Log In
Register
Home
Add Reply
Topic RSS
Read the original blog post
5:52 am
Quote> ... the current solution seems to be
> “We’ll blame it all on Ancel Keys, because he’s dead.”
"Science advances one funeral at a time." - Max Plank
Norman Borlaug is now dead as well.
We need to take advantage of these opportunities as they inter.
_______
Borlaug created runt mutant goatgrass
(misleadingly sold as semi-dwarf hybrid wheat).
2:04 am
@Fred
The idea that carbohydrates aren't essential is hardly a controversial thing in the medical literature - it's only when it comes to actual practice that things are arse about.
Eg. here's a bunch of biochemistry textbooks that flat out tell us this which we choose to ignore:
2:14 am
1. For a woman what is the optimum healthy ratio of TG/HDL, please?
2. Does LDL have any significance for a woman's health?
Thank you.
7:52 pm
Just wanted to congratulate you on the semi-quote on Times. And as far as anedoctal evidence goes I do think paleo-like ideas on nutrition are gradually getting discussed with a little less of that automatic aversion by the general public. This should help.
9:05 pm
Loved your commentary and am subscribing! I also wrote a review of this Time article at http://www.doctorhelisek.com/2014/06/22/dont-blame-fat-time-magazine-june-2014/ and have another helpful link or two for your readers. Let's keep putting the pressure on our government to submit to evidence regarding 1. stopping subsidies for grains 2. changing school lunch programs 3. subsidizing grass fed livestock
11:39 pm
February 22, 2010
Offline
tam:
"There's nothing wrong with fat, and there's nothing wrong with carbs."
That depends on the type and quantity of fat (Americans consume far too much linoleic acid and, in general, not enough EPA and DHA) -- and a person who is metabolically inflexible, insulin resistant, and/or has a family history of type II diabetes will find that there is indeed something wrong with carbs!
Boundless:
Max Planck is correct. People don't change their mind: they die and people with contrary opinions take their place.
Also, the persistence of world hunger in the face of the Green Revolution conclusively proves that hunger is a socioeconomic problem, not a technological problem. If a more-than-tripling of typical crop yields (at the cost of environmental devastation and dependence on fossil fuels to feed the world) has failed to solve world hunger, how will additional marginal improvements change the situation?
Rachel:
1. The association between TG/HDL ratio and heart disease seems to apply for both men and women, so lower is still better. However, I don't know how low one can go before diminishing returns kick in.
2. I have no idea what "optimum" LDL levels are for a woman…but since higher TC is associated with lower mortality, and you can't get high TC without high LDL, I suspect it doesn't matter much.
Fmgd:
In about 10-15 years it will be recognized that we were right all along, but we won't get any credit -- because Walter Willett will be tellling everyone how he had data that supported the Paleo diet since 2004 but the journals wouldn't let him publish!
Joseph:
Agricultural subsidies are indeed the root of many of our problems. If grains weren't artificially cheap, feedlot beef wouldn't be cheaper than grass-fed beef, and junk food wouldn't be cheaper than real food!
JS
8:35 am
Wonderful post! The more things change, the more they remain the same....
It is a pretty incredible moment and the paleo movement (those elements that have been stirring the skeptic-pot for the past decade or so), have played a huge part in both crushing satfatphobia and generally shaking up the nutritional status quo.
Greed and a lack of transparency have corrupted medicine, agriculture, government, research, business and general health/nutritional advice. It is incredible that so many people have decided to question the state of health and fitness advice, made their own decisions, reached their own conclusions, such that the authorities and other societal decision makers can ignore us no more and are bending to accommodate our ideas.
The power of institutions comes from our compliance. By ignoring 'them' they HAVE to adapt or die through their irrelevance.
PS. Welcome back J! Glad to see you posting again.
12:51 am
The media (Time mag included) will just publish what is popularly believed, or what they believe is about to be popular belief.
Time saying anything is not a win, or a loss - that would be giving them too much credit.
They are just another business.
Better to ignore most health opinions said in the media, by doctors, by 'health authorities' and governments.
3:04 pm
JS - great to see you blogging again; your Hunger post still remains one of the best pieces of advice on the net. Sorry to be greedy and I understand you are busy, but does this mean that we will be honoured with more of your insights?
3:13 pm
June 5, 2011
Offline
... always follow the money, eh, Mitch? 
Living in the Ice Age
http://livingintheiceage.pjgh.co.uk
12:26 am
February 22, 2010
Offline
pam:
Thank you!
Asclepius:
"The power of institutions comes from our compliance." Exactly so.
Mitch:
I think I made my position clear when I said "The mainstream press is a trailing indicator, not a leading indicator" and "What I find interesting are the implications and consequences of the article."
brenmitch:
Thank you for the vote of confidence! I'll continue to write articles -- although they will be somewhat spotty until after AHS 2014, as my presentation is taking much of my research and writing time.
Paul:
Exactly.
I'm caught up! Thank you all for your continued support.
JS
7:57 am
Great post and comments! Thank you. I thought readers here might be interested in another post regarding Dr. Keys.
http://exceptionallybrash.blogspot.com/2013/05/who-got-ancel-keys-office.html
4:20 am
I've experimented with high fat and I don't find it satiating i.e. I like it and still eat too much of it and it seems to spike my blood sugars. I have found for superior weight loss, hunger control, energy, satiety that the best diet for me is high protein. Even eating too many green veggies with my meals can create constant hunger and BS spikes, cravings. Eating only protein seems to be my sweet
4:24 am
I've experimented with high fat and I don't find it satiating i.e. I like it and still eat too much of it and it seems to spike my blood sugars. I have found for superior weight loss, hunger control, energy, satiety that the best diet for me is high protein. Even eating too many green veggies with my meals can create constant hunger, carb creep, BS spikes, cravings and weight gain. Eating only protein seems to be my sweet spot but I am concerned about the long term effects of just eating meat. Yes my diet is high fat but it's much higher in protein. Can anyone reassure me I'm not doing too much damage to my body in long-term. Surely if my body responds so well to this it must good for me?
6:31 pm
My only regret is being almost 50 before I realized fat was not the enemy. All of us that grew up in the fat free 80s were brainwashed.
My wake up call was being told to take red yeast rice by my GP and taking 2 years to recover from the effects of lowering my cholesterol. It dropped from 275 to around 200 and I suffered muscle and small fiber nerve damage. Had to take Neurontin for the burning nerve pain.
Have no desire to ever test my cholesterol again. If my diet is going to give me a heart attack I'll take the big one. Hit me with a freight train. I don't want to wake up with stents and prescriptions. Taking pills that rob your memory.
I don't worry about it at all though. Never felt better. I won't let a number and a doctor govern my life.
7:23 pm
February 22, 2010
Offline
EB:
I honestly hope that Ancel Keys died with the weight of millions of deaths on his conscience. He and his cronies have killed far more people than the Third Reich ever did.
brenmitch:
In general, protein is the most satiating (and sating) macronutrient, so unless you have a special need to stay ketogenic (which most people don't), it's better to concentrate on whole (animal) foods high in protein. If you're eating whole foods, the fat/carbs usually take care of themselves.
Again, unless someone has very specific needs, trying to hit specific macros generally leads to the consumption of isolated oils, sugars, or other non-foods -- thereby usually leaving one worse off than simply eating food!
Unless you're downing lots of protein powder I wouldn't worry about "too much protein" -- meat becomes extremely unappetizing once your body has decided you can't process any more of it. And there are a lot of undiagnosed gut issues that tend to go away once it's not continually being irritated by whatever grain or plant product was causing the problems. So long as you're doing well, I say keep going, with the following caveats:
1. Sauces, rubs, and marinades can have beneficial health effects (e.g. vinegar) as well as making meat taste a lot better. Tip: chimichurri is delicious!
2. Don't go crazy, but do make sure to drink plenty of water -- and get plenty of salt/minerals/etc.
3. As time passes and your body and gut heal, you'll probably find that you can start tolerating certain vegetables or starches. Try one at a time every once in a while and see how you do: intolerances are often strongly individual, and sometimes it's only one or two foods out of dozens that are causing problems.
Bea:
I am very fortunate in that my mother grew up in the country and never really bought into the whole anti-fat mania...though I certainly ate my share of cereal and waffles, I ate steak for dinner and drank whole milk growing up, and our house was never full of low-fat diet junk. I did spend about 15 years eating Kashi and "soy nuts" after I left home, but I'm sure that not growing up on it helped greatly.
Any doctor that prescribes cholesterol-lowering medications to women should lose their license to practice -- every single piece of data we have shows mortality for women over 50 decreasing with higher cholesterol. And what would you do differently anyway? As Doug McGuff once said, "If the number is bad, eat healthy. If the number is good, eat healthy."
I've been saying it since 2010: the low-fat, low-cholesterol brigade has killed millions of people and caused untold suffering for millions more.
JS
10:37 am
i'm so glad you're back to writing!
re. Chad's TC
you can try Iranian formula, which is more accurate for LDL
Chris Masterjohn also said the number can vary as much as 30 (your body fluctuates + measurement uncertainty)
also for people who loose a lot of weight in a short time, it can go up momentarily. he advises to wait for 3 months after the weight stabilizes to recheck it.
i also agree that very high TC (maybe > 300) is a cause of concern (but not "cause of diseases") since it is a sign that something is out of balance.
was your TC high to begin with? do you have familiar cholesterol? then the only thing that seems to help is statin. although i think most of MDs prescribe way too high dosage.
or you may have low thyroid?
during one winter, my TC was high (280) likely due to low thyroid, + severe anemia --- hemoglobin & iron + a slew of others too low
(probably due to work stress + lack of sleep + workout)
maybe you can try more sea weed (iodine)?
for me, sea weed + less exercise + higher starch ("safe starch") esp. before & after working out, help bring TC down to high 200's.
i also added liver or beef heart almost everyday (raw) i just marinade it a little; too lazy to cook; + it freaked out most of male colleagues. my Korean colleague was the only one that liked raw meat.
also artichoke is supposed to help.
regards,
10:40 am
ps. sorry forgot to mention: i think Paul Jaminett also has some write up about high TC
he thinks it's a deficiency of some mineral (K2? or Cu? i forgot which)
regards
Most Users Ever Online: 183
Currently Online:
5 Guest(s)
Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)
Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 1763
Members: 5338
Moderators: 0
Admins: 1
Forum Stats:
Groups: 1
Forums: 2
Topics: 250
Posts: 7101
Newest Members:
EddieIcofe, RobertSteld, JaneFog, JamNub, Jamesunelo, CarmelajemAdministrators: J. Stanton: 2045
