The Daily Mail strikes again with Atkins Diet

[borofergie]

There seem to be a lot of Atkins book on Amazon. Is there one anyone would recommend as a good one to start with please?

"New Atkins for A New You", because it's updated by Phinney, Volek and Westman (who are the established experts in low-carb), to include the latest thinking on the topic.

[viviennem]

Stephen - you said in an earlier post that "high protein diets are deleterious to anyone's health".

Isn't that particularly "high lean protein diets?

Which is why we die if we eat only rabbit (or is there something else involved there?) but the Eskimos who originally ate a protein diet based on fish and sea mammals and lots of fat, only varied in the short spring/summer, nevertheless were fit and healthy?

A genuine question . . .

Viv

[Unbeliever]

I can't see that the risk is anything to worry about either but when the report mentions vegetable protein as opposed to animal protein it was only saying that those who replaced the EXTRA protein some of those studied had eaten to replace the carbs they had reduced. not ALL the protein.

The very small increased risk is probaly absolutely minimal for diabetics anyhow.

[borofergie]

Stephen - you said in an earlier post that "high protein diets are deleterious to anyone's health".

Isn't that particularly "high lean protein diets?

Which is why we die if we eat only rabbit (or is there something else involved there?) but the Eskimos who originally ate a protein diet based on fish and sea mammals and lots of fat, only varied in the short spring/summer, nevertheless were fit and healthy?

A genuine question . . .

Viv

Yes, a high lean protein diet is bad for you (rabbit poisoning). But I'm sure the eskimos in question were eating a high-fat diet with adequate protein. Across the whole world the average protein intake is constant at about 15-16%

Fueling your body with excess gluconeogenesis is also potentially problematic. It results in raised cortisol levels, and can potentially damage kidneys. Protein is mainly for structural needs and an emergency back-up energy supply, you're not supposed to use it all of the time as a principal energy source.

Your appetite is finely tuned to make sure you get just enough protein and not too much:

This article from Paul Jaminet is worth a read: http://perfecthealthdiet.com/2011/10/pe ... rt-harris/
Under the "Food Reward and Obesity" section he discusses protein and satiety in terms of how, under experiemental conditions, a rats appetite (and total calorie intake) is finely tuned to make sure that (s)he gets exactly enough protein to meet structural needs and (if necessary) fuel gluconeogenesis. If you feed them a food that is low in protein but high in carbs, they will continue eating until they've met their protein requiement, even though that means taking on lots of extra carbohydrate calories.

[jopar]

The new Atkins diet, was updated a couple of years ago to include an increased amount of carbs..

I can't see how the information be dismissed as with a "The very small increased risk is probaly absolutely minimal for diabetics anyhow." it's a risk that one needs to be aware of and put into their own risk factor..

Boro, suggest the body has a system to ensure that it doesn't get too much protein, with this study, seem that; that my not actually be the case out side the theoretical text book!

When looking at the research, looking in the 'Strength and weakness' of the study it says, that even though the combined carbs/protein energy level were equal, they hadn't correlated this to total energy, so there isn't any correlation to whether the energy from Fats played any part in the risk increase or not!

But it seems, that even though Boro says the body has a system to ensure it doesn't get too protein, it seems that it can have too much protein in this study, as that's when problems arise. So perhaps this means the 'Text book' theory concerning proteins is wrong...

[catherinecherub]

Worth reading what the NHS has to say about the Press Journalist's interpretation of the study.
http://www.nhs.uk/news/2012/06june/Page ... -risk.aspx

[Unbeliever]

Worth reading what the NHS has to say about the Press Journalist's interpretation of the study.
http://www.nhs.uk/news/2012/06june/Page ... -risk.aspx

Thanks as ever catherinecherub. Very interesting and puts it all into the perspective which the press usually lacks.

The newspapers are very useful in publishing these sudies and naturally they use attention-grabbing headlines o sell more papers.
They can't be blamed for that but it is good to red a considered ,measured response, which answers a few questions , for me , at least.

[Robinredbreast]

I'm a women and I have never been on a 'fad' diet and I never will. A good balanced diet with exercise, does wonders

My mum died of Heart failure( even though it said pnuemonia on the death certificate) she wasn't diabetic, didn't smoke, alcohol in moderation, port or Cherry Brandy, but her Chloresteral was abit on the high side and she was a between a size 14 and 16 all her life. I think we women with constant diets etc, have enogh to put up with, so its a definate NO from me

[lucylocket61]

Great link CatherineCherub.

Am I right in reading the link to say that they didnt differentiate between any types of carbs? For example, the cabs could have been taken as pure sugar for all we know?

And no cholesterol readings were taken prior to the study?

[ursus262]

I'm not sure I would believe anything in the Daily Mail!