BTW, - The study was partly funded by the Nutrition Sciences Initiative, a very pro-low carb group, and NIH.
@danL1011
8 жыл бұрын
Yes, the folks at NSI wanted a respected researcher with opposing opinions to head up the study. They got more than they bargained for as Dr. Hall's conclusions are not warranted. Quite amazing how researchers are blinded by their own biases. From your link: "Compared with the baseline diet, the ketogenic diet was associated with increased energy expenditure (57±13 kcal/day; P=0.0004) and sleeping energy expenditure (89±14 kcal/day; P
@mrragamuffin
8 жыл бұрын
Yeah. What is your BMI?
@mikewellwood1412
7 жыл бұрын
+mrragamuffin "Yeah. What is your BMI?" And that would be relevant to this study how, exactly?
@PhilosophyLines
5 жыл бұрын
@@danL1011 57 kcal is pretty minimal, and it was reducing as the study went on. Fundamentally it contradicts the insulin theory of obesity that fat loss SLOWED when they went on keto, and they lost fat MORE on the high sugar diet. How is that possibly consistent with Taubes' theory?
@danL1011
5 жыл бұрын
@@PhilosophyLines [57 kcal is pretty minimal] Well, the point is that most of the differences were minimal in this study. [ that fat loss SLOWED when they went on keto, and they lost fat MORE on the high sugar diet] Is that your reading of the data??? It's been a few years and I can't recall the details. My conclusion at the time was that Dr. Hall's statement about "falsified" was ridiculous. But in numerous RCT studies, people do better on low-carb than high-carb. Insulin is the "fat storing" hormone. Remember the guy who ate only potatoes for a year? He lost a lot of weight, much of it muscle mass. His body was flabby. People on keto lose fat and retain muscle. That's why there are so many of them on YT flexing their "ripped" muscles. [How is that possibly consistent with Taubes' theory?] Read Jason Fung's critique of Hall's statement. He wrote at least 2 articles. Obesity is complex. Insulin is only one component. But Taubes' theory is a better start than "calories in/calories out" BY FAR.
@edlindley73
8 жыл бұрын
Everyone who has to manage patients with type II diabetes understands that the less insulin needed to obtain glucose control the better. If you don't, you need to go back and reread Williams textbook of Endocrinology chapters 16-36.
@blowera1
6 жыл бұрын
If you decrease carbs to reduce insulin secretion wouldn't your body still utilise the fats you're consuming as fuel before it turns to its own fat stores?
@ssslayer
4 ай бұрын
**wink** don't ask such questions to LCHF folks
@MrCartoonsShow
4 жыл бұрын
honest study, in conclusion, calories in calories out always work despite your diet religion and low carb sucks
@rolandobonilla
5 жыл бұрын
Went from 240 lb to 160 lb in three years with several low carb diets: Atkins / South Beach / Paleo. That was 5 years ago and I have been able to keep the weight loss. We should be open to the possibility that there is not a one size fits all diet. Many people, like me, tend to gain weight when eating plenty of carbs.
@themovingdance2744
2 жыл бұрын
If patients can lower their risks it is worth trying
@bignige
11 ай бұрын
3 times in my life I've lost around 25 lbs on an Atkins/keto diet. I just didn't feel hungry. Each time I've returned to a normal diet and taken quite a few years to put the weight back on again.
@joc8092
7 ай бұрын
"....we should be open to the possibility there is not a one size fits all diet...." Uh, that's what the real nutritionists and scientists have been saying all along. They've essentially said that people should adopt whatever diet is suitable for them, and a diet that is good is a diet that can be adhered to over the long term, while ensuring essential nutrients are consumed in adequate quantities. That's why a keto diet is not good.... because of the adherence condition. So if a low carb diet works for you, then great. But it's not the god send that Keto zealouts think it is. The calories in calories out model still hold, unlike the keto people who blindly believe the disproven carbohydrate insulin model of obesity
@ekondigg6751
4 жыл бұрын
Oh dear, the rapid weight loss at the start of the low carb high fat diet is typical of water loss when cutting carbs. No mention of that. My personal experience (I've never been obese): At 92kg, I was overweight for my height and age even though eating the recommended whole grains, etc. and lots of exercise on bike (resting pulse down to 39), my sticking-out tummy wouldn't go away. After starting LCHF and slowly into keto, it took me about 3 months to get fat-adapted (the fruity smell goes away). That's more than the 2 months of this study. After 5 months, I was down to 81kg and 3 years later I'm at 82kg. And you can see my muscles - not that I'm a body builder - but there's clearly no problem with muscle loss. It's not necessary to remain in ketosis after losing weight, as long as you stay low carb (and higher fat) It works. And it keeps working.
@EmilEngholmSrensen
2 жыл бұрын
He did mention that. And the water loss is not the water in your belly :-)
@sholbk
8 жыл бұрын
I don't understand why Dr. Hall declares the insulin hypothesis is wrong when the study is Energy Expenditure Increases Following An Isocaloric Ketogenic Diet In Overweight And Obese Men. It seems to me he is confused by the title and what he tells people at conferences.
@danielfcastro
8 жыл бұрын
Either confused or willfully lying?
@vegannursepractitioner9629
8 жыл бұрын
Perhaps you need to listen to the video again Stephanie, some times it is hard for people to 'let go' a false belief, but if you watch it a few more times you might manage to
@sholbk
8 жыл бұрын
Vegan Nurse Practitioner didn't you read the actual data from the study? It does not match what Dr. Hall is saying
@Macloded
8 жыл бұрын
I am with you Stephanie, his abstract from his study cherry picks the facts and ignores other important data, I think he needs to go back to Physics. The study was very short also
@PhilosophyLines
5 жыл бұрын
@Rufus Jackson This was not testing whether keto has health benefits or leads to weight loss, just narrow claims made by Taubes and others about carbs being solely responsible for obesity, not calories.
@funastacia
6 жыл бұрын
Awesome, thank you, I wish I had every study presented to me by the author before reading it )))
@u.martin6917
6 жыл бұрын
Instead of saying "lean mass" loss they should be calling it "non-fat mass" loss. I say this because this non-fat loss is mostly water weight since carbohydrate metabolism is very water-intensive. Most the initial crazy weight loss people praise the keto diet for is mostly water weight.
@corybarnes2341
3 жыл бұрын
They measured an increased use of protein from the urine.
@moraghebe
2 жыл бұрын
Is loosing water mass a bad thing? I do not carry few kilos of water every day. It has helped my joints and added to my mobility.
@Dr_Dieta
8 жыл бұрын
beautiful study. The ketogenic group had lower insulin but also insulin resistance improvement? Whey protein insulin sensibility effect is what they needed to evaluate the insulin hypothesis. low insulin doesn't mean insulin sensitive in ketogenic diet.
@maryh7449
8 жыл бұрын
This issue about insulin supposedly causing obesity gets murky. One has to question just what is it that is being claimed about insulin that supposedly makes people obese? Some say that it's abnormal elevated basal serum levels of insulin locking away fat in fat cells. But high serum insulin is usually associated with insulin resistance. This means that cells aren't responsive to the signal of insulin and would not be taking up serum energy as readily. That's the opposite of fat cells being greedy, taking up energy substrates in the serum, and causing 'internal starvation'. Being insulin sensitive is considered normal and overall serum insulin level is usually relatively low for someone who is insulin sensitive (not considering other pathology that might cause elevated insulin). Cells are responding readily to the signal of insulin and taking up energy substrates in serum. That would imply that the fat cells are greedy in this insulin-sensitive state and are causing internal starvation. How does one resolve this supposed pathological 'internal starvation' state with having good insulin sensitivity which is considered healthy? A very high insulin sensitivity causing 'internal starvation' might have some merit. But most overweight and obese people don't have a very high insulin sensitivity while gaining weight and they usually don't when they have reached obesity. Many are insulin-resistant in the overweight or obese state. Many remain obese even when trying to lose weight in this insulin-resistant state. This is not a state of cells being greedy with substrate energy in serum but rather a state of not taking up energy readily which would facilitate weight loss. How does one explain this?
@m3lezgnz829
8 жыл бұрын
cortisol, inflammation, cyrcadian rythms and gut health.
@KKing55
Жыл бұрын
3 1/2 years on Low carb, 9 months on Keto. on low carb I ended up with NO energy and still just as fat. ON Keto lost 25lbs first 5 weeks, then NOTHING, but started having Chest Pains. Went to a dietition for 12 weeks, who kept telling me I was Not eating enough, to eat more carbs. She said I would not gain weight, so I did, and I did Not gain weight but energy increased. I am convensed that Keto is NOT for me. I need Carbs. I eat less than a freind who is skinny as a rail. There's more to this than they have figured out~!
@devtest9607
7 жыл бұрын
Finally, some opinions on keto that doesn't come from an invested party. I've started my own keto experiment a week ago and I've been searching for 'keto debunked' forever and it's either "fitness gurus" who say it'll cure cancer and vegans who say it'll cause it. Can't believe how hard it is to find unbiased information in this age.
@rubygreta1
7 жыл бұрын
It doesn't cure or cause cancer. It can however, stop and sometimes reverse Type 2 diabetes. And it's great for weight loss if you can do it. I did. No counting calories, never hungry.
@iriorton
3 жыл бұрын
hey @dev test i just started keto as an experiment and I am looking for information about keto vs non keto (common EU diet) but everyone seems to fight each other.... How the keto went? Did you find anything interesting?
@tomstdenis
6 жыл бұрын
The real question is when you FORCED them to eat the same calories in fat how often did they feel full/fuller than in their regular diet?
@PhilosophyLines
5 жыл бұрын
That's a totally different question, this was testing Taubes' carbohydrate/insulin theory of obesity.
@Leonidas-eu9bb
3 жыл бұрын
Tip: a lower carb, lower fat, lower protein, lower alcohol diet would work
@damienwilliams8171
2 жыл бұрын
Love his honest style of addressing these topics
@DanEngell
3 жыл бұрын
I think we need to do what works for us individually. Keto has helped me keep 40 lbs off for five years now easily. For me, when eating carbs, I am HUNGRY on 2000 calories per day. On keto, I am SATISFIED on 1200 calories per day. I will go 16 hours without even thinking about food. Best blood work of my adult life also. Keto works for me.
@EmilEngholmSrensen
2 жыл бұрын
Thanks Dan. I agree. Im not low carb, or low fat, fan. Im not fan of any diet. But whatever works for one person, is great. With that in mind, i have 3 main categories, that is a must, when on a restrictive diet. 1) Don't become less social because of the food 2) Go get your blood-work after 1-2 years, and make sure, that all your numbers are alright. 3) Make sure it is a diet you can live on, for the rest of your life, and never try and push someone to eat the same, without telling them about up/downsides. (not even your kids). These 3 points is to keep optimal overall health.
@FunkyTao72
8 жыл бұрын
I just sent this reply email to Anthony Colpo: Anthony, You have completely misinterpreted the new study with half truth. The NUSI study was a fat LOSS study, not a fat GAIN study. Ketogenic diets will make you lose water and lean mass, not fat. However, insulin is most definitely a big player in fat gain, something the study wasn't observing. I can't stand Taubes or the low carb crowd, but this study does not show that insulin has no affect on obesity. It shows that insulin has limited effect on fat loss. Want to lose fat? Lift weights/do high intensity workouts, and eat your carbs. So in reality, the study does nothing to disprove Taubes' argument. Your CICO disinformation is making you a non-player in this global health discussion. Colin
@Fudoh1
8 жыл бұрын
+Colin Nordstrom Two years of nutritional ketosis and my lean mass is the same it used to be. My body fat percentage went down drastically
@mikewellwood1412
7 жыл бұрын
+Fudoh1 - Congratulations on your "failure"! :-)
@yveclark
8 жыл бұрын
They had to eat all their food hungry or not. Keto diets mean you stop when you are no longer hungry. So this is not a fair test let them stop when not hungry then he might have something.
@PhilosophyLines
5 жыл бұрын
That wasn't what they were testing here anyway, they were specifically looking at Taubes' insulin theory of obesity which posits that calories don't matter.
@Caladcholg
8 ай бұрын
1:44 the fact that this guy causally says that people on the ketogenic diet think 'they can eat whatever they want' and lose weight is, and the fact that he is using millions of dollars to try to prove a counter-model ... disingenuous to be kind. The entire point of the keto diet is you DON'T eat whatever. A huge part of the benefit is NOT eating 95%+ of the 'products' being sold as 'food'. Edit: the guys keeps asking leading questions, and the most fascinating thing about the entire video is the amount of times they both mentioned glycogen (hint: it's zero. Bonus hint: it's on purpose). That alone literally confounds every single thing you point you attempt to make.
@donnerparty1815
7 жыл бұрын
wow.....a whole two months.............30 days on each diet.......why such a long trial.....lmfao
@PhilosophyLines
5 жыл бұрын
It's a metabolic ward, do you know how expensive it is to lock people up for that amount of time? Perfectly long enough too, makes no sense under Taubes' theory that you'd see more fat loss on a high sugar diet.
@artembidnichenko8371
3 жыл бұрын
14 days each. not 30 days.
@gracegates5658
7 жыл бұрын
One study you did prior to this showed decreased energy expenditure about 100 kcal/d with low carb (and decreased EE with low fat- but less- about 50 kcal/day). In this study you found an INCREASE in EE with low carb about 100 to 50 kcal/d. Why do you think the data is different between the two studies?
@eliannidezambaogaio6498
4 жыл бұрын
Amazing... I see that in my clients and it is so hard to change. Everybody is so scared about carbs. And barely think about quality carbs.
@Greynerd
7 жыл бұрын
A closed study of 17 people! He talks calories but not whole foods. Those people would lose weight on a high carb whole food diet. He doesn't mention Blood results.
@joelhall5124
7 жыл бұрын
Hall reduced EE by hypocaloric intake, then claimed the macronutrient ratio caused the effect. He knows this.
@cord11ful
3 жыл бұрын
No, the calories were equal in both groups, that was the whole point. Energy input was controlled for so that the effect of carbs versus fat could be isolated & examined. I am and have been a low-carb proponent for a few years now, but am open to other hypotheses, as one size doesn't fit all out there in the real world. I'm more interested in getting to the truth than rigidly taking a side.
@leesaklich6486
6 жыл бұрын
Here's a link to the study: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4962163/
@mikewellwood1412
7 жыл бұрын
Here is the Jason Fung article refuting Kevin Hall's spin, which another commenter referred to (thank you for that): www.dietdoctor.com/how-kevin-hall-tried-to-kill-insulin-hypothesis-pure-spin
@HummingBlackGuy
4 жыл бұрын
My reply to this may be 3 years too late, but for people who read this, this is a pretty bad refutation to be honest. Not only does it completely ignore the fact that nitrogen losses INCREASED on the keto diet, it also ignored that fat loss SLOWED down. So in other words, this study showed that keto diets suck even more than we had previously known and should be avoided like the plague if you want to lose fat (and gain muscle).
@qix4172
6 жыл бұрын
It would've been more interesting to see at the same time: - what would've happened to a control group that stayed on the baseline SAD diet over the same 30 days at which the test group switched over to the low-carb diet. Isn't a slowing of fat loss inevitable anyway, as your metabolism adapts over time to a new diet and less body fat? - also a random group start of on the equivalent low-carb diet, half of which switch later to the SAD diet - how feelings of hunger in each group change over the periods So I guess a study with at least 4x as many people to pull this off would have been good. Has anyone done a larger scale / more longitudinal study along these lines?
@donaldreitsma6419
6 жыл бұрын
What I didn't hear was that DXA could not differentiate between RF or RC fat loss. I know lots of people who have been very happy not too stay on SAD.
@Xanadu2025
8 жыл бұрын
Did he measure blood ketones? If there are ketones in the blood the body must be metabolizing fat. You cannot falsify basic physiology.
@antipropo461
3 жыл бұрын
Experiment group too small, experiment too short. I wonder why so many lose wai and reverse Diabetes 2 then? Magic 🙄🙄🙄🙄
@erikokeefe138
3 жыл бұрын
Now do the same study again but switch the order. Then you would have a meaningful comparison. He did half of a study.
@larrywimberly4930
3 жыл бұрын
how come all these people on keto loose weight and say it is so good
@samvandervelden8243
Жыл бұрын
Possibly because extremely restrictive diets are satiating
@Alec_Collins78
8 жыл бұрын
You know he's wrong of course, Dr Freedhoff.
@RichKaySSC
7 жыл бұрын
Great summary. Now let's do a study on how fasting intermittently as our ancestors did impacts insulin, weight loss and other bio markers. 😎👍 Some say it's not necessarily how many calories or macro nutrients mix we eat, but rather how frequent we eat impacts health, longevity and associated bio markers. We are not adapted to food abundance, constant eating and chemically engineered processed refined foods. We were designed to eat and fast. Ever hear of an obese caveman? Lol. Paradigm shift time... Keep moving and keep smiling.
@jamesboardman2721
6 жыл бұрын
Kevin Halls study (who is funded by the sugar industry for what its worth) The study was done (a pilot) by low-carb naysayers. Influential folks who had spent their careers insisting that a calorie is a calorie (Kevin Hall) no harm right? That way the results of the studies wouldn’t seem tainted because pretty much everyone knows that researchers can see what they want to see. They are afflicted with the confirmation bias themselves. So if nonbelievers did the study, no one would question the results. Kind of like an organization of atheists hiring a bunch of cardinals from the Vatican to do a study they think will demonstrate that God doesn’t exist. Sounds like a good idea, but you can see how it could go wrong. Think about it. If you spent 15 years of your academic career insisting that a calorie is a calorie, would you like to publish a study with strong data more or less negating what you’ve been saying all your working life? Especially if you had publicly ridiculed that philosophy in years gone by? If you were Kevin Hall and you spent the last year insisting that low-fat diets were the best way to lose weight, there are some who are unbiased (Gardner’s Stanford Atkins study) but not many. As Kevin is a Govt employee it seems to an outsider that Hall may be at least under the influence of the sort of activities exposed recently around Nina Teicholz. irp.nih.gov/pi/kevin-hall The preservation of the Dietary Guidelines and the reputations of the anointed in this field appear to be high priorities. I hope some US residents dig into this with FOI requests and expose the backstage agenda. The US Govt is the grain cabal, you need look no further than the Words “National Institute…” to see the problem. And those graphs you sent me earlier have USDA and Kevin Hall at the bottom, they have to protect whatever last of bad nutrition science they are holding onto, wouldn’t you think? They went with 140 grams of carbohydrates per day, so their macro nutritient composition was the kind that those in the ketogenic camp have repeatedly argued is awful and ineffective, in the sense that the body doesn't permanently change the way it metabolizes fat (ketosis) and the desired effects fail to appear. And then they went on and put just 19 people on the diet for six days only, even though a lot of these diets call for an adaptation period that is longer. I don't understand those choices - either increase the days (difficult and costly, sure) or, much better, go ultra low carb right away. And increase the number of participants - within-subject is a strong design, but 19 people is still very little. If they did those things, maybe it wouldn't be the case that half of their comparisons aren't statistically significant, even without accounting for their multitude. In this form, the study is interesting, but it should be much stronger. And what types of fats were used on subjects? The study never said, could have been vegetable oils for all we know. The study wasn’t set up to test the insulin hypothesis as the word “insulin” does not even appear in the NCT trial registration. The primary outcome was energy expenditure, and should be the big thing on his poster. Body mass and fat mass didn’t get a mention either. if a calorie is a calorie, and insulin is not a factor - how does one explain (undiagnosed) type 1 diabetics who can eat mass quantities and still lose weight?.. Seems this alone would invalidate his “theory” Even the former popular blogger Stephan Guyenet stated as to how all Type 1 (insulin deficient) diabetics were immensely fat and all Type 2 (insulin resistant) diabetics were very slim. Too long to post here just read the breakdown of Kevin Halls study here by an unbiased physician I might add medium.com/@davidludwigmd/defense-of-the-insulin-carbohydrate-model-redux-a-response-to-kevin-hall-37ea64907257 Dr Michael Eades MD rebuttal of Kevin Halls study proteinpower.com/drmike/2016/05/06/contradictions-and-cognitive-dissonance-the-kevin-hall-effect/ And don’t pull the “Oh there biased” card, or that they wrote books, or Dr Eades adheres to low carb dieting, I can make the same argument for Kevin Hall who works for NIH who’s in cahoot with the USDA to protect their failed nutrition science,
@HummingBlackGuy
8 жыл бұрын
One thing you low carb shills are conveniently forgetting is that during the period that energy expenditure was increased (the increase in EE disappeared near the end of the study), fat loss DECREASED and fat free mass loss INCREASED. At around 5:45, Hall explains that this has been partly due to increased nitrogen excretion, thus meaning protein loss. Do you really think this is anything worth celebrating about? If anything, this study shows us that ketogenic diets suck even more than what was previously thought! It also is in accordance with previous ward studies that show that isocaloric carb/fat/protein diets produce the same amount of weight loss/gain. Also as mentioned before, if Hall is really so incompetent, that doesn't say much good about Taubes either since NuSi gave birth to this study in the first place......
@BRBWaffles
6 жыл бұрын
If you actually read the study, proteolysis stopped around the same time fat loss picked back up (around day 15 of the KD). If you actually look at the ranges on the EE charts, there were some participants maintaining an excess of -100cal in EE despite proteolysis tapering off. Considering beta-oxidation was constant throughout the KD phase, this means that some people had an increased EE from fat, while others didn't seem to get the same effect. While the median increase in EE was around -57cal, there were some doing a lot better than that and some doing a lot worse. So, instead of saying "this study refutes the carbohydrate-insulin hypothesis", what it easily could have said is that "the effect of a KD on EE is more profound in some people than others". The question is why? Hall speculates it's because of protein, and he said in an interview that if they had clamped protein at a higher percentage, there probably would have been a different effect. So, it's possible that protein was just too low, and some people didn't respond well to it.
@mariutube01
6 жыл бұрын
Please, by all means, consume all the carbs and leave the high quality fats, protein and leafy greens to the smart people. Good luck.
@tterb777
6 жыл бұрын
at 11:30 or so... I've come along the journey via Paleo/LowCarb/Keto and have found massive success. I minimally have meat and all my carbs are from salads/veggies and periodically fruit, maybe honey here and there. Ultimately, living a satiated live the biggest change is no cravings for any other food item other than what I believe to be energy for my body on a cellular level. I can't explain it but that's what must of happened b/ i have no interest in "food" that is not nourishing for my body on a deeper level... even possibly my brain cells. So therefor it is a long term "solution" ... my view of what is "food" has changed naturally too... not but brute force.... Veggies, healthy fat and grass fed meat... there's nothing more satisfying and frankly there's nothing outside of this basic Macro view that I see as "food" ... So therefor it is a long term "solution" and method of consumption... basically everything else is "poison" to me... although not literally but pretty close.... I can probably eat newspaper to fill me up like crappy "food" does and get a tummy ache and a company could turn around and call it safe to eat and put it in "food"... call it pulp and filler and bamb... a new additive.... but not for me...
@coffeemachtspass
5 жыл бұрын
If the LCHF portion of the study was providing so much dietary fat, what incentive does the body have to dig into its storage? The other point that I’ve heard discussed is the role played by brown adipose tissue, which is highly active as an energy consumer. I understand that BAT ramps up its activity in ketosis, but that it takes time to multiply its mitochondria. Perhaps this study was too short to capture that potential effect?
@greatfeather2070
8 жыл бұрын
The HUGE flaw in this study is they're measuring the opposite function. Measuring WEIGHT LOSS during calorie deficit through different diets has nothing to do with OBESITY. Obesity is weight gain, this study is weight loss. Absolutely no one is suggesting that people gain weight by having the kind of limited insulin found in a calorie deficit diet. All this seems to prove (it was hard to hear) was that harshly limiting insulin wasn't better than mildly limiting insulin, while strictly limiting calories into deficit. Calorie deficits aren't a factor in weight gain, that's basically the only fundamental thing that is unquestionable, so this study is kind of useless. If you want to prevent WEIGHT GAIN, then you need studies that involve WEIGHT GAIN. A far more thorough study would be 0, 500, 1000 calories surpluses, with groups also consuming 30g, 60g, 120g, 240g, 480g and 960g+ of carbohydrates in a day, while keeping calories the same. Measure hunger levels, and measure what rate they all gain fat (or lose). I predict you would very likely find wildly differing results within the same calorie groups, and it would do MUCH better to prove whether insulin is a factor in weight GAIN. Hunger levels are also important, that is the starting point to any weight gain process.
@maryh7449
8 жыл бұрын
It does seem strange that in the U.S. the paradigm in recent years has been to pit high-fat diets and low-fat diets against each other in a weight loss situation to try to determine what is causing weight gain. Weight loss studies are a roundabout way of trying to prove what is causing weight gain. It's even more roundabout to try to prove from measuring insulin during weight loss that it is insulin that is causing initial weight gain. There is value in it in terms of trying to analyze weight regain after weight loss from an overweight state but it doesn't directly examine the original weight gain that caused the overweight state. It's also a very narrow paradigm that considers only 'fat vs. carbohydrate'. Gary Taubes has stated that he thinks that weight loss studies are the way to go but hasn't offered any convincing reasons why he thinks this. He has said that it would take too long to do weight gain and that weight loss can be done quicker, which isn't true. Weight gain studies could be done just as quick. He also said that any 'metabolic advantage' observed during a low-carb weight loss is presumably due to the effects of insulin but he hasn't given any science-based reasons why he thinks this. It's expected that people of the popular press such as Taubes would want to go this route because weight loss diet books and articles are going to sell better to the general public than writings about imposing weight gain. What's disturbing is that researchers have gotten into this game and are using it to promote their own weight loss diet books. After receiving funding from the NuSI group of Taubes, David Ludwig fully climbed on board the insulin-obesity hypothesis of Gary Taubes and published his own weight loss diet book in early 2016. The blurring of science with popular media sales is increasing Researchers in the past have warned against doing 'science by press conference'. Today it is turning into 'science by diet book sales' and 'diet book sales by biased, cherry-picked, science studies'.
@PhilosophyLines
5 жыл бұрын
Taubes et al. all suggest the low carb diet for weight loss, so I think you are clutching at straws here.
@mariutube01
6 жыл бұрын
Nobody says you can eat tons of calories and lose weight. You know nothing of what speak.
@PhilosophyLines
5 жыл бұрын
Gary Taubes? He argues calories don't matter, it's just carbohydrate that impacts fat accumulation.
@johnsalwin5262
8 жыл бұрын
AWESOME. So does this mean that Taubes and Attia and Ferriss will apologize to guys like Anthony Colpo, who were pointing out that calories were the more important thing to focus on for anyone trying to lose fat and weight? Or, more importantly, apologize to their fans and followers for being wrong? I'd especially like to see an apology from Ferriss, who in The Four Hour Body, claimed that an hour long stairmaster session would only burn 7 (that's right, seven) more calories than sitting on the couch watching The Simpsons. With 500+ calories being burned simply from being outside of calorie chamber, clearly Tim had no idea the calorie burn of various activities.
@keangkong
8 жыл бұрын
+John Salwin Apologize? Gary Taubes said good research should be conducted. That's what was done. Nothing to apologize for.
@sholbk
8 жыл бұрын
+John Salwin Did you read the title of the study? Energy Expenditure Increases Following An Isocaloric Ketogenic Diet In Overweight And Obese Men. It seems Dr Hall is confused by what he publishes and what he tells people at conferences. Taubes and Attia are indeed correct! Hall's study shows exactly that.
@johnsalwin5262
8 жыл бұрын
+Stephanie Holbrook Yeah, but if that increased energy expenditure comes from lean mass, then I personally (and I would wager the vast majority of dieters also) would have no use for it. Did you see the part where fat loss slowed during the ketogenic phase of the trial? The faster weight loss is coming from water, glycogen, and amino acids lost to gluconeogenesis. Not exactly awesome. Low Carb diets can offer advantages like higher protein and dietary cholesterol, a focus on whole foods, and more healthy saturated fats. But guess what? You can do all of those things with a higher carb intake as well, all while maintaining a caloric deficit. That's my personal strategy.
@johnsalwin5262
8 жыл бұрын
+Keang Kong There have been over twenty well conducted metabolic ward trials going back as far as 1935. Kudos to Taubes for putting his money where his mouth is and funding what looks like another high quality trial, but I remember the part in GCBC where he suggests that weight and/or fat loss would be the same on caloric intakes from 0-3100 calories if only carbs where held constant, and that just ain't true.
@bbaker6212
8 жыл бұрын
+John Salwin If you include strength training there will be even more fat loss and no lean mass loss. This stuff has been well known for decades. Go read about Vince Gironda.
@1967davidfitness
6 жыл бұрын
Weight loss happens when you sleep, because you exhale! No one talks about that, books to sell??
@davidday8692
8 жыл бұрын
Talk about clinically biased, of course people don't lose weight when they consume more fat/fuel than they burn. To lose weight one needs to eat a ketogenic diet high in hunger satiating protein & low in fat/fuel & let nature decide how much one wants to consume, obviously. Lipogenesis is a known metabolic process & not a "carbohydrate insulin hypothesis". But don't take my word for it, get a glucometer, eat some carbs & when you see your blood glucose level rise, then you know your body is producing insulin to deal with that excess glucose. Insulin does not force excess glucose into cells, because each cell only activates it's glucose receptor when it needs glucose & therefore cannot be force fed. Insulin simply supplies all the missing nutrients that the empty calorie/sugar molecule requires to transform that sugar molecule into a fat molecule, which is then transported by a lipoprotein to the nearest fat cell capable of accepting it. IF ones pancreas lacks sufficient nutrients to produce insulin, then insulin resistance / type 2 diabetes occurs. Excess glucose in the blood stream damages the inner lining of the arteries, causing cholesterol to form a scab over the injury to allow that injury to heal, causing atherosclerosis. To even attempt to publish such rubbish as scientific evidence only shows how desperate they are to keep everyone sick & only a brain dead vegan would accept such crap as scientific evidence, which vegans are infamous for doing, but to be fair, the poor misguided fools have nothing else to cling to. Here's a link to some real scientific evidence. www.diabetes.co.uk/diet/low-carb-diet-diabetes-diet-and-scientific-research.html A.K.A Adam Davies.
@mofomartianp
8 жыл бұрын
To lose weight one needs to burn more energy than one consumes. It really is that simple. If you eat too many carbs... just start doing 1 hour of cardio per day and you'll burn through your glycogen stores to where your sugar intake won't be a problem anymore. And make sure you have 1 gram of dietary fiber for every 2 grams of sugar in your diet. Don't sit around on your ass all day and tell me pasta causes diabetes. Go for a run or bike ride. The problem is not a high carb diet... the problem is that people consume too many simple carbs while living a sedentary lifestyle. This leads to repeatedly spiked insulin levels and develops into a glucose intolerance. At which point, you will needs to exercise anyway to help mitigate the effects of reduced insulin levels. Every study on the subject has shown giving type 2 diabetics insulin has a negligible impact on their health and longevity. DIET & EXERCISE, specifically a fiber-rich diet with plenty of cardio, has been proven to produce significantly better results. In some cases it has actually cured people of glucose intolerance and/or helped type 2 diabetics to stabilize their insulin levels. Use your body. For Christ sake people, use your body.
@anglicantian
7 жыл бұрын
"KLC and NLC diets were equally effective in reducing body weight and insulin resistance, but the Ketogenic Low carb was associated with several adverse metabolic and emotional effects. The use of ketogenic diets for weight loss is not warranted." www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16685046 Ketogenic diets aren't smart for everyone. This study demonstrated negative atherogenic chances in lipoproteins with patients on a ketogenic diet. "Ketogenic Diet treatment promotes negative changes in lipoprotein size and phenotype, contributing to atherogenic risk in these patients." "The LDL phenotype became worse; 52.1% of the patients had a non-A phenotype after 6 mo of the KD. Small HDL subfractions decreased only after 6 mo of the KD." www.nutritionjrnl.com/article/S0899-9007(16)30135-6/abstract Furthermore, ketogenic diets are bad for athletic performance and may make patients feel more fatigued. "Blood beta-hydroxybutyrate was also significantly correlated to feelings of "fatigue" (r=0.458, P=0.049) and to "total mood disturbance" (r=0.551, P=0.015) while exercising. These pilot data indicate that ketogenic, low-carbohydrate diets enhance fatigability and can reduce the desire to exercise in free-living individuals."
@davidday8692
7 жыл бұрын
+anglicantian You are unable to link any peer reviewed scientific research to prove the Lipid Hypothesis, because none exists. Linking non-scientific "studies" that conflict directly with the findings of modern research does not suffice, obviously. +mofomartian Exercise can manage ones weight, but does not protect one from the damaging effects of sugar. Gluconeogenesis provides the correct type & exact dose of glucose as required. All glucose consumed is excess & is processed into fat. Processing glucose into fat depletes one of their reserves of essential vitamins & minerals & can cause nutrient deficient disease such as type 2 diabetes. While the excess glucose is in the blood stream it is damaging the inner lining of the arteries, where cholesterol forms a scab to heal the injury, causing atherosclerosis/high blood pressure. Glucose is acidic & while ones blood glucose is elevated ones pH becomes acidic & we all know Cancer thrives in an acidic environment & is fueled by sugar.
@anglicantian
7 жыл бұрын
"You are unable to link any peer reviewed scientific research to prove the Lipid Hypothesis, because none exists." I agree. "Proof" doesn't exist in science. What does exist, though, is the preponderance of available evidence being in favor of, or against, a particular hypothesis. But no theory is ever "proven". We do know that a high serum-cholesterol is associated with increased mortality in some studies, and in some specific subsets of patient populations: "All-cause mortality seemed to be highest in the highest quartile of total cholesterol and nearly as high in the lowest quartile of total cholesterol, suggesting a U-shaped connection, but the differences were not statistically significant. However, cardiovascular mortality was significantly lowest in the lowest quartile of total cholesterol and significantly highest in the lowest quartile of HDL-c. High levels of serum total cholesterol and particularly low levels of HDL-c seem to be risk factors for cardiovascular mortality even in the elderly population." www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20154511 "The association of serum total and HDL cholesterol with mortality follows a U-shaped pattern in Hispanic patients residing in the West. This is in contrast to Hispanic patients in the East Coast whose survival seems to improve with increasing total and HDL cholesterol levels. Elevated serum LDL levels in Hispanic patients on the West Coast are associated with a significant increase in mortality, while this association is not observed in patients residing on the East Coast." www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26044456 "The few studies that have examined the association of total cholesterol with coronary heart disease occurrence and mortality in women have consistently shown that (a) women have much lower rates of coronary heart disease than men at the same values for cholesterol, and (b) clearly elevated risk for coronary heart disease in women is evident only at relatively high values of total cholesterol (i.e., greater than 260 mg/dL). There also appears to be an age effect, with total cholesterol concentrations being more predictive in older than in younger women. "The rate of coronary disease in women with cholesterol concentrations exceeding 265 mg/dl was 3 times higher than in those with the lowest cholesterol concentration. In 2 American studies an increase of 10 mg/dl in HDL was associated with a 42-50 % reduction of coronary risk in women." www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3042201 So a higher serum-cholesterol is indeed associated with higher mortality and rates of coronary disease in these populations, in some studies. Higher HDL seems to have a protective effect. Obesity impacts on cardiovascular risk: "A total of 194 men (6.5%) died due to IHD and 1184 (39.8%) from all causes. All lifestyle factors and clinical/metabolic risk factors were associated with BMI, positively or negatively. Risk of IHD and ACM increased gradually from the normal weight (BMI 20.0-25.0) to higher BMI groups. The importance of risk factors for IHD mortality, in particular serum TG and serum HDL-C, depends on BMI." www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19032035 "Among serum lipids, the most informative predictor (of ischaemic heart disease mortality) was the ratio of total cholesterol to HDL cholesterol. Using more informative expressions of conventional risk factors for ischemic heart disease may improve both the validity and precision of estimates of risk, and may be useful both clinically and for preventive purposes." www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21461943
@davidday8692
7 жыл бұрын
+anglicantian Peer reviewed scientific evidence does exist, you just need to stop focusing on nonsensical theory tales & learn to use google.
@bbaker6212
8 жыл бұрын
I find all this very amusing. It's been known for decades that a lower-carb higher-fat diet keeps you leaner and is more satiating (less hunger). Anyone who's ever ate this way for an extended time knows this as well. Vince Gironda, one of the best personal trainers ever recommended back in the 60's a lowish-carb cycling (not ketogenic) diet.
@hyoklee3297
8 жыл бұрын
+Bradley Baker The argument that low carb/ketogenic diet results in better appetite control is a perfectly valid argument. But, that is not what's been put forth by low carb advocates. They have claimed that you can eat as much as you want, as long as you keep carbs low. This study clearly shows that to be wrong. Also, it's been claimed that there is a benefit to low insulin for fat loss. Again, this has been shown to be wrong.
@bbaker6212
8 жыл бұрын
+Hyok Lee The statement "eat as much as you want" can have two different meanings. 1) eating to satiety and 2) eating beyond satiety. The latter (usually eating for pleasure) will be problematic for anyone regardless of their diet regimen, so it's sorta irrelevant to a discussion about what regimen is most optimal for the majority of people. High average insulin levels on their own are not a factor (since protein spikes insulin as well) but if high average glucose levels (frequent spikes) are the cause of the insulin then that has a big impact on fat loss (restricted glucagon, lipolysis).
@Alec_Collins78
8 жыл бұрын
+Hyok Lee Where has the insulin thing been shown to be wrong? The other thing you said has been shown to be wrong hasn't been.
@Alec_Collins78
8 жыл бұрын
+Bradley Baker As much as you want Vs as much as you can.
@anglicantian
7 жыл бұрын
"I find all this very amusing. It's been known for decades that a lower-carb higher-fat diet keeps you leaner and is more satiating (less hunger)." Really? Some studies say otherwise. "The satiety quotient was greater after ad libitum and isoenergetic meals during the LFHC condition compared with the HFLC condition (P=0·006 and P=0·001, respectively), whereas ad libitum energy intake was lower in the LFHC condition (P
@ttabdoc
6 жыл бұрын
smart fellow, but the study only deals with subjects with BMI
@brocklee2458
4 жыл бұрын
ttabdoc you missed the whole point of the findings. INSULIN DOES NOT MATTER.
Пікірлер: 147