Disease Proof

Increased Risk of Cancer Associated with The Atkins Diet

This is part of a weeklong review of the popular Dr. Atkins high-protein low-carbohydrate diet-style. See Monday's post for an overview. The following is from Dr. Fuhrman's book Eat to Live:

Robert Atkins's books, as well as other authors advocating high-protein weight-loss plans, recommend diets for health and weight loss with significantly more animal protein than is typically consumed by the average American. Americans already eat approximately 40 percent of their calories from animal products; we have seen a tragic skyrocketing in cancer and heart-disease rates in the past fifty years as a result of such nutritional extravagance.1 You can lose some weight on the Atkins Diet, but you run the risk of losing your health at the same time.



Atkins devotees adopt a dietary pattern completely opposite of what is recommended by the leading research scientists studying the link between diet and cancer.3 Specifically, fruit exclusion alone is a significant cancer marker. Stomach and esophageal cancer are linked to populations that do not consume a sufficient amount of fruit.4 Scientific studies show a clear and strong dose-response relationship between cancers of the digestive tract, bladder, and prostate with low fruit consumption.5 To the surprise of many investigators, fruit consumption shows a powerful dose-response association with a reduction in heart disease, cancer, and all-cause mortality.6 There is also a striking consistency in many scientific investigations that show a reduction in incidence of colorectal and stomach cancer with the intake of whole grains.7 Colon cancer is strongly associated with the consumption of animal products.8 And these researchers have concluded that the varying level of colon cancer in the low-incidence population compared with the high-incidence population could not be explained by "protective" factors such as fiber, vitamins, and minerals; rather, it was influenced almost totally by the consumption of animal products and fat.

More saturated fat & less fruit = Higher cancer risk

Less saturated fat & more fruit = Lower cancer risk

There are numerous ways to lose weight. However "effective" they may be, some are just not safe. We wouldn't advocate smoking cigarettes or snorting cocaine simply because doing so would be effective in promoting weight loss. Advocating a weight-loss program based on severe carbohydrate restriction is irresponsible. You may pay a substantial price--your life! As was the case with Dr. Atkins's own death, most likely a heart attack that resulted in the slip and fall.

Check back tomorrow for a review of the short and long-term dangers of high-fat diets.









Dana - April 5, 2006 9:50 PM

I can't seem to find the subject anywhere on this website about fat loss versus weight loss. Do I need to eat a certain amount of protein to maintain my lean body mass and burn fat, or do I just need to keep my glycogen stores in check by consuming adequate nutrient dense calories?

nanceen - September 1, 2007 12:01 PM

Dr. Atkins does not state in his book to only eat meat and never touch fruit or vegetables. That is complete nonsense. Sit down, read the book from cover to cover. You simply eliminate REFINED carbohydrates and gradually introduce complex carbohydrates until you reach the right amount you need to maintain your weight. And you can also do Atkins vegetarian. I did Atkins seven years ago and lost 75 lbs. I struggled with obesity and a low fat diet for years. At one point I weighed 205 and ate no more than 10 to 20 grams of fat per day with no more than 1200 calories. I felt terrible all the time. I did the conventional calorie limiting, eat fruit, carbs three times a day, low fat diet for years and weighed 205lbs on a 5' 2" frame! On Atkins I Lowered my cholesterol 60 points (now normal range) and eat between 1800 and 2300 per day. Why his book is not read cover to cover by his critics I will never know. Today I am 50, weigh a bikini and will never go back to eating a trashy high carbohydrate only diet. I eat plenty of vegetables, oils, fats, meats, yogurt, oatmeal all in abundance with NO FRUIT and I feel terrific. It works for me and I am glad to be alive.

Dr Onatcog. - September 27, 2008 7:27 PM

I think that it should be noted that most meat today is radiated, and THAT not the actual consumption of it is probably responsible for the spike in cancer for those who consume more meat products.

This article also fails to mention that vegetarians have a higher incidence of generalized stomach cancers than do meat/vege eaters.

Good day.

Cori - September 27, 2008 10:03 PM

Grass-fed beef has CLA among other important nutrients and has the right omega-3 to omega-6 ratio. That's just the beginning of the argument....

Let's really get at the truth behind what causes cancer. Science does not support the claim that red meat or saturated fat is responsible for cancer. Both have basically been vindicated.

Science is beginning to show that methylation is very important in cancer prevention. Some of the best methyl-donating foods come from animal products.

Support local, humane grass-fed cattle farming.

MrTrashcan - January 13, 2010 12:40 AM

None of those studies proves the title of this article. Talk about bad science.


Let me get this straight. You're suggesting that in the past people DIDN'T eat this much animal food? Give me a break. I'd say it's been since low fat has been pushed in the 60s that cancer has skyrocketed. That's the most obvious correlation. Not to mention all the other new diseases surfacing since that time. Animal food consumption has actually gone down since the 60s.

Dr. Fuhrman's Executive Offices
4 Walter E. Foran Blvd.
Suite 408
Flemington, NJ 08822