Go Back   Olympic Weightlifting Forums - Catalyst Athletics > Olympic Weightlifting > Nutrition

Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-19-2009, 04:34 AM   #11
Darryl Shaw
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 681

Originally Posted by Brian Stone View Post
The author does not seem to be taking aim at the zone specifically as at low carbohydrate diets generally. I cannot disagree more; I think Michael Eades has done nothing short of an outstanding job on his blog and in his other writings of showing why the science does indeed back low-carb diets.

There is a big nutritional divide in the scientific community between fat-bad and carb-bad science. After looking into both quite a bit, I have to say I think the lower-carb dieters are onto something.

In short, though, to say that low carb diets have no science behind them is flat-out wrong.
It isn't a question of whether the best or healthiest diet should be high or low in any particular nutrient it's a question of determining what's appropriate for your needs. Focusing too much on macronutrient percentages or high this and low that instead of total calories and grams per day doesn't help as it just confuses matters and allows the authors of fad diet books to get away with making ridiculous claims based on little or no evidence.

Also when it comes to evaluating the writings of Eades, Sears, Atkins, Taubes or any of the other authors of popular diet books it's worth keeping in mind the concluding paragraph of Prof. Louise Burkes critique of The Zone Diet -

Tips for writing a best selling diet book

(from Hawley, J. and L. Burke. Peak Performance: training and nutrition strategies for sport, Sydney: Allen and Unwin, 1998)

•Have impressive sounding qualifications in a medically related field.

•Be controversial. Slam the current world experts on health and nutrition, and the guidelines for healthy eating.

•Claim an amazing new scientific understanding. Fill pages with complicated biochemistry explained in simple language.

•Claim that your diet will cure all manner of diseases and health problems, including heart disease, cancer, diabetes and aids. Prove this with case histories.

•Provide a complicated set of rules about foods that can't be eaten, or even worse, foods that can't be eaten at the same time.

•Have sports stars, film stars and political heavy weights follow and flourish on your diet - or at least be rumoured to.

•Best of all, promise that weight loss will occur while the dieter can eat as much as they like.
Darryl Shaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2009, 12:08 PM   #12
Emily Mattes
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 727

I remember when I first started Crossfit and decided to try out the Zone. I would record my foods for the day and be shocked at the low number of calories (like 1200 for a 180lbs female). When I and others asked about this on the Crossfit forums, everyone chimed in with "Oh, your body will just get used to it" and "Humans are too accustomed to eating too many calories anyway, we don't really need that many!" The euphoria produced by eating the Zone for long periods of time was also another argument towards the diet.

Of course, looking back these claims were utterly ridiculous and the "euphoria" is likely nothing different than the euphoria anorexics also report after extended periods of starvation. But at the time I figured people knew what they were talking about (always a poor assumption on Internet forums).
Emily Mattes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2009, 02:21 PM   #13
Blair Lowe
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 607

Garrett what sport or activity were you doing?
Blair Lowe is offline   Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:05 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9 Beta 3
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.