Atkins-ruokavalio aiheutti naiselle hengenvaarallisen myrkytyksen

10% ALENNUS KOODILLA PAKKOTOISTO
:offtopic: Enpä ole tuommosta dieettiä kokeillu, mutta joskus muusta syystä saanut kropan ketoosiin ja ainut todella ikävä puoli asiassa oli se, että aivot ei toimineet (tarvitsevat rasvaa ja myös sitä hiilaria). Olo oli kuin aivot olis jumittanu kokonaan. Ajatustyöläiselle hienoa...:jahas:
 
Taitaa olla ihmiskohtaista että kuinka pää suhtautuu ketoosiin. Itsellä ainakin tuntuu olo hieman virkeämmältä kuin hiilaripitoisella ruokavaliolla. Tosin aina viikonloppuna kun vetää ekan satsin hiilareita alas, niin tuntuu ettei jaksa liikauttaa eväänsä seuraavaan pariin tuntiin. Mutta siitä se sitten "tasaantuu" pikkuhiljaa. Maanantaina taas kun alkaa rasvan syönti niin olo on mahtava, jatkuen viikonloppuun asti.
 
Aivot vaatii yllättävän vähän sitä hiilaria toimiakseen. Mulla ei ollut mitään ongelmia tn kanssa. Anabolicin idea oli siinä että keho ei ole kaua siinä ketoosissa kerrallaan. Se ehtii olla sen max 2 päivää ja sitten alkaa taas tankkaus. Treenit kulkee ja kasvuhormooni/testotasot on korkealla. Eli ei pitäisi olla samaa ongelmaa kuin dieeteillä joissa on alle 30 g rasvaa:( :rock:
 
Kyllä se Atkinsin dietti on vaarallista kun jumalauta viihdetaiteilija Anita Hirvonen niin sanoo! Tästä on turha enää keskustella :D
 
Anabolic Dietistä on tarinaa Bodauslehdessä 3/96.
 
Tuo juttu perustui The Lancet -lehden tapausselostukseen. Sillä naisella oli haimatulehdus, joka voi tietysti vaikuttaa insuliinin eritykseen ja siten ketoaineiden tuotantoon. Itseasiassa se ketoainemäärä virtsassa ei yksistään edes voisi aiheuttaa ketoasidoosia. Valtamedia tietty rummuttaa näitä.. :)
 
Anssi Manninen sanoi:
Tuo juttu perustui The Lancet -lehden tapausselostukseen. Sillä naisella oli haimatulehdus, joka voi tietysti vaikuttaa insuliinin eritykseen ja siten ketoaineiden tuotantoon. Itseasiassa se ketoainemäärä virtsassa ei yksistään edes voisi aiheuttaa ketoasidoosia. Valtamedia tietty rummuttaa näitä.. :)
Se on muuten kumma että media aina paisuttelee kun tulee juttua Atkinsista; esim. kun arvon tohtori löi päänsä ja joutui koomaan, niin heti keksittiin että hän kuoli omaan diettiinsä (ja sairaalassa ollessa lihoi tolkuttomasti). Vaikka syy on ihan toinen, niin joku aina tahtoo syyttää "edelläkävijöitä". Ei varmaan ikinä tule lehtiin otsikkoa kuin että; "Bodikansa pelon kourissa, kukaan EI ole kuollut vielä ketodietillä!". Miksi? koska kukaan ei kuollut. Jos joku kuolisi esim. vaikka auto-onnettomuudessa, niin media keksisi että Atkins-dietti aiheutti hänelle ketoasidoosin jonka vuoksi menetti autonsa hallinnan. Kuolema myy, ja jos siihen lisää hieman sensaatiomaustetta niin myy vielä enemmän:(
 
:hyper: Ihan sika hyvä toi edellinen. Media käyttä tätä pelon vyöhykettä avukseen. Kun ihmiset on ymmällään uuden jutun kanssa ja heillä voi olla jopa ylipainoa, mutta ei halua eikä pokeria laihduttaa, niin tälläisillä lehtijutuilla saadaan ihmiset taas olemaan sarjan, "minä hyväksyn itseni tälläisenä, enkä tarvitse mitään tuollaisia vaarallisia muotijuttuja, näin olen ainatehnyt....", kansalaisia. Kyllä on mullekin tullu sika monet jauhamaan asiasta mutta empä ole vielä muulla tavalla saanut itseäni lahtumaan. Kesällä alkaa sitten eka normidieetti. Pitää sitäkin joskus kokeilla.
 
Bandiitti sanoi:
:offtopic: Enpä ole tuommosta dieettiä kokeillu, mutta joskus muusta syystä saanut kropan ketoosiin ja ainut todella ikävä puoli asiassa oli se, että aivot ei toimineet (tarvitsevat rasvaa ja myös sitä hiilaria). Olo oli kuin aivot olis jumittanu kokonaan. Ajatustyöläiselle hienoa...:jahas:

Sun ei tarvitse varmarti murehtia vaikka aivot eivät täysin toimisikaan :D
 
Veikkaisin että jokaista Atkinsin dieetillä kuollutta kohti kuolee 10 ihmistä 'normaalilla' salaatti-vissyvesi-rasvakammo-dieetillä. Atkinsin dieetti on yksinkertaisesti niin tabu aihe ettei sitä tavallinen kaduntallaaja voi hyväksyä. Ruokavaliosta on tullut väiteltyä useiden ihmisten kanssa, jotka ei tiedä mistään ravintoarvoista mitään, ja voi sanoa että kyllä aivan käsittämättömiä luuloja porukoilla on terveellisestä ja monipuolisesta ruokavaliosta.
 
For starters, I applaud Dr. Lessnau for bringing this interesting case up for discussion. That said, however, Dr. Lessnau seems a bit too eager to blame carbohydrate restriction for his patient's metabolic acidosis. With apologies for my rather formal style, here's why I think he shot from the hip.

In the Lancet case report, Chen and Lessnau (see ref 1 below) suggest that a carbohydrate-restricted diet can induce ketoacidosis in a non-diabetic patient, but the data presented do not support this conclusion.

First: the reported anion gap of 26 represents a 12 mM anion excess above the upper limit of normal. The serum beta-hydroxybutyrate (the dominant circulating ketone moiety in humans), reported at 390 ug/mL, translates to a concentration of 3.7 mM. That is, the ketones in this case (both beta-hydroxybutyrate and acetoacetate) account for only about a third of the apparent anion excess. Thus the ketonemia in this case represents only a minor fraction of the anion excess, and thus is not the primary factor in the reported metabolic acidosis.

Second: the normal physiologic state of nutritional ketosis, also called starvation ketosis, is associated with serum ketones in the 1-5 mM range (as in this case), and this is not normally associated with metabolic acidosis (see refs 2,3,4). So given that nutritional ketosis does not cause acidosis despite up to 5 millimolar ketones, how is it credible to blame 4 millimoles of ketones for a 12 millimolar of excess anions in this case?

Third: in their case report, Dr. Lessnau states that they provided the patient with dextrose at the rate of only 38 g/d (5% dextrose at 30 ml/hr). This is not enough carbohydrate to reverse nutritional ketosis, and yet the patient improved. If the ketogenic state was the cause of her problem, why did it improve on a homeopathic dose of glucose?

Fourth: Yes, a barcarbonate of 8 and an anion gap of 26 are worrisome, and any ER doc would admit this patient for evaluation and rehydration. However most of us would save the term "severe acidosis" for anion gaps greater than 30 and blood pH values under 7.1. Calling an arterial blood pH of 7.19 "severe acidosis" is a bit of hyperbole.

Fifth: patients with pancreatitis can have an elevate lipase but normal serum amylase (see ref 5). Given her elevated lipase, white blood cell count of 13x10.ninth, and gastrointestinal symptoms, why was this not just a case of mild pancreatitis? We all know that CT scans of the abdomen in someone with a BMI of 41 are notoriously difficult to interpret for soft-tissue injury.

Sixth: I agree with Science4u1959 in questioning the frequency of events such as this case during low carbohydrate dieting. As an academic physician with 30 years of experience in adult weight management, I have not seen a similar case in over 3000 patients followed closely during a very low calorie ketogenic diet. Given this experience, I think that it is likely that the current case represents association without causality. Not having this experience, it is unfortunate that Dr. Lessnau chose to conclude causality rather than raising it as a hypothesis.

Stephen D. Phinney, MD, PhD
Professor emeritus, UC Davis
Elk Grove, CA, USA

References

1. Chen TY, Smith W, Rosenstock JL, Lessnau KD. A life-threatening complication of Atkins diet. The Lancet 2006;367:958.

2. Cahill GF. Starvation in man. N Engl J Med 1970; 282:668-675.

3. Phinney SD, Horton ES, Sims EAH, Hanson JS, Danforth E, LaGrange BM. Capacity of moderate exercise in obese subjects after adaptation to a hypocaloric, ketogenic diet. J Clin Invest. 1980;66:1152-1161.

4. Phinney SD, Bistrian BR, Wolfe RR, Blackburn GL. The human metabolic response to chronic ketosis without caloric restriction: physical and biochemical adaptation. Metabolism 1983; 32:757–768.

5. Sharma P, Lim S, James D, Orchard RT, Horne M, Seymour CA. Pancreatitis may occur with a normal amylase concentration in hypertriglyceridaemia
BMJ 1996;313:1265.
 
Jostain kumman syystä tämä tyyppi halusi kommentoida nimettömänä... :)


Dr. Lessnau: I don't believe you are the real Dr. Lessnau. In fact I think you are an imposter, claiming to be Dr. Lessnau. If you are however Dr. Lessnau, you should go back to medical school. Because if you are a real medical doctor you should know that ketoacidosis is something totally different from ketosis and only can occur in diabetics with uncontrollable in-serum glucose swings.

However, if there is ONE diet that has been shown to offer absolutely superior glycemic control, dear doctor, it is a low-carb diet. Glycemic control, as you should know, STABILIZES glucose levels, so ketoacidosis can never occur in such patients. The editors of the Lancet, where you published your "research", should have realized that too.

So, this "dangerous condition" that you discovered has nothing to do with the Atkins diet, or any other low-carb diet for that matter. And even if by some miracle you could prove (any) causation your conclusions are far too premature. Did you document any cofounding intervention factors, doctor? I highly doubt it.

I also wonder, dear doctor, did you also write a simular article in the "Lancet" for the tens of millions of people that died as a result of the low-fat diet fallacy, the calorie theory / portion control lie, or perhaps the millions suffering from the sideeffects of unnecessary statin drugs, or maybe the incredible number of people that is currently suffering from the dietary delusions of the Government and "health experts"? I don't think so, huh?

To base your conclusions, "warnings" and outright scare mongering on the - higly unfortunate - death of ONE person, and then even have the nerve to call it a "scientific study" (a scientific study of one? ridiculous!) worthy of publication in a medical journal is a total travesty and completely unprofessional as well as unscientific. You should do your research by investigation rather than proclamation.

The very fact that a respected and prestigeous publication as the "Lancet" approved your unscientific scribbles for publication shows that even such publications are no longer reliable these days and open to manipulation.

It also proves, I am afraid, that even a (alleged) medical degree does not protect against severe mental and moral degeneration.

Your entire idea and intent was to discredit this diet, nothing more. You failed.

But please, Dr. Lessnau (or the imposter), don't forget to call the Post, the NY Times, CNN, and all those other wonderful "free and unbiased media" outlets regarding this great scientific discovery that you made!

I am sure they will be more than happy to oblige!
 
Todella "fiksulta" vaikuttava tyyppi tuo Lessnau. Jos tässä elettäis vielä 1800-lukua niin arvon konitohtori matkustais varmaan kaupungista toiseen myymässä käärmeöljyä ja tulilientä. Ja suosittelis liikapainoon "hoidoksi" pikkukivien syöntiä.
 
Raapaisin itsekki kommentin aiheeseen liittyen:


When the rate of mobilization of fatty acids from fat tissue is accelerated, as, for example, during a very-low-carbohydrate diet, the liver produces ketone bodies. The liver cannot utilize ketone bodies and thus, they flow from the liver to extra-hepatic tissues (e.g., brain, muscle) for use as a fuel. Simply stated, ketone body metabolism by the brain displaces glucose utilization and thus spares muscle mass (muscle protein). Dietary ketosis is harmless physiological state; however, many health care professionals and even some scientists have confused dietary ketosis with diabetic ketoacidosis (an abnormal condition of increased acidity).

All diabetic patients know that the detection in their urine of the ketone bodies is a danger signal that their diabetes is poorly controlled. In severely uncontrolled diabetes, if the ketone bodies are produced in massive supranormal quantities, they are associated with ketoacidosis. In this life-threatening complication of diabetes mellitus, ketone bodies are produced rapidly, which overwhelm the body’s acid-base buffering system. However, very-low-carbohydrate diet cannot lead to dangerous ketoacidosis in HEALTHY subjects (without alcohol or drug abuse), because ketone bodies have effects on insulin and glucagon secretions that contribute to the control of the rate of their own formation.

Nevertheless, a case report, published in The Lancet, described a 40-year-old female patient who was vomiting as often as six times daily and had difficulty breathing after strictly following the Atkins diet for a month. According to the report, ”Our patient denied alcohol use; her serum osmolar gap was 0, which excludes the presence of unmeasured osmotic agents such as methanol or ethylene glycol; L-lactate concentration was normal; and salicylate was undetectable… Serum [blood] was positive for acetone, and ß-hydroxybutyrate [a major ketone body] was high at 390 µg/mL (normal 0–44 µg/mL), consistent with ketoacidosis."

However, it is my view that the level of ketones in her urine (390 µg/mL) are not alarming. Just to be sure, I contacted Dr. Richard Feinman, a Professor of Biochemistry at SUNY Downstate Medical Center and a well-known researcher in the area of carbohydrate-restriction, to ask his opinion about The Lancet case report. According to Dr. Feinman, ”Clinicians here agree that it was kind of a rash conclusion. The ketones are, in fact, not sufficient to have caused the acidosis and while high for most people on the Atkins diet, they are in the ball-park of people who are in starvation for 10 days (who can live for at least another 20-60 days) and less than half of the ketoacidosis seen in untreated type 1 diabetes. We are actually using the case with students to show how to do the calculations correctly. I think the physicians were just not familiar with the whole problem of ketosis and got carried away. The Atkins diet still has so much baggage in medical circles that they didn't realize you can't attribute things to diet just on what people tell you. In any case, she apparently hadn't retained much food at all for three days and was probably in starvation rather than on any diet. The treatment was actually minimal (mostly re-hydration) and the whole thing was blown way out of proportion. Also, even if the problems were due to the diet, millions of Americans are on some kind of carbohydrate restricted diet and nutritionists have been trying unsuccessfully to find a problem for thirty years. Do you know any drug, or even any weight loss diet, that has this kind of record?' "

In a commentary also published in The Lancet, Drs. Lyn Steffen and Jennifer Nettleton of the University of Minnesota's School of Public Health blasted low-carbohydrate/high-protein diets like there}s no tomorrow. These sadly misinformed ladies supposedly hold some sort of doctoral degrees yet cannot even perform a appropriate PubMed search. They stated, "These [low-carb/high-protein] diets also increase the protein load to the kidneys and alter the acid balance of the body, which result in loss of minerals from bone stores, thus compromising bone integrity."

This statement is misleading, at best. Best available scientific evidence indicates that protein-induced changes in kidney function are a NORMAL adaptative mechanism well within the functional limits of a healthy kidney. However, protein restriction may benefit patients with chronic kidney disease. Also, there is no scientific evidence supporting the notion that low-carbohydrate/high-protein diet leads to loss of minerals from bone stores. Quite to the contrary. Many experimental and clinical studies indicate that low-protein diet negatively affects bone health. Furthermore, it has been demonstrated that proteins enhance IGF-1, a growth factor that exerts positive activity on bone formation. Consequently, high-protein intake is, if anything, protective against loss of bone minerals.

Don’t get me wrong. I}m not advocate for Atkins diet. I feel a diet containing moderate amounts of low-glycemic carbohydrates is generally the healthiest way to achieve and maintain ideal body weight. However, I realize one diet approach doesn’t fit all. Identifying specific needs, goals and the activity level of each individual is the key for success. Thus, I advocate for applying science to ALL diets, including Atkins diet. Certainly, diet-related public warnings should be based on thorough analysis of the scientific literature, not unsubstantiated fears and misrepresentations.

Anssi Manninen, M.H.S.(sportsmed)
Senior Science Editor
Advanced Research Press, Inc.
 
Anssi Manninen sanoi:
Jostain kumman syystä tämä tyyppi halusi kommentoida nimettömänä... :)


Loistava :)
 
March 23, 2006
Michael R. Eades, M.D.

Low-carb diet takes one below the belt

There's a hold up in the Bronx, Brooklyn's broken out in fights. There's a traffic jam in Harlem that's backed up to Jackson Heights. There's a scout troop short a child, Kruschev's due at Idlewild! Car 54 where are you?
Anyone who watched TV in the early sixties no doubt remembers the hilarious show Car 54 Where Are You? starring Fred Gwynne and Joe E. Ross as New York uniformed police officers Francis Muldoon and Gunther Toody. Muldoon and Toody were well meaning but hopelessly inept, always screwing things up in outrageous fashion, causing no end of grief and embarrassment to their precinct commander Captain Block, who had to sort out the idiocy and try to make things right.

Now comes the medical equivalent of Muldoon and Toody in the persons of in-training physicians Tsuh-Yin Chen, M.D. and William T. Smith, M.D. The role of precinct commander in this production is played by one Klaus-Dieter Lessnau, M.D., who, unlike Captain Block, only adds to the problem with another layer of ignorance and stupidity. And whereas Car 54 Where Are You? left its viewers with their sides hurting from laughter, the repercussions of our medical drama will be felt painfully in the world of nutrition for years to come. A well-respected medical journal will have a blot on its record in much the same way CBS did after rushing to air the discredited George Bush Air National Guard story before it was authenticated, and, lastly, the whole episode will serve as a cautionary tale to anyone considering going to the emergency room of a teaching hospital.

Our drama unfolds not on the TV screen but in the emergency room of Lenox Hill Hospital in New York. The script for this show is contained in an article in the current issue of The Lancet entitled "A life threatening complication of Atkins diet." Let's tune in.

First, a brief synopsis of what happened--a treatment as they say in Hollywood--then we'll review the case in more detail to see what really happened.

An obese woman who had been on the Atkins diet for the previous month came to the emergency room complaining of shortness of breath. The resident physicians who saw her found evidence of elevated ketone bodies in her blood, diagnosed her with ketoacidosis, admitted her to the intensive car unit, gave her IV fluids, tested and x-rayed everything, and discharged her four days later after a complete recovery. The resident physicians along with their attending physicians wrote this case up as an example of what could happen to someone following a low-carb diet and got it published in a prestigious British medical journal, accompanied with an editorial issuing a further warning as to the risks of low-carb dieting. The press was all over the story and one of the attending physicians issued statements to anyone who called.

Let's look a little deeper. This is the patient's history:

In February, 2004, we saw a 40-year-old obese white woman who complained of dyspnoea (shortness of breath). 5 days earlier, her appetite had decreased, and she had felt nauseous and had since vomited four to six times daily. She became increasingly short of breath, and presented to us as an emergency.
She had strictly followed the low-carbohydrate high-protein Atkins diet, eating meat, cheese, and salads for the previous month.
This lady was truly on the Atkins Diet:

She took vitamins recommended by the diet: chromium picolinate, Atkins Basic3 (multivitamins; Atkins Nutritionals, Inc, USA), Atkins Essential Oils (omega fatty acids), Atkins Dieters' Advantage (electrolytes and extracts), and Atkins Accel (a "thermogenic" formula). As instructed by the original Atkins diet book,1 she monitored her urine twice daily, with dipsticks strongly positive for ketones. She reported a weight loss of about 9 kg over this 1-month period.
Here is her presentation and the doctors' physical findings along with my commentary:

On presentation to the emergency department, our patient was in moderate distress, with a respiratory rate of 20-30 breaths per min.
'Moderate distress' breathing at a rate of 20-30 breaths per minute? I don't think so. A normal respiratory rate is between 12-20 breaths per minute, but obese people tend to breath a bit faster since they have a lot going on metabolically and need a little more oxygen. I wouldn't say that an obese person breathing 20-30 times per minute was in distress, especially in view of the rest of the physical exam, which we'll see in a moment. The resident physicians are trying to make a case for severe metabolic acidosis with this patient. If the patient truly was in severe metabolic acidosis (as type I diabetics can be if they go into ketoacidosis) she would have been demonstrating a type of breathing called Kussmaul breathing, which is characterized by rapid, deep, labored, sighing breaths familiar to anyone who has ever seen a bad case of ketoacidosis. We're this patient exhibiting Kussmaul breathing, I'm sure it would have been identified as such in the published case report.

On examination, her bowel sounds were hyperactive and she had mild epigastric tenderness. Otherwise, clinical examination was unremarkable with normal vital signs.
Okay, when the resident physicians listed to this patient's abdomen they heard more active, louder bowel sounds than normal and when they pushed on her abdomen she told them it was mildly tender. And her clinical examination was 'unremarkable' and her vital signs (blood pressure, heart rate, etc.) were normal. It doesn't sound like someone in distress to me. When patients are in distress, their heart rates and/or blood pressure readings are usually elevated.

Her body-mass index was 41.6 kg/m2.
Interestingly, the case report doesn't tell us this patient's height or weight, only her body mass index (BMI). I assumed a height of 5' 5", which, when run through the BMI calculator, gives a weight of 250 pounds.

So, let's see what we've got so far. An obese, 40 year old lady who has been nauseated and vomiting (4-6 times per day) for the past five days shows up in the emergency room. She is breathing a little faster than normal, but, given her weight, probably not by much. She doesn't appear to be in any distress and all her vital signs are normal. Her abdomen is a little tender (whose wouldn't be after vomiting for five days?) and her bowel sounds are hyperactive (think of the last time you got some kind of abdominal flu; I would be willing to bet that you could hear your own bowels gurgling without the aid of a stethoscope). Every doctor who has taken care of patients for any length of time has seen this same picture countless times. It's a diagnosis that can be practically made from across the room.

The patient has gastroenteritis, an infection (probably viral) of the gastrointestinal tract. She may be a little dehydrated if she hasn't been able to keep any fluids down, but she has probably been able to hold some fluids on her stomach or her blood pressure would be low and her heart rate rapid from the dehydration. If you're the physician taking care of this patient you might want to run a couple of other tests just to make sure, which you do and find out that her blood sugar is normal (so you know she isn't a diabetic in ketoacidosis) and her amylase is okay (so she doesn't have acute pancreatitis) and her liver enzymes are normal (so she probably isn't afflicted with hepatitis) and her white blood cell count is elevated, which goes along with an infection. You then might drip a liter of fluid into her intravenously to rehydrate her and make her feel better, give her a shot to reduce the nausea and vomiting or maybe a prescription for a suppository for the same thing, tell her to drink only clear fluids, and come back if she doesn't get any better. In virtually all cases the patient will get well.

Then as you're discussing all this with the patient, you find out that OH MY GOD, SHE'S BEEN ON THE ATKINS DIET! Now, if you're an experienced physician, you tell her to not worry about her diet for a while until she gets over her nausea and vomiting, but that once she's recovered she can return to her low-carbohydrate weight-loss efforts..

If you're Muldoon and Toody, however, you panic. Low-carb diets cause ketosis, you think. Maybe she's in ketoacidosis, which can be fatal. Since you're an idiot, you ignore her normal blood sugar level, which should tell you that she's making plenty of her own insulin. As the level of ketone bodies rises in the blood, it stimulates the release of insulin from the pancreas. The spurt of insulin then shuts down the process that makes ketones. Ketones only rise to dangerous levels in people who have type I diabetes and can't make their own insulin. If the system didn't work this way, people who starved would die from ketoacidosis relatively quickly, but they don't; they live for weeks without food before they succumb to protein malnutrition, not ketoacidosis. The idea that this patient, who had a normal (or probably an elevated) insulin level was in dangerous ketoacidosis is absurd, but Muldoon and Toody don't realize this because the patient HAS BEEN ON THE ATKINS DIET, FOR GOD'S SAKE.

In their frenzy of misdiagnosis, the panic-stricken Muldoon and Toody check the patient's blood levels of beta-hydroxybutyrate, a specific ketone body, and find it to be high. They, of course, don't bother to realize that, the Atkins diet notwithstanding, elevated levels of ketones would be expected since the patient hadn't been able to hold anything on her stomach for five days, and when people don't consume food they break down body fat for energy and produce ketones in the process. Nope, that would be way too rational. These doctors-in-training have the diagnosis of ketoadidocis burned into their brains thanks to the red herring of the Atkins diet, and they're looking for anything to confirm it. They check a bunch of other labs that don't really show anything all that earth shattering (and, in fact, don't even really compute--but that's a technical issue beyond the scope of this post) and admit the patient to the intensive care unit. Car 54 Where Are You?

In a typical teaching setting, the next morning the resident physicians would present their patient who is now resting comfortably in the intensive care unit at about $5,000 per day, and whom, in their own minds at least, they had just snatched from the jaws of impending death from ketoacidosis, to their attending physician. In a typical teaching hospital, the attending physician, who would have had a number of years of patient experience, would gently (or maybe not so gently) tell the residents that they had overreacted a little and would walk them back through the situation with a Socratic-type dialogue that would probably go something like this:

'You checked this patient's blood sugar and it was normal, right? Okay, now, what does that blood sugar tell you about the condition of the patient's pancreas? Uh huh, that's right, it's making plenty of insulin. Okay, now, if the patient is making plenty of insulin, is it really possible that she could be in life-threatening ketoacidosis? Okay, guys, let's review how ketones are made...' You get the picture. I know how these little dialogues go because I was a resident at one time and I was on the other end of a number of them. In fact, I had an attending physician in surgery, famous for his sarcasm, who, had I done something like these two had done here, would have led me through the whole Socratic-dialogue process so that I could see every misstep I made along the way, then would have shaken his head and said, "Well, Doc, which is it? Are you stupid or do you just not care?"

But that wasn't how this one must have gone there at the Lenox Hill Hospital. Instead of Captain Block gently reading Muldoon and Toody the riot act, our leader, Dr. Klaus-Dieter Lessnau, must have fallen into the OH MY GOD SHE'S BEEN ON THE ATKINS DIET trap. Instead of showing his underlings the folly of their ways, he jumped right in there with them, wallowed in their stupidity, kept this poor patient in the intensive care unit for four days, and may have even said, 'let's write a paper on it.' After the paper was published and made the news, our attending was ever so eager to bask in his 15 minutes of fame and talk to any reporter that called and further memorialized his own boneheadedness. See here, here, and here. Had members of the press possessed even a smidgen of medical knowledge or had they checked with anyone other than Dr. Lessnau himself, the many pieces appearing about this fiasco might have been entitled something along the lines of:

Buffoons misdiagnose mild gastroenteritis, costs patient thousands.
Unfortunately, however, the press, afflicted with its own pro-low-fat bias, has been more than happy to take this opportunity to lambaste low-carb diets. Car 54 Where Are You?

In a perfect world, after this idiocy had consumed both the residents and their attending physician, and was then written up and sent out to journals for publication, someone, somewhere, with good sense, doing peer review would see it, realize it for what it was, and reject it. I have no way of knowing, but I suspect from the dates involved that that is exactly what happened. These events took place over two years ago in February of 2004, and were, I'm sure, written up shortly thereafter, and shipped off to some medical journal. I seriously doubt that The Lancet was the first choice. I would imagine that these authors received a number of rejections, but kept sending the paper out. It finally fell on fertile soil with The Lancet where not only did the editors fall for this ignorance hook, line, and sinker, they saw fit to publish a supporting editorial written by a dietitian turned PhD at the University of Minnesota. Car 54 Where Are You?

The editorial goes through the following argument. Although a number of studies have shown the low-carbohydrate to be superior to the low-fat diet in oh so many ways, we've got to be concerned about dieter safety. The report by Muldoon and Toody shows what can happen to a dieter on a low-carbohydrate diet. This patient could have died. The Atkins diet (and by extension all low-carbohydrate diets) are unbalanced. If you don't believe it, compare the Atkins diet to the 2005 US Dietary Guidelines (and we all know how perfect those are). We'll even provide the table. There, you see:

Clearly, the Atkins diet is not nutritionally balanced.
And they finish off with:

Special care needs to be taken when formulating the best prescription for weight loss, because people choosing to lose weight range from being marginally to significantly overweight, and might have a wide range of disease risk factors with varying levels of severity. As researchers and clinicians, our most important criterion should be indisputable safety, and low-carbohydrate diets currently fall short of this benchmark.
So, with this paper and accompanying editorial all the low-fat zealots have gotten what they've been waiting for. For years when MD and I and Robert Atkins and Ron Rosedale and Robert Crayhon and Jonny Bowden and a host of others have extolled the virtues of the low-carbohydrate diet, all the naysayers said: Where are the studies? All your clinical experience is simply anecdotal; we want to see the science. Show us the studies.

Well, over the last three or four years these pinheads have been deluged with studies showing the superiority of the low-carb diet over the low-fat diet for not just weight-loss, but for lipid lowering, blood sugar control, and blood pressure reduction as well. In any head to head challenge, the low-fat diet hasn't been able to lay a glove on the low-carb diet.

Now that the low-fatters have been bloodied with all these studies they have been demanding for years, they haven't given up, they've only changed their strategy. Since they can't successfully argue on the merits, they're resorting to scare tactics. Sure, they'll say, you'll lose weight alright, solve your lipid problems, and all the rest, but look at that poor lady who almost died. It was written up. That could happen to you, you know.

And to think that The Lancet has been a party to this travesty is almost beyond belief until it is recalled that it was The Lancet that published the Dean Ornish I've-proved-that-my-diet-has-reversed-heart-disease paper back in 1990. Like the current paper, the 1990 Ornish paper, in my opinion, was not worthy of publication without some serious rewriting. But, it is obvious that the powers that be at The Lancet have a bias in favor of low-fat dieting. And, based on the publication of these two papers, not just a mild bias, but a totally slanted perspective. In fact, I think that the name of the journal should be changed the The Slantcet.

Car 54 Where Are You?
 
Hienoa kun Anssi jaksat kirjoitella (ja pasteillakin) näitä ihan kovia tutkimustuloksia ja tieteellistä analysointia tänne, mukavaa lueskeltavaa kaiken mutuilun seassa. Thumbs up!
 

Latest posts

Suositut

Back
Ylös Bottom