Mercola's Twelve Reasons to Avoid the South Beach Diet

[nobimbo]

I want to point out that Dr. Mercola has his own agenda here (his own diet book), and his views are considered very controversial a lot of the time (he also disagrees with some of Atkin's ideas). I still thought this was worth posting:

Twelve Reasons to Avoid the South Beach Diet

By Dr. Joseph Mercola
with Brian Vaszily

Overall I believe The South Beach Diet’s success is a powerful influence in several important respects. With sales in the millions, The South Beach Diet has joined the groundbreaking Atkins Diet in prompting deeper inquiry into the value of low-carbohydrate dieting, and has been central to making lower-carb cuisine more widely available. Just as important, it has also helped to destroy the dangerous myth -- a myth that prevailed for thirty years -- that low-fat dieting is safe and effective.

That said -- and as a physician with over two decades of clinical experience who is highly respected for my dietary program, with a New York Times bestseller of my own, and most importantly, who maintains strict adherence to the Hippocratic oath to “first do no harm” -- I would never recommend The South Beach Diet to any of my patients. In fact, I’d like to warn everyone about the dangers of adopting Dr. Agatston’s popular diet.

If you know anyone on or considering The South Beach Diet, please forward this article to them so that they can make an informed decision
First, I have great respect for Rodale Press, the book’s publisher. They also publish Prevention Magazine, which I used to read regularly back in the 1970s (one of their articles in fact inspired me to select osteopathic medicine as opposed to a traditional M.D. school), and the www.prevention.com website, which is the number two natural health website on the Internet behind only my own, www.Mercola.com. Rodale is also an exceptionally astute and effective marketing company, which leads me to my first point:

“The South Beach Diet must be a worthwhile diet,” a widely prevalent logic goes, “or else it wouldn’t have sold millions of copies!”

By now Americans ought to know that just because something sells well it doesn’t mean that it’s worth buying, and yet the flawed logic above prevails. Bottom line is, the major reason for The South Beach Diet’s success is that Rodale has spent in excess of one million dollars per month to promote this book. A marketing budget of that size could turn a bicycle repair manual into a major bestseller.

What’s more, according to various reports that are easily accessible by searching Google, with all they’ve spent on marketing the book versus all the book’s sales, it is my understanding that Rodale has actually taken a loss on the book. They’re a clever company, though, and I believe that loss is only temporary, serving more so as an investment in their ever expanding publishing empire. But don’t be swayed by the book’s phenomenal sales -- there are many reasons for you to avoid jumping on the South Beach bandwagon. I list twelve important ones below that should be enough to help you think twice about this diet that is synonymous with “fad” (in all honesty, I could write an entire book pointing out how misguided Dr. Agatston’s diet is, but I am hoping twelve suffice here for you to think twice about this diet):

Reason 1: Gets the “Good” Carbs Wrong -- At the Risk of Many People’s Health

Dr. Agatston promotes the concept that I have long recommended and detail in my Total Health program -- there are good carbs that you should be consuming and bad carbs you should avoid. But then, on the simplest levels, he gets the “good” carbs wrong, including promoting both whole grain breads and fruits as good carbs. This advice can seriously impair the health of the millions of people in this country with sub clinical gluten sensitivity. It is also a prescription for disaster for the large number who have high carbohydrate sensitivity and struggle with controlling their insulin. It is best that ALL grains and sugars (fruits, as opposed to vegetables, have high sugar content) be avoided until insulin levels are normalized.

Reason 2: Severely Misguided Advice Can Lead to Dangerous Levels of Mercury and PCBs in You

Dr. Agatston recommends fish, displaying absolutely no understanding that nearly all fish from every type of water source are now contaminated with dangerous levels of mercury and PCBs from generations of water pollution from coal plants and other sources. Mercury and PCBs can lead to all kinds of very serious disease including neurological disorders. The dangerous levels of toxins in fish is not hearsay but a warning that has been issued by many health practitioners and major health and government agencies -- even the very conservative EPA advises pregnant women to avoid fish -- and I have witnessed the epidemic with thousands of patients in my own clinic. Either Agatston is not aware of this important issue or decided not to cover it; no mention is made that, to safely avoid the mercury and PCB issue in fish while still getting proper omega-3 intake, substituting clean sources of bottled or capsule fish oil is by far the wisest option. Additionally, a recent USA Today report suggested that it would cost over $90 a week to follow the misguided fish intake recommended by The South Beach Diet anyway.

Reason 3: Advice on Milk May Worsen a Common Allergy

Dr. Agaston freely advocates commercial pasteurized milk. He is obviously unaware of the major problems many people have with pasteurized casein and its prevalence as one of the most common food allergies (further, as he is positioning himself as a dietary expert, he should be aware and note that many people aren’t even yet aware they have this allergy). Though consuming raw (unpasteurized) milk is still a controversial topic, for some people many of the problems they experience with pasteurized milk disappear when they consume clean milk in its raw state (raw milk is becomingly increasingly available again). However, even in a clean, raw state many still are unable to tolerate it. Many should therefore avoid milk altogether. The point is, none of this essential information that impacts many people is covered in The South Beach Diet.

Reason 4: Buys Into the Old Myth of Saturated Fat -- at Your Expense

Dr. Agatston fortunately does not buy into the myth that eggs are bad (eggs can be quite healthy for you, especially organic eggs), but he is still under the delusion that saturated fat is bad for everyone. Like carbohydrates, though, some high quality saturated food is not merely okay but needs to be part of a truly healthy diet. What matters, as with carbs and all macronutrients, is that you are getting your saturated fat from a clean and healthy source such as organic virgin coconut oil. (Search “saturated fat” on Mercola.com for more on this issue.)

Reason 5: Recommends Aspartame ... Widely Recognized as a Health Hazard

Though NutraSweet/aspartame has been shown in many studies to be dangerous, linked to a wide range of diseases such as cancer and diabetes and various emotional disorders (read “Articles on Aspartame” on Mercola.com or input “aspartame” into the Mercola.com search engine), Dr. Agatston actually encourages its use in The South Beach Diet.

Reason 6: Dangerous Misguidance on a Serious Trans-Fat Issue

Perhaps Dr. Agatston’s most significant oversight is his lack of understanding of trans fats. Early in the book he states that trans-fats are dangerous and need to be avoided, yet on page 54 he makes the outrageous claim that French fries and potato chips are healthier choices than baked potatoes because of the “fat in which they’re cooked.” This is extremely dangerous misinformation, as French fries and potato chips tend to be profoundly high in trans fats and are amongst the unhealthiest foods on the planet.

I perceive this statement as irrefutable evidence of his nutritional ignorance. I can’t possibly imagine anyone with even a minimum amount of nutritional biochemical education making a recommendation like that. Although Dr. Agatston is a cardiologist as Dr. Atkins was, he was never part of the pioneering group of physicians who understood nutrition as it relates to health (which Atkins was). I have some disagreements with Dr. Atkin’s program, but they are relatively minor compared to my objections with The South Beach Diet. Dr. Atkins would never have advocated eating French fries or potato chips. These foods are the toxic equivalent of a cigarette and should be avoided like the plague.

Reason 7: Even More Misguidance on Fats

Further displaying his lack of knowledge on fats, Dr. Agatston promotes the use of synthetic margarines like “I Can’t Believe It’s Not Butter” (versus the healthier choice, real butter). He is not aware that the process of creating this type of margarine completely distorts the physical structure of its fats, making it nearly as dangerous as margarines that have trans-fats. He is apparently making this recommendation due to his phobia of saturated fat without realizing that, as mentioned above, some saturated fat -- such as healthy saturated fats that are found in raw organic butter and coconut oil -- are necessary for optimal health. Moreover, he classifies all unsaturated fats as healthy, obviously unaware that the high omega-6 unsaturated fat that causes a distortion of the omega 3:6 ratio is one of the major contributing factors to most chronic degenerative diseases.

Reason 8: The Lack of Nutritional Insight Can Be Carcinogenic!

Dr. Agaston continues to display his lack of nutritional awareness by advocating peanut butter on page 49 as a good source of monounsaturated fat and the polyphenolic bioflavanoid, resveratrol. While I am a fan of both of these nutritional items, it is very important to pay attention to the quality of the peanut butter, and the type of peanuts in general. He does advise to avoid peanut butters with added sugar and to use only all-natural peanut butter (though he ought to expand a bit on why -- peanuts are probably the crop most heavily sprayed with pesticides in the world, for instance). But he fails to mention one of the most serious peanut issues of all and make recommendations accordingly: most peanuts are very susceptible to contamination by afflatoxin, a carcinogenic mold spore, and so you should seek to restrict peanut butter (and any type of peanut product) consumption to Valencia peanuts only. This species grows in dry climates, which seriously restricts the growth of afflatoxin. Fortunately, Arrowhead Mills Organic Peanut Butter (which you can find in many stores now) meets both qualifications.

Reason 9: An Effective Diet Can Eliminate Dependency on Statins, but This One Does Not

Dr. Agatston is still absolutely unaware of the power of an optimized diet to normalize cholesterol, as he still takes a statin drug to lower his own cholesterol and is apparently unaware of the many dangers associated with statin drugs. It is quite possible to avoid statin drugs and supplements to normalize cholesterol levels, and my patients have experienced this success by following my own Total Health Program. I encourage Dr. Agatston to give my program a try as well so he can get off the statin drugs and avoid their risks.

Reason 10: Many Will Not Even Temporarily Lose Weight

The South Beach Diet is a one-size-fits-all diet that completely ignores the fact that we have different genetic requirements for optimal health ... one-size-fits-all diets never work for all, or even close to all. Because of their biochemistry, some people actually need a high carb diet (with limited or no grains), while others require the low-carb, high-protein diet that Dr. Atkinson advocates.

This is the principle of “metabolic typing,” and explains why one person will lose weight on a low-carb diet (though, as covered throughout this article, they may not necessarily improve their health or lose it permanently, unless it is a healthy low-carb diet) while another person will not lose any on the identical diet. To understand this principle in more detail and learn your own metabolic type so you can optimize your efforts at truly effective weight loss and improve your health while you are at it, I urge you to read “Modify Your Diet So You Feel Terrific” on Mercola.com, or type in “metabolic typing” on the Mercola.com search engine.

The South Beach Diet also contains a serious lack of appropriate guidance on the Glycemic Index. Dr. Agatston relies on this index as a tool in weight loss, but I have found it anything besides useful, as it contains far, far too many exceptions to be of any value. A classic example is fructose, which has a very low glycemic index yet has been clearly established as a major reason why many people are overweight. If you follow Dr. Agaston’s advice in this regard you will be going down the weight gain path for sure. This is also an issue with some of the low glycemic index foods like chocolate, cherries, and apple juice, which we know should be avoided if you want to lose weight, yet would seem to have nearly unlimited access to if you follow The South Beach Diet.

Reason 11: Too Lax on the Exercise for Most Readers

Exercise is a critical part of any permanent weight loss regime, but Dr. Agatston’s advice on exercise is highly debatable. While I absolutely agree with his central thesis that we don’t need to train like an Olympic hopeful and that 20 minutes a day is sufficient, this advice is only for people who are already in shape. Most people in this country, and likely even a higher proportion of those reading a weight loss book, have developed a serious exercise deficiency and will need far higher levels of exercise to make a significant influence on up-regulating the body’s metabolic machinery to burn fats continuously, especially while one sleeps.

Reason 12: Most Will NOT Lose Weight Permanently with this Diet

The book is subtitled, The Delicious, Doctor-Designed, Foolproof Plan for Fast and Healthy Weight Loss, but I suspect many people buying the book care much more about the weight loss aspect than the “healthy” aspect. As you can figure out from points above, the diet has very little to do with improving your health anyway, and can lead you in the opposite direction.

Even in terms of losing weight, though, the book might succeed for some in the short-term like many fad diets, but most will not permanently lose weight. Agatston even alludes to this in the chapter entitled “Why Do People Occasionally Fail on This Diet?” though he seems to demonstrate just more lack of insight on the real “why” in that chapter.

By far the main reason most people will fail at losing weight permanently on this diet (and many other popular diets) is because no real solutions have been presented for the emotional challenges that come with dieting ... and those challenges are, far more than knowing what is right and wrong, the biggest challenges of all.

There are solutions to the emotional challenges such as cravings, food addictions, self-image issues and the other self-sabotaging behavior (I encourage you to search Mercola.com for more on this topic), so it is extremely distressing that in Dr. Agatston’s program -- and in this day and age in any dietary program -- these weren’t covered effectively.

In short, even if The South Beach Diet’s nutritional recommendations were solid -- and they are by no means solid -- without covering the emotional component, adherents to the diet are left with a void where some of the most important advice to them should be. Therefore, most who “swear by” the diet because it helped them shed a few pounds in the short-term will ultimately end up where they started before The South Beach Diet ... that is, desperate for real help and a prime target for yet another heavily marketed fad diet book promising the world but delivering dust.

Dr. Joseph Mercola is the founder of Mercola.com, the world’s most visited natural/alternative health website with over 36,000 pages of health information and the free Mercola.com health & wellness e-newsletter. He is also the director of The Optimal Wellness Center in Chicago, one of the nation’s leading natural health clinics, and a New York Times bestselling author whose latest book, The Total Health Cookbook & Program, presents his entire renowned dietary health program. An Illinois licensed medical physician, he is trained in both conventional and natural healthcare, and has been in practice over two decades. Prior to The Optimal Wellness Center, he was Chairman of the Department of Family Practice at St. Alexius Hospital in Illinois for five years. He has been interviewed and profiled extensively for his health and dietary expertise, including ABC’s World News Tonight, CNN, CBS, ABC, NBC, and Fox TV shows across the nation.

http://www.mercola.com/2004/jun/9/south_beach.htm

[dazzlin182]

interesting

[Nelson]

I am really sceptical of this type of hysterical screed! Mercola always seems to me to be a self-promoting zealot who wants everyone to believe the he and he alone can lead us all to nutritional salvation. He really sounds unhinged at times!

[LilaCotton]

I agree Mercola can be radical, but reading through his 12 reasons, every one of them makes sense. I'm sure we can all see those very claims are backed up in The South Beach Diet book. ;)

Yes, the man has an agenda, and he has his own diet to sell. But I think his points are very valid on this one.

[potatofree]

They don't ALL make sense to me, but there are a few kernels of food for thought in there.

[Nancy LC]

Well, he spends about the first 6 or so paragraphs promoting his book and web site and then criticizing Rodale Press for promoting the SBD book. Reason #5 is pretty much pure nonsense for anyone other than the folks that have to avoid aspartame for amino acid reasons. He acts as if its an accepted fact, and it isn't... far from it.

If you ask me, it's a case of diet doctor envy. He probably wishes he were getting Dr. Agaston's royalty check.

[woodpecker]

In reading the South Beach Diet it was obvious to me that Agaston was struggling with a number of issues where he was out of his depth. Agaston does understand the connection between sugar and insulin, but then fumbles the ball many times. I am surprised that Mercola didn't mention that low fat milk is also recommended in this diet. Is it even really a low-carb diet or a mish-mash of something else?

Mercola is definitely a crusader and an extremist. He can hardly honestly criticize anyone else for the cost of their diet when he is recommending organic buffalo meat and juicing 3 pounds of organic vegetables a day. However, I agree with much of what he says except I note the following. Many small fish, including small tuna (according to Dr. Julian Whitaker) are not significantly compromised by mercury and other contaminants (point 2). French fries and potato chips are often now cooked in unsaturated fats, not trans fats - although this was not true when Agaston wrote the diet (point 6). (However, there is still an acrylamide problem). You can hardly blame Agaston for boosting unsaturated fats (point 7) as the Harvard University Pyramid is flogging these and this seems to be a situation totally arising from the work of Mary Enig and the Weston Price Foundation. Mercola himself says that the final story on fats is not in yet.

I have no doubt that Mercola is on to some good things, but fanaticism of all types can be very destructive. Witness Mercola's about-turn on how many glasses of water we should drink a day. After hammering home that you should drink water until you float, he suddenly presents a new position as if he figured it out himself. http://www.mercola.com/2004/may/5/eight_glasses_water.htm

Yes, there is some crass self-promotion here and I don't believe Mercola's book was on the NY Times Best Seller list for long. (Note that he doesn't say how many weeks - one week?)

[dazzlin182]

very enlighting to read some posts here (esp. from those who are not even on south beach)

as a sbder that has lost weight on it, im not tryin to justify this plan or whatever, as it is, what i found, is a basic, relax eating plan that emphasize on what are oks and what nots (just like other eating plans).

reading this guy's post i do think he has points - its good to see other people's persepective (esp. from someone that is in the similar business to what dr. agatston is in)

the use of synthetic margarines like “I Can’t Believe It’s Not Butter” (versus the healthier choice, real butter).
when it comes to plans or woe i think whats best is still balls down on what works (or available) to a person. e.g for me i use light butter instead of margarine and avoid aspartame cuz its laxative effect

imho once you adapt to your new eating style you can simply add or draw few things or something (that may not be listed on the plan) as i can see many people do have their own customized plan - food choices people made is the result of what suit them best.

i do agree about the organic coconut oil that isnt listed on south beach can be beneficial.

He does advise to avoid peanut butters with added sugar and to use only all-natural peanut butter (though he ought to expand a bit on why -- peanuts are probably the crop most heavily sprayed with pesticides in the world, for instance)
regardless of what plans you guys on - what type of peanut butter do you use? definitely one with no sugar? mine is sf and natural (organic) cuz i thought the processed/regular peanut butter has transfat/hydrogenated? so which one to use - natural or regular?

It is best that ALL grains and sugars (fruits, as opposed to vegetables, have high sugar content) be avoided until insulin levels are normalized.
i did read something in the book re: phase 1 is to resolve insulin resistance but not sure whether it could normalized insulin levels. expert knowledge welcomed

south beach has revised version and there are few foods/facts been added to it (e.g. from chat transcript with dr. agatson)

Buys Into the Old Myth of Saturated Fat -- at Your Expense
Dr. Agatston fortunately does not buy into the myth that eggs are bad
txmom:If we stay on Phase 1 for 3-4 weeks is it safe to consume eggs every morning?

Yes, the latest evidence is that eggs are good for us--even the yolk, which actually has Vitamin e and other important nutrients. The Harvard School of Public Health has done studies showing seven eggs a week are fine. They did not study higher numbers. Eggs usually increase the good cholesterol out of proportion to the bad. If you have a history of a cholesterol problem and are consuming a great deal of eggs you should recheck your cholesterol.

Advice on Milk May Worsen a Common Allergy
odinks: What do I substitute for all of the dairy products in SBD. I am highly allergic.
Lean meats, nuts, beans, and lentils supply protein. If avoiding dairy products, I would also suggest a dairy supplement.

i may have read the book twice but always open to feedbacks

as we're always looking for reasons, tryin to find ways to improve our woe - whatever facts that dr. agatston may not mention in the original or revised version, fwiw expert comments are welcomed

cheers shaz

[Angeline]

Well, he spends about the first 6 or so paragraphs promoting his book and web site and then criticizing Rodale Press for promoting the SBD book.

Actually he spends the first 6 paragraphs complaining about how much money they have to throw at this promotion thing. Guess he wishes he had the same deep pockets :)

[skpaddie]

I got the South Beach diet book free with a magazine so I can see how they must have made a loss. I agree with a lot of his points, having read the book I decided to stick to Atkins.

[PacNW]

Mecola's website is at www.mercola.com. It is at least thought provoking, if a bit out there. I am not sure this guy is a real Dr. He seems driven to use his newsletter this morning to tout his own "No-Grain" diet book. But Mercola's stuff criticizing SBD should resonate somewhat with those on Atkins: "good carbs," sat fats, trans fats, syntehtic butter, statins, etc.

http://www.mercola.com/2004/jun/9/south_beach.htm

Twelve Reasons to Avoid the South Beach Diet

By Dr. Joseph Mercola
with Brian Vaszily

Overall I believe The South Beach Diet’s success is a powerful influence in several important respects. With sales in the millions, The South Beach Diet has joined the groundbreaking Atkins Diet in prompting deeper inquiry into the value of low-carbohydrate dieting, and has been central to making lower-carb cuisine more widely available. Just as important, it has also helped to destroy the dangerous myth -- a myth that prevailed for thirty years -- that low-fat dieting is safe and effective.

That said -- and as a physician with over two decades of clinical experience who is highly respected for my dietary program, with a New York Times bestseller of my own, and most importantly, who maintains strict adherence to the Hippocratic oath to “first do no harm” -- I would never recommend The South Beach Diet to any of my patients. In fact, I’d like to warn everyone about the dangers of adopting Dr. Agatston’s popular diet.
If you know anyone on or considering The South Beach Diet, please forward this article to them so that they can make an informed decision

First, I have great respect for Rodale Press, the book’s publisher. They also publish Prevention Magazine, which I used to read regularly back in the 1970s (one of their articles in fact inspired me to select osteopathic medicine as opposed to a traditional M.D. school), and the www.prevention.com website, which is the number two natural health website on the Internet behind only my own, www.Mercola.com. Rodale is also an exceptionally astute and effective marketing company, which leads me to my first point:

“The South Beach Diet must be a worthwhile diet,” a widely prevalent logic goes, “or else it wouldn’t have sold millions of copies!”

By now Americans ought to know that just because something sells well it doesn’t mean that it’s worth buying, and yet the flawed logic above prevails. Bottom line is, the major reason for The South Beach Diet’s success is that Rodale has spent in excess of one million dollars per month to promote this book. A marketing budget of that size could turn a bicycle repair manual into a major bestseller.

What’s more, according to various reports that are easily accessible by searching Google, with all they’ve spent on marketing the book versus all the book’s sales, it is my understanding that Rodale has actually taken a loss on the book. They’re a clever company, though, and I believe that loss is only temporary, serving more so as an investment in their ever expanding publishing empire. But don’t be swayed by the book’s phenomenal sales -- there are many reasons for you to avoid jumping on the South Beach bandwagon. I list twelve important ones below that should be enough to help you think twice about this diet that is synonymous with “fad” (in all honesty, I could write an entire book pointing out how misguided Dr. Agatston’s diet is, but I am hoping twelve suffice here for you to think twice about this diet):

Reason 1: Gets the “Good” Carbs Wrong -- At the Risk of Many People’s Health

Dr. Agatston promotes the concept that I have long recommended and detail in my Total Health program -- there are good carbs that you should be consuming and bad carbs you should avoid. But then, on the simplest levels, he gets the “good” carbs wrong, including promoting both whole grain breads and fruits as good carbs. This advice can seriously impair the health of the millions of people in this country with sub clinical gluten sensitivity. It is also a prescription for disaster for the large number who have high carbohydrate sensitivity and struggle with controlling their insulin. It is best that ALL grains and sugars (fruits, as opposed to vegetables, have high sugar content) be avoided until insulin levels are normalized.

Reason 2: Severely Misguided Advice Can Lead to Dangerous Levels of Mercury and PCBs in You

Dr. Agatston recommends fish, displaying absolutely no understanding that nearly all fish from every type of water source are now contaminated with dangerous levels of mercury and PCBs from generations of water pollution from coal plants and other sources. Mercury and PCBs can lead to all kinds of very serious disease including neurological disorders. The dangerous levels of toxins in fish is not hearsay but a warning that has been issued by many health practitioners and major health and government agencies -- even the very conservative EPA advises pregnant women to avoid fish -- and I have witnessed the epidemic with thousands of patients in my own clinic. Either Agatston is not aware of this important issue or decided not to cover it; no mention is made that, to safely avoid the mercury and PCB issue in fish while still getting proper omega-3 intake, substituting clean sources of bottled or capsule fish oil is by far the wisest option. Additionally, a recent USA Today report suggested that it would cost over $90 a week to follow the misguided fish intake recommended by The South Beach Diet anyway.

Reason 3: Advice on Milk May Worsen a Common Allergy

Dr. Agaston freely advocates commercial pasteurized milk. He is obviously unaware of the major problems many people have with pasteurized casein and its prevalence as one of the most common food allergies (further, as he is positioning himself as a dietary expert, he should be aware and note that many people aren’t even yet aware they have this allergy). Though consuming raw (unpasteurized) milk is still a controversial topic, for some people many of the problems they experience with pasteurized milk disappear when they consume clean milk in its raw state (raw milk is becomingly increasingly available again). However, even in a clean, raw state many still are unable to tolerate it. Many should therefore avoid milk altogether. The point is, none of this essential information that impacts many people is covered in The South Beach Diet.

Reason 4: Buys Into the Old Myth of Saturated Fat -- at Your Expense

Dr. Agatston fortunately does not buy into the myth that eggs are bad (eggs can be quite healthy for you, especially organic eggs), but he is still under the delusion that saturated fat is bad for everyone. Like carbohydrates, though, some high quality saturated food is not merely okay but needs to be part of a truly healthy diet. What matters, as with carbs and all macronutrients, is that you are getting your saturated fat from a clean and healthy source such as organic virgin coconut oil. (Search “saturated fat” on Mercola.com for more on this issue.)

Reason 5: Recommends Aspartame ... Widely Recognized as a Health Hazard

Though NutraSweet/aspartame has been shown in many studies to be dangerous, linked to a wide range of diseases such as cancer and diabetes and various emotional disorders (read “Articles on Aspartame” on Mercola.com or input “aspartame” into the Mercola.com search engine), Dr. Agatston actually encourages its use in The South Beach Diet.

Reason 6: Dangerous Misguidance on a Serious Trans-Fat Issue

Perhaps Dr. Agatston’s most significant oversight is his lack of understanding of trans fats. Early in the book he states that trans-fats are dangerous and need to be avoided, yet on page 54 he makes the outrageous claim that French fries and potato chips are healthier choices than baked potatoes because of the “fat in which they’re cooked.” This is extremely dangerous misinformation, as French fries and potato chips tend to be profoundly high in trans fats and are amongst the unhealthiest foods on the planet.

I perceive this statement as irrefutable evidence of his nutritional ignorance. I can’t possibly imagine anyone with even a minimum amount of nutritional biochemical education making a recommendation like that. Although Dr. Agatston is a cardiologist as Dr. Atkins was, he was never part of the pioneering group of physicians who understood nutrition as it relates to health (which Atkins was). I have some disagreements with Dr. Atkin’s program, but they are relatively minor compared to my objections with The South Beach Diet. Dr. Atkins would never have advocated eating French fries or potato chips. These foods are the toxic equivalent of a cigarette and should be avoided like the plague.

Seeking more insider's insight like this and solid advice on health & dietary issues that really matter to you? Subscribe to the FREE Mercola.com "eHealthy News You Can Use" e-newsletter … now the world's most popular natural health newsletter with over 225,000 subscribers!

You will also receive a FREE special report on "The Dangers of Grains & Sugars," so click below for the free twice-weekly "eHealthy News You Can Use" now!

Reason 7: Even More Misguidance on Fats

Further displaying his lack of knowledge on fats, Dr. Agatston promotes the use of synthetic margarines like “I Can’t Believe It’s Not Butter” (versus the healthier choice, real butter). He is not aware that the process of creating this type of margarine completely distorts the physical structure of its fats, making it nearly as dangerous as margarines that have trans-fats. He is apparently making this recommendation due to his phobia of saturated fat without realizing that, as mentioned above, some saturated fat -- such as healthy saturated fats that are found in raw organic butter and coconut oil -- are necessary for optimal health. Moreover, he classifies all unsaturated fats as healthy, obviously unaware that the high omega-6 unsaturated fat that causes a distortion of the omega 3:6 ratio is one of the major contributing factors to most chronic degenerative diseases.

Reason 8: The Lack of Nutritional Insight Can Be Carcinogenic!

Dr. Agaston continues to display his lack of nutritional awareness by advocating peanut butter on page 49 as a good source of monounsaturated fat and the polyphenolic bioflavanoid, resveratrol. While I am a fan of both of these nutritional items, it is very important to pay attention to the quality of the peanut butter, and the type of peanuts in general. He does advise to avoid peanut butters with added sugar and to use only all-natural peanut butter (though he ought to expand a bit on why -- peanuts are probably the crop most heavily sprayed with pesticides in the world, for instance). But he fails to mention one of the most serious peanut issues of all and make recommendations accordingly: most peanuts are very susceptible to contamination by afflatoxin, a carcinogenic mold spore, and so you should seek to restrict peanut butter (and any type of peanut product) consumption to Valencia peanuts only. This species grows in dry climates, which seriously restricts the growth of afflatoxin. Fortunately, Arrowhead Mills Organic Peanut Butter (which you can find in many stores now) meets both qualifications.

Reason 9: An Effective Diet Can Eliminate Dependency on Statins, but This One Does Not

Dr. Agatston is still absolutely unaware of the power of an optimized diet to normalize cholesterol, as he still takes a statin drug to lower his own cholesterol and is apparently unaware of the many dangers associated with statin drugs. It is quite possible to avoid statin drugs and supplements to normalize cholesterol levels, and my patients have experienced this success by following my own Total Health Program. I encourage Dr. Agatston to give my program a try as well so he can get off the statin drugs and avoid their risks.

Reason 10: Many Will Not Even Temporarily Lose Weight

The South Beach Diet is a one-size-fits-all diet that completely ignores the fact that we have different genetic requirements for optimal health ... one-size-fits-all diets never work for all, or even close to all. Because of their biochemistry, some people actually need a high carb diet (with limited or no grains), while others require the low-carb, high-protein diet that Dr. Atkinson advocates.

This is the principle of “metabolic typing,” and explains why one person will lose weight on a low-carb diet (though, as covered throughout this article, they may not necessarily improve their health or lose it permanently, unless it is a healthy low-carb diet) while another person will not lose any on the identical diet. To understand this principle in more detail and learn your own metabolic type so you can optimize your efforts at truly effective weight loss and improve your health while you are at it, I urge you to read “Modify Your Diet So You Feel Terrific” on Mercola.com, or type in “metabolic typing” on the Mercola.com search engine.

The South Beach Diet also contains a serious lack of appropriate guidance on the Glycemic Index. Dr. Agatston relies on this index as a tool in weight loss, but I have found it anything besides useful, as it contains far, far too many exceptions to be of any value. A classic example is fructose, which has a very low glycemic index yet has been clearly established as a major reason why many people are overweight. If you follow Dr. Agaston’s advice in this regard you will be going down the weight gain path for sure. This is also an issue with some of the low glycemic index foods like chocolate, cherries, and apple juice, which we know should be avoided if you want to lose weight, yet would seem to have nearly unlimited access to if you follow The South Beach Diet.

Reason 11: Too Lax on the Exercise for Most Readers

Exercise is a critical part of any permanent weight loss regime, but Dr. Agatston’s advice on exercise is highly debatable. While I absolutely agree with his central thesis that we don’t need to train like an Olympic hopeful and that 20 minutes a day is sufficient, this advice is only for people who are already in shape. Most people in this country, and likely even a higher proportion of those reading a weight loss book, have developed a serious exercise deficiency and will need far higher levels of exercise to make a significant influence on up-regulating the body’s metabolic machinery to burn fats continuously, especially while one sleeps.

Reason 12: Most Will NOT Lose Weight Permanently with this Diet

The book is subtitled, The Delicious, Doctor-Designed, Foolproof Plan for Fast and Healthy Weight Loss, but I suspect many people buying the book care much more about the weight loss aspect than the “healthy” aspect. As you can figure out from points above, the diet has very little to do with improving your health anyway, and can lead you in the opposite direction.

Even in terms of losing weight, though, the book might succeed for some in the short-term like many fad diets, but most will not permanently lose weight. Agatston even alludes to this in the chapter entitled “Why Do People Occasionally Fail on This Diet?” though he seems to demonstrate just more lack of insight on the real “why” in that chapter.

By far the main reason most people will fail at losing weight permanently on this diet (and many other popular diets) is because no real solutions have been presented for the emotional challenges that come with dieting ... and those challenges are, far more than knowing what is right and wrong, the biggest challenges of all.

There are solutions to the emotional challenges such as cravings, food addictions, self-image issues and the other self-sabotaging behavior (I encourage you to search Mercola.com for more on this topic), so it is extremely distressing that in Dr. Agatston’s program -- and in this day and age in any dietary program -- these weren’t covered effectively.

In short, even if The South Beach Diet’s nutritional recommendations were solid -- and they are by no means solid -- without covering the emotional component, adherents to the diet are left with a void where some of the most important advice to them should be. Therefore, most who “swear by” the diet because it helped them shed a few pounds in the short-term will ultimately end up where they started before The South Beach Diet ... that is, desperate for real help and a prime target for yet another heavily marketed fad diet book promising the world but delivering dust.

Dr. Joseph Mercola is the founder of Mercola.com, the world’s most visited natural/alternative health website with over 36,000 pages of health information and the free Mercola.com health & wellness e-newsletter. He is also the director of The Optimal Wellness Center in Chicago, one of the nation’s leading natural health clinics, and a New York Times bestselling author whose latest book, The Total Health Cookbook & Program, presents his entire renowned dietary health program. An Illinois licensed medical physician, he is trained in both conventional and natural healthcare, and has been in practice over two decades. Prior to The Optimal Wellness Center, he was Chairman of the Department of Family Practice at St. Alexius Hospital in Illinois for five years. He has been interviewed and profiled extensively for his health and dietary expertise, including ABC’s World News Tonight, CNN, CBS, ABC, NBC, and Fox TV shows across the nation.

Brian Vaszily is the editorial director of Mercola.com and co-author of Dr. Mercola’s Total Health Cookbook & Program.

[beeshoney1]

Honestly, the reasons he outlined were the same reasons I chose Atkins over South Beach. Of course he does seem as if he has an axe to grind with the Dr. Agatston but the article did strike a chord with me especially in relation to dairy and whole grains.

[dazzlin182]

I got the South Beach diet book free with a magazine so I can see how they must have made a loss.
not tryin to imply, or anythin, but few years back i picked up the first "sex and the city" book when i bought a UK-based magazine here (been an avid reader of books, magazines and spent lot of time weekends at the book store - i noticed they like to bundle 'worth-reading' or 'worth-trying' or maybe (like claimed) 'not making any profits' free stuff e.g cds, starter kits type of thing with mostly being books). sex and the city was then a hit tv series where millions (not just in the u.s but around the world) were watching and the original author, candance bushnell since then had published more books the-like in the period of 2-3 years (e.g. 4 blondes, trading up), due to the overwhelming success of sex and city that was once given away for free....

cheers

[skpaddie]

it was defiently the real one, i have a friend who bought it. Granted the magazine was pretty expensive. It was about 2 years ago though.

[ItsTheWooo]

The amount of people in the population who need a very low carbohydrate diet is fairly small. Most people live a lifestyle & have the metabolic needs for low-moderate amount of high nutrition complex carbohydrates as part of a balanced meal. I think for the average person with a reasonably active lifestyle (I don't think sedentary people would do well on SB) and no/minimal symptoms of having sugar metabolism pathology (tendency towards only being slightly overweight or being lean, a good cardiac profile, no glucose tolerance/energy balance issues, etc), eating south beach would be very healthy for them.

The same goes for his position on aspartame/pasteurized milk/moldy peanuts/soy/etc... while there is a certain minority subset of the population who needs to abstain or avoid these products, to say these products should be abstained from by and are unhealthy for *everyone* is quite the illogical leap to make from there. The average person has very little problem metabolizing complex carbohydrates, dealing with aspartame, soy isoflavones, pasteurized milk, or any of the other substances Mercola crusades against. We are all individuals, and therefore one diet isn't right for everyone. If SB doesn't work for you because of your individual physiology, it doesn't mean it's bad, it just might be bad for you. Maybe you would do better on a more carb-restrictive plan instead, like Atkins.

One curious thing Mercola doesn't mention is the fact that a certain subset of the population is what Dr. Atkins calls "fat sensitive", meaning they don't do as well on a high fat diet as others do. Up to 1/3 of the population is, as described by Atkins, fat sensitive. SB would probably be really good for fat-sensitive types who want to be healthy. Does this mean fat & sat fat should be abstained from by everyone? Of course not! Some people, myself included, do quite well on a high fat diet. I don't do well with high complex carbs though. Other - in fact most - people have no problems with fat or carbs. Since eating as wide of a variety diet as possible is the most health promoting action to take, the majority of people do best on a moderate complex carbs & moderate fat diet.

Personally, I think Dr. Mercola is concerned mostly with promoting his naturalist philosophy and less with actually improving the health of people. I don't see how else he can justify his irrational nutritional advice. He selectively crusades against allergens... those allergens which are considered "unnatural" he rails on about but ones which are natural yet known to have adverse reactions (such as fat) he is silent about.

[simplydawn]

Mercola scares me! LOL.. I am slightly serious.. when I began massage school, the nutritionist teacher at that time.. (several years ago) was a Mercola Groupie.. she just thought His word was equivelant to God's...and at first, in her class..she presented her 'cases' in such manners that sorta made sense in a FIRE ALARM kinda way...

http://www.bbc-systems.com/site/images/pro_images/fire.jpg

Balance. Balance. Balance...

[Turtle2003]

I think for the average person with a reasonably active lifestyle (I don't think sedentary people would do well on SB) and no/minimal symptoms of having sugar metabolism pathology (tendency towards only being slightly overweight or being lean, a good cardiac profile, no glucose tolerance/energy balance issues, etc), eating south beach would be very healthy for them.

Can't be too many people like that in this country. The average person in this country lives an extremely sedentary lifestyle. If you doubt that, go take a seat at your local mall or Walmart and watch people waddle by.

[bluesmoke]

des have referred to studies suggesting that 75% of the population have some degree of insulin resistence, hardly a small number.
If you wish to consume these things, fine, it's your body. Wanting your beliefs to be universally true doesn't make them so, unsupported statements are not facts. nyah levi

[LCanita]

I like Dr. Mercola and subscribe to most of what he says. As much as possible I buy grass-fed beef, free range chicken, and never purchase farm raised fish. I buy mostly organic fruits and vegetables, and virtually no grains or sugars. No, I am not nearly as neurotic and exclusive as he is, but my husband and I have made many changes in our diet which we believe are for the better. (My husband's allergies are virtually gone, I've lost weight, and am no longer on a prescription hypertension medication, although that is on a trial basis.)

However, that's us. Most people are unwilling or unable to do these things, and the small changes brought about by South Beach in a healthier direction are a good thing.

Also, the Drs. Eades of Protein Power basically agree with Dr. Mercola on most if not all of these issues, if you desire optimum health. But they even admit that they don't adhere 100% to their own recommendations. They enjoy wine and fully leaded coffee and other treats from time to time. This, I believe is a rational approach.

Each of us must decide how far we are willing to go and how much benefit we may derive from these dietary changes.

What is important is to have the discussion and for us to have the information given to us so that we can make the decision for ourselves. I appreciate that Dr. Mercola is willing to go out on some limbs with some positions which may not agree with the mainstream. In that regard he has a LOT in common with our revered Dr. Atkins. :)

[ItsTheWooo]

I think for the average person with a reasonably active lifestyle (I don't think sedentary people would do well on SB) and no/minimal symptoms of having sugar metabolism pathology (tendency towards only being slightly overweight or being lean, a good cardiac profile, no glucose tolerance/energy balance issues, etc), eating south beach would be very healthy for them.

Can't be too many people like that in this country. The average person in this country lives an extremely sedentary lifestyle. If you doubt that, go take a seat at your local mall or Walmart and watch people waddle by.

I don't know how accurate it is to look at a fat person and assume they don't move at all. For example, my cousin weighs 250 lbs on her 5'3 frame. She is clearly very obese. However, she does tons of physical work... she walks everywhere & does a lot of heavy lifting and stuff as a consequence of her profession. More than the average person I should think. So why is she so fat? Easy. She eats a LOT of calories, a LOT of starch, and is very insulin resistant. She's got that famous insulin resistance belly, and I'm sure she must be borderline diabetic (she had gestational diabetes which is not a good sign).

If you don't have reason to believe you are genetically susceptible to insulin resistance (no personal or familial history of obesity, sugar problems, heart problems) and if you live a lifestyle with reasonable amounts of activity, I don't see the reason why you can't enjoy a diet complete with moderate amounts of complex carbs.

[Nelson]

Also, the Drs. Eades of Protein Power basically agree with Dr. Mercola on most if not all of these issues, if you desire optimum health. But they even admit that they don't adhere 100% to their own recommendations. They enjoy wine and fully leaded coffee and other treats from time to time. This, I believe is a rational approach.

You have a point. I have read both of the PP books and am comfortable following most of their recommendations. It's really Mercola's style that I find most off-putting. I believe that I am among those people who really do better on a no-grain diet, just as he recommends; but he gets so hysterical about it! Since many people need to avoid grains, he acts as if everyone needs to avoid them or die!

I am beginning to think that the human animal is just "hard-wired" for extremism. It simplifies things and helps the world make sense. As more and more of us abandon religious belief in a conventional, anthropomorphic God-based sense, we replace it with extreme food issues, or extreme environmental positions, or political positions, or what-have-you. It probably stems from our ancient genetic bias toward narrative which is at the heart of human communication.

Hmmmm. Maybe I should look into the paleolithic diet.

[woodpecker]

Nelson, actually, I think the paleolithic diet is worth looking at. I do hate killing furrry little animals tho.

[Nelson]

I know! I actually tried lacto-ovo vegetarianism for a couple of years, but I did not thrive. I am much healthier eating adequate meat proteins.

But I still love animals, even cows, chickens, etc., and hate to dwell on what my diet requires.

Presumably, the paleo/neanderthal/hunter-gatherer diets don't require that you actually find and kill your own meals, of course.

[mio1996]

Everyone should look into the paleolithic diet (neanderthin, specifically). Mercola's reasons for disliking SBD are about the same as mine, although I don't really agree with metabolic typing. The fact that SBD promotes using statins (and that the author uses them himself) shows that EVEN THE AUTHOR does not believe in his own program's effectiveness to reduce heart disease risk.

[CindySue48]

The fact that SBD promotes using statins (and that the author uses them himself) shows that EVEN THE AUTHOR does not believe in his own program's effectiveness to reduce heart disease risk.

Really? I did not know that!

[woodpecker]

To both Nelson and CindySue (and anyone else):

What is your take on genetic engineering? Apparently, science can now make meat out of vegetables. It's not future - its happening now. What do you think (e.g., mushrooms that taste like beef)? Presumably, they could be made low-carb too.

[DebPenny]

The problem with making "meat" out of vegetables, is that it may taste like meat, but it doesn't have a "complete" protein. That's one of the hardest things to get on a vegetarian diet. That's why they devised combining for vegetarians so they could get the full range of essential amino acids.

When I'm calculating my protein, fat, and carb intakes, I don't even count the "protein" in vegetables, except as calories. IMO: unless they can "engineer" vegetables to have the complete set of essential amino acids, I wouldn't count on them to solve any food shortages.

I find it interesting that when they talk about engineering vegetables like corn to have a higher percentage of protein that they never talk about the fact that it's still deficient (totally lacking) in the full range of essential amino acids (proteins).

[CindySue48]

To both Nelson and CindySue (and anyone else):

What is your take on genetic engineering? Apparently, science can now make meat out of vegetables. It's not future - its happening now. What do you think (e.g., mushrooms that taste like beef)? Presumably, they could be made low-carb too.

I'm not a fan of genetic engineering. Selective breeding and cross breading I have no problem with....that's working with nature. Genetic engineering is, in my opinion, working against nature.

[MyJourney]

I pretty much decided against the SBD for similar reasons. I think mercola is a bit out there, but I do agree with him on many points.

On the french fry thing, from what I understand most (if not all) fast food places still use partially hydrogenated veg oils to deep fry their foods in. The reason would be a longer shelf life, if they used plain veg oil it would oxidize way too quickly and they wouldnt be able to reuse the oil the way they do.

I am totally against Statin drugs and I dont want to get into a long rant on them here. I will say that my triglycerides have gone down over 350 points on Atkins and it works for me.

For peanut butter I use Smuckers all natural because of the afflatoxins found in peanut butter. It seems that commercial brand peanut butters have lower levels of afflatoxins in them.

The saturated fat thing I totally disagree with on south beach. Even if you have a fat sensitivity, I think you should be the judge of that yourself and not be totally afraid of fats or saturated fat.

[dazzlin182]

ok now what is statin again? why dont i recall taking one? what is the 'pharmacy name' for statin or people just called it statin?

sorry just needed to know thanks!

[MyJourney]

ok now what is statin again? why dont i recall taking one? what is the 'pharmacy name' for statin or people just called it statin?

sorry just needed to know thanks!

they are drugs designed to lower cholesterol like Lipitor and Zocor

check out www.statinalert.org

[woodpecker]

Mercola et al have almost hijacked the low carb movement. The world will never be the same food wise if what I have learned in the last year is any indication. Woo, you are a great source of information, but I question your use of the term "complex carbohydrates." Bread, potatoes and such all have been termed complex carbohydrates, but they all break down into sugar (glucose) pretty quickly. Table sugar, since it has fructose in it, actually breaks down even slower than potatoes. I think there is an argument that the term complex carbohydrates is now a phoney issue.

[cc48510]

I agree 100% with him on the Fats...There are basically, 5 types of Lipids we are concerned with:

Saturated Fat -- Long demonized for raising cholesterol, some saturated fats, such as Coconut Oil may actually be good for you. In fact, the only saturated fats that appear to actually signifcantly effect cholesterol are the kind found in Butter, and tests on the subtypes of LDL found the subtype of LDL created by Butter was probably not harmfull.

Trans-Fat -- As a result of the phobia of Saturated Fat, Americans have begun using Trans-Fats. Trans-Fat, unlike Saturated Fat REALLY IS bad for your health. Not only does it raise LDL, but the most damaging subtype. It also lowers HDL, raises Triglycerides, increases your risk of Diabetes, raise several other risk factors for Heart Disease, may possibly increase your risk of Cancer, and takes the place of Essential Fats which your body needs, wreaking havoc. Worst of all, I read somewhere a while back that when a mother eats a diet high in Trans-Fat, her breast milk becomes high in Trans-Fat.

Omega-6 Polyunsaturated Fat -- Many folks fail to make a distinction between the 2 main types of Polyunsaturated Fat: Omega-6 and Omega-3. While, Omega-3s are very good for you, Omega-6s are not good in excess. We need a certain amount of Omega-6s, but the amount is so small and Omega-6s so prevelant that a deficiency has never been a significant threat. Unfortunately, Omega-6s are so prevelant that we are now getting too much of them, with damaging effect. Omega-6s, in excess, can supress the immune system and cause Cancer, so I'd be wary of them. The biggest sources of Omega-6s are Vegetable Oils such as Soybean, Corn, Sunflower Seed and Cottonseed. Legumes [other than Peanuts] and Sunflower Seeds are also high in Omega-6s, but they don't contibute anywhere near as much as Vegetable Oils. For this reason, I avoid all oils high in Omega-6 PUFAs and limit my consumption of Soy and Sunflower Seeds.

Omega-3 Polyunsaturated Fat -- These do basically the exact opposite of Trans-Fat. These are also Essential Fats, meaning you have to eat them, because your body can't make them. Unlike Omega-6s, which are way too prevelant, its much harder to get enough Omega-3s. Also, unlike Omega-6s, there is no damaging effect to eating too much Omega-3s. In fact, everything I've seen suggests the more the better. The best sources are Cold Water fish such as Salmon. Canola Oil contains a significant amount of Omega-3s, but is some debate as to whether or not high temperatures [such as in frying] may damage the Omega-3s in Canola Oil, or even make them harmfull to your health.

Monounsaturated Fat -- These are good for your heart. They improve your Cholesterol. They aren't quite as good as Omega-3s at improving your health, but they are much easier to get. Most animal fats [Lard and Tallow] are slightly over half Monounsaturated. Bacon is even higher in Monounsaturated Fat. Some Fish [Catfish and Dolphin (Mahi-Mahi) if I remember correctly] are high in Monounsaturated Fat. Olive, Canola, Avocado, and Peanut Oils are extremelly high in Monounsaturated Fat, being mostly Monounsaturates...as are Olives, Avocadoes, and Peanuts. Palm Oil, which is widely considered a Saturated Fat is I believ about 40 percent Monounsaturated or thereabouts. Even Butter, which is about 3/4 Saturated has almost the entire rest of its fat as Monounsaturates.

In fact, that's the case with almost all Animal Products except Chicken and Seafood. Animal Products are mostly a combination of Saturated and Monounsaturated Fat, with small amounts of Polyunsaturated Fats, a mix of Omega-3s and Omega-6s. Chicken is higher in Polyunsaturates [Omega-6s] than other land animals, but is still about half Monounsaturated. But, don't worry too much because unlike Vegetable Oils Chicken does not contribute a significant amount of Fat to our diet. Seafood is sometimes high in Omega-3s which are a type of Polyunsatured Fat.

[CindySue48]

Statin is the generic name for the meds designed to lower cholesterol. Lipitor, Zocor, Pravachol, etc.

[dazzlin182]

Statin is the generic name for the meds designed to lower cholesterol. Lipitor, Zocor, Pravachol, etc.
they are drugs designed to lower cholesterol like Lipitor and Zocor

check out www.statinalert.org
thank you.

[MyJourney]

Canola Oil contains a significant amount of Omega-3s, but is some debate as to whether or not high temperatures [such as in frying] may damage the Omega-3s in Canola Oil, or even make them harmfull to your health.

from what I understand it seems just the basic processing of canola oil turns the omega 3s into trans fats... or am I misunderstanding something.

Modern oil processing is a different thing entirely. The oil is removed by a combination of high temperature mechanical pressing and solvent extraction. Traces of the solvent (usually hexane) remain in the oil, even after considerable refining. Like all modern vegetable oils, canola oil goes through the process of caustic refining, bleaching and degumming—all of which involve high temperatures or chemicals of questionable safety. And because canola oil is high in omega-3 fatty acids, which easily become rancid and foul-smelling when subjected to oxygen and high temperatures, it must be deodorized. The standard deodorization process removes a large portion of the omega-3 fatty acids by turning them into trans fatty acids. Although the Canadian government lists the trans content of canola at a minimal 0.2 percent, research at the University of Florida at Gainesville, found trans levels as high as 4.6 percent in commercial liquid oil.24 The consumer has no clue about the presence of trans fatty acids in canola oil because they are not listed on the label.

http://www.westonaprice.org/know_your_fats/conola.html

[woodpecker]

(My Journey) On the french fry thing, from what I understand most (if not all) fast food places still use partially hydrogenated veg oils to deep fry their foods in. The reason would be a longer shelf life, if they used plain veg oil it would oxidize way too quickly and they wouldnt be able to reuse the oil the way they do.

I'd say you are right about the above quote and your canola oil comments above. McCains Foods, which says it produces 1/3 of the world's processed french fries, now advertises that it does NOT cook them in partially hydrogenated vegetable oil. Instead it uses canola or soya oil. I suppose that means that the canola oil they are using still has trans fats. Who knows, it could be false advertising. Of course, when the restaurants get the frozen chip, they usually cook it in partially hydrogenated oil anyway. Incidentially, McCains says it has on-going research on the acrylamide probelm. If they solve that and find a low carb potato, perhaps one day we'll be able to eat French fries again.

[VickySail]

Hm. Can't delete this...

[VickySail]

Zealots with agendas always give me hives. Given enough facts, they can twist them to fit any perspective, like a balloon poodle.

I will probably do a modified SBD when I reach goal, and not before. It is so similar to Atkins Maintenance, that it won't matter what I call it, it will be a controlled carb, low glycemic index lifestyle. I will probably eat leaner meats and use fats without transfats. I will probably stay away from french fries, but make fried yam sticks. Everything in MODERATION.

I really don't see anything wrong with eating like that, or am I missing something here?

Vicky

[bluesmoke]

Canola oil really isn't a big source of transfats. However, it must be highly processed to make it usable by humans, this processing removes most of the Omega 3. The processing also creates free radicals, which are the same harmful substances from the heat caused breakdown of other cooking oils.
On the whole, it is better avoided. Nyah Levi

[zedgirl]

In the ‘Book Reviews’ section of the Weston A Price Foundation website, SBD is described as “one of the most dangerous diets out there”. The review is written by another holistic doctor by the name of Stephen Byrnes Phd (he has his own website and books to sell). Sally Fallon also criticizes Protein Power as “a step in the right direction but a very small step” and she also gives The Zone diet the thumbs down. There’s no mention of Atkins though in either of the ‘Thumbs Up’ or ‘Thumbs Down’ list which I find interesting considering it’s popularity……….

http://www.westonaprice.org/book_reviews/book_reviews.html

[TwilightZ]

I am beginning to think that the human animal is just "hard-wired" for extremism. It simplifies things and helps the world make sense. As more and more of us abandon religious belief in a conventional, anthropomorphic God-based sense, we replace it with extreme food issues, or extreme environmental positions, or political positions, or what-have-you. It probably stems from our ancient genetic bias toward narrative which is at the heart of human communication.

It stems from the yearning to discover the truth.

Maybe I should look into the paleolithic diet.
Good idea.

[Nelson]

It stems from the yearning to discover the truth.

oh, horse pucky! (with all due respect, of course)

[dazzlin182]

ive used canola/olive/palm oils long before but tossed the palm after started south beach. ive heard and always concerned about canola being trans fat from time to time but didnt really do somethin about it e.g. further reading etc

ive gone thru threads websites etc and lot of people seem to agree that it could pose danger.

guess its really time to toss canola, will not use it in a heat state.

thanks!

[VickySail]

Regardless of Agatston's woeful errors, can anyone clarify any major differences between Atkins Maintenance and the South Beach Diet? Minor ones?

In a paleolithic hard-wired way, I too am searching for truth. :D

Vicky

[MyJourney]

ive used canola/olive/palm oils long before but tossed the palm after started south beach.

Natural palm oil is great for you!

Natural Palm oil is a minimally processed palm oil that maintains the natural nutrients of Vitamin E and Vitamin A. Typical RBD (Refined, Deodorized, and Bleached) palm oil has these nutrients stripped from them resulting in a clear oil. Tropical Traditions Natural Palm Oil is processed with no solvent extracts or bleaching at low temperatures. We are the first ones in the Philippines to develop this unique process.

In its natural state, palm oil is red in color due to a high concentration of carotenes and tocols. It is a traditional oil used for more than 5000 years in Asian and African countries. In non-tropical climates in cooler temperatures the oil tends to be orange, like a carrot.

Advantages of Natural Red Palm Oil
High Stability To Oxidation
Oils and fats generally are susceptible to attack by atmospheric oxygen, resulting in rancidity. Natural Palm Oil contains a high level of the tocols (Vitamin E) which are powerful natural antioxidants. It contains a very low concentration of linolenic acid and only a moderate proportion of linoleic acid, the most readily oxidized components of oils. Therefore, it has exceptional resistance to rancidity.

Natural Palm Oil is known for its excellent stability at high temperatures. The low content of polyunsaturated fatty acids, which confers resistance to rancidity, also makes it less prone to oxidative polymerization. The formation of polymeric materials is responsible for the increase in viscosity and for the foaming tendency of a heated oil.

Vitamin E - The Tocotrienols: Super Anti-oxidants

Vitamin E is one of the most important phytonutrients in edible oils. It consists of eight naturally occurring isomers, a family of four tocopherols (alpha, beta, gamma and delta) and four tocotrienols (alpha, beta, gamma and delta) homologues. While most Vitamin E supplements on the market today are composed of the more common tocopherols, tocotrienols are believed to be a much more potent antioxidant than tocopherols. Tocotrienols are naturally present in most plants, however they are found most abundantly in palm oil extracted from palm fruits. Other sources are rice, wheat germ, oat and barley. It has been shown by published research that alpha-tocotrienol is 40-60 times more potent than alpha-tocopherol in the prevention of lipid peroxidation. Since tocotrienols are a form of Vitamin E found less abundantly in nature than tocopherols, the research on this super anti-oxidant is still recent and ongoing. It is predicted that tocotrienols will become recognized as the new super anti-oxidant in the very near future.

http://www.tropicaltraditions.com/images/vitamine.gif

Vitamin A - Carotenes from Natural Palm Oil is Nature's Most Abundant Source

In nature, there are approximately 600 known carotenoids, ranging from yellow orange to red hues and some 50 of these pigments possess vitamin A activity of varying degrees. Red palm oil is one of the richest natural plant sources of carotenoids with concentration of 500-700 ppm. It has 15 times more retinol-equivalent than carrots and 300 times more than tomatoes. No other vegetable oil contains carotenoids in significant quantities. Analysis shows that alpha and beta carotenes constitute approximately 90% of the total carotenoid content.

http://www.tropicaltraditions.com/images/carotenes.gif

Read More Published Research on Palm Oil (http://www.tropicaltraditions.com/palmoilresearch.htm)

In the ‘Book Reviews’ section of the Weston A Price Foundation website, SBD is described as “one of the most dangerous diets out there”. The review is written by another holistic doctor by the name of Stephen Byrnes Phd (he has his own website and books to sell). Sally Fallon also criticizes Protein Power as “a step in the right direction but a very small step” and she also gives The Zone diet the thumbs down. There’s no mention of Atkins though in either of the ‘Thumbs Up’ or ‘Thumbs Down’ list which I find interesting considering it’s popularity……….

That might be because in The Sally Fallon/Mary Enig cookbook Nourishing traditions Atkins gave a review saying.

"I have to reccomend Nourishing Traditions by Sally Fallon. The first chapter of her book is so right on target that I feel a little guilty for taking her ideas. But what she pointed out is that independent producers of food--such as people who present us with meat, poultry, eggs and butter--provide the lowest profit margin in the industry. People who put out junk food . . . have an incredible return on invested capital because they are putting out low-cost items and making a very high profit."

Weston A Price is against all the frankenfoods and protein isolates. I think they agreed much more with what Atkins initially intended and disagree with Atkins Nutritionals and the direction the company is going.

[Nancy LC]

SBD introduces whole grains, fruit and starchy fruits and veggies back in the diet after the first 2 weeks. Atkins generally advises that you add in carbs in 5g increments until you stop losing weight, then go down a bit. He doesn't really specify what those increments could be, they could be grains or fruits, but most people stick to berries and non-starchy veggies.

[TwilightZ]

Regardless of Agatston's woeful errors, can anyone clarify any major differences between Atkins Maintenance and the South Beach Diet? Minor ones?

In a paleolithic hard-wired way, I too am searching for truth. :D

Vicky

Vicky, I'm glad you're seeking the truth. :)

If I'm not mistaken, Agatston is anti-saturated fat. Atkins considers it to be an important part of the diet not only for weight loss, but for good health for the rest of your life. I think that's a pretty significant difference. You can lose weight on both, but I think the health consequences of not eating saturated fat will catch up with those who maintain Agatston's way of eating long term.

Howard

[VickySail]

Vicky, I'm glad you're seeking the truth. :)

If I'm not mistaken, Agatston is anti-saturated fat. Atkins considers it to be an important part of the diet not only for weight loss, but for good health for the rest of your life. I think that's a pretty significant difference. You can lose weight on both, but I think the health consequences of not eating saturated fat will catch up with those who maintain Agatston's way of eating long term.

Howard,

Agatston advocates lower saturated fat. He is into part-skim cheeses and leaner cuts of beef, chicken and fish, and using an oil-based spray (or trans-free margarine) instead of butter for cooking. I guess for some reason he figures lower fat (not non-fat) and higher carbs is better, rather than the Atkins saturated fat position (which has altered to include more veggies and exercise since the first book). For some reason, Agatston's pushing skim milk, tho. Yuck. (One of the things I remember from the book is Canadian bacon rather than regular bacon).

I would like to add whole grain complex carbs once I don't need to lose weight, and if you have more carbs, does it make common nutritional sense to cut out some saturated fat? If not, why does Atkins limit cheese intake from the very beginning? This is all starting to twist my poor little brain. :spin:

I won't even get into the "I can't give up bread and cake!" whiners, but there are too many who find the Atkins diet too restrictive and either give up or go back to low-fat diets, but find they can live with the South Beach diet and get slim. (Clinton and Billary are the famous examples). According to this thread, that is an entirely wrong approach. Being obese is better?

An Atkid from '98 (but screwed it up by eating carbs again),
Vicky

[MyJourney]

why does Atkins limit cheese/nut intake from the very beginning? This is all starting to twist my poor little brain.

From my understanding Atkins limits cheese due to mold and yeast issues, not fat. Which is why cheese can stall so many people. That and those who are lactose intolerant. Also cheese is a snacky convenient food and people can easily just eat cheese all day or snack on it all day and add tons of calories and carbs from it without realizing.

Nuts are mostly monounsaturated fats not saturated fats and are also restricted because people can eat huge amounts of it as snacks and not realize as all those calories and carbs crept on.

People tend to have a habit of eating handfulls of nuts at a time and not realizing what a serving really is.

While I can take 12 almonds and feel satisfied with it, if I wasnt paying attention I could easily go through half a container of almonds and not realize it.

Also the majority of your carbohydrates are supposed to be coming from veggies, not from eggs, nuts and cheese.

I happen to think that butterfat and the fats in meat are healthy for me, and I shouldnt be afraid of eating them. I personally think those sprays arent good for you, and I have opinions on things like smart balance, and low fat/fat free cheeses. I also think he adds grains way too quickly, but thats my personal opinion.

Of course I lived for years without fat and on lean meats and fat free cheeses and sprays and whole grains and egg beaters and my triglycerides were around 400 (at 125 lbs) and once I started eating fats including a good amount of saturated fats they dropped to 53 without statins.

As you increase your carbohydrate amount, the amount of fat you eat drops some naturally, but not to the degree that he advises.

In the end we all do our own thing and what we feel is best for us and what works for us. There is always room for improvement no matter what you do.

[VickySail]

You make some good points. I hadn't thought about the mold/yeast angle regarding cheese, and I had already removed the nuts from the post after I thought about it for a minute. :)

I believe you're right about adding grains too fast, which is why I plan on waiting until goal weight. I think they're not part of any good weight loss plan.

I had asked initially what the diff was between SB and Atkins Maintenance, and I still haven't really seen much of one except for the recommended amount of saturated fat you should eat, which remains vaguely fuzzy in both plans. Veggies and fruit and some complex carbs are part of both. They just seem to become the same diet at that point. That is what I am trying to clarify.

Even Atkins had admitted that eating too many calories will stop weight loss, even on his plan. I'm not afraid of eating food sauted in butter either, but if I can fry eggs in something that won't add 100 more calories, I have the option of eating those calories later in a snack. Or not. I believe I have gone "over cals" in a day. One large dinner meal will stop my progress for a couple of days, even if it's strictly low-carb.

It just bothers me a bit to see a plan bashed that shadows Atkins' own Maintenance plan so closely.

Vicky

[TwilightZ]

Agatston advocates lower saturated fat. He is into part-skim cheeses and leaner cuts of beef, chicken and fish, and using an oil-based spray (or trans-free margarine) instead of butter for cooking. I guess for some reason he figures lower fat (not non-fat) and higher carbs is better, rather than the Atkins saturated fat position (which has altered to include more veggies and exercise since the first book). For some reason, Agatston's pushing skim milk, tho. Yuck. (One of the things I remember from the book is Canadian bacon rather than regular bacon).

Vicky, I think it comes down to what you consider to be the "closeness" of the two plans. I consider the above (Agatston's recommendations) to be not close, but rather 180 degrees from Atkins. When you lower saturated fat and raise unsaturateds and add more carbs, that is a recipe for weight gain. I think SB weight maintenance would be tough to achieve. It might be easier to follow due to variety, but what's the point if you can't maintain your weight. I do not believe that saturated fat contributes to weight gain, except maybe if you ate a pound of butter at one sitting, which you couldn't do anyway. Coconut oil actually promotes weight loss. It's not a matter of 100 calories of butter vs. 100 calories of carbs. They are metabolized differently and the end result is not the same. That's the whole point of Atkins and other low-carb/high sat fat plans. It's not just a simple calories in equals calories out.

Agatston is a mainstream physician trying to cash in on lowcarb by making it politically correct. There is no science in it--IMO it's garbage and unhealthy.

Seriously, just mosey on down to paleo and check us out, no obligation. Check out the book Neanderthin--it's a cheap paperback and an easy read. The guy isn't out to make millions--he had severe health problems and solved them through research into human physiology and anthropology. This is much easier than Atkins, no carb counting, just eating the right foods which the body was designed to eat. You lose weight and get healthy.

Howard

[Nancy LC]

I just ran across another article on the Mercola site that I think paints them as sort of Luddites. Its on the evils of microwaving. Someone died because a nurse microwaved some blood before they gave them a transfusion, thereby proving that microwaves tainted it!

... not that perhaps the blood got cooked?

http://www.mercola.com/article/microwave/hazards.htm

And they fail to mention that microwave ovens were unbanned after Peristroika.

[Nadz]

I actually agree with many of Mercola's points..but not all. I'm doing a modified SB because I'm aware of the drawbacks. No plan is perfect. That's why it's important to constantly educate oneself about proper nutrition.

[TwilightZ]

And they fail to mention that microwave ovens were unbanned after Peristroika.

Oh, yippee, that's a reason to use them.