PCRM unleashes latest attack on Atkins diet, but comparisons with Asian diet are invalid

Email this article to a friend

Printable Version

Opponents of the Atkins diet are hard at work trying to discredit it. Dr. John McDougall and the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM) have unleashed their latest attack on the low-carb diet by claiming that because it causes ketosis, it therefore must be dangerous to a person's health. I don't disagree with this assessment, but the more important question is whether this state of ketosis is more dangerous than a person remaining overweight. Frankly, the health risks associated with temporary ketosis seem to outweigh the enormous risk of disease and death associated with obesity. Because, after all, a low-carb diet does help many people lose weight.

The PCRM takes some unjustifiable cheap shots at the low-carb diet in this latest announcement. For example, they state that people in Asia live on high-carbohydrate rice diets and seem to do just fine. That's not an honest comparison for two reasons. First, the Asians who are "doing fine" on rice diets are physically active, and most Americans are not. Secondly, Asians are born with metabolic systems better able to handle grains and carbohydrates when compared to people of European or American Indian descent. I know this because I've spent considerable time studying the dietary response to carbohydrates in the Chinese (I lived in Asia for two years, I speak Chinese, and I'm married to a full-blood Chinese). What I know is that Chinese people can consume a large bowl of noodles and a side dish of white rice without suffering the radical blood sugar swings normally experienced by "white" people (like me). In other words, Chinese have evolved a superior metabolic response to dietary carbohydrates. Yet even that can be overcome by Western diets: when Asians start consuming fast food, processed food, soft drinks and other staples of the western diet, they also succumb to the ravages of diet-related diseases like cancer and diabetes. So, for the PCRM to state that "Asians eat carbohydrates and are just fine" is either disturbingly uninformed or outright deceptive. Asians have a unique metabolism well suited to the consumption of grains -- other people do not.

For many years, I have supported the PCRM's basic stance on health and especially on their effort to increase awareness of what really goes on behind closed doors in the beef industry, but I think that recently the organization has sadly turned to publicity tactics that are rather unethical -- like getting their hands on Dr. Atkins' medical records and leaking them to the press. That's an invasion of Atkins' privacy, for one thing, and a violation of basic ethics. Sure, they were trying to make a point (they proposed Dr. Atkins died of heart disease), but if they are really physicians, they have a special duty to uphold the privacy of medical records. The ends don't always justify the means.

Share

Free registration is required to read the rest of this article...
Enter your email address to continue:  
Your email privacy is 100% protected by NaturalNews. We do not sell, rent or share emails.


Get articles like this delivered to you FREE in our popular email newsletter

Related CounterThink Cartoons:

Related Articles: • The Atkins Diet Food Guide Pyramid, Part 3: All Foods Shown On the Atkins Pyramid Are Unrefined, Unprocessed Foods • Dieting Americans discover they can't pig out on low-carb foods and still lose weight • Atkins diet works better than low-fat diets, especially in men	Take Action: Support NaturalNews.com Email this article to a friend Share this article on: NewsVine | digg | del.icio.us Permalink to this article: http://www.NaturalNews.com/000981_low-carb_diet_Atkins.html Reprinting this article: Non-commercial use OK, cite NaturalNews.com with clickable link. Embed article link: (copy HTML code below): <a href = "http://www.NaturalNews.com/000981_low-carb_diet_Atkins.html">PCRM unleashes latest attack on Atkins diet, but comparisons with Asian diet are invalid</a>