A Mediterranean or low-carb diet may boost weight loss, but neither makes fat melt away. Israeli researchers assigned 277 men and 45 women, all middle-aged and obese (they averaged about 200 pounds), to one of three diets:
• The (so-called) low-fat diet cut calories (to 1,500 for women and 1,800 for men) and limited fat to 30 percent of calories (what most people were eating when they entered the study). Dieters were told to eat more fruits, vegetables, and beans and to cut back on fats and sweets.
• The Mediterranean diet cut calories (to 1,500 for women and 1,800 for men) and allowed more fat (35 percent of calories), mostly from olive oil (2 to 3 tablespoons per day) and nuts (5 to 7 per day). Dieters were told to eat more vegetables, poultry, and fish.
• The low-carb diet didn't cut calories or fat, but limited carbs to 20 grams a day for two months and 120 grams a day afterwards. Unlike an Atkins diet, dieters were told to get their fat and protein from plants, not animals.
After two years, those on the "low-fat" diet had lost an average of about 6 pounds,
while those on the Mediterranean or low-carb diet had lost an average of 10 pounds. The researchers noted that the 45 women in the study "tended to lose more weight on the Mediterranean diet," but they gave no further details.
Also, HDL ("good") cholesterol rose more on the low-carb diet and triglycerides (which are bad) dropped more on the Mediterranean and low-carb diets. Among the 36 participants with diabetes, fasting blood sugar levels were lowest on the Mediterranean diet.
What to do: For men, the best diet might be either low-carb or Mediterranean, but
women and anyone with diabetes might do better with a Mediterranean diet.
To go Mediterranean, load your plate with fruits and vegetables, but leave some room for whole grains, nuts, poultry, and seafood. (Meat-and-cheese-laden pizza, lasagna, and similar Italian dishes have too much saturated fat to fit in a traditional Mediterranean diet.) A tablespoon of olive oil (or any oil) has 120 calories, so don't go beyond 2 or 3 tablespoons a day.
FISHING FOR 0MEGA-3S
All fish are not equal when it comes to omega-3 fats like EPA (eicosapentaenoic acid) and DHA (docosahexaenoic acid). Researchers analyzed samples of 30 species
of fish caught or farmed in the United States, Ecuador, Honduras, Norway, New
Zealand, Canada, or Chile. Their goal was to find fish with the most EPA and DHA, but the lowest levels of an omega-6 fat called arachidonic acid, which may promote inflammation.
Among wild-caught fish, salmon was highest in omega-3s. Other wild fish had less, but none were high in arachidonic acid.
Farmed salmon and trout were higher in arachidonic acid than wild-caught fish, but
they also had high levels of omega-3 fats to balance their arachidonic acid, in contrast, farmed tilapia and farmed catfish had more arachidonic acid.
What to do: It's still uncertain if arachidonic acid is harmful, but if you're looking for omega-3s, you may be safer with either wild or farmed salmon or trout than farmed tilapia or catfish.
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
New name, old diet
BRITISH MONARCH William the Conqueror had a problem: He'd grown too stout to ride his horse. Determined to trim down, he put himself on a diet consisting solely of alcoholic beverages. The year was 1087.
Diets have existed for as long as people have overfilled their britches—and, in some form, so have most of today's hottest plans, says Laura Fraser, author of Losing It: False Hopes and Fat Profits in the Diet Industry (Plume Books). Had William the Conqueror lived today, his regimen might be called the Low-Food Diet, and it would probably sit atop the best-seller lists.
"The low-carb diets keep coming back again and again, with different names and gimmicks," says Julie Miller Jones, PhD, a professor of nutrition at the College
of St. Catherine in St. Paul, Minnesota. The Atkins diet. Miller Jones says,
bears a striking resemblance to the eating plan published by London casket maker William Banling in 1864. It preached abstinence from starches and sugars and was wildly popular. Low-carb re-emerged in the mid-1960s with Irwin Slillman's
The Doctor's Quick Weight Loss Diet, which restricted dieters to meat, eggs, and cheese.
Other approaches have also made numerous appearances, including liquid plans (not just William the Conqueror's bul Slim-Fast's) and diets emphasizing single foods (the grapefruit and cabbage diets). Some ideas, mercifully, have not had a renaissance, like the tapeworm diet of the early 1900s or the "bland" diet
devised in the 19th century by Sylvester Graham, of graham cracker fame. Graham promised that foods without spices would not inflame the senses and therefore
would prevent overindulgence when it came to eating or other bodily pleasures.
Tapeworms aside, most of these plans share a simple trick: They limit you to a few food groups. The reliable result: You lose weight, at least in the short run. This raises the milliondollar question: Do any of these gimmicks—or sensible strategies, for that matter—work well enough for women to stomach long-ierm? Our Diet Face-Off aims to find out how four popular diets (Atkins, Ornish, Weight Watchers, and
The Way to Eat) perform in real life. Any day now, our volunteers will finish their 6-month stints on their diets. In our May issue, we'll tell you what some of them have to say about their experiences. Stay tuned.
Diets have existed for as long as people have overfilled their britches—and, in some form, so have most of today's hottest plans, says Laura Fraser, author of Losing It: False Hopes and Fat Profits in the Diet Industry (Plume Books). Had William the Conqueror lived today, his regimen might be called the Low-Food Diet, and it would probably sit atop the best-seller lists.
"The low-carb diets keep coming back again and again, with different names and gimmicks," says Julie Miller Jones, PhD, a professor of nutrition at the College
of St. Catherine in St. Paul, Minnesota. The Atkins diet. Miller Jones says,
bears a striking resemblance to the eating plan published by London casket maker William Banling in 1864. It preached abstinence from starches and sugars and was wildly popular. Low-carb re-emerged in the mid-1960s with Irwin Slillman's
The Doctor's Quick Weight Loss Diet, which restricted dieters to meat, eggs, and cheese.
Other approaches have also made numerous appearances, including liquid plans (not just William the Conqueror's bul Slim-Fast's) and diets emphasizing single foods (the grapefruit and cabbage diets). Some ideas, mercifully, have not had a renaissance, like the tapeworm diet of the early 1900s or the "bland" diet
devised in the 19th century by Sylvester Graham, of graham cracker fame. Graham promised that foods without spices would not inflame the senses and therefore
would prevent overindulgence when it came to eating or other bodily pleasures.
Tapeworms aside, most of these plans share a simple trick: They limit you to a few food groups. The reliable result: You lose weight, at least in the short run. This raises the milliondollar question: Do any of these gimmicks—or sensible strategies, for that matter—work well enough for women to stomach long-ierm? Our Diet Face-Off aims to find out how four popular diets (Atkins, Ornish, Weight Watchers, and
The Way to Eat) perform in real life. Any day now, our volunteers will finish their 6-month stints on their diets. In our May issue, we'll tell you what some of them have to say about their experiences. Stay tuned.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)