Ancestral Weight Loss Registry
  • Home
  • Join
  • Results
  • Testimonials
  • Science
  • Blog
  • About

Not All Calories Created Equal?

6/27/2012

4 Comments

 
The new study getting all sorts of publicity, especially among the low carb proponents, has come to a very interesting conclusion. One that people like Gary Taubes has been arguing for years. Not all calories are created equal. Here is Dr. Ludwig, the lead investigator of the study:

Here is how Mark Bittman of the NYTimes summarized the results of the Atkins group:

"The results were impressive. Those on the “Atkins” diet burned 350 calories more per day — the equivalent of an hour of moderate exercise — than those on the standard low-fat diet. Those on the low-glycemic diet burned 150 calories more, roughly equivalent to an hour of light exercise."

This was done with out exercising at all. Although this study is very small, it is particularly compelling because it was done in a controlled facility, feeding the study subjects every meal. This study could not have come out at a worse time for Marion Nestle who just wrote a book entitled "Why Calories Count". 
Picture
A quick look at the Amazon reviews of Mrs. Nestle's book has many 5 star ratings, with one very provocatively written 1-star review, posted on June 6. Here is what Mack90 had to say:

"After hearing one of the authors being interviewed on NPR yesterday, I bought the Kindle edition of their book. Given their title, I was particularly curious about how they addressed the evidence that indeed calories don't count nearly so much as the type of food eaten and that the "calories-in/calories-out" energy balance paradigm represents a misunderstanding of the First Law of Thermodynamics (see the articles on MedPage Today entitled "Food Fight Over Whether Hitler Made Us Fat" and also "Food Addiction: Cheesecake-Eating Rats and Obesity as a Mental Illness").

In 2007, author Gary Taubes published a 600-page book (including 114 pages of footnotes and references) entitled Good Calories, Bad Calories: Fats, Carbs, and the Controversial Science of Diet and Health. This book amassed and described a virtual mountain of evidence based on biochemistry, metabolism, physiology, endocrinology, epidemiology and clinical research that leads to the conclusions that:

1. Obesity is a disorder of excess fat accumulation and not the result of energy imbalance, overeating or sedentary behavior
2. Overeating and inactivity are compensatory effects and not the causes of obesity
3. We don't get fat because we overeat, we overeat because our adipose tissue is accumulating excess fat

So what data and arguments do Nestle and Nesheim muster to counter Taubes' evidence and conclusions? First of all, they don't even do it themselves, rather they bring in a surrogate, Dr. David Katz, to make their case. And what does Dr. Katz have to say? As quoted by Nestle and Nesheim, Katz asserts that the result of an anecdotal "N-of-1" experiment conducted by a single individual eating a "Twinkie Diet" is sufficient to invalidate or refute the arguments made in two books summarizing hundreds of studies over many decades (Taubes more recently published a streamlined and updated sequel (Why We Get Fat: And What to Do About It) to his earlier book. Moreover, Katz is hardly an unbiased judge of the evidence because he profits from his own commercial "NuVal(tm)" and "Flavor Point" diets that, if Taubes is right, might not be so compelling an approach to healthy eating and weight control or be good for his reputation as a diet blogger on The Huffington Post.

The use of a surrogate with an undisclosed conflict of interest represents intellectual cowardice (or laziness) and dishonesty (or carelessness) on the part of the authors of "Why Calories Count." This hugely negative aspect of the book calls into question the authors' reasoning and objectivity with respect to other arguments and conclusions made in their book
."

Maybe Gary Taubes, and Mack90 are on to something...


--
Tried a paleo or low carb diet? Join the registry today and contribute to a better understanding of this way of eating!
4 Comments
Trish Cherry
6/27/2012 05:26:00 am

I read Gary Taubes book a few years ago and began to seriously think that indeed the calorie myth is all wrong. Many many dieters will testify to that! We are not liars when we say we dont eat much! I was exisitng (not living because my health suffered and I was hungry all the time) on 1000 calories for years. But eventually my body would go in to starvation/famine mode and I would end up bingeing, then starting again. then I cam accross The Obesity Epidemic by Zoe Harcombe and it changed my life forever. I have been following her princliples now for eighteen months. My weight is steady, Albeit half a stone more than I would like it to be. I am never hungry. I dont count calories any more. I eat REAL food not junk. I manage my carbs by keeping them down to about 70grms. I am happier with myself than I have ever been. After 48years of counting calories!! I,m free of all that! I am 68 years old by the way!

Reply
Nichelle
6/27/2012 05:32:16 am

About 7 years ago I thought that I was incredibly lucky to be chosen to be on Good Morning America where they supplied 4 people with guidance from nutrition and fitness luminaries including Dr. Katz. He told me the error of my low carb ways (via which I'd lost 60 lbs before meeting him). Everyone promptly gained 12-15 pounds lol! I'm so glad I found the light again and left the Dr. Katz-style idiocy.

Reply
Alexandra M
6/28/2012 08:10:07 am

What is the matter with these people??? Do none of these researchers ever talk to each other? A lot of good advice about not eating low fat yogurt, and then he ends up by saying throw away one egg yolk so as not to get "too much cholesterol!"

I was shocked to hear, however, that their results showed INCREASED inflammation on a low carb diet, since most people see an improvement in their CVD risk markers on low carb. Maybe this was due to the short duration of the study.

Reply
Michael
7/4/2012 10:10:14 am

Alexandra M: "I was shocked to hear, however, that their results showed INCREASED inflammation on a low carb diet, since most people see an improvement in their CVD risk markers on low carb. Maybe this was due to the short duration of the study."

But here's the thing: it did not increase inflammation. It lowered inflammation but not as much as the two other diets but it was still a very good improvement from their pre-experiment CRP numbers.

You can read Peter Attia's comments on the study and on the news articles here:

http://eatingacademy.com/books-and-articles/good-science-bad-interpretation

Reply



Leave a Reply.

Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.