A diet based on a deception to your own body?

[fodus8]

It's common knowledge now that the body uses a self-defense mechanism when not given adequate carbs. Tricking the body into thinking it's starving so that it acquires it's main source of fuel from fat. It's a deception. The body doesn't know one is on a "diet" and sets off into survival mode.

Low-Carbing to the point of ketosis forces the body into survival mode. Survival Mode. How long is it suitable for the body to be in this burn fat or die mode?

Lets just hope we all have strong healthy livers. Yes, I know....no one has ever proven that ketones in the blood put an unhealthy strain on the liver.

Bottom line: your body is in a constant state of self-defense.

[tamarian]

I always thought of it the other way around :)

You're body store fat when you eat all sorts of carbs and sugar, so the body thinks it's starving and stores all the fat on your body as a survival mechanism.

When you start eating healthy, poviding your body with healthy doses of protein and fat, avoiding all kinds of sugar, and junk processed foods, just adding vegetables, your body feels healthy and starts to elease all the excess body fat.

That's the way all humans ate all along, unil refined processed carbs were introduced.

So which one sounds more like a deception?

Wa'il

[Frederick]

Hi Fodus,

I am impressed.

What you’ve just articulated was eloquent, lucid, and very well thought out. The concept of self-defense has always put me in a state of unease especially when I realize that it’s being forced upon me unwittingly—even by an eating philosophy, of all things.

The words “burn fat or die mode” has been permanently engraved into my mind. Or, as per the hilarious Nike commercial, “scorched into my retina.”

Whenever I read something as thought provoking, I’m always reminded of an old adage, “a moment to make, and a lifetime to break.” With that in mind, you’ve convinced me completely. I have decided to give up on limiting my carbs and hope that I will have engendered enough good will with my body so it doesn’t opt to “die” on me.

With a look to the past, and a nod to the future,

Deceived No Longer

[Lisa N]

Originally posted by fodus8
It's common knowledge now that the body uses a self-defense mechanism when not given adequate carbs. Tricking the body into thinking it's starving so that it acquires it's main source of fuel from fat. It's a deception. The body doesn't know one is on a "diet" and sets off into survival mode.



LOL!

It also used to be "common knowledge" that the world was flat and that the earth was the center of the universe.
Common knowledge does not equate to truth.

Studies, please, not opinion .

If forcing your body to burn its fat stores is a bad thing, either through lack of carbs so it has to burn fat, or caloric deficit or both, then all diets that work this way (and that would pretty much encompass all of them) are bad. I don't think you'll find one serious doctor or health professional that will tell you that burning body fat (and that's exactly what weight loss entails by any method) is bad for you or puts undue stress on the body.
Second; fat burning mode does not last forever. When one reaches goal weight, one moves on to maintainance levels of both calories and carbs which if you were following the plan correctly, you should nearly be at by the time you reach that point.
Last....the body does not go into "survival mode" or "starvation mode" as long as there are adequate calories coming in to support basal metabolism. It's only when caloric intake drops below that point (which is about 10 times idea body weight) that the body begins to lower metabolism in response. Whether it be from fat or carbs, as long as the body has enough calories, it doesn't care where it's getting its fuel supply from.

[Lisa N]

Originally posted by fodus8
Bottom line: your body is in a constant state of self-defense.

Let's hope so, or we'd all be quickly overwhelmed with infection and die (it's called a healthy functioning immune system).

[fodus8]

Everyone seems to answer my questions with some oddball sense of wit. I guess the answer is "no one really knows for sure if this is healthy." Answering my questions and my search for what is right with sarcasm is, I'm the first to admit, funny, but just not helpful. I came to this board to learn more about low-carbing but I've run into the writers of theonion.com.

Sorry to let you down but that stuff you learned in high school about Columbus being the only one who thought the earth was round is just not true. Any educated man at that point in time was well aware the earth was round. Look it up.

It's difficult to think of a lifetime with limited access to all fruits, complex grains, and sugars.

I have an interesting question. Take a person with a normal metabolism at a normal weight. Feed him/her with a steady diet of carbs and lots and lots of fats. Steak, pork, cream, lard, eggs, butter, duck, buffalo balls (kidding), and huge amounts of grease. Ooops, I forgot my question.

Here's another question: I have a two year old baby who has a little body fat on him. I was thinking of starting him on an all-bacon diet. Would this be a good thing? Since ketosis is the natural human state of being.

[Frederick]

Hello again Fodus,

“Sorry to let you down but that stuff you learned in high school about Columbus being the only one who thought the earth was round is just not true. Any educated man at that point in time was well aware the earth was round. Look it up.”

I don’t dispute this, naturally. We’re not endeavoring to engage in revisionist history here, but merely to take something from which to draw a parallel. Think of it as an effort to place the future into the service of the present. The similarity is that back then—as it is now—the establishment, both educated and otherwise, believed the world was flat, which had been the historical dogma since the inception of primitive deductive reasoning to the then relative scientific thoughts of the 14th century. Becoming isolated, being berated, and often ridiculed was the price for conviction one paid for being a lone individual dissenter and independent thinker, as Columbus et al were.

“It's difficult to think of a lifetime with limited access to all fruits, complex grains, and sugars.”

The key concept here is “limited” and not “none”. A common misperception of proponents for the high carb/low fat view is that the low carb view means no carb. Equally, I would argue that for some of us, it is just as challenging to embrace a lifetime of limited access to fatty meats, cheese, rich cream, and the variety of fat foods which we naturally find both delectable and exquisite to our palates.

“Here's another question: I have a two year old baby who has a little body fat on him. I was thinking of starting him on an all-bacon diet.”

I see you’ve a natural flair for posing questions of diametric extremes. I’m first to admit that it is very funny, but as you so artfully put it, “not helpful”? LOL It is sort of akin to asking a violinist, if you must, would you prefer to sever your right arm, or your left one? Let me ask you this, if I may. In Fodus-ese, if you could only choose one, would you opt to place your two-year old boy on an all bacon diet? Or, an all granulated sugar diet?

And, finally, in my view, sarcasm is the highest form of wit, but lowest form of intellect. Perhaps, there are times when we’re more one than the other.

With kindest regards,

Frederick

[Lisa N]

My point, dear Fodus, is that what is considered "common knowledge" may or may not be true or fact. It's equivalent to saying, "everyone knows..." to support a point which you cannot back up with fact or proof. If something that is incorrect is repeated 1 million times, that will not change it into a correct statement or make it truth simply in the repeating of it or by the number of people that believe it and repeat it in turn.


Answering my questions and my search for what is right with sarcasm is, I'm the first to admit, funny, but just not helpful.

Which of the studies and articles that you have been presented with so far did you find unhelpful? I did quite a bit of searching last night and couldn't find a single study to support your first statement in this thread. If you have one, please feel free to post it; studies, not opinion.


Take a person with a normal metabolism at a normal weight. Feed him/her with a steady diet of carbs and lots and lots of fats

Carbs and fat are not what low carbing is about. Fat, yes. Carbs, no. At least not in the quantities that most people are accustomed to consuming. What low carb encourages, if you look past the 2 week induction phase of one plan, is lots of vegetables low in carbs and high in nutrients and antioxidants along with healthy fats and adequate amounts of protein. Even the induction phase of Atkins requires a minimum of 3 servings of veggies daily. Currently, I average 5-6 servings of vegetables daily and occasionally some fruits and this on 30 grams of carbs per day.


I have a two year old baby who has a little body fat on him. I was thinking of starting him on an all-bacon diet. Would this be a good thing? Since ketosis is the natural human state of being.

I think Frederick addressed this question nicely. An all-bacon diet would not be low carb and there isn't a single low carb plan that I can think of that consists of nothing but meats processed with nitrates, although there are cultures (the Inuit) who existed on primarily seal and whale meat and blubber, including all children who were weaned. Dr. Atkins also discourages the use of meats containing nitrates (health concerns from the nitrates) and enourages instead consumption of unprocessed meats. Dr. Atkins also does not recommend induction levels of carb for for children under 12, but again I don't think you'd find a single health professional that is all in favor of kids eating all the junk food and sugar that they can get their hands on. My kids are 7 and 8 and and follow a carb restricted program that includes lots of veggies, fruits, nuts, cheese, yogurt and whole grains in moderation which usually averages out to about 125 grams of carb per day; much lower than the average of 300 or more mostly coming from high fructose corn syrup, and transfats. Am I depriving them and causing them ill health by not allowing them to gobble sugar by the pound and keeping hydrogenated and transfats out of their diets?

It's difficult to think of a lifetime with limited access to all fruits, complex grains, and sugars.

Unless you care absolutely nothing about your health, restriction of one type of food or another is going to be a necessity. You can't have your cake and eat it too if you want to remain healthy. The question becomes what are you going to limit your access to? Sugar, highly refined starches and hydrogenated fats or proteins and healthy fats? There isn't a single vitamin, mineral or nutrient found in fruit that cannot be obtained through vegetables, sometimes in better quantity (potassium for example). The same principle applies to grains and there is absolutely no nutritive value to sugar at all; it just tastes good. So good, in fact, that millions of men, women and children have unwittingly become addicted to it. There are essential proteins and essential fatty acids, there are even essential vitamins and minerals, but there are no essential carbs or sugars.

If you're truly interested in information about low carb, go down to your local library and get a book (or several) on low carb plans and see what the authors have to say beyond the weight loss phase, which in the lives of most people following the plans is not forever. I say several because each author gives a different perspective and references different studies and articles. The studies and supporting documentation are well noted in the books by footnotes. Read the whole book as well as the referenced studies and articles and base your decision on that; not the opinions of those who stand to lose a great deal if low carb ever becomes mainstream.

[pokey one]

Well said, LisaN, very well said!!

[tamarian]

Originally posted by fodus8
Answering my questions and my search for what is right with sarcasm is, I'm the first to admit, funny, but just not helpful.

I doubt you're on a search, you've made up you're mind :) Otherwise, you wouldn't see other's polite response as sarcasm.

My reply was very serious, and not meant as sarcasm. Didn't see any other sarcastic responses either.

So if you are really on a search, open up your mind, and you may be able to read the other side's opinion in a different light, without taking every other opinion than yours as sarcasm.

Just my $0.02.

Wa'il

[fodus8]

Thanks for the funny follow-up Frederick. At first, I didn't know what to think of you and your sarcasm. Seems like some of your audience completely missed the boat. Anyhow, I think you're quite witty. I do tend to be a bit dramatic on the example front but it's mostly terrible sarcasm, which you obviously picked right up on. "Baby bacon diet." I understand your point about the all bacon or all sugar diet. It was a good one. Once again we all have to listen to the adage, "Everything in moderation." Hell, even too much exercise can kill you.

I understood the flat earth reference the first time around, it's just more fun to poke fun at the Columbus round earth thing.....
I googled Columbus.....
http://www.id.ucsb.edu/fscf/library/RUSSELL/FlatEarth.html

I know the low-carb diet works for many people and that's all that matters.

[Ogden]

Originally posted by fodus8

I know the low-carb diet works for many people and that's all that matters. [/B]

Well, yes and no. Yes it works for many people, but no that is not all that matters to most of the people here.

If your search for information about lo-carb diets brought you here to ask "Is this diet healthy?" Then you have come to the right place and there is a lot of experience, information, and results to be found.

If you are suggesting, by that statement, that people here only care about losing weght and not about overall health, I think you will find that you are wrong. Most people here are very concerned about their health and many of them experience an "adjustment period" of uneasiness when they begin low-carbing, as they switch over from a low-fat mentality.

In fact, I would bet that people here are more up to date on new literature about heart disease, cholesteral, high blood pressure, diabetes, insulin, syndrome X and other medical issues, than a typical low-fat dieter.

But what we are all finding out, via this site, via new information, new studies, and our own experience, is that this does appear to be a healthy, happy way to live. The establishment is catching on. Its true that they may not be jumping onto the uber-low-carb bandwagon, but reccomendations to cut back on refined starches and sugars are everywhere these days.

Read the books, give it a shot. You can always go back to low-fat.

[dannysk]

[QUOTE]It's common knowledge now that the body uses a self-defense mechanism when not given adequate carbs. Tricking the body into thinking it's starving so that it acquires it's main source of fuel from fat. It's a deception. [QUOTE]

Yes it is a deception. Througout the world and for millions of years, there are seasons (winter/dry season) when no carbs are readily available.
When you don't eat carbs, you trick your body into thinking that it's winter and we should our stored fat reserves.

When you eat carbs you deceive your body into thinking that it is mid-summer to early fall, and we better pack on as much fat as possible as soon as posible because winter is coming.

danny

[Sydney1030]

Here's another question: I have a two year old baby who has a little body fat on him. I was thinking of starting him on an all-bacon diet. Would this be a good thing? Since ketosis is the natural human state of being. [/B][/ QUOTE]

Where is all this venom coming from? Has someone who eats low-carb harmed you in some way?
Everyone knows that a 2 year old needn't be on a low-carb eating plan. And why, when someone wants to criticize low-carbing, do they always accuse us of eating too much bacon? I have been eating low-carb for 2 months and haven't eaten one piece of bacon. I don't like it, therefore I don't eat it. Dr. Atkins himself doesn't promote the unlimited eating of bacon-he says right in his book that the preservatives in it are harmful and it should be eaten every moderately.

However, refined sugar and flour aren't healthy for our bodies, no matter what our age. Perhaps, fodus8, you should read up on the way of eating you are so angry about (low-carbing) before you start your ranting on this forum.
I can't believe anyone would go thru all the trouble to register just to post such antagonizing, ignorant blather! :Puke:

[rebsee]

You googled Columbus? Well done! Now try looking at Aristotle - he knew the earth was round as early as 360BC.

[wbahn]

While off the topic of the thread, some might find this site interesting. They seem to do a good job of providing references for their work, make a concerted effort to present the arguments as seen by different viewpoints in a balanced way, and are quick to acknowledge places where there have been shifts in their conclusions.

http://www.ethicalatheist.com/docs/flat_earth_myth.html

[bluedelfin]

well said, danny, about the winter and summer thing, never thought of it like that. Makes total sense, even from a scientific standpoint. I've been on carbohydrate addicts plan and it is wonderful. No cravings and I find that I can't even eat a lot during my reward meal. Thanks for simplyfying things in a way that I think everyone can understand...
best of luck!!

[Princesspp]

I know this thread has basically gone into the archives .. but I just wanted to put my 2 cents worth before it went in there ...

On Focus8's original post ....
.....Lets just hope we all have strong healthy livers. Yes, I know....no one has ever proven that ketones in the blood put an unhealthy strain on the liver.
.........

When I started this 3 or 4 years ago .... my liver was screwed up then .. each year my liver counts have gotten better ...

I now have a very very healthy liver .. and I believe it's because of this woe .. because I no longer try and depend on the weight loss pills (with hopes and wishes) .. or the water pills (again with hopes and wishes) .. (major contributors to my liver problems)

I know this post has no technical backing .. except for my personal tests .. since starting this wol .. my health has improved greatly ..

No longer do I have Hypoglycemic episodes
No longer do I have Hi cholestrol
No longer do I have to worry about my liver

Sorry -- I can't understand how anyone can knock this wol ....

[Samuel]

"Here's another question: I have a two year old baby who has a little body fat on him. I was thinking of starting him on an all-bacon diet. Would this be a good thing? Since ketosis is the natural human state of being."

Feeding young children high carbohydrate food causes their stomach to grow in size which could be the reason we see more and more kids becoming overweight every day.

I think the recommended carbohydrate intake for an adult should be reduced from 300 grams to 100 grams. Children's carbohydrate intake should be reduced by the same ratio.

Vegetables and fruits are not a natural food as you may think. Before man has developed agriculture, these vegetables and fruits have been very rare.

So, over millions of years, when man's body have been under development, I believe, the carbohydrate intake of an average human has been in the range of (0:100) grams.

Sam

[gawdess]

I wouldnt put anyone on an all bacon diet.....yuck...a little bodyfat is okay...its 80 pounds that wont budge that is a problem....

[potatofree]

Isn't ANY weight-loss plan a deception to your body? Unless you really ARE in the midst of a famine, trying to use up the food your body has so diligently tucked away in case food becomes scarce when there is abundant food all around you, is deceptive isn't it?

No harm can come from limiting or doing without the refined, unnatural carbs that fuel our innate drive for sweet things. There's a big difference between healthy whole grains, veggies, and some fruit and doughnuts, sugary sodas, and a heap of white-flour pasta.

[gotbeer]

I'm going in circles trying to figure out how one can intentionally "trick" one's own body.

To "Trick" involves a willing deception of an unwilling organism. One can willingly deceive others, but can one willingly deceive oneself? Doesn't the knowledge of the trick defeat the whole point of being tricked?

Doesn't "tricking" my body assume that my body has a "mind" of it's own (that is somehow independent of me)? Without my mind, my body would be as dead as a stone, and you can't trick a stone, because the stone doesn't care!

One can unintentionally fool oneself, I guess, by ignoring evidence or forgetting the origin of the deception, but really, the idea that my body somehow "thinks" differently than me - and can be deceived by me - is just illogical (and pretty creepy, to boot).

[jazzmess]

I find your use of the word "starvation mode" interesting. When my body goes into "starvation mode", I do not lose weight. My body says, "Uh oh, we're not getting enough to eat. Better slow the metabolism down so that we can survive on fewer calories." At which point I become tired all the time and I stop losing weight. On Atkins, I get plenty to eat so "starvation mode" does _not_ kick in. I'm more energized than I was before, and I do lose weight. Fodus, looks like you've presented a great argument for why low calorie diets generally don't work, but low carbing does. ;)

Fata Morgana

[Alopex]

Hi gotbeer!

I think that the very reason the body can be "tricked" is because it can't reason things out. There are automatic patterns that are designed to respond to changes in eating patterns, food source, etc., and it is the (usually) intentional manipulation of these processes that we call "tricking."

You're right, though, that ascribing powers of thought and reason to the body (separate, of course, from the mind) is a little far-fetched. ;)

***Oh, and I meant to add, on the flat earth front, it wasn't just the Greeks who put stock in the round earth thing. Other cultures did too. Some proof that this round earth idea was a little more widespread comes from the Romans (who prolly got it from the Greeks, true enough), whose term for the earth was orbis terrae "the orb/sphere of earth." Not that anyone cares. ;) Still, it always confused me that this flat earth thing was an issue centuries after people had come to the conclusion that it was round.***

[gotbeer]

If I put gasohol into my car instead of gasoline, has it really been "tricked" into burning something different? (Nope - it has "automatic processes" that keep on burning.) I could even put sugar in my tank, and that would burn, too, at least until it destroyed my engine (not unlike the body, though at a differing pace).

I read the original post as implying that Atkins was somehow bad because it involves deception (lying) - in this case, to the body. The unspoken assumption was that lying is wrong, and hence Atkins was wrong.

I think there is no moral issue here - no one is being lied to, no one is deceived, no one tricked. I am my body, my body is me. No actual lying, deception, or trickery is involved.

Now, as a common but poor verbal metaphor, we can say we are "fooling" the body as an oversimplification of the true processes involved, but using this metaphor as a basis for either scientific or moralistic evaluation of the diet pushes the metaphor far beyond the breaking point.

[Alopex]

I agree, gotbeer. There isn't any lying in the real sense. We just call it that. I don't agree at all with the conclusion drawn by the original poster. Perhaps we shouldn't use a poor metaphor, but we do, and if people want to take it too literally, well, that's their problem, I guess. Not mine. :)

[tsalinas75]

Well..to me...its this simple...when I am eating a lot of carbs and junk that goes in my body..I feel awful..slugish, tired, foggy, no motivation, wake up in the morning all puffy and ick...When I am lowcarbing..I have a lot more energy, my mind seems to be a lot clearer, I am more motivated and feel overall more healthy..I dont wake up in the morning all puffy, but wake up in the morning ready to face the day...when I think about it that way..I wonder which one is killing my body? If I am feeling better and its killing me vs, feeling like crap and living..I would go for feeling better anyday.

[applebum]

I am on the Atkin's diet and I find that I am getting diarrhea everyday. I mean it is awful. I don't know what to do. If I include more fiber isn't that going to make it worse?

[gotbeer]

Recurrent diarrhea can be a symptom of gastro-intestinal illness that goes beyond the diet. Ulcerative colitis in particular comes to mind.

Suggestions:

1. Consult a physician!!!
2. Add a bit of full-fat yogurt to your diet.

Fiber may help or hurt depending on what the underlying problem is.

Best wishes on getting this resolved.

[Linda Love]

I get that too some days of the week. I think my body is cleansing itself. I have no symptoms of indigestion or heartburn and I feel fine.

Do you have other symptoms which may be pointing to an ailment? Drink your water to avoid dehydration.

[Suzanne]

I did not read through this entire post. As a matter of fact I stopped at the first sentence of the first post and feel that i have to make this correction as it applies to the entire thread.

'It's common knowledge that the body uses a self-defense mechanism when it is not given adequate carbs."

You are partially correct. Your body does use a self-defense mechanism, but it is when it is not given adequate CALORIES. Carbs has nothing to do w/ the self-defense mechanism.

Just my input.

[Grimalkin]

fodus8 maybe you should look at The Scwarzbein Principle I or II before you make up your mind about low carb being bad or not. She does NOT advocate ketosis, but her plans are definitely carb restricted. She offers some very good medical reasons for why she recommends the amounts she does.

[skeeweeaka]

Well I must add my two cents here... I have tried my share of truly low carb Atkins and Protein Power... They, however, felt the same to me... After stalling on Protein Power I decided to go on a quest to find the eating plan that was right for me. I enjoy fruit, bread, and cereal.. I like convenience foods.. I like yogurt and milk...

So after some searching, I stumbled upon Sugar Busters and The Insulin Resistance Diet... Both diets advocate whole foods...and good complex carbs.. I don't count carbs, although I watch them.. I eat less fat than on the other plans and my meals are much more balanced.. I enjoy eating on these plans and could do this for life... Whenever I decide to treat myself with a dessert, I simply balance it and have it immediately after my meals...

With these plans I broke my 6 week stall and lost 5 pounds to date.. What's more important is that it doesn't feel like a diet.. My blood sugar levels stay much more stable and I don't focus on food as I did on the other plans... Strangely enough, I was always hungry on the other plans...waiting for my next meal or snack... Now I eat when I am hungry...

Basically Sugar Buster's recommends eliminating sugar...nothing more than 3 grams per serving... Also eliminating processed foods... Insulin Resistance advocates balancing carbs with proteins...15 carb grams to 7 protein... Also, no more than 30 grams of carbs in a 2 hour period.. With balancing, I can pretty much eat what I want... If having dessert, I save it for dinner... I eat sweet potatoes, whole wheat products, fruit, yogurt, milk, etc...

The best thing is I don't worry about ketosis...and when I do decide to treat myself...I don't gain 5 pounds in 1 day...!!!

TJ

[adkpam]

This way of eating only SEEMS odd to people because it is so different.
However, before the advent of agriculture, we couldn't eat grains or sugar...so what did we eat for a very long time?
And fruit was only in certain seaons.

[CindySue48]

Applebum....VERY important with diarrhea that you get your water. And see a doc if it lasts more than a day or so.....or happens more than once or twice a week.

[pookiejay]

Can I just say that I think that Fredricks analogy was great! LOL

"if you could only choose one, would you opt to place your two-year old boy on an all bacon diet? Or, an all granulated sugar diet?"

I would opt for the bacon...

[Linda Love]

I'm know I'm a bit late for this discussion, but I couldn't help but notice Fodus8's diet in his/her's profile is Atkins. Now, (asking myself) why would someone trash the very diet they are on, especially since if you look a little closer, have lost weight on it. I'd say 4lbs.?

School me if I'm wrong.

[Wardrobe]

Dear list,

It just occurred to me that many misunderstandings of the Atkins diet could be cleared up if it were referred to as the "normal-carb" instead of the "low-carb" diet. It is only a low-carb diet relative to the excessive carb diet that is the modern norm.

[madmike]

Here is a point no one has mentioned... even if we accept for a moment that the low-carb diet isn't the most healthy eating pattern, particularly in the induction phase, that still needs to be balanced against the health risks of being obese. In other words, which is worse for you... a relatively short period of time with extremely limited carb intake followed by a lifetime of "normal" carb intake on the maintenance level, or... being overweight for a lifetime and subjecting your body to diabetes, heart disease, stroke and all the other things that are proven to be results of being overweight?
For me, I will take the former. Bottomline is the health benefit to losing and maintaining an ideal weight greatly outweighs (excuse the pun) the minimal danger of low-carbing. Now you have my 2 cents... Mike

[FinlayMcL]

I am reading the atkins diet, as I am looking for a way to lose some extra weight without losing muscle. I think the only problem with the diet is that certain people see it as an excuse to exclusively eat meat and fatty foods. However the range of food available when you reach the weight maintenance level are very broad, including fruit, veg, meat dairy, some sweet treats etc.

I think this is a good diet for short term weight loss, but once you reach your goal weight the old adage of a balanced diet should come into effect. And certainly we should all eat less processed food, like flour, sugar, sweetners and other manufactured foods.

I found this page looking for info on Diets which are natural and season based.
Man as a hunter gatherer animal would not eat processed foods, and would only eat the foods availale in certin seasons. Eggs usually only available in spring, fruits available in summer, root veg only available in autumn, and mostly meat in winter. Can anyone direct me to a book or website that can expand upon this, as I only have limited knowlege of it.

[Hellistile]

Here are some links to hunter-gatherer information:

http://www.rawpaleodiet.org/
http://www.beyondveg.com/cat/paleodiet/index.shtml
http://www.healingcrow.com/dietsmain/dietsmain.html
http://www.theomnivore.com/index.html
http://www.naturalhub.com/opinion_r...uman_animal.htm
http://www.naturalhub.com/opinion_r..._human_diet.htm

Articles
Ray Audette article
http://www.sofdesign.com/neanderthin/observer.html
http://www.mercola.com/2003/oct/22/paleo_diet.htm
Balzer Article
http://www.earth360.com/diet_paleodiet_balzer.html
www.westonaprice.org/know_your_fats/oiling.html
http://atkins.com/Archive/2002/10/7-248323.html

[Samasnier]

I think the only problem with the diet is that certain people see it as an excuse to exclusively eat meat and fatty foods.
A way of eating is not unhealthy simply because some fail to follow it properly.

However the range of food available when you reach the weight maintenance level are very broad, including fruit, veg, meat dairy, some sweet treats etc.
I'm in the Ongoing Weight Loss phase of Atkins. I eat a broad range of foods including grains (flax seed), fruit (tomatoes, strawberries, blueberries), vegetables (pretty much anything that isn't starchy), unprocessed meats, and dairy (cheeses and yoghurt).

I think this is a good diet for short term weight loss, but once you reach your goal weight the old adage of a balanced diet should come into effect.
That's exactly what Atkins is. By the time you've reached your healthy weight, you are eating a very balanced diet.

[inkleberry]

The fact is this...
low carb vs low fat..a debate that shouldn't be
neither are the same
one is more extreme
it is sense to know that any restrictive diet is bound to cause failure, and health issues! It also nurtures an obsessive eating pattern and behavior which in end results in depression and poor self image

[platypusd]

i wandered through this thread and noticed alot debate on whether ketosis is natural or if we are tricking our bodies into thinking we are starving and so on. i discussed the diet at length with my significant other, a biochemist-and made him read the Atkins book. This is how he explained it to me (paraphrased of course - i don't recall the technical/big words):

The brain needs sugar to operate. Carbs are broken down into sugar that are happily used by the brain to function (i think this is called the "Kreb Cycle" - but am not certain - i dropped chemistry in the 10th grade). However, sometimes humans don't have access to carbs to break down into sugar (particularily pre-agricultural hunter-gathering humans). So, to prevent untimely brain death and the end of our species, our body has a back up system. If there is no carbohydrate to create sugar, it 'switches' to ketosis and uses fat/protein to create ketones, which the brain can use just like sugar. since all of our calories come from either carbs/protein/fat, such a back up system allows us to stay alive regardless of where the calories are coming from. when carbs become available, it uses them.

when you are eating low carb, your body isn't in starvation mode (which is caused by not enough food) it is in ketosis (caused by not enough carbohydrate).

[fatburner]

This issue is also addressed in another thread in this forum: 'burning fat through exercise or ketosis. 'Defence mechanism' is such an emotionally loaded term. If everyone ate low carb, glucose metabolism would probably be seen as a 'defense mechanism'. I for one do see it as a defense mechanism now, because I have realized that because of glycation, burning carbs for energy, although very efficient, is not really very healthy. It might help you to win sprinting races (or get away from marauding sabre tooth tigers) but it ages your body quicker than fat metabolism will - whether or not you use ketones or FFA's for energy. And although some people obviously adjust to using FFA's rather than ketones (in tissue that can use either - just about anything except the brain) FFA's in the mitochondria merely don't waste as much energy. Why do people persist in suggesting that ketones are unhealthy. I'd rather be producing ketones (and using , or excreting them) than glycating glucose and protein molecules. That's just the metabolic effect. The immune suppressing and blood sugar complications of carbohydrate metabolism are insignifigant aren't they? ;) duh!. And if you want to lose weight ketosis is just about the best metabolic trick nature has to offer. Glucagon (dietary fat/catabolic) or insulin(glucose from dietary carbohydrate/anabolic). Take your pick. It's a no brainer.
'Defense mechanism' You can't be serious. We might as well call road safety a defense mechanism - rather than just plain old common sense.

[tom sawyer]

Platypus, ask your husband to consider for a moment, which system evolved as the backup system, and which is the primary system. Consider that hunter/gatherer man probably had access to meat year-round, and only seasonal access to plant materials and no high starch materials at all. It is only since agriculture, that the glucose system would have become the primary system and not the backup, and this timeframe of 10000 years is not enough for the genetic changes required to bolster the backup system.

Persoanlly I think both systems are fully functional and neither should be considered a backup to the other.

[AndreaBash]

Weird how this thread popped back up.. I liked this quote:

Any educated man at that point in time was well aware the earth was round. Look it up.

In about 50 years, everyone will know that low carb is healthier than low fat... and we will all be the "educated people" who knew and spoke out before the establishment would acknowledge it. :)

I wonder what that makes the people who are still crying, "the earth is flat!! the earth is flat!" Seems that this pattern is pretty familiar in history.

[bioteclady]

Andrea I hope you're right, but consider that Banting first wrote about this way of eating over a hundred years ago. Seems that there is a natural proclivity for carbs, that and big money to be made off of them. So like many good ideas, they may never come to be accepted by the majority.

[platypusd]

Tom Sawyer said "Platypus, ask your husband to consider for a moment, which system evolved as the backup system, and which is the primary system"

That's a good point. I personally don't know a great deal about early human evolution or our pre-agricultural eating habits (other than we ate what was available - animal or vegetable) but it makes sense to me that we would have had more stable access to meat than vegetable, given growning season considerations. I am inclined to think they evolved together so that we could exist on what ever was at hand. This is a neat trick (not all animals can convert anything they eat into useful fuel) that has allowed us to spread out and live pretty much anywhere on earth.

From a sociological standpoint, I find it interesting that my husband was taught that it was a "back up system". This means that all the pre-med students in his class were also taught that ketosis is a "back up system", as an accepted/undisscussed fact, with no discussion such as we are having now. When you couple this with the wee bit of nutritional training they get in medical school (fat bad, carbs good - and they don't even get much training on that) you can see how patients who come in to talk about low carb eating might fare badly.

[janiepi]

The reality of this arguement is very clear. The FDA says that a persons daily recomended allowance of carbs is 300 grams, one plain glazed donut has 22 g carbs 18 of which are sugar, how many donuts can a person eat a day if this was all they used to make up their daily allowance? Too many. What people who argue low carb and ketosis don't take into account is that it is NOT normal that the human body not burn fat for fuel, our glutonous American diets have our bodies working overtime burning glucose for fuel just in the struggle to keep us from becoming diebetic. As long as the body has to burn off sugar it will not and cannot burn fat. If we elliminate all sugar carbs from our diet and take in only carbs that are high in fiber and those with high nutritional value do you really think that you would need to eat 300 grams of carbs per day in order to be healthy? Deffinately not. Ketosis is just a natural period of adjustment while your body relearns how to efficiently burn fat instead of the sugar it has been so used to and is safe as long as the diet is consistant in no or low sugar. Ketoacidoses will only happen if the body is unable to properly break down fat causing ketone build up in the body. What is important to note on the safety of low carb dieting is that cheeting is very hard on your system going in and out of ketosis by binge sugar eating is not recomended. It is best if you can teach your body and your taste buds to accept a healthier way of eating and stay that way.