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, April 8, 2014

Book Review: Talking Back to Gurus by Mike Howard

Talking Back to Health Gurus:
An Un-revolutionary and Un-sexy Guide to Fat Loss     by Mike Howard





Note: This might look/sound familiar, because Mike's book was in the Superhero bundle my book was a part of. I hope several others will become available individually as well for those that weren't interested in a bigger investment. 

I'd appreciate anyone interested buying through my Amazon affiliate link above. Heck, use that link to access Amazon to buy anything, and I'll get a small percentage. This is something I've finally gotten on board with and it's great. The author gets their same percentage from Amazon, you pay nothing more, and folks like me who spread the word get a little something some.  As a matter of full disclosure, yes, I received a free copy of this book for review.  But I'd be promoting it anyway!



Can I just say that I'm a huge fan of this guy?  I've "known" him for at least 3 years now since I noticed some traffic from an article he wrote for dietblog.   Over the past year or so I've gotten to know him better through Facebook.  This guy is legit, the real deal, and an all around nice guy.  And if that's not enough, he works with kids!   Getting kids into fitness, and this is just damned impressive.  He's also a pretty funny guy, creator of "honest diet book covers" like the one below left, in the book, and my current favorite below right.


     

Mike's book is a great expose on what the diet and fitness industry is really all about in the current age.   I know so many people who were so convinced by Gary Taubes' Good Calories, Bad Calories they've flat out admitted they just aren't ready to go back!   If this was you, or you can relate, Mike's book is for you!  This is a bit of a deprogramming manual if you will, for when "they're wrong, I'm right" devolves into "well, they're still wrong, buy my book anyway even if I'm not right to learn why XYZ will kill your pancreas or your brain, if it doesn't outright kill you first".

Mike goes through the marketing tactics and the logical fallacies used to influence you.  Even if you're familiar with these, as I am, it's a great refresher to strengthen your insulin basher resistance.  There's a primer on what to look for when that latest scientific study makes the rounds on Facebook and Twitter.  Next Mike tackles the biggest gimmicks used to sell diet books and follows that up with how fear and sex are used to sell you even more.    Ever notice how almost all the latest NYTimes best sellers begin and end with why you need to fear some class of foods?    Mike brings things home with "10 Unsexy tips that REALLY work".  The chapter title says it all.   I see the tide turning (hopefully) towards more "unsexy matter of fact" type books down the pike, and I hope Mike as a prominent voice in that pack!

For a preview of the type of thing Mike writes in the book, he just wrote an article for Tom Venuto (where he is a contributing editor):  Calorie Denialism: Why It’s Hurting Your Fat Loss Efforts.

So once again, if you're interested,
CLICK HERE TO GET YOUR COPY NOW!!

54 comments:

MacSmiley said...

Gotta love those book covers. Did Mike post them at one place, in a single blog post? Or on Facebook (cause I don't do FB). I'd love to see the whole collection.

John Smith said...

I don't know why female gurus always talk about Bringing Teh Sexay, it's very not-feminist. You don't see the male gurus preoccupying themselves with being Sexay. At least one of the female paleo blogs reads like Cosmopolitan magazine.

charles grashow said...

http://www.marksdailyapple.com/how-hunter-gatherer-diets-varied/#axzz2yPjSqLqQ
One True Paleo Diet Doesn’t Exist, but So What?

carbsane said...

I don't think they are all in one place anywhere. Perhaps I'll put a bug in his ear on that one!

carbsane said...

Yes the Ivy League chemist and international go go dancer has all the clues for all the women ... except her own self. Totally bizarre.

marksuave25 said...

I have to preface what I am about to ask. I do not want to start any sort of argument or confrontation. But, I haven't seen you talk about your current weight. I see you often talk about other low carb advocates and their struggles with their weight, but I have no clue as to what your current BMI or weight is. Jimmy is down to...I think 230 or 220 and he is 6'3" tall. I know that Anthony colpo is shredded, at least his picture on his site says he is. My current weight is around 225 and I'm 6' tall. I need to still lose weight and get down to sub 15% body fat. What are your current stats?

marksuave25 said...

Let me reiterate. I do not want to start an argument

carbsane said...

What does this have to do with the price of free bullshit coffee in a low carb china shop? I've become friends with a lot of trainers, fitness and nutrition experts over the past couple of years and can point you to some solid -- free and paid -- resources if weight loss advice is what you're seeking (with or without muscle building as a concurrent goal). Or you can follow Jimmy Moore's advice, whatever floats your boat!

Hello_I_Love_You said...

Mark, you're confusing physique with health. That's a concern because many low-carbers are exchanging health for leanness. In Jimmy's case, he's made a deal with the Low Carb Devil to exchange aspects of health for weight loss and social acceptance. That's his choice. But it's when Jimmy tries to hide the health consequences he's suffered and tries to snare people like you in that we have a problem.

It's a problem because you're clueless about the health consequences of severe carb restriction. Jimmy used to be morbidly obese and now his weight fluctuates somewhere in continuum where he feels he can be presentable. He's also experienced reactive hypercholesterolemia, hypothyroid and possibly other hormonal symptoms. He's admitted this during his podcast interviews. What other symptoms do you think he's not disclosing? Yet, he cannot get proper tests for diagnosis as he has no health insurance. No insurer will cover him given his 450ish cholesterol, which even his podcast guests are concerned about, as it is inordinately atherogenic even if it doesn't translate immediately to atherosclerosis.

marksuave25 said...

So let's get a few things out in the open. I do not follow a low carb life style. I used to for about 2 years and it worked a little for me but I didn't lose all the weight I wanted to lose. I still listen to Jimmy Moore from time to time when I'm working out at the gym. But I will give Jimmy Moore a lot of credit. He has been open about his weight struggles. The guy went from 400 lbs to 220lbs, he then ballooned back up to over 300lbs. We dieted his way back down to 220lbs using an extreme diet. He has laid his cholesterol levels, his weight, and even his dexa scan info out there for people to see. Evelyn aka carbsane has laid out any of that info for her readers to see. I may have honestly missed the post of her putting out this information for her readers to see. I was just asking a question, a valid one in my opinion, what does she weigh? Is her weight within a healthy range. Is she athletic, does she work out and count the calories that she eats? I do! And it helped me lose some more weight, but I feel like crap when I do it. So if she doesn't want to answer the question that is her prerogative. It's a simple question, but if she doesn't want to answer it, that is fine with me.

Hello_I_Love_You said...

CarbSane is not advocating an extreme diet, Jimmy is. So the burden is on Jimmy to fess up to any health issues he's encountered. The problem is Jimmy is parading his weight loss and hypercholesterolemia, only to show that high cholesterol isn't affecting his health. So far. Yet Jimmy is not entirely forthright and cannot be trusted to be forthright; he's now making a living off of his blog, sans health insurance. Do you really think Jimmy will admit to every health issue he's developed while low-carbing? He's admitted that he has hypothyroid symptoms to Dr. Kharrazian. Yet he clammed up quickly and said that his T3 is "normal" and all his other thyroid markers are "normal." If that's the case, Jimmy should be more concerned, as that could mean Raynaud's, suggesting autoimmune cascade that will affect him for the rest of his life. The same with his cholesterol "tell all": what's so reckless is he's parading 450 total cholesterol on a high fat diet as perfectly safe as long as trigs are low.


Why are you so obsessed with weight when you're only slightly overweight? If you're concerned about health, shouldn't you be pouring over your blood labs over your daily scale reading? I'm concerned about health. That's why I ignore Jimmy's weight and instead focus on the biomarkers and symptoms he selectively discloses. What I'm seeing doesn't look good for JImmy down the road. I see hormonal dysregulation, immunodeficiency, and hypercholesterolemia that makes him sitting duck for a coronary event should he ever lapse or develop other risk factors.

carbsane said...

Mark.

Jimmy Moore is a "Weight Loss Success Story". That is all he is. A guy who lost 195 lbs. For the second time. He promotes an extreme lifestyle that is objectively damaging his own health. He lies about it all the time, and I do not use that term lightly.


This is not a diet blog. It is not my personal blog. It is not a weight loss advice column. When you have had internet war waged on you and have entire blog posts written about how no way a person weighing a certain amount can fit a certain size of pants, etc., perhaps you'll understand my decision to limit severely any and all personal information on this blog. Incidentally, I can't think of any other blogger who puts that kind of information out there either. There may be one or two -- likely those who have no other claim to fame but losing weight. Realize that Jimmy's "openness" is HIGHLY censored. In many ways, if you read this blog, you probably know the "real me" better than Jimmy.


It is very unfortunate for him that he has entangled his and his wife's entire livelihood in this low carb thing.


As I said before, I have many friends who are far more qualified to provide you assistance in your endeavor. It's not my realm. If you want to know if there is anything to the claims about LC diets, this is a blog about that. Learn a bit about how metabolism really works, get the real deal behind the headlines of the latest study? This is what I do. If you want to believe in insulin fairies and magical ketones that prevent CVD and let you live forever? I wish you well.


Many in the paleo community are some of the most unhealthy people out there. They put on a good front for the cameras, but drink coffee by the gallon to stay awake by day and can't sleep by night and then line up to listen to "experts" on the importance and value of a good night's sleep. That's just the tip of the iceberg.


Here's my diet advice. Eat mostly real whole foods. Put a priority on protein, get enough, no need to overdo. Don't base your diet on junk food. How important the rest of the details are is really up to you.

carbsane said...

The most sad part of it all is that it is not even working for weight.

I would like to know how Westman signs off on a book in which Jimmy puts his lipids in healthy. This is not a healthy man and he is ONLY 42.

http://www.examiner.com/article/ketogenic-diet-expert-recounts-180-pound-weight-loss-on-low-carb-high-fat-diet



People will think me cruel, but I've felt for a long time that the best thing for Jimmy would be for his LLVLC thing to just implode and for him to find another line of work. When this paleo thing fades .... and it will .... his "friends" will not be around anymore.

carbsane said...

Yes you do. Why don't you seek sources that can help you reach your goals? If this isn't that place, I'm not offended. But I'm not going to change into someone you want me to be. The wee wee pad ain't that place either Mark.

marksuave25 said...

??? The wee wee pad? You must mean "it's the woo woo". I was surfing the Web and I saw you mentioned her months ago. I go to many different websites, some that offend you and others that don't. I saw her posting about your weight. I'm saying to myself "this woman has never met Evelyn, how does she know what weight she is?". So I decided to go and ask you myself. And I saw that I got no answer from you. Thanks for your time Evelyn.

carbsane said...

If you read there, then you should understand why your obsession with my weight asked in both places is so disturbing. I don't have the time (nor the desire) to explain myself to "Jane" (real name ... ) . That's a person on the internet who is not interested in discussing the science and facts. So enjoy reading there and if/when you are looking to lose some weight, that's not my thing but I know a lot of people who can help you.

marksuave25 said...

"Obsession" lmao! That's funny.

carbsane said...

"I recently asked Evelyn what her weight was. Because I really want to know and I don't want to start an argument with her over it. She essentially blew me off and said that her weight had nothing to do with her advice. She gets on Jimmy and other low careers for their weight struggles. But we have no clue as to what her BMI is, what her weight is, if she weight trains or does ccardiovascular exercises. It's here prerogative on sharing her weight.....but I find it highly hypocritical of her or any other person who is not physically fit to give out diet advice. If she isn't a physically fit woman, she should just be open about it. It's okay. Jimmy got up over 300lbs a year ago and was honest about it, and through his extreme diet he's back down in the 230 range."


I don't get on anyone for their weight STRUGGLES Mark. You are misinformed. I'm also not Jimmy. I bring something else to the table here on this blog. Again, if you don't like the menu to your liking, I won't be offended if you move on.


But I'm happy to have helped you get rid of some ass.

charles grashow said...

http://blog.cholesterol-and-health.com/2009/01/total-to-hdl-cholesterol-ratio-what.html


Jimmy's last posted blood test - TC 392, HDL 70 - TC/HLD ratio 5.92


Ideal ratio - <3.5

Hello_I_Love_You said...

When your TC is above 350 or so, you can't have your TC/HDL ratio under 3.5. To do so, Jimmy's HDL has to be 113, which is pretty hard to have unless you genetically have high HDL. It's usually an immune reponse or if it's genetics, it's not as protective as someone who increased it through healthy lifestyle. Perhaps you could do it by gorging yourself with EVCO, as Chris mentions, since lauric acid will convert to MUFA. But that also shows why hypercholesterolemia in itself is not harmless; it will be nearly impossible to keep your HDL that high. Even if you did, it's not necessarily protective.

charles grashow said...

Totally agree - my point is that his non-HDL is probably over 300 and his LDL-P is probably >3000. His, and others, point is that TC is meaningless, high LDL-P in the context of a VLCHF diet is also meaningless and that the ONLY ratio that matters is TC/HDL!

charles grashow said...

The man is FAT - his diet is not working

Kade Storm A.K.A. Hedonist said...

Sooner or later, cogntive dissonance will prevail, and even the ratio will become meaningless since that's not working out favourably in the context of the present reads and bias.

Hello_I_Love_You said...

His holy grail is low triglycerides and the Trigs/HDL ratio. Jimmy used to have trigs as low as 10-20, which is only possible either in starvation or in deep ketosis. At that level, what would your Trigs/HDL be? As low as 0.10. He's been preaching that the lower the trigs the better, as that suggests virtually no VLDL. But at that level, it's really triglycederidemia. And LDL, and presumably VLDL, plays an immune function which we do not fully understand. Jimmy keeps claiming that LDL shouldn't be too low; the same could be the case with triglycerides.


This is why very low triglycerides and high free fatty acids (which Jimmy would also have) are often associated with immune dysfunction. Kind of makes sense because leptin is now emerging as not just a hormone that induces satiety but an important player in the adaptive immune system. And you would go from excess leptin to leptin deficiency in the diet that Jimmy promotes.

charles grashow said...

On my last blood test my triglycerides were 43 and my HDL was 44 and trust me I do not eat a diet that is remotely ketogenic

Kade Storm A.K.A. Hedonist said...

A low LDL number for regression seems to be the case, but then one could buy into the plaque stabilisation school of thought. I also don't understand the first and last portion of your statement regarding diet because your results are seriously confounded by actual drug therapy, which possibly explains why your trigs and LDL are where they are despite not being on a ketogenic diet. Diet at this point is probably a secondary factor as far as lipids are concerned.

Hello_I_Love_You said...

First, your trigs are not low. They seem low in absolute numbers but as a proportion of TC, they're not. We're talking about Jimmy having trigs 10-20 when his TC is 350ish, less than 5% of TC. Your trigs are exactly what you'd expect from someone with TC of 100, about 40% of TC. It's about 80 if your TC were 200, which is a good number.


Your TC, however, is low and I am not sure what prompted you and your doc to go on Lipitor. Your CRP is moderately high, yes. But your CAC is entirely age-dependent. 30 woudln't be too bad if you're ~60 but if you're only 35, that's a concern. Most 35 year olds have a score of zero; in fact 50% of 40 year olds have a score of zero. But atherosclerosis is really part of aging and the score starts going up after you turn 50-55.


Your LDL-P is low, your small LDL-P portion could be a bit lower, and LDL size perhaps a bit larger. But you need to compare those numbers with your baseline before starting Lipitor to gauge the effectiveness of statin therapy. Ideally, you could lower your A1c to 4.5-5.0 and CRP under 0.3. But based on traditional Framingham risk factors, you have low risk regardless of age. The problem is 3.0 CRP for someone with otherwise stellar lipids and 48 CAC depending on how long in the tooth you are.

charles grashow said...

In 10/2012 while on LCHF diet - BEFORE statin - Triglycerides were 31 and HDL was 69

charles grashow said...

Will be 60 in July 2014 - C12:C22 fatty acid profile shows low Omega 3 - didn't eat enough fish - tried to get the Omega3's from hemp/chia/flax but obviously my conversion is low - will get blood work in another 6 months to check inflammation markers

At the height of my LCHF paleo diet my TC was 274, LDL was 199 (calculated), HDL was 69, Triglycerides were 31, LDL-P was 1430, Small LDL-P was 132, ApoB was 104 and LP(a) was <2

I agreed with my doctor to try the lowest dose stain because LDL and LDL-P were too high (IMHO)

Hello_I_Love_You said...

For a 60 year old you're in the top 25-30%ile or so. But for someone health conscious analyzing his blood labs and following health blogs online, I'd say there is room for improvement. I don't think the CRP is from the 3-6 imbalance. How's your BMI and liver enzymes? If it's metabolic, that will show up in your ALT/AST, if you dont' drink. They should be no higher than 20, if you're lean with your level of trigs and HDL. Otherwise, look elsewhere.


Your high LDL was probably reactive to high fat. You know Davies believes in the ApoE4 thing. That's possible but also low T3 could have made you reactive. So you need numbers prior to that diet where you ate normal carbs. That should be your baseline in determining if you should be on statin therapy. You may not need to be on it, if your LDL/TC were under 200 on a normal diet. Now you're going from one extreme to another; your level of TC can be seen in people with IBD and fat malabsorption. The lowest dose is Pravastatin 10mg or Zocor 5mg, both much less potent than 10 mg Lipitor. That could make your LDL rebound to around 100 and your TC around 170 or so.

charles grashow said...

With regard to thyroid I'm on 120mgs (2 grains) Armour/day

Liver enzymes are all normal

At 6'1" and 160lbs BMI isn't a problem

I've been tested - ApeE3/3

At LDL of 100 - IMO - plaque will NOT reverse - Davis believes that for plaque reversal to occur LDL MUST BE <60

As to my higher than I want it to be hsCRP you might look at this

http://www.nature.com/ejcn/journal/v63/n9/full/ejcn200920a.html
An inverse relationship between plasma n-3 fatty acids and C-reactive protein in healthy individuals


I will consume 3gms/day of fish oil and get inflammtory markers retested in 6 months and will see

Screennamerequired said...

Her weight is irrelevant to me. She isn't advocating a diet and claiming how great it is. I come here to see the smackdown of the paleo low/carb "science" (as well as John smith's posts). I think that's a hell of a lot more noble than the paleo guru's selling shaky fad diet books and supplements.

MacSmiley said...

Hi, Charles,

I tried posting this below your lipid results, but Disqus wasn't cooperating that far down the thread with cut & paste on my iPhone:

Have you seen the Cleveland Clinic videos on this subject…?

Intravascular Ultrasound Insight into the Pathophysiology of Coronary Disease
http://youtu.be/YfeCB-GHMvc

Factors Driving Progression and Regression of Coronary Plaques
http://youtu.be/7CHuHPtIHBs

New Targets for Anti-Atherosclerotic Therapy
http://youtu.be/4K3lv5tOCA0

Caveat: The HDL-raising drug mentioned in the 3rd video was pulled by the manufacturer due to increased mortality.

The info about the ApoA1 Milano polymorphism was intriguing, demonstrating that HDL numbers alone are not necessarily protective, especially when artificially raising HDL with supplements and/or drugs.

HDL is evidently more sophisticated a lipoprotein than originally thought, and much more needs to be learned about it before we can depend on its respective ratios for cardio-protective reassurance.

You are correct that LDL <60 can induce plaque regression, and AFAIK such LDL lowering may also cause more stability in existing atheromas. But I must wonder about the side effects of such a high dose (80mg) of Lipitor/Atorvastatin.

The positive results of this aggressive statin therapy, however, lends credence to the dietary approaches of Pritikin/Ornish/Esselstyn and colleagues IMO. They accomplished both plaque regression and adverse cardiac event reduction in their patients.

Even if you have chosen not to go completely plant-based, have you at least tried Michael Pollan's sensible advice to "Eat mostly plants"? It's working well for my lipids. It may well do so for yours, as well.

MacSmiley said...

Jimmy is definitely not shredded, despite the weight loss. Regardless of BMI, the tale of the tape would still reveal some dangerous central obesity, just judging by the photograph Charles posted.

MacSmiley said...

Found a bunch on Twitter, but a single collection in one place would be awesome. Thanks, Evelyn.

Hello_I_Love_You said...

You're talking about LDL-C of 60, which is not as meaningful as LDL-P. You have sub-500 LDL-P and LDL-P would be associated more closely with atherosclerosis than your LDL-C. I would guess that most of your atherosclerosis happened prior to your current level of LDL-P, which is not very atherogenic. That 48 CAC is a result of cumulative plaque formation over the years. It is true that most of that happens in the 40s and 50s but the pace accelerates starting in the mid-50s. If you're euthyroid and taking Armour due to low T3, then that may have contributed also prior to T3 normalization. I notice a minor oddity like your small LDL-P being proportionally high for someone with LDL-P that low.


But even at 48, you're not in bad shape for your age group, where most people are between 55-150. Obviously, you wanna do better but reducing the overall risk of CVD is more than just lowering CAC. If your CAC score is >0, then you need to look at BP, inflammation (CRP) and blood stickiness (fibrinogen, A1c). If your mode of exit is via heart disease, then it's usually via thrombogenic myocardial infarction caused by inflammation-led cap rupture or hypertension than stenosis.


And your CRP isn't really coming from the O3-O6 imbalance. Your BMI is around 20; check the table in the the study: these guys all have BMI's in the high 20s. Like I said, CRP overlaps with metabolic inflammation and you can't deduce that it's due to lack of O3; those studies are usually not done with lean people with moderately elevated CRP (like you) but those with significant metabolic inflammation, which is not the same as inflammation caused by autoimmunity or hormonal dysfunction. When's the last time you had your hormone panel done, even serum cortisol?

charles grashow said...

What hormones are you suggesting I test? I may have had these done - if so I will post results

charles grashow said...

Remember - I'm taking 10mgs Atorvastatin/day + certain supplements and my LDL was 47 per my last NMR test

marksuave25 said...

I didn't say Jimmy was shredded. I said anthony colpo is. Jimmy is definitely smaller now than he was a year ago.

marksuave25 said...

The science part is fine by me. I remember you. You used to watch and comment on plant positive's videos right? I hope he is doing well. I wonder why he never came out and showed his subscribers his identity or a bigger pic of himself. His advice was helpful for me and my family.

Hello_I_Love_You said...

Charles, check out the first group in the study you provided the link to:

http://www.nature.com/ejcn/journal/v63/n9/fig_tab/ejcn200920t1.html#figure-title



They're overweight/obese but they have CRP <1 and if you checked their liver enzymes, cholesterol, A1c and other markers, they would be normal, even optimal. They're perfectly healthy people. Jimmy chose to accept that weight = health and has proceeded down the slippery slope of ketogenic catabolism, where he will become hormonally wrecked and immunodeficient.

Hello_I_Love_You said...

I actually agree with that. On a vegetarian or on a 15% animal food diet, you could reverse atherosclerosis. That is something Paleo folks will never acknowledge. Whether you want to choose that restrictive lifestyle is another issue. Pritikin had no plaque whatsoever when he died. Go to 16:25 of the first video. That chart shows the frequency of atherosclerosis and you see how it explodes from 40 onward. For those over 50, 85% have it but 15% do not. Those percentages match the CAC score and those with zero scores dwindle as age creeps up. But it is possible to have zero CAC even if you're 70+. About 3% do. In the 60-70 age group, it's about 10%. What do you think that 10% is doing different?

Hello_I_Love_You said...

The problem is it's hard to zero in on hormones. It's not strictly high/low cortisol but the HPA axis dysfunction. That's just a hunch on what you might have assuming that your T3 reactively went down from low-carbing. Low T3 doesn't just give you cold hands and low body termperature; your CRP could go up if cortisol can't contain inflammation. We saw that in a clinical study (I'll find it) of comparative diets. Before you even do that check your ALT/AST and make sure they're under 25 or so to rule out hepatic sources. Those Aussies in the 3rd group in the study you cited with very high CRP, they are obese and have inflammation. But CRP there is arterial inflammation that show up as high WBCs: >7.0. Check your WBC: it will probably be no higher than 5.5 given your low T3, unless your Armour is working really well. At sub 5.5, you don't see inflammation driven by metabolic issues; your CRP is probably due to non-metabolic reasons, especially if you low-carbed and experienced side effects.


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17697159
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18979272

carbsane said...

You're a year behind the ball Mark. He's regained at least half the nuttyK weight loss. Which by he way, I will make fun of and mock (the nuttyK) because using diabetic supplies for weight loss is just silly and that diet is about as paleo as microwave popcorn. Many have tried to help Jimmy but he will have none of it. So his weight struggles will continue and if paleo is legit growing, Jimmy will be left along the side of he road. There were only 3 on his Cholesterol Panel at PFX. With 150 speakers or something like that, surely if 2 spots had been unexpectedly absent, someone from the gang could have sat in. Mark? Robb? Diane? Too busy, eh? His LC Cruise this year sports a pitiful lineup and we're probably looking at the last one. The man has skills in marketing. I hope for his sake he didn't wait too long to capitalize on that in some other (could be related) line of work.

MacSmiley said...

Normal genetic variation is my guess. For example, not everyone who smokes gets lung cancer.

I'm wondering about CAC as well. Is the calcification of plaques a characteristic of older, stable plaques? I've been told that Dr. Atkins admitted in a TV interview that he suffered from calcification of his arteries, but that was way back before YouTube. If true, I don't know how old Atkins was at the time.

Meanwhile, the IVUS revelation in the first Cleveland Clinic video that plaques grow early towards the outside of the arteries before they grow inwards to occlude the artery, yet can still be deadly, should be a sobering thought. It explains all those heart attacks that happen days or weeks after stress tests and angiograms gave the all clear, as well as the vast majority of heart attacks which happen without any prior cardiac symptoms.

MacSmiley said...

BTW Nathan Pritikin did reintroduce a small amount if animal protein back into his diet along the way.

You may find this interesting:

Interview with Nathan Pritikin

http://youtu.be/qOj4rzSkqok

The LA Times reported on Pritikin's autopsy. I didn't know his autopsy was so serendipitous, since the cause of death was so obvious. I had erroneously thought it had been prearranged or requested by his survivors. It was not.

While there were small traces of fatty tissue both in the heart muscle and in the coronary arteries, all four of the major arteries examined were totally free of any restriction--a condition virtually unheard of for a 69-year-old man living in a Western country.

http://articles.latimes.com/1985-07-04/news/vw-9280_1_nathan-pritikin

That the summary of that autopsy was published in the New England Journal of Medicine is extraordinary. I presume the Pritikin family was consulted for permission before publication. In contrast, Atkin's family declined even to have an autopsy done, much less have it published. Too bad.

I'm of the opinion that all diet gurus be transparent about their health conditions and pre-arrange for their own autopsies and publication thereof.

ZM said...

"If ANYONE here can refer me to studies that show plaque regression WITHOUT drastically lowering LDL I would appreciate it."

It would be better if you can show that the regression is actually due to lowered LDL. Since most or all treatments possess multiple effects it is impossible to know. A more relevant and important question: Is lowering LDL associated with reduced cause-specific and overall mortality outcomes? After analyzing most of the evidence, I'd say the answer is no.

marksuave25 said...

Why do you care about his weight? Why would you go to his blog regularly and check up on him? How about you take your own advice and move on if you don't like what he has on his blog? If you believe that he will be left by the roadside, why not just leave him and his blog there. Fyi, I rarely go to his blog, yours, or anyone else's. I listen to the podcast from time to time when I'm in the gym. Why mock him? Isn't that behavior unbecoming of a middle aged woman?

carbsane said...

NOTICE ABOUT DELETIONS:

It is with regret that I deleted many comments today, many with interesting and informative content, but woefully off topic. I generally allow off topic comments here, but this just got out of hand. This is a book review.

I have saved the conversation should I have time later to somehow put it elsewhere. The discussions about cholesterol, etc. were especially difficult to delete, but it was impossible to leave just some without the others.

To marksuave - I would point you to this page here: http://carbsanity.blogspot.com/p/who-is-carbsane_29.html



This is not my personal blog, nor is blogging my main profession. I provide information here which I hope others will use to make informed decisions for themselves. Decisions based on the facts as we know them through the current limitations and understanding of the underlying science, not hype or unverifiable n=1 anecdotes. That is what I do and will continue to do, especially when so many are out there struggling because they believe the lies many gurus are telling them. You will note that I haven't done a post on a certain guru in a very long time. Since he wrote a book I consider to be one of THE most irresponsible books on a medical topic ever published. You brought that up, not me.

Sanjeev Sharma said...

good discussion and links - thank to almost everyone

charles grashow said...

WBC 5.4 on 11/1/2013
AST 21 on 10/18/13
ALT 26 on 10/18/13

carbsane said...

Sorry I had to delete it. I'm thinking of a way to repost where it's not part of a book review.

Blogger said...

New Diet Taps into Pioneering Plan to Help Dieters Lose 12-23 Pounds in Just 21 Days!

Blogger said...

EasyHits4U - Your Free Traffic Exchange - 1:1 Exchange Ratio, Business social network. Get FREE Advertising!

Post a Comment

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