Dr. Atkins dies

[Samus]

Whoops!

http://www.cnn.com/2003/HEALTH/04/17/obit.atkins/index.html

[Victor Danilchenko]

Whoops? What sort of a thing is that to say?

[Brown]

One suspects that the Onion will report that he is merely testing a new technique for losing weight.

[Samus]

Originally posted by Victor Danilchenko
Whoops? What sort of a thing is that to say? I don't know, I read it after I posted it and thought the same thing you did.

Perhaps "Wow!" would have been more appropriate.

[EvilYeti]

Originally posted by Victor Danilchenko
Whoops? What sort of a thing is that to say?

There is a strong backlash against Dr. Atkins in the scientific/skeptical community as he was long considered a quack, but then unfortunately (for them) turned out to be right.

The ironic thing is that everything he has been saying is based on pretty basic, simple, nutritional science. But since the scientific community has been harping the "low-fat and high-carbs" mantra for so many years its become religious dogma to them.

I'm sure there are many who are secretly delighted that he's dead, but the fact of the matter is the damage is done. Dr. Atkins exposed the mythology of American nutrional science for what it was, and for that I salute him as a model skeptic and free-thinker.

requiescat in pace, Dr. Atkins.

[HarryKeogh]

i have to agree with evilyeti.

low fat diets were the rage in the 90's and people just got fatter. they replaced the fat in sweets with more sugar and it didnt work. has anyone gotten thinner eating "snackwells"? nope. the usda food pyramid is a joke. 9 servings of bread and starch a day? no thanks. finally atkin's methods are becoming more mainstream and accepted (and rightfully so). it's a shame he couldnt see the culmination of his efforts.

rest in peace.

[KillerBob]

Originally posted by EvilYeti


There is strong backlash against Dr. Atkins in the scientific/skeptical community as he was long considered a quack, but then unfortunately (for them) turned out to be right.


Wow, you might to want to let the medical community in on that secret. The best that can be said so far are the results shown in this month's JAMA:

"There is insufficient evidence to make recommendations for or against the use of low-carbohydrate diets"

JAMA: Low Carb Diet Abstract (http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/289/14/1837?maxtoshow=&HITS=10&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&fulltext=atkins&searchid=1050613872194_6356&stored_search=&FIRSTINDEX=0&journalcode=jama)

[pgwenthold]

Originally posted by KillerBob


Wow, you might to want to let the medical community in on that secret. The best that can be said so far are the results shown in this month's JAMA:

"There is insufficient evidence to make recommendations for or against the use of low-carbohydrate diets"

JAMA: Low Carb Diet Abstract (http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/289/14/1837?maxtoshow=&HITS=10&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&fulltext=atkins&searchid=1050613872194_6356&stored_search=&FIRSTINDEX=0&journalcode=jama)

Or this one:

"Among the published studies, participant weight loss while using low-carbohydrate diets was principally associated with decreased caloric intake and increased diet duration but not with reduced carbohydrate content. "

I don't think it will shock anyone from Weight Watchers.

[EvilYeti]

Originally posted by KillerBob

Wow, you might to want to let the medical community in on that secret. The best that can be said so far are the results shown in this month's JAMA:

"There is insufficient evidence to make recommendations for or against the use of low-carbohydrate diets"

JAMA: Low Carb Diet Abstract (http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/289/14/1837?maxtoshow=&HITS=10&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&fulltext=atkins&searchid=1050613872194_6356&stored_search=&FIRSTINDEX=0&journalcode=jama)

Wow, JAMA's blowing more smoke again, could it have anything to do with the fact that the establishment has been pushing a high-carb/low-fat diet for decades? Talk about rampant woo-woo'ism.

What they convienently neglect to mention is that calories from fat and protein make one feel "full" much quicker than calories from carbs. People trying a low fat diet often eat large portions of carbs to satisfy their appetite. Replace a fraction of those carb calories with fat & protein and it becomes much easier to maintain a diet.

[EvilYeti]

Originally posted by pgwenthold

"Among the published studies, participant weight loss while using low-carbohydrate diets was principally associated with decreased caloric intake and increased diet duration but not with reduced carbohydrate content. "


Unbelievable, they are saying the weight loss was due not to a decrease in carbohydates, but a decrease in carbohydrate calories. A total pseudo-scientific whitewash.

Dieting becomes much, much easier if you replace carb calories with proteins and fats. You eat LESS calories overall and feel MORE satisfied with the calories you do eat. Notice the study is careful to avoid mentioning the psychophysical nature of dieting.

What scientific evidence is there that a low fat/high carb diet works? I would point to the epidemic of obeseity among Americans as strong negative evidence.

[pgwenthold]

Originally posted by EvilYeti

What scientific evidence is there that a low fat/high carb diet works? I would point to the epidemic of obeseity among Americans as strong negative evidence.

It would absolutely idiotic to look at me as evidence against a low fat/high carb diet.

[dingler44]

"What scientific evidence is there that a low fat/high carb diet works? I would point to the epidemic of obeseity among Americans as strong negative evidence."

You think that's strong negative evidence? How many people are using the low fat/high carb diet - apparently you're well aware?

Maybe the epidemic of obesity is due to people sitting on their asses the entire day and wishing a fad diet would "melt" their fat ass away.

[schplurg]

I have my own Patented Diet Plan: Don't eat too much, eat foods that are at least somewhat healthy, and get at least a moderate amount of exercise. Works for me. I'm slightly overweight, but I have friends who are absolutely huge. They eat too much junk food, I see it myself. Obviously some people have trouble maintaining a healthy weight no matter how hard they try...it's not always as easy for them as it is for me. Maybe it's genetic in some of these cases.

I heard a commercial on the radio a few days ago for a Miracle Weight Loss" formula:
" I want to lose weight, but I don't want to go on a diet or exercise. I want to be able to eat whatever I want and still lose weight!"

That is almost verbatim...I laughed out loud when I heard that. Generally speaking, that is why America is so fat...we're lazy! We always go for the "quick n easy" fix, in all areas of our lives. When will the FDA crack down on these types of scams (including health supplements that "cure diseases"etc)?

[dingler44]

Oh and I think the whole "feeling full" idea used in some fad diets is a load of bull.

I don't know if fats and proteins make you feel more full than carbohydrates or not - but all you have to do to lose weight is consume fewer calories.

Oh, you're still hungry? Just quit eating! After a few weeks of exercising your will power, you'll find your stomach is satisfied after eating less.

You don't lose weight unlesss you burn more calories than you consume. Who gives a **** whether or not it's high carb or low carb?

Who cares if protein makes you feel full sooner? You don't have the will power to put down your fork? Give me a break.

[Knightmare6]

Sorry to hear that.

[zakur]

Originally posted by dingler44
...but all you have to do to lose weight is consume fewer calories.

Oh, you're still hungry? Just quit eating! After a few weeks of exercising your will power, you'll find your stomach is satisfied after eating less.

You don't lose weight unlesss you burn more calories than you consume. Who gives a sh*t whether or not it's high carb or low carb?

Who cares if protein makes you feel full sooner? You don't have the will power to put down your fork? Give me a break. Exactly! I've lost about 15 pounds in the past two months, and several of my coworkers have asked me what my secret was. I tell them "I eat less, and exercise more."

Many of them don't believe me. They think there is some special diet or secret weight-loss pill that I'm using. Several have tried Atkins and other fad diet plans ('The Zone,' 'Eat Right for Your Type,' etc.) or diet supplements (Metabolife, collagen, chromium picolinate, etc.) and failed miserably. They're still trying to find that "magic" diet or weight-loss product.

Those who do understand this basic principle (to lose weight you must eat less and/or exercise more), tell me that they just don't have the willpower to eat less or the the time to exercise. I have no sympathy for these people. They will be fat until they accept responsibility, and give up their bad eating habits and sedentary lifestyles.

[KillerBob]

Originally posted by EvilYeti


Wow, JAMA's blowing more smoke again, could it have anything to do with the fact that the establishment has been pushing a high-carb/low-fat diet for decades? Talk about rampant woo-woo'ism.

What they convienently neglect to mention is that calories from fat and protein make one feel "full" much quicker than calories from carbs. People trying a low fat diet often eat large portions of carbs to satisfy their appetite. Replace a fraction of those carb calories with fat & protein and it becomes much easier to maintain a diet.


"Rampant woo-woo'ism"?

Care to support any of that? If not, you might want to consider who's more likely the woo-woo here.

And just in case you point to the New York Times Magazine article, here's some perspective on that:


Big Fat Lie (http://www.fumento.com/fat/reason.html)

[KillerBob]

As others have pointed out, at this time there's just no escaping the ultimate truth:

The only healthy, long term way to lose weight and eventually maintain a healthy weight is moderate diet and regular exercise.

(Notice the period at the end of that sentence)

[JeffR]

Originally posted by KillerBob
As others have pointed out, at this time there's just no escaping the ultimate truth:

The only healthy, long term way to lose weight and eventually maintain a healthy weight is moderate diet and regular exercise.

(Notice the period at the end of that sentence)
True, but overly simplistic.

What makes for a moderate diet? Just the number of calories you consume or do the types of foods make a difference? Does eating too many carbs lead to cravings for more and more like the low-carbers claim? What foods should you eat for optimum health?

What kind of exercise? How much? How much of a difference does it make? Unless you go from couch potato to total gym rat, exercise helps a bit but not as much as we are all led to believe.

You can't ignore the issue of why people who are overweight enough for it to be a health problem (10-15 lbs is not) eat so much. In most cases it's not due to laziness or lack of will power, but to deeply rooted emotional issues. That's the real obstacle to losing weight and keeping it off, but how to go about fixing these problems?

Sure enough there are no magic pills or diets for losing weight and keeping it off, but the eat less exercise more advice isn't very useful. I think a lot of people probably figure this out for themselves after a few fad diets, but very few ever have success losing weight.

The AMA deserves to be criticized about their state of knowledge of human nutrition. When it comes to helping people lose weight and keep it off (or better yet not get overweight in the first place), or telling people what they should eat to be healthy, the AMA is no better than many of the "woo-woo's".

[specious_reasons]

I'm not a doctor, but I married one on TV...

At one point, I asked my wife about the Atkins diet. She has no doubts that the diet does work. From her (more informed than mine) opinion, her concern was the effects of being on the diet for a long period of time. When I heard about Dr. Atkins death, the news story implied that much of the resistance from the medical community came from cardiologists.

From an anecdotal view, I had two overweight co-workers (a couple) who tried the Atkins diet. IIRC, after a day or two they had splitting headaches, which they relieved by eating some carbs. They wound up losing the weight the more traditional way of eating less, eating more vegetables when they did eat, and exercising more.

..I think I'm getting a salad for lunch today....

[KillerBob]

Originally posted by JeffR

True, but overly simplistic.

What makes for a moderate diet? Just the number of calories you consume or do the types of foods make a difference? Does eating too many carbs lead to cravings for more and more like the low-carbers claim? What foods should you eat for optimum health?

What kind of exercise? How much? How much of a difference does it make? Unless you go from couch potato to total gym rat, exercise helps a bit but not as much as we are all led to believe.

You can't ignore the issue of why people who are overweight enough for it to be a health problem (10-15 lbs is not) eat so much. In most cases it's not due to laziness or lack of will power, but to deeply rooted emotional issues. That's the real obstacle to losing weight and keeping it off, but how to go about fixing these problems?

Sure enough there are no magic pills or diets for losing weight and keeping it off, but the eat less exercise more advice isn't very useful. I think a lot of people probably figure this out for themselves after a few fad diets, but very few ever have success losing weight.

The AMA deserves to be criticized about their state of knowledge of human nutrition. When it comes to helping people lose weight and keep it off (or better yet not get overweight in the first place), or telling people what they should eat to be healthy, the AMA is no better than many of the "woo-woo's".


A bit simplistic? Yes.

Overly simplistic? No.

Yes, we still have a lot to learn about both diet and exercise.

Still, less trips to McDonald's and more trips to the produce section combined with getting off the couch and out to the park or the pool and doing some type, any type, of physical activity several times a week are still the key to weight loss and maintenance for the majority of overweight people.

Are emotional issues a primary key? Absolutely, and you're right, we do need to work on better understanding them. But overcoming those does not effect the physiologic truth of the statement above.

The eat less, exercise more advice is absolutely useful. The problem is, it's not what most people want to hear. That's why fad diets and the supposed magic pills are such big money makers.

Who said the AMA shouldn't be criticized?

[Bjorn]

Originally posted by KillerBob
Are emotional issues a primary key? Absolutely, and you're right, we do need to work on better understanding them. But overcoming those does not effect the physiologic truth of the statement above.The Americans are getting more and more overweight.

If emotional issues are a primary key, we should have more emotional problems now than 15 years ago and 30 years ago and so on. Do we? :confused:

[toddjh]

What bothers me is the way his death is being misrepresented in some circles as a result of his diet. He died from injuries sustained in a fall, folks!

As for weight loss and fitness, I'm constantly amazed at the overemphasis on diet. In my experience, exercise is far more important than diet to staying thin and keeping in shape. I guess it's harder to cash in on "fad exercise programs" because people are looking for something effortless.

In fact, a lot of people put more effort into maintaining their cars than maintaining their bodies, which I will never understand. You only get one body.

Jeremy

[KillerBob]

Originally posted by Bjorn
The Americans are getting more and more overweight.

If emotional issues are a primary key, we should have more emotional problems now than 15 years ago and 30 years ago and so on. Do we? :confused:

Thanks for keeping me honest, Bjorn.

Instead of "absolutely", I should have said "possibly".

To answer your question, I don't know.

[dingler44]

Originally posted by JeffR

True, but overly simplistic.

What makes for a moderate diet? Just the number of calories you consume or do the types of foods make a difference? Does eating too many carbs lead to cravings for more and more like the low-carbers claim? What foods should you eat for optimum health?


The approach to weight loss could not be simpler:

burn more calories than you consume

The acts of burning more calories and consuming fewer is what is difficult for people.

Anyone in doubt of the above principles can do one of two things:

1. read up on all the available research

2. try it for yourself - journal your caloric intake and caloric expenditure

Since I graduated highschool 6 years ago I've been amazed at how precisely I can control my weight and physical health with exercise and attention to caloric intake.

(I mention highschool graduation as a time mark because it was after that that I moved out on my own and really developed a concern for my diet)

[EvilYeti]

Originally posted by KillerBob

"Rampant woo-woo'ism"?

Care to support any of that? If not, you might want to consider who's more likely the woo-woo here.



http://www.pueblo.gsa.gov/cic_text/food/food-pyramid/pyramid.gif

Roughly TWO-THIRDS of the recommended diet is carbohydrates!!!

Don't think carbs can make you fat? Can beer make you fat? Any fat in beer?

Diabetes and obeseity are at epidemic proportions PRECISELY because of nonsense like the "low-fat" diet. It leads people to think all they have to do is cut fat out of their diet to lose weight.

Wrong. Cutting out fat makes everything worse. Dieters end up, conciously or not, eating WAY more calories than they would eating a balanced diet WITH fat and protein.

If you are not going to exercise, for whatever reason, you HAVE to cut way down on carb intake. Carbs give fast energy for physical activity and are metabolized into fat if not used.

[dingler44]

Originally posted by EvilYeti

Roughly TWO-THIRDS of the recommended diet is carbohydrates!!!

Don't think carbs can make you fat? Can beer make you fat? Any fat in beer?

Diabetes and obeseity are at epidemic proportions PRECISELY because of nonsense like the "low-fat" diet. It leads people to think all they have to do is cut fat out of their diet to lose weight.

Wrong. Cutting out fat makes everything worse. Dieters end up, conciously or not, eating WAY more calories than they would eating a balanced diet WITH fat and protein.

If you are not going to exercise, for whatever reason, you HAVE to cut way down on carb intake. Carbs give fast energy for physical activity and are metabolized into fat if not used.

First of all, that government recommended food chart is incredibily out of date and I don't use it as a reference.

Second, yes, carbs can make you fat, yes beer can make you fat. NOBODY IN HERE IS SAYING THEY CAN'T! Fat can make you fat too and so can protein! Nobody in here is even advocating the low-fat diet you keep trying to debunk!

You sound absolutely taken by Dr. Atkins' diet. PLEASE read the entire article that killerbob provided a link to... hang on a sec, I'll go copy and paste it so you don't have to scroll:

http://www.fumento.com/fat/reason.html

One thing especially important to note from this article is that even though the PERCENTAGE of fat being eaten by Americans has decreased over the last decades, the actual mass of fat eaten by Americans is increasing! Do you see the difference??? It is not evidence that a low-fat diet does not work - it is evidence that increased calorie consumption leads to weight gain.

[toddjh]

Originally posted by EvilYeti
If you are not going to exercise, for whatever reason, you HAVE to cut way down on carb intake. Carbs give fast energy for physical activity and are metabolized into fat if not used.

While I'm not a big fan of the food pyramid for most people myself, I think your criticism here is a little disingenuous. The makers of the food pyramid also recommend exercise and avoiding large amounts of sugar. It's not valid to criticize one part of the plan in a vacuum.

They also recommend a specific number of calories, depending on your sex, age, and level of physical activity. If people eat more calories than it recommends, you can hardly hold the pyramid responsible, can you?

Jeremy (who eats tons of everything and compensates with massive amounts of exercise)

[Victor Danilchenko]

Atkins's contention was that high carb intake causes insulin spikes, which in turn causes glucose spikes and dips, and blood glucose dip is one of the main hunger triggers under carb-rich diet. Thus eating a lot of fat without eating fewer carbs won't do squat -- as long as you consume the carbs, you will be riding the glucose rollercoaster.

Which is to say, putting extra butter on your sandwich is emphatically not what the Atkins recommended, is not what Atkins claimed will lead to lower weight, and thus "refutations" like the one above are attacking a strawman.

Does weight loss under low-carb diet come from absence of carbs, or from low caloric intake? I am not sure; but I do know that a low-carb diet does wonders for controlling appetite. Even if the weight loss is simply due to lower caloric intake because of lessenned hunger, which there are studies indicating to not be the case, it's still a good thing -- because regular low-calorie diets sure as hell don't do anything about the incessant gnawing in your stomach...

Oh yeah, don't forget that low-carb diets have been strongly linked to reduced risk of diabetes and heart disease.

[KillerBob]

Don't think carbs can make you fat? Can beer make you fat? Any fat in beer?

Who claimed carbs can't make you fat?

Diabetes and obeseity are at epidemic proportions PRECISELY because of nonsense like the "low-fat" diet. It leads people to think all they have to do is cut fat out of their diet to lose weight.

Wrong. Cutting out fat makes everything worse. Dieters end up, conciously or not, eating WAY more calories than they would eating a balanced diet WITH fat and protein.

Care to support any of that?

Also, I doubt you'll find too many people claim that cutting out the fat is all there is to it. They usually throw in that pesky exercise thing.

If you are not going to exercise, for whatever reason, you HAVE to cut way down on carb intake. Carbs give fast energy for physical activity and are metabolized into fat if not used.

Yes, that's part of it, but prove that chewing on a piece of bacon instead is a better idea.

[zakur]

On the subject of "food pyramids," this is the one I try to follow: Mayo Clinic Healthy Weight Pyramid (http://www.mayo.edu/news/pyramid.jpg). Note that they go beyond food and put "Daily Physical Activity" in the center of the pyramid. (More info and expanded version of the pyramid here (http://www.mayo.edu/comm/mcr/news_1393.html).)

On the theory that low-carb diets suppress appetite: are there studies that show this? The above-cited Fumento article says:But is there any empirical support for this? No, according to an April 2002 review of studies in the Journal of the American College of Nutrition that summarized "high and low fat treatments when subjects were allowed to eat ad libitum:." It found "energy intake on the low-fat diets ranged from 16 percent to 24 percent less than those on high fat diets."

"We've done masses of studies on fat and satiety," says Barbara Rolls, professor of nutrition at Pennsylvania State University, where she has authored four books and written about 6o medical journal articles on human food intake. She's widely considered the nation's top authority on satiety. Some of her experiments involved ingestion; in others, "We directly infused pure fat and pure carbohydrates both directly into [human] veins and directly into stomachs." Says Rolls, "We found very little difference between fats and carbohydrates."

Rolls does say there is some evidence that high-protein diets may be more satiating, but Atkins isn't really high protein; it's just high fat. According to an analysis in the journal Circulation, Atkins starts off at 36 percent protein from calories and declines to 24 percent in the "maintenance" stage.

[Corsair09]

Well, I’ve stayed out of most of the Atkins bashing, but here’s my experience:

I’m 33 years old. I have a sedentary job, and I married the daughter of a restaurateur and caterer. In short, the lady can COOK. I was/am hypertensive, and on 4 different blood pressure medications, and Zocor to reduce cholesterol. In addition, my father died at age 47 of a heart attack. In short, I was a statistic waiting to happen.

I went to the nutritionists, and endocrinology people, and I followed the low-fat “If it tastes good, spit it out” diet TO THE LETTER. I exercised 3 to 4 times a week in our company health club. This consisted of 30 minutes on the treadmill (pushing hard) and 30 minutes of weight training.

The results: Initial weight loss of 5 pounds, little to no progress after that. For nearly a year. All this time, I’m plagued by hunger cravings, yet still not loosing weight. So I went back to the Doctor. He ordered a whole set of blood workups. I was, in his words, “pre-diabetic” and suffering from “hyperinsulinism.” Basically, the food I WAS allowed to eat was causing huge spikes in insulin production, and it was only a matter of time before diabetes set in.

In desperation, I wanted to try the Atkins plan. My Doc was nervous, but agreed to work with me on it if I promised to keep up the medications and take multivitamin and fiber supplements. He also warned me that he was going to order blood workups for every visit to keep an eye on things.

The results: I’ve been on the Atkins plan for 5 months. I’ve lost 43 pounds. My blood pressure is WAY down, and I am now on only 2 of the 4 medications. My cholesterol is the best it has ever been, and triglycerides are way down (I don’t have my numbers in front of me, sorry). My energy levels are up, and it is far easier to make it through my workout sessions. My Doc is pleased with my progress, and my over all health is the best it has been in years.

I don’t know that the diet is for everybody.. Some folks have great success on the standard low-fat method. I did not. This program did, and is continuing to work for me. YMMV, of course.

[KillerBob]

Well folks, I'm about to call it a weekend, so here's a summation of where I stand.

We still have a LOT to learn about the effects of diet and exercise. I make no claim that the AMA or anyone else has it all right.

I do have a problem when people claim that Atkins had it right. To that I say, prove it.

I do credit Atkins with bringing needed popularity to the idea that everything we know about diet may not necessarily be true.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Originally posted by EvilYeti

There is a strong backlash against Dr. Atkins in the scientific/skeptical community as he was long considered a quack, but then unfortunately (for them) turned out to be right.


Ummm...not so fast there bucko. I think there are quite a few nutritionists and doctors who would disagree.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Eat less. Exercise more. End of discussion.

[swellman]

Originally posted by The Central Scrutinizer
Eat less. Exercise more. End of discussion.

Wrong.

Eat what you want. Get fat. Sue someone.

[corplinx]

Its real simple folks. Cut out the corn, potatoes, and highly refined flour. Try not to eat carbs for dinner at all, ignore that dinner roll. When it comes to wheat bread and sugars, just moderate yourself. Have them at lunch if your going to have them.

Remember above all things, dont drink full calorie sodas. They are full of icky corn syrup (its cheaper than real sugar which metabolizes much better, the soda companies use corn syrup so they can afford high dollar celebrity advertising campaigns which relaly affect nobodies soda purchase).

[EvilYeti]

Originally posted by zakur

On the theory that low-carb diets suppress appetite: are there studies that show this? The above-cited Fumento article says:

Well, first of all appetite is a subjective experience, so its impossible to study and quantify 100% accurately. I know, from personal experience, that a bacon-wrapped filet mingon will satisfy my appetite much more than the same amount (in calories) as pasta. I also find that after eating a high carb meal I will be hungry again much quicker than when I eat a low carb meal. I guess YMMV, but I've never met anyone who has experienced the opposite.

[EvilYeti]

Originally posted by The Central Scrutinizer


Ummm...not so fast there bucko. I think there are quite a few nutritionists and doctors who would disagree.

Well of course there are and they would be wrong. Much like Corsair09's doctor was wrong to push a low-fat diet instead of a low-carb diet.

[Suddenly]

One big problem with any discussion of the Atkins diet is that it is often incorrectly defined. Media reports of the "diet" bring forth visions of people eating butter soaked 30 ounce steaks w/ a side of bacon for every meal. More realistic (for me, a 330 pound male) is the following:

Breakfast:
3 eggs scrambled over low heat + small pat of butter
2 tbsp guacamole

Lunch:
2 cups salad vegitables w/ 1/3 pound grilled chicken
3 Tbsp olive oil based italian dressing (no sugar)

Dinner
12 oz samon sauteed in olive oil
1 cup green beans w/ small pat butter & 1 tsp. garlic

(Throw in the occasional 4 oz. hunk of cheese or a low carb energy bar when hunger strikes - maybe 3-5 times a week or so)

(plus vitamins, fiber suppliment + "fish oil" type suppliment)

People generally attack the "diet" by rolling out concerns over bacon and unlimited calorie intake, ignoring that Atkins in his books made it quite clear that it is important to use mostly "good" fats (fish oils, avacados, etc.). More important is the distinction between "eat until you are satisfied" vs. "eat as much as you want." Atkins was his own worst enemy when it came to public misinformation regarding his advice, as he tended towards extreme hucksterism when speaking about his diet. I guess he was worried more about getting attention than being totally accurate. Ironically, his death may help eventually destroy some of the misconceptions about his diet, as his writings are quite moderate compared to his public comments.

For example, Atkins never in his books claimed that unlimited calorie intake would lead to weight loss. He simply claimed that lowering carbs and increasing fat 1) reduces hunger, 2) causes the body to increase metabolism and 3) causes the body to process less of what is eaten. This is not really a "revolution" from conventional dieting in that the core principle of "weight loss occurs when calories in < calories burned" remains true. This is a different picture than that suggested from major media reports and Atkins' own comments. Of course, Adkins was a critic of calorie counting, which is different. This follows from the theory that carbohydrate restriction eliminates blood sugar swings. Then, one feels hungry only when one actually requires food. Thus, natural hunger feelings become a reliable gauge of metabolic need.

Until I went on the "diet" I was going through something like 2 gallons of ice cream a week. I figured it was some kind of personal shortcoming that I couldn't stop myself. I then went 2 weeks with less than 20 grams of non-fiber carbohydrates per week, gradually increasing carbs to level out at an acceptable level of weight loss. (the Atkins "diet") It has been 6 months and minus about 50 pounds ( "about" since before the diet I could not use a normal human scale :eek: ) and no ice cream, don't even miss it. This would seem to indicate the root of my problem was physical and not mental.

I tried the diet to prove to my wife that it didn't work. I am thankful to not be as smart as I sometimes think I am.