Thorsten Schier said:"Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" schrieb:
Quoted message said:
Thorsten Schier said:"Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" schrieb:
>
> Thorsten Schier wrote:
>
> > As far as I know, there are no studies which really proof that
> > carbohydrates cause obesity. But there are no studies either
which
> > proof
> > otherwise.
> >
>
> Actually there are studies that prove that weight loss is
achievable
> with caloric reduction independent of the macronutrient
composition of
> the food being ingested.
Well, yes. Weight loss is also achievable with caloric restriction
independent of the weight of the food.
If the kinds of food is held invariant, caloric restriction is weight
restriction.
If, yes. But if you replace bread or butter with broccoli, you can
achieve a reduction in calories without a reduction in weight.
For many folks, not a lasting reduction.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:
The question is, to what extend patients can follow such a diet in
the
long run and how healthy that is.
Why would eating less be unhealthy if someone is eating excessive
amounts?
Restricting the amount of food when someone is eating all the wrong
things is surely better than overeating these things.
It's also better if someone is overeating the *right* things.
Quoted message said:However they might
be better of, if they just ate healthier food (of course we would have
to discuss what those healthier foods are).
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:
Or when it comes to the causes of obesity:
Overeating.
Quoted message said:What causes people to overeat
in the first place?
It is an innate tendency.
The how do you explain that most people are more or less normal weight
until some time in life when they begin to gain weight?
Increasing food availability.
Quoted message said:Why are adults
more prone to obesity than children?
They've stopped growing lengthwise. They also have more money (ie more access to food).
Quoted message said:Perhaps because adults have begun
to develop insulin resistance?
Obesity leads to insulin resistance in the susceptible. Not the other way around.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:
> This is consistent with the observation that obesity in not
rampant in
> parts of world where the majority of the world's population is
eating
> proportionately higher amounts of carbs (ie Rice).
Rice is better than potatoes and white bread because it has a lower
glycemic index.
Actually, it has the same glycemic index.
According to this source, this isn't true, parboiled rice is listed with
68, white bread is listed with 100, boiled or mashed potatoes with 104
and french fries even with 107:
http://www.diabetes.ca/Section_About/glycemic.asp
The steamed white rice that is the common staple in Asia is *not* parboiled rice. It is likely as digestible
as instant rice.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:And of course it is much better than sugar, because it contains no
fructose and fructose is known to cause insulin resistance.
Being overweight (plus inherent susceptibility) causes insulin
resistance.
Feeding rats a diet high in fructose makes them insulin resistant in a
matter of weeks. This is one of the standard methods to produce rats
with diabetes.
Does this really contradict what I just wrote?
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:As long as
your not insulin resistant, you can probably get away with consuming
considerable amounts of carbs.
Until you become obese causing insulin resistance if you are
predisposed to it.
People don't usually become obese, if they are not insulin resistant.
Anyone can overeat to obesity.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:
> >
> > So scientists have to make up their mind on less solid evidence.
>
> Most scientists already *know* that carbohydrates do not cause
> obesity.
They *think* that they know.
They simply know.
Quoted message said:That is not necessarily the same.
Prisoners fed prison-fare of only bread and water do not become obese.
I assume prisoners are usually fed less than two pounds of bread per day
They are.
Quoted message said:...
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:
> > You
> > believe that carbohydrates are innocent, other people believe
> > otherwise.
> >
>
> Go ahead and cite a reference where a credentialed scientist
states
> the latter.
"Carbohydrates with high glycemic indexes and high glycemic loads
produce substantial increases in blood glucose and insulin levels
after
ingestion. Within a few hours after their consumption, blood sugar
levels begin to decline rapidly due to an exaggerated increase in
insulin secretion. A profound state of hunger is created. The
continued
intake of high-glycemic load meals is associated with an increased
risk
of chronic diseases such as obesity, cardiovascular disease, and
diabetes. "
Low-glycemic-load diets: impact on obesity and chronic diseases.
Bell SJ, Sears B.
Ok, you cite a scientist(s) stating that high-glycemic load meals may
increase risk for obesity.
Now cite one that says carbohydrates *causes* obesity.
Two points to be made here:
(1) Cause is not synonymous with risk.
(2) Carbohydrates is not synonymous with high-glycemic load meals.
Most carbohydrates in our nutrition come in form of high-glycemic load
meals.
Of course there is nothing wrong with the carbohydrates in, say,
broccoli. I never claimed that all carbohydrates were equally dangerous.
You still have not addressed the above points.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:
Sears Labs, 222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 500, Danvers, Massachusetts
01923,
USA. [email hidden]
(http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=12940416&dopt=Abstract)
> >
> > > >
> > > > > > However
> > > > > > that may be, cutting out most carbs will cause a vast
> > majority
> > > > of obese
> > > > > > people to lose weight.
> > > > >
> > > > > Cutting out anything will cause weight loss.
> > > >
> > > > But if you are insulinresistent, and a vast majority of
obese
> > > > persons
> > > > are, cutting out fat and protein leaves you hungry most of
the
> > time
> > >
> > > Cutting out anything is going to cause some hunger.
> > Hyperketonemia to
> > > suppress hunger is not a good thing.
> >
> > I don't think so.
> >
>
> Are you a physician?
No.
Then you don't really understand what hyperketonemia is, now do you?
I wonder if you do.
I do.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:However, I have a university diploma in biology and so I think I am
able to read and understand medical articles and abstracts.
Then by all means read about hyperketonemia.
Would suggest the same to you.
I have.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:
So far, no one has been able to show me evidence that ketosis
induced by
a low-carb diet might be harmful.
See my earlier posts on the topic of hyperketonemia.
Those were hardly convincing. See the replys to these posts by Matti
Narkia.
Matti has skirted the issue by claiming hyperketonemia is irrelevant. Now, that is hardly convincing.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:
> >
> > > >
> > > > because it
> > > > produces reactive hypoglycaemias.
> > >
> > > Hypoglycemia in insulin-resistant individuals come largely
from
> > > overconsumption of simple sugars and not from cutting out
either
> > fat
> > > or protein.
> >
> > You are aware of the fact that for example most kinds of bread
raise
> > the
> > blood sugar as much and as quickly as does sucrose, if not more
so?
> >
>
> Not a fact to be aware of.
>
> Anyone who has taken a biochemistry course can explain this to
you.
Then go ahead.
The gut can not directly absorb long polymers of glucose. It can
directly absorb many mono and disaccharides.
Can you give source that provides evidence that sucrose is directly
absorbed in larger quantities?
Certainly, here you go:
http://tinyurl.com/rtuv
Quoted message said:
However that may be, you will be aware of the fact that sucrose is
composed of glucose and fructose and that fructose does not raise the
blood sugar nearly as much or as quickly as does glucose.
And you claimed earlier that fructose can cause diabetes in rats.
Quoted message said:Since starch
only contains glucose, the time to break it down is more than
compensated by the fact, that it contains twice the amount of glucose
than does sucrose.
So?
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:
> >
> >
> > > > Besides you have a high level of
> > > > insulin in your blood which tends to prevent wheight loss.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Insulin resistance leading to need for elevated levels of
insulin
> >
> > > happen *after* weight gain and not before.
> >
> > Your opinion.
>
> My clinical experience plus what is currently known about
Metabolic
> Syndrome (MetS). I have never seen a thin type 2 diabetic.
>
> Nor have I ever seen a thin person with MetS.
Well, Eades and Eades (Protein Power) have.
Are they physicians?
Yes, they are. And you don't have to take my word for it. Please fell
free to contact them at their office: 11205 Anderson Road, Suite 130,
Little Rock, AR 72212. Michael R Eades, M. D. and Mary Dan Eades, M. D.
(They give this information in their book).
Interesting. No Eades in AR according to the AMA database.
So in which state are they licensed to practice medicine?
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:
> > It remains to be seen wether it is based on facts. Surely
> > you can point to a study back up your thesis?
> >
>
> Simply google "Metabolic Syndrome" and "Syndrome X" for literally
> hundreds of references.
Should be easy for you then to cite just one study that supports
your
position.
I have in the past. Use Google.
So you can't. Thougth so.
Use google.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:
> >
> > For another opinion:
> >
> > "It is concluded that hyperinsulinemia is a pathological driving
> > force
> > in producing both incipient obesity by overstimulating white
adipose
> >
> > tissue and liver metabolic activity, and concomitantly producing
> > incipient muscle insulin resistance."
> >
> > Hyperinsulinemia and its Impact on Obesity and Insulin
Resistance
> > Reference:
> > Cusin, I., Rohner-Jeanrenaud, F., Terrettaz, J., et al.,
> > "Hyperinsulinemia and its Impact on Obesity and Insulin
Resistance,"
> >
> > International Journal of Obesity and Related Metabolic
Disorders,
> > 16(Suppl 4), 1992, pages S1-S11.
> >
> > (http://atkins.com/Archive/2002/1/11-61705.html)
> >
>
> Interesting article where the investigators implanted insulin
pumps in
> otherwise healthy rates and overfed these animals to prevent
> hypoglycemia. These animals became overweight (because they were
> overfed).
>
> Imho, the authors are erroneous in their conclusion because they
could
> not control for weight gain.
According to the abstract the elevated insulin caused the larger
food
intake.
This is where your limited knowledge of physiology and biochemistry
fails you.
Limited though my knowledge of phyiology and biochemistry doubtless is,
I begin to suspect that it might be greater than yours.
See above.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:They don't say anything about offering them more food than the
control group or about force-feeding the rats. And they say that the
rats _got_ hypoglycemia. So this does not sound as if they overfed
them
in order to prevent this.
Rat die from hypoglycemia. That the rats survived to be studied
proves they were fed more.
"Hyperinsulinemia produced by prior insulin treatment (i.e. prior
insulinization of the normal rats) resulted in a well tolerated
hypoglycemia, increased food intake and body weight gain."
Sounds like you just affirmed the rats got more food and consequently gained weight.
Quoted message said:
So unless you want to suggest that the authors are lying, your statement
that rats die from hypoglycemia must be erroneous.
See above.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:> >
> > > >
> > > > > Problem is that research
> > > > > studies indicate that such "dieting" has dismal long-term
> > success
> > > > rates..
> > > >
> > > > Could you point to such a study?
> > >
> > > http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/289/14/1792?etoc
> >
> > What has this to do with low-carb diets?
>
> It has to do with dieting in general. Reread the discussion.
Well, small wonder they failed, if they used a low-fat diet. This
proves
nothing about the efficacy of low-carb dieting.
They don't specify LC or otherwise.
So it might well have worked, if they had used a low-carb approach.
They might have.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:It is my understanding that physicians frequently prescribe
diuretics in
order to lower blood pressure.
Not to everybody.
But to those who suffer from water retension, I believe.
Again, not to everybody.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:And now you claim diuresis to be a bad
thing.
For folks who don't need it. Yes.
Quoted message said:That there might be medical conditions that make diuresis
dangerous is another question.
We don't put diuretics in drinking water now do we?
Where I live, they don't even put vitamin C into the water. That's not
to say that vitamin C is unhealthy.
We do put flouride.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:Most of us don't have failing kidneys,
however.
Majority rules, eh?
I believe in Democracy :-)
Ok, so for _some_ people, severe restriction of carbohydrates might pose
them at some risks.
Glad you finally agree.
--
Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Board-Certified Cardiologist
http://www.heartmdphd.com/
