Is this true?

Chad C. said:

circularstrengthmag.comjacques.htmlOpen ↗

This may be of interest to fellow low-carbers. Are there
any counterpoints to what he raises? The link was posted
by somebody else, in alt.support.diet.low-carb. Here's
what I've posted in response thus far, in that newsgroup:

"This guy looks like he knows his stuff. Of course,
knowing your stuff and "knowing enough" isn't the same
thing. Oftentimes knowing a little something leads you to
be afraid of something that upon further investigation
isn't so bad to begin with. In which case knowing nothing
would have produced the same behavior as knowing "a whole
bunch" but knowing an intermediate amount of information
between the two extremes can lead to non-optimal, i.e.
misinformed behavior. I hope the issues he raises have
cogent counterpoints.

-Chad"

Very likely nobody knows. These are complex issues - and
there are many cases where you can cite evidence both for
and against low-carb.

On the whole, I agree with his thinking - long term low carb
is probably not beneficial (don't know whether it's actually
harmful); but adequate carb intake is what we should aim for
- and that's going to be lifestyle dependant.

He doesn't really mention specifics when it comes to types
of carbs, but it's implied in the text - carbs that have
been grown (fruit, veg, whole grain) should be eaten in
preference to refined carbs. He makes little reference to
GI, which would make his text largely irrelevant to
Diabetics I would have thought.

He has some good points, but they lack backup in places.
Yes, the tribes he mention do have shorter lifespans than
other races - but he implies this is down to their diet -
but that might not be the case; the tribes he mentions all
live in inhospitable parts of the world where conditions are
stressful anyway - there's nothing to suggest their shorter
lifespan is due to diet.

I haven't read anything there to suggest I should change my
lifestyle. I choose adequate carbs (which is what Atkins is
about, albeit with some rather dramatic stages along the
way) which are mostly not refined.

--
Succorso

"Chad C." <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

circularstrengthmag.comjacques.htmlOpen ↗

This may be of interest to fellow low-carbers. Are there
any counterpoints to what he raises? The link was posted
by somebody else, in alt.support.diet.low-carb. Here's
what I've posted in response thus far, in that newsgroup:

"This guy looks like he knows his stuff. Of course,
knowing your stuff and "knowing enough" isn't the same
thing. Oftentimes knowing a little something leads you to
be afraid of something that upon further investigation
isn't so bad to begin with. In which case knowing nothing
would have produced the same behavior as knowing "a whole
bunch" but knowing an intermediate amount of information
between the two extremes can lead to non-optimal, i.e.
misinformed behavior. I hope the issues he raises have
cogent counterpoints.

-Chad"

I think the article was a whole lot of nothing. He is
arguing against the various theories as to why a low-carb
diet might be more in keeping with our nutritional needs.
Then he talks about theoretical complications such as
dopamine depletion, cardio and immune complications, and
adrenal burnout. He claims to have witnessed these
complications in his clients and ascribes it to low-carb
dieting. It all sounds quite vague and he doesn't really
address how he came to connect these apparent effects with
low-carbing by itself.

Yeah, he sounds like he knows what he's talking about but he
doesn't present any detailed info as to how he came to these
conclusions.

For example: adrenal burnout in low carb dieters, here is an
odd quote: "Less than 2% are able to maintain this lifestyle
without stimulants such as caffeine." How did he come to
this strange conclusion? An informal survey of 210 long-term
low-carb eaters? What is he asking? How does he conclude
that they are unable to maintain the life-style without
caffeine? And how does he make a connection with adrenal
burnout? Sounds like he's stretching quite a bit.

I think it is the old "if you can't dazzle 'em with your
brilliance, baffle 'em with your [censored]" approach to
nutrition. I highly doubt that any studies will support
these specific concerns as expressed by
Dr. Brett Jacques, CST and he does not present anything
other than his apparently skewed, limited and biased
observations.

TC

"Chad C." <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

circularstrengthmag.comjacques.htmlOpen ↗

This may be of interest to fellow low-carbers. Are there
any counterpoints to what he raises? The link was posted
by somebody else, in alt.support.diet.low-carb. Here's
what I've posted in response thus far, in that newsgroup:

"This guy looks like he knows his stuff. Of course,
knowing your stuff and "knowing enough" isn't the same
thing. Oftentimes knowing a little something leads you to
be afraid of something that upon further investigation
isn't so bad to begin with. In which case knowing nothing
would have produced the same behavior as knowing "a whole
bunch" but knowing an intermediate amount of information
between the two extremes can lead to non-optimal, i.e.
misinformed behavior. I hope the issues he raises have
cogent counterpoints.

-Chad"

emediawire.comemw121850.htmOpen ↗

TC

Ah, finally a web reference, one presumes at the level of comprehension
desired. Really can't call it research, only a news release sort of thing
advertising a new diet rag:

" ABOUT LOWCARB ENERGY More than 220,000 copies of LowCarb
Energy magazine's debut issue will be available nationwide
in bookstores, mass market retailers, drugstores and
health food stores beginning May 4. The first issue of
this 128-page print publication from Coincide Publishing,
LLC, offers"

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

"This guy looks like he knows his stuff. Of course,
knowing your stuff and "knowing enough" isn't the same
thing. Oftentimes knowing a little something leads you to
be afraid of something that upon further investigation
isn't so bad to begin with. In which case knowing nothing
would have produced the same behavior as knowing "a whole
bunch" but knowing an intermediate amount of information
between the two extremes can lead to non-optimal, i.e.
misinformed behavior. I hope the issues he raises have
cogent counterpoints.

-Chad"

emediawire.comemw121850.htmOpen ↗

TC

"Chad C." <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

circularstrengthmag.comjacques.htmlOpen ↗

This may be of interest to fellow low-carbers. Are there
any counterpoints to what he raises? The link was posted
by somebody else, in alt.support.diet.low-carb. Here's
what I've posted in response thus far, in that newsgroup:

"This guy looks like he knows his stuff. Of course,
knowing your stuff and "knowing enough" isn't the same
thing. Oftentimes knowing a little something leads you to
be afraid of something that upon further investigation
isn't so bad to begin with. In which case knowing nothing
would have produced the same behavior as knowing "a whole
bunch" but knowing an intermediate amount of information
between the two extremes can lead to non-optimal, i.e.
misinformed behavior. I hope the issues he raises have
cogent counterpoints.

-Chad"

Lookee lookee, Dr Brett Jacques is an "independent"
consultant to a low-calorie weight loss program:

bodywise.comhome.aspOpen ↗

He sells the following:

Products that support and balance all the major areas that
contribute to weight control The ABC Eating Plan that
provides healthy guidelines for real nutrition -
incorporating regular food and normal eating patterns The
Body Wise Personal Fitness program - a balanced exercise
plan to keep you in shape and burn calories

Here is their diet pitch:

"For a Better Life, All Your Life One of the hardest things
to learn when "Reshaping" is how to eat. Our goal at Body
Wise® is to help you make healthy eating both simple and
fulfilling. When you look at today's fad diets, few of them
are really grounded in good nutrition. For example, low-fat
plans often neglect excellent sources of protein and healthy
fats, while "low-carb" dieters lose out on a range of very
nutritious grains, legumes, and fruits."

The guy is a salesman, not a doctor. Must be losing a lot of
business to the low-carb diets.

TC

Ah, but you gotta make some connection that has some
direct bearing on the quality of the information he
presents. Why bother doing a cut and paste of some atkins
blurbs, and his books, and his health programs and his
food products, and his licensing of his name and etc. etc.
etc., if we are going to use this very irrelevant smear.
It's the quality of the info son, the info that is at
issue not that atkins stood to make millions from his
products and services. Give me anyone in the nutrition
field and I can show yyou potential linckage with self
interest, anyone son, anyone at all.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

This may be of interest to fellow low-carbers. Are there
any counterpoints to what he raises? The link was posted
by somebody else, in alt.support.diet.low-carb. Here's
what I've posted in response thus far, in that newsgroup:

"This guy looks like he knows his stuff. Of course,
knowing your stuff and "knowing enough" isn't the same
thing. Oftentimes knowing a little something leads you to
be afraid of something that upon further investigation
isn't so bad to begin with. In which case knowing nothing
would have produced the same behavior as knowing "a whole
bunch" but knowing an intermediate amount of information
between the two extremes can lead to non-optimal, i.e.
misinformed behavior. I hope the issues he raises have
cogent counterpoints.

-Chad"

Lookee lookee, Dr Brett Jacques is an "independent"
consultant to a low-calorie weight loss program:

bodywise.comhome.aspOpen ↗

He sells the following:

Products that support and balance all the major areas that
contribute to weight control The ABC Eating Plan that
provides healthy guidelines for real nutrition -
incorporating regular food and normal eating patterns The
Body Wise Personal Fitness program - a balanced exercise
plan to keep you in shape and burn calories

Here is their diet pitch:

"For a Better Life, All Your Life One of the hardest things
to learn when "Reshaping" is how to eat. Our goal at Body
Wise® is to help you make healthy eating both simple and
fulfilling. When you look at today's fad diets, few of them
are really grounded in good nutrition. For example, low-fat
plans often neglect excellent sources of protein and
healthy fats, while "low-carb" dieters lose out on a range
of very nutritious grains, legumes, and fruits."

The guy is a salesman, not a doctor. Must be losing a lot
of business to the low-carb diets.

TC

Hi Mark,

Could you comment on your personal opinion on some of
the points he raises? I'm trying to follow a low-carb
diet and I'm concerned if some of his points might be
true. What's your take? Please do share, I respect
your opinions.

Thanks,

-Chad

<[email hidden]> wrote in message -"]news:[email hidden]-
net.com...

Quoted message said:

Ah, but you gotta make some connection that has some
direct bearing on the quality of the information he
presents. Why bother doing a cut and paste of some atkins
blurbs, and his books, and his health programs and his
food products, and his licensing of his name and etc. etc.
etc., if we are going to use this very irrelevant smear.
It's the quality of the info son, the info that is at
issue not that atkins stood to make millions from his
products and services. Give me anyone in the nutrition
field and I can show yyou potential linckage with self
interest, anyone son, anyone at all.

My mistake, I meant to copy and past this:

bodywise.comhome.aspOpen ↗

TC

[email hidden] wrote in message news:<[email hidden]-
net.com>...

Quoted message said:

Ah, finally a web reference, one presumes at the level of
comprehension desired. Really can't call it research, only
a news release sort of thing advertising a new diet rag:

" ABOUT LOWCARB ENERGY More than 220,000 copies of LowCarb
Energy magazine's debut issue will be available nationwide
in bookstores, mass market retailers, drugstores and
health food stores beginning May 4. The first issue of
this 128-page print publication from Coincide Publishing,
LLC, offers"

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

"This guy looks like he knows his stuff. Of course,
knowing your stuff and "knowing enough" isn't the same
thing. Oftentimes knowing a little something leads you
to be afraid of something that upon further
investigation isn't so bad to begin with. In which case
knowing nothing would have produced the same behavior
as knowing "a whole bunch" but knowing an intermediate
amount of information between the two extremes can lead
to non-optimal, i.e. misinformed behavior. I hope the
issues he raises have cogent counterpoints.

-Chad"

emediawire.comemw121850.htmOpen ↗

TC

I fail to see the relevence of the new link to anything on
topic, it is a page promoting a mlm marketing scheme.

Quoted message said:

My mistake, I meant to copy and past this:

bodywise.comhome.aspOpen ↗

TC

[email hidden] wrote in message news:<[email hidden]-
n et.com>...

Quoted message said:

Ah, finally a web reference, one presumes at the level
of comprehension desired. Really can't call it
research, only a news release sort of thing advertising
a new diet rag:

" ABOUT LOWCARB ENERGY More than 220,000 copies of
LowCarb Energy magazine's debut issue will be available
nationwide in bookstores, mass market retailers,
drugstores and health food stores beginning May 4. The
first issue of this 128-page print publication from
Coincide Publishing, LLC, offers"

Quoted message said:

> "This guy looks like he knows his stuff. Of course,
> knowing your stuff and "knowing enough" isn't the same
> thing. Oftentimes knowing a little somethi

ng

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> leads you to be afraid of something that upon further
> investigation isn't

so

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> bad to begin with. In which case knowing nothing would
> have produced the same behavior as knowing "a whole
> bunch" but knowing an intermediate amoun

t

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> of information between the two extremes can lead to
> non-optimal, i.e. misinformed behavior. I hope the
> issues he raises have cogent counterpoint

s.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>
> -Chad"

emediawire.comemw121850.htmOpen ↗

TC

Quoted message said:

Could you comment on your personal opinion on some of the
points he raises? I'm trying to follow a low-carb diet and
I'm concerned if some of his points might be true. What's
your take? Please do share, I respect

your >opinions. > >

I break it into two parts. His commentary on cultures and
diet didn't ring true for several reasons not relevent to
your concerns, but which causes me to consider the quality
of the rest of his article. It is anecdotal and is at best
suggestive. This kind of experience often is the birth of a
new direction of enquiry, but based alone on his
observations no firm conclusions can be drawn. I should
reveal that I have an inherent bias against "naturopathy" of
which he is a "dr.". Far too much of their "research" relies
too much on the sum of anecdotal observations and too little
on standard scientific research approaches. There is
research underway asking many of the core questions about lc
diets, finally because atkins had none, and we should know
much more when it is published. My personal view is that for
people without health problems related to carb
metabolism,ie. diabetes etc. and those not overweight; lc
has no advantages and some possible problems. The one of
most concern is that fruits and veggies are the source of
many of the goodies which contribute to good health and
disease prevention. Animal products in the extreme by
definition of practical application weighs in against
getting the goodies. In short, for the normal guy on
thestreet it has no advantage and some cautions. Some who
look at the one year numbers see just as many lc folk having
stopped as other "diet" methods. If I were to use it to lose
weight it would be in the short term to aid in getting some
goal and then do moderate carbs with emphasis on whole
minimal refined versions which have nutritional content of
benefit in addition to their energy content alone.

You must be kidding? Are you that dense?

A fellow who calls himself a doctor writes an involved
article criticizing low-carb diets. It then turns out that
the guy is barely a doctor and is an "independent"
consultant to a low-calorie weight loss diet. He takes a
bunch of half-truths and skewed personal observations and
presents them as some kind of medical/scientific fact. This
is neither medicine nor is it science. It is a sales pitch
to defend his inferior product. And it is a medical and
scientific fraud.

TC

[email hidden] wrote in message news:<[email hidden]-
net.com>...

Quoted message said:

I fail to see the relevence of the new link to anything on
topic, it is a page promoting a mlm marketing scheme.

Quoted message said:

My mistake, I meant to copy and past this:

bodywise.comhome.aspOpen ↗

TC

[email hidden] wrote in message news:<[email hidden]-
n et.com>...

Quoted message said:

Ah, finally a web reference, one presumes at the level
of comprehension desired. Really can't call it
research, only a news release sort of thing advertising
a new diet rag:

" ABOUT LOWCARB ENERGY More than 220,000 copies of
LowCarb Energy magazine's debut issue will be available
nationwide in bookstores, mass market retailers,
drugstores and health food stores beginning May 4. The
first issue of this 128-page print publication from
Coincide Publishing, LLC, offers"

>> "This guy looks like he knows his stuff. Of course,
>> knowing your stuff and "knowing enough" isn't the
>> same thing. Oftentimes knowing a little somethi

ng

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>> leads you to be afraid of something that upon
>> further investigation isn't

so

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>> bad to begin with. In which case knowing nothing
>> would have produced the same behavior as knowing "a
>> whole bunch" but knowing an intermediate amoun

t

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>> of information between the two extremes can lead to
>> non-optimal, i.e. misinformed behavior. I hope the
>> issues he raises have cogent counterpoint

s.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>
>> -Chad"
>
>
>emediawire.comemw121850Open ↗
>.htm
>
>TC

Substitute "low" for "high" and what part doesn't fit
atkins? It is the info son, the info that either stands
scrutiny, both atkins and this guy, or not. You might want
to read my responce to the article posted in responce to
another poster.

Quoted message said:

A fellow who calls himself a doctor writes an involved
article criticizing low-carb diets. It then turns out that
the guy is barely a doctor and is an "independent"
consultant to a low-calorie weight loss diet. He takes a
bunch of half-truths and skewed personal observations and
presents them as some kind of medical/scientific fact. This
is neither medicine nor is it science. It is a sales pitch
to defend his inferior product. And it is a medical and
scientific fraud.

TC

[email hidden] wrote in message
news:<[email hidden] -net.com>...

Quoted message said:

I fail to see the relevence of the new link to anything
on topic, it is a page promoting a mlm marketing scheme.

Quoted message said:

My mistake, I meant to copy and past this:

bodywise.comhome.aspOpen ↗

TC

[email hidden] wrote in message
news:<[email hidden]

y-n

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

et.com>...
> Ah, finally a web reference, one presumes at the level
> of comprehension desired. Really can't call it
> research, only a news release sort of thing
> advertising a new diet rag:
>
> " ABOUT LOWCARB ENERGY More than 220,000 copies of
> LowCarb Energy magazine's debut issue will be
> available nationwide in bookstores, mass market
> retailers, drugstores and health food stores beginning
> May 4. The first issue of this 128-page print
> publication from Coincide Publishing, LLC, offers"
>
>
> >> "This guy looks like he knows his stuff. Of course,
> >> knowing your stuff

and

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> >> "knowing enough" isn't the same thing. Oftentimes
> >> knowing a little some

thi

Quoted message said:

ng

Quoted message said:

> >> leads you to be afraid of something that upon
> >> further investigation isn

't

Quoted message said:

so

Quoted message said:

> >> bad to begin with. In which case knowing nothing
> >> would have produced th

e

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> >> same behavior as knowing "a whole bunch" but
> >> knowing an intermediate am

oun

Quoted message said:

t

Quoted message said:

> >> of information between the two extremes can lead to
> >> non-optimal, i.e. misinformed behavior. I hope the
> >> issues he raises have cogent counterpo

int

Quoted message said:

s.

Quoted message said:

> >>
> >> -Chad"
> >
> >
> >emediawire.comemw121850.Open ↗
> >htm
> >
> >TC

Big difference... the atkins diet actually works and is
conducive to good health. Oh yeah, and atkins didn't have to
rag on other diets to get it on the bestseller list. It made
it there on its own merits.

TC

[email hidden] wrote in message news:<[email hidden]-
net.com>...

Quoted message said:

Substitute "low" for "high" and what part doesn't fit
atkins? It is the info son, the info that either stands
scrutiny, both atkins and this guy, or not. You might want
to read my responce to the article posted in responce to
another poster.

Quoted message said:

A fellow who calls himself a doctor writes an involved
article criticizing low-carb diets. It then turns out
that the guy is barely a doctor and is an "independent"
consultant to a low-calorie weight loss diet. He takes a
bunch of half-truths and skewed personal observations and
presents them as some kind of medical/scientific fact.
This is neither medicine nor is it science. It is a sales
pitch to defend his inferior product. And it is a medical
and scientific fraud.

TC

[email hidden] wrote in message
news:<[email hidden] -net.com>...

Quoted message said:

I fail to see the relevence of the new link to anything
on topic, it is a page promoting a mlm marketing
scheme.

>My mistake, I meant to copy and past this:
>
>bodywise.comhome.aspOpen ↗
>
>TC
>
>[email hidden] wrote in message
>news:<[email hidden]

y-n

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>et.com>...
>> Ah, finally a web reference, one presumes at the
>> level of comprehension desired. Really can't call it
>> research, only a news release sort of thing
>> advertising a new diet rag:
>>
>> " ABOUT LOWCARB ENERGY More than 220,000 copies of
>> LowCarb Energy magazine's debut issue will be
>> available nationwide in bookstores, mass market
>> retailers, drugstores and health food stores
>> beginning May 4. The first issue of this 128-page
>> print publication from Coincide Publishing, LLC,
>> offers"
>>
>>
>> >> "This guy looks like he knows his stuff. Of
>> >> course, knowing your stuff

and

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>> >> "knowing enough" isn't the same thing. Oftentimes
>> >> knowing a little some

thi ng

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>> >> leads you to be afraid of something that upon
>> >> further investigation isn

't so

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>> >> bad to begin with. In which case knowing nothing
>> >> would have produced th

e

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>> >> same behavior as knowing "a whole bunch" but
>> >> knowing an intermediate am

oun t

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>> >> of information between the two extremes can lead
>> >> to non-optimal, i.e. misinformed behavior. I hope
>> >> the issues he raises have cogent counterpo

int
s.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>> >>
>> >> -Chad"
>> >
>> >
>> >emediawire.comemw12185Open ↗
>> >0.htm
>> >
>> >TC

"Big difference... the atkins diet actually works and is
conducive to good health. Oh yeah, and atkins didn't have to
rag on other diets to get it on the bestseller list. It made
it there on its own merits."

As have all the succesful diet books. All are effective
because they reduce calorie intake, the author's start with
this and work backwards and include whatever is their spin
by which to mark themselves as being new and different. What
did he say about other diets, consider carefully now.

[email hidden] wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

"Big difference... the atkins diet actually works and is
conducive to good health. Oh yeah, and atkins didn't have
to rag on other diets to get it on the bestseller list. It
made it there on its own merits."

As have all the succesful diet books. All are effective
because they reduce calorie intake, the author's start
with this and work backwards and include whatever is their
spin by which to mark themselves as being new and
different. What did he say about other diets, consider
carefully now.

Actualy that is simply not true. low carb is not about
low calories. Despite what gets repeated over and over
all calories are NOT equal. There are studies to show
this and I have seen this for myself. I had weighed
about 165 for many years, never really fluctuating more
than 3 or so pounds plus or minus. As soon as I sharply
reduced carbs and kept calories the same I began to lose
weight. I found I had to significantly increase calories
to keep from losing. Eventualy my weight got down to
about 145 and there it has stayed for almost 2 years. I
even eat a moderate amount of carbs per day, about 120
grams all from whole unprocessed foods of course. They
come mostly from vegetables and some sprouted whole
grains and fruit. As far as calories I would say I eat
at least 500 caloris more a day than I used to when i
weighed 165. That is not an insignificant amount. Also
my physical activity has remained the same. This is done
by cutting out calories from refined junk carbs like
sugar and flower.

So it is plainly obvious that all calories are not
equal as politically correct nutritionists and the
mainstream medical community dictates over and over,
including health secretary Tommy thomson in a speach
not long ago. It was baffling to me at first why they
attempt to drive this obviously flawed point into us
so desperately. Now I understand that it is necessary
to keep the public believing this lie so that they
continue to think it is ok to get calories from junk
carbs (most prophitable to food industry) so long as
they keep total calories low. If even a small
fraction of the poplulation knew the real dangers of
these foods and stopped eating them completely it
would be an incredibly devastating blow to the food
industry and seriously damaging the economy. of
course that can not be alowed. There is always a big
picture you just have to open your eyes to it. That
is why the dangers of flower and sugar will never be
part of goverment nutritional policy when science
clearly shows they are among the worst things in the
human diet. It is shocking enough that trans fat is
slowly but surely being seen for what it is. Of
course it took 70 or so years dispite all the
evidence. Who knows maybe in 20 or 40 years when the
state of human health world wide has declined
drasticly enough as it has been doing for the last
100 years despite the "wonders of modern medicine"
and enough people are dying things will change.

Show me the information to which you refer which shows the
calory balance model doesn't account for weight status. This
topic has had some discussion here, perhaps you missed it.
Suggesting differences in the energy costs of evoking
different pathways for macro source metabolism is not info
in support against the calory balance model.

Quoted message said:

Actualy that is simply not true. low carb is not about
low calories. Despite what gets repeated over and over
all calories are NOT equal. There are studies to show
this and I have seen this for myself. I had weighed
about 165 for many years, never really fluctuating more
than 3 or so pounds plus or minus. As soon as I sharply
reduced carbs and kept calories the same I began to
lose weight. I found I had to significantly increase
calories to keep from losing. Eventualy my weight got
down to about 145 and there it has stayed for almost 2
years. I even eat a moderate amount of carbs per day,
about 120 grams all from whole unprocessed foods of
course. They come mostly from vegetables and some
sprouted whole grains and fruit. As far as calories I
would say I eat at least 500 caloris more a day than I
used to when i weighed 165. That is not an
insignificant amount. Also my physical activity has
remained the same. This is done by cutting out calories
from refined junk carbs like sugar and flower.

So it is plainly obvious that all calories are not
equal as politically correct nutritionists and the
mainstream medical community dictates over and over,
including health secretary Tommy thomson in a speach
not long ago. It was baffling to me at first why they
attempt to drive this obviously flawed point into us
so desperately. Now I understand that it is necessary
to keep the public believing this lie so that they
continue to think it is ok to get calories from junk
carbs (most prophitable to food industry) so long as
they keep total calories low. If even a small fraction
of the poplulation knew the real dangers of these
foods and stopped eating them completely it would be
an incredibly devastating blow to the food industry
and seriously damaging the economy. of course that can
not be alowed. There is always a big picture you just
have to open your eyes to it. That is why the dangers
of flower and sugar will never be part of goverment
nutritional policy when science clearly shows they are
among the worst things in the human diet. It is
shocking enough that trans fat is slowly but surely
being seen for what it is. Of course it took 70 or so
years dispite all the evidence. Who knows maybe in 20
or 40 years when the state of human health world wide
has declined drasticly enough as it has been doing for
the last 100 years despite the "wonders of modern
medicine" and enough people are dying things will
change.

Quoted message said:

having stopped as other "diet" methods. If I were to use
it to lose weight it would be in the short term to aid in
getting some goal and

then

Quoted message said:

do moderate carbs with emphasis on whole minimal refined
versions

which

Quoted message said:

have nutritional content of benefit in addition to
their energy

content

Quoted message said:

alone.

Which is why there are four phases in Atkins....

Mirek

It all depends on what one considers moderate carbs, which
means to me a level outside the atkins maintenence level.
Unless one has a metabolic disorder and doesn't exceed
caloriy requirments, I see no reason that a good percentage
of calories shouldn't be complex carb sources.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

having stopped as other "diet" methods. If I were to use
it to lose weight it would be in the short term to aid in
getting some goal and

then

Quoted message said:

do moderate carbs with emphasis on whole minimal refined
versions

which

Quoted message said:

have nutritional content of benefit in addition to
their energy

content

Quoted message said:

alone.

Which is why there are four phases in Atkins....

Mirek

<[email hidden]> pí¹e v diskusním pøíspìvku
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

It all depends on what one considers moderate carbs, which
means to me

a

Quoted message said:

level outside the atkins maintenence level. Unless
one has a

metabolic

Quoted message said:

disorder and doesn't exceed caloriy requirments, I see no
reason that

a

Quoted message said:

good percentage of calories shouldn't be complex carb
sources.

Question is whether there is a good reason why "net" carbs
should exceed say 120g / day. Are there any real health
benefits in adding grains and starches to diet? They still
seem to be pretty empty calories. I see no difference in
fueling my BMR by grains/starch or fat except that empty
carbs are much more harder to manage to stay within my
calorie requirements...

Mirek