Practiceby Lab 10 Get started ›
Crossfire

If I cut carbs and eat when I'm hungry, will the fat come off on its own?

What the experts say

Benjamin T. BikmanPhD · Professor of Cell Biology and Physiology, Brigham Young University; director of the Laboratory of Obesity and Metabolism

Yes. Get insulin down and the fat cell has no choice

What it rests onCell biology. Insulin is the signal that keeps fat inside the fat cell and suppresses its release, carbohydrate is the main driver of insulin, protein raises it slightly and fat not at all. He adds that chronically elevated insulin, rather than stored energy, is what drives insulin resistance in the first place, reasoning from the athlete's paradox and from diacylglycerol and ceramide accumulation. His practical rule is to control carbohydrate, prioritise protein at 1 to 1.5 g per kg, and not restrict fat.

Source: magazine.byu.edu ↗
Kevin D. HallPhD · metabolism researcher; formerly Section Chief, Integrative Physiology Section, NIDDK, National Institutes of Health

No. In a controlled test, people ate substantially more

What it rests onAn inpatient randomised crossover trial: 20 adults, two weeks on each diet, eating as much as they wanted, both diets minimally processed. A plant-based low-fat diet at 10.3% fat and 75.2% carbohydrate against an animal-based ketogenic diet at 75.8% fat and 10.0% carbohydrate. One participant withdrew with hypoglycemia. NCT03878108.

Source: pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov ↗

Overview

Hall's participants did not choose the diet, did not shop or cook, had no adaptation period, and ate a formulated ketogenic diet for fourteen days in a hospital. Bikman is describing people who choose the approach and stay on it, and he would say two weeks is not long enough for the fat cell to respond.

Neither is describing the other's person, and the honest answer may differ for a fortnight and a year. Neither side is talking about people on glucose-lowering medication, where a sharp carbohydrate cut needs supervision.

Where they agree

Larger than either side's supporters expect. Both hold that calorie counting is a poor daily practice and that hunger is the thing that defeats people; Bikman says hunger always wins, Hall says the environment moved intake by 508 kcal a day with no change in reported appetite. Both hold that refined carbohydrate is worth reducing. Both hold that the failure is not a character failure. They disagree about what the fat cell is responding to.

What would settle it

For Bikman, a longer trial in which people eat as much as they want, with a proper adaptation period, which he would say the two-week design cannot provide. For Hall, a demonstration that lowering insulin reduces fat mass at matched energy intake, which is the isocaloric test his own trials were built to run. Both sides invoke the same shape of study, which is why the dispute is tractable in principle and stuck in practice.

Practice does not pick a winner here

You do, and your call is dated, kept, and yours to change. Follow the people you already trust and what they publish turns into a short daily practice.

Get started

Free to sign up and use. We do not ask for a card.