Here I sit studying for a Sports Nutrition Exam, and really it should be easy, every single recommendation they tell us is right basically starts, 8-10g per kg carbohydrate. hmm, every sport immaginable, boxing 8-10g, cricket 8-10g, yada yada yada, 10000km running race, well a bit more but generally 8-10g a day. They expect us to believe what they say, but then they give us a gem like this, 1970’s and 1980’s, low cho diets developed for weight loss. Hmm wasnt Ttkins around earlier than that? Well yes, wasnt one of the first written comments on a low cho diet for weight loss somewhat around 1870, well yes. Well shouldnt that be easy to understand for somebody who supposedly did their phd studying the effects of high fat diets on endurance exercise. Well I would hope. Makes me really wonder if its at all worth while.
Probably not.
NO shit , in my nutriton class the prof says that calories should be 60 percent carbs 30% fat and 10% protien. He says that any thing more than 10% will turn into fat tissue.
Using “they” is very bothersome, prejudmental, and to be honest, its offensive, because
- every professor has unique views on topics (whether you agree with them or not is your choice) and
- the professor, can’t go around stating things in life science courses at that aren’t backed up by the literature. Atkins? Give me a break. Ornish made him look like a fool at the USDA debate. The guy hasn’t published one paper. Once he publishes 5 or 10 like Ornish, instructors will acknowledge his work. But for now he’s all about $$$$.
If you don't think its worthwhile, get out now, because that's how academia works bro. The best thing you can do is to teach yourself, that is, read the literature and you'll learn a lot. Good luck, but you've got the wrong impression and attitude.
Is Dr. Atkins only about $$? I think not. As a matter of fact, he was recently at Harvard Med. School to speak about his complementary medical practices. Harvard was very impressed… in fact they recetly opened a complementary medical division within the school. Atkins isn’t just a diet “guru”, he runs an extremely impressive complementary medical facility in NYC. Is he about $? You bet your A$$, is he only about $… I doubt it.
Show me the data bud. Convincing data that saturated fat doesn’t increase the risk of heart disease and cancer. I’m not talking about “complementary medicine”, as I’m sure he has helped many people as a cardiologist.
The guy has made millions and says he hasn't published because he has no money to fund a study. Some of his philosophy is appropriate, but he doesn't read the literature, and like so many others, he incorrectly thinks all carbohydrates are "created equally."
One can take all the supplements/herbs/vitamins he suggests to cover up dietary deficiencies induced by eating the diet, and without them wold induce cancer and heart disease progrssion, but its not the best way to prevent disease. He even states, "if your not overweight, you shouldn't be on my diet."
Atkins actually doesn’t believe that all carbohydrates are created equal. In fact, there’s something called the “Atkins Ratio” which has to do with the antioxidant to carb content of foods. I also find it ironic that you’re blasting Atkins for thinking that all carbs are created equal, but from the sound of it, you think that all saturated fats are created equal. I’d suggest you do some serious research into the difference between palmitic acid and lauric and stearic acids. As for not being on the Atkins diet unless you’re overweight, that’s true to the extent that “The Atkins Diet” has come to signify the extremely low carb diet that Atkins suggests; he also suggests several other diets, all of which are lower in carbohydrates, but some of which are much closer to an isocaloric diet. Now, why am I such an Atkins proponent? Well, he saved the lives of both of my parents, treated an “untreatable” condition in my mother, and I’ve seen the incredible benefits of his diet on hypercholesterolemia, hypertension, diabetes, hypoglycemia, and hyperlipidemia first hand. He doesn’t need to fund any studies as far as I’m concerned. However, he did fund a study that showed a possible metabolic advantage to low carbohydrate diets; however, because it was funded by him, his opponents claim that he cheated somehow (note that he was not one of the experimentors, thereby drastically reducing the possibilites of experimentor bias and of his “fudging” the results.