Salla kirjoitti:
http://www.cc.jyu.fi/~jjhulmi/Manninen28.pdf
Montignac'in ruokavaliota soveltavana voi vain olla tyytyväinen Mannisen
tuomiin kommentteihin, etenkin Misconception #4, jossa viitataan Montignac'in ruokavalioon
Nutrition Performance
By Anssi H. Manninen, MHS
Low-Carb Diets: The Truth… the Whole Truth
Misconception #4
“An increasing body of research also suggests that what people eat when they go on very low-carbohydrate diets— proteins… may put their health at risk.”
Contrary to popular belief, supported by animal rights activists and vegetarian zealots, high-protein diets are, if anything, protective against heart disease. For example,
Dr. J.G. Dumesnil and co-workers at the Quebec Heart Institute in Canada investigated the short-term (six days) nutritional and metabolic effects of an ad libitum (at one’s pleasure and not obligatory)
low-glycemic index/low-fat/high-protein diet compared with the purportedly “heart healthy” American Heart Association (AHA) diet consumed ad libitum (
British Journal of Nutrition, 2001;86:557-568).
During the ad libitum version of the AHA diet, subjects consumed 11,695 kilojoules per day (about 2,795 calories) and this diet induced a 28 percent increase in triacylglycerols (harmful blood lipids) and a 10 percent reduction in good cholesterol. In sharp contrast, the low-glycemic index/low-fat/high-protein diet consumed ad libitum resulted in a spontaneous 25 percent decrease in total energy intake, which averaged 8,815.0 kilojoules (about 2,107 calories) per day. Further, the low-glycemic index/low-fat/high-protein diet produced a substantial decrease (-35 percent) in triacylglycerols and marked decreases in plasma insulin levels measured either in the fasting state, over daytime and following a 75-gram oral glucose load. The authors concluded that a low-glycemic index/low-fat/high-protein diet may have unique beneficial effects compared with the AHA diet for the treatment of the atherogenic metabolic risk profile of abdominally obese patients. Translation: although this study was short-term intervention, these results strongly suggest that the “heart healthy” AHA diet may actually promote heart disease!
Bottom Line
Don’t get me wrong. I’m not advocate for low-carbohydrate diets. In my opinion, a diet containing adequate amounts of protein and good fats in addition to moderate amounts of low glycemic load carbohydrates is the most effective way to achieve and maintain ideal body weight. However, I advocate for applying science to all diets and giving low-carb diets an appropriate analysis. The fact that AHA nutrition recommendations are so simple-minded and inflexible means we have a model for what not to do! Obviously, individual dieters must try different regimens to see which is the most effective and fit into their individual lifestyles. Finally, public warnings on low-carb diets should be based on thorough analysis of the scientific literature, not unsubstantiated fears and misrepresentations.
Tässä viitatun julkaisun abstrakti:
Effect of a low-glycaemic index--low-fat--high protein diet on the atherogenic metabolic risk profile of abdominally obese men.
Dumesnil JG, Turgeon J, Tremblay A, Poirier P, Gilbert M, Gagnon L, St-Pierre S, Garneau C, Lemieux I, Pascot A, Bergeron J, Despres JP.
Quebec Heart Institute, Laval Hospital Research Center, Quebec, Canada.
medjgd@hermes.ulaval.ca
It has been suggested that the current dietary recommendations (low-fat-high-carbohydrate diet) may promote the intake of sugar and highly refined starches which could have adverse effects on the metabolic risk profile. We have investigated the short-term (6-d) nutritional and metabolic effects of an ad libitum low-glycaemic index-low-fat-high-protein diet (
prepared according to the Montignac method) compared with the American Heart Association (AHA) phase I diet consumed ad libitum as well as with a pair-fed session consisting of the same daily energy intake as the former but with the same macronutrient composition as the AHA phase I diet.
Twelve overweight men (BMI 33.0 (sd 3.5) kg/m2) without other diseases were involved in three experimental conditions with a minimal washout period of 2 weeks separating each intervention. By protocol design, the first two conditions were administered randomly whereas the pair-fed session had to be administered last.
During the ad libitum version of the AHA diet, subjects consumed 11695.0 (sd 1163.0) kJ/d and this diet induced a 28 % increase in plasma triacylglycerol levels (1.77 (sd 0.79) v. 2.27 (sd 0.92) mmol/l, P<0.05) and a 10 % reduction in plasma HDL-cholesterol concentrations (0.92 (sd 0.16) v. 0.83 (sd 0.09) mmol/l, P<0.01) which contributed to a significant increase in cholesterol:HDL-cholesterol ratio (P<0.05), this lipid index being commonly used to assess the risk of coronary heart disease. In contrast, the low-glycaemic index-low-fat-high-protein diet consumed ad libitum resulted in a spontaneous 25 % decrease (P<0.001) in total energy intake which averaged 8815.0 (sd 738.0) kJ/d. As opposed to the AHA diet, the low-glycaemic index-low-fat-high-protein diet produced a substantial decrease (-35 %) in plasma triacylglycerol levels (2.00 (sd 0.83) v. 1.31
(sd 0.38) mmol/l, P<0.0005), a significant increase (+1.6 %) in LDL peak particle diameter (251 (sd 5) v. 255 (sd 5) A, P<0.02) and marked decreases in plasma insulin levels measured either in the fasting state, over daytime and following a 75 g oral glucose load.
During the pair-fed session, in which subjects were exposed to a diet with the same macronutrient composition as the AHA diet but restricted to the same energy intake as during the low-glycaemic index-low-fat-high-protein diet, there was a trend for a decrease in plasma HDL-cholesterol levels which contributed to the significant increase in cholesterol:HDL-cholesterol ratio noted with this condition. Furthermore, a marked increase in hunger (P<0.0002) and a significant decrease in satiety (P<0.007) were also noted with this energy-restricted diet.
Finally, favourable changes in the metabolic risk profile noted with the ad libitum consumption of the low-glycaemic index-low-fat-high-protein diet (decreases in triacyglycerols, lack of increase in cholesterol:HDL-cholesterol ratio, increase in LDL particle size) were significantly different from the response of these variables to the AHA phase I diet.
Thus, a low-glycaemic index-low-fat-high-protein content diet may have unique beneficial effects compared with the conventional AHA diet for the treatment of the atherogenic metabolic risk profile of abdominally obese patients. However, the present study was a short-term intervention and additional trials are clearly needed to document the long-term efficacy of this dietary approach with regard to compliance and effects on the metabolic risk profile.
Publication Types:
Clinical Trial
Randomized Controlled Trial
PMID: 11737954 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
Kirjaudu sisään
UKK
Etsi
