Interesting study

[chris mason]

I'm glad they noted that fact that the advantage of most low carb plans is that they allow higher total caloric intake than the paltry 1,200-1,500 cals that a lot of the low fat plans promote. They, of course, miss the REAL truth which is almost no one will stick with a 1,500 or less calorie diet forever...

Anyway, interesting read: http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/11/10...rbs/index.html

[djpc]

I also find it interesting that their "low carb" diet (4% carb cal) is much more severe than their "low fat" (30% fat cal) diet. If they'd have applied the same standards, restricting the low fat regimen to 4% calories from fat, I imagine that group would have done poorly long-term compared to the "low carb". Conversely, if the "low carb" would have been more like 30-30-40 Pro-Carb-Fat that group would have fared better long term as well. Seems like a dial-a-result study almost.