Non-Fat Milk Is Not a Diet Food says Experts

[borofergie]

Stole this from Jenny Ruhl's Facebook page today:
http://www.cisionwire.com/the-investor- ... s,c9227199

Researchers from the Harvard School of Public Health, along with several other institutions, recently looked at the milk consumption and weight of almost 13,000 adolescents and found that skim and 1% milk were associated with weight gain, but dairy fat was not.

Calorie restriction has a poor track record when it comes to weight loss. Numerous studies conclude that restricted-fat diets are no better than restricted calorie diets. Research shows that removing the fat from milk to reduce either the calories or the saturated fat has no scientific basis in promoting successful weight loss. However, with each fat reduction step, the percentage of fat is reduced, but the percentage of sugar increases. It is excess sugar in our diet that results in fat storage not fat or even calorie

I have the problem that, after years of trying to convince the wife to buy skimmed milk instead of semi-skimmed milk, I'm now trying to convince her that we need to drink full-fat milk instead. Anyone else remembering fighting over the cream on top of a good old fashioned bottle of milk?

I know that these guys have a book to sell, but it's good to hear even more voices joining the low-carb, high-fat bandwaggon.

 

[phoenix]

I don't think the original research backs up the Turbocharged authors claim that it wasn't about calories. I think the whole thing seems to be a bit of a non issue. if you drink lots of skimmed milk you might be more likely to put on more weight than if you drink smaller quantities of full fat milk ( full fat is any case not that high in fat 3.5% as opposed to 1.7% in semi skimmed).

Children who drank the most milk gained more weight, but the added calories appeared responsible. Contrary to our hypotheses, dietary calcium and skim and 1% milk were associated with weight gain, but dairy fat was not. Drinking large amounts of milk may provide excess energy to some children

http://archpedi.ama-assn.org/cgi/conten ... OA50006-48
A more recent review of relevant research states

Milk Intakes Are Not Associated with Percent Body Fat in Children from Ages 10 to 13 Years

http://jn.nutrition.org/content/141/11/2035.abstract

I can only read the abstract but the writers of this review appear to claim that the findings are inconsistent and a lot of the existing research is confounded by not accounting fully for dietary reporting errors.
The big Havard study relied on a postal dietary survey and also used self reported measurements of height and weight.

 

[Sid Bonkers]

Calorie restriction has a poor track record when it comes to weight loss.

.

I dont understand how anyone can really believe that calorie restriction doesnt work how do you think the Newcastle Study diet works, magic?

Now the Newcastle Study diet is just a starvation diet but any calorie restriction will help with any diet :thumbup:

 

[borofergie]

I dont understand how anyone can really believe that calorie restriction doesnt work how do you think the Newcastle Study diet works, magic?

Now the Newcastle Study diet is just a starvation diet but any calorie restriction will help with any diet :thumbup:

Well, to be fair, I didn't say that, it was a quote from the article. I guess what the author was alluding to is "sustainable weight loss".

I don't think anyone (not even Taubes) will argue that you can't lose weight on a calorie restricted diet, the question is the ease with which you can keep it off. The thinking being that reduced calorie diets that leave you hungry are good for only transient weight loss.

Your friend Mr Taubes argues that most calorie controlled diets (as opposed to "low-fat" diets) are in reality low-carb diets in disguise. He'd also probably note that the Newcastle diet (@ about 60g of carb per day) is a near ketogenic diet (and everyone would agree that it's not a sustainable one).

 

[Sid Bonkers]

I don't think anyone (not even Taubes) will argue that you can't lose weight on a calorie restricted diet, the question is the ease with which you can keep it off. The thinking being that reduced calorie diets that leave you hungry are good for only transient weight loss.

Your friend Mr Taubes argues that most calorie controlled diets (as opposed to "low-fat" diets) are in reality low-carb diets in disguise.

Please dont say "your friend Taubs" as I would genuinely hate for anyone to think that I agree with his theories

I can testify that reduced calorie diets do work, I have lost 4 stone and kept it off for 3 years, I did put on 9lbs over last Xmas when I ate more than I usually do, mainly stuff like cheese every night and more food generally - not just the Celebrations which some people seem to think is a central part of my diet :roll: but the least said about them the better - but a few weeks tightening things up saw the extra weight drop off, and for the record I dont feel hungry all the time. The truth is that most people living in the west eat far too much food period so any reduction in carbs and portion sizes is going to work, I genuinely dont know why you dont try it as by your own admission you are struggling to lose weight by LCHF.

And I am not looking to try to convert your thinking on diets, I am pretty sure you will not be trying it anyway as you prefer to listen to Taubs etc and if his theory works for you then great but if it doesn't?

 

[borofergie]

Please dont say "your friend Taubs" as I would genuinely hate for anyone to think that I agree with his theories

I know Sid, I'll have to try and dig out an irony avatar somewhre

I can testify that reduced calorie diets do work, I have lost 4 stone and kept it off for 3 years, I did put on 9lbs over last Xmas when I ate more than I usually do, mainly stuff like cheese every night and more food generally - not just the Celebrations which some people seem to think is a central part of my diet :roll: but the least said about them the better - but a few weeks tightening things up saw the extra weight drop off, and for the record I dont feel hungry all the time.

That's great Sid. As you know, I'm an advocate of the "everyone is different" philosophy. I cite your diet as an example to new members all the time (in fact I did it today). I realise that cutting out processed carbs altogether is a big step for many of the newly diagnosed, and I think your approach is the only one that makes any sense of the message they are getting from the NHS.

The truth is that most people living in the west eat far too much food period so any reduction in carbs and portion sizes is going to work, I genuinely dont know why you dont try it as by your own admission you are struggling to lose weight by LCHF.

Since when? When I was first diagnosed I dropped nearly 4 stone. I wasn't even really trying to lose weight, but I wanted to get my BG under control (<40g carbs/day HbA1c=5.4%).

The only reason I stopped (at the start of September) is that I've been running quite seriously since September, and that allowed me to eat a few more carbs than before. My weight has stayed more-or-less constant since then although judging by the grotesque sight of my calves, my muscle mass has increased significantly. It helped reduce my HbA1c to 5.2%.

I've only been back on the VLC (<<30g) for three weeks (on Tuesday), one of which was a rather difficult week in America, where I got a bit sick of steak. My weight has dropped about 5lbs, but I don't trust any weight loss at the start of a diet. My aim is twofold firstly to get a HbA1c of 4.9% or less, and secondly to lose weight to help my running.

I'm delighted with the way things are going. Apart from a huge liver dump after racing on Saturday morning, my BG hasn't been above 6mmol/l. (I mean not ever not at 30mins, 60mins or 120mins after eating).

Why don't I try your diet? You'll appreciate that I can't easily go out and run 8 miles in a morning on 16g of corn-flakes. As I said above, our lives our very different, and what works for you probably won't work for me and vica-versa.

And I am not looking to try to convert your thinking on diets, I am pretty sure you will not be trying it anyway as you prefer to listen to Taubs etc and if his theory works for you then great but if it doesn't?

I'd be doing this if I'd never read Taubes (although reading his NY Times article was like a Road to Damascus moment for me). Bernstein was enough to convince me, but Taubes and Phinney and Ruhl, have all reinforced my opinion (and Stephen Guyenet has put a bit of a dent in it once or twice).

I'm also not trying to convince you or anyone else. If you look at my posts to newbies, you'll see that I always try to offer them a variety of paths to controlling their carbs. I don't think that anyone needs to eat less tha 30g of carbs to control their diabetes (I certainly don't), but I think that there are significant benefits to be had, if you can stick to what is essentially a very restrictive diet.

I think there is a significant difference between us. I'm prepared to accept that there are a variety of ways to control your diabetes and to lose weight. I think both of us agree that you need to somehow manage you carb intake to control your diabetes, aside from that I'm happy to listen to (and recommend) any diet, including yours, which allows diabetics to do exactly that. On the other hand, you seem to have this big axe to grind against anyone who advocates a Bernstein style low-carb diet. I don't understand why. It clearly works for some people, including me, and to suggest otherwise seems rather niggardly.

 

[Sid Bonkers]

I think there is a significant difference between us. I'm prepared to accept that there are a variety of ways to control your diabetes and to lose weight. I think both of us agree that you need to somehow manage you carb intake to control your diabetes, aside from that I'm happy to listen to (and recommend) any diet, including yours, which allows diabetics to do exactly that. On the other hand, you seem to have this big axe to grind against anyone who advocates a Bernstein style low-carb diet. I don't understand why. It clearly works for some people, including me, and to suggest otherwise seems rather niggardly.

That is just not true, what I object to is people who give advice like saturated fat is good for you when the current medical thinking is that it is not, I have no axe to grind when it comes to Bernstein either in fact his advised diet has more to do with mine than it does to yours as he is a big advocate of portion control, to the extent that he advises not to eat more than a cupful of salad at any one meal, how many times have I read advice from a ultra low carber saying that if you cut out the carbs you can eat as much veg/salad as you like, totally against what Dr B advocates.

I have never ridiculed anyone for what they eat, unlike many of the lchf fraternity, I dont cherry pick statements from research and leave out any bits that dont fit in with my thinking. And if you can show me where I have been unable to accept someone elses diet with the possible exception of the guy who advocates drinking industrial bleach then feel free to quote me

 

[borofergie]

That is just not true, what I object to is people who give advice like saturated fat is good for you when the current medical thinking is that it is not

Which current medical thinking? Do you mean "some medical thinking"? It might be your opinion, but it certainly isn't a medical fact. In fact, if anything, recent reviews seem to be suggesting that the wind is blowing in the opposite direction. From two recent well respected reviews on the role of saturated fat and cardiovascular disease:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20071648

A meta-analysis of prospective epidemiologic studies showed that there is no significant evidence for concluding that dietary saturated fat is associated with an increased risk of CHD or CVD.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1 ... 2/abstract

Modifying fat in our food (replacing some saturated (animal) fats with plant oils and unsaturated spreads) may reduce risk of heart and vascular disease, but it is not clear whether monounsaturated or polyunsaturated fats are more beneficial. There are no clear health benefits of replacing saturated fats with starchy foods (reducing the total amount of fat we eat)

There were no clear effects of dietary fat changes on total mortality or cardiovascular mortality. This did not alter with sub-grouping or sensitivity analysis.

So the first review says that saturated fat doesn't influence cardiovascular disease. The second says that it might influence cardiovascular disease, but even if it does, it doesn't have any influence on mortality.

I have no axe to grind when it comes to Bernstein either in fact his advised diet has more to do with mine than it does to yours as he is a big advocate of portion control, to the extent that he advises not to eat more than a cupful of salad at any one meal, how many times have I read advice from a ultra low carber saying that if you cut out the carbs you can eat as much veg/salad as you like, totally against what Dr B advocates.

Again you are misrepresenting Bernstein, he advises no such thing. He only observes that a cup full of of salad is around 6g of carbs, he's happy with you eating as much as you like within your 30g limit. It's very difficult to stay below 30g of carbs if you eat unlimited quantities of veg. It's also quite difficult to eat enough brocolli, spinich and lettuce to get you up to 30g of carbs (it'd take almost a kilogram of steamed spinich to get you 30g of carb). Bernstein's diet is also unashamedly low-carb/high-fat and is nutritionally complete (you don't have to take multi-vitamins to do it).

I have never ridiculed anyone for what they eat, unlike many of the lchf fraternity

Where is this lchf fraternity hiding? How can I become a member?

Seriosuly, I'm only aware of a couple of members of this forum actually doing the lchf thing, and neither of us are the ridiculing type.

I dont cherry pick statements from research and leave out any bits that dont fit in with my thinking. And if you can show me where I have been unable to accept someone elses diet with the possible exception of the guy who advocates drinking industrial bleach then feel free to quote me

See above re current research on saturated fat.