This paper begins by conceding with the views propounded by Bowden (2004) that only three things in life induced powerful visceral response-religion, politics and nutrition. In reference to nutrition, Bowden holds the notion that nothing has generated a lot of debate over the years like low –carbohydrates diets. This is because of the various views held by people in different professions .
While to the nutritionist, low-carbohydrates is the moral equivalent of devil worship (Escott- Stamp 2007), to paramedics, it is the cause of massive increase in chronic diseases and death, while millions of people view such diets as the key to actual loss of weight(Bowden 2004). The debate is endless but for purposes of this paper, we shall examine the various views held with regard to low-carbohydrate diets and associated impact. Low carbohydrate defined Low carbohydrate diets also referred to as Ketogenic diets are dietary programmes that restrict the consumption of carbohydrates for purposes of controlling weight.
(Bowden 2004). While carbohydrate restriction is often regarded as a mechanism of reducing weight loss on one hand, Bowden stipulates that CHO restriction is also important in ameliorating high fat glucose and insulin, high plasma triglycerides, low HDL and high blood pressure. He concedes that over time, diets with high carbohydrates are seen to be of importance for patients with high BML and high plasma triglycerides. Low carbohydrate foods and Metabolic Syndrome. The existence of obesity, diabetes, cardiovascular diseases and hypertension are the key indictors of metabolic syndrome (MetS).
Bowden (2004) establishes that the symptoms of MetS are precisely those targeted by diets that restrict carbohydrates intake; since low-carbohydrate is known to be a facilitative element in raising glucose, insulin and triglyceride while lowering HDL and conversely replacing high carbohydrates with monounsaturated fat. It is however not worthy that medical practitioners do not hold low-carbohydrates as an appropriate approach in treatment of MetS. (Roth 2002). An examination of this view is examined below.
The key indicator of MetS is generally obesity (Escott- Stamp 2007) since high prevalence of metabolically obese-normal-weight individuals with MetS has long been known. It is also agreed that the first measurement against MetS should be the reduction of weight. However controversies lie with the methods to be applied. While one school of thought holds the view that low fat diet should be the mechanism adopted others provide that strategies based on carbohydrate restriction should be adopted.
Bowden (2004) establishes that while low fat diets can be effective, it’s faced with limitations as it should be backed by exercise and other requirements for it to be effective. He also establishes that fat restriction per se is not effective for long term weight loss and thus cannot prevent regain of weight. Proposals of the use of low carbohydrate food as alternatives have thus been seen as appropriate due to the spontaneous reduction in calories while improving lipid outcome while having no negative impact on the kidney (Escott- Stamp 2007).
It is provided by various authors that patients with more than two characteristics of Mets symptoms particularly a combination of triglyceride and HDL should commence by using low-carbohydrate dietary while patients with high BML and high LDL should sensibly try low fat dietary (Bowden 2004). Bowden (2004) establishes that a low-carbohydrate diet improves MetS symptoms as it relives the symptoms and its use for a duration enables patients terminate their medication.
It is also stated that since weight loss is seen as a mechanism that improves MetS in instances where normal-weight persons would like to maintain their weight the use of low-carbohydrate dietary is advisable as it improves MetS in the absence of weight loss (Escott- Stamp 2007), while on the other hand it has in instances of weight loss precipitated it as low carbohydrates decrease calories thus leading to loss of weight. It is also established that low-carbohydrate constitutes of rich micronutrient composition as compared to low fat diets thus enhancing the efficiency of energy utilization and thus efficacy (Bowden 2004).
Bowden has however established that those persons who are insulin resistant would have metabolic advantage on a low-carbohydrate diet while those who are insulin sensitive would do better on low fat. Arguments against low-carbohydrate The school of thought that propounds views against the use of low-carbohydrate dietary as curative mechanisms for MetS stipulates that unlike other alternatives low carbohydrate dietary is deficient in fiber, which is essential for regular bowel movements responsible in reducing the risk of heart diseases, cancer and diabetes (Roth 2002).
This view depicts that this mechanism is likely to increase the chances of MetS as opposed to its reduction. Roth (2002) also established that low-carbohydrate dietary leads to loss of a lot of nutrients required for the functioning of the body such as water , fat as well as muscle mass which requires the consumption of extra protein to avoid losing muscle mass. It is however argued by Escott-Stump (2007) that muscle mass is preserved by low-carb diet and that such dietary burns fat as opposed to muscle.
It is also established that low-carb leads to weakness and lack of energy since insulin levels tend to be low in such diets which precipitate catabolism of muscle protein which leads to a stoppage of protein synthesis. This in turn results to fatigue and when ketasis drops below the level required these forces the body to turn to other nutrients to perform the work that carbohydrates should have performed.
In such instances when protein is used it releases nitrogen into blood streams placing a burden on the kidneys as they try to excrete excessive urinary water due to loss of sodium. When fat is likewise used it releases fatty acids, which also burden the kidney.
References Bowden J. (2004) Living the Low Carbohydrate Life: from Atkins to the zone choosing the Diet, Barries & Noble Escott Stamp S. (2007) Nutrition and Diagnosis – Related care; Lippincott Williams & Wilkins Roth R. (2002) Nutrition and Diet Therapy. Thompson Delmar Learning