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
|
|||
|
|||
Stanford researcher compares diets in real world conditions
On Jun 17, 5:34*pm, Doug Freyburger wrote:
wrote: Over the years I've provided numerous references here right out of Atkin's books, complete with page number that completely refute what Doug claims Atkins said. * I've asked him to do the same, to back up what he claims, but have yet to see a single one. * Now we know that's because Doug's musings and self collected and tabulated "data" trump anything Atkins wrote. *And he ends by accusing others of taking things out of context and wanting to believe their own conclusions? Note that Dr A never published or released any of his tabular data and now that he's dead there's no way to how long or even if he continued to maintain any tabular data. He did not discuss his data after journals refused to publish it. Folks take it on faith that he had any data at all or that his data was any better than than anecdotal tabulations I use. *Citations from his books are therefore matters of having faith in Dr A. They are assumptions that he's right in all cases most especially when a favored interpretation of his words is not the only one possible. Actually the statements I cited from his books were never meant to show he had data and I never claimed he had data beyond his clinical observations dealing with thousands of patients over decades. I posted some of his statements, complete with page numbers from his books, only to show that many times, what YOU claimed he said was untrue or that advice you were spewing was inconsistent with Atkins. You on the other hand have a hard time distinguishing between fact and opinion and never provide a reference at all. - There is no living evidence that Dr A's data was better than mine. *He never published or released it. *If you don't like my data or my conclusions quoting his books is an argument by appeal to authority where real data still aces any of it. *As usual a real study with real data wins not a quote from his book. *My attempts have always been to improve on people's interpretations of his statements or to build on his work. It gets even better. Now Doug actually thinks he's Atkins equal. It's not that I don't like your data. It's that what you think is data is just ruminations in your own mind. Do you really expect anyone to believe you sit around tabulating random anecdotal internet reports and manage to extract data from it? And even if that were possible, you are the last person I'd expect would do it fairly or objectively. When I started studying low carb it was because statements in his books do not match actual experience. *Also points in his books trigger confusion so I tracked how made what choice of meaning and how it worked. *His plan is so robust it usually works even without choing the right interpretation. *Pick any one ambiguous point and tracking posters shows that at points there's a choice that is more effective for more people than picking the most obvious choice. Here we go with the "tracking internet posters again." The statements in his books match my personal experience. Please add that to your "tracking data banks". My tabular data is more often about obvious interpretions that are incorrect. *Dr A used ketosis (which he really used to mean ketonuria) as synonymous with loss which is completely false if taken literally. Dr A also stated that adding carbs cut the loss rate which is also completely false if taken literally. This is new. At least now you acknowledge that Atkins stated that adding carbs cuts the weight loss rate. Should I take you back to all your old posts where you argued vehemently that he never stated that? *Taken together they can mean something - Take it that he meant going over CCLL by more carbs and the statements all work. *Yet folks quote his statements out of context like that quite often. *Yes, my tabular data does trump such quotes from his book. *For the simple reason that such quotes don't match actual results no matter how much folks want them to be. My tabular data does trump statements fished out of his books. *Yep. *I make no bones about that assertion. *And there's no data available to back up the statements in his book. *He never released any data. And it gets even better. Now Doug is superior to Atkins. For the record, I never quoted anything out of context. That's why I freely provide reference numbers to the page, so people can read it for themselves and see it in context. You on the other hand, just refer to your own "data". As for the above new twist that he meant weight loss only slows when adding more carbs over CCLL, that obviously makes no sense. That's because when you go over CCLL, your weight loss doesn't slow, by defintion it stops. Try reading the book. I'd also wager that decades of Dr Atkins clinical observation covering thousands of patients trumps your internet tabulations any day. But I must say, your post this time was truly priceless. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Stanford researcher compares diets in real world conditions
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Stanford researcher compares diets in real world conditions
On Jun 21, 5:35*pm, Doug Freyburger wrote:
wrote: That's why I freely provide reference numbers to the page, so people can read it for themselves and see it in context. * So we're at a point that we originally reached in, what, 2004 or so? No, we're way beyond that. Back then you weren't claiming yourself as being Dr Atkins equal. And you also were not claiming that your internet reading of people's posts here trump statements from Atkins books based on decades of medical experience with thousands of patients. I guess that frees you up to present just about anything as fact now, doesn't it? You quote the book and ignore reports that go against the book, in other words ignore data. And exactly what data would that be? As for ignoring reports, it was you in this thread who didn't bother to look at the video link to the study, but then proceeded to summarize and jump to conclusions. *And you think that makes you right and me wrong. It's not a situation that's changed in a lot of years and it's why I rarely reply to your points dismissing my efforts. *I tried replying to you a very long time ago and the result was you quoting the book and ignoring reports that go against the book. Yes, I've noticed you rarely reply and I think I know why. I provide links to pages in Atkins books to refute your claims of what you said he wrote. And you reply with zippo. You just did that in this thread, where you claimed that Atkins stated that weight loss slows down, but only in the context of it happening when you go over Critical Carb Level for Losing. Now anyone, even a newbie who has read the book, knows that's a total crock. The most obvious thing wrong is that it's impossible by definition. You determine CCLL by slowly adding carbs each week, having your weight loss slow, and CCLL is the point at which weight loss stops or reverses. So anyone can plainly see Atkins could not have meant what you claim he meant, which is that weight loss only slows down AFTER going over CCLL. It's just another example of you spinning and lieing. I can point you to pages in DANDR that completely refute this nonsense. Where are your page references? The book has errors. *You ignore that. *I don't. Errors don't explain your constant misquoting of Atkins as per above. *You quote the book at me in response. *That's cyclical. *Cyclical reasoning does not make you right any more than it does not make me wrong. Cyclical reasoning? Excuse me? You are wrong because what Atkins wrote is a fact, it's there in print and what you claim he wrote is untrue. Show us where he said that as you add carbs weight loss slows, but only after CCLL. A simple page reference will do. *And there's no way you'll ever budge on the point. *Every once in a while I try to engage you in conversation to see if that has changed. *It has not. Seems it's not just me that says you have a fertile imagination and invent things and present them as facts. Two other posters in this very thread said exactly that. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Stanford researcher compares diets in real world conditions
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Stanford researcher compares diets in real world conditions
On Jun 30, 11:15*am, Doug Freyburger wrote:
wrote: Yes, I've noticed you rarely reply and I think I know why. You ignore observation. * Funny, it was YOU who just gave a good demonstration of doing exactly that. You ignored playing the video about the study, which was central to this very thread before spouting off, drawing conclusions and making comments about it. You treat the Atkins book as an error free Bible. *You treat your own interprations of the book as Papal bulls. I'm always willing to discuss any errors that you claim are in the book. The way to do that would be for YOU to cite those errors. Just give us some page references, then we can all go read them, see exactly what Atkins said, as opposed to what YOU claim he said, which is frequently wrong. That's why I rarely respond to your citations from the book. You rarely respond to those citations because they are there in black and white and completely contradict what you claimed Atkins said. You make the bogus claim that I have taken things out of context, then just slink away because you have no cites to back up your made up crap. I provide not only the excerpts of the relevant Atkins statements direct from the book, but also the page numbers so anyone can go read them and see the context. You have yet to do that, which speaks volumes about who is full of crap here. *I also rarely respond to folks who quote scripture as if it were error free and they were the sole source of what it means. I observe and study. *Lacking the funding to conduct experiments I can't conduct all of the steps of the scientific method but I long ago learned that scripture references aren't a part of the method. Really? Atkins had many thousands of patients in his practice over many decades. How many do you have Doug? Right now, I personally don't know a single person doing Atkins. Over the decades that I have done Atkins I also don't know a single person that did Atkins for any length of time. A mere few tried some version of LC, but I would not pretend to have any idea what they actually did nor did I have any insight into the results. Nor did I see their bloodwork, track their weight loss, etc. So, are you running a clinic? Wait, I know. You're making "internet observations" from whomever shows up here in this almost comatose newsgroup, makes a couple posts about whatever and then disappears. And you claim to "tabulate" that into "data". What a crock. Appeal to authority all you like it still doesn't make you right when observation shows otherwise. *And so you ignore observation. Yeah, I'll continue to cite Atkins every time you make a post that claims he said something that he never said. Like the bold faced lie you made in this thread. You claimed Atkins said that adding carbs only causes weight loss to slow when your carbs go over CCLL (critical carb level for losing). Anyone that really knows the Atkins diet knows that is impossible by defintion alone. CCLL is the point at which weight loss STOPS or REVERSES, so how the hell could weight loss just slow when you go beyond it? JUST GIVE US THE PAGE REFERENCE FROM ATKINS THAT SAYS THAT. And note that this has NOTHING to do with observation. It's a great example of YOU lying again about what ATkins said. It's also funny how you claim you just ignore my posts, yet here you are, but you can't provide the simple page reference. It's clear why, and that's because it doesn't exist. Over time you've earned your reputation here. Two others in this very thread had similar issues before I ever entered the thread. So go ahead and continue to compare yourself to Atkins and tell us how your "data" is equal to or better than his. We all know you're just a blowhard. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Stanford researcher compares diets in real world conditions
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Stanford researcher compares diets in real world conditions
On 1 juil, 20:56, Doug Freyburger wrote:
wrote: I'm always willing to discuss any errors that you claim are in the book. * The way to do that would be for YOU to cite those errors. Just give us some page references, then we can all go read them, see exactly what Atkins said, as opposed to what YOU claim he said, which is frequently wrong. You ask for a scripture quote. I didn't ask for a scripture quote. I asked for a simple reference to where Atkins stated that weight loss only slows after you exceed the CCLL level (critical carb level for losing), which is what YOU claimed he said. Of course, since you can't provide it, this nonsense is the best you can do. *May as well supply some advice from Odin. Havamal 22. A miserable man, and ill-conditioned, sneers at every thing; one thing he knows not, which he ought to know, that he is not free from faults. If you're incapable of the observation that any book about any science has errors then what's the point of discussing them with you. *You continue to insist that the Atkins books are error free. *If they were they would not have changed edition to edition. It is not and has never been about Atkins books being error free. It's about you being incapable of seperating facts from personal opinion, conjecture, and flat out lying. Paying attention to what actually happens it's not difficult to find errors in statements in the book. *You deny that every time I point it out. *Of course you'll see how my quote applies to me without seeing how it applies to you. It's not about any errors in any book. If it were, you would provide the page with the error so everyone could go read it and then discuss it. It's about you once again just making things up and getting caught. In this case; it's the absurd claim you attributed to Atkins in this thread. And I'm not going to just sit here and let you get away with it. You also have a new found trait. Besides lying about what Atkins wrote, you have the gall to compare yourself to Atkins and claim your "data" allegedly gleemed from anonymous internet newsgroup postings and experience are equal to or superior to his. In fact you're just a lying blowhard with an inflated ego. How's that for scripture? |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Stanford researcher compares diets in real world conditions
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Stanford researcher compares diets in real world conditions
In article ,
Doug Freyburger wrote: wrote: In fact you're just a lying blowhard with an inflated ego. Doug, you are trying to be reasonable with a jerk (the kindest adjective I could find). Remember the story of the "Tar Baby", the more you messed with it, the worse it got. Say hello, to the "Tar Baby". If you don't recognize it, it doesn't exist. Bye-bye. Quit breathing life into it. -- - Billy "Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." - Benito Mussolini. http://www.democracynow.org/2010/7/2/maude http://www.democracynow.org/2010/6/2...al_crime_scene |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Stanford researcher compares diets in real world conditions
Billy wrote:
wrote: In fact you're just a lying blowhard with an inflated ego. Doug, you are trying to be reasonable with a jerk ... Sorry about that. He has a history of positive contributions so I had a lot of resistance to putting him in my kill file. The move to calling me a liar finally broke through that resistance. No more getting frustrated that he requests citations from the holy book that say the holy book is incorrect. No more getting frustrated that he ignores all observation that is contrary to his own beliefs. It's interesting to notice what would happen if the methods he applied to me were applied to the statements of Dr Atkins. If you want to mine my sources they are on the wayback machine for escribe and ncenter and on google for ASLDC. If you want to mine Dr Atkins' sources they either don't exist at all or in a vault somewhere. Have fun getting Dr A's data. Yet if you manage to get any of his data notice that it suffers the same problem of self selected subjects that forum posts have. And have fun deciding whether to follow trader4's trajectory and the accusations that would result. I suggest following a different trajectory. I remember folks reacting against Lyle McDonald http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/ calling his claims ego matters. Like him or not he's one of the most knowledgable experts in the world on low carb metabolism. I definitely sympathize with Lyle and wish I had half his expertese on the subject. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
a good handbook of library ejournal list with stanford jhuuniversity!! | [email protected] | General Discussion | 0 | October 17th, 2008 02:54 AM |
What makes Ernie Primeau a famous hairloss researcher? | I'm not Farrel you retard | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 0 | October 2nd, 2006 04:50 PM |
confirmation - calories are too impractical to work in the real world | [email protected] | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 23 | March 4th, 2006 02:07 AM |
Obese workers' pay lower -- Stanford U.. Study | jbuch | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 13 | May 11th, 2005 02:58 PM |
Researcher Links Obesity, Food Portions | Wm Harmon | General Discussion | 3 | January 3rd, 2004 04:27 PM |