Dear Heather,

It seems that you may not have a full understanding of what the 'zone' really is. The Zone Diet is not intended to be a weight loss program due calorie deficit.  It is about hormonal control!  Dr. Sears recommends the ratio 40/30/30 because of its direct link to controling insulin.  This is not possible on any other diet percentage, hi-carb, low-fat or other fad diet out there! The Zone has proven to be extrememly effective for fat loss vs. weight loss when compared to other restrictive diets.  In fact the Zone is not a diet at all, it is a way of controlling your hormones via food.  Like any change, at first it is challenging to manage food choice/combinations, but after a few weeks, it becomes very easy!  As a fitness professional, I have found the Zone to be the most successful approach to changing body composition and improving athletic pefromance.

Chris LaLanne,

BS Exercise and Nutritional Sciences, 

CSCS,

CrossFit 

Raymond

4/21/08 9:06pm

I agree with Chris.

 

I am a little annoyed by this article as I feel it conveys a flawed idea as to what exactly the Zone Diet is.  I am currently a college student and I agree that it takes some discipline to adhere to the diet, but it is not, by any means, too difficult.  After a couple weeks on it, you get quite adjusted to the lifestyle.  Not to mention that you feel amazing.

Adam, MS, RD, Texas, CrossFit (unaffliated)

5/29/09 2:39pm

Dear Chris,

 

Although the zone diet may be good for weight loss, saying it helps control insulin with 40/30/30 ratio diet is preposterous. Diet restriction occurs when on the zone diet, whether intentional or not. You restirct what you eat, namely high glycemic, breads and carbs, while consuming more veggies. You can't possibly eat the caloric equivalent of veggies that a loaf of bread contains. Hence, caloric restiction with satiety. That's why it works. 

 

Suggesting that athletic performance is superior on a low-carb diet compared to a high carb diet is both physiologically impossible and misleading. Glycogen stores are postively correlated with exercise intensity. By increasing your glycogen stores through a diet high in carbohydrate (prior to exercise specifically) you can perform at a high intensity compared to someone with less glycogen. Your muscle cells want ATP and the easiest ways to make ATP is through glycolysis, which needs glucose derviced from glycogen. You can't perform at your highest potential while restricting carbohydrate. You might argue that with prolonged carb restriction comes increased utlization of fat for energy, but that pathway takes significantly longer to make ATP than glucose metabolism, regardless of aquired adaptations.

 

Also, insulin is the most anabolic hormone we can produce in our body. If you overeat, then yes, you'll shuttle excess glucose to adipose tissue where it will be stored as triglycerides and make you fat. However, be conscious of your portions and total carbohydrate consumed, you can maximize both your storage of glycogen and feed your tissues glucose they need (along with protein) for anabolism and tissue repair.

 

You can't argue that Atkin's is superior to a high glycemic diet when it comes to athletic performance. I could go into how low-blood glucose can also cause decreased mental awareness, lethargy, and poor test performance but I think this is enough. It is great for weight loss, which is simply lower high glycemic carbs, lots of veggies and lean meats, but you don't need the zone diet to eat that way.

Adam

5/29/09 2:43pm

Adam, learn how to spell and proofread before posting. Yikes. Sorry!

I disagree with this article.  The Zone concept, or 40/30/30 formula is an easy routine to follow, once you commit to healthier eating.  You are never hungry and are able to shed body fat rather than water weight or muscle.  The writer should have done a little bit more research.  I've been on every diet from Stillman, Atkins, Weight Watchers [4 times], South Beach and others, and have always felt deprived, been hungry or had the feeling I was being denied something.  Through a neighbor I was introduced to the 40/30/30 formula, which is based on the Zone. There is no feeling of deprevation.  I don't do any calculating, but rather have ordered books about the theory and cookbooks which give numerous choices as well as gourmet recipes to follow.

Rita Burke 

I dont think the zone or any diet that completely restricts your carbs. is worth doing. First once you start eating NOrmal youll gain the weight back. I think its all about moderation. I have lost 55 lbs in 4 months by watching what Im eating and paying attention to what im putting in my mouth and using Phentramin D. I now have so much energy and work out four days a week on the elliptical for a half hour. I never thought I could lose this much weight. http://www.SlimEffects.com

Rob

1/25/10 1:10pm

Diets that don't restrict carbs DO NOT WORK.  You are crazy if you think you are going to lose weight by eating mounds of bread.  I hate when people say go back to eating NORMAL.  Listen if you want to keep the weight off you can never go back to eating bad food ever again.  You may have lost 55lbs watching what you eat but you probably have alot of weight to lose.  Once your weight loss stops you need to do the zone so you can get as skinny as possible and healthy at the same time.

It's so crazy how these diets come and go and become hybrids of eachother. There are a lot of similarities between the Zone and GI diets. Nice article!

Natalie

www.natlifestyle.com

like the one guy said you need carbs in your diet, without the proper amount of carbs you can develope ketosis, which oddly enough is a sign of toom much insulin.Without proper carbs which is the bodies main source of energy you feed off the protein and fat, and start to feed off your muscle. So this diet totally contradicts itself and is just another stupid fad diet. I don't care about all the books the founder of the diet wrote, i'm pretty sure back in the day they ate vegetbales and not just meat, it was called hunting and gathering.