Carb-Strong or Carb-Wrong?

We asked you for your health-related view of carbs, and got the above-depicted, below-described, set of responses

• About 48% said “Some carbs are beneficial; others are detrimental”
• About 27% said “Carbs are a critical source of energy, and safer than fats”
• About 18% said “A low-carb diet is best for overall health (and a carb is a carb)”
• About 7% said “We do not need carbs to live; a carnivore diet is viable”

But what does the science say?

Carbs are a critical source of energy, and safer than fats: True or False?

True and False, respectively! That is: they are a critical source of energy, and carbs and fats both have an important place in our diet.

❝Diets that focus too heavily on a single macronutrient, whether extreme protein, carbohydrate, or fat intake, may adversely impact health.❞

~ Dr. Russel de Souza et al.

Source: Low carb or high carb? Everything in moderation … until further notice

(the aforementioned lead author Dr. de Souza, by the way, served as an external advisor to the World Health Organization’s Nutrition Guidelines Advisory Committee)

Some carbs are beneficial; others are detrimental: True or False?

True! Glycemic index is important here. There’s a big difference between eating a raw carrot and drinking high-fructose corn syrup:

Which Sugars Are Healthier, And Which Are Just The Same?

While some say grains and/or starchy vegetables are bad, best current science recommends:

• Eat some whole grains regularly, but they should not be the main bulk of your meal (non-wheat grains are generally better)
• Starchy vegetables are not a critical food group, but in moderation they are fine.

To this end, the Mediterranean Diet is the current gold standard of healthful eating, per general scientific consensus:

• The Mediterranean Diet: What Is It Good For?
• Four Ways To Upgrade The Mediterranean Diet

A low-carb diet is best for overall health (and a carb is a carb): True or False?

True-ish and False, respectively. We covered the “a carb is a carb” falsehood earlier, so we’ll look at “a low-carb diet is best”.

Simply put: it can be. One of the biggest problems facing the low-carb diet though is that adherence tends to be poor—that is to say, people crave their carby comfort foods and eat more carbs again. As for the efficacy of a low-carb diet in the context of goals such as weight loss and glycemic control, the evidence is mixed:

❝There is probably little to no difference in weight reduction and changes in cardiovascular risk factors up to two years’ follow-up, when overweight and obese participants without and with T2DM are randomised to either low-carbohydrate or balanced-carbohydrate weight-reducing diets❞

~ Dr. Celeste Naud et al.

Source: Low-carbohydrate versus balanced-carbohydrate diets for reducing weight and cardiovascular risk

❝On the basis of moderate to low certainty evidence, patients adhering to an LCD for six months may experience remission of diabetes without adverse consequences.

Limitations include continued debate around what constitutes remission of diabetes, as well as the efficacy, safety, and dietary satisfaction of longer term LCDs❞

~ Dr. Joshua Goldenberg et al.

Source: Efficacy and safety of low and very low carbohydrate diets for type 2 diabetes remission

❝There should be no “one-size-fits-all” eating pattern for different patient´s profiles with diabetes.

It is clinically complex to suggest an ideal percentage of calories from carbohydrates, protein and lipids recommended for all patients with diabetes.❞

~Dr. Adriana Sousa et al.

Source: Current Evidence Regarding Low-carb Diets for The Metabolic Control of Type-2 Diabetes

We do not need carbs to live; a carnivore diet is viable: True or False?

False. For a simple explanation:

The Carnivore Diet: Can You Have Too Much Meat?

There isn’t a lot of science studying the effects of consuming no plant products, largely because such a study, if anything other than observational population studies, would be unethical. Observational population studies, meanwhile, are not practical because there are so few people who try this, and those who do, do not persist after their first few hospitalizations.

Putting aside the “Carnivore Diet” as a dangerous unscientific fad, if you are inclined to meat-eating, there is some merit to the Paleo Diet, at least for short-term weight loss even if not necessarily long-term health:

What’s The Real Deal With The Paleo Diet?

For longer-term health, we refer you back up to the aforementioned Mediterranean Diet.

Enjoy!

Ayurveda’s Contributions To Science (Without Being Itself Rooted in Scientific Method)

Yesterday, we asked you for your opinions on ayurveda, and got the above-depicted, below-described, set of responses. Of those who responded…

• A little over 41% said “I don’t know what ayurveda is without looking it up”
• A little over 37% said “It is a fine branch of health science with millennia of evidence”
• A little over 16% said “It gets some things right, but not by actual science”
• A little over 4% said “It is a potentially dangerous pseudoscience”

So, what does the science say?

Ayurveda is scientific: True or False?

False, simply. Let’s just rip the band-aid off in this case. That doesn’t mean it’s necessarily without merit, though!

Let’s put it this way:

• If you drink coffee to feel more awake because scientific method has discerned that caffeine has vasoconstrictive and adenosine-blocking effects while also promoting dopaminergic activity, then your consumption of coffee is evidence-based and scientific. Great!
• If you drink coffee to feel more awake because somebody told you that that somebody told them that it energizes you by balancing the elements fire (the heat of the coffee), air (the little bubbles on top), earth (the coffee grinds), water (the water), and ether (steam), then that isneither evidence-based nor scientific, but it will still work exactly the same.

Ayurveda is a little like that. It’s an ancient traditional Indian medicine, based on a combination of anecdotal evidence and supposition.

• The anecdotal evidence from ayurveda has often resulted in herbal remedies that, in modern scientific trials, have been found to have merit.
  • Ayurvedic meditative practices also have a large overlap with modern mindfulness practices, and have also been found to have merit
  • Ayurveda also promotes the practice of yoga, which is indeed a very healthful activity
• The supposition from ayurveda is based largely in those five elements we mentioned above, as well as a “balancing of humors” comparable to medieval European medicine, and from a scientific perspective, is simply a hypothesis with no evidence to support it.

Note: while ayurveda is commonly described as a science by its practitioners in the modern age, it did not originally claim to be scientific, but rather, wisdom handed down directly by the god Dhanvantari.

Ayurveda gets some things right: True or False?

True! Indeed, we covered some before in 10almonds; you may remember:

Bacopa Monnieri: A Well-Evidenced Cognitive Enhancer

(Bacopa monnieri is also known by its name in ayurveda, brahmi)

There are many other herbs that have made their way from ayurveda into modern science, but the above is a stand-out example. Others include:

• Ashwagandha: The Root of All Even-Mindedness?
• Boswellia serrata (Frankincense) Against Pain and Depression/Anxiety

Yoga and meditation are also great, and not only that, but great by science, for example:

• NCCIH | Yoga for Health: Clinical Guidelines, Scientific Literature, Info for Patients
• The Neuroscience of Mindfulness: How Mindfulness Alters the Brain and Facilitates Emotion Regulation

Ayurveda is a potentially dangerous pseudoscience: True or False?

Also True! We covered why it’s a pseudoscience above, but that doesn’t make it potentially dangerous, per se (you’ll remember our coffee example).

What does, however, make it potentially dangerous (dose-dependent) is its use of heavy metals such as lead, mercury, and arsenic:

Heavy Metal Content of Ayurvedic Herbal Medicine Products

Some final thoughts…

Want to learn more about the sometimes beneficial, sometimes uneasy relationship between ayurveda and modern science?

A lot of scholarly articles trying to bridge (or further separate) the two were very biased one way or the other.

Instead, here’s one that’s reasonably optimistic with regard to ayurveda’s potential for good, while being realistic about how it currently stands:

Development of Ayurveda—Tradition to trend

Take care!