actually eat more than folks on standard low-fat plans and still lose weight. Perhaps nothing is more controversial in the diet world than the low-carb diet long espoused by the late Dr. Robert Atkins. Now, a small but carefully controlled study offers a strong hint that maybe Atkins was right. The study, directed by Penelope Greene of the Harvard School of Public Health and presented at a meeting here this week of the American Association for the Study of Obesity, found that people eating an extra 300 calories a day on a very low-carb regimen lost just as much during a 12-week study as those on a standard low-fat diet. Researchers are still arguing over why, and if, the Atkins diet works. ''A lot of our assumptions about a calorie is a calorie are being challenged,'' said Marlene Schwartz of Yale. ''As scientists, we need to be open-minded.'' *********************************** http://www.azdailysun.com/non_sec/na...?storyID=74896 Surprise: Low-carb dieters eat more calories, still lose weight By DANIEL Q. HANEY AP Medical Editor 10/14/2003 FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. -- The dietary establishment has long argued it's impossible, but a new study offers intriguing evidence for the idea that people on low-carbohydrate diets can actually eat more than folks on standard lowfat plans and still lose weight. Perhaps no idea is more controversial in the diet world than the contention -- long espoused by the late Dr. Robert Atkins -- that people on low-carbohydrate diets can consume more calories without paying a price on the scales. Over the past year, several small studies have shown, to many experts' surprise, that the Atkins approach actually does work better, at least in the short run. Dieters lose more than those on a standard American Heart Association plan without driving up their cholesterol levels, as many feared would happen. Skeptics contend, however, that these dieters simply must be eating less. Maybe the low-carb diets are more satisfying, so they do not get so hungry. Or perhaps the food choices are just so limited that low-carb dieters are too bored to eat a lot. Now, a small but carefully controlled study offers a strong hint that maybe Atkins was right: People on low-carb, high-fat diets actually can eat more. The study, directed by Penelope Greene of the Harvard School of Public Health and presented at a meeting here this week of the American Association for the Study of Obesity, found that people eating an extra 300 calories a day on a very low-carb regimen lost just as much during a 12-week study as those on a standard lowfat diet. Over the course of the study, they consumed an extra 25,000 calories. That should have added up to about seven pounds. But for some reason, it did not. "There does indeed seem to be something about a low-carb diet that says you can eat more calories and lose a similar amount of weight," Greene said. That strikes at one of the most revered beliefs in nutrition: A calorie is a calorie is a calorie. It does not matter whether they come from bacon or mashed potatoes; they all go on the waistline in just the same way. Not even Greene says this settles the case, but some at the meeting found her report fascinating. "A lot of our assumptions about a calorie is a calorie are being challenged," said Marlene Schwartz of Yale. "As scientists, we need to be open-minded." Others, though, found the data hard to swallow. "It doesn't make sense, does it?" said Barbara Rolls of Pennsylvania State University. "It violates the laws of thermodynamics. No one has ever found any miraculous metabolic effects." In the study, 21 overweight volunteers were divided into three categories: Two groups were randomly assigned to either lowfat or low-carb diets with 1,500 calories for women and 1,800 for men; a third group was also low-carb but got an extra 300 calories a day. The study was unique because all the food was prepared at an upscale Italian restaurant in Cambridge, Mass., so researchers knew exactly what they ate. Most earlier studies simply sent people home with diet plans to follow as best they could. Each afternoon, the volunteers picked up that evening's dinner, a bedtime snack and the next day's breakfast and lunch. Instead of lots of red meat and saturated fat, which many find disturbing about low-carb diets, these people ate mostly fish, chicken, salads, vegetables and unsaturated oils. "This is not what people think of when they think about an Atkins diet," Greene said. Nevertheless, the Atkins organization agreed to pay for the research, though it had no input into the study's design, conduct or analysis. Everyone's food looked similar but was cooked to different recipes. The low-carb meals were 5 percent carbohydrate, 15 percent protein and 65 percent fat. The rest got 55 percent carbohydrate, 15 percent protein and 30 percent fat. In the end, everyone lost weight. Those on the lower-cal, low-carb regimen took off 23 pounds, while people who got the same calories on the lowfat approach lost 17 pounds. The big surprise, though, was that volunteers getting the extra 300 calories a day of low-carb food lost 20 pounds. "It's very intriguing, but it raises more questions than it answers," said Gary Foster of the University of Pennsylvania. "There is lots of data to suggest this shouldn't be true." Greene said she can only guess why the people getting the extra calories did so well. Maybe they burned up more calories digesting their food. Dr. Samuel Klein of Washington University, the obesity organization's president, called the results "hard to believe" and said perhaps the people eating more calories also got more exercise or they were less apt to cheat because they were less hungry. ------ EDITOR'S NOTE: Medical Editor Daniel Q. Haney is a special correspondent for The Associated Press. ------ On the Net: http://www.naaso.or |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Now Harvard study backs up Atkins diet
The most controversial result of the study is its challenge to the
virtually univeral belief that a calorie is a calorie is a calorie.....and so on. I recall having read a book about thirty years ago entitled "Calories Don't Count" wherein the author claimed to have conducted small-scale studies in which subjects on controlled-calorie diets lost weight when their diets where primarily comprised of fat and virtually carb free. The assumption that all calories are treated the same by the human body seems to be contradicted by research on the effects of insulin. It is known that fat does not cause a significant increase in serum glucose, and without a corresponding increase in insulin. Carbs increase serum glucose, resulting in increased insulin to facilitate glucose's entry into muscle and fat cells which could result in stored body fat. Obviously, this is a serious oversimplification of a complex phenomenon, but isn't the notion that a calorie is a calorie, etc. an equal oversimplification? Ron Jake wrote in message ... On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 17:36:46 -0500, rosie read and post wrote: the HARVARD study points out that low carb weight loss is apparently NOT due to lowered calorie intake. -- read and post daily, it works! rosie happiness is not a state to arrive at, but a manner of traveling. ................................m.l. runbeck "Trent Duke" wrote in message ... I was hoping someone was gonna post this article and say such study backs the Atkins Diet. In some aspects it does, but in some ways it doesn't. First, the study found that each diet WORKED. This is no real big suprise considering everyone had their calories reduced and controlled. Second, doesn't any one else find it funny or rather disingenuous that a "low carb diet" is only 5% of total calories and that a "low fat diet" is a whopping 30%? Almost every low fat study done consists of 30% of calories. To be frank, 30% just isn't low enough IMO. Low is around 10%. Third, the study didn't give the fiber amount each group was taking. Fiber can have a profound impact on weight loss here in each group. Fourth, how do we know that the calorie reduction wasn't greater in one group over the other since people were randomly chosen? This too can have a profound impact on the overall study results. Fifth, were these people not allowed to exercise? Was this controlled too, cause the study does not say? Just my thinking behind the study Trent -- Look and Feel Great! FREE weight loss and anti-aging group. Join now @ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/weightloss_health From: (Diarmid Logan) Organization: http://groups.google.com Newsgroups: alt.support.diet.low-carb,alt.support.diet,sci.med.nutrition Date: 14 Oct 2003 09:07:44 -0700 Subject: Now Harvard study backs up Atkins diet http://www.suntimes.com/output/healt...s-fside14.html Now Harvard study backs up Atkins diet October 14, 2003 FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. -- The dietary establishment has long argued it's impossible, but a new study offers intriguing evidence for the idea that people on low-carbohydrate diets can actually eat more than folks on standard low-fat plans and still lose weight. Perhaps nothing is more controversial in the diet world than the low-carb diet long espoused by the late Dr. Robert Atkins. Now, a small but carefully controlled study offers a strong hint that maybe Atkins was right. The study, directed by Penelope Greene of the Harvard School of Public Health and presented at a meeting here this week of the American Association for the Study of Obesity, found that people eating an extra 300 calories a day on a very low-carb regimen lost just as much during a 12-week study as those on a standard low-fat diet. Researchers are still arguing over why, and if, the Atkins diet works. ''A lot of our assumptions about a calorie is a calorie are being challenged,'' said Marlene Schwartz of Yale. ''As scientists, we need to be open-minded.'' *********************************** http://www.azdailysun.com/non_sec/na...?storyID=74896 Surprise: Low-carb dieters eat more calories, still lose weight By DANIEL Q. HANEY AP Medical Editor 10/14/2003 FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. -- The dietary establishment has long argued it's impossible, but a new study offers intriguing evidence for the idea that people on low-carbohydrate diets can actually eat more than folks on standard lowfat plans and still lose weight. Perhaps no idea is more controversial in the diet world than the contention -- long espoused by the late Dr. Robert Atkins -- that people on low-carbohydrate diets can consume more calories without paying a price on the scales. Over the past year, several small studies have shown, to many experts' surprise, that the Atkins approach actually does work better, at least in the short run. Dieters lose more than those on a standard American Heart Association plan without driving up their cholesterol levels, as many feared would happen. Skeptics contend, however, that these dieters simply must be eating less. Maybe the low-carb diets are more satisfying, so they do not get so hungry. Or perhaps the food choices are just so limited that low-carb dieters are too bored to eat a lot. Now, a small but carefully controlled study offers a strong hint that maybe Atkins was right: People on low-carb, high-fat diets actually can eat more. The study, directed by Penelope Greene of the Harvard School of Public Health and presented at a meeting here this week of the American Association for the Study of Obesity, found that people eating an extra 300 calories a day on a very low-carb regimen lost just as much during a 12-week study as those on a standard lowfat diet. Over the course of the study, they consumed an extra 25,000 calories. That should have added up to about seven pounds. But for some reason, it did not. "There does indeed seem to be something about a low-carb diet that says you can eat more calories and lose a similar amount of weight," Greene said. That strikes at one of the most revered beliefs in nutrition: A calorie is a calorie is a calorie. It does not matter whether they come from bacon or mashed potatoes; they all go on the waistline in just the same way. Not even Greene says this settles the case, but some at the meeting found her report fascinating. "A lot of our assumptions about a calorie is a calorie are being challenged," said Marlene Schwartz of Yale. "As scientists, we need to be open-minded." Others, though, found the data hard to swallow. "It doesn't make sense, does it?" said Barbara Rolls of Pennsylvania State University. "It violates the laws of thermodynamics. No one has ever found any miraculous metabolic effects." In the study, 21 overweight volunteers were divided into three categories: Two groups were randomly assigned to either lowfat or low-carb diets with 1,500 calories for women and 1,800 for men; a third group was also low-carb but got an extra 300 calories a day. The study was unique because all the food was prepared at an upscale Italian restaurant in Cambridge, Mass., so researchers knew exactly what they ate. Most earlier studies simply sent people home with diet plans to follow as best they could. Each afternoon, the volunteers picked up that evening's dinner, a bedtime snack and the next day's breakfast and lunch. Instead of lots of red meat and saturated fat, which many find disturbing about low-carb diets, these people ate mostly fish, chicken, salads, vegetables and unsaturated oils. "This is not what people think of when they think about an Atkins diet," Greene said. Nevertheless, the Atkins organization agreed to pay for the research, though it had no input into the study's design, conduct or analysis. Everyone's food looked similar but was cooked to different recipes. The low-carb meals were 5 percent carbohydrate, 15 percent protein and 65 percent fat. The rest got 55 percent carbohydrate, 15 percent protein and 30 percent fat. In the end, everyone lost weight. Those on the lower-cal, low-carb regimen took off 23 pounds, while people who got the same calories on the lowfat approach lost 17 pounds. The big surprise, though, was that volunteers getting the extra 300 calories a day of low-carb food lost 20 pounds. "It's very intriguing, but it raises more questions than it answers," said Gary Foster of the University of Pennsylvania. "There is lots of data to suggest this shouldn't be true." Greene said she can only guess why the people getting the extra calories did so well. Maybe they burned up more calories digesting their food. Dr. Samuel Klein of Washington University, the obesity organization's president, called the results "hard to believe" and said perhaps the people eating more calories also got more exercise or they were less apt to cheat because they were less hungry. ------ EDITOR'S NOTE: Medical Editor Daniel Q. Haney is a special correspondent for The Associated Press. ------ On the Net: http://www.naaso.or I think what he means is the calorie reduction of the individual dieter. According to the study, the Atkins dieters consumed more calories per day than the low fat dieters, but the question is how many calories each dieter was taking in *before* the study began. Jake |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Now Harvard study backs up Atkins diet
Doesn't the research behind the zone diet prove that a calorie is not a
calorie and that insulin levels determine how much fat the body stores? Also, does 12 weeks prove anything? Maybe the atkins dieters had more water loss? Maybe the atkins dieters lost muscle mass in addition to fat stores? ron lorden wrote: The most controversial result of the study is its challenge to the virtually univeral belief that a calorie is a calorie is a calorie.....and so on. I recall having read a book about thirty years ago entitled "Calories Don't Count" wherein the author claimed to have conducted small-scale studies in which subjects on controlled-calorie diets lost weight when their diets where primarily comprised of fat and virtually carb free. The assumption that all calories are treated the same by the human body seems to be contradicted by research on the effects of insulin. It is known that fat does not cause a significant increase in serum glucose, and without a corresponding increase in insulin. Carbs increase serum glucose, resulting in increased insulin to facilitate glucose's entry into muscle and fat cells which could result in stored body fat. Obviously, this is a serious oversimplification of a complex phenomenon, but isn't the notion that a calorie is a calorie, etc. an equal oversimplification? Ron Jake wrote in message ... On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 17:36:46 -0500, rosie read and post wrote: the HARVARD study points out that low carb weight loss is apparently NOT due to lowered calorie intake. -- read and post daily, it works! rosie happiness is not a state to arrive at, but a manner of traveling. ................................m.l. runbeck "Trent Duke" wrote in message ... I was hoping someone was gonna post this article and say such study backs the Atkins Diet. In some aspects it does, but in some ways it doesn't. First, the study found that each diet WORKED. This is no real big suprise considering everyone had their calories reduced and controlled. Second, doesn't any one else find it funny or rather disingenuous that a "low carb diet" is only 5% of total calories and that a "low fat diet" is a whopping 30%? Almost every low fat study done consists of 30% of calories. To be frank, 30% just isn't low enough IMO. Low is around 10%. Third, the study didn't give the fiber amount each group was taking. Fiber can have a profound impact on weight loss here in each group. Fourth, how do we know that the calorie reduction wasn't greater in one group over the other since people were randomly chosen? This too can have a profound impact on the overall study results. Fifth, were these people not allowed to exercise? Was this controlled too, cause the study does not say? Just my thinking behind the study Trent -- Look and Feel Great! FREE weight loss and anti-aging group. Join now @ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/weightloss_health From: (Diarmid Logan) Organization: http://groups.google.com Newsgroups: alt.support.diet.low-carb,alt.support.diet,sci.med.nutrition Date: 14 Oct 2003 09:07:44 -0700 Subject: Now Harvard study backs up Atkins diet http://www.suntimes.com/output/healt...s-fside14.html Now Harvard study backs up Atkins diet October 14, 2003 FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. -- The dietary establishment has long argued it's impossible, but a new study offers intriguing evidence for the idea that people on low-carbohydrate diets can actually eat more than folks on standard low-fat plans and still lose weight. Perhaps nothing is more controversial in the diet world than the low-carb diet long espoused by the late Dr. Robert Atkins. Now, a small but carefully controlled study offers a strong hint that maybe Atkins was right. The study, directed by Penelope Greene of the Harvard School of Public Health and presented at a meeting here this week of the American Association for the Study of Obesity, found that people eating an extra 300 calories a day on a very low-carb regimen lost just as much during a 12-week study as those on a standard low-fat diet. Researchers are still arguing over why, and if, the Atkins diet works. ''A lot of our assumptions about a calorie is a calorie are being challenged,'' said Marlene Schwartz of Yale. ''As scientists, we need to be open-minded.'' *********************************** http://www.azdailysun.com/non_sec/na...?storyID=74896 Surprise: Low-carb dieters eat more calories, still lose weight By DANIEL Q. HANEY AP Medical Editor 10/14/2003 FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. -- The dietary establishment has long argued it's impossible, but a new study offers intriguing evidence for the idea that people on low-carbohydrate diets can actually eat more than folks on standard lowfat plans and still lose weight. Perhaps no idea is more controversial in the diet world than the contention -- long espoused by the late Dr. Robert Atkins -- that people on low-carbohydrate diets can consume more calories without paying a price on the scales. Over the past year, several small studies have shown, to many experts' surprise, that the Atkins approach actually does work better, at least in the short run. Dieters lose more than those on a standard American Heart Association plan without driving up their cholesterol levels, as many feared would happen. Skeptics contend, however, that these dieters simply must be eating less. Maybe the low-carb diets are more satisfying, so they do not get so hungry. Or perhaps the food choices are just so limited that low-carb dieters are too bored to eat a lot. Now, a small but carefully controlled study offers a strong hint that maybe Atkins was right: People on low-carb, high-fat diets actually can eat more. The study, directed by Penelope Greene of the Harvard School of Public Health and presented at a meeting here this week of the American Association for the Study of Obesity, found that people eating an extra 300 calories a day on a very low-carb regimen lost just as much during a 12-week study as those on a standard lowfat diet. Over the course of the study, they consumed an extra 25,000 calories. That should have added up to about seven pounds. But for some reason, it did not. "There does indeed seem to be something about a low-carb diet that says you can eat more calories and lose a similar amount of weight," Greene said. That strikes at one of the most revered beliefs in nutrition: A calorie is a calorie is a calorie. It does not matter whether they come from bacon or mashed potatoes; they all go on the waistline in just the same way. Not even Greene says this settles the case, but some at the meeting found her report fascinating. "A lot of our assumptions about a calorie is a calorie are being challenged," said Marlene Schwartz of Yale. "As scientists, we need to be open-minded." Others, though, found the data hard to swallow. "It doesn't make sense, does it?" said Barbara Rolls of Pennsylvania State University. "It violates the laws of thermodynamics. No one has ever found any miraculous metabolic effects." In the study, 21 overweight volunteers were divided into three categories: Two groups were randomly assigned to either lowfat or low-carb diets with 1,500 calories for women and 1,800 for men; a third group was also low-carb but got an extra 300 calories a day. The study was unique because all the food was prepared at an upscale Italian restaurant in Cambridge, Mass., so researchers knew exactly what they ate. Most earlier studies simply sent people home with diet plans to follow as best they could. Each afternoon, the volunteers picked up that evening's dinner, a bedtime snack and the next day's breakfast and lunch. Instead of lots of red meat and saturated fat, which many find disturbing about low-carb diets, these people ate mostly fish, chicken, salads, vegetables and unsaturated oils. "This is not what people think of when they think about an Atkins diet," Greene said. Nevertheless, the Atkins organization agreed to pay for the research, though it had no input into the study's design, conduct or analysis. Everyone's food looked similar but was cooked to different recipes. The low-carb meals were 5 percent carbohydrate, 15 percent protein and 65 percent fat. The rest got 55 percent carbohydrate, 15 percent protein and 30 percent fat. In the end, everyone lost weight. Those on the lower-cal, low-carb regimen took off 23 pounds, while people who got the same calories on the lowfat approach lost 17 pounds. The big surprise, though, was that volunteers getting the extra 300 calories a day of low-carb food lost 20 pounds. "It's very intriguing, but it raises more questions than it answers," said Gary Foster of the University of Pennsylvania. "There is lots of data to suggest this shouldn't be true." Greene said she can only guess why the people getting the extra calories did so well. Maybe they burned up more calories digesting their food. Dr. Samuel Klein of Washington University, the obesity organization's president, called the results "hard to believe" and said perhaps the people eating more calories also got more exercise or they were less apt to cheat because they were less hungry. ------ EDITOR'S NOTE: Medical Editor Daniel Q. Haney is a special correspondent for The Associated Press. ------ On the Net: http://www.naaso.or I think what he means is the calorie reduction of the individual dieter. According to the study, the Atkins dieters consumed more calories per day than the low fat dieters, but the question is how many calories each dieter was taking in *before* the study began. Jake |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Now Harvard study backs up Atkins diet
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Now Harvard study backs up Atkins diet
In alt.support.diet Dan wrote:
Maybe the atkins dieters lost muscle mass in addition to fat stores? Good question. I wonder why Harvard researchers couldn't be bothered to check what KIND of weight was being lost. Instead of lots of red meat and saturated fat, which many find disturbing about low-carb diets, these people ate mostly fish, chicken, salads, vegetables and unsaturated oils. I find it interesting that they did the OPPOSITE interpretation of Atkins than most people. I mean, the first thing Atkins people do is load up on saturated fats most of the time. I'm not sure how the Atkins people can then crow that the diet works. Do they think saturated fats and polyunsaturated fats are the same thing? The rest got 55 percent carbohydrate, 15 percent protein and 30 percent fat. I don't mean to quibble, but I wouldn't call this low-fat. In the end, everyone lost weight. Who cares. Did they lose fat? Until that is answered this is just a meaningless journalism sideshow. Dr. Samuel Klein of Washington University, the obesity organization's president, called the results "hard to believe" and said perhaps the people eating more calories also got more exercise or they were less apt to cheat because they were less hungry. Good point. Geez, don't you suppose that Harvard researchers might consider the amount of calories burned as being related to weight loss? I'm trying to figure out if the study was poorly designed on purpose or if it is just being poorly reported. Wendy |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Now Harvard study backs up Atkins diet
Wendy wrote in message ...
In alt.support.diet Dan wrote: Maybe the atkins dieters lost muscle mass in addition to fat stores? Good question. I wonder why Harvard researchers couldn't be bothered to check what KIND of weight was being lost. Instead of lots of red meat and saturated fat, which many find disturbing about low-carb diets, these people ate mostly fish, chicken, salads, vegetables and unsaturated oils. I find it interesting that they did the OPPOSITE interpretation of Atkins than most people. I mean, the first thing Atkins people do is load up on saturated fats most of the time. I'm not sure how the Atkins people can then crow that the diet works. Do they think saturated fats and polyunsaturated fats are the same thing? Where do you get your information from? How the heck do you know that "the first thing Atkins people do is load up on saturated fats most of the time". The rest got 55 percent carbohydrate, 15 percent protein and 30 percent fat. I don't mean to quibble, but I wouldn't call this low-fat. In the end, everyone lost weight. Who cares. Did they lose fat? Until that is answered this is just a meaningless journalism sideshow. Dr. Samuel Klein of Washington University, the obesity organization's president, called the results "hard to believe" and said perhaps the people eating more calories also got more exercise or they were less apt to cheat because they were less hungry. Good point. Geez, don't you suppose that Harvard researchers might consider the amount of calories burned as being related to weight loss? Ok, so maybe all seven people on the low-fat diet were couch potatoes and all 14 on the low-carb diets ran a marathon every day. Yeah, right! Do you have any idea how absurd you guys sound? I'm trying to figure out if the study was poorly designed on purpose or if it is just being poorly reported. Wendy It is just being poorly interpreted by individuals like yourself who wouldn't recognize the difference between good science and bad science if your lives depended on it. You said that you don't mean to quibble, except that that is exactly what you are doing. You seem to have an agenda and any small detail seems to be enough for you to reject these findings. Remember, this was only a news report taken from a presentation. The study itself hasn't been published yet, as far as I know. So any criticisms about the design of the study is based on generalities and assumptions and you really do not know exactly what all the details of the design were. TC |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Now Harvard study backs up Atkins diet
The study, accepting for the moment it's results, is not a complete
justification for the atkins diet. Unlike what he provides, it was lower in saturated fats and sources of same, which were in part replaced with mono fats and lean "non-red" meat products. I does provide support for changing ratios of macro nutrients. It is more directly support for other lower carb diets which guide folk into lower saturated fat consumption. Finally, the results can not exclude the possibility that if an atkins diet were followed the results might have not been reported,ie. the extra calerie consumption results and weight that make this study interesting. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Is this better than Atkins? | Ferrante | General Discussion | 13 | October 8th, 2003 08:46 PM |
It's Official - Atkins Diet Can Be Deadly | bicker 2003 | General Discussion | 23 | October 5th, 2003 02:00 AM |
Study: Even mid-life diet change can extend life | Steve Chaney, aka Papa Gunnykins ® | General Discussion | 7 | October 3rd, 2003 11:12 PM |
Study: Low-Calorie Diet Can Extend Life | bicker 2003 | General Discussion | 3 | September 23rd, 2003 02:02 PM |