Quote:
Originally posted by Mila
I have no problems with marketing strategies publishing houses or the authors of the dieting books use.
|
Me neither. Marketing is one thing, integrity is something else. The problem arises when they are in conflict, and they don't have to be.
Quote:
|
I cannot speak for dr.sears. where in his books or public statements does he state that increased protein intake leads to the muscle mass loss? high protein diets do cause initial water loss, because of increased urination, as the body tries to get rid of the excess of the ketone bodies. since you haven't provided references to this statement of dr. sears's I do not know if he indeed referred to the initial water weight loss or was unwise enough to say that all loss on ketogenic diets is due to reduction in bodywater %.
|
Enter the Zone, pages 18-20. I frankly didn't think his views were unknown, but glad to know you think it's unwise.
Quote:
|
ketosis is normal body reaction to abnormal health status (e.g. the one that arises in diabetes) or to abnormal nutrition ( extremely low carbs, either intentionally or not intentionally achieved by the individual), you know that. that's the meaning of the 'abnormal' in dr.sears's statement.
|
That's exactly the type of misinformation you get into, when science is irrelevant. When ketosis and ketoacidosis are treated as one and the same. .
Quote:
|
as a side note, why be so hot about 'clinical and scientific proof'? science doesn't prove anything,
|
Well, for starters, it's under the guise of "scientific proof" that these claims are made, and Dr. Sears presents tons of scientific papers to quote from, except on the marketing aspect attacking other LC plans.
In addition, with all of it's limitations, science leaves no room for pure emotions towards what's right and what's not.
I'd rather be "hot" on science, than "hot" on "my plan is best". For a while, you were "hot" on the zone and advising others to switch to the zone. Now it's Fat Flush, not the Zone, tomorrow it might be something else. Not to dismiss the role of emotions though, but why is it placed higher than science? From what I've seen, it leads to zealousy, where if your latest plan becomes an emotional attachement, you end up as an evangelist to your plan as the way, they only way, and no one loses fat except through your way (the others just lose water and muscle)...
What's worst, under the emotional embrella, it's hard to see this taking place. So, to me science is a better alternative, not perfect, but the best we have.
Wa'il