>ENTER THE ZONE A Giant Leap Backwards
>by Charles R. Attwood, M.D., F.A.A.P.
>Anne, an old friend of mine, walked up to Barry Sears at
>the Tom Landry Sports Medicine and Research Center in Dallas.
>She complained that the program outlined in his book,
>Enter The Zone--more lean meat, egg whites, poultry and fish,
>while limiting many grains, vegetables, and fruits--just didn't
>work for her. She didn't feel good, and her performance level
>(swimming) had declined.
1)Sears concedes that his diet is not for everybody and that 25% of the
population do well on high carbohydrate diets. 2) For most people the
zone diet means an increase in consumption of fresh fruits and
vegetables - even by vegetarian standards. 3) How long was she on the
diet? It can sometimes take weeks for the body to adjust and maybe she
was not doing it right.
> While it's true that eicosanoids are hormones involved in many
>metabolic processes, the relation of "bad" eicosanoids to obesity and
>disease is at best a scientifically unproven gimmick. Unfortunately,
>however, it has captured the unquestioning reader's imagination.
The fact that some of the tenets of the diet remain unproven does not
prove anything either way.
>Every few years since the early 1950's, someone has based
>a book on carbohydrate bashing. First, there were the
>Dr. Stillman's Diet and Dr. Atkins' Diet followed by
>The Scarsdale Diet, and finally, Enter The Zone.
>Now there are others: Michael and Mary Dan Eases's
>Protein Power and Rachael and Richard Heller's Health For Life.
>And once again Dr. Atkins' New Diet Revolution is back
>on the bestseller lists. According to Bonnie Liebman at
>the Center For Science in the Public Interest, it's nothing new.
>"Miracle diets come and go like hemlines, hair-dos, and
>celebrity romances."
The zone does not bash carbohydrates but advocates a moderate
consumption of especially grain products. The other diets above are
very low on carbohydrates though the "Protein Power" maintenance diet
is basically the same as the zone. I wonder who the "Center For
Science in the Public Interest" is and if it is a lobbying organization
for some biased interest group. Does anybody know?
>Furthermore, they don't work;
Many claim they do.
>and all of them have the potential of raising low density
>lipoprotein (LDL) levels.
They claim to be doing the opposite.
> And finally, what do these diets do for the authors themselves?
>Both Dr. Atkins and Barry Sears have exceeded the upper limits of
>weight recommended by federal guidelines
The zone is a calorie restricted diet and Barry Sears himself is no
more than 10 lb. overweight by my estimation which is not much as he is
a very tall man weighing, if my memory serves me right, 220 lb.
>A vegetarian diet, according to Sears, is as far as you
>can get from The Zone.
Not true. Many people on the zone diet are vegetarians including his
own daughter.
>He ignores the fact that individuals who eat vegetarian diets have far
>less heart disease and cancer, and tend to be leaner, not fatter.
I think there is some truth to this mainly because vegetarians tend to
lead healthier life styles. I do not think that Sears denies this but
rather that he believes that many vegetarians will do much better in
the zone.
>Moreover, most clinical studies conducted during the last
>half-century, clearly show that a high-protein, high-fat,
>low-carbohydrate diet leads to higher rates of heart disease, stroke,
>hypertension, adult onset diabetes, and many types of cancer.
I do not believe this is true and would like to see these studies.
>The relationship of animal fat to cancer is stronger than ever
>before.
I would like to see this evidence as well.
> According to new studies released by the Environmental
>Protection Agency, potent carcinogens from industrial wastes,
>such as dioxin and other chlorinated compounds, are known to be
>concentrated in the animal fat of meat, fish, and dairy
>products. On the other hand, vegetables, fruits, and grains
>contain only small amounts of these compounds.
The concentration of toxins is naturally higher at the top of the food
chain yet it seems that despite of this obvious concern that the
benefits from the nutrients in these foods outweigh the dangers.
>So why is the Zone diet so popular? Its followers defend
>it vehemently, largely because they find the rapid weight loss
>irresistible. Like most low carbohydrate diets, however,
>a great deal of the weight loss is dehydration. Ordinarily,
>three grams of water are stored with every gram of
>carbohydrates in the form of glycogen in the liver and skeletal
>muscles. When this is sharply limited, the desperate "zonies"
>think they are losing up to a pound of fat a day. It's also
>low in calories (about 1,700), causing the unhealthful depletion
>of lean body mass along with the minimal fat loss.
The above is complete nonsense. No zoners are claiming to loose more
than a pound of fat per week and many of them are monitoring their lean
body mass and body fat composition on a regular basis.
>Also, without careful monitoring, this type of diet may
> lead to "ketosis" (an unnatural form of acidosis), which often
>causes some degree of anorexia and even euphoria. Sears denies
>that this happens with the amount of carbohydrates he allows.
Ketosis is reached when about 30 grams or less of carbohydrate are
consumed daily. The zone does not even come close this and Sears speaks
out strongly against ketosis.
>However, Dr. Atkins, another proponent of high protein, high
>fat, low carbohydrate consumption, considers ketosis to be a
>useful and necessary state. If ketosis sounds familiar, it's
>also the result when insulin-dependent diabetics can't
>metabolize carbohydrates without their insulin injections--a
>state leading up to diabetic coma.
The zone is a moderate not a high protein diet.
>The Sears diet recommends that one get 30 percent of
>calories from fat, 30 percent from protein, and 40 percent from
>carbohydrates. Here, it should be obvious that these are
>approximately the proportions already consumed in most Western
>countries, including the United States, where heart disease and
>cancer are rampant.
Correct me if I am wrong but I believe it is more like 35% from fat,
15% from protein and 50% from carbohydrates. Besides, even if the
percentages were the same the diet that Sears advocates is high in
whole foods like fresh fruits and vegetables and low in refined foods.
> Furthermore, with such low intakes of
>complex carbohydrates, it appears that Sears' recommended diet
>would be deficient in vegetables, fruits, and whole
>grains--and would contain inadequate fiber.
On the contrary the zone is very high in fiber.
> Adding insult to injury, this level of protein consumption may
>promote calcium loss and osteoporosis.
This is a myth in my opinion. Anybody wanting to get a different take
on this issue call the Price Pottenger Nutritional Foundation at 619-
574-7763 and get some back issues of their journal.
>Sears has very little to say about cholesterol levels in
>his book. He writes, "if cholesterol is such a villain, why
>does the body make so much of it?" The real heart disease
>risk, he says, is "hyperinsulinemia and bad eicosanoids."
> He is either unaware that practically all published reports
>indicate just the opposite, or he hasn't thoroughly
>read his own book--written with the help of professional
>magazine writer, Bill Lawren. It's riddled with such comments
>as, "eating fat doesn't make you fat." It cautions that such
>foods as potatoes, brown rice, bread, corn, carrots, pasta,
>bananas, dry breakfast cereals, apple juice and orange juice
>may be harmful to your health. None of the references quoted,
>backing these conclusions, have ever been published, and the
>book does not contain a reference section or a bibliography.
As it says in the book, anybody can call up Sears and get the 30 page
bibliography sent to them for free. I did so and there are many
published papers to back up many of Sears claims though he is the first
to admit that much more research is needed.
>So in summary, a half century of scientific research,
>first from Ansel Keyes' population studies in the 1950's to
>T. Colin Campbell's ongoing Cornell-Oxford-China Nutrition
>project today, has given us a wealth of data supporting the
>health benefits of carbohydrates.
Keyses I do not know but the Cornell study is certainly not without its
flaws.
> "The Zone" would be a giant step backward.
1)Bernard Jensens's diet is basically a zone diet. 2) Sears was
recently the key note speaker at a prominent naturopathic conference in
the NW. 3) Half of the staff of the Vegetarian Times are now on the
zone diet ( see Jan. 1997 issue) and numerous leaders in the holistic
communities are now embracing it.
>A little weight loss, which is quickly regained when the diet is no
>longer tolerated, isn't worth the inevitable long-term health risk.
Not true. The weight stays off. The zone is not a high protein crash
diet.
>Charles R. Attwood, M.D., F.A.A.P
>author of Dr. Attwood's Low-Fat Prescription For Kids
>621 N. Ave. K
>Crowley, LA. 70526
>(318) 783-8215
Dr. Atwood has not done his homework and should have investigated this
issue a little better before airing his ignorance in public.
Best, Peter
[log in to unmask]
|
