Practiceby Lab 10 Get started ›
Crossfire

When a low-carb diet works for me, what is it that's actually working?

What the experts say

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

The insulin. Lower it and the fat cell releases

What it rests onCell-level signalling. Fat cells enlarging by hypertrophy become insulin resistant, leak fatty acids and drive ectopic fat into liver, pancreas and muscle; the disruptors of insulin signalling there are diacylglycerols and ceramides rather than triglyceride, which is why endurance athletes carry muscle triglyceride without insulin resistance. He calls the result insulin toxicity rather than energy toxicity.

Source: shows.acast.com ↗
Layne NortonPhD · nutrition scientist, coach, and competitive powerlifter

The calorie deficit, which the diet made easier to hold

What it rests onIsocaloric feeding comparisons and the observation that weight is lost on GLP-1 medication and in other settings where insulin is not low. He addresses Bikman by name, in an episode with a chapter titled 'Dr. Bikman's Claims', characterising the position as 'if we keep insulin low and control seed oils, fat cells can stay smaller and healthier' and arguing the hyperplasia and hypertrophy story does not carry the weight put on it.

Source: biolayne.com ↗

Overview

Neither is talking about a special population, which is unusual and is what makes the disagreement clean. Both are addressing a general adult trying to lose fat. The only real difference is who they are used to arguing with: Bikman's audience has already failed at calorie counting, Norton's has already tried eliminating carbohydrate.

Where they agree

This is the important half, and it is the half you would never guess from the argument. Both recommend a high protein intake in essentially the same range. Both recommend resistance training. Both recommend reducing refined carbohydrate, for different reasons.

Both hold that sustainability decides the outcome and that a plan you abandon is worth nothing. Both reject moralising about obesity. A user who followed either one's actual instructions would eat and train almost identically.

What would settle it

A well-powered isocaloric feeding trial with matched protein comparing high and low carbohydrate on fat mass, which both invoke and read differently. Norton would also be moved by a demonstration that fat mass falls at matched intake when insulin is lowered; Bikman would be moved by a long trial with an adaptation period, people eating as much as they want, in which the low-carbohydrate arm did not do better.

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.