Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
low-carb diet with plant proteins best for longevity, per Harvard Health Letter
41 views
Skip to first unread message
Ellen K.
Feb 28, 2012, 2:16:22 PM2/28/12
to
From Harvard Health Letter 2/28/2012
Going low-carb? Pick the right proteins
Low-carb eating plans like the Atkins diet were once so popular that they
graced the covers of Newsweek and other magazines. Some experts championed
these diets as the best way to lose weight. Others scorned them as the
heart-clogging way that might help you shed pounds but put your health at
risk. Now several large randomized controlled trials - the gold standard of
medical research - have shown that low-carb diets are as good as low-fat
diets for losing weight, and may even be better. But how do they fare for
long-term health?
Most low-carb diets deliver more protein and fat than "regular" or low-fat
diets. We know there are good and not-so-good fats and carbohydrates. Could
the same hold true for protein sources? If so, then the type of protein that
dominates a diet can influence health as much as the kinds and amounts of
carbohydrates or fats.
The evidence
Researchers at the Harvard School of Public Health have been following
85,000 female nurses and 45,000 male health professionals since the
mid-1980s. Every few years, the participants fill out questionnaires
detailing what they eat and provide other information on their health. This
wealth of data is offering some insight into the long-term effects of
different low-carb diets.
In one study, the researchers created scores for each nurse's intake of
protein from red meat, poultry, fish, dairy, eggs, nuts, and beans. The
findings:
The more protein from red meat, the higher the chances of developing heart
disease.
Women who averaged two or more servings of red meat a day had a 30% higher
risk of developing heart disease than those who had one or fewer servings a
day.
Replacing one serving of meat with one of nuts reduced the risk by 30%.
In a separate study, the researchers created scores that reflected both the
amount of carbohydrate in the diet and the main sources of protein. Among
the nurses and male health professionals, those with a low-carb diet heavy
in animal protein were 23% more likely to have died over 20-plus years of
follow-up than those with "regular" diets, while those following a low-carb
diet rich in plant protein were 20% less likely to have died.
Going low-carb? Pick the right proteins
Low-carb eating plans like the Atkins diet were once so popular that they
graced the covers of Newsweek and other magazines. Some experts championed
these diets as the best way to lose weight. Others scorned them as the
heart-clogging way that might help you shed pounds but put your health at
risk. Now several large randomized controlled trials - the gold standard of
medical research - have shown that low-carb diets are as good as low-fat
diets for losing weight, and may even be better. But how do they fare for
long-term health?
Most low-carb diets deliver more protein and fat than "regular" or low-fat
diets. We know there are good and not-so-good fats and carbohydrates. Could
the same hold true for protein sources? If so, then the type of protein that
dominates a diet can influence health as much as the kinds and amounts of
carbohydrates or fats.
The evidence
Researchers at the Harvard School of Public Health have been following
85,000 female nurses and 45,000 male health professionals since the
mid-1980s. Every few years, the participants fill out questionnaires
detailing what they eat and provide other information on their health. This
wealth of data is offering some insight into the long-term effects of
different low-carb diets.
In one study, the researchers created scores for each nurse's intake of
protein from red meat, poultry, fish, dairy, eggs, nuts, and beans. The
findings:
The more protein from red meat, the higher the chances of developing heart
disease.
Women who averaged two or more servings of red meat a day had a 30% higher
risk of developing heart disease than those who had one or fewer servings a
day.
Replacing one serving of meat with one of nuts reduced the risk by 30%.
In a separate study, the researchers created scores that reflected both the
amount of carbohydrate in the diet and the main sources of protein. Among
the nurses and male health professionals, those with a low-carb diet heavy
in animal protein were 23% more likely to have died over 20-plus years of
follow-up than those with "regular" diets, while those following a low-carb
diet rich in plant protein were 20% less likely to have died.
Peppermint Patootie
Feb 28, 2012, 4:45:45 PM2/28/12
to
In article <M1a3r.16912$kq7....@newsfe10.iad>,
PP
--
"What you fail to understand is that criticising established authority by means
of argument and evidence is a crucial aspect of how science works."
- Chris Malcolm
"Ellen K." <firstiniti...@dslextreme.com> wrote:
> The more protein from red meat, the higher the chances of developing heart
> disease.
>
>
>
> Women who averaged two or more servings of red meat a day had a 30% higher
> risk of developing heart disease than those who had one or fewer servings a
> day.
I'll betcha they didn't differentiate between grain fed and grass fed.
> The more protein from red meat, the higher the chances of developing heart
> disease.
>
>
>
> Women who averaged two or more servings of red meat a day had a 30% higher
> risk of developing heart disease than those who had one or fewer servings a
> day.
PP
--
"What you fail to understand is that criticising established authority by means
of argument and evidence is a crucial aspect of how science works."
- Chris Malcolm
GysdeJongh
Feb 28, 2012, 5:05:43 PM2/28/12
to
Peppermint Patootie wrote:
> In article <M1a3r.16912$kq7....@newsfe10.iad>,
> "Ellen K." <firstiniti...@dslextreme.com> wrote:
>
>> The more protein from red meat, the higher the chances of developing
>> heart disease.
>>
>>
>>
>> Women who averaged two or more servings of red meat a day had a 30%
>> higher risk of developing heart disease than those who had one or
>> fewer servings a day.
>
> I'll betcha they didn't differentiate between grain fed and grass fed.
yep, and I'll betcha that the cows were not low carb
> In article <M1a3r.16912$kq7....@newsfe10.iad>,
> "Ellen K." <firstiniti...@dslextreme.com> wrote:
>
>> The more protein from red meat, the higher the chances of developing
>> heart disease.
>>
>>
>>
>> Women who averaged two or more servings of red meat a day had a 30%
>> higher risk of developing heart disease than those who had one or
>> fewer servings a day.
>
> I'll betcha they didn't differentiate between grain fed and grass fed.
Susan
Feb 28, 2012, 5:09:46 PM2/28/12
to
x-no-arachive: yes
On 2/28/2012 4:45 PM, Peppermint Patootie wrote:
> I'll betcha they didn't differentiate between grain fed and grass fed.
>
Didn't read it, but I'm pretty sure that vegetable proteins are crap
compared to animals, bioavailability wise.
Not only feedlot, but if cured vs. uncured is not controlled for, no deal.
Susan
On 2/28/2012 4:45 PM, Peppermint Patootie wrote:
> I'll betcha they didn't differentiate between grain fed and grass fed.
>
compared to animals, bioavailability wise.
Not only feedlot, but if cured vs. uncured is not controlled for, no deal.
Susan
steve
Feb 28, 2012, 6:15:07 PM2/28/12
to
On Feb 28, 1:16 pm, "Ellen K." <firstinitiallastn...@dslextreme.com>
wrote:
> diets. We know there are good and not-so-good fats and carbohydrates. Could
I missed out on what the good carbs are. Could you elaborate?
Steve
--
wrote:
> diets. We know there are good and not-so-good fats and carbohydrates. Could
Steve
--
Message has been deleted
Ellen K.
Feb 29, 2012, 2:06:17 AM2/29/12
to
The part I found interesting was that the folks on the low-carb diet with
vegetable proteins did better than the people on the "regular" (i.e.
non-low-carb) diet.
"Susan" <su...@nothanks.org> wrote in message
news:9r51jn...@mid.individual.net...
vegetable proteins did better than the people on the "regular" (i.e.
non-low-carb) diet.
"Susan" <su...@nothanks.org> wrote in message
news:9r51jn...@mid.individual.net...
ra...@val.com
Feb 29, 2012, 2:42:29 AM2/29/12
to
On Feb 29, 1:06 am, "Ellen K." <firstinitiallastn...@dslextreme.com>
wrote:
> The part I found interesting was that the folks on the low-carb diet with
> vegetable proteins did better than the people on the "regular" (i.e.
> non-low-carb) diet.
I agree, you point is very note worth.
But were the carbs on the low carb diet higher quality than the carbs
on the higher carb diet.
What I would also like to know is how the authors defined "low carb".
Most published studies consider low carb to be as high as 45%.
Its' probably difficult to construct a much lower carb diet based on
vegetable proteins. Carbs come along for the ride with vegetable
proteins.
Randy
wrote:
> The part I found interesting was that the folks on the low-carb diet with
> vegetable proteins did better than the people on the "regular" (i.e.
> non-low-carb) diet.
But were the carbs on the low carb diet higher quality than the carbs
on the higher carb diet.
What I would also like to know is how the authors defined "low carb".
Most published studies consider low carb to be as high as 45%.
Its' probably difficult to construct a much lower carb diet based on
vegetable proteins. Carbs come along for the ride with vegetable
proteins.
Randy
ra...@val.com
Feb 29, 2012, 3:07:43 AM2/29/12
to
Susan Wrote:
> I missed out on what the good carbs are. Could you elaborate?
The best carbs might be those that increase butyrate production in the
> I missed out on what the good carbs are. Could you elaborate?
colon. Improved glycemic response can result in hours.
Also a certain amount of carbs are needed to increase insulin
sensitivity even in diabetics. Very low carb diets result in decreased
insulin sensitivity. If your eating very low carb that might be OK,
the problems is that the liver still produces insulin and if you
insulin resistance higher fasting bg levels might result.
I can provide source if requested.
Randy
Chris Malcolm
Feb 29, 2012, 5:49:24 AM2/29/12
to
Peppermint Patootie <peppermin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> In article <M1a3r.16912$kq7....@newsfe10.iad>,
> "Ellen K." <firstiniti...@dslextreme.com> wrote:
>> The more protein from red meat, the higher the chances of developing heart
>> disease.
>>
>>
>>
>> Women who averaged two or more servings of red meat a day had a 30% higher
>> risk of developing heart disease than those who had one or fewer servings a
>> day.
> I'll betcha they didn't differentiate between grain fed and grass fed.
Nor did they differentiate between processed red meat and raw red meat.
> In article <M1a3r.16912$kq7....@newsfe10.iad>,
> "Ellen K." <firstiniti...@dslextreme.com> wrote:
>> The more protein from red meat, the higher the chances of developing heart
>> disease.
>>
>>
>>
>> Women who averaged two or more servings of red meat a day had a 30% higher
>> risk of developing heart disease than those who had one or fewer servings a
>> day.
> I'll betcha they didn't differentiate between grain fed and grass fed.
--
Chris Malcolm
0 new messages