jombithedjinn wrote:
> You obviously know nothing about nutrition.

You shouldn't say things like that when you are just about to say
things like this:

> Typical diets are inferior to the atkins diet

A diet that forces you into an illness in order to create a particular
look for a purely subjective reason is inferior to almost any other
diet in almost every way.

Atkins was a scam, then a fad, now it's just an old joke.

--Blair

Blair P. Houghton wrote:

> jombithedjinn wrote:
>
>>You obviously know nothing about nutrition.
>
>
> You shouldn't say things like that when you are just about to say
> things like this:
>
>
>>Typical diets are inferior to the atkins diet
>
>
> A diet that forces you into an illness in order to create a particular
> look for a purely subjective reason is inferior to almost any other
> diet in almost every way.
>

People who think ketosis is an illness are misinformed. It's very likely
that our hunter/gatherer ancestors spent much of their lives in ketosis.

> Atkins was a scam, then a fad, now it's just an old joke.

Atkins works, has been around for over 30 years, and has quite a lot of
independant clinical research backing it up.

Dana

Just out of curiosity: How many of the people in this discussion who
are referring to Atkins as a "scam" or claim it's unhealthy have
actually *read* Dr. Atkins' New Diet Revolution, or any book written by
Dr. Atkins, for that matter?

Dana

Dana Carpender wrote:
> Just out of curiosity: How many of the people in this discussion who
> are referring to Atkins as a "scam" or claim it's unhealthy have
> actually *read* Dr. Atkins' New Diet Revolution, or any book written by
> Dr. Atkins, for that matter?
>
[ All the cross - addresses deleted ]

I read the first Atkins book through about the first 60 pages. It was
such nonsense I kept waiting for the punch line. When it hadn't
appeared by then, I tossed it. Then to my surprise it didn't go away
and developed a whole generation of True Believers. So I read
whichever was the latest book about a year and a half ago. Once again
it's premises were ludicrous but now there was a lot of pseudo-science
arrayed around it. All the same fallacies and omissions and lack of
rigor of all the other fads that Americans surround themselves with.

Not that my reading experience means anything, but: you asked. -aem

"Dana Carpender" > wrote
> Just out of curiosity: How many of the people in this discussion who are
> referring to Atkins as a "scam" or claim it's unhealthy have actually
> *read* Dr. Atkins' New Diet Revolution, or any book written by Dr. Atkins,
> for that matter?

Me. It's a scam. It's unhealthy, and you're a ****ing moron if you buy into
"fad" diets.

But hey, since this all started with an offhanded comment by Trijcomm, I'm
not surprised it drew other hopelessly clueless rubes.

On Sun, 21 May 2006 15:49:11 -0400, Dana Carpender
> wrote:

>Just out of curiosity: How many of the people in this discussion who
>are referring to Atkins as a "scam" or claim it's unhealthy have
>actually *read* Dr. Atkins' New Diet Revolution, or any book written by
>Dr. Atkins, for that matter?
>
>Dana

My wife and I did it and I lost 45 pounds, and felt great. Why does
anybody think that giving up sugar, flour, potatoes and "sweet" fruits
are necessarily bad for you. You only give up the fruits for a short
time, then you can eat them sparingly.

My doctor pretty much summed it up when he saw the results and found
out how I did it. His response "I've never had to put anybody in the
hospital from following this diet."

Neal