6 ms·

The only reason a study like this works is because it takes place in a controlled environment where they can actually starve the rats (or sometimes make genetic

The only reason a study like this works is because it takes place in a controlled environment where they can actually starve the rats (or sometimes make genetic changes that reduce the rats hunger.) Study after study and clinical experience shows that low calorie diets are really hard for humans “in the wild” to maintain in practice. People who are on them constantly complain of hunger (in the mid-20th century these were actually called “semi-starvation” diets), and go back to their previous weight as soon as they are done. That’s why a lot of modern dieting has oriented around low carb / high fat because it means that you get enough calories, but the composition of your macronutrients causes you to lose weight. You don’t have to go as low as Keto to get these effects (that’s 5-10% carbs) and certainly don’t need to entirely cut out fruit, etc. And the results have been observed clinically for 100+ years. This, however, hasn’t prevented academic nutritionist after academic nutritionist from pushing these narratives without any clinical experience. Can you imagine being at least a little hungry for 20 years... the equivalent time span in humans to get the effect reserved here in rats? That’s insane. And, more bluntly, probably not doable. If you’re skeptical of this try dropping your caloric intake by 30% for two weeks and tell me how you feel :)

overgard 7y ago
Agreed, although I also think intermittent fasting is a good way to reduce calories. Its a lot easier to skip a meal than it is to plan out 3 meals a day with like 20% less calories
fearface 7y ago
That’s a bit of BS. You don’t loose weight magically because of macronutrients. Bollocks. You loose weight, because you burn your excess fat. Without restricting your intake, there is no reason for your body to burn your fat reserves and that’s why you won’t loose weight just with low carb and same total calories. (You may loose some water, but not fat). On a ketogenic diet, your body is constantly using fat as fuel, which makes it easier to eat less calories and be less hungry. Also ditching carbs prevents insulin spikes, which impact a lot how you feel and act. I lost +30kg with restricting my calory intake by ~25% (calculated on the energy value of the fat loss per month) and keto helped me to not feel hungry and also skip a meal or two without any impact on my energy level.
- overgard 7y ago
  I don't think you can really dismiss macro-nutrient allocation as a factor. The metabolic pathways for fats and carbohydrates are just way different. For some reason people think that this stuff works like a gas tank, where all that matters is how much fuel you pour in, but the evidence clearly shows that what kind of fuel you pour in is incredibly important. If you think about how incredibly complicated things like nutrients and proteins are, and how insanely complicated the body is, it makes sense. We've evolved so that we can eat almost anything, but that doesn't mean that we should eat anything. The evidence seems to point towards carbohydrates being something that should be eaten when there's a large energy demand and otherwise should be kept low.
  - fearface 7y ago
    Science says you're wrong: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28765272 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28765272 "risk for obesity is primarily determined by total calorie intake" The macro nutrients certainly matter in the details, but not so much in the overall picture. It does mostly work like a gas tank, and the energy content in good is literally measured in [kJ]. Fat has a lot of stored energy, why on the planet, do people believe the body is able to create and store energy out of thin air? And it exactly works the opposite way, the body will use the stored energy in the fat if there's not alternative.
    - dang 7y ago
      > "Science says you're wrong" Please don't use dismissive internet tropes like that on HN. It's of course fine to cite a study, but no single study is "Science". https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - claudiawerner 7y ago
    It really is like a gas tank. Just like everything else in the universe, we are regulated by the laws of physics. You can't move (live) without expending energy, and all energy put in must be transformed or stored. It's thermodynamics.
silviogutierrez 7y ago
To echo other replies, ketogenic and other diets diets with specific protocols (IF) do work, but primarily for behavioral reasons. That is, you’re just not that hungry. Or if you eliminate an entire meal (IF), you ”save” a ton of calories. Yes there are subtleties around actual macronutrient composition and gut flora, but the effect appears to be minimal. Find a keto person eating 5000 calories of bacon per day and I guarantee they’re not losing weight. For what it’s worth: I’m a big fan of keto for cuts.
- calvinmorrison 7y ago
  Keto works well in my opinion because of the way humans self negotiate. It's far easier to have a list of yes/no items. No fries, bread, burgers versus calorie counting every food (even in simplified systems like weight watchers). Sure eat all the bacon you want, but it works to limit eating out and limits unhealthy fried foods and take out. Personal anecdote: my bread tolerance dropped dramatically on a 6 month keto stint. Sandwiches were gross there's just Soo much bread! Yuck! Then I got used to it again but now I stick with mostly rice/beans and have maintained my weight loss which is great
  - tzs 7y ago
    You may be on to something there. I lowered carbs to well below the typical American diet, but nowhere near were the popular low carb diets go. I aimed for at most 40% of calories from carbs, and actually came in at 30-35%. It's perhaps not as easy as a yes/no list, but 40% is very easy to figure out from the nutrition label: max_carbs = calories x 1 g carbs / 10 calories For example, a Sausage McMuffin w/Egg at McD is 480 calories, so as long as it has no more than 48 g of carbs, it's OK. (It has 28 g). Make every item on your meal satisfy the 40% criteria, and the meal as a whole will. Slightly up the effort scale, you can keep a running total of how much you are over or under for the day. Say you are going to get the Sausage McMuffin w/Egg for breakfast. That puts you 20 g of carb ahead. How about adding some McD Donut Sticks to the meal? 280 calories, 33 g of carb. That's 5 g too many carbs for the item to be 40%. But the McMuffin is putting you 20 g ahead, so losing 5 g won't mess up your overall meal. Go ahead and have those Donut Sticks if you like them.
tasogare 7y ago
> If you’re skeptical of this try dropping your caloric intake by 30% for two weeks and tell me how you feel :) I’ve done so for three weeks this month because of money issue (only one real very balanced meal a day, few biscuits on the evening) while also increasing physical exercise (walking between 5 to 7km a day) and I plan to adopt a similar diet for a longer time. The hunger was not very hard the manage and I even felt better than before. Overall I feel I have been more productive than usual. I also have sleep issue but I felt consistently less sleepy during the day than previously when eating a lot.
dehrmann 7y ago
> Can you imagine being at least a little hungry for 20 years But think of how that discomfort will make time pass more slowly. It'll be like adding two years to your life!
krzat 7y ago
Not hard using IF, you could cut 30% and still feel full at least once a day.

overgard 7y ago

Agreed, although I also think intermittent fasting is a good way to reduce calories. Its a lot easier to skip a meal than it is to plan out 3 meals a day with like 20% less calories

fearface 7y ago

That’s a bit of BS. You don’t loose weight magically because of macronutrients. Bollocks. You loose weight, because you burn your excess fat. Without restricting your intake, there is no reason for your body to burn your fat reserves and that’s why you won’t loose weight just with low carb and same total calories. (You may loose some water, but not fat). On a ketogenic diet, your body is constantly using fat as fuel, which makes it easier to eat less calories and be less hungry. Also ditching carbs prevents insulin spikes, which impact a lot how you feel and act. I lost +30kg with restricting my calory intake by ~25% (calculated on the energy value of the fat loss per month) and keto helped me to not feel hungry and also skip a meal or two without any impact on my energy level.

overgard 7y ago
I don't think you can really dismiss macro-nutrient allocation as a factor. The metabolic pathways for fats and carbohydrates are just way different. For some reason people think that this stuff works like a gas tank, where all that matters is how much fuel you pour in, but the evidence clearly shows that what kind of fuel you pour in is incredibly important. If you think about how incredibly complicated things like nutrients and proteins are, and how insanely complicated the body is, it makes sense. We've evolved so that we can eat almost anything, but that doesn't mean that we should eat anything. The evidence seems to point towards carbohydrates being something that should be eaten when there's a large energy demand and otherwise should be kept low.
- fearface 7y ago
  Science says you're wrong: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28765272 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28765272 "risk for obesity is primarily determined by total calorie intake" The macro nutrients certainly matter in the details, but not so much in the overall picture. It does mostly work like a gas tank, and the energy content in good is literally measured in [kJ]. Fat has a lot of stored energy, why on the planet, do people believe the body is able to create and store energy out of thin air? And it exactly works the opposite way, the body will use the stored energy in the fat if there's not alternative.
  - dang 7y ago
    > "Science says you're wrong" Please don't use dismissive internet tropes like that on HN. It's of course fine to cite a study, but no single study is "Science". https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- claudiawerner 7y ago
  It really is like a gas tank. Just like everything else in the universe, we are regulated by the laws of physics. You can't move (live) without expending energy, and all energy put in must be transformed or stored. It's thermodynamics.

silviogutierrez 7y ago

To echo other replies, ketogenic and other diets diets with specific protocols (IF) do work, but primarily for behavioral reasons. That is, you’re just not that hungry. Or if you eliminate an entire meal (IF), you ”save” a ton of calories. Yes there are subtleties around actual macronutrient composition and gut flora, but the effect appears to be minimal. Find a keto person eating 5000 calories of bacon per day and I guarantee they’re not losing weight. For what it’s worth: I’m a big fan of keto for cuts.

calvinmorrison 7y ago
Keto works well in my opinion because of the way humans self negotiate. It's far easier to have a list of yes/no items. No fries, bread, burgers versus calorie counting every food (even in simplified systems like weight watchers). Sure eat all the bacon you want, but it works to limit eating out and limits unhealthy fried foods and take out. Personal anecdote: my bread tolerance dropped dramatically on a 6 month keto stint. Sandwiches were gross there's just Soo much bread! Yuck! Then I got used to it again but now I stick with mostly rice/beans and have maintained my weight loss which is great
- tzs 7y ago
  You may be on to something there. I lowered carbs to well below the typical American diet, but nowhere near were the popular low carb diets go. I aimed for at most 40% of calories from carbs, and actually came in at 30-35%. It's perhaps not as easy as a yes/no list, but 40% is very easy to figure out from the nutrition label: max_carbs = calories x 1 g carbs / 10 calories For example, a Sausage McMuffin w/Egg at McD is 480 calories, so as long as it has no more than 48 g of carbs, it's OK. (It has 28 g). Make every item on your meal satisfy the 40% criteria, and the meal as a whole will. Slightly up the effort scale, you can keep a running total of how much you are over or under for the day. Say you are going to get the Sausage McMuffin w/Egg for breakfast. That puts you 20 g of carb ahead. How about adding some McD Donut Sticks to the meal? 280 calories, 33 g of carb. That's 5 g too many carbs for the item to be 40%. But the McMuffin is putting you 20 g ahead, so losing 5 g won't mess up your overall meal. Go ahead and have those Donut Sticks if you like them.

tasogare 7y ago

> If you’re skeptical of this try dropping your caloric intake by 30% for two weeks and tell me how you feel :) I’ve done so for three weeks this month because of money issue (only one real very balanced meal a day, few biscuits on the evening) while also increasing physical exercise (walking between 5 to 7km a day) and I plan to adopt a similar diet for a longer time. The hunger was not very hard the manage and I even felt better than before. Overall I feel I have been more productive than usual. I also have sleep issue but I felt consistently less sleepy during the day than previously when eating a lot.

dehrmann 7y ago

> Can you imagine being at least a little hungry for 20 years But think of how that discomfort will make time pass more slowly. It'll be like adding two years to your life!

krzat 7y ago

Not hard using IF, you could cut 30% and still feel full at least once a day.