>You realize I've sold over a million books. Do you really think I've
spoken to that many people?

It doesn't matter how many you have "spoken" to. The fact remains that
you wouldn't sell any books if people didn't believe the crap you and
your cult spew about low-carb diets.

mdginzo wrote:

>>You realize I've sold over a million books. Do you really think I've
>
> spoken to that many people?
>
> It doesn't matter how many you have "spoken" to. The fact remains that
> you wouldn't sell any books if people didn't believe the crap you and
> your cult spew about low-carb diets.


Does it occur to you that some of us actually have *improved* our health
eating this way? That some of us really *did* feel like crap eating a
carb-heavy diet? I haven't eaten this way for 11 years because it's
making me ill, you know. Or do you really believe that I'm totally
insincere about this, or actually seriously ill, and in denial?

Dana

>Does it occur to you that some of us actually have *improved* our health
>eating this way? That some of us really *did* feel like crap eating a
>carb-heavy diet? I haven't eaten this way for 11 years because it's
>making me ill, you know. Or do you really believe that I'm totally
>insincere about this, or actually seriously ill, and in denial?

Oh sure, many have lost weight and many feel better and are healthier.
That is true of any fad diet. I am just here to do what you won't
dare to do and that is point out the dangers of this diet. You got a
problem with that?

In article . com>,
"mdginzo" > wrote:

> >Does it occur to you that some of us actually have *improved* our health
> >eating this way? That some of us really *did* feel like crap eating a
> >carb-heavy diet? I haven't eaten this way for 11 years because it's
> >making me ill, you know. Or do you really believe that I'm totally
> >insincere about this, or actually seriously ill, and in denial?
>
> Oh sure, many have lost weight and many feel better and are healthier.
> That is true of any fad diet. I am just here to do what you won't
> dare to do and that is point out the dangers of this diet. You got a
> problem with that?

I'll chime in and say I don't have a problem with it. There are dangers
in nearly every diet, and the main one in the Atkins diet, as with most
others is: Doing It Wrong.

Doing It Wrong in the Atkins diet can include: eating no vegetables,
eating no carbs, staying at Induction carb levels for too long a time,
trying to do low-fat at the same time, and not exercising.

If the diet is followed correctly, it is NOT high protein. Here's an
example, imagining a typical American overweight person and what may be
a typical meal:

Pre-Atkins lunch: Burger, fries, and a soda.

Atkins lunch: Burger (no bun) a side salad, water.

Well, you're already eliminating some unnecessary calories in the bun,
fries, and soda, and adding vegetables with the salad. Add to that the
interesting phenomenon that many people feel even LESS hungry when they
don't eat the carby foods, so they may not even finish the whole burger,
whereas pre-Atkins they'd still be hungry even after the full meal!

Does it work this way with everyone? Of course not. Some people don't
get that "Chinese food affect" (you know, you eat Chinese food and
you're hungry an hour later) from carbs, so limiting carbs doesn't help
lessen their appetite. But for those of us who do get more hungry when
we eat carby foods, Atkins can mean we end up eating less of
_everything_, not just carbs. So while the percentage of meat in the
diet may be greater, the overall quantity can be even less than before
going on low-carb. The only thing I eat more of now than before
starting low-carb is vegetables.

Luna wrote:

> In article . com>,
> "mdginzo" > wrote:
>
>
>>>Does it occur to you that some of us actually have *improved* our health
>>>eating this way? That some of us really *did* feel like crap eating a
>>>carb-heavy diet? I haven't eaten this way for 11 years because it's
>>>making me ill, you know. Or do you really believe that I'm totally
>>>insincere about this, or actually seriously ill, and in denial?
>>
>>Oh sure, many have lost weight and many feel better and are healthier.
>> That is true of any fad diet. I am just here to do what you won't
>>dare to do and that is point out the dangers of this diet. You got a
>>problem with that?
>
>
> I'll chime in and say I don't have a problem with it. There are dangers
> in nearly every diet, and the main one in the Atkins diet, as with most
> others is: Doing It Wrong.
>
>

I've asked a few times now how many of the Atkins critics actually *read
the book*. Still no takers.

Dana

>I've asked a few times now how many of the Atkins critics >actually *read
>the book*. Still no takers.

Because it is an insulting quetion not worthy of a response.

mdginzo wrote:

>>I've asked a few times now how many of the Atkins critics >actually *read
>>the book*. Still no takers.
>
>
> Because it is an insulting quetion not worthy of a response.
>

Didn't read it, eh?

Dana

In article >,
Dana Carpender > wrote:

> Luna wrote:
>
> > In article . com>,
> > "mdginzo" > wrote:
> >
> >
> >>>Does it occur to you that some of us actually have *improved* our health
> >>>eating this way? That some of us really *did* feel like crap eating a
> >>>carb-heavy diet? I haven't eaten this way for 11 years because it's
> >>>making me ill, you know. Or do you really believe that I'm totally
> >>>insincere about this, or actually seriously ill, and in denial?
> >>
> >>Oh sure, many have lost weight and many feel better and are healthier.
> >> That is true of any fad diet. I am just here to do what you won't
> >>dare to do and that is point out the dangers of this diet. You got a
> >>problem with that?
> >
> >
> > I'll chime in and say I don't have a problem with it. There are dangers
> > in nearly every diet, and the main one in the Atkins diet, as with most
> > others is: Doing It Wrong.
> >
> >
>
> I've asked a few times now how many of the Atkins critics actually *read
> the book*. Still no takers.
>
> Dana

I've read one. It was just simpler for my life to just limit my diet to
vegetables, meat, eggs, cheese, and the occasional piece of fruit,
rather than counting and measuring everything and making sure I went up
by 5g each week . . . blah. So I don't technically do Atkins, because I
still drink coffee, I don't take vitamins, and I don't do the math part.

Luna wrote:

> In article >,
> Dana Carpender > wrote:
>
>
>>Luna wrote:
>>
>>
>>>In article . com>,
>>> "mdginzo" > wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>Does it occur to you that some of us actually have *improved* our health
>>>>>eating this way? That some of us really *did* feel like crap eating a
>>>>>carb-heavy diet? I haven't eaten this way for 11 years because it's
>>>>>making me ill, you know. Or do you really believe that I'm totally
>>>>>insincere about this, or actually seriously ill, and in denial?
>>>>
>>>>Oh sure, many have lost weight and many feel better and are healthier.
>>>>That is true of any fad diet. I am just here to do what you won't
>>>>dare to do and that is point out the dangers of this diet. You got a
>>>>problem with that?
>>>
>>>
>>>I'll chime in and say I don't have a problem with it. There are dangers
>>>in nearly every diet, and the main one in the Atkins diet, as with most
>>>others is: Doing It Wrong.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>I've asked a few times now how many of the Atkins critics actually *read
>>the book*. Still no takers.
>>
>>Dana
>
>
> I've read one. It was just simpler for my life to just limit my diet to
> vegetables, meat, eggs, cheese, and the occasional piece of fruit,
> rather than counting and measuring everything and making sure I went up
> by 5g each week . . . blah. So I don't technically do Atkins, because I
> still drink coffee, I don't take vitamins, and I don't do the math part.

I never did either. I just stopped eating any concentrated carb foods
-- starches and sweets -- 11 years ago. Always ate lots of veggies, and
reasonable quantities of strawberries and grapefruit and such. Over the
years, I've added back very modest quantities of stuff like low carb
(high fiber) tortillas, and rye flatbreads, etc.

But I have read Atkins, and Protein Power, and The Carbohydrate Addict's
Diet, and Sugar Busters, and Neanderthin, and The Zone, and The Glycemic
Load Diet, and The No-Grain Diet, and The G-Factor Diet, and most of the
other books, and I know the theories behind them, and the differences
and similarities between the programs. And I also am aware of how
common it is for people to stop eating anything but meat, eggs, and
cheese and say "I'm doing Atkins." Or to read Atkins, get as far as
Induction, and figure, "Well, that's how I'll lose weight really, really
fast, so that's what I'll do."

Dana

>If the diet is followed correctly, it is NOT high protein. Here's >an
>example, imagining a typical American overweight person and >what may be
>a typical meal:

Even done right, with the Atkins diet you still have to worry about
testing your Ketone level and have to take a handful of vitamins every
day. That alone should send bells and whistles blowing.

mdginzo wrote:

>>If the diet is followed correctly, it is NOT high protein. Here's >an
>>example, imagining a typical American overweight person and >what may be
>>a typical meal:
>
>
> Even done right, with the Atkins diet you still have to worry about
> testing your Ketone level and have to take a handful of vitamins every
> day. That alone should send bells and whistles blowing.

Do you think vegetarianism is a dangerous fad diet? You know, the need
for B12 supplements and all.

Actually, I'm unaware of *any* vitamin that can't be obtained through
low carb sources. But then, I've taken supplements since I was a kid,
took 'em all through my low fat/high carb days, so it never occurred to
me to stop when I went low carb.

If you can identify a vitamin or mineral that can't be obtained through
low carb sources, I'd be very interested to hear about it.

Dana

>Do you think vegetarianism is a dangerous fad diet? You know, the need
for B12 supplements and all.

Yes. Humans were meant to be omnivores. But the need for one vitamin
is not nearly as bad as being on a diet where you have to worry about
ketones as well as not getting enough nutrients.

In article . com>,
"mdginzo" > wrote:

> >If the diet is followed correctly, it is NOT high protein. Here's >an
> >example, imagining a typical American overweight person and >what may be
> >a typical meal:
>
> Even done right, with the Atkins diet you still have to worry about
> testing your Ketone level and have to take a handful of vitamins every
> day. That alone should send bells and whistles blowing.

Yeah, I don't do the vitamin thing, but I don't technically do Atkins.
I just stopped eating foods that made me either feel all crappy and
sluggish, or made me crave more and more even when I was full. It just
turned out the foods I stopped eating were the same foods most Atkins
dieters stop eating, or at least limit strictly. I don't think every
single thing Atkins wrote is correct for every single person. I feel no
need to stop drinking coffee, or start taking vitamins, or test ketones
or whatever.

On 2006-05-24 22:38:42 -0500, "mdginzo" > said:

>> If the diet is followed correctly, it is NOT high protein. Here's >an
>> example, imagining a typical American overweight person and >what may be
>> a typical meal:
>
> Even done right, with the Atkins diet you still have to worry about
> testing your Ketone level and have to take a handful of vitamins every
> day. That alone should send bells and whistles blowing.

Atkins didn't say ketostix were essential. And he said also that some
people never show more than a trace.

"mdginzo" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> >If the diet is followed correctly, it is NOT high protein. Here's >an
> >example, imagining a typical American overweight person and >what may be
> >a typical meal:
>
> Even done right, with the Atkins diet you still have to worry about
> testing your Ketone level

Testing ketone levels is only a fun tool. It's not necessary to test for
them. The problem with the ketone thing, is that it has gotten a bad rap
because it is a danger flag for diabetes. But that is actually called
ketoacidosis, and it could be a sign that a diabetic is not burning the
carbs that are ingested, and is having to break down fat and muscle tissue
from the body. Not a good thing.
Ketosis, on the other hand is the body's way of burning fat. Nothing wrong
with that. It's not a dangerous thing. It is often confused with
ketoacidosis, even by doctors.

>and have to take a handful of vitamins every
> day. That alone should send bells and whistles blowing.

That is not true. It is recommended that a person dieting to lose weight
take a vitamin supplement if calories are very low. Many diets recommend
that. Besides, doesn't it make sense that if you are taking in less food,
that you may be unable to get enough vitamins? But that is the price you pay
for gaining all the weight. The body isn't as good at storing vitamins as it
is storing extra fat. When you put on weight, you're not getting any
healthier by eating extra food and vitamins. When you are trying to lose
weight, you still need adequate vitamins and minerals, but may not be eating
enough food to supply them.
Also on the topic of vitamins. When grains and sugar are refined, they are
stripped of most of the vitamins, minerals, and fiber. Many packaged foods
state, "Fortified with vitamins and nutrients". They wouldn't have to
fortify the foods if they weren't removed in the first place. Atkins' is
mainly about removing these empty calories from the diet.
It's funny that nobody worries about vitamin deficiencies when you're
eating white bread, french fries, pasta, potatoes, white rice and pop. These
are staples in many families' average food intake. How many vitamins are in
these foods? How much fiber is there in white flour?
This post was started mainly about what Humans ate over their history.
Many arguments were made about whether we should be eating whole grains or
not, how much meat we should be eating, what % of all this should be carbs,
saturated fats and cholesterol, etc. Well, when I walk down the aisles in a
grocery store, I don't see a lot of whole grain foods. All I see is highly
refined white flour products. Where's the whole grains? Is it in Honeynut
Cheerios made with whole grains? Is it in the brown colored bread? I
wouldn't have a problem with someone that actually ate whole grains.
Most of the white flour products seem to be categorized as whole grains,
but they are not. This is supposed to be healthy? This is supposed to be 50
to 60% of what we eat? Grains that are stripped of most of the vitamins and
nutrients, with added preservatives and bonding chemicals?
We may have adapted somewhat to eating grains. Fine. But, grains can not
be eaten without some kind of refinement of crushing and cooking. Whether
you want to argue about the amounts we should be eating, I don't care. But
we are not eating whole grains. We are mainly eating the calories extracted
from the grains. That is not natural, and no animal is designed to eat them
that way.
I have been eating low carb for 2 years. I have lost the extra weight, my
cholesterol and blood pressure are down, I no longer suffer from acid
reflux. Generally, I'm a lot healthier than before. I notice that many of
the people that dis the Atkins diet eat a lot of crap, and don't eat as many
vegetables as I do. They're scared of eating fat, but the alarm bells don't
go off for them when they are eating french fries or ice cream. It's got
carbs, so it must be ok to eat them, eh?
I don't eat any of that stuff, but since I'm doing Atkins, people tell me
my kidneys are going to drop out, my cholesterol is going to soar, and I
must be vitamin deficient. Isn't it diabetics that mainly have kidney
problems and high cholesterol?

>

Tom G wrote:

> "mdginzo" > wrote in message
> ups.com...
>
>>>If the diet is followed correctly, it is NOT high protein. Here's >an
>>>example, imagining a typical American overweight person and >what may be
>>>a typical meal:
>>
>>Even done right, with the Atkins diet you still have to worry about
>>testing your Ketone level
>
>
> Testing ketone levels is only a fun tool. It's not necessary to test for
> them.

Well, and testing positive for ketosis only tells you that you're
running a fat-burning metabolism instead of a glucose burning
metabolism. It doesn't tell you whether you're burning body fat or
dietary fat.

Dana

Supplements are just insurance because regardless of the type of diet, most
people don't plan their food intake to insure they are getting proper
amounts of all required vitamins and minerals--of which there are many.
Lots of people take and lots of doctors recommend daily supplements
regardless of the kind eating their patients do.

In ups.com,
mdginzo > stated

| Even done right, with the Atkins diet you still have to worry about
| testing your Ketone level and have to take a handful of vitamins every
| day. That alone should send bells and whistles blowing.

mdginzo wrote:

>>You realize I've sold over a million books. Do you really think I've
>
> spoken to that many people?
>
> It doesn't matter how many you have "spoken" to. The fact remains that
> you wouldn't sell any books if people didn't believe the crap you and
> your cult spew about low-carb diets.
>

Oh, and you might like to see the entire two articles that came up on
pubmed in response to "Atkins diet kidney":


A low-iron-available, polyphenol-enriched, carbohydrate-restricted diet
to slow progression of diabetic nephropathy.

Facchini FS, Saylor KL.

Department of Medicine, Division of Nephrology, San Francisco General
Hospital and University of California-San Francisco, Box 1342 UCSF, San
Francisco, CA 94143-1341, USA.

Diabetic nephropathy has become the leading cause of uremia. Several
lines of evidence suggest dietary factors other than protein intake have
a substantial role in the progression of diabetic nephropathy to
end-stage renal disease. The present investigation was initiated to
evaluate whether a carbohydrate-restricted, low-iron-available,
polyphenol-enriched (CR-LIPE) diet may delay and improve the outcome of
diabetic nephropathy to a greater extent than standard protein
restriction. To this aim, 191 diabetic patients, all with type 2
diabetes, were randomized to either CR-LIPE or standard protein
restriction and the following outcomes monitored: doubling of serum
creatinine, cumulative incidence of end-stage renal disease, and all
cause mortality. Over a mean follow-up interval of 3.9 +/- 1.8 years,
serum creatinine concentration doubled in 19 patients on CR-LIPE (21%)
and in 31 control subjects (39%) (P < 0.01). Renal replacement therapy
or death occurred in 18 patients on CR-LIPE (20%) and in 31 control
subjects (39%) (P < 0.01). These differences were independent from
follow-up interval, sex, mean arterial blood pressure, HbA(1c), initial
renal dysfunction, and angiotensin system inhibitor use. In conclusion,
CR-LIPE was 40-50% more effective than standard protein restriction in
improving renal and overall survival rates.


Effects of carbohydrate restriction on renal injury in the obese Zucker rat.

Kasiske BL, Cleary MP, O'Donnell MP, Keane WF.

The obese Zucker rat model of nonimmune-mediated, spontaneous focal
glomerulosclerosis is ideally suited to study the influence of diet on
the initiation and progression of glomerular injury. Young (6 wk) and
old (33 wk) lean and obese female Zucker rats were fed a
carbohydrate-restricted diet intermittently for 27 wk. Carbohydrate
restriction resulted in lower body weight (460 +/- 16 versus 310 +/- 7
g, p less than 0.025), kidney weight (1.26 +/- 0.04 versus 1.07 +/- 0.05
g, p less than 0.025), and glomerular area (6930 +/- 290 versus 5780 +/-
230 micron2, p less than 0.025) in young obese Zucker rats compared to
ad libitum-fed rats. Although urine-albumin excretion was substantially
reduced by carbohydrate restriction in young obese Zucker rats (41.1 +/-
12.3 versus 6.9 +/- 2.9 mg/24 h, p less than 0.01), glomerular injury
was not significantly altered. In old obese rats, carbohydrate
restriction did not significantly reduce albuminuria or prevent the
progression of glomerular injury. Thus, intermittent carbohydrate
restriction failed to alter significantly either the initiation of
glomerular injury in young, or the progression of nephron damage in old,
obese Zucker rats.

*******************

So while your doctor blames your kidney failure on your low carb diet,
there's not a lot of research to back him/her up. Certainly it has been
my experience that no matter what the health problem, from a cold to
residual pain from my car wreck, some doctor somewhere will see fit to
blame it on my low carb diet.

And you still haven't answered: Did you read the book and follow Atkins
as written, adding back progressively greater quantities of healthy
carbs every week, until you were in a very mild state of ketosis? Or
did you just decide that Induction was the whole diet, and call it "Atkins?"

Dana

You need to read a little further and see how the Atkins diet has been
known to cause kidney scarring.

mdginzo wrote:

> You need to read a little further and see how the Atkins diet has been
> known to cause kidney scarring.
>

You got a peer-reviewed study?

Dana

Dana Carpender wrote:

>
>
> mdginzo wrote:
>
>> You need to read a little further and see how the Atkins diet has been
>> known to cause kidney scarring.
>>
>
> You got a peer-reviewed study?
>
>

I just did a PubMed search under "ketogenic diet nephrosis" -- zippo.

There are studies regarding stone formation in children kept on a
ketogenic diet for epilepsy. It should be pointed out that those diets
are *much* stricter than Atkins, cause a *much* deeper state of ketosis,
and restrict fluids specifically to conserve the ketones in the body.
But still no mention of nephrosis.

Dana

x-no-arachive: yes

mdginzo wrote:
> You need to read a little further and see how the Atkins diet has been
> known to cause kidney scarring.
>

The Atkins diet doesn't do that, but badly managed diabetes does.

Susan

>The Atkins diet doesn't do that, but badly managed diabetes does.

Why do you lie? Obviously you haven't looked it up and are just
parrotting the Atkins cultists.

mdginzo wrote:

>>The Atkins diet doesn't do that, but badly managed diabetes does.
>
>
> Why do you lie? Obviously you haven't looked it up and are just
> parrotting the Atkins cultists.

You're still short even one citation.

Dana
>

>You're still short even one citation.

Anyone with access to Google and is honest has all the citations they
need. That diabetes causes kidney scarring is a lie.

Okay, smartypants, would you please tell me just how many grams of protein a
day you consider high protein? I never can get any Atkins critic to give me
such a figure. In order to know if something is "high protein", a number is
needed.

In oups.com,
mdginzo > stated
| Why do you lie? Obviously you haven't looked it up and are just
| parrotting the Atkins cultists.