American Heart Association No-Fad Diet, 2nd Edition: A Personal Plan for Healthy Weight Loss

American Heart Association No-Fad Diet, 2nd Edition: A Personal Plan for Healthy Weight Loss

American Heart Association No-Fad Diet, 2nd Edition: A Personal Plan for Healthy Weight Loss

text very clean, excellent condition, fast shipping.Lasting weight loss doesn’t come from following extreme diets or quick-fix fads. Being able to lose weight and keep it off comes from choosing the lifestyle habits that make sense for you in the long term. If, like millions of other Americans, you are struggling to lose weight, this second edition of the American Heart Association No-Fad Diet will show you how to find just the right combination of attitude, eating, and exercise to achieve you

List Price: $ 24.99

Price: [wpramaprice asin=”0307407594″]

[wpramareviews asin=”0307407594″]

Find More Fad Diets Products

steph

Owner and editor of Dietsupermarket.com

3 thoughts on “American Heart Association No-Fad Diet, 2nd Edition: A Personal Plan for Healthy Weight Loss

  1. 2 of 2 people found the following review helpful
    4.0 out of 5 stars
    Pros and Cons of the AHA diet (quoted from my book Maimonides and Metabolism), June 13, 2015
    Verified Purchase(What’s this?)
    This review is from: American Heart Association No-Fad Diet, 2nd Edition: A Personal Plan for Healthy Weight Loss (Hardcover)

    Summary:
    The AHA claims that fad diets may work temporarily, but do not lead to permanent weight loss. They write: Signs of an unhealthy or fad diet include: a drastic reduction in calories without regard for adequate nutrition; a dependence on powders, herbs, or pills; a reliance on certain foods or food combinations; an elimination of carbs, fat, or any other type of food; a recommendation to skip meals or replace meals with drinks or food bars.
    1. For weight loss, one should strive for a 500-calorie (per day) deficit to lose one pound per week, or a 1,000-calorie (per day) deficit to lose two pounds per week. Choose between or combine the following three strategies of calorie reduction:
    a. Substitute high-calorie foods with lower calorie foods. For example, instead of having a glass of orange juice, eat an orange. Instead of having a regular soft drink, substitute it with a sugar-free one. Instead of eating regular cheddar cheese, go for the low-fat version.
    b. Reduce portion size.
    c. Try the American Heart Association Menu Plans.
    2. The diet should be rich in nutrient-dense foods, from these major food groups: vegetables and fruits, whole grains, low-fat dairy, fish, lean cuts of meat and poultry, legumes-nuts-seeds, and unsaturated oils/fats.
    3. Avoid trans fats, and limit cholesterol to less than 300mg/day.
    4. Limit salt to less than 1500 mg/day.
    5. Limit added sugars to less than 150 calories/day for men and 100 calories/day for women.
    6. Limit alcoholic beverages to no more than two per day for men and 1 per day for women.
    7. If you’re not hungry, don’t eat.
    8. Keep snacks low in calories.
    9. Begin meals with a zero-calorie drink or a low-calorie starter.

    Pros:
    1. Avoiding excess salt, sugar, trans fats, and cholesterol, and eating varied and balanced, nutrient-dense food is solid, time-tested advice.
    2. Beginning a meal with a zero-calorie drink helps one feel sated by fewer calories.
    3. Cutting calories helps some people lose weight, at least in the short term.

    Cons:
    1. As explained at length in the preface, calorie-restricted diets usually increase ghrelin, which can lead to an increased number of fat cells, reduced leptin, and setting one’s homeostatic fat-mass level to a heavier level, leading to weight gain.
    2. No advice is provided for reducing the number of fat cells, or improving leptin sensitivity, which is necessary for long-term fat reduction.

    Criticisms:
    1. Not all calories were created equal. The previous chapter included many studies and meta-analyses demonstrating the clear advantages of low-carb/high-protein diets for weight loss and other parameters (such as sugar stability, lowered triglycerides, etc.). In fact it is undisputed that low-carb diets are especially advantageous for short-term weight-loss. These studies span decades and are well known. Yet the American Heart Association claims that “a calorie is a calorie no matter what the macronutrient source is.”(pg. 13) They base this claim on a single study (for which they do not provide any details—date, authors, or name of study), writing: “In a recent study from the National Institutes of Health, experts compared four different diets representing a range of percentages of fat, protein, and carbohydrates, and they found that all subjects lost about the same amount of weight.”(pg. 13)
    The only study I am aware of that compares four different diets is a twelve-month study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, in 2007 (Christopher D. Gardner, Alexandre Kiazand, Sofiya Alhassan, Soowon Kim, Randall S. Stafford, Raymond R. Balise, Helena C. Kraemer, and Abby C. King, “Comparison of the Atkins, Zone, Ornish, and Learn Diets for Change in Weight and Related Risk Factors among Overweight Premenopausal Women: The A to Z Weight Loss Study,” Journal of the American Medical Association (2007), http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=205916). In it, 311 women were randomly assigned to follow the Atkins (very low carb), Zone (moderate/low carb), LEARN (high carb, low fat, based on national guidelines), or Ornish (very high carb) diets for twelve months. The study concludes: “The Atkins group on average lost roughly double the weight each of the other groups, and experienced more favorable overall metabolic effects at 12 months (4.7 kg – 10.3 lb.). Weight loss was not statistically different among the Zone, LEARN, and Ornish groups. Zone (1.6 kg – 3.5 lb.), LEARN (2.6 kg – 5.7 lb.), and Ornish (2.2 kg – 4.9 lb.).”

    I am surprised that the American Heart Association published this diet book in 2005 and again in 2011, writing the above (that all types of divisions of macronutrients lead to the same weight loss), when in 2003, a six-month study that was sponsored by the…

    Read more

    Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 

    Was this review helpful to you? Yes
    No

  2. 2 of 3 people found the following review helpful
    5.0 out of 5 stars
    easy to read, June 13, 2013
    By 
    Ann L. Hodgson
    (REAL NAME)
      

    Verified Purchase(What’s this?)
    This review is from: American Heart Association No-Fad Diet, 2nd Edition: A Personal Plan for Healthy Weight Loss (Hardcover)
    easy to read, makes sense- a way to eat that is easy to remember. Many good. I will be able to follow this plan.

    0

    Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 

    Was this review helpful to you? Yes
    No

  3. 5.0 out of 5 stars
    Five Stars, August 20, 2014
    By 

    Verified Purchase(What’s this?)
    This review is from: American Heart Association No-Fad Diet, 2nd Edition: A Personal Plan for Healthy Weight Loss (Hardcover)
    great if you follow diet

    0

    Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 

    Was this review helpful to you? Yes
    No

Comments are closed.