Can anyone tell me about there impressions of it?
Thanks.

MJS,
I think the concept is good, especially in moderation, if you are one that is used to eating a lot of pasta, bread, desserts, etc.
I first did the diet full-time about five years ago...lost 20 pounds in six weeks - went to France for 10 days and gained back 40 over the next four months when I didn't return to the diet.
Tried it again as a lifestyle diet four years ago and lost forty pounds; kept it off until last year when I couldn't take it anymore.
I've taken up working out as a better idea to keep the weight down. I still watch the carbs, which is probably the best way to do it, but I won't go back to that no-carb lifestyle.
If you do it, know that the weight will jump back on with a vengence when you start eating heavy carbs again. Just my experience, good luck.

A meal is not a meal without wine; thus I skip breakfast.

Read up on the South Beach diet. Makes more sense. My doctor is totally against Atkins. It is not healthy. Eating red meat everyday, plus all the eggs and everything else for that matter makes no sense whatsoever.

The South Beach Diet is very big in Europe. For whatever reason, it has not caught on here in the states.

Cheers to GrapeFriends!

wut up MJS? i was in tacoma for a few years, i went to UPS.

anyway, i'm mostly against the Atkins diet. first of all, i don't like the way you have to "reset" your body the way Atkins does, there are healthier ways. next, it is universally recognized that a healthy, balanced diet w/ exercise (mostly cardio) is the best thing for you, depending on a persons' body type & diet (i.e., history of heart probs, etc...).

Atkins has just recently (3-6 months) gotten tremendously popular even though it has been around and widely used for years... and we are just now learning more about it. The head nutritionist in charge of Atkins just recently came out and said that, now only 20-30%, i believe, of your calories should come from fat. that is a very significant difference then what people of Atkins advocated before. i would agree that minimizing carbs all around is good, if they are unhealthy carbs. but your body needs them if you are leading an active lifestyle & exercising - take it from someone who was in athletics for over 10 years & still excercises to this day. Atkins may make you skinny, but that doesn't mean healthy.

if you really want to be healthy and fit, go see a nutritionist at a gym or a doctor about what combo of diet & exercise is best for you

that's my opinion

Atkins is bogus as far as I'm concerned. Totally unbalanced and unhealthy way to eat.
The only way to keep your weight at a healthy level is to not ingest more calories than you burn.
Exercise. Exercise. Exercise.
Build muscle - it burns more calories.
As the previous poster said, the pounds may come off - but brother, it will come back and then some.

por vino

There was a prior discussion of this, which included good comments from several of the physicians on the board.
Adkins (or my modification of it) seems to work for me. I don't do what he says about eating tons of high fat foods. I do limit very much carbs, except for those contained in wine. I try not to eat too much fruit.
But, I don't skimp on the veggies. But you should check with your doctor for sure. Lots depends on your cholesterol and heart situation. I am lucky, having a very good cholesterol level, which I attribute to genes, wine consumption, and fish consumption.

Irwin

"Outside of a dog, a book is probably man's best friend; inside of a dog, it's too dark to read."
-Groucho Marx

I can't speak for the Atkins diet other than I've heard Dr. Atikins died fat and with heart disease on the news yesterday.

Dieting is a bitch but won't really work without exercise.

I quit eating fast food after coming back from Napa on November 10th. I tipped the scales at 243 lbs.

Since then, I've limited my intake of high fat foods, cheese, butter etc., red meat and of all things chocolate.

I've lost thirty pounds and gone from a 42 waist to almost a 36.

In the gym for at least two hours every other day too.

Never really lost any weight on a "fad" diet.

Still splurge once in a while, usually when going out to eat, todays menu though was carrots, celery, two nectarines for lunch and a salad with sliced chicken and no fat dressing for dinner. Kind of boring but seems to work. Once I hit 195 I'm going on a maintenance diet and will add a few of those goodies back. Can't imagine eating a whole bag of potato chips again though.

--------------------
"One may dislike carrots, spinach, beetroot, or the skin on hot milk. But not wine. It is like hating the air that one breathes, since each is equally indispensable."

Marcel Ayme`

I recently posted some info on this on a different board (after the whole Atkins had heart disease at the post hoopla) so I will just re-post that info here...I am referring to two articles published in the New England Journal of Medicine in 2003 which evaluated a low carb diet (Atkins) vs a traditional low fat diet.

**cut**
I've read these studies back when they were released in the New England Journal back in 2003. They provide some useful ideas about low-carb diets, but since the end point was fairly short (6 mos and 12 mos) and the number of participants was fairly low, we have to interpret the results with caution.

I'll focus on the Foster et al article, as it likely applies to the majority of us (subjects were more typical of the general population)...

Bottom line: adherence is tough. The low carb diet did show a greater magnitude of weight loss, but with its difficulty in compliance, by the end of the study (12 mos) there was no difference in overall wt loss between the two groups. In addition, the actual difference in wt loss was only ~4%...not a huge amount. For those of you wondering, the investigators wanted to replicate typical conditions, so follow-up was at a minimum in both groups. In other words, there was no additional pressure by the investigators to stay on the diet. If the subjects couldn't comply, they were simply allowed to quit.

As for the question of lipid profile, at the end of the study, there was no difference in the reduction of total cholest or LDL (bad cholesterol) between the two groups. Although, I do have to point out that at the 3 mo point, there was a significantly higher amount of total choles and LDL in the low carb group.

However, there was a greater reduction in triglyceride and a greater elevation in HDL (good cholesterol), which did surprise a few people. Many had thought that there would be an increase in triglyceride in the low carb group since there was not an emphasis on decreasing sat. fat intake. The authors suggest that the reasons for these effects are likely due to the following: the greater amount of wt loss seen in the low carb subjects and the decreased intake of poly-unsat fats in the low fat group. Basically, the effect on the lipid profile from losing wt had a greater impact than the effect eating a high fat diet would. In addition, with the low fat diet, you also eliminate polyunsat fat and replace it with carbs, which has been known to decrease HDL and raise trigly.

However, it is unclear what these "improvements" in traditional cardiovascular risk factors actually mean. Past research on these risk factors was based on more traditional diets/exercise. So, having a more favorable HDL/trigly typically would lower risk of CV complications. However, the sticking issue with the low carb diet is the lack of restriction on sat. fats. Prior studies also included the restriction of sat fats, which have been shown to be an independent risk factor themselves.

So, this leaves us with the major question at hand. Do we still see decrease risk of CV complications in the situation where we have a more favorable HDL/trigyl but an increase intake in sat fats? Since there have been no long term studies, we don't know if the low carb diet actually decrease the rate of CV complications. On the other hand, we do have studies that show diets high in fiber, low in sat fats, and moderate in polyunsat fats (Mediterranean diet) actually decrease CV complications.

In addition, people with renal insufficiency should be very cautious if they start the Atkin's diet. The huge protein load this diet requires is potentially a huge risk factor in drastically worsening renal function in people who are already at risk...No studies are out yet (that I know of) that look at the long term effects on renal function of people on the low carb diet (both normal subjects and people with renal insufficinecy).

Just my 2 cents...

Joe
Grape Lakes Wine Appreciation Guild
www.grapelakes.com

It's not for me, I like Chianti too much...and it requires pasta!

Joseph wu, Dr T,

What are your comments on the extremely low fat diets of such as Dr Ornish?

Some posters may not be aware of this theory, however, by altering the diet to very low fat, high carbo, plus lifestyle changes (exercise and meditation to reduce stress), this physician apparently REVERSED blockages of the coronary blood vessels. This was monitored with PET scans.

I reduced a total blood lipid level (HDL + LDL) from 6.4 micro mols to 4.3 micro mols (and no, no one has been able to give me the conversion formula to mg), by cutting out butter, reducing animal fats and going to non-fat milk products.

The triglyceride level increased with the complex carbohydrates and the HDL/LDL ratio worsened, though the total dropped. Weight didn't alter at all from BMI of 23.

Though I can happily eat a totally vegetarian diet, I notice a lack of day-long energy at times of high physical activity (over vintage say). Half a pound of lean steak at night, will keep me fueled until three in the afternoon the next day, w'out the need or ANY other intake of food. Basically a carnivore I guess. A plate of rolled oat-porridge lasts until 2pm before snack-time.

It appears to me that I need a balance of both meat (read red, white and fish) and complex carbs to meet my energy needs. Also, much more satisfying.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gigond Ass:
I can't speak for the Atkins diet other than I've heard Dr. Atikins died fat and with heart disease on the news yesterday.

Dieting is a bitch but won't really work without exercise.

I quit eating fast food after coming back from Napa on November 10th. I tipped the scales at 243 lbs.

Since then, I've limited my intake of high fat foods, cheese, butter etc., red meat and of all things chocolate.

I've lost thirty pounds and gone from a 42 waist to almost a 36.

In the gym for at least two hours every other day too.

Never really lost any weight on a "fad" diet.

Still splurge once in a while, usually when going out to eat, todays menu though was carrots, celery, two nectarines for lunch and a salad with sliced chicken and no fat dressing for dinner. Kind of boring but seems to work. Once I hit 195 I'm going on a maintenance diet and will add a few of those goodies back. Can't imagine eating a whole bag of potato chips again though.

--------------------
"One may dislike carrots, spinach, beetroot, or the skin on hot milk. But not wine. It is like hating the air that one breathes, since each is equally indispensable."

Marcel Ayme`

---

Good methodology, GA. I gotta drop some poundage myself.

www.vinocellar.com -- Mm-Mm-good

Did you know the guy was over 120 kg when he died?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Kicker:
Did you know the guy was over 120 kg when he died?

---

did you know some people actually find out the facts BEFORE they post

the Dr. suffered from serious health problems that caused the weight gain...it was not related to his diet

in your BBA studies do they teach you to just be blindly lead by the first thing you see on the internet that somewhat validates YOUR assumptions?

also what university do you attend so i will know to never hire anyone from an institution that teaches people how not to think....much less think critically

also i asked before but you did not answer, but now i know you must be really cute because otherwise im not sure what more you have to offer that a parrot does not offer

I'm just curious why he had such serious health (cardiac) problems when his diet was supposed to be so good for you.

I started the Atkins diet at the beginning of the year and lost 16 pounds in three weeks. While the folks on both sides raise some good points, I really believe balance is key to a healthy diet. I just did it to get a jump start on things to help my attitude.
I've now gone back to eating like a teenager and working out a lot more. Calories in = Calories retained - calories burned. It really boils down to regular exercise.

quote:

---

Originally posted by winebibber:
I'm just curious why he had such serious health (cardiac) problems when his diet was supposed to be so good for you.

---

He had Cardiomyopathy caused by a bacterial infection on an overseas trip

hope this clears the confusion

also i do not back this or any other diet the way to lose weight is as others have stated above

reasonable eating habits and exercise to burn excess calories

but i also have no time for internet parrots squaking the first thing they see on the net

but he actually died of a head injury after a fall, no?

yea but the bacteria/virus (I ampretty sure it was a virus) had something to do with his balance and injuries sustained.

That rug tied the whole room together

Kicker
Member posted Feb 12, 2004 01:54 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Did you know the guy was over 120 kg when he died?
---------------------------------

From what I understand, he fell on ice and hit his head. On entry to the hospital he weighed 195 pounds, but was on life support, suffered organ failure and blooted to 258 pounds. What was in the paper was released by a vegetarian group. He weighed 258 when he died, that was correct, but they "forgot" to mentioned he weighed 195 when he was admitted in a coma. He gained all the extra weight while in the coma with organ failure, is what I understand. I am not defending Atkins, as I have never tried the diet, but what was on the front pages of newsparers throughout the world on him weighing 258 pounds (obese) when he died was grossly misleading from an animal rights group that hates the "meat eating" diet, if I understood this correct.

quote:

---

Originally posted by MJS:
... if I understood this correct.

---

I do NOT like Atkins (the diet); however, you are correct in your understanding.

Sliding back onto topic for a moment...

My major concern would be where the Atkins or South Beach diets stood on moderate wine consumption?

"In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women!" --Homer Simpson

I am currently on the south beach diet, which is much easier to stay on than Atkins. After the first two weeks south beach allows 6-8 ounces of red wine per day. A must for any diet I am planning to stay on.

Live long and prosper

said group was PETA, if i am not mistaken. Hardly a bastion of truth honesty or tact for that matter.

That rug tied the whole room together

I have moderated my carbohydrates and experienced real success. By moderation I mean, half a potato instead of the whole thing, no bread after lunchtime, etc. Wait a minute before you say, "All you did was reduce your calories". I still eat until I'm satisfied. I have replaced my reduction in carbs with other calories of other kinds- protien and fat.

I dropped 10 pounds and a waist size AND kept it off permanently with what I'd call a miniscule change in my eating habits. I'm grateful for the knowledge that Dr. Atkins brought to the world. As with any type knowledge, his diet can be abused. Everything in moderation.

Vinserve:

I am not very familiar with Dr. Ornish, nor his theories, so I cannot say one way or the other. Although his name does sound familiar. Furthermore, I cannot advise you on any medical condition, nor give advice...your personal physician would be the one to do that. However, I can speak in conjecture...I am a little skeptical about these claims. Especially since you mentioned that he measured CAD via PET scan? Did you mean MRI? A PET scan would not have been able to show the anatomy of the coronary vessels. A PET scan is typically used to show areas of increase glucose uptake...now used as a fancy cancer scan.

Getting to your other question, your lipid levels after a low fat diet are not unusual. I actually mentioned that in my previous post. It is known that by going on a low fat diet, one replaces the fats with carbs, and that has been known to worsen trigly levels. In addition, a low fat diet also cuts out polyunsat fats (the good fats) which has been known to decrease HDL as well.

What I think we have to understand, is that like with cholesterol, there also exists bad and good versions of fats and carbs. Bad fats = sat fat. Good fats = polyunsat fats. Bad carbs = sugars/pastas. Good carbs = complex carbs/fiber. In theory, one would try to limit the intake of both the bad fats and carbs and increase intake of both the good fats/carbs. This, in essence, is the Mediterranean diet I mentioned above that has been shown in studies to reduce the number of cardiovascular incidents.

Dr. T, do you have anything to add?

As for the conversion ratio, use the following formulas:

Cholesterol:
conv units (mg/dL) * 0.02586 = int'l units (mmol/L

Trigly:
conv units (mg/dL) * 0.01129 = int'l units (mmol/L

So, basically divide your values by 0.02586 and 0.01129 for cholesterol and trigly respectively.

As for the other stuff:

Not having actually reading the post-mort report, I cannot say for sure what exactly happened. However, I do have a few guesses...

If it was true that Atkins had a viral infection, then his congestive heart failure could have been a by-product of the infection. If it was, then it would have been a viral cardiomyopathy...not one caused by CAD or HTN (read: not caused by his diet). This CHF could have caused left/right sided heart failure, thus leading to massive ascites/peripheral edema. In addition, by the sheer fact that he was hospitalized in what appears to be critical condition, his nutritional status could have been very poor, leading to a low albumin and more periph edema. Read: weight gain.

However, as for the rumors that he had hypertension and an AMI, well, the man was in his 70s, and that isn't all that rare.

Besides, let us remember that one subject does not prove nor disprove anything. Even if Dr. Atkins was massively obese, had horrible CAD, ischemic CHF, and a horrible lipid profile while on his low-carb diet, it would mean nothing. That would be the equivalent to saying that I know this guy who lost 20lbs while on the all ice cream diet, so it must work! In this case, it would just be a little ironic that the "diet guru" himself was not necessarily as healthy as he would like to be portrayed.

This, by no means, suggests that I am defending the Atkin's diet, nor advocating it. Truth be told, I am appalled by the diet for both medical and moral reasons. However, I do have a problem when the media takes a piece of information, completely pervert it, and spread it for purely sensationalistic shock value. It's even worse that the information was gained in a wholly unethical manner. As I understand it, a Nebraska Physician requested the records from the NY ME Office. Allegedly, he did not state in the request that he was treating Atkins, although he did not state that he did not treat him as well. After receiving the records, this Nebraska doctor then sent it to PCRM, and from there to the WSJ. While I do think that PCRM, (Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine), should have known better, they are by no means a "know-nothing group of radicals." This time, they showed extremely poor judgment.

Joe
Grape Lakes Wine Appreciation Guild
www.grapelakes.com