Skip to content
The official website of Drs. Michael and Mary Dan Eades, low carb pioneers and authors of Protein Power.

Reality check for the lad Down Under

Oh dear. He’s at it again. Our misguided, angry young friend from Down Under has seized on my post of a couple of weeks ago as flip flop in my position on calories. He seems to believe that I secretly read the book he has been trying so desperately to promote and, as a consequence, have come around to his way of thinking.

He was so taken with his own self importance that when he read my post saying that calories really do count – even on low-carb diets – he chortled with glee and set about trying to capitalize on my admission of error.

He ran to his computer and pounded out one of his angry interminable posts. The premise of this one being that I had finally come to my senses and admitted that he had been right all along.

He then sent an email blast to all 6 of his readers alerting them to the existence of this post. The subject line of his email in bold print

Famous Diet ‘Guru’ Finally Admits I’m Right!

In the body of the email he writes

In September of last year, I publicly exposed what I considered to
be an extremely misleading blog post by Dr. Michael Eades, author
of the best selling book Protein Power.

In retaliation, Eades has gone to great lengths in an attempt to
portray me as a “clueless young prat” who has it all wrong when it
comes to weight loss.

However, Eades has recently done an about-face. In a recent
blog post, he acknowledges that I was right all along!

Then he refers the recipients of this email to his post. Upon arriving there one reads on an on ad nauseam about how the author of the post is correct and all his detractors are wrong. And how everyone vilifies him but he emerges from it all with everyone (including yours truly) acknowledging his genius.

Let the record show that Eades initially and strenuously resisted my assertions, but is now writing them up on his blog like he always believed and taught them. Let the record show that it was not until well after I made these assertions public, and that the noise between Eades and I [sic] faded somewhat, that he embraced them. Eades has clearly learnt something from our dispute and my book. Obviously he will never publicly admit this, but only the dopiest of his followers (admittedly, they’re a pretty damn dopey bunch) will fail to see what’s going on here. I guess I should be quite proud – getting through to a pigheaded, vituperative old prat like Eades is no small feat! [bold in the original]

And, as if this weren’t enough, a few days later he sends another email blast to the same 6 readers.

In my previous newsletter we learned how after reading my book, famous diet author Dr Michael Eades was finally beginning to acknowledge the real facts about fat loss and shedding some of the erroneous beliefs he had propagated in his best-selling book Protein Power.

Since we’re letting ‘the record show,’ let’s let it show the reality not the fantasy. The reality is that I’ve held this position publicly since long before our friend ever arrived upon the nutritional scene.

Here is what I wrote in The Protein Power LifePlan almost 10 years ago. (PPLP was published in 2000 but was written in 1999.)

…if you want to lose weight you have to watch the calories – even on a low-carbohydrate diet – particularly if you’re a small person. Remember, low-carbohydrate intake means a lower insulin level; and a lower insulin level means that you can easily unload fat from your fat cells. But, if your body has no need to use any of the fat from your fat cells because it has more than enough fat to meet all its needs coming from your diet, it’s not going to go after your stored fat, and you won’t lose weight. To lose weight you’ve got to create an energy deficit. [my bold] For the vast majority of people, simply following a low-carbohydrate diet will easily create enough of a caloric deficit to bring about a reasonable weight loss. (from The Protein Power LifePlan, page 51.)

Doesn’t seem to me to be any different than what I wrote in my post of May 27.

Here is how our friend summarizes his book, of which he is so proud. He leads with my ‘public’ acknowledgment of it.

And yet Eades is now publicly acknowledging that the main contentions of my book are in fact 100% correct!

-Calorie restriction – not carbohydrate restriction – is the key requirement for weight loss;

-The abolition of the initial calorie deficit by subsequently reduced calorie burn is the real cause of weight loss plateaus, and;

-The real reason people lose weight on low-carbohydrate diets is because greater satiety on these diets allows them to eat less and establish a calorie deficit.
[bold in the original]

Looks to me like he is using my alleged conversion to shamelessly promote his own book, parts of which could be said to have been ripped off from my much earlier one. Since the publication of my own ideas predated his by almost a decade, perhaps I should do an email blast to all my readers with the subject line:

Unknown Self-styled Nutritional Expert Finally Admits I’m Right.

Let the record show indeed…

39 Comments

  1. Gabe on June 20, 2008 at 1:45 pm

    Mike, I don’t recall you saying that calories don’t count. In Protein Power LifePlan you wrote ‘Calories count… but not that much’. Your previous posts have explained that once again. Of course they count, even in a low carb diet, but… and here is where I think a lot of people get a little confused, if insulin is low enough, calories take care of themselves. Fat internalization and fat synthesis are both insulin-dependent processes. To increase fat mass we either need a lot of fat synthesis (i.e. a lot of insulin, thus a lot of fat being made inside the cell), or a lot of fat being internalized (i.e. a lot of insulin, thus a lot of at going inside the fat cells).
    The way I saw this when I read your book the first time, and the way I sometimes explain it now when I am asked, is that when insulin is low (low meaning no longer in the hyperinsulinemic stage) glucagon encourages fat cells to release fat that can be used for energy, but only if it’s needed (i.e. if there is a caloric deficit). But, as you clearly explained, if the diet itself, even a low carb one, is providing a readily available source of energy in the calories coming in (of course from fat as it is costly for the body to extract it from protein), then there is no need for the fat cells to get rid of their fat. The end result for us is that because insulin is low, no fat is coming inside the fat cells, which translates into no weight gain… but no weight loss either. The end result is a plateau.

    I don’t know… to me is still so clear; calories do count… but not as much as we think. 🙂

  2. mc on June 20, 2008 at 2:06 pm

    Good that you didn’t name him. Wouldn’t want the silly prat to get more traffic for his sensationalism.

  3. Hammad on June 20, 2008 at 2:08 pm

    It seems common in the fitness/nutrition industry: if you bash on another’s idea, your ideas sell more. People bash on one training style to promote their own. Readers see the bashing, and their opinions follow along with the basher because to them, the one doing the trash talking must be right and superior. It’s a sad tactic, but it works. Dr. Eades, I’m glad that you are a gentleman and do not resort to vulgar ways.

  4. fred hahn on June 20, 2008 at 2:30 pm

    You’ve always said that to LOSE weight a calorie deficit is required. He thinks this means ONLY by taking in less food when you can indeed take in a maintenance level of calories and lose body fat by either creating the deficit via the types of calories you consume or burning them off via exercise – or both.

    Yet he still can’t explain – because he lacks the knowledge – how it is possible to eat more calories than maintenance levels and not gain if the calories come from fat or protein.

    I think that there is something to be said for muscle mass maintenance via eating a low carb diet. Most high carb diets allow the adult to continue to lose muscle tissue year after year due to insufficient protein and fat intake. By adopting a low carb higher fat and protein diet you do not suffer nearly as much from sarcopenia. This is an educated guess of course. If true, it is as if you are creating a deficit by maintaining lean mass. IOW, if you eat the same amount of calories year after year yet, lose lean tissue year after year, you’ll keep getting fatter year after year.

    That’s why strength training is so vital to the fat loss picture.

  5. simon fellows on June 20, 2008 at 3:02 pm

    …what doth one call a well balanced Australian ?
    A personage with a chip on both shoulders.

    And isn’t vituperative a type a wine ?

  6. Michael L on June 20, 2008 at 7:41 pm

    This ongoing exchange between the two of you has grown almost humorous, although I’m sure neither of you feels that way right now.

    It’s strange, because a lot of us follow BOTH of you, and you both are saying almost the same thing about low carb living.

    I think you two are going to be great friends in the end. 🙂

    P.S. Keep up the great blog! I really enjoy it.

    I suppose there is always the possibility that we might become great friends, but somehow I doubt it.

  7. con on June 20, 2008 at 8:14 pm

    dr eades,
    you wrote in reply to charles’ comment
    ‘You may have effortlessly lost weight and maintained a lower weight by doing nothing but reducing carbs to zero, but you are a study of n=1. I can assure you that in my many years of taking care of patients I have seen many who have struggled to lose weight with diets in which the carbs have been severely restricted. And in those patients, once we started looking at the calories, the weight loss picked up.”
    May I ask you what type of calories you looked at and reduced: meat/fat or nuts/cheese
    or what the carb count was pre weight loss compared to during the weight loss phase of these patients? Or did you just look at calorie numbers?
    con

    Cheese, nuts and nut butters along with processed ‘low-carb’ junk food. See this post for a fuller explanation.

  8. Matthew Kane on June 20, 2008 at 9:17 pm

    Dr. E, Thank you so much for these amazing posts. So, will you be dissecting the first chapter of his “book” soon? Now THAT would be a great way to “slap him around again.”

    Also, could you tell us how one can gain fat with an excess of calories without carbs? I’m guessing it has to do with gluconeogenesis and the extra protein, but I’m not sure. BTW, I hope you do a promotional tour for the new book. I’d love to say thanks in person! Thanks a million!

    Actually it’s difficult to gain fat with an excess of calories without carbs. It’s easy, however, not to lose fat with an excess of calories without carbs. Put low-carb and calories in the search box and look at the two recent posts I wrote on this issue.

    Cheers–

    MRE

  9. Bill on June 21, 2008 at 6:39 am

    He is just a bratt,tying to popularize his e-book and its lowcarb as well.And if he wants to go somewhere go to Atkins site talk about flip flop they now advocate lean protein on there site .Ever since the passing of DR Atkins they have turned his diet upside down.And also would it hurt me to go on the meat and egg diet for a time to get things going i weigh 300lbs. thanks Doc

    I’ve had many patients go on meat only (including eggs) diets to get their weight loss going.

  10. John on June 21, 2008 at 2:55 pm

    >>And isn’t vituperative a type a wine ?

    Close. It’s actually a type of whine.

  11. Amy on June 21, 2008 at 5:19 pm

    A little off topic, but was wondering what your opinion of this “study” is:

    Study backs carb-packed ‘big breakfast’ diet
    Plan wards off cravings, results in long-term weight loss, small study finds
    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25286161/

    I’m going to post on it.

  12. petrus on June 22, 2008 at 2:45 am

    I find it interesting that when this spat blew up That I was on both parties weblist. I had a couple of cordial interchanges with AC and regularly got missives from him.

    When the spat hit I wrote AC about a couple of scientific issues and got a somewhat vituperative response. Being a kiwi (and we NEVER take crap from Australians!) he got both barrels straight back.

    Silence (merciful).

    Then this calorie thing surfaces. Waddaya know I get an email from ..

    Seems like desperation spawns all sorts of flip flops.

  13. Todd on June 22, 2008 at 1:06 pm

    Misguided? You’re being far too kind. I would call it irrational or even psychotic. The symptoms he exhibits are certainly consistent with many forms of common mental illness. Don’t take it too seriously. Anyone reading his blog or his “book” and doesn’t see something awry, deserves his advice.

  14. Razwell on June 22, 2008 at 2:36 pm

    Dr Eades

    I wrote under the “Anthony Colpo A Man Obsessed” article today, you might want to switch it here to expose what kind of person he is. Whichever place is best.

    I have real quotes from e-mails from him and am happy to show the kind of person he is – in it for himself only.

    Take Care

    Razwell

    I posted the other comment on the other post. If these are direct quotes from his emails to you

    “My site is a complete waste of my time with bugger all return”

    ”I am now trying to profit from my fellow humans stupidity in the stock market”

    I fear he is in for a rude awakening. He will learn about his fellow humans’ stupidity in a real hurry if he ventures into the treacherous waters of the stock market. He will find out that he is the bait.

    Cheers–

    MRE

  15. Michael Richards on June 22, 2008 at 4:51 pm

    What a shame about Voldemate (“The Aussie Who Must Not Be Named”).

    Michael

  16. Tom Naughton on June 22, 2008 at 5:16 pm

    Years ago, I lost about 6 pounds per month on the Zone diet. (I was happy about it, too.) I averaged 1700 calories per day, which included about 175 carbohydrates to maintain the 40/30/30 ratio — not low-carb, but down from the high-starch vegetarian diet that had led to gaining weight in my 20s.

    On my fast-food diet for the film, I averaged 1950 calories, about 100 grams of carbohydrates, and lost 12 pounds in a month. Yes, calories matter, but obviously carbs matter too, at least for a lot of us. Somewhere between 100 and 175 carbs, my insulin goes up to the point that it impedes weight loss even if it doesn’t stop weight loss completely; I was eating less on the Zone diet, but lost weight at only half the rate. My guess is that after burning what little fat it could on the Zone diet, my body simply slowed its metabolism to counteract the reduction in calories. The type of calories I consumed affected the calories-out side of the equation. (My exercise routines were the same on both diets.)

    This isn’t a case of simply feeling more satiety on the low-carb diet and therefore believing I was eating more. I kept daily, meticulous journals during both diets.

    So I don’t much care what a few metabolic ward studies show. I know what my own diet history has taught me: I lose weight more quickly — and feel fuller and have more energy — when I restrict my carbs to 100 or fewer.

    Some people may lose at the same rate on both diets. If so, all that means to me is that their insulin response isn’t the same as mine. We all know people who can eat anything and never gain a pound. (I’m married to one of them.)

    By the way, I thought your readers might like to know that we’ve signed a deal for international distribution and are considering an offer for domestic DVD distribution. My producer’s rep is still working on landing a cable deal — which would be nice because it would help to sell the DVDs when they come out — but either way, people will be able to buy a copy soon.

    Hey Tom–

    Great news about the distribution. I hope the cable deal works out.

    Keep us posted.

    Best–
    Mike

  17. Daron on June 23, 2008 at 4:29 am

    I understand your being bothered by this persons slandorous alagations. However, taking the time to respond and comment on them only keeps this guy going. The fact that a famous diet “guru” such as yourself is giving him so much attention might actually be making him seem more credible in some people’s eyes. The fact that he can rile you up is what keeps him going. In my opinion, you’re much better off letting your “fans” defend you as opposed to getting involved personally. Kudos on not mentioning his name this time.

    I don’t really get all that agitated over it. I think it’s more fun than anything else. Most of the people in the scientific arena who have felt the brunt of his anger ignore him, but I’ve got just enough redneck in me to stay in his face. Especially when he out and out lies about me and uses those lies to promote his own psychotic ramblings for profit.

  18. donnyrosart on June 23, 2008 at 6:39 am

    To be fair, he may be down to six readers, but he’s banned at least twice that.

  19. Zach on June 23, 2008 at 7:34 am

    What do you all know? You are just “…a pretty damn dopey bunch…”! 🙂

    First off, I know that anyone who reads this blog does not need reassurance about whether Dr. Eades is right or not, but, I just wanted to get off my chest the fact that people who desparately feel the need to gloat or attract attention away from other people are simply insecure.

    The way the person writes indicates jealousy and inadequacy. Neither are useful when it comes to creating a following of students. Your blog is great and has been a profound tool in guiding my healthy lifestyle.

    Much thanks,

    Zach

    Hey Zach–

    Thanks for the kind words and support. But I’ll be the first to admit that I’m not always right. I’m just another guy out there in a quest for the truth. Sometimes I find it, and sometimes I get fooled. I just hope the former happens more than the latter.

    Cheers–

    MRE

  20. Navarath on June 23, 2008 at 7:51 am

    No offense – but these posts talking about this guy are getting old. He’s old news, and everytime you post something, it just brings it back to the front burner.

    I know, I know. But it’s getting old for me to be attacked unfairly, and to use my own information to peddle his ramblings for profit.

    I’ll try to not get drawn into the fray, but when I do, you’ll just have to indulge me.

    Cheers–

    MRE

  21. Charles on June 23, 2008 at 8:52 am

    But, if your body has no need to use any of the fat from your fat cells because it has more than enough fat to meet all its needs coming from your diet, it’s not going to go after your stored fat, and you won’t lose weight. To lose weight you’ve got to create an energy deficit. [my bold] For the vast majority of people, simply following a low-carbohydrate diet will easily create enough of a caloric deficit to bring about a reasonable weight loss. (from The Protein Power LifePlan, page 51.)

    But if you have low insulin, why would a person be prompted to eat more fat than their body needs? Hunger is a response to a request for fuel from the cells. If the cells are able to get at the energy contained in fat cells, then why would they make such a request? Does hunger intiate in the mind or in the cells?

    On the one hand, you acknowledge that carbohydrates have the unique ability to raise insulin levels and cause cravings which lead a person to eat more carbohydrates. With low insulin levels, a person is not eating many carbohydrates so therefore their cravings are down and they are mobilizing fat for energy. Now, you suggest that they are eating too much fat, yet for an example you use carbohydrates in the form of cheese and nuts, which suggests that their problems are a result of too many carbohydrates. Wouldn’t providing an answer that suggested that fat was the culprit more illustrate your point? I’m sure that would be problematic for you because you know high fat diets don’t lead to weight gain without carbohydrates.

    You acknowledge that if the person is only eating fatty, high calorie protein like prime rib, they probably wouldn’t gain weight yet you suggest that if they are eating relatively low calorie cheese and nuts, that would cause weight gain or stalling? By what mechanism does this occur? It can’t be calories because the prime rib has more calories!

    Finally, what biological change occurs when a person reaches their goal weight that allows them to enjoy cheese and nuts without gaining weight? On our forum, we see the opposite. Carb creep sends people back to induction every day yet you claim that they can avoid this fate once they get to goal?

    Answering these question will greatly assist me and the many who read our forum understand your position.

    Charles

    I don’t know if you read these two posts or not, but if you haven’t, they pretty much explain my thinking on the subject.

    Cheese and nuts, for the most part, have few carbohydrates – they are primarily fat. They are way more calorically dense per ounce than prime rib. My point is that people can eat a lot of cheese and nuts while still staying within a fairly low carb limit. The enormous caloric intake from these then provides all the body’s caloric needs, meaning that the body doesn’t have to go after the fat stored in the fat cells.

    Appetite is of two origins. First comes the appetite that is the body’s call for calories, i.e., the appetite that prevents us from starving. Second, is the hedonistic appetite. This is the appetite that tells us to eat something, not because we need it, but because it tastes good. Dessert is a specific example. We’ve all been to a dinner where we are absolutely stuffed, then the waiter comes around with the dessert cart. We don’t eat the dessert because we’re hungry or because our cells need it, we eat it because it is a pleasurable experience.

  22. peter on June 23, 2008 at 12:17 pm

    I just finished reading the article “Study backs carb-packed ‘big breakfast’ diet” referred to by Amy. Of course people will lose weight on such a diet. The calorie count is dreafully low. With such a low calorie count, one would have craving’s for all sorts of foods, and thus, it probably makes sense to provide carbs, since the carbs will at least help to satiate cravings, at least for a short while, and i emphasise SHORTWHILE.

    I’m going to post on this.

  23. Tom on June 23, 2008 at 12:39 pm

    I agree you should stop feeding the trolls, but not until after I’ve launched my new e-book, the “Mike Eades Is a Stoopit Doodyhead Fat-Smasher Diet.”

  24. susan on June 23, 2008 at 1:02 pm

    Hey Doc, the way I see it, here’s a guy that put years of time, effort and passion into making a living as a nutrition/fitness expert and …it didn’t happen. So, it’s not unfathomable that he would be bummed, bitter, angry, defensive, desperate. And that he might act out against those who DID make it. Lots of people react this way when their dreams and endeavors fail. It’s not pretty, but I think it’s pretty human. That doesn’t excuse his behavior of course, but maybe explains it in a way to make room for a weeeeeee bit of understanding.

  25. simon fellows on June 23, 2008 at 1:28 pm

    John..that was very very smart…elegant even. Nice one sunbeam

  26. Tom on June 23, 2008 at 1:50 pm

    here’s a guy that put years of time, effort and passion into making a living as a nutrition/fitness expert and …it didn’t happen.

    He certainly didn’t put in enough of the above. If he’d been that serious, he’d have more than an ebook. If he wants to be Mike Eades, there’s nothing stopping him from going to medical school, building a practice, seeing what helps the patients, and writing real books — other than the fact that all of that is hard. And there’s nothing stopping him from being Fred Hahn other than years of study of Kinesiology, a willingness to be curious about what really works even if it’s not what everyone’s parroting, and busting his dang balls for years on end to build a reputation and a franchise.

    But any nobody can jump on the net and throw turds…now that’s easy. It’s what every musclehead in the gym is doing…so what?

    Hi Tom–

    I agree with you. I don’t really have anything against autodidacts; in fact, I sort of consider myself one in a lot of subjects. But, nothing takes the place of a lot of hands on experience, much of which comes through a formal educational experience.

    My favorite story is about my friend Dr. Richard Bernstein. He was a successful engineer with an inquisitive mind. He had had type I diabetes since about the age of 12, but when he got his hands on one of the first glucometers his life changed. (His wife was a physician and helped him get an early version. In the early days, these machines were huge and extremely costly.) He started fiddling with what he ate, then measuring his blood sugar. He, in essence, did a huge series of mini-glucose tolerance tests on himself to find out how the body responds to foods in the absence of insulin. He developed a diet (a low-carb one) and a system of insulin injections that enabled him to minimize his doses of insulin while keeping his blood sugars normal. He wrote a couple of papers that he submitted to various journals – all of which were rejected; and he tried to get speaking gigs, but had difficulty doing so because of a lack of credentials. Despite his knowing more about type I diabetes and its management than probably 99.9 percent of the physicians in the world, Richard Bernstein enrolled in medical school at the advanced age of 40 and graduated simply so that he could get the credentials to be able to get his message heard. That’s dedication. AC should take a page from Dr. Bernstein’s book if he (AC) is worried about getting his message across.

    I’m not afraid to learn from anyone. I suspect there is a lot that AC knows that I don’t know – especially about the nutritional aspects of bodybuilding – and I would be happy to learn from him. But, his personality makes it difficult to do so.

    Cheers–

    MRE

  27. Cheerwino on June 23, 2008 at 5:19 pm

    Dr. Mike wrote: “I’ve got just enough redneck in me to stay in his face.”

    As a fellow Southerner, I have to say, so true! When your readers urged you to ignore him earlier in this rift, I thought, “he can’t, he’s Southern!” As long as the gauntlet is being thrown, a Southern gentleman must pick it up and smack his opponent around with it. And with Aussies being cut from the same cloth, it continues…

    Right you are. It’s a Southern thing.

  28. Megan Bagwell on June 23, 2008 at 6:56 pm

    Dr. Eades,
    What a great idea this blog is! I’m reading your first book for the first time. I actually just found it by the pool while I was on vacation and haven’t put it down since. I’ve learned a lot more from your book than from any of the other low carb books. I now know what is wrong with my mother. That whole book just screams my mother (high blood pressure, HIGH HIGH cholesterol, fat around the middle, etc etc etc) and I’m trying to get her to pick this book up and apply it to her life b/c I’m truly afraid she won’t be here to see her grandchildren grow up if she doesn’t make this change…I wish I could send her over to you!!

    Anyways, I have a question unrelated to the previous stuff I wrote about. I have started occasionally doing the “fat fast” diet here and there that Dr. Atkins mentioned in his book. (a few days of doing 1000 calories made up of 90% fat and 10% carbs/protein.) He mentioned that it could be ‘dangerous’ if you aren’t truly metabolically resistant and that it could also be dangerous to do it for longer than I think 4 days. What exactly could happen that could be DANGEROUS? It amazes me how I can do it for just 1 or 2 days and lose 2 lbs. and it stays off. Do you think I’m putting myself in any type of harm doing it for 3 days at a time here and there. I’m about 20 lbs.above my ideal weight from doing the calculation in your book.

    I don’t think it’s dangerous and I doubt that Atkins did either. It was probably something his publisher made him put in. Having said that, I always recommend that people check with their physicians before making any major dietary changes.

    Cheers–

    MRE

  29. Razwell on June 23, 2008 at 7:24 pm

    Dr. Eades

    I thought I would write what i forgot instead of writing the same exact post over on this one about the arrogant Australian.

    Anthony Colpo is a snake oil salesman only interested in what he can sell you NOT spreading a message to help persons. I found this out the hard way.

    Anthony Colpo rides on the coat tails of true pioneers like Dr. Uffe Ravnskov ,Dr. Malcolm Kendrick , Dr. Kilmer McCully. Colpo’s cholesterol book is a regurgitation of Dr Ravnskov mixed in with his OPINIONS on what causes CHD.

    People please see Anthony Colpo for The AdHomnivore that he is.

    His attack on Dr Eades was a PURE PUBLICITY STUNT for his CRAP fat loss book.

    Also take a real hard look at that ab shot. It looks photo shopped to me where his shirt meet the abs . Something does not look natural in it.

    Colpo reeks of shadiness.

  30. Megan Bagwell on June 23, 2008 at 7:56 pm

    Everyone needs to check out http://www.thedailyplate.com It’s a great way to count carbs and calories (and fat, protein ). Anything you eat is already in the database OR you can add it yourself. I love seeing everything in front of me that way, and even in a little pie chart if you’re really visual! http://www.thedailyplate.com/users/myplate/?when=2008-06-23 Here you can see MY daily plate today and how awesome this site is!

    Yes, it’s a great way, but kind of a PIA (pain in the you know what). I did fiddle with it though and discovered that my food intake today (rib eye steak, tomato, asparagus, cucumber, about a third of a roast chicken, 3 eggs, 3 slices of bacon, and a half an avocado) provided me with 1437 kcal and 12 grams of usable carbohydrate. And to think that Ancel Keys’ subjects were starving on 1560 low-fat calories.

    Thanks for the link.

  31. Megan Bagwell on June 23, 2008 at 7:59 pm

    Ok, it didn’t take you to MY plate. Well, if you want to see a low carbing stranger’s plate, my screenname on the site is SweetSunni. Anyways, I again, I highly recommend it to everyone now, b/c it’s helping me keep track easily.

    Got it. Thanks.

  32. Megan Bagwell on June 23, 2008 at 8:07 pm

    http://www.thedailyplate.com/diary/who/SweetSunni Ok, maybe this one will work!

    Thank you, Dr. Eades for clearing up that it’s probably not dangerous (the fat fast) other than feeling like I might FREAK out on any given person by the 3rd day if I eat one more handful of macadamia nuts.

  33. Megan Bagwell on June 23, 2008 at 8:44 pm

    I’m feeling quite good on 803 net calories and only 21 grams carbs (after subtracting fiber)… I love knowing the exact numbers, it’s a sick obsession now, even if the site is a PIA, I agree, it can be.

    I feel like a rhino if I eat 1500 calories now. I just don’t know what a good calorie range is. I know if I eat carbs I don’t lose at all unless I’m netting some crazy practically starvation number and just losing lean muscle…so I’m going to really work at making this low carb lifestyle happen. I’m really good at the visualization part…

  34. Michael Richards on June 23, 2008 at 9:04 pm

    @Megan Bagwell

    Just a quick note from someone who did the Fat Fast a couple of times last year to try and get rid of that last, pesky 5 kg using it. It does work, but — as it’s low on protein — it is not muscle sparing. Quite the opposite. Then when you stop it, because you’ve not been ingesting much in the way of food weight, your weight then goes up (because you’re then eating more weight in food) and you have to cross your fingers that you maintain at least some deficit. I’ve had far more success with Dr Mike’s suggestion in the previous post “Low-carb and calories” of eliminating nuts and cheese (damn!). The weight for me came off quicker and stays off.

    The trick appears to eat enough cals to maintain your rate of metabolism while providing a enough deficit to lose. Well, I haven’t done any calcs, I’ve just held off the Ns & Cs and apparently got that balance right through sheer dumb luck.

    But I will say this in favour of the Fat Fast: you actually don’t feel hungry, so it’s not torture. The amount of food you eat is so small it’s freaky, but it’s doable without a serious sense of deprivation. But it’s hardly a party either!

    Michael.

  35. Megan Bagwell on June 24, 2008 at 5:20 am

    Michael Richards,
    I will say, after I’ve done the fat fast for a couple days I’m SO HAPPY to go back to eating salads and chicken legs!! The induction phase is like a TREAT after that and the cravings are gone and ketosis is doing it’s magic! But you’re right, definitely not a party. The first day is always good for me then after that I dry heaving at the thought of having a cup of coffee with 4 tbsp of heavy cream in it!

  36. Scott on June 25, 2008 at 2:37 pm

    I have to say, it does surprise me that the Ad Homnivore would bite on this. Even in your post, ‘Learn Why AC is MAD’ you explained that the only disagreement you two had was in your belief that MAD exists. You said, even then, that you had to have a caloric deficit in order to achieve weight-loss. I would have figured that he would have read that post a thousand times. All of your posts about MAD have all been very clear in that it was only about a maximum 300 kcal but that an overall caloric deficit was necessary for losing weight.

    It seems as though he’s not as critical a reader as he claims.

    My only guess is that he jumped to a conclusion and grouped you in with Atkins without really reading more into it just as he apparently reviewed Taubes without reading his work. He must have just read that you believed that MAD existed and that you disagreed with him on that one issue. Then he must have assumed that by MAD that you meant that you could ‘eat all the low-carb you want and still lose weight.’

    I’m just stunned that he would stake his reputation on this one issue when you’ve clearly agreed with him on this.

    That being said, someone who would actually change, edit, post and then ban people publicly without giving them a chance to reply is despicable. It’s one thing for your readers and supporters to speak ill of him but reading Razwell’s comments speaks volumes about the guy.

    Nothing surprises me about the Ad Homnivore an longer except that I can always count on him trying to exploit anything I write for his own self-promotion efforts. It’s sad, really.

  37. mrfreddy on June 26, 2008 at 5:12 am

    it’s sad and it’s tedious. However, I still don’t know why I shouldn’t believe him when he says these metabolic ward studies absolutely prove the metabolic advantage doesn’t exist.

    Of course, I don’t care, it’s just a minor academic point to me. If it does exist, in my case, it’s too small to even notice at all.

    I don’t know why he gets himself into such a lather over it (except to promote his book, of course, but it seems to go deeper than that with him).

    I’m glad to see the name I coined for him, the adhomnivore, is finally catching on! I still can’t believe he has the -nads/lack of self awareness/impaired memory/whatever- to attack anyone for ad hominem attacks. Jeeesus…..

    Hey mrfreddy–

    Don’t worry. The metabolic ward studies quoted don’t put a stake through the heart of the metabolic advantage idea. Only his interpretation of them. I really will get around to dealing with them.

  38. Razwell on June 29, 2008 at 4:22 pm

    mrfreddy

    Don’t worry about Anthony Colpo. You gave him quite a caning a few months ago . So bad a caning in fact Colpo could not take the heat, that’s the only reason you were banned. You made the “Almighty Colpo” look mortal.

    I can vouch for you that he edited what you say and then bans because he did it to me too, the ( formerly , stupidly, and never again) biggest syocphant of his forum- “Razzi”. The fact that I vouch for you speaks VOLUMES about Colpo’s integrity- he has none.

    If Anthony Colpo needs to do as many sets and volume of an exercise that he says he must NOT be training that hard .

    Keep on super slowing and putting Anthony Colpo’s puny build to shame.

    Sincerely

    Razwell

  39. mrfreddy on July 1, 2008 at 5:47 am

    Raz, you’re confusing me, it seems, with Fred Hahn, the slow-burn guy. I know Fred, I work out at his studio, but I am, alas, not him. For one thing, I’m much better looking! (Ok, he’s a lot more muscular, but I got more hair, on my head anyway!).

    btw, Anthony never did respond to Fred’s final caning, it’s a doozy:

    http://tiny.cc/4ARwC

    The caning from Fred was a good one. Poor AC. He’s likely covered with welts from the drubbings he’s recently taken.

Leave a Comment