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 |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Harvard study/CNN article
http://www.cnn.com/2003/HEALTH/diet.....ap/index.html
this article raises several points that have been debated (often hotly) in this newsgroup, dividing even Atkins adherents. The most provacative being that even with INCREASED calories, more weight was lost by atkins followers Here are some quotes that capture some of the shock.....and hit phrases argued he 1)"It doesn't make sense, does it?" said Barbara Rolls of Pennsylvania State University. "It violates the laws of thermodynamics. 2)"That strikes at one of the most revered beliefs in nutrition: A calorie is a calorie is a calorie. It does not matter whether they come from bacon or mashed potatoes; they all go on the waistline in just the same way. " 3)"Each afternoon, the volunteers picked up that evening's dinner, a bedtime snack and the next day's breakfast and lunch. Instead of lots of red meat and saturated fat, which many find disturbing about low-carb diets, these people ate mostly fish, chicken, salads, vegetables and unsaturated oils. "This is not what people think of when they think about an Atkins diet," Greene said." This last part is my favorite quote, as for the first time, it captures my main beef (pardon the pun) with coverage of atkins, as my diet is nothing like the red meat-dripping with blood-diet portrayed normally in the media. Fish, salads, vegatables, chicken, blueberries and nuts. That is my atkins diet. Some of the misconceptions were discussed: "Or perhaps the food choices are just so limited that low-carb dieters are too bored to eat a lot. " (Hahahahahahahahahah!) A truth that all of us agree on was mentioned: "Maybe the low-carb diets are more satisfying, so they do not get so hungry." and related: "perhaps the people eating more calories also got more exercise or they were less apt to cheat because they were less hungry." But the thrust of this article was reporting the astounding fact that people ate MORE calories and lost MORE weight. This has been debated hotly here, amongst those of us who believe in atkins. To me there are the following possibilities: 1) people cheat in studies, but on atkins they cheat on atkins. 2) something changes in the digestive process, either passing calories (this would be easy (if somewhat disgusting) to test by running fecies and uring through a calorimeter.) 3) it costs more calories to digest atkins food (mentioned in this article, but this seems doubtful to me) 4) A change in the metabolic rate. This was doubted in the article, but i am not even sure how they would measure it 5) A fundamental flaw in our understading of the nutritional models incorporating all or some of the above or some other aspects known to us. glad i stocked up on atkins freindly food this week, i predict a 10% increase in prices before the weekend. Bob Morrell 197/164/160 |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Harvard study/CNN article
Bob Morrell 197/164/160 Great points, Bob, and even better numbers in your sig. Sounds like your doing real good. One thing I wish I could see was the actual study itself- not just articles written about it. There are so many factors to a scientific study that it's difficult to take any article at face value without actually seeing what the control points were. Jake -- My favorite animal is steak.--Fran Lebowitz |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Harvard study/CNN article
"bob" writes: 5) A fundamental flaw in our understading of the nutritional models incorporating all or some of the above or some other aspects known to us. Ignorance is always a safe bet ;-) |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Harvard study/CNN article
Jake,
The actual study will probably appear in this week's Medscape newsletter. To get it, go to www.medscape.com and sign up. It's free. When you do, tell 'em you're a physician to get the non-dumbed down version of the newsletter. I get the Endocrinology and Family Medicine version every week. It's extremely useful for tracking the latest in medical research, though if you read it for a while, you'll soon realize how much of that research is badly designed and poorly analyzed. -- Jenny 168.5/137 Low Carb 9/1998 - 8/2001 and 11/10/02 - Now http://www.geocities.com/jenny_the_bean How to calculate your need for protein * How much people really lose each month * Water Weight Gain & Loss * The "Two Gram Cure" for Hunger Cravings * Characteristics of Successful Dieters * Indispensible Low Carb Treats * Should You Count that Low Impact Carb? * Curing Ketobreath * Exercise Starting from Zero * NEW! Do Starch Blockers Work? "Jake" wrote in message ... Bob Morrell 197/164/160 Great points, Bob, and even better numbers in your sig. Sounds like your doing real good. One thing I wish I could see was the actual study itself- not just articles written about it. There are so many factors to a scientific study that it's difficult to take any article at face value without actually seeing what the control points were. Jake -- My favorite animal is steak.--Fran Lebowitz |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Harvard study/CNN article
On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 10:13:10 -0400, Jenny wrote:
Jake, The actual study will probably appear in this week's Medscape newsletter. To get it, go to www.medscape.com and sign up. It's free. When you do, tell 'em you're a physician to get the non-dumbed down version of the newsletter. I get the Endocrinology and Family Medicine version every week. It's extremely useful for tracking the latest in medical research, though if you read it for a while, you'll soon realize how much of that research is badly designed and poorly analyzed. -- Jenny 168.5/137 Low Carb 9/1998 - 8/2001 and 11/10/02 - Now http://www.geocities.com/jenny_the_bean How to calculate your need for protein * How much people really lose each month * Water Weight Gain & Loss * The "Two Gram Cure" for Hunger Cravings * Characteristics of Successful Dieters * Indispensible Low Carb Treats * Should You Count that Low Impact Carb? * Curing Ketobreath * Exercise Starting from Zero * NEW! Do Starch Blockers Work? "Jake" wrote in message ... Bob Morrell 197/164/160 Great points, Bob, and even better numbers in your sig. Sounds like your doing real good. One thing I wish I could see was the actual study itself- not just articles written about it. There are so many factors to a scientific study that it's difficult to take any article at face value without actually seeing what the control points were. Jake -- My favorite animal is steak.--Fran Lebowitz Thanks! Jake -- My favorite animal is steak.--Fran Lebowitz |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Diet Linked To Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma | pearl | General Discussion | 166 | April 11th, 2004 10:29 AM |
Now Harvard study backs up Atkins diet | Diarmid Logan | General Discussion | 84 | November 16th, 2003 11:31 PM |
Now Harvard study backs up Atkins diet | Diarmid Logan | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 79 | November 16th, 2003 11:31 PM |
Harvard study -- clearing the air | Patricia Heil | General Discussion | 3 | October 24th, 2003 08:50 PM |
Low-Carb Dieters Eat More Calories But... ---article about Low carb | ronit | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 6 | October 16th, 2003 10:29 AM |