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 Thu, Feb-07-19, 17:30
bevangel's Avatar
bevangel bevangel is online now
Posts: 1,915
 
Plan: modified adkins (sort of)
Stats: 265/176/167 Female 68.5 inches
BF:
Progress: 91%
Location: Austin, TX
Default Less red meat and/or more fiber yields no effect on cardio-metabolic risk factors

American Journal of Clinical Nutrition - Abstract, Feb 5, 2019


Quote:

Potential effects of reduced red meat compared with increased fiber intake on glucose metabolism and liver fat content: a randomized and controlled dietary intervention study.

Background:

Epidemiological studies suggest that an increased red meat intake is associated with a higher risk of type 2 diabetes, whereas an increased fiber intake is associated with a lower risk.

Objectives:

We conducted an intervention study to investigate the effects of these nutritional factors on glucose and lipid metabolism, body-fat distribution, and liver fat content in subjects at increased risk of type 2 diabetes.

Methods:

This prospective, randomized, and controlled dietary intervention study was performed over 6 mo. All groups decreased their daily caloric intake by 400 kcal. The "control" group (N = 40) only had this requirement. The "no red meat" group (N = 48) in addition aimed to avoid the intake of red meat, and the "fiber" group (N = 44) increased intake of fibers to 40 g/d. Anthropometric parameters and frequently sampled oral glucose tolerance tests were performed before and after intervention. Body-fat mass and distribution, liver fat, and liver iron content were assessed by MRI and single voxel proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy.

Results:

Participants in all groups lost weight (mean 3.3 ± 0.5 kg, P < 0.0001). Glucose tolerance and insulin sensitivity improved (P < 0.001), and body and visceral fat mass decreased in all groups (P < 0.001). These changes did not differ between groups. Liver fat content decreased significantly (P < 0.001) with no differences between the groups. The decrease in liver fat correlated with the decrease in ferritin during intervention (r2 = 0.08, P = 0.0021). This association was confirmed in an independent lifestyle intervention study (Tuebingen Lifestyle Intervention Program, N = 229, P = 0.0084).

Conclusions:

Our data indicate that caloric restriction leads to a marked improvement in glucose metabolism and body-fat composition, including liver-fat content. The marked reduction in liver fat might be mediated via changes in ferritin levels. In the context of caloric restriction, there seems to be no additional beneficial impact of reduced red meat intake and increased fiber intake on the improvement in cardiometabolic risk parameters. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT03231839. (emphasis added)








Abstract on Pubmed
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2   ^
Old Fri, Feb-08-19, 15:26
Dodger's Avatar
Dodger Dodger is online now
Posts: 8,326
 
Plan: Paleoish
Stats: 225/170/175 Male 71.5 inches
BF:18%
Progress: 110%
Location: Longmont, Colorado
Default

I am not surprised by the results at all. I'm sure that the pro-fiber and anti-red meat advocates will ignore it.
Reply With Quote
  #3   ^
Old Fri, Feb-08-19, 19:24
WereBear's Avatar
WereBear WereBear is online now
Posts: 11,214
 
Plan: Epi-Paleo/IF
Stats: 220/155/150 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 93%
Location: USA
Default

I was just listening to a podcast with low carb nutritionist Amy Berger. She was talking about what led her to write her book on low carb for Alzheimer’s. She ran across some research, and was planning that subject for her Master’s thesis, and wasn’t sure how many more papers she could find to base it on.

It turned out, there were LOTS.

It reminded me of when I finally got diagnosed, and hunted through Pub Med for any information. AND THERE WAS LOTS.

But NONE of it is being acted upon! The studies have been done, and help is there, and we never hear a word about it.

It infuriates me.
Reply With Quote
  #4   ^
Old Fri, Feb-08-19, 20:04
Meme#1's Avatar
Meme#1 Meme#1 is online now
Posts: 10,071
 
Plan: Atkins DANDR
Stats: 210/188/160 Female 5'4"
BF:
Progress: 44%
Location: Texas
Default

The drug companies bury it with propaganda marketing making people buy drugs that don't work.

Same thing with the iodine. In reading this book it's amazing the material the author dug up from many years ago.
Reply With Quote
  #5   ^
Old Tue, Feb-12-19, 03:39
Grav Grav is online now
Senior Member
Posts: 946
 
Plan: Banting
Stats: 302/187/187 Male 175cm
BF:
Progress: 100%
Location: New Zealand
Default

Oh, man. I wish I'd noticed this before going to the fibre conference I just got back from tonight. Would have loved to have relayed this to some of the speakers there.
Reply With Quote
  #6   ^
Old Tue, Feb-12-19, 07:08
WereBear's Avatar
WereBear WereBear is online now
Posts: 11,214
 
Plan: Epi-Paleo/IF
Stats: 220/155/150 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 93%
Location: USA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Meme#1
Same thing with the iodine. In reading this book it's amazing the material the author dug up from many years ago.


When I combed Pub Med for help with my illness, it was amazing how much information was there, but had been ignored.
Reply With Quote
  #7   ^
Old Tue, Feb-12-19, 08:50
khrussva's Avatar
khrussva khrussva is online now
Posts: 7,186
 
Plan: My own - < 30 net carbs
Stats: 440/211/210 Male 5' 11"
BF:Energy Unleashed
Progress: 100%
Location: Central Virginia - USA
Default

Today I am 12 days into a 'plant free' N=1 diet tweak. It is sort of a dirty effort at a carnivore diet. I'm eating commercially produced meat (mostly red), eggs, & dairy. No plant products. I'm even avoiding OO, coconut oil, cocoa, black pepper and other plant based spices. The one exception is my morning coffee.

There is no fiber in my current diet at all. None. This is quite the switch for me as I have been averaging 30+ grams of fiber daily for a couple of years. When I first started upping the fiber I remember it taking me a long time to adjust to it. Insoluble fiber felt like gravel in my gut. Constipation was an issue that came and went from time to time. So was bloating and gas. Gas was a problem the whole time I was doing the high fiber thing. I'd become an old fart -- literally.

The new diet plan has changed a few things. Gas, bloating, and constipation are not problems any more. My body seemed to complain a lot when adding the fiber. It didn't complain at all when I suddenly dropped it. My BMs are regular, but without all that added bulk a BM every other day has been the norm. I'm eating less, enjoying greater satiety between meals, and I'm slowly losing weight again. I'm feeling good and I'm in total control. The transition to this new diet plan has been remarkably smooth. I didn't expect it to be this easy. Fiber? I think that it's overrated.

My initial plan of this N=1 was to do it as sort of an elimination diet for 30 days, then add back some plants one at a time to see if I notice any intolerances. I'm thinking twice about that. Fiber free feels pretty good so far.

Last edited by khrussva : Tue, Feb-12-19 at 13:55.
Reply With Quote
  #8   ^
Old Tue, Feb-12-19, 09:51
WereBear's Avatar
WereBear WereBear is online now
Posts: 11,214
 
Plan: Epi-Paleo/IF
Stats: 220/155/150 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 93%
Location: USA
Default

Wicked cool, Ken!

I likewise had cut way down on my fiber years ago, and now with my Keto plan, the only plants I eat are olives, pickles and avocado... all fruits, no veg.
Reply With Quote
  #9   ^
Old Tue, Feb-12-19, 10:23
Meme#1's Avatar
Meme#1 Meme#1 is online now
Posts: 10,071
 
Plan: Atkins DANDR
Stats: 210/188/160 Female 5'4"
BF:
Progress: 44%
Location: Texas
Default

It works better for me too without plants for the most part with a few exceptions weekly for low fiber cooked veggie. Mostly I eat red meat, eggs, bacon some chicken, cream and some cheese.
BM is perfect. GI is perfect.

edit- this is a very interesting read:
https://www.gutsense.org/fiber-mena...enace-book.html

Last edited by Meme#1 : Tue, Feb-12-19 at 10:35.
Reply With Quote
  #10   ^
Old Tue, Feb-12-19, 12:11
GRB5111's Avatar
GRB5111 GRB5111 is offline
Posts: 2,634
 
Plan: Ketogenic (LCHFKD)
Stats: 227/186/185 Male 6' 0"
BF:
Progress: 98%
Location: Herndon, VA
Default

bev - thanks for sharing this information. It's consistent with what I've suspected; yet, red meat has become a negative lightning rod for several diet agendas. As recently stated in another post, I eat all types of animal proteins, and I consume red meat most frequently. I try not to obsess over grass fed, as I purchase my proteins taking advantage of the best prices. I favor grass fed if the cost isn't exorbitant.

Ken - I'll be curious to learn how you do longer term, as this approach is very close to how I'm eating now. I've increased my protein, stayed steady with fat, and my carb consumption is lower due to reduction in low-starch vegetables. I, too, don't miss fiber and my increase in protein still has me producing ketones and burning fat. I made these adjustments several months ago after watching videos from Bikman and Naiman presenting recent research and clinical findings regarding increased protein consumption with positive results for those already eating low carb. Good stuff.

So, red meat? It's become the bad meat like LDL is the bad cholesterol. Neither claim is fact based, but the reputation lingers due to the repeated chanting of these misguided phrases.
Reply With Quote
  #11   ^
Old Tue, Feb-12-19, 12:22
WereBear's Avatar
WereBear WereBear is online now
Posts: 11,214
 
Plan: Epi-Paleo/IF
Stats: 220/155/150 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 93%
Location: USA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GRB5111
So, red meat? It's become the bad meat like LDL is the bad cholesterol. Neither claim is fact based, but the reputation lingers due to the repeated chanting of these misguided phrases.


This is all based on those correlation studies, and of course 90% or more of the nation's red meat is wrapped in a flour bun, accompanied by starch fried in trans fats, and a sugary drink.

Oh, yeah, red meat'll kill ya.
Reply With Quote
  #12   ^
Old Tue, Feb-12-19, 12:36
Meme#1's Avatar
Meme#1 Meme#1 is online now
Posts: 10,071
 
Plan: Atkins DANDR
Stats: 210/188/160 Female 5'4"
BF:
Progress: 44%
Location: Texas
Default

It's the fiber that your body cannot digest and it all ends up in your colon. It doubles the size of the bm and your colon isn't made to handle that.
The Fiber Menace explains that bran is like sandpaper to the colon. Hulls, something that cannot be digested by humans but the big agriculture found a way to sell it for human consumption. This started happening at the same time that low-fat hit the scene. Both are damaging to the body and rely on flawed theory.
Reply With Quote
  #13   ^
Old Tue, Feb-12-19, 12:54
deirdra's Avatar
deirdra deirdra is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 3,918
 
Plan: HF/vLC/GF,CF,SF
Stats: 197/136/150 Female 66 inches
BF:
Progress: 130%
Location: Alberta
Default

For people on ultra low-fat and low-magnesium diets, fibre is probably needed to irritate the colon enough to roto-rooter the crap out of there. I've never found a need for indigestible fibre while eating plenty of fat, drinking enough water and taking a daily 250 mg magnesium supplement. The only time I ever get constipated is if I get dehydrated on really long hikes or when I get too busy to remember to drink (though thirst usually causes me to top up with a lot of water at the end of the day and nip it in the bud). More water and an extra magnesium tablet handles that. Fibre just clogs up my system and I don't need it to "feel full" on enough rabbit food to distend the stomach, when fat keeps my satiation hormones at proper levels to feel full.

Last edited by deirdra : Tue, Feb-12-19 at 13:03.
Reply With Quote
  #14   ^
Old Tue, Feb-12-19, 15:36
bevangel's Avatar
bevangel bevangel is online now
Posts: 1,915
 
Plan: modified adkins (sort of)
Stats: 265/176/167 Female 68.5 inches
BF:
Progress: 91%
Location: Austin, TX
Default

Very interesting Ken.

I've been noticing for a while now that when I eat more fiber than usual, my gut "complains" with a lot more noise, a bit of gas, and some constipation.

I too am thinking that fiber has been totally over-rated. I used to add ground psyllium husks to almond meal breads in order to get more fiber but quit doing that about a year ago.

Nowadays, the only fiber I get comes from the carefully-selected low-carb low-glycemic-index veggies I eat.

However, when I buy cabbage to make the "crack slaw" recipe on DietDoctor, we usually wind up eating cabbage in one form or another for 6 or 8 meals in a row in order to use it the full head before it goes bad... and I ALWAYS wind up constipated and gassy.

On the flip side tho, my most recent blood work showed that my LDL cholesterol has risen somewhat which COULD have been due to less fiber. It rose enough that my doctor (who is generally supportive of this WOE) mentioned that "we need to keep an eye on that." OTOH, the morning I went to get my bloodwork done, the lab was excessively busy and I had some other errands to run. So I left and came back about 3PM to get the blood drawn...which meant that by the time my blood was drawn, it had been pretty close to 20 hours since I'd last eaten. Far more than the 8 to 12 hrs fasting that is considered normal. I personally suspect THAT the longer fast had as much or more to do with my higher cholesterol reading than the amount of fiber I had or had not been eating over the previous several months.

I'm thinking that before my next blood draw, I'll follow Feldman's protocol carefully and see if I get results that'll keep my doc and my insurance company happy.

For myself, regardless of what my lipid numbers say, t I WILL NOT TAKE A STATIN , not as long as my coronary calcium CT scan score is at ZERO!

MAYBE I'll reconsider if my CT score goes up into a dangerous range. MAYBE...but probably NOT because, honestly, I'd rather die of a sudden stroke or heart attack while otherwise feeling great up to that moment than again risk the debilitating effects that statins had on me.
Reply With Quote
  #15   ^
Old Tue, Feb-12-19, 16:54
WereBear's Avatar
WereBear WereBear is online now
Posts: 11,214
 
Plan: Epi-Paleo/IF
Stats: 220/155/150 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 93%
Location: USA
Default

Bevangel, as a woman, STATINS DO NOTHING TO HELP.

Middle-aged male who has already had a heart attack has a slight decrease in getting another... but the cancer rate goes up.

And the side effects can be terrible.
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 11:51.


Copyright © 2000-2019 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.