81 replies to this topic

[TheFountain]

 

 

I know Mark's blog is very popular and maybe rightly so, but in this particular post his "second brain" got the best of him and made him talk out of his ass. 

 

 

 

I had been reading MDA for quite a while but ultimately decided he was a quack. While he was basing a lot of his stuff on science and a lot of his recommendations would be a definite improvement for the average American, reporting was invariably very biased.

 

His own line of supplements is actually pretty horrible once you look at it.

 

 

You don't think marks advise is helpful? What about his legions of followers on the primal forum? 

[Duchykins]

@ OP

Some people are irrationally terrified of phytoestrogens due to morons who think phytoestrogens are just like mammalian estrogens. Nuts are chock full of phytoestrogens. Eat nuts.

Humans are omnivorous and do best with diverse and balanced diets.

Have fun.

 

 
I know Mark's blog is very popular and maybe rightly so, but in this particular post his "second brain" got the best of him and made him talk out of his ass. 
 

 
 
I had been reading MDA for quite a while but ultimately decided he was a quack. While he was basing a lot of his stuff on science and a lot of his recommendations would be a definite improvement for the average American, reporting was invariably very biased.
 
His own line of supplements is actually pretty horrible once you look at it.
 

 
You don't think marks advise is helpful? What about his legions of followers on the primal forum? 

What about that argument from popularity? o.O

[misterE]

I want to throw some nuts into this conversation.

 

For all human existence, humans only got to eat nuts at certain type of the year, for a limited amount of time. There is an intricacy intertwined between the type of fat in nuts and seeds and the seasons. The polyunsaturated-fats in nuts and seeds induce a lowered metabolism, similar to what you see in hibernating animals. The plants know when winter is coming and produce polyunsaturated-fats to protect them from freezing, animals eat these nuts and obtain the polyunsaturated-fats from them which not only prevents their cells from freezing but also decreases the metabolism in order to spare energy for the winter. Tropical plants like coconut, cocoa and palm, don't contain much polyunsaturated-fat because these regions never experience winter.

 

What humans have done is disrupt this intricacy, and now we eat nuts all year long, and we squeeze the polyunsaturated-oils out of corn and soybeans and use them to have cheap fats quickly on the market. Who knows what kind of consequence this is going to have. 

[maximum411]

Epidemiological studies show that increased nut consumption is associated with reduced mortality, so overall it seems to be healthy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Duchykins]

I want to throw some nuts into this conversation.
 
For all human existence, humans only got to eat nuts at certain type of the year, for a limited amount of time. There is an intricacy intertwined between the type of fat in nuts and seeds and the seasons. The polyunsaturated-fats in nuts and seeds induce a lowered metabolism, similar to what you see in hibernating animals. The plants know when winter is coming and produce polyunsaturated-fats to protect them from freezing, animals eat these nuts and obtain the polyunsaturated-fats from them which not only prevents their cells from freezing but also decreases the metabolism in order to spare energy for the winter. Tropical plants like coconut, cocoa and palm, don't contain much polyunsaturated-fat because these regions never experience winter.
 
What humans have done is disrupt this intricacy, and now we eat nuts all year long, and we squeeze the polyunsaturated-oils out of corn and soybeans and use them to have cheap fats quickly on the market. Who knows what kind of consequence this is going to have. 

Tell us about your diet.

[timar]

Some people are irrationally terrified of phytoestrogens due to morons who think phytoestrogens are just like mammalian estrogens. Nuts are chock full of phytoestrogens. Eat nuts.

 

No, they are not. Soybeans, flax and sesame seeds are chock full of phytoestrogens (isoflavones and lignans, respectively). Nuts, grains and other seeds contain none or very little phytoestrogens, just as fruits and vegetables.

 

That is not to say that phytoestrogens are not good for you. I'm not sure about isoflavones, but lignans are certainly beneficial.

 

 

I want to throw some nuts into this conversation.

 

For all human existence, humans only got to eat nuts at certain type of the year, for a limited amount of time. There is an intricacy intertwined between the type of fat in nuts and seeds and the seasons. The polyunsaturated-fats in nuts and seeds induce a lowered metabolism, similar to what you see in hibernating animals. The plants know when winter is coming and produce polyunsaturated-fats to protect them from freezing, animals eat these nuts and obtain the polyunsaturated-fats from them which not only prevents their cells from freezing but also decreases the metabolism in order to spare energy for the winter. Tropical plants like coconut, cocoa and palm, don't contain much polyunsaturated-fat because these regions never experience winter.

 

Nice theory, but have you any scientific references to back it up? Otherwise it is hardly more compelling that any other appeal-to-nature Paleo fallacy. Just because something is supposed to be natural, it doesn't mean that it has a deeper purpose or that it is better for you. Moreover, your argument is so generalizing and simplifying that it can hardly be considered a valid hypothesis. Nuts and seeds vary widely in their fatty acid composition, and that variation doesn't simply reflect the latitude of their habitat as you suggest. Hazelnuts, for example, are almost completely monounsaturated and grow in freezing Northern Europe, while brazil nuts (which grow... guess where) are relatively high in polyunsaturated fats. Humans and their hominid ancestors have evolved and gathered nuts in the tropics most of their time, where there are dry and wet seasons but hardly any large variations in temperature. There is no season for brazil nuts - as they bear fruits year-round like many other tropical trees and shrubs. Even when homo sapiens began to venture out of africa some 50,000 years ago, nuts and seeds were probably the only type of food that could be kept and carried around for a long period of time without going bad. Hence given both their extraordinary preservability and their nutrient density, they were probably collected whenever possible and kept for the hard times and as a convenient source of calories during exhausting hikes and thus eaten not only during their season. After all, humans differ from animals in that they have developed cultural techniques that made them more and more independent from the chance of Nature and the change of seasons.

[Duchykins]

Some people are irrationally terrified of phytoestrogens due to morons who think phytoestrogens are just like mammalian estrogens. Nuts are chock full of phytoestrogens. Eat nuts.

 
No, they are not. Soybeans, flax and sesame seeds are chock full of phytoestrogens (isoflavones and lignans, respectively). Nuts, grains and other seeds contain none or very little phytoestrogens, just as fruits and vegetables.
 
That is not to say that phytoestrogens are not good for you. I'm not sure about isoflavones, but lignans are certainly beneficial.
 
 

I want to throw some nuts into this conversation.
 
For all human existence, humans only got to eat nuts at certain type of the year, for a limited amount of time. There is an intricacy intertwined between the type of fat in nuts and seeds and the seasons. The polyunsaturated-fats in nuts and seeds induce a lowered metabolism, similar to what you see in hibernating animals. The plants know when winter is coming and produce polyunsaturated-fats to protect them from freezing, animals eat these nuts and obtain the polyunsaturated-fats from them which not only prevents their cells from freezing but also decreases the metabolism in order to spare energy for the winter. Tropical plants like coconut, cocoa and palm, don't contain much polyunsaturated-fat because these regions never experience winter.

 
Nice theory, but have you any scientific references to back it up? Otherwise it is hardly more compelling that any other appeal-to-nature Paleo fallacy. Just because something is supposed to be natural, it doesn't mean that it has a deeper purpose or that it is better for you. Moreover, your argument is so generalizing and simplifying that it can hardly be considered a valid hypothesis. Nuts and seeds vary widely in their fatty acid composition, and that variation doesn't simply reflect the latitude of their habitat as you suggest. Hazelnuts, for example, are almost completely monounsaturated and grow in freezing Northern Europe, while brazil nuts (which grow... guess where) are relatively high in polyunsaturated fats. Humans and their hominid ancestors have evolved and gathered nuts in the tropics most of their time, where there are dry and wet seasons but hardly any large variations in temperature. There is no season for brazil nuts - as they bear fruits year-round like many other tropical trees and shrubs. Even when homo sapiens began to venture out of africa some 50,000 years ago, nuts and seeds were probably the only type of food that could be kept and carried around for a long period of time without going bad. Hence given both their extraordinary preservability and their nutrient density, they were probably collected whenever possible and kept for the hard times and as a convenient source of calories during exhausting hikes and thus eaten not only during their season. After all, humans differ from animals in that they have developed cultural techniques that made them more and more independent from the chance of Nature and the change of seasons.

Stop lying about phytoestrogens. You're no better than MisterE

Oil seeds like flax have the greatest concentration of *total* phytoestrogens, more than soybeans but soybeans are next ont the list. Nuts (and oil seeds), cereals (grains) and vegetables are good sources of lignans. Precursors of lignans are also notable. Spinach, clover, alfalfa, brussels sprouts, and of course legumes and soybeans are good sources of coumestrol.




http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/10384822

http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/18671400

http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/17943494

http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/17125538

http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/19373603



We actually know every little about the different types of phytoestrogens in plants. Every few years or so we are finding that this or that plant-based food has more phytoestrogens than previously believed.

[misterE]

 

Tell us about your diet.

 

 

I tend to follow a starch-based diet. Most of the calories you get each day comes from starch, combined with vegetables with a tiny bit of fat, sugar, salt and protein.

[misterE]

 

 

Nice theory, but have you any scientific references to back it up?

 

 

 

 

Am J Physiol. 1987 May;252(5 Pt 2):R897-901.

Polyunsaturated lipid diet lengthens torpor and reduces body temperature in a hibernator.

Geiser F, Kenagy GJ. 

Abstract

 

Membrane lipids of vertebrate animals that tolerate cold are high in polyunsaturated fatty acids. Because the lipid composition of cellular membranes in mammals can be experimentally altered by diet, we investigated whether a diet rich in polyunsaturated fatty acids would lengthen bouts of torpor and reduce the minimum body temperature in hibernating chipmunks (Eutamias amoenus) compared with a diet rich in saturated fatty acids. Animals on the highly unsaturated diet showed significantly longer bouts of torpor, lower minimum body temperatures, and lower metabolic rates than those on a saturated diet. Animals on a control diet were intermediate. These dietary adjustments apparently influence the control of body temperature by the central nervous system, which results in a modification of the pattern of torpor. The observations also suggest a role of nutritional ecology in hibernation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Am J Physiol. 1993 Apr;264(4 Pt 2):R747-53.

The effect of a low essential fatty acid diet on hibernation in marmots.

Florant GL, Hester L, Ameenuddin S, Rintoul DA.     

 

Abstract

We investigated the effect of an essential fatty acid (EFA)-deficient diet on hibernation patterns in yellow-bellied marmots. Fatty acid (FA) analysis of white adipose tissue (WAT) from animals maintained for 2 mo on the EFA-deficient diet suggested that little or no EFAs were present in the gonadal or omental fat depots. Hibernation about lengths of the EFA-deficient animals were significantly shorter than control animals. Stated another way, these animals aroused twice as frequently compared with control animals and used more energy to survive winter. Analysis of WAT composition and blood samples revealed that animals were highly lipolytic during winter. Furthermore, the release of FAs was not random: linoleate was significantly under-represented in venous outflow from the gonadal WAT pad based on the percentage of this species in WAT. The concentration of saturated FAs was higher than that predicted from the WAT-FA composition. We conclude that linoleate is preferentially retained within WAT and that concentrations of this EFA may influence hibernation behavior. Thus EFAs may have a thermoregulatory role in hibernation in addition to their role as essential precursors for physiologically important lipids after hibernation is over.

Edited by misterE, 30 April 2014 - 12:00 AM.

[Duchykins]

 
Tell us about your diet.
 

 
I tend to follow a starch-based diet. Most of the calories you get each day comes from starch, combined with vegetables with a tiny bit of fat, sugar, salt and protein.

Sounds pretty novel. Good luck and I hope you're supplementing taurine, creatine and carnosine (or beta alanine). There aren't any vegan choices of foods that can get you anything but negligible amounts of those.

[misterE]

 

Sounds pretty novel. Good luck and I hope you're supplementing taurine, creatine and carnosine (or beta alanine). There aren't any vegan choices of foods that can get you anything but negligible amounts of those.

 

 

No TMAO either.

 

 

 

http://www.nih.gov/r...4222013meat.htm

 

Edited by misterE, 30 April 2014 - 10:30 PM.

[Duchykins]

 
Sounds pretty novel. Good luck and I hope you're supplementing taurine, creatine and carnosine (or beta alanine). There aren't any vegan choices of foods that can get you anything but negligible amounts of those.
 

 
No TMAO either.
 
 
 
http://www.nih.gov/r...4222013meat.htm
 

Uhm, okay, cool article. What does it have to do with anything I said?

Firstly, that study used a pitifully small sample size. Secondly, the results indicate that a high red meat diet affects your gut flora in a way that leads to higher TMAO. It doesn't mean carnitine itself is bad. It means be mindful of your sources of carnitine and eat a balanced diet. That's reasonable and is consistent with human physiology.

Third and MOST IMPORTANT - it's completely irrelevant to carnosine. You mixed those up, like I should have known you would. The ignorant often do, especially when they're determined to knee-jerk reject all information that contradicts their beliefs. So glad to know that your diet has your brain firing on all cylinders! Congratulations. I hope you're proud of yourself.

Sarcasm aside, you do more harm than good, you hurt people; spreading pseudointellectual garbage, disinformation, irrational fear-mongering and encouraging people to sicken themselves with unnatural and unbalanced diets, and starve their brains of vital chemicals scarce or non-existent in vegetarian/vegan diets, leading LEAST of all to behavioral and mental health issues.

YOU CAN'T EVEN BE BOTHERED to help your fellow vegans and vegetarians maintain brain health with correct information about nutrition and what supplements they SHOULD be taking as part of a healthy vegetarian/vegan lifestyle. You're disgusting, you're a disgrace to this forum and an embarrassment to your peers everywhere.

[Chupo]

Fish is probably the best source of TMAO and is consistently linked with longevity. 

[misterE]

... 

Edited by misterE, 01 May 2014 - 02:56 AM.

[misterE]

 

 

Sounds pretty novel.

 

 

 

Oh yeah, real novel alright... its only been the primary diet of humanity for the past 100,000 years. Or are you one of those goofs who think humans evolved eating meat?
 

Edited by misterE, 01 May 2014 - 03:05 AM.

[Duchykins]

 

 

Sounds pretty novel.
 

 
 
Oh yeah, real novel alright... its only been the primary diet of humanity for the past 100,000 years. Or are you one of those goofs who think humans evolved eating meat?
 

Since evolutionary biology is one of my strongest subjects (second only to philosophy of religion & logic), my answer is a partial yes, partial because your question suggests that humans have a hypercarnivorous history, but we don't. We evolved as omnivores and social apex predators (though being an apex predator is not wholly decided on your diet). Everything from the development of our brain, our teeth and eyes, our stomachs and intestines, our atrophied appendix, our posture, to the way mutation and natural selection has efficiently but imperfectly caused us to be partly dependent upon animal food sources for certain nutrients, indicates and is consistent with an omnivorous evolutionary history. On the anthropological/archeological side of things I'm sure the widespread abundance of vegan cultures throughout antiquity far outweighs the evolutionary arguments for human omnivorism ... oh wait, what abundance of vegan cultures?

I'm sure raw vegan diets never need supplementing because our use of fire is pretty recent in evolutionary history?

I'm sure ancient inland humans obtained adequate cobalamin from ... wait, what?

I'm sure our ancestors didn't hunt mammoth?

I'm sure we didn't find solid artifact evidence last year of human ancestors hunting and scavenging some 2 million years ago?

I'm sure humans didn't remain omnivorous after the advent of agriculture (farming and animal husbandry) some 10,000 years ago?

I'm sure the mutations for lactose tolerance weren't favorably selected in independent cultures because milk drinking was disadvantageous?


To deny all this is to join the ranks of anti-evolutionists and all those other idiots who have *no concept* how much evidence they are denying but yet are very sure they know what they're talking about.

But maybe you are a creationist, I don't know your religious preferences. Aside from veganism, that is.

If you doubt my assurance on this, go check the Intelligent Design thread in Longecity's religious forum. I am very familiar with this topic so if you think you can intimidate me by pretending to know what you are talking about, think again. I promise you that this is a road you don't want to go down with me because I will drag it out at length, I will laugh at you at every turn and embarrass you in front of all these lovely people who will probably find it very entertaining.


Perhaps you are telling me your diet so finely attuned to our physiological needs because of our evolutionary history that no supplementation is necessary to maintain overall health superior to their omnivorous neighbors? Is that true?

[nupi]

 

 

 

I had been reading MDA for quite a while but ultimately decided he was a quack. While he was basing a lot of his stuff on science and a lot of his recommendations would be a definite improvement for the average American, reporting was invariably very biased.

 

His own line of supplements is actually pretty horrible once you look at it.

 

 

You don't think marks advise is helpful? What about his legions of followers on the primal forum? 

 

 

I think pretty much what I wrote: it's a step up (or a few even) from SAD but still far from sane.
 

[TheFountain]

 

 

 

 

I had been reading MDA for quite a while but ultimately decided he was a quack. While he was basing a lot of his stuff on science and a lot of his recommendations would be a definite improvement for the average American, reporting was invariably very biased.

 

His own line of supplements is actually pretty horrible once you look at it.

 

 

You don't think marks advise is helpful? What about his legions of followers on the primal forum? 

 

 

I think pretty much what I wrote: it's a step up (or a few even) from SAD but still far from sane.
 

 

Can you clarify what you mean by "far from sane"?

 

The diet to my understanding summarized concisely, is as follows:

 

Emphasis on organic, grass fed meat. 

 

Emphasis on a lot of vegetables in pretty much every meal.

 

Emphasis on fat not being the enemy (which to me does not necessarily mean hyperlipid). As far as the amount of fat he emphasizes? that seems to be a big question. My guess is anywhere between 50-150 grams daily. Probably recommends the upper end of the fat spectrum. 

 

The diet is to be accompanied by short bursts of intense exercises (as our ancestors apparently partook in their natural, every day lives) to help activate the benefits of the diet for muscle sparring and fat loss. 

 

Because these short bursts of intense activity create a strong "after burn" effect, they are interspersed with long periods of leisure and fun activity. 

 

Does this all sound that bad? 

Edited by TheFountain, 01 May 2014 - 11:45 AM.

[nupi]

I always figured it to be hyper lipid with the non-stop crusade against any and all types of carbs (otherwise you simply don't get enough calories). And then there's the get sun exposure bullshit and the rather paranoid view on phytates...

[TheFountain]

I always figured it to be hyper lipid with the non-stop crusade against any and all types of carbs (otherwise you simply don't get enough calories). And then there's the get sun exposure bullshit and the rather paranoid view on phytates...

 

I agree about the phytate claim. But about sun? I am on the fence. I think we need some, and as someone who has supplemented vitamin D for the past 5 years, from liquid Gelcaps to Chewables to now attempting the D3 skin lotion, I have to say that in my psychological (and perhaps physiological) experience the #1 best way to get vitamin D is through sun exposure on the skin. This is why I opt for a happy medium of about 30 minutes a day during spring and summer, at least 4-5 days a week. But I always wear sunblock on my face and Emu oil on the arms when doing this, because it allows for some protection without missing out on the benefits.

 

What do you consider Hyperlipid? And why is it a bad thing? 

[ta5]

It seems to me that hyperlipid pretty much implies high calorie. Looking at cron-o-meter, I've noticed that if I want to get the majority of my nutrition from food and around 1.2g/kg protein, I can't fit in much fat before I'm no longer looking at a calorie restricted diet. If I was targeting higher calories, then I could play around more with the ratios of carbs:protein:fat.

[TheFountain]

It seems to me that hyperlipid pretty much implies high calorie. Looking at cron-o-meter, I've noticed that if I want to get the majority of my nutrition from food and around 1.2g/kg protein, I can't fit in much fat before I'm no longer looking at a calorie restricted diet. If I was targeting higher calories, then I could play around more with the ratios of carbs:protein:fat.

 

Well sure, if calorie restricting is your goal, fat is not going to help you out in that regard.

 

But if your intensity level is really high like me, if you do intense work outs, sprints, Judo, Krav Maga, etc. 

 

Well then you probably would need about 2500 calories a day to keep up with your bodies tendencies to burn fuel. 

[nupi]

 

I always figured it to be hyper lipid with the non-stop crusade against any and all types of carbs (otherwise you simply don't get enough calories). And then there's the get sun exposure bullshit and the rather paranoid view on phytates...

 

I agree about the phytate claim. But about sun? I am on the fence. I think we need some, and as someone who has supplemented vitamin D for the past 5 years, from liquid Gelcaps to Chewables to now attempting the D3 skin lotion, I have to say that in my psychological (and perhaps physiological) experience the #1 best way to get vitamin D is through sun exposure on the skin. This is why I opt for a happy medium of about 30 minutes a day during spring and summer, at least 4-5 days a week. But I always wear sunblock on my face and Emu oil on the arms when doing this, because it allows for some protection without missing out on the benefits.

 

What do you consider Hyperlipid? And why is it a bad thing? 

 

 

Ultimately I don't care much if people do hyperlipid or not (what that comes out with depends a lot on their actual genetic make up). What I do take issue with is Sisson turning this into a religion more than anything else.

[TheFountain]

 

 

I always figured it to be hyper lipid with the non-stop crusade against any and all types of carbs (otherwise you simply don't get enough calories). And then there's the get sun exposure bullshit and the rather paranoid view on phytates...

 

I agree about the phytate claim. But about sun? I am on the fence. I think we need some, and as someone who has supplemented vitamin D for the past 5 years, from liquid Gelcaps to Chewables to now attempting the D3 skin lotion, I have to say that in my psychological (and perhaps physiological) experience the #1 best way to get vitamin D is through sun exposure on the skin. This is why I opt for a happy medium of about 30 minutes a day during spring and summer, at least 4-5 days a week. But I always wear sunblock on my face and Emu oil on the arms when doing this, because it allows for some protection without missing out on the benefits.

 

What do you consider Hyperlipid? And why is it a bad thing? 

 

 

Ultimately I don't care much if people do hyperlipid or not (what that comes out with depends a lot on their actual genetic make up). What I do take issue with is Sisson turning this into a religion more than anything else.

 

Now you're just saying shit without qualifying it. 

[blood]

Nice discussion of the statistical difficulties around pinning a health benefit on nut consumption:

http://fivethirtyeig...d-quit-smoking/

 

I'm still eating raw nuts daily. I try to limit my eating of roasted nuts (peanuts, cashews) on account of their quite high AGE content.

 

Edited by blood, 11 May 2014 - 04:09 AM.

[Chupo]

Yet another nut/peanut study:

 

 

 

Prospective Evaluation of the Association of Nut/Peanut Consumption With Total and Cause-Specific Mortality

 

 

Importance High intake of nuts has been linked to a reduced risk of mortality. Previous studies, however, were primarily conducted among people of European descent, particularly those of high socioeconomic status.

Objective To examine the association of nut consumption with total and cause-specific mortality in Americans of African and European descent who were predominantly of low socioeconomic status (SES) and in Chinese individuals in Shanghai, China.

Design, Setting, and Participants Three large cohorts were evaluated in the study. One included 71 764 US residents of African and European descent, primarily of low SES, who were participants in the Southern Community Cohort Study (SCCS) in the southeastern United States (March 2002 to September 2009), and the other 2 cohorts included 134 265 participants in the Shanghai Women’s Health Study (SWHS) (December 1996 to May 2000) and the Shanghai Men’s Health Study (SMHS) (January 2002 to September 2006) in Shanghai, China. Self-reported nut consumption in the SCCS (approximately 50% were peanuts) and peanut-only consumption in the SMHS/SWHS were assessed using validated food frequency questionnaires.

Main Outcomes and Measures Deaths were ascertained through linkage with the National Death Index and Social Security Administration mortality files in the SCCS and annual linkage with the Shanghai Vital Statistics Registry and by biennial home visits in the SWHS/SMHS. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs.

Results With a median follow-up of 5.4 years in the SCCS, 6.5 years in the SMHS, and 12.2 years in the SWHS, 14 440 deaths were identified. More than half of the women in the SCCS were ever smokers compared with only 2.8% in the SWHS. The ever-smoking rate for men was 77.1% in the SCCS and 69.6% in the SMHS. Nut intake was inversely associated with risk of total mortality in all 3 cohorts (all P < .001 for trend), with adjusted HRs associated with the highest vs lowest quintiles of intake being 0.79 (95% CI, 0.73-0.86) and 0.83 (95% CI, 0.77-0.88), respectively, for the US and Shanghai cohorts. This inverse association was predominantly driven by cardiovascular disease mortality (P < .05 for trend in the US cohort; P < .001 for trend in the Shanghai cohorts). When specific types of cardiovascular disease were examined, a significant inverse association was consistently seen for ischemic heart disease in all ethnic groups (HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.45-0.85 in blacks; HR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.39-0.92 in whites; and HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.54-0.89 in Asians for the highest vs lowest quintile of nut intake). The associations for ischemic stroke (HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.60-1.00 for the highest vs lowest quintile of nut intake) and hemorrhagic stroke (HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.60-0.99 for the highest vs lowest quintile of nut intake) were significant only in Asians. The nut-mortality association was similar for men and women and for blacks, whites, and Asians and was not modified by the presence of metabolic conditions at study enrollment.

Conclusions and Relevance Nut consumption was associated with decreased overall and cardiovascular disease mortality across different ethnic groups and among individuals from low SES groups. Consumption of nuts, particularly peanuts given their general affordability, may be considered a cost-effective measure to improve cardiovascular health.

→ source (external link)

[TheFountain]

I want to throw some nuts into this conversation.

 

For all human existence, humans only got to eat nuts at certain type of the year, for a limited amount of time. There is an intricacy intertwined between the type of fat in nuts and seeds and the seasons. The polyunsaturated-fats in nuts and seeds induce a lowered metabolism, similar to what you see in hibernating animals. The plants know when winter is coming and produce polyunsaturated-fats to protect them from freezing, animals eat these nuts and obtain the polyunsaturated-fats from them which not only prevents their cells from freezing but also decreases the metabolism in order to spare energy for the winter. Tropical plants like coconut, cocoa and palm, don't contain much polyunsaturated-fat because these regions never experience winter.

 

What humans have done is disrupt this intricacy, and now we eat nuts all year long, and we squeeze the polyunsaturated-oils out of corn and soybeans and use them to have cheap fats quickly on the market. Who knows what kind of consequence this is going to have. 

 

But what about regions where it is warm (or cold) most of the year?

[TheFountain]

I want to throw some nuts into this conversation.

 

For all human existence, humans only got to eat nuts at certain type of the year, for a limited amount of time. There is an intricacy intertwined between the type of fat in nuts and seeds and the seasons. The polyunsaturated-fats in nuts and seeds induce a lowered metabolism, similar to what you see in hibernating animals. The plants know when winter is coming and produce polyunsaturated-fats to protect them from freezing, animals eat these nuts and obtain the polyunsaturated-fats from them which not only prevents their cells from freezing but also decreases the metabolism in order to spare energy for the winter. Tropical plants like coconut, cocoa and palm, don't contain much polyunsaturated-fat because these regions never experience winter.

 

What humans have done is disrupt this intricacy, and now we eat nuts all year long, and we squeeze the polyunsaturated-oils out of corn and soybeans and use them to have cheap fats quickly on the market. Who knows what kind of consequence this is going to have. 

 

But what about regions where it is warm (or cold) most of the year?

I want to throw some nuts into this conversation.

 

For all human existence, humans only got to eat nuts at certain type of the year, for a limited amount of time. There is an intricacy intertwined between the type of fat in nuts and seeds and the seasons. The polyunsaturated-fats in nuts and seeds induce a lowered metabolism, similar to what you see in hibernating animals. The plants know when winter is coming and produce polyunsaturated-fats to protect them from freezing, animals eat these nuts and obtain the polyunsaturated-fats from them which not only prevents their cells from freezing but also decreases the metabolism in order to spare energy for the winter. Tropical plants like coconut, cocoa and palm, don't contain much polyunsaturated-fat because these regions never experience winter.

 

What humans have done is disrupt this intricacy, and now we eat nuts all year long, and we squeeze the polyunsaturated-oils out of corn and soybeans and use them to have cheap fats quickly on the market. Who knows what kind of consequence this is going to have. 

 

But what about regions where it is warm (or cold) most of the year?

[misterE]

 

 

But what about regions where it is warm (or cold) most of the year?

 

 

Well in the tropics, all the plants are very saturated and contain very little polyunsaturated-fat... like coconuts, palm or cocoa. The reason for this is because the plants never experience a winter; they have no reason to synthesize polyunsaturated-fats. The animals in the tropics don't ever enter hibernation. The fish in the tropics also have less polyunsaturated-fat and more monounsaturated-fat, which is much less prone to oxidation by heat.

 

If these plants and animals in the tropics contained high levels of polyunsaturated-fat, they would oxidize and degrade faster, due to the hot climate.

 

The cold regions are the opposite, whereas the polyunsaturated-fat protects against cold climates by staying liquid in freezing temperatures.   

Edited by misterE, 08 March 2015 - 06:42 PM.

[TheFountain]

 

 

 

But what about regions where it is warm (or cold) most of the year?

 

 

Well in the tropics, all the plants are very saturated and contain very little polyunsaturated-fat... like coconuts, palm or cocoa. The reason for this is because the plants never experience a winter; they have no reason to synthesize polyunsaturated-fats. The animals in the tropics don't ever enter hibernation. The fish in the tropics also have less polyunsaturated-fat and more monounsaturated-fat, which is much less prone to oxidation by heat.

 

If these plants and animals in the tropics contained high levels of polyunsaturated-fat, they would oxidize and degrade faster, due to the hot climate.

 

The cold regions are the opposite, whereas the polyunsaturated-fat protects against cold climates by staying liquid in freezing temperatures.   

 

But wouldn't that mean that those of us with ancestors who evolved mostly in the warmer climates are genetically optimized for a different macro ratio and fat intake pattern?