Oh, I just thought of something else actually as I re-read this post - and it raised a very salient point. That is, the lack of empirical evidence regarding the “success rate” of the Atkins diet - or for that matter, the “Lo Fat” diet of a decade ago etc.
Here’s my logic dillemna… all of the published evidence concludes that rates of “overweightness and obesity” are higher than ever before in the Western World. Surely, we can agree on this, yes? OK, my logic hurdle is this - how can we empirically measure (let alone even identify or define) the success of the Atkin’s diet in comparison to other notable diet programs which have come before it?
You see, (and jayjay please note I’m not singling you out here - you merely raised the salient point) my maths tells me that more and more people than ever before in the Western World are having weight problems. And while it’s very true that some people are showing great results on the Atkin’s program - the maths would indicate that more people than ever before need to do something about their weight. Hence, how can we ever possibly measure how successful Atkin’s is, if the numbers of people with weight problems keeps climbing regardless?
So, as I said, I applaud the success that some people have had with Atkins. That’s great. The problem seems to be far more entrenched than even the good Doctor himself could foresee however. In an earlier post, I opined that innately the problem is that we, as a culture in the Western World, are lazier than ever before. Certainly, this explains the explosion in numbers. Hence, I tend to fall back on my credo of “work harder in your general life” because ultimately, the maths would indicate that THAT is the true source of the problem.
