Thursday July 11, 2002

Press Release

SOURCE: Pritikin Longevity Center & Spa

Pritikin Doctors and Dietitians Challenge Gary Taubes' Fat-Promoting Article, 'What If It's All Been a Big Fat Lie?' published July 7, 2002, In New York Times

Article Fails To Recognize Significance Of Difference Between Refined Vs. Unrefined Carbs

AVENTURA, Fla., July 11 /PRNewswire/ -- The physicians and dietitians with the nonprofit Nathan Pritikin Research Foundation and the pioneering Pritikin Longevity Center, one of the first American programs to promote a low-fat, fiber-rich carbohydrate diet, are in an excellent position to comment on major nutrition and medical topics, including the issues raised by Gary Taubes' article published July 7, 2002, in the New York Times Magazine entitled "What If It's All Been a Big Fat Lie?"

The article proposes that Atkins and other proponents of high-fat diets may be correct that carbohydrates are the cause of America's obesity, diabetes, and heart disease epidemics. The take-away from the article by the public and many news sources, though not expressly written, is that the "low- fat, high-carb diets" don't work and that the answer to our health and weight problems may be an Atkins-like high-fat, very low-carb, low-nutrient diet.

Mr. Taubes is correct that the typical American diet is a disaster and his article, much more than any other recent article, has brought to the forefront the controversy of high-fat vs. high-carb diets. Mr. Taubes points out that sugars and other refined carbs like white bread and white rice cause spikes in blood sugar and surges in insulin, which, in turn, stimulate appetite, worsen cholesterol profiles, and decrease fat-burning, contributing to the fattening of America. Though the author mentions that there are different types of carbs, he seemingly pronounces all high-carb diets the same, infers that they are all ineffectual, and then makes the leap to high-fat diets as the answer.

There is, however, another far healthier alternative: a low-fat diet that is rich, not in sugary, REFINED carbs, but in carbs of a different color -- fiber-filled, nutrient-packed, straight-from-the-earth carbs like fruits, vegetables, beans, and whole grains such as oats, brown rice, and corn. These high-fiber carbs, known as unrefined carbs, cause no insulin overreaction. Unlike the low-fat, high-carb diets generically referred to by Mr. Taubes as causing an increase in triglyceride levels and other ills, low-fat, high-carb diets full of UNREFINED carbs have the most proven healthy effects of all diets.

The dramatic health results of people who have followed this kind of diet at the Pritikin Longevity Center (over 70,000) demonstrate the remarkable effectiveness of a low-fat, high-unrefined carb diet. A sampling of the results from the more than 65 Pritikin studies include a 33% drop in Triglycerides and a 23% drop in average and LDL cholesterol (4,587 subjects), 30% reduction in fasting insulin by subjects studied with Syndrome X, and of 652 type 2 diabetics, 39% of those on insulin left the program insulin-free and 70% of those on oral medications left medication-free.

These results have been published in peer-reviewed medical journals such as the "New England Journal of Medicine" and the "Archives of Internal Medicine." Regular exercise and a low-fat diet full of fruits, vegetables, and whole grains have also been proven to reverse coronary artery disease and prevent heart attacks. And in the largest study ever published on weight loss, the National Weight Control Registry, most of the nearly 3,000 subjects credit two factors for their success: a low-fat, high-carb diet and regular physical activity. They lost, on average, 64 pounds, and, impressively, kept it off for five years and more. Only 1% followed a high-fat, high-protein diet.

No such data exist on the high-fat diets. Without data to show that a high-fat, low-nutrient diet is safe or effective in the long term, it seems irresponsible to promote such a diet. We agree with Mr. Taubes that research comparing an Atkins'-type diet with a low-fat diet is badly needed, but it is imperative that the low-fat diet used is one that is full of high-fiber, unrefined carbs. We are ready, willing, and able to be the comparator.

In conclusion, we wish to assure Mr. Taubes and readers of the New York Times that low-fat, high-carb diets have NOT been "a big fat lie." Certainly, if we trade fat for sugars in the form of refined carbs, we ARE living a lie. "Fat free" carbs can make us fat. But, just as there are "healthy" and "unhealthy" carbs, there are "healthy" and "unhealthy" fats -- a distinction the Atkins' diet does not appear to recognize. A huge body of research has confirmed that saturated fats, cholesterol, and trans fatty acids block arteries. They're the primary culprits of our country's #1 killer: heart disease. Foods sizzling with saturated fat do clog arteries. Mr. Taubes was right to wince over his breakfast of sausage and eggs.

SOURCE: Pritikin Longevity Center & Spa

http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/020711/flth013_1.html

The response sounds a bit childish, let alone it's lack of any scientific substance. Notice they don't like low-carb term, and prefer to call it high-fat.

I can understand it though, they got whipped

Wa'il

These low-fat cheerleading doctors always come up with this same dumb study. I've read it a million times. It's everyone's pat answer that eating low-fat is the best diet and that eating low-carb is just some low-calorie trick. You'd lose weight on any low-calorie diet so they say.

Let's look at their key study:

This article cites the following study from the National Control Registry that shows that a low-fat diet works. Oh yeah! It works, but why and how? It works when women eat an average of 1,300 calories per day for the entire five years in order to "maintain" their weight. Yes I said, "Maintenance" was 1,300 calories a day PLUS vigorous exercise . How much exercise? Enough to burn 400 calories per day . But ooooh nooooo, it's not the low calories and huge amounts of exercise that are keeping these people thin. We are supposed to believe that it is the heaven-sent, decreed by almighty God himself, low-fat diet! So how much could men eat to maintain weight? Men averaged 1,600 calories per day on this high carbohydrate low fat diet. They also exercised off 400 calories per day. Does anyone see any hypocrisy here?

Study cited:
http://www.uchsc.edu/nutrition/nwcr.htm

Now let's get down to the real reason these doctors are shaking in their boots. Let's get down to the real reason the government has not given grants to researchers doing low-carb, no matter how reasonable the hypotheses appear to be.

Has anyone ever heard of the lawsuit against BIG TOBACCO? How about the one against Fen-Phen? How about the ones against utility companies like in Erin Brockovich? Well, guess what!? The government itself and the NIH National Institute of Health has backed a diet that was recommended to the entire American public that is responsible for an epidemic that has killed almost 1,000,000 Americans alone per year since 1980. We are talking almost 20 million dead Americans. More than died in any war, more than died from tobacco, more than died from any drug. And that is just deaths. Right now 62 million Americans have cardio-vascular (heart) disease. Let's not even mention obesity, type II diabetes, and hypertension.

Does anyone smell a lawsuit? A lawsuit so big, so enormous with every single American in a class action suit against the government and every institution (like Pritikin) that has pushed the low-fat diet upon us. Do you understand their reluctance to fund low-carb studies? Do you understand their reticence to publish findings? The cash outlay to every single American would have to be enormous to recompense a government backed dietary recommendation that has affected so many lives!

Well said!!!!


Scarlet

Voyajer,

That is exactly what I have been saying! The federal government and the AMA are afraid to admit that by irresponsibly advocating an untested diet hypothesis they have ruined the health of countless Americans over the past 25 years because they know there will be lawsuits like the ones you mention. So once again they are covering their rear ends at the expense of the people they are supposed to be protecting and treating. They should be ashamed of themselves!!

(Can you tell I get just a little angry about this? :rolleyes

Karla

Atkins or Pritikin?

chaise raises a good point, but I think we don't need to descend to the level of gloating over exactly who is, and isn't, alive, we know we can do better than that.

Oh, um, for one thing, I've just read the bit near the back of Protein Power about mummified Egyptian remains, which I think answers the point raised in this article rather nicely. You can't honestly tell me that their health problems were caused by eating refined carbs - nope, it would seem that they had a diet high in unrefined carbohydrates, plus a moderate amount of fat, and had pretty much the same health problems that plague the western population today.

They have a point - their diet probably works. Bully for them. The joy about America is we get to decide what works best for us.

I know I don't have a huge desire to eat brown rice and oats. Yuck!! I'll stick with the lower carb diet with real food like butter & meat!!

Lawsuits are mostly just a racket by which lawyers skim the profits of corporations (which is why they are so common in the land of greed and capitalism, but unheard of in other countries). Not that corporations are innocent, far from, it's just that it has very little to do with justice and everything to do with greed... thieves stealing from thieves. You know, when something has affected so many people, like low fat dogma, there just isn't much money to be made in class action lawsuits. Sure a few enterprising lawyers might pick off one or two of the obvious corps (say, weight watchers) but other than that, nothing much would change.

For this reason, I think the low fat appologists are playing offense, not defense. They have financial interests tied up in diet products, obesity/health meds and surgery, and grain products. There isn't as much money in cures as there is in temporary fixes and treatments for symptoms. Not to mention, the high carb product is cheaper to produce (yielding a greater profit margin). Low fat allows these people to siphon more money from the american public than atkins and low carb does.