New study finds low carb/high fat diet lowers cardiovascular risk (high-carbohydrate diet, gluten)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The medical community never promoted "low-fat" diets, instead they promoted moderate-fat diets and recommended that people reduce their fat intake. But it was found that this advice was problematic because people would often replace high fat foods with unhealthy low-fat foods like refined carbohydrates and sugary foods. So the recommendations have shifted towards reducing saturated fat and increasing intake of healthful foods like whole grains, legumes, vegetables,nuts, fruit and fish.
Where the medical community is really gravitating towards is plant-strong diets rich in whole grains, legumes, vegetables, fruit, etc which will be low to moderate in fat depending on the food choices. The amount of fat in the diet is not seen as the critical issue, instead the consumption whole plant foods while minimizing intake of fatty animal foods and refined foods.
That's unfortunate and shows how often doctors go against the scientific community in their recommendations.
Why is it unfortunate? Nearly every single study on LC diets states that LC diets lower triglycerides more than LF diets. Why would a doctor ignore the actual scientific evidence, which shows LC is better for lowering triglycerides, in favor of information that is outdated (and was never that accurate anyway)?
Got a cite to validate that from anything other than a vegan site? Any names you like to drop of medical professionals who used to be HFLC and are now moderate to low-fat proponents? I've got lots of extremely reputable medical professionals who swung the other way.
There you go talking about vegans again, this has nothing to do with vegans. All the worlds major health organizations recommend diets rich in whole plant foods that minimize fatty meats and other major sources of saturated fat, sugars and refined carbohydrates:
What I'm talking about has nothing to do with low-fat proponents and I really don't care how many people have switched from recommending high fat diets to low fat diets or vice verse. The amount of fat in the diet shouldn't be the major focus, instead eating health promoting foods and when you do this your fat intake ends up being low to moderate depending on the food choices.
Quote:
Originally Posted by saigafreak
Well, she has quite a bit more education than you in the medical field, so I'm not worried about your opinion vs. hers.
You don't know anything about me and, I don't know, someone that changed their mind based on something their patient told them doesn't sound very informed. But you can find medical professionals promoting all sorts of crazy things, what matter is the science.
Almost every study that shows that low carb is better than low fat for weight loss also states that low carb is better for heart health.
There are very few long-term studies on the health consequences of high-fat diets, one of the few long-term studies showed an increased risk from following a low-carbohydrate diet:
When people lose weight their cholesterol numbers tend to improve but you need to track actual rates of heart disease to determine whether the shift in cholesterol numbers actually represents an improvement in heart health. Short-term studies on weight loss don't track disease and as a result only tell you about the short-term effects of the diet on your weight.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Momma_bear
Why is it unfortunate? Nearly every single study on LC diets states that LC diets lower triglycerides more than LF diets.
This isn't true and this low-fat vs high-fat diet thing has little to do with what is happening in the scientific community. The focus should be on dietary practices that are known to improve triglycerides, for example, limiting saturated fat, limiting sugars, eating high fiber foods like whole grains and legumes, etc. The level of fat in the diet, so long as its in the recommended range, isn't the critical factor.
It is actually more simple than that. It is not carbohydrates that is the problem exactly, but grains (wheat especially), as it has nothing in common with the wheat of 50 years ago. Remember the Green Revolution in the 1970s that solved a good chunk of the world hunger problem in 3rd world countries? Hybrid dwarf wheat was introduced there and yields increased by a factor of 8 or more. However, the end result was the wheat was fundamentally changed with a much shorter plant, larger seed heads, and much higher gluten content. Modern wheat also has characteristics that act like an appetite stimulant, meaning if you have grains you are more likely to feel hungry or snack a few hours after eating. This wasn't an issue at all in this country in the past. Take wheat out of the diet and most health problems disappear, even with less exercise.
This isn't true and this low-fat vs high-fat diet thing has little to do with what is happening in the scientific community. The focus should be on dietary practices that are known to improve triglycerides, for example, limiting saturated fat, limiting sugars, eating high fiber foods like whole grains and legumes, etc. The level of fat in the diet, so long as its in the recommended range, isn't the critical factor.
Almost every study I have read says that both LC and LF diets decrease triglycerides but that LC diets lowered triglycerides more than LF diets.
I could probably find an hundred more studies that state that LC diets decrease triglycerides more than LF diets but I don't feel like it.
b-b-b-b-ut numbers don't mean anything. You have to favor at a solitary outdated non-statistically significant qualitative study done 20 years ago and 7 data points from a 50 year old study (i.e. "lipid hypothesis"). Oh, and you have to favor the policies over the science.
Dr. Gardner, a 25 year vegetarian, admits Atkins wins on all counts.
Almost every study I have read says that both LC and LF diets decrease triglycerides but that LC diets lowered triglycerides more than LF diets.
I imagine you tend to read studies that confirm what you wish to believe. But, as I said before, this high-fat vs low-fat diet battle has little relationship to what is going on in nutritional science. The amount of a fat in a diet doesn't tell you much about the diet, for example, a higher-fat diet that is rich in nuts, seeds, vegetables, fish, etc is going to be more healthful than a low-fat diet rich in white bread, sugar, chicken nuggets, etc. Comparing diets on their fat content alone makes little sense.
This compared a carbohydrate restriction group with a low-fat group that was also taking medications, as such this tells you nothing whether high-fat or low-fat diets are better for lowering triglycerides.
The low-carbohydrate group lost more weight, as I mentioned before, losing weight tends to improve triglycerides and HDL. You'd have to compare two groups that lost the same weight to determine which diet improved triglycerides the most.
None of the studies you've cited show that low-carbohydrate diets decrease triglycerides more than high-carbohydrates diets. This would, in fact, be extremely difficult to prove because "low-carbohydrate" and "high-carbohydrate" don't represent particular diets. You are reading more into the studies than what they really say. The focus should be on dietary patterns that lower triglycerides, that is, eating more whole grains, legumes, vegetables, nuts, etc while limiting saturated fat, sugar and refined foods.
This compared a carbohydrate restriction group with a low-fat group that was also taking medications, as such this tells you nothing whether high-fat or low-fat diets are better for lowering triglycerides.
It tells you that low carb diets lower triglycerides. It does. You don't want to admit it so you have to try to move the needle from carbs to fats. The study concludes:
"In this outpatient program, a carbohydrate-restricted diet and a low-fat/low-calorie diet + medication led to weight loss, but the carbohydrate-restricted diet had a more favorable effect on triglycerides and HDL. Because of the effects on weight, triglycerides, and HDL, a carbohydrate-restricted diet may be useful for the treatment of metabolic syndrome."
That is not MY conclusion. It is the conclusion of the researchers.
Let me repeat that: A low carb diet lowered triglycerides and HDL more than a low fat dies plus medication. No matter how you twist this conclusion it stands.
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id
The low-carbohydrate group lost more weight, as I mentioned before, losing weight tends to improve triglycerides and HDL. You'd have to compare two groups that lost the same weight to determine which diet improved triglycerides the most.
If A>B and B>C then A<C. If losing weight is the primary determinant of lowering triglycerides and HDL would it stand to reason that the diet that causes people to lose the most weight (low carb) would be better at lowering triglycerides and HDL?
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id
None of the studies you've cited show that low-carbohydrate diets decrease triglycerides more than high-carbohydrates diets. This would, in fact, be extremely difficult to prove because "low-carbohydrate" and "high-carbohydrate" don't represent particular diets. You are reading more into the studies than what they really say. The focus should be on dietary patterns that lower triglycerides, that is, eating more whole grains, legumes, vegetables, nuts, etc while limiting saturated fat, sugar and refined foods.
No matter how smart you think you are and how stupid you think I am, you are wrong about this.
b-b-b-b-ut numbers don't mean anything. You have to favor at a solitary outdated non-statistically significant qualitative study done 20 years ago and 7 data points from a 50 year old study (i.e. "lipid hypothesis"). Oh, and you have to favor the policies over the science.
Dr. Gardner, a 25 year vegetarian, admits Atkins wins on all counts.
I'm waiting for the post that says that you don't know how to read the study, are reading too much into the study, or some other such nonsense.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
