T Nation

Why Are Low Carb Diets Even Debated

Honestly, I don’t understand why or how anyone can even debate about low-carb diets for fat loss at this point. I mean, all it takes is a high school level appreciation of physiology to understand why they make you fat:

carbs make your pancreas relese insulin, that insulin tells your fat cells to take up more nutrients, and insulin puts the brakes on lipase.

Yet, talk to a physician, nutritionist or just about any other health conscious person and say “carbs make you fat” and you’ll get looks like you just condoned the Holocaust. Since they fell out of fashion, people will once again use the term “Atkins” as derisive. Well, fuck 'em, when will they get a clue?

I even had a teenage girl tell me a while ago that “carbs don’t give you diabetes”, referring to type II diabetes. So I asked her what does, and she said “I don’t know, but it’s not carbs.” WTF?

Ignorance is bliss. It’s tough to find any sane intelligent medical professional who will even attempt to recommend anything other than low fat still. It’s sad really. My mom’s endocrinologist had the balls to tell her to try to keep her carb intake between 300g and 500g a day. 500 grams! She’s an overweight Type II diabetic in her 60’s for crying out loud. She shouldn’t even be coming anywhere near 300g. Oh but she’s making sure her diet is low fat. That’ll help… fucking joke.

[quote]eengrms76 wrote:
My mom’s endocrinologist had the balls to tell her to try to keep her carb intake between 300g and 500g a day. 500 grams! She’s an overweight Type II diabetic in her 60’s for crying out loud. She shouldn’t even be coming anywhere near 300g. Oh but she’s making sure her diet is low fat. That’ll help… fucking joke.[/quote]

And you convinced her otherwise, yes? I’ve repeatedly taught my mom a better way to eat and live, and I’ll even have her on Superfood & Resveratrol soon.

Back to topic, all these fucking fads are largely due to these celebrity crap “diets” which people seem to follow. And these tv programs like “diet doctors” or whatever, it makes me sick to watch that crap - I’ve even ended in an heated discussion with the girlfriend about it(she thinks 3 day crash diets are good).

meh, sheeple.

Dogma is a powerful thing. And the media doesn’t help either. They will report ANYTHING they think is news-worthy regardless of it’s credibility or correctness. I saw a teaser for a news program this morning that said only this:

“Diet determines sex?” And then showed a shot of a baby and then raw brats.

It’s long been established that sex of a child is determined by the chromosome passed by the father, X or Y, that’s it. But they will put this shit on the air and less-informed individuals will think there is merit. What scientist wastes his time doing a study like that?

So, it will be ages before low fat goes away. It’s too easy to correlate in one’s head that eating fat equals getting fat and eating less means losing it.

cueball

Well, I’m not a big fan of low-carb diets, mainly because it gives off the wrong message, that all carbs are bad.

when in reality most people (that are overweight), would go a long way to give up white bread, white sugar, etc, rather than thinking they can’t have brown rice, oatmeal or the like.

let’s not forget, potatoes and rice have been around forever, obesity is only a recent epidemic.

that being said, those that are overweight, would benefit from a reduced carb diet, most likely.

the answer always lies somewhere in the middle.

[quote]conorh wrote:
s" as derisive. Well, fuck 'em, when will they get a clue?

I even had a teenage girl tell me a while ago that “carbs don’t give you diabetes”, referring to type II diabetes. So I asked her what does, and she said “I don’t know, but it’s not carbs.” WTF?[/quote]

and? she was right. carbs don’t give you diabetes.

among other things, it’s abuse of over consuming refined carbs, inactivity and genetics.

Some people respond better to high carb diets. While I wouldn’t argue against low carb diets for most people, or pretty much anyone trying to lose fat. Many ectomorphic athletes handle high carb diets better than the high fat diets of t-dawg or anabolic diet.

This includes me.

[quote]conorh wrote:
Honestly, I don’t understand why or how anyone can even debate about low-carb diets for fat loss at this point. I mean, all it takes is a high school level appreciation of physiology to understand why they make you fat:

carbs make your pancreas relese insulin, that insulin tells your fat cells to take up more nutrients, and insulin puts the brakes on lipase.

Yet, talk to a physician, nutritionist or just about any other health conscious person and say “carbs make you fat” and you’ll get looks like you just condoned the Holocaust. Since they fell out of fashion, people will once again use the term “Atkins” as derisive. Well, fuck 'em, when will they get a clue?

I even had a teenage girl tell me a while ago that “carbs don’t give you diabetes”, referring to type II diabetes. So I asked her what does, and she said “I don’t know, but it’s not carbs.” WTF?[/quote]

Most people may be clueless and blindly follow the leader, but there are a group of people who will do better on low fat. I have always done better on low fat, then low carbs.

I have tried both over the years for extended periods of time and found that low carb left me not only weak, but fatter. I could practically grab fat off my body that just seemed to come out of no where on a diet consisting of meat cheese and veggies.

Now when I switch to the low fat version containing animal protein, fruits and vegetables, the fat is practically blow torched off. I’ve stuck with low fat for a while and keep on losing fat and gaining muscle.

I do not feel carbs cause diabetes. I would say a genetic history is the main cause, followed by central obesity. Certain medications and illnesses can also cause diabetes. If you add carbs and an inactive lifestyle to a genetic history and central obesity you have the perfect storm. An athlete with a low bodyfat percentage and no history of diabetes can handle a tremendous amount of carbs with no consequences. Yes this is not the typical American I agree.

Once you have diabetes you will not suffer many of the consequences of the disease by severely limiting carbs, and of course losing weight. If you have the predisposition I would say it is better to stay very thin than avoid carbs to delay the onset of the disease. I would do both if diabetes ran in my family.

I still believe there are few inherently bad foods. It is all based on the individual and timing.

Doctors know little about nutrition and mainstream nutritionists are forced to teach information that is about 10 years old to the masses even if they are up to date with latest studies. The best we can hope to teach the masses are to use whole grains and rice in moderation at meal time only and cut out the junk food and high calorie beverages. Most people think baked Lays and diet soda are healthy.

I do agree that a low carb lifestyle with mainly natural food cause most people to lose weight for a variety of reasons. Getting the masses to change their diet is like taking crack from an addict. I compare someone changing their diet for life to someone that stops smoking. Most people do not change but like to talk about it all the time. Only about half of people even stop smoking after a heart bypass. Because of this many in the fat loss industry focus a lot of their attention to the psychology of weight loss not just the nutrition and exercise programs.

I do feel the number one things most people can do for the health no matter how they do it is to keep central obesity to a minimum and for this diet is key. I think the typical American knows that keeping carbs down helps to lose weight, but the typical American does not know just how unhealthy a high carb diet is for someone that is already fat and inactive. Also people only want to go low carb for a few weeks and not for life. Going from fat to a little less fat and back to high carbs is not a good formula for success.

I know that you likely know all the above and I agree with your major point about low carb and fat loss. Anyone on this site for awhile knows all this.

Also as the last poster noticed everyones body is different. There is some truth to this and in a few years we know many of the key enzymes that make one individual handle food differently than another. The key is to keep bodyfat levels low no matter how you do it individually.

[quote]deadlift655 wrote:
conorh wrote:
Honestly, I don’t understand why or how anyone can even debate about low-carb diets for fat loss at this point. I mean, all it takes is a high school level appreciation of physiology to understand why they make you fat:

carbs make your pancreas relese insulin, that insulin tells your fat cells to take up more nutrients, and insulin puts the brakes on lipase.

Yet, talk to a physician, nutritionist or just about any other health conscious person and say “carbs make you fat” and you’ll get looks like you just condoned the Holocaust. Since they fell out of fashion, people will once again use the term “Atkins” as derisive. Well, fuck 'em, when will they get a clue?

I even had a teenage girl tell me a while ago that “carbs don’t give you diabetes”, referring to type II diabetes. So I asked her what does, and she said “I don’t know, but it’s not carbs.” WTF?

Most people may be clueless and blindly follow the leader, but there are a group of people who will do better on low fat. I have always done better on low fat, then low carbs.

I have tried both over the years for extended periods of time and found that low carb left me not only weak, but fatter. I could practically grab fat off my body that just seemed to come out of no where on a diet consisting of meat cheese and veggies.

Now when I switch to the low fat version containing animal protein, fruits and vegetables, the fat is practically blow torched off. I’ve stuck with low fat for a while and keep on losing fat and gaining muscle. [/quote]

You are truly an anomaly…

[quote]icecold wrote:
I do not feel carbs cause diabetes. I would say a genetic history is the main cause, followed by central obesity. Certain medications and illnesses can also cause diabetes. If you add carbs and an inactive lifestyle to a genetic history and central obesity you have the perfect storm. An athlete with a low bodyfat percentage and no history of diabetes can handle a tremendous amount of carbs with no consequences. Yes this is not the typical American I agree.

Once you have diabetes you will not suffer many of the consequences of the disease by severely limiting carbs, and of course losing weight. If you have the predisposition I would say it is better to stay very thin than avoid carbs to delay the onset of the disease. I would do both if diabetes ran in my family.[/quote]

You’re partially right and partially wrong. Carbs by themselves do not cause diabetes. But you cannot get diabetes without a serious amount of weight gain typically caused by an abuse of carbs. It’s very difficult to become obese on meat and veggies alone.

The link between Type II diabetes and genetic history is anecdotal at best. And someone who has Type II does not automatically get relief from all of the symptoms just by losing weight and controlling carbs. It is possible, but not automatic. Once the organ damage is done it’s irreversible. The only hope is to catch it early to limit the damage.

[quote]eengrms76 wrote:
icecold wrote:
I do not feel carbs cause diabetes. I would say a genetic history is the main cause, followed by central obesity. Certain medications and illnesses can also cause diabetes. If you add carbs and an inactive lifestyle to a genetic history and central obesity you have the perfect storm. An athlete with a low bodyfat percentage and no history of diabetes can handle a tremendous amount of carbs with no consequences. Yes this is not the typical American I agree.

Once you have diabetes you will not suffer many of the consequences of the disease by severely limiting carbs, and of course losing weight. If you have the predisposition I would say it is better to stay very thin than avoid carbs to delay the onset of the disease. I would do both if diabetes ran in my family.

You’re partially right and partially wrong. Carbs by themselves do not cause diabetes. But you cannot get diabetes without a serious amount of weight gain typically caused by an abuse of carbs. It’s very difficult to become obese on meat and veggies alone.

The link between Type II diabetes and genetic history is anecdotal at best. And someone who has Type II does not automatically get relief from all of the symptoms just by losing weight and controlling carbs. It is possible, but not automatic. Once the organ damage is done it’s irreversible. The only hope is to catch it early to limit the damage.[/quote]

I think we agree more than we disagree.

Maybe the obesity is more important than the genetics, but I still feel there is a large genetic component. I see a much larger percentage of fat and unhealthy Caucasians without diabetes than African Americans and those of Mexican ethnicity. Of those in the same family with a very very strong history of diabetes it is often the morbidly obese teenager that gets type II diabetes and the thin and healthy relative that sometimes delays getting the disease until they are 60 or 70. They still get the disease very often with a very strong familial history. I still feel lifestyle is the key.

The health consequence of a newly diagnosed 60 year old diabetic that is well controlled and a poorly controlled obese child is huge. It is the difference between a likely healthy life of normal life expectancy versus likely amputation of legs and blindness. Yes due to years of end organ damage. Of course the morbid obesity on its own is horrible but add diabetes to that and you have one sad and sick life that makes gastric bypass a serious consideration.

My observations are confirmed by other studies.

Clin Chem Lab Med. 2007;45(3):301-8

Genotypes, obesity and type 2 diabetes–can genetic information motivate weight loss? A review.

Gable D, Sanderson SC, Humphries SE.
Centre for Cardiovascular Genetics, British Heart Foundation Laboratories, Royal Free and University College, London Medical School, London, UK.

The current worldwide prevalence of type 2 diabetes (T2D) was estimated to be 2.8% in 2000, but it is predicted to increase to epidemic proportions in the coming decades, primarily due to lifestyle changes, particularly obesity. In the United Kingdom there are over 1.4 million men and women with T2D. In addition to a strong environmental element, the existence of an underlying genetic component to T2D risk is supported by twin studies, family studies and the widely different T2D prevalence across ethnic groups. Here we review data showing that several common genetic risk variants for T2D have now been successfully identified, with modest, but meta-analytical robust effects on risk (in the region of 1.1-1.5-fold risk per allele). Use of these in combination may have clinical utility in identifying subjects at high risk. Whether this information will be motivating to make the type of lifestyle changes that have been shown to reduce the rate of progression from the pre-diabetes state to overt T2D is discussed.

I think that your ability to handle carbs is genetic. If you’re a naturally lean guy, you can probably get away with it. Otherwise…

This is corroborated by the research showing that genetics and obesity are related. I don’t think most people are going to get fat without a lot of carbs. Most people don’t have the genes to handle large amounts of carbs. Combine it with the cheapest food in the world an a sedentary life style, and you have diabetes. Carbs definitely have a place in the pathogenesis of type II diabetes.

But, carbs do not make you fat and they do not cause diabetes. A sedentary lifestyle + obesity + chronic high insulin levels gives you diabetes. And you don’t wake up one day and have diabetes, it is a continuum. Many people are in a state of prediabetes. Oh, and it is possible to fully reverse diabetes and prediabetes.

Being biased against an entire macronutrient is just plain crazy, people need to make intelligent choices about where they get their carbohydrates, just like they have to make intelligent choices as to where they get their fats, just like they have to make intelligent choices as to where you get their protein. There is a common trend, intelligent choices. It is about total calories, not carbs. Hell, you can get easily get fatter on the atkins diet, without eating a single carbohydrate. And you can lose fat eating mostly carbs.

Granted I use a controlled carbohydrate diet, but I still consume carbohydrates; people should not be afraid to eat an apple. Don’t get me started on the benefits of fruits and veggies considering fiber and phytochemicals.

I think the take home message is to keep carbohydrate intake under control, but don’t eliminate the macronutrient.

CARBS themselves are not bad. Simple sugars(other than PWO) and processed carbs are bad. take the japanese diet: fish and LOTS of rice. somehow they should all be fat and dead by 60 right? wrong.

i have experienced the same thing as deadlift, when i tried to cut carbs i got fatter and weaker. while i wouldnt personally recommend over 500g or carbs/day unless you weigh more than 255-260, but i also wouldnt recommend less than 1g/BW for anyone trying to make any kind of strength and/or size gains

[quote]Zagman wrote:
it is possible to fully reverse diabetes and prediabetes.[/quote]

Wrong. Prediabetes maybe, but not once you are diabetic. You are diabetic for life. You might be able to suppress the symptoms with diet/exercise, but you are still diabetic.

[quote]eengrms76 wrote:
Zagman wrote:
it is possible to fully reverse diabetes and prediabetes.

Wrong. Prediabetes maybe, but not once you are diabetic. You are diabetic for life. You might be able to suppress the symptoms with diet/exercise, but you are still diabetic.[/quote]

WRONG. My dad was diabetic, lost 50 lbs and viola! not diabetic anymore.

[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
Well, I’m not a big fan of low-carb diets, mainly because it gives off the wrong message, that all carbs are bad.

when in reality most people (that are overweight), would go a long way to give up white bread, white sugar, etc, rather than thinking they can’t have brown rice, oatmeal or the like.

let’s not forget, potatoes and rice have been around forever, obesity is only a recent epidemic.

that being said, those that are overweight, would benefit from a reduced carb diet, most likely.

the answer always lies somewhere in the middle.[/quote]

I’m with you on this 100%.

I’m on the AD right now, and while it’s not bad, I’m not exactly amazed by the results so far either. I would say I switched to utilizing fat for energy really easily, and I don’t have any ketones in urine when I test for them. I have energy throughout the day, and I did go from 256 to about 246 this morning.

Now, THAT being said…I did lose strength in the gym, and that pisses me off a little bit. I could routinely deadlift over 600, now I think I would have put serious effort into pulling that weight.

I definitely look a little better now, with 2 inches off my waist, but here is the thing: I was fine before starting the AD. And I do miss eating fruit, oatmeal, etc during the week. AND, I believe in a greater anabolic effect in eating a good amount of carbs after a heavy workout. I think Chad W. recommends this in his test-boosting article. Eversince starting the AD, my workouts haven’t been what they used to be, and I blame the lack of post-workout carbs. I consume PLENTY of fat, steak is my favorite, and I’m not afraid to drink olive oil straight up. But I still think I need the post workout carbs, and I’m talking way more than 30grams. It’s not that I need them for energy, it’s just that my strength in the gym went down the toilet.

As others have pointed out, there are many ways to go about eating. AD is one of the most thoughtout diets, no doubt, but Dr. Hatfield, for instance, is not wrong either, when he recomments 3:2:1 ratios for carbs, protein, and fat. High glycemic index carbs are bad news no matter what, unless it’s post-workout.

As an alternative to the AD, one just simply has to not be retarded about eating carbs to be successful.

Just to add/clarify…

Sometimes people claim the alternative to the AD is an ultra low fat diet. Dr. DiPasquale uses this example at the begining of the book to show how the AD is superior.
But I prefer higher carbs, high protein, moderate fat.

I believe in the middle road. I think fats are nothing to be afraid of, and neither are carbs. The AD, as Dr. D points out, is nothing more than re-arranging your macronutrients throughout the week.

I will stick with the AD for a while, but unless I start feeling incredibly good on it, I’m going back to my normal eating habits, as I’m really not seeing any drastic benefits so far.

Dr. Haftield’s words still ring in my ears: “Your body is not on a 7 day schedule”. He was talking about planning your training, but I think it applies to eating as well.

[quote]masonator wrote:
eengrms76 wrote:
Zagman wrote:
it is possible to fully reverse diabetes and prediabetes.

Wrong. Prediabetes maybe, but not once you are diabetic. You are diabetic for life. You might be able to suppress the symptoms with diet/exercise, but you are still diabetic.

WRONG. My dad was diabetic, lost 50 lbs and viola! not diabetic anymore.[/quote]

Bullshit. Would he be diabetic again if he gained the 50lbs back? Then he is still diabetic. Maybe it’s in “remission” but he’s still diabetic. There isn’t a doctor or medical professional alive that will actually say he’s not diabetic anymore.