Low Carb diet Causes Insulin Resistance [new study]

I hear that :)

IMG_97731.jpg
 
Is it the actual lowering of carbs or the increase in something else like saturated fat that triggered insulin resistance?

Can I eat a dozen doughnuts a day without insulin issues due to them not being low carb?
 
I read between the lines

some of it was fiber related mumbo jumbo, yes, low carb can make you constipated

the odd sample of people are already in shape? inflammatory markers, but no actual inflammation? basically, there is no meaning to this.

lack of minerals disclaimer and education material

a lot of fluff for trying to say, little to no findings.
 
Shit study (I read the entire study) with tons of limitations and for what purpose? That carbs are not the only thing that impact serum glucose and insulin production? No shit. Let me break it down for you guys.

Can“low/lower” carb diet increase insulin resistance? Yes, but it depends as it’s very nuanced and multifactorial. When eating less carbs you usually make up for it with more protein and fat (unless you are doing so to put you at a caloric deficit). A higher fat intake, especially saturated fat can increase insulin resistance. Combine that with a sedentary lifestyle, a shit diet and eating at a caloric surplus, weight gain, poor sleep, stress, alcohol, etc it can then lead to chronic insulin resistance that may lead to prediabetes or even type 2 diabetes. Usually though your pancreas can self-regulate serum glucose levels pretty well. The metabolic acidosis shtick is bologna, although they may see a difference in the “lower/low” carb group since protein intake was likely higher that can lead to more acid production and slightly higher bicarb levels. None of the participants was even near clinical metabolic acidosis.. Great news though, your kidneys can self-regulate that in someone with healthy kidneys. Also of course c-peptide levels will increase with more insulin production. Same would apply with the high-carb group because it would need to produce/use more insulin in order to regulate serum glucose levels.

So what does that all mean? It means that your entire” dietary picture” and lifestyle is more important in context of increasing risk for Diabetes assuming that was their purpose of this study. Focus on eating a health promoting diet, improving your weight and body composition, getting in adequate physical activity and sleep.
 
I've seen studies in the past with type 2 diabetes patients being on a low carb diet being able to control their diabetes with a low carb diet and getting off of some medications. the diet didn't work for everyone, I believe it tended to have around a 60% success rate.

This girl I know who is a doctor did the same thing and got rid of her diabetes. She even has people calling her a liar on her facebook page when she says it, it's kind of crazy. Her own doctor told her she would have it for life.
 
You covered it well, but it's still shocking to me what passes as a study, how people will just read the title, and go along with it.

On a 2000 calorie diet, their definition of "low carbs" is still potentially over 200 grams. That's a garbage study.
It's a bit dishonest to use the word Keto for this study. The people in this study aren't really hitting ketosis with up to 45 percent of diet being carbs.
 
Last edited:
He has great videos on carbs/fats/brotein
 
Last edited:
I don't trust this study. I see too many weird names.

Seriously though. It is only a 7 day study and the people aren't really low carb. It's just carbs making up less than 45 percent of diet. It's not really low carb as we know it. I am glancing through it while eating rice and meat. Maybe I will read the whole thing later.
How dare you sully the good names of Dr. Kellog's and Dr. Monsanto!
 
Ah I see what happened we broke the no flaming rule so I'm guessing it was a mod. And apparently reminding someone of a question previously asked but not answered is an issue too. My bad.'


EDIT - or can threadstarters delete posts?
 
Last edited:
I will try again.
This is a horrible study that is full of holes and the title of this thread is misleading and an egregious example of headline abuse.
 
Back
Top