The Atkins Diet

[Hazelip]

Kook, I hear ya, and I sympathize.

While carbs may be broken down faster, creating a less-full sensation, and thusly resulting in one eating more, that is not the same thing as blaming carbs for making one fat. It is the constant shoveling of said carbs into one's mouth that will make one fat unless one is running marathons every day.

The feeling of hunger is not an indication that you have burned your calories. It is an indication that your stomach is empty.

 

[Wile E. Coyote]

You can point that this triggers that, but that does not make my initial point wrong.

Well, I agree with that. But will you at least concede that sugars and carbs alter blood-sugar levels?

A low-carb diet is meant to keep one's blood-sugar level within a normal range. Low-fat/high-carb diets may reduce the calories, but they mess with the blood-sugar levels, which induces hunger.

It is harder to stay on low-fat diets because of this. Also, since most energy is taken from carbs, proteins get cast aside. This leads to muscle loss, which means you have to consume even less calories to lose the same amount of weight.

You are absolutely right in saying that the calorie counts make the biggest difference. However, all I am saying is that certain kinds of foods trigger a response in the body that discourages overeating.

Another thing I have noticed is that low-fat products do not have much fewer calories than the normal products. A lot of times the difference is only about 5%. All they have changed is the "calories from fat" line.

 

[JeffR]

Riddle me this, Batman. When is a calorie not a calorie?

OK, I don't have a good tag line for the riddle, but I do have a good example, I think.

If I am interpreting the controlled carb proponents correctly, when you read a food product label you'll see total carbs and fiber. Both are carbohydrates and both are included in the calorie count, but the fiber isn't digested. Most of the controlled carb plans have you subtract the grams of fiber from the total grams of carbohydrate for a food for this reason.

I will agree that when you eat food all the calories have to go somewhere, but there are other places for them to go than being burned for energy or converted to body fat. Some of the protein you eat is used to replace or build muscles. Some fat is needed for hormones and tissues. On top of that there are numerous ways for the body to eliminate stuff it doesn't need.

Eat a few cobs of fresh corn and you'll have proof the next day that your body doesn't utilize every calorie you put in your mouth.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

Sorry folks, hunger patterns and other stuff are secondary effects. Your body will store excess calories as fat, PERIOD!!! Eat 3000 calores of beef jerky (for protein rich) and burn only 2000 a day, you'll have an extra pound of fat on your bod in 3.5 days.

You are still making the assumption, or are misinformed, that these molecules( fat, carbohydrate, protein) that have the potential to generate x number of calories ( unit of measure, remember) of heat, will all be transformed into fat, if they are not metabolized, and that all of these molecules, are equally susceptible to the processes that result in these transformations taking place.

You can take comfort, along with the people who make millions peddling ineffective diet plans, that thousands(millions, over the years) of people share those assumptions with you.

How did you do in biochemistry?

 

[kookbreaker]

Well, I agree with that. But will you at least concede that sugars and carbs alter blood-sugar levels?

A low-carb diet is meant to keep one's blood-sugar level within a normal range. Low-fat/high-carb diets may reduce the calories, but they mess with the blood-sugar levels, which induces hunger.

Trouble is, if what you say is true, then the Atkins diet should be easy to stick to. But it isn't. In fact, in the Atkin's sponsored test, some 60% of low-carbers dropped out, as opposed to 25% of the low-fatters.

It is harder to stay on low-fat diets because of this. Also, since most energy is taken from carbs, proteins get cast aside. This leads to muscle loss, which means you have to consume even less calories to lose the same amount of weight.

I would disagree with that when the evidence is examined. For example The National Weight Control Registry has done several studies of peoplw who have lost 30 lbs. or more and kept it off for a year at leastTheir findings:

Both groups are meeting RDAs for most nutrients and, compared to the general population, are consuming less energy and a lower percentage of energy from fat. Among this sample of successful weight loss maintainers, maintenance of weight loss is associated with continued consumption of a healthy low-energy, low-fat diet.

Low-carb diets have a serious problem with almost no long-term success.

You are absolutely right in saying that the calorie counts make the biggest difference. However, all I am saying is that certain kinds of foods trigger a response in the body that discourages overeating.

Said same foods can also trigger monotony of diet much faster as well.

Another thing I have noticed is that low-fat products do not have much fewer calories than the normal products. A lot of times the difference is only about 5%. All they have changed is the "calories from fat" line.

Very true. Its also amusing when candy bars made with processed sugar (i.e. non-chocolate bars) put "No Fat!" on their labels.

 

[tamiO]

The feeling of hunger is not an indication that you have burned your calories. It is an indication that your stomach is empty.

An empty stomach is one reason for feeling hungry.

But if you haven't been eating the things that your body needs, then your stomach doesn't need to be empty for you to feel hungry.

source: http://www.wsu.edu/DrUniverse/hungry.html

 

[JeffR]

Here's some information about insulin resistance and insulin's role in body fat storage from someone who is definitely not a low-carber (read her dietary recommendations).

I had always wondered if the low-carbers were making up what they say about insulin, but at least one "outsider" (the first one I found when doing a search) appears to validate their views to some extent. Interesting.

 

[JeffR]

source: http://www.wsu.edu/DrUniverse/hungry.html

Hey that's my alma mater. I don't think they had any cats on the faculty when I was there.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

Here's some information about insulin resistance and insulin's role in body fat storage from someone who is definitely not a low-carber (read her dietary recommendations).

I had always wondered if the low-carbers were making up what they say about insulin, but at least one "outsider" (the first one I found when doing a search) appears to validate their views to some extent. Interesting.

Hey!!! Don't start clouding the issue with scientific studies, chemistry or any of that stuff..

P.S. I was going to comment on your perception regarding corn-on-the-cob, but decided to let it pass for a bit. It is the type of rational insight that often gets lost in only five easy payments of $19.95..

 

[Wile E. Coyote]

Trouble is, if what you say is true, then the Atkins diet should be easy to stick to. But it isn't. In fact, in the Atkin's sponsored test, some 60% of low-carbers dropped out, as opposed to 25% of the low-fatters.

The Atkins diet is definitely NOT easy to stick with. However, the reason is different from other diets. The Atkins diet encourages you to eat when you are hungry. This is because, with high protein consumption and blood-sugar regulation, your body accurately tells you when it needs more energy. If you can tolerate the monotony of food for the first two weeks, then you will probably succeed. You are gradually able to add more carbs until you reach your limit. The diet also suggests many foods that are very good for you, but maintains a focus on protein.

Like I said in an earlier post: If companies started making more reasonably-priced low-carb versions of popular foods, the success rate for the diet would be much better.

Right now it is the carbohydrate addiction that kills the diet. My wife is experiencing withdrawal symptoms whereas mine are diminishing. My body is telling me that the diet is right.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

....Right now it is the carbohydrate addiction that kills the diet. My wife is experiencing withdrawal symptoms whereas mine are diminishing. My body is telling me that the diet is right.

You piqued my curiosity with this thread, so I bought the book this weekend.

You have to agree, most of the book is anecdotal, but the scientific claims should be verifiable.
The bottom line, is whether or not it works and whether or not one's vitals improve or more important, do not deteriorate.

You really went out on a limb( sort of) by touting the plan early in your efforts. I will look forward to hearing how it works for you..

Make sure you tell us about the bad as well as the good..
It might be usefull in helping others in their decision to explore Atkins or a similar plan.


I would certainly think it would be a good idea to get some blood work done from time to time as you progress, to see how the indicators look.

 

[Wile E. Coyote]

I have sort of gone out on a limb. I am not claiming this diet is for everyone, but I will admit that my energy levels have increased.

I have not lost much weight lately, but I have noticed my muscle growth has increased.

I need to incorporate more fiber, if you know what I mean.

This diet may not work for me, but that does not mean that it does not work. It is hard to change a lifetime of eating habits. My neighbor did it, and I think I may be able to as well.

As for excercise, I have been riding my bike a lot lately and lifting weights 3 times a week. This is probably the most important factor in my weight loss.

 

[Genghis Pwn]

Is it true that if you eat 2000 calories a day, including lots of eggs, and burn 2500 calories a day, that your body won't have any adverse effects from the cholesterol in the eggs, because it all got used up, or "burned up"?

I guess this would apply to steak, or Bacon, whatever. The idea is you could live on Pizza Hut, as long as you were burning more calories than you were consuming, because no "bad fat" would get stored, or make it into your arteries, or whatever.

I can't remember where I heard that. Some whacky chiropractor I think.

 

[Hazelip]

As for excercise, I have been riding my bike a lot lately and lifting weights 3 times a week. This is probably the most important factor in my weight loss.

Actually, since you're eating so much protein, and lifting three times a week (I've started this too, wanna be e-mail lifting buddies to nag each other on?), expect your weight to plateau for a while, then increase.

Muscle weighs more than fat, so as your diet progresses with fat loss and muscle gain, there will logically be a period of "stagnation" as far as your weight loss is concerned, followed by a weight gain as you add more mass. It's just lean mass, but gravity doesn't care what it is as long as it can pull on it.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

Is it true that if you eat 2000 calories a day, including lots of eggs, and burn 2500 calories a day, that your body won't have any adverse effects from the cholesterol in the eggs, because it all got used up, or "burned up"?

If you don't consider ' disappearing' as ' adverse ', then; no...

 

[BillyJoe]

.....the human body evolved to handle extreme quantities of [fat].

Evolution only wants to keep us alive till we are forty ir so. After that it doesn't care whether we live or die.

regards,
BillyJoe
[speaking figuratively]

 

[Wile E. Coyote]

Evolution only wants to keep us alive till we are forty ir so. After that it doesn't care whether we live or die.

Good point. However, that does not mean that fat is bad for us. I think the main reasons we live longer now are a relatively complete vitamin and mineral supplement to our diets, the practice of hygene, medical cures for diseases, and less environmental stress on our bodies.

 

[Genghis Pwn]

Good point. However, that does not mean that fat is bad for us. I think the main reasons we live longer now are a relatively complete vitamin and mineral supplement to our diets, the practice of hygene, medical cures for diseases, and less environmental stress on our bodies.

Plus less wars and lions eating us.