Low carb diets 'cut heart energy'

"Is a "stiffer" heat undesirable? Is a less "stiff" heart desirable? We
don't know. Maybe our heart are too soft from too much refined carbs in
the diet. We don't know.

5) "One of the participants even noticed he could not manage his daily
run while on the diet"

How severe was the diet? What does this mean, considering that they
were on the diet for only two weeks? What diet was he on before this
diet? What a pile of [censored].

It is just amazing that these "research professionals" would actually
attach their names to this piece of sludge and actually expect it to be
taken seriously."

Ah, our crack mind at work again, where asking rhetorical questions makes
him an expert but mostly serves to show his level of ignorance in the
area. Good to know he is around to tell us what is valid research and
not. A counter question, if this is the result for two weeks what for
longer periods? I think I know the answer based on previous research
involving an army experiement and another a man who went on an amimal
source diet for long periods. Let's see if the crack mind figures it out
on his own.

Quoted message said:

Low carb diets 'cut heart energy'

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4435046.stm

Here is the text of the "study":

******

Low carb diets 'cut heart energy'

There are concerns about a low-carb diet
Scientists have found high fat, low carbohydrate diets can reduce
energy to the heart.
The Oxford University team say it is unclear at this stage whether this
could have a damaging impact on health - but say more research is
needed.

Many people have lost weight quickly by following such diets - but
scientists fear they may not be good for health in the longer term.

The new study is being presented to an American Heart Association
meeting.

The Oxford team monitored 19 people over a two week period.

We would certainly not recommend high fat-low carb diets to anyone
who wants to lose weight and look after their heart

Professor Peter Weissberg

They found that the energy stored in the heart was reduced by an
average of 16% among those who followed a high fat, low carbohydrate
diet.

In some people the energy reduction was as much as a third.

Their hearts also became slightly 'stiffer' - not relaxing quite as
well as before the diet.

One of the participants even noticed he could not manage his daily run
while on the diet.

The changes were reversed within two weeks after returning to a normal
diet.

Associated with illness

Lead researcher Professor Kieran Clarke told BBC News that people with
illnesses such as diabetes, obesity and heart disease also had lower
than normal heart energy levels.

A more severe form of energy depletion is one of the features of heart
failure, where patients struggle with physical exertion because they
have little 'in the tank'.

Professor Clarke said further research should be carried out on a
larger sample over a longer period.

"Our study gives us some interesting insights into how extreme diets
might be affecting us.

"Of course, this is a small and short-term piece of work. The body is
remarkably adaptive and what we don't know is whether our hearts would
have gradually returned to normal had we stuck to the diet long-term."

The British Heart Foundation, which funded the work, said the results
reinforced their view that people should not follow high fat, low carb
diets to lose weight.

Professor Peter Weissberg, BHF medical director, said: "Diet devotees
can be reassured that this research in no way suggests that the high
fat-low carb regime is going to give them heart failure.

"However, they should be aware that such unbalanced diets are a major
insult on their bodies' metabolism and, as this study shows, may be
having direct effects on their hearts, particularly since they tend to
be high in saturated fat.

"We would certainly not recommend high fat-low carb diets to anyone who
wants to lose weight and look after their heart.

"Achieving this with a balanced diet and regular exercise is
sustainable for life and, for most people, is the safest way for your
heart."

*******

1) The study is not published, it is being presented to the American
Heart Association meeting. The AHA has shown to be squarely against low
carb from day one. They have been shown to have an agenda against
low-carb.

Here is what CSPI has to say about the AHA.

http://cspinet.org/integrity/nonprofits/american_heart_association.html

enuf said 'bout the AHA.

2) "The Oxford team monitored 19 people over a two week period."

NINETEEN people over TWO WEEKS adds up to absolutely squat. It is hard
to believe that serious scientists would even consider presenting this
to anyone without being completely embarassed out of the profession. Is
this a joke? It must be, but April Fool's day was months ago.

3) "They found that the energy stored in the heart was reduced by an
average of 16% among those who followed a high fat, low carbohydrate
diet.

In some people the energy reduction was as much as a third. "

Did they establish that the reduction was undesired. Maybe the
initially elevated energy levels were undesired. What did they mean by
energy stored? Glycogen levels? All muscles store glycogen. On a high
carb doet the muscles will have to store more glycogen. Is this
desirable? We don't know. Is the reduction in stored energy desirable?
We don't know. Should we be alarmed either way? We don't know.

4) "Their hearts also became slightly 'stiffer' - not relaxing quite as
well as before the diet."

Is a "stiffer" heat undesirable? Is a less "stiff" heart desirable? We
don't know. Maybe our heart are too soft from too much refined carbs in
the diet. We don't know.

5) "One of the participants even noticed he could not manage his daily
run while on the diet"

How severe was the diet? What does this mean, considering that they
were on the diet for only two weeks? What diet was he on before this
diet? What a pile of [censored].

It is just amazing that these "research professionals" would actually
attach their names to this piece of sludge and actually expect it to be
taken seriously.

TC

Quoted message said:

Ah, our crack mind at work again, where asking rhetorical questions makes
him an expert but mostly serves to show his level of ignorance in the
area. Good to know he is around to tell us what is valid research and
not. A counter question, if this is the result for two weeks what for
longer periods? I think I know the answer based on previous research
involving an army experiement and another a man who went on an amimal
source diet for long periods. Let's see if the crack mind figures it out
on his own.

Who cares what you think you know and what you base it on? No-one here.

TC

This was a 2 week study. The first two weeks of transition into or out of
ketosis has side effects. They needed to wait until the dieter had adjusted
to the new way of eating.

"TC" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Low carb diets 'cut heart energy'

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4435046.stm

Here is the text of the "study":

******

Low carb diets 'cut heart energy'

There are concerns about a low-carb diet
Scientists have found high fat, low carbohydrate diets can reduce
energy to the heart.
The Oxford University team say it is unclear at this stage whether this
could have a damaging impact on health - but say more research is
needed.

Many people have lost weight quickly by following such diets - but
scientists fear they may not be good for health in the longer term.

The new study is being presented to an American Heart Association
meeting.

The Oxford team monitored 19 people over a two week period.

We would certainly not recommend high fat-low carb diets to anyone
who wants to lose weight and look after their heart

Professor Peter Weissberg

They found that the energy stored in the heart was reduced by an
average of 16% among those who followed a high fat, low carbohydrate
diet.

In some people the energy reduction was as much as a third.

Their hearts also became slightly 'stiffer' - not relaxing quite as
well as before the diet.

One of the participants even noticed he could not manage his daily run
while on the diet.

The changes were reversed within two weeks after returning to a normal
diet.

Associated with illness

Lead researcher Professor Kieran Clarke told BBC News that people with
illnesses such as diabetes, obesity and heart disease also had lower
than normal heart energy levels.

A more severe form of energy depletion is one of the features of heart
failure, where patients struggle with physical exertion because they
have little 'in the tank'.

Professor Clarke said further research should be carried out on a
larger sample over a longer period.

"Our study gives us some interesting insights into how extreme diets
might be affecting us.

"Of course, this is a small and short-term piece of work. The body is
remarkably adaptive and what we don't know is whether our hearts would
have gradually returned to normal had we stuck to the diet long-term."

The British Heart Foundation, which funded the work, said the results
reinforced their view that people should not follow high fat, low carb
diets to lose weight.

Professor Peter Weissberg, BHF medical director, said: "Diet devotees
can be reassured that this research in no way suggests that the high
fat-low carb regime is going to give them heart failure.

"However, they should be aware that such unbalanced diets are a major
insult on their bodies' metabolism and, as this study shows, may be
having direct effects on their hearts, particularly since they tend to
be high in saturated fat.

"We would certainly not recommend high fat-low carb diets to anyone who
wants to lose weight and look after their heart.

"Achieving this with a balanced diet and regular exercise is
sustainable for life and, for most people, is the safest way for your
heart."

*******

1) The study is not published, it is being presented to the American
Heart Association meeting. The AHA has shown to be squarely against low
carb from day one. They have been shown to have an agenda against
low-carb.

Here is what CSPI has to say about the AHA.

http://cspinet.org/integrity/nonprofits/american_heart_association.html

enuf said 'bout the AHA.

2) "The Oxford team monitored 19 people over a two week period."

NINETEEN people over TWO WEEKS adds up to absolutely squat. It is hard
to believe that serious scientists would even consider presenting this
to anyone without being completely embarassed out of the profession. Is
this a joke? It must be, but April Fool's day was months ago.

3) "They found that the energy stored in the heart was reduced by an
average of 16% among those who followed a high fat, low carbohydrate
diet.

In some people the energy reduction was as much as a third. "

Did they establish that the reduction was undesired. Maybe the
initially elevated energy levels were undesired. What did they mean by
energy stored? Glycogen levels? All muscles store glycogen. On a high
carb doet the muscles will have to store more glycogen. Is this
desirable? We don't know. Is the reduction in stored energy desirable?
We don't know. Should we be alarmed either way? We don't know.

4) "Their hearts also became slightly 'stiffer' - not relaxing quite as
well as before the diet."

Is a "stiffer" heat undesirable? Is a less "stiff" heart desirable? We
don't know. Maybe our heart are too soft from too much refined carbs in
the diet. We don't know.

5) "One of the participants even noticed he could not manage his daily
run while on the diet"

How severe was the diet? What does this mean, considering that they
were on the diet for only two weeks? What diet was he on before this
diet? What a pile of [censored].

It is just amazing that these "research professionals" would actually
attach their names to this piece of sludge and actually expect it to be
taken seriously.

TC

TC said:

It is just amazing that these "research professionals" would actually
attach their names to this piece of sludge and actually expect it to be
taken seriously.

TC

You are an idiot with no credibility. Same cast of characters only
with the results you want and everything would be fine.

You act just like the Weston Price cult in that they attck the CSPI in
one area and then use them to support their claims in another area
i.e. refined sugar is bad for you.

jt said:

TC said:

It is just amazing that these "research professionals" would actually
attach their names to this piece of sludge and actually expect it to be
taken seriously.

TC

You are an idiot with no credibility. Same cast of characters only
with the results you want and everything would be fine.

You act just like the Weston Price cult in that they attck the CSPI in
one area and then use them to support their claims in another area
i.e. refined sugar is bad for you.

OK, here comes the troll again.

TC

jt said:

TC said:

It is just amazing that these "research professionals" would actually
attach their names to this piece of sludge and actually expect it to be
taken seriously.

TC

You are an idiot with no credibility. Same cast of characters only
with the results you want and everything would be fine.

You act just like the Weston Price cult in that they attck the CSPI in
one area and then use them to support their claims in another area
i.e. refined sugar is bad for you.

OK, here comes the troll again.

TC

"Cubit" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

This was a 2 week study. The first two weeks of transition into or
out of
ketosis has side effects. They needed to wait until the dieter had
adjusted
to the new way of eating.

From someone that enjoys endurance running, studies have shown exercise
and low carbs are oil and water and yes past the ketosis cycle. Low
carb, and I'm not talking about cheap sugar [censored], does not provide
enough energy. You may lose weight on LC but that says nothing about
health. Hell you can lose weight on all those asinine fad diets.

If an eating regimen will not keep the exercising body with enough
energy then I find the diet is detrimental to healthy living. Proper
eating should keep you healthy from sleeping through the Tour de France.
Does anyone think people like Lance Armstrong, Yanos Kuros or simple
marathon runner are low carb? Then again some people think simple
exercise is egregious and will not control weight.

Actually I shocked that this summary article even raises an eyebrow. Low
carb and exercise has been known for years to be a disaster.

-DF

Ignoramus, who posts here occasionally has run a half marathon on low carb
with no ill effects.

There is some anecdotal evidence that a runner who lives in ketosis never
"hits the wall."

"Doug Freese" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Cubit" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

This was a 2 week study. The first two weeks of transition into or
out of
ketosis has side effects. They needed to wait until the dieter had
adjusted
to the new way of eating.

From someone that enjoys endurance running, studies have shown exercise
and low carbs are oil and water and yes past the ketosis cycle. Low
carb, and I'm not talking about cheap sugar [censored], does not provide
enough energy. You may lose weight on LC but that says nothing about
health. Hell you can lose weight on all those asinine fad diets.

If an eating regimen will not keep the exercising body with enough
energy then I find the diet is detrimental to healthy living. Proper
eating should keep you healthy from sleeping through the Tour de France.
Does anyone think people like Lance Armstrong, Yanos Kuros or simple
marathon runner are low carb? Then again some people think simple
exercise is egregious and will not control weight.

Actually I shocked that this summary article even raises an eyebrow. Low
carb and exercise has been known for years to be a disaster.

-DF

"Cubit" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Ignoramus, who posts here occasionally has run a half marathon on low
carb
with no ill effects.

No disrespect to Ignoramus but his effort was a bit above a walk. If he
had tried to really run it, he would have found the wall real fast.

Quoted message said:

There is some anecdotal evidence that a runner who lives in ketosis
never
"hits the wall."

It has to be anecdotal because the science and reality says it aint so.
You can't do exercise short of a casual walk in ketosis or LC in
general. Many people that start running to lose weight try Atkins and
running at the same time. They want to hurry up and get svelte. They
soon come into the running forum wondering why they have no energy and
feel like [censored]. Once they return to carbs they get their energy back and
lose weight as long as they keep their caloric intake less then they
burn.

In fact the big problem with surviving endurance exercise, is make sure
you get enough carbs or you end up in the medical tent.

If you have to minimize you exercise because your body does not have
enough carbs, tell me again how healthy LC is? There is and old saying
listen to your body. If your exercise is the TV remote control, you
haven't got the foggiest idea about exercise and nutrition.

-DF