[Cyborg]

What I didn't agree with was the notion that the Atkin's Diet was based on lower calorie consumption. The diet is based on carb reduction and staying in a state of ketosis.

I'm trying to figure out the difference between the diet advocated by Dr. Bernstein and the Atkin's Diet.

As far as the nuts go, I suppose it's hard for me to accept that high calorie, low carb foods, such as nuts, can actually help one lose weight.

[jen_slc]

Originally Posted by BriOnH

In the CD's he says that if you put rocks in your stomach (What's funny is I could totally see people tha rag on Bernstein, take this comment literally) it will increase BG. The simple fact of

Stomach expansion --> Causes alpha cells to excrete glucugon --> raises BGL (via Glyogen -> Glucose)

So what if you totally load up on water? I would think then, that regardless with what you distend your stomach (lettuce, water, meat, carbs), you are activating the nerve pathways that ultimately result in glucagon release and increased blood sugar. Except that when you have distended your stomach with nutrients and not water, the metabolism of those nutrients should inhibit the release of glucagon. Water wouldn't have that effect, so should we see a detectable rise in BG if we drown our stomachs in water? Has anyone noticed an effect such as this? Does anyone know the magnitude of this effect, does Bernstein or Atkins or anyone else address it? I wonder if we're just talking about a tiny increase here....

And in thinking about the person who ate a head of lettuce before swimming and ended up with higher BG levels afterward.... who says it was the lettuce and not the exercise that increased it?

[jen_slc]

Originally Posted by Cyborg

I'm trying to figure out the difference between the diet advocated by Dr. Bernstein and the Atkin's Diet.

As far as the nuts go, I suppose it's hard for me to accept that high calorie, low carb foods, such as nuts, can actually help one lose weight.

I only have a limited knowledge of both diets, but from that, it appears to me that the Atkins Diet primarily focuses on reducing carb intake while encouraging high protein and high fat intake. It seems that the Bernstein Diet does not necessarily encourage the high/unlimited protein part, since certain amounts of protein will be converted to sugar and require more insulin. I don't know if that's the biggest difference that sets them apart, but it's something.

I think the concept behind the high calorie, low carb foods helping you to lose weight is that these foods are supposed to satisy you longer and reduce the need for snacking. Less food is required to fill you up.

[BriOnH]

As usual I continue to be more and more informed on diabetes. I think Bernstein's work is a huge contribution to the field of diabetes. I enjoyed his teleconference. It ended unbruptly however, which I thought was rather rude.

Originally Posted by jen_slc

So what if you totally load up on water? I would think then, that regardless with what you distend your stomach (lettuce, water, meat, carbs), you are activating the nerve pathways that ultimately result in glucagon release and increased blood sugar. Except that when you have distended your stomach with nutrients and not water, the metabolism of those nutrients should inhibit the release of glucagon. Water wouldn't have that effect, so should we see a detectable rise in BG if we drown our stomachs in water? Has anyone noticed an effect such as this? Does anyone know the magnitude of this effect, does Bernstein or Atkins or anyone else address it? I wonder if we're just talking about a tiny increase here....

And in thinking about the person who ate a head of lettuce before swimming and ended up with higher BG levels afterward.... who says it was the lettuce and not the exercise that increased it?

I don't think water or liquds count. The liquids diffuse pretty quickly due to osmotic pressures in the stomach and the duodenum<sp>. It seems that solids keep the stomach and lower gi 'filled' with material is what causes this effect. Or so it seems he infers, which I am likely to incline to believe.

From what I have gathered from him, a unit of Humulin R insulin is 25x more diluted then than a unit of human generated insulin from the pancrease. Thinking of this it makes me put the power of sugar into a new perspective.

I need to try this and I remember that salad example you are referring to.

I need to try it. If anyone tried it please post your numbers.

[BriOnH]

I goofed up editing above
** upper gi not lower
** osmotic pressure is more greatly influenced once past the stomach starting with the duedonum into the upper gi to the small intestine(via epithelial transport in to the paritenal cavity where the kidneys eventually filter)

[HelenM]

I have a copy of The Atkins Diabetes Revolution written after his death by his associates. I bought it when I thought I had type 2. It contains quite a lot of sense and some good explanations of metabolic processes. I'm just very wary of the very low carb phase of his diet.
It starts with the very low carb phase of 20gm carb daily and then 'when your metabolism is fairly well under control' (ie fasting BS, blood pressure and lipids lowered) carbs are gradually added, 20 gms at a time until an equlibibrium is reached. 'For some of you that number will be only 20gms a day, others may be able to go up as high as 40 or even 60 gms a day'
He emphasises the concept of the Glycaemic index(called the Atkins Glycaemic ranking) so therefore low GI fruits are not excluded.
He stresses eating the 'right foods' (veg high in antioxidants, oily fish, high calcium foods and high fibre whole grains, five portions of fruit and veg).
He advocates regular meals, counting calories 'if necessary' and exercise.
His concept of healthy fats includes eggs, cheese, meats, pouiltry , olive oil , advocados and oily fish.(but his restriction on calories means portion sizes of these foods has to be small).
He suggests eating enough protein 'to satisfy appetite'

Personally, apart from the initial very low carb phase I don't find what I read in this book as alarming as Bernsteins diet (from what i've read on the internet). Although he only includes equilibrium levels of up to 60gms carbs a day, presumably some people will have even higher equilibriums: the book is aimed at type 2 with insulin resistance.

I had been concerned about the advocacy of commercial products (for me ersatz and unavailable here anyway) He does suggest the use of 'low carb' products (including his own) but warns against trans fats and prioritises fresh, whole foods.
I did a quick calorie count of a couple of his suggested days menus on the initial phase (using his recipe quantities and 'normal portion sizes for protein) and came to between 1200 and 1300. Low but not as low as some fad diets.

[REDLAN]

hmmm found this about atkins, which may be of interest...

BBC NEWS | Health | Uncovering the Atkins diet secret

essentially there is no difference between a calorie restricted diet, and atkins - you lose weight because you eat fewer calories. One result from an identical twin study - showed that there was no significant difference in calorie's burned between an atkins diet and a normal calorie restricted one.

the second danish study showed that people on high protein diets (i.e. atkins) eat fewer calories because they feel fuller, and therefore less hungry, and therefore eat less food.

the other point of note that there have been no long term studies looking at the effectiveness of the atkins diet - the longest has been 1 year, most are 6 months or less.

[BlueSky]

Originally Posted by REDLAN

.... there have been no long term studies looking at the effectiveness of the atkins diet - the longest has been 1 year, most are 6 months or less.

Actually quite a big study has been done on this - evolution. And it has been going on for millions of years.

It is an interesting article. It highlights the fact that people don't eat to satisfy a calorific requirement. We eat because we get hungry. The problem arises when we still feel hungry after consuming all the calories we need to maintain normal body weight. That is when people put on weight. The Atkins approach works because people feel satisfied sooner and and don't feel the need to consume calories they don't require.

There is another effect that that article doesn't mention. The consumption of carbohydrate is thought to slow down the metabolism because of the thrifty gene effect. A slower metabolism burns up less energy, which could help explain why people on a high-carb diet have more difficulty losing weight.

[DeusXM]

The consumption of carbohydrate is thought to slow down the metabolism because of the thrifty gene effect. A slower metabolism burns up less energy, which could help explain why people on a high-carb diet have more difficulty losing weight.

Not forgetting that a high-carb diet tends to be high in calories too.

Incidentally, I'm not buying your evolution argument. It's already been demonstrated that in just a few thousand years, human beings evolved from being lactose intolerant to generally able to drink cows' milk. Therefore just because something may have genetically been the case 10,000 years ago doesn't mean it is now.

[BriOnH]

Does anyone know definitivly how Atkins died?

[REDLAN]

well contrary to popular belief Dr. Atkins didn't die of a heart attack, nor was he obese at the time of his death, as was widely circulated.

I found a link

USATODAY.com - Statements on Atkins' death

it appears that he suffered a serious head injury and went into a coma, from which he didn't recover.

the report of obesity was based on a the fact that he had gained 60 or so pounds in weight due to water retention caused by organ failure.

he did apparently suffer from cardiomyopathy - which was caused by a viral infection, which may have complicated the head injury (although it does not explicitly say so in the article)

[karen]

Brian,

Was there one thing during the teleconference that we would find interesting or that really stood out that you could share with us after listening in on the teleconference?

Karen

[BriOnH]

Originally Posted by karen

Brian,

Was there one thing during the teleconference that we would find interesting or that really stood out that you could share with us after listening in on the teleconference?

Karen

Some stuff he went over was on his audio cd's, and it was good to listen to them again. Topics like: 1)human non D generated insulin vs the insulin type 1s take, chinese reteraunt effect. While he is plugging his new book he didn't over plug it, and was kind of like listening to an AM talk show host. I wish he had his own radio show. As his CD's are kind of out dated now, he went over newer therapies:
1) Pfizers<sp> Exubra inhaler - he didn't mention anything new that hasn't been mentioned here. 1mg and 3mg "puffs". He gave a very unbiased view of it. He noted it's limitations but did it very professional. After listening to his review I felt it was "neautral".
2) Symilyin - Referred to it as a miracle drug. I was shocked by that. At this poing a pharmacist jumped in on the call and started talking about byetta and totally lost me as he tried to compare symilin and byetta. In the end it was ultra appearant the pharmacist just wanted to talk about byetta and symilin was the worst segway to it. Bernstien said when byetta is used in type 2's usually it will max out thier beta cells and end up destroying them. So people on byetta should take breaks off it. He didn't say it for certain, but I interpreted a 2 month on 1 month off cycle.
3) He prefers Lantus to levimir because of something about potency and dilution. I don't remember the specifics so I won't speculate. He was asked if their is any benefit to giving lantus 3 or more times a day. His response was 2 is max.

His phone call was cut short. He rather inferred it was the telco provider trying to jip him which it seems they did. Either way the phone conference was ended ubruptly and without a close inwhich I was kind of mad about. They said at the beggining of the call they would open it up for questions at the end. I was looking forward to that and it didn't take place.

Over all it was a great call. I love listening to Bernstien. I wish I could get Him, Dr. Faustman, and a couple of people here for a week somewhere to just talk about the next steps in better therapies (cellular therapy), control via an exercise extreme instead of a carb extreme, and cures.

Probably a little more then you asked for Karen

[karen]

Thank you that was a great recap. Don't know if I could add Symlin to the mix and when I was on Lantus I did it twice a day and it worked well for me.

I would love to find out what his menu is for a day as I am such a carbaholic

Thanks again,

Karen

[BriOnH]

If you know of any more events of his coming up please share them. I appreciate you pointing me to that last call.