Originally Posted by
Carbonfiberboy
and the subject of much of this thread,
Effects of low-carbohydrate vs low-fat diets on weight loss and cardiovascular risk factors: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16476868
This should be a required reading before anyone tries to look for low-carbohydrate studies in Google:
http://www.plantpositive.com/37-cher...research-by-a/
http://plantpositive.squarespace.com...research-by-a/
http://plantpositive.squarespace.com...research-by-a/
It may be a bit hard to follow because it's a transcript of the video and it's supposed to be accompanied with slides.
The essence is that there are many, many studies comparing low-fat vs low-carb where "low-fat" happens to be clearly deficient in a number of ways. This source goes through the list of studies provided by a pretty well-known low-carb activist, and looks closely at what's happening there. You repeatedly see things like "low-fat" diets that turn out to have 12-16 g/day of fiber and no reduction in % of calories in saturated fat vs baseline;
low-carbers who manage to lose 10+ lbs but fail to see any improvement in LDL, or result in worsening LDL (indicating that, at constant weight, low-carb clearly worsens LDL); and studies that simply neglect to report dietary fiber in the low-fat group and/or LDL in the low-carb group.