Talk:South Beach diet
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] What do you think of this diet?
What do people think of the South Beach diet? 164.116.126.126
- I eat like that anyway, so my reaction was "What diet?". This kind of "diet", if you want to call it that, just tastes good. My whole family is kind of thin, but obviously I haven't lost any weight because I never really had any other diet. Some things are not too obvious: lard is less saturated than butter and is a perfect replacement for shortening. Probably what you really need to do is adjust your cooking habits. Broccoli is awful if you overcook it, and not that good raw, but truly wonderful when lightly steamed or stir-fried. Fish is dreadful if you don't buy frozen-at-sea fish and keep it frozen until use; good fish is odorless. (live fish works too) Even asparagus and Brussels sprouts are yummy if you know how to cook them right. You do have to do your own cooking if you want good food. AlbertCahalan 04:22, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- What do I think? I HATE IT! It's better than Atkins, but still too restrictive. I want to be able too eat what I want, and how much I want, and my mom fusses at me a lot for eat too much. At least I know that I'm not the only target. My step-dad gets it a lot too. I wish she'd lay off...both of us. --John R. Sellers 05:14, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Sound nutritional principles
It's good to see someone with the courage of conviction to use Atkins nutritional principles in formulating a diet. It could be said that South Beach is simply Atkins modified. For example, Atkins does say it's perfectly ok to eat lean meats instead of high fat ones. But then he goes on to say that high fat meats are more effective in suppressing one's appetite, which is correct. When someone on Atkins meets his target weight, then the diet allows for the incorporation of whole grains and more fruit, thus resembling at this point South Beach. Both Atkins and South Beach fly in the face of conventional "wisdom", and for that they should be admired. People are healthier if they employ these programs with a healthy dose of common sense.
[edit] Request for Expansion
This description of the South Beach Diet is rather vague and attempts to get the specifics of what consist of this diet have proven to be brickwalled by attempts to "hide" the information as somehow "propietary." Food cannot be patented and the information about what foods are in which diet cannot either. Therefore, I recommend that someone who either knows what is in each specific phase and can do a good enough job of using their own language to describe it or who has actually used the diet expand the article. --128.193.161.139 18:06, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] More information
I agree, we need more information. I'm trying to do a report on this diet for school, and its really hard because there is so little info on here. How about a list of pros and cons? Maybe some example meals? Possible effects on your health from using the diet, either good or bad, that sort of thing. --209.137.185.66 15:39, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] POV check
This article seems to speak with a pro- point of view. I'm asking for someone who may be more informed to review, expand, and reference as necessary. /Blaxthos 05:18, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
- I think, in particular the term 'emphasizes' should be replaced. While the diet certainly has the listed items as goals, inderectly asserting that it possesses traits such as 'ease' seems POV. I'm at a slight loss on how to cleanly otherwise phrase that, though. Bitnine 20:28, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Expert needed
I know there are a lot of doctors and other professionals here who have studied this diet and diets like it in great detail. Let's get someone to give this article the treatment it deserves. --Ericpaulson 15:31, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
I came to Wikipedia hoping for an answer to the biggest mystery of thjis diet: What's the science behind losing 7-13 pounds in Phase One? After a;;. almost all reliable sources concur that to lose a pound of fat, there must be a 3,600-caolorie deficit, either through less eating or increased exercise. Two weeks of Phsee One would at most represent a 14,000-calorie deficit for most people (I am generously aassuming about 1,000 fewer calories per day than previously). So what makes up the difference? Agatston very clearly ignores this question in his book. Is it simply dehydradion, in which case he's being pretty deceptive? Hopefully an unbiased expert or two can clarify! 24.148.11.26 17:50, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
I did SB a while back - IIRC, we actually worked out the calories in a typical Phase 1 day to be around 1100. FleetfootMike 09:01, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
