which ones that came out awhile ago, you mean the one that was funded by atkins, and hasnt been published in any reputeable journal? or do you mean the ones that were published in the New england Journal of medicine, and basically didnt control calories, or measure water balance at all? let alone use BIA for BF estimation on a diet that influences water content…
and Zulu
You seem to like chucky, Dipasle and serrano. Where is their proof?
High carb influencing immune system. maybe if you knew what you were talking about. Most people on a low carb diet have compromised immune responses. While they seem to have less allergies, when they get a cold, they get it much harder. maybe chucky gets less of this, ebcause this is the only time glutamine seems useful, and he loves glutamine. Look up some of the research on carbohydrate and immune response in relation to endurance exercise (especially upper respiratory track infections)
and I know that Mercela has a woody about grains and the like, but unless you are a suffering celic you wont have a problem.
Also in terms of insulin sensitivity, somebody who is lean, performing rigourous activity is not going to have poor insulin sensitivity (within a normal range)
And guess what, even if you take an obese, extremely insulin resisntat person, and feed them a high carb, low fat diet, guess what happens
They become less insulin resistant…
and PS why do you think I like berardi? P+F & P+C stuff is bollocks, I agree with very little of the stuff he writes. The only reason I quoted his latest article becuase he has writen something simple “The Atkins program works for all patients under the direct care of the Atkins team?as long as patients follow it. The Zone program works for all patients under the direct care of the Sears team ?as long as they follow it. The Pritkin Diet works for all patients under the care of the Pritkin team? as long as they follow it.”
All diets work.
morg… hate to rain on your parade but cyco, is doing his masters in nutrition and is very knowledgable, also has a billion studies to back up most of his opinions… good luck… youll need it
I’ve been deabating … er … discusiing nutrition with cycomiko for the last week. It’s quite interesting, sicne what he says goes against all I have read about nutrition in the last 9 years!
Of course, my information comes from reading articles, and not their references.
There was a study that came out a couple of months ago that looked at the effects of Atkins, Low Fat, and balanced macronutrients, i think, and it showed that all three decreased cholesterol and blood pressure.
By they way, the atkins diet is on every menu in the world. Its called eating meat and not eating carbs. its not rocket surgery.
i should just give up. trying to say anything to people like this and they come out with all these studies. just like all the stuff about heart disease and high carb diets. there’s “studies” to back them up, after all. they’re “scientists” with “education.” it must be true!
just disregard poliquin and all them, despite all their success and experience. you know better because you’re taking classes!
Is that “rocket science” or “brain surgery”, Goldie?
For an interesting read and one that does back up the science behind Atkins, check out “Protein Power” by Dr. Eades.
It’s hard to refute the science behind it.
And like I say, it does work.
Now I did do the “Protein Power” version which does allow for up to 50 carbs per day depending on how much fat you have to lose. I think that Atkins may restrict you even further than that, which I’m not sure is necessary.
You do have to count your carbs, and keep track of protein amounts, cals, etc. if I remember correctly.
The most important aspect, in my experience, is to gradually increase your carb intake once you’ve reached your goals, to prevent your body from overcompensating and putting the fat right back on.
I think that’s the biggest downfall of most people who’ve been on the diet. They reach their goals and then, bam! Go right back to their old ways of eating, and screwing up the body chemistry they’ve worked so hard to establish. I know that’s what I did.
Go T-Dawg 2. It’s much easier to follow, the results are just as impressive, and the weight is much easier to keep off.
ACtually not at school, but Graduate school, I am an adult studetn tho, being about 15 years older than my ‘peers’ Hell, Im older than half the teachers.
You seem to love Poliquin, but the main problem is outside of his ‘group’ most people in the world does not know who he is…Becuase of his results in a select group of professional athletes, who if they say tehy are not using, are lying. So his, anecdotal evidence from THIS population, is supposedly meant to refute information from vast eipideminological studies, and large amounts of clinical trials? for use in population recommendations.
The AIM wouldnt give a flying fuck about poliqun, Mario or serrano. And before you go on a tyraid about the current population recommendations, tell me what they actually are…(and I bet you would be surprised at the levels of protein, carbs and fat htey provide as a recommendation.
FUck, Im not even from the states and I know more about your countries Recommneded intakes than you seem to.
Chris aus, I hate to rain on your parade but a masters in nutrition doesn’t really impress me.
Cyco, it’s extremely easy for you to punch holes in something. Can you come up with a study where isocaloric diets show weight loss? Remember, it must take into account water lost. And LBM. And fiber intake must be no greater than 15g per day. And protein intake must be minimized. And water intake. ETC, ETC. If you set 125 conditions to be met…of course no current studies are going to convince you.
Do you have any explanation for the fact that on a low carb diet people can eat 300cals more and lose MORE weight? This study, btw, was sponsored without knowing what the results would be.
How did they control dietary intake? on free living subjects?
How did they measure BF?
What statistics did they use
Randomisation
Subject selection
study protocols
blah blah blah
you realise that just because a study was done that its not nessecarily a good study. There was a couple of studies done at the New Engl J med that show low carb subjects lost weight, but they also only used dietary records as an example of dietary intake. It was pathetic (but low carb usually allowes better weight loss in free living subjects, just becuase it is anoretic.
Maybe if you had the ability to critically analyse papers yourself, you wouldnt rely on other peopels interpretation of them.
Zulu: I didnt expect it to impress you… Morg was talking to Cyco like he was an idiot that new nothing, when infact he is very knowledgable… to me it seemed like people were assuming that because he doesnt punctuate properly and has a different view to several people at this site, that his posts are not worthy or something.
Also the masters of nutrition or whatever dont impress me either, its the way he analyses studies that does… Now he may not necasserily be correct, but he is a smart guy with some good points, and virtually all of you could learn something from critical analysis of data and scientific studies rather then just saying Atkins said this or Poliquin says that.
actually, Zulu, people do apply scrutiny. BUT, there will always be politics in science and that’s why you see half of the dumb shit you read. Hell, I’ve read more crappy papers this year than any other year and I’m not happy with it.
you were not only too lazy to substantiate a study??? … did you actually provide us all with a study? i only saw you mention a “recent” study and a study with 300kcal or something you didnt actually reference either of them…
Cyco did however reference a study, did you read it?
Dont worry Chris, I punctuate like a moron because i am one…
I cant analyse the paper that zulu mentoions because it doesnt exist, at least not yet. This is about as close as we get http://www.cnn.com/2003/HEALTH/diet.fitness/10/14/lowcarb.mystery.ap/
and there is a vast quantity of information missing from this news article that would be required to guide what is actually happening here, including statistics.
Much like a large number of papers that the atkins institute seems to be involved with, they dont get published into peer reviewed journals. I know it takes time, but not this long…if its done correctly.
Zulu, who says that I dont apply the same scrutiny to the articles at this webpage?
Cyco, if you do apply the same scrutiny towards the articles here, then how can you believe a word anybody here says? Almost nothing is backed up by long term reputable studies which were featured in imressive journals.
I’m not too great of an Atkins fan, but I do think the concept has a great deal of merit. Certainly far more than the B.S espoused by the USDA.
[quote]Cyco, if you do apply the same scrutiny towards the articles here, then how can you believe a word anybody here says? Almost nothing is backed up by long term reputable studies which were featured in imressive journals. [/quote]who sez I do believe a word that is said here?
[quote]I’m not too great of an Atkins fan, but I do think the concept has a great deal of merit. Certainly far more than the B.S espoused by the USDA. [/quote]a lot of the stuff put saying the USDAinfo=bollocks is rather wrong. Just because the USDA provides a food pyramid and nutrition guidelines doesnt mean that americans eat that way… most overcomsume everything, which blows everything out the window. The pyramid also represents commonly eaten food sources, but if they moved fat further down the pyramid, what would happen? same thing that happend when people were told that they eat lots of carbs, they eat the worst possible kind of carbs, and massive amounts. (and they also ate more fat too at the same time…)
People are stupid. Atkins ‘concept’ would not work for public recommendations, becuase the public on average are too stupid to do it correctly.
