I did, I found it's owned by accelerantstudios, which seems to be a web site creation and hosting service...

essentialnutrition.org



Registrant:
Accelerant Studios (CCJIIIVHYD)
919 18th Street NW
Suite 925
WASHINGTON, DC 20006
US

Domain Name: ESSENTIALNUTRITION.ORG

Administrative Contact:
Glick, David (NIRCUGSGFI) info~accelerantstudios.com
Accelerant Studios
919 18th Street NW
Suite 925
WASHINGTON, DC 20006
US
202-263-2976 fax: 123 123 1234

Technical Contact:
Network Solutions, LLC. (HOST-ORG) customerservice~networksolutions.com
13200 Woodland Park Drive
Herndon, VA 20171-3025
US
1-888-642-9675 fax: 571-434-4620

Record expires on 15-Jun-2005.
Record created on 15-Jun-2004.
Database last updated on 23-Jun-2004 12:12:14 EDT.

Domain servers in listed order:

DNS1.SUPREMESERVER13.COM 209.25.170.8
DNS2.SUPREMESERVER13.COM 209.25.170.9

Of everything that I have learned so far on this forum, this is the one thing that keeps blowing my mind. How the ADA, in the face of results such as yours, still insist that people should load up on carbs is mind boggling. It's so close to malpractice I can't see the line. If there was a way to prove they knew or should have known their advice is dangerous, they could be sued into insolvency. How can results such as yours not outweigh any perceived misconceptions about low-carb in the mind of anyone sane, I just don't know. It is better to avoid whatever potential (and unproven) problems low-carb causes just to die from the very real and proven complications from diabetes?? What kind of sane person thinks like that? Diabetes doctors should be falling all over themselves trying to promote low-carb to their patients... or at the very least studying it very very serioulsy

If there was a drug that had the same effect as low-carbing on diabetes -- loss of weight, sugar control, and improved lipid profiles --- they would be hailing it as the greatest medical breakthrough since penicillin!! They would want to put it in the drinking water!! Even if the drug made your hair fall out in clumps, made you impotent and caused you to like Barry Manilow songs, they would still worship it.

So this, more than anything else, made me loose all faith in the "system". It's painfully obvious that people's well being are on a much lower priority scale than their wallet. When low-carb should have arrived from the top down (promoted by the medical authorities (like low-fat was) and gradually adopted by the general population), the reverse has happened. Low-carb was adopted by the people first, then by the industry (who wants to make a buck), and then very very slowly by the authorities. What does that tell you? That no one is looking out for you but you. It makes me seriously think that this society is about to go the way of the Romans.

Domain ID104533416-LRORDomain Name:ESSENTIALNUTRITION.ORGCreated On:15-Jun-2004 16:36:29 UTCLast Updated On:21-Jun-2004 18:53:59 UTCExpiration Date:15-Jun-2005 16:36:29 UTCSponsoring Registrar:R63-LRORStatus:CLIENT TRANSFER PROHIBITEDStatus:TRANSFER PROHIBITEDRegistrant ID:6167819-NSIRegistrant Name:Accelerant StudiosRegistrant Organization:Accelerant StudiosRegistrant Street1:919 18th Street NWRegistrant Street2:Suite 925Registrant City:WASHINGTONRegistrant State/ProvinceCRegistrant Postal Code:20006Registrant Country:USRegistrant Email:info~velocityrx.comAdmin ID:6167818-NSIAdmin Nameavid GlickAdmin Organization:Accelerant StudiosAdmin Street1:919 18th Street NWAdmin Street2:Suite 925Admin City:WASHINGTONAdmin State/ProvinceCAdmin Postal Code:20006Admin Country:USAdmin Phone:+1.2022632976Admin Email:info~accelerantstudios.comTech ID:5358805-NSITech Name:Network Solutions, LLC.Tech Organization:Network Solutions, LLC.Tech Street1:13200 Woodland Park DriveTech City:HerndonTech State/Province:VATech Postal Code:20171-3025Tech Country:USTech Phone:+1.18886429675Tech Email:customerservice~networksolutions.comName ServerNS1.SUPREMESERVER13.COMName ServerNS2.SUPREMESERVER13.COM

The only reasons that I can guess at:

1. They still believe lipid issues are MORE dangerous for diabetics than sky-high blood sugars. And never mind what the research says.

2. It would be embarrassing to admit that an idea they DID NOT DEVELOP THEMSELVES would actually be better than what they have preached for years.

3. Paradoxically, actually HELPING diabetics would lessen the power, prestige, and NEED for the organization itself. The better diabetics feel (healthwise), the fewer their complications, and the less fear they have, the less they would need the ADA. The more that diabetes is seen as a 'scourge', a 'rampant' epidemic, an intractable and incurable mystery, the more powerful the ADA remains. (And the more money they get from various sources.) In my view, organizations FIRST act to preserve themselves. Everything else is secondary.

4. They're just dull-witted.

I think you hit the nail on the head with this one. Low-carbing means death for the organization.

Wow! Thanks to MyJourney and MrFreddy for their quick replies to my bleg.

ack! I didnt pay attention that mine got all funky formatting.

sorry.

its the sadest thing..america constantly lives in a panic. This article is written on the same basis as those cnn commercials that say "your kids cereal could kill them..film at 11" that if you actually watch it its based on one box of cereal that was never eaten. They like causing an uproar. And this is such a common lifestyle now that its easy to cause panic in many people all at once. Not to mention all the companies who are getting there panties in twist because the LC WOL is killing there business. It is true like many of you have said above that some of the products are garbage but so is eating cheeseburgers..pizza...ice cream..donuts every day and hiding behind excuses like this...

The website is registered by a webshop, most likely the one that designed and made the site for them. It seems like Accelerant Studios does a lot of work for medical groups, so that's probably how they got the job. http://accelerantstudios.com/portfolio/web/lc.htm

It's already been pointed out who are the main sponsors of the organization. It's right on their main page. Of course, you have to investigate each one of those organizations to find out who's behind them.

For the most part, it seems that this site was set up to be an "answer" to the increasing interest in controlled-carb eating.

I decided to look at the first six just because I can't do all of them. What I found is that for the most part, these are organizations who are sincere in what they're trying to do and just buy into the whole low-fat, low-meat, high carb way to eat.

The American Obesity Association and Allience for Aging Research are the only ones out of the first six that seem to have any kind of possible industry connections and agendas. the others just seem to be still in the mainstream thinking without looking at or even attempting to address the "other" research.

Here's what I found in a quick perusal of the sites.

Alliance for Aging Research
http://www.agingresearch.org/
Calling for more NIH funding for research into medical treatements and therapies for help in aging.
They have a "headline" on their front page saying that humans may have eaten grain 10,000 years earlier than thought. (still a couple of million too late)
Board of Directors includes members from Merk, GlaxoSmithKline, Procter and Gamble, Omnicare, etc.
The first principle they site in their Guiding Principles is "Science and its applications offer the best hope to improve the universal human experience of aging"

American Association of Diabetes Educators
http://www.aadenet.org/
From About AADE: "Founded in 1973, the American Association of Diabetes Educators is a multi-disciplinary professional membership organization dedicated to advancing the practice of diabetes self-management training and care as integral components of health care for persons with diabetes, and lifestyle management for the prevention of diabetes..."
Seems to be a professional organization for Certified Diebetes Educators. Whenever job listings are involved, you know you've got the professional organization for some group.

American Institute for Cancer Research
http://www.aicr.org/index.lasso
Founded to research the connection between cancer and diet
One thing to say, they are well-funded. According to their IRS 990 they receive about $30+ Million a year consistantly since at least 1998. (page 9 of http://www.aicr.org/about/2003_form990.pdf) A little too consistent if you ask me. Looks like they have a regular 30-million donor. Now, who can donate 30 mil a year? From their financial report they seem to indicate that it's mainly from private endowments and gifts. I see no mention of any corporate anything anywhere.
Close, informal ties with the National Cancer Institute.
Review panels for grants seem to be mainstream doctors, many at prestigious institutions.
Very closely tied to the whole concept of a "predominantly plant-based diet" with their "New American Plate" way of eating. (2/3 of the plate covered with fruit, vegetables and whole grains, 1/3 or less with animal protein, low fat of course) which won them the American Dietetic Association's Presidents' Circle Nutrition Award.
Their seven guidelines:
1. Choose a diet rich in a variety of plant-based foods.
2. Eat plenty of vegetables and fruits.
3. Maintain a healthy weight and be physically active.
4. Drink alcohol only in moderation, if at all.
5. Select foods low in fat and salt.
6. Prepare and store foods safely.
And, always remember...
7. Do not use tobacco in any form.

American Obesity Association
http://www.obesity.org/
I talked about above.

National Consumer's League
http://www.nclnet.org/
"The National Consumers League works to protect and promote the economic and social interests of America's consumers, using education, research, science, investigation, publications, and the public and private sector to accomplish that mission. The organization was formed in 1899 with that purpose in mind and will continue to throughout the next century."
I can't quite figure out why they'd be a part of this unless they thought LC'ing was a fraud. Sounds like they'd be more likely to be pro-LC against the fraud that is the USDA Pyramid if they only knew the story.
They did have this press release which seems to indicate they have the potential to be friendly:
"National Consumers League Praises FDA for Allowing Omega-3 Fatty Acids Nutrient Content Info"
http://www.nclnet.org/pressroom/omega3.htm
They seem mostly interested in child labor, telemarketing and internet fraud, fire safety and consumer and marketplace skills for teens.

National Women's Health Resource Center
http://www.healthywomen.org/
"Since the late 1980s, the National Women’s Health Resource Center, Inc. (NWHRC) has helped millions of women educate themselves about the health topics that concern them the most. The non-profit organization, dedicated to helping women make informed decisions about their health, encourages women to embrace healthy lifestyles to promote wellness and prevent disease."
"As the national clearinghouse for women’s health information, providing access to health information and resources is our primary goal. The information we provide is comprehensive, objective, and supported by an advisory council comprised of the nation’s leading medical and health experts."
They seem to be suggesting the calories in vs. Calories out theory at http://www.healthywomen.org/content...6.0&L3=2.0&L4=0
Their dietary guidlines are as follows: "plan your meals so that your main dishes are made mostly from vegetables, dried beans and peas, and grain products like whole-grain bread, pasta, rice and cereals. Also, eat plenty of fruits. Meat and milk products should be eaten as smaller side dishes."
"High-volume, low-calorie foods" and While you should try to cut back on fats and sugars, allow for an occasional treat."
It's really the old, low-fat, high-carb diet. 'nuff said.

Actually I got a chuckle out of it! Who can be upset by all those lovely smiley faces!?!?!?!?

This has been a busy week for the media trying to undermine OUR collective agenda here [lc woe, etc.]

First a nerve hit about diabetes and diabetes doctors:

I have been close to several people over the years who fit the same mold, so I'm sure this is no mere coincidence:

Someone develops diabetes [adult onset] and gets all of the classic symptoms and test results [GTT has soaring BS levels; takes forever to come back down, perhaps never quite getting all the way back to FBS levels, etc.] I even know someone who literally had to be restrained due to freaking out from the rapid BS loss at the end, etc.

Doctor admits patient is "officially" diabetic, which is consistent with family history [mother takes shots for 14 years up to this point]. Doctor recommends a limited-quantity too-much carb diet with the net effect that BS levels are "maintained" at a goal level of 140 [still too high; should be 100!]

Point is that Doctor is typical and unethical because of all of the following:

1) By maintaining BS at 100 goal, patient will actually stop diabetes in its tracks, i.e., various myopathy damage will not advance [potential stroke, blindness, skin disorders, kidney disorders, etc.] thus stabilizing the patient. Clearly this WOULD be the proper treatment course, etc., but Doctor doesn't apply this. The reason is quite selfish on the part of the doctor. By maintaining the 140 level, the increased "volatility" of BS levels in diabetic patients avoids the hypoglycemic range of say anything below 85. Of course this also means that for some of the time there is a corresponding way-too-high BS level of something north of 140 far too often.

But this way, there is little chance the patient will get into one of those plummeting BS level episodes that lead to Doctor being called during his off/home/golf time he prefers to avoid!

2) By maintaining the goal level too high, myopathies and related degenerative side effects are merely somewhat slowed, not as good as could, just somewhat. Inevitably, patient can expect amputation, stroke, blindness, kidney failure, skin "rot" and other goodies to be more than a remote possibility for the rest of their lives.

All of this so Doctor "doesn't have to be bothered".

Enter me on Atkins alone in the woods [all of this is circa 1980].

It's real hard to explain to the patient that when levels drop to more like 100 and there are temporary episodes of lower still, that by feeling worse, it's actually healthier. Couple this with Doctor in total disagreement ["you're as good as you feel"], and great resistance to improving their lot, etc. [Oh, and one more thing: Doctor gets to prescribe all sorts of nice expensive diabetic medications, attempts tweaking variations, and sets the patient up for the "good news" that likely the inevitable is insulin shots self-administered!]

A similar story with a better outcome. This is the one with the family history.

Pretty much the same story as above, but person introduced to Atkins done correctly. Blood sugar totally stabilizes, doctor scratches his head and can only conclude diabetes "must be in remission" [!]

Eventually, after some bouts with BS volatility, person gets to lose weight, exercises, stays on Atkins and abandons ALL diabetes medicine and continues to monitor BS levels. Sticking to the diet all is fine, "cheating" and BS levels soar, etc. Becomes a good incentive to stick to the diet. To my knowledge, no change in regimen or results starting from about 1986 to present.

Postscript to story: Mother of patient [daughter] is convinced to follow Atkins and succeeds. After 14 years on insulin shots, mother is able to merely take diabinase. Apparently her insulin system was merely highly repressed, not totally broken!] Losing weight allowed it to work well enough with the oral medication as a stimulator, etc.

cjl (Many (diabetic) doctors suck)

Can anyone dig up the skinny on one of our enemies? The name is Samantha Heller. I want to know who she is, is associated with [radical vegans?] or whatever, in preparation for some info to follow about her and some others, but she is the key villain in this particular piece.

Would really appreciate a post on this piece of work!

cjl (really starting to get angry about what's happening to what I have been doing since 1972 to stay healthly! Notwithstanding our fine forum here!)

ps: folks! It really works long-term! Best advice from someone who's been there that long - Just keep on going. Get a support system that works for you, otherwise you might fall off the sugar wagon. It's the Timex diet; it takes a licking and keeps on ticking, as long as you don't lick sugar!

Samanth Heller

http://www.healthology.com/faculty_...heller_samantha

I read ol' Samantha's interview and it had some real puzzlers.

"I think when someone chooses or goes on a low carb diet, what they are doing is cutting out almost an entire food group. Any time you do that, you're going to be cutting out calories, so you tend to lose weight." Huh?? So, I could cut fruit out of my diet and live on chocolate chip cookies and thereby cut calories out of my diet? If that's true and if her statement about it all being about calories, then I could live just on chocolate chip cookies and lose weight! I love logic.

Another one: "initially, you're losing water. Then maybe over time, if you're losing numbers of pounds, some fat. Then, what I find very scary, you're going to start losing protein. You're body wants to spare carbohydrate because it's the fuel it needs to support your brain and your muscles. So, you'll start breaking down protein. Guess what's made of protein? Your heart and your muscles." Ooh! I'm scared! I must have lost 40 pounds of water and protein. I bet I don't even have a heart left, it's been eaten up by my ravenous body!

Then, her friend Martha McKittrick chimes in: "It also alters some of your brain chemicals. When you seriously cut out carbohydrates, you alter your brain chemicals, and you are really going to crave carbohydrates. It's a difficult thing, and there is no need to do it." Yeah, that's just what I've heard. People go on this diet and all at once they develop cravings for carbs! It must be because their bodies know that they need them! Or maybe they're just crazy because their body has already eaten their own brain.

Samantha again after describing ketosis as a sign of "entering the danger zone" : "A ketone is a byproduct of breaking down fat for energy. It's the only other source that your brain can use for fuel. It's like if you run out of gas for your car, what is the last resort thing you can use? Your body is freaking out a bit, saying, "Okay, let's make those ketones so we can at least use our brain to have our bodies function."" Of course we're freaking out, our brain chemistry has changed, our body is eating its own organs and we're in the "danger zone"!!

And a last parting message: "we know by common sense and by a whole host of scientific literature that eating a high saturated fat diet and cutting out carbs for a long time is dangerous for your health." Uh, yeah. Like what?

Well, here's to your continued journy down the "dangerous" road.

Plane Crazy to keep eating as I'm doing according to Samantha.

Yeah, we wouldn't want to do that if we are trying to lose weight.