Study Zeroes In on Calories, Not Diet, for Loss

[archerships]

Study Zeroes In on Calories, Not Diet, for Loss

“…For people who are trying to lose weight, it does not matter if they are counting carbohydrates, protein or fat. All that matters is that they are counting something.

That is the finding of the largest-ever controlled study of weight-loss methods published on Wednesday in The New England Journal of Medicine. More than 800 overweight adults in Boston and Baton Rouge, La., were assigned to one of four diets that reduced calories through different combinations of fat, carbohydrates and protein. Each plan cut about 750 calories from a participant’s normal diet, but no one ate fewer than 1,200 calories a day.

While the diets were not named, the eating plans were all loosely based on the principles of popular diets like Atkins, which emphasizes low carbohydrates; Dean Ornish, which is low-fat; or the Mediterranean diet, with less animal protein. All participants also received group or individual counseling.

After two years, every diet group had lost — and regained — about the same amount of weight regardless of what diet had been assigned. Participants lost an average of 13 pounds at six months and had maintained about 9 pounds of weight loss and a two-inch drop in waist size after two years. While the average weight loss was modest, about 15 percent of dieters lost more than 10 percent of their weight by the end of the study. Still, after about a year many returned to at least some of their usual eating habits.

The lesson, researchers say, is that people lose weight if they lower calories, but it does not matter how.”

Note, however, that the low carb diet may not have been, in fact, low-carb.

Original: craschworks - comments

Comments

[tinymammoth.livejournal.com]

The comments say that the so-called low-carb diet was 35% carbs, which is way more than most low-carb advocates would allow.

I thought that was sneaky of them, to present this study as though they were testing the low-carb diet without actually testing the low-carb diet.

[crasch.livejournal.com]

Thanks for the heads up!

[zarex.livejournal.com]

Great catch!

[ersigh.livejournal.com]

This seems obvious to me.

I have read some studies that have found that which calories you cut out does matter, depending on the person. Some people simply respond differently to a low carb diet versus a low fat diet, etc. And there were the people who didn't respond at all, to diet or exercise. The particular study I'm thinking of, the people actually went to a camp for weight loss so the environment was more controlled and included both diet and exercise.

I think for the average person, cutting calories but being smart about which ones is still the best way to go. Fad diets... and going to extremes doesn't do anything except set a person up for failure.

[vyus.livejournal.com]

this is what i think, too... for the average, mildly overweight person, composition probably doesn't matter as much. and some people do respond differently than others.

for an athlete or someone trying to move into better-than-avg body composition, what type of diet might matter more, too.

[ersigh.livejournal.com]

Yeah, when I was working out a lot, I did a lot of reading on what would give me the best energy results pre-track day, and there did seem to be a difference in diet depending on what the goal was.

I have a metabolic issue so I can't lose weight by diet and/or exercise. I've always worked to maintained a healthy weight to avoid facing the mountain known as "losing weight".

I know a lot of people were freaked about the NY law of it being required that caloric value for all foods sold being placed where it could easily be seen (*ahem* Starbucks) but I think it's a fantastic idea. I don't think that the average person really understands how much they're eating... or they dismiss the calories in say, the average mocha (300+), because it's in fluid form.

[daphnep.livejournal.com]

Hasn't anyone reading diet sources over the last couple of decades figured this out by now? The more important question seems to be, "can a person eat this way for the rest of their life?"

And that's going to vary person by person, eating plan by eating plan, depending on body, tastes, lifestyle, etc.

[fishsupreme]

I don't really see why "it turns out that if you eat less, you lose weight" should be a surprising or controversial finding.

And 140g of carbohydrates per day is "low carb" compared to the average modern American diet, but still high by evolutionary/paleontological standards and extremely high compared to something like Atkins.