Re: Re: Atkins proponents changing their tune?

[Guest guest]

I am not responding to any post in particular, but wanted to share my positive thoughts on the Atkins plan.

I have been doing a modified low carb way of eating for 10 months and don't plan to change. My blood lipids (and all my labs) are great; cholesterol is 130, ratio 2.9...HDL great, etc etc. The Atkins ongoing weight loss and maintenance, as I read the book, meant to me, no sugar, low to no starches, little bits of cheese, eggs several times a week, little to no dairy, higher quality protein (fish, lean cuts, small amounts), lots of vegetables ( at least four cups a day), fruits added in with attention paid to sugar spiking quality, better quality fats and nuts, and more fiberfull complex carbs in moderation. The 2 week induction period is the only extreme time of the plan and it is designed to detoxify from sugar. This is how I read his book and how I implemented it. As of today I am 84 lbs down....feel like a new person. Those folks I know who have done this...have been very successful and I know people who have been doing this for years with great success. I never understood Atkins to say "eat tons of meat, cheese and eggs all day long" but that is what some unfortunate people have done to great harm. I remember the thing that struck me when I read the book this past year, was the detailed emphasis on vegetables, and the stepping up of adding good carbs back into the nutrition plan. Currently that is where I am in my nutrition walk; adding small amounts of the best quality, fiber-rich, complex carbs back into my diet, up to the point that I can still keep my weight balanced with no sugar spiking and no weight gain.

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 1/28/04 11:31:52 AM Eastern Standard Time, katnap@... writes:

Am I the only one who doesn't believe that Atkins died by slipping on

ice and banging his head?

No, Mayor Bloomberg agrees with you. But you may be the only two. Peg

[Guest guest]

LOL. AFAIK, Mayor Bloomberg of NYC was the only one to disbelieve. Who

else?

on 1/28/2004 11:18 AM, katrinacrader at katnap@... wrote:

> Am I the only one who doesn't believe that Atkins died by slipping on

> ice and banging his head?

>

> Katrina.

[Guest guest]

Probably

Positive Dennis

katrinacrader wrote:

Am I the

only one who doesn't believe that Atkins died by slipping on

ice and banging his head?

Katrina.

[Guest guest]

Am I the only one who doesn't believe that Atkins died by slipping on ice and banging his head?No. Mayor Bloomberg of NYC doesn't believe it either..or

atleast that's what he said during a supposedly off-the-

record moment. Last I heard, he's apologizing to Atkin's

widow over a steak dinner.

Al

[Guest guest]

I believe he died from slipping on the ice and banging his head.

While I tried the Atkins diet when it first came out and enjoyed a short

term weight loss, the weight came back like every other diet I tried.

I believe Dr Atkins deserves credit for thinking outside the box (not all

calories are created equal). It's a shame that he was taken by an accident

before his time. We must be careful not to read too much into the fate of

human icons for the various dietary approaches. One data point is just that.

JR

-----Original Message-----

From: katrinacrader [mailto:katnap@...]

Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2004 10:19 AM

Subject: [ ] Re: Atkins proponents changing their tune?

Am I the only one who doesn't believe that Atkins died by slipping on

ice and banging his head?

Katrina.

[Guest guest]

I, for one was unaware that he had a heart attack in 2002. That changes the

picture completely. OTOH, I'm not surprised what with all that saturated

fat he was originally advocating.

on 1/28/2004 12:36 PM, katrinacrader at katnap@... wrote:

> So you think his heart attack in April of 2002 was completely

> unrelated to his death one year later? And you also think it is

> coincidental that the Atkins group changes their dietary

> recommendations within 9 months of him dying?

>

> Actions speak louder than words.

[Guest guest]

katrinacrader wrote:

So you

think his heart attack in April of 2002 was completely

unrelated to his death one year later?

sure, he fell. There is no doubt about this. Remember what the good doctor

taught us about two events occurring together and one causing the other?

And you also

think it is

coincidental that the Atkins group changes their dietary

recommendations within 9 months of him dying?

they actually changed nothing you did not read the article carefully enough.

They recommend that 20% of the diet be saturated fat, to my mind this is

a huge number! Since they assume that Atkins followers will eat 60% of their

diet as fat, this means they are recommending that 1/3 of the fat calories

be saturated. To my mind this is a huge amount of fat and seems to me to

be no change at all.

For me right now I am doing atkins as I need to lose weight quicker than

I feel is prudent in preparation for surgery. But what I will eventually

do (if i Decide to CRON) is something along the lines of a zone diet, but

I will not purposefully add fat as Sears does in order to reach an "ideal"

fat %.

I do think that it is interesting that the Saturated Fat % of modern beef

is to a large extent dictated by our modern agricultural practices. We have

steadily reduced the amount of grazing animals do and replaced that with

grain in feedlots.

The arsenic in Chicken feed is now detectable in the blood of heavy chicken

eaters. I have always poo pooed organic products but I may change my mind.

Positive Dennis

Actions speak louder than words.

what actions?

Positive Dennis

>

> > Am I the only one who doesn't believe that Atkins died by

slipping on

> > ice and banging his head?

> >

> > Katrina.

[Guest guest]

You can believe or not believe but Atkins said his heart attack was not related

to the fats, I forget the kind of attack he had, but it was of a nature that

his disclaimer was not impossible.

In addition this is highly antidotal (sic). People with loads of saturated

fat in the diet live to their 90's and some with low fat diets die in their

60's of heart failure. Although both may be extremes on a bell curve.

Positive Dennis

Francesca Skelton wrote:

I, for one was unaware that he had a heart attack in 2002. That changes

the

picture completely. OTOH, I'm not surprised what with all that saturated

fat he was originally advocating.

on 1/28/2004 12:36 PM, katrinacrader at katnap@... wrote:

> So you think his heart attack in April of 2002 was completely

> unrelated to his death one year later? And you also think it is

> coincidental that the Atkins group changes their dietary

> recommendations within 9 months of him dying?

>

> Actions speak louder than words.

[Guest guest]

But they did not change anything, they have always (in recent books anyway)

said that saturated fat should be 33%. I do not see his death as related

to his diet.

Positive Dennis

katrinacrader wrote:

> sure,

he fell. There is no doubt about this. Remember what the good

> doctor taught us about two events occurring together and one

causing the other?

Cause and effect is very difficult to prove, and I was not trying to

prove that. I was just pointing out that one should not believe

everything one reads - particularly when large sums of money are

involved.

> They recommend that 20% of the diet be saturated fat, to my mind

> this is a huge number!

I think they are covering themselves against legal action. But that

is just a guess on my part.

> I do think that it is interesting that the Saturated Fat % of

modern

> beef is to a large extent dictated by our modern agricultural

practices.

Indeed. Paleo man would have been eating wild meat with a fat

percentage probably as low as 4 or 5.

> We have steadily reduced the amount of grazing animals do and

replaced

> that with grain in feedlots.

You don't have to work hard to convince me that grains are not good

for animals. Every farmer knows that you feed the animals grains if

you want them to be fat for slaughter.

> Actions speak louder than words.

>

> what actions?

Having a heart attack, dying one year later, and then the group

making a public statement limiting the amount of saturated fat.

K.

[Guest guest]

http://www.cnn.com/2002/HEALTH/diet.fitness/04/25/atkins.diet/

>From: Francesca Skelton <fskelton@...>

>Reply-

>< >

>Subject: Re: [ ] Re: Atkins proponents changing their tune?

>Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:57:31 -0500

>

>I, for one was unaware that he had a heart attack in 2002. That changes

>the

>picture completely. OTOH, I'm not surprised what with all that saturated

>fat he was originally advocating.

>

>

>on 1/28/2004 12:36 PM, katrinacrader at katnap@... wrote:

>

> > So you think his heart attack in April of 2002 was completely

> > unrelated to his death one year later? And you also think it is

> > coincidental that the Atkins group changes their dietary

> > recommendations within 9 months of him dying?

> >

> > Actions speak louder than words.

>

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 1/28/2004 8:42:59 PM Pacific Standard Time, apricot85@... writes:

Carb watching has been long used by diabetics and epileptics.

There are other diseases and disorders that benefit from this as well. Many autoimmune diseases benefit from this.Multiple sclerosis comes to mind and diabetes is an autoimmune disease. . So many of us come from a "diseased and/or disordered" health perspective when we come to CRON. Lowering carbs may be the thing that the "doctor orders" for us. I am in remission from cutting sugar and starches..no doubt in my mind. I often feel that I eat like a diabetic. This doesn't seem to be a problem and since the QOL got better...I am not changing plans now. I agree with Apricot and others who remind us...that Atkins biggest focus was not to tell us to eat more meat, fats etc, but to stop eating sugar.

[Guest guest]

I don't believe the entire diet philosophy should be undervalued over

the issue of saturated fat. More than anything, his diet focused on the

types of carbs, amount of carbs, & the effects of excess carbs. He was

a pioneer promoting this thinking. In my view, processed sugar is an

unrecognized poison that encourages numerous diseases. Carb watching

has been long used by diabetics and epileptics. Atkins wasn't the only

one. Since you spoke negatively about grains for animals, perhaps you

are moderate in this regard for humans.

Katrina, you don't show a fervor to pounce on the man like some

" anti-atkins " folks. Many people get a benefit from watching carbs, &

it's as though the anti-atkins club have a need to focus only on

negatives. I believe we should be happy for ( & listen to) those who

experience a benefit, regardless of what we believe for our own health.

katrinacrader wrote:

> So you think his heart attack in April of 2002 was completely

> unrelated to his death one year later? And you also think it is

> coincidental that the Atkins group changes their dietary

> recommendations within 9 months of him dying?

>

> Actions speak louder than words.

[Guest guest]

Type I diabetes is an autoimmune disease, or, rather, the result of an

autoimmune attack on the pancreatic insulin producing cells. Type II, the

much more common " adult onset " type of diabetes is more of a metabolic

disease.

>From: kimlynette@...

>Reply-

>

>Subject: Re: [ ] Re: Atkins proponents changing their tune?

>Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 01:26:53 EST

>

>In a message dated 1/28/2004 8:42:59 PM Pacific Standard Time,

>apricot85@... writes:

>Carb watching

>has been long used by diabetics and epileptics.

>There are other diseases and disorders that benefit from this as well. Many

>autoimmune diseases benefit from this.Multiple sclerosis comes to mind and

>diabetes is an autoimmune disease. . So many of us come from a " diseased

>and/or

>disordered " health perspective when we come to CRON. Lowering carbs may be

>the

>thing that the " doctor orders " for us. I am in remission from cutting sugar

>and

>starches..no doubt in my mind. I often feel that I eat like a diabetic.

>This

>doesn't seem to be a problem and since the QOL got better...I am not

>changing

>plans now. I agree with Apricot and others who remind us...that Atkins

>biggest

>focus was not to tell us to eat more meat, fats etc, but to stop eating

>sugar.

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 1/29/2004 12:29:43 AM Pacific Standard Time, dowlic@... writes:

Type I diabetes is an autoimmune disease, or, rather, the result of an autoimmune attack on the pancreatic insulin producing cells. Type II, the much more common "adult onset" type of diabetes is more of a metabolic disease.

Type 2 diabetes responds to diet, exercise as though it is an inflammatory process in the vein of autoimmune disease. Folks who do right by their nutrition can put their systems into "remission" if you will. If they fall off the wagon, they will have a "flare."

[Guest guest]

Definition of autoimmune disease:

n : any of a large group of diseases characterized by abnormal functioning

of the immune system that causes it to produce antibodies against your own

tissues

Type II DM: In type 2 diabetes, either the body does not produce enough

insulin or the cells ignore the insulin.

No antibodies. DM II is caused by lack of exercise and improper diet.

It is not an autoimmune disease. No antibodies involved, no cytotoxic T cell

attack on the body involved.

>From: kimlynette@...

>Reply-

>

>Subject: Re: [ ] Re: Atkins proponents changing their tune?

>Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 11:47:22 EST

>

>In a message dated 1/29/2004 12:29:43 AM Pacific Standard Time,

>dowlic@... writes:

>Type I diabetes is an autoimmune disease, or, rather, the result of an

>autoimmune attack on the pancreatic insulin producing cells. Type II, the

>much more common " adult onset " type of diabetes is more of a metabolic

>disease.

>Type 2 diabetes responds to diet, exercise as though it is an inflammatory

>process in the vein of autoimmune disease. Folks who do right by their

>nutrition

>can put their systems into " remission " if you will. If they fall off the

>wagon, they will have a " flare. "