Someone pointed this article out to me today also. I’m a rookie at Keto but interested in others input on the issue. I’ve had significant success with regard to weigh loss and feel great as well so I have no Keto complaints. Im excited to see my blood workup from my next physical.
Article claiming long term study suggests low carb high fat diets take years of life
anon54735292
#7
This https://www.facebook.com/notes/low-carb-hedonist/low-carb-diets-will-shorten-your-life-or-maybe-not/409063212965578/ post sums up a few (not all) major issues with the study.
And this explains the difference between The Lancet & the actual journal the study appeared in
"The Lancet is one of the most respected journals around. So respected and peer reviewer that only 5% of the studies submitted are published. They have a ton of respect. Those that read it take it as true.
This story is from, The Lancet Public Health, which is owned by the same company as above. Many published reports that are seen in The Lancet. But, the big difference is, this one also allows open sourced articles. As long as it is relevant and meets some guidelines The Lancet Public Health will publish what The Lancet will not. The media uses AI and scrapes for stories from here or credible outlets like Lancet and then rehash that as news. The only way this story is credible is if it was on The Lancet. Since it is not it is open source opinion piece.
I have been on Keto for 4 years. In those years I have lost over 165 pounds. I have gone from a person who could not have surgery or take pain pills for his health issues, a person with all the signs of pre diabetes, a person with Fatty Liver Disease that the GI said was gonna kill me to a person who can ride a bike for three hours, and person who is no longer diabetic, no longer dealing with liver issues. I was just tested for pre-op and they said I have a healthy body that is 99.6% likely to survive a surgery. I gotta trust my mirror, my scale, my Doctors that cheer me on, and the labs. Keto is a great life and has given me life.
TLDR; The Lancet is as legit as they come. They only publish 5% of what they get. They formed The Lancet Public Health so people that do reviews that may not be Lancet quality have a home. The hope is the secondary site is seen as credible by using the name. Content is open sourced. This piece originated in The Lancet Public Health.".
ianrobo
(ianrobo)
#8
and add on top Big food as well which is in a kind of relationship with them …
For example I saw an article about the impact of a drink called Milo in SA where it is claimed this sugar laden drink is not only healthy but is the brain’s preferred source of energy …
all it does is to force kids (thats who they market it at) to become fat and then go to pharma whilst addicted to this crap …
Janie
(Jane)
#9
I expect these types of stories to surface more often as the keto trend grows.
Cue the crisis actors crying and peering into the camera telling the world how “keto ruined my health and my life!!!” * big sob *
atomicspacebunny
(Bunny)
#10
One important thing to note is that the author of this article points out “animal proteins and fats” so what about fish protein and oil/fat from fish? This whole study looks a little fishy? …lol
Eating a diet which is low in carbohydrates could knock years off lifespan, a 25 year study (hmmm?) suggests.
”Half of your daily calories should come from carbs, such as pasta, and most of the rest from vegetables and nuts, a study suggests”
Food plans which replace carbs with protein and fat, such as the Ketogenic or Atkins, have gained popularity in recent years, and are often endorsed by celebrities such as Gwyneth Paltrow and Kim Kardashian
But new research which has followed 15,400 people since the 1980s found those with low carb diets died an average of four years earlier than those who had moderate intakes.
Even people who had high intakes were better off than those who drastically cut out carbohydrates.
“Low-carb diets that replace carbohydrates with protein or fat are gaining widespread popularity as a health and weight loss strategy,” said study leader Dr Sara Seidelmann, Clinical and Research Fellow in Cardiovascular Medicine from Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston.
“However, our data suggests that animal-based low carbohydrate diets, which are prevalent in North America and Europe, might be associated with shorter overall life span and should be discouraged.
“Instead, if one chooses to follow a low carbohydrate diet, then exchanging carbohydrates for more plant-based fats and proteins might actually promote healthy ageing in the long term.”
For the study, researchers followed 15,428 adults aged 45-64 years from 1987, monitoring their diets and health outcomes for more than two decades.
The researchers found that from age 50, the average life expectancy was 83 years for those with moderate carbohydrate intake (50 - 55 per cent of daily calories) which was four years longer than those with very low carbohydrate consumption (less than 40 per cent of calories) who lived an average of 79 years. Those with a high carb intake (greater than 70 per cent of daily calories), lived until an average age of 82.
Researchers also found that replacing carbohydrates with protein and fat from animal sources was associated with a higher risk of mortality than moderate carbohydrate intake.
In contrast, replacing carbohydrates with plant-based foods was linked to a lower risk of mortality.
The authors found similar trends in eight other study cohorts involving 430,000 people and speculate that Western-type diets that heavily restrict carbohydrates often lead to greater consumption of animal proteins and fats which may drive inflammation, biological ageing and oxidative stress.
”Many diets shun carbohydrates but they increase lifespan, say researchers” CREDIT: TREVOR HAGAN BLOOMBERG
Commenting on the study Catherine Collins, an NHS dietitian, said: “No aspect of nutrition is so hotly contended on social media than the carb versus fat debate, despite the long term evidence on health benefits firmly supporting the higher carb argument.
“Yet supporters of the cult of Low Carb High Fat (LCHF) eating, itself based on a lifestyle choice and the flimsiest of evidence supporting benefit, will no doubt disagree with this newest research on the subject.
“Such a stance is at odds with advice from WHO and government health bodies globally – including the UK’s Public Health England – that recommend a carb intake to provide around half our daily calorie needs.”
Prof Nita Forouhi, MRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge, added: “This finding is spot-on in line with the Public Health England dietary guidelines in the UK.
“Current guidelines have been criticised by those who favour low-carb diets, largely based on short term studies for weight loss or metabolic control in diabetes, but it is vital to consider long-term effects and to examine mortality, as this study did.”
The research was published in The Lancet Public Health.
atomicspacebunny
(Bunny)
#11
The data on the higher carb intake mortality calculations out-paces keto\LCHF because not enough studies in the time frame (by number of research studies) for the low carb/high fat intake to make any correlation and causation arguments?
E.g. People eat a particular diet whether it be cultural or by other choices for an X amount of time perhaps a life-time and they live an X amount of years and throw in the difference between centurians[2] and average life expectancy per population (e.g. Hong Kong[1]), this tells me that LCHF would increase the life-span considerably compared to what is purported in the supposed cross-validated research not decrease it? (increase longevity considerably in addition to the higher carbohydrate increasing longevity argument?)
We have no idea who strictly adhered to low carb/high fat?
One thing I do know; if you add high sugar to high fat intake ratios, it will definitely shorten your life-span[2]!
One important distinction to make is “25 years” worth the studies/research verses people following a particular eating pattern for “25 years?” e.g. how long was a particular eating pattern followed within the context of each study?
References:
- How to live to 100: Secrets of the world’s healthiest village revealed: “…A doctor has revealed the secrets behind the “world’s healthiest village”– and there it all comes down to eating less sugar. Cardiologist Dr Aseem Malhotra – who describes himself as a former sugar addict – has spent years studying the reasons behind rocketing rates of heart disease and obesity in Britain. Key to his research were residents of the village of Pioppi, in southern Italy, where diabetes is unheard of and many live to over the age of 100. …”
Q66
(KetoQ)
#12
Hi Safi –
Well said, and if I could amplify on your answer, as I work with major medical journals.
The Lancets and the JAMAs of the world are highly credible and respected, primarily because they are “peer reviewed” by serious doctors and researchers.
On the other hand, there are a number of other credible sounding publications that are known as “predatory” in that they charge authors and contributors to publish their articles. There may or may not be a peer review process. It’s more important that you pay a $1,000 or $2,500 fee than show credible science.
So that’s how you can get some of this bad science, like this article.You can tell right away that it is GARBAGE. Plus, when you see a version of this article appear in the likes of the NY Post, where it is sensationalized as a puff piece … thanks, but I’ll get my health info elsewhere. The NY Post should stick to what it does best, keep me up on the latest on Stormy Daniels and let me know what the top Brazilian butt models are up to.
Janie
(Jane)
#13
So if we are a brainwashed cult… who is our charismatic cult leader? The 2 Dudes???
kib
(karen)
#14
I posted this on the other thread about this topic, I still feel it’s absolutely HUGE. The study was adjusted for sex, age, etc. AND DIABETES.
I still want to know what that means. Because saying, “we’re going to reduce / remove the study impact for people who have diabetes” is batshit crazy FIDDLE FADDLE. When assessing the impact of carbohydrates on life expectancy, you’re going to “adjust” for the life shortening, potentially fatal disease that’s most closely associated with carbohydrate intake??? That’s like seeing how many people die of lung cancer, but adjusting for those who smoke, because for some strange reason they skew the results. I think the other F word probably applies here, along with the S word.
– I’ll be part of a cult any day before I’ll follow advice based on “scientific” data that’s as processed as a twinkie.
atomicspacebunny
(Bunny)
#16
“Cult” and “Fad”
“Fiddle Faddle” is exactly why we have obesity and going back to our dietary roots is what should be done but of course we have fiscally motivated academia and scientists trying to FIDDLE FADDLE with our heads on a play with logic and word smithery to make sure we munch down those processed sugars and carbs to keep the pockets of the sugar dealers full of money?
Splotchy
(Splotchy)
#17
Looking closer at this ‘research’, it seems they excluded all the participants who developed cardiac disease/strokes/diabetes during the years they were studied. So - given much other research (eg PURE) would indicate a greater proportion of high-carb-munchers in this group, they’ve probably excluded the people most crucial to help determine diet on health outcome. It’s like researching whether high-risk sports result in more fractures and then excluding all those who take up sports involving being at heights.
Also, they looked at ‘all cause mortality’. I’d like to know more about what caused death in these youngish working age (45-65) year olds. Occupational risks and family breakdown/mental health can be skews in deaths in this age group - but there was no checking of this.
Finally, I note the PURE study, also published by The Lancet, and which indicated the health benefits of LCHF, also using end points of morbidity as well as mortality, had around 10x the participants. For these reasons it’s a much stronger study.
There are lies, damned lies and poorly constructed studies of low carb diets! KCKO
Splotchy
(Splotchy)
#18
…oh, and perhaps this is a more nasty point, but Catherine Collins, (a U.K. dietician, quoted in one of the posts above and in U.K. media panning low carb, and who has been rude about Aseem Malhotra on Twitter, also found on YouTube promoting a diet containing margarine, white bread in preference to brown, and some ready meals), is a rather sturdily-built woman. I’d guess around 250lb.
Sadly, she is on the U.K. Obesity Review Group.
anon54735292
#19
It drives me spare when every article & news bulletin leads with “A study published in The Lancet…” but then I suppose that’s the whole point 
Janie
(Jane)
#20
It would have a huge effect. Looks at all the peeps here who have been able to stop their diabetes and blood pressure meds from this lifestyle.
What if it became the norm among the general population? Their profits would suffer and the execs might get smaller bonuses * gasp *
PaulL
(Bacon is a many-splendoured thing)
#21
As I’ve posted in the four six other threads about this study, one of the authors, Walter Willet, works with Seidelmann at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston. When he was working for Frederick Stare at the Harvard University School of Public Health, he and Stare co-wrote reports demonizing meat and saturated fat, in a campaign orchestrated and paid for by the sugar industry, to take the heat off sugar (this was all reported in a recent book by a professor at the University of California at San Francisco, who discovered a cache of sugar-industry memos that had been donated to a library collection).
It was on the basis of a report ghost-written by the sugar industry and signed by Willett and Stare, that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration came to consider sugar as “Generally Recognized as Safe.” (Meaning that the sugar industry never had to do any studies to prove that sugar has no harmful effects when added to food.)
Splotchy
(Splotchy)
#23
Here’s Ken Berry’s analysis: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Ce6eHcUOc4s&feature=youtu.be
He’s a medic who’s featured on the dude podcast and in the clip above he shows us the science. And rants just a bit! (and rightly so)
