Dietary carbohydrate restriction as the first approach in diabetes management: critical review and evidence base.

The inability of current recommendations to control the epidemic of diabetes, the specific failure of the prevailing low-fat diets to improve obesity, cardiovascular risk, or general health and the persistent reports of some serious side effects of commonly prescribed diabetic medications, in combination with the continued success of low-carbohydrate diets in the treatment of diabetes and metabolic syndrome without significant side effects, point to the need for a reappraisal of dietary guidelines. The benefits of carbohydrate restriction in diabetes are immediate and well documented. Concerns about the efficacy and safety are long term and conjectural rather than data driven. Dietary carbohydrate restriction reliably reduces high blood glucose, does not require weight loss (although is still best for weight loss), and leads to the reduction or elimination of medication. It has never shown side effects comparable with those seen in many drugs. Here we present 12 points of evidence supporting the use of low-carbohydrate diets as the first approach to treating type 2 diabetes and as the most effective adjunct to pharmacology in type 1. They represent the best-documented, least controversial results. The insistence on long-term randomized controlled trials as the only kind of data that will be accepted is without precedent in science. The seriousness of diabetes requires that we evaluate all of the evidence that is available. The 12 points are sufficiently compelling that we feel that the burden of proof rests with those who are opposed.

Comparison of a reduced carbohydrate and reduced fat diet for LDL, HDL, and VLDL subclasses during 9-months of weight maintenance subsequent to weight loss.

OBJECTIVES: This study compared LDL, HDL, and VLDL subclasses in overweight or obese adults consuming either a reduced carbohydrate (RC) or reduced fat (RF) weight maintenance diet for 9 months following significant weight loss. METHODS: Thirty-five (21 RC; 14 RF) overweight or obese middle-aged adults completed a 1-year weight management clinic. Participants met weekly for the first six months and bi-weekly thereafter. Meetings included instruction for diet, physical activity, and behavior change related to weight management. Additionally, participants followed a liquid very low-energy diet of approximately 2092 kJ per day for the first three months of the study. Subsequently, participants followed a dietary plan for nine months that targeted a reduced percentage of carbohydrate (approximately 20%) or fat (approximately 30%) intake and an energy intake level calculated to maintain weight loss. Lipid subclasses using NMR spectroscopy were analyzed prior to weight loss and at multiple intervals during weight maintenance. RESULTS: Body weight change was not significantly different within or between groups during weight maintenance (p>0.05). The RC group showed significant increases in mean LDL size, large LDL, total HDL, large and small HDL, mean VLDL size, and large VLDL during weight maintenance while the RF group showed increases in total HDL, large and small HDL, total VLDL, and large, medium, and small VLDL (p<0.05). Group*time interactions were significant for large and medium VLDL (p>0.05). CONCLUSION: Some individual lipid subclasses improved in both dietary groups. Large and medium VLDL subclasses increased to a greater extent across weight maintenance in the RF group.

Has carbohydrate-restriction been forgotten as a treatment for diabetes mellitus? A perspective on the ACCORD study design.

Prior to the discovery of medical treatment for diabetes, carbohydrate-restriction was the predominant treatment recommendation to treat diabetes mellitus. In this commentary we argue that carbohydrate-restriction should be reincorporated into contemporary treatment studies for diabetes mellitus.

Dietary carbohydrate restriction in type 2 diabetes mellitus and metabolic syndrome: time for a critical appraisal.

Current nutritional approaches to metabolic syndrome and type 2 diabetes generally rely on reductions in dietary fat. The success of such approaches has been limited and therapy more generally relies on pharmacology. The argument is made that a re-evaluation of the role of carbohydrate restriction, the historical and intuitive approach to the problem, may provide an alternative and possibly superior dietary strategy. The rationale is that carbohydrate restriction improves glycemic control and reduces insulin fluctuations which are primary targets. Experiments are summarized showing that carbohydrate-restricted diets are at least as effective for weight loss as low-fat diets and that substitution of fat for carbohydrate is generally beneficial for risk of cardiovascular disease. These beneficial effects of carbohydrate restriction do not require weight loss. Finally, the point is reiterated that carbohydrate restriction improves all of the features of metabolic syndrome.

Comparison of a low carbohydrate and low fat diet for weight maintenance in overweight or obese adults enrolled in a clinical weight management program.

BACKGROUND: Recent evidence suggests that a low carbohydrate (LC) diet may be equally or more effective for short-term weight loss than a traditional low fat (LF) diet; however, less is known about how they compare for weight maintenance. The purpose of this study was to compare body weight (BW) for participants in a clinical weight management program, consuming a LC or LF weight maintenance diet for 6 months following weight loss. METHODS: Fifty-five (29 low carbohydrate diet; 26 low fat diet) overweight/obese middle-aged adults completed a 9 month weight management program that included instruction for behavior, physical activity (PA), and nutrition. For 3 months all participants consumed an identical liquid diet (2177 kJ/day) followed by 1 month of re-feeding with solid foods either low in carbohydrate or low in fat. For the remaining 5 months, participants were prescribed a meal plan low in dietary carbohydrate (~20%) or fat (~30%). BW and carbohydrate or fat grams were collected at each group meeting. Energy and macronutrient intake were assessed at baseline, 3, 6, and 9 months. RESULTS: The LC group increased BW from 89.2 +/- 14.4 kg at 3 months to 89.3 +/- 16.1 kg at 9 months (P = 0.84). The LF group decreased BW from 86.3 +/- 12.0 kg at 3 months to 86.0 +/- 14.0 kg at 9 months (P = 0.96). BW was not different between groups during weight maintenance (P = 0.87). Fifty-five percent (16/29) and 50% (13/26) of participants for the LC and LF groups, respectively, continued to decrease their body weight during weight maintenance. CONCLUSION: Following a 3 month liquid diet, the LC and LF diet groups were equally effective for BW maintenance over 6 months; however, there was significant variation in weight change within each group.

Low-carbohydrate nutrition and metabolism.

The persistence of an epidemic of obesity and type 2 diabetes suggests that new nutritional strategies are needed if the epidemic is to be overcome. A promising nutritional approach suggested by this thematic review is carbohydrate restriction. Recent studies show that, under conditions of carbohydrate restriction, fuel sources shift from glucose and fatty acids to fatty acids and ketones, and that ad libitum-fed carbohydrate-restricted diets lead to appetite reduction, weight loss, and improvement in surrogate markers of cardiovascular disease.

Low carbohydrate diets in family practice: what can we learn from an internet-based support group.

The Active Low-Carber Forums (ALCF) is an on-line support group started in 2000 which currently has more than 86,000 members. Data collected from posts to the forum and from an on-line survey were used to determine the behavior and attitudes of people on low carbohydrate diets. Members were asked to complete a voluntary 27-item questionnaire over the internet. Our major findings are as follows: survey respondents, like the membership at large, were mostly women and mostly significantly overweight, a significant number intending to and, in many cases, succeeding at losing more than 100 lbs. The great majority of members of ALCF identify themselves as following the Atkins diet or some variation of it. Although individual posts on the forum and in the narrative part of our survey are critical of professional help, we found that more than half of respondents saw a physician before or during dieting and, of those who did, about half received support from the physician. Another 28 % found the physician initially neutral but supportive after positive results were produced. Using the same criteria as the National Weight Registry (without follow-up)--30 lbs or more lost and maintained for more than one year--it was found that more than 1400 people had successfully used low carb methods. In terms of food consumed, the perception of more than half of respondents were that they ate less than before the diet and whereas high protein, high fat sources replaced carbohydrate to some extent, the major change indicated by survey-takers is a large increase in green vegetables and a large decrease in fruit intake. Government or health agencies were not sources of information for dieters in this group and a collection of narrative comments indicates a high level of satisfaction, indeed enthusiasm for low carbohydrate dieting. The results provide both a tabulation of the perceived behavior of a significant number of dieters using low carbohydrate strategies as well as a collection of narratives that provide a human perspective on what it is like to be on such a diet. An important conclusion for the family physician is that it becomes possible to identify a diet that is used by many people where the primary principle is replacement of starch and sugar-containing foods with non-starchy vegetables, with little addition of fat or protein. Used by many people who identify themselves as being on the Atkins diet, such a strategy provides the advantages of carbohydrate-restricted diets but is less iconoclastic than the popular perception and therefore more acceptable to traditional nutritionists. It is reasonable for family practitioners to turn this observation into a recommendation for patients for weight control and other health problems.

A low-carbohydrate, ketogenic diet to treat type 2 diabetes.

BACKGROUND: The low-carbohydrate, ketogenic diet (LCKD) may be effective for improving glycemia and reducing medications in patients with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: From an outpatient clinic, we recruited 28 overweight participants with type 2 diabetes for a 16-week single-arm pilot diet intervention trial. We provided LCKD counseling, with an initial goal of <20 g carbohydrate/day, while reducing diabetes medication dosages at diet initiation. Participants returned every other week for measurements, counseling, and further medication adjustment. The primary outcome was hemoglobin A1c. RESULTS: Twenty-one of the 28 participants who were enrolled completed the study. Twenty participants were men; 13 were White, 8 were African-American. The mean [+/- SD] age was 56.0 +/- 7.9 years and BMI was 42.2 +/- 5.8 kg/m2. Hemoglobin A1c decreased by 16% from 7.5 +/- 1.4% to 6.3 +/- 1.0% (p < 0.001) from baseline to week 16. Diabetes medications were discontinued in 7 participants, reduced in 10 participants, and unchanged in 4 participants. The mean body weight decreased by 6.6% from 131.4 +/- 18.3 kg to 122.7 +/- 18.9 kg (p < 0.001). In linear regression analyses, weight change at 16 weeks did not predict change in hemoglobin A1c. Fasting serum triglyceride decreased 42% from 2.69 +/- 2.87 mmol/L to 1.57 +/- 1.38 mmol/L (p = 0.001) while other serum lipid measurements did not change significantly. CONCLUSION: The LCKD improved glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes such that diabetes medications were discontinued or reduced in most participants. Because the LCKD can be very effective at lowering blood glucose, patients on diabetes medication who use this diet should be under close medical supervision or capable of adjusting their medication.

Clinical experience of a carbohydrate-restricted diet for the metabolic syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Our objective was to analyze a restricted carbohydrate dietary approach compared to a standard low-fat diet plus medication plan as treatment for weight loss and the metabolic syndrome. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of patients attending an outpatient weight and metabolism management program, including periodic individual visits combined with either a carbohydrate-restricted diet (with multivitamin and essential fatty acids supplementation) or low-fat/low-calorie diet + phentermine/fenfluramine. The main outcome measurements were total body weight and fasting serum lipid profiles. Clinical data were maintained on standardized flow sheets. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-two patients had complete baseline and follow-up information. Sixty-six were treated with a carbohydrate-restricted diet without medication, and 56 were treated with a combination of low-fat/low-calorie diet and medication. Weight loss occurred in both groups, but was greater in the medication group: the carbohydrate-restricted group lost a mean of 9.5 kg over 15.0 weeks (0.63 kg/week); the low-fat/low-calorie diet + medication group lost a mean of 14.1 kg over a mean duration of 20.2 weeks (0.70 kg/week), p < 0.01. The carbohydrate-restricted group had a greater reduction in triglycerides (p = 0.02) and triglyceride/HDL ratio (p = 0.01), and a greater increase in HDL (p < 0.001) than the medication group. CONCLUSIONS: In this outpatient program, a carbohydrate-restricted diet and a low-fat/low-calorie diet + medication led to weight loss, but the carbohydrate-restricted diet had a more favorable effect on triglycerides and HDL. Because of the effects on weight, triglycerides, and HDL, a carbohydrate-restricted diet may be useful for the treatment of metabolic syndrome.