Latest blog from Dr Mike Eades. As it contains a video, I'm just providing the link to the article:

Low-carb gaining a foothold…with the mainstream
http://www.proteinpower.com/drmike/...the-mainstream/

wasn't the big low carb moment in the spotlight around '03-'04? then it fell by the wayside....

Interesting! when he shows how much better the insulin resistant did on Atkins, versus the other plans, it was quite astounding.

Funny though, even after seeing these results he's still a die-hard vegetarian and intends to indoctrinate his new child into that...

Carne, one of the things you have to consider about lowcarb history is that at one point, "low carb frankenfoods" suddenly exploded. Basically, retailers and manufacturers realized that many people ate lowcarb or close-enough, and hence surely they could make tons of cash selling low-carb insta-treats! Atkins started this to be honest, and that corp certainly went into overdrive with the 'products' push, but many others did as well. I remember walking around my superwalmart and there was just tons of insane crap that was 'lowcarb', much of which was "fake candy/desserts" using sugar alcohols that made your stomach hurt and your digestion explode.

What I don't think the enthusiastic sellers took into consideration is that although Atkins was a leading-edge-of-products, MOST people who ate low carb 'or close to it' actually ate REAL FOOD. Sure, they might try a small bag of candies but they are not going to be a constant consumer in quantity. Most lowcarbers tried these things and realized the food either upset their body or just gave them carb cravings or in any case was frankenfood.

See the idea, I have come to believe, was that everybody really did just want a quick fix. And I'd agree that sounds great. But that doesn't mean everybody wants a quick fix that is disgusting and harmful and expensive. If beef jerky was affordable and not filled with crap nowdays I'd buy more of it, but I don't buy sugarfree chocolate candies made with maltitol; if I want chocolate that bad I just eat chocolate.

So the market was a 'boom' of enthusiasm followed by a real 'crash' of implementation. Most people don't eat lowcarb as a fad, aside from the ever-new 'edge of the wave' of people just hearing about it. Most the committed lowcarbers ('or close enough') in the world eat that way because they must, or they just seriously want to. Those people are not going to be too moved by the marketing of frankenfoods. It's mostly the flash in the pan 'brief fling dieters' who go out and buy LC-crapfood, but those are not remotely the market size of the larger group.

The conclusion in media (ad nauseum) was that since people after a brief novelty-fling were not buying the LC frankenfoods, most of which were disgusting I might add, that "lowcarb was dead" and "its popularity waned." I have a different opinion on this. I don't believe that lowcarb is any less 'popular' than it was at any point, short of the marketing wave points of Atkins's books (but I feel the long-term LCers have probably filled in that gap by now).

I believe that it was a disastrous and greedy marketing idea that bombed because the products were revolting and fake.

I am relatively certain that if some frozen dinner company created a few TV dinners that were lowcarb (there is not ONE SINGLE dish in my super walmart that does not have rice, pasta, or potatoes with it), and not too nuts on sodium, that people would probably buy these, especially if they also had a note about being low-G.I. on them. But that would be "real food." Not frankenfood. They weren't trying to market REAL food, so they will never know if that might actually have worked.

I see it as a profound market misunderstanding and resultant failure in product sales; I do not see it is as evidence that low carb suddenly lost popularity.

PJ

This is a really good video - especially as it is by a researcher who was surprised by the results of his study. He didn't anticipate that Atkins would do better it all areas than Zone, Ornish, and LEARN.

I found the discussion of how diet results differ by whether the dieter is insulin resistant or insulin sensitive to be very interesting. This starts at about 40 minutes into the recording.

I almost started crying at the graph at about 42:56. It compares the results of insulin resistant dieters on Atkins v. Ornish. Dramatic difference! It validated my experience on low-fat, low-calorie diets.

It is a great video -- I have passed it around to quite a few non-Atkins people for them to watch.

Some people are vegetarians for other reasons than only health, it's possible that his reasons are based on those other reasons as well. To me, vegetarian doesn't need to be at odds with Atkins at all if said vegetarian embraces the health benefits of high-fat. Plus since he isn't overweight at all and not insulin resistant I would suppose, he could always jump into an Atkins diet at the maintenance phase where carbs are usually higher for someone with his physiology, and still be on Atkins and easily be vegetarian. I'm not saying he is doing this, but it is possible to do

For me the "scream-it-from-the-mountaintops" part of this presentation is that for obese, insulin-resistant people who have been told to cut out all the fat and cut their portions all these years to the point it is dogma, it is the Atkins diet that is absolutely the best diet for them(us) to lose weight and make drastic improvements to their health. I knew this already obviously since it is exactly what Atkins did for me, I am just so pleased that we have a really good presentation that you can show to people who might benefit from it.

The food pyramid is a major lie that has been sold to north americans and has only made people more fat and that makes me so sad...especially when I see obese people going to weight watchers and eating their salads with no salad dressing (or worse, low-fat dressing) and eating low-fat desserts and fruits and fruit juices and cutting down on their meat and sat. fat.....and destined to fail.

You had EXACTLY the same reaction as I did.

The problem is it's too long. This is the problem with all the good info on low carb. Too long or too technical. It requires time and attention - two things most Americans, at least, are pathologically short on. But to really "get it" you have to be willing to spend the time and the effort and be open to changing your views. Most people aren't.



I have a coworker who just lost a ton of weight on WW. It makes me terribly jealous since I've been stalled for a year now. She just zoomed effortlessly to goal. But I feel quite sure she isn't insulin resistant.

http://academicearth.org/lectures/battle-of-the-diets

This is _amazing_!!

Atkins vs other diets.

Yep, it is isn't it.

We can read more here and here:
http://www.proteinpower.com/drmike/...the-mainstream/

http://forum.lowcarber.org/showthread.php?t=402590

Exactly, I think that's where "Fat Head" excels -- it's simple and humorous -- like a sit-com.

Thank you so much for posting the video -- I watched the whole thing completely fascinated.

As a person who has obviously always been insulin resistant, I wonder how much damage I did to my body when I tried the low fat, carb rich diet for several years. I did not really lose weight, and felt terrible, but persisted because I believed the "fat makes you fat" myth. I feel like so many of us were faithfully attempting to do what was considered to be the latest scientific advice, and our metabolisms were ruined. It does make you want to cry.

Yes, you're right, it is amazing and thanks for posting the link!!

To me, what was glaring and not addressed was why the Atkins people increased the carbs at the 6 mo mark. He said they were to follow the book exactly, yet he didn't explain that the book actually does increase the carbs as you go. So those people were probably following the diet more as written than the other groups.

This was an extremely informative and enlightening video. Now if we could just get "normal" people to watch it with an open mind, they may better understand why we like Atkins.

And to get them to realize that "just eat less fat and calories" doesn't work for everyone.