More

HuffPost Social Reading

Cut Calories For Weight Loss: Report

Calories Weight Loss

The Huffington Post   First Posted: 02/ 5/2012 5:04 pm Updated: 02/ 5/2012 5:12 pm

If you're trying to lose weight, a new study shows it doesn't really matter what you cut out of your diet as long as you're cutting something.

The study, published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, suggests it doesn't matter whether people adhere to diets where they have to cut out fat, and/or carbs and/or protein -- so long as they're just cutting the calories consumed, Reuters reported.

"If you're happier doing it low fat, or happier doing it low carb, this paper says it's OK to do it either way. They were equally successful," study researcher Christopher Gardner, a professor at Stanford University who was not involved in the study, told Reuters.

To test this, Pennington Biomedical Research Center scientists had 424 overweight or obese men and women take part in one of four diets for two years. The first was low-fat with average protein, the second was low-fat with high protein, the third was high fat with average protein and the fourth was high fat with high protein, the Globe and Mail reported.

All the diet plans cut 750 calories a day from the participants' diets, and all were high-fiber and low in cholesterol and saturated fat. Researchers followed up at the six-month mark and the two-year mark, and found that after six months, all four dieting groups had lost an average of nine pounds of total body fat and five pounds of lean muscle, according to the Globe and Mail.

"Participants lost more fat than lean mass after consumption of all diets, with no differences in changes in body composition, abdominal fat, or hepatic fat between assigned macronutrient amounts," researchers wrote in the study.

However, study researcher Dr. George Bray told Reuters that the ultimate predictor of weight loss was adherence to a diet.

The Mayo Clinic explained that calories we consume either get turned into fat or physical energy. And if you consume more calories than you are burning off, then that will lead to weight gain.

The Mayo Clinic reports:

Because 3,500 calories equals about 1 pound (0.45 kilogram) of fat, you need to burn 3,500 calories more than you take in to lose 1 pound. So if you cut 500 calories from your typical diet each day, you'd lose about 1 pound a week (500 calories x 7 days = 3,500 calories).

But don't take this to mean you can eat horrible food, as long as you eat less of it. Past research suggests that not all foods are equal when it comes to weight loss (and of course, not all foods are equal nutritionally, either). A study conducted by Harvard researchers shows that there are certain foods that seem to be more linked with weight gain, the New York Times reported.

Eating French fries is linked with gaining an average of 3.4 pounds every four years, according to the New York Times, and foods like potato chips, red and processed meat and sugary drinks are also associated with weight gain.

Meanwhile, foods like fruits, veggies and whole grains were linked with weight loss in the study, according to the New York Times.

Also on HuffPost:

FOLLOW HUFFPOST HEALTHY LIVING

If you're trying to lose weight, a new study shows it doesn't really matter what you cut out of your diet as long as you're cutting something. The study, published in the American Journal of Clinic...
If you're trying to lose weight, a new study shows it doesn't really matter what you cut out of your diet as long as you're cutting something. The study, published in the American Journal of Clinic...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 140
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3  Next ›  Last »  (3 total)
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Matt Blanc
11:39 AM on 02/16/2012
If I eat proteins I don't get as many hunger pangs as when I eat starches or sugars. So I try not to get my 'hunger urge' started by staying away from breads and sweets. But the smell of toast works on me like the whistle and Pavlov's dogs -- I start salivating and my stomach growls for yeast and wheat!
01:24 AM on 02/12/2012
Weight loss should not be the goal rather fat loss should. A fat loss nutritional program is effective when there is an obvious calorie deficit, however it is most efficient and optimal if the foods consumed are whole foods. Those who are irrationally dogmatic need to understand that fat loss should simultaneously compliment a healthy lifestyle.
02:51 PM on 02/10/2012
So it doesn't matter what I eat as long as they contain less calories, yet at the same time, not all foods are created equal for weight loss, so even if I eat the calorie equivalent of french fries and vegetables I will gain more weight with french fries.

Nutritional science is a joke, but worse is when news sources promote it as fact.

Folks, just experiment with your own diet. If you can maintain no carbs and lose weight then go for it. If you bike ride and keep gaining weight, then change it. Stop listing to what "journalists" think is important.
02:10 AM on 02/11/2012
Dear Scienceisgreat, you need to read the book "Eating healthy and dyind obese"! There is a chapter: "Science feeds the confusione", which you will enjoy reading (follow this link)http://www.vitasanas.ch/wp/?page_id=370
Enjoy the lecture!
Leoluca Criscione, Switzerland
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Dubagee
08:02 PM on 02/09/2012
The problem with this article is that it's far too wordy so most likely people won't read that the TYPE OF FOOD YOU EAT IS WHAT MATTERS... they will only read that they have to cut some food out of their life. So then they will just cut out veggies to reduce their calorie load... and wind up NOT losing weight and then complain because they did follow the guidelines. It sucks that people don't read as much as they used to, but a lot of people just don't have time, so make these articles less wordy next time.

Oh wait, did I just write a long response? lol.

www.gigieatscelebrities.com
photo
chamberwindow
Socialism or barbarism.
06:17 PM on 02/09/2012
Oh I'm just so shocked that if you put people on semi starvation diets that they lose weight. Just sooo shocked.
Now put these people into the real world, where they will have to suffer from intense mind numbing hunger, DAY IN and DAY OUT for days, weeks, months, or better yet, the REST OF THEIR LIVES.
Now given that, what should actually matter is, which dieters felt less hungry throughout the day while under supervision. The group that follows that diet will probably be the most successful.
From my own experience, the only diet (I have tried maybe one hundred or so) that allowed me to go most of my day, between meals, without any hunger pangs, was a high fat, low carbohydrate diet. Much higher in fat, and much lower in carbohydrate than the "low carb" diet used in this study.
02:14 PM on 02/09/2012
A quick look at the source study and a little math indicates that this should have been a throw-away story. The study participants ate closer to a theoretical average diet among all of the participants than they did to their respective prescribed diets. It is no big shocker then that no difference was found among the different diet groups. Same diet = same results.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jacquelinenh
HuffPo Addict
09:51 AM on 02/08/2012
In addition to the basics, a healthy weight loss diet must include B vitamins, chromium, omega 3 fatty acids, and vitamin D -- all important for signaling the body to shed pounds. Explained here: http://www.womentowomen.com/healthyweight/nutritionforweightloss.aspx
04:02 AM on 02/08/2012
Dear ALL, I have been reading ALL the comments! They represent a further (if needed) support on the confusion in the field! As former obesity scientist, I have to admit that this confusion has been created and continously fed by the us: the scientists!

"Eating healthy and dying obese... elucidation of an apparent paradox" is the title of a book describing how this confusion has been 'scientifically' CREATED and how a NEUTRAL information looks like! All the best
Leoluca Criscione, Switzerland
http://www.vitasanas.ch/fileadmin/user_upload/pdf/BOOK-chapter_1_confusion.pdf
IMOPINIONH8D
because I want it empty...
07:03 PM on 02/07/2012
I quit drinking soda, red meat, and fried foods. Lost fat and put on some muscle.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
raker
03:16 PM on 02/07/2012
I've never lost more weight faster and without being hungry all the time than with the low-carb lean-protein South Beach Diet.
03:03 PM on 02/07/2012
This just demonstartes that this study was NEUTRAL (not sponsored!!!!!). It is a new study demonstrating old physiological knowledges! This is the way the body works: CALGENETIC BALANCE!! see more with this link http://www.vitasanas.ch/fileadmin/user_upload/pdf/book11_the_genetic_balance_methode_mangiasano_method.pd
08:34 AM on 02/07/2012
And this is supposed to be news..? It is OLD news..! We all know that already...eat less...lose weight..!
03:11 PM on 02/07/2012
You are totally right: it is OLD news! This study is simply an example of a NEUTRAL one (not sponsored!!!!!). This is the way the body works: CALOGENETIC BALANCE, !! see more with this link http://www.vitasanas.ch/fileadmin/user_upload/pdf/book11_the_genetic_balance_methode_mangiasano_method.pd
07:54 AM on 02/07/2012
Finally, an article that recognizes the basic physics of weight loss. Eat fewer calories and burn more calories than you need, weight loss will happen. There are no magic foods, magic diets, etc. Eat too many calories in apples and carrots and you will gain weight. Go on a twinkie diet but take in fewer calories than you are expending, you will lose weight. Energy in
08:32 AM on 02/07/2012
You must be an expert! So I can cut out food entirely, and just have 7 Rum & Cokes a day and get healthier?? Thanks for the advice, Dr.
04:32 PM on 02/07/2012
No. Just lighter :)
photo
JoeyDee2
I know what just passed here
03:27 PM on 02/09/2012
Sounds good except I can't do rum: triggers atrial fib. in my case. Scotch--yes!
06:47 AM on 02/07/2012
good genes are better than a good diet. like arthritis cures, there are many diets because none work well (because fat people wont stay on the diet). overeating is an addiction like smoking. fat people interpet many different stimuli as hunger. they are in such denial that they wont admit to snacking even when videos are taken of them overeating. there are over 4000 cal in a pound of fat. if your cal requirment is 1200 and you eat 1000 cal, it takes about 20 days to loose a pound. in our immediate gratification society few have the patience to loose much.
06:24 PM on 02/07/2012
You are talking rubbish here. Stop characterising fat people as being of bad character and morals. The day is coming when large law suits will be fought over this form of character assassination and assault. And for your information, a 1500 calorie diet, let alone a 1000 calorie diet is a STARVATION DIET in which heart muscle will necessarily be devoured by the body. We have a pretty good handle on how to correct weight now through proper nutrition, but people like you with your unearned sense of moral superiority don't want to let go of the last vestiges of your ability to victimise others now that you have been denied access to other forms of discrimination.
11:37 AM on 02/08/2012
I've been eating under 1500 (usually 1200) for years and my doctor always praises me when he does my check-ups. And I am not skinny either. And don't use your size as something to get defensive about. If you were exercising for half an hour a day and you eat no chips or soda or fast food, then feel free to get offended. Until then, don't be so rude and listen to what this person is saying; the majority of people who are overweight are that way because they don't cut down their caloric intake and they ignore that they snack all day long.
11:56 PM on 02/06/2012
This is such a crock! First of all, it is not a new study. It was published a few years ago and this is just a rehash of the same data. If you look closely at the study results, the subjects did not conform to their assigned diets. The researchers used two methods of assessing compliance and both of them confirmed this. Compliance was poor at the six month mark and by the end of the study everyone was eating the same proportions. Since the authors used and intention-to-treat analysis, they reported the results as though everyone complied with their assigned diets. This is why nutritional science has served us so poorly and why everyone is so confused about what should constitute a healthy diet and which weight loss diets are the best. I know from personal experience that at least two of the authors are outspoken critics of low-carb dieting so I assume that this sloppy piece of work was done for a purpose.
03:44 PM on 02/07/2012
Dear Canuck1950: You are likely a Gary Taubes's fan! Gary Tauber with his 'half-truth' has created a lot of confusion. It is true that the body converted carbs to fat, but ONLY if the energy (calories) taken is HIGHER than the PERSONAL DAILY Total Energy Expenditure (DTEE)!!!! The problem is that few, very few people know their Personal DTEE... read more with this link http://www.vitasanas.ch/fileadmin/user_upload/pdf/BOOK4_The_personal_caloric_requirement__2_.pdf
06:58 PM on 02/07/2012
I had a look at your link there. It is clear that you subscribe to the calories-in/calories-out paradigm that Gary's book has thoroughly discredited (yes, I am a fan, I also consider him a good friend) to the extent that I wonder if you actually read Good Calories, Bad Calories. The CICO paradigm, although perfectly commonsensical certainly hasn't served us very well in combating the obesity and related epidemics. Things that are intuitively commonsensical sometimes turn out to be completely wrong. The fact that the earth is not flat, for instance, or that the sun doesn't revolve around the earth. The idea that we must know our DTEE and consciously adjust our intake to avoid obesity is absurd. How is it that people were not obese until very recently in human history. Were our forebears aware of their DTEE and the caloric values of their foods? Of course not, they weren't eating a high sugar, high refined carb diet that messes with your metabolism so that normal homeostatic controls malfunction leading to weight gain, insulin resistance, diabetes and heart disease. It's the nature of our food that is the problem, not the amount. Gary's book makes that very clear. I suggest you read it.
01:07 PM on 02/10/2012
Dear Leo, what works for some doesnt always work for all. We all have a different genetic makeup. I personally am very carbohydrate intolerant. Gluten, sugar etc. A diet similar to the Taubes diet has really worked for me. I think if you read the Taubes book you would see it actually says: it works for many not all.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DrP
09:28 PM on 02/07/2012
What he said!