On another board I'm a member of, we are discussing how successful our diets are. One lady is on a low calorie diet and posted some article from her dietician sister. This one riled me, I'd like to argue it but would prefer to be armed with some facts/article links from you knowledgeable people.....

Link to article http://www.adviceforeating.com/article/fad_diets.html



The Downfalls to Fad Diets
By Catherine Kruppa, MS, RD, LD


In January of 2002, Men's Health Magazine awarded Houston the fattest city in America award. With so many Houstonians, as well as Americans, wanting to lose weight, many turn to fad diets in an effort to find that magic weight loss bullet. This article addresses a few of the more popular fads and the potential risks.

Dr. Atkin's New Diet Revolution is based on cutting out carbohydrate containing foods and eating an unlimited amount of meat, fish, poultry and fats. This definitely appeals to most Americans who can easily live without the bun on their double bacon cheddar cheeseburger. People see weight loss due to two reasons. First, when high amounts of protein byproducts are excreted through the kidneys, so is a lot of water. Secondly, after the first three days of the diet the novelty of eating as much fat and protein as you want wears off, your caloric intake decreases due to the exclusion of a food group. The potential risks of this diet include an increased risk of heart disease, cancer, osteoporosis, gout, kidney stones, orthostatic hypotension, high blood pressure, and diet failure. The bottom line is how long can you really avoid bread and bread products - a lifetime? And when you do start eating them again, unless you have decreased your total calorie intake, that weight is going to magically reappear.

The Carbohydrate Addict's Diet consists of a low carbohydrate diet all day, expect for a one-hour reward meal. Again, this diet is effective because it limits calories from carbohydrates at every meal except for one and that meal lasts only one hour. Potential problems of this diet include that it promotes inaccuracies such as "grapes are nothing but sugar bound to ignite nonstop carbohydrate cravings". It calls for decreased fruit intake and decreased intake of fiber, numerous vitamins, minerals, and phytochemicals. Scientific studies show that fruit, fiber, vitamins, minerals and phytochemicals fight against heart disease and cancer. This is just another diet that leads consumers another step away from normal eating.

Sugar Busters! works by cutting out concentrated sources of sugar and high glycemic carbohydrates. This successfully cuts calorie intake for most people. This book also includes the promotion of inaccuracies; such as carrots are a bad food. Do you really believe that an excess amount of carrots is what has caused obesity in America? Excluding sugar from the diet has important psychological consequences and moderate consumption of sugar does not compromise blood sugar and can be part of a healthy diet. This diet can definitely be detrimental to athletes and other active people.

The bottom line is that these diets may cause you to lose a few pounds, but can they realistically last a lifetime as well as promote your health? The answer is no, and you are better off having a few excess pounds than watching your weight yo-yo with every new fad diet. The key to healthy weight loss is to consume fewer calories than you expend during the day and to consume a well-balanced diet.

First off, there are NO studies that show that Atkins causes cancer, gout, kidney stones or anything else listed. NOT ONE STUDY shows this. Tell your friend to go look for some. Second, this article actually is saying that sugar can be a part of a healthy diet. Which diet says that sugar is healthy? None. Yeah, athletes can usually get away with some sugar consumption, but most Americans that are overweight aren't athletes. I am assuming that by athlete, the author is referring to someone who spends most of their time in intense physical activity.

Also the author has apparently either never talked to long term low carbers or read beyond induction in the Atkins book. How do they know that three days is all Atkins people can deal with? Where did that three days come from? Atkins also allows you to slowly add carbs back in a specific order until you get to the point where you find your maintenance level. Do I eat the occasional piece of bread? Yes. Do I need it to live? No.

There are several ways to do long term maintenance on something like Atkins. I stay at a fairly low carb level 6 1/2 days a week (eating between 30-40 g of carbs per day) and then I have one "blow out" night a week and eat anything I want. I decided to do it this way instead of eating my daily CCLM which is around 45-50 depending on my activity level. It gives me one night to go out with friends and not worry. Atkins suggests this tactic in his book.

Gee, where to begin?

"Dr. Atkin's New Diet Revolution is based on cutting out carbohydrate containing foods and eating an unlimited amount of meat, fish, poultry and fats."
No, it doesn't. Dr. Atkins advocates concentrating on healthy sources of carbohydrates, such as non-starchy vegetables, nuts, and low glycemic index fruits. He doesn't say to eat unlimited amounts of anything, simply to eat until one is satisfied. Only trans-fats are forbidden fats, the worst fats you can eat.

About CAD "It calls for decreased fruit intake and decreased intake of fiber, numerous vitamins, minerals, and phytochemicals." Vegetables are much better sources of all these things than fruit. Besides, CAD allows almost anything at a balanced Reward Meal, so if anyone is missing any "vital carbohydrates" they can get them once a day.

As for Sugar Busters, the most moderate in its approach to lowering carbohydrate: "Excluding sugar from the diet has important psychological consequences and moderate consumption of sugar does not compromise blood sugar and can be part of a healthy diet."
Since when? And where? And with what species, since Homo Sapiens evolved without sugar?
I'll say eliminating sugar has important psychological consequences. For me, it meant I was able to stop stuffing my face constantly, didn't want to fall asleep after lunch, and slept better.

The central fallacy in this line of thinking is that "the body needs carbs." I do eat some carbs. If the body needs any more than my 40-60 grams, itmakes the carbs it needs from protein sources. Most organs run fine on ketones; in fact, the brain PREFERS ketones.

And ask them this: if carbs are needed for energy, why does a meal with pasta and bread make you sleepy?
And one of my fat/protein/low carb meals not only satisfies me for hours, but DOESN'T make me sleepy?

And here's my favorite in these discussions: why does nutritional science recognize "essential fats" and "essential proteins" but there aren't any essential carbohydrates?

You know i've seen "carrots" thrown around a lot in articles and opinions like this.
No, carrots themselves didn't make me fatter BUT eating carrots caused me to have gnawing hunger and cravings for more carbs and i usually ended up eating more sweets and processed foods or a LOT of fruit at one time. Even now i have to be very careful about carrots because they are a trigger food for me and will cause me to want to 'munch' after a meal that has had even just two or three baby ones.