Funny, i am a type 1 diabetic. On a low carb diet i needed less insulin, which also reduced my overall hunger. I lost weight because insulin stores fat. My blood sugar is in the normal range.

I think what philb and a lot of others are wondering about is the high success rate that we generally seem to see in people on LCHF diets. I’m glad I read this, as it gives me a more balanced perspective on ketogenic diets, but I think a lot of people might be confused as it seems from whatever (erroneous or not) information there is on the Internet, ketogenic diets seem to almost produce better results than other diets. Also, personal experience is a factor.

Although I don’t agree with your conclusions, I believe that your article is solid. I agree that a ketogenic or low-card diet is not for everyone. And, more than anything, this article should prompt smart people to think more deeply about what they put into their bodies for fuel.

Keep up the good work,

Jason

Some sad creatures obviously can’t imagine a life without diet gurus…

I’m definitely not “afraid” to talk about broader issues, its just that its a red-herring. The article only argues a specific point.

I said it before, the macronutrient composition of your diet is always going to be different person to person. Some thrive on a high-carb raw vegan diet whereas other thrive on low-carb high-fat regimen. The point is fat loss will be the same if both diets are isocaloric. I eat the macronutrient ratio that I do because I have found it to be optimal.

And I do make recommendations. I clearly say to forget obsessing over macronutrient composition and focus on total calories instead. The composition of those calories should be individually based.

The point is very clear, you just don’t get it. Again, I’m ONLY talking about calories and the fact that calories matter. I don’t need to give a specific breakdown of macro’s, it doesn’t matter. All I need to show (and did show repeatedly) is that calories matter. What they are made of is up to you. Are you starting to get it?

As for the bodyweight issue, I already said I agreed with you that bodyweight doesn’t mean much per se. But you totally ignore my second comment that it is a powerful surrogate for just about everything in the metabolic syndrome. And you knew full well that I was referring to people with extremely high levels of body fat when I said obese and not referring to BMI. As for your other statement about thin people and heart-disease etc. sure, of course they develop it but how often compared to people with a high body fat? Your focusing on the minority here to support your failing argument.

“You have made the same mistake as other people who commented here.”

Not sure why you have to immediately try to point out some irrational ‘mistake’ I didn’t make. Many of the comments above are just trying to continue the discussion past what you already said. Just disregarding all their points and referring to your specific argument is persnickety. If you really think you are correct you should not be afraid to engage a broader discussion of the topic.

“At no point do I suggest an optimal macronutrient ratio”

I know you didn’t specify a macronutrient ratio. That actually seemed odd to me because that is integral to what you were discussing. That is why I asked…

I would think that low-carb diets do help preserve muscle while losing fat; in any case the macro-nutrient ratio is important here. It’s basically the entire point of the article; you say it doesn’t matter because no ratio will burn fat faster or slower. If you believe that then why do you eat less carbs than the USDA recommends? At what percent breakdown is a diet ‘low-carb’? Why not follow the USDA guidelines of 18/29/53? Why bother writing all this if you are NOT going to make any recommendations?

You say “…carbohydrate-restricted diets work and have produced weight-loss for millions of people worldwide, this article is solely addressing the claim that they accelerate the weight-loss process through some magical metabolic effect. Yes, low and no-carbohydrate works, but (metabolically) no more than any other isocaloric diet.”

Ok, I get it, you just wanted to show that eating close to zero carbs and loads of fat does not make you burn more body fat. Especially if you eat way more calories. I agree with you. I just believe that puffing yourself up and telling everyone how right you are doesn’t really lead to any meaningful advice. My personal breakdown is around 30/45/25. If we’re not talking specifics what’s the point?

Oh and as for “You are going to be hard-pressed to find an obese person who is not a T2D as well.”

A laughable claim really. YOU forget that body weight alone is basically useless in the context of health. No I will not be ‘hard-pressed’ to find someone who is ‘obese’ and does not have T2D. How about most NFL athletes, a lot of the NBA, military, virtually every bodybuilder… you get the point. Many of the healthiest people in the country have a BMI in the overweight/obese category. There are also many people with very ‘healthy’ body weights with T2D and heart disease. For an article claiming to ‘disrobe dogma’ and challenge conventional wisdom, you sure do spout a lot of it off.

At least we can agree on one thing though. Grains definitely make me feel shitty as well. Sweet potatoes FTW.

You have made the same mistake as other people who commented here. I -specifically- argue that low-carbohydrate diets do not accelerate fat-loss. At no point do I suggest an optimal macronutrient ratio, that’s up to people to work out for themselves.

As an aside, your technically right that bodyweight per se is not indicative of overall health, but you forget that its a powerful surrogate marker (the mechanism being lifestyle, of course). You are going to be hard-pressed to find an obese person who is not a T2D as well.

I agree grains are by no means necessary. Personally, I don’t eat any grains because they make me feel crappy. I get 99% of all my carbs from tubers and fruit. My general macronutrient breakdown is around 25/40/35 (P/F/C).