The best way for a woman to lose weight may be to eat like her Stone Age ancestors.
New research shows a cavewoman diet is potentially one of the most effective ways to slim.
Scientists came up with the findings after tracking female dieters for up to two years and comparing weight loss among those on the cavewoman - or paleolithic - diet with those complying with modern nutritional guidelines.
Women who adopted a so-called Palaeolithic diet lost twice as much weight within six months as those who followed a modern programme based on official health guidelines. Researchers also saw a greater reduction in their waist circumference, although the difference between the two groups became smaller after two years of dieting.
It is designed to simulate what our ancestors ate before the advent of farming, meaning followers can eat whatever they like except for certain types of food including grains, refined sugars and salt.
One previous experiment found that men who followed the Palaeolithic diet for just three weeks were less likely to suffer from heart attacks and strokes.
The study in detail
In the latest study, published in the European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, researchers divided 70 postmenopausal, heavily overweight women into two groups.
One was told to follow a Palaeolithic diet, and the other a Nordic diet based on whole-grain cereals, low-fat dairy products, fruit, pulses, fish and vegetable oils.
Dr Caroline Mellberg, who led the study along with colleagues at Umeå University and researchers at Cambridge University, said: “Since pasta and rice and such things were excluded, most [participants] ate pretty normal things like a chicken fillet, but they excluded pasta and added vegetables instead.”
Participants were asked to design their diet to get about 30% of their total energy intake from protein but found it difficult to reach that level and compensated by eating extra carbohydrates and five to seven portions of fruit and vegetables each day, she added.
“They lost weight probably due to a low energy intake,” she said. “It is quite hard to eat enough fruit and vegetables to fill your energy needs. None of them complained about being hungry, so I guess the foods are quite filling. They ate a lot.”
After six months those on the Palaeolithic diet had lost an average of 6.2kg of fat and 11cm from their waistline, compared with 2.6kg and 5.8cm in the other group, and levels of harmful blood fat known as triglyceride were also lower.
By the end of the two-year study the difference between the groups had narrowed, but Dr Mellberg suggested there could be a simple explanation – people on the Palaeolithic diet grew tired of it.
“I think the participants weren’t compliant,” she said. “It is quite a hard diet [to follow] in the Western world. We eat a lot of foods like bread, pasta, cereals.”
“They were quite satisfied too, after the first year. They had lost a lot of weight and many of the participants did not want to lose any more, so they started to eat more normal foods.”
Catherine Collins, chief dietitian at St George’s Hospital in London, added that the low protein intake could have slowed the rate at which participants’ bodies burned calories over time.
“As the metabolic rate declines, at some point that will stop you losing weight,” she explained.
Sources: http://sciencenordic.com/, http://food.ninemsn.com.au/, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/, http://www.iol.co.za/
One previous experiment found that men who followed the Palaeolithic diet for just three weeks were less likely to suffer from heart attacks and strokes.
The study in detail
In the latest study, published in the European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, researchers divided 70 postmenopausal, heavily overweight women into two groups.
One was told to follow a Palaeolithic diet, and the other a Nordic diet based on whole-grain cereals, low-fat dairy products, fruit, pulses, fish and vegetable oils.
Dr Caroline Mellberg, who led the study along with colleagues at Umeå University and researchers at Cambridge University, said: “Since pasta and rice and such things were excluded, most [participants] ate pretty normal things like a chicken fillet, but they excluded pasta and added vegetables instead.”
Participants were asked to design their diet to get about 30% of their total energy intake from protein but found it difficult to reach that level and compensated by eating extra carbohydrates and five to seven portions of fruit and vegetables each day, she added.
“They lost weight probably due to a low energy intake,” she said. “It is quite hard to eat enough fruit and vegetables to fill your energy needs. None of them complained about being hungry, so I guess the foods are quite filling. They ate a lot.”
After six months those on the Palaeolithic diet had lost an average of 6.2kg of fat and 11cm from their waistline, compared with 2.6kg and 5.8cm in the other group, and levels of harmful blood fat known as triglyceride were also lower.
By the end of the two-year study the difference between the groups had narrowed, but Dr Mellberg suggested there could be a simple explanation – people on the Palaeolithic diet grew tired of it.
“I think the participants weren’t compliant,” she said. “It is quite a hard diet [to follow] in the Western world. We eat a lot of foods like bread, pasta, cereals.”
“They were quite satisfied too, after the first year. They had lost a lot of weight and many of the participants did not want to lose any more, so they started to eat more normal foods.”
Catherine Collins, chief dietitian at St George’s Hospital in London, added that the low protein intake could have slowed the rate at which participants’ bodies burned calories over time.
“As the metabolic rate declines, at some point that will stop you losing weight,” she explained.
Sources: http://sciencenordic.com/, http://food.ninemsn.com.au/, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/, http://www.iol.co.za/
EmoticonEmoticon