You know, it seems to me that Atkins shouldn't need to change its approach to fat for marketing reasons, if that's why they did it. In fact, it could be the worst thing they have ever done, if they don't have science to back it up.

Consider the metaphor of two blockbuster summer movies: One is heavily hyped and marketed, with scads of CGI effects--but little substance or storyline. It doesn't work. It draws in crowds, but over time, the word of mouth kills its legs and it doesn't make money like its producers wanted. It's, say, The Incredible Hulk.

The other movie is based on a good story; it's a Big Fat Greek Wedding, say. The movie has little hype or marketing, but everyone loves it and as time goes by it makes tons of money.

Diets work that way, too. South Beach or other psuedo-low-carb diets have Bill Clinton on them; they get the hype. They have great packaging. You just don't know that they have the word of mouth that the core Atkins plan has.

The Atkins people have just taken a HUGE risk. They've in effect altered the script of their movie. They're hoping that sexing the script up will break down some dogmatic barriers to a target audience of mostly doctors. But they are now altering a cornerstone of their movie, a movie that was getting sensational word of mouth. It didn't have Princess Fergie or Bill Clinton pimping it, but that didn't matter. Their movie continued to sell tickets.

Now, if they change the script, who knows whether it's a Greek Wedding or a Hulk; they won't know until people stop coming to the movie.

By the way, there is some interesting fat research here: http://nasw.org/mem-maint/awards/01Taubesarticle8.html