Is a Calorie a Calorie?

J

Jon Stark

New Member
This is pretty interesting...

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tm....inter=1

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]Now, a small but carefully controlled study offers a strong hint that maybe Atkins was right: People on low-carb, high-fat diets actually can eat more.

The study, directed by Penelope Greene of the Harvard School of Public Health and presented at a meeting here this week of the American Association for the Study of Obesity, found that people eating an extra 300 calories a day on a very low-carb regimen lost just as much during a 12-week study as those on a standard lowfat diet.

Over the course of the study, they consumed an extra 25,000 calories. That should have added up to about three kilograms (seven pounds). But for some reason, it did not.

"There does indeed seem to be something about a low-carb diet that says you can eat more calories and lose a similar amount of weight," Greene said.

That strikes at one of the most revered beliefs in nutrition: A calorie is a calorie is a calorie. It does not matter whether they come from bacon or mashed potatoes; they all go on the waistline in just the same way.
Click to expand...

It sounds like a pretty well-designed experiment, too. All the food was prepared by the same restaurant.

Definitely a study worth noting. The calorie-is-a-calorie notion seems to be gaining ground again lately, but this might be cause to think again.
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]Everyone's food looked similar but was cooked to different recipes. The low-carb meals were 5 percent carbohydrate, 15 percent protein and 65 percent fat. The rest got 55 percent carbohydrate, 15 percent protein and 30 percent fat.
Click to expand...
5+15+65=85% :confused:?:confused:??
 
Well, while nice, its only a news article, and from the brief discription, its not a utterly controleld trial (like some of the older keto ones where they held the people in medical wards while feeding them - which controlls any eating outside of the diet and exercise)

Until the paper is actually published (assuming that it will make it thru the review process)
and there is also to worry about extremely small subject numbers. 21 people into 3 groups only makes 7subjects per group... and they dont mention statistical significance between groups, only total weight lost.

its also interesting to note that the funding for the study came thru Atkins 'non profit' foundation. And the diet was structured a site differently than what atkins would generally recommend in the books

I wonder where the other 15% has gone?
 
I thought of that after my post, they dont mention it at all (and most researchers dont bother), if you take ~2kg as water losses it all becomes nothing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top