Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: New study report: low carb vs. low fat - depends on your genes page

  1. #1
    KestrelSF's Avatar
    KestrelSF is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    349

    1

    Shop Now


    I'm curious what people think of this study which claims that depending on your genetic makeup either a low carb OR low fat diet will work better for you:


    http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6224UV20100304


    which might explain, assuming there is any validity to it, why some people might not do as well at losing weight on a primal diet as others.

    Apathy is tyranny's greatest ally.

  2. #2
    frogfarm's Avatar
    frogfarm is offline Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    trudgin' across the tundra, mile after mile
    Posts
    45

    1



    I would say that no matter what a person's individual carbohydrate tolerance, everyone should avoid the neolithic agents of disease.


  3. #3
    hannahc's Avatar
    hannahc is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Cincinnati
    Posts
    1,134

    1



    Hmmm. I'm reading that as saying some people need more fat and less protein, and others need more protein and less fat. They basically say no processed carbs for all the diets they tested! The fat/protein balance makes sense to me, and no matter which one you do better with, avoiding processed foods will help regardless. Bread/pasta/rice/all grains take a lot of processing to be edible and digestable when you start from the seed (you're not just going to eat wheat berrys raw), so they would fall right into that "processed carbs" category in my opinion.

    You are what you eat,
    and what you eat eats too - Michael Pollan


  4. #4
    hippie_mama's Avatar
    hippie_mama is offline Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    66

    1



    The gist:


    "The company says 39 percent of white Americans have the low-fat genotype, 45 percent have the type that responds best to a diet low in processed carbohydrates and an unlucky 16 percent have gene mutations that mean they have to watch both fat and processed carbohydrates."


  5. #5
    Asturian's Avatar
    Asturian is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Lurking in the land of the uncensored.
    Posts
    282

    1



    I don't think the study was acurately interpreted because they tried to differentiate between processed carbs and non-processed carbs. All carbs are converted to blood glucose once the final end processing is done by our body. That glucose (regardless of whether it originated from processed, partially processed, or non-processed) triggers an insulin response based on the "volume" of blood glucose (the rate is irrelavent ie. glycemic index is just hocus-pocus).


    There may or may not be a genetic response to high fat in the diet, but there is definitely a response in the human genetic expression to carbs in the diet and it varies from person to person, between genders and ethnicities, and from youth to old age for any individual.


    Carb intake and optimal health are generally inversely related, so the key is to limit carbs according to the genetic expression (health) you wish to live with.

    “It is a truism that almost any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creeds into law if it acquires the political power to do so, and will follow it by suppressing opposition, subverting all education to seize early the minds of the young, and by killing, locking up, or driving underground all heretics.”
    —Robert A. Heinlein

  6. #6
    kcurtain's Avatar
    kcurtain Guest

    1



    Okay, so there was 140 women to start with. They divided those 140 into four groups. Then I'm assuming 40 dropped out of the study since they only test 100 for the genetic mutations and an undisclosed amount of women lost more weight with the "appropriate diet". Oh and that was after a year, which means it certainly wasn't in a controlled clinical environment, and these sorts of studies are notorious for lack of adherence, especially after such a long period. If that weren't bad enough, they lost hardly any weight at all. 5.3% body weight loss: let's say they were 200 lbs to start with, then they lost a whopping 10.6 lbs! The non-appropriate people lost 2.3% - that's 4.6 lbs! I could lose that in a weekend juice fast. Am I missing something?


    Not impressed.


  7. #7
    FrankOcean's Avatar
    FrankOcean is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    154

    1



    Well "Modern Carbs" are the ones people who regardless of what type they are should avoid.


    Cookis, Twinkies, Burgers etc...


  8. #8
    MalPaz's Avatar
    MalPaz is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Mississippi
    Posts
    2,790

    1



    i agree with the avoidance of junk, processed carbs, i dont even know why people study the effects or fat free bread with i cant believe its not butter and compare it to a sirloin and broccolli...


    but i am wondering if anyone else has further opinions on gene's, heredity and carbohydrate load vs those who do well high saturated fat


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •