Does anyone have any good recipes for the Atkins Diet? Need some good
ideas for meal planning.

On Mon, 3 Nov 2003 12:08:48 -0700 (MST), (Vicky and
John) wrote:

>Does anyone have any good recipes for the Atkins Diet? Need some good
>ideas for meal planning.

I've been searhing the net for months and can't find a single
Atkins-friendly recipe.

-sw

Try this one, go to the recipe rooms.
http://www.atkinsfriends.com/

"Steve Wertz" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 3 Nov 2003 12:08:48 -0700 (MST), (Vicky and
> John) wrote:
>
> >Does anyone have any good recipes for the Atkins Diet? Need some good
> >ideas for meal planning.
>
> I've been searhing the net for months and can't find a single
> Atkins-friendly recipe.
>
> -sw

Ya know, Google sux!

Jack Lost

Steve Wertz wrote:

> On Mon, 3 Nov 2003 12:08:48 -0700 (MST), (Vicky and
> John) wrote:
>
>
>>Does anyone have any good recipes for the Atkins Diet? Need some good
>>ideas for meal planning.
>
>
> I've been searhing the net for months and can't find a single
> Atkins-friendly recipe.
>
> -sw


Try this site - it's full of free Atkins-diet recipes. Good? YMMV.

http://recipes.thinner.com/

Cheers!
Peg

> > I've been searhing the net for months and can't find a single
> > Atkins-friendly recipe.
> >


thats ridiculous!
meat, fish, fowl...............................
(just lose the carbs/sugar)

i forgot something.....................
to all that meat, fish, and fowl....................add lots and lots of
veggies!
(salads with FULL FAT dressings)

--
read and post daily, it works!
rosie

If you don't like life, its the way you're livin' A little less takin',
a bit more givin'; A little less hatin', a little more lovin'; A little
more helpin', not o much shovin'; A little more smilin', not so much
strife, And soon you will be in love with life.
............................ j.w.t. meehan



"rosie read and post" > wrote in message
...
> > > I've been searhing the net for months and can't find a single
> > > Atkins-friendly recipe.
> > >
>
>
> thats ridiculous!
> meat, fish, fowl...............................
> (just lose the carbs/sugar)
>
>

On 2003-11-03, Steve Wertz >

> I've been searhing the net for months and can't find a single
> Atkins-friendly recipe.

Surely, you jest.

http://atkins.com/food/recipes/index.html

nb

Hark! I heard notbob > say:
> On 2003-11-03, Steve Wertz >
>
> > I've been searhing the net for months and can't find a single
> > Atkins-friendly recipe.
>
> Surely, you jest.
>
> http://atkins.com/food/recipes/index.html

I think he was being sarcastic, at the expense of the OP...


--
j*ni p. ~ mom, gamer, novice cook ~
...fish heads, fish heads, eat them up, yum!

In article >,
Steve Wertz > wrote:

> On Mon, 3 Nov 2003 12:08:48 -0700 (MST), (Vicky and
> John) wrote:
>
> >Does anyone have any good recipes for the Atkins Diet? Need some good
> >ideas for meal planning.
>
> I've been searhing the net for months and can't find a single
> Atkins-friendly recipe.

Take yourselves over to alt.support.diet.low-carb. More Atkins recipes
posted over there than you can wave a stick at.

Miche

--
If you want to end war and stuff you got to sing loud.
-- Arlo Guthrie, "Alice's Restaurant"

Steve Wertz wrote:

> On Mon, 3 Nov 2003 12:08:48 -0700 (MST), (Vicky and
> John) wrote:
>
>>Does anyone have any good recipes for the Atkins Diet? Need some good
>>ideas for meal planning.
>
> I've been searhing the net for months and can't find a single
> Atkins-friendly recipe.
>
> -sw


Try lowcarbluxury.com

In article >,
Peggy > wrote:

> Steve Wertz wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 3 Nov 2003 12:08:48 -0700 (MST), (Vicky and
> > John) wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Does anyone have any good recipes for the Atkins Diet? Need some good
> >>ideas for meal planning.
> >
> >
> > I've been searhing the net for months and can't find a single
> > Atkins-friendly recipe.
> >
> > -sw
>
>
> Try this site - it's full of free Atkins-diet recipes. Good? YMMV.
>
> http://recipes.thinner.com/
>
> Cheers!
> Peg
>

How about we declare rfc an Atkins-free zone? The Atkins-ers have
several newsgroups, and "sci.med.nutrition" has scads of lowcarb fiends.

Cindy

--
C.J. Fuller

Return address to the present tense to email me

"Cindy Fuller" > wrote in message
...
>
> How about we declare rfc an Atkins-free zone? The Atkins-ers have
> several newsgroups, and "sci.med.nutrition" has scads of lowcarb fiends.
>
> Cindy
>
> --
> C.J. Fuller
>
> Return address to the present tense to email me

There are a few formerly-regular rfc posters who low-carb. When they do
post, they don't often talk about low-carbing, but sometimes a mention or
two slips through. I'd hate to lose them altogether just because some
people don't want to hear about low-carbing at all. It's rec.food.cooking,
after all, not rec.food.cooking.must-have-carbs.

rona

--
***For e-mail, replace .com with .ca Sorry for the inconvenience!***

Cindy Fuller > wrote in message >.. .
> In article >,
> Peggy > wrote:
>
> > Steve Wertz wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, 3 Nov 2003 12:08:48 -0700 (MST), (Vicky and
> > > John) wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >>Does anyone have any good recipes for the Atkins Diet? Need some good
> > >>ideas for meal planning.
> > >
> > >
> > > I've been searhing the net for months and can't find a single
> > > Atkins-friendly recipe.
> > >
> > > -sw
> >
> >
> > Try this site - it's full of free Atkins-diet recipes. Good? YMMV.
> >
> > http://recipes.thinner.com/
> >
> > Cheers!
> > Peg
> >
>
> How about we declare rfc an Atkins-free zone? The Atkins-ers have
> several newsgroups, and "sci.med.nutrition" has scads of lowcarb fiends.

By the same token, should we declare rfc a "low-fat free zone"?


>
> Cindy

On Wed, 5 Nov 2003 07:09:39 -0600, "Rona Yuthasastrakosol"
> wrote:

>
> "Cindy Fuller" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > How about we declare rfc an Atkins-free zone? The Atkins-ers have
> > several newsgroups, and "sci.med.nutrition" has scads of lowcarb fiends.
> >
> > Cindy
> >
> > --
> > C.J. Fuller
> >
> > Return address to the present tense to email me
>
> There are a few formerly-regular rfc posters who low-carb. When they do
> post, they don't often talk about low-carbing, but sometimes a mention or
> two slips through. I'd hate to lose them altogether just because some
> people don't want to hear about low-carbing at all. It's rec.food.cooking,
> after all, not rec.food.cooking.must-have-carbs.
>
> rona

To tell you the truth, I haven't noticed one mention of
Atkins until now. Someone has a burr under her blanket.

sf > wrote in
:

> On Wed, 5 Nov 2003 07:09:39 -0600, "Rona Yuthasastrakosol"
> > wrote:
>
>>
>> "Cindy Fuller" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >
>> > How about we declare rfc an Atkins-free zone? The Atkins-ers have
>> > several newsgroups, and "sci.med.nutrition" has scads of lowcarb
>> > fiends.
>> >
>> > Cindy
>> >
>> > --
>> > C.J. Fuller
>> >
>> > Return address to the present tense to email me
>>
>> There are a few formerly-regular rfc posters who low-carb. When
>> they do post, they don't often talk about low-carbing, but sometimes
>> a mention or two slips through. I'd hate to lose them altogether
>> just because some people don't want to hear about low-carbing at
>> all. It's rec.food.cooking, after all, not
>> rec.food.cooking.must-have-carbs.
>>
>> rona
>
> To tell you the truth, I haven't noticed one mention of
> Atkins until now. Someone has a burr under her blanket.
>

How come she gets a blanket?

In article > ,
Hahabogus > wrote:

> sf > wrote in
> :
>
> > On Wed, 5 Nov 2003 07:09:39 -0600, "Rona Yuthasastrakosol"
> > > wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> "Cindy Fuller" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> >
> >> > How about we declare rfc an Atkins-free zone? The Atkins-ers have
> >> > several newsgroups, and "sci.med.nutrition" has scads of lowcarb
> >> > fiends.
> >> >
> >> > Cindy
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > C.J. Fuller
> >> >
> >> > Return address to the present tense to email me
> >>
> >> There are a few formerly-regular rfc posters who low-carb. When
> >> they do post, they don't often talk about low-carbing, but sometimes
> >> a mention or two slips through. I'd hate to lose them altogether
> >> just because some people don't want to hear about low-carbing at
> >> all. It's rec.food.cooking, after all, not
> >> rec.food.cooking.must-have-carbs.
> >>
> >> rona
> >
> > To tell you the truth, I haven't noticed one mention of
> > Atkins until now. Someone has a burr under her blanket.
> >
>
> How come she gets a blanket?

I was in a rather surly mood the other night. There are some lowcarbers
who post stuff here on a regular basis. I'm also currently working in
the midst of a bunch of lowcarbers (one of whom is an MD and should know
better) and getting constant questions about what I think about it. The
executive summary: Low carb diets have not been shown in controlled,
large-scale, long-term studies to be any better at maintaining weight
loss than other diets. Many people find the diet very expensive and
hard to maintain. There are health effects of eating all of that
protein. Urine pH goes down, which means that those prone to form
calcium oxalate, uric acid or cystine kidney stones will. Then we have
the inconvenient side effects of bad breath and constipation.

End of lecture, it's time to talk about folic acid, vitamin B12, and
vitamin C to my real students.

Cindy

--
C.J. Fuller

Return address to the present tense to email me

In article >,
Cindy Fuller > wrote:

> In article > ,
> Hahabogus > wrote:
>
> > sf > wrote in
> > :
> >
> > > On Wed, 5 Nov 2003 07:09:39 -0600, "Rona Yuthasastrakosol"
> > > > wrote:
> > >
> > >>
> > >> "Cindy Fuller" > wrote in message
> > >> ...
> > >> >
> > >> > How about we declare rfc an Atkins-free zone? The Atkins-ers have
> > >> > several newsgroups, and "sci.med.nutrition" has scads of lowcarb
> > >> > fiends.
> > >> >
> > >> > Cindy
> > >> >
> > >> > --
> > >> > C.J. Fuller
> > >> >
> > >> > Return address to the present tense to email me
> > >>
> > >> There are a few formerly-regular rfc posters who low-carb. When
> > >> they do post, they don't often talk about low-carbing, but sometimes
> > >> a mention or two slips through. I'd hate to lose them altogether
> > >> just because some people don't want to hear about low-carbing at
> > >> all. It's rec.food.cooking, after all, not
> > >> rec.food.cooking.must-have-carbs.
> > >>
> > >> rona
> > >
> > > To tell you the truth, I haven't noticed one mention of
> > > Atkins until now. Someone has a burr under her blanket.
> > >
> >
> > How come she gets a blanket?
>
> I was in a rather surly mood the other night. There are some lowcarbers
> who post stuff here on a regular basis. I'm also currently working in
> the midst of a bunch of lowcarbers (one of whom is an MD and should know
> better) and getting constant questions about what I think about it. The
> executive summary: Low carb diets have not been shown in controlled,
> large-scale, long-term studies to be any better at maintaining weight
> loss than other diets. Many people find the diet very expensive and
> hard to maintain. There are health effects of eating all of that
> protein. Urine pH goes down, which means that those prone to form
> calcium oxalate, uric acid or cystine kidney stones will. Then we have
> the inconvenient side effects of bad breath and constipation.
>
> End of lecture, it's time to talk about folic acid, vitamin B12, and
> vitamin C to my real students.
>
> Cindy

There is one population you forget about though - those who are
diabetic, or prone to diabetes. And the thing about low-carb dieting is
that a) it doesn't have to be high protein (myth, thank you) and b) you
don't have to have bad breath (it's linked to too much protein) and
finally c) constipation doesn't seem to be a problem for those who
really need to do it.

Why do I say this? 79 pounds in 14 months, no bad breath (other than
the usual from garlic); no constipation, no badness of any kind, being
monitored by my physician.

Nothing is absolute. I take it you're a nuitritionist?

--
Nancy Howells (don't forget to switch it, and replace the to send mail).

"Vicky and John" > wrote in message
...
> Does anyone have any good recipes for the Atkins Diet? Need some good
> ideas for meal planning.

I'm certainly not an M.D. but would like to relay comments from my own M.D.

If you are trying to lose weight, but are diabetic, do *not* go on the
Atkins diet. It is dangerous for diabetics since it throws the body into
ketosis. The best and safest recommendation is to stay within the American
Diabetic Association (ADA) guidelines.

Dora
>

On Thu, 06 Nov 2003 15:19:09 GMT, Nancy Howells
> wrote:

>
>There is one population you forget about though - those who are
>diabetic, or prone to diabetes.

There are all kinds of diets (and dietary restrictions) for specific
diseases/conditions. Most people take "diet" to mean either
weight-loss, nutritionally adequate, or disease-related. There is,
indeed, no "diet" perfect for everyone.

>79 pounds in 14 months, no bad breath (other than
>the usual from garlic); no constipation, no badness of any kind, being
>monitored by my physician.

Good for you. Particularly the monitoring.

My own *highly* personal view is that that it's nuts. :-) I tend to
distrust *any* magic regime that enrolls passionate deciples who offer
primarily anecdotal proofs. My own strictly amateur research tells me
it *is* a reduced-calorie plan, offering rather lopsided nutritional
choices. However,...when friends and family anectotally report they
have lost weight, "don't feel hungry all the time," and sing the
praises of the plan, I'm willing to listen. A bit. I'm glad it works
for them. Could be than in 10 years we'll *all* be having steak and
eggs for breakfast and consuming a noodle will be a dirty secret. Not
yet, 'though.

"limey" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Vicky and John" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Does anyone have any good recipes for the Atkins Diet? Need some good
> > ideas for meal planning.
>
> I'm certainly not an M.D. but would like to relay comments from my own
M.D.
>
> If you are trying to lose weight, but are diabetic, do *not* go on the
> Atkins diet. It is dangerous for diabetics since it throws the body into
> ketosis. The best and safest recommendation is to stay within the
American
> Diabetic Association (ADA) guidelines.
>

You need to find a new doctor. Sheesh, it is terrible to see such basic
ignorance of medicine in a practicing physician. I am dead serious on this
and I know what I am talking about. Your Dr. is mixing up ketosis which is
of no danger to diabetics or anyone else, and ketoacidosis which is
dangerous.


--
Peter Aitken

Remove the crap from my email address before using.

sf > wrote in message >. ..
> On Wed, 5 Nov 2003 07:09:39 -0600, "Rona Yuthasastrakosol"
> > wrote:
>
> >
> > "Cindy Fuller" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > >
> > > How about we declare rfc an Atkins-free zone? The Atkins-ers have
> > > several newsgroups, and "sci.med.nutrition" has scads of lowcarb fiends.
> > >
> > > Cindy
> > >
> > > --
> > > C.J. Fuller
> > >
> > > Return address to the present tense to email me
> >
> > There are a few formerly-regular rfc posters who low-carb. When they do
> > post, they don't often talk about low-carbing, but sometimes a mention or
> > two slips through. I'd hate to lose them altogether just because some
> > people don't want to hear about low-carbing at all. It's rec.food.cooking,
> > after all, not rec.food.cooking.must-have-carbs.
> >
> > rona
>
> To tell you the truth, I haven't noticed one mention of
> Atkins until now. Someone has a burr under her blanket.

A Google search shows 1550 articles that mention "Atkins" and 1540 that
mention "low carb" in RFC.
They seem to bother the hell out of here.
On the other hand, she doesn't seem to mind the 10,600 articles that
mention "low fat".

"Peter Aitken" > wrote in message
news
> "limey" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Vicky and John" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > Does anyone have any good recipes for the Atkins Diet? Need some good
> > > ideas for meal planning.
> >
> > I'm certainly not an M.D. but would like to relay comments from my own
> M.D.
> >
> > If you are trying to lose weight, but are diabetic, do *not* go on the
> > Atkins diet. It is dangerous for diabetics since it throws the body
into
> > ketosis. The best and safest recommendation is to stay within the
> American
> > Diabetic Association (ADA) guidelines.
> >
>
> You need to find a new doctor. Sheesh, it is terrible to see such basic
> ignorance of medicine in a practicing physician. I am dead serious on this
> and I know what I am talking about. Your Dr. is mixing up ketosis which is
> of no danger to diabetics or anyone else, and ketoacidosis which is
> dangerous.
> --
> Peter Aitken

In that case, dear heart, I am the one who misunderstood the terms
ketosis/ketoacidosis, not my M.D. I said I was no M.D.
His message was emphatic and clear - Atkins is not for diabetics.

Dora

"limey" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Peter Aitken" > wrote in message
> news
> > "limey" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > >
> > > "Vicky and John" > wrote in message
> > > ...
> > > > Does anyone have any good recipes for the Atkins Diet? Need some
good
> > > > ideas for meal planning.
> > >
> > > I'm certainly not an M.D. but would like to relay comments from my own
> > M.D.
> > >
> > > If you are trying to lose weight, but are diabetic, do *not* go on the
> > > Atkins diet. It is dangerous for diabetics since it throws the body
> into
> > > ketosis. The best and safest recommendation is to stay within the
> > American
> > > Diabetic Association (ADA) guidelines.
> > >
> >
> > You need to find a new doctor. Sheesh, it is terrible to see such basic
> > ignorance of medicine in a practicing physician. I am dead serious on
this
> > and I know what I am talking about. Your Dr. is mixing up ketosis which
is
> > of no danger to diabetics or anyone else, and ketoacidosis which is
> > dangerous.
> > --
> > Peter Aitken
>
> In that case, dear heart, I am the one who misunderstood the terms
> ketosis/ketoacidosis, not my M.D. I said I was no M.D.
> His message was emphatic and clear - Atkins is not for diabetics.
>
> Dora
>

You still don't get it. If he said that Atkins causes ketoacidosis then he
is wrong. If he said that ketosis is harmful to diabetics then he is wrong.
I do not see what there could have been for you to misunderstand. The bulk
of the evidence indicates that the low carb approach is beneficial for both
type 1 and type 2 diabetics. There are probably individual cases where other
factors argue against Atkins, but if he made the blanket statement "Atkins
is not for diabetics" then he is wrong, period, end of story. You can go on
blindly believing him if you like or you can look into it for yourself.

--
Peter Aitken

Remove the crap from my email address before using.

"limey" > wrote in message >...
> "Vicky and John" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Does anyone have any good recipes for the Atkins Diet? Need some good
> > ideas for meal planning.
>
> I'm certainly not an M.D. but would like to relay comments from my own M.D.
>
> If you are trying to lose weight, but are diabetic, do *not* go on the
> Atkins diet. It is dangerous for diabetics since it throws the body into
> ketosis. The best and safest recommendation is to stay within the American
> Diabetic Association (ADA) guidelines.

Lots of people disagree with your MD:

http://www.defeatdiabetes.org/Articles/diet030710.htm













Diabetes Diet War
The nutrition advice given to most diabetics might be killing them
posted 07/10/03

By Dara Mayers

The bible says "make starches the star." That's the Diabetes Food and
Nutrition Bible, published by the American Diabetes Association.
"Grains, beans, and starchy vegetables form the foundation of the
Diabetes Food Pyramid. The message is to eat more of these foods than
of any of the other food groups." For 17 million Americans with
diabetes, diet is a crucial part of treatment, And what the ADA bible
preaches, many doctors, nutritionists, and patients believe.

But what if the ADA's high-starch diet--another way of saying
high-carbohydrate--is not healthy for people with diabetes but harmful
to them instead?

This possibility is now the source of heated debate in the diabetes
community. It is "the most controversial aspect of diabetes treatment
today," says Scott King, editor-in-chief of Diabetes Interview
magazine. How controversial? "Malpractice!" is how physician and
diabetes specialist Lois Jovanovic, chief scientific officer of the
Sansum Medical Research Institute in Santa Barbara, Calif., describes
conventional high-carb nutrition advice.

Carb consequences. These arguments are more intense than the nutrition
wars over low-carb, Robert Atkins-like diets taking place in
mainstream culture. For people with diabetes, the battle is about more
than waistlines. As far as bodies are concerned, carbohydrates equal
sugar. And complications from Type I and Type II diabetes, which are
caused by high blood-sugar levels, include amputation, heart disease,
blindness, and kidney failure. Often they are lethal. The illness is
not necessarily a disaster, because people with diabetes who maintain
close to normal blood sugar can effectively avoid these problems. A
number of doctors and people with diabetes, however, believe the
high-carb diet is a recipe for trouble.

"There are a number of myths surrounding diet and diabetes, and much
of what is still considered sensible nutritional advice for diabetics
can over the long run be fatal. I know, because it almost killed me,"
writes physician Richard Bernstein in his book Diabetes Solution.
Bernstein, a Type I, or insulin-dependent, diabetic for the past 57
years, has been at war with the medical establishment since the 1970s.
At that time, his failing health caused him to wonder why someone
whose body couldn't process carbs--which are chains of sugar
molecules--was repeatedly being told to eat a lot of them. Should
people with diabetes be eating a diet that is, essentially, 50 percent
to 60 percent sugar?

The reason, historically, has been fear of fat and the cardiovascular
problems that plague diabetics. As the cholesterol-fat-heart-disease
links moved doctors to recommend a low-fat diet, the amount of
carbohydrates recommended for diabetics gradually increased to fill
the void. In 1994, the ADA stated that people with diabetes could eat
anything, including sugar itself. "There is no longer a diabetic diet.
People with diabetes eat the exact same foods as anyone else," says
Nathaniel Clark, national vice president for clinical affairs at the
ADA. "We do not believe there is any harm in eating carbohydrates."

Bernstein does. He prescribes an extremely low carbohydrate
diet--approximately 30 grams of carbs over three meals for diabetics
to achieve normal blood-glucose readings round-the-clock. "In my
experience," he says, "the ADA diet does not work for anyone."

He's not alone. "Diabetes is a disease of `carbohydrate intolerance.'
Thus, meal plans should minimize carbohydrates because people with
diabetes do not tolerate carbs," says Sansum's Jovanovic. She
prescribes food considerably lower in carbohydrates than does the ADA.

Some patients are discovering low-carb benefits for themselves. Nancy
Humeniuk, a 70-year-old retiree and Type II diabetic from Monterey,
Tenn., was put on the ADA diet under the direction of a diabetes
educator. "While I was following the diet, my blood-glucose levels
were completely out of control," Humeniuk says. "They told me I was
being noncompliant--but I was following the diet exactly. I was
scared." After three months, Humeniuk switched to low carb. "Within
three days of going low carb, my blood sugars were normal. And they
have been for the past six years." Her cholesterol profile is also
very good. "My doctor told me that whatever I was doing, I should keep
it up," she says.

The ADA, however, remains firm in its stance. "A diet that is very low
in carbohydrates is significantly higher in protein and in fat, and
there are specific risks to people with diabetes from high-protein
diets in regard to kidney disease and from high-fat diets in regard to
cardiovascular disease," Clark says. The ADA is far from alone in its
position. "We recommend that 45 to 60 percent of calories come from
carbs," says Karen Chalmers, director of nutrition services at the
Joslin Diabetes Center in Boston.

"Healthy fats." Scientific evidence supporting the low-carb approach
has been thin. But some recent studies have refuted the idea that an
Atkins-like diet increases cholesterol, or lipid, problems. "Our data
would suggest that you don't get a negative lipid pattern with the
Atkins diet," says James Hill, director of the Center for Human
Nutrition at the University of Colorado, where a recent study compared
the Atkins diet with a standard low-fat, high-carb diet. Cholesterol
levels in the Atkins dieters were actually better after a year. Frank
Hu, associate professor of nutrition and epidemiology at the Harvard
School of Public Health, also believes that lower-carb diets are
beneficial to some people with diabetes. He is careful to point out,
however, that carbohydrates should be replaced with "healthy fats,"
such as the mono- and polyunsaturated fats found in olive oil, nuts,
and avocados.

The kidney-disease claim is also disputed. "There is no evidence that
in an otherwise healthy person with diabetes eating protein causes
kidney disease," says Frank Vinicor, director of diabetes research at
the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Some people hope that the new data will have an impact. "The ADA is
responsive to new scientific data and is likely to incorporate this
information into new dietary guidelines with a lower proportion of
carbohydrates," says ADA board member Barbara Kahn, a physician and
diabetes expert at Harvard Medical School. Kahn has seen how difficult
it is for people with diabetes to gain control while following current
recommendations, so she is pushing for changes. Still, the ADA Web
site and all of its literature continue to tell people with diabetes
and the thousands of medical professionals who treat them to make
starches "the centerpiece of the meal." Revising a bible is never
easy, so it may be quite some time before this bit of medical gospel
sees real change.

Meal plans
Dinner duel

Low-carb Diabetes Solution fare really differs from the standard
advice for diabetics.

"DIABETES SOLUTION" DINNER

Steak 4-6 oz.
Cooked broccoli 2/3 cup
Salad w/dressing 1 cup

AMERICAN DIABETES ASSOCIATION DINNER

Pasta w/vinaigrette dressing 1 cup
Fish 3.5 oz.
Granola bar
Banana


Source: US News & World Report.

July News Article Index




>
> Dora
> >

"Peter Aitken" > wrote in message

> You still don't get it. If he said that Atkins causes ketoacidosis then he
> is wrong. If he said that ketosis is harmful to diabetics then he is
wrong.
> I do not see what there could have been for you to misunderstand. The bulk
> of the evidence indicates that the low carb approach is beneficial for
both
> type 1 and type 2 diabetics. There are probably individual cases where
other
> factors argue against Atkins, but if he made the blanket statement "Atkins
> is not for diabetics" then he is wrong, period, end of story. You can go
on
> blindly believing him if you like or you can look into it for yourself.
>
> --
> Peter Aitken
>
Good grief. Lighten up.

"limey" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Peter Aitken" > wrote in message
>
> > You still don't get it. If he said that Atkins causes ketoacidosis then
he
> > is wrong. If he said that ketosis is harmful to diabetics then he is
> wrong.
> > I do not see what there could have been for you to misunderstand. The
bulk
> > of the evidence indicates that the low carb approach is beneficial for
> both
> > type 1 and type 2 diabetics. There are probably individual cases where
> other
> > factors argue against Atkins, but if he made the blanket statement
"Atkins
> > is not for diabetics" then he is wrong, period, end of story. You can go
> on
> > blindly believing him if you like or you can look into it for yourself.
> >
> > --
> > Peter Aitken
> >
> Good grief. Lighten up.
>

That's about the most asinine response I have ever seen. Your doctor is
misleading you and I am trying to provide you with better information, and
you tell me to "lighten up?" OK, how's this:

"Golly gee, doctors are never wrong, you better believe him!"

--
Peter Aitken

Remove the crap from my email address before using.

On Thu, 6 Nov 2003 12:53:19 -0500, "limey"
> wrote:

>
>"Peter Aitken" > wrote in message
>news
>> "limey" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >
>> > "Vicky and John" > wrote in message
>> > ...
>> > > Does anyone have any good recipes for the Atkins Diet? Need some good
>> > > ideas for meal planning.
>> >
>> > I'm certainly not an M.D. but would like to relay comments from my own
>> M.D.
>> >
>> > If you are trying to lose weight, but are diabetic, do *not* go on the
>> > Atkins diet. It is dangerous for diabetics since it throws the body
>into
>> > ketosis. The best and safest recommendation is to stay within the
>> American
>> > Diabetic Association (ADA) guidelines.
>> >
>>
>> You need to find a new doctor. Sheesh, it is terrible to see such basic
>> ignorance of medicine in a practicing physician. I am dead serious on this
>> and I know what I am talking about. Your Dr. is mixing up ketosis which is
>> of no danger to diabetics or anyone else, and ketoacidosis which is
>> dangerous.
>> --
>> Peter Aitken
>
>In that case, dear heart, I am the one who misunderstood the terms
>ketosis/ketoacidosis, not my M.D. I said I was no M.D.
>His message was emphatic and clear - Atkins is not for diabetics.
>
>Dora
>
>

Doru RUN dont walk RUN from that MD...either clueless of
basic fact about nutrition and diabetes or hes trying to
kill you off fast hon...Hag k



As a beauty Im not a star, there are
others more handsome by far, but my
face I dont mind it because Im behind
it, its the folks out front that I jar...

Pull a loraine Bobbit (cut off waynespenis) to reply

"Peter Aitken" > wrote in message
. com...
> "limey" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Peter Aitken" > wrote in message
> >
> > > You still don't get it. If he said that Atkins causes ketoacidosis
then
> he
> > > is wrong. If he said that ketosis is harmful to diabetics then he is
> > wrong.
> > > I do not see what there could have been for you to misunderstand. The
> bulk
> > > of the evidence indicates that the low carb approach is beneficial for
> > both
> > > type 1 and type 2 diabetics. There are probably individual cases where
> > other
> > > factors argue against Atkins, but if he made the blanket statement
> "Atkins
> > > is not for diabetics" then he is wrong, period, end of story. You can
go
> > on
> > > blindly believing him if you like or you can look into it for
yourself.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Peter Aitken
> > >
> > Good grief. Lighten up.
> >
>
> That's about the most asinine response I have ever seen. Your doctor is
> misleading you and I am trying to provide you with better information, and
> you tell me to "lighten up?" OK, how's this:
>
> "Golly gee, doctors are never wrong, you better believe him!"
>
> --
> Peter Aitken

That's perfectly all right, Peter. I have suffered enough of your
supercilious and derogatory remarks for some time, as have others. I will
no longer get irritated by your know-it-all attitude to me and to others if
you agree to overlook (let's see) my lack of intelligence (made some time
ago), that in this instance I "don't get it", that my remarks are asinine,
etc., etc. It's your right to killfile me - please do.

Dora

"Tony Lew" wrote in message
>
> Lots of people disagree with your MD:
>
http://www.defeatdiabetes.org/Articles/diet030710.htm


Thank you, Tony, for the informative article. I appreciate your courtesy.

Dora

"Hag & Stenni" > wrote in message
> >
>
> Doru RUN dont walk RUN from that MD...either clueless of
> basic fact about nutrition and diabetes or hes trying to
> kill you off fast hon...Hag k
>
Thanks, Hag - your advice I will take. I just really got my back up a few
posts ago. I usually don't sound off (even though I meant it :-D)

Dora

Dora

"limey" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Peter Aitken" > wrote in message
> . com...
> > "limey" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > >
> > > "Peter Aitken" > wrote in message
> > >
> > > > You still don't get it. If he said that Atkins causes ketoacidosis
> then
> > he
> > > > is wrong. If he said that ketosis is harmful to diabetics then he is
> > > wrong.
> > > > I do not see what there could have been for you to misunderstand.
The
> > bulk
> > > > of the evidence indicates that the low carb approach is beneficial
for
> > > both
> > > > type 1 and type 2 diabetics. There are probably individual cases
where
> > > other
> > > > factors argue against Atkins, but if he made the blanket statement
> > "Atkins
> > > > is not for diabetics" then he is wrong, period, end of story. You
can
> go
> > > on
> > > > blindly believing him if you like or you can look into it for
> yourself.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Peter Aitken
> > > >
> > > Good grief. Lighten up.
> > >
> >
> > That's about the most asinine response I have ever seen. Your doctor is
> > misleading you and I am trying to provide you with better information,
and
> > you tell me to "lighten up?" OK, how's this:
> >
> > "Golly gee, doctors are never wrong, you better believe him!"
> >
> > --
> > Peter Aitken
>
> That's perfectly all right, Peter. I have suffered enough of your
> supercilious and derogatory remarks for some time, as have others. I will
> no longer get irritated by your know-it-all attitude to me and to others
if
> you agree to overlook (let's see) my lack of intelligence (made some time
> ago), that in this instance I "don't get it", that my remarks are asinine,
> etc., etc. It's your right to killfile me - please do.
>
> Dora

I guess that you really don't see what you are doing. Offered a correction
to some erroneous information that you posted, you reject it. Are you so
fond of remaining ignorant that you cannot suffer any corrections? That's a
sure way to stay ignorant for the rest of your life. Well, maybe that's what
you want. Such insecurity is all too common on the newsgroups. I may not be
the most diplomatic person, but I offer my opinions and knowledge in the
spirit of cooperation and mutual help that is - or at least should be - the
basis of these groups. If you cannot accept that it is your problem and I
cannot do anything about it.

BTW, where did you get the idea that I was going to killfile you? I never
mentioned any such thing - it is your invention. I should point out that
asking someone to killfile you is the latest junior high school level way of
trying to get the upper hand in a disagreement. It does not speak well for
you.

--
Peter Aitken

Remove the crap from my email address before using.

On 6 Nov 2003 09:46:07 -0800, (Tony
Lew) wrote:
>
> A Google search shows 1550 articles that mention "Atkins" and 1540 that
> mention "low carb" in RFC.
> They seem to bother the hell out of here.
> On the other hand, she doesn't seem to mind the 10,600 articles that
> mention "low fat".

Hmmm. I must have my own built in filter, because I don't
filter any messages via my news reader... I read/post on an
almost daily basis.

Peter Aitken wrote:


YOU NEED TO GROW UP, Peter!!!
>
> I guess that you really don't see what you are doing. Offered a correction
> to some erroneous information that you posted, you reject it. Are you so
> fond of remaining ignorant that you cannot suffer any corrections? That's a
> sure way to stay ignorant for the rest of your life. Well, maybe that's what
> you want. Such insecurity is all too common on the newsgroups. I may not be
> the most diplomatic person, but I offer my opinions and knowledge in the
> spirit of cooperation and mutual help that is - or at least should be - the
> basis of these groups. If you cannot accept that it is your problem and I
> cannot do anything about it.
>
> BTW, where did you get the idea that I was going to killfile you? I never
> mentioned any such thing - it is your invention. I should point out that
> asking someone to killfile you is the latest junior high school level way of
> trying to get the upper hand in a disagreement. It does not speak well for
> you.
>
>

"Peter Aitken"
>
> I guess that you really don't see what you are doing. Offered a correction
> to some erroneous information that you posted, you reject it. Are you so
> fond of remaining ignorant that you cannot suffer any corrections? That's
a
> sure way to stay ignorant for the rest of your life. Well, maybe that's
what
> you want. Such insecurity is all too common on the newsgroups. I may not
be
> the most diplomatic person, but I offer my opinions and knowledge in the
> spirit of cooperation and mutual help that is - or at least should be -
the
> basis of these groups. If you cannot accept that it is your problem and I
> cannot do anything about it.
>
> BTW, where did you get the idea that I was going to killfile you? I never
> mentioned any such thing - it is your invention. I should point out that
> asking someone to killfile you is the latest junior high school level way
of
> trying to get the upper hand in a disagreement. It does not speak well for
> you.
>
> Peter Aitken

To use your flattering term, "you just don't get it, do you?" It was not
the information you were disseminating, but the way you have presented
yourself in this thread. Certainly, if I have believed my physician and
not checked, then I have been
naïve, but your attitude has just succeeded in antagonizing me again. You
have a problem. End of subject.

"limey" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Peter Aitken"
> >
> > I guess that you really don't see what you are doing. Offered a
correction
> > to some erroneous information that you posted, you reject it. Are you so
> > fond of remaining ignorant that you cannot suffer any corrections?
That's
> a
> > sure way to stay ignorant for the rest of your life. Well, maybe that's
> what
> > you want. Such insecurity is all too common on the newsgroups. I may not
> be
> > the most diplomatic person, but I offer my opinions and knowledge in the
> > spirit of cooperation and mutual help that is - or at least should be -
> the
> > basis of these groups. If you cannot accept that it is your problem and
I
> > cannot do anything about it.
> >
> > BTW, where did you get the idea that I was going to killfile you? I
never
> > mentioned any such thing - it is your invention. I should point out that
> > asking someone to killfile you is the latest junior high school level
way
> of
> > trying to get the upper hand in a disagreement. It does not speak well
for
> > you.
> >
> > Peter Aitken
>
> To use your flattering term, "you just don't get it, do you?" It was not
> the information you were disseminating, but the way you have presented
> yourself in this thread. Certainly, if I have believed my physician and
> not checked, then I have been
> naïve, but your attitude has just succeeded in antagonizing me again.
You
> have a problem. End of subject.
>

Actually I do get it. Someone responding to you to provide information or a
correction has to carefully compose the message to avoid offending your
delicate sensibilities or running afoul of your insecurities. When I respond
to someone I show them the respect of assuming that they are a mature adult
and can deal with the information I provide without getting into a snit
about my admittedly straightforward and sometimes blunt way of expressing
myself. I guess that assumption was wrong in this case.

Peter G. Aitken

In article >,
(Tony Lew) wrote:


[snipped a lot of very useful information about diabetes and diet]


> "DIABETES SOLUTION" DINNER
>
> Steak 4-6 oz.
> Cooked broccoli 2/3 cup
> Salad w/dressing 1 cup
>
> AMERICAN DIABETES ASSOCIATION DINNER
>
> Pasta w/vinaigrette dressing 1 cup
> Fish 3.5 oz.
> Granola bar
> Banana


I think what I'd find with both of the above diets is that I would have a
serious case of the munchies sometime in the evening. Of course, if I
weighed 100 pounds instead of 175, the above diets might be enough.
However, that second dinner looks like a sugar spike waiting to happen.


Part of the problem is that we are all looking for the easy solution. The
easy solution probably won't be a good solution. Since diet is the number
one factor in controlling blood sugar for type II diabetics, it's worth
spending the time to find out what works and what doesn't. The best diet
in the world is no good if the patient doesn't follow it.


Another part of the problem is that people have eating habits that are
very hard to change. The high carb diet is going to work a whole lot
better for a diabetic if they eat six meals a day. It's not going to work
well for somebody who eats 2/3 of their carbs in one meal. It's also not
going to work well for the person who "conveniently" doesn't notice that
they are eating 4 cups of pasta when the diet specifies one cup.


Most type II diabetics are fat. There, we're out with it. I suspect that
the composition of the diet is less important than just losing weight.

--
Dan Abel
Sonoma State University
AIS

Nancy Howells wrote:

> Why do I say this? 79 pounds in 14 months, no bad breath (other than
> the usual from garlic); no constipation, no badness of any kind, being
> monitored by my physician.
>
> Nothing is absolute. I take it you're a nuitritionist?
>
> --

You just keep doin' what you're doin'. CONGRATULATIONS on your big weight loss.

Nutritionists, who seem to be entirely full of themselves (to put it politely)
not so long ago were advising the banning of egg yolks and the use of
polyunsaturated fats only. I recall one radio nutritionist in the 1980s almost
stepping out of her step-ins when the interviewer said that he didn't see
anything wrong with olive oil, which isn't polyunsaturated.

Now monosaturated oils are supposed to be better for you than polyunsaturates.
At least until next Tuesday...

Joe Flannigan > wrote in message >...
> Nancy Howells wrote:
>
> > Why do I say this? 79 pounds in 14 months, no bad breath (other than
> > the usual from garlic); no constipation, no badness of any kind, being
> > monitored by my physician.
> >
> > Nothing is absolute. I take it you're a nuitritionist?
> >
> > --
>
> You just keep doin' what you're doin'. CONGRATULATIONS on your big weight loss.
>
> Nutritionists, who seem to be entirely full of themselves (to put it politely)
> not so long ago were advising the banning of egg yolks and the use of
> polyunsaturated fats only. I recall one radio nutritionist in the 1980s almost
> stepping out of her step-ins when the interviewer said that he didn't see
> anything wrong with olive oil, which isn't polyunsaturated.
>
> Now monosaturated oils are supposed to be better for you than polyunsaturates.
> At least until next Tuesday...

Hell, there was an article about "Nutrition Myths" in Parade magazine a few
weeks ago, and you know what? Every single one of these "myths" was
what the nutritionists were recommending about 15-20 years ago (e.g. Don't eat
nuts because they're high in fat) !