70 replies to this topic

[DukeNukem]

Well, it's been years since I've been a big contributor here, all the while I've made near daily posts in a private game developer's forum (in a massive health thread) about diet and supplements.  I'll share these postings here, in this single thread, rather than start a new thread each time.  In effect, duplicating how I've already been posting about health topics the last several years (actually, over 10 years now in that forum, before almost anyone ever talked about high-fat diets, resveratrol or avoiding grains).

Over the years, this thread may become quite large!

I'll start with a few of my most recent posts:


A sad reality for vegetarians/vegans:

Quote

Grains, Vegetarians, Vegans and Nutritional Density
http://freetheanimal...al-density.html

~~~~~

I thought this was interesting...Neanderthals used plants for medicinal properties.  Not surprising, though--we know that cats and many other mammals do this.

Quote

Neanderthals in Northern Spain Had Knowledge of Plants' Healing Qualities
Until recently Neanderthals, who disappeared between 30,000 and 24,000 years ago, were thought to be predominantly meat-eaters. However, evidence of dietary breadth is growing as more sophisticated analyses are undertaken...Dr Stephen Buckley, a Research Fellow at the University of York's BioArCh research facility, said: "The evidence indicating this individual was eating bitter-tasting plants such as yarrow and camomile with little nutritional value is surprising. We know that Neanderthals would find these plants bitter, so it is likely these plants must have been selected for reasons other than taste."

Professor Les Copeland from the Faculty of Agriculture and Environment, University of Sydney, Australia, said: "Our research confirms the varied and selective use of plants by Neanderthals."
http://www.scienceda...20718131348.htm

~~~~~

Quote

Alzheimer’s Disease Linked to Diabetes, Study Suggests
http://www.scienceda...20718164604.htm

Yes, we paid money for the above research.

We've known for 10 years that Alzheimer's is a sugar overload of the brain. Alzheimer's is a unique "disease" to societies that consume too much carb (aka glucose) in their diet. BTW, that's why the treatment is consuming ketones (from MCT oil), because it gets the brain back on a proper/healthy fuel mix of 50/50 fatty acids and glucose.

~~~~~

Low carb diets, over and over, crush low calorie diets when it comes to treating diabetics.  Ketogenic diets offer the best benefits for diabetics.

Quote

Effect of low-calorie versus low-carbohydrate ketogenic diet in type 2 diabetes.
This study shows the beneficial effects of a ketogenic diet over the conventional LCD in obese diabetic subjects. The ketogenic diet appears to improve glycemic control.
http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/22673594

Now, while this type of result is a no-brainer for most of us here, the vast majority of diabetics are still being told to eat a low-calorie, low-fat diet (because most doctors still insanely believe that eating fats makes a person fat).  And, of course, a low-fat diet is high-glucose diet -- EXACTLY what further hurts the health of a diabetic.

[DukeNukem]

For the smokers here...

Quote

Vitamin D May Protect Lung Function in Smokers
"We examined the relationship between vitamin D deficiency, smoking, lung function, and the rate of lung function decline over a 20 year period in a cohort of 626 adult white men from the Normative Aging Study," said lead author Nancy E. Lange, MD, MPH, of the Channing Laboratory, Brigham and Women's Hospital. "We found that vitamin D sufficiency (defined as serum vitamin D levels of >20 ng/ml) had a protective effect on lung function and the rate of lung function decline in smokers."
http://www.scienceda...20720081843.htm

This isn't a strong study, but regardless, since we ALL should supplement with vit D3 and keep our levels above 50 ng/ml, it's a no-brainer that all smokers should supplement with D3.  (Smokers should also supplement with anti-inflammatory supplements like fish oil, magnesium, curcumin, and 5-loxin.)

~~~~~

About 12 years ago leptin was discovered as a key hunger controlling hormone.  However, elevated triglycerides reduce the effect of leptin, which needs to reach the brain and signal that you are no longer hungry.  How are trigs elevated?  On a high-carb diet.  Another reason high-fat diets are better at fighting hunger than high-carb diets.

Quote

Winning the Battle of the Bulge: We're a Scrimmage Closer to Victory
http://www.slu.edu/r...y/homepage/4263

More about the leptin issue, and how it makes children both fat, and couch potatoes:
http://www.dietdocto...r-robert-lustig

[shadowhawk]

Look forward to your posts.

[Droplet]

Hands up if you looked at the title and thought that it was about Duke doing a poop.   *Shrinks away in shame*

[caliban]

maybe start a blog?

[DukeNukem]

Fruit juices (aka sugar bombs) shut down your fat-burning metabolism for 3-4 hours.  (A well-known fact for years.)

Quote

Orange juice limits postprandial fat oxidation after breakfast in normal-weight adolescents and adults.
Caloric beverages may promote weight gain by simultaneously increasing total energy intake and limiting fat oxidation.
http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/22798004

Other sugar bombs:  starchy vegetables like potatoes and carrots, grains of any type including rice, alcoholic drinks, sugary fruits like bananas.  (Generally, if you must peel your fruit then it's not worth eating, because most beneficial nutrients are in the skin where they protect the fruit from the elements and bacteria -- the inside is where nature stores the energy in the form of sugars.)

[1kgcoffee]

I think that's a good rule, but what fruits do you make an excpetion for? Cantaloupe, grapefruit, cactus pears?

[DukeNukem]

I pretty much only eat berries.  They have a much higher nutrient to sugar ratio than larger fruits.  50 grams of whole berries blows away the nutrient content of 50 grams of apple, banana, pear, melon, etc.  Pomegranate is one exception I can think of to my don't-eat-it-if-you-must-peel-it rule.

[Mind]

That is what I eat as well when it comes to fruit - mostly berries, kiwis, and pomegranates. I treat bananas, oranges, and mangoes as a desert or treat (like ice cream or cake) and only eat them once in a while.

[pamojja]

Don't forget Avocados.

[APBT]

Duke

In regard to your post #6, thoughts on quinoa, purple potatoes, yams, sweet potatoes.

[mia22]

Cool.
You're like a human encyclopedia of info, enjoy reading your posts.

[DukeNukem]

APBT, on 23 July 2012 - 10:51 PM, said:

In regard to your post #6, thoughts on quinoa, purple potatoes, yams, sweet potatoes.

Anything starchy I recommend in moderation, simply because starch (chains of glucose) is probably pro-aging.  In other words, you're dealing with rising blood sugar (a pro-inflammatory event), rising insulin to store this sugar as triglycerides into fat cells, potential glycation elevation, and increased metabolic free radical damage (because glucose-driven metabolism creates more free radical waste than fat burn metabolism).

~~~~~

Yup, avocado another great example of a super nutritious fruit *after* being peeled.

[Thorsten2]

Sorry to digress but does anyone have any tips on what to mix with avocado? Avocado really agrees with my body. I just struggle with the taste of it. It is creamy and there isn't anything wrong with that. It's the other taste it has which I can't really describe that makes it a chore to eat.

I tried mixing it with bacon as I thought the saltiness of the bacon would overpower the 'bleh' taste of avocado but unfortunately the avocado won the battle.

I might try it with a big chunky piece of gammon in a salad. Take that avocado?!

Why am I persisting with avocado? I think anything that is natural and improves my wellbeing and libido is worth keeping. Plus it's highly nutritious (decent mineral content), generally insulin friendly (in comparison to other fruits already mentioned such as mangos), has healthy fats and leaves me feeling centred, alkalized and full!

Any tips on improving its laborious taste?

Edited by Thorsten2, 26 July 2012 - 07:24 PM.

[Thorsten2]

Duke do you use olive oil? It's another thing that I find absolutely rank. I would drench my salads in it if I could but the taste is disgusting!


Coconut oil seems to be ok. So right now I gently heat 2tbs and then pour over salad usually eaten with a steak or something. Maybe it is the superior oil anyway with it being more stable especially when heated?


Also, have you seen a decline in your sex drive since being on a carb-restricted diet?

Edited by Thorsten2, 26 July 2012 - 07:36 PM.

[DukeNukem]

Quote

Lower Vitamin D Could Increase Risk of Dying, Especially for Frail, Older Adults
The study divided people into four groups. The low group had levels less than 50 nanograms per milliliter; the highest group had vitamin D of 84 or higher. In general, those who had lower vitamin D levels were more likely to be frail.
http://www.scienceda...20726135232.htm

I'm posting about this study because the ng/mL level recommended here is considerably higher than I usually see by overly cautious researchers.  I've said before the sweet spot is 70-90 ng/mL (mine is almost always measured between 80-90), and this study noted that the least frail group had a level in the 80's and higher.  Too many doctors, etc., are afraid to recommend levels above 50.  Ignore these people.

~~~~~

Thorsten, have you tried making guacamole with avocado?

And yes I use a lot of olive oil.  I try to buy very high quality olive oil with a bold/peppery high-polyphenol-content taste.  Coconut oil and olive oil are not comparable--you should use both to maximize health benefits.  Each has their own quite different fatty acid profile, and different polyphenol content.  Both are super healthy, just in different ways.

Quote

Also, have you seen a decline in your sex drive since being on a carb-restricted diet?

Zero.

[mpe]

Thank god your back and please keep posting.

[Thorsten2]

Quote

Thorsten, have you tried making guacamole with avocado?

Excellent thank you. Hopefully I can find one that is low in carb.

[DukeNukem]

Thorsten2, on 29 July 2012 - 05:09 PM, said:

Excellent thank you. Hopefully I can find one that is low in carb.

I don't think I've ever seen anything but low-carb guac.  ;-)

~~~~~

Quote

Obesity Theories Challenged By Hunter-Gatherer Study
A new study comparing the lifestyle of Westerners with that of hunter-gatherers challenges the idea that the current obesity crisis is due to lack of physical activity. The researchers suggest the more likely explanation is over-consumption of calories, particularly due to the presence of energy-dense foods in the Western diet.
http://www.medicalne...cles/248333.php

This study helps show that hunter-gathers weren't necessarily always on-the-go to stay healthy.  In fact, much evidence indicates that they were quite lazy, especially the males, much like male African lions.  Most likely, H-G males took it easy between hunts, which were likely every few days.  Women likely were more on-the-go than males, taking care of children, dwelling upkeep, and foraging.

Diet is the primary factor is health (significantly more important that exercise), and it's also the biggest factor in terms of bodyfat composition.  When you eat the right foods, it takes very little exercise to maintain a healthy bodyfat (10-12% for men).

~~~~~

Quote

Ketogenic diet does not affect strength performance in elite artistic gymnasts.
Despite concerns of coaches and doctors about the possible detrimental effects of low carbohydrate diets on athletic performance and the well known importance of carbohydrates there are no data about VLCKD and strength performance. The undeniable and sudden effect of VLCKD on fat loss may be useful for those athletes who compete in sports based on weight class. We have demonstrated that using VLCKD for a relatively short time period (i.e. 30 days) can decrease body weight and body fat without negative effects on strength performance in high level athletes.
http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/22835211

This again shows that you do not need carbs (or carb-loading) to operate a peak athletic levels.  I think that this was also shown during the last summer Olympics, when news broke that the American gymnasts where on a very high fat diet.

[DukeNukem]

Quote

Most With Celiac Disease Unaware of It; Others Go Gluten-Free Without Diagnosis
Roughly 1.8 million Americans have celiac disease, but around 1.4 million of them are unaware that they have it, a Mayo Clinic-led analysis of the condition's prevalence has found...Researchers found that celiac disease is much more common in Caucasians.

Researchers have estimated the rate of diagnosed and undiagnosed celiac disease at similar levels prior to this study, but this is the most definitive study on the issue. "This provides proof that this disease is common in the United States," says co-author Joseph Murray, M.D., a Mayo Clinic gastroenterologist. "If you detect one person for every five or six (who have it), we aren't doing a very good job detecting celiac disease."  Celiac disease is a digestive disorder brought on when genetically susceptible people eat wheat, rye and barley.
http://www.scienceda...20731094104.htm

Going back years ago, I said that Celiac disease is essentially the end-point of a continuum, that all humans are on.  We are ALL allergic to the gluten within grains, and our bodies experience inflammation from consuming it.  Some people reach the end-point sooner than others because [1] they are more genetically predisposed to the negative consequences of gluten, and/or [2] they have higher exposure to it.  We will ALL get Celiac disease given enough time and exposure to gluten.  Just as diabetes is a symptom of carb over-exposure, Celiac disease is a symptom of gluten over-exposure.

The researchers in this article seem puzzled that over a million and a half people not yet diagnosed with Celiac disease are on a gluten-free diet.  The answer is simple:  They are smarter than the researchers.

[hamishm00]

Keep dumping!

[hippocampus]

DukeNukem, on 31 July 2012 - 04:45 PM, said:

The researchers in this article seem puzzled that over a million and a half people not yet diagnosed with Celiac disease are on a gluten-free diet.  The answer is simple:  They are smarter than the researchers.

When I went gluten-free because of some health problems and I said this to my doctor, he said that it's ok, that I probably know more about that than him, because I read about it on internet a lot, although I'm only 21 years and don't have medical education ... more doctors should be more humble about things they don't know a lot about, afterall we live in information age.

[DukeNukem]

Marilyn Monroe's diet, a self-described paleo-ish diet (plus ice cream treats).  Of course, the article's author dismisses the diet as unhealthy, then gets ripped apart by people with an actual clue in the comments section.

The Marilyn Monroe Diet: Eggs, Meat…And Ice Cream?
http://blisstree.com.../#ixzz23tNecA3F

I love that paleo is becoming so well known that press people can't continue to get away with dietary cluelessness anymore.  Also, I heard today from a person who would know that paleo is all the rage in Russia now -- spreading like wildfire.  People get on the diet, lose weight, gain energy, gain strength, lose their acne, don't get sick as much, and the list goes on.

[hivemind]

Duke's massive dump sounds like an appropriate name for this thread.

Your cholesterol levels are way too high. Eat more starches and less animal foods, cholesterol and saturated fat.

Paleo is a fad diet.

http://www.youtube.c...B5&feature=plcp

The primitive human had a cholesterol level under 150.

Edited by hivemind, 18 August 2012 - 10:55 PM.

[hivemind]

DukeNukem, on 31 July 2012 - 04:45 PM, said:

Going back years ago, I said that Celiac disease is essentially the end-point of a continuum, that all humans are on.  We are ALL allergic to the gluten within grains, and our bodies experience inflammation from consuming it.  Some people reach the end-point sooner than others because [1] they are more genetically predisposed to the negative consequences of gluten, and/or [2] they have higher exposure to it.  We will ALL get Celiac disease given enough time and exposure to gluten.  Just as diabetes is a symptom of carb over-exposure, Celiac disease is a symptom of gluten over-exposure.

The researchers in this article seem puzzled that over a million and a half people not yet diagnosed with Celiac disease are on a gluten-free diet.  The answer is simple:  They are smarter than the researchers.

No, we are not all allergic to gluten. About 1-2% of people have celiac disease and another 1-2% is estimated to have gluten insensitivity. So gluten is a problem only for a small minority of people, a few percent. For all the others, whole grains are a healthy food.

Edited by hivemind, 18 August 2012 - 11:03 PM.

[Chupo]

Low cholesterol levels are associated with increased mortality. It's also associated with cancer even decades prior. http://www.scienceda...20326113713.htm


In this study, all three diets, low carb, low fat, and Mediterranean, reversed atherosclerosis.  It was the lower blood pressure that was associated with the reversal - NOT cholesterol levels.  There was no difference in cholesterol levels between those who progressed and those who reversed.  There is no reason to try getting cholesterol so dangerously low.

Edited by Chupoman, 18 August 2012 - 11:53 PM.

[hivemind]

Chupoman, on 18 August 2012 - 11:51 PM, said:

Low cholesterol levels are associated with increased mortality. It's also associated with cancer even decades prior. http://www.scienceda...20326113713.htm

Yes, the cholesterol denialists always refer to this. The fact is that low cholesterol does not cause cancer. Poor health and cancer can cause low cholesterol.
It's called reverse causation: http://en.wikipedia....se_causation.29

Quote

In this study, all three diets, low carb, low fat, and Mediterranean, reversed atherosclerosis.  It was the lower blood pressure that was associated with the reversal - NOT cholesterol levels.  There was no difference in cholesterol levels between those who progressed and those who reversed.  There is no reason to try getting cholesterol so dangerously low.

LDL is not only associated with atherosclerosis, it is actually a causative factor for heart disease/atherosclerosis. There is no atherosclerosis with low cholesterol levels. It has been shown beyond any doubt in hundreds of studies. One such study is the Framingham heart study:

http://en.wikipedia....ham_Heart_Study

Edited by hivemind, 19 August 2012 - 12:35 AM.

[hivemind]

Chupoman, on 18 August 2012 - 11:51 PM, said:

Low cholesterol levels are associated with increased mortality. It's also associated with cancer even decades prior. http://www.scienceda...20326113713.htm

Did you read your own link?

Quote

Dr. Lavigne cautions the current study does not suggest that having low LDL-C somehow leads to the development of cancer. He recommended that patients diagnosed with high LDL-C should adhere to cholesterol-lowering guidelines, including the use of medications, to prevent heart disease.
"There is no evidence to indicate that lowering your cholesterol with a medication in any way predisposes to a risk for cancer.

[Chupo]

No observational study can prove causation... unless it comes from you, I suppose.  Nice cherry-picking of paragraphs. By the way, heart disease IS atherosclerosis of the coronary arteries.  You don't have to have super low cholesterol to heal it.

Edited by Chupoman, 19 August 2012 - 12:26 AM.

[hivemind]

Chupoman, on 19 August 2012 - 12:20 AM, said:

No observational study can prove causation... unless it comes from you, I suppose.  Nice cherry-picking of paragraphs. By the way, heart disease IS atherosclerosis of the coronary arteries.  You don't have to have super low cholesterol to heal it.

There are many RCT-studies to prove the lipid hypothesis. You do not have to rely only on those observational studies. It is probably the most strongly proven thing in medicine.

Atherosclerosis is the accumulation of (mostly)LDL cholesterol on the walls of the arteries. It is a cause of heart disease. There are also other ways the arteries or the heart can get damaged. Atherosclerosis is not the only cause of heart disease. Of course it is by far the most common cause.

150 is the cholesterol level under which atheroschlerosis does not happen. If you go over that, your artery walls start to accumulate cholesterol.

Edited by hivemind, 19 August 2012 - 12:55 AM.