Well,
I'm no MD, & I don't wish to spoil this, but...
Higher protein intake stresses the kidneys, and there's a point of diminishing returns regarding higher protein intake & muscle hypertrophy. As protein intake increases, increasing water intake is crucial, since proteins have a naturally acidic pH, and water helps to buffer that effect.
FWIW, I don't consume large portions of protein, and carbs are vital to me for my exercise because of their quick-burning capability. Low carb/high protein routines just don't cut it. I'm 35, have been exercising since I was 15, and can do about as much as I could when I was a teenager. I can still perform 30+ pull-ups, 50-100 push-ups & dips, 15-20 hand-stand push-ups - all the basic stuff I did as a gymnast in HS & college. I do a routine 6 mile run (@ a nice 10 min/mile pace), and occasionally, swim 2-3 miles. I'm not suffering from a lack of protein, and I'd "hit the wall" quickly if I was.
My point is that, you probably would do better in the long run if you focused on balancing the energy intake a bit more, maybe stressing cardiovascular stuff a little more instead. The Adkins diet will certainly aid fat loss efforts, but it won't do much for your running, swimming, or other heart-stressing activities. You need a mix of proteins, fats & carbohydrates for that. Weight lifting also requires carbs, especially if the intensity is high. Of course, this applies to a "normal" physiology that isn't inclined to convert energy directly to fat. Some people have that problem, necessitating a more unique diet. I'd wager that the Adkins diet has a more profound affect on those who fit this "abnmormal" physiology.
Consider: 30 g of carbs = 120 kcals. Your muscles & liver, combined, can store roughly 1500 kcals before any excess is stored as fat. Protein is same as carbohydrate, @ 4 kcal/g, & fat rates @ 9 kcal/g. Consider your own consumption & do the math. The avg. BMR is around 1500 kcal/day (The minimum amount necessary for sustaining basic bodily functions). The actual amount is specific for each person, but 1500 is a useful, rough avg. for an evaluation in this discussion.
Again - I'm no MD, but I'd argue for a little more moderation. It seems that this diet might work in the short-term, but have long-term consequences. This is probably the best reason to "consult you physician". After all, they aren't [i]all[/i] in the "diet biz".
A note of observation: gout seems to occur more in cultures where meat consumption is greater, but hereditary issues might be at play here, too.
Just my $0.02