What if It's All Been a Big Fat Lie?

I agree, I lost 36 pounds in 10 weeks, beginning last July. I didn't try to lose weight, I was just too stressed to eat anything. Once I felt better, I was concerned I would gain the weight back. I started an intense program of arobics and weigth training, 5-6 days a week. I have gained 3 pounds back but am smaller than I was before I stated working out. I also consume between 3000- and 4000 calories a day, many (most?) from carbs. I do need to eat something with fat (usually peanut butter) in it before bedtime though, or I can't sleep well.

I'd much rather sweat it out for an hour and a half everyday, than eliminate my italian bread, my pizza, or my pasta portofino.

Me too!

big FAT bump (for later).

I've tried the Atkins diet before, but giving up the "ultimate carb" (i.e. the kind that comes in 12 ounce cans) has been the hardest part! Invent a low-carb BEER and we'll all be happy and slim !:-)

"Invent a low carb BEER and we will all be happy and slim..."

Michelob Ultra has 2.9 carbs in 12 ounces and has been made and marketed specifically for the growing low carb market.

Incidently...I lost 100 pounds and have kept it off for over 4 years on a low carb diet. This was after 20 years of nearly low fat dieting myself to death. If you know the statistics, you now that well over 90 percent of overweight people will never lose the weight and of those who do over 90 percent will gain it back. I - and now 7 others among my closest family and friends - are beating those odds.

I was scared to death to try this diet because everyone said it would kill me. But it was the only one I had not tried and I figured a 3 month trial could not make things any worse. I have never looked back.

From dangerously high cholesterol and blood pressure to excellent checkups (without medication)time after time. My doctor was horrified when I started and is now a believer. He now recommends this way of eating to his patients not only for weight loss, but because it is good for them as well.

If those of us who are eating this way are quick to defend it, it is because our lives have literally been saved and changed enormously for the better by it and we are frustrated by the incredible resistance by others to even consider that conventional wisdom on this subject could be wrong.

As in the article above, people are beginning to question why low fat dieting is failing us. I urge all of you to keep an open mind. You will continue to hear more and more about this and, as usual, you heard it HERE first.:)

Common sense: 1) You lose weight by eating fewer calories and/or burning more calories.

This is simply not true and there are several recent studies that refute this. There is a very different metabolic pathway between fats, protein and carbs. That is why one can eat 2200 calories a day on a low carb diet and lose but can't lose on a 1400 calorie low fat diet. The most recent study on this question was done at the University of Pennsylvania and can be found at Medscape: [I do have others!]

My guess is you don't have this one: Effect of weight loss plans on body composition and diet duration.

Are low carbohydrate high protein (LCHP) diets more effective in promoting loss of weight and body fat and can individuals stay on an Atkins-like diet more easily than on a conventional weight loss diet? A pre-test/post-test randomized group design composed of three cohorts was utilized to test 1) a LCHP ketogenic diet; 2) the Zone diet; and 3) a conventional hypocaloric diabetic exchange diet that supplied < 10%, 40%, and 50% of calories from carbohydrate, respectively. Body composition was measured before and after the intervention treatment period with dual energy X-ray absorptiometry. Mean weight loss was 5.1 kg for those who completed the 12-week program. There were no significant differences in total weight, fat, or lean body mass loss when compared by diet group. Attrition was substantial for all plans at 43%, 60%, and 36% for LCHP, Zone and conventional diets, respectively.

I'm really amazed at how easily people are persuaded into taking an extreme position. I'm not against the Atkins diet, but to me it is emblematic of the tendency for the weak to prefer abstinence to temperance, as are all other diet fads. The key to good health (barring bad genetic code) is to earn your food. Hardly anyone earns their food anymore, and that's the reason so many people are fat.

When I was growing up everyone used to tell me that I would get fat as I got older because I was Italian (even though nobody else in my family was fat?), and ate all that bread and pasta. First of all the typical Italian meal I grew up on consisted of soup, meat, pasta, insalata (salad) or vegetables, and fruit and nuts for dessert (all in moderate proportions). Americans on the other hand nearly always have to have some kind of high calorie dessert after their meal; that's probably another reason so many Americans are fat.

And as far as I can tell Italians are far less obese than Americans. I was there in '97 and '00 and you had to go along way to find an overweight teenager, and in this country you don't have to go far to find a fat youngster. Between twinkies and the boob tube, they don't stand a chance.

Of one thing I am sure, as long as I earn my food, I will never be fat.

My guess is you don't have this one: Effect of weight loss plans on body composition and diet duration.

And my guess is that you don't have many of the others that directly refute the study you reference. Not to mention the fact that every study shows that the majority of the participants on low fat diets drop out, resulting in net GAINS in most studies.

Another recent one was the Schneider's Childrens Hospital study:

Recent research at Schneider Children’s Hospital in New Hyde Park, N.Y., confirms the effectiveness of a controlled carbohydrate program for teens. Marc S. Jacobson, M.D., lead researcher and director of the Center for Atherosclerosis Prevention at New York Hospital, reported that 22 adolescents consuming a high-protein, high-fat carbohydrate-restricted diet were more successful at losing weight than those consuming a low-fat, high-carbohydrate one. Teens who restricted their carb intake also had improved cardiovascular risk factors and other clinical health markers.

Participants were 12 to 18 years old and 20 to 100 pounds overweight. Those following a controlled carb program lost 19 pounds in 12 weeks, while the low-fat group lost less than half that amount, 8.5 pounds.The research showed that the controlled carb group also showed a greater decrease in overall cholesterol levels, with triglycerides dropping 33 percent as compared to a 17 percent drop for the low-fat group.

Kidney and liver functions were unaffected by the high-protein, high-fat diet. The high-protein group ate 66 percent more calories than the low-fat group (1,830 calories vs. 1,100 calories per day). After three months on a weight-loss regimen, the participants followed a weight maintenance program that included additional carbohydrates. Nutritionist Nancy Copperman, M.S., R.D., who designed both regimens, says that six to 12 months later, most members of the controlled carbohydrate group had maintained their weight loss.

Yet another:

Moderate-Fat vs Low-Fat Diets

Pub Med.

Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord 2001 Oct;25(10):1503-11 A randomized controlled trial of a moderate-fat, low-energy diet compared with a low fat, low-energy diet for weight loss in overweight adults.

McManus K, Antinoro L, Sacks F. Department of Nutrition, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.

CONTEXT: Long-term success in weight loss with dietary treatment has been elusive.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a diet moderate in fat based on the Mediterranean diet compared to a standard low-fat diet for weight loss when both were controlled for energy. DESIGN: A randomized, prospective 18 month trial in a free-living population.

PATIENTS: A total of 101 overweight men and women (26.5-46 kg/m(2)).

INTERVENTION: (1) Moderate-fat diet (35% of energy); (2) low-fat diet (20% of energy). MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Change in body weight.

RESULTS: After 18 months, 31/50 subjects in the moderate-fat group, and 30/51 in the low fat group were available for measurements. In the moderate-fat group, there were mean decreases in body weight of 4.1 kg, body mass index of 1.6 kg/m(2), and waist circumference of 6.9 cm, compared to increases in the low-fat group of 2.9 kg, 1.4 kg/m(2) and 2.6 cm, respectively; P</=0.001 between the groups. The difference in weight change between the groups was 7.0 kg. (95% CI 5.3, 8.7). Only 20% (10/51) of those in the low-fat group were actively participating in the weight loss program after 18 months compared to 54% (27/50) in the moderate-fat group, (P<0.002). The moderate-fat diet group was continued for an additional year. The mean weight loss after 30 months compared to baseline was 3.5 kg (n=19, P=0.03).

CONCLUSIONS: A moderate-fat, Mediterranean-style diet, controlled in energy, offers an alternative to a low-fat diet with superior long-term participation and adherence, with consequent improvements in weight loss.

I've tried the Atkins diet before, but giving up the "ultimate carb" (i.e. the kind that comes in 12 ounce cans) has been the hardest part! Invent a low-carb BEER and we'll all be happy and slim !:-)

I know lots and lots of low carbers who drink beer and wine!

And as far as I can tell Italians are far less obese than Americans. I was there in '97 and '00 and you had to go along way to find an overweight teenager, and in this country you don't have to go far to find a fat youngster. Between twinkies and the boob tube, they don't stand a chance. Of one thing I am sure, as long as I earn my food, I will never be fat.

You make several good points, namely that the Italians eat high fat diets with pasta and bread yet are far less obese than Americans. The difference is that our diet is very high in refined carbs, as in sugar and flour products. Most Americans have a diet that consists of as much as 60% in carbs, mostly refined. The Italians also have a high fat diet like the French, yet they are not obese like we are.

However, the Atkins diet is not a fad diet. It is simply a diet of natural, unprocessed foods sans the junk food. It is meat, vegetables, unprocessed dairy, whole grains, brown rice, fruit, nuts and beans. That is not a fad, there is nothing faddish about it. That is how people used to eat until we got on this silly low fat/high carb kick that has resulted in an epidemic of obesity and diabetes II.

Atkins is a "fad diet," huh? Then how come doctors were recommending this very diet for the years proceeding the low fat farce? [the low fat fad diet that has led to an epidemic of obesity and diabetes II]

This is what doctors were recommending in 1958:

There are three kinds of food: fats, proteins and carbohydrates. All of these provide calories; the fats 9.3 calories per gramme, the proteins and the carbohydrates 4.1 each. But the carbohydrates provide calories and nothing else.

Fat is the caloric reserve material of nature. The whale stores fat in his subcutaneous layers against the rigours of life at the Pole, the camel stores it in his hump against hard times in the desert, the African sheep stores it in his tail and his buttocks against the day when even the parched grass shall have withered away. But fats are more than stores of reserve caloric material. They are heat insulators, they are fillers of dead spaces, and they are facilitators of movement in rigid compartments such as the orbit, the pelvis, and the capsules of joints. They are also essential building materials. Animal fats contain three groups of substances: the neutral fats which are chiefly energy providers, the lipids containing phosphorus that enter into most tissues and bulk largely in the brain and the central nervous system, and the sterols that are the basis of most hormones.

The expert on nutrition is not the nutrition expert, but the man who has studied nutrition by the ultimate method of research, the struggle for survival. The Eskimo, living on the ice floes of the North Pole, the Red Indian travelling hard and far over wild lands in hunting or war, the trapper in the Canadian forests, the game hunters in Africa-these men must find food that gives the greatest nutritive value in the smallest bulk. If they cannot find such a diet, their journeys will be limited both in time and in distance, and they will fail in their task All these men have found that a diet of meat and animal fat alone, with no carbohydrates, with no fruit or vegetables, with no vitamins other than those they get in meat, not merely provides them with all the energy they need, but keeps them in perfect health for months at a time. Seal meat and blubber for the Eskimo, pemmican for the Indian and the trapper, biltong for the hunter, have proved to be the perfect diet both in quality and in bulk.

Read entire article at http://www.ourcivilisation.com/fat/foreword.htm

To your response about athletes not benefiting from this diet, especially runners, I'd direct you to this success link about a woman who, on atkins, was able to complete a race consisted of a quarter-mile swim, a 13-mile bike ride and a 5-kilometer run.

http://atkinscenter.com/Archiv e/2002/6/17-987576.html

Here's to you're "Have any of you SEEN long-distance runners?"

I know lots and lots of low carbers who drink beer and wine!

Ditto. Moderation in all things, including moderation.

And my guess is that you don't have many of the others that directly refute the study you reference.

Well, you guessed wrong because, unlike you, I've read all relevant studies regarding this topic. Apparently, you spend all your time at pro low-carb sites, and it shows.

Here's another study you've probably never read: Similar weight loss with low- or high-carbohydrate diets.

The goal of this study was to evaluate the effect of diets that were equally low in energy but widely different in relative amounts of fat and carbohydrate on body weight during a 6-wk period of hospitalization. Consequently, 43 adult, obese persons were randomly assigned to receive diets containing 4.2 MJ/d (1000 kcal/d) composed of either 32% protein, 15% carbohydrate, and 53% fat, or 29% protein, 45% carbohydrate, and 26% fat. There was no significant difference in the amount of weight loss in response to diets containing either 15% (8.9 +/- 0.6 kg) or 45% (7.5 +/- 0.5 kg) carbohydrate. Furthermore, significant decreases in total body fat and waist-to-hip circumference were seen in both groups, and the magnitude of the changes did not vary as a function of diet composition. Fasting plasma glucose, insulin, cholesterol, and triacylglycerol concentrations decreased significantly in patients eating low-energy diets that contained 15% carbohydrate, but neither plasma insulin nor triacylglycerol concentrations fell significantly in response to the higher-carbohydrate diet. The results of this study showed that it was energy intake, not nutrient composition, that determined weight loss in response to low-energy diets over a short time period.

This study has more power than the others because the subjects were confined to a hospital, and could only eat what was given to them. The trouble with studies that employ free-living subjects is that the researchers can never be certain that the diets were followed as prescribed.

My diet growing up was neither high fat nor low fat, it was moderate. And by the way, Italians like their bread white and berry free, same with their pasta. It's all refined. When it's all said and done, man's life expectancy has grown not diminished. And your eskimos, what is their life expectancy (an honest question, hoping you have an answer to)? Humans have a long history of being omnivores (sp?) and I don't imagine that a moderate amount of refined carbohydrates is going to do anyone harm.

Covert Bailey who is not a person prone to deny science says that after an intense aerobic workout, nothing beats pure white sugar for restoring glycogen stores. Not because that's his opinion, but because it's been shown to be true through studies performed on professional athletes. My point is that refined carbs are only a problem if you overindulge. That is true if you overindulge in eggs, steak, cheese, beer, etc., etc.

As I noted in my first post to this thread, I eat carbs (refined and unrefined with every meal). My cholesterol is 191 with 85/HDL to 111/LDL ratio. My blood pressure is low, my resting heartrate is 56 and my bodyfat is 24%. None of this is due to my diet, it is due to my love of earning my food, and my decent genetic disposition.

As I said in my post above, I lost 100 pounds eating low carb. The problem with this study (and others like it) is that they make up the rules for the 'diet'. In this study they determined that a carbohydrate level of 15% was 'low carb'. Compared to an average American's diet it may be, but it is still far too high for most people to see much benefit. On this diet of 1000 calories per day, that would be 150 carbs.

Most of us who eat this way eat between 30 and 60 carbs per day on the weight loss phase of the diet. When I personally went over 35 carbs per day, I would not lose...even WITH exercise. Atkins, Protein Power, and all other successful plans limit carbs to far less than 150 grams per day in the initial diet stages. You MUST limit more so your body will begin to burn fat for fuel.

In essence, both diets tested were the SAME diet, so it is not surprising that they got the similar results. Ultimately, both these groups would fail to lose weight and keep it off because the body begins to adjust to severe calorie restriction and you have to cut down more and more to lose any weight. You just mess up your metabolism and gain weight with a vengence as soon as you let yourself eat even a little more food. Been there and done that...It's a vicious cycle. Eating this way stopped that for me. I'm eating far more that I did when I was 100 pounds heavier and keeping it off.

Well, you guessed wrong because, unlike you, I've read all relevant studies regarding this topic. Apparently, you spend all your time at pro low-carb sites, and it shows. Here's another study you've probably never read: Similar weight loss with low- or high-carbohydrate diets.

And it appears that you only heed the ones that support your predetermined viewpoint and ignore all the rest. That would explain why you can't seem to come to an intelligent conclusion. I realize that there has been intense brainwashing in favor of low fat/low calorie diets.

However, I have formed my opinion via facts and evidence, rather than popular propoganda. You are simply trying to support what you have been told, despite the fact that low fat is a dismally ineffective, unhealthy diet. You see, I used to believe in low fat so I have come full circle due to my research and personal experience.

What often happens is exactly what the studies claim. For example, I was on a 1300-1500 low fat calorie per day diet for 4 months and lost 2 net pounds. I lost all of my energy, much hair, developed low level depression and had throbbing low blood sugar headaches every day. By the end of this diet my cholesterol was 318, triglycerides 495 and I was hypoglycemic. Body fat was 43%

In desperation, I switched to Atkins and lost 40 pounds in 4 months eating 2000-2200 calories per day. Blood sugar was immediately corrected, headaches disappeared and within 6 months cholesterol was dramatically reduced. After 3.5 years on my "dangerous" high fat diet my cholesterol is 221, HDL 73, triglycerides 66 and body fat is 19.6% My doctor is thrilled with my results.

For me, I have to go with what works. When personal experience, test results and many major studies support my experience, I have to open my mind and see the truth that is right in front of me, DESPITE popular propoganda.

Compared to an average American's diet it may be, but it is still far too high for most people to see much benefit. On this diet of 1000 calories per day, that would be 150 carbs.

Good detective work, OreganWoman, 150 carbs would not be considered a "low carb" diet by any stretch of the imagination. That is pretty high carb and much higher than any phase of most low carb diets. The studies that I posted were truly low carb diets with a much lower % of calories from carbs.

Compared to an average American's diet it may be, but it is still far too high for most people to see much benefit. On this diet of 1000 calories per day, that would be 150 carbs.

Good detective work, OreganWoman, 150 carbs would not be considered a "low carb" diet by any stretch of the imagination. That is pretty high carb and much higher than any phase of most low carb diets. The studies that I posted were truly low carb diets with a much lower % of calories from carbs.

Actually, the 15% carb diet contains only 37.5 grams of carbohydrates, not 150 grams. You're confusing calories from carbohydrates with grams of carbohydrates.

The math: 1000 calories x 15% = 150 calories from carbs. 150 divided by 4 (1 gram of carb has 4 calories) = 37.5 grams of carbohydrates.

That's pretty low-carb if you ask me.

That's pretty low-carb if you ask me.

But not low carb enough for Atkins. Atkins induction level is UNDER TWENTY or it doesn't work. Carb levels that high are only for the maintence level or OWL after the bulk of weight loss has been acheived. Many cannot even abide levels that high on Maintenence without gaining weight again. I guess they should have checked the Atkins book before they did a study on it, huh?

Phase 1: Induction

Restrict carbohydrate consumption to 20 grams each day, obtaining carbohydrate primarily from salad and other non-starchy vegetables.

Phase 2: Ongoing Weight Loss (OWL)

Add carbohydrate, in the form of nutrient-dense and fiber-rich foods, by increasing to 25 grams daily the first week, 30 grams daily the next week and so on until weight loss stops. Then subtract 5 grams of carbohydrate from your daily intake so that you continue sustained, moderate weight loss.

Phase 3: Pre-Maintenance

Make the transition from weight loss to weight maintenance by increasing the daily carbohydrate intake in 10-gram increments each week so long as very gradual weight loss is maintained.

Phase 4: Lifetime Maintenance

Select from a wide variety of foods while controlling carbohydrate intake to ensure weight maintenance and a sense of well-being. This lifestyle is the foundation for a lifetime of better health.

http://atkinscenter.com/Archiv e/2001/11/29-367514.html