College Media Network - Search the largest news resource for college students by college students Jobs and internships for students -

The Chronicle > Editorial/Op-Ed

Diets don’t work and prove to be unhealthy

By Katherine Yaremko

Columnist

|

Published: Sunday, November 15, 2009

Updated: Sunday, November 15, 2009

America’s obsession with fad diets and fast nutritional fixes has contributed to our adoption of, and at times, blind adherence to ridiculous marketing schemes.

Advertisements for weight loss programs bombard us with propaganda about the slimming effects of following their low-fat, low-carb or high protein diets. While some of these diets may result in some weight loss initially, most are ineffective at curbing excessive weight for extended periods of time. In addition, they raise serious questions about the health effects of their products. Perhaps what is most disturbing about these diets is that they mainly advocate weight loss in order to reel in customers while hardly mentioning anything about their food’s overall health and nutritional value. Even those maintaining an average weight can still suffer from poor eating habits and nutritional deficiencies.

One of the most recent developments in the food marketing world is Dr. Siegal’s Cookie Diet. Customers are provided with six cookies to eat per day, at 90 calories each, and a multivitamin packet “to take care of any deficiencies that might arise,” according to Dr. Siegal, as quoted in The New York Times. In addition to the cookies, which are a blend of fiber, protein and other ingredients, followers are supposed to eat one actual meal a day. Accounting for this single meal, the diet leaves individuals with a total intake of approximately 800 to 1,000 calories every day. For comparison, that’s the average caloric intake of a refugee in Darfur, Sudan.

While arguably the most ridiculous and dangerous diet currently on the market, the real danger lies in its success, with the company garnering a profit of $12 million last year. Other popular diet options may not be as extreme, but that is no indication that they are not harmless. I am not an expert in regard to diets, although the low-carb diet, with the Atkins Diet being an example, is one whose nutritional value I am skeptical of. Followers increase their intake of protein and fat, a lot of which comes from animal sources. Now, there is nothing wrong with receiving protein and fat from meat but a diet which advocates meat as a main source of fat probably won’t result in long-term health. Unsaturated fat, derived mainly from plant sources, is generally considered to be much healthier than its animal-derived alternative, saturated fat.

Concerns with losing weight as quickly as possible have also contributed to certain dietary misconceptions, such as the idea that carbohydrates lead to weight gain. This seems to be a contributor to the large success of Atkins and similar diets. However, only large amounts of refined grains should cause individuals to gain weight. Unrefined whole grains are metabolized at a slower rate, and if higher in soluble fiber, help to keep one feeling full. A higher soluble fiber intake has also been associated with lower cholesterol levels and a lessened risk of cardiovascular disease, according to the American Heart Association, if one also eats less saturated fat.

It may be common sense that low-calorie diets do not lead to long-term health. Although, this won’t prevent those looking to make a profit from exploiting the fears that many Americans have about losing and keeping off weight. For the most part, diets fail after they are completed since the dieter usually returns to previous unhealthy eating habits. Therefore, the best way to eat well, maintain a healthy weight and avoid being sucked into expensive diet programs, is to put in the extra time and effort to construct healthy meals yourself or to buy foods which have not been heavily processed. While not always convenient in today’s fast-paced world, it will definitely benefit you in the long term and minimize the influence of those who would prefer to siphon off your wallet than actually promote beneficial advice about healthy eating.

Recommended: Articles that may interest you

7 comments

Todd29
Wed Dec 23 2009 13:32
“Recently, I lost 85 pounds and I don’t know how to describe how great I feel! I am loving the new me along with everyone and everything around me! All of my dreams are now possible! Thank You!” This is a comment which I received last week. By following the guidelines in the book Lose Weight Using Four Easy Steps from www.bbotw.com anyone will achieve spectacular weight loss results.
Your name
Sun Dec 13 2009 17:34
The best xmas present for anyone who is serious about getting control of their weight is the book Lose Weight Using Four Easy Steps from www.bbotw.com If nothing else, get the book for yourself, leave it laying on your coffee table, and borrow it to a friend. They will be forever grateful to you!
Anthony
Thu Nov 19 2009 21:29
"Now, there is nothing wrong with receiving protein and fat from meat but a diet which advocates meat as a main source of fat probably won’t result in long-term health. Unsaturated fat, derived mainly from plant sources, is generally considered to be much healthier than its animal-derived alternative, saturated fat."

Are you a vegan or a vegetarian because this comment and your views against protein seem to indicate a bias. Protein is the most important nutrient in building and sustaining muscle mass and the main source is meat. You simply can't find that kind of protein in vegetables. Plus you forgot to mention that the lean meats like salmon, tuna, and grilled chicken is high and protein and low in saturated fats. Plus some saturated fat is good for you, its transfat that is worthless and poison to the human body. You also didn't mention the fact there are two kinds of carbs; complex (the good ones found and veggies and fruits) and simple ones that are blasted with refined sugar. You also forgot to mention that you also need dietary fat in your system. I'm sorry while I agree that calorie restrictive diets are crap, you show that you fail to grasp basic nutrition or you have some kind of agenda. In reality you need a combination of vegetables, fruit and protein in a successful diet.

Salmon >> cookies
Mon Nov 16 2009 19:37
Dr. Seigal,

No matter what transpires in these comments, can you honestly say that if a patient were to adopt a well-balanced, 1500-2000 calorie diet of low-fat protein sources (eggs, fish, lean meats), whole-grains, fruits, and vegetables, you would tell them to toss this diet out and take on your cookie diet? I find it very difficult to believe that anyone who has even watched an episode of Grey's Anatomy would opt for the latter in place of the former. The sad truth is that the checks you cash in seem to have more of an influence over your concerns than the welfare of your patients. Sure, perhaps this diet will not immediately harm someone who stays on it for "the time being", but what studies do you have to show some, if any, long-term benefits for maintaining the cookie diet? And if it is not meant to have long-term beneficial effects, then why bother in the first place? Doesn't that just make it a quick-fix for people who are too overwhelmed and vulnerable (your ideal target crowd) to try and combat half-lifetimes of unhealthy eating habits? A red flag here is the fact that you probably have an internet flagging system that shows any and all articles that might mention your name, otherwise how on earth did you come across this article? If that is the case, then why so ready to defend, Dr? Do you see government-employed health officials patrolling the internet to defend and advocate on behalf of low-fat meats and vegetables? No. The reason is that healthy eating through a well-balanced, organic, NOT PROCESSED diet is commonsensical. Your diet appears to be little more than luna bars without the added chocolate coating.

Besides all of this, you fail to address ms. yaremko's points about the vitamin supplements your provide your customers with. Studies have shown that vitamin supplements with a well-balanced diet (like the one mentioned above many times) might have little to no effect on the overall health of a person, providing them with essentially very expensive urine as most of the excess nutrients will be flushed out. I'd be curious to see whether your cookie diet, without the vitamin supplements, could stand its own in such a way.

A further point is that the mention of obesity in this context is simply nonsensical. We're not talking about obese patients, i.e. people who have chronic genetic conditions or otherwise chronic conditions, classified as diseases, and who need a medically-sound CURE for their conditions. We both know the people who pay for your car are those who are medium-heavy and who would benefit not from a weight loss program, but a lifestyle change. And while I have no statistics to throw in here to support that (because, well, do you need statistics to support common sense?) I have to say that with everything that has been "vetted and used by over 500,000 people" in the past, your "statistic" is nothing more than a fact about human nature; people are desperate to lose weight and if they do so, they will vet and use it.

I have to say, reading your response to ms. yaremko's column was akin to reading the Davinci code; I am consistently told that the person communicating with me is an "expert" or "genius" and yet there does not seem to be much evidence to support it. If you have to spend your days flagging down twenty-something OP-ED journalists instead of, oh, I don't know, providing us with some evidence that your system is more than a glorified infomercial that somehow made it off of the scifi channel's late night television, then I really have to question how great of a diet this is, and how thorough your research has been.

Jack
Mon Nov 16 2009 15:45
I just want to say that I agree that diets do not work...unless you plan on sticking to it for the rest of your life and workout regularly. Then, you might have a shot. For me, I just eat as healthy as I can, I supplement my diet with protein powder from bulkfoodsdirect.com and a good multivitamin from vitacost and workout daily. This has helped me to shed a few pounds and maintain a healthy weight.
Your name
Mon Nov 16 2009 09:19
Katherine, you have dismissed as "arguably the most ridiculous diet on the market" what is actually a sensible, medically sound approach to weight loss that has been fully vetted and used by well over 500,000 people. While I tend to cut student journalists significant slack, I'm afraid that your column cries out for criticism due to its myriad inaccuracies:

1. "One of the most recent developments in the food marketing world..."

Dr. Siegal's Cookie Diet is not new. It's actually nearly 35 years old and has been used by hundreds of physicians to help more than a half million people control their hunger and stick to their diet.

2. You referred to Dr. Siegal's Cookie Diet as extreme when, in fact, it is based on well-accepted medical concepts. As is clearly stated on CookieDiet.com, in Dr. Siegal's Cookie Diet Book, and on the product packaging, the diet that I advocate for the typical dieter is 1,000 to 1,200 calories. Not only is that not a VLCD ("very low calorie diet") as defined by the U.S. government, it skirts the upper limit of what is defined as an LCD ("low caloried diet"). A VLCD is fewer than 800 calories; an LCD is 800 to 1,200 calories.

3. "I am not an expert in regard to diets..."

You admit that you aren't an expert and then you proceed to offer what sure sounds like an "expert opinion" on a sophisticated medical topic, and to disparage (without providing even one example or source to support your views) the medical opinions of true experts. I'm a physician who has specialized in the treatment of obesity for more than fifty years. I've treated hundreds of thousdands of patients on a low calorie diet without seeing even one significant adverse event.

Katherine, your views on medicine and nutrition are based not on your real world experience with actual patients but rather on what you have read or heard others say. But don't feel too bad for you're not alone. The opinions of most of the so-called experts (nutritionists, dieticians, and even some doctors) who are invariably invited to appear with me on TV shows and in newspaper articles in order to refute my views usually got their information from the same sources as you.

Sanford Siegal, D.O., M.D.
CookieDiet.com
Miami, FL

Geekay
Sun Nov 15 2009 22:43
A few points:

- Atkins advocates a whole foods approach that significantly reduces sugars and starches, which have relatively little to bring to the diet besides calories; how can this be suspect?

- If hunger were satisfied simply by "feeling full", and not a need for fuel to drive metabolism, we could just stuff ourselves all day with no-calorie bulk and never feel hungry.

- Carbohydrate restriction has been shown to reduce weight reliably. People regain when the start eating them again.

- A diet which advocates meat as a main source of food might also be healthful in the long term; we don't know, It has not been tested. The national recommendation to eat a low-fat diet has been a thirty-year failure that has seen the population get ever heavier.







log out