No tavallaan oikein, jos tuota lähtee halkomaan. Keto voi olla parempi painon pudotukseen. Ottamatta siis huomioon nyt mikä osuus on rasvaa ja mikä vettä. Ja se on oikein myös, että jos syöt enempi rasvaa niin kroppa myös käyttää enempi rasvaa.
Mutta kaikki varmaan ymmärtää, kun tuosta jättää saivartelun pois niin tuotahan veijari ei tarkoittanut postauksellaan.
Aika monessa tutkimuksessa on todettu, että kun proteiinit ja kalorit mätsätään niin ei juuri saada eroja laihtumiseen.
Onhan Tim Nokeskin jopa tuosta samaa mieltä. Tuo löytyy ihan jopa hänen omasta kirjastaan. Hän pitää tosin asettelua epäreiluna, kun nälän hallinta on helpompi ja usein johtaa isompaan kalorivajeeseen.
Toki sitten on poikkeiksia ja poikkeavia tilanteita joille joku makromalli toimii paremmin, mutta keskustelun vuoksi on parempi puhua siitä yleisestä massasta vaan.
Kaikkiin näihin ravintomalleihin voidaan lyödä aukkoja erilaisilla tilanteilla tai yksilöillä.
Kyllä toi aika saivartelua kyllä on. Tim Noakesilta en ravitsemus ohjeita kyllä ottais.
6kk.
Sainsbury et al, 6 months: no difference in weight loss between lower and higher carbohydrate diets (WMD -0.14 kg, 95% CI -0.94 to 0.65, p=0.72, I2=48%, random-effects model; 9 RCTs, 953 participants). The MA included 1 RCT (contributing 11.7% weight in MA) of T1D participants only. Subgroup analyses by prescribed carbohydrate quantity (‘low’ vs ‘high’ and ‘moderate’ vs ‘high’) reported no difference in weight loss with the ‘low’ compared to the ‘high’ carbohydrate diet (WMD -1.07 kg, 95% CI -2.52 to 0.37, p=0.14, I 2=33%, random-effects model; 4 RCTs, 240 participants) or between the ‘moderate’ and ‘high’ carbohydrate diets (WMD 0.29 kg, 95% CI -0.60 to 1.17, p=0.52, I2=48%, random-effects model; 5 RCTs, 713 participants).
van Zuuren et al (2018): no difference in weight loss between lower and higher carbohydrate diets (WMD -2.51 kg, 95% CI -5.42 to 0.40, p=0.09, I2=88%, random-effects model; 7 RCTs, 537 participants). A sensitivity analysis excluding studies at high risk of bias was in agreement with the main analysis, reporting no difference in weight loss between lower and higher carbohydrate diets (WMD –1.69 kg, 95% CI -4.57 to 1.18, p=0.25, I2=88%, random-effects model; 6 RCTs, 506 participants). A sensitivity analysis excluding studies causing substantial heterogeneity also reported no difference in weight loss between lower and higher carbohydrate diets (WMD 0.52 kg, 95% CI -0.28 to 1.33, p=0.2, I2=0%, random-effects model; 5 RCTs, 417 participants).
Korsmo-Haugen et al (2018): no difference in weight loss between lower and higher carbohydrate diets (WMD -0.87 kg, 95% CI -1.88 to 0.15, p=NR, I 2=33%, random-effects model; 7 RCTs, 424 participants).
12kk
Longer-term data (≥12 months) In total, 15 longer-term (≥12 months) primary RCTs were included in the MAs. Sainsbury et al (2018): no difference in weight loss between lower and higher carbohydrate diets (WMD -0.43 kg, 95% CI -0.93 to 0.07, p=0.09, I 2=0%, randomeffects model; 10 RCTs, 1267 participants). A subgroup analysis based on prescribed carbohydrate quantity of the lower carbohydrate diet (‘low’ or ‘moderate’) reported no difference in weight change between a ‘low’ and ‘high’ carbohydrate diet (WMD 0.58 kg, 95% CI -0.83 to 1.99, p=0.42, I 2=0%, randomeffects model; 3 RCTs, 244 participants) but a significantly greater weight loss with ‘moderate’ compared to a ‘high’ carbohydrate diet (WMD -0.58 kg, 95% CI -1.11 to -0.04, p=0.04, I 2=0%, random-effects model; 7 RCTs, 1023 participants).
Korsmo-Haugen et al (2018): no difference in weight change between lower and higher carbohydrate diets (WMD 0.14 kg, 95% CI -0.29 to 0.57, p=NR, I2=0%, random-effects model; 10 RCTs, 1163 participants).
Huntriss et al (2018): no difference in weight change between lower and higher carbohydrate diets (WMD 0.28 kg, 95% CI -1.37 to 1.92, p=0.74, I2=75%, randomeffects model; 6 RCTs, 567 participants).
van Zuuren et al (2018): no difference in weight loss between lower and higher carbohydrate diets (WMD -0.19 kg, 95% CI -1.65 to 1.27, p=0.80, I 2=0%, randomeffects model; 5 RCTs, 483 participants). Results using a fixed-effects model agreed with those of the random-effects model. Results of 2 sensitivity analyses (excluding RCTs at high risk of bias and RCTs causing substantial heterogeneity) agreed with the main results.
www.medrxiv.org
Makroista viis...