MRS. SPATKINS

By STEFAN C. FRIEDMAN

February 15, 2004 -- Less than a month after publicly lambasting Mayor Bloomberg for tarnishing her husband's legacy, the widow of Dr. Robert Atkins already has a new target in her sights - people who don't eat meat.
"They're like the Taliban. They're the vegetarian Taliban," Veronica Atkins fumes in an interview with "Dateline NBC" set to air Friday in conjunction with the last American TV interview with Dr. Atkins before his death.

"They're nasty. I've seen them. I've been to conventions, and everything else. They are nasty, nasty people," Mrs. Atkins continues.

Mrs. Atkins was infuriated when the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine - a group that promotes a vegetarian diet - obtained the diet guru's medical records that showed that he weighed a beefy 258 pounds when he died.

Mrs. Atkins contends the group then leaked the medical records to the Wall Street Journal in an attempt to prove that Dr. Atkins' low-carb, protein-rich diet was responsible for his massive girth.

"If they had obtained them, [that's] one thing," she said. "But they send them around to everybody. As a physician, is that honorable? Is that honest? Have they forgotten . . . their oath?"

The president of PCRM says the Atkins people brought this on themselves by using Dr. Atkins himself as a spokesman for the diet.

"Dr. Atkins used details of his own heart health in a completely inappropriate way for the sole purpose of promoting his diet," said Dr. Neal Barnard.

"This absurd claim that Atkins was in great heart health has gone forward, and it has been simply untrue."

Atkins supporters claim he gained an astounding 63 pounds from attempts to save his life - including being fed intravenous fluids - during the eight days he spent in the hospital prior to his death.

Several doctors told The Post that a brain-injured patient on life support can easily gain 20 to 30 pounds of fluid in a week, but they called a 63-pound weight gain implausible, even ridiculous.

Many who saw Dr. Atkins in his last years noticed he was a little heavy around the middle.

While not calling him fat, some say the controversial diet guru was pear-shaped and had a flabby gut. "He wasn't Dom DeLuise, but he wasn't thin," said radio host Mark Simone, who saw Atkins several times.

"He didn't look like a guy who you'd ask, 'You look great. What diet are you on?' "

As for Mrs. Atkins' feud with Bloomberg, who called Dr. Atkins "fat" and suggested he actually died from health problems and not a slip on icy pavement, Mrs. Atkins says the hatchet is officially buried.

The mayor "created quite a storm," she says, laughing. "But I don't think he really meant harm."

Source: http://www.nypost.com/news/regionalnews/17928.htm

I am going to make myself a bumper sticker. "I am a vegetarian, but I don't support the PCRM."

Interesting key words in this "informative" article. Starting with the headline, "Mrs. Spatkins", and moving on to "beefy", and "massive girth" in describing Dr. Atkins. Odd that they would include this quote: "While not calling him fat, some say the controversial diet guru was pear-shaped and had a flabby gut. "He wasn't Dom DeLuise, but he wasn't thin," said radio host Mark Simone, who saw Atkins several times.", but not Neil Cavuto, who thought he looked rather frail. But maybe they didn't ask Neil if he could be quoted because what he was saying wouldn't create nearly as much controversy. And, OBTW...who are these "some"? And I guess they had to use the word "several" in this quote: "Several doctors told The Post that a brain-injured patient on life support can easily gain 20 to 30 pounds of fluid in a week, but they called a 63-pound weight gain implausible, even ridiculous." because they couldn't find "most" or even "many". Someone should tell the media it is time to move on to something else...they are really, really making me grumpy.

I think this is similar to how animal lovers feel about PETA. I abhore cruelty to animals, and I also abhore PETA's ethics and tactics.

So it doesn't surprise me that most vegetarians also disagree with PCRMS ethics and tactics.

Not surprisingly, those two organizations are on and the same, financially.

Wa'il

Yup-

It is one of those slippery slopes where the ends don't justify the means.

Very good idea. It's groups like PCRM that give vegans/vegetarians a bad name.

I'm against animal cruelty, but that doesn't mean I'm for PETA.

Let's see now. 'Several' doctors stated that a patient on life support can easily gain 20 to 30 pounds in a week. Atkins was on life support for two weeks. 30 plus 30 equals 60. They really should start requiring grade school arithmetic in medical schools, or should I say journalism schools.

If only these people (PETA/PCRM) would put their energies towards pushing for sustainable agriculture, with animals treated humanely and having decent lives, and thus producing much healthier meats for all of us. But no. These fanatics have to demand that we all become vegans. Can't even wear leather shoes or wool clothing. What a waste. And they defame other vegetarians and folks who are truly working for the 'ethical treatment of animals'. What a crying shame.

(Oh, and BTW, I have heard several news reports stating that Atkins was weighed when he was brought to the hospital and his weight was 195.)

CNN obtained Dr. Atkins' admission/hospital records (legally...with family consent) and they did indeed show that his weight on admission was 195 pounds.

I'm always uncomfortable, to be blunt, with the attachment of words like Taliban or Nazi to someone other than actual Nazis or Taliban. I think PCRM are dead wrong, unethical, and generally an awful bunch. I wouldn't want to confuse ethics in relationship to their abhorent behavior with the brutal murderers that ruled Afghanistan in the 1990's.

They're a rotten bunch, but they aren't Taliban. It's just out of perspective to make those comparisons (the same as the people who inevitably compare others to Hitler; only Hitler was Hitler, folks).

I just think we'd all be better off maintaining some kind of proper perspective on this kind of namecalling. Mrs. Atkins probably has a personal reason to hate PCRM's guts, so it's a bit more understandable in her case than in many others.

Oh boy. You know, there's something called "Godwin's law" that states that any serious discussion is over at the first mention of nazis or Hitler (and an unofficial corollary that states that whoever invoked such loses). I would reluctantly go out on a limb and add "the Taliban" to this list, and sadly say that Mrs. Atkins "lost" this round.

That law applies to common sense arguments and debate. I don't think anyone sees any common sense with the PCRM and PETA, except the PCRM and PETA. To them, if you eat meat or chicken, you're a nazi!

Wa'il

No, not the Vegetable Taliban!?!

For some reason, I see zucchinis in turbans weilding scimtars and riding carrots and yelling while charging at a hapless steak.

True, there was only one Hitler - until the next wannabe comes along - and if the new one starts showing Hitler-like traits, are we just supposed to give him a pass because he is NOT the "real" Hitler?

Similarities between the Taliban and PETA/PCRM/ALF:

1. Religious Certainty the excludes Science

The Taliban principles are based on a fundimentalist, Sunni Islamic teaching that exclude other religions or sciences.

The PRCM/PETA/ALF principles are based on quasi-religious beliefs (and sometimes actual religious beliefs) that exclude any scientific information that does not gibe with their teachings.

2. Dealing with Others.

The Taliban destroyed ancient Buddhist statues, despite the near-universal outcry from other Islamic countries.

The ALF (Animal Liberation Front) has caused millions of dollars of damage to animal research and processing facilities, despite denunciations from more moderate vegetarian and vegan groups. (PCRM and PETA have uncomfortable ties to ALF).

3. Dealing with women.

The Taliban threw acid onto the faces of women who did not veil themselves.

PETA/ALF threw paint onto the clothers of women who wore fur.

4. Coverups.

In order to better manipulate diplomatic systems and protect their members, the Taliban obscured their relationship with the followers of Osama bin Ladin until it became clear that they were one in the same.

In order to better manipulate the media and their critics, and protect their fund-raising and their members, PCRM/PETA/ALF obscure their links with shell organizations to keep it from becoming clear that they are one in the same.

5. Origins

The Taliban began as "Talibs" - "schools" for teaching an extremist version of Sunni Islam.
PCRM and PETA began as "educational" groups to promote an extremist version of "healthier eating" and "better treatment for animals".

6. Ethics

The Taliban recognized no barriers or standards of ethics for enforcing their beliefs on others - their treatment of women and dissenting Afghans makes that clear.

The PCRM and PETA recognize no barriers or standards of ethics for enforcing their beliefs on others - their treatment of fur-wearers, Dr. Atkins, and other dissenters makes that clear.

7. Goals

The Taliban's goal was to spread their version of Islam throughout the entire world, at any cost.

The goal of PCRM/PETA is to spread their version of Veganism throughout the entire world, at any cost.

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but the PCRM has yet to *kill anyone.*

"The ALF (Animal Liberation Front) has caused millions of dollars of damage to animal research and processing facilities, despite denunciations from more moderate vegetarian and vegan groups. (PCRM and PETA have uncomfortable ties to ALF)."

Stop medical research using animals and eventually you will have "killed" people by denying them the medical treatment discovered through this research that could have saved their lives. Dead is dead, regardless of whether you use the knife to inflict the killing blow or prevent the research that will save the life.