From watching all the stuff going on in the media, I'm going to make a guess, just like the Amazing Criswell (remember him?)

Within two years, the mainstream nutritional thinking will be:

They will emphasize GOOD fats, especially from plant sources, but stop short of admitting saturated fats were "framed for a crime they didn't commit." (Remember The Fugitive?)

They will emphasize GOOD carbs, still pushing whole grains and fruit, but admit that processed carbs are not a good source of carbs. They won't unthrone the potato, just urge people not to fry him.

They will recommend people get ENOUGH protein, but won't be able to help themselves and set the bar too low. In addition, they will remind people that combining corn and beans count towards protein, without any mention of the carbs they contain.

They will hammer on calories still, only now the buzzwords will be PORTION CONTROL. ("Don't worry so about calories, just control your portions" will be their newest stance, worthy of the endstage in a game of Twister. Remember Twister?)

A lot of these concepts are out there floating around, but I contend they have not made it into the mainstream. Because here's a press release from March 2003 from worldwide experts:

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/releases/2003/pr20/en/

They're saying "limiting fat to between 15 and 30 percent of total daily energy intake and saturated fats to less than 10 percent of this total" (that's 25 grams of fat a day, which is what I used to eat) and "Carbohydrates, the report suggests, should provide the bulk of energy requirements – between 55 and 75 percent of daily intake" (hey, that's only 275 grams of carb a day!) and "Protein should make up a further 10-15 percent of calorie intake" (this would put me at 45 grams of protein a day, which I'm convinced is TOO LOW!)

Are my predictions seemingly contradictory? Yes, but so is most nutrional information.

That's the mainstream. So my predictions stand.

Interesting series of predictions. Oddly, though, what you're predicting reminds me a bit of the diet section in Body for Life, which I've been skimming. He seems to advocate (already) a lot of what you're saying: Potatoes and brown rice are good , portion control (the old "size of your fist" idea), that sort of thing. However, he has no problem with animal protein, and I don't remember reading anything about protein from plant sources, either.

Hopefully, if I've unintentionally distorted his ideas someone will be along shortly to correct my errors.

All of these "nutrition experts" who keep saying different things are what we ALL need to do remind me of meteorologists in Oklahoma. The truth is I can predict the weather as well as many of them do by just looking out my window.

If I've learned anything from raising my own children and years as a classroom teacher, it's that people are different. What works with one will fail miserably with another. I'm just glad I finally found LC, which works for me!

You want to hear a conspiracy theorist's idea on the whole thing?

If 'they' create a healthy populace, how can 'they' control that populace? Healthy people can run, fight back, etc. People who 'need' meds to keep them alive have no choice but to succumb because they are too afraid to die. If you cut off normal food supplies from a carb-addicted population, they're putty in their hands.

No matter where I look, what type of situation I hear about, it's all about taking the control away from people and putting it into the hands of the PTB.

I hope that by posting this I'm not setting myself up to look like a radical, just a realist, pure and simple.

I hear you, LilaCotton, and I admit to some twinges of paranoia myself when I hear all the urgings against low carbing. But fortunately we live in a capitalist society, which has gotten rich feeding people what they want to eat, not what they are supposed to eat.
This sprang from some musings about how the nutritional police will handle the new studies we've been talking about in this forum, the ones that show your kidneys don't fall out, your blood numbers improve...and, oh yeah, you lose weight, though it puzzles them how.

ADKPam has put her finger on it.

Just check out the Ruby Tuesday website on their new "Smart Eating" menu items.

http://www.rubytuesday.com/SE/pages/SE_CC_2.1.htm

I seem to recall Johnny Carson's the Great Carnack as the famous diviner... however he answered things backwards...

The Great Carnack would have said... "and the answer is 'improved lipid profiles, better health, and better state of mind'"

And the envelope would be torn open and read, "and the question is 'What does a Controlled Carbohydrate lifestyle do for you'?"

What I am really wondering now is long will the low-carb craze last. Right now we are seeing more low-carb offerings. A lot of them are doubtful at best, snackwellized crap but a few of them are great. Like for example the new Ruby Tuesday menu. I wonder if that will continue and expand, or simply die off.

If I look at the lowfat craze, it brought along a whole lot of useless products but never really caught on in restaurants.

I think over the next 10 years the US obesity will decline for the first time and Dr. Atkins will be remembered as the man who has rescued the nation.I think over the next 10 years the US obesity will decline for the first time and Dr. Atkins will be remembered as the man who has rescued the nation.

"If I look at the lowfat craze, it brought along a whole lot of useless products but never really caught on in restaurants."

Some places it did catch on, I remember low fat desserts in Houlihan's and the like, but fancier places are never going to go low fat, butter is the foundation of their kind of cooking, which is what people like.
This is why I think restaurants will find the switch to Atkins easier from a cook's point of view.