Hacker News Reader

Comment by gibsonf1 | Hacker News Reader

A great book for getting into the science behind not eating flour/sugar/rice is "Good Calories, Bad Calories: Fats, Carbs, and the Controversial Science of Diet and Health" by Gary Taubes. After reading it I completely changed my diet and only wish I could have known earlier.

View on HN

Here are 15 studies showing that diet composition doesn't matter much and the most important thing is calories in/calories out.

http://examine.com/faq/what-should-i-eat-for-weight-loss.htm...

Here is a detailed debunking of Taubes science.

http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/2011/08/carbohydrate-h...

The only known benefit of a low carb diet is that some people are more willing to stick to it than other types of diets.

I've trained and assisted 100s of people with fitness and nutrition. This is flat out wrong. I have yet to see any recent credible research that says all calories are equal. It is a fact that hormonal response varies widely based on where that calorie is coming from.

Out of curiousity I clicked on one of the articles you linked to: "...during a 6-wk period of hospitalization. Consequently, 43 adult, obese persons were randomly assigned to receive diets containing 4.2 MJ/d (1000 kcal/d) composed of either 32% protein, 15% carbohydrate, and 53% fat, or 29% protein, 45% carbohydrate, and 26% fat."

A 6-week period with only 43 participants? ...how does this get published?

Did you peruse the summary only or actually look at the study? http://www.ajcn.org/content/63/2/174.full.pdf 6 weeks in a hospitalized environment with a consistent daily diet as measured/provided by the researchers, with a 14-hr fast before and after the 6 weeks. There are statistically significant correlations for some variables and insignificant for others. If the half of 43 participants was all over the map, then I'm sure it wouldn't have passed muster.

I'm not saying this study is the answer, nor does the study attempt to claim that. But to declare it as unworthy of publishing seems extreme.

Good points. It was harsh and not entirely relevant. I'm just passionate about the topic because of my experience. I could find outdated "scholarly papers" that say the world is flat. I didn't have enough time to dig up counter research. Will do now. Thanks for keeping me honest!

So out of 17 studies, you focused and criticized ones?

The way this works is you have to show even one study that contradicts the 17 other studies.

Oh there is one - except it was funded by the Atkins Co.

I focused on the first one I clicked. It took a lot of digging (like searching google and clicking the first link), but I found some counter studies: http://thepaleodiet.com/published-research

Either way, to each their own. My research and experience has led me in a certain direction, and the results in my personal health and those around me have been fantastic. In all actuality only time will tell. Obviously the state of current knowledge in the area is widely inconclusive. Best of luck to you.

Please explain how countless cultures who are severely malnutritioned and live off of less than 600 calories a day are obese? There are no credible studies that are currently being done that can answer those questions with calories in / calories out. Because it is simply wrong.

Taubes google talk http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M6vpFV6Wkl4

I don't have time to watch a 90 minute talk. Could you tell me which cultures become obese on 600 cals/day, and perhaps give a non-Gary Taubes source for it?

I've certainly never encountered it. In my experience, people who consume insufficient amounts of carb heavy food tend to be quite thin (Maharashtra, for example - all carbs, and not very many of them).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com