Originally Posted by KimberlyP:
I know exactly what you're going through! A few years ago I did the Atkins Diet and lost almost 50lbs only to gain it back because I couldn't live without carbs. When I discovered Weight Watchers I was terrified to eat carbs because plans like SB and Atkins teach people that carbs are evil and will only make you gain weight!

That's not at all what SB and Atkins teach. Both plans involve adding carbs back in gradually to whatever point the individual finds themselves able to maintain a healthy weight. Neither plan "forbids" anything for life, they both hold the individual accountable for determining the best carb-level for themeselves. They both only limit carbs severely for 2 weeks and then you start adding carb-foods back in - the lower GI and slower digested carbs first, and more concentrated sources of carbs afterward.

Both diets list foods to "limit or eat sparingly." But people tend to ignore the moderation advice and interpret the plans as more severely limiting than they are. "Eat occasionally" somehow becomes "don't ever under any circumstances eat or you'll be doomed forever." I don't know why it happens, but it does. For example corn is not forbidden or banned from South Beach, because there is no forbidden or banned list. However people like to invent banned and forbidden lists so they say that "South Beach says corn is evil," "Atkins forbids fruit."

People also criticise Atkins for being "too low," but Atkins never gives a maximum carb level. You keep adding carbs 5g per week until you stop losing (called the ACE = Atkins Carbohydrate Equilibrium). There is no upper limit stated. I believe the author does state the carb level at which most of his patients found their ACE (I don't remember what that was), but there is no upper limit.

South Beach does the same, only there is no counting of carbs, but higher-carb foods are reintroduced systematically also.

There are legitimate and true reasons for not choosing Atkins or SB, but teaching that carbs "evil" is not one of them. I'm not on SB and Atkins for several reasons, the most important to me was that I didn't want to follow a plan that has "stages" because it puts me in a weird "magic" mindset in which I think if I make a mistake in one stage, I can't move on to the next stage until I'm "perfect" at the previous stage. But, that's my issue not the plan.

You may never want to limit carbs, and if you can pull that off, that's great. Unfortunately I can't. Calorie-counting without controlling carbs tends to leave me hungrier and I don't lose as well on 1800 calories of anything compared to 1800 calories of low-carb. That doesn't mean that I or anyone else who advocates low-carb believes that carbs are "evil."

I don't think everyone has to follow a low-carb plan to lose weight, but many of us do, and making false accusations make it very difficult to find the right plan. I didn't give low-carb a fair shot, because I assumed they all were "can't ever eat a potato" plan, and since my doctor recommended low-carb, I haven't found a single low-carb plan that was nearly as strictly low-carb as low-carb plans are criticised for.