y, more the sheer discomfort of immobility and the many minor associated ailments.
Like so many dieting books that have followed, the Letter of 1862 was flabby, overwritten, repetitive, smug and desperately deficient in any detailed scientific explanation......Banting is indeed the Founding Father of a dubious publishing tradition!
However, to be fair, Banting lost a considerable amount of weight ?and kept it off (and he didn't publicize for monetary gain). Yet his achievement is the starting point of a heated debate that has been central to the Dieting Industry's evolution ever since.
Banting put his success down to abstaining from ?tarch and saccharine matter? This has been seized upon by legions of low-carb diet advocates every since as seminal proof that high-protein, high fat-and low-carbohydrate dieting is the Holy Grail of weight-loss.
There is, though, a glaring problem in this contention. Whilst Banting quantifies in some detail his diet consumption, he simply generalizes about what went on beforehand. We hear of beer and pies and pastries and bread ?and we can only speculate as to the quantities.
Was his weight-loss simply due to eating less overall food, or was there a magic in his particular food method? From his evidence we cannot know. And ever since this argument has raged between advocates of one diet or another diet ?is there a particular effect of limited carbohydrates in raising metabolism, accelerati上一页 [1] [2] [3] [4] 下一页 |
[