Low-Carb Diets Unhealthy and a Ripoff, Experts Say

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Popular low-carbohydrate diets are leading Americans to poor health and are spawning a rip-off industry of "carb-friendly" products, health experts and consumer advocates said on Tuesday. They announced a new group, called the Partnership for Essential Nutrition, to help educate Americans about the need for healthy carbohydrates such as vegetables, fruits, beans and whole grains.

"When unproven science becomes a sales pitch, some people get rich and the rest of us get ripped off," Jeffrey Prince of the American Institute for Cancer Research told a news conference. "Eating vegetables, fruits, whole grains and beans, which are all predominantly carbohydrate, is linked to a reduced risk of cancer, heart disease, stroke, diabetes and a range of other chronic diseases." Prince said low-carb diets that advocate piling on the animal protein and fat are "increasing the risk of developing cancer, heart disease, stroke, type-2 diabetes and other chronic diseases."

The new group includes such organizations as the Alliance for Aging Research, the American Association of Diabetes Educators, the AICR and the American Obesity Association. Its Web site at essentialnutrition.org is especially critical of programs such as the Atkins diet that advocate throwing the body into a condition called ketosis. During this phase the body sheds water as it tries to get rid of excess protein and fat breakdown products. The group published a survey of 1,017 adults, done by Opinion Research Corporation, that showed 19 percent of dieters are trying to cut carbs. The survey found that 47 percent them believed that low-carb diets can help them lose weight without cutting calories.

"They are confused. They lack an understanding of the basic science," Barbara Moore, president of Shape Up America, told the news conference.


http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=571&ncid=751&e=1&u=/nm/20040622/hl_nm/health_diets_dc

This article misses the point that after a 2-week carb-free induction, the dieter then adds in "good" carbs like fruits and vegetables and whole grains, and it's the BAD non-nutrient carbs that are avoided. And you NEVER over-carb. If you want potatoes, eat potatoes, just don't have the bread and corn and baked beans with it. Have a salad and green beans. Keeping it simple and sane will keep you healthy and slim.

Some people are just miserable without carbs and do better on other eating plans, but it certainly worked for me and it's working for my sister.

because it is hurting corporate farmers.

It's all about the corn.

asses! If you eat right, lose weight, get healthy and stay healthy you hurt: Sugar/bread and pastry industries
Pharmaceutical/drug companies
Medical profession, hospitals, nurses etc.
Weight-loss industries

to mention only a few. People might even begin to think better with a healthy body that can lead to a more healthy mind. God knows, they sure don't want that to happen. People might even start being nice to each other because they feel so good, depression and anxiety are gone... can't make wars with that kind of people.

Damn those health fanatics and their diets!!!

to agree is probably not the healthiest. Something about pounds of bacon and all the steak you want - not a sensible plan, but I do know some "younger" people who have done just that and lost a ton of weight.

You seem to be talking more about the South Beach type plan which are very healthy and teach you about good fats and carbs vs. the bad fats and carbs. YES, that one does work!!! "Hubby" loves it now, was reluctant to give up his bread for lunch at first, but doesn't miss it at all now. He's lost around 25#, 10 in the 1st 2 weeks and the rest over 6 weeks. Little slower results for me, around 14# in the same 8 weeks, but I'm happy with it so far.

We didn't get these Wisconsinite figures overnight, so we won't get rid of them all that quickly either!

There's a been a few stuides published recently showing that atkins-style diets lead to better heart health for most people in the study. Here's one article on the subject:

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/health/bal-hf.health20jun20,0,6383496.story?coll=bal-health-headlines

from this particular article. It does say that 30% experienced rasied levels of LDL though. Interesting quote from the article that makes about the same point on the over doing of bacon and steak that I mentioned.

To maximize the diets' healthfulness, he added, people should avoid going hog-wild on fatty bacon and red meat - opting instead to eat healthy oils (monounsaturated and polyunsaturated fats) and get protein from fish, beans, nuts and chicken.

Because what you are describing is NOT what Atkins prescribed! I wish the people who attack this diet bothered to read the stupid book, just once.

"Something about pounds of bacon and all the steak you want"

gosh, I must have missed that chapter in my Atkins book.

Written by a cardiologist, pulls together all the stuff I've been reading about for 2 - 3 years now but didn't quite know how to get a handle on in order to put it to practical use in my own eating: prediabetes, glycemic index, insulin resistance.

The recipes are just terrific (we're having Bombay sole for dinner tonight, and marinated London Broil tomorrow night), the meal plan has no portions to worry about or weigh, there's no counting anything (not calories nor carbs nor fats), there are some terrific snacks and a decent dessert or two even for Phase 1. I'm never hungry (until it's time to BE hungry), I'm not having any cravings, and the principles are well enough described and make sense enough that it won't be difficult to make this what EVERY dieter and EVERY diet advisor knows is absolutely essential: a lifestyle change.

All this, and I'm on Phase I which the author stressed "is the hardest part" with no fruit of any kind, no sugar, no breads (sounds much more difficult than it is, I swear). Phase 2 adds in fruit and whole grains in small quantities.

And all this praise from someone who isn't a big vegetable eater (tho I am now, and loving it -- the diet retrains your taste). The emphasis is on good carbs (veggies, legumes, whole grains in moderation), good fat, and all the protein you need. Nothing to count.

I couldn't be more pleased with it. If anyone wants to try it, be sure to get The South Beach Diet Cookbook too, for even more great recipes. Most of the recipes in both books are things you'd be happy to eat whether you're on a diet or not. Seriously.

Oh, and I don't know how the Atkins diet may have changed from its initial incarnation, but once upon a time at least it WAS a very unhealthy diet. Very hard on the kidneys, and probably a lot of other things. Plus, as Dr. Agatston points out in his book, the Atkins, Ornish and Pritikin diets are difficult to stay on for the longeterm (i.e., lifestyle change). He's had patients on his diet (in the maintenance phase) for 5 years and counting.

I'm a fan of the SBD and have dropped about 25-30 lbs so far. (And I'm not following it all that conscientiously.)

my own version, i.e., I started with phase 2. I'm in no hurry. I've been carrying around the excess weight for many years. I rely on many of those low carb foods, too. I've spent a lot of time searching labels for low carbs (without hydrogenated fats or Equal), but I guess I'm not alone. The food manufacturers finally got it!! The low carb foods in the supermarket have finally made it easy to maintain or lose weight, without having to cook everything from scratch.

To eat right. The South Beach Diet is simply founded on simple, "eat right" principles that anyone with a brain and an interest in nutrition could practice for themselves WITHOUT paying for this book, its cookbook and any attendant products someone will think of to market with it (like all of the Atkins products out there now).

Jeez, I didn't need to buy all of this shit to figure this out for myself. People in this country are too lazy to figure out nutrition and exercise for themselves. SAD.

did it occur to you that many people may not have the same access to nutrition education? :eyes:

Who looks fantastic. Love the photo on the book cover.

doesn't promote a whole food diet and tells people to use a sugar substitute, which is very bad , IMO. Processed foods are bad. At least what you're eating in the Zone or Atkins are whole foods.

It is a fad. You will put the weight back on or make yourself sick trying to keep it off. If low carb was good for you humans would have done it long ago. It is a stupid risky fad.

But go ahead, it's your body. For me, no thank you.

Of course it's a fad! All of the food companies now are jumping on the bandwagon and offering 'low carb' items to appeal to Atkins and South Beach dieters.
I don't see how eating alot of fat can be good for anyone in the long run. IMO, the best way to lose weight(even though it may take longer)is to limit portions, cut back on desserts and junk food, and exercise regularly.

CARBS and SUGAR. So stop advocating a low carb diet!</sarcasm>

Civilization= invention of grains used for agriculture. Before that, people lived on fruits, vegatables and what they hunted.

This does look like yet another food industry initiative, like that from the "Dietitians."

for these people. Trying to talk them out of a diet is like trying to convert America to communism. Ain't gonna happen.

what his/her diet consists of. Corporations control what the the industrialized world eats while rest of the world is hungry. In the case of the US, Processed wheat flour and corn syrup is cheap and abundant. Take a look in your supermarket. It's all crap but it's relatively inexpensive and man does it taste good. Eating healthy is truly practical only for the rich.

Jay

I can get a box of Kraft Macaroni and cheese for under $1
If I want to increase the quality a bit with whole grain pasta and all natural cheese it jumps to $2-$3 depending on brand and where I shop
If I want to make my own with all natural, organic ingredients and whole grains it jumps even more.

I see loaves of bread for $.99 filled with chemicals, processed flour, sugar and partially hydrogenated oils. The whole grain breads are closer to $3 and if I want something without wheat (a major allergen because it is eaten so prevalently) I can pay even more.

Fortunately, these are choices I can make. I feel sorry for moms who have no option but to load up their shopping carts with 10 boxes of the cheap stuff.

Most of the food I see for kids is loaded with cheap sugar. It is typically in the top 3 ingredients. But the stores are practically giving the stuff away. This poor quality of food is a source of many behavior problems that kids experience.

I thought I was the only person who thought this was unsafe bullshit. My mom has been a dialysis nurse for 30 years and a big chunk of that is spent working with dieticians (sp?) educating patients...low carb can do a number on your kidneys and some people are gonna find that out the hard way unfortunately.

You want to know what my favorite thing is? I saw a commercial the other day for some vitamin for people on low carb...this lady goes "my husband and I are concerned we may not be getting the nutrients we need from our low carb diet." Isn't that a clue you need to change your fucking diet instead of popping a damn pill?!

Gawd the gullibility of this country never ceases to amaze me. We are so the bitches of the food industry. When I saw low carb Cheetos I swear I saw PT Barnum smiling up from hell...

You can get a scientific study to show almost anything.
For many people a regular amount of carbs are very addictive and bad for their overall health.
Every body is different.

As so many people are feeling better and are healthier as a result.

The issue in large part is not that people eat or don't eat carbs. It is the poor quality and lack of nutritional value in most of the carbs people eat. And it is the quantity - more than they burn off.

Nutritionally speaking fruits and vegetables are not carbs they are sources of vitamins, minerals, micronutrients and fiber.

Certainly there are some people out there abusing the concept of lo carb eating just as so many abuse eating in general.

Bottom line: do your own research, pay attention to how the food you eat makes you feel, strive for a balanced diet of whole foods heavy with fruits and vegetables, and limit your carb intake to match your activity level - the more active you are the more carbs you will burn as fuel the excess will turn to fat.

I consume way more carbohydrates than 70% of the population and my weight hasn't changed in 40 years...
:eyes:

if you aren't insulin resistant, then carbs don't affect you the same way that they affect someone who is insulin resistant.

Are you like one of those skinny bitches I used to work with, who would have chips, a pop, a candy bar and a cigarette for lunch, and never gain weight? I'd be willing to be you are.

Metabolic syndrome and insulin resistance are real medical conditions that affect how your body processes carbs.

Low carb means cutting out starch and sugar. It does not mean eating slabs of bacon and washing it down with butter.

You can eat lots of healthy vegetables, fruit, grains, etc. Those are really good for you.

You cut out empty calories -- white bread, white rice, twinkies, cookies, etc. I don't know of any nutritionalist who will advocate eating empty calories.

This person should actually read the diets before slamming them...

Get rid of the white stuff - sugar, processed flour, and for some people, dairy. Not only do you lose weight, you feel better emotionally and have more energy. However, different people have different metabolisms & physcial makeups, so not everyone responds this way.

I rarely buy processed foods (that's where the expense is) and stick to the perimeters in the market - vegetables, fruit, nuts, lean protien. I was severely hypoglycemic so I had to cut that stuff out for the most part, but much to my surprise I dropped 2 sizes almost without trying and felt so much healthier and happier.

Some of us, with blood sugar problems, react strongly to anything with a high glycemic uptake - sugars, starches, processed foods, etc. - so in order to feel stable, we need to stick to a low (refined) carb diet (note: you can eat whole grains and even the occasional treat).

I occasionally go through periods where I indulge myself and it puts me on this roller-coaster where I have severe mood swings (depression to anger), I am mentally foggy and I have no energy at all. I am learning to avoid those things, but I think there is nothing wrong with an ice cream cone or piece of cake once in a while for your well being. Just don't over do it.

nt

Instead of trying to change their products they want to kill the messenger.

I know for a fact that low-carb diets work. I lost twenty pounds in three weeks and have never felt better!!

In health matters, as with everything else, FOLLOW THE MONEY!!!
Some sugar-based industries stand to loose billions if this catches on.

It's a couple of second-string organizations with very few people willing to let their names be used. There's no accessable way to check out their references or claims, but there's a ton of industry buzzwords and language. And nearly none of their references are from supporting organizations. I would also be willing to guess that the studies were cherry-picked for data, as well.

This one looks like prime Astroturf, an issue organization underwritten by one of the non-low-carb food producers' organizations.

You want info on low-carb eating? Check out the well-condusted scientific studies on each side of the issue. Check out the hundreds of thousands of low-carb dieters who are NOT being rushed to the hospital.

And look for where the money is coming from -- from ANY organization that presumes to tell you what's good for you.

--bkl

Atkins is the only diet that has ever worked for me, HOWEVER, the "lo-carb" garbage selling for $$$$ is a ripoff. They are a ripoff because they don't change behavior.

If you can eat "low carb" ice cream, it won't hurt you, but what happens when you get off the "low carb" stuff and try real stuff again? The weight goes right back on.

off. It was NJ-NY-CT plan put together by a nutrionist/prof from Rutgers under the name of Lean Line. It was far better than Weight Watchers because it didn't rely on pre-fab foods and discouraged the use of artificial sweeteners, etc. as much as possible. However, bonus foods included things like beer, etc. which are normally excluded from diets. The point was that we live and eat in the real world and we have to learn to make choices and every once in a while, we want something and we should learn to handle it. After reaching certain plateaus, we had "cruises" which were essentially a week on a "maintenance" calorie intake, with extra portions allowed, which helped break any "stalls" in weight loss and also were tests of our ability to add new foods. There was lots of freedom on this plan, too. We also did behavior modification.

Over time, I lost my desire for sweets and fatty foods and developed more of a taste for whole foods, esp. fruits and complex carbos like whole wheat bread...

I eventually became a lecturer because I really believed in this program.

Now, almost 30 years later, I'm still exactly at my goal weight (!) I never gained more that 5-8 lbs. and I just modified my eating and lost it. The food choices have become ingrained in me. Thank you, LEAN LINE!!! Ahead of it's time.

You don't need the "low-carb" products that seem to be the rage right now. A diet of proteins (such as chicken, fish, beef, and the like), veggies, selected fruits and nuts, cheeses, and beans will do far more for you than the latest low-carb tortillas or ice cream. Cutting sugars and refined flours is the key.

Admittedly, I do enjoy the Klondike Carb Smart bars from time to time, but it's not a habit.

whole grain pastas and breads. no refined sugar or flour. small amounts of high carb-high sugar veggies. its not rocket science.

...but I am happy to report that there are no "low carb" branded products in his house.
Everything there is regular food that happens to be low in carbs, or full of good carbs (whole-grain bread, brown rice, etc.). No "Carb WOW!" peanut butter that's full of splenda and that actually has no fewer carbs than natural peanut butter (ingredients: peanuts). Just food.

I think low-carb can work well for some people -- just as low-fat can work for others -- but in either case, we need to turn our attentions from processed replacement foods to actual real food. We saw what happened when we didn't with low-fat food -- we ate ourselves silly on fat-free cheese and fat-free cookies and fat-free salad dressing and ended up gaining weight.

If people would just get up off their lazy asses and burn more calories than they take in they will lose weight.

Get up off the couch and DO SOMETHING!

This country is way too soft and spoiled.

the way to lose weight (for the 95% of people without physical abnormalities) is to burn more calories than you ingest.

It doesn't even make a difference what you eat; you can lose weight even if all you eat is Snickers bars and ice cream, just as long as you work out enough to burn the calories off...though it would just be easier and better for you if you ate more nutritious foods while trying to lose weight.

I'm with you. I'm going out for a walk right after my nap.

;)

However, some people are so obese that they have to lose weight somehow before they can exercise safely. That's what low-carb did for me. It helped me lose weight so I could exercise. I have lost 50 lbs. Prior to the diet I could not jog 3/4 of a mile without being severely winded. However, once I lost the 50 lbs I started jogging 1.5 miles each time. I have since built that up to 3 miles which gets me my 20 minutes of aerobic exercise a day.

As well, the diet, if done properly, gets you off of just about all fried and/or breaded foods -- a definite plus.

Dance Dance Revolution will lose you more weight than any bullshit fad diet. My friend lost 90 lbs playing that game (she also cut back on processed junk food and ate smaller portions).

As usual follow the nerds we are always way ahead of the curve. :)

nobody seems to be able to agree about anything related to high-protien diets except one thing...

if you follow it faithfully, you will lose weight in a rather dramatic fashion, and it will tend to stay off for a long time if you stick with the plan. and this will happen whether or not you even bother getting up to exercise at all, which is one of the factors that is going to keep this diet around for a long, long time. is it healthy? i think it's a benefit to obese people who are seriously at risk anyway. for people who are just slimming down, who knows? i guess if they have the discipline to exercise regularly they probably would have the discipline to eat less overall as well. we're a lazy country that way. we're looking for short-cuts and despite any danger, we're not going to give them up.

a lot safer than stomach surgery or remaining very obese. I've found that calorie counting is not even necessary - it is hard to eat too much food when you're not eating refined carbs.

Exercise is certainly good, but you won't ever lose enough weight just with exercise, unless you become a full-time marathon runner - you need to walk about 35-40 miles to get rid of a pound of fat.

This page has an exercise calculator.
http://walking.about.com/library/cal/uccalc1.htm

Exercise is good for cardiovascular health, but most people would not find it a good weight loss tool.

I've only dropped 14 pounds since going on Atkins a year ago, but I'm taking less than half the insulin. My wife has lost 35 lbs.

Dr. Berstein is a type I diabetic and has written two wonderful books on administering isulin, pre prandial, dosage according to the carbs you will eat. He has been on a low carb diet for ten years without any severe health effects. His books are clearly written and he is NOT a quack. He was an engineer and out of control no matter how and what he did. He developed the system of carb counting, usually limiting carbs to between thirty and forty a day. He is right when he says that achieving normal blood sugars is the treatement for warding off the complications of diabetes. He is sixty five years old, .
When he began testing his blood sugar when the monitors first came out ;more than ten years ago and were very expensive, he began to develop a way of eating that allowed him to achieve normal blood sugars withnout the spikes and dips. He wrote many papers and tried to get others to see the wisdom of his method. He was rejected by the medical and the diatetic community. So, not to be thwarted, he went to medical school and became a MD . Now, people do listen to him.

www.diabetes-normalsugars.com/

For diabetics who test daily four or more times, the advantage of low carb diet is immediately seen.

Some of us can see before our eyes with our glucose monitors the benefits of this diet to our health.

Those who poo poo the diet are not the ones who are testing theit blood sugar levels before and after a meal.

The newer foods coming out that are low carb can be evaluated in the same way. Alcohol suguars that are present in many of the foods, may affect the blood sugar levels of some people--others do not.

I Have been low carb for almost five years and no health problems and no lipid levels that are outrageous. To the contrary I once tried vegetarian, low fat diet and after a year ended up in the emergency room with gall stones being passed when no one in my family ever had gall bladder problems and neither did it until I went on that diet. Doctor said it was due to the diet. I also did not feel good on that diet.

I allow myself small portions of low glycemic fruit--berries, and there are several others every once in a while. There are people who are working on glycemic indexes, Rick Mendosa for one and he has a an excellent web site with lots of info on it.

http://www.mendosa.com/diabetes.htm

I do not miss the sweet stuff really and one of those Atkins fudge ice cream bars with a few berries on top and a tablespoon of whipped cream on top, satisfies me on special occasions, and the low carb bread put out by Atkins is just fine with me.

suggest reading Metabolic Typing. Most of our dietary needs are controlled by genetics and heredity. I heard somewhere that the Food Pyramid was fashioned after some tribal diet in Africa, people who live near equator have higher needs for carbs than folks in northern latitudes.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to notice all the Atkins products they are trying to sell you for a profit. And it's disgustingly unhealthy.

South Beach as more sane but healthy food and exercise is the best way to go.

The South Beach diet gives you the directions for free on their website. You don't have to buy anything, not even the damn book.

Disgusting....all and everything in moderation, end of story.

Arnold's makes a multi-grain low carb bread which is quite good.

:shrug:

Low carbs? High profit!! ANYONE can lose weight if they eat less processed crap, and no sugar, AND they increase their activity level. Any diet works that requires you to THINK about what you're eating.. that's the difference. People rarely give much thought to their eating normally, other than fries or onion rings with that? "Diets" cause people to consider what they eat. There is no magic diet that works.. because the successful ones all have the same components... eat less processed food, no sugar. Hell. if all we did was cut those two things out, we'd all lose weight.. no need for six dollar brownie mix.

Other than someone who must live on low carbs for health reasons, I doubt we'll see a ton of people still eating that disgusting low-carb line of products 3 years from now. Weird.. we're reliving the 70's: Disco music, gas shortages, clothing, born-again christians, and now Atkins. What next?

have ever really been on a diet or had a battle with food?

I have lost 35 pounds with Atkins, it works for me. I am more alert, fitter, more willing to exercise with a lower in take of carbs.Certain types of Carbs such as types of breads and potatoes make me sluggish and sleepy.
The Atkin's Brownie mix is not essential for the diet, it is an option. The diet is perfectly possible without ever buying any Atkins products. They have only recently reached the shops in the UK.
The reason people may have Kidney problems is that they do not drink enough, it is vital to drink lots of water during the induction stage.
Personally I often eat Bacon and Eggs for breakfast or berries with Creme Fraiche, a tuna salad for lunch, Chicken or red meat with green veggies or salad. Nuts,cheese and an Apple for snacks. The only Atkins products I buy are the Morning breakfast bars or sometimes the indulgance bars, both are very satisfying. It is not unhealthy, in anyway.

most just parrot the sound bytes they hear, and have no real knowledge of what they are talking about.

to follow the Atkins or South Beach diets, unless you choose to do so. YOu can follow both diets by eating "normal" foods.

1. Low-carb diets, including Atkins, are NOT "all protein and fat." Even in the first two weeks ("induction") you are encouraged to eat a lot of non-starchy vegetables, and you start adding moderate amounts of carbs after that until you find your own level of tolerance. A typical meal during the induction phase might be a stir-fry made with spinach and/or cabbage, a a chicken or shrimp Caesar salad without croutons, or chef's salad made with tuna or turkey.

2. As for the "just get off you lazy ass" crowd, I can attest to the fact that this ain't necessarily so, especially in middle age. I gained twenty pounds (and no, it was NOT all muscle) during a time when I was taking three circuit training and two water aerobics classes a week, walking twenty minutes each way to the gym. However, I was eating "low fat," filling up on pasta and bread. The weight gain stopped when I cut out sugar and white flour, but I needed to cut back on all carbs to actually lose weight.

3. Eating low-carb has nothing to do with those overpriced low-carb substanceoids produced by the agribusinesses.

4. Who are the "experts" in the original article? The sugar industry has its own bought and paid for "scientists" who go into the media and try to tell the public that eating a lot of sugar is good for you. You can find an "expert" to proclaim just about anything, and the names of their "associations" sound about as astroturfish as they come.

I've been on low carb now since Jan 10th. What's unhealthy about giving up SUGAR, FLOUR, PASTA AND RICE?

I eat healthier than I ever have, I don't eat donuts, cookies, bread, pizza, candy, cakes, chips. I quit drinking wine.

I no longer have heart burn, or high blood pressure. I've only lost 35 lbs, and have about 35 more to lose. I'm 59 years old, female and have more energy this year than I have had in several years.

I can fit into clothes that don"t look like tents and i like myself better this year than i have since 1993.

The "experts" who are suggesting giving up sugar, flour pasta and rice are bad for you are also the same "experts" who are telling you all we eat is "bacon, eggs, and fats".

My two cents.

One-cent (Penny)

That's terrific! You're doing something right. Congratulations! Keep up the great work!

:toast:

showed that low-carb diets worked faster for the first few months, but that more balanced plans like Weight Watchers eventually catch up and exceed that success ... and that people kept the weight off better on Weight Watcher-type diets.

:scared:

misunderstanding of the "low-carb" diets. Personally, I don't buy the new low-carb items available except the yogurt made with Splenda vs sugar and once in a great while the sugar free ice cream. But I'd be getting these sugar free items anyway as diabetes runs in the family and my Dr. told me to watch the sugars.

What he didn't tell me about was the refined white flour and bread! I don't get low-carb bread, but I do use whole grain when I have bread (which isn't very often). I was never a pasta nut, and not too keen on potatoes so I don't miss those at all. Ahh, but white rice, I miss white jasmine rice!

Anyway, yeah a lot of this low-carb stuff on the market is a bunch of bunk - made with soy flour and lots of added fiber to reduce the "net carbs" for the Atkins type diet. Just give me whole grain instead.

you don't need to call it any type of diet. It's called eating healthy.

I don't care what the "experts" say. Before I cut sugar and pasta from my diet, my triglyceride level was 2200 (that's not a typo). After 3 months of low-carb, it was 500...still quite high, but not nearly as astronomical. And my weight dropped by more than 10 percent.

Makes you wonder if these so-called "experts" aren't on somebody's payroll.

EVERYTHING in moderation -- carbs, fats, dairy, oils, protein. I think there's nothing wrong with cutting back on "bad carbs," but I'd never eat all that fatty meat. Bleah. (I'm nearly vegetarian anyway). I'm trying to cut back on lots of different things (not on non-starchy vegetables, of course).

I don't believe anyone can stay on a diet forever that severely restricts a certain kind of food. And when you go back, you gain the weight back.

I'm also trying to add the "super foods" to my diet more often(blueberries, spinach, salmon, red wine (just a drop -- any more disturbs my sleep!), nuts, legumes, soy, broccoli, tomatoes, etc.).

"Makes you wonder if these so-called "experts" aren't on somebody's payroll."

Yeah, they're all in the pockets of Big Carbohydrate (like Big Tobacco). The industry is putting sugar, corn syrup and fructose in everything - and I mean everything! And bread, pasta, potato and corn products - all those lovely carbohydrates - turn to sugar, sugar, sugar! We are all addicted to the stuff and it's killing us. Big Carbohydrate does not care about the health of the consumer. It follows that I no longer listen to the experts. I trust my instincts now and just do what works for me.

that my astronomical triglyceride level followed a year of "conventional" low-fat dieting, and I followed it religiously! I avoided all forms of red meat...I even insisted on angel food cake for my birthday, because of its lower fat content. But none of that helped; in fact, it actually made my numbers worse. So, it's low-carb for me from now on.

Having said that, there is nothing wrong with cutting back on saturated fats. But I'm not nearly as fanatical about it now. For me, an ideal diet would be one that consists of lean meats and green veggies, and avoids greasy, creamy, sugary, and starchy items--for it satisfies both the low-fat and low-carb approaches.

Neanderthin: Eat Like a Caveman to Achieve a Lean, Strong, Healthy Body
by Ray Audette, Troy Gilchrist


http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0312975910/qid=1087963077/sr=8-1/ref=pd_ka_1/102-5648922-8716928?v=glance&s=books&n=507846


Did it for two years successfully. Lost 125 pounds in 12 months. No exercise, no hunger.

Problem is, as with Atkins, it's a lifestyle choice, and we Americans love exercising our hedonistic freedom of choice. The weight's back on, but this eating plan for life is not to blame.

As for those cashing in on the C-R-A-Z-E, you know not to trust those vipers in marketing. Study yer Bill Hicks.

we're hunter/gatherers by nature. the ideal human diet consists of meat/fish/poultry, eggs, 'unprocessed' fruits & vegetables, nuts, berries, tubers, etc.
things like bread, pasta, refined sugar, carbonated beverages, high-fructose corn syrup and the like are not the best fuels for our systems.

Wonder where that kind of money comes from.

--bkl

The article DOES NOT talk about whether or not it WORKS. It talks about the HEALTH risks, which are CONSIDERABLE:

Prince said low-carb diets that advocate piling on the animal protein and fat are "increasing the risk of developing cancer, heart disease, stroke, type-2 diabetes and other chronic diseases."

Let me tell you this: I developed anorexia and serious health complications at an early age as a result of high-protein low-carb diet. It was called "the Air Force Diet" when I was a teen (in the '60s!)--restricting carbohydrates in a day to under 60 gms. Atkins didn't invent anything. He just popularized a very nutritionally unsound eating regimen in order to make a lot of money. And now, in addition to the Atkins line, there are a whole assortment of products out there that are very expensive in order to support this fad. DO NOT fall for it.

The same rules apply that have always worked: Eat sensibly, and increase your exercise.

Americans are sickening, always looking for the magic bullet: bypasses, lap banding, Ephedrine, etc. etc. etc. TRY WILL POWER AND GETTING OFF YOUR LAZY ASS!

P.S. I'm old enough to remember the '50s, when being FAT was something that was ODD. Now it's everywhere and being THIN is odd. In the '50s people didn't have all the crap processed foods laden with chemicals that people consume now. They didn't veg out in front of the tube. They just ate right and used their bodies to consume calories.

I don't believe the diet "caused" anorexia. Usually anorexia is psychological in origin, so, right off the bat I'm skeptical.

I've lost about 35 pounds on an Atkins-like diet.

And exercise is mandatory under Atkins and South Beach.

People didn't all eat right in the 50's either, and, like now, where there was poverty there was obesity.

Mostly because carbs are cheap.

You don't need the products to do Atkins either- the only time I taste them is on air travel.

There may be people who eat nothing but steak and eggs, but that's because they're relying on hearsay or rumors about the diet rather than what it's actually about.

I tried the good carbs approach and gained 5 pounds in a month. I simply cannot have carbs at every meal, not even if those carbs are stone ground oatmeal, whole grain bread from a high-quality bakery, and brown rice.

If I want to maintain my weight, I can't have carbs at more than one meal a day. This is tough on me, since I love cereal and bread, but avoiding them is easier than buying a whole new wardrobe in a larger size.

Oh, yes, and I take four exercise classes a week and walk rather than drive if I can. My metabolism changed for the worse after age 40, and I have to do all this just to hold steady.

with just a few whole grains thrown in.

People insist in equating "carb" ONLY with breads and other grains (oatmeal). Yes, those things are heavily carbohydrate in make-up, but so are vegetables. "Good carbs" = VEGETABLES.

Not only did I suffer from it but so did my son when he was 16. A lot of very intensive research into the disease indicates that it is in large part a genetic response to stress. So, although both I and my son were in stress conditions, I could have chosen to simply cut calories but found the "quicky" approach in the Air Force low-carb diet. And my son, although he recovered when he was 16, at the age of 31 started going the high-protein, low-carb route but has since abandoned it for several (health) reasons. This is a proven unhealthy way to eat. I developed numerous health problems as a result of following it for over three years. I would NEVER follow this again.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

http://www.essentialnutrition.org/lowcarb.php

The most widely used low-carbohydrate diet is the one advocated by the late Dr. Robert C. Atkins, which was introduced in 1972 and changed in 1992. At the same time, severely restricting the intake of carbohydrates is the basis for a number of diet plans, including the High Protein Diet, Hollywood Diet, and South Beach Diet...According to the theory espoused by these diet plans, low-carb diets force the body to use fat as its main energy source, resulting in "ketosis," a process that is jump-started by eliminating carbohydrates, and specifically glucose, which is what the brain needs for normal functioning.

Actually South Beach does not lead to Ketosis, as this states.

Ketosis also produces metabolic dehydration, a type of dehydration has nothing to do with what one eats or drinks. Metabolic dehydration occurs when the body uses its own stores of carbohydrates and protein, both of which are stored in water. In fact, a classic study reported in the Journal of Clinical Investigation2 found that although people tended to lose weight more quickly on low-carbohydrate diets, the additional weight loss was not fat loss but water loss due to metabolic dehydration.

This is belied by my physique. And the diets advocate making sure that ALOT of water is drunk.

What researchers have found is that temporary additional weight loss on low-carbohydrate diets is entirely explained by metabolic dehydration and that there is no sustained difference after a year.

False, as the article posted in the Baltimore paper showed.

Because so few dieters following the Atkins plan were found in the registry, the researchers concluded that very low-carbohydrate diets do not offer a weight loss advantage over the long term.


This is one of the more phony canards thrown about by folks like Dietitians: this study is a study of popularity of a diet, nto its effectiveness!

And, it was before data came out showing that low-carb was effective!

But it IS very unhealthy and VERY dangerous if followed as a long-term plan and if taken to an extreme. There is a tendency to reduce carbs further than is healthy in order to speed up the loss, and the diet's "approval" of animal fats is just plain contradictory to the "rules" of heart-healthy eating.

cut out sugar & white flour and I've never felt better. Mostly because I'm miserable when I eat it - fingers get swollen, achiness, bloat, low energy, poor concentration. The sugar & snack industry are major players - anyone remember the WHO controversy recently? It's only expected that there is going to be a coordinated backlash against low carb because it's working to drain profits.
I don't really give a damn what someone else chooses to eat. But I think it's important to listen to our bodies and consider that what we eat is not just running through our body like a sieve but actually might be contributing to how we physically feel & look. The government's current campaign is to suggest that people are obese because they're lazy & poor calorie counters. This is insulting & obscures the complexity of the situation.

Check it out -

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/focus/story/0,6903,1125762,00.html

As Ellen Ruppel Shell points out in her groundbreaking book Fat Wars, the average American consumes 34 teaspoons of sugar a day in their diet, a 30 per cent increase from just 15 years ago. The annual consumption of sweeteners - not just the sugar but the high-fructose corn syrup, dextrose and glucose - has leapt by 32lbs since 1970, mostly because of soft drinks. In a 12oz can of a fizzy drink there will be about ten teaspoons of sweetener.

President Bush, under pressure at home to do something about the fact that two-thirds of Americans are now overweight or obese, has announced initiatives to encourage fitness, but argues that it is an individual's responsibility to keep their weight down. The President himself, a former jogger, likes to use exercise machines and claims that he has no problem fitting workouts into his life.

However, that is not Bush's only reason for arguing against any kind of social policy or public measure to prevent weight gain. There are enormous financial interests tied up in 'Big Sugar'. The sugar industry has strong connections to the highest levels of the US government through its lobbying firms, which have aggressively targeted politicians and government officials. One of the strongest factors in its favour is that much of US sugar production is based in Florida, a state that was vital in 2000 presidential election and is likely to be key this year too.

One of the sugar magnates close to President Bush is Jose 'Pepe' Fanjul, president of giant Florida sugar firm Florida Crystals Corp. He is one of Bush's top fundraisers, and enjoys access to senior officials close to the president. His brother Alfy Fanjul deals, meanwhile, with the Democrats. Their access is seen as unmatchable - Bill Clinton famously took a phone call from Alfy Fanjul while entertaining intern Monica Lewinsky.

Experts say that anyone hoping to raise political money in Florida will have to pay attention to its sugar industry. This is particularly true of the current administration as Florida's governor is Jeb Bush, the brother ofthe President. There have been other sugar contributions too. In 2000 J. Nelson Fairbanks, chief executive of US Sugar Corp, became a 'Pioneer', a special status among fundraisers, for raising at least $100,000 for Bush's campaign. Warren Staley, chief executive of Cargill, which has a large sugar trading operation, is a Pioneer in 2004. Sometimes the money has come directly from the lobbyists themselves. Alan Feld pledged to raise $100,000 for Bush in 2000. He is employed by a lobbying firm which works for the Grocery Manufacturers of America. The industry has also created its own lobbying instruments. In 1978 the International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI) was founded in Washington by the Heinz Foundation, Coca- Cola, Pepsi-Cola, General Foods, Kraft and Procter and Gamble. Despite once being headed by Alex Malaspina, vice-president of Coca-Cola, the body has gained accreditation to the WHO and the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation.

The food corporations also appear to have been vigorously lobbying the sugar exporting countries such as Mauritius, Brazil and French Guyana. All of them have already expressed reservations about the WHO strategy, fearing that a curb on consumption may mean a decline in their sugar exports. A letter sent by French Guyana is remarkably similar to one mailed early last year by the Sugar Association.

One of those who saw the intensive lobbying efforts at first hand is Dr Pekka Puska, who was head of non-communicable diseases at the WHO until he left to run Finland's leading public health institute.

'After we produced the 916 report, the lobbying was quite extraordinary, particularly when they threatened to withdraw US financial support to WHO,' recalled Puska.

'We had done everything possible to be transparent, to be fair and rigorous, and we held meetings around the world on it. Ours was a balanced road-map to help individual nations decide how they could combat this trend. Every third person in the world has cardiovascular disease - how can we stand by and not try to do something?'

The decision by the US government to fight the global strategy has come as a major shock to many experts in the field. Bruce Silverglade, of the US health campaign group Centre for Science in the Public Interest, said that the influence of 'Big Sugar' in the about-turn was obvious.

Steiger himself comes from a family with long-standing connections to the Bush family. His father, also called Bill Steiger, was a senator and close friend of Bush senior and also of vice-president Dick Cheney. Steiger's mother, Janet, was appointed by Bush senior to chair the Federal Trade Commission.

As the WHO prepares to meet this week to thrash out a possible solution to the global obesity crisis, many believe they face a formidable opposition.Or as Silverglade puts it: 'The sugar industry has its hands wrapped around the political system

notice how I didn't say "no carb." Really worked well when I was keeping my carbs moderately low and eating stuff that was not made of white flour or sugar. I had energy like you wouldn't believe and, best of call, my blood sugar didn't fluctuate and, for the most part, I was able to resist the bad stuff.

Unfortunately since I have a son living at home I have a hard time keeping the bad stuff out of the house. Once I started eating the bad stuff it was hard to stop. I wish he'd get a place of his own and I can throw out all the garbage. The other thing that makes it hard is all the candy my co-workers bring in.


:-(

first it was the "sugar free" fad where everything was made with NutraSweet. Then there was the "fat free" fad where everything came in the low fat variety. Now it's the "carb free" fad that's sweeping the nation. A few years from now it will be something else.

I think there's evidence both for and against low-carb diets. I am just tired of people trying to profit on the low-carb trend, much as they did with the low-fat trend. I am a little frightened as to what is actually in those low carb foods.

Every diet -- Atkins, South Beach, Weight Watchers, you name it -- offers the same amount of calories. The diet creators simply try to find a way to make those 1200-1500 calories more filling. The other thing no one mentions is that a diet is really for life.

I have had success with Weight Watchers -- I lost 60 pounds 15 years ago and kept most of it off for a good 10 years. As I got into some bad habits, though, some of the weight crept back and I am now trying to lose again. So far it's been 18 pounds.

Every diet -- Atkins, South Beach, Weight Watchers, you name it -- offers the same amount of calories.

There are NO calories to count (nor anything else to count or weigh or measure - unless it's measured for a recipe), no portion requirements. So it's hardly calorie-controlled.

if you were to count it, is probably in that range, I would guess.

Note that this "partnership" is made of organizations who in turn are funded by, among others:

Weight Watchers

Jenny Craig

A group of fat-cutting surgeons...

IOW, people with an interest in seeing people stay fat or dependent on them.

for me and my partner. We have simply cut out refined sugars and flours, hydrogenated oils and trans fats. It is actually quite easy to eat healthier if you know how to read a label and know what to avoid. As always, you can never go wrong with whole foods. We have enjoyed every recipe we tried in the South Beach cookbook, interesting dishes made with tasty ingredients. Neither of us had alot of weight to lose, so we didn't go on the phased program, but we have both lost about 6-8 pounds just by making some minor changes in our diets.

Optimally they would be healthy carbs of whole foods. Fruits and Vegetables are classified as such.

I attended a presentation by Udo Erasmus author of "Fats that Kill" awhile back. He was poisoned by working in the pesticide industry and restored his health through nutrition.

He agrees with the Atkins perspective in principle but presents a plan that he calls "Carb Conscious". Thinks Atkins is too high in saturated fat and advocates healthier Omega 3 and 6. He contends that your carb intake should correspond with your activity level or else what is not burned off will turn to fat.

Read what he has to say about carbs at http://www.udoerasmus.com/articles/udo/from_fat_to_fit.htm

In general people do eat too many carbs and those of an unhealthy nature: sugar, white flour and various incarnations of corn. A problem for many is not only the empty carbs but the fact that these foods are so prevalent in our diets that many people have acquired food sensitivities to these foods.

It's not "carbs" that are bad, per se, but the TYPE of carbs.

It's not "fats" that are bad, per se, but the TYPE of fats.

It's about "eating right", eating a rounded diet, not loading up on calorie-rich nutritionally empty processed foods, AND exercising. That is the ONLY way to maintain overall health and a trim body.

People in this country consume TOO much food and TOO much of the WRONG food AND don't exercise enough. Just eating a bunch of steaks and eggs with butter and sugar-free desserts loaded with dairy fat to "be thin" is just WRONG, WRONG, WRONG. You should eat to be HEALTHY and if you eat right and exercise right you WON'T be fat. IT'S THAT SIMPLE. Believe me, I'm 55 years old and I am 5 foot 9 and weigh 125 pounds. I am toned not because I work out (I only do Pilates once a week) but because I USE my body for physical activities like working in my yard, around my house, roller-blading, hiking, etc. And I just had a physical and my blood pressure is low, my cholesterol levels are phenomenal and I do NOT look my age.

Americans want the "magic bullet", the lazy and quick way to be "skinny" and beautiful. They will eat dangerous diets, take dangerous supplements and undergo dangerous elective surgeries and it's ALL about vanity--NOT about being healthy. It's disgusting vanity and there are a LOT of people preying on it and getting rich off of it.

Just eating a bunch of steaks and eggs with butter and sugar-free desserts loaded with dairy fat

If this is how someone is eating, they are not following either Atkins or South Beach.

As someone with a little bit of knowledge of both nutrition and biochemistry, I have one major problem with Atkins/South Beach/low-carb.

The biggest consumer of carbs in your body is your brain. It runs exclusively on glucose, and burns more of it than any other organ. The only exception to this is in times of starvation, when the brain switches its metabolism so it's able to burn ketone bodies made from the hydrolysis of fat stores, a state known as "ketosis". (One of these ketone bodies is acetone, the same stuff you remove fingernail polish with) Atkins and other low-carb diets fool the body into a state of ketosis by severely limiting carbs. In other words, these diets exploit a metabolic mechanism for staving off starvation. I know of no long-term studies or even retrospective studies of long-term ketosis, but it seems to me that depriving your brain of its preferred fuel for long periods of time is not a good idea.

I also agree if you don't manage a low-carb diet wisely, the increased protein content can be hard on the kidneys and the lower fiber content is not good for your colon.

That being said, I am not totally against low-carb diets, just apprehensive about them. I feel there is ample opportunity for people to abuse their health on these diets, and little is known about their long-term effects. My Dad recently lost weight on a low carb diet. He couldn't do it any other way, and there is no doubt that he is now at a healthier weight than before. I do, however, wish that he would switch to a low-fat, calorie-restricted diet to maintain the weight.