On Wednesday in the Daily Mail there was an article written by a Doctor which reported on a recent study published in the US comparing various diets from low fat to low carb. The apparent conclusion was that it didn’t matter which diet was followed as they all had the same results.

Now I would have believed this had I not actually read the Study itself – sad lawyer that I am. Whilst it is true that the conclusion of the Study was correctly summarised by the Doctor it was quite clear that the Doctor had  either not bothered to read the Study or did not understand the subject sufficiently well to understand the conclusion.

Had he read the Study or understood the subject well he would had known that there was a fundamental fault in the definition of low carb.  The definition of low carb has not yet been set in law but ,and this is a big but, it is quite clear from numerous randomized clinical studies throughout the world that  low carb needs to be no more than 60grams of carbs a day. The reason for this is that if you have more than 40-60 grams of carbs a day you can not go into ketosis and it is ketosis that offers such fast and efficient fat loss. Indeed in all other comparative studies which are actually comparing proper low carb to low fat or Mediterranean there is only one outcome – low carb wins

So if you have a low carb diet of 80g a day it would be low compared to the average diet of the average person but it would not be sufficiently low to actually reap the fantastic benefits of low carb diets which put you into ketosis. The study in question had a carbohydrate count closer to 100grams a day rather than the 60 or less required for ketosis.

So don’t believe everything you read in the press because unfortunately some of the journalists don’t always go into the level of detail required to give a fair summary of what they are reporting on.  Now that just makes me want to rant all over again about responsibility……..