Shuurai wrote:

>>>What I find interesting is that people will ignore groups like the AMA,
>>>ADA, the National Academy of Sciences, and so forth in favor of a
>>>non-peer-reviewed, unscientific and largely anecdotal study;
>>
>>You're aware that there are a lot of studies of low carb diets in
>>peer-reviewed journals? You're aware, too, that there are studies
>>showing that recommendations of a low fat diet based on complex carbs
>>turned out to be valueless?
>
>
> You're aware that there are also a lot of studies in peer-reviewed
> journals showing that Atkins is bunk, and that low fat diets based on
> complex carbs can be quite good for you? Pick a position, there is a
> peer-reviewed study the supports it, and another that contradicts it.
>
>
>> all
>>
>>>because it says what they'd like to hear. \
>>
>>
>>I ate a low fat diet high in whole grains and legumes for *years*. I
>>was not eating junk. I hadn't bought a loaf of white bread in over 15
>>years. I didn't drink soda. I exercised vigorously. I was *GAINING*
>>weight, I was hungry all the time, my energy swings were nasty, and I
>>had borderline high blood pressure. I *did* what the authorities told
>>me to do. It didn't work for me. Low carb did, and does.
>
>
> I'm glad it worked for you. But you're taking what worked for *you* as
> a basis of declaring what is right and good for everyone.

Where? Where did I say that? I have *never*, in *anything* I've
written, suggested that there is one diet that is right for everyone.


Billions of
> people eat diets based on grains and legumes and don't have the
> problems you describe.
>
> Never once have I sad that the Atkins diet is "wrong" or bad for you.
> For some people it works wonderfully. But that doesn't mean that
> everyone should blindly jump onto the bandwagon. The unfortunate fact
> is, many people who follow it are more attracted to the idea of an easy
> way to lose weight with minimal effort than anything else.

Since when is completely changing the way you eat "minimal effort?"

Dana