Active Low-Carber Forums
Atkins diet and low carb discussion provided free for information only, not as medical advice.
Home Plans Tips Recipes Tools Stories Studies Products
Active Low-Carber Forums
A sugar-free zone


Welcome to the Active Low-Carber Forums.
Support for Atkins diet, Protein Power, Neanderthin (Paleo Diet), CAD/CALP, Dr. Bernstein Diabetes Solution and any other healthy low-carb diet or plan, all are welcome in our lowcarb community. Forget starvation and fad diets -- join the healthy eating crowd! You may register by clicking here, it's free!

Go Back   Active Low-Carber Forums > Main Low-Carb Diets Forums & Support > Low-Carb Studies & Research / Media Watch > LC Research/Media
User Name
Password
Register FAQ Members Calendar Mark Forums Read Search Gallery My P.L.A.N. Survey


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   ^
Old Wed, May-08-02, 09:15
Jilly Jilly is offline
New Member
Posts: 15
 
Plan: Schwarzbein
Stats: 238/224/126
BF:
Progress: 13%
Location: UK
Default Low fat myth exposed

The Independent newspaper (Uk broadsheet) today ran this article:

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/he...sp?story=293029


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Quote:

The myth of the low-fat diet

For years, we've been advised to eat a low-fat diet in order to help prevent heart attacks and promote weight loss. But, says Jerome Burn, the latest research suggests that such a diet may actually do more harm than good

08 May 2002
Looking for something healthy and non-fattening for your evening meal? How about a nice porterhouse steak, which is 50-50 fat and protein? It's a suggestion that comes about as close to heresy as we get these days, but there is increasing evidence that a low-fat diet is not the panacea we have been promised. For the past 30 years such a diet has been officially promoted, on both sides of the Atlantic, as the route to plaque-free arteries and a slim figure. A message that has propelled 15,000 low-fat products on to American supermarket shelves.

However, the campaign has had no obvious effect on the incidence of heart disease, nor have the pounds been falling off the national waists and hips. In fact, according to a recent report, we are getting fatter. Not only is a low-fat diet largely irrelevant to reducing heart disease but it may be responsible for the worrying rise of diabetes.

Praise for the fat-laden porterhouse steak came in an award-winning investigative article, published last year, on just how little evidence there is supporting the low-fat dogma (Science, 30 March 2001). Virtually ignored in the UK at the time, it should be required reading for anyone interested in diet. The problem with the low-fat message is that it is far too simple.

For instance, we've all been told to avoid animal fats because they are saturated and that saturated fat raises cholesterol levels in the blood. But half the fat in a steak is actually "monounsaturated" the same type as found in "good for the heart" olive oil. The other half is, indeed, saturated but about a third of it is a type called stearic acid, which, like olive oil, raises the "good" HDL cholesterol in the blood. So just 30 per cent of the fat in a steak is the sort of saturated fat that can raise "bad" LDL cholesterol. However, even this demonised fat will simultaneously raise the "good" HDL. "All of this suggests," writes science journalist Gary Taubes, author of the Science article, "that eating a porterhouse steak rather than carbohydrates might actually improve heart disease risk".

The recommendation that dietary fat be reduced to 30 per cent of the total calorie intake is contained in a 1976 Senate report. Written by a journalist, who had only previously reported on labour relations, it drew on just two days of testimony, most from an eccentric Harvard nutritionist Mark Hegstead, who regarded dietary fat as the nutritional equivalent of cigarettes.

That would not have mattered had the evidence come in to support his recommendation but, beyond a certain point, it hasn't. Undoubtedly if you are at high risk of having a heart attack overweight, high blood pressure, no exercise, etcetera and you have very high levels of cholesterol, then reducing them with diet or drugs can significantly reduce your chance of a heart attack. What has not been shown convincingly, however, is that someone who is not at risk will have their life cut short as a result of regularly eating more than the recommended level of dietary fat. As Taubes reports in his article, at least four large trials between 1980 and 1984 comparing disease rates and diet "showed no evidence that men who ate less fat lived longer or had fewer heart attacks".

Since the early Seventies Americans' fat consumption has dropped from an average of 40 per cent of the diet to 34 per cent, but the incidence of heart disease hasn't fallen too. In fact, between 1979 and 1996, largely reflecting the range of new developments, the number of medical procedures for heart disease increased from 1.2 million to 5.4 million. At the same time the proportion of obese Americans has soared from 14 per cent to 22 per cent.

A low-fat diet may be actively harmful. In the late Eighties, David Jacobs, from the University of Minnesota, did a study in Japan on the effects of cholesterol and, interestingly, found a link between low blood cholesterol levels and an increase in non-heart disease related deaths. He reported to the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute, which hosted the American Heart Association conference in 1990. At that conference the results of 19 studies from around the world on the links between cholesterol levels and disease were pooled. Taubes writes: "The data were consistent. When investigators tracked all deaths instead of just heart disease, the cholesterol curves were U-shaped for men (both high and low increased the risk) and flat for women." He adds: "As for women, if anything, the higher their cholesterol the longer they lived."

Meanwhile, the link between low-fat diets and weight loss hasn't fared well either. The ongoing Women's Health Initiative a $100m study on women's health enrolled 50,000 women in a randomised trial, putting half of them on a draconian diet that provided only 20 per cent of their calories from fat. After three years they had lost, on average, just one kilogram.

Critics of the low-fat hypothesis, such as Peter Ahrens of Rockerfeller University in New York City, have always been concerned that simply lowering fat intakes could have a range of unforeseen effects. Fat is a major component of cell membranes, the brain is 70 per cent fat, and changing fat ratios could affect all sorts of processes, from immune responses to hormone levels.

Just how much else is involved in determining the effect of fat levels in the diet was illustrated by the Lyons Diet Heart Study (16 February 1999). This involved two groups of heart attack survivors, one getting a typical low-fat diet and the other a Mediterranean diet with more bread, cereals, beans, vegetables, olive oil, fruit and fish. The total amount of fat and the type of fat type that each group ate were very different. Intriguingly, however, since high fat is supposed directly to affect cholesterol, the cholesterol levels in the blood of the two groups were very similar. After four years the Mediterranean group had had 14 heart attacks, compared with 44 for those on the "low-fat" diet. This suggests that reducing blood cholesterol is not simply a matter of reducing dietary fat. What is crucial, it turns out, is the type of fat and what you eat along with that fat.

A danger of the low-fat advice may be that it is encouraging us to eat too much of the wrong sort of food. Given the chance, people tend to eat about the same amount of calories, however varied their composition, and those who eat lots of meat and dairy products, like the Finns or Americans, tend not to eat lots of vegetables and fruits. So if you reduce fat, it is likely to be replaced with refined carbohydrates, and that seems to be the problem.

Troublingly, the evidence has been growing that diets high in carbohydrate can increase the blood level of dangerous fats called triglycerides and reduce the "good" or HDL cholesterol. Diets high in sugar and other carbohydrates may also lead to a condition called insulin resistance the extra carbohydrates are turned into extra glucose, which makes the body produce extra insulin and after a while the body becomes less sensitive to insulin. This combination produces something that Stanford endocrinologist Gerald Reaven has called "syndrome X" (New Scientist, 1 September 2001).

In the United States an estimated 30 per cent of males and 10 per cent to 15 per cent of post-menopausal women have insulin resistance, which commonly leads to diabetes and is linked with a raised risk of heart disease. High-energy snacks are one way to expose the liver to damaging levels of insulin, although exercise can keep the level of harmful triglycerides down. Another element of the high-carbohydrate diet that has been linked with syndrome X is a high consumption of a type of sugar known as fructose. Fructose makes up half of ordinary sugar but corn syrup, now used to sweeten a vast range of foods breakfast cereals, many low-fat snacks and fizzy drinks is almost pure fructose. Rather than a high-fat diet, a major contributor to our creeping obesity epidemic could be increased consumption of carbohydrates, especially those coming from sugars.

What's very interesting is that researchers who are concerned about syndrome X come up with the same sort of dietary advice to avoid it as those who are studying fats and heart disease. One again, olive oil, fish oils, plenty of fruits and fresh vegetables and slow release carbohydrates like lentils, beans, brown rice and oats are recommended as a way of avoiding insulin resistance, as well as rendering saturated fats safe.

One reason for the survival of low fat as a recommended diet, which really only seems relevant to people at risk of a heart attack due to high cholesterol, is the difficulty of giving general dietary advice. Not only do fats and cholesterol levels interact in a variety of complicated ways but so also do the ways we lay down fat. The billions that a successful anti-fat pill would generate, means huge amounts of research effort are being put into research to uncover the multiple pathways controlling appetite and fat storage. The complexity of this emerging system suggests why the simple low-fat mantra has proved so unsuccessful as a weight loss programme, too.

A glimpse of just how complicated this system is came from a study by researchers at Rockerfeller University, using an extraordinary technique to trace the brain areas involved in appetite. A pseudo-rabies virus, which infects linked brain cells, genetically modified to produce green glowing jellyfish protein, was injected into rats' brains. Most hunger research concentrates on the appetite centre in the hypothalamus but tracing the green lines left by the virus revealed that brain centres that control the emotions, smell and the higher centres had all been infected. Our appetite seems very much part of who we are.

A similar programme to begin to tease out what is involved in the relationship between dietary fats and cholesterol should eventually yield more sophisticated and useful advice than the low-fat diet.

A longer version of this article appeared in the monthly newsletter 'Medicine Today'. www.medicine-today.co.uk

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2   ^
Old Wed, May-08-02, 09:41
agonycat's Avatar
agonycat agonycat is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 3,473
 
Plan: AHP&FP
Stats: 197/125/137 Female 5' 6"
BF:42%/22%/21%
Progress: 120%
Location: Dallas, Texas
Default

Very good read!

Thanks for sharing.
Reply With Quote
  #3   ^
Old Wed, May-08-02, 17:25
Lisa N's Avatar
Lisa N Lisa N is offline
Posts: 12,028
 
Plan: Bernstein Diabetes Soluti
Stats: 260/-/145 Female 5' 3"
BF:
Progress: 63%
Location: Michigan
Default

Thanks for the post, Jilly....very informative and interesting. It's sounding more and more like Dr. Atkins is right on the money with his recommendations for weight control and better overall health!
Reply With Quote
  #4   ^
Old Wed, May-08-02, 21:23
Oldsalty's Avatar
Oldsalty Oldsalty is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 160
 
Plan: Home grown based on Protein Power
Stats: 194/174/174
BF:
Progress: 100%
Location: Salt Lake City
Default

Great article and sounds like a reporter who did a little homework for a change. I liked this piece of the article as an example.
"But half the fat in a steak is actually "monounsaturated" the same type as found in "good for the heart" olive oil. The other half is, indeed, saturated but about a third of it is a type called stearic acid, which, like olive oil, raises the "good" HDL cholesterol in the blood."
Thanks for posting it
Reply With Quote
  #5   ^
Old Sun, May-12-02, 03:00
Patchouli's Avatar
Patchouli Patchouli is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 44
 
Plan: Calories Don't Count (The New Nutrition Principle) by Herman Taller, MD
Stats: 178/176.5/135
BF:
Progress: 3%
Location: Richmond, BC Canada
Default Thanks Jilly

Very informative. Thanks for sharing it.
Reply With Quote
  #6   ^
Old Sun, May-12-02, 10:15
astinson's Avatar
astinson astinson is offline
New Member
Posts: 15
 
Plan: atkins
Stats: 251/228/195 Male 6 feet
BF:
Progress: 41%
Location: Espanola, Ontario
Default

It good and refreshing to see articles like this one.
Reply With Quote
  #7   ^
Old Sun, May-12-02, 10:36
k9dodo k9dodo is offline
New Member
Posts: 1
 
Plan: atkins
Stats: 224/217/140
BF:
Progress: 8%
Location: Souther California
Smile Low Fat Myth

This is a very good article. I am one of the people who fights high tryglycerides and staying low fat did nothing for me. Thank you for posting this.
Reply With Quote
  #8   ^
Old Mon, May-13-02, 12:11
PAMMYSUE's Avatar
PAMMYSUE PAMMYSUE is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 64
 
Plan: ATKINS DIET
Stats: 260/225/170
BF:30%/20%/10%
Progress: 39%
Location: Ohio
Unhappy article

THANK YOU FOR THE ARTICLE. BUT KNOW IAM STILL CONFUSED.
IAM ON THE ATKINS DIET, 5 WEEKS ( LOST 15 PDS, 8 INCHES).
BUT I WENT ON THE BFL WEBSITE THIS LAST WEEKEND AND TALKED TO A FEW PEOPLE THERE AND THEY WERE TRYING TO
CONVINCE ME THAT THE ADKINS DIET IS HARMFULL. THEY DIDNT
UNDERSTAND HOW YOU COULD CUT CARBS AND EAT ALL THE MEAT YOU WANT. ALSO STATING THAT TO EAT THAT MUCH IS
HARMFUL. I GUESS FOR MYSELF, IAM GOING TO START
EXCERCISING CLOSE TO THE ROUTINE OF THE BFL AND CONTINUE
TO DO THE ATKINS (AROUND 45 GMS OF CARBS A DAY) AND
STILL CUT BACK ON MY BREADS AND PASTAS.

ANYONE HAVE ANY OTHER IDEAS OR ARTICLES THAT MIGHT
MAKE ME FEEL A LITTLE MORE AT EASE.

I WISH THE POUNDS WILL JUST FALL OFF AND THEN I WOULD
NOT HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT IT. HA HA

HAVE A GREAT WEEK ALL.

PAM
Reply With Quote
  #9   ^
Old Tue, May-14-02, 04:42
Melberry's Avatar
Melberry Melberry is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 145
 
Plan: Paleoish
Stats: 218/175/155 Female 160cm
BF:
Progress: 68%
Location: South Australia
Default

Jilly, thank you so much for posting that information. It was very interesting.

PammySue, 15lbs in 5 weeks is fabulous and I would certainly class that as "falling off". Congratualtions!
In relation to the people rubbishing Atkins, chances are they haven't even read the book. It is a common misconception that it's all meat and fat whereas in actual fact it also includes more salad and vegetables than you've probably eaten before. The protein that you eat in the diet is actually what is required for the body to repair and create muscle, etc. There are many other people that are on this site than can tell you more about the technical side of it. There are also several people who follow BFL and I'm sure some of them will come along soon. In the meantime you could try looking at the BFL section of this website (under Exercise Forum section)

Melberry
Reply With Quote
  #10   ^
Old Tue, May-14-02, 07:40
PAMMYSUE's Avatar
PAMMYSUE PAMMYSUE is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 64
 
Plan: ATKINS DIET
Stats: 260/225/170
BF:30%/20%/10%
Progress: 39%
Location: Ohio
Talking

Thank you Melberry. I needed that little boost.
I was beginning to doubt the plan. Iam now
including exercising, now that I am starting to feel
better. Good Luck to all.

Pam
Reply With Quote
  #11   ^
Old Tue, May-14-02, 08:03
agonycat's Avatar
agonycat agonycat is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 3,473
 
Plan: AHP&FP
Stats: 197/125/137 Female 5' 6"
BF:42%/22%/21%
Progress: 120%
Location: Dallas, Texas
Default

Pammysue, I have been following Atkin's for over a year now and my doctor says I am in better health now than I was before I started.

So *IF* eating all "this meat and fat" is bad for ones health I do believe I will keep eating this way Sounds like the people on that other board haven't even picked up a copy of DANDR to read. They are just going by the media hype which is ill informed to say the least.
Reply With Quote
  #12   ^
Old Tue, May-14-02, 15:56
PAMMYSUE's Avatar
PAMMYSUE PAMMYSUE is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 64
 
Plan: ATKINS DIET
Stats: 260/225/170
BF:30%/20%/10%
Progress: 39%
Location: Ohio
Default THANK YOU

THANK YOU AGONY CAT FOR THE REPLY.

I BELIEVE THE WAY YOU DO. BUT I AM STILL NEW
AT THIS SO I AM STILL WONDERING ABOUT EVERYTHING.

YOU SAID YOU HAVE BEEN ON THIS FOR ONE YEAR. HOW MUCH WEIGHT DO YOU LOOSE ON THE PROGRAM. (HOPE YOU DONT MIND ME ASKING) I HAVE LOST 15 PDS SO FAR AND ABOUT 7 INCHES (ONE MONTH) TO ME THATS GOOD, BUT IAM NOT SURE. DID YOU STICK TO THE PROGRAM RELIGIOUSLY OR DID YOU HAVE TIMES THAT YOU FELL OFF THE WAGON AS THEY SAY. THIS LAST WEEKEND I WANTED TO FALL OFF SO BAD AND ORDER A BIG OLD PIZZA. I WONDER IF I HAD, HOW MUCH HARM IT WOULD HAVE DONE.

QUESTIONS QUESTIONS QUESTIONS.

AGAIN THANKS EVEYONE FOR YOUR HELP. TALKING IS
MAKING MUCH EASIER.

PAM
Reply With Quote
  #13   ^
Old Wed, May-15-02, 08:00
PAMMYSUE's Avatar
PAMMYSUE PAMMYSUE is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 64
 
Plan: ATKINS DIET
Stats: 260/225/170
BF:30%/20%/10%
Progress: 39%
Location: Ohio
Talking CHAT

HI ALL - ANOTHER DAY....

THINGS ARE GETTING CRAZY NOW. 2 KIDS DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS FOR BASEBALL, NO TIME FOR FAMILY DINNERS ANYMORE. ANYONE ELSE GOT THAT PROBLEM. FIND MYSELF FORGETING TO EAT OR LOOSING TRACK OF TIME AND REALIZING ITS BEEN ALL DAY AND I HAVE NOT EATEN. JUST LIKE YESTERDAY, I HAD A PIECE OF SAUSAGE AND AN EGG FOR BREAKFAST AND BEFORE I KNEW IT IS WAS 8:00 PM AND HAD NO LUNCH OR DINNER. HUSBAND TOOK KIDS TO MCDONALDS BEFORE DROPPING THEM OFF TO ME. SO AT 8:00 I HAD SOME FRIED UP SOME SAUSAGE LINKS AND THEN MADE SOME TUNA SALAD.

NOW MY QUESTIONS, ON THE ATKINS, DO YOU HAVE TO EAT 3-4 MEALS A DAY? IF YOU DONT OR CANT DOES IT HURT WHAT YOU ARE TRYING TO DO?

WHAT YA THINK?

PAM ARMSTRONG
Reply With Quote
  #14   ^
Old Wed, May-15-02, 08:08
agonycat's Avatar
agonycat agonycat is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 3,473
 
Plan: AHP&FP
Stats: 197/125/137 Female 5' 6"
BF:42%/22%/21%
Progress: 120%
Location: Dallas, Texas
Default

Pammy as you can see by my stats I have lost around 47 pounds so far. I did stall out for 8 months due to not eating enough and didn't realize it.

I have slowed down my weight loss considerably so that I approach my goal at a more relaxed pace. I know that by taking it slow, I am learning what I can eat to keep my weight stable.
Reply With Quote
  #15   ^
Old Wed, May-15-02, 08:52
PAMMYSUE's Avatar
PAMMYSUE PAMMYSUE is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 64
 
Plan: ATKINS DIET
Stats: 260/225/170
BF:30%/20%/10%
Progress: 39%
Location: Ohio
Default

Hi Agonycat::

Congrats on you weight loss.

I hope i get be as successful. I just have to get past the point
of wanting the weight off yesterday.

I am going to start incorporating more exercise. I have had to take it very slow, I had back surgery 2 years ago and I do not want to hurt it again and have to be down again. Thats how I
put on the weight, because I could not exercise for 2 years.

Do you find that you can miss meals and still loose weight or do you have to eat 3-4 meals a day?

Hope I am not asking to many questions. Thanks for your help.

Pam
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
[CKD] CKD 101 Trainerdan Specific Exercise Plans 98 Thu, Nov-21-13 21:08
The Soft Science of Dietary Fat Karen LC Research/Media 10 Fri, Feb-04-05 19:23
CKD 101 Trainerdan Plan comparison 3 Thu, May-22-03 14:28
Current and Potential Drugs for Treatment of Obesity-Endocrine Reviews Voyajer LC Research/Media 0 Mon, Jul-15-02 19:57


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:44.


Copyright © 2000-2018 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.