The Carb-Sane Asylum

S UMMARY Continuing on with discussion of: Effects of a low carbohydrate diet on energy expenditure during weight loss maintenance: randomized trial In Part I , I discussed some issues with methodology, mostly focusing on the reduced Run-In Phase that likely compromised the outcomes irreparably. In Part II ,  I highlighted a serious issue with the Run-In Phase, the purpose of which was to produce a somewhat homogeneous "reduced weight state" to test various diets in maintenance of that state. Ultimately,  randomization to the various test diets occurred after weight loss (PWL) all subjects lost weight on the same 45% Carb / 30% Fat / 25% Protein diet targeting a weight loss of 12% ± 2% initial body weight. The researchers do not appear to have made many adjustments in the weight loss phase to produce a more uniform weight loss.   Rather than 12% ± 2%  (from 10% to 14%)  losses, the actual outcome was roughly 10.5% ± 5% (actual ...

U PDATE:   12/17/2018      Original Posting: 12/3/2018    During the writing of a new installment in this se ries, I revisited the following paper: A randomized study of dietary composition during weight-loss maintenance: Rationale, study design, intervention, and assessment Yes, folks, so full of themselves were these researchers, that they felt the need to write an entire paper (submitted approx. one year in advance of the "real study") outlining their amazing study. Regarding this post, focusing on the OUTRIGHT FAILURE TO IMPLEMENT THEIR STUDY DESIGN AS STATED , I stress the following from the previous paper. ONCE AGAIN, the stated goal of the weight loss run in is 12% ... not 10 or 5 or 15 or whatever ... 12%.  I'm just going to quote the relevant part here (cleaned of references, etc. and formatted for readability, all emphasis mine) Energy intake was restricted to 60% of estimated needs to achieve a target weight loss equ...

This post was prompted by the following article on Medscape Why Aren't We Prescribing Pills for Obesity? It is written by Caroline M. Apovian, MD  I'd encourage you to read this whole thing first, as I'm genuinely interested in that response. Additionally I'm curious as to whether or not your response changes after reading this blog post (or other sources I'm about to link to).

Well, the pudgy mirdled one , diet book author and former diet doctor Mike Eades has taken a break from changing the world ** with his Sous Vide * to compose his ninth blog post of the year!   Last we heard from him here at The Asylum , he and his wife had resolved to -- yet again! -- diet in 2012 .  You'll see why all of those links are relevant as we get into discussing his latest:   Are carbohydrates fattening? His post refers to the 6 year follow-up (4 years after the initial 2 year study) from the famous diet comparison study from Shai et.al .  I discussed this study back in my more gregarious days (grin) in Gary Taube$, Shai-ster?    This study was done in a workplace setting in Israel, where through the cafeteria, they were able to assist participants in complying with the diet by offering choices labeled as appropriate for their assigned diet plan.   In this 2-year trial, we randomly assigned 322 moderately obese subjects (me...

I’ve read that [he] has regained quite a bit of the weight. When I’ve seen him [in pictures] lately, it’s only from the shoulders up. Questions: Who is "he"? Who said this? What is he/she implying about the subject?

So I was getting my morning news fix the other day and of course the new study mentioning gastric bypass as a cure for diabetes was discussed.  One of the many mainstream press articles about two recently published articles in NEJM can be found here .  The full texts of both studies are available online free:   Bariatric Surgery versus Conventional Medical Therapy for Type 2 Diabetes  - Mingrone et.al. and  Bariatric Surgery versus Intensive Medical Therapy in Obese Patients with Diabetes  - Schauer et.al.  I've discussed some other studies previously here .  Lastly on the links for now, I have not followed all contained in this post, but from a surgery center blog we have:   Gastric bypass to ‘cure’ diabetes goes mainstream   (you are forewarned that the last one is a "medical tourism" clinic in Colombia).

A few days ago, the New York Times Magazine published an article by Tara Parker-Pope entitled The Fat Trap .   This has apparently caused the ego supremous nerve in the whydablitome region of Gary Taubes' cortex to fire uncontrollably.  The result?  Well, a petition , cloaked as a "Letter to the Editor" of the NYT. When I first heard about this I was astounded.  Huh?  Here you have Gary Taubes ... THE Gary Taubes! ... Award winning science journalist who penned the classic " What If It's All Been a Big Fat Lie " in the very same publication, author of the NYT Bestseller Good Calories Bad Calories  ... Yes, THAT Gary Taubes.  The same man who had the lay-friendly version of GCBC published not much more than a year ago, Why We Get Fat .  Yes, the very same Gary Taubes who was on the nationally syndicated TV show of one Dr. Oz ... not to mention countless radio and print interviews in the mainstream press in a publicity flurry surroundi...

** I'm updating and bumping this post because my omission of a link to the blog post has led to some confusion as to the reference to Dr. Jeff Volek in the second to last paragraph. Here's the blog post I was discussing:   http://livinlavidalowcarb.com/blog/jimmy-moores-may-2010-testimony-before-the-usda-regarding-the-2010-dietary-guidelines/10989 -------------- original post ------------- So ... If I've heard it once, I've heard it a thousand times. The USDA's misguided nutritional advice has wreaked havoc on our population and spawned the obesity epidemic. Really? Firstly, let me state flat out that I agree that the old pyramid was misguided. And I believe the newer guidelines are even more misguided. They aren't going to solve the problem. Basing a diet on whole grains and encouraging grain consumption when whole grains equates with flour and highly processed foods is absurd.   That said, let's be honest here. When a 275-ish p...

Effects of experimental weight perturbation on skeletal muscle work efficiency, fuel utilization, and biochemistry in human subjects Or in plain English, what happens to your metabolism when you gain or lose weight. Maintenance of a body weight 10% above or below that “customary” for lean or obese individuals results in respective increases or decreases in the energy expended in low levels of physical activity (nonresting energy expenditure, NREE). These changes are greater than can be accounted for by the altered body weight or composition and are due mainly to altered skeletal muscle work efficiency at low levels of power generation.