Is overeating carbs worse than overeating on an LCHF diet?

The result of 5,800 calories of junk food daily

The result of 5,800 calories of junk food a day

Sam Feltham carried out an experiment a few months ago that caught a lot of attention. For three weeks he pigged out on low-carb LCHF foods, 5,800 calories a day.

According to simplistic calorie counting, Feltham should have gained 16 lbs (7.3 kg). But in reality, he only gained less than 3 lbs (1.3 kg).

Now Feltham has repeated his experiment with exactly the same amount of calories, but from carbohydrate-rich junk food. On the same amount of calories he gained more than five times as much weight: almost 16 lbs (7.1 kg)!

The difference in waist circumference was even more significant: 5,800 calories of LCHF food for three weeks reduced his waist measurement by 1 1/4 inches (3 cm). The same amount of junk food led to a 3 1/2 inch (9.25 cm) increase in his waist. And you can see the difference visually.

A picture is worth a thousand words

Above are photos from the junk food experiment. Below, the LCHF experiment (with the same amount of calories) as a comparison:

The result of 5,800 calories of LCHF foods daily

The result of 5,800 calories daily on an LCHF diet

Conclusion

A calorie is not a calorie. This has already been proven in study after study, but Feltham provides us with a nice real world illustration.

Here’s his final report: Day 21 Of The 21 Day 5,000 Calorie CARB Challenge

What do you think about the outcome?

Previous

What Happens if You Eat 5,800 Calories Daily on an LCHF Diet?

More

A Calorie Is Not a Calorie

Doctor: “No Fat People in Auschwitz”

Why Calorie Counters are Confused

Is Your Dietitian Educated by The Coca Cola Company?

How to Lose Weight

LCHF for Beginners

1 2

104 comments

  1. Berit
    Fantastic...but not surprising... I have done something similar myself... :-)

    I think he gained muscle on the LCHF experiment. The lower waist sircumference speaks of that.

    Would have been interesting to know exactly how much more muscle and how much less fat tissue at the end of the LCHF experiment.... :-D
    And ofcourse how much more fat and less muscle tissue was the result after the HCLF experiment....

  2. Fredmull1973
    This is a great experiment for someone without a broken metabolism. LCHF in the context of calorie appropriate eating works great for people with broken metabolism. Neither I, nor Tommy from eatlowcarbhighfat could get away with this many calories in any macro ratio.
    Reply: #4
  3. LarryB
    I think that the idea is to eat what you need to eat, and if you've got any luck it will be the same amount of food as you want to eat. 5,800 kCal is a LOT of food for anyone except maybe an Olympic athlete, and even then only in certain sports, and not every day.

    As to the Quantified-Self style experiment, I wonder how many other people have tried it. I never would. My alarm bells ring if my weight moves up more than 2kg, which seems to be just a bit more than the standard deviation around my stable weight of 82 kg.

    That's probably because it took me so long to lose the last 5 kg of the 34 I lost doing LCHF and intermittent, high-intensity workouts.

  4. Dave
    Well, it is possible to do the same experiment on a broken metabolism

    One just have to measure to see if the weight gains are the same on both diets Would one gain weight more quickly on a sugar-ladened diet of the same calorie count or a fatty diet of the same calorie count.

  5. Daniel
    Simply wonderful!
  6. Jennifer @yummylowcarb
    Wow thats really interesting (although not that surprising for those who have read up on how a low carb diet affects the body and hormones.

    Follow my instagram if you want to get inspiration for easy to make, nutritious and delicious lchf-dishes @yummylowcarb

  7. tz
    Perhaps something to be tried would be a LCHF "fat farm". I know they had them in the past, but they did the calorie restriction thing. A vacation at a resort where food was controlled.

    Have a 24/7 buffet but without a single food that has even moderate carb. Stuff yourself, but you won't be able to go over 20g of carb per day. For minum two weeks with a doctor and measuring blood glucose, insulin, and ketones.

    Then see what happens. Better for a month, but two weeks no sugar (or starch) will break the addiction.

    One advantage of the new drug that dumps glucose out the urine is it would make cheating a bit less of a problem - in my case "lite" beer - I don't do a lot, but maltose is 2 glucose molecules, and it would add new meaning to the old joke "you don't buy beer, you rent it".

  8. davehpt
    this is important and helpful information for anyone looking for most efficient way to gain fat by deliberately over eating. It'd be a shame to force feed yourself to such a degree and still not quite reach your fatness goal due to eating the wrong foods.

    However, I'm not sure you made it quite clear enough that this has no relevance to how the body utilises carbohydrates within a normal amount suitable to maintain a lean physique at a lower body weight. It be a shame if people with such a goal thought that the findings of this experiment applied to them.

  9. PhilT
    Certainly interesting and food for thought.

    It's a pity he didn't keep the protein the same in the two cases, as we're left comparing lowe carb/higher protein/high fat with high carb/lower protein/low fat so it's not as clear cut what lies behind the differences.

    On the first LCHF diet I would have preferred to see a maintenance run-in of a week or so to get him stabilised onto low carb (glycogen reduction etc) in order to assess the true impact of the extra calories.

    But the key message is that calories per se are less important than what makes up those calories.

  10. lolno
    3 weeks is not nearly long enough to see any real results.
  11. Ondrej
    It's outrageous and intellectually dishonest to represent Sam's publicity stunt - created to draw traffic to his website and sell products - as a scientific experiment.

    Where were the controls and safeguards of this experiment?

    Where is the independent confirmation that he actually ate what he claims he ate?

    Why hasn't he addressed the issue of what his actual weight maintaining caloric-intake would be prior to an overfeed?

    And so on and so on.....

    You really have to be desperate to present this low carb circus act as scientific evidence of your already scientifically discredited MAD (metabolic advantage dogma).

    Reply: #12
  12. FrankG
    It's outrageous and intellectually dishonest to attack Dr Andreas' post as if he is in any way, representing this "experiment" as if it were truly scientific.

    The point is simple. Calories are NOT all equal. This "nice real world illustration" ably demonstrates that.

    You really have to be desperate to think you can discredit that fact.

    Tell you what Ondrej... try it for yourself... see what happens :-P

    Reply: #13
  13. Ondrej
    "Sam Feltham carried out an experiment a few months ago that caught a lot of attention. For three weeks he pigged out on low-carb LCHF foods, 5,800 calories a day."

    That was weak frankg. I'm really disappointed. I guess you have to fight with a bayonet when you don't have any bullets.

    Reply: #16
  14. bill
    #11 and #13, Ondrej:

    Is that how you see things here? You are "fighting"?

    Wow. You need to eat more fat to mellow out.

    Reply: #15
  15. Paul
    bill, Ondrej is not fighting. Ondrej is on the mission to save all of us

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LfmrHTdXgK4

  16. FrankG
    Yes Ondrej... I can (and have) actually read the blog post for myself. You may note that I ALSO used the word "experiment".

    In your tiny little world are we to believe that "experiment" is always synonymous with "SCIENTIFIC experiment"?

    You honestly think that Dr Andreas posted this here believing it to have the same scientific rigour as an RCT? Because that is the basis under which you "attacked" him.

    I think you are mistakenly judging people by your own intellectual standards. Many of us aspire to thinking for ourselves and I am gratified to see that people like Dr Andreas do not try to spoon feed us every tiny piece of redundant minutia; which it seems necessary to provide you.

    Once again the point (ably demonstrated) is that "Calories are NOT all equal". Do you dispute that? Do you have studies showing that protein, carbs and fat are all metabolised in exactly the same way in the body? Because there are plenty showing that they are not.

    Of course in an over-simplistic, abstract world you might say that calories ARE all the same to a bomb calorimeter. Are you a bomb calorimeter Ondrej? In which case that might explain a great deal. :-P

    Yes it is a unit of measure but we are talking here about the "real world"... where at least I live -- not so sure about you Ondrej. Is a mile walked on foot over level ground, the same as a mile biked uphill; in the real world application?

    Get over yourself and deal with the fact that your paradigm has failed and is no longer helpful.

    Replies: #17, #22
  17. JAUS
    Good luck on convincing those who have been brainwashed. I, myself, find it a waste of time, I rather comunicate with people who uses reason, not fallacys, to argument their points. I don't think that Ondrej will ever escape from his delusion, though I hope that I'm wrong for his sake.

    The really sad thing is that he actually thinks that he's the skeptical one. A real skeptic follows the evidence, not personal belief. His ad-hoc's to save his paradigm are embarrissingly weak. He just wants to prove that he's right, instead following the evidence to what's really the thruth.

    If you only believe in things that you want to be true, then you most certainly live in a deluded fantasy world. Some people are just afraid of accepting reality for what it is.

    Reply: #23
  18. Sam Feltham
    Hi All, Thank you so much for your support along with all of the questions, concerns and comments! I will be addressing as many as I can in my post experiment conclusion, but in the mean time I would appreciate it if those that feel it's all just a publicity stunt would be a little more courteous and perhaps be a little more humble in their assumptions about my motivation to do all of this. I only wish to help people and I don't think it's particularly constructive for anyone to go on rants about people's character you only know in the online world, in fact it is destructive to all of our overall aim of helping people be healthy.

    Ondrej, briefly in regard to your questions above:

    1) Where were the controls and safeguards of this experiment? As I keep on saying, this was not a randomised controlled trial but is a clear demonstration of the different effects of different foods on 1 healthy individual. I would love to have it controlled by a University, however I am a very busy man and would not be able to take off 6 weeks of my life to do this properly as I am the leader of a growing business that helps 1,000s of people live a healthy lifestyle.

    2) Where is the independent confirmation that he actually ate what he claims he ate? Again this would require me to take 6 weeks off of a busy schedule and be placed in a metabolic ward, but it would just be a N=1 and we want large RCT's to study, which NuSI are planning. Unfortunately, in the case of my self-experiments you will just have to trust that I am an honest person with the integrity to practice what I preach.

    3) Why hasn't he addressed the issue of what his actual weight maintaining caloric-intake would be prior to an overfeed? I don't know why this question has arose and the accusations that I have never addressed it, but I have and did in the LCHF experiment. Normally my maintenance caloric intake is approximately 3,500 k/cals depending on my levels of activity, pretty much what I am currently eating on my fake food rehab diet to try and maintain the weight I put on.

    Be well and smash it out :) Sam

    Reply: #19
  19. Paul
    Hi Sam,
    Couple of years ago few of my friends and I did very similar experiment to yours (we included 10 km run/day as well) althogh we are much older than You, we obtained very similar results.

    I admire FrankG and people like yourself for being patient with someone like Ondrej. For some time (several months ago) others and I tried to have a civil dialog with him, but it was a waste of time, I have lost my political correctness with him and I repeat what I said then: Ondrej you are a moron who can not tell shit from clay.

  20. Stephen
    I find it bizzare that someone would feel the need to attack anyone for trying to educate and enlighten people. I personally think that it's these small independent 'experiments' (if I can use the word) that will eventually turn the tide in relation to health and diet and a lead to a general acceptance that LCHF is in fact a healthier option than what current guidelines recommend.

    Has nobody wondered why that even though the Western world and beyond is on the brink of a diabetes and obesity epidemic that the governments of the world aren't running these controlled and monitored studies themselves? Call my a cynic but I personally doubt they would run the risk of finding out that the diet guidelines they've been 'pushing' for 30 years are wrong and that this has resulted in the current health condition that countries are facing.

    It's up to the individuals to do their bit and if Sam brings a bigger understanding to the public about calories and diet then good on him!

    Reply: #21
  21. Paul
    Nicely summarized. If I may add, governments are made of people of special psycho-behavioral make-up whose primary goal is to be elected and to be kept in office. For this these people need money and at present time big chunk of these money come from sugar/metabolic syndrome diseases industry.
  22. grinch
    This experiment does not prove that "calories are NOT all equal" within the context of overall body fat gain / loss. The only thing this experiment convinces me of is that it is very difficult to overfeed on a low carb diets verses a highly palatable high carb diet. Since calorie intake was not controlled, there is a lot of doubt as to whether Sam ate the same number of calories during the LC and HC phases of the experiment. The scientific literature would suggest its plausible he ate less calories on LC, because study after study has shown people are known to be unable to accurately count their own calories. The reasons here are probably subconscious and due to 1) his bias that LC is superior to HC for fat status and 2) the LC meals are more satiating, making him more likely to give himself credit for calories he probably never ate.

    And to address FrankG's mega strawman that conventional wisdom says all calories are the same, the metabolic ward studies have almost unanimously shown that when calories are tightly controlled, body fat changes are not significantly affected by macro-nutrient composition, despite the different metabolic pathways of these nutrients. Its only free-living studies where calorie intake reporting is proven unreliable, that the advantage goes to LCHF.

    Unfortunately the experiment Sam did has never been tested in a metabolic ward, but it SHOULD be. If this experiment is done and shows the same conclusions as Sam, then and only then will I eat my words.

    Replies: #24, #28
  23. grinch

    Good luck on convincing those who have been brainwashed. I, myself, find it a waste of time, I rather comunicate with people who uses reason, not fallacys, to argument their points. I don't think that Ondrej will ever escape from his delusion, though I hope that I'm wrong for his sake.The really sad thing is that he actually thinks that he's the skeptical one. A real skeptic follows the evidence, not personal belief. His ad-hoc's to save his paradigm are embarrissingly weak. He just wants to prove that he's right, instead following the evidence to what's really the thruth.If you only believe in things that you want to be true, then you most certainly live in a deluded fantasy world. Some people are just afraid of accepting reality for what it is.

    Do you realize the way you sound? Ondrej is skeptical because this experiment did not use the scientific method. Should we rely on an unreliable n=1 experiment to learn the truth? Should we throw out the decades of experiments that had contradictory results?

    Reply: #33
  24. bill
    grinch said:

    "...the metabolic ward studies have almost unanimously shown that when calories are tightly controlled, body fat changes are not significantly affected by macro-nutrient composition..."

    Please provide your references so we can
    look at the studies ourselves and make our own
    judgement.

    Reply: #25
  25. grinch
    Chapter 1, The Fat Loss Bible by Anthony Colpo. He analyzes about two dozen of these studies with full references. You can look them up individually yourself.
  26. Sophie
    First off I want to thank Sam for his dedication and willingness to use his body as the field for an experiment! I think Sam himself is very much aware that his results apply to him only, and that it is not a scientific endeavour. His experience supports what many of us believe here : that weight loss is supported by a LCHF diet. Sumo wrestlers eat a carb rich diet to reach their heavy weight, and apparently it was also the case of roman gladiators and wrestlers who wanted to pack on mass.

    I personally try to keep an open mind. I think metabolism, nutrition, fat accumulation, fat loss, appetite and everything else are probably more complicated and vary more greatly between individuals than many on each side of the fence are willing to admit.

    Wasn't there a nutrition professor who did a similar experiment on himself and was able to lose weight on a twinkies-only diet? What about the BBC documentary "how not to get fat" (name?) where one of the participants actually LOST weight when calorie intake was increased, because his metabolism had overreacted to the additional calorie intake?

    I don't doubt Sam's results, I really believe he is truthful in the data he has provided, but what works for him may not work for all of us, and I did not read any claim on his part that similar results should be expected by anyone.

  27. Eric Anderson
    @Grinch and Ondrej

    No one is asking for your approval.

    Is the study design of the NuSi protocol OK?
    If not what do you say are problems?

    DO you think Doctor Richard K Berstein is not telling the truth about his clinical practice?
    Maybe all the porcine animal studies misrepresent the data and pig farmers are in secret feeding pigs high fat low carb diets to fatten them up?

    What part of high insulin levels block fat burn and promotes fat storage do you not accept as fact?

    Do you doubt the reduction in fasting glucose or insulin or Hemoglobin A1c?

    I understand the potential value and role of a skeptic. SO, what is your alternative? A calorie is a calorie and High carb low fat produces better mortality and morbidity results? Evidence?

    Eric

    Reply: #34
  28. FrankG
    So LCHF helps people to lose weight "unconsciously" because "free living" people (that would be 99.999% of us) are notoriously bad at accurately counting calories (ya think!?!) and LCHF is more satiating.

    And this is bad somehow?!? Seriously you are trying to downplay the benefits of LCHF with this argument? That it works! :-)

    I'm pretty sure that Sam (unlike let's say the SuperSize me guy) kept accurate food logs throughout. Is your response to calories are NOT equal to just call everyone who disagrees with you a liar?

    I've dealt with your bible stories about metabolic wards before in some detail, in comments directed to you. I've no intention of repeating myself again here, if you can't or won't be bothered to read them.

    Calories (in the real world) are NOT all equal.

    Reply: #35
  29. Murray
    It is a confusion, I believe, to equate scientific method with statistical method, as though a centrally monitored collection of anecdotes elevates a same bad story into a good one by telling it often enough. An experiment is a narrative (setting, event, result) and what makes a good story is in the telling. What elements of the setting, event and result are relevant, and in what way. What matters most is good story design, not the number of them. Numbers are a crutch for poor design. Galileo did fine with n=1 as did. Many other giants of science. What typifies the greater scientists from the science bureaucrats is the sense to design better narratives (anecdotes) and develop a keener sense for enlightening interpretations.

    It also requires a sense of degrees of plausibility. Every narrative has play in the joints, the author cannot control everything in every detail. Plainly Sam did not measure calories to the micro unit, but unless one is blinded by confirmation bias, it is not plausible to project behaviour patterns of a random sample of mostly unsuccessful dieters to someone putting this much trouble to find out the truth about his metabolic response. The differences in outcome were much larger than the plausible tolerance of error in the setting. And the outcome itself plausible, although perhaps for reasons different than hypothesized.

    I say this because I, too, tried the first half the experiment with similar result. I had read a report on research that found that cells low in energy send a signal to the liver to produce bile to absorb more fat from the gut for energy. As a general heuristic, nature is a stingy engineer, so I hypothesized that this signalling would not evolve and persist unless not all fat is otherwise absorbed from the gut. And it makes sense from an evolutionary standpoint, for a meat and fat eater to only take up a limited amount of fat from a carcass. So I tried eating as much fat as I could, with very low carbs for three weeks. I did not count calories; never do, never will. But I ate a lot of fat. Going over to dinner at friends serving beef brisket, I ate all the visible fat from the brisket, as everyone else were lipophobes. I ate loads of butter, coconut oil. 100% chocolate! tablespoons of olive oil, homemade mayonnaise, hollandaise. I would serve eggs Benedict (no muffin, of course) and would finish the entire batch of hollandaise myself. I got local foie gras from a woman who uses her family's traditional method from Provence, with four 250 ml mason jars with the foie encased in dark yellow duck fat, all of which I ate like candy. A carb binge for me during this experiment was a handful of walnuts. The result was zero weight gain and floating feces. My interpretation was not that there was some massive metabolic difference that burned off one or two thousand more calories per day; it seems the difference amounts only to a few hundred in more carefully controlled experiments. Rather, there is simply another "calories out" subplot that does not get told by most storytellers, whether anecdotal or in statistical aggregations of randomly selected anecdotes. Since my n=1 investigation, I have seen numerous reports of the same outcome, including Sam's. Not proof,, obviously, but it enhances plausibility. I have also since seen research reports of animal studies where feces are analyzed to measure that mode of calories out. So why not in people studies? Confirmation bias from the vested interests supported by the calorie-centred hypothesis--they need it to be true in their attempt or desire to govern food choices (lifestyle, corporate interests selling food or drugs, career paths).

    So it was encouraging for me to learn that the recently announced NUSI study will indeed control for calories out through feces and urine. Urine, as many keto adapted people know, contains ketones when one is in dietary ketosis, creating another source of calories out. These additional modes of calories out are an important subplot left out of most stories, even the statistically composed ones with aggregations of randomly selected anecdotes. Adding the outcome of these subplots makes for a better story, even if it is a story told just once.

  30. Paul
    As many of us said so many times on the pages of this blog, weight, CICO and such like are of lesser importance to much greater benefits of LCHF to our health.

    Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2013 Aug 2. doi: 10.1111/nyas.12222. [Epub ahead of print]
    Ketone esters increase brown fat in mice and overcome insulin resistance in other tissues in the rat.

    Veech RL.
    Source
    Laboratory of Metabolic Control, Department of Health and Human Services, National Institute of Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, Maryland.

    Abstract
    Brown adipose tissue (BAT) is classically activated by sympathetic nervous stimulation resulting from exposure to cold. Feeding a high-fat diet also induces development of brown fat, but is decreased by caloric restriction. Blood ketone bodies, which function as alternative energy substrates to glucose, are increased during caloric restriction. Here we discuss the unexpected observation that feeding an ester of ketone bodies to the mouse, which increases blood ketone body concentrations, results in an activation of brown fat. The mechanism of this activation of brown fat is similar to that occurring from cold exposure in that cyclic adenosine monophosphate (AMP) levels are increased as are levels of the transcription factor cyclic AMP-responsive element-binding protein, which is also increased by ketone ester feeding. Other effects of feeding ketone esters, in addition to their ability to induce brown fat, are discussed such as their ability to overcome certain aspects of insulin resistance and to ameliorate the accumulation of amyloid and phosphorylated tau protein in brain, and improve cognitive function, in a triple transgenic mouse model of Alzheimer's disease.
    Published 2013. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.

    Reply: #31
  31. Ondrej
    Rat studies again? LMAROF!

    Once again Paul, take a picture of a rat, place it next to you and look in the mirror.

    See the difference? Based on your thinking, probably none.

    Reply: #32
  32. Paul
    I agree, none.
    Oooo by the way, you need to tell this to prof. Veech as well - what a fool he must be to waste his life on such a research.
  33. Paul
    "Should we rely on an unreliable n=1 experiment to learn the truth? "

    For the last time. Personal comment based on a personal experience. As I mentioned before (few times) friends of mine and I (n=8) few years ago did very similar experiment to Sam's, including comprehensive blood work. We obtained very similar results to Sam results. We repeated experiment 3 times. My personal understanding, based on my own experiences and the experiments I carry out on animal, is that, saying it simply, calories supplied by macronutrients are processed differently. Calorie is not a calorie.

    Reply: #36
  34. grinch
    "What part of high insulin levels block fat burn and promotes fat storage do you not accept as fact?"

    There is not a shred of evidence that "insulin levels block fat burn" has anything to do with calorie balance. The whole purpose of this action by insulin is to switch from primarily burning fat to primarily burning glucose, because glucose is the preferred energy source. Insulin levels are not tied to calorie balance. As soon as glucose is less available, fat burning turns back on. The human body is remarkably good at NOT wasting calories by switching to a different fuel source.

    "Do you doubt the reduction in fasting glucose or insulin or Hemoglobin A1c?"

    Completely irrelevant question.

    "I understand the potential value and role of a skeptic. SO, what is your alternative? A calorie is a calorie and High carb low fat produces better mortality and morbidity results? Evidence?"

    Alternative to what? I'm not saying LCHF is bad, I'm saying the science used to promote it is wrong. It does not guarantee weight loss results because calorie balance is the determinant of weight loss.

    Reply: #39
  35. grinch
    "So LCHF helps people to lose weight "unconsciously" because "free living" people (that would be 99.999% of us) are notoriously bad at accurately counting calories (ya think!?!) and LCHF is more satiating.

    And this is bad somehow?!? Seriously you are trying to downplay the benefits of LCHF with this argument? That it works!"

    No its not bad, but I'm continuing to see calorie denial by the LCHF crowd.

    "I'm pretty sure that Sam (unlike let's say the SuperSize me guy) kept accurate food logs throughout. Is your response to calories are NOT equal to just call everyone who disagrees with you a liar?"

    Calories are NOT equal in what context? I cannot trust that Sam's own cognitive bias' did not in some way influence his ability to track his eating. That is why real experiments are conducted in highly controlled environments. Are you suggesting these protocols are unecessary?

    "Calories (in the real world) are NOT all equal."

    Why would calories be different in a controlled environment verses the real world?

  36. grinch
    Paul,

    I've tried a couple of different diets over the years and what I found about myself is that I will lose weight when I lower calories, I will gain weight when I increase them. LCHF worked for me just like anyone else, by removing the *trigger* foods that I overconsume, allow me to eat adequate protein without even thinking about it, and overall feel more satiated than other diets. I certainly was not eating 4-5000 calories when I was losing weight on LCHF.

  37. Sam Feltham
    Thanks Paul & Sophie!

    Grinch & Ondrej please read chapter 2 of Endocrinology: An Integrated Approach by Stephen Nussey & Saffron Whitehead at St. George's Hospital Medical School, London, UK in regard to the actions of insulin...available for free here :) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK30/

    Replies: #38, #43
  38. grinch
    Sam,

    Its amazing to me that despite the obvious staring right at us, the evidence that insulin's action on adipocytes is a direct cause of a positive energy balance has been eluding researchers for more than a century.

    Reply: #50
  39. Murray
    "The whole purpose of this action by insulin is to switch from primarily burning fat to primarily burning glucose, because glucose is the preferred energy source. "

    That is interpretation and projects human intentionality, begging the question. The reverse is more plausible. Glucose becomes the primary energy source only when there is too much glucose in the system, which eventually lowers glucose to a safer level (reducing rates of glycation and free radical damage), until the default mode of fat burning is restored. Plenty of data reviewed by Phinney and Volek and recent studies show numerous benefits in terms of mitochondrial fitness and replication in fat and ketone metabolism, versus glucose metabolism. Dr. Seyfried even calls a ketogenic diet a mitochondrial enhancement diet.

    Another question-begging interpretation of carbophiles is that the liver stores glycogen for fuel. Again, a reversal is just a plausible. The liver stores glycogen to help mitigate blood sugar spikes after carb loads, until it starts to interfere with liver function (too much water retention) and the safety buffer is exceeded. Indeed, there is evidence that the liver converts glycogen and releases sugar into the blood when sugar is detected in the mouth. This indicates the metabolism starts the process of ridding excess sugar as soon as possible, as a triage response to incoming sugar. The liver and metabolism "prefer" (to adopt your teleological language) to have full buffering capacity in the liver, which means no glycogen or at least reduced glycogen. This allows blood sugar and HgbA1c to fall. Telling is recent research showing cognitive decline and rate of annual brain cell loss are directly proportion to blood sugar levels---with no minimum blood sugar level at which the rate levels or starts to go up. The lower the blood sugar the less the loss of brain mass and less cognitive decline--with no minimum. Hardly what one would expect from the body's "preferred" fuel. Further, Cynthia Kenyon's work shows the levels of insulin are directly proportional to indications of aging, and minimizing insulin enhancing body repair mechanisms. So, by Nietzschean reversal of interpretation (do university degrees no longer have humanities requirements?), it does not seem plausible that sugar is the preferred fuel; rather, it seems more likely that fat is the preferred fuel.

    Of course, both views are interpretation. The body metabolism has no intentionality. It just evolves in response to sustained environmental pressures, such as living off of ruminants for a couple of million years in the savannahs.

  40. bill
    grinch said:

    "LCHF worked for me just like anyone else, by removing the *trigger* foods that I overconsume, allow me to eat adequate protein without even thinking about it, and overall feel more satiated than other diets."

    So there's no more need to respond to grinch.
    He's on our side.

    Good on ya, grinch.

    Replies: #41, #42
  41. Paul
    He is still mighty confused though, whether by nature or nurture.
  42. FrankG
    But wait bill.. are you sure? grinch is quick enough to dismiss Sam's experience as an n=1 and untrustworthy data due to cognitive bias (which could have "in some way influence[d] his ability to track his eating") -- apparently NO ONE can be trusted unless they are locked in a metabolic chamber! But somehow we are to accept grinch's own n=1 as valid? ROFL indeed :-P

    Best stick with Stephan grinchy, he will keep saying just what you want to hear... and lawd knows it is too much work to actually form a thought for yourself.

    WHY do you think LCHF leaves you more satiated than other diets? Magic or Biochemistry?

    Reply: #45
  43. Ondrej
    Sam, if you really want to convince me and thousands of others, all you need to do is perform a valid CRT.

    Don't give me excuses. Is it that you lack money or you are afraid you will not like the results?

    Unless you conduct an RCT don't expect anyone with an IQ at or higher than room temperature to accept your low carb circus act.

    But if you want to look like a tool...

    Reply: #44
  44. FrankG
    Thus speaks the expert on "looking like a tool" :-P
    Reply: #51
  45. grinch
    Bill,

    The difference in beliefs between me and most LCHF practitioners is that I do not believe reduced insulin is what makes LCHF work for *some* people. I believe LCHF works because of the effects of increased protein, but also it lowers the variety and overall palatability of the foods enough to prevent overconsumption. I do not think insulin causes people to eat more, if anything it has the opposite effect. I think people eat too much because of the brain's reward center coupled with genetics, the body's homeostatic system (ie. settling point), and the modern western food environment. In other words its multifactorial, which is why every single-factory theory about obesity can be debunked by simply looking at other populations that show the opposite.

    I'm not sure why in the LCHF community there is this belief that there is exactly two sides. Either you are CICO or you are LCHF. I think Taubes has had quite an influence on this community, with all the people who think the calorie hypothesis of obesity was established simply for political reasons while unaware of the mountains of evidence in support of it.

    Reply: #47
  46. grinch
    "apparently NO ONE can be trusted unless they are locked in a metabolic chamber! But somehow we are to accept grinch's own n=1 as valid? ROFL indeed "

    Way to miss the point.

  47. FrankG
    Yup.. sounding more and more like a Stephan "it's anything but insulin -- oh and if you can slur Gary Taubes at the same time, go for it" disciple, every time you post.

    Get a life and get some independent thoughts.

    Mountains of evidence did not sway Galileo did they? Do you really think that quantity is better than quality?

    Reply: #48
  48. grinch
    "Mountains of evidence did not sway Galileo did they? Do you really think that quantity is better than quality?"

    Okay then, where is this quality that you mention? I haven't found anything of quality that actually supports the insulin hypothesis.

    Reply: #49
  49. FrankG
    This is old ground... it has been covered for you dozens of times already. Maybe you should read it. I'm done wasting my time repeating things for the likes of you.
  50. greensleeves
    @grinch

    "Its amazing to me that despite the obvious staring right at us, the evidence that insulin's action on adipocytes is a direct cause of a positive energy balance has been eluding researchers for more than a century."

    What on earth are you talking about? Every single biochemical medical textbook states this as a fact & presents the tables. Do you believe we are too stupid to just read a medical book & should instead believe your false statements?

    A very standard example would be "Textbook of Biochemistry for Medical Students," Vasudevan et al, 2010, JP Medical Ltd. See esp. pp-139-148, altho' useful info is also on pp 86-87,91-93, and p. 442. Best wishes to you.

1 2

Leave a reply

Reply to comment #0 by

Older posts