http://my.webmd.com/content/chat_sc...stselectedguid={5FE84E90-BC77-4056-A91C-9531713CA348}

Some points Dr. Ornish makes:

1) Atkins' philosophy is only half-right: American DO eat too many simple carbs but the cure is wrong.

2) Studies have shown that a "whole-food" diet (foods with complex carbs) can "reverse the progression of even severe heart disease in most people. These results have been published in the leading peer-reviewed medical journals."

3) Just because a person loses weight, doesn't mean they have done so in a manner that is healthy.

4) "The only peer-reviewed study of the effects of a high-protein diet on heart function found that blood flow to the heart actually worsened and heart disease became more severe."

5) People often believe what they WANT to hear regardless of the research and evidence.

This my take on the points you quoted from Ornish



That's his personal opinion



Yeah, because they stopped eating all the high-carb anti-nutrient junk food that comprised most of their diet...duh. Same thing happens on Atkins



There are NO studies that have managed to prove Atkins was unhealthy..... so where's the beef ?



Irrevant when it comes to Atkins, since Atkins is NOT a high-protein diet. It's a moderate protein at best.



I agree 100%. Ornish is a perfect example of that. However I have no such bias. I have no money riding on wether I'm right or wrong. This goes for most of the people on this website. We only want to be healthy. Show me this research and evidence and I'll be your first convert.

About the only similarity between Ornish and Atkins is that both approach condems refined carbohydrates.

I don't think anyone today ( that isn't already living deep into the food industry's pocket) will argue that refined carbohydrates are a GOOD thing. It fact I am firmly convinced that it's one of the leading cause of today's obsesity epidemic. So it stands to reason that when you do stop eating all those junk carbohydrates, you will improve on many levels. It is also logical that following either Ornish or Atkins will result in immediate improvements. So I am not surprised at Ornish's claims of reversal of heart disease. The only real question here is what is better for you in the medium and long term.

What makes sense to me is to return to the one diet that million of years of evolution has programmed us to thrive on. It's the diet that has help shaped us from the size of our brain to our digestive system. It's the optimum diet for us. And guess what, our ancestors were definitively NOT vegetarians.

I found this great web site . This is an example of one of their essays. It's a bit technical. If you got LOTS of time on your hands, it will convince you that vegetarianism is not the way to go, if you are doing so solely for health reasons. Pay particular attention to the paleodiet information. Fascinating stuff.

....even the AHA states that Ornish's program is too restrictive and too low in fat for anyone to realistically adhere to for long. If you can't make it a permanent change, it's not going to help for long.

I just read the article Nutri-nut referred to. But the conclusions aren't so readily supported by objective evidence.

Quote:

2) Studies have shown that a "whole-food" diet (foods with complex carbs) can "reverse the progression of even severe heart disease in most people. These results have been published in the leading peer-reviewed medical journals."

Guess whose studies these were? Ornish's. Amazing that his studies confirm his hypothesis.

Kinda makes you go hmmmmmmmmm, doesn't it?

Yet there are a number of other MDs with studies that also show their methods (low carb, that is) are effective in reversing heart disease, hypertension, elevated cholesterol and triglyceride levels, obesity, and so forth (e.g., schwarzbein, bernstein, eades, ravnscov(sp?), etc.).

And, btw, the difference between brown rice and white rice on the glycemic indexex and glycemic loads is almost negligible. Same with whole wheat flour and white flour. They are not far different from sucrose, or table sugar, either.

It makes sense, then, IMHO, to eat the most nutrient-packed carbohydrates, which is exactly what the low-carbers try to do. It serves a number of purposes, one of which is to keep insulin and other hormones at steadier levels. It also (by carb deficit) induces the body to burn fat stores, thereby generating fat--and weight --loss. Ornish's method produces a caloric deficit and ignores insulin ramifications.

In the end, what is common sense for one may not be common sense for another.

Pokey One

LOL Well, all I have to say is the proof is in the pudding (low carb that is). I have 1) lowered cholesterol, my blood pressure to be completely off medication, no longer need my medicatin for diabetes, and I wake up at 5:30 am with NO ALARM. So you tell me, is losing weight on a low carb diet - I mean way of life - unhealthy, I don't think so - again, the proof is in the pudding (low carb all the way!)

This is from Low-Fat Lies by Vigilante & Flynn:

"Researchers from Canada found that animals fed low-fat diets produce increased amounts of a fat-making enzyme.

Researchers from the Rockefeller University found that people on very-low-fat diets manufacture fat at a dramatically increased rate. So eating less fat actually can cause your body to make more.

Researchers from the University of Colorado found that when people go on low-fat diets, a fat storage enzyme calle lipoprotein lipase becomes more active, causing the small amount of fat you are eating to be stored more easily, thereby potentially increasing fat storage in the body ." (pg 26-7)

"His book, with the unfortunate title Eat More Weigh Less sometimes misquotes or misinterprets the scientific research. ...these scientific studies show something quite different from what Ornish claims. ...the one study that actually measured metabolic rate showed that it went down on both diets but especially on the high-carbohydrate diet - just the opposite of what Ornish suggested. Furthermore, that same study showed the patients actually lost less weight on an Ornish-style diet and lost more weight on a high-fat/low-carbohydrate diet .

On page twenty-six Ornish states that insulin levels rise when you lose weight by eating less. That's not true. Insulin goes down when you lose weight by any means. Furthermore, low-fat, high-carbohydrate diets like his are notorious for raising insulin levels.

He then cites on page thirty-two a study by Chen Junshi, a researcher from China, and claims that the study shows that increased fat intake correlated with increased weight. Again in reality the study shows something different from what he suggests - dietary fat is not related to increased weight." (pg 104)

I'm not very happy with the book Low-Fat Lies, though, because he also goes after other diets that do work and is promoting his own fitness plan. So, I looked in another book.

Losing It: America's Obsession With Weight and the Industry that Feeds On It , by Laura Fraser

The most benign thing she says about Ornish is that his plan may work for people who have serious heart disease IF they follow the ENTIRE plan, which includes exercise, psychological counseling, and several other factors. Both authors pointed out that exercise makes a greater contribution to heart health than a low-fat diet.

I have tried whole food diets, they inflamed my IBS. New research into this condition has found that diet high in fibre are not good for this condition, however white bread etc. made me fat and I still had IBS symptoms.
Since I've been on Atkins I'm symptom free, loosing weight and inches, my skin is better, blood pressure is down, and I feel well. Why can't you except that the low carb diet without fats and proteins retricted is healthy. You don't have to do it. You will never convince us the contrary as we have personal experience to back it up. Read through this site and you will find people who have turned their lives around. I admire them all as they have done in the face of critiscim like yours.

IMHO, one diet - low carb or vegetarian or whatever, does not fit everyone. I know plenty of vegetarians who have been on that way of life and have remained slim, active, healthy. I also know people who practically live on meat - never knew to do any different (men, not bombardeded by low fat propaganda in "women's" mags) and are also slim, active, healthy.

Anyway, I guess my point is that we should listen to our bodies. This is a personal choice, and I don't think there exists one definitive 'right' study. When you are studying humans, there are too many variables for pefection. I have worked in many labs and speak from first hand knowledge.

Peace y'all,
jinx

I read an article by Ornish once...He bashed Dr. Atkins' diet as Dangerous, Unhealthy, and Unmaintainable. But, his information on the Atkins Diet was totally wrong. He claimed foods were banned that were in fact allowed, in moderation of course. He acted as if Atkins was a Fat-Only diet, where all healthy foods were forbidden. The ignorance among some people about the Atkins Diet is amazing.

BTW, if it counts...a Diet like Ornish's works. But, only slightly so. I ate a diet very similar to his for 6 months and lost a small amount of weight. I have been on Atkins for 4 months and have lost 3x what I lost in 6 months, and am eating almost 3x what I was eating on the low-fat diet.

Hi, I'm Bruce. I lost 110 pounds on Atkins. My blood is now perfect, and dropped my blood pressure down to normal.

Any questions?