32 replies to this topic

[forever freedom]

One more study on the benefits of eating a daily portion of nuts to decrease general mortality risk:

http://m.medicalxpre...tion-death.html

In any circumstance it appears that nuts should be in anyone's diet. Their benefits keep piling up in one study after the other.

Edited by forever freedom, 21 November 2013 - 11:35 AM.

[theconomist]

Is there a causality link tho? If by increasing nut consumption people decrease their consumption of other kinds of foods such as simple carbs, animal protein... then it would be understandable why they're getting these kind of results.
However nuts by themselves would increase your PUFA consumption (unless you're eating macademia nuts) which isn't something we'd want.

Don't get me wrong, I like nuts, just bought some hazelnuts and almonds today but I enjoy them in moderation. It would be nice to have some clear(er) answers on nuts.

[Deep Thought]

Is there a causality link tho? If by increasing nut consumption people decrease their consumption of other kinds of foods such as simple carbs, animal protein... then it would be understandable why they're getting these kind of results.
However nuts by themselves would increase your PUFA consumption (unless you're eating macademia nuts) which isn't something we'd want.

Don't get me wrong, I like nuts, just bought some hazelnuts and almonds today but I enjoy them in moderation. It would be nice to have some clear(er) answers on nuts.

In that case, including more fish in ones diet would be a prudent thing to do.

[theconomist]

Is there a causality link tho? If by increasing nut consumption people decrease their consumption of other kinds of foods such as simple carbs, animal protein... then it would be understandable why they're getting these kind of results.
However nuts by themselves would increase your PUFA consumption (unless you're eating macademia nuts) which isn't something we'd want.

Don't get me wrong, I like nuts, just bought some hazelnuts and almonds today but I enjoy them in moderation. It would be nice to have some clear(er) answers on nuts.

In that case, including more fish in ones diet would be a prudent thing to do.

That brings with it other problems: methionine. http://nutritiondata...00000000-1.html (it would be more prudent to balance one's omega 3 to 6 ratio through consumption of flaxseed).( I don't want to enter into a vegan vs paleo diet debate tho, methionine is something one should aim to limit and a low animal protein diet is one way to achieve that.)

, if my understanding the litterature is correct it's not so much the omega 6 to 3 ratio that's an issue, it's the total ammount of PUFA in one's diet. http://www.longecity...d-inflammation/

[TheFountain]

if my understanding the litterature is correct it's not so much the omega 6 to 3 ratio that's an issue, it's the total ammount of PUFA in one's diet.

Then why are you attacking nuts? The 'healthy' nuts, such as Almonds, Cashews and macadamia nuts are much higher in MUFAs than PUFAs and cashews have the exact same ratio of PUFA-MUFA-SFAs as our good friend olive oil does. And yes, cashews do contain a fair amount of antioxidants too (albeit not the same as those found in EVOO).

[Thorsten3]

if my understanding the litterature is correct it's not so much the omega 6 to 3 ratio that's an issue, it's the total ammount of PUFA in one's diet.

Then why are you attacking nuts? The 'healthy' nuts, such as Almonds, Cashews and macadamia nuts are much higher in MUFAs than PUFAs and cashews have the exact same ratio of PUFA-MUFA-SFAs as our good friend olive oil does. And yes, cashews do contain a fair amount of antioxidants too (albeit not the same as those found in EVOO).

I'm pretty sure he's not attacking nuts. He's taking part in a discussion and bringing up the point that most nuts are loaded with PUFAs (which they are). It's not rocket science. If you believe that restricting PUFAs is generally a good thing, then staying away from the vast majority of nuts is probably a good idea. When you eat 100g of cashews, the PUFA content already starts hitting the high side (because it's all N6, and throws N3/N6 way off balance). That's the point he was making. Instead of supplementing N3, restrict PUFAS completely so you don't even have that issue where N6 is completely dominating N3 by many factors.

Only Macademia has super low PUFA.

[scottknl]

There's a difference between handfuls of nuts and a handful of nuts. 100 g is almost 4 handful of nuts, unless you're Shaq (basketball player with big hands)!

I think the study was referring to about an ounce or so of nuts per day. That amount can safely be balanced with flaxseed and/or fish oils and other diet elements. It seems wrong to disregard the study because some here believe that "PUFA's are bad for you". They're essential nutrients -- you just have to control the quantities so you don't get a fatty acid imbalance.

[theconomist]

There's a difference between handfuls of nuts and a handful of nuts. 100 g is almost 4 handful of nuts, unless you're Shaq (basketball player with big hands)!

I think the study was referring to about an ounce or so of nuts per day. That amount can safely be balanced with flaxseed and/or fish oils and other diet elements. It seems wrong to disregard the study because some here believe that "PUFA's are bad for you". They're essential nutrients -- you just have to control the quantities so you don't get a fatty acid imbalance.

I did not discredit the studies, all I said was; is there a causality link between nut consumption and longeviety; it could very well be that nut consumption satiates you so you don't overeat which we know is one big factor in ageing. It could be that us CRONed people get the same benefits observed in the study without eating nuts.

[DukeNukem]

I suspect people eating nuts are eating them in place of much worse snacks, like those cheese cracker sandwiches, or candy bars. Boom... health benefit achieved.

[TheFountain]

When you eat 100g of cashews, the PUFA content already starts hitting the high side (because it's all N6, and throws N3/N6 way off balance).

Hmm, so since Olive oil has pretty much the exact same ratio of fatty acids as Cashews, eating a few table spoons of this a day (as many here advocate) would throw your N3/N6 out of balance? Somehow I think it is not that simple. Especially when the antioxidant content is contributing to offset these effects. And when you are also taking Fish oil 2-3 grams daily and eating an otherwise very healthy diet. And with the amount of eggs and dairy a lot of you consume, wouldn't you think that might be more of a concern since the PUFA content of both can be a lot greater than what is espoused here? I am not a vegan, but it almost feels like the nuts are being targeted because they are a staple of that diet. Dairy seems to get a free pass, as do other animals products high in PUFA content. Again, I am not vegan, I am omnivore (eat some fish and chicken, eggs etc) but arguments should be based on even handed logic, not what constitutes a staple food for you or your fellow paleo or vegan dieters. Has dairy been discussed here? yes. Has the health benefits/negatives of eggs? Yes. But neither is attacked anywhere near as much as Nuts. Which is kinda nuts.

[DePaw]

Dairy seems to get a free pass, as do other animals products high in PUFA content.

Animal products are not high in PUFAs, they are mostly saturated and mono-unsaturated fatty acids.

Butter: 81% fat, 3.0% PUFA, PUFA = 4% of fatty acids.
Beef tallow: 100% fat, 4.0% PUFA, PUFA = 4% of fatty acids.
Lamb tallow: 100% fat, 7.8% PUFA, PUFA = 8% of fatty acids.
Pork lard: 100% fat, 11.2% PUFA, PUFA = 11% of fatty acids.

Granted, pork is a little higher in PUFA, but ruminants and their dairy are low in PUFAs.

Compare:
Brazil nuts: 66% fat, 20.6% PUFA, PUFA = 31% of fatty acids.
Cashews: 43% fat, 7.8% PUFA, PUFA = 18% of fatty acids.
Almonds: 49% fat, 12.1% PUFA, PUFA = 25% of fatty acids.
Coconut: 33% fat, 0.4% PUFA, PUFA = 1% of fatty acids.
Macademia: 75% fat, 1.5% PUFA, PUFA = 2% of fatty acids.
Peanuts: 49% fat, 15.6% PUFA, PUFA = 32% of fatty acids.

Apart from coconut and macademia, nuts have many fold the PUFA content as meat/dairy. Brazil/peanuts have nearly 8 times the PUFA as butter/beef tallow.

All data: CRONometer.com

[misterE]

Edited by misterE, 24 November 2013 - 12:46 AM.

[TheFountain]

Dairy seems to get a free pass, as do other animals products high in PUFA content.

Animal products are not high in PUFAs, they are mostly saturated and mono-unsaturated fatty acids.

Butter: 81% fat, 3.0% PUFA, PUFA = 4% of fatty acids.
Beef tallow: 100% fat, 4.0% PUFA, PUFA = 4% of fatty acids.
Lamb tallow: 100% fat, 7.8% PUFA, PUFA = 8% of fatty acids.
Pork lard: 100% fat, 11.2% PUFA, PUFA = 11% of fatty acids.

Granted, pork is a little higher in PUFA, but ruminants and their dairy are low in PUFAs.

Compare:
Brazil nuts: 66% fat, 20.6% PUFA, PUFA = 31% of fatty acids.
Cashews: 43% fat, 7.8% PUFA, PUFA = 18% of fatty acids.
Almonds: 49% fat, 12.1% PUFA, PUFA = 25% of fatty acids.
Coconut: 33% fat, 0.4% PUFA, PUFA = 1% of fatty acids.
Macademia: 75% fat, 1.5% PUFA, PUFA = 2% of fatty acids.
Peanuts: 49% fat, 15.6% PUFA, PUFA = 32% of fatty acids.

Apart from coconut and macademia, nuts have many fold the PUFA content as meat/dairy. Brazil/peanuts have nearly 8 times the PUFA as butter/beef tallow.

All data: CRONometer.com

I remember when there was the egg discussion a while back and a lot of guys were talking about eating 10 eggs a day. Which equals about 6-7 grams of PUFA! Now, dairy does have some PUFA as well and if you start adding it all up during the course of a day it is easy to see how you can be getting 10 grams a day from animal products. Even conservatively, only eating about 5 eggs a day and some dairy gets you about 5-6 grams of PUFA. That is more than two servings of Nuts! So what are you nuts?

Edited by TheFountain, 24 November 2013 - 02:24 AM.

[misterE]

I remember when there was the egg discussion a while back and a lot of guys were talking about eating 10 eggs a day. Which equals about 6-7 grams of PUFA! Now, dairy does have some PUFA as well and if you start adding it all up during the course of a day it is easy to see how you can be getting 10 grams a day from animal products. Even conservatively, only eating about 5 eggs a day and some dairy gets you about 5-6 grams of PUFA. That is more than two servings of Nuts!

Great point… not only do animal-products contain significant omega-6 concentrations (compared to grains, beans, vegetables and fruits). But the type of omega-6 in animal-products (called arachidonic-acid) is much more harmful than the type of omega-6 in plant-products (called linoleic-acid). Obviously if you are eating egg-yolks, poultry and other meats on a daily basis, like most Americans do, then you will have an accumulation of arachidonic-acid in your adipose-tissue, which has deleterious outcomes.



The only animal-products that are truly low in omega-6 are skim-milk, egg-whites and fish.

Edited by misterE, 24 November 2013 - 03:47 AM.

[TheFountain]

I remember when there was the egg discussion a while back and a lot of guys were talking about eating 10 eggs a day. Which equals about 6-7 grams of PUFA! Now, dairy does have some PUFA as well and if you start adding it all up during the course of a day it is easy to see how you can be getting 10 grams a day from animal products. Even conservatively, only eating about 5 eggs a day and some dairy gets you about 5-6 grams of PUFA. That is more than two servings of Nuts!

Great point… not only do animal-products contain significant omega-6 concentrations (compared to grains, beans, vegetables and fruits). But the type of omega-6 in animal-products (called arachidonic-acid) is much more harmful than the type of omega-6 in plant-products (called linoleic-acid). Obviously if you are eating egg-yolks, poultry and other meats on a daily basis, like most Americans do, then you will have an accumulation of arachidonic-acid in your adipose-tissue, which has deleterious outcomes.



The only animal-products that are truly low in omega-6 are skim-milk, egg-whites and fish.

My view of Arachidonic acid is that we need some (for normal growth) but not too much (otherwise the negative effects will compound). May not be a conventional view but it is based on literature I have dabbled in.

[misterE]

My view of Arachidonic acid is that we need some (for normal growth) but not too much (otherwise the negative effects will compound). May not be a conventional view but it is based on literature I have dabbled in.

Well sure. My view is that the body can make all of the arachidonic-acid (AA) we need from the small amount of linoleic-acid (LA) we get from whole-grains, beans, fruits and vegetables. The problems occur when we take in too much LA (from nuts and oils) in comparison to alpha-linolenic-acid (from vegetables, beans and flaxseeds). Of course when you eat egg-yolks and meat (and to a lesser extent: dairy) you are getting lots of premade AA, which accumulates in our adipose-tissue whether we need it or not.

[Thorsten3]

When you eat 100g of cashews, the PUFA content already starts hitting the high side (because it's all N6, and throws N3/N6 way off balance).

Hmm, so since Olive oil has pretty much the exact same ratio of fatty acids as Cashews, eating a few table spoons of this a day (as many here advocate) would throw your N3/N6 out of balance? Somehow I think it is not that simple. Especially when the antioxidant content is contributing to offset these effects. And when you are also taking Fish oil 2-3 grams daily and eating an otherwise very healthy diet. And with the amount of eggs and dairy a lot of you consume, wouldn't you think that might be more of a concern since the PUFA content of both can be a lot greater than what is espoused here? I am not a vegan, but it almost feels like the nuts are being targeted because they are a staple of that diet. Dairy seems to get a free pass, as do other animals products high in PUFA content. Again, I am not vegan, I am omnivore (eat some fish and chicken, eggs etc) but arguments should be based on even handed logic, not what constitutes a staple food for you or your fellow paleo or vegan dieters. Has dairy been discussed here? yes. Has the health benefits/negatives of eggs? Yes. But neither is attacked anywhere near as much as Nuts. Which is kinda nuts.

Well, you've provided one example of something that has its own individual benefits. Olive oil, is quite unique in that respect. Do we see any studies attributing the increased lifespan of humans, to nuts? I'm not saying that they aren't healthy (if restricted). Of course they are nutritious and can be part of a healthy diet, if you keep an eye on PUFA :-)

You say that it's not that simple. Do you understand that high omega6 is going to have a pro-inflammatory effect on the body, regardless of the benefits that individual foods/drinks are having? It's like saying that it's ok for me to smoke 4 cigarettes a day because I am covered by the raw carrot salad that I eat each day. Restricting PUFA is about restricitng toxic load on the body. I guess it depends where you put your goal posts, though. You might think that 30g per day of PUFA is fine, whereas I, might think differently.

If your N3/N6 ratio is 1-25, I guess some of the inflammatory response could be handled by some of the beneficial foods in your diet, but surely it's more important to reduce the toxic load in the first place?

Fish oil, is a double edged swored isn't it? It's not all positive stuff out there. It has drawbacks too. Plus it's PUFA and is rapidly unstable once it enters your hot body (that's if it hasn't already oxidised at room temperature - if you've bought a bad, cheap fish oil with no vitamin E added).

Not sure what you're talking about with the eggs/dairy thing. I don't eat 10 eggs a day. I eat egg whites (not ten, though). You're actually incorrect about dairy being super high in PUFA. Unless you have some weird dairy out there in the US. Most of the dairy I have seen in the UK has PUFA on the very low side, to the point it becomes almost negligable. The example you gave about the dairy/eggs, would have seen a PUFA content provided predominantly by the egg yolk. Dairy would have been pretty irrelevant.

Dairy has its own drawbacks, too (ignoring PUFA) from what I've seen. Not saying that it gets a free pass from me.

Edited by Thorsten2, 27 November 2013 - 10:56 AM.

[Thorsten3]

My view of Arachidonic acid is that we need some (for normal growth) but not too much (otherwise the negative effects will compound). May not be a conventional view but it is based on literature I have dabbled in.

Well sure. My view is that the body can make all of the arachidonic-acid (AA) we need from the small amount of linoleic-acid (LA) we get from whole-grains, beans, fruits and vegetables. The problems occur when we take in too much LA (from nuts and oils) in comparison to alpha-linolenic-acid (from vegetables, beans and flaxseeds). Of course when you eat egg-yolks and meat (and to a lesser extent: dairy) you are getting lots of premade AA, which accumulates in our adipose-tissue whether we need it or not.

That sounds interesting. Have you got any references to show that this is the case? Like, take some grass fed organic beef for example. Let's just say, it's the finest you can buy and it's been raised perfectly (or close to, or whatever). Let's say it's very low in PUFA. Which most grass fed beef is, anyway. Isn't AA a type of omega6? So, if I compare this beef to a factory farmed chicken, full of PUFA, - the amount of AA I get in the beef will be hardly anything, in comparsion? Or is all meat the same and full of this disgusting compound (like you say)?

I haven't come across AA before, in all honesty. I'd like to learn more about it.

Edited by Thorsten2, 27 November 2013 - 10:57 AM.

[APBT]

http://www.vitalchoi...ables ✯ MORE

[APBT]

I haven't come across AA before, in all honesty. I'd like to learn more about it.

http://viewer.zmags....e6#/71a011e6/54 pages 54-65

[DePaw]

http://www.westonapr...us-yet-perilous

[misterE]

That sounds interesting. Have you got any references to show that this is the case?

Lipids. 1998 Apr;33(4):437-40. Contribution of meat fat to dietary arachidonic acid. Li D, Ng A, Mann NJ.

Lipids. 1998 Dec;33(12):1151-7. Assessment of the arachidonic acid content in foods commonly consumed in the American diet. Taber L, Chiu CH, Whelan J.

J Nutr. 1995 Oct;125(10):2528-35. The arachidonic acid content of the Australian diet is lower than previously estimated. Mann NJ, Johnson LG, Warrick GE.

Clin Nutr. 2007 Aug;26(4):474-82. Adipose tissue arachidonic acid and the metabolic syndrome in Costa Rican adults. Williams ES, Baylin A, Campos H.

Isn't AA a type of omega6?

Yes.

So, if I compare this beef to a factory farmed chicken, full of PUFA, - the amount of AA I get in the beef will be hardly anything, in comparsion? Or is all meat the same and full of this disgusting compound (like you say)?

AA is found in all animal-foods (even fish contain it in small amounts). Grass-fed meats are lower in AA than commercial-meats, but AA is still present in grass-fed meats as well.

[mrd1]

Arachidonic is NOT a essential fatty acid. And, while Omega-6 fatty acids are essential, a 1:1 ratio of w-3:w6 is ideal with a 1:4 being more realistically possible. Also, your body can easily synthesis all the Arachidonic acid it needs from linoic acid. Therefore. it makes more sense to focus on swapping your omega 6 fatty acids for omega 3 fatty acids and omega 9 fatty acids to try to get the ratio as close to 1:1 as possible.

Omega 3 Fatty acids that show much more promise and important are
ALA
EPA
DHA

And polyunsaturated fats such as nuts and healthy oils because they don't tip the w3:w6 ratio and are less damaging to the body.

[timar]

Arachidonic is NOT a essential fatty acid.

Well, for infants at least it is. It is present in high amounts in mother's milk and added to formulas.

And polyunsaturated fats such as nuts and healthy oils because they don't tip the w3:w6 ratio and are less damaging to the body.

I don't know what to make out of that statement. Did you mean monounsaturated and wrote polyunsaturated? Of course all polyunsaturated fats will affect the omega-6/3 ratio...

[AstralStorm]

Yes, but infants get enough from the milk assuming the mother is not strictly deficient in it due to metabolic defects or total lack of linoleic acid. No need for specific supplementation unless the child is fed a formula made out of soymilk or similar vegetable protein.

Actually nuts are pretty interesting based on outcomes, the recent three-point mediterranean diet was quite a study, showing both olive oil and nuts (was it 30g/day?) separately improving cardiac outcomes notably, almost 30%.
I'd love to hear more about them.

[Hebbeh]

Yes, but infants get enough from the milk assuming the mother is not strictly deficient in it due to metabolic defects or total lack of linoleic acid. No need for specific supplementation unless the child is fed a formula made out of soymilk or similar vegetable protein.

What's your point? Infants can not make their own AA in sufficient quantities for health and therefore REQUIRE it either in diet or supplemented if necessary. That makes it essential. No different than any other essential nutrient that is required in dietary form. Your statement makes no sense.

[timar]

Yes, but infants get enough from the milk assuming the mother is not strictly deficient in it due to metabolic defects or total lack of linoleic acid. No need for specific supplementation unless the child is fed a formula made out of soymilk or similar vegetable protein.

Formulas are mostly made from vegetable protein, this is why they are supplemented with AA, DHA, oligosaccharides, vitamins and minerals, in order to meet the infants nutritional needs and to make them as similar to human milk as feasible.

My point was that it is silly to demonize AA. It may be healthy in certain amounts even for adults, despite that most people's diet contains too much of it (and not enough of the antagonizing EPA and DHA). Nutrition is better understood through the concept of "yin and yang" than through "good and evil". There are some "evil" toxins, but generally it is more about balance than about strict avoidance.

Edited by timar, 16 December 2013 - 05:32 PM.

[mrd1]

A scientific advisory from the American Heart Association has favorably evaluated the health impact of dietary omega-6 fats, including arachidonic acid.[29] The group does not recommend limiting this essential fatty acid. In fact, the paper recommends individuals follow a diet that consists of at least 5–10% of calories coming from omega-6 fats, including arachidonic acid. Dietary ARA is not a risk factor for heart disease, and may play a role in maintaining optimal metabolism and reduced heart disease risk. It is, therefore, recommended to maintain sufficient intake levels of both omega-3 and omega-6 essential fatty acids for optimal health.

People are so much above 5-10% that it isn't even worth giving them any evidence to continue eating them because even if they "eliminate them" I bet they'd end up at maybe 10% still. I agree in the yin yang thing. But the issue is Americans have all yang and no yin.

[Darryl]

I don't think its the fat content (granted, walnuts aren't that bad). Its the magnesium.

Rosanoff, Andrea, Connie M. Weaver, and Robert K. Rude. "Suboptimal magnesium status in the United States: are the health consequences underestimated?." Nutrition reviews 70.3 (2012): 153-164.

Low magnesium intakes and blood levels have been associated with type 2 diabetes, metabolic syndrome, elevated C-reactive protein, hypertension, atherosclerotic vascular disease, sudden cardiac death, osteoporosis, migraine headache, asthma, and colon cancer. Almost half (48%) of the US population consumed less than the required amount of magnesium from food in 2005–2006, and the figure was down from 56% in 2001–2002. Surveys conducted over 30 years indicate rising calcium-to-magnesium food-intake ratios among adults and the elderly in the United States, excluding intake from supplements, which favor calcium over magnesium. The prevalence and incidence of type 2 diabetes in the United States increased sharply between 1994 and 2001 as the ratio of calcium-to-magnesium intake from food rose from <3.0 to >3.0. Dietary Reference Intakes determined by balance studies may be misleading if subjects have chronic latent magnesium deficiency but are assumed to be healthy. Cellular magnesium deficit, perhaps involving TRPM6/7 channels, elicits calcium-activated inflammatory cascades independent of injury or pathogens.

Just looking at the best studied mortality risk reduced by nuts:

Peacock, James M., et al. "Serum magnesium and risk of sudden cardiac death in the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) Study." American heart journal 160.3 (2010): 464-470.
Chiuve, Stephanie E., et al. "Plasma and dietary magnesium and risk of sudden cardiac death in women." The American journal of clinical nutrition 93.2 (2011): 253-260.
Albert, Christine M., et al. "Nut consumption and decreased risk of sudden cardiac death in the Physicians' Health Study." Archives of Internal medicine162.12 (2002): 1382.

or inflammation, central to so many chronic diseases.

Chacko, Sara A., et al. "Magnesium supplementation, metabolic and inflammatory markers, and global genomic and proteomic profiling."The American journal of clinical nutrition 93.2 (2011): 463-473.
Jiang, Rui, et al. "Nut and seed consumption and inflammatory markers in the multi-ethnic study of atherosclerosis." American journal of epidemiology 163.3 (2006): 222-231.

It can't be nuts omega-3:omega-6 ratio, because with the possible exception of walnuts (1:4), the ALA:LA ratio of nuts is mostly poor. Peanuts are equally effective in mortality reduction, and their ALA:LA ratio is a terrible 1:500.

Nuts, including peanuts, however, are among the very best sources of magnesium on a per gram basis, and aren't terrible on a per-calorie basis. A 200 Calorie serving (about 33 g or 1.2 oz) provides:

Pumpkin seeds: 205 mg
Sesame seeds: 123 mg
Brazilnuts: 115 mg
Sunflower seeds: 111 mg
Cashews: 106 mg
Almonds: 96 mg
Peanuts: 66 mg
Walnuts: 48 mg

These are significant amounts, considering the US RDA for magnesium is ~400 mg/day for men.

Edited by Darryl, 21 December 2013 - 02:35 PM.

[mrd1]

Good point. micronutrients are also important