Another failed diet? Blame hormones
Weight-loss success may depend on more than just motivation and willpower, according to a study reported last week in the Journal of the American Medical Association. It appears that which diet works best may depend on your hormones.
There has been debate among scientists regarding the most effective diet for weight loss. Recent studies that have pitted diet against diet - low-fat, low-carbohydrate and low-glycemic-load - have delivered inconsistent findings, with some suggesting one diet is superior and others indicating no difference between them.
Why some people do well on a conventional low-fat diet and others do poorly is often chalked up to compliance: People just aren't motivated to stick to their diet long term.
But perhaps there's another explanation. Inherent differences in insulin secretion may affect one's ability to lose weight on a diet. (Insulin is the hormone that clears sugar from the bloodstream.)
In the new study, participants classified as "high-insulin-secreting" lost five times more weight on a low-glycemic-load diet than on a conventional low-fat diet.
Low-glycemic-load diets limit rapidly digested carbohydrates that sharply raise blood sugar (glucose) and insulin levels. High-glycemic-load foods cause blood sugar and insulin levels to rise higher than do those with a low glycemic load. In response to excess insulin secretion, blood-sugar levels drop lower over the next few hours, which can trigger hunger and overeating.
Researchers from Children's Hospital Boston assigned 73 obese adults, aged 18 to 35 years, to either a low-fat diet (55 per cent carbohydrates, 20 per cent fat, 25 per cent protein) or a low-glycemic-load diet (40 per cent carbohydrates, 35 per cent fat, 25 per cent protein) for six months. Participants were then followed for an additional 12 months.
Volunteers on the low-glycemic-load diet emphasized whole grains, nuts, legumes, fruits and non-starchy vegetables and limited their intake of high-glycemic-load foods (white bread, white rice, refined breakfast cereals, potatoes, fruit juices, sweets).
Individuals who followed the low-fat diet were counselled to eat grains, vegetables, fruits and legumes and to limit sweets and high-fat snacks. Low-fat diets generally contain more carbohydrates and raise insulin higher than low-glycemic-load diets.
The diets involved no calorie restrictions or measuring of food. Participants received ongoing counselling and were told to "eat when hungry, but before famished" and to "stop eating when satisfied, before feeling stuffed."
Initially, all volunteers were given an oral-glucose tolerance test to measure their insulin response. (The test requires drinking a liquid containing 75 grams of glucose. Blood is taken before, and again every 30 to 60 minutes after, drinking the solution.) In this study, insulin concentration was measured at 30 minutes.
After six months, changes in body weight and body fat did not differ between the two diet groups. However, when the researchers analyzed the results based on insulin levels, there were noticeable differences.
High insulin secretors lost 2.2 lbs (1 kg) per month on the low-glycemic-load diet versus only 0.9 lbs (0.4 kg) on the low-fat diet. After 18 months, total weight loss was 12.8 lbs (5.8 kg) in the low-glycemic-load group, but only 2.6 lbs (1.2 kg) in the low-fat group of high insulin secretors.
Among the low insulin secretors, body weight and fat loss did not differ significantly between the two weight-loss plans.
Regardless of insulin secretion, following the low-glycemic-load diet boosted HDL (good) cholesterol and lowered concentrations of triglyceride (a blood fat) in the blood, effects that were not seen on the low-fat diet.
This isn't the first study to suggest how much insulin you secrete might predict how well you do on a diet. A study in 2005 from
Moreover, numerous studies have shown that eating low-glycemic foods delays hunger, decreases subsequent food intake and increases satiety compared with high-glycemic foods.
In my opinion, you don't need a blood test to determine if you should follow a low-glycemic-load diet.
A low-glycemic-load diet that's also low in saturated fat is good for anyone trying to lose weight, especially if you have high insulin levels. It's a healthy way to eat even if you don't need to trim down.
Lightening the load
The glycemic index and glycemic load are complicated concepts to grasp. Perhaps that's why almost four in 10 Canadians have little awareness of the glycemic index. Diets based on these concepts require you to choose foods based on numbers - glycemic index and glycemic load values.
The glycemic index is a scale that ranks carbohydrate-rich foods by how fast they raise blood sugar levels compared with pure glucose. The glycemic load of a food is calculated by multiplying its glycemic index by the grams of carbohydrates it provides.
To me, this sounds confusing and impractical. No one wants to carry around a calculator or a list of glycemic load values. I certainly don't. Fortunately, there are simpler ways to reduce the glycemic load of your diet.
Think concept, forget numbers.
Eat more unprocessed fresh foods such as whole grains, legumes, nuts, fruits and vegetables. These have a low GI value compared with highly processed foods, which also may contain a concentrated amount of sugar.
Include at least one low-GI food per meal, or base two of your meals on low-GI choices.
Pay attention to breads and breakfast cereals because these foods contribute the most to the high glycemic load of the North American diet.
Avoid eating high-GI snacks like pretzels, corn chips and rice cakes as these can trigger hunger and overeating. Opt for fresh fruit, low-fat dairy products, nuts or plain popcorn.
Choose fruits that are more acidic (e.g. oranges, grapefruit, cherries) as these have a low GI and will lower the glycemic load of a meal.
Use salad dressings made from vinegar or lemon juice - the acidity will result in a further reduction in the GI of your meal.
Watch portion size. When it comes to weight control, excess calories add up regardless of how they affect your blood glucose and insulin.
Source: The Globe and Mail.com
No comments:
Post a Comment