Comparison of LC plans

[jomil]

Hi All!

Do you get the feeling that Dr. Atkins does not get personally involved with any of the marketing of his food products?

I believe that this is a separate subsidiary, and that it is solely run by business entrepreneurs. He probably gets a royalty.

How else can you justify the promotion and hype about all the LC delicacies that his company offers that I believe truly goes against the LC WOL, and his teachings. I am truly disappointed in that he allows this type of marketing using his name.

I have now read CAD, Dr.Atkins books, Power Protein, and very recently "Eat Yourself Slim" by Montignac (a Frenchman who has sold over 8 million copies in Europe, according to the front cover). Yet none of them have recommended eating "health bars" in their books.

I still feel strongly that LC WOE is the wise and healthy way.
But..... I am not certain that Dr. Atkins isn't "selling out".

If I am on the wrong track, somebody please give a correct direction.

Regards
Joe

P.S. I think it would be of tremendous value to all our members if we did a study and compared all the different programs and phases that have been recommended by the various authors of LC WOE and arrive at a consensus as to the proper carbs for induction, etc.

[Karen]

Originally posted by jomil

P.S. I think it would be of tremendous value to all our members if we did a study and compared all the different programs and phases that have been recommended by the various authors of LC WOE and arrive at a consensus as to the proper carbs for induction, etc.

Great idea Joe! Why don't you start the research for the study? ;)

Karen

[jomil]

Karen, I only come up with the ideas......it requires a Committee to do this study.....

Only the most experienced LC WOE should be considered qualified to participate in this Committee.

After all I am only a novice in this WOL, having just started in mid March of this year.

Now that you have asked me, I would probably recommend, yourself, Wa'il, and Doreen, and others.

Regards
Joe

I will mention it to Doreen on Sunday, if she doesn't read this before then.

[Karen]

But Joe! Through study and teaching, we learn.

I think you're prime for Committee Chair!

Karen

[tamarian]

I actually like the idea of a comparative study of LC plans. This will require help from many people, each describing their plan, since no one person can know them all. I'm comfortable describing, Atkins and PP, but there are many others plans that I don't know the details of, or have the time to read all the books available.

If each person following a plan would summarize the main points and guilines in just a few paragraphs, I can post an initial document, and request further corrections and addtions, until we get it right.

How does that sound?

Wa'il

[jomil]

Great start idea Wa'il!

Can I make a few sugestions on the layout and initial procedure beyond your ideas?

1. To decide which Plans to compare, let's refer to our own Poll that lists all the published plans and layout a short initial list of headings across the top of the page. ie
Atkins-- CAD-- P.P.-- etc.

2. Down the left side of the page we can list by number the different questions.
Starting with, ie
1. Induction Time (min. period in weeks)
2. Max. carbs per day (in grams)
3. No. of phases in plan
4. Maintanence Time
5. Max. carbs allowed in maint.(in grams)
6. Etc. The rest of the questions can actually originate from the new inductees. Each new member has posted questions in the past that can actually be of value in this Consensus.

We can then fill in the apropriate answer under each heading.

I am certain a lot more questions can come to your mind, in order to do a comparison of the diferent plans.

Regards
Joe

[tamarian]

Jo, great ideas are racing right now :)

Keep'em coming folks!

Wa'il

[Karen]

See Joe! You have become the Chair! ;)

Y'all probably know this, but ASDLC has a synopsis of quite a few of the plans. When I'm finished with Potatoes Not Prozac, I can do a write up unless there are some lurkers out there who have experience with it and would like to give us a hand. I'm also PP babe although it looks like I'm following Atkins.

Karen

[debbiedobson]

joe, i'm going to see you tomorrow and i'm really looking forward to it!!:D i think you should run with this joe!! you've got the picture in your mind! as karen said, you're already the chair! i love your plan! let's do it!!:D

[numberonewendy]

Good plan there. I like it :)

[Andy Davies]

Wa'il, I have already researched and summarised 4 such diets. These are:- The Harvey/Banting diet, the Stone Age diet (Mackarness), the Blake Donaldson meat-only diet and Atkins' "New Diet Revolution" diets. These are currently summarised in 4 pages of text as part of the guide I send out. I will send you a copy as an attachment to an e-mail to your private e-mail site. You will probably need to summarise it down even further for your purposes, but this could be a good start for this project.

[tamarian]

Andy.

Excellent contribution! I now have something to work on, while members send in their entries.

As Jo suggested, these are the diets listed in our poll (minus the ones Andy provided).

If you follow, or are familiar with any of these diets, please post or send a breif summary of concepts/plan:

Body Opus
CKD
Carbohydrate Addicts
Dr. Bernstein's Diabetes Solution
Insulin Control Diet
Ketogenic
Montignac
Neanderthin
Paleolithic Diet
Protein Power
Schwarzbein Principle
Sommersizing
Stillman Diet
Sugar Busters
The Zone

This should be an interesting collective project.

Wa'il

[Karen]

Wa'il, you should post this request in the Main LC forum. There may be a few lurkers (and non-lurkers) who would love to write about their plan.

Karen

[tamarian]

Originally posted by Karen
Wa'il, you should post this request in the Main LC forum. There may be a few lurkers (and non-lurkers) who would love to write about their plan.


Hmmm, I thought this is the main LC forum!?!? ;)

Wa'il

[jomil]

Wa'il you are doing a fantastic job on this new LC Consensus programme! Keep up the good work!

If Andy's comparison is dealing with other LC Plans ( which I was not aware of) should we not consider including them with our list of Plans, especially if we are trying to be of service to the International members?

Are you planning on publishing a treatise of each of the different plans in this Forum before you actually do a comparison list?

Can we get volunteers to do each of the plans?

I will volunteer to do Montignac, because I have his book right now from the library. But I need some guidelines as to the content of the treatise. Perhaps Andy's comparison would be a good guideline of how to start.

Regards
Joe

[tamarian]

Hi Joe,

All LC plans are welcome to be included, even the ones Andy covered (read hist post listing all 4 of them).

Great to have you cover Montignac. Eeach member has the option to post their summary of their chosen diet on the forum first, or email it to me (I prefer posting to the forum, but I perfectly understand if some members are too shy to do so).

I haven't figured the guidlines yet, please feel free to come up with some, or we can have each member write in their own style and choose the best entry in terms of organization, style etc.

Wa'il

[Karen]

Hmmm, I thought this is the main LC forum!?!?

Duh! I thought I was in Andy's Journal. Ground Control to Karen...can you read me! LOL!

What about posting it under a new heading then?

Karen

[tamarian]

Originally posted by Karen


What about posting it under a new heading then?



Definitly! Will do.

Wa'il

[jomil]

Wa'il , this is proving to be a lot more complicated than I originally foresaw, without an established guideline.

I thought that maybe Andy's analysis might be a way to start. But I don't have a copy of it.

(As an example of picking one subject from two books) Reading Montignac's "Eat Yourself Slim", I find that he is anti-sugar, and sits on the fence regarding artificial sweeteners. While Heller's "CA Healthy Heart Programme is anti-sweetener and sits on the fence about sugar. Who is correct?

Would it be simpler to start this "Comparison" by producing a thread on individual subjects and see how they differ with each author and get additional input from our knowledgeable Administrator and Moderators, plus any other comments from our members based on their experience.

When we have completed a number of threads on various subject, we can then compile them into a sort of manual, and put it in our archives.

Has anybody got any better ideas to help give this a kick-start?

Regards
Joe

[Karen]

(As an example of picking one subject from two books) Reading Montignac's "Eat Yourself Slim", I find that he is anti-sugar, and sits on the fence regarding artificial sweeteners. While Heller's "CA Healthy Heart Programme is anti-sweetener and sits on the fence about sugar. Who is correct?

In a comparison study, I don't think it matters as to who is correct. We're looking for differences, as well as similarities. It's up to the individual to decide what is correct for them.

Karen

[Andy Davies]

Hi Joe,

I have been giving some thought to how I would tackle your task, given the variations in diet and presentation you will have to cope with.

What I think I would do is get members to submit their summaries, then edit them all, to give a consistency of style, presentation and emphasis. This would give you a document for each diet summarised. I would then collate the information from all of the documents into a single table, which is what members would see if they visited the survey. It would be an overall summary sheet, giving direct comparisons between all of the diets. Anyone interested in learning more about any of the featured diets could click on the row or column it occupies in the table, and this would throw the reader directly onto the whole page summary about it. In this way, there would be a lasting resource for the benefit of all, which does not waste any of the input but streamlines access to it or enables comparison between diets.

[mtnlaurl]

. . . but I've been watching this thread as I think its a grand idea and am anxious to see the summaries of the different plans.

I was re-reading my CAD last night so thought I'd try to summarize it here. First - a disclaimer - this is only a summary as I understand it. For full information, you need to read the book.

******************************

The Carbohydrate Addict's Diet [Copyright 1991]
The Carbohydrates Addict's LifeSpan Program "A Personalized Plan For Becoming Slim, Fit, and Healthy In Your 40s, 50s, 60s, and Beyond" [Copyright 1997]
By: Dr's. Richard F. and Rachael F. Heller

Summary of Basic Premise: According to the Heller's research, many carbohydrate addicts produce too much insulin. This excess insulin creates hunger and causes the body to store fat. This program is designed to reduce hunger and carbohydrate cravings - thus achieving weight loss - by controlling your insulin. Controlling insulin is accomplished by controlling the amount, type and timing of carbohydrates that are consumed during the course of the day.

Summary of Basic Plan: Two meals during the course of the day are of specifically listed low carbohydrate foods. The third meal of the day - the "reward" meal - includes carbohydrates. However, the reward meal is to include a pre-meal "craving reducing" salad and equal portions of protein, vegetable and carbohydrate-rich food [including any dessert you may desire]. Also, the reward meal must be consumed in its entirety within one hour.

Pro's: No induction period. No weighing or measuring of foods and no counting of carbs; just a simple list of "Craving-Reducing Foods" that are permitted during the course of the day [excluding the "reward meal"].

Con's: Some persons may have trouble holding back on the reward meal until they become adapted to the diet. The reward meal is not a permitted "binge"; it has specific guidelines that must be adhered to if the diet is to work.

Misc: Includes Carbohydrate Addiction test, information on carb triggers, reasons for and possible solutions to weight reduction stalls, additional weight-loss options that may be added to the basic plan and sample menus and recipes. Low fat options are included for those who must limit the fat in their diet.

**************************************

Feel free to use this summary as a starting point in determining what type of outline you want, information you need, etc.

Best Regards;
Sandy

[Andy Davies]

Hi Sandy,

Wonderful! Thanks, I have learnt from your posting. It is clear that if this really gets going, so many people could benefit. Joe...

[tamarian]

Well done Sandy!

I will procede with Andy's suggestion and create a temporary web page, with each user entry having it's own page, and a link to a forum thread about that entry for user suggestions, corrections and revisions, until we have a consensous that it is accurate, readable and useful.

Each summary will have the author(s) name(s), and contributors. When done, it will be added to our Tips page under the title "Which LC plan is right for me" or "Comparison of LC Plans" or the best title offered by our members.

I'll probably have that page ready later this evening with all available entries. Feel free to add your entry.

Wa'il

[jomil]

Keep up the good efforts Wa'il, Andy and Sandy!!!!

Well I have just finished reading another LC book which I find even more interesting than my CAD plan.

Here is a synopsis of:

Eat Yourself Slim by Michel Montignac

Copyright- 1999. (8 million copies sold in Europe- according to the cover)

PRO- The most fascinating part of this diet is that you do not count , carbohydrate or calories.

There are only two phases to this plan.
Phase 1.- You stay on this until you get to your ideal weight.
Phase 2.- This is the maintenance portion that you live with the rest of your life.

Carbohydrates- The foods are not shown in grams, but are given an 'index number' to show their glycemic index, for a comparison of 'good' and 'bad' carbs.

As an example here is a short list:
High Glycemic Index Carbohydrates:
Maltose (beer) 110
Glucose 100
Baked potatoes 95
Hamburger Rolls 85
Sugar (saccharose) 70
Corn 70
Long-grain rice 60
Bananas 60
Shortbread cookies 55

Low Glycemic Index Carbs.
Brown Rice 50
Sweet Potatoes 50
Oatmeal 40
Rye Bread 40
Raw Carrots 30
Dairy Products 30
Green Lentils 22
Fresh Apricots 15
Green Veggies < 15

Phase 1 - You eat three substantial meals a day plus snacks.
He also does not expect anybody to over eat these meals. You use only Carbs that have a Glycemic index from 0 to 35. Of course these meals do include protein and fats.

Phase 2 - You can eat the rest of your life from 0 to 50 which will maintain your weight.

For people who have high blood pressure or heart conditions, he does also recommend low fat, and low cholesterol foods.

I do not know if any of our members who have been on this Plan, but I am thinking of trying it, as CAD is too slow for me.

I like the idea of not having to count carbs or calories,

Regards
Joe

P.S. If I anybody has studied or used this Plan, we all would be interested in your opinions.

[Andy Davies]

Congratulations Joe. Now things are really moving. Already there are so many interpretations or variations of LC methods. The more that are on file, the more likely this forum will be able to provide something for everybody, I reckon. I bet you never thought your idea would go so far!

[jomil]

I neglected to include the following important information in the Montignac EYS synopsis that I began yesterday.

Vitamins, Minerals and Trace Elements

The author maintains that we should be able to get all our essential vitamins through eating fresh foods prepared by ourselves. As a result he gives detailed instructions on how to prepare them. (What happens if you do not have the time or facilities to do this?}

He describes "minerals" as calcium, phosphorus, potassium, sodium, sulphur, and magnesium. He describes "trace elements" as chromium, cobalt, zinc, copper and selenium that function in infinitesimal quantities.

He states that "a lack of minerals and trace elements can be harmful". He maintains that synthetic supplements are "not easily absorbed by the intestines".

He therefore strongly advocates the use of a teaspoon of 'beer yeast' or 'wheat germ' added alternatively each morning to a dairy product.

Sugar and Artificial Sweetener

Montignac considers sugar as "Poison", but he also warns everybody to "be careful of artificial sweeteners", as they could disturb metabolism in the long run.

Fructose appears to be his favourite sweetener, because he considers that it can be classified as a 'natural sugar', and has a low glycemic index of 20.

That is all I have to report at this time.

If anybody has any questions, I will be pleased to hear from you.

Regards
Joe

[darcy]

Hi all, I'm new to your group but I would be happy to do a brief summary of carbohydrate addicts, if no one senior to me wants to do it.
Darcy

[tamarian]

Hi Darcy,

Welcome aboard! Check the announcement at the top of this forum, it points to this URL:

http://www.lowcarb.ca/atkins-diet-and-low-carb-plans/index.html

This page should contain the latest submissions. CAD was covered by Sandy. However, we do welcome any additions, comments modifications to entries. So do check it out, and feel free to contribute any comments.

Thanks!

Wa'il

[darcy]

Very good summary of CA Sandy!
Maybe we could add that the Hellers are totally opposed to being in Ketosis. They feel it is harmful and should be avoided by eating enough carbs. I find it confusing that they take this position and Dr. Atkins takes the opposite.
Darcy

[tamarian]

Good point Darcy,

I can add this info to "particulars and differences" section.

Thanks,

Wa'il

[jomil]

What happened fellow Low Carbers?

I have not seen any new book reports on the Comparison of LC Plans.

I have just finished skimming through my fifth book on Low Carb dieting and am quickly coming to a strong conclusion that Dr. Atkins programme is extreme, (to say the least) in advocating a high FAT, no calorie count plan.

All the other authors all agree on Low Carb WOE, but they also stress that it is absolutely essential to stay with low fat and low calories to lose weight and especially low cholesterol if you are concerned with hypertension and angina.

We have a large number of knowledgeable members that I would like to hear from that may wish to dispute the information that I have concluded.

Is it possible that the reason for the slowness of the book reports is because all the other authors are contradicting Dr. Atkins on everything but Low Carbs and therefore creating some doubt in their minds?

Regards
Joe

[Karen]

Umm, did you see my synopsis of Neanderthin?

Karen

[jomil]

Great job Karen on the Neanderthin report.

How were you able to reply to my comments so quickly?

What do you think about my analysis of the situation?

Andy is luking somewhere near here and he might also have some thoughts on the subject.

Can all the other Doctors be wrong and Atkins right?

Regards
Joe

[Karen]

I took the day off to get a bunch of non-LC writing done! LOL!

I don't think the lack of response is due to doubts. If people have an agenda, they will always look for confirmation of their agenda.

I think it's because nobody either has the time/capability/are afraid/wants to do it. It's a pretty big project, and everyone here is a volunteer, looking for advice/support/guidance or casual poster. Big volunteer projects take a looong tiiime.

I'm reading CALP right now. Well not right now, but you know what I mean.

Karen

[jomil]

Yes Karen, I certainly don't know were you guys find the time to do the work that you do on this Forum. It must be a labour of love.

Wa'il is lucky to have such devoted volunteers like yourself , Doreen, and the others, to be able to produce such a successful Web that is spreading around the world.

Regards
Joe

P.S. I have to leave now to take my min, schnauzer "Macho" for his late night walk before he hits the sack.

[Andy Davies]

Hi Joe,

I suppose we are always most influenced by the first writers we read on a subject. For me, although I enormously admire Atkins, when there are occasions of doubt or challenge, I go back to the first two authors I read (Mackarness and Donaldson, in that order). After that, I look for supporting evidence from anywhere reliable, which are likely to settle points of dispute. One team I am particularly impressed with was Kekwick and Pawan, two medical scientists who ran a series of experiments at Middlesex Hospital in England in the 1950s, into claims by Donaldson and others into the viability/wisdom/safety of the Eskimo-style meat-only diet, and the physiology behind the Harvey-Banting diet. It was Kekwick and Pawan who isolated and named Fat Mobilising Substance, and it was Kekwick and Pawan who identified that eating 60g or less per day of carbohydrate would trigger its production. It was Kekwick and Pawan who proved scientifically that LC diets work. They also proved that fat in the diet was far more active in breaking down adipose tissue than protein, and them again who concluded that the ideal ratio between fat and protein is 1:3 repectively. The title of Mackarness's book was "eat Fat and Grow Slim", and he was is certainly the most enthusiastic supporter of a high fat diet. I do not see any harm in eating a high-fat diet. The body will not let you eat too much fat, whereas you can have insufficient. It is important for the cetral nervous system and brain. In the absence of carbohydrates, fat is not fattening. Study after study has shown that it is carbohydrate, and not fat, that increases cholesterol, blood pressure, risk of heart disease, etc. What nutritional value is there in food that is low in everything? It rather sounds to me as if modern authors are getting away from the original evidence, and veering into the ephemeral world of trends and fashion. No doubt you will make your own mind up, and I can understand your concerns. But if in doubt, check the evidence behind the assertion. Best wishes.

[eebee]

I could do the Go Diet as I have the book. Did you post any style rules? Where do I send the review when it is written?:)

[tamarian]

Hi Eebee,

Yes, please do. It will be greatly appreciated. Here's our draft for a style guide:

http://forum.lowcarber.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=13898

In this subforum, there's an empty thread for the Go-Diet, you may post it there, or email to me. I'll publish entries every Saturday, take a look at the current pages under construction here:

http://www.lowcarb.ca/atkins-diet-and-low-carb-plans/index.html

Thanks!

Wa'il

[eebee]

Could I have your email address so I can post it to you? Just so you can check it out before it goes public.

[tamarian]

Yes, my email is at the bottom of every page on this forum, where it says contact us :)

Wa'il

[jomil]

Andy, you certainly have done your homework to arrive at the comments you expressed in a convincing manner.

I would be interested in your additional thoughts if you analysed some of the other LC books on our list, as compared to your favourites.

Glad to see Eebee from N.Z. offer to do a book report on a book that I am not familiar with.

I can guarantee that the best way for new LCarbers to learn how to apply this wonderful WOE and WOL is to try and right a book report on the Plan that they are interested, so that others may be able to understand how that plan works.

Regards
Joe

P.S. Andy how to you lose such large quantities of weight in such a short period. Do you REALLY think that it is safe to lose so quickly, based on everything that you have studied?

[Andy Davies]

Hi Joe,

I have been reminded by Eebee's timely appearance that this thread is supposed to be for discussing the comparison of LC diets in terms of how they are dealt with. We have strayed into a discussion of the detailed merits of different LC diets, which is a natural next step. However, in order to clear the way for what this thread was intended for, I will just say here that yes I am still happy about rate of weight loss, but that I will discuss it further in my Journal ("Another Way of Doing it?")

Welcome, Eebee, I liked your treatment of the diet you reviewed. Are Low Carbohydrate diets very popular in New Zealand?

[doreen T]

And this is why I love this forum so much :D

Discussions have such a wonderful, charming way of going off on such interesting tangents. Just like real conversations.

Doreen

[eebee]

No they aren't. We are constantly admonished by nutritionists that they are dangerous and we need to eat lots of carbs and low fat. I think they are starting to be tried here though, Atkins book is in all the shops and a fe wplaces sell low carb bars- which after reading about their lying labels I will not be buying any more.

[Bonnie]

Very interesting and informative thread...I think with all LC Plans that are out there one has to make an informative and personal commitment to exactly what they believe to be "gospel" that the LC authors of many of these books are presenting to the public...I personally have chosen to follow a LC Plan along the Eades guidelines but make it a point to read books by several authors to keep abreast of all viewpoints...am really looking forward to seeing this thread of the comparison of LC Diets come together...

Bonnie

[doreen T]

hey Bonnie!

:D :p :rolleyes: :o :D

I notice that nobody's volunteered to review Protein Power yet??? ;)

I too was following the original Protein Power pretty much to the letter, although the last few months I have cut the carbs back to Atkins' Induction Level. It was after reading YOUR description of the Eades' lastest book last fall --- Protein Power Lifeplan .. that I went right out and bought it. The science and research in it has helped me understand so much more about lowcarbing . and I like their writing style ... very "readable".

I'm currently reading Dr. Bernstein's Diabetes Solution ...

Anyway, we're certainly still open to receive reviews of many different plans and programs.

Doreen

[Andy Davies]

Hi Eebee,

We have exactly the same problem in the UK.

I have been trying to persuade the British Government to put a stop to a large number of operations in this country every year which I believe are unnecessary. These are such operations as wiring people's jaws together, stomach stapling, gastric bypass and inflating balloons in people's stomachs. The medical profession use this kind of operation to reduce the weight of people who would be in our "triple digit" club. My point is that such operations can be avoided by simply putting candidates onto a suitable low carbohydrate diet. The British Government, while sympathetic to any initiative aimed at reducing the rapidly-growing number of overweight people here as in the rest of the world, have expressed concern about low-carb diets. Apparently there is an international agreement to which the UK is a party that the amount of carbohydrates each person consumes be increased to a certain figure, higher than at present. On this basis, the Government feel unable to support my suggestions, because adopting them would contravene the agreed guidelines for carbohydrate consumption. Am I the crazy one? Surely these horrendous operations are far worse than contravening questionable guidelines? I have asked for more information from the Government, and depending what they say, I might be back to this forum in a few weeks asking what is known about this agreement elsewhere, and what sort of implementation other countries are imposing. I would certainly be interested to know about New Zealand, Australia, Canada and the USA. The worrying thing is that Governments take their advice from dieticians and doctors who all seem to promote the low-calorie and greater exercise regimens we know do not work, and they all dismiss our opinions as cranky, eccentric or weird. It seems from your post that the same applies in NZ.

[eebee]

Andy- I find this really interesting. As a public servent myself- in health funding -I can understand your frustration. They will have labeled you a crank! I am English too (emigrated in 1976 but still feel English). Government policy makers ( like me!!;) are not able to do the research themselves, they are administrators not clinicians. They (we!) are not experts in health only in health services admin. therefore must depend on experts in the field and so will always adopt the accepted theory. I think this is realistic- how could a bunch of bureaucrats make their own decisions on optimal health practices? So it is the clinicians that need convincing before government will accept the practice. I expect we in NZ are a party to the protocol you mention but I will ask my daughter to find out- she is a NZ diplomat so should be able to discover the relevant papers.

[Andy Davies]

eebee - fascinating. What you say makes perfect sense. The problem is those clinicians, who will definitely confirm to the British Government that I am a crank. I am working on ways to persuade them as well, but I find this leads to fragmentation - individual doctors can be impressed with evidence and stats, but the medical profession en masse remain unconvinced. The initials the Government official used were COMA, will try to find out more.

[IslandGirl]

have been working for some time on a common (Canada, USA, presumably Mexico) macronutrient and micronutrient "RDA" equivalent... they've been tackling the micronutrients one by one for the last couple of years and are (IIRC) to tackle the macronutrients this and next year. Consensus. By Committee. Labelling Laws to follow. Uh Oh.

I'll see what I can dig up from over here in the middle [grin!]

[Andy Davies]

Thanks Judi. I realise that this can become political, but the decision-makers need to know there are other opinions than the ones expressed by mainstream medical advisers. Frankly, I can't think of anything more likely to encourage large-scale weight gains than recommending a larger intake of carbohydrates.

[IslandGirl]

I agree... it already has been and IS political. I won't stop trying to affect that juggernaut process though, I'm too stubborn...

[Andy Davies]

Thanks Judi, I find your commitment very supportive of my own endavours. Often it feels like I'm battling alone, and hearing an answering voice like this is so reassuring. I get quite a lot of knocks, as I'm sure you do, but your words have reinforced my own resolve. Thanks.

[Andy Davies]

Wa'il,

(Or anyone else who has both books) Could you please tell me the original date of publication of the first Atkins book "Dr Atkins' Diet Revolution"? Also, are the Publishers the same as now? I need this info for my update on his diet. Thanks.

[tamarian]

The top line in the Publishing history shows:

"David McKay edition published Septemper 1972"

I think this is the first publication.

Wa'il

[Andy Davies]

Thanks.

[emcqueen]

:wave: :wave: :wave:
This idea is fantastic!!!!!!
Do we have any results yet? As a newby..I cant wait for every skeric (is that how you spell the tiniest amount) of info about all the plans. People keep telling me "...never heard of a diet that you couldn't eat fruit". As a big fruit eater(and I mean big3-4 pieces every day) in the past, I miss it....but I still feel full all the time. After a breakfast of bacon, egg and mushrooms, I am not interested in eating again until late at night ...but I do!!!! After 20 years of avoiding any fat/oil I cant wait to lose this weight to show them all!!!!!!!!! I need facts and figures to be able to argue with all the ^%$^&%$*% experts around me.
ELiz :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

[Natrushka]

Eliz, on the right of every page there's a column called "Quick Links" The comparison plans are there under "Which Low-Carb plan is right for me?"

Nat

[emcqueen]

Thanks, I'm on my way there now!!!
Eliz :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

[RamonaK]

Spending lazy day reading posts etc. I found this one.. and wanted to reply to Joe's first post about Dr. Atkins. I agree, he has some marketing company that came to him or vice verse and wanted the portion of the protein bar 'movement'. So now, he gets all markets. I have never tried one of his, I have eaten others.. not particulary fond of them, when I can eat real food, but they will do in a pinch. Also I am concerned about the hidden carb counts in these babies...

Ramona