The traditional Grapefruit Diet gained widespread popularity in the 1980s. The weight loss plan involved a dramatic reduction in calorie intake—dieters were encouraged to consume no more than 800 calories per day.

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.

The “Eat Right 4 Your Type!” diet (a program that argues your blood type is the determining factor for selecting what you eat) by naturopath Dr. D’Adamo, is to dieting as astrology is to astronomy. And I’m not the only one who thinks so. The non-profit Center for Science in the Public Interest called it “as scientific as a horoscope.”

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 4 Your 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 4 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  this diet 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 (here, 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 4 Your 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 4 Your 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!

The Hollywood diet has a glamorous name, alright. But is it Hollywood’s official diet? According to the marketing it is. In reality, there’s no evidence it’s more popular in Hollywood than anywhere else. It’s marketing, plain and simple.

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.

There’s been a fair amount of hype about “negative calorie foods” and the negative calorie diet lately, and I’ve been receiving more than my fair share of questions on the legitimacy of such claims. Let me first say that no, there is no such thing as a “negative calorie food.” Yes, some foods do elevate the metabolism more than others. For example…

… it requires 25-30% of the caloric value of any protein source to be digested and utilized by the body. So a 400 calorie protein-rich meal would only add 275-300 calories to your daily caloric intake. The remainder of those calories would be required for processing. For carbs, only 6-8% of calories is required for processing, and for fats, it’s only 2-3%.

Obviously then, your best bet is to eat protein rich foods. Not so on the Negative Calorie diet — the focus here is on vegetables, fruit, and the “Negative Calorie” soup, which you’ll be eating until you’re “blue in the face.”

In fact, the lack of variety on this diet will make it very difficult for most people to stay on it for any length of time (although this diet is not meant to be a replacement for your regular eating habits). Lean protein is allowed on this diet, but not until a little later in the program.

Snacks consist of water, celery, and apples, lunch and dinner is soup (with perhaps a backed potato), and breakfast is fruit — cantaloupe, honey dew melon, grapefruit, orange, papaya, pineapple, strawberries, or watermelon — eat until you are full. (In my opinion though, the main problem with this diet is the fact that the food choices are dead boring, and most people will have a heck of a time sticking to the program).

Will the Negative Calorie Diet work for you?

Yes, this diet will definitely lead to weight loss (it claims to help you lose 14 lbs. in 7 days), but most of this weight loss will be comprised of water and muscle, and not fat. In fact, if you’re going to experiment with this diet, I highly recommend you focus on tracking your bodyfat percentage, and not your body weight for a true measure of success. Otherwise, you threaten the lean tissue mass which has a positive effect on your overall metabolism.

The most alarming thing about the Negative Calorie diet is the complete lack of scientific based evidence to back up the claims touted by the publication. The author presents no compelling data that negative calorie foods are anything more than a pet theory of his, and the same goes for some of the deep breathing exercises also touted to elevate metabolism.

In the end, this diet works because of simple caloric restriction, and the preponderance of high fiber, low energy density foods consumed (these are foods that have relatively few calories per gram), not because of any magic or negative calories. Foods high in fiber and volume tend to make you feel full longer, and you eat less during the day. Be sure to eat lots on this diet though… because the extremely low calorie intake of this diet will leave you famished!

I’m not a fan of this diet, but if you’d like to learn more about it, you can do so here!

The Scarsdale Diet has become one of the most popular weight loss programs in the world. Designed by Dr. Herman Tarnower, the diet is a one to two week program that is made up of 43 percent protein, 22.5 percent fat, and 34.5 percent carbohydrates.

One of the major advantages of the Scarsdale Diet is its speed—it tends to yield incredibly quick results. This is due to the fact that it relies on radically reduced calorie consumption.

If you follow the plan strictly, you can lose as much as 10 to 20 pounds in a two-week period — although most of that will be water weight. Even worse, the extreme caloric deprivation threatens lean muscle mass, a critical element of an elevated metabolism. While advocates of the diet plan maintain that Scarsdale represents an express route to weight loss, critics say that it provides too few calories for good health.

Under the Scarsdale plan, you will follow a strict diet for two weeks, then follow a less rigid diet plan for an additional week or two. The second phase of the plan is known as the Keep Trim program. Critics of the program maintain that it is far too restrictive to be healthy.

The Scarsdale program involves heavy consumption of protein. In fact, much of the diet consists of lean meats, with a number of salads also recommended. Alcohol is strictly forbidden under Scarsdale, and the only dressings that are permitted are lemon and vinegar and mustard. However, dieters are permitted to use ketchup, soy sauce, Worcestershire sauce, and herbs. Most vegetables are permitted, with the exception of corn, peas, potatoes, and beans.

Scarsdale recommends using artificial sweeteners instead of sugar in order to reduce calorie consumption. Dieters may also use herbal appetite suppressants in order to cut down on their food cravings.

The Scarsdale Diet is extremely low in calories—only 850 to 1,000 calories a day are permitted. This is significantly below the minimum caloric requirements recommended. You might find it difficult to follow the Scarsdale plan at first because so many favorite foods are banned. For instance, dieters cannot indulge in candy, desserts, or dairy fat; ice cream and custard are expressly forbidden.

Pasta and other flour-based products are also banned. Any meat you consume must be trimmed of skin and fat. You can only eat eggs three times a week; the only snacks you’re permitted are carrots and celery. While you can eat a variety of meats, such as beef, lamb, veal, ham, and pork, seafood canned in rich sauces are to be avoided.

Under Scarsdale, a typical diet meal would include half a grapefruit, a slice of protein bread, and coffee or tea. Lunch might consist of cold cuts, while dinner would include animal protein or seafood along with a salad. You might be surprised to learn that barbecued chicken is permitted on the Scarsdale Diet.

Scarsdale advocates drinking a great deal of water. At least four glasses of water are required each day. This is because drinking large amounts of H20 helps to flush out your system and facilitates weight loss.

While Scarsdale was one of the first “lower” carb diets to appear on the scene, it is not as popular as the Atkins Diet or the Zone Diet. Scarsdale does not require any exercise. In fact, it advocates no strenuous exercise for people over the age of 40, unless the dieters are already involved in a rigorous exercise program. Since Scarsdale severely restricts calories, you might find that you simply do not have the energy to engage in even vigorous walking.

The Scarsdale Diet can provide you with rapid weight loss over the short term. Of course “weight” does not mean “fat” in this case… your weight loss will be comprised of water, lean muscle, and fat tissue.

Additionally, you might find it difficult to maintain your weight loss because of the strict calorie requirements. Also, if you are hoping to combine dieting with exercise, Scarsdale may not be the right food plan for you.

Bottom line?

The best diets really should be a lifestyle change — something you can maintain for a long time. Otherwise, you’ll just gain the weight back when you quit dieting. The Scarsdale is not a diet anyone can commit to in the long run, and you’re very likely to gain most of the weight back after you complete the program. This is not a sensible, long term solution to weight loss.