Peg,
I know this was directed towards Gregory, but since I have read his book I would like to reply to some of your comments.

Your absolutely right you don't need to know how a TV works to turn it on. But what if your TV is broken? How can you fix it if you don't know how it works? It's the same thing with wieght control. If you want change (fix) your body, you must understand how your body uses food.



I agree with you on this point as well. People are always going to have different interpretations of things. I'm sure Dr. Ellis agrees with this point too. But should that stop him from sharing his view? After all, isn't Atkins and all the other authors simply sharing their interpretation of the data as well?



If you had actually read his book, you would know that Dr. Ellis doesn't force anyone to follow a specific way of eating. He only has one rule, and only one rule. That rule is to burn more calories than you consume. Outside of that, it doesn't matter if your following Atkins, Weight Watchers, Richard Simmons or your own specialized diet - you will lose weight. Dr. Ellis does give specific (and very useful) ways to optimize your weightloss and control hunger. This is primarily done through a low carb diet. This website is a resource for people on a low carb diet - not just Atkins. I don't think that Dr. Ellis is wrong in sharing his "version" of this diet and trying to explain his research.



What you are arguing is the way in which Dr. Ellis has chosen to market his plan - not his plan itself. I can see why you might be wary of examining it because of the way he has chosen to present it. Unless you read the book, there really is no way to convince you.

I followed the Atkins diet for about a year - and I had great success. I only needed to lose about 10 pounds - so the main reason I did it was to maintain my body weight. I am certainly not anti-Atkins. His program is great, as long as one understands that it isn't a license to stuff your face with as much food as you want.

In addition, I ultimately found it difficult to stick to extremely low carb eating for extended periods of time. I think most people on a low carb diet would agree with me.

After reading Dr. Ellis book, I know I can be much more flexible in how many carbs I eat and still maintain my weight very easily. In fact - I have such a strong understanding of how the body regulates it's weight that I know exactly what I need to do if I want to lose more weight.

If you can afford the book - buy it. Even if you don't agree with everything he says, you will gain incredible knowledge on how your body works.

If following Atkins plan is working for you and you are happy with it, by all means don't stop doing it. In fact, if it is working for you then you are already following Dr. Ellis' recommendations.

However, for those who have tried Atkins and didn't lose, or have stopped losing weight, he offers a solution.

Not really, it's the plan. If the plan itself claims to be based on the laws of thermodynamics, to apply to human intake and the amount of calories, as Dr. Ellis claims here, then that's enough to show it is misguided.

Various scientific studies proved it wrong over the last century (as quoted earlier, and ther's a lot more). The only studies supporting this claim, indirectly, are isocaloric or with various caloric amounts, with constant percentages.

This is unscientific, and clearly bad logic.

Yes, you will lose weight on any low-calorie diet. If that's what you want, follow Dr. Stanley (not Dr. Richard) Bernstein's diet, with 600 calories and vitamin injections, and that's it. And you'll lose faster on it! It is low-carb, but low- in everything else. You will lose following Richard Simmons, Weight Whachers, Jenny Craig, and any other low-calorie diet. They all work, initially, and never made the mistake of claiming to follow the laws of thermodynamics.

But no need to twist the laws of thermodynamics for such an effect. It's not a valid thermodynamic case, in an isolated thermodynamic system!

Not sure if Dr. Ellis will realize this mistake, since he has no degree in mechanical engineering. And I do not imply you have to have such a degree, but you need to make the effort to at least understand the basics of those theories, especially if you try to use them in a scientific way to support a hypothesis.

Wa'il

Hi Suze
I too have a son with cerebral palsy. He's a spastic quad, much more unlucky than your son is. He's only able to use an electric wheelchair.
I do have to say that I've counted everything that has gone into that boy's mouth for years and can stick up for you on this point.
My son is 30 now and still skinny as a rail.
Nothing fattening, no amount of calories nothing at all has ever made him gain an ounce.
I was turned in by his pediatrician to the state for being a neglectful mother when he failed to gain weight.
He was put into Childrens Hospital and after 2 weeks returned to me and labeled at 5 months old as a "failure to thrive" baby.
I won't get into any arguements at all with anyone over a diet of any kind but wanted to let you know that I've been where you are too.
Hang in there.
Gail

How can you eat MORE calories on Atkins and still lose weight? Don't the laws of thermodynamics forbid that? Not exactly, it turns out.

You can't escape thermodynamics, true, but you can step around it, and even bend it to your advantage.

Loopholes in the thermodynamic interpretation of diets ("Calories count") might include any or all of the following:

1. Excretion through elimination. (Sorry if the following offends some people, but the eyes of science should be unblinking.) The skat we eliminate is not free of calories - quite the opposite. Have you ever seen an undigested peanut, pickle fragment or corn kernel in the toilet? Proof enough to me that a calorie eaten is not necessarily a calorie burned or stored in the body. Easily absorbed carb calories might count much more highly than fat or protein calories, particularly if the latter are preferentially excreted via adequate fiber. Hence, one hole in the thermo argument - calorie count is not an absolute if some of them are literally flushed away.

2. Excretion through the skin. - Have you ever felt oily skin after a careful cleansing? The oil - the FAT - has been washed away. My skin has become much oilier since I've been on Atkins - I feel it, see it on my face, my clothes (the collars mainly) and my washcloth. How much? It would vary by person based on their amount of skin, type of skin, and bathing habits - but it is NOT zero. Hence, a second hole in the thermo argument - calorie count is not an absolute if some of them are literally being washed away.

3. Increased metabolism. Discussed at length previously in this thread, but I still find the Atkins case compelling, based on both the sounder science and the anecdotal evidence of my friends and me. I have more energy, sleep less, and feel warmer since I've become a low carb devotee. My mental processes are sharper and faster - my productivity at work, as measured by completed tasks - has spiked sharply upward since Atkins. Thus, the third hole in the thermo argument - calorie count is not an absolute if more of them are being burned away.

How can you bend thermodynamics to your will?

1. Flush more (increase your fiber & water; decrease preferentially absorbed calories [meaning carbs, of course]; and don't overchew your food ).

2. Wash more - encourage your body to excrete as much fat through your skin oils as you can. YMMV, of course.

3. Burn more - wear less clothing - walk in a cool breeze - shiver more - forget to wear your coat - drink icy drinks - turn the thermostat to a lower temperature setting - leave the ceiling fan on and reduce the number of blankets on your bed - anything to rev up the fuel burning in your body. Your body wants to maintain its core temperature - NEEDS to burn that fat - if you give it a good reason to. And yes, even exercise will help - but don't exercise with extra weight bags on your body - any fool can do that - be smarter and exercise with extra ICE BAGS on your body - my endurance soars when I wrap an icy towel around my neck, especially in hot weather, and my ability to thermodynamically maximize my fat-burning grows, too.

These are theories, of course, but they are based on known science, observation, and personal experience. Rigorous experimentation and/or studies could prove or disprove them. They are working for me, and if they work for you, then it is all good. I don't know everything, but I do know that people who claim to have all the answers and get irritated when they are questioned are not worthy of the mantle of science.

"Seek the company of those who are looking for the truth, and flee from those who have found it."
-- Vaclav Havel

I read a fair portion of the original article and just couldn't go any further. After the second or third time that he claimed, in absolute terms, that he had learned everything there was to know about the subject, red lights were flashing. Especially after having asked the rhetorical question about some why people plateaued even on reduced calorie diets and then answer his own question with, "I don't know". Well, if he doesn't know that, then how can he know everything about the subject? It's been my experience that people that think they have learned everything about a subject actually know very little - they don't even know enough to recognize how much they don't know! We call these people "sophomores" - Sophisticated Moron - a very real phenomenon that many people - myself included - go through at about that time in their education. You have reached a level of competence with the fundamental, simplified material that you feel you have mastered everything because you have not yet delved into the next level of not-so-simplified material that generally rocks your world and knocks you off your high horse.

At first I was expecting a rational paper that would focus on other aspects of weight control other than DIET COMPOSITION as he always capitalizes it. I was expecting him to talk about the need for exercise - to which I would have pointed out that Atkins himself says that if you aren't exercising you aren't doing Atkins.

But his concept of thermodynamics (as far as I was able to keep reading the diatribe) is very sophomorish. As others have pointed out - thermodynamics deals with ALL of the energy forms being in balance. A gallon of gasoline has so much energy. But if I put that gallon into two identical cars and drive them identical distances in an identical manner one will go a lot farther than the other if one of them has a hole in the gas tank.

For those that don't think feces contain quite a bit of energy, consider that many families used to provide all of their home's heating and cooking energy by using cow dung. Many insects and even many higher animals get most or all of their food intake from eating dung. Organic fertilizer provides the food for the plants that grown in it.

As a result, fairly minor shifts in the percentage of your calorie intake that is eliminated has a huge impact on the energy balance.

As for metabolism being the same for everyone - then how does he explain the generally humongous calorie needs of high endurance athletes such as marathon runners and cyclists? Their calorie consumption increase far exceeds what is required for the activities they participate in. Simple (to first order). If the body is to develop the ability to process energy at an increased level for a sustained period of time, then that same ability is going to require a significantly higher bias point even when those abilities are not being used. High output engines consume quite a bit of fuel even when idling.

I have spent way too long soaking all of this up. I am new to the group and an glad to see so many opinions. Here is mine..

NO ONE has had all the answers for me ( and I am guessing you as well). I have had to work thru my regimine and see what works for my particular body type.

IF EVERYONE HAD THE SAME METABOLIC RATE NONE OF US WOULD BE HERE! I am not going to quote articles, I can see by the postings most of us are thinking clearly.

I have been diagnosed with SYndrome X... I see alot of you probably have the same problems. In 1997 I weighed in at 100...I started this process at least 180. I was having blood sugar comas...I have hypothyroidism. The whole insulin resistance family of fun. I have never in my life lived on more than 1200 calories a day. (This is a average).

In the last 5 years I have seen no less than 10 diffrent doctors all with a diffrent plan of attack. Low Carb does work for me. Thats what I am going with. That is why I am here to seek advice of others IN my situation. I find the whole sales pitch in the beginning to be a "praying" behavior.

I do very much look forward to hearing everyones opinions. As long as you aren't selling them to me!

some people just can't handle tequilla...

Jesus Buddy! I dont even buy Atkins brand stuff...and I am on the plan! Move on...

well, Dr. Ellis, we're waiting for your reply! And your revised editions of your "books"...


guess you didn't really know "everything", did you, ha haaa...


http://www.newsday.com/news/health/...ealth-headlines




THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

October 14, 2003

Fort Lauderdale, Fla. - A new study offers intriguing evidence for the idea that people on low-carbohydrate diets can actually eat more than folks on standard low-fat plans and still lose weight.

Perhaps no idea is more controversial in the diet world than the contention, long espoused by the late Robert Atkins, that people on low-carb diets can consume more calories without gaining weight. Yet skeptics say these dieters simply must be eating less.

Now, a small but carefully controlled study offers a strong hint that Atkins was right: People on low-carb, high-fat diets actually can eat more. The study, directed by Penelope Greene of the Harvard School of Public Health and presented at a meeting here this week of the American Association for the Study of Obesity, found that people eating an extra 300 calories a day on a very low-carb regimen lost just as much weight during a 12-week study as those on a standard low-fat diet.

During the course of the study, they consumed an extra 25,000 calories. That should have added up to about 7 pounds. But for some reason, it didn't.

"There does indeed seem to be something about a low-carb diet that says you can eat more calories and lose a similar amount of weight," Greene said. Not even Greene says this settles the case, but some at the meeting found her report fascinating.

"A lot of our assumptions about a calorie-is-a-calorie are being challenged," said Marlene Schwartz of Yale. "As scientists, we need to be open-minded." Others, though, found the data hard to swallow. "It doesn't make sense, does it?" said Barbara Rolls of Pennsylvania State University. "It violates the laws of thermodynamics. No one has ever found any miraculous metabolic effects."

In the study, 21 overweight volunteers were divided into three categories: Two groups were randomly assigned to either low-fat or low-carb diets with 1,500 calories for women and 1,800 for men; a third group was also low-carb but got an extra 300 calories a day.

Each afternoon, the volunteers picked up that evening's dinner, a bedtime snack and the next day's breakfast and lunch. Instead of lots of red meat and saturated fat, which many find disturbing about low-carb diets, these people ate mostly fish, chicken, salads, vegetables and unsaturated oils. In the end, everyone lost weight. Those on the lower-cal, low-carb regimen took off 23 pounds, while people who got the same calories on the low-fat approach lost 17 pounds. The big surprise, though, was that volunteers getting the extra 300 calories a day of low-carb food lost 20 pounds.

I've lost close to 100 pounds on Atkins...I've hit plateaus just like everyone else. They last for a few days to several weeks. I just waited them out. If someone quits because they hit a plateau for a week or two they aren't really putting any effort into it. I did Low-Calorie/Low-Fat for 6 months, I was stalled for 4-5 MONTHS before I finally gave up. Giving up after a week or two is just plain not trying. As for Ketosis, I don't know if I'm in a deep ketosis or not. The strips stopped registering months ago, but I'm still losing.

As for why Atkins works...you are partly right...it does supress appetite. That is the biggest reason it works. But, it also increases metabolism as much as a few hundred Calories. While this isn't as significant as the several hundred or even thousand plus Calorie reduction in intake, it helps. Even a 250 kcal/day boost will have a large effect on fat loss. Another reason it works as compared to a Low-Fat/Low-Calorie diet is that folks have alot more energy...and this often translates into more exercise. Even 30 minutes/day more excercise can significantly increase fat loss.

Calories count...But, I don't think humans were meant to count them. The ability to measure Calories in food has not been around for too long. If you had to carefully count your Calories, how'd folks stay skinny for millions of years ??? Simple, as long as you eat the right foods...most of the time your intake [of Calories] will regulate itself.

Calories in - Calories out will always be the basic equation. Some folks just don't seem to accept that Calories out can vary other than by exercise. That's why some folks are thin as rails, yet eat twice what I ate before going on Atkins [as estimated by food receipts] and Exercise less. Atkins boosts Metabolism...Albeit not by anywhere near the thousands of extra Calories some folks can eat and not get fat. I believe Metabolism vary considerably (thousands of Calories.) Some folks have very slow Metabolisms which make it very difficult to lose weight...While others are blessed with super fast Metabolisms that allow them to inhale entire bags [BIG BAGS] of Potato Chips washed down with 64 oz. Big Gulps without gaining an ounce. Exercise plays a good role, but it doesn't explain how a guy who sits on the couch watching football all day, inhaling bags of Potato Chips, and washing them down with Gallons of Soda doesn't gain an ounce while another person has to exercise religiously and watch his Calories very closely to keep from gaining weight.

Dr Ellis apparently has too much time on his hands. Atkins bashing (and low carb bashing) has become a favourite past time for many people. Once again (as in previous posts), I must state that Atkins DID NOT invent low carbing, nor did the author's of NeanderThin, Protein Power, The Carbohydrate Addit's Diet, etc. Atkins is the one who was persistent enough to get the message through and gained the most popularity for the low-carb way of eating. Although it is difficult for people to believe there was a history of eating before they appeared on this planet, low carbing was the sole way of eating for hundreds of thousands of years before the birth of Atkins. And the longer humanity strays from this way of eating, the more humanity suffers, as shown by death statistics which become more horrendous every year. Understanding this is not rocket science, it is very simple. History has proven it.
All I know and care to know is that low carbing works for me. I feel great, a number of my previous ailments have entirely disappeared, and a number have been alleviated and I am only 1/4 of my way towards achieving my goal. Sure I only lose approximately 2 pounds per month on average, but what's the hurry. I'm happy, healthy and eating well without hunger. I eat lot's of meat, saturated fat, fruits, nuts, and vegetables (AS MUCH AS I WANT WITHOUT COUNTING CALORIES). Who the heck cares about thermodynamics, and all that other stuff, unless, of course, you are trying to sell books, products, or have nothing better to do.

I just wanted to say thanks for this tread. I have been receiving alot of emails reguarding Dr. Ellis's book. I was shocked at the 65.00 cost, and appalled at the sales pitch, but I still had that nagging doubt of should I try to come up with the money for this?
My decision... Nope, Omaha Steaks is calling my name more .
Jeanne in Jacksonville

I wanted to thank EVERYONE who shared their opinions on this thread.
I learned a LOT! By the way, I am from Costa Rica, so forgive me if
I don't use english properly or " misspell" some words.

I have PCOS and have been trying to loose the weight I gained for quite a while. I would like to buy the book but $65...anyway, if I buy if I promise you
I will share the secret if it works for me ( pardon me Dr. Ellis, I could not keep the secret of something that I have the certainty that could help other people).

diet composition does matter, but not in the way that most people think. our body is a machine. it requires particular nutrients to do particular tasks. the main reason we gain weight is that we are ingesting foods that we may have in excess, and at the same time not delivering to the body what it is asking of us. so we can certainly eat too many carbs. we can also not eat enough carbs. we can eat too much fat, or not enough fat. we can eat too much protein, or not enough protein. our goal should be to understand what our individual body needs, and then provide it with that - this will give us optimal health.

in regards to metabolic rates - the laws of thermodynamics do not have anything to do with the regulation of our metabolism. that rate, which is different for all of us, is regulated by our thyroid gland. for whatever reason, people were born to have different normal levels of thyroid, which controls the rate of our metabolisms. this in no way contradicts the laws of energy in - energy out. just some of us burn faster, so we must fuel up more often.

if we look at other animal species, some have ridiculously high metabolic rates, when compared to us - for example, most insects.