Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Arioch7
Arioch, As usual, you do not know of what you speak and never back up your claims. I have supported every claim I have made. You are simply parroting popular propoganda that you "heard" [with no substantiation] that is easily dispelled with the original article that started this debate and the subsequent ones I have posted. [did you even read the article??]

you wrote: As far as Eskimos being tainted by our dietary choices, I just dont buy it.

Of course you don't buy it because you DON'T KNOW. You research nothing. You are only guessing and making it up as you go along. My claims are backed up with research - yours are not. The reason I believe in Atkins is because I have RESEARCHED IT and let the FACTS and the SCIENCE bring me to my conclusions - NOT the other way around. As is common with you anti-low carb people, you cannot back your claims up because you have NOT come to the conclusion honestly via FACTS, evidence from your own research. You simply take the lazy man's way out and parrot what you HAVE HEARD. You have come to a conclusion based on OTHER PEOPLE'S opinions and that is why you get caught with your pants down like this.

Let's look at the a study about native Alaskans:

Dietary Changes and Obesity Associated With Glucose Intolerance in Alaska Natives

Reference: Murphy, N.J., Schraer, C.D., Thiele, M.C., et al., "Dietary Changes and Obesity Associated With Glucose Intolerance in Alaska Natives," Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 95(6), 1995, pages 676-682.

Summary: Obesity was virtually nonexistent in Alaska in aboriginal times, when carbohydrate consumption comprised only 3 to 5 percent of the total diet. Between 1962 and 1972, incidence of obesity was significantly higher than it had been 25 years prior. By 1978, carbohydrates constituted 50 percent of total calories, with a majority of those carbohydrates being of low nutrient-density. Researchers in this study sought to investigate associations between changes in food intake and its relation to body weight and glucose intolerance in Alaskan natives. In this study, nutrition screenings of 1,124 participants (20 years of age and older) were completed in 15 Alaskan villages during 1987 and 1988. Subjects were classified into those who ate native ethnic foods and those who ate Western foods. Body Mass Index was used to define weight status. Researchers noted that Athabascan Indians had twice the rate of non-insulin dependent diabetes (NIDDM) as did Yup'ik Eskimos. This appeared to be related to eating greater amounts of non-indigenous foods (white bread, soda, Tang/Hi-C, potatoes, rice cereal, shortening and deep fried foods), while at the same time eating fewer native carbohydrates (greens, berries, Eskimo potato) and fats (salmon/fish and seal oil). Subjects who were glucose intolerant weighed more than other subjects and consumed less seal oil and more non-ethnic, Western protein. Individuals underage 30 consumed significantly less indigenous protein and fat and more low-nutrient-density carbohydrate than individuals 60 and older. The authors noted that increased consumption of sweetened soda, increased incidence of overweight, midsection obesity and loss of fitness in Arctic children parallel non-Arctic children as do the escalating rates of NIDDM in children. The authors concluded that lower intake of seal and salmon fat was the most important factor in the increased rates of obesity and NIDDM in Alaska.

326 posted on 07/07/2002 11:29:28 AM PDT by Dana113
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 310 | View Replies ]


To: Dana113; All
Ok. I did not say that I knew for a fact that the Eskimos were not affected by our dietary choices, I said I did not buy it.

What else in my article was wrong?

I will et you know the reason I am not posting scientific studies. The thing is that almost the entire scientific community agrees with me. If I quote them, you will say that I am "Parroting," the status quo which IMHO is a conveniant way to say nothing I post will change your mind.

Lets see, how about this quote, it has Harvard AND the ADA...

"Atkins explains it this way: when carbohydrates are severely restricted, the body is missing its main energy source—glucose that is made from carbs—and so it burns its own fat to use as energy and you lose weight.

The American Dietetic Association’s explanation is this: A low-carb diet forces the liver to produce that missing glucose, in the process sacrificing muscle and other lean tissue.

Since a low-carb diet depletes muscle tissue and water quickly, dieters see instant results. But when a normal diet is resumed, the muscle tissue is rebuilt, water is restored and weight quickly returns.

“It’s calories and portion sizes that have made us fat, not complex carbohydrates,” says Dr. George Blackburn, a leading obesity expert at Harvard University.

“Every diet that lowers your overall caloric intake is going to make you lose weight,” adds Dr. John Foreyt, director of Nutrition Research at Baylor College. “You could have people stand on their heads and they’d lose weight.”

Since 95% of the bloody world agrees with me, I could post a billion others. When I posted anything such as carbs being the brains main source of energy, you said I was falling for thier propoganda.

About my misunderstanding of the condition known as Ketosis which I apoligized for, I also have medical essays which I will post so as to not make this too long.

The reason I am not doing any RESEARCH is because I have done it before and since I have been training for over fifteen years I think I have a handle on it but if it is research you want, I will give it to you. Of course, it will be flawed "Anti-Atkins;" research by your estimation.

328 posted on 07/07/2002 3:05:49 PM PDT by Arioch7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 326 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson