ketogenium
Tue, Jan-14-14, 12:47
Happy New Year, everyone!
Well, I thought I've heard it all, but Anti-Low-Carb proponents have proven me wrong again. I came a cross this "incredibly conclusive" study which clearly "proves" we all are going to get Diabetes and die of heart disease. Here's the abstract....
Kaneko T, Wang PY, Wang Y, Sato A.: The long-term effect of low-carbohydrate/high-fat diet on the development of diabetes mellitus in spontaneously diabetic rats. Diabetes Metab. 2000 Dec;26(6):459-64. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11173716)
Let's read the abstract line by line!
The long-term effect of low-carbohydrate/high-fat diets on the development of diabetes mellitus was studied in Otsuka Long-Evans Tokushima Fatty strain (OLETF) rats. O.K., now all of us expect a true Low Carb diet including high quality fats and less than 10% caloric intake in form of non-refined carbs. Right? Let's read further.
Four groups of spontaneously diabetic (type 2) male rats at 10 weeks of age were pair-fed semi-purified powder diets containing different amounts of carbohydrate (80%, 60%, 40%, 20% of total calories) for 30 weeks. Uhm... Nope, no high quality foods but highly processed fats and carbs. That alone makes me cringe. Oh well, let's ignore that! They stopped at 20%, which means for a human to consume 100g carbs daily. Carbohydrate intake of 80-20% carbs, somehow I miss the "Low Carb" part here. But it gets better, folks...
The carbohydrate content was isocalorically substituted for the fat content in the diet. At the onset of experimental feeding (10 weeks of age), an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) was normal in each group. After 15 weeks of the test diet feeding there was no significant difference in the glucose tolerance among the 4 groups, although most of the rats were diabetic. The body weight increased with the decrease of the carbohydrate intake and increase of the fat intake (p <0.05), and the difference increased in proportion to age (p<0.05). The severity of diabetes mellitus was also increased along with the lower carbohydrate intake and higher fat intake , when the carbohydrate intake was less than 60% (in energy). In other words, they fed their diabetic rat groups with diets where carbs were more and more substituted with fat. That means diet compositions of 60% carbs and 20% fat, 40% carbs 40% fat, 20% carbs 60% fat. WHERE IS LOW CARB HERE??? All I see is a typical SAD diet, processed food powder with 20 to 80% refined carbohydrates! The findings are absolutely predictable and come as no suprise!!
On the other hand, there was a significant increase in the 20% group in the postload plasma insulin levels as compared with the other 3 groups at 40 weeks of age. Fasting plasma free fatty acid levels were increased in the lower carbohydrate content groups (20% and 40%) as compared with the higher carbohydrate content groups (60% and 80%) at the end of the experiment. Impairment of insulin secretion may be the cause of glucose intolerance induced by low carbohydrate intake rather than insulin resistance. And here is their epic conclusion! These findings suggest that low-carbohydrate/high-fat diet aggravates diabetes mellitus in genetically diabetic rats, and that the development of diabetes mellitus is associated with the activation of the glucose-fatty acid cycle. Brilliant! Absolutely brilliant!!!
So, what do we have here? We have diabetic rats fed with processed fats and carbohydrates, we have diet ratios of 80% carb 0% fat - 60% carbs and 20% fat - 40% carbs 40% fat - 20% carbs 60% fat - and we have these typical SAD ratios explicitey labeled as "lower carbohydrate". Health of rats predictably deteriorated and of course the conclusion was it is the fat which causes all that. And in the end they simply concluded their "lower carbohydrate" diet to be a typical low-carbohydrate/high-fat diet!
What we just read is basically the greatest piece of "proof" Anti-Low-Carbers use to label LC as "unhealthy".Wrongly labeled clinical tests, which always are based on S.A.D. (Standard American Diet, 45-60% carbs, 32-35% fat) - and in the end everyone concludes that it must be fat which causes all the health deterioration, 30-40% refined carbohydrates are never even considered to be the main cause of insulin secretion and fat metabolism impairment. No one of them even tries to exactly replicate Atkins diet for rats and mice, I guess because they KNOW what the results would be. And such pieces of outright BAD Science are then used to bash LC.
http://danielgriswold.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/double-facepalm.jpg
Thanks for reading!
ketogenium
Well, I thought I've heard it all, but Anti-Low-Carb proponents have proven me wrong again. I came a cross this "incredibly conclusive" study which clearly "proves" we all are going to get Diabetes and die of heart disease. Here's the abstract....
Kaneko T, Wang PY, Wang Y, Sato A.: The long-term effect of low-carbohydrate/high-fat diet on the development of diabetes mellitus in spontaneously diabetic rats. Diabetes Metab. 2000 Dec;26(6):459-64. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11173716)
Let's read the abstract line by line!
The long-term effect of low-carbohydrate/high-fat diets on the development of diabetes mellitus was studied in Otsuka Long-Evans Tokushima Fatty strain (OLETF) rats. O.K., now all of us expect a true Low Carb diet including high quality fats and less than 10% caloric intake in form of non-refined carbs. Right? Let's read further.
Four groups of spontaneously diabetic (type 2) male rats at 10 weeks of age were pair-fed semi-purified powder diets containing different amounts of carbohydrate (80%, 60%, 40%, 20% of total calories) for 30 weeks. Uhm... Nope, no high quality foods but highly processed fats and carbs. That alone makes me cringe. Oh well, let's ignore that! They stopped at 20%, which means for a human to consume 100g carbs daily. Carbohydrate intake of 80-20% carbs, somehow I miss the "Low Carb" part here. But it gets better, folks...
The carbohydrate content was isocalorically substituted for the fat content in the diet. At the onset of experimental feeding (10 weeks of age), an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) was normal in each group. After 15 weeks of the test diet feeding there was no significant difference in the glucose tolerance among the 4 groups, although most of the rats were diabetic. The body weight increased with the decrease of the carbohydrate intake and increase of the fat intake (p <0.05), and the difference increased in proportion to age (p<0.05). The severity of diabetes mellitus was also increased along with the lower carbohydrate intake and higher fat intake , when the carbohydrate intake was less than 60% (in energy). In other words, they fed their diabetic rat groups with diets where carbs were more and more substituted with fat. That means diet compositions of 60% carbs and 20% fat, 40% carbs 40% fat, 20% carbs 60% fat. WHERE IS LOW CARB HERE??? All I see is a typical SAD diet, processed food powder with 20 to 80% refined carbohydrates! The findings are absolutely predictable and come as no suprise!!
On the other hand, there was a significant increase in the 20% group in the postload plasma insulin levels as compared with the other 3 groups at 40 weeks of age. Fasting plasma free fatty acid levels were increased in the lower carbohydrate content groups (20% and 40%) as compared with the higher carbohydrate content groups (60% and 80%) at the end of the experiment. Impairment of insulin secretion may be the cause of glucose intolerance induced by low carbohydrate intake rather than insulin resistance. And here is their epic conclusion! These findings suggest that low-carbohydrate/high-fat diet aggravates diabetes mellitus in genetically diabetic rats, and that the development of diabetes mellitus is associated with the activation of the glucose-fatty acid cycle. Brilliant! Absolutely brilliant!!!
So, what do we have here? We have diabetic rats fed with processed fats and carbohydrates, we have diet ratios of 80% carb 0% fat - 60% carbs and 20% fat - 40% carbs 40% fat - 20% carbs 60% fat - and we have these typical SAD ratios explicitey labeled as "lower carbohydrate". Health of rats predictably deteriorated and of course the conclusion was it is the fat which causes all that. And in the end they simply concluded their "lower carbohydrate" diet to be a typical low-carbohydrate/high-fat diet!
What we just read is basically the greatest piece of "proof" Anti-Low-Carbers use to label LC as "unhealthy".Wrongly labeled clinical tests, which always are based on S.A.D. (Standard American Diet, 45-60% carbs, 32-35% fat) - and in the end everyone concludes that it must be fat which causes all the health deterioration, 30-40% refined carbohydrates are never even considered to be the main cause of insulin secretion and fat metabolism impairment. No one of them even tries to exactly replicate Atkins diet for rats and mice, I guess because they KNOW what the results would be. And such pieces of outright BAD Science are then used to bash LC.
http://danielgriswold.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/double-facepalm.jpg
Thanks for reading!
ketogenium