ATKINS DIET WOMEN IN NEW CANCER RISK Sep 15 2003

By Lesley Mair

WOMEN who use the controversial Atkins diet are much more likely to develop cancer of the womb, a study has found.

Overweight slimmers who follow the high-fat, low-carbohydrate plan raise their chance of contracting the disease by six times, scientists claim.

Experts looked at the eating habits of 500 women with cancer of the lining of the uterus and compared them with women free of the disease.

Those who ate a large amount of fruit and veg cut the risk of developing the cancer by a third.

And for post-menopausal women, who have a lower level of oestrogen, the effects were even stronger.

The results suggest a low-fat diet that promotes eating nutrient-rich fruit and vegetables is healthier.

Some three million Britons follow the Atkins diet and 10 per cent of women have tried it. Many have praised the results and celebrity devotees have included Jennifer Aniston, Geri Halliwell and Catherine Zeta-Jones.

But the research by the Northern California Cancer Centre and the University of California in San Francisco prompted some doctors to warn against using it long term.

Catherine Collins, chief dietician at St George's Hospital, London, said: "It all points back to the good old Mediterranean diet,incorporating at least five fruits and vegetables a day.

"As a low dietary fat and a high fruit and veg intake seem protective, it proves anti-Atkins method again."

The researchers believe phytoestrogens - found in fruit and veg - are vital to combating the effects of oestrogen, which can lead to womb cancer. Ms Collins said obese women were more at risk using Atkins probably because the phytoestrogens they ate did not reach therapeutic levels.

The Atkins regime is also said to cause a higher risk of heart disease, kidney and liver damage, osteoporosis, brittle bones and bowel cancer.

link

Okay, this makes me *really* mad. The study showed that it's a really good idea to eat your fruit and veggies, and they conclude that Atkins folks don't fall into that category?! Who wrote this article, Neil Barnard?

I will put in my 2 cents...... The article said long term??? I'm confused.....Why does everyone assoicate atkins w/ only the intake of fats and meats.... I believe fruits and vegetables are listed and approiate w/ the diet's WOL......
The only thing I might agree w/ is the Kidney part.. only b/c I have kidney problems and have lowered my fat intake b/c the high fat intake was over working my kidneys and was beginning to give me a few problems......

Cancer....Everything nowadays causes cancer. Please.. eating too many fruits and vegetables can cause cancer.

Because, they were too lazy to read the book (DANDR or AFL.)



Fruits and Vegetables are allowed in some quantity from Day 1. In DANDR, Atkins suggests 2-3 cups of "Vegetables" from his approved list. The list includes almost all green vegetables, as well as a few fruits (Cucumbers and Tomatoes). Olives and Avocadoes are allowed at all stages...and are listed under "Special Foods." Same with Lemon/Lime Juice, but the amount is severely restricted. After the first two weeks:

1) DANDR says to chose vegetables [including Cucumbers and Tomatoes, which are Fruits] from the approved list, to reach 25g of Net Carbs. That is ALOT of vegetables, well in excess of 5 servings/days.

2) AFL has a larger list of vegetables. All the ones from the DANDR list are listed under "Eat Regularly." Most others are listed under "Eat in Moderation." Potatoes, Yams, Parsnips, and I believe Beets are listed as "Eat Sparingly." So, if you follow the Carb Ladder as spelled out in AFL, you can eat almost any vegetable [post-induction] as long as you don't eat too many of the Higher Glycemic ones and keep within your Carb limit.

Berries [the fruits with the most powerfull antioxidants] can be added back not long after induction. 1 serving of some berries is said to impart as much antioxidant effect as 5 servings of most other fruits and vegetables. Other fruits can be added back later, as well as more of the Higher Carb Vegetables [those listed under "Eat in Moderation" and "Eat Sparingly."]

In DANDR, only a few foods are off limits for life: White Grains and Added Sugar. In AFL, even these are allowed "sparingly." The only things off limits for life [in AFL] are Trans-Fats, Aspartame, and possibly Caffeine. Full-Sugar [Extra Rich -- Breyers or Hagen-Daz ???] ice cream is listed under the Dairy Rung as "Eat Sparingly." White Bread is listed under the Grain rung as "Eat Sparingly."

DANDR -- Dr. Atkins New Diet Revolution
AFL -- Atkins for Life

I hate seeing all the negative artickes like this..it's very scarey! Sometimes I dont know who to believe! I am however continueing atkins because I personally am eating a lot healthier than I was.

This is just ridiculous. How can eliminating WHITE flour, sugar and pre-packaged foods raise your risk of cancer? Come on, we didn't all just fall of the turnip truck. Nobody is told to increase their fat intake and run around drinking lard, just to choose healthier types of fats, olive oil, butter, full fat mayo, etc etc. This is the healthiest I've been in a long time, and it's about time the rest of the world woke up. Anybody read 'Life without Bread'? Some very good info there, and it's backed by some great research. Ciao.

I hope at least one of you took a moment to cc: your superb comments to the audience who needs to read it the most (the editors of the paper that slipped up and let it go to print) rather than just preach to the choir! (smile).
These people really need to be alerted (not just the article's befuddled author, but her editor as well, to keep editor Steve Purcell from assuming this is accurate reporting).

To that effect, here's the address where one can email them, according to the contact section of the article's website - email address is:

mailbox~mirror.co.uk

I also copied the site editor at:

steve.purcell~mirror.co.uk

Here's what I wrote them (and those of you possibly a tad intimidated about writing editors, etc. just keep in mind, we don't need to compose Shakespeare, just simple objections that we disagree with what they're writing - such dissenting letters, if even a fraction of us cc: the editors/authors, WILL register with them - but not if you deny them your objections!).

To: mirror.co.uk
Subj: Lesley Mair got the story wrong

re: article
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnew...-name_page.html
ATKINS DIET WOMEN IN NEW CANCER RISK
She writes that a diet with veggies and fruit lowers cancer of the womb. So far, so good. But then she misstates that the Atkins Diet therefore falls into the category of diets not partaking in much veggies/fruit.
Didn't Lesley bother to at least peek at the book explaining the diet? If she did, she'd have realized that not only are vegetables allowed, but much more, they're REQUIRED. Fruits are involved, too.
As far as Lesley then making the sweeping claim that the Atkins Diet "is said" to cause a host of diseases, she needs to cite references to who said such - and far more preferably, to cite peer-reviewed studies, because I dispute that such studies exist and challenge her to provide references. Parroting mere undocumented heresay is poor journalism indeed.
Please urge your reporter to do better homework before going to print, as well as whomever the editor who similarly was asleep at the wheel in not correcting these easy-to-verify oversights.
Concerned,



[xxxx]

Ho hum, more b******t. The reason we keep seeing articles like this is that the opponents to this way of eating are well aware of the principle of arguing against a "straw man". You set up a false argument for your opponent and then rip it to shreads, thus proving that you are right and he is wrong. The Straw Man in this case is the idea that people on Atkins live on nothing but meat and fat. So, you write your little article attacking Atkins dieters for doing what they never did in the first place, cutting out all vegetables and fruits. I strongly suspect that the authors of many of these articles are not simply stupid, but are vegetarians trying to push their own agenda.

If you're worried about cancer, remember this - "Cancer loves sugar!". You can read about that here.

http://www.mercola.com/2000/oct/8/sugar_cancer.htm

One other thought about this. It's sad to think of all the women out there who see only the headline or just barely glance at the article and become convinced that they will get breast cancer from the Atkins diet. So they will go on loading in the carbs and increasing their likelihood of getting that very disease.

I wrote to them as well. It would be interesting to read if I get a reply.

I'M COMPLETELY INSANE!I haven't eaten a fruit or vegetable for yeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaars!!!

for breakfast I just get a big dog bowl, fill it with sour cream and raw bacon and GO TO TOWN!!!...or better yet! I just grab a stick of butter , wrap a steak around it and MANGA when I'm on the go! LOL

this is the image I see promulgated by these media idiots every day!

Dear Media Idiots: I eat more fibrous dark green cruciferous vegetables now than I ever have before!!!

C'mon people, it's the lobbyists' rage. How can the economy flourish. We are putting the sugar companies, flour manufacturers, and potato farmers out of business. I recall reading in the 1972 version of the Atkins Diet Revolution that he favored saccarine, but the sugar industry's sales were diminishing and the only way to recover was to eliminate the opponent, thus numerous experients were conducted on animals entailing exaggerated administration of saccarine---more than the average consumer would ingest in a lifetime and fabricated studies indicating the product was cancer causing and a threat to public safety and through these "findings" the FDA banned the use of saccarine and the sugar industry prevailed.

I'm serious, it's in the book. Now as far a these mysterious studies on womb cancer, it's a wonder we haven't all been affected by the administration of growth hormones and substandard feed of beef and pork.

In retrospect, I don't really think it's a matter of low fat vs. low carb/high protein in our diets, I think a combination of politics and hormones have Americans loosening their belts to make room for the effects of ingesting too much science. No wonder Americans rank a 65% obesity rating.

In short, WE ARE WHAT WE EAT.

This is so ridiculous I am going to die of laughter.

1) I eat way more dark green veggies than I did before atkins, and I would bet I eat more than the average person. So many people think all veggies are equal, they're not. Potatoes and iceberg lettuce (which is where most peoples vegetable intake comes from) are worthless compared to spinach, broccoli and romaine lettuce.

2) After a two week induction, the average atkins dieter eats more nutrient rich fruit than the average westerner. The only time an atkins dieter is advised to stay on induction longer than two weeks is in the case of obesity; or what should be better termed "undoing the damage from a poor diet high in calorie because of excessive refined carbohydrate consumption".

3) Atkins encourages liberal consumption of nuts, loaded with essential fats and nutrients, which the low fat "eat sparingly" food pyramid does not.

4). The article is offering studies comparing high fat/high total carb/high refined carb diets, to low fat/high total carb/moderate refined carb diets (the lesser of two evils) as proof atkins is dangerous. Any conclusions drawn on the healthfulness of high fat/low-moderate total carb/near zero refined carb is irrelevant based on this evidence.

5) Phytoestrogens are dangerous in dietary excess, and can be destructive to the endocrine system. A connection between soy phytoestrogens and hypo/hyperthyroidism is well known.

More "throughly researched" information from the British press, the standard bearers of accurate reporting.

From a fellow low carber truly mediterranean ( Portugal ):

The original mediterranean portuguese diet is so much similar
to low carb than they care to admit.
Here is a sample old fashioned meal:

vegetable (cabbage or carrot )soup with olive oil (NEVER OPTIONAL)
fish,boiled egg with kale or turnip greens with lots of olive oil to dunk it in
one piece of bread ( to soak the olive oil ;-) )
one piece of fruit.

May be too high in carbs for induction but you'll find it is perfect
for maintenance, has LOTS of vitamins and minerals, has LOTS
of fats ( mono and saturated), none of polyunsaturates.
This is what I grew up with until being 10 or 12, when globalization
set in and suddenly I knew what were pizzas and burgers ( never
having heard of them before).

Interestingly enough that was when I started to put on a lot of weight,
and find contradiction on nutrition recommendations for lots of
cereals and low fat, and what I had heard as a child:
" Bread and Starchy things are VERY fattening, use sparingly"

So, take it from me, the nutritionists don't really know what the
mediterranean diet is. Whoever said it was low fat, was crazy. We
thrived on traditional products: olive oil, goat and lamb cheese,
traditional sausages like chorizo and paio. And we didn't have a lot
of fruit all year round, and the most common were apples, orange and
melons and peaches.No sugar-loaded tropical fruits.

And for heaven's sake, the people who ate the most cereals were poor
people who didn't have money for anything else, not even enough olive oil, and spent the carbs on very hard field work.Most of them grow fat and die of heart disease when they move to the cities. My relatives
did. Only my great-grandfather, who stayed active through his nineties
eating only traditional fare died very late of natural causes with a heart like an ox.

So, there you go.Eat like a true mediterranean.

Thanks for clearing that up...I always though a mediterranean diet was an Italian thing, with pasta, lots of grains and a lot of tomato and other vegtables. I couldn't understand why such a "healthy" diet made the women so heavy! (Not all women, of course, but the majority I saw in magazines and travel brochures about traveling around the area of Italy.)