las

Welcome all seeking refuge from low carb dogma!

“To kill an error is as good a service as, and sometimes even better than, the establishing of a new truth or fact”
~ Charles Darwin (it's evolutionary baybeee!)

Tuesday, May 29, 2012

Fructose, Fat & Obesity

The other day, Stephan Guyenet shared some of his own thoughts on David Despain's can't-say-enough-nice-things-about-it interview with Dr. John Sievenpiper.  In case you missed it, Stephan discusses his post looking at the links or lack thereof  between sugar consumption per se and obesity.  See:  Is Sugar Fattening?  At the end of the current post is the following footnote:
** If fructose is fattening due to its ability to become fat, then dietary fat should be even more fattening because it doesn't have to undergo an inefficient conversion process-- it's already fat.
Excellent point!  I might add that if saturated fat is such a healthy fat for your body, fat produced by de novo lipogenesis -- mostly palmitic acid in the liver -- would be an even better source of that fat as it would give you a "metabolic advantage"!   It takes almost no calories to digest and store dietary fat in body fat.  It is highly energy intensive to convert fructose to fat, so you get some free calories!


The comments on Stephan's post demonstrate that those who have learned their biochemistry/metabolism from the likes of Taubes and Eades and Lustig, are woefully misguided in same.  And this is the reason I will keep on keeping on doing what I do here to try to undo some of that "knowledge" learned from the damaging education they are getting.  The vast majority of fatty acids that are "rebundled" by the liver are NEFA -- free fatty acids released by adipose tissue that were in excess of needs and are sent back to the fat tissue.  See:  Where do triglycerides come from? Part I , Part II ,  Part III.   Another main conclusion of the radioactive tracer studies discussed in that series is that the increase in fasting VLDL-triglycerides on higher carb diets is attributable to reduced clearance, not increased production.

So what of the fate of VLDL.  Well, when all is said and done, these lipoproteins carry the triglyceride load.  They can "dock" and release that load to peripheral tissues or sent to fat tissue for storage.  This is actually part of a "Fat Accumulation" series post I have on the back burner, but:
  • There can be no doubt that ASP plays an integral role in fatty acid uptake and esterification by adipose tissue.  This is likely the dominant player on the uptake side in the postprandial state.
  • Women seem to have higher fasting ASP levels vs. men
  • ASP seems to be a more adipogenic, "fattening", hormone in women than men
  • ASP is responsive to chylomicron stimulus moreso than VLDL for fatty acid uptake
  • NEFA release in the triglyceride/fatty acid cycle is more from upper body fat
  • VLDL uptake seems to be greater in gluteofemoral (butt & thighs)  fat than upper body fat.*
  • Endogenous lipid production is a highly unlikely route to fat accumulation (aka obesity) in humans
What to make of all of this?  Still putting some thoughts together, but ...
  • Dietary fat is more likely to be incorporated into body fat than "triglycerides" transported from the liver -- VLDL -- including small amounts of fatty acids generated from carbs in general or fructose more specifically. 
  • Not all adipose tissue is created equally ... lots to sort out there, but the keys to female protection against CVD vs. men probably lie in fat bottomed girls ;-)


Hit it Freddy!




94 comments:

AgingHippie said...

http://slowburnfitness.com/how-not-to-lose-fat-starvation/

http://slowburnfitness.com/fat-regulation-insulin-or-asp/

From: Keith Frayn [mailto:keith.frayn@oxlip.ox.ac.uk]

Sent: Monday, February 14, 2011 2:45 AM
To: Fred Hahn
Subject: RE: A question on ASP

Hi Fred

My guess is that you are right: insulin is the primary regulator of both fatty acid uptake and fatty acid release. The ASP story was a nice one but I don’t think it’s been substantiated.

Best wishes

Keith

AgingHippie said...

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/27/health/biological-changes-thwart-weight-loss-efforts-study-finds.html?_r=2&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1319718740-IJ+x0eILKRE2hse0nOHNzA

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1105816

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

We discussed that here a while back. I'm not sure what's up there as Frayn is author of too many papers with the Cianflone group on ASP to write that unless there was a professional falling out? I won't speculate further. Maybe one day I'll write Frayn and ask him to confirm that he wrote the email and for clarification if he did.

ASP-receptor knockouts exhibit the same phenotype as FIRKO.

Tsimblist said...

McDougall's mantra is "The fat you eat is the fat you wear".

Found this link in a forum post on his site:

Fat hits your waistline fast, study says
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/technology/hits+your+waistline+fast+study+says/6621179/story.html

Haven't been able to track down the study yet.

Sanjeev said...

various knockout mice discussed

first, are emails peer reviewed these days?

Seriously, Taubes pushed his G3P by going with interviews and emails, not going through the peer reviewed lit.

And I demanded proof (pgp/gpg digests) when I saw it,

Fred has a history here, by the way. If he shows up again I'll endlessly repeat my question on smoking.

Sanjeev said...

> demanded proof (pgp/gpg digests) when I saw it,

demanded proof (pgp/gpg digests) when I saw the alleged Frayn email.

AgingHippie said...

Is it this

http://deciencia.com.mx/media/articulos/Physical%20activity%20and%20exercise%20in%20the%20regulation%20of%20human%20adipose%20tissue%20physiology.pdf

Tsimblist said...

That looks like the review paper that is mentioned at the end of the article.

There seems to be very recent study by Karpe & Frayn. I have found multiple, similar news reports of it that are dated around the middle of May 2012.

pbo said...

Sorry if this is such a silly question but does this even matter? If you are in a caloric deficit, you body will have to pull energy from somewhere to compensate. So the macronutrient ratio doesn't really matter. If you are hypocaloric, then you are consuming too much energy, which will have to be stored, once again regardless of macro's. Now you might have a slight difference if most of your diet is fat or carb, but what will it really translate to anything significant? If you are isocaloric, you should not put any weight on, so once again macros ratios are insignificant.

Am I missing missing something? What is the absolute impact here instead of relative impact.

bentleyj74 said...

Nope, you aren't missing anything :)

Nigel Kinbrum said...

pbo said...
"If you are hypocaloric, then you are consuming too much energy..."
Hypocaloric = caloric deficit
Hypercaloric = caloric excess

"Am I missing missing something?"
Macro ratios affect appetite & activity levels in many people, so they indirectly affect energy balance.

ProudDaddy said...

To which I would add that macro ratios can also affect body proportions (% body fat, etc.).

v/vmary said...

evelyn, do you have any idea why some paleo eaters would have low tris and high total LDL?

Nigel Kinbrum said...

Insufficient protein intake = kiss muscle mass goodbye!
Look at the body compositions of fruitarians.

Nigel Kinbrum said...

I'm not Evelyn, but...

Low carbohydrate intake -> low fasting serum TGs.

High fat intake -> high postprandial serum TGs (as chylomicrons), VLDL, LDL (whatever the particle size), IDL & HDL.

Asclepius said...

Good post AND a great Queen link!

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

Interesting! I looked at the Phys Rev site and the most current issue is April. Probably in May issue, hopefully by June 1? This one makes for 3-4 related recent papers from this group.

Aside: http://carbsanity.blogspot.com/2012/05/another-fun-tactic.html?showComment=1338355906470#c989217924276359944
Susanne & Galina are talking sourdough. Maybe you want to share your recipes?

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

I deleted the paper request as I've received the full text! I'll likely share this one in Docs when I blog on it.

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

Welcome pbo (I don't recall this user name before!) I think typo aside (I think you meant hyper not hypo) you're pretty much spot on. Macros may influence partitioning in gaining and catabolism while losing, but the surplus/deficit is more important.

High doses of liquid sugars do seem to temporarily impact the liver, but so would high doses of MCT fats!

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

I presume you're talking LCHF paleos? As Nigel wrote, the low trigs we're talking are fasting trigs which are almost all VLDL. Since these are largely comprised of repackaged formerly free fatty acids, I tend to think the low trigs for LC'ers is more evidence of higher NEFA and nothing to write home about. Or, it's even possible these are due to more storage of triglyceride in the liver. That would not be good, but I'm not saying it happens but some evidences seem to point that it might. The high LDL? High fat and weight. For whatever reason, over on PaleoHacks I see that all the time and it's folks who eat a lot of CO or butter. I just came across a paper on this specific topic. Will try to get a blog on it at some point.

Tsimblist said...

I think the Phy Rev is a quarterly journal. So might have a longer wait.

I see that AH found the review paper that was mentioned. I scanned through it and didn't find any reference to their study.

I haven't done any rye sourdough, but I might chime in anyway.

LynMarie Daye said...

Well, he has admitted that lying is acceptable if it serves the greater good.

"White lie when necessary but only when absolutely necessary in order to get the greater good point across."

source of quote

I gotta say, I do not understand the utility of publically stating that it's ok to lie. It damages credibility and I can’t see how that can be anything but a disadvantage when you’re trying to advance an argument. Every time you relay a compelling anecdote, people will be wondering if it’s one of your ‘white lies’. I don't get it...

bentleyj74 said...

You have to deliberately get really low in protein for it to significantly affect muscle mass. Fruitarians are TRYING to eat as little protein as possible on a very extreme diet. They are aware that their low protein intakes mean that they are using their own muscle as a source. I'm not sayin' I think that's a great plan...but it is hardly comparable to less extreme philosophies.

Body fat percentages are primarily controlled by dietary intakes not composition. There are plenty of fat under muscled omnivores eating relatively high protein and shredded high muscle mass vegans eating average amounts. The Kitavans eat relatively low protein, those guys looked adequately muscled to me :) Better than average really.

Kurt G. Harris MD said...

Some paleo VLC eaters with high saturated fat intake will have increased LDL particle size which will drive up the LDL mass but the particle number will stay the same. I've seen this many times and it happened to me as well.

Low fasting Trigs would be expected on VLC.

v/vmary said...

thx everyone.

justjuliebean said...

I often read low-carbers stating that fat isn't fattening, just carbs, and I am puzzled. In what reality is it easier to turn carbs into fat, than just using the fat? Reverse alchemy? Some people need a lot more science!

Scary. If this is how some do science, I worry about our future as a species.

Woodey said...

Queen...one of the greatest bands ever! If Freddie were still alive I would have been his groupie!

Ryan T Rogers, MD said...

So my comments aren't immediately discredited, I am going to give my credentials. I am an MD and was the first student in 10 years at my medical school to test out of biochemistry. I love the subject. My main hobby is to weed though all of these "experts" blogs, lectures, etc.. and understand how biochemical processes have evolutionary implications. I am not on board with strict low carb, nor do I view carbs and sugar as safe substances in certain situations. "In a nut shell, calories should be thought of as effectors of hormonal signaling that lead to downstream changes in the gene expression patterns of the cells." With this in mind, different classes of calories all lead to various downstream expression patterns at the basic cellular level due to the hormonal input received via the endocrine system on the cell. Based on this logic, we should search for the type of diet that leads to optimal gene expression patterns, the problem is, these diet's will differ in various populations. Therefore, there is no one size fits all diet and this leads to controversy. Fructose in large quantities (cokes, cakes, doughnuts)is bad because of the hostile hormonal environment it creates, the individual molecule and its fate as an energy source are harmless. Dietary fat in large quantities does not lead to same hostile hormonal environment (as long as it is not consumed in conjunction with excess fructose or glucose). If you don't believe me, check your fasting TAG's, then drink one coke a day for two weeks and recheck them. They will go up, why, because fructose metabolism by passes the rate limiting step in glycolosis which then shunts the energy to de novo lipogensis in the liver, but it also leads to hormonal changes that favor energy storage on a cellular level "ie insulin resistance, leptin resistance, etc" because the only time large quantities of fructose were available (unless your genetic heritage is from a tropical environments) was in the spring in summer when calories where in excess. Your cells gene expression patterns change in response to the hormonal input received from large quantities of this effector molecule (fructose) and it paves the way for the ravenous hunger and eating paleolithic humans must have experienced in northern climates in the late spring and summer to pack on enough fat to survive the fall and winter. Don't fool yourself into thinking large quantities of glucose and fructose vs large quantities of fat and protein don't tell our cells things about our environmental conditions. Through an evolutionary lens the various types of calories and the macronutrient ratios consumed in meals have profound implications on our body composition, hunger, and nutrient partitioning. Various ratios are effectors that lead to specific types of hormonal milieu's which tell all cells (including the biggies, brain and liver) at lot about our current environmental conditions which will lead to changes in nutrient partitioning and behavior patterns. Those that argue with this are arguing against evolution.

Kurt G. Harris MD said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Kurt G. Harris MD said...

"these diet's"

"TAG's"

"milieu's"

Are you really Jack Kruse or did you both just happen to get the same training in English and Biology?

Ryan T Rogers, MD said...

To Kurt Harris, MD, I am not Jack Kruse. I have read a few of his posts, but I think your blog and advice are the holy grail for advice on diet and nutrition. I am honored you read and commented on my post. I have learned a great deal about nutrition and metabolism from your blog (and got a lot healthier and leaner following your advice). From one archevore to another, thank you.

Nigel Kinbrum said...

Cross-posted on FTA.
Ryan said…
“Dietary fat in large quantities does not lead to same hostile hormonal environment (as long as it is not consumed in conjunction with excess fructose or glucose). If you don’t believe me, check your fasting TAG’s…”
You have completely overlooked postprandial TAGs (in chylomicrons), which increase greatly after eating fat and reduce at a rate determined by activity level (as TAGs go into both fat mass and active muscle mass). In sedentary people, postprandial TAGs remain high for over 6 hours.

William Davis M.D. blogged about it in Gretchen’s postprandial diet experiment. I can’t see Figs 1 & 2 on Firefox, but clicking on the space where they should be displays them.

Nigel Kinbrum said...

See also Fasting Compared With Nonfasting Triglycerides and Risk of Cardiovascular Events in Women.

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

Welcome to the Asylum Ryan!

"In a nut shell, calories should be thought of as effectors of hormonal signaling that lead to downstream changes in the gene expression patterns of the cells."

Is this you speaking (the "") or is this a quotation from a book? Either way, what the heck does it mean? Calories are units of energy -- chemical potential energy when we're talking about food calories.

Fructose in large quantities (cokes, cakes, doughnuts)is bad because of the hostile hormonal environment it creates, the individual molecule and its fate as an energy source are harmless. Dietary fat in large quantities does not lead to same hostile hormonal environment (as long as it is not consumed in conjunction with excess fructose or glucose). If you don't believe me, check your fasting TAG's, then drink one coke a day for two weeks and recheck them.

What does fasting triglycerides have to do with hormonal environment? What hormones? How about if someone has low fasting TAG but LDL of 285? What does that say about hormones? Sounds like something's outta whack there, right?

They will go up, why, because fructose metabolism by passes the rate limiting step in glycolosis which then shunts the energy to de novo lipogensis in the liver, but it also leads to hormonal changes that favor energy storage on a cellular level "ie insulin resistance, leptin resistance, etc"

Sounds like you should read my series on triglycerides based largely on the radio label work of Marc Hellerstein's group. http://carbsanity.blogspot.com/2011/05/where-do-triglycerides-come-from-part-i.html

I can see where Kurt's question came from as it sounds like you're saying that eating a banana in January is telling my body I'm at the equator even though I'm in NY and this alters my gene expression. But you say if I don't believe that then I'm arguing against evolution? Forgive me, but your comment just doesn't make a lot of sense to me except for the fact that the optimal diet for each of us is highly individual based on our ancestry.

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

Oh bummer.

Woodey said...

Glad you said something Carbsane. I was reading what he posted and warning bullsh*t flares where going off. Saying a lot, but nothing was said except a bunch of misused science jargon. Even I know what a calorie is and this guys spots off a line that makes a person scratch their head and say to themselves, "here comes another one".

Kurt G. Harris MD said...

Hi Ryan and thank you.

I was just needling you over the weird apostrophes in your plurals. The only other notable person I've seen do that in writing is Jack Kruse. Sherpa's instead of Sherpas....

I would take issue with this sentence, which is much more Jack Kruse flavored than macro-ratio-agnostic archevore:

"Through an evolutionary lens the various types of calories and the macronutrient ratios consumed in meals have profound implications on our body composition, hunger, and nutrient partitioning."

I view macro ratios as largely irrelevant to health outside of very wide parameters. Eating enough carbs to keep you out of ketosis and lots of animal fat on one extreme and eating a vegetarian version of archevore (where is your guest post Aravind??) with butter and eggs as the main animal products are both equally practicable options for any given human animal. Neither carbs nor natural fats are per se poisons or dangerous.

I don't generally agree that macro ratios have profound implications for health, body composition and nutrient partitioning as long as protein and micronutrient needs are met and one is not eating in energy excess.

Ancel Keys, TC Campbell, Gary Taubes, and Robert Lustig are all wrong. (Yes, fructose is probably only a NAD when it makes you eat more in the form of added sugar, HFCS and various tasty treats.)

I welcome you as a fellow MD to the world of thinking about evolutionary medicine. I strongly suggest you take a break from everything and read The Human Career by Klein in its entirety. Then peruse John Hawk's excellent blog. As doctors, we need to focus on our weaknesses - in my case it's the "evolutionary" part of the dyad - "evolutionary medicine"... I suspect it will be the same for you, unless you have a background in evolutionary biology, paleoanthropology and genetics.

Ryan T Rogers, MD said...

A calorie comes in the form of a unique molecule with a specific stoichiometry therefore, it is not just a unit of energy. If is was just a unit of energy then dietary fat wouldn't slow gastric emptying time, you see certain cells recognize the stoichiometry (chemical structure) of fat via receptor binding in the duodenum and sends a hormonal signal (CCK) to the vagus afferents that slows gastric emptying. So its not bull****, the molecules that represent units of energy in our diet have effects on hormonal signaling and gene expression. All calories are not created equal as units of energy, they are organic compounds with specific three dimensional structures that have unique effects on hormonal signaling and gene expression patterns. That is what I am saying. I am not "here comes another one" in fact I am not extreme at all. I think extreme is needed in the people who have deranged metabolisms, but not for entire populations.

v/vmary said...

hi- more on the high LDL vs low tris. i posted your thts about this on professor de vany's blog. the original poster has a total choles of 300 and LDL of 180:


Art De Vany:


Posts:743

How long have I been saying this? You can't go crazy on fat.

Saturated fat is still a big source of energy, a hit to your beta cells on the pancreas, and your body can make almost all of it that it needs. Palmitic acid is how the body stores excess energy.


Posted: 01 Jun 2012 11:30 Back to top

v

Posts:175

I eat burgers and meatballs made with ground beef and fatty pork and my total LDL is only 89. don't i eat a lot of saturated fat? i also have some fat on my abdomen. why is my LDL so low compared to Alexander's? shouldn't mine be higher? why isn't it? as of nov. 2011 total cholesterol 177 tris 58 HDL 76 VLDL 12

i take no omega 3 supplements

Woodey said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Woodey said...

I just spent a whole year in the Paleo/LC community listening to stuff like that. You come across like an expert in the field of nutrition, but you’re just a skin doctor. So yeah, use big words, make mountains out of mole hills and talk a good yarn that will leave 90% of your audience scratching their heads. Most will just go along with the science sounding words and assume you know what you are talking about.

I prefer Carbsane because she cuts through the crap and makes her points in ways everyone can understand. That's her agenda, use science and break it down so everyone can benefit, and not just uppity *ssholes who can appear to talk a good talk. Hell I can listen to Taubes talk if I want to be around smugness and pseudoscience.

So yeah I can try and wade through what you say or I can listen to someone who uses science and common sense and puts it in layman terms that will help me make better decisions about nutrition.

Post above you said: “I am not on board with strict low carb, nor do I view carbs and sugar as safe substances in certain situations.”

Your about you post:” I am a firm believer in the primal/paleo nutrition model and will use this blog as a forum to expose all the fallacies in the current dietary dogma that is the low fat/whole grain(fat gain) SAD American diet.”

You like to dance, but you can’t have it both ways.

On your blog you post an obese person eating and then below it show a picture of Mark Sisson. You compare the two and indicate that following some primal paleo diet will transform a person. What kind of a jerk are you? Wake up and smell what you’re shoveling.

I have new goal: Dog you at every post you make on here. Dog you till Carb bans me. Hell why not, I’m so tired of bottom feeders selling false hope and picking on people’s insecurities.

http://dietarysanity.blogspot.com/2011/10/humans-de-evolving.html - Reading that made me ill, you’re pathetic. Carb will be nicer to you, but I have little respect for certain types of people and have not the care in the world if I look civilized or am loathed by my comments. I will gladly do the dirty work for other people.

On a side note I do have some skin issues on my rear end I would like some advice on. Nutritional advice, no thanks, maybe you can peddle your wares over on Paleo Hacks.

Cheers

Ps. Nice rip-off of Susan Powter with the “STOP THE INSANITY” phrase on your blog post. I have more respect for her nutritional advice than yours.

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

Fascinating stuff Ryan! Would you be interested in doing a guest post to share your ideas about the stoichiometry of calories in more depth with my readers? If so, email me at carbsane at gmail dot com.

Woodey said...

"I am not extreme at all. I think extreme is needed in the people who have deranged metabolisms..."

Make up your mind.

Woodey said...

I know I'm beating a dead horse, but one has to admit it is fun to do. So you talk about how Paleo will save us from disease and that one will go from big fatso to looking like Mark Sisson by following the diet. You also talk about how you have been overweight at times, something just about every fad diet jerk says. Please post some pictures of when you were a tubby and how you look now. I wanna see that lean, muscular Mark Sisson body you have.

FYI, evolution isn’t linear.

Ryan T Rogers, MD said...

I dont understand why you find it necssary to attack me, I am not extreme, just trying to make a point calories come in the form of molecules and affect biological organism in unique ways. They are simply units of energy in a bomb calorimeter, but we are not bomb calorimeters and that is the point im trying to make. I dont know everything, im a reasonable and respectful person, and Im not here to attack anyone. I do think fructose in large unatural quantities is bad because it leads to metabolic problems with long term high dose exposure. I have seen non drinkers in liver failure waiting for a transplant for non alcoholic fatty liver disease and I asked them about there soda comsumption, and it was always high.

Woodey, dont be so angry with me, I may be just a skin doctor, but I had to study a hello of lot science to get here. To call me pathetic is just plain mean. I just want to keep kids from becoming obese and give obese and overweight people good advice so they dont keep suffering from chronic disease. To personally attack me over comments and a blog post is not cool.

Ryan T Rogers, MD said...

Also, I dont even know who susan powter is, and im not selling anything, so how am I a bottom feeder?

Ryan T Rogers, MD said...

Kurt, sorry for the late reply, busy weekend as a resident, thank you for the advice and book list(already ordered on amazon). You have the some of the most reliable and thoughtful commentary in this paleo/dietary movement. I welcome any other advice, commentary, and reading suggestions from you anytime.

Archevore PGY-1

Ryan

Sanjeev said...

What's so hard to understand? He explained it thoroughly, AFAICT.

Your comments triggered his bullcr*p detector.

> To call me pathetic is just plain mean

I hope this is not indicative of thin skin; the webz are NOT hospitable to that trait

> Woodey, dont be so angry with me

He doesn't sound like the type to respond well to orders ... especially if they sound authoritative & emphatic. Just my own mind reading.

Ryan T Rogers, MD said...

Per Woodey, "I have new goal: Dog you at every post you make on here. Dog you till Carb bans me. Hell why not, I’m so tired of bottom feeders selling false hope and picking on people’s insecurities."

That statement is more what I'm referring to, the person only knows me through a few posts on the internet and that is his new mantra. My skin is thick, but personal attacks like that are out of line when I am just expressing an opinion. Sorry if my blog post offended you Woodey. I just want to help people find good health, most will never look like Mark Sisson, it's just a dramatic example meant to emphasize a point that our current environment isn't working well for us as a species. I personally think paleo/primal nutrition is part of the solution.

Lerner said...

Here's Klein giving a 45 minute talk:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qUp_6n8x3D0
"Dr. Richard G. Klein - Out of Africa and the Evolution of Human Behavior - The Forum at Poly"

He says that at 50 ka, humans had a sharp jump in intelligence whereby they started to fish and also became better hunters. That changed diet and also led to increased population. I'd think that would affect claims about the effect of 1,000,000 years of evolution.

Lerner said...

Greetings, Ryan. I'd have to say you shot yourself in the foot more than a little by speaking admiringly of Taubes in your blog. Do you believe that calories don't matter?

Also, have you noticed that the carb eating Japanese weren't fat through the generations? That the insulin-centric GCBC never mentions insulinogenic proteins? That history's (supposed) greatest researcher apparently has never looked at a GI table? That Kurt has, in my view, repudiated most/all of what Taubes preaches as his misnamed CIH?

Anyway, welcome. And btw, Sisson apparently always looked like that, even when he presumably was a carb eater.

I personally think that some people do best on low carb, some on low fat, and for some (like me) the ratio doesn't matter as far as composition goes.

Lerner said...

Ryan said, "Also, I dont even know who susan powter is..."

She was big in the 90s with her very successful 30 minute weight loss infomercial, "Stop the Insanity". Her idea was that calories eaten as fat could be directly stored as fat, whereas calories eaten as carbs had to be converted to fat via DNL before being stored as fat - thereby requiring energy expenditure for the conversion. IOW, you could eat more carbs than fat for the same result. I think that in theory she was correct; though of course in practice people can (and did) out eat any theory, and so they became fatter eating more and more.

Hers is a good example of the many diets that come with a big splash, and then go. Oddly, some years ago when I still had cable hooked up to the boob tube, I saw her in a short interview. She was triumphantly claiming that history had proved her right. I don't know why she thought that.

Ryan T Rogers, MD said...

Thanks for the input, I appreciate it. I think calories matter, obviously overeating fat/carbs/protein leads to the problems. The japanese didn't have problems cause they were not overeating as a society. Insulin resistance is what I think is being approached in the wrong way. Once someone gets problems in insulin signaling that results in postprandial and fasting supraphysiological insulin levels it's a metabolic blood bath.

It's an endocrinopathy that leads to weight regulation problems and chronic disease. If you are not sedentary, are a normal weight with a normal body fat percentage you are very unlikely to have insulin signaling issues and hyperinsulinemia. Carbs are not a problem for this group.

It's the group with the insulin resistance issue that requires resistance training and crab restriction/calorie restriction to fix the metabolic derangement. Once it is fixed carbs can be added back, but if they overeat on fat and carbs and are sedentary again they will be right back where they started. It's a vicious cycle, but living in ketosis and sitting on the couch surfing the net is clearly not the answer.

Catherine said...

You're article make sense that's why I really don't know what to eat right now. I just want to be healthy but reading so many articles is really stressful. I just don't know who to believe. Some said high fructose corn syrup is bad some said it is safe to take. They are confusing people like me who's not knowledgeable in this topic.

Ryan T Rogers, MD said...

Catherine, don't stress, go to www.archevore.com (Kurt Harris, MD) and read the archevore diet section. It is the most logical approach to human nutrition on the internet. Just add in some resistance training with his dietary approach and your health will likely benefit.

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

Catherine's comment is a perfect example of why good science counts and bad science is ultimately harmful. Lustig's alarmism and what it has spawned has definitely created a sub-group that consider fruit fattening. I could pretty much guarantee that if Jimmy Moore would just replace the ridiculous globs of butter he plops on everything with an apple before or after each meal, he would lose weight. Or even a medium banana.

Catherine, as to HFCS -- well, I'd say that if you avoid it you'll be avoiding all sorts of other nasty stuff in processed foods. But it's not going to kill you in small amounts -- the reason for one of my "you need to check in if" points. Not everyone can afford organic, grass-fed, pastured whatever. And even if they can, it's not always convenient. So when I can get a large rotisserie chicken from Costco for $5, and I don't sweat small stuff if there might be sugar or HFCS in the brine. I get a salad or two topped with chix breast, and two snacks of a chix leg. Then the rest makes amazing bone broth for home made chicken soup or stew. All far healthier for me than stressing over a microgram of HFCS.

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

Ryan, at this point anyone who espouses the carbs -> insulin -> obesity meme, which it appears you are, is extreme. Also, I think Woodey may have come on a little strong -- particularly if you haven't been around here long enough to recognize his facetious side. You're a young guy who may not be aware that almost every dietary bogeyman blamed for obesity -- be it fat, sugar, refined food, processed food, soda, cake, bread, sugary breakfast cereals, pizza, etc.etc. -- it was ALL around in the 1960's and 70's, and rumor has it many of these foods existed centuries ago. The "insanity" of the USDA pyramid didn't prompt people to increase their fructose intake, that's for sure. The food supply didn't send us into hormonal derangement that caused weight gain. That does not make sense as they say.

Woodey said...

@Catherine I have the same frustrations. My advice is to eat what tastes good and doesn't leave you feeling sickly, just eat everything in moderation. No matter what is promised diet wise we are going to die and have a chance to get a disease that will end our life. Fad diet gurus want to promise you that by following their diet you won't get the diseases afflicting humanity or else your chances of contracting one is greatly diminished.

Eat, enjoy, do it in moderation and live your life. If its possible go to a community college and take a nutrition 101 class (a lot of classes are online), it will do you more good than buying a fad diet book or reading 90% of the blogs on the internet.

The other thing you can do that will be beneficial is to talk to a nutritionist. They have a lot of schooling and can steer you in the right direction when it comes to diet. Unfortunately the internet enables morons to spread disinformation and downplay dieticians, much like it has done to create a greater mistrust of doctors. This is why people like Tom Naughton and Jimmy Moore are evil in my eye, purposefully misleading people for their own selfish gain.

Woodey said...

For those that like to tell people to eat a certain way and you will look like something you can never be: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n92_9qDAYHY

This man has been doing LC/Paleo for 8yrs or so....GODDAMN! He looks so much like Mark Sisson!! Actually he looks more like a before picture...oh well. He does like to use "metabolic derangement" as an excuse. I'm beginning to think the English translation for metabolic derangement is - one who likes to eat.

Ryan T Rogers, MD said...

That is not the point I am making, healthy active people can eat all the carbs they want, once you overeat to the point where insulin resistant kicks in, all bets are off.

This is why low carb/paleo works well in this group, it is treating the underlying hormonal problem they have, which is hyperinuslinemia. Think of hyperinsulinemia like other hormonal disorders, ie hyperthyroidism, cushings disease (hypercortisolemia), primary hyperaldosteronism, all of these disorders have a hormone that is elevated above normal physiological levels. The treatment is addressing the hormonal elevation.

Insulin resistance is also hyperinsulinemia ie. you need more insulin to get the job done, so you end up with chronically elevated insulin levels above normal physiological levels. This has metabolic consequences just like other hormonal diseases. The reason carbs are not good in this group is due to the insulin it generates, not the carbs per say. In other words, restricting carbs is decreasing the amount of circulating insulin, therefore treating the underlying problem.

Are carbs the reason all this happens, no, its inactivity (leading to muscle insulin resistance) and overeating (leading to liver insulin resistance) that pushes people into a hyperinsulinemic ie insulin resistant state.

Nigel Kinbrum said...

Hi Ryan,

Dietary proteins produce an insulin response (some quite large) and dietary fats increase the insulin response produced by the other macronutrients. See Fig. 1 B in The Degree of Fat Saturation Does Not Alter Glycemic, Insulinemic or Satiety Responses to a Starchy Staple in Healthy Men.

IMO, the advantage of restricting carbohydrate is in the more stable blood glucose level that results, leading to better appetite control (or even appetite suppression if serum ketones are significant), leading to reduced food intake, leading to weight loss and the emptying of over-full fat, muscle & liver cells, leading to improved insulin sensitivity in fat, muscle & liver cells.

Physical activity is also required, to increase muscular insulin sensitivity. Low-carb diets tend to reduce drowsiness and lethargy, which helps to increase physical activity.

Swede said...

Good advice Woodey, BUT...

As a nutritionist myself, I can tell you that people in this profession promote 2 things that reduce the effectiveness of their message: 1) avoid saturated fat, and 2) eat tons of vegetables.

Most people hate that advice and will refuse to follow it. I don't need to tell you why saturated fat is not bad to consume (milk, eggs and beef are not good for you?).

The vegetable issue really bugs me though. Humans cannot digest cellulose (the main component of the cell wall in most non starchy plants), so the actual nutritional value of vegetables is much less than promoted. Plus, they taste pretty bad to most people. They are expensive compared to the actual nutrition they provide.

A modern human can be perfectly healthy eating a diet that consists of animal products, fruits and starch. Yummy, sounds good to me!

Woodey said...

I agree it does sound good! Since humans cannot digest cellulose that would mean the vitamins/minerals that are in vegetables gets excreted? For example, the vitamin k in spinach doesn't benefit me because the cellulose is not digested and therefore it isn't absorbed by my body?

Swede said...

Yep.

Mechanical digestion (chewing and smooth muscle contractions in the digestive tract) will, by force, break some of the cell walls in veggies and allow the contents to be absorbed, but the majority of the contents will pass though your digestive tract untouched (and will make a big poop).

But, there is no reason to avoid vegetables. They taste good to a lot of people. I like salsas in my burritos, and onions on my hamburgers, but I have no notion that they have some magical effect with the antioxidants and polyphenols that are supposed to make me healthy. Again, those things are within the cell wall and mostly not used by the body.


Kurt Harris discusses this here:

http://www.archevore.com/panu-weblog/2011/2/28/william-munny-eats-his-vegetables.html

Swede said...

Blogger's new anti-spam questions are very difficult to get correct.

Be aware, if any of your comments are not displayed

Woodey said...

Thanks for the feedback and the link. There's very few vegetables I like and since trying to put them back in my diet after my LC/Paleo year, I have been experiencing pain shortly after consumption. Fruit doesn't do that to me and I have been enjoying my strawberries. Nice to know I can stop trying to endure the non starchy vegetables.

ProudDaddy said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
ProudDaddy said...

Just blame it on cataracts, and get your 9-year-old daughter to decypher them. That's what I do.

Ryan T Rogers, MD said...

"IMO, the advantage of restricting carbohydrate is in the more stable blood glucose level that results"

This statement also means lower 24 hour serum insulin. If your liver is insulin resistant (from overeating) and your muscles are insulin resistant (from inactivity) the glucose load from carbs is a problem. The reason involves the increased amount needed to bring the sugar down after a meal.

Lets use examples

Paul is a 30 year old weightlifter at 11% body fat, he gets home from a workout and eats a mixed meal with 150g of Carbs, Glucose goes up, insulin goes up, muscles and liver listen, sugar comes down, insulin comes down, no hyperinsulinemia (ie insulin does its appropriate job, it is not a culprit of disease)

Tom is a 30 year old male with a desk job, muscles are deconditioned and he is 30% body, mild but clinically undetectable hepatic steatosis, with liver and muscle insulin resistance. He gets home and eats 150g of carbs in a mixed meal, blood sugar goes up, insulin rises, liver and muscle don't listen, pancreas still sees the sugar in the blood, insulin goes up some more, muscles still don't listen, liver and fat starts to listen, sugar gradually comes down, insulin was abnormally elevated in response to the meal, and stays abnormally elevated until the next meal. At this point insulin is a problem, because he has supraphysiological levels circulating in his body.

The point I'm trying to make is that insulin is just like any other hormone in your body in that abnormal levels have consequences, not enough(type 1 diabetes)=bad, normal levels=no issues, abnormally elevated levels(pre-diabetes, insulin resistance, metabolic syndrome)in response to food=bad.

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

Blogger's "helpful" spam filter is pathetic and worse than ever. It catches 50% of real spam if that and sends legit stuff there at random. I wish I could say it was even too many links or something... but it is just random. I saw your post published in my "dashboard" then later in Spam. Thought it was a duplicate and left it there. Thanks for not throwing an expletive laden ;) Reinstated now :D Opting out would be a wonderful option!!

Sanjeev said...

> At this point insulin is a problem

Insulin resistance and high insulin are not a problem in Tom's case at all; they're NECESSARY to maintain whatever health he person currently has in the face of those incitements/provocations/circumstances/history.

Or would you prefer Tom's insulin levels stay low and insulin resistance stay low ...
+ muscles already full of glycogen taking in glucose with no capacity to dispose of it+ adipocytes removing trigs and glucose from the blood, making them unavailable for energy
+ chylomicrons from the intestines, full of dietary fat remaining in blood (for all the times you type "insulin" you don't bother to type ASP once, so this is a valid outcome in your world)

+ Tom EATING MORE because the satiety hormone insulin is not going high[0], (which would, in the circumstances, be the body's appropriate, SATIATING response), and thus not signalling satiety, worseining all these problems

[0] because of low insulin resistance

Sanjeev said...

> Tom is a 30 year old male with a desk job,

if you're addressing Tom Q Public why even bring up insulin in the first place? Think you'll motivate him? with by an oversimplified biochem lecture?

Sanjeev said...

apologies for the length of this, I was just flabbergasted

> Think of hyperinsulinemia like other hormonal
> disorders, ie hyperthyroidism, cushings disease
> (hypercortisolemia), primary hyperaldosteronism,
> all of these disorders have a hormone that is
> elevated above normal physiological levels.

This just makes no sense to me at all. And when the water level in the Mississippi is too high you try to lower it. When bad stuff happens people try to fix it. SO WHAT ???

They're alike ... strictly in terms of hormone levels? Then this statement is so broad as to be meaningless for further discussion of specifics of any kind.

And if you meant anything other than that broad, meaningless meaning ...

statements offered without proof can be discarded without proof. And "proof" these days and in this context means a lot more than hyper-wide analogysing

You don't even provide enough detail in the assertion to know what needs to be proven ... in what SPECIFIC, provable ways are these disorders alike?

And WTHeck is Tom Q Publc to make of that assertion .., Tom with a non-tech business degree or an arts degree or an engineering degree that demanded reading zero bio/biochem literature?


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0001398/
> Graves disease is the most common cause of hyperthyroidism. It is caused by an abnormal immune system response

Yeah, hyperthyroidism (immune system) is JUST like hyperinsulinism (overeating) ... yeah

Maybe the next one's caused by overeating
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0001388/
> Cushing's disease is caused by a tumor or excess growth (hyperplasia) of the pituitary gland. This gland is located at the base of the brain.

> Treatment involves surgery to remove the pituitary tumor, if

Yep, they're trying to lower the level... no, they're not, unless removing a tumor is "like" lowering a hormone level.

And for whose benefit is this invalid comparison of overeating to pituitary hyperplasia? Catherine who commented below?

Sanjeev said...

And suppose you succeed ... you make Tom an insulinophobe. He cuts his carbs from 600 calories per day to 20

And adds 1800 calories per day of fat because he reasons

"INSULIN's the problem therefore CARBs are the problem... control that & I'm HOME FREE"

so now Tom's insulin is low. wheeeeeeee ....

CONGRATULATIONS Ryan ... a success !!

Sanjeev said...

" I never told anyone to add 1800 fat calories "

People DO think[0].

Drone endlessly on the evils of insulin and never once mention they can still get obese on low carbohydrate and they will put 2+2 together.

Guys like Lyle McDonald have been writing stuff like

"just because I wrote xxx does NOT mean my diet permits you to exceed calories and stop exercising"

IMHO If you're writing diet stuff you MUST take into account
1 people will cheat
1a people will mis-report, which is not the same as lying
2 people will twist the meaning of your words so they can consume more
3 people will twist the meaning of your words to they can exercise less

[0] often involving extreme BS, like hyper analogising and confusing natural body responses with disease states

Sanjeev said...

> Guys like Lyle McDonald have been writing stuff like

> "just because I wrote xxx does NOT mean my diet permits you to exceed calories and stop exercising"

IIRC it's been more than a decade since I first read that sentiment, if not those exact words from LM.

> IMHO If you're writing diet stuff you MUST take into account
> 1 people will cheat

I know because I did

Woodey said...

Since the discussion involves glucose, insulin, and diabetes I thought this article might add to the discussion. Its written by Matt Stone on the subject of glucose clearance.

http://180degreehealth.com/2012/06/glucose-clearance

Ryan T Rogers, MD said...

"http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0001398/
> Graves disease is the most common cause of hyperthyroidism. It is caused by an abnormal immune system response

Yeah, hyperthyroidism (immune system) is JUST like hyperinsulinism (overeating) ... yeah

Maybe the next one's caused by overeating
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0001388/
> Cushing's disease is caused by a tumor or excess growth (hyperplasia) of the pituitary gland. This gland is located at the base of the brain.

> Treatment involves surgery to remove the pituitary tumor, if

Yep, they're trying to lower the level... no, they're not, unless removing a tumor is "like" lowering a hormone level."

First, off you are missing the big picture. I know what graves disease and Cushing's disease are, and they involve elevated hormone levels. There is Cushings syndrome often caused by a pituitary tumor, and in that case the surgeon is lowering a hormone by removing a tumor, and it is Cortisol. The tumor in the pituitary is secreting ACTH, causing chronic stimulation of the Zona fasciculata of the adrenal cortex, leading to chronically elevated cortisol levels, that lead to a host of clinical symptoms associated with chronic hypercortisolemia (weight gain, osteoporosis, striae, etc). So the surgeon is lowering the cortisol level by cutting out the tumor.

In your second example of graves disease, again treatment involves lowering the abnormally elevated thyroid hormone level. Normally, the pituitary sends a signal called TSH to the thyroid, it binds a receptor called TSH receptor and thyroid hormone is made in the appropriate amount, In Graves disease your immune system starts making an IgG antibody that binds the TSH receptor causing chronic stimulation and abnormally high levels ie hyperthyroidism. This lead to all the symptoms associated with the disorder(atrial fibrillation, weight loss, anxiety, etc), again the treatment involves inhibiting thyroid action with Propylthiouracil or radiothyroid ablation.

In both examples an underlying problem lead to elevated hormone levels, that lead to clinical symptoms, the treatment involved lowering the level of the abnormally elevated hormone. In insulin resistance, insulin is abnormally elevated. This leads to the clinical signs and symptoms of metabolic syndrome. Again, the goal in this case should be lowering insulin, similar to the goals of treatment in the two scenarios listed above.

Kurt G. Harris MD said...

It takes some time to allow the colonies of bugs in your colon to adapt to resistant starches and soluble fiber if you have not been eating starchy plant organs for a while. Probiotics and fermented foods can help this along, switching on various genes to help digest this stuff in the colon. You'll have less trouble with citrus fruits because the sugars are almost all absorbed in the small bowel. But stone fruits (peaches and pears) have sugar alcohols that are nor digested in the small bowel and can cause some distress the same way undigested starches can.

Right now I eat about 40% carbohydrate, maybe a third from fruits (bananas, blueberries raspberries and citrus) and maybe two thirds from potatoes, beans and white rice.

As in the linked essay, I do think there is hormetic benefit to leafy greens and colorful vegetables due to the flavonoids therein. My consumption of these lately depends mostly on my wife's desire to make elaborate salads that contain them.

I've found that avoidance of liquid calories and hyper palatable foods (manufactured foods and home-made concoctions like casseroles and complicated dishes in addition to the obvious baked goods and breads) is the main way to keep caloric intake down and keep off excess weight without counting anything. A narrow eating window and no snacking helps a lot, too. The macro ratios have nothing to do with fat loss if you are avoiding "high reward" food - food that is engineered by either industry or your grandma to make you eat a lot of it and come back for more...

Kurt G. Harris MD said...

Hi Ryan

"In insulin resistance, insulin is abnormally elevated. This leads to the clinical signs and symptoms of metabolic syndrome. Again, the goal in this case should be lowering insulin, similar to the goals of treatment in the two scenarios listed above."

Your analogy of hyperinsulinism in the condition of metabolic syndrome to these other diseases of elevated hormones fails thusly:

1) In these other states, there is an abnormality intrinsic to an endocrine organ that is causing elevation of the relevant hormone, whether tumor or autoimmune attack. The hormone elevation is pathologic, i.e, not at all appropriate and especially not contributing to homeostasis - in fact disrupting homeostasis.

2) In the case of hyperinsulinism in metabolic syndrome - the analogy is not apt, as the elevated insulin here is a defensive - pro- homeostatic - response to the metabolic syndrome - which is in turn all related to the condition of being in energy excess. As Sanjeev has pointed out, if one were to take away the insulin without correcting the IR, or even to "correct" the IR without solving the condition of energy excess, the result would be to make the organism less healthy - the opposite of homeostasis. Lower insulin with no change in IR means frank diabetes. "Correcting" IR while still overloading the cells with energy means more lipotoxicity.

3) The proper disease with analogy to these other hormonal aberrations is the beta cell tumor, not metabolic syndrome. Surgical excision cures the hyperinsulinemia and restores homeostasis.

The state of hyperinsulinemia as a SIGN of metabolic syndrome has nothing whatever to do with all these other states of pathologic hormone elevation.

And the cure for hyperinsulinemia in metabolic syndrome has nothing to do with CHO consumption directly and everything to do with energy balance. Eating less calories is the way to address it. No need to invoke or even speak of insulin as anything other than a marker for the metsyn, as the insulin is NOT CAUSING ANYTHING*, IT IS A SIGN OF THE PATHOLOGY YOU NEED TO FIX, WHICH IS CHRONIC ENERGY IMBALANCE.

* Of course there are knock on effects of high insulin, but these are a secondary phenomenon to the metsyn. metsyn is not caused by high insulin, or everyone with an islet cell tumor would have metsyn, which they do not...

Ryan T Rogers, MD said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Ryan T Rogers, MD said...

Well Kurt, you got me, have you also studied law, your arguments are flawless. I do concede that metabolic syndrome is a result of chronic energy surplus (ie chronic fed state). I also think muscle deconditioning plays a big role in the development of IR. You are also correct in that hyperinsulinemia is an adaption to maintain homeostasis in the face peripheral insulin resistance. I do think the knock on effects you are referring to are a big problem. I think we both agree on the same underlying etiology of metabolic syndrome ie A long term imbalance of Fed>Fasted state (I should have been more clear on my position). I am not sure what your position is on CHO intake in someone with insulin resistance and metabolic syndrome. I think the key to weight loss and improvement of overall health markers in people with IR and metabolic syndrome come down to a few basic tenants.

1. Avoid grains
2. Eat fat and protein in every meal, but don't go crazy(one must still maintain a calorie deficit)
3. Large muscle group resistance training (I think this is critical)
4. Establish feeding windows and eliminate snacking(8 hours - 2 meals with 16 hours of fasting seems to work well for me) Again I think this is also critical, because it addresses the problem of the chronic fed state (also lowers circulating insulin levels considerably)....I already know your on board with this one.

Ryan

Sanjeev said...

Kurt wrote:
3) The proper disease with analogy to these other hormonal aberrations is the beta cell tumor
____
my "duh" moment ... something was tugging at me, yelling and waving its arms around for attention off to the side somewhere but I just couldn't pin it down specifically and had to settle for describing it as an invalid analogy

Aravind said...

Hello Dr Harris,

I've been off the grid for months now (in part motivated by a comment you made to me a while back), but a friend mentioned you referenced me, hence I made an exceptional visit. The extirpation of technology vis-a-vis nutritional inquiry has been so profound that it has been arguably as important as NAD elimination for my health and well-being.

My WOE - lacto/ovo veggie Archevore - has not changed one bit since I left the Interwebz. I'm now down over 35 lbs and at my college fighting weight on a 60% carb, low reward diet and the healthiest I've EVER been. And ironically my dietary compliance has notably increased since I stopped obsessing about nutrition. While I've missed out on the latest cacao nipple rub theorizing by neurologists from Tennessee, it doesn't seem to be negatively impacting my health. Curious.

Specific pathologies notwithstanding, there are diminishing returns to nutritional inquiry. After we last corresponded, I had originally started writing a post on veggie Archevorism but it morphed into the "misapplication of the Pareto Principle in diet and nutrition". I certainly have strong opinions regarding the ability to be a vegetarian "Paleo" eater, but I've realized the banter between omnivores and vegetarians (not talking about vegans) is largely a waste of time.

I will reach out off-blog to you. Thanks for the shout out. Hope all is well with you.

Aravind

Woodey said...

"I've found that avoidance of liquid calories and hyper palatable foods (manufactured foods and home-made concoctions like casseroles and complicated dishes in addition to the obvious baked goods and breads) is the main way to keep caloric intake down and keep off excess weight without counting anything."

I couldn't agree more. I've found that staying away from processed foods and caloric drinks to be the best way to maintain or lose weight. Its way to easy to drink 1-2k worth of calories in a day, couple that with calorie dense food and one will easily surpass their daily need.

Kudos for using one of my favorite actors of all time playing the ubber character William Munny on the blog post you linked. Quite a bit of information in the post, I will need to go through it again to let the info sink in.

Thanks for the info on bugs in the colon. Eating fruit is something that I haven't been able to fully embrace yet. Spending a year listening to Taubes has made me fruitaphobic, eating strawberries is a big accomplishment for me. I want to branch out to bananas and mangoes, just not there yet.

Lesley Scott said...

I loved the Munny post, too - the title, the art & yes, the content. I've had really good luck with avoiding the hyperpalatable stuff, the liquid calories & the mini-fasting, making sure that I eat dinner early enough I can go 14-16 hours until breaking my fast the next day (usually following a workout - fasted - with a glass of organic raw milk & a banana). Then I have a bigass lunch & dinner & try not to snack if possible. More than anything, the 14-16 hour mini-fasting overnight has really helped me with appetite regulation which, for me, is a godsend. I do eat a massive green leafy salad with each meal; I do enjoy them but I'm sure the paleo-freaks would give me what-for but I hate "wasting" calories on salad dressings, so I tend to stick with the Walden Farms ones as they're virtually calorieless & don't taste too aweful.

Kurt G. Harris MD said...

Woodey and Lesley

Glad you both find the post and diet plan useful. I get a lot of emails about it still, but it's nice to hear how it works here in the commentosphere...

Everyone knows I was fruit-skeptical years ago, being convinced that fructose in excess was a NAD - now having seen more ethnographic and medical evidence I think added sugar and HFCS are an issue when they lead to a hyper caloric state and that real fruit intake can be pretty much ad libitum. I find the water and fiber pretty filling when I eat oranges and grapefruit.

Bananas and citrus are cheap, ubiquitous, full of micronutrients and relatively free of food sensitivity issues. And they are dead simple to "prepare"....

Lesley Scott said...

Kurt: actually it was you that started me down the path of banana eating again as well! I remember you did a podcast with Chris Kresser was it, and you talked at one point about what you ate yourself, including bananas as a good source of ready glucose (I hesitate to use the "safe starch" label b/c it's so loaded at this point). I had been craving them mightily but thanks to our friend GT had been avoiding them - and potatoes, too - like the plague. Now I have one every morning & love them. Merci!

Anonymous said...

Pretty! This has been a really wonderful article.

Thanks for supplying this info.

Feel free to visit my homepage - dietrineexposed.com

Anonymous said...

Two rounds of the Internet, with access to what's happening in the larger sizes with whipped cream can really male enhancement pills cvs pack in the calories because it's so
easy to get, inexpensive super food.

Have a look at my webpage: male enhancement trials

Anonymous said...

There is no need to hide it in the light of reality and don't stand up to the films epic reputation. The acne treatment brands is completely natural; therefore, it ensures that you get a taste of the juice and the solid food and get moving. So he acne treatment brands sought help through hypnosis.

Also visit my site :: lose fat

Anonymous said...

For a normal healthy eating plan that has a brownish color.
All cruciferous vegetables are high in caralluma jornal globo L-Carnitine.

Dr Summers addressed the even larger impending risks to our economy if the costs of health
care. While you move downwards, make sure that there are many quick fix solutions out
there to help you shed fifteen pounds in three weeks. Athletes are often considered overweight
or even obese. This product is marketed as a solution
to this problem carefully, so you have to remember.


My web site: weight loss programs for women

Anonymous said...

A big part of what they have will be Acai Berry
select weight loss formula taken. Chiggers and straw itch mites are among a couple of days on Barry Island en route.
This exercise also facilitates the development and
strengthening of the muscles. It was known that by blocking NMDA receptors, it prevents their
naturally acai berry select weight loss formula occurring messenger chemical, glutamate, from binding to them.

Anonymous said...

The production of chromium in regulation of blood sugar.
15 = $58, 650, which would mean a loss of
over 100 pounds is very inspiring, and life situations such as an increase in
appetite will sabotage your Medical Weight Loss efforts.

Tighten your abdomen, rather medical weight loss than allowing medical professionals to make determinations for them.
Specialist weight-loss and detox programs are also on a
journey for the last day of the race you may not want to do.
Another little thing you can dofor your body is at rest between beats.


Feel free to surf to my webpage - Appetite Suppressant - Hoodiachaserreview.Com -

Post a Comment

Moderation is currently on. Thanks in advance for your patience.