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 |
#81
|
|||
|
|||
Atkins = ? (should i start this again?)
In calgary.general cory wrote:
People want a magic cure without having to work at it. If you just diet and dont excercise you are doomed from the start. Likewise, if you just excercise, but don't watch what you eat - which is my problem. I recognize now that proper health is a combination of the two. (Not that I actually adhere to that, tho). -- .................................................. ............................ Chase after truth like hell and you'll free yourself, even though you never touch its coat-tails. -Clarence Darrow .................................................. ............................ http://www.memeticcandiru.com |
#82
|
|||
|
|||
Atkins = ? (should i start this again?)
Steven C \(Doktersteve\) wrote:
In the first phase of Atkins, you are stuck at less than 30 grams of carbs a day. In the first 14 days you get as close to 20 as you can without going over. 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? Atkins is a process not a menu. It's a process to answer that question for you, in fact. But that means that no one can answer it for *you*. Folks can only answer for themselves or give reported averages. Form that the best you can do is guess. So for me: My CCLL is 50ish, my CCLM is 100ish. Those are common numbers. To lose I need to stay under 50 in ketosis. To maintain I need to stay between 50 and 100 grams per day. But CCLLs range from 15 to 150. The only way to find out for yourself is to follow the process and see what your body's own unique characteristics take you. |
#83
|
|||
|
|||
Atkins = ? (should i start this again?)
Ghandi "Thee Asshole" Sarl wrote:
is that simple. People fail at these fad diets because they are just that, fads. 30 year fad ... interesting concept -- Kitty =^..^= 168/159/130 - November Goal 155 17 September 03 |
#84
|
|||
|
|||
Atkins = ? (should i start this again?)
It's great that you realize you need to get into shape. Unfortunately
you can't just get on a diet and expect to loose weight then go back on your merry way and eat the same things you ate before. The word "diet" refers to the way one eats and does not mean to do a session of limiting certain food groups etc. If you want want to follow a certain system because you believe that it is the right thing to do and it works for you do it. But there is no short term solution. There are many variants of low carb type of diets out there but they should be part of your lifestyle along with proper exercising, which should include cardiovascular as well as weigh bearing routines. As it has been already pointed out, eat a healthy balanced diet. Unless you have bodybuilding goals, it really doesn't matter what system you follow as long as your calorie intake is less than what your body burns. Start writing down what you eat all day, and add up the calories. You can use www.fitday.com for this as well. Eat 6 small meals a day, which will also increase your metabolism. Lift weights as more muscle mass will use more calories. Add some cardio (running, biking etc.) which will also use more calories, and there you have it. Follow this for life and you will be set. If you need more motivation check out Dave Draper's web site. He also has a weekly newsletter that should help you to whip you in shape. http://davedraper.com/draper-newsletter.html Good luck, Zsolt Steven C (Doktersteve) wrote: "MadRedHatter" wrote in message news:Ydhrb.346965$6C4.158687@pd7tw1no... "Steven C (Doktersteve)" wrote in message news:Wbhrb.6788$jy.3697@clgrps13... Oh man... here I am again considering trying the Atkins diet. Or hey .. how about doing this .. Eat sensibly. Exercise regularly. Burn more calories then you take in. Why fall for the fad diet de jour? The thing is, the diet has been around for years (what, 30 years?), however it is a fad lately, I will agree. There are so many other "low carb" diets out there (Suzanne sommers has even gotten in on it), and so many claim that it works. Actually, I knew someone in Minnesota who managed to loose 45 lbs on it, but he was actually considered very large (like 250 lbs). anyhow, as I said in my post, I tried that diet, and eventually hit my wall. I hit it pretty fast actually, after loosing only 15 lbs, I found it hard to increase my cardio workout time to 2 hours plus just to continue to see results. I am not a skinny person by default, but I as I mentioned, not flabby fat. so the best I can hope for is to shed the fat which is there and then build muscle, lead a healthier lifestyle (exercise, eat right), and keep the weight off. That is why I asked about how much back to "normal" a person gets after the initial phase of Atkins. Thanks. |
#85
|
|||
|
|||
colon cancer, was Atkins = ? (should i start this again?)
revek wrote:
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. Fiber as prevention was only a theory, and it has not panned out. See the two attached articles. After Induction, Atkins allows ample high fiber vegetables, a little of fibrous fruits, and nuts. When one is getting most of their allowed carbs on Atkins from veggies and nuts, and not eating a lot of LC-engineered products, there is a lot less waste than on a high carb diet. It is also of a consistency that is more easily pushed through the tract than the high volume of pasty waste from a high carb diet. The standard recommendations of daily fiber might be overstated for a low-carb diet. I've always gotten most of my carbs from veggies and nuts, and in more than six years on Atkins, can count on one hand the number of times I became constipated. Also, a lot of newbies confuse needing to go less often than on a high carb diet with constipation. Constipation means difficult or painful elimination. "Daily regularity" is a phrase that was made up to sell laxatives. According to various gastroenterology sites, normal bowel function varies anywhere from 3 times a day to 3 times a week. October 12, 2000 Study: Fiber Doesn't Prevent Cancer By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS Filed at 7:02 p.m. ET LONDON (AP) -- Evidence is mounting that fiber might not prevent colon cancer after all, with a new study suggesting that one type of supplement might even be bad for the colon. The theory that a high-fiber diet wards off the second-leading cancer killer has been around since the 1970s, but the evidence was never strong. The concept began to crumble last year when the first of three major U.S. studies found it had no effect. In the latest study, published this week in The Lancet medical journal, European researchers found that precancerous growths, or polyps, were slightly more likely to recur in those taking a certain fiber supplement. The findings demonstrate the difficulty of trying to figure out the relationship between nutrition and disease, said Dr. Michael Thun, who heads epidemiological research for the American Cancer Society. Fiber is particularly complicated, he said, because there are various types and they all could act differently. ``The concept of a healthy diet continues to be the recommendation for overall health,'' Thun said. ``But the painful process of clarifying which ingredients in food do what will take us decades to sort out.'' Thun said the American Cancer Society will revisit its recommendations on fiber and colon cancer in light of the growing body of evidence eroding support for the theory that it wards off the disease. Experts recommend a low fat, high-fiber diet rich in fruits and vegetables and whole grains because it has been shown to reduce the risk of heart disease, high blood pressure, diabetes and some other cancers. ``There is definitely something dietary going on with bowel cancer, but we haven't really been able to fix on what it is,'' said Dr. Tim Key, a cancer researcher at Oxford University who was not connected with the study. ``The cause of colorectal cancer is very far from understood.'' The latest study, conducted by scientists at the University of Bourgogne, France, does not address the effect of a high-fiber diet, but of supplements of one type of fiber -- ispaghula husk, a compound similar to psyllium that is not part of the average diet. Psyllium, a grain grown in India, is found in some over-the-counter laxatives and fiber supplements. The study, involving 552 Europeans who previously had precancerous growths in the bowel, found that 29 percent of those receiving the supplement got at least one new tumor within three years. That compares with 20 percent of those given fake granules. The findings may or may not be related to the role fiber in general plays in bowel cancer but, considered together with other recent studies, the plausibility of a protective role looks less likely. ``This does produce more evidence for the negative side,'' said Dr. Lesley Walker, a scientist at the London-based Imperial Cancer Research Fund, which was not connected to the research. ``But we still haven't got the totality of the evidence we want,'' Walker said. ``There are still some important ongoing studies under way on the fiber question that should give us some solid answers.'' Sorting out the influence of genes, food, pollutants, living habits and other factors requires drawing together information from many different scientific approaches. Those include lab experiments, rat studies, observations of large groups of people and human experiments. Information from all of these kinds of science went into the rise and fall of the idea that fiber prevents colon cancer. It started when scientists noticed that Westerners get more colon cancer than poor people in rural Africa. While the differences between these two populations are too numerous to count, an obvious one was the Africans' higher consumption of fiber. Over time, many lines of evidence seemed to support the theory. People see their risk of colon cancer rise when they move from places with low rates to areas where it's more common and they adopt the local eating habits. Furthermore, the idea made sense. Fiber makes the stool bulkier and perhaps more likely to dilute cancer-causing substances. It also causes them to flow more quickly through the digestive system. The data seemed convincing enough for health agencies to recommend high- fiber foods as one way of preventing colon cancer. Then last year, the first major study putting the theory to the test, in which researchers based at Harvard School of Public Health studied 88,757 nurses for 16 years, concluded fiber doesn't help. ---end article-- from http://www.upmc.edu/newsbureau/science/vatstudy.htm UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH RESEARCHERS DEMONSTRATE METABOLIC LINK BETWEEN LARGE WAISTS AND COLORECTAL CANCER PITTSBURGH, July 15, 1999 -- People with large waistlines suffer metabolic changes that significantly predispose them to developing colorectal cancer, according to new data from a University of Pittsburgh-led study whose results are published in the July 7 issue of the Journal of the National Cancer Institute. This information is the first to link intra-abdominal fat, or visceral adipose tissue (VAT), and its associated metabolic changes with colorectal cancer, according to the authors. "For several years, scientists have recognized that obese people are more likely to develop colorectal cancer. Our study sheds light on the metabolic process underlying this connection," said Robert Schoen, M.D., assistant professor of medicine at the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, where he is the medical director of the Center for Families at Risk for Colorectal Cancer. "The metabolic parameters we measured, including glucose, insulin and waist circumference, reveal a risk of colorectal cancer that equals or exceeds other known risk factors, such as having a first-degree relative with this disease or consuming a high-fat or low-fiber diet." The current report is based on a study of 5,849 people age 65 and older who participated in the Cardiovascular Health Study, a multi-center observational study of risk factors for coronary heart disease and stroke. The researchers found that people with increased waistlines, high levels of glucose (the sugar needed to fuel the body's activities) and high levels of insulin (the hormone that helps dispose of glucose) were twice as likely to develop colorectal cancer as individuals without these characteristics. Individuals in the study who developed colorectal cancer did not differ from their non-affected counterparts in terms of smoking, current aspirin use, alcoholic drinks consumed per week, percent of fat calories in diet or mean number of vegetable or fruit servings per week. Study participants were followed for an average 6.5 years. "A very important finding here is that people with increased amounts of abdominal obesity, or VAT, do not need to be diabetic to develop colorectal cancer," remarked Lewis Kuller, M.D., Dr.P.H., chairman of the department of epidemiology at the University of Pittsburgh Graduate School of Public Health and study co-investigator. "Nondiabetics appear to have an elevated risk of colorectal cancer as their fasting insulin and glucose rise, even if glucose levels do not reach those defined as consistent with diabetes." Previous studies have shown that insulin and insulin-like growth factors (IGFs) stimulate the growth of colorectal cancers. Obesity appears to decrease the production of proteins that bind with circulating IGFs, thus exposing the body to higher concentrations of these substances. More research is needed to clarify the roles VAT, insulin, IGF and IGF-binding factors play in causing colorectal cancer, according to the investigators. Other researchers on the federally funded study include Catherine M. Tangen, Ph.D., department of biostatistics, University of Washington, Seattle; Gregory L. Burke, M.D., department of public health and sciences, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, N.C.; Mary Cushman, M.D., departments of medicine and pathology, University of Vermont, Burlington; Russell P. Tracy, Ph.D., departments of medicine, pathology and biochemistry, University of Vermont; Adrian Dobs, M.D., department of medicine, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Md.; and Peter J. Savage, M.D., National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute, Bethesda, Md. ---end article--- -- jamie ) "There's a seeker born every minute." |
#86
|
|||
|
|||
Atkins = ? (should i start this again?)
go to atkin.com and they will tell u all the info u need and u can ask them
any question u want and they will answer i found this web site by mistake last night and it gave ideas to do while on weight watchers. if u can stick to it from what i read on the web site it does work. check out the site. angie "Doug Freyburger" wrote in message om... Steven C \(Doktersteve\) wrote: In the first phase of Atkins, you are stuck at less than 30 grams of carbs a day. In the first 14 days you get as close to 20 as you can without going over. 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? Atkins is a process not a menu. It's a process to answer that question for you, in fact. But that means that no one can answer it for *you*. Folks can only answer for themselves or give reported averages. Form that the best you can do is guess. So for me: My CCLL is 50ish, my CCLM is 100ish. Those are common numbers. To lose I need to stay under 50 in ketosis. To maintain I need to stay between 50 and 100 grams per day. But CCLLs range from 15 to 150. The only way to find out for yourself is to follow the process and see what your body's own unique characteristics take you. ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
#87
|
|||
|
|||
Atkins = ? (should i start this again?)
I WOULD NOT do the Atkins diet again. There is no reason to but your body
through a state of ketosis which is ABNORMAL. There is no reason to reduce your intake of complex carbs either...only the simple ones. If you are exercising, you NEED carbs. I would first like to ask you a few simple questions: 1. How many calories do you consume daily and be honest about it? 2. When you tried a "low fat diet," how low did you go i.e. was it truely low fat? The reason I ask is because the FDA standard low fat diet of 60g a day is not low enough. 3. What is your fiber intake like? Are you getting at least 30g a day? 4. How do you exercise? If you are 5 feet 6 inches and weigh 190, you are obese my friend. You should weight closer to 140 give or take 10 pounds. Your waist line shouldn't be more 32 inches. I am a similar height as you. I have a 30 inch waist and a six pack stomach. I eat sensibly and workout to have a fuel burning machine body. As a result, I can eat those pancakes and not gain a pound. I run a weight loss support group you might wanna visit. Click on the "Links" section to read important articles to losing weight. Trent -- Look and Feel Great! FREE weight loss and anti-aging group. Join now @ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/weightloss_health From: "Steven C \(Doktersteve\)" Newsgroups: alt.support.diet,alt.support.diet.low-calorie,alt.support.diet.low-carb,alt.su pport.diet.low-fat,calgary.general Date: Sun, 09 Nov 2003 01:59:18 GMT Subject: Atkins = ? (should i start this again?) Oh man... here I am again considering trying the Atkins diet. Lol, years ago I got the newest version of the book, and I tried to do it. I guess I did not have the willpower to get past that first real carb craving week that the book said I would experience, and I crashed, ended up eating pancakes on a Sunday morning, and said "Atkins sucks". The second time I tried the diet, I was dumb and did it with too much high carb/sugar foods in the house. I crashed, and blamed the Atkins diet. In retrospect, it may have been the fact that at the time I was working a strenuous job and not getting enough sleep, and generally not taking care of myself. It was also in the middle of a hard time for me when I was experiencing some self loathing and depression (more than is usual for a negative type guy like me). So I am considering it again. I am not fat. I have weight I don't want, but am not a "large" person. I am five foot 6 inches and weigh about 190 lbs, however alot of that is muscle I suspect, because my waist is 36, which isn't HUGE, but isn't skinny. I want to loose some weight, and get alot of the refined sugars out of my diet, as I have been a sugar junkie so long, and I don't really feel like developing type 2 diabetes in my life... But there seem to be roadblocks. The Atkins diet seems to me in some ways like a clever scheme to sell specialized foods from their website, and now through GNC stores. You need to cut SO MANY carbs out of the diet to go into ketosis, that it seems to me that you will end up spending lots on the high fatty foods that are required whilst in the first few weeks (or months) of the program. Meats, cheese, eggs, these are all things which are actually more expensive than the highly processed foods that we are used to eating as a society. I guess that you have to ask yourself whether you can put a pricetag on your health though, right? 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 question why an additive developed for diabetics and people on diet's would deter people from loosing weight. Of course, Atkins also conveniently sells products with the Splenda type of sweetener in them (cant recall the non brand name atm). 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. So yeah, I have lots of questions, and I would appreciate it very much of someone could shed some light on my queries. I have tried low calorie/low fat/lots of exercise diets in the past with MARGINAL success. In total I lost about 15 lbs before I found I had to increase my cardio workout substantially. I don't drive a car, I take transit and walk all over the place. Its not as if I am suffering from the suburbanite syndrome of driving everywhere and anywhere. Thanks. |
#88
|
|||
|
|||
Atkins = ? (should i start this again?)
sorry if this seems silly to ask Trent but why are you on the lowcarb board
if you don't like Atkins? and I don't mean that in a mean spirit, just wondering. You have to remember, what didn't work for you can work wonders for somebody else. I agree, your body *does* need carbs; every food has a carb content. But it depends on where you get your carbs from that is key. And believe it or not, there is a such thing as carb addiction; to be addicted to high-sugar, high-fat, gluten laded, simple *or* complex carbs. That is why it is so hard to cut things out and why after you do, you feel so much better. Steve, I am sure that is why you are having a hard time. because you are addicted to certain carbs that makes your system go nuts when you eat them. For me, it is pasta, rice and sweets. Everytime I eat rice or pasta, it is like I can't stop at one serving. And after ward, my feet and ankles swell up something horrible. You know, once I started doing Atkins and stopped eating them, I haven't had swollen feet or ankles or a pasta craving since the beginning of Nov. That for me, is a victory. Yes, it was hard and it was not easy but I am learning that I have to be strong and not give in no matter what. And I agree, the Atkins plan is *not* for everybody. Just like WW, Jenny Craig, and other plans don't work for some, neither does Atkins. Every diet or plan has a success and failure rate. Atkins has a higher success rate than any plan out there for losing and keeping it off, if you stick to the plan. For us it is not a diet, it is a way of eating that is forever. And I think if you would have stuck it out, you still would have gotten your six-pack and 30" waist, if you were patient and did the plan. I am sorry that doing Atkins has made you bitter about it but you should not totally discourage some one who could probably help him discover why he has been having problems and help him solve them. I mean, I don't go around saying, "Don't do low fat!! It is not normal!! It can harm you," or anything like that. There is nothing wrong with doing Atkins or the plan; the only thing wrong is that people are so narrow minded that they would rather stay the status -quo--of America being 65% fat--than accept that maybe drs. etc. made mistakes and the data has been wrong all these years or that it has evolved as we have evolved. lowcarb_newbie "Trent Duke" wrote in message ... I WOULD NOT do the Atkins diet again. There is no reason to but your body through a state of ketosis which is ABNORMAL. There is no reason to reduce your intake of complex carbs either...only the simple ones. If you are exercising, you NEED carbs. I run a weight loss support group you might wanna visit. Click on the "Links" section to read important articles to losing weight. Trent From: "Steven C \(Doktersteve\)" Newsgroups: alt.support.diet,alt.support.diet.low-calorie,alt.support.diet.low-carb,alt. su pport.diet.low-fat,calgary.general Date: Sun, 09 Nov 2003 01:59:18 GMT Subject: Atkins = ? (should i start this again?) Oh man... here I am again considering trying the Atkins diet. Lol, years ago I got the newest version of the book, and I tried to do it. I guess I did not have the willpower to get past that first real carb craving week that the book said I would experience, and I crashed, ended up eating pancakes on a Sunday morning, and said "Atkins sucks". The second time I tried the diet, I was dumb and did it with too much high carb/sugar foods in the house. I crashed, and blamed the Atkins diet. In retrospect, it may have been the fact that at the time I was working a strenuous job and not getting enough sleep, and generally not taking care of myself. It was also in the middle of a hard time for me when I was experiencing some self loathing and depression (more than is usual for a negative type guy like me). |
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 |