Active Low-Carber Forums
Atkins diet and low carb discussion provided free for information only, not as medical advice.
Home Plans Tips Recipes Tools Stories Studies Products
Active Low-Carber Forums
A sugar-free zone


Welcome to the Active Low-Carber Forums.
Support for Atkins diet, Protein Power, Neanderthin (Paleo Diet), CAD/CALP, Dr. Bernstein Diabetes Solution and any other healthy low-carb diet or plan, all are welcome in our lowcarb community. Forget starvation and fad diets -- join the healthy eating crowd! You may register by clicking here, it's free!

Go Back   Active Low-Carber Forums > Main Low-Carb Diets Forums & Support > Low-Carb Studies & Research / Media Watch > LC Research/Media
User Name
Password
FAQ Members Calendar Search Gallery My P.L.A.N. Survey


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   ^
Old Mon, Jun-30-03, 10:34
gotbeer's Avatar
gotbeer gotbeer is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 2,889
 
Plan: Atkins
Stats: 280/203/200 Male 69 inches
BF:
Progress: 96%
Location: Dallas, TX, USA
Thumbs down "Sizing up the popular diet plans" (Atkins was the worst)

Sizing up the popular diet plans

June 30, 2003

STORIES BY JIM RITTER Staff Reporter


link to article

Among leading weight-loss programs, Weight Watchers is the best and the Atkins diet is the worst, registered dietitians said in response to a Chicago Sun-Times survey.

Dietitians who specialize in weight management gave Weight Watchers an average total score of 20.4, of a possible 25. Among the seven programs rated, Atkins finished last, with 7.9 points. The lowest possible score was 5.

Weight Watchers is the nation's most popular commercial weight-loss program. Participants attend weekly one-hour meetings and pay $10 to $12 a week.

"Although one method of losing weight does not necessarily work for everyone, Weight Watchers has the highest success rate and provides the most support with the largest national network," one dietitian wrote in answering the survey.

Finishing second in the survey was TOPS (Take Off Pounds Sensibly), followed, in order, by: Overeaters Anonymous, Jenny Craig, Optifast, Slim-Fast and Atkins.

Dietitians from Northwestern Memorial Hospital's Wellness Institute helped design the survey. At the Sun-Times' request, the American Dietetic Association e-mailed the survey to 30 dietitians around the country; 15 responded. The survey is not scientific, and its results should be used for guidance only.

All of the diet plans surveyed can work, experts said--if dieters follow them. The trick is to find one that fits your personality and lifestyle, said Wellness Institute dietitian Dawn Jackson.

The knock on Atkins

Diet books by the late Robert Atkins have sold more than 15 million copies. The Atkins diet restricts carbohydrates, such as bread, potatoes, pasta, rice and cereals, while allowing high-fat and high-protein foods such as pork chops and ham-and-cheese omelets. The idea is to lose weight without feeling hungry.

But dietitians said Atkins doesn't provide a balanced diet and is difficult to maintain.

"I have not seen one long-term success story with Atkins in 25 years of experience," one dietitian wrote. "Many report short-term successes, but, when you look at their weight one year, two years or five years later, most often they have kept off none or regained more than the initial weight."

Other dietitians offered scathing comments on Atkins: "Any diet that restricts fruits, vegetables and whole grains is dangerous because these foods protect against many diseases ... goes against all of our current dietary recommendations ... throws years of solid research out the window ... terrible!"

Colette Heimowitz, of Atkins Health and Medical Information Services, dismissed the criticism, saying dietitians have been indoctrinated by 30 years of conventional wisdom that low-fat diets are the best way to lose weight. Dietitians, she said, will be the last ones to be convinced by emerging research showing you can lose weight on Atkins without increasing cholesterol or other risk factors.

Atkins dieters lost more weight than conventional dieters in two recent studies published in the New England Journal of Medicine. Among people who were more than 100 pounds overweight, Atkins dieters lost 12.8 pounds after six months, compared with 4.2 pounds by conventional dieters. In the second study, Atkins dieters lost 9.7 pounds after 12 months, compared with 5.5 pounds by conventional dieters.

Both studies were flawed, though, by dropout rates of nearly 40 percent. Also, the weight loss in the first study was modest compared with how much dieters needed to lose. And the Atkins advantage in the second study steadily diminished the longer dieters were followed.

Back to basics

At any time, 29 percent of men and 44 percent of women are trying to lose weight. Last year, Americans spent about $40 billion on health clubs, diet soda, diet books and videos, artificial sweeteners, weight-loss centers and liquid diets, according to Marketdata Enterprises, which predicts that will increase to $49 billion by 2006.

But the more we spend trying to lose weight, the fatter we seem to get. The reason is that most people don't do the two things essential to dropping pounds: Eat fewer calories, and be more physically active.

A panel of experts from the National Institutes of Health offers these guidelines for losing weight:

*Your initial goal should be to lose 10 percent of your weight.

*Lose one to two pounds a week. This means burning 500 to 1,000 calories more each day than you consume.

*Cutting fat, by itself, won't work. You have to reduce overall calories.

*Physical activity contributes to modest weight loss and might decrease abdominal fat. Begin with 30 to 45 minutes of moderate activity two to five days a week.


Comparing the plans

Weight Watchers. Weekly one-hour meetings. Foods have points, based on fat calories and fiber. (A salad without dressing, for example, is zero points; a piece of thin-crust pizza, five.) Participants keep track of their points in journals. Physical-activity points can be traded for extra food or saved to enhance weight loss. (A brisk, 30-minute walk is worth two activity points for a 160-pound adult.)

TOPS (Take Off Pounds Sensibly). Not-for-profit weekly support group, with motivational rallies, workshops and retreats. TOPS recommends low-fat exchange diet (for example, a cup of plain nonfat yogurt can be exchanged for a cup of skim milk). Members get weight goals and food and exercise plans from their doctors.

Overeaters Anonymous. Not-for-profit, 12-step support group for compulsive overeaters, modeled after Alcoholics Anonymous. The goal is to abstain from overeating, one day at a time. Following the 12 steps is said to promote inner change. "As old attitudes are discarded, we often find there is no longer a need for excess food," OA says.

Jenny Craig. Includes private, weekly weight-loss consultations, manuals, walking audio tapes and journals to track progress. Encourages up to 30 minutes of physical activity most days. Jenny Craig sells low-fat, high-fiber foods that follow "food pyramid" guidelines.

Optifast. Low-calorie liquid diet plus nutrition bars for people at least 50 pounds overweight. Requires medical exam and doctor's care. Program claims hunger typically fades after the first week or so. After weight loss, dieter gradually transitions to a low-fat diet rich in fruits, vegetables and grains.

Slim-Fast. Replaces two daily meals with Slim-Fast shake or meal bar. Three low-calorie snacks a day (such as fruit, fat-free pretzels or Slim-Fast snack bar) are allowed. Advocates 30 to 60 minutes of daily physical activity. No meetings; Web site for support.

Atkins. Low-carbohydrate diet. Phase one restricts carbs to 20 grams a day (the equivalent of about half a bagel.) Phase two increases carbs to 25 grams a day the first week, 30 grams the second week, etc. until weight loss stops. Then, subtract 5 grams per day. Phase 3 increases daily carbs in 10-gram increments each week as long as gradual weight loss is maintained. Phase 4 controls carb intake to maintain weight.

KEEPING IT OFF

For every five people who lose weight, at least four gain it all back.

"We focus on losing weight and don't focus on keeping it off," said James Hill of the University of Colorado. "We're focusing on the wrong part."

Hill has studied 4,000 people on the National Weight Control Registry who beat the odds by losing at least 30 pounds and keeping it off for at least one year. Average weight loss: 67 pounds.

Most registry members do four things to keep the weight off:

*Eat breakfast. Seventy-eight percent do that every day, which helps ease hunger later in the day.

*Keep to a low-fat, high-carbohydrate diet. Registry members report they get just 24 percent of their calories from fat. The actual percentage might be higher; people tend to underestimate fat consumption. But the figure almost certainly is lower than the 30 percent maximum in government dietary guidelines. Americans average 33 percent.

*Self-monitor. Most members weigh themselves at least once a week and also do things like keep food journals.

*Exercise. Ninety-one percent do regular physical activity, typically an hour a day. They burn about 2,800 calories a week, through walking briskly, biking, swimming or other exercise. Many said they hated it at first but got used to it. The key, Hill said: Start slowly, increase gradually.

Barbara French, who has kept off more than 100 pounds for nearly 10 years, shows how it's done. She usually eats breakfast, typically Kellogg's Wheat Bran.

"It helps get me through the day," French said. "I'm not hungry, so I'm not focusing on the next meal."

She avoids high-fat foods. Though her husband and two teenage sons are supportive, the boys grumble there's never cake or cookies to eat.

French spends at least 30 minutes a day, five days a week walking, peddling a stationary bike and doing floor exercises such as situps. She weighs herself two or three times a week. If she gains two or three pounds, she becomes extra-vigilant, recording all she eats in a food diary.

French, a first-grade teacher, weighed 311 pounds when she attended her first meeting of Take Off Pounds Sensibly on June 12, 1992. "They're my extended family," she said. "When you gain weight and are feeling discouraged, they support you and say, 'Next week, you'll do better.' "

If she didn't know how many calories a food had, she'd avoid it. She gave up pizza and fried food, and satisfied cravings for junk food with tiny portions--a bite-size Nestle Crunch rather than a whole candy bar. And she wouldn't go to bed until she exercised.

It took 1-1/2 years to lose 100 pounds. She now weighs about 200, hopes to drop to 175 and still goes to weekly TOPS meetings in Hickory Hills. "I'm leader of the chapter," she said. "I don't want to let them down."

If you've lost weight, qualify for the registry and would like to join, call (800) 606-6927.

WHEN NOTHING ELSE WORKS

Mike Figliulo tried everything to lose weight--Atkins diet, Weight Watchers, Herbalife--and failed with all of them.

At 347 pounds, Figliulo had diabetes and sleep apnea. Walking even a block left him breathless and sweaty.

Desperate, Figliulo had gastric-bypass surgery. Surgeons blocked off most of his stomach, leaving a thumb-size pouch and rerouting his digestive tract. Food now goes from Figliulo's stomach directly to the lower segment of his small intestine, bypassing portions of his digestive tract that absorb calories and nutrients.

As a result, Figliulo, 51, can eat only small amounts. A typical breakfast? Eight ounces of yogurt. Lunch? Five ounces of tuna salad, with no bread. He'll have a piece of fruit or a sugar-free Popsicle for a snack, and half a chicken breast for dinner.

In 18 months, Figliulo has lost more than 100 pounds. Now, he walks two miles and barely breaks a sweat, and his diabetes and sleep apnea are getting better.

Stomach surgeries are an increasingly common last resort for those who are morbidly obese. An estimated 80,000 to 100,000 people will undergo the surgery this year, up from 40,000 in 2000. There are several techniques, but gastric bypass is by far the most popular. Some surgeons are booked for up to a year.

"The demand is overwhelming," said Dr. James Madura, a gastric-bypass surgeon at Rush-Presbyterian-St. Luke's Medical Center.

That popularity is in part because of coverage of operations done on singer Carnie Wilson and TV weatherman Al Roker. Also, laparoscopic techniques have made the surgery less invasive and safer. And insurance companies are more willing to pay bills totaling $20,000 to $30,000.

Under government guidelines, the surgery can be considered for people with a body mass index higher than 40 (about 80 pounds overweight for women, 100 pounds for men). Having a body mass index between 35 and 40 and an obesity complication such as heart disease or diabetes also qualifies you for the surgery.

Most gastric-bypass patients lose between 50 percent and 80 percent of their excess weight within two years. Then they stabilize, or perhaps gain back 10 or 20 pounds. Few reach their ideal weight.

Major surgery on extremely obese people can be risky. Excess fat makes the operation more difficult. Obesity-related conditions such as diabetes increase surgical risks. Complications, which can require additional surgery, include infections, life-threatening blood clots, ulcers and leakages in the gastrointestinal tract. About 1 percent of patients die.

Another hurdle: Rapid weight loss can cause gallstones. And the shortened digestive tract might not absorb enough calcium, vitamins and other nutrients, so patients must take supplements for the rest of their lives. They also are susceptible to "dumping syndrome": If food moves too fast through the small intestine, they can suffer nausea, weakness, faintness and diarrhea.

After losing so much weight, many patients need plastic surgery to remove sagging skin. And some have trouble adjusting psychologically when they're no longer able to eat food for comfort: Studies have even found that divorce and suicide rates increase after bypass surgery.

No magic pill

The long search for a simple pill that melts away fat has largely failed so far.

Researchers are learning just how difficult it is to change the body's metabolism or disrupt the brain's appetite circuits without producing serious side effects.

Prescription and over-the-counter drugs generally have produced modest weight loss, with some pills posing severe health risks.

Once-popular amphetamines have been banned because they're addictive and cause psychotic behavior and brain damage. The "fen-phen" diet-pill combination was taken off the market after being linked to heart valve damage.

Ephedra is the latest casualty. The herb, once a popular supplement, has been linked to strokes, anxiety and other side effects. Illinois recently banned the supplement, and stores around the country have pulled it off their shelves. Drug and health food stores sell ephedra alternatives, such as green tea, bitter orange, guarana and banaba, but there's little research to prove that these products are safe and effective.

That leaves three prescription drugs:

*Phentermine (the "phen" in "fen-phen") suppresses appetite, but it works only for a few weeks because the body builds up resistance.

*Meridia also affects appetite and can be used for months. But it can increase blood pressure and heart rate and isn't intended for heart patients. Side effects include headache, dry mouth, constipation and insomnia.

*Xenical blocks the absorption of dietary fat. But it can cause bowel changes, especially after eating high-fat meals. These changes include gas with oily discharge, more bowel movements and an inability to control bowel movements.

Weight loss from Meridia and Xenical is usually modest--10 or 15 pounds--and people typically put the weight back on after they stop taking the pills.

Eleven new obesity drugs are in clinical trials, according to the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America. It's too early to tell how well and how safely any of those will work.

There might never be a drug that restores an obese person to an ideal weight. But losing even a few pounds has health benefits, said Dr. Samuel Klein of the North American Association for the Study of Obesity.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2   ^
Old Mon, Jun-30-03, 11:11
cc48510 cc48510 is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 2,018
 
Plan: Atkins
Stats: 320/220/195 Male 6'0"
BF:
Progress: 80%
Location: Pensacola, FL
Default Re: "Sizing up the popular diet plans" (Atkins was the worst)

Quote:
Originally posted by gotbeer
But dietitians said Atkins doesn't provide a balanced diet and is difficult to maintain.


It is not hard to maintain. I've been on it for almost 7 months now...and feel like I can maintain it for life. By comparison, the LF Diet I was on in 1996/1997 left me so hungry that once I reached my goal (6 months)...I went back to eating normal and gained all the weight I'd lost back plus an extra 130 pounds.

Quote:
"I have not seen one long-term success story with Atkins in 25 years of experience," one dietitian wrote. "Many report short-term successes, but, when you look at their weight one year, two years or five years later, most often they have kept off none or regained more than the initial weight."


Dr. Atkins -- Went on a Low-carb diet in 1963...kept the weight off for 40 years.

Jennifer Anniston (?) -- Went on a Low-carb diet years ago...and is still keeping the weight off.

There are many others out there also.

Quote:
Other dietitians offered scathing comments on Atkins: "Any diet that restricts fruits, vegetables and whole grains is dangerous because these foods protect against many diseases ... goes against all of our current dietary recommendations ... throws years of solid research out the window ... terrible!"


Restricts vegetables ??? That's odd...I must be doing it wrong, seeing as I eat 2-3x the current USDA recomendations for vegetables. Restricts Fruit...That varies. I eat fruit...just not as much as they suggest. Once I reach maintnance...I'll probably be able to eat the minimum 2 servings they suggest.

Whole grains = good for you ??? I beg to differ. They need to read "The Naive Vegetarian" (anyone have a link ???) It covers the issue pretty well. Grains contain anti-nutrients and other substances which block the absorption of nutrients. Not only is grain not good for you...it is actually deleterious to your health.

I also find it ridiculous that they bash Atkins for being unmaintainable and not providing enough variety...while they rate SLIM FAST higher than Atkins. Which has more variety:

1) A diet that replaces two of your three meals a day with thickened sugar water er Shakes...and suggests you replace the 3rd with a sugary candy bar, or

2) A diet that tells you to eat plenty of green vegetables, allows you hundreds of different meats, vegetables, nuts*, seeds*, berries*, fruits*, etc...

*OWL and later.

Let's discuss "unmaintainable." Perhaps, they forgot that the majority of those on weight watchers (their diet of choice) gained the weight back.
Reply With Quote
  #3   ^
Old Mon, Jun-30-03, 11:14
cc48510 cc48510 is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 2,018
 
Plan: Atkins
Stats: 320/220/195 Male 6'0"
BF:
Progress: 80%
Location: Pensacola, FL
Default

And, here is one for those who claim we can't get proper nutrition on this diet:





*Forgot to point out...that was without ANY supplements. I ate alot of seafood that day, which is why my protein and Polyunsaturated fat is higher.

Last edited by cc48510 : Mon, Jun-30-03 at 11:16.
Reply With Quote
  #4   ^
Old Wed, Jul-02-03, 08:40
Groggy60's Avatar
Groggy60 Groggy60 is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 486
 
Plan: IF/Low carb
Stats: 219/201/172 Male 70 inches
BF:
Progress: 38%
Location: Ottawa, ON
Default

Quote:
"I have not seen one long-term success story with Atkins in 25 years of experience," one dietitian wrote. "Many report short-term successes, but, when you look at their weight one year, two years or five years later, most often they have kept off none or regained more than the initial weight."


Its not like I would have anything to do with dietitians now that I understand carbs better than they do. It caught me off guard when my doctor supported low-carbing 100%
Reply With Quote
  #5   ^
Old Wed, Jul-02-03, 13:58
badgoat's Avatar
badgoat badgoat is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,415
 
Plan: Restarted LC 8/23/06
Stats: 254/208/175 Female 5'8"
BF: Moo
Progress: 58%
Default

Quote:

Other dietitians offered scathing comments on Atkins: "Any diet that restricts fruits, vegetables and whole grains is dangerous because these foods protect against many diseases ... goes against all of our current dietary recommendations ... throws years of solid research out the window ... terrible!"

They don't read much, do they? Or the blinders are really tight.

I share an office with a dietician...one who is on WW...and is usually hungry. I did WW last fall and lost 23 lbs but went off for a spell. In June I decided to re-try Atkins after hearing some good research reported on NPR. We don't discuss our plans at all after she sent me a Michael Fumento article. Who am I to challenge "The Nutrition Establishment"? A fatty who has probably been fed a Big Fat Lie. She has a copy of that now.

I remember reading my first article about carbs and our fat problem, back in the early 90s. I remember thinking, this is nuts! But I watched a housemate train for a 26 mile marathon around the same time. Carbo-loading and everything. She never lost that pudge after hours and hours of running, training and burning calories, but she could run the marathon. I remember thinking, sh*t, this thing is hopeless, ain't it? I hadn't even hit 170 back then, not even a size 14.

*SLIM*-fast? Yanno, I think these folks watch too much television. Notice that the highest votes were most-advertised. I'll stick to my books and skip the hefty fees and sugary canned "meals", thanks.

badgoat
Reply With Quote
  #6   ^
Old Wed, Jul-02-03, 16:39
TarHeel's Avatar
TarHeel TarHeel is offline
Give chance a chance
Posts: 16,944
 
Plan: General LC maintenance
Stats: 152.6/115.6/115 Female 60 inches
BF:28%
Progress: 98%
Location: North Carolina
Default

I know, I am preaching to the choir....it has been said here on this forum about a thousand times, but I can't resist saying it again: What is this obsession about the fact that if people go back to eating the foods that made them overweight in the first place, that means the way they were eating when they were LOSING didn't work?

Why would anyone think that losing weight on ANY kind of diet would somehow prevent you from gaining again no matter what you ate after you stopped "dieting"?

And by the way, my doctor also supports low carb. Here is one reason why: In January, 2003, my total cholesterol was 263. My bad cholesterol was terribly high, as were my triglyercide levels, though my good cholesterol was within normal limits (barely). I went on Atkins in mid to late February, and at the time of my next lipid panels done in June of 2003, I had lost 13 pounds. And the numbers?


Total cholesterol: 150 (down from 263 five months ago)
HDL (good cholesterol) 103 (way up)
LDL (bad cholesterol) 37 (way, way down)
Triglycerides: 47 (down from 160 five months ago)

And my doctor says he has never seen that kind of improvement from anyone taking Lipitor alone, and thinks it is a combination of weight loss and my current diet.

Signed,
Exasperated with these stupid media "reports"
Reply With Quote
  #7   ^
Old Thu, Jul-03-03, 00:00
dannysk dannysk is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 165
 
Plan: Atkins
Stats: 297/235/190
BF:
Progress: 58%
Location: Israel
Default

Quote:
<<As a result, Figliulo, 51, can eat only small amounts. A typical breakfast? Eight ounces of yogurt. Lunch? Five ounces of tuna salad, with no bread. He'll have a piece of fruit or a sugar-free Popsicle for a snack, and half a chicken breast for dinner.

In 18 months, Figliulo has lost more than 100 pounds. Now, he walks two miles and barely breaks a sweat, and his diabetes and sleep apnea are getting better. >>

From where I sit he is doing low carb. Very low carb. Unhealthy, no vege at all low carb. And they say he failed on Atkins ????
By the way I know people who had some sort of surgery and gained it all back after they got used to it and figured they could return to their old way of eating.

danny
Reply With Quote
  #8   ^
Old Thu, Jul-03-03, 00:03
dannysk dannysk is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 165
 
Plan: Atkins
Stats: 297/235/190
BF:
Progress: 58%
Location: Israel
Default

The first part of my quote got lost.
it was

As a result, Figliulo, 51, can eat only small amounts. A typical breakfast? Eight ounces of yogurt. Lunch? Five ounces of tuna salad, with no bread. He'll have a piece of fruit or a sugar-free Popsicle for a snack, and half a chicken breast for dinner.

danny
Reply With Quote
  #9   ^
Old Sun, Jul-06-03, 14:59
beginagain's Avatar
beginagain beginagain is offline
New Member
Posts: 17
 
Plan: atkins
Stats: 181/174/125 Female 5'4"
BF:
Progress: 13%
Default

I tried weight watchers, but gave up after a while. I'd eat my allotted amount of points, and I'd still be hungry at the end of the day. I was hungry most of the time. Paying for weekly meetings really adds up, so I couldn't swing it financially as I'm on a very limited income. If you didn't go to meetings, you'd fall off the wagon. The meetings were pointless because everyone in the room would talk at once while the group leader was talking. They'd talk about snack alternatives and people's problems. I really didn't like going. It made me feel discouraged because I'm very shy in a group situation. The whole premise still was low-fat/low-cal. Now I'd probably still recommend it to someone who is unwilling to go lowcarb, but I atkins much better. I still eat the same amount of veggies I did on WW. Actually I eat more veggies than I used to in the past few months.

Well different strokes for different folks, but atkins seems much healthier to me. The person writing the article really didn't do their research very well.
Reply With Quote
  #10   ^
Old Tue, Jul-08-03, 15:19
Azraelle's Avatar
Azraelle Azraelle is offline
Midas in reverse
Posts: 744
 
Plan: Atkins
Stats: 260/231/165 Male 75 inches
BF:~31%/~26%/<17%
Progress: 31%
Location: Southern Utah
Default

Some time ago, I needed an attorney, but couldn't afford one, to fight the child welfare system, so I got a court-appointed one. The county that hired the attorney hires from a small pool of struggling private practice lawyers that get their primary means of support from serving as court-appointed lawyers. I found out after about 2 months of bad counsel ("forgetting" to tell me of my rights to examine the evidence through the discovery process, for one example) that it is a very bad idea to expect good and fair representation from a lawyer who is employed by the same government that brought the charges in the first place. I then went several thousand dollars in debt and hired my own lawyer; two things happened almost simultaneously: somehow the county clerk's office door was found to have been unlocked for an undetermined amount of time and the evidence in my case couldn't be found (!), and all charges were dropped for "lack of evidence".

What has this to do with the subject at hand? Dieticians have a vested interest in staying employed as dieticians. Of all the plans mentioned, Atkins is the least profitable (and most threatening) from a dietician's point of view--even Slim-Fast employs dieticians on a regular basis as consultants. Atkins can be followed by anyone who can read.

Last edited by Azraelle : Tue, Jul-08-03 at 15:21.
Reply With Quote
  #11   ^
Old Tue, Jul-08-03, 15:41
badgoat's Avatar
badgoat badgoat is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,415
 
Plan: Restarted LC 8/23/06
Stats: 254/208/175 Female 5'8"
BF: Moo
Progress: 58%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Azraelle
What has this to do with the subject at hand? Dieticians have a vested interest in staying employed as dieticians. Of all the plans mentioned, Atkins is the least profitable (and most threatening) from a dietician's point of view--even Slim-Fast employs dieticians on a regular basis as consultants. Atkins can be followed by anyone who can read.


Hmmm...I would agree with you if these were only federal researcher/dieticians who were surveyed. I think they have been subjected to the same mis-information via the media and lack of research that the rest of us have. Atkins has been the laughing stock of the medical/nutrition community for years and this is only just beginning to be reversed with solid, independent, long-term research.

I share an office with a dietician (I am a social worker) and we work at a dialysis clinic. With all of the misery that we see on a daily basis as a direct result from years of poor diet, high blood pressure and diabetes, we both frequently say that we would be happy to be without a job if there were suddenly a miracle cure for what has ailed our patients.

As more research is done, the Food Pyramid as we know it may well indeed have to be revamped. Until that time, dieticians who espouse something else run the risk of appearing to be unprofessional and renegade, if not outright dangerous. Atkins himself had to go before Congress to defend his nutritional premises.

I don't see dieticians as a whole as having a vested interest per se in the current Food Pyramid. The ones I work with genuinely want to see us conquer what ails us. Obsesity is a crisis in the US. Unfortunately, they are still, and will continue to be, purveyors of the information the status quo espouses, until the hard numbers prove the Food Pyramid wrong. Or at least the bad stuff that's in that Pyramid that most of us wind up eating...

badgoat
Reply With Quote
  #12   ^
Old Tue, Jul-08-03, 16:52
gotbeer's Avatar
gotbeer gotbeer is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 2,889
 
Plan: Atkins
Stats: 280/203/200 Male 69 inches
BF:
Progress: 96%
Location: Dallas, TX, USA
Default

Even the most well-intentioned dietician might have a hard time admitting that prior advice she gave out was faulty. They "bought into" the pyramid professionally and emotionally and now they will lose face as it comes crashing down.
Reply With Quote
  #13   ^
Old Tue, Jul-08-03, 18:36
DebPenny's Avatar
DebPenny DebPenny is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,514
 
Plan: TSP/PPLP/low-cal/My own
Stats: 250/209/150 Female 63.5 inches
BF:
Progress: 41%
Location: Sacramento, CA
Default

Beginagain wrote: "Well different strokes for different folks, but atkins seems much healthier to me. The person writing the article really didn't do their research very well." And others have replied...

Actually, I think there is something going on with dieticians, but I don't know what it is. I have yet to see a report of or hear from a dietician who advocates low-carb. However, both my internist and my gynocologist are OK with my low-carbing (my internist whole-heartedly, my GYN reservedly) -- at least they have open minds. On a personal note, I was harangued by a dietician for even thinking of poisoning myself with a low-carb nutritional approach. Personally, I think high-carb is poison.

;-Deb
Reply With Quote
  #14   ^
Old Tue, Jul-08-03, 23:09
dannysk dannysk is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 165
 
Plan: Atkins
Stats: 297/235/190
BF:
Progress: 58%
Location: Israel
Default

By "dietitions" you mean American dieticians. Here in Israel the dieticians recommend a diet pretty low in carbs. Not "low-carb" by any means but not the USDA recommendations.
In fact I got a diet from a dietition and decided that I could do without the 3 or 4 portions of "carbs" and go Atkins. (who can eat 1/2 cup of pasta or rice)

danny
Reply With Quote
  #15   ^
Old Wed, Jul-09-03, 08:41
Ms.Kidy's Avatar
Ms.Kidy Ms.Kidy is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 149
 
Plan: Atkins
Stats: 195/150/150 Female 5 ft 6 in
BF:
Progress: 100%
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Default

Last summer when I wasn;t working, I went to the gym every morning and worked out for an hour, then I would come home and do all my usual stuff and eat all my usual things, I slimmed down a bit, but I never lost weight. Now I understand why. Before atkins, I felt lethargic, would get the shakes and get VERY crabby if I didn;'t eat RIGHT NOW! Then a couple of months ago decided to limit my food intake and eat at only certain times of the day. I read a book on the weigh down diet and thought, this makes some sense, don;'t eat if your not hungry. I took me a long time to learn to not eat everytime there was food in front of me (you know, eat like you will never get food again). I had to break myself of that mentality that I had to eat it cause is was in front of me. I still felt lethargic, but I lost five pounds. I went on atkins, and I feel GREAT I no longer get the shakes, get irritaable, and I am never hungry. I no longer feel I need to eat just because it is in front of me. I don;t think I have felt this good since I was on the playground. I tried the diet shakes and the healthy choice meals. For as "healthy" as I was eating I wasn't losing anything. I think it's stupid that they would try to say atkins is the worst when there is more testimony to it's success then they are willing to admit!
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
"Ceviche: Popular Latin American dish is becoming hot choice for Bay Area diners" gotbeer LC Research/Media 1 Thu, Jul-17-03 09:21
"Who's Got the Best and Worst 'Personal Brands' of 2003?" gotbeer LC Research/Media 0 Thu, Jul-10-03 11:11
"Scarsdale Diet popular again" gotbeer LC Research/Media 1 Tue, Jul-08-03 03:19
The Worst Mistake in the History of the Human Race Voyajer LC Research/Media 1 Mon, Jul-15-02 08:55
USDA to Report on Health Effects of Popular Diets tamarian LC Research/Media 0 Wed, Dec-06-00 18:21


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 15:33.


Copyright © 2000-2024 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.