Salvatore’s publication doesn’t really shed any new light on low carb dieting (he’s basically following the Atkin’s diet), but instead documents one person’s day-to-day experience with a low carb diet, and provides handy tips for living the low carb lifestyle (in this way, Salvatore’s publication adds a nice dose of practicality missing in typical low carb diet publications).

In fact, “The One Low Carb Diet That Always Works”, isn’t really the ideal publication for those of you who aren’t yet familiar with the basics of low-carb dieting.

In fact, so little information is provided about the actual mechanics of low-carb dieting, and why it is a viable weight loss strategy that the novice low-carb dieter may have difficulty understanding exactly what it is he/she should or should not do. Of course, you will pick up the basics over the course of the publication, but it would be nice to see the “low carb fundamentals” outlined concisely in a single chapter early on.

That notwithstanding, “The One Low Carb Diet That Always Works” does offer one main benefit over a longer, more complex and in-depth publications like the Atkins diet …

It’s brief, simple, and unpretentious, and you can get through the bulk of the publication in an hour!

There’s plenty of good info here too, some of it not found in the Atkins diet, like…

• How to count carbs (includes a nice discussion on glycerine) on non-digestible alcohol sugars (like malitol, xylitol, sorbitol, and so on)
• The best online resources for low carb diet items — like low carb pancakes, pizzas, muffins, breads, and all the goodies that make living the low carb lifestyle that much easier
• A thorough discussion on the health benefits of nuts and monounsaturated fats
• A holiday survival guide for the low carb dieter
• A nice discussion on the benefits of CLA (conjugated linoleic acid)
• A list of the top 10 low carb “do’s”
• A 2-week induction plan and plenty of low carb recipes

Aesthetically, “The One Low Carb Diet That Always Works” is an attractively-formatted 83 page PDF ebook that’s a breeze to get through quickly. It also comes with several bonus files, and there’s a low carb forum, too.

Although you’d get much more from reading the Atkins diet from cover to cover (all 300+ pages) those of you who are time-pressed or already familiar with the mechanics of low-carb dieting may well appreciate this stripped down and personal approach to low carb dieting.

You can check out The One Low Carb Diet That Always Works here!

The main thrust of the diet involved eating large amounts of “fat-burning” grapefruit in order to rev up one’s metabolism. Dieters could eat protein each day—mostly boiled eggs—an occasional piece of dry toast, and as much black coffee as one’s heart desired.

Some nutrition experts, however, scoffed at the diet, saying that the fat-burning qualities of grapefruit were more myth than reality. They maintained that any weight loss on the Grapefruit Diet was the result of restricted calorie intake, rather than the supposed medicinal qualities of grapefruit.

Makes sense to me. With caloric intake limited to 800 calories, you could lose weight eating Mars bars.

However, a recent study indicates that adding grapefruit and grapefruit juice to your diet can enhance weight loss.

The research, conducted by the Nutrition and Medical Research Centre at Scripps Clinic in San Diego, California, demonstrates that you can lose weight with the aid of grapefruit—without changing the rest of your diet. Apparently, even the leader of the study was surprised at the results.

In the study, 100 people suffering from obesity were sectioned off into three groups.

Group one ate half a grapefruit before each meal, while group two drank grapefruit juice prior to meals. The third group, the control group, consumed neither grapefruit nor grapefruit juice. Twelve weeks later, individuals who ate grapefruit with each meal lost an average of 3.6 pounds, while those who drank grapefruit juice shed 3.3 pounds. The control group lost an average of only a half pound.

As an added bonus, those who consumed grapefruit or grapefruit juice demonstrated lower levels of insulin, a hormone responsible for the regulation of blood sugar levels. As a result, they were at lower risk for diabetes and stroke.

The theory behind a grapefruit-oriented diet is that the fruit contains plant compounds that cut insulin levels, enabling weight loss to occur. This makes sense, since high insulin levels can make you feel hungry, causing you to increase the portions you eat. However, I have yet to see any documented clinical evidence that proves this theory. At this point, it is merely speculation.

In light of this , some nutritional experts recommend exercising caution in interpreting the results of the study. They say that they believe that grapefruit is not characterized by an special qualities that would promote weight loss (actually, grapefruit contains naringin, a flavanoid which has been shown to exhibit cholesterol lowering effects).

They add that the participants in the study might have been concentrating on their food intake and their exercise routine, making them more likely to lose weight than the average person.

Any way you want to “slice it” consuming more grapefruit will not harm your health and can help improve the overall quality of your diet. Since many nutrition guidelines recommend eating five portions of fruit and vegetables each day, it is perfectly reasonable to make grapefruit part of your daily diet.

Still, the Grapefruit Diet of the ‘80s appears to have lost popularity over the years. The calorie requirements are too restrictive, and the diet lacks the balance necessary to make it a viable long term eating plan.

Also, the diet regimen itself can be tiring. The best way to lose weight is to consume a variety of foods—not to limit yourself to large portions of one individual food.

So what’s the deal with the glycemic index? Ah, good question…

Foods with high GI ratings break down and release their stored energy quickly. This causes a surge of insulin (insulin is the hormone in charge of shuttling gluose to the muscle cells). If you’re not involved in a vigorous activity, it’s likely that released energy will be stored as fat (if you’ve lived a lifetime of consuming high glycemic foods, you may be on the cusp of Adult Type II diabetes, and experiencing symptoms like mood swings, intense cravings for sweets, and wildly vacillating energy levels).

In contrast, foods with low G.I. scores break down and release their energy more slowly, leaving you feeling full for a longer period of time. These foods do not result in the dramatic releases of insulin and wildly vacillating energy levels discussed earlier. Low GI foods form the core of the diet.

Examples of high G.I. foods include those made from white flour, where essential nutrients have been eliminated. Low G.I. foods include fruits, vegetables, nuts, legumes, whole grains, lean meat and fish and low-fat dairy products -foods that are filled with nutrients and good for your health.

Backers of the G.I. regimen say 95 percent of diets fail because the dieters feel hungry or deprived. These diets can also be too complicated, requiring people to count calories, grams, blocks, or points in order to lose weight. The diets can also leave people listless and unhealthy, prompting them to eat more.

The G.I. diet operates according to a traffic light system. Red light foods are those you want to avoid in order to lose weight; yellow light foods are those you can eat occasionally; and green light foods are the foods that are preferred for your diet.

The advantages of the G.I. diet are many. First of all, it will not leave you feeling hungry or deprived. You can eat your fill of foods – provided they’re in the right category. High-nutrient foods are plentiful on the diet, meaning that the diet can be good for your heart as well as for your waistline. The diet’s promoters say it can reduce your risk for heart disease, stroke, type 2 diabetes, colon and prostate cancer.

The diet is also simple – if you can follow a traffic light, the saying goes, you can follow the G.I. diet. Its supporters say it’s also the type of diet you can easily maintain for a lifetime.

Some people might think the G.I. diet is similar to the Atkins diet-but the differences are significant. The Atkins diet emphases high protein and animal fat and low carbohydrates. The theory behind the Atkins diet is that if the body is deprived of carbohydrates it will be forced to break down fat as an energy source instead.

In contrast, the G.I. diet encourages carbohydrates such as fruits, vegetables, whole grains, beans, and low fat dairy, while eliminating saturated fat.

However, the G.I. diet does have its limitations. People who have lived their lives eating foods labeled as “red light” by the G.I. system may have difficulty adjusting.

All in all, the G.I. diet is a pretty sound program, and worthwhile experimenting with.

With that said, let me get to fundamentals of the Body Rx diet plan…

1) No calorie counting. Sounds odd, doesn’t it? After all, calorie counting is something you expect to do on any diet. But calorie counting is one of the real drawbacks on any diet-it’s tedious, boring, and downright impractical.

According to Connelly, caloric intake actually has very little to do with weight loss or weight gain. The type of foods you eat, and the metabolic responses they stimulate within the body are the contributing factors (he calls this “nutrient partitioning”).

Connelly’s absolutely right, of course—eating well, eating plenty, and eating often is a surefire way to prime the metabolic furnace. Conversely, restricting calories only serves to slow the metabolic rate as well as threaten lean body mass.

Calorie counting becomes important when your diet is lacking in quality. When a large percentage of your daily calories come from “less than optimal” sources, extra calories WILL be deposited as fat. On Connelly’s Body Rx diet however, it almost impossible to over-consume calories (the bulk of your food intake will come from lean protein, and low G.I., high fiber carbs).

But if you stop in to Burger King to order a “double whopper with cheese” you may be interested to know you are about to consume 1100 + calories!

2) Implement a weight training program: In Body Rx Connelly advises: stay off the treadmill. Again, research bears him out-aerobic activity is a very inefficient method of burning extra calories. Additionally, aerobic activity often sacrifices as much lean tissue as fat, so your metabolic rate drops as you lose a combination of both fat and muscle. Weight training, of course, builds lean muscle, which increases both caloric requirements and the metabolism.

3) Increase protein consumption: In my article on this site, “Much Ado About Protein” I discuss how recent research correlates increased protein intake with weight loss and fat burning. Increased protein intake is a huge part of Body Rx. In fact, lean protein (chicken, turkey, lean beef, whey protein, etc.,etc.,) should comprise a major part of each meal.

And don’t worry; new evidence indicates that increasing protein consumption has no adverse effects on kidney function (International Journal of Obesity and Related Metabolic Disorders, 23(11):1170-7., 1999)

4)  Eat well, eat often: Small, balanced meals every 2-3 hours keep blood sugar levels balanced, cravings eliminated, and energy levels on an even keel. 6-7 small meals is a very important part of any successful weight loss plan, and the foundation of Body Rx.

5) Avoid fructose (specifically the high fructose corn syrup used in so many processed foods): According to Connelly, fructose is a metabolic poison, and a “negative partitioning agent”. Again, Connelly is correct—recent research indicates that fructose consumption is indeed a bad idea.

In fact, Arizona State University research headed by Dr. Mike Pagliassotti indicates it is fructose that is the main ingredient behind the problem of insulin resistance. Over-consumption of fructose often leads to obesity and Syndrome X. Symptoms of such include hypertension, diabetes, and heart disease. Fructose use is widespread in the food processing industry—you’ll find 8-10 teaspoons in a can of pop, and plenty even in processed white bread.

Only one problem… why doesn’t a guy who is so dead set against fructose find a suitable sweetening alternative for his own supplement line? Must of this supplements do contain plenty of fructose.

6) Increase fiber content: A dieting no-brainer, fiber increases satiety, lowers blood sugar levels, and may even contribute to colon health and lower cholesterol levels. I’ve written more about fiber here!

Bottom line on Body Rx?

What I like best about Body Rx is its downright simplicity. In my opinion most diets are inherently impractical and complicated, and a far bigger contributor to dieting failure then usually acknowledged. In Body Rx, foods are divided into 3 categories…

1) Red: Foods to be avoided (sweets, and fatty foods in general)

2) Yellow: Foods to be eaten ONLY in moderation (moderate to high rated GI (glycemic index) carbs for the most part).

3) Green: Foods you can eat to your heart’s content (low GI carbs and veggies, lean protein and so on).

So eating is simple on this diet; avoid “red” category foods, eat small, infrequent servings of the “yellow” foods, and “pig out” on the green foods.

Forget all about calories. Wonderful!

This diet is very easy to follow, and it will work. All in all, well worth trying. You can find Body Rx at Amazon.com!

Despite the general consensus from qualified professionals, I am still seized by a very powerful urge to tear my hair out every time I pick up “Eat Right for Your Blood Type!” This diet is a perfect example of how the ridiculous, when presented in print, somehow becomes acceptable and plausible.

This diet is also a good one to use when illustrating the confusion between cause and effect; for some people of certain blood types, the “Eat Right for Your Blood Type!” diet will work. But it’s not because of some unique tie-in between your blood type and your diet. It’s simply because the diet in question is a sensible one; moderate in calories and low in refined grains and starchy carbohydrates.

The crux of “Eat Right for Your Blood Type!” is quite simple: D’Adamo postulates that your blood type evolved a certain way, and it is the determining factor in what you should be eating. Each of the 4 diet plans specific to each blood type (O,A,B, and AB), are carefully formulated to avoid foods containing the “protein lectins” incompatible with it. According to D’Adamo…

“… when you eat a food containing protein lectins that are incompatible with your blood type antigen, the lectins target an organ or bodily system (kidneys, liver, brain, stomach, etc.,), and begin to agglutinate blood cells in that area”.

Michael Klaper, M.D., had this to say about that statement…

“For me what really pushes the “blood type” theory beyond the limits of believability is D’Adamo’s postulation that lectin proteins on some foods cause blood agglutination in people of certain blood types who are “not genetically/evolutionarily suited” to eat those foods. Agglutination is a very serious, and potentially life-threatening, phenomenon, whereby the red cells in the bloodstream stick together, forming irreversible clumps.”

Unfortunately, D’Adamo offers no proof or documentation of any sort to quantify his statements. There is no peer reviewed data to validate any of his theories, no credible references of any sort.

The best he can do is state his theory is valid because he himself has done tons of research to prove it so. In other words, we are not to question this theory, but to accept it at face value (the almost total lack of footnotes in the book, especially to validate the many general statements, is particularly alarming).

At one point in his book, Dr. D’Adamo claims to be in the eigth year of a ten year trial testing the blood type diet on reproductive cancers and showing impressive improvements in life expectancy. Well, “Eat Right” was published in 1996, and to date, there has been no published study showing anything of the sort. Also, the cost of such a properly conducted trial would be significant for even the major drug companies: if such a trial existed, where did D’Adamo get his funding, and why haven’t the results been shared with the world?

Several experts have gone on record in published journals refuting D’Adamo’s theory of blood type mutation; other clinical data simply contradicts his theory (see Molecular Biology and Evolution, Vol 14, 399-411, Rev. Bras. Hematol. Hemoter). Not surprisingly, this further damages the credibility of his argument.

Perhaps even more disturbing is the fact that the symptoms attributed by D’Adamo to “lectin agglutination” mirror the symptoms of many other diet-related disorders—yeast overgrowth, nutritional deficiencies, bowel toxicity, allergies, heavy metal toxicity, hyperinsulinemia, prostaglandin imbalance and so on.

In other words, this is at best, only a theory… and one on very shakey ground, at that.

Believe it or not, D’Adamo even goes as far as to predict personality traits and establish exercise programs on the basis of blood type. For instance, he indicates blood type A’s exceed psychologically at planning and networking, and are decent, and law abiding people.

Unbelievable.

The problems don’t end here; there are some serious issues with D’Adamo’s theory linking blood type with diet. For instance…

D’Adamo postulates that blood type A evolved sometime between 25,000-15,000 B.C. in response to the domestication of livestock and farming. Blood type A, for example, apparently allowed people to “better tolerate grains and other agricultural products”.

What’s the problem with this? There are two…

First, most experts agree that mankind made the jump from hunter-gatherer to farmer about 6-10,000 years ago. On the outside, this switch-over began no earlier than 15,000 years ago, at which time the last ice age was drawing to a close.

The significance of this?

Well, geneticists theorize that it takes many thousands of generations to bring about any sort of significant genetic evolutionary response. In other words, our switch from hunter gatherer to farmer happened much too recently in our history for it to have resulted in the evolution of a new blood type. Since blood type A obviously evolved as a result of some other stimuli, D’Adamo’s theory is a bust.

As a reader, one can feel D’Adamo grasping at straws as he develops his theory for blood type B, which evolved in the Himalayans “perhaps” as a result of climactic change.

Here’s another BIG problem… if blood type mutation and evolution is not consistent with dietary changes (D’Adamo suggests B is a result of climatic change, not diet), why would it make sense to use blood type to best determine what we eat?

When it comes to actual diet advice itself, D’Adamo doesn’t fare much better.

In fact, he consistently provides recommendations that are totally incorrect;. For instance…

Type B’s are encouraged to eat rice cakes (pure carbohydrate with a glycemic rating of pure glucose), which are perhaps the dieter’s worst enemy. Peanuts, on the other hand, are said to cause hypoglycemia for type Bs. But we know peanuts have a very low G.I. (glycemic index) rating, and don’t generate fluctuations in blood sugar levels. Statements like this totally contradict what we know to be true, and must be validated with some sort of proof or reference. Again, D’Adamo provides none.

Believe it or not, the entire book is jam-packed with similar misinformation, generalities, and information that is just plain wrong.

Despite this, around 50% of those trying “Eat Right for Your Blood Type!” will experience positive results, but certainly not because D’Adamo’s theory is correct. Here’s why…

In North America, the predominant blood type is type O. Just under 50% of the Black/People Of African descent population is type O, while the Caucasian population comprises just slightly less (about 45%).

D’Adamo’s blood type O diet focuses on restricting breads and grains, while increasing lean meat, poultry, and fish. This will effectively place the dieter on the “cusp” of ketosis, similar to a modified Atkins diet. It will also eliminate vacillating blood sugar levels, encourage lean muscle growth, and stimulate weight loss. In short…

The plan for type O will work, simply because it sticks to proven diet fundamentals, NOT because there’s a link between blood type and food consumption. Don’t make the mistake of confusing cause and effect here.

If your blood type is anything other than type O, you’ll be lucky to achieve anything on this diet.

Despite the lack of clinical evidence validating Eat Right For Your Blood Type, my review has generated more than its fair share of angry visitor feedback over the years.

“Who are you”, some ask, “to question D’Adamo’s theory? Are YOU a doctor?”

My answer is always the same…

No, I am NOT a medical doctor, and neither, as a matter of fact, is D’Adamo. Secondly, using the prefix “Dr.” in front of your name does not allow you to make broad, sweeping generalizations, present statements that contradict established theories and practices and promote your own theories without providing one iota of supporting evidence. The onus is on D’Adamo to prove his theory is valid. I have simply pointed out the obvious: none of his theories have any supporting evidence, and there are plenty of credible qualified professionals who contest his conclusions.”

You don’t need to be a doctor to do that.

To investigate a REAL diet, check out Tom Venuto’s Burn The Fat, reviewed here!

All in all, it all makes for an interesting discussion.

The Atkins Diet has returned to the spotlight with the resurgence in the popularity of such low carbohydrate diets as “Protein Power”, “The Carbohydrate Addict’s Diet”, and Barry Sears’ “Enter the Zone”. But clearly this man is no stranger to the dieting industry. A former cardiologist, his first book “Dr Atkins’ Diet Revolution”, was released way back in 1972. And it differs little from his most recent offering.

So what’s the crux of this diet, and why all the controversy?

Ah… good questions.

The problem with the Atkins diet, according to some experts, is its period of extreme carbohydrate restriction (under 30 grams daily). In the initial stages, the bulk of daily caloric intake comes either from fat (saturated or unsaturated is fine) or protein.

Although the science behind low carb dieting is starting to catch up with and vindicate many of claims made by Atkins and others, that hasn’t prevent nutritionist from claiming…

1) That increased protein intake is dangerous, and seriously hampers and impedes normal kidney function. This is absolute and total rubbish. None of the experts making such claims have been able to dredge up a single example of renal failure as a result of this diet. And I could not find any evidence that an increased protein intake posed any dangers to “normal” individuals not suffering from renal disease. In fact, I found the contrary (see Nutr Metab (Lond). 2005 Sep 20;2:25)…

“…we find no significant evidence for a detrimental effect of high protein intakes on kidney function in healthy persons after centuries of a high protein Western diet.”

One review (Contrib Nephrol. 2007;155:102-12) proposed…

“… that the concept that protein restricted diets decrease the risk of developing kidney disease in the general population is not supported by the scientific literature.

This one, which investigates a higher level of protein intake for athletes (see Appl Physiol Nutr Metab. 2006 Dec;31(6):647-54) indicated…

“…that higher protein diets have quite consistently been shown to result in greater weight loss, greater fat loss, and preservation of lean mass as compared with “lower” protein diets.” 

Of course, there are issues when increased protein is NOT a good thing — anyone with less than optimal kidney function needs to be concerned about increasing their protein intake without first consulting with a medical professional. And as Elissa points out in this blog post, diets rich in cereals/grains, animal proteins, and salt (like the typical North American diet) can get a condition known as chronic metabolic acidosis (CMA). That aside, the available evidence indicates an elevated protein consumption is not dangerous.

2) Severe long term carbohydrate restriction leads to nutritional deficiencies. Yes, this is true. But anyone who reads the Dr. Atkins diet knows that his period of extreme carbohydrate restriction is very short lived—only a couple of weeks. Then you gradually start reintroducing low glycemic carbs (like fruits and veggies) back into your diet. Plus, Dr. Atkins suggests you do supplement your diet with vitamins and minerals during this brief period of extreme restriction.

Additionally, those who make this claim are neglecting to mention that the folks adopting this diet are doing so because their previous eating habits were terrible. It is not liklely, for instance, that the vast majority of individuals embarking on the Atkins diet were consuming perfectly balanced diet complete with highly nutritious meals beforehand. In other words, it’s a valid point, but in the real world, it’s moot.

3) Increased fat intake leads to higher cholesterol levels, and increases chances of heart attack. Any diet that place an emphasis on the consumption of fatty foods can’t be good for you, goes the argument proposed by mainstream nutritionists. Unfortunately, there is no evidence this is so. In fact, a recent 20-year study found no association between low carb diets and the risk of coronary heart disease. In other words, this “danger” is not a danger at all.

It’s also been demonstrated that it’s the low carb diet that is more effective at improving metabolic syndrome!

Now I realize that some of you may have a difficult time accepting this. To you I really have only two things to say…

First, I don’t have a personal stake in promoting this diet. I’m only interested in presenting you with facts. Please review the clinical references I include here if you continue to be skeptical.

Secondly, for most of our entire evolutionary development we have been hunter-gatherers. That means no harvesting of crops, no tending of flocks: just scratching a living from what we scavenged or killed each day. Scientists studying the fossilized feces of early man (now there’s a job for you!), have speculated that as much as 80-85% of their diet came from meat.

Considering our early ancestors lived in Northern Europe around 30,000 years ago, and survived an ice age, it’s not surprising they ate meat. When it’s that cold, there just aren’t bushels of fruit and vegetables available at every street corner!

The bottom line here is very simple… our ancestors often experienced times of severe carbohydrate restrictions for extended periods of time (in fact, the Inuit of the Canadian Arctic did so up until very recently), without any ill effects. So this diet does not present any real threat to safety, especially considering the short period of time you’re actually restricting carbs.

So what is the purpose of this carbohydrate restriction anyway?

It’s to get the body’s insulin secretion system back on an even keel. Simple carbs, like those in preponderance in the North American diet, cause the body to become insulin resistant. In short, this leads to wildly vacillating blood sugar levels. This may lead to weight gain, fatigue, moodiness, lack of concentration, and UN-productivity. Carbohydrate restriction “reprimes” the body, and gets it back to working properly again.

With all that said, this isn’t an easy diet to stay on. Sure, eating all the steak, burgers, bacon, nuts, and cheese you want may sound appealing, but it quickly loses it’s allure when it’s the only thing you eat. Steak isn’t much fun without potatoes, burgers are lacking without fries, and cheese without crackers?

Boring.

Additionally, lean muscle mass seems to be threatened on this diet. Considering muscle burns calories even at rest, the loss of even some of this critical tissue is very undesirable. As an avid weight lifter, the rapid muscle loss I experienced while on this diet was particularly unnerving. I also found that without carbohydrates as a fuel source, strength at the gym dropped dramatically—even after the body had made the adjustment from a carb burning to a fat burning machine.

Despite all that, this diet does seem to be an effective way of losing fat weight. If you’re going to attempt this diet, however, I have two comments for you. First…

The first week is the hardest. On about the third day of the diet, it’s likely you’ll start to feel “muggy-headed” as the body starts to make its switch to a fat burning machine. Hang in there, you’ll soon feel better. Secondly, you will weigh at least 10 lbs. lighter at the end of the first week. Don’t get too excited though, severe carb restriction has a diuretic effect. Most of what you’ve lost is water.

The Dr Atkins diet isn’t perfect, but it does work. That’s the bottom line.

If you’re hypoglycemic, or severely insulin resistant and suffering from metabolic syndrome, the Dr Atkins diet may be just what you need. From what I’ve seen with personal contacts, it is the Atkins diet that leads to the most dramatic improvements in important blood markers (cholesterol blood triglycerides, etc) and weight loss.

The Zone Diet is all about getting into that mysterious place Sears calls “the zone.” According to Sears, this is the place where athletes perform better, where mental focus is enhanced, and life is generally a better place. Getting there is a simple matter of changing your eating patterns to reflect the 40/30/30 ratio, which, Sears argues, is the best way to stabilize blood sugar, promote general well-being, and encourage weight loss.

Why 40/30/30? What’s the rational behind this ratio of macronutrients?

The whole point of this 40/30/30 ratio is to balance two main metabolic hormones – insulin, which promotes the storing of excess calories as fat, and glucagon, which promotes the burning of fat. Sears also claims The Zone diet also promotes a positive balance of the body’s microhormones (called eicosanoids), although he does not present any clinical evidence to validate this statement. 

As a weight loss book, “Enter the Zone”, isn’t too bad a read. Unfortunately Sears ventures off track enough during his discussion of eiconsanoids to give even the most dedicated of dieters a severe case of boredom.

If you’re going to give this diet a shot, it’s essential you read and understand chapter 7 – “Boundaries of The Zone.” In this chapter Sears maps out the entrance points to “The Zone.” It’s crucial that you know this “40/30/30 ratio” is only the mid-point of this entrance-way. You will- and this is important-have to adjust your carbohydrate intake according to your personal sensitivity to them in order to find your personal entrance to the “zone”.

The main problem for the average dieter will be finding this sweet spot (i.e. your unique entrance point to “the zone”). This is crucial to the entire plan — if you don’t find it, you won’t lose weight. And if you’re hypoglycemic or hyperinsulinemic, it’s likely that 40% of total daily calories from carbs is too much! If this is the case, I recommend you start with a smaller percentage of daily caloric intake from carbs, and increase them only if you can.

Let’s outline some pros and cons of this diet…

The Zone Diet “Pros”:

1. Since you are not significantly restricting any one food source in Sears’ diet, you are never totally deprived of the foods you love.

2. If you successfully find your entrance to “The Zone” you will experience slow, gradual, and permanent weight loss.

3. “The main purpose of this diet plan, that of balancing insulin and glucagon, is fundamentally correct!

The Zone Diet “Cons”:

1. The 40/30/30 macronutrient ratio represents the “mid point” to the entranceway of the mysterious place of which Sears speaks. You have to play around (by adjusting carbohydrate intake), find your own entranceway. This can be tricky.

2. The daily caloric intake for this diet is determined by your protein requirements – which can lead to incredibly low daily caloric intake – much too low!

3. Claiming the 40/30/30 zone ratio creates a positive eicosanoid balance isn’t a bad theory, but it’s a largely unproven one.

All in all, I’d have to say Barry Sears’ diet is probably worthwhile buying – if, and only if, you can read it from cover to cover. If not, I’d recommend checking out my ebook, The Ultimate Fat Burning Diet Primer. It will give you a good handle on the dieting fundamentals, but won’t bore you to death, nor require massive amounts of willpower to get through.  

You can learn more about The Ultimate Fat Burning Diet Primer here!

“Wow! This is great stuff.”

What Lewis has done with this publication is brought the collective wisdom of 8 of the Net’s qreatest fitness and weight loss gurus together into one nicely formatted, easily accessible PDF document (also known as an e-book).

Some of the people included in this publication may be familiar to you if you are a regular visitor to Ultimatefatburner.com. Craig Ballantyne, author of Turbulence Training contributes his wise words, as does Nick Nillson. Other contributors may not be immediately familiar to you, but trust me… they all know their stuff! The only question really is…

Is this the product for you?

Before I answer that, I have to start with the usual caveat. In this publication each expert lays out his/her most effective, proven methods to lose fat and build muscle as quickly and efficiently as possible. That does not mean, of course, that this is an easy, effortless solution. This publication does not provide any magic pill, nor does it contain the secret to losing tons of fat while lounging on the couch watching “Friends” reruns.

What A To Z Fitness’ Total Body MakeOver does do is provide a road map to success and a whole lot of really solid information. If you are willing to work, and follow the words of these pros, you will not be disappointed.

You will not “spin your wheels”.

However, I would caution that this is probably not the ideal publication for anyone who has not made it past the third chapter of Barry Sear’s “The Zone”. While each expert only contributes between 10-20 pages to the compilation, some contributions are more intense than others.

Secondly, don’t make the mistaken assumption that you won’t get anything from this publication because you only want to lose fat, and are not really interested in “maximum muscle gain”. If you are ever going to lose weight and keep it off, you need to do some sort of resistance training.

That’s because resistance training builds lean muscle mass which elevates the metabolism, causing you to burn more calories at rest. Resistance training causes your body to burn an elevated number of calories for up to 24-48 hours post workout. For this reason, weight/resistance training is one of the most effective arsenals in any weight loss program (aerobics burns calories relatively inefficiently and although helpful, only elevates your metabolic rate for a short period post exercise).

Of course, this doesn’t mean you will turn yourself into a muscle-bound freak. Building muscle takes work and dedication. Building a lot of muscle takes a lot more work, and a lot more dedication. It’s a long-term, time intensive process.

A rudimentary program will work wonders for most people — men or women, young or old.

Skim through the book, and you’ll find meal plans, food recommendations, food lists, best practices for dieting, weight loss and training, general tips and recommendations, and some darn interesting insights.

What I found most beneficial about this publication (other than to pick the brains of some of the Net’s top experts), was the ability to mix and match suggestions from different experts, according to my preferences, lifestyle, and body type.

Another one of the biggest benefits of this publication is the fact that it is broken into 8 easily digestible chunks. Instead of being forced to read an entire e-book, you’re reading the equivalent of a short story at each sitting.

Nice!

For those of you who need some tuition selecting and performing exercises, there are lots of thumbnail photos (and I mean lots — several of the experts make use of them), which makes this an even more valuable resource.

Bottom line?

This is a quality publication and I’d be very surprised if most people did not find it an extremely valuable resource (there are also a ton of quality bonus files that accompany this program). It’s also well written, well edited, and aesthetically pleasing!

You can learn more about purchasing the A to Z Fitness’ Total Body MakeOver here!

I really like Jeremy Likeness’ “Lose Fat, Not Faith”.

There are numerous reasons why this so. For instance, it’s very well written, it flows nicely, it contains a ton of very useful cutting edge dieting and weight loss information. As a teaching and learning tool, it can carry its weight against publication I’ve read.

But that’s not the main reason I feel so strongly about it. Nope, I like “Lose Fat, Not Faith” because it discusses something most diets skip altogether, or give only passing mention.

And what’s that?

It’s the “personal development” aspect of healthy living. It’s about…

i) Overcoming your fears and insecurities in order to succeed.

ii) Tapping into your inner strengths to make a personal commitment, not to a diet — but to a new and healthy way of living.

iii) Setting goals tied directly to mind, body, and spirit (there is a powerful spiritual element to “Lose Fat, Not Faith”) and then determining”why” that goal is important. This is a critical step. If you can’t come up with a powerful reason “why” your goal of losing weight is important, it’s unlikely you will attain that goal.

“Along the way, I found another “why for losing the fat: control. I was obviously out of control, because my mind was so weak that it let cravings for foods control my health. This wasn’t fair to my children who looked to me as a role model, or my wife who had committed to spend her life with me.” (Jeremy Likeness, “Lose Fat, Not Faith”)

iv) Maintaining a positive “I can” attitude through thick and thin.

v) Achieving a balance between your life, your family, and your responsibilities and a healthy lifestyle.

This isn’t all theoretical, of course. Jeremy’s “been there, done that, and bought the t-shirt.” He’s battled with an expanding waistline and “shrinking” jeans. He’s was unable to bend over and tie up his shoes. He has struggled, as anyone who makes this commitment inevitably will. But Jeremy perseveres, and he does so gloriously.

Sometimes, it’s a little difficult to get out of your comfort zone because you know what dieting entails. That’s why inevitably all diets fail, and the weight comes back. Jeremy’s publication prepares you for a lifestyle change, so you can embrace it, rather than avoid it.

Of course, this publication covers all the nutritional bases. For instance, 2/3 of this 350 page e-book is dedicated to educating you on nutrition and exercise. And there’s no doubt… Jeremy knows his stuff! There’s lots of good stuff here; on caloric cycling, portion sizes… you name it, it’s in here.

So who’s this volume for?

Although I think everyone will benefit from this publication, it’s probably not for those of you who want a very short and precise “eat this”, “do that” diet. If you’re looking more for a structured diet plan, check out Tom Venuto’s Burn the Fat program, reviewed here!

On the other hand, it is ideal for anyone for anyone who has struggled with motivation, with dedication, or with fear. It’s for anyone who has not yet been able to draw the internal strength necessary to realize their health and fitness dreams.

If this is you, I highly recommend this publication. You will not be disappointed. And, in the EXTREMELY unlikely event that you are, your purchase is protected with a 60-day completely honored money-back guarantee. So you really can’t lose.

To learn more about purchasing Jeremy’s “Lose Fat, Not Faith” click here!

I’d also recommend checking out Jeremy’s free publication, “10 Fat Mistakes”. You can check that out here!

Is the Hollywood diet an effective and healthy way to lose weight? Does the diet live up to its claims?

Fans (i.e., “marketers”) say it is a “cleansing diet” which allows you to shed a great deal of weight over a brief period of time.

One study (which was not a peer reviewed, double blind clinical study, mind you) involving 27 dieters, men and women age 18 to 67, showed that followers of the weight loss plan lost an average of 4.5 percent of their overall body weight, in addition to a sizeable proportion of fat. Overall weight loss among participants ranged from 4.5 pounds to 16.5 pounds.

This is not surprising, considering you’re dealing with simple “caloric economics.” In other words, if you dramatically reduce your caloric intake, as you are required to do on this diet, you will lose weight. It ain’t rocket science.

Dieters reported that they were satisfied with the amount of weight they had lost and hoped to use the diet again.

The Hollywood Diet requires you to consume nothing but a specially-mixed juice and water for two days. That means you cannot eat, drink caffeine products, or drink alcohol. As a result, you’ll be consuming only about 400 calories a day, as opposed to the normal 2000 calories per day.

What’s the secret to the success of the Hollywood Diet?

Advocates of the meal plan say that it hinders your typical food intake while cleansing your digestive system (I’m extremely skeptical of any cleansing or detoxing product—see this blog post for more!).

You drink juice all day long in order to balance your blood sugar levels and to curb your appetite (drinking juice curbs your appetite? Who knew?).

The juice consists of a blend of natural fruit juices, along with enzymes and minerals that the retailers claim act as a laxative.

Under the Hollywood Diet, you’re likely to lose one pound of fat, as many as two pounds of muscle, two to five pounds of waste matter, and as much as a half dozen pounds of water, for a total weight loss of four to 14 pounds.

Therefore, while the diet offers fairly significant short-term weight loss, only a small proportion of that loss involves fat. Worse, the loss of lean muscle tissue adversely affects your metabolic rate, meaning you will burn calories at an even more reduced rate once you complete the diet.

The chief benefit of the Hollywood Diet is that it is easy to follow. Other than that, there’s very little positive to say. You will be deficient on nutrients and calories, and the diet is unsustainable, which means any weight lost on the program will return quickly. Plus, the juice is extremely overpriced… $30 a bottle is common.

Critics have dismissed the Hollywood Diet as a scam. I’d be inclined to agree that this diet is a text book example of the sort of program you should avoid at all costs.