Dominic Shields wrote:
|| On Mon, 3 Jan 2005 13:37:13 -0500, "Roger Zoul"
|| <
[email protected]> wrote:
||
||| Perhaps you can
||| enlighten me as to its content or message.
||
|| Absolutely, here is the BBC page with links to the transcript for the
|| programme in question
||
http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/horizon/2004/atkins.shtml
It's no wonder that you've got screwed up ideas about Atkins from that show.
Just consider this one example from the transcript:
"NARRATOR: And it worked, the results were stunning. Dr Atkins patients lost
weight quickly and easily. He began to realise there was something very
special about this diet. It seemed you could eat as much as you want as
often as you want and still lose weight. There appeared to be no need to
worry about calories. This was the heart of the Atkins diet mystery. How
could people eat lots of food without counting calories and become thin?"
These are the narrator's words. Note how this person turned one truthful
phrase around and converted it to ********:
"It seemed you could eat as much as you want as often as you want and still
lose weight."
The the narrator says: "There appeared to be no need to worry about
calories." and later "How could people eat lots of food without counting
calories and become thin?"
Now, the first truthful statement is truthful because people on Atkins, who
are eating a diet typically high in fat, but only moderated in protein, are
actually eating less food than they were eating. They are instructed to eat
until you're satisfied, which means eat all you want, not all you can.
But the narrator turns it all around. "There appared to be no need to worry
about calories." Well, that is often true. But what is more true is that
calories typically don't have to be counted because decreased appetite
results, for the typical overweight person, in eating less. That doesn't
mean that calories aren't important, but that if one removes the effects of
excessive carbs on an overweight person, they tend to get normal appetite,
rather than an abnormal appetite.
The, this last statement is just completely nuts. "How could people eat lots
of food without counting calories and become thing?" Geez....who said
anything about eating lots of food? And why is is a mystery that people can
lose weight without counting calories? Since when is counting calories the
only way to become thin? There are zillions of normal weight people around
who are thin and don't count calories.
But, the article does seem balanced except there the narrator makes such
silly statements. It make the entire idea seem silly. Of course, this
notion of Aktins having to do with the metabolic advantage I think is junk.
I don't find that one exists. I think most people just don't realize how
many calories people were eating compared to how many they eat after
starting the plan. That difference makes a difference.
Then, after these people lose all this weight and see all of their health
markers improve, medical researchers start asking questions about long-term
effects. Well, we know that the prospects for long-term of those overweight
folks were had that not lost weight. But now we cast FUD on these long-term
prospects in light of further research. IMO, that's total ****. We need
mankind to figure out what we should eat, rather than just eating what would
be available to us without the fruits of run-away technology. Yeah, what
that tells me is that we are our own worst enemies.
Gotta go to the gym.