I was listening to an author on the radio (CBC to be exact) who is a scientific writer, and not a dietician. He has researched and explored the diet theories and history of dieting quite thoroughly and has come to the following conclusions:
1. Carbohydrates drive insulin, and insulin-response drives fat production. He says that this is scientifically proven. Fat and protien do not drive the insulin response.
2. The low-fat, high carb movement came out in the late 1970s. For decades and decades before, the common knowledge (if you will) about being fat meant that you were eating too many carbohydrates. As of the late 1970s, the thought that "fat made you fat" and high-carb, low-fat diets became all the rage.
3. Since the early 1980s, there has been an EXPLOSION in obesity rates. He feels that the higher obesity rates are directly linked to the high carb, low fat diet philosophies that have been prevalent only since the late 1970s.
4. There is a moral judgement placed on those who are overweight, instead of recognizing the physiological response to excess carbohydrates in a diet. Large people are seen as lazy and unmotivated INSTEAD of being people who are simply displaying the results of excess carb intake, and paradoxically, their excess carb intake is a result of the officially sanctioned high carb, low fat philosophy. In other words -- you can't win if you follow government guidelines because physiology and science is against you, and furthermore, you will be judged for failing!
I thought that these thoughts were profound, and controversial, too. The book is called "Good Calories, Bad Calories" and here is a link to a review of the author's work:
http://www.randomhouse.com/knopf/cat...=9781400040780
The most interesting thing I heard in the interview, is that the author begged, and I mean BEGGED for a thorough investigation of his results. He isn't trying to convince anyone, he just wants the scientific truth to come out. He isn't promoting any diet or eating plan. He has just investigated the science behind dieting as it exists in 2007.
Now, I know there is another thread on this, and I understand the controversy. So my point is NOT to say that he is right. It is just to say that there are many points of view on this subject, of which this is only one. And he has his detractors, for sure. So perhaps I've only ADDED to your confusion! Which I don't mean to do!!!!!
Maya