MOVED TO LIVINLAVIDALOWCARB.COM/BLOG

PLEASE UPDATE YOUR BOOKMARKS TO LIVINLAVIDALOWCARB.COM/BLOG

Thursday, March 22, 2007

'Livin' La Vida Low-Carb Show' Episode 36: Low-Fat Expert Agrees Low-Carb Is Effective

We'll conclude this special edition of my podcast show this week with Episode 36 of "The Livin' La Vida Low-Carb Show with Jimmy Moore." This is Part 2 of a teleconference call about the now infamous JAMA study showing the Atkins low-carb diet was best among all the diets after one year. It's a little long, but worth every minute to listen:

icon for podpress  "The Livin' La Vida Low-Carb Show with Jimmy Moore" Episode 36 [34:43m]: Play in Popup | Download

Picking up right where we left off in Episode 35, we get even more debate featuring the commentary of such low-carb experts as Dr. Mary Vernon, Dr. Eric Westman, Dr. Gil Wilshire, and others in Episode 36. Plus the sound quality of Part 2 is a million times better than Part 1 was, so be sure to listen to this one from start to finish.

Special thanks to RevolutionHealth.com as well as my fellow bloggers Laura Dolson, Kate Welch, and the always entertaining Dana Carpender who contributed to the call with their comments and questions. Also, I appreciate the professionalism by the host of the call Jason Rosenburg as well as the guests Dr. Michael Dansinger (who I will be sharing an interview with soon at my blog) and Dr. James Hill.

Access "The Livin' La Vida Low-Carb Show" anytime by:

1. Listening at the official web site
2. Going to iTunes
3. Calling (818) 688-2763 to listen via Podlinez
4. Subscribing to the RSS feed

Do you have any final comments to share about this teleconference call? What should we do next to bring about my recommendation to have the low-carb diet promoted alongside the low-fat diet as equally effective? Share your thoughts about this in the comments section or by calling our listener comment line at (206) 203-4192.

Come back next week for another exciting episode of "The Livin' La Vida Low-Carb Show with Jimmy Moore" including an interview on Thursday with the founder and president of Carbsmart, Andrew DiMino, who will discuss the state of the low-carb retail industry. DON'T MISS IT! :)

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Monday, March 19, 2007

'Livin' La Vida Low-Carb Show' Episode 35: Dansinger, Hill Take On The Low-Carb Bloggers

Today and Thursday I have a special edition of my podcast show to share with you. In Episode 35 of "The Livin' La Vida Low-Carb Show with Jimmy Moore," you will access the first part of an exciting teleconference call the took place recently following the JAMA study from Stanford University showing the Atkins diet was better after one year for weight loss and improved health. Check out Part 1 right now:

icon for podpress  "The Livin' La Vida Low-Carb Show with Jimmy Moore" Episode 35 [31:00m]: Play in Popup | Download

You will notice that Episode 35 is about twice as long as normal for my podcast show. Because I was out of town all of last week (and just got home off a red-eye flight this afternoon), we decided to split the recent teleconference call sponsored by RevolutionHealth.com into two parts and it features some low-carb luminaries that you may recognize in Part 1--Dana Carpender, Dr. Mary C. Vernon, and myself all got to ask Dr. Michael Dansinger and Dr. James Hill questions about the low-carb study that shocked the world recently. Tune in for the fireworks!

Access "The Livin' La Vida Low-Carb Show" anytime by:

1. Listening at the official web site
2. Going to iTunes
3. Calling (818) 688-2763 to listen via Podlinez
4. Subscribing to the RSS feed

Let me apologize for the poor sound quality of the podcast. It was a recorded teleconference call with people calling in from all over, so the quality is only about as good as a bad phone connection. If you can endure through that, then it is well worth your time to listen and I'd love to know what you think. Provide your comments and state whether you are buying the argument by Dr. Hill that low-carb is only good for temporary, short-term weight loss.

Be sure to listen to the second half of the teleconference call on Thursday which will feature even more famous low-carb researchers and bloggers you will quickly recognize. I even get in another comment or two challenging this "temporary" argument head-on. Don't miss it!

Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

Wednesday, March 07, 2007

If The Atkins Diet Works As Well As Low-Fat, Then Why Not Recommend It?

Boy, we've got the low-fatties beside themselves today!

After the release of this JAMA study on Tuesday that is making tons of positive headlines for livin' la vida low-carb, you would think those who support low-fat diets were just told the government was no longer going to actively recommend that way of eating as the publicly-endorsed nutritional approach for getting healthy.

Of course, you know that wouldn't be such a bad idea if it happened. GASP! LOL! More about that in a moment.

I was privileged to be invited to join a teleconference debate last night sponsored by RevolutionHealth.com, a new web site dedicated to helping people take action to manage their health care, conditions and healthy living goals by bringing together a blend of the best health information, tools, communities and services all in one place. It's a free site that is worthy of your attention if you are like me and care about the subject of health.

The debate itself was between Dr. Michael Dansinger, MD who authored this JAMA study comparing various popular diets in 2005 and Dr. James Hill, PhD. from the National Weight Control Registry (NWCR). Neither one of these men are what I would call enthusiastic supporters of livin' la vida low-carb, but Dr. Dansinger is at least respectful of the diet. Dr. Hill, on the other hand, has his doubts about the Atkins diet beyond short-term weight loss. I'll explain why I think he believes this way shortly.

Jason Rosenberg, who hosted the call, asked me to invite people to the call since my "Livin' La Vida Low-Carb" blog was one of the more prominent ones in the low-carb community. So, I e-mailed a handful of low-carb supporters across the various fields of academia, research, advocacy, and blogging and came up with people who I thought could join me and the other low-fat diet bloggers and advocates as we hash out the the details of this study.

But when I called just minutes before the teleconference began at 7:30pm, imagine my surprise when every single one of the people participating in the call was in some way connected to the low-carb community. What?! Where were the low-fat diet bloggers and supporters? Were they simply unwilling to engage in a little spirited debate surrounding these newfound facts about the Atkins diet? Surely you jest?!

Nope! It was true. Not one single person beside Dr. Hill was there to defend low-fat, despite the fact that Jason invited them just like he did me. In a way I felt bad for Dr. Hill because I didn't want him to think all of us low-carbers were ganging up on him like a bunch of blood-thirsty savage wolves seeking to devour some freshly-caught prey. I'm sure that may be how he felt once we all started asking our questions and making our comments.

So, who was on the call with me? Here's the list:

- Dr. Mary C. Vernon from the University of Kansas
- Dr. Eric Westman from Duke University Medical Center
- Laura Dolson from About Low-Carb Diets
- Kate Welch from The Steaks Are High
- Dr. Gil Wilshire from The Carbohydate Awareness Council
- Regina Wilshire from Weight Of The Evidence
- Dana Carpender from Lowcarbezine!
- Marilyn Turnbow from Atkins YAHOO! Group

It was quite a distinguished panel and I was honored to be a part of it. After some formal introductions of the speakers and an informal roll call of everyone who was participating, both Dr. Dansinger and Dr. Hill gave their assessment of what they thought about the Gardner study that released on Tuesday.

Interestingly, both men agreed that there is very clear evidence from the body of research that has come out in the past few years about low-carb diets that they should not be dismissed altogether. But what irritated me the most was when Dr. Hill kept insisting on giving the caveat "in the short-term" whenever he discussed low-carb diets. Oh, they're great for weight loss "in the short-term" and I wouldn't have any problem with someone wanting to try that diet "in the short term."

UGH!

As you can imagine, I was chomping at the bit to ask my question and Jason gave me the first shot. So I asked Dr. Hill point blank if low-carb is only good for the short-term, then how am I supposed to eat long-term? He responded by stating that if it's working for me then keep doing it, but it does not work well for everyone. Thankfully, he did admit the same thing about low-fat diets, but the same scrutiny does not exist for that diet.

One interesting statement made by Dr. Hill that quite frankly floored me was when he said low-carb diets are as equally ineffective after a year just as low-fat diets are. Did you catch that apparent slip of the tongue? He just said low-fat diets are INEFFECTIVE after a year. If that's true, Dr. Hill, then why do we keep having what you admit is a FAILED message hammered down our throats year in and year out? Isn't the low-fat, low-calorie diet what your National Weight Control Registry recommends as the long-term way to lose weight?

Taking his thesis that low-carb is equal to low-fat in bringing about weight loss and improved health (or not) a little further, I asked a follow-up question for Dr. Hill a few minutes later asking if the Atkins diet works just as well as the low-fat diets, then why aren't government and health entities recommending both alongside each other? Dr. Hill said that was an important question to ask, but never really said if he believed it could, should, or would ever happen. There's a reason he ducked at that question.

Dr. Hill's answer was not at all surprising considering his obvious conflict of interests I blogged about previously with his ties to the food industry. Dr. Hill is on the advisory board for the Grain Foods Foundation and has consulting ties to PepsiCo, McDonald's, HealtheTech, Johnson & Johnson, Procter & Gamble, and Coca-Cola. He has also received speaker fees from Abbott Laboratories, Roche Laboratories, and Kraft Foods as well as research funding from M&Ms/Mars. The Sugar Association has also funded his research on the role of carbohydrates in weight management.

And this is the same man, along with Dr. Rena Wing from Brown University/Miriam Hospital, who supposedly speaks for what works for people to bring about weight loss over the long-term according to the much-heralded NWCR. Ever since I joined the NWCR in 2005, I have been concerned about their apparent bias against low-carb while the low-fat, low-calorie diet is so heavily endorsed. Frankly I'm surprised nobody outside the low-carb community is as concerned about this as I am.

This conversation about developing long-term weight and health strategies is an important one to discuss as Dr. Vernon so eloquently mentioned regarding providing individuals with the support they need to be successful. Before that happens, though, we must all agree that if low-carb diets are as effective as low-fat diets (and that's what the evidence has shown in multiple studies now), then they deserve equal footing, equal treatment, and equal endorsement by our leaders.

The time for talking about this is over. We've seen the research and it shows that low-carb is as good or better than low-fat diets for at least one year. With this knowledge under our belt, when are we going to stop pandering to the special interests in the food industry and finally do the right thing--PROMOTE LOW-CARB AND LOW-FAT AS EQUALS! This is a public charge to health leaders like Dr. Hill and the like to stand up and do the right thing.

Kate from "The Steaks Are High" blog summarized it well in her post about the teleconference call echoing my message of equal treatment for low-carb diets.

"All low carbers are asking for is that the low-carb approach be recommended as an option alongside low fat, since the medical safety of Atkins has been proven by this and many other studies. Oh yeah, and that the American Heart Association and the American Diabetes Association read some of the latest research for a change."

That really is all we are asking for. Livin' la vida low-carb doesn't have to be advocated (although it could be argued that low-fat diets HAVE been for decades), but simply put on the table as a viable option for people to try if they need to lose weight and get healthy. What harm will come if people are given a choice, hmmm?

E-mail Dr. James Hill and urge him to use his powerful position in the realm of health and nutrition to push government and health leaders to promote low-carb alongside low-fat in national dietary recommendations at CHN@uchsc.edu.

3-7-07 UPDATE: You can now listen to the audio of this nearly one-hour teleconference call I blogged about. ENJOY!

Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

Monday, March 05, 2007

Get In On A Low-Carb Teleconference Debate

The murmurings about this BIG STUDY coming out on Tuesday afternoon are getting louder and louder and it is putting the Atkins diet and livin' la vida low-carb back in the limelight again in 2007 (just as I've been predicting would happen as all this new research comes out). The actual study releasing Tuesday is embargoed until 4pm EST on Tuesday afternoon, but I will DEFINITELY be blogging about it at that time. Stay tuned!

But for those of you who have your own low-carb blog and/or web site, I'd like to invite you to an event on Tuesday evening at 7:30pm EST. It's a conference call with a debate about this new study and the merits of the low-carb lifestyle.

Two dietitians will be featured in the study Dr. Michael Dansinger, MD who was the lead researcher in the infamous Tufts diet trial from January 2005 and Dr. James Hill, PhD from the National Weight Control Registry and obesity expert.

After their brief debate, there will be a discussion from people invited to talk about this--and they've asked me to be on the call. Even better was the fact that they said I could invite all my rowdy friends to come on over as well. :D So, that's YOU and I want you to be a part of the fun if you can make it.

Send me an e-mail at livinlowcarbman@charter.net if you have a low-carb blog or web site and would like to take part in this teleconference call on Tuesday night. I'd be happy to let the call organizers know you are coming and send you the special telephone number to call as well as the access code.

Let me hear from you ASAP if you are interested in being on the call. There will be some BIG NAMES in the low-carb community on the line, so you won't want to miss being a part of the action. Plus, the event organizers have promised to make the audio of this teleconference call available to me afterwards which I will try to post here when it becomes available.

Get in before it's too late...join the low-carb teleconference debate!

Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Sunday, October 15, 2006

NWCR Still Assumes Low-Fat, Low-Calorie The Only Healthy Weight Loss Method

Amidst my whirlwind week of craziness in my life this past week was the unexpected arrival of a big white envelope directly from Brown University. It was from Dr. Rena R. Wing, professor of psychiatry at Brown University/The Miriam Hospital and one of the co-founders of The National Weight Control Registry (NWCR) documenting the long-term weight loss success of over 5,000 Americans who have been able to lose at least 30 pounds and keep it off for a minimum of one year.

Last July, I was privileged to join this distinctive group of individuals as a member of the NWCR after losing over 180 pounds and keeping it off for well over a year at the time. However, I expressed my concerns about this supposedly independent research project when I received my first questionnaire and discovered there was a seemingly very explicit bias against people who lost weight by livin' la vida low-carb like me.

It was very evident in a copy of a magazine article they sent to me in the package with the survey that listed the four following keys to permanent weight loss and weight maintenance success:

1. Eat a reduced-calorie, low-fat, moderately high-carb diet
2. Try to eat breakfast every day
3. Check weight regularly
4. Exercise regularly


With the exception of #1, I could not agree more. But it's that first recommendation that has people like me who are participating in the NWCR thinking Dr. Wing and the other co-founder, Dr. James O. Hill from the University of Colorado Health Sciences Center, don't give a rip about those of us who have successfully maintained our weight on a low-carb diet.

Nevertheless, a new study released by the NWCR in June 2006 shows that the low-carbers participating in the NWCR are seemingly making a difference in the statistics. But those statistics are from 2003, one year before the height of the low-carb popularity reached its climax (I didn't even START my low-carb lifestyle until 2004!). More recent information is expected to be forthcoming in the next year they say, but we'll have to wait and see.

You will recall that I blogged about Dr. Wing's latest study last week showing self-regulation of your weight through frequent weighing and meeting with others are some of the keys to keeping the weight off for good. But you may remember the nutritional approach used to help those who had gained weight to begin losing weight again was the low-fat diet, which was surprising since ostensibly a wide variety of weight loss plans were used by the participants for their intial weight loss. Why was it assumed by Dr. Wing that low-fat eating was the only healthy way to lose weight? Hmmmm?

Getting into the survey packet that was mailed to me last week, Dr. Wing wrote that she is thankful to have my participation in the NWCR and that providing this information is helping them determine what is working best to help people keep the weight off. She may not be as grateful to me about my participation after reading this column today. :)

There was an excellent fact sheet of statistics about NWCS, including:

- 80 percent are women and 20 percent are men
- The average age of the women is 45 and weighs 145 pounds
- The average of of the men is 49 and weighs 190
- Members lost an average of 66 pounds and kept it off 5.5 years
- Weight loss ranged from 30 to 300 pounds
- Members have kept the weight off for 1 through 66 years
- Varying rates of weight loss, including one that took 14 years
- 45 percent did their own diet, 55 percent followed a program
- 98 percent changed their food intake to lose weight
- 94 percent increased exercise, especially walking

All of this was noteworthy data to see, but the real eye-opening stuff was in the survey itself. Even after they insist there are changes happening with the survey participants regarding their dietary habits, it appears the NWCR is STILL insisting on assuming that people are following a low-fat diet to lose and maintain their weight and that it is the recommended method for eating healthy for weight loss and weight maintenance. ARGH!

Here's one example of what I'm talking about:

One question asked "Have you used this strategy to maintain or lose weight during the past year and how useful has it been for you?"

The answers were either YES or NO and included "Kept few high-fat foods in your house." Why is this relevant in the context of weight loss or weight maintenance, especially for people who are livin' la vida low-carb? OF COURSE I KEPT HIGH-FAT FOODS IN MY HOUSE!!! It's the macronutrient I am using to fuel my body. What a presumptuous question by the NWCR!

But that's not all! Here's another example:

In a section about what foods I eat, it asks about various ways that food is prepared.

"Did you eat chicken?" was one of the questions regarding my eating habits from the past year. When I answered YES there was a follow-up question that asked "How often did you take off the skin or buy skinless chicken?" Again, WHY WOULD I DO THAT? That's the most healthy part of eating chicken!

Or how about this one--"Did you eat red meat?" When I answered YES, the follow-up question asked "How often did you trim all the visible fat?" Do you see where these questions are heading? Something tells me Dr. Wing didn't expect ANYONE to answer NEVER, but I did as I'm sure the other low-carbers taking the survey did as well!

When they asked "Did you eat ground beef?" and I answered YES, the follow-up question again presumed low-fat was better by stating "How often did you choose extra lean (very low fat) ground beef?" UGH UGH UGH! Oh yeah, sure, there's not a bias against low-carb living in that kind of question is there?! HA!

These types of questions went on and on regarding the use of butter, milk, cheese, dressings, and mayonaisse, among other foods. Every single one of the questions about the foods I had consumed wanted to know if I chose the extremely low-fat or fat-free versions. Um, how can I say this in a nice way...NO!

Then there was the section about "other factors influencing weight loss/maintenance" that yet again lays the groundwork assumption that controlling fat intake, calories and portions is the way to control your weight. Here are those sample statements that they asked you to mark either TRUE or FALSE:

Imagine my angst when I read the following statements which didn't make any sense to this low-carber: "When I have eaten my quota of calories, I am usually good about not eating anymore" and "I count calories as a conscious means of controlling my weight." What if you don't count calories, Dr. Wing? That's why I had to check FALSE for both of these questions.

There was a similar question that asked for varying degrees of answers ranging from "unlikely" to "very likely"--"How likely are you to shop for low calorie foods?" Hmm, let me think...can you say "unlikely?" Duh!

In yet another question asking "How much pleasure do you derive from the following activities?," one of the statements read "Eating a low fat meal." Can you understand why I would mark NONE AT ALL, Dr. Wing? Eating a low-fat meal is NOT a pleasurable experience for people eating low-carb because it is completely unnecessary for a low-carb dieter to cut back on fat intake. What's so difficult to understand about that?

I think that's plenty of examples (although there are many more!) that clearly make my point. Whether they want to admit it or not, the people behind the NWCR are indeed promoting, if not flaunting, a low-fat diet as the only healthy way to lose and maintain weight loss by automatically assuming people who are controlling their weight are eating this way as a lifetime commitment. Some may be doing that, but not all of us. The evidence is obvious from the skewed framework of their survey questions that they want people to make the connection between low-fat and eating healthy.

But wait, there's more.

In this Medscape article about the NWCR, you will see the following statement made about the participation of low-carb dieters in the survey.

"Extremely few participants (<1%) consumed a very low carbohydrate diet (<24% kcal from carbohydrates, or <90 g of carbohydrates per 1500 kcal). Despite the popularity of low-carbohydrate diets, there is no evidence that such diets are effective in the long term.

All I have to say is so what if less than one percent of the NWCR participants are active low-carbers? That's STILL about 50 of us who are showing that is CAN be done to not only lose weight but also KEEP IT OFF FOREVER! Adding in the commentary that low-carb is "not effective in the long term" is simply on someone's opinion, not based in the reality of people just like me and others who have seen permanent weight loss success on low-carb.

In fact, my blogging friend Kent Altena, who has also lost 200 pounds on the Atkins diet and kept it off ever since and is a member of the NWCR, wrote the following at my blog last week regarding his survey.

"I had to laugh at the one-year renewal survey NWCR sent to me yesterday. I just filled my copy last night, and it was still almost entirely focused on if I cared about eating fatty foods or how many calories I was eating. Something tells me I skewed the results again."

Yep, me too, Kent! :D

Another one of my readers has a theory about why low-carb participation in the NWCR is so low.

"As you mentioned before, [Dr. Wing] doesn't have many low-carbers among the study participants--less than 1% according to what I received in her latest mailing. I'm guessing that is because of the referral phenomenon. Weight Watchers people know other Weight Watchers people, not Atkins people, so those are the ones who hear about the study by word of mouth. Plus, the latest round of Atkins dieting started only a few years ago. I don't think there were that many low-carbers in 1993 when they got started. On the other hand, eating low-carb for life may be harder for most people than it is for us, and that may be why lots of low-carb people don't keep the weight off in the long term."

That's a good point, which is why I have often encouraged successful low-carbers to sign up for the NWCR and prove to researchers like Dr. Wing and the whole world that this way of eating IS working to not only help people lose the weight, but then KEEP IT OFF for the rest of their lives. There's no way to document this unless people who lose weight on low-carb are involved in the NWCR. So if you have lost 30 pounds and kept it off for at least a year, GO SIGN UP!

Sadly, one of my readers at Low-Carb Newsline this week revealed some rather disturbing conflict of interest connections that both Dr. Wing and Dr. Hill have that may be having a profound effect on how they few the survey results that are being used to promote low-fat dieting and regular meetings as the way to maintain weight loss.

You see, Dr. Wing is a pharmaceutical consultant and is on the advisory board for Weight Watchers (ah, now we know why she's so gung ho about having regular meetings for weight maintance--that kind of information fits the Weight Watchers philosophy like a glove!).

Meanwhile, Dr. Hill is on the advisory board for the Grain Foods Foundation and has consulting ties to PepsiCo, McDonald's, HealtheTech, Johnson & Johnson, Procter & Gamble, and Coca-Cola. He has also received speaker fees from Abbott Laboratories, Roche Laboratories, and Kraft Foods as well as research funding from M&Ms/Mars. The Sugar Association has also funded his research on the role of carbohydrates in weight management. Can you guess what he concluded about sugar's role in weight gain?

Need I go on? What we have here are two individuals purporting to be doing legitimate scientific research on successful weight management while using this platform to promote their own self-serving special interest groups. If you ask me, there is nothing more sickening than to see research pretenders like Dr. Wing and Dr. Hill hiding their true motives in an attempt to make themselves look objective to the general public. Clearly, they are NOT and that's a crying shame if you ask me.

While I appreciate being a part of the NWCR and will continue to share my sustained weight loss success on the low-carb lifestyle with them in the coming years through this survey, I think it is important to remember what I have written here today about what they are doing. That way the next time you read about the National Weight Control Registry in the newspaper or see a segment about it on the evening news, you'll know why the advice given may not exactly be right for you.

The NWCR is obviously not about seeking the truth about what works for people regarding weight loss, but rather it is showing favoritism by specifically singling out one particular method--THE LOW-FAT DIET--and hailing it as the only healthy way to lose and maintain weight. That is doing a huge disservice to the tens of millions of people who are struggling to find a way to overcome their weight problem. Low-carb saved my life and has done the same for many others. Why would this amazing way of eating be blacklisted by the NWCR if it is helping so many lose weight and get healthy? It doesn't make sense to me.

Dr. Rena Wing and Dr. James Hill should be ashamed of themselves! You can share your concerns about their tainted viewpoints regarding a healthy lifestyle by e-mailing them directly at rwing@lifespan.org for Dr. Wing and CHN@uchsc.edu for Dr. Hill. They need to hear from anyone and everyone who is concerned that they are compromising the scientific integrity of the NWCR. Tell them to STOP pushing their low-fat diet propaganda and to start acknowledging that there are health benefits to a controlled-carbohydrate lifestyle.

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,