Quote:
|
Here is the problem...They are characterizing an entire diet by ONE possible menu. They state that you "will be deficient," not that you may be deficient...if you do Atkins. That is misleading.
|
They characterized all the diets based on their sample menus. They criticized the Ornish diet as being deficient in Vit E, B12, and zinc. The study made it clear that the comparison was based on sample menus from the books and included them in the study. They also made clear that careful food selection (on any of the diets) could eliminate the nutritional inadequacies.
I was mainly responding to Vpeach's comment about the researchers "not reading the book or anything".
Atkins (or his successor) could clearly solve this problem by reworking the sample menu in his book to something nutritionally balanced.
Quote:
|
I don't see most dieters simply following sample menus. Most eat what they want within the rules.
|
But obviously you pay attention to your nutrient intake. Does everyone? I don't know - I don't perceive myself to be the typical dieter. My limited anecdotal experience with other dieters is that some barely track calories, let alone macronutrients, let alone vitamin and mineral intake!! So, could someone simply "count carbs" and "eat within the rules" and get an inadequate nutrient intake? Absolutely. Again, I don't feel the average member of this forum represents the average person "on the street" - I think there's much more awareness of the full nutritional component of the diet, including adequate vitamin and mineral intake.
Quote:
|
That's where we differ. When I read it, I see another article trying to paint Atkins as a "Dangerous" diet that noone should do. I see the pushing of LF Dairy as trying to push people away from Atkins and to the AHA Diet.
|
Are we talking the study or the article? I'm talking the study. Do I think the article accurately represents the study, and all the nuances of it? No, but how many news items do? It's called "dumbing it down", and it happens all the time. People still think the USDA recommended "don't eat fat"...they didn't, never did, they recommend a moderate-fat diet of 20-30% fat, but what happened? It got "dumbed down". People think Atkins says "don't eat carbs", too....
I refuse to get nutritional (or any other) guidance from a news blurb, simply because most of them are so simplified as to miss the main point involved.
Quote:
|
As I said, I read somewhere (a while back) that Sugar (such as in Colas) blocks Calcium absorption. Never heard that Fat blocks Calcium absorption.
|
For sodas, the phosphoric acid is what's blocking the calcium absorption. There's a balance between calcium, magnesium, and phosphorus - and too much phosphorus relative to calcium will block the absorption of the calcium. (The whole issue of mineral absorption and malabsorption and interaction with other nutrients is FAR too complicated for me to try and optimize mineral absorption in my diet - and I confess to being exceptionally anal retentive when it comes to charting and planning my food intake!!
)
Fat will block calcium absorption, but it's something of a mixed blessing...the calcium will bind with the fats and block the absorption of the fats, too! It's believed to prevent colon cancer. So, six of one...half dozen of the other..
Fiona: thanks for the info on the oxalic acid. I didn't expect to see Frances Moore Lappe's name on this forum, though...
wsgts:
to individual differences. "Twenty men crossing a bridge into a village are twenty men, crossing twenty bridges, into twenty villages."