Wed, Nov-12-03, 17:14
|
 |
Registered Member
Posts: 356
|
|
Plan: CKD
Stats: 225/170/150
BF:
Progress: 73%
Location: Austin, TX
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Lisa N
Something else I noticed is that they are basing the reduction in cardiac risk solely on the percentage of weight lost and they only give bloodwork results for those on Atkins (maybe because nobody else's improved or they got worse?).
|
Actually, if you look at this version of the study results:
Quote:
|
"Atkins reduced LDL 8.6 percent, Zone 6.7 percent, Weight Watchers 7.7 percent and Ornish 16.7 percent," Dansinger said in a statement afterwards. He said the Atkins and Zone diets diet raised HDL by about 15 percent, Weight Watchers by 18.5 percent, and Ornish by 2.2 percent.
|
(from http://health.yahoo.com/search/heal...=s&p=id%3A49369 )
you'll see that Atkins was slightly better than WW and the Zone at reducing LDL, and not quite as good as WW (but just as good as the Zone) in increasing HDL. The Ornish diet was significantly better at reducing LDL, but caused almost no increase in HDL. I think the reason they only gave the bloodwork results for Atkins in this Netscape version was because eating more cholesterol and having your cholesterol improve is your basic "man-bites-dog" story (until conventional wisdom catches up with current science)
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Lisa N
Cardiac risk is not determined solely by what you weigh. Another good example of how you can skew the data to show what you want the public to see.  |
Well, looking at the clustering of serum lipid results, it would appear that short of a fanatical low-fat approach like the Ornish or Pritikin diets, cardiac risk is primarily determined by what you weigh.
|