Low-Carb Diets Could Shorten Life, Study Suggests (bbc.com) 170
An anonymous reader quotes a report from the BBC: In the study, published in The Lancet Public Health, 15,400 people from the U.S. filled out questionnaires on the food and drink they consumed, along with portion sizes. From this, scientists estimated the proportion of calories they got from carbohydrates, fats, and protein. After following the group for an average of 25 years, researchers found that those who got 50-55% of their energy from carbohydrates (the moderate carb group) had a slightly lower risk of death compared with the low and high-carb groups. Researchers estimated that, from the age of 50, people in the moderate carb group were on average expected to live for another 33 years. This was: four years more than people who got 30% or less of their energy from carbs (extra-low-carb group); 2.3 years more than the 30%-40% (low-carb) group; and 1.1 years more than the 65% or more (high-carb) group.
The scientists then compared low-carb diets rich in animal proteins and fats with those that contained lots of plant-based protein and fat. They found that eating more beef, lamb, pork, chicken and cheese in place of carbs was linked with a slightly increased risk of death. But replacing carbohydrates with more plant-based proteins and fats, such as legumes and nuts, was actually found to slightly reduce the risk of mortality.
The scientists then compared low-carb diets rich in animal proteins and fats with those that contained lots of plant-based protein and fat. They found that eating more beef, lamb, pork, chicken and cheese in place of carbs was linked with a slightly increased risk of death. But replacing carbohydrates with more plant-based proteins and fats, such as legumes and nuts, was actually found to slightly reduce the risk of mortality.
Re: High carb shortens life too (Score:2)
I read a report this week that sticking long term low carb diets may trigger diabetes also.
Who to believe? I guess I should just outdoors and do some physical activity instead of stuffing my face with food while reading slashdot!
Re: High carb shortens life too (Score:1)
Its a myth that just fat folks get type 2, you can be i shape and still get it. But yeah, 90% of folks with love handles probably have type 2 even if they dont know it yet.
Re: High carb shortens life too (Score:2, Informative)
Eat varied and don't follow fad diets. That is all yoy need to believe in.
Re: (Score:1)
A diet that feels strange (only one kind of food lik a "banana diet" or avoiding something like "no fat" or "no carbs) are all wrong.
The body basically knows what it needs - that is why some foods taste great!
Our taste can be fooled to some extent, with refined artifical products. But other than that, eat what's good and don't eat the same every day. Don't overeat and use your muscles - and you won't get very fat either. Lifestyle problems solved, lets move on to nerd stuff . . .
Re: High carb shortens life too (Score:5, Informative)
The body basically knows what it needs - that is why some foods taste great!
Bull shit. The human appetite evolved to deal with times when food frequently scarce. That's why sugar taste so good - it's high density energy. Following your appetites is NOT optimum in a land of excess such as most of us now live in.
Re: (Score:2)
The body basically knows what it needs - that is why some foods taste great!
Carbs taste great, on the whole. So you should eat as much of those as you want, right. Type 2 diabetes cannot possibly be the result as the 'body basically knows what it needs'
Re: High carb shortens life too (Score:5, Informative)
Sounds like a truism, but what you said is a falsehood.
Too many of my friends and colleagues are dying of sugar/carb addiction. They don't have to be huge, just not monitoring their blood A1C score (blood sugar).
It's not a fad diet. People consume a huge amount of starchy foods, sugary beverages, and worse, get no exercise. Type 2 diabetes is almost the epidemic that opoids are!
Often, people do this too late. The damage to their pancreas is already done, the effects of fat uptake because of enormous insulin dumps to battle the constant sugar cycles eventually takes its toll. Some people are even more reactant genetically; they don't need to have huge fat uptake to become insulin resistant.
The Lancet's study isn't an observation-- instead, people took a freaking survey-- people never lie on polls and surveys!! Right?? (looking at you, 538.com).
Re: (Score:2)
You do not seem to have understood the comment that you have replied to. If people are eating a varied diet then they are spreading their calorie intake across different food types - not overeating carbs/sugar.
Re: High carb shortens life too (Score:5, Informative)
No, you miss the point.
It's not about calories, it's about net carbs after fiber. Counting calories works well for high-output individuals, who in the US, are about 2 in 10. The rest of the people need to count carbohydrates by the gram or other measure.
Calories isn't so much of a figment, rather, it doesn't portray the accuracy of a nutritional diet. See https://www.amazon.com/Case-Ag... [amazon.com] for questions. His other books are equally as well annotated, chapter and verse.
Truly and sincerely, it's not the calories, it's the carbohydrates net of fiber content.
Re: (Score:3)
No, you miss the point.
It's not about calories, it's about net carbs after fiber. Counting calories works well for high-output individuals, who in the US, are about 2 in 10. The rest of the people need to count carbohydrates by the gram or other measure.
Calories isn't so much of a figment, rather, it doesn't portray the accuracy of a nutritional diet.
Counting calories works for everyone. If you consume more energy than you need, the excess is stored as fat. Our population is not facing nutritional deficiency, but an obesity epidemic. And exercise is a pitiful amount of energy expenditure, so its not the lack of that. Its the lack of accurately counting kcal consumption that is causing it. Blaming carbs, protein and fats for this is foolish.
Re: (Score:3)
You completely missed the entire chemistry behind insulin, insulin reaction, ketosis, and more.
The obesity epidemic is the direct result of sugar/starch/carb addiction. It's like nicotine or crack-- but worse. Cheap carbs are the basal cause of the epidemic. Sugar feeds a serotonin release caused by a chemical pathway to the brain. It's addiction.
Calories aren't useful for most people, but carbs are necessary for all. You've been hypnotized by the BRIBED research. Read the book in the citation. Read its bib
Re: (Score:2)
You completely missed the entire chemistry behind insulin, insulin reaction, ketosis, and more.
I don't think I have sir.
The obesity epidemic is the direct result of sugar/starch/carb addiction.
No, its excess kcal over time.
Calories aren't useful for most people, but carbs are necessary for all.
Calories are necessary for human life. Its a unit of food energy. The books you are reading are running contrary to thermodynamics. Nobody has hijacked your brain using sugar. You just want to blame that so you don't have to take responsibility.
Physics doesn't really care either way. You eat an excess, you'll wear it.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, you completely missed the Kreb Cycle.
Try applying basic physics to this problem:
Take an aluminum rod, 2 feet in length. Place one end of the rod in a pot of warm water. Measure the time it takes for the other end of the rod to increase in temperature and reach equilibrium.
Now, do the same experiment with a human. Place one hand in a pot of warm water. Measure the time it takes for the other hand to increase in temperature and reach equilibrium.
Now, of course, basic physics still works - but what y
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, you completely missed the Kreb Cycle.
Not really.
but what you're really interested in isn't "calories in/calories out" as measured by "food in the mouth, physical activity of the muscles". You could put a metal ball with 10,000 calories of energy in your body, and not be able to metabolize any of it. So the *quality* of the calorie counts too.
Good thing calories come calculated using the modified atwater system which only includes things humans can gain energy from.
In the case of insulin, which drives fat accumulation, it is driven by blood sugar levels, which is driven by carbohydrate intake (particularly refined carbohydrates). If you don't include that in your calculation, you're using a simple formula for a complex scenario.
The calorie values for carbs(4kcal/gram), nor protein(5kcal/gram) or fat(9kcal/gram). Insulin doesn't drive
Re: (Score:2)
I'm agreeing with you as hard as I can.
I think what you don't see is that excess consumption doesn't drive fat accumulation without insulin :)
Even further, I think what's interesting is that when you see a 500 pound fat man eating pizza like he's starving, it's because his muscles *are* starving, and his fat cells, under the influence of insulin, are stealing all the energy from his muscles.
Now, is it "excess consumption" if your muscles are
Re: (Score:2)
Counting calories works for everyone. .
You're assuming that counting calories leads to a sustained decrease in caloric intake over a long period of time. That simply does not happen for the vast majority of people, even if you are only looking at the people strongly motivated to lose weight.
Re: (Score:2)
Again, you seem to have missed the meaning of words.
“If people are eating a varied diet then they are spreading their calorie intake across different food types - not overeating carbs/sugar.”
Do you understand what varied means?
Re: (Score:2)
Simply not true.
People don't discriminate. They drink a coke with lunch, eat a sandwich, then have pasta or something with rice. A beer, perhaps later.
Each of these has too much sugar. Let's say they have a nice meaty steak, then have potatoes. Oops. Add these carbs up. NOT the calories. It's the sugary and starchy (often with grains) part that few people understand.
In today's culture, you need to actively watch the carbs, because carbohydrates are everywhere. Groceries devote aisle after aisle to carbs. Ch
Re: (Score:2)
You’re not so good at reading are you?
Instead of projecting your ideas onto what somebody has written, try reading what they have written. What you are arguing against is not a varied dist.
Re: (Score:2)
Again, you seem to have missed the meaning of words.
It does not do you credit to be so condescending. Especially when the other guy is right: you can eat a hundred vastly different foods that all contain too much sugar. A varied diet will not save you. Unless you mean a molecularly varied diet rather than a diet whose foods vary, but to my view that would be silly: we can gain energy from very few categories of molecules, and any way you split them up (which constricts sugars and simple carbs to one category of many) would be fairly arbitrary.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
I read a report this week that sticking long term low carb diets may trigger diabetes also.
Who to believe? I guess I should just outdoors and do some physical activity instead of stuffing my face with food while reading slashdot!
Was that "study" perchance funded by the corn growers lobby?
Re: High carb shortens life too (Score:5, Interesting)
Who to believe?
Learn critical thinking. What critical word appears in the very first sentence of the summary?
Answer: "Questionnaire"
This was a SURVEY, of people that selected their own diets, not a controlled study. People that give up meat and eat "plant based proteins" are the same people that will exercise, avoid smoking, drink a glass of red wine instead of a keg of beer, etc. Correlation is not causation [xkcd.com], and the results of this survey really don't mean anything.
Re: (Score:2)
15k people is actually pretty good. Unless the completely muffed the statistics, they really have proven that of people who respond to this survey, the ones who are on a diet (likely because they are SICK) satisfy some other test (which may or appropriate here) which implies they will live less long than people who don't watch what they eat (presumably because they don't HAVE TO) in this particular way.
That and a quarter will buy you something from a cheap gumball machine.
Re: (Score:2)
Thinking about this more, it's good that they published this. This is essentially a null result. The really desirable number to come out of this would be "Go on a low fat diet and live longer even when you're initially unhealthy!" They didn't see that. That would be a really medically useful result.
And they didn't get that. They got bupkis. And it's REALLY GOOD that they published their bupkis, since most studies where there's no interesting result don't get reported which is really bad for science.
Bu
Re: (Score:2)
Eat this, don't eat that, blah blah.
Eat what makes you feel good and die when you die. The worry and stress of trying to "eat healthy" will make whatever years you do have miserable.
Re: (Score:2)
Eat what makes you feel good and die when you die.
So how much did the cheesecake lobby pay you to say that?
Re:High carb shortens life too (Score:5, Funny)
*asking for a friend
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, cheese cake is disgusting. The apple pie lobby on the other hand wants you to know how good apples are for you and in pie form it's nothing but happiness.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Are we talking the home-made apple-pie lobby, or the commercial apple-pie lobby, which is secretly controlled by the salt, cornstarch, and high-fructose corn syrup lobby? (And also possibly the not-many actual apples in the apple pie lobby.)
Re: (Score:2)
This would work if we didn't pay for their healthcare. But we do, since (in the US) we're pooled in the same insurance group as them.
So, no. Don't slowly eat yourself to death because that costs ME money. If you want to kill yourself, please do so quickly and inexpensively in a way which causes little mess: Stick a note on the outside of a thick plastic bag, move the plastic bag to the receiving area of the morgue, get in the plastic bag, seal the bag up tight, and THEN eat yourself to death.
Or be a heal
Re: (Score:2)
If it wasn't for motorcycles then work on synthetic organs would need to be much more advanced.
I don't have an issue with motorcycles, as long as they have more than two wheels for stability, and maybe some sort of outer covering for poor weather, and a reasonable amount of luggage space. Maybe space for some friends to come along too. Air con would be great for hot days, or heating in winter.
Re: (Score:1)
Did they control for other factors? (Score:5, Interesting)
Almost everyone I know who eats low carb does so for a reason. They are fat, prone to be fat, diabetic, celiacs, or some other health problem that made them switch to low carb in the first place. Otherwise healthy people generally don't choose low carb without a health problem first.
Re: (Score:1)
Almost everyone I know who eats low carb does so for a reason. They are fat, prone to be fat, diabetic, celiacs, or some other health problem that made them switch to low carb in the first place. Otherwise healthy people generally don't choose low carb without a health problem first.
Exactly.
Re:Did they control for other factors? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Did they control for other factors? (Score:4, Insightful)
According to findings [gizmodo.com] on platforms like Reddit a lot of internet users will not read the article before forming an opinion on the piece. It's likely that they read headlines and subhead. Maybe they will read a summary if they feel like it. But from personal experience of the comment sections on major German newspaper that rarely happens as far as online platforms go. Which leads me to believe that this is a fairly common phenomenon among various cultures.
Of course it's a nice thing to know for online media whose revenue relies on generating clicks for their article. If all they do is to pick a catchy headline and perhaps write summery in a similar fashion, it's already enough to draw a significant amount of attention from their audience. On top of that the same phenomenon as illustrated above probably also applies to a significant portion ofjournalists, leading them to mostly only read press releases instead of working through the full papers.
I'm not sure in which direction the causality goes here as in whether those who publish papers have found out what gets you more likely published, journalists have found out what makes the most money, or both. In anyway the result stays the same.
Re: (Score:1)
they actually didnt
if you look at the data all the people eating low carb are massively at risk from dying earlier, in comparison, regardless of diet
Re: (Score:1)
Yes. Of course they fucking did. RTFA:
Re: (Score:1)
>"Almost everyone I know who eats low carb does so for a reason. They are fat, prone to be fat, diabetic, celiacs, or some other health problem that made them switch to low carb in the first place. Otherwise healthy people generally don't choose low carb without a health problem first.""
The main problem is obesity. It is far, far worse than WHAT people eat. And the cure is simple. Eat less. Low-carb is just essentially another fad deit like low-fat, low-sugar, low-salt, pills, high-fiber, all-fruit,
Wrong... (Score:2)
I am approaching my 6th year on a low-carb high-fat diet. I am 5'11" tall and I weighed 172 when I started. I hold steady right around 160 now, +-5 lbs. Went from 34" waist to 32", and am still there.
I know plenty of people who chose a low-carb diet who were not overweight. I was in good shape (not my best) but saw significant improvements after only a month. Joint pain went away, my teeth are better, my cardio vascular health improved. I suspect these were due to things like lowering of inflammation d
Re: (Score:2)
In summary (Score:1)
Eat 50% carbs and get your protein & fat from nuts & beans. You will gain 1-4 years on your life... if you make it past 50.
We couldn't add a sentence or two about their samples exercise level to get more concrete answers?
Re: (Score:2)
History of consumption counts more than what they allow. So what have you consumed from birth, what damage has been done during growth and now manifests with poor outcomes and a requirement for diet change.
Diet change can mitigate further harm and to an extent repair harm already caused dependent age and duration or poor dietary choices. So you need family diet history and probably environmental exposure to pollution, in order to make a more valid analysis.
Of course source of proteins and herbivorous diet
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Eat 50% carbs and get your protein & fat from nuts & beans.
Hmm.. pretty much what I've been aiming for since a couple of years. Almost no sugar, and don't be afraid of fats! Just watch the kinds of fats & what other nutrients (protein, minerals, fibres etc) their sources come with. As the body adapts to pull calories from fats & high-fibre 'slow' carbs (vs. from sugar and low-fibre carbs found in many processed foods), blood sugar highs and lows tend to disappear. Making you loose those cravings for sugar rich, unhealthy in-between snacks.
One thing the a
Re: (Score:2)
I thought I'd been reading that saturated fats really aren't as bad for you as had been thought....??
Have you seen any of that out there in the literature lately?
More p-hacking headlines... (Score:2)
https://www.explainxkcd.com/wi... [explainxkcd.com]
News flash: butter bad. Wait.. This just in... (Score:5, Interesting)
Butter is good. Low carb leaves a lot of parameter space for what are you replacing it with. At the end of the day you pick a caloric intake and you pick a method of filling it. Turning down the mid range doesn't say what you did with the treble, base and volume knobs.
Here's the thing. If you lower your carbs and 2 years later your whole body still feels great then whatever you did probably was the right thing. I'm not saying eat what makes you happy. Because if you do that, and happy is pancakes, then 2 years from now you won't feel healthy or happy about how you feel when you aren't eating pancakes.. Unless maybe you are a kid.
You body doesn't have sense on a meal by meal basis but it lets you know you are not eating well overall.
SO no frigging way are the people on low carb diets long term and likeing how they feel doing damage.
On the other hand low carb diets could be bad ideas if for example you stay on the atkins diet or something equivalently stupid. Atkins is better than being obese but once you shed that, get off it man!
The thig about low carbs is that for some people it's incredibly easy. Once you stop using sugar you just lose the desire for it. it's not punishment. And that's the magic of low carbs. It's one of the few "diets" that doesn't lead to yo-yo. At least not for a subset fo people. It's sustainable.
It isn't for every one. But for some folks it is an easy way to feel good over the long term. That can't be unhealthy.
Re: (Score:1)
Once you stop using sugar you just lose the desire for it. it's not punishment. And that's the magic of low carbs. It's one of the few "diets" that doesn't lead to yo-yo. At least not for a subset fo people. It's sustainable.
It isn't for every one.
This just reminds me of reading some "article" by someone several years ago about why low carb was bad and not good for weight loss. They literally did low carb for 3-4 weeks.... then got off it and admitted to eating an entire cake... THEN complained about gaining weight after that day. They said something about how it was so great that they lost 2-3lbs while doing the diet then how they gained 4lbs the day after they quit it and ate *A CAKE*.
Re: (Score:2)
Obesity is unhealthy. thats the alternative.
Re: (Score:1)
There's actually some studies showing that being 20-40 pounds "overweight" can add a couple years to your life.
Re: (Score:1)
it's hard to say... they use "obese" and "overweight".
And the standard for that changes constantly.
Like for diabetes, 10 years ago 125 was "pre diabetic". Now it's "diabetic".
Like for "binge" drinking. Having 5 drinks in 5 hours is "binge" drinking. "Binge" sounds horrible... but 5 drinks in 5 hours would not even give you a buzz.
Um (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Um (Score:4, Insightful)
Why do we keep covering these obvious causation vs correlation studies. Heck this one looks like it was crafted in reverse just to tarnish low carb diets. They get 2 minute blurbs on news stations and you never hear from them again. Ridiculous.
Follow the Funding...
Re: (Score:2)
You all are dismissing survey results too quickly. A well-crafted survey can control for the kind of factors that people in this thread are just assuming the authors didn't consider, and randomized trials have their own drawbacks.Both methods are necessary to get the fullest picture of what works and what doesn't.
Makes sense (Score:5, Funny)
If you cut all pasta, bread and cakes out of your diet, you won't actually die younger. You'll just wish you would.
Cynthia Kenyon (Score:2)
No desserts. No sweets. No potatoes. No rice. No bread. No pasta. âoeWhen I say âno,â(TM) I mean âno, or not much,â(TM)â she notes... Kenyon, professor of biochemistry and biophysics at the UCSF, has been on her diet for two-and-a-half years. âoeI did it because we fed our worms glucose and it shortened their lifespan.â
Re: (Score:3)
No potatoes. No rice. No bread. No pasta
So the main downside of this diet is you live longer.
why focus on protein ? (Score:5, Informative)
Many comments here about protein, and the sources of protein, yadda. For some bizarre reason scientists and the general public assume that low carb means high protein. IT DOESN'T. Every responsible low carb diet makes it perfectly clear that one should not eat much protein. For one thing, your body will use it to make carbohydrates. Why people choose to ignore this is baffling. More fat, less protein, much less carbohydrate is the formula. Is it that difficult to remember?
And let's not fuss about 'good' fat vs 'bad' fat. There are two primary concerns: Trans fats are bad. The other is never mentioned- rancid fat. This is a problem due to the fad of switching from animal fats to vegetable fats that started around the'80s. The good thing about animal fat is you know when it is rancid- it stinks. But vegetable fat doesn't. You don't know that you are poisoning yourself with it. Buy the smaller container of vegetable oil (if you must use it; lard is acceptable) and put it in the refrigerator after you open the bottle. Throw it out if you have any doubt. Coconut and MCT oil seem pretty stable at room temp and they are very good fuel for athletes and diabetics and most people.
Re:why focus on protein ? (Score:5, Interesting)
The fad with saturated fats has really hurt the average health, because people started eating more carbs to make up for the missing calories. And as a result, there was an explosion of diabetes cases.
As you say, when it comes to fats, the main thing you should look out for is whether they are trans-fats or not, and avoid trans-fats like the plague. But saturated fats have been proven to not be any worse for the cardiovascular system than non-saturated fats. Only this fact seems to have been suppressed in popular media.
Re:why focus on protein ? (Score:4, Informative)
Every responsible low carb diet makes it perfectly clear that one should not eat much protein. For one thing, your body will use it to make carbohydrates.
A bit. When there are insufficient carbs in your diet, some of the protein can be eventually converted to glucose, but not all amino acids can take that pathway. Either way your body pretty much only makes the glucose you need since it's a rather slow and inefficient process compared to direct ingestion of carbs.
Re: (Score:3)
You need the protein to get fuckin swole, dude!
Re: (Score:1)
Okay, I am going to disagree with your statement on vegetable oils and say that you do not know what you are talking about. Yes, they will eventually go rancid. However it takes a while--particularly if you take a little bit of care in how you store it (e.g., pantry or cabinet). And you can taste it when it goes rancid.
I couldn't find an immediate great website, but here is a reference:
https://www.canitgobad.net/can-vegetable-oil-go-bad/
I'll leave it to you to find a more authoritative reference that backs
Re: (Score:1)
"vegetable oil" is too general a term to say anything useful about.
polyunsaturated fats go rancid very quickly because they are prone to oxidation.
Flax seed oil for example can even spontaneously combust (google it) because it oxidizes so fast. This is why it should also be sold and kept refrigerated, and seeds should be ground and consumed immediately.
canola oil, ie canadian rapeseed oil is highly processed and usually hydrogenated, ie with plenty of trans-fats. The fda banned rapeseed oil in the 1950's
Re: (Score:2)
Many comments here about protein, and the sources of protein, yadda. For some bizarre reason scientists and the general public assume that low carb means high protein. IT DOESN'T. Every responsible low carb diet makes it perfectly clear that one should not eat much protein. For one thing, your body will use it to make carbohydrates. Why people choose to ignore this is baffling.
right!
this is what i tell people who are all into the 'protein diet' craze. it's BS, your body works on carbs - your brain needs it to function, your muscles need it to perform. your body will try anything to get carbs from somewhere if it doesn't get it through normal channels (you eating). transforming fat or proteins, but in general getting it from proteins is bad.
carbs are not evil, just some carbs are, just like fat isn't evil, just some fats are.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't care, I feel great after ditching carbs. (Score:5, Interesting)
I've been diagnosed with diabetes a couple of years ago. I knew that lowering caloric intake can cure type 2 diabetes, but I am not fat, in fact, I am more on the skinny side, so I had few option of lowering my caloric intake much. However, I knew that carbs are associated with diabetes and started researching the issue more in depth. I decided to severely cut the amount of carbs I eat.
It was difficult at first, but as time went on, I gradually found it easier and easier. I replaced it with vegetables everywhere I could, which turns out to be a lot of places.
I am happy to announce that I have no symptoms or readings associated with diabetes anymore, and I do feel awesomely good. Whether this diet will shorten my life or not, I can't say (though I doubt it very much), but I really don't care. Quality of life matters more than length of life, and the quality of my life is so much higher than before the diet, I am glad to sacrifice a decade of shitty diabetic life for it.
Re: (Score:2)
A couple things.
I was looking stuff up and found that studies on the effects are CONTRADICTING EACH OTHER.
I would take the one that says that being on a ketogenic diet causes diabetes with a HUGE grain of salt - it's backwards of the others for instance.
Also there's a huge difference between being low carb and out of ketogenesis and low carb IN ketogenesis.
And there's a difference between relying on oils or fats or meat...
The fact is that we don't really have good information on the effects of macronutrient
Re: (Score:1)
The problem with ketogenic diet that no matter how much it improves certain health outcomes (cancer, neurological disorders, whatever) all of that pales in comparison to the leading killer ... heart disease. Cardiac arrest and it's influence on lifespan happen to be poorly captured in mouse models. Human epidemiology is always the final arbiter for long term health outcomes, but in this case there is little alternative.
I think despite the particle size angle, the extra cholesterol needed to digest the fat i
Re: (Score:2)
Are those your videos? That stuff is great and you should have posted this non-anonymously.
Re: (Score:1)
There's a saying. I see old people. I see fat people. I don't see old fat people.
I have seen middle aged fat people with major health problems due to being fat. Such as losing digits, limbs, etc.
However your statement is very true. Death is something that occurs to 100% of the people. You can't cheat it - so far.
Correlation != Causation (Score:2)
E.g. people who eat ~50% carbs might be the normal ones, living a relaxed life, not having the need for any diets. People who make diets, such as low carbs, might be more fat. Also, replacing carbs with nuts is pretty expensive. These are people with money, it is no surprise they live longer.
life is .. (Score:1)
Small wonder (Score:2)
Those replacing carbs with steaks and cold cuts sure ruin the statistics.
Where's the low-carbing? (Score:2, Interesting)
This study (really a survey) defines a low-carb diet as between 30-40% of calories. And the average is about 38% for the observed low-carbers.
That's lower carb, for sure, but it's not meaningfully low-carb. Ketosis (fat metabolism) doesn't begin until about 20% carbs (50-60g per day of carbs, as a rule of thumb).
A few months ago another study, 'proving' that low-carb diets had no advantages, also gave a firm conclusion recommending a 'plant based diet' while talking up low-carbing's supposed health issues.
Big Fat Surprise author panned this study (Score:1)
I'm glad (Score:1)
Glad to see they didn't just say "low carb = death do the opposite." I worried at first it was going to be an article saying they found low carb people dying younger so therefor eat a ton of carbs all the time.
Instead it looks like they are actually saying low carb only shaved 2ish years off while high carb was actually the "true villain."
Healthy years are the only thing that matters (Score:2)
In this decreases lifespan, but mantains, or actually increases, the number of healthy years in that decreased lifespan, is actually a welcome development.
attention Paleo cult (Score:1)
Eat more beans, it will save your life.
Bogus Conclusions (Score:3)
The idea that you can extend the results of this study to the current definitions of "low carb" eating is bogus.
In this study "low carb" was 38% of calories from carbs.. way higher than anything you would need to approach nutritional ketosis (the target of current low-carb eating). In fact the group identified as "low carb" were basically "shitty lifestyle", and in the words of the study: "were more likely to be young, male, a self-reported race other than black, college graduates, have high body-mass index, exercise less during leisure time, have high household income, smoke cigarettes, and have diabetes."
So in fact the study showed something that is common sense.. people who don't care about their health fair worse than people who do.
Absolute junk science (Score:1)
There is no possibility of controlling for all the relevant variables.
This conflates every kind of carbohydrate and fatty acid.
There are so many other things I could point out but this is enough to prove the worthlessness of the study.
Can't fix stupid (Score:2)
Nutritionists and health food nuts have been trying to "fix" what people eat for decades. The fix is always worse than the original problem if there really was any problem to begin with. And so what if you live to be 95? You'll most likely have some debilitating degenerative disease that makes daily life pretty miserable.
30%-40% (low-carb) group (Score:2)
Most folks eating "low carb"... would consider 30% carbs to be obscenely high; ketosis probably doesn't work for most people even at 10%.
Both the low carb folks and traditional dieticians would agree that fat is bad when you have enough carbs to trigger strong insulin responses. 30% carbs is going to trigger strong insulin responses, so both the low carb folks and the traditional dieticians could kinda look at this ahead of time and predict the outcome?
I have been suffering from (HERPES) disease (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
This is just an obscured example of the Broken Window Fallacy. Healthy people spend money on many things, some of which will actually advance technology, many of which actually make lives better.
Re: (Score:2)