Links to studies supporting Low Carb/showing calorie restriction ineffective?

[ATZ]

And you keep ignoring the fact tbat T2 diabetics not on medication have to reduce their carb intake to keep their blood glucose levels down.

No they do not. If you restrict caloric intake leading to weight loss you will see improvements in blood glucose control.

You can use a carbohydrate based diet to do this and it's been proven over and over again.

Kempner's "Rice Diet" for one:

Diets centered on white rice have, in fact, produced some of the most dramatic health benefits ever reported in the medical literature. The Rice Diet, as pioneered by Walter Kempner, has repeatedly been shown to drastically reduce hypertension [3], insulin resistance [4], and obesity [5]. Low-fat diets emphasizing starch have demonstrated the ability to reverse diabetes mellitus [6] and coronary artery disease [7]. These remarkable studies were all inspired by the traditional Asian cuisine.

https://www.bmj.com/content/344/bmj.e1454/rr/575608

Or the Ma-Pi 2 diet, which is a largely vegan 70% carbohydrate containing based diet:

Conclusions: Findings of this post hoc analysis demonstrated that the Ma-Pi 2 diet is a safe dietary strategy to reduce levels of the markers of insulin resistance and inflammation, compared with baseline values, in the short term. Furthermore, the Ma-Pi 2 diet was superior to the control diet in reducing insulin growth factor-1 and may be beneficial for patients with T2D

https://drc.bmj.com/content/3/1/e000079

And:

After correcting for age, gender, BMI at baseline, and physical activity, there was a significantly greater reduction in the primary outcomes fasting blood glucose (95% CI: 1.79; 13.46) and post prandial blood glucose (95% CI: 5.39; 31.44) in those patients receiving the Ma-Pi 2 diet compared with those receiving the control diet

Intervention with a short-term Ma-Pi 2 diet resulted in significantly greater improvements in metabolic control in patients with type 2 diabetes compared with intervention with standard diets recommended for these patients.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4190933/

I'll wait for you to do explain how a white rice based and 70% carbohydrate based diets produce favourable outcomes in those with T2D. Even fairly rapidly given the latter was only a 21 day trial.

 

[zand]

Well my blood glucose. meter and scales don't agree with you.

 

[bulkbiker]

we know people misreport their intake

Possibly because it is almost impossible to calculate your intake (as well of course as expenditure) to any decent degree of accuracy.

The steak I eat may fit the nutrient profile from the McCance and Widdowson table or it may not.
It will depend on the breed of cow, how it was raised, what it ate and maybe which part of the UK it comes from.
Likewise depending on temperature, state of metabolic derangement, time of day 'inter alia' the energy expenditure my dog walk uses will vary too.
So we have a hazy idea of Calories In and an even hazier idea of Calories Out.

That many of us here have lost loads of weight fairly effortlessly by reducing our carb intake without recording or counting those pesky cals should maybe be of more interest to you (especially those that have maintained that weight loss for extended periods) than constantly repeating how we have all "got it wrong".

I have to question what your motivation for joining the forum was?

To tell people with a "chronic, progressive condition" (the words of my DN) that they are "doing it wrong" seems to be a strange reason which you have yet to elaborate on.

Apologies mods if derailing but it is an interesting question.

 

[ATZ]

Well my blood glucose. meter and scales don't agree with you.

And we're back to anecdotes.

I'm stoked a low carb diet has worked for you. That doesn't mean a comparable diet under supervision wouldn't.

 

[ATZ]

Possibly because it is almost impossible to calculate your intake (as well of course as expenditure) to any decent degree of accuracy.

The steak I eat may fit the nutrient profile from the McCance and Widdowson table or it may not.
It will depend on the breed of cow, how it was raised, what it ate and maybe which part of the UK it comes from.
Likewise depending on temperature, state of metabolic derangement, time of day 'inter alia' the energy expenditure my dog walk uses will vary too.
So we have a hazy idea of Calories In and an even hazier idea of Calories Out.

Not hazy at all. Just misunderstood and misrepresented here.

That many of us here have lost loads of weight fairly effortlessly by reducing our carb intake without recording or counting those pesky cals should maybe be of more interest to you (especially those that have maintained that weight loss for extended periods) than constantly repeating how we have all "got it wrong".

I have to question what your motivation for joining the forum was?

To tell people with a "chronic, progressive condition" (the words of my DN) that they are "doing it wrong" seems to be a strange reason which you have yet to elaborate on.

Apologies mods if derailing but it is an interesting question.

As I covered elsewhere, low carbohydrate diets often (not always) promote spontaneous caloric reductions.

My motivation was and continues to be pretty simple, prevent the spread of misinformation.

Threads like this where members are actively looking for information to confirm their bias do not help with providing q balanced perspective.

 

[zand]

And we're back to anecdotes.

I'm stoked a low carb diet has worked for you. That doesn't mean a comparable diet under supervision wouldn't.

Well yes it does mean exactly that because I have tried most of them. Funny how you think I am incapable of weighing and measuring my food without supervision when it comes to calorie intake but I am quite capable of weighing and measuring my food without supervision when it comes to low carbing. Do you seriously expect me to ignore my blood glucose meter? If the meter says No I don't eat it. How's that for willpower without supervision?

 

[bulkbiker]

My motivation was and continues to be pretty simple, prevent the spread of misinformation.

So what method do you think is best for putting T2 into remission.. if all we are doing here is spreading misinformation?

 

[HSSS]

If you restrict caloric intake leading to weight loss you will see improvements in blood glucose control.

So what if you are currently at a good weight, either not having been overweight at all or have already lost it, by any method?
How do you then control too high blood glucose levels without medication? (Other than low carb that we all in here know works)

 

[HSSS]

Please could people share links to good quality studies either supporting Low Carb or showing calorie restriction to be ineffective long-term? Many thanks!

Just for clarity are we talking works/effective in terms of weight loss or blood sugar control in diabetes or both?

 

[zand]

I find it quite amusing that so many of us have found that low carbing works for us for weight loss and blood glucose control yet it 'doesn't count' because we haven't been in an official study.

 

[ATZ]

I find it quite amusing that so many of us have found that low carbing works for us for weight loss and blood glucose control yet it 'doesn't count' because we haven't been in an official study.

That's not what I'm saying. Low carbing works, but not because you've dropped carbs, because you're eating less calories. That is the topic of this thread, somebody looking for "science" that low carbing works by some other mechanism. You won't find it.

 

[zand]

That's not what I'm saying. Low carbing works, but not because you've dropped carbs, because you're eating less calories. That is the topic of this thread, somebody looking for "science" that low carbing works by some other mechanism. You won't find it.

Myfitnesspal doesn't agree that I eat less calories. I don't eat less calories. I eat more but its more convenient for you to think I don't count them properly because otherwise you would have to admit that some of your training was wrong.

 

[lucylocket61]

No they do not. If you restrict caloric intake leading to weight loss you will see improvements in blood glucose control.

You can use a carbohydrate based diet to do this and it's been proven over and over again.

Kempner's "Rice Diet" for one:



https://www.bmj.com/content/344/bmj.e1454/rr/575608

Or the Ma-Pi 2 diet, which is a largely vegan 70% carbohydrate containing based diet:



https://drc.bmj.com/content/3/1/e000079

And:





https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4190933/

I'll wait for you to do explain how a white rice based and 70% carbohydrate based diets produce favourable outcomes in those with T2D. Even fairly rapidly given the latter was only a 21 day trial.

If that is the case, why is the first instruction when we meet out DN for us to lower our carbs to improve our blood sugars? If one is on a mission to also lose weight, then the reduction in calories also results in a reduction in carb intake, by its very nature, resulting the in improvement seen in your post. Once the calorie intake goes back to maintenance levels, the carb intake goes up again, and T2 diabetes gets worse.

 

[lucylocket61]

Threads like this where members are actively looking for information to confirm their bias do not help with providing q balanced perspective.

given that much of the advice on this whole website is about managing carbs, and reducing carbs, it seems ironic to talk about bias on here.

You do know that this site has an award winning, NHS backed low carb programme to help us with our blood sugar levels?

I think maybe you need to research the effect of insulin resistance on weight gain, and the disproportionate effect ingesting carbs has on diabetics. For us - and this IS a diabetes site you are on - a calorie is NOT a calories due to insulin resistance. This difference has to be taken on board.

What country are you in?

 

[Rachox]

I have been reading this thread with interest, but not having a very scientific mind a lot of it has gone over my head! However as a type 2 with a low carb success story, of n = 1 (I think that’s the terminology!), for both blood sugar control and weight loss, I decided to Google are all calories the same? This is the first thing that came up:
https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/6-reasons-why-a-calorie-is-not-a-calorie
Notably it claims to be evidence based. If you don’t want to read the whole article the conclusion says:

The Bottom Line
Different calorie sources can have vastly different effects on hunger, hormones, energy expenditure and the brain regions that control food intake.
Even though calories are important, counting them or even being consciously aware of them is not at all necessary to lose weight.
In many cases, simple changes in food selection can lead to the same or better results than restricting your calorie intake.

 

[ATZ]

So what method do you think is best for putting T2 into remission.. if all we are doing here is spreading misinformation?

There is no one "best" it depends on the individual, it's likely a combination of the following:

1. Weight loss - being overweight is a key risk factor in insulin resistance. This is largely managed via diet and a sustained caloric deficit until at a healthy weight.

2. Diet Quality - this supports point 1. above but also improved overall glycemic control

3. Activity - Being more active again supports point 1. and this can be as simply as getting out for a 10min walk. But activity also supports metabolic improvements, resistance training is likely a key thing a lot of T2D overlook. Resistance training shows very promising improvements in HbA1c and insulin sensitivity. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5335813/

4. Sleep - a key factor in improved insulin sensitivity and how you metabolise nutrients

Overall lifestyle has a lot to answer for.

 

[ATZ]

I have been reading this thread with interest, but not having a very scientific mind a lot of it has gone over my head! However as a type 2 with a low carb success story, of n = 1 (I think that’s the terminology!), for both blood sugar control and weight loss, I decided to Google are all calories the same? This is the first thing that came up:
https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/6-reasons-why-a-calorie-is-not-a-calorie
Notably it claims to be evidence based. If you don’t want to read the whole article the conclusion says:

The Bottom Line
Different calorie sources can have vastly different effects on hunger, hormones, energy expenditure and the brain regions that control food intake.
Even though calories are important, counting them or even being consciously aware of them is not at all necessary to lose weight.
In many cases, simple changes in food selection can lead to the same or better results than restricting your calorie intake.

The internet is both a blessing and a curse. That fact that different food sources contain differing amounts of energy and illicit different hormonal responses is not evidence that calories don't matter.

The last section is true enough, improving habits can often be enough to lose weight, but the mechanism is still ultimately the same - an imbalance between the energy you consume and the energy you expend.

 

[lucylocket61]

This study proves it's energy intake and not carbohydrate you need to be concerned with:

Unless you are diabetic and/or have insulin resistance. At what point are you going to take on board the metabolic difference between those with diabetes, and those without?

For those who are not diabetic or likely to become diabetic then yes, calories are all that matters. Their bodies can deal with carbs.

For those with diabetes this is not the case, as our metabolic difference changes the way we process and deal with carbs, and insulin resistance is part of why carbs have a disproportionate and non standard affect on our weight and thus our sugar levels.

This is proven by the many studies (referenced on this whole site) which has explained why those of us with impaired carb responses gain weight if we dont control our carbs, even if we control our calorie intake.

Its very simple, and the foundation of what the is promoted by this site, whose low carb diet is now promoted by the NHS officially.

On a different point - it is insulting to suggest people on here are not capable of recording and weighing our intake. How do you think those on insulin and other diabetic medication, for example, manage to control their blood sugars if they are incapable of calculating their carb intake? They record, weigh and measure day after day, hour after hour. If they get it wrong, they risk death. They deserve respect for their hard work.

Please open your mind to one word: Diabetes, and take it on board when responding and learning.

 

[lucylocket61]

The internet is both a blessing and a curse. That fact that different food sources contain differing amounts of energy and illicit different hormonal responses is not evidence that calories don't matter.

I have just re-read this thread very carefully. I see no-one who has said calories dont matter. I do see many who have said that the make up of those calories has an effect above and beyond the standard calorie effect normally seen in those who have not got a metabolic condition. This effect, for many, overrides the calorific value of t.he food, thus making calorie counting a tool, but not the master of the situation.

I count both calories and carbs. However, I know that the makeup of those calories affect whether I lose, maintain or gain weight given the same amount of calories a day. Eventually all these anecdotes will add up, anecdotes are just data waiting to be collated, as has been done my many respected researchers, whose names and websites you have already been pointed to.

With respect, I think your difficulty is in separating out what you have been taught works for those without a metabolic condition, and what works for those who have one.

"Calories are all that matter" and "calories are part, but not all, of the equation" are equally true, it just depends on who you are applying them to regarding their health condition(s)

Here, on a Diabetes Site, the latter is our truth.

 

[ATZ]

Unless you are diabetic and/or have insulin resistance. At what point are you going to take on board the metabolic difference between those with diabetes, and those without?

For those who are not diabetic or likely to become diabetic then yes, calories are all that matters. Their bodies can deal with carbs.

For those with diabetes this is not the case, as our metabolic difference changes the way we process and deal with carbs, and insulin resistance is part of why carbs have a disproportionate and non standard affect on our weight and thus our sugar levels.

This is proven by the many studies (referenced on this whole site) which has explained why those of us with impaired carb responses gain weight if we dont control our carbs, even if we control our calorie intake.

Can you show me those studies demonstrating weight gain even in the absence of an excess of calories?

On a different point - it is insulting to suggest people on here are not capable of recording and weighing our intake. How do you think those on insulin and other diabetic medication, for example, manage to control their blood sugars if they are incapable of calculating their carb intake? They record, weigh and measure day after day, hour after hour. If they get it wrong, they risk death. They deserve respect for their hard work.

Please open your mind to one word: Diabetes, and take it on board when responding and learning.

It's not insulting because it's established fact within the nutritionsphere. People suck at recording dietary intake, I've provided you links that demonstrate this. Perfect example is present in this video too:

The fact you can track you blood glucose levels using a meter is irrelevant.