Aug. 22 Over the Hump Bump: Paleo Summit Flashback
I changed the title of this post entirely for obvious reasons.
So, in T-minus 4 days the world will finally achieve Cholesterol Clarity! Thanks to NYT Bestselling (hopeful is he) author Jimmy Moore. The banner states that:
So I looked at the list of experts and recalled this post highlighting how one of them, Dr. Cate Shanahan, blamed carbs for being turned into LDL and then make us fat. You can browser search to "Skip to here!" and skip the intro stuff. You might also be interested in my notes from the full presentation, HERE. I've also had a chance to see what she says about LDL in her book Deep Nutrition, a whole 'nother theory there, and her interview with Jimmy for the book was quite enlightening. Beware the shaman lab tech and doctor trying to read your bloodwork tea leaves! If you don't get hungry between meals you are a healthy fat burner ... don't worry, be happy.
I think it is a damn shame that the Victory Belt Book Mill will be publishing such a book. I'm sorry but the only thing Jimmy brings to the table here is his incredible bias as regards lipoprotein levels and this is apparent in the introduction he posted online a couple of days ago. He repeats the lie about his cholesterol levels always being alarmingly high as well, because he starts the clock in 2008 when he began upping the percentage of fat in his diet (which he took to mean upping fat period) on the advice of co-author Dr. Eric Westman (of Atkins fame). It is also apparent in his choice of experts. Apparently VB doesn't care to even ensure there is any merit to use of the word expert, but it shouldn't even be enough to be able to rightfully claim the title "health expert" for a book of this nature. The interviewees should be recognized experts in the field of lipidology in some way, shape or form. Few on the list meet the standard of even being knowledgeable let alone expert. However if you're interested in the works of a well known skeptic, may I suggest the essays of Malcolm Kendrick over on THINCS . Free to boot!
The area of cholesterol is confusing enough without having every so-called expert (as Jimmy calls mainstream experts in his intro) weigh in with unsubstantiated opinions rather than the best of what the scientific evidence is telling us at the present time. In a comment on his blog regarding Dr. Dayspring, Jimmy wrote:
Dayspring certainly has his position on LDL-P being the be all end all. I let him make his case in my book. But many other of my experts believe it is the size that matters. It’s interesting he left out the Small LDL-P number in the case study. Why? Because it doesn’t support his position.
I have yet to see much evidence for the "large fluffy LDL" being benign or even protective as some were describing it for years. Indeed that meme seems largely gone from the skeptosphere because newer information has shown that particle size per se is not very predictive ... just like total cholesterol concentration!
So anyway, here's your bump ... in anticipation of some scrutiny of the positions of various experts, Shanahan included, from the book in the future (as time and interest permits ... it would be wonderful if we didn't hear much more about this book ...)
(Note: The scheduled Thursday bump didn't work as planned, it is indeed Friday today, sorry for the confusion! Stop by the Asylum bar for a Cherry Pickin' Martini on the house tonight - liver sparing virgin and/or fructose free versions always available.)
Original Publication 2/19/12
For those who haven't heard, Sean Croxton of Underground Wellness has put together an online event dubbed the Paleo Summit. Over the course of 4 days, there will be 23 video slide presentations from "experts" around the Paleo world on any manner of subjects. You can see the lineup here. So I "mailed" my registration in early and received my links to some free videos: Interview with Mark Sisson, and Interview with Gary Taubes. I've listened to the first (will have some comments on that one as it fits in with a post in my draft bin) but can't really stomach the drone of a dying TWICHOOB much anymore -- I'll save that for a day of torture ;-)
I don't really know much about Croxton, though his name has come up from time to time in LLVLC-land. As much as I enjoy his style, my heart sank when he got to the part with Mark where he laid out his mission as getting everyone to forget the failed notion of eating less and moving more. This is basically what I'm going to discuss about the Sisson interview, because after discussing the lectins and phytates and saponins and whatnot from evil grains, Sisson says that he didn't eat breakfast that morning. Then they go into a kitchen and cook taco-less fish tacos. Basically lemon-pepper seasoning on cubed white fish (halibut if memory serves) fried in a bit of olive oil (sorry, too lazy to rewatch) and served in a bowl with a couple of lettuce leaves. They enjoy their lunch and later in the "day with Mark", the two have a little workout with pushups, pullups, squats and planks. Ummm ... sounds like Mark (who skipped breakfast and said he doesn't eat it most days) doesn't eat a lot, and don't give me this crap that their workout wasn't the dreaded exercise!
Skip to here!
In any case, what caught my eye on the list of preview video-shorts was one Dr. Cate "snacking-takes-liters-of-fluid-out-of-circulation" Shanahan. In the clip, Shanahan schools us on The LDL-Weight Gain Connection. This is apparently part of her presentation The Paleo Diet vs. Top-Selling Drugs — Who Wins? The title of the snippet caught my eye, so I had to give a listen. Basically Shanahan takes a page from Nora "all-bodyfat-comes-from-glucose" Gedgaudas and decides to trace a little bit of extra body fat back to its source: why, a bowl of pasta, of course! You see, pasta becomes blood sugar which travels around to your liver where "the liver picks it up and starts transforming it into fat". Jeez Louise! Even Taubes & Co only claim that about 30% of carb in a meal is turned to fat. Dr. Cate continues ... and this part is just over the top:
One thing all of medical students and dieticians should learn, but we don't, is how carbohydrates make us make more cholesterol.
C'mon Doc!! One of the things that continues to be an achilles heel for LC diets, especially in maintenance, is that LDL -- the type of cholesterol she's talking about, make no mistake about it -- tends to go up. In some cases, markedly, shockingly so! Not in Human Physiology -899 by Dr. Cate. You see, she goes on to repeat that the glucose from your pasta is made into LDL in the liver where it's then deposited in your fat cells ... like somewhere on your thighs for instance. I think Dr. Cate may just take the award for the most incorrect information in the shortest time here:
- Glucose gets taken up by the liver and turned to fat as some primary metabolic route
- Glucose is converted to cholesterol packaged up in LDL
- Cholesterol is deposited as body fat
- Only carbohydrates/glucose in large excess are converted in small amounts to fat by the liver
- Fatty acids from the liver are packaged up into VLDL
- VLDL particles do transport excess fatty acids from all sources, primarily circulating NEFA, to fat cells for uptake
What is the screening process for the speakers and experts for these things? None, apparently. The reason medical students don't learn that carbs turn to cholesterol turn to body fat is because that doesn't happen. Where did YOU learn that? And what qualifications do you really have (since you claim you didn't learn it in medical school) to teach this nonsense to anyone? It seems that someone out there has to counter the promotion of pseudoscience as "expert" fact espoused by "brilliant" minds ... it might as well be me :-)
So, in a move that's sure to further ingratiate me to the movement shakers and fakers, I'll be "live blogging" on the Paleo Summit. The price is right, and I expect to get what I pay for!
"When your body burns fat for fuel it is said to be in a “ketogenic state.”
She then contrasts ketogenic with "carbogenic." What?
she's in a neologismgenic state, also a misnomergenic one. Wonder what she smoked to get there ...
with a leeeeetle bit of wiggle room to deny that's what he meant.
It's a bit funny actually .. Croxton is on the way to saying you canNOT eat that much steak and Taubes cuts him off and says Taubes could easily eat 5,000 calories of steak in one sitting.
> Wonder what she smoked to get there ...
I'm in a pleonasmgenic state.
 just to be pedantic, also in a pedantogenic state
tangentially, also a Lyle McDonaldgenic state (quite in fact, that's a complicated one)
This is a credible voice of paleo?
Can't you get into conferences like that for a fraction of the price as a "volunteer"/workshop monitor/some such?
This sort of thing really bugs me. It's one thing to take stuff out of context (ultimately what Taubes does with insulin) or stretch the interpretation (what I believe the whole fat-burning metabolism hype comes down to). It's quite another to make up your own physiology. I wasn't going to address that whole blog post of hers b/c she seemed rather obscure. The paleo community is doing their "cause" no favors promoting this stuff :(
Which would have left her in a carcinogenic state!
I wonder if Croxton has seen Jimmy lately. They're (PaleoFX and Paleo Summit) using his 2005 "After" pic. At some point "I used to eat Little Debbies by the boxful and weigh 410 lbs and have a 67" waist, but now I wear 50" (or larger?) pants" ain't gonna cut it. I would like to see that Dave guy from Mark's Daily Apple, or Caroline Jhingory, or Hank Garner, or ....
On the issue of 'where does body fat come from' and the notion of carbs being en-mass converted to fats, I find the following paper suggestive.
"Hydrogenated Oils and Fats: The presence of chemically-modified fatty acids in human adipose tissue." http://www.ajcn.org/content/34/5/877.abstract
As part of a study into the relationship between fat and CHD related death, researchers recovered adipose tissue from the recently deceased and analyzed it into its constituent fatty acid fractions. They also analyzed the fatty acid composition of a typical diet consumed in the same region.
End result? With a couple of minor and easily explained exceptions there was a very high match between the adipose tissue fat profile (fatty acid composition) and the dietary fat profile. In their words:
"It is proposed therefore (for such tissue samples which form the subject of the present investigation) that a population average depot fat composition truly reflects the fatty acid composition of the average dietary fat of that population, subject only to the difference that a measure of desaturation of dietary 16:0 to 16:1 and of dietary 18:0 to 18:1 occurs to give a degree of unsaturation consistent with optimum cell-membrane fluidity and functional integrity."
So if we accept their methods/findings, and the profile of stored body fat closely matches the dietary fat profile, then, for me anyway, the suggestive inference is that body fat is simply stored dietary fat, with no other "fat factories" making a significant contribution.
or copy & paste this in the url textbox:
rewind for the full context
And, btw, to give an idea, "here speaking" someone who is most of the time a very low carber. Even tough I don't avoid carbs for weightloss (nor because of diabetes or similar) 'cause I'd probably find them equally if not less "fattening" than fat. I mean Glucose/starch.
Jimmy is a classic example of how activity and exercise MATTER and WORK. From his own n=1 experience, which makes this so sad.
In any case, that is convincing evidence for this. I am going to be blogging on a rat study of different KD's (different fats, 80% fat) and lo and behold, body fat on rats mirrored dietary intake. I do imagine that on very high carb and energy surplus diets, DNL has a greater contribution, but seeing as fat cells seem to suck up chylomicrons and have less of an affinity for VLDL, this should be protective for fattening, no?
I'm going to have to blog on this as the Jimmy of 2008 holds all the answers to the 2012 Jimmy's mysteries.
Here he's lifting weights and apparently eating like he's training for the Olympics -- only with gross "paleo" stuff this time. Ughh.
True, but he's got his own problems with diet craziness. His exchange with AC was interesting.
I can't take any of these guys seriously anymore. They get so locked into a philosophy and it's hard to get out, especially when money is involved. Primal Fuel? The only thing "Primal" about it is the word on the container. I'm not against protein powder, btw-but to pretend that Primal Fuel is somehow more "Grok" friendly is just plain silly. And even if MS denies that he promotes it as a more primal food, it's definitely implied. Anyway.....
No - I'm afraid I can't claim the honor of posting to Gary's blog - I long ago gave up on his particular Procrustean solution to the world's dietary problems :-)
I must also confess to being a long time reader and silent supporter, and have greatly enjoyed the underlying common sense and science based understanding you have brought to an area often characterized by strange and self-delusional fantasies.
The corroboration of the results in a rat study is most interesting. It is comforting to know our furry friends are not so metabolically different after all.
With respect to DNL and VLDL contributing to fat gain, a paper on which you have already blogged:
... seems to sum up the situation quite nicely.
1. After a high carb load DNL is higher in the obese than in average weight men, although DNL does not contribute directly to net weight gain.
2. Circulating fatty acids are high despite concurrent high insulin levels.
3. Tissue oxidation of fatty acids is lower in the obese than normal weight men.
So despite DNL and resultant circulating VLDL not being direct contributors to net weight gain, they do appear to have a significant fat sparing effect. To quote:
"Taken together, these results—the qualitatively higher hepatic
DNL with lower fat oxidation, the correlation between DNL and
increased serum triacylglycerol, and the greater availability of
fatty acids to tissues despite lower fat oxidation by tissues—all
point to an impairment of tissue fuel selection (utilization of
fatty acids) in the overweight group, in whom a carbohydrate
load produced a fat-sparing effect more pronounced than in lean
men and so a less negative fat balance than in lean men."
I think these are interesting findings as they are consistent with the observation that stored fat seems to mirror dietary fat and DNL is not a significant contributor to fat stores per se. However, on the converse side, high DNL levels can ultimately provide a significant fat sparing effect.
Thanks again for the blog.
(ps. I changed my sign in name to avoid any confusion )
Post a Comment
Comment Moderation is ON ... I will NOT be routinely reviewing or publishing comments at this time..