Active Low-Carber Forums
Atkins diet and low carb discussion provided free for information only, not as medical advice.
Home Plans Tips Recipes Tools Stories Studies Products
Active Low-Carber Forums
A sugar-free zone


Welcome to the Active Low-Carber Forums.
Support for Atkins diet, Protein Power, Neanderthin (Paleo Diet), CAD/CALP, Dr. Bernstein Diabetes Solution and any other healthy low-carb diet or plan, all are welcome in our lowcarb community. Forget starvation and fad diets -- join the healthy eating crowd! You may register by clicking here, it's free!

Go Back   Active Low-Carber Forums > Main Low-Carb Diets Forums & Support > Low-Carb Studies & Research / Media Watch > LC Research/Media
User Name
Password
FAQ Members Calendar Search Gallery My P.L.A.N. Survey


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   ^
Old Mon, Sep-02-24, 13:33
Demi's Avatar
Demi Demi is offline
Posts: 27,291
 
Plan: Muscle Centric
Stats: 238/152/160 Female 5'10"
BF:
Progress: 110%
Location: UK
Default TWO Competing Theories of Why We Get Fat: A Breakthrough

From Gary Taubes, Unsettled Science:

Quote:
TWO Competing Theories of Why We Get Fat: A Breakthrough

Is it carbs or the calories that make us fat? The debate comes to top journal, Nature Metabolism


Last week, the journal Nature Metabolism published the latest chapter in the ongoing debate about why we get fat. The article, on which I was a co-author along with 15 influential obesity researchers, was titled “On the pathogenesis of obesity: causal models and missing pieces of the puzzle.”

It is the first article of its kind — revolutionary, in its way — but we hope not the last.


Quote:
On the pathogenesis of obesity: causal models and missing pieces of the puzzle

Application of the physical laws of energy and mass conservation at thewhole-body level is not necessarily informative about causal mechanismsof weight gain and the development of obesity. The energy balance model(EBM) and the carbohydrate–insulin model (CIM) are two plausible theories,among several others, attempting to explain why obesity develops withinan overall common physiological framework of regulation of human energymetabolism. These models have been used to explain the pathogenesis ofobesity in individuals as well as the dramatic increases in the prevalence ofobesity worldwide over the past half century. Here, we summarize outcomesof a recent workshop in Copenhagen that brought together obesity expertsfrom around the world to discuss causal models of obesity pathogenesis.These discussions helped to operationally define commonly used terms;delineate the structure of each model, particularly focussing on areas ofoverlap and divergence; challenge ideas about the importance of purportedcausal factors for weight gain; and brainstorm on the key scientific questionsthat need to be answered. We hope that more experimental research innutrition and other related fields, and more testing of the models andtheir predictions will pave the way and provide more answers about thepathogenesis of obesity than those currently available.
Read in full here.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2   ^
Old Mon, Sep-02-24, 18:48
Calianna's Avatar
Calianna Calianna is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 2,176
 
Plan: Atkins-ish (hypoglycemia)
Stats: 000/000/000 Female 63
BF:
Progress: 50%
Default

It's about time they're starting to work together to figure out the real reasons why people gain weight!

My guess is that it's a combination of too many calories and too many carbs - but that it's the too many carbs driving the hunger for too many calories.

If they ever get the funding to study this the way they want (5-20 YEARS), I expect they'll eventually realize exactly what we've seen on here: that different people have different carb tolerances for when the undeniable hunger kicks in driving the desire for more and more carbs.

For one person it might be 20 carbs/day, another person it might be 150 carbs/day, while some may really be able to eat the recommended 300 carbs/day without it spiking ravenous hunger. I suspect they'll find very few are able to eat that way for decades without metabolic problems though - and those few only because they have such fast metabolisms that they can burn through all the excess blood sugar before their blood sugar drops enough to make them hungry again.
Reply With Quote
  #3   ^
Old Tue, Sep-03-24, 02:50
JEY100's Avatar
JEY100 JEY100 is online now
Posts: 13,745
 
Plan: P:E/DDF
Stats: 225/150/169 Female 5' 9"
BF:45%/28%/25%
Progress: 134%
Location: NC
Default

Why can’t it be both?

Haven’t we beaten this dead horse enough by now? I thought 2021 was end of dietary dogma. Carbs, insulin, and obesity: Is the carbohydrate-insulin model dead or alive?

https://www.dietdoctor.com/carbs-in...l-dead-or-alive

The CIM is proved wrong everyday by the "black swans" walking around under 15% body fat who do eat a significant percentage of carbs in their diet. ..almost every endurance athlete, body builder and most everyone who follows a dietary pattern that increases satiety and decreases caloric intake. There are more people who successfully manage their metabolic health and weight through some version of energy balance than carb restriction.

Quote:
So what can we make of all the controversy?

Insulin plays a role in weight gain and weight loss, but it may not be the same role in both situations.

Chronic hyperinsulinemia likely plays a larger role in obesity than short-term post-meal insulin rises.

CIM does not describe the only manner in which we gain and lose weight and is not the only mechanism by which low-carb diets work.

In addition to lowering insulin, low-carb diets help with healthy weight loss by:

Reducing highly processed and high- sugar foods that may cause cravings and stimulate overeating

Naturally reducing caloric intake through improved satiety

Increasing protein intake

Allowing only high-quality, high-fiber carbs

Other dietary patterns that achieve these same goals will likely also result in sustainable weight loss.

Is CIM dead or alive?

Does it matter?

Last edited by JEY100 : Tue, Sep-03-24 at 08:48.
Reply With Quote
  #4   ^
Old Tue, Sep-03-24, 03:36
JEY100's Avatar
JEY100 JEY100 is online now
Posts: 13,745
 
Plan: P:E/DDF
Stats: 225/150/169 Female 5' 9"
BF:45%/28%/25%
Progress: 134%
Location: NC
Default

No, it doesn’t matter to me because the "several other theories" mentioned work best for me, they are combination theories:
Comparing Theories: Carb-Insulin Model and Protein Leverage Hypothesis in Obesity
https://optimisingnutrition.com/car...otein-leverage/
Your Personal Fat Threshold & High Insulin Levels
https://optimisingnutrition.com/personal-fat-threshold/
These theories are not as simplistic as the CIM, but then our metabolisms are more complicated than "a unifocal reduce carbs" approach. As Calianna wrote, Find the carb level that works best for you, but increasing fiber and lowering fat often has be part of the equation to reach an ideal weight longer term. Adding super high fat is adding super high calories. As Dr Atkins and Westman wrote…calories matter.

Last edited by JEY100 : Tue, Sep-03-24 at 09:34.
Reply With Quote
  #5   ^
Old Wed, Sep-04-24, 15:37
Calianna's Avatar
Calianna Calianna is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 2,176
 
Plan: Atkins-ish (hypoglycemia)
Stats: 000/000/000 Female 63
BF:
Progress: 50%
Default

I hope the biggest conclusion that will come of this line of research is the recognition that what carb/fat/protein proportions works for one individual does not necessarily work for everyone.

In fact, the exact proportions of carbs/fats/proteins that works for one person may not work for anyone else.

On person can feel completely energized by a high carb/moderately low to low fat diet.

Some of us feel the exact opposite of energized on that kind of diet: sluggish, brain fog, and constantly hungry.

It can take a while to figure out what proportions of carbs/fats/proteins works best for YOU as an individual, and it may not be the same as anyone else.
Reply With Quote
  #6   ^
Old Thu, Sep-05-24, 04:58
WereBear's Avatar
WereBear WereBear is online now
Senior Member
Posts: 14,960
 
Plan: Carnivore & LowOx
Stats: 220/130/150 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 129%
Location: USA
Default

Even calories never worked they told me they do. I'd white-knuckle on 1200 for up to 3 months, but it was impossible to stick to when I didn't lose anything but water weight.

But I was always choosing carbs. So I didn't lose. Had I eaten 1200 calories of meat, seafood, and fat, it would have worked like a charm.
Reply With Quote
  #7   ^
Old Thu, Sep-05-24, 06:21
JEY100's Avatar
JEY100 JEY100 is online now
Posts: 13,745
 
Plan: P:E/DDF
Stats: 225/150/169 Female 5' 9"
BF:45%/28%/25%
Progress: 134%
Location: NC
Default

Food choice makes all the difference to Satiety. I can be completely satisfied with 1000 calories of meat, seafood, veggies and yogurt. While on 1200 calories of WW foods, starve and then give up after 2 weeks.
And no surprise if I eat 200 fewer calories each day, I will slowly, lose down to a healthy goal weight …and miracles..stay there..

Both of these plans can work, on their own, or even better, together …if you focus on Nutrition.

Last edited by JEY100 : Fri, Sep-06-24 at 04:32.
Reply With Quote
  #8   ^
Old Sat, Sep-07-24, 02:20
JEY100's Avatar
JEY100 JEY100 is online now
Posts: 13,745
 
Plan: P:E/DDF
Stats: 225/150/169 Female 5' 9"
BF:45%/28%/25%
Progress: 134%
Location: NC
Default

Don Layman:
Quote:
I see no reason this discussion has to be either EBM or CIM. I think the data supports EBM must be true and that the CIM helps explain the metabolic dysregulation
Gabrielle Lyon:
Quote:
Energy Balance Model vs. Carbohydrate-Insulin Model — what really drives obesity? A global panel of experts recently gathered to debate the root causes of weight gain and obesity. In speaking with my longtime mentor ~donlayman, it is probably both - addressing obesity requires not only managing caloric intake but also considering the specific metabolic impacts of different foods.

The Ability to Hold Two Opposed Ideas in Mind at the Same Time

Last edited by JEY100 : Sat, Sep-07-24 at 05:16.
Reply With Quote
  #9   ^
Old Sat, Sep-07-24, 06:44
Calianna's Avatar
Calianna Calianna is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 2,176
 
Plan: Atkins-ish (hypoglycemia)
Stats: 000/000/000 Female 63
BF:
Progress: 50%
Default

I think many of us have known this for quite some time.

I mean I know personally what happens when I eat a high carb diet: I completely lose control and can't stop eating, because I'm constantly hungry.

But eating a low carb diet means I'm not desperately hungry every waking moment, and in fact I'm hungry a lot less often than people around me on a "normal" diet.

This combined with the recent startling revelation (sarcasm intended) that it's possible to get a nutritious, balanced diet on low carb, maybe The Powers That Be will finally acknowledge that LC is a perfectly sustainable way of eating.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:26.


Copyright © 2000-2024 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.