Just randomly perusing the Internet landscape:
It shouldn’t even be questioned that the low-fat diet advanced during the fat-phobia craze of the 80s and early 90s is an unhealthy and nonsustainable diet. Aside from throwing the baby out with the bathwater (i.e., essential fatty acids with saturated fats), the low-fat diet also features a high proportion of carbohydrates comprising the daily calorie intake. It gave rise to the entire low-fat/fat-free food industry, ignored the issue of dietary control of hormonal levels (insulin, in particular), and probably was the single biggest factor why today Americans are so goddamn fat.
One can safely suspect that I do not hold the low-fat diet in high regard.
Well, personal trainers continue to tell their clients to “avoid foods high in fat,” and clients are advised to lower the total number of calories they consume daily (especially from fat), but no options are given when confronted with the envitable hunger pangs that accompany a reduced-calorie, carbohydrate-based diet. Patients are advised not to eat foods high in fat and to minimize fat in their diet for fear that their blood cholestrol should hit record highs and cause their hearts to spontaneously explode. Fat is still the enemy, I’m afraid. Even though it really isn’t.
So here’s more grist for the mill: According to the study cited in the article, by restricting fat in the diet, the liver doesn’t get signals to engage in lipolysis, and no fat is burned. Additionally, existing fat in the system is not sufficient – instead, new fat must be introduced (through diet) in order to kick-start the process. In other words, if you don’t eat fat, you stay fat (or at least, your body tends not to burn fat for energy too easily).
Just another nail in the coffin for the low-fat crowd.
One thing, however – why do all researchers have complex names, like “Clay Semenkovich?”