Um .. it seems the NY Times report got it all balled up. :daze: 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.


Doreen

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

Apparently :q:

Here's the next paragraph of the newswire ..

Doreen

Gee, In the words of Gilda Radner.."Nevermind...."

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

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

"Don't believe anything you read and only half of what you see".

My favorite is "trust........but VERIFY".

"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!

Newbie
 

Just my 2 cents worth as a Newbie on this WOE.........BOY!!!!! AM I REALLY CONFUSED NOW!!!!!!! :lol: :lol: :daze: :lol: :lol: :roll: :roll: :daze: :daze:

Boy, they REALLY blew it.

Why did they have to say ANYTHING AT ALL?????

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! :lol: 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 :agree:

Margot

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.

You just expect better from the Times, even given its recent history.

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. :rolleyes: (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. :lol: )

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.