Six common beliefs addressed, Part 161

1. Diet is the only thing that determines if you will become obese. 

Obesity is caused by a disruption in blood glucose homeostasis which disrupts metabolic hormones. This can result from anything that interferes in normal blood glucose regulation. Certain diseases, medications, etc. can contribute to this dysfunction which leads to obesity. Anything that disrupts proper blood glucose regulation can be the culprit.

But for the most part, the most common disruption in blood glucose regulation is the result of diet. This is the case for all common metabolic conditions from metabolic syndrome to diabetes.

2. I recently had a wisdom tooth pulled. I have had wisdom teeth pulled before and the pain and recovery time has been horrendous. This time I suffered no pain and no inflammation. I even had antibiotics, along with a probiotic, with no issues whatsoever. 

When you better your metabolic health, you become much more resilient to other conditions that may present themselves. If you already have lower inflammation and better blood glucose control, then when the body experiences stress from illness or injury, it can better handle it and you lower your risk of complications. You have less reactions to antibiotics and if you have to consume a liquid meal or be on an IV, which may contain ingredients you wouldn't usually consume, you will experience less of a set back.

3. When Type I diabetics break down their body, and everything they eat, into glucose they become emaciated if it's not stopped but Type II diabetics can break down their body, and everything they eat too, but remain obese. 

Catabolism from glucagon "gone wild" should produce the same results in Type II as it does in Type I, because they are both suffering from the exact same thing. So why doesn't it? After all, Type IIs can run a blood glucose of 400 - 500 mg/dL and up, chronically, and not waste away to anything at all. What gives? The answer is in their insulin function commonly described as "insulin resistance".

Type Is have no insulin whatsoever, so they don't have insulin resistance. Type IIs have insulin, in some cases too much of it, but it doesn't function properly causing a condition referred to as insulin resistance. Because of this, in a Type I their entire body melts into glucose and ketones but in Type II their lean muscle mass alone, melts into glucose and ketones. Their fat mass is always spared as their insulin function spares their fat mass, above all else. This is a hallmark of insulin resistance. 

For a Type II insulin function is as follows:

• Under release of insulin to halt chronic catabolism into glucose and ketones (glucagon).
• Over expression of catabolic hormones on lean muscle mass (cortisol).
• Under expression of catabolic hormones on fat mass (leptin).
• Insulin action is over expressed in storing fat and preventing its loss.
• Insulin action is under expressed in getting glucose and nutrients into other tissues.
• Insulin action is under expressed in its anabolic effects on lean muscle mass.

As you can see, insulin function effects other hormones as insulin is sort of like the conductor in an orchestra.

So a Type II diabetic is not only a person who might have very high insulin but a person who always has abnormal insulin function. A Type II diabetic's insulin is primed and honed for only one specific task, at the expense of everything else, - the building and preserving of fat mass. So it doesn't matter how much the body catabolizes itself, it never catabolizes its fat mass. For this reason, a Type II diabetic will never lose a pound of fat from this exaggerated catabolic process unless their disease progresses to Type I from pancreatic beta cell failure.

4. Many people with lipedema and/or lymphedema frequent obesity discussions because they claim their conditions are a "type of obesity". 

Lipedema is not obesity nor is it "metabolic" in nature. No one knows its exact cause but it appears to be related to female hormonal changes and/or imbalances. Only about 11% of women are affected by this. For these reasons, it is not subject matter that I discuss on this blog. I know a lot of people like to jump on the bandwagon so people with lipedema are very active in obesity groups. This is where many of these groups begin to lose focus as people with this condition usually have a very difficult time exercising which is a necessary part of any protocol that treats obesity. That's where the concessions begin. 

So the best source of information on this condition is your doctor and/or specialist. There is nothing that I can advise on it as I can't make concessions for this particular ailment. The only thing I can recommend is to try to live a lifestyle that keeps female sex hormones in homeostasis. An anti obesogenic lifestyle would be a good start to achieve this. Having said that, I will briefly give an overview on these conditions for those who are curious. 

• Lipedema is a condition where fat is distributed in an irregular way, usually in the buttocks and legs, causing for the lower body to grow heavy, become tender and even bruise easily. Hence the female hormone suspect, as this is the main pattern of fat distribution in females. This large bottom half will obviously limit mobility.  
• Lymphedema develops when this excess fat blocks the lymphatic system and prevents proper drainage of lymph fluid. This can lead to complications such as infections and non healing wounds. This requires treatment with invasive procedures. 

Like I have said many times prior, just because someone appears "fat", doesn't mean they're obese. Just because someone "gains weight" doesn't mean they're obese. Obesity is an adaptive metabolic state where the body stores and spares body fat beyond its threshold, usually around the middle/central region. This is the result of metabolic syndrome. 

5. If you can't swallow pills, you should still never take gummy vitamins because they have carbs.

First, if your can't swallow pills, you will have a hard lot in life. Outlying situations like these, cannot make the rules for others, as I mentioned above in the question about lipedema. I do not make concessions on this blog. We give advice on the treatment of obesity/metabolic syndrome. There is nothing I can do if something hinders you from following the advice given. The advice does not change. 

Second, we don't "count carbs" either. It is a useless practice that does nothing to treat obesity/diabetes. What you need is an overall low carbohydrate, whole foods diet. Counting the carbs of single food items is not going to cut it. There are many items that have zero to low carbs and are still very obesogenic, depending on how they are eaten. So an anti obesogenic diet is not about carb counting but about overall macronutrient composition, food quality, meal timings and general eating practices. That gummy vitamin is not going to treat your metabolic condition but it is also not going to contribute to it. 

Third, and this part was unsolicited in the statement but I will add it anyway. "Gummy vitamins" are generally not good quality vitamins. You are basically paying for a bottle of "sugar in small doses". When you buy a vitamin you have to make sure that it is bioavailable so they should always be coenzymated. This means the vitamins are bound to the enzymes needed to break them down. This causes your body to actually absorb them, rather than just pee them out. The majority of deficiencies are not caused from "lack of vitamins" per say, but lack of the enzymes needed to get them into cells, either because of some genetic problem or some other chronic condition. 

All minerals should be chelated. Chelated minerals are bound to an amino or organic acid, so they don't require as much stomach acid to be efficiently digested. Most people are deficient in minerals because they cannot break them down due to low/insufficient stomach acid. 

You also have to make sure that you stay away from certain supplements such as "folic acid". Folic acid is a synthetic form of vitamin B9 (folate). It tends to build up in the body and cause issues over time. There are other supplements that pose this same issue because they are synthetic as well or they must be taken alongside other supplements to prevent issues. 

So research your supplements carefully and don't just go to the local pharmacy to pick up a bottle of whatever they have. At best, you will be wasting your money and possibly not treating your deficiency. At worse, you could be harming your health. 

6. I was following "keto" and lost 30 pounds. I felt great. I have now come across "The Proper Human Diet", which I am currently learning about, but my numbers keep going up.

First, I don't know what anyone means by "keto" but since you are now "learning" about "The Proper Human Diet", I can only imagine it was some type of fad protocol you found online. This tells me that you most likely jump from one diet to the next and aren't committed to any one of them. Of course, in this case, you might have done the right thing by dumping "keto". Unfortunately, you remained in the garbage pile and picked up yet some more junk. 

I have said it before that there is no "proper human diet". There are only marketing slogans and improper human diets of which there are only two - vegan and the Standard American Diet (SAD). That's it. Everything other than those two goes. In fact, humans are so adaptable, to any diet available, that they can make vegan and SAD work for them under strict conditions (i.e. supplementation, caloric restriction). These conditions can at least make these diets work for a very long time before they fail. So we have cleared that nonsense. 

Second, people who have overweight/obesity or any level of metabolic syndrome, including diabetes, do better on a carbohydrate restricted, clean diet of meat and above ground vegetables only. This doesn't mean that's the "proper human diet", it just means it's the best diet for someone who has metabolic dysfunction. This is because they can get a better handle on their blood glucose regulation when following this type of protocol. Blood glucose dysregulation is what causes metabolic issues to begin with. Diet has a huge effect on blood glucose regulation so it makes sense to target the problem with diet. 

There are no gimmicks to following a carb restricted diet. You simply eat meat and above ground vegetables. That's it. Meat and above ground vegetables basically becomes a low carb, moderate fat, adequate protein diet. This is the best macronutrient composition for the metabolically dysfunctional. There is no "learning" involved in this. 

Third, I recommend you get your mental health in order before you embark on any diet because you are displaying a very common behavioral issue of the obese - diet mongering. You just keep trying every single diet you come across and since there are multiple reasons for this, I won't guess what yours are. I will tell you this, metabolic dysfunction requires a long term treatment. For a treatment to be long term you must be committed and consistent with it. You shouldn't be looking for a protocol on every click bait title that comes across your screen. You need to actually think through a protocol and see how it fits your lifestyle and goals. 

Fourth, this isn't just about eating. You need to tackle other lifestyle issues that can interfere and hinder progress such as your behavior, described above, exercise regimen and systemic stress reduction.

Six common beliefs addressed, Part 150

1. I love breakfast but I'm scared to eat it because I keep reading that breakfast is a "scam" on low carb pages. 

Oh dear. This question seems to always come up, every once in a while, like the living dead who refuse to stay in their grave. I don't know why it won't just stay dead. It's probably because low carb advocates recycle this one, every so often, and people who are new to these diets see it for the first time and then come to me with it. Hopefully, after this post - "God grant it lie still". 

Low carb advocates have a "thing" about breakfast because most breakfast foods are produced by companies like Kellogg’s, who they have deemed to be the devil incarnate. Don't fall for it. They just want Kellogg's revenue for themselves. 

There have been numerous studies done on different meal timings and eating early has consistently been shown to be anti obesogenic. In fact, the fattest people in the world are the ones who have the least hunger in the morning. This is why lack of morning hunger is usually a sign of active obesity. Contrary to popular belief, obese people are oftentimes the least hungry people over all so it is not surprising that they aren't hungry in the mornings. 

The exact mechanism and cause for this is not well understood, but circadian rhythms and hormone homeostasis are involved. It seems like the more body fat you acquire, the less hunger in the mornings. Insulin function/Dawn Phenomenon seems to be implicated in this, but again, it is not well understood precisely how. It seems like more energy is stored with later eating than earlier eating and this energy allotment appears to be different between the overweight/obese and the lean/healthy. So we won't make assumptions on the exact cause since there are no definitive answers. This is why I get a kick out of people adamantly advising on breakfast or not. 

The only thing we know for sure is that, regardless of cause, force feeding yourself in the morning is not going to magically make you thinner because your hormonal profile will remain the same. For this reason, on this blog, we encourage you to have breakfast if you are hungry in the mornings. This can be a very good sign. But if you aren't hungry in the mornings, then skip breakfast and have your first meal later. It doesn't pretty much matter. The only thing that matters is if you can regain and sustain proper blood glucose regulation, not if you can show off how late you can eat.

2. There are many ways of making your diet work. You can always try different hacks to get results. 

When a weight loss coach, counselor, advisor, whoever, has to come up with a "hack", then you know for certain that their diet, and everything else they are trying to sell, is a farce. So let me help out. There are no weight loss hacks. Actually I take that back. There is one. Stop drinking any liquids and take a laxative and you will be a few pounds lighter in a couple of days. Athletes do this all the time to make weight requirements. Teenage girls do this all the time to fit into their prom dresses. Just keep in mind that this is dangerous and absolutely not recommended nor advised on this blog. But technically, that is the only hack for weight loss known to work. 

All hacks are just as unhealthy and dumb as that one, but worse - They are ineffective. There are no hacks for treating overweight/obesity. None. Not even liposuction, much to my husband's dismay. True overweight/obesity treatments are based on long term lifestyle changes that require consistent adherence and application. Anyone that is trying to "sell" you a hack, is a quack. 

3. Carbohydrates are the preferred energy for the body. 

False. 

The body runs mostly on fatty acids. It is a misconception that carbs are the "preferred fuel" for the body. The origins of this misinformation is from the fact that the body makes its own glucose when it needs it for the specific cells that must use glucose for energy. People who learn this fact assume that because the body makes glucose then it must be because it prefers glucose. If not, then why would it go out of its way to make it itself? But it doesn't prefer it. It simply needs it. It must keep a steady and highly regulated amount of glucose in the blood stream in order to function properly. 

The only thing that prefers carbs is the tongue, not the body. And the only reason the tongue prefers carbs is because carbs have been sweetened and made into fun foods. Believe me, the tongue does not prefer plain boiled potatoes. It prefers Doritos or Debbie Snacks. So it's not the carbs per say, it's the junk that is preferred. 

4. If your loved one has cancer, you should make them eat "keto" in order for them to be cured. 

First, "keto" is not a cure for cancer. As of this post, there is no cure for cancer. 

Second, you can't force someone to follow a diet they don't want to. "Keto" and low carb diets in general, when followed correctly, are elimination protocols. The person who tells you they aren't is a chaffle eating liar. Elimination means the person has to be willing to give up the foods they are accustomed to. Sometimes the food items that have to be given up are staples of culture, tradition, religion, whatever. They have to be eliminated regardless, if the person wants to follow the diet properly and achieve results. This can be a difficult decision for anyone but especially for someone who is already having health issues. They might not want to be bogged down with an entirely new way of eating and having to give up their favorite foods, which might be the only thing they find stability in at this time in their life. For this reason, don't force people. People are allowed to follow whatever diet they want. 

"Keto" and low carb diets are only for people who are ready and committed to following them. The worse thing you can do is mix a Standard American Diet (SAD) full of crackers, breads, pastas and sweets with a low carb/"keto" diet. That is usually what occurs when the person is not committed to following the diet and is only following it to get someone off their back. 

5. You can still follow "keto" if you aren't a big meat eater and are also allergic to nuts and dairy. 

If you can't eat nuts and you can't eat dairy and you refuse to eat meat, then what else is left? Air? You just eliminated all of the foods that comprise a very low carb diet. You can absolutely salvage the diet without the nuts and diary but you can't salvage it without meat as that's the center of the diet itself. A situation like this, requires for you to find another diet all together. One that you can follow. I don't know why people like to put themselves into these predicaments. It's like me saying that I am allergic to all plant foods and find algae disgusting but I would like to follow a vegan diet. It's not happening. 

I hate to say this but this type of statement makes me doubt that the person making it is serious about resolving their health. It just seems like a person who wants to be a part of whatever fad is going on at the moment and follow the crowd mindlessly. A person who is serious about their health, wouldn't even bother following "keto" or low carb since they are aware of their limitations. Instead of asking for a nonexistent resolution, they would have been seriously looking for an alternative. 

6. Coffee is "good for you" and you should drink it with butter.  

Coffee and everything else on earth is only good for you until it turns bad. This is why we don't make claims that anything is definitively good or bad except for one: sugar. Sugar is always bad. We can say that coffee is not necessarily "good for you". It is just not been shown to cause any adverse health effects in the majority of people. 

Studies on the effects of coffee have had mixed results. We do know that black coffee is better than orange juice, but so is plain tea. So basically anything, including muddy rain water, is better than orange juice at this juncture. Coffee can be the same as orange juice if it is loaded with added sugar and/or fat, so we know that coffee is only as benign as what goes in it. 

Some people are exceptionally sensitive to the caffeine in coffee. In fact, I wouldn't advise caffeinated coffee to anyone who has metabolic syndrome/diabetes. You don't want caffeine interfering further with your blood glucose regulation. If you want to drink coffee, drink decaf and add no sweeteners to it of any kind. Limit the amount of cream you use by keeping to your daily fat macros. Do not make "Bulletproof Coffees" because they aren't bulletproof and they certainly aren't obesity proof.  

Some people prefer butter in their coffee to cream. To each his own. There is no requirement to use butter or cream or anything in your coffee. What shouldn't be in your coffee is sugar or artificial sweeteners of any kind. Also remember to not drink gallons of coffee a day. Coffee should be reserved for your eating window and should never be had during fasting, even if you only drink it black. 

The best way to stop the snacking habit is to simply not taste anything during your fasting time. Give the tongue a break. Remember it's connected to your brain. Please allow your brain to not sense anything coming in for some period of time. Limit your coffee to two cups a day and by cups, I mean literal, measured cups. Not the coffee cup you bought on eBay that is as tall as your forearm. A cup = 8 fluid ounces.

Six common beliefs addressed, Part 133 - Diet Wars Edition

1. I recently came across an article on Facebook, "debunking" Dr. Fung and I wanted your take on it. People are raving about it! 

I usually don't get involved in this type of discussion because I rather focus on subject matter that would help people on their metabolic journey. I also hate ruffling feathers with critiques, but I will make an exception with this one, since it does touch on a few misconceptions that often come up. I also want to prove a very important point that will be crystal clear by the end of this post. 

If anyone is interested, you can read the entire article being discussed, for yourself here. 

This article was written by Dr. Layne Norton, a so-called "renowned prep/physique coach and pro natural bodybuilder/power lifter with a PhD in Nutritional Sciences". (So, the next time a quack tells you to ask your doctor why they only took two hours of "nutrition" in school, remember this article. Your doctor was working hard to get an actual MD.) Layne is just another Dr. Stephan Guyenet minion. You can tell who they are from their extraordinarily long articles, about mostly nothing, and super corny memes. By that criteria, Layne is definitely one of them. 

I personally don't care about these "diet wars" because I have no skin in the game. I don't sell anything, so I am not in competition with any of these fools. I just try to weed out the charlatans, so you can make better decisions on how to address your metabolic problems. I believe that both Fung and Layne are charlatans, desperately trying to convince you to buy their programs. This is why they endlessly go at each other. It's simply competition for your money. If you want a real debunking of Fung, you can read my article on him here. 

In the meantime, let's tackle this new found BS. Layne has a bone to pick with Fung and he painstakingly details each gripe in this article. There is a lot to break down here, and most of it is nonsense, so I will only address key points and ignore everything else because this article is longer than 'War and Peace'. You will also be surprised that it ends in nothing. I know it's hard to believe that, but you will see for yourself by the end of this post. Let's begin. 

Gripe 1 - Layne begins by introducing you to Dr. Fung and his obvious snake oil. Fung is the Canadian Nephrologist who self proclaims to be "a world-leading expert on intermittent fasting and low carb". Layne starts off by claiming that Fung "misinforms" his followers. Well, many would say that so does Layne. So, they basically both cancel each other out. After all, quack per quack still leaves you with a duck. 

Gripe 2 - Layne is salty that Fung has refused to debate him. But, can we really blame Fung for that? If the debate goes the same way this article went, there would be no reason to have one. It would be a total waste of time and if someone out there doesn't believe me, go read the entire article for yourself. Better yet, you can hear what this debate would be like by simply searching on YouTube "Rogan Taubes Guyenet". This should take you to clips of a debate that's already been had. We don't need to hear it again from Fung and Layne because it will end up in the same place Taubes and Guyenet's did - No where. After all, "A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still."

Gripe 3 - Layne tries discrediting Fung by saying that 'Red Pen Reviews' gave - "The Obesity Code a shocking score of 31% for ‘Scientific Accuracy’". Then he goes on to say that - "Red Pen Reviews was founded by Seth Yoder and Dr. Stephan Guyenet to provide systematic reviews of nutrition books and the veracity of their claims" and "They are the best source of unbiased reviews of nutrition books available today". Wait, what? Guyenet is not biased? Guyenet wrote a book called 'The Hungry Brain' and is now peddling his own weight loss program online! Guyenet is obsessed with Gary Taubes for Pete's sake. Do your Googles, everyone, and find out for yourself. 

Gripe 4 - Layne goes for the jugular by making the claim that - "There are several people who I have spoken with who Dr. Fung attempted to get fired from their jobs or get them kicked out of grad school, but these folks wish to remain anonymous". Well sir, if they wish to remain anonymous, it's as if they didn't exist. No point of mentioning them, since we can't corroborate this bit of info. Besides that, what the hell does that have to do with debunking Fung? After all, there's a difference between being "misinformed" and being an "a--hole". 

Gripe 5 - Layne now tries to pull at your heart strings and says that - "In 2016, Dr. Fung fat-shamed two obesity researchers for being fat themselves at a scientific conference". LOL That was hilarious and yeah, that's actually true. Good for Fung! How the hell are you going to have fat obesity researchers? Rather than "fat shamed", they should have been fired and kicked out of the conference. If we can "fat shame" Jimmy Moore for being a fat diet monger, then we can "fat shame" two obesity researchers for being the same. Especially when they say they have the "solution" to a problem that they can't even solve for themselves. At least, if I regain 500 lbs., you can all say "Gina told us this would happen..." 

Gripe 6 - Layne points out that Fung is promoting a - "Fasting tea that promises 2x the results with 50% the effort from your fast". Then he goes on to debunk the tea's ingredients. Well done, but what's surprising about this? I mean, what can you expect from a snake oil salesman? Fung is simply trying to sell the same snake oil every other diet monger is, including "pro natural body builders". 

Intermission 1. Start elevator music here. In this section of the article, Layne goes into a very long winded and boring break down of calories in/calories out (CICO) theory. As usual, it's full of the same repetitive jargon and reeked with out of context information, that everyone before him has already hashed with no results, including the two fat obesity researchers at the conference. Here are just a few I addressed spiffily or I'll be here forever: 

• The Law of Thermodynamics only applies to closed systems. The body is an open system. So, please stop mentioning it. 
• Basal Metabolic Rate is the main focus of every diet because it makes up to 70% of your energy usage and it's all from body fat. So, please stop minimizing it. 
• We already know that all calories are the same because they are just units of energy. So, please stop repeating it as if it's something profound. 

Before Layne allows us back to his regularly scheduled article, he flip flops and says - "It’s important to note that all caloric sources do not affect energy expenditure in the same way". Wait, what? That entire encyclopedia worth of CICO crap to basically end up agreeing with Fung? Surprisingly, the flip flops won't stop here.... 

Gripe 7 - After that long interlude, Layne now goes to hormones and says - "Dr. Fung has spent many articles and videos nebulously discussing ‘hormones’", only to flip and then say - "Some hormones indeed DO impact energy expenditure". Layne then points out one - thyroid hormone, which is affected by fasting. He just didn't mention that this effect can be negative or positive, depending on what your issues are. So, Layne didn't do a thing to clear up Fung's "nebulous" hormone discussion. 

Gripe 8 - Layne criticizes Fung for calling insulin - "The fat storage hormone", but then goes on to say -"Insulin does inhibit lipolysis, fat oxidation, and increases fat uptake into adipose". So, is it a fat storage hormone or not? Layne can't say for sure, so he just says that - "Its effects on body fat levels are more complicated". He's right about this getting ever so much more complicated.... 

Gripe 9 - Layne now pulls the rabbit out of a hat and says - "Before you blame insulin for the cause of obesity, understand that fat can be stored in adipose without increases in insulin via a protein called acylation stimulating protein (ASP)". Whoa! But, he fails to mention that ASP also stores glucose into adipose and it stimulates insulin release. Damn! Just when we were making headway..... back to square one. 

Gripe 10 - To make things ever more complicated, Layne says that - "Of the fat that winds up in adipose tissue, over 98% of it comes from dietary fat, and less than 2% comes from dietary carbohydrates". That's very interesting and who knows what context he's referring to, since he is as "nebulous" as Fung. Regardless, in practice, people can drop incredible amounts of weight on low carb diets and others can still remain fat, while getting fatter, on low to no fat diets. Of course, Layne continuously reminds us, it's much more complicated than that. Well then, that's why he shouldn't try to make it appear so simple. 

Intermission 2. Start elevator music here. In this section, Layne goes into a long winded rant about different studies, etc. which "prove" Fung wrong. Beat yourself up if you're interested. He provides links to all his sources, so have at it. 

Intermission 2 continues. If anyone is still awake, in this section, Layne goes into another tirade about metabolic adaptation and appears to not really believe in it, but then cites the 'Biggest Loser Study'. That of course makes him flip flop, yet again, and he points out that other studies have shown less metabolic adaptation. Then he flip flops again and says basically that metabolic adaptation occurs with all diets. Then he says it is - "Unlikely that simply eating 500 calories less will cause 500 calories per day attenuation in energy expenditure". He just fails to mention that it is also unlikely it will reverse your obesity.  

Then Layne ends up at The Law of Thermodynamics, once again, which I already explained is being misapplied to the human body. Layne finally returns to metabolic adaptation and debates how quickly it can occur or under what deficits, blah, blah, blah.... the song that appears to never end... but it does end. It ends in the weirdest of ways when Layne says - "The body does have elaborate compensatory mechanisms in place, and whole-body physiology is messy". So, what was his point? No one knows. 

The kicker to all of this is how this entire article ends. It literally does so with Layne stating - "I am not saying that hormones do not matter for weight loss. I am not saying that insulin plays no role in weight gain or weight loss. I am not saying low carb does not work. It certainly does. I am not saying that Intermittent Fasting/Time Restricted Eating does not work. It certainly does. I am NOT saying that energy expenditure isn’t modifiable based on energy intake." 

Basically, Layne is not saying any of the things that he just spent the entire article trying to say. So, WTF is he saying? No one knows. Not even himself. But, it seems like the article's point was - "The harm is that singling out foods, macronutrients, or hormones as ‘good’ or ‘bad’ can create disordered eating patterns in some people". But, then again - "I’m not saying that low-carb diets or Intermittent Fasting/Time Restricted Eating cause binge eating". Well, I'm not saying that calorie restriction can also cause disordered eating habits, even though it most certainly has.

And that's a good way to make the point I said I would make by the end of this post. Forget everything in that article or whether Fung or Layne are right or wrong. All that matters is the end result. The end result, ladies and gentlemen, is that as you listen to these two fools you get fatter, while they get richer and solve nothing.

Six common beliefs addressed, Part 14

1. Studies have shown that calorie restriction increases life span.

Studies have always shown that there is a link between calorie restriction and longevity. It has been studied ad nauseum. 

But this is not a blog about longevity. This is a blog about metabolic health. 

2. When low carbohydrate and low fat diets have been studied, side by side, they show no difference in results, as long as the calories are the same.

This is correct. 

All of the studies on diet so far, have concluded that all diets have the same effect and calorie restriction always affects weight. This is what I have been saying on this blog so far. All diets affect blood glucose, which in turn affects insulin and this has a temporary effect on weight. So the claim that "all weight loss and gain is mitigated through calories", should really be that "all weight loss and gain is mitigated through insulin". Calories, like any other dietary protocol always affects insulin. But what happens after? 

Insulin is quite easy to manipulate through blood glucose. This will affect weight. But excess weight is not obesity. Obesity is excess fat. All fat loss is mitigated through leptin. This means your protocol has to get past affecting insulin, in the short term, to affecting it in the long term, enough so that leptin is affected. Calorie restriction has never been able to do that. 

No diet has been studied in the long term, but we can safely say that calorie restriction has been circulating long enough to prove itself a failure. In fact, obesity is still being researched, to this day, and still considered "a condition with no known cure". Calorie restriction has certainly not been named as the cure. 

So, we already have something that's been proven to not work - calorie restriction. This means we must go with something that might have a better chance at working - carbohydrate restriction. 

3. Does 'The Potato Hack Diet' cause weight loss?

If it effects blood glucose, it will effect insulin and you will see weight loss. The weight lost might be water and muscle, but it's still weight loss. 

As stated above though, none of these fad diets and hacks have been shown to work for the long term. You can imagine that the temporary effect on blood glucose will never lead to proper blood glucose regulation, considering that potatoes are starch which is basically glucose.  

4. Does 'The Fat Fast Diet' cause weight loss?

If it effects blood glucose, it will effect insulin and you will see weight loss. The weight lost might be water and muscle, but it's still weight loss. 

As stated above though, none of these fad diets and hacks have been shown to work for the long term. You can imagine that the temporary effect on blood glucose will never lead to proper blood glucose regulation, considering that you are restricting calories and only eating fat. That's a recipe for a double down in fat gain when the diet is done. 

5. Does 'The Protein Sparing Modified Fast Diet' cause weight loss?

This one is a legitimate weight loss protocol. It has found success and usage in a clinical setting, but it must be modified in order to make it suitable for following long term. 

This diet has been shown to affect leptin, but it is still unknown for how long. You can find this protocol on the right, side bar of this blog under 'Recommended Diets' if you want to try it out. 

6. Obesity can’t be related to sugar, because statistics show that sugar purchase has gone down, not up.

There are two reasons for this:

• People no longer need to add sugar to their food, because food manufacturers are adding it for them. This is why the sugar bowl is now an item that graces the shelves of antique stores and thrift shops, and will soon be dug up by future archaeological expeditions as a relic from the past.
• People are now using artificial sweeteners, since diabetes is running rampant. Their sweet tooth is the same as it has always been, but it can now be pacified through man made chemicals, rather than old fashioned sugar. So, if you still work at a sugar refinery, I highly recommend you go back to school and learn chemistry instead, since the future will be for those making sugar substitutes to appease all of the growing numbers of obese and diabetic people around the world.