If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.*
Joseph Goebbels (pictured left)
Reich Minister of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda
The history of our race, and each individual’s experience, are sown thick with evidence that a truth is not hard to kill and that a lie told well is immortal.
Mark Twain, Advice to Youth
I’ve always loved the above two quotes because their sentiments are so on the money. It is sad but true that the bigger the lie, the more people are willing to unquestioningly accept it. And the greater the mass of people who accept the lie, the easier it is to persuade others to join the growing crowd. In such a way does a great lie snowball into a great ‘truth.’
Nutritionally I can’t think of a bigger lie than the one claiming that fats in general and saturated fats in particular are bad for us. This lie is so deeply embedded in the minds of most that you couldn’t blow it out with a stick of dynamite. Especially in the minds of academics, and more especially in the minds of most dietitians. Not all, but most. Nutritionally, it is truly the Big Lie.
Despite the fact that they all tenaciously cling to the Big Lie, the evidence disputes it. But, “a lie told well is immortal.” Over at Whole Health Source Stephen Guyenet wrote a post recently looking at the observational data about saturated fat and cholesterol levels and heart disease. Most of the Big Lie devotees worry obsessively about saturated fat intake while the great mass of observational data shows little, if any, correlation. A couple of years ago, I wrote a long post about the invalidity of observational studies as proof of much anything, but in that post I neglected to mention that although observational studies can’t show that correlation equals causation, they probably are valid in demonstrating the opposite: if there is no correlation, there probably isn’t much of a case for causation. So, if there isn’t a lot of correlation between saturated fat intake and elevated cholesterol and/or heart disease, is doubtful that saturated fat intake is causal.
I just came across a paper – a research editorial, to be correct – in the Journal of the American Dietetic Association (JADA) that, did I not already have a close and abiding relationship with Jameson, would drive me to drink. In fact it probably did drive me to drink just a little more. Now the JADA is the journal edited by and written for Registered Dietitians, and, as a consequence, it has an RD feel to it in terms of content. It usually hews to the low-fat, high-carb party line, but every now and then it publishes a paper on some facet of low-carbohydrate dieting. The particular article that caused my heartburn is titled Low-Glycemic Load Diets: How Does the Evidence for Prevention of Disease Measure Up?
This article annoys me on many levels, the first of which is that it even talks about glycemic index (GI) and glycemic load (GL). I’ve written previously about why I don’t believe the glycemic index to be a particularly valid way of characterizing carbohydrates. And I don’t think the glycemic load concept is much better. What’s wrong with simply counting carbohydrates? It provides more benefits and doesn’t encourage the consumption of fructose, a harmful sugar with a low glycemic index. The reason the glycemic index and glycemic load have been so embraced by the academic community is because they simply can’t bring themselves to admit that the low-carb diet is a superior diet for weight loss, lipid control, blood pressure lowering, blood sugar stabilization, GERD ridding, etc. than is their beloved low-fat diet. So instead of manning up and admitting that they had been wrong for the past 40 years, they tart the venerable low-carb diet up in academic sounding garb and call it the glycemic load diet and hope no one notices the subterfuge.
It’s perfectly acceptable to talk about low glycemic load diets bringing about health benefits without anyone saying, Whoa, you’ll croak your kidneys. Or, Whoa, you may lose weight, but you’ll clog your arteries. No, the low glycemic load diet is perfectly innocuous in any company. No pompous academic will give you grief if you simply use the word ‘glycemic.‘ Try using the term ‘low-carb’ in the halls of Academe, however, and you may be in for some withering stares.
The author of the ‘research editorial‘ drones on about a handful of studies that have looked at the efficacy of low-glycemic-load diets in preventing the development of type II diabetes and other metabolic conditions in healthy subjects. All of the studies discussed have various problems: not large enough, not long enough, less than optimal dietary questionnaires, etc. Given the watery results of the studies describe, the article then ends on a bizarre note.
Despite the limitations of the available studies, there is increasing evidence that low-glycemic-load diets could prevent diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and some cancers, including endometrial cancer and esophageal adenocarcinoma.
Say what?
Yep, each of these statements is backed up by a citation or two. It would seem to me that the ‘research editorial’ would have been much more interesting and meaningful had it focused on the results of these cited studies instead of the ones it did.
Nonetheless, the author soldiers on (and this is the part that really torques me):
In light of these findings, adherence to a low-glycemic-load diet, provided it meets current dietary recommendations including those related to dietary fat content and portion control, seems prudent. [Italics mine]
Ah, the Big Lie rears its fearsome head. Doesn’t matter how well the diet works or what diseases it might prevent, we don’t want to follow it unless we meet those current recommendations on fat. No sir.
Do you think the author of this drivel has ever really thought about what food is made of? It seems unlikely.
Food is made of fat, protein and carbohydrate. That’s it. Food also contains water, vitamins, minerals and other nutrients, but only fat, carbohydrate and protein provide calories. And when a diet is constructed of these things – especially one that toes the line as far as portion control is concerned – trade offs have to be made.
If you keep the calories the same, and you decrease one of the three components, you’re going to have to increase one of the others. Let’s look at how the brain of a lipophobe would cypher this. Okay, we need to cut the fat, so that’s the first thing we’ll do. We’ll cut fat, and we’ll really cut saturated fat. But now we’ve got to get our calories back up, so we’ll add low-glycemic carbohydrates to do that. But, uh oh, when we add that many carbs, even though they are low-glycemic-index carbs, we increase the glycemic load. We can’t really do that if we want to prevent all these diseases. We’ll increase the protein. But, wait, we can’t increase it too much or we’ll damage the kidneys. (A myth, of course, but they all believe it.) And it’s hard to increase the protein without increasing the fat because most good sources of protein contain fat, even, God forbid, saturated fat. So if we up the protein, we up the fat. But fat is the devil in disguise, oh yes it is; it’s the devil in disguise. Can’t go there.
See what I mean. If you are a lipophobe, there is no solution. It could be called the Lipophobe’s Conundrum. And that’s why I’m glad I‘m not a lipophobe, so I don’t have to worry about it. I haven’t bought into the Big Lie. All I need to do is cut the carbs and let everything else take care of itself.
*Below is the Goebbel’s quote in full. Interesting to note that Dr. Joe’s ideas are still alive and well and in full use by many of our own politicians.
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”
“Food is made of fat, protein and carbohydrate.” You forgot alcohol!
Especially Guinness. You can *chew* Guinness, gosh dern it.
I think alcohol is being counted as a carbohydrate.
I doubt that alcohol is being counted as a carbohydrate, since it isn’t one, and isn’t processed like one.
I think it wasn’t included because it generally isn’t considered a macronutrient.
Except by Lindenberg – a Swede – in his pseudo-Paleo diet studies.
Drinks are counted in “paleo” and control – but take heart, the Norwegians are worse.
Etanol is digested like fructose, exept the buzz offcourse:P http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM
What is your take on this report???
Aggressive Prostate Cancer: High Omega-3s in
Blood Doubled the Risk, but High TransFatty
Acids Cut Risk in Half
http://www.cancernetwork.com/prostate-cancer/content/article/10165/1851186
I like what you had to say. However, be aware that folks who do *not* agree with you are going to read this and say, “He’s comparing us to Nazis.”
Because they are morons (not Nazis).
I thought he was comparing them to Mark Twain…
cremes,
That’s only if they have reading comprehension problems. Wait, you already figured that out.
“…they are morons (not Nazis).”
Largely correct. Social Corporatists in the classic mold of Benito Mussolini, actually. A distinction with little difference but for their placement – just a tad bit above basic street-level – in the Dominant Social Order, little more than that.
And that is all. 0{:-\o<
I like your explanation of the “lipophobe’s conundrum” as you put it. I have had several dietitians email me contesting different things I have posted, mainly because of my recommendation to eat more healthy fats. In the discussions that follow, this conundrum always comes up, and they do talk themselves into a hole. There truly is no logical answer, just as they cannot rationally answer why we “need” grains when the gluten, lectin, phytates, etc are so harmful to our bodies. Great article!
A lipophobe I am not! What baffles me is how do we break the spell? At least get people to think openly and objectively? Do some rigorous science and research? Keep at it Mike.
Jim, it might be harder than you think. Facts, it seems, are not always enough. Have a look at this article http://bit.ly/fqT4rt
I think we need to work on the brains of our children to get them more flexible, adaptable and reasonable.
Thanks for the feedback, I’m gonna check it out.
Yes, but the problem is their brains need sufficient saturated fat to work properly and most children are not being fed enough of this “devil in disguise”. Children need proper diet, not just proper education, for their brains to be flexible, adaptable and reasonable.
Did you ever wonder why so many people seem to have a difficult time using critical thinking skills? Could it be because all this low-fat crap has messed up their brain?
most children are not being fed enough of [saturated fats] …Margaret, are you nuts? One word…McDonalds…
I think she doubtless meant good quality saturated fats without all the other fats that are part of the McDonald’s menu. But that’s just a guess.
Let’s examine the Big Mac combo with Large Fries and a Large Coke. A popular choice.
1387 calories – 38% fat, 55% carbs, 9% protein
Sat fat is 9% of calories
Sugars are 12% of calories
Commentary:
The overall calorie count is driven high for a single meal by the empty carb content. Most alarming are the 93 grams of sugars. That’s 47 grams of fructose. A VERY alarming figure.
The protein is adequate at 30 grams.
The fat is mostly junk polyunsaturates that are likely rancid from high heat handling.
Saturated fat is NOT the problem with this meal.
Junk carbs and junk oils IS.
Be well,
Ben
(figures slightly exceed 100% due to rounding errors)
But all McDonalds offer Diet Coke as an beverage. What happens to the carb count if you switch to a diet soft drink?
1) The spam filter on this site is super restrictive.
2) Here’s my approach to fighting this lipophobe non-sense:
http://www.geekbeast.com/the-experiment/
I’m starting with my friends and a small blogged experiment that’s very hard to ignore due to the irreconcilable cognitive dissonance it causes.
Thanks, it looks pretty cool. Even when I talk to friends and relatives they’re all brainwashed. So I gave up trying to interest any of them. At least with Dr. Eades, Gary Taubes and all the other vanguard people out there, the word does filter through somewhat. I’m gonna get into the geekbeast.
Great article, except for the “Big Lie” quote. I can’t find any authoritative evidence Goebbels ever said that: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Lie
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”
The_Craven Joseph Goebbels quote
http://www.thinkexist.com
That is Goebbels most famous quote!
It is so wonderful to see that I am not the only one who argues this stuff on a daily basis…that see’s the insanity of what the rest of the country believes! ….(The LIE) It’s from being able to read blogs like yours that let me know that at least not the whole world is insane! That 40+ year old “LIE” is so ingrained that people think you’re nuts when you explain the benefits of a low carb lifestyle…why are they so afraid to try a way of eating that might save their lives and improve their health? Why do some people think that having a bowl of cereal for dinner is normal? and on and on….anyway, sorry I got off on a tangent, but Thank you for your great articles/blogs.
We sympathise with you entirely, after discovering the countless benefits of eating a diet based on what we evolved to eat, we felt compelled to set up Paleoworks at great personal cost just to get the word out and help people.
There is presumably a cost benefit ratio of increasing amounts of each macronutrient (more precisely: there must be one for any macronutrient combination package with a given calorie content, in genetic, micronutrients, etc. context). So the LC might perhaps be more fruitfully viewed as simply a wrongly weighted/ particularly biased version of a more general issue.
I was about to enjoy the morning paper, I flipped the page and saw this article (“Hands off my statins (and please pass the steak”). I still can’t get over it. It ruined my morning. The writer seems to think that it is quite alright to take statins so that he can eat “cheese, cream., red meat, and butter.” Does he think taking statins is like wearing a helmet when riding a bike? The message here is this: conquer your fear of fat with statins.
I couldn’t help share this article from our newspaper the other day
I wonder how much the pharmaceutical companies paid him to write that?
Reads like satire to me. Nobody could say, “I listen to the good it can do and tune out the stuff about side-effects” with a straight face.
January 17, 2008 presentation by Christopher Gardner for the Stanford School of Medicine Medcast lecture series.
The case for low-carbohydrate diets is gaining weight. Christopher Gardner, PhD, assistant professor of medicine at the Stanford Prevention Research Center, has completed the largest and longest-ever comparison of four popular diets using real-world conditions, which he discusses – the lowest-carbohydrate Atkins diet came out on top.
Stanford University School of Medicine:
I posted a couple of years ago on the Chris Gardner talk at Stanford.
It barely has over 43,000 views (as I hit the submit button to this comment) since it was posted in May of 2008. Dr. Lustig’s Sugar: The Bitter Truth has almost 750,000. Personally, as a layman interested in optimizing my health, I’d rank Dr. Gardner’s video right on up there with Dr. Lustig’s.
In this context I would like to comment that in 2008 a “Konsenspapier” (consensus paper?) was signed and released by four influental German nutrition experts – among them a former representative of the DGE (official german society of nutrition) who was known for his advocacy of low-fat diets – which has some interesting quotes in it. Firstly they recommend a moderate reduction in carbohydrate (down to 30-40%) and increase in fat / protein (30-40%, 20-30%) which is kind of a major deviation from the former official recommandation (>50%, <30%, 20%). But it gets better and it is finally acknowledged that different people might have different nutritional requirements. I quote:
"Patients with insulin resistance, metabolic syndrom and hyperinsulinimia, as well as the typical dyslipoproteinemia (low HDL, high TGL, low % of small dense LDL) are recommended a further increase of fat percentage to 40-50% in exchange for carbohydrate. Reduction in carbohydrate will lead to reduction in HbAIc and fasting glucose levels in type 2 diabetics as well."
Isn't that something?
The big lie is not from Goebbels, but was in Mein Kampf of Hitler where it was lifted from Henry Ford’s book, and it was more an accusation of the jews than a program to follow.
One thing one should know about Goebbels, is that his “techniques and methods” came not from a vacuum, he has hardly invented anything. Everything came from Edward Bernays who is still acclaimed today as the father of marketing (another word for propaganda).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Bernays#Recognition_and_criticism
Thew reference to Nazi-ism is hyperbolic, cliche, and inappropriate.
The reference was to lies, specifically the big ones, and how they are sustained. The Nazi reference was not central to the argument, was it?
Still inappropriate, and cliche and hyperbolic as was the fantasy of blowing them up with a sick of dynamite.
The doctor needs healing.
What fantasy?
I re-read Dr. Eades’s post and did not see a sentence labelling anyone a nazi.
The quotes were used to make a point: tell a big lie many times and many people will believe it. (Using the quotes without attribution would have been plagiarism.)
The full quote at the bottom of the post, regardless of the creator, is true. Our politicians are masters at the big lie and only when the unblemished truth comes out do they run for the cover of darkness like the cockroaches they are.
The problem with the quote is that the whole premise of the article is that a lie, repeated, is accepted as the truth, and, ironically, the quote itself is a phony quote that has been repeated so many times that it is accepted. Candidly, I don’t think that it is necessary to the article and, by falling into the trap Dr. Eades is criticising, diminishes the message. I firmly believe the message, but by using a phony quote to make the point, doubters will find fodder for criticism.
You’re right, the fake quote more or less proves my point about lies oft told ultimately becoming the truth. Wish I had done that on purpose.
The reference to the Nazis is really about propaganda and control over the population. Hitler represents these things. What better symbol to represent control and lies, who better than Hitler.
It’s not a “fantasy” about blowing them up with dynamite but a metaphor explaining how embedded the belief about fat being bad is. And I think it’s a pretty apt metaphor. I smiled when I read it.
In fact, there was no Nazi reference in the main article.
Yes, let’s just never mention the Nazis again–it’s not like our children need to read about them in history class or anything, right?
Your comment is also hyperbolic. The point is that the reference to Nazi-ism when trying to make a point about NUTRITION is out of place and irritating. Calling someone a Nazi is just an easy cop out when you don’t have enough information at hand to prove the point you’re trying to make.
Bolshevism killed tens of millions more than the Nazis, and you never hear about them in history classes. Ever heard of the Cheka? What is your point?
Nobody called anyone a nazi in this article. Perhaps you should re-read it and replace the name on the quote with “little fuzzy bunny” and see if you think the article is now calling someone a little fuzzy bunny.
For some people, just hearing the word “nazi” makes them reactive, and they can’t get past that long enough to actually read or listen to the actual words being said.
Same could be said of “low carb”. People don’t listen or hear what you’re saying, as soon as the words “low carb” come out of your mouth they go off on something they heard somewhere or read somewhere from somebody someplace who said it was bad. They won’t listen to research, or information, or even listen to hear your own personal story. They go off on complete alternate tangents.
The quote was about lies and how hard they can be to kill. If the quote was by anybody else and the article was exactly the same, would you still be upset?
For some people, just hearing the word “nazi” makes them reactive. ….Gee, I wonder why?
This quote was put here to compare how the Nazis purposely lied to the supposed lies of conventional nutrition. So yes, he called them Nazis.
Flavia, you are a twit and I think you should go take some lipitor!
I believe the low carb, higher fat diet is the best diet for around 75% of the population. However, about 25% of the population carry the Apo E4 allele. These individuals will increase their LDL-C, LDL-P and sdLDL as they increase their fat intake. I am Apo E3/4 and have been eating low carb for the past 5 years and at the same time struggling with LDL issues. I recently began limiting fat (especially saturated fat) as well as carbs and lost approximately 15 pounds over a 10 week period while concomitantly cutting my LDL-P and sdLDL in half with little change in my LDL-C. My LDL particles got bigger and hopefully less atherogenic. My weight has now stabilized. One diet apparently doesn’t fit all.
If you cut simultaneously sat.fat and carbohydrates you will never know limitation of which helped you. Even Dr. Oz knows that extra carbs increase LDL .
I moved from 2 years long plateau by limiting carbs to the ketogenic level, limiting amount of meals a day to 2-3 and increasing the amount of fat (coconut oil) . It was not possible to try each variable separately because without extra fat it will be difficult to space meals at 5 hours intervals.
If you cut carbs *and* fat then your diet’s mostly protein and the first time you go through major stress you’re set up for rabbit starvation. Not a fun time. Protein needs to be backed with either fat or digestible carb and my personal preference (and, I imagine, the good doctor’s) is to back it with fat.
Do you have an papers on this?
Yea – another good one- Just love that last big paragraph – catch 22,44,AND 66 trying to get the diet politically/academically correct!
This link also (more generally) nails research results pretty well – “Why Most Published Research Findings Are False”
http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124
Thanks Doc for battering this subject – every time you do SOMEONE new must get a clue…
Hi Dr. Eades.
I often cite an article you co-authored, which is widely cited – Cordain, Eades, & Eades (2003). It is summarized here: http://bit.ly/gVqBiv. The article makes many contributions, one of which is the very valid point that there is a huge gap between glycemic loads of refined and unrefined carbohydrate-rich foods.
I think the GL matters, because it reflects in a single measure a couple of reasons why refined carbohydrate-rich foods may be so problematic when compared with unrefined carbohydrate-rich foods: (a) their carbohydrate content per gram is too high; and (b) they mess up with hunger regulation.
Unrefined carbohydrate-rich foods, even the high GI ones like potatoes, are mostly water. They also have other nutrients, all of which reduced their GL. This makes them more satiating, and reduces the glucose response. Vitamin C, which is almost universal among natural carbohydrate-rich, reduces glycation; a possible reason why blood glucose levels in birds are high yet HbA1c levels are low (bit.ly/9GDA82).
Refined carbohydrate-rich foods generally have low nutrient value; even their protein is of poor quality, and often causes malabsorption problems. At the same time, refined carbohydrate-rich foods (like some natural ones) tend to cause an abnormal elevation of blood glucose. This is not a good combination.
“Thew reference to Nazi-ism is hyperbolic, cliche, and inappropriate.”
Seen on a T-Shirt: Hyperbole is the BEST THING EVER!
Hyperbole is a rhetorical device.
Cliches are cliche because they contain a germ of truth.
Inappropriate is in the eye of the beholder.
Millions of Americans have health problems because of LIES they’ve been told by the AMA, the Cancer Society, and worst of all, their own government.
If you aren’t incensed by that, how can you be upset by the good doctor’s choice of words?
Well said lpdbw, very well said.
Yes, the reference was to Nazi’s was bad. Goddel’s law says he lost the argument with the first paragraph.
Notice how the best replies to his post completely omit any reference to the Nazi comparison or the eliminationist fantasy part about blowing his opponents brains out with a sick of dynamite?
Most good paleo people are polite and just ignore his hyperbole like they would if he farted in their presence. At least he didn’t bring in the whole “blood libel” comparison. That is popular on the right as well.
Misrepresenting what Dr. Eades said is a poor way to win an argument.
That’s Godwin’s Law, and you’ve misquoted it.
“As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1.”
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law If you don’t like me citing Wikipedia, do your own Google homework.
It’s OK, it’s a common misquote, but I’m still going to correct it. You don’t automatically lose an argument for making a Nazi comparison.
He’s not comparing anyone with Nazi’s, jughead. Nazi’s are not the only ones who like to repeat lies often so that people are so brainwashed they believe them. Anyone who wants you to believe something that will allow them to do something they want to do, or that wants you to believe something because it will allow them to exploit you or others in some way uses this method. It happens in business, industries do it, governments do it, even some parents do it.
That’s Godwin, moron, Godwin, not Goddel.
And you misapply his law. It’s only applies when the reference to Nazis or Nazism is out of context, and it’s not here. Why don’t you yell at him for quoting Twain while you’re at it? Oh, I know, because the whole Godwin thing is only for trolls who don’t have any other argument to back up their point (if they even have a point).
Hi Mike,
Great as usual… I just had a couple of comments, first on your paragraph that starts:
“It’s perfectly acceptable to talk about low glycemic load diets bringing about health benefits without anyone saying, Whoa, you’ll croak your kidneys…”
Did you mean to say “It’s perfectly acceptable to talk about low-carb diets bringing about health benefits…..” to compare low-carb vrs low-glycemic load diets?
Second, I think that one of the most toxic concepts in nutrition is the ‘calorie’ concept. I don’t think anyone has ever defined a ‘nutritional calorie’, but rather, the concept takes from physics, not from biology. It is very hard to make heads or tails of nutrition if we have that always bugging, and quite frankly clogging our minds. And, perhaps, the core of that problem is thinking of nutrition in terms of energy balance, rather than the need to provide what the body has evolved to subsist from very efficiently. Gary Taubes explains this very nicely in his new book.
He’s saying that if you call the diet a “low glycemic load diet” instead of a “low carb diet”, people will listen to what you have to say without lobbing the usual criticisms of low carb diets, even though you’re talking about pretty much the same thing. He’s right, too. It drives me nuts the way diet and nutrition writers on the ‘net will speak in reverent tones of low-glycemic and low-GL diets but still refer to plans such as Atkins and Protein Power as “fads.”
But low glycemic gives people to load their diet with pure fructose.
This researcher claims to have tried to track down the original source for the Goebbels quote and was unable to find one:
http://www.bytwerk.com/gpa/falsenaziquotations.htm
A source for investigating and avoiding one’s use of falsely attributed quotes:
Paul F. Boller, Jr. and John George,
They Never Said It: A Book of Fake Quotes, Misquotes, & Misleading Attributions
(New York: Oxford, 1989),
Looks like I was incorrect in attributing that quote to Goebbels. I had always heard (and read) that he had said it, so I looked it up on a quote site, and there it was. My apologies.
The quote does exist – somebody said it sometime, somewhere. And at least the first sentence captures perfectly the essence of the big lie: if told often enough, it becomes the ‘truth.’
Thanks to all those who set me straight.
I found this quote on http://www.thinkexist.com:
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”
The_Craven Joseph Goebbels quote
http://www.thinkexist.com
I suppose this site has it wrong!
The idea exists in Mein Kampf, vol. 1 ch. X. Not the same wording, but the first part is very close.
“All this was inspired by the principle–which is quite true within itself–that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Lie
If you are seriously interested (from a historical point of view) in Goebbels’ place in that particularly tragic and sad part of Germany’s history, it’s worth reading David Irving’s biography of him, which is available as a free download from one of his sites (I’ll leave you to do your own googling). This will probably get me some hate-mail, but DI is actually a hard-working and painstaking historian, and has done an incredible amount of research on his subject(s). I get the impression he dislikes Goebbels more than most of the Third Reich leaders (so it’s no apologia for him), and perhaps blames him for a lot of what happened to Germany in that terrible period.
I’ve done a lower and low-carb diet for many years on a 90/10 rule. That is, if I want a piece of cake here and there, I’ll have it.
With Type 1 Diabetes, you can see what carbs do your your blood sugars, let alone to the rest of your health. The less insulin shoved into your body the better.
If people with Type 2 diabetes or eve pre-diabetes adopted a low carb way of eating, half the ‘diabetes epidemic’ would be wiped out in one fell swoop.
As a Type 1 (and true for Type 2s in my country), we are required to see a dietician on a regular basis. Every last one of them over the last 35 years has pushed a carb-rich diet at me. I just don’t argue with them any more – it’s pointless. They have their degree in nutrition, and I don’t. I say yes, yes, yes and do what I want. If they want food diaries, I make it up.
I have absolutely no doubt about the benefits of eating a lower carb diet. I have not yet died from not having fruit (and I don’t have scurvy either). I can more easily control my blood glucose and I use less insulin.
My butcher, however, can’t understand why I want marbled meat with the fat on. Apparently no one else who shops there does… they’ve all swallowed the big fat lie (pun intended)!
IWhen will this become mainstream? In another 50 years, while people die from their low-fat, high-carb diets and statins?
It will become mainstream in 50 years when all of us are still around while our grain-eating brethren have either died or are in nursing homes with dementia…..
Like Katie, I’ve had dietitians send me emails asking me to change my website: this latest one reinforces your post. The dietitian says:
“I was looking at your nutrition for Diabetics and must say that I don’t agree with your thinking. The end result was to have a meal that contains 60% fat and low carb, lower protein. I understand that eating more carbohydrates is not beneficial for diabetics but eating 40 grams of fat in one meal will in the long-term not help either. Eating fruits/vegetables will not affect the blood sugar in the same way a piece of cake does. Eventually a diabetic will gain weight and have other health problems by making their diet too high in fat. I strongly urge you to reconsider your position on some of what you’ve said.”
I wrote her back with several citations of gold standard studies showing how low carb or ketogenic diets improve diabetic health. This was her response:
“I understand what you’re saying about fat not affecting blood sugar, but when you consider all the factors of a high-fat diet then you’re doing more damage. Eventually cholesterol levels will rise, exercise will be more difficult, and body fat percentage will increase which poses risks to diseases and health problems.
I do agree that fat intake needs to be higher for a diabetic than average people but 60% is extremely high. It is possible to manage blood sugar levels appropriately without taking in so much fat. Like I said before, not all carbs affect blood sugar the same way. Some will go into the blood stream at a slower rate such as complex carbs. Fruits and vegetables are carbs but nutritional benefits out-weigh the fact that they are carbs.
The bottom line is that fat will still make a diabetic fat just like it will a non-diabetic fat. Too much fat in the body is not beneficial for anyone.”
and after I disputed the above, she writes back:
“Well at this point we must agree to disagree because it is obvious neither of us are going to be swayed the other direction. I could give you studies of research I have done but there would be no point. People will initially lose weight cutting out carbs just like so many people have done the Atkins diet. But our bodies aren’t meant for so little carbs and such high fat and that is why it is a diet. People don’t stay on diets because their body can’t handle it. Eventually there will be consequences to someone staying on a high fat diet and that has been proven over and over even if you don’t think so. I am looking at long term health not short term. Thanks for responding back to me but this is where I am cutting it off because we are clearly going to go in circles.”
Ah, the scourge of cognitive dissonance. I can’t hear what you are saying ’cause it hurts my head.
Why not shoot back a final response pointing her to Taubes’ Good Calories Bad Calories?
Because it wouldn’t put a dent in the dogma? 😀
@Ellen:
Regarding your disagreement with the dietitians:
My wife has lost nearly 90 lbs over 3 years, with absolutely perfect blood lipids the whole time, by following a moderate low-carb diet — no hunger, no deprivation.
She’s within reach of her weight/body fat goal for the first time in almost 30 years. I eat a diet that is mostly the same as hers, and I’ve dropped weight and improved my BP and blood lipids panels as well.
I guess it all depends on what ‘eventually’ means. Eventually we all get sick. Eventually we all die. In the meantime, I’ll choose eating well and staying fit while staying off statins, BP meds, cholesterol-reducing meds, etc. not to mention eliminating all that worry.
I’m in total agreement with Dr. Eades on this point: I’m glad I’m not a lipophobe, because all I had to do is cut the carbs and everything else just took care of itself.
@Low carb compatible:
Congrats to both you and your wife. Same at this end..I eat a diet of mostly saturated fat and some protein, very little carb and my lipid panels are great, I reversed all my pre-diabetic symptoms, and feel pretty darn good just about all the time. Dietitians can believe whatever they want, I know what works for me, and lots of other people who get it.
Sure, and the traditional Inuit are all “on a diet” too. Sigh.
I would ask her what the “studies of research” are that she has done. I would also ask her to explain why, after 40 years of low fat eating everyone is still fat?
Trouble is the dietician thinks exactly the same thing about you – “I can’t hear what you are saying ’cause it hurts my head” In her world, her beliefs are correct.
@ Dr. Goldstrich: Could you elaborate a little on your sources (or thinking) regarding APOE4 positive people requiring less saturated fat? As APOE4 is the so-called ‘ancestral allele’ it would seem that plenty of saturated fat would be beneficial to those carrying that ‘gene.’ Wouldn’t a diet relatively high in saturated fat, therefore, more closely mimic the diet that shaped our genome, which was predominantly APOE4 for many millennia?
And Mike, do you have any thoughts on any of this? A lot of us who have taken care of parents with Alzheimer’s are beginning to seriously think about these things. For example, low glucose metabolism in the brain seems to be a stage setting state for Alzheimer’s, and because coconut oil raises ketone bodies shouldn’t those of us at risk chose it as our fat of choice. Theoretically, it seems like a hedge. But not if it’s jerking LDL particle size around. Wee bit of a conundrum of its own, perhaps.
As always, thanks for the great blog.
I’m interested in Dr Goldstrich’s reply on this too.
Propaganda – the shortened form of “propaganda fidei” meaning “Propagation of (the) Faith (belief)” a section of the Vatican with responsibility for promoting Catholic Belief.
So believe and you will be saved.
Luke said “Physician, heal thyself”.
I paraphrase “Dietician, lose the adipose inches”.
A Lie – no – merely a Discredited Conjecture.
In Richard Feinman’s terms lipophobia is the “fad diet”.
Isn’t a falsehood (or a discredited conjecture, as you describe it) knowingly asserted, a lie?
Thanks for the Feynman reference, btw.
Feinman…not Feynman.
Feinman is a chemist. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_D._Feinman
Feyman is a physicist. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Feynman
Not to be pedantic or anything.
Oops, sorry, that was a typo on my part. I’m used to typing ‘Feynman’ way more often than ‘Feinman’ so it was automatic.
To believe in the lipid hypothesis, one has to believe in the following ideas:
-Our native diet of meat (up to nearly 100% in some cases) is bad for us (or we’re actually native vegetarians).
-It doesn’t matter that our liver makes the vast majority of our cholesterol.
-That our bodies take the cholesterol, mostly made by our liver, and gums up our arteries with it, just because the cholesterol is there.
-That a diet that helps reduce excess body fat, improves lipids in most people, and helps control blood glucose levels without resorting to starvation or medications is going to give us a heart attack.
I find all these ideas extremely unlikely. That my lipids improved on a three-month fat fest reinforces my belief in a low-carb, high-fat diet.
Dear Dr. Mike,
Knowing your voracious reading thought this might be of interest.
I’m in the midst of reading a book by Dan Gardner called Future Babble Why Expert Predictions Fail – and Why We Believe Them Anyway and was struck by his explanation of the delusions we tend to hold in our minds.
Chapter 3 called In The Minds of Experts states:
“In Peter Wason’s seminal experiment, he provided people with feedback so that when they sought out confirming evidence and came to a false conclusion, they were told, clearly and unmistakably, that it was incorrect. Then they were asked to try again. Incredibly, half of those who had been told their belief was false continued to search for confirmation that it was right: Admitting a mistake and moving on does not come easily to Homo sapiens.” Fascinating reading – depressing thought.
Thank you for continuing to educate and post your thoughts.
Well, to be a devil’s advocate for a minute, those of us who advocate for low carb are often told we’re wrong, but we continue to search for (and find) confirmation that we’re right.
It’s probably a good thing people are that stubborn about belief or we’d be a lot more easily swayed than we already are.
Actually, I’ve bought into Taubes’ analysis completely. By that I mean – the Truth is Out There – and there is mass delusion in government, nutrition, etc.
At some point, the tables will turn – because all sorts of obese, diabetic people will begin to die……
I’m trying to do my part – contacting journalists, annoying my friends, neighbours, doctor……
Thank you Dr. Mike!
The difference is that we’re influenced by the facts we find, rather than by what random people tell us.
You should read the book I mentioned….Future Babble. Might give you some insight in what influences YOU!
For myself, it’s a journey….
I’ve got it on pre-order at Amazon. I love books like that one, but not enough to cough up $38 for it used now when I can get it for $14 in a couple of months. Hope it’s as good as Mistakes Were Made.
We could look at it differently such that we aren’t trying to confirm what we know, instead we’re trying to refute the low fat dogma. In order to attempt to refute the low fat dogma, we must test the hypothesis by doing the opposite which is eating a low carb high fat diet, which should make us fatter, sicker, weaker and probably stupider. That it does the exact opposite of the expectation is refutation enough. Now compare this kind of experiment with the usual attempts at confirmation we see all the time in nutrition papers all over.
Unfortunately a simple inexpensive solution shown by such and experiment would bring down the careers and huge industries, including segments of Healthcare….the fact that several of such experiments have shown this and are being ignored by the mainstream is proof enough of the monetary threat it poses to many who havea vested interest in keeping the status quo.
Actually, the reference to portion control is really addressing the whole calories issue, isn’t it. Because it is calories that provide the fuel to obesity. Duh. You can make that connection yourself, so go on and do it already!
And if you get your panties in a twist about calories, then listen to this podcast from Eric Westman, the Atkins honcho:
http://radio.theheart.org/bob-harrington-show/2010/12/10/31-atkins-diet-obesity-and-cardiovascular-disease-risk-with-dr-eric-westman?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+radiotheheartorg+(radio.theheart.org)
THEN, go pour yourself another drink. You need it. You deserve it. Enjoy!
@Peter here are a couple of recent abstracts supporting the limiting of dietary fat for those with Apo E4 polymorphism. There is more in the literature. In addition, many lipidologists now restrict omega-3 fatty acids to a maximum of 1,000 EPA +DHA daily (I limit to 500 mg) due to increased LDL.
Nutr Res. 2009 Aug;29(8):542-50.
A 12-week worksite health promotion program reduces cardiovascular risk factors in male workers with the apolipoprotein E2 and apolipoprotein E3 genotypes, but not in apolipoprotein E4 genotype.
Cho SW, Kang JY, Park YK, Paek YM, Choi TI.
Radiation Health Research Institute, Korea Hydro & Nuclear Power Co., Ltd, Seoul 132-703, South Korea.
Abstract
Worksite health promotion programs focusing on diet and lifestyle modification have been shown to improve health outcomes in workers. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether a 12-week worksite health promotion program shows different response of cardiovascular risk factors in subjects according to apolipoprotein E (Apo E) genotype and obesity level in 141 male Korean industrial workers. We hypothesized that the health changes of a 12-week intervention may not be the same within Apo E genotypes in nonobese and obese subjects. They received 5 face-to-face meetings based on their health profiles. In obese group carrying Apo E3 genotype, body mass index, body fat (%), waist circumference, waist-hip ratio, and systolic blood pressure were decreased, as well as intakes of energy (P = .000) and carbohydrate (P = .005). High-density lipoprotein cholesterol (P = .004) level was improved in individuals with the Apo E2 genotype. These beneficial effects were only observed in individuals with the Apo E2 or Apo E3 genotype. Multiple linear regression revealed that obesity was strongly correlated with waist circumference (P = .002), plasma total cholesterol (P = .037), and changes in dietary cholesterol intake (P = .011) in individuals with the Apo E3 genotype, whereas only changes in dietary fat intake (P = .044) was correlated in those with the Apo E4 genotype. Overall, the results of this study suggest that a health promotion program can be a useful method of improving cardiovascular risk factors and dietary intake in industrial workers with certain genotypes only. Therefore, further research is needed to develop a tailored, long-term worksite health promotion program based on genetic background.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Atherosclerosis. 2010 Oct;212(2):481-7. Epub 2010 Jun 30.
Interactions between age and apoE genotype on fasting and postprandial triglycerides levels.
Carvalho-Wells AL, Jackson KG, Gill R, Olano-Martin E, Lovegrove JA, Williams CM, Minihane AM.
Department of Food and Nutritional Sciences and Institute of Cardiovascular and Metabolic Research, University of Reading, Reading RG6 6AP, UK. a.l.wells@reading.ac.uk
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The influences of genetic determinants on the magnitude of postprandial lipaemia are presently unclear. Here the impact of the common apolipoprotein (apo)E epsilon mutation on the postprandial triglyceride (TG) response is determined, along with an assessment of genotype penetrance according to age, body mass index and gender.
METHODS AND RESULTS: Healthy adults (n=251) underwent a postprandial investigation, in which blood samples were taken at regular intervals after a test breakfast (0 min, 49 g fat) and lunch (330 min, 29 g fat) until 480 min after the test breakfast. There was a significant impact of apoE genotype on fasting total cholesterol (TC), (P=0.027), LDL-cholesterol (LDL-C), (P=0.008), and %LDL(3) (P=0.001), with higher and lower levels in the E4 and E2 carriers respectively relative to the E3/E3 genotype. Reflective of a higher fasting TG (P=0.001), a significantly higher area under the curve for the postprandial TG response (TG AUC) was evident in the E4 carriers relative to the E3/E3 group (P=0.038). In the group as a whole, a significant age×genotype interaction was observed for fasting TC (P=0.021). In the participants>50 years there was a significant impact of genotype on TC (P=0.005), LDL-C (P=0.001) and TAG AUC (P=0.028).
CONCLUSIONS: It is possible that an exaggerated postprandial lipaemia contributes to the increased coronary heart disease risk associated with carriers of the E4 allele; an effect which is more evident in older adults.
The following cites statistics that indicate that the Apo E4 allele was favorable in hunter-gatherer societies, but selected against among agriculturalists:
http://www.second-opinions.co.uk/alzheimers.html
—————————-
What is considered “high” cholesterol has been linked to better cognitive performance (though without reference to Apo E4):
“Serum cholesterol and cognitive performance in the Framingham Heart Study”,
http://www.psychosomaticmedicine.org/cgi/content/abstract/67/1/24
“Participants were 789 men and 1105 women [aged 55 to 88 years] from the Framingham Heart Study original cohort who were free of dementia and stroke and who received biennial TC determinations over a 16- to 18-year surveillance period….
Results: There was a significant positive linear association between TC and measures of verbal fluency, attention/concentration, abstract reasoning, and a composite score measuring multiple cognitive domains. Performance levels for three clinically defined groups were examined. Participants with “desirable” TC levels (<200 mg/dL) performed less well than participants with borderline-high TC levels (200–239 mg/dL) and participants with high TC levels (240 mg/dL).”
—————
And also:
Relationship Between Low Levels of High-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol and Dementia in the Elderly. The InChianti Study
“Conclusions. Among community-dwelling older people, individuals affected by dementia showed significantly lower TC, non-HDL-C, and HDL-C levels; however, at multivariate analysis, only HDL-C was associated with dementia. Our results suggest the existence of an independent relationship between dementia and low HDL-C levels.”
http://biomedgerontology.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/65A/5/559
———————-
And:
On cholesterol levels and statins in cognitive decline and Alzheimer’s disease; progress and setbacks
“…Although many are speculating the alternative positive uses of statins in patients who are at risk for AD, there is still uncertainty about whether high cholesterol levels actually increase the risk of AD in patients. Additionally, there are still questionable opinions on whether “cognitive decline” outcomes ultimately correlate with the progression of AD….” (2009)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2784643/
———————-
History is a set of lies agreed upon.
– Napoleon Bonaparte (1768-1821)
Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it.
–Adolf Hitler
What luck for the rulers that men do not think.
–Adolf Hitler
“All I need to do is cut the carbs and let everything else take care of itself.”
I think alternatively one could argue, cut the sugar, wheat, and vegetable oil and let everything else take care of itself.
Get rid of the crap and eat real food, and you might not have to worry about the macronutrients.
If you are already diabetic or suffering from metabolic syndrome, it doesn’t matter how “real” the food is, you’re going to have to take macronutrients somewhat into consideration.
If you can heal whatever the underlying issue is, far enough that you can eat somewhat normally again… fine, but if you’re not there yet, it all turns into sugar in the body, and the defining element of your condition is that you *can’t* process sugar, therefore, don’t eat it in *any* form.
Easier said than done, but I won’t pretend that if I just ate lots of potatoes instead of pasta or crackers I’d be OK. I might be *slightly* better off, but my body still can’t handle all that glucose right now.
I tried that, and gained weight, until I cut grain products, and now I’m down 20lb over 3 months. 🙂
No doubt I felt better on a real food diet but I was still a porker….
A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right, and raises at first a formidable outcry in defense of custom. But the tumult soon subsides. Time makes more convert than reason. – Thomas Paine “Common Sense”
And that is why they, (Nazi regime), ordered the burning of all books, because knowledge is power to the masses, and the last thing a lier wants the masses to do is have the ability to search for the truth.
Thanks Dr. Eades.
They didn’t burn ALL books, just the books of selected authors, considered as “un-German”, and this was essentially a single, symbolic act (although it didn’t all happen on one day, all over the place). It wasn’t something that was going on continuously throughout the Nazi period.
More serious though was the consequence that these authors were effectively “banned” from publication thenceforth in Germany, and many were either exiled, or put themselves into exile (e.g. Thomas Mann, Berthold Brecht). Others, such as Erich Kästner, remained in Germany but were unable to publish freely.
Not to underplay the importance of the burning, but it’s best not to exaggerate it either. Historical accuracy is important, when it’s possible to establish it, and in this case, it is.
Awesome quotes, Mike, thanks. He also made the point that government’s chief means of growth is to frighten the populace and offer a solution.
Fear of drugs, fear of fat, fear of the Iranians, fear of folks starving in the street, fear of inadequate health care for millions, fear of oil companies cheating the game, etc etc etc. I only vote for the idiot politicians (sorry for the redundancy) who are trying to make us afraid of the government. Paul
Thank you for this well written article. For years I have enjoyed your blog and have been a big fan of the Eades!
The truth most often isn’t even allowed in the game, which you know, because it goes against the “rules.” I assume that you are also playing this game, too, though. (I know you aren’t going to like this.) Evolution doesn’t allow Creation as science but there are genius scientists around the globe (many of them that are converted Evolutionists to Creation, most really) showing how what Materialists say Evolution did, really the Flood did. The Grand Canyon, the deep oceans, the mountains? Creation.com has 7,000 extremely well-written articles. I wonder if you, too, will refuse to read any?
As the ‘rules’ of science are now defined, creation is forbidden as a conclusion—even if true.
by Carl Wieland
This was a very interesting read. I had never seen your article about the glycemic load/index, but after reading it I have to say that my understanding has been completely changed.
I was hoping you could answer a couple of questions for me though. Some pertaining to fructose, some pertaining to foods in general.
I live in a campus dorm, with which I have a campus-supplied meal plan. For breakfast, there is unfortunately not much of an option as far as food goes, besides the egg beaters omelets, frozen sausage, and microwave bacon. However, they have a really large supply of fruit, and it seems that that is the only thing I find appealing. I know fruit has a lot of carbs and fructose in it, but if I eat the whole fruit, such as an apple, is that better than, say, apple juice or something? That is, if my breakfast is comprised mainly (or wholly) of fruit, is it bad?
On the same topic as before, is food that is minimally prepared, such as a fruit, better than food that imitates a whole food, such as an orange flavored substance? I’m really wondering because I like fruit and it curbs my want for sweets like cookies and candy, but I also want to stay as low carb as possible.
Thank you for taking the time to read this, and possibly reply to this.
There is a fair amount of fructose in fruit. An medium apple, for example, contains about 19 grams of sugar, about 13 grams of which are fructose. Some fruits are a little richer in fructose while others contain less, but fruit contains fructose. 13 grams of fructose is between 2 and 3 teaspoons. The entire blood volume of an average human with normal blood sugar contains about one teaspoon of sugar.
A little fructose, a few grams, actually makes the body get rid of excess sugar more efficiently, but the amount found in a bunch of fruit can be problematic.
Given your choices, I’d go with the bacon and maybe a small amount of fruit. Microwave bacon is surprisingly good.
I hope you review Future Babble after you read it.
For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths. 2 Timothy 4:3-4
Evolution= greatest myth ever told
Yeah, and what about that insidious myth that the Earth is round?
It specifically says in the Bible that the Earth has four corners.
Mike….Glad that you were able to get around to posting again.
Any thoughts about Tim Ferris’s book 4 Hour Body particularly his Slow Carb Diet……after all he gives you several tips of the hat for your body fat measurement technique (P. 53), Gout-Protein non-connection (P. 94) and benefit of blood donation (P. 467).
However, he talks up unlimited legumes even if it is hundreds of carb protein per day……go figure……
Thanks!
Tim sent me a copy of his latest, but I haven’t had the chance to read it yet. As you can tell from my recent blogging frequency, I haven’t had time to do much lately.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_iTLYelv7Eo
Viennese-born Edward Bernays wrote a book called “Propaganda” in 1928. During the rough & tumble ’30s, it became the operational bible of Nazi Propaganda Minister Joseph Goebbels. That Bernays was a Jew apparently didn’t matter to evil Goebbels! Another bit of irony: Bernays was the nephew of Sigmund Freud. Hence, we should be willing to discuss the Nazi methods outside of the context of the holocaust.
Thank you so much for your blog. You and Taubes are my main sources of information to follow.
My great concern is all the pollutants that settle in fat. Any information on how safe a high fat diet is from this standpoint?
Also I hate the taste and texture of meat fat. (But not within the meat like n.y. steak). But I’m pre-diabetic and can’t control serious carb cravings. If I add more fat will this help control cravings? What kind would you suggest? (without globs of meat fat). Thanks, Tracy
Tracy, if you replace the carbs with fat, that will eliminate the carb cravings. If you add fat but keep the carbs, you may still have cravings. For sources, eat fattier cuts of meat, like 70% lean hamburger, walnuts, even olive oil instead of dressing on salads.
A good source of fat is heavy cream. Best bought from a local dairy, as the commercial stuff has crap in it.
Also butter (or ghee) for cooking. Finish your steak with a huge pat of butter. That’s my favorite. Make sure you cook in pure lard, add extra. It’s good for you 😀
Every man should be consuming 1-20 glasses of Jameson a week, it is good for you…..thats the truth!
“Every man should be consuming 1-20 glasses of Jameson a week, it is good for you…..thats the truth!”
@Ray, can I drink Glenlivet instead?
I have been consuming a low carb /higher protein diet for 6 weeks now and feel absolutely great. This stuff works and obviously makes sense if you think about it.
Here are 10 more references that show a profoundly different response of people with and without apoE4 allele(s) to dietary fat and carbohydrate. Since most dietary studies don’t distinguish between subjects with and without apoE4 alleles, they likely have different mixes of each. E4 is preferentially represented in CAD patients, for example, so studies of them are overweighted in apoE4, compared to the general population.
Impact of apolipoprotein E genotype and dietary quercetin on paraoxonase 1 status in apoE3 and ApoE4 people transgenic mice.
Quercetin promotes the anti-inflammatory PON1 in ApoE3 subjects but not ApoE4 subjects.
Plasma n-3 fatty acid response to an n-3 fatty acid supplement is modulated by apoE epsilon4 but not by the common PPAR-alpha L162V polymorphism in men.
Fish intake prevents cognitive decline in elderly ApoE3 subjects but not ApoE4 subjects.
A 12-week worksite health promotion program reduces cardiovascular risk factors in male workers with the apolipoprotein E2 and apolipoprotein E3 genotypes, but not in apolipoprotein E4 genotype.
Obesity correlates with plasma cholesterol & dietary cholesterol intake in ApoE3 subjects, but it correlates with dietary fat intake in ApoE4 subjects.
Serum lipid and antioxidant responses in hypercholesterolemic men and women receiving plant sterol esters vary by apolipoprotein E genotype.
Plant sterol esters reduce serum total cholesterol (TC) and LDL cholesterol (LDL-C) in ApoE2 &E3 subjects but not ApoE4 subjects.
Differential modulation of diet-induced obesity and adipocyte functionality by human apolipoprotein E3 and E4 in mice.
Western-type high fat diet impairs glucose tolerance and promotes fat overload in ApoE4 subjects but not ApoE3 subjects.
Apolipoprotein E polymorphism, life stress and self-reported health among older adults.
ApoE4 subjects have lower self-reported health than ApoE3 subjects.
Apolipoprotein E and lipoprotein lipase gene polymorphisms interaction on the atherogenic combined expression of hypertriglyceridemia and hyperapobetalipoproteinemia phenotypes.
Compared to apoE3 carriers, the ApoE4 allele significantly increases the risk of expressing the “hyperTG/hyperapoB” phenotype and ApoE2 decreases the risk.
[The role of epsilon 2/epsilon 3/epsilon 4 polymorphism of the apolipoprotein E gene in the development of dislipoproteinemia and its influence on the efficacy of the hypolipidemic therapy].
ApoE4 subjects have lower affinity to lipoprotein (LP) receptors and lipids than ApoE3 subjects or ApoE2 subjects. ApoE4 subjects are associated with hypercholesterolemia due to its impaired recycling in hepatocytes. Statins and physical training were more effective in ApoE2 subjects. Probucol and low-fat diet were more effective in ApoE4 subjects.
Apolipoprotein E genotype and plasma lipid levels in Caucasian diabetic patients.
Compared to diabetic ApoE3 subjects, total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol and Apo B levels were lower in diabetic ApoE2 subjects and higher in diabetic ApoE4 subjects. HDL-C was higher in ApoE2 subjects only.
Apolipoprotein E and atherosclerosis: beyond lipid effect.
ApoE polymorphism is particularly notorious for its role in neurodegenerative disorders and atherosclerotic arterial disease. Compared to ApoE3 subjects, ApoE4 subjects have higher LDL-C and are more proatherogenic, but ApoE2 subjects have lower LDL-C and are anti-atherogenic (although ApoE2 may be associated with increased plasma triglycerides and lipoprotein remnants).
Apolipoprotein E genotype in dyslipidemic patients and response of blood lipids and inflammatory markers to alpha-linolenic Acid.
ALA supplementation produced a small but significant decrease in HDL-C in ApoE3/3 subjects, but reduced serum amyloid A (SAA), CRP, macrophage colony-stimulating factor (MCSF), and IL-6. In ApoE3/4 subjects, ALA reduced SAA and MCSF. In ApoE2/3 subjects it had no effect.
Effect of apolipoprotein E4 allele on plasma LDL cholesterol response to diet therapy in type 2 diabetic patients.
Baseline plasma levels of LDL cholesterol were significantly higher in the ApoE4/3 group than in the apoE3/3 group. However, calorie-restricted diet therapy is more effective in reducing plasma LDL cholesterol in type 2 diabetic patients with the ApoE4 allele.
Alcohol intake and risk of dementia.
Intake of up to three daily servings of wine but not liquor or beer was associated with a lower risk of Alzheimer’s disease, but only for ApoE2 and ApoE3 subjects.
Interactions of apolipoprotein E genotype and dietary fat intake of healthy older persons during mid-adult life.
Lower fat diet may protect ApoE4 subjects from disorders of later life.
Evidence for differential effects of apoE3 and ApoE4 people on HDL metabolism.
Mice expressing ApoE3 on the Apoe(-/-) background had substantially lower VLDL levels than mice expressing ApoE4. ApoE4 mice had smaller HDL than ApoE3-expressing mice on both chow and high-fat diets. Also, ApoE4 was less efficient at transferring apoA-I from VLDL to HDL and at generating HDL in vitro than that from apoE3-expressing mice.
Effects of apolipoprotein E genotype on dietary-induced changes in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol in obese postmenopausal women.
ApoE2 & E3 postmenopausal women decreased HDL-C and increased triglycerides in response to a low-fat, low-cholesterol diet, while ApoE4 women had a smaller decrease in HDL-C and no change in plasma triglyceride. Also, ApoE2 & E3 women decreased HDL(2)-C by 32% , while ApoE4 women increased HDL(2)-C by 12% on a low-fat diet . It may be prudent to genotype older women before initiating low-fat diet therapy, as those with the ApoE4 allele benefit the most, while the lipid profile could worsen in women without the ApoE4 allele.
APOE polymorphism and the hypertriglyceridemic effect of dietary sucrose.
ApoE2 subjects had lower LDL-C and higher triacylglycerol ApoE3 subjects or E4. ApoE4 subjects have a greater serum cholesterol response to dietary changes in fat and cholesterol. ApoE2 CAD patients have a greater triacylglycerol response to high dietary sucrose intakes than ApoE3 or E4 patients.
Apoprotein E genotype and the response of serum cholesterol to dietary fat, cholesterol and cafestol.
The responses of LDL-C to saturated fat was larger in subjects with the APOE3/4 or E4/4 genotype than in those with APOE3/3. In contrast, responses of LDL-cholesterol to cafestol (from coffee) were smaller in subjects with the APOE3/4 or E4/4 genotype than in those with the APOE3/3.
APO E gene and gene-environment effects on plasma lipoprotein-lipid levels.
ApoE2 subjects have lower and ApoE4 subjects have higher total cholesterol and LDL-C than ApoE3 subjects. ApoE2 subjects, and possibly E3, subjects reduce plasma total and LDL cholesterol levels more than ApoE4 subjects with statin therapy. ApoE2 subjects are more likely to respond favorably to gemfibrozil and cholestyramine. With probucol, ApoE4 subjects improve plasma lipoprotein-lipid profiles more than ApoE3 subjects. ApoE2 and E3 perimenopausal women improve plasma lipoprotein-lipid profiles more with hormone replacement therapy than ApoE4 women. On the other hand, low-fat diet interventions tend to reduce plasma LDL cholesterol more in ApoE4 subjects than in ApoE2 or E3 individuals. ApoE2 and E3 individuals improve plasma lipoprotein-lipid profiles more with exercise training than APO E4 individuals.
Effects of ApoE genotype on ApoB-48 and ApoB-100 kinetics with stable isotopes in humans.
ApoE4 subjects have been shown to have higher LDL-C and apoB levels than ApoE3 & E2. Compared with the apoE3/E3 subjects, the ApoE3/E4 subjects had significantly higher levels of LDL ApoB-100. In addition, more VLDL apoB-100 was converted to LDL apoB-100 in ApoE3/E4 subjects than ApoE3/E3 subjects. One E4 allele was associated with higher LDL apoB-100 levels due to lower fractional catabolism of LDL apoB-100 and an increase in the conversion of VLDL apoB-100 to LDL apoB-100.
Apolipoprotein E isoform polymorphisms are not associated with insulin resistance: the Framingham Offspring Study.
There is no association between Apo(e) polymorphisms and insulin resistance. These appear to represent 2 completely independent risk factors for CHD.
Effect of apolipoprotein E genotype on lipid levels and response to diet in familial hypercholesterolemia.
ApoE4 subjects have higher basal total and LDL-C plasma levels and show an increased LDL-C response to dietary manipulation. The response to diet in subjects with familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) is also variable, but the influence of apo E genotypes on the dietary response of FH patients was minimal.
Apolipoprotein E genotype and exercise training-induced increases in plasma high-density lipoprotein (HDL)- and HDL2-cholesterol levels in overweight men.
APO E2 men have greater plasma HDL-C and HDL2-C increases with endurance exercise training versus E3 and E4 men
The apolipoprotein E4 allele is not associated with an abnormal lipid profile in a Native American population following its traditional lifestyle.
The increased LDL C levels associated with the E4 allele in previous studies were not observed in a Native American population with non-westernized habits.
[Apolipoprotein E and its alleles in healthy subjects and in atherosclerosis].
ApoE2 binds defectively to LDL- and to remnant-receptors. In Europe, E4 allele frequency increases from south to north along the cardiovascular disease frequency gradient. The ApoE4 role in atherosclerosis could be explained by its high solubility in ApoB lipoproteins. The average cholesterolemia of E4/E3 subjects is higher than E3/E3 subjects and E3/E3 subjects’ cholesterolemia is higher than in E3/E2 subjects, probably because of a faster uptake of chylomicrons and VLDL remnants in E4/E3 subjects.
The effect of age and lifestyle factors on plasma levels of apolipoprotein E.
The mean plasma ApoE varies from 2.42 mg/dl in men with the E4/4 phenotype to 8.32 mg/dl in men in the E2/2 group. ApoE level is positively correlated to BMI and consumption of alcohol. The effect of age on the ApoE peaks in men aged 40-44 years, and is lower before & after. Subjects with BMI in the range 27-30 kg/m2 had a higher ApoE concentration than men in the group with BMI lower than 23 kg/m2. Smoking was only of borderline significance.
Apolipoprotein E phenotype and diet-induced alteration in blood pressure.
Two intervention diets were consumed by the study subjects for 4 wk at a time. Systolic, diastolic, and mean arterial pressures were significantly reduced during the low-fat diet period among the ApoE4 subjects only. Age was correlated with blood pressure response in ApoE4 subjects.
Prolonged postprandial responses of lipids and apolipoproteins in triglyceride-rich lipoproteins of individuals expressing an apolipoprotein epsilon 4 allele.
Postprandial clearance of intestinal and hepatogenous triglyceride-rich lipoprotein remnants is impaired in young ApoE3/4 men compared to ApoE3/3 men.
moderator, that was the wrong list of references. please delete that post and substitute the following. Sorry, the post was sent before I finished editing it.
Here are 10 more references that show a profoundly different response of people with and without apoE4 allele(s) to dietary fat and carbohydrate. Since most dietary studies don’t distinguish between subjects with and without apoE4 alleles, they likely have different mixes of each. E4 is preferentially represented in CAD patients, for example, so studies of them are overweighted in apoE4, compared to the general population. I think its likely that low-carb, high fat, high saturated fat diets work well only in non-apoE4 carriers.
1. Differential modulation of diet-induced obesity and adipocyte functionality by human apolipoprotein E3 and E4 in mice.
2. [The role of epsilon 2/epsilon 3/epsilon 4 polymorphism of the apolipoprotein E gene in the development of dislipoproteinemia and its influence on the efficacy of the hypolipidemic therapy].
3. Effect of apolipoprotein E4 allele on plasma LDL cholesterol response to diet therapy in type 2 diabetic patients.
4. Interactions of apolipoprotein E genotype and dietary fat intake of healthy older persons during mid-adult life.
5. Effects of apolipoprotein E genotype on dietary-induced changes in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol in obese postmenopausal women.
6. Apoprotein E genotype and the response of serum cholesterol to dietary fat, cholesterol and cafestol.
7. APO E gene and gene-environment effects on plasma lipoprotein-lipid levels.
8. Effects of ApoE genotype on ApoB-48 and ApoB-100 kinetics with stable isotopes in humans.
9. Apolipoprotein E phenotype and diet-induced alteration in blood pressure.
10. Prolonged postprandial responses of lipids and apolipoproteins in triglyceride-rich lipoproteins of individuals expressing an apolipoprotein epsilon 4 allele.
Creation vs. Evolution. It always seems to be a matter of either/or, with battle lines drawn between the two. I think a third understanding is possible: God created, and evolution was/is how God created and continues to create.
Ever since the Counter-Reformation the Catholic Christian Church’s theology taken the position that Christianity and Science relate to different aspects of God’s interactions with Humans.
For example, in the 60’s, astronomy’s Big Bang theory of cosmological expansion from a singularity 13 to 15 billion years ago was taken as Science’s confirmation of Religion’s Creation.
Teilhard de Chardain, a Jesuit theologian, conjectured that sub-atomic particles have a primitive form of consciousness, which over the timeline of the Universe led to Human consciousness, thro’ the mechanism of Adaptive Evolution.
Archbishop Ussher’s estimate of the date of Creation at 4004 BC was an absurd calculational error in 1654, and still remains so in 2011. He was the Anglo-Irish Primate of the Colonial English Crown’s state religion.
Hey Doc,
Questions for you if you have a moment. You can just answer yes or no if you please. I’m writing a weight loss article and got stuck a bit. If you were still practicing bariatrics, would you measure leptin levels in addition to fasting glucose or stick with just the fasting insulin and know that when insulin resistance is fixed, leptin is most likely as well (in the average person). Can we say insulin resistance and leptin resistance pretty much parallel each other if a person is obese?
Thanks in advance
Robert
I might measure leptin levels, but I don’t know for sure. When I was last actively seeing patients, there was no commercially available means to test leptin levels, so I never tested them. Had I done so, I would have fairly quickly determined if leptin levels were something that provided me with information that I could use to better help patients of if it were simply something that tracked with fasting insulin levels, as I suspect it does. At the time, I was in practice with Ron Rosedale, who has since written a book about leptin. At the time, however, he didn’t check leptin levels because of lack of availability of commercial testing.
Oops, I meant fasting insulin not fasting glucose. Plus I guess I did not word the questions in a way that they could be answered yes or no. It’s the lack of sunlight here in western PA or maybe post Steeler victory euphoria.
I understood. Your post Steeler victory euphoria may last only for another few days.
3 years ago I went on 60 grams of carbs or less per day, did that for a year and got much healthier and lost a lot of weight. 2 years ago I added back unlimited vegetables,potatoes, dairy, and fruit carbs….and I’ve stayed the exact same weight, still feel good, and my blood markers are the same. Gary Taubes has come out with a new book and still blames carbs, per se, despite the nutritional anthropology to the contrary. The nutritional anthropology and my n=1 case suggest that sucrose and modern grains caused my health problems. Perhaps we could make more inroads with lipophobes if we stop saying low carb-because I think reality says “low-carb” for non-diabetics is completely unnecessary. Instead maybe say “no white sugar or grains”.
My n=1 test showed pretty conclusively that it was potatoes that were the biggest problem; cutting grains without cutting potatoes didn’t do much for me.
My n=2 metaanalysis given your data and mine suggests that it is in fact carbs that are the issue, but different carbs for different people.
Found this on Yahoo today – made me laugh out loud when I read the title then, upon reading the article, I nearly fell out of my chair. Apparently making up information has become commonplace in today’s journalism 🙁
http://shine.yahoo.com/channel/health/8-reasons-carbs-help-you-lose-weight-2442968/
Since Eric Westman, spokesperson for Atkins, has admitted that low-carbing is basically low-calorie-ing, the real problem is how to jigger your protein and fat and carbs. When protein goes up, fat goes up, and that means calories goes up – and too many calories means what too many calories has always meant. Then, you’re stuck, having to cut something else from your diet – a problem, unless you give up the good carbs, which are healthful and have tons of good things for your health…
http://radio.theheart.org/bob-harrington-show/2010/12/10/31-atkins-diet-obesity-and-cardiovascular-disease-risk-with-dr-eric-westman?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+radiotheheartorg+(radio.theheart.org)
Great post!
It’s funny that one of my biochemistry books in school, it goes in to great detail about the effects of insulin on lipid cell receptors and then in the nutrition chapter it says that carbohydrates aren’t fattening, even though they stimulate the most insulin release.
Dr. Mike, I am guilty of having written The Glycemic Load Diet Cookbook, my reason being that anything that gets people to stop eating so much carby crap is okay in my book (literally and figuratively). I long ago noticed that the more syllables you use for something, the less threatening people find it. We used to call the psychiatric condition of WWI and II veterans “shell shock” — short and to-the-point. By Korea it had become “battle fatigue” — twice the syllables, and nowhere near as, well, shocking. Now we have “post-traumatic-stress disorder,” and it sounds like something you can just take a pill for.
Similarly, I know a lot of pagan folks, and have figured out that the word “witch” freaks people out, “pagan” is a little less threatening, “neo-pagan” is kinda approachable, “Celtic neo-pagan” is almost cuddly, and “Goddess-worshipping tree hugger” is someone you could take home to mom and dad.
If the polysyllabic “low glycemic load” is what it takes for mainstream doctors to stop telling their patients to load up on whole grains, I’m okay with it.
Dana Carpender
And would you be even more ok if the poly-polysyllabic term “zero load industrial sugars and flours” was in use by mainstream practitioners ?
My husband and I have been reading some of the positive information on low carb eating, fats, and protein. We recently tried a low carb diet for eight weeks where we started eating eggs, grass-fed beef and pork, salmon, cheese plus some of our normal veggies. We eliminated grains and fruits. We had two goals – weight loss for my husband and better lipid numbers for both of us. We achieved neither goal. As a matter of fact, our lipid numbers took an alarming soar – LDL went up 70 pts. for my husband and 120 pts. for me, for example. After the first two weeks of a modest weight loss, my husband’s weight remained the same for the next six weeks.
This is very confusing to us when we read blog posts like this one that make us think that the saturated fat in our low carb diet should have helped not hindered us. Thoughts?
There is a phenomenon called ‘transient hypercholesterolemia’ that sometimes occurs in the early stages when some people go on low-carbohydrate diets. The fat cells contain cholesterol along with fat, and when the diet causes the fat cells to empty, they get rid of cholesterol along with the excess fat. When this cholesterol is dumped into the blood, the blood levels rise, but only for a few weeks at most. Then cholesterol levels tend to normalize. I would give it a bit and see what happens.
http://www.westonaprice.org/blogs/why-is-my-cholesterol-so-high-on-this-diet.html
If Dr Eades suggestion to recheck lipid levels in a few weeks doesn’t produce better results, you might check a ways up the thread for replies from harry35.
The citations he provides may explain why a quarter of the population does not respond to low carb nutrition plans like the rest of us. This interference seems to be due to the presence of certain Apolipoprotein E genotypes.
I think you have done well revealing that there is some deceit with the concept of GI and GL.I didn’t really notice it that much, but you’ve really brought it to my attention. These medical “experts” just can’t afford to lose all that money, ya know.
I too find it easier to just avoid bread, pasta, rice, potatoes, most fruits, alcohol, sugar alcohols, etc and just count carbs from lots of green leafy vegies, nuts, some berries, and dairy meanwhile eating high fat, namely saturated fat and moderate/high protein depending on my activities. I always feel more satiated with that combo. In fact, I haven’t really cared about eating any sweets very much since I’ve done that.
Hello Dr. Eades,
I am a newly graduated Nutritionist. I chose the path of becoming a ‘nutritionist’ via an alternative school rather than becoming an RD because I do not believe in the high carb, low fat diets that they are bound by their registering bodies to promote to their clients. I do not like the idea of being stripped of my designation and having my career destroyed for telling the truth!
However, I am both excited and terrified of embarking on my new career of a “rogue nutritionist” who goes completely against the grain. My biggest worry is being dragged into court by a grieving family if a client dies after years of carbohydrate abuse and drug side effects, simply because I told him to eat a whole egg…
I wonder how many RD’s would like to tell their clients the truth, but are afraid of having their careers and lives ruined for it??
You must face this in your own practice. Do you have any words of wisdom or advice for someone like myself?
Barb
Don’t know if you read my post on the four patients who changed my life, but at the time I saw those four patients, I felt the same way you do now. But times are a little different now. At the time I was putting people on low-carb diets, it was totally against the mainstream, and had anyone had a problem, it would have been difficult for me to dredge up a qualified expert to testify that what I was doing was grounded in science. Now, there are any number of experts you could recruit to testify on your behalf. As I discussed in the post linked above, positive changes occur very quickly with low-carb diets, so the patients themselves (as well as any of your fellow Nutritionists that might care to inquire) can see the improvements themselves. Also, the best defense against a lawsuit is to simply be kind to people and show them you care. Compassion is all too lacking in any kind of patient care today.
There was a section in one of Malcom Gladwells’ books that described how an insurance company decided to see which of it’s physicians got sued for malpractice. They listened to recorded phone conversations of the doctors and their patients. They found that patients sueing had nothing to do with whether or not an error had been made, but was entirely based on whether or not the physician was kind and friendly (listening to the patient, not interupting) or not. In fact, they didn’t even have to listen to the words that were exchanged. If the doctor was rude, cold and interupted the patient, the patient was likely to sue.
So, being compassionate is a good defense, as well as just being the right thing to do!
Hey Barb- What school did you go to? I went to NTA based in Olympia, WA.
I went to the CSNN in Toronto, ON
Dr Eades, I just had to write to you and tell you that PP has changed my life.
I’m off blood pressure, cholesterol, asthma, and heartburn medicine. I know this list of cured ailments isn’t unusual for you, but each one is amazing to me. I watched my blood pressure go down with home monitoring. After eating some chili (avoiding the beans), I discovered that I didn’t get the usual heartburn. And I also found that if I ate dinner late, I could sleep well anyway, no purple pill needed. I passed up the dreaded ragweed season with just a couple days of a slightly runny nose, and absolutely no asthma, and no Advair. Now I’m in the middle of the Mountain Cedar allergy season, and I only sneeze occasionally. Nothing like the horrid symptoms I used to have–It was almost like my body and my antihistamines and decongestants were in an arms race. Heck, I even raked leaves in the nice autumn sunshine last year several times, an activity I avoided before, because it would induce an asthma attack. The low-carb life is the life for me!
And these are just the major items. I could also mention the improvement in my plantar fasciitis, skin blemishes, mental acuity, enthusiasm, and energy. I used to be the first one to get tired, when my family got together and we ended up in the kitchen in a cooking marathon. Not any more! 🙂 And I could swear my vision is slightly better. Brightly lit truck stops and car dealerships look so lovely to me now, at night. The light is just beautiful, for some reason.
And PP has even changed my goals. We have purchased some land that we want to retire on. Previously, I had envisioned large gardens. We have already planted fruit trees, blueberry bushes, perennial vegetables such as asparagus, garlic, jerusalem artichokes, and perennial onions and peppers. Hmm, I just consulted the PPLP Gram Counter. The jerusalem artichokes will have to be an occasional treat. I’ll have to try again to grow regular artichokes.
But now my goals have shifted somewhat, and I’m thinking about less ambitious gardens and increasing the pasture land. I have expanded my vision to include pigs and a cow or two, instead of just chickens, rabbits, and goats. It’s a way to put some of those futile cycles to work!
Wow, this is a lot of change, for just 4 months of PP influence! Oh, yeah, and I lost 20 pounds! I lost zero pounds the first month, though, because I was on a fat eating frenzy, trying to beat the carb addiction. It’s really amazing that I didn’t gain weight, that first month. The only side effect that I have had was because I didn’t listen to your recommendation to supplement with potassium. I was going to go out and buy some, but I put it off. Even when I developed soreness in my right hip, I didn’t realize what was happening. By the time I did realize, I was limping. Yes, I know, you implored your readers to supplement with potassium. Believe me, I take your advice now. 🙂 The soreness has abated, finally.
I don’t feel like I’m such a lazy, gluttonous person any more. I didn’t realize that the fact that I only felt like doing household chores in the mornings, was a clue. Evenings were spent in a carb haze. PP and IF have changed my life and my outlook on it. How easy it is now to skip breakfast and lunch, when your body is cruising along on saturated fats and protein! And I have been discovering how to cook greens so they aren’t bitter. I’ve discovered kale, and I’m going to try sprouting some broccoli sprouts and little bitty lettuce seedlings. 🙂
Thank you so much for giving me back my health, Drs Eades. And for showing me the way towards lifelong health. And to think I was only looking for a way to lose weight! And thank you so much for your continuing gift of your blogs. That and your books have really opened my eyes. God bless you both.
Thank you very much for the kind letter. I’m delighted that our information helped you as much as it did, but never lose sight of the fact that you are the one who really did all the work. Congratulations on your regained health, and thanks again for writing. I can’t tell you how much MD and I enjoy getting letters like yours.
I refuse to take statins fir a number of reasons. I have had extremely high cholesterol since my teens – normal here is below 5.5 mmol/l. I’m consistently around 11. I did low carb for many years and do it now a little less.
When I was doing <30 gr Cho, my cholesterol numbers barely budged. My triglicerides are ok.
I need to come up with something before yet another doctor holds me to ransom for not taking his beloved statins.
I read harry35's response and others about the Apo E4 allele. I'm sure my local doctors would tell me I'm nuts if I asked to be tested. Maybe I need to assume I have it?
Going to be beyond my budget – lean meat and organic veggies are the most expensive here. I'm at a loss what to eat. It's difficult enough as it is with T1 D and low carb.
Has anyone here come across any sites with diets for people with Apo E4 allele, or does anyone have any other suggestions for me?
What can you tell me about the extreme eater on a low carb diet. I will go to a buffet and eat a small salad and then eat meat until food no longer looks good. Then I go home. for exercise I walk a couple miles a day. Thats it. I weigh around 400 pounds and am 6 foot 6 inches tall. Have there been any low carb studies about low carb gluttony?
Don’t know if there have been any studies, but I have had some experience. I wrote about it here. And you can read part II here.
Dr. Eades,
Thanks for another great post. I’m doing pre-requisites for med school and have a passion for ancestral nutrition (with training). Now obviously, I’m going to have to fend for myself if I wish to be “out of the closet” as a medical student. But I’m hopeful, because of your work and the work of people like Gary Taubes, that there are pockets of change within the mainstream. Can you recommend some medical schools where my interests might find a place to flourish? Duke? Berkeley? UCSF? Are there others?
Gonna have to get me some Mangalitsa. That looks good!
Best,
Jered Morgan
Regarding low-carb gluttony, I have found myself during anxious periods of my life eating 1 lb of meat a day, plus as many as 12-18 eggs. Almost certainly under 40 ECs a day, and many days under 30 (yes, I’ve measured it.) No fruit (zero) or nuts (hardly) at all. Barely any cheese to speak of, other than occasionally a few tiny free sample cubes at the local gourmet store when I shop there. No dairy at all other than that. Not really hungry, just compulsive eating. I vary between a 31″-33″ waist, so I guess high-carb eaters would kill to get the results I get (usually down 40 lbs from my top at 184 lbs , but at 150 lbs and a 33″ waist my blood pressure is starting to run high (130/75) instead of my normal 112/70. For my body type, although I’m middle-aged, a true optimal waistline would probably be around 29″-30″, because I can easily see the fat on my sides, back and front and still pinch 3/4″-1″ of a fat next to my navel at 32-33″.
Since I am relatively strict as a low-carber, but just an anxious over-the-top glutton, and I don’t kid myself about what I’m eating, (carbs are in 1/2 oz of nuts/seeds a day, salad and green vegetables, and overeating avocado) I’m wondering how I put on any fat at all. Just recently, as an example, I yo-yo’ed back from 31″ to 33″ again, while keeping the carbs low.
Therefore, I am wondering about Dr. Bernstein’s discussion of the insulin response that occurs simply due to overeating. His book gives an example of a gal who would eat a head of lettuce and be unable to control her blood sugar. Dr. B once told me in a phone conversation that even eating sawdust or otherwise stretching the stomach will fool the body into releasing insulin. If this is so, is it possible that in writing PP, PPL, etc., and the two articles you referenced directly above, you simply didn’t count on gluttons like me being able to constantly spike my insulin by overeating on a strict low-carb diet? And that perhaps that’s why I’m not successfully curing my metabolic syndrome-related cholesterol, higher blood pressure, weight gain, etc.?
So, I welcome any comments you may have. Thanks, Mike.
Forgot to mention: I’m 5’10”, in case that info helps you think about my question. Thanks again.
I am not so worried about losing weight. I can do that easily enough by reducing my intake. But metabolizing fat from food is so much more comfortable than metabolizing body fat. I was particularly interested in finding out if there are any downsides to remaining heavy while remaining on low carb.
I keep a jar of peanut butter next to my bed for snacks (I add wallnuts and sunflower seeds to the peanut butter) but my carbs remain below 50 grams a day at most and somewhat less than that on a usual day. I exercise twice a week using the slow burn 30 minute workout at home which takes me a bit longer as I have no left wrist and am partially paralyzed in my right hand. But the slow burn workout is making it easier to maintain my leg conditioning in winter so it wont be as hard next spring when I can start walking again. Because of my problems with my hands pushups are difficult so I do them against the wall and crunches are done on my bed or otherwise I’d have difficulty getting back up again from the floor (its really terrible to not have the ability to push up off the floor with hands).
I want you to understand I’m a giant and I don’t expect to stop being a giant. I don’t have rolls of fat I’m just big all over. I suppose as my conditioning improves I will change shape but don’t really expect to lose weight (or want to because I am happy at the weight I am at). I love your slow burn work out by the way. All my life the only meaningful exercise I have been able to do is weight lifting and slow burn has made it easier and more productive with less likelihood of an injury (which I’ve had plenty of).
What I was most interested in is what are the health side affects of being on a low carb diet for ever and remaining heavy. I enjoy eating a lot of protein and fat. I get lots of exercise after the snow is gone and am outdoors working in my nursery so I should be getting lots of vitamin D. I don’t like sweets don’t eat ice cream. Popcorn is the hardest thing to avoid.
And here’s another question. I was just talking to my friend Dr Millard and he has been eating cheerios to lower his cholesterol (he tells me). I understand the idea of consuming fiber so that it absorbs cholesterol but wouldn’t your liver manufacture more cholesterol as your intake was reduced? How can Rich be lowering his cholesterol by eating cheerios?
Hey Doc – Re your Tweet on demise of Golden State.
The Eagles had it “spot on” in their song “The Last Resort”
Who will provide the grand design?
What is yours and what is mine?
‘Cause there is no more new frontier
We have got to make it here
We satisfy our endless needs and
justify our bloody deeds,
in the name of destiny and the name of God
And you can see them there,
On Sunday morning
They stand up and sing about
what it’s like up there
They call it paradise
I don’t know why
You call someplace paradise,
kiss it goodbye
Soyanara
Hey guys,I found some “interesting” information regarding the ‘The Big Lie‘
quote.
I sincerely apologize if I have offended anyone.It’s hard to stomach,but nevertheless it is informative.
Hi Doc,
I love dietary fats and they sure keep my energy going strong all day, so I’ve a question: when on low carb we metabolize our stored and/or dietary fat during ketosis, if our bodies can convert such fat into muscle tissue, or is fat merely usable as a most effective energy substrate?
I’m unclear if muscle tissue growth is only driven by up-grading dietary intake of protein (paired with exercise, assuming no other confounding factors of disease, etc.); could dietary and stored fats actually play a larger, primary role in muscle tissue growth?
Thought I’d ask before eating pounds of butter and hitting the gym…
Thanks!
I was okay with the quote but could have done without the photo of the Nazi. That’s what I find in poor taste.
Where did you get the Goebells quote from? I’m pretty sure he never said that. Just thought you should know.
Hi Dr. Mike-
I’m hoping you might shed some light on this situation, which might be applicable to many people.
My husband, age 64, has been slowly improving his “sort-of” low carb diet for the last 6 months or so, and has lost around 25 pounds, down to 204 at 6’1″ tall. He takes quality supplements including fish oil, CoQ10, magnesium, curcumin, vitamins C, D, E, etc.
He recently had a check-up with a cardiologist, which showed LDL at 104, HDL 79, triglycerides 63, normal blood pressure (108/68), A1c down from 5.6 to 5.3, and all other blood work normal.
You’d think the doctor would be cheering, but his nuclear stress test showed more than 80% blockage in one coronary artery, the one going to the bottom of the heart. The doc. wants him on a Statin drug, and wants him to have an angiogram and possible stent inserted. He is concerned about strong family hx of heart disease (both parents died from it and both brothers have had stents/bypass surgery.
My husband wants no part of this mainstream treatment. He has embarked on a very strict low carb diet, (wild caught/free range meats/ lots of good fats/ plenty of fresh green veg, etc.no grains, junk or dairy) and is wondering if this can really clear out this plaque? How long can this be expected to take? With such good “numbers”, how much concern is this one blocked artery? He has no symptoms, and exercises moderately, lifting weights and treadmill work a few times a week. He is also considering adding proteolytic enzymes, Serrapeptase and Nattokinase to his protocol. What do you think about this? Any other suggestions?
Any input greatly appreciated. And thank you for your tireless and constantly inspiring work!
Maddy Mason
I am very new to low carb eating and had dismissed this about 10 years ago as it just did not seem logical to me in light of what I have learned.
Now at 40 and some severe chronic ankle tendonitis I have been relegated to just sitting around most of the time. I was already obese and despite trying diet and exercise never eally managed to lose more than 5 lbs or so over several months.
After reaching about 280 lbs I decided to severly restrict my calories. I lost weight slowly, but during this I was also using a food diary online. I noticed the only effective to reduce calories and still eat enough not to feel like I was starving all the time (and many times I was) was to reduce the potatoes, rice and pasta. I was not low carb yet but I think on the way. I still did not believe the “low carb hype” as i was taught to eat differently. Soon after I noticed an artcle about the perfect breakfast. To my surprise the perfect filling breakfast was eggs and bacon so I decided to try it. I was actually shocked when only consuming about 100 calories more for breakfast i was not hungry 3 hours after breakfast like i was with the typical oatmeal breakfast I usually ate.
Needless to say, this started me thinking and I decided to try low carb eating. I have been eating this way now for about 3.5 months and have lost 40 lbs or so, not really sure how much as the scales were never my friend so did not use them very often.
I will generally allow myself one high carb day per month just to break up the monotony of the diet. I have just found your site while continuing to read more about low carb. With great success so far, I still find myself craving chips, potatoes and pasta. Does this pass with enough time or does anyone have any suggestions to cope.I am afraid it would only be short step for me to revert to my old eating habits ang gain all my weight back. I am afraid of losing my will power. Can anyone help me with this.
Thanks to all.
I’m on a particular type of low carb diet – high fat paleo – and I quit craving starchy carbs after about six months without them. Others on this diet have reported the same thing. I don’t know if the same would apply to other low carb diets, and I don’t think it would have happened if I had had a starchy cheat meal even once a month.
I do have limited fruit, and I have noticed that I can go a day without fruit, but if I eat a little, I want more. Still, it’s not difficult to limit to below 50g/day of carbs.
I’ve found that I have more variety on paleo than I ever had on a standard american diet.
How about a MASSIVE Low-Carb study, gathering information from all the people who follow it, with medical exams to atest for it.
Gathering all the already available data, research-wise, to lay the most important notions and misconceptions about nutrition.
It would take a collective effort but i think that it would be possible, and the internet makes most of it much easier, and a much wider reach.
It’s about time we uncover the Big Lie.
Take care and thank for this amazing website,
Tom.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-12764852
On the radio this morning new health initiative pairing up people who are pre-diabetic with people who are fully diabetic and ‘manage it well’ to be mentor and give them health and diet and exercise advice. Correct me if I’m wrong, but wouldn’t it have made more sense to pair them up with people who have been pre-diabetic and managed to get themselves back to normal by their choice of diet and exercise? Millions of our money being wasted AGAIN
I have been following you and your advice through your book, blog, and Twitter. It all makes sense to my husband and me, but our doctor disagrees and is giving us a hard time. She has even sent letters to our home to “protect” her because of our “unhealthy diet.” The question I have is about satins. My husband comes from a family with high cholesterol. After 3 months on a low carb diet my husband’s numbers were: HDL 46, LDL 317, Trig 89. We don’t have numbers before and his doctor nearly had a heart attack just from reading those numbers. I know you say the numbers that matter are the HDL and triglycerides. But is there some point when the LDL is a concern? Like here?
After 5 months on Crestor his numbers were HDL 52, LDL 177, Tri 66. Another 7 months essential the same numbers. He has stuck with the low carb eating plan. He is very strict and only eats around 40-50 carbs a day. He has only eaten one high carb meal since Sept. 2009. He now gets horrible cramps in his feet and calves which wake him at night. He is taking Co enz Q but he still is plagued by intense cramps. He went off the Crestor at my request for several weeks and the cramps eased up. But he is back to taking it because he fears his numbers put him at high risk for a heart attack.
With his extremely high LDL is my husband a good candidate for Crestor, in your opinion? His high cholesterol and father’s first heart attack at age 60 are his only risk factors. My husband is 5’9″ weighs 140, exercises regularly, doesn’t smoke or drink, and though he is 55 and I am his wife, I think he looks more like 40-45.
Here is what he eats:
Breakfast: Bacon, eggs with cheese, black coffee
Lunch: leftover steak or chicken from previous night and sometimes leftover green beans or asparagus
Dinner: Steak or chicken thigh, either green beans or asparagus.
Snacks, eaten every night: 3 slices muenster cheese, 6 cups butter lettuce with vinaigrette, and 3.6oz Haagen-Dazs ice cream (individual size container)
This is exactly his menu everyday. He is not much for variety.
So what do you think?
Hello Dr. Eades!
Let me start by saying I’m well versed already in low carbing – including the metabollic advantage and futile cycles. As a bio major in college, I also actually understand the mitochondrial proton gradient you explained (surprise surprise!). To this end, I still have a few questions about low-carbing.
1. Since protein can turn partially into glucose, would eating a REALLY REALLY high protein diet, like say, 60%+ daily calories from protein lead to weight gain if calories are not in check since insulin will also be rising from this protein?
2. You talk about how as long as you keep carbs low, you can literally eat as much as you want of fat and meat without gaining weight, but is there a threshold carb amount, like, 20g per day? or 30? 50g? I know YMMV but is there any sort of rule of thumb?
Thanks!
There are plenty of native peoples all around the world who have lived and thrived on their native diet without the diseases of modern man. And they have done it on carbohydrate intakes of up to 60-80E%. Bottom line is, carbohydrates at almost any amount is not dangerous. What’s dangerous is probably refined carbohydrates and lack of physical activity. Fat is of course harmless.
There’s a television show, Too Fat for 15, that chronicles the experiences of some overweight teens. I’ve watched a couple of episodes, and I’m disgusted by the whole idea. And of course, the eat less/move more nonsense rules the place (1200 cals/day is the average), and the low fat lie lives large. They boast of a “unique approach to weight loss,” although I don’t see how advising young people to eat very low fat, consume 30 grams of fiber daily, and to exercise daily is anything new. It’s tragically sad to me.
http://www.wellspringweightloss.com/toofatfor15/
Snacks? All fat-free (or nearly so) of course:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dAjeIIG_kDw
I feel so sorry for all of these kids. Of course, they lose weight; most people do the first or second time around. And naturally they’re happy about their weight losses, but I wonder how long they’ll be able to keep it up, especially when they get back in the real world.
Here’s one for you:
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/p-nu/201103/cardio-may-cause-heart-disease-part-i
Nina
Sorry I don’t do Twitter, so couldn’t post it there.
Nina
Does anyone give any thought to fat soluble vitamins? If we are to avoid fat like the plague, how are we to utilize fat soluble vitamins? That’s one I wish someone would confront the “experts” with.
any input on this little abstract? (It is to do with the ratio of protein and carbs and testosterone levels).
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6T99-47797TX-164&_user=10&_coverDate=05%2F04%2F1987&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=gateway&_origin=gateway&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=1702494349&_rerunOrigin=scholar.google&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=541524a989d2ebc63154481c498ad403&searchtype=a
Hey, just letting y’all know that you should be paying attention to Matt Stone. We’re eating carbs and sugar over here and it appears to be healthy! When’s the last time you “lost your willpower” and had to give in to the “bad” foods?
http://180degreehealth.blogspot.com/
Also, if you think Matt Stone (or me) is a just a douche, perhaps you can relate to this article:
http://www.dannyroddy.com/main/2010/7/14/i-used-to-think-matt-stone-was-a-douche-i-was-wrong.html
Also, Dr. Eades, have you heard of Ray Peat? What do you think? http://www.raypeat.com
Wow, come to this site and the OP is a troll! Godwin’s law much?
*Votes with feet*
Love the post – Well written. I too subscribe to the belief that the consumption of dietary fats (saturated) does not directly cause increased cholesterol levels. Instead, since fat is more calorie-dense than the other macronutrients, those eating an excess amount of fats are indeed eating an excess amount of calories (which may be the culprit). Calories in / calories out. Thanks for the read!
“This quote was put here to compare how the Nazis purposely lied to the supposed lies of conventional nutrition. So yes, he called them Nazis.”
Boo-Hoo-Who Cares?!!! I hate evil, lies, and hypocrisy. I DON’T CARE what you have to say on the matter. I just wish some of you would respond like I was sitting in the same room with you. I can guarantee you’d get a schoolin’.
Here’s one for your latest Twitter post on swastikas. The Carlsberg foundation in Copenhagen has elephant statues using ancient Indian symbols:
http://swastika-info.com/en/startpage/danmark/1069534845.html
Remember they were occupied by the Germans in the war.
Nina
Dr Eades, this article is just begging for you to blow a hole through it:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tim-harlan-md/lowcarb-diets-linked-with_b_851506.html
Dr. Eades,
Can you please explain why, if carbohydrates make people fat, the Chinese and the Japanese have such low obesity rates?
I read Taubes’ GOOD CALORIES BAD CALORIES. You’ll recall that he begins the book with the tragic example of the Pima Indians who now have the highest rates of obesity and diabetes in the world, which he ascribes to carbohydrate intake. But…their traditional diet was largely carbohydrate (beans were the staple, desert plants and fruits, meat was a small part of their diet).
Is this a case of, good carbs, bad carbs?
Can you clear this up?
Actually, the traditional Pima diet included quite a lot of meat and fish, which Taubes explained either in [i]Good Calories Bad Calories[/i] or in his lectures – I forget which.
Define “quite a lot.”
I know about the Pima; my relatives live in the Tucson area. I’m well acquainted with their history.
What percentage of their traditional diet was protein?
You are flat-out lying if you say that the majority of their diet was protein. It was carbohydrate. Taubes did NOT deal with their history honestly or logically. He claimed that they starved and got fat. This is false. They starved in the 1870s and got fat starting in the early 1900s, a not uncommon occurrence. People quite often re-feed after starvation and get fat. It happened in Holland after WWII.
Now please deal with the issue of how and why obesity rates in China and Japan are so low, and their diet is largely carbohydrate.
Ugh… obesity is a phenotype of a bigger underlying problem of insulin resistance. The question you’re asking isn’t even the right one. What you should be asking how the rates of insulin resistance compare in the countries you listed vs the USA.
If you want to talk about obesity, why don’t you go look up the biochemistry of fatty acid oxidation:
http://themedicalbiochemistrypage.org/fatty-acid-oxidation.html
@js290,
What is your point, that the Chinese and Japanese have obesity rates to rival the US?
They don’t. They have carb-based diets and low obesity rates. In fact, as their consumption of protein increases, so do their obesity rates.
What is your point?
Look at the amount they eat (much less than we do), the proportion of rice to protein and vegetables, and the fact that, in Japan, as the amount of fructose has increased (sugar, fruit juices), along with some western diet “processed grain” additions (eg burgers), that is much more likely to be the cause of an increase in weight. When they were just adding protein, weren’t they just taller, but not fatter?
Sue,
re: “amount they eat….”
CORRECT!
It all comes down to calories in, calories out. Exactly what Taubes and Eades say is NOT happening.
At least you don’t deny that the Chinese & Japanese eat carbs, a form of lying I have seen quite frequently on low-carb boards.
I still await Dr. Eades response to my questions.
If carbs are so bad, why are there so many lean people who eat carbs? Why were the Pima “sprightly and healthy” eating carbs?
Don’t know where you got your quote about “sprightly and healthy” as relating to the Pima. Their traditional diet may have been primarily agricultural. I don’t know without doing some research on it, but that’s what I recall from memory. Admittedly, I’m not a student of the traditional Pima diet. But, it’s not a question of whether certain people can do okay on higher-carb diets – because it obvious that some can – it’s a question of whether or not they would have done better on a lower-carb diet. Just because they adapted to a high-carb diet doesn’t mean it was optimal for them. Can you state with any assurance that the Pima (or the Japanese or Chinese or Kitavans, for that matter) would have done worse on low-carb diets? If I had to bet, my money would be on their doing better.
The ancient relatives of Pimas, Japanese, Chinese, Egyptians and all the rest of us were Paleolithic people. And these Paleo people descended from Homo Erectus, who descended from Homo habilis, et cetera. The carbon isotope testing of these ancient ancestors of ours (and the Pima’s) showed they were primarily carnivores. They have virtually the same carbon isotope pattern as do pure carnivores that lived contemporaneously with them, which indicates they ate a lot of meat. Which also indicates that meat – it was what they had available since agriculture hadn’t been developed – is what they were adapted to thrive on. Any who didn’t do well on a primarily meat diet were weeded out. Since the Pima came from this basic stock, I would imagine that they would have seen an improvement in health had they switched to a lower-carb, higher-animal-fat diet.
What’s the basis of your argument that the Pima enjoyed optimal health on their agricultural diet? Do you have a basis for your argument? Did the Pima live longer than other indigenous people – say members of the great plains tribes – who ate primarily meat? The answer is no just in case you’re wondering. And the Pima were smaller. And probably less robust all around. And I would imagine had more tooth decay and greater rates of infection. I don’t know this for a fact, but I do know it holds true whenever other groups of primarily hunters are compared to agriculturalists living during the same period. You can take a look at this post to see what I mean.
The “sprightly and healthy” is a quote or approximate quote Taubes uses of early descriptions of the Pima, when they did a lot of hunting and fishing as well as eating agricultural products. He uses it to contrast that condition with their later condition when on reservations eating almost exclusively flour and sugar when they had high rates of obesity.
Personally I will trust Taubes’ research over the anecdotal evidence Diana cites. But for Diana’s benefit, I will cite my own anecdotal evidence about Asians, since I am half Asian: Asians tend to get diabetes before they get fat. They still get metabolic syndrome, but it just happens that being fat isn’t one of their symptoms the way it is for Americans, because their fatty tissue becomes insulin resistant faster. No idea why that is, or even if it would hold up to research by a careful researcher like Taubes, but for people who value anecdotal evidence, it should be relevant.
Thanks for the info on the “sprightly and healthy” quote.
“Don’t know where you got your quote about “sprightly and healthy” as relating to the Pima.”
From your buddy, Gary Taubes. It’s in both his books. Didn’t you read them?
“Their traditional diet may have been primarily agricultural.”
It WAS primarily agricultural. They were farmers.
“But, it’s not a question of whether certain people can do okay on higher-carb diets – because it obvious that some can – it’s a question of whether or not they would have done better on a lower-carb diet. Just because they adapted to a high-carb diet doesn’t mean it was optimal for them. Can you state with any assurance that the Pima (or the Japanese or Chinese or Kitavans, for that matter) would have done worse on low-carb diets? ”
What the hell does this mean? I have a population of people – actually, several – who exhibit good health. You admit that they do fine on carb-based diets. Then you switch the terms of the debate to say that they might have done better on low-carb diets?
You are a complete, total dogmatic fraud.
(Sorry in advance this is so long!)
@Diana – right theory about the amount people eat – specifically the amount of carbs, but wrong conclusion!!
You can eat far more protein and fat than carbs without packing on weight, although try eating the same volume or even calorie value of protein to the amount of rice we eat. You probably won’t finish the plate! Yet carbs are easy to scoff down. And if you don’t exercise to maximise metabolism (not burn off) of those carbs, you’ll get fat.
I think it would be good to note the difference in the total carbs per day of Chinese or Japanese compared to what we are conditioned to eat. I dare say it’s a whole lot less, despite the fact that they eat carbs. And not it’s not calories. Meat and fat can be very high in calories, but the Total Available Glucose (TAG) to your system is very different to carbs.
Look at TAG from those carbs (100% if no fibre) and from the fat (10%) and protein (about 50%-60% depending on type). You need to eat much less protein and fat to feel full and stay feeling that way, yet you can eat much more (including calories) and not get fat.
People with type 1 diabetes get thin because they don’t have insulin to metabolise carbs an store them for energy. Before insulin, people could be kept alive for longer (maybe a year or two) by cutting out the carbs and feeding them protein and fat – no amount of calories from those foods would pack any weight on. But that didn’t help much because the brain needs glucose, and even though it makes a tiny bit itself, it’s not enough, and they had no way of converting the available glucose from any food. So they had muscle wasting and became emaciated.
Compare calories of a large steak to the volume of rice – not all that much difference. Compare the same in carbs – huge difference – steak – zero, rice – 1 cup, 41 carbs. The TAG for the steak would be around 50% of 20gr protein. Big difference! Simple school science – the energy from food gets converted from carbs, plus 50% of protein and 10% fat, to glucose. Glucose is transported to cells (not calories) and is stored in the liver. The measurement of calories is not the measurement of carbs.
There’s no mystery here. It’s not converted from calories, or if you think it is, please explain how or what substance other than the insulin conversion (which works on carbs) makes you fat?
Carbs definitely do matter, but there’s another thing in the mix…
Japanese people are far more active than some of us are. Their whole lifestyle is centred around moving – to public transport, which most people in the cities use, walking around the city and the countryside, and more. They are also socially far less tolerant of anyone who is overweight, so they take steps to reduce food consumption far earlier than we would. What food do you think they reduce?
The small amount of carbs they eat in comparison to us, combined with the activity, makes for much less getting fat. Activity is not for burning anything per se (unless you want to exercise all day), it’s to reduce cortisol and other fat-promoting or fat-resistance-promoting hormones like insulin.
If you move, you need less insulin, and it’s used more efficiently in the cells. In other words, you are less insulin resistant, which probably every adult is to some small degree after 35. If you’re stressed and your cortisol levels are high, that makes for more insulin resistance. The Japanese, in particular, also have a saying which goes something like: eat until you’re 80% full. Even the Okinawans, who were once made examples of because of longevity and lean physiques, can now no longer used as examples because of Western and processed foods high in carbs, making their way into the diet.
If any of us would eat the same diet, the same amount, and move in the same way, plus probably have some of their genes, we wouldn’t have a problem either, including the small amount of carbs they eat, compared to us.
If you want to look at fat kids, look at the carbs and the additional amount of un-opposed (by fibre) fructose consumed. High fructose corn syrup, fruit juices (30-60 gr carb in one fruit juice snack bottle) – eg fruit juice in babies bottles, and even all the ‘low fat’ stuff people are convinced to consume. The fat is replaced with what? Carbs! Compare a low-fat yoghurt to a full fat one – that’s an easy one.
Did the Pima sit on their behinds most of the day? I doubt it. And what amount of food did they eat? Did they have 3 huge meals a day, stuck in a microwave from a packet of highly processed foods including breads and cakes and processed cheese, or did they hunt, gather and graze and eat organic food? And surely they moved about most of the day, allowing the carbs from food to work better in their cells?
Just look what’s happened to them today – significant rates of diabetes and obesity.
I think one has to take the entire lifestyle into account, as well as the types and amount of carbs they’re eating before any judgement can be made. Big difference between carbs and calories!
Sorry this is so long but it’s not a short explanation by any stretch. Hence books are written!
Have you actually read GC, BC? He begins the book with the story of William Banting, the 19th century Englishman who first popularised low-carb dieting with this “Letter on Corpulence”. He doesn’t really get to the Pima until Chapter 14 and basically their problems started with the white mans refined flour and sugar. GT is mainly clear in implicating REFINED carbs and sugars.
Some of us may go a little further, but if you are quoting Taubes, then I think the above is approximately correct.
The Chinese and Japanese traditionally ate little sugar.
Modern Chinese are beginning to get diabetes, so I have read.
Hey Doc! I’m just popping in to see where in the hell you made off to.
I only recently found your site and now I see you haven’t been here in a bit. I hope everything is well in your world and that you’ll be posting another fine article soon.
Take care.
Just posted one. Nothing bad going on in my world; just incredibly busy with my day job as an appliance salesman.
It strikes me that your real job is a supplement salesman, and a dispenser of very bad advice to desperate fat people.
It strikes me that with your obvious dislike of me and my message, you’re spending way too much time on my blog. Why don’t you spend more time on the blogs of people who don’t irritate you nearly so much and who will feed your confirmation bias? You’re always welcome here, but I can’t understand why you would want to visit.
I note that you don’t deny you are a supplement salesman. How much time do I spend on your blog? Very little. And from now on, nothing, because you are a complete and utter waste of time, although I just might start a blog of my own to expose the fraud that is low-carb dieting.
Confirmation bias, my foot. You disgusting man, you make a charge without knowing ANYTHING about my background.
My background is that of a serial failed low-carb dieter. Over 10 years of failure, sometimes going for weeks eating virtually no carbs at all. THIS you call confirmation bias? Finally I got real about eating: it is calories in, calories out. Nothing more. You admit this yourself: you eat 1700 calories a day. Go up to 3000 calories of meat and butter a day and let’s see whether you gain weight.
You are the very definition of a quack. You are also probably the most vicious character in the low-carb world, which is full of them. Don’t worry, I won’t contribute anything more to your blog, a loony bin of dittoheads.
Sugar burners sure are ornery.
http://themedicalbiochemistrypage.org/fatty-acid-oxidation.html#mobilization
http://www.phlaunt.com/diabetes/14045524.php
http://www.bbc.co.uk/i/p00bg00v/
Yeah, real ornery, thanks.
I’m down 24 pounds today due to portion control.
I ate two small brownies, a cup of pasta, and two tangerines yesterday, in addition to some chicken and green veg.
I stepped on the scale and was down half a pound, to 132. (I’m 5’6″).
How did that happen?
Fat people seem so angry….
wow… fat angry people.. Just because something doesn’t work for you, but does for most can’t be true, right? No, of course not. And you wouldn’t happen to hold a serious grudge to all people who do succeed in this diet? I think you are a very overweight and angry person, who blames everyone else for her obesity.
Now off you go. Find another blog to spill your bad temper…
As I said in the above comment, I’m 5’6″ and weigh 132.5 pounds. In whose world is that fat? I would like to lose 5 more pounds but I’m not fat.
I lost 24 pounds as a result of portion control. And increased exercise, but mostly portion control. I’m past 50. I supposedly have a wrecked metabolism, chortle. I have thyroid problems.
Look guys, give it up. You are wrong. The low-carb dogma is crazy. Eat less, exercise more, occasionally fast and you’ll lose weight. If I could do it, you can do it.
from diana: “Eat less, exercise more, occasionally fast and you’ll lose weight.”
From age 17 thru age 19 I lost 80 lbs by eating less and exercising more. I was the Food Pyramid poster boy. I was 5’10” and 170lbs. At age 33 my weight began to creep up, so I cut more calories and exercised more, but it didn’t help. I put on about a pound every 6 months and was accumulating more visceral fat than muscle. At one point I was averaging about 900 calories/day and assume I couldn’t shed weight because my body thought it was starving.
I was around 180 lbs when I requested a glucose tolerance test. My doc was hesitant, but I insisted. I made sure I ate 150g of carbs each day for 3 days as is required to prep for the test. My 2 hr result was 180mg/dl, just 20mg/dl away from a type 2 diabetes diagnosis.
As a result, I started eating like a diabetic, replacing carbs with protein and fat. No meds/insulin. Blood glucose, triglycerides, and weight went down. HDL went up. I found I could still lose weight, even after cautiously increasing protein and fat calories. I’ve been stable at 150 lbs for 4 years now. At each annual physical, my doc is amazed at my lab results.
Sorry it doesn’t work for you, diana. But for those like me (developed insulin resistance despite Food Pyramid adherence and no family history of diabetes), the low carb way of life works.
From diana: “Go up to 3000 calories of meat and butter a day and let’s see whether you gain weight.”
At 5’6″ I doubt your metabolism is high enough, nor your exercise vigorous enough, to burn off 3000 calories a day. If you were consuming 3000 calories a day, it’s no surprise your eating plan failed in a big way.
In reality, such a plan would result in weight gain for the average person following a low carb nutrition plan. I’ve never seen Dr Eades recommend the calorie consumption you described, so why you would make such a ridiculous comment?
If you find your eating plan works for you, great. I know your plan wouldn’t work for me because I’ve been there, done that, and failed miserably. Sound familiar?
Moreover, the arrogance you display in your comments suggests you do not have the capacity to understand the differences in human metabolism. You would do well to refrain from criticising that which you do not understand.
Hi Dr. Mike-
Welcome back!
Never did get a reply to this post from several months ago, so reposting here, hoping you might find the time for a short answer.
Thanks again!
Hi Dr. Mike-
I’m hoping you might shed some light on this situation, which might be applicable to many people.
My husband, age 64, has been slowly improving his “sort-of” low carb diet for the last 6 months or so, and has lost around 25 pounds, down to 204 at 6’1″ tall. He takes quality supplements including fish oil, CoQ10, magnesium, curcumin, vitamins C, D, E, etc.
He recently had a check-up with a cardiologist, which showed LDL at 104, HDL 79, triglycerides 63, normal blood pressure (108/68), A1c down from 5.6 to 5.3, and all other blood work normal.
You’d think the doctor would be cheering, but his nuclear stress test showed more than 80% blockage in one coronary artery, the one going to the bottom of the heart. The doc. wants him on a Statin drug, and wants him to have an angiogram and possible stent inserted. He is concerned about strong family hx of heart disease (both parents died from it and both brothers have had stents/bypass surgery.)
My husband wants no part of this mainstream treatment. He has embarked on a very strict low carb diet, (wild caught/free range meats/ lots of good fats/ plenty of fresh green veg, etc.no grains, junk or dairy) and is wondering if this can really clear out this plaque? How long can this be expected to take? With such good “numbers”, how much concern is this one blocked artery? He has no symptoms, and exercises moderately, lifting weights and treadmill work a few times a week. He is also considering adding proteolytic enzymes, Serrapeptase and Nattokinase to his protocol. What do you think about this? Any other suggestions?
Any input greatly appreciated. And thank you for your tireless and constantly inspiring work!
Maddy Mason
““If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.””
He forgot the dietary consequences….
Dear Dr. Eades,
I read on a website of a guy who dispenses info. to those into fitness and strength training, that he believes that very low carb diets are damaging to the metabolism. One reason he sites for this is a claim that excessively low carb diets compromise thyroid function and are stressful to the adrenals. He said that a considerable number of people don’t have very effective gluconeogenesis and that when they run low on glucose their adrenals have to kick in with adrenaline and are stressed every time this happens. He believes in a semi low carb diet, but not lower than 70 grams. It is his opinion that the adrenaline rushes are why people feel good and have energy initially, but often later feel more tired when their adrenals are flagging from putting out adrenaline so much. I am interested in you’re opinion on this, and if it might be true, at least for some people that ultra low carb diets could cause some issues. For how long should one be on ultra low carb, and how can a person determine what is best for their system? Are there any indicators a person can watch for to help them make adjustments?
I have thyroid and adrenal issues and it has seemed to me that I feel better having a little protein and a little carb in more frequent mini meals than if I eat
Thank you for your help.
P.S. I have most of your books
Sorry! I accidentally hit the post button before I was done! I was saying I feel better with more frequent mini meals of a little carb and a little protein
than larger more infrequent meals. The carb level I am feeling best on is between about 50 and 60 grams. I am working on losing weight, and seem to be doing so by keeping carbs and fat at fairly low levels and getting adequate protein. I am concerned about whether I will ultimately be able to lose the weight I want if I have difficulty managing to go lower with the carbs if needed. Is there any advice you can give? I am on thyroid medication and have been working on optimizing nutrients that my bloodwork indicated were low and that my doctor said can lower metabolism and energy, such as iron, vitamin d, and iodine. If I have trouble losing weight on 50 to 60 grams of carb but don’t feel well if I go lower, what can I do?
Thanks
dr eades
the fact that you’ve admitted not believing in ‘climate change’ makes me wonder if you are truly in the scientific realm…have you upgraded your thinking now that the glaciers are melting and threatening the shoreline round the world?
I paraphrase goebbels .”tell a lie long enough and dramatically enough..and people will swallow it”
I am skeptical of dramatic, ‘this is it!’ ideas anyway…
I lived and worked in new guinea where the people ate only sweet potatoes and grass….an occasional pig perhaps once a year for celebratory reasons.,…their access to meat was difficult because most of the animals had already been killed..somehow they survivied and.the incidence of chronic disease was almost zero….
do you not believe in evolution either?
maybe they should get rid of the gi thing and call it nutrient density reading. because you notice the more nutrient dense a carb the lower gi and the more you can eat of it before reaching a carb limit whatever that is? strawberries I can eat a cup of fresh cut strawberries and only get like 50 or 60 caloires, after subtracting fiber it is like 55 caloires or less. and it is satisfying.
so that means only 55 caloires of carbs. now try that with a slice of bread. one slice is like 100 cal of carbs and eat it and still be hungry. not nutrient dense at all.
the strawberries takes longer to hit the bloodstream then the bread. hence you dont get as hungry so quick after ward and have lots of nutrients to handle the glucose you did take in. bread is like all glucose with nothing to help the body slow it down or cope with it.
same with alot of fruits and veggies. you can eat a ton and get lots of nutrients compared to the less nutrient stuff which you have to portion control as getting over a carb limit happens without much effort.
also calculation just the carbs would make it alot easier to do. it is best to consume nutrient dense carbs with saturated fats as these help faciliate absorption of the nutrients in the fruits and veggies. grains, these are questionable, it is to easy to get alot of carbs in a little amount even if you add the fiber and protein content and use whole milk to buffer it. but sometimes you need it your body will tell you. our bodies are quite capable of handling glucose provided it is packeage as God intented fruits and veggies and even whole grains, tho one can consider being in a imperfect state as we are must consider if grains are a problem for them or not. then eat accordingly..
some people do not handle grains well.
I personally have did all the diets out there over my 35 years or so dieting history and lower gi/low carb seems to help me the most. tho I do try to do it without pain, in the summer I didn’t crave as many carbs as during this winter.
but the craving is not crazy or anything, it is just the need to eat alittle more than I did over the summer.
rosa
Mr. Eades,
This article http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23082722
claims that Ketone body utilization drives tumor growth and metastasis. I am skeptical. I think I know why they get the results they do, but I was wondering what your take would be on their data. I think the devil is in the DMEM. They get one cell type to make ketones even though there is glucose in the media, and then say that the ketones are driving the growth of the cancer cells because the cancer cells over express enzymes for ketone re utilization.
I think the glucose and its metabolism must be accounted for.
Did you write about another research paper that was claiming something similar?
Here is the only thing I can think of that I wrote on the subject.
You can Google ‘Warburg effect’ to read more.
Warburg effect may point us in the right direction, but may not be the full explanation.
http://youtu.be/WUlE1VHGA40
http://livinlavidalowcarb.com/blog/the-llvlc-show-episode-628-dr-eugene-fine-uses-ketogenic-diet-in-recharge-cancer-trial/16350
According to Dr. Eugene Fine, it’s not just the glucose as fuel, but apparently also the action of insulin. So a ketogenic diet may be therapeutic because it reduces serum insulin levels. I think I’ve heard Dr. Rosedale mention in a few interviews that elevated levels of insulin signals cells to multiply.
This is the other study that I was thinking of and this is where I read about it.
http://livinlavidalowcarb.com/blog/do-ketones-fuel-cancer-the-low-carb-experts-respond/10124
I liked Phinney’s take on the research the most.
Searching “reverse warburg effect” should be effective. I just googled “ketones cancer”.
Thanks for your reply.
Always a pleasure reading yoru fine articles.
But I feel it is weird that someone who believes that the same media that propagate the Big Lie about food, would be trustworthy about history. You think they only lie about food? Weird conspiracy. Me thinks they lie about everything, as soon as money is involved.
Goebbels’ views were quite different than what this fraudulent quote suggests. In an address given in September 1934 in Nuremberg, he said:
“Good propaganda does not need to lie, indeed it may not lie. It has no reason to fear the truth. It is a mistake to believe that people cannot take the truth. They can. It is only a matter of presenting the truth to people in a way that they will be able to understand. A propaganda that lies proves that it has a bad cause. It cannot be successful in the long run.”
Whatever is stated about evil nazi germany, one can not deny they had the most outreaching health programm for its citizens in the world, and still today. They invented the anti-smoking and anti-cancer campaignq, promoted biodynamic famring, banned vivisection, were sceptical about vaccins, and most of their leaders were into vegetarianism (correct for the views of those days, were vitamins were just discovered). But hey, big brother will probably have as autocensure this little spark of truth.
I sent to a direct to consumer company 1.5 yrs ago, which sent me false results: APO E3/3. However, I am APO E3/4 according to the “Big Name” clinic I sent confirmatory blood to. Still,, my lipid panel shows an HDL of 53 and an LDL of 90. Triglycerides of 35 and a BMI of 19.5. Therefore, I will continue to eat what I want because I exercise and keep trim.
Go away, you nutrition charlatans, and leave it to medically trained nutritionists, ‘kay? I don’t eat sweets, and lost my taste for gummy bears about 5 yrs ago. Soda is off the list. My numbers remain good, and were good even when I ate cherry pie a lot and indulged in other sweets. Because I run, walk, and otherwise exercise a lot, I have never been overweight.
. My Asian parent is healthy in her 70s because she did not adopt the sedentary sugar-rich US lifestyle. My other parent is a disgusting looking slob with a big pot-belly, He’s younger than my mom. This is because he likes simple carbs and wine. He doesn’t exercise much due to the heart disease that he mostly caused through his lifetime.
So the answer is: don’t be sedentary and stop the excess sugar. Eat like a non- US person. Look it up. I will live until I die, but healthy in mind (importantly) and body. That is what I want.