Obesity and What Doesn't Matter

Since the recognition of the existence of  macronutrients, (carbohydrates, proteins, and fats) by William Prout (1785-1850) in 1827, their role in human nutrition and obesity has been hotly debated.  James Salisbury (1823-1905) took this information and started one of the first fad diets with his belief that human health was improved by a diet of chopped steak (Salisbury steak) and coffee.  John Kellogg (1852-1943) , in turn, ran health farms advocating a vegetarian diet with enemas.  He started the Kelloggs cereal empire.

Since the days of Salisbury and Kellogg little has changed.  Arguments still go back and forth over the health benefits of relative amounts of carbohydrates, proteins, and fats in the diet and their role in obesity. Most of these debates have little to do with science so perhaps a new study that helps to clarify the science of this issue will have little impact.  Still, we might hope. 

Frank Sachs and colleagues have just completed a two year study following 811 subjects needing to lose weight.  They were randomly placed on one of four diets in which the relative amount of macronutrients varied.  Their findings were that none of the diets led to a significant difference in weight loss.  

The conclusion.  In dieting it isn't what you eat but how much that matters.

Reference: Sachs FM, and others. 2009.  Comparison of weight-loss diets with different compositions of fat, protein and carbohydrates. New England Journal of Medicine 360(9): 859-873.

Photo Credit:  JMH649: Wikipedia Commons.  Computed Tomography (CT) transverse scan of obese (right) and non-obese abdomen.