January 09, 2005

• Dammit. Think I jumped the gun on this one. Guess I should have read the rest of the article...
• Good lord, I understood not a jot of that article.
• Meh, it's only a matter of time before people realize that cutting carbohydrates is extremely dangerous. I think that point is more important than the "too much protein might be bad" angle. Seems like the fad is starting to die anyway.
• Whereas here in the antipodes, it seems to be catching on. We've never really been with the times. My sole evidence of this is a display in my local bookshop consisting of books related to the Atkins, South Beach and Zone diets. I avoid Cosmo-type magazines like the plague, and they would be a better indicator.
• This article has information on a diet that reduces the CRP protein that the above article refers to: An anti-inflammatory diet includes abundant fresh vegetables and fruits, small servings of whole grains and protein from fish (especially salmon, mackerel, cod, sardines and other deep-sea-dwelling species). Pumpkin seeds, walnuts and flaxseeds are excellent sources of omega-3 fats. Ground flaxseeds can be added to whole grains or sprinkled onto salads to augment omega-3 intake. Avoid corn, soy and cottonseed oils, especially those that have been hydrogenated. Instead, use olive or canola oil when added fats are called for. You can also use butter, but do so moderately.
• genial, your comment makes no sense. A protein is any sequence of amino acid molecules. Different proteins do all sorts of different things in your body. They hold your cells together, they aid in cell replication, move organelles around, transport nutrients and waste in and out of cells, provide nuclear envelope stability, the list goes on. Think of it this way: your DNA stores information about how your body is supposed to be; proteins make it all actually work (a gene is nothing more than instructions for creating a certain type of protein). So, no two proteins are exactly alike. This study is pointing out an apparent link between a particular kind of protein and heart disease. This protein is manufactured from your DNA, and that gene's rate of expression is absolutely not affected by how much protein you actually eat. When you ingest some protein-rich food, all that happens is your digestive system breaks them down into component amino acids, which are then used for fuel (nice high energy bonds there), or reused directly. The point is, the rate at which you consume protein-rich foods has absolutely no bearing on how much of this potentially dangerous protein your body creates. So Atkins-bashing is inappropriate and ignorant (for the record, I think Atkins is bad, bad, bad for you - but this is not why). Nutrition 101 note: there are a total of 20 amino acids. Our bodies are perfectly adept at manufacturing 12 of these internally, but the other 8 it must obtain from outside (these are called essential amino acids). This is why we have to eat protein. If we could produce all 20 internally, we'd have no need for outside protein as long as we could obtain energy and any special atoms required for synthesis (for example we need a certain amount of phosphorus to get most any ATP-fueled reaction going).
• Cutting carbs isn't that bad and can even be beneficial. Artificially inducing or prolonging ketosis is however as bad as weight-loss ideas get, from what little reading I've done on this topic. The scary thing is that when I say this to any Atkins convert--and there are many in my chosen profession--I am told either that I don't understand what I'm talking about (which is true), or that I share a bias with the established medical professions against radically new ideas (which isn't). Thanks to this thread, though, I looked it up in Wikipedia, and now have better ammo to use in these arguments.
• bcc, I accidently missed the part about the protein in the article not being a part of the essential amino acids. My point was more related to the idea of extreme Atkins dieters I know that want to believe that carbohydrates are a bad thing. It's gone as far as some people believing the "Carbs are good" argument is manufactured by the grain industry as a political thing. The brain, nervous system, and blood can ONLY use carbohydrates for fuel. Cutting carbs is a fine idea if you regularly eat too many to begin with (excesses are stored as fat) but like Grignr said, self-induced and prolonged ketosis is a dangerous thing. The timing of this is pretty interesting, I'm actually in the middle of a Fitness Concepts class and we are discussing these very issues right now. So where I would normally be totally uninformed (most of the article was a little over my head), I can still grasp the kind of stuff blindcarboncopy was talking about.
• Also, I only mentioned Atkins because it was in the title of the post, blindcarboncopy. Didn't mean to derail the thread too much.
• I still don't get this. As I read the news article, there is NO link between high-protein, low-carb diet and occurrence of that particular protein which may have a role in heart disease. No link at all. So, why is everyone bashing Atkins in comments? It makes no sense. Protein-rich diets do not have a 1st degree causal collection to expression of vast majority of body protein. The article said nothing to indicate that this particular protein was an exception to the rule. It's like... reading an article about volvo opening a new fab plant, and then everyone starts talking about how Queentin Tarantino just doesn't make movies the way he used to. Where is the link? Or is it just that everyone was antsy to have another "Atkins is bad" thread, and this link just came along? On preview: I guess much of the blame should rest with blankx23 who gave the post a completely misleading title.
• I got confused by the title and just went with. After rereading the article (which is STILL a little over my head) I concurrently place all the blame on blankx23 as well. *munches on low-carb candy bar*
• Man, I loved Pulp Fiction and all, but what the hell was up with Kill Bill and Kill Bill 2? Did Tarantino just want to tell us that he loves every movie he has seen ever? He's seriously losing his edge. Maybe he can direct the next Star Wars sequel.