O/T: Atkins lied?

Discussion in 'Mountain Bikes' started by Carla A-G, Jan 27, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Dave W

    Dave W Guest

    "Slacker" <[email protected]> had this to say news:[email protected] 191655.news.uni-berlin.de

    > Dave W wrote:
    >> "Slacker" <[email protected]> had this to say news:[email protected] 191655.news.uni-
    >> berlin.de
    >>
    >>>> Yeah, as usual the bulk of the American public is willing to be led astray by whoever's on TV
    >>>> spouting the latest diet fad. They'd rather let others think for them. Right now it's comical
    >>>> but if in 2 years I can't find a hamburger that includes a bun it's going to be very annoying.
    >>>>
    >>>> Greg
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Die white bread.... die!!!
    >>> --
    >>> Slacker
    >>
    >> not if I can help it!!
    >
    >
    > Rage against the machine if you must, but soon you and GT will be woofing down naked wieners and
    > burgers!
    > --
    > Slacker

    NEVER. They can take my sandwhich when they pry it from my cold, dead hand!

    >
     


  2. Pete

    Pete Guest

    "MPD Blue" <[email protected]> wrote

    > The only thing that sucks is NO BEER!!!

    That's just sadistic!

    Pete
     
  3. Penny S

    Penny S Guest

    MPD Blue wrote:
    >The only thing that sucks is NO BEER!!!

    so?
     
  4. Stephen Baker <[email protected]> wrote:
    > Shawn Curry says:

    > >May as well, for all the respect you have for how modern science is done.

    > Science is _done_? I always that that science just _was_. It does, after all, mean "knowledge".
    > Now, if you were really trying to say "scientific procedure" as opposed to "science", then the
    > word you were so desperately seeking is "performed", not "done"

    > Steve "I'm done....""

    Nope. You can argue that physical phenomena "just are" (if you drop a rock it falls, and this was
    true even before any people were around to think about why that should happen), but scientific
    knowledge exists only in people's heads, and has to be created. Before Aristotle or Newton started
    thinking about why rocks fall, there was no such concept as "gravity," even though the rocks were
    falling all along, regardless of whether humans thought about it.

    Creating this knowledge is doing science. The only person out there who performs science is Bill Nye
    the Science Guy.

    Though I like to think of myself not as doing science, but as blinding people with it.

    -Regards,
    Dr. T. Dolby
     
  5. Dave W

    Dave W Guest

  6. > >
    > > Having peers that already agreed with you before you did the study then review your information
    > > and confirm your beliefs once again is not exactly ground breaking science.
    >
    > So you're saying their data and its interpretation is fraudulent? Great. And computers work by
    > little elves magicing messages back and forth through telepathy. May as well, for all the respect
    > you have for how modern science is done.
    >
    > Shawn
    >

    It's incomplete, if you can't see that then you are also incomplete.
    --
    _________________________
    Chris Phillipo - Cape Breton, Nova Scotia http://www.ramsays-online.com
     
  7. > >
    > > All I know is I went from 236lbs to 169 lbs in 6 months on a low carb (read LOW CARB, not HIGH
    > > FAT) diet and 3 years later my highest weight has been 178 lbs. which was after this christmas,
    > > and as soon as the chocolate ran out the weight came off again :) I'm at 174 now which is the
    > > best I can do in the winter months, I will be 169 again once I get back to regular riding. And
    > > the only time I really restricted carbs to 20-30g a day was during those initial 6 months, I
    > > haven't done that since. I simply don't buy the regular pop, cereal or the loaf of bread, I
    > > stick to meat, cheese, eggs and green vegetables and diet pop/Crystal Lite/Sugar free kool-aid
    > > and that does it for me.
    > >
    >
    > I'll bet if you ate more high carb vegetables that are low-glycemic you'd do fine, too.
    >
    > Greg
    >
    >

    Oh no someone actually gets the point! Lower your insulin response by any means necessary and
    everything else falls into place.
    --
    _________________________
    Chris Phillipo - Cape Breton, Nova Scotia http://www.ramsays-online.com
     
  8. > >
    > > not if I can help it!!
    >
    >
    > Rage against the machine if you must, but soon you and GT will be woofing down naked wieners and
    > burgers!
    > --
    > Slacker
    >
    >
    >

    Good lord, I don't be needin' that image this early in the morning.
    --
    _________________________
    Chris Phillipo - Cape Breton, Nova Scotia http://www.ramsays-online.com
     
  9. Shawn Curry

    Shawn Curry Guest

    Chris Phillipo wrote:
    >>>Having peers that already agreed with you before you did the study then review your information
    >>>and confirm your beliefs once again is not exactly ground breaking science.
    >>
    >>So you're saying their data and its interpretation is fraudulent? Great. And computers work by
    >>little elves magicing messages back and forth through telepathy. May as well, for all the respect
    >>you have for how modern science is done.
    >>
    >>Shawn
    >>
    >
    >
    > It's incomplete, if you can't see that then you are also incomplete.
    Well duh. Its an abstract. It looked like you needed to pay $12 to read the complete study. I don't
    care that much. BUT, if you're refering to the study-its a small part of a very big human diet
    picture. I got no impression that the researches were saying any more than that. Their conclusions
    followed from their data. The Willet diet I refered to in another post is big picture. this was a
    small study.

    Shawn
     
  10. Jonesy

    Jonesy Guest

  11. In article <[email protected]>,
    [email protected] says...
    > Chris Phillipo wrote:
    > >>>Having peers that already agreed with you before you did the study then review your information
    > >>>and confirm your beliefs once again is not exactly ground breaking science.
    > >>
    > >>So you're saying their data and its interpretation is fraudulent? Great. And computers work by
    > >>little elves magicing messages back and forth through telepathy. May as well, for all the
    > >>respect you have for how modern science is done.
    > >>
    > >>Shawn
    > >>
    > >
    > >
    > > It's incomplete, if you can't see that then you are also incomplete.
    > Well duh. Its an abstract. It looked like you needed to pay $12 to read the complete study. I
    > don't care that much. BUT, if you're refering to the study-its a small part of a very big human
    > diet picture. I got no impression that the researches were saying any more than that. Their
    > conclusions followed from their data. The Willet diet I refered to in another post is big picture.
    > this was a small study.
    >
    > Shawn
    >

    Did anyone see Scientific American Frontiers on PBS last night, all about dieting. I felt sorry for
    all those people at the weight watchers meeting, hoping to be one of the lucky ones that didn't gain
    and being all ecstatic when they lost 2 lbs over 4 weeks and it cost them like $300. One common
    factor in all the failed dieters seemed to be their inability to stick to it, and I think Atkins
    plan is probably a hard one to stick to also, I didn't use that one. Personally I think any method
    that requires you to significantly reduce your food intake when you weren't binge eating in the
    first place is doomed to fail. When I was losing between 3 and 5 lbs. a week and was never hungry it
    was great. When I went back and did the same epic rides again that I used to at 230
    + lbs. it was like having a tail wind all the time.

    --
    _________________________
    Chris Phillipo - Cape Breton, Nova Scotia http://www.ramsays-online.com
     
  12. Stephen Baker <[email protected]comnospam> wrote:

    > Knowledge is not "created" unless you are Mikey V. Science is "studied" in order to achieve
    > knowledge (take THAT, Grasshopper..)

    No really, I am not M*V*, nor am I denying the existence of physical laws that govern natural
    phenomena. I'm just arguing that knowledge is a property that requires a knower, and that science is
    a type of knowledge. We study physical phenomena - do experiments, make theories - in order to gain
    knowledge. When that knowledge is gained according to certain rules and customs, we call it
    "science." ;

    > >Before Aristotle or Newton started thinking about why rocks fall, there was no such concept as
    > >"gravity," even though the rocks were falling all along, regardless of whether humans thought
    > >about it.

    > There was no concept of gravity, true, therefore it was not part of "science". It became "science"
    > when it became "knowledge" Amazing how two words with the same meaning can mean the same thing,
    > isn't it?

    > >Creating this knowledge is doing science.

    > Knowledge is not created, again. Science cannot be done. Scientific experiments can be
    > done/performed in the _pursuit_ of science.

    ???!!! You can believe that facts are immutable and exist prior to discovery, but I don't see how
    you can make that argument about knowledge. For example, Franklin more or less firmly showed that
    lightning was electrical. Before he did that, lightning was in fact electrical, but nobody knew
    that. You could argue that the knowledge existed waiting to be discovered, but I think that's an
    abuse of language. Knowledge implies knowers.

    > >The only person out there who performs science is Bill Nye the Science Guy.
    > >

    > LOL! I would have said he was the only person who could be said to "do" science. ;-)

    > >Though I like to think of myself not as doing science, but as blinding people with it.

    > You must try harder to achieve that goal - it is not working yet.

    > Steve "shoulda bin a English teecher"

    I don't know if you missed the Thomas Dolby reference, or if it was so lame that you graciously
    passed over it in silence. Guessing the latter.

    Ben
     
  13. Pat

    Pat Guest

    > The Atkins diet (in my limited understanding) mixes high fat and protein with low carbs (and no
    > exercise). It's essentially an unhealthy and lazy way to achieve similar goals through different
    > methods.

    You're wrong--the Atkins diet stresses exercise.

    Pat in TX
     
  14. Pat

    Pat Guest

    > Did anyone see Scientific American Frontiers on PBS last night, all about dieting. I felt sorry
    > for all those people at the weight watchers meeting, hoping to be one of the lucky ones that
    > didn't gain and being all ecstatic when they lost 2 lbs over 4 weeks and it cost them like $300.
    > One common factor in all the failed dieters seemed to be their inability to stick to it, and I
    > think Atkins plan is probably a hard one to stick to also, I didn't use that one. Personally I
    > think any method that requires you to significantly reduce your food intake when you weren't
    > binge eating in the first place is doomed to fail. When I was losing between 3 and 5 lbs. a week
    > and was never hungry it was great. When I went back and did the same epic rides again that I used
    > to at 230
    > + lbs. it was like having a tail wind all the time.
    >
    > --
    > _________________________
    > Chris Phillipo - Cape Breton, Nova Scotia

    The Atkins diet is not hard to stick with. Eating this way, you are never hungry. It doesn't require
    a significant reduction of food intake---just a reduction of carbohydrate intake during the first
    two weeks. A person fills full earlier eating a higher protein diet. At first, on this diet, you
    tend to eat more fat (such as bacon and sausage), but then after awhile you find that you just can't
    continue eating so much fat because you get tired of it! So, you tend to eat fewer calories overall.
    The main key is to break yourself of the cravings for sugar, and that is done during the first two
    weeks. After that, you continue to add carbs back to the diet, concentrating on low glycemic ones,
    until you find the level at which you can eat without gaining weight. This is a pretty high carb
    rate, especially for athletes.

    I have ridden all morning bike rides just snacking on cheese. Cheese tastes better than those
    "sludge" bars I used to carry along.

    Pat in TX
     
  15. >
    > The Atkins diet is not hard to stick with. Eating this way, you are never hungry. It doesn't
    > require a significant reduction of food intake---just a reduction of carbohydrate intake during
    > the first two weeks. A person fills full earlier eating a higher protein diet. At first, on this
    > diet, you tend to eat more fat (such as bacon and sausage), but then after awhile you find that
    > you just can't continue eating so much fat because you get tired of it! So, you tend to eat fewer
    > calories overall. The main key is to break yourself of the cravings for sugar, and that is done
    > during the first two weeks. After that, you continue to add carbs back to the diet, concentrating
    > on low glycemic ones, until you find the level at which you can eat without gaining weight. This
    > is a pretty high carb rate, especially for athletes.
    >
    > I have ridden all morning bike rides just snacking on cheese. Cheese tastes better than those
    > "sludge" bars I used to carry along.
    >
    > Pat in TX
    >
    >
    >

    You are preaching to the quire here, however I used the Protein Power book from Doctors Michael R.
    Eades and Mary Dan Eades, I never read the Atkins book, he always seemed to be selling something on
    TV where as the Eades family simple wrote a book about something they've been practicing for over a
    decade with their patients as a means to control weight, diabetes, MS and a number of other things.
    I know what you mean about long distance rides because that's the reason I initially went looking
    for a way to ride longer a 6 pack of cliff bars, instead of carrying 3 pound of food, you end up
    burning a couple pounds of fat, and it doesn't come back. At the time I started thought I was over
    weight by 25 lbs., so I was all the more shocked when I lost 60. I usually take jerky or almonds on
    rides, cheese doesn't react well to hours of heat :)
    --
    _________________________
    Chris Phillipo - Cape Breton, Nova Scotia http://www.ramsays-online.com
     
  16. G.T.

    G.T. Guest

    "Pat" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    >
    > >
    > The Atkins diet is not hard to stick with. Eating this way, you are never hungry. It doesn't
    > require a significant reduction of food intake---just a reduction of carbohydrate intake during
    > the first two weeks. A person
    fills
    > full earlier eating a higher protein diet. At first, on this diet, you
    tend
    > to eat more fat (such as bacon and sausage), but then after awhile you
    find
    > that you just can't continue eating so much fat because you get tired of
    it!
    > So, you tend to eat fewer calories overall. The main key is to break yourself of the cravings for
    > sugar, and that is done during the first two weeks. After that, you continue to add carbs back to
    > the diet, concentrating on low glycemic ones, until you find the level at which you can eat
    > without gaining weight. This is a pretty high carb rate,
    especially
    > for athletes.
    >

    That sounds effective to me.

    > I have ridden all morning bike rides just snacking on cheese. Cheese
    tastes
    > better than those "sludge" bars I used to carry along.
    >

    I love cheese, in fact I've professed my love for cheese several times in this newsgroup, but it's
    not something I care to eat while exercising.

    Greg
     
  17. On 2004-01-29, Pat penned:
    >
    > The Atkins diet is not hard to stick with. Eating this way, you are never hungry. It doesn't
    > require a significant reduction of food intake---just a reduction of carbohydrate intake during
    > the first two weeks. A person fills full earlier eating a higher protein diet. At first, on this
    > diet, you tend to eat more fat (such as bacon and sausage), but then after awhile you find that
    > you just can't continue eating so much fat because you get tired of it! So, you tend to eat fewer
    > calories overall. The main key is to break yourself of the cravings for sugar, and that is done
    > during the first two weeks. After that, you continue to add carbs back to the diet, concentrating
    > on low glycemic ones, until you find the level at which you can eat without gaining weight. This
    > is a pretty high carb rate, especially for athletes.

    All of that sounds fine, except for the whole 'break yourself of the craving for sugar" thing. Might
    as well tell me to break myself of the craving for oxygen!

    > I have ridden all morning bike rides just snacking on cheese. Cheese tastes better than those
    > "sludge" bars I used to carry along.

    I adore cheese, but it gets kind of ... gross. Nuts aren't nearly as likely to get slimy or start
    to reek ...

    Not that they're low in sugar, exactly, but here's another chance to plug lara bars (
    http://www.larabar.com/ ). They are made with fruits, but no added sugar, anyway. Each is about 200
    calories, and no weird-ass ingredients I can't pronounce. Pretty small company, so I don't know if
    you can get them in the store outside of Colorado.

    --
    monique
     
  18. In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
    > On 2004-01-29, Pat penned:
    > >
    > > The Atkins diet is not hard to stick with. Eating this way, you are never hungry. It doesn't
    > > require a significant reduction of food intake---just a reduction of carbohydrate intake during
    > > the first two weeks. A person fills full earlier eating a higher protein diet. At first, on this
    > > diet, you tend to eat more fat (such as bacon and sausage), but then after awhile you find that
    > > you just can't continue eating so much fat because you get tired of it! So, you tend to eat
    > > fewer calories overall. The main key is to break yourself of the cravings for sugar, and that is
    > > done during the first two weeks. After that, you continue to add carbs back to the diet,
    > > concentrating on low glycemic ones, until you find the level at which you can eat without
    > > gaining weight. This is a pretty high carb rate, especially for athletes.
    >
    > All of that sounds fine, except for the whole 'break yourself of the craving for sugar" thing.
    > Might as well tell me to break myself of the craving for oxygen!

    It gets easier after the first 10 minutes! :)

    --
    _________________________
    Chris Phillipo - Cape Breton, Nova Scotia http://www.ramsays-online.com
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...