ClimbnSink
Ejection Handle Pulled
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2007
- Messages
- 6,997
- Display Name
Display name:
Greg
My diet guru can beat up your diet guru.
My diet guru can beat up your diet guru.
1600vw
Pattern Altitude
I gave up all soft drinks over 10 years ago. I also tried to cut all sweets out of my diet. My biggest down fall is chocolate. I love the stuff. Sometimes I go months without any. Then other times I will eat a couple bars a week. During the summer I try to eat melon's instead of other sweets.
I found after not drinkings sweetened soft drinks that now these drinks taste like crap if I try to drink them.
The biggest issue is all the high fructose corn syrup that is put in most foods. Now they are trying to hide this by calling it things like corn syrup and modified syrup ect. But they put this crap in all most everything.
Tony Sweet
I found after not drinkings sweetened soft drinks that now these drinks taste like crap if I try to drink them.
The biggest issue is all the high fructose corn syrup that is put in most foods. Now they are trying to hide this by calling it things like corn syrup and modified syrup ect. But they put this crap in all most everything.
Tony Sweet
dtuuri
Final Approach
Ha! This "guru" (Dr. Hazen) is a steak lover who cut his red meat consumption by over 90% by my math because of his research. He went from 12 oz several times/week to less than 6 oz every two weeks.
dtuuri
azure
Final Approach
Interesting result, but I'm suspicious of any paper that claims a single-cause etiology for CAD. Weren't polyunsaturated fats the killer food last year?
Also, maybe it's just poor writing in the article, but it seems to imply that smoking isn't relevant, which goes against so much accepted research that it's almost certainly wrong. Maybe they just meant that TMAO is a risk factor independently of smoking.
Also, maybe it's just poor writing in the article, but it seems to imply that smoking isn't relevant, which goes against so much accepted research that it's almost certainly wrong. Maybe they just meant that TMAO is a risk factor independently of smoking.
dtuuri
Final Approach
What, the NY Times guilty of bad reporting? Say it ain't so!
I didn't detect a single-cause claim on the part of the researchers, nor that smoking isn't relevant. All they ever made a claim for in my reading is that TMAO enables cholesterol to create plaques and predicts coronary artery disease a lot better (10X?) than traditional labs. The head researcher, though, cut back on his meat consumption by 90%, so that ought to speak louder than words.
dtuuri
ClimbnSink
Ejection Handle Pulled
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2007
- Messages
- 6,997
- Display Name
Display name:
Greg
After the ancel keys fraud we're supposed to believe the same crap stuffed in a different box?
RJM62
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Jun 15, 2007
- Messages
- 13,157
- Location
- Upstate New York
- Display Name
Display name:
Geek on the Hill
azure
Final Approach
Apparently I skipped over a sentence the first time I read it. They're saying what I thought they should have been saying, that TMAO levels are an independent risk factor, not that smoking isn't also an independent risk factor.
The fact that he cut down on meat would only tell me something if I suspected the study to be fraudulent. I'd do the same thing if I believed the result, but I've believed lots of things that later turned out to be wrong. This is a preliminary result, let's wait to see how it shakes out.
If it's true, that's one risk factor I don't have, since I eat less red meat than Hazen does now.
dtuuri
Final Approach
I don't know much about Ancel Keys, so I Googled him then searched for TMAO in the article. Zip. Your ball.
dtuuri
dtuuri
Final Approach
21.0 as of this morning. What's yours?
Hmmm... I find myself being attracted to your body mass index.
dtuuri
azure
Final Approach
Now, now.
Palmpilot
Touchdown! Greaser!
The claim I found is that Keys' study, which used data from seven countries to establish a link between dietary fat and heart disease, left out countries whose data was not consistent with his hypothesis.
dtuuri
Final Approach
So then, you didn't find any reference to TMAO either, i.e., "...the same crap stuffed in a different box?" My reason for bringing it up in the first place is because this is new information meat eaters should care about. Being vegan, I've got my worries: vitamin B-12 and too much omega-6 fatty acids vs. omega-3 and not getting enough EPA & DHA. For them, LDL particle size and TMAO ought to get their attention. However, the test for TMAO may not be available to the general public yet like I thought.
dtuuri
ClimbnSink
Ejection Handle Pulled
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2007
- Messages
- 6,997
- Display Name
Display name:
Greg
One study pushing the standard American diet, excuse us for not getting excited. I used to make fun of vegetarians but I've realized we have more in common then most, none of us believes the standard american diet is any good.
dtuuri
Final Approach
AFAIK, it wasn't a "diet study" and they aren't "pushing" anything. They seem more intrigued by the possibility of someday having a pill that will kill the specific flora that cause TMAO which would let you continue to enjoy unhealthy food having no fiber and far too much protein for your own good.
dtuuri
ClimbnSink
Ejection Handle Pulled
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2007
- Messages
- 6,997
- Display Name
Display name:
Greg
Dude we can all find bright and shiny new studies that reinforce our choices. BBQ up some pulled pork for dinner, mmmmhhh yummy.
JoeSelch
Pattern Altitude
This.
dtuuri
Final Approach
Show me your best one, "shiny new" or old, that stops or reverses coronary artery disease.
dtuuri
ClimbnSink
Ejection Handle Pulled
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2007
- Messages
- 6,997
- Display Name
Display name:
Greg
Why bother, you would just dismiss them as blasphemy against your church. Believing you follow the correct diet might be more important then the actual diet. So go forth and eat no meat in health and happiness.
dtuuri
Final Approach
There aren't any to bother with because AFAIK they don't exist. This TMAO study suggests why.
dtuuri
ClimbnSink
Ejection Handle Pulled
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2007
- Messages
- 6,997
- Display Name
Display name:
Greg
You want homework? Go read good calories bad calories. All I eat is meat and broccoli, we can compare blood work, the report I got after a recent physical(first one in years) the doc put a sticky little gold star on it. Like kindergarten, not sure if I should be insulted or complimented. I keep telling you there is science to back up whatever the heck you want to do. So just be happy, do what you think is best and enjoy life.
dtuuri
Final Approach
I've read enough of Gary Taubes' articles in years gone by to conclude he sells snake oil to muttonheads, present company excepted of course, YMMV. So, I saved my money and read a free copy of The China Study instead.
That could be interesting if we agreed on what is considered good. For instance, it used to be thought high HDL was a good thing, but now it's known it can be not so good--depending on efficiency, they can be just like LDL. The test for that, though, is only done in research labs, so I don't worry about HDL too much. My goals for LDL are below 70 and triglycerides below 80, which I'm meeting with only 5 mg of pravastatin/day, which is my concession to the possible stabilizing effects it may have on any existing plaques.
dtuuri
ClimbnSink
Ejection Handle Pulled
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2007
- Messages
- 6,997
- Display Name
Display name:
Greg
I got a better idea let's have a friendly diet death match. Whoever has the wrong diet dies early.
Palmpilot
Touchdown! Greaser!
I wasn't looking for it. The only reason I Googled it was that I was wondering what Ansel Keys' alleged fraud was.
dtuuri
Final Approach
I got a better idea let's have a friendly diet death match. Whoever has the wrong diet dies early.
I think the odds are greater that whoever has the wrong diet won't die first, but rather suffer first from the debilitating effects of a stroke, heart attack and/or diabetes. They'll need help getting dressed, going to the bathroom, cooking or eating a meal and traveling to their many doctor appointments for the rest of their lives, which could be a long time. The ER will become a familiar place, as well as hospitals and rehab centers where they'll sit in a noisy, crowded space all day while the facility milks the government of their medicare benefits. There'll be subsequent broken hips, pelvices and arms as they exceed their limitations, and pills, pills, pills to swallow in apple sauce all day long between insulin snacks delivered through the point of a needle three to five times a day. Blood draws every week and finger pricks three or four times a day too. Blood thinners will turn a mild bump into a "hematomato" that'll need to be lanced, packed and seen by wound care specialists every day or two. I could go on... or you can ask my mother what life's been like the past 18 years.
For the OP, getting a handle on your blood sugar levels throughout the day is just one thing you need to do. Deciding on an eating plan that keeps the above experiences at bay requires choices from among vastly divergent options. Until I felt some chest pain I believed I was eating a healthy diet, but I was wrong, so I changed. The solid research is easy to find, but so are anecdotal distractions. Google wisely.
dtuuri
Last edited:
Doggtyred
En-Route
I do not play into the ambiguous "toxin" diatribe that people have spread around, including the ones for aspartame. I'm ok with GMO's too, if it means my food has less insecticide sprayed on it.
I actually use a powerade drops formulation for the 150 oz of water I consume a day... that has electrolytes and sucralose, another sugar substitute.
I'm more than anything else, priming someone to think that if its "diet" or "sugar free" more often than not, a synthetic substance has been added to make it more tasty. The same for "fat free". Sugar or other substances are quite often added to make it palatable.
The keys are to eat fresh vegetables, carbs with lots of fiber, fats, and avoid starchy carbs (they turn into sugar, which turns into stored fat), and avoid processed foods with all their chemicals and preservatives, and if you are one of those bordering on metabolic syndrome, something atkins-like MAY be beneficial.
Doggtyred
En-Route
You are welcome to your own drivel and old wives tales. I'm avoiding the standard american diet because of where I've ended up (BMI 40, hgb a1c >6, sleep apnea) and eating healthier, losing weight and liking what is happening.
Key aspects of my lifestyle change (not DIET... because its not temporary), no added sugar, no added table salt, avoidance of processed foods, minimize starchy carbohydrates, whole grain carbs when starchy carbs are consumed. I have all but weaned myself off caffeine over the years, and on the very very rare occasion I need a pick-me-up its a Coke zero, maybe 1 a month, or less. I used to drink VERY sweet tea by the gallon, and cokes just as much. Now I cant stand the taste of either as served by restaurants. If it has more than a 1/2 cup of sugar/gal it just tastes "nasty" to me.
I used to love ribeye's.. now its filet, or sirloin.. lean cuts. My DOGS get more fast food hamburgers for treats than I do... Grilled salmon.. Baked chicken.
I rarely drink beer.. lots of liquid carbs. If I want a little nip, I have liquor I can mix up on rare occasion. Of course, it helps that I dont find the need to drink alcohol to relax or unwind. Thats not my thing. You wont find me drinking my carbs at the bar for happy hour.
A colleague of mine has access to proper grazing land, and has a few head of grass fed beef, as well as a small coop with a few chickens. She has fresh eggs, and once a year enough beef to fill the freezer. She also gets ag exemption on the grazing land for her taxes - BONUS...
Down 15 lbs in 2 months, and thats with only occasional exercise, averaging 6000 steps a day.
I have cheat meals. I still eat out on occasion. Hell, I've even gotten 4 oz sizes of Ben and Jerry's and had one last month. A lot easier to control bad portions when you only have the sample cup size. But overall I stick to the core plan that I identified above.
Thanks for the opportunity, Ron, to spread my drivel, and drive home how I've walked away from the Standard American Diet. You dont have to do what I'm doing. And if you do, I wouldn't want you to do so because I told you to.
I would encourage you to read critically, evaluate the facts and make your own informed decision. Or not. Whatever, sir..
azure
Final Approach
Based on what science? So what if a synthetic substance has been added? I'm well aware that most processed foods are also extremely high in either sugar or sodium, which if you have a problem with hypertension or kidney stones is probably a good thing to keep down to moderate levels or lower. But other than that, and other than the in-vogue-today-discredited-tomorrow news flashes about this or that chemical being a possible carcinogen in rats when consumed at rates 15,000 times the amounts used in foods, I've never seen a peer-reviewed study attributing negative health effects to the preservatives and other chemical additives in processed foods. Other than the high sodium content, the main harmful added ingredient in processed foods isn't a synthetic but refined sugar, and there's a LOT of science implicating excess consumption of sugar, especially refined sugar, in the etiology of DM2. But chemicals? We and everything we consume are made of chemicals and actually many if not most naturally-occurring chemicals are harmful or even lethal. From what I can tell, almost all of the push today for fresh/organic/all natural everything is based on fuzzy thinking with little or no science behind it.
Personally I prefer fresh, unprocessed foods, mostly vegetables, fish, and chicken, some pasta, cooked with sparing amounts of olive oil, well seasoned but without excessive salt. But that's a matter of taste, I don't delude myself into thinking that it's necessarily healthier than eating frozen dinners and canned soup 5 nights a week, assuming you don't have a sodium or sugar-sensitive health problem.
gkainz
Final Approach
I am now on week 3 of the 4 week plan on Whole30.com - eliminated all added sugars, grains, grain carbs, processed foods, etc. Down 15 lbs (altho you're not supposed to get on the scale during this, as it's not specifically for weight loss) but the biggest difference I feel are my joints not hurting as much, so I think my inflammation has begun to subside. I felt like a 90 year old man the last few months. The biggest medical indicator that surprised me was my triglycerides and cholesterol numbers were more than cut in half according to the blood test last week. I've historically had very high triglycerides that refused to react to any of the common bio-pharma treatments, and I reacted very badly to the statin drugs early on.
After the 4 weeks, you re-introduce some of the eliminated food groups and evaluate how the make you feel and then decide to keep or avoid those groups.
Heading towards Paleo after the full program. My son lost around 60 lbs this way a couple of years ago and has kept it off. His mom wrings her hands and laments "you're too skinny!" He is very active tho with capoeira and yoga, whereas my stupid desk job has me whipped...
After the 4 weeks, you re-introduce some of the eliminated food groups and evaluate how the make you feel and then decide to keep or avoid those groups.
Heading towards Paleo after the full program. My son lost around 60 lbs this way a couple of years ago and has kept it off. His mom wrings her hands and laments "you're too skinny!" He is very active tho with capoeira and yoga, whereas my stupid desk job has me whipped...
Last edited:
dtuuri
Final Approach
And also phosphorous. I've had this article sitting on my desk for the past few years: http://www.rodalesorganiclife.com/food/phosphate-foods
It's amazing where this stuff lurks:
my emphasis.
dtuuri
azure
Final Approach
Yes I've heard about this before and it's a good example of preliminary science being used to support a movement that's largely based on a knee-jerk reaction against non-organic foods (notice I didn't say inorganic food, since there isn't any such thing).
My takeaway: hyperphosphatemia is directly associated with and leads to high mortality by mechanisms that are well understood. If you have CKD then you should probably keep your inorganic phosphate intake to a minimum. If you don't have CKD and your metabolism is otherwise normal, it will limit the buildup of serum phosphate and keep you in the high normal range, at worst. Everything else is very preliminary science, as best I can tell. Yes, there is a correlation between high normal serum phosphate and vascular damage and organ calcification. Of course correlation does not equal causation and as the article says, causation hasn't yet been proven. That's why I say this is preliminary science. I wouldn't megadose on the stuff but until harder evidence comes in, I wouldn't go out of my way to avoid it at all costs.
bflynn
Final Approach
Nation Institute for Health - nih.gov
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2716748/
The study reported results from a 24 week low carb/high fat-protein diet - aka an Atkins diet.
"The present study shows the beneficial effects of a long-term ketogenic diet. It significantly reduced the body weight and body mass index of the patients. Furthermore, it decreased the level of triglycerides, LDL cholesterol and blood glucose, and increased the level of HDL cholesterol. Administering a ketogenic diet for a relatively longer period of time did not produce any significant side effects in the patients. Therefore, the present study confirms that it is safe to use a ketogenic diet for a longer period of time than previously demonstrated"
But hey, if you won't listen to your own government, who are you going to listen to?
dtuuri
Final Approach
I say again, "Show me your best one, 'shiny new' or old, that stops or reverses coronary artery disease."
EDIT: Btw, figure 5 shows an LDL level at the end of 24 weeks that is the same as what mine was when my heart earned a stent. You have to cut that in half to do any good. On a vegan diet, I did that immediately--no 24 weeks of ketosis.
dtuuri
Last edited:
ClimbnSink
Ejection Handle Pulled
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2007
- Messages
- 6,997
- Display Name
Display name:
Greg
This thread reminds me of that line from life of Brian 'he is the true Messiah, I would know I've followed a few'
bflynn
Final Approach
"Furthermore, it decreased the level of triglycerides, LDL cholesterol and blood glucose, and increased the level of HDL cholesterol. "
They didn't state that explict conclusion because it is so obvious to everyone else. Here: http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/health-topics/topics/cad/causes
Causes of CAD -
- Smoking
- High levels of certain fats and cholesterol in the blood
- High blood pressure
- High levels of sugar in the blood due to insulin resistance or diabetes
- Blood vessel inflammation
Two of the five major causes are improved by a ketogenic diet. Does this "stop" CAD? No, there are other causes, including damage already caused by being overweight and having high blood sugar. No diet in the world is going to "stop" that, because it's history. It WILL stop it from getting worse. Can it reverse it? Let's look further, here's a good one: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7500065
This paper states: "coronary disease could be prevented, arrested, or even reversed by maintaining total serum cholesterol levels below 150 mg/dL." Let me assure you - a good ketogenic diet can do exactly that.
Like I said - if you won't listen to your own government, who will you listen to on this? I suspect the answer is nobody even though what you think you're so sure of is probably incomplete.
Last edited:
RJM62
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Jun 15, 2007
- Messages
- 13,157
- Location
- Upstate New York
- Display Name
Display name:
Geek on the Hill
Which is why I generally stay out of diet arguments. Nutrition is infused with too much religion-like zeal, with all sides constantly trying to demonize the others and finding fault in studies that suggest even the possibility that their favorite saint's way may not be the only true path.
In my opinion, the single most important dietary rules are (1) avoid processed foods, and (2) avoid refined carbohydrates. If you do just those two things, you'll be eating better than 90 percent of Americans.
Beyond that, you can find studies that back up everyone from Dr. Atkins to Dr. Esselstyn, and every diet from Paleo to Vegan. So pick the one that you like best ("like" as in "enjoy"), and stick to it. If you pick one that you hate you're not going to stick to it, anyway, so pick one that's in line with your eating preferences.
Rich
dtuuri
Final Approach
Any cardiologist will say LDL should be below 70 if you have CAD. The median for the participants in the study you cited still had twice that amount (expressed as 3.4 mmol/l) after six months. Since just about everybody on a Western diet has increasing amounts of atherosclerosis, if they want to stop it from increasing they ought to use the same target, IMO. Not doing so is fighting a war of attrition with plaque--you hope you die of something else first before it bursts.
That refers to the Framingham heart study. Practically nobody with numbers below 150 had a heart attack. I doubt they were eating a ketogenic diet though, so I wouldn't jump to any conclusions about it. Triglycerides seem to affect how much LDL becomes radicalized, as I understand it, so keeping both low is important. Trigs below 80 aren't enough to worry about, according to Dr. Patrick McBride.
Now you're just being contentious. For your information, I follow the Esselstyn diet in your second link.
dtuuri
dtuuri
Final Approach
Show me an Atkins or Paleo study that reversed CAD, or stopped it from progressing.
dtuuri
ClimbnSink
Ejection Handle Pulled
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2007
- Messages
- 6,997
- Display Name
Display name:
Greg
Nuts man. Oh wait you probably don't eat those.
RJM62
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Jun 15, 2007
- Messages
- 13,157
- Location
- Upstate New York
- Display Name
Display name:
Geek on the Hill