High-carb, low-glycemic-index diet best for weight loss and CVD risk reduction

[wabmester]

A study published last month indicated that high-carb / low-GI diets are best for both losing weight and reducing CVD risk.

Summary here.

Our findings suggest that dietary glycemic load [GL], and not just overall energy intake, influences weight loss and postprandial glycemia. We found that moderate reductions in glycemic load appear to increase the rate of body-fat loss, particularly in women. And diets based on the low-glycemic index maximize cardiovascular risk reduction—particularly if protein intake is high.

There have been many diets that suggest this approach, but there hasn't been a lot to confirm it scientifically.   This basically kills the idea that a calorie is a calorie.

Edit: looks like the summary might ask for registration. Another version is here.

 

[retire@40]

For dinner I just had a grilled filet mignon and grilled asparagas and washed it down with some homemade red zinfandel.

I don't know how that fits into any diet, but I'm sure fat and happy tonight.

 

[riskadverse]

 This basically kills the idea that a calorie is a calorie.

There's no money to be made in the obvious. 

Calories in > calories out = weight gain.
Calories in < calories out = weight loss.

Makes for a short diet book. 

 

[Dawg52]

Re: High-carb, low-glycemic-index diet best for weight loss and CVD risk reducti

For dinner I just had a grilled filet mignon and grilled asparagas and washed it down with some homemade red zinfandel.

I don't know how that fits into any diet, but I'm sure fat and happy tonight.

I just had a juicy back yard cheese burger and fries. mmmmmmm good. Time for a Red Stripe beer. Hope these are good calories.

 

[razztazz]

There's no money to be made in the obvious.

Calories in > calories out = weight gain.
Calories in < calories out = weight loss.

Makes for a short diet book

Yes, but since that data is wrong nobody should read that book. What's the old saying about a solution that's easy, simple, and wrong?

As far as all these mentions of protein whether in the above mentioned "carbo" diet or in the more familiar South Beach/Atkins "low carb" mold ... it is almost impossibe to get any appreciatble amounts of animal proteinm (the only kinds that matters) and not go over what "They" , The Medical and established "Diet" Industries, consider acceptable amounts of evil fat

 

[Rich_by_the_Bay]

Re: High-carb, low-glycemic-index diet best for weight loss and CVD risk reducti

There have been many diets that suggest this approach, but there hasn't been a lot to confirm it scientifically. This basically kills the idea that a calorie is a calorie.

Not.

The basic laws of thermodynamics are safe.

If it's valid, confirmed and vetted in future research, it's probably about the appetite effects of mild ketosis, insulin surges, etc. I favor watching your glycemic loads cause it may turn out to be a way to reduce diabetes risk. Dietary and weight reduction research is exceedingly difficult to perform and interpret.

I'd recommend great restraint in generalizing and over-stating the results of any one such study.

 

[azanon]

There's no money to be made in the obvious. 

Calories in > calories out = weight gain.
Calories in < calories out = weight loss.

Makes for a short diet book.

Correct.   I know this is true because i have counted calories on and off for years now.   An interesting thing happens... when the calories i eat is less than the amount i burn, i lose weight.   And it dont matter what the calories are.  Ive gone from steaks and greasy food to cheerios galore.    As long as i eat less calories than i burn.

I use fitday.com to count calories, btw.   its pretty cool;  an online calorie counter.  that site is great because it allows you to enter in physical activity for the day and average activity levels so that your end calorie count is pretty accurate.   With practice, i've gotten really accurate at estimating the amount of calories i eat when it wasnt quantified.

And what's my grand prize for all of this work? A BMI of 22 =p

Azanon

 

[mb]

High glycemic index foods (yummy, yummy Gu and Power Bars) immediately before, during and after exercise. Low glycemic index foods the rest of the time.

MB

 

[wabmester]

Re: High-carb, low-glycemic-index diet best for weight loss and CVD risk reducti

Not.

The basic laws of thermodynamics are safe.

If it's valid, confirmed and vetted in future research, it's probably about the appetite effects of mild ketosis, insulin surges, etc. I favor watching your glycemic loads cause it may turn out to be a way to reduce diabetes risk. Dietary and weight reduction research is exceedingly difficult to perform and interpret.

I don't think this is about ketosis.   These are *high* carb diets with low glycemic loads.   And it doesn't have to violate thermodynamics.   Isn't it possible that when you eat a meal with a high glycemic load that your body simply "overreacts" by storing more fat and making less energy available?

I really don't have a clue, but if I had to guess, my guess is that we underestimate the role of de novo lipogenesis.    I'll even go way out on a limb and suggest that increased availability of high GI processed foods is the root cause of the obesity / metabolic syndrome / diabetes epidemic in this country.

 

[mathjak107]

i lost 40lbs on a high carb low fat diet........its all about calories period...heres the secret to weight loss:
  EAT LESS -MOVE MORE"

there,thats everything you need to know about weight loss....
problem with most diets is just like you cant tell yourself to breath 1/2 a lung of air you cant just eat less food as your body is always hungry...the trick for me was low fat high carb...since as you cut fat which have almost 3x the calories per gram you can eat way more to feel full....as an example for 2,000 calories a day you can eat almost 20 baked potatoes...not that you would but it shows the volume of low fat food you can consume....instead of the potatoes you have other calorie/fat type foods and balance it out......

 

[mathjak107]

being a weight lifter and cyclist as well as run every other day my wife and i also realized exercise by itself with out cutting calories merely helps us maintain our weight but certainly not loose weight....we just eat more.i mean way more ha ha ha ..on the days i run 3 -4 miles i dont even get full i just get tired lifting a fork to eat...... its once again all about calories to loose weight not the food type not exercise by itself

 

[wabmester]

its all about calories period...heres the secret to weight loss:
  EAT LESS -MOVE MORE"

Er, yes, that works.    But I have to ask: did you bother to read the article?   It's not all about calories.

The study found that for diets with the *same* number of calories, a high-carb, low glycemic index diet reduced body fat and improved lipid profile vs the other 3 diets tested.

Your body responds differently to different macronutrients.   You have different metabolic pathways for alcohol, carbs, fat, and protein, and your body prefers certain pathways to others (for example, we have no way to store alcohol, so it is always burned first).

It has long been suspected that high glycemic loads do nasty things to you.   They cause insulin spikes.   And your liver and intestines seem get out of whack in the long term.   You start storing more fat than you should.    Your blood triglycerides go up.   Your HDL goes down.   And you make those nasty small-particle LDLs that lead to arterial plaque formation.

Anyway, the medical community has been reluctant to recommend low GI diets, but this study triggered an editorial that urged docs to consider the data on low GI/GL diets.    I think this will eventually change mainstream dietary recommendations.

 

[mathjak107]

i agree with this article  ...l im not convinced most of these other theories ever pan out that we read about ,as either true or working for the bulk of us.......we had the low carb high fat theory,,,,the dont mix certain food groups together at the same time theory, the zig zag theory where you eat  very low carb for 6 days a week and high carb 1 day a week.....all have some study and lots of scientific gibirish but very few work or work long term......i do agree with avoiding the high glycemic carbs part though...in fact high carb low glycimic carbs are exactly the diet i was refering to that worked for me.....genetically i run very hi triglyceride levels..i can break 1,000 if im not careful diet wise or dont exercise enough.....watching the glycemic carbs definatly works from a cardio standoint...from a weight loss stand point im not so sure in practice it really matters

 

[grumpy]

Re: High-carb, low-glycemic-index diet best for weight loss and CVD risk reducti

One thing not discussed in this thread that is important is whether the diet is something that you can stay on. I have found that, for me, a low carb (Atkins) diet allows me to control my weight without feeling hungry most of the time as I have felt on all other diets I have tried. I assume I am getting the same number of calories on the low-carb diet as on the others but I can stick with this one more easily because I don't get the cravings for carbs and feel hungry as much. The key to successful weight loss and maintaining that loss is a diet that you can comply with in the long run.

Grumpy

 

[mathjak107]

i wasnt hungry on the atkins diet at all...problem we had was my wife and i both bonked and came to a halt within 5 minutes of each other doing our cardio routine from lack of carbs.......the atkins diet actually mimics diabetes and makes the body go into ketosis ...the body thinks its sick and takes your appetite away to fight the illness it thinks you have.....aitkins wasnt for me........

 

[mathjak107]

weight watchers wasnt for me either...i had to eat 2 or 3 of those little dinners ha ha ha........

 

[wabmester]

i wasnt hungry on the atkins diet at all...problem we had was my wife and i both bonked  and came to a halt within 5 minutes of each other doing our cardio routine from lack of carbs

But I bet your TG levels went way down. Have you tried a high carb, low GI diet? Seems tailor-made for your situation.

 

[mathjak107]

yep,,it works the best for me

 

[Alex]

Re: High-carb, low-glycemic-index diet best for weight loss and CVD risk reducti

There's no money to be made in the obvious.

Calories in > calories out = weight gain.
Calories in < calories out = weight loss.

Makes for a short diet book.

this is the theory that made americans big fat morbidly obese slobs. It ranks right next to the idea that eating fat makes you fat. The idea is simple, intuitive and DEAD WRONG. The problem with calorie theory is that food 'talks' to our body in very different ways. Eating 100 calories of broccoli has a totally different effect on your body than eating 100 calories of white sugar.

 

[mathjak107]

brocalli is a bad choice as it has next to no calories.....anything with calories is a calorie just by definition of what a calorie value is.........we know vegatarians who cant loose weight and its because they eat nuts and sesamee and all kinds of higher calorie vegtables...yeah you can make an argument sugar is metabolized differently than protein or low glycemic carbs but at the end of the day any calories left over and not burned are stored...there are so few long term success stories over all from people who were on atkins for long long periods of time,in fact everyone i knew who was on it has given up on it at this point.... and fat calories take 3x the energy to break them down..you can only eat 1/3 the volume of fat ladden foods that you can for carbs or protein...that makes a big difference long term in weight loss and whether you will stick to the plan..being hungry is a pain to the body and in order for any eating plan to work your body has to be full or all bets are off

 

[mathjak107]

i basically use a low fat high carb diet and enjoy my sweets.....
in fact im a bit of a gym rat ...im 175lbs and 12% body fat,down from over 220 6 years ago ,,people look at the sweets my wife and i eat on the weekends and go we can't believe you go to the gym and eat like this....we go we go to the gym sooooo we can eat like this............

 

[grumpy]

Re: High-carb, low-glycemic-index diet best for weight loss and CVD risk reducti

there are so few long term success stories over all from people who were on atkins for long long periods of time,in fact everyone i knew who was on it has given up on it at this point.... and fat calories take 3x the energy to break them down..you can only eat 1/3 the volume of fat ladden foods that you can for carbs or protein...that makes a big difference long term in weight loss and whether you will stick to the plan..being hungry is a pain to the body and in order for any eating plan to work your body has to be full or all bets are off

mathjak,

I guess I'm the exception. I have been on a very strict version of Adkins (less than 40 grams of carbs a day) for about 5 years. Prior to this I was on a low fat diet and my weight was up to 197 and I was hungry all the time. After being on the diet for six months my weight was down to 183, which I have maintained within a few pounds ever since. I don't crave carbs any more. I have no problem with cardio workouts. I swim one mile in around 32 minutes 4 times a week. A typical day's meals would be:
Breakfast: Eggbeater cheese omlet, coffee
Lunch: 6 ounces of chicken, 3 ounces of cheese, pork rinds, diet coke
Dinner: 8 ounce steak, green salad, diet coke
Snacks (2 to 3 a day) a handful of macadamia nuts or almonds, or string cheese, or sugar free jello.
Other: Coffee with artificial sweetner two to four cups a day. Diet coke (2)
This diet can get a little monotonous but I am a creature of habit and don't feel the need to "cheat" very often. It is rare for me to say "oh no, do I have to have a steak AGAIN?"

Another effect of this diet for me has been a complete absence of stomach distress I frequently experience before.

I realize that this diet is very high in saturated fat and I may be really clogging up my arteries but the diet works so well for me in all other ways that, on balance, I think it is worth it.

GRUMPY

 

[haha]

Er, yes, that works.    But I have to ask: did you bother to read the article?   It's not all about calories.

I wasn't able to access the article; only an abstract. I would really like to see the article itself, as what little they mentioned is odd. As I remember, they gave mean weight loss for each group, and % losing over a certain amount. They gave lipid chemistry for selected groups. They described the results as high carb, low GI best, but it appears that on at least one dimension, in the high protein group the hghi GI group had better results.


“In this study, 129 overweight or obese young adults (body mass index [BMI], ≥ 25 kg/m2) were randomized to 1 of 4 reduced-fat, high-fiber diets for 12 weeks, and changes in weight, body composition, and blood chemistry profile were studied. Diets 1 and 2 were high carbohydrate (55% of total energy intake), with high and low GIs, respectively, whereas diets 3 and 4 were high protein (25% of total energy intake), with high and low GIs, respectively. The glycemic load was highest in diet 1 and lowest in diet 4.
Mean weight loss was similar in all groups (diet 1, -4.2% ± 0.6%; diet 2, -5.5% ± 0.5%; diet 3, -6.2% ± 0.4%; and diet 4, -4.8% ± 0.7%; P = .09). However, the proportion of subjects in each group who lost 5% or more of body weight varied significantly by diet (diet 1, 31%; diet 2, 56%; diet 3, 66%; and diet 4, 33%; P = .01). Women on diets 2 and 3 lost approximately 80% more fat mass (-4.5 ± 0.5 [mean ± SE] and -4.6 ± 0.5 kg) than did those on diet 1 (-2.5 ± 0.5 kg; P = .007).
Mean low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels decreased in the diet 2 group (-6.6 ± 3.9 mg/dL [-0.17 ± 0.10 mmol/L]) but increased in the diet 3 group (+10.0 ± 3.9 mg/dL [+0.26 ± 0.10 mmol/L]; P = .02). Goals for energy distribution were not achieved exactly, in that both CHO groups ate less fat, and the diet 2 group ate more fiber.
"Both high-protein and low-GI regimens increase body fat loss, but cardiovascular risk reduction is optimized by a high-carbohydrate, low-GI diet," the authors write. “

So the two best groups for weight loss were 3 and 4, respectively low GI and high GI. Sounds random to me. And for the LDL reduction, they are a bit sparse with the details. My guess is the details would mess up their pretty summary.

It appears that one needs a sub to Archives of Int Medicine to read the full article. In general, I do not trust summaries or abstracts. These guys know what results will fly and which ones won't; so even when they are not outright massaging data, they all too often are selectively abstracting, leaving out anything which doesn't fit the thesis.

These are pretty small groups too- 129 people into 4 groups. Random variation in body chemistry of the participants could have had a large effect. In addition, they do not mention how many subjects finished the study

I don't doubt at all that low GI diets are beneficial, I am just not sure how much of that or anything else is proven by this study ( at least what I have been able to read.)

Ha

 

[dmpi]

"Mean weight loss was similar in all groups (diet 1, -4.2% ± 0.6%; diet 2, -5.5% ± 0.5%; diet 3, -6.2% ± 0.4%; and diet 4, -4.8% ± 0.7%; P = .09)."

This tells me that if your looking to lose weight: "a calorie is a calorie".

 

[wabmester]

I don't doubt at all that low GI diets are beneficial, I am just not sure how much of that or anything else is proven by this study ( at least what I have been able to read.)

Yeah, there are still a lot of outstanding questions.   But there have been similar studies with similar results.   The biggest benefit for the low-GI diet seems to be for people who are already overweight and showing some insulin resistance.   The benefits aren't as clear for normal people.    My only concern about high protein would be in kidney load, but the take-home message I get is that:

1) Body fat is bad for you.
2) If you want to lose body fat, go with a low GI diet.

Here's another study that looks at post-meal effects of various glycemic loads:

Glycemic and insulinemic meal responses modulate postprandial hepatic and intestinal lipoprotein accumulation in obese, insulin-resistant subjects