It is very much evident that Atkins Diet is a good diet plan and still people used it. It is a high protein, low carbohydrate weight-loss plan. In past some medical professional has criticized it but it is popular and very much part of the people’s daily diet. But the question that exist is that what are the points that they have criticized.

According to Neal Barnard, MD of the Physicians Commission for Responsible Medicine in Washington “Low-carb diets have been linked to increased frequency of colon cancer, formation of kidney stones, kidney disease, and even osteoporosis. According to him “eating meat is direct invitation to the dangers of this kind of diet. It increase the risk of colon cancer for the people who eat meat daily” he says. This results in the problem related to kidneys.

The question that arise here is “whether the carbohydrate is the main source of obesity”. If yes then the misconception is that most of the people in Asia region ate more carbohydrate and still have lower weight then Americans. This low carb diet plan restricts the limit of carbohydrate intake which results in weight loss but it also restricted to temporary period.

What do you people think about it?

I think this belongs in the War Zone, myself...
But I think if you do the diet correctly, you're fine. All four stages, eating the right fats, etc.
d.

Unfortunately any comment thats associated with the PCRM is going to be totally flawed. They're a completely mad animal rights organization.

So the only comment I will make is that low carb is totally perfect for me and I will never change it, My weight, my energy levels and my health have never been better. I just wish I'd started it years ago!

Jo

this is what I think of that:

1) there is no valid SCIENTIFIC evidence that meat consumption leads to any of the woes described by the vegan activist Neal Barnard.

2) Human beings evolved over millions of years on a diet high in animal protein and fat.

3) There is plenty of SCIENTIFIC evidence that a low-carb diet leads to weight loss and improved cholesterol and tryglicerides profiles.

4) It is a misconception that all asians eat a high carbohydrate diet.

5) Can't tell if your post is a quote from somehwere or something you wrote yourself?

1. Atkins is High Fat, Moderate Protein, Low Carb, not High Protein.

2. Don't get me started on dear Dr. (I use the term loosely) Barnard. He would post the craziest stuff on a Paleo list I used belonged to. To me the man seems certifiable.

Debbie

I think this question is something to think about!

Heavy meat eating is not limited to low-carb eaters, so this should be aimed at people in general not just low carb dieters.

Quite true

Actually, Atkins is high FAT and low carbohydrate. The percentage of protein in atkins is probably a little higher than average (mainly because most people do not eat enough protein and too many carbs for sugar instead)... but percentage of calories from protein are not that high. Atkins in strict phases is probably 65/20/5 fat/protein/carbohydrate. As you progress through the diet, and per your own tolerance, you eat less fat and more carbohydrate (and some people might opt to raise the protein percentage instead).

That's because ways of eating such as Atkins or similar diets are necessary for carbohydrate sensitive people, such as myself.

I should say here that most of the resistance to low carb eating falls into a few categories:

1) From the medical establishment, who has a lot of careers tied up in preserving the status quo (fat bad; carbohydrate good!). It would be devastating to a ton of professional careers if they have to admit that the advice to liberally eat meals of pasta with fat free marinara sauce is absolutely horrid advice for the diabetic, for the heart disease patient, and for the obese person. Most professionals involved in nutritional science made their careers preaching low fat dogma, they're not about to throw up their hands and say "oh snap, my bad... looks like that was horrible advice and makes problems worse for a whole lot of patients".

2) In conjunction with the medical establishment, there is the resistance from industry.
See you have to understand most everything we've come to hold as a self evident truth today, especially when it comes to health, is at least partially resulting from industry propaganda. While industry can only spin lies so far (they need to at least stay within a confining margin/template of reality), a LOT of the things "everyone knows" about this or that stems from some business(es) deciding it would increase profit margins if people thought it were true.
With that said, you must realize the role of industry in forging a resistance to low carb eating, and the great threat it poses to it. The collective financial power of those industries which gain from popularizing low carb eating (dairy, produce, meat) are way outweighed by the collective power of industries which stand to lose (pharmaceuticals, surgical, and other services associated with the health sector; processed packaged food companies which currently make up the overwhelming majority of the standard american diet as well as the idealized american diet (low fat high grain), etc). Therefore, do not be surprised that there aren't a whole lot of people singing it's praises, and do not be surprised that every study which shows low carb to be effective follows with the caveat "that more studies are needed to prove it is safe in the long term" ...
Anyway, the good news is that a low carbohydrate diet can totally control or prevent most all cases of "diseases" currently thought to be controllable only with utilization of intensive drug therapies/surgeries and not through diet/exercise alone. Examples of such diseases/syndromes are diabetes (as well as hypoglycemia and impaired glucose tolerance), CHD, obesity and PCOS.
The bad news is low carbohydrate diets cost nothing, require minimal professional assistance to upkeep and maintain once you learn the essentials, and reduce or eliminate dependency on expensive drugs, surgeries, and doctor trips. So that's really 3 strikes there. To start a low carb diet is free, and it doesn't require you purchase much of anything besides veggies and meat. No doctors, no pills, no money flowing in.

3) From extremists and fringe activists. Mainly animal rights extremists (who feel low carb diets encourage animal product consumption, and they will do/say anything to force their subjective religious beliefs on others), but also environmental extremists (whom feel low carb diets encourage "greed" and squandering of resources; they reason that a field of crops and land to raise a cow are equal, but the crops feed more people and are less resource-intensive to grow making basing your diet on animal products "selfish and wasteful").
I won't go into detail debunking the validity of this resistance (not only is the resistance based on ignorance and incorrect assumptions, but even if it weren't it's no ones business which products I CHOOSE to buy. Only I know whats best for me, and if I'm wrong so be it. I appreciate and encourage others to vocalize dissenting opinions, as that is the only way I can ever have the knowledge and power to make informed decisions... however, the involvement of others into choices that are primarily affecting me should end right there.)
It's not your RIGHT to up and decide (based largely on gross ignorance) that my diet is needlessly destroying the planet and so I shouldn't have the option of eating that way.
It's not your RIGHT to decide I am committing murder by eating eggs for breakfast and tuna for lunch, or that I am being disrespectful because do not believe my cat should be a human equal... that he should wear a top hat and a cane and I should bid him a good day and address him as sir.
If you want to eat tree bark to save the planet, or if you want to invite your companion animals to dine with you, be my guest... and if you want to explain why you feel your choices are better than mine, I really do appreciate it because the more I know about things, the better my choices will be.
But please don't be deceptive, don't be manipulative, don't attempt to otherwise COERCE others into doing what you "know" to be right. Just explain the facts as you understand them and leave people free to choose, that's the only way truth can prevail.

and finally...
4) From common people who are just parroting back everything they "heard" from the other 3 sources.
"Oh god you eat cheese meat eggs and butter? You think that's healthy? "Everyone knows" fat makes you fat! "Everyone knows" you will get heart disease!"
They work to reinforce the propaganda and brainwashing, and make it hard for real people to actually stay on low carb.

Neal Barnard is an animal rights extremist. He is in fact married to the head of PETA. His only goal is "proving" the more frequently you eat animal products, the less healthy you are. In this case, his concern for our "health" is nothing more than a tool used to manipulate people into compliance with his religious beliefs. A warning of "bad health" for omnivorism is basically the equivalent of how conventional religious extremists use the threat of "hell" to force followers to do as they say.
This is self evident, as he has demonstrated a willingness to do or say anything to promote (or scare people into) veganism, despite the consequences on health. He will manipulate studies, data, facts and stand a breath away from totally fabricating a lie to do it. The common denominator in all his actions and positions are understandable if one looks at them with this question in mind... which position and statement is good for animal rights?

In typical Barnard fashion, he is manipulating data.
First of all, the links between consumption of meat and disease are very, very weak (practically insignificant) yet he is presents it to the ignorant reader as if they are unquestioned medical truths. He does this because he doesn't want people to eat meat, not because he wants people to be healthy.

Second, even if we assume the links are there (as weak as they are), it's currently unknown WHY the links exist. Is it because of certain meats? Is it because of our methods of preparation and treating meat? Is it some other factor in diet? A non-extremist will at least admit that it might not be meat itself that is the problem, but then again Bernard is an extremist.

The stern warning to "not eat meat or else you'll get cancer and die" is almost comical to me, if it weren't a sad fact that a lot of people are BELIEVING him.

It's not that simple. Dietary and environmental factors do not exist in a vacuum of each other. To point to asia and say "see it can't be the carbohydrate as they are all thin" is misguided for this reason.

Think of it like this. Carbohydrate is like a spark. Access to ample caloric energy is gasoline. A lifestyle of conveniences would be the equivalent of fanning the subsequent blaze.
In asia, they have very little gasoline, so those "sparks" from carbohydrate don't really produce much in the way of a blaze. Furthermore, they live much more labor intensive lives, so they don't really fan the flames, they are more easily extinguished. So asia demonstrates nothing but the fact that when resources are very scarce and people are doing tons of physical activity due to poverty, it's really hard to gain weight if your meager rasher of food is almost 100% high gi carbohydrate (rice). What does this say about health? What evidence does it offer about correcting obesity?[/i]

If you starve yourself, you will lose weight. This is obvious. Ask any anorexic who eats a rice cake a day if she is losing weight. No one is denying that if you make a conscious effort to hold your breath and fight your body tooth and nail you can probably force some weight loss.

But ...

...is this healthy, physically or psychologically?
The ultimate goal of weight loss is health. I mean everyone wants to LOOK better, but the reason weight is really important is because it is a sign and cause of bad health.
So the question is, is a starvation diet that is totally ineffective at controlling hunger and making weight normalization a normal process of the body doing anything to address and correct the source of the obesity? All you're doing is masking the symptoms.
IF you take someone who is gaining weight uncontrollably due to crazy sugars and high insulin levels, and starve him down to thinness but doing absolutely nothing to correct the original source of the obesity (the hunger and easy weight gain caused by high insulin and unstable sugar)... is that person inside as healthy as someone who does not have those problems and is thus naturally thin?
Absolutely not.

Thanx for the great response.

I like your comment "ItsTheWooo".

But Last day I have found some more facts about Atkins diet and they are like this :

According to Neal Barnard, MD of the Physicians Commission for Responsible Medicine in Washington “Low-carb diets have been linked to increased frequency of colon cancer, formation of kidney stones, kidney disease, and even osteoporosis. According to him “eating meat is direct invitation to the dangers of this kind of diet. It increase the risk of colon cancer for the people who eat meat daily” he says. This results in the problem related to kidneys.

I have also heard from people that they have headaches due to the taking out of coffee as it is mentioned in this diet. They also said that having same daily breakfast which includes egg and bacon can be quite annoying and irritating. In the other words we can say that low carb diet includes limited eating options.

More suggestions will be highly appreciated.

Sorry, I cant see any point in commenting about anything that PCRM say. Just remember that kidney problems, colon cancer etc have affected people who have never low carbed in their lives (both my parents died from colon cancer and didnt ever follow atkins!) Even vegetarians may get these illnesses

As for the so called side affects from Atkins, well, yes for the first few days you may get headaches, flu symptoms - its detox!! sugar and caffiene are drugs, you can get withdrawal symptoms!

Limited options?? er.... I've never felt limited. Society may make it difficult sometimes when the only options are sandwiches, cakes, snack bars, but I manage fine.

Eggs and bacon for breakfast??? I dont have that very often (once or twice a month maybe??), I'm not keen on fried eggs, you soon become sick of it everyday. I had prawn salad with mayo this morning, yesterday I had fish fried with spinach and topped with melted cheese. Some days I just have a bag of peanuts and a piece of cheese if I'm in a hurry

Is a bowl of cornflakes or unsweetened muesli really less limiting??

Jo

Vishal

Why did you repeat your question re. quote from the PCRM when several people gave you adequate replies and Wooo responded with an extremely articulate and well-thought out post addressing your questions?

Why have you not posted your stats? I understand some members have legitimate reasons to keep that info private, but not posting stats sometimes indicates that members are not fully engaging in the forum or are being less than honest with other forum members.

Why have you come directly into the War Zone to ask these questions on your first few posts instead of fully educating yourself about the way or eating you say you are committing to?

I know this may sound harsh, but I am bothered by your repetition of a question that was throughly answered by my fellow members and I suspect that you perhaps are not asking these questions from an authentic desire to learn.

Apologies if I am incorrect.

Remember Asians also have an increased risk of osteoporosis. Also I know alot of Asians who are not very small at all. BTW, Sumu wrestlesrs are huge and they consume massive amounts of rice to help them to bulk up. I think that the Asian diet isn't really something that we know a whole lot about.

The only way that this diet creates kidney stones is if the kidneys were unhealthy to begin with. I just had a bone Xray due to a knee injury. Osteoporosis is one thing that docs look for in a woman my age. However, the doctor remarked that I had very healthy bones. If I have healthy bones it is because of my diet.

People who give up coffee will experience headaches from caffeine withdrawal, not from the diet. This diet is limited only if one's imagination is limited. There is no Atkins law that says that you must eat bacon and eggs for breakfast. Those items are an option. There are many other breakfast items that are healthy and useful to low carbing. Two days ago, I had flax cereal and strawberries. Yesterday I had 4 ozs of steak for breakfast which was wonderful. I kept regular coffee in my diet.

Hmmm...would these be the same people who have had cereal or bagels or toast or oatmeal for breakfast every single day for as long as they can remember (mostly grains)? And then they say that bacon and eggs every day can get irritating?
Okay...eating the same thing over and over can get monotonous, I'll grant you that, but if you can't come up with anything besides bacon and eggs for breakfast on a low carb plan, somebody needs to pay a visit to the recipes forum for a few ideas.
You're only as bored and limited with your choices on low carb as you allow yourself to be.

You get headaches from caffeine withdrawal whether you are low carbing or not if you cut out caffeine. I have to say that this is the first time I've seen the suggestion that caffeine is probably best cut out of the diet no matter what plan you're following used as a criticism of low carb.

I have eggs and sausage for breakfast almost every day. Before Atkins, I have cereal and skim milk for breakfast almost every day. I much prefer the eggs/sausage and don't find them boring in the least.