Atkin's Diet

[Munkay]

Being a generally fit college student on the verge of 20, I spend a good part of my week destressing in the gym lifting weights and doing cardio work. I attempt to eat the best I can (oh boy is it hard to not heed the call of that beautiful double cheeseburger) and look out for my health the best I can. I try to read up online about nutrition for my own ends, but also to try to field some questions people ask. Do any activity long enough to get noticed, sports, computer games, walking backwards, and people start asking for opinions or advice. I always attempt to give the best answers I can.

I had heard hersay about the negative effects of Atkin's Diet, and decided to read up on both the positive and the negative sides to Atkins tonight.

The basic idea behind Atkins is:

The Atkins diet recommends a limit of 20g of carbohydrate each day for the initial 14-day induction phase. This is a very small amount; for example a banana contains about 22g ... The next phase is the ongoing weight-loss phase which allows about 40g of carbohydrate a day ... When a target weight is reached, dieters slightly increase their intake of carbohydrate until their weight stabilises, but the diet recommends not going over 90g of carbohydrate a day. -BBC

The negative aspect can be seen here:

Sponsored by the National Institutes of Health, a study done by Althea Zanecosky, RD, advises moderation when applying the Atkins diet principle.

"The body needs a certain amount of carbohydrate every day for the brain to function and the super high protein diets really don't meet the minimum quota," Zanecosky said. "Studies have shown that the average adult needs about 400 calories worth of carbohydrate a day. Four hundred calories is a hundred grams." Link

I got a bit scared and searched deeper to find something retaining to the diet other than weightloss, that would account for the *general good health of Atkin's Dieters (*this is biased by my opinion, for I've never seen any friends on the Atkin's Diet have negative health results from the diet). This is what I found:

Layman [a professor of nutrition at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign] and his colleagues put 24 overweight women who were 45 to 56 years old on a diet of 1,700 calories a day...

The other group ate more protein and fewer carbs...

After 10 weeks, both sets of women lost about the same amount of weight, about 16 pounds. Howewver, the women on the higher protein diet lost more fat and less muscle...

Layman attributes his results in part to leucine, an amino acid that previous research has shown regulates muscle. Meat, poultry, fish, eggs and dairy products are rich in leucine, he says. - Link

The obvious solution seems to be a bit more carbs with lots of protein rich in leucine, but I'm not the one with the PHD.

What do you lurkers think? Anyone a devote Atkin's Diet-er?

For a young guy I've been told I'm old fashioned; I've always beleived in moderation and exercise. Go figure.

Just thought I'd post on my readings and inform a group that's been so helpful in informing me on other issues. :D

-Munk

[Griselda]

In my not-very-informed opinion, I think the reason that the low-carb diets work is that most junk foods are primarily carbohydrates. So, people on low-carb diets have more motivation to avoid snacking. You have to be really hungry to grab a bun-free hot dog or something when you're just looking for a snack.

Low carb is just an empty phrase now anyway. I bet that most people who buy "low carb" stuff don't even know that it stands for carbohydrate, or what a carbohydrate is.

Of course, as a vegetarian, I haven't tried any low-carb diets. I'd be reduced to a cheese-and-broccoli diet! Does that sound healthy to you? :unsure:

[Artega]

Fatkins died from his own diet.

Weight Watchers, SlimFast, and other similar gimmicks are useless, and expensive.

Excercise and moderation have worked since the dawn of time (or, rather, since the dawn of the point when people had enough surplus food for obesity to become a national problem), and they'll always work.

Limit the AMOUNT you eat, and try to eat healthier, too. If you still can't stay away from the cheeseburgers and fries, do yourself a favor and take a multivitamin every day. Multivitamins aren't substitutes for eating good stuff like leafy green veggies, fruits, and other healthy-foods, but they certainly help.

Get at least thirty minutes of aerobic excercise (walking, jogging, running, swimming, hell, even jumping) at least five times a week. Do resistance-training (weight-lifting and such) if you want to build or tone muscle mass.

Frankly, the Fatkins diet doesn't make sense, in some ways. Will it make you lose weight? Definitely. Carbohydrates are used as energy; if your body takes in unneeded energy, it stores it. The energy stores are fat. If you deprive your body of carbohydrates (energy), it will tap into its reserves (fat) to compensate. The problem is that rapid fat-loss (and the subsequent weight loss) can lead to ketones, gall stones, and possibly even kidney stones - of course, any kind of rapid weight-loss (including starvation) can do that. With the Fatkins diet, you're literally starving your body of energy, forcing it to tap into its reserves to make up for the lack. The only difference is that, unlike fasting, your body won't go psycho to rebuild the lost stores once you start eating normally again.

I've looked at "Atkins-Approved" stuff (which is ridiculously expensive, by the way), and it's horrifically high in fats, saturated fats, cholesterol, and proteins. Fatkins died from his own diet.

[Munkay]

Of course, as a vegetarian, I haven't tried any low-carb diets.  I'd be reduced to a cheese-and-broccoli diet!  Does that sound healthy to you?  :unsure:

Cheese and Broccoli are two mighty fine snacks! Although not a vegetarian, Its hard to think of any situation where I don't eat meat with complimentry carbs. So 'going low carb' would put me in the same boat as you.

Ever thought of starting a joint venture, writing a book, and eating a whole lotta broccoli and cheese? :lol:

-Munk
Edit: Its late and I'm starting to mix up my own words! Fixed some mistakes.

[Nystul]

My brother (closing in on age 40) runs local 5k, 10k, and triathlon races. He carbo-loads (and has since childhood really... he used to eat his breakfast cereal out of a mixing bowl). Ironically, his wife has used the low carb, high protein diet. It seems like they've both been happy with the results of this little Jack Sprat exercise.

I certainly have no expertise in the dietary field. Personally, I can't fathom the low carb diet. To me it just seems plain wrong. To me it seems to be saying "We know you are too lazy to get off your butt and exercise, ever again, so there is really no point in filling your tummy with carbs." But perhaps that is the reality of the situation, that the carbs simply aren't needed because the people on the diet are neither bluecollar workers nor recreational athletes.

Here is my observation about diets: the rules *always* change but one rule stays the same. That's the one you seem to go by; that if you eat a balanced diet in moderate portions and get plenty of exercise it tends to work out. I think that one is the safe bet, and is the only dietary advice I'd feel confident giving other than "Go see a doctor."

There is one more safe bet. Much like my brother, all the health advice in the world wouldn't be enough to keep me away from bread, pasta, and donuts. Mind you, a nice high-protein steak isn't something I'd pass up either!

[Freepaperclips]

And besides, what would I do without butter-fried bread?!

Really, what it comes down to is genes: I eat fry bread or steaks or chops every couple days; I love Philly cheese-steaks and fries, but no matter what I eat I stay in good shape and burn it all off.

On the other hand, I know plenty of people who diet and work out every day and can't manage to get in shape.

It's easy to say "Hey, you just need to exercise more and eat less," but life really doesn't work like that and it sucks for those who don't have a great metablolism.

Note: I'm not saying moderate diet and exercise don't help, just that body types are hard to break out of.

[Munkay]

My brother (closing in on age 40) runs local 5k, 10k, and triathlon races.  He carbo-loads (and has since childhood really... he used to eat his breakfast cereal out of a mixing bowl).

Reminded me of a funny thing I read in a Runners World magazine. The man who holds the record for most marathons (I beleive its close to 500) ran in a lifetime has the same pre-race diet. A donut and some coffee. :lol:

all the health advice in the world wouldn't be enough to keep me away from bread, pasta, and donuts. Mind you, a nice high-protein steak isn't something I'd pass up either!

Behold the glory of moderation. Extremes never worked for me. I'm with you, I'll always sneak in a good ol' greasy snack here and there. :)

-Munk

[Little Faith]

Personally, I can't fathom the low carb diet.  To me it just seems plain wrong.

I find the Atkins diet plain wrong from another perspective.

All those lovely carbohydrates are one of the prime reasons why we can afford to have so many humans running around.


..and proteins are not really meant to be used as mere fuel.

Sure there are fats but what does your slim thighs matter with your bloated blood vessels slowly choking you from inside.

[[wcip]Angel]

I really don't know much about the human body, except that each person has a different metabolism (as freepaperclips pointed out) and that people will react differently to eating and exercising.

Seeing as this thread is all about exercise, and we have all these knowledgable people here, may I ask a question?

I haven't exercised in 3 years. After I quit high school there were no mandatory gym lessons to keep me in relative shape. I'm 21 years old, 1.70m tall (5.5 feet), I way a bit over 65kg (143 pounds) (converter) and I want to flatten my stomach. I've come to a place where I can still appear as thin as I was 5 years ago if I wear a loose shirt, but if I tuck it in, (and if I don't hold my breath :)), people might notice a small tire around the waist.

My question is three-fold

1. How should I go about flattening my stomach?
2. Do sit-ups work at all?
3. If so, what is the correct way of doing sit-ups? I've researched it a bit online, but it seems for every doctor or expert I find, there's another way of doing sit-ups. I've heard that if you do them wrong (lift your upper body all the way to your knees) you can do more damage to your back than you're helping your stomach.)

I've also heard that running regularly, eating less, and eating right will also help me shed some weight. Is this correct?

Sorry for the thread-highjack, but I don't think we need two threads on the same subject.

[--Pete]

Hi,

No expert, but until a few years ago I was able to maintain a semblance of athleticism.

1. How should I go about flattening my stomach?

If the problem is muscle tone, then crunches work -- Google it. If the problem is excess fat, then no exercise alone will fix it, you've got to lose fat. Not weight. You can lose fat by losing weight, but it is even better to lose fat by replacing it with muscle.

2. Do sit-ups work at all?

For the stomach? No. They can do a pretty good job of hurting your back.

3. If so, what is the correct way of doing sit-ups?

If you do partial sit ups (not coming up beyond 45 degrees or so, they do some good with little back strain. But crunches are still better.

I've also heard that running regularly, eating less, and eating right will also help me shed some weight. Is this correct?

Well, yeah. The eating right part is pretty essential for overall good health. The quantity you need to eat depends on *your* metabolism. However, there are some pretty good general guides by age, weight, height and life style. From what you say, sounds like you're pretty sedate, so I'd guess somewhere around 1400 to 1600 calories (nutritional calories, i.e., kilo-calories) a day. But, again, Google it.

Exercise helps three ways. First, it burns calories directly. About 65 calories per km (and the amazing thing is that that number is relatively constant if you walk, jog, run, or even swim). Second, the muscle mass developed from exercise burns more calories. It raises your basal metabolic rate, so that you can actually "diet" and be eating more. Third, it is (after a while) both fun and addicting. Which is good, considering the other beneficial effects.

--Pete

[kandrathe]

I've never been food oriented. In fact, many times I find people around me reminding me to eat a meal. I do take a daily multivitamin, and some other supplements.

I think one problem with a human diet is that we get used to eating a particular way when our metabolism is very high, but as we age both our activity levels and our caloric needs both decrease.

But, of course, diet alone does not make a body fit. So I am in Angel's category of searching for time and motivation for fitness. Recently I saw a bit on the local news comparing a couple of different work outs. Both were designed for people with very little time, and no need for a professional gym.

The Power of 10

The other was a daily 20-30 minute traditional cardio workout just getting the pulse into the target range and then maintaining that elevated pulse for 15 minutes.

I've always been more of a weight lifter than a runner, so the first one is more appealing to me.

When I was in my early to mid 20's I was very focused on trying to maintain almost zero body fat. And, being a stereotypical computer geek I graduated from high school all of about 65 Kilograms. I wanted to bulk up a bit and as chance would have it in my freshman year at the University I ended up on the dorm floor with a large portion of the football team. So, over the next two years working out with the footballers I added 25 Kg of muscle mass.

The way I did it then was by following a body builders regime ala. Joe Wieder, by working out every day. Upper body one day, lower body the next, etc. I focused on weight lifting mostly. One day a week I would do cardio only. My diet at that time was very strict. No fats. Limited carbohydrate portions. As many proteins, and vegetables as you wanted (sans fats). So meats like skinless chicken breasts, and other lean meats were preferred.

Seems to me that Atkins works because if you take away carbs, what is left is meats, fruits and vegetables. All of which the body craves in limited quantities, or provide so much more bulk per calorie that you can only eat a limited amount at a time.

[LemmingofGlory]

Low carb is just an empty phrase now anyway. I bet that most people who buy "low carb" stuff don't even know that it stands for carbohydrate, or what a carbohydrate is.

"Low carb" is the new "low fat." It makes people think they can eat it without feeling guilty about eating it. It makes them think they can eat as much of it as they want. And it's silly because they slap "low carb" labels on things as if they did something to the product to make it that way. "Low carb pork rinds"? Give me a break. Pork rinds have always been low in carbohydrates, but now companies have a new marketing gimmick. Advertising makes me ill.

Myself, I cut out foods that encourage me to eat. Cereal, waffles, and pancakes I can eat serving after serving and be hungry a half hour later. Chips are right out; I can't eat just one. Sugar's terrible. Not only does sugar stick to the teeth and leave a strong, unpleasant aftertaste, it's real easy to want more of it.

Unfortuantely, I've had lifelong allergies to fresh fruits and veggies, so I've never been able to each much of them unless they were cooked or canned first. And even when they are prepared, I avoid eating them if I have to leave the house. Vegetation is a natural laxative (sometimes to the extent of diarrhea) that works on me in ~2 hours time. So, I have to be careful about what time of day I ingest vegetation, but otherwise I've no problem with eating it.

Meats are good because I don't have to eat much to not want to eat anymore. So, when it's feasible, I work in some vegetation, dairy, or whatever to go with.

Now, when I go out to eat, all bets are off. Dieters who try to maintain their diets in resturants don't make sense to me. You're eating out. Enjoy it, dammit! But I only eat out maybe four times a year, so maybe it's a bigger deal for me.

-Lemmy

[Munkay]

Adding a similar perspective than Pete, six pack abs are more diet than anything. You can bulk those muscles as big as they can get, but as long as there's a decent layer of fat over them (there will always be a bit) six pack abs stay a dream. Working out abs without knocking away the fat can actually make the stomach appear larger, since the fat over the muscles smooths and rounds the stomach.

Fat burning cardio and eating better (or less, depending on current diet) are keys to abs. 'Fat burning cardio' is sort of an ambiguous answer, the two that have always worked the best for me is running and swimming. Swimming is probably one of the best exercises possible. Very low impact on the joints, intense fat burning over the entire body, and great toning of every major muscle group. Find whatever cardio works best. The key is to find one you can stick to, 5 times a week for a half an hour or more.

Finally, sit ups do work out your abs. Just not so well. From what I have read, during a sit up, after the initial 45 degree incline, the Iliopsoas muscle group takes over. This is what is also called the "Hip Flexor." You can see it in action when you sit down, if you bring your leg up (your thigh towards your stomach) and watch your abs, they don't do anything but sit there. The hip flexors that are under your abs lift up your leg. This are very important in general fitness, but definately won't give six pack abs. This is why the idea of the crunch took off.

I personally hate crunches, and have a weak lower back that always hurts after situps/crunches. So instead I do two different types of ab work outs. Hanging Leg Raises (link (I love the pictures) or the kneeling crunch link. But these generally involve having to go to a gym (which in most places prices have gone far down). If trying the hanging leg raise, make sure the legs are brought up and a "crunch" is made, or else the hip flexors will be the only thing being worked out. The abs are like any other muscle in your body, so its possible to weight train them, using more than your upper body weight, which I personally enjoy much more. 30 reps of anything tuckers me out :P

-Munk

Oh, please note the site I linked to is merely a catalog of current exercises that are generally accepted, and won't tell you what is 'best.' As always, doctors or personal trainers are always much better than silly websites!

[[wcip]Angel]

If the problem is muscle tone, then crunches work -- Google it.  If the problem is excess fat, then no exercise alone will fix it, you've got to lose fat.  Not weight.  You can lose fat by losing weight, but it is even better to lose fat by replacing it with muscle.

1. What is a "crunch" compared to a sit-up?

2. Are crunches the best way of turning fat into muscle? If not, are there other ways to accomplish this?

[Munkay]

Read up ^ :lol:

[Jeger]

I certainly have no expertise in the dietary field. Personally, I can't fathom the low carb diet. To me it just seems plain wrong. To me it seems to be saying "We know you are too lazy to get off your butt and exercise, ever again, so there is really no point in filling your tummy with carbs."

Well, here is my take. I am 51 years old, and still exercise, but the amount is greatly cut down due to two knee surgeries. The days of running marathons, and playing basketball all day are unfortunately way behind me. I tried cutting down on what I ate, to the point where it was ridiculous. However, most of what I ate was carbs, and I still gained weight.

I am now on the South Beach diet, which tries to keep your insulin levels low by restricting your "bad" carb intake. I now eat way more than I did before, and I still lose weight. I am sold on the concept.

LOL on " too lazy to get off your butt" wait until you put on 30 years and come back and say that. :P

[Nystul]

LOL on " too lazy to get off your butt" wait until you put on 30 years and come back and say that.

Shoot, if I'm alive to see 60 I probably will be too lazy to get off my butt too. But at that age nothing short of a health crisis will keep me from eating whatever I want whenever I want! Come to think of it, I have that attitude already. Being too broke to buy massive quantities of food and too lazy to cook meat and potatoes have probably done as much for my slim profile as my daily grind at work :)

[DeeBye]

I've been on a reverse diet for the last 15 years. It's not going too well though. I've only gained 10 pounds.

I've always been skinny. When I was a teenager, my father encouraged me to eat sticks of butter. I always figured it would be something I'd grow out of and that one day I'd have to stop eating whatever I wanted. Well, I recently turned 30 and I can still eat whatever the hell I want without gaining an ounce.

People always tell me to just eat more, and I do. I eat a lot of food throughout the day. I just have the ability to burn off the calories instantly. My only explanation is that I'm fidgety. My body is always in constant motion. I'm the annoying guy who sits on a couch and constantly taps his foot on the floor. I even do this in my sleep. It's like I'm on permanant speed.

About ten years ago I made a concerted effort to gain weight, so I ate as many incredibly fatty meals as I could. I ate until I felt sick. I was eating twice as much food as a normal person. At the end of the week, I was happy to see that I had gained 5 pounds. The next week, I took it easy and just ate like I normally would. I lost 10 pounds.

I've pretty much given up being so concerned about my weight. I'm tall and skinny, and that's just the way I'll always be.

[Munkay]

About ten years ago I made a concerted effort to gain weight, so I ate as many incredibly fatty meals as I could.  I ate until I felt sick.  I was eating twice as much food as a normal person.  At the end of the week, I was happy to see that I had gained 5 pounds.  The next week, I took it easy and just ate like I normally would.  I lost 10 pounds.

Aigh!

I know the plight of reverse dieting all too well. I've added an extra thousand calories to my diet daily, but with cardio I still do not see a gain in weight. I stuffed myself straight, to the point of bursting. A few months later I gained a pound... I think?

At this point I'm done over stuffing, but still push to eat a little bit more than I normally would. If my destiny is to always be tall and skinny, then that's how I'll be. I'm just trying to keep from losing anymore!

One perk I've found to be amusing is going to the gym and racking my weights on. Sometimes I'll work in with a huge guy who thinks he's a hot shot. I love seeing their expression when my weight is equal, if not more, to what they are doing.

B)

[WarLocke]

I've pretty much given up being so concerned about my weight. I'm tall and skinny, and that's just the way I'll always be.

... I hate you now. :(