Study casts doubt on advantages of Atkins diet Low-carb regimen no better than low-fat after a year

By Robert Bazell, Correspondent

Updated: 7:41 p.m. ET May 17, 2004Like millions of Americans, James and Suzy Gelman went on the Atkins low-carbohydrate diet because they thought it was a way to lose weight quickly and eat lots of the foods they love.

“My main eating problem is portion control, and Atkins offered a way to eat a lot of steak, and chicken and that type of stuff,” says James Gelman.

Even physicians have been attracted to the diet. Dr. Linda Stern of the Philadelphia Veterans Administration Hospital liked it so much she decided to study it. What was it about the Atkins diet that appealed to her?

“I had just gotten back from a vacation where I had gained a few pounds, and I tried it," says Stern. “And I was surprised to see how quickly and easily I lost the few pounds that I had gained.”

But does the weight stay off? Stern experimented with 132 obese patients — half went on the Atkins diet, while half ate a standard low-fat diet.

“The results: After six months, the low-carbohydrate group lost significantly more weight than the group following the low-fat diet,” says Stern.

And that finding, along with several similar studies, made big news — especially because cholesterol and other risk factors for heart disease actually improved on the Atkins diet.

But in research released Monday, Stern finds that while the Atkins diet worked better for the first six months, after a year, the weight of the two groups became almost the same. Other studies are reaching the same conclusion.

Dr. Glenn Gasser of the University of Virginia predicts this longer-term research is the beginning of the end of the Atkins fad. “My guess is that, in a few years, people will look at themselves in the mirror and they won’t see much difference in this low-carb diet they’ve been on for a number of years, and will go on to something else.”

That is what James and Suzy Gelman have decided. “Moderation — it’s a boring concept, but it seems to be the one that works best."

© 2004 MSNBC Interactive

Gad.. talk about spinning a story ! First they say that



Then they conclude that after a year the weight loss was the same in both groups and totally ignore the risk factors. What happened to them, they are no longer important ? And I thought that Atkins was such an evil diet because it was at first thought to worsen cholesterol. Now that it's proven that it actually improves blood work, it's no longer relevant ?

Talk about being selective about facts. And what about indications that low-fat is actually bad for you ? Swept under the rug?

So what if the results are supposedly the same. There is this implied conclusion that if results are the same, low-fat is preferable. You got to be really brainwashed to believe that. Low-fat is a miserable hunger inducing diet that is not sustainable in the long term. I tell you, even if the results between Atkins and Low-fat were exactly the same, I know what I would choose.

IN the real world away from the study, the numbers that stay on low-fat more than a year are very few.

Do they live in the real world.

It's very rare for people who are obese (including me) to starve themselves for long term.

They say after a year the weight loss is the same. Well I would rather be on low-carb than starving.

And the study went for one year. What about the long term effects ?
What if they only did their study for 6 months ? wouldn't their conclusions be completely different ? If it varies that much in a year ? what are the variations on 18 months ? 2 years ?

This report is just dog doo-doo!

I guess they just proved that low carb is the way to go, not only is it just as effective as a low fat diet after a year, but it actually got you there six months faster.

Actually, did they not just prove that it takes twice as long on a low fat diet to achieve the results you get on an Atkins diet? LOL, these are scientists right?

brobin