Trading while trying to lose weight on Atkins
- Thread starter jem
- Start date
Ok toward that end remember...research is only as good as the men preforming it, the controls instilled and the prejudices inherent ....ex: For years Alcohol was BAD.....research said so....now, alcohol is good....a glass of wine a day is great for the heart....based on more research....BUT wait....now it may not be the wine itself, its the GRAPE ...Grape juice will give you the same benefits.....so alcohol is bad again....do you see where im coming from?
"1) LOL. Fleming used LOW FAT diet and serveral popular high protein/high fat diets in the other groups in (including one popular diet everyone believed would make them healthy again -sound familiar 
). The low fat diet was the clear winner. Geez what's your problem axemoron?"
You have NOT shown that the study you posted has ANYTHING
to do with the Ornish protocol whatsoever.
a) Notice how LS continually changes his stance?
What happened to your Ornish protocol? Low fat is NOT the Ornish diet. The ZONE diet is a LOW FAT diet.
Does this mean that fleming used the ZONE diet as the low fat
diet of choice? Of course not. Your have failed to support
your ORIGINAL assertion that the Fleming study used
the Ornish protocol.
b) Axemoron? More Ad Hominem attack by someone who
cannot debate on merit alone.
"2)But LACK of published research by the other does prove it ."
You really need to take a critical thinking course.
Does lack of research on me being god PROVE that i'm god?
This is the worst example of illogic i've seen in a long time.
A-->B does NOT equal B-->A. Basic stuff.
"Research which you youself have failed to give despite repeated requests. But i am not surprised because there are none demonstrating direct measureable improvement so you can't come up with the goods that you would sorely love to produce to shore up your nonsense here. "
I stated up front that I have seen NO hard science on ANY
of these diets, which reverses heart disease, including the
Ornish study.
"3)How old are you? "Which can be looked up on medline? LOL What are you babbling about? That's your defense?? "
Funny. You posted a study which can be found in Medline
on heart disease, and I post a study which can be found
on Medline on Eskimo diet, and its ok for you, but not for me?
You DENIED the fact that researchers are aware of blubber
eating Eskimo diets with a low incidence of heart disease.
So I provided a reference to a study available in medline.
To this date you have NOT proven this is an illusion or just
"an eskimo story" as you put it. Continue to deny reality.
"4)Yes I ALWAYS attempt to use a measure of common sense when reasoning, you should try it!
Dean ornish protocol produced measureable and significant results. I gave these to you (unfortunately for you, you are incapable of understanding them). The very low fat diet is the centerpiece of the Ornish protocol. Fleming study was additional proof of the importance of low fat intake. "
You have failed to PROVE that the Fleming study used
the Ornish protocol. It is NOT mentioned ANYWHERE in the study.
Can you not read?
Your logic breaks down to this:
Fleming used a low fat diet
The Ornish diet is a low fat diet
---------------------------------------
Therefore: Fleming used the Ornish protocol.
non sequitur.
If you cannot see the flaw in this logic, then your are hopeless.
Let me make it CLEARER for you since you KEEP missing
this simple point. I could just as easily claim the following:
Fleming used a low fat diet
The ZONE diet is a low fat diet
---------------------------------------
Therefore: Fleming used the ZONE protocol.
Again. You have NO evidence that Fleming used the Ornish protocol. Period. End of story.
I think the ONLY reason you believe this, is because
Ornish posted the Fleming study on his website
I guess Ornish should take credit for EVERY study he
posts on his website as using HIS protocol. LOL!
"C-mon back junior when you have more than an Eskimo pie and lay book to show us. It has been amusing heh ehe "
The only thing amusing has been your repeated failed attempts
to back up ALL of your empty assertions. People have already
pointed this out on this thread. You haven't defended
a single assertion to date!
I think it's quite clear for any rational person to see.
You have been caught red handed several times already,
and since you are obviously incapable of saving face at
this point and admitting you cannot back up your assertions,
I see no point in continuing this any further.
You have already concede this debate by failing to address
all the issues I have pointed out.
Let's summarize one more time:
1) You never proved the Fleming study used the Ornish protocol
2) You never proved Dean Ornish is the ONLY definitive proof out there
3) You never proved the Eskimo studies dont exist
4) You never proved that diet was the ONLY variable that
mattered in the Fleming study.
Complete failure, any way you cut it.
Have a nice day
peace
axeman
). The low fat diet was the clear winner. Geez what's your problem axemoron?"You have NOT shown that the study you posted has ANYTHING
to do with the Ornish protocol whatsoever.
a) Notice how LS continually changes his stance?
What happened to your Ornish protocol? Low fat is NOT the Ornish diet. The ZONE diet is a LOW FAT diet.
Does this mean that fleming used the ZONE diet as the low fat
diet of choice? Of course not. Your have failed to support
your ORIGINAL assertion that the Fleming study used
the Ornish protocol.
b) Axemoron? More Ad Hominem attack by someone who
cannot debate on merit alone.
"2)But LACK of published research by the other does prove it
."You really need to take a critical thinking course.
Does lack of research on me being god PROVE that i'm god?
This is the worst example of illogic i've seen in a long time.
A-->B does NOT equal B-->A. Basic stuff.
"Research which you youself have failed to give despite repeated requests. But i am not surprised because there are none demonstrating direct measureable improvement so you can't come up with the goods that you would sorely love to produce to shore up your nonsense here. "
I stated up front that I have seen NO hard science on ANY
of these diets, which reverses heart disease, including the
Ornish study.
"3)How old are you? "Which can be looked up on medline? LOL What are you babbling about? That's your defense?? "
Funny. You posted a study which can be found in Medline
on heart disease, and I post a study which can be found
on Medline on Eskimo diet, and its ok for you, but not for me?
You DENIED the fact that researchers are aware of blubber
eating Eskimo diets with a low incidence of heart disease.
So I provided a reference to a study available in medline.
To this date you have NOT proven this is an illusion or just
"an eskimo story" as you put it. Continue to deny reality.
"4)Yes I ALWAYS attempt to use a measure of common sense when reasoning, you should try it!
Dean ornish protocol produced measureable and significant results. I gave these to you (unfortunately for you, you are incapable of understanding them). The very low fat diet is the centerpiece of the Ornish protocol. Fleming study was additional proof of the importance of low fat intake. "
You have failed to PROVE that the Fleming study used
the Ornish protocol. It is NOT mentioned ANYWHERE in the study.
Can you not read?
Your logic breaks down to this:
Fleming used a low fat diet
The Ornish diet is a low fat diet
---------------------------------------
Therefore: Fleming used the Ornish protocol.
non sequitur.
If you cannot see the flaw in this logic, then your are hopeless.
Let me make it CLEARER for you since you KEEP missing
this simple point. I could just as easily claim the following:
Fleming used a low fat diet
The ZONE diet is a low fat diet
---------------------------------------
Therefore: Fleming used the ZONE protocol.
Again. You have NO evidence that Fleming used the Ornish protocol. Period. End of story.
I think the ONLY reason you believe this, is because
Ornish posted the Fleming study on his website
I guess Ornish should take credit for EVERY study he
posts on his website as using HIS protocol. LOL!
"C-mon back junior when you have more than an Eskimo pie and lay book to show us. It has been amusing heh ehe
"The only thing amusing has been your repeated failed attempts
to back up ALL of your empty assertions. People have already
pointed this out on this thread. You haven't defended
a single assertion to date!
I think it's quite clear for any rational person to see.
You have been caught red handed several times already,
and since you are obviously incapable of saving face at
this point and admitting you cannot back up your assertions,
I see no point in continuing this any further.
You have already concede this debate by failing to address
all the issues I have pointed out.
Let's summarize one more time:
1) You never proved the Fleming study used the Ornish protocol
2) You never proved Dean Ornish is the ONLY definitive proof out there
3) You never proved the Eskimo studies dont exist
4) You never proved that diet was the ONLY variable that
mattered in the Fleming study.
Complete failure, any way you cut it.
Have a nice day
peace
axeman
OK....Im officially never arguing with AXE, Doubter, Stu or Gordon Gekko again....the first three because they are very insightful thoughtful with every response...the last one , well My daddy always told me never to argue with the insane!!
seriously though, great debate and arguments although Long, you are a good debater and i know this but you have resorted to twists, turns and name calling which.......is basically what i usually do ...But Long has a lot of good points that are cause for debate however, I think we've beaten this horse enough....let's stay on track and seriously talk about....what did you've for lunch? Today I have chunky chicken soup...let me read the label to you:
total fat: 3.5G
sat fat: 1.5g
cholesteral 15mg ( only 5% of the recommended allowance)
sodium: 870mg!!!!!!!!
total carb: 15g
fiber 1g
sugars 2g
protein 9g
thats alot of Carbs and salt in one little can of soup!
seriously though, great debate and arguments although Long, you are a good debater and i know this but you have resorted to twists, turns and name calling which.......is basically what i usually do
...But Long has a lot of good points that are cause for debate however, I think we've beaten this horse enough....let's stay on track and seriously talk about....what did you've for lunch? Today I have chunky chicken soup...let me read the label to you:total fat: 3.5G
sat fat: 1.5g
cholesteral 15mg ( only 5% of the recommended allowance)
sodium: 870mg!!!!!!!!
total carb: 15g
fiber 1g
sugars 2g
protein 9g
thats alot of Carbs and salt in one little can of soup!
Six ripe organic bananas
91% carb
5% fat
4% protein
Nutrionally perfect. No prep. No washing up. Excellent satiation.
Quote from TM_Direct:
what am I, Martha Stewart?????
It's a habit. One of the easiest ways to lose weight is to avoid eating anything you don't make (unless you're going to make chocolate chip cookies or potato chips, but, even then, you'll eat a lot less of it if you have to make it yourself).
But it doesn't take any more effort to pick up a package of boneless, skinless chicken breasts than it does to pick up a can of soup. And cooking them just means dropping them in simmering water for five minutes. Chop 'em up, stick 'em in the fridge, and you've got soup, enchiladas, burritos, creamed chicken on toast, chicken salad, whatever.
You like tomato soup? Empty a can of tomato paste (not tomato sauce) into a saucepan. Add water and basil. Heat. You like cream of tomato? Add cream.