'Put fat children on Atkins diet'



On 15 Mar 2004 17:38:36 GMT, Ignoramus21819
<[email protected]> wrote:

>In article <[email protected]>,
>Jayjay wrote:
>> On 15 Mar 2004 15:59:39 GMT, Ignoramus21819
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>This is funny as this seems to be a dialog of people
>>>where both of them have no clue as to what they are
>>>talking about.
>>>
>>>One says that kids should be put on Atkins, which works
>>>becaus eit is "high protein". (********, as atkins is a
>>>high fat diet)
>>
>> ******** to you too, atkins is not high fat either. In
>> the true sense of the way the program works, it should
>> not be either high fat or high protein. One should not
>> consume excess of either.
>
>Okay, think about a typical person who eats 2,000 calories
>per day and is on maintenance after losing weight on
>Atkins. This person eats 80 grams of carbs per day (not at
>all unreasonable). This is 320 calories from carbs.

Please read the other posts in this thread in regards to
this - its been explained well. You obviously still have
not read his book to understand the true way of the
eating program.

If per say, a person who eats 2000 cals per day is now on
maintenance, the way atkins works is that they increase
their carbs (in forms of good carbs, like veggies, whole
grains, etc) to the point where they aren't losing any
more. For some people this increases their carbs to over
100 or more.

The diet works by keeping your meat/fat levels the same and
decreasing/increasing the carbs to a level for weightloss
or maintenance. Yes, the overal percentages of what is
consumed will alter based on your changes. But in reality
the *amount* that is consumed for fat/protein does not need
to change.

This argument is akin to the "Fat weighs more than muscle"
argument. By volume, yes, but pound for pound, no.

Same with Low carb. Protein/Fat consumption, by
percentage increases/decreases based on the carbohydrate
levels, but ounce for ounce of consumption, it is not
necessary to change.
 
"JMA" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "SnugBear" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > >
> > Oh we have *special dairies* that sell *special milk*
> > from *special
> cows* -
> > all at a very *special price* here in Maine. hmph

> And one of your *special dairies* actually a milk
> processor that gets milk only from hormone free dairies is
> getting sued by Monsanto, the maker of
the
> bovine growth hormone for advertising that their farmers
> certify that they don't use the hormones.

There are powerful lobbies that food industries use to
protect their profits. Labeling by organic food suppliers is
being contested tooth and nail. Wording must not read
"Hormone free, antibiotic free" on the milk carton. (We
don't add hormones or antibiotics to our milk the
conventional dairies say.) They also want the size of the
print used to be smaller. They want it to say something like
"Our cows were not given hormones, and conventional milk
products do not have hormones added to the milk."

> Milk that is certified as organic comes from cows that are
> not given the growth hormone and does come at a premium.

Well, both sides have their own profit making agendas. The
conventional farms and their suppliers still have the
political clout, however. I don't believe either industry
necessarily has my best interest at heart, so I just try to
use my brain and make my own choices of what is or isn't
worth the extra bucks to me.

Interestingly, some conventional dairies spend more than
some organic dairies to get their milk to market. It does
allow a guy with a smaller organic herd to make a nice
profit. It's not just hormones that those cows don't get,
either. Feed and use of drugs/antibiotics are also issues to
be aware of when making a comparison. It is also good to to
be able to differentiate terms like "natural", "organic",
"free range", etc...when making your purchase decisions.

http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/aib780/aib780i.pdf
 
In article <[email protected]>, Jayjay wrote:
> On 15 Mar 2004 17:38:36 GMT, Ignoramus21819
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>In article <[email protected]>,
>>Jayjay wrote:
>>> On 15 Mar 2004 15:59:39 GMT, Ignoramus21819
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>>This is funny as this seems to be a dialog of people
>>>>where both of them have no clue as to what they are
>>>>talking about.
>>>>
>>>>One says that kids should be put on Atkins, which works
>>>>becaus eit is "high protein". (********, as atkins is a
>>>>high fat diet)
>>>
>>> ******** to you too, atkins is not high fat either. In
>>> the true sense of the way the program works, it should
>>> not be either high fat or high protein. One should not
>>> consume excess of either.
>>
>>Okay, think about a typical person who eats 2,000 calories
>>per day and is on maintenance after losing weight on
>>Atkins. This person eats 80 grams of carbs per day (not at
>>all unreasonable). This is 320 calories from carbs.
>
> Please read the other posts in this thread in regards to
> this - its been explained well.

Mostly agreeing with me.

> You obviously still have not read his book to
> understand the true way of the eating program.

I did.

> If per say, a person who eats 2000 cals per day is now on
> maintenance, the way atkins works is that they increase
> their carbs (in forms of good carbs, like veggies, whole
> grains, etc) to the point where they aren't losing any
> more. For some people this increases their carbs to over
> 100 or more.

http://atkins.com/Archive/2001/12/15-39302.html

`` A typical male of average metabolic resistance may find
he has a CCLM of 50 grams. As long as he regularly eats no
more than 50 grams of carbs a day, he will not lose more
weight and become too thin. On the other hand, if he starts
consuming 60 grams a day, he'll be above his CCLM and will
start to regain weight.''

My 80 gram number was very generous.

> The diet works by keeping your meat/fat levels the same
> and decreasing/increasing the carbs to a level for
> weightloss or maintenance.

I would like to see a factual basis for this statement.

> Yes, the overal percentages of what is consumed will alter
> based on your changes.

exactly.

> But in reality the *amount* that is consumed for
> fat/protein does not need to change.

Well, if the percentage of fat is higher, then the diet is a
higher fat diet. High fat/low fat diets are always defined
by percentage of the macronutrient.

For example, the US government advocates a diet composed
of 30% fat, 15% protein and about 55% carbohydrates (see
http://www.jsonline.com/alive/nutrition/oct99/lowcarb2410-
2399.asp ).

>
> This argument is akin to the "Fat weighs more than muscle"
> argument. By volume, yes, but pound for pound, no.
>
> Same with Low carb. Protein/Fat consumption, by
> percentage increases/decreases based on the carbohydrate
> levels, but ounce for ounce of consumption, it is not
> necessary to change.

Again, high fat/low fat is defined by percentages.

i
 
Doug Freyburger <[email protected]> wrote or quoted:

> A lie is when someone tells a falsehood that they know is
> false. A mistake is when someone tells a falsehood that
> they beleive to be Read the book, Tim, and stop the
> mistakes. Because now you have been told so from here on
> out if you continue to misrepresent what Atkins actualyl
> is, you'll be lying.

Shanghai'd by the Atkins zombie hordes ;-)

Don't take it from me:

``[Dr. Atkins' dietetic revolution: a critique]

[...]

The diet, though far from good, is better than the book.
ATKINS' theories are at best half-truths, and the results
he claims lack credibility. The obese subject's
disappointment with traditional reducing diets and the
book's hard-sell style account for ATKINS' success.''

- http://calorierestriction.org/pmid/?n=897645

...

...and this - on how well researched the diet has been:

``A randomized trial of a low-carbohydrate diet for obesity

Despite the popularity of the low-carbohydrate, high-
protein, high-fat (Atkins) diet, no randomized, controlled
trials have evaluated its efficacy. [...] The low-
carbohydrate diet produced a greater weight loss (absolute
difference, approximately 4 percent) than did the
conventional diet for the first six months, but the
differences were not significant at one year. The low-
carbohydrate diet was associated with a greater
improvement in some risk factors for coronary heart
disease. Adherence was poor and attrition was high in both
groups. Longer and larger studies are required to
determine the long-term safety and efficacy of low-
carbohydrate, high-protein, high-fat diets.''

- http://calorierestriction.org/pmid/?n=12761365

Experiment on yourselves by all means - but don't claim
afterwards nobody warned you - and maybe hold off putting
kids on the diet until it has been better researched.
--
__________
|im |yler http://timtyler.org/ [email protected] Remove
lock to reply.
 
In article <[email protected]>, Tim Tyler wrote:
> Doug Freyburger <[email protected]> wrote or quoted:
>
>> A lie is when someone tells a falsehood that they know is
>> false. A mistake is when someone tells a falsehood that
>> they beleive to be Read the book, Tim, and stop the
>> mistakes. Because now you have been told so from here on
>> out if you continue to misrepresent what Atkins actualyl
>> is, you'll be lying.
>
> Shanghai'd by the Atkins zombie hordes ;-)
>
> Don't take it from me:
>
> ``[Dr. Atkins' dietetic revolution: a critique]
>
> [...]
>
> The diet, though far from good, is better than the book.
> ATKINS' theories are at best half-truths, and the
> results he claims lack credibility. The obese subject's
> disappointment with traditional reducing diets and the
> book's hard-sell style account for ATKINS' success.''
>
> - http://calorierestriction.org/pmid/?n=897645
>
> ...
>
> ...and this - on how well researched the diet has been:
>
> ``A randomized trial of a low-carbohydrate diet for
> obesity
>
> Despite the popularity of the low-carbohydrate, high-
> protein, high-fat (Atkins) diet, no randomized,
> controlled trials have evaluated its efficacy. [...] The
> low-carbohydrate diet produced a greater weight loss
> (absolute difference, approximately 4 percent) than did
> the conventional diet for the first six months, but the
> differences were not significant at one year. The low-
> carbohydrate diet was associated with a greater
> improvement in some risk factors for coronary heart
> disease. Adherence was poor and attrition was high in
> both groups. Longer and larger studies are required to
> determine the long-term safety and efficacy of low-
> carbohydrate, high-protein, high-fat diets.''
>
> - http://calorierestriction.org/pmid/?n=12761365
>
> Experiment on yourselves by all means - but don't claim
> afterwards nobody warned you - and maybe hold off putting
> kids on the diet until it has been better researched.

Tim, suppose that your friend has an obese kid and tells you
that he put his kid on a diet by eliminating flour, potatoes
and sugars and junk food from the child's diet, and added
some vegetable stuff.

Would it sound any more appealing to you than if you heard
that the kid was put on "atkins"?

I am not an atkins advocate, as I follow a much less
stringent lowered carb diet, control calories etc. What I
want to point out is that the idea of low carbing has some
validity, as many carbs (starches and sugars) are the least
nutritionally valuable of all macronutrients, and thus
safest to reduce intake of.

i
 
"Tim Tyler" <[email protected]> wrote in message

- and maybe hold off putting kids on the diet until
> it has been better researched.

A good idea. Only problem is what kids do we want to
experiment on? Using rats only gets us so far and using
adults may not mirror the results that preschoolers would
have from a particular diet.

HeartCenter Online (they claim 1 out of 4 cardiologists are
members) has a poll on the Adkin's diet posted online.
http://makeashorterlink.com/?B27331BB7 A couple of caveats,
HeartCenter Online has their own diet to sell and I don't
see any definition/information for who the "cardiovascular
professionals" are or how well informed they are on how the
Adkin's diet is actually written.
 
Patricia Heil <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> How stupid can it get!!! Get them out the door to exercise
> and don't take them to McDonald's and make them eat fruit
> instead of chips. There is not long-term data on Atkins
> and it's dangerous to do something to kids that isn't
> adequately tested on adults.

That didn't stop anyone from putting children on low-
fat diets.

brian
290/228/210 july 8, 2003
 
x-no-archive: yes

>
>Just one study, and I'm hoping they mean a high percentage
>of calories came from fats, not that they were feeding the
>kids diets of whale blubber or anything ;-)

It was nothing like the Atkins diet. It was stripped of
carbs and severely restricted protein as well. It was
virtually all fat.

Susan
 
Tim Tyler <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> In sci.life-extension Mark D. <Mark.D_is-not-now-
> [email protected]> wrote or quoted: My impression is that
> Atkins diet restricts carbohydrates - but not fat or
> protein. So people eat more fat and protein to make up for
> the lack of carbohydrates. The Atkins diet appears to be a
> bad one :-| People should be encouraged to eat more fruit
> and vegetables - not to replace them with animal fat.

I'm eating the exact same amount of fat and protien as I did
before the diet. The only things I'm doing different:

I stopped all refined sugar. I removed some fruits but not
all. I stopped all refined flour and only eat small amounts
of whole wheat. I stopped all white rice (i don't like wild
rice). I stopped all potatos and generally replaced them
with vegitables.

That change made me lose 60 pounds in five months with no
significant exercise. I have maybe 10 or 20 to go which I'm
having a hard time losing because my calories are too high.
My weight has been stable for four months now. I plan to
start running again when the snow/ice clears, which I expect
will make me lose the rest in 3 months or so. I tried to
start running again when I was 290. I got about 100 feet and
felt like I was going to die. One flight of stairs was
enough to make me out of breath. The other night, I ran a
mile without stopping.

Tonight, I'm going to a steak house chain to eat a 16 ounce
steak and vegies, plus a salad with no dressing. How is this
not healthy? Because I didn't eat two loaves of bread with
it? or three mugs of coke? Or a giant baked potato?

When I get to my goal weight, I'll eat just enough carbs to
keep me out of ketosis.

44" to 36" waist, 3xlt to lt shirt size, 30 point blood
pressure drop, 186 cholesterol, and I can run again. I'm
never going back.

brian
290/228/210 july 8, 2003
 
Tim Tyler <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> Doug Freyburger <[email protected]> wrote or quoted:
>
> > A lie is when someone tells a falsehood that they know
> > is false. A mistake is when someone tells a falsehood
> > that they beleive to be Read the book, Tim, and stop the
> > mistakes. Because now you have been told so from here on
> > out if you continue to misrepresent what Atkins actualyl
> > is, you'll be lying.
>
> Shanghai'd by the Atkins zombie hordes ;-)
>
> Don't take it from me:

Take it from null and void sources...

>
> ``[Dr. Atkins' dietetic revolution: a critique]
>
> [...]
>
> The diet, though far from good, is better than the book.
> ATKINS' theories are at best half-truths, and the
> results he claims lack credibility. The obese subject's
> disappointment with traditional reducing diets and the
> book's hard-sell style account for ATKINS' success.''
>
> - http://calorierestriction.org/pmid/?n=897645

So you think quotes of somebody's opinion are proof of
anything? I guess insulin and glucagon must be "half truths"
and "lack credibility". What drivel.

>
> ...
>
> ...and this - on how well researched the diet has been:
>
> ``A randomized trial of a low-carbohydrate diet for
> obesity
>
> Despite the popularity of the low-carbohydrate, high-
> protein, high-fat (Atkins) diet, no randomized,
> controlled trials have evaluated its efficacy. [...]

The absence of a study surely means that the concept is
wrong...in the minds of uneducated lemmings. BTW, the low
carb diet involves consumption of high fibre vegetables. The
only reason it is "high" fat is that the percentage of
calories from starch goes down together with the total daily
caloric intake. For insulin resistant people starch goes
primarily into fat accumulation at *any* level of
consumption over a few grams.

> The low-carbohydrate diet produced a greater weight loss
> (absolute difference, approximately 4 percent) than did
> the conventional diet for the first six months, but the
> differences were not significant at one year.

This must mean that the 56 pounds that I have lost during
the last six months will spontaneously start coming back in
the next six. No study could ever be wrong, right?

> The low-carbohydrate diet was associated with a greater
> improvement in some risk factors for coronary heart
> disease. Adherence was poor and attrition was high in
> both groups.

It is too bad that so many people are addicted to starch.
But that has nothing to do with the validity of the
concept of reducing starch consumption. Funny how the low
fat, high carb pushers all of the suddent get picky about
attrition rates.

> Longer and larger studies are required to determine the
> long-term safety and efficacy of low-carbohydrate, high-
> protein, high-fat diets.''
>
> - http://calorierestriction.org/pmid/?n=12761365

Your favourite content-free website makes yet another
hilariously absurd point.

>
> Experiment on yourselves by all means - but don't claim
> afterwards nobody warned you - and maybe hold off putting
> kids on the diet until it has been better researched.

Anything you say. We all know that starch is such a vital
nutrient for life. After all people have been eating
potatoes, white bread and over a hundred pounds of sugar per
annum for tens of thousands of years...in the fantasy world
of the demented sugar pushers.
 
JC Der Koenig wrote:

> I've drank more than 2 gallons a day in the past (that's
> how I got up to 240 lbs), and I don't think I was affected
> by any growth hormones that were administered to the cows.
>
> n = 1
>
No way!

Marsha/Ohio
 
"Marsha" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> JC Der Koenig wrote:
>
> > I've drank more than 2 gallons a day in the past (that's
> > how I got up to
240
> > lbs), and I don't think I was affected by any growth
> > hormones that were administered to the cows.
> >
> > n = 1
> >
> No way!
>

Way!
 
Troll factor: 4 of 10

"JC Der Koenig" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Please tell me that you've had your ovaries removed.
>
> --
> Most of us probably aren't in danger of eating too
> little. :)
>
> Becky P.
>
> "Pizza Girl" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:69-
> [email protected]...
> > OK. There are these little things called "calories" and
> > when you put foodsy-woodsy in your mouthy-poo it
> > contains some of these calories.
They
> > won't hurt you if you don't get sicky-wicky.
> >
> > Maybe ask Dr. Seus for more info.
> >
> > "JC Der Koenig" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > > You're an idiot. Hopefully you haven't reproduced yet.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Most of us probably aren't in danger of eating too
> > > little. :)
> > >
> > > Becky P.
> > >
> > > "Pizza Girl" <[email protected]> wrote in message ne-
> > > ws:[email protected]
> > > m...
> > > > Use pure cream instead of milk, untrimmed meat
> > > > instead of lean, no
low
> > fat
> > > > products etc.
> > > >
> > > > High fat and bad for you. A high protein I go for
> > > > but not high fat
> too.
> > > >
> > > > "JC Der Koenig" <[email protected]> wrote in
> > > > message news:[email protected]
> > > > digy.com...
> > > > > It's not a high fat diet either, in an absolute
> > > > > sense.
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Most of us probably aren't in danger of eating too
> > > > > little. :)
> > > > >
> > > > > Becky P.
> > > > >
> > > > > "Ignoramus21819"
> > > > > <[email protected]> wrote in
> > message
> > > > > news:[email protected]...
> > > > > > This is funny as this seems to be a dialog of
> > > > > > people where both
of
> > > > > > them have no clue as to what they are talking
> > > > > > about.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > One says that kids should be put on Atkins,
> > > > > > which works becaus
eit
> > is
> > > > > > "high protein". (********, as atkins is a high
> > > > > > fat diet)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Another objects by saying essentially nothing
> > > > > > meaningful at all.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > i
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In article <6d220a72.0403150754.355d4554@postin-
> > > > > > g.google.com>,
> > Diarmid
> > > > > Logan wrote:
> > > > > > > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3509792.stm
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 'Put fat children on Atkins diet'
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Fat children should be put on Atkins-style
> > > > > > > diets to lose
weight
> > and
> > > > > > > prevent illness, a cancer specialist has said.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Professor Julian Peto, of the Institute of
> > > > > > > Cancer Research,
said
> > > > > > > high-protein, low-carbohydrate diets could
> > > > > > > suppress appetites
> and
> > > keep
> > > > > > > children slim.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Obesity "is now overtaking smoking as the
> > > > > > > number one killer
and
> I
> > am
> > > > > > > very concerned that we need to tackle it
> > > > > > > early," he told BBC
> Radio
> > 5
> > > > > > > Live.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > He said dietary advice for children was not
> > > > > > > working and needed
a
> > > > > > > "rethink".
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > He added that children should be weighed
> > > > > > > regularly in school.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The problem of obesity is soaring among
> > > > > > > children in the UK.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > In 1998, 9% of two to four-year-olds were
> > > > > > > considered obese -
> > almost
> > > > > > > double the figure in 1989.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The World Health Organisation says being
> > > > > > > overweight causes
> > diabetes,
> > > > > > > heart disease and some forms of cancer.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Professor Peto said the Atkins diet, which
> > > > > > > involves eating
lots
> of
> > > > > > > meat and other high protein foods, while
> > > > > > > restricting
> > carbohydrates,
> > > > > > > worked because proteins suppressed the
> > > > > > > appetite and people did
> not
> > > eat
> > > > > > > as much.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > "I am sure the Atkins wasn't developed on this
> > > > > > > basis but that
is
> > why
> > > > > > > it works," he said.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > "The levels of salt and fat are anything but
> > > > > > > healthy but the
> basis
> > > of
> > > > > > > the diet - which is low carbohydrate and high
> > > > > > > protein - is
ideal
> > for
> > > > > > > losing weight."
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Opponents of Atkins-style diets claim that,
> > > > > > > over the long
term,
> > they
> > > > > > > can cause kidney damage, thin bones and
> > > > > > > constipation, raise cholesterol levels and
> > > > > > > increase the risk of diabetes and an
> early
> > > > > > > heart attack.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > But some British doctors are already putting
> > > > > > > obese children on Atkins-style diets.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Dr Dee Dawson, medical director at Rhodes Farm
> > > > > > > Clinic, a
> > residential
> > > > > > > home for treatment of children with eating
> > > > > > > disorders, says the
> > diet
> > > is
> > > > > > > good for children.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > "The children who come here are not just
> > > > > > > overweight, they are
> ill,
> > > and
> > > > > > > in danger of dying. Some of them can't breathe
> > > > > > > and some of
them
> > > can't
> > > > > > > lie down.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > "I do think the basis of Atkins - low
> > > > > > > carbohydrate and high
> > > protein -
> > > > > > > is a good diet for children and the priority
> > > > > > > is for these
> children
> > > to
> > > > > > > get weight off."
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > But nutritionist Dr Toni Steer, of the Medical
> > > > > > > Research
Council,
> > > > > > > warned that there is not enough research into
> > > > > > > the long-term
> health
> > > > > > > effects of being on the diet.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > "We realise obesity is a major problem which
> > > > > > > we need to tackle
> as
> > a
> > > > > > > matter of urgency but I would be very
> > > > > > > concerned about advising children to follow
> > > > > > > diets like Atkins."
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
 
Butter instead of oils, cream instead of milk, leave the fat
on the meat etc.. etc..

"Ryan Mitchley" <[email protected]>
wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Well, Atkins stresses vegetable (especially) and fruit
> intake in his books (at least in his "age-defying" book -
> the only one I've read). He even
ranks
> fruit and vegetables according to the ratio of
> antioxidants to carbohydrates.
>
> I think the "animal fat" part is misquoting his ideas
> somewhat (at least
the
> parts I've read). He stresses omega-3 rich foods, fish,
> good oils, etc
quite
> a lot. A fair amount is devoted to improving the HDL to
> LDL ratio. He
likes
> eggs more than the medical establishment has
> traditionally thought
healthy.
>
> I think the idea that the Atkins diet is a kind of rabid
> steak-eating
fetish
> is rather inaccurate.
>
> The basic ideas of restricting (especially refined)
> carbohydrates and getting a healthy intake of good fats
> and sufficient protein seem pretty well known. In
> combination with sufficient intake of vegetables
(primarily)
> and fruits, this sounds like a fairly good eating plan
> (ignoring the possibly significant issue of total calorie
> intake).
>
> Ryan
 
Idiot factor: 10 of 10.

--
Most of us probably aren't in danger of thinking too much.

"Pizza Girl" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Troll factor: 4 of 10
>
> "JC Der Koenig" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > Please tell me that you've had your ovaries removed.
> >
> > --
> > Most of us probably aren't in danger of eating too
> > little. :)
> >
> > Becky P.
> >
> > "Pizza Girl" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:-
> > [email protected]...
> > > OK. There are these little things called "calories"
> > > and when you put foodsy-woodsy in your mouthy-poo it
> > > contains some of these calories.
> They
> > > won't hurt you if you don't get sicky-wicky.
> > >
> > > Maybe ask Dr. Seus for more info.
> > >
> > > "JC Der Koenig" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > news:[email protected]...
> > > > You're an idiot. Hopefully you haven't reproduced
> > > > yet.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Most of us probably aren't in danger of eating too
> > > > little. :)
> > > >
> > > > Becky P.
> > > >
> > > > "Pizza Girl" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[email protected]
> > > > .com...
> > > > > Use pure cream instead of milk, untrimmed meat
> > > > > instead of lean, no
> low
> > > fat
> > > > > products etc.
> > > > >
> > > > > High fat and bad for you. A high protein I go for
> > > > > but not high fat
> > too.
> > > > >
> > > > > "JC Der Koenig" <[email protected]> wrote in
> > > > > message news:[email protected]
> > > > > rodigy.com...
> > > > > > It's not a high fat diet either, in an absolute
> > > > > > sense.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Most of us probably aren't in danger of eating
> > > > > > too little. :)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Becky P.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "Ignoramus21819"
> > > > > > <[email protected]> wrote in
> > > message
> > > > > > news:[email protected]...
> > > > > > > This is funny as this seems to be a dialog of
> > > > > > > people where
both
> of
> > > > > > > them have no clue as to what they are talking
> > > > > > > about.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > One says that kids should be put on Atkins,
> > > > > > > which works becaus
> eit
> > > is
> > > > > > > "high protein". (********, as atkins is a high
> > > > > > > fat diet)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Another objects by saying essentially nothing
> > > > > > > meaningful at
all.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > i
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > In article <6d220a72.0403150754.355d4554@post-
> > > > > > > ing.google.com>,
> > > Diarmid
> > > > > > Logan wrote:
> > > > > > > > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3509792.s-
> > > > > > > > tm
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 'Put fat children on Atkins diet'
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Fat children should be put on Atkins-style
> > > > > > > > diets to lose
> weight
> > > and
> > > > > > > > prevent illness, a cancer specialist has
> > > > > > > > said.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Professor Julian Peto, of the Institute of
> > > > > > > > Cancer Research,
> said
> > > > > > > > high-protein, low-carbohydrate diets could
> > > > > > > > suppress
appetites
> > and
> > > > keep
> > > > > > > > children slim.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Obesity "is now overtaking smoking as the
> > > > > > > > number one killer
> and
> > I
> > > am
> > > > > > > > very concerned that we need to tackle it
> > > > > > > > early," he told BBC
> > Radio
> > > 5
> > > > > > > > Live.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > He said dietary advice for children was not
> > > > > > > > working and
needed
> a
> > > > > > > > "rethink".
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > He added that children should be weighed
> > > > > > > > regularly in
school.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The problem of obesity is soaring among
> > > > > > > > children in the UK.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > In 1998, 9% of two to four-year-olds were
> > > > > > > > considered obese -
> > > almost
> > > > > > > > double the figure in 1989.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The World Health Organisation says being
> > > > > > > > overweight causes
> > > diabetes,
> > > > > > > > heart disease and some forms of cancer.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Professor Peto said the Atkins diet, which
> > > > > > > > involves eating
> lots
> > of
> > > > > > > > meat and other high protein foods, while
> > > > > > > > restricting
> > > carbohydrates,
> > > > > > > > worked because proteins suppressed the
> > > > > > > > appetite and people
did
> > not
> > > > eat
> > > > > > > > as much.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > "I am sure the Atkins wasn't developed on
> > > > > > > > this basis but
that
> is
> > > why
> > > > > > > > it works," he said.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > "The levels of salt and fat are anything but
> > > > > > > > healthy but the
> > basis
> > > > of
> > > > > > > > the diet - which is low carbohydrate and
> > > > > > > > high protein - is
> ideal
> > > for
> > > > > > > > losing weight."
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Opponents of Atkins-style diets claim that,
> > > > > > > > over the long
> term,
> > > they
> > > > > > > > can cause kidney damage, thin bones and
> > > > > > > > constipation, raise cholesterol levels and
> > > > > > > > increase the risk of diabetes and an
> > early
> > > > > > > > heart attack.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > But some British doctors are already putting
> > > > > > > > obese children
on
> > > > > > > > Atkins-style diets.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Dr Dee Dawson, medical director at Rhodes
> > > > > > > > Farm Clinic, a
> > > residential
> > > > > > > > home for treatment of children with eating
> > > > > > > > disorders, says
the
> > > diet
> > > > is
> > > > > > > > good for children.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > "The children who come here are not just
> > > > > > > > overweight, they
are
> > ill,
> > > > and
> > > > > > > > in danger of dying. Some of them can't
> > > > > > > > breathe and some of
> them
> > > > can't
> > > > > > > > lie down.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > "I do think the basis of Atkins - low
> > > > > > > > carbohydrate and high
> > > > protein -
> > > > > > > > is a good diet for children and the priority
> > > > > > > > is for these
> > children
> > > > to
> > > > > > > > get weight off."
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > But nutritionist Dr Toni Steer, of the
> > > > > > > > Medical Research
> Council,
> > > > > > > > warned that there is not enough research
> > > > > > > > into the long-term
> > health
> > > > > > > > effects of being on the diet.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > "We realise obesity is a major problem which
> > > > > > > > we need to
tackle
> > as
> > > a
> > > > > > > > matter of urgency but I would be very
> > > > > > > > concerned about
advising
> > > > > > > > children to follow diets like Atkins."
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
 
"Susan " <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> x-no-archive: yes
>
> >
> >Just one study, and I'm hoping they mean a high
> >percentage of calories
came
> >from fats, not that they were feeding the kids diets of
> >whale blubber or anything ;-)
>
> It was nothing like the Atkins diet. It was stripped of
> carbs and
severely
> restricted protein as well. It was virtually all fat.
>
> Susan

Eewww! Now that really does not sound pleasant or
maintainable at all. Poor kids.
 
> I prefer: Help families with overweight children learn to
> eat better and get more excercise.
>
> Jeff's rules of food:
>
> 1) No arguements at the dinner table. ((s)he who starts
> and arguement leaves the table).
>
> 2) No mentioning how much or how little one eats at the
> table.
>
> 3) All food is eaten and all drink (except water) is drunk
> in designated areas (e.g., kitchen, dining room table).
>
> 4) No food in front of the TV/computer.
>
> 5) Only two hours of recreational computer, TV and video
> game use per day, combined.
>
> 6) Little unhealthy food is brought into the house
> (unhealthy food includes chips, cookies, cake)
>
> 7) When you can walk, you walk (e.g., if the grocery store
> is two blocks away, you walk, not ride.
>
> 8) The family goes to the park, church, etc.,
> together. Jeff

Those are very good rules. Not hard to do at all. They
are good habits and way of life, that can be carried onto
adulthood, and then taught to their own children. Good
way to go.
 
I don't know if it contributed to my weight... I had a latte
2 days in a row last month and I got a huge new cystic zit
on my chin shortly after that. That was the first time I've
had a hard painful zit like that in a couple of years. I
have to remember to get soy lattes (if I am not allergic to
soy too!).

"Julianne" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:4vF5c.3537$F91.2103@lakeread05...
> My understanding is that growth hormone, like insulin,
> will be completely broken down by the digestive process
> which is why growth hormone (and insulin) must be injected
> to bypass the normal digestion process. I don't drink milk
> because of an allergy but I suspect that if I drank a
> gallon of milk a day (and didn't lose my cookies), I would
> be hooge, too. I can't speak to other hormones in milk
> because it never occurred to me to investigate being that
> I don't drink enough of it to be concerned.
 
"Tim Tyler"

> My impression is that Atkins diet restricts carbohydrates
> - but not fat or protein. So people eat more fat and
> protein to make up for the lack of carbohydrates.

If they need more, then they eat more. You don't want people
to starve do you?

> The Atkins diet appears to be a bad one :-|

That is what everyone says before they try it.

> People should be encouraged to eat more fruit and
> vegetables - not to replace them with animal fat.

Calorie wise, an Atkins approved serving of broccoli and
cheese has as many calories as an unbuttered potato. And
you are still getting the health benefits of eating
vegetables. The difference is that the calories are in the
form of fat instead of sugar. And fat is a lot easier on
your body than sugar is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom Back