• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans

Photo
* * * * * 1 votes

Carbs (aka glucose) impairs arterial and brain function -- enjoy your Turkey Day carb feast!

carbs glucose heart brain

  • Please log in to reply
98 replies to this topic

#31 TheFountain

  • Guest
  • 5,362 posts
  • 257

Posted 03 December 2011 - 09:39 AM

Duke, Arthur DeVany, Mark Sisson, and Michael Rose....oh, and Niner, make it 5. They all seem to be doing ok. They are, of course, quite meticulous in how they achieve their paleo status.


Well, I'm not as meticulous as the rest of them probably are. I still have a problem with sweets. I try to keep it under control, and not have them in the house, but if I'm at a party or something and there's some really tasty desert, it's not going to be a super paleo day for me... Honestly, I'm not meticulous about any of it. Maybe that's the secret. It's easy to follow because I don't have to be fanatical about it. and it still works!

Niner, what is this semi-paleo diet you are on like? What does a daily food intake chart for you look like?


A typical 'good day' would look something like this:

Breakfast-
Cup of cocoa in water, sweetened with splenda
Oatmeal with coconut oil and blueberries, more splenda
20 oz coffee with half & half, yet more splenda... (i know...)

Lunch- (sometimes skipped)
Usually a smaller quantity of the stuff I have for dinner, but no salad.

Dinner-
Salad with olive oil & vinegar (usually balsamic)
Sauteed Greens
Various Other vegetables, occasional fruit.
A protein source; chicken, ruminant, fish, or a veggie concoction.
Rice or White potatoes occasionally, but I tend to go light on those.
A handful of raw cashews with some semisweet chocolate

On a good day, two or three meals would be it, with no snacks.

I try to avoid sugar, wheat, omega 6 PUFAs, high GI carbs, and burned stuff. Emphasis on "try", since I don't actually 100% avoid any of them. I might split a donut with one of my kids, and blow it on all five at the same time. My "paleo" approach to the donut is to pick the kind that's lowest in sugar, and only have half of one. And it doesn't happen that often. In a week, I'll probably have several flour tortillas and several pieces of bread. That's in comparison to the constant barrage of wheat that I used to eat. I usually don't eat the crusts on bread. (very high in AGEs) While a hardcore paleo guy would probably laugh me out of the room, the distance I've moved from where I used to be is pretty large. I only occasionally drink milk, but eat cheese and greek yogurt, and probably a quarter cup of half & half a day. Omega 6 PUFAs are hard to avoid in the modern world. I've been trying to improve my game there. I just got some Trader Joe's banana chips that are cooked in coconut oil, and are relatively low in sugar. That beats about 99.9% of typical packaged snack foods.

So that's basically my "paleo lite" approach. I try to eat paleo whenever it's not too much of a pain, but it's not a religion.


Have you considered sardines? They seem to have a decent omega fatty acid profile (something like 2 grams of omega 3s per serving).

This actually isn't all that different from my diet, except I don't eat chicken or other land based animals, and I include eggs (of the omega 3 variety). I've actually been lucky enough to find 1:1 ratio omega 3 eggs, but they are fairly expensive at almost 3$ a dozen, but it evens out since I pay so little on most vegetables and sardines are only a dollar a can (sometimes less).

White potatoes are off my list too, instead I prefer sweet potatoes. For my oatmeal I tend to do what you do except I make it in low fat milk with cranberries, dark chocolate and organic banana slices. I have been chilling out on the chocolate a little lately because it's been getting me anxious again. Not sure why my body does this, I can eat chocolate for a few months with no anxiogenic reaction, then boom, all of a sudden it gives me anxiety again. No change in anything else (still off the st johns wort and prefer 5htp over it).

I also eat low carb pasta. Dream fields specifically. And pumpernickel bread a few times a weak. Overall, I still think my carb intake maxes out around 150-170 at most. Which adjusting for the fat intake levels and all is pretty good. With dairy I have realized that opting for the low fat kind, for whatever reason, seems to solve most of my sensitivity issues (lactose intolerance). I therefor go for the no fat greek yogurt which my stomach well agrees with. But I eat a lot of kale, tomatoes, sweet potatoes and fresh parsely (which contains some pretty important polyphenols).

oh, I also stay away from caffeine as much as possible as this tends to cause me serious anxiety in anything but small quantities (I wonder, will we ever solve the mystery of why some people get messed up on caffeine, while other's can take it in by the gallon?).

Edited by TheFountain, 03 December 2011 - 10:12 AM.


#32 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 03 December 2011 - 02:36 PM

Thanks for the sardine tip; that's a great idea. I'll have to check out the Dream Fields pasta too- does it taste ok? There are some known genetic polymorphisms that affect caffeine metabolism- I think they're in P450 1A1, but that should only change the half life; there must be something else that explains sensitivity. I had a cup of "decaf" on an airplane at 7pm a couple weeks ago, and I was awake all freaking night. If I drink coffee in the morning, I'm fine with it. I do notice a short period of spaciness right after I drink it, but that seems to fade pretty quickly. I mostly drink it for the flavor/overall experience.

sponsored ad

  • Advert
Click HERE to rent this advertising spot for NUTRITION to support LongeCity (this will replace the google ad above).

#33 TheFountain

  • Guest
  • 5,362 posts
  • 257

Posted 03 December 2011 - 06:34 PM

Thanks for the sardine tip; that's a great idea. I'll have to check out the Dream Fields pasta too- does it taste ok? There are some known genetic polymorphisms that affect caffeine metabolism- I think they're in P450 1A1, but that should only change the half life; there must be something else that explains sensitivity. I had a cup of "decaf" on an airplane at 7pm a couple weeks ago, and I was awake all freaking night. If I drink coffee in the morning, I'm fine with it. I do notice a short period of spaciness right after I drink it, but that seems to fade pretty quickly. I mostly drink it for the flavor/overall experience.

I remember the test someone here presented a couple of years ago which determined if you were a 'slow caffeine metabolizer' or something to that effect which also determined the apparent likelihood of heart problems resultant of caffeine consumption later in life. I cannot locate the thread (don't remember the title). Perhaps this is an extension of the fore-mentioned polymorphism.

Dreamfields pasta tastes great for apparently 'low carb' pasta. According to the company that makes this stuff they 'denature' the carbohydrates as to render them less active somehow, leaving you with '5 digestible carbs' while the rest are 'protected carbs' (the whole omission of fiber in carb count debacle). But I caution the wheat sensitive, as they do still contain some. I don't seem to be as wheat sensitive as other's so I seem to be able to get away with it.

Edited by TheFountain, 03 December 2011 - 06:37 PM.


#34 hggh

  • Guest
  • 15 posts
  • 13
  • Location:California

Posted 03 December 2011 - 08:25 PM

What if paleo diet is slow release toxin like oxygen?
http://www.reddit.co.../comments/mk3ut http://www.reddit.co...nous_air_fixed/

Or prostate cancer
http://healthcorrela...720027837689172

Um, think about how ridiculous this premise is. Paleo is mostly about getting rid of the Franken-food junk that our great grandparents didn't even eat. Omega-6 seed oils? Those oils combined catalytically with hydrogen gas under high pressure? High fructose corn syrup? Animals fed unnatural grains instead of the food they're supposed to eat? We don't even need to ask if this stuff is bad for us. We KNOW it's bad. The typical paleo diet consists of foods that people have been eating for tens of thousands, if not millions of years. It's really defined by what is NOT there, which is all the modern stuff, and some of the semi-modern stuff like gluten grains.


Do you think bacon as a healthy food item?:
Mark Sisson "There's no such thing as too much." http://www.marksdail...ilyapple.com%2F
RobbWolf twitter pictures http://yfrog.com/h03ixatj & http://yfrog.com/h87efcqj & http://yfrog.com/kgukaxnj just bacon grease & http://yfrog.com/mnfkmvlj & http://yfrog.com/gzcaeenj

-
at 5minutes:
http://is.gd/ebYvCl & http://is.gd/jEtVWA click 'telomere length.pdf':
"Includes sausage, chorizo, scrapple, and bacon.
5 Includes liver, including chicken livers, and other organ meats.
6 Includes ham hocks, pigs’ feet, and chicarones."

Edited by hggh, 03 December 2011 - 08:35 PM.


#35 yoyo

  • Guest
  • 582 posts
  • 21

Posted 04 December 2011 - 03:34 AM

Thanks for the sardine tip; that's a great idea. I'll have to check out the Dream Fields pasta too- does it taste ok? There are some known genetic polymorphisms that affect caffeine metabolism- I think they're in P450 1A1, but that should only change the half life; there must be something else that explains sensitivity. I had a cup of "decaf" on an airplane at 7pm a couple weeks ago, and I was awake all freaking night. If I drink coffee in the morning, I'm fine with it. I do notice a short period of spaciness right after I drink it, but that seems to fade pretty quickly. I mostly drink it for the flavor/overall experience.

I remember the test someone here presented a couple of years ago which determined if you were a 'slow caffeine metabolizer' or something to that effect which also determined the apparent likelihood of heart problems resultant of caffeine consumption later in life. I cannot locate the thread (don't remember the title). Perhaps this is an extension of the fore-mentioned polymorphism.

Dreamfields pasta tastes great for apparently 'low carb' pasta. According to the company that makes this stuff they 'denature' the carbohydrates as to render them less active somehow, leaving you with '5 digestible carbs' while the rest are 'protected carbs' (the whole omission of fiber in carb count debacle). But I caution the wheat sensitive, as they do still contain some. I don't seem to be as wheat sensitive as other's so I seem to be able to get away with it.


probably they are cooking & staling the starch to have it crystalize into resistant starch. I would definatly consider that a benefcial change, though still inferior to using beans as the starch source.

#36 Werner

  • Guest
  • 80 posts
  • 6
  • Location:Europe

Posted 04 December 2011 - 10:48 PM

This is an age-old discussion on Atikins diet.
Atkins is completely wrong. To substitute carbs for
protein is horrible for the human health.
A low-carb diet considerably increases the risk of heart
diseases. Why? A low-carb diet increases the
risk factor homocystein already after some weeks.
If you eat oranges you are doing something healthy
for you body. Oranges are carbohydrates with a lot
of natural sugar. But not only that. Oranges contain a
lot of enzymes and acids that are needed for a good
health.
OK, there are a lot of bad carbohydrates that should
not be eaten. For example, all those sweeties are bad.

The age-old fat question has long been answered.
n-3s are very good for your health (eat flaxseed oil),
n-6s are necessary in moderate quantity. Saturated
fatty acids are only acceptable in modest quantities.
Werner
  • dislike x 4
  • like x 1

#37 TheFountain

  • Guest
  • 5,362 posts
  • 257

Posted 05 December 2011 - 11:16 AM

This is an age-old discussion on Atikins diet.
Atkins is completely wrong. To substitute carbs for
protein is horrible for the human health.
A low-carb diet considerably increases the risk of heart
diseases. Why? A low-carb diet increases the
risk factor homocystein already after some weeks.
If you eat oranges you are doing something healthy
for you body. Oranges are carbohydrates with a lot
of natural sugar. But not only that. Oranges contain a
lot of enzymes and acids that are needed for a good
health.
OK, there are a lot of bad carbohydrates that should
not be eaten. For example, all those sweeties are bad.

The age-old fat question has long been answered.
n-3s are very good for your health (eat flaxseed oil),
n-6s are necessary in moderate quantity. Saturated
fatty acids are only acceptable in modest quantities.
Werner


The kind of fat you want the most of is the kind that is identified as being 1-At the very least neutral to health and 2-At the very most affective toward a healthy lipid profile. That would be Monounsaturated fatty acids. Olive oil, avocados, etc.

If you're of the polymorphous genotype that cannot handle a ton of fat you may wish to limit your quanitity of even the most healthy of fats.

#38 TheFountain

  • Guest
  • 5,362 posts
  • 257

Posted 05 December 2011 - 11:18 AM

This is an age-old discussion on Atikins diet.
Atkins is completely wrong. To substitute carbs for
protein is horrible for the human health.
A low-carb diet considerably increases the risk of heart
diseases. Why? A low-carb diet increases the
risk factor homocystein already after some weeks.
If you eat oranges you are doing something healthy
for you body. Oranges are carbohydrates with a lot
of natural sugar. But not only that. Oranges contain a
lot of enzymes and acids that are needed for a good
health.
OK, there are a lot of bad carbohydrates that should
not be eaten. For example, all those sweeties are bad.

The age-old fat question has long been answered.
n-3s are very good for your health (eat flaxseed oil),
n-6s are necessary in moderate quantity. Saturated
fatty acids are only acceptable in modest quantities.
Werner


The kind of fat you want the most of is the kind that is identified as being 1-At the very least neutral to health and 2-At the very most affective toward a healthy lipid profile. That would be Monounsaturated fatty acids. Olive oil, avocados, etc.

If you're of the polymorphous genotype that cannot handle a ton of fat you may wish to limit your quanitity of even the most healthy of fats. Omega 3s are definitely healthy in the presence of a 1:1 ratio with omega 6. And One may wish to limit ones daily intake of these to about 5 grams each.

Edited by TheFountain, 05 December 2011 - 11:19 AM.


#39 Werner

  • Guest
  • 80 posts
  • 6
  • Location:Europe

Posted 05 December 2011 - 11:35 AM

The kind of fat you want the most of is the kind that is identified as being 1-At the very least neutral to health and 2-At the very most affective toward a healthy lipid profile. That would be Monounsaturated fatty acids. Olive oil, avocados, etc.

If you're of the polymorphous genotype that cannot handle a ton of fat you may wish to limit your quanitity of even the most healthy of fats.


There is a ton of literature on omega-3 fatty acids. All showing a very strong effect
on your health. Take the reduction of harmful cytokines such as IL-1 and TNF-alpha
by eating omega-3-FAs.
I only eat a small amount of fat per day, but a lot of omega-3-FAs.

#40 DukeNukem

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 2,008 posts
  • 141
  • Location:Dallas, Texas

Posted 05 December 2011 - 10:42 PM

My diet is paleo plus, because I do include dairy (goat when possible, and never anything but whole fat diary). Luckily dairy doesn't appear to negatively impact my health markers--especially my inflammation markers (which are rock bottom low).

I do eat a relatively high-fat diet simply because fat is a less destructive fuel (in terms of metabolic waste, and glycation issues). Plus, it's the perfect endurance energy fuel for maintaining relatively high and unchanging energy throughout the day, avoiding the ups-n-downs typical of relying on carbs as fuel.

Most well known people on a paleo diet, like all of the bloggers I know, including Sisson, De Vany and Richard Nikoley, all would benefit greatly by also incorporating hormones and more supplements into their health program. I also don't get the impression that they do extensive blood and body tests.
  • dislike x 1

#41 TheFountain

  • Guest
  • 5,362 posts
  • 257

Posted 05 December 2011 - 11:06 PM

The kind of fat you want the most of is the kind that is identified as being 1-At the very least neutral to health and 2-At the very most affective toward a healthy lipid profile. That would be Monounsaturated fatty acids. Olive oil, avocados, etc.

If you're of the polymorphous genotype that cannot handle a ton of fat you may wish to limit your quanitity of even the most healthy of fats.


There is a ton of literature on omega-3 fatty acids. All showing a very strong effect
on your health. Take the reduction of harmful cytokines such as IL-1 and TNF-alpha
by eating omega-3-FAs.
I only eat a small amount of fat per day, but a lot of omega-3-FAs.

Of course, but the kind of fats still proven most effective for long term health, thus far, are MUFAs. Also, the context in which omega 3s are usually sited to have health benefits in is when evenly rationed with omega 6. Too much of one or the other may not be beneficial.

Edited by TheFountain, 05 December 2011 - 11:19 PM.


#42 DukeNukem

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 2,008 posts
  • 141
  • Location:Dallas, Texas

Posted 06 December 2011 - 01:10 AM

Of course, but the kind of fats still proven most effective for long term health, thus far, are MUFAs.


Do you have any evidence for this?

#43 TheFountain

  • Guest
  • 5,362 posts
  • 257

Posted 06 December 2011 - 01:16 AM

Of course, but the kind of fats still proven most effective for long term health, thus far, are MUFAs.


Do you have any evidence for this?

Are you serious? Just the sheer amount of clinical data alone shows that, if anything, the one form of fatty acid that the jury is still out on is omega 6, followed closely by your favorite, Saturated fat. Most of what you guys cite comes from blog opinions. Yea, there are a few studies indicating health benefits from MCT's but, against MUFAs? Really? No comparison.

#44 TheFountain

  • Guest
  • 5,362 posts
  • 257

Posted 06 December 2011 - 01:27 AM

Also, how many of the studies you guys cite are rat studies? How many studies on MUFAs are done in human trials vs how many are done on SFAs?

#45 TheFountain

  • Guest
  • 5,362 posts
  • 257

Posted 06 December 2011 - 01:40 AM

ORIGINAL RESEARCH COMMUNICATIONS

Effects of diets rich in monounsaturated fatty acids on plasma lipoproteins--the Jerusalem Nutrition Study: high MUFAs vs high PUFAs

EM Berry, S Eisenberg, D Haratz, Y Friedlander, Y Norman, NA Kaufmann and Y Stein
Department of Medicine B, Hadassah University Hospital, Jerusalem, Israel.
Twenty-six Yeshiva students were randomly assigned to a 24-wk crossover study of monounsaturated fatty acid (MUFA) vs polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA) diets (50% carbohydrate, 32% fat, 18% protein) fed alternately during two 12-wk periods. Total plasma cholesterol (TC) decreased significantly by approximately 10% and approximately 16% on the MUFA and PUFA diets, respectively. Plasma triglyceride response was variable. Low-density-lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) decreased in both groups with an additional significant effect between periods. Concentrations of high-density-lipoprotein cholesterol did not change significantly. LDL-receptor status in fresh monocytes, affinity of LDL towards the LDL receptor in cultured fibroblasts, zonal-centrifugation profiles, and lipoprotein composition were not significantly different between the diets. There was a significantly higher tendency toward lipid peroxidation on the PUFA diet, as ascertained by more thiobarbituric acid-reactive-substances formation on that diet. Dietary PUFA results in somewhat lower TC and LDL-C concentrations whereas with MUFA the susceptibility of LDL to oxidative stress is lower.

http://www.ajcn.org/.../53/4/899.short
  • like x 1

#46 TheFountain

  • Guest
  • 5,362 posts
  • 257

Posted 06 December 2011 - 01:50 AM

Of course, but the kind of fats still proven most effective for long term health, thus far, are MUFAs.


Do you have any evidence for this?





What is the effect of dietary intake of MUFA on health and intermediate health outcomes?


Conclusion

Strong evidence indicates that dietary monounsaturated fatty acids (MUFA) are associated with improved blood lipids related to both cardiovascular disease (CVD) and type 2 diabetes (T2D), when they are a replacement for dietary saturated fatty acids (SFA). The evidence shows that five percent energy replacement of SFA with MUFA decreases intermediate markers and the risk of CVD and T2D in healthy adults and improves insulin responsiveness in insulin resistant and T2D subjects.

Grade: Strong

Overall strength of the available supporting evidence: Strong; Moderate; Limited; Expert Opinion Only; Grade not assignable For additional information regarding how to interpret grades, click here.


Evidence Summary Overview
Thirteen studies published since 2004 and conducted in the US, Europe and Australia were reviewed to determine the effect of monounsaturated fat (MUFA) on health outcomes. These included one methodologically strong meta-analysis evaluating 11 prospective cohort studies (Jakobsen, 2009) and 11 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) ranging from 14 to 162 subjects, including six methodologically strong studies (Appel, 2005; Berglund, 2007; Due, 2008; Lopez, 2008; Thijssen and Mensink, 2005; and Thijssen, 2005) and five methodologically neutral studies (Allman-Farinelli, 2005; Binkoski, 2005; Clifton, 2004; Paniagua, 2007; and Rasmussen, 2006). The reviewed studies also included one methodologically strong prospective cohort study of 5,672 subjects from the Nurses’ Health Study who reported a diagnosis of type 2 diabetes (T2D) (Tanasescu, 2004).
Overall, MUFA replacing saturated fat (SFA) in the diet as percent of energy leads to a decrease in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) (Allman-Farinelli, 2005; Appel, 2005; Berglund, 2007), a decrease in serum triglycerides (TG) (Allman-Farinelli, 2005), a decrease in markers of inflammation (Allman-Farinelli, 2005), and a decrease in cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk (Appel, 2005; Rasmussen, 2006). Increasing MUFA intake, rather than replacing SFA with MUFA, also leads to a decrease in total cholesterol (TC) (Haban, 2004), LDL-C (Haban, 2004), LDL-C to high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) ratio (Due, 2008), serum TG (Brunerova, 2007), inflammatory markers (Brunerova, 2007) and fasting insulin and Homeostasis Model Assessment-Insulin Resistance (HOMA-IR) scores (Brunerova, 2007; Due, 2008). However, Clifton et al, (2004) found a greater decrease in TC and HDL-C in women who consumed a very low-fat diet, compared with a high MUFA diet and no difference in the LDL:HDL ratio between the two diets (Clifton, 2004). Replacing SFA with MUFA, compared to replacement with carbohydrates (CHO), decreased serum TG (Appel, 2005) and increased HDL-C (Appel, 2005; Berglund, 2007). Lastly, a prospective cohort study involving a T2D subpopulation within the Nurses’ Health Study found that replacing 5% energy from SFA with equivalent energy from MUFA was associated with a 27% lower risk of CVD. The authors conclude that replacing SFA with MUFA may be more protective against CVD than replacement with CHO (Tanasescu, 2004).
Comparing substitution of SFA with MUFA vs. polyunsaturated fat (PUFA) showed a greater decrease in TC and LDL-C with PUFA substitution (Binkoski, 2005). Furthermore, a pooled analysis of 11 prospective cohort studies showed that risk of coronary events and coronary death was lowest with 5% energy substitution of SFA with PUFA; PUFA substitution resulted in the greatest decrease, with MUFA showing somewhat less, and CHO showing the least improvement when substituted for SFA (Jakobsen, 2009). In a comparison of individual fatty acids, oleic acid was no different than stearic or linoleic acid in its effect on measures of serum lipids or lipoproteins and markers of inflammation (Thijssen and Mensink, 2005; Thijssen, 2005).
Evidence Summary Paragraphs
Allman-Farinelli et al, 2005 (neutral quality) This was a randomized, extra-period crossover trial, conducted in Australia. The study compared the effect of a SFA-rich diet with a MUFA-rich diet on the concentrations of factor VII coagulant activity factor, fibrinogen, plasminogen, activator inhibitor-1 and blood lipids. Subjects consumed either the SFA-rich diet (20.8% energy as fat) for five weeks and crossed over to the MUFA-rich diet (20.3% energy as fat) for 10 weeks or the opposite diets with no washout period between diets. Fifteen of the 18 initial subjects (five males, 10 females; aged 35-69 years) completed the study. Subjects completed three-day food diaries on two occasions during each intervention. Weight was maintained throughout the study. Dietary compliance was confirmed by a significant increase in both plasma phospholipids and neutral lipid oleic acid (P<0.0001) on the MUFA diet. Factor VIIc was lower (97±1%) on the MUFA diet (P<0.05) compared to the SFA diet (99±1). Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (3.47±0.06mmol per L) was lower (P<0.001) compared to SFA (4.01±0.07mmol per L) and TG levels were also lower (P<0.01) on the MUFA -rich diet (144.0±4.6mmol per L) compared to the SFA diet (145.1±4.9mmol per L). There were no differences between diets for fibrinogen and insulin concentrations or plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 activity.
Appel et al, 2005 (positive quality) This was the Omni Heart randomized, three-period crossover trial conducted in the US. The study compared the effect of three reduced SFA, on blood pressure (BP) and serum lipids in 191 healthy adults with stage I hypertension (HTN) or pre-hypertension (PHTN). The three six-week interventions included a diet rich in CHO, a diet rich in protein (about half from plant sources) and a diet rich in unsaturated fat (predominantly MUFA); all were reduced in SFA, cholesterol and sodium, and rich in fruits, vegetables, fiber, potassium and other minerals at the recommended levels. One hundred sixty one subjects were included in this analysis (45% women, mean age 53.6±10.9 years). Blood pressure, LDL-C and estimated CHD risk were lower on each diet compared to baseline. Compared with the CHO-rich diet, the unsaturated fat diet decreased systolic blood pressure (SBP) by 1.3mmHg (P=0.005) and by 2.9mmHg among those with HTN (P=0.02), had no effect on LDL-C, increased HDL-C by 1.1mg per dL (0.03mmol per L, P=0.03) and lowered TG by 9.6mg per dL (0.11mmol per L, P=0.02).
Berglund et al, 2007 (positive quality) This was a randomized crossover trial conducted in the US. The study compared MUFA with CHO as a replacement for SFA in subjects with a high metabolic risk profile. Three diets were fed in a double-blind, three-way crossover with each lasting seven-weeks with a rest period of four to six weeks between each intervention. The three diets reflected the typical pattern of the US population. Two were modified to replace 7% of energy from SFA with either CHO (primarily complex) on the CHO-replacement diet or with MUFA on the MUFA-replacement diet. All food was provided except for a self-selected meal [following the NCEP Step I guidelines] on Saturday evenings. Blood samples were drawn at weeks five, six and seven of each intervention. Eighty five of the initial 110 subjects completed all three interventions (33 females, 52 males and mean age 35.5±9.2 years, range 21-61 years). Relative to the average American diet, LDL-C was lower with both the CHO-replacement diet (-7.0%) and MUFA-replacement diet (-6.3%), whereas the difference in HDL-C was smaller during the MUFA-replacement diet (-4.3%) than during the CHO-replacement diet (-7.2%). Lipoprotein (a) concentrations increased with both the CHO-replacement diet (20%) and MUFA-replacement diet (11%) relative to the average American diet.
Lopez et al, 2008 (positive quality) This was a randomized, single-blinded, crossover trial of 14 healthy men in Spain to determine the degree to which unsaturation of dietary fatty acids influences the postprandial control of insulin secretion and insulin sensitivity. The postprandial response to high-fat meals enriched in SFAs or MUFAs was assessed using mixed meals with common foods. The isocaloric diet interventions included 9% more fat, replacing CHO in the control NCEP diet, and were as follows:


  • NCEP Step I

  • High butter (MUFA:SFA, 0.48:1.0)

  • Refined olive oil (ROO) (MUFA:SFA, 5.43:1.0)

  • High palmitic sunflower oil (HPSO) (MUFA:SFA, 2.42:1.0)

  • Mixture of vegetable and fish oils (VEFO) (MUFA:SFA, 7.08:1.0).
Subjects were normo-triglyceridemic and had normal fasting blood glucose (FBG) and glucose tolerance. Results showed that high fat meals increased the postprandial concentrations of insulin, TG, and free fatty acids (FFAs), and they increased postprandial b-cell activity as assessed by the insulinogenic index (IGI), a surrogate measure of first-phase insulin secretion; IGI/HOMA-IR ratio; AUCinsulin/AUCglucose ratio; and HOMA of b-cell function (HOMA-B). High fat meals also decreased postprandial insulin sensitivity assessed by a glucose and TG tolerance test meal (GTTTM)-determined insulin sensitivity test and the postprandial Belfiore indices for glycemia and blood FFAs. These effects were significantly improved, in a linear relationship, when MUFAs were substituted for SFAs; subjects became less insulin resistant postprandially as the proportion of MUFAs, compared with SFAs, in dietary fats increased (VEFO>ROO>HPSO>butter). When the early postprandial insulin response was used as a measure of b-cell activity, it decreased as the ratio of MUFA/SFA increased. Overall the findings suggest that b-cell function and insulin sensitivity progressively improve in the postprandial state as the proportion of MUFAs, relative to SFAs, increases in the diet, suggesting that MUFAs moderate the postprandial hyperactivity of the pancreatic b-cell. The underlying mechanism likely involves different insulinotropic potentials of individual FFA (e.g., oleic acid has been reported to elicit half the insulin secretion from b-cells as palmitic or stearic acids).
Tanasescu et al, 2004 (positive quality) This study used data from the prospective cohort Nurses' Health Study conducted in the US to assess the relationship between different types of dietary fat and cholesterol and the risk of CVD among women with T2D. The Nurses' Health Study started in 1986 with follow-up questionnaires sent every two years. Dietary fat and cholesterol were assessed through semi-quantitative food-frequency questionnaire (FFQ). Five thousand six hundred seventy two female nurses (30-55 years in 1976) who had reported a physician's diagnosis of diabetes at age >30 years on any follow-up questionnaire were included in the analysis. Between 1980-1998, 619 new cases of CVD (non-fatal MI, fatal CHD and stroke) were identified. Relative risks of CVD were estimated from Cox proportional hazards analysis after adjustment for potential confounders. The relative risk of CVD for an increase of 200mg cholesterol per 1,000kcal was 1.37 (95% CI: 1.12-1.68, P=0.003). Each 5% of energy intake from SFA, as compared with equivalent energy from CHO, was associated with a 29% greater risk of CVD (RR=1.29, 95% CI: 1.02-1.63, P=0.04). The PUFA: SFA (P:S) ratio was inversely associated with risk of fatal CVD. Replacement of 5% energy from SFA with equivalent energy from CHO or MUFA was associated with a 22% or 37% lower risk of CVD, respectively. Overall, an increased intake of cholesterol and SFA and a low P:S was related to increased CVD risk in women with T2D. Among women with T2D, replacement of SFA with MUFA may be more protective against CVD than replacement with CHOs.

http://www.nel.gov/e...mmary_id=250249

And that doesn't even enter the olive oil studies yet.



#47 DukeNukem

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 2,008 posts
  • 141
  • Location:Dallas, Texas

Posted 06 December 2011 - 03:39 AM

Fountain, nothing you posted is evidence of your claim that MUFA is the healthiest of all oils/fats.

I consider MUFA as generally a neutral oil, with negative health effects, but I'm not sure it's truly pro-healthy (I'd love to know if there's a study out there show that it is). I've never seen a pure MUFA study (not one using polyphenol-free olive oil, because the polyphenols might be the source of healthy attributes) indicate it does anything truly positive for a human's health. How are MUFA lipids used in a human body? Are they incorporated within cells? Used as fuel, like saturated fat? Used to build hormons (like EPA)?

#48 TheFountain

  • Guest
  • 5,362 posts
  • 257

Posted 06 December 2011 - 04:07 AM

With all due respect duke, I think there is a lot more data favoring MUFAs than there is SFAs, but I guess that depends on what your definition of viable data is. To me cross referential analyses do count somewhat, as well as actual macroscopic human trials. As far as all I have read SFAs seem to be borderline neutral/possiblly harmful in excess whereas MUFAs seem to be at the very least neutral and at the very most beneficial.

#49 TheFountain

  • Guest
  • 5,362 posts
  • 257

Posted 06 December 2011 - 05:59 AM

By the way, we're talking about human health outcomes right?

According to the macroscopic data, it seems that, as many of the above studies indicate, replacing SFA with MUFA reduces the instance of CVD, which is only a single reference. there are many other's, as you can see.

Edited by TheFountain, 06 December 2011 - 06:00 AM.


#50 Luminosity

  • Guest
  • 2,000 posts
  • 646
  • Location:Gaia

Posted 06 December 2011 - 06:58 AM

I don't agree with the carb-bashing. The only culture that didn't eat carbs traditionally was eskimos, average life-expectancy, 40.

Major country with highest life-expectancy, Japan. Food they consume most of: white rice.

Yes, I did enjoy my carbs and I will again.

Carbs aren't the devil. No food is the devil, except, perhaps, hydrogenated oil. Everything else has a place.
  • like x 2
  • Enjoying the show x 1

#51 TheFountain

  • Guest
  • 5,362 posts
  • 257

Posted 06 December 2011 - 07:59 AM

Carbs aren't the devil. No food is the devil, except, perhaps, hydrogenated oil.

And refined sugar.

Edited by TheFountain, 06 December 2011 - 08:00 AM.


#52 hivemind

  • Guest
  • 417 posts
  • 60
  • Location:Earth

Posted 06 December 2011 - 08:12 AM

And high cooking temperatures, white wheat flour and processed foods.

Edited by hivemind, 06 December 2011 - 08:13 AM.


#53 rwac

  • Member
  • 4,764 posts
  • 61
  • Location:Dimension X

Posted 06 December 2011 - 08:12 AM

And refined sugar.


Nah, PUFAs are the devil.
Haha, there's so many opinions on this one...

#54 TheFountain

  • Guest
  • 5,362 posts
  • 257

Posted 06 December 2011 - 08:17 AM

And refined sugar.


Nah, PUFAs are the devil.
Haha, there's so many opinions on this one...

Wrong!

This is the real devil! Posted Image

#55 Werner

  • Guest
  • 80 posts
  • 6
  • Location:Europe

Posted 06 December 2011 - 11:40 AM

My diet is paleo plus, because I do include dairy (goat when possible, and never anything but whole fat diary). Luckily dairy doesn't appear to negatively impact my health markers--especially my inflammation markers (which are rock bottom low).

I do eat a relatively high-fat diet simply because fat is a less destructive fuel (in terms of metabolic waste, and glycation issues). Plus, it's the perfect endurance energy fuel for maintaining relatively high and unchanging energy throughout the day, avoiding the ups-n-downs typical of relying on carbs as fuel.

Most well known people on a paleo diet, like all of the bloggers I know, including Sisson, De Vany and Richard Nikoley, all would benefit greatly by also incorporating hormones and more supplements into their health program. I also don't get the impression that they do extensive blood and body tests.


Dairy is really NOT a good nutrition.
With dairy you have the problem of A1 beta casein. "In the Western world...dairy
has become one of the most inflammatory foods", Dr. David Jockers).

Relating to fat you have to distinguish the type of fat and that there is maximum
level to respect. Otherwise, the longterm effect will be desastrous.
Look at Atkins and his diet. Protein and saturated fat, more or less no carbs.
Its a diet for people who wish to die.

The problem with carbs is that there are good carbs and bad carbs. You
should avoid bad carbs and take good carbs, as fruits. Avoid sugar added food.
  • like x 1

#56 hivemind

  • Guest
  • 417 posts
  • 60
  • Location:Earth

Posted 06 December 2011 - 11:42 AM

Dairy is really NOT a good nutrition.
With dairy you have the problem of A1 beta casein. "In the Western world...dairy
has become one of the most inflammatory foods", Dr. David Jockers).


There's not much evidence to support that.

#57 Werner

  • Guest
  • 80 posts
  • 6
  • Location:Europe

Posted 06 December 2011 - 12:15 PM

A1 beta casein:
"There's not much evidence to support that."
You can see the evidence everywhere. All these countries
with high dairy consumption have desastrous health problems:
CVD, diabetes, Alzheimer...
Look at third world countries with low dairy consumption. All these
diseases arent there.
The scientific evidence is there, too. But it is something the nutrition
industry does not esteem, of course.
  • like x 1

#58 Werner

  • Guest
  • 80 posts
  • 6
  • Location:Europe

Posted 06 December 2011 - 12:56 PM

"Of course, but the kind of fats still proven most effective for long term health, thus far, are MUFAs. Also, the context in which omega 3s are usually sited to have health benefits in is when evenly rationed with omega 6. Too much of one or the other may not be beneficial."
------------------
MUFAs are not important, sometimes unhealthy. For example, chicken fat has a MUFA:PUFA relation
of 50 : 23. And chicken fat is really not healthy. Or take hazelnuts. The relation is 48 : 7. A lot of MUFAs
and hazelnuts are harmful due to their lectine and phytate content. It is not that easy.
The relation n-6 : n-3 is very important. It should be 5 : 1. Instead, in the western world it is about 14 : 1
due to most used oils and wheat.

#59 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 06 December 2011 - 02:56 PM

MUFAs are not important, sometimes unhealthy. For example, chicken fat has a MUFA:PUFA relation
of 50 : 23. And chicken fat is really not healthy. Or take hazelnuts. The relation is 48 : 7. A lot of MUFAs
and hazelnuts are harmful due to their lectine and phytate content. It is not that easy.
The relation n-6 : n-3 is very important. It should be 5 : 1. Instead, in the western world it is about 14 : 1
due to most used oils and wheat.


We're talking about the relative merits of different classes of fatty acids, not things like lectins or phytates that might exist in some foods that also contain those fats. The fact that chicken fat isn't very healthy isn't because it contains MUFAs; typical grain-fed chickens are high in omega 6 PUFAs. As for the n-6:n-3 ratio, I agree that lower is better, but isn't 5:1 still kind of high?

#60 Werner

  • Guest
  • 80 posts
  • 6
  • Location:Europe

Posted 06 December 2011 - 05:38 PM

MUFAs are not important, sometimes unhealthy. For example, chicken fat has a MUFA:PUFA relation
of 50 : 23. And chicken fat is really not healthy. Or take hazelnuts. The relation is 48 : 7. A lot of MUFAs
and hazelnuts are harmful due to their lectine and phytate content. It is not that easy.
The relation n-6 : n-3 is very important. It should be 5 : 1. Instead, in the western world it is about 14 : 1
due to most used oils and wheat.


We're talking about the relative merits of different classes of fatty acids, not things like lectins or phytates that might exist in some foods that also contain those fats. The fact that chicken fat isn't very healthy isn't because it contains MUFAs; typical grain-fed chickens are high in omega 6 PUFAs. As for the n-6:n-3 ratio, I agree that lower is better, but isn't 5:1 still kind of high?

I agree, you're right. But as you can see in my examples, you have to take it all: a high
part of MUFAs AND detrimental parts. Lectins and phytates are a big health question.
Look at WGA (Wheat Germ Agglutinins). It is incredibly ugly.
5 : 1 is already good, 4 : 1 is still better.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users