-
Hello, this board in now turned off and no new posting.
Please REGISTER at Anabolic Steroid Forums, and become a member of our NEW community!
-
Check Out IronMag Labs® KSM-66 Max - Recovery and Anabolic Growth Complex
Trying to get more info on Adkins. What is good/bad about it
- Thread starter Bishop
- Start date
Welcome to IM!
Depends on who you talk to......There have been numerous discussions here regarding the Atkins Diet, including a very informative related article from Dr. Mercola, courtesy of DP. Do a search...it's up there, in the corner....North/North East...//// Good Luck.
Depends on who you talk to......There have been numerous discussions here regarding the Atkins Diet, including a very informative related article from Dr. Mercola, courtesy of DP. Do a search...it's up there, in the corner....North/North East...//// Good Luck.
There are the questions of what impact low carbonhydrate consumption has on mental activity and whether a high presence of ketones in the blood stream could raise some sort of health concern, but I haven't read any answers on these even though the Atkins diet seems to be popular amongst many people.
Dieticians underline the danger of high saturated fats consumption so I would say that this is the greatest risk with the Atkins diet. Mercola defends the consumption of saturated fats with various arguments which I don't have the knowledge to evaluate but I do have two strong objections:
First, he says the rise in heart disease in western populations is partly attributed to the rise of unsaturated fats and the decline of saturated fats in our diets. Of course this is the form of the suggested modern diet but to what degree it is followed by the population is another subject. I am under the impression that modern people have shifted their diets into consuming large amounts of fast food and meat thus increasing the intake of saturated fats. Is there any research that claims the opposite?
Second, he claims that Greek people have long longevity because of high animal fat diets. Being Greek I can assure you that the traditional Greek diet aka the mediteranean diet is low in animal fats because of the infrequent consumption of meat. People in the old days used to eat chicken once a week and other kinds of meat even more scarcely. There was though a daily consumption of dairies and a frequent consumption of eggs. Religion related fasting cycles which excluded the consumption of animal sources(except fish) were also followed. The main protein sources generally were beans and fish. Dieticians attribute the health benefits of the greek diet to the exclusive use of olive oil in cooking, the frequent consumption of fish, the consumption of plants and vegetables rich in flavonoids, the moderate use of red wine and the infrequent consumption of meat. Todays Greeks follow western type diets --meat and fast food on the every day table and guess what, the percentage of heart disease occurences has increased dramatically.
Now on the theory of the Atkins diet and its effectiveness, dieticians from what I know, are very sceptical as to the lack of research to support Atkins' claims. I have found though a research conducted on cyclists that could support the argument that the body can be trained to burn more fat with a high fat diet and I'm posting the abstract below:
Carey A. L., H. M. Staudacher, N. K. Cummings, N. K, Stepto, V. Nikolopoulos, L. M. Burke and J. A. Hawley. Effects of fat adaptation and carbohydrate restoration on prolonged endurance exercise. Journal Applied Physiology 91: 115-22, 2001.
We determined the effect of fat adaptation on metabolism and performance during 5 h of cycling in seven competitive athletes who consumed a standard carbohydrate (CHO) diet for 1 day and then either a high-CHO diet (11 g. kg(-1)x day(-1) CHO, 1 g x kg(-1) x day(-1) fat; HCHO) or an isoenergetic high-fat diet (2.6 g x kg(-1) x day(-1) CHO, 4.6 g x kg(-1) x day(-1) fat; fat-adapt) for 6 days. On day 8, subjects consumed a high-CHO diet and rested. On day 9, subjects consumed a preexercise meal and then cycled for 4 h at 65% peak O(2) uptake, followed by a 1-h time trial (TT). Compared with baseline, 6 days of fat-adapt reduced respiratory exchange ratio (RER) with cycling at 65% peak O(2) uptake [0.78 +/- 0.01 (SE) vs. 0.85 +/- 0.02; P < 0.05]. However, RER was restored by 1 day of high-CHO diet, preexercise meal, and CHO ingestion (0.88 +/- 0.01; P < 0.05). RER was higher after HCHO than fat-adapt (0.85 +/- 0.01, 0.89 +/- 0.01, and 0.93 +/- 0.01 for days 2, 8, and 9, respectively; P < 0.05). Fat oxidation during the 4-h ride was greater (171 +/- 32 vs. 119 +/- 38 g; P < 0.05) and CHO oxidation lower (597 +/- 41 vs. 719 +/- 46 g; P < 0.05) after fat-adapt. Power output was 11% higher during the TT after fat-adapt than after HCHO (312 +/- 15 vs. 279 +/- 20 W; P = 0.11).
In conclusion, compared with a high-CHO diet, fat oxidation during exercise increased after fat-adapt and remained elevated above baseline even after 1 day of a high-CHO diet and increased CHO availability. However, this study failed to detect a significant benefit of fat adaptation to performance of a 1-h TT undertaken after 4 h of cycling.
http://www.ausport.gov.au/ais/nutrition/abstract37.htm
Any more info from anyone?
Dieticians underline the danger of high saturated fats consumption so I would say that this is the greatest risk with the Atkins diet. Mercola defends the consumption of saturated fats with various arguments which I don't have the knowledge to evaluate but I do have two strong objections:
First, he says the rise in heart disease in western populations is partly attributed to the rise of unsaturated fats and the decline of saturated fats in our diets. Of course this is the form of the suggested modern diet but to what degree it is followed by the population is another subject. I am under the impression that modern people have shifted their diets into consuming large amounts of fast food and meat thus increasing the intake of saturated fats. Is there any research that claims the opposite?
Second, he claims that Greek people have long longevity because of high animal fat diets. Being Greek I can assure you that the traditional Greek diet aka the mediteranean diet is low in animal fats because of the infrequent consumption of meat. People in the old days used to eat chicken once a week and other kinds of meat even more scarcely. There was though a daily consumption of dairies and a frequent consumption of eggs. Religion related fasting cycles which excluded the consumption of animal sources(except fish) were also followed. The main protein sources generally were beans and fish. Dieticians attribute the health benefits of the greek diet to the exclusive use of olive oil in cooking, the frequent consumption of fish, the consumption of plants and vegetables rich in flavonoids, the moderate use of red wine and the infrequent consumption of meat. Todays Greeks follow western type diets --meat and fast food on the every day table and guess what, the percentage of heart disease occurences has increased dramatically.
Now on the theory of the Atkins diet and its effectiveness, dieticians from what I know, are very sceptical as to the lack of research to support Atkins' claims. I have found though a research conducted on cyclists that could support the argument that the body can be trained to burn more fat with a high fat diet and I'm posting the abstract below:
Carey A. L., H. M. Staudacher, N. K. Cummings, N. K, Stepto, V. Nikolopoulos, L. M. Burke and J. A. Hawley. Effects of fat adaptation and carbohydrate restoration on prolonged endurance exercise. Journal Applied Physiology 91: 115-22, 2001.
We determined the effect of fat adaptation on metabolism and performance during 5 h of cycling in seven competitive athletes who consumed a standard carbohydrate (CHO) diet for 1 day and then either a high-CHO diet (11 g. kg(-1)x day(-1) CHO, 1 g x kg(-1) x day(-1) fat; HCHO) or an isoenergetic high-fat diet (2.6 g x kg(-1) x day(-1) CHO, 4.6 g x kg(-1) x day(-1) fat; fat-adapt) for 6 days. On day 8, subjects consumed a high-CHO diet and rested. On day 9, subjects consumed a preexercise meal and then cycled for 4 h at 65% peak O(2) uptake, followed by a 1-h time trial (TT). Compared with baseline, 6 days of fat-adapt reduced respiratory exchange ratio (RER) with cycling at 65% peak O(2) uptake [0.78 +/- 0.01 (SE) vs. 0.85 +/- 0.02; P < 0.05]. However, RER was restored by 1 day of high-CHO diet, preexercise meal, and CHO ingestion (0.88 +/- 0.01; P < 0.05). RER was higher after HCHO than fat-adapt (0.85 +/- 0.01, 0.89 +/- 0.01, and 0.93 +/- 0.01 for days 2, 8, and 9, respectively; P < 0.05). Fat oxidation during the 4-h ride was greater (171 +/- 32 vs. 119 +/- 38 g; P < 0.05) and CHO oxidation lower (597 +/- 41 vs. 719 +/- 46 g; P < 0.05) after fat-adapt. Power output was 11% higher during the TT after fat-adapt than after HCHO (312 +/- 15 vs. 279 +/- 20 W; P = 0.11).
In conclusion, compared with a high-CHO diet, fat oxidation during exercise increased after fat-adapt and remained elevated above baseline even after 1 day of a high-CHO diet and increased CHO availability. However, this study failed to detect a significant benefit of fat adaptation to performance of a 1-h TT undertaken after 4 h of cycling.
http://www.ausport.gov.au/ais/nutrition/abstract37.htm
Any more info from anyone?
Last edited:
From http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2003-04/sumc-srr040303.php
Stanford researchers review efficacy and safety of low-carbohydrate diets
STANFORD, Calif. - People who go on low-carbohydrate diets typically lose weight, but restricted caloric intake and longer diet duration are the biggest reasons why, according to a study from Stanford University Medical Center and collaborators at Yale University. The sweeping review of literature on this popular diet also found there are no short-term adverse effects of the diet, but also that there is insufficient evidence on the diet's long-term effects and impact on people over the age of 53.
"Low-carbohydrate diets have been extremely popular as of late, and the lay press has suggested they're a safe and effective means of weight loss," said lead author Dena Bravata, MD, social science research associate at Stanford's Center for Primary Care and Outcomes Research. "While these diets are effective in the short term, weight loss results from reduced calories, not carbohydrate restriction."
The study - the first review of its kind - appears in the April 9 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association.
Books on low-carbohydrate/ high-protein diets - such as the popular Atkins diet - have sold in the millions, and proponents say these diets cause rapid weight loss without adverse side effects. Numerous medical associations and physicians, however, have expressed concern that these diets are too high in fat and can lead to kidney and liver problems and other health risks.
Despite their popularity - and the concern of some in the medical community - Bravata said little evidence exists on the efficacy and safety of low-carbohydrate diets. Bravata and her colleagues, many of whom are practicing internists, said they wanted to know what to tell their patients about these diets. The aim of their study was to synthesize the current literature and evaluate any changes in weight and cholesterol, glucose, insulin and blood pressure levels.
Bravata and the researchers collected literature on low-carbohydrate diets published between 1966 and 2003. They reviewed a total of 107 diet studies, which involved 3,268 people from around the world. The studies were small and heterogeneous, with carbohydrate and caloric intake, diet duration and participant characteristics varying greatly. The studies did have two things in common: none of the studies had participants with a mean age over 53 and none of the randomized and controlled studies lasted longer than 90 days. "Information on older adults and long-term results are scarce at best, and this should be kept in mind when looking at our findings," noted Bravata.
The researchers' meta-analysis found that people on diets of 60 or fewer grams of carbohydrates a day (a threshold used in some of the popular low-carbohydrate diets) did lose weight. But the weight loss was associated with restriction of caloric intake and longer diet duration, not with reduced carbohydrate intake. It also found that the greatest weight loss occurred among those participants on diets with the highest baseline weight and lowest caloric content.
"The greatest predictors of weight loss appear to be caloric intake and diet duration," she said. "The findings suggest that if you want to lose weight, you should eat fewer calories and do so over a long time period."
The researchers found no significant adverse effects on cholesterol, glucose, insulin and blood-pressure levels among participants on the diets. But, Bravata stressed, the adverse effects may not have shown up within the short period of the studies. She also said losing weight typically leads to an improvement in some of these levels, so this could have had an impact on the numbers.
While Bravata is pleased to be able to provide her patients with the most current evidence on these diets, she and the researchers concluded that there is insufficient evidence overall to make recommendations for or against using the diets. She said studies are now needed on the role of exercise in weight loss (as exercise information was excluded from this analysis), the long-term effects of these diets and the effectiveness and safety of these diets for people over the age of 53.
Co-author Christopher Gardner, PhD, assistant professor of medicine with the Stanford Center for Research in Disease Prevention, agreed that more studies on low-carbohydrate diets are needed. "The team did a phenomenal job of synthesizing all that's out there, but there wasn't a lot of information from well-designed, randomized controlled trials to begin with," he said. "The obesity epidemic involves people having weight problems for years or decades, and we need long-term data on these diets' effectiveness and safety."
Stanford researchers review efficacy and safety of low-carbohydrate diets
STANFORD, Calif. - People who go on low-carbohydrate diets typically lose weight, but restricted caloric intake and longer diet duration are the biggest reasons why, according to a study from Stanford University Medical Center and collaborators at Yale University. The sweeping review of literature on this popular diet also found there are no short-term adverse effects of the diet, but also that there is insufficient evidence on the diet's long-term effects and impact on people over the age of 53.
"Low-carbohydrate diets have been extremely popular as of late, and the lay press has suggested they're a safe and effective means of weight loss," said lead author Dena Bravata, MD, social science research associate at Stanford's Center for Primary Care and Outcomes Research. "While these diets are effective in the short term, weight loss results from reduced calories, not carbohydrate restriction."
The study - the first review of its kind - appears in the April 9 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association.
Books on low-carbohydrate/ high-protein diets - such as the popular Atkins diet - have sold in the millions, and proponents say these diets cause rapid weight loss without adverse side effects. Numerous medical associations and physicians, however, have expressed concern that these diets are too high in fat and can lead to kidney and liver problems and other health risks.
Despite their popularity - and the concern of some in the medical community - Bravata said little evidence exists on the efficacy and safety of low-carbohydrate diets. Bravata and her colleagues, many of whom are practicing internists, said they wanted to know what to tell their patients about these diets. The aim of their study was to synthesize the current literature and evaluate any changes in weight and cholesterol, glucose, insulin and blood pressure levels.
Bravata and the researchers collected literature on low-carbohydrate diets published between 1966 and 2003. They reviewed a total of 107 diet studies, which involved 3,268 people from around the world. The studies were small and heterogeneous, with carbohydrate and caloric intake, diet duration and participant characteristics varying greatly. The studies did have two things in common: none of the studies had participants with a mean age over 53 and none of the randomized and controlled studies lasted longer than 90 days. "Information on older adults and long-term results are scarce at best, and this should be kept in mind when looking at our findings," noted Bravata.
The researchers' meta-analysis found that people on diets of 60 or fewer grams of carbohydrates a day (a threshold used in some of the popular low-carbohydrate diets) did lose weight. But the weight loss was associated with restriction of caloric intake and longer diet duration, not with reduced carbohydrate intake. It also found that the greatest weight loss occurred among those participants on diets with the highest baseline weight and lowest caloric content.
"The greatest predictors of weight loss appear to be caloric intake and diet duration," she said. "The findings suggest that if you want to lose weight, you should eat fewer calories and do so over a long time period."
The researchers found no significant adverse effects on cholesterol, glucose, insulin and blood-pressure levels among participants on the diets. But, Bravata stressed, the adverse effects may not have shown up within the short period of the studies. She also said losing weight typically leads to an improvement in some of these levels, so this could have had an impact on the numbers.
While Bravata is pleased to be able to provide her patients with the most current evidence on these diets, she and the researchers concluded that there is insufficient evidence overall to make recommendations for or against using the diets. She said studies are now needed on the role of exercise in weight loss (as exercise information was excluded from this analysis), the long-term effects of these diets and the effectiveness and safety of these diets for people over the age of 53.
Co-author Christopher Gardner, PhD, assistant professor of medicine with the Stanford Center for Research in Disease Prevention, agreed that more studies on low-carbohydrate diets are needed. "The team did a phenomenal job of synthesizing all that's out there, but there wasn't a lot of information from well-designed, randomized controlled trials to begin with," he said. "The obesity epidemic involves people having weight problems for years or decades, and we need long-term data on these diets' effectiveness and safety."
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2003
- Messages
- 279
- Reaction score
- 2
- Points
- 0
- Age
- 70
- Location
- Yateley, Hants, United Kingdom
Mary G Enig asserts that there is good correlation between coronary heart disease and the consumption of hydrogenated fats, but not animal fats. http://www.enig.com/trans.html
Barry Groves says much the same thing http://www.second-opinions.co.uk/cholesterol_myth_2.html
Any comments, anyone?
Barry Groves says much the same thing http://www.second-opinions.co.uk/cholesterol_myth_2.html
Any comments, anyone?
I've read another recent study (no link sorry) that found a low carb diet lead to faster weight loss than one with carbs despite equal intake of calories. My experience would suggest the same. Although I suspect my body really doesn't deal with carbs well at all.
True, this diet does allow the consumption of any and every form of fat, however, the same success can be reached eating only "good" fats. I think, in general, people are reading way too much into the Atkins diet. Seems like everyone's perception is based on the induction period alone, which is not at all accurate/representative of the overall structure of the diet.
Similar threads
