I read the obesity code last year and it is interesting, though I think it’s important to recognise that his work focuses on obese individuals diagnosed with type II diabetes.
There are many experts that counter much of what Fung claims stating the research as it currently stands doesn’t strongly support this model as a main driver of adiposity in most people. Whilst it certainly contributes from what they say they know right now about human physiology and the causes of obesity, it doesnt seem to be the most probable cause? At least not for most people, most of the time.
This meta-analysis (Obesity Energetics: Body Weight Regulation and the Effects of Diet Composition - PubMed) is a very interesting read discussing this topic. It reviews all of the highly controlled trials ever conducted that matched calories and protein, and simply varied carbs and fats to see any fat loss differences. Hint, there weren’t any :). It also dives into the concepts of energy balance, set-point models, mechanisms and feedback loops to resist weight loss, and where the literature currently stands overall.
James Kreiger’s http://weightology.net/insulin-an-undeserved-bad-reputation/ series is also worth a read regarding this topic.
Another great series is by Dr. Stephan Guyenet. You can search his old site - wholehealthsource.org - more easily than his new site - stephanguyenet.com. Simply search “carbohydrate hypothesis” or “insulin”, and you will get a whole slew of excellent articles like these:
nb I got all this from my nutrition coaching group i did my course with. Personally I still feel 99% of people overthink everything and some basic habit changes and their behaviours around food are what we need to work with.
I agree and disagree with Fung on different topics. No I’m not a scientist or nutrition expert and can only go based on what I’ve read.
Use of fasting to reduce the hormones which cause hunger makes sense and helps to reduce total calorie intake.
Eating more protein and fewer carbs, especially refined carbs makes sense because of the extra energy needed to access carlories in protein and smoothing out blood glucose. Not advocating keto or super low carb just rebalancing away from current western diet with very high carb intake.
Long term calorie deficit causing bodies slowing metabolism meaning it’s hard to achieve long term and why people yo-yo diet.
Simply put and not particularly controversial
Fewer carbs and much less refined carbs
More fibre
More healthy protein and fat
Learn what a healthy portion size looks like.
Don’t eat late at night which tends to lead to poor decision making
“The caloric content and structure of medieval diet varied over time, from region to region, and between classes. However, for most people, the diet tended to be high-carbohydrate, with most of the budget spent on, and the majority of calories provided by, cereals and alcohol (such as beer ).”
In my ‘fat bastard’ opinion, there are two types of audience for this stuff. Those that are academically invested and actually know what they are talking about, whether they agree with CICO or not. They have coherent and scientific and data backed rationale. I don’t profess to understand half of that stuff.
Then there is the other demographic, the ones that are looking for a magic bullet and will go to the ends of the earth to disprove why CICO doesn’t work, usually citing an N+1 type of anecdotal evidence.
I still think for ‘most of the people, most of the time’ CICO does work and of course that goes hand in hand with a balanced diet. Few people on this site would be training on a diet of absolute crap. I eat way too much junk food to be athletic but I’m pretty sure my diet is better than 90% of the non exercising populace. I’m pretty weak willed and that’s on me.
If we concentrated on what would work for most of the population most of the time, we’d spend a lot less time arguing about the periphery. It’s not a popular message of course.
I’m with @Hammerer on this and Guyenet really knows his stuff. It is also worth listening to/reading interviews with Iñigo San Milan, a real expert on metabolism and particularly with our demographic here.
But live expectancy at 20 was almost certainly 60+, and probably 70+, so the life expectancy influenced by the diet wasn’t that bad at all. (Hoping it wasn’t a plague time)
