No. Only "history" we have is that I refuted some of his BS claims concerning higher protein/lower carb diets.
Message from Lyle Mcdonald:
-----
Well, apparently I'm not going to get my email validated by the mods so I asked someone else to post the following in response to Anssi's comments about me.
****
Anssi,
You have an interesting revisionist history regarding our 'debates' over high protein/low carb diets on my forum. But since I apparently have no credentials or knowledge, I'll simply repost the following questions, the same questions (with a couple of additions) that you have continually evaded on my forum.
I'm sure that the Getbig.com members will appreciate your detailed answers to these questions so that you can demonstrate your own credentials and knowledge.
Lyle
***
1. In their paper Bucholz et. al. bring up the following point regarding high vs. low carb diet studies.
In both short-term and long-term studies of low vs. high carb diets, the same ~2.5 kg difference in body weight shows up, this occurs whether the studies are a few days long, a few weeks long or a few months long.
So why doesn't this metabolic advantage sustain past the several day/several week mark?
Why it it only an early event?
Put differently: if there is a metabolic advantage that is able to nearly double weight loss over a few days to 2 weeks, how come that same metabolic advantage doesn't double weight loss over the length of the study (and spare me reference to the obese children study, if you look at the individual data, it was clear that three monster outliers in that study skewed the numbers in the low-carb group)?
2. You wrote "People don't lose lot of water in low-carb diet (see the recent papers in the Annals of Internal Medicine) so it cannot explain the greater weight loss. "
So how come I can easily drop 5-7 lbs in the first 3 days on a lowcarb diet and piss like a racehorse the entire time? How come that same 5-7 lbs comes back on when I carb load on the weekends? How come the hundreds of people I've had report their results on lowcarb diets over the past 8 years report the same phenomenon?
Considering that this 5-7 lbs already exceeds the 2.5 kg difference reported in most studies, how can you justify your claim that loss of water cannot explain the greater weight loss?
While you're at it, can you please adress the role of insulin in water resorption at the kidney? How about the known diuretic effect of ketones? Perhaps you would care to explain the relationship between muscle glycogen and water storage. Please adress each within your assertio that 'people don't lose a lot of water in low-carb diet'.
3. How come no studies examiningg metabolic rate on different diets have noted a change in resting oxygen uptake? If this metabolic advantage is significant, why is it not measurable?
4. Can you and Feinman et. al. really not make the distinction between diets that differ in carbohydrates and those that differ in protein? Because every study you like to trot out invariably has protein, fat and carbohydrates varying. And the group with higher protein generally does better. That is, you're typically looking at studies with somethihng like
'Low-carb': 30% protein, 10% carbs, 60% fat
'High-carb': 15% protein, some %carbs, some %fat
The difference of course, has NOTHING to do with the carb content but that you're comparint diets that are high and lower in protein.
But this has nothing to do with carbohdyrate intake per se, does it. It's just as easy to eat high protein in the context of a carb-based diet as a low-carb diet.
Put differently, which diet would you expect to have the 'metabolic advantage'?
Diet 1: 30% protein, 50% carbs, 20% fat (typical carb-based diet)
Diet 2: 30% protein, 10% carbs, 60% fat (typical low-carb diet)
I'm sure that the Getbig members will be illuminated by your detailed answers to these questions.
Lyle
