Because “Trader Joe’s Whole Wheat Cranberry Hazelnut Bread” also contains healthy whole grains we need to prosper.

Whole grains are good sources of complex carbohydrates, various vitamins and minerals and are naturally low in fat. Whole grains are great sources of fiber and other important nutrients, such as selenium, potassium and magnesium.

Whole grains haven't had their bran and germ removed by milling, making them better sources of fiber — the part of plant-based foods that your body doesn't digest. Among many health benefits, a high-fiber diet also tends to make a meal feel more filling and linger longer, so you stay full for a greater amount of time.

Don't be misled by fad diets that make blanket pronouncements on the dangers of all carbohydrates. Complex carbohydrates provide the body with fuel it needs for physical activity and for proper organ function, and they are an important part of a healthy diet.

The best sources of carbohydrates—whole grains, vegetables, fruits and beans—promote good health by delivering vitamins, minerals, fiber, and a host of important phytonutrients.

From the science section at Atkins.com: “Eating a variety of foods is the best way to get all the vitamins and minerals you need each day. Whole or unprocessed foods — like fresh fruits and vegetables, whole grains, low-fat dairy products, lean meats, fish, and poultry — are the best choices for providing the nutrients your body needs to stay healthy and grow properly.”

Please read DANDR 2002 pages 216 - 217.

Bo

That mantra of "healthy whole grains" probably kills more people than almost any other.
http://heartscanblog.blogspot.com/2...know-about.html

So... This whole two years I haven't touched whole-grain, have lost weight, have the best bloodwork results of my life and more energy than I can find things to do with isn't prospering? Damn, I guess I should go back to eating plenty of whole grains and exercising my ass off every day to stay thin.



So I should cut my fat and therefore starve my body of the fuel that keeps it running at peek performance? Wow I never knew. Anything grown in nutrient rich soil has selenium, not just whole grains. In fact, the whole grains you're eating if in the USA were probably grown in mineral-void soil, just FYI. I can get all the potassium I need from the fish, broccoli and avocados I eat. Magnesium? Nuts and once again seafood.



Fiber is just one of the great myths of the last fifty years. Any fibre I consume is just a by-product, from nuts usually. And by the way, that's a load of crap about being filling and lingering longer; Unless of course by 'filling' you mean 'bloating' and by 'lingering longer' you're referring to gas. Thanks but no thanks to the fermentation in my bowels. It is PROVEN that protein/fat provide a higher level of satiety.



Fad diets? I suppose the diet of the human race for 99% of its existence myst be a fad. Seriously, you would have to be mentally stunted to believe that we could evolve fast enough at a cellular level over a few thousand years to change the basics of our dietary function and consume carbohydrates as our primary source of energy. Carbohydrates do nothing for proper organ function. In fact, the only one that might even be mildly helpful is called a "hemicellulose", simply because it doesn't metabolize but is helpful to our intestinal bacterial. They are not at all an important part of a healthy diet; Perhaps part of a standard, bastardized industrial-age diet, but not one humans should be following.



Can't entirely disagree, but then again there's plenty of lower carb fruits and berries as well as vegetables. Who the hell needs carbs to deliver vitamins, minerals and fiber when there's plenty of wonderful, natural low-carb foods that deliver the same things? Seafood, sea vegetables, eggs, raw-milk, aforementioned low-carb veggies and fruits, nuts. The list goes on and on, you know. The same thing goes for phytonutrients; I do not need to eat high-carb food to get them--any of them--at all.



Atkins, now, has taken a turn to try and make their diet "easier" for people and is straying off its original course as far as I'm concerned. Most likely they're trying to escape bad press and revitalize what's left of themselves as a company as opposed to really practicing anything that Dr. Atkins himself believed. You can't quote that garbage, no one who knows their stuff about low-carb will follow the "new" Atkins diet. Low-fat with low-carb is a recipe for killing yourself.

I'm sorry BoBo but, honestly, why are you even here? All you do is antagonize a community of people whom, regardless of education level or the number of nonsense nutrition texts they have read, understand fundamental science and internal workings of the human body more than you seem to be able to grasp. You sound like a spokesman for Imperial Sugar or worse yet, a Harvard grad who actually believes what he's been taught (by the pharmaceutical companies, FYI). The people of this website have come together in open acceptance of the fact that everything we have been taught by our peers, schools and high levels of government is a farce and here are people like you, clinging to 'scientific studies' funded by groups with an agenda or by those who have been payed off. Here you are preaching to thousands of enlightened individuals the 'dangers' of lowering carbohydrate consumption and how 'fantastic' lowering fat consumption is.

The science behind our way of life is basically impossible to refute, yet you keep on trying, linking nonsense stories that get ripped apart, speaking like you're transcribing the pages of "Staying Healthy With Nutrition" directly to your screen. The truth is what the majority of us here believe and what everyone before the 50's believed. The truth is what our animal-spearing, nut-devouring, berry gathering ancestors didn't even have to understand to know that it was what they were supposed to be putting in their bodies.

It's sad really, that you're living in this little fairy-tale land, holding on to the notion that your viewpoint is accurate when it is entirely askew. When the diseases of civilization lash out at you, perhaps you'll turn-tail and think 'Oh, gee, maybe they were right, sorry Ansel'. I think you should take everything you plant here in this forum and go apply to write for the health section at one of your local newspapers; That would be more suited for the disease-promoting, ill-informed babble you post and promote here.

Just another for your bullcrap, BoBo.

I'm about to shout, "Hallelujah!" Edless!

You have a lot more patience than I do Edless.

Edless, this part gave me my morning belly laugh - not only because it's hilarious, but because it is so very true!!

"Fiber is just one of the great myths of the last fifty years. Any fibre I consume is just a by-product, from nuts usually. And by the way, that's a load of crap about being filling and lingering longer; Unless of course by 'filling' you mean 'bloating' and by 'lingering longer' you're referring to gas. Thanks but no thanks to the fermentation in my bowels. It is PROVEN that protein/fat provide a higher level of satiety."

"All substances are poisons; there is none which is not a poison. The right dose differentiates a poison…." Paracelsus (1493-1541)

Substances often considered toxic can be benign or beneficial in small doses.

Best wishes.

Bo

Interestingly - I just came across something:



from: http://heartscanblog.blogspot.com/2...-come-from.html

The idea is that if you eliminate grains and eat more vegetables, you will increase the fiber in your diet by quite a bit. The argument that 'whole grains' are rich in fiber just isn't true. Sure, they've got a wee bit more fiber than white bread, but there's really not much fiber in grains at all - take a look:



(From The Paleo Diet Newsletter at http://www.thepaleodiet.com/newslet...ck_issues.shtml) as quoted in http://heartscanblog.blogspot.com/2...-come-from.html

I'm not seeing a lot of good reasons to eat 'whole grains'. While I realize that some low-carb plans will find a way to eventually include these items into their maintenance levels in some very minor fashion - I don't think I'd include them in 'optimal nutrition'.

I think melibsmile's suggestion to just eat the berries and hazelnuts is a much better idea than bothering with the bread.

I hate to contradict Atkins but I have to here. I read one abstract of Le Magnen. In it, he said something like "it's well known that people eat more when it's a varied diet." Maybe a varied diet causes us to eat more. Maybe because it doesn't actually contain all the nutrients, in all the right quantities and proportions, so we need to eat more to get it all. A diet of fat meat and water, on the other hand, is much more satisfying. Maybe it's because it contains all the nutrients, in the right quantites and proportions, so we don't need to eat as much to get it all.

"Important part of a healthy diet". That's just a little misleading. It sounds good but it leads to a lie: We must eat carbohydrate for our diet to be healthy. In fact, carbohydrate is not essential. We don't need to eat it for our diet to be healthy. I will even say that adding carbohydrate to the diet makes it less healthy than it was to begin with. See the "varied diet" argument above.

Very good points Sara!!

I have to say that my personal experience with following SB is that they push grains way too much. The title of the food list for phase II isn't just starches...but originally it said "whole grains". As I began to get more familiar with all its workings, I soon realized that it was wrong it should say starchy veggies and or whole grains.....not just whole grains!!
When I got to meet Dr Agatson a couple of years ago, I did tell him to have it fixed and he did.

On SB, we work to get up to 2-3 servings of "starch" a day, 1/2 cup is a serving. I found that I lost better adding in starchy veggies and very little grain. Even now, I will have 1-2 Wasa crisbreads a day...rye only, no wheat here. If that is say 70 calories day out of 2000 to maintain, thats around 3-4% of my total.... not a whole lot of grain. Once in a while, I'll have a bowl of oatmeal.

I do eat a lot of fiber rich veggies....and legumes....and fruit. It works for me.

Yeah, the SB diet doctor doesn't even eat grains himself. Much easier to market a book to the masses if you tell them what they want to hear.

Do you know this for a fact Nancy? or did you hear it somewhere because I have no idea what he eats.

Well, someone here attended a seminar he spoke at and he revealed he eats a paleo diet. It's here in the forums somewhere.

Oh it was you! I'm still searching for the thread, but you said he was following a paleo diet.

Oh yeah, here we go:

Ok, maybe he isn't following it himself but seems he's stepped away from pushing grains.

http://forum.lowcarber.org/archive/...p/t-337734.html

It may interest you to read his first book, the ORIGINAL 1972 edition; it was re-printed in 1981 and again very recently, as several posters have mentioned finding it at Barnes & Noble. In reading anything out of the 2002 edition, it probably is imperative to remember how maligned he was by the medical establishment and how the nutrition industry continually refered to the Atkins Diet as dangerous.

In the Challenges forum is a group of people following the ORIGINAL Atkins, and if you check page 1 of the thread, they've posted the original rules there.

When I did Atkins in the 70s & 80s, I lost weight very quickly, very simply -- but I don't recall eating all the FATS that I read online I should have eaten, and back then there weren't flaxseed muffins or many foods with artificial sweeteners.

Here's a link to that thread, the ORIGINAL diet guidelines are in the first posting:

http://forum.lowcarber.org/showthread.php?t=386471

Thanks for doing all that digging around Nancy!!
Yes, I knew it was me!!