[Sca-cooks] Atkins, since it came up...

[Phil Troy / G. Tacitus Adamantius]

Also sprach Phlip:
>Here's an article about Dr Atkins and the fight his widow is having, to
>convince folks he wasn't obese at death. Seems like all the hooplah is being
>generated by people associated with PETA....
>
>http://www.cnn.com/2004/HEALTH/02/16/atkins.widow/index.html
>
>And here's a picture of him shortly before his death- a couple months
>before. Sure doesn't look obese to me....
>
>http://business2.blogs.com/business2blog/#a0000885084
>
>Draw your own conclusions, people, but I suspect PETA and their ilk are
>trying to pull a fast one.

What's actually "all so f****** hilarious", if I may quote from a 
character in "The Road To Perdition", is that the drive on the part 
of PETA, et al, to falsely discredit Atkins (and they have to know 
this is simply a lie but apparently they don't care if it serves 
their agenda -- there may be reasons to doubt Atkins but this isn't 
one of them) is almost certainly based upon the idea that what the 
guy advocated was a carnivorous diet, which isn't remotely true.

Now, whether they believe this because they're idiots who never 
bothered to glance at the copious printed and webbed literature 
available on the subject before condemning it, which is plenty bad 
enough, or if they don't actually believe this and are essentially 
libelling a dead man for political purposes, which is worse, I don't 
know.

It seems as if most of the wilder detractors (such as PETA) are 
either basing their positions either on total ignorance and hearsay, 
or on obsolete data collected 40 years ago, misinterpreted, and 
_then_ distorted by the rumor mill.

Basically, the equivalent of trying to discredit the AMA for their 
habit of bleeding people with leeches, and responding to the 
statement, "But we don't generally bleed people with leeches, as a 
rule, not for maybe two or three hundred years," by asking, "So 
what's your point?"

Adamantius