Potatofree

Don't leave - we are all here to learn. I think this topic is important for all of us who are concerned with our health and there is nothing wrong with trying to understand, especially when things are up in the air like this.

All the new media hype has shaken a lot of things up and we will be hearing about it for a while now. Tonight on my local news - I heard them make some mis-statements in an effort to do timely reporting.

Hooray for you wanting to understand!

Onward....

The reaction to this news item is clearly not just from Atkins followers. Even non low carbers, like the journalist from NYT, know what this means, and recognized its significance, and so do many of us.

This is quite different from diet zealots who may have bashed your choice of LC plan. Which is why I suggested you start a new thread to discuss that issue if it interests you, such as diet zealots, bashers and bashing, and which plan's followers will have "egg on their face" due to marketing changes, etc.. It's an interesting topic, as each plan (Atkins, Low-Carb, Paleo, WW, Dr. Phill, Simmons etc.) has it's bashers and nay sayers. Chance are, the Atkins Diet gets bashed the most.

Wa'il

This is very bad because some people may switch from healthy saturated fats to very unhealthy fats such as canola oil. If you want to learn about fats from a true expert, go here:
http://www.westonaprice.org/know_your_fats/skinny.html

Here's my information from Fitday:

12/02 -- 2144 kcal; 43% Fat; 19% SFA; 17% MUFA; 164g CHO
01/03 -- 1259 kcal; 60% Fat; 26% SFA; 24% MUFA; 4g CHO
02/03 -- 1320 kcal; 50% Fat; 23% SFA; 18% MUFA; 20g CHO
03/03 -- 2108 kcal; 72% Fat; 29% SFA; 30% MUFA; 14g CHO
04/03 -- 2071 kcal; 66% Fat; 30% SFA; 25% MUFA; 13g CHO
05/03 -- 1754 kcal; 64% Fat; 27% SFA; 25% MUFA; 20g CHO
06/03 -- 2093 kcal; 60% Fat; 27% SFA; 23% MUFA; 17g CHO
07/03 -- 2131 kcal; 58% Fat; 25% SFA; 22% MUFA; 22g CHO
08/03 -- 1834 kcal; 58% Fat; 23% SFA; 21% MUFA; 33g CHO*
09/03 -- 1907 kcal; 60% Fat; 23% SFA; 24% MUFA; 18g CHO
10/03 -- 1949 kcal; 59% Fat; 23% SFA; 23% MUFA; 19g CHO
11/03 -- 1919 kcal; 59% Fat; 21% SFA; 26% MUFA; 22g CHO
12/03 -- 2141 kcal; 56% Fat; 22% SFA; 23% MUFA; 30g CHO
01/04 -- 1959 kcal; 58% Fat; 21% SFA; 25% MUFA; 32g CHO

*Blood Pressure Before Atkins: 140s/90s

**Cholesterol: 175; Triglycerides: 96; Blood Sugar: 84; Electrolytes: Normal; Blood Pressure: 120/70; Kidneys/Liver: Working Just Fine

My Saturated Fat has been just over 20% for 13 months now...and in fact was just coming off its highest levels when I had my Lipids Checked. I see no reason to change my WOE.

The big deal to me is TRUST. All of my life I've been listening to the big fat lies that made me sick and overweight. Mainstream nutritionists tell me they care about me, yet their advice clearly doesn't work and they refuse to change their tune.

Dr. Atkins told what HE believed was the truth... as do the Eades, the Hellers, Schwarzbein, etc. ad nauseum. Yes there are some differences between their plans but they seem to be sincere in their science, and at least they reference their literature heavily with research as well as their practical experiences. We choose to trust that they actually have our best interests at heart and are really trying to help us (and would like to sell some books, of course).

After this sudden switch on sat fats for no apparent good reason (except marketing goals), I guess I just don't trust AN anymore, and they are making me feel as if they might tell me anything to get me to buy more bars and shakes now...

"fat as polyunsaturates (hope I quoted you right, Doreen). "

I think that's monounsaturates, Rose. If it was polyunsaturates, I wouldn't be eating it. Cheers.

That's certainly a valid concern. I find myself wondering how many low carbers will hear the "reduce your saturated fat to 20% or less" message and switch to very unhealthy fats such as margarine in an effort to comply without doing any research on what healthy fats are and in the process cause themselves far more damage than a saturated fat intake higher than 20% ever would have (none when combined with low carb!). Face it; how many people actually look into the science behind low carb and fat intake for themselves or even read that portion of the book?
I also wonder how many will simply quit low carb completely and go back to a low fat/high carb plan due to interpreting what AN has said as "fats are bad" instead of "lower your saturated fat intake". For that matter, this may very well have the unintended effect of driving more of their customers in the direction of South Beach since their plan as it is currently written gives no practical guidelines for how one goes about limiting their saturated fat intake on low carb and South Beach does. That's not necessarily a bad thing since South Beach is also a carb restricted plan, but it's not the effect that I think they were looking for with this.



I can imagine that you didn't like and/or appreciate that. However, think about how millions of Atkins followers are going to feel when they are now reprimanded by their friends, family, co-workers and doctors regarding their saturated fat intake unnecessarily. Think they're going to feel confused and/or betrayed? I do.
As far as having egg on our faces; that might be true if AN was actually correct in their recommendation since "having egg on your face" implies that you were wrong and are now having to eat a healthy (low carb) serving of crow. There's nothing wrong with recommending a balance of healthy fats, but to single out saturated fat as somehow deserving of being limited without the science to back them up causes them to lose a great deal of credibility in my eyes.

Lisa, that's my worry too. People will think it means that TOTAL fat intake should be limited to 20% of the day's calories. Or .. as I noted earlier .. they'll confuse "saturated fat" to mean "animal fat" and sharply limit their intake of meat proteins and eggs in the mistaken belief that the fat is pure saturates, which it's not (less than 50%). Even virgin olive oil is 13.5% saturated fat.


Doreen

What an incredible thread. Thank you to all that have posted the great links.
Whereas I tend to get a little lost in all the medical jargon, I've learned an awful lot from Dr. Atkins and PP about what I put in my body and how it is affected. "Healthy and Natural" eating is what its all about. I lost faith in the Atkins Corp when they began marketing their "frankenfoods". I don't buy them and will continue to not buy them as it goes against what I believe Atkins intended. If Atkins Corp goes bankrupt....then so be it! I know this WOL is best for me and I refuse to change ANYTHING! Yes...I truly believe Atkins Corp is changing their opinion for the almighty $$$$...but I agree with Potatofree...if this gets more people to LCing...then its not a bad thing. I truly believe each person needs to find the "right" plan for them...be it SB, CAD, PP, etc...they are all simply modifications of Dr. Atkins original plan.
I'm kinda happy about this uproar....maybe now beef prices will come down some and I can reap the benfits and I continue my "HIGH-FAT" WOL!!

Regarding sat fat, I suggest that everyone looks here, here, and here. The question isn't, what does the Atkins Center say? It's, what does the best science say? The anti-sat-fat hypothesis is full of wholes. By the methods of good science, it should be discarded. See the links.

Sheldon

Yep. We're buying a new chest freezer, to house the 1/2 SIDE OF BEEF we're buying. Yep, lots of steak, roasts and burgers for me. I'm even going to ask for packages of BEEF LARD!!!!

I think I'll keep a batch of the lard in the fridge and fry my EGGS in it. MMmmm....

Thanks for the Ravnskov link. That was a new one for me.

On that same vein, if one wants to consume MORE cholesterol, then they should be eating LEAN meats. Since cholesterol is a basic building block for cells, LEAN meats contain more cholesterol than fattier cuts.

Wow uuum I thought the Canola oil was ok... I guess I just thought of it just like Vegetable oil.

It's quite amazing how much response this thread has generated.
While I'm glad to have discovered Controlled Carb eating and while I acknowlege that Dr Atkins gets credit for exposing me (and millions of others) to it I would never buy into it entirely. I always look for a balanced point of view. I always try to consider opposing points of view. It's amazing how often both sides are correct.
I'm afraid there are alot, maybe most, people who, when they find something they believe in entrench themselves around it and refuse to consider that it's not perfect. The good Dr. made us aware of the dangers of refined foods and sugars and has shown us a way to lose weight but we should not diefy him. There has actually been a thread entitled "Dr Atkins is a God". I know it wasn't meant literally but it still makes a point.
After reading "Fast Food Nation" I decided to lay off a lot of red meat....so what? I still follow a low carb program. I still lose weight. If you want to cut back your saturated fats (and I do) go ahead. If not don't. If you haven't read "Fast Food Nation" I suggest you do......and then make up your own mind....don't just by into a good argument without exploring all opposing arguments.
Keep an open mind.

Okay, I think I understand. I'm glad I came back to finish reading the thread because I really think I "get it" at last. Grimalkin, you summed it up...it's a violation of trust, pure and simple. THAT, I understand. You put your trust in someone/something and they go and change horses mid-stream without good reason.

Archie-- I'm sure THOSE were the people "thumping" me....

Atkins (the corporation, not the plan) has lost my respect long ago.

Atkins, the PLAN, has my respect. As with anything, there are evangelists that put a person off a bit, but that has nothing to do with it being a sound plan. No matter the change, unfounded in science as it may be, it's a good plan, and is what helped me lose the bulk of my weight thus far.

Thanks to those who tried to understand the basis of my questions, and answered to the best of their ability. I feel like I do understand a bit better now.