Practiceby Lab 10 Get started ›
Crossfire

Is cutting carbs the thing that makes a diet work?

What the experts say

Christopher D. GardnerPhD · nutrition scientist, Stanford Prevention Research Center

No. Once both diets exclude added sugar and refined grain, the carbohydrate level stops deciding the outcome.

What it rests onA 12-month randomised trial in 609 adults where a healthy low-fat and a healthy low-carbohydrate arm produced median weight changes of 5.3 kg and 6.0 kg with no significant difference, and where neither a prespecified genotype pattern nor baseline insulin secretion moderated the effect. A second trial in prediabetes and type 2 diabetes found ketogenic and Mediterranean-plus arms did not differ on HbA1c at 12 weeks. He concedes a small behavioural edge to low-carbohydrate eating (gar-lowcarb-edge) and locates it in cheating patterns rather than metabolism.

Source: jamanetwork.com ↗
Shawn BakerMD · orthopedic surgeon and strength athlete

Yes. Carbohydrate is the one macronutrient you can remove entirely, and removing it is the intervention.

What it rests onMechanistic: gluconeogenesis supplies the glucose red blood cells and liver cells require and ketones can supply most of the brain's energy, so carbohydrate has no dietary requirement while protein and fat do. Operationally he sets a working target under 20 g net carbohydrate a day with fat at roughly 60 to 75 percent of calories (bak-carb-target), while noting ketosis is optional.

Source: carnivore.diet ↗

Overview

Gardner's trials enrolled adults with a BMI of 28 to 40 without diabetes (DIETFITS), overweight premenopausal women (A TO Z), and people with prediabetes or type 2 diabetes (Keto-Med). Baker is largely addressing people who have already failed conventional advice and who arrive with symptoms, which is a self-selected group that no diet trial recruits.

Gardner is also answering "which diet wins on average" and Baker is answering "what should I personally do", and the enormous within-group variance Gardner documents (gar-individual-variation) is the reason both answers can be honest.

Where they agree

Larger than the fight suggests. Both exclude added sugar and refined grain, both treat ultra-processed food as a primary problem, both reject calorie counting as the operative lever, and both tell people to eat to appetite rather than to deprivation. Gardner's A TO Z trial found the lowest-carbohydrate arm lost the most weight and he has never withdrawn it (gar-lowcarb-legitimate).

What would settle it

For Gardner: a trial with genuine equipoise in which a very-low-carbohydrate arm beats a matched high-quality comparator on a hard outcome rather than on triglycerides. For Baker: a randomised comparison of carbohydrate elimination against a high-quality moderate-carbohydrate diet with symptom and quality-of-life endpoints, which neither side currently has.

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.