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 > Low-Carb Studies & Research / Media Watch > LC Research/Media
User Name
Password
FAQ Members Calendar Mark Forums Read Search Gallery My P.L.A.N. Survey


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #106   ^
Old Mon, Jan-19-04, 10:39
doreen T's Avatar
doreen T doreen T is offline
Forum Founder
Posts: 37,202
 
Plan: LC paleo/ancestral
Stats: 241/188/140 Female 165 cm
BF:
Progress: 52%
Location: Eastern ON, Canada
Exclamation

Um .. it seems the NY Times report got it all balled up. Atkins Nutritionals corp. has been misrepresented, and there really is NO LIMIT on saturated fat after all.

http://www.prnewswire.co.uk/cgi/news/release?id=115415 .. This PRN newswire was published in the UK earlier today.

Quote:
The January 18 article in The New York Times and the subsequent publicity is yet another dramatically inappropriate example of the media reporting on the media and perpetuating a false report on Atkins. This is a great disservice to the millions upon millions of Atkins followers who have been benefiting from this nutritional approach for over 30 years.

Doreen
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #107   ^
Old Mon, Jan-19-04, 10:48
OHGal1415's Avatar
OHGal1415 OHGal1415 is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 387
 
Plan: Atkins
Stats: 270/225/145 Female 5'4
BF:
Progress: 36%
Default

So, who said the 20% thing?
Are they recanting that, as well? Or was this orchestrated by the media?
Reply With Quote
  #108   ^
Old Mon, Jan-19-04, 10:50
doreen T's Avatar
doreen T doreen T is offline
Forum Founder
Posts: 37,202
 
Plan: LC paleo/ancestral
Stats: 241/188/140 Female 165 cm
BF:
Progress: 52%
Location: Eastern ON, Canada
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OHGal1415
So, who said the 20% thing?
Are they recanting that, as well? Or was this orchestrated by the media?

Apparently

Here's the next paragraph of the newswire ..
Quote:
The accusation in today's media (January 18) claiming that Atkins is retreating from its long held position on the consumption of fat is simply wrong. It is a false premise created by members of the media itself based on input from "experts" who apparently have never read any of Dr. Atkins books, nor have even casually browsed the Atkins web site "Atkins.com".


Doreen
Reply With Quote
  #109   ^
Old Mon, Jan-19-04, 10:53
potatofree's Avatar
potatofree potatofree is offline
Fully Caffeinated
Posts: 17,245
 
Plan: Back to Atkins
Stats: 298/228/160 Female 5ft9in
BF:?/35/?
Progress: 51%
Default

Gee, In the words of Gilda Radner.."Nevermind...."
Reply With Quote
  #110   ^
Old Mon, Jan-19-04, 11:06
doreen T's Avatar
doreen T doreen T is offline
Forum Founder
Posts: 37,202
 
Plan: LC paleo/ancestral
Stats: 241/188/140 Female 165 cm
BF:
Progress: 52%
Location: Eastern ON, Canada
Default

The rebuttal is slowly making its way into North America ... it's now posted at Yahoo! business news .. http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/040119/nym053_1.html

Wonder how long before CNN picks it up .. and the big question??? What will the NY Times have to say about it?/


Doreen
Reply With Quote
  #111   ^
Old Mon, Jan-19-04, 11:20
Archie's Avatar
Archie Archie is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 518
 
Plan: Atkins
Stats: 236/202.5/159 Male 66
BF:
Progress: 44%
Location: Vancouver Island, B.C.
Default

In the words of an Uncle of mine....

"Don't believe anything you read and only half of what you see".
Reply With Quote
  #112   ^
Old Mon, Jan-19-04, 11:26
OHGal1415's Avatar
OHGal1415 OHGal1415 is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 387
 
Plan: Atkins
Stats: 270/225/145 Female 5'4
BF:
Progress: 36%
Default

My favorite is "trust........but VERIFY".
Reply With Quote
  #113   ^
Old Mon, Jan-19-04, 11:47
CindySue48's Avatar
CindySue48 CindySue48 is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 2,816
 
Plan: Atkins/Protein Power
Stats: 256/179/160 Female 68 inches
BF:38.9/27.2/24.3
Progress: 80%
Location: Triangle NC
Default

"The January 18 article in The New York Times and the subsequent publicity is yet another dramatically inappropriate example of the media reporting on the media and perpetuating a false report on Atkins."

ok....so the Director of Research and Education says something in a seminar.....that is picked up by the NYT and that's perpetuating a false report?

OK...so when is this director loosing her job?

This sounds to me like trying to CYA and blame the media at the same time!

This woman is a representative of ANA. She made a statement that, according to the initial article was backed up by an unnamed "representative" of ANA.

Sorry...but I lost resect for ANA with the frankenfoods. I lost more respect after reading the NYT article. It really is a shame....they're undermining the befiefs and teaching of their founder. If they came out with new reasearch that indicates sat fat should be limited, fine.....but this is not the case.

ARRRRRGGGGGHHHHHHHH

And now, as I'm writing this I'm also listenting to the news...the ad for the next story? "Wait until you hear what the Atkins people are now saying about what you should eat" and "cut back on the fat....you've heard it before, but this time the advice is coming from the people who brought you the Atkins diet"

Lets see what the report actually says: To paraphrase:

1. For years Atkins dieters have been told they could eat all the red meat, eggs, and cheese they want to. Well now, they're being told to lighten up on saturated fats.
2. President of Atkins (NOT ATKINS NUTRITIONALS) is not commenting, at least for now.
3. The scientific community is saying "I told you so". Then a nutritionist was on saying that they "knew" that the diet was wrong for "promoting artery clogging, icky sticky saturated fats"
4. It remains to be seen if the new recomendations are going to be as successful as the original plan.

After the report, the in-studio reporter noted " Atkins has been shown to reduce cholesterol much better than traditional diets" (hmmmmI wonder if she's a LCer?)
Also, on the plus side, the dieters they showed were eating steak, chicken and fish.....no veggies, but at tleast there wasn't a slice of bacon in sight!
Reply With Quote
  #114   ^
Old Mon, Jan-19-04, 11:52
katlynweb's Avatar
katlynweb katlynweb is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 259
 
Plan: Atkins
Stats: 170/140/130 Female 5 feet 3 inches
BF:
Progress: 75%
Location: Chattanooga, Tennessee
Default Newbie

Just my 2 cents worth as a Newbie on this WOE.........BOY!!!!! AM I REALLY CONFUSED NOW!!!!!!!
Reply With Quote
  #115   ^
Old Mon, Jan-19-04, 11:55
OHGal1415's Avatar
OHGal1415 OHGal1415 is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 387
 
Plan: Atkins
Stats: 270/225/145 Female 5'4
BF:
Progress: 36%
Default

Boy, they REALLY blew it.

Why did they have to say ANYTHING AT ALL?????
Reply With Quote
  #116   ^
Old Mon, Jan-19-04, 12:10
mollymom's Avatar
mollymom mollymom is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 761
 
Plan: Superfoods RX
Stats: 270.5/228/170 Female 68.5 inches
BF:TOO MUCH
Progress: 42%
Location: Sarnia, ON, Canada
Talking Holy Cow..or am I supposed to Say Chicken Now?

WHOA! Everyone take a deep breath. For a while there, reading this thread I felt like I was in the Low Carb War Zone, not the FORUM.

Here are my two cents (well, okay, $2.22) worth:
  • I don't know about in the States, but in many parts of Canada, LCing in any form has yet to gain great respect, which is why I don't discuss my WOE with many people outside of here, so loss of credibility isn't much of an issue for me. I just know I felt that I had a real EUREKA moment when I finally read DANDR, and some of the other research, and just plain looked at the results on here. I didn't bother discussing it with my doctor at all, he would look at me blankly and tell me to eat lettuce.
  • I did suddenly "push the envelope" and eat things I hadn't eaten without guilt in years..prime rib, butter, bacon, full fat cheeses etc. and I probably overdid it. In any form, too much of a good thing is NOT a good thing in my opinion. I love chicken and fish, why suddenly was I buying beef like crazy? I am not say give up the beef, but as many said, isn't just eating a good variety of foods the best way anyhow?
  • I am with Potatofree on many things, especially, if it gets LCing more respect..then great..let them "approve what we are doing" then eat as we always did...you can fool a lot of the people a lot of the time! I am sorry that, yes, it may suddenly seem like the DOC lost some credibility, but those who believe and know the truth just say the heck with it, this WOE isn't going away.
  • Atkins was the pioneer, the rest have picked up on his research. No one WOE works for everyone. I don't know if Atkins is my WOE for forever, I too may find in time, I want to try CAD or CALP or any of the others if I feel as I get to know my body better, there is a better plan for me.
  • Folks keep saying in many journal discussions and posts that you have to do what works for you, yet I can see that some people do treat others as traitors in they even mention something other than Atkins. Fanaticism of any kind scares me. I believe the U.S. Constitution and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, do uphold the rights to freedom of speech and opinion...as long as it doesn't hurt others (always have to add the responsibility after the right!)
So..WOE's will come and WOE's will go, but the basic science remains the same. The media will continue to get it wrong...it requires a lot of understanding ( as in my goodness, I felt I needed a degree in Biochemisty to understand some of the arguments in this post)...and I learn every day. BUT...bottom line... IMHO if whatever LC plan you are following works for you, and you are happy, and your body is improving, along with your mood, your blood chemistries etc....just do it, and forget the misreporting, uneducated media who still think after thirty years it is a fad or a craze! There is enough bashing out there, we don't need to start in on each other.

PEACE

Margot

Last edited by mollymom : Mon, Jan-19-04 at 12:14.
Reply With Quote
  #117   ^
Old Mon, Jan-19-04, 12:27
gotbeer's Avatar
gotbeer gotbeer is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 2,889
 
Plan: Atkins
Stats: 280/203/200 Male 69 inches
BF:
Progress: 96%
Location: Dallas, TX, USA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mollymom
There is enough bashing out there, we don't need to start in on each other.


I have to agree - my anger is directed towards that bogus nutritionist who started this false rumor, and the publications that reported it uncritically.

I suggest writing the editor at each publication that reprinted the lie and demand a correction and an apology.
Reply With Quote
  #118   ^
Old Mon, Jan-19-04, 13:50
kyrasdad's Avatar
kyrasdad kyrasdad is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 3,060
 
Plan: Atkins
Stats: 338/253/210 Male 5'11"
BF:
Progress: 66%
Location: Broken Arrow, Oklahoma
Default

You just expect better from the Times, even given its recent history.
Reply With Quote
  #119   ^
Old Mon, Jan-19-04, 13:54
RoseTattoo's Avatar
RoseTattoo RoseTattoo is offline
Kid R
Posts: 1,168
 
Plan: Maintenance
Stats: // Female 5"1'
BF:Too darn much!
Progress: 90%
Location: PA
Default

A couple of things:

Whoever corrected me about meat containing mono vs poly fats (sorry, it was so many posts ago I've lost track, lol), you're absolutely right and I apologize for my error.

Second, the NYTimes has had a lousy track record regarding accuracy lately, under the editorship of Howell Raines and even into the current editorship of Bill Keller. It frequently has to run corrections of its pieces, so it wouldn't surprise me one bit if the reporter simply got things wrong. (But because it is the NYTimes, people take it seriously and it's important for us to know what's out there.) This particular writer, Marian Burros, is a well-known low-fat advocate and would probably just LOVE to find the Atkins people eating crow. (Crow containing less than 20% of its calories as sat fat, of course. )

Last edited by RoseTattoo : Mon, Jan-19-04 at 13:55.
Reply With Quote
  #120   ^
Old Mon, Jan-19-04, 14:03
gotbeer's Avatar
gotbeer gotbeer is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 2,889
 
Plan: Atkins
Stats: 280/203/200 Male 69 inches
BF:
Progress: 96%
Location: Dallas, TX, USA
Default

Burros has a cookbook out, "Cooking for Comfort", that emphasizes healthful fare like macaroni & cheese, pineapple upside-down cake, and sloppy joe sandwiches.

Yikes. No conflict of interest there.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

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

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Weight debate pits good fat vs. bad fat tamarian LC Research/Media 3 Mon, Jan-20-03 12:44
The low fat/low cholesterol diet is ineffective--European Heart Journal Voyajer LC Research/Media 1 Mon, Aug-19-02 14:23
Current and Potential Drugs for Treatment of Obesity-Endocrine Reviews Voyajer LC Research/Media 0 Mon, Jul-15-02 18:57
Low fat myth exposed Jilly LC Research/Media 21 Mon, May-20-02 03:34


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 00:39.


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