Active Low-Carber Forums
Atkins diet and low carb discussion provided free for information only, not as medical advice.
Home Plans Tips Recipes Tools Stories Studies Products
Active Low-Carber Forums
A sugar-free zone


Welcome to the Active Low-Carber Forums.
Support for Atkins diet, Protein Power, Neanderthin (Paleo Diet), CAD/CALP, Dr. Bernstein Diabetes Solution and any other healthy low-carb diet or plan, all are welcome in our lowcarb community. Forget starvation and fad diets -- join the healthy eating crowd! You may register by clicking here, it's free!

Go Back   Active Low-Carber Forums > Main Low-Carb Diets Forums & Support > Low Carb Health & Technical Forums > Plan comparison
User Name
Password
FAQ Members Calendar Search Gallery My P.L.A.N. Survey


 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #6   ^
Old Thu, May-21-09, 13:21
capmikee's Avatar
capmikee capmikee is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 5,160
 
Plan: Weston A. Price, GFCF
Stats: 165/133/132 Male 5' 5"
BF:?/12.7%/?
Progress: 97%
Location: Philadelphia
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Abby3
Maybe I should just forget about the cholesterol issue.

Yes! You have bigger fish to fry. There's very little conclusive data about cholesterol anyway.

I find that things get a lot less confusing if you consider the source. Most sources of information that say that meat is bad, fat is bad, or carbohydrates are good are based on the lipid hypothesis of Ancel Keys. This hypothesis is fundamentally incompatible with the idea that eating low-carb is healthy, so if you accept it you are bound to be confused. A combination of personal experience and plenty of low-carb reading has helped me decide what to think of the lipid hypothesis (and the competing "carbohydrate hypothesis"). If you haven't made up your mind yet, it might help to tackle this big question first before you examine the details.

"Good Calories, Bad Calories" is mostly about how these two hypotheses came about and what evidence exists to support them. While I agree with Fallon and Enig on most things, their writing style and facility with the facts tends towards the fanatical. Taubes is much more level-headed and scientific about the subject.
Reply With Quote
 


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:12.


Copyright © 2000-2024 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.