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
FAQ Members Calendar Mark Forums Read Search Gallery My P.L.A.N. Survey


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #16   ^
Old Sun, Jan-19-20, 08:16
Calianna's Avatar
Calianna Calianna is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,851
 
Plan: Atkins-ish (hypoglycemia)
Stats: 000/000/000 Female 63
BF:
Progress: 50%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GRB5111
I realize that this study isn't intended to be humorous, but I can't help but laughing at the lack of awareness of discreet metabolic mechanisms going into this. If the desired outcome is good, then full speed ahead, forget all the other stuff.


I actually had to read the following part of the quote a couple of times (early morning, brain wasn't firing on all cylinders yet), before I noticed that it was it a mouse study (and therefore quite likely not even relevant to humans).
Quote:
In the study reported in Nanomedicine, mice were fed high fat, high calorific diets, to induce weight gain, mixed with specially engineered MSPs. The results showed that MSPs reduced food efficiency by 33 percent leading to a lower weight gain, and a positive effect on the metabolic profile, as well as significant lower levels of adipose tissue formation and leptin, together with lower levels of circulating insulin.


But what really got me was that even not knowing exactly what macro percentages they fed the mice, there was the fact that the mice had such good results controlling insulin, and lower weight gain than expected, considering the high calories. How much of that could be attributed to the MSPs, and how much to the diet itself? Do they know or care that it's not just about calories in/calories out?

I think someone up there pointed out that they didn't even say whether the MSPs absorbed calories from fats, protein, or carbs - but given the better metabolic improvement and lower insulin levels, my guess is that it really only affected carb absorption.

Are they living in such a cloistered little world of lab values that none of them have ever heard of a ketogenic diet, and how that diet alone gives similar results? Yes, if you eat too much fat and overall calories on keto, you can fail to lose weight, and if you go completely overboard on fats and cals on keto, you could even gain weight - but generally speaking, you aren't likely to gain nearly as much weight on an equivalent number of calories on keto as you would on SAD. It's not just a calorie game, it's how the human body (as opposed to a mouse body) uses those calories.

But that's not important in the lab! Oh, no - what's important is figuring out some new drug or food additive they can sell so people can continue eating whatever junk they want, while not gaining as much weight as expected. My guess is that when they market the MSPs, they'll still be combined with a low fat diet, which by the way is not even what the gave the mice, so I hate to think about the results of that -take a nutritionally poor diet, block part of the calorie absorption (and very likely a good bit of the nutrient absorption), and even if their metabolisms improve a bit, they'll be even worse off in the end.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #17   ^
Old Sun, Jan-19-20, 08:23
GRB5111's Avatar
GRB5111 GRB5111 is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 4,036
 
Plan: Very LC, Higher Protein
Stats: 227/186/185 Male 6' 0"
BF:
Progress: 98%
Location: Herndon, VA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Calianna
My guess is that when they market the MSPs, they'll still be combined with a low fat diet, which by the way is not even what the gave the mice, so I hate to think about the results of that -take a nutritionally poor diet, block part of the calorie absorption (and very likely a good bit of the nutrient absorption), and even if their metabolisms improve a bit, they'll be even worse off in the end.

It appears that research and solutions like this are borne out of a total commitment to prove SAD works and one can eat what one likes as long as they're taking the measures to make it all appear to be healthy. The "SAD works with qualifiers" is fraught with many land mines, but the objective to enable people to eat what they like is highly rewarding financially.
Reply With Quote
  #18   ^
Old Sun, Jan-19-20, 09:17
teaser's Avatar
teaser teaser is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 15,075
 
Plan: mostly milkfat
Stats: 190/152.4/154 Male 67inches
BF:
Progress: 104%
Location: Ontario
Default

Okay, I managed to stay conscious long enough to read the discussion section of the study. They do mention orlistat--they say the particles don't induce the same sort of oily stool. Also the idea of possible similarity to a starch-blocker is mentioned.

Quote:
Instead, the functional MSP supplements; SM0016 and SM0023, are similar to treatment with the lipase inhibitor orlistat, which does not affect appetite. Orlistat decreases weight through a reduced gastrointestinal lipid availability and absorption [41]. Orlistat shows effects on weight loss and preventing weight regain, but the reduced lipase activity is associated with side effects such as oily stools and fecal urgencies [42], side effects not seen with silica supplementation. Additionally, functional MSP supplementation might mimic the intake of dietary fiber or resistant starch, leading to increased fecal energy excretion


So they say similar to orlistat--in that appetite is not affected. Then describe what orlistat does--but don't say that the silicon supplements actually block fat absorption.

Quote:
It has been hypothesized that MSP with specific physiochemical properties affect weight through modulation of lipase activity [9] which would reduce fat uptake and limit the formation of adipose tissue. We noted that treated mice showed no sign of adverse reactions such as steatorrhea, indicating that the mechanism would be milder than full lipase inhibition. We speculate that the MSP could inhibit several digestive enzymes to some extent, leading to reduced digestion. The pore size and pore volume of the MSP could be critical parameters. However, MSP effects on enzymes and the dependence on specific silica properties have so far only been investigated in vitro with results pointing in different directions [46,47]. Further in vitro and in vivo experiments are needed to elucidate the involvement of enzyme inhibition.


Maybe the next study will actually look at fecal fat/carb/protein content. Something to look forward to.
Reply With Quote
  #19   ^
Old Sun, Jan-19-20, 10:03
WereBear's Avatar
WereBear WereBear is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 14,606
 
Plan: EpiPaleo/Primal/LowOx
Stats: 220/125/150 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 136%
Location: USA
Default

Isn't bariatric surgery just nutrient uptake blocking? And that's got a shocking death rate.

Just living with it is... tricky. Seen on a bariatric patient site: "Just ask yourself, did I sh!t my pants today?"

I wonder if they really discuss that particular side effect. Because I think it's a rare person who doesn't deal with it.
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 20:20.


Copyright © 2000-2024 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.