Oh, what a great morning!The weather is absolutely beautiful in New York City and I wake up to a story from Time Magazine in which Harvard School of Public Health Chair Walter Willett (pictured at left) reminds us what matters most when it comes to weight gain and weight loss -- calories!
I have never been a fan of the scapegoating targeted at specific nutrients.
I do not think eating fat causes people to become fat, nor do I think carbohydrates are sent up on an express elevator from hell.
This is why, if you are a reader of Small Bites, you know that the recipes I share are not "low fat" or "low carb."
"From many kinds of studies conducted over years, we are quite confident now that a calorie from fat will cause a similar amount of weight gain as a calorie from carbohydrate," Willett affirms.
And, no, he isn't pulling this theory out of thin air; there are plenty of studies showing that diet composition isn't as important as caloric intake in determining weight.
"The best way to get to the bottom line is to look at long-term studies where we randomize people to a high-fat/low-carb diet or to a low-fat/high-carb diet and follow them for at least a year or more.
That kind of study takes into account the possibility that one kind of diet provides more satiety; so, over the long run you would see more weight loss on that diet.
But those studies — half a dozen or more such studies have been done — show quite clearly that the percentage of calories from fat has very little effect on long-term weight loss."
What Dr. Willett does stress is that the quality of fats and carbohydrates are important (i.e.: whole grains, monounsaturated fats, and Omega-3 fatty acids are nutritionally superior to refined grains, saturated fats, and trans fats).
Let's cap this off with another great quote: "We've now looked at over 250,000 men and women for up to 30 years, and we [also] haven't seen that the percentage of calories from fat or from carbohydrates in your diet makes any difference in relation to heart attacks, various cancers, or stroke."
Let the Gary Taubes fanclub hatemail begin...
Posts
7 comments:
I love it when you provoke gary taubes followers.... :)
Have you read the book yet, Andy? If you're going to criticize Taubes, at least have the decency to read Good Calories, Bad Calories. If you aren't interested in reading it, or you don't have time, or whatever -- then don't keep making anti-Taubes posts every few weeks. It seems only fair to understand the man's arguments before you attempt to refute them.
"What Dr. Willett does stress is that the quality of fats and carbohydrates are important"
So he agrees with Taubes.
"We've now looked at over 250,000 men and women for up to 30 years, and we [also] haven't seen that the percentage of calories from fat or from carbohydrates in your diet makes any difference in relation to heart attacks, various cancers, or stroke."
If that's true then why in the world would a low-fat diet be recommended (or a high-fat diet condemned) for a "healthy heart"?
--GK
Anonymous -- I have leafed through "Good Calories, Bad Calories" and read approximately 10pages of it.
That said, I have read and watched approximately 20 interviews with Gary Taubes and have read several of his articles.
In any case, this post is not a book review or a critique of "Good Calories, Bad Calories."
One does not need to read as much as a paragraph in that book to know that Gary Taubes views are that calories are irrelevant in weight gain/loss and that weight gain is ultimately caused by carbohydrate consumption.
And, seeing as how this is my blog, I have complete freedom to write about whatever I want. So, if I want to take a jab at Mr. Taubes every few weeks, you can be sure I most certainly will.
Off to have some brown rice. :)
GK -- how do you perceive Dr. Willett as agreeing with Gary Taubes?
What Dr. Willett is saying -- that, ultimately, what determines weight loss/gain is calories -- is exactly what Gary Taubes challenges with every word he says.
As you know, I am not a proponent of low-fat diets for healthy people. Instead, I am much more of the belief that healthy fats (monounsaturated fats as well as Omega-3 fatty acids) play a major role in heart health.
I definitely think saturated fat and trans fat consumption should be limited.
I think the "low fat diet for a health heart" statement had more to do with obesity (remember, being overweight by as little as 10pounds increases heart disease risk).
Since fat is higher in calories than protein and carbs (9 calories per gram, rather than 4), the "low fat" message was originally intended as a way to keep caloric intakes lower.
It then got convoluted and twisted around.
As far as I'm concerned, both fat phobia and carb phobia are detrimental in their own right.
"What Dr. Willett is saying -- that, ultimately, what determines weight loss/gain is calories -- is exactly what Gary Taubes challenges with every word he says."
No, Taubes says exactly the same thing, in GCBC p.293, in two places: "Either way, the calories in will equal the calories out, as they must..."; "...they will observe correctly that positive caloric balance is associated with weight gain..."
I find nothing in the other 500 pages that contradicts this, and not in his numerous lectures and interviews.
GK
GK,
I don't think Gary Taubes would be happy to hear that you think his book defends the "calories determine weight loss/weight gain" theory.
The "caloric" theory states that, say, eating an additional amount of calories from any food will cause weight gain.
Taubes, however, argues that only calories from carbohydrates are guilty of this.
Post a Comment