http://www.zoeharcombe.com/2014/06/the- ... r-lose-it/
So, let me understand this, the people on the 600 calorie-a-day deficit (the NICE recommendation) were 5 kilograms (11 pounds) lighter than those not doing this “at 12 months.” Applying the basic maths formula, these 12 people should each have lost 600*365/3,500 = 62.57 pounds of fat. Not an ounce (of fat) more or less. AND, there should have been no range of results – everyone should have lost exactly the same (that’s what happens with a mathematical formula). The least anyone lost (let’s put it all into pounds) was 0.8 pounds and the most anyone lost was 17.2 pounds. Even the highest weight loss was 45 pounds lower than it should have been. This is also all about fat – we haven’t even started looking at muscle or water loss. This is also a study of 12 people. There are 1.1 billion overweight people in the world and we can’t prove a formula using 12 of them.
There were 15 other studies in Table 15.14, 10 of which had data for where a calorie deficit had been created over a specified period of time. This enabled me to analyse what the weight loss should have been (using the 3,500 formula) and what the average weight loss actually was (from the study data). Again, in every single study, there was a wide range of results (which means that the formula failed per se). In all of the other ten studies, the actual weight loss was multiples away from what the weight loss should have been. The smallest gap between actual weight loss and ‘should have happened’ weight loss (according to the formula) was 28.7 pounds (we continue to ignore water to try to give the formula a chance). At the other extreme, the biggest difference between the fat that should have been lost and the fat that was lost was 143.9 pounds.
Department of Health (DoH)
I was still digesting the immense implications of all this when the DoH reply arrived, on the 21 July, saying “The Department is unaware of the rationale behind the weight formula you refer to.” Pause for a second – the UK government Department of Health, has no idea where their founding piece of diet advice comes from. They kindly suggested another lead, (Dietitians in Obesity Management UK (DOM UK) – a specialist group of the British Dietetic Association), which I followed up on 24 July.
National Institute of Clinical Excellence (NICE)
I chased NICE on 27 July, as the 20 working days were ‘up’ in my calendar. I appeared to have been passed between NHS and NICE during July and a helpful woman called me back to say she had found the right department to deal with the query. A couple of days later, the reply came “Whilst our guidance does contain reference to studies involving 500 calorie deficit diets we do not hold any information about the rationale behind the statement ‘one pound of fat contains 3,500 calories, so to lose 1lb a week you need a deficit of 500 calories a day’.” That is to say – although we are an evidence based organization, we have no evidence.
http://foodmed.net/2016/04/cant-to-lose ... lains-why/
Myth No 1: Energy in equals energy out
Diet advisors love to say “energy in equals energy out”, and “you can’t change the”laws of the universe.” They clearly don’t know what the laws say.There are four laws of the universe. None says energy in equals energy out. Two laws can be ignored by the dieting world. Two need to be taken into account. The first essentially says energy can be changed from one form to another. The second notes that energy will be lost during the process of energy changing form (we boil the kettle, electricity heats the water and steam is lost in the process.) These “laws of the universe” are about energy, not weight. They were never intended to become fundamental principles of dieting. They have some relevance to dieting, but only when correctly applied, and when all the caveats are allowed for.
The first essentially says energy can be changed from one form to another. The second notes that energy will be lost during the process of energy changing form (we boil the kettle, electricity heats the water and steam is lost in the process.) These “laws of the universe” are about energy, not weight. They were never intended to become fundamental principles of dieting. They have some relevance to dieting, but only when correctly applied, and when all the caveats are allowed for.
These “laws of the universe” are about energy, not weight. They were never intended to become fundamental principles of dieting. They have some relevance to dieting, but only when correctly applied, and when all the caveats are allowed for.
Myth No 2: Eating less will make you weigh less
Eating less will not make you weigh less. It is an almost universally held belief that people who are overweight just need to eat less and/or do more. The idea is based on so many underlying assumptions – none of which is true. The idea that if you eat 500 fewer calories the body will give up 500 calories of fat to make up the difference is the ultimate naivety in the world of dieting. The body is not a cash machine for fat.
Myth No 3: Doing more will make you weigh less
Doing more will not make you weigh less. Both the eating less and doing more beliefs make the massive and wrong assumption that the body is able to burn fat. The body can only burn fat when there is no glucose/glycogen available. Modern man rarely, if ever, allows his body to get to the state where it can burn its own fat – let alone will. Think about it: you lose your job, you don’t automatically dip into savings, you cut back on expenditure; the body does exactly the same.
Myth No 4: Weight gain is the result of too many calories in
Weight gain is from fat being stored, not too many calories in. Equally, weight loss is about fat lost, not fewer calories in. The perfect way to store fat is to eat carbohydrates. It’s the carbs that count, not the calories.
Myth No 5: One pound equals 3,500 calories
One pound does not equal 3,500 calories. One of the most commonly held diet myths is: “To lose one pound of fat you need to create a deficit of 3,500 calories”. It is actually worse than a myth – it is one of the cruellest lies we have told desperate dieters.
The myth that one pound equals 3,500 calories is wrong at every level. You will see this formula in government literature, in just about every diet book, in private health booklets and all over the Internet. The next time you see it, or hear it, ask where it comes from. You will not get an answer.
Myth No 6: Cholesterol will kill you
Cholesterol is life critical – not the bad guy in any way, shape or form. You would literally die without cholesterol. It is a key part of the structure for every cell in your body. Cholesterol is so vital that your body makes it, and cannot risk leaving it to chance that you would get it externally from somewhere. Statins stop the body from producing the cholesterol – they literally stop one of your fundamental body processes from being able to function.
One in 500 people has familial hypercholesterolemia, and may have a problem clearing cholesterol in their body (rather like type 1 diabetics who can’t return blood glucose levels to normal). For anyone else to be actively trying to lower their vital and life-affirming cholesterol levels is deeply troubling.
Myth No 7: There is GOOD cholesterol and BAD cholesterol
There is no such thing as good and bad cholesterol. The chemical formula for cholesterol is C27H46O. There is no molecular formula for a good version or a bad version. We must stop using such erroneous and emotive terminology
Obesity Epidemic Myth No 8:
You need to eat five-a-day fruit and veg
There is no basis for telling you to eat five-a-day. The pick-a-number-a-day campaign (it is not always five in each country) has spread across three continents and tens of countries. It has become the most well-known and promoted public health nutritional message ever. You would think, therefore, it was evidence-based and founded upon robust scientific knowledge. You would be wrong.
Five-a-day is a marketing campaign with no evidence; it is fuelling the obesity epidemic, rather than helping in any way whatsoever. If parents knew what researchers such as Dr Robert Lustig and Dr Richard Johnson know about fructose, they would never give children fruit juice again.
Myth No 9: Saturated fat causes heart disease
It does not. There are three facts I can state without any fear of being proven wrong: i) It has not been proven that saturated fat consumption causes heart disease; ii) It has not even been proven that there is a consistent association between saturated fat consumption and heart disease; iii) The definitive study to try to prove this has notbeen done and likely never will be.
You may like to read that again if you thought that the trial against saturated fat had even been opened, let alone closed.
Myth No 10: Fat clogs your arteries
Fat does not clog your arteries. If a juggernaut were travelling around the road transport system – which roads would clog up? The minor roads and country lanes would be impassable and the motorways would run with little disruption. Fat never clogs veins.
By a process of common sense, therefore, fat also never clogs arteries. It is a reasonable assertion that fat is not even travelling freely in the blood stream. Fat and water don’t mix, so, since blood is effectively water, fat cannot travel freely around the blood system.
Fat travels around in lipoproteins – along with cholesterol, protein and phospholipids. The idea that fat somehow leaps out of lipoproteins to attach itself to the arterial wall to try to clog up the system and kill you is ludicrous.
Myth No 11 – You must keep your blood sugar topped up, and eat little and often to achieve it
This is one of the maddest bits of advice. Every time you eat a carbohydrate, and your blood glucose levels rise, the body needs to release a substance called insulin (from the pancreas) to return your blood glucose levels to normal. Any “topping up” simply places a demand on the body to get the blood glucose levels back down again.
I believe this is one key reason for the explosion in type 2 diabetes. The body is asked to release insulin too much, too often and has no way of recognising some of the foreign substances we consume in modern man-made food.
Myth No 12 – Graze – eat little and often:
Do not graze, unless you are a cow, or want to be the size of one! This (advice) seems partly because of the nonsensical idea that you can or should keep blood glucose level topped up. I know not why else this advice would be given because it is one of the surest ways to fatten humans (or grazing animals).
Harcombe demolishes other myths, including that:
Meat is loaded with saturated fat – Meat is mainly unsaturated fat. I have yet to find a meat on the planet with more saturated than unsaturated fat – and I’ve checked whale, quail, chicken, beef, lamb, goose and all sorts. If dietitians know this, why are they not telling us? Dare I suggest that it doesn’t fit with the advice: “Don’t have bacon for breakfast – have a (sugary) cereal instead”?
Fruit is highly nutritious – It is not; fruit’s benefit has been massively over-hyped. Those who have studied nutrition are not surprised that (eating more fruit) has no impact on cancer, and would be surprised if it had any impact on any modern health condition.
Fructose (fruit sugar) is good for dieters – It is bad for dieters, more likely to make them fat. Having established that fruit is not that nutritious, it gets worse. Fructose, also known as fruit sugar, is being called the fattening carbohydrate in the world of obesity. It is uniquely metabolised by the liver, so it doesn’t get the chance to be used up as fuel in the blood stream – it goes straight to the liver where it can be turned into fat.
You must eat fibre – 25g to 30g of the stuff in fact – You need to know two things about fibre: i) Humans can’t digest fibre. So, how can something you can’t digest be so important for your health? and ii) Why on earth would you want to rush food through from the gut?
The majority of nutritional absorption takes place in the small intestine, so why would you want to speed up this process, and disturb the nutrients being absorbed? Don’t put nasty substances in the body (sugar and additives that accompany bran to make it palatable), and then you don’t need to rush nutritious, healthy food out of your digestive system.
Sedentary behaviour caused this obesity epidemic and exercise will cure it –Sedentary behaviour did not cause this obesity epidemic, and exercise won’t cure it. The UK government notes that exercise is only claimed to have a medium level of evidence for moderate preventative and therapeutic benefits for obesity – that is, the evidence is not strong for much benefit either as a prevention or a cure.
Also, the idea that man is naturally active is another myth. Man is as evolutionary disposed to being sedentary as to gathering food. What man would have done, and what we should do today, is natural activity – walk, talk, sing, dance, cook, clean and tend the land, not pump iron.