quote:
quote:
If refined carbohydrates increase the chance of heart disease, you have to ask yourself why you'd want to go off it. Like I said, it's the way I plan on eating for the rest of my life.
Practically any doctor or nutritionist would approve of going off of refined sugars, processed flour and so on. That's not the same as what Atkins says about carbs.
Semantics. I could just have easily said if carbohydrates increase the chance of heart disease, you have to ask yourself why you divert from an eating lifestyle that excludes them.
True of any diet... That's where exercise comes in.
Not true, that I know of. And without stored glycogen, exercise will cause you to lose
more muscle mass.
I've always lost muscle mass when I've lost weight (and if you look above, you can see I've lost more than you probably weigh). And I've always gained muscle mass when weight training.
These two facts are so self-evident to me. If they're not to you, OPEN YOUR EYES YOU LOUSY COCKSUCKER.
I don't follow what you mean since your next sentence is:
"Neither kind of weight loss" referred to water and muscle loss. They make for weight loss, but not the kind you want.
That's complete horseshit.
Some of the weight loss from the Atkins diet IS due to water loss. It's due to the body using up glycogen stores in the body, which have water associated with them. For each 1 gram of glycogen, the body stores 3 grams of water. Aggressive estimates put this water loss at 7 to 10 pounds.
I've lost 100. Do the math. A high percentage of the weight loss from the Atkins diet comes from loss of fat. Anyone telling you different is blowing smoke up your ass, or doesn't know what the hell they're talking about.
quote:
quote:
Vitamins.
I take vitamins, but I'm not sure I'd call a diet healthy if it requires you take them. There are enough micronutrients in a balanced diet.
You take vitamins yet don't recommend a diet where vitamins are taken? Even ignoring the validity of the vitamin recommendations (brought to us by the same geniuses who gave us the assinine and unhealthy food pyramid, no doubt), and the necessity of taking them during the Atkins diet (recommended, not required. though highly recommended in the induction phase) your do-as-I-say, not-as-I-do attitude make me want to shit velveta.
That's what worries me, is that people think the Atkins diet is an easy way to lose weight. But so far you've said it drives your body into ketosis and requires you to take vitamin supplements. Some critics say it causes you to lose the wrong kind of weight and that it's easily gained back. I don't know if it sounds so easy to me.
The Atkins diet isn't easy at first. It's hard to shop for, hard to cook for, and expensive. Does that make it more credible?
It's easy because your body is doing the work. Ketosis is a completely natural body process. It's not artificial in any way. We've learned how to invoke it, do, and reap the rewards from it.
Die, you fucker.
But seriously, if you're worried about your heart-- I don't think you'd find a member of the American Heart Association's Nutrition Committee who'd go anywhere near this diet.
I have little doubt that current medical opinion holds that the Atkins' diet increases heart disease. It reminds me of the planet Vulcan.
Ever heard of the planet Vulcan? In the late 19th century, it was noticed that Mercury had certain perturbations in its orbit that couldn't be explained. So scientists met (let's say at an underground silo, just for ambience), put their collective egg-shaped heads together and came up with the only possible solution - there must be a planet between Mercury and the Sun. This planet was given the name Vulcan.
And here's the point I want to stress. The scientists were completely correct in doing this. The planet vulcan was the only possible answer that physics predicted. They were making a logical deduction.
Well, about 20 years later, along comes a dick named Einstein and fucks everything up by turning physics on its head with his Theory of Relativity. It's quickly proven that relativity explains away the perturbations in Mercury's orbit, and the idea of a planet Vulcan is dismissed.
So who's the asshole in this story? It's not the relativists - they were right. It's not those predicting planet Vulcan - they acted logically with the information they had available.
No, the assholes were the ones who refused to see the perturbations at all.
12/19/2001 (3 months into the Atkins diet)
--Chem 2, HDL--
Cholesterol = 204; Range: 39 - LOW
LDL Cholesterol, Calc. = 157; Range: 39 - LOW
LDL Cholesterol, Calc. = 127; Range: <130
VLDL Cholesterol = 17; Range: 0-29
Cholesterol/HDL Ratio = 5.0; Range: <5
--Comprehensive Metabolic Panel--
Glucose = 86; Range = 65-109
---
I ate a hooker half a bottle of knife.
