What Really Makes Us Fat

[philnotfil]

Just for Dream

nytimes.com

What was done by Dr. Ludwig’s team has never been done before. First they took obese subjects and effectively semi-starved them until they’d lost 10 to 15 percent of their weight. Such weight-reduced subjects are particularly susceptible to gaining the weight back. Their energy expenditure drops precipitously and they burn fewer calories than people who naturally weigh the same. This means they have to continually fight their hunger just to maintain their weight loss. The belief is that weight loss causes “metabolic adaptations,” which make it almost inevitable that the weight will return. Dr. Ludwig’s team then measured how many calories these weight-reduced subjects expended daily, and that’s how many they fed them. But now the subjects were rotated through three very different diets, one month for each. They ate the same amount of calories on all three, equal to what they were expending after their weight loss, but the nutrient composition of the diets was very different.

One diet was low-fat and thus high in carbohydrates. This was the diet we’re all advised to eat: whole grains, fruits, vegetables, lean sources of protein. One diet had a low glycemic index: fewer carbohydrates in total, and those that were included were slow to be digested — from beans, non-starchy vegetables and other minimally processed sources. The third diet was Atkins, which is very low in carbohydrates and high in fat and protein.

The results were remarkable. Put most simply, the fewer carbohydrates consumed, the more energy these weight-reduced people expended. On the very low-carbohydrate Atkins diet, there was virtually no metabolic adaptation to the weight loss. These subjects expended, on average, only 100 fewer calories a day than they did at their full weights. Eight of the 21 subjects expended more than they did at their full weights — the opposite of the predicted metabolic compensation.

On the very low-carbohydrate diet, Dr. Ludwig’s subjects expended 300 more calories a day than they did on the low-fat diet and 150 calories more than on the low-glycemic-index diet. As Dr. Ludwig explained, when the subjects were eating low-fat diets, they’d have to add an hour of moderate-intensity physical activity each day to expend as much energy as they would effortlessly on the very-low-carb diet. And this while consuming the same amount of calories. If the physical activity made them hungrier — a likely assumption — maintaining weight on the low-fat, high-carb diet would be even harder. Why does this speak to the very cause of obesity? One way to think about this is to consider weight-reduced subjects as “pre-obese.” They’re almost assuredly going to get fatter, and so they can be research stand-ins — perhaps the best we have — for those of us who are merely predisposed to get fat but haven’t done so yet and might take a few years or decades longer to do it.

[Dreamliner]

A-n-d a thorough refutation:

http://www.anthonycolpo.com

[your_perfect_enemy]

Well I assumed that study wasn't particularly accurate and still pretty much assuming because I pretty much didn't get past the picture of the sweedish girls.

[MiketheCuban]

So what is the best diet to lose weight?

[Dreamliner]

Originally Posted by MiketheCuban

So what is the best diet to lose weight?

The only thing that works: calorie deficit. Eat the foods you enjoy ... just less of them. Calorie restriction beats food restrictions any day of the week.

[LeafUF]

Originally Posted by MiketheCuban

So what is the best diet to lose weight?

The one that you can stick to.

[ClowntownGator]

I got on board the Beachbody train in January. Did Power 90 and lost 34lbs in 90 days, then started doing P90X in April and lost another 16lbs.

Lost exactly 50lbs in 5 months working out, eating smart and drinking Shakeology. Now my goals have changed and I'm putting on mass. Have never felt better and now am a Coach with Team Beachbody and get to help others reach their goals! It's a fantastic circle

You need to do what makes you comfortable and, as others have said, what you'll stick with. For me, the home workouts worked best, and matching them with an accountability group and good nutrition/all-natural supplements, I've never been in better shape in my life.

[ATL_Gator]

Accountability and something you can live long term with.

---

As far as strategy, I side mostly with Dreamliner on this one. Calroie deficit will work for dropping weight. Always.

In general, I am anti-supplement. If you need a suppliment to meet your nutritional needs, then what you are eating is wrong to begin with.

[Dreamliner]

Basically, supplements produce expensive pee.

[oI2ange]

Ha, yeah, I don't use any supplements either...protein included. I just eat like a hoss and call it good

[LeafUF]

I use supplements and have no problem with that. Yes there is a lot of garbage in the industry and most of it is unnecessary. Still I find a few very useful and I feel better when taking them than when not.

[mastoidbone]

just because it makes one feel better does not imply effectiveness----you might feel better when you take them for reasons 100% unrelated to their contents.

[Dreamliner]

Plus, don't discount placebo effect. It's arguably more responsible for making people feel better than drugs or supplements.

[mastoidbone]

Placebo is REAL---I mean it REALLY changes even brain chemistry----which proves power of mind and attitude.

So---save some money and take a sugar pill and call it supplements!!!!!