Another study on low-carb diets…
…comes up with some interesting results that might disturb advocates of low-carb diets:
In a large cohort of adults living in four diverse US communities, with more than two decades of follow-up, mid-life dietary patterns marked by both low carbohydrate (<40% of energy from carbohydrate) and high carbohydrate (>70% of energy from carbohydrate) consumption were associated with increased mortality risk and shorter residual lifespan, with minimum risk observed with 50–55% of energy from carbohydrate. These findings reflect a U-shaped relationship between carbohydrate intake and mortality, and were corroborated by data from other North American, European, Asian and multinational cohorts, combined as part of a meta-analysis. However, low carbohydrate dietary patterns that replaced energy from carbohydrate with energy from animal-derived protein or fat were associated with greater risk. However, this association was reversed when energy from carbohydrate was replaced with plant-derived protein or fat.
I’ve written many times about my own experiences with low-carb diets, as regular readers here probably know, but the summary version is that I hate them for many reasons, including a very important one: I don’t lose weight on them. I also don’t like eating a lot of meat or cheese of any kind, and it makes me feel lousy. Really lousy. Among other things, my digestive system shuts down. It’s just a miserable, unproductive experience for me.
But I know a lot of people love and swear by them, and that they say that their bloodwork improves immensely and they feel and look better. More power to you, folks.
I believe that low-carb advocates will shrug off the findings mentioned in that quote about the study, for the following reasons and probably more:
—they’ll say the low-carb diets studied don’t reflect the type of diet they advocate.
—they’ll say that studies of diet and health that rely on self-report of food intake have inherent flaws
—they’ll say that other studies don’t find the same results, so this one is an outlier (I’m not sure, though, that the other studies measured all-cause mortality, which this one appears to do, so it may be apples and oranges).
One thing I have noticed, here and on other sites, is that some low-carb advocates treat it almost as a religion, and they proselytize. I cannot tell you how often, when I write any sort of post on the topic of these diets, people come here and ignore what I’ve written about how low-carb diets have worked (or not worked) on me in the past. There’s also a tendency among advocates to become hyper-rigid about diet.
What’s more, some of the historic arguments about paleo don’t make a whole lot of sense to me. Humans have been eating grains and fruits and vegetables and cereals for many thousands of years—different forms of the foodstuffs, to different extents, in different societies—and I think it stands to reason that there has been quite a bit of evolution and natural selection to deal with that since the earlier time when paleo diets supposedly were dominant.
But I’m not trying to talk anyone out of something that seems to work for that person. I think we still know very little about optimal diets, and I also think that each individual reacts very differently to diets and we especially don’t know how to tailor dietary instructions to the individual.
Eat what you like to eat. You are going to die anyway.
My experience has been like yours, Neo. Because of my joint issues and the fact that I would be caring for my newborn granddaughter one day each week, in 2010 I changed my diet and lost 26 lbs. I have kept all but 6 lbs off (in the last 1-1/2 yrs…aging? these 6 lbs have become a challenge). All I did was cut back on the things I eat–the Mediterranean diet, or as my father said, “everything in moderation and too much of anything isn’t good for you”. (Oh, and in 2014 I tried “gluten free” for 7 months because of chronic pain in my thumb. It was of absolutely no help, however I lost 4 additional pounds because I just wasn’t interested in eating those foods. In fact, my trip to Italy that year resulted in my taking 500 mg of aspirin–offered to me on the plane to Rome, which alleviated my pain while nothing else did. The one thing I hadn’t tried–aspirin.)
It’s another attempt by ideologues to sell vegetable diets no one really likes.
I think that diet cannot be separated from lifestyle. When we started eating grains it’s because we started farming them. But as farmers we worked all day long, using hand tools and driving oxen, burned a ton of calories!
Also most people didn’t have the ability to eat a ton of meat, the usual meal was some sort of bread, perhaps some cheese. Meat was not for daily consumption.
Today we spend a lot more time sitting, working on computers, etc. Not that much calorie consumption needed for the daily grind.
As soon as I retired, I lost weight. Nothing changed except instead of 8-10 hours of sitting in front of a computer or in a car, I seem to be moving a lot in my house, walking dogs, cleaning, gardening, just a lot more movement. And I don’t eat out of boredom at the office anymore, those tempting goodies in the office kitchen.
I technically eat a low carb diet. I started with a very restrictive version in 2004 – not Atkins but similar in terms of carb intake – and have evolved over the years to one where I mostly avoid sugars. I’ve never really liked starches like rice, potatoes, squash, and root vegetables. In addition to protein I eat a lot of what my wife and I have come to call ‘good carbs’, which are mostly green vegetables and legumes. Fourteen years on and I still eat this way because I feel very much better than when I do not. My vitals, which have always been very good, are unchanged. As I may have mentioned before, my wife does not follow this diet, she is like Neo in that she feels poorly when she overly restricts carbs. The main symptom for her is migraines.
I don’t recommend this diet to anyone, the reading I’ve done on the subject shows that the holy grail of a one-size-fits-all diet is non-existent for human beings. Eat what makes you feel best – however it is that you measure that.
I lost about 70 pounds on an Atkins diet, and then I found I couldn’t stand to do it a second time. Every time I tried, my mouth felt like I’d been drinking bacon grease….
In the end, weight loss is about calorie deprivation. I lost 150 pounds by using a medically supervised diet that was about balanced calorie deprivation, rather than low sugar, low fat, or low carb. If you can deprive yourself of calories through a low-carb diet AND lose weight, and then keep it off, you’re probably better off on it. If you gain weight off fats, then a low-fat diet is good for you.
Most people would lose weight quickly by just cutting out sugars, processed carbs, fried foods, and high sodium foods. I’ve conceded that my post-weight-loss diet will have to completely exclude Coca-Cola, sugary snacks, and fried foods. The thought still hurts.
I had long been a bike rider, walker, and was active in outdoor activities, but it became necessary to curtail most of that and become essentially house bound for a couple of years when I became caregiver for my wife as she developed dementia. To offset the reduced activity, I changed to a Mediterranean type diet and lost about thirty pounds. I was also under considerable stress during that time which, no doubt contributed to the loss.
When she started to wander and I could no longer provide the care she needed she was placed in a secure facility. My Daughter provided much support, which I needed, and helped with getting her placed. She also suggested I move in with her and her husband. Being eighty-two and pretty well stressed out, that seemed preferable to living alone, so I accepted the offer. Now my diet has changed to meat and carb heavy, but I’m able to get more exercise and my stress level has been reduced considerably. My weight has remained the same for the four months I’ve been here and my last labs were close to perfect as they’ve always been.
I relate all of this to demonstrate there’s a lot more to our health and how much we weigh than diet alone.
On the recommendation of my doctor, I did the Whole 30 program. I’ve lost about 40 pounds and I was able to reduce the BP meds. But, I am adding foods back and have noticed a change. Some foods do result in an reaction (hives, gas, knee pain, or a general blah feeling). And, in some cases, it takes a while of repeated exposure to a food to get the reaction. So, I going back soon to the Whole 30 routine and retest again to narrow down the bad foods.
But, getting rid of some foods made me feel better, so for me, I’ll stick with the healthy fats and lean protein.
I’ve lost 30 pounds, reduced pain from joint inflammation, and reduced my cholesterol and triglycerides eating low carb, normal protein levels, and high fat. But it is true that bodies differ. For people with a genetic tendency to misuse carbs, what I’m doing works well. As always, other bodies may need other approaches.
“I relate all of this to demonstrate there’s a lot more to our health and how much we weigh than diet alone.” Phil Underwood
There is a lot of truth to that statement. When my mother died suddenly in 2005 (my full-time assistant at our business) and I was responsible for her funeral and many out-of-town guests as well as our office, I lost 7 pounds in that first week, even though I was eating. That weight stayed off for over a year. It was stress and grief–not diet.
Just reading the Stephen Ambrose history of the Lewis and Clark expedition- Undaunted Courage. They had to eat anything they could find, from buffalo to horses to dogs to roots and berries. They were on the edge of starvation during the winter over at Ft. Clatsop (Astoria, OR) even though they were able to hunt Elk and fish the Colombia River. The amazing thing about our human physiology is that we can survive on almost anything, all we need is enough of it.
We are blessed with a civilization that creates enough food in abundance that we can debate how best to not overindulge. Truly “First World” issues.
I, myself, am proud to be an Omnivore.
My neighbor’s doc suggested a gluten-free diet for her 8 years ago, even though she was not celiac. Her health has gone from bad to worse. Now he wants her to go dairy-free, even though she has no dairy allergy. I just want to give her a hamburger on a bun and a milk shake! Oh, yeah, she’s allergic to nuts. I can’t cook for her because she doesn’t like tomatoes, onions, garlic, all of which I use in everything except my cereal and desserts. Oh, yeah, in spite of all this, she gains weight.
Yes, “First World” issues, for sure.
I had terrible luck with the low carb diet. I made it four weeks and my weight didn’t budge.
And boy, did I miss my spaghetti sandwiches.
I’ve managed to maintain a decent weight through cutting out one meal (breakfast) and increasing my activity. I go to the gym twice a week and lift weights and I hike (3-10 miles) on the weekend. Last week I did my first 20+ mile hike at altitude. That was tough but rewarding.
I rewarded myself with three (3) spaghetti sandwiches.
All respectful comments here so far, Neo, which is good. When you post about diets I for one always acknowledge that your experience with low carb being ineffective for you is just as valid as anyone else’s. My body does badly on a typical modern American diet that is pretty high carb and that’s born out directly in measurable test results. I’m on a few months now of low carb and am down 20 lbs, A1C is 6.4, and most importantly my triglycerides went from off the charts to moderately high. The struggle continues! As far as this study goes, I read it as saying that in the U-shaped curve, very low carb AND high carb are both undesirable. However—and this is key—the low carb negative effect disappears when people replace animal fat in the low carb diet with plant-based fats. I’m very interested to see this. I eat a fair amount of animal fat, mostly dairy, when I low carb. I’ll be conscious of replacing some butter with olive oil now.
Scott J gets it right on the Lewis & Clark expedition, but I will supplement.
First, fat contains 9 calories per gram. One calorie is the amount of energy that raises 1cc. of water by 1 degree Celsius.
Proteins and carbohydrates in pure form yield 4 calories per gram.
Game animals are notoriously lean. Most ground venison today has pork intentionally added to provide fat, the source of flavor we love so much, hunters and non-hunters alike. Think of prime-grade steaks, well-marbled by streaks of fat!
The Lewis & Clark guys had ONLY game animals to eat, devoid of fat and carbohydrates, day after day after day. They slogged on foot many miles a day after leaving the Missouri River, burning up much fuel (calories). The body can to a certain extent make carbohydrates like glucose from digested proteins (gluconeogenesis) but it is a chemically laborious process, especially when one is in great need for 4000 calories per day marching toward the Pacific while carrying a heavy pack, a muzzle-loader, gunpowder, lead shot, blankets, etc. The brain relies on glucose as primary fuel.
A 4000 calorie-per-day need would require the ingestion, 100% digestion, and 100% absorption of 1kg of protein. That is 2.2 pounds of meat, and obviously the body is not a perfect machine, so it might need 3 lbs of protein or more per day. They killed as they went. Had to!
They could not fish for salmon in the headwaters, which is where salmon go to spawn, then immediately die. They spawn with rotten flesh literally falling off their bodies, and spawning only occurs once each year–otherwise there are no salmon to be found in fresh water, period. So not a readily available, or palatable fat source when available.
Not much vitamins B and C in animal flesh either! Essential vitamins A,D,E,K are fat-soluble, not water-soluble, so without fat, well….
The Lewis & Clark guys ran into friendly Indians just in the nick, who showed them what carb-containing roots to grub for. Probably also had air-dried salmon for them, for fat.
We are omnivores for good reason!
Cicero,
The calories measured in food are actually1000 times larger than the heat calories you mention using the physicist’s definition of calories. Dietary calories are actually kilocalories, 1000 calories each.
Why are humans obsessed with losing weight. For much of human history, it was the other way around. What they don’t want to tell you, the public, is that US vegetables and grains have less than 33% of its mineral and nutrient content compared to even 1945.
Eating 3x more the servings is the only way the body can self adapt itself without its health functions failing. Cancer is already roaring up due to a weakened immune system. Cancer is not some abnormal quality. Everybody has mutated and incorrect cells floating around that T cells and other parts of the immune system “cleans up”. Too much “trash to clean up” in the swamp creates the DC effect however: the host dies.
Minerals and trace minerals are given to pets, but not to humans. You humans are not as valuable as your pets according to the FDA. When a pet has disorder ABCDEFG, they are given nutrient supplements first. Usually this prevents or cures the disease, and surgery is only a last resort. While we don’t have cancer studies comparing 1915 human cancer rates to 2018 cancer rates, what we do have is almost as good: our pets.
Trying to replace gluten or wheat with eggs and diary and meat is merely a patch up job fix. Egg yolk has more nutrients but it is refined from the chicken eating grains. The less stuff in the soil the less stuff in the veggies. It is better than eating salad which has almost zero material for the body but there is a limit. Some human metabolisms can process a lot of protein and egg/diary, others cannot.
There is also something else the modern medical and orthodox community doesn’t like to talk about: the human invisible electromagnetic field or also known as the light aura body.
Human professionals are leery of being seen talking about cutting edge issues, as one word line will get their grant and thus careers offlined.
Diets are for human entertainment. If people want to purify the body and create a higher spiritual bandwidth, they will need to fast.
That means stop eating, and later stop drinking water.
Only when you mortals face death will you begin to be ready to learn.
Michael:
You are of course correct. My quick glitch.
but the basics of the nutritional exposition are unchanged: the Lewis & Clark scouts had to eat massive daily amounts of protein, were nevertheless losing weight. Only the starch in various roots saved them.
Thank-you for posting this study,which is very useful. Where was this published?
I have been struggling to keep my weight down for 60 of my 65 years. I started gaining more rapidly as I grew beginning at 5 years old. I was put on diet pills by my pediatrician at 10 – and he wasn’t a quack. Skim milk only, NO after school snacks unlike my normal sized friends who gobbled down cupcakes and peanut butter sandwiches before they ate dinner. One thing that I have learned is that there are no blanket statements that apply to everyone when it comes to how to lose weight. If it works for you , do it. But “calories in , calories out” is not one size fits all. I can agree that it will work for a lot of folks. But it doesn’t work for everyone and there’s research out there that proves just that. I always laugh when I hear the latest “Just give up soda, fast foods, snacks, etc.” , since these are things I’ve never made a part of my eating habits. Medicine has just scratched the surface on this topic,IMO. Studies on gut flora seem to be onto something. And yes, stress can’t be discounted. Cortisol and our other hormones rule a lot more of our lives than we realize.
“Eat what you want, die like a man.”
A friend wrote the book.
My wife lost 150 pounds on sheer will power at the age of 50.
I need to lose 20 and can’t seem to.
The difference? I’ll eat 20 chips and she’ll “try” one.
We are blessed with a civilization that creates enough food in abundance that we can debate how best to not overindulge.
ScottJ: Since 2011 there have been more obese people than undernourished.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2011/09/22/there-are-now-more-obese-people-than-hungry-people/
I’m hoping we’ll get a better handle on obesity, but I’m so happy people are eating more and living longer. When I was younger, I was haunted by those who weren’t.
I suspect that the study was a bit biased by people who went to low carb diets when they were already having problems. The diabetes epidemic the past 40 years is probably related to the diet advice that we have gotten since the flurry of alarm caused by coronary artery disease in Korean War casualties. That set off the great cholesterol panic. The fact that smoking was probably the cause of coronary disease in young men was ignored.
I wrote a history of medicine book about 1998 for medical students and, in researching this issue, I could not find one positive research paper on Atkins and his diet recommendations. He was vilified in all science and medical literature until the past few years. It had the same religion overtones that global warming acquired.
Our esteemed Federal government has persisted in giving us dietary directions through much of my life. And supplemental feedings! As a result, we have a lot of fat kids fed on federal school lunch programs ( and after-school supper there also!). Fat kids become fat adults.
It is really pretty simple; lower caloric intake below caloric need. See Auschwitz: You will lose weight. Maybe not as soon or as fast as you want, but the population is infantile. It wants what it wants and it wants it now.
As a childhood (Type I) diabetic, I have been on a diet of sorts all my adult life, matching intake to insulin dose, requiring tedious and relentless self-control. No dessert, thank you. As a result, in my 70s I weigh the same as at age 18 (155 lb).
“It’s another attempt by ideologues to sell vegetable diets no one really likes.”
Most likely. But I agree some people (on all sides) preach their diet as a religious sacrament almost.
For myself, switching from a low carb diet to a “normal” diet of mostly grains and root vegetables caused my body weight to go up by 2lbs per DAY, as well as causing dangerous spikes in my blood glucose levels.
At the time, I had to because of a serious digestive problem that temporarily left me unable to digest fat and most protein at all.
For 2 months I survived on a diet of boiled rice with some boiled peas and sweetcorn for adding some taste and texture. Adding most anything else would cause massive stomach cramps and acid reflux.
Switching back to my regular low-carb diet (modified Atkins at the time) caused me to lose 40lbs of the more than 120lbs I’d gained, but that took 2 years after gaining that weight over just 2 months.
4 years later and I’ve lost another 10lbs or so, so yes, it’s slowed down dramatically.
I am now switching to a diet with next to no carbs at all, see what that does for me.
Not every diet is for everyone, something dieticians and lifestyle advocates of all kinds should keep in mind more when promoting their things.
Experiment, see what works for you, but stick to something for several months before judging as your body needs that much time to adjust to a new digestive regimen.
For me, an ultra-low carb diet may be the only chance left to reduce my weight short of invasive surgery like stomach reduction, which has such a high risk of severe complications (from chronic bleeding ulcers to a total inability to process solid foods to death) that I’m not interested in it unless it were a life and death situation.
I thought you might be interested in what Mark Sisson has to say about it. He’s a primal, low carb advocate, but he really digs into the various studies:
https://www.marksdailyapple.com/does-low-carb-shorten-lifespan/
He’s a lot more relaxed than most primal people, and his thoughts have definitely changed over the years. He doesn’t believe that all people do well on low carb, for instance.