Another day, another so-called published “study” slamming the Atkins diet. Some things just never change. And yet some things seem to stay the same, too.

Details about the latest anti-low-carb research to come down the pipeline are documented in this Yahoo news story and [...]]]>
He’s baaaaaaaack! Dr. Michael Miller gets his fat-hating study published

Another day, another so-called published “study” slamming the Atkins diet. Some things just never change. And yet some things seem to stay the same, too.

Details about the latest anti-low-carb research to come down the pipeline are documented in this Yahoo news story and my fellow low-carb blogging friend Laura Dolson from About.com’s Low-Carb Diets site writes an excellent recap of the study details. I even blogged about it when the study was first presented publicly in 2007.

Here are the basic details of the study:

Lead researcher Dr. Michael Miller from the Center for Preventive Cardiology at the Baltimore-based University of Maryland Medical Center received funding from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to observe cholesterol and heart health risk factors when dieters reached their weight loss goals and decide to stay on their same diet. One would think this kind of an in-depth study would involve at least several hundred overweight participants on a variety of dietary plans to shed the pounds over at least a one-year period of time, right? Nope.

The study included 18 HEALTHY and NORMAL WEIGHT people who each went on one of three diet plans for four weeks at a time:

ATKINS–50% fat
SOUTH BEACH–30% fat
ORNISH–10% fat

The study participants engaged in all three diets with a four-week period between the diets from January to December 2006. Cholesterol levels were checked at the beginning of each new four-week period prior to starting on a new diet and the researcher evaluated other heart health risk factors as well. Additionally, since the study participants were on their own with the foods they ate, a 3-day food record journal was also looked at at the end of each four-week period. Blood vessel function was also checked by measuring the blood vessel dilation in the arm.

Dr. Miller stated that the higher the saturated fat is in the diet, the lower the blood vessel dilation is, which regulates the flow of blood in the body. Wagging his finger of blame at the worst culprit in his opinion, he scorned the diet that contained the most saturated fat.

“The diet that performed the worst was the Atkins diet,” Miller said.

Hmmmmm, that’s an awful familiar quote, Dr. Miller. It’s almost verbatim what you said in this November 2007 Reuters news story when you released the results of this study at an American Heart Association meeting. Let me refresh your memory on what you said at the time.

“It really is the Atkins diet that is the worst,” Miller said to Reuters.

But you didn’t stop there with your anti-Atkins bias, did you, Dr. Miller? Let’s see what else you had to say about the healthy low-carb lifestyle.

“We don’t recommend the Atkins diet,” Miller added in the Reuters story. “Why not start out with a diet that will be healthier for you in the long run after weight loss?”

Ahhhhh, now don’t you just love it when there is objectiveness by researchers doing studies on diet and health? Wow, Dr. Miller, you do such a great job separating your own personal beliefs and opinions about nutrition and the impact it has on people–NOT! And the further evidence of this is in his interpretation of the lipid data.

Because the Atkins diet included 30 grams of that dastardly of all substances known as saturated fat compared with 14 and 3 grams respectively for the South Beach and Ornish diet, Dr. Miller scolded the famous low-carb diet for being much too high as a percentage of total calories–which he says saturated fat needs to be under 7 percent.

“So, if your caloric intake is 2,000, saturated fat should be about 14 grams [or less] daily,” he noted.

Why Dr. Miller? When carbohydrate intake is significantly reduced to below 10 percent of total caloric intake, saturated fat is passive. It’s the dietary carbs that cause all the problems with health, not the fat. A true Atkins diet would have a fat/protein/carbohydrate ratio of around 70/20/10, not 50/20/30. Therein may lie your problem with the results you found.

But he also failed in his interpretation of the lipid panels. Did Dr. Miller look at HDL cholesterol or triglycerides? Not at all. The only thing reported on was that the LDL cholesterol levels went up slightly by 8 percent which was not statistically different at all. This is not uncommon for people who begin a low-carb diet in the short term.

Even still, the LDL is really insignificant unless you are measuring the size and total particles found in that LDL cholesterol. This was not measured in the study participants at all. Incidentally, the South Beach diet decreased the LDL by 12 percent and the Ornish dieters dropped theirs by 17 percent. Again, big whoop-dee-doo! Wanna bet the Atkins diet produced a higher INCREASE in their HDL and DECREASE in their triglycerides than the other diets? We’ll never know.

Plus, we’re talking about only 18 people who don’t even have a weight problem in this study going back and forth between some really radical extremes of the diet spectrum from a high-carb, low-fat diet to a high-fat, low-carb diet. I don’t think going four weeks between them is near enough time for the body to adjust to whatever the next diet is. Calling this a flawed study is an understatement!

Dr. Miller’s study was published in the April 2009 issue of the Journal of the American Dietetic Association.

Unfortunately for Dr. Miller, his bias against the saturated fat-heavy Atkins diet becomes crystal clear when you see what diet he thinks happens to be the healthiest one for people to eat (HINT: Think Dr. Michael Ozner!):

Add Dr. Miller to that group of people who are falling all over themselves to push the Mediterranean diet as the best diet for people to eat. No wonder he is so critical of a high-fat, low-carb plan like Atkins because it doesn’t jive with his personal agenda to promote a high-carb, low-fat diet. Now the truth is getting out!

You can send your feedback about this study directly to Dr. Michael Miller by using his “Ask The Expert” form. Sounds to me like this “expert” has a thing or two to learn about what long-term low-carb living is REALLY all about. Don’t hold back!

Despite being called out by Gary Taubes in his book Good Calories, Bad Calories, the use of sensationalism by the active players in modern health research and journalism hasn’t changed a bit! Want an example of this? Just look at today’s headline from Reuters [...]]]>
Dr. Michael Miller puts his personal low-carb bias ahead of science

Despite being called out by Gary Taubes in his book Good Calories, Bad Calories, the use of sensationalism by the active players in modern health research and journalism hasn’t changed a bit! Want an example of this? Just look at today’s headline from Reuters to see what I mean:

“High-fat Atkins diet damages blood vessels: study”

Most people will simply read that headline and say to themselves, “Oh my God, why in the world would I ever go on the Atkins diet?” Then from there, people will infer that they shouldn’t go on ANY low-carb diet at all because we all KNOW how unhealthy it is, don’t we? This is the kind of sloppy science and reporting that has prevented the healthy low-carb lifestyle from ever gaining any favor in the public eye. And that’s such a crying shame.

Lead researcher Dr. Michael Miller, director of preventive cardiology at the Baltimore, MD-based University of Maryland Medical Center, and his colleagues wanted to see what effect a maintenance diet has on blood fat levels, cholesterol, and other markers for inflammation. They observed 18 people over a ONE-MONTH period following one of three diets:

ATKINS–50 percent of calories from fat
SOUTH BEACH–30 percent of calories from fat
ORNISH–10 percent of calories from fat

The researchers made sure that NONE of the study participants lost weight so the results would not be skewed by weight improvements since it was about weight control and not weight loss. Each of them had their blood tested for all of the health markers checked out for the study.

What was the result?

The ATKINS group allegedly saw an increase in their cholesterol levels and inflammation which the researchers concluded would cause “long-term damage to blood vessels” and could very likely lead to heart and artery disease. On the other hand, the SOUTH BEACH and ORNISH groups saw their cholesterol levels come down and artery function was improved.

Using an ultrasound machine to measure flexibility and dilation of the blood vessels as well as proteins in the blood, the researchers found major inflammation in the ATKINS group.

“Some markers of inflammation were increased by as much as 30 to 40 percent during the Atkins phase, whereas during the South Beach and Ornish phases, the markers either were stable or went down, some by as much as 15 to 20 percent,” Dr. Miller remarked.

Oh my God, oh my God, what am I gonna do now?! Oh my God, somebody hurry and call 911 for me or something because this “study” says I’m gonna blow a blood vessel or something, oh my God, oh my God! EEEEK!!! What a freakin’ crock of horse manure if you ask me! I’ve been livin’ la vida low-carb for MUCH longer than one month (nearly four years and counting!) and I have not been harmed by my high-fat Atkins diet.

What’s most interesting about this grand conclusion about how dangerous the Atkins diet is for people to be on is that it is merely based on the results of SIX PEOPLE! Yep, the millions of us who are enjoying our low-carb lifestyle must now put up with a very small-scale study reported on by an overzealous anti-Atkins researcher and his willing accomplices in the press reporting on it as the gospel truth. And that’s the worst part of a study like this one.

So, was this “study” actually published in some prestigious medical or science journal? Nope! Instead, it was presented as a paper at the Scientific Sessions of the American Heart Association help in Orlando, Florida this week. No peer review. No long-term observations. No real proof of anything except a sloppy way to compare the supposed impact of diet on blood vessels. The lack of substance in this study along with some rather suspicious and shady implications about what the Atkins diet is should have made anyone with a brain at this conference stand up and question the validity of such research.

Did it happen? Yeah right!

Was anyone else struck by the almost-exclusive focus on the dietary fat content of these diets? What was the ratio of the other two macronutrients–protein and carbohydrate? If that “Atkins” diet with 50 percent fat was matched up with say 30-40 percent carbs, then it is NOT the Atkins diet. If that’s the case, then no wonder their LDL cholesterol went up. Fat consumption is only healthy when carbohydrate intake is kept to a minimum.

Most of us who are doing the Atkins plan as outlined in Dr. Atkins’ New Diet Revolution (the only Atkins diet that REALLY counts since it is BY THE BOOK!) even in maintenance are consuming less than 10 percent of our calories in the form of carbohydrates. My personal diet ratio of fat/protein/carbohydrate is close to 60/30/10.

Obviously, Dr. Miller was no fan of the Atkins diet from the beginning.

“It really is the Atkins diet that is the worst,” he told Reuters. “The Atkins diet caused the LDL levels to go up by about 7 percent, whereas in the Ornish and South Beach diets … they went down 7 to 10 percent.”

Yeah, so what? What happened to the HDL “good” cholesterol in the ATKINS group, Dr. Miller? How about the triglycerides? I would be willing to bet that there was a SIGNIFICANT difference in the increased levels of HDL and decreased triglycerides for them compared to the other two low-fat groups. Why wouldn’t you talk about that data since these are tell-tale signs of health improvements on low-carb, Dr. Miller?

Describing the Atkins diet as “the worst” is merely your opinion, sir. This “study” of yours shows nothing but what happens when you fail to provide honest and trustworthy research to a world who unfortunately trusts everything people like yourself have to say about your research. They rely on you to provide quality, accurate information about health, not some sensationalist, headline-grabbing ruse of a research scam. These kind of shabby conclusions are what drives people away from listening to anything you have to say because they get tired of hearing you cry wolf when there isn’t one anywhere close.

While the diets used in this study were supposed to simulate what would happen when you begin a maintenance plan on the various plans, there is something to be said for those of us who DID actually lose weight on these methods and then continued to follow them long-term after the weight has come off. When I weighed 410 pounds in 2004, my weight was bad, but my health was getting much worse. Without the Atkins diet, I never would have regained my health and become the energetic man I am today.

And my lipid profile did improve and has continued to do so four years later. But Dr. Miller believes any positive impact of livin’ la vida low-carb will only reach a certain level before your health declines.

“When you lose weight everything looks good but after a while you plateau and you hit a maintenance stage,” Dr. Miller contended.

That’s right, you do, Dr. Miller. But that’s what happens on ANY lifestyle change when you begin as an overweight or obese person and DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. Whether you choose low-fat, moderate-fat, or lo
w-carb, the end result is still the same–lasting and permanent weight and health control. If one option doesn’t work, then another one should be tried. That has always been my motto in trying to help people in their own journey to better health. Low-carb is definitely one of those permanent weight loss solution options that people should consider.

Sadly, you have people like Dr. Miller who insist on pushing the low-fat lie that is at the root cause of why obesity and disease still exists in America and around the world today. Pushing vegetables has forced people into choosing potatoes and other starchy choices (according to statistics from the American Diabetes Association) while shunning healthy meat selections has made the high-carb beans, tofu, and whole grains the protein source for many people to the detriment of their health. But, no, we can’t be having people on that low-carb Atkins diet, Dr. Miller says.

“We don’t recommend the Atkins diet,” Dr. Miller concluded. “Why not start out with a diet that will be healthier for you in the long run after weight loss?”

And what kind of diet would that be, hmmmm? We have such varying definitions of what constitutes a “healthy” diet these days, Dr. Miller, that you can’t possibly expect people to know what that looks like. So please tell us. I’m sincerely interested in hearing what you have to say.

But don’t spout off sound bytes like a “balanced” diet with lots of fruits, vegetables, and whole grains (that’s nothing but a big fat copout if you ask me!) because that doesn’t mean a thing to most people. Give us sample menus of the foods you would recommend on your “healthy” diet and let’s see how it stacks up with how real low-carbers like me eat now. I would not be surprised to find that my diet is as healthy or even healthier than what you come up with, sir. So why pigeonhole people into following YOUR definition of that kind of diet?

Drawing broad-based conclusions about a healthy nutritional approach like the Atkins diet, which was created by a world-renowned cardiologist who clearly understood the science behind eating a controlled-carbohydrate diet, looking at a very short-term study with a small sample size and trying to extrapolate long-term consequences from such limited data is both irresponsible and repugnant. Isn’t the very point of research to help people BETTER understand what may happen to their health in a given circumstance?

So then why would you try to purposely manipulate the results of that research just to suit your own personal agenda? That’s just plain shameful, Dr. Miller, and I cannot believe you would put your professional integrity and character on the line just to follow the template of your own biased belief system. Tsk tsk!

The general population of laymen like myself who simply want the science to speak for itself deserve better than this–MUCH BETTER! Weight loss, healthy living, and solid nutrition are too important to just be playing games. What we need and quite frankly DESERVE are researchers who can get back to doing what they were meant to do. And that’s looking at problems objectively, following research protocol precisely, and then letting the results show what they show. It’s the right thing to do and anything else is merely garbled and twisted chatter among ideological zealots like yourself!

The Atkins low-carb diet is absolutely sound nutrition, pure and simple. For the past three decades, we have seen excellent independent research validating every single point that the late great Dr. Robert C. Atkins wrote about in his books as well as real people like Jimmy Moore who lost nearly half of his body weight and now kept it off for close to three years. Is that not long-term enough for you, Dr. Miller?

It’s this kind of validation of the low-carb lifestyle that should have researchers excited about looking into this program (and there is “strong interest” behind-the-scenes) rather than seeking to annihilate and destroy it at every opportunity just because you don’t like it personally. The history books will look back someday on all this vile hatred for the Atkins diet and livin’ la vida low-carb as a sad time in the history of health in the world with so many people clueless to the benefits of low-carb living while people getting fatter and sicker than ever!

Want more helpful insights about Dr. Miller’s ridiculous Atkins diet blood vessel study? Check out what the always-entertaining Dr. Mike Eades wrote about it at his blog today. ENJOY!

11-7-07 UPDATE: Here is the official response to Dr. Miller’s study today from Atkins Nutritionals, Inc.:

A presentation at the recent meeting of the American Heart Association in Orlando, Florida, comparing the maintenance stages of three diet regimens, Atkins, South Beach and Ornish, has relied on faulty research and a misunderstanding of Atkins protocols to suggest the Atkins diet may not be heart healthy.

Dr. Michael Miller, who made the presentation, apparently ignored more than 30 years of clinical experience and independent research on low carbohydrate diets, and now four years of trials looking specifically at the Atkins protocols, which have consistently demonstrated the effectiveness and safety of the Atkins diet.

Colette Heimowitz, M.Sc., Vice President of Nutrition & Education at Atkins Nutritionals, commenting on Dr. Miller’s presentation, referenced several peer reviewed studies which report opposite findings. Among the most prominent was a year-long weight loss and health study conducted by Stanford University researchers and published in the Journal of the American Medical Association which showed no increased risk of cardiovascular markers in more than 300 overweight subjects.

In summarizing his study, Dr. Miller acknowledged that researchers considering the effects of low carbohydrate diets have reached very different conclusions depending on sample size, research protocol and any number of other uncontrolled variables. Unfortunately, Dr. Miller’s research cannot be fully evaluated since his study has not been peer reviewed or published. But, given the short duration of his study, the very small sample size, and the weak correlations, drawing conclusions about possible long term health risks tied to fat consumption in the maintenance phase of any weight control program is not good science.

According to media reports, the subjects in Dr. Miller’s study were put on what’s described as the maintenance phase of Atkins with 50% of their calories coming from fat. However, this is not the Atkins maintenance phase protocol, nor is it part of the Atkins diet protocols. The lipid response Dr. Miller reported is what one might expect from a combination of rich carbohydrates and fat, but it’s not Atkins.

When it comes to nutrition and weight control, the public deserves science based conclusions. Time and again independent research has shown the benefits of a low-carb
ohydrate nutritional approach to safe and healthy weight loss and weight maintenance. And that’s Atkins!

With all the attention being placed on high-fat, low-carb diets again with the release of the new Gary Taubes book Good Calories, Bad Calories last week, you just HAD to know a study like this one was bound to mysteriously show up seemingly out of [...]]]>
Dr. Yunsheng Ma contends high-carb diets best for cardiovascular health

With all the attention being placed on high-fat, low-carb diets again with the release of the new Gary Taubes book Good Calories, Bad Calories last week, you just HAD to know a study like this one was bound to mysteriously show up seemingly out of thin air so it would make headlines. Don’t believe for a second this thing was not coordinated with the Taubes book release. It’s just too conveniently timed if you ask me.

Lead researcher Dr. Yunsheng Ma, assistant professor of medicine at the University Of Massachusetts Medical School, and his colleagues wanted to pinpoint which of the most popular diet plans over the past five years is best for heart health by rating them in order for their ability to reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease.

Before I share the results of this study with you, let me just ask the obvious–how in the world can you accurately determine which diet plan is best for cardiovascular health when there isn’t a consensus on what actually is at the root of heart disease to begin with? Traditional health promoters says it’s the fat, but more modern and intelligent-thinking researchers are conducting studies that seem to point to carbohydrates as the culprit. So what good does a ranking of the diets do when the parameters for measuring it are in question, hmmmm?

Think about that as I share the results of this UMass study with you.

The researchers chose the most popular weight loss plans that have hit The New York Times bestseller list since 2002 for this study to analyze them using the creation from Dr. Walter Willett from Harvard University called the Alternate Healthy Eating Index (AHEI) as the standard by which to measure whether these various diets are “heart healthy” or not. This is a bit different from the USDA-recommended Healthy Eating Index which was the basis for the 2005 update to the much-heralded United States Department of Agriculture’s newly revamped Food Pyramid.

Dr. Willett felt the USDA was woefully inept in their attempt to help people understand how to make their diet the best it can possibly be, which is why he created the AHEI. Here’s what those supposedly new and improved guidelines entail according to the Alternate Healthy Eating Index parameters for the Healthy Eating Pyramid outlined in Dr. Willett’s book Eat, Drink, And Be Healthy (let’s see if they’re any better than what the USDA came up with):

- Whole Grain Foods (at most meals)

The body needs carbohydrates mainly for energy. The best sources of carbohydrates are whole grains such as oatmeal, whole-wheat bread, and brown rice. They deliver the outer (bran) and inner (germ) layers along with energy-rich starch. The body can’t digest whole grains as quickly as it can highly processed carbohydrates such as white flour. This keeps blood sugar and insulin levels from rising, then falling, too quickly. Better control of blood sugar and insulin can keep hunger at bay and may prevent the development of type 2 diabetes.

Obviously, I disagree with the “body needs carbohydrates” assertion and have done just fine remaining energetic and alive without the need for the so-called “healthy whole grains” craze that has swept the nation in recent years. Sure, these may be better options than refined carbs, but they STILL turn into sugar in the body.

- Plant Oils

Surprised that the Healthy Eating Pyramid puts some fats near the base, indicating they are okay to eat? Although this recommendation seems to go against conventional wisdom, it’s exactly in line with the evidence and with common eating habits. The average American gets one third or more of his or her daily calories from fats, so placing them near the foundation of the pyramid makes sense. Note, though, that it specifically mentions plant oils, not all types of fat. Good sources of healthy unsaturated fats include olive, canola, soy, corn, sunflower, peanut, and other vegetable oils, as well as fatty fish such as salmon. These healthy fats not only improve cholesterol levels (when eaten in place of highly processed carbohydrates) but can also protect the heart from sudden and potentially deadly rhythm problems.

Fats are INDEED healthy and I mean ALL fat sources and not just from plants. Some oils/fats not listed here that should be include butter, coconut oil, lard, animal fat, and other saturated fats. When consumed as part of a low-carb diet, these fats are extremely beneficial to your health and will protect your heart. Believe it or not, eating fat is a major part of a healthy lifestyle.

Vegetables (in abundance) and Fruits (2 to 3 times)

A diet rich in fruits and vegetables can decrease the chances of having a heart attack or stroke; protect against a variety of cancers; lower blood pressure; help you avoid the painful intestinal ailment called diverticulitis; guard against cataract and macular degeneration, the major cause of vision loss among people over age 65; and add variety to your diet and wake up your palate.

It’s very easy for people to just nod their head in agreement with the fruits and vegetables recommendation, but my problem with this is WHICH ONES? There’s never a distinction between the good fruits and veggies (non-starchy, green leafy, low-glycemic) and the bad fruits and veggies (starchy ones like potatoes and corn and sugary like bananas and oranges). To me it’s just an irresponsible copout to say “eat your fruit and vegetables” and never explain the differences between the good and the bad.

Fish, Poultry, and Eggs (0 to 2 times)

These are important sources of protein. A wealth of research suggests that eating fish can reduce the risk of heart disease. Chicken and turkey are also good sources of protein and can be low in saturated fat. Eggs, which have long been demonized because they contain fairly high levels of cholesterol, aren’t as bad as they’re cracked up to be. In fact, an egg is a much better breakfast than a doughnut cooked in an oil rich in trans fats or a bagel made from refined flour.

Yes, protein is indeed power food for your body, especially from fish because of the healthy omegas they contain, but I wouldn’t get too worked up over saturated fat. Chicken and turkey are good choices if you like them, but there is absolutely nothing wrong with the saturated fat-heavy beef and pork either (we’ll get to those in just a moment). I’m pleased to see eggs and their BENEFIT on satiety mentioned in a positive light because the dietary cholesterol contained in them does NOT raise your cholesterol as has been widely believed by most people.

Nuts and Legumes (1 to 3 times)

Nuts and legumes are excellent sources of protein, fiber, vitamins, and minerals. Legumes include black beans, navy beans, garbanzos, and other beans that are usually sold dried. Many kinds of nuts contain healthy fats, and packages of some varieties (almonds, walnuts, pecans, peanuts, hazelnuts, and pistachios) can now even carry a label saying they’re good for your heart.

Almonds have been found to be as healthy as fruits and vegetables and you certainly can’t go wrong with eating nuts as a healthy snack on your low-carb lifestyle. But beans are another story entirely. I don’t eat beans and haven’t in the four years since I began my low-carb journey. Their high-carb counts are not conducive for my weight management program.

Dairy or Calcium Supplement (1 to 2 times)

Building bone and keeping it strong takes calcium, vitamin D, exercise, and a whole lot more. Dairy products have traditionally been Americans’ main source of calcium. But there are other healthy ways to get calcium than from milk and cheese, which can contain a lot of saturated fat. Three glasses of whole milk, for example, contains as much saturated fat as 13 strips of cooked bacon. If you enjoy dairy foods, try to stick with no-fat or low-fat products. If you don’t like dairy products, calcium supplements offer an easy and inexpensive way to get your daily calcium.

Again, the saturated fat issue isn’t something to worry about. Getting the higher fat sources of dairy is BETTER for you than the low-fat ones. Besides, fat-free cheese is disgusting and the fat-rich ones are not only delicious but nutritious, too! Skip the regular milk and opt for low-carb ones like Calorie Countdown or even heavy cream instead to reduce the carbs. Don’t skimp on the fat when you’re reducing the carbs because it is your body’s fuel on a ketogenic diet.

Red Meat and Butter (Use Sparingly)

These sit at the top of the Healthy Eating Pyramid because they contain lots of saturated fat. If you eat red meat every day, switching to fish or chicken several times a week can improve cholesterol levels. So can switching from butter to olive oil.

I couldn’t DISAGREE with Dr. Willett more about red meat and butter because the saturated fat is NOT an issue when carbohydrates are reduced. This is something Gary Taubes illustrates beautifully in his book despite cutesy attempts by health groups like the American Heart Association and their “Bad Fat Brothers” campaign which I saw a television commercial about the other day. PUH-LEEZ! Keep eating butter and red meat while limiting your carbs and something amazing will happen–your HDL “good” cholesterol will go WAY up (a VERY good thing!) and your triglycerides will plummet to below 100. And recent studies have shown that these are better markers for cardiovascular health than LDL and total cholesterol anyway.

White Rice, White Bread, Potatoes, White Pasta, Soda, and Sweets (Use Sparingly)

Why are these all-American staples at the top, rather than the bottom, of the Healthy Eating Pyramid? They can cause fast and furious increases in blood sugar that can lead to weight gain, diabetes, heart disease, and other chronic disorders. Whole-grain carbohydrates cause slower, steadier increases in blood sugar that don’t overwhelm the body’s ability to handle this much needed but potentially dangerous nutrient.

FINALLY! Something Dr. Willett and I agree on regarding a healthy diet. But he says to “use sparingly.” I would contend DON’T USE AT ALL if you want to do your health a big favor. You don’t need these empty, garbage carbs anymore, so why even bother with them. They only lead to heartache and pain–both figuratively and LITERALLY!

Multiple Vitamin

A daily multivitamin, multimineral supplement offers a kind of nutritional backup. While it can’t in any way replace healthy eating, or make up for unhealthy eating, it can fill in the nutrient holes that may sometimes affect even the most careful eaters. You don’t need an expensive name-brand or designer vitamin. A standard, store-brand, RDA-level one is fine. Look for one that meets the requirements of the USP (U.S. Pharmacopeia), an organization that sets standards for drugs and supplements.

Again, couldn’t agree more about taking supplements, including fish oil. Couldn’t and wouldn’t live without them!

Alcohol (in moderation)

Scores of studies suggest that having an alcoholic drink a day lowers the risk of heart disease. Moderation is clearly important, since alcohol has risks as well as benefits. For men, a good balance point is 1 to 2 drinks a day; in general, however, the risks of drinking, even in moderation, exceed benefits until middle age. For women, it’s at most one drink a day.

I’m personally not a drinker, but clearly alcohol is not a good choice for a healthy lifestyle. But the 1-2 drink a day recommendation by Dr. Willett must come with one disclaimer that people should know about before taking that drink–you WILL get kicked out of ketosis and fat-burning will cease until all the alcohol is used for fuel. Think of it as a super-charged carbohydrate that the body has to get rid of before stored fat will begin melting again.

Okay, now that you understand the criteria by which all of these diets were measured, each was given a score of 0-10 for each of the following seven conditions:

1. the ratio of white to red meat
2. ratio of polyunsaturated fat to saturated fat
3. quantities of fruit
4. quantities of vegetables
5. quantities of nuts and legumes
6. quantities of cereal fiber
7. quantities of trans fats.

As you can see, these are not a very low-carb friendly set of dietary stipulations from the get go, so the results should surprise no one. With 70 being the “perfect score,” here’s how the top ten diets did in a head-to-head face off using Dr. Willett’s guidelines (and it shouldn’t surprise anyone!):

Ornish (ultra low-fat diet)–64.6
Weight Watchers high carbohydrate–57.4
New Glucose Revolution–57.2
South Beach/Phase 2–50.7
Zone–49.8
2005 Food Guide Pyramid–48.7
Weight Watchers high protein–47.3
Atkins/100g carbohydrate–46
South Beach/Phase 3–45.6
Atkins/45g carbohydrate–42.3

The results of this “study” reminded me the Consumer Reports survey that came out about the various diets in June ranking them according to what is considered a “healthy” diet. Their criteria? Of course, it was the 2005 U.S. Food Pyramid! Obviously livin’ la vida low-carb is NOT gonna do well and it didn’t coming in DEAD LAST in that list just like it did this one.

The results of this “study” were published in the October 2007 issue of The Journal of the American Dietetic Association (not exactly friends of the low-carb lifestyle, mind you!).

All the ooohs and aaahs of the researchers about what they have done proclaiming to the world what they have “discovered” is nothing more than a meaningless attempt to denigrate and smear low-carb all over again. It would be like ranking Democrats and Republican candidates for president using the GOP platform as the standard. Obviously, the Democrats would not fare well in that list because the criteria is different for them.

And the same goes for livin’ la vida low-carb. Actually, it quite a badge of honor that the Atkins and South Beach diets did so poorly because they DON’T adhere to the conventional wisdom regarding diet and health. Instead, they are an alternative way of eating that is helping people not just lose weight, but control their blood sugars, reduce their insulin production, and effectively manage their diabetes with reduced or completely eliminated medications.

Additionally, we’ve seen so many other areas of health improved from eating a low-carb diet which I have documented quite extensively here at my blog. Browse through my past articles and you will see some truly remarkable research into low-carb living that will make you wish you had been eating this way a long time ago!

Unfortunately for Dr. Ma, he wants nothing of the good news about low-carb diets to be seen or heard and is only interested in his narrow-minded view of heart health despite studies that clearly show the heart health risks of low-carb over the long-term are futile. But he turns a blind eye to this astounding research and instead acts surprised when the Food Pyramid doesn’t do very well in his study.

“One of the unexpected findings is that the 2005 USDA Food Guide Pyramid, the current government recommendation, fared significantly worse than the New Glucose Revolution, Weight Watchers High Carbohydrate and Ornish plans,” Dr. Ma noted. “The USDA dietary guidelines were originally devised to prevent nutrient deficiencies and it’s clear that we need to modify or rebuild the pyramid to look into cardiovascular disease prevention, as it is the leading cause of death and disability for Americans. Americans deserve a better dietary guideline and recommendation.”

Oh, I wholeheartedly agree that “Americans deserve better,” Dr. Ma! But they also deserve to hear the truth regarding saturated fat and animal fat being a MAJOR part of a healthy lifestyle. The insistence of people like Dr. Willett to continually hammer the supposed harm that comes from saturated fat intake while all but ignoring the detrimental impact of all those carbohydrates he recommends is despicable. I know he’s a highly-respected health “expert” in the United States, but that doesn’t make him immune to being questioned.

Study co-author Dr. Sherry Pagoto, who is also an assistant professor of medicine at UMass as well as a clinical psychologist at the UMass Memorial Weight Center, said people should not only choose a diet plan for weight loss, but also for their health.

“Patients can lose weight with most dietary plans in the short term, but whether the plan they choose maximizes cardiovascular risk reduction over the long term should also be a consideration for patients and health care providers,” he concluded.

I couldn’t agree more, Dr. Pagoto! That’s why I CHOOSE to be eating low-carb because my health has never been as good as it is today. Before I started on the Atkins diet in January 2004, I was on prescriptions medicines for high cholesterol, high blood pressure, and breathing. I was 410 pounds on well on my way to diabetes, heart attack, and quite possibly even death.

But one year later, I had lost 180 pounds, cut 20 inches off my waistline, dropped FIVE sizes in my shirts, was more active than I had EVER been (and still am!), and, oh by the way, ditched all of those drugs and haven’t taken a single one since! That’s what that last-place ranking Atkins diet did for me, baby, and I’m proud of it, too.

Nobody–not Dr. Willett, not Dr. Ma, and DEFINITELY not Dr. Dean Ornish–will EVER be able to take this accomplishment away from me and so many others who have made low-carb their permanent and healthy lifestyle change. We did it despite those recommendations to eat a low-fat, low-calorie diet which had failed to keep the weight off of me over the years because I was constantly hungry and MISERABLE on those diets.

If people can hack the Ornish diet and they like it, then I tell them to GO FOR IT! But this study no more helps people decide which diet is best for them than it would for a city to put a stop light that stays red all the time at a busy intersection would. My advice? IGNORE THIS RIDICULOUS STUDY (and read a REAL comparison study instead) and keep on livin’ la vida low-carb. You’ll be so glad you did.

You can e-mail your comments and concerns about this study to Dr. Yunsheng Ma at Yunsheng.Ma@umassmed.edu. Let him hear how disappointed you are with him about this research that is nothing more than a not-so-veiled attack against low-carb.

10-3-07 UDDATE: The high-carb, low-fat apologists are delirious about this study as this WCAV-TV story with comments from a University of Virginia exercise physiology professor named Dr. Glenn Gaesser takes the findings and runs with it as gospel.

Check out these absurd statements he makes during the feature:

“I think there is a place for all types of food, it’s a matter of balance and proportion.”

Um, Dr. Gaesser, livin’ la vida low-carb gives me all the “balance” I’ll EVER need!

“Most studies indicate that people who consume a lot of carbohydrates generally are thinner than those who do not.”

“Most studies” is a rather unilateral statement to make and I would challenge you to look at ALL the preponderance of the evidence concerning diets that are reduced in carbohydrates. While it is arguable those high-carb eaters are thinner, but I can say with confidence that the low-carb eaters are HEALTHIER! And that is more important!

If you want to keep the weight off Gaesser said try a low fat diet not low carb.

Nah, after losing a couple hundreds pounds, keeping it off for several years, and feeling healthier and better than ever before, I’m gonna keep on livin’ la vida low-carb, Dr. Gaesser. No more suffering on a low-fat diet for me!

How about sharing with Dr. Gaesser how the low-carb lifestyle has changed your life by e-mailing him at gag2q@virginia.edu? I’m sure he’d be interested in hearing from people who have done very well eating this way. Tell him YOUR story!