Quote:
|
Originally Posted by JEY100
This article is going a bit off-topic from fasting but since it discusses insulin resistance and sensitivity, I wonder what the folks on this thread think of Chris Gardner follow-on research to his earlier studies LF vs LC. The study results indicate there wasn't much difference, but Bill Lagokos sees something else, that also relates back to Woo's criticism of JM/Fung...he is really NOT insulin resistant but very insulin sensitive now. Net down, Bill thinks that after losing on LC, to finish consider switching to HCLF.
http://caloriesproper.com/chris-gardner-strikes-again/
(many graphs/charts, couldn't really copy) |
One think Bill links to there is a post he did on a study comparing an Atkin's style diet to the more moderate-carb Zone diet, the study was authored by Barry Sears, where low carb didn't result in greater weight loss. One problem in this that he does mention is that both diets were calorie-restricted, in many low carb studies, there is no calorie limit given, but very often people will end up eating less calories anyways.
In that study, he mentions that there was a decrease in hunger both in Zone and in Atkins dieters. But this was in the context of restricting calories to 1500 in both groups. There is a problem in this--in that a spontaneous decrease to 1500 calories or so is fairly common in low carb ad-lib studies. But do calories spontaneously decrease when eating 40 percent carbohydrate, 30 protein, 30 fat? They sure didn't for me. A little of this, a little of that--improved macronutrient ratio plus calorie restriction might reduce hunger, but without a spontaneous decrease in food intake, Zone ratios wouldn't actually have much effect on insulin vs. SAD ratios.
Bill at CaloriesProper;
Quote:
Low carb diet: participants went from 230 grams/d to less than 50 for the first 3 months, then creeped up to ~80 over the next 3 months.
Will the critics say “the carbz weren’t low enough!”? REALLY?
|
Yes, yes they will.
Personally, I did the "moderate" Zone diet, following the Zone Blocks put me around 1400 calories. What's the problem? I did have a decrease in appetite while losing weight. But eventually I was at goal. How is that a problem?
Maybe moderate carbs worked
if calories were restricted. Lowering calories does decrease insulin after all. But then I reach goal, increase the calories to keep from losing more weight (because 1400 calories doesn't cut it for me). Once I'm eating more, insulin is going to go up. Even if I went off Zone ratios at that point, added in more fat rather than carbs or protein to fill in the gap, insulin would go up. And the appetite suppression would go away.
For a decade or so on mostly Atkins-style low carb, my setpoint seemed to be 170 pounds. The last few years, more consciously pursuing ketosis, it seems to be 160 pounds--which might not sound like much, but in that previous decade, it was a real struggle to hold it down at 160 for very long.
Bill posted this in the comments section of his Gardner study post;
Quote:
|
You know what happens though (re your last scenario). Plateau on LC = MUST LOW CARB HARDER => VLC => keto => ?neurosis =>..." -Anastasia Boulais
|
I have had two clear psychotic breaks in my life, and my basal state is one of strong social anxiety. Mere neurosis might be an improvement.