The initial reports that came out when he died was, "he died from a heart attack." Immediately after, his critics started attacking the Atkins Diet for its high cholesterol, low carbohydrate meals.
His company released statements shortly after refuting the cause of death. They said that he didn't suffer a heart attack; rather, he hit his head on the ice and died from a head injury.
Then, the controversy morphed into he had a heart attack, which caused him to fall on the ice, hit his head and die.
Mayor Bloomberg's Medical Examiner's Office "accidentally" released the causes of death, which later became public information: it said the cause of death was from hitting his head on ice. However, it didn't say whether he had a heart attack prior. The controversy continues...
There wouldn't be so much controversy over his death had his widow and the company been transparent about the cause of death and his medical history. But why would they? If he died of a heart attack, how does that play out in a PR campaign? Where does that leave the company financially? I mean, Atkins having a heart attack is the exclamation point on your critics' argument.
We know that he suffered numerous heart attacks and was overweight, though his widow denies it.
To be perfectly candid, I don't care what you or anybody eats. Eat what you like. Eat what you don't like. It's irrelevant to me. Eating vast amounts of saturated fats clogs arteries; on the other hand (to Atkins' credit) carbohydrates makes you gain weight.
Personally, I follow the advice of the ancient Greeks: everything in moderation.