Atkins Was Obese, Had Heart Disease

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 34
  1. #1
    Registered User
    brodus's Avatar


    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Chicago, Illinois
    Posts
    1,023
    Rep Points
    354231

    Atkins Was Obese, Had Heart Disease






    Just so you know what's in store for you if you subscribe to the "Atkins for Life" thing.

    http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...dical_report_3


  2. #2
    Rebel without a clue
    ELITE MEMBER
    Stickboy's Avatar


    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    NM
    Posts
    1,115
    Rep Points
    1374636

    Actually, the report I saw said his diet was not responsible for his condition when he died, according to his doctor anyway.

  3. #3
    Registered User
    brodus's Avatar


    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Chicago, Illinois
    Posts
    1,023
    Rep Points
    354231

    Right, but independant review says otherwise. That's why it's a news story of significance. I'm sure the doctors who percribed Rush Limbaugh's pain killers would say he had real "pain management" issues.

    Also, his wife didn't permit an autopsy--so the world will never know how clogged his pipes were. It also is a good way to secure the revenue stream.

    And he did have a heart attack that he tried to cover up as something else.

    It's no coincidence that his health condidtions were exactly what science would predict for someone with the risk factors associated with his diet and lack of real exercise.

    The mayor of New York recently had to "take back" an off-mic comment about Atkins being fat.

    Responsible doctors and legitimately trained physicians would never perscribe such a diet, especially for the long-term.

  4. #4
    inadvertant tree hugger
    ELITE MEMBER
    bandaidwoman's Avatar


    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Atlanta, Georgia
    Posts
    1,440
    Rep Points
    59565640

    There are no long term data on what Atkin's does. No studies were ever carried out beyond six months. So we have no long term data on Atkin's unlike other diets such as the American heart Association diet etc.

    People on Atkin's do lose weight faster (initial fluid loss mostly) and surprisingly, had good cholesterol (lower ldl and high hdl) after a 6 mos study in two studies http://abcnews.go.com/sections/livin...er_031120.html

    However, does this translate to less heart attacks or strokes later is questionable.

    In addition, there is a higher rate of kidney stones, gall stones and gout in those who pursue this diet and are predisposed.

    In Atkin's defense....he was ahead of his time in advocating how we look at our carbohydrate portion. His diet was extreme but the new food pyramid has now incorporated a higher portion of protien than it did previously. In addition, it is a great diet to reduce seizures in those refractory to seizure medicines


    Atkins Diet May Help Prevent Epileptic Seizures in Difficult-to-Treat Patients



    Dec. 10, 2003 (Boston) — Researchers at the Johns Hopkins Children's Center in Baltimore, Maryland, are experimenting with the Atkins diet as a possible regimen to prevent epileptic seizures in patients refractory to other therapeutic regimens.

    Pediatric neurologist Eric H. Kossoff, MD, told Medscape he got the idea from parents who would say, "Like the Atkins diet?" when he told them he wanted to put their children on the ketogenic diet, a more rigorous high-fat, low-carbohydrate diet used as anticonvulsant therapy for intractable patients.

    Both diets mimic starvation, tricking the body into burning fat and producing ketones. "Ketone bodies do something to help reduce epilepsy. Beyond that, we don't know," Dr. Kossoff said here at the 57th annual meeting of the American Epilepsy Society, where he presented a poster on a pilot study of six patients, ages 7 to 52 years.

    Two children achieved 100% seizure control, and in an 18-year-old, seizure activity was reduced by 90%. Two middle-aged adults did not improve, and a 12-year-old patient experienced only a 20% reduction in seizure activity.

    Both seizure-free patients are still on the Atkins diet -- one for 20 months, according to Dr. Kossoff. He said he has since tested the diet in a dozen patients, and is recruiting 20 children for a larger study.

    A big advantage of the Atkins diet is that it is more lenient than the ketogenic diet, which children start in a hospital on a two-day fast, according to Dr. Kossoff. "It is much easier to start," he said. "We can tell them to go to CVS and buy a book."

    The researchers began the children on 10 grams of carbohydrates a day, which is less than the 20 grams usually recommended in the Atkins diet, but more than is recommended in the ketogenic diet. "If they are doing well, we give them more carbs," he said. "If they are not doing well, we take away carbs."

    Some of the children lost weight initially, but later stabilized, according to the Baltimore researcher. One concern is that the high-protein, high-fat combination in the Atkins diet might be more than the kidneys can handle, according to Dr. Kossoff. The only side effect in the pilot study was a slight cholesterol increase in a 42-year-old patient.

    Despite the ubiquity of the Atkins diet, Dr. Kossoff warned against epileptic patients trying it ad hoc. "This is something that should be done under medical supervision," he said. "It is not something that families, parents should be doing on their own."

    This study received no commercial funding.

    AES 57th Annual Meeting: Abstract 2.310. Presented Dec. 9, 2003.

    Reviewed by Gary D. Vogin, MD

    In addition, Dr. Atkin's did have evidence of viral cardiomyopathy and congestive heart failure according to the inner circles of doctors . (Many of whom hate Atkin's out of either jealousy or that he was so successful selling an idea that had not been tested in clinical trials).
    Last edited by bandaidwoman; 02-10-2004 at 01:14 PM.
    Official Race Member of the Crank Crushing Rednecks

    Eat more mud, mountain bike until you die!

    XX Feminine power

  5. #5
    Registered User


    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    70
    Rep Points
    10

    Yes he did have a heart attack. From what exactly, who knows. I don't knock his diet because I know several people who have lost a lot of weight. I tried it and it just was not for me. In the gym, my energy dropped and had little endurance. Then I would feel sluggish for the rest of the day. I switched to eating clean 5-6 times a day (including whey protein shakes) and feel much better. Feels like the weight is coming off (slowly ) but muscle gains have been favorable.

  6. #6
    Registered User
    brodus's Avatar


    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Chicago, Illinois
    Posts
    1,023
    Rep Points
    354231

    An overwheliming amount of research shows that consuming high levels of red meats, sat. fat, and cholesterol has adverse health effects:

    Research has shown consuming high levels of saturated fat, as many Atkins dieters do, may have adverse health consequences.

    Adds Anderson, who discourages his patients from the Atkins diet, "Using the Atkins guidelines long-term will raise cholesterol by 28 percent, whereas a low-fat diet will lower cholesterol by 20 percent."

    Also, Atkins doesn't work in the long-term. This is very recent:

    The new research, published in the New England Journal of Medicine, compares the weight loss of severely obese individuals eating according to Atkins with those eating according to a conventional low-fat, low-calorie nutrition plan.

    The results? While the Atkins dieters slimmed down significantly more than the traditional dieters, there was no weight difference between the groups after one year
    Is giving people hardened arteries and health problems "okay" in the name of "raising carb consicousness?" That's the worst line of reasoning I've ever heard. That's like saying RJ Reynolds should be thanked for raising "celan air consicousness."

    I find it funny that anyone who criticizes Atkins is "jealous," and that a concern for the well-being of others is never identified as a the prime motivator.

    There are tons of ways to lose weight quickly that have adverse health effects. And yes, Atkins is one of them.

    I'm only upset b/c people want an easy, no-sweat way to look like fitness models, and there is no other way to do it and be healthy than to push your metabolism through the roof with exercise. Just look at Atkins himself.

    If Atkins is so wonderful, why don't competitive athletes use it? I ate everything in sight and as many carbs as I could, and through TRAINING, not some cook diet, ran a 1:45 half mile in college. I was sub 5% bodyfat for years. Anyone else could do the same thing, and here's the simple perscription--workout two hours a day. Hard work produces results--Atkins produces revenue for health food companies and heart attacks.

    I also worked with nutrionists on the President's Council of Fitness, including Dr. Charles Kuntzlman who designed the health curriculum for the State of Michigan, and the overwhelming consensus was that Atkins diet is bad news.

    I propose an alternatie explanation--there are more people standing to gain $ by promoting/not slamming Atkins now (including DOCTORS, food , grocery stores, media outlets, etc.), and hence they shy away from critical analysis.

  7. #7
    inadvertant tree hugger
    ELITE MEMBER
    bandaidwoman's Avatar


    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Atlanta, Georgia
    Posts
    1,440
    Rep Points
    59565640

    Most doctors hate Atkins for the very reason we all have specified which is that no long term studies have been done despite quick results. And may I stress that noone, especially doctors, make any profit from advocating atkins, only the Atkin's institute. But the research is still out and conflicting studies depend on the patient population studied. For those with syndrome X or type II diabetes, an Atkin's like diet may be good :

    In a head-to-head comparison between two popular and distinctly different eating plans, the Atkins diet trimmed significantly more pounds and body fat in obese but otherwise healthy women than a traditional low-fat diet, according to a report released last week at the annual meeting of the American Dietetics Association.

    The study enrolled 53 women, aged 31 to 59, for six months. Half followed a low-fat approach, eating 30 percent of calories from fat. The other half ate according to the very-low-carbohydrate diet popularized by physican Robert Atkins.

    Those in the Atkins group shed on average 18.5 pounds -- about 10 of it from body fat. (The rest was due to loss of water and lean muscle.) By comparison, the low-fat group lost about nine pounds, about five of them from body fat.

    Despite the results, the study's lead author cautioned against drawing too many conclusions or abandoning a low-fat approach to weight loss. "I'm not sure that there is a take-home message from this study, except that there is more research needed," said registered dietitian Bonnie Brehm, assistant professor in the College of Nursing at the University of Cincinnati. "This is one, relatively short-term study. Our conclusions are that in the short term, a low-carbohydrate diet produces loss of weight and body fat. . . . We by no means are recommending the Atkins diet from this one study."
    I personally like the Zone diet and the South beach diet.

    In the long run, the Atkin's diet incorporates foods that are known cancer risks (especially colon cancer which is associated with high fat foods and meat) so for this reason, it should not be advocated long term even if the cardiac studies may surprise us.
    Official Race Member of the Crank Crushing Rednecks

    Eat more mud, mountain bike until you die!

    XX Feminine power

  8. #8
    RAWR!
    ELITE MEMBER
    derekisdman's Avatar


    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    1,294
    Rep Points
    1440588

    Don't try to argue with bandaid woman, you won't win.
    Homer: Hey! I saved your life! That egg sandwich could have killed you by cholesterol.
    Lenny: Pfft, forget it, Homer. While it has been established that eggs contain cholesterol, it has not yet been proven conclusively that they actually raise the level of serum cholesterol in the human
    blood stream.


  9. #9
    inadvertant tree hugger
    ELITE MEMBER
    bandaidwoman's Avatar


    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Atlanta, Georgia
    Posts
    1,440
    Rep Points
    59565640

    Originally posted by derekisdman
    Don't try to argue with bandaid woman, you won't win.

    I didn't think we were arguing, and Brodus brings up great points that make most in the medical community skeptical of the Atkins, including myself.
    Official Race Member of the Crank Crushing Rednecks

    Eat more mud, mountain bike until you die!

    XX Feminine power

  10. #10
    Registered User
    brodus's Avatar


    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Chicago, Illinois
    Posts
    1,023
    Rep Points
    354231

    It is not true to imply that the Atkins Institute is the sole beneficiary and that doctors don't stand to gain anything from endorsements. There are plenty of crooked docs who will support any product or endorse any supplement available. Many of theses people are piggybacking the Atkins craze to get their free lunch ticket.

    An entire BRAND CULTURE has developed around Atkins, and people are making money hand over fist. It goes both ways. Just look at all of atkins and "low-carb" products on the market. Hell, they've even inked a deal with Subway. Everywhere I look I see the Atkins logo. That means $, $, $. Many, many people are banking on this--it extends far beyond the Atkins Institute. Even Beer companies--they hope you're too dumb to know that light beers already are low-carb, and that beer isn't exactly diet-friendly.

    This is what I refer to when I say that there are a ton of people who stand to gain a lot by down-playing the risks of Atkins.

    Do you know why they call it "The Atkins Institute?" It's because no real health insitute will support their claims, nor will any major University with a background in exercise physiology and nutrition.

    I just wonder how many Olympic athletes eat Atkins or any other fad diet....I can confidently say probably NONE. I have worked out with a man who held the world record for the fastest mile (Jim Ryan--he went sub-4:00 in HIGH SCHOOL). I also worked with a true fitness and nutrition expert who was on the President's Council of Fitness and close friends with Arnold Shw. (Dr. Charles Kuntzleman http://www.kines.umich.edu/facstaff/kuntzleman.htm). From my experience, people in peak physical condition worry about training first and carb-counting last, if at all. Ketosis is not an athlete's friend.

    I appreceiate that people have experienced weight loss and there are some who enjoy Atkins. I just get upset because people think they're going to look ripped and buff just by replacing bread with steak, and that's impossible and unhealthy. I thought this was common knowledge.

  11. #11
    Registered User
    brodus's Avatar


    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Chicago, Illinois
    Posts
    1,023
    Rep Points
    354231

    Yes, we're not arguing! I love a good debate.

    I don't want to come off sounding angry!

    I am just very skeptical of things, especially when I see the logo EVERYWHERE! It drives me nuts.

  12. #12
    RAWR!
    ELITE MEMBER
    derekisdman's Avatar


    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    1,294
    Rep Points
    1440588

    I know I know
    Homer: Hey! I saved your life! That egg sandwich could have killed you by cholesterol.
    Lenny: Pfft, forget it, Homer. While it has been established that eggs contain cholesterol, it has not yet been proven conclusively that they actually raise the level of serum cholesterol in the human
    blood stream.


  13. #13
    inadvertant tree hugger
    ELITE MEMBER
    bandaidwoman's Avatar


    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Atlanta, Georgia
    Posts
    1,440
    Rep Points
    59565640

    I do know long distance athletes do not fare too well on the atkins.

    T he ones who really do best are the most sedate ones who rarely get much excercise in.

    However, some of them are smart enough to use the Atkins as a jump start to lose 20 pounds so their athritic joints can handle the load of weight bearing exercises and they go to a more modified version (more like the zone) and start increasing the excercise workouts. I've seen patients use this in a temporary fashion and it has worked well for them.
    Official Race Member of the Crank Crushing Rednecks

    Eat more mud, mountain bike until you die!

    XX Feminine power

  14. #14
    Moderator
    MODERATOR
    Dale Mabry's Avatar


    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Elsewhere
    Posts
    15,580
    Rep Points
    247492144

    Anyway, I will pick apart your statement for you. This si in no way an attack, just letting you know the facts.


    Originally posted by brodus
    An overwheliming amount of research shows that consuming high levels of red meats, sat. fat, and cholesterol has adverse health effects:

    Their methodology is flawed...


    Also, Atkins doesn't work in the long-term. This is very recent:

    They dropped weight, therefore it WAS effective, maybe not more so than the other ideters, but it was effective. Also, this never looked at HDL and other indices of health, just weight. It also did not look at the difference between LBM and total mass.

    Is giving people hardened arteries and health problems "okay" in the name of "raising carb consicousness?" That's the worst line of reasoning I've ever heard. That's like saying RJ Reynolds should be thanked for raising "celan air consicousness."

    See above regarding Research methodology, these claims are baseless. You cannot argue one minute that there is a lack of evidence supporting Atkins' methods and then say there are long-term effects from the diet. Bandaid woman hit it right on the head, there is no long-term studies on the Atkins diet to state for a certain fact that it will cause any of the afforementioned problems just as there is no way to say it helps out these issues.

    I'm only upset b/c people want an easy, no-sweat way to look like fitness models, and there is no other way to do it and be healthy than to push your metabolism through the roof with exercise. Just look at Atkins himself.

    Couldn't agree with you more about b=people wanting an easy way out, but who cares about Atkins personal health. Even if he was unhealthy, we are all making the assumption that Atkins ate according to his diet. I have never seen a single article stating that he followed this diet.

    If Atkins is so wonderful, why don't competitive athletes use it? I ate everything in sight and as many carbs as I could, and through TRAINING, not some cook diet, ran a 1:45 half mile in college. I was sub 5% bodyfat for years. Anyone else could do the same thing, and here's the simple perscription--workout two hours a day. Hard work produces results--Atkins produces revenue for health food companies and heart attacks.

    This diet is not geared toward professional athletes, it is geared to overweight people trying to lose weight. These are 2 different populations and, thus, cannot be compared.

    I also worked with nutrionists on the President's Council of Fitness, including Dr. Charles Kuntzlman who designed the health curriculum for the State of Michigan, and the overwhelming consensus was that Atkins diet is bad news.

    Is this the same President's council on fitness that pushed the old food pyramid for years? Do they have any clinical evidence to support this "finding"?

    I propose an alternatie explanation--there are more people standing to gain $ by promoting/not slamming Atkins now (including DOCTORS, food , grocery stores, media outlets, etc.), and hence they shy away from critical analysis.
    The only people that stand to make $ from this diet is the Atkins folks. I can make a Low carb bar and call it just that, a low carb bar. Atkins does not hold any type of patent on the term "low carb", but he does on his little symbol that pops up everywhere. If Subway decides they want their food to carry that symbol, that is their choice.

    By the way, I don't follow an Atkins diet and never will. I just think the folks that are slamming it are either misinformed or backstepping for decades of poor research. It has it's merits and will continue to evolve.
    If sense were common, everyone would have it.

    4/2007-Current 75th Ranked most popular image 1 spot behind Prince's bulge...

    Check out my world famous Bob Loblaw's Law Blog at http://www.synergyhw.blogspot.com/...Just kidding, it's a health and wellness blog.

  15. #15
    Another Arnold wannabe
    ELITE MEMBER


    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Ouagadugu
    Posts
    272
    Rep Points
    165493

    The PCRM that published that Report is fake

    Hey guys.. I haven't read through all the arguments in your debate, but in case you haven't got to it I thought I'd bring this to your attention:
    PCRM Just A Front

    It turns out the PCRM (Physicians Committee For Responsible Medicine) who published this original report about Atkins being obese is a fake organization. It's just a front for the PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals).

    It's all a part of their campaign to turn Americans into Vegetarians.

    Atkins went into hospital at 180-190 pounds (he was over 6 feet tall) but ballooned to the 258 while in a coma before he died.

  16. #16
    Rebel without a clue
    ELITE MEMBER
    Stickboy's Avatar


    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    NM
    Posts
    1,115
    Rep Points
    1374636

    I wasn't try to say people should use the Atkins Diet ( I don't, and won't, but I have no need for a diet designed to lose weight) in my original post.

    Corri said it much better than I ever could.

    PETA. Doesn't surprise me at all, if true. These people would kill off the human population to save a bird.

  17. #17
    Registered User
    brodus's Avatar


    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Chicago, Illinois
    Posts
    1,023
    Rep Points
    354231

    bandaidwoman--you're totally right, I think the rapid loss of Atkins would be great for the sedentary obese in reducing muscle/joint strain and accelerating their return to exercise. I hadn't really thought about that. I initially thought this discussion was more geared to bodybuilders or people on track for competetive athletics (considering the site), but that was short-sighted of me. I'm more concerned about the effects on blood glycogen, the LBM loss due to ketosis, and long-term health effects.


    Well, Corri, belief is a choice, and if you get your news from http://www.consumerfreedom.com/ instead of peer-reviewed sources that employ top candidates from major journalism schools you are certainly free to do so.

    That "article" you linked to is a press release written by the restaurant and beef industry.

    In case you didn't know, so-called "Center for Consumer Freedom" is funded by restaurants and food companies and is less than six-month old (legally), so I would hardly call their reporting non-biased. They also think that our country is gripped by "fat hysteria," and don't really understand the concept of public interest. They're the same people who favor sticking cows full of steroids prior to slaughter to get more money at market, so I don't rate their ethics very high.

    And I don't have the time to do dissect Dale's response to my arguments--but I do appreciate the time he took to formulate semi-cogent rebuttals.

    I'll just say three things:

    1. The President's Council on Fitness, led for a time by Arnold Shw., did a lot more to raise exercise consciousness and long-term healthy living for the public at no cost than the for-profit Atkins empire has done. But that's not the rub for me--people who truly want to help humanity don't charge assloads of money for their "secrets"--be they religious leaders, whatever--those not driven by profit generally seek to work in the public arena, as their desire is to enlighten humanity vs. make $.

    2. You are plain wrong to assert that every study that links increased dietary intake of high sat-fat/high cholesterol with increased health risks utilized flawed methodology. I honestly can't believe you'd think that. If you had access to a University computer system, you'd quickly realize just how wrong you are.

    3. This is a bodybuuilding website and forum, not an obesity forum. My analysis of the Atkins diet, then, was well within the threshold of topical reference, and since most all posters here aspire to some higher level of athleticism, my view--that Atkins probably isn't the best choice--is a perfectly valid statement.

    Let's do a deal--I'll keep "backstepping" on my "decades old research" that has built countless world-class athletes, and you try pure Atkins for six months and watch what happens to your lean body mass and blood levels. We both take photos before and after, and get independent third-party verification. I'm so confident that "old school" training is far superior, that I'd bet just about everything I own on it. If you're not a strength athlete, then the first person to run a sub 5-minute mile wins. (I would assert that a six-month pure Atkins diet would prevent virualy anyone from reaching that speed/endurance level).

  18. #18
    Moderator
    MODERATOR
    Dale Mabry's Avatar


    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Elsewhere
    Posts
    15,580
    Rep Points
    247492144

    Originally posted by brodus

    And I don't have the time to do dissect Dale's response to my arguments--but I do appreciate the time he took to formulate semi-cogent rebuttals.

    I'll just say three things:

    1. The President's Council on Fitness, led for a time by Arnold Shw., did a lot more to raise exercise consciousness and long-term healthy living for the public at no cost than the for-profit Atkins empire has done. But that's not the rub for me--people who truly want to help humanity don't charge assloads of money for their "secrets"--be they religious leaders, whatever--those not driven by profit generally seek to work in the public arena, as their desire is to enlighten humanity vs. make $.

    I know all the particulars of the Atkins diet and have not spent one penny on anything related to the Atkins people. I also agree that the President's council on fitness greatly raised the awareness to the general public, but their ideas on diet are lacking.


    2. You are plain wrong to assert that every study that links increased dietary intake of high sat-fat/high cholesterol with increased health risks utilized flawed methodology. I honestly can't believe you'd think that. If you had access to a University computer system, you'd quickly realize just how wrong you are.

    I have been in clinical research for 3 years and am now a clinical research coordinator at the University of Pennsylvania. I have full access to anything you could imagine and then some, as well as full credibility when it comes to picking apart this research. My initial point was poorly phrased so I will rephrase it. The research that is used to condemn Atkins' philosophies is not valid as it pertains to the Atkins diet. You cannot take people who have been eating carbs for their whole life, switch them to a keto diet for 4 weeks, and then measure indices of CV health, you would need a longer term study to assess this. Plus, you cannot perform a study on one thing and change the focus of it 25 years later. Those studies were done on Saturated fat as it pertains to someone eating a carb rich diet and thus, cannot be used for people utilizing the Atkins diet.


    3. This is a bodybuuilding website and forum, not an obesity forum. My analysis of the Atkins diet, then, was well within the threshold of topical reference, and since most all posters here aspire to some higher level of athleticism, my view--that Atkins probably isn't the best choice--is a perfectly valid statement.

    Couldn't agree with you more here. I never said it should be used by athletes, I believe it is contraindicated to athletes. I was merely stating that the diet has it's merits to a greater populatiojn, the obese people of this obese country.

    Let's do a deal--I'll keep "backstepping" on my "decades old research" that has built countless world-class athletes, and you try pure Atkins for six months and watch what happens to your lean body mass and blood levels. We both take photos before and after, and get independent third-party verification. I'm so confident that "old school" training is far superior, that I'd bet just about everything I own on it. If you're not a strength athlete, then the first person to run a sub 5-minute mile wins. (I would assert that a six-month pure Atkins diet would prevent virualy anyone from reaching that speed/endurance level).

    I would never do this diet since I am not obese, which is the target population.
    Let us continue this rather great debate.

    Edit: The smoking gun has the medical examiner's report of Dr. Atkins online. The ME report does not state that Atkins' death was caused by a heart attack, it says he had a history of CV issues. These issues could have been discovered recently, or they could have been discovered 40 years ago, who knows.
    Last edited by Dale Mabry; 02-11-2004 at 09:10 AM.
    If sense were common, everyone would have it.

    4/2007-Current 75th Ranked most popular image 1 spot behind Prince's bulge...

    Check out my world famous Bob Loblaw's Law Blog at http://www.synergyhw.blogspot.com/...Just kidding, it's a health and wellness blog.

  19. #19
    Registered User
    brodus's Avatar


    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Chicago, Illinois
    Posts
    1,023
    Rep Points
    354231

    Hah--the debate continues! I told myself I would leave it at that, but Dale brings up many good points.

    Well, we'll never know the truth about Atkins death b/c his wife suspiciously deined an autopsy and it seems that many groups with an agenda have gotten a hold of this sotry and muddied the water beyond hopes of clarity (to wit: the story has become a touchstone for the fight between the Restaurant and Beef industries and PETA, and I don't trust either group!)

    My initial point was poorly phrased so I will rephrase it.
    Yeah, I thought that's what you meant. True, most of the studies used to link high fat dietary intake to heart disease/health risk factors were not specific to Atkins plans. And I'm not claiming that there is a 100% scientific causal relationship here. I would say, though, that through meta-analysis you can establish definite trends towards increased health risk over the long term.

    And even when you introduce the dramatic changes brought on by the diet--ketosis, insulin whiplash, and the rest--still, eating bacon, eggs, and steak all day is not healthy. Okay, you're correct to point out that in a scientific setting, the validity of trying to connect the dots is in question based on the Cartesian principles that form the backbone of modern science (the method of doubt). But there are plenty of studies that weren't conducted SPECIFICALLY on Atkins, but carefully looked at the effects of a high fat/high chol diet (of which Atkins is a version), and did establish causal links to risk factors over time. This is enough for physicians and nutritionists to proceed with caution. Similar actions have been taken in regards to Effedra and other substances.

    I just don't get how losing weight quickly allows smart people to fool themselves into thinking they've trumped a natural rule, that eventually, garbage in/garbage out.

    You're a smart person--you know its a bad diet for anyone in athletics, you wouldn't do it, even though you know that substantial long-term studies haven't been done. Why is this?

    Couldn't agree with you more here. I never said it should be used by athletes, I believe it is contraindicated to athletes. I was merely stating that the diet has it's merits to a greater populatiojn, the obese people of this obese country.
    Well, I am an athlete and I would hazard a guess that the vast majority of posters here are too, so this is a rather signiificant distinction when you're evaluating the efficacy of a dieting regime. It's not really helpful to advocate a diet for the grossly obese on a bodbulding website. Look at the logo--it is of a lean, ripped athlete, not a blubberous, sedentary lazy ass.

    I point to comeptetive athletics as a litmus test for dietary and health regimes b/c at this level, tiny changes in performance are exhibited and felt, and the athlete's body is functioning at top efficiency.

    After all the defense of Atkins, and a supposed disbelief in the side effects and risks, you still won't eat your own medicine. Your only escape is this:
    I would never do this diet since I am not obese, which is the target population
    Is this true though? It seems to me the "target population" for this marketing engine and pop-culture phenomenon is everyone. If it's only for the obese, surely the last place you'd expect to find it is on a bodybuilding forum, where people are concerned with attaining goals of sub 5% b.f.

    I don't even need to find studies to site to guarantee that anyone who works out 1 to 2 hours per day as a LIFESTYLE change, not a fad diet, is going to lose weight faster, maintain lean body mass, KEEP the weight off, feel better about themsleves, have elevated seratonin levels, and dramatically reduce their disease risk factors to a level the Atkins can only dream of. This is what physicians with good conscience should advocate. Something proven to work for everyone.

    The fact that noone here will take my challenge says everything. If you want to get ripped, win races, or kick a$$ in ANY sport, Atkins is the worst.

    I extend my offer to anyone who thinks they can eat pure Atkins for one month and run a sub-5 minute mile, or consistently rain at a pro level. I believe this is physiologically impossible.

  20. #20
    Moderator
    MODERATOR
    Dale Mabry's Avatar


    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Elsewhere
    Posts
    15,580
    Rep Points
    247492144

    Athletes are about efficiency, people who are trying to lose weight are not. If you want explosiveness, carbs are the best fuel source so it would hold that one would want them if performing an event that requires explosive behavior such as weight training.

    In regard to your challenge, you are assuming that speed in the mile is the only performance parameter to consider, which is far from correct. You could measure performance in a million different ways and find pros and cons for both. I imagine that you chose this event because you are good at it. Obviously Atkins does not lend itself well to this event with it's lack of carbs. On the other hand, I think one could perform an endurance event equally as well on Atkins as on a normal carb-heavy diet. I think a more appropriate challenge would be to have someone eating an Atkins style diet perform a long distance event. When I did the Anabolic Diet a few years back I got 5 miles in a touch over 30 mins and I imagine I prolly could have kept that pace for about 10 minutes at a weight of 200 lbs.
    If sense were common, everyone would have it.

    4/2007-Current 75th Ranked most popular image 1 spot behind Prince's bulge...

    Check out my world famous Bob Loblaw's Law Blog at http://www.synergyhw.blogspot.com/...Just kidding, it's a health and wellness blog.

  21. #21
    Senior Member


    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    740
    Rep Points
    10

    there is nothing suspicious about a person not having an autopsy done on a decedent at all. although having an autopsy done on a live person would be surprising. If a person dies of a known cause due to non criminal actions or due to an illness for which he received treatment, then no autopsy is required at all.
    for people who see conspiracy all around them, this non-autopsy is a huge issue. they want it done " for posterity's sake" or to "clear up the murky issues " or whatever. they quote "public interest" ad naseum.

    if a 30 year old wife of a recently deceased octagenarian decides to forego the autopsy then immediately cremates the body, that is suspicious. this was not the case.

    i dont' recall it ever being said that Atkins would be beneficial for athletes. Did Atkins himself ever say this or was it ever published that the atkins style diet would be of benefit for sub 4 minute milers or elite athletes.? i have never had enough interest in this sustained low carb diet business to ever inquire.
    mm

  22. #22
    Senior Member


    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    740
    Rep Points
    10

    Re: The PCRM that published that Report is fake

    Originally posted by Corri
    Atkins went into hospital at 180-190 pounds (he was over 6 feet tall) but ballooned to the 258 while in a coma before he died.
    please provide your reference for this information. i can't find this fact mentioned anywhere. every journalist continually mentions 258 pounds which was his weight at time of death, not admittance

  23. #23
    Registered User
    brodus's Avatar


    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Chicago, Illinois
    Posts
    1,023
    Rep Points
    354231

    Marcus is right, it's not normal to do an autopsy for someone that dies essentially of natural causes. It is true, though, that we'll never know what exactly was up with the founder of the lastest anti-fat fads b/c since no autopsy was performed. Part of me thinks that someone interested in putting rumors to rest with nothing to hide might permit an autopsy, but you're right, that's speculation.

    The importance of complex carbohydrates in the nutrition schedule of a bodybuilder cannot be emphasized often enough.
    Someone pinch me--is this a bodybulding site? Or an obesity site? Judging by the name and the logo, it seems to me that athletes would be interested in diets that support athletics. Why are you advocating a diet that doesn't work well for athletes? That's really the heart of the issue, no pun intended.

    Dale, I picked a mile becuase it's easily measured on a track, which most people have acess to, whereas a 5k road race is more problematic. And actually, you are wrong, Atkins favors shorter distances, not longer. The longer you extend the distance, the more important stored glycogen becomes. That's why marathoners and competitive cyclists carbo-load and mile runners don't really. That's why they make high-density carbo gels for distance athletes. And to run fast miles, you need to train at long distances, and there is no way you can sustain interval training at sub-5 minute paces on hamburgers and half and half. I choose this time b/c I think its the threshold between the top 5% of conditioned runners and the rest of the population. I'm saying that if you're shooting for the top, Atkins will only hurt you.

    I used running numbers becuase I am familiar with them and I have trained with Olympic athletes, so I am aware of the demands that kind of training puts on your body.

    I also trained with college soccer teams, and they carbo-loaded before games, too. My brother plays college football, and they have spaghetti dinners before games.

    No matter the sport, I see very little difference in the importance of carbs to anyone working out for more than 25 minutes. A bodybuilder on Atkins is going to feel fatigue much quiker than a bodybuiler who is eating right.

    Let's face it--no study or test I think up is going to satisfy your conditions. I was trying to think of something simple, since proposing a double-blind, controlled unviersity conducted study seems out of my price range.

    Why even waste your time counting carbs when the science behind increased exercise is so strong? I get angry b/c many, many people are misled into thinking Atkins can make them look like fitness models, and that is utter horse$hit. Posting pro-Atkins stuff on a Body Building site contributes to this mis-direction, in my opinon. No one gains huge, wins races, climbs mountains on Atkins. It is only for obese people who can't really exercise to get them to a state where they can exercise and then begin a healthy lifestyle.

  24. #24
    Moderator
    MODERATOR
    Dale Mabry's Avatar


    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Elsewhere
    Posts
    15,580
    Rep Points
    247492144

    IMO, bodybuilders are far from athetes. Do you think Ronnie Coleman could run a sub 5 minute mile? I would love to see him play a pro sport, I bet he couldn't. Also, I will prolly catch hell for this, but the percentage of people on this board who I would term BBers is prolly no more than 2%.


    http://static.elibrary.com/m/medical...stancerunners/

    Medical Post : Athletes trim too much fat from diets: long distance runners especially guilty [Peter Horvath study] :
    Albuquerque, N.M. -- Athletes may have trimmed too much fat from their diets for peak performance, New York researchers report. "Many athletes, especially long distance runners , consume insufficient energy for optimal training and performance , believing body weight is more important than maintaining maximal energy stores , " said Dr. Peter Horvath (PhD) , associate professor of nutrition at the State University of New York at Buffalo. "There's a fat phobia out there among athletes." The emphasis on muscle glycogen stores has led athletes to focus on dietary carbohydrates at the expense of triglycerides , Dr. Horvath said. "A low-energy diet with low dietary triglycerides may compromise performance for certain individuals and events." The study involving six male long distance runners aged 18 to 21 was presented at the American College of Nutrition meeting here.


    IN regrad to running a marathon vs sprinting. You would not be able to create energy fast enough to power a sprint in the absence of carbohydrate considering it is highly anaerobic. If you were running a marathon, you would at least be able complete it with just fat in the diet.

    Anyway, about your proposal. What percentage of the general population can run a sub 5 minute mile? I am talking people who have absolutely no training to do so? Now, take that pool of people who do have the training to do so, what do their coaches push in terms of diet? I would imagine the number of coaches who promote the Atkins diet to be zero. So how do you know without a shadow of a doubt that it cannot be done? There is no sample of subjects to compare. You seem to know alot about research, so you should know that you can't say something cannot happen when there is no pool of people to pick from. You would need either a child who is on Atkins and trains while doing this diet, or someone who has been training for years to switch over to the Atkins diet. I would imagine the number of people on this board that could run a sub 5 minute mile to be a handful at best so your best bet on analyzing the Atkins diet would be to get one of them to do it. The fastest mile I have run is 5:27 and I am not interested in training to reduce that as I have no reason to.


    In parting, think about this. Fifteen years ago, if you asked an expert what the best way to lose fat is, they would tell you that 30-60 mins of slow cardio is the way to go. The answer today is HIIT, which is 180 degrees from slow, steady cardio. Research is ever-evolving and I would imagine that within the next 10-15 years, you may just see an Atkins advocate become a sub 5 minute miler. The diet has not been mainstream for long enough to judge if it is totally inadequate for an athlete.
    If sense were common, everyone would have it.

    4/2007-Current 75th Ranked most popular image 1 spot behind Prince's bulge...

    Check out my world famous Bob Loblaw's Law Blog at http://www.synergyhw.blogspot.com/...Just kidding, it's a health and wellness blog.

  25. #25
    Peak Physiques™
    ELITE MEMBER
    Twin Peak's Avatar


    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    7,870
    Rep Points
    4938138

    Originally posted by Dale Mabry
    IMO, bodybuilders are far from athetes. Do you think Ronnie Coleman could run a sub 5 minute mile? I would love to see him play a pro sport, I bet he couldn't. Also, I will prolly catch hell for this, but the percentage of people on this board who I would term BBers is prolly no more than 2%.
    I think you are flawed and/or highly limited in your definitions here.

    1) Define "athlete".

    2) Define "bodybuilder."

    Personally, based on my own definitions, I consider myself both. However, I am not a professional at either.

    What does running a sub 5 minute mile have to do with being an athlete? Hardly appropriate for a definition of the same.

  26. #26
    Moderator
    MODERATOR
    Dale Mabry's Avatar


    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Elsewhere
    Posts
    15,580
    Rep Points
    247492144

    Originally posted by Twin Peak
    I think you are flawed and/or highly limited in your definitions here.

    1) Define "athlete".

    2) Define "bodybuilder."

    Personally, based on my own definitions, I consider myself both. However, I am not a professional at either.

    What does running a sub 5 minute mile have to do with being an athlete? Hardly appropriate for a definition of the same.

    I am not really defining them, I am looking at them as opposite ends of a spectrum/continuum based solely on DIRECT training purpose. A pure athlete is someone who trains based solely on performance while a pure BBer is someone who trains purely for aesthetics. I fall in the middle somewhere as well TP, but more closely to performance.

    IMO, running a sub 5 minute mile has absolutely nothing to do with athletic prowess, which was my point. The original intent by the thread starter was to show that someone doing the ATkins could not be an elite ahlete. He proposed a contest to see if someone who is doing an Atkins diet run a sub 5 minute mile. Personally I don't see the relevance.
    If sense were common, everyone would have it.

    4/2007-Current 75th Ranked most popular image 1 spot behind Prince's bulge...

    Check out my world famous Bob Loblaw's Law Blog at http://www.synergyhw.blogspot.com/...Just kidding, it's a health and wellness blog.

  27. #27
    Registered User
    brodus's Avatar


    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Chicago, Illinois
    Posts
    1,023
    Rep Points
    354231

    Dale,
    Yeah, I agree that there isn't a large enough population size to do a real, honest-to-goodness valid study. By your own rationale, though, you must understand that the "study" you sited, involving SIX runners, all male, is pretty weak.

    My challenge was really more of a though experiement--I just want posters to concede that Atkins is for rapid fat loss---the ketosis that it inspires is not good for athletes. If it was, why do, as you say, probably zero elite trainers use it? You know why, as well as I do, if you know about what happens physiologically to enable such rapid weight loss.

    My reason for posting, and why I am still coming back to this thread, (and questions you haven't answered) is that if, as you say, Atkins is targeted toward obese people, why is it all over a bodybuilding board? And doesn't it bother you that there is so much $ attached to this whole thing? Although you truly point out that the Atkins Institute doesn't get a paycheck everytime someone say "low carb," it is also true that the low-carb craze has lined the pockets of many, many people who could care less about anyone's long-term health.

    I also agree with your contiuum as it relates to the end goals of training. And come on, anyone here knows that someone as huge as Ronnie Coleman isn't your first pick for a soccer match or the swim team. That's not a slam--that's just reality.

    And I agree that the percentage of athletes online is proabably small. Most people I train with don't even know what an online forum is! Any maybe that's how it's supposed to be...maybe I should be working out right now instead of sitting on my ass and posting!!

    Have a good day everyone!

  28. #28
    Registered User


    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    WVA
    Posts
    380
    Rep Points
    724530

    Yeah, aint that some shit.


    Goes to show you that fad diets are bullshit, as was the low carb craze.

    Watch now, the fast food chains will again be touting the high carb menu, lol
    To achieve Success is certaily tough..but keeping it, much tougher!

  29. #29
    Registered User
    brodus's Avatar


    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Chicago, Illinois
    Posts
    1,023
    Rep Points
    354231

    Andyo, they already are "on board," and sell burgers wrapped in lettuce here in Chicago.

    Eating enough of the right carbs is important. Buying a loaf of carb-crusher bread for $5 and a gallon of $6 low-carb milk is just stupid.

    I'm still waiting to see a celebrity athlete endorsement. Then I will vomit, and eat three baked potatoes.

  30. #30
    Just call me Mayo
    ELITE MEMBER
    HoldDaMayo's Avatar


    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Oceanside, CA
    Posts
    1,917
    Rep Points
    613911






    I'm not a fan of the atkins lifestyle... but i do feel the induction phase can be a great tool for temporary quick weight loss...
    Are you kidding me????

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-27-2011, 01:57 PM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-27-2011, 01:57 PM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-27-2011, 01:57 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-22-2011, 11:40 AM
  5. anyone try Atkins (that wasn't obese to start with)?
    By viet_jon in forum Diet & Nutrition
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-17-2010, 08:46 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
-->