• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Fun Article About ' Atkins ' Diet

Originally posted by Diogenes Atkins is more concerned with how quickly foods raise your blood sugar. Some fruits are more likely to do this than others.

Well, some fruits are higher in sugar concentration than others, but none are so concentrated that they could give you a sugar-high anything like one standard can of commercial soda-pop. To get the same sort of buzz you would need to consume huge volumes of fruit in a short period of time - and would probably make yourself ill in the process!

So I'm skeptical of this particular claim, I'm afraid. Can you expand on his reasoning a bit, please?

I'm not sure what Wile E. was referring to when he said ' most fruits ' , but after the initial ' induction ' period, Atkins does recommend generous amounts of some fruits. However, keeping your ' carb ' count significantly lower than the tradtional western diet ( last 30 or so years ) is an important part of the plan..

Hmmm. What exactly is this "Western diet" of which he is so critical?
Click to expand...
 
I have to admit, I actually do eat fruit every day. The problem with fruits, according to the Atkins diet, is the amount of sugar in them. This sugar can cause spikes in your blood-sugar level, which causes you to produce insulin and gain weight. Also, when I said "most fruits" I was taking into consideration fruits like tomatos and cucumbers, which are low sugar fruits. Bananas are pretty much nothing but sugar.

The Western diet is high in grains and starches. It is hard to find a single restaurant that doesn't serve French Fries with more than half of its meals. I have nothing against that diet, personally, except that it allowed me to gain a lot of weight without realizing it.

Atkins allows any kind of seafood, beef, chicken, pork, eggs, most cheeses, most vegetables, many seeds and nuts, and a few fruits.

I was quite skeptical of this diet before I tried it, but I can actually feel a big difference in my energy level. I can eat an entire rack of ribs or a huge steak or a hundred clams and not gain any weight.

I have been able to stay up later at night, and get up in the morning more easily. And my allergies are minimal. (My allergies were not food allergies, except milk. I am allergic to dust, animal dander, pollen, and smoke. These things have minimal effect on me now.)
 
My fiancee was reading "Fast Food Nation" at the same time I was reading Atikins's book.

I haven't read it myself, but according to her, the author of Fast Food Nation corrolates the rise of obecity in America with the rise of the fast food industry. Which, after we thought about it, made more sense based on what I was reading in Atkins.

Not only did Americans increase their fat and sugar intake (did you know there is sugar in the fries?), but also greatly increased their grain and starch intake. So, not only was there more fat and sugar, but more carbohydrates to process that fat and sugar in the body to energy. All that extra energy is more than the body needs, so it stores the excess as fat.

I eat just as much (if not more lately) fast food now as I did before I started the diet, except I cut out the bun, fries, ketchup and non-diet soda. I'm getting all the fat, but not enough carbs for my body to process it.

Kind of having my cake and eating it too (except that I couldn't actually eat cake)
 
Upchurch said:
I haven't read it myself, but according to her, the author of Fast Food Nation corrolates the rise of obecity in America with the rise of the fast food industry. Which, after we thought about it, made more sense based on what I was reading in Atkins.
Click to expand...
I bet some side-by-side line graphs would look interesting..

Even more so, if you throw in the rise of heart disease and diabetes...

Also, keep in mind, that along with the rise in ' Fast-Food ' we have a rise in processed, packaged food, with ' shelf-life ' and profitability being more of an issue than health concerns.

One of the the main ingrediants in most of these foods is ' sugar ' , even though the manufacturers like to play word games and call it different things, like ' high fructose corn syrup '......
 
But without the bun (150 calories), non-diet soda (12-15 calories per oz.) you are having significantly fewer calories. The patty itself may be around 2-300 calories


There's nothing magic at work here, no miracle of the human body being able to process some types of calorie and not others, just fewer calories


The rise in obesity has more to do with huge prtions of everything and no-one getting off their fat a$$es to exercise, do house or yard work and the increasingly sedentary nature of our work
 
The Don said:
But without the bun (150 calories), non-diet soda (12-15 calories per oz.) you are having significantly fewer calories. The patty itself may be around 2-300 calories
Click to expand...
Except now I get the ultimate bacon cheesburger (two patties, a couple of layers of cheese, bacon, and mayo), which I wouldn't have touched with a ten foot poll before this diet. I don't know if that adds up to what I would have before, though.
The rise in obesity has more to do with huge prtions of everything and no-one getting off their fat a$$es to exercise, do house or yard work and the increasingly sedentary nature of our work
Click to expand...
Well, this last week or so aside, I've been feeling more full on less food for longer.

Bottom line is, I'm losing weight, I'm eating well, and I feel better than I've felt in a long time. Unless I find out there are some serious life threatening consequences of this diet, I'm sticking to it.
 
Wifey is starting pretty much today. She needs to drop a BMI point or two to qualify for the next-lower amount of material removal that our insurance company will cover for breast-reduction surgery. She's been exercising almost daily and doing the Slim-Fast(low-fat, but very high carbos) thing, and lost no weight, so on to the next thing. I'll keep y'all posted...

did
 
Reading the above, I'm surprised that some of the more obvious "food legends" have persisted. These have long been debunked.

1. "Carbohydrates" are somehow less "fattening" than other foods.
* Carbohydrates are simply one form of energy that the human body uses. It just takes longer to digest than sugar, and it happens further down your gut. Same with starches and fats. ALL energy producing foods are broken into smaller components so that they can be absorbed into the bloodstream for use. Sugar breaks down faster because it has relatively smaller molecules. Starches and fats take longer and so release energy slower. Any excess is stored in reserve in the most efficient form possible - fat. (Sidebar: cellulose is a more efficient form still, but humans can't digest cellulose) Summary: Calories are what count, no matter what you eat.

2. Meat is bad because it has animal fat.
* The human body treats all fat as just fat (see above). Avocado has fat in it, as does most fish. Meat also has iron and other required trace elements. You don't need much meat, though, so pigging out on monster steaks shouldn't be common. Also, processed meat often contains extra fats and other fillers and stabilisers, so they are usually just plain greaseballs.

3. "Potatoes" equals "fries"
* Sheesh! Ever tried eating baked or boiled potato INSTEAD? You can still salt them, and they taste much better anyway, like grandma used to make. All the excess calories involved in fries are in the oil and fat and sugar that they are cooked in.

4. Dieting means starving.
* Try eating filling foods that are low in calories instead. Most fruit and vegetables fit this requirement admirably. Even potato and banana have much fibre. You can easily fill up to bursting on these and not run up a huge calorie bill.

5. You can lose weight and not exercise.
* Only if you don't eat, and that ain't healthy, is it. Sorry. Up you get and start doing yard work, or walking or cycling or SOMETHING! Doesn't have to be a marathon every day.

It's simple. You will only lose weight if you use more calories than you consume.
 
Diogenes said:


A diet that gets most of it's calories from refined sugar and grains.
Click to expand...

I would characterize the western diet as one that is too high in saturated fats, animal protein (especially red meat), highly processed, high glycemic index carbohydrates, and too low in fresh fruits, vegetables, fish, mono and polyunsaturated fats (especially w-3 fatty acids). IMO the Atkins diet does not address many of these shortcomings and encourages people to eat some of the less healthy foods. I'd stick with the Mediterranean diet for optimal health.
 
BTox said:
I would characterize the western diet as one that is too high in saturated fats, animal protein (especially red meat), highly processed, high glycemic index carbohydrates, and too low in fresh fruits, vegetables, fish, mono and polyunsaturated fats (especially w-3 fatty acids). IMO the Atkins diet does not address many of these shortcomings and encourages people to eat some of the less healthy foods. I'd stick with the Mediterranean diet for optimal health.
Click to expand...
I agree! Plus it tastes wonderful and it has an incredible variety of ingredients to choose from.
 
BTox said:


I would characterize the western diet as one that is too high in saturated fats, animal protein (especially red meat), highly processed, high glycemic index carbohydrates, and too low in fresh fruits, vegetables, fish, mono and polyunsaturated fats (especially w-3 fatty acids). IMO the Atkins diet does not address many of these shortcomings and encourages people to eat some of the less healthy foods. I'd stick with the Mediterranean diet for optimal health.
Click to expand...

Then you'd characterize the Western diet incorrectly. Saturated fats (ie animal fats), animal protein (especially red meat) are a wonderful source of nutrition for which we evolved. The polyunsaturated fats, the artery-clogging transfats and the year-round availability of simple carbohydrates are key parts of the Western diet which have been shown to be very unhealthy. Omega-3 fatty acids are saturated fats, not polyunsaturated.

Please don't let this get into a semi-vegetarian argument, otherwise it could go on for ages.
 
Zep said:

It's simple. You will only lose weight if you use more calories than you consume.
Click to expand...

If it's so ' simple ', why are 64% + americans overweight?

Everything you say is essentially true, but it doesn't account for the chemistry ( blood sugar, insulin level etc.. ) that governs how we feel and why we continue to eat when we obviously have all (and more ) the energy reserves ( fat ) we need.


Certain foods do a better job of regulating these ( chemistry factors ) than others..


We are bombarded with a lot of misinformation, that is often as simple as ' eating fat will make you fat ', and it is simply not true..
You have to pay attention to the fine print that reads ' sponsored by the American Grain Board .. "..
 
Diogenes said:


If it's so ' simple ', why are 64% + americans overweight?
Click to expand...

There are many reasons here are a few :

- Indolence
- Ignorance
- Lack of self-control
- Personal choice


Diogenes said:

Everything you say is essentially true, but it doesn't account for the chemistry ( blood sugar, insulin level etc.. ) that governs how we feel and why we continue to eat when we obviously have all (and more ) the energy reserves ( fat ) we need.


Certain foods do a better job of regulating these ( chemistry factors ) than others..
Click to expand...

I agree with you, but many people don't discriminate between cause and effect. The great majority of people I encounter who are on the Atkins diet believe that somehow the consumption of fat and protein "magically" melts away fat. Those people I've actually managed to get to write down a "food diary" come to the realisation that what's happening is that they're consuming significantly fewer calories. This will aid their long term weight management if, and only if

- They can maintain this diet, or a version of it in the long term
- There are no long-term health issues (jury is out on this one)


Diogenes said:

We are bombarded with a lot of misinformation, that is often as simple as ' eating fat will make you fat ', and it is simply not true..
You have to pay attention to the fine print that reads ' sponsored by the American Grain Board .. "..
Click to expand...

Absolutely, because these are the only people who can afford to advertise in this way.

By necessity, everyone has to deal in soundbites because one of the side effects of ketosis is a loss of attention span :D
 
The Don said:




The great majority of people I encounter who are on the Atkins diet believe that somehow the consumption of fat and protein "magically" melts away fat.



Click to expand...

And that tells me that they haven't even read the book...


That said.. The spirit and content of your post is well taken...


And yes, the bottom line is, that people who successfully follow the Atkins plan, are consuming less calories than they are burning..
 
The idea is that while you are burning more than consuming you also feel better. That is, no blood-sugar spikes or drops. This lets me know when I am actually hungry as opposed to just craving carbs.

The Mediteranian diet consists mostly of foods that are good on Atkins. In fact, I like to get Mediteranean salads when I go out.

My mother-in-law tried the diet without understanding it and never lost the weight. She doesn't like meat (beef or chicken or fish), so she was eating salads with eggs for every meal. The idea is to give yourself enough protein to level out your blood-sugar.

The biggest thing to tell people who are considering the diet is: Read the Book! If you don't understand why it works, then you are more liable to goof.
 
Okay, I have known LOTS of people who have done the Atkin's Diet.

Of those, LOTS of them have lost weight.

Of those, LOTS of them found it to be, overall, a good thing. They liked being able to eat their meat and their cheese and the various fats and protiens that they craved so much with other diets.

Of those, NOT ONE is still on it.

Of those, NOT ONE of them kept off any of it.

Of those, LOTS of them are now heavier then ever.


In other words, the Atkins Diet sounds like every other diet out there. They all (almost to the one) 'work', in that if you follow the diet, you will indeed lose weight. Virtually every diet, no matter how 'fad'ish, works. Problem is, human nature prevents most anyone from losing weight. Losing weight is evolutionaryily contrary to survival, and it is only in the last couple hundred years that the average human had access to the calories and nutrition to become overweight in the 1st place. Obese people have it even harder, as most (not all) have a 'conservation gene' in them that works overtime. They are better off in situations of famine, but nowadays, the average American has very little to fear from famine. Fact is, VERY few people in America starve to death, and nearly all of those who do did it intentionally (anorexia and the like).

All diets 'work'. Few, if any, Work.
 
Larspeart said:
Of those, NOT ONE is still on it.

Of those, NOT ONE of them kept off any of it.
Click to expand...
A friend of mine has been on it for two years. Minus a few deviations while on vacation, he's stuck to it and kept the weight off.

Technically, those who go off Atkins completely are not following the diet. That's why he's gone to calling it a nutritional plan rather than a diet. You're supposed to train yourself to find a balance that works for the rest of your life. It sounds like the people you know who tried it only got through the first couple of phases and then didn't follow through.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom