Another Un-Compelling Study.

Ho-hum. Another day, another study "proving" the dangers of a low carb diet. This new one comes out of Tufts University, and claims to show that a low carb diet impairs memory, while a low calorie diet does not.

Uh-huh. Let's dolly in for a closer look.

First of all, this was a very small study -- just 19 women, ranging in age from 22 to 55. They were allowed to choose either a low carb diet or a low calorie "balanced" diet. They split, with 9 women choosing low carb and 10 choosing low calorie.

Before they started their diets, the women were given tests that assessed attention, long-term and short-term memory, and visual attention, and spatial memory. They then went on their chosen diets, and were assessed twice again during the first week on their diet. During that week, the low carbers showed decreasing memory and slowed reaction time.

During the second week, carbs were added back to the low carbers' diet, and they were assessed twice more during the next two weeks. Their cognition skills "returned to normal."

Argh. Can you see how wrong-headed this study was? Because it jumped out at me with the first article I read about it.

They tested low carb dieters only during the first week of a low carb diet. Remember your first week of low carbing? Chances are that about three days in you were hitting the wall. Your body had run out of glycogen (stored sugar,) but hadn't yet made ketones in any great quantity, nor up-regulated the enzymes needed to burn fat for fuel, nor increased gluconeogenesis, the process by which your liver creates what little glucose you really need.

Clinical tests show that it takes roughly two weeks for a body to thoroughly adjust to carb restriction. So this study stopped half-way through the process, and then concluded that "low carb diets impair memory." Truth is, this study says nothing about cognitive function on a long-term low carb diet.

But there's more. The headlines are trumpeting "Low Carb Diet Impairs Memory," but even during that one week of a real low carb diet, the news was not all bad. The low carb dieters beat the low calorie dieters during the "attention vigilence task" -- ie, maintaining focus for extended periods. Dunno about you, but that's a pretty important ability in my life. Furthermore, the low calorie dieters suffered more confusion. So how does this study indicate that low carb diets are uniquely problematic?

Once again, we have a study that appears to have been deliberately designed and interpreted to fulfill the researchers' pre-existing prejudices about a low carb diet.

That's not science, folks. It's propaganda.

actually those added back carbs don't add up to a hill of beans!

I too was checking out that study since the Atkins induction diet was mentioned in the study write up and actually came across the protocal for it. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6WB2-4TB181Y-1&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=8ac6c083c0959d22333692a2c85fdb49

Seems the new headline is based on a press release promoting the study for a Feb 09 release and does not accurately report findings based on a low carb diet improved by adding back carbs.

If the participant chose low carb ( the other choice was the American Diabetic Association's diet)
week 1 is Zero carbs eatten and tested at 48 hours and again at the end of the week.

then they add back the carbs per the press release but hold the presses those added back carbs are 5-8 grams yep you read that right 5-8 grams worth of carbs.
and the additional carbs on week 3 are again just 5-8 grams putting them to 10-16 total carbs.

seems those folk are even below Atkins eating on their base line low carb impairs memory testing week and imporove when they are eating Atkins induction level carbs.

I sincerly hope the editors of the Feb edition of the mag it is coming out in do some reading of the article and see the hypthosis is not supported by the test results as any low carber will tell you 10-16 grams of carbs is a very low carb diet.

http://2big4mysize.wordpress.com

Thanks

I work at a pharmaceutical company and I have access to these studies when they come out due to our scientific online resources, and I got so mad when I read it. I wish there was a site online that debunked scientific articles. At least once a week I read something that is so bizarre. There was one this week about how countries with cars had more obesity than countries where people had to rely on other means of transportation. Um, do they think it could have something do to with the western diet instead of the fact that they have cars? Or the fact that these countries have money to spend on alcohol and junk food? Hmmm. I just laughed when I saw this one, but how many people believe these unquestioningly.

Interesting!

Very interesting! Thank you. I only had access to what information I could find in the general media; I'll read the protocol.

Study actually shows induction doesn't harm cognative skills

Gald I could help out. It annoys me to no end when a school like Tuffs issues a press release designed to stir interest in a study conducted at their location that has faulty logic and uses sensationalism.

if you actually get to see the study and the data you can see that the low carbers in week 3 after the addition of those 10-16 grams of carbs which would still be below Atkins induction levels scored as well as they had pre diet so one could conclude from that very same data that Atkins induction level carbs does not harm cognative skills nor mood while the ADA diet did.

http://2big4mysize.wordpress.com
http://kimkinsdiettruth.wordpress.com/
http://lowcarbdiets.about.com/od/populardietplans/a/kimkinsdiet.htm
http://kimkinssurvivors.wordpress.com/

Use a tool well

You are quite correct that this study is dumb, but virtually all of the "science" we are doing today is dumb. I had a jr high science teacher who was fond of pointing out in class that "science is not doing the same experiments as the classes before you and getting the same result; science is doing these same experiments -- getting a different result, and figuring out why." I used to hate hearing that but I am glad of it today. It is what scientists today should be hearing and taught. Instead they seem to be taught that science is coming up with a theory, and then doing experiments that prove the theory. If the results don't match your theory you keep modifying the way you do the experiment until the "correct results" are produced. Then you claim that you have proved your theory correct.

But I will say that it appears that this is a demonstration that you should start a low carb diet only when you can afford to be "off your game" for a couple weeks.

Totally Off Topic

I know this is totally off-topic, but on lowcarbfriends website, I came across a thread offering a coupon for a new product called Sun Crystals. It's a mixture of erithrytol and raw cane sugar and has only 4 calories and I believe 1 gram carb per packet. This product would be perfect for the Glycemic Load Diet - in limited amounts of course because it does have that cane sugar. Still, it's diluted quite a bit by the erithrytol.

I printed out the coupon and am going to Whole Foods to buy it today!

Just thought I'd share - those of us on this plan need all the shared ideas we can get!