Atkins diet...healthy?

[Cool Texan]

NEW YORK - Dr. Robert Atkins, whose popular diet stresses protein-rich meat and cheese over carbohydrates, weighed 258 pounds at his death and had a history of heart disease, a newspaper reported Tuesday.

At 258 pounds, the 6-foot-tall Atkins would have qualified as obese, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (news - web sites)'s body-mass index calculator.

Full story:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...medical_report

[Bait O' Eggs]

Interesting, I saw him interview Larry King not long before he fell hurting his head and I would have guessed he weighed about 170lbs +/-


Here is a link to photos of Atkins, he sure dont look like a 250 + lb'er

LINK

[Woody]

Stuart Trager, chairman of the Atkins Physicians Council in New York, told the Journal that Atkins' heart disease stemmed from cardiomyopathy, a condition that was thought to result from a viral infection.


Atkins' weight was due to bloating associated with his condition and the time he spent in a coma after his head injury, and he had been much slimmer during most of his life, Trager said.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">

[corrirod]

They must have buried him with some of his money still in his pockets!

I'm with you BOE, I saw the interviews also and he didn't look that heavy to me.

[KROY]

It's a conspiracy started by Nabisco, the AMA, and Weight Watchers.

[Cool Texan]

Originally posted by Woody:
thought to result from a viral infection.


Atkins' weight was due to bloating associated with his condition and the time he spent in a coma after his head injury, and he had been much slimmer during most of his life, Trager said.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">[/QUOTE]

Thought to have been... and according to the chairman of the Atkins group, who would go bankrupt if anyone found out that this diet is no good.

Point being...if you're following the diet, just be careful.

[Woody]

who would go bankrupt if anyone found out that this diet is no good.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">True, point taken.

[Mello-Yello]

I've yet to hear anything stating that Dr. Atkins actually did the diet himself. Does anyone even know if he did?

[high_arc]

I'm not sure if he did it or not. But, I know that I have been to my Doctor twice since I started for blood tests. He has only found positive effects of the diet for me.

[foxer]

I heard on the radio that the info about his weight etc was "released" by a vegan group that is against the meat eaters that flock to this diet.

[Silver Hilton]

I've been atkins-ing for over a year, just had a checkup. My doctors comments on my cholesterol - "excellent!" Blood pressure, good. HDL/LDL split, excellent. Triglycerides, excellent.

Now, that is just anecdotal evidence, and one sample doesn't mean squat. But it helped me lose weight, and my health is still excellent. More to the point, it was easy to keep to, so that the weight DID get lost.

Your mileage may vary. However, I know four people right off the bat whose experience is similar to mine.

[ 02-10-2004, 12:04 PM: Message edited by: Silver Hilton ]

[kayakfisher]

The A. diet is bogus..works for acute weight loss, but it is not a healthy diet...and is in reality not a sustainable way to live ..if you are looking at the big picture.

m.

[Thumper]

Hmmmmm.... Kayakfisher, as a physician your opinion is certainly important, but give me some literature to support that. My cardiologist would disagree with you. In my case --- 5 years, 60+ pounds, lower bad stuff, higher good stuff. :smile:

[Abalone]

Atkins is not a diet it is a way of life.
Read the book before you judge.

Almost everyone I talk to about Atkins has something negative to say about it. I have been warned I don't know how many times. If you read the book it speaks for itself. People that fail on it fail because they don't follow the rules. Especially excercising. You can't do Atkins half way you have to do it right.

If God didn't want you to eat Animals he wouldn't have made them out of Meat and Cheese.

[Bait O' Eggs]

My dad use to do the low fat thingy He has never been overweight nor smoked. First double bypass at 42 :shocked: Got really strict on the 'ol low fat diet thingy, Then another double bypass a few years later :shocked: been rotorootered twice since then clearing blockages. :shocked: Every male on my dads side of the family dies of heart disease. :depressed:

Dad now sees one of the best heart doctors in the state at OHSU, and the heart doctor tells him no problem with Atkins. From what I hear it sounds like doc prefers him to be on Atkins lifestyle.

You cant go back and forth, you gotta stick with it and make it a way of life on how you eat. I do believe heart conditions are way more hereditary than most acknowledge.

Have you pee'd on a keto strip lately? Read the book before you judge or your just flapping your gums :tongue:

[Silver Hilton]

BOE is right on the heredity thing. College friend of mine was a marathon runner, never smoked, probably 8% body fat, great diet. Dropped dead on the Burke Gilman running trail of a heart attack at 35. His father died before 40 of a heart attack as well. Sometimes you just draw crummy cards.

[jet]

FYI

Dr. Atkins was never a large man he was 6'.

Read the paragrah below is was from Dr. Atkins wife.

I can post the whole thing if interested.

Dr. Atkins' weight was consistently and frequently documented in the years
and months prior to his fall; as he was suffering from cardiomyopathy, his
health was monitored closely. Due to water retention, this robust 6-foot
plus man, who competitively played tennis frequently during the week, had a
weight that varied between 180 and 195. During his coma, as he deteriorated
and his major organs failed, fluid retention and bloating dramatically
distorted his body and left him at 258 pounds at the time of his death, a
documented weight gain of over 60 pounds. How and why the Journal reported
that he was obese, remains the only unanswered question in this pathetic
situation.

Any implication that Dr. Atkins was obese or fat prior to his coma, shows a
blatant disregard or even worse, lack of understanding of the medical facts
surrounding this case, or of the physiology of severe heart failure and the
degree of fluid retention that occurred during this hospitalization. None
of us would expect the physicians at PCRM to reveal this in light of their
past and their current motivation...but surely as physicians they understood
that this was not obesity, I guess it just didn't support the point they
cared to convey...so they chose to ignore it?


Jet~~~

[jet]

Here is one of her statements.

Statement by Veronica Atkins on the illegal distribution of personal medical information regarding her late husband Dr. Robert C. Atkins

I have always assumed that my husband’s personal medical history is private and of no concern or relevance to the media or general public. Prior to today, I have not seen any reason to share Dr. Atkins’ private information with the public. I am sure that any one of you would be offended and perhaps even horrified to have complete strangers intrude into your personal family matters, especially with regard to something as intimate as your medical records or those of your loved-one.

It has now become clear to me that if I don’t speak out, unscrupulous individuals will continue to twist and pervert the truth in an attempt to destroy the reputation and great work of my late husband. These individuals have gone so far as to obtain my husband’s personal and confidential medical information from the New York City Medical Examiner’s office for distribution to news organizations in direct and knowing violation of federal law. Obviously such people will have no trouble picking and choosing bits and pieces of fact and supposition to mislead the world.

But here is the truth: my husband’s medical records have been reviewed by knowledgeable doctors and his medical condition discussed with cardiac specialists. It is clear that Dr. Atkins developed a condition called cardiomyopathy approximately three years prior to his death. It is also true that when Robert developed cardiomyopathy his coronary arteries showed only minimal and clinically insignificant signs of coronary artery disease, consistent with what would be expected in a 69-year old man. Cardiomyopathy is a serious and progressive condition and was, I have been told, in Robert’s case, caused by a viral infection. Though this condition significantly weakened his heart, its cause was clearly related to an infection and not his diet.

All of this was well documented and openly discussed by Robert himself on national television. Additionally, as Dr. Atkins explained on Larry King Live and other public appearances, he did have a witnessed cardiac arrest in April of 2002. All accounts and records related to this event, and the insight of his treating cardiologist, are consistent with conditions arising from his cardiomyopathy, rather than a lack of blood flow. While Robert did have some progression of his coronary artery disease in the last three years of his life including some new blockage of a secondary artery that was remedied during this admission, he did not have a heart attack.

There is no evidence to suggest otherwise and for any physician to suggest so would be irresponsible, unethical and represent nothing more than an attempt to tarnish the reputation of a man who dedicated his life to solving one of medicines greatest challenges – the obesity epidemic. Let me state emphatically that I have been assured by my husband’s physicians that my husband’s health problems late in life were completely unrelated to his diet or any diet.

It is also clear that my husband’s death resulted from a serious head injury that occurred April 8th, 2003. Hospital records obviously and unequivocally detail the unfortunate clinical course that transpired following arrival of Emergency Medical Services through the entirety of hospitalization, confirming that after losing consciousness en route to the hospital, Robert’s condition failed to improve despite emergency neurosurgical treatment for bleeding within his head. In life, Dr. Atkins was adamant about not wanting life support and when his wishes were honored, and ventilator life support was withdrawn on April 17th, he passed away as has been widely reported in the media.

But it has become clear to me that something as simple as the truth will be perverted and manipulated by dishonest individuals who will stop at nothing and will proceed without any regard for medical ethics or the previously private medical history of Dr. Atkins in an attempt not only to discredit my husband’s work but to profit from his death. Work, I might add, that has been consistently and repeatedly vindicated by 18 independent scientific studies over these past three years. I now find myself in the uncomfortable position of having to relive his horrific accident and defend my late husband from people who would convince you that stolen and irrelevant bits and pieces of Dr. Atkins’ medical history carry more validity than published scientically controlled and peer reviewed research out of Harvard, Duke University, the American Heart Association and the National Institutes of Health.

It is for these reasons that I realized that I must put aside my grief and pain and speak out. Make no mistake about it, Dr. Atkins, at the end of life, was struggling with the effects of his cardiomyopathy and did not hide that fact. Despite repeated, often pathetic and now even illegal attempts by his most bizarre and extreme detractors to make the health of this 72 year old man THE central issue in the all important obesity debate raging in this country and around the world, it is not and never will be relevant. It is a sad and distracting sideshow, taking time away from an intelligent debate of the known science.

We should all ask, is caring about what someone else eats so important that some Doctors are willing to betray their most basic of oaths, to protect a patient’s dignity and confidentiality? It is time to forget the myths and urban legends perpetuated by extremists like those who acted unethically in disclosing my husband’s records and pay more attention to the real issues and all available peer reviewed science.

I will do my utmost to put an end to this nonsense so that responsible physicians can focus on a debate rooted in fact and moderation and objectivity. We will not engage in espionage, tabloid journalism, or try to shout louder than these shameless individuals and I look forward to the day when Dr. Atkins’ soul can rest in peace and I can grieve uninterrupted.

Jet~~~

[jet]

Here is the other from Atkins


Based in distorted reporting in this morning's Wall Street Journal, the
statement below was released to the media. As before, please direct any
questions you might have to either Paul or Scott or to Michael Bernstein.
All media calls must be referred to Richard Rothstein at 212-268-7346 or to
Gina at WWR at 212-714-9253.

Statement by Stuart Trager, M.D., Chair, Atkins Physicians Council on
February 10, 2004 Report on Dr. Atkins Weight at the time of his death

Today's Wall Street Journal ran a story on the health of Dr. Robert Atkins
and grossly distorted and inaccurately reported information that Dr. Atkins
was obese at the time of his death. In fact, up until the time he became
comatose and lay in the hospital for two weeks. Dr. Atkins' average weight
was actually 60 pounds less than reported in the Journal. The newspaper
article was based on incomplete personal medical records that were illegally
delivered to the newspaper in violation of federal law, coming from a known
group of Vegan and animal rights extremists.

Dr. Atkins' weight was consistently and frequently documented in the years
and months prior to his fall; as he was suffering from cardiomyopathy, his
health was monitored closely. Due to water retention, this robust 6-foot
plus man, who competitively played tennis frequently during the week, had a
weight that varied between 180 and 195. During his coma, as he deteriorated
and his major organs failed, fluid retention and bloating dramatically
distorted his body and left him at 258 pounds at the time of his death, a
documented weight gain of over 60 pounds. How and why the Journal reported
that he was obese, remains the only unanswered question in this pathetic
situation.

Any implication that Dr. Atkins was obese or fat prior to his coma, shows a
blatant disregard or even worse, lack of understanding of the medical facts
surrounding this case, or of the physiology of severe heart failure and the
degree of fluid retention that occurred during this hospitalization. None
of us would expect the physicians at PCRM to reveal this in light of their
past and their current motivation...but surely as physicians they understood
that this was not obesity, I guess it just didn't support the point they
cared to convey...so they chose to ignore it?

Jet~~~

[Thumper]

Ya gotta remember, folks, that m-o-n-e-y is driving all this. Imagine the investment that the lo-fat folks have made over the years in their products. Imagine the investment now that the lo-carb folks have in their stuff.

The lo-fat frenzy has run its course. A trip to most any restaurant, fast-food joint or bookseller will now convince anyone that the lo-carb folks are now driving the diet bus. Free enterprise is doing its thing, and it's about time.

Two things are clear to me. First, I am unaware of any truly scientific literature that debunks the effectiveness and safety of a lo-carb diet, IF (big IF) it is followed as Atkins described it nearly 40 years ago. Second, you can't do the lo-carb approach and then eat lots of carbs occasionally. That renders the diet ineffective at best, and dangerous at worst.

As others have pointed out here, lo-carb eating is a way of life. Exercise is critical as well.

[kayakfisher]

I will be the first to admit .. I have not read the book..and maybe now I should, eh? On the other hand, the cardiologists I know well don't seem to share the enthusiasm for the A. diet that your cardiologists apparrently have.

Now if one does enough vigorous physical activity to burn all the calories you eat, and then some, things should be fine on any balanced diet, right? In the old days the average hard working farmer could eat a huge fat and carbo breakfast and get along fine ....we think that is how it was. But in those days many people died of other things than "heart disease"...and retrospective analysis doesn't really always work well.

I guess I need to go to the library and come up with some lit, as suggested. Going on vacation for a week or so, but I will see if I can come up with something objective...if the work has been done, and has been published.

M.

[kayakfisher]

Originally posted by Thumper:
Two things are clear to me. First, I am unaware of any truly scientific literature that debunks the effectiveness and safety of a lo-carb diet,

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Of course, the burden of truth is on the one who advocates such a radical diet...and I think is it a fairly radical diet. It also may be a bit high in calcium and low in phosphorous...this is a recipe for poor bone density...and the problem with hip fractures in the elderly in this country has really reached what some might consider to be epidemic proportions. A high meat diet is truly a high phosphorous, low calcium balance...and a setup for bone loss as one ages...of course excersize can offset that, but good intake is required also. There are some folks who think a total vegetarian diet is in reality the best for bone density results...and for heart disease, and for weight control, and maybe for longevity also...but longevity may well be affected by things we do not really understand well at this point (almost surely, in fact).

The diet fads/extremes really have a long history ... kind of like diet meds. It is up to the proponent of a new product (drug), or a new radical diet to prove that it is safe, for whom it is safe, and for how long it is safe. It is not up the proponents of moderation and common sense based on known physiology to prove that it is not safe to go down these paths...

As we all know...when money drives the cause, objectivity goes down the tubes...and everything must be taken with a grain of salt, the reports need to be read between the lines. But last time I checked, there have been no long term studies to show that the A diet is safe for most people as a lifelong way of eating....looking at the whole picture, and not just weight.

(I will check the lit on this..in case I am wrong..but don't think the study can be done in a few months, or even just a couple of years, and it cannot be done by studying thirty people. This work really would take years, and possibly thousands of people as a multicenter study.

Hope I am wrong about the A diet's safety in the long term...I would enjoy an Aktins diet way of eating, if i understand it properly.

In my experience however, there are no easy answers to the problem of weight control, and usually there is no one answer fits all either.

Eating large amounts of salmon...now there is a bit more support for that I think, than red meat...


M.

[ 02-11-2004, 08:37 PM: Message edited by: STGRule ]

[kayakfisher]

Also...meant to say a high meat diet is high in phosphorous and relatively low in calcium, and therefore somewhat of a poor diet for bone density.

M.

[ 02-11-2004, 08:36 PM: Message edited by: STGRule ]

[Hogback]

The A diet works but is not a healthy way to live. Your body runs on sugar(carbs). If you want a good answer to the A diet debate ask a dietician not a doctor (no disrespect intended KF). If I remember correctly the human body requires 51g of carb. just to function. People run the risk of low blood sugar which can lead to lightheadedness and even unconsciousness. BOE mentioned ketosticks, ketosis is an abnormal physiological condition in a healthy person eating a balanced diet. Studys seem to indicate that a balanced diet including carbs, fats, and protein are a slower but healthier way to lose weight and maintain that weight loss. When people remain on the A diet (origionally the Air Force diet) to long the human body will try to eventually save its fat and start burning muscle.
Randy

[kayakfisher]

http://www.atkinsdietalert.org/

I searched for info that the A diet has been shown to be safe in the long term...so far cannot find a study that really addressed to question well.

The above website summarizes some of the reasons it is not thought to be a good diet for long term use...ie it is not thought to be a healthy, sustainable way to eat ... if the big picture is considered.

Read it thoroughly for a fairly good representation of some common dietary sense, based on current accepted medical views on sensible eating.

A have a friend who says he is writing a book to summarize all the fad diets...if and when it comes out I will put it's title out on the list and make a copy available to anyone who wants to borrow it...if it turns out to be any good. I think there is a wealth of info out there on dietary issues....but not a wealth of totally unbiased info on diets with a proprietary financial interest.

M.

[Thumper]

Originally posted by kayakfisher:
The above website summarizes some of the reasons it is not thought to be a good diet for long term use...ie it is not thought to be a healthy, sustainable way to eat ... if the big picture is considered.

Read it thoroughly for a fairly good representation of some common dietary sense, based on current accepted medical views on sensible eating.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Sorry Kayakfisher, you posted the URL of the Physicians Committee For Responsible Medicine, a well-known veggie/animal rights advocate group. This is the same group who reported on Atkin's supposed overweight, which was a downright lie.

Surely you can do better than that. :smile:

[Bait O' Eggs]

You talk about loss of bone density. If you read the book you would see where vitamins are supplemented to make up for lack of certain items in the diet/lifestyle. I think vitamins are recommended in all diets for the lack of things we dont get from food.

You talk about ketosis not being a good state for the body to be in. As I understand it, the by product of burning fat is ketones. If you are burning fat you are creating ketones no matter what diet you are on. If you burn more carbs a day than you eat you lose weight and create ketones. Dont think of calorie intake but carb intake instead. If you keep track of your carb intake and use keto strips you will know how many carbs your body burn a day. When you figure out what that point is, you can eat that many carbs and maintain your weight. If you want to lose weight you eat less than that, to put your body in ketosis, when you want to maintain you are not in ketosis but rather holding steady. Ketones may not be good for the kidneys. You can lessen the effect by drinking a lot of water to keep them diluted and flushed from your system. Atkins diet does not always have you in ketosis, only the early part where you lose weight. Once target weight is achieved you up carbs to your balance point and are not in ketosis. For some it may be 40 carbs a day others for others it might be 100 carbs a day, all of our bodies are different.

It is a lifestyle, not a diet. You only lose weight in the first part of it, then the rest of your life you maintain your weight.

The Dept of Agriculture created the food pyramid not the American Heart Assoc.

I look around the streets and see the effect of low fat diets. America is fatter than it has ever been. The entire Atkins thing could be off base, I dont know, but I see what isnt working and see what makes sense to me. I eat a steak and am full for hours and hours. I eat pasta and am starving again before I leave the table. My blood work is better since being on Atkins, I weigh less and feel better.

It is very difficult for doctors and dieticians to all of a sudden say: my entire college was a waste, I have been wrong all this time and now I want you to do something else. Time will tell, but I suspect in 100 years the recommended diet will be about 60 carbs a day, not 2000 calories, and the food pyramid will be turned over.

[kayakfisher]

As I said...the burden of proof is on the proponent, right?

I had no idea who "they" were...and I don't support their methods if they are pushing things that are not true...but in fact there are no good studies of which I am aware that shows the A diet is sound in the big picture. But I also don't think the nutritional reasoning was unsound...it is obviously not a technical study...but reasonable nontheless.

Surely, Dr.Atkins must have done a big multicenter study? Don't think he did it. Haven't found it so far...I am aware of some of the Mayo stuff...too limitted a study to draw broad conclusions.

I am very happy to have the A diet shown to be great...but don't think it that has happened so far. Might be good for "Kilchis"...but not for omnivores.

I don't support the treatment of disease by foot manipulation...but that doesn't mean not finding studies disproving the practice indicates the my logic is flawed.

M.

[kayakfisher]

America is fatter than ever before because we excercise less, and ear more calories than we should. It is not because we eat to little protein. America is not on a low fat diet, I assure you...but it seems we eat to much of almost everything, as a group.

The A diet is getting to be almost a religious following it seems...but in the end, it will take a long time to determine how it all pans out.

Dr. A should in fact have taken the time to promote studies of his proposition...if he was right, and if he truly believed in the value of his cause, I cannot understand why that did not happen. I would guess he had the funds to do so...and surely could have received sponsoring from certain meat industry groups. I imagine he could have started such a study with a a couple of phone calls, but for some reason that did not happen.

This seems similar to the DMSO fad of the 70's.....and a particular proponent of that from OHSU, whoose support of DMSO is almost on the level of a new religion.

Time will tell i guess...

M.

[glassblower]

I think we all know a well rounded diet in proper serving amounts is the healthy way to eat. All of one thing and none of the otheres is not healthy. Want to loose weight? get off your duff and quit watching TV, Walk, Run, Ride a bike, Mow grass, Dig holes, Chop wood, but mainly do something besides sit and eat all day in front of the TV. And while you are at it drink water, LOTS & LOTS of water. I know people who use the Dr. A. diet, and just watching someone eat all that fat & grease is enough to make you sick. I do not see how it could not be a heart attack waiting to happen, or at least an upset stomac. To each their own I guess.

[high_arc]

Eating all that fat and grease?? Then your friends may not be doing it right. I always here people talk about how it is a high fat diet. To be honest, I don't think I eat more fat now than I did before. I see this comments about this diet kind of like when people post about catching a lot of fish. There are some people who are happy for them, then there are others that start to moan and complain about the number of fish they are catching. For some of us, the diet is working very well. We are getting regular check ups and approval from our physicians to continue this lifestyle. Can't you just be happy for us that we are losing the wait and becoming healthier? How many of you that are knocking the diet are overwieght and have tried it correctly? I plan on continuing it until my doctor finds a medical reason why I shouldn't. I have lost 80 lbs and counting. Cheers to those of you that are making a lifestyle change (low carb brew, of course).

[kayakfisher]

80 lbs!...I will definitely bow to anyone who can do that... [img]graemlins/applause.gif[/img]

And as I have said before ... I hope I am under estimating the A diet...

Everyday I hope someone can show me to be wrong about something I think is true...so I can learn something new daily.

M.

[Silver Hilton]

Kayak, I think Atkins, Eades, et al. would say that the problem is not that America is on a low fat diet, it is that America eats too many refined carbs. The Mcdonalds meal is bad in many ways, but the theory at least is that the reason our bodies tend to lay the fat on is the glycemic load imposed by the supersized coke and large fries. Lots of calories, because of the fat, and our body loads them up as fat, because of the reaction to the carbs.

The more important reason for people to try these approaches is that they dramatically reduce your appetite. Cookies are truly addictive in the clinical sense of the term. Replacing them with some cut up veggies with blue cheese dressing fills the tummy, without causing another snack craving in two hours. That is where the big impact comes for me, and for my friends.

My BP dropped, my blood work remains fine, my weight dropped, and the chicks dig me. What's not to like? OK, maybe I stretthed the point on that last one...

[Thumper]

SH is right on. After all the arguments pro and con, I am convinced that the main reason that the Atkins diet works is that it is basically a low calorie diet masquerading as a low carb diet. I can't believe how many fewer calories I now consume.

[ 02-12-2004, 08:05 AM: Message edited by: Thumper ]

[kayakfisher]

Glad it is working for you...but in my experience (based on my single friends' stories...since I have a spouse and kids)...chicks love anyone who is "a provider of liquidity"...esp if he also has a coooool jet boat. You know, the more boaty you got, the more booty you get?

(Hope Jennie doesn't see that one!! or I may get diciplined?) :grin:

I understand the principles of the A diet...and I know it can result in weight loss and helps in appetite control. But since I have not yet read the book, and now I know I should if i continue my position among you religious advocates of it , I don't know what else he advocates...in the way of excersize, vits, etc.

I also know that anything that reduces obesity is positive in our culture, one in which obesity is such a difficult problem. I also know that nutritional habbits have to do more than address obesity. The picture is broader than that, and history so far has eventually shown every diet drug, every "radical" diet to be less than ideal in the big picture. There is no doubt in my mind that for some people the A diet is great...but I still think the advocates of the diet, or better yet nonadvocates, need to do a real study to really try to define wether or not the percieved problems with that diet are real or not...or more exactly maybe, to define better who should be on that diet, and who should not.

It is likely hazardous for some people in comparison with a more moderate approach to weight loss.

I think the concept of weight control is going to be greatly changed someday...as we gain a better understanding of appetite control from an endocrine perspective. There are some hormonal and metabolic discoveries coming down the line I think that will allow us to better find out why some individuals have a harder time reaching satiety. Ie becoming "full" and feeling that they have had enough to eat. Perhaps the A diet in some people activates an endocrine cascade of events that results in satiety. It is known that some strains of mice have a deficiency of a hormone that makes them feel "full" and when their genes are manipulated their offspring become "normal" in that characteristic don't have satiety problems, and therefore don't get obese.

It is also clear that eating, and satiety are complex issues, and there is not going to be one simple solution that works for everyone. There is a great deal of knowledge that is going to be coming down in the future, althought the timeline is unknown about these things. The chemistry of obesity needs to be much better understood, and the stereotypes of those affected by obesity need to be forgotten. It takes a huge more amount more self control for some people to maintain their a "normal" weight than others...this is not due to a personality defect(the stereotype)...but it is due to many complex things working together...in the end, weight control best is achieved by a multifactorial approach...diet, excerise, and in some people there will be (maybe) an endocrine solution treated with medications that replace normal biochemical patterns...and perhaps other solutions will be worked out that have not yet been perceived.

Studies of the A diet really could contribute a lot to the evolution of this knowledge i think...ie determinine how it results in satiety.

Loosing weight by almost any means in some people tends to reduce their cholesterol and blood lipids...that is good. But does it work in everyone?

Gotta go ... busy day ahead...have fun. Perhaps I will go to the library today and pick up the A book...so you guys don't think I am uninformed on this topic! :shocked: Going along with the crowd!! Defnitely not my style I guess.

Take care, have fun, eat right.

M.

[KROY]

Here's my story:

About three years ago I started to hear about this diet that you could lose weight on by eating bacon, eggs, and sausage. Having read two books on low-fat diets and trying to keep my weight down for years, I was skeptical. I decided that instead of arguing with people about something I didn't know anything about, I would read a Dr. Atkins book.

After reading three books written by Dr. Atkins, reading Sugar Busters, The Zone Diet, The Underburner's Diet and a few others, the science makes perfect sense. Next on the list is the South Beach Diet.

I don't do well discussing things with a keyboard so I'll leave that to people like Bait O' Eggs who makes excellent points.

All the skeptic's points are addressed with science and thousands of case studies in the books.

I eat a low saturated fat, low carb diet with lots of fruits and vegetables and it's from the diet. I also take lots of vitamins which are recommended along with gallons of water.

The food pyramid is wrong. We don't need 300 grams of carbs a day. Around 100 is fine for most people to stay healthy. Processed flour and process sugar are the problem. Natural foods are fine. Modern human beings have evolved over the last 200,000 years in this form. We only started to get fat after eating over 300 grams of processed carbs a day. I will say that early humans could have dealt with all the sugar better than we could because those tigers could run real fast.

The last observation I've made after being on this three year personal "experiment" is, I'm never hungry. I use to starve to keep my weight at 165 lbs. with moderate exercise. I would cringe at the thought of the next 30 years dealing with the hunger of low-fat diets.

I now weigh 157 lbs. and I'm not hungry at all. My triglycerides and cholesterol are now excellent. I was having problems with both before my eating lifestyle changed. Friends and family have had the same results.

Thanks,
Ken

[ 02-12-2004, 08:42 AM: Message edited by: KROY ]

[Silver Hilton]

Originally posted by kayakfisher:
You know, the more boaty you got...
(

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Um, in my experience, the correlation is negative. :depressed:

[kayakfisher]

Silver...Then in theory my boat should be bigger than it really is!!

[Fish_N_Russ]

Atkins, as well as many other diets, only work well for certain body metabolism types. I am not saying low-carb is bad, its just that some people can deal with it A LOT better than others.

[Silver Hilton]

Kayak, I think the best book to read in the area is Protein Power, by Eades. He has the least fluff and promo, and the best explanation of the putative mechanism. For recommending to patients (oh, presumptious me!) the South Beach Diet does the best job of actually delivering a reasonably healthy diet on full maintenance. They are all variations on a theme. South Beach is Atkins without ketosis.

[Thumper]

Another vote for "Protein Power".