正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

Long before modern diet debates, low-carb was mainstream medicine. History matters when we talk about obesity today. #NutritionHistory #MetabolicHealth #LowCarb #HealthEducation #ObesityScience #MedicalHistory

0 条评论

暂无评论

原始帖子的评论将显示在这里

相关视频

Last night Dr David Unwin was on mainstream news talking about the benefits of reducing carbs for those living with diabetes. The results he gets are amazing. I know it can be replicated by others because I copy what he does in my own clinical practice using David Oliver, Freshwell resources (which are free btw). As a result, in 2024 forty of my patients achieved remission too. The news report featured an endocrinologist Shivani Misra who, at the 4mins 27s timestamp in the video, said: "If someone does a low carb with higher fat what does that mean for their cholesterol and their cardiovascular disease risk? We don't know the answer to this" I'm here to tell you this is a false statement. The research has been done. Let me show you: In 2020 a meta analysis looking at the effects of low carb on CVD risk found: "For total cholesterol there was no significant change in the data corresponding to low-carbohydrate diets lasting 12–23 months and over 24 months" With regards LDL the meta analysis says: "For plasma LDL, as the forest map shows, that there was no significant difference between the low-carbohydrate diet group and the control group at 6–11 months, 12–23 months, and 24 months" All other factors improved (blood pressure, triglycerides, etc) The meta analysis concluded: "In conclusion, the overall effect of a low-carbohydrate diet on cardiovascular risk factors tended to be favorable at less than 6 months and 6–11 months, but after 2 years of a low-carbohydrate diet, there was no significant effect on cardiovascular risk factors" So short term: CVD risk factors are improved, long term, things don't get worse". This mirrors what I see in clinical practice and with myself having been low carb full time since the start of 2020 - all my CVD risk markers are in the normal range. Study source: The reporter also talks about low carb as a "restrictive diet". What's more restrictive: Giving up bagels, bread, sweets and other junk IN FAVOUR OF protein, vegetables etc Or Giving up solid food entirely for a 850kcal liquid diet for months? Despite the latter being far more restrictive it has been rolled out nationally by the NHS. Nothing wrong with this as it works but so does low carb. Why not give patients a choice? The reporter also says Dr Unwins results are just because of the support he provides. Whilst support matters (a lot), this is blatant misinformation. Plenty of studies show that reducing carbs is disproportionately better for those with diabetes than low fat. Here are some: In 2023 Novo Nordisk published a randomized controlled trial comparing low carb to low fat for diabetes. They found: 🩸 Low carb led to the greatest reduction in hba1c 💉 Only the low carb group reduced medications 📉 Low carb had the greatest reduction in triglycerides + higher HDL (LDL was similar) ⚖️ Low carb group lost more weight + more fat spontaneously despite eating more calories 🩸 Systolic blood pressure was lower for low carb The low carb group non significantly raises their LDL but 0.23mmol. The researchers said: "we consider the beneficial effects of low carb to outweigh the minor increase in LDL (0.23mmol) induced by the diet. This is supported by other studies" So low carb is better and CVD risk markers overall improved. Naturally, the study was hidden behind a Paywall. Link: I can hear the skeptics now: "But Mike, this is one study, it's not enough" Ok here's a meta analysis showing that hba1c is directly proportional to the carbs eaten: This meta analysis concluded:

Mike - Low Carb Dietitian

17,028 次观看 • 1 年前

For fifty years the world's obesity advice has come down to one phrase. Eat less. Move more. A Harvard pediatric endocrinologist named David Ludwig spent twenty years showing it was the wrong answer. Ludwig directs the New Balance Foundation Obesity Prevention Center at Boston Children's Hospital. He is a professor at both Harvard Medical School and the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. He has spent his career treating the most obese children in New England. The standard playbook was not working. The kids cut calories. They tried harder. They came back heavier. So Ludwig started asking a different question. What if the calorie was not the lever. He built what he calls the carbohydrate-insulin model. Refined carbs spike your insulin. Insulin tells your body to store fat. After the spike your blood sugar crashes. Your body interprets the crash as starvation. You get hungry again. You eat. You store more fat. You crash again. It is a feedback loop. And the loop runs on the carbohydrate, not the calorie. In November 2018 his team published the result in the British Medical Journal. 164 adults. 12 percent body-weight loss on a run-in diet. Then randomly assigned to high-carb, moderate-carb, or low-carb at calorie levels designed to maintain their new weight. For twenty weeks straight. The low-carb group burned over 200 extra calories per day at the same body weight as the high-carb group. The effect was larger in participants with the highest insulin secretion. Read that again. Same body weight. Same maintenance calories. The low-carb body was running 200 calories per day hotter. That number ends every "a calorie is a calorie" debate the moment you read it. Ludwig is not a fringe figure. He is the most credentialed voice in nutrition science quietly dismantling the orthodoxy from the inside. His 2016 book Always Hungry has been on the New York Times bestseller list. His 2021 paper in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition formalized the model into a unified theory of obesity. The standard advice is not just wrong. It is the wrong question. Eat less and move more is what you say when you do not understand the disease. #NSNG #DavidLudwig #CarbInsulinModel #AlwaysHungry #LowCarb #Insulin #Obesity #HarvardMedicine

Vinnie Tortorich

11,404 次观看 • 1 个月前

🚨New science DEBATE released on HIGH CARB vs KETO: What the new Tim Noakes vs Louise Burke debate actually shows 👇 American Journal of Clinical Nutrition just released it big debate between two of the biggest names in exercise performance asking one loaded question: does a low-carbohydrate diet impair endurance performance? On one side is Louise Burke, one of the most influential sports nutrition researchers in the world. Her argument: yes, low carb can impair performance? She is not saying every athlete must eat high-carb all the time. She is saying performance depends on the event, intensity, environment, training status, sex, and the athlete in front of you. Her biggest physiological point is fuel economy. Near an athlete’s oxidative ceiling (i.e., elite race pace), she argues that carbohydrate produces more usable energy per liter of oxygen than fat. So even if keto adaptation dramatically raises fat oxidation, that does not automatically mean better speed or power. Now I am skeptical of this point, since we have conducted Randomized Controlled Trails in both runners and ironman competitors and showed that athletes at 86% of their VO2max can utilize fat as the predominant fuel while on a very low carb diet and STILL maintain performance. On the other side, Tim Noakes argues: low carb does not necessarily impair performance when athletes are adapted long enough. He points out that many “keto hurts performance” studies are short, often under four weeks, and that several randomized trials lasting four to six weeks report similar performance between high-carb and low-carb groups. He also reframes fatigue. Instead of saying muscle glycogen is always the main limiter, he argues that during prolonged exercise, maintaining blood glucose, the small glucose pool is the most important. In our trial, 10 grams of carbohydrate per hour improved prolonged cycling performance after both diets. Noakes and Burke also did something really special: they developed a CONSENSUS article where they explored key points of AGREEMENT and DISAGREEMENT for future research. This is the coolest part and in my opinion was one of the verty unique aspect of these three studies My take is this: It is not "team high carb" versus "team keto." The weight of the evidence demonstrates that 1) BOTH high and low carb diets can work, and that 2) Carbohydrates during prolonged exercise are valuable...but 3) How this is applied depends on the individual athlete. What's your take?

Andrew Koutnik, Ph.D.

15,031 次观看 • 2 个月前

Scott Jennings reveals details from his 17-minute phone call today with Mitch McConnell from the hospital. JENNINGS: “Yeah, he called me this morning before I did my radio show. We talked for about 17 minutes.” “You know, he talked a lot about the situation with Iran, talked a little bit about Ukraine and what’s going on in Europe.” “I told him I had been to the Teddy Roosevelt library. We talked a little bit about the history of the vice presidency and how Roosevelt had transformed that and the modern presidency. A little history of the Senate.” “You know, it was a wide ranging conversation. I talk to him often. I hadn’t talked to him since he’d been in. I’d gotten a few text messages from him, but I hadn’t spoken to him. So it was good to hear his voice.” “Voice sounded strong and sounded like he was keeping up with the news to me.” HUNT: “Did you ask him how he was feeling?” JENNINGS: “Yeah, he said, you know, he said he was feeling okay. You know, obviously well enough to call me on the phone and obviously well enough to talk to Barrasso and Thune.” “Now, look, I’m not qualified to discuss any medical issues or give you any information about that, that’s really for him or his staff to do.” “But, you know, I talk to him from time to time, and I see him from time to time. And, you know, we had a conversation today about the things that we normally talk about, which are news of the day political stuff.”

Overton

505,269 次观看 • 10 天前