Man Sues Atkins Over Heart Problems

[sturm und drang]

This has to be a joke, right? Right?

{sigh}

Man sues Atkins over heart problems

Diet company stands by plan

Thursday, May 27, 2004

WEST PALM BEACH, Florida (AP) -- A businessman sued the promoters of the Atkins Diet and the estate of founder Dr. Robert Atkins, alleging that the low-carb, high-fat meal plan clogged his arteries and threatened his health.

The suit by Jody Gorran, filed Wednesday in Palm Beach County Circuit Court, seeks $15,000.

Gorran, 53, said Thursday he started the diet in May 2001 because his weight had risen from 140 to 148 pounds. In two months, he said, his cholesterol rose from a normal 146 to an unhealthy 230, and by October 2003, he needed heart angioplasty to clear his arteries.

"I came very close to dying, and this is from a diet I thought was marvelous," said Gorran.

Atkins Nutritionals said in a statement that it stands by the science that has "repeatedly reaffirmed the safety and health benefits of the Atkins Nutritional Approach."

The company questioned the motivation of a Washington-based advocacy group that helped Gorran with the suit. The group, the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, promotes a vegan diet banning meat, fish, dairy and egg products.

"We should not let the real issue, providing people with a scientifically validated nutritional choice in the face of a worldwide obesity and type 2 diabetes epidemic, be manipulated by this extremist animal rights vegan group," Atkins Nutritionals said in a statement.

For years, doctors and nutritionists have debated the Atkins diet, which advocates meat, eggs and cheese, frowns on bread, rice and fruit, and allows up to two-thirds of calories from fat, more than double the usual recommendation.

The diet doctor, who died last year at 72 after falling on an icy sidewalk, argued that carbohydrates generate too much insulin, which makes people hungrier and encourages them to put on fat. His books, including the best-selling "Dr. Atkins' New Diet Revolution," have sold 15 million copies and attracted millions of followers.

The advocacy group said Gorran's suit is the first to recently question the merits of the Atkins diet. In 1979, a New York jury rejected an elderly, overweight woman's lawsuit claiming that the Atkins Diet caused her heart disease.

Gorran, who owns a company that makes solar panels for swimming pools, said he believes Atkins products should warn of a risk for developing health problems when eating meat and other foods that are endorsed by the diet and are high in saturated fat.

"For 21/2 years, I extolled the virtues of this diet to anyone who listened because I was losing weight and I felt great. But when I started, I had no idea I was making a deal with the devil for trying to keep a 32-inch waistline," he said.

[Drbio]

I lost 50 on Atkins AND dropped my cholesterol significantly. This is a stinking load of crap. This guy is trying to get free money.

[mavsman55]

What a douche. I hate people like that.

[MavKikiNYC]

It was the bacon smoothies that did him in.

[Smiles]

If it was kidney problems he was belly aching over, I could understand that Atkins could contribute to such problems... I thought everyone was aware of that risk though (?).

Doc what are the kidney hormones that also affect the way the heart functions.... I can't remember anymore... I bet that's what he's building his case on.

[irontoad]

God this country is becoming so lawsuit happy it's getting ridiculous... my favorite recent one was the person that tried to sue McDonald's because the food made them fat...

[Drbio]

Originally posted by: Smiles
If it was kidney problems he was belly aching over, I could understand that Atkins could contribute to such problems... I thought everyone was aware of that risk though (?).

Doc what are the kidney hormones that also affect the way the heart functions.... I can't remember anymore... I bet that's what he's building his case on.

Are you thinking about Lactic Dehydrogenases (LDH) or Transaminases?

[MavsFanatik33]

Thats why the Atkins diet is a problem...you have to have carbs...

Atkins says that bacon and eggs in the morning is better than for instance, Total cereal. Eggs and bacon both have 0 carbs, where-as Total has about 50 per bowl. Now, you tell me...which breakfast one is healthier and better for you?

[u2sarajevo]

Originally posted by: MavsFanatik33
Thats why the Atkins diet is a problem...you have to have carbs...

Atkins says that bacon and eggs in the morning is better than for instance, Total cereal. Eggs and bacon both have 0 carbs, where-as Total has about 50 per bowl. Now, you tell me...which breakfast one is healthier and better for you?

Actually that is absolutely false.... you don't "have" to have carbs. At least not high carbs.

A "healthier" option for breakfast would be neither. Actually of those two, skip the bacon and I'll take the eggs. Eggs have essential fatty acids.

[ddh33]

I've been waiting for this.

There are some problem associated with every diet. They affect different people differently, but it was only a matter of time until someone tried this.

[Drbio]

The science behind the Atkins diet is beyond reproach. If anyone wants to debate that...fine. The science and theory are solid. As ddh33 alluded to though, there will always be an outlier. However, the science is factual and noone has been able to successfully shoot it down.

[EricaLubarsky]

There have been no long-term studies that show either side of the Atkins debate. The science isnt there as DrBio claims. Weightlifters, boxers and wrestlers have been doing a form of the Atkins diet for years to drop weight quickly and there is no doubt that it works, but even in short periods of Atkins eating (as weightlifters do), there is no evidence to show that it is safe conclusively. Long-term use of the Atkins diet (which is what is advised by Dr. Atkins) is way more of a concern from a traditional medical perspective.

Although it may turn out that there are no health concerns over the Atkins diet, (and no connection to kidney problems and diabetes), it is unnatural; we have lived on a very innefficient diet for years and scientists have discovered that that innefficiency is healthy. Raw sugar is better than refined sugar, whole wheat is better than refined flour, etc. Most humans on the planet have eaten less than 20% meat in their diet, and the rest is plant product. It just seems a little too dramatic for me to drop carbohydrates which has been the main staple of the human diet for thousands of years.

[Drbio]

I respectfully point out that you are incorrect EL. There are numerous studies which support the theory. The diet lobby has perpetuated that and other false rumors such as the alleged liver damage rumor (which is totally false). Look....I have no vested interest in Atkins either way, but I do understand that science and theory behind the program in a very comprehensive manner. There are many conclusive studies supporting the program.

[EricaLubarsky]

There are many conclusive studies supporting the program.

there are studies out that "prove" that Atkins is harmful to liver and kidney function as well, D.

Where is the conclusive scientific evidence if science cannot find common ground? When short-term studies are finished prematurely and enough time is not given, then there isnt conclusive scientific evidence. Multiple studies in the 70s found DDT safe, while there were many that discovered its danger but it took about a decade to come out with a large enough sample size over a long enough time to really tell. Im not comparing Atkins to DDT, only the scientific studies. Atkins might be perfectly harmless but the evidence isnt there yet. Not until we have enough information about long term effects (and ths studies stop contradicting themselves) will we really know. Is it safe? probably but the amount of scientific evidence isnt there yet.

[Drbio]

There are no reputable studies out there that "prove" the Atkins regime is harmful to the liver, kidneys, etc. There are only rumor, misinformation and incorrect assumption. If you want to debate the science I will be happy to oblige you any time.

Again (respectfully), you have been misinformed.

[CT Mavsfan]

I was pre-diabetic before starting the Atkins diet, I went on it for a few months and dropped twenty pounds. I had my bloodwork done at this point because I was trying to get pregnant, and I was no longer pre-diabetic. Now I am going back on Atkins to lose those baby pounds (you must quit Atkins while pregnant or nursing). I never felt or looked as good as I did on Atkins. My brother-in-law lost 100 pounds and lowered his cholesterol. This way of eating has helped a lot of people, it is sad that this country has become so law suit happy.

[Murphy3]

edit

[EricaLubarsky]

Originally posted by: Drbio
There are no reputable studies out there that "prove" the Atkins regime is harmful to the liver, kidneys, etc. There are only rumor, misinformation and incorrect assumption. If you want to debate the science I will be happy to oblige you any time.

Again (respectfully), you have been misinformed.

Umm, so the study that found harms in Atkins is just misinformation? I'm looking at a review of it from the NYT.

I mean I was fooled by the fake-reporter there but the study was a study. Im not claiming it was good, but there is scientific evidence that the Atkins diet can cause wrong. You can't deny the studies that find harms in the diet, and accept wholeheartedly the studies that support the Atkins diet. If you read my initial post about that you would find that I was critiquing the breadth and depth of the studies in both directions, not those that found the diet safe.

P.S. I have not been misinformed, Im not going on hearsay or assumption. I am going off a very reputable news source that has been picked up on Reuters and AP. Please do not tell me that I am any more.

[Drbio]

A reputable scientific outlet such as the NYT? Give me a break. I have thirteen years of experience as a professional biologist and professor. I'm fairly certain I understand this issue better than your reporter. You have been misinformed.

If you would like to debate the science I will be happy to accomodate you. You wish for me to review your opening remarks? OK...here we go. You made the initial remark "The science isnt there as DrBio claims which quite frankly is nothing shy of a huge stinking load of scatalogical misinformation. You are either trying to intentionally garner some type of response or you have been grossly misinformed about the facts of the science and theory involved in this area.

You then state a qualifying remark......."...but even in short periods of Atkins eating (as weightlifters do), there is no evidence to show that it is safe conclusively. Sorry....you are misinformed again. Debate the merits anyone?

Then you dropped this little nugget on us (which was one of my favorites) "Long-term use of the Atkins diet (which is what is advised by Dr. Atkins) is way more of a concern from a traditional medical perspective. This is absurd. The Atkins diet may not fit the traditional cereal box popularized dietary triangle (which is I hope what you were attempting to cite), but it CLEARLY supports traditional medical ideals and principals. Oops....did it again. Misinformation abounds.

Not to be outdone, you espouse a very popular misinformation campaign slogan when you dropped the following nugget...."Although it may turn out that there are no health concerns over the Atkins diet, (and no connection to kidney problems and diabetes), it is unnatural. *SIGH* Wrong again....at least consistent though. Do please inform me how med school was wrong and the principals of Atkins are "unnatural". BTW, the Atkins regime has been responsible for removing numerous diabetics from the daily prison of insulin injections and has significantly imrpoved a majority of diabetics quality of life. Were you even aware of the fact that Dr. Atkins developed his diet to assist in improving the lives of diabetics or did you just repeat what some anti-Atkins agenda puppet had told you? Let's not let history and facts get in the way at this point though.

The rest of your opening paragraph is debatable at best, but please do not espouse those percentages as fact when sociological factors are the main cause of world-wide dietary percentages. Are you trying to compare a starving Ethiopian to a overly healthy north American? You certainly boundary on that possibility by your words.


Anyways....misinformation abounds in your opening statement which you wished for me to reconsider. Well, I've re-read your post as requested....considered the factual science and can conclude with a enourmously high certaintly that you are indeed misinformed.

Have a nice day.

[EricaLubarsky]

A reputable scientific outlet such as the NYT? Give me a break

Um NYT, Reuters and AP just announced the scientific study. Give me a break instead of nit-picking.

Are you trying to compare a starving Ethiopian to a overly healthy north American?

um read what I said. North Americans 100 years ago had the same diet. Europeans had a vegetable and carb-rich diet. Do I really need to compare the Atkins diet to a starving Ethiopian. Give me a break. I only have to look at history and anthropology to figure that out. I never made a normative statement that claimed Atkins was unhealthy, rather that it was an enormous change in diet. I said "Its too big of a difference for me"

You then state a qualifying remark......."...but even in short periods of Atkins eating (as weightlifters do), there is no evidence to show that it is safe conclusively. Sorry....you are misinformed again. Debate the merits anyone?

Im sorry but I did not include the word "conclusive". The science that you quote is a collection of studies that fail to look at a number of factors. Here is a review of the major supporting studies as provided by Atkins.com

<u>Atkins</u>

====Abbasi, F., McLaughlin, T., Lamendola, C., et al., "High Carbohydrate Diets, Triglyceride-Rich Lipoproteins, and Coronary Heart Disease Risk," The American Journal of Cardiology, 85, 2000, pages 45-48.

Only looked at the overall cholesterol with a controlled diet that was very low in cholesterol. Did not look at Kidney, liver, or Pancreas. The diet was only performed for a year and no follow-up checks were done after a year.

====Ball, S.D., Keller, K.R., Moyer-Mileur, L.J., et al., "Prolongation of Satiety After Low Versus Moderately High Glycemic Index Meals in Obese Adolescents," Pediatrics, 111(3), 2003, pages 488-494.

only looks at insulin responses in adolsecents. Short study period.

====Bravata, D.M., Sanders, L., Huang, J., et al., "Efficacy and Safety of Low-Carbohydrate Diets: A Systematic Review," The Journal of the American Medical Association, 289(14), 2003, pages 1837-1850.

The Atkins Website quotes the conclusion of the The Journal of the American Medical Association study, "There is insufficient evidence to make recommendations for or against the use of low-carbohydrate diets, particularly among participants older than age 50 years, for use longer than 90 days, or for diets of 20 g/d or less of carbohydrates. Among the published studies, participant weight loss while using low-carbohydrate diets was principally associated with decreased caloric intake and increased diet duration but not with reduced carbohydrate content."[/b]

Also interesting is that the synthesis was from a number of studies, none of which had a test period of more than a year "The included studies were highly heterogeneous with respect to design, carbohydrate content (range, 0-901 g/d), total caloric content (range, 525-4629 kcal/d), diet duration (range, 4-365 days)...Only 5 studies (nonrandomized and no comparison groups) evaluated these diets for more than 90 days."

What Atkins.com does not mention is that the conclusion drawn by Bravata, Sanders and Huang is based on a whopping 107 studies.

====Brehm, B.J., Seeley, R.J., D’Alessio, D.A., et al., "Effects of a Low Carbohydrate Diet on Body Weight and Cardiovascular Risk Factors", College of Nursing and College of Medicine, University of Cincinnati. Also appears as Brehm, B.J., Seeley, R.J., Daniels, S.R., et al., "A Randomized Trial Comparing a Very Low Carbohydrate Diet and a Calorie-Restricted Low Fat Diet on Body Weight and Cardiovascular Risk Factors in Healthy Women," The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism, 88(4), 2003, pages 1617-1623.


6 month study, 3-months of follow up. Still less than a year. They conclude that "These results indicate that for short periods of time, a low carbohydrate, ketogenic diet is efficacious in causing weight loss and has no deleterious effects on cardiovascular risk factors. " but they do not even try to claim that the study applies to long-term use of the Atkins diet.

====Brown, R.C., Cox, C.M., "Effects of High Fat Versus High Carbohydrate Diets on Plasma Lipids and Lipoproteins in Endurance Athletes," Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 30(12), 1998, pages 1677-1683.

three months of eating Atkins, all people tested were athletes and a low-cholesterol diet was used. They also only got 50% of their calories from fat which is fairly low for Atkins. The study concludes a very vague and uninteresting, "According to this study, a high-fat diet may not have adverse effects on performance or blood lipid profiles. Including up to 50% total calories as fat had no negative effects on the total and LDL cholesterol levels of well trained athletes"

====Campbell, L.V., Marmot, P.E., Dyer, J.A., et al., "The High-Monounsaturated Fat Diet as a Practical Alternative for NIDDM," Diabetes Care, 17(3), 1994, pages 177-182.

Only ten test subjects. All with mild NIDDM. They concluded "the HM diet was, in the short-term, metabolically better in some aspects than the currently recommended diet for NIDDM"

Brehm, B.J., Seeley, R.J., Daniels, S.R., et al., "A Randomized Trial Comparing a Very Low Carbohydrate Diet and a Calorie-Restricted Low Fat Diet on Body Weight and Cardiovascular Risk Factors in Healthy Women," The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism, 88(4), 2003, pages 1617-1623.

Ten days of eating higher-fat diets doesnt cause any damage. This study was quoted by the LA Times as "Atkins study finds that higher fat diet is healthy for Diabetics" which is grossly over-labeled.

====Coulston, A.M, Liu, G.C., Reaven, G.M., "Plasma Glucose, Insulin and Lipid Responses to High-Carbohydrate Low-Fat Diets in Normal Humans," Metabolism, 32(1), 1983, pages 52-56

The study covered only 11 people and a diet of 10 days. They conclude (with only ten days of research) that diets too high in carbs are unhealthy. This is great to know, but the debate really is between Atkins and balanced diets.

====Dreon, D.M., Fernstrom, H.A., Miller, B., et al., "Low-Density Lipoprotein Subclass Patterns and Lipoprotein Response to a Reduced-Fat Diet in Men," The FASEB Journal, 8(1), 1994, pages 121-126.

"One hundred five men a consumed two diets for six weeks each. " supports the idea that too many carbs are bad for the heart but again is only short-term.

====Dreon, D.M., Fernstrom, H.A., Williams, P.T., et al., "A Very-Low-Fat Diet Is not Associated With Improved Lipoprotein Profiles in Men With a Predominance of Large, Low-Density Lipoproteins," American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 69, 1999, pages 411-418.

They conclude that cutting back severely on fat isnt necessarily helpful for people with heart disease. "Thirty-eight men were assigned to follow their "usual" diet (comprising 35% fat) or a very-low-fat diet (less than 10% calories from fat) for 10 days each" Again it is short-term

====Dreon, D.M., Frey-Hewitt, B., Ellsworth, N., et al., "Dietary Fat: Carbohydrate Ratio and Obesity in Middle-Aged Men," American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 47, 1988, pages 995-1000.

supports the claim that Atkins helps people lose weight, but we already knew that. It also concludes that "Men who ate more calories from carbohydrate and plant protein tended to have a lower percentage of body fat"

====Facchini, F.S., Saylor, K.L., "A Low-Iron-Available, Polyphenol-Enriched, Carbohydrate-Restricted Diet to Slow Progression of Diabetic Nephropathy," Diabetes, 52(5), 2003, pages 1204-1209.

Cutting carbs is the real element in reducing diabetes risk, instead of increased protein. Protein still helped and they did not test diets with higher fat content.

====Fagan, T.C., Oexmann, M.J., "Effects of High Protein, High Carbohydrate, and High Fat Diets on Laboratory Parameters," Journal of the American College of Nutrition, 6(4), 1987, pages 333-343.

high-protein diets have high-glucose levels which can impede weight-loss. Not a big deal.

====Farnsworth, E., Luscombe, N.D., Noakes, M., et al., "Effect of a High-Protein, Energy-Restricted Diet on Body Composition, Glycemic Control, and Lipid Concentrations in Overweight and Obese Hyperinsulinemic Men and Women," American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 78(1), 2003, pages 31-39.

Strangely the study found that "Weight loss (7.9 +/- 0.5 kg) and total fat loss (6.9 +/- 0.4 kg) did not differ between diet groups."

"Replacing carbohydrate with protein from meat, poultry, and dairy foods has beneficial metabolic effects and no adverse effects on markers of bone turnover or calcium excretion."

They also were less than six months.

====Foster, G.D., Wyatt, H.R., Hill, J.O., et al., "A Randomized Trial of a Low-Carbohydrate Diet for Obesity," The New England Journal of Medicine, 348(21), 2003, pages 2082-2090.

"The low-carbohydrate diet produced a greater weight loss (absolute difference, approximately 4 percent) than did the conventional diet for the first six months, but the differences were not significant at one year. "

Longer and larger studies are required to determine the long-term safety and efficacy of low-carbohydrate, high-protein, high-fat diets.

=
=
=

I see lots of studies that conclude that diets that are too high in carbs are bad, but I dont see any study that has lasted any significant amount of time that concludes that Atkins is healthier. I also see no long-term study that finds that Atkins is healthy over a long period of time. It's a little abusive for me to make you find one, but you called me "misinformed" so I guess justification is your burden there. Im curious. If I really missed a study with a large sample size that lasted more than a year that concluded that a continued Atkins diet is safe then I will apologize and admit to being misinformed.

[Drbio]

EL - there are several. One such study which has been ongoing for 6 years now out of UCLA or USC in conjunction with the Universidad Autonoma de Guadalara has been tracking cohorts who have remained faithful to the Atkins regime. The cohorts were 20-29yoa, 30-39 yoa, 40-49yoa and 50+.

There has been an approximate 26% attrition rate due to death, participant cheating and other factors, but the long term trends are very much supportive and in line with traditional medical theory.

Noone can argue against the scientific theory of the Atkins program. It is well established and very much understood and repeatable. There is just no room for debate there. Atkins has withstood a furious smear campaign sicne the 1970's by the traditional diet nazi's who insist on promoting the traditional ceral box dietary pyramid even though the pyramid has been brutally battered by studies over the past 4 decades. They had a better lobby than Dr. Atkins, who cared more about his patients apparently than in seeing his diet recommended by the US government.

People have been misinformed in this area for decades. There is no shame or negativity in it at all. The US government backs the pyramid because they were attempting to keep people healthy and at the time that was the best choice. They have stubbornly affixed themselves to it over the years however even though science has shown the value in other "non-traditional" dietary regimes. You can pull up literally thousands of studies supporting the dietary pyramid, but they are not designed to compete with alternative dietary regimes, rather they intend to support the theory involved in that diet program (diet not meaning losing weight here). Therein lies a lot of the misinformation potential. People have used those studies to "show" that Atkins is bad for a variety of manufactured reasons, when in fact tehy are misusing the studies. There is a lot of misinformation out there along this line.

In conclusion, you and millions of others have been misinformed over the years regarding diet. There are numerous studies to back this assessment, but quite frankly, those who are professionals in related fields such as myself will tell you....there is not a single thing wrong wiht the Atkins program. Solid Science. Solid Practice. Solid Results. Healthy. Period.

[Caliente]

[img]http://rds.yahoo.com/S=96062883/K=bacon/v=2/TID=DFIM_1/l=IVS/*-http://www.bbqjudge.com/images/bacon.JPG[/img]

[Caliente]