I’m such a newbie! I just recently started the Atkins/Protein Power regimen, about 4 weeks ago.

I am over in the slightly anal camp, and I record all of my meal plans with calories, protein, and carb totals for the day. I’m wondering if anyone would like to read what a low-carber/protein life planner eats on a typical day and how the numbers play out over time.

I’d have to learn how to set up my own blog, but does this sound like it would be useful information to anyone? I could include recipes, as well.

Hi Rachel–

Go for it!  Get your feet wet.  You might want to take a look at the Discussion Forum (click at the top of this page) on this website.  It has a lot of people who would be interested.

Cheers–

MRE 

Dr. David L. Katz
Atkins diet still seems a bad idea
Dr. David Katz
03/12/2007
email this storyEmail to a friendprinter friendlyPrinter-friendly
Despite the big splash made by a recent Stanford University study suggesting that the Atkins diet produces more weight loss at one year than several alternatives, I persist in my long-held view that the diet is just plain silly, and a bad idea.

The study, conducted at Stanford’s Prevention Research Center, and published in the prestigious Journal of the American Medical Association, compared the “low-carb” Atkins diet to the Zone diet, the Ornish diet, and a behavior change program called LEARN, designed to help people achieve the balanced diet recommended by most authorities and the U.S. government, in a group of roughly 300 overweight and obese women.

At the end of one year, the women assigned to the Atkins diet had lost the most weight, about 10 pounds. The several heart disease risk factors that were measured, including blood pressure, LDL cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, insulin, and blood glucose were fairly comparable across all four treatment groups overall, suggesting that the Atkins’ diet facilitated weight loss while lowering cardiovascular risk.

But beyond these basic facts, the hype over this study and its real implications part company. A truly vast amount of scientific study suggests that a diet rich in fruits (mostly banned by Atkins), vegetables, whole grains (banned by Atkins), lean protein sources, nuts, seeds, healthful oils from such sources as olives, and restricted in saturated fat (essentially encouraged by Atkins) is optimal for lifelong health. All such diets already suggest limiting intake of sugar, white flour and starches; Atkins did not invent this concept.

A healthful, balanced diet offers two other distinct advantages: It is pleasurable (imagine never eating bread or pasta again!), and it’s suitable for everyone in the family. In an age of epidemic obesity and diabetes in children, a diet for adults that leaves children behind is not just silly, it’s irresponsible.

But what about the fact that the Atkins diet did lower weight the most, while also improving cholesterol and blood pressure? Doesn’t that mean it’s healthy? If so, then cholera, cancer and chemotherapy are healthy, because they lower weight, blood cholesterol and blood pressure, too. Cocaine use causes weight loss; that scarcely makes it a good idea.

Another noteworthy aspect of this study is the poor performance of all four diets. The Atkins group “won” by losing 10 pounds in a year on average. If their weight loss had occurred at a steady pace, that would mean a loss of about 3 ounces a week! In fact, they lost weight faster at first, and were rapidly gaining it back by year’s end. So this study reaffirms that in a modern world that makes weight gain so easy and weight loss so difficult, most of us can’t seem to make any diet work.

Both pinto beans and jelly beans are carbohydrate, and the difference is important! Atkins was wrong to suggest that better health, or lasting weight control, could be best achieved by discarding a large and diverse nutrient category, home to some of the most nutritious of all foods. And those studying the Atkins diet are wrong if they suggest that the hallmark of a healthful diet is how fast it produces weight loss in the short term.

This latest trial, which asked and answered the wrong question, does not change my views about how best to feed myself and my family. It should not change yours, either.

Dr. David L. Katz is director of the Yale Prevention Research Center at the Yale University School of Medicine.

Visit his Web site at http://www.davidkatzmd.com.

©New Haven Register 2007

Hi Marjorie–

Sounds like a major case of sour grapes to me.

Cheers–

MRE

The graphics are quite interesting too! Since I don’t have access to the article, I’ve wondered about several things that you’ve answered in your post.

Curious tho….did anyone determine WHY people dropped out? or didn’t follow the assigned plan? I think that might be equally interesting!

Now, I know random assignment of plans is the “best” way to conduct studies….but in the case of diets, don’t you think there would be different results if people actually chose the plan they were going to be on? I know for myself, the minute I was told I would be doing the Ornish plan I would have dropped out immediately! Even before discovering low carb, I knew I couldn’t follow a severely low fat diet. (for for me is much more effective than fiber, if you know what I mean)

I may highjack a few of your graphics (if you don’t mind) if I ever get to posting my own opinion of the study and reports about it.

Hi Cindy–

Most of the people dropped out of the study for scheduling reasons.  A few got pregnant and several had ‘family’ reasons, whatever those might have been.  Another large category was listed simply as ‘Other.’

The point about whether the dieters should have been randomized or selected the diet they wanted on their own can be argued either way.  It would have been interesting to have given a bunch of people all four books, let them read all of them, then select the diet they would feel most comfortable with.  I would love to see in a situation such as that which diet most would choose.

Feel free to use the graphics.  They all came from the study.

Cheers–

MRE 

From Dr. Atkins New Diet Revolution, copyright 92, 99, 2002, 10th printing in paperback, page 122. Chapter: And Away You Go: The Induction Phase.

“The Induction Phase is not going to be your lifelong way of eating. It will last at least fourteen days, after which you should see a significant result.”

From page 159:
“A lot of people think of Induction as only two weeks, but it can be followed for a longer time. If you have a lot of weight to lose or have difficulty losing weight, you might want to do Induction for quite a while.”

He goes on to discuss when to go into OWL, which is too complicated to copy out of the book, but if you’re bored, don’t have a lot of weight to lose, are not very metabolically resistant and are willing to slow down your loss to get more food choices, move on. If not, you can do Induction “safely for six months or more.”

Conclusion: 2 weeks is right. 2-3 months may be right too. Like PP/LP it’s highly customizable.

Hi Max–

Thanks for the clarification.

Cheers–

MRE 

Does anybody else’s copy of PP or PPLP have a cover quote from none other than Barry Sears, Ph.D.? Mine says:

I strongly recommend this book.”

and

The Nutritional Primer of the Nineties.”

Also, while I’m going over my bookshelf, everyone is right on Dr. Atkins Induction. It lasts 2 weeks for everyone. It can last 6 months if you want it to. But really: the difference between 7g/meal (atkins Induction) and 10g/meal (pp Induction for heavy folks) is pretty small change, right? The difference is the allowed food list and mandatory veggies on Atkins that makes it a little harder in Induction. But with the ketosis focus, well, you get what you pay for, right?

At any rate, who are these people eating 30% carb calories on an LC diet? I’m closer to 10%.

As to Dr. Atkins, poor soul/dead guy. Shameless self-promoter, so I guess he deserves to be the Name for the LC diet in studies. If you and MD get out and bust hump in the marketing field the way Dr. Atkins did, maybe you can change the paradigm. Course, it’s easier to become the first model than replace the first model. And I know there were other LC diets before Robert Atkins ever saw his first obese person. But, the world is what it is. Should we go back to calling it the Banting Diet?

Hi Max–

Yep, Barry Sears gave us a cover blurb as we did him.

As to your last paragraph, I don’t even know where to begin, so I won’t.

Cheers–

MRE 

http://www.atkins.com/articles/atkins-phases/phase-one/phase-1-induction/

Just thought this little tidbit of information was important for you to know.

Hi Mandy–

This is what the recommendation is of the people running the Atkins site right now.  The researchers used whatever was in the original book, which, as I recall, was a lot longer than 14 days.  Feel free to check and let me know.

Cheers–

MRE 

Or (and I think this is the case) when people follow a low-carb diet in a half-assed fashion they get a lot better results than they do if they follow the Zone, Ornish or the LEARN program in a half-assed fashion.

I just had to jump in to agree with this sentiment; somehow, lowcarbing seems to be more forgiving.

Maybe it’s because we eat so MANY carbs that even cutting down from 300 to 150 does a world of good.

My husband has a chronic illness and finds it difficult to stay on track when it flares up. Even doing low carb this half-assed way (I tease him that he’s doing “half-assedKins”) he’s lost almost 60 pounds.

The last three months, being housebound, he still lost seven pounds.

And his lipids look great. Low carbing has definitely been a great thing for him to do. Even if it is half measures.

Half-AssedKins! I love it.

I also think it has a lot to do with the amount of carb intake. The percentage of carbohydrate consumption in the Atkins group is a lot higher than my understanding of what Atkins should be. Granted I haven’t read the newest book. But with the amount of weight these women needed to lose, they should have been consuming a lot less carbohydrates for a lot longer.

I am used to seeing closer to 5% carbohydrate during the initial induction phase (2 weeks is the minimum time, with up to a few months if the person has a lot to lose, or is highly resistant), and maybe 20% in the ongoing weight loss or maintenance phases.

At 6 months the average is almost 30% carbs and at 12 months 35% carbs. I’m not surprised that they gained weight back, I know I certainly would.

I’m not saying that protein doesn’t have anything to do with it, but I think the amount of carbs is a dead give away as to the results.

Just my opinion.

Hi Cathy–

I’m with you.

Cheers–

MRE 

Which leads me to the next point – the Atkins women in this study regained the weight they lost at 6 months in 6 months by eating only ~70 calories more (in the end) and NOT increasing their % of cals by carbs. I find this curious. 70 calories! That’s the cream in your 2 cups of coffee!

This study seems to be screaming out that calories matter – a lot.

Or protein matters a lot more than anyone is looking at. I’m still dredging data from other studies to write about it, but it’s curious that as protein intake peaked (96g – up from habitual baseline of 78g) their weight loss was stong. With each tick downward for protein (6mo down to 86g; 12mo down to 82g) they lost their ability to continue weight loss (with little calories added as you noted)….interesting too is that with each tick down of protein, fat followed back to pretty much their baseline level of consumption (76g baseline; 2mo 84g; 6mo 80g; 12mo 79g).

Then go look at the other plans – their protein and fat we’re going in the exact opposite direction (Zone initially increased) – but with the exception of Ornish, they were also increasing carbs and calories.

Then, if you have a chance, go take a gander at Simpson et al “Protein Leverage Hypothesis” published in 2005 (and ignored)…really interesting read.

There’s something I think we’re all missing….and I have a hunch it’s the protein intake is what is really going to matter most…now I just have to find the time to flesh out the data from enough studies to see if it’s true!

Hi Regina–

Jump on in.  I, too, have read the “Protein Leverage Hypothesis” by Simpson and actually have several slides on his work (from this paper and one other of his) that I use in my talks.  I think protein has a major role to play, but I haven’t climbed on board with his total hypothesis that the slight decrease in protein over the past few years is the cause of the obesity epidemic.

It’s interesting that Simpson and his co-authors are all insect biologists and came up with this idea from their study of bugs. 

Cheers–

MRE