In recent years, it has become
quite fashionable to argue that the real culprit in obesity are carbohydrates
and as such fats have gained considerably good marks in the hierarchy of villainous calories. Gary Taubes, a highly influential author on this topic wrote
thus: ‘‘Any diet that succeeds does so
because the dieter restricts fattening carbohydrates .Those who lose fat on a
diet do so because of what they are not eating—the fattening carbohydrates’’.
The argument is that carbohydrates cause a surge in insulin release and insulin
is what keeps fat within fat cells. When carbohydrates are restricted, this
insulin surge falls allowing fats to be released from fatty tissue for burning
(oxidation) for energy. All very well in theory but now, the results of an impeccably designed human study will greatly challenge this recent view that fats are good
and barbs are bad[1].
So what makes this study so solid.
The volunteers were extremely
obese. The males had a BMI of 38 while that of females was 33. The study randomized
the subjects into two arms for 11 days of dietary intervention and all of the
period of dietary intervention was conducted in a metabolic ward with strict
clinical supervision. For the first 5 days in each study arm, the subjects ate
what is referred to as a eucaloric diet. That is, they received the exact
amount of calories that they needed simply to neither gain nor lose weight. The
nutritional composition of each subjects eucaloric diets was identical with 50%
energy from carbohydrate, 35% from fat and 15% from protein. For the next 6
days, their caloric intake was reduced by 30% either through a very low fat
diet or a very low carbohydrate diet. There were no other changes in the
composition of the calorie reduced diets. The only foods available to the
subjects were those prepared by the research team and all eating occasions were
supervised.
On days 2 and 5 of the eucaloric diet and on
days 1, 4 and 6 of the energy restricted diets, the subjects spent 23
consecutive hours inside a metabolic chamber. This would be a small room with a
bed, seat, bathroom and other facilities but which is specially constructed to
measure the inflow and outflow of oxygen and carbon dioxide. By measuring the
loss of oxygen (used for fuel) and the gain of expired carbon dioxide, it is
possible to accurately tell what type of fuel is being burned by the body for
energy. When the six days of dieting
ended, the subjects took a 2-4 week break before resuming the same protocol but
switching from the low fat arm to the low carbohydrate arm and vice versa.
The main effects were as follows, as outlined by the authors:
“Body fat loss was calculated as the difference
between daily fat intake and net fat oxidation measured while residing in a
metabolic chamber. Whereas carbohydrate restriction led to sustained increases
in fat oxidation and loss of 53 g/day of body fat, fat oxidation was unchanged by
fat restriction, leading to 89 g/day of fat loss, and was significantly greater
than carbohydrate restriction”.
To those of us in experimental nutrition for some time, these
results come as no surprise. Very similar results were found in a series of
studies carried out at the UK Dunn Nutritional laboratory in the 1990s. The
bottom line is this. If you want to lose fat from the body, first lose it from
the plate but make sure that the caloric deficit of fat leads to an overall
deficit of calories form the diet.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.