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
Register FAQ Members Calendar Mark Forums Read Search Gallery My P.L.A.N. Survey


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31   ^
Old Wed, Mar-07-07, 06:04
kebaldwin kebaldwin is offline
Thank you Dr Atkins!
Posts: 4,146
 
Plan: Atkins induction
Stats: 311/250/220 Male 6 feet
BF:45%/20%/15%
Progress: 67%
Location: North Carolina
Default

I appreciate your insight as to what is happening - because I don't know how it works -- I know only that it does work.

You don't even have to look at exactly what happens inside your body. Just take several over weight people put them on the Atkins diet - and see what happens. They lose weight and their health improves (by no longer needing prescription drugs, having more energy, health problems are gone, concentration is much improved, eyesight is better, by looking at their blood tests, etc).
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #32   ^
Old Wed, Mar-07-07, 06:34
1000times 1000times is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 440
 
Plan: eat less, exercise more
Stats: 229/185/154 Male 66 inches
BF:41%/28%/13%
Progress: 59%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Demi
Have also just come across these:
Atkins Fares Best in Study Of Four Weight-Loss Regimens - Washington Post
Atkins Beats Other Diet Plans in Study - Associated Press (Published in Washington Post)
Eat To Live: Atkins diet back on top - Science News Daily

I'm waiting for GamePro magazine to headline their version thusly:
ATKINZ PWNS 0RNISH D!ET!!!111
Reply With Quote
  #33   ^
Old Wed, Mar-07-07, 07:00
diemde's Avatar
diemde diemde is offline
Posts: 7,547
 
Plan: lower carb
Stats: 333/199.8/172 Female 5'8"
BF:??/39.0/25
Progress: 83%
Location: Central Ohio
Default

Well, regardless of how it works, the good news here is that the researchers and reporters are paying attention! Even the rebuttals will help to stir things up a bit. I think sometimes the researchers are staring into their test tubes for too long and need to come up for air and look at the real world. While they are off studying, trying to find that magic pill, people are dying from obesity related illnesses. We need to get the word out on the street to use lower carb diets, regardless of which specific plan. I think this announcement will help do that.
Reply With Quote
  #34   ^
Old Wed, Mar-07-07, 07:21
pbowers's Avatar
pbowers pbowers is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 389
 
Plan: lc
Stats: 93/75/74 Male 181
BF:
Progress: 95%
Location: Seoul, South Korea
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dean ornish
The authors concluded, “Women assigned to follow the Atkins diet, which had the lowest carbohydrate intake, lost more weight and experienced more favorable overall metabolic effects at 12 months than those assigned to follow the Zone, Ornish, or LEARN diets.” This is simply not true. If you read the study carefully, you will find that the authors found that there was no significant difference in weight loss between the Atkins and Ornish or LEARN diets after one year! (There was significantly more weight loss on the Atkins diet after one year only when compared with the Zone diet.) This directly contradicts the primary conclusion of their study.
i guess the lack of fat is impairing dean's ability to read and comprehend. the authors' conclusions are accurate; the women on atkins lost more weight and had better biomarkers after 12 months. the weight loss, after 12 months, was not statistically significant (notice how dean omits the word 'statistically'). the women lost twice as much weight as the ornish people - despite eating a diet composed of 34% carbs after 1 year.


also, note that dean claims the conclusions of the authors are false, but he only disputes the weight loss, not the metabolic factors.
Reply With Quote
  #35   ^
Old Wed, Mar-07-07, 08:23
pbowers's Avatar
pbowers pbowers is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 389
 
Plan: lc
Stats: 93/75/74 Male 181
BF:
Progress: 95%
Location: Seoul, South Korea
Default

Quote:
In contrast, studies show that heart disease worsens on the Atkins diet. This is consistent with published autopsy results on Dr. Atkins revealing that he had serious heart disease when he died. It’s important to lose weight in a way that enhances health rather than ones that may harm it. These are summarized more extensively in a review article that I wrote, “Was Dr. Atkins Right?” that was published in the Journal of the American Dietetic Association.
which studies were these, dean? perhaps one that you conducted? atkins had severe heart disease? really? care to expound? you had your boys steal the autopsy report, but no such information was found. atkins suffered from myocarditis, a viral infection of the heart, which can cause weakening of the heart muscle and heart failure. i'm not sure dean would know the difference.

Quote:
If you eat a stick of butter, your HDL will go up, but that doesn’t mean that butter is good for your heart.
does it mean its bad for you? some evidence please. it's revealing that people like dean are now trying to dispute the benefits of low-carbing as opposed to telling us how bad it is for us. i guess this is how paradigms begin to change.
Reply With Quote
  #36   ^
Old Wed, Mar-07-07, 08:48
elpasopop's Avatar
elpasopop elpasopop is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 162
 
Plan: Primal Blueprint
Stats: 405/350/220 Male 6'0
BF:
Progress: 30%
Location: Atlanta
Default Prove it

Quote:
Originally Posted by kebaldwin
You are incorrect. Millions of Atkins dieters have proved that incorrect. I hope that you soon start listening.


I'm an Atkins believer, as I have lost 50+ pounds on the plan. Your claim is unsupported by the facts and unsubstantiated in any literature. The reason anyone loses weight on atkins is because they consume fewer calories than they burn. We may burn it by a variety of mechanisms, but we still burn more than we eat, hence weight loss. The burden of proof is on you to prove your claim; there is 200 years of medical research to back up my claim.
Reply With Quote
  #37   ^
Old Wed, Mar-07-07, 08:52
elpasopop's Avatar
elpasopop elpasopop is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 162
 
Plan: Primal Blueprint
Stats: 405/350/220 Male 6'0
BF:
Progress: 30%
Location: Atlanta
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Samuel
Sorry, although I agree that eating more calories than you burn is the direct cause, but we can't end the story here.

The human body contains a self regulation mechanism which - if functioning properly - knows how to maintain a constant weight. You cannot eat unless your body allows you to. Even if you could force yourself to eat and keep doing that for a long time, your body have other means to stabilize your weight. It can raise your metabolic rate, it pass food without complete digestion and it can even make you thraw-up if necessary.


You are mentioning set point theory. Our bodies tend to stabilize towards a specific weight. IF WE ARE NORMAL. I, however, have quite an abnormal food intake pattern. I can eat when my body tells me no. I have no such mechanism...hence morbid obesity exists for me and countless others. There are hundreds of ways to burn weight and our bodies adapt and adjust depending on the types of foods we eat...nobody disputes that. But we can't burn calories that aren't there to burn -- out of thin air -- so what we eat gets burned and the rest, if there is a deficit, comes from our bodies.
Reply With Quote
  #38   ^
Old Wed, Mar-07-07, 09:10
pbowers's Avatar
pbowers pbowers is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 389
 
Plan: lc
Stats: 93/75/74 Male 181
BF:
Progress: 95%
Location: Seoul, South Korea
Default

Quote:
The reason anyone loses weight on atkins is because they consume fewer calories than they burn.
this is obvious. however, what's in question is whether one's metabolism can be modified to burn more calories simply by changing the composition of one's diet. it appears that energy expenditure goes up on lc diets without increases in physical activity. this would constitute a metabolic advantage over other types of diets and would come in addition to the reduced intake of calories that typically occurs when one reduces carb intake.
Reply With Quote
  #39   ^
Old Wed, Mar-07-07, 09:20
1000times 1000times is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 440
 
Plan: eat less, exercise more
Stats: 229/185/154 Male 66 inches
BF:41%/28%/13%
Progress: 59%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by elpasopop
Unfortunately, in contradistinction to what some in Atkins-land espouse, the cause of obesity is eating more calories than you burn. Period, end of story.


Begone, blasphemer! To Hell with you, heretic -- and take your unholy "biochemistry" with you!

Reply With Quote
  #40   ^
Old Wed, Mar-07-07, 09:25
camkuhns camkuhns is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 30
 
Plan: Atkin's or similar
Stats: 186/167/160 Male 74 inches
BF:
Progress: 73%
Location: Grand Junction, CO
Default

And still another link to support Atkins.
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_relea...c-sds030107.php
Reply With Quote
  #41   ^
Old Wed, Mar-07-07, 09:34
1000times 1000times is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 440
 
Plan: eat less, exercise more
Stats: 229/185/154 Male 66 inches
BF:41%/28%/13%
Progress: 59%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by camkuhns
And still another link to support Atkins.
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_relea...c-sds030107.php

That's the same story. It doesn't count as additional evidence.
Reply With Quote
  #42   ^
Old Wed, Mar-07-07, 09:51
PS Diva's Avatar
PS Diva PS Diva is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,102
 
Plan: Low GI
Stats: 220/214/145 Female 67
BF:yes, I admit it
Progress: 8%
Location: Western New York
Default

Quote:
the cause of obesity is eating more calories than you burn. Period, end of story.
Certainly the medical establishment has believed this for years. Don't you think, with what you have learned about low carb that that is a bit of over simplification?
Reply With Quote
  #43   ^
Old Wed, Mar-07-07, 09:58
Whoa182's Avatar
Whoa182 Whoa182 is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 1,770
 
Plan: CRON / Zone
Stats: 118/110/110 Male 5ft 7"
BF:very low
Progress: 100%
Location: Cardiff
Default

Reply With Quote
  #44   ^
Old Wed, Mar-07-07, 09:58
KarenJ's Avatar
KarenJ KarenJ is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,564
 
Plan: tasty animals with butter
Stats: 170/115/110 Female 60"
BF:maintaining
Progress: 92%
Location: Northeastern Illinois
Default

Quote:
HDL (“good cholesterol”) rose slightly on the Atkins diet but did not change after one year on the Ornish diet. However, not everything that raises HDL is good, which is summarized in a recent NEWSWEEK column, “The Garbage Trucks in Your Blood.” Your body makes HDL to get rid of excessive saturated fat and cholesterol in your diet. If you eat a stick of butter, your HDL will go up, but that doesn’t mean that butter is good for your heart. Pfizer recently had to stop a large trial of torcetrapib when it was found that this drug raised HDL but also increased the risk of heart attacks and strokes.


That is the most insulting, ridiculous, illogical thing I've ever read. Gee, I better start getting my HDL down or I'm going to die of a heart attack.
Is torcetrapib made from butter? Unbelievable how this guy twists words to suggest that "not everything that raises HDL is good".
The man obviously needs a steak.

Anecdotal at best, but I gained 30 pounds on a 1500 calorie/day diet.
I now maintain exactly the same weight (and have for 3 years) eating at least 2,000 calories/day. It has nothing to do with calories and everything to do with where those calories come from.
I believe in "energy in/energy out" when it comes to cars and gasoline, but not when it comes to Humans.
Reply With Quote
  #45   ^
Old Wed, Mar-07-07, 10:05
mrjsmith mrjsmith is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 28
 
Plan: Low GI-ish
Stats: 236.6/209/186 Male 69 inches
BF:
Progress: 55%
Default My seething hatred of msnbc

I absolutely hate msnbc. Their health section is riddle with garbage. I've written several hate filled diatribes about articles they've posted in a blog (that I've since taken down, as I'm looking for a job and don't want to see too angry .

You know how they posted this story? By giving Dean Ornish a podium to yell back from.

"Why I Disagree With this Study"

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17490143/site/newsweek/

Yeah, if you go to the Health section, you get the normal article...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17484912/

but Dean's response gets posted on the actual home page.

Loved this...

“It’s a lot easier to follow a diet that tells you to eat bacon and brie than to eat predominantly fruits and vegetables,” said Dr. Dean Ornish, creator of the Ornish diet.

Yeah. Right. If you can't follow the diet, it doesn't work.

Loved this...

“To me, it just screams out for the need to prevent obesity,” Brownell said.

Thanks. Glad we solved that. We can just pack it up and go home now. How crazy is that? As if preventing obesity had an obvious solution.

I liked the opener...

"beating the Zone, the Ornish diet and even U.S. guidelines"

Like the U.S. guidelines were somewhere in the bible and found in cave paintings. I was doing a little research into the Pyramid. If you get some time, check it out.

Where does the pyramid come from? The government, right? Yeah, but what agency?

http://www.mypyramid.gov/

Ah. The Department of Agriculture. Wouldn't it make more sense to have the Food and Drug Administration do that?

Check out the mission statement on the USDA's site (http://www.usda.gov):

"expanding markets for agricultural products and support international economic development, further developing alternative markets for agricultural products and activities, providing financing needed to help expand job opportunities and improve housing, utilities and infrastructure in rural America..."

Seems like they have a lot of stuff to do. Not sure why they'd be coming up with food guidelines, unless they were selling something. To be fair, meat is made on farms too, but I'm guessing grains would have to actually kill you before they'd suggest you eat less of them.

Rant over.
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



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 23:51.


Copyright © 2000-2019 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.