Last Updated: 2002-10-21 11:25:16 -0400 (Reuters Health)

By Alison McCook

PHILADELPHIA (Reuters Health) - People who follow a low-carbohydrate, high-protein diet for 6 months may lose more weight than those on a standard low-fat diet, and they appear to experience no cardiovascular problems as a result.

However, study author Dr. Bonnie J. Brehm of the University of Cincinnati in Ohio told Reuters Health that despite the apparent short-term benefits of the low-carbohydrate, high-protein (LCHP) diet, this option may not be healthy in the long run.

Following the diet for 3 or 4 months may be fine, Brehm said. "But long-term? We don't know," she added.

One example of a LCHP diet is the Atkins Diet, which first gained popularity during the 1970s. Limited evidence suggests it may help people lose weight, but many experts remain concerned about the long-term health effects of the diet, which can contain high levels of fat and cholesterol.

The current study is based on results from 53 obese women, half of whom were asked to follow the LCHP diet, in which less than 10% of their calories came from carbohydrates. The rest of the women followed a standard low-fat diet, in which fat made up only 30% of their total calories. Both groups consumed the same number of calories each day.

After 6 months, Brehm and her colleagues found that women on the LCHP diet lost 10 more pounds of body weight and 6 more pounds of body fat than did those following the low-fat diet. Blood pressure and blood sugar levels--which can indicate increased risk for cardiovascular disease--were within normal ranges for both groups.

However, as the authors reported here on Sunday at the 85th Annual Meeting of the American Dietetic Association (ADA), those on the LCHP diet ate less carbohydrate and fiber and more protein, fat and cholesterol than did the low-fat diet followers. The ADA is a professional organization representing the nation's licensed nutritionists and dietitians.

So why did a seemingly unhealthy diet not affect indicators of cardiovascular risk? In an interview with Reuters Health, Brehm suggested that the benefits of losing more weight may offset the disadvantages associated with high fat and cholesterol. "Perhaps it's weight loss that causes the positive results (in cardiovascular risk factors)...and it isn't dependent on the diet," she said.

Although the LCHP diet helped dieters shed more pounds than the low-fat regimen, Brehm cautioned that much more research is needed before consumers can consider this program to be safe and effective. "More research does need to be done before I think you can make any kind of recommendation as to what you should follow," she said.

The study was supported by funds from the American Heart Association.

In an interview with Reuters Health, Dr. Meir Stampfer of Harvard University said that the current study was well conducted, but he agreed that 6 months is not long enough to determine if the LCHP diet is safe over the long term.

However, he added that low-fat diets are often unsatisfying for dieters, because many carbohydrates--a common source of low-fat foods--cause a rapid rise and fall of blood sugar, leaving eaters hungrier sooner than after eating protein and other foods with the same number of calories.

But the alternative does not have to be diets that are high in protein and fats, he added. Rather, Stampfer said that he recommends that people follow a reasonable diet, consisting of moderate levels of protein and fat.

http://www.reutershealth.com/archiv...021elin019.html

What does he suggest people eat, then?

So they run in circles chanting "Our research doesn't really mean what it says". This is done to scare away the Demon Atkins, and the lesser fiend, oopswwewerewrong.
DLB

This is a grand slam milestone study! While it stresses that it is a short-term bla bla bla, and try to "water-down" the findings, no none can question the funding! It was funded by the #1 Anti-Atkins/ Low-Carb organization: the American Heart Association

I'm sure they're kicking themselves in the butt, for not getting what they paid for

Wa'il

An equally pertinent and maybe more urgent question is to ask "is a low fat diet healthy over the long term". No one seemed to require proof before it was pretty much shoved down the throat of an entire unsuspecting population.

We are so quiet in the voice of authority.. or have been in the past.
When they said.. oh yes.. feed diabetics sugar..they can have it.. I questioned in my brain..but not outloud the logic of that. WHY
NOT?? And since the medical establishment was so illogical
about them, why didn't I question them when they said "fat is what makes you fat?"
Poofie!

" Limited evidence suggests it may help people lose weight, but many experts remain concerned about the long-term health effects of the diet, which can contain high levels of fat and cholesterol."

Limited evidence???? Anyhow, I bought the new book by Diana Schwarzbein yesterday. The Schwarzbein Priciple II. In the book she hints at findings that external cholesterol sources react differently in the body. It's the cholesterol that your body produces from excessive carbohydrate intake that is damaging to your body and can increase your risk of heart disease.

the 'health experts' ' way of slow rubbing into the fact that low-carb diet is the sole right way of eating.....

if they accept it totally at one go.......no one will trust them anymore.

maybe next time the title changes to : "Low-carb diet deemed safe over long term"

give them all the time to find out.......we have already gotten the enlightenment.

Fascinating. Note what the study confirms: given an equal amount of calories, people on low-carb diets lose more weight than people on high-carb diets. May I inquire what has become of the laws of thermodynamics? Did the scientists suspend them for the duration of the study? (That in itself should have caused headlines.)

It is a myth that an Atkins-style diet is high-protein. Relatively high-fat? Yes. But not high-protein. This was affirmed by Stefansson. On his all-meat diet, which he stayed on for a year, most of his calories came from fat, not protein, even if the volume of protein was greater.

I like this one: "'Perhaps it's weight loss that causes the positive results (in cardiovascular risk factors)...and it isn't dependent on the diet,' she said." If that is so, then it is overweight--not cholesterol and fat--that causes negative cardiovascular results. This is a major concession to our position.

Very interesting. We're making progress, folks.

Sheldon

My wife just brought something else to my attention. Note the phrase "moderate levels of protein and fat." May we conclude that the era of the LOW-fat commandment has come to an end?

If so, hurrah!

Sheldon

We might see some more out of Dr Brehm.

Although she is quite LC-skeptical in Fitness Central: Protein Power , she has been funded by the AHA for three years on Effects Of A Ketogenic Diet On Body Weight And Cardiovascular Risk Factors (a pdf file) at Cincinnati Children's

She still had her funding as of August, and in March she said the one-year and two-year results would be written up.

Sure, a year and two years will not be "long enough to determine if the LCHP diet is safe over the long term", and who knows what her LCHP diet is (where ARE the details in that Reuters article?). Nevertheless, this might be a crack in the wall...

Thanks seyont I've been trying to find more info. about this particular study, and only coming up with dead ends. Now I see that it's still ongoing, so likely why there's nothing written in any journals yet. The above Reuters' report stated only that Brehm introduced these study results in a presentation to the Annual Meeting of the American Dietetic Association.

Doreen

Perhaps her study is the one mentioned in today's Experts Ping-Pong on Protein Advice by someone reporting on the doings of the 85th ADA meeting:



The HP diet mentioned could be an active person's Zone diet if they get at least 50 grams of fat. The second diet is close to the USDA's 2000 calorie 56 g P: 300 g C or more: 65 g F or less recommendations.

According to the Reuters article posted at the top, the women in the study who were following the low-carb, high-protein diet were consuming no more than 10% of their calories from carbs. Of course the article doesn't state what the daily calorie intake is ... but even at 2000 cal. per day, 10% would be 200 calories, or 50g carbs. So the LCHP diet in Brehm's study would be at or below 50g carbs per day. Which makes it ketogenic.

Doreen

You're right- these have to be different studies. That's good news. Can't wait for the full proceedings of that 85th ADA meeting to be made available...