Page 1 of 17 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 166

Thread: What makes you fat? This will be an interesting study page

  1. #1
    canuck416's Avatar
    canuck416 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Sebastopol, CA
    Posts
    1,174

    What makes you fat? This will be an interesting study

    Primal Fuel
    " A key initial experiment will be carried out jointly by researchers at Columbia University, the National Institutes of Health, the Florida Hospital–Sanford-Burnham Translational Research Institute in Orlando, and the Pennington Biomedical Research Center in Baton Rouge, La. In this pilot study, 16 overweight and obese participants will be housed throughout the experiment in research facilities to ensure accurate assessments of calorie consumption and energy expenditure. In stage one, the participants will be fed a diet similar to that of the average American—50 percent carbohydrates (15 percent sugar), 35 percent fat and 15 percent protein. Researchers will carefully manipulate the calories consumed until it is clear the participants are neither gaining nor losing fat. In other words, the calories they take in will match the calories they expend, as measured in a device called a metabolic chamber. For stage two, the subjects will be fed a diet of precisely the same number of calories they had been consuming—distributed over the same number of meals and snacks—but the composition will change dramatically.

    The total carbohydrate content of the new diet will be exceedingly low—on the order of 5 percent, which translates to only the carbohydrates that occur naturally in meat, fish, fowl, eggs, cheese, animal fat and vegetable oil, along with servings of green leafy vegetables. The protein content of this diet will match that of the diet the subjects ate initially—15 percent of calories. The remainder—80 percent of calories—will consist of fat from these real food sources. The idea is not to test whether this diet is healthy or sustainable for a lifetime but to use it to lower insulin levels by the greatest amount in the shortest time."

    Calories will be the same (the presumed amount to maintain the current weight of the obese subjects) but different macros. Will the low carb group lose weight? What do you think?

    Here is the Scientific America article about the research - What Makes You Fat: Too Many Calories, or the Wrong Carbohydrates?: Scientific American
    Last edited by canuck416; 08-26-2013 at 09:00 AM.

  2. #2
    Giblets's Avatar
    Giblets is online now Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Northern Michigan
    Posts
    47
    Ah, finally a good test of the old Calories-in=Calories-out fallacy. Which, bio-chemically speaking, is just silly. But of course, let's wait for the proof ... the higher-fat diet should prove remarkably better for weight loss.

  3. #3
    canuck416's Avatar
    canuck416 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Sebastopol, CA
    Posts
    1,174
    Quote Originally Posted by Giblets View Post
    Ah, finally a good test of the old Calories-in=Calories-out fallacy. Which, bio-chemically speaking, is just silly. But of course, let's wait for the proof ... the higher-fat diet should prove remarkably better for weight loss.
    I agree, still it will be fascinating to see the actual results, since they are going to strictly keep caloric intake at the level required to maintain current body weight. I have been wondering if the high fat diet provides better satiety and therefore individuals eating this way tend not to eat as many calories. Where as high carb diets tend to lead to overeating. By not factoring in this problem we may not see any actual changes in body weight.
    Last edited by canuck416; 08-26-2013 at 10:15 AM.

  4. #4
    janie's Avatar
    janie is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    640
    My experience -- and the experience of many others I know -- is that high fat delivers weight loss and improved insulin response. It will be interesting to see the study results. I do wish that the # of study participants were larger, but it is likely the result of tight research funding.
    Starting Weight: 197.5
    Current Weight: 123
    Lost 75# eating low carb (20-40 g) and then MDA primal low carb. Tried many other options but only LC helped me lose weight and improve health. Now at a good weight, I find my body can tolerate a few more carbs but rarely go over 100 g.

  5. #5
    Leida's Avatar
    Leida is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Calgary, AB
    Posts
    5,800
    Will they track number of suicides? It's not all about the weight loss, it's the well-being.
    My Journal: http://www.marksdailyapple.com/forum/thread57916.html
    When I let go of what I am, I become what I might be.

  6. #6
    canuck416's Avatar
    canuck416 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Sebastopol, CA
    Posts
    1,174
    Quote Originally Posted by Leida View Post
    Will they track number of suicides? It's not all about the weight loss, it's the well-being.
    Agreed, but the research is to determine if the hormone hypothesis is a viable explanation for why we get fat and that insulin resistance, driven perhaps by the sugars in the diet, is a fundamental defect not just in type 2 diabetes but in heart disease and even cancer.

    "The idea is not to test whether this diet is healthy or sustainable for a lifetime but to use it to lower insulin levels by the greatest amount in the shortest time."
    Last edited by canuck416; 08-26-2013 at 10:23 AM.

  7. #7
    Timthetaco's Avatar
    Timthetaco is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Phoenix, Arizona
    Posts
    798
    So this is NuSci's first experiment? Figures. The weights between the groups should be relatively the same, but I've been in the low carb community for a while now, so I know if the low carb group weighs even five grams less on average they'll proclaim it as a victory.

    Waste of funding.

  8. #8
    hedwards's Avatar
    hedwards is offline Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    74
    Quote Originally Posted by Giblets View Post
    Ah, finally a good test of the old Calories-in=Calories-out fallacy. Which, bio-chemically speaking, is just silly. But of course, let's wait for the proof ... the higher-fat diet should prove remarkably better for weight loss.
    This is questionable. Not sure if you mistyped this, or if you're that wrong on the subject.

    Thermodynamics dictates that calories eaten must be stored, burned or passed through the body. There are no other possibilities. Now, some sources of calories are more efficiently processed and utilized than others, and some types may signal metabolic adjustments that others don't and some sources do get metabolized preferentially to others. But, on the whole, calories digested coming in are either stored as fat or they're burned. (Obviously there are some other minor stores, but those aren't generally what people are worried about with regards to weight gain)

    In terms of higher fat versus lower fat. That's, to my knowledge, always been expressed as a ratio. A low fat diet would have fat consisting of a smaller percentage of the total than a high fat diet. You would be eating less ounces or grams of fat to hit a particular caloric target, because it's more calorie dense, but you'd still be eating the same number of calories.

    When all is said and done, fats, proteins and carbs get processed differently and as such it's not unreasonable for one or the other to be lead to weight gain or loss all things being equal. But, that does not imply anything about the calories in = calories out idea. As the two must balance if you're to maintain a given amount of weight and body composition.

    And that's what studies like this are about. It's well established that calories behave the same regardless of source. The question though is about how the body goes about extracting those calories and whether one type signals metabolic changes or not.
    Quote Originally Posted by Timthetaco View Post
    So this is NuSci's first experiment? Figures. The weights between the groups should be relatively the same, but I've been in the low carb community for a while now, so I know if the low carb group weighs even five grams less on average they'll proclaim it as a victory.

    Waste of funding.
    That's what peer review is for. And if the results don't include a margin of error and the difference isn't statistically significant, then they're worthless.

    But, when it comes to this sort of research, I'm rather cynical. Medical research tends to be of rather low quality and regularly contradicts itself.

  9. #9
    jakejoh10's Avatar
    jakejoh10 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    California
    Posts
    882
    Quote Originally Posted by Timthetaco View Post
    So this is NuSci's first experiment? Figures. The weights between the groups should be relatively the same, but I've been in the low carb community for a while now, so I know if the low carb group weighs even five grams less on average they'll proclaim it as a victory.

    Waste of funding.
    This.

    In addition, the protein content of the diet is laughably low, in my opinion.
    My nutrition/fitness/critical thinking blog:

  10. #10
    jakejoh10's Avatar
    jakejoh10 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    California
    Posts
    882
    Also, Yoni Freehoff wrote a solid piece in response to this: Weighty Matters: Gary Taubes Launches Non-Profit to Prove His Low-Carb Hypothesis
    My nutrition/fitness/critical thinking blog:

Page 1 of 17 12311 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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