Interesting article. It's fairly convincing that insulin isn't the mechanism leading to weight change on a low-carb diet, but it doesn't seem to explain weight loss or hunger suppression resulting in some of the people who try it. It has convinced me to investigate leptin.
When I tried a no-carb diet for a couple of months a few years ago, I experienced no hunger suppression despite having expected it.
In fact, from the article:
If calories and protein are kept the same, high-carbohydrate meals cause equal or greater satiety than high-fat meals, and equal or less subsequent food intake, despite a much larger insulin response (4, 5, 6, 7).
I ate only meat, no vegetables or cheese. The only carbs I got were the tiny amounts of glycogen and sugars in the meat itself. Yes, I checked with test strips.
That sounds like it counts as "no" carbs. I'm just a bit surprised because of the large effect that ketosis has on my appetite and the appetite of those I know who have tried it. I have to eat some carbs just to keep from getting too skinny.
I assume you were getting enough fat? Your body can only handle so much protein, and trying to live on lean meat alone can cause rabbit starvation. It's possible that you were getting a mild case of this which would explain high hunger levels and high calculated caloric intake even after adjusting for hunger suppression. Since your useable calories would be lower than calculated, your energy expenditure would have decrease if your weight stayed constant.
It's kinda a long shot, but were you eating lean meat and moving around less?
I don't like lean meat much, except for steak tartare. My meat only period was during the winter, though, and I eat a lot of soups and stews in cold weather, that year a lot of beef brisket, pork shoulder, and chicken leg quarters, none of which are very lean. And I don't have a car so I do a lot of walking, even when I might prefer not to (like in the snow).
I notice my confusion, but have heard conflicting information on that point.
Particularly, I'm experiencing hunger suppression starting around the time that I started eating a low-carb diet. It could have been caused by other changes made simultaneously. I know a bunch of other people who claim the same experience.
From the book, I remember there being a few studies where higher fat meals caused more satiety, given equal calories. Maybe the protein amounts changed?
This surprises me too.
Per calorie, water is very good at making me feel full immediately following ingestion, and I remember seeing evidence (as well as personal experience) saying that fats are especially bad at this. However, feeling satiated hours later is different and I'd expect it to reverse. The part that is really surprising is the equal or lower subsequent food intake with carbs. I'm not sure what happens when you use nasty fats like transfats or oils high in omega 6, so as far as I know, maybe they were using different fats that are less satiating than carbs which are less satiating than animal fats?
I want to check the references, but I don't see where he says what "(4,5,6,7)" actually refers to.
Here. A number of people here are fans of Taubes' work, and so I thought they would be interested in a well-referenced criticism. Hat tip to Landsknecht.