Exactly! First of all, self-reporting diaries are well known to be extremely unreliable indicators of what was actually consumed! People just don't remember; they estimate badly; and most of all, the very act of self-reporting makes people change the way they eat, even if they don't realize it. IMO the only way to do a proper macronutrient study is to completely control what the participants eat. And that's much easier said than done.

Even more important, as you rightly point out, metabolism is so different on a keto diet that it is ludicrous to use this study as an anti-Atkins weapon.

I am getting sick and tired of the British media's attitude to LC. They try to discredit it every chance they get. They trumpet forth anything that supposedly shows it to be "bad," and mostly ignore anything "good" about it, including massive amounts of weight lost, health improvements etc, reported by so many individuals. The same tired old myths about LC are repeated over and over again, complete with warnings from self-righteous doctors and nutritionists.

I'm sure many of the UK lowcarbers remember the "Diet Trials" series which was aired earlier this year--when it turned out that the Atkins diet was not damaging kidneys, causing cholesterol to skyrocket, or fulfill any of the other dire predictions made about it, I swear the "health pros" involved were actually DISAPPOINTED! Since they couldn't criticize it on health grounds, they made repeated enormous points about how horrible your breath would smell, how monotonous your food would be, and how you would have to eat nothing but bacon for the rest of your life or you'd gain it all back in an instant. Oh, and every other word used about Atkins was "controversial." I found the level of bias rather sickening. In fact, IMO they slightly shortchanged the amount of time devoted to the other diets, to concentrate on bashing Atkins.

One day this past spring, I was working out on the elliptical trainer at my gym, and idly watching a daytime talk show to pass the time. They were interviewing some woman who had lost about 3 stone on the Atkins diet, and IIRC she had kept it off for at least a year. They showed the before pictures and she really had lost a tremendous amount. All her blood numbers were better, blood sugar was controlled, and her general health was massively improved. And--amazingly--they trotted out some doctor who told the audience that while she applauds any time someone loses weight, that LC was a "controversial fad diet" which should not be used. She repeated the whole anti-LC litany including cancer risk, cholesterol, rapid weight regain etc. What stunned me was that she was doing this in the face of a living denial of her claims! The doctor pooh-poohed the vast improvement in this woman's health, stating that it was only due to the weight loss and would have happened on any diet.

All this in the country where the government has seriously proposed forcing obese people to sign contracts with their doctors which would limit their access to medical care unless they lose the weight....

Emily