Published Thursday, January 15, 2004

Low-Carb Diets Giving Fruits a Bad Reputation

By Gary White, The Ledger
gary.white~theledger.com

link to article

image

Dr. David Katz could be called the Anti-Atkins.

Katz, a professor at the Yale University School of Medicine and the nutritional columnist for O: The Oprah Magazine, makes no secret of his disregard for the Atkins method and other low-carbohydrate diets. Katz's mission, as director of Yale's Prevention Research Center, is to encourage Americans to eat healthier diets in general and to consume more fruits and vegetables in particular.

Among his other criticisms of "low-carb" diets, Katz says the regimens have negatively affected the way many people regard fruits, which tend to provide most of their nutrients in the form of carbohydrates. He also laments the lately popular notion that all grain products are bad -- with no distinction made between highly processed bread and whole-grain items.

"The intake of fruits and vegetables has been too low for a long time," Katz says. "It was too low before (Atkins). Those diets are causing a problem even if they're not reducing the intake of vegetables very much, and that is distracting people from the absolutely critical importance of increasing both fruit and vegetable intake. They actually have some people convinced that eating fruit is bad for them, and that's wrong." Katz says a diet tilted toward protein at the expense of fruits, vegetables and whole grains invites all kinds of health problems. He says studies have shown a connection between the eating of plant-based foods and improved weight control and alowered risk of diabetes and some cancers. He says the antioxidants in fruits and vegetables are crucial to the proper working of the body's immune system. And he says some evidence suggests that not eating enough fresh produce increases the likelihood of osteoporosis and depression.

The underlying problem, Katz says, is that Americans tend to focus on appearance rather than health and on the short term rather than a lifetime. He says any diet that banishes a particular food group will cause people to take in fewer calories and as a result lose weight.

"I don't think we should be eating in a pattern just to achieve rapid weight loss," Katz says. "If that's all you cared about, you could eat marbles. You'd lose a lot of weight; the only problem is you wouldn't be getting any nutrients."

Katz particularly worries about the message children are receiving from parents who gobble pork rinds and eschew oranges. He notes that he consumes 15 to 20 servings of fruits and vegetables a day and wears the same pants size he did 20 years ago. (He also emphasizes the importance of regular exercise for health and weight control.)

Katz, who often appears on national television programs, has drawn the ire of Atkins acolytes with his references to low-carb regimens as "fad diets."

"I get a lot of e-mails from people calling me names," Katz says. "I say, `Get back to me in 10 years.' I've got five children ages 4 to 15, and we all eat the same healthy diet and none of us need to lose weight . . . . Until the folks doing Atkins or South Beach can give me 10 years of experience, I'm not impressed."

It just bolsters my argument that it is not a one size fits all diet world. What works well for one metabolic type may not work for another metabolic type. We need to stop making generalizations and extrapolating one person's/group's success with a particular diet on to the whole population. I think there might be indicators as to which diet is best for which group. I think that type II diabetes and insulin resistance is a clear indication that a person's body chemistry is out of balance and that that person needs a lc diet.

Katz particularly worries about the message children are receiving from parents who gobble pork rinds and eschew oranges.

I think he has a point about fruits getting a bad rep.. Maybe it's alright to cut out most fruits for a certain time in order to loose weight, but they shouldn't be shunned as bad by everyone

I can see the scenario he is describing above as becoming more and more common as junk food low-carb food is becoming more common. I can see people choosing low-carb chips instead of fruits for their children. (see http://forum.lowcarber.org/showthread.php?t=159447).

Whole fruit (not juice) is to me an excellent dessert for someone who has no insulin or weight problem.

He's got a point about fruit. I miss fruit -- although I do sneak a bit here and now. But he's very off-base about the low carb diet being a fad. It's been around far too long and works far too well to stick into that box. He's also stating some things (like implications for mood and the immune system, osteoperosis) that simply have never been demonstrated as a side effect of low carb. He is using scare tactics that undermine his legitimate points.

He's also ignoring the facts by writing off low carb as just a reduced calorie diet. All diets are reduced calorie, but the jury is in, and low carb works better even with more calories than a low fat regimen.

He's not as dogmatic and close minded as some we've seen posted here, but he's clearly got an agenda that isn't neutral toward all nutritional approaches.

I still use non-berry fruit on an occasional basis - maybe 1 apple per month, and about 1 orange every couple of months.

Of course, a bit of fresh-squeezed lime juice sure perks up the Tequila.

I kind of agree with his point.

When I get to maintenence, I plan on having low gi fruit and berries regularly.

I disagree with his point on fruit. First of all, fruit, available year-round, is a luxury we've only had for the last x number of generations. What did people do before they could just walk into the Quikky Mart go get out-of-season fruit that's been shipped half way 'round the world?

Sugary fruit is simply not a necessity. There are no essential vitamins or minerals that can't be had from vegetables. Additionally, he insists on approaching fruit vs vegetable from a cook's perspective and not basic botany. Tomatoes, peppers, cucumbers, eggplant, zucchini, olives, avocadoes etc are FRUIT. I can't think of a LC plan that puts a harsh limit on these.

>>"Until the folks doing Atkins or South Beach can give me 10 years of experience, I'm not impressed."

How about the hundreds of thousands of years of hominid evolution we had before grains?

Well, I have a lot of fruit trees in my back yard and I do enjoy lots of fruit when it is ripe. Nectarines and apples and a few apricots. I managed to stay on the diet, but probably went a little higher with the carbs. But not enough to derail my slow, steady weight loss.

In fact, I'm thinking that I'll be making some nectarine low-carb ice cream this spring.

From listening to all these carb pushing experts you kind of wonder how they explain the relatively good health (except for the pollutants that are piling up on them) of eskimos who don't eat grain or fruits!

I eat fruit practically EVERY day. I have Cucumbers and Olive Oil [If Fruit Juice can be considered a Fruit, why not Fruit Oil ???] on my salad. I eat berries for desert. Occassionaly I'll have an Apple, Tangerine, Tangelo, Grapes, Watermelon, Cantaloupe, etc...with a meal.

As for vegetables...I eat close to his 15 servings a day [8-12 on average, with 20+ on rare occassions]...mostly green vegetables. I eat lots of Spinach and Lettuce, Broccoli in moderate amounts, small amounts of Carrots, and even a Potato once or twice a month.

Sigh. . .

Why do these people always claim we "gobble" pork rinds. . . or "Pig out" on bacon . . . or "chow down" on beef and cheese. . . or "fill up" on High-fat fare?

We're the gluttonous pigs, while they are the sensible ones?

Perhaps we should talk about the way they "stuff themselves" with bananas, "gorge" on oatmeal, and "scarf" buckets starch-and-cellulose-laden fare.

Tomatoes, zucchinis, summer squash, cucumbers, bell peppers/capsicums, olives, avocadoes, eggplants ... are all fruits. Last time I read the book, these fruits are all allowed on Atkins' program, including Induction. While it's true that some fruits contain phytonutrients that have therapeutic benefits, they're not essential for human nutrition .. if they were, then people living in parts of the world where the fruit is not native would've died out eons ago from lack of it.

While the absorption of the fructose sugar from fruits is modulated somewhat by its fiber content, fructose consumed in excess has serious health consequences. Studies show that fructose contributes to obesity, insulin resistance and high triglycerides. And while the studies were done using crystalline fructose, one needs to remember that your liver only recognises that it's fructose - and not where it came from. Fructose, weight gain, and the insulin resistance syndrome.

As with all things, moderation is key. For those who enjoy having some fruit now and then, as I do .. try to choose those with the lowest sugar and highest fiber content.


Doreen