It seems to have fallen out of favour here of late - but when dieting i still see sense in the P+C/P+F idea.. even if 'Berardi has moved away from it'!
When dieting - i generally restrict carbs down to 30~50g or so a day, and eat high protein, high fat. OR if i want to drop just a little fat during a bulk (to control fat gain), i'll drop fats and eat high protein, high carb. They BOTH work and i know for a fact that if i was to eat high P, C and F then i would not improve my composition as much as i currently do with the protocols i use.
Of course it is not just black and white - and i am not suggesting that eating P+C that is laden with sugar will be as successful as a diet with EFA's, wholegrains and lean proteins - BUT i am working under the assumption that healthy choices are always made (high fibre, low sat fat, low sugar, etc.)
Maybe it is because i am a bodybuilder instead of a general fitness/general muscle proponent like many who follow the 'popular' nutrition/training plans - but i stick to low carb (ie. P+F with P+C re-feeds) for dieting and it is perfectly fine (add in carb cycling at discretion).
*I am NOT saying that the nutrition articles are of no value - they are of fantastic value. It is just that it seems that so many who read them religiously tend to move from one to the next depending which is newer, and never really get an opinion of their own.
I think it is a shame that a site with SUCH good information breeds so many fans that are thus unable to discern between them, feeling the need to follow each and every idea!*
sorry - /rant.