The FastDay Forum

[carorees]

This might be explained by the study that showed that some people lose more weight on a low carb diet while others lose better on a low fat diet. The people who lost best on low carb were those with insulin resistance. The difference between the two diets was large with some people doubling their weight loss when switching to the alternate diet.

See here: viewtopic.php?f=10&t=1839

This might be explained by the study that showed that some people lose more weight on a low carb diet while others lose better on a low fat diet.

In summary, one paper was titled "A Low-Glycemic Load Diet Facilitates Greater Weight Loss in Overweight Adults With High Insulin Secretion but Not in Overweight Adults With Low Insulin Secretion in the CALERIE Trial", showing that a lower glycemic load diet suited people who secrete more insulin in response to a glucose test. Low GL was still 40% carbs.


The second paper grouped women into "insulin resistant" (high levels of fasting insulin) and "insulin sensitive" (low levels of insulin) and found the best weight loss combinations to be Insulin resistant people on LC/HF (40% carbs, 40% fat) and Insulin sensitive people on HC/LF (60 / 20).

So neither were low carb diets in the usual use of the term, so "reduced carb" is perhaps an appropriate description.

Would the GI of the carbs have any bearing Phil? As I can't eat wheat or gluten my carbs would be well up the GI scale. It only took a couple of weeks to spoil everything and not just my weight loss. My energy levels plummetted, my fasting BG was well up and yet during the day it was dropping down to hypo levels.

High GI is seldom helpful to anything, if you have a high insulin response to glucose (which the hypo thing suggests) then a low GL diet was found to give better weight loss than high GL in http://care.diabetesjournals.org/conten ... /2939.long

The "Low GL" version was 40% carbs with an estimated GI of 53 and GL of 45 g/1,000 kcals. The "High GL" diet was 60% carbs with an estimated daily average Glycemic Index (GI) of 86 (!) and a glycemic load (GL) of 116 g/1,000 kcal

Thanks Phil. The hypo was the first I've had for ages. When I was first told I was pre diabetic I worked hard to sort it myself as my sugars were always OK during the day. I could go to bed with a bg of 5.5 and wake up with it at 7.8! I went down the usual NHS trail of high carb/low fat and it was getting worse. I joined the diabetes.co.uk forum and it was the saving of me as I followed their advice of LC/HF and it just went steadily down. Just hoping I can manage to continue to lose weight on this more moderate carb level as it gives a wider range of choices.

Right now its fast dayu and its meal time so I'm off WooooHoooo FOOOD!!!!

This might be explained by the study that showed that some people lose more weight on a low carb diet while others lose better on a low fat diet.

...the best weight loss combinations to be Insulin resistant people on LC/HF (40% carbs, 40% fat) and Insulin sensitive people on HC/LF (60 / 20).

So what do we think is happening here? The difference is either accounted for by compliance (but hopefully the study eliminated that or adjusted for it) or by changes in metabolism.

I think maybe people who are insulin sensitive might tend to have a metabolism which reacts to high carb (perhaps even more to high GI) with a raised metabolism. I think I am 'hot' on heavy feeding days ( = raised metabolism) and 'cold' on fast days (= lowered metabolism). I can't from personal experience confirm the carb link but heavy feeding in my case usually involves a fair share of carbs!

And I think this business of different RMRs and maybe also of the daily variability of RMR might explain why some are 'good losers' and others are 'bad losers' - the good losers have higher and/or more variable metabolisms than the bad losers who get stuck with a relatively lower metabolic rate.

5:2 might work particularly well for the good losers because unlike CR their metabolism doesn't get permanently depressed but recovers on the feed days. The bad losers don't get this advantage, so their average metabolic rate stays lower and their weight loss is correspondingly reduced.

So what do we think is happening here? The difference is either accounted for by compliance (but hopefully the study eliminated that or adjusted for it) or by changes in metabolism.

In one study where the weight loss was higher in the favourable combinations the authors stated that "These differences could not be explained by changes in resting metabolic rate, activity, or intake." The energy value of the additional loss could not be accounted for, whereas the less favourable combinations matched expectations.

They didn't use DLW or have the subjects in a metabolic chamber so the activity was self reported.

Another complication is that the IR / LC people had about the same insulin level at the end as the IS people started with, so their insulin resistance had gone away. Would that imply they should switch to the opposite diet ?

Edit to add - http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-lo ... rview.html says "Finally, I should mention that some research has found that insulin resistant individuals may have an impaired TEF response to eating, with a rough 50% reduction occurring. This could conceivably become significant. For example, on a 3000 cal/day diet, the estimated TEF would be 300 calories. Cut that in half and you only get a 150 cal/day increase in energy expenditure via TEF"

The energy value of the additional loss could not be accounted for

Thanks Phil. So it really was magic!

Ruling that out for the moment, and ruling out experimental error, I still can't see what is left as an explanation except a change in metabolism. Maybe the RMR as measured didn't explain the change but this might be because RMR didn't change (at least at the time when it was measured) but average MR had changed. What other explanation is there?

It's logical isn't it that higher carbs (especially if they included some high GI) would raise (or facilitate the raising of) metabolic rate - isn't that why runners consume glucose during a race?

Edit: if Phil can edit his post after mine was written, I can edit mine too! Thanks for the link Phil, I found the section headed 'Adaptive Component' particularly helpful. Sort of agreed with me, I think, about the spendthrift and thrifty phenotypes. The spendthrifts seem to have the best time of it, a bit like real life maybe?

I feel i need to add my two penneth worth as i was the person who started the SCENIC ROUTE thread....

I rarely eat carbs

I have raspberries or strawberries for breakie along with greek yogurt

I have soup for lunch with two wholegrain ryvitas

I have usually have some sort of meat and lots of veg with either sweet potatoes or butter nut squash, or have wholegrain brown rice or wholewheat pasta (but all limited)

Rarely have a jacket potato or bread and if i do partake in bread then its always wholemeal

Personally if i cut out all carbs my life would be terribly dull and miserable!

I eat carbs, just not often or very much in the evening. I couldn't cut them out completely either, which is why I like this diet. But I just couldn't eat a big meal in the evening.

I have lost weight each month and am within the "average weight loss" range. I hardly ever eat pasta or rice and perhaps have potatoes once a week. I virtually never eat bread. That's a disgrace because I make fabulous bread for everyone, but I'm wheat intolerant so can't eat the stuff

I have been losing at the rate of 1.27lb a week. I do think it's because I've never really been a big lover of carbs. Thank god! Reading everyone else's difficulties with them I'm glad

Very low carber here, it's the only way I can lose weight and keep it off. I'm a carb/sugar addict and when I indulge in them the compulsion for more is impossible to control I feel so much better without them though, physically and mentally, much more energy, clearer mind, happier in myself and better control of my appetite!

I'm on the scenic route. Having dabbled with Atkins in the past and a year on SW, I know that low carb suits me better otherwise I will overeat. Breakfast therefore generally consists of boiled egg, cottage cheese and some lean ham. Lunch will routinely be a bowl of soup (no bread) or a tuna salad. Evening meal will be meat/ veg/ potatoes or rice. On a Friday and Saturday, we dine out (rarely choosing desserts) but wouldn't eat much beforehand. I gave up sugar in coffee about 30 years ago and don't do sugary drinks or fruit juices. Cakes are an occasional indulgence and my one Easter egg received is still sitting there untouched. Please don't tell me I'm probably not eating enough and yes I've had my thyroid checked. I'd be absolutely ecstatic if Caroline's questionnaire got to the root cause, but really I don't see any different pattern in 5:2 versus other weight loss regimes. The bottom line is that some people, whether they be overweight to begin with or not, lose weight faster than others.

[carorees]

Presumably the people with high insulin levels are in a situation where the insulin prevents release of fats from stores (which it does) so they are unable to shift the fat so easily (presumably they run their glycogen stores down lower than when they are on a lower carb diet).

It's logical isn't it that higher carbs (especially if they included some high GI) would raise (or facilitate the raising of) metabolic rate - isn't that why runners consume glucose during a race?

No, that's because they believe they're going to run out of glycogen reserves and are therefore adding carbs to compensate for their expenditure.

It is going to be something above the RMR that is responsible, but unless they use a technique to measure total energy expenditure it'll go down as an experimental oddity. They did note that longer trials did not show the same effect.

Presumably the people with high insulin levels are in a situation where the insulin prevents release of fats from stores (which it does) so they are unable to shift the fat so easily (presumably they run their glycogen stores down lower than when they are on a lower carb diet).

I think over a few weeks study the glycogen reserves are neither here nor there.

To pull off a bigger fat loss requires more lipolysis which as you say implies less insulin which is more likely on the low carb or low GI routes and more likely in the initially low insulin people - so why do low insulin people do better on higher carb ? Everyone's going to burn all the food because it's hypocaloric - calorie deficient.

It doesn't explain why the extra fat is used ie where the extra energy goes.