<div>
(Lol @ May 20 2008,8:06)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">I'm not sure if this is particularly pertinent but isn't it the case that many of the poor folks who suffered a consistent negative energy balance (in WWII concentration camps) eventually died when their bodies were no longer able to function? Did they look well fed at the time they died or do photographic records show that they were emaciated beyond belief. The same was also true for many who survived the ordeal. Anyone know what they mainly had to eat? My guess would be carbs (like bread) rather than meat and fat.
It would seem that a consistent negative energy balance would lead to weight loss and eventually death.
</div>
See Ancel Keys starvation studies in the 1940'. That will answer all your questions on starvation. You are speaking of starvation, aren't you? The physiological state of starvation (zero food intake) does not translate as is to a negative caloric balance with carb intake (hypocaloric high carb) and vice versa.
Starvation causes a similar physiological state as a ketogenic diet. Hunger is suppressed, fat is released from fat tissue, lean tissue is spared as much as possible, energy expenditure adjusts to total nutrients available, etc.
A negative caloric balance with carb intake causes a much different set of conditions. Hunger increases, lean tissue wastes away, fat is locked in fat tissue, etc.
Between zero food intake and negative caloric balance with carb intake, the Keys starvation studies resembled more the second set of conditions (increased hunger, etc) than the first (ketogenic diet, etc). It is from these studies, for instance, that we learned not to feed starving people so much food all at once. It is from these studies, for instance, that we learned that people die when fed carbs following a lengthy bout of starvation. They died because their bodies would enter a state with all the conditions of the second set (increased hunger, lean tissue wasting away, fat locked in, etc) so dramatically that they went into shock and their organs shut down. I'm not explaining it so well but that's about it at a glance.
So yes, a negative caloric balance will cause us to lose weight. But we're not speaking of losing weight. We're speaking of growing fat by eating fat. And speaking of losing fat or growing lean. Not merely losing weight indiscriminately. Unless, of course, you subscribe to the PCB hypothesis in which case you have no choice but to lose weight indiscriminately (fat and lean tissue at the same time) as the Keys starvation studies have shown.
It is pertinent. Unfortunately, it agrees with the carbohydrates hypothesis. Not the PCB hypothesis.