Home
Effect of Low-Fat vs Low-Carbohydrate Diet on 12-Month
Weight Loss in Overweight Adults and the Association
With Genotype Pattern or Insulin Secretion
The DIETFITS Randomized Clinical Tria
http://sci-hub.hk/10.1001/jama.2018.0245
Chris Gardner did the ATOZ study (listed in the references) he is a vegan (or at least a vegetarian) so I was impressed that he published the results showing the Atkins diet in a favourable light.
He seems to have been a bit more careful this time
"There were improvements in the secondary outcomes
for both diet groups. However, there were no significant
between-group differences observed for body mass index,
body fat percentage, and waist circumference (Table 3).
At 12 months relative to baseline, both diets improved lipid
profiles and lowered blood pressure, insulin, and glucose levels,
with the exception of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol
concentrations, which increased for participants in the healthy
low-carbohydrate group (Table 3). The 12-month changes in
low-density lipoprotein cholesterol concentrations significantly
favored a healthy low-fat diet. High-density lipoprotein
cholesterol concentrations increased significantly more
and concentrations of triglycerides decreased significantly
more for the healthy low-carbohydrate diet group than for
the healthy low-fat diet group. The decrease in the prevalence
of the metabolic syndrome was not significantly different
between the diet groups."
Already being used to claim that low fat diets should be used instead of low carb because there is no difference.
Actually it is NOT a low carb diet and not that different from the low fat one.
A low-fat vegan diet and a conventional diabetes diet in the treatment
of type 2 diabetes: a randomized, controlled, 74-wk clinical trial1–4
Neal D Barnard, Joshua Cohen, David JA Jenkins, Gabrielle Turner-McGrievy, Lise Gloede, Amber Green, and
Hope Ferdowsian
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2677007/pdf/ajcn8951588S.pdf
Hb A1c
changes from baseline to 74 wk or last available values were
- 0.34 and - 0.14 for vegan and conventional diets, respectively
(P ¼ 0.43)
Nothing to see here, move along . . .
How evidence-based medicine is failing due to biased trials
and selective publication
http://sci-hub.hk/10.1111/jep.12147
"Abstract
Evidence-based medicine (EBM) was announced in the early 1990s as a ‘new paradigm’
for improving patient care. Yet there is currently little evidence that EBM has achieved its
aim. Since its introduction, health care costs have increased while there remains a lack of
high-quality evidence suggesting EBM has resulted in substantial population-level health
gains. In this paper we suggest that EBM’s potential for improving patients’ health care has
been thwarted by bias in the choice of hypotheses tested, manipulation of study design and
selective publication. Evidence for these flaws is clearest in industry-funded studies. We
argue EBM’s indiscriminate acceptance of industry-generated ‘evidence’ is akin to letting
politicians count their own votes. Given that most intervention studies are industry funded,
this is a serious problem for the overall evidence base. Clinical decisions based on such
evidence are likely to be misinformed, with patients given less effective, harmful or more
expensive treatments. More investment in independent research is urgently required. Independent
bodies, informed democratically, need to set research priorities. We also propose
that evidence rating schemes are formally modified so research with conflict of interest bias
is explicitly downgraded in value"
Weight Loss in Overweight Adults and the Association
With Genotype Pattern or Insulin Secretion
The DIETFITS Randomized Clinical Tria
http://sci-hub.hk/10.1001/jama.2018.0245
Chris Gardner did the ATOZ study (listed in the references) he is a vegan (or at least a vegetarian) so I was impressed that he published the results showing the Atkins diet in a favourable light.
He seems to have been a bit more careful this time
"There were improvements in the secondary outcomes
for both diet groups. However, there were no significant
between-group differences observed for body mass index,
body fat percentage, and waist circumference (Table 3).
At 12 months relative to baseline, both diets improved lipid
profiles and lowered blood pressure, insulin, and glucose levels,
with the exception of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol
concentrations, which increased for participants in the healthy
low-carbohydrate group (Table 3). The 12-month changes in
low-density lipoprotein cholesterol concentrations significantly
favored a healthy low-fat diet. High-density lipoprotein
cholesterol concentrations increased significantly more
and concentrations of triglycerides decreased significantly
more for the healthy low-carbohydrate diet group than for
the healthy low-fat diet group. The decrease in the prevalence
of the metabolic syndrome was not significantly different
between the diet groups."
Already being used to claim that low fat diets should be used instead of low carb because there is no difference.
Actually it is NOT a low carb diet and not that different from the low fat one.
A low-fat vegan diet and a conventional diabetes diet in the treatment
of type 2 diabetes: a randomized, controlled, 74-wk clinical trial1–4
Neal D Barnard, Joshua Cohen, David JA Jenkins, Gabrielle Turner-McGrievy, Lise Gloede, Amber Green, and
Hope Ferdowsian
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2677007/pdf/ajcn8951588S.pdf
Hb A1c
changes from baseline to 74 wk or last available values were
- 0.34 and - 0.14 for vegan and conventional diets, respectively
(P ¼ 0.43)
Nothing to see here, move along . . .
How evidence-based medicine is failing due to biased trials
and selective publication
http://sci-hub.hk/10.1111/jep.12147
"Abstract
Evidence-based medicine (EBM) was announced in the early 1990s as a ‘new paradigm’
for improving patient care. Yet there is currently little evidence that EBM has achieved its
aim. Since its introduction, health care costs have increased while there remains a lack of
high-quality evidence suggesting EBM has resulted in substantial population-level health
gains. In this paper we suggest that EBM’s potential for improving patients’ health care has
been thwarted by bias in the choice of hypotheses tested, manipulation of study design and
selective publication. Evidence for these flaws is clearest in industry-funded studies. We
argue EBM’s indiscriminate acceptance of industry-generated ‘evidence’ is akin to letting
politicians count their own votes. Given that most intervention studies are industry funded,
this is a serious problem for the overall evidence base. Clinical decisions based on such
evidence are likely to be misinformed, with patients given less effective, harmful or more
expensive treatments. More investment in independent research is urgently required. Independent
bodies, informed democratically, need to set research priorities. We also propose
that evidence rating schemes are formally modified so research with conflict of interest bias
is explicitly downgraded in value"
