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
  #61   ^
Old Thu, Oct-15-15, 15:21
RawNut's Avatar
RawNut RawNut is offline
Lipivore
Posts: 1,203
 
Plan: Very Low Carb Paleo
Stats: 270/185/180 Male 72 inches
BF:
Progress: 94%
Location: Florida
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JEY100
Dr. Fung's Thoughts on the Kempner Rice Diet:
(also long, more graphs )
https://intensivedietarymanagement....pner-rice-diet/


Some very good points. Thanks for posting. I didn't think it was long though. Did he have the Pritikin part attached at first?
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #62   ^
Old Thu, Oct-15-15, 17:09
deirdra's Avatar
deirdra deirdra is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 3,845
 
Plan: HF/vLC/GF,CF,SF
Stats: 197/136/150 Female 66 inches
BF:
Progress: 130%
Location: Alberta
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JEY100
Dr. Fung's Thoughts on the Kempner Rice Diet:
(also long, more graphs ) https://intensivedietarymanagement....pner-rice-diet/
I thought Fung was using some of his usual humor when he said "Kempner would, on occasion, whip his patients to help compliance." But he wasn't kidding. He links to a newspaper article about a lawsuit against Kempner for whipping patients (because they said they wanted it).
https://news.google.com/newspapers?...=6859%2C6027332
Reply With Quote
  #63   ^
Old Thu, Oct-15-15, 17:28
rightnow's Avatar
rightnow rightnow is online now
Posts: 19,313
 
Plan: ~VLC/~dirty primal
Stats: 520/377/350 Female 66 inches
BF: Why yes it is.
Progress: 84%
Location: Ozarks USA
Default

Holy crap! If you have to be physically abused to stay on an eating plan, it is NOT a good thing...

PJ
Reply With Quote
  #64   ^
Old Thu, Oct-15-15, 17:51
teaser's Avatar
teaser teaser is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 12,836
 
Plan: mostly milkfat
Stats: 190/152.4/154 Male 67inches
BF:
Progress: 104%
Location: Ontario
Default

Dr. Fung mentioned failure to replicate results. I just saw this McDougall Swank-type diet study on MS;


http://www.sciencedaily.com/release...40501101121.htm

Quote:
Low-fat diet helps fatigue in people with MS, study shows

People with multiple sclerosis who for one year followed a plant-based diet very low in saturated fat had much less MS-related fatigue at the end of that year -- and significantly less fatigue than a control group of people with MS who didn't follow the diet, according to a study. "Fatigue can be a debilitating problem for many people living with relapsing-remitting MS," said one researcher. "So this study's results -- showing some notable improvement in fatigue for people who follow this diet -- are a hopeful hint of something that could help many people with MS."


MS related fatigue? How do you differentiate MS fatigue from the sort the rest of us get? Improved energy levels are a good thing--but is this necessarily an improvement in MS itself?

Quote:
The study measured indicators of MS among a group of people who followed the McDougall Diet for 12 months and a control group that did not. The study measured a range of MS indicators and symptoms, including brain lesions on MRI brain scans of study participants, relapse rate, disabilities caused by the disease, body weight and cholesterol levels.

It found no difference between the diet group and the control group in the number of MS-caused brain lesions detected on the MRI scans. It also found no difference between the two groups in relapse rate or level of disability caused by the disease. People who followed the diet did lose significantly more weight than the control group and had significantly lower cholesterol levels. People who followed the diet also had higher scores on a questionnaire that measured their quality of life and overall mood.


Not a very long study. Not much evidence of MS remission. What did improve--weight loss, fatigue--doesn't seem specific to MS.

I'm not sure what Dr. Fung assumed about fruit was correct, that one study that gave an example of a person's daily diet had people eating an enormous amount of fruit, something like half their daily calories. But it looks like he's right about the lower calories for overweight patients;

https://www.drmcdougall.com/2013/12...-the-rice-diet/

Quote:
The nutrient breakdown is about 2,000 to 2,400 calories per day (depending on the patient’s body weight): 95% carbohydrate, 4 to 5% protein (20 to 25 grams), 2 to 3% fat (rice is relatively high in the essential fat linoleic acid), 140 milligrams of calcium, and 150 milligrams of sodium daily. For more rapid and effective weight loss, the calories are restricted.


The higher calories are for people who don't need to lose weight in the first place...

Found this personal anecdote from when the Rice Diet clinic closed down a couple of years ago;

http://globalnews.ca/news/830532/ri...s-hypertension/

Quote:
Under the rigid discipline of Kempner, enrolling in the Rice Diet residential facility was like entering boot camp for the overweight, said Jean Renfro Anspaugh.

“One ate rice and fruit and walked. The staff didn’t care what you thought, only what you ate and how often you exercised,” said Anspaugh, whose book about her experiences with the program is called “Fat Like Us.”

Anspaugh, 59, of Fairfax, Va., knew of Durham and the Rice Diet from celebrities discussing weight loss on television in the 1960s. That’s where she headed, dropping out of law school in Sacramento, Calif., within weeks after her excess weight collapsed a patio chair. She lost 70 pounds in four months on the Rice Diet, but ran out of money before reaching her target of another 50 pounds, and got a job with Kempner’s team.

She believes the Rice Diet Program suffered from the multiplying number of diet books, the difficulty having insurance cover time at a diet retreat and the popularity of gastric bypass surgery.

“Why go to Durham and spend all that money eating rice and fruit and starving to death when you can go to your local hospital and have it done and have your insurance pay for most of it?” Anspaugh said.


Biggest Loser effect? How does it work on free-living subjects? This was a person with enough drive to be in law school in the first place, never mind if she found it necessary to drop out to go to the clinic. Can't help but notice that she doesn't say "eat rice and fruit to satiety, yet still lose weight," she says starve.
Reply With Quote
  #65   ^
Old Thu, Oct-15-15, 19:05
WereBear's Avatar
WereBear WereBear is offline
Posts: 10,493
 
Plan: Epi-Paleo/IF
Stats: 220/161/150 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 84%
Location: USA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by teaser

Can't help but notice that she doesn't say "eat rice and fruit to satiety, yet still lose weight," she says starve.


So are we right back at fasting again?
Reply With Quote
  #66   ^
Old Thu, Oct-15-15, 19:16
GRB5111's Avatar
GRB5111 GRB5111 is offline
Posts: 2,304
 
Plan: Ketogenic (LCHFKD)
Stats: 227/186/185 Male 6' 0"
BF:
Progress: 98%
Location: Herndon, VA
Default

It's interesting as the layers of the onion are peeled, we start to get some confirmation of initial reactions to the rice diet. I was curious about the lack of differentiation that didn't include different dietary approaches and a control group, as Kempner's primary goal didn't favor the rigor of research to disprove his hypothesis; rather, he seemed to be convinced that he had the answer to treat obesity and HBP, which was his primary objective. I wanted a comparison with a low fat wheat group to better understand the differences between a non-wheat rice diet and the wheat consumers. In addition, it would have been great at the time to have a higher fat group as well, but it appears Kempner assumed he already had the answer he required for treatment.

Fung's HBP hypothesis of the resulting reduction due to dietary salt elimination may be correct, but I'm not so sure about that. I eat plenty of salt, and despite that my BP went down once I eliminated all grains including rice, but my prior grain consumption was mostly wheat. Hopefully, more to come on this, as Denise has triggered much examination in a positive way.
Reply With Quote
  #67   ^
Old Fri, Oct-16-15, 04:29
WereBear's Avatar
WereBear WereBear is offline
Posts: 10,493
 
Plan: Epi-Paleo/IF
Stats: 220/161/150 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 84%
Location: USA
Default

It's anecdotal, but I've heard plenty of wrecked metabolism stories which included the fact that the person would be on an IV drip of glucose in the hospital, not eating at all, and they would gain under such circumstances.

In 1936, there was the probable advantage of coming at these folks before they had yo yo dieted?
Reply With Quote
  #68   ^
Old Fri, Oct-16-15, 05:27
teaser's Avatar
teaser teaser is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 12,836
 
Plan: mostly milkfat
Stats: 190/152.4/154 Male 67inches
BF:
Progress: 104%
Location: Ontario
Default

With the salt, we're looking at extremely low levels. It's possible the "damage" is already done at a very moderate level of salt intake. The body seems to be able to maintain its sodium levels at a wide range of sodium intake, but once you get down to 30 mg or so, that might be outside of the range that it can adapt to.

Denise Minger show's up in the comments, she makes a good point about dietary fat increasing the insulin response when added to carbohydrate. I think she used the word potentiating. If you think about it--this does make sense of insulin decreasing, at some point, as carbs go up. Suppose you ate just fat and starch. At 30 percent fat, there's lots of fat there. Twenty percent fat might not make much difference. Now cut to three or four percent, like in the rice diet. Carbohydrate intake has gone up 20-40 percent. But that potentiating fat has become nil. What happens to insulin at that point? It's not necessarily higher. Even when you look at accumulation of liver fat--I think it's not that obvious whether this would increase that or not. Fructose increased, check. But postprandial free fatty acids greatly decreased--probably, also check. Something that often happens with diabetics, not always, but often, is that when they begin insulin therapy, liver fat will actually go down. A few things work towards this. Liver increases VLDL triglyceride secretion--bad for blood lipids, but good for the liver. And the triglycerides in the liver come from somewhere, a major source is inappropriately high free fatty acids. Fat trapped in fat cells isn't available to fatten the liver.

All this is moot if the diet is a semi-starvation one that needs whips and incarceration to make it work. But at least some people do experience a decrease in appetite when they switch to a very low fat diet.
Reply With Quote
  #69   ^
Old Fri, Oct-16-15, 09:33
teaser's Avatar
teaser teaser is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 12,836
 
Plan: mostly milkfat
Stats: 190/152.4/154 Male 67inches
BF:
Progress: 104%
Location: Ontario
Default

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ra-egRqAiiE

Dr. Don Rosati and his wife Kitti carried the ball for the rice diet after Kempner. Here they're being interviewed, Dr. Rosati gives a history of how the diet started being used for obesity. He does say that it was hard for some people to maintain bodyweight when the diet was originally used vs. malignant hypertension, patients weren't generally overweight to begin with. Later in the 70's when obesity became more common, he says Kempner adapted the diet for weight loss--800 to 1000 calories a day. Not much need to dig into theories involving nicotinic acid to explain how a plan like that might reduce insulin, very little food equals very little insulin.

The claims made for malignant hypertension are still interesting. And reversibility of diabetic retinopathy--that's interesting whether calories are restricted or not.
Reply With Quote
  #70   ^
Old Fri, Oct-16-15, 21:14
Nicekitty's Avatar
Nicekitty Nicekitty is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 464
 
Plan: Banting
Stats: 150/132/132 Female 5'7"
BF:
Progress: 100%
Location: PNW
Default

From Denise Minger's comment:
Quote:
Think of Part 1 of my blog post as more of a history lesson showing that 1) people were promoting the low-fat thing long before Ancel Keys; and 2) patients were able to heal from a variety of chronic diseases while eating low-fat diets (a separate issue from saying low-fat diets were the reason they healed — but still a salient point, given the growing blame being placed on low-fat diets for those very diseases!). Part 2 will answer a lot of questions and tie up the inconclusiveness of Part 1.

She might have a point about Ancel Keys. It's very hard to go back in time and figure out what/who happened to change the general perception of any one thing, such as dietary fat. I thing the Keys=dietary devil theme was first developed by Gary Taubes?

Totally disagreeing with the second point. I don't see anyone saying a low-fat diet in particular causes any disease, other than possibly a deficiency of certain fatty acids. It's the corresponding increase in carbohydrates, to fill the (stomach and caloric) void that is causing problems. The high-carb diet, not the low-fat part. I'm not really understanding why she is focusing so much on the low-fat part of these diets, and not (as Fung is) exploring all the other possible explanations for healing on such a restricted diet. Fat is a perfectly good and yummy macronutrient, but the demonization continues....
Reply With Quote
  #71   ^
Old Sat, Oct-17-15, 00:22
Sagehill Sagehill is online now
Senior Member
Posts: 14,152
 
Plan: 8am-2pm IF, Dr. Fung
Stats: 250/176.4/150 Female 5'3"
BF:
Progress: 74%
Location: Central FL
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by teaser
I guess the big question is--does the 1200 calorie, fat-free diet leave you hungry? I know it would leave me hungry, but I've seen people write about doing the potato hack and having a similar decrease in appetite to what some experience on low carb. All the potato hack did for me is make me want to stop eating potatoes.

Teaser, I wonder if the PH was hard for you because you didn't have much weight to lose?

I did the potato hack in late May 2013, eating about 600-800 cals a day of mostly cold potatoes, and had remarkable lack of hunger on it despite doing heavy gardening/farm work nearly every day. I ate potatoes Mon-Fri, and lower cal LC (1200-1500 cals) on weekends, and didn't get sick of them even after three weeks, probably because of the weekend LC meals. After three weeks, I did a three-way rotation of PH, FF and LC, dropping even more weight.

I lost 17 lbs those three weeks, and my blood sugar dropped the longer I was on it, my mood improved, my basal body temperature rose, and I slept much better. In fact, overall, I felt better physically and mentally on potatoes than I do on high-fat ketosis, which I can't do much of anymore. High-fat ketosis tends to make me very depressed and physically cold, even in summer. The PH is definitely more sustainable for me over the long haul than high-fat ketosis.

When I started the PH, I tracked my blood sugar obsessively, frightened that the PH was going to turn me from pre-diabetic to full-blown diabetic. Instead, I was very surprised to see it come down, AND rise after eating high-fat, low-carb on weekends! Very confusing, after being told all these years that only LC lowers BS. It was my first indication that HF/LC was not all that great for me.

Unfortunately, I did regain those lost pounds the following fall... not because of the PH but because of autumn SAD that always started in August every year. In Michigan, I always regained weight lost the previous spring-summer thanks to SAD, no matter what I tried. Dwindling light and increasing cold always ramped up my appetite, packing on pounds, which often made winter depression worse. Now that I'm in Florida, the annual SAD is not happening and I'm still losing weight.

Anyway, the PH was a great experiment... I learned a lot about how my body works, and learned not to fear whole-food carbs anymore, though I still keep relatively LC, mostly IF.

I tracked and discussed everything on my journal during those three weeks: weight, what and how much I ate, blood sugar meters, theories and research in why the PH works, changes in mental attitude, sleep and other benefits... it's pretty interesting reading, actually: http://forum.lowcarber.org/showthre...1&page=74&pp=15.

Check out the PH highlights under "Potato Hack Info" if you don't want to read the whole three weeks: http://forum.lowcarber.org/showthre...41&page=1&pp=15

I started the PH May 22nd, but didn't mention it until May 26th, after losing 7 lbs in 4 days and everyone wanted to know how I did it.

Here's the 3-week recap, 17lbs in 13 potato days: http://forum.lowcarber.org/showpost...&postcount=1270

Last edited by Sagehill : Sat, Oct-17-15 at 00:28.
Reply With Quote
  #72   ^
Old Sat, Oct-17-15, 03:36
teaser's Avatar
teaser teaser is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 12,836
 
Plan: mostly milkfat
Stats: 190/152.4/154 Male 67inches
BF:
Progress: 104%
Location: Ontario
Default

I think that may be a factor... my big problem with the potato hack was that my appetite for potato, specifically, just wasn't there, but there was no general appetite suppression. I could probably have done the oatmeal and brown sugar hack, the white rice and soy sauce (or canned fruit like the rice diet) hack, etc. just fine. The banana hack actually did seem to work for me.

Thanks for providing the links. I do think there's something useful to be had in all this.
Reply With Quote
  #73   ^
Old Sat, Oct-17-15, 03:48
JEY100's Avatar
JEY100 JEY100 is offline
To Good Health!
Posts: 10,318
 
Plan: IF Fung/LC Westman/Primal
Stats: 222/171/169 Female 5' 9"
BF:45%/25.3%/24%
Progress: 96%
Location: NC
Default

Somewhat aside, For history buffs, there is nothing new.
This week's podcast on "Stuff you missed in History Class" was "Starvation Heights", a turn of century fasting cure place near Seattle. Thankfully at the beginning the hosts clarified there are some positive studies of fasting as a cure for disease, and it has been used for centuries in many cultures, but this woman starved some of her patients to death.

Others have been about John Harvey Kellogg's Sanatorium:
"At the sanitarium, Kellogg explored various treatments for his patients, including diet reform and frequent enemas. He encouraged a low-fat, low-protein diet with an emphasis on whole grains, fiber-rich foods, and most importantly, nuts. Kellogg also recommended a daily intake of fresh air, exercise, and the importance of hygiene. Many of the theories of John Harvey Kellogg were later published in his book The Road to Wellness. Charles W. Post or "CW" as he preferred also worked with John Harvey Kellogg ( Dr.Kellogg)"
Dr Kellogg also used a mechanical slapping device, so maybe beatings were already considered necessary to keep people low fat
I was really put off by the sleeping outdoors bit..in winter, in Michigan.


Low fat, low protein, vegan, whatever...all around long before Ancel Keys.

Last edited by JEY100 : Sat, Oct-17-15 at 04:00.
Reply With Quote
  #74   ^
Old Sat, Oct-17-15, 04:06
teaser's Avatar
teaser teaser is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 12,836
 
Plan: mostly milkfat
Stats: 190/152.4/154 Male 67inches
BF:
Progress: 104%
Location: Ontario
Default

http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/32/4/905.full.pdf

Quote:
The food and nutrient intakes of the
Tarahumara Indians of Mexico13


Basically a corn and beans diet. These people are closely related to the Pima Indians. A common argument put forth when looking at a very high carb diet is that yeah, it might work for a person whose metabolism is uncompromised, not for people prone to insulin resistance. A lot of the people hit hardest on the modern diet, though, are people whose ancestors did eat very high carb diets. That doesn't necessarily mean that once they are insulin resistant, the ancestral diet will do them any good.

http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/53/6/1647S.long


Quote:
Obesity and cardiovascular risk intervention through the
ad libitum feeding of traditional Hawaiian diet3


But returning to an ancestral diet, very low in fat, high in carbs (or at least the researcher's idea of what the ancestral diet was) did seem to work for these folk. There seemed to be a decrease in appetite there, as well. Weight loss, improved blood glucose.

Quote:
The Waianae Diet Program is a community based
intervention strategy designed to be culturally appropriate
by using a pre-Western-contact Hawaiian diet to reduce chronic disease
risk factors in Native Hawaiians. This paper describes a
trial of the traditional Hawaiian diet fed ad libiturn to Native
Hawaiians with multiple risk factors for cardiovascular disease
to assess its effect on obesity and cardiovascular risk factors.
Twenty Native Hawaiians were placed on a pre-Western-contact
Hawaiian diet for 21 d. The diet was low in fat (7%), high in
complex carbohydrates (78%), and moderate in protein (15%).
Participants were encouraged to eat to satiety. Average energy
intake decreased from 10.86 Mi (2594 kcal)/d to 6.57 MJ (1569
kcal)/d. Average weight loss was 7.8 kg(P < 0.0001) and average
serum cholesterol decreased 0.81 mmol/L (P < 0.001) from 5.76
to 4.95 mmol/L. Blood pressure decreased an average of 11.5
mm Hg systolic (P < 0.001) and 8.9 mm Hg diastolic


That decrease in blood pressure is 3 or 4 times anything I can remember seeing in studies on the idiot DASH diet.

Neither diet was vegan, though meat was low. Corn and bean sounds pretty monotonous, but I'm sure I'd last longer on low fat burritos than I did on potato.


Quote:
I learned a lot about how my body works, and learned not to fear whole-food carbs anymore



I think there's a place for fearing whole-food carbs, though. I think there are probably people who can benefit from either a ketogenic approach, or one of these high starch ancestral approaches. I don't know that everybody can, though. And I think choosing one is probably safer than the muddy middle--basically, I'm saying fear whole food carbs in a certain context. A real foods approach is dangerous in that it's entirely possible to construct a SAD diet like experience on whole foods. I tried Atkins plus fruit once (basically) after misreading Art DeVaney's blog, years ago. That gave me the worst blood pressure of my life.
Reply With Quote
  #75   ^
Old Sat, Oct-17-15, 05:23
teaser's Avatar
teaser teaser is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 12,836
 
Plan: mostly milkfat
Stats: 190/152.4/154 Male 67inches
BF:
Progress: 104%
Location: Ontario
Default

Sagehill--just spent some time poking around in your journal. Lots of interesting stuff. I have a different view of nutritional ketosis, but then I respond to it pretty well, not everybody likes it as well as me. It is an extreme, and when you get to the extremes, you are liable to get outliers who respond particularly well and particularly poorly. The same is likely true of carbosis--I would guess, do not try it if you are Inuit.



Your potato recipes look much better than mine. That might be why I could not do the potato hack. Maybe if I had managed to eat more potatoes, I would have ended up satisfied on less calories than usual, I just could not seem to get myself to eat that many.
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



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 14:27.


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