I'd agree 100%. And also, compared to the way most Americans eat, BFL could be considered pretty high protein.... and high cardio, and high resistance training. Get my point?

However, it makes me shudder to hear someone compare the BFL program to the Atkins Diet. BFL has a sensible approach to carbohydrates and fats. BFL is teaching you the best types of foods to eat... where Atkins would have you almost completely removed from carbohydrates of any type... and I'm saying that I think this is dangerous. I see otherwise healthy people who might be 10-20-30 pounds jumping to Atkins because of the "success" stories. I'm here to say there are more sensible approaches to a LONG TERM healthy, lean, muscular body. If you are simply on the "Atkins diet", with little or no weight training, you are causing your metabolism to creep. Guess what. God forbid you ever start eating more that the spinkle of carbs you're currently on because you will balloon. Your metabolism is so low that your body is actually less "capable" of burning fat than before you started the Atkins diet.



Sorry but I don't agree. The Zone and BFL should not be considered in the same light as the Atkins diet. Maybe it's just that we see "LC" in a different way. You refer to LC as it compares to the "normal" American way of eating. I refer to it as a program that disregards the complex nature of carbohydrates and tries to remove carbs from your diet... turning "carbohydrate" itself into a "bad" word.

I, for the most part, subscribe to the BFL program. There are other "programs" out there that seem very sensible and healthy as well. Atkins ain't one of 'em. I've read on this very forum where people are in "induction" for several weeks and MONTHS at a time. It's ridiculous people. Less than 20 grams of carbs a day?