Skip to main content

Dietary carbohydrate restriction as the first approach in diabetes management: Critical review and evidence base

Richard D. Feinman, Wendy K. Pogozelski, Arne Astrup, Richard K. Bernstein, Eugene J. Fine, Eric C. Westman, Anthony Accurso, Lynda Frassetto, Barbara A. Gower, Samy I. McFarlane, Jörgen Vesti Nielsen, Thure Krarup, Laura Saslow, Karl S. Roth, Mary C. Vernon, Jeff S. Volek, Gilbert B. Wilshire, Annika Dahlqvist, Ralf Sundberg, Ann Childers, Katharine Morrison, Anssi H. Manninen, Hussain M. Dashti, Richard J. Wood, Jay Wortman, Nicolai Worm

Nutrition 2015

This paper argues that restricting carbs should be the first-line diet for diabetes because it quickly lowers blood sugar, improves key health markers, and often reduces medications—without proven long‑term harms comparable to drugs.

Study Details

Journal Nutrition
Year 2015
Volume/Issue Vol. 31, Issue 1
Pages 1-13
2 min read

What this paper says

The authors present 12 lines of evidence that cutting dietary carbohydrates—especially to low or very‑low levels—produces the most consistent and immediate improvements in diabetes. They emphasize real-world clinical results over hypothetical long‑term worries.

  • Blood sugar falls fastest by lowering carbs. Hyperglycemia is the defining problem in diabetes, and carbs are the main driver of post‑meal glucose. Low‑carb diets reduce average glucose and HbA1c more than other diets, including low‑fat.
  • Benefits do not depend on weight loss. Even when weight is kept stable, lowering carbs improves glycemic control and insulin dynamics.
  • Low‑carb consistently beats low‑fat for weight loss. Across trials, people on low‑carb lose more weight and improve more risk markers than low‑fat, often even when low‑fat is calorie‑restricted and low‑carb is ad libitum.
  • Adherence is at least as good, often better. People tend to stick with low‑carb, likely due to steadier energy and greater satiety from protein and fat.
  • Replacing carbs with protein (and/or fat) helps. Trials and meta‑analyses show better weight, body composition, resting metabolism, and cardiometabolic markers when carbs are reduced and protein is adequate.
  • Dietary fat (including saturated fat) doesn’t predict heart disease risk in these large studies. Multiple major cohorts and meta‑analyses failed to show that eating total or saturated fat causes cardiovascular disease. The paper argues these negative results should carry weight.
  • Blood saturated fats track carbs more than dietary saturated fat. In humans, high plasma saturated fatty acids are driven by carb‑stimulated liver fat production; low‑carb diets lower these blood fats even when saturated fat intake rises.
  • Glycemic control (HbA1c) predicts complications. Better HbA1c strongly reduces microvascular complications and modestly lowers heart attacks; since low‑carb reliably improves HbA1c, it targets the right lever.
  • Low‑carb best improves triglycerides and HDL. It powerfully lowers triglycerides and raises HDL, improving ratios linked to smaller, denser LDL particles—markers more closely tied to risk than total LDL alone.
  • Medications often drop—sometimes are eliminated. In type 2 diabetes, many patients reduce or stop drugs on low‑carb; people with type 1 typically need less insulin and experience fewer glucose swings.

The authors’ core stance: the benefits of carbohydrate restriction are immediate and well documented; the worries are largely speculative and long‑term. Given the diabetes epidemic and the repeated underperformance of low‑fat approaches, they argue the burden of proof now lies with critics of low‑carb.

Notes on evidence style

The paper prioritizes clinical improvements seen across multiple trials and mechanisms consistent with biochemistry. It challenges the idea that only long‑term randomized trials count, arguing that such a standard is not applied elsewhere in science and is impractical given funding and bias against non‑traditional diets.

Read Full Paper