Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Archived Threads 2001-2004' started by Marty Christion, Dec 14, 2001.
I've seen these discussed in past threads, and found the following article:
I saw a similar article a year or so ago, but when I was on my Atkins diet (been off for almost a year), it certainly didn't seem that I was cutting many calories. I would frequently eat 2 ultimate bacon burgers from Jack in the Box at a time (which I later learned were about 1300 calories a piece), but I had no problem loosing weight. I would also eat 20 ounce steaks at he local steak house. If the article is true, then my only response can be that it didn't feel true to me.
People have always argued that low carb diets don't work, or that they work, but not the way people say that they should work, or that they work but you shouldn't try them because they are "trendy". Either way, you certainly must conceed that they do in fact work. Of course, there are other ways to loose wait as well, and now I'm trying to keep my weight in check by eating better and excersizing more.
BTW, I lost 69 pounds in about 5 months and have mostly kept it all off. I will admit, however, that after about 3 months it stopped feeling healthy.
EDIT: I must also say that my cholesteral levels dropped while on the diet and that my blood pressure stayed the same, so (at least in my case) it doesn't seem like the slippery slope that he makes it out to be. I would agree, however, that it is probably best to use it as a short term diet to jump start your wait loss. I do know people that are at high risk for diabetes, however, that have been following low card diets for years and they swear by them.
I'm on an Atkins diet at the moment, but I must confess that I've 'adapted' it - plenty of 'permitted' vegetables, and I try to take my protein sources from lean meat and fish (and unless it's a bad day, not an excessive amount). Oh yes, and drinking plenty of (non-calorific) fluids. In other words, a healthy diet minus all sugar and a lot of starch. Once I've shed a lot of the excess weight, then I'll go on to sensible eating plan and burn the rest off with extra exercise. I must say that at the moment, the diet is working for me. BUT - I know this sounds OTT, but I would not recommend anyone to start any diet without seeing their doctor.
I'm confused. How can you state with such certainty that the only healthful diet is one that is low in fat? What in your mind constitutes a healthful diet? One in which the dieter loses weight? Lowers his/her cholesterol? Lowers his/her blood pressure? Has more energy? These are all benefits of high protein, low carb diets.
You are correct. There is a lot of conflicting information out there. However, blanket posts like yours don't help the situation. The Atkins diet does indeed work and has improved the health of many Americans. Read the Amazon.com reviews of his book for proof. Is there a concern over the amount of red meat and fat advocated by his diet, as well as the lack of vitamins? Sure.
That's why that part of the diet is only "Step 1." Once the weight is lost, you can adapt a more balanced intake of carbs/protein. All the while, Atkins insists that you take vitamin supplements to make up for the ones lost by the diet.
And while the AMA and AHA are certainly credible organizations, they aren't the be all and end all of accurate health information. "Eggs are bad for you. Eggs are good for you. Margarine is bad for your. Margarine is good for you." Their track record isn't exactly spotless.
The bottom line is that this is a lifestyle people have to choose for themselves. What's best for them? I certainly don't know. What I do know is that there is never "one right way" for anything. Has Reese's Pieces taught us nothing?
I was only saying that in my case I felt great for the first three months, I can't help but feel that losing 69 pounds is a healthy thing. I also pointed out that using the main indicators that we use to measure health (cholesteral, weight, blood pressure, blood tests, etc.), all of my indicateors improved. (I know that there's a lot more to it than that, but I'm just going by what we can actually measure. But I myself admit that I started feeling bad after about 3 months, so I would not recommend this diet long term.
Whose "facts" are these? Correct me if I'm wrong, but your opinion is based on things you've read with which you have never had any personal experience with, no? Have you been on the Atkins diet? Have you even read the book?
Fact: My diet included well over 1500 calories each day.
Fact: My cholesterol, triglycerides, and blood pressure went down on an Atkins-type plan.
Fact: Scott's results indicate the same thing.
Fact: We have both kept the weight off for long periods of time.
All of the evil side effects listed in your blurb are the direct result of "a semi-starvation diet" of "less than 600 calories per day."
And anyone who has actually read Atkins' book will realize that your daily calorie intake will be much, much higher than 600.
Furthermore, everyone agrees that eating a large amount of protein each day will cause dehydration. Again, as discussed in the book, that's why high-protein diets call for you to drink plenty of water each day.
If you either a) don't understand Atkins' diet or b) don't follow it, then yes the potential for side-effects exists. Just as if you abuse any regimen.... Popping 20 Advil is going to make you sick. That's why you follow the instructions.
My problem with your comments is that you don't seem to even know what the Atkins diet is or what it calls for. You seem to be blindly following the rhetoric of others (rhetoric which you're certainly welcome to believe in as long as you understand it).
I can only speak for my myself, but I was eating a bunch of calories. I didn't measure them, so I cannot be postive whether I ate more calories before on the diet or while on the diet. All that I can say is that it didn't feel like I was eating any less. In fact, I would dare to say that most of my individual meals topped the 600 calories that Tom refers to. It's obvious that the "facts" that Tom is refering to are different from what I experienced.
Also, the diet advises that you drink lots of water and I never experienced dehydration or any of the other un-pleasantness mentioned above. My wife's a nurse - she would have noticed.
However, to each his own. If you want to lose weight a different way, then great! All that I'm saying is that everybody likes to trash the Atkin's diet for all kinds of reasons, but none of their arguments seem to match my experience. It sounds like Don's experience was similar to my own.
I talked to my doctor recently about losing weight. He suggested that I adjust my diet, cutting out 500 calories per day. I'd then lose weight at a rate of two or three pounds per week, until my body had decide it was time ot stop losing weight.
It was fairly easy for me to target 500 calories. Since then I've lost about 5 pounds (just started a week and a half ago).
We'll see how it goes.