1) Impaired aerobic exercise capacity - failed to be demonstrated
2) Decreased performance on attention tasks - failed to be demonstrated
3) Significantly changed brain glucose metabolism - failed to be demonstrated

Still, many conventional medical institutions offering online health advice, are firm in stating that the diet is dangerous. They sometimes seem to be quite inattentive to the method details and their concerns could often be resolved by mere reading the book.

For instance, the most typical opinion, posted by UCSF Division of General Internal  Medicine in February 1995, contains no factual data at al let alone footnotes. It also disregards the fact that the diet schedule contains gradual increase of limited amounts of carbs with individual adjustments of their total intake for the rest of ones life and that it offers a special vitamins and minerals supplementation  program including increased fiber amounts and mild herbal diuretics for the "weaning" period. This is the entire text:

Low carbohydrate diets are the most resilient popular diet concept. Examples include the Atkins diet, the Stillman diet, and the Scarsdale diet. These diets are based on the correct observation that at equal calorie intakes, low carbohydrate diets result in more rapid weight loss than high carbohydrate diets. Unfortunately, the greater weight loss observed during low carbohydrate feeding is  entirely due to changes in water balance. During carbohydrate   restriction, ketonuria increases and results in greater sodium  excretion and water loss. The resumption of carbohydrate feeding  reverses this process and results in sodium and water retention. No  other differences in body composition or weight loss are observed.  Low carbohydrate diets are by definition high in fat and/or protein  and are thus unsuitable for long term weight loss. These diets are  also commonly deficient in calcium and dietary fiber.

But there is a fact reported in the article "Treatment of Obesity with Low-carbohydrate Diets," where Drs Rabast et al. wrote:

"The weight loss observed during the carbohydrate-restricted diets was significantly greater than during the high-carbohydrate diet. At no time did the intake and loss of fluid and the balances calculated therefrom show significant differences."

Nevertheless, Tufts University Nutrition Navigator, American Council on Science and Health, or Good Housekeeping Magazine are among sites criticising the diet and none of them contains proper credited data or references to peer reviewed journal articles.

Now, after three years of being a leader of weight loss community atAbout.com I've collected about half a thousand feedbacks. Roughly speaking, one of every 10 had a negative opinion and out of them, only one of every five had personal experience.  Out of them, roughly one of every 10gave the diet a try longer than a few days.

I invited all people who managed to find any facts about adverse effects of the diet and received none of facts, only opinions again, sometimes people claimed that there were facts when there were actually medical officials’ opinions.

One of the opponents' remarks was: "That is not about weight loss but about epilepsy." This is very true. But - so what?! What we have here is an invaluable  experience showing NO significant complications in any looked at aspects of human physiology.

Qute to the contrary, there was the following conclusion cited in the article published in the Journal of Pediatrics:

"The diet can be used as a treatment for diabetes, atherosclerosis, hypertension, hyperlipoproteinism,  autism, obesity, epilepsy, and other serious medical conditions, including gallbladder  stones"

Comment in: Nutrition 1998
Journal of Pediatrics. 117(5):743-5, 1990
Journal of the American Dietetic Association.  98(3):316-21, 1998
Journal of the American Dietetic Association.  97(10 Suppl2):S192-4, 1997
 
 

<-previous page   1   2