TY - JOUR T1 - Macronutrient mass intake explains deferential weight and fat loss in isocaloric diets JF - medRxiv DO - 10.1101/2020.10.27.20220202 SP - 2020.10.27.20220202 AU - Francisco Arencibia-Albite AU - Anssi H. Manninen Y1 - 2021/01/01 UR - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/01/21/2020.10.27.20220202.abstract N2 - Currently, obesity treatment rests on the “calories-in, calories-out” rule, formally named the energy balance theory (EBT). It maintains that body weight increases as food calories are greater than expended calories but decreases when the opposite occurs; hence, weight stability is expected at energy balance meaning that over time energy-in equals energy-out.1 It follows that dietary regimens with identical energy content should evoke similar amounts of weight and fat loss with only minor differences that emerge from diet’s macronutrient composition7, e.g., diet-induced glycogen depletion and water excretion. A vast collection of evidence shows, however, that low-carbohydrate diets typically result in much greater weight and fat loss than isocaloric low-fat diets.7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 Furthermore, our recent mathematical analysis demonstrated that weight stability coincides with a persistent energy imbalance and not otherwise.4 As an alternative, the mass balance model (MBM) was proposed that fitted weight loss data and explained the often superior weight loss evoked by low-carbohydrate diets versus low-fat diets.4 Here, we expand on these observations by computationally contrasting the predictions of both models in two scenarios described in the literature3, 16: altering the diet’s macronutrient composition while energy intake is kept at weight maintenance level; and the weight loss response as diet composition is changed under untreated type 1 diabetes. Our results indicate that MBM predictions are remarkably accurate while those of the EBT are clearly erroneous. These findings may represent the beginning of a paradigm shift in obesity research.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Clinical TrialThis is a computational study.Funding StatementThis research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:N/AAll necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesN/A.MBMmass balance model;MBmass balance;EBenergy balance;EBTenergy balance theory;CIMcarbohydrate-insulin model;FFMfat-free mass;FMfat mass;EPMenergy-providing mass;VLCDvery-low-carbohydrate diet;KDketogenic diet;HCDhigh-carbohydrate diet;ND“normal diet”;BWbody weight;BFbody fat;EIenergy intake;EEenergy expenditure;T1Dtype 1 diabetes;ECFextra cellular fluid;Glyglycogen;nEPMnon-energy-providing mass;ATadaptive thermogenesis;PALphysical activity level;RQrespiratory quotient;GNGgluconeogenesis;DNLde novo lipogenesis;TGtriglycerides;HDLhigh-density lipoprotein;LDLlow-density lipoprotein;HbA1cGlycated hemoglobin;total-Ctotal cholesterol;MRImagnetic resonance imaging;CTcomputed tomography;NHANESNational Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. ER -