This page summarizes some of the science behind low carb / paleo diets:
The science of low carb
The old thougts was that fat course high cholesterol and that was the reason to heart diseses, its not.
High colesterol is more complicated then that, but some whith syndrom X and similar condition often get better blod lipids, becuse high insulin levels provoke the liver to produce a lot of triglycerids an smll LDL.
One thing you can say is that more fat and less carbs often result in better HDL/LDL ratio and lower VLDL.
Its this fat/cholesterol hypotes thats totaly wrong!
You know this is a fat diet.. and if one have problems about gout one shouldnt eat more protein then one needs.
And about gout.. this was before thougt to be caused by eating a lot of meat.. but today its more linked to metabolic syndrome!
"Dietary causes account for about 12% of gout, and include a strong association with the consumption of alcohol, fructose-sweetened drinks, meat, and seafood. Other triggers include physical trauma and surgery. Recent studies have found dietary factors once believed to be associated are, in fact, not; including the intake of purine-rich vegetables (e.g., beans, peas, lentils, and spinach) and total protein. The consumption of coffee, vitamin C and dairy products as well as physical fitness appear to decrease the risk. This is believed to be partly due to their effect in reducing insulin resistance."
And if one do realy have gout.. one should reduce purin rich foods to its minimal as one in every case do get a minimum of essentiall aminoacids.
And in the mean time use much C-vitamin and coffe to reduce your symptoms!
Do you have any symptoms of insulin resistance??
In type 2 diabetes, randomisation to advice to follow a low-carbohydrate diet transiently improves glycaemic control compared with advice to follow a low-fat diet producing a similar weight loss.
You can access the full article here: http://www.springerlink.com/content/b56453v536503166/fulltext.html
However in 70 years, there has not been a single metabolic ward study that compares isocaloric high and low carb diets (w/protein controlled) and shows a metabolic advantage of low carb diets. So the only advantage of low-carb diets for the purposes of weight loss is the appetite blunting effect.
So the only advantage of low-carb diets for the purposes of weight loss is the appetite blunting effect.
If so, that is still brilliant right?
To lose weight you should probably eat less. With low carb you will want to eat less. Smart or what?
If one is obese.. one needs more insulin to make the fat stay in fattcells.. with lower insulin levels you get higher lipolysis in your fat cells and then you have energy in your blood and dont need to eat that much.
They do get higher total lipid levels on a hig fat diet.. but almoste everyone do get better or the same quota!
You mentioned insulin resistance as a possible explanation for lack of results. Can you expand on its symptoms/signs and consequences?
I got very tired everytime I ate grains (before I started LCHF) and it still happens to me after a big meal of 2 sausages and 2 eggs.
What are some other reasons that may impede success?
And typical symptoms is high blood glucose levels and high levels of insulin.
Many obese persons is in some level insulin resistant, with higer then normal insulin levels.. becuse there is a need for more insulin to get the fat to stay in the fat cells.
Insulin inhibits lipolysis how is the process to break down triglycerides to free faty acids how then can be used as energy to your cells.
When one eat, a lot of blood do goes to your guts and your digestal system, its take a lot of energy to digest and metabolice food.. so almoste everybody do have som energy defecits ounder the postprandial time.
I am still learning about the LCHF way of eating and only started today. I hope to get good results.
I live in Lincolnshire UK where local Lincoln Red Cattle finish well on grass so spend most if not all the year outdoors with direct access to grass. The meat from those animals is readily available from local butchers. Grassfed meat has benefits that affect the way our body is able to deal with inflammation and oxidation. I get Raw Milk/butter/cheese direct from the local dairy.
Diet Doctor's post Saturated Fat and the European Paradox should give us cause to question if the experience of corn fed industrialized, intensively reared/housed meat/dairy production that is the reason US meat/dairy is relatively cheap is when combined with a high refined carbohydrate and high sugar/fructose intake is a different scenario altogether.
To loos weight.. energy limitation and resting, best is to make the limitation go by natural causes.. like LCHF!
The Art and Science of Low Carbohydrate Performance
Thanks so much for putting this article together, and importantly, such a good selection of references.
I have been eating low carb for quite a while now and it has helped me to lose body fat, keep a very nice energy level ALL DAY, and also allowed me to help my clients to lose excess fat easily and without hunger.
I see many discussions about whether insulin, leptin or all manner of other things are responsible for fat storage/mobilisation, but at the end of th day, low carb/high fat works, full stop.
thanks for a great resource
I was just thinking... If you're obese and then start to loose weight. Then wouldn't the fat from your body go to your bloodstream and make you fat again if fat was fattening??? And wouldn't your cholestrols etc. go up hence there would be so much exces fat in your blood???
The fat enters your blood from your guts by mostly chylomicrons, they deliver fat to cells, adipote tissue and to the liver.. perticuly if you altso have high insulin levels.
When it reach liver its broken down and rebuilt to VLDL, how goes out in the blood again, to deliver fat and cholesterol to your cells.. and ones again.. if the insulin level is to high.. then its going to adiopote tissuie for storing.. you geting fatter!
But if the insulin level goes down, then your cells need fat as energy and its relesed as FFA, (Free Fatty Acids), bonded to albumin, how is the form for transporting fat for cell energy from adiopote tissuie.
And if your cells get all energy it need, then your not that hungry anymore.. and probably eat less?
If one do have a lot of fat in ones blood, then its often becuse of metabolic syndrome.. how is mostly caused by high glycemic load and a hereditet weaknes for that.
"One of the more remarkable results from Jeff Volek’s laboratory in the past few years was the demonstration that when the blood of volunteers was assayed for saturated fatty acids, those who had been on a low carbohydrate diet had lower levels than those on an isocaloric low-fat diet. This, despite the fact that the low-carbohydrate diet had three times the amount of saturated fat as the low-fat diet. How is this possible? What happened to the saturated fat in the low-carbohydrate diet? Well, that’s what metabolism does. The saturated fat in the low-carbohydrate arm was oxidized while (the real impact of the study) the low-fat arm is making new saturated fatty acid."
But fat is not fattening. That's why you go on a Low-Carb High Fat diet. Your body goes into a fat burning mode when you eliminate carbs. You burn the fat in your food and the fat from you fatty tissue.
What's fattening is carbs. When you eat carbs your blood sugar rises, which causes your insulin to rise, and insulin regulates fat storage. When insulin is high free fatty acids form triglycerides in fat tissue, and are stuck there until they breakdown, and insulin keeps them from breaking down too!
>>> And wouldn't your cholestrols etc. go up hence there would be so much exces fat in your blood???
There are good cholesterols and bad cholesterols. (HDL is considered good, LDL small particle size is bad). On a LCHF diet the HDL levels generally go up and the LDL levels generally stays the same, but the LDL particle size improves. At the same time circulating triglycerides also drop. All of those factors improve your risks for chronic diseases.
Also, while there may be more fat in circulation, there is less blood sugar so your body metabolizes the fat.
And thats the goal of any weight loss diet, to burn stored fat.
Yes, I know those things from the information I´ve recieved from these webpages and many others. The science behind low-carb high-fat diet seems strong enough to challenge hi-carb diets anytime.
And I´m just trying to move into nice ketogenic state with my metabolism myself.
I was just trying to come up with even more ways for people to see the evident fact that fat is not the problem, but the carbs are. (but especially that fat isn´t!!)
Most of the people are so deep in this paradigm that it´s just like a religion with emotional response when you try to say that "It´s not the fat it´s the carbs". (In Finland at least) No matter how delicate you try to be.
And therefore I came up with this idea that if fat was fattening then loosing weight trough burning fat from your fatcells would increase your health problems. That was intentional fiction with what I was trying to make a point. I think I wasn´t clear enough?
Is there a huge difference in the way our bodies digest fat that comes from our fatcells and the fat that we eat???
Am I making any sence at all?
The meal fat comes by chylomicrons and/or VLDL to your cells.
The fat from fat cells comes by FFA, its relesed by lipolysis in absent or low insulin levels.
And if one do eat to little carbs then ones body emediate need for fuel, then the lipolysis get higher.. and when your levels of FFA is high your cells cant burn them all.. so a lot goes to the liver.. how covert a lot of them to keton budies.
The liver have no enzyms to burn keton budies, so it goes ut in your blood.. and there its goes to any other cell thet want to use it.
In the end the fat is oxidised to water an carbon dioxid!
And a notation.. chylomicrons altso activate fat storage, by ASP!
Effect of reducing total fat intake on body weight: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials and cohort studies
'Conclusions There is high quality, consistent evidence that reduction of total fat intake has been achieved in large numbers of both healthy and at risk trial participants over many years. Lower total fat intake leads to small but statistically significant and clinically meaningful, sustained reductions in body weight in adults in studies with baseline fat intakes of 28-43% of energy intake and durations from six months to over eight years. Evidence supports a similar effect in children and young people.'
'Implications for public health policy and research
Although it may be difficult for populations to reduce total fat intake, attempts should be made to do so, to help control weight, where mean total fat intake is 30% or more of energy. For populations where the mean total fat intake is below 30% of energy then interventions to restrict rises in total fat intake to over 30% of energy may help to avoid obesity. High quality trials are needed to examine the effect on body weight of reducing fat intake in developing or transitional countries with total fat intakes greater than 30% of energy, and of preventing total fat intake rising above 30% of energy in countries with total fat intakes of 25-30% of energy. High quality trials are also needed in children.'
They included only low-fat vs control groups studies. Since they didn't include studies that included low-carb as one of the diets tested, no conclusion can be drawn concerning a comparison between low-fat and low-carb. However, since there are studies that compare low-carb and low-fat (the 18 studies above), and since those studies show low-carb to be superior to low-fat for weight loss, we can safely assume that whatever results the low-fat meta-analysis study found would have been bested by low-carb. This is the logic of similarity. If two are equal to a third, then all are equal to each other. Or, if A is greater than B, and if B is greater than C, then A is greater than C, and A is still greater than B.
But nobody cant live like that a whole life!
Calorie restriktion does work, the thing is that free living peopel dont seems to be able to stand a such regim a long time!
Low carb high fat diets seems to be a more sustainable diet, and it lower ones apetite if one have a lot of fats stored.
The energy consumed during the exercise is normally not massive - a few hundred calories more than sitting around - so don't bet too much on cardio exercise for weight loss.
That makes sense, until you realize that a heavier guy has to carry around a heavier weight, therefore must spend more energy. Think about it for a second.
To lift a weight, it requires energy. To lift a heavier weight, it requires more energy.
I'm sure you understand the First Law of Thermodynamics that says energy can't be created. If a heavy guy has to carry around more weight than a lighter guy just because he's heavier, where does the heavy guy get the extra energy required to carry around this extra weight? He's gonna eat more, of course.
But what if the heavy guy eats exactly as much as the lighter guy? He's gonna spend less, or he will lose mass. We can't predict what kind of mass he'll lose, but if he doesn't spend less, he'll lose mass for sure. Now what if the heavy guy can't lose mass because of some metabolic problem? If he can't lose mass, he'll spend less. There is no other choice. Now what if this metabolic problem is not some genetic defect or something? Maybe it's from the environment. Maybe there's something outside that affects his metabolism, and this is why he can't lose mass, even if he eats less than he should, even less than the lighter guy.
Look at the list of 18 studies above. Those are experiments that try to find out just what's that thing that prevents people from losing mass, even when they eat less. Those studies are dietary studies, so you might think well they're just looking at calories. No, they're looking at macronutrients, and the effect of those macronutrients on metabolism. But more specifically, they're trying to find out what happens to fat tissue - inside fat cells - when you change the ratio of fat and carbohydrate intake. This has nothing to do with muscle cells spending more or less energy. It's got to do with how quickly or slowly fat cells take in and release fat, depending on how much carbs and fat we eat.
Here's a funny thing. In those studies, they found that when you cut carbohydrate intake by a lot, you eat less without even thinking about it. Now maybe they lose weight because they eat less. But maybe they eat less because they're just not as hungry anymore. Remember the heavy guy. He's heavy so he spends more energy, so obviously when he eats, he eats more than the lighter guy. But here, people are losing weight, are less hungry, so of course they eat less. But like the heavy guy, they don't lose weight because they eat less, instead they eat less because they're getting lighter. Another funny thing is that people who cut carbs say they have more energy. It makes no sense if you look at calories, since they eat less. But it makes perfect sense when you look at what happens to fat tissue, inside fat cells. They have more energy because now their fat cells can release fat more quickly. They've removed the metabolic problem.
Take a look at this video. It's a woman who performs a lift called the power clean.
I don't know about you, but in my opinion, she looks real fine. If you're scared that you'll build ugly large muscles by lifting heavy weights, well that video should prove you won't. You'll get stronger and gain endurance, but you won't grow muscles that much.
The thing about muscle mass is that the primary determinant of muscle mass is testosterone. The more testosterone, the more muscle mass. That's why bodybuilders inject testosterone. They want big bigger biggest muscles. Lifting heavy weights is not enough to grow huge muscles. As a woman, you have much less testosterone than a man. So even if you lift heavy weights for years, you won't grow that much bigger muscles.
An advantage of lifting heavy weights vs jogging is that you can get it done in about 15 minutes, 2-3 times per week. And you're done.
Insulin works in all tissues, not just the muscles. Nor does insulin work "mainly" in the muscles. For example, in the liver, it regulates glycolysis, lipolysis, ketogenesis, and glycogenolysis, to name a few. In fat tissue, it regulates fatty acid esterification, and triglyceride desterification. In muscle tissue, it regulates protein synthesis, and glucose/fatty acids/ketones metabolism. In the brain, it regulates hunger, and various other functions.
In fat cells, insulin also regulates what's called adipocyte differentiation and proliferation. This is the mechanism of changing pre-adipocyte to mature adipocyte, and increasing the number of adipocytes.
In my opinion, exercise can affect insulin resistance. But I'm not sure this is always true in all circumstances. Imagine you don't eat any carbs. If exercise reduces insulin resistance, then muscle cells can now take in more glucose, but since you don't eat any glucose, you're going to run out pretty quickly. You might imagine that you'd "hit the wall" like that. But you'd be wrong. A few months ago, there's one ultra-marathoner who decided to start a ketogenic diet. That's a diet that contains almost no carbs. He won by a wide margin. Broke his previous records, etc. He obviously didn't hit the wall. He obviously didn't spend much glucose. So, maybe here exercise doesn't really do anything for insulin resistance in muscle cells.
But that's not a problem. Muscle cells can use ketones instead. When you cut carbs, your liver starts producing much more ketones than otherwise. This happens mainly because insulin level drops. So we can see why this ultra-marathoner won and broke records. And he didn't hit the wall. So maybe exercise doesn't do much for insulin resistance in muscle cells, but with lots of ketones, it doesn't matter much.
And ofcourse.. with more muscles, more space to store glucose!
Its about allocation of GLUT4, how is glucose transportation chanels in your cells how reacts to insulin signaling.. and/or internal energy demands.
But.. but.. its more complicated then that.. some do have damaged there signaling pattern.. how should react on insulin.. and to that.. high levels of FFA in the form of NEFA, seems to block the reaction to allocate GLUT4 to the surface of the cells!
And that state often is found in Metabolic syndrome.. one have high blood sugar and high blood lipids!
And to that.. one never have more GLUT4 then one need.. its about time/energy regulation!
Exercise give you more muscles, more space to store glucose, more GLUT4, and deplet some of the energy in your cells!
Email (not shown) (required)