Scientists (sort of) settle debate on low-carb vs. low-fat diets(washingtonpost.com)

2 pointsby Libertatea11 lat temu2 comments

Scientists (sort of) settle debate on low-carb vs. low-fat diets

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2015/08/14/scientists-sort-of-settle-debate-on-low-carb-vs-low-fat-diets/

1 comments

epalmer11 lat temu

I've tried both and can't stick to low fat. My genotype is carb sensitive. Eating carbs of low nutrient value (bread, grains, pasta ...) makes me hungry. A well formulated low carb diet that has me keto-adapted reduces my appetite dramatically and has me losing 2+ lbs a week. Of course I have to exercise but I have been doing that for years. And I do count calories. It is not hard to stay under my requirement for calories.

It is important to understand what a well formulated low carb diet means. I track protein, carbs and net carbs after fiber. I have targets for each. Fat is mostly from good oils like olive oil.

http://www.amazon.com/Art-Science-Low-Carbohydrate-Living/dp...

The study seems flawed. Low carb diets assert that you need to be keto adapted. That can take weeks. It took about 3 weeks for me. And there may be other benefits of keto adapted diets: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2367001/

methodOverdrive11 lat temu

I didn't read the study, but the WSJ article also didn't even mention the amount of fat or carbohydrates in the diets. I wouldn't be surprised if a "low-carb, but not actually ketogenic" diet was bad for you - if you're restricting carbs to be lower than the control 50% but still consuming, say, 20% carbohydrates, then you would never even become keto adapted.