low-carb

You are currently browsing articles tagged low-carb.

duncehatI imagine some of you have heard about the new study published in the Annals of Internal Medicine claiming that low-carb, meat-based diets raise the risk of heart attacks, other cardiovascular events and death. With headlines in the media like “Low carb, high meat diet has high risks” and “Low-carb diets might be deadly“, you might be (understandably) concerned.

Well, as they say in NYC, “fuggedah-bout-it.”

As many preposterous and poorly designed studies as I read (and let me tell you, I read a lot of them), I haven’t lost the ability to be shocked by a particularly bad one. I know the researchers who publish them aren’t stupid. And in general, I think their motivations are good. But it is truly astonishing to see how easily highly trained scientists can completely abandon reason and critical thinking.

And don’t get me started on the mainstream media. They’re hopeless. Do they even read the junk that comes across their desk before regurgitating it as a sensationalized and vapid news story? I know that news outlets have science reporters on staff. Where do they find these people? I could explain this study to a ten-year old in simple language, and they’d understand right away how ridiculous and worthless it is.

Maybe these researchers and reporters need to eat more meat and fat so their brains work better. Because stuff like this is pretty embarrassing for them.

When I saw this study, I knew I’d have to write about it. After all, a low-ish carb, meat-based diet is exactly what I advocate for optimal health. Fortunately, several of my esteemed blogger colleagues have already dissected, dismantled and otherwise disposed of this piece of scientific garbage. Rather than re-create the wheel, I’m simply going to link to their articles and provide a brief summary of the key points here.

The study claimed that a plant-based, low-carb diet (which we’ll call the Vegetable group) is associated with a lower risk of mortality and disease, while an animal-product based low-carb diet (which we’ll call the Animal group) is associated with an increased risk of mortality and disease.

Does the study support those claims? Hardly. Here’s why:

  • The so-called low-carb diet in the study wasn’t remotely low-carb. The participants got between 37% – 60% of calories from carbohydrates, which is what most low-carb experts would call, um, “high-carb.”
  • People in the Animal group were more likely to smoke and be overweight than the Vegetable group. Smoking and overweight are risk factors for heart disease. This alone could explain the results, but it also suggests that the Vegetable group may have been more health conscious in other ways (like exercise, stress management, etc.) that were not accounted for in the study. This, of course, is the problem with attempting to draw conclusions from epidemiological research – as we’ve discussed several times here before.
  • The Vegetable group didn’t exactly eat a vegetable-based diet. They got almost 30% of calories from animal products (vs. 45% from the Animal group).
  • When you examine the data in the study closely, differences in death rates were unrelated to animal product consumption. That means something else (not eating meat) described the differences seen in the study.
  • Epidemiological (observational) studies about meat intake are notoriously inaccurate, because people tend to lie (or forget) how much meat they actually eat. Since this study was based on nurses and doctors, who firmly believe the “meat is bad for you” hype, and are invested in the medical establishment, the participants may have been more likely to under-report their meat intake.

Of course Dean Ornish has jumped on the bandwagon claiming this study vindicates his completely unscientific claims that a plant-based diet is healthier than a meat-based diet. It does nothing of the sort, as you’ll see when you read the following articles. (I’ve lost all respect for the Dean Ornish’s integrity. I think his heart is in the right place, but he so clearly believes eating meat is bad and wrong that he entirely ignores any evidence that conflicts with his belief, and eagerly distorts any evidence that vaguely appears to support his belief.)

For a full analysis of the absurdity of this study, check out the following articles:

  • Why the latest low carb scare study is flawed, by Jenny Ruhl at Diabetes Update
  • Brand-spankin new study: are low-carb meat eaters in trouble?, by Denise Minger at Raw Food SOS: Troubleshooting on the Raw Food Diet
  • The Atkins study (ahem, ahem) according to Ornish, by Tom Naughton at Fat Head
  • New study shows that lying about your hamburger intake prevents disease and death when you eat a low-carb diet high in carbohydrates, by Chris Masterjohn at The Daily Lipid. (That headline says it all, doesn’t it?)

Tags: , , ,

lowcarbDr. Kharrazian has written an excellent post over at his blog about the importance of proper diet in the treatment of Hashimoto’s. He covers all the bases: the importance of going gluten-free, why gluten-free isn’t enough for most people, how to identify and address food sensitivities, how to balance blood sugar, and how to deal with the psychological and emotional resistance that may arise when making significant dietary changes.

The main obstacle most Americans face in implementing dietary changes, as Dr. K points out, is their addiction to the idea of a “quick fix”:

Americans are infatuated with pills, thanks to decades of conditioning from the pharmaceutical industry. It doesn’t matter whether they come from the pharmacy or the health food store, we have a cultural fixation with finding that magic bullet. It’s no wonder—making genuine, lasting changes to your health takes hard work and discipline, the two last things you’ll see advertised on commercials during your favorite television show.

As long as this mentality prevails, we’ll continue to suffer from increasing rates of disease and morbidity, and our “disease-care” system will continue to buckle and, eventually, collapse.

Dietary and lifestyle changes aren’t easy, but they’re the key to promoting health and preventing disease. And that’s just as true with Hashimoto’s as it is with type 2 diabetes and heart disease.

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

obesityWelcome to the first episode of The Healthy Skeptic Podcast! To listen to this podcast and subscribe to future episodes in iTunes, click here or click the new iTunes podcast button in the sidebar to the right.

If you don’t use iTunes, you can listen to the file by clicking this link. If you’d like to download it, just right-click the link and download it to your computer. If you’re an Android user or prefer subscribing to an RSS feed of the podcast and blog together, click here.

We’re kicking things off with an interview with Dr. Stephan Guyenet, Ph.D. on obesity, body fat regulation, and weight loss. Stephan is a researcher at the University of Washington studying the neurobiology of fat regulation. He also writes one of my favorite blogs on nutrition and health, Whole Health Source.

Topics covered include:

  • The little known causes of the obesity epidemic
  • Why the common weight loss advice to “eat less and exercise more” isn’t effective
  • The long-term results of various weight loss diets (low-carb, low-fat, etc.)
  • The body-fat setpoint and its relevance to weight regulation
  • The importance of gut flora in weight regulation
  • The role of industrial seed oils in the obesity epidemic
  • Obesity as immunological and inflammatory disease
  • Strategies for preventing weight gain and promoting weight loss

It’s a bit long at 1:20, but I think you’ll enjoy it if you’re interested in this topic.

Please let me know what you think!

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

kiss health goodnightNote: this is the sixth and final article in a series about heartburn and GERD. If you haven’t done so already, you’ll want to read Part I, Part II, Part III, and Part IVa, and Part IVb before reading this article.

In this final article of the series, we’re going to discuss three steps to treating heartburn and GERD without drugs. These same three steps will also prevent these conditions from developing in the first place, and keep them from returning once they’re gone.

To review, heartburn and GERD are not caused by too much stomach acid. They are caused by too little stomach acid and bacterial overgrowth in the stomach and intestines. Therefore successful treatment is based on restoring adequate stomach acid production and eliminating bacterial overgrowth.

This can be accomplished by following the “three Rs” of treating heartburn and GERD naturally:

  1. Reduce factors that promote bacterial overgrowth and low stomach acid.
  2. Replace stomach acid, enzymes and nutrients that aid digestion and are necessary for health.
  3. Restore beneficial bacteria and a healthy mucosal lining in the gut.

  1. Reduce factors that promote bacterial overgrowth and low stomach acid

Carbohydrates

As we saw in Part II and Part III, a high carbohydrate diet promotes bacterial overgrowth. Bacterial overgrowth – in particular H. pylori – can suppress stomach acid. This creates a vicious cycle where bacterial overgrowth and low stomach acid reinforce each other in a continuous decline of digestive function.

It follows, then, that a low-carb (LC) diet would reduce bacterial overgrowth. To my knowledge there have only been two small studies done to test this hypothesis. The results in both studies were overwhelmingly positive.

The first study was performed by Professor Yancy and colleagues at Duke University. They enrolled five patients with severe GERD that also had a variety of other medical problems, such as diabetes. Each of these patients had failed several conventional GERD treatments before being enrolled in the study. In spite of the fact that some of these patients continued to drink, smoke and engage in other GERD-unfriendly habits, in every case the symptoms of GERD were completely eliminated within one week of adopting a very low carbohydrate (VLC) (<20 grams/day) diet! The patients were able to stop all antacids and prescription stomach medicines and this improvement continued even after they liberalized their carbohydrate intake to a more tolerable 70 grams per day.

The second study (PDF) was performed by Yancy and colleagues a few years later. This time they examined the effects of a VLC diet on eight obese subjects with severe GERD. They measured the esophageal pH of the subjects at baseline before the study began using something called the Johnson-DeMeester score. This is a measurement of how much acid is getting back up into the esophagus, and thus an objective marker of how much reflux is occurring. They also used a self-administered questionnaire called the GSAS-ds to evaluate the frequency and severity of 15 GERD-related symptoms within the previous week.

At the beginning of the diet, five of eight subjects had abnormal Johnson-DeMeester scores. All five of these patients showed a substantial decrease in their Johnson-DeMeester score (meaning less acid in the esophagus). Most remarkably, the magnitude of the decrease in Johnson-DeMeester scores is similar to what is reported with PPI treatment. In other words, in these five subjects a very low carbohydrate diet was just as effective as powerful acid suppressing drugs in keeping acid out of the esophagus.

All eight individuals had evident improvement in their GSAS-ds scores. The GSAS-ds scores decreased from 1.28 prior to the diet to 0.72 after initiation of the diet. What these numbers mean is that the patients all reported significant improvement in their GERD related symptoms. Therefore, there was both objective (Johnson-DeMeester) and subjective (GSAS-ds) improvement in this study.

It’s important to note that obesity is an independent risk factor for GERD, because it increases intra-abdominal pressure and causes dysfunction of the lower esophageal sphincter (LES). The advantage to a low-carb diet as a treatment for GERD for those who are overweight is that LC diets are also very effective for promoting weight loss.

I don’t recommend VLC diets for extended periods of time, as they are unnecessary for most people. Once you have recovered your digestive function, a diet low to moderate in carbohydrates should be adequate to prevent a recurrence of symptoms.

An alternative to a VLC is something called a “specific carbohydrate diet” (SCD), or the GAPS diet. In these two approaches it is not the amount of carbohydrates that is important, but the type of carbohydrates. The theory is that the longer chain carbohydrates (disaccharides and polysacharides) are the ones that feed bad bacteria in our guts, while short chain carbohydrates (monosacharides) don’t pose a problem. In practice what this means is that all grains, legumes and starchy vegetables should be eliminated, but fruits and certain non-starchy root vegetables (winter squash, rutabaga, turnips, celery root) can be eaten. These are not “low-carb” diets, per se, but there is reason to believe that they may be just as effective in treating heartburn and GERD. See the resources section below for books and websites about these diets, which have been used with dramatic success to treat everything from autism spectrum disorder (ASD) to Crohn’s disease.

Be careful to avoid the processed low-carb foods sold in supermarkets. Instead, I suggest what is known as a “paleolithic” or “primal” approach to nutrition. Mark’s Daily Apple is a great online resource for this approach, and his book “Primal Blueprint” is a good summary of the principles.

Fructose and artificial sweeteners

As I pointed out in Part II, fructose and artificial sweeteners have been shown to increase bacterial overgrowth. Artificial sweeteners should be completely eliminated, and fructose (in processed form especially) should be reduced.

Fiber

High fiber diets and bacterial overgrowth are a particularly dangerous mix. Remember, Almost all of the fiber and approximately 15-20% of the starch we consume escape absorption. Carbohydrates that escape digestion become food for intestinal bacteria.

Prebiotics, which can be helpful in re-establishing a healthy bacterial balance in some patients, should probably be avoided in patients with heartburn and GERD. Several studies show that fructo-oligosaccharides (prebiotics) increase the amount of gas produced in the gut.

The other problem with fiber is that it can bind with nutrients and remove them from the body before they have a chance to be absorbed. This is particularly problematic in GERD sufferers, who may already be deficient in key nutrients due to long term hypochlorydria (low stomach acid).

H. pylori

In Part III we looked at the possible relationship between H. pylori and GERD. While I think it’s a contributing factor in some cases, the question of whether and how to treat it is less clear. There is some evidence that H. pylori is a normal resident on the human digestive tract, and even plays some protective and health-promoting roles. If this is true, complete eradication of H. pylori may not be desirable. Instead, a LC or specific carbohydrate diet is probably a better choice as it will simply reduce the bacterial load and bring the gut flora back into a state of relative balance.

The exception to this may be in serious or long-standing cases of GERD that aren’t responding to a VLC or LC diet. In this situation, it may be worthwhile to get tested for H. pylori and treat it more aggressively.

Dr. Wright, author of Why Stomach Acid is Good For You, suggests using mastic (a resin from a Mediterranean and Middle Eastern variety of pistachio tree) to treat H. pylori. A 1998 in vitro study in the New England Journal of Medicine showed that mastic killed several strains of H. pylori, including some that were resistant to conventional antibiotics. Studies since then, including in vivo experiments, have shown mixed results. Mastic may be a good first-line therapy for H. pylori, with antibiotics as a second choice if the mastic treatment isn’t successful.

  1. Replace stomach acid, enzymes and nutrients that aid digestion and are necessary for health

HCL with Pepsin

If you have an open-minded doctor, or one that is aware of the connection between low stomach acid and GERD, ask her to test your stomach acid levels. The test is quite simple. A device called a Heidelberg capsule, which consists of a tiny pH sensor and radio transmitter compressed into something resembling a vitamin capsule, is lowered into the stomach. When swallowed, the sensors in the capsule measure the pH of the stomach contents and relay the findings via radio signal to a receiver located outside the body.

In cases of mild to moderate heartburn, actual testing for stomach acid production at Dr. Wright’s Tahoma clinic shows that hypochlorydria occurs in over 90 percent of thousands tested since 1976. In these cases, replacing stomach acid with HCL supplements is almost always successful.

Although testing actual stomach acid levels is preferable, it is not strictly necessary. There is a reasonably reliable, “low-tech” method that can be performed at home to determine whether HCL supplementation will provide a benefit. To do this test, pick up some HCL capsules that contain pepsin. HCL should always be taken with pepsin because it is likely that if the stomach is not producing enough HCL, it is also not producing enough pepsin.

Note: HCL should never be taken (and this test should not be performed) by anyone who is also using any kind of anti-inflammatory medication such as corticosteroids (e.g. predisone), aspirin, Indocin, ibuprofen (e.g. Motrin, Advil, etc.) or other NSAIDS. These drugs can damage the GI lining that supplementary HCL might aggravate, increasing the risk of gastric bleeding or ulcer.

To minimize side effects, start with one 650 mg capsule of HCL w/pepsin in the early part of each meal. If there are no problems after two or three days, increase the dose to two capsules at the beginning of meals. Then after another two days increase to three capsules. Increase the dose gradually in this stepwise fashion until you feel a mild burning sensation. At that point, reduce the dosage to the previous number of capsules you were taking before you experienced burning and stay at that dosage. Over time you may find that you can continue to reduce the dosage, or you may also find that you may need to increase the dosage.

In Dr. Wright’s clinic, most patients end up at a dose of 5-7 650 mg capsules. In my more limited experience, 3-4 capsules is the norm.

Bitters

Another way to stimulate acid production in the stomach is by taking bitter herbs. “Bitters” have been used in traditional cultures for thousands of years to stimulate and improve digestion. More recently, studies have confirmed the ability of bitters to increase the flow of digestive juices, including HCL, bile, pepsin, gastrin and pancreatic enzymes. 1

Unsurprisingly, there aren’t many clinical studies evaluating the therapeutic potential of unpatentable and therefore unprofitable bitters. However, in one uncontrolled study in Germany, where a high percentage of doctors prescribe herbal medicine, gentian root capsules provided dramatic relief of GI symptoms in 205 patients.

The following is a list of bitter herbs commonly used in Western and Chinese herbology:

  • Barberry bark
  • Caraway
  • Dandelion
  • Fennel
  • Gentian root
  • Ginger
  • Globe artichoke
  • Goldenseal root
  • Hops
  • Milk thistle
  • Peppermint
  • Wormwood
  • Yellow dock

Bitters are normally taken in very small doses – just enough to evoke a strong taste of bitterness. Kerry Bone, a respected Western herbalist, suggests 5 to 10 drops of a 1:5 tincture of the above herbs taken in 20 mL of water.

An even better option is to see a licensed herbalist who can prescribe a formula containing several of the herbs above as appropriate for your particular condition.

Apple cider vinegar, lemon juice, raw (unpasteurized) sauerkraut and pickles are other time-tested, traditional remedies that often relieve the symptoms of heartburn and GERD. However, although these remedies may resolve symptoms, they do not increase nutrient absorption and assimilation to the extent that HCL supplements do. This may be important for those who have been taking acid suppressing drugs for a long period.

It is also important to avoid consuming liquid during meals. Water is especially problematic, because it literally dilutes the concentration of stomach acid. A few sips of wine is probably fine, and may even be helpful.

Finally, for those who have been taking acid stopping drugs for several years, it may be necessary to replace the nutrients that are not absorbed without sufficient stomach acid. These include B12, folic acid, calcium, iron and zinc. It’s best to get your levels tested by a qualified medical practitioner, who can then help you replace them through nutritional changes and/or supplementation.

  1. Restore beneficial bacteria and a healthy mucosal lining in the gut

Probiotics

Because bacterial overgrowth is a major factor in heartburn and GERD, restoring a healthy balance of intestinal bacteria is an important aspect of treatment. Along with performing several other functions essential to digestive health, beneficial bacteria (probiotics) protect against potential pathogens through “competitive inhibition” (i.e. competing for resources).

While I haven’t seen any specific research on probiotics in the treatment of GERD, numerous studies have demonstrated their effectiveness in treating a variety of G.I. conditions.

Researchers in Australia have shown that probiotics are effective in reducing bacterial overgrowth and altering fermentation patterns in the small bowel in patients with IBS. Probiotics have also been shown to be effective in treating Crohn’s disease, ulcerative colitis, and other digestive conditions.

I am often asked what type of probiotics I recommend. First, I am not a big believer in supplements. I think we should always attempt to get the nutrients we need from food. This is also true for probiotics. Fermented foods have been consumed for their probiotic effects for thousands of years. What’s more, contrary to popular belief and the marketing of commercial probiotic manufacturers, foods like yogurt and kefir generally have a much higher concentration of beneficial microorganisms than probiotic supplements do.

For example, even the most potent commercial probiotics claim to contain somewhere between one and five billion microorganisms per serving. (I say “claim” to contain because independent verification studies have shown that most commercial probiotics do not contain the amount of microorganisms they claim to.) Contrast that with a glass of homemade kefir, a fermented milk product, contains as many as 5 trillion beneficial microorganisms!

What’s more, fermented milk products like kefir and yogurt offer more benefits than beneficial bacteria alone, including minerals, vitamins, protein, amino acids, L-carnitine, fats, CLA, and antimicrobial agents. Studies have even shown that fermented milk products can improve the eradication rates of H. pylori by 5-15%.

The problem with fermented milk products in the treatment of heartburn and GERD, however, is that milk is relatively high in carbohydrates. This may present a problem for people with severe bacterial overgrowth. However, relatively small amounts of kefir and yogurt are therapeutic and may be well tolerated. It’s best to make kefir and yogurt at home, because the microorganism count will be much higher. Lucy’s Kitchen Shop sells a good home yogurt maker, and Dom’s Kefir site has exhaustive information on all things kefir. If you do buy the home yogurt maker, I suggest you also buy the glass jar that Lucy’s sells to make it in (rather than using the plastic jar it comes with).

Another option is to eat non-dairy (and thus lower-carb) unpasteurized (raw) sauerkraut and pickles and/or drink a beverage called kombucha. Raw sauerkraut can easily be made at home, or sometimes found at farmer’s markets. Bubbies brand raw pickles are sold at health food stores, as is kombucha, but both of these can also be made quite easily at home.

If you do choose to take capsules, make sure the brand you choose is reputable and the viability of their product has been independently verified. Natren is such a brand in the US.

Bone broth and DGL

Restoring a healthy gut lining is another important part of recovering from heartburn and GERD. Chronic stress, bacterial overgrowth, and certain medications such as steroids, NSAIDs and aspirin can damage the lining of the stomach. Since it is the mucosal lining of the stomach that protects it from its own acid, a damaged stomach lining can cause irritation, pain and ultimately, ulcers.

Homemade bone broth soups are effective in restoring a healthy mucosal lining in the stomach. Bone broth is rich in collagen and gelatin, which have been shown to benefit people with ulcers. It’s also high in proline, a non-essential amino acid that is an important precursor for the formation of collagen. Bone broth also contains glutamine, an important metabolic fuel for intestinal cells that has been shown to benefit the gut lining in animal studies. See this article and this one for more information about the healing power of bone broth, and how to make it.

Although I’m not big on supplements, as I explained above, I’m not averse to using them when they can be helpful – especially for short periods. Deglycyrrhizinated licorice (DGL) has been shown to be effective in treating gastric and duodenal ulcers, and works as well in this regard as Tagamet or Zantac, with far fewer side effects and no undesirable acid suppression. In animal studies, DGL has even been shown to protect the stomach lining against damage caused by aspirin and other NSAIDs.

DGL works by raising the concentration of compounds called prostaglandins, which promote mucous secretion, stabilize cell membranes, and stimulate new cell growth – all of which contributes to a healthy gut lining. Both chronic stress and use of NSAIDs suppress prostaglandin production, so it is vital for anyone dealing with any type of digestive problem (including GERD) to find ways to manage their stress and avoid the use of NSAIDs as much as possible.

When natural treatments may not be enough

There may be some cases when an entirely natural approach is not enough. When there is tissue damage in the esophagus, for example, a surgical procedure called “gastroplication” which repairs the LES valve may be necessary. These procedures don’t have the potential to create nutrient deficiencies and disease the way acid blockers do. It is advisable for anyone suffering from a severe case of GERD to consult with a knowledgeable physician.

Conclusion

The mainstream medical approach to treating heartburn and GERD involves taking acid stopping drugs for as long as these problems occur. Unfortunately, because these drugs not only don’t address the underlying cause of these problems but may make it worse, this means that people who start taking antacid drugs end up taking them for the rest of their lives.

This is a serious problem because acid stopping drugs promote bacterial overgrowth, weaken our resistance to infection, reduce absorption of essential nutrients, and increase the likelihood of developing IBS, other digestive disorders, and cancer. The manufacturers of these drugs have always been aware of these problems. When acid-stopping drugs were first introduced, it was recommended that they not be taken for more than six weeks. Clearly this prudent advice has been discarded, as it is not uncommon today to encounter people who have been on these drugs for decades – not weeks.

What is especially disturbing about this is that heartburn and GERD are easily prevented and cured by making simple dietary and lifestyle changes, as I have outlined in this final article.

Unfortunately, the corruption of our “disease-care” system by the financial interests of the pharmaceutical companies virtually guarantees that this crucial information will remain obscure. Drug companies make more than $7 billion a year selling acid suppressing medications. The last thing they want is for doctors and their patients to learn how to treat heartburn and GERD without these drugs. And since 2/3 of all medical research is sponsored by drug companies, it’s virtually guaranteed that we won’t see any large studies on the effects of a low-carb diet on acid reflux and GERD.

So once again it’s up to us to discover the truth and be our own advocates. I hope this series of articles has served you in that goal.

I have created a “myth busing report” page for heartburn and GERD which contains an index of these articles, as well links to books and other offsite resources. If anyone you know is suffering from heartburn and GERD, please direct them to https://thehealthyskeptic.org/heartburn.

  1. Wright, Jonathan M.D. Why Stomach Acid is Good For You. M Evans 2001. p.142

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

caution signFor the last 50 years mainstream medical “authorities” have been hammering it into our heads that high cholesterol levels are dangerous and low cholesterol levels are desirable; that eating saturated fat is bad for us; and that a low-fat, high carbohydrate diet is healthy and helps people lose weight.

If you’re a new reader, you might be surprised to learn that there’s very little evidence to support these recommendations and plenty of evidence that contradicts them. Long ago I learned that if I wanted to live a long, healthy life it was in my best interest to ignore the dietary advice of the medical mainstream. And of course that’s why I started this blog – to share this information with all of you so you can make educated, and informed choices about your health.

Lately I’ve been encouraged by the number of studies being published that undermine the anti-fat, anti-cholesterol dogma we’ve been brainwashed with for so long. This is good news.

The bad news is that paradigm shifts do not happen overnight. It took half a century for researchers and doctors to convince people that eating toxic, highly processed, nasty-tasting vegetable oils was somehow better for them than eating traditional animal fats like butter and lard; that eating dry bagels, boneless-skinless chicken breast and salad with fat-free dressing was a path to good health; and that the best way to lose weight was to eat a highly unnatural diet high in processed, refined carbohydrates and low in fat.

So I don’t expect these ideas to disappear anytime soon, in spite of the solid evidence being published that contradicts them. It’s going to take time. But my sense is that it will take less time to convince people that eating traditional, nutrient-dense, whole foods that have been minimally processed is better for them than eating what the industrial food conglomerates have been selling us.

Here are the three studies.

The first is yet another study that associates low cholesterol with an increase in the risk of death (total mortality). It showed increased death rates in hospitalized patients with low cholesterol levels.

CONCLUSIONS: In our cohort, lower LDL-cholesterol at admission was associated with decreased 3-year survival in patients with NSTEMI.

This shouldn’t be a surprise. There’s already plenty of evidence suggesting low cholesterol increases the risk of death – as well as contributing to other conditions such as cancer and depression. For more on this see my previous article Cholesterol Doesn’t Cause Heart Disease.

The second study shows (once again) that cutting carbs is the best way to lose weight and fight obesity.

No surprise here either. Countless studies, trials and reviews have demonstrated that low-carb diets are superior for weight loss, managing diabetes and preventing many of the other modern diseases which plague us. How long will it take until doctors and the media get the message? For more on one such recent review, see Low-carb Diet Best for Weight Loss.

The last study I want to share with you was performed by a Swedish PhD student. It demonstrates that children who eat saturated fat and full-cream dairy products are healthier than those who do not.

Conclusions: BMI correlated strongly to fat mass and leptin was the best marker of overweight and fat mass in 8-year-olds. Food choice was similar to that at 4 years of age. An intake of fat fish once a week was associated with higher serum concentrations of n-3 fatty acids. Saturated fat and intake of full fat milk were inversely associated with BMI. Serum phospholipid fatty acids were associated with bone mineralisation. The results for metabolic markers may provide preliminary reference intervals in healthy children.

If you’re surprised by this, read my recent post Have Some Butter with Your Veggies as well as Whole Fat Milk: Benefits for Moms and Kids.

Tags: , , , , ,

steak and veggiesA study was just published in the New England Journal of Medicine on July 17th comparing the effectiveness and safety of three different weight loss diets. 322 moderately obese subjects were assigned to one of three diets: low-fat, restricted-calorie; Mediterranean, restricted-calorie; or low-carbohydrate, non-restricted calorie.

The rate of adherence to the study diet was 95% at year one and 85% at year two. Among the 272 participants who completed the intervention, the mean weight losses were 3.3 kg for the low-fat group, 4.6 kg for the Mediterranean-diet group, and 5.5 kg for the low-carbohydrate group.

Perhaps more significantly, the relative reduction in the ratio of total cholesterol to HDL was 20% in the low carbohydrate group while only 12% in the low-fat group. Among the 35 subjects with diabetes, changes in fasting plasma glucose and insulin levels were more favorable among those assigned to the Mediterranean diet than among those assigned to the low-fat diet.

Unfortunately, the bias against saturated fat and animal products that is still so prevalent in the mainstream (in spite of the lack of evidence to support it) prevailed in this study. The research team advised those following the low-carb diet to “choose vegetarian sources of fat and protein” and moderate their consumption of saturated fats and meat.

This suggests that the low-fat dieters may have consumed a substantial portion of their calories as fat in the form of omega-6 polyunsaturated fatty acids. Excess intake of omega-6 fatty acids contributes to a host of problems including heart disease, diabetes, and cancer; but even more relevant to this study and its results is the fact that omega-6 fatty acids can cause increased water retention. And as everyone knows, increased water retention equals increased weight.

This certainly causes me to wonder how much more dramatic the results of this study might have been if the low-carb subjects were encouraged to significantly restrict their consumption of omega-6 fats (which cause water retention, and thus weight gain) and replace them with saturated fats (which do not cause water retention). What is remarkable is that in spite of the consumption of omega-6 fats, the low-carb group still lost more weight than both the low-fat and Mediterranean groups. That’s a strong endorsement for the benefits of a low-carb diet for weight loss.

The low-carb and Mediterranean (to a lesser degree) diet also had other benefits beyond promoting weight loss and improving cholesterol measures. The level of high-sensitivity C-reactive protein decreased significantly only in the Mediterranean and ow-carb group, with the low-carb group again showing the greatest decrease (29% vs. 21%). C-reactive protein is a measure of inflammation that has been positively correlated with heart disease in recent studies. Once again, one must wonder if the reduction would have been even greater in the low-carb group had the subjects been told to restrict their intake of omega-6 fats, which are known to promote inflammation.

Another interesting finding is that although caloric intake was only restricted in the low-fat and Mediterranean diet groups, the low-carb group also ended up eating fewer calories during the diet. Many people who follow a low-carb, high protein/high fat diet find that they spontaneously eat less because additional protein, and in particular fat, leads to greater levels of satiety (satisfaction).

One limitation of the study is that it relied on self-reported dietary intake (this is true of almost every dietary study except those performed in tightly controlled conditions, such as an inpatient facility). However, the study was somewhat unique in that it was conducted in a workplace at a research center with an on-site medical clinic. It also had several other strengths. The drop-out rate was exceptionally low for a study of this kind; all participants started simultaneously; the duration was relatively long (2 years); the study group was relatively large; and the monthly measurements of weight remitted a better understanding of the weight-loss trajectory than other studies.

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Bad Behavior has blocked 708 access attempts in the last 7 days.

Better Tag Cloud