Slashdot Mirror
Hackers On Atkins
`Sean writes "Salon.com has published a story about Hackers on Atkins. Although going on a diet is the last thing on the minds of the stereotypical geek basking in the ambient radiation of multiple monitors for 15 hours per day, many hackers have been embracing Atkins because utilizing low-carb methods to modify the metabolism is analogous to hacking and overclocking the body. Others have been combining Atkins with other systems, such as John Walker's The Hacker's Diet. I've personally lost a hundred pounds so far and will toss in the obligatory if I can do it, anyone can ism."
From what I've heard, Atkins is extremely harsh on your kidneys, with some seriously bad side-effects when you use it for prolonged periods. Surely getting thin is not worth dying or having permanent renal damage for...
Daniel
Carpe Diem
Also, its good to eat a regular portion. If you stuffed yourself, you probably ate too much. Most restaurants will give you a dump-truck full so long as you hit their price point or $5~7 per person.
IANAD, but that's just my thoughts.
It's usually morbidly obese people who are doing this, and while I don't doubt it works, those people are still far from healthy. They still carry a few extra pounds, don't exercise, and they reek.
It's funny how humans have lived on a staple of grains, rice, potatoes for thousands of years, and billions around the world continue to do so, and now it's no good for you? No thanks, I'll continue to eat whatever I want in moderation, and exercise frequently. It's a lot easier and healthier than these fad diets.
SIG:Slashdot: indymedia for nerds.
You can't fool Mother Nature
Human beings did not evolve to subsist on protein. We evolved as *active* animals who browsed and hunted for food.
The current social environment mitigates against health. There is too much food available, too much stress, not enough 'meaningful personal connection' (loss of the tribe?), too little movement [exercise], etc.
It's understandable that a population that is grossly unhealthy seeks tweaked solutions to health.
Atkins, like many other tweaks, will sooner or later be found to cause health problems, and drop from favor.
What's unfortunate - and ironic - about all these body tweaks, is that there is a grain (pun intended) of truth in most of them. It's probably a good thing that people move away from refined carbohydrates, add reasonable amounts of healthy fat to the diet, consume a greater portion of protein relative to carbs than has been the case for the last several decades, etc.
Unfortunately, the 'overclocking' crowd hoes whole hog (pun intended, again) on this stuff - the water diet, the grapefruit diet, the protein diet, etc. A price will be paid.
The Atkins Diet not what Mother Nature intended, and she always has her way in the end.
What I would like to see is a more in depth analysis - by individual - of how different bodies matabolize different foods, or combinations of foods. That day is coming. When we're they're (it's a way off), we'll have a better idea about what 'works' for us as individuals, and be able to intelligently act on that.
One last thing: populations and food availability co-evolve. One of the reasons why the French and Italians do so well with a lot of wine is because they're been drinking it for hundreds of generations. Those who coudn't take the Italian, French, Chinese, or whatever diet, died off, and tended not to reproduce. Those who were left are the ones who were able to handle it, and thrive on it (for the most part).
There have been interesting studies that return Southwest American Indians to their original diets, lost generations ago. What's startling about these studies is that many individuals who were diabetic, or had other health problems, experienced dramatic returns to health, or major improvement as a result of diet.
We might say the same for the typical American diet, with it's high sugar, refined carbohydrate and other oddities. If we did nothing at all, over generations (many of them) an 'American' genotype would evolve that was able to deal with the current toxins in the American diet (even pesticides), and thrive on them.
Sure, Atkins will work very well for some small number of people over a long period of time. However, many more people will most likely pay a price in compromised health (or general frustration)over the long term with Atkins diet, or any other diet that doesn't work the way MOther Nature intended.
Alternatively, you can implement a life plan where you exercise and eat right (Atkins diet != right).
The key is to collect recipes for quick meals that are comprised of as few processed foods as possible. A George Foreman grill is a must. I suggest subscribing to the few men's fitness magazines that are out there, as they have both recipes and exercises for people in a hurry. The magazines are tailored for busy people. Buy the $16.95 Body For Life book as it is full of exercise and food tips.
Dumb bells and a weight bench are cheap, alternatively, you could just go for 30 minute walks. Avoid driving, when possible. Shitcan your pansy-assed Segway. Invest in a good bicycle.
Fad diets, like the Atkins diet, are just stupid shortcuts that work, somewhat, but don't think it's a healthy lifestyle. The Atkins diet is for lazy people who don't exercise much. You'll certainly get thinner, but not any healthier. And once you go off the diet, you'll just balloon up again. Whereas with exercise and more muscle, your body will burn more calories (and fat).
It's not a diet where you just quit when you've lost weight. It's a change in your way of eating, and you can have still have a very proper diet on it. Once you've reached your goals, you can introduce some carbs back in (healthy ones, like fruits) to keep you at your ideal weight. You don't just quit and start eating pasta for breakfast, lunch and dinner. And, many people don't exercise because they're overweight, so losing weight often gets people interested in being more physically active.
Our "modern diet" is killing us, and since the government has been preaching "low fat" the past few decades, things have only gotten worse. People are eating more because carbs cause insulin surges which increase appetite.
Remember when "Low Fat" products were all the rage? The only problem with "low fat" is low fat usually doesn't mean low calories... Take Snackwell cookies for example, low fat doesn't mean shit if you're planning on eating the entire box in one sitting. Low carb is just another trend that is totally meaningless if you think it keeps you from counting calories.
The only reason diets like Atkins work at all is simple: just about everything has carbohydrates in it! There's so few things you can eat if you strictly adhere to the diet that you inevitably end up eating LESS CALORIES.
Howstuffworks has an excellent article on dieting and the gist of it is, you guessed it - limiting your calories consumed.
If you are willing to tolerate counting calories and figure out exactly what you need to maintain your desired weight, you can pretty much eat whatever you want. 100 calories of carbs = 100 calories of fat. If you're the type of person that needs a "banned foods"-type list to really feel like you're on a diet, Atkins probably is for you. If you're the type that can push away from the table - you probably don't need to do anything more than watch your calories.
---
DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
Ok, the simple truth is this...
As adults... (The growth mechanism of children is quite different then the maintenance mechanisms of adults...)
We are genetically inclined to eat carbs. Our whole body from taste buds, to energy use, and insulin cycles are based upon the carbohydrate energy cycle.
Two problems... 100's of years of developing tasty food (IE food that has been shown to have maximum effect on our carbohydrate systems), and secondly, unparalled access to limitless quantities of such food.
And a third problem, we are hormonally beholding to the carbohydrate cycle. And hormones win nearly everytime over will-power. (Anyone who disbelieves this, is either genetically "lucky" or is woefully ignorant of modern psychiatry and the biomechanical nature of the brain and how it affects behavior).
This results in overeating of carbs (we are just doing what feels normal...) This results in insulin resistence (the body going... I am sorry sir, but I cannot possibly store any more energy in these cells), followed by type 2 diabetes (the blood is a lovely red syrup), followed by nerve damage, loss of limbs, blindness and death....
All of this because, well historically (ignoring the past 50 years or so), it was genetically superior to be carb-centric. Those that are carb-centric lived longer, were revered, and had more power.
Atkins works because it lowers blood sugar due to lack of carbohydrates in the diet. This essentially stops type 2 diabetes.
If calories are below need then energy is released by cells. (This will increase insulin sensitivity as cells now have space to store excess sugar)... (Though the calorie equation is best a guess. Basing how much water temprature rises is equivelant to biomechanical energy release is at best a sketchy and not fully understood relationship).
Ultimately people are MUCH healthier not being in type 2 diabetic and insulin resistent state. Than being *in* that state.
However, lack of blood sugar has negative affect on brain activity, and excess protien in the blood has been shown to increase kidney stone production, and may be related to renal failure....
So, once moved to the much healthier non-diabetic bloodstream, and non-insulin resistent cell-state, a balanced macro-nutrient diet, is probably best (as research done on sports teams, and diabetic patients)...
BUT.... Oh and this is a big BUT!!! We are still hormonally driven beings.... And hormones will drive you back to Carbo-Heaven... Cuz that is what we are genetically incline to eat. And this will make this an ongoing mental and physical exercise to exorcise the hormonal demons..
OK kids, all crap aside, lets go back to basics:
Any energy that goes into your mouth goes one of 3 places:
1) You burn it. Literally - and burning food generates heat. Each gram of fat contains 9 Calories, which is equivalent to jogging for one minute. That's 9000 calories (little c) which will heat your average 200lb sysadmin 0.2 degrees F. There are 27 grams in an ounce - that's a half hour run per ounce of fat. Think about how sweaty that would make you. This is an important thermodynamic consideration we'll get back to.
2) You store it. One gram of fat in becomes one gram of fat on your ass. One gram of carbohydrate or protein in becomes 1/2 gram of fat on your ass. There's no magic here; joules don't vanish.
3) You excrete it. This is what chiral analogs of various energy sources do, such as Olestra. If this was happening, you would know it; the term is anal leakage. Sugars you cannot digest, like the sugars in beans, create equally socially endearing outputs.
Now the article claims that Atkins overclocks the body. Crap. If it did you'd get hot. Run a motor fast, it gets hot. Run your body fast, it gets hot. Take amphetamines, you start to twitch and sweat. Thermodynamics. You can't beat it. Atkins can't beat it. Atkins does not make you hot. If you burned an extra pound of fat you'd heat your body to boiling. It does not accelerate your metabolism, it does not perform any insulin magic. The whole thing is the stunningly ignorant optimism of the hopefully overweight.
But people do lose weight on it - or so it seems (statistically this isn't really borne out by actual controlled studies, but hey, who needs science when we can make choices based on anecdotes). Why? Because in a normal diet 60-70% of your calories come from carbohydrates and you cut them you and you're on a calories restricted diet. Bingo. Eat nothing at all and keep your activity level up and you'll lose about 1/2 pound each day (8.2oz of fat = 2000 calories). Eat more calories than nothing and prorate that weight lose. Joules are joules, they body isn't happy about wasting them, and if it does, bacteria won't and your cube neighbors won't be happy about that.
So much for the insulin magic and ketosis crap, but there's this wacky claim of "satiety " the claim that fat and protein is a high satiety food and that if you eat it, you'll eat less total. Could be. Maybe for some people, not for others. If it works for you, go for it, just don't make magic claims or act like the self-righteous health nuts who claim to Received The Counterintuitive Truth.
As for the health of it all, if you stop eating processed sugars, like every nutritionist including Atkins has been saying for 50 years, you'll generally lose weight, probably a lot of it, and you will be healthier. My mom used to call them "empty calories," but that's too kind. Sugars are bad, and Atkins is right about refined sugar (complex carbohydrates absorb more slowly, "glycemic index" crap aside) - you do tend to crash after (all nutritionists know this). Crash means metabolism temporarily slows. Slow metabolism means less calories burned. Not a lot less - watching TV burns 2.4 calories per minute, walking 2mph burns 2.8 - but a bit less, which means a small difference, a few grams of fat a day maybe. The big difference is eating less sugar - 4.5 Cal per M&M adds up fast.
As for the health of it, if you eat "too much" protein your piss will start to smell weird. If that happens back off. Otherwise it's not likely to kill you. Don't chow down on high saturated fats, the "Atkins helps heart disease" stuff is crap. If you lose weight your cholesterol level will drop, but that doesn't contradict about 50 years of very well documented data showing a direct correlations between saturated fat and heart disease, which strikes thin, otherwise healthy people too.
Skipping fruit is dumb, but it won't kill you if you're eating your veggies. All the vitamins and minerals are in vegetab
Gluconeogenesis takes pyruvates and oxaloacetates and converts them into glucose. You get these through catabolism of amino acids, chiefly from muscle tissue. The muscle is broken down and transported to the liver for gluconeogenic processing. Alanine, cysteine, glycine, serine, & threonine can be deaminated directly or indirectly to form pryuvate and asparagine and aspartate can be made into oxaloacetates.
Hey, that's great that you remember your high school chemistry, but the clinical data don't support your theory. Atkins focuses on foods hight in fat & protein, so there's always enough protein intake that the body does not need to break down muscle tissue. This has been gospel among body builders for 30+ years. Low-carb diets preserve muscle mass moreso than low-fat diets, and the fat loss compared to low-fat is probably more significant than current studies already indicate.
I've been fat all my life, peaking at 277 lbs eight years ago. I just finished my first year on Atkins. I'm down from 244 to 187 (that in the first sixth months actually), the same weight I was a as a high school freshman (15 years ago). Now that I've broken my carb addiction I've added healthy carbs (whole grains, vegetables, fruit) back into my diet. It's been a year now and I haven't had a donut, french fry, or any sort of sugar or junk food. My triglycerides are under 80. Is your diet that healthy?
"..because utilizing low-carb methods to modify the metabolism is analogous to hacking and overclocking the body."
More like being retarded. Like the guy who's fine with his box crashing 2-3 times a day as long as he _knows_ it's oc'ed to the max. Your body will crash too - there is no magic. The difference is that Atkins, when he was alive, marketed for profit his unsafe body overclocking methods that could seriously fuck you up for life, whereas frying a Barton will only hurt your pocket the average monthly salary of a chinese factory worker making the motherboard you fried it on.
Must-not-watch TV!