If you eat excess fat, you won't gain weight, but you won't lose it either. An explanation on where the excess fat goes is here The Blog of Michael R. Eades, M.D. » Thermodynamics and the metabolic advantage Scroll down to the addendum. It's a bit complicated, but it explains it better than I can.
Good link, thanks for that.
However
he seems to say a lot while saying nothing. OK that's harsh. He says why high fat diets don't make you gain weight. We all get it that insulin is the fat regulation hormone but he didn't acknowledge why the guy lost 1 pound on 4500 calories a day. This goes back to what Gary Taubes says about having a preset hypothesis about how it all works. He didn't explain why it was possible to eat 2000 extra calories a day and lose a pound. He just explained why he didn't gain which ignored a big part of the question - why he lost weight.
Without insulin what is holding the fat in our fat cells? Jimmy Moore (I think it was him, if not it was probably Taubes) said he knew someone losing weight on 6000 calories a day. Atkins said you can eat 2600 calories a day and lose weight. This goes against that article as far as I can see. Glucose is obviously sugar. It seems a bit strange to me that we supposedly need glucose, and therefore to be in glucosis, when many other scientists and doctors claim that fat, and therefore ketosis, is the body's preferred energy provider.
He also says '
The body requires about 200 grams of glucose per day to function properly'
In the Atkins book he says 'the two fuel sources are your body's alternative, completely parallel options for energy metabolism' (page 59). If they are alternative sources, why on Earth would one convert back to the other? It makes no sense! The alleged fact that only 70g of this can be replaced by ketones also seems odd. Why only 70g? Atkins says ketones are the exception to needing glucose. 'Ketones fuel the body in lipolysis just as glucose fuels the body in glucosis' (again page 59).
The Atkins view seems to be shared by many of the big names out there who do their research and can quote their sources:
Mark Sisson
Jimmy Moore (lost 170 pounds on Atkins)
Chris Shugert
Gary Taubes
and many more. It seems Atkins was lightyears ahead of his time and until someone can show me solid evidence of why he was wrong, i'm sticking with him! An example of this is him saying saturated fats are unfairly victimised. Apparently now even Jilian Michaels has said that they are not as bad as they are made out to be! It's the only diet i've ever been able to do (with the exception of the last 2 months...but that's my own stupidity)
Sorry to go into full on essay mode on you all