Another Worthless Study and Pointless Anti-Fat Article from the New York Times

Rat Scientists abound! Ah, yes, here we go again. Bad science reigns at The New York times ‘Well Blog’ this week by Tara Parker-Pope (technically, it was from last week, but I just discovered it on Slashdot). Its sad that the NYT was also the original publication where Gary Taubes published his brilliant ‘What if its all been a Big Fat Lie’ article (which is the exact opposite of what this article is trying to say). I guess that’s some fair and unbiased journalism – we give credibility to all kinds of information:  right, wrong or otherwise!

Just to give you a taste, here is the intro (which can double as the conclusion too, really)

“Eating fatty food appears to take an almost immediate toll on both short-term memory and exercise performance, according to new research on rats and people.

Other studies have suggested that long-term consumption of a high-fat diet is associated with weight gain, heart disease and declines in cognitive function. But the new research shows how indulging in fatty foods over the course of a few days can affect the brain and body long before the extra pounds show up.”

[Note: The study that the article was written about is 100% RATS, not PEOPLE as the lead-in sentence alludes to]

We (the enlightened low-carb community) know that it is complete rubbish, but the American public is always hungry for some anti-fat biased lies.

Go ahead and read the article if you want (to get angry), but the study basically showed that rats fed high-fat / low(er)-carb Rat Chow did worse than the low-fat / high-carb rats in maze performance as well as treadmill performance.

Special Announcement: This year, The Rat Olympics will be sponsored by Kashi and Special K.

Anyone who has thrived on a low-carb (and therefor high-fat) diet knows that the first few days to a week can be trying. This is because your body has to “change gears” (or have your metabolism get acclimated) in order to process all the fat and protein efficently. If you we’re asked to run a marathon during your first week on low-carb – and you collapsed in a pile during it, would that mean that low-carb is bad? Not at all.

The comments are full of moronic “That’s Right!” comments, but thankfully also have a healthy amount of actual free thinkers and readers to pick apart the conclusions as well. I’m going to post a few comments down below, but feel free to check them out – it gives me hope that we’re starting to assemble numbers (almost) equal to the standard “nutritional sheep” (Mmmm, sheep!).

Regarding the “change-over effect” into high-fat diets by ‘Trent’

“Speaking from personal experience, I went from eating a mixed diet to a high fat diet (low to no carb diet) during the first two weeks I felt groggy, weak and unable to focus. However, once my body “detoxed the carbs” my energy levels went through the roof, my cognitive functions are at least par with my pre-diet abilities and my lifting strength has actually increased with exercise. Not to mention that with no added exercise I have gone from 24% body-fat to less than 12%. I have received several test throughout my diet showing a clean bill of health, including blood work, cholesterol, and ekg/stress test.

I pose two possible answers to your findings:
1. The lab rats were in the first phase “carb” detox and there had not been sufficient time for their systems to adjust.
and/or
2. As I have personally experienced, I no longer have cravings for carbs as I once had, and hence the rats had little or no motivation to retrieve a “sweet” treat.”

..and more by ‘Murray’

“The transition period from an extreme low-fat diet to high-fat in the experiment seems inadequate. Personally, I have evolved to a high-fat low-carb diet (55-25-20 fat/protein/carb) over the past few years as I have read more nutritional studies. (The fat is predominatly from nuts, seeds, avocado/olive oil, 100% chocolate, yoghurt, fatty fish and artisan cheese).My percent body fat decreased in lock step with decreased starch/sugar, and is now at about 7.5% b.f. This weekend I set a personal best for a 5km kayak, immediately followed by a 10km bike ride in hills and a 2 km swim. My blood sugar (12 hour fast) is between 3.7 and 4.3. All of this leads me to question whether the experiment sheds much light on the effect of fat per se, as much as the effect of a dramatic and abrupt shift in diet pattern.”

By ‘Thomas’

“This research is as relevant as feeding elephants with medium done stakes would have been. Then applying the results to the humans.”

By ‘Dr. E. Franes’

“Sorry but this is bad science and poor journalism. What a tragedy to those who take such nonsense to heart (literally).

1. Rats evolved to eat a grain-based diet. Humans evolved to eat mostly meat with some nuts and berries (we didn’t discover carbohydrate until about 10-15000 years ago, which is a nanosecond in our history.) Rat data doesn’t correlate with humans even a little.

2. Look at the photo above. How much carbohydrate is there compared to nutritious protein and fat.

3. Read Gary Taubes’ Good Calories Bad Calories, or any book by Dr. Michael Eades to understand the real science behind human metabolism. Not this nonsense.

Unbelievable. Who sponsored this study? The corn industry or some such?”

Check out the rest, you’ll be impressed. (unintentional rhyming)

If anyone brings this study up in regards to your diet… Tell them that it doesn’t apply to you – since you’re not a rat coming down from a sugar addiction.

UPDATE: Oh snap, I was just informed that Mark’s Daily Apple just did a complete once-over of this study the other day – and its completely unstoppable – seriously, its that good. Thanks @CastleGrok!

Related posts:

1. “Eco-Atkins” Vegetarian Protein Diet Study = Meaningless