
Time to Retire the Low-Carb Diet Fad - jamesbritt
http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2012/06/time-to-retire-the-low-carb-diet-fad/258343/
======
isleyaardvark
Pretty sure the title is alarmist and inacurrate.

The paper itself notes an increase consumption of fat and decreased
consumption of carbohydrates. That is _not_ the same as a low carb diet. For
example (from the paper):

> Fats used for spreading on bread and cooking, dairy products, oil for salad
> dressing or cooking, various types of meats and sausages as main dish or on
> sandwiches, pizza, deep- fried potato chips (French fries), and non-sweet
> snacks (including potato and maize crisps (chips), cheese-flavoured puffed
> products, popcorn, and peanuts) were identified to be associated with high
> fat intake (fatE%) in the study population by PLS.

Few of these foods are recommended in low carb diets. Nor do the percentages
of calories from carbs given in the study come anywhere near those recommended
by low carb diets.

------
frankus
The thing to remember when you see a headline like this about an observational
epidemiology study is that you're basically looking at educated superstition.

The authors can go to great lengths to remove all of the confounding factors
they can possibly think of, but ultimately the best they can do is show a
correlation. And almost every time a follow-up interventional study will fail
to demonstrate a causal relationship.

(Full disclosure: I've been eating relatively low-carb for about 15 years and
in the last two years reduced my intake even further. I'm currently by far the
leanest I can remember being, despite being just a few pounds shy of the
heaviest I've ever been).

~~~
xiaoma
There are limits to what you can do in terms of rigorous double blind
nutritional studies on humans, unless you're a dictator or have free reign
over a prison camp.

That said I'll take their gigantic 25-year study designed by people whose life
work is nutrition over your personal n=1 study. I might not take over _my_ n=1
study if I did one, though. So, I definitely see where you're coming from.

------
biaxident
Unfortunately the article doesn't distinguish between high/low GI
carbohydrates, which is the main focus of low card diets.

------
paulsutter
This article should have been titled "Time to Retire the High-Animal-Fat Diet
Fad".

Nothing in the article cast doubts on the wisdom of avoiding fast (high-
glycemic) carbs, nor did it present any reason to question the long term toxic
effects of high-fructose diets.

------
grandpoobah
I lost 8kgs on a low carb diet. Aimed to keep my carb intake between 20-30
carbs per day for about 2 months (Christmas was in the middle, so I cheated
and ate all kinds of horrible foods and that screwed up my progress).

After getting down to my ideal weight I stopped the diet and now eat normally
but try to avoid high carb foods.

It may be a fad, but it works if you're strict.

~~~
aggie
> It may be a fad, but it works if you're strict.

You can eat nothing but twinkies and lose weight if you're strict about
calories.

~~~
xiaoma
A nutrition professor did! Here's the link:
[http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/...](http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/index.html)

~~~
dannywoodz
To a certain extent, he did. From the article:

"Two-thirds of his total intake came from junk food. He also took a
multivitamin pill and drank a protein shake daily. And he ate vegetables,
typically a can of green beans or three to four celery stalks."

So he provided the calories that he needed with the junk, but kept the
processing machinery of his body running with supplements and real food.

I wonder how he'd feel at the end of the experiment if he lost all that weight
eating _nothing_ but twinkies.

