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
|
|||
|
|||
Why Bad Diets Are Bad?
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Why Bad Diets Are Bad?
On Aug 12, 8:00*pm, Who_me? wrote:
On 12/08/11 12:44 AM, wrote: On Aug 11, 4:43 am, *wrote: On 11/08/11 1:01 AM, Billy wrote: In , * * *wrote: On 10/08/11 2:02 PM, swaggy wrote: Bad diets may be effective for weight loss in the short term because you will lose some extra fluid as well as some fat. However, the weight loss is usually temporary because you re going to return to your old eating habits when you go off the diet. In a few weeks, your weight will be right back where it was before the diet. There are no such things as bad diets, there are only bad dieters. All diets that reduce calories work, though some are less healthy than others, but they work. Wrong. Right. Anything that you do that reduces your total calorie count, be it simply reducing calories or increasing calories burned, will reduce weight. Good Calories, Bad Calories: Fats, Carbs, and the Controversial Science of Diet and Health (Vintage) by Gary Taubes Not interested, as everyone has their version of what is good or bad. I like a low carb (not ludicrously unhealthy like Atkins) diet, but that does not mean that others have to agree with me. What exactly is supposed to be ludicrously unhealthy about the Atkins diet? * You say you eat high fat, so clearly that isn't what you've got your shorts in a knot about. It goes to ludicrous extremes, Ketosis is not necessary. On Atkins you lose energy, both strength and endurance. Ask around any gym for the opinions of those who have tried it. You can eat low carb without those side effects. I don't have to ask around. I know I feel fine and have lots of energy doing Atkins. In fact, I feel better than I do when eating a typical diet high in carbs which is what makes me feel tired and sluggish. Some people may be able to do LC and have success without starting out at 20g a day. But many others will not and Atkins has been proven to work for many people. It's worked for me and many others here over the years. My shorts are not knotted, I am simply a realist. Did you ever even do Atkins or just rely on heresay? I'd venture to say that most people claiming to do Atkins are not actually following the plan. So, I would not put much credence in casual comments from people claiming to do Atkins without finding out exactly what they are actually doing. I also eat high fat - it is nonsense that consumed fat (calorie count aside) puts on more body fat than any other form of calorific intake. I am the same weight as when I was a very fit surfer in my late teens. I wear the same size clothes and can still run a marathon in very close to the same time - and I am now in my fifties.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - You think just maybe genetics plays a role in that? No, else my parents and siblings would not be fat - and they are FAT. You have neither the exact genes of either parent, nor of your siblings. For genes to play a role in obesity, the fact that you are not obese while apparently everyone else in your immediate family is, proves nothing. It's widely accepted that genes do play a significant role in obesity. And again, it's incorrect for you to assume that because something works or doesn't work for you, that means everyone else has the same metabolism and their body functions exactly the same. I put weight on briefly in the eighties when I was in a relationship with a girl who loved high carb foods and fanatically avoided all fats. The weight came on quickly, and when I realised what had caused it and went back to the high protein, high fat diet that I had previously favoured I lost it just as quickly. I developed a diet that has kept me fit for decades, and recently I have seen that it is very similar to the much vaunted Dr Dukan's diet. Strange thing that.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - And of course there are other "realists" who would just as quickly slam what you're doing too for so called "common sense" reasons just like you're doing with Atkins. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Why Bad Diets Are Bad?
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Why Bad Diets Are Bad?
On Sat, 13 Aug 2011 23:43:41 +1000, Who_me?
wrote: I'd venture to say that most people claiming to do Atkins are not actually following the plan. So, I would not put much credence in casual comments from people claiming to do Atkins without finding out exactly what they are actually doing. Nothing casual about my comments, I have tried Atkins, exactly as Atkins taught and it was not a good diet. Didn't I just read, from you: "There are no such things as bad diets, there are only bad dieters." ? I went from Atkins to increased carbs, basically cutting all processed carbs but not cutting back on carbs from fresh food, even high carb fruit and vegetables. That worked - I have energy and I maintain a very low body fat percentage. This right here shows you did *not* do Atkins as written. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Why Bad Diets Are Bad?
On Aug 13, 9:43*am, Who_me? wrote:
On 13/08/11 10:08 PM, wrote: On Aug 12, 8:00 pm, *wrote: On 12/08/11 12:44 AM, wrote: On Aug 11, 4:43 am, * *wrote: On 11/08/11 1:01 AM, Billy wrote: In , * * * * *wrote: On 10/08/11 2:02 PM, swaggy wrote: Bad diets may be effective for weight loss in the short term because you will lose some extra fluid as well as some fat. However, the weight loss is usually temporary because you re going to return to your old eating habits when you go off the diet. In a few weeks, your weight will be right back where it was before the diet. There are no such things as bad diets, there are only bad dieters. All diets that reduce calories work, though some are less healthy than others, but they work. Wrong. Right. Anything that you do that reduces your total calorie count, be it simply reducing calories or increasing calories burned, will reduce weight. Good Calories, Bad Calories: Fats, Carbs, and the Controversial Science of Diet and Health (Vintage) by Gary Taubes Not interested, as everyone has their version of what is good or bad.. I like a low carb (not ludicrously unhealthy like Atkins) diet, but that does not mean that others have to agree with me. What exactly is supposed to be ludicrously unhealthy about the Atkins diet? * You say you eat high fat, so clearly that isn't what you've got your shorts in a knot about. It goes to ludicrous extremes, Ketosis is not necessary. On Atkins you lose energy, both strength and endurance. Ask around any gym for the opinions of those who have tried it. You can eat low carb without those side effects. I don't have to ask around. *I know I feel fine and have lots of energy doing Atkins. *In fact, I feel better than I do when eating * a typical diet high in carbs which is what makes me feel tired and sluggish. *Some people may be able to do LC and * have success without starting out at 20g a day. *But many others will not and Atkins has been proven to work for many people. *It's worked *for me and many others here over the years. My shorts are not knotted, I am simply a realist. Did you ever even do Atkins or just rely on heresay? I tried Atkins for several months - I lost strength, endurance and muscle mass from the start, as soon as ketosis started, but I persevered. I was constantly tired during workouts and so have most other people reported who in my experience have tried Atkins and are involved in sports or are gym regulars. There have been many similar reports here over the years and even Atkins himself admitted that his diet was not ideal for someone who had a career, sport or hobby that imposed a high regular demand for energy. Why do you think that athletes "carb up" before competition? Let's assume Atkins, at least when starting out and at the lowest level of carbs, is not a good diet for those involved in sports or endurance activities. The claim you made was that the Atkins diet is "ludicrously unhealthy", with no qualifiers. Neither I nor most of the folks here or in the world at large are doing endurance excercise. I'm telling you that from my personal experience it works fine. I have more energy when on Atkins than I do eating a typical diet, even when at induction level of carbs. There have also been studies done over the years that show that it works as well as or better than other diets and that those on it have no apparent ill effects. In fact, their blood pressure, lipid levels, etc are usually better than those on other diets. I'd venture to say that most people claiming to do Atkins are not actually following the plan. *So, I would not put much credence in casual comments from people claiming to do Atkins without finding out exactly what they are actually doing. Nothing casual about my comments, I have tried Atkins, exactly as Atkins taught and it was not a good diet. I went from Atkins to increased carbs, basically cutting all processed carbs but not cutting back on carbs from fresh food, even high carb fruit and vegetables. That worked - I have energy and I maintain a very low body fat percentage. The above would suggest that you don't know what Atkins is about, because on Atkins you also go to increased carbs. That is the very essence of the plan. Depending on your metabolism you could be as high as 100g a day of carbs in Atkins maintenance. I use an oximeter and I have tested the blood oxygen levels of people in ketosis and they drop back four or five percent over those who have the minimum necessary amount of carbohydrate in their diet. The minimum necessary amount of carbs is probably close to zero or people like the Intuit would not be surviving. BTW, I would suspect their energy expeditures rival those of you gym buddies. The first thing that happens when you become fatigued when working out is your blood oxygen level drops - insufficient oxygen to meet muscle demand. People in Ketosis start exercise the way fit people finish exercise. How do you even know those people were in Ketosis? Or that they were really doing Atkins correctly? Were they all just starting Atkins and at 20g a day, or had some of them reached maintenance? I also eat high fat - it is nonsense that consumed fat (calorie count aside) puts on more body fat than any other form of calorific intake. I am the same weight as when I was a very fit surfer in my late teens. I wear the same size clothes and can still run a marathon in very close to the same time - and I am now in my fifties.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - You think just maybe genetics plays a role in that? No, else my parents and siblings would not be fat - and they are FAT. You have neither the exact genes of either parent, nor of your siblings. * For genes to play a role in obesity, the fact that you are not obese while apparently everyone else in your immediate family is, proves nothing. *It's widely accepted that genes do play a significant role in obesity. Ah, I see, you are one of those people who twists and turns in discussion.. You suggested that genes had something to with my fitness - by implication genetic traits. No, even identical twins do not have "exactly" the same genes, but traits within families are normal. I can easily gain weight if I allow myself to be indulgent, there is no magical gene in my makeup that stops me from gaining weight. If I am preparing for a marathon I can gain ten pounds in a very short time as I increase carbs in preparation. I lose it very quickly, a lot during the run, the rest with a week or so afterward. I don't see anything I suggested as twisting and turning. You are implying that what works for you should work for everyone. That everyone can just as easily lose weight or stay at a desirable weight. That genetics cannot make it a lot harder for some of us to either lose weight or keep it off. If you opened your eyes, it would not be hard to see that is not the case. I've known people who could eat most anything, not excercise beyond normal typical daily routines, and stay thin. If I ate what they ate, I put on weight. And again, it's incorrect for you to assume that because * something works or doesn't work for you, that means * everyone else has the same metabolism and their body functions exactly the same. I will assume that if the majority of people do exactly as I do, eat what I eat, and exercise as I exercise they will end up at a fitness level close to mine. What works for the majority doesn't mean too much, does it? That still could leave say 40% who it doesn't work for because their bodies aren't built or don't work like yours. I have done this several times, with various friends and with girls with whom I have had a relationship. I have also experienced many, many years of your sort of "it aint't my fault, it is my genes etc." from overweight people when explaining their failure to be fit and healthy. You apparently don't realize that their is plenty of mdeical evidence that says genetics do play an important role in obesity. So, instead of looking down at those people as failures in willpower, maybe you should do some reading. I suspect that won't be happening though, because it was already suggested to you that a good place to start is the work by Gary Taubes, to which you replied: "Not interested, as everyone has their version of what is good or bad. " Which explains a lot. Metabolism is not fixed, it is the body's response to the demands made on it and the amount an type of food available to it. With very few exceptions if you have a slow metabolism it is because you are physically lazy. According to you. Medical research would suggest otherwise. I put weight on briefly in the eighties when I was in a relationship with a girl who loved high carb foods and fanatically avoided all fats. The weight came on quickly, and when I realised what had caused it and went back to the high protein, high fat diet that I had previously favoured I lost it just as quickly. I developed a diet that has kept me fit for decades, and recently I have seen that it is very similar to the much vaunted Dr Dukan's diet. Strange thing that.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - And of course there are other "realists" who would just as quickly slam what you're doing too for so called "common sense" reasons * just like you're doing with Atkins. Not many seem to slam things that actually work without side effects. Again, it's you who is claiming there are side effects to Atkins. I've seen no negative side effects and I actually do it. Nor for the most part, have I seen negative effects here in the newsgroup over the last 10 years from others that are doing it. Yet I see Atkins slammed by you and the media. Look at the current world wide response to the Dukan diet. Even if they do it is little skin off my nose. I work in an area where I have input into diet and training for a small number of people - they are the only ones who concern me. They do not slam their new lifestyle. Folks here mostly don't slam Atkins either, but you did. Some overweight people will segue from diet to diet always looking for a magic bullet. They will remain fat. The only magic bullet is willpower and consistency.- Hide quoted text - There you go again. Up on your high horse denying that genetics plays a role. You claim anyone who can't lose weight easily or remain trim like you as simply having a willpower problem. While you think the Atkins diet is ludicrous, it in fact is not and was designed to directly address a big part of that problem. It's the only diet I know of where it drastically curbs your appetite from the start. That is one of the purposes of getting into ketosis. Now, which diet do you think is going to be easier for people to stay with? One where you feel hungry all the time or one where you don't? And what makes the Atkins diet ludicrous for the people who choose to do it and for whom it works? Let's not hear more about endurance athletes, because clearly that's not 99% of those doing Atkins. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Why Bad Diets Are Bad?
On 14/08/11 3:21 AM, BlueBrooke wrote:
On Sat, 13 Aug 2011 23:43:41 +1000, wrote: I'd venture to say that most people claiming to do Atkins are not actually following the plan. So, I would not put much credence in casual comments from people claiming to do Atkins without finding out exactly what they are actually doing. Nothing casual about my comments, I have tried Atkins, exactly as Atkins taught and it was not a good diet. Didn't I just read, from you: "There are no such things as bad diets, there are only bad dieters." ? From the point of view of losing weight, yes. I also noted at the same time that some diets are less healthy than others. Atkins like any diet that cuts calories, works. From a general health and fitness point of view it sucks. I went from Atkins to increased carbs, basically cutting all processed carbs but not cutting back on carbs from fresh food, even high carb fruit and vegetables. That worked - I have energy and I maintain a very low body fat percentage. This right here shows you did *not* do Atkins as written. Er, um - Bull****. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Why Bad Diets Are Bad?
On Aug 13, 8:26*pm, Who_me? wrote:
On 14/08/11 3:21 AM, BlueBrooke wrote: On Sat, 13 Aug 2011 23:43:41 +1000, wrote: I'd venture to say that most people claiming to do Atkins are not actually following the plan. *So, I would not put much credence in casual comments from people claiming to do Atkins without finding out exactly what they are actually doing. Nothing casual about my comments, I have tried Atkins, exactly as Atkins taught and it was not a good diet. Didn't I just read, from you: *"There are no such things as bad diets, there are only bad dieters." *? *From the point of view of losing weight, yes. I also noted at the same time that some diets are less healthy than others. Atkins like any diet that cuts calories, works. From a general health and fitness point of view it sucks. I went from Atkins to increased carbs, basically cutting all processed carbs but not cutting back on carbs from fresh food, even high carb fruit and vegetables. That worked - I have energy and I maintain a very low body fat percentage. This right here shows you did *not* do Atkins as written. Er, um - Bull****. I'd say it,s you who is full of BS. You come in to a low carb newsgroup and proclaim that the Atkins diet, which is probably the most popluar and successful low carb diet, is "ludicroulsy unhealthy". Then you stated: " I developed a diet that has kept me fit for decades, and recently I have seen that it is very similar to the much vaunted Dr Dukan's diet. Strange thing that. " I've never heard of the Dukan diet before. Never seen it mentioned here by anyone that I can recall in over 10 years in this low carb group. . So, unlike you, who rejected a suggestion to take a look at some of Gary Taubes work, I decided to take a look at what the Dukan diet entails: "http://www.dukandiet.com/The-Dukan-Diet/4-Phases Phase 1 - ATTACK The Attack phase consists of pure protein and creates a kick-start to the diet. During this phase, you can eat 68 high-protein foods that produce immediate and noticeable weight loss." You claimed the Atkins diet was unhealthy because it produced ketosis. What the hell do you think the above will produce? "Phase 2 - CRUISE The Cruise phase adds 32 vegetables and will take you to your True Weight. You will gradually but steadily lose weight by alternating Pure Protein days and Protein + Vegetables days. The average length of this phase is based on a schedule of 3 days for each pound you want to lose. Phase 3 - CONSOLIDATION During this time you are at your most vulnerable, as the body has a tendency to quickly regain lost pounds. The Consolidation Phase is designed to prevent the rebound effect by gradually returning previously forbidden foods and allowing for two “celebration" meals per week. Phase 4 - PERMANENT STABILIZATION This phase is the rest of your life! You have learned how to eat healthily in the previous phases and have developed a pattern to follow." Sounds like another guy with a plan similar to Atkins. In fact, it's MORE radical than Atkins, as it starts out at zero carbs. Then, like Atkins, it introduces more vegetable in the next phase, increasing the carb level. Yet you have the nerve to call the Atkins plan "ludicroulsy unhealthy". And you say you believe fat is good, even beneficial, yet you endorse this guys diet that is pure protein at the start. In short, I think you're just plain clueless and don't know what you're talking about. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Why Bad Diets Are Bad?
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Why Bad Diets Are Bad?
On Sun, 14 Aug 2011 10:26:07 +1000, Who_me?
wrote: On 14/08/11 3:21 AM, BlueBrooke wrote: On Sat, 13 Aug 2011 23:43:41 +1000, wrote: I'd venture to say that most people claiming to do Atkins are not actually following the plan. So, I would not put much credence in casual comments from people claiming to do Atkins without finding out exactly what they are actually doing. Nothing casual about my comments, I have tried Atkins, exactly as Atkins taught and it was not a good diet. Didn't I just read, from you: "There are no such things as bad diets, there are only bad dieters." ? From the point of view of losing weight, yes. I also noted at the same time that some diets are less healthy than others. Atkins like any diet that cuts calories, works. From a general health and fitness point of view it sucks. I went from Atkins to increased carbs, basically cutting all processed carbs but not cutting back on carbs from fresh food, even high carb fruit and vegetables. That worked - I have energy and I maintain a very low body fat percentage. This right here shows you did *not* do Atkins as written. Er, um - Bull****. Your post implies that fresh foods, including high carb fruit and vegetables, are not allowed on Atkins. This statement is untrue. So, either you didn't bother to actually get the books, or read the website, but instead relied on rumor and innuendo, or you never made it past Induction and/or OWL. This is not doing Atkins "exactly as Atkins taught." Ongoing Weight Loss (OWL): There are . . . two key distinctions between the first [Induction] and second [OWL] phases of Atkins: the slightly broader array of healthful acceptable foods in OWL and the gradual increase in overall carb intake. These foods include nuts and seeds (which you may already be eating if you spent more than two weeks in Induction), berries and a few other relatively low-carb fruits, a wider array of dairy products, a few vegetable juices and legumes such as lentils and kidney beans. Still, despite eating more carbs and gradually introducing a greater variety of them, it’s best to regard these two changes as baby steps. Perhaps the biggest mistake you can make when you move from Induction to OWL is to regard the transition as dramatic. http://www.atkins.com/Program/Phase2...ivesofOWL.aspx Carboyhydrate Level for Losing (CLL): There is a tremendous range of carbohydrate tolerances. A high one could mean a CLL of 60 to 80 grams or even more. Still others find that they can’t move much beyond the 25 grams of Net Carbs that initiate OWL. If you’re losing less than a pound a week on average, you’re probably close to your CLL and should not increase your carb intake. If your weight loss rate picks up, you may be able to raise your carb intake slightly. Your CLL is influenced by your age, gender, level of physical activity, hormonal issues, medications you may be taking and other factors such as whether you’ve repeatedly lost and regained weight. Again, younger people and men tend to have an advantage. Increasing your activity level or exercise program may or may not raise it. No matter what your tolerance for carbs, however, it’s perfectly normal to lose in fits and starts. The scale isn’t a perfect tool to measure the positive changes you’re experiencing, which is why we recommend weight averaging. http://www.atkins.com/Program/Phase2...ngYourCLL.aspx Pre-Maintenance: In Pre-Maintenance, you’ll have the opportunity to reintroduce the whole foods carbohydrates that have been off-limits until now. They appear on the top three rungs of the Carb Ladder: fruit higher in carbs, starchy vegetables and whole grains. Some people can eat all these foods; others can eat only some, eat only in small portions or eat them only rarely. Others find they do best when they simply stay away from higher-carb foods that might cause weight regain or make it difficult to stay in control. In Phase 3, you’ll learn what works—and what doesn’t work—for you. http://www.atkins.com/Program/Phase3...intenance.aspx |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Why Bad Diets Are Bad?
Who_me? wrote:
The high incidence of kidney problems alone among those who rigidly adhere to Atkins should be enough to warn most people off. I considered a larger point by point reply but the above is all that really needs to be addressed. There are a handfull of signs that someone is here just to troll. One is confusing the ketosis of a successful hunter with the ketoacidosis of a diabetic. One is lying about Dr Atkins being overweight when he slipped on the ice and broke his skull. One is mention of kidney problems. One is competitive body builders or marathoners complaining that a plan that is explicitly not for them is somehow flawed because it's beneficial for the other 99% of the population because they think what works for 1% must be good for the other 99%. In the 1970s when the Atkins plan well new the AMA went after him about kidney damage. His defense was simple - Show even one single case of new kidney damage by a person who did not have previous kidney damage who followed the directions in his books. Three decades later Dr Atkins slipped on the ice walking to work, at a weight that was arguably somewhere between ideal or a bit below ideal for his height and build, broke his skull, and died as a result of brain damage from that fall. He died with his medical license current because the AMA never did come up with a single case. Not one single case in three decades. Your claim of kidney problems is nonsense. So I call BS on you two ways. Falsehoods about kidneys. Irrelevancies about competitive body builders. In fact plenty of competitive body builders use a cycle process of 5-12 days of lower carb than the Atkins process would have them at and 2 days of reversed low fat low carb. The very low carb because it reduces body fat without muscle mass loss and because it keeps water retention low. The very low fat high carb because it promotes new muscle mass growth at the price of water retention. Some low carb fans use cycles because cycles work. Some low carb fans disapprove of cycles because cycles trigger massive carb cravings for many. The intensity of carb cravings varies widely and that explains the differing views. I take it most competitive body builders have very weak carb cravings. My sample space is small - The one competitive body builder who cycled like that reported no carb cravings during his low carb weeks. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
diets | sweet&soft | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 0 | May 13th, 2008 03:26 PM |
Index of Popular Diets and Niche Diets | cj | General Discussion | 0 | April 13th, 2008 04:13 AM |
Very-low-fat diets are superior to low-carbohydrate diets (***sigh!***) | Roger Zoul | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 7 | March 23rd, 2006 12:00 PM |
Low Carb Diets Really Low Calorie Diets | John WIlliams | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 27 | October 7th, 2004 10:19 PM |
Low Carb Diets Really Low Calorie Diets | John WIlliams | General Discussion | 24 | October 7th, 2004 04:03 PM |