A few years back when first reading Why We Get Fat, I read a paragraph that questioned the fibre hypothesis, but since I was overwhelmed all the other revelations I had put that insight on the back-burner until now.
Considering this article about where the fibre hypothesis came from; I now wonder if there are any robust clinical trails or other reviews high on the scientific hierarchy of evidence that justify the fibre dogma.
My question: What hard evidence underlies the conventional assumptions of fibre intake?
Epidemiological studies will be considered insufficient unless no other source is available.
Our favourite conjectures (my bad habit also) regarding life 50,000 years ago are also disqualified unless referencing a reputable report of evolutionary archaeology.
asked byLateralFractal (300)
Get FREE instant access to our Paleo For Beginners Guide & 15 FREE Recipes!
on June 28, 2014
at 02:59 PM
I found this recently http://europepmc.org/abstract/med/2545640 - Which finds benefits to weight-control for a fiber supplement in a random, placebo controlled clinical trial. Then, there's the DART study which finds little to no benefits of a high fiber intake http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2571009
Anyone have more clinical study links on fiber intake? I am especially interested in studies that use insoluble fiber supplements rather than natural foods which happen to also be rich in fiber (and rich in minerals, rich in vitamins etc.)