Here is the link again: http://www.dietitian.com/locarb.html (1),(3),(4)
I am not sure if I will get to everything, but I will try and if needed will do it on more than one post.
The nutritional information provided here on carbohydrate controlled diets is based on research, education and clinical experience. I don't quote specific research studies as this website is for the general public not for nutrition scientists to debate various studies.(1)This part is probably very true. They use research, but like any person only reviews things that support their belief system. Another issue is that there just hasn't been very much GOOD legitimate research in the nutrition world. Most of it is epidemiological studies based on people reporting on their diets over a period of time. It is widely known that humans are not very good record keepers when it comes to their personal eating habits. So, yes they use research and look at studies, but most of them are pretty flawed. Including things like the average end food 'cohorts' eating almost the same diets by macronutrient ratios, yet still classifying them as being within the parameters of the study. In this study that is perfectly clear:
Comparison of the Atkins, Ornish, Weight Watchers, and Zone Diets for Weight Loss and Heart Disease Risk Reduction(2)This represents the four diets from the above study, can you tell me which diet was the low carb one?
Diet 1: 1832 KCal, 208g CHO, 64g FAT, 83g PRO ( 45% CHO, 31% FAT, 24% PRO )
Diet 2: 1757 KCal, 173g CHO, 72g FAT, 90g PRO ( 40% CHO, 37% FAT, 23% PRO )
Diet 3: 1886 KCal, 190g CHO, 81g FAT, 86g PRO ( 40% CHO, 39% FAT, 21% PRO )
Diet 4: 1819 KCal, 218g CHO, 64g FAT, 77g PRO ( 48% CHO, 32% FAT, 20% PRO )(2)
I have no idea which diet is which, but it shows how inaccurate the research really was because all the diets are pretty similar in macronutrient ratios. Did you know that the Ornish diet is supposed to be 70 CHO, 10% fat and 20% protein? Do you see even one group that achieved that goal over the course of the study? I sure don't. But the abstract says they were 'compliant' with their prescribed diet. I really don't see how that can be considered compliant. All of these ratios, compared to the Food Guide Pyramid, are technically considered 'low carbohydrate' or at least 'lower carbohydrate' diets, no wonder they worked. Yet, this is the type of study that is used for the 'research' mentioned by the dietitian. Not so impressive, is it? I would guess they don't want to share their research because it is obvious it is manipulated or just flat out misinterpreted.
Secondly, high or low blood sugars do not cause anxiety attacks. The cravings and obsessing you describe are more indicative of binge eating.(3)Really, blood sugar levels do not cause anxiety attacks? Hmmm, I have experienced it personally when I had an attack of hypoglycemia. When your blood glucose levels are too low it will trigger a stress response, this includes a flood of adrenaline into the body. This flood of adrenaline results in an anxiety attack. The body does not care that the 'flight or fight' response was the result of low blood sugar levels. It reacts the same way regardless of where the stimulus comes from, so people that are prone to anxiety attacks will experience them more frequently when they have unstable blood sugar levels. Now, some say this might not be true and that anxiety attacks have nothing to do with blood glucose levels. But, those same people will admit that a case of hypoglycemia will cause symptoms that are very similar to and can be mistaken for an anxiety attack. The original person that commented and asked the question of the dietitian is not a medical professional, and would not know this. The same would be said for the audience of people reading her response. What would have been a better thing to do was clarify that low blood glucose levels* cause symptoms very similar to an anxiety attack, but not an actual anxiety attack. Although, I have experienced this phenomena and I will say it sure SEEMED like an anxiety attack. And you know they say perception is reality, right?
High blood sugar is one symptom of diabetes and is caused by a lack or insufficient production of insulin. Low blood sugars is one symptom of hypoglycemia which is triggered by eating high carbohydrates, especially simple sugars and sweets, which causes an overproduction of insulin.(4)Here it seems to me she doesn't quite grasp the difference between Type I and Type II diabetes. Type one is caused by a lack of insulin, whereas Type II is the result of either a lack of insulin OR hyperinsulinemia (high insulin, or over production of insulin). Insulin resistance (IR) is what causes Type II diabetes in many people, IR is a situation in which the cells of the body are not able to use the insulin appropriately to reduce the blood glucose levels. This leads to high levels on insulin in the blood. Eventually this leads to Type II diabetes. Does this medical professional really want to stand by her statement? Wanna read more about it? Check out this great article on it.
Okay, that is all for now. Reading the next question and her answers has lead me to realize that each question deserves its own post. There is just that much wrong information being presented as truth.
So, more to come. Maybe as a Friday night project.
Tomorrow I will post the yummy stuffed portobellos we had for dinner, delish!!! (with food pron)
*note that ANXIETY is one of the symptoms of hypoglycemia (low blood sugar)