Fallen_Horse Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 http://archinte.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/169/11/1046?etoc&eaf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 11, 2009 Share Posted June 11, 2009 Thanks for the info. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marcina Posted June 11, 2009 Share Posted June 11, 2009 I read the study and the subjects were put on a lacto-ovo vegetarian diet, not a vegan diet. Unless I read wrong.. I'm underslept.. Zzzzz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xjohanx Posted June 11, 2009 Share Posted June 11, 2009 The low-carb diet was vegan while the high-carb diet was only lacto-ovo with low-fat dairy products. I do not like how this study was done at all. Too many factors are in play to make a worthy conclusion. The fat-lovers points out that the low-carb group didn't complain as much about hunger and were in general more satisfied with the diet but that's what you would expect since they were eating 31% protein compared to 16%. When you want to compare high carb vs high fat you should always keep protein at the same level. An intresting thing however is that the grous lost equal amounts of weigth. Usually the high protein groups lose more but I guess there can be a lot of explanations for this. Not that I think a high-fat vegan diet is horrible for your health but I would like to point out the obvious, this is a weight loss study and weight loss "hides" a lot of the negative affects of a diet that you would see at maintenance. I would also like to hear the explanation of why the researchers choose to include dairy in the high-carb diet, adding another totally unneccesary factor. The positive notes about this is that the people here prepping for contests low-carb don't have to worry that much anymore since they are loosing weight etc. One of the main reasons I don't like high-fat vegan diets is the totally fucked up n-3:6 ratio, but for a short period of time (contest prepping) I see no problem with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 12, 2009 Share Posted June 12, 2009 One of the main reasons I don't like high-fat vegan diets is the totally fucked up n-3:6 ratio, but for a short period of time (contest prepping) I see no problem with it. You say it like all vegan high-fat (which is a totally useless term anyway) diets are all the same. For example, I'm currently getting 25-35% of my daily calories from fat and my n-3:n-6 ratio is 1:2 (1:3 on some days) . And the only nuts/seeds I eat are flaxseeds and hempseeds. Rest of the fat comes from whole soybeans, cocoa, wheat germ and veggies. Not all that "fucked up" if you'd ask me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xjohanx Posted June 12, 2009 Share Posted June 12, 2009 One of the main reasons I don't like high-fat vegan diets is the totally fucked up n-3:6 ratio, but for a short period of time (contest prepping) I see no problem with it. You say it like all vegan high-fat (which is a totally useless term anyway) diets are all the same. For example, I'm currently getting 25-35% of my daily calories from fat and my n-3:n-6 ratio is 1:2 (1:3 on some days) . And the only nuts/seeds I eat are flaxseeds and hempseeds. Rest of the fat comes from whole soybeans, cocoa, wheat germ and veggies. Not all that "fucked up" if you'd ask me. First of all I would not count 25% as high-fat really. 40% is usually where the "limit" is. In Sweden the limit for our version of the atkins diet they usually say 50-60% (unless of course there's a study with less fat that gives great results. Then it's still low-carb). Anyway I might have expressed myself unclearly, and to be honest I'm not 100% about what I'm about to write but one of my teachers who does a lot of research on fatty acids said this. If you have a 1:3 ratio and you eat 2 grams of n-3 and 6 grams of n-6 would mean that there is 4 grams of n-6 not being "compensated" for. But if you eat 15 grams of n-3 and 45 grams of n-6 you will have 30 grams of extra n-6. The way my teacher saw it was that the second situation is much worse, which is quite logic. I wish I knew more about it but the truth is I don't. I hope you understand what I'm saying. It's not just about the ratio, the amount also matters.And besides if your ratio is 1:2 or 1:3 my guess would be you are getting a lot of SAFA which is bad for a lot of other reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCNINJA Posted June 12, 2009 Share Posted June 12, 2009 My problem is that this is a diet to rehabilitate someone who is fat. How about a vegan diet program for people who are not fat, in shape, and want to improve performance? That said we see it for endurance athletes sometimes, but rarely in strength athletes. My recent anecdotal experiment on my favorite test subject (me) showed that a lower protein (20%) combined with roughly 60-70% carbs and 10-20% fats was not as good as a diet that is more balanced with moderate fats, proteins and carbs in roughly equal proportions. Anyone else have anything anecdotal or otherwise? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 12, 2009 Share Posted June 12, 2009 First of all I would not count 25% as high-fat really. Agreed. If you have a 1:3 ratio and you eat 2 grams of n-3 and 6 grams of n-6 would mean that there is 4 grams of n-6 not being "compensated" for. But if you eat 15 grams of n-3 and 45 grams of n-6 you will have 30 grams of extra n-6. The way my teacher saw it was that the second situation is much worse, which is quite logic. I wish I knew more about it but the truth is I don't. I hope you understand what I'm saying. It's not just about the ratio, the amount also matters. Sure, I also thought about that. And besides if your ratio is 1:2 or 1:3 my guess would be you are getting a lot of SAFA which is bad for a lot of other reasons. What's SAFA? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xjohanx Posted June 12, 2009 Share Posted June 12, 2009 SAFA - saturated fatty acidsMUFA - monounsaturated fatty acidsPUFA - polyunsaturated fatty acids Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 12, 2009 Share Posted June 12, 2009 SAFA - saturated fatty acidsMUFA - monounsaturated fatty acidsPUFA - polyunsaturated fatty acids Stop showing off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 13, 2009 Share Posted June 13, 2009 SAFA - saturated fatty acidsMUFA - monounsaturated fatty acidsPUFA - polyunsaturated fatty acids Well, then it depends on what do you consider "a lot". I calculated my yesterday's intake, and it look something like this: 10,8g n-321g n-612,4g monounsaturated fat7g saturated fat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now