Legitimate? Like - you want a guarantee?

Legitimate as in...are there studies that show the benefits/effects of Atkins over a long-term period (20-50 years)?

Why, in your opinion, is Atkins any more of a cult than the "lite" "low-Cal" diet it replaced?

I guess it really isn't, but I didn't notice quite the massive explosion of people accepting a diet as "proven" in such a short amount of time as has the Atkins crowd.

Why the hostility?

Well, besides being ranty, hyped up on coffee, the bad day, and having to listen to someone sing the praises of Atkins on the phone while at the office (the same man who suffered yet another minor heart attack two weeks prior) I just can't understand what it is with people who equate health to only what they consume. Plenty of people I've known on the Atkins diet, while eating out, will kindly use the same hand that is holding a fourth refill of soda to point out that the rice on my sushi roll is bad for me before going back to consuming an entire steak covered with melted butter. Three months later they're delighted to have lost some weight, but confused when six months into it the weight is back, again. The only thing most people adjust is what they eat, not how much they eat or what they do. I guess my hostility comes from so knowing so many people that are on it and refuse to listen to anything but Atkins. Portions? Not a problem! Exercise? Not needed! Liquid calorie intake? Soda's not bad! Just ignore the carbs and you'll be perfect.

So far, I've not known anyone who was overweight and gone on the Atkins diet to have visited the doctor and said, "Hey, doc, the pants are feeling a little tight and I'd like to remedy that. What should I do?" Somehow I don't think the answer would be, "Continue eating lots of red meat, cheeses, and greasy things while passing the bread the waiter leaves on the table."

I have been aware of Atkins for years before it became this monster craze.
My mom being a diabetic, I have always believed that sugar is the number one danger in food. Atkins was one of the first diet that acknowledged this. I am sick of seeing 'healthful' foods that declare themselves lowfat and yet contain gobs and gobs of sugar.

___
--This diet has been around for 30 years...why is everyone trying to get in on it now?
-----

word of mouth advertising finally hit critial mass I would think. Also, people have become frustrated with the nonfunctional 'low-fat' paradigm.

____
--This is a fad that will eventually pass...b/c in the end, people love their carbs too much.
-----

Sorry Syc, low-carb eating will [announcer voice] revolutionize American food habits forever[/announcer voice]

Because this is available for all the other diets you'd consider - or the one you're currently following? I'm sure Atkins could predermine a conclusion and throw some research together to support it, just like anyone else.

I'm not on Atkins, but I can't find any logical fault with it. Seems pretty straight forward to me, in promoting a whole foods diet. I really doubt it will soon be discovered that humans actually require refined sugars to survive.

My mothers doctor advised her to try Atkins to help control her diabetes, and reduce her need for diabetic medications. She's lost some weight, but more importantly, she has better control of her blood sugar (and hasn't been hospitalized in a quite a while).

It sounds like the people you eat with are idiots - regardless of what diet they're following. Soda indeed.... <snort>

I don't follow any particular diet per se at this time.

Atkins, along with other diets, are quite radical--not necessarily bad, just quite different. People see a little bit of success, tell others, than a mad stampede ensues. And yet, is anybody really looking at how it will effect you at age 40 or 50 or 60? There are some doctors out there that say it's great, and others who say it is dangerous. Of course, people will do what they want anyway, but I believe there is enough concern out there to merit independent scientific research (i.e. not paid for by these concerned folks nor by Atkins's folks).

By "diet" I'm talking about what you eat everyday, right now.

I'm not on Atkins, but I can't find any logical fault with it.

While I think Atkins has some good points, I don't think it is the correct path to health. To temporary weight loss, possibly, but not to an overall healthy body that has the ability to continue to be fit over the years.

• People have consumed carbs as a staple of the American diet for years, yet only now are they a problem.
• Sugars have been replaced by High Fructose Corn Syrup, yet no one is pointing that they might be an issue.
• Portion sizes have increased dramatically in the past twenty years, yet no one is claiming people should simply eat less.
• People aren't nearly as active as they used to be, but no one seems to think increasing activity would assist in weight loss.

Fasting for a week is a good way to lose weight, too, but it ain't healthy. (Oh, wait, that diet has come and gone already.)

The diet I currently follow is bad for me--it contains an excessive amount of sugar and fat, and I don't get enough exercise.

My mothers doctor advised her to try Atkins to help control her diabetes, and reduce her need for diabetic medications. She's lost some weight, but more importantly, she has better control of her blood sugar (and hasn't been hospitalized in a quite a while).

Atkins makes sense, here. Complex carbohydrates break down into sugars, so diabetics should avoid them. On the other hand, I've also read that cutting off your carbohydrate intake completely affects insulin production and that there has been a correlation between people who cut off carbs and having diabetes later in life. There are also indications that high protein, low carb diets stress out your kidneys which is not the best idea for someone who is a diabetic.

Not to mention the fun that begins when you've cut out all those foods that are high in fiber because you fear carbs.... (and consume so much delicious cheese!)

[quote]Originally posted by Kitsune
[b]I'm not on Atkins, but I can't find any logical fault with it.

While I think Atkins has some good points, I don't think it is the correct path to health. To temporary weight loss, possibly, but not to an overall healthy body that has the ability to continue to be fit over the years.

How would you adjust the diet then, to make it beneficial to long term health. What do you think is the problem with it currently?

• People have consumed carbs as a staple of the American diet for years, yet only now are they a problem.
  Really? Americans have never been fat or unhealthy before now? By "only now" do you mean now that everything is made with white flour and refined sugars?
• Sugars have been replaced by High Fructose Corn Syrup, yet no one is pointing that they might be an issue.
  [/color] I've seen lots of pointing at HFCS because of high glycemic response - especially in pro Atkins information.
• Portion sizes have increased dramatically in the past twenty years, yet no one is claiming people should simply eat less.
  "Adjust the quantity you eat to suit your appetite, especially as it decreases. When hungry, eat the amount that makes your feel satisfied but not stuffed…." Of course you could "simply eat less" - but eventually your metabolism will catch up with you.... and if the less you're eating is refined crap, you're still not going to be healthy.
• People aren't nearly as active as they used to be, but no one seems to think increasing activity would assist in weight loss.
  No one? Come on.... Maybe it's just that when you're paid to sit on your ass all day instead of working the fields, it's easier to adjust your diet than it is to get more exercise. But really, I don't think that's a reflection on the diet.

Really? Americans have never been fat or unhealthy before now? By "only now" do you mean now that everything is made with white flour and refined sugars?

What I mean is that people have always eaten complex carbohydrates and only now are people saying they're bad for you.

What I'm attempting to say (and doing it quite badly) is that it seems that the Atkins diet has discovered a correlation between the consumption of carbohydrates and obesity and in order to correct the problem, the Atkins diet reccommends cutting them out of your diet. I would say that there is a correlation between eating carbohydrates while remaining inactive and that the more natural way to resolve the issue is to not eat the full portions provided today and get out and be more active. I think it may be a potentially bad mistake to cut out a lot of the important fruits and veggies because of the fear of carbs and replace them in a diet that advocates eating a lot of fatty foods and red meats.

Of course, all of my information is based on the "good for you today, bad for you tomorrow" health-issue media. Coffee used to be bad for you, then for a short time it was good, now bad again. A correlation between the consumption of red meats and colon cancer was found, high protein to kidney damage, etc, etc.

Kitsune, you are right on all points - except maybe the one about the corn syrup, HF corn syrup to me always fell in the same crowd as refined sugars, though I don't know if it in particular is worse than the others.


People are fatter today more than ever because of a combination of things: eating too much, not enough exercise, and eating more processed foods which happen to have lots of simple sugars.

The solution then is to do the opposite of all the above: eat less, exercise more, and eat unprocessed foods with less sugar. Doing any one of the three may work, but I would think that for a long term solution, one has to do all three.

Now I have a point to make about the eating less. Other generations as far as I know never counted calories. They just ate their basic foods until they were full. I would argue that eating too much sugar encourages one to eat more! As long as I have been on Atkins, I have been much less hungry than before, and I get far fewer cravings for sweet things. The result is that, while I am not counting calories, I am sure that I am eating less calories than I did before I started this diet.

Now I have a point to make about the eating less. Other generations as far as I know never counted calories. They just ate their basic foods until they were full. I would argue that eating too much sugar encourages one to eat more!

It was once noted in a book I read that up until the age of five, a child's body understands that liquid intake=energy. (Imagine an infant that never felt full -- the horrors of a house with newborn child!) However, once you're beyond that age, you can consume all the liquid energy you want and never feel full, so you still eat solid foods. Now combine this with stopping at the 7-Eleven for a "Twenty-Gallon Truckers' Gulp" of soda and bad things start to happen.