Active Low-Carber Forums - The Truth About Low-Protein, High-Carb Diets and Brain Aging

Active Low-Carber Forums (http://forum.lowcarber.org/index.php)

- LC Research/Media (http://forum.lowcarber.org/forumdisplay.php?f=4)

- - The Truth About Low-Protein, High-Carb Diets and Brain Aging (http://forum.lowcarber.org/showthread.php?t=481680)

The Truth About Low-Protein, High-Carb Diets and Brain Aging

Quote:

Psychology Today
December 4, 2018

The Truth About Low-Protein, High-Carb Diets and Brain Aging

Should you pass on the meat and reach for the muffins instead?

Georgia Ede MD

A new study conducted at the University of Sydney and published in the journal Cell Reports is inspiring headlines around the world, like this one:

"Low-protein, high-carb diet may help ward off dementia"

In the study, scientists compared diets containing different amounts of protein and carbohydrate to a low-calorie diet. Their results suggested that diets lower in protein and higher in carbohydrate may, in some cases, provide subtle brain benefits similar to the benefits seen with calorie restriction. The researchers concluded, “A very low-protein, high-carbohydrate diet may be a feasible nutritional intervention to delay brain aging.”

In the study, scientists compared diets containing different amounts of protein and carbohydrate to a low-calorie diet. Their results suggested that diets lower in protein and higher in carbohydrate may, in some cases, provide subtle brain benefits similar to the benefits seen with calorie restriction. The researchers concluded, “A very low-protein, high-carbohydrate diet may be a feasible nutritional intervention to delay brain aging.”

This, despite a growing body of clinical evidence suggesting that low-carbohydrate diets can be helpful for people with brain problems, including neurological, psychiatric, and cognitive disorders such as Alzheimer’s disease. What is going on here?

If you believe in the health benefits of high-carbohydrate diets, you could take the headlines at face value and feel reassured that the study confirms your beliefs. You could point to the fact that this study represents a collaborative effort of international scientists from prestigious places like the University of Sydney, the National Institutes of Health, and Harvard University. You could even spend time skimming the 38-page paper admiring how sophisticated and impressive the science looks.

If you believe in the health benefits of low-carbohydrate diets, you could decide to dismiss this study simply because it is a mouse study, or you could spend precious time scrutinizing the results and judge them to be weak or inconclusive.

However, the best and most efficient way to evaluate this (or any) rodent nutrition study is to go straight to the methods section and look at the chow. [Caution: what you’ll discover in almost every case may shock, infuriate, confuse, or entertain you, depending on your personality structure.]

Click to read the rest of the article here:

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/...and-brain-aging

I enjoyed the way Dr. Ede dismantled this mouse study. Her expose should be required reading for anyone reading this study that has been published and broadcast by many media outlets. Unfortunately, newspapers, magazines, and television news shows rush to publicize these types of "research" without examining the credibility of the stated findings and then leaping to inaccurate conclusions regarding the relevancy to humans. Thanks go to Dr. Ede for interpreting these efforts accurately.

I thought it was a great article by Dr Ede. It emphasized what is most important that is "did the study really test what they said it tested?" and "are the conclusions that were reached backed up by the results of the study?" and finally "is what the media is reporting an accurate assessment of the above?" The answer to all these questions is no. In other words, ignore it.

The interesting thing to me was that none of the 5 diets tested were low carbohydrate - in fact the carb counts were nearly identical. Yet the inference in the headlines is that headlines is that high carb is better for your brain than low carb. Go figure?

In the study itself, it's interesting that the protein restriction had a greater effect on decreasing fat mass than lean mass.

Another caution I'd throw out, human versus mouse, is the difference in metabolic rate. These animals have six or seven times our rate of metabolism, but they have a state of torpor they can enter where there metabolic rate is ten percent of their usual--this is a metabolic flexibility we really can't match. Five percent protein is low, but in terms of grams of protein per kilogram of lean mass, it's higher than it would be in a human. This leaves room for efficiencies--the percentage of the animals total protein intake they'd have to retain to achieve positive protein balance is smaller than it would be for a human--that is, since they normally burn through so much protein, the amount they'd have to spare to gain lean mass is a smaller percentage of what they eat.

Mouse studies are relatively inexpensive to do. You get what you pay for.