162
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      A randomized trial of a low-carbohydrate diet for obesity.

      The New England journal of medicine
      Adult, Analysis of Variance, Body Mass Index, Coronary Disease, Diet, Fat-Restricted, Diet, Reducing, methods, Dietary Carbohydrates, administration & dosage, Female, Glucose, metabolism, Humans, Lipoproteins, blood, Male, Middle Aged, Obesity, diet therapy, Risk Factors, Triglycerides, Weight Loss

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Despite the popularity of the low-carbohydrate, high-protein, high-fat (Atkins) diet, no randomized, controlled trials have evaluated its efficacy. We conducted a one-year, multicenter, controlled trial involving 63 obese men and women who were randomly assigned to either a low-carbohydrate, high-protein, high-fat diet or a low-calorie, high-carbohydrate, low-fat (conventional) diet. Professional contact was minimal to replicate the approach used by most dieters. Subjects on the low-carbohydrate diet had lost more weight than subjects on the conventional diet at 3 months (mean [+/-SD], -6.8+/-5.0 vs. -2.7+/-3.7 percent of body weight; P=0.001) and 6 months (-7.0+/-6.5 vs. -3.2+/-5.6 percent of body weight, P=0.02), but the difference at 12 months was not significant (-4.4+/-6.7 vs. -2.5+/-6.3 percent of body weight, P=0.26). After three months, no significant differences were found between the groups in total or low-density lipoprotein cholesterol concentrations. The increase in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol concentrations and the decrease in triglyceride concentrations were greater among subjects on the low-carbohydrate diet than among those on the conventional diet throughout most of the study. Both diets significantly decreased diastolic blood pressure and the insulin response to an oral glucose load. The low-carbohydrate diet produced a greater weight loss (absolute difference, approximately 4 percent) than did the conventional diet for the first six months, but the differences were not significant at one year. The low-carbohydrate diet was associated with a greater improvement in some risk factors for coronary heart disease. Adherence was poor and attrition was high in both groups. Longer and larger studies are required to determine the long-term safety and efficacy of low-carbohydrate, high-protein, high-fat diets. Copyright 2003 Massachusetts Medical Society

          Related collections

          Most cited references23

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Intensive lifestyle changes for reversal of coronary heart disease.

          The Lifestyle Heart Trial demonstrated that intensive lifestyle changes may lead to regression of coronary atherosclerosis after 1 year. To determine the feasibility of patients to sustain intensive lifestyle changes for a total of 5 years and the effects of these lifestyle changes (without lipid-lowering drugs) on coronary heart disease. Randomized controlled trial conducted from 1986 to 1992 using a randomized invitational design. Forty-eight patients with moderate to severe coronary heart disease were randomized to an intensive lifestyle change group or to a usual-care control group, and 35 completed the 5-year follow-up quantitative coronary arteriography. Two tertiary care university medical centers. Intensive lifestyle changes (10% fat whole foods vegetarian diet, aerobic exercise, stress management training, smoking cessation, group psychosocial support) for 5 years. Adherence to intensive lifestyle changes, changes in coronary artery percent diameter stenosis, and cardiac events. Experimental group patients (20 [71%] of 28 patients completed 5-year follow-up) made and maintained comprehensive lifestyle changes for 5 years, whereas control group patients (15 [75%] of 20 patients completed 5-year follow-up) made more moderate changes. In the experimental group, the average percent diameter stenosis at baseline decreased 1.75 absolute percentage points after 1 year (a 4.5% relative improvement) and by 3.1 absolute percentage points after 5 years (a 7.9% relative improvement). In contrast, the average percent diameter stenosis in the control group increased by 2.3 percentage points after 1 year (a 5.4% relative worsening) and by 11.8 percentage points after 5 years (a 27.7% relative worsening) (P=.001 between groups. Twenty-five cardiac events occurred in 28 experimental group patients vs 45 events in 20 control group patients during the 5-year follow-up (risk ratio for any event for the control group, 2.47 [95% confidence interval, 1.48-4.20]). More regression of coronary atherosclerosis occurred after 5 years than after 1 year in the experimental group. In contrast, in the control group, coronary atherosclerosis continued to progress and more than twice as many cardiac events occurred.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Quantitative Insulin Sensitivity Check Index: A Simple, Accurate Method for Assessing Insulin Sensitivity In Humans

            A. Katz (2000)
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Dietary fat intake and the risk of coronary heart disease in women.

              The relation between dietary intake of specific types of fat, particularly trans unsaturated fat and the risk of coronary disease remains unclear. We therefore studied this relation in women enrolled in the Nurses' Health Study. We prospectively studied 80,082 women who were 34 to 59 years of age and had no known coronary disease, stroke, cancer, hypercholesterolemia, or diabetes in 1980. Information on diet was obtained at base line and updated during follow-up by means of validated questionnaires. During 14 years of follow-up, we documented 939 cases of nonfatal myocardial infarction or death from coronary heart disease. Mutivariate analyses included age, smoking status, total energy intake, dietary cholesterol intake, percentages of energy obtained from protein and specific types of fat, and other risk factors. Each increase of 5 percent of energy intake from saturated fat, as compared with equivalent energy intake from carbohydrates, was associated with a 17 percent increase in the risk of coronary disease (relative risk, 1.17; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.97 to 1.41; P=0.10). As compared with equivalent energy from carbohydrates, the relative risk for a 2 percent increment in energy intake from trans unsaturated fat was 1.93 (95 percent confidence interval, 1.43 to 2.61; P<0.001); that for a 5 percent increment in energy from monounsaturated fat was 0.81 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.65 to 1.00; P=0.05); and that for a 5 percent increment in energy from polyunsaturated fat was 0.62 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.46 to 0.85; P= 0.003). Total fat intake was not signficantly related to the risk of coronary disease (for a 5 percent increase in energy from fat, the relative risk was 1.02; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.97 to 1.07; P=0.55). We estimated that the replacement of 5 percent of energy from saturated fat with energy from unsaturated fats would reduce risk by 42 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 23 to 56; P<0.001) and that the replacement of 2 percent of energy from trans fat with energy from unhydrogenated, unsaturated fats would reduce risk by 53 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 34 to 67; P<.001). Our findings suggest that replacing saturated and trans unsaturated fats with unhydrogenated monounsaturated and polyunsaturated fats is more effective in preventing coronary heart disease in women than reducing overall fat intake.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Comments

                Comment on this article