What the latest diet study really means
You’ve probably seen the headlines today about the latest head-to-head comparison of popular diets. Israeli researchers put workers at a nuclear research facility on one of three diets for two years: low-carb, low-fat (as recommended by the American Heart Association) and the Mediterranean Diet.
Among those who stuck with the diet for the full two years, average weight loss was 12.3 pounds for those on the low-carb diet, 10.2 pounds for the Mediterranean dieters and just 7.3 pounds for the low-fat dieters.
12 pounds in two years is good?
Many in the media are heralding this study as proof that the low-carb diet is the best choice if you want to lose weight. But really, losing 12 pounds instead of 10 pounds is not that big of a difference, and none of these results sound particularly encouraging to the person who has a lot of weight to lose.
At the very least this study did show that eating a low-carb diet isn’t actually harmful, since the diet was better at boosting levels of good cholesterol than the low-fat diet was. Levels of bad cholesterol were similar among all groups.
And the Mediterranean Diet was better than the others at controlling blood glucose levels, which indicates it would be a good choice for diabetics or those in danger of becoming diabetic who also need to lose weight.
Study issues
Advocates of super-low-fat diets, like Dr. Dean Ornish, say the study didn’t require participants to cut their fat levels enough, which explains why the diet didn’t show more success.
And though the study met all requirements showing it lacked financial conflicts, it was funded by the research center started by Dr. Robert Atkins, founder of the low-carb Atkins diet. The low-carb diet in the study actually allowed people more carbs in the later phases of the diet than the Atkins Diet does.
Another potential problem with this study is replicating it. The nuclear center was chosen for the study because people rarely leave work, and the cafeteria menus were color-coded so people would know what to eat. In the real world, people have to count calories, carbs and fat grams themselves, and most of them aren’t that dedicated to stick to a particular diet plan all the time.
Finally, while a two-year study sounds like a long time, most people’s weight loss plateaued after just six months, which suggests that none of these diets were particularly effective for long-term, steady weight loss.
Perhaps the real lesson of this study is that the diet that will work for you is the one you can stick to and gradually alter in terms of eating less and exercising more so your weight loss continues for more than a few months.
(By Sarah E. White for CalorieLab Calorie Counter News)
Subscribe to our RSS feed | Weekly e-mail updates | Follow us on Twitter
Related posts from the CalorieLab Calorie Counter News archives:
It seems like you’re minimizing the relative benefits of the low-carb diet. And failing to note that for that diet, it was only carbs that were restricted. Protein and fats were unrestricted. That seems pretty significant.
It’s absolutely true that the weight loss between the low-carb and Mediterranean diets were not that significant. What was significant, and surprising considering all the negative press that low-carb diets have gotten over the years was that the low-carb, unrestricted fat/protein diet had the greatest positive benefit to various markers of health.
Those on the low-carb plan experienced a greater reduction in the dangerous C-reactive protein, lowered their triglycerides, raised their HDL cholesterol and dropped their A1C more than those on either the Mediterranean or the low-fat diets.
So on all the markers that the low-fat advocates have always claimed to be better, the low-carb was not only in the ball park, but beat them.
HDL cholesterol rose 8.4 mg/dl in the low-carb group, compared with 6.3 in the others. Not statistically significant.
LD cholesterol dropped 5.6 mg/dl in the Mediterranean group, and 3.0 in the low-carb group. Again, not statistically significant.
Total/HDL ratio improved in both the low-carb and Mediterraneans, but the difference between the two was not statistically significant.
This study is important in showing that common cardiovascular risk markers are not adversely affected by low-carb eating. This confirms other studies. The medical community is slowly coming to realize that low-carb eating is not as “dangerous” as once feared. The beauty of low-carb weight-loss dieting, at least for the short-term, is that you don’t have to consciously limit your caloric intake or portion sizes.
In contrast to low-carb/Atkins eating, the Mediterranean diet has been proven to prolong lifespan, reduce rates of cardiovascular disease, prevent type 2 diabetes, reduce incidence of dementia, and reduce certain cancers (breast colon, uterus, prostate). That’s why I eat Mediterranean-style.
For my comprehensive analysis, please see:
http://advancedmediterraneandiet.com/blog/?p=56
-Steve