Right. I don't eat beef, poultry, lamb, pork and I'm still able to follow a low-carb diet by getting most of my protein/fat from vegetable sources, some fish, olive oil and dairy. I thought I was "doing it wrong" by not eating meat (despite my results so far) so it's good to read that it not only can be done without meat but it's also recommended.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suzanne 3FC
This was an interesting study, mainly because the low carb group was advised to choose vegetarian sources of fat and protein, which is healthier.
Right. I don't eat beef, poultry, lamb, pork and I'm still able to follow a low-carb diet by getting most of my protein/fat from vegetable sources, some fish, olive oil and dairy. I thought I was "doing it wrong" by not eating meat (despite my results so far) so it's good to read that it not only can be done without meat but it's also recommended.
I got more than adequate protein doing a vegan low carb diet and lost MORE weight than ever and had lots of other benefits to the way of eating too. It's entirely possible to eat a low carb diet and be 100% plant based.
Anyone catch the Today show this morning? They said that this study had quite a few flaws, including the fact that it was funded by the Atkins Foundation and that the lower fat diet didn't lower the fat much at all.
I got more than adequate protein doing a vegan low carb diet and lost MORE weight than ever and had lots of other benefits to the way of eating too. It's entirely possible to eat a low carb diet and be 100% plant based.
We need a thumbs up smiley. But I agree.
ETA: Mamaspank- I didn't catch that. Did they have Dr. Ornish on? There was an article on newsweek.com (I linked it earlier in this thread) that argued those points.
Location: NW New Jersey But, My Heart's In Pittsburgh!! GO STEELERS & PENGUINS!!!
Posts: 3,060
S/C/G: 245/143/145
Quote:
Originally Posted by mamaspank
Anyone catch the Today show this morning? They said that this study had quite a few flaws, including the fact that it was funded by the Atkins Foundation and that the lower fat diet didn't lower the fat much at all.
The study was FUNDED by the Atkins Foundation...however, the actual study itself was not even based on the Atkins diet...it was based on a similar diet (although, if it didn't include meat & it did include vegetarian sources of fat & protein...this is not similar to Atkins!)
And as far as the lower fat diet not lowering fat all that much...that just goes to show you, fat doesn't have to be lowered to cause a person to lose weight
I posted this on another site but thought I'd post it here also
----------------------------------------------------------------
I went to the site and read the report on the three diets. I then sent a comments
to the site asking them to clarify what they meant by eating a vegetarian low
carb diet. The report stated that the first two months of the diet was no more
than twenty carbs a day. I asked how you could stay at twenty carbs eating
vegetarian. I just don't see how that could be done. Now if they had said to eat
the lowest fat meats and cheese and remove all visable fat, I could have understood
that. I asked them to release more info on the details of the diet to the media and
perhaps a two or three day menu. I hope they do explain what they mean.
I thought the amount of weight they lost on all the plans was low, and it does seem that on the actual Atkins diet people generally lose a whole lot more but I'm confused how that actually works, can anyone tell me if at any point on Atkins you do count calories? Because regardless of whether the body is in fat burning mode or carb burning mode I don't understand why the body would begin to burn its own stored fat as fuel if its getting adequate fuel on a daily basis from the food being eaten?
Sorry if this is a totally dumb question, I know I should read the book but I have lost it and not yet replaced it so bear with me
Funding sources aren't necessarily as big a concern as they seem to be. Reputable university/hospital research programs apply for grants to get the money they need for funding, however, they're very careful to do what they can to prevent even the rumor of the funding affecting the outcome of the study. Often the people doing the actual research do not know where the money is coming from. So, just that the study is funded by Atkins would not concern me nearly as much as the reputation of the facility doing the research.
Considering how much vegetables I can eat that barely contribute carbs at all to my diet, I don't think it would be terribly difficult to keep carbs under 20 g without eating meat (especially if you're not "counting" fish as meat - which is still a very common, if incorrect reasoning). Even without fish, there are vegetarian sources of protein that are quite low in carb.
I'm not an expert, as I'm still an omnivore, but I eat a lot less meat than I used to (partially because various concerns with large-scale "factory" meat production, but honestly, mostly because of finances). At any rate, I use quite a few vegetarian low carb products. Tvp (soy protein, in several forms) is quite low carb, and for 60 - 100 calories (depending whether the tvp is flavored, etc) it's the equivalent of 3 to 4 ounces of beef. I'm not vegetarian, but I like that per serving, it's 1/2 the calories of beef (or less) and 1/3 the price. So any time a recipe calls for ground beef, I either use tvp or use my own mixture of tvp and ground meat (I used to use 1 lb of ground beef to 1 cup of dry tvp - this is about a 50/50 split, but now I use more tvp about 1 lb of tvp to 1/2 lb of ground beef and 1/2 lb of ground chicken along with onion, celery, bell pepper and garlic. I then freeze it and smush the bag every few minutes until it's frozen, so I can scoop out what I need to make quick recipes with).
I'm not following Atkins, but I know the plan pretty well. I'm not limiting my carbs to 20g. I aim for under 100g and feel ok about a day that is under 150g. I've had days as low as 40, but if I consistently eat fewer than 60g, I lose weight much more quickly, but experience headaches, light headedness, and severe irritability. So a moderate approach works much better for me, but what I'm doing isn't incompatible with Atkins, I just didn't do induction and take 16 or more weeks to get here (because after you're done with induction you can add 5g of carbs per week so long as you're still comfortable with the rate you're losing). It's interesting to note that a person following Atkins in OWL (ongoing weight loss) should be eating more than 20 g of carbs, but Atkins never says how many carbs it should be. The person can keep adding carbs, basically until they stop losing weight, and then back up to the carb level that allows them to continue to lose weight. Atkins never tells the person where to stop, so a person could theoretically be eating what I do, that is 100 or more carbs per day and could still be following Atkins as it is laid out in the books. Also while Atkins tells you the foods you are allowed to eat, it does not tell you what you HAVE to eat, so a person on Atkins does not have to ever have cheese, beef, pork, or bacon if they do not want to. There are plenty of other things they can eat.
A completely vegan diet, I would guess would be extremely challenging (at least for me, for someone already a vegan, it might be a breeze, I don't know). Still, I'd hardly declare it impossible, just from knowing what I do about what I eat. I bet that I could keep my carb count very low and eat vegetarian if not vegan. It would just take a LOT more work.
Quoting mimzy: I thought the amount of weight they lost on all the plans was low, and it does seem that on the actual Atkins diet people generally lose a whole lot more but I'm confused how that actually works, can anyone tell me if at any point on Atkins you do count calories? Because regardless of whether the body is in fat burning mode or carb burning mode I don't understand why the body would begin to burn its own stored fat as fuel if its getting adequate fuel on a daily basis from the food being eaten?
__________________________________________________ ________
mimzy,
I think I can help a bit. The amounts lost in these studies are always very low, because overall, diet compliance is very low. Getting people to go on a diet is easy, getting them to stay on one, is difficult (even when you call it a lifestyle change). People revert to old behaviors very easily, so in any group, only a few are going to be successful. While the average may have been 5 lbs, the real fact is that some people lost nothing, some gained, and some lost a lot.
On Atkins, you're never supposed to have to count calories. The idea is that when you're eating according to plan, hunger will regulate your food needs, and you won't have to count calories.
I'm not sure this is true for everyone. I think for people with compulsive eating issues, or (like me) have wonky hunger signals that counting carbs sometimes isn't enough. Although Atkins is clear that you're not to eat as much steak (for example) as you are able to stuff into your stomach without upchucking. You're only supposed to eat until you are just satisfied (what most of us think of as "full" is probably too much).
Since my hunger control system doesn't work right (if I'm eating too many carbs, I'm always hungry, and if I'm eating very low carb, I don't even get hungry and I certainly don't know what satisfied but not "full" is), I use a back up plan of an exchange plan. Though I do know many low carbers who have lost and maintained without counting a single calorie - or even carb, they just followed some basic guidelines in avoiding foods with significant starch/sugar content.
Sorry didn't mean to come across as if it was directed at you, it was more just a general statement after listening to the news report and hearing the female reporter Ann Curry say, "We're not talking talking about the Atkins diet that involves bacon, cheese and steak. so what exactly are we talking about?"
I just seem to be having one of those days where every post I write comes out wrong and offends someone. Sorry if it did.
I see. Yeah, I can see where Ann Curry's statements would have set you on edge!
I agree that it's not a good study really. I can't imagine Atkins without eggs?? It's annoying that they can't just do an honest study and let us know if the eggs will become an issue. I was so disappointed when I read the article.....10 lbs in 2 years is just depressing. Why would you go without and make such huge changes in your diet if you would only lose from 6.5 to 10 lbs in 2 years?
On Atkins I've lost 26 lbs in 4 months......and I'm sure if I just stay to his instructions I'll lose the other 22 I need to remove before the year is up. (wishful thinking? I hope not!)
In all honesty, I have tried Atkins and I have done the low-fat thing. The low-fat thing is what works for me. I was never able to lose more than seven or eight pounds with Atkins. I was very loyal to the diet, but I felt like I was missing out on a lot of food. I thought that it was interesting that when they brought up the topic on the Today show that the doctor made it a point to say who the study was funded by. Usually they just mention it and move on. Just thought I would counter one doctor's viewpoint with another.
I think it is great that you have found success with Atkins. I have a couple friends that love they way they feel on it.
Thank you for explaining that, I can see how that would work. When I think about it, because I was always hungry when I was eating starchy carbs I was eating at least three times what I actually needed, whereas on Atkins there's no way I'd be hungry enough to eat too much. So I guess there is a calorie deficit but the difference is you don't have to worry about counting the calories because you will naturally end up eating the amount that's right. I get it now!
