The Most Epic Week In Review, Ever?

Selfie of the week is a little awkward but
at least my arms look huge.

I don't always do a week in review every week, because some weeks there's not all that much to talk about. This week though? Holy crap. This week was a legit game changer as far as I'm concerned. So much happened.

First of all though; Busted Scammer Of The Week is always a regular feature. And today we got some good news regarding perhaps one of the most disgusting and despicable scammers of all time.

• Conwoman Belle Gibson faces $1m fines over cancer scam fundraising fraud.

What a piece of trash.

This following story is good news too, and if I'm not mistaken I believe the Blocked By Pete Evans page (which I was a founding admin of, but am no longer involved with) are owed credit for first exposing this dangerous and outrageous nonsense.

• Victorian Health Minister Jill Hennessy orders crack-down on 'rogue' chiropractors. 
• An excellent report on this issue at Science Based Medicine; The Crack Heard Round The World.

We're just getting started though. Now the big stuff.

The Biggest Loser Study was big news this week.

This one basically confirmed what I've been saying for years now. Too far into calorie deficit for too long at high activity levels (aka over worked and underfueled) is a myopic approach to weight loss and people WILL stop seeing further fat loss at a certain point, and slashing further into deficit or increasing activity even further will not fix it. This approach will backfire over the long term resulting in weight regain even if you do stick to the regime of restricting and burning of calories.

• The study: Persistent metabolic adaptation 6 years after “The Biggest Loser” competition.
• An earlier study also based on The Biggest Loser contestants: Metabolic adaptation following massive weight loss is related to the degree of energy imbalance and changes in circulating leptin.
• Does this mean there is no hope for obese people who'd like to lose weight? My take, on my facebook page. 
• Ironically I published this just a couple of days earlier, right here: Ending The Unhealthy Obsession With Calorie Deficit.
• Leigh Peele examines some of the limitations & implications of this study and offers practical advice for best results in long term successful weight loss and weight management, here.

Low carb & keto dieting as beneficial for weight loss, finally and thoroughly debunked.

I have saved the best for last and this really was epic. For years, advocates of low carb and ketogenic dieting have insisted that it is the only way to avoid weight gain, and the only way to lose weight. Obviously, that's not correct. All you have to do is ask around, "hey, you seem quite lean and not over weight. Are you doing low carb or keto?". You'll find there are no shortage of people who consume a moderate to high amount of carbohydrates within a total energy intake that is appropriate to them, who are quite normal sized, quite healthy, and even in quite athletic shape.

Real world observation and clinical evidence have shown for some time that it is total energy provision relative to total energy requirement that drives weight gain, and not the mere presence of carbs in the diet as per the alternative "carbs drive insulin, insulin drives fat storage" hypothesis.

Here's where it gets funny.

Proponents of this  alternate hypothesis such as Gary "Good Calories Bad Calories" Taubes who have rejected all of this evidence on the basis of "we don't know who funded it and if they might have had reason to fudge the numbers to protect big potato" (or something like that) decided they would fund and design their own study, contract respected, qualified, objective and impartial researchers to carry it out and find the conclusive evidence that carbs are to blame and LCHF &/or ketogenic dieting is what we should have been told to do all along.

Just one problem though... the research found the opposite.

Here's what we knew already:

• Low Carbohydrate versus Isoenergetic Balanced Diets for Reducing Weight and Cardiovascular Risk:
  
  Trials show weight loss in the short-term irrespective of whether the diet is low CHO or balanced in terms of its macronutrient composition. There is probably little or no difference in weight loss and changes in cardiovascular risk factors up to two years of follow-up when overweight and obese adults, with or without type 2 diabetes, are randomised to low CHO diets and isoenergetic balanced weight loss diets.
• Comparison of Weight Loss Among Named Diet Programs in Overweight and Obese Adults:
  
  Low-carbohydrate and low-fat dietary programs were associated with more weight loss than no dietary intervention over a 12-month period; behavioral support and exercise enhanced weight loss. The weight loss differences between indivdual named diets were small with likely little importance to those seeking weight loss. This supports the practice of recommending any diet that a patient will adhere to in order to lose weight.
   
• Long-term effects of a low carbohydrate, low fat or high unsaturated fat diet compared to a no-intervention control.
  
  Significant cardiometabolic risk factor reduction was observed equally with VLC, VLF and HUF diets after 15 months.

• Calorie for Calorie, Dietary Fat Restriction Results in More Body Fat Loss than Carbohydrate Restriction in People with Obesity.
  
  Cutting carbohydrates increased net fat oxidation, but cutting fat by equal calories had no effect. Cutting fat resulted in more body fat loss as measured by metabolic balance.

Those are the sort of studies that the LCHF fanatics aren't terribly impressed by. Here's their own study, which one assumes they designed to be more stringent, rigorous and unbiased:

• Energy expenditure and body composition changes after an isocaloric ketogenic diet in overweight and obese men.
  
  Body fat loss slowed during the KD and coincided with increased protein utilization and loss of fat-free mass.
  
  The isocaloric KD was not accompanied by increased body fat loss but was associated with relatively small increases in EE that were near the limits of detection with the use of state-of-the-art technology. 

Even More: February 2018

It's funny because professional low carb conspiracy theorists like Taubes & Noakes keep trying to prove the superiority of a low carb approach, and keep failing spectacularly.

• Low-fat vs low-carb? Major study concludes: it doesn’t matter for weight loss.
• Does high-carbohydrate intake lead to increased risk of obesity? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Further & Related: 

• NutritionWonk asks: Is the Insulin Theory of Obesity Over?
• Carbsane asks why Taubes continued to promote his low carb / insulin myth while knowing that his organisation's own study has disproved it?
  
  It's beyond frustrating at this point, it's infuriating. Taubes' dishonesty is unparalleled in its audacity. Truly. The MDs -- Ludwig, Hyman, Lustig to name just three -- cashing in on TWICHOO are simply shameless at this point as well.
• Not directly related but while we're on the subject: High-carb meals better in curbing appetite amongst the obese. Thanks to Gabrielle Maston Dietitian & Exercise Physiologist for bringing this one to my attention.
• Further still, more related to sports nutrition: A problem with the reporting of effects of ketogenic diet.

Read More