-Diablo's Journal, 28 Jul 18

From the article/study: "81 men and postmenopausal women [49 men and 32 women; age range: 40-65 y;" Maybe people will stop saying what they've said to me for the last 10 years. "You're still young, just wait till you're 50."  

I don't really understand anything here but the words "jelly sweets" caught my attention. 

Basically, eat healthily but don't sweat the jellies or sweets if they fit into your calorie goals. :) 

Lol SoCalPam I had to take a break from reading and think about jelly beans which lead to Easter candies and yeah I had to start reading again before I headed to the kitchen lol. Funny/good post diablo! 

Yeah, Martin Macdonald can be abrasive but I find it funny. A man after my own heart. After so many years discussing nutrition, it's hard to sugarcoat my messages. 

Well you won’t have to sugar coat them for me :). I am hyper sensitive at times but usually apologize when I realize I was over reacting. I’d rather someone be 100% honest with me than sugar coat something to the point I misunderstand.  

Well some things were misquoted/misrepresented ----from the linked study(caps to show emphasis)"Substituting whole grains for refined grains in a 6-wk randomized trial FAVORABLY affects energy-balance metrics in healthy men and postmenopausal women. ... Conclusion: These findings suggest POSITIVE effects of whole grains on the RMR and stool energy excretion that FAVORABLY influence energy balance and may help epidemiologic associations between whole-grain consumption and REDUCED body weight and adiposity." -----for those who are not doctors, please consult your physician. ------------as for my opinion, the "...(95% CI: 28, 156-kcal/d) higher net daily energy loss compared with that of the RG..." could make a nice difference in those who count calories or need that deficit daily. I don't eat grains so doesn't effect me. 

Btw, can you point out the misquotes or misrepresentation? 

I mean, the cliffnotes point out the 90 calorie difference if you go full junk food. If you go with what most flexible dieters preach 80/20 there will be no difference to speak of. 

I don't eat grains either but to the dieter that does use whole grains combined with whole foods, which is not in the study, it can make a difference. a person on a 1000 calorie diet for weight loss that is the difference of almost 10% of their daily calories. whole grains versus refined grains is a very very limited scope study. there is much more to whole foods versus refined foods. But if this makes you happy, fine. You seem to feel the need for justification to eat refined products I don't understand it. And I agree with those folks warning you of the future. Some day your metabolism will change or adjust. It happens to everyone as they mature. You can not stop mother nature or father time. 

here is a positive result of the keto diet and resistance training for 3 months https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29910305  

low carb high fat diet vs high carb diet on diabetes overall reduction of meds on the high fat. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26224300 

bottom line there are many options for weight management and improved health and no one should try to force their preferred choice on others. live and let live. 

10% IF you ate nothing but carbs AND ate nothing but junk. 5% if you eat 50% carbs and nothing but junk, 2.5% IF you ate 50% carbs and half of them were junk. We are verging on inconsequential when the 80/20 rule is in effect and you concentrate on protein. Also, yeah your links are useless if you don't make your own post, they do not work. 

all you have to do is copy it and you can paste it in the search bar of any internet, I couldn't use your link in your journal either. a study showing high protein is better than high carb in diets of women https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21524314 diet showing older generation does better on a high protein diet higher protein diets benefit 50 and older https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4892287/ you can find studies for anything you want, but the benefit of higher protein tends to overwhelm any study of high carb. Since you like to use studies for proving your point, I thought I would share some links to studies that show a differing point of view. I had another one but copied the link wrong. If I have time I will see if I can find it. I don't normally bother with this, but you seem fixated on pushing your point of view against other dieters choice of diet. I an open minded and support the struggles of the folks here and try to always be helpful. I do not believe folks need a negative point of view upsetting the apple cart. We have enough stress in life in the real world, this is our point of refuge to be open and share our concerns. you are entitled to your point of view, we are entitled to our point of view. I appreciate that you posted this study on carbs in your own journal instead of stomping on a keto diet or any diet on someone else's journal. this really is the appropriate place for your view. I hope you don't mind me posting different points of views on your journal.  

Sry @Diablo360x I went to bed after that, just got your notifications. I know you didn't make the cliff Notes just posted it. But to me it is like a tabloid news report whereas it takes factual information and then alters the meaning in the report to go with their own personal bias or agenda. What most people complain about when they watch/read local news - the headlines are sensationalized to get more clicks. ----- So while the post did contain facts from the study, it was mostly sensationalized by the writers bias and agenda. Anyone can take a fact and weave it to their own understanding. It is best to just report the facts and allow the reader to draw their own conclusions. -----------As we all know a 'minimal' change can have dramatic effects on and for the body. Every diabetic knows this, as do most of us that have changed our woe. So when the post said "....You can now legitimately say, "Yes..." it is misquoting/misrepresenting the linked study in entirety.  

It explains the difference and how minimal it is if someone were to eat nothing but refined grains. Take a normal diet with some treats and you have a difference that shouldn't be worried about at all. As for diabetics, follow your doctor's advice for health but no, CICO does not change even with diabetes. 

@baskington, your links are truncated. Do you think Chris and I don't know how to copy/paste? Anyways, you're preaching to the choir on protein. I know it should be a focus and has several benefits. Science isn't my point of view, it's fact. 

@Diablo360x How can you still try to say the linked article explains how minimal it is?? Minimal means of little consequence how you are stating it. The study very clearing stated in its headline and in is conclusion of the results of the study that the difference was SIGNIFICANT regardless of the numbers you seem to be stuck on. 

I have an article that shows a definite link of refined carbs and sugar to negativitely impacting the brains ability to receive satiety signals. tons of articles on linking western diet of refined carbs and sugar to obesity in children. gosh it all goes on and on. Personally I enjoyed the same type of eating you are currently doing. but I never would say its long term effects are healthy.