This discussion of the positives and negatives of the South Beach Diet
is apart from those of low carb diets in general. People whose bodies are suited to low carb eating tend to feel better on them, be less hungry, and have positive health responses (lower triglycerides and blood glucose; lower blood pressure, higher HDL, among others
Positives of The South Beach Diet:
Very Simple – No counting and not much measuring. For the most part, you just choose foods from certain lists and eat within that.
Low in Saturated Fats – Low carb diet authors have different opinions on whether it's important to limit saturated fats on reduced carb diets; however, no author recommends relying on them. At the very least, it's probable that some people do better with a minimum of some of the saturated fats.
Encourages Individual Experimentation
– To me, one of the strongest aspects of the diet is the focus on each person being aware of the effects of foods on their bodies, particularly as they add carbohydrates. I think using the marker of carb cravings
can be a useful one, as it’s vital for people who are sensitive to carbohydrates tp be aware of what foods and what quantities trigger these cravings.
Negatives of the South Beach Diet:
Use of Glycemic Index
– Agatston relies a lot on the glycemic index
when evaluating foods. This is surprising to me given that the book was written after the concept of glycemic load
was introduced, and it is a much more practical and useful indicator of how a food is likely to affect blood glucose.
Very Restrictive First Phase
, which could turn some people off to the diet. On the other hand, it's short-term, and the author doesn't recommend anyone staying with it longer than 3 or 4 weeks at most (for people who have quite a bit of weight to lose). Since there are no guidelines as to how much carbohydrate to eat, "carb crash"
could also occur, depending upon the individual dieter's food selections.
Possibly Not Enough Structure for some people when it comes to adding carbs back in. This diet leaves a lot up to the individual, which is good in the long run, but is probably harder in the short run. Also, some people just aren't all the tuned in to their bodies' signals and might not be motivated to become so.
– Quite a few aspects of the diet that don't really fit together well. Why is more saturated fat allowed in Phase Three? Why say that portion size of low carb foods should be left up to the individual, but then recommend counting individual nuts (and it's a different number depending upon the nut). And what's the deal with couscous? This is a highly processed, high glycemic form of wheat, and yet Agatston recommends it and has many recipes which include it. Other high glycemic foods are in his menus and recipes, which may send, at the least, a mixed message.
Note also that the glycemic index charts in the first book are based on white bread being a value of "100", where most numbers you read these days are based on glucose being "100", so you may see foods with different numbers. (I think the white bread index may be more useful in some ways. See Is the Glycemic Index Useful?
and Old Vs New Glycemic Index