Well, the first long-awaited results of the NuSI metabolic ward studies comparing high-carb vs. ketogenic diets were publicly released today. Nutrition nerds around the world hung on to every word between interviewer Dr. Yoni Freedhoff and principal investigator Dr. Kevin Hall live via Periscope from an ICO 2016 poster session.
Take note. This is not some “bro-science” nutrition video, but a walk-thru of actual pre-publication data from the first NuSI Energy Balance Consortium paper. This was to be Gary Taubes’ RCT-to-end-all-RCTs, nobody-has-ever-measured-it-properly-before, let’s determine once-and-for-all if a “calorie is a calorie” or if “carbs make you fat” study.
This highly controlled laboratory study will help determine whether it’s the total amount of calories you eat or the proportion of fat and carbohydrate in the diet that most importantly drives body weight gain.
The study was seriously expensive, funded in part by the NIH and by $40M NuSI donors Laura and John Arnold. It was designed to measure as accurately as possible the total energy in minus the total energy out of 17 overweight-to-obese subjects, and to measure the body composition changes (DEXA-scan) resulting from about a 300 calorie deficit under a high carb/sugar diet, and then under a ketogenic diet.
The excellent interview tells you everything you need to know. You’ll see that the subjects lost fat quicker on the 25% sugar high-carb diet than on the 80% fat / 15% protein / 5% carb ketogenic diet (while likely insulin-resistant). RQ charts show the subjects quickly went to fat oxidation (“fat adaptation”), and C-peptide shows a quick 50% insulin drop in ketosis. Interestingly, subjects lost lean mass in ketosis, but not under the high-carb diet. Dr. Hall found no metabolic advantage for the ketogenic diet, and concludes that results falsify Taubes’ carbohydrate-insulin theory of obesity (the “Alternative Hypothesis”).
Well, this is awkward. The whole point of the creating the NuSI non-profit was to validate the carb-insulin theory of obesity, and prove that a calorie is not a calorie. These were to be the definitive metabolic ward studies to end the low-carb vs. high-carb debate. Well, ironically, it’s first study might just have done that. Just kidding! This is just another study any true believer will simply ignore. The tweets will go on.
Two Pounds of Starch A Day 
The study says the opposite.
That a calorie is not a calorie.
The study says whatever you want it to say.
I’d have to agree… although it showed slower fat mass reduction, it should a great weight loss, even if it is from lean mass (and presumably not good)… Still for the obese, who tend to have a possible excess of lean mass… it would arguably not be bad if they lost lean mass, if it is in excess… I could be wrong… but the results do show that the dietary changes resulted in differences regardless of what you think is good or bad results… different diets do different things…
Ahhh, good point. I only care about fat loss (and I don’t want to lose lean mass; and, of course, glycogen water weight loss is meaningless).
Yes, I see your point, different diets have different effects. But most people probably are thinking in terms of fat loss.
Very good point. I hope it is added to the discussion out there.
No.
It says that when switching to more fat and less carbohydrates the subjekts:
1. Lost more weigh
2. Spent more calories
3. Produced less insulin