Cutting sugar is very healthy and will likely result in weight loss, but if you cut sugar and replace if with carbs like bread and pasta, you've kind of exchanged one bad for another.
If however you cut both complex carbs AND sugar, and replace them both with almost anything else you'll shed the weight. Seems the Atkin's diet (eat unprocessed meats only) really did have some merits after all, fats and animal proteins are very healthy, as are greens, just have to kick that sugar addiction...
I'd be legitimately interested to meet an overweight individual who could maintain that weight without eating sugar or complex carbs, I don't personally think it is possible, but I'd be interested to be proved wrong.
If so, why did Dr. Atkins die overweight with a history of heart attack, congestive heart failure and hypertension? Please, don't buy into the Atkins/low-carb/paleo hype - check out http://www.atkinsfacts.org/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Atkins_(nutritionist)#C...
If you follow general nutrition there is almost nobody currently saying sugar and complex carbs are good for you, everyone is saying to limit your intake, while consuming more fats, proteins, and greens.
All of those diets have one thing in common: Less sugar and less of things that easily metabolize into sugar.
Who is saying to limit intake of carbs? Definitely not any non-profit organization like WHO:
> The Consultation RECOMMENDS:
> 3. Against the use of the terms extrinsic and intrinsic sugars, complex carbohydrate and available and unavailable carbohydrate.
> 11. That the many health benefits of dietary carbohydrates should be recognized and promoted. Carbohydrate foods provide more than energy alone.
> 12. An optimum diet of at least 55% of total energy from a variety of carbohydrate sources for all ages except for children under the age of two.
> 17. That the bulk of carbohydrate-containing foods consumed be those rich in non-starch polysaccharides and with a low glycemic index. Appropriately processed cereals, vegetables, legumes, and fruits are particularly good food choices.
> 18. That excess energy intake in any form will cause body fat accumulation, so that excess consumption of low fat foods, while not as obesity-producing as excess consumption of high fat products, will lead to obesity if energy expenditure is not increased. Excessive intakes of sugars which compromise micronutrient density should be avoided. There is no evidence of a direct involvement of sucrose, other sugars and starch in the etiology of lifestyle-related diseases.
http://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/nutrientrequiremen...
> Who is saying to limit intake of carbs?
NHS[0]. US Government[1]. Harvard nutritionists[2]. Health Canada[3]. American Diabetes Association[4]. American Heart Association[5]. Need I go on? Who ISN'T saying limit carb intake?
[0] http://www.nhs.uk/Livewell/Goodfood/pages/eatwell-plate.aspx [1] http://www.choosemyplate.gov/ [2] https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/healthy-eating-... [3] http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/fn-an/food-guide-aliment/basics-base/... [4] http://www.diabetes.org/food-and-fitness/food/planning-meals... [5] http://www.heart.org/HEARTORG/HealthyLiving/HealthyEating/Nu...
Your first two sources (NHS & Choose My Plate) are literally government/industry propaganda, so aren't even worth taking seriously.
The Harvard page doesn't say, "carbs are evil". It says, "The type of carbohydrate in the diet is more important than the amount of carbohydrate in the diet, because some sources of carbohydrate—like vegetables (other than potatoes), fruits, whole grains, and beans—are healthier than others."
Where does it say to limit carbohydrates on the other pages? They all say to increase fruit and vegetable consumption, which are almost all "carbs". I'm genuinely puzzled and intrigued by why some people think carbs are so bad, at least in the form of whole plant foods.
I really think the success people have (when they have success) with low-carb dieting is because they are cutting out half of a normal person's intake of calories when they remove carbohydrates.
That's a normal person, too - dunno how it works out when a person is getting carbohydrates through icing-covered donuts and not through, say, whole wheat bread, but it probably isn't good.
p.s. I love donuts.
An insulin index of foods: the insulin demand generated by 1000-kJ portion of common foods
Sugars are a type of carbs. There are many other types of carbohydrates than sugar.
You think the first law of thermodynamics is bullshit?
Repeating it to a fatty as fat-loss advice is a lot like trying to teach someone to swim by continually telling them that water is wet. Absolutely true, but completely unhelpful.
The broken element in a fatty is a complex biochemical feedback system that ultimately does not send "start eating" and "stop eating" signals at appropriate times. The frontal cortex can consciously override it to some extent, by refusing to eat when the "start eating" signal is sent, but this is psychologically very stressful.
One of the great things about low-carb and keto diets is that the body's backup ketone-burning power system is usually not affected by the buggy firmware updates that have been applied to the carb-burning system over the years. Once you are adapted to it, you can consciously control your caloric intake as appropriate for your body-reform plan without getting bombarded by unsatiated appetite signals every waking moment of your day. You can eat a 1200 kcal diet without biting through the padlock on the fridge and gorging yourself on whatever is in there.
A fatty usually isn't fat because they want to be, or because they don't understand thermodynamic balance. They're fat because they have a little shoulder devil constantly whispering in their ear, that just won't shut up, ever.
DEVIL: Hey. I want a doughnut. I want a dozen doughnuts.
FATTY: No.
DEVIL: Get me a doughnut. Do it. Do it now. Gooey jelly doughnut.
FATTY: Those are like 300 Calories. Each. So, no.
DEVIL: Don't care. Ok, compromise. 3 beignets. C'est si bon.
FATTY: No!
DEVIL: Fine. Churros, por favor. Me gusta.
FATTY: No. No fried sugar-dough of any kind. Will french fries work?
DEVIL: Super size! Extra ketchup! Fountain drink!
FATTY: [om nom nom]
DEVIL: Now I want chocolate.
It is, however, the final word.
Thank you for that. Now if you'd like to adopt the assumption that your audience isn't brainless, let's talk about the interesting point that everyone wants to be talking about: that the 'calories out' number varies for the same 'calories in' number across people, diets, and behaviors.
If you can demonstrate everywhere the energy comes from and everywhere it goes and where and how it's used in the body, I imagine there's a nobel prize in it for you. There's still a lot we don't know about where all that energy comes from and goes.
Weight loss...
>And the energy needed to convert complex carbs and protein into glycogen?
Energy out...
>The energy used converting glycogen to ATP?
Energy out...
The body is complex. Energy in - energy out = weight lost its not.
A statement which is true, but brings almost no information, isn't useful.
This would have been much more interesting if one group had low to zero cards, and high fat and high protein.
Such a diet has worked well for me to lose a hundred pounds in 8 months... without any exercise. (and I don't think I'm losing muscle.)
The question is- can you cut carbs and become fat adapted (Which is what I have done, and the results are dramatic, my bodies response to fat is much different than before)... while still building muscle.
This is the next phase for me- the second hundred pounds I want to lose I will do while working out and building muscle.
In my case, this change in diet has become a change in lifestyle. I'm perfectly happy eating steak and BBQ and when I get a hankering for a pizza I make it with almond flour and have very little carbs. It's easy and fun and I'm eating better now (and saving money) while feeling much better.
Like the people in the study I've also recently started experimenting with a shake. It's called "Keto Chow" and you can find the recipe at diy.soylent.com. The nice thing about this is that I put my daily vitamins in the shake and some supplements so I'm getting better nutrition than I was before.
This is taking essentially no effort. Before when I dieted (low fat, high carb standard "diet") it was very difficult because it took a huge amount of willpower.
This takes almost none.
Of course, exercising will take willpower so I'm finding exercises that I like to do. Dancing is my aerobic approach. Not sure what I will do for muscle building yet, though, because lifting is kinda boring. (but I do have dumbbells next to my chair and I pick them up and exercise a bit when I'm thinking.)
I think the whole theory of "calories in < calories out" is BS-- people are different and some people are more sensitive to insulin the others.