Active Low-Carber Forums
Atkins diet and low carb discussion provided free for information only, not as medical advice.
Home Plans Tips Recipes Tools Stories Studies Products
Active Low-Carber Forums
A sugar-free zone


Welcome to the Active Low-Carber Forums.
Support for Atkins diet, Protein Power, Neanderthin (Paleo Diet), CAD/CALP, Dr. Bernstein Diabetes Solution and any other healthy low-carb diet or plan, all are welcome in our lowcarb community. Forget starvation and fad diets -- join the healthy eating crowd! You may register by clicking here, it's free!

Go Back   Active Low-Carber Forums > Main Low-Carb Diets Forums & Support > Daily Low-Carb Support > Atkins Diet
User Name
Password
FAQ Members Calendar Search Gallery My P.L.A.N. Survey


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   ^
Old Fri, Aug-31-07, 20:36
Locarb4mee's Avatar
Locarb4mee Locarb4mee is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 390
 
Plan: Zero Carb
Stats: 200/189/150 Female 5'5"
BF:
Progress: 22%
Default Opinions: DANDR vs Atkins 72

It seems to me that I see a slight preference in folks recommending Atkins 72 over DANDR. I have only read posts where Atkins 72 Induction is described. I did just finish reading DANDR and think it rocks!

Is there a reason people seem to think the 72 plan is better than the latter plan?
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2   ^
Old Fri, Aug-31-07, 20:44
JAnn's Avatar
JAnn JAnn is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 4,039
 
Plan: LC/GF/IF
Stats: 237.0/223.6/174.6 Female 5 ft 10 in
BF:42%.
Progress: 21%
Location: Central Arizona
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Locarb4mee
It seems to me that I see a slight preference in folks recommending Atkins 72 over DANDR. I have only read posts where Atkins 72 Induction is described. I did just finish reading DANDR and think it rocks!

Is there a reason people seem to think the 72 plan is better than the latter plan?
it is stricter and allows less choices. I did it back in the 70's but I like DANDR better for myself, however, as most people do, I have modified it to meet my needs.
Reply With Quote
  #3   ^
Old Fri, Aug-31-07, 21:31
VGrace's Avatar
VGrace VGrace is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 140
 
Plan: Atkins
Stats: 180/148/135 Female 5'5
BF:
Progress: 71%
Default

I prefer DANDR too,I don't remember to much on the 72 one
Reply With Quote
  #4   ^
Old Fri, Aug-31-07, 22:48
LStump's Avatar
LStump LStump is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 3,105
 
Plan: Gluten Free, Low Carb
Stats: 205/200.2/150 Female 5ft 7in
BF:
Progress: 9%
Location: NoVA
Default

Just as we need to find the diet that fits our lifestyle and works for us, we also much choose which Atkin's version to use. I can't do 72.. Well, I could, of course, but i don't like the strictness of it. I like the choices of DANDR, and I can't complain about the fiber deductions, lol, I feel like I can eat way more! But some people just can't do DANDR and get the results they want. So its all up to your body and mind, what works for you.
Reply With Quote
  #5   ^
Old Sat, Sep-01-07, 02:10
Kisal's Avatar
Kisal Kisal is offline
Never Give Up!
Posts: 14,482
 
Plan: It's anybody's guess!
Stats: 350/250/160 Female 70 inches
BF:
Progress: 53%
Location: Oregon
Default

I use DANDR 2002. I don't think I'd care for the original version. It is my own opinion that Dr. A. very likely altered it because few people could follow it as a wol.
Reply With Quote
  #6   ^
Old Sat, Sep-01-07, 07:16
ElleH ElleH is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 10,352
 
Plan: PP/Atkins Maintenance
Stats: 178/137/137 Female 5'6"
BF:28%
Progress: 100%
Location: Northern Virginia
Default

There are only a few people here who use 72. Not sure where you got that idea? Use the one that sounds best to *you!*
Reply With Quote
  #7   ^
Old Sat, Sep-01-07, 07:36
pennink's Avatar
pennink pennink is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 12,781
 
Plan: Atkins (veteran)
Stats: 321/206.2/160 Female 5'4"
BF:new scale :(
Progress: 71%
Location: Niagara Falls, ON
Default

Use what works for me.

I must use 72 as it seem to work best for me. I only count actual carbs, not net.

I've been doing Atkins on an off since the 70s, so I know it very well. Knowing a plan inside and out helps with your success. So what ever plan you decide on, learn it very very well.

By the way, I've done the other plans.. 2002 completely stalled me and I ended up quitting. YMMV
Reply With Quote
  #8   ^
Old Sat, Sep-01-07, 08:09
Kristine's Avatar
Kristine Kristine is offline
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25,669
 
Plan: Primal/P:E
Stats: 171/145/145 Female 5'7"
BF:
Progress: 100%
Location: Southern Ontario, Canada
Default

I think everyone should start out 2002. He changed the plan over decades for a reason. I can't think of any 72ers who aren't 'seasoned' LCers, and it seems some have unusual health challenges. 'Why make it harder than it needs to be, if it doesn't have to be?' is MHO.
Reply With Quote
  #9   ^
Old Sat, Sep-01-07, 08:19
pennink's Avatar
pennink pennink is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 12,781
 
Plan: Atkins (veteran)
Stats: 321/206.2/160 Female 5'4"
BF:new scale :(
Progress: 71%
Location: Niagara Falls, ON
Default

What kind of health challenges, Kristine? I've only gotten healthier and so did my mother, so now I'm wondering what I don't know.

I thought he changed it just to make it a bit easier, but it works slower. Then when Atkins Nutritionals got involved, well... it was a sad day for low carbers.
Reply With Quote
  #10   ^
Old Sat, Sep-01-07, 11:20
ElleH ElleH is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 10,352
 
Plan: PP/Atkins Maintenance
Stats: 178/137/137 Female 5'6"
BF:28%
Progress: 100%
Location: Northern Virginia
Default

I thought he changed it b/c people are people (Americans) and they demanded more food, more variety, more more MORE. People simply ate less in the early 70's and today people would not stand for a cup of lettuce with celery and radishes per day--even if it does mean all the meat and fat you need.

I'm sure there are some good things about 2002, the carb ladder comes to mind as something valuable, but for sure the increase in variety and higher carbs from the get-go does slow down the weight loss, and especially the bigger variety of foods can cause problems with people from Day one, IMHO.
Reply With Quote
  #11   ^
Old Sat, Sep-01-07, 15:31
pennink's Avatar
pennink pennink is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 12,781
 
Plan: Atkins (veteran)
Stats: 321/206.2/160 Female 5'4"
BF:new scale :(
Progress: 71%
Location: Niagara Falls, ON
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ElleH
I thought he changed it b/c people are people (Americans) and they demanded more food, more variety, more more MORE. People simply ate less in the early 70's and today people would not stand for a cup of lettuce with celery and radishes per day--even if it does mean all the meat and fat you need.

I'm sure there are some good things about 2002, the carb ladder comes to mind as something valuable, but for sure the increase in variety and higher carbs from the get-go does slow down the weight loss, and especially the bigger variety of foods can cause problems with people from Day one, IMHO.


Well said. That's what I feel happened too. He keeps giving in to people's whining (lol).

I find that I enjoy what I make. I'm happy as a clam eating what I eat. Plenty of ways to prepare foods.
Reply With Quote
  #12   ^
Old Sat, Sep-01-07, 16:09
doreen T's Avatar
doreen T doreen T is offline
Forum Founder
Posts: 37,231
 
Plan: LC, GF
Stats: 241/188/140 Female 165 cm
BF:
Progress: 52%
Location: Eastern ON, Canada
Lightbulb

Dr. A's Diet Revolution (Atkins 72) was promoted and marketed as a weight loss diet. His "New" Diet Revolution was intended for a broader audience, not just for weight loss but also as a corrective, therapeutic lifestyle program for a wide range of health problems, including obesity.

In his preface to DANDR 1992, he wrote ..
Quote:
... It was only after the Atkins diet made me famous that I moved to my life's work in nutrition medicine, using it to treat serious health problems. Why, then, am I writing another book on dieting?

Dieting is a crucial part of the health care I provide. Unless you eat right, you can't be healthy, and if you do eat right, then, generally speaking, you won't be overweight.

This is a basic truism that everything in my experience as a physician has reinforced.

Obesity and ill health, crankiness and exhaustion, sleepy days and sleepless nights - let me tell you, those are a familiar melody in the ears of any physician who has treated the fat, malnourished, ill-exercised modern American for long. Obesity is not an accidental accumulation of extra ounces, it is a basic metabolic disorder intimately related to ill health.

When I wrote my original bestseller, Diet Revolution, twenty years ago, I was chiefly concerned about showing people how to lose weight quickly, easily, and without much pain or bother. The principles I devised for doing that still hold. They are an effective way of discarding the excess pounds and inches, and keeping them off. Indeed, I strongly doubt that a more surefire and hunger-free method of dieting has ever been proposed.

But the principles I have been working on ever since my early days as a diet doctor are concerned with more than weight loss. They involve a commitment to complete wellness - the metabolic basis of richly satisfying well-being.




.
Reply With Quote
  #13   ^
Old Sat, Sep-01-07, 16:12
pennink's Avatar
pennink pennink is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 12,781
 
Plan: Atkins (veteran)
Stats: 321/206.2/160 Female 5'4"
BF:new scale :(
Progress: 71%
Location: Niagara Falls, ON
Default

my favourite part

Quote:
Indeed, I strongly doubt that a more surefire and hunger-free method of dieting has ever been proposed.
Reply With Quote
  #14   ^
Old Sat, Sep-01-07, 16:46
ElleH ElleH is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 10,352
 
Plan: PP/Atkins Maintenance
Stats: 178/137/137 Female 5'6"
BF:28%
Progress: 100%
Location: Northern Virginia
Default

Yeah, I forgot about that, but thought about it later, that 72 was basically a "Cosmo diet." I still think 02 is too liberal, however. 92 is the middle of the road one that has worked well for me!
Reply With Quote
  #15   ^
Old Sat, Sep-01-07, 16:49
pennink's Avatar
pennink pennink is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 12,781
 
Plan: Atkins (veteran)
Stats: 321/206.2/160 Female 5'4"
BF:new scale :(
Progress: 71%
Location: Niagara Falls, ON
Default

This should be in my siggy

Quote:
Unless you eat right, you can't be healthy, and if you do eat right, then, generally speaking, you won't be overweight.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:27.


Copyright © 2000-2024 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.