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 |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Atkins = ? (should i start this again?)
"Steven C (Doktersteve)" wrote in message news:mKzrb.10339$jy.4609@clgrps13... "revek" wrote in message ... "Patricia Heil" wrote in message ... I recently posted here that one of my concerns with Atkins is that 68% of those who tried it, in one clinical study, wound up constipated. And how long was this study? Did they ever get past the first phase? That is kind of important, as you move past induction, which is supposed to last 2 weeks only, you are supposed to begin eating more vegetables, and less of other things. Two weeks is not long enough to give you long term problems, and any study that focuses on the begining stage as if it is the whole diet is worthless as a source of information. and i have read that some people's initial phase lasts longer based on how much they want or need to loose. Is that true? They may base it on those criteria, but if they did, they would be doing Atkins incorrectly. Induction is more than just limiting yourself to 20 carbs per day, it's also restricting certain foods known to cause problems in some people. (The induction phase is the first part of an elimination diet to help find food allergies and food triggers-- the things that make you binge, as well as 'kick starting' weight loss for motivational purposes). It's also about teaching people who don't eat healthy or know much about portion control or how to listen to their bodies (or they wouldn't have gotten fat, in most cases) almost effortlessly. Once past induction, you may stay at 20 grams if you feel comfortable there but you stop eating from the restricted induction list only. Staying on the induction food list or restricting your carbs to induction levels instead of some other number in no way helps you lose faster or any more, even though many people assume it does. That is bad for long term health. Removing fiber from the diet demonstrably leads to colo-rectal cancer, the third leading cancer killer behind lung cancer and prostate cancer, and therefore the #2 preventable killer cancer. that is a very good point. i am sure that a proponent of the diet could bring up something to debate you on this, but i havent seen anything of that sort yet. Atkins goes out of it's way to insist on lots of fiber-- and in the two week beiginning phase if you do not eat enough fiberous vegetables, you are supposed to ease the *temporary* situation with fiber supplements. So does that prevent the above? Studies suggest that fiber helps reduce the occurence of colon-rectal cancer. If Atkins done correctly means lots of fiber, then that would suggest that Atkins could be a viable strategy against colon-rectal cancer. Studies also suggest that glucose is cancer's best friend. Sugars and starches convert to glucose. Reducing as much as possible sugars and starches, while increasing fiber and vitamins through high nutrient vegetables (ala Akins) would seem to be a sensible thing to do, if you worry about such things. Fat and protien also have their debatable points. But since that covers all the calorie sources available to humans, we'll just have to make do with what we have. revek (nothing is all black or all white in the world of nutrition.... except transfats LOL) --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.536 / Virus Database: 331 - Release Date: 11/3/2003 |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Atkins = ? (should i start this again?)
Couldn't he just remove the refined carbs in his diet and slowly back
into it since the actual induction period is way to hard on him?? |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Atkins = ? (should i start this again?)
"Steven C (Doktersteve)" wrote in message news:ONzrb.10340$jy.4331@clgrps13... "JC Der Koenig" wrote in message ... Look at your BMI. At 5'6" and 190, you are over 30, which is categorized as obese. And if he is at 12% bodyfat? Still obese? Idiot. Like I said, I do not have a ton of excess flab, and alot of it is muscle. so I don't put alot into what a persons BMI index is unless they are really noticeably fat. I don't have a double chin, and my arms, legs, and neck look slim. the weight I want to loose is around my stomach and sides, to give you an idea. I'm the one that wrote that you're probably NOT obese. Low carbing (not neccessarily Atkins) is a proven winner in dropping bodyfat% if you engage in a consistent exercise program. Lifting heavy things would be preferred over cardio stuff. If you feel that you must do cardio, look into HIIT. |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Atkins = ? (should i start this again?)
In article , Wayne S. Hill wrote:
Vegetarian wrote: JC Der Koenig wrote: Look at your BMI. At 5'6" and 190, you are over 30, which is categorized as obese. And if he is at 12% bodyfat? Still obese? Idiot. I highly doubt that having this pile of useless, worthless muscles is doing anything good for his health. Having a BMI of 32 is bad. Being fat at BMI 32 is horrible, being muscular at BMI 32 is not that great either. References? Can you point to any peer-reviewed studies that indicate that "excess" muscle mass raises health risk? BMI is used as a simple-minded proxy for BF% because, As I've already pointed out, it's actually a proxy for mortality, or at least that's where the concept originated. in the broad cross-section of society, people with high BMI have high BF. It is an unwarranted leap to conclude that high BMI with low BF% causes health risk. There are two big leaps in here. One is the assumption that a link between mortality and BMI exists independent of BF%, the other is that such a link is causal. Cheers, -- Donovan Rebbechi http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/ |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Atkins = ? (should i start this again?)
"Steven C \(Doktersteve\)" wrote in
news:Wbhrb.6788$jy.3697@clgrps13: Oh man... here I am again considering trying the Atkins diet. Also consider the one known as "the caveman diet". The gist of them both is to get your body burning protein for energy instead of carbohydrates. Protein produces energy more slowly so less of it gets stored as fat. Once your metabolism is adjusted you can then start eating carbohydrates again, so long as you don't go overboard and switch back to a carbohydreate- based metabolism. With any diet that has an author behind it, don't try to follow the exact plan laid out by the author. Everyone is different. If someone related to the author stands to gain from your diet, or if someone has built a business around the diet plan, look for the core wisdom of the diet and apply it your own way - don't buy the author's friend's products. Can I drink diet soda while on Atkins? For some reason, Atkins himself seems to act as if aspartame is the devil, and will impede your weight loss. I don't know about impeding weight loss, but aspartame is suspect anyway. Some people become severely addicted to it, and it can cause insulin-related problems. Left-handed sugars trick your body into thinking it's about to get a load of glucose, and then it fails to deliver. You end up with tired insulin producers and extra insulin floating around with nothing to do. This is a bad thing. If you find yourself drinking too much diet pop or putting 30 packets of Sweet'n'Low on your yogurt, you're probably addicted to aspartame. How much back to "normal" (breads and other carbs) will I get back to after I have lost my initial weight? I have a goal to have flat abs, to be honest, as well as feel more energetic and the like. I can't really say, but I'll share my experience with the Atkins/Caveman diet. I'm a bit on the large side - probably about 50 pounds over my ideal weight, and it's all blubber. My lifestyle doesn't allow me much time for exercise and I'm not willing to change that. As for other diets, they don't work for me; I won't eat things with left-handed sugars in because I think it's unhealty. I also generally don't like the taste of "diet" foods, and caloric reduction doesn't work anyway. I actually don't eat too much - I just eat the wrong things. I first tried eating high protein/low carb earlier this year. I tried it for one month. I lost about ten pounds and it stayed off for about six months after I returned to my normal diet. This is the biggest success I have ever had, and I intend to give it a better, longer try again soon. I had trouble sticking to it for a few reasons. One is that I'm a lousy cook and I re-introduced the no-no foods just to get some variety back. Another is that had cravings for favorite foods like bread and potatos. They weren't bad cravings - nothing like being on a caloric reduction diet - but I gave in because of the third reason: I'm lazy. Cooking a good meal is a lot of work compared to slapping a sandwich together. I guess I need to hire a cook. One other thing about meat - yes, it's expensive, so spend a little more and get the best. Look for the healthiest meat - free-range chicken, organ-free ground beef etc. I eat a lot of ground beef, and I have to say I've noticed that the organ-free beef tastes better. Up with cow and chicken! Good luck! |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Atkins = ? (should i start this again?)
"JC Der Koenig" wrote in message m... "Steven C (Doktersteve)" wrote in message news:ONzrb.10340$jy.4331@clgrps13... "JC Der Koenig" wrote in message ... Look at your BMI. At 5'6" and 190, you are over 30, which is categorized as obese. And if he is at 12% bodyfat? Still obese? Idiot. Like I said, I do not have a ton of excess flab, and alot of it is muscle. so I don't put alot into what a persons BMI index is unless they are really noticeably fat. I don't have a double chin, and my arms, legs, and neck look slim. the weight I want to loose is around my stomach and sides, to give you an idea. I'm the one that wrote that you're probably NOT obese. Low carbing (not neccessarily Atkins) is a proven winner in dropping bodyfat% if you engage in a consistent exercise program. Lifting heavy things would be preferred over cardio stuff. If you feel that you must do cardio, look into HIIT. Sorry, I didn't meant to sound combative. I appreciate what you said. I can work out, do weights. That isn't a problem. I have noticed in the past that my muscles react very well to a workout, and within a few weeks I see a difference, the problem was before that I had tried a low fat low calorie diet, with LOTS of cardio, which left me constantly hungry and needing more and more cardio to keep up with any sort of weight loss. I believe that muscle burns fat, and that gaining a reasonable amount of well toned muscle will eventually speed up metabolism to a certain degree (I am not being unrealistic though, I have a medium paced metabolism), and that in time I can kick some of this fat off. I have a question. In the first phase of Atkins, you are stuck at less than 30 grams of carbs a day. A low carb diet is what the Suzanne sommers diet is based around, and I hear it really works, so how many carbs is "low carb". Obviously you want to cut out the empty carbs like glucose-fructose and white sugars, and replace them with complete complex sugars, but how many carbs do you cut out? Thanks for the reply to this thread btw. you are being helpful, while so many are just being goofy. |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
Atkins = ? (should i start this again?)
"revek" wrote in message ... "Steven C (Doktersteve)" wrote in message news:mKzrb.10339$jy.4609@clgrps13... "revek" wrote in message ... "Patricia Heil" wrote in message ... I recently posted here that one of my concerns with Atkins is that 68% of those who tried it, in one clinical study, wound up constipated. And how long was this study? Did they ever get past the first phase? That is kind of important, as you move past induction, which is supposed to last 2 weeks only, you are supposed to begin eating more vegetables, and less of other things. Two weeks is not long enough to give you long term problems, and any study that focuses on the begining stage as if it is the whole diet is worthless as a source of information. and i have read that some people's initial phase lasts longer based on how much they want or need to loose. Is that true? They may base it on those criteria, but if they did, they would be doing Atkins incorrectly. Induction is more than just limiting yourself to 20 carbs per day, it's also restricting certain foods known to cause problems in some people. (The induction phase is the first part of an elimination diet to help find food allergies and food triggers-- the things that make you binge, as well as 'kick starting' weight loss for motivational purposes). It's also about teaching people who don't eat healthy or know much about portion control or how to listen to their bodies (or they wouldn't have gotten fat, in most cases) almost effortlessly. Once past induction, you may stay at 20 grams if you feel comfortable there but you stop eating from the restricted induction list only. Staying on the induction food list or restricting your carbs to induction levels instead of some other number in no way helps you lose faster or any more, even though many people assume it does. That is bad for long term health. Removing fiber from the diet demonstrably leads to colo-rectal cancer, the third leading cancer killer behind lung cancer and prostate cancer, and therefore the #2 preventable killer cancer. that is a very good point. i am sure that a proponent of the diet could bring up something to debate you on this, but i havent seen anything of that sort yet. Atkins goes out of it's way to insist on lots of fiber-- and in the two week beiginning phase if you do not eat enough fiberous vegetables, you are supposed to ease the *temporary* situation with fiber supplements. So does that prevent the above? Studies suggest that fiber helps reduce the occurence of colon-rectal cancer. If Atkins done correctly means lots of fiber, then that would suggest that Atkins could be a viable strategy against colon-rectal cancer. Studies also suggest that glucose is cancer's best friend. Sugars and starches convert to glucose. Reducing as much as possible sugars and starches, while increasing fiber and vitamins through high nutrient vegetables (ala Akins) would seem to be a sensible thing to do, if you worry about such things. Fat and protien also have their debatable points. But since that covers all the calorie sources available to humans, we'll just have to make do with what we have. revek (nothing is all black or all white in the world of nutrition.... except transfats LOL) Awesome. Thank you! I am getting alot out of this. One of the things is that I may not have to cut out ALL carbs, just the white fours, white sugars, glucose/fructose, and then be careful of what I eat. Atkins sounds ideal, and I know that even on Atkins you need to exercise (lots of people think that Atkins is just some magical diet idea, and it isn't), however I don't like the idea of no carbs, based on how I felt before. I may give it another shot, but them more I read about entering ketosis, the more it seems as if its a hard change on the body. I will give it some more thought based on what I read on the net and in this thread. IF I do go on Atkins again, I will do it right, and follow it pretty much exactly. |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
Atkins = ? (should i start this again?)
|
#39
|
|||
|
|||
Atkins = ? (should i start this again?)
"Qilt Kitty" wrote in message ... Couldn't he just remove the refined carbs in his diet and slowly back into it since the actual induction period is way to hard on him?? Yeah, that is what I am starting to read from this thread. As I said, the induction phase was hard on my PHYSICALLY. some people claim that its a lack of discipline that keeps many away, but for me it was "I think I am going to pass out, my hands are shaking" sort of problem. |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
Atkins = ? (should i start this again?)
revek wrote:
"JC Der Koenig" wrote in message m... Gay as in happy. Try to think outside the box you've built for yourself. Also gay as in extremely lame, as the teenagers in this part of the country use the term. Language mutates. language is a virus from outer space. -- william s. burroughs |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AIDS, Anthrax, Atkins: The Scarlett A's.. Eat Carbs Stay Alive. | Steve Randy Shilts Bayt | General Discussion | 7 | June 25th, 2004 09:24 PM |
AIDS, Anthrax, Atkins: The Scarlett A's.. Eat Carbs Stay Alive. | Steve Randy Shilts Bayt | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 10 | June 25th, 2004 09:24 PM |
You want PROOF - Here's Quackery Proof. | marengo | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 173 | April 17th, 2004 11:26 PM |
Dr. ATKINS IS A QUACK | Irv Finkleman | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 5 | March 31st, 2004 12:37 PM |
Atkins = ? (should i start this again?) | Steven C \(Doktersteve\) | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 98 | December 8th, 2003 04:27 PM |