I read an article from WebMD that tries to dispel the belief that food combining (i.e. meals with only fat + pro or carbs + pro in them) is better for fat loss than a typical low calorie diet. They gave as evidence a 54 person study where all the participants ate 1100 calorie diet with the same foods except the combination group did not eat fats with carbs in the same meal. Each group had 4 meals a day. The balanced meal group lost an average of 16.4 pounds while the food combination group lost an average of 13.5 pounds. Both groups lost the same amount of fat according to WebMD. The article did not say whether or not the subjects were on an exercise program. Anyway, WebMD tried to use this data as evidence that food combining is no better than balanced meals. What they don’t tell you that any idiot can figure out however is that the group that had the balanced diet lost 2.9 more pounds of LBM than the food combining group. I bet the common sheeple are going to look at that article and think ‘oh well the balanced diet group actually lost more weight, so food combining isn’t good.’ Just thought I’d share one of many biased articles that seem to appear in WebMD.
They only ate 1100 calories per day. Of course it doesn’t matter when the caloric intake is that low. Now had they eaten a more reasonable diet…say 1800 calories per day…we might see a shift toward more fat loss in the non-food combining group
i was skimming through mfw and they had a link to a webmd article talking about how dangerous and horrible eccentric training is (i think they were refferering to eccentric only but they never bothered to make that clear). “For weekend warriors and those who exercise just to keep fit and healthy, the best and safest way to train is to use the standard weight machines available at the gym, says Panes. These machines carefully balance concentric and eccentric movements for a safe and effective workout.” oh ok, and here i thought free weights were better. jeez