Debunking Atkins

[pohjonen]

Blather all you like Scylla. You are still unconditionally, absolutely, positively, beyond a shadow of a doubt WRONG.

You say the weight loss on low-carb is because the dieter eats less calories. WRONG!

Then you and your sources say it’s merely loss of water weight. WRONG! It’s patently absurb to say someone lost 50 or 60 pounds of water.

You say it’s nutritionally devoid of vitamins and nutrients. WRONG!

Your sources say the high fat is not good for lipid profiles. WRONG!

So what does that leave you with. Possible kidney problems owing to the consumption of protein? Well apparently the jury is still out on that one too. Unless one already HAS kidney damage.

So show me your cites of all the people dropping like flies because of the diet and then we’ll talk some more.

[JThunder]

*Originally posted by pohjonen *
**
So show me your cites of all the people dropping like flies because of the diet and then we’ll talk some more. **

Are you saying that a diet is only “ill-advised” if it causes people to drop like flies? Really?

Seems like an excessively restrictive criterion to me.

[Apos]

Okay, I’ve purchased a ZModem, and backordered some YModem. I had to smash it into smaller bits to even get to the chewing stage, but I’ve just now finally choked down the last piece. When do I start losing weight?

—He specifically predicates against it lasting any longer.—

Well… yeah. Hopefully no one but determined anorexics will WANT to continue with ketosis as a lifestyle. I usually like to stop just before the heart failure stage, but not before my eyeballs become sunken.

Also, this:
http://www.omen.com/varmint.html
made me cry. Thanks a bunch pohjonen.

Though the nasty swipe about poor, deluded Debbie and her unfair accusations of “double-timing” seemed a little out of place…

[Liberal]

One sure sign that a debator is drowning is when he begins to flail and slap at the water.

Scylla, I don’t know of any site that self-references more than the U.S. government site. Does that make the site unreliable? When a site contains numerous articles on a variety of topics, self-reference makes for handy navigation. In fact, that’s why hyperlinking was invented.

When you’ve reduced yourself to poking fun at the titles of articles with extremely exaggerated sarcasm, and wallowing in generic fallacies, you’ve effectively signaled that your argument is worthless.

Maybe you read the old book. There is a new one now (Dr. Atkins New Diet Revolution), with amended guidelines and additional explanations and references. Its bibliography is extensive. And it is clear that you’ve not read the new book. If you have, then your comprehension and retension skills need serious attention.

[Cuckoorex]

I, too, have been using the Atkins diet and found a significant stabilization of my triglycerides and cholesterol levels, with an increase in ‘good’ cholesterol and decrease in ‘bad’ cholesterol. My blood pressure is stable, and my lipid profiles show normal/good ranges all the way through (which I couldn’t say about my pre-Atkins lipid profile).

I would estimate that my diet right now is roughly 50% protein, 30-40% fat, and 10-20% carbohydrate. For myself and hopefully most of the people who try Atkins, the ‘permission’ to eat a lot of high-fat foods is a bit of a novelty that quickly wears off. I find that I do feel more satisfied for longer periods of time after eating an Atkins-approved meal, and I don’t doubt that I’m probably consuming less calories now than I was before. The point is, though, that the reason I’m consuming less calories is because I’m satisfied with the meals and because the vast majority of truly fattening snacks (donuts, pizza, potato chips, regular ice cream, etc.,) are either very restricted or disallowed entirely.

Here’s a twist, though; prior to using the Atkins diet, I was on a traditional ‘low-fat’ diet. And you know what? I also lost weight on that diet, although I was FAR more likely to want to cheat on that diet, and felt hungry far sooner after meals. That, ultimately, was the downfall of the low-fat approach for me.

In regards to nutrition: yes, I think that getting vitamins and minerals from whole food sources is ideal, but Atkins does advocate using vitamin supplements on the diet, which I do use. I imagine it’s not much harder than a vegetarian making sure they get enough protein; either you find sources in foods or you use supplements (whey protein drinks, for example).

About serving sizes; I’m sorry, but the ‘serving size’ amounts listed on packages…? I know of NO ONE that consistently follows those guidelines. I think there is a bit of deception going on with food labeling at times, where ‘serving size’ is determined more by making the caloric and nutritional values look better than the amount of the food that the average person is likely to eat in one sitting. Go to just about ANY restaraunt and the meals they sell you will have MANY times the amount that is considered a ‘single serving’. In many restaurants you can’t even order a steak that is less than 9 ounces.

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

*Originally posted by Cuckoorex *
**I imagine it’s not much harder than a vegetarian making sure they get enough protein; either you find sources in foods or you use supplements (whey protein drinks, for example).
**

Nitpick: if you’re a vegetarian, and

• If you eat a maintenance amount of calories (e.g., 2000 a day or thereabouts), and
• If you eat a variety of foods (e.g., your diet doesn’t consist solely of oatmeal), and
• If you don’t get most of your calories from alcohol, oils, refined sugars, or sweet potatoes, then
• You’ll get all the protein you need.

Estimates for the amount of protein a diet needs range from 2.5% to 8% of one’s calories. Very few whole foods derive fewer than 10% of their calories from protein. And eating a variety of foods ensures that you’ll eat all the different amino acids you need for good health.

Although vegetarian gurus in the '60s and '70s thought that vegetarians needed to obsess about protein combinations, research in the '80s debunked that. A few vegetarians and vegans still come down with nasty diseases like kwashiankor (sp?) every now and then, but usually it’s because they’re subsisting on a junk-food diet.

Daniel

[Scylla]

Lib:

If you like the modem guy duck picture cite wherein he makes outrageous blanket statements citing himself as the athority, that’s fine with me.

Personally I like cites like this:

http://www.hcrc.org/faqs/ketogen.html

This one’s by a Dr.

-The initial weight loss from the Atkins diet is water loss
-long-term positive results are a function of reduced caloric intake
-No more efficacious then other diets
-potentially dangerous.

Like I’ve been saying all along, and like every credible medical athority has been saying all along.

[Scylla]

Oh, and here’s a cite from the American Heart Association, issuing a warning, citing all of the things I’ve said.

-Weight loss from water,
-Reduced caloric intake
-Cholesterol levels dropping from weight loss
-Various dangers.

[Scylla]

Here’s another nifty cite from quackwatch:

http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/lcd.html
It again says all the same things I’ve been saying throughout this thread, and cites a few studies.

Most interesting new piece of information is that even though the Atkins diet has been around for 30 years, it doesn’t appear that anybody’s actually been able to follow it and maintain weight loss.

Looks like 19 months is about the average before it all gets gained back.

[Scylla]

Researchers who compile the National Weight Control Registry analyzed the diets of 2,681 members who had maintained at least a 30-pound weight loss for a year or more. They found that less than 1% had followed a diet similar to the Atkins program. Most followed high-carbohydrate, low-fat diets, says James Hill, director for the Center for Human Nutrition at the University of Colorado Health Sciences Center in Denver.

From a USA today article also citing reduced caloric intake as the reasons for Atkins diet weight loss.

[Liberal]

Scylla wrote:

If you like the modem guy duck picture cite wherein he makes outrageous blanket statements citing himself as the athority, that’s fine with me.

Now, that’s silly, Scylla. Just because you put words in my mouth doesn’t make them my words.

This one’s by a Dr.

So is this one.

http://atkinscenter.com/

-The initial weight loss of most diets is water
-Long term positive results are a function of metabolic adjustment
-A higher success rate than all other diets
-Safe even for diabetics

[Liberal]

Scylla quoted USA Pictures Today:

Researchers who compile the National Weight Control Registry analyzed the diets of 2,681 members who had maintained at least a 30-pound weight loss for a year or more. They found that less than 1% had followed a diet similar to the Atkins program. Most followed high-carbohydrate, low-fat diets, says James Hill, director for the Center for Human Nutrition at the University of Colorado Health Sciences Center in Denver.

When will they study Dr. Atkins’ 10,000,000 “members”?

[Scylla]

Lib:

Atkins has apparently abandoned his credentials and devolved into quackery.

I’m sure that you will appreciate that I find it both humorous and unsurprising that Atkins is a propenent of his diet.

It is after all, his diet, and he does have books to sell.

On the other hand, there’s this thing called peer review which prevents things like the cold fusion debacle.

Independant scientific athorities and nutritionists consider his “metabolic adjustment” to be a bunch of hooey.

I’m sure that Atkins claims that his diet has a higher success rate than “all other diets.” This however is a total lie, as you can see from the article I quoted studying the long-term efficacy of the Atkins diet.

Less than 1% of people who maintain weight loss did it on Atkins.

Atkins is full of shit, and just like the Duck guy’s cite, citing Atkins on Atkins is total bullshit.

[Scylla]

*Originally posted by Libertarian *
**Scylla quoted USA Pictures Today:

When will they study Dr. Atkins’ 10,000,000 “members”? **

Probably when they lose 30 pounds and maintain that loss for a year.

Doesn’t look like it’s happening, does it?

[Anonymous_Coward]

I’m not a great GD’er, so I’ll save my comments and save face while I’m at it. However, you may want to check out this link. It’s about a fellow that has maintained his weightloss for 3 years on Atkins, as well as some general Atkins info (pro and con) and some more stats.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2002-12-09-life-cover_x.htm

[Justhink]

sigh

Scylla is correct. Benefits on the Atkin’s diet are related to the biochemistry you were born with and not some system designed for all human beings. Even more, the Atkins diet necessarily selects for a smaller percentage of the population, as most people living on this earth metabolize carbohydrates (alkalinic food) with the greatest efficiency.

a.) They won’t be able to break down the fat or protien from an acidic base
b.) They won’t be able to efficiently draw out the nutrients of a diet with an acidic base.

Since the diet doesn’t calculate pH levels of the carbohydrate end of the spectrum, the application is necessarily arbitrary and equivilent to a game of russian roulette with regards to the effects of decreased hormone production and nutrient absorbtion.

-Justhink

[Liberal]

Scylla wrote:

Atkins has apparently abandoned his credentials and devolved into quackery.

That’s not apparent to me.

I’m sure that you will appreciate that I find it both humorous and unsurprising that Atkins is a propenent of his diet.

Odd. Most humor is born of surprise.

It is after all, his diet, and he does have books to sell.

Yep. His book has been a runaway best seller. And nearly all the bitching and moaning is from people who haven’t tried the diet. How many people have been dissatisfied with their Atkins results? Divide that number by 10,000,000, multiply by 100, and you’ll have a rough percentage.

On the other hand, there’s this thing called peer review which prevents things like the cold fusion debacle.

There’s also this thing called politics, which causes things like the “eggs will kill you” debacle.

Independant scientific athorities and nutritionists consider his “metabolic adjustment” to be a bunch of hooey.

Few independent authorities have studied it. There is a difference between “Oh, it simply must be bad,” and “Here are our data.” Fortunately, there is a living, breathing database of millions of successful dieters. And of the few studies done, they’ve nearly all found the diet to work.

I’m sure that Atkins claims that his diet has a higher success rate than “all other diets.” This however is a total lie, as you can see from the article I quoted studying the long-term efficacy of the Atkins diet.

You mean quack watchers? The study of “18 Atkins dieters for a month”?

Less than 1% of people who maintain weight loss did it on Atkins.

You mean of the couple of thousand who joined the National Weight Control Registry? That’s a classic statistical fallacy.

Atkins is full of shit, and just like the Duck guy’s cite, citing Atkins on Atkins is total bullshit.

Genetic fallacies must be your favorite.

[Scylla]

Lib;

Ok. This is interesting. You cite 10,000,000 satisfied Atkins dieters. The diet has been around for 30 years.

So where are all these formerly fat people who are following the Atkins diet?

Apparently, there’s one in GA.

That’s not apparent to me.

That’s ain’t an acid test, babes.

Odd. Most humor is born of surprise.

Not true at all. Are you surprised when Lucy pulls the football away from Charlie Brown?

That’s an absurd statement.

Yep. His book has been a runaway best seller. And nearly all the bitching and moaning is from people who haven’t tried the diet. How many people have been dissatisfied with their Atkins results? Divide that number by 10,000,000, multiply by 100, and you’ll have a rough percentage.

I’m not interested in satisfied/dissatisfied, Lib. People are incredibly stupid and their self-satisfaction is not indicative of the efficacy and safety of the diet, but rather of Dr. Atkins marketing skills.

I’m interested

A. In the long-term health effects.
B. The likelihood of a succesful and lasting weightloss.

So far less than 1% of the people studied who have lost 30 plus pounds and maintained that loss for a year did it on Atkins.

You’re 10,000,000 successful dieters assertion is just stupid. If they’re representative than I guess a billion people lost 30 pounds or more last year.

There’s also this thing called politics, which causes things like the “eggs will kill you” debacle.

You got a cite for the politically motivated “eggs will kill you” debacle? I don’t recall any such.

Few independent authorities have studied it. There is a difference between “Oh, it simply must be bad,” and “Here are our data.” Fortunately, there is a living, breathing database of millions of successful dieters. And of the few studies done, they’ve nearly all found the diet to work.

This is denser than molybenum. Look at the second sentence (or is it the first?) of my OP.

The diet will work.

That is not the issue.

The issues are 1. Why does the diet work (answer: lowered caloric intake and initial water loss)

2. Is the diet safe? *(answer: not sure. There is reason to thinkg that is potentially harmful though, i.e. the ADAs warning, and the dangers of ketosis)

3. Is the diet the best way to lose weight (answer: Not a fucking chance in hell)

You mean quack watchers? The study of “18 Atkins dieters for a month”?

That’s a dishonest and incomplete summary of the cite.

[Liberal]

Okay, so I’m a dishonest, stupid, and uninteresting liar. Your argument has become like a crashing helicopter. I hope everyone has enough sense to get out of the way.

(Oh, and by the way, I laughed only the first time I saw Lucy pull the football away.)

[jjimm]

*Originally posted by Scylla *
**So where are all these formerly fat people who are following the Atkins diet?

Apparently, there’s one in GA **

Waves There’s one here in Dublin too. If you review the previous recent Atkins thread, you’ll find a ratio of about 10:1 in favour. Granted, it’s not a perfect cross-section, but the people who have tried it who contributed to that thread (and I think as many angry, dissatisfied Dopers would be motivated to write about Atkins as satisfied ones) said they were very happy with it.