http://www.hofstrachronicle.com/news...d-897314.shtml

(requires free registration)

This article, I suppose written by a journalistic intern or something, should be called

"The Negative Health Effects of Shoddy Journalism".

They accept comments: I think we should give them some.

Here were my comments:

Ms. Scully's article would more properly have been titled, "The Negative Health Effects of Shoddy Journalism."

First and foremost, she certainly did not do her homework when it comes to actually researching what the Atkins Diet is. Her statement that you can only have "two cups of romaine lettuce a day" is absolutely false. She could easily have learned that FOUR cups a day of salad vegetables or three cups of salad veggies and one cup per day of other veggies are part of the plan from the very beginning at :http://atkins.com/Archive/2004/12/27-833156.html. The Atkins website should have been the first stop in her quest for knowledge on the diet. Or perhaps she interviewed another 19 year old sophmore marketing major to learn about the diet?

Her claim that Atkins is a "good on paper" diet is absolutely ludicrous. Exactly what that means I'm not sure, since she seems to go to great lengths to show that it doesn't "make sense", but if by paper she means "respected scientific journals", she is wrong again. http://atkins.com/science/researchsupportingatkins.html lists over 40 studies, many funded by independent orgs. such as the NIH, AMA, and ACS, that show in various ways the Atkins approach to be a safe and effective method for weight loss.

No, there haven't been any "long term studies" of Atkins. Yes, there are many studies showing that a diet high in saturated fat in the context of a mixed (high carb) diet is detrimental. But as several studies have demonstrated, a ketogenic diet offers a metabolic and appetite advantage that helps people lose weight, improve markers for coronary heart disease, control blood glucose and all while providing satisfying foods. For Ms. Scully to have summarily dismissed these facts with just a line or two is blatantly bad journalism, and a disservice to your school community - many of whom might benefit from a low-carb approach.

I could certainly write more on this topic, as the falsehoods in her article are so numerous - but let me end with this: I've been on a low-carb diet since 1999. I've lost well over 100lbs and kept it off. I am at the gym 4-6 days a week, building lots of muscle. And my brain still works quite well, thank you.

I don't expect your publication to be "low-carb positive"; I do expect a publication that is a Google News Source do more balanced - and factual - reporting.

Andrea M. Mondello
Web editor, LowCarb Living Magazine
and long-term Atkins dieter

Way to go Andrea!

__________________
Started Atkins-1/2/04
174 lbs at heaviest



5'0 154/136.5/130

Puh-leeze! Will these MORONS ever give up? Low carb LIVING is here to stay. They just need to get over it and let those of us who want to live healthy do so. Live and let live, I say.
(Loved your comments as usual, Andrea.)

__________________

Andrea:

I do understand your enthusiastic, almost dogmatic, support of the Atkins diet. But once again I am shocked by the hateful way you've chosen to attack the journalist.

As a "journalist" yourself...albeit one with a very biased outlook on your single subject (low carb eating), I would think that you would have responded differently instead of with such cutting remarks.

I love this site and the people here, but whenever I read about your hate-filled replies to journalists, your heated argument with people at your gym and the sometimes curt replies to people who fail to follow low-carb eating the way they "should," I have second thoughts about how valuable this place really is.

__________________
Melissa

hateful-adj- to invite hate and loathing

This was a proper rebuttal to the story and the journalist. There was no name calling nor did Andrea question the woman's sanity or invite others to throw stones at her. As for being dogmatic, we must be. I for one am not content to sit idlly by and keep silent while those around me are suffering and dying from obesity related complications that may have been addressed with LCing.
Will you stand by and watch a 2 yr. old run into the traffic and hold your tongue just because the mother is near-by? If that mother doesn't speak up and stop the child and that child gets hurt or worse yet, killed, you are just as much to blame. While we are in ignorance concerning any subject, we are as that child, not knowing any better.
People need to know the truth so that they can make their own choices concerning how to eat.There is no excuse for these irresponsible media tactics.
This is not the first time that you've posted harshely against people on this board who debate a "news" story.
You sound as if this is a personal attack against you. Perhaps you've been deeply hurt by others not not coming into agreement with you.
Andrea's rather gracious, most would have called her out for her attempted foist.

__________________

Kimberly

I don't see what's so hateful about calling shoddy journalism what it is. This article was a hatchet job, using the most primitive form of argumentation. Build a straw man by mistating the nature of the item being discussed and then knock it down.

It blatantly false in at least seventeen places (I stopped counting at that point).

Hooey is hooey.

I posted a reply but cannot view either my reply or Andrea's.

__________________

Melissa:

I am sorry you see my reply as hateful! I certainly did not mean it to be. If you take the time to read my posts on this board - not just the ones about journalists - I think you'll see I'm not a "hateful" person at all. In fact, I'm sure the people who know me could say a lot of bad things about me, but I truly doubt that "hateful" would be on the list.

I get angry, yes. Am I hateful? No. In fact, I think my comments are pretty standard "letter to the editor" tone for people who disagree strongly with a piece. But maybe I'm wrong.

Melissa, that article WAS shoddy journalism, plain and simple. I've been at this since 1999. I simply am sick of hearing the same (at worst completely erroneous at best mostly conjecture) fiddle-faddle being spouted again and again as fact.

And I'm very much aware of my own bias, but since I'm only writing for low-carb related publications, that is not so much of an issue, I would think.

I also make a very strong attempt to include other points of view when I'm writing articles, such as here:
http://forums.lclmag.com/cms/content/view/332/47/

I "personally" don't think the case against "red meat" is that strong, when I look at all the facts, including how the studies were done, and how the data were combined to get "red meat", etc. I think there's a lot of doubt.

But I made sure to include comments from Walter Willett, because he's a very well-known, highly educated authority - and I'm certainly not an epidemiologist or someone with a bunch of letters after my name. I realize my own bias in favor of Atkins style low-carb. I think if you read that article, you'll see I worked hard to be balanced - albeit within a low-carb point of view, which is acceptable for someone writing for a low-carb audience.

I'm under no illusions that I'll ever win a pullitzer prize, or write for the New York Times. As far as low-carb goes, I consider myself a low-carb apologist, and do the best I can to get the facts out there.

And I do think it entirely proper that we respond to such articles. You don't see me posting links to every "negative" article here, because there are many legit things people say that are not low-carb positive. This piece struck me as particulary bad, was all.

As for my ONE "encounter" with the person at my gym, she and I are smiling and waving to each other every day. Was I mad? yes. Was she mad? yes. Are we two mature adults who realize that we both got too upset? Absolutely.It's over.

Do you think I go around saying angry things to everyone I meet that doesn't like low-carb? Honestly? I pretty much keep my own struggles and heartaches to myself, because I think it would be wrong of me to share them here. But once in a while, I have to vent, too!


As far as curt replies, there are many things that go on behind the scenes here - banned users who re-register under other names and IP's to make trouble, who come and post stupid things, dummies who are just here to be silly. After five years of running the board, I (and the moderators) can usually smell them a mile away. (BTW, the moderators will tell you that I generally let things go on longer than I should, just to be sure.) I don't delete their comments, because I don't want to be accused of censorship, and I want to be sure. But I do reply "curtly" if I think it is someone trolling.

As for my "curt replies" if people are really not doing the diet as "I think they should" - one of the big arguments that researchers and medical people make is that "people don't do the diet right so they shouldn't do it at all." I hear it probably once a week. I guess it gets in my craw.

Melissa, I don't want everyone to agree with low-carb. But I expect that they try as much as humanly possible to get their facts right. That writer did not even do basic research as to what is actually recommended to eat during induction. C'mon. And she is not alone: most articles written about low-carb and Atkins in particular don't get it right, when it would be so simple to research.

here's what I'm going to do, though, because I suspect that my "angry" posts must be taken as "hateful" by more people than you.

I'll find somewhere else to vent, and I'll keep my replies to journalists to myself.

Because I truly love the members here,and LCE and this group is such an important part of my life. And I certainly don't want to give anyone the wrong impression of who I am.

As I said in the post about talking to the lady at my gym: I win when the members here achieve their goals. Not when I win an argument.

Melissa,
I am not a journalist, but I know what I expect from them: to present me with information based on facts. And I think if they do not do this, I, as a member of the reading public, have a right to refute what they have written. It's one thing to give an opinion, but to publish innuendo and lies to support that opinion is irresponsible, and begs a response.
I don't think Andrea's reply was hateful at all; it was calling the article exactly what it was: sloppy, biased and badly researched. There is such a huge amount of misinformation about low carb, and I think it is the resposibility of those of us who know the truth to get that truth out there.
Of course this site is valuable; it gives people who believe in low carb a forum to interact and support each other. It provides a place to learn the truth, and if we don't reinforce that truth whenever and wherever we can, we are letting down those who are searching for it.

__________________
Trina

Vice-President of the Intergalactic Order of Brussels Sprouts Haters

[font='Times New Roman', Times, Serif, serif][/font]

Andrea, Please don't withhold your rebuttals from us! The greatest journalists throughout history have had public debates and air their rebuttals as well as their opponant's.
It is only inappropriate when slander and character bashing take place, something I've never seen you do on these boards.
Mellisa, on the other hand did use these tactics. Please don't allow wrong to dictate to or control the actions of right!

__________________

Kimberly

cogno:

I don't want this thread to degenerate into me vs. melissa, or a contest between "wrong" and "right".

I honestly respect what she's saying. I take criticisms into account in what I do and say.

if I'm coming across as hateful, or dogmatic, that's a big issue to me.

But don't worry, I won't be silent.

maybe I am "curt" too often. Perhaps it comes of being rebuffed, insulted or ignored so often, just because I work for a publication with the words "low-carb" in its name. Which I shouldn't let spill over into the boards here.

Anyway, I'm closing this thread, because I think it's gone far enough. I've had my say, Melissa has had hers. I'll take the conversation to heart, in my own way, and try to come away a better webmaster and netizen.

That's all folks.