Atkins

valpuk

Hi girls

Has anyone ever tried Atkins?

I have been exercising (severely) for last 2 months and have seen dramatic toning on my chest and arms and stomach but i still havent lost a huge amount of weight. i have still been eating the wrong foods while doin this exercising thing so i wanna change my lifestyle altogether,

i tried the slender xcellerate tablets but i am no good for takin tablets so i cannot give judgement on whether they work or not.

i would rather not spend money on supplements like these, would rather just continue with the exercising and try atkins

just wanna kno anyone experience with this particular diet please.

Thanks

BlackandGold

I'm hardly one to give nutritional advice if you've read many of my other posts, but why Atkins? If it's a lifestyle and diet change you want to make I don't know if Atkins is going to help??

If you are exercising [not too severely I hope!] then eating a balanced diet should help you see results. By balanced I mean something like porridge and a piece of fruit for breakfast, or chopped fruits with yogurt, or even an omelette [made with the whites I think is healthier] and some tomato, lunch - ryvita with cottage cheese/tomato/salmon, and dinner - a small piece of lean meat, boiled veg and small portion of potatoes or rice?

Snack on carrot sticks/a piece of fruit/a few nuts [Try and stick to the 3 meals].

Someone else may be able to offer you better/more correct advice, but something like a diet, be it Atkins or Catkins or whatever it's called, is not advisable/suitable for someone wanting to make a lifelong change. They're only short fixes.

Professey Chin

As BlackandGold said these diets are only short term fixes and dont give your body what it actually needs.If you want to change your eating habits youd be better off seeing a nutritionist who can actually tell you what your eating right/wrong and the correct times etc etc etc.
These diets act like theyre going to make your dreams come true but really they just make you starve yourself to an extent(and your body consumes muscle not fat in these cases) and when you come back off it, your body doesnt know whats happening and you just put on the weight again.
As for those slimming tablets, id stay away from those too.
If you go to a nutritionest, spend about 5 days beforehand making a food diary showing exactly what your eating and be honest about it. No cheating :P
The Nutrition fourm on here can provide some good advice too

jdivision

valpuk wrote: »

I have been exercising (severely) for last 2 months and have seen dramatic toning on my chest and arms and stomach but i still havent lost a huge amount of weight. i have still been eating the wrong foods while doin this exercising thing so i wanna change my lifestyle altogether,

The reason you've not lost much weight is you've put on muscle and lost fat and that's something to be admired and well done on it. The muscle weighs more so you shouldn't be focusing on your weight, you should look at pictures of you before and now and you'll see the difference the toning makes. The other good thing is muscle burns more calories naturally so you'll lose weight naturally as you continue exercising over the next few months.

Don't diet in the conventional sense, they don't work. Eat properly - this can require a lot of changes - and exercise (which you're doing), use the stickies on the nutrition and fitness forum. You'll learn a lot about what you think is low fat and is actually awful for you. You should post up there what you usually eat (a few days worth is good) and how much you exercise and you'll get loads of help.

The key thing is to take it slow, don't look for instant results or you'll just end up back at square one. I lost 70lbs in 14 months using the above.
Best of luck.

Dudess

Why pay attention to the scales? What matters is whether your clothes are getting looser/you're losing inches, and it seems these things are happening. I wouldn't bother with the scales at all - things like drinking lots of water can cause your weight to change temporarily.
Also, why do you need to be on a "diet"? Just eat healthily and don't over-do the carbs. Jeez, you're better off keeping away from that pill sh1te.

Wibbs

The diet and nutrition forum and the fitness forum would be a better place to ask questions like this.

g'em

moved to N&D

fatmammycat

jdivision wrote: »

The reason you've not lost much weight is you've put on muscle and lost fat and that's something to be admired and well done on it. The muscle weighs more so you shouldn't be focusing on your weight, you should look at pictures of you before and now and you'll see the difference the toning makes. The other good thing is muscle burns more calories naturally so you'll lose weight naturally as you continue exercising over the next few months.

Don't diet in the conventional sense, they don't work. Eat properly - this can require a lot of changes - and exercise (which you're doing), use the stickies on the nutrition and fitness forum. You'll learn a lot about what you think is low fat and is actually awful for you. You should post up there what you usually eat (a few days worth is good) and how much you exercise and you'll get loads of help.

The key thing is to take it slow, don't look for instant results or you'll just end up back at square one. I lost 70lbs in 14 months using the above.
Best of luck.

First off OP, well done on getting into shape. Personally I think Atkins is quite severe as a diet to follow, but cutting back on empty carbs, like white bread, pasta and so on will hep a great deal with weight loss.
Second of all, I do wish people would stop saying muscle weighs more than fat. It does not. A pound of fat is equal weight to a pound of muscle. The difference is muscle is more dense and takes up less space-that is probably why you look more 'toned'. You are probably carrying less fat-also as stated, muscle uses more energy thus burns more calories even when you're resting.
Keep up the exercise, take it slow as this poster I quote says and watch what you eat and you will get there. Quality food over quantity for the win.

dioltas

I think that's what people mean generally, that muscle is more dense. It's like if I said steel weighs more than wood. I wouldn't mean that 1kg of steel weighs more than a kg of wood! What they mean is that the same volume of muscle weighs more than the same volume of fat.

Youe dead right in what your saying, but I think people generally mean muscle is denser..

fatmammycat

Actually I think a lot of people DO think muscle is heavier that fat. That's why they say it.
Anyway, regardless, good luck OP, there is plenty of good advice on the stickies here and over in fitness. Very much worth having a read.

crazyy

Atkins is a terrible diet, don't do it!!
If you want liver failure, go for it, but the only way to successfully lose weight (in my opinion ) is forget about shortcuts.
What the Atkins diet does, as far as I know, it get rid of carbohydrates and increase protein to be used for energy instead. Correct me if I'm wrong on any on this btw, but I'm fairly sure of what I'm saying.
If you've ever seen a food pyramid, carboydrates is at the bottom, meaning you need most of this type of food.
So consider that when choosing a diet that wants to abolish this food.
Also, using protein for all your energy needs is NOT good!
Protein's primary functions are for growth and repair. Only excess proteins are used for energy. They are deaminated in the liver.
Which basically means putting unneccesary pressure on the liver as it has to work really hard, to fulfil your energy needs from a food that shouldn't be solely providing your energy.
Hope that makes sense. Pretty much, it's not the way to go.

jdivision

Too many carbs is how you get fat crazzy. The food pyramid is rubbish.

crazyy

Well obviously too much of anything is bad, if balanced with exercise, the food pyramid is a healthy thing to base your diet on. They don't just have if for no reason! Carbs only turn to fat when they're not used.

EileenG

Atkins is a perfectly good diet, and anyone who had actually read the books admits they are full of common sense.

The basic principle of Atkins is to cut out the refined carbs and processed fats (anyone want to try defending those?) and replace them with quality proteins, fats and green vegetables. There is an "induction phase" where you go cold turkey on non-veggie carbs for a couple of weeks, then you reintroduce clean healthy carbs. You'd be amazed how many people think that the induction phase is all there is to Atkins.

The longer you spend on Atkins, the more quality carbs you bring back into your diet, until you arrive at the point where you can eat for life. However, you will find that people on Atkins eat bucket loads of veg compared with someone on a "balanced" diet.

I've been on some version of Atkins for over 8 years now, and the worst thing my doctor can find is flat feet. I've cleared up a lot of minor health problems and lost a lot of weight. Of course, one case doesn't prove anything, but there are large numbers of studies out (some which set out to disprove Atkins) which show that it's a safe and effective diet.

<snip>

corkcomp

EileenG wrote: »

Atkins is a perfectly good diet, and anyone who had actually read the books admits they are full of common sense.

The basic principle of Atkins is to cut out the refined carbs and processed fats (anyone want to try defending those?) and replace them with quality proteins, fats and green vegetables. There is an "induction phase" where you go cold turkey on non-veggie carbs for a couple of weeks, then you reintroduce clean healthy carbs. You'd be amazed how many people think that the induction phase is all there is to Atkins.

The longer you spend on Atkins, the more quality carbs you bring back into your diet, until you arrive at the point where you can eat for life. However, you will find that people on Atkins eat bucket loads of veg compared with someone on a "balanced" diet.

I've been on some version of Atkins for over 8 years now, and the worst thing my doctor can find is flat feet. I've cleared up a lot of minor health problems and lost a lot of weight. Of course, one case doesn't prove anything, but there are large numbers of studies out (some which set out to disprove Atkins) which show that it's a safe and effective diet.

IMO that is a very rose tinted repressentation of atkins. I would agree with a lot of the principals but I dont see the point of "induction" as such ... The main issue with atkins is that it tends to demonise a lot of good carbs like fruit and whole grains .. There is NO DOUBT that processed carbs are bad news, the same way trans fats are, but lots of people stay fit and healthy on diets which comprise a lot of fruits and whole grain carb sources ... A lot of people are also obsessed with cutting certain carbs but dont realise the carbs they are taking in are far worse .. I know of one person who will eat 2 kitkats everyday but wont touch potato's (LOL!)
While green veg are great, there will be a point of deminishing return - you wouldnt eat scrambled egg or porridge 4 or 5 times per day?!

Most people would see great results by cutting out processed crap, be it fat or carbs ... I dont believe anyone ever gets seriously over weight because of porridge + bananas! in fact most overweight people i know have processed meats several times a day - sausages, poor quality ham .. etc. from personal experience, you can loose a serious ammount of BF by cutting soft drinks, sugar and anything white - bread, pasta, sugary cereals ...

EileenG

corkcomp wrote: »

... I dont believe anyone ever gets seriously over weight because of porridge + bananas

I did! I used to live according to the food pyramid, and I was 17 stone for most of my adult life. It was switching to a low carb diet that allowed me to lose weight.

Induction is not essential, it just makes it easier to make the switch to low carb. Otherwise, it's very tempting to think that if you just eat brown bread instead of white, that's all that's necessary.

If you read the book, you'll find that fruit and whole grains are exactly the sort of carb you bring back after induction. It's cake and biscuits that are out.

My typical day is something like: mushroom omlette or poached egg with spinach.
Lunch: fish and green veg or big salad.
Dinner: steak/chicken/stew/stirfry/casserole etc with piles of veg.
Stacks: cottage cheese, nuts, seeds, home-made bran muffins etc.

So far today, I have eaten cauliflower, sorrel, spinach, broccoli, rhubarb, kohlrabi and courgettes.

I've got children who whine "If I eat extra kale, do I have to eat my aubergine?" Of course, they still like their junk food, but they eat far less than their friends.

corkcomp

EileenG wrote: »

I did! I used to live according to the food pyramid, and I was 17 stone for most of my adult life. It was switching to a low carb diet that allowed me to lose weight.

Induction is not essential, it just makes it easier to make the switch to low carb. Otherwise, it's very tempting to think that if you just eat brown bread instead of white, that's all that's necessary.

If you read the book, you'll find that fruit and whole grains are exactly the sort of carb you bring back after induction. It's cake and biscuits that are out.

My typical day is something like: mushroom omlette or poached egg with spinach.
Lunch: fish and green veg or big salad.
Dinner: steak/chicken/stew/stirfry/casserole etc with piles of veg.
Stacks: cottage cheese, nuts, seeds, home-made bran muffins etc.

So far today, I have eaten cauliflower, sorrel, spinach, broccoli, rhubarb, kohlrabi and courgettes.

I've got children who whine "If I eat extra kale, do I have to eat my aubergine?" Of course, they still like their junk food, but they eat far less than their friends.

i guess the point i was trying to make is that there should be no need to cut out fruit + whole grains i.e. - induction phase.
TBH I have eatten more varieties of veg than that today but I also had porridge for breakfast - a brown scone with lunch and a baked potato for dinner - along with 3 pieces of fruit for breakfast - and no I am not carrying any excess body fat -
The potential issue with the food pyramid is that it doesnt really differentiate between whole grains and processed junk and there is a world of difference!

EileenG

I suspect you might be younger and probably a lot more muscular than me. There is an Atkins food pyramid, www.atkins.com/food-pyramid.html which increases bread and fruit etc according to exercise.

When I'm skiing all day, I can eat bread and rice. With the Irish weather keeping me off the bike most of the time, I give them a miss.

corkcomp

EileenG wrote: »

I suspect you might be younger and probably a lot more muscular than me. There is an Atkins food pyramid, www.atkins.com/food-pyramid.html which increases bread and fruit etc according to exercise.

When I'm skiing all day, I can eat bread and rice. With the Irish weather keeping me off the bike most of the time, I give them a miss.

LOL .. possibly younger but wasnt always muscular, in fact any excess weight I put on in the past was mostly fat .. I see your point though, the more active somebody is the more carbs they can eat ... I find that I dont have as much appetite for carbs on days I am not active though so it probably balances out ... Even very active people should probably stick with whole grain carb sources though ..

El_Dangeroso

I think the point of the induction period is like a sort of bootcamp for your tastebuds and your metabolism. For me, the health benefits were so drastic and immediate and being in ketosis is so appetite suppressing that for the first time in my life I felt weightloss was not only achievable but quick and not that hard.

I think I'm just the type of person who is especially suited to paleo/low carb because I love the food and then energy I get from being in ketosis. I think most people who start Atkins do it for the weightloss, but pretty much everyone who sticks with it does it because of the drastic improvement in their health, which is a far better motivation to eat better.

CathyMoran

EileenG wrote: »

<snip>

Actually a low Glycemic Index/Load diet does this, not atkins. OP, I would avoid atkins like the plague and if you want to loose weight and maintain a healthy weight over the long term try the low GI/GL diet which is very do able.

El_Dangeroso

CathyMoran wrote: »

Actually a low Glycemic Index/Load diet does this, not atkins. OP, I would avoid atkins like the plague and if you want to loose weight and maintain a healthy weight over the long term try the low GI/GL diet which is very do able.

Atkins has the lowest glycemic index and lowest glycemic load of any weight loss program. GI/GL was formulated in response to the great success of the Atkins diet.

CathyMoran

Temple_Grandin wrote: »

Atkins has the lowest glycemic index and lowest glycemic load of any weight loss program. GI/GL was formulated in response to the great success of the Atkins diet.

That is because you are eating minimal sugar! The ideal situation is to have sugars that go into your blood stream over time so that you have a constant supply of energy, it also means that you are less hungry and less likely to snack (ie GI/GL diet).

g'em

CathyMoran wrote: »

The ideal situation is to have sugars that go into your blood stream over time so that you have a constant supply of energy, it also means that you are less hungry and less likely to snack (ie GI/GL diet).

Ideal according to who though? I'm neither 100% pro-Atkins or 100% pro-low GI/GL but I do believe there's no 'ideal' for everyone, it's very much down to the individual involved.

Some people are more carb-tolerant than others and can well afford to have a lot of them in their diet. Others are much less so, and find that an Atkins' style diet that minimises sugar consumption (and therefore retain better insulin control) is preferable.

As long term healthy eating plans go both Atkins and the Low GI/GL eating plans have numerous benefits, and I'd be slow to choose one over the other.

neuro-praxis

I knew Atkins wasn't for me when I read a recipe for "pizza" in one of the books that suggested making the base out of minced beef...

coillte

Hi all

Been low carbing since 2003 where I was 16st. I'm now 11st & have maintained my weight over the years, apart from a lifestyle change last year where I went up to 13 but have now lost that & am back to maintaining my norm. (I'm male BTW)

Tips for food ideas - Linda's Low Carb Menu & Recipes.
http://www.genaw.com/lowcarb/

The recipes are great.

Best of luck

corkcomp

the bottom line with either atkins or low GI is that you need to make it a permanent lifestyle - personally I wouldnt want to live by atkins principals because I love carbs .. Balanced diets are far more sustainable in the long term .. whatever diet / lifestyle you choose needs to be something you stick to for life and that doesnt deprive you of foods you like ...

rubadub

corkcomp wrote: »

Balanced diets are far more sustainable in the long term ..

I think so too, but you can cut down as most peoples are not balanced to begin with, i.e. too much carbs. I get comments all the time in work having lunch "wheres the bread?" as though it is essential to a lunch or something. I have had people ask if I am on Atkins in work too, and told them "No, sure I have ketchup on it", and got a blank look...

I try and cut down as much with my own food but always eat carbs when out, e.g. in a mates getting chinese or pizza, or at a wedding etc. If having carbs at home I try and wait till after a weights workout.

the books that suggested making the base out of minced beef

That sounds good to me!

neuro-praxis

It's basically just a giant burger lashed with Italian style tomato sauce and mounds of cheese...pizza it ain't!

EileenG

neuro-praxis wrote: »

I knew Atkins wasn't for me when I read a recipe for "pizza" in one of the books that suggested making the base out of minced beef...

I've got a good recipe somewhere where the base is based on flaxseed.

Personally, if I go out for pizza, I pretend I'm a kid again, and eat all the toppings and ignore the base.

neuro-praxis

See now...that's just no way to live!

EileenG

What, behaving like a kid? I'll stop at once, and spend all my time shaking my finger at you....

corkcomp

EileenG wrote: »

I've got a good recipe somewhere where the base is based on flaxseed.

Personally, if I go out for pizza, I pretend I'm a kid again, and eat all the toppings and ignore the base.

oh dear - my love of carbs must have been developed at birth because I used to scrape EVERY BIT of topping off mine and eat the base .. LOL

El_Dangeroso

I think that a lot people have the misconception that Atkin's IS the induction period and that's just not true.

The glycemic load diet is really similar to Atkins and there are plenty of meals that are great on boths plans, omelettes etc.

I don't follow Atkins (I do the Idiot proof diet) but I do follow similar carb levels.

Today I ate:

Breakfast: Pancetta and avacado omlette, coffee with whipped cream
Lunch: Sardines and salad with olive oil
Dinner: Roast chicken with sweet potato roasted in duckfat and steamed broccoli

<60g carbs for the day

What's not balanced about that?

EileenG

Of course, you know that without regular intake of rice cakes and other stuff like tastes like packing pellets, you are going to die of malnutrition......

corkcomp

Temple_Grandin wrote: »

I think that a lot people have the misconception that Atkin's IS the induction period and that's just not true.

The glycemic load diet is really similar to Atkins and there are plenty of meals that are great on boths plans, omelettes etc.

I don't follow Atkins (I do the Idiot proof diet) but I do follow similar carb levels.

Today I ate:

Breakfast: Pancetta and avacado omlette, coffee with whipped cream
Lunch: Sardines and salad with olive oil
Dinner: Roast chicken with sweet potato roasted in duckfat and steamed broccoli

<60g carbs for the day

What's not balanced about that?

the first thing that springs to mind about the menu above is that it really isnt a lot of food ... obviously depending on portions the above could be around 1500 cal .. I am presuming your not extremely active but correct me if im wrong? I need to take in between 4 - 4500K calories per day and without whole grain carbs it would be difficult .. I could obviously add loads of butter and fat to everything but I dont like it so why would I ? I dont want to start the whole argument about people needing carbs for exercise but try doing 20 minutes of supersets followed by 20 mins ss cardio followed by 15 mins HIIT before breakfast and see if an omlette and coffee will satisfy your post gym munchies??

EileenG

corkcomp wrote: »

I need to take in between 4 - 4500K calories per day and without whole grain carbs it would be difficult

Bear in mind that you are unusual. Most of the guys on Supersize v Superskinny are eating less than you do, and they are well over 20 stone. Most of us average out around 2000 or so cals a day, unless we are unusually active, or breastfeeding or something. And anyone who is older, or injured, or just very small, might need a good bit less.

My maintenance is around 1800 cals unless I am really clocking up the milage on my bike (not happening this weather), and I simply don't have the calories to waste on a lot of pasta.

El_Dangeroso

corkcomp wrote: »

the first thing that springs to mind about the menu above is that it really isnt a lot of food ... obviously depending on portions the above could be around 1500 cal .. I am presuming your not extremely active but correct me if im wrong? I need to take in between 4 - 4500K calories per day and without whole grain carbs it would be difficult .. I could obviously add loads of butter and fat to everything but I dont like it so why would I ? I dont want to start the whole argument about people needing carbs for exercise but try doing 20 minutes of supersets followed by 20 mins ss cardio followed by 15 mins HIIT before breakfast and see if an omlette and coffee will satisfy your post gym munchies??

The menu comes out at 1840 cals on fitday(I have a LOT of added fat) which is 230cals above my basal metabolism, not that I really believe that calories are the whole story.

I can exercise vigourously while eating that with no fatigue at all, in fact I'm about 10 times more energetic than my grain eating days.

It's totally up to you whether you choose to get your energy cals from carbs or fat, personally I choose fat because it is incredibly nutritious and satisfying and I find butter delicious .

neuro-praxis

Temple_Grandin wrote: »

Today I ate:

Breakfast: Pancetta and avacado omlette, coffee with whipped cream
Lunch: Sardines and salad with olive oil
Dinner: Roast chicken with sweet potato roasted in duckfat and steamed broccoli

<60g carbs for the day

What's not balanced about that?

Well...you ate only 3 portions of veg, and no fruit. And (gets out the can opener)...there's no wholegrain...

The reality is, most of us didn't get fat from complex carbs. We got fat from sweets, chocolate, beer and takeaways.

corkcomp

neuro-praxis wrote: »

Well...you ate only 3 portions of veg, and no fruit. And (gets out the can opener)...there's no wholegrain...

The reality is, most of us didn't get fat from complex carbs. We got fat from sweets, chocolate, beer and takeaways.

I was considering making a similar comment, esp regarding the veg ... I try to have at least 7 or 8 different veg every day, but I was sort of predicting that I might get a reply about duck fat containing more nutrients than veg or something to that effect!

gaz wac

Is there a thread here that explains Atkins in more detail as in, what you can and cant eat and what a typical days menu is like ?

corkcomp

EileenG wrote: »

Bear in mind that you are unusual. Most of the guys on Supersize v Superskinny are eating less than you do, and they are well over 20 stone. Most of us average out around 2000 or so cals a day, unless we are unusually active, or breastfeeding or something. And anyone who is older, or injured, or just very small, might need a good bit less.

My maintenance is around 1800 cals unless I am really clocking up the milage on my bike (not happening this weather), and I simply don't have the calories to waste on a lot of pasta.

I wouldnt think its that unusual .. People tend to overthink the calories in vs calories out theory .. IMO you can increase your metabolic setpoint considerably by consuming more calories and working out harder .. I recently added about 800cal daily and i am not gaining any weight and if i was consuming 800cal fewer than I should have been all the time i should have been loosing weight (but i wasnt) ...

regarding the guys on supersize vs superskinny - they probably dont do the following:
"try doing 20 minutes of supersets followed by 20 mins ss cardio followed by 15 mins HIIT before breakfast"

I can recall a time I was a good 18stone and probably taking in less than 2K calories every day, which shows it was down to the wrong type of calories and no physical activity...

EileenG

Gotta love the old supersets...

But most people regard brushing their teeth as too much exercise for first thing in the morning, and won't be HIITing any time soon.

Back when I was pregnant and breastfeeding, I could pound the Jaffa cakes all day and get away with it. But I'm pretty sure there aren't enough women doing that to make it recommendations about it.

El_Dangeroso

neuro-praxis wrote: »

Well...you ate only 3 portions of veg, and no fruit. And (gets out the can opener)...there's no wholegrain...

The reality is, most of us didn't get fat from complex carbs. We got fat from sweets, chocolate, beer and takeaways.

*Dips spoon into can of worms and takes a bite*

First of all avacado is a fruit :P

Secondly, show me the scientific basis for the '5 a day' mantra. It's not actually based in science, or any good science, but I really don't want to start quoting pubmed ad nauseum so you're going to have to take my word on that one.

Thirdly, no one in the world ever died of a wholegrain deficiency, in fact, we didn't eat wholegrains for 99% of human history, so it would be very surprising to evolutionary biologists if we suddenly developed a necessity for them.

I just can't understand the vehement opposition to low carb diets. They are perfectly healthy (I would say the healthiest IMO) and are the solution to a lot of people's health and weight problems. Why bash that?

neuro-praxis

Ah in fairness I am not a low-carb basher. I'm just not a low-carber for what I think are good reasons!

El_Dangeroso

I'm not a low-carb fascist or anything.. evangelical maybe, but if you had the same turnaround in health and energy that I had you would be too.

I think that low-carb is just another option but the amount of mis-information and declarations of it's 'extreme' or 'faddiness' is depriving people of an option that might just help them.

BTW, I can totally get fat eating wholegrains, fruit and veg! But I did a brief experiment to settle a bet with a doctor friend of mine. I ate 3,500 cals a day for a week but kept protein at 60g and carbs at 40g, the rest was fat. He bet me I would gain weight according to the cals in cals out theory. I didn't gain a lb, study of one for sure, but if you ask me, if anything in the diet is to blame for weight gain, it's the carbs.

corkcomp

Temple_Grandin wrote: »

I'm not a low-carb fascist or anything.. evangelical maybe, but if you had the same turnaround in health and energy that I had you would be too.

I think that low-carb is just another option but the amount of mis-information and declarations of it's 'extreme' or 'faddiness' is depriving people of an option that might just help them.

BTW, I can totally get fat eating wholegrains, fruit and veg! But I did a brief experiment to settle a bet with a doctor friend of mine. I ate 3,500 cals a day for a week but kept protein at 60g and carbs at 40g, the rest was fat. He bet me I would gain weight according to the cals in cals out theory. I didn't gain a lb, study of one for sure, but if you ask me, if anything in the diet is to blame for weight gain, it's the carbs.

thats the point I was trying to make earlier about metabolic setpoint manipulation .. obviously there are upper and lower limits but whether i take in 3500 or 4500 cal per day doesnt seem to affect my weight ... Having said that I would probably gain 5 or 6 kg in 2 weeks if I took in most of that from sugar or refined carbs ... wholegrain dont appear to have any bad effects though ... BTW the macro breakdown you mention above wouldnt be in any way bad but if fat was only accounting for 10% it would want to be very healthy fat ... I would always be cautions about giving any advice online that I couldnt relate to from personal experience and believe me you CAN get fat from consuming too much fat ... On a side note, why is it that low carb advocates (well at least any i know) tend to murder green veg by smothering it in butter, FFS whats wrong with just having it steamed without all the grease!

corkcomp

Temple_Grandin wrote: »

*Dips spoon into can of worms and takes a bite*

First of all avacado is a fruit :P

Secondly, show me the scientific basis for the '5 a day' mantra. It's not actually based in science, or any good science, but I really don't want to start quoting pubmed ad nauseum so you're going to have to take my word on that one.

Thirdly, no one in the world ever died of a wholegrain deficiency, in fact, we didn't eat wholegrains for 99% of human history, so it would be very surprising to evolutionary biologists if we suddenly developed a necessity for them.

I just can't understand the vehement opposition to low carb diets. They are perfectly healthy (I would say the healthiest IMO) and are the solution to a lot of people's health and weight problems. Why bash that?

a big reason why people are opposed to low carb diets is that some people take it to an extreme .. you gotta remember on a site like this most people coming on looking for advice did NOT get fat from porridge or fruit or veg, most likely it was simple sugars, soft drinks, alcohol and processed meats etc ... Remember how obesity only started to become a major problem in the UK once white bread became popular (and brown wholegrain bread became the food of the less well off)
Ive seen several people list out terrible diets, coco pops, crisps .. you get the picture - some of them were told to cut out fruit except for post workout!!!, in fairness if most of these people swapped the junk for fruit (even bananas!) they weight would fall off them ... A lot of people are genuinely clueless about nutrition and I would hate to think anybody would be frightened off making lifestyle and diet changes by people making extreme sugestions ... Of course good quality meat and protein is healthy but so are fruit and veg ...

Bottle_of_Smoke

Atkins is demonised because there's lots of soundbites you can use to attack it. "bad breath" "high fat" blah blah

Lot of misinformation about it. Was watching a show on "fad" diets. The moron talking about atkins was going on about her first few days and mentioned how she had to eat bacon and sausages

So she obviously never tried it as sausages would stop ketosis and the diet wouldn't work.

I might do it in a few months but trying to just build muscle now so just eating constantly. I'd recommend it to anyone who's overweight.

Bottle_of_Smoke

gaz wac wrote: »

Is there a thread here that explains Atkins in more detail as in, what you can and cant eat and what a typical days menu is like ?

At the beginning its quite tough, for my tastes anyway.

Most of your energy comes form high fat sources. So lots of bacon, eggs, double cream, philadelphia cheese. Some of the intake would also be oily fish, beef, pork as well as beg such as broccoli, spinach, cauliflower, turnips, tomatoes

Absolutely no sugar. It basically tricks your body into thinking you're starving so it takes fuel from ketone bodies and fat sources. If you were starving your body would do this to preserve muscle and brain tissue loss. However because you have the fat and protein you dont get the negatives of starvation

El_Dangeroso

corkcomp wrote: »

a big reason why people are opposed to low carb diets is that some people take it to an extreme .. you gotta remember on a site like this most people coming on looking for advice did NOT get fat from porridge or fruit or veg, most likely it was simple sugars, soft drinks, alcohol and processed meats etc ... Remember how obesity only started to become a major problem in the UK once white bread became popular (and brown wholegrain bread became the food of the less well off)
Ive seen several people list out terrible diets, coco pops, crisps .. you get the picture - some of them were told to cut out fruit except for post workout!!!, in fairness if most of these people swapped the junk for fruit (even bananas!) they weight would fall off them ... A lot of people are genuinely clueless about nutrition and I would hate to think anybody would be frightened off making lifestyle and diet changes by people making extreme sugestions ... Of course good quality meat and protein is healthy but so are fruit and veg ...

I disagree that if someone is seriously overweight then all they need to do is cut out white foods, I think if you are seriously overweight then your pretty much guaranteed to have some level of insulin resistance, and you need to take some serious corrective action.

I am a complete diet veteran, I have done weight watchers, slimfast, low GI, Rosemary Connolly, cabbage soup, grapefruit diet and even that crazy maple syrup master cleanse only to end up fatter at the end of it.

Forgive me if I am incorrect but you have never been obese right? I say that because my brother and I have similar discussions all the time, he has a body-fat percentage of <10% and does triathlons for fun. People like him tend to think 'Eat-less, move more' is the key but if that worked we'd all be slim. What's most disheartening is being told 'Oh just eat less junk' and then not losing weight. Some women I know don't touch junkfood and have a weight problem. They are eating brown rice and quinoa and all the right things and can't lose a lb. These are the type of people that NEED to be on a carbohydrate controlled diet and they are more common than you'd think.

The fact is when you have insulin resistance your body can't access fat reserves easily, your basically starving at the cellular level. So what do you do when you're starving? You get hungry and you eat.

I think that if you're healthy and at a reasonable weight then you can handle carbs, but I think if you are obese you have permanently damaged your blood sugar metabolism with refined carbs and as a result, brown unprocessed carbs are going to inhibit your weight loss and your health.