johncaruso
Joined January 2011
Posts
504
Following
1
Followers
11
Weight History

Start Weight
253.5 lb
Lost so far: 19.0 lb

Current Weight
234.5 lb
Performance: losing 3.9 lb a week

Goal Weight
165.0 lb
Still to go: 69.5 lb
Goals and timeline for 2024:

X 255 - Jan 2024
X 245 - Feb 2024
X 235 - Mar 2024 - Obesity Class 1 (BMI <35) - <236
- 225 - Apr 2024
- 215 - May 2024
- 205 - Jun 2024
- 197 - Jul 2024 - Overweight (BMI <30) - <203
- 189 - Aug 2024
- 181 - Sep 2024
- 173 - Oct 2024
- 165 - Nov 2024 - Normal weight (BMI <25) - <170

johncaruso's Weight History


johncaruso's Latest Member Challenges

24
  Atkins Induction - New Year Jump Start
status: Completed
ended: 11 Apr 11
view progress
 
 


Following

ObeseToBeast123
last weighin: gaining 4.9 lb a week Up
   



johncaruso's Latest Posts

Fats
corifeo wrote:

The authors have indicated that they have received grant or research support from the Robert C. Atkins Foundation, In.

So? How does that invalid what they say? They say "The VLCKD effect seems to be particularly marked on the level of blood triglycerides,24,28" and provide two footnotes to other papers:

24 Paoli A, Cenci L, Fancelli M, Parmagnani A, Fratter A, Cucchi A et al. Ketogenic diet and phytoextracts comparison of the efficacy of mediterranean, zone and tisanoreica diet on some health risk factors. Agro Food Ind Hi-Tech 2010; 21: 24.

28 Sharman MJ, Kraemer WJ, Love DM, Avery NG, Gomez AL, Scheett TP et al. A ketogenic diet favorably affects serum biomarkers for cardiovascular disease in normal-weight men. J Nutr 2002; 132: 1879–1885.

Which were *not* funded by the Atkins Foundation, and which support their assertion.


Because there are very few ad libitum (“free-living”) outpatient studies and no controlled studies longer than 8 weeks, no conclusion can be made yet regarding the longterm safety and efficacy of this approach.

OK, for once I'll agree. There needs to be more studies to determine longterm safety. But that does not disprove that there are numerous papers showing triglycerides are lowered more on low carb diets than high carb diets.

If you want to discuss the longterm safety of diets, let's start by discussing the low fat high carb diets that people are eating now, pushed by our wonderful government agencies, that are leading our nation and the world into an obesity epidemic replete with metabolic disorders. Clearly, for many people, higher carb diets are not safe.

You contend that this is all from overeating, but you are apparently ignorant about *why* people are overeating. Changing the macronutrient composition changes our how our bodies react to food. So, while I agree that certainly eating fewer calories contributes to weight loss, you cannot disregard the macronutrient composition. Eating two twinkies a day may end up in you losing weight, but it's not likely to help with controlling your blood sugars or lowering triglycerides.


You need to start reading stuff before posting it, am not going to reply to you no more obviously your emotionally invested in this you don’t know what you’re doing your just randomly posting stuff

It isn't me who seems to be missing the relevant data in these papers, and it isn't me who is trying to discredit a paper published in the European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, because the the authors may or may not (I can't seem to verify where you got that info from) have received money from the Atkin's Foundation - like somehow that invalidates the research they point to done by others.


OK, you've indicated you won't reply to me, so I'll be happy to close this discussion and let our readers decide things for themselves.

Thanks for the conversation, and for helping me answer (fairly extensively now) the OPs question about reducing triglycerides.

John - signing off...
posted 06 Aug 2014, 02:00
Fats
LOL, OK I couldn't resist. Plus, I think this directly addresses the OP who was wanting to reduce her triglyceride levels. Sandycatiller, here are genuine scientific papers showing that, yes, in fact, you CAN lower you triglycerides by adopting a low carb diet.

First, let's dismantle corifeo's misleading response:

corifeo wrote:

“were no differences between the low-fat and low-carbohydrate diets in FMD at any time point. At 6 months (r = 0.26, P = 0.04) and 1 year (r =0.28, P = 0.03), there were positive correlations between change in FMD and change
in leptin but not at 2 years.”

Why are you quoting a study on dietary effect on flow mediated vasodilatation (FMD), a measure of endothelial function? It didn't appear to be measuring triglyceride differences

“Both diets achieved substantial improvements for several clinical glycemic control and CVD risk markers.”

And here's the rest of the quote you conveniently omitted:

"These improvements and reductions in GV and antiglycemic medication requirements were greatest with the LC compared with HC. This suggests an LC diet with low saturated fat may be an effective dietary approach for T2DM management if effects are sustained beyond 24 weeks."


And from the Results section of the same paper: "LC achieved greater reductions in triglycerides (-0.5 ± 0.5 vs. -0.1 ± 0.5 mmol/L)"

“Low-GI and low-CHO diets have both acute and chronic effects on postprandial glucose and triglycerides in T2DM subjects”

This studied postprandial (after meal) levels - not fasting triglyceride levels. Which is what the OP is talking about.


And you apparently missed these articles, from the first page of results:

http://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/4/2/e003505.short

Results 23 participants (50% test, 68% control) completed the 6-month ad libitum study. The approximate 4 kg weight loss on the metabolic study was increased to −6.9 kg on low-carbohydrate and −5.8 kg on high-carbohydrate 6-month ad libitum treatments (treatment difference (95% CI) −1.1 kg (−2.1 to 0.0), p=0.047). The relative LDL-C and triglyceride reductions were also greater on the low-carbohydrate treatment (treatment difference (95% CI) −0.49 mmol/L (−0.70 to −0.2Cool, p<0.001 and −0.34 mmol/L (−0.57 to −0.11), p=0.005, respectively), as were the total cholesterol:HDL-C and apolipoprotein B:A1 ratios (−0.57 (−0.83, −0.32), p<0.001 and −0.05 (−0.09, −0.02), p=0.003, respectively).

Conclusions A self-selected low-carbohydrate vegan diet, containing increased protein and fat from gluten and soy products, nuts and vegetable oils, had lipid lowering advantages over a high-carbohydrate, low-fat weight loss diet, thus improving heart disease risk factors.


http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0026049513002230

Results
The age range of subjects was 21–62 years. As a percentage of daily calories, the HFLC group consumed 33.5% protein, 56.0% fat and 9.6% carbohydrate and the LFHC group consumed 22.0% protein, 25.0% fat and 55.7% carbohydrate. The change in percent body weight, lean and fat mass, blood pressure, flow mediated dilation, hip:waist ratio, hemoglobin A1C, fasting insulin and glucose, and glucose and insulin response to a 2 h oral glucose tolerance test did not differ (P > 0.05) between diets after 12 weeks. The HFLC group had greater mean decreases in serum triglyceride (P = 0.07), and hs-CRP (P = 0.03), and greater mean increases in HDL cholesterol (P = 0.004), and total adiponectin (P = 0.045) relative to the LFHC. Secreted adipose tissue adiponectin or TNF-α did not differ after weight loss for either diet.

Conclusions
Relative to the LFHC group, the HFLC group had greater improvements in blood lipids and systemic inflammation with similar changes in body weight and composition. This small-scale study suggests that HFLC diets may be more beneficial to cardiovascular health and inflammation in free-living obese adults compared to LFHC diets.

I'll let our readers decide whether my point has been made, and whether your tactics of selective quoting and blatant omissions support your positions or paint you quite clearly as...

A TROLLLLLL!!!
Laughing

posted 06 Aug 2014, 01:01
Fats
Must.. resist.. the.. urge.. to.. take.. the.. bait LOL
posted 06 Aug 2014, 00:04
Fats
Actually, I should thank corifeo, in reviewing the Google Scholar search results I provided supporting reduction of triglycerides in low carb diets, I stumbled on this:

Beyond weight loss: a review of the therapeutic uses of very-low-carbohydrate (ketogenic) diets
http://www.nature.com/ejcn/journal/v67/n8/abs/ejcn2013116a.html

Here's a graphical summary:
http://www.nature.com/ejcn/journal/v68/n5/fig_tab/ejcn201447f1.html#figure-title

Published just last summer, it is a fascinating read, and makes me even more convinced that I've made the right decision in adopting a LCHF / ketogenic lifestyle, and that much more motivated to stick with it.

It also shows how outdated most of the links corifeo provided are. I'm glad nutrition science didn't stop back in the 90's. Smile
posted 05 Aug 2014, 23:58
Fats
corifeo, Insulin may very well be a satiety hormone, but how effective is it in a person who is insulin resistant - i.e., a large majority of obese people.

Perhaps fat has a weak effect on satiety. All I know is that I am virtually never hungry, and have to remind myself to eat. This is either because I've added more fat to my diet and it is satiating me, or by restricting carbs I have fewer insulin spikes, more even blood sugars, and therefore less crashing and pursuant hunger. Or a combination of both.

You say "Yes it does" in response to "Fat does not pack fat cells."

OK, then why do people lose so much weight eating low carb high fat diets? 75-85% of my daily calories are fat, including that much maligned saturated fat. Why have I lost 20 lbs in 2 months? By your logic, eating all this extra fat should be making be fatter.

The problem is, as I mentioned before, but don't seem to grasp: your body processes fats differently depending on whether it's burning mostly carbs for fuel or mostly fats (keto-adapted).

The research you link to does not appear to account for keto-adaptation. So, while it very well may hold for someone on a typical high carb american diet, it may not hold us for low carbers.

corifeo, you appear to be one of the very few people on fatsecret who's goal weight is actually higher than their start weight. You want to gain weight. Well, then I suggest you continue eating a high carb diet. If you are underweight, then certainly eating a diet high in processed grains, sugars and starches will help you gain the weight you desire. All of us overweight and obese, and morbidly obese people on fatsecret can attest to the effectiveness of a high carb diet for weight gain. Smile

We are here to lose weight. And despite decades of negative reaction towards low carb diets, and numerous claims that they are harmful to your health, in the last decade or so considerable research is showing that Atkins (and all those pioneers before him and since) was right, low carb diets are effective in not only losing weight but also in resolving numerous disorders associated with metabolic syndrome.

Honestly, you don't appear to be very educated in the latest research on this subject - and why would you be? You're trying to gain weight! Why would you care about research related to weight loss?

I've said enough, I will no longer feed this troll, and suggest others do the same.
posted 05 Aug 2014, 23:07
johncaruso has submitted 5 posts
Get the app
    
© 2024 FatSecret. All rights reserved.