Testing321:
This is a direct quote from the second study:
"Changes in energy intake, macronutrients, sugar variables, and all food and beverage servings were not related to any changes in health outcomes. The only relations found between changes in diet and changes in metabolic health were an inverse relation between total and insoluble fiber intakes and visceral adiposity."
Bless your heart, my dear.
It seems I was not clear enough for you in my previous post. Let me try again.
The first study is about the impact macro and micronutrient have on visceral fat. The second focus on the impact with nutrition, insulin levels, and visceral fat. While they have similar focus, they have different scopes and methodology.
Keep in mind the first study focuses on health Japanese adults while the second focuses on overweight Latino boys. As such, the results are going to be a bit different.
In fact, the first study has this to say:
3.4. Macronutrients Associated with Change in VFA or BMI
The associations between changes in macronutrients and VFA or BMI are shown in Table 4. For VFA, in Model 1, the following factors were used for the adjustment: age, sex, VFA, and amount of each macronutrient (protein, fat, and carbohydrate) ingested at baseline, and the change in intake of energy, amount of exercise, BMI, WC, and smoking habit. Of the 33 micronutrients, changes in two nutrients, soluble dietary fiber and manganese, were significantly negatively associated with change in VFA (β = −2.31, p = 0.014 and β = −2.43, p = 0.018) over 2 years. In Model 2, the following factors were used for the adjustment: age, sex, VFA, and amount of each macronutrient (protein, fat, and carbohydrate) ingested at baseline, and the change in the amount of protein, fat, and carbohydrate ingested; amount of exercise; BMI; WC; and smoking habit. Of the 33 micronutrients, change in 7 micronutrients, soluble dietary fiber, manganese, potassium, magnesium, vitamin K, folic acid, and pantothenic acid, were significantly negatively associated with change in VFA (β = −2.59, p = 0.007, β = −2.19, p = 0.042, β = −0.004, p = 0.039, β = −0.06, p = 0.018, β = −0.011, p = 0.050, β = −0.018, p = 0.045 and β = −3.43, p = 0.001), and change in 1 micronutrient, monounsaturated fat, was significantly positively associated with change in VFA (β = 1.34, p = 0.050). However, vitamin K and monounsaturated fat had borderline p-values (p = 0.05). For BMI, in Model 3, the following factors were used for the adjustment: age, sex, BMI, and amount of each macronutrient (protein, fat, and carbohydrate) ingested at baseline, and change in the energy ingested, amount of exercise, VFA, WC, and smoking habit. Of the 33 micronutrients, none were significantly associated with a change in BMI. In Model 4, however, the following factors were used for the adjustment: age, sex, BMI, and amount of each macronutrient (protein, fat, and carbohydrate) ingested at baseline, and change in the amount of protein, fat, and carbohydrate ingested; amount of exercise; VFA; WC; smoking habit; and amount of energy ingested. Of the 33 micronutrients, changes in 4 nutrients: alpha-tocopherol, vitamin B6, vitamin B12, and n-3 polyunsaturated fat, were significantly negatively associated with change in VFA (β = −0.061, p = 0.023, β = −0.474, p = 0.015, β = −0.020, p = 0.015, and β = −0.115, p = 0.031).
Taken together, 7 micronutrients: soluble dietary fiber, manganese, potassium, magnesium, vitamin K, folic acid, pantothenic acid, alpha-tocopherol, vitamin B6, vitamin B12, and n-3 polyunsaturated fat, which are abundant nutrients in a vegetable diet, had a significant inverse correlation to VFA. Only monounsaturated fat had a significant positive association with VFA.This is in direct contradiction to your previous statement. This is not to say that one is more correct than the other. Rather they set up their studies very differently and got different results. As I said before, fiber slows down your digestion which minimized insulin spikes. This can lead to decreased visceral body fat.
