Atkins on the "TODAY SHOW"

[MichelleM]

Did anyone see the 'Consumer Reports" lady on the TODAY SHOW with Katie Couric this morning?

They reviewed all the diets on the market and pretty much bashed Atkins.

They put Atkins on the BOTTOM of the 'effective' diet list. They said people DID lose weight quickly on Atkins but the diet was the most 'nutritionally unbalanced" of all the diets they tested... also that people eat almost 60% fat and that the fat they eat is not necessarily 'good" fat. Also they reported that many people get tired of it and go off of it. Blah blah.

[e3team]

I did happen to see that report this morning. The thing that I find most amazing is that people who haven't done Atkins' are the ones that bash it the most. "You don't eat any veggies...how can that be good for you?" I have done WW, and I spent all of my points eating bread and fruit making sure I saved several points for my ice cream/chocolate fix. Is that good for me? NOT. As with all diets/WOE it's what you make of it. The thing I noticed most by doing Atkins is that if I did need a chocolate fix, it didn't show up on the scale the next day.

[just4peas]

I saw that. I was yelling at the tv.

Slim Fast was #2?????!!

Oh please.

The amount of disinformation was beyond belief. The part that really cracked me up was that she said that WW was the ONLY diet that had a support group.

Apparently she doesn't know about this place.

[Cosmo35]

Slim Fast was number 2?!?

[5cats4me]

Yep, Slim Fast, then the Zone, which she even admitted was too rigorous to follow due to all the measuring etc.....I just don't get it.

[RobinB]

You have to consider the source. The Today Show.

[Praying Colonel]

A chart I saw on what Atkins induction is gave some very misleading info.



Did I miss a recent revision to Atkins which says induction carbs are now reduced to 8? That OWL carbs are 11?

If they're going to rip Atkins, they could at least get their facts right.

[e3team]

How much did WW and SlimFast pay Consumer Reports for this information? Although, having worked in Market Research you can always have the results read the way you want them. Even with that chart, they don't take each individual's situation into consideration. Atkins WANTS you to have a physical before you begin and have your cholesterol checked. I did WW for years, my HDL/LDL were considered in the dangerous level. Doing Atkins for 6 months...my cholesterol dropped 57 points. How bad can this be?

[oliveoyl]

I just got the latest issue of Consumer Reports which reviews all the diets and they really, really try to be fair-minded about Atkins but they just don't get it. For example, there's pictures of a sample meal you can eat on Atkins, Ornish and Weight Watchers for similar calorie counts. For Ornish and Weight Watchers there's these huge heaping plates of food (mostly grains and vegetables) and for Atkins there's this really sickly-looking chicken leg and a teeny-tiny little salad on a noticeably bare plate. As we all know, the point is not to stuff your face with as much food as you possibly can, but the rest of the world just lives with an entirely different frame of reference when it comes to food. Ironically, it was Consumer Reports' previous diet survey about three years ago that go me started on Atkins -- they surveyed members and the majority of members who had successfully lost weight and maintained had used Atkins. Funny, but there was absolutely no reference to that previous survey this time around!

[Gusgus]

If Consumer Reports failed to do the proper research required to understand Atkins, then how can we trust their other reports and ratings? I think it's time to send them a letter, and ask them to cancel my subscription.

David

[kcduffer]

Originally Posted by Praying Colonel

A chart I saw on what Atkins induction is gave some very misleading info.



Did I miss a recent revision to Atkins which says induction carbs are now reduced to 8? That OWL carbs are 11?

If they're going to rip Atkins, they could at least get their facts right.

This chart is pretty misleading. After some mental gymnastics, I see that the numbers are percentages. If you add fat, carbs, and protein, you get 100. There are some other percentages thrown in too just to confuse the issue. The fiber is based on 1000 calories per day and it's not in grams even though it says it is, it's a percentage. Are you confused yet. They also overlap percentages in the fiber and fruits and veggies columns. They also show a higher percentage of fiber than total fruits and veggies. I'm not sure if that's possible since there's no fiber in fat and protein. If you weren't confused before, you certainly are now.

I wonder if the person who designed this chart also designed the new food pyramid. It's about as easy to understand.

What really scares me is that I think I've been able to figure this chart out. Oh my gosh.

[Peskie]

I noticed that too (about the %'s). Very misleading considering YES, we may very well have a higher % of fat, but bet I'm STILL eating less GRAMS of fat per day than I was PRE-low carb.

[LynxL]

Whenever anyone says how restrictive Atkins is then I know they are full of @@@t. Sure, induction sucks...really...it does LOL BUT....um, Atkins isnt all about induction...

And those stats are wrong. WHen I went over the SB menu the average calorie count I got was 1100.

[Sue421]

Shocking!!! They are "killing" low-carb. Really, though, who are the people paying these TV stations? Advertisers of low-carb products (I doubt it), or is it advertisers of high-carb products? They would lose millions, if not billions in revenue if they supported low-carb, would they not?

David, I don't blame you. You are maintaining at a wonderful, healthy weight, because you know what works (Atkins and low-carb) and did not buy into the lies that the media and government want us to buy into.

Here in Canada the government actually passed a law which stated that NO product may claim low-carb on its label.

[Praying Colonel]

Originally Posted by kcduffer

What really scares me is that I think I've been able to figure this chart out. Oh my gosh.

Wow--you're good.

Makes more sense when you break it into %'s, but I never would've thought that was what they were talking about.

[kcduffer]

Brian, Thanks...

I'm good with numbers and I've probably tried every diet known to mankind in my life. This one has the best chance of succeeding IMHO. There is far less pain and aggravation in this WOE than in any of the others. Once you can understand how insulin works, this diet makes a lot of sense. Other types of diets don't take the effects of insulin into account in their diets.

[alleine]

I am too upset for words at seeing this disinformation and knowing that it was broadcast on national television.

[Sherri14]

Yes, that page was VERY confusing. However, as someone else said, the people who wrote the article, and probably did the research, have obviously not tried the Atkins WOE. I believe that the best diet is the one YOU can stick to. For me, it is Atkins; others maybe slim-fast or ww (although I don't see how! ) Having had gestational diabetes, and diabetes in my family, I know I have to lose weight, and Atkins is working for me. I get WAY less cravings (after those first few crazy days), never feel bloated, and eat to my heart's content!

[m a m a]

Originally Posted by Sue421

Here in Canada the government actually passed a law which stated that NO product may claim low-carb on its label.

Really? In Calgary maybe? There low carb stickers on products all over here in Vancouver, BC!!! Especially in the low carb stores!

[OzarkMama]

Aside from fewer carbs, since I have been eating low carb, I eat FAR less fat, FAR fewer calories, and FAR more real-foods than processed junk.

The only difference in fact is that I eat less per meal, NOT BECAUSE I am starving myself, but because I am full, because I'm eating protein. I mean how many people have gone to a steakhouse for dinner and come out still hungry?! Protein makes all the difference.

In the last few weeks, for my dinners, I have had chicken enchiladas (both green and red), chicken fajitas, jalapeno-jack cheeseburgers, beef burritos, grilled steaks, baked chicken, and more. I've had bread and tortillas and ice cream thanks to lowcarb alternatives, all without mucking up my insulin levels. I've had more vegetables (and berries) than I would ever have eaten prior to LC. My only problem has been eating ENOUGH calories and eating often enough!

I've lost over 28 lbs. I also lost my acid reflux, lost my asthma, lost my complexion breakouts, lost my bloating, and lost a good % of my exhaustion. All those things I had to give up, in order to eat lowcarb!

OM

[Haunch]

I've lost over 28 lbs. I also lost my acid reflux, lost my asthma, lost my complexion breakouts, lost my bloating, and lost a good % of my exhaustion. All those things I had to give up, in order to eat lowcarb!

And that is one of the best 'side effects' of all. Good for you!

[blue_monday_88]

Originally Posted by Cosmo35

Slim Fast was number 2?!?

You're kidding, right?!? OMG I cannot believe they have the audacity to even say that, although Slim Fast is owned by Unilever, and therefore probably contributed $$$$ to advertising their products on Today. AT least Atkins teaches you how to eat, unlike SllimFast where you crash diet and then start adding scoops of vanilla to your "shake for breakfast" because you are dying of sugar crashes. Oh and incidentally has ANYONE ever read the labels for SlimFast? Not anything I would want to drink.

[blue_monday_88]

Originally Posted by e3team

How much did WW and SlimFast pay Consumer Reports for this information? Although, having worked in Market Research you can always have the results read the way you want them. Even with that chart, they don't take each individual's situation into consideration. Atkins WANTS you to have a physical before you begin and have your cholesterol checked. I did WW for years, my HDL/LDL were considered in the dangerous level. Doing Atkins for 6 months...my cholesterol dropped 57 points. How bad can this be?

Exactly, just because it's "effective" as far as consumers know, doesn't exactly mean they are effective WOLs. Fartknockers

[bdjh99]

GRRRRRR!

I'm so tired of them reviewing Atkins like they do. To most "outside" peeps the induction phase seems a little extreme, but change their minds when I tell them that it's only for two weeks to get you thinking in the right frame of mind (which is cutting hunger and eliminating the thought of food all the time).

After that you slowly add back more vegetables, like there aren't plenty avavilable in phase I and phase II anyway. Most of my generation doesn't eat many veggies. I've eaten more on this WOE than at any other time in my life.

The results are weight loss, when done correctly, and better health.

Doesn't sound worthy of a bad review to me!!!!!

Brandi

[bdjh99]

Fartknockers!!

ROTFL

[G-Mom]

What these ppl don't realize is that many of us who go on Atkins have insulin resistance issues and eating all that sugar in WW and Slim-Fast only compounds the problem. I used to be hypoglycemic pre-Atkins, and have never had another episode since. Sugar is the enemy, and sorry "experts", but whole grains turn into simple sugars in the intestines too. Why can't they see that?

[OrchidCactus]

Repeat after me: Follow the money trail, follow the money trail, follow the money trail.

If ignorance is bliss, there's some really happy people on the Today show.

[LowCarbDenise]

Katie Couric has been a LC basher for years. I used to like her, but after numerous segments on the evils of LC, I don't watch her anymore.