Jump to content
RemedySpot.com

Re: The Healthiest Diet?

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

Just a question, the Ornish is not a weight loss diet.

But it was evaluated in terms of weight loss.

So are you saying you agree as a weight loss or as a healthy diet period?

Regards

[ ] The Healthiest Diet?

I couldnt agree more with this.PERSPECTIVES IN PRACTICEA Dietary Quality Comparison of Popular Weight-LossPlans Journal of the American Dietetic AssociationOctober 2007, Vol. 107, No. 10A Dietary Quality Comparison of Popular Weight LossDietsThe Alternate Healthy Eating Index measures andcompares factors in a person's diet that are stronglylinked to reducing risk for cardiovasculardisease. According to researchers at the Universityof Massachusetts who compared the dietary quality ofseveral popular weight-loss plans, none of the plansachieved a perfect AHEI score, "but the Ornish, WeightWatchers high-carbohydrate and New Glucose Revolutionplans were among the best performers using the AHEIand traditional dietary quality assessments."The researchers calculated the AHEI from meal planstaken from books or Web sites for the New GlucoseRevolution, WeightWatchers, Atkins, South Beach, Zone, Ornish and 2005 U.S. Department of AgricultureMyPyramid plans.Of a maximum possible score of 70, the AHEI scores foreach weight-loss plan were:Ornish: 64.6WeightWatchers high-carbohydrate: 57.4New Glucose Revolution: 57.2South Beach Phase 2: 50.7Zone: 49.8MyPyramid: 48.7Weight Watchers high-protein: 47.3Atkins 100-g carbohydrate: 46South Beach Phase 3: 45.6Atkins 45-g carbohydrate: 42.3The researchers conclude that the AHEI "is a valuabletool in selecting a weight-loss plan that maximizesboth weight loss and (cardiovascular disease)prevention." Since the study was based on meal plansas described by their creators, the researchersrecommend further study "to observe what patientsactually consume when following a popular weight-lossplan."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

> Just a question, the Ornish is not a weight loss

> diet.

> But it was evaluated in terms of weight loss.

> So are you saying you agree as a weight loss or as a

> healthy diet period?

The diets were not rated in terms of weight loss. The

picked the common popular diets and evaluated them

against the criteria of a healthy eating index.

The factors they were evaluated on were..

1) amount of vegetables recommended

2) amount of fruits

3) amount of fiber

4) poly/saturated fat ratio

5) inclusion of a serving of nuts an/or soy protein

6) amount of trans fat

7) a measure of protein

You can read these online at

http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/full/76/6/1261

A few years back they also evaluated many of the same

diets in relation to the hegsted equations and found

similar results.

Either way, shouldnt we be recommended the healthiest

diet for weight loss.

Regards

Jeff

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont agree with all the standards of the scale and

myself would change a few. I am going to do a smal

write up on that and will post a link if anyone wants.

But, Interesting you mention the issues you did.

I do agree the the Ornish program has certain

limitations and could be much improved if he would

update it. However, I can understand how difficult it

is for these programs to change their guidelines. I

fought the same battle with Pritikin.

One of the first things I did when I joined the

Pritikin team was to update some of the dietary

principles that I thought were out of date.

And the first was the elimination of the holy grail...

the emphasis on 10% fat and to raise the level of EFAs

and reduce the " potential " levels of omega 6s.

Second was to further change its emphasis from portion

control to calorie density, which had already begun.

And to dramatically reduce the availability of

processed whole grains.

Third, was to expand the role a wide variety of fruits

and veggies plays in the program and move it away from

being called a " near vegetarian diet " to a " unrefined

unprocessed whole food plant based diet " .

I agree we dont know all we need to know about some of

the issues related to all these disease and their

development, but clearly, as you mentioned, widening

our intake of colorful fruits and veggies is better

for us.

I remember the " Salad " bar when I got there. It was

one green leafy and maybe 8 other options. I thought

I could eat the salad bar for lunch that day myself.

The salad bowls were like soup bowls.

Now, we offer 3-4 leafy greens a meal, and over 30

varieties of veggies and fresh herbs on the salad bar

and several steamed veggies each meal. The individual

salad bowls are now around the size most people use

for the serving bowl. :) I think they are like 64-72

oz (volume).

Same with fruit. Breakfast used to offer banana,

grapefruit and maybe one other fruit. Now, every

morning its a buffet of 3-4 melons, 3-4 berries, a few

tropical fruits and several other in season fruits.

Regards

Jeff

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting that the criteria are all inputs versus results.

Maybe this is because they know from other studies how each

of these inputs affects the outputs (ie., in the short term,

blood tests, in the long term, outcomes and longevity).

Still, it seems a little backward.

-

--- In , Jeff Novick <chefjeff40@...>

wrote:

>

> The diets were not rated in terms of weight loss. The

> picked the common popular diets and evaluated them

> against the criteria of a healthy eating index.

>

> The factors they were evaluated on were..

>

> 1) amount of vegetables recommended

> 2) amount of fruits

> 3) amount of fiber

> 4) poly/saturated fat ratio

> 5) inclusion of a serving of nuts an/or soy protein

> 6) amount of trans fat

> 7) a measure of protein

>

> You can read these online at

>

> http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/full/76/6/1261

>

> A few years back they also evaluated many of the same

> diets in relation to the hegsted equations and found

> similar results.

>

> Either way, shouldnt we be recommended the healthiest

> diet for weight loss.

>

> Regards

> Jeff

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to Willet, they are inputs based on results.

And he acknoweldges that it doesnt rate adherence

Thanks

Jeff

--- <truepatriot@...> wrote:

> Interesting that the criteria are all inputs versus

> results.

> Maybe this is because they know from other studies

> how each

> of these inputs affects the outputs (ie., in the

> short term,

> blood tests, in the long term, outcomes and

> longevity).

> Still, it seems a little backward.

>

> -

>

>

>

> >

> > The diets were not rated in terms of weight loss.

> The

> > picked the common popular diets and evaluated them

> > against the criteria of a healthy eating index.

> >

> > The factors they were evaluated on were..

> >

> > 1) amount of vegetables recommended

> > 2) amount of fruits

> > 3) amount of fiber

> > 4) poly/saturated fat ratio

> > 5) inclusion of a serving of nuts an/or soy

> protein

> > 6) amount of trans fat

> > 7) a measure of protein

> >

> > You can read these online at

> >

> > http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/full/76/6/1261

> >

> > A few years back they also evaluated many of the

> same

> > diets in relation to the hegsted equations and

> found

> > similar results.

> >

> > Either way, shouldnt we be recommended the

> healthiest

> > diet for weight loss.

> >

> > Regards

> > Jeff

> >

>

>

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...