Starting the Atkins diet

grinch031

There is no secret to losing weight. It all boils down to burning more calories than you take in, whether those calories come in carbs, fats, or proteins.

Actually, there is a secret! When you lower your carbs, you usually up your fat and protein. When you eat more fat and protein, you feel full and tend to eat less calories!
Conversely, if you're only tracking your calories and exercising more, you feel hungry more often and faster, making it easier to cheat.
IMO.

Based on an individuals preference. It can vary from person to person, but in the end it still comes down to burning more calories than you take in no matter if you eat carbs or not. You can cut all the carbs you want out of your diet, but if you are still eating 3000 calories a day of proteins and fats, you are going to have a hard time losing weight.

well when I was on it I lost 60 lbs....and I ate alot......it was ketoacidosis that caused the weight loss.

You mean ketones or being in ketosis. Ketoacidosis is what diabetics have when they have large amounts of ketones, so much more than you would have when just dieting.

martinah4 going to now comment on her inciting things or actually correcting someone to the benefit of everyone is alright?

You seem to be on a quest to cleanse all low-carb threads of unscientific information that favors the low-carb lifestyle. Even though you don't explicitly bash low-carb eating, your posting behavior does demonstrate some kind of agenda. I mean there's alot of nonsense spewed on this forum, so I'm not quite sure why you are so fixated on low-carb threads.

But I don't find it surprising that a member having success with a low-carb lifestyle would want to defend it from false information that makes the lifestyle sound unhealthy, dangerous, or ineffective.

dcmat

Good luck - great if it works for you as everyone is different.

I have been on 50-65% carbs for over 6 months now and have still kept the weight off. However cycling 1000 miles a month helps to convert them into energy

AntWrig

There is no secret to losing weight. It all boils down to burning more calories than you take in, whether those calories come in carbs, fats, or proteins.

Actually, there is a secret! When you lower your carbs, you usually up your fat and protein. When you eat more fat and protein, you feel full and tend to eat less calories!
Conversely, if you're only tracking your calories and exercising more, you feel hungry more often and faster, making it easier to cheat.
IMO.

Based on an individuals preference. It can vary from person to person, but in the end it still comes down to burning more calories than you take in no matter if you eat carbs or not. You can cut all the carbs you want out of your diet, but if you are still eating 3000 calories a day of proteins and fats, you are going to have a hard time losing weight.

well when I was on it I lost 60 lbs....and I ate alot......it was ketoacidosis that caused the weight loss.

You mean ketones or being in ketosis. Ketoacidosis is what diabetics have when they have large amounts of ketones, so much more than you would have when just dieting.

martinah4 going to now comment on her inciting things or actually correcting someone to the benefit of everyone is alright?

You seem to be on a quest to cleanse all low-carb threads of unscientific information that favors the low-carb lifestyle. Even though you don't explicitly bash low-carb eating, your posting behavior does demonstrate some kind of agenda. I mean there's alot of nonsense spewed on this forum, so I'm not quite sure why you are so fixated on low-carb threads.

But I don't find it surprising that a member having success with a low-carb lifestyle would want to defend it from false information that makes the lifestyle sound unhealthy, dangerous, or ineffective.

He is bringing factual studies, while others are bringing what they "feel".

grinch031

There is no secret to losing weight. It all boils down to burning more calories than you take in, whether those calories come in carbs, fats, or proteins.

Actually, there is a secret! When you lower your carbs, you usually up your fat and protein. When you eat more fat and protein, you feel full and tend to eat less calories!
Conversely, if you're only tracking your calories and exercising more, you feel hungry more often and faster, making it easier to cheat.
IMO.

Based on an individuals preference. It can vary from person to person, but in the end it still comes down to burning more calories than you take in no matter if you eat carbs or not. You can cut all the carbs you want out of your diet, but if you are still eating 3000 calories a day of proteins and fats, you are going to have a hard time losing weight.

well when I was on it I lost 60 lbs....and I ate alot......it was ketoacidosis that caused the weight loss.

You mean ketones or being in ketosis. Ketoacidosis is what diabetics have when they have large amounts of ketones, so much more than you would have when just dieting.

martinah4 going to now comment on her inciting things or actually correcting someone to the benefit of everyone is alright?

You seem to be on a quest to cleanse all low-carb threads of unscientific information that favors the low-carb lifestyle. Even though you don't explicitly bash low-carb eating, your posting behavior does demonstrate some kind of agenda. I mean there's alot of nonsense spewed on this forum, so I'm not quite sure why you are so fixated on low-carb threads.

But I don't find it surprising that a member having success with a low-carb lifestyle would want to defend it from false information that makes the lifestyle sound unhealthy, dangerous, or ineffective.

He is bringing factual studies, while others are bringing what they "feel".

That's not the point.

Acg67

People have been doing atkins for how long now??? How can long term effects not be known, BS..

Right cause every study on the diet also tested cognitive function

BMI is inaccurate method, did they use people who had greater than average muscle math? Where any of these athletes, coach potatos, what? BS

Why is BMI used for groups and populations?

^^ part of the study... yet they still claim negative effect on mood in the conclusion..

as usual your reading comprehension is awesome, that was not part of the study but a reference to another study and it was short term, hence this study was designed to evaluate the effects longer term

AntWrig

There is no secret to losing weight. It all boils down to burning more calories than you take in, whether those calories come in carbs, fats, or proteins.

Actually, there is a secret! When you lower your carbs, you usually up your fat and protein. When you eat more fat and protein, you feel full and tend to eat less calories!
Conversely, if you're only tracking your calories and exercising more, you feel hungry more often and faster, making it easier to cheat.
IMO.

Based on an individuals preference. It can vary from person to person, but in the end it still comes down to burning more calories than you take in no matter if you eat carbs or not. You can cut all the carbs you want out of your diet, but if you are still eating 3000 calories a day of proteins and fats, you are going to have a hard time losing weight.

well when I was on it I lost 60 lbs....and I ate alot......it was ketoacidosis that caused the weight loss.

You mean ketones or being in ketosis. Ketoacidosis is what diabetics have when they have large amounts of ketones, so much more than you would have when just dieting.

martinah4 going to now comment on her inciting things or actually correcting someone to the benefit of everyone is alright?

You seem to be on a quest to cleanse all low-carb threads of unscientific information that favors the low-carb lifestyle. Even though you don't explicitly bash low-carb eating, your posting behavior does demonstrate some kind of agenda. I mean there's alot of nonsense spewed on this forum, so I'm not quite sure why you are so fixated on low-carb threads.

But I don't find it surprising that a member having success with a low-carb lifestyle would want to defend it from false information that makes the lifestyle sound unhealthy, dangerous, or ineffective.

He is bringing factual studies, while others are bringing what they "feel".

Isn't it in most cases how we feel more important than what anyone tells us?

That is not all ways the case.

I may "feel" great eating 500 calories a day. However science tells us that is foolish and will hurt in the long run.

Acg67

You seem to be on a quest to cleanse all low-carb threads of unscientific information that favors the low-carb lifestyle. Even though you don't explicitly bash low-carb eating, your posting behavior does demonstrate some kind of agenda. I mean there's alot of nonsense spewed on this forum, so I'm not quite sure why you are so fixated on low-carb threads.

Yup I never ever post in other threads, esp not ones on meal frequency, supplements, sugar or anything else.

But I don't find it surprising that a member having success with a low-carb lifestyle would want to defend it from false information that makes the lifestyle sound unhealthy, dangerous, or ineffective.

But what is the difference between correcting a low carber vs a low carber correcting someone else, why is one considered inciting?

suziecue66

I don't think you ever have to go 20g carbs. Yes it's only meant to be for 2 weeks induction but human nature has you wanting to do it to goal,, hoping for fast weight loss. When you do up the carbs you feel miserable as scale goes up, you know it's water weight but you're still not happy. It causes you to see fruit and starchy veggies as bad.
If you can keep it to no less than 75g carb I think you would fare better. If you are 20g low carb some of the week and higher carb other days I think that would work too.

RonSwanson66

On this one, everything i said to acg's study, applies to this one... and what where the sexes of these canidates??

Try reading the full text. The answers are in there.

You're a student. You should have access to full-text articles through your university library.

Or don't you know how to do research?

Acg67

People have been doing atkins for how long now??? How can long term effects not be known, BS..

Right cause every study on the diet also tested cognitive function

BMI is inaccurate method, did they use people who had greater than average muscle math? Where any of these athletes, coach potatos, what? BS

Why is BMI used for groups and populations?

^^ part of the study... yet they still claim negative effect on mood in the conclusion..

as usual your reading comprehension is awesome, that was not part of the study but a reference to another study and it was short term, hence this study was designed to evaluate the effects longer term

So you're saying that's the only one that tested cognitive function in how many years? Is 1yr long enough to even jump to a conclusions? Yeah why is BMI even used? beats me.

Yes it was in reference to another study, which was addressed in the original study. Did they use the same people in the rest of the studies? More than likely not.

You really can't be this dense

scottc561

I started the Atkins diet two days ago and I got on the scale today and it says I lost 2 pounds in two days!

I didn't read the wall of text in this thread so not sure if this was covered or not. Those 2lbs you lost is pure water, plain and simple. When you cut out carbs you lose water weight almost immediately. Even if you stopped eating for 2days you would not lose 2lbs of fat at your size. (unless you sat on the treadmill all day). This is a very heated topic so I'm done, but if you would like to read some interesting info on atkins go here.

http://www.leangains.com/search/label/Low Carb Diets

RonSwanson66

So you're saying that's the only one that tested cognitive function in how many years? Is 1yr long enough to even jump to a conclusions?

Learn to read:

"Further studies are required to evaluate the effects of these diets on a wider range of cognitive domains."

^^That doesn't sound like jumping to conclusions to me^^^

Yeah why is BMI even used? beats me.

Because it correlates well with body fat percentage in populations.

Yes it was in reference to another study, which was addressed in the original study. Did they use the same people in the rest of the studies? More than likely not.

grinch031

You seem to be on a quest to cleanse all low-carb threads of unscientific information that favors the low-carb lifestyle. Even though you don't explicitly bash low-carb eating, your posting behavior does demonstrate some kind of agenda. I mean there's alot of nonsense spewed on this forum, so I'm not quite sure why you are so fixated on low-carb threads.

Yup I never ever post in other threads, esp not ones on meal frequency, supplements, sugar or anything else.

But I don't find it surprising that a member having success with a low-carb lifestyle would want to defend it from false information that makes the lifestyle sound unhealthy, dangerous, or ineffective.

But what is the difference between correcting a low carber vs a low carber correcting someone else, why is one considered inciting?

No I know you post in other threads, but you rarely let a low-carb thread slip through the cracks.

And the problem I think is that some of your posts on low-carb threads lack tact. Its one thing to be on another thread and someone brings up low-carb dieting and you whip out your arsenal of studies. Or I think the Paleo thread you created was an appropriate place, but I don't consider it appropriate to just hijack a low-carb newbie's thread with scientific studies every time. That's all.

RonSwanson66

On this one, everything i said to acg's study, applies to this one... and what where the sexes of these canidates??

Try reading the full text. The answers are in there.

You're a student. You should have access to full-text articles through your university library.

Or don't you know how to do research?

Research for what?

The question you JUST ASKED.

Yet i don't buy in to most studies.

Because you lack the ability to comprehend them.

megsmom2

I did Atkins a few years ago...and it worked really well for me. However, it just wasn't something I could stay on forever. I like bread and pasta and all that stuff. I felt good, and as long as I was giving it ALL my attention, I could stay on it. But.....I have other things to think about!!! I think it can be healthy, and for some folks, becomes a way of life. What it did for me is make me more aware of where my macros are, and I guess that's still a good thing to be aware of.

RonSwanson66

So you're saying that's the only one that tested cognitive function in how many years? Is 1yr long enough to even jump to a conclusions?

Learn to read:

"Further studies are required to evaluate the effects of these diets on a wider range of cognitive domains."

^^That doesn't sound like jumping to conclusions to me^^^

Yeah why is BMI even used? beats me.

Because it correlates well with body fat percentage in populations.

Yes it was in reference to another study, which was addressed in the original study. Did they use the same people in the rest of the studies? More than likely not.

haha... ""Further studies are required to evaluate the effects of these diets on a wider range of cognitive domains." come on... Why would you guys even post this then?

Science is the process of expanding the body of knowledge. Each study contributes to it (some to a greater extent than others), but it's NEVER settled.

How can you knot know this.

BMI, depends... people who work out or not, what % of those people worked out? they can easily have a higher BMI, due to excess muscle mass.

This is why BMI is effective in POPULATIONS. The percentage of people with high BMI but low bodyfat is small.

RonSwanson66

Maybe i comprehend them so well, and i conclude them to be BS, like the ones you guys posted. Yet you guys still buy in to them. You're just out of your league ron, you remind me of this.

You conclude them to BS without actually reading them -- which is obvious when you ask questions that are answered in the full-text of the studies.

Not really speaking well for your academic prowess.

RonSwanson66

Maybe i comprehend them so well, and i conclude them to be BS, like the ones you guys posted. Yet you guys still buy in to them. You're just out of your league ron, you remind me of this.

You conclude them to BS without actually reading them -- which is obvious when you ask questions that are answered in the full-text of the studies.

Not really speaking well for your academic prowess.

So you're saying those studies aren't bs?

Read the ENTIRE study, and then come back and tell us what, specifically, is wrong with them. Then tell us how they could be improved.

ALL studies have limitations. Individually, they only give a piece of the puzzle. But taken as a whole, they begin to reveal the entire picture.

This is what you clearly don't get.

RonSwanson66

No you have it backwards Ron, it's what YOU don't get. If a system of multiple variables is used to solive an equation, yet one variable isn't complete. Can the equation be solved? No, once again BS.

You're naivete about mathematics is just as bad is your understanding of science.

Any sufficiently complex system is incomplete. Godel proved it over 80 years ago.

RonSwanson66

No you have it backwards Ron, it's what YOU don't get. If a system of multiple variables is used to solive an equation, yet one variable isn't complete. Can the equation be solved? No, once again BS.

You're naivete about mathematics is just as bad is your understanding of science.

Any sufficiently complex system is incomplete. Godel proved it over 80 years ago.

Yes any complex system is incomplete. I didn't have to study math as long as you did, and it didn't take me 80yrs to come to that conclusion either. How long did it take me? 5mins... your logic saddens me.

Does light bend around you?