If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
New Atkins Book
In article ,
Walter Bushell wrote: In article , " wrote: On Apr 28, 4:26*pm, Doug Freyburger wrote: Billy wrote: *Doug Freyburger wrote: wrote: In reality, it establishes nothing. To know what gravity does, is empirical knowledge. To claim to know how it does it, may involve a mathematical construct of "thingies" called gravitons. It may be nice to know the later, but doesn't affect your use of the former. In a recent thread Orlando Enrique Fiol questioned my double standard objecting to highly sweetened fruit but not to grain fattened livestock. It was a valid point that needed to be addressed. *The answer to that comes from the arithmetic of gram counts that are common among low carbers - When the gram count of carbs are low the sources of carb grams are important to control. *When the gram count of fats are high the sources of fat grams are less important. *For fats one can go all the way from avoiding transfats and otherwise ignoring fatty acid ratios all the way to tracking fatty acid types by gram and there's little change in the results. Now Trader4 questioned the statistical certainty level of my conclusions. *Given my assertive phrasing it's a completely valid question. *My assertive phrasing can easily be interpreted as my feeling more certainty in my conclusions than is statistically valid. *It's an issue with my writing style. *There's a line between assertive and aggressive that I do not convey in person that I do convey in writing. No matter the amount of practice I have not acheived the writing skill to correctly qualify my statements. *Whenever I try they come across as long legalese not as descriptions. Why do I reach the conclusions I do? *What data have I based my conclusions on? *What's the quality of that data? *Is there better data on that topic available anywhere? *Is there a scientific explanation for my stance in addition to the observed data? *Escpecially on points where I disagree with what Dr Atkins appears to have written and on points where people quote Dr Aktins regularly it is best to ask these questions about my conclusions. *The quality of the data and any history I have of changing my mind on the topic based on increased data quanity or quality are important considerations. There's also the issue of formal qualifications. *I'm an engineer with a good scientific education with neither major nor degree in biochemistry or medicine. *On the one hand I can't rely on my own authority because the only authority I have is from a few people who have tried my suggestions and succeeded. *On the other hand when I disagree with an Atkins book quote and still claim to be an Atkins fan I have to be careful in justifying my conclusions. *For me it has to be all about the data, the quantity of the data and the quality of the data. *The data has to follow the science and the science has to explain the data. *Here Trader4 called me on data quality. *Data quality matters greatly. *And yet conclusions can be made on poor quality data so long as those conclusions are provisional and subject to change when/if better quality data emerges. I do think that beginners need certainty more than they need long lists of qualifications but that's not the cause of my declarative writing style. *Among the various side effects of my declarative writing style that's one that's beneficial. *Not all of the side effects are beneficial. *Plenty of folks disagree with me on a lot of points that I've addressed any times over the years. *Eventually it comes down to an offer to gather better data than I have and get back to me. *So far few ever have. * The problem is that your concept of "data" consists of anecdotal reports from anyone posting on the internet. And I would also strongly suspect that the data is NOT tabulated and interpreted with an unbiased eye. In other words, you see what you want to see and justify it in your own mind. Regarding this whole issue of the deductibility of carbs, I'd say the issue of accounting for the soluble carbs in the grand scheme of things doesn't matter for two reasons. First, with most foods people doing any reasonable version of LC, the amount of indigestible fiber is going to be the dominant type of fiber. Second, most of the soluble fiber is fermented in the digestive tract and turned into short chain fatty acids, which are actually beneficial to our health. These are not carbs. The rest is apparently eliminated undigested. So, I think from a practical standpoint it's OK to simply deduct all the carbs from the carb count. Unless, of course, it doesn't work for *you*. Metabolisms vary. And how else are yo going to find out if it doesn't work for you unless you try it? The alternative is do the deer in the headlight routine, by computing your safe zone/comfort every time you eat, and you still need to allow for personal metabolism. Of course it may not be personal metablolism, but the kindness of unknown micro-flora in your guts, i.e. http://www.physorg.com/news189865361.html . Intrinsic metabolisms, I presume, are much more similar, or would you like to correct this presumption? -- - Billy "Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." - Benito Mussolini. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Arn3lF5XSUg http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Zinn/HZinn_page.html |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
New Atkins Book
I'm not dumb. In fact I have a 148 IQ, but I have a hard time following
all this. I can't believe how analytical you folks are? Perhaps it's a case of the few left on this NG are into the techno babble of it all? In the olden days of Doc Atkins being alive and well, there was mostly talk of recipes, carb counts. and "whooshes". Please don't take offense. I'm just making an observation, no insult intended. -- JK Sinrod www.MyConeyIslandMemories.com |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
New Atkins Book
Billy wrote:
Walter Bushell wrote: " wrote: So, I think from a practical standpoint it's OK to simply deduct all the carbs from the carb count. Unless, of course, it doesn't work for *you*. Metabolisms vary. And how else are yo going to find out if it doesn't work for you unless you try it? Not that many people are organized enough to be able to figure out if their bodies treat soluble fiber like carbs. It can be done with a glucose meter. It can be done by telling if you have ketones in your urine and/or breath and then adjusting your carb and fiber levels in increments - I did that to see how my body reacted to sugar alcohols once and it was so much work I have no interest in trying it for fiber. But it really doesn't matter. Gram counts and calorie counts are inaccurate but folks lose anyways. Deducting fiber means eating more veggies and that's a good thing - It does not need to go beyond that. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
New Atkins Book
JK Coney wrote:
In the olden days of Doc Atkins being alive and well, there was mostly talk of recipes, carb counts. and "whooshes". Bring on a bunch of newbies so we can discuss beginner issues! it would be great. The current population of regulars have mostly been at low carbing a lot of years. With a new book coming out maybe newbies will flow in. Hope springs eternal. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
New Atkins Book
"Doug Freyburger" wrote in message ... JK Coney wrote: In the olden days of Doc Atkins being alive and well, there was mostly talk of recipes, carb counts. and "whooshes". Bring on a bunch of newbies so we can discuss beginner issues! it would be great. The current population of regulars have mostly been at low carbing a lot of years. With a new book coming out maybe newbies will flow in. Hope springs eternal. I agree, it would be nice, but I fear that we are the low carb dinosaurs! -- JK Sinrod www.MyConeyIslandMemories.com |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Anyone got the Atkins book from the '70s? | Patricia Martin Steward[_2_] | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 8 | November 4th, 2009 06:41 PM |
THe new Atkins Revolution book | diane | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 0 | December 31st, 2004 12:47 AM |
Atkins Essentials Book vs New Updated Diet book | Drop34 | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 2 | July 10th, 2004 05:46 AM |
Im Honestly too Poor for The Atkins book | *AmBeR* | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 91 | February 16th, 2004 02:03 PM |
atkins by the book | blondie | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 0 | November 11th, 2003 10:41 PM |