Atkins Diet Has Long-Term Dangers, Researchers Warn

[CVX]

By Jeremy Laurance
Health Editor
The Independent - UK
9-2-4

The pounds may fall off in the first few months but the Atkins diet does not help people lose weight in the long term and it may be dangerous, according to a scientific review of research.

More than 45 million copies of the Atkins diet books have been sold which recommend unlimited consumption of butter, fatty meat and high-fat dairy products while carbohydrate intake is restricted to under 30g (1oz) a day, equivalent to a small potato.

People who follow the diet do lose weight more quickly than on standard diets, but the weight loss is not sustained. Studies of the diet in obese men and women showed that they lost up to 4.6kg (10.1lb) more over six months than those who followed conventional low-calorie, low-fat diets. But by 12 months there was no significant difference between the two groups.

Danish researchers who conducted the review, published in The Lancet, say the diet may be safe to use in the short term - up to six months - but that side-effects were more worrying in the long term.

Arne Astrup, of the Centre of Advanced Food Research in Copenhagen, who led the study, said: "Our conclusion is a little more liberal than the conventional medical view that the Atkins diet is bad for you. In the short term the diet is producing a weight loss and it is not just fluid loss - there is a loss of fat. At the same time it is producing a beneficial effect on the blood in terms of blood pressure, blood sugar and cholesterol levels.

"All the complications of being overweight look better on the Atkins diet and we have no real reason to say that it should not be used in the short term for a couple of months."

The likely reason for its success in promoting weight loss was that the diet restricted food choices, in common with many other diets, and that protein was better at satisfying hunger than fat.

Professor Astrup stressed that there was little scientifically robust evidence on the effects of the diet and new research could reveal hidden risks. Few studies have looked at long-term risks. Those that had been conducted showed people tended to regain their lost weight after one year and were more likely to complain of side-effects.

Professor Astrup said: "They start to suffer headaches, muscle cramps and diarrhoea. This is consistent with a carbohydrate deficiency. They simply do not get enough carbohydrate to supply the tissues with blood sugar. That is why the organs start to malfunction." The minimum daily requirement of carbohydrate for an adult is 150g a day. On the Atkins diet, carbohydrate intake is restricted to one fifth of that level.

The researchers conclude that the lack of long-term studies means the diet cannot be recommended. They say restricting the intake of whole grain bread and cereals, fruit and vegetables does not equal a healthy diet and the absence of these food groups may increase the risk of heart disease and cancer. "There is no clear evidence that Atkins-style diets are better than any others for helping people stay slim. Although the diet appears to promote weight loss without hunger, at least in the short term, the long-term effects on health and disease prevention are unknown."

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/hea...p?story=557740

[anastrophe]

blah blah blah. the same old tired arguments, without any actual data to back it up. just 'it seems to suggest'. or 'in the long term it might'. blah blah blah.

what's particularly galling is the mention of a 'minimum daily requirement of carbohydrate for an adult is 150g a day'. exsqueeze me? there is no such requirement, at all. there is *no dietary requirement for carbohydrates*. you can completely eliminate carbohydrates from your diet, and you won't die, and you won't suffer from a deficiency for it. it is quite fantastical that they suggest that there is such a dietary requirement.

classic scare mongering. "new research could reveal hidden risks". well duh! just as new research could reveal hidden benefits! adding that sentence provides no scientific evidence, and is purely pandering to fear.

junk science. discard. next!

[capt_buzzard]

I call these Fads,all these diets. Some guy's are rakeing in the dollars thinking up new idea's I for one do not go for all of these Junk adds,fads,call them what you like.

We have alway's eat well here and then took long walks afterwards. What did our Grandparents do without these fad diets. They worked off the fat and there was no high tech gyms in those days.


Get off your backsides and work or walk it off. Cheeper too.

[Serenity]

I was told that the atkins guy , died of a heart attack

[Bill Sikes]

Originally Posted by Serenity

I was told that the atkins guy , died of a heart attack

His death was nothing to do with his diet, though. No. No way, never, his diet
was not linked to his death. No way. Listen to me, it wasn't. Never. Linked? No.
Excuse me a minute, I've got to go and recommend this diet to some people
I know. Like them? Not really, no. Anyway, the Atkins diet is completely free
of any risk whatsoever, and more natural than eating a balanced diet. Really.
Anyway, I've been following it for 5 years, and I've never felt better, it's never
done me any harm at..... [Whurp!!! <THUD>]

[Bill Sikes]

Originally Posted by capt_buzzard

I call these Fads,all these diets. Some guy's are rakeing in the dollars thinking up new idea's I for one do not go for all of these Junk adds,fads,call them what you like.

They are fads, yes - for people who can't handle any effort or lifestyle change,
IMO... miracle cures, snake oil....

Originally Posted by capt_buzzard

We have alway's eat well here and then took long walks afterwards. What did our Grandparents do without these fad diets. They worked off the fat and there was no high tech gyms in those days.


Get off your backsides and work or walk it off. Cheeper too.

Erm, running is better... for a while. Then it shags your joints and you're fsck'd. :/

[capt_buzzard]

You don't have to run. A good brisk walk for 30 minutes a day will do for starters.

[Bill Sikes]

Originally Posted by capt_buzzard

You don't have to run. A good brisk walk for 30 minutes a day will do for starters.

I was making an unfortunately snide reference reference to someone else's
insistence that walking is not a good form of exercise, apologies. I used to
walk about 9 miles a day, to the pub. and back. I went from nearly 15 stone
to 12 in less than 3 months (a very low fat diet at the same time - unlimited
beer, though!). Wore out a couple of pairs of boots, but no bad side-effects
apart from a slight case of shin splints early on. I know a chap who has been
doing quite a lot of running, or rather used to... he's knackered now :(

[capt_buzzard]

[Africanique]

I say forget the low-carb craze, go low-glycemic. If people would focus on consuming the right kind of carbohydrates instead of cutting them out of their diet maybe they would be alright.