I gotta say Hurray!!!!!!! Earlier today I defended the Lean Cuisine Web Site when someone posted an untrue statement about what they (Lean Cuisine)said about about carbs on the Atkins board. Now I’ve just seen a commerical from Kraft Foods - in which their dietician shows exactly what 1 serving of carbs is - she closes by saying - remember it’s not about avoiding carbs but eating them in the recommended proportions - ½ cup of pasta is one portion, 1 slice of bread of is one portion etc.

Right now we are being bombarded by all kinds of recommendations to cut carbs, new low carb products and resturaunts providing low carb meals - ok this is fine and good - I can use some of this stuff - but have managed to watch carbs for years without it. Low Carbing has been around for years, right now it’s fighting to replace Low Fat - something else will come along and fight for its place. Many people who did low carb years ago - lost weight and then gained it back, Many people who lost weight on low fat, gained it back, some people from each plan kept it off, most likely because they learned how to combine the best of both and learned moderation.

I’m just happy because I’m SICK of hearing people bash carbs, and bash low fat products. I’m glad that some companies are defending carbs because really most of us will not be happy forever subsisting on a diet containing 60 or less carbs a day forever. It’s got to be more about educating people on the “good carbs” and even using some lower fat products to control total calorie/carb intake.

Are you posting on the right forum?

My 60-ish carbs a day is hardly "subsistance"...

Well, ya know, whatever works.
I find I like eating 60 or less, since so many foods appeal to me. If someone wants to add more carbs, and reduce the fat, go for it.
I THOUGHT I'd be one of those, but I've frankly lost my taste for bread and pasta. It's amazing but true: I don't feel deprived at all!
If Dr. Atkins wrote his autobiography, I doubt it could be titled "30 Years Without Doughnuts." I feel I can eat anything I want, I just don't want things like I used to. And I can eat them IN MODERATION. Which didn't used to be true.

Kristine



Ok I agree it's not subsistance - But are you honestly, truely, happy and satisfied at that level day after day after day, without EVER going over that level? If you ever do weaken and go over, do you get the water gain the next day? Then go back on the merry go round of under 20 carbs to lose that water weight? It might not be true for you, but for me if I constantly keep my carb levels in control but not as low as 60 I don't suffer from the water gain if I have a few extra carbs in one day. I'm definitely not anti-low carb, but I'm definitely not Pro-Atkins, though at one time I was. I just truly believe that there is a better balance to be acheived by combining lower fat with lower carb, from reading on this forum I see many people trying to satisfy hunger with 0 carb foods that are extremely high calorie - I KNOW the argument about fat being self limiting, but obviously that dosen't work for all - and for a lot of people the good carbs do a better job of filling the belly.

I know everyone is different, I was just pleased that some companies are defending carbs in the midst of the current low carb frenzy.

Actually...I do just fine on 30 a day and have now for nearly 3 years. I don't feel deprived and those moments when I am tempted to eat higher carb are now rare indeed. But...that may just be me.

Lisa,

I doubt that it's just you, just as it's not me that finds I do better with and in fact need more carbs. Part of the reason I made this post is because it took a lot of people here a long time to discover that what worked better for them was controlled, rather than low carb - I guess we are a bit more low profile than the Atkiners, and tend to hang out in the Swartzbein, Sommersizing or other forums and mainly exchange our ideas in journals. Posting this was REALLY meant to help some people who might be trying to keep their carbs lower than is good for their own individual system. I was in no way trying to bash low carb - why else would I have been here for a year, I love it here, I just want to remind people that one plan is not the answer for everyone.

KoKo,
I think I agree with you about the ultra-low carb plans. I didn't feel energetic on them, which made me dread exercise, and regular exercise is my only good habit! So many people I know (not on this board, necessarily) lose weight on induction and are then blindsided by how quickly it comes back if they reintroduce even a moderate amount of carbs.

I am using the Insulin Resistance diet. It allows up to 30 grams of carbs in any two-hour "window" but they must be balanced with about 15 grams of protein. I just keep my portions small and the carbs and protein in a 2/1 ratio. I take it easy on fats, but I eat as much as it takes to make the meal appealing (just not more than necessary) and I feel really good!

My energy level is up, I am exercise more faithfully than before and enjoying it. The very best part is that I have no cravings at all! I just realized today that I can't remember the last time I was tempted to go get a piece of pastry in the middle of the afternoon, and that used to be my downfall. Today, at lunch, I went to a really nice restaurant and had grilled salmon with brocolli (hold the mashed potatos). There was a big loaf of fresh sourdough bread on the table and it required absolutely no exercise of will at all to not eat it. I simply decided not to since I was planning on havlng an apple for dessert when I got back to the office.

That would never have happened a year ago!

Of course, there are many, many people on this board who are very happy with their results on Atkins, and I don't doubt them at all. One size NEVER fits all. I would recommend Atkins to anyone I talked with if they seemed really interested. I would just urge them to actually read the books and not just start living on bacon and cream cheese and tell themselves the were "doing Atkins." I think some of the problems and disappointments arise because people read one magazine article and then think they know what Atkins is all about.

Those who follow Atkins as written aren't "subsisting on 60 grams of carbs a day" rather, by the end of maintenance, finding the proper balance of "good" carbs as well as lowering the percent of fat proportionately as the carbs increase... isn't that precisely what you're advocating "instead" of Atkins?

I understand your point, though, that it's easy for people to get "carbophobic" and scream if a noodle accidentally passes their lips.... I remember well the threads where Dr Phil got reamed for suggesting that the right carbs are healthy for you! His plan stresses getting rid of refined flour and sugar ("low respose-cost, low-yield foods") and emphasizes veggies, lean meats, fruits and whole grains.

There are zealots of all kinds and I worry too. I just had to stop fighting most of them because it was starting to become a broken record.

While carbs are not essential for human health and nutrition (any glucose required can be made in the liver from protein) .. they do taste good, and in moderation can be used to add variety, satiety and interest to meals.

What I'm having trouble with is the idea of Kraft and Lean Cuisine instructing what's good for me. To me, the only good carbs come direct from Mother Nature, just like the good fats. These folks aren't pushing natural whole wheat berries from the bulk foods store, they want me to buy their highly processed things. Maybe we should start calling them trans carbs


Doreen

Hello, all I have a question about our bodies not needing carbs for health and nutrition - don't we need fruits and vegetables for the cancer fighting properties? If we don't eat them we're not adding these nutrients that fight free radicals that we're exposed to though so many avenues such as our air (I live in Los Angeles) foods, pesticides, etc. I guess I'm riding the low carb fence right now -

There are no nutrients in fruit that aren't found, often in greater quantities, in vegetables...and those fruits we consider vegetables like tomatoes...

I'm eating more veggies on lc than I ever did before. Briccoli, cauliflower, dark leafy greens.... so I guess I don't "get" your question.

Yes, we absolutely do need carbs. Just not 250 grams a day. And everyone would be lots healthier if there were no such things as refined flour or sugar; those carbs are just plain bad for you.

Although in DANDR, Atkins mentions (and I never thought of this) that often the soil crops grow in is so "growed out" that the veggies don't contain all the nutrients they should. (Organic crops might be an exception to this because of all the soil amendments added.) So that's one reason he recommends supplementing anyway.

hi Linda,

The reference to humans not requiring carbohydrates is purely technical Humans can and do live healthy lives without carbohydrates .. to whit the Inuit and similar hunter-gatherer cultures.

Yes, vegetables and fruits provide antioxidants .. so do meats, fish and fats. And yes, certain phytonutrients found in vegetables and fruits do have therapeutic benefit, but they are not essential for life. If they were, then people living in parts of the world where those plants aren't native would've died out ages ago.


Doreen

..and the mint he makes from the supplements.

Living in an agricultural state, I can vouch for the amount of fertilizer put into crops. No farmer worth his salt will leet the soil get "grown out" or he gets lower yields and less income. I guess I'd need to see a LOT of real evidence to support that theory.

Well, this thread has been a breath of freash air.

I pretty much agree with the OP. I actually had a bit of a quiet rant about this in my journal recently - but I find it really disturbing sometimes the volume of ppl who find it neccessary 3 mths into the plan to still have an issue with carrots.... or as potatofree put it, scream at a noodle.

In fact, I was getting a bit angry at these boards for a while for the awful cultishness of it all...
I almost posted an angry rant (but restrained myself!) in a thread about using cream in coffee not milk... the sheer authritiveness of the person chastising the milk user! My personal opinion, is that at this point, I will take 2-3 carbs in milk in coffee rather then the calories in cream!

However, potatofree got it right I think -
>>>"Those who follow Atkins as written aren't "subsisting on 60 grams of carbs a day" rather, by the end of maintenance, finding the proper balance of "good" carbs as well as lowering the percent of fat proportionately as the carbs increase... isn't that precisely what you're advocating "instead" of Atkins?">>>

Yes, that is how I understand Atkins. But, by and large, that is not how ppl seem to follow Atkins on this board. Hardly anybody follows OWL even, instead they hang out on 20 carbs forever even if they don't have a massive amount to lose, and then develop some fear of going up... they don't know there CCL and are afraid of the concept. Then, with a few pounds to go things are reintroduced but rarely, it seems, are calories closely watched and fat watched unless there is a serious stalling problem. I don't count anything, but it seems pretty obvious that if I am eating 40-90 carbs a day coffee with milk is better then with cream.
And in fact, I eat pasta - I just don't consider it a main but a compliment to a protien/vege based meal... and in that regard, the 1/2 cup serving info, and the idea of learning serving sizes, is very true.