The atkins diet ....

On Tue, 03 Aug 2004 08:41:43 -0400, Rob Chesebrough
wrote:

Which "carby foods" have you given up? Were they mostly simple carbs?
Has your fat intake increased or decreased? Do you have more muscle and
less weight or simply just less weight?


Personally, I've given up pasta, brown rice, most fruits, flour, potatos,
etc.



--
Bob in CT
Remove ".x" to reply

On Tue, 03 Aug 2004 08:41:43 -0400, Rob Chesebrough
wrote:

Which "carby foods" have you given up? Were they mostly simple carbs?
Has your fat intake increased or decreased? Do you have more muscle and
less weight or simply just less weight?


Personally, I've given up pasta, brown rice, most fruits, flour, potatos,
etc.



--
Bob in CT
Remove ".x" to reply

Here are some links from sites other than Atkins although his name is in
some of them repeatedly.

http://www.ketosis-ketoacidosis-difference.com/

http://www.bestlowcarbs.com/article1067.html

http://members.shaw.ca/myatkins/lie.htm

Tom
210/178/180
----------------------------------------------------
"Rob Chesebrough" wrote in message
...
Can you send me a link to this evidence? I'm not ready to believe that
ketosis is supposed to happen other than between meals.

Penelope Baker wrote:

"Rob Chesebrough" wrote in message
...

Yes, apparently I combined the two. Ketones are the backup source of
energy for the body when glucose is not available. Once in the backup
mode you’re in a state of ketosis not ketoacidosis. The body is starved
for carbs, not food.

Now can you help me understand the purpose of putting the body in the
“back-up” mode for life? If it’s not going to be for life, why bother?

Why not limit caloric intake? Why not give the body water, lean protein
sources, complex carbohydrates and unsaturated fats? That’s what it
wants to function at its best so treat it right. Why instead of all
this would one put their body into its back-up mode of ketosis full
time?


There's more than a bit of evidence that suggests that ketosis is
actually
our natural state, and that glucose burning is the 'backup mode'.

Here are some links from sites other than Atkins although his name is in
some of them repeatedly.

http://www.ketosis-ketoacidosis-difference.com/

http://www.bestlowcarbs.com/article1067.html

http://members.shaw.ca/myatkins/lie.htm

Tom
210/178/180
----------------------------------------------------
"Rob Chesebrough" wrote in message
...
Can you send me a link to this evidence? I'm not ready to believe that
ketosis is supposed to happen other than between meals.

Penelope Baker wrote:

"Rob Chesebrough" wrote in message
...

Yes, apparently I combined the two. Ketones are the backup source of
energy for the body when glucose is not available. Once in the backup
mode you’re in a state of ketosis not ketoacidosis. The body is starved
for carbs, not food.

Now can you help me understand the purpose of putting the body in the
“back-up” mode for life? If it’s not going to be for life, why bother?

Why not limit caloric intake? Why not give the body water, lean protein
sources, complex carbohydrates and unsaturated fats? That’s what it
wants to function at its best so treat it right. Why instead of all
this would one put their body into its back-up mode of ketosis full
time?


There's more than a bit of evidence that suggests that ketosis is
actually
our natural state, and that glucose burning is the 'backup mode'.

Eat no potatoes, rice, wheat products, granola bars, corn, peas, sugar;
limit consumption of tomatoes, carrots, winter squash. Fat intake has
probably increased, at least as a percentage of total intake but I never was
a low fat dieter, in fact I had not dieted to lose weight in more than 20
years. I don't consider that I am dieting now, just eating different
things, but have lose 54.5 pounds in 13 months. Just less weight as I do
not exercise.

In ,
Rob Chesebrough stated
| Which "carby foods" have you given up? Were they mostly simple carbs?
| Has your fat intake increased or decreased? Do you have more muscle
| and less weight or simply just less weight?
|
|
| FOB wrote:
|| Because then you are either overeating and fat or you are hungry all
|| the time. And I have lost weight by eating--eating different things
|| than I used to eat. I eat less but that is because I am not as
|| hungry as I was eating lots of carby food.
||
|| In ,
|| Rob Chesebrough stated
||| Yes, apparently I combined the two. Ketones are the backup source
||| of energy for the body when glucose is not available. Once in the
||| backup mode you’re in a state of ketosis not ketoacidosis. The
||| body is starved for carbs, not food.
|||
||| Now can you help me understand the purpose of putting the body in
||| the “back-up” mode for life? If it’s not going to be for life, why
||| bother?
|||
||| Why not limit caloric intake? Why not give the body water, lean
||| protein sources, complex carbohydrates and unsaturated fats? That’s
||| what it wants to function at its best so treat it right. Why
||| instead of all this would one put their body into its back-up mode
||| of ketosis full time?
|||
||| Why let food manufacturers put new buzz words (Low Carb) on their
||| labels to sell products loaded with calories but low in carbs? So
||| people think they’ll lose weight by eating?
|||
||| I just don’t get it.
|||
||| Rob
||| 185/155/160

Eat no potatoes, rice, wheat products, granola bars, corn, peas, sugar;
limit consumption of tomatoes, carrots, winter squash. Fat intake has
probably increased, at least as a percentage of total intake but I never was
a low fat dieter, in fact I had not dieted to lose weight in more than 20
years. I don't consider that I am dieting now, just eating different
things, but have lose 54.5 pounds in 13 months. Just less weight as I do
not exercise.

In ,
Rob Chesebrough stated
| Which "carby foods" have you given up? Were they mostly simple carbs?
| Has your fat intake increased or decreased? Do you have more muscle
| and less weight or simply just less weight?
|
|
| FOB wrote:
|| Because then you are either overeating and fat or you are hungry all
|| the time. And I have lost weight by eating--eating different things
|| than I used to eat. I eat less but that is because I am not as
|| hungry as I was eating lots of carby food.
||
|| In ,
|| Rob Chesebrough stated
||| Yes, apparently I combined the two. Ketones are the backup source
||| of energy for the body when glucose is not available. Once in the
||| backup mode you’re in a state of ketosis not ketoacidosis. The
||| body is starved for carbs, not food.
|||
||| Now can you help me understand the purpose of putting the body in
||| the “back-up” mode for life? If it’s not going to be for life, why
||| bother?
|||
||| Why not limit caloric intake? Why not give the body water, lean
||| protein sources, complex carbohydrates and unsaturated fats? That’s
||| what it wants to function at its best so treat it right. Why
||| instead of all this would one put their body into its back-up mode
||| of ketosis full time?
|||
||| Why let food manufacturers put new buzz words (Low Carb) on their
||| labels to sell products loaded with calories but low in carbs? So
||| people think they’ll lose weight by eating?
|||
||| I just don’t get it.
|||
||| Rob
||| 185/155/160

First, thank you for spending a great deal of time with your reply.

This being the internet, you never know whom you’re dealing with and
whether they’re telling the truth or not. That being said, I’m 5’8”,
155 lbs and bounce between 10-12% body fat. My week is full of 4-5 days
of weight training, a beach volleyball league and a soccer league. I
commute an hour to work on a sport motorcycle, weather permitting. The
rest of the day I have the usual sit down office job. If you believe
all I’ve said, you’ll understand that my body is lean and fairly calorie
hungry. For having this body I am ridiculed by others for having a Tape
worm, over-active thyroid, naturally skinny, don’t have to watch what I
eat, don’t know what it’s like to be overweight, etc. I eat lean,
portion controlled meals and exercise regularly. My personal sacrifices
of time and food choices earned me this body and I’m tired of hearing
that everyone else needs to work harder than I do to achieve the same
result. This ridicule makes me a bit less sensitive to those that are
overweight than I should be. Even less so to people on fad diets so I
apologize if I’ve come across harsh.

I eat very well, in my own opinion. I break down the 4 nutrients more
than most. It is this breakdown that has conflicts with the low carb
diets. Rather than limit the carbs category, I limit the simple carbs
to fruit and yogurt. I eat the complex carbs like whole wheat flour,
whole wheat pasta, brown rice and whole grain bread.

I do not separate complete and incomplete proteins. Rather I eat a
variety of vegetables and complex carbs which, when combined, form
complete proteins. I further supplement my protein with fish, poultry,
soy, whey and occasionally lean meat.

I avoid saturated fats like meats, whole milk, cream & cheese and
instead focus on monounsaturated fat oils like olive, peanut and canola.
I only eat lean cuts of beef, substitute ground turkey or chicken into
chopped or ground beef recipes and drink soy milk.

The fourth nutrient is of course water, which I drink in moderation. I
get plenty indirectly from fruits and vegetables so I only require a
couple glasses each day.

My “avoid if possible” list includes splenda, equal, sweet-n-low, high
fructose corn syrup (HFC), butter, margarine and trans fats. HFC is the
hardest to avoid while butter and margarine are easily substituted with
¾ TBS olive oil per 1 TBS.

This is my diet. It doesn’t have phases and it doesn’t discard
nutrient categories. It’s just getting the best sources or water,
carbs, protein and fats available for the body and controlling the
portion sizes. This, in my mind, is the key to a lean, muscular body
with healthy internal organs and a clear circulatory system.

Where do we disconnect?

I don’t like diets with phases. Do it right from day one and refine it
as time passes.

Our meat should not be too lean about 2/3rds of the calories
should be fat.

Here’s a serious problem. 66% of what you’re eating is fat. You’re
trying to lose fat, right? How do you lose it when you’re adding it in
as 66% of your diet? Not only that, you’re saying get this fat from
meat. Therefore, 66% saturated fat. I’d cut down this percentage to
25% fat and make sure the majority was monounsaturated and
polyunsaturated instead of saturated.

The high concentration of carbohydrates causes a spike in insulin
because it is too easily digestable. When, the carbohydrates are used
up, the body can't react in time to shut off the insulin. Now we get
lower blood sugar than normal and it causes us to eat more because we
feel hungrier. This up and down cycle causes us to over eat more than
we should and the excess is deposited as fat.

This can be easily avoided by substituting complex carbs. They take
longer to digest and fuel the body for longer. Simple carbs is the
catch all for junk food (cookies, cakes, candies, sodas, etc.) They’re
high in calories and high in saturated fats. Limit the junk food
instead of limiting the complex carbs. Even simple carbs aren’t all
bad. Fruit and yogurt are very nutrient rich foods even if their easily
digestable.

Lastly, too much emphasis on weight loss. That old phrase that mom’s
used, “you are what you eat” still holds true. 30 pounds of fat weighs
the same as 30 pounds of muscle. The difference is body composition.
Don’t worry about what you weigh, worry about what you look like in a
mirror. If you just lose fat that skin is going to droop almost as bad
as it does now. You need to stretch that skin across muscle if you want
to look healthy. Weight means nothing if you don’t know what it’s made
up of.

Thank you for your time and good luck!

Rob

Tom wrote:
After completing this, I see that I have gone on quite a bit too long.
Sorry about that, but there were a lot of questions to answer.

"Rob Chesebrough" wrote in message
...
Yes, apparently I combined the two. Ketones are the backup source of
energy for the body when glucose is not available. Once in the backup
mode you’re in a state of ketosis not ketoacidosis. The body is starved
for carbs, not food.

Now can you help me understand the purpose of putting the body in the
“back-up” mode for life? If it’s not going to be for life, why bother?

Actually, I think we are basically built for eating meat, fruit, and
whatever edible plants that can be found. The only primate that I know of
that does not eat a lot of meat is the gorilla. All the rest eat bugs and
small animals, as well as whatever they can steal from other predators. Meat
is highly prized in the chimpanzee and baboon world. I didn't know that
until I did some reading about primates to find out if we are classified as
meat eaters, vegetarian, or omnivore. I believe we are omnivores capable of
eating both meat and vegetation. A good survival mechanism. The problem with
our present day diet is that most of the plants we grow for food do not grow
that large or sweet in the wild. Along with the fact that we refine our
grains so that they are too easily digestable. Long ago, people discovered
that if they grew their own plants, it would be easier than walking for
miles to find what you were looking for when meat was scarce, so
agricultural societies developed. Without this event, we would have been
largely nomadic and it would be difficult to build a society. So it was a
good thing in the beginning. I just think we have too much high calorie food
available now along with a more sedentary lifestyle. I don't think we were
built to be able to get our calories so easily from plants. Yes, the body
would prefer to burn the more efficient carbohydrates, but the foods we were
meant to eat to get the carbohydrates are not as calorie dense as what we
grow, and grains are nearly impossible to get to the starchy part without
intervention by cracking, or cooking. Starchy vegetables and fruits only
grow in season as well. So, to answer your question, I believe we are meant
to eat meat and complex carbs, but definitely not the refined sugars, grains
and large calorie rich vegetables, and that a state of ketosis was actually
what our ancestors were in most of the time.

Why not limit caloric intake? Why not give the body water, lean protein
sources, complex carbohydrates and unsaturated fats? That’s what it
wants to function at its best so treat it right. Why instead of all
this would one put their body into its back-up mode of ketosis full time?

It is tougher in modern society to limit calories because of the
availability of food. High calorie carbohydrate foods overwhelm our bodies.
With all that extra energy, the body is forced to deal with it some how. The
high concentration of carbohydrates causes a spike in insulin because it is
too easily digestable. When, the carbohydrates are used up, the body can't
react in time to shut off the insulin. Now we get lower blood sugar than
normal and it causes us to eat more because we feel hungrier. This up and
down cycle causes us to over eat more than we should and the excess is
deposited as fat.
Water is of course the best thing we should be drinking.
Our meat should not be too lean about 2/3rds of the calories should be
fat.


New studies are showing that high cholesterol is caused by eating too
high carb of a diet. High blood sugar is damaging to the artery walls and
the body makes extra cholesterol to repair the dammage. It's not the
cholesterol and fat we eat that makes us overweight and unhealthy. So your
right about the protein and complex carbohydrates, but the protein should
not be lean. Fat is nessacary for our survival to make hormones and supply
the energy our bodies were built to use. Carbohydrates happen to be more
efficient, but so is alcohol, which is used up before carbohydrates. So I
don't think that ketosis is the back-up mode. Carbs are the back-up mode for
us. All of the prior studies on high fat, were also high carb. Researchers
fed the subjects cake, ice cream, donuts, french fries, potatoes with butter
etc. Then when cholesterol levels went up, they blamed it on the high fat
intake. Now we better understand that high fat and high carb is a lethal
combination. Our bodies are designed to eat fat with protein. If the
researchers were to have given the subjects fatty meats, they would have
found that cholesterol actually went down.

Why let food manufacturers put new buzz words (Low Carb) on their labels
to sell products loaded with calories but low in carbs? So people think
they’ll lose weight by eating?

I agree totally on this issue. I have not bought any of their products.
The idea of lo-carb is to eat natural complex carbohydrates, which are
fruits and vegetables in reasonable amounts. The products that they make are
what a lot of people here consider to be fake or as we call them,
frankenfoods. They are preying on people that want to eat low carb, but
don't want to give up what they were eating before. Most of these products
are in fact still to high in carbs for the proper way of eating this way.
They use tricks with "net carbs" or "impact carbs" on the label. Sugar
alcohols are widely used, but not consideres as a real carb, so are deducted
from the total causing confusion. There is a lot of money involved with
refined products so the manufactures want to keep their stuff on the shelves
and seem to be willing to do anything to do so. Any of the other lo-carb
products try to replace the carbs with low grade protein matter and the
resulting food usually doesn't taste very good. It has given real low
carbohydrate diets a bad name. The marketing of this stuff is just crazy
right now. It's everywhere you go, and people are darn sick of all the hype.
I believe the food industry doesn't care if we eat good food, just as long
as it tastes great so they can sell it. If you have read any of the popular
diet books, they speak endlessly about the evilness of high carb foods, but
realize that some people are not willing to give up their favorite foods.
Most of the people that I know that have tried the diet fail because they
are not happy with eating meat and vegetables every day. They still want
their pizzas, bread and pastas. I like the way I eat now. If I was eating
before, like you say we should, I'm sure I would not have gotten overweight.
But not enough emphysis was placed on eating carbs that are healthy. The
indication I got as I was growing up was that any carbohydrates were good
for you for energy. Only sugar was said to be bad. I never ate that much
sweets, but always had potatoes, rice or pastas, and breads for most of my
meals. Sorry this was so long, but I felt that you were truly interested in
why people think it is a good diet, even if you do not want to follow it. I
can understand the confusion because if anyone who hasn't done any research
goes by what they see in the grocery aisles or what is said on the media, it
seems like a bizzare fad diet, when in fact it is about eating unrefined
carbohydrates and meats in their natural forms, and that doesn't sound bad
to me at all. Not all lo-carbers eat those weird foods, but some believe it
is neccessary that their are food choices available so they can stick with
it.

I just don’t get it.

Hope this helps to understand that it is actually a good way to eat, but
has been warped by food manufactures and the media to make money on it so it
looks like just another fad diet. I don't get it either.
Tom

Rob
185/155/160


Tom wrote:

How else would you explain the body being in Ketosis? Does the body do
this when it's fed normally? The point of the Induction Phase is limit
carbs to get the body into Ketosis, right? Type “ketosis” into a
google
search, you’ll find your starvation proof. Ketosis is a body’s
reaction
to starvation. Fueling itself with ketones because it’s in trouble.


Are you confusing ketoacidosis with ketosis? I've seen articles that
call
the cannibalization of body tissue due to diabetes as ketosis. This is
ketoacidosis and is dangerous when you are a diabetic. Your body is not
getting enough energy from the food you are eating because it can
not be
processed. Ketosis is different. It is the process that the body
uses to
break down it's own body fat. This is totally natural and is how the
body
uses it's own fat stores for energy. If there is an absence of
carbohydrates, then the body is forced to use the next most efficient
fuel,
which is fat, and is called being in ketosis. If there is enough
protein
ingested, the body will not have to derive it from it's stores of
protein,
which is of course muscle tissue. Breaking down muscle tissue for
energy
is
inefficient and is only done as a last resort. The body will only break
down
it's own tissue if there is a lack of protein in the diet. You can put
your
body into a state of ketoacidosis by not eating enough food. It would
then
be forced to take energy from fat and muscle tissue. Fat would of
course
be
used for energy and what ever other functions, like making hormones or
bile.
Muscle tissue would be broken down for body repair and some for energy.
You
can live on a diet devoid of carbohydrates. The Inuit people are proof
of
that. But you must have protein and fat to survive. Again, ketoacidosis
is
starvation mode either by lack of food, or that the body can't process
the
food because of diabetes. Ketosis is the breaking down of the
bodies own
fat
stores to provide energy and is a totally natural process. How else
would we
burn the fat off if not by ketosis. Even the traditional low calorie
diets
will produce some ketosis, but it won't be able to be measured on the
keto
sticks unless you eat to few calories, because your still burning some
fat.
Eating lo-carb is still low calorie, but you are not hungry all the
time
which is handy when your trying to lose weight.
Tom
210/178/180

Pasta?
Not only have you cut carbs, you've cut a whole country's food from your
menu? Diet is for the rest of your life, right? No Italian for the
rest of your life? Get your hands on some whole wheat pasta and cook up
some old country favorites.
Brown rice?
Add beans to the meal w/ brown rice and you've created a complete
protein without fat.
Fruit?
That and yogurt are some of the most nutrient rich simple carbs available.
Flour?
If it was white, bleached flour, yeah give it up. Introduce wheat flour
(complex carb) and make pancakes, waffles and breads that are full of
nutrients, long term energy and a long term hunger buffer.

Bob in CT wrote:

On Tue, 03 Aug 2004 08:41:43 -0400, Rob Chesebrough
wrote:

Which "carby foods" have you given up? Were they mostly simple carbs?
Has your fat intake increased or decreased? Do you have more muscle
and less weight or simply just less weight?


Personally, I've given up pasta, brown rice, most fruits, flour,
potatos, etc.

Pasta?
Not only have you cut carbs, you've cut a whole country's food from your
menu? Diet is for the rest of your life, right? No Italian for the
rest of your life? Get your hands on some whole wheat pasta and cook up
some old country favorites.
Brown rice?
Add beans to the meal w/ brown rice and you've created a complete
protein without fat.
Fruit?
That and yogurt are some of the most nutrient rich simple carbs available.
Flour?
If it was white, bleached flour, yeah give it up. Introduce wheat flour
(complex carb) and make pancakes, waffles and breads that are full of
nutrients, long term energy and a long term hunger buffer.

Bob in CT wrote:

On Tue, 03 Aug 2004 08:41:43 -0400, Rob Chesebrough
wrote:

Which "carby foods" have you given up? Were they mostly simple carbs?
Has your fat intake increased or decreased? Do you have more muscle
and less weight or simply just less weight?


Personally, I've given up pasta, brown rice, most fruits, flour,
potatos, etc.

On Tue, 03 Aug 2004 12:09:25 -0400, Rob wrote:

Pasta?
Not only have you cut carbs, you've cut a whole country's food from your
menu? Diet is for the rest of your life, right? No Italian for the
rest of your life? Get your hands on some whole wheat pasta and cook up
some old country favorites.

Nope. Never. Whole wheat pasta has the same effect for me -- it causes
my blood sugar to shoot through the roof.

Brown rice?
Add beans to the meal w/ brown rice and you've created a complete
protein without fat.

Sorry -- my favorite meal on low fat was brown rice with some type of
bean. This caused my blood sugar to go so high that I had to hang onto
something. This meal and pasta are the reasons I started low carb.

Fruit?
That and yogurt are some of the most nutrient rich simple carbs
available.

I eat yoghurt daily.

Flour?
If it was white, bleached flour, yeah give it up. Introduce wheat flour
(complex carb) and make pancakes, waffles and breads that are full of
nutrients, long term energy and a long term hunger buffer.

You're wrong. Wheat flour has the same effect on me as white flour: my
blood sugar skyrockets. You might be able to eat that crap, but I cannot.

Bob in CT wrote:

On Tue, 03 Aug 2004 08:41:43 -0400, Rob Chesebrough
wrote:

Which "carby foods" have you given up? Were they mostly simple carbs?
Has your fat intake increased or decreased? Do you have more muscle
and less weight or simply just less weight?


Personally, I've given up pasta, brown rice, most fruits, flour,
potatos, etc.






--
Bob in CT
Remove ".x" to reply