I've been pondering for a few weeks as to the subject matter for this maiden e-zine...

After racking my brains for a while, I wandered into the kitchen at work to make a cup of tea and walked straight into an animated debate.

A couple of co-workers were discussing -- loudly! -- the merits of their respective diets.

One swore by the low carb diet she was on, the other her low calorie weight loss plan.

After casually listening in whilst I dunked a tea bag, they both turned to me and said...

"Marcus, you know all about healthy stuff, dieting and all that...which diet do you think is best?"

And there it was, the subject of my first e-zine!

Having briefly extolled the virtues of both approaches I made my excuses and left.

It's not just in office kitchens that the debate rages, it's repeated all over the internet, in weight loss forums, in magazines and books, in respected scientific journals...

So what's the answer?

What's the Argument About...?

The accepted wisdom for years has been that if you burn more calories than you eat, you'll lose weight.

Eat fewer calories, eat a healthy, balanced diet made up of all the main food groups and do some exercise.

The low calorie approach to dieting is simple...and then along came the low carbers and turned the accepted wisdom on its head!

Or did they?

Low calorie diets are founded on a few basic principles.

The central principle is to eat less fat. Fat has twice as many calories gram for gram as carbs so by eating less fat in your diet you'll eat fewer calories.

Makes sense, right?

This is followed by another key principle -- fill up on starchy carbs like bread, rice and pasta, preferably of the wholegrain variety.

They've got fewer calories than fatty foods and all that fiber will fill you up so you'll eat less.

...Then along came the good Dr Atkins.

His theory was that your body digested carbs - sugars and starches - quickly and all that sugar was dumped in your bloodstream.

Your body produced insulin to balance your blood sugar levels and ferried the excess sugar off to be converted to fat and stored in your fat tissue.

As a result, he banned carbs from your diet and replaced them with lots of protein and fat.

This forced your body to dip into its fat stores as there were no carbs to burn.

The protein was difficult to digest so your body had to work harder and use more calories to metabolise all that meat.

The dietary protein also helped prevent your body from canibalising its muscle tissue for energy.

The result? Rapid and significant weight loss.

Ok, that's simplified the arguments somewhat, but hey, this is just an e-zine!

There's more on the low carb approach to weight loss on the website.

So Who's Right?

The truth is, both are.

There's study after study that demonstrates that low calorie, low fat, low protein, high carb diets are effective for weight loss.

Populations that eat such a diet are seen to have lower BMIs and obesity levels than people who consume the typical high fat Western diet.

There is as yet nothing like that body of evidence to support a low carb diet...

But let's just take a step back.

Sure, the Atkins Diet, which is held up as the archetypal low carb diet breaks all the brules when it comes to a healthy, balanced diet.

But there are plenty of low carb diets around nowadays that look suspiciously like the a set of Government healthy eating guidelines...

Give or take a few grams of protein and carbs here and there.

Moderate amounts of healthy wholegrains, plenty of fruit and veg, some lean protein.

Ok, healthy eating guidelines suggest that you get around 50-60% of your calories from carbs, 20-30% of your calories from fat and 15-20% from protein.

The typical low carb diet is now 40% carbs, 30% fat and 30% protein.

Largely gone are the bacon, eggs and butter. Instead, lean chicken and heart healthy unsaturated oils are in.

Forget the ban on fruit and veg, most low carb diets are now comparatively generous when compared to the Atkins when it comes to these nutritionally dense foods.

So, which approach is right?

Common sense would indicate to me that if you're fairly inactive, you should eat fewer carbs - you just don't need all the energy.

If you plan on exercising regularly, carbs are less of a problem.

Protein fills you up - try eating a whole chicken or a couple of tins of tuna in one sitting! - so it makes sense to me to eat a little more lean protein.

Fat has twice as many calories as protein and carbs, so if you're trying to lose weight, it would make sense to eat a little less of it and to make the fat you do eat the healthy, unsaturated variety.

Fiber fills you up too, so eating some wholegrains and plenty of fiber-rich fruit and veg would seems a good idea.

As you're eating fewer calories, eating nutrient-dense food would also be smart - another argument for eating some fruit and veg.

Now is that low carb or low calorie dieting?

The Bottom Line...

In fact, once you cut out or cut down on the carbs a low carb diet is actually quite low in calories.

One of the reasons they work - surprise, surprise!

My advice? Use some common sense. Eat foods from all the main food groups each day, eat a little bit less and do some exercise.

Adopt a healthy weight loss plan and you'll feel better - and lighter! - for it.

Check out the website for a few weight loss tips to help you out and for reviews of the best diets if you want a more formal and structured weight loss program.

So there it is - not that I'm sitting on the fence or anything!

We hope you found our e-zine helpful and we'll see you next month!

Best wishes!