Low-carb Diet Reduces Inflammation And Blood Saturated Fat In Metabolic Syndrome
Marilyn Mann
Metabolic Syndrome
ScienceDaily (Dec. 4, 2007) -- Metabolic syndrome is a condition
afflicting one quarter to one third of adult men and women and is an
established pre-cursor to diabetes, coronary heart disease, and other
serious illnesses. Patients have long been advised to eat a low-fat
diet even though carbohydrate restriction has been found to be more
effective at reducing specific markers, such as high triglycerides,
characteristic of the syndrome. Now, a new study indicates that a diet
low in carbohydrates is also more effective than a diet low in fat in
reducing saturated fatty acids in the blood and reducing markers of
inflammation.
While there have been contradictory and confusing messages directed at
health conscious consumers about dietary recommendations, most
researchers agree on the need to limit inflammatory agents. In a
report published in the on-line version of the journal Lipids,
researchers at the University of Connecticut with co-authors from SUNY
Downstate Medical Center in Brooklyn, the University of Minnesota, and
the University of California show much greater improvement in
inflammatory markers in patients with metabolic syndrome on a very low
carbohydrate approach compared to a low fat diet.
Lead researcher Jeff S. Volek, PhD, RD, associate professor of
kinesiology at the University of Connecticut, describes the study as
"adding to the evolving picture of improvement in general health
beyond simple weight loss in keeping blood glucose and insulin under
control." The work is part of a larger study (currently under review)
showing numerous improvements in blood lipids. The current work
concludes that "lowering total and saturated fat only had a small
effect on circulating inflammatory markers whereas reducing
carbohydrate led to considerably greater reductions in a number of pro-
inflammatory cytokines, chemokines, and adhesion molecules. These data
implicate dietary carbohydrate rather than fat as a more significant
nutritional factor contributing to inflammatory processes."
Richard Feinman, PhD, professor of biochemistry at SUNY Downstate
Medical Center, adds, "The real importance of diets that lower
carbohydrate content is that they are grounded in mechanism --
carbohydrates stimulate insulin secretion which biases fat metabolism
towards storage rather than oxidation. The inflammation results open a
new aspect of the problem. From a practical standpoint, continued
demonstrations that carbohydrate restriction is more beneficial than
low fat could be good news to those wishing to forestall or manage the
diseases associated with metabolic syndrome."
One of the remarkable effects in the data presented that may have
contributed to the results is that despite the three-fold greater
saturated fat in the diet for the low carb group, saturated fat in the
blood turned out to be higher in the low fat group due to the process
known as carbohydrate-induced lipogenesis. Dr. Volek points out that
"this clearly shows the limitations of the idea that 'you are what you
eat.' Metabolism plays a big role. You are what your body does with
what you eat."
* * *
Can't post the abstract because no abstract seems to be available on
the journal's website.
Marilyn
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
have been advised to eat less, down to the optimal amount, from the
outset.
Dearly departed Dr. Atkins, went the low-carb diet route, and died
prematurely one year after having to be resuscitated from SCD blamed
on cardiomyopathy of unknown cause that many suspect is linked to the
low-carb diet he advocated.
The optimal diet varies from person to person.
We know when we are eating the foods that are optimal for us when we
want more (are hungrier) after eating these foods.
Simply a few words to the wise.
Be hungry... be healthy... be hungrier... be blessed:
http://TheWellnessFoundation.com/BeHealthy
Prayerfully in the infinite power and might of the Holy Spirit,
Andrew <><
--
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Lawful steward of http://EmoryCardiology.com
Bondservant to the KING of kings and LORD of lords.
Cary Kittrell
> Clearly, instead of being advised to change their diet, folks should
> have been advised to eat less, down to the optimal amount, from the
> outset.
>
> Dearly departed Dr. Atkins, went the low-carb diet route, and died
Of head injuries, suffered in a fall.
> prematurely one year after having to be resuscitated from SCD blamed
> on cardiomyopathy of unknown cause that many suspect is linked to the
> low-carb diet he advocated.
"Suspect" is a good word there, as no autopsy was ever performed,
and thus the speculation on the cause of an elderly man falling
is just that: speculation.
>
> The optimal diet varies from person to person.
As does the total amount.
>
> We know when we are eating the foods that are optimal for us when we
> want more (are hungrier) after eating these foods.
Only if "we" is limited to "Andrew B. Chung", out of all those
in the field of medicine.
-- cary
Mark Filice
Marilyn Mann says...
>
>Low-carb Diet Reduces Inflammation And Blood Saturated Fat In
>Metabolic Syndrome
>low in carbohydrates is also more effective than a diet low in fat in
>reducing saturated fatty acids in the blood and reducing markers of
>inflammation.
>
told me that if I didn't get my glucose level down, it was time to talk about
medications. He mentioned Metabolic Syndrome. I had elevated triglycerides,
hypertension, and my HDL level was low. So I had some of the conditions of
Metabolic Syndrome. I was also about 60 lbs overweight.
He knows I like to read, so he also told me to get some books on it.
I read the books (Reaven & Challem) and started restricting my carbs--not
eliminating them. No potatoes, no rice, no bread. No more sodas or beer. Meat,
eggs, cheese, and most green vegetables. I eat desserts from time to time--about
once every 2 weeks.
After 6 weeks, I took a follow up blood test. I was 20 lbs. lighter, and my
triglycerides and glucose levels went down about 20%--almost down to normal. He
liked my progress and told me to test again at the end of December. My blood
pressure was down far enough that we cut my Rx dosage in half.
I'm 35 lbs lighter now, and I am enjoying this new way of eating. I no longer
take Prilosec OTC for GERD--I simply don't get reflux at night anymore. I'm
getting 2 of my old suits cleaned for holiday parties. I haven't been able to
fit into them for years.
I'm not dreading getting my blood work done later this month. I'm looking
forward to it to see how well I've progressed. My BP is low enough now that I
hope I can get completely off those meds as well.
Mark
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
> Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
>
> > Clearly, instead of being advised to change their diet, folks should
> > have been advised to eat less, down to the optimal amount, from the
> > outset.
> >
> > Dearly departed Dr. Atkins, went the low-carb diet route, and died
> > low-carb diet he advocated.
>
> "Suspect" is a good word there, as no autopsy was ever performed,
> and thus the speculation on the cause of an elderly man falling
> is just that: speculation.
The cardiomyopathy was diagnosed at the time of the sudden cardiac
death (SCD) when Dr. Atkins required resuscitation. An autopsy is not
required for diagnosing cardiomyopathy.
Nor is an autopsy required to diagnose SCD:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/f798eb8593314c50?
> > The optimal diet varies from person to person.
>
> As does the total amount.
We have empirically determined that the optimal amount does not vary
from person to person.
> > We know when we are eating the foods that are optimal for us when we
> > want more (are hungrier) after eating these foods.
>
> Only if "we" is limited to "Andrew B. Chung", out of all those
> in the field of medicine.
Not necessary. There are other physicians who have become convinced
that hunger is indeed wonderful :-)
May we, who are Jesus' brethren, continue to pray for you:
http://HeartMDPhD.com/Convicts/PrayForCary
Prayerfully in the infinite power and might of the Holy Spirit,
Andrew <><
--
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Lawful steward of http://EmoryCardiology.com
Bondservant to the KING of kings and LORD of lords.
Cary Kittrell
> convicted neighbor Cary Kittrell wrote:
> > Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
> >
> > > Clearly, instead of being advised to change their diet, folks should
> > > have been advised to eat less, down to the optimal amount, from the
> > > outset.
> > >
> > > Dearly departed Dr. Atkins, went the low-carb diet route, and died
> > > prematurely one year after having to be resuscitated from SCD blamed
> > > on cardiomyopathy of unknown cause that many suspect was linked to the
> > > low-carb diet he advocated.
> >
> > "Suspect" is a good word there, as no autopsy was ever performed,
> > and thus the speculation on the cause of an elderly man falling
> > is just that: speculation.
>
> The cardiomyopathy was diagnosed at the time of the sudden cardiac
> death (SCD) when Dr. Atkins required resuscitation. An autopsy is not
> required for diagnosing cardiomyopathy.
Cite: (and I don't want to see the coroner's report which
that office later said should not have been released):
>
> Nor is an autopsy required to diagnose SCD:
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/f798eb8593314c50?
Cite to someone other than you, if you please:
>
> > > The optimal diet varies from person to person.
> >
> > As does the total amount.
>
> We have empirically determined that the optimal amount does not vary
> from person to person.
And which "we" would that be?:
-- cary
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
> Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
> > convicted neighbor Cary Kittrell wrote:
> > > Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
> > >
> > > > Clearly, instead of being advised to change their diet, folks should
> > > > have been advised to eat less, down to the optimal amount, from the
> > > > outset.
> > > >
> > > > Dearly departed Dr. Atkins, went the low-carb diet route, and died
> > > > prematurely one year after having to be resuscitated from SCD blamed
> > > > on cardiomyopathy of unknown cause that many suspect was linked to the
> > > > low-carb diet he advocated.
> > >
> > > "Suspect" is a good word there, as no autopsy was ever performed,
> > > and thus the speculation on the cause of an elderly man falling
> > > is just that: speculation.
> >
> > The cardiomyopathy was diagnosed at the time of the sudden cardiac
> > death (SCD) when Dr. Atkins required resuscitation. An autopsy is not
> > required for diagnosing cardiomyopathy.
>
> Cite: (and I don't want to see the coroner's report which
> that office later said should not have been released):
"I have had cardiomyopathy, which is a non-coronary condition and is
in no way related to diet," Atkins said in a statement.
http://archives.cnn.com/2002/HEALTH/diet.fitness/04/25/atkins.diet/index.html
>
> > Nor is an autopsy required to diagnose SCD:
> >
> > http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/f798eb8593314c50?
>
> Cite to someone other than you, if you please:
The article about the SCD of the 14 yo girl was not written by me:
> > > > The optimal diet varies from person to person.
> > >
> > > As does the total amount.
> >
> > We have empirically determined that the optimal amount does not vary
> > from person to person.
>
> And which "we" would that be?:
We, who are Jesus' brethren.
May we continue to pray for you:
Thorsten Schier
Sudden cardiac death in teenagers is rare, but not unheard of, is it?
If it were true that the girl in this case was completly healthy before
starting the diet and her death a consequence of the diet as this
article suggests, this would raise the following question:
If the Atkins-diet can kill a healty 14 year old girl in just two weeks,
why does this not happen more often? Why are millions of people thriving
on this diet, most of them older, many of them less then healthy to
begin with and many of them following the diet not for weeks but for years?
There may or may not have been a connection between the girls diet and
her death. Perhaps the diet was for some reason unhealthy for her. But
the diet cannot possible have been the only reason for her death.
>
>>>>>The optimal diet varies from person to person.
>>>>
>>>>As does the total amount.
>>>
>>>We have empirically determined that the optimal amount does not vary
>>>from person to person.
>>
Here is my personal advice for you:
Wiser to eat more, up to the optimal amount.
2 pounds a day may be enough for MU, but this kind of caloric
restriction does not seem to be healthy for you.
>>And which "we" would that be?:
>
>
> We, who are Jesus' brethren.
Could you be more specific? Surely not all "Jesus brethren" were
involved in this determination? Unless, of course, this exclusive club
is smaller than people realise?
Thorsten
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
> >
> > http://tinyurl.com/28ycon
>
> Sudden cardiac death in teenagers is rare, but not unheard of, is it?
Sudden cardiac death in a 16 yo girl in the manner described has not
been heard of previously.
> If it were true that the girl in this case was completly healthy before
> starting the diet and her death a consequence of the diet as this
> article suggests, this would raise the following question:
>
> If the Atkins-diet can kill a healty 14 year old girl in just two weeks,
> why does this not happen more often?
http://www.atkinsexposed.org/atkins/38/Massive_Health_Risk.htm
> Why are millions of people thriving
> on this diet, most of them older, many of them less then healthy to
> begin with and many of them following the diet not for weeks but for years?
The ones that I have seen are not thriving but rather are developing
severe heart disease.
> There may or may not have been a connection between the girls diet and
> her death. Perhaps the diet was for some reason unhealthy for her. But
> the diet cannot possible have been the only reason for her death.
There have been no other reasons discovered.
> >
> >>>>>The optimal diet varies from person to person.
> >>>>
> >>>>As does the total amount.
> >>>
> >>>We have empirically determined that the optimal amount does not vary
> >>>from person to person.
> >>
>
> Here is my personal advice for you:
>
> Wiser to eat more, up to the optimal amount.
Not applicable for me but rather for those who are eating less than 2
lbs per day.
> 2 pounds a day may be enough for MU, but this kind of caloric
> restriction does not seem to be healthy for you.
If that were true, would have been physically unable to do the set of
170 push-ups that the Holy Spirit guided me to do this morning.
> >>And which "we" would that be?:
> >
> > We, who are Jesus' brethren.
>
> Could you be more specific?
It would be my choice not to be.
> Surely not all "Jesus brethren" were
> involved in this determination?
Did not write that all of Jesus' brethren were involved in empirically
determining the optimal amount of food for all.
> Unless, of course, this exclusive club is smaller than people realise?
This is not an exclusive club but rather a relationship with the risen
LORD Jesus Christ.
"These who do the will of MY Father in heaven are My family." -- LORD
Jesus Christ describing HIS brethren.
Amen.
You do not have much longer, Thorsten:
http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit/Prophecy
May you wisely choose to surrender by publicly declaring with your
mouth that "Jesus is LORD:"
http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit/TheWay
Ferd Farkel
<heartdo...@emorycardiology.com> wrote:
> convicted neighbor Thorsten Schier wrote:
>
>
>
> > Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
> > > convicted neighbor Cary Kittrell wrote:
> > >>Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
> > >>>convicted neighbor Cary Kittrell wrote:
> > >>>>Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
>
> > >>>>>Clearly, instead of being advised to change their diet, folks should
> > >>>>>have been advised to eat less, down to the optimal amount, from the
> > >>>>>outset.
>
> > >>>>>Dearly departed Dr. Atkins, went the low-carb diet route, and died
> > >>>>>prematurely one year after having to be resuscitated from SCD blamed
> > >>>>>on cardiomyopathy of unknown cause that many suspect was linked to the
> > >>>>>low-carb diet he advocated.
>
> > >>>>"Suspect" is a good word there, as no autopsy was ever performed,
> > >>>>and thus the speculation on the cause of an elderly man falling
> > >>>>is just that: speculation.
>
> > >>>The cardiomyopathy was diagnosed at the time of the sudden cardiac
> > >>>death (SCD) when Dr. Atkins required resuscitation. An autopsy is not
> > >>>required for diagnosing cardiomyopathy.
>
> > >>Cite: (and I don't want to see the coroner's report which
> > >>that office later said should not have been released):
>
> > > "I have had cardiomyopathy, which is a non-coronary condition and is
> > > in no way related to diet," Atkins said in a statement.
>
That's like what, 4 Big Macs (tm) a day?
Rod ¿
A fella needs to stay away from things. The big mac has an incredible
amount of garbage in it to start with. $ big macs a day for several
weeks and you'll think your heart was pumping grease instead of blood.
--
Psa 37:8 Put an end to your wrath and be no longer bitter; do not give
way to angry feeling which is a cause of sin.
Psa 37:9 For the evil-doers will be cut off: but those who have faith
in the Lord will have the earth for their heritage.
Psa 37:10 For in a short time the evil-doer will be gone: you will go
searching for his place, and it will not be there.
Psa 37:11 But the gentle will have the earth for their heritage; they
will take their delight in peace without measure.
:-)
> > 2 pounds a day may be enough for MU, but this kind of caloric
> > restriction does not seem to be healthy for you.
This thing should go metric. People in Europe need hunger too.
> If that were true, would have been physically unable to do the set of
> 170 push-ups that the Holy Spirit guided me to do this morning.
How about broadcasting that on youtube?
> > >>And which "we" would that be?:
>
> > > We, who are Jesus' brethren.
Himm... quite a lot of them are mighty chubby.
> > Could you be more specific?
>
> It would be my choice not to be.
Like you have a choice. "We" = MU and Andrew and... and... hello
anyone else out there? Hello?...
:-)
> That's like what, 4 Big Macs (tm) a day?
I'm planning on putting some variety into it myself. Sunday: 2 lbs of
Big Macs (tm), Monday: 2 lbs of Whoppers (tm), Tuesday: 2 lbs of
Wendy's Chili (tm), Wednesday: 2 lbs of Flamin' Hot Cheeto's (tm),
Thursday: 2 lbs of Oreo's (tm)...
Thorsten Schier
Well, of course every case is different, but there are hundreds of SCDs
in the US in children and youths each year.
>
>>If it were true that the girl in this case was completly healthy before
>>starting the diet and her death a consequence of the diet as this
>>article suggests, this would raise the following question:
>>
>>If the Atkins-diet can kill a healty 14 year old girl in just two weeks,
>>why does this not happen more often?
>
>
> http://www.atkinsexposed.org/atkins/38/Massive_Health_Risk.htm
>
Just speculation without any real evidence.
>
>>Why are millions of people thriving
>>on this diet, most of them older, many of them less then healthy to
>>begin with and many of them following the diet not for weeks but for years?
>
>
> The ones that I have seen are not thriving but rather are developing
> severe heart disease.
>
You are probably the only cardiologist on this planet who experiences
this. Clinical studies so far have shown nothing of this kind.
>
>>There may or may not have been a connection between the girls diet and
>>her death. Perhaps the diet was for some reason unhealthy for her. But
>>the diet cannot possible have been the only reason for her death.
>
>
> There have been no other reasons discovered.
>
As is often the case.
>
>>>>>>>The optimal diet varies from person to person.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>As does the total amount.
>>>>>
>>>>>We have empirically determined that the optimal amount does not vary
>>>>
>>>>>from person to person.
>>>>
>>
>>Here is my personal advice for you:
>>
>>Wiser to eat more, up to the optimal amount.
>
>
> Not applicable for me but rather for those who are eating less than 2
> lbs per day.
>
Than obviously 2 lbs is not enough for you.
>
>>2 pounds a day may be enough for MU, but this kind of caloric
>>restriction does not seem to be healthy for you.
>
>
> If that were true, would have been physically unable to do the set of
> 170 push-ups that the Holy Spirit guided me to do this morning.
>
Any witnesses?
>
>>>>And which "we" would that be?:
>>>
>>>We, who are Jesus' brethren.
>>
>>Could you be more specific?
>
>
> It would be my choice not to be.
>
Big surprise.
>
>>Surely not all "Jesus brethren" were
>>involved in this determination?
>
>
> Did not write that all of Jesus' brethren were involved in empirically
> determining the optimal amount of food for all.
>
>
>>Unless, of course, this exclusive club is smaller than people realise?
>
>
> This is not an exclusive club but rather a relationship with the risen
> LORD Jesus Christ.
>
> "These who do the will of MY Father in heaven are My family." -- LORD
> Jesus Christ describing HIS brethren.
>
> Amen.
>
> You do not have much longer, Thorsten:
>
> http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit/Prophecy
Your rate of fulfilled vs. unfulfilled prophecies is so pathetic that
I'd be more worried, if you were predicting me a long life.
>
> May you wisely choose to surrender by publicly declaring with your
> mouth that "Jesus is LORD:"
>
> http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit/TheWay
>
May you wisely choose to discontinue your approach.
Thorsten
MU
> 2 pounds a day may be enough for MU, but this kind of caloric
> restriction does not seem to be healthy for you.
Naw, Chung's doing fine.
MU
Today, you're full of two pounds of shit.
MU
> > > We, who are Jesus' brethren.
>
> Himm... quite a lot of them are mighty chubby.
>
>>> Could you be more specific?
>>
>> It would be my choice not to be.
>
> Like you have a choice. "We" = MU and Andrew and... and... hello
> anyone else out there? Hello?...
This is a sane test. You and your buddy-wuddy chillins make up 90% of SMC
postings. Unless, of course, you believe people actually heard you yell
"Hello" outside Usenet.
Clarify.
Go.
:-)
It would be my choice not to.
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Not without an identifiable underlying predisposing condition or cause
even in this case where the cause has been identified to be the
Atkin's diet on the basis of the observed electrolyte derangements.
> >>If it were true that the girl in this case was completly healthy before
> >>starting the diet and her death a consequence of the diet as this
> >>article suggests, this would raise the following question:
> >>
> >>If the Atkins-diet can kill a healty 14 year old girl in just two weeks,
> >>why does this not happen more often?
> >
> > http://www.atkinsexposed.org/atkins/38/Massive_Health_Risk.htm
>
> Just speculation without any real evidence.
You asked for an explanation and so you have received a very plausible
explanation.
Sorry you do not agree with the explanation.
> >>Why are millions of people thriving
> >>on this diet, most of them older, many of them less then healthy to
> >>begin with and many of them following the diet not for weeks but for years?
> >
> > The ones that I have seen are not thriving but rather are developing
> > severe heart disease.
>
> You are probably the only cardiologist on this planet who experiences
> this.
Not among the discerning ones.
> Clinical studies so far have shown nothing of this kind.
The long-term ones are expected to confirm the anecdotes.
> >>There may or may not have been a connection between the girls diet and
> >>her death. Perhaps the diet was for some reason unhealthy for her. But
> >>the diet cannot possible have been the only reason for her death.
> >
> > There have been no other reasons discovered.
>
> As is often the case.
Incorrect.
> >>>>>>>The optimal diet varies from person to person.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>As does the total amount.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>We have empirically determined that the optimal amount does not vary
> >>>>
> >>>>>from person to person.
> >>
> >>Here is my personal advice for you:
> >>
> >>Wiser to eat more, up to the optimal amount.
> >
> > Not applicable for me but rather for those who are eating less than 2
> > lbs per day.
>
> Than obviously 2 lbs is not enough for you.
Obviously you are deluded.
> >>2 pounds a day may be enough for MU, but this kind of caloric
> >>restriction does not seem to be healthy for you.
> >
> > If that were true, would have been physically unable to do the set of
> > 170 push-ups that the Holy Spirit guided me to do this morning.
>
> Any witnesses?
Yes, GOD and HIS legions of angels, who were counting.
If you make a public declaration with your mouth before witnesses that
"Jesus is LORD," record this on digital video, upload this onto
YouTube, publishing the link here...
... would be glad to reciprocate with a video of my doing 170 push-ups
**after** viewing your surrendering to LORD Jesus Christ:
http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit/TheWay
With HIS help, I believe I can even do 200 push-ups for your
entertainment pleasure but more importantly for HIS glory :-)
> >>>>And which "we" would that be?:
> >>>
> >>>We, who are Jesus' brethren.
> >>
> >>Could you be more specific?
> >
> > It would be my choice not to be.
>
> Big surprise.
Sarcasm remains satan's style.
> >>Surely not all "Jesus brethren" were
> >>involved in this determination?
> >
> > Did not write that all of Jesus' brethren were involved in empirically
> > determining the optimal amount of food for all.
> >
> >>Unless, of course, this exclusive club is smaller than people realise?
> >
> > This is not an exclusive club but rather a relationship with the risen
> > LORD Jesus Christ.
> >
> > "These who do the will of MY Father in heaven are My family." -- LORD
> > Jesus Christ describing HIS brethren.
> >
> > Amen.
> >
> > You do not have much longer, Thorsten:
> >
> > http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit/Prophecy
>
> Your rate of fulfilled vs. unfulfilled prophecies is so pathetic that
> I'd be more worried, if you were predicting me a long life.
100% is not pathetic.
The Holy Spirit guided me to make only one prediction (prophecy)
previously:
http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit/Prophecy
Obviously, this single prophecy has been realized.
> > May you wisely choose to surrender by publicly declaring with your
> > mouth that "Jesus is LORD:"
> >
> > http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit/TheWay
>
> May you wisely choose to discontinue your approach.
Without the LORD, your wishes are meaningless (Ecclesiastes).
May we, who are Jesus' brethren, continue to pray for you:
http://HeartMDPhD.com/Convicts/PrayForThorsten
Thorsten Schier
According to my sources, the "underlying predisposing condition or
cause" remains unclear in about 20-30 % of all cases.
>
>>>>If it were true that the girl in this case was completly healthy before
>>>>starting the diet and her death a consequence of the diet as this
>>>>article suggests, this would raise the following question:
>>>>
>>>>If the Atkins-diet can kill a healty 14 year old girl in just two weeks,
>>>>why does this not happen more often?
>>>
>>>http://www.atkinsexposed.org/atkins/38/Massive_Health_Risk.htm
>>
>>Just speculation without any real evidence.
>
>
> You asked for an explanation and so you have received a very plausible
> explanation.
>
> Sorry you do not agree with the explanation.
>
You only offered speculations why the Atkins-diet should be dangerous in
theory. This is no explanation as to why we do not see any adverse
effects in the real world (except this single case).
>
>>>>Why are millions of people thriving
>>>>on this diet, most of them older, many of them less then healthy to
>>>>begin with and many of them following the diet not for weeks but for years?
>>>
>>>The ones that I have seen are not thriving but rather are developing
>>>severe heart disease.
>>
>>You are probably the only cardiologist on this planet who experiences
>>this.
>
>
> Not among the discerning ones.
>
I take it the "discerning ones" make their own reality?
>
>>Clinical studies so far have shown nothing of this kind.
>
>
> The long-term ones are expected to confirm the anecdotes.
>
Expected by whom?
>
>>>>There may or may not have been a connection between the girls diet and
>>>>her death. Perhaps the diet was for some reason unhealthy for her. But
>>>>the diet cannot possible have been the only reason for her death.
>>>
>>>There have been no other reasons discovered.
>>
>>As is often the case.
>
>
> Incorrect.
>
According to my sources, the "underlying predisposing condition or
cause" remains unclear in about 20-30 % of all cases.
>
>>>>>>>>>The optimal diet varies from person to person.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>As does the total amount.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>We have empirically determined that the optimal amount does not vary
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>from person to person.
>>>>
>>>>Here is my personal advice for you:
>>>>
>>>>Wiser to eat more, up to the optimal amount.
>>>
>>>Not applicable for me but rather for those who are eating less than 2
>>>lbs per day.
>>
>>Than obviously 2 lbs is not enough for you.
>
>
> Obviously you are deluded.
>
Hardly.
>
>>>>2 pounds a day may be enough for MU, but this kind of caloric
>>>>restriction does not seem to be healthy for you.
>>>
>>>If that were true, would have been physically unable to do the set of
>>>170 push-ups that the Holy Spirit guided me to do this morning.
>>
>>Any witnesses?
>
>
> Yes, GOD and HIS legions of angels, who were counting.
They don't count. Even if the had been counting, they still don't count
as in: "Count my witnesses".
>
> If you make a public declaration with your mouth before witnesses that
> "Jesus is LORD," record this on digital video, upload this onto
> YouTube, publishing the link here...
>
> ... would be glad to reciprocate with a video of my doing 170 push-ups
> **after** viewing your surrendering to LORD Jesus Christ:
>
> http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit/TheWay
>
> With HIS help, I believe I can even do 200 push-ups for your
> entertainment pleasure but more importantly for HIS glory :-)
>
I would rather not spread lies on YouTube. It remains my choice to
continue to be truthful.
>
>>>>>>And which "we" would that be?:
>>>>>
>>>>>We, who are Jesus' brethren.
>>>>
>>>>Could you be more specific?
>>>
>>>It would be my choice not to be.
>>
>>Big surprise.
>
>
> Sarcasm remains satan's style.
>
I wouldn't know, never met the guy.
>
>>>>Surely not all "Jesus brethren" were
>>>>involved in this determination?
>>>
>>>Did not write that all of Jesus' brethren were involved in empirically
>>>determining the optimal amount of food for all.
>>>
>>>
>>>>Unless, of course, this exclusive club is smaller than people realise?
>>>
>>>This is not an exclusive club but rather a relationship with the risen
>>>LORD Jesus Christ.
>>>
>>>"These who do the will of MY Father in heaven are My family." -- LORD
>>>Jesus Christ describing HIS brethren.
>>>
>>>Amen.
>>>
>>>You do not have much longer, Thorsten:
>>>
>>>http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit/Prophecy
>>
>>Your rate of fulfilled vs. unfulfilled prophecies is so pathetic that
>>I'd be more worried, if you were predicting me a long life.
>
>
> 100% is not pathetic.
>
> The Holy Spirit guided me to make only one prediction (prophecy)
> previously:
>
> http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit/Prophecy
Not counting your prophecies about global earthquakes, nuclear wars,
bird flu pandemics and the untimely death of uncounted members of this
group, are we?
>
> Obviously, this single prophecy has been realized.
>
>
>>>May you wisely choose to surrender by publicly declaring with your
>>>mouth that "Jesus is LORD:"
>>>
>>>http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit/TheWay
>>
>>May you wisely choose to discontinue your approach.
>
>
> Without the LORD, your wishes are meaningless (Ecclesiastes).
>
"Meaningless! Everything is meaningless!" (Ecclesiastes)
With or without the Lord, it doesn't matter.
"I have seen all the things that are done under the sun; all of them are
meaningless, a chasing after the wind."
Thorsten
:-)
"Brother MU" such language. It's a good thing that you seem to be
exempt from being "convicted". But thanks for continuing to drive the
'ol double standard issue home. No fault of your own of course, I'm
sure it was never your idea to be labeled "Brother MU". Makes me
wonder about accuracy of a certain someone's "discernment" factor
though. Now if you'll excuse me, it's time for me to eat
2 lbs of jelly filled donuts and do 500 one-armed chin-ups.
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Only for folks who would also say that the cause of death of the 16 yr
old girl in this case is unclear when clearly it is due to the Atkin's
diet both to her doctors and her parents.
Electrolyte derangements simply do not occur spontaneously.
> >>>>If it were true that the girl in this case was completly healthy before
> >>>>starting the diet and her death a consequence of the diet as this
> >>>>article suggests, this would raise the following question:
> >>>>
> >>>>If the Atkins-diet can kill a healty 14 year old girl in just two weeks,
> >>>>why does this not happen more often?
> >>>
> >>>http://www.atkinsexposed.org/atkins/38/Massive_Health_Risk.htm
> >>
> >>Just speculation without any real evidence.
> >
> > You asked for an explanation and so you have received a very plausible
> > explanation.
> >
> > Sorry you do not agree with the explanation.
>
> You only offered speculations why the Atkins-diet should be dangerous in
> theory. This is no explanation as to why we do not see any adverse
> effects in the real world (except this single case).
"The downfall of the Atkins Diet is also its one saving grace--people
may not be able to tolerate the diet for long enough to suffer the
long-term consequences."
Source:
http://www.atkinsexposed.org/atkins/38/Massive_Health_Risk.htm
> >>>>Why are millions of people thriving
> >>>>on this diet, most of them older, many of them less then healthy to
> >>>>begin with and many of them following the diet not for weeks but for years?
> >>>
> >>>The ones that I have seen are not thriving but rather are developing
> >>>severe heart disease.
> >>
> >>You are probably the only cardiologist on this planet who experiences
> >>this.
> >
> > Not among the discerning ones.
>
> I take it the "discerning ones" make their own reality?
No.
The discerning ones are the ones who are in touch with reality.
The others suffer from delusions that keep them from being grounded in
reality.
> >>Clinical studies so far have shown nothing of this kind.
> >
> > The long-term ones are expected to confirm the anecdotes.
>
> Expected by whom?
By those who are discerning.
> >>>>There may or may not have been a connection between the girls diet and
> >>>>her death. Perhaps the diet was for some reason unhealthy for her. But
> >>>>the diet cannot possible have been the only reason for her death.
> >>>
> >>>There have been no other reasons discovered.
> >>
> >>As is often the case.
> >
> > Incorrect.
>
> According to my sources, the "underlying predisposing condition or
> cause" remains unclear in about 20-30 % of all cases.
Your sources are not among the discerning.
> >>>>>>>>>The optimal diet varies from person to person.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>As does the total amount.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>We have empirically determined that the optimal amount does not vary
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>from person to person.
> >>>>
> >>>>Here is my personal advice for you:
> >>>>
> >>>>Wiser to eat more, up to the optimal amount.
> >>>
> >>>Not applicable for me but rather for those who are eating less than 2
> >>>lbs per day.
> >>
> >>Than obviously 2 lbs is not enough for you.
> >
> > Obviously you are deluded.
>
> Hardly.
Not for the discerning.
> >>>>2 pounds a day may be enough for MU, but this kind of caloric
> >>>>restriction does not seem to be healthy for you.
> >>>
> >>>If that were true, would have been physically unable to do the set of
> >>>170 push-ups that the Holy Spirit guided me to do this morning.
> >>
> >>Any witnesses?
> >
> > Yes, GOD and HIS legions of angels, who were counting.
>
> They don't count.
Actually, they are able to count.
> Even if the had been counting, they still don't count
> as in: "Count my witnesses".
They do for the discerning...
... as in "As GOD is my witness."
> > If you make a public declaration with your mouth before witnesses that
> > "Jesus is LORD," record this on digital video, upload this onto
> > YouTube, publishing the link here...
> >
> > ... would be glad to reciprocate with a video of my doing 170 push-ups
> > **after** viewing your surrendering to LORD Jesus Christ:
> >
> > http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit/TheWay
> >
> > With HIS help, I believe I can even do 200 push-ups for your
> > entertainment pleasure but more importantly for HIS glory :-)
>
> I would rather not spread lies on YouTube. It remains my choice to
> continue to be truthful.
Without LORD Jesus Christ, Who is the truth, you can never be
truthful.
> >>>>>>And which "we" would that be?:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>We, who are Jesus' brethren.
> >>>>
> >>>>Could you be more specific?
> >>>
> >>>It would be my choice not to be.
> >>
> >>Big surprise.
> >
> > Sarcasm remains satan's style.
>
> I wouldn't know, never met the guy.
Without guidance from the Holy Spirit, the guidance you have been
receiving has been from satan via the lies he has placed in your
heart.
Your sarcasm will always serve as a tell betraying the latter contents
in the heart of your soul.
> >>>>Surely not all "Jesus brethren" were
> >>>>involved in this determination?
> >>>
> >>>Did not write that all of Jesus' brethren were involved in empirically
> >>>determining the optimal amount of food for all.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Unless, of course, this exclusive club is smaller than people realise?
> >>>
> >>>This is not an exclusive club but rather a relationship with the risen
> >>>LORD Jesus Christ.
> >>>
> >>>"These who do the will of MY Father in heaven are My family." -- LORD
> >>>Jesus Christ describing HIS brethren.
> >>>
> >>>Amen.
> >>>
> >>>You do not have much longer, Thorsten:
> >>>
> >>>http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit/Prophecy
> >>
> >>Your rate of fulfilled vs. unfulfilled prophecies is so pathetic that
> >>I'd be more worried, if you were predicting me a long life.
> >
> > 100% is not pathetic.
> >
> > The Holy Spirit guided me to make only one prediction (prophecy)
> > previously:
> >
> > http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit/Prophecy
>
> Not counting your prophecies about global earthquakes,
This is Jesus' prophecy as written in Revelation.
> nuclear wars
This too is also described in Revelation.
> , bird flu pandemics
This is a prediction by others and remains a threat especially with
the latest example of possible human-to-human transmission in Nanking,
China.
> and the untimely death of uncounted members of this
> group, are we?
Their deaths are certain if they unwisely choose not to stop sinning
just as it was for our dearly departed Bob Pastorio as prophesied:
http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit/Prophecy
> >
> > Obviously, this single prophecy has been realized.
> >
> >
> >>>May you wisely choose to surrender by publicly declaring with your
> >>>mouth that "Jesus is LORD:"
> >>>
> >>>http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit/TheWay
> >>
> >>May you wisely choose to discontinue your approach.
> >
> > Without the LORD, your wishes are meaningless (Ecclesiastes).
>
> "Meaningless! Everything is meaningless!" (Ecclesiastes)
... without the LORD since that is the context of Solomon's writing of
Ecclesiastes.
> With or without the Lord, it doesn't matter.
Not for the discerning.
> "I have seen all the things that are done under the sun; all of them are
> meaningless, a chasing after the wind."
... without the LORD.
May we, who are discerning, continue to pray for your endangered soul:
MU
>>> I'm planning on putting some variety into it myself. Sunday: 2 lbs of
>>> Big Macs (tm), Monday: 2 lbs of Whoppers (tm), Tuesday: 2 lbs of
>>> Wendy's Chili (tm), Wednesday: 2 lbs of Flamin' Hot Cheeto's (tm),
>>> Thursday: 2 lbs of Oreo's (tm)...
>>
>> Today, you're full of two pounds of shit.
>
> "Brother MU" such language. It's a good thing that you seem to be
> exempt from being "convicted".
I'm not.
> But thanks for continuing to drive the
> 'ol double standard issue home. No fault of your own of course, I'm
> sure it was never your idea to be labeled "Brother MU".
I have no problem with that, Chung and I have shared a brotherhood for many
years. What dble std do you speak?
> Makes me
> wonder about accuracy of a certain someone's "discernment" factor
> though. Now if you'll excuse me, it's time for me to eat
> 2 lbs of jelly filled donuts and do 500 one-armed chin-ups.
As if you could.
MU
Good choice, you saved your Usenet butt.
Thorsten Schier
So, then why has no clinical study about low carb diets shown comparable
electrolyte derangements? All the doctors have in this case are a lot of
theories about the Atkins diet could theoretically have contributed to
this derangement.
>
>>>>>>If it were true that the girl in this case was completly healthy before
>>>>>>starting the diet and her death a consequence of the diet as this
>>>>>>article suggests, this would raise the following question:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>If the Atkins-diet can kill a healty 14 year old girl in just two weeks,
>>>>>>why does this not happen more often?
>>>>>
>>>>>http://www.atkinsexposed.org/atkins/38/Massive_Health_Risk.htm
>>>>
>>>>Just speculation without any real evidence.
>>>
>>>You asked for an explanation and so you have received a very plausible
>>>explanation.
>>>
>>>Sorry you do not agree with the explanation.
>>
>>You only offered speculations why the Atkins-diet should be dangerous in
>>theory. This is no explanation as to why we do not see any adverse
>>effects in the real world (except this single case).
>
>
> "The downfall of the Atkins Diet is also its one saving grace--people
> may not be able to tolerate the diet for long enough to suffer the
> long-term consequences."
>
> Source:
>
> http://www.atkinsexposed.org/atkins/38/Massive_Health_Risk.htm
>
However, the girl in question was only dieting for one or two weeks. So
the alleged long-term consequences are irrelevant for this case. So the
question remains why no study has shown adverse effects of the Atkins diet?
>
>>>>>>Why are millions of people thriving
>>>>>>on this diet, most of them older, many of them less then healthy to
>>>>>>begin with and many of them following the diet not for weeks but for years?
>>>>>
>>>>>The ones that I have seen are not thriving but rather are developing
>>>>>severe heart disease.
>>>>
>>>>You are probably the only cardiologist on this planet who experiences
>>>>this.
>>>
>>>Not among the discerning ones.
>>
>>I take it the "discerning ones" make their own reality?
>
>
> No.
>
> The discerning ones are the ones who are in touch with reality.
>
With your own reality, which unfortunatly is not same reality as for
everbody else.
> The others suffer from delusions that keep them from being grounded in
> reality.
>
>
>>>>Clinical studies so far have shown nothing of this kind.
>>>
>>>The long-term ones are expected to confirm the anecdotes.
>>
>>Expected by whom?
>
>
> By those who are discerning.
>
By those who live in their own reality, in other words.
>
>>>>>>There may or may not have been a connection between the girls diet and
>>>>>>her death. Perhaps the diet was for some reason unhealthy for her. But
>>>>>>the diet cannot possible have been the only reason for her death.
>>>>>
>>>>>There have been no other reasons discovered.
>>>>
>>>>As is often the case.
>>>
>>>Incorrect.
>>
>>According to my sources, the "underlying predisposing condition or
>>cause" remains unclear in about 20-30 % of all cases.
>
>
> Your sources are not among the discerning.
>
Yes, indeed, my sources are not religious fanatics.
>
>>>>>>>>>>>The optimal diet varies from person to person.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>As does the total amount.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>We have empirically determined that the optimal amount does not vary
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>from person to person.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Here is my personal advice for you:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Wiser to eat more, up to the optimal amount.
>>>>>
>>>>>Not applicable for me but rather for those who are eating less than 2
>>>>>lbs per day.
>>>>
>>>>Than obviously 2 lbs is not enough for you.
>>>
>>>Obviously you are deluded.
>>
>>Hardly.
>
>
> Not for the discerning.
>
>
>>>>>>2 pounds a day may be enough for MU, but this kind of caloric
>>>>>>restriction does not seem to be healthy for you.
>>>>>
>>>>>If that were true, would have been physically unable to do the set of
>>>>>170 push-ups that the Holy Spirit guided me to do this morning.
>>>>
>>>>Any witnesses?
>>>
>>>Yes, GOD and HIS legions of angels, who were counting.
>>
>>They don't count.
>
>
> Actually, they are able to count.
>
>
>>Even if the had been counting, they still don't count
>>as in: "Count my witnesses".
>
>
> They do for the discerning...
>
> ... as in "As GOD is my witness."
>
That proves my point.
>
>>>If you make a public declaration with your mouth before witnesses that
>>>"Jesus is LORD," record this on digital video, upload this onto
>>>YouTube, publishing the link here...
>>>
>>>... would be glad to reciprocate with a video of my doing 170 push-ups
>>>**after** viewing your surrendering to LORD Jesus Christ:
>>>
>>>http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit/TheWay
>>>
>>>With HIS help, I believe I can even do 200 push-ups for your
>>>entertainment pleasure but more importantly for HIS glory :-)
>>
>>I would rather not spread lies on YouTube. It remains my choice to
>>continue to be truthful.
>
>
> Without LORD Jesus Christ, Who is the truth, you can never be
> truthful.
>
You wouldn't know of course.
>
>>>>>>>>And which "we" would that be?:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>We, who are Jesus' brethren.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Could you be more specific?
>>>>>
>>>>>It would be my choice not to be.
>>>>
>>>>Big surprise.
>>>
>>>Sarcasm remains satan's style.
>>
>>I wouldn't know, never met the guy.
>
>
> Without guidance from the Holy Spirit, the guidance you have been
> receiving has been from satan via the lies he has placed in your
> heart.
>
> Your sarcasm will always serve as a tell betraying the latter contents
> in the heart of your soul.
>
Sorry, but it remains my choice not to receive guidance from
non-existing entities, divine or otherwise.
>
>>>>>>Surely not all "Jesus brethren" were
>>>>>>involved in this determination?
>>>>>
>>>>>Did not write that all of Jesus' brethren were involved in empirically
>>>>>determining the optimal amount of food for all.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Unless, of course, this exclusive club is smaller than people realise?
>>>>>
>>>>>This is not an exclusive club but rather a relationship with the risen
>>>>>LORD Jesus Christ.
>>>>>
>>>>>"These who do the will of MY Father in heaven are My family." -- LORD
>>>>>Jesus Christ describing HIS brethren.
>>>>>
>>>>>Amen.
>>>>>
>>>>>You do not have much longer, Thorsten:
>>>>>
>>>>>http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit/Prophecy
>>>>
>>>>Your rate of fulfilled vs. unfulfilled prophecies is so pathetic that
>>>>I'd be more worried, if you were predicting me a long life.
>>>
>>>100% is not pathetic.
>>>
>>>The Holy Spirit guided me to make only one prediction (prophecy)
>>>previously:
>>>
>>>http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit/Prophecy
>>
>>Not counting your prophecies about global earthquakes,
>
>
> This is Jesus' prophecy as written in Revelation.
>
So, now you are trying to blame Jesus for your failed prophecies?
>
>>nuclear wars
>
>
> This too is also described in Revelation.
>
So, now you are trying to blame Jesus for your failed prophecies?
>
>>, bird flu pandemics
>
>
> This is a prediction by others and remains a threat especially with
> the latest example of possible human-to-human transmission in Nanking,
> China.
>
>
>>and the untimely death of uncounted members of this
>>group, are we?
>
>
> Their deaths are certain if they unwisely choose not to stop sinning
> just as it was for our dearly departed Bob Pastorio as prophesied:
>
> http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit/Prophecy
>
Every death is certain, including yours. It has nothing to do with
"sinning" but with the fact that we are mortal humans.
>
>>>Obviously, this single prophecy has been realized.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>May you wisely choose to surrender by publicly declaring with your
>>>>>mouth that "Jesus is LORD:"
>>>>>
>>>>>http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit/TheWay
>>>>
>>>>May you wisely choose to discontinue your approach.
>>>
>>>Without the LORD, your wishes are meaningless (Ecclesiastes).
>>
>>"Meaningless! Everything is meaningless!" (Ecclesiastes)
>
>
> ... without the LORD since that is the context of Solomon's writing of
> Ecclesiastes.
>
This is not what is written in Ecclesiastes. And surely yoou realise
that Solomon had nothing to do with the authorship of this book? It was
written centuries after his death and is influenced rather by greek
philosophy then by the rest of the bible.
>
>>With or without the Lord, it doesn't matter.
>
>
> Not for the discerning.
>
>
>>"I have seen all the things that are done under the sun; all of them are
>>meaningless, a chasing after the wind."
>
>
> ... without the LORD.
Would suggest you read Ecclesiastes again.
Thorsten
MU
> Every death is certain, including yours. It has nothing to do with
> "sinning" but with the fact that we are mortal humans.
Did it always?
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
It should not surprise you (nor others like Marilyn) to learn that
researchers are biased in favor of the source of their research
dollars.
Where there is bias, there is blindness.
You won't know about the electrolyte derangements until you look for
them as this dentist did:
http://www.nature.com/bdj/journal/v195/n9/full/4810683a.html
Truth is simple.
Be hungry... be healthy... be hungrier... be blessed:
http://TheWellnessFoundation.com/BeHealthy
Prayerfully in the infinite power and might of the Holy Spirit,
Pastor Frank
news:fjf8ed$pdb$01$1...@news.t-online.com...
function properly. Anyone filling up on a salad of raw vegetables mixed with
meat, eggs, cheese and flavoured with balsamic vinegar and doused in olive
oil will remain healthy and lose weight. Once the ideal weight has been
established, one can have a hot meal of low glycaemic carbs, like Brazilian
Fejuada, American chilly or pork and beans, European pea soup with ham or
Indian chick peas curry etc. etc. once a day. The total would be less than 2
pounds/day unless one includes the green tea.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Cary Kittrell
> 6c47...@e1g2000hsh.googlegroups.com> <fjckak$hae$01$1...@news.t-online.com> <649a3c7a-7a74-41b9...@l1g2000hsa.googlegroups.com> <fjeenu$qap$03$1...@news.t-online.com> <4d76cf00-3e00-4206...@e6g2000prf.googlegroups.com>
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> X-Trace: news.t-online.com 1197155598 01 26027 9mdk1hIrEJxMN9N 071208 23:13:18
> X-Complaints-To: usenet...@t-online.de
> X-ID: bpE0caZErenQINqkDNQ+WkPXifA8WqnE3g+fjPJkki+8S8Lq2khI8d
> User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Windows/20050317)
> X-Accept-Language: de-DE, de, en-us, en
> In-Reply-To: <4d76cf00-3e00-4206...@e6g2000prf.googlegroups.com>
> Xref: news.arizona.edu sci.med.cardiology:114380 alt.christnet.christianlife:386254 alt.christnet.evangelical:137596 alt.christnet.theology:43196 alt.christnet.prayer:34078
Bingo!
Got it in one. Very good.
-- cary
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Pastor Frank
news:iduh7xmnc0jg$.1wl859ekn27m6.dlg@40tude.net...
> On Sun, 09 Dec 2007 13:35:47 +0100, Thorsten Schier wrote:
>>
>> Every death is certain, including yours. It has nothing to do with
>> "sinning" but with the fact that we are mortal humans.
>
doesn't know sin but also has no knowledge of death. The knowledge of sin
and death are properties inherent exclusively to humans.
Ferd Farkel
You're an omnivore. You need to balance your diet on a daily basis.
1 lb Big Mac, 1 lb Whopper each day would be right. I'd say on
Friday, you've earned the right to splurge on 2 lbs of Frito pie (2
12 oz cans of Hormel chili with beans, 1 8 ounce sack of Fritos,
baked until it bubbles like lava. Top with Kraft Velveeta (tm)
cheese spread).
Ferd Farkel
Andy says 2 lbs of the garbage is fine for your heart, and fine
with Jesus.
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
>
> You're an omnivore. You need to balance your diet on a daily basis.
> 1 lb Big Mac, 1 lb Whopper each day would be right. I'd say on
> Friday, you've earned the right to splurge on 2 lbs of Frito pie (2
> 12 oz cans of Hormel chili with beans, 1 8 ounce sack of Fritos,
> baked until it bubbles like lava. Top with Kraft Velveeta (tm)
> cheese spread).
Far better than 6 pounds of your usual diet per day.
Truth is simple.
May we, who are Jesus' brethren, continue to pray for you:
http://HeartMDPhD.com/Convicts/Ferd
Thorsten Schier
Not all low carb studies were funded by low carb supporters.
> You won't know about the electrolyte derangements until you look for
> them as this dentist did:
>
> http://www.nature.com/bdj/journal/v195/n9/full/4810683a.html
More anecdotes and not even to the point. Saliva pH does necessarily
translate into electrolyte (im-) balances and this dentist is not
comparing people on atkins with the general population but people on
allegedly high protein diets (Atkins is a high fat diet, not necessarily
higher in protein than the standard american diet) vs. vegetarians, who
tend to be rare in the general population. So, if anything, we can make
a guess about vegetarians compared with the general population from the
experiences of this dentist, but not about people on atkins compared
with the general population.
Thorsten
Cary Kittrell
Ah, but you're arguing with someone who just told you that "Where there is
bias, there is blindness."
And on that one, you can take Andrew at his word.
-- cary
Thorsten Schier
> More anecdotes and not even to the point. Saliva pH does _not_ necessarily
Here of course I forgot to insert a "not".
Thorsten
em
"Thorsten Schier" <use...@naturfoto-hamburg.de> wrote
> Atkins is a high fat diet
> Thorsten
No it isn't.
em
"Susan" <neve...@nomail.com> wrote in message
news:5s8p1pF...@mid.individual.net...
> x-no-archive: yes
>
> em wrote:
>
>>
>> No it isn't.
>
> Well, yeah, it is, actually.
Hi Susan,
No, it isn't.
There may be people who eat more fat when they're on low-carb, but that's
not by design of the diet.
I've seen references to at least a few studies on l-c stating that people
actually end up eating less fat (in terms of grams). If you look through the
alt.support.diet.low-carb group, you'll see some of these posts and should
be able to find your way back to the studies if you're interested.
On another note, I eat a lot more fruits and veggies within the constraints
of a low-carb diet than I do otherwise. I'm pretty much forced to do so in
order to get my carbs. I *never* used to eat a salad and fruit every day.
Now I have no choice.
Mike
(Going on 70# lost!)
Aaron Baugher
> There may be people who eat more fat when they're on low-carb, but
> that's not by design of the diet.
>
> I've seen references to at least a few studies on l-c stating that
> people actually end up eating less fat (in terms of grams). If you
> look through the alt.support.diet.low-carb group, you'll see some of
> these posts and should be able to find your way back to the studies if
> you're interested.
It's probably true that many people eat less fat on a low-carb diet,
simply because they were eating high-fat *and* high-carb before. So
many foods are a combination of the two: potatoes and gravy, most
desserts, bread and butter, anything conventionally breaded and fried.
If you replace potato chips and ice cream with broccoli and pork rinds,
you'll be getting less carb *and* less fat.
However, compared to the USDA's recommendation of a maximum 30% of
calories from fat, or Ornish's 15% (or whatever), low-carb is almost
certainly going to be relatively high-fat. Mathematically, it *has* to
be either higher-fat, higher-protein, or lower-calorie, after all. My
protein requirement for the day gives me 480 calories, and my carb
maximum gives me up to 120 more, for a total of 600 from non-fat
sources. Now, a guy my size would normally eat 2400 calories a day to
maintain, but let's say the well-known appetite suppression aspect of
low-carbing kicks in or I do some fasting/starving, and I drop down to a
very low 1800 calories a day. That *still* has me getting 67% of my
calories from fat, which would have mainstream experts measuring me for
a coffin. If I stay up near my "normal" consumption of 2400
calories--without increasing protein or carbs--I'll be getting 75% from
fat.
That's high-fat. That's not a criticism, since I think it's the right
way to eat, but if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck...
> On another note, I eat a lot more fruits and veggies within the
> constraints of a low-carb diet than I do otherwise. I'm pretty much
> forced to do so in order to get my carbs. I *never* used to eat a salad
> and fruit every day. Now I have no choice.
That's a good point; when you stick with the very-low-carb sources like
broccoli and berries, you do have to eat a lot to get up near your carb
limit/requirement. You could reach the same number a lot faster with
some starchier vegetables or something like low-carb bread, but there
wouldn't be nearly as much nutrition in that smaller volume.
--
Aaron -- 285/254/200 -- aaron.baugher.biz
em
> x-no-archive: yes
>
> em wrote:
>
>> Hi Susan,
>>
>> No, it isn't.
>>
>> There may be people who eat more fat when they're on low-carb, but that's
>> not by design of the diet.
>
Susan,
If you compare low-carb to other diets, especially low-fat diets or the USDA
food pyramid, yes, there's more fat by percentage. I concede. If you are
going to sit there and say, "It is a high fat diet because it has more fat
in it than a low fat diet", you win.
Regardless, low carb means low carb, not high fat. The diet is primarily
defined by the amount of carbs one eats, not the amount of fat.
Lets not argue over semantics.
> I've been reading and posting on ASDLC for about a decade, and low carbing
> that long, reading all the research and books then and now.
And eating a lot of fat? Me too :-)
> Yes, low carb rewards us for loading up on colorful, leafy, low carb
> veggies. I eat tons more veggies by volume, but not by % of calories on
> low carb than I ever did when I ate starch.
LOL, you'd have to eat a lot of leafy greens to do that.
> But veggies don't make up the caloric deficit, increasing fat does.
Obviously, low-carb limits you to a few hundred calories, max, from carbs.
Those extra calories have to come from *somewhere*.
> You're quite a newbie, right?
Only ten years? I guess that makes you the newbie :-)
Sadly, I am old. My posts on BBS systems predate Usenet. I won't be pompus
and say that I was low-carbing before you were born, but, if you're as young
and beautiful as you sound, that may very well be the case :-)
Mike
Gantlet
"em" <i...@dun.no> wrote in message news:esV7j.4115$mF1....@newsfe08.phx...
>
> "Susan" <neve...@nomail.com> wrote in message
> news:5sacnnF...@mid.individual.net...
>> x-no-archive: yes
>>
>> em wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Susan,
>>>
>>> No, it isn't.
>>>
>>> There may be people who eat more fat when they're on low-carb, but
>>> that's not by design of the diet.
>>
>> Nonsense.
>
> Susan,
>
> If you compare low-carb to other diets, especially low-fat diets or the
> USDA food pyramid, yes, there's more fat by percentage. I concede. If you
> are going to sit there and say, "It is a high fat diet because it has more
> fat in it than a low fat diet", you win.
>
> Regardless, low carb means low carb, not high fat. The diet is primarily
> defined by the amount of carbs one eats, not the amount of fat.
what is the difference between a low carb diet and a High Fat diet?
and please don't say the name.
even if you go high protein is very hard to keep it low fat.
I believe the only reason it is called low carb is because calling it high
fat
wouldn't help sell it back when the name was given.
For myself I if i went low carb i would feel safer getting most fat from
Monounsaturated, Polyunsaturated and Omega 3 Fatty Acids. and keeping
Saturated, Trans Fat and foods high in cholesterol the lowest my will power
allows.
--
Tom
Information on Specific Types of Fat.
http://www.diabetes.org/nutrition-and-recipes/nutrition/foodlabel/specific-fats.jsp
Doug Freyburger
>
> There may be people who eat more fat when they're on low-carb, but that's
> not by design of the diet.
Dr Atkins had two stories of why he started on his low carb high fat
path. 1) The original "fat fast" study where the test group that ate
90% fat at 1000 calories lost more than either the total fast group
or the 90% protein 1000 calorie group. This is why his plan has
always been high fat by design. 2) His observation that many of his
patients who stuck to low fat for more than 6 months saw worsening
cholesterol tests. This is why he switched to low carb on himself.
Low carbing is high fat by design because the original experiment
showed that high fat outperforms high protein.
> On another note, I eat a lot more fruits and veggies within the constraints
> of a low-carb diet than I do otherwise. I'm pretty much forced to do so in
> order to get my carbs. I *never* used to eat a salad and fruit every day.
Low carb - Drop potatoes, pasta and sweets and replace them with
assorted veggies and some fruit. Phrased that way it's going from
high
everything to brocolli and beef.
em
"Gantlet" <T...@TomsDiabeticDiary.com> wrote
> what is the difference between a low carb diet and a High Fat diet?
> and please don't say the name.
Hi Tom,
All diets are low in something, no? Low fat, low carb, low calorie, etc.
To my knowledge, calories come from three different things: fat, protein and
carbs. Therefore, its only natural that if one cuts all of the X out of
their diet, they're going to eat a higher ratio of Y and Z.
I'll make up some numbers here. Lets say a (fat) person is eating 3000
Calories a day: 1000 Cal each from fat, protein and carbs. Then they go on a
low-carb diet and, at the same time, cut their daily caloric intake from
3000 Cal to about 2000 Cal per day. How? Easy: they cut themesleves down to
about 20 grams of carbo's per day. Now, they're down to around 2000 Cal/day,
and their diet pretty much consists of 50% fat and 50% protein. (And they're
dropping weight like a fricken' rock.)
If someone wants to say, "Well, 50% of their diet comes from fat, that is a
HIGH FAT DIET!!!"... whatcha gonna do?
The reason *I* would call this a low-carb diet, and *I* would not call it a
high-fat diet is because cutting carbs is what defines the diet. The dieteer
(sic, as in mouseketeer,) can choose what foods he eats and, to a great
extent, control the amount and type of fat that he eats.
I hope this makes some sort of sense. I am having the damndest time putting
this point across in another section of this thread.
> For myself I if i went low carb i would feel safer getting most fat from
> Monounsaturated, Polyunsaturated and Omega 3 Fatty Acids. and keeping
> Saturated, Trans Fat and foods high in cholesterol the lowest my will
> power allows.
That sounds reasonable to me. I'm not an expert dieter. I am a fat guy on
his way to skinny. There are some really good books out there on low-carb. I
suggest you check a few of them out at your local bookstore and, if anything
seems to float your boat, buy the book and read it.
Take your time, enjoy the journey.
Mike
em
> x-no-archive: yes
>
> em wrote:
>
> I've been comparing diets for over a decade and reading tons of research
> on it, as well as experimenting with my own macronutrient breakdown. Low
> carb *is* necessarily high fat, unless you go to starvation calorie levels
> or eat extremely, I mean VERY high lean protein daily.
E.g. protein sparing, Stillman, {shudder} kimkins, et al.
My point is that l-c is defined by low carbs not high fat. Saying low-carb
is high fat is the same as saying low-cal and low-fat diets just nice
sounding names for what is nothing more than a high sugar diet. Sure, many
people on low-fat diets do eat a lot of sugar, either by choice or through
ignorance. But "eat a lot of sugar" is not how these diets are defined.
It is carbs that you must count on a low-carb diet, not grams or percentage
of fat.
> My diet is lower fat than a typical Atkins dieter, but comes out as around
> 50% fat,
I don't know what you mean by "typical Atkins dieter". What about a
by-the-book protein power dieter? Or a by-the-book South Beach dieter?
I'm not saying that most people who follow a low-carb woe don't eat a lot of
fat, but calling low carb a "high fat diet" is a poor (and frequently
inaccurate) way to describe low-carb diets in general. You can eat a ton of
fat if you want, or a ton of protein, and not be on a low-carb diet unless
you're limiting carbs. That is why low-carb diets are called low-carb diets
instead of high-fat diets.
> I've been comparing diets for over a decade and reading tons of research
> on it, as well as experimenting with my own macronutrient breakdown.
Well, then, I'll be sure not to debate such topics with you in the future
:-)
Really, though, I bet you're quite the cutie! Have you been skinny for, say,
the past ten years?
Mike
Jackie Patti
> Really, though, I bet you're quite the cutie! Have you been skinny for,
> say, the past ten years?
I can't say, but she's certainly been sexy for the past ten years.
Brains turn me on.
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
It remains wiser to eat less, down to the optimal amount no matter
what is being eaten (ie no matter the diet):
Be hungry... be healthier... be hungrier... be blessed:
http://TheWellnessFoundation.com/BeHealthy
em
> x-no-archive: yes
>
> Jackie Patti wrote:
>> em wrote:
>>
>>> Really, though, I bet you're quite the cutie! Have you been skinny for,
>>> say, the past ten years?
>>
>>
>> I can't say, but she's certainly been sexy for the past ten years.
>>
>> Brains turn me on.
>>
>
Oh my.