Title should include “in healthy lean individuals” which was the study title. Without that it sounds like the study contradicts a huge body of evidence which it doesn’t.
I've recently been trying to "eat better" in an effort to improve/maintain my overall health. I'm not overweight, just trying to be as healthy as I possibly can. Maybe prevent future disease if I can. I don't want to end up with diabetes. But it is surprisingly difficult to know what eating healthy actually looks like. One minute I'll be convinced that I should cut out carbs, then sooner or later something else comes along claiming that I should do the opposite.<p>The only thing that I feel comfortable doing with a surety is to cut out sugar as much as possible. Also eat a variety of fruits and vegetables.<p>Wondering if other feel that it's way too difficult and confusing to get serious about eating healthy.
The study: <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37006572/" rel="nofollow">https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37006572/</a>
This is so interesting to me. Totally anecdotal (and not totally related to the paper), but my father and my uncles on both sides all have the same story -- low carb works great -- ONCE. After a big weight loss in their early forties, every one of them are severely overweight in their late sixties and constantly struggle. I find myself beginning the same ride . . .
> The participants were then divided into three groups: the low carbohydrate intake group (LC) consisted of those who received less than 45% of their calories from carbohydrates, the recommended carbohydrate intake group (RC) received 45% to 65%, and the high carbohydrate intake group (HC) received more than 65%.<p><45% threshold for a low carb diet classification seems off-putting as a research methodology here.
it's so fascinating when health/fitness discussions crop up on HN. absolutely not gatekeeping, but just observing that compared to the technical topics, there is sooo much more disagreement while at the same time, more conviction. Seems like people really believe they know what they are talking about, whereas when it comes to the technical discussions, the tone seems more curious/introspective vs. dogmatic.
I feel like a lot of comments that I’m reading, that contradict each other, are “armchair experts”.<p>It’s not like you’re telling someone they’re an idiot for writing a rest api. If you’re making medical claims, maybe establish some credentials?
I feel that apart from exercise, how much on uses their brain is bound to make a big difference given how much energy it can consume during tasks like playing chess or programming vs idle. Not sure to what extent this is taken into consideration in studies such as this. At least from personal experience carbs seem like the preferred fuel for the brain and its no wonder why its popular at long coding sessions and hackathons
Great. Now let’s have a pre-registered replication study.<p>Also, the article claims higher blood glucose in the LC group and I didn’t see that in my skim of the paper, nor what I was looking for, which is how the levels compare to healthy or optimal range.<p>I’m not a fanatic; I tried it and don’t like it, possibly for all the reasons mentioned here, but it has a very impartial feeling to it.
Is there a colloquial interpretation of 'low carb' == 'no carbs' going on here?<p>Because quite a lot of us are on low(er) carb diets forever, having reduced our intake of pasta and potato to a 'sometimes food' but boosted our fruit and veg overall because of 'eat lots of colours'<p>We still eat carb. we eat -> less <- carbs than we used to. Is this not low carb? A lot of the heat in this discussion appears to be from keto people, who are 'no carb' not 'low(er) carb'<p>It's not a temporary diet shift: in my case, its 5+ years of a significantly different diet model. I still eat toast, from time to time, and I still enjoy carbs from time to time but they no longer represent 40-50% of the lunch and dinner plate.<p>Carbs include sugars == coke and pepsi, if you cut down on fizzy drinks, are you now 'low carb' in this discussion?<p>Over 60s are advised to increase protein in the diet anyway.
Is it the low carbs though? I’ve notice I get inflammation flare ups on rapid weight loss. Even with generic cal restricted rather than low carb specifically
My father was a physician and one of his specialities was diet. Weight loss.<p>He told me just to eat well-rounded healthy meals, not to be a glutton, and walk for an hour a day.<p>There's too much splitting the hairs these days.<p>"Follow the crowd" people say: "I heard that hopping on one leg, eating a egg through the nose by sucking it in, and belching loudly in church is the best way to be healthy. This week. Next week it's going to be eating 45 tiny meals a day, somersault 5 times, click your heels three times and say "There's no place like Alpha Centauri.""
I've gone breakfast-only (banana, bowl of cereal, pumpkin seeds, milk) during the week.<p>Eat some dinner on the weekends.<p>~6k steps/day.<p>~25lb drop in 2mos.<p>Feel *great*.<p>When I reach the goal weight, flip to just eating dinner and try to figure out the optimal calorie intake.<p>Now, I had done a bunch of fasting for years before settling on this approach. It was not sudden.<p>Moral: listen to experts, but know yourself.
Reviewed the paper, there is no mention of what the fat and protein ratios were and only talked about carb only.<p>Q:So was the fat intake for the low carb group and which band (% protein) had the elevated insulin resistance?<p>Since we do know that over eating Protein, causes Protein Poisoning, if intake is more than 35% of your diet.<p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protein_poisoning" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protein_poisoning</a>