JGL53

Dr. Atkins in dead - but I'm not. Are there any valid criticisms of his dietary approach? If so, let's hear them. ((I await with sharpened sword.))

Free Thinkr

Yes. Energy is energy, is energy. Be it fat, carbs, or protien, you eat a shitload a day, prepared to be fat. Also, the retarded low carb approach makes you constantly tired. Low fat and low carb are both stupid dietary approaches. Low calories is the only way to go. (By the way, ever stop to think why the atkins diet is successful? It's because the vast majority of the average diet is carbohydrates. Obviously, reducing carbohydrate intake a rediculous amount will reduce caloric intake. Also, ever notice that nearly everything is too high carb for the atkins diet?)

JGL53

I suppose this is true if one force-fed oneself like they do geese in france. But on a diet that is sufficiently low in carbs, one does not overeat fat and protein, as a general rule. There is only so much steak, eggs, and cheese one would wish to eat, since such items satisfy the appetite so well. I've never heard of anyone gaining weight on a low carb diet. I suspect that's a real rarity.

[/B][/QUOTE] Also, the retarded low carb approach makes you constantly tired. [/B][/QUOTE]

I've been eating a reduced carb diet for several years. I don't feel tired. Some people do experience lack of energy initially in following the Atkins regimen. which starts one off with only 10 carb grams per day (the induction diet), but this is supposed to be used ONLYfor one to two weeks, then carbs are gradually added. I experienced a lack of enery for about a one and a half day period at the first, then my enery level went up and stayed up.

[/B][/QUOTE] Low fat and low carb are both stupid dietary approaches. Low calories is the only way to go. [/B][/QUOTE]

I agree that low fat is stupid. But low carb is a way to avoid unnatural hunger and it prevents, therefore, binge or over-eating. A high carb diet containing a large per cent of sugary high glycemic foods that is low in fiber induces over-eating, as such a diet stimulates the appetite unnaturally (at least, that's been my experience and the experience of many others).

[/B][/QUOTE](By the way, ever stop to think why the atkins diet is successful? It's because the vast majority of the average diet is carbohydrates. Obviously, reducing carbohydrate intake a rediculous amount will reduce caloric intake. [/B][/QUOTE]

In the induction part of the diet, yes, you are correct. But this part of the regimen is muscle sparing, and lasts only two weeks. It is used to kick start, so to speak, your fat loss, while sparing muscle and INCREASING your metabolism, instead of sending it into the crapper as all reduced CALORIE diets do.

Plus. consider this - both fat and protein are ESSENTIAL nutrients - without them in proper amounts you get sick or even die. There are NO essential carbohydrates. By cutting calories across the board, you might miss out on getting the proper amounts of the two essentials, fat and protein. This does not happen on the Atkins regimen.

[/B][/QUOTE] Also, ever notice that nearly everything is too high carb for the atkins diet?)
[/B][/QUOTE]

For the induction diet, only a small green salad is allowed - in addition to the meat, cheese, eggs, etc. Each week five grams per day of carb is added until weight (fat) loss ceases. then one backs off. After the period of time it takes to reach near one's goal of body fat loss, one begins the maintenance diet where one adds more intense exercise and increases the 'good' carbs in ones diet, replacing some of the fat and protein.

As an example, I had hommus, green and black olives, grilled salmon with red bell peppers and onions, and portobello mushroom soup for dinner, with chocolate coated almonds (Splenda sweetened) for dessert with some hot chai tea with cream. My carb controlled diet is as healthy if not healthy than most people.

You apparently have a lot of misconceptions concerning this subject, Free Thinkr. I was fairly ignorant of this subject myself until I took the time to learn about it several years ago.

Free Thinkr

This is what they claim, and frankly, it is bullshit. An 8oz serving of meat and some cottage cheese is not going to fill you up if you're used to eating that 8oz serving of meat on a huge bun, and having fries go along with it. I don't see how this claim continues on. Just tonight I ate a can of tuna straight out of the can. Guess what? I wasn't full.

I did the diet for about 2 months, and was constantly tired. I also lifted and ran about 30 mins a day, and I don't see how you're supposed to get the necessary energy for any activity.

Low carb does not prevent any such thing. Look, unless you're some sort of mutant, bread, pasta, and grains are part of your regular diet. Constatly trying to find low carb food is hard. When you do eventually find some low carb foods, you get sick of the tiny variety quickly. Sure, I could live on tuna and chicken, but I want corn and perhaps some bread with it, goddamnit.

Look, by reduced caloric intake I do NOT mean anorexia. Reducing your intake to a reasonable level will not make you overly hungry or overly tired, it simply takes will power to get out of bad habits. The idiotic thing about the atkins diet and any fad diet like it is that it tries to sell the concept that weight loss is easy. Look at the amount of fad diets out there. Each one has plenty of success stories, some are sure to succeed. But why did they succeed? In the end, probably because they were determined enough to make it work.

True, there are no essential carbohydrates. But carbohydrates, complex carbohydrates in particular, are good sorces of energy. Without energy, you get tired, and lose muscle.

Look at the reccommended 2000 calorie diet. And look at the percentages of fat, protien, and carbohydrates reccommended. If you eat around these values, you should both lose weight, and get all the essential fats and protiens. Think food pyramid.

2 weeks of nothing but meat, cheese, eggs, etc. is a joke. A JOKE. If you have the will power to eat very nearly no carbs for 2 whole weeks, you don't need a fad diet -you're determined. Just eat right.

Not so. I tried the diet and concluded that it is pseudoscientific bullshit. So has, by the way, most of the scientific community.


These diets amount to laziness. Everyone wants the magic bullet -they want an easy way to lose weight. The fact of the matter is that weight loss is difficult. If it wasn't difficult, there wouldn't be so many fat people. The thing is, just about everyone really knows how to lose weight. Stop eating cookies. Make fast food a rarity. Eat smaller portions. Cut back on anything overly greasy. Everyone knows polishing off a bag of chips will make them fat, but chips taste good. People are thrilled when they first learn of the atkins diet -I sure was. Hey, all the fat and meat I want! Yay! What they don't tell you is that just about everything they eat is made up mostly of carbohydrates. All breads are mostly carbohydrates. Most vegetables. And the real killer -sugar. Sugars = carbohyrdates. In order for the atkins diet to work, one must cut sugar from their diet; moreso even than a diabetic. That's ridiculous.

Godot

Free Thinkr, we had a long drawn out discussion about this same topic recently. you can find it in all its splendour, here.
Apparently, nothing I had to say there qualified as a "valid criticism."

Godot

Awww, hell. I'll bite.
JGL: you make a claim in your thread title. Substantiate it using empirical, scientific evidence that has been published in peer-reviewed journals. Without that, your position is untenable.

Nuno Figueira

"Women runners who eat a relatively low-fat diet may face a greater risk of injury than women who include an average amount of fat in their diets, according to a study.

This goes against the general belief of some runners that a lighter body, which yields less weight on joints, protects against injury.

The one-year study involved 87 female runners who ran an average of 30 miles per week.

It was found that women who received 30 percent of their calories from fat were less likely to be injured than those who consumed 27 percent of their calories from fat.

This works out to an average consumption of 80 grams of fat per day among women who were not injured, compared to 63 grams per day among those who developed injuries.

Researchers pointed out that the women eating the lower quantity of fat were still eating an amount considered to be healthy for active women.

They suggest that the lower fat diet may not have provided the women with enough nutrients to repair the microscopic muscle damage that can occur during workouts.

Along these lines, previous studies have found that extremely low-fat diets may reduce endurance and moderately low-fat diets may also reduce endurance and increase the risk of injury.

Previous injury, difference in leg length and poor flexibility also increased the risk of injury among women runners.

Researchers suggested that the association between fat intake and injury might not be as strong in men.

Experimental Biology 2003, April 11-15, 2003, San Diego, California
"

Interesting, isn't it? A 3% reduction in fat intake produced a measurable and statistically significant difference in injury occurrence in athletes. Not that I do it often but one more reason not to let my fat intake drop below 30% (which also has a desirable impact on the endocrine system, by the way).

But are not part of your natural diet.

Well, I'm pretty sure another interesting discussion is around the corner but it's a sunny day here and I'm of to the beach.

JGL53

Apparently so-called low carb diets aren't for everyone. And that's good. Godot and FT and every other mother's son are obviously perfectly free to eat a sixty per cent carb diet. If they can be healthy and happy on such, who am I to criticize?

There's plenty of research that demonstrates a diet much higher in fat and lower in carbs than government recommendations can be healthy, even healthier than the government's diet, and be quite satisfying. Someone posted a list of several dozen of them on the other thread that was mentioned by Godot, so I won't bother.

I had previously tried, apparently unsucessfully, to get across to Godot that a diet is not like cosmology or astrology. It is not just theoretical for most people, like the former, and there will be empirical evidence that will show whether it is healthy for the individual or not, and not just be some wish-fulfillment fantasy like the latter.

I've had success with a carb-controlled diet for about seven years now. Ergo, Free Thinkr's post in reply to mine, and all of Godot's posts to date, are meaningless to me. I did not experience the horror that they see in this dietary lifestyle. (Jeez, was I just not paying attention, guys?) Whatever personal problems others have with 'low-carb' are their problems. I could not care less. On this particular subject, yes indeedy, it IS all about me.

BTW, I noted Free Thinkr and Godot had no comment on the various items I had for dinner last night. Don't like hommus, grilled salmon, or chocolate-coated almonds, boys? Do you believe such food unhealthy?!? I promise you, cross my heart, that I didn't 'overeat'. So what the fuck's the BIG problem?

Free Thinkr

Then why bother with this thread? Obviously your mind is closed to the issue. This sounds suspisously like "I've experienced god myself. No matter what supposed evidence you present, I know he exists."

Look, I'm not saying that a high carb diet is terrible, nor am I saying that it is impossible to lose weight on one. My point is that it promises something it can't deliver -an easy fix. Worse, it makes people give up some of thier favorite foods for no reason. Do you deny that spaghetti is delicious? I like to have a meal that has a serving of meat, some veggies, and some sort of carbohydrate -be it a potato, or some rolls, rice, or whatever. Giving that up is pointless when you know that simply eating smaller servings or excersizing more will give you the same result.

Well, I've never had hummus, but I am a very picky eater and suspect I'd hate it. The salmon sounds okay, but in very limited quantities. As for the chcolate-coated almonds, I hate almonds and you say they were sweetened with splenda -I hate artificial sweeteners. Your cuisine sounds okay, but it also sounds expensive and somewhat difficult to prepare. I had mac and cheese last night. See the point?

Well, if you didn't overeat, then what the fuck is the point of the low carb diet? They hype the diet as a way to overeat and still lose weight -provided the overeating doesn't include carbs. The big problem is that you seem to be avoiding carbs for masochistic reasons.

JGL53

I see absolutely nothing in the above post worth replying to - anyone else have some issues on this subject they'd like to discuss? I'm here for you - as long as you can avoid hysteria.