Banting AKA LCHF
clairetc
Posts: 3 Member
Anyone following the Tim Niakes Banting Diet ?
0
Replies
-
Niakes' diet is potentially dangerous. A Ketogenic diet shows benefit for people with epilepsy and/or other neurologic conditions. Applying this to other situation may be beneficial in the short term, but long term greatly increases potential cardiovascular damage.
NZ Financial Mail: Banting diet’s heartfelt warningWhile people following this diet may experience significant weight loss and an increased feeling of wellbeing, its effects on blood cholesterol could be harmful. So far, the Banting diet has not been shown to be safe or beneficial in the longer term.
Countless studies have shown that cholesterol-induced hardening of the arteries, also known as atherosclerosis, is responsible for most heart attacks, strokes and narrowing of the leg arteries, and is the most frequent cause of illness and premature death. The emergence of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) in developed and developing countries is a crisis that is engaging the medical profession and national governments around the world.
Noakes is well aware that a long-term clinical trial needs to be done to prove the safety and benefit of what he is proposing. Until such time, his theories must remain just theories, his results on weight loss and improved energy simply road signs that do not necessarily point to the desired destination.
In deciding on the best eating pattern, we may need to keep an open mind, but not so open that our brains fall out!0 -
Also:
The South African Health News Service: New research could debunk banting diet“Decades of research have shown the balanced diet to be safe and healthy in the long term, and along with a healthy lifestyle, is associated with a lower risk of heart disease, stroke, diabetes and certain cancers,” says Heart and Stroke Foundation South Africa CEO Dr Vash Munghal-Singh. “We do not have similar proof that a low-carbohydrate diet is safe and healthy in the long term, and some studies already point towards an increased risk of heart disease and death with low carbohydrate diets.”0 -
-
Also:
Long-term effects of a ketogenic diet in obese patientsCONCLUSIONS:
The present study shows the beneficial effects of a long-term ketogenic diet. It significantly reduced the body weight and body mass index of the patients. Furthermore, it decreased the level of triglycerides, LDL cholesterol and blood glucose, and increased the level of HDL cholesterol. Administering a ketogenic diet for a relatively longer period of time did not produce any significant side effects in the patients. Therefore, the present study confirms that it is safe to use a ketogenic diet for a longer period of time than previously demonstrated.0 -
AlabasterVerve wrote: »Also:
Long-term effects of a ketogenic diet in obese patientsCONCLUSIONS:
The present study shows the beneficial effects of a long-term ketogenic diet. It significantly reduced the body weight and body mass index of the patients. Furthermore, it decreased the level of triglycerides, LDL cholesterol and blood glucose, and increased the level of HDL cholesterol. Administering a ketogenic diet for a relatively longer period of time did not produce any significant side effects in the patients. Therefore, the present study confirms that it is safe to use a ketogenic diet for a longer period of time than previously demonstrated.
24 weeks is hardly long term. It isn't even 6 months. It does support my original observation that this approach can be beneficial in the short term, but doesn't say anything about my specific criticism - long term [adherance] greatly increases potential cardiovascular damage.
I've done ketogenics in the past - under medical supervision - and it was marginally successful. I was told to stop by my cardiologist when they found my heart disease.0 -
The only people concerned about ketogenic diets causing heart disease are those who still believe in the lipid/cholesterol theory of heart disease. If you're still of the opinion that fat and meat are bad carry on and avoid the diet like the plague -- you eat fat and meat on a ketogenic diet.AlabasterVerve wrote: »Also:
Long-term effects of a ketogenic diet in obese patientsCONCLUSIONS:
The present study shows the beneficial effects of a long-term ketogenic diet. It significantly reduced the body weight and body mass index of the patients. Furthermore, it decreased the level of triglycerides, LDL cholesterol and blood glucose, and increased the level of HDL cholesterol. Administering a ketogenic diet for a relatively longer period of time did not produce any significant side effects in the patients. Therefore, the present study confirms that it is safe to use a ketogenic diet for a longer period of time than previously demonstrated.
24 weeks is hardly long term. It isn't even 6 months. It does support my original observation that this approach can be beneficial in the short term, but doesn't say anything about my specific criticism - long term [adherance] greatly increases potential cardiovascular damage.
I've done ketogenics in the past - under medical supervision - and it was marginally successful. I was told to stop by my cardiologist when they found my heart disease.
If you accept that lipid hypothesis was wrong then there is absolutely no reason to doubt the studies, like the one I posted, stating the diet is safe and effective. You'll find a crapton of articles like the ones you posted expressing concerns based on a theory that has been thoroughly debunked (or vegan propaganda) but they don't have merit, IMO.0 -
Do that. Best advice here
(I'm not low carb)0 -
AlabasterVerve wrote: »
The only people concerned about ketogenic diets causing heart disease are those who still believe in the lipid/cholesterol theory of heart disease. If you're still of the opinion that fat and meat are bad carry on and avoid the diet like the plague -- you eat fat and meat on a ketogenic diet.AlabasterVerve wrote: »Also:
Long-term effects of a ketogenic diet in obese patientsCONCLUSIONS:
The present study shows the beneficial effects of a long-term ketogenic diet. It significantly reduced the body weight and body mass index of the patients. Furthermore, it decreased the level of triglycerides, LDL cholesterol and blood glucose, and increased the level of HDL cholesterol. Administering a ketogenic diet for a relatively longer period of time did not produce any significant side effects in the patients. Therefore, the present study confirms that it is safe to use a ketogenic diet for a longer period of time than previously demonstrated.
24 weeks is hardly long term. It isn't even 6 months. It does support my original observation that this approach can be beneficial in the short term, but doesn't say anything about my specific criticism - long term [adherance] greatly increases potential cardiovascular damage.
I've done ketogenics in the past - under medical supervision - and it was marginally successful. I was told to stop by my cardiologist when they found my heart disease.
If you accept that lipid hypothesis was wrong then there is absolutely no reason to doubt the studies, like the one I posted, stating the diet is safe and effective. You'll find a crapton of articles like the ones you posted expressing concerns based on a theory that has been thoroughly debunked (or vegan propaganda) but they don't have merit, IMO.
So Drs Ornish, Esselstyn, McDougall, Kahn, Barnard and the rest of the interventional cardiologists that have reversed heart disease over the last 40+ years with a low fat, whole food, plant based (not necessarily vegan) dietary approach are wrong? The findings of The Lyon Heart Study? Nurses I and II? Framingham? Seven Countries? Blue Zones? The Adventist Health Study with a cohort of 96,000 (with ages ranging from the 30s to well over 100), reporting that Levels of cholesterol, diabetes, high blood pressure, and the metabolic syndrome all had the same trend – the closer you are to being a vegetarian, the lower the health risk in these areas - The various Adventist studies have been ongoing since the mid-1950s.
Consider also that about 47% of sudden cardiac deaths occur outside a hospital (suggesting that many people with heart disease don't act on early warning signs) and that many heart attacks don't cause chest pain and consuming A High-Fat Meal Increases Cardiovascular Reactivity to Psychological Stress in Healthy Young Adults, meaning damage to heart function can start immediately.
There is direct evidence of the damage to coronary artery function caused by a low-carb diet, from a Clinical study of Blood flow within the hearts of those eating low carb diets was compared to those eating plant-based diets.
According to the CDC:
- About 610,000 people die of heart disease in the United States every year–that’s 1 in every 4 deaths.
- Heart disease is the leading cause of death for both men and women.
- More than half of the deaths due to heart disease in 2009 were in men.
- Coronary heart disease is the most common type of heart disease, killing over 370,000 people annually.
- Every year about 735,000 Americans have a heart attack. Of these, 525,000 are a first heart attack and 210,000 are repeat events.
For a different view of the pseudo-science at play, Dr. David Katz, President, American College of Lifestyle Medicine responded to Nina Ticholz's NY Times 'op-ed' with We're Fat and Sick and The Broccoli Did It!
In conclusion, and based on everything I know, I'll stick with my original statement:A Ketogenic diet shows benefit for people with epilepsy and/or other neurologic conditions.
Applying this to other situation may be beneficial in the short term, but long term greatly increases potential cardiovascular damage0 -
AlabasterVerve wrote: »
The only people concerned about ketogenic diets causing heart disease are those who still believe in the lipid/cholesterol theory of heart disease. If you're still of the opinion that fat and meat are bad carry on and avoid the diet like the plague -- you eat fat and meat on a ketogenic diet.AlabasterVerve wrote: »Also:
Long-term effects of a ketogenic diet in obese patientsCONCLUSIONS:
The present study shows the beneficial effects of a long-term ketogenic diet. It significantly reduced the body weight and body mass index of the patients. Furthermore, it decreased the level of triglycerides, LDL cholesterol and blood glucose, and increased the level of HDL cholesterol. Administering a ketogenic diet for a relatively longer period of time did not produce any significant side effects in the patients. Therefore, the present study confirms that it is safe to use a ketogenic diet for a longer period of time than previously demonstrated.
24 weeks is hardly long term. It isn't even 6 months. It does support my original observation that this approach can be beneficial in the short term, but doesn't say anything about my specific criticism - long term [adherance] greatly increases potential cardiovascular damage.
I've done ketogenics in the past - under medical supervision - and it was marginally successful. I was told to stop by my cardiologist when they found my heart disease.
If you accept that lipid hypothesis was wrong then there is absolutely no reason to doubt the studies, like the one I posted, stating the diet is safe and effective. You'll find a crapton of articles like the ones you posted expressing concerns based on a theory that has been thoroughly debunked (or vegan propaganda) but they don't have merit, IMO.
So Drs Ornish, Esselstyn, McDougall, Kahn, Barnard and the rest of the interventional cardiologists that have reversed heart disease over the last 40+ years with a low fat, whole food, plant based (not necessarily vegan) dietary approach are wrong? The findings of The Lyon Heart Study? Nurses I and II? Framingham? Seven Countries? Blue Zones? The Adventist Health Study with a cohort of 96,000 (with ages ranging from the 30s to well over 100), reporting that Levels of cholesterol, diabetes, high blood pressure, and the metabolic syndrome all had the same trend – the closer you are to being a vegetarian, the lower the health risk in these areas - The various Adventist studies have been ongoing since the mid-1950s.
Consider also that about 47% of sudden cardiac deaths occur outside a hospital (suggesting that many people with heart disease don't act on early warning signs) and that many heart attacks don't cause chest pain and consuming A High-Fat Meal Increases Cardiovascular Reactivity to Psychological Stress in Healthy Young Adults, meaning damage to heart function can start immediately.
There is direct evidence of the damage to coronary artery function caused by a low-carb diet, from a Clinical study of Blood flow within the hearts of those eating low carb diets was compared to those eating plant-based diets.
According to the CDC:
- About 610,000 people die of heart disease in the United States every year–that’s 1 in every 4 deaths.
- Heart disease is the leading cause of death for both men and women.
- More than half of the deaths due to heart disease in 2009 were in men.
- Coronary heart disease is the most common type of heart disease, killing over 370,000 people annually.
- Every year about 735,000 Americans have a heart attack. Of these, 525,000 are a first heart attack and 210,000 are repeat events.
For a different view of the pseudo-science at play, Dr. David Katz, President, American College of Lifestyle Medicine responded to Nina Ticholz's NY Times 'op-ed' with We're Fat and Sick and The Broccoli Did It!
In conclusion, and based on everything I know, I'll stick with my original statement:A Ketogenic diet shows benefit for people with epilepsy and/or other neurologic conditions.
Applying this to other situation may be beneficial in the short term, but long term greatly increases potential cardiovascular damage
I have 15 years of perfect bloodwork that says you're wrong. Nobody is required to do lc, and some of the programs like Banting's are extreme, but that's no excuse to start your own misinformation evangelizing campaign. If every way of eating that anyone ever failed on was banned, we'd all be dead.0 -
So. Is this supposed to be support thread for people doing LCHF or a bashing banting thread?0
-
I thought it was looking for people doing the Banting/LCHF diet. I'm quite lost on how 24 weeks isn't 6 months, but I'm a math scrub.kayemharrell wrote: »So. Is this supposed to be support thread for people doing LCHF or a bashing banding thread?
0 -
kayemharrell wrote: »So. Is this supposed to be support thread for people doing LCHF or a bashing banding thread?
It appears to be both
0 -
I thought it was looking for people doing the Banting/LCHF diet. I'm quite lost on how 24 weeks isn't 6 months, but I'm a math scrub.kayemharrell wrote: »So. Is this supposed to be support thread for people doing LCHF or a bashing banding thread?
There needs to be a bot that posts the link to the LC group as soon as any thread is posted remotely related to it. It's unfortunate nobody saw this one until it got hit by a protester.0 -
I only skimmed your post (I've seen it all before) so here's a cut and paste response that does a nice job of summing up my disdain for Ornish et al. To The Vegetarian Evangelists0
-
So Drs Ornish, Esselstyn, McDougall, Kahn, Barnard and the rest of the interventional cardiologists that have reversed heart disease over the last 40+ years with a low fat, whole food, plant based (not necessarily vegan) dietary approach are wrong?
It's definitely counter intuitive, but it really is possible for a whole gaggle of experts to be wrong.
These two articles by Gary Taubes explain how:
Do We Really Know What Makes Us Healthy
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/16/magazine/16epidemiology-t.html
What If It's All Been a Big Fat Lie
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/07/07/magazine/what-if-it-s-all-been-a-big-fat-lie.html
0 -
I have 15 years of perfect bloodwork that says you're wrong. Nobody is required to do lc, and some of the programs like Banting's are extreme, but that's no excuse to start your own misinformation evangelizing campaign. If every way of eating that anyone ever failed on was banned, we'd all be dead.
I had nearly 30 years of perfect blood work.
Have you had a calcium score or cardiac CT angiography? That's how my heart disease was found, prior to that I was asymptomatic.
Ultimately everyone has to decide what is right for them, I'm not 'bashing' Low Carb/Atkins/Banting, etc. I did acknowledge its potential benefit for short time frames and don't dispute the findings of the study presented.
My issue is long-term - as in decades long time frames. Some will benefit, because of genes. However, it it my belief that Low Carb/Atkins/Banting, etc is potentially dangerous over longer time horizons.So Drs Ornish, Esselstyn, McDougall, Kahn, Barnard and the rest of the interventional cardiologists that have reversed heart disease over the last 40+ years with a low fat, whole food, plant based (not necessarily vegan) dietary approach are wrong?
It's definitely counter intuitive, but it really is possible for a whole gaggle of experts to be wrong.
These two articles by Gary Taubes explain how:
Do We Really Know What Makes Us Healthy
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/16/magazine/16epidemiology-t.html
What If It's All Been a Big Fat Lie
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/07/07/magazine/what-if-it-s-all-been-a-big-fat-lie.html
What if Taubes is wrong ?I'm quite lost on how 24 weeks isn't 6 months, but I'm a math scrub.
It is, if one assumes 4 weeks (28 days)/month , which isn't the case. 1 year is 52 weeks, 6 months is 26 weeks.
With that, I'll step out.
0 -
Dr. Eades has been debunked too......and the girdle he wears
I have 15 years of perfect bloodwork that says you're wrong. Nobody is required to do lc, and some of the programs like Banting's are extreme, but that's no excuse to start your own misinformation evangelizing campaign. If every way of eating that anyone ever failed on was banned, we'd all be dead.
I had nearly 30 years of perfect blood work.
Have you had a calcium score or cardiac CT angiography? That's how my heart disease was found, prior to that I was asymptomatic.
Ultimately everyone has to decide what is right for them, I'm not 'bashing' Low Carb/Atkins/Banting, etc. I did acknowledge its potential benefit for short time frames and don't dispute the findings of the study presented.
My issue is long-term - as in decades long time frames. Some will benefit, because of genes. However, it it my belief that Low Carb/Atkins/Banting, etc is potentially dangerous over longer time horizons.So Drs Ornish, Esselstyn, McDougall, Kahn, Barnard and the rest of the interventional cardiologists that have reversed heart disease over the last 40+ years with a low fat, whole food, plant based (not necessarily vegan) dietary approach are wrong?
It's definitely counter intuitive, but it really is possible for a whole gaggle of experts to be wrong.
These two articles by Gary Taubes explain how:
Do We Really Know What Makes Us Healthy
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/16/magazine/16epidemiology-t.html
What If It's All Been a Big Fat Lie
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/07/07/magazine/what-if-it-s-all-been-a-big-fat-lie.html
What if Taubes is wrong ?I'm quite lost on how 24 weeks isn't 6 months, but I'm a math scrub.
It is if one assumes 4 weeks/month, which isn't the case. 1 year is 52 weeks, 6 months is 26 weeks.
With that, I'll step out.
http://www.proteinpower.com/drmike/low-carb-diets/dr-dean-ornish-blasts-high-protein-diets/?utm_content=buffer98519&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer
Arteries "expand" before they contract, this is what the Dr.Ornish crew measured. Also his study, he told people how to eat and to come back in I think 8 months? Over half of the people dropped out, that should tell you something.
Ornish has been debunked many times.
0 -
I have 15 years of perfect bloodwork that says you're wrong. Nobody is required to do lc, and some of the programs like Banting's are extreme, but that's no excuse to start your own misinformation evangelizing campaign. If every way of eating that anyone ever failed on was banned, we'd all be dead.
I had nearly 30 years of perfect blood work.
Have you had a calcium score or cardiac CT angiography? That's how my heart disease was found, prior to that I was asymptomatic.
Ultimately everyone has to decide what is right for them, I'm not 'bashing' Low Carb/Atkins/Banting, etc. I did acknowledge its potential benefit for short time frames and don't dispute the findings of the study presented.
My issue is long-term - as in decades long time frames. Some will benefit, because of genes. However, it it my belief that Low Carb/Atkins/Banting, etc is potentially dangerous over longer time horizons.So Drs Ornish, Esselstyn, McDougall, Kahn, Barnard and the rest of the interventional cardiologists that have reversed heart disease over the last 40+ years with a low fat, whole food, plant based (not necessarily vegan) dietary approach are wrong?
It's definitely counter intuitive, but it really is possible for a whole gaggle of experts to be wrong.
These two articles by Gary Taubes explain how:
Do We Really Know What Makes Us Healthy
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/16/magazine/16epidemiology-t.html
What If It's All Been a Big Fat Lie
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/07/07/magazine/what-if-it-s-all-been-a-big-fat-lie.html
What if Taubes is wrong ?I'm quite lost on how 24 weeks isn't 6 months, but I'm a math scrub.
It is, if one assumes 4 weeks (28 days)/month , which isn't the case. 1 year is 52 weeks, 6 months is 26 weeks.
With that, I'll step out.
Your story, you tell it however you want. Bottom line, I've been in medically supervised ketosis for 15 years, and I'll put the reputations of my doctors over those years above your cherry picked (and inaccurate) internet research. Rattle off as many names as you want, you said it is not sustainable long term. I am proof you are wrong. Have a nice day.0 -
Meanwhile: OP, I hope you'll join the low carb group linked above or one of the others.0
-
AlabasterVerve wrote: »I only skimmed your post (I've seen it all before) so here's a cut and paste response that does a nice job of summing up my disdain for Ornish et al. To The Vegetarian Evangelists
I think I've read just about all the 'experts' books-Ornish, McDougall, Furhman, Esselstyn (Sr and Jr), Campbell, Taubes, Sisson, Cordain, Wolf, Fallon, Atkins, Davis, Perlmutter, Mosley, Johnson, Verady and about 20 others....
From what I've gotten from them all is 1. they all push their way as the only way to eat, and if you don't follow their specific diet you will die a horrible and painful death, possibly while sprouting horns. 2. They all are trying to sell their name/books, including of course the 'must have' cookbooks. And surprise surprise, several of them also sell their own special line of supplements. And don't forget the 'must have' special dietary equipment, dvds etc etc etc. 3. They all spout off success stories, stats and studies. Which of course another 'expert' will refute vehemently and claim that if people eat that way they'll die a horrible and painful death....
Around and around we go!0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions