|
[ Atkins Diet Archive ] [ Main Archives Page ] [ Glossary/Index ] [ FAQ ] [ Recommended Books ] [ Bulletin Board ] |
Search this site! | |
We would like to notify you of (1) risks from the long-term use of high-protein diets, (2) currently circulating misunderstandings and deceptive statements made in support of such diets, and (3) the establishment of a registry for individuals who have followed such diets.
Health Risks
Despite press accounts of seemingly dramatic weight loss, the effect of high-protein diets on body weight is similar to that of other weight-reduction diets. Two recent studies (one at Duke University1 and a second at the University of Pennsylvania, whose results are as yet unpublished) suggest that the average weight loss with high-protein diets during the first six months of use is approximately 20 pounds. This is not demonstrably greater than that which occurs with other weight-loss regimens or with low-fat, vegetarian diets.2
High-protein, very-low-carbohydrate, weight-loss diets are designed to induce ketosis, an abnormal state that also occurs in uncontrolled diabetes mellitus and starvation. Over the long run, ketosis can contribute to a variety of physical problems, including calcium losses, increased risk of osteoporosis, and an increased propensity to form kidney stones.3
High-protein diets typically contain higher-than-recommended amounts of dietary cholesterol, fat, saturated fat, and protein, and very low levels of fiber and some other important dietary constituents. The Nutrition Committee of the Council on Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Metabolism of the American Heart Association states, High-protein diets are not recommended because they restrict healthful foods that provide essential nutrients and do not provide the variety of foods needed to adequately meet nutritional needs. Individuals who follow these diets are therefore at risk for compromised vitamin and mineral intake, as well as potential cardiac, renal, bone, and liver abnormalities overall.4
A nutrient analysis of the sample menus for the three stages of the Atkins diet as described in Dr. Atkins' New Diet Revolution (pp. 257-259) is presented below. The menus analyzed were as follows:
Typical Induction Menu
Breakfast
Bacon slices, 4 slices
Coffee, decaf, 8 ounces
Scrambled eggs, 2
Lunch
Bacon cheeseburger, no bun
Bacon, 2 slices
American cheese, 1 ounce
Ground beef patty, 6 ounces
Small tossed salad, no dressing
Seltzer water
Dinner
Shrimp cocktail, 3 ounces
Mustard, 1 teaspoon
Mayonnaise, 1 tablespoon
Clear consommi, 1 cup
T-bone steak, 6 ounces
Tossed salad
Russian dressing
Sugar-free Jell-O, = cup
Whipped cream, 1 tablespoon
Typical Ongoing Weight Loss Menu
Breakfast
Western Omelet
Eggs, 2
Cheddar cheese, 2 ounces
Bell peppers, 1 tablespoon
Onion, 1 tablespoon
Ham bits, 1/10 cup
Butter, 1 tablespoon
Tomato juice, 3 ounces
Crispbread, 2 carbo grams (1/4 slice)
Tea, decaf, 8 ounces
Lunch
Chef's salad with ham, cheese, and egg with zero-carb dressing
Iced herbal tea, 8 ounces
Dinner
Subway seafood salad, 1 item
Poached salmon, 6 ounces
Boiled cabbage, 2/3 cup
Strawberries, = cup with 4 tablespoons cream
Typical Maintenance Menu
Breakfast
Gruyhre and spinach omelet
Eggs, 2
Gruyhre cheese, 2 ounces
Spinach, < cup cooked
Butter, 1 tablespoon
= cantaloupe
Crispbread, 4 carbo grams, = slice
Coffee, decaf, 8 ounces
Lunch
Roast chicken, 6 ounces
Broccoli, 2/3 cup, steamed
Green salad
Creamy garlic dressing
Club soda
Dinner
French onion soup, 1 cup
Salad with tomato, onion, carrots
Oil and vinegar dressing
Asparagus, 1 cup
Baked potato, = small with sour cream (2 tablespoons) and chives
Veal chops, 1 serving
Fruit compote, 1< cups (generous cup)
Wine spritzer, 16 ounces
Nutrient Analysis of Atkins Sample Diets
Atkins Induction Atkins Weight Loss Atkins Maintenance
Energy, kcal 1759 1505 2173
Protein, g (% energy) 143 (33%) 120 (32%) 135 (25%)
Carbohydrate, g (% energy) 15 (3%) 36 (10%) 116 (22%)
Fat, g (% energy) 125 (64%) 97 (58%) 110 (45%)
Alcohol, g (% energy) 0 0 26 (8%)
Saturated fat, g 42 45 38
Cholesterol, mg 886 885 834
Fiber, g 2 7 18
Calcium, mg (% DV) 373 (37%) 952 (95%) 1019 (102%)
Iron, mg (% DV) 15 (86%) 10 (54%) 13 (70%)
Vitamin C (% DV) 20 (33%) 140 (234%) 242 (404%)
Vitamin A, RE (% DV) 799 (80%) 1525 (153%) 2521 (252%)
Folate, 5g (% DV) 143 (36%) 268 (67%) 584 (146%)
Vitamin B-12, 5g (% DV) 11 (191%) 8 (132%) 5 (80%)
Thiamin, mg (% DV) 0.7 (48%) 1.1 (76%) 1.0 (64%)
In addition to having very high protein content and low carbohydrate content, the menus at all three stages are very high in saturated fat and cholesterol and very low in fiber. In addition, these sample menus do not reach Daily Values for calcium and iron. The Induction menu does not meet the Daily Values for vitamin C, vitamin A, folate, and thiamin. The Weight Loss menu is low on folate and thiamin.
High-protein, high-fat dietary patterns, when followed over the long term, are associated with increased risk of the following conditions:
1. Colorectal cancer. Colorectal cancer is one of the most common forms of cancer and is among the leading causes of cancer-related mortality. Long-term high intake of meat, particularly red meat, is associated with significantly increased risk of colorectal cancer. The 1997 report of the World Cancer Research Fund and American Institute for Cancer Research, Food, Nutrition, and the Prevention of Cancer, reported that, based on available evidence, diets high in red meat were considered probable contributors to colorectal cancer risk. In addition, high-protein diets are typically low in dietary fiber. Fiber appears to be protective against cancer.5
2. Heart disease. Typical high-protein diets are extremely high in dietary cholesterol and saturated fat. The effect of such diets on blood cholesterol levels is a matter of ongoing research. However, such diets pose additional risks to the heart, including increased risk for heart problems immediately following a meal. Evidence indicates that meals high in saturated fat adversely affect the compliance of arteries, increasing the risk of heart attacks.6
3. Impaired kidney function. High-protein diets are associated with reduced kidney function. Over time, individuals who consume very large amounts of protein, particularly animal protein, risk significant kidney damage.
The American Academy of Family Physicians notes that high animal protein intake is largely responsible for the high prevalence of kidney stones in the United States and other developed countries and recommends protein restriction for the prevention of recurrent kidney stones.7
4. Osteoporosis. Very high protein intake is known to encourage urinary calcium losses and has been shown to increase risk of fracture in research studies.8,9
5. Complications of diabetes. In diabetes, kidney and heart problems are particularly common. The use of diets that may further tax the kidneys and may reduce arterial compliance is not recommended.
In people with diabetes, the safest approaches to preventing or slowing kidney problems include controlling blood glucose levels, blood pressure, and cholesterol, and decreasing protein intake to low normal levels.10
While high-protein diets may carry potential health risks for anyone if maintained for more than a few weeks, they are especially risky for people with recurrent kidney stones, kidney disease, diabetes, osteoporosis, colon cancer, or heart disease.
Misunderstandings and Deceptive Statements
Recent prominent news stories have encouraged the circulation of significant misunderstandings among members of the public, sometimes further encouraged by inaccurate statements in the course of media interviews. Some patients may be confused or misled about important dietary issues based on the following inaccurate notions:
1. High-protein diets cause dramatic weight loss.
As noted above, the weight loss typically occurring with high-protein dietsapproximately 20 pounds over the course of six monthsis not demonstrably different from that seen with other weight-reduction regimens or with low-fat, vegetarian diets. People adopting vegetarian dietswhose nutrient pattern is much more healthful than high-protein dietstend to lose approximately 10 percent of their body weight. Anecdotal accounts of greater weight loss with high-protein diets are atypical and may represent the additional effects of exercise or other factors.
2. “Fatty foods must not be fattening, because fat intake fell during the 1980s, just as America's obesity epidemic began.”
Some news stories have encouraged the public to discount health warnings about dietary fat and saturated fat, suggesting that fat intake declined during the 1980s, an era during which obesity became more common. However, food surveys from the National Center for Health Statistics from 1980 to 1991 show that daily per capita fat intake did not drop during that period. For adults, fat intake averaged 81 grams in 1980 and was essentially unchanged in 1991. While the American public added sodas and other non-fat foods to the diet, forcing the percentage of calories from fat to decline slightly, the actual amount of fat in the American diet did not drop at all.
A notable contributor to fat intake during that period was cheese consumption. Per capita cheese consumption rose from 15 pounds in 1975 to more than 30 pounds in 1999. Typical cheeses derive approximately 70 percent of energy from fat and are a significant source of dietary cholesterol.
3. “Fat and cholesterol have nothing to do with heart problems.”
Abundant evidence has established the ability of dietary fat and cholesterol to increase cardiovascular disease risk. Nonetheless, some popular-press articles have suggested that evidence supporting this relationship is weak and inconsistent. In addition, widely circulated news reports of a cardiac arrest suffered by diet-book author Robert Atkins have suggested that neither diet nor atherosclerosis played any role in the unfortunate event. The net result of such reporting may be to suggest that individuals may disregard well-established contributors to heart disease.
4. Meat doesn't boost insulin; only carbohydrates do that and that's why they make people fat.
Popular books and news stories have encouraged individuals to avoid carbohydrate-rich foods, suggesting that high-protein foods will not stimulate insulin release. However, contrary to this popular myth, proteins stimulate insulin release, just as carbohydrates do. Clinical studies indicate that beef and cheese cause a bigger insulin release than pasta, and fish produces a bigger insulin release than popcorn.11
Also, it is important to realize that different carbohydrate-rich foods have very different effects. Most cause a gradual, temporary, and safe rise in blood sugar after meals. Beans, green leafy vegetables, and most fruits are in this healthful category. The main exceptions are large baking potatoes, white bread, and sugary foods, which can cause an overly rapid rise in blood sugar.
5. People who eat the most carbohydrates tend to gain the most weight.
Popular diet books point out that a carbohydrate restriction may induce ketosis as well as a reduction in energy intake, resulting in temporary weight loss. This has been misinterpreted as suggesting that carbohydrate-rich foods are the cause of obesity. In epidemiologic studies and clinical trials, the reverse has been shown to be true. Many people throughout Asia consume large amounts of carbohydrate in the form of rice, noodles, and vegetables and generally have lower body weights than Americansincluding Asian Americanswho eat large amounts of meat, dairy products, and fried foods. Similarly, vegetarians, who generally follow diets rich in carbohydrates, typically have significantly lower body weights than omnivores.
High-Protein Diet Registry Established
In order to assist patients and consulting clinicians, the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine has established a registry for individuals who have begun high-protein diets or who may have been prescribed them by practitioners. It is available on-line at www.AtkinsDietAlert.org. Individuals signing onto the registry may report their experience with such diets and will find information on research and legal issues that may relate to liability.
References:
Westman EC, Yancy WS, Edman JS, Tomlin KF, Perkins CE. Effect of 6-month adherence to a very low carbohydrate diet program. Am J Med 2002;113:30-6.
Ornish D, Brown SE, Scherwitz LW, Billings JH, Armstrong WT, Ports TA. Can lifestyle changes reverse coronary heart disease? Lancet 1990;336:129-33.
Wiederkehr M, Krapf R. Metabolic and endocrine effects of metabolic acidosis in humans. Swiss Med Wkly 2001;131:127-32.
St Jeor ST, Howard BV, Prewitt TE, Bovee V, Bazzarre T, Eckel RH; Nutrition Committee of the Council on Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Metabolism of the American Heart Association. Dietary protein and weight reduction: a statement for health care professionals from the Nutrition Committee of the Council on Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Metabolism of the American Heart Association. Circulation 2001;104:1869-74.
World Cancer Research Fund/American Institute for Cancer Research. Food, Nutrition, and the Prevention of Cancer: a global perspective. World Cancer Research Fund/American Institute for Cancer Research, Washington, DC, 1997, pp. 216-51.
Nestel PJ, Shige H, Pomeroy S, Cehun M, Chin-Dusting J. Post-prandial remnant lipids impair arterial compliance. J Am Coll Cardiol 2001;37:1929-35.
Goldfarb DS, Coe FL. Prevention of Recurrent Nephrolithiasis. Am Fam Physician 1999;60:2269-76.
Abelow BJ, Holford TR, Insogna KL. Cross-cultural association between dietary animal protein and hip fracture: a hypothesis. Calcif Tissue Int 1992;50:14-18.
Feskanich D, Willett WC, Stampfer MJ, Colditz GA. Protein consumption and bone fractures in women. Am J Epidemiol 1996;143:472-9.
Gin H, Rigalleau V, Aparicio M. Lipids, protein intake, and diabetic nephropathy. Diabetes Metab 2000 Jul;26 Suppl 4:45-53.
Holt SHA, Brand Miller JC, Petocz P. An insulin index of foods; the insulin demand generated by 1000-kJ portions of common foods. Am J Clin Nutr 1997;66:1264-76.
08/02/02
We would like to notify you of (1) risks from the long-term use of high-protein diets, (2) currently circulating misunderstandings and deceptive statements made in support of such diets, and (3) the establishment of a registry for individuals who have followed such diets.
Health Risks
Despite press accounts of seemingly dramatic weight loss, the effect of high-protein diets on body weight is similar to that of other weight-reduction diets. Two recent studies (one at Duke University1 and a second at the University of Pennsylvania, whose results are as yet unpublished) suggest that the average weight loss with high-protein diets during the first six months of use is approximately 20 pounds. This is not demonstrably greater than that which occurs with other weight-loss regimens or with low-fat, vegetarian diets.2
High-protein, very-low-carbohydrate, weight-loss diets are designed to induce ketosis, an abnormal state that also occurs in uncontrolled diabetes mellitus and starvation. Over the long run, ketosis can contribute to a variety of physical problems, including calcium losses, increased risk of osteoporosis, and an increased propensity to form kidney stones.3
High-protein diets typically contain higher-than-recommended amounts of dietary cholesterol, fat, saturated fat, and protein, and very low levels of fiber and some other important dietary constituents. The Nutrition Committee of the Council on Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Metabolism of the American Heart Association states, High-protein diets are not recommended because they restrict healthful foods that provide essential nutrients and do not provide the variety of foods needed to adequately meet nutritional needs. Individuals who follow these diets are therefore at risk for compromised vitamin and mineral intake, as well as potential cardiac, renal, bone, and liver abnormalities overall.4
A nutrient analysis of the sample menus for the three stages of the Atkins diet as described in Dr. Atkins' New Diet Revolution (pp. 257-259) is presented below. The menus analyzed were as follows:
Typical Induction Menu
Breakfast
Bacon slices, 4 slices
Coffee, decaf, 8 ounces
Scrambled eggs, 2
Lunch
Bacon cheeseburger, no bun
Bacon, 2 slices
American cheese, 1 ounce
Ground beef patty, 6 ounces
Small tossed salad, no dressing
Seltzer water
Dinner
Shrimp cocktail, 3 ounces
Mustard, 1 teaspoon
Mayonnaise, 1 tablespoon
Clear consommi, 1 cup
T-bone steak, 6 ounces
Tossed salad
Russian dressing
Sugar-free Jell-O, = cup
Whipped cream, 1 tablespoon
Typical Ongoing Weight Loss Menu
Breakfast
Western Omelet
Eggs, 2
Cheddar cheese, 2 ounces
Bell peppers, 1 tablespoon
Onion, 1 tablespoon
Ham bits, 1/10 cup
Butter, 1 tablespoon
Tomato juice, 3 ounces
Crispbread, 2 carbo grams (1/4 slice)
Tea, decaf, 8 ounces
Lunch
Chef's salad with ham, cheese, and egg with zero-carb dressing
Iced herbal tea, 8 ounces
Dinner
Subway seafood salad, 1 item
Poached salmon, 6 ounces
Boiled cabbage, 2/3 cup
Strawberries, = cup with 4 tablespoons cream
Typical Maintenance Menu
Breakfast
Gruyhre and spinach omelet
Eggs, 2
Gruyhre cheese, 2 ounces
Spinach, < cup cooked
Butter, 1 tablespoon
= cantaloupe
Crispbread, 4 carbo grams, = slice
Coffee, decaf, 8 ounces
Lunch
Roast chicken, 6 ounces
Broccoli, 2/3 cup, steamed
Green salad
Creamy garlic dressing
Club soda
Dinner
French onion soup, 1 cup
Salad with tomato, onion, carrots
Oil and vinegar dressing
Asparagus, 1 cup
Baked potato, = small with sour cream (2 tablespoons) and chives
Veal chops, 1 serving
Fruit compote, 1< cups (generous cup)
Wine spritzer, 16 ounces
Nutrient Analysis of Atkins Sample Diets
Atkins Induction Atkins Weight Loss Atkins Maintenance
Energy, kcal 1759 1505 2173
Protein, g (% energy) 143 (33%) 120 (32%) 135 (25%)
Carbohydrate, g (% energy) 15 (3%) 36 (10%) 116 (22%)
Fat, g (% energy) 125 (64%) 97 (58%) 110 (45%)
Alcohol, g (% energy) 0 0 26 (8%)
Saturated fat, g 42 45 38
Cholesterol, mg 886 885 834
Fiber, g 2 7 18
Calcium, mg (% DV) 373 (37%) 952 (95%) 1019 (102%)
Iron, mg (% DV) 15 (86%) 10 (54%) 13 (70%)
Vitamin C (% DV) 20 (33%) 140 (234%) 242 (404%)
Vitamin A, RE (% DV) 799 (80%) 1525 (153%) 2521 (252%)
Folate, 5g (% DV) 143 (36%) 268 (67%) 584 (146%)
Vitamin B-12, 5g (% DV) 11 (191%) 8 (132%) 5 (80%)
Thiamin, mg (% DV) 0.7 (48%) 1.1 (76%) 1.0 (64%)
In addition to having very high protein content and low carbohydrate content, the menus at all three stages are very high in saturated fat and cholesterol and very low in fiber. In addition, these sample menus do not reach Daily Values for calcium and iron. The Induction menu does not meet the Daily Values for vitamin C, vitamin A, folate, and thiamin. The Weight Loss menu is low on folate and thiamin.
High-protein, high-fat dietary patterns, when followed over the long term, are associated with increased risk of the following conditions:
1. Colorectal cancer. Colorectal cancer is one of the most common forms of cancer and is among the leading causes of cancer-related mortality. Long-term high intake of meat, particularly red meat, is associated with significantly increased risk of colorectal cancer. The 1997 report of the World Cancer Research Fund and American Institute for Cancer Research, Food, Nutrition, and the Prevention of Cancer, reported that, based on available evidence, diets high in red meat were considered probable contributors to colorectal cancer risk. In addition, high-protein diets are typically low in dietary fiber. Fiber appears to be protective against cancer.5
2. Heart disease. Typical high-protein diets are extremely high in dietary cholesterol and saturated fat. The effect of such diets on blood cholesterol levels is a matter of ongoing research. However, such diets pose additional risks to the heart, including increased risk for heart problems immediately following a meal. Evidence indicates that meals high in saturated fat adversely affect the compliance of arteries, increasing the risk of heart attacks.6
3. Impaired kidney function. High-protein diets are associated with reduced kidney function. Over time, individuals who consume very large amounts of protein, particularly animal protein, risk significant kidney damage.
The American Academy of Family Physicians notes that high animal protein intake is largely responsible for the high prevalence of kidney stones in the United States and other developed countries and recommends protein restriction for the prevention of recurrent kidney stones.7
4. Osteoporosis. Very high protein intake is known to encourage urinary calcium losses and has been shown to increase risk of fracture in research studies.8,9
5. Complications of diabetes. In diabetes, kidney and heart problems are particularly common. The use of diets that may further tax the kidneys and may reduce arterial compliance is not recommended.
In people with diabetes, the safest approaches to preventing or slowing kidney problems include controlling blood glucose levels, blood pressure, and cholesterol, and decreasing protein intake to low normal levels.10
While high-protein diets may carry potential health risks for anyone if maintained for more than a few weeks, they are especially risky for people with recurrent kidney stones, kidney disease, diabetes, osteoporosis, colon cancer, or heart disease.
Misunderstandings and Deceptive Statements
Recent prominent news stories have encouraged the circulation of significant misunderstandings among members of the public, sometimes further encouraged by inaccurate statements in the course of media interviews. Some patients may be confused or misled about important dietary issues based on the following inaccurate notions:
1. High-protein diets cause dramatic weight loss.
As noted above, the weight loss typically occurring with high-protein dietsapproximately 20 pounds over the course of six monthsis not demonstrably different from that seen with other weight-reduction regimens or with low-fat, vegetarian diets. People adopting vegetarian dietswhose nutrient pattern is much more healthful than high-protein dietstend to lose approximately 10 percent of their body weight. Anecdotal accounts of greater weight loss with high-protein diets are atypical and may represent the additional effects of exercise or other factors.
2. “Fatty foods must not be fattening, because fat intake fell during the 1980s, just as America's obesity epidemic began.”
Some news stories have encouraged the public to discount health warnings about dietary fat and saturated fat, suggesting that fat intake declined during the 1980s, an era during which obesity became more common. However, food surveys from the National Center for Health Statistics from 1980 to 1991 show that daily per capita fat intake did not drop during that period. For adults, fat intake averaged 81 grams in 1980 and was essentially unchanged in 1991. While the American public added sodas and other non-fat foods to the diet, forcing the percentage of calories from fat to decline slightly, the actual amount of fat in the American diet did not drop at all.
A notable contributor to fat intake during that period was cheese consumption. Per capita cheese consumption rose from 15 pounds in 1975 to more than 30 pounds in 1999. Typical cheeses derive approximately 70 percent of energy from fat and are a significant source of dietary cholesterol.
3. “Fat and cholesterol have nothing to do with heart problems.”
Abundant evidence has established the ability of dietary fat and cholesterol to increase cardiovascular disease risk. Nonetheless, some popular-press articles have suggested that evidence supporting this relationship is weak and inconsistent. In addition, widely circulated news reports of a cardiac arrest suffered by diet-book author Robert Atkins have suggested that neither diet nor atherosclerosis played any role in the unfortunate event. The net result of such reporting may be to suggest that individuals may disregard well-established contributors to heart disease.
4. Meat doesn't boost insulin; only carbohydrates do that and that's why they make people fat.
Popular books and news stories have encouraged individuals to avoid carbohydrate-rich foods, suggesting that high-protein foods will not stimulate insulin release. However, contrary to this popular myth, proteins stimulate insulin release, just as carbohydrates do. Clinical studies indicate that beef and cheese cause a bigger insulin release than pasta, and fish produces a bigger insulin release than popcorn.11
Also, it is important to realize that different carbohydrate-rich foods have very different effects. Most cause a gradual, temporary, and safe rise in blood sugar after meals. Beans, green leafy vegetables, and most fruits are in this healthful category. The main exceptions are large baking potatoes, white bread, and sugary foods, which can cause an overly rapid rise in blood sugar.
5. People who eat the most carbohydrates tend to gain the most weight.
Popular diet books point out that a carbohydrate restriction may induce ketosis as well as a reduction in energy intake, resulting in temporary weight loss. This has been misinterpreted as suggesting that carbohydrate-rich foods are the cause of obesity. In epidemiologic studies and clinical trials, the reverse has been shown to be true. Many people throughout Asia consume large amounts of carbohydrate in the form of rice, noodles, and vegetables and generally have lower body weights than Americansincluding Asian Americanswho eat large amounts of meat, dairy products, and fried foods. Similarly, vegetarians, who generally follow diets rich in carbohydrates, typically have significantly lower body weights than omnivores.
High-Protein Diet Registry Established
In order to assist patients and consulting clinicians, the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine has established a registry for individuals who have begun high-protein diets or who may have been prescribed them by practitioners. It is available on-line at www.AtkinsDietAlert.org. Individuals signing onto the registry may report their experience with such diets and will find information on research and legal issues that may relate to liability.
References:
Westman EC, Yancy WS, Edman JS, Tomlin KF, Perkins CE. Effect of 6-month adherence to a very low carbohydrate diet program. Am J Med 2002;113:30-6.
Ornish D, Brown SE, Scherwitz LW, Billings JH, Armstrong WT, Ports TA. Can lifestyle changes reverse coronary heart disease? Lancet 1990;336:129-33.
Wiederkehr M, Krapf R. Metabolic and endocrine effects of metabolic acidosis in humans. Swiss Med Wkly 2001;131:127-32.
St Jeor ST, Howard BV, Prewitt TE, Bovee V, Bazzarre T, Eckel RH; Nutrition Committee of the Council on Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Metabolism of the American Heart Association. Dietary protein and weight reduction: a statement for health care professionals from the Nutrition Committee of the Council on Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Metabolism of the American Heart Association. Circulation 2001;104:1869-74.
World Cancer Research Fund/American Institute for Cancer Research. Food, Nutrition, and the Prevention of Cancer: a global perspective. World Cancer Research Fund/American Institute for Cancer Research, Washington, DC, 1997, pp. 216-51.
Nestel PJ, Shige H, Pomeroy S, Cehun M, Chin-Dusting J. Post-prandial remnant lipids impair arterial compliance. J Am Coll Cardiol 2001;37:1929-35.
Goldfarb DS, Coe FL. Prevention of Recurrent Nephrolithiasis. Am Fam Physician 1999;60:2269-76.
Abelow BJ, Holford TR, Insogna KL. Cross-cultural association between dietary animal protein and hip fracture: a hypothesis. Calcif Tissue Int 1992;50:14-18.
Feskanich D, Willett WC, Stampfer MJ, Colditz GA. Protein consumption and bone fractures in women. Am J Epidemiol 1996;143:472-9.
Gin H, Rigalleau V, Aparicio M. Lipids, protein intake, and diabetic nephropathy. Diabetes Metab 2000 Jul;26 Suppl 4:45-53.
Holt SHA, Brand Miller JC, Petocz P. An insulin index of foods; the insulin demand generated by 1000-kJ portions of common foods. Am J Clin Nutr 1997;66:1264-76.
08/02/02
In Reply to: someone said, "At what cost?" RE: Atkins "diet" - THIS COST! posted by Michele on May 31, 2003 at 17:58:52:
Lose More Than Weight On High Protein Diets~
Lose Your Health!
By Lisa S. Lawless, R.M.
Holistic Wisdom C.E.O.
If you are like me, you probably know of someone who has, or have tried a high protein diet yourself. High protein diets are all the rage and more and more people are getting on them. I've got some bad news about them, and if you or anyone you know is on one. Please read this.
The high-fat, high-protein, low-carbohydrate diets such as the popular "Atkins Diet" may risk long-term health problems, according to the American Dietetic Association (ADA). The ADA is a professional organization representing the nation's licensed nutritionists and dietitians.
The Atkins Diet, and others like it, trigger short-term weight loss through a process called ketosis. Ketosis occurs whenever the body lacks a sufficient supply of carbohydrates, a prime source of energy. During ketosis, carbohydrate-depleted metabolisms turn to other sources, including ketones from stored fat or protein, to satisfy daily energy needs.
So the issue is not whether you will lose weight on the diet, the issue is at what cost, and only to gain it back again when you are done with this very unhealthy diet. The first bit of weight loss is water weight, the carbohydrates that are in your muscles, and as you progress on the diet you will lose some fat, but you will also lose muscle mass.
It's so high in cholesterol and saturated fat, and counters the documentation of a healthy diet from the American Heart Association to the American Dietetic Association. Is Atkins so bold as to say that they are wrong?
It is also interesting to note that the diet is also low in fruits and vegetables and whole grains. These are foods with proven health benefits. Shouldn't a diet be healthy? Shouldn't it be a life style change not some quick fix that leaves us more unhealthy than when we started?
This does not even go into the facade that we can get all of our vitamins and nutrients from a vitamin and mineral supplement, because we can't! Fiber or photochemicals can only be found at the source. Gains, veggies, and fruits... you take those out to the equation and you are looking for trouble.
In Reply to: Re: from holistic practioner....on the web posted by Michele Again on May 31, 2003 at 18:03:48:
Michele, I the culprit who said at what cost..I lost weight on the Atlkins diet but that not the healthly way to lose weight..Someone on this board said you can lose weight by eatting M & M's three times a day and nothing else..You will be one skinny sick person..But some of us ( me included )have to learn the hard way..Steve
In Reply to: someone said, "At what cost?" RE: Atkins "diet" - THIS COST! posted by Michele on May 31, 2003 at 17:58:52:
Look what the vacuum of HY's exit sucked in.
In Reply to: someone said, "At what cost?" RE: Atkins "diet" - THIS COST! posted by Michele on May 31, 2003 at 17:58:52:
Man this is a shot to the dome alright.
It's amazing the information you gather when your turn the long term "infallible" "noise" down and allow others to speak.
With this new information, it is time for another diet change!
In Reply to: Re: someone said, "At what cost?" RE: Atkins "diet" - THIS COST! posted by Gregory on June 01, 2003 at 07:57:46:
Don't ya think ya otta mull it over for a while, first?
These links are no better than HY's. Links are just a compilation of somebody's agenda. The hard work involves going to the studies and sifting out the wheat from the chaff (or meat from the offal). The agenda here is clear, since there is talk of forming groups for law suits.
What about all the people harmed by the nutritional paradigm pushed in the US for the last 25 years? Almost every MD, dietician, nutritionist and public agency would be culpable. What if every diabetic sued his Doc for the idiotic treatment plans being followed?
This is just a sordid attempt to stifle the stirrings toward a new paradigm, and with Atkin's recent death, the opposition is feeling empowered and emboldened.
I encourage you, as a fellow fighter against ignorance and stupidity, to be circumspect and cautious in the slippery halls of science, lest you take a tumble.
In Reply to: OK Gregory, but posted by cris on June 01, 2003 at 08:30:43:
Very well cris. I can hardly ignore such a thoughtful and concise analysis of the situation.
I guess we'll be "shiny trinket hunters" together.
In Reply to: OK Gregory, but posted by cris on June 01, 2003 at 08:30:43:
According to my way too traditional nutrition book, about 1% of Americans actually follow the diet guidelines recommended by the "establishment" - aka those guidelines set by the FDA and touted by RDs.
Not that I'm supporting the traditional dietary approach. But do we really know what kind of results their diet approach brings?
In Reply to: Re: from holistic practioner....on the web posted by Steve on June 01, 2003 at 07:36:57:
I was the one who said about M&Ms - but sarcastically in one way - it's as absurd as doing nothing but the No-carb...making a point, that any one thing would be horrible.
In Reply to: Re: OK Gregory, but posted by thessa on June 01, 2003 at 10:50:32:
By the time anyone really figures out the absolute nutritional truth, we'll all be dead, so it always comes back to balance, don't you think? That's why I washed down my Sugar Pops cereal this morning with wine, beer and whiskey...and then I woke up. Good morning, Thessa (I mean evening for you).
In Reply to: someone said, "At what cost?" RE: Atkins "diet" - THIS COST! posted by Michele on May 31, 2003 at 17:58:52:
I didn’t have time or inclination to read your entire post, but I will address several items that grabbed my attention.
High-protein, very-low-carbohydrate, weight-loss diets are designed to induce ketosis, an abnormal state that also occurs in uncontrolled diabetes mellitus and starvation.
Ketosis that occurs in uncontrolled diabetes is different from what happens when dietary carbohydrates are reduced.
High-protein diets typically contain higher-than-recommended amounts of dietary cholesterol, fat, saturated fat, and protein, and very low levels of fiber and some other important dietary constituents… they restrict healthful foods that provide essential nutrients and do not provide the variety of foods needed to adequately meet nutritional needs.
Recommended amount? Recommended by whom? Are you talking about RDA values? Is it your first time when you encounter attempts of people to consume more that RDA’s? I think you will have a hard time persuading many (especially here) that RDA’s are all you need.
About fiber… First of all, fiber is not essential for life or good health. There are good real life examples of that. One such example can be Masai of Kenya. They are knows to very healthy, with very low rates of degenerative disease; yet, they eat mostly meat, milk (fermented), and blood. Sounds like a high protein and fat diet to me. Before Inuit adopted “displacing foods of modern commerce”, they also had high protein and fat diet with very little to no fiber and were very healthy. You can learn more details by reading a book called Nutrition and Physical Degeneration by Weston Price. If you don’t want to buy it, you can get it for free at Soil And Health Library.
Second, high protein diets don’t normally restrict low GI, high fiber vegetables. You can consume tons of fiber (if you wish) on such diets.
Next, it is incorrect that high protein diets “restrict healthful foods that provide essential nutrients”. Name one essential nutrient that well designed high protein diets don’t provide! Such diets can include lots of vegetables and fruits. They just shouldn't be high in sugar.
Individuals who follow these diets are therefore at risk for compromised vitamin and mineral intake, as well as potential cardiac, renal, bone, and liver abnormalities overall.
As I stated above, this is not true. You can have a very nutrient (including vitamins and minerals) dense diet that is high in protein and fat. Including organs meats will vastly improve such a diet.
In addition to having very high protein content and low carbohydrate content, the menus at all three stages are very high in saturated fat and cholesterol and very low in fiber… High-protein, high-fat dietary patterns, when followed over the long term, are associated with increased risk of the following conditions…
The article uses the word "associated". In the heart disease section, it says "the effect of such diets on blood cholesterol levels is a matter of ongoing research". There's a large amount of evidence (epidemiological and otherwise, old and new) that contradicts the claim that dietary saturated fat and cholesterol cause heart disease. You could learn a lot (provided that you suspend your anti-fat and anti-animal based food indoctrination) from http://www.ravnskov.nu/cholesterol.htm. You will get a chance to analyze scientific studies and see how misinterpretation and misrepresentation has lead many to believe that dietary saturated fats and cholesterol are dangerous.
Now, as HY and others have said multiple times, no diet works for everyone. I've heard personal reports from some people that they were constipated unless they had grains and fruits. I, on the other hand, experience the opposite – sweet fruits and vegetables and grains cause constipation in me. So, one should take into account his or her individual qualities. In spite of that, it is incorrect to claim that high protein diets are dangerous as the article you posted does. You can make any type of diet deficient and harmful. Just as you can exercise and hurt yourself. For god's sake, you can breathe and die if you do it incorrectly!
P.S. Michele, realize that Dr. Stoll pays for traffic and disk space consumed by the BB. So next time, post a link to what you want us to read instead of copying and pasting the whole (and huge) thing here. There are also visitors to this BB that might be paying for traffic and online time as well (it’s not uncommon in Europe). So, by providing a link only, you give them a chance to decide if they want to spend their money to read someone else’s writing.
In Reply to: Re: OK Gregory, but posted by thessa on June 01, 2003 at 10:50:32:
I'm sure that wouldn't dissuade them from suing, if they could.
But that is not the point. The point is that forces with power and money try to drive away opposing ideas, not with better ideas, but with fear, punishment, and lack of funding. Also, people are all too ready to jump on the bandwagon if the wagon is well-decorated and festooned with links.
To my mind, science should not be carried out through shoot-outs, fire-fights, subtrefuge or strong-arm methods. It should not be "advanced" by debating points.
In Reply to: Re: from holistic practioner....on the web posted by Michele on June 01, 2003 at 10:55:20:
If you are going to attack the Atkins diet, at least be accurate. It is not a no-carb diet, it is a controlled carb diet. People count grams of carb in the foods they eat and keep them below certain levels that work for them. It is not a high protein diet, per se, either. High protein diets often try to be low fat diets--a disaster. In fact, if you try not to over-simplify the diet, it may not seem so ridiculous to you.
In Reply to: someone said, "At what cost?" RE: Atkins "diet" - THIS COST! posted by Michele on May 31, 2003 at 17:58:52:
WOW!
This makes real good sense to me. My not-so-humble-opinion has always been that any diet that tends to be extreme is an unbalanced diet, unless one is taking it to cure a disease or imbalance. But even in the latter case, once the disease/imbalance is gone, the diet should go back to normal, which for the majority of healthy adults, should be whole grain-based, with lots of leafy greens, a variety of other seasonal veggies, with moderate amount of fish/meat/eggs/butter/beans/nuts/fruits/sea veggies/bugs...and everything should be organicly grown, minimally processed, and as fresh as possible.
btw, take the bugs with a grain of salt :)
In Reply to: Re: someone said, "At what cost?" RE: Atkins "diet" - THIS COST! posted by bing on June 01, 2003 at 15:44:32:
once the disease/imbalance is gone, the diet should go back to normal
But that "normal" is different for different populations, as studies by Weston Price and others has shown. For some, it was close to what you described, while for others it was skewed toward animal based or plant based foods. And all of these "normal" diets evidently were able to keep people for many, many generations, which is very important.
You know, bing, if I had to go on a deep space exploration mission, I wouldn't take you for a position that would require rational analytical skills. The only position I would take you for… or is it… in? Oh, damn language! This is making me thirsty.
In Reply to: someone said, "At what cost?" RE: Atkins "diet" - THIS COST! posted by Michele on May 31, 2003 at 17:58:52:
For me, the biggest question is we don't know the long-term effects of such diets on a western population, and won't know until large numbers of people stay on such diets for multiple decades. Maybe it's not so bad, but I certainly wouldn't want to use myself as a guinea pig. I know my diet works for me so I'll stick with it. :-)
In Reply to: Re: OK Gregory, but posted by FW on June 01, 2003 at 11:29:00:
That's scary FW. I just woke up from a beautiful dream that ricky bought me 4 boxes of sugar cereals, 2 of which were Corn Bran and Fruity pebbles! Stop sending me your cravings! ha ha I can't totally blame that on you. I used to binge on those cereals in my "Watch this, I CAN eat as much sugar as I want mom" days of yesteryear.
In Reply to: OK, thessa, but posted by cris on June 01, 2003 at 15:04:54:
You'll find no argument on that from me!
In Reply to: Re: OK Gregory, but posted by thessa on June 01, 2003 at 10:50:32:
it was never my intention to revert to an establishment diet. I was just pointing out that I would have to *revise* my diet again.
I am now considering (actually practicing) eating more salads, and more is something of a white lie as I never gave up eating them.
I do the rare/raw meat thing, although I'm not so good with dairy. Yoghurt, sometimes milk, sometimes ice cream. especially when making a smoothie (real fruit though).
And yes, there always seems to be an equally powerful "anti" group to whatever seems a reasonable or popular diet plan. I do try to discern who is behind what recommendations, but there is lots of hidden agendas and misinformation around.
Following the money isn't easy as all sides stand to make money.
In Reply to: Re: someone said, "At what cost?" RE: Atkins "diet" - THIS COST! posted by R. on June 01, 2003 at 14:26:27:
R - didn't realize about the traffic thing ...my apologies to dr. Stoll!
In Reply to: The Whole Truth, please posted by cris on June 01, 2003 at 15:06:52:
The odd thing is, that people seem to think that Atkins is the ONLY high-protein diet. It isn't. I follow a very high protein diet now and feel great - but I admit, I eat whatever I want, in pacing. If I want a plate of pasta, I don't check to see if it is "allowed"... is there anyone else like me, that basically eats what they want - I'd be interested in knowing what R, happygal, phillylady, nutmeg and others eat...and to what boundaries. I'm all for any diet that makes anyone feel good. I was simply posting what I found through what I feel, is credible sources.
In Reply to: Re: OK Gregory, but posted by thessa on June 02, 2003 at 02:04:06:
Too funny, Thessa. Here I thought I really didn't have anything important to say, but just wanted to say hi since it had been awhile, and here we are sharing dreams again. So you say beautiful dream instead of nightmare...hmm, does that mean you long for those sugary days of old? Gotta love those Fruity Pebbles (maybe the word pebbles should have clued us all in to what they would eventually do to our insides, as well as sugar POPS).
In Reply to: Re: The Whole Truth, please posted by Michele on June 02, 2003 at 08:28:48:
I follow the "Eat Right for Your Mood Diet" (ERFYM). This very successful diet does not regulate food intake quantity or type. Instead, the practitioners regulate their moods and emotions, since these are the primary drivers for addictive, impulsive and situational eating.
In Reply to: Re: The Whole Truth, please posted by Michele on June 02, 2003 at 08:28:48:
It doesn’t seem so to me. Atkins diet is just a marketing names for a general type of a diet, and many people who try to learn nutrition understand that.
I follow a very high protein diet now and feel great
You do that and post the diet's critique that contains a lot of misleading information? Why? I'd understand it if you truly believed what you posted, but your diet is similar to what you attacked!
I also eat what I want without checking anything. But because I want to feel good and have clear complexion, the diet ends up being pretty much animal based foods (meat, fish, eggs, fermented dairy, butter) and low sugar vegetables and fruits.
In Reply to: Re: from holistic practioner....on the web posted by Michele Again on May 31, 2003 at 18:03:48:
Here's an article, which refutes the one you posted.
This paper is a response to “High-Protein Diets--Are You Losing More Than Weight?” by Monique Gilbert. The article appeared in the American Naturopathic Medical Association’s quarterly publication MONITOR (vol.5, #4, 2001) and is posted at http://www.anma.com.
In the December issue of the Monitor, there was an unreferenced article by a self-styled “health advocate” named Monique Gilbert that deserves considerable comment for the large amount of errors and misinformation it contained. “High-Protein Diets--Are You Losing More Than Weight?” is little more than a vegan and soy propaganda piece. If the propaganda were accurate, one could forgive Ms. Gilbert for her zeal. In this case, however, it is not and inaccuracies cost lives.
Clinically, I have used low-carbohydrate, high fat and protein diets to very good effect, especially with those conditions that are worsened by excessive carbohydrate intake, e.g., diabetes, chronic fatigue, fibromyalgia, and heart disease. When properly practiced, low-carb diets are not harmful. Furthermore, if one were to follow Ms. Gilbert’s dubious nutritional advice as given in her article, one would actually increase one’s chances of contracting a number of debilitating diseases such as cancer, heart disease, osteoporosis, and diabetes.
Gilbert begins her piece by rightly pointing out the vital need for protein in the human diet. Unfortunately, the errors begin creeping in shortly thereafter. She states that, “Excessive protein consumption, particularly animal protein, can result in heart disease, stroke, osteoporosis, and kidney stones.” Though she does not list it, Gilbert would no doubt include cancer as a disease caused by animal protein intake. As I stated at the beginning, the article is unreferenced so these claims have no backing. I have no idea where Gilbert got her “facts” from, but it is certainly not from the scientific literature.
It is excessive carbohydrate intake, not protein or animal protein intake, that can result in heart disease and cancer (1). Readers should note that the type of diet Gilbert advocates in her article is a high carbohydrate one because that is exactly what diets that are low in protein and fat are. Furthermore, the idea that animal products, specifically protein, cholesterol, and saturated fatty acids, somehow factor in causing atherosclerosis, stroke, and/or heart disease is a popular idea that is not supported by available data, including the field of lipid biochemistry (2).
The claim that animal protein intake causes calcium loss from the bones is another popular nutritional myth that has no backing in nutritional science. The studies that supposedly showed protein to cause calcium loss in the urine were NOT done with real, whole foods, but with isolated amino acids and fractionated protein powders (3). When studies were done with people eating meat with its fat, NO calcium loss was detected in the urine, even over a long period of time (3). Other studies have confirmed that meat eating does not affect calcium balance (4) and that protein promotes stronger bones (5). Furthermore, the saturated fats that Gilbert thinks are so evil are actually required for proper calcium deposition in the bones (6).
The reason why the amino acids and fat-free protein powders caused calcium loss while the meat/fat did not is because protein, calcium, and minerals, require the fat-soluble vitamins A and D for their assimilation and utilization by the body. When protein is consumed without these factors, it upsets the normal biochemistry of the body and mineral loss results (7). True vitamin A and full-complex vitamin D are only found in animal fats.
If the protein-causes-osteoporosis theory teaches us anything, it is to avoid fractionated foods (like soy protein isolate, something Gilbert would no doubt encourage readers to consume given her zeal for soy) and isolated amino acids, and to eat meat with its fat. New evidence shows that men and women who ate the most animal protein had better bone mass compared to those who avoided it (8) and that vegan diets (most likely also advocated by Gilbert) place women at a greater risk for osteoporosis (9).
The claim that protein intake leads to kidney stones is another popular myth that is not supported by the facts. Although protein restricted diets are helpful for people who have kidney disease, eating meat does not cause kidney problems (10). Furthermore, the fat-soluble vitamins and saturated fatty acids found in animal foods are pivotal for properly functioning kidneys (11).
Gilbert’s explanation as to how meat supposedly “acidifies” the blood, leading to greater mineral loss in the urine is also incorrect. Theoretically, the sulphur and phosphorus in meat can form an acid when placed in water, but that does not mean that is what happens in the body. Actually, meat provides complete proteins and vitamin D (if the fat or skin is eaten), both of which are needed to maintain proper acid-alkaline balance in the body. Furthermore, in a diet that includes enough magnesium and vitamin B6 and restricts simple sugars, one has little to fear from kidney stones (12). Animal foods like pork, beef, lamb, and fish are good sources of both nutrients as any food and nutrient content table will show. It also goes without saying that high protein/fat and low-carbohydrate diets are devoid of sugar.
Gilbert’s contention that the weight loss on high-protein diets is mostly from water loss is strange given that low-carb proponents like Robert Atkins, MD, tell their devotees to drink lots of water while on the diet. Initially, there is a water loss (as with any diet), but the high water intake afterwards would certainly offset any more drastic “water losses.”
She further claims that weight loss occurs on high protein/fat diets because the person eats less food because he or she gets fuller faster on fat. Given that fat has more than twice as many calories than either protein or carbohydrate, this explanation is far from satisfactory. In other words, you may not eat as many carbohydrates as you did before you went on the high protein diet, but because you’re ingesting more fat, which has over twice as many calories as carbohydrate, your actual caloric intake is likely to stay the same or be higher than it was before.
Gilbert’s claim that , “Plant-based proteins, like that [sic] found in soy, lowers [sic] LDL cholesterol and raises HDL (good) cholesterol. This prevents the build up of arterial plaque which leads to atherosclerosis . . . and heart disease, thus reducing the risk [of] heart attack and stroke,” is yet another nutritional fantasy in her article that, although popular, is not true. The HDL/LDL theory has been thoroughly debunked by a number of prominent researchers (13) and LDL serves many useful functions in the body--there is nothing “bad” about it (14). Cholesterol is actually used by the body as an antioxidant (15); vegetarian diets do not protect against atherosclerosis or heart disease (16); and female vegans have higher rates of death from heart disease than female meat eaters (17).
Gilbert’s contention that, “Vegetable-protein diets enhance calcium retention in the body,” is simply wrong as “vegetable proteins” do not contain the fat-soluble vitamins A and D which are needed to assimilate calcium (and protein and other minerals). Furthermore, numerous plant compounds like oxalates and phytates inhibit calcium absorption. Unfermented soy products, in particular, are noted for their high phytic acid content and phytates block mineral absorption (18). Soybeans and soy food products are also noted for their high oxalic acid content as a recent study showed (19). The authors of this study concluded that soybeans and soy foods (as well as some other legumes like lentils) should not be eaten by people with a history of oxalate kidney stones.
Gilbert’s recommendation for us to replace vegetable protein for animal protein and unsaturated fats “like olive and canola oils” for saturated fats, is dubious at best and dangerous at worst. A number of recent and prior studies catalog the veritable witches brew of toxins found in processed soy products (20) and canola oil has caused vitamin E deficiencies in lab animals (21). Canola oil is also quite susceptible to rancidity due to its high level of alpha-linolenic acid; in the deodorization process used with canola oil, harmful trans-fatty acids are created (22). Are Gilbert’s recommendations sound or sane for health-conscious people?
Lastly, studies have not borne out the claims that vegetarians have lower cancer rates than the general population. A large study on vegetarian California 7th Day Adventists showed that, while the Adventists had slightly lower rates for some cancers, their rates of malignant melanoma; Hodgkin’s disease; and uterine, prostate, endometrial, cervical, ovarian, and brain cancers were higher than the general population, some quite significantly. In the paper, the authors wrote that,
Meat consumption, however, was not associated with a
higher [cancer] risk.
And that,
No significant association between breast cancer and a high consumption of animal fats or animal products in general was noted. (23)
Indeed, Dr. Emmanuel Cheraskin’s survey of 1040 dentists and their wives showed that those with the fewest health problems as measured by the Cornell Medical Index had the MOST protein in their diets (24).
The facts are that high-protein diets, when consumed in balance with enough water, fat and fat-soluble vitamins, and nutritional factors from non-starchy vegetables, ARE healthy. They are not guilty of the things Gilbert blames on them. Minimally processed animal foods like beef and lamb are healthy foods that are rich in a number of nutrients that protect and enhance several body systems: taurine; carnitine; creatine; glutathione; vitamins A; D; several of the B-complex, including B6 and B12; minerals like chromium, magnesium, sulphur, iron, zinc, and phosphorus; complete proteins; and coenzyme Q10, needed for a healthy heart.
If readers want to get an accurate assessment of lower-carbohydrate diets, they should check out reliable books on the subject (25) and not fatuous articles about them by misinformed individuals like Monique Gilbert.
For more reading on low-carbohydrate diets, click here!
NOTES
1. F. Jeppesen and others. Effects of low-fat, high-carbohydrate diets on risk factors for ischemic heart disease in post-menopausal women. Am J Clin Nutr, 1997; 65:1027-1033. Mensink and Katan. Effect of dietary fatty acids on serum lipids and lipoproteins: a meta-analysis of 27 trials. Arterio Thromb, 1992, 12:911-9; I. Zavaroni and others. Risk factors for coronary artery disease in healthy persons with hyperinsulinemia and normal glucose tolerance. New Eng J Med, 1989, Mar 16, 320:11:702-6; J. Witte and others. Diet and premenopausal bilateral breast cancer: a case control study. Breast Canc Res & Treat, 1997, 42:243-251; S. Francheschi and others. Intake of macronutrients and risk for breast cancer. Lancet, 1996, 347:1351-6; S. Francheschi and others. Food groups and risk of colo-rectal cancer in Italy. Inter J Canc, 1997, 72:56-61; Seely, and others. Diet Related Diseases--The Modern Epidemic (AVI Publishing; CT), 1985, 190-200; WJ Lutz. The colonisation of Europe and our Western diseases. Med Hypoth 1995, 45:115-120; D. Forman. Meat and cancer: a relation in search of a mechanism. The Lancet. 1999;353:686-7
2. Uffe Ravnskov. The Cholesterol Myths (New Trends Publishing; Washington, D.C.), 2000; Mary Enig. Know Your Fats: The Complete Primer on Fats and Cholesterol (Bethesda Press; Maryland), 2000, 76-81; Russell Smith and Edward Pinckney. Diet, Blood Cholesterol, and Coronary Heart Disease: A Critical Review of the Literature (Vector Enterprises; California), 1991; The Cholesterol Conspiracy (Warren Greene, Inc.; USA), 1991; Stephen Byrnes. Diet and Heart Disease: Its NOT What You Think, (Whitman Books; 2001), 25-52; George V. Mann, ed. Coronary Heart Disease: The Dietary Sense and Nonsense, (Veritas Society; London), 1993.
3. H. Spencer and L. Kramer. Factors contributing to osteoporosis. J of Nutr, 1986, 116:316-319; Further studies of the effect of a high protein diet as meat on calcium metabolism. Amer J Clin Nutr., 1983, 37:6: 924-9.
4. J. Hunt and others. High-versus low meat diets: Effects on zinc absorption, iron status, and calcium, copper, iron, magnesium, manganese, nitrogen, phosphorus, and zinc balance in postmenopausal women. Amer J Clin Nutr, 1995, 62:621-32; Spencer, Osis, and Kramer, Do protein and phosphorus cause calcium loss? J Nutr 1988 Jun;118(6):657-60.
5. C. Cooper, and others. Dietary protein and bone mass in women. Calcif Tiss. Int., 1996, 58:320-5.
6. BA Watkins and others. Importance of vitamin E in bone formation and in chondrocyte function. American Oil Chemists Society Proceedings, 1996, at Purdue University; “Food Lipids and Bone Health” in Food Lipids and Health, McDonald and Min, Editors, (Marcel Dekker Co.; NY), 1996.
7. S. Fallon and M. Enig. Dem bones--do high protein diets cause osteoporosis? Wise Traditions, 2000, 1:4:38-41. Also posted at http://www.westonaprice.org
8. RG Munger and others. Prospective study of dietary protein intake and risk of hip fracture in postmenopausal women. Amer J Clin Nutr, 1999, 69:1:147-52; MT Hannan and others. Effect of dietary protein on bone loss in elderly men and women: The Framingham Osteoporosis Study. J Bone & Min Res, 2000, 15:2504-2512.
9. Chiu JF; Lan SJ; Yang CY, and others. Long-term vegetarian diet and bone mineral density in postmenopausal Taiwanese women. Calcif Tissue Int, 1997; 60: 245-9; EM Lau, T Kwok, J Woo, and others. Bone mineral density in Chinese elderly female vegetarians, vegans, lacto-vegetarians and omnivores. Eur J Clin Nutr 1998;52:60-4.
10. J. Dwyer and others. Diet, indicators of kidney disease, and late mortality among older persons in the NHANES I Epidemiologic Follow-up Study. Amer J of Pub Health, 1994, 84:(8): 1299-1303.
11. M. Enig. Saturated fats and the kidneys. Wise Traditions, 2000, 1:3:49. Posted at http://www.westonaprice.org.
12. V. Rattan and others. Effect of combined supplementation of magnesium oxide and pyrodoxine in calcium-oxalate stone formers. Urol Res, 1994, 22(3):161-5; NJ Blacklock. Sucrose and idiopathic renal stone. Nutr Health, 1987, 5(1): 9-17. ++++++++
13. See references for note number two.
14. M. Enig. Know Your Fats, 258.
15. E. Cranton and JP Frackelton. J of Holistic Med, 1984, Spring/Summer, 6-37.
16. Russell Smith, op cit.; L. Corr and M. Oliver. The low-fat/cholesterol diet is ineffective. Eur Heart J, 1997, 18:18-22; F. McGill and others. Results of the International Atherosclerosis Project. Clin Lab Invest, 1968, 18:(5):498; Herrmann, Schorr, Purschwitz, Rassoul, Richter. Total homocysteine, vitamin B (12), and total antioxidant status in vegetarians. Clin Chem 2001 Jun;47(6):1094-101; EA Enas. Coronary artery disease epidemic in Indians: a cause for alarm and call for action. J Indian Med Assoc 2000 Nov;98(11):694-5, 697-702.
17. Ellis, Path, Montegriffo. Veganism: Clinical findings and investigations. Amer J Clin Nutr, 1970, 32:249-255.
18. HH Sandstead. Fiber, phytates, and mineral nutrition. Nutr Rev, 1992, 50:30-1; AH Tiney. Proximate composition and mineral and phytate contents of legumes grown in Sudan. J Food Comp and Analy, 1989, 2:67-68; see also S. Fallon and M. Enig, “The Ploy of Soy,” posted at http://www.westonaprice.org.
19. LK Massey and others. Oxalate content of soybean seeds, soy foods, and other edible legumes. J Agric Food Chem, 2001, Sep. 49:9:4262-6.
20. See research abstracts posted at http://www.soyonlineservice.co.nz.
21. FD Sauer and others. Additional Vitamin E required in milk replacer diets that contain canola oil. Nutr Res., 1997, 17: 259-262.
22. M. Enig, Know Your Fats, 120-1,195-6.
23. Mills, Beeson, Phillips, and Fraser. Cancer-incidence among California Seventh-day Adventists, 1976-1982. Am J Clin Nutr, 1994, 59 (suppl):1136S-42S.
24. E. Cheraskin, and others. J of Orthom Psych, 1978, 7:150-155.
25. Diana Schwarzbein and Nancy Deville. The Schwarzbein Principle (HCI Publications; Florida), 1999; Robert C. Atkins. Dr. Atkins’ New Diet Revolution. (Avon Books; NY), 2002; Wolfgang Lutz. Life Without Bread (NTC/Contemporary Publishing; IL), 1999.
In Reply to: These are some valid concerns posted by Eliza on June 01, 2003 at 18:20:48:
sure we do. Humans have eaten this way for millions of years (low grain i mean)
In Reply to: someone said, "At what cost?" RE: Atkins "diet" - THIS COST! posted by Michele on May 31, 2003 at 17:58:52:
Hi Michelle,
This post represents one of my final contributions to this board. I have one more post to leave which you will see at the top of the BB board soon. Once that thread is complete, that will be my last appearance on this board. I just couldn't leave without setting some things straight.
I can appreciate all the references you posted and all the work it took to put all that together. There is some ok information here but there is mostly a lot of not-so-good information and half-truths. Later, you also admit to eating a diet similar to what you have spoken out against. That was your biggest mistake. There's way too much in your post to touch upon everything but there's a few key issues to touch upon.
1) I know better than anybody here what a high-protein diet does during osteoporosis because I was born with it. I will leave a link below that will send you to a very well referenced article indicating that a high protein diet only causes bone loss when calcium is low in the diet. When adequate calcium and potassium are in the diet, a high protein diet not only causes no bone loss, it actually builds stronger bones than a low-protein diet. I will post the reference separately attached to this post.
2)Dr. Atkins did not suffer a "heart attack" from his diet. He had an infection.
3) The type of fat that was lowered during the 1980's was animal fats. However, polyunsaturated fats were increased. You didn't mention this in your post
4) Fat and cholesterol have been "suspect" in causing heart problems but in fact have never been proven. Many societies eat a diet high in fat and protein and do not get heart disease. The Eskimos are one such society. Visit www.cholesterolmyths.com if you would like to learn more
5) High protein diets may have been shown to be harmful for people with already pre-existing conditions but have never been proven to be harmful for healthy individuals. Furthermore, you have to define what "high protein" means. If the protein was consumed without the fat, problems would most likely develop since fat helps with the absorption of proteins. I will look more into your references but I suspect many of these studies on high protein diets didn't use high fat proteins. Overall, the jury is still out on this. I have never had a problem on a high protein/fat diet and thousands of people can attest to that.
6)Proteins DO affect insulin but not nearly to the amount that carbohydrates do. I am very suspect of that reference you posted. You can test you own blood sugar on protein foods and carb foods and see a difference for yourself
7) It states in your post that protein is responsible for CAUSING kidney problems. This is not true. Protein can aggravate an existing kidney problem but has never been shown to actually cause a kidney problem in persons without kidney damage.
8) Kidney stones are known to be caused by a high oxylates which are found in certain foods, none of which are animal in origin (I believe). They CAN be caused by eating pastuerized dairy but not raw dairy.
Also, I'd like to say that although I believe Atkin's diet is not dangerous, I DO feel it can be improved. Adding more vegetables juices or whole vegetables more than provides enough nutrients in addition to the healthful animal foods in the diet. Also, the SOURCE of the animal foods makes or breaks the protein. Grass-fed meat contains more nutrients, less saturated fats, more omega 3's, and CLA, a potent anti-cancer fatty acid whereas grain fed meat does not.
The one main reason that "red meat" is so unhealthy has to do with the way it is cooked. "well done" meat contains potent carcinogens that can contribute to cancer. Rare or raw meat does not pose this danger. The Eskimos eat raw meat and fat almost exclusively with no heart disease. The only group of Eskimos to have this problem are those that begin to cook their meat.
Overall, I don't find the information be very convincing. "Nourishing Traditions" by Sally Fallon is an excellent book that you should read. It is FULLY referenced with thousands of references and tackles these issues very well. Those ideas are certainly mainstream in the field of nutrition but they are far from cut and dry.
http://www.ars.usda.gov/is/pr/2003/030428.htm
http://www.westonaprice.org/myths_truths/myths_truths_bones.html
These two references show that protein does not necessarily cause bone loss. Just this one point shows that the whole argument against protein/fat is misleading and flimsy at best. Oh, and Gregory, These "theories", as you like to call them, are not mine. They are the culmination of years worth of research from some of the best minds in the field of health and nutrition. Also see my final post at the top of the BB board
-HY
In Reply to: Re: The Whole Truth, please posted by R. on June 02, 2003 at 15:22:12:
I need to add - I eat a very high protien diet because I work out almost 4 hours a day - sometimes 6.... I don't think if I were say, a secretary who maybe worked out at "curves" a day or two a week for 20 minutes a pop, I'd be worried about getting enough protein.
The diet was about Atkins itself - which is a lot stricter than most higher protein diets I've seen. I in fact, don't know of another diet that pushes high fat russian dressing. Wait...there is one (this is true!) there was a cookbook which was supposed to be funny called, "how to kill your husband slowly" and it had a bunch of high fat and so forth "killer" recipes that appeared to be healthy. Little tidbits about adding fat, adding salt and so on...
Oh geeze, I hope I don't start getting emails about trying to kill men. That wasn't the point or focus! LOL
In Reply to: I eat what I "feel" like eating posted by cris on June 02, 2003 at 14:35:37:
What about someone who is depressed and wants to overeat...
Or, does a practioner help them along with that via food choices?
In Reply to: Re: I eat what I "feel" like eating posted by Michele on June 02, 2003 at 20:38:42:
The practitioner is the one practicing the diet, ie, the one regulating his or her emotions/mood. A person who is depressed is not regulating his/her emotions/mood unless that person is a masochist. The point is to regulate (be in command of) the emotions/mood, not the diet, per se.
In Reply to: Re: These are some valid concerns posted by reader on June 02, 2003 at 17:07:42:
That's quite a trick considering humans (homo sapiens) have only existed for about 100,000 years.
In Reply to: Michelle posted by Helping You on June 02, 2003 at 18:37:07:
Proteins DO affect insulin but not nearly to the amount that carbohydrates do. I am very suspect of that reference you posted. You can test you own blood sugar on protein foods and carb foods and see a difference for yourself
I have read (but not confirmed) that protein stimulates insulin production and that some protein stimulates more insulin production than some carbohydrates. However, one of members of native-nutrition yahoo group has done experiments on herself to understand this more. She has measured her blood glucose level in relation to meals and experimentally confirmed that eating protein stabilizes blood glucose level very rapidly. This doesn't say much about insulin level, but at least sugar remains stable.
By the way, she has also found what might surprise some people. Have some you noticed uncomfortable feeling when you are hungry? Feeling irritated, angry maybe? A popular explanation for these states are low blood sugar. Well, when she measured hers during one of these states, her sugar was normal! What she has discovered through research is that these feeling are probably caused by elevated cortisol (stress hormones) level. One of ways the body uses cortisol is to stabilize blood sugar. Now, since her uneasiness went away soon after starting eating protein (not isolated but as a part of meat), she made a conclusion that probably cortisol effects were compensated in some way by whatever was caused by ingestion of protein.
In Reply to: Re: Protein and insulin posted by R. on June 02, 2003 at 22:44:11:
I have measured my blood sugar many times while on low carb/ high protein and fat fare. The blood sugar was always in the mid to high eighties. Very stable.
In Reply to: Re: The Whole Truth, please posted by Michele on June 02, 2003 at 20:37:52:
For god's sake, woman, give readers here more credit! You'd be surprised how many people can understand correctly written data.
That book must have been written to make people laugh. Fat doesn't kill. Unless it is excessive polyunsaturated (especially, Omega-6) and trans fatty acids and rancid oils.
In Reply to: Re: Protein and insulin posted by cris on June 02, 2003 at 22:51:32:
Great! That's two people now confirming the claim.
In Reply to: someone said, "At what cost?" RE: Atkins "diet" - THIS COST! posted by Michele on May 31, 2003 at 17:58:52:
In Reply to: Re: Protein and insulin posted by R. on June 02, 2003 at 23:03:57:
Make that more like 50. I test people this way all the time. It's to the point where the results are highly predictable
-HY
In Reply to: Re: Protein and insulin posted by R. on June 02, 2003 at 22:44:11:
Perhaps I am missing the main issue in regards to insulin. It might be that these certain proteins affect insulin more than certain carbohydrates, but these proteins stablize BLOOD SUGAR better than these carbohydrates, and perhaps that is where people are getting confused, myself included. It may be that with a more stable blood sugar level, the insulin is less of a problem or is metabolized more efficienty. This may be one of those things where when you get down to the nitty gritty, the protein/insulin connection may be there, but in practical application, the protein/fat foods ALWAYS stablize blood sugar.
What you said about the cortisol makes sense. Many people think that they do not have an insulin regulation problem because the cortisol is being used to "buffer" the high sugar level. So, the sugar appears normal but in fact, it is imbalanced. I imagine that people can go years without picking up on the connection. However, when their adrenals have burned out, the blood sugar will not come back to normal and at that point, they finally figure out the problem.
-HY
In Reply to: Really? posted by Eliza on June 02, 2003 at 22:05:14:
I didn't say *homo sapiens*, I said humans. i didn't make a specific classification. various species of humans have been around for millions of years. i don't have the exact numbers but it far outdoes the 100,000 years you are talking about.
In Reply to: Re: Protein and insulin posted by Helping You on June 03, 2003 at 00:08:31:
Actually, as far as I know, cortisol is used to "buffer" LOW sugar level. The rest is as you said. An endocrinologist at a lab where I tested my hormones told me that unstable sugar level is a major stress to the body. When adrenals get exhausted, you develop hypoglycemia. When you adrenals are strong enough, you walk around with elevated cortisol (if it is used to compensate for low glucose level), which is harmful. And when your adrenals are no good anymore, you start walking around with low blood glucose, and probably low cortisol and maybe other stress hormones. Now, if you study endocrine theory or aging (can be found at www.vrp.com), you will see how it all comes somewhat together.
Insulin isn't used only to drive sugar into cells but other nutrients as well (at least, amino acids). So, consuming protein must stimulate insulin release; otherwise, why waste money on meat? :)
In Reply to: Re: Protein and insulin posted by R. on June 03, 2003 at 00:49:26:
So, anything that improves the utilization of insulin or anything improves insulin regulation should promote better nutrient levels in the body which in turn should optimize or at least improve all aspects of health. No wonder Dr. Mercola always states that the control of insulin is one of the most important factors agains the fight in aging and disease. Human Growth Hormone comes to mind as an exceptionally good "nutrient" for making our cells more receptive to insulin. And of course, a diet lower in carbohydrate, higher in healthy protein/fats, and eating smaller meals throughout the day does this as well. You have really prokoved my thought process on this one. Thanks!
-HY
In Reply to: Re: someone said, "At what cost?" RE: Atkins "diet" - THIS COST! posted by Gregory on June 01, 2003 at 07:57:46:
It is amazing how quickly you laid down your guns for this information without an effort to refute a single sentence even though this post is full of mis-information. Allow me to refute at least one paragraph. I assure you, many more mistakes like this are contained in that post.
"3. Impaired kidney function. High-protein diets are associated with reduced kidney function. Over time, individuals who consume very large amounts of protein, particularly animal protein, risk significant kidney
damage."
--Flat wrong! High protein diets are associated with the worsening of symptoms in patience ALREADY WITH KIDNEY DAMGAGE. High protein diets have NOT been shown to harm individuals with normal kidney function. This is just one example of a half-truth that you accepted as a flat fact.
"4. Osteoporosis. Very high protein intake is known to encourage urinary calcium losses and has been shown to increase risk of fracture in research studies.8,9"
--Again, only a half-truth. High protein diets with LOW calcium in the diet cause calcium loss. However, high protein diets do NOT cause calcium loss if calcium is high in the diet and furthermore, if the diet contains abundant calcium, a high protein diet builds better bones than a low protein diet. See my reference at the top of the BB board on the myths and truths about osteoporosis.
I could go on taking apart her entire post piece by piece like this. As you can see, what she posted seems like a logical argument but the truth is, there are more factors at play. Still ready to make that diet change?
-HY
In Reply to: Re: Protein and insulin posted by Helping You on June 03, 2003 at 00:08:31:
I also experience that irritated, annoyed feeling when I get very hungry. I do have low blood sugar, and yes, I definitely experience a total lessening of this when I eat any protein rich meal.
I know that in the past, when I would experience these hunger pang 'upheavals', that when I ate a carb rich meal, I initially felt better, but it was always followed by an energy slump. I dont experience this with high protein, and normally feel quite satisfied afte a meal rich in protein and no carbs, which I didnt think was possible. I always thought I had to have rice, pasta, grains etc to feel fully satisfied after a meal.
In Reply to: Re: The Whole Truth, please posted by Michele on June 02, 2003 at 08:28:48:
Hi, Michele.
Atkins is basically a high fat diet--to promote lipolysis. The high protein just happens because stuff with high fat also tends to be high in protein.
Hope ths helps.
Walt
In Reply to: Re: The Whole Truth, please posted by Michele on June 02, 2003 at 08:28:48:
Hi Michelle,
I haven't been following the latest diet debates, but somehow popped in here and saw my name.
Truthfully I think that arguing about which diet is right for everyone is kind of like arguing about which shoe size to wear -- each person has to find what fits and is comfortable.
I'm eating a strict PWFD, avoiding all fruits and other foods I'm hypersensitive to. I eat plenty of animal protein, grains, nuts and vegetables. Mostly I try to listen to what my body wants, and if I don't, it complains.
Hope this helps.
Best wishes,
Happygal
In Reply to: Re: Protein and insulin posted by HY on June 02, 2003 at 23:59:40:
Mid to high eighties for me, HY, using the usual nurse's finger-stick glucometer.
I don't think my body would be comfortable in the fifties.
In Reply to: Dr. Stoll, please archive this thread! nmi posted by R. on June 02, 2003 at 23:04:54:
Thanks, R.
I have been trying to avoid making an Atkins archive. It has been harder and harder with each passing day. Now I wish I had archived a lot of stuff about it that was not marked.
Namaste`
Walt
In Reply to: Re: Protein and insulin posted by Miss Bliss on June 03, 2003 at 02:16:31:
Probably means that you have exausted your adrenals which cannot buffer the low blood sugar anymore. The protein/fat with non-starchy carbohydrate is definitely the way to get it back
-HY
In Reply to: Re: Protein and insulin posted by cris on June 03, 2003 at 08:02:14:
LOL no, cris. Not 50 as in a blood sugar reading. 50 as in the number of people I have tested lol
-HY
In Reply to: Michelle posted by Helping You on June 02, 2003 at 18:37:07:
I think you'll see if you look at my input, you'll see that the higher protien was because of my activity level. I do feel that people who burn more typically, need to consume more. I think diet is relative. Many of the people who go drastic diets are people who are overweight, which means they are not very active. It wasn't a mistake. I firmly do still feel that one diet is not any better than any other and it is more personal. There are large amounts of asians who eat white rice in large amounts, who do not have weight problems - AND who have long lives.
As Happygal said, arguing about this is like arguing about shoes....there is no "one size fits all" nor "one diet that fits all"... I have, throughout almost each post, respected that some people may be having success, but my only real point is that (again I say) Atkins is NOT for everyone.
My research was not a lot of work - quite easy - punch in "atkins" + "Long Term Effects" and you get a myriad of research. I did not however, find anything that was very positive, unless it was from an Atkins site, which I feel, is slanted. I do understand (again, I stress!) that there are sites which may make claims that are untrue - but the ones I posted I felt were fairly accurate and seemed unbiased. They do state there is SOME success!
Uy! this is my last post here...it's almost moot, because there will always be ongoing pro's and con's and opinions. When one see's a post such as Weight Watchers, one never see's this type of debate!
In Reply to: Re: Protein and insulin posted by R. on June 03, 2003 at 00:49:26:
R., I thought all food boosted insulin release? I'm confused about this! Explain this to me or give me a site to understand it? If you can, just email it to me at dcaschool@aol.com
I'm losing grip as to what the point here is.... is it insulin (atkins) or protein? Why wouldn't carbs be the precourse? Why isn't exercise mentioned in any of this also? (this are real questions, I really am asking) Because I feel that any weight loss without exercise isn't really that healthy...I thought the body needs exercise, and that exercise helps regulate the body systems...help!
In Reply to: Re: These are some valid concerns posted by reader on June 02, 2003 at 17:07:42:
But - there are cultures where HIGH GRAIN is the norm and they exist quite well! Some exceed western longevity and health by far!
Could it be culture/genetics that come into play?
In Reply to: flat facts and half truths posted by Helping You on June 03, 2003 at 01:17:39:
Then why does even the Atkins diet ask you to get a blood test to test the liver? I am in this post to learn not to just "give info"...so please don't be harsh. I found (easily) tons of information on the net that was very con-atkins, so I posted what I thought was helpful and valid informatio