0dbd7154d909b97fe774d1655754f195
42

Dr. Ron Rosedale's Recent Posts about "Safe Starches". What do you think?

by (16131)
Updated about 22 hours ago
Created October 05, 2011 at 12:42 AM

Safe Starches:

Kurt Harris says this: Paul Jaminet says this: and NOW Ron Rosedale says this: and this:and this: and this: and this and this:.

My head is truly spinning about this. I am confused. I know what works for me personally, but I wonder what you Paleohackers have to say about all this "safe starch stuff?"

UPDATE:

Jimmy Moore just released this post on this very subject. Just for further information. If a better question can be gotten from this blog post, please someone have at it!

UPDATE #2:

So it seems that more may be to come on this blog post from Jimmy. Just FYI.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · September 07, 2013 at 1:28 AM

Carbsane, its more probable that its physiological. During ketosis there must be physiological insulin resistance to save glucose for cells without mitos and also to keep pancreas functioning in absence of dietary glucose spikes. That is also concluded in review you posted. Also, the studies from diabetic patients aren't quite representative for healthy humans. Its also well known fact that during starvation your insulin levels drop down quickly, its not the same when somebody puts needle with fat in your vein. This is there like in every book: goo.gl/wCYLe

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
56616 · September 07, 2013 at 1:28 AM

ok, there is no evidence at all that kitavans are different

5e92edc5a180787a60a252a8232006e9
340 · August 31, 2012 at 3:27 AM

Why would that be an issue. The point is that most people ate diets where starch figured as a huge component of their daily caloric intake. The highlanders and Kitavans happen to be closer to the carb-heavy side; the Okis have been misrepresented as being low-carb but finally shown to be moderate to high carb, to the surprise of many low-carb diehards.

Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5
5381 · August 27, 2012 at 11:07 PM

Are you descended from the kitavans, okinawans or the highlanders of new guinea?

3cdc762b2ae30b4ca3529f011ccac174
186 · August 18, 2012 at 11:42 PM

Seems like much of what Rosedale said at AHS12 however was validated by the cancer researchers here: http://www.biomedcentral.com/series/metabolismdietanddisease AMPK, mTor, AKT, PK13. . .these things are worth considering, I think. So I'm giving Rosedale a little more credence now despite his unpleasant manner.

543a65b3004bf5a51974fbdd60d666bb
4393 · August 18, 2012 at 11:14 PM

& Paul has a new one as well http://perfecthealthdiet.com/2012/08/ahs-2012-the-safe-starches-panel/

543a65b3004bf5a51974fbdd60d666bb
4393 · August 18, 2012 at 11:13 PM

& Pauls' done a new one as well, http://perfecthealthdiet.com/2012/08/ahs-2012-the-safe-starches-panel/

Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5
5381 · August 18, 2012 at 1:30 PM

As I stated in the other thread, I found his thoughts on longevity pretty darn interesting.

543a65b3004bf5a51974fbdd60d666bb
4393 · November 02, 2011 at 6:18 AM

Paul Jaminet has now posted a reply to Dr Rosedale here; http://perfecthealthdiet.com/?p=5027

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 09, 2011 at 11:51 PM

ttp://www.nature.com/oby/journal/v18/n2/full/oby2009228a.html here is the link. About leptin not being able to help neuroplasticity in adulthood here are those links. 1. Harvey J, Solovyova N, Irving A. Leptin and its role in hippocampal synaptic plasticity. Prog Lipid Res 2006;45:369–378. | Article | PubMed | ChemPort | 2. Moult PR, Milojkovic B, Harvey J. Leptin reverses long-term potentiation at hippocampal CA1 synapses. J Neurochem 2009;108:685–

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 09, 2011 at 11:45 PM

This is from the 2010 Nature article on Leptin: Perturbed arcuate connectivity can be reversed in ob/ob mice by administering leptin perinatally, but not in adulthood. These data support the idea that a perinatal leptin surge acts as a developmental signal to promote arcuate connectivity and the formation of pathways which control energy homeostasis. Beyond its role in the hypothalamus, leptin is also proposed to play an important role in long-term potentiation, which underlies learning and memory within the hippocampus.

667f6c030b0245d71d8ef50c72b097dc
15976 · October 08, 2011 at 1:10 PM

day after day I'm checking this thread - just wanted to say thanks to Melissa HGL, Rosedale, Quilt, Maj, and the rest of you. It's semi-educational and just plain enjoyable to see you guys go back and forth. Good stuff, wish I could chime in.

C0cf19329f850011e66d1ccfa7d10896
278 · October 08, 2011 at 6:51 AM

The NY times Rosedale letter to the editor.. http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E05EFD9123AF930A25751C0A96E9C8B63

C0cf19329f850011e66d1ccfa7d10896
278 · October 08, 2011 at 6:48 AM

Rosedale does exactly the opposite of ACCORD, and shows that you can reverse diabetes without drugs using his diet alone. The ugly truth of ACCORD is that despite lowering glucose, the use of more meds (most raising insulin) results in more death. Rosedale is an expert whose opinion on ACCORD was published by the NY Times. He said, and has said for 20 yrs, that the reason there were more deaths is because medicine does not realize that diabetes is not a disease of glucose; it is a disease of dysfunctional hormone signaling. What ACCORD had shown was the treatment becoming the disease.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 08, 2011 at 6:40 AM

Its better to say like this: All cells except few can work on ketones, only few can work exclusively on glucose.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 08, 2011 at 6:35 AM

@Ambimorph, its because forum sucks for replying, its not designed for such things. Its designed for programmers, to give the answer to a problem and get few short comments.

149af6e19a06675614dfbb6838a7d7c0
3202 · October 08, 2011 at 5:15 AM

majkinetor, I am there opening night of your restaurant and I can't wait to see the quality of the waitresses you have hand picked. I aim to be head bus-boy.

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 08, 2011 at 1:47 AM

Im also going to get dr. Myers latest papers on this together as well

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 08, 2011 at 1:46 AM

The data and cites for the ages of hardwiring are found in my transgenerational epigentic post. You can read them.

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 08, 2011 at 1:44 AM

Many have tried to bury accord.....there is a lot to learned from that study. I remember when it came out i posted a thread on here about it and all the carb lovers were just dead silent.

1f8384be58052b6b96f476e475abdc74
2231 · October 08, 2011 at 1:34 AM

wow, i think we are all burning ketones after hacking at this...our brains used up all our glucose hacking!!

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 08, 2011 at 12:51 AM

Awesome thread here.....ron and maj!

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 08, 2011 at 12:45 AM

majkinetor; I see that you had answered similarly FenFire's question earlier. Thank you.

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 08, 2011 at 12:42 AM

Katherine make a great point here. Once someone recovers leptin sensitivity i do not think macronutient ratios matter one bit. This is why i have no problem with carbs once the signs of LS return. As they do i recommend uping HIIT with carb loads. This fits with PHD and others. My comments were focused on carbs and cancer. Oncogenesis is a physiologic novel place to be. Once cells lose growth controls hundreds of thousands of articles that are peer reviewed have been written about this in a simple pub med search.

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 08, 2011 at 12:06 AM

If one reads this article and the Expensive Tissue Hypothesis, it is seen that diet quality is being equated with energy density i.e. fat content, as is typical in studies such as this. Melissa, I'm happy to answer questions or entertain other thoughts, but please don't argue just for the sake of argument. Please have some merit... And if people are eating out of my hands, great; they're filled with almonds right now, no starches.

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 08, 2011 at 12:00 AM

abstract cont.; Following from the inverse correlation of gut size with diet quality, the expensive tissue hypothesis predicts that differences in diet quality are positively correlated with differences in brain mass, once the correlation of each variable with body mass is taken into account. We tested this prediction… The results of both methods are consistent with predictions made by the expensive tissue hypothesis…Overall, the results indicate that improved diet quality, by allowing reduction in relative gut mass, is one mechanism involved in increased encephalization. ...

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 07, 2011 at 11:58 PM

Melissa.. this is a very popular theory and accepted by many. This is your field? "Name one study"? OK.. Dietary constraints on encephalization in primates. Am J Phys Anthropol. 2003 Feb;120(2):171-81. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12541334 Abstract; Encephalization, and its relationship to potential selective forces, have been a focus of many studies of primate adaptation. It has been argued that gut size may constrain brain mass because these two types of "expensive tissue"(among others) compete in their metabolic requirements (Aiello and Wheeler [1995] Curr. Anthropol.36:199-221...

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 07, 2011 at 11:09 PM

ZenFire;didn't see the question, and only have so much time. Intermittent fasting as you laid out is one way to limit exposure to excess sugar and protein and should show benefit. The purpose of my study that has been referred to previously is to show similar benefits, at least in laboratory parameters, to caloric restriction. In other words, just “fasting” from sugar/starch and excess protein, while not necessarily having to fast from beneficial fats may be as good or better, and likely easier for most people, than the fasting program you referred to. Thanks for the question.

100fd85230060e754fc13394eee6d6f1
18671 · October 07, 2011 at 11:06 PM

I don't think it needs to be closed, Meredith. It's a beautiful monstrosity. I do think that there could be lots of new questions opened based on some of the discussions here, though.

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
56616 · October 07, 2011 at 10:27 PM

Dr. Rosedale, fortunately one of the people who contributed to that paper is my mentor and advisor. You've got people who have no experience with this stuff eating out of your hand. Name one paleoanthropologist who agrees with you. In fact, the evidence for a high-fat diet in early African hominids and humans is very thin and is my research area because I would like to prove that they did have access to more fat than typical paleoanthropologists think (I got interested when arguing with Cordain, but my opinion is on the fringe and honestly more reputable PAs (Wrangham) look more towards carbs.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 9:57 PM

@Andre: Its a bit different for a man - cooking is more like... women generally don't know to cook and you can't really depend on woman because one day she will have that period or something when she will be like 'no dinner for you' - but hey, you don't care as you cook far better, and if you master both skills, then her new lover will look like a fail blog and give you opportunity to xpress your alpha attributes toward other females - you see, its a win win win combination

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 9:56 PM

@Andre: Its a bit different for a man - cooking is more like... women generally don't know to cook and you can't really depend on woman because one day she will have that period or something when she will be like 'no dinner for you' - but hey, you don't care as you cook far better, and if you muster both skills, then her new lover will look like a fail blog and give you opportunity to xpress your alpha attributes toward other females - you see, its a win win win combination.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 9:52 PM

@Matthew: I know, I master both skills. :D

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 9:43 PM

*"The point was that people always cite that study"* - **That** study ??? There are at least 10 studies that I know with normal people and at least 5 I know related to exercise. Its not THAT study. Contrary, I couldn't find anything more related to the study you referred. Further, there is a well known physiological explanation - vitmin c competition - that is crucial to understanding of basics of immune function in all animals. Its so primal that the latest book is named "Primal Panacea". If you could upload it to server and give me the link I would appreciate it anyway.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 9:41 PM

"The point was that people always cite that study" - That study ??? There are at least 10 studies that I know with normal people and at least 5 I know related to exercise. Its not THAT study. Contrary, I couldn't find anything more related to the study you referred. Further, there is a well known physiological explanation - vitmin c competition - that is crucial to understanding of basics of immune function in all animals. Its so primal that the latest book is named "Primal Panacea". If you could upload it to server and give me the link I would appreciate it anyway

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 9:40 PM

*"The point was that people always cite that study"* - **That** study ??? There are at least 10 studies that I know with normal people and at least 5 I know related to exercise. Its not THAT study. Contrary, I couldn't find anything more related to the study you referred. Further, there is a well known physiological explanation - vitmin c competition - that is basic to understanding of basics of immune function in all animals. Its so primal that the latest book is named "Primal Panacea". If you could upload it to server and give me the link I would appreciate it anyway.

0dbd7154d909b97fe774d1655754f195
16131 · October 07, 2011 at 8:22 PM

I AGREE! Someone take this thing away. It's a monster! What can be done??? Take away my points - I don't care. I'm tired.

100fd85230060e754fc13394eee6d6f1
18671 · October 07, 2011 at 8:10 PM

Ack. This page is out of control. I was so confused until I realized I had previously been reading a new answer that responded to comments to an old answer that is lower on the page -- more than once! I think it has now become a cyclic graph that cannot be untangled.

5740b342b3b4ca4af7625f9505f7eb5d
281 · October 07, 2011 at 7:50 PM

Still ducking my question 'Doc'. Nice one.

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 07, 2011 at 7:43 PM

Melissa; I have read the paper more than once, and better yet, I have thought about it. It might serve you well to do the same. The Expensive Tissue Hypothesis is powerful evidence that pre and early humans must have eaten a high fat, lower carb diet for their brain to have evolved its current, large 'metabolically expensive' size. The authors did not, could not measure brain energy substrate use millions of years ago. However, if evolving man was indeed eating a high fat diet, in times of feast and famine, what fuel do you think their brains were mostly burning? Hint; not glucose.

100fd85230060e754fc13394eee6d6f1
18671 · October 07, 2011 at 7:39 PM

Jay, where are you getting the higher serum glucose tidbit? I think a couple of highly vocal ZCers have mentioned having higher BG, but it really isn't the norm. And there is surely enough evidence that ketones are therapeutic for multiple brain conditions that by now one needn't repeat it every time it is mentioned. Anyway, I think this a quote, not Mallory's words at all.

100fd85230060e754fc13394eee6d6f1
18671 · October 07, 2011 at 7:30 PM

Travis, glucose is preferred by some tissue, ketones by some other, including parts of the brain, and lactate by other. Preferred is a terrible term, because it makes it sound like the tissue "wants" it most. This may or may not be the case, and so it creates a lot of confusion.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 6:44 PM

LOL . . .

149af6e19a06675614dfbb6838a7d7c0
3202 · October 07, 2011 at 3:59 PM

Right Mattew, so cook for her and her new lover.

4781cf8ae1bfcb558dfb056af17bea94
4359 · October 07, 2011 at 3:42 PM

Mallory, ketosis is not the norm and you have provided no evidence that it is healthy. In fact, people in ketosis for long periods of times seems to end up with HIGHER serum glucose than other people. Mysteries yet to be worked out... Nobody had the answers.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 07, 2011 at 3:29 PM

*"Meh... old individuals do not contribute once they rise kids and pass the knowledge"* Glad I'm not your grandparent :)

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 07, 2011 at 3:27 PM

@majkinetor - *"Meh... old individuals do not contribute once they rise kids and pass the knowledge"* There speaks a young person? :)

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 07, 2011 at 3:25 PM

*nature needs us until we have helped raise our grandchildren*

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 07, 2011 at 3:11 PM

lol majkinetor, being a good cook is also a good way to keep a women happy.

8949bf87b0e0aefcad10f29975e4fa2b
8979 · October 07, 2011 at 2:58 PM

+1 Quilt....................

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 07, 2011 at 2:52 PM

I didn't realise that it was not available. I can email you a copy if you send me your address.

5740b342b3b4ca4af7625f9505f7eb5d
281 · October 07, 2011 at 2:52 PM

"Good point. In general, the detriment such as non-enzymatic (unregulated) glycation of a macronutrient such as starch will outweigh any micronutrient benefit it might offer." - Reference?

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 07, 2011 at 2:52 PM

I didn't realise that it was not available. I can email you a copy if you post you email here. Delete the comment once you have it.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 07, 2011 at 2:51 PM

They fed cream or bacon. The point was that people always cite that study showing carbs reduce phagocytosis but never look up the effects of dietary fat on white blood cells.

5740b342b3b4ca4af7625f9505f7eb5d
281 · October 07, 2011 at 2:43 PM

"Better results" - I assume you are referring to AGEs? So far, my mood, exercise, sleep, colonic and financial regimen has done better on higher carbohydrates, predominantly from sweet potatoes. I'm actually getting leaner too. Generally I eat around 100-130g per day, but twice that straight after a very heavy lifting session. There are so many factors in choosing foods that I'm starting to get a little bit fed up with blanket statements that are made from what I understand to be fairly poorly understood physiological mechanisms...

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 2:30 PM

Its evolutionary thingy - there are only 2 things that can keep a man - food and sex. You need to be superb in both to get and keep the alpha male. No references, pure XP, so you will have to trust me on that.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 2:29 PM

Its evolutionary thingy - there are only 2 things that can keep a man - food and sex. You need to be superb in both to get the alpha male. No references, you will have to trust me on that.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 2:25 PM

@ZenFire. IF is similar to ketetosis in many aspects. You spend **majority** of time keeping sugar on native level. You would probably achieve far better results keeping cabs at lower range.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 07, 2011 at 2:25 PM

I didn't realise that. I can email you a copy if you like.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 2:24 PM

@ZenFire. IF is similar to ketetosis in many aspects. You spend **majority** of time keeping sugar on native level.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 2:24 PM

@ZenFire. IF is similar to ketetosis in many aspects. You spend **big majority** of time keeping sugar on native level.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 2:21 PM

I know. I was supportive !

5740b342b3b4ca4af7625f9505f7eb5d
281 · October 07, 2011 at 1:52 PM

You answered Majkinetor, but not myself, so for the time being I will assume you don't know how to answer the question!

667f6c030b0245d71d8ef50c72b097dc
15976 · October 07, 2011 at 1:23 PM

the difference between saying *nature does not need us after we procreate* and saying *nature does not need us after we raise children* is large. They are two totally different claims.

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
56616 · October 07, 2011 at 1:23 PM

@maj, coincidentally, that is one of my favorite games.

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
56616 · October 07, 2011 at 1:11 PM

Have you read the Expensive Tissue Hypothesis? It's unbelievable that you would cite that as evidence that humans brain evolved a ketogenic optimum. Nowhere in the entire paper do the authors even mention ketones.

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
56616 · October 07, 2011 at 1:10 PM

Have you real the Expensive Tissue Hypothesis? It's unbelievable that you would cite that as evidence that humans brain evolved a ketogenic optimum.

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 07, 2011 at 1:07 PM

Good point. In general, the detriment such as non-enzymatic (unregulated) glycation of a macronutrient such as starch will outweigh any micronutrient benefit it might offer.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 1:06 PM

Meh... old individuals do not contribute once they rise kids and pass the knowledge. They are actually harmful as they drain energy and require maintenance that could be used to secure survival. Even in some human communities there was a practice to send old people to rest in some form of ritual because of this very reason. Animals are not much different. They will kill older of their own kind in many cases without any problem to promote genome dominance and fuel preservation

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 1:05 PM

Meh... old individuals do not contribute once they rise kids and pass the knowledge. They are actually harmful as they drain energy. Even in some human communities there was a practice to send old people to rest in some form of ritual because of this very reason. Animals are not much different. They will kill older of their own kind in many cases without any problem to promote genome dominance and fuel preservation.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 12:54 PM

Oh FFS, if we are deficient in glucose, we would be **HYPOGLYCEMIC** and that is **MEASURABLE** !. The question for me is more, whether CHO rich foods **come with some OTHER beneficial substances NOT PRESENT in low glycemic foods**. I know for at least one - POLICOSANOL (sugar cane, yams, wheat, beeswax) - which is used as panacea in Cuba. I don't claim such substance is SO beneficial (it looks like it helps) but it is found ONLY in CHO foods AFAIK

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 12:52 PM

Oh FFS, if we are deficient in glucose, we would be *HYPOGLYCEMIC* and that is *MEASURABLE* !. The question for me is more, weather CHO rich foods come with some beneficial substances not present in low glycemic foods. I know for at least one - POLICOSANOL (sugar cane, yams, wheat, beeswax) - which is used as panacea in Cuba. I don't claim such substance is SO beneficial (it looks like it helps) but it is found ONLY in CHO foods AFAIK

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 12:51 PM

Oh FFS, if we are deficient in glucose, we would be HYPOGLYCEMIC and that is MEASURABLE!. The question for me is more, **weather CHO rich foods come with some beneficial substances not present in low glycemic foods**. I know for at least one - POLICOSANOL (sugar cane, yams, wheat, beeswax) - which is used as panacea in Cuba. I don't claim such substance is SO beneficial (it looks like it helps) but it is found ONLY in CHO foods AFAIK.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 12:41 PM

@Melissa: http://goo.gl/GihS6

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 12:35 PM

Yeah, that is really apparent in animal life :S

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 12:25 PM

Mhm, keeping sugar in bladder to feed urinary bacteria seems like a really bad idea. Maybe if you were peeing constantly :)

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 12:23 PM

Yes, keeping sugar in urine to feed urinary bacteria seems like a really nice idea. Maybe if you were peeing constantly.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 12:13 PM

@Matthew: I can not find full paper. I don't know which kind of fat is used, we all know that different fats differently influence immunity.

24df4e0d0e7ce98963d4641fae1a60e5
8879 · October 07, 2011 at 11:58 AM

Ron, Did you read the paper? Or at least my quotation above? Diabetes is profoundly reversed (not just put into remission where a few grams of carbs sends BG's skyrocketing) by the early insulin treatment (and with that crash diet). Half of the EIT's were still diabetes free after a year. Yet you say EIT has no place in medicine? Really?? The mechanism is that the EIT relieves the hyperglycemia that is compounding the lipotoxicity and likley lowers the elevated NEFA causing the GSIS impairment. Now the pancreas can produce insulin properly instead of hyper-basal and impaired GSIS.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 07, 2011 at 11:54 AM

"Nature" does need us after we procreate. If it did not we would be unlikely to have the option of a long life.

5740b342b3b4ca4af7625f9505f7eb5d
281 · October 07, 2011 at 10:53 AM

How do your PB hyperinsulinemia theories tie into intermittent fasting (daily 16hr fasts, approx. 2 meals a day, no snacks, 100-300g carbs per day)? I ask as intermittent fasting is suppose to be highly beneficial when it comes to preventing and dealing with insulin resistance.

5740b342b3b4ca4af7625f9505f7eb5d
281 · October 07, 2011 at 10:53 AM

I ask as intermittent fasting is suppose to be highly beneficial when it comes to preventing and dealing with insulin resistance.

5740b342b3b4ca4af7625f9505f7eb5d
281 · October 07, 2011 at 10:52 AM

How do your PB hyperinsulinemia theories tie into intermittent fasting (daily 16hr fasts, approx. 2 meals a day, no snacks, 100-300g per day)?

C0cf19329f850011e66d1ccfa7d10896
278 · October 07, 2011 at 9:54 AM

When Rosedale talks about being unnatural, he is not meaning using bad products, or drugs, he is very against that, he is talking about allowing the body to maximize its true potential, naturally nature does not need us after we procreate as he said, we are only allowing the signals in the body to believe we still have a purpose and a need, I for sure would opt for a longer expiry date the natural way for super health!

C0cf19329f850011e66d1ccfa7d10896
278 · October 07, 2011 at 9:43 AM

Thank goodness you revised your answer Dr. Harris as I thought i might be losing my mind, I know and follow Dr. Rosedale and what you had quoted him as saying, was so totally not Dr. Rosedale's words at all.

C0cf19329f850011e66d1ccfa7d10896
278 · October 07, 2011 at 9:40 AM

majkinetor.. great comments..

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 07, 2011 at 9:20 AM

majikinetor, you might find this study interesting to read http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1650714

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 8:31 AM

Kurt, have you checked reduced phagocytosis of WBC with all types of CHO ? Thats why its poison if elevated for instance. The fact that something is toxic doesn't mean you don't need it. Oxygen is toxic but you chain it in iron and use it. The problem is too much of it.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 8:23 AM

RE: Natural de-glycation... thats interesting.. don't know much about it, will have to read, thx for pointing it out.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 8:22 AM

RE: I don't say sugar is not valuable, I don't think its SO valuable that you have to eat it :) Its obviously valuable as we can't live without endogenous production.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 8:20 AM

RE: Its not only that sugar spikes are poisonous. You don't have much storage for sugar, it makes sense to use it first, just as you would use alcohol as a fuel *before* sugar. You would do the same in your house if you had a choice to eat raw milk that can live for 3 days or fatty lard which could be stored for a year or more without problem.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 8:18 AM

RE: Brain can live on more then 60% of ketones, the figures go as high as 80%. Red blood cells are optimized to deliver things, they don't have room for mitos. That doesn't prove your point. We make what we need.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 8:17 AM

Thats what I said, not Rosedale

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 07, 2011 at 8:13 AM

No offence to you Kurt but I sometimes wonder why medical doctors are so vulnerable to discovering THE *TRUTH* and deciding that they have solved all the worlds problems. Particularly American doctors for some reason.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 07, 2011 at 8:02 AM

But Kurt you forget that *The sugar is evil!* If you believe that i'm sure it all makes sense.

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 07, 2011 at 6:21 AM

So, are you recommending periodic treatment with insulin injections (that will ultimately increase resistance) every week? month? to reduce stress and glucotoxicity secondary to sugars from starches in their diet that is sure to recur if those people continue to eat as they had previously?...or maybe those with diabetes, diagnosed as a disease of high blood glucose, and where the typical goal of therapy is to lower it, should just minimize eating it?

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
56616 · October 07, 2011 at 5:19 AM

It's also a relic of infancy. The infant brain is heavily reliant on ketones and burns them more efficiency than a human adult can. The amount human babies rely on this is unique among living primates and is a testament to how energy hungry our brains are, as this occurs even in regularly fed babies.

24df4e0d0e7ce98963d4641fae1a60e5
8879 · October 07, 2011 at 2:24 AM

What part of roughly 50% remission from diabetes after VERY short term insulin treatment did the Drs. not get? They're not stressing their islets with insulin. They reduce lipo and gluco toxicity and allow the beta cells to regain proper function.

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 07, 2011 at 2:10 AM

Amazing how ones perspective colors their perception of scientific reality. When the summation does equal someones perspective we go ad hominem. Nice.

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 07, 2011 at 2:05 AM

Lucky you can eat carbs and not become LR is your epigenetic switches are built for it. This is precisly what colpo's argument is with dr. Eades. He is correct. I believe most LR is caused by Pufa's.....but how we fix LR best is with high protein resets. We can do it with hi fat resets but they take longer and are tougher for patients to handle clinically, they work best in neurological cases in which i happen to see with regularity. For t2d and obesity protein is easier and better tolerated clinically

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 07, 2011 at 2:00 AM

Ron plus 1000 on the answers here.....we agree a lot more than we disagree.

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
56616 · October 07, 2011 at 1:50 AM

The guy who says everyone has diabetes is telling me I have extreme unscientific bias? The guy whose data shows his diet improves leptin/insulin, but the improved values don't even approach those of Kitavans or raw vegans?

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
56616 · October 07, 2011 at 1:46 AM

The guy who says everyone has diabetes is telling me I have extreme unscientific bias? I'm in touch with many researchers, researchers with PhDs, and they laugh at such conjectures.

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 07, 2011 at 1:39 AM

thanks majkinetor for your good comments

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 07, 2011 at 1:37 AM

...and fat should not be combined with sugar forming starches.. the glycemic load remains the same. The sugar will still raise insulin and leptin and impair ones ability to burn fat..

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 07, 2011 at 1:31 AM

majkinetor; "I don't know why would long chain fatty acids be a problem." I don't think they would be a major problem once one is adapted to burning fat. However, in general, the longer chain a saturated fatty acid is, the harder it is to burn.

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 07, 2011 at 1:26 AM

...Far better to treat T2 DM by improving insulin and leptin sensitiviy, and this is done by greatly reducing those foods that provoke insulin and leptin, i.e. starches. Like being in a smelly room reduces your ability to smell, you must reduce the odor to regain it. You do not reverse T2 diabetes by giving them more insulin.. You must reduce it...

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 07, 2011 at 1:16 AM

CarbSane.."A recent study comparing intensive insulin therapy (multiple daily insulin injections or continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion) with oral hypoglycemic agents (glicazide and/or metformin) in newly diagnosed patients with type 2 diabetes provided some provocative results (21)". They are comparing insulin therapy with oral agents that raise insulin by stressing islets. So raising insulin without stressing islets is better than stressing islets. Either way they are raising insulin and worsening an underlying cause of the disease.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 07, 2011 at 12:17 AM

@Meredith - Any one thread here does have a time limit of being usefull when there are too many answers and comments. Unfortunately these kind of arguments do tend to degenerate in a male chicken swinging contest after a while :)

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 07, 2011 at 12:16 AM

@Meredith - Any one thread here does have a time limit of being usefull. Unfortunately these kind of arguments do tend to degenerate in a male chicken swinging contest after a while :)

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 07, 2011 at 12:14 AM

M-H; "The wheat lectin can also bind to insulin receptors". Glucose binding to receptors and islet cells themselves is likely to be far more detrimental.. I'm certainly not an advocate of wheat...or rice, or potatoes...

0dbd7154d909b97fe774d1655754f195
16131 · October 07, 2011 at 12:03 AM

@matthew - no joke! I don't really have anything pertinent to say myself. I sure am hoping someone takes this question and runs with it! LIke "Who do you think was the most convincing argument...??" I'm retiring from this question myself.

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 06, 2011 at 11:54 PM

M-H Gathet Love; They were not 31 people chosen by me... They were the people that did all the necessary before and after lab work...and the statistics were analyzed by an expert statistician from Duke. This WAS a real study, with very valid information that should absolutely be studied further and not dismissed by extreme unscientific bias such as yours.

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 06, 2011 at 11:45 PM

The patients were their own control...before and after. And yes, it was an interventional retrospective study... more "controlled" than Kitavan and other population studies with no intervention to control, and perhaps more relevant for us... Shows the same people with the same genes and lifestyle can greatly improve health parameters in a few months...perhaps the Kitavans could also. I'd like to do a prospective study...comparing my diet to any you'd like to try...care to fund it?

8949bf87b0e0aefcad10f29975e4fa2b
8979 · October 06, 2011 at 11:43 PM

Don't forget all self-appointed experts are not statisticians. If I listened to the experts and didn't delve into real statistical issues, I'd still be overweight and sick.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 06, 2011 at 11:33 PM

@majkinetor - I do not have "beliefs" on nutritional science. I consider uncertainty to be the only valid position on many points of issue. Undue levels of certainty are what causes a lot of the confusion around what to eat. Occasionally it is amusing to question people who do have deep convictions on any side of an argument, it rarely has any effect though.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 06, 2011 at 11:31 PM

@majkinetor - I do not have "beliefs" on nutritional science. I consider uncertainty to be the only valid position on many points of issue. Undue levels of certainty are what causes a lot of the confusion around what to eat. Occasionally I amuse myself by questioning people who do have deep faith on any side of an argument, it rarely has any effect though.

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
56616 · October 06, 2011 at 11:21 PM

The sample was 31 people chosen by you. You can certainly calculate a p value that's significant, but whether it has any bearing on the general population depends on the study design. The study design was not adequate to extrapolate to that.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 06, 2011 at 11:13 PM

@Meredith - Apparently people have a lot to say on the subject!

Eecc48184707bc26bce631485b5b7e34
4764 · October 06, 2011 at 11:06 PM

Hey Dr. Rosedale, while I used to have incredible difficulty with cravings and food addiction, it's really gone now after 18 mos paleo. Something changed. I can and do eat starch, maybe 75-100g per day without cravings, without weight gain, without issue. My post 30,60,90 minute prandial blood glucose sticks right around 100 with my starchy (high fat, moderate protein) meals and when I was lower carb (ie no starches but lots of non-starchy produce). Fasting am BG has always been (paleo or not) 70-74. Just an n=1

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 06, 2011 at 10:54 PM

The study had a bunch of statistically viable samples...analyzed and computed to some up with very significant p values by Duke University. You really have no idea what you are talking about.

8ea84667a7f11ac3967f2ecfcad28ad8
641 · October 06, 2011 at 10:32 PM

It's possible simultaneously include starches in the diet while remaining ketogenic. http://paleohacks.com/questions/64219/carbs-and-ketosis-simultaneously-hack-my-experiment#axzz1a2FlyytT

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 06, 2011 at 10:02 PM

All I have right now is lack of faith...

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 06, 2011 at 9:06 PM

Your opinion, all I have right now is lack of belief :)

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 06, 2011 at 9:02 PM

Your opinion, all I have right now is doubt :)

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 06, 2011 at 9:01 PM

Your opinion, all I have right now is doubt :)

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 06, 2011 at 8:47 PM

That is why i wrote that word **IMO**, Matthew. You are also deep in faith, but it appears to me that you don't know that. That is the difference between me and you. I know I am believer, so I can change.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 06, 2011 at 8:44 PM

Thats why i wrote that word *IMO* Matthew. You also practice faith, just you don't know it. I am well aware of it and so I can change it.

Medium avatar
39841 · October 06, 2011 at 8:19 PM

Ambi: If ketone-bodies were preferred, I would expect overeating to result in up-regulated ketogenesis and excretion of glucose. Instead, in the presence of glucose, we see excretion of ketones, even if a person is eating a highly ketogenic fat like coconut.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 06, 2011 at 7:48 PM

Hey Melissa :) There are none so blind as those who will not see...

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 06, 2011 at 7:38 PM

@majkinetor - "There is nothing wrong in putting your faith on any type of diet, just don't impose that on others like its a math theorem." - I think this is exactly what you are doing and this is what is annoying Melissa. Also no one is talking about proof, just good evidence. If you don't learn to tell the difference you will end up believing all kinds of nonsense.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 06, 2011 at 7:25 PM

@majkinetor - To many people base their ideas on faith. After a while you begin to forget it is a faith... "So it does really make some sense. Could it be wrong ? Sure. How likely it is? Not very likely IMO" Sorry but biochemistry doesn't work by what "makes some sense" to you.

Af1d286f0fd5c3949f59b4edf4d892f5
18412 · October 06, 2011 at 6:36 PM

Ben - I'm 31, grew up in Cali and NJ, and I bet you're right. The 80's were **disastrous** to the food industry.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 06, 2011 at 6:36 PM

Carbsane, its more probable that its physiological. During ketosis there must be physiological insulin resistance to save glucose for cells without mitos and also to keep pancreas functioning in absence of dietary glucose spikes. That is also concluded in review you posted. Also, the studies from diabetic patients aren't quite representative for healthy humans. Its also well known fact that during starvation your insulin levels drop down quickly, its not the same when somebody puts needle with fat in your vein. This is there like in every book: http://goo.gl/wCYLe

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 06, 2011 at 6:34 PM

Carbsane, its more probable that its physiological. During ketosis there must be physiological insulin resistance to save glucose for cells without mitos and also to keep pancreas functioning in absence of glucose. That is also concluded in review you posted. Also, the studies from diabetic patients aren't quite representative for healthy humans. Its also well known fact that during starvation your insulin levels drop down quickly, its not the same when somebody puts needle with fat in your vein. This is there like in every book: http://goo.gl/wCYLe

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 06, 2011 at 6:20 PM

... so we came to one important distinction here - ketones float around, freely accessible by mitos, ignoring barriers and shit, simply diffusing around, while glucose needs to be delivered to the location and not get hijacked in between. So it does really make some sense. Could it be wrong ? Sure. How likely it is? Not very likely IMO <-- this is the part where it turns to faith for me, for now.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 06, 2011 at 6:16 PM

Melissa, look, its not that hard. We know that energy is most important, that is the reason we have mito and evolved and what differs us from the invisible life forms. Now, since we understand the importance of energy and the fact that brain is energy hog, we can convincingly say that everything that boosts brain's energy is probably very very good for you as brain controls everything. Now we have this sugar which needs some transporters and is also used by invisible life forms as preferred fuel source which can happen to live inside your brain for instance....

24df4e0d0e7ce98963d4641fae1a60e5
8879 · October 06, 2011 at 5:44 PM

... compared with 27% in the oral therapy group. **Whereas in the oral agent group, acute insulin response at 1 year declined significantly compared with immediate post-treatment, it was maintained in the insulin treatment groups. ** I'd say there ought to be a place in medicine for EIT in T2's.

24df4e0d0e7ce98963d4641fae1a60e5
8879 · October 06, 2011 at 5:42 PM

... In this trial, 92% of 382 subjects with poorly controlled diabetes achieved glycemic targets (fasting and 2-h postprandial capillary glucose levels of <110 mg/dl and <144 mg/dl, respectively) within an average of 8 days from start of therapy (Table 2). Treatment was withdrawn after 2 weeks of normoglycemia, followed by diet and exercise management. ... By the end of 1 year, remission rates were significantly higher in the groups that had received initial insulin therapy (51 and 45% in the continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion and multiple daily insulin injections groups, respectively)..

24df4e0d0e7ce98963d4641fae1a60e5
8879 · October 06, 2011 at 5:40 PM

Regarding Early Insulin Therapy: *Insulin therapy for type II diabetics (producing their own insulin prior to significant islet cell burnout) makes them worse and should not be a part of medicine* {Rosedale} http://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/32/suppl_2/S266.full A recent study comparing intensive insulin therapy (multiple daily insulin injections or continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion) with oral hypoglycemic agents (glicazide and/or metformin) in newly diagnosed patients with type 2 diabetes provided some provocative results (21). ...

24df4e0d0e7ce98963d4641fae1a60e5
8879 · October 06, 2011 at 5:35 PM

*free fatty acids do not stimulate insulin release.* Wrong. http://carbsanity.blogspot.com/2011/04/chronic-exposure-to-free-fatty-acid.html http://carbsanity.blogspot.com/2011/07/effects-of-ffa-and-ketone-levels-on.html http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC302480/pdf/jcinvest00184-0197.pdf @majkinetor, it's hardly in vitro circumstantial evidence.

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
56616 · October 06, 2011 at 4:29 PM

it was not a controlled study and did not have a statistically viable sample.

8949bf87b0e0aefcad10f29975e4fa2b
8979 · October 06, 2011 at 4:15 PM

...like, oh, so and so isn't a real scientist and such and such isn't a real study and I'm the only one around here who gets to say what's real.

8949bf87b0e0aefcad10f29975e4fa2b
8979 · October 06, 2011 at 4:12 PM

+ a bunch, majkinetor, for calling out some of the pseudo-science going on here.

8949bf87b0e0aefcad10f29975e4fa2b
8979 · October 06, 2011 at 4:08 PM

sheesh! Melissa, you need to go out and play

8949bf87b0e0aefcad10f29975e4fa2b
8979 · October 06, 2011 at 3:59 PM

Why would they be embarrassed? It looks like they may have avoided another ACCORD fiasco.

3aea514b680d01bfd7573d74517946a7
11986 · October 06, 2011 at 3:25 PM

I don't know if they think keto is "optimal," but they certainly don't think it's "suboptimal." Stephen Phinney: http://authors.simonandschuster.net/Dr-Stephen-D-Phinney/71212576 Jeff Volek: http://www.education.uconn.edu/directory/details.cfm?id=85

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 06, 2011 at 3:16 PM

@Namby Pamby - Starch is also an important source for butyrate production in your colon. This could be why you found such an improvement as butyrate has many beneficial effects on your gut lining.

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
56616 · October 06, 2011 at 2:47 PM

maj, name one research scientist who believes keto is optimal. Search all the scientific databases...there are none. You don't need to know every scientist to determine that there are no papers that even argue this.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 06, 2011 at 2:06 PM

There are indeed papers showing that free fatty acids stimulate insulin release, but it is circumstantial and seem to increase with level of saturation and chain size. For instance http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC302480/ http://www.springerlink.com/content/l50vrq37getytvjw/fulltext.pdf

3c6b4eed18dc57f746755b698426e7c8
5132 · October 06, 2011 at 2:04 PM

I mean continuous, unremitting and persistent constipation that could only be relieved by adding safe starch. But then I ain't the only one.

3c6b4eed18dc57f746755b698426e7c8
5132 · October 06, 2011 at 2:03 PM

Dr. Ron, that same advice is doled out by Nora Gedgaudaus, Robb Wolff, Dr. Su (mo coconut oil) et al and is about as useful as this clinical pearl given by GIs: "Mo water, mo fiber." That, in turn, is as usefl as: try psyllium husk, try Miralax, Senna, mo exercise, crouch low, avoid hard cheese, dig enzymes, try probiotics, try prebiotics." None of that worked except for Paul Jaminet's suggestion of adding 150g of safe starch. Paul has this low-carb demon figgered out. Colon moisture immediately returned. We're not talking about occasional, sporadic or even frequent constipation.

100fd85230060e754fc13394eee6d6f1
18671 · October 06, 2011 at 2:03 PM

Namby, your experiences are interesting to me. But my comment really had nothing to do with whether it's better for your whole system to eat starch, it was whether ketones are a better fuel for the brain specifically. So the studies I'm talking about, but didn't name, show no such thing.

7d64d3988de1b0e493aacf37843c5596
2861 · October 06, 2011 at 1:30 PM

"Body hacking in 'unnatural' way" does seem kind of the opposite of the paleo principle. One problem with unnatural body hacking is that we usually don't know enough to get it right. Anabolic steroids "work", but there is a price to pay. I think focusing on simple mechanisms we can better kinda understand (steroid -> muscle, insulin -> fat) and trying to extrapolate from that leads to all kinds of problems in practice because the body is so complex.

667f6c030b0245d71d8ef50c72b097dc
15976 · October 06, 2011 at 1:26 PM

@KGH: as always thanks for the injection of common sense. I love CO and cook with it quite a bit but I never think or tell people that it's THE go-to fat and that it is the key to something. It's great stuff but it is one fuel source - one.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 06, 2011 at 1:18 PM

You constantly talk about proofs. Proof is a concept of mathematics and it doesn't exist in science. Science is about models and evidences, not about proofs. At the end, you will still have to put your faith in the model. There is nothing wrong in putting your faith on any type of diet, just don't impose that on others like its a math theorem.

667f6c030b0245d71d8ef50c72b097dc
15976 · October 06, 2011 at 1:07 PM

im 32. grew up in NJ. im betting most of us grew up with that same diet, JK.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 06, 2011 at 11:49 AM

@Melissa, BTW, I didn't know you knew all reputable scientists.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 06, 2011 at 11:49 AM

@Melissa: First you need to calm down. Second, somehow I don't trust people [perhaps watching House MD to much]. The fact that somebody 'tried very hard' means nothing to me because they still could do it wrong. BTW, I am not VLC and nobody claims that there is 1 diet for all, just that 1 diet is most likely to do it for all, I thought that is apperent by now. However, I am still interested in body hacking in 'unnatural' way, I am sorry if that offenses you purists...

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 06, 2011 at 11:47 AM

@Melissa: First you need to calm down. Second, somehow I don't trust people [perhaps watching House MD to much]. The fact that somebody 'tried very hard' means nothing to me. BTW, I am not VLC, that is apperent by now. However, I am still interested in body hacking in unnatural way, I am sorry if that offenses you purists.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 06, 2011 at 11:45 AM

@Melissa: So what? There was no reputable scientist believing in quasicrystals but the dude got the Nobel Prize anyway.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 06, 2011 at 11:43 AM

@CS: If ketones are so toxic, hibernating animals like bears and squirrels would not exist and during times of starvation, we would probably all be dead soon.

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
56616 · October 06, 2011 at 11:42 AM

There is no reputable scientist who believes that the ketone system is the optimal system rather than a backup.

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
56616 · October 06, 2011 at 11:41 AM

You don't get it do you? Different diets work for different people and all the people you and Rosedale are advising have gotten this same exact advice on this forum. They tried very hard to make VLC HFLC work. The VLC-ians can only see their own success and their own desire to see their favorite diet be considered the human optimal. Good thing there is no such thing.

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 06, 2011 at 11:41 AM

free fatty acids do not stimulate insulin release. I am certainly not confusing postprandial insulin response with basal insulin. Early Insulin therapy for type I DM was tried a number of years ago including by myself, and failed to stem the disease... Insulin therapy for type II diabetics (producing their own insulin prior to significant islet cell burnout) makes them worse and should not be a part of medicine.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 06, 2011 at 11:40 AM

@CarbSane: I didn't say glucose is SO toxic. Its needed as turbo fuel and for those cells which lack mito. Also, you said it yourself. Reason is *conversion* - why convert when you can use it ASAP. Evolution doesn't choose such wasting of energy.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 06, 2011 at 11:37 AM

I am so sorry we are disappointing for you Melissa.....

24df4e0d0e7ce98963d4641fae1a60e5
8879 · October 06, 2011 at 11:35 AM

Alternately we could have upregulated de novo lipogenesis. Or, how about an excretory pathway for glucose excesses?

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 06, 2011 at 11:33 AM

It is the other way around. Improvement in insulin and especially leptin resistance comes first, within the first few weeks prior to significant weight loss, and this will then result in fat loss if necessary and multiple other physiologic benefits including improved cardiovascular function. The rest of what you said about insulin has little to do with the truth and is regardless trivial as a major cause of diabetes. The CHOP study just shows relevance for hyperinsulinemia resulting in islet stress contributing to islet cell death.

24df4e0d0e7ce98963d4641fae1a60e5
8879 · October 06, 2011 at 11:32 AM

*"It makes absolutely no sense that neurons only start using ketone bodies under nutritional stress- glucose shortage - if that is the "best" [Haris] It makes sense if excess sugar is poisonous to the body. There are no redudant systems in the body to control for blood sugar except utilisation, so ... you must utilise it to get rid of it. Insulin is the only hormone that promotes that. If sugar was so valuable we would have some redudancy I guess.* Ketones are made from Acetyl CoA so there's no reason we wouldn't have glucose to ketone conversion if glucose were so toxic and ketones preferd

24df4e0d0e7ce98963d4641fae1a60e5
8879 · October 06, 2011 at 11:23 AM

Ron, your premise seems to conflate postprandial insulin response with basal insulin. Basal insulin is stimulated significantly by free fatty acids that there is robust research, to use your term, to support are the initiating factor in the etiology of diabetes. Bierman, McGarry, Frayn, Boden, DeFronzo, the list could go on. Can't find it right now but there's a study showing early insulin therapy cures diabetes and the participants were able to stop therapy after like 8 weeks or so with normal glucose homeostasis.

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
56616 · October 06, 2011 at 11:22 AM

Reads like a vegan forum around here these days. "Just do this or that and the vegan diet will work, Dr. so and so said so!"

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
56616 · October 06, 2011 at 11:20 AM

Fiona, since Rosedale's isn't a real study, you can't even compare his "numbers" to those in real studies. I will do a post on this later.

24df4e0d0e7ce98963d4641fae1a60e5
8879 · October 06, 2011 at 11:07 AM

Weight loss improves insulin sensitivity no matter the method. Hyperinsulinemia contributes to insulin resistance only as a down stream cycle -- e.g. when it keeps glycogen stores topped off thus reducing non-oxidative glucose disposal which is the general defect responsible for impaired glucose disposal into skeletal muscle. I don't get the relevance of the CHOP paper to all of this. Except that the basal insulin requirements deplete the ability to make insulin for GSIS. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC508661/pdf/1011094.pdf ...

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 06, 2011 at 10:35 AM

... and one must also recognize the extremely high contribution that leptin resistance plays in diabetes... may even be more important than insulin. Spikes in blood sugar cause spikes in leptin, contributing to if not causing leptin resistance resulting in centrally mediated (brain) increased gluconeogenesis, elevated insulin, islet burnout... diabetes...

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 06, 2011 at 10:18 AM

... and don't forget to drink plenty of water especially during the transition and not be afraid of fats and oils (limit w6)... and do not eat high protein... substituting high-protein for carbohydrates will cause you to burn protein as fuel... producing excess urea... while still preventing proper burning of fat.. unhealthy and you will not feel well..

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 06, 2011 at 10:10 AM

"fainting spells when getting up from a chair" [Namby] called postural hypotension... from low vascular fluid..As insulin comes down, you will lose excess retained fluid, especially for the first couple of months and this will take magnesium and potassium with it. Therefore this needs to be supplemented for at least the first couple of months... and generally all will be well..

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 06, 2011 at 7:38 AM

There are some clues - sugar makes oxidative stress higher and we can get oxidized cholesterol. If it is all about PUFA its easily oxidized. MCTs do not go that pathway and SFA are stable. I don't know why would long chain fatty acids be a problem. Thats why I asked and thats what Rosedale claims.

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 06, 2011 at 6:42 AM

I have very successfully treated multiple patients with the primary complaint of constipation using a high fat, low carbohydrate diet. Constipation and fatigue is sometimes a problem with low carbohydrate, high-protein diets. Fatigue after the first several weeks is generally only a problem if enough fat is not eaten because of our fat phobic society, or if most of the consumed fat is long chain saturated, that is harder to burn.

3c6b4eed18dc57f746755b698426e7c8
5132 · October 06, 2011 at 6:15 AM

Add to that no libido and you do feel like an Inuit stuck in Winter Wonderland with no spear to throw. No Libido + Constipation + Low Energy + Dry Skin + Creeping Hpothyroidism = No Pursuit of Happiness.

C0cf19329f850011e66d1ccfa7d10896
278 · October 06, 2011 at 6:15 AM

Yes, it was very unfortunate. There lead doctors were very embarrassed, especially after 6 months and lots of money putting it all together.

3c6b4eed18dc57f746755b698426e7c8
5132 · October 06, 2011 at 6:03 AM

It's all relative but the argument from the safe starch Paleo camp has been that more ethnic groups have been healthy eating starchy-based diets than ketogenic diets. And that a significant portion of experimenters face aforemntioned side effects. This is not just isolated cases or a noisy minority. I mean, constipation is an epidemic among low-carbers; most just don't talk about it. When you actually attain fecal incontinence you finally come to your senses and realize that you don't need your colon walls to be stone dry, giving birth to Bristol Chart 1 rabbit pellets.

C0cf19329f850011e66d1ccfa7d10896
278 · October 06, 2011 at 6:01 AM

@Melissa-Hunt. As far as I have seen, there are no other studies that show the same magnitude and direction of change in laboratory markers of calorie restriction such as insulin, leptin, freeT3, and body temperature as Rosedale's diet does. No vegan diets, no any diets. Please show me the studies that you might be referring to.

3c6b4eed18dc57f746755b698426e7c8
5132 · October 06, 2011 at 5:57 AM

In fact, I'm a t2 diabetic that's doing moderate-carb Paleo w/safe starches, as the above problems of ketosis became too debilitating (especially constipation). At first I thought I'd sacrifice BG control. No! My A1c is now lower than when I was ketogenic: 5.5 vs. 5.7. It's counterintuitive: sweet potatoes actually make me more insulin sensitive, while a ketogenic diet froze out my insulin. For the metabolically deranged (which u seeem to be), VLCing and ketosis might be ideal; but for those who ain't, it is fraught w/unwanted complications that're actually worse than diabetes.

3c6b4eed18dc57f746755b698426e7c8
5132 · October 06, 2011 at 5:48 AM

Ambi, those studies also showed susceptibility to kidney stones and other complications that beset ketogenic diets. I agree with PHD 100% on this mainly because I've experienced the very same complications while on a ketogenic diet: constipation due to mucosal dryness; fungal toes and scaly feet that resembled an alligator's; dry eyes (although for me this may have otehr causes); fainting spells when getting up from a chair; possible hypothyroidism, as I display subclinical symptoms; and low LIBIDO! All these I attribute specifically to my ketogenic diet experiment that lasted 12 mos.

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 06, 2011 at 4:54 AM

Another study, one lay and the journal article http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/09/080905215945.htm http://www.jci.org/articles/view/34587 I also know from perhaps treating 1000 diabetic patients that reducing insulin and leptin via diet rapidly improves insulin and leptin resistance, and greatly improves, if not altogether reverses, T2 diabetes and other chronic diseases of aging. The reduction in leptin and insulin happens first and appears to be a requisite. Others are now doing this including Eric Westman and Mary Vernon who have published papers.

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 06, 2011 at 4:52 AM

Insulin: In need of some restraint? Salk Institute Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,March 07, 2007 "the study reveals the "dark side" of high insulin production, the kind that results from over eating and obesity. "Insulin is very effective at lowering blood sugar, and promotes fat storage, preparing the animal for times when food may not be available," he says. "But when the hormone is produced at too high a level for too long, the body becomes insulin resistant and blood sugar and certain blood lipids gradually creep up, which can cause progressive damage to multiple organ."

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 06, 2011 at 4:48 AM

..it would be more than embarrassing since the vast majority of treatment for diabetes over the last half century or longer results in hyperinsulinemia. Medicine (and its lawyers) don't want to face itself in the mirror knowing it's been helping to kill its patients. A couple of studies...

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 06, 2011 at 4:47 AM

There IS plenty of evidence that hyperinsulinemia is a major contributor if not the main cause of type II diabetes. Admittedly, not that easy to find, as it is not something that that gets much research money and pharmaceutical companies are turning their heads, as drugs to lower insulin are nonexistent.Even so-called insulin sensitizers are not that. Showing that hyperinsulinemia is a major precursor to islet dysfunction and the onset of T2 diabetes is not something that Medicine (or the food industry) would wish to know about. Not only would the major therapy then be dietary and not drugs...

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 06, 2011 at 4:42 AM

i.e.HbA1c;there is another explanation that I feel is most likely; these are patients on diabetic medications.To achieve lower A1 C they likely received greater amounts of medications,and the vast majority of medications used to treat diabetes excessively raise insulin,causing at the very least artificial hyperinsulinemia,islet cell stress and dysfunction, islet cell death, worsening of the underlying cause of diabetes and increased mortality.Other medications such as PPARg agonists have their own manifest problems increasing mortality.In other words, the treatment itself becomes the disease.

8949bf87b0e0aefcad10f29975e4fa2b
8979 · October 06, 2011 at 3:27 AM

Well, that is unfortunate

100fd85230060e754fc13394eee6d6f1
18671 · October 06, 2011 at 2:59 AM

Indeed! It is indisputable that humans evolved to use both. That doesn't mean that one can't be "better" than the other, though. But I think it's important to be specific when talking about being better. Being better is only meaningful relative to some goal.

100fd85230060e754fc13394eee6d6f1
18671 · October 06, 2011 at 2:55 AM

Indeed! It is indisputable that humans evolved to use both.

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
56616 · October 06, 2011 at 1:48 AM

both systems have their places and it's likely humans evolved to use both

Af1d286f0fd5c3949f59b4edf4d892f5
18412 · October 06, 2011 at 1:10 AM

omg I used to live off of whoppers and fries. i liked mine with hot sauce instead of ketchup. have you ever seen my thread about pre paleo foods? http://paleohacks.com/questions/26481/horrible-things-you-ate-drank-pre-paleo-even-growing-up#axzz1ZxYJs2r5

100fd85230060e754fc13394eee6d6f1
18671 · October 06, 2011 at 1:03 AM

I find the term "default fuel preference" confusing. It presupposes a default diet. When ketones are not available, the brain uses glucose, when they are, it uses them.

Ba686a7b91a9c04f18170dd4ac762968
764 · October 06, 2011 at 12:59 AM

"There is NO evidence that postprandial insulin spikes and BG spikes cause diabetes." This is the bottom line and is the loch ness monster of the CIH. I've looked for over 4 years and seen no convincing evidence that this happens. PP BG increases do not cause hyperinsulinemia. Pathological insulin resistance causes hyperinsulinemia, not the other way 'round...

100fd85230060e754fc13394eee6d6f1
18671 · October 06, 2011 at 12:59 AM

"Works best" is a bit vague. There are plenty of studies that are at least suggestive that ketone bodies are uniquely healthy brain fuel. They are certainly neuroprotective, reducing the effects of trauma, and various neurodegenerative states. They are efficient, and do decrease ROS production and inflammation.

Ba686a7b91a9c04f18170dd4ac762968
764 · October 06, 2011 at 12:55 AM

The linear relationship between HBA1c and mortality falls apart below 6.0 for several reasons. Diabetics have shortened red cell lifespan compared to healthy normals, which means healthy normals HBA1c overestimates glycation damage. Healthy normals have higher variability in HBA1c, that makes it less accurate at these lower levels. Finally, we all have de-glycation enzymes that repair the glycation damage. No one has zero glycation, and no one needs to have it.

Ba686a7b91a9c04f18170dd4ac762968
764 · October 06, 2011 at 12:48 AM

If you eat animals, you will get roughly get equal amounts of saturated and mono fats for your fuel. Outside a handful of tropical biomes that have easily processed sources of MCTs via coconut, it makes no evolutionary or historical sense to even talk about choosing between fat types that are "safe" to combine with starches. You can eat starch. You can eat animal fat that is 50/50 mono/LCSF. You can eat coconut fat for fuel as well. The idea that you can't safely combine them without some armchair theoretician's permisssion is just silly. There is no good evidence for this idea.

1f8384be58052b6b96f476e475abdc74
2231 · October 06, 2011 at 12:42 AM

soooo for a young person trying to become fertile, the bio-chemical and physiological changes/signals brought on my a fatty acid burning system is prolly the worst idea possible?????????

Ba686a7b91a9c04f18170dd4ac762968
764 · October 06, 2011 at 12:36 AM

"The idea that "natural" is irrelevant and that you can game the system is not uncommon in medicine, and not particularly effective either. Isn't it a bit presumptuous to imply that the brain's default fuel preferences are incorrect and that evolution made a mistake?" - TRAVIS "I guess you are looking at it from a non hormone optic" - QUILT I favor Travis' wide field of view binocular over the narrow field of view high power "hormone' optic. It makes absolutely no sense that neurons only start using ketone bodies under nutritional stress- glucose shortage - if that is the "best"....

8949bf87b0e0aefcad10f29975e4fa2b
8979 · October 06, 2011 at 12:27 AM

...just couldn't wait!....

8949bf87b0e0aefcad10f29975e4fa2b
8979 · October 06, 2011 at 12:27 AM

http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736%2810%2960614-9/fulltext

149af6e19a06675614dfbb6838a7d7c0
3202 · October 06, 2011 at 12:25 AM

Jack...you just took me back to 3rd grade with that list...throw in Burger King Whoppers with fries and a coke and you got me covered 100%.

66e6b190e62fb3bcf42d4c60801c7bf6
12407 · October 06, 2011 at 12:12 AM

mer, the kids in elementary school make me look avg at that age. and i was the biggest BY FAR 25-30 years ago...

8949bf87b0e0aefcad10f29975e4fa2b
8979 · October 05, 2011 at 11:24 PM

Ice cream is NOT recommended by any popular low carbers that I know of. It is popularized by CW dietitians as a way to regulate bs spikes in diabetics.

8949bf87b0e0aefcad10f29975e4fa2b
8979 · October 05, 2011 at 10:52 PM

Quilt, it's just pillar envy

4b8bf8683630d2acfb13303e5f311e71
79 · October 05, 2011 at 10:08 PM

I appreciate the view from the micro perspective -- but what about the macro/whole health view? Unfortunately we don't have many clinical longitudinal trials on carnivores that I know of. I've yet to see you make a convincing point that life without excessive glucose is suboptimal. I'm not talking about high end athletes either who needs constant replenishment of glycogen to stave of cortisol spikes.

4b8bf8683630d2acfb13303e5f311e71
79 · October 05, 2011 at 10:06 PM

Hmm.. Never wished away glucose as a fuel, Travis. And my metaphor still works -- combustion engines rely on combustion regardless of fuel. I see your point about starvation -- but I think you're exaggerating. Similarity doesn't imply that both processes are necessarily the same. I had no symptoms of starvation on ZC and I wasn't even forced ZC by disease or ill-health like many others. Body comp., eyesight, skin, mental clarity, BM regularity, and energy levels all got better for me on ZC. It was an experiment that I learned a lot from.

4b8bf8683630d2acfb13303e5f311e71
79 · October 05, 2011 at 10:03 PM

Hmm.. Never wished away glucose as a fuel, Travis. And my metaphor still works -- combustion engines rely on combustion regardless of fuel. I see how your point about starvation -- but I think you're exaggerating. I had no symptoms of starvation on ZC and I wasn't even forced ZC by disease or ill-health like many others. Body comp., eyesight, skin, mental clarity, BM regularity, and energy levels all got better for me on ZC. It was an experiment that I learned a lot from.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 05, 2011 at 9:42 PM

@Luckybastard - Leptin sensitivity is one of those things that, along with epigenetics, can be used to explain away anything that disagrees with your own pet theories. They can also apparently be easily diagnosed over the internet.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 05, 2011 at 9:40 PM

@Luckybastard - Leptin sensitivity is one of the immeasurable factors that, along with epigenetics, can be used to explain away anything that disagrees with your own pet theories. They can also easily be diagnosed over the internet apparently.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 05, 2011 at 9:32 PM

@Luckybastard - Leptin sensitivity is one of the immeasurable factors that, along with epigenetics, can be used to explain away anything that disagrees with your own personal theory.

D1c02d4fc5125a670cf419dbb3e18ba7
13692 · October 05, 2011 at 8:50 PM

LB - You know I'm laying low. But I was checking up on my boy Kamal to see how bad he was cheating, and then decided to cheat myself and give PH just a little bit of attention today (not too much though). Like crack or a fine piece o' tail, I usually can't do just a little. Oh well.

0dbd7154d909b97fe774d1655754f195
16131 · October 05, 2011 at 8:33 PM

@LB - remember when being the fat kid was an anomaly? I stuck out - literally. There are so many kids in my local elementary school who are so much bigger than I ever was. It's at the point of bat-shit crazy and something radical has to be done.

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
56616 · October 05, 2011 at 8:33 PM

There is absolutely no research scientist out there who believes that ketones are the preferred fuel for the brain in adults. It's sad for me to see the paleo community lap woo up just because it comes from an MD.

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
56616 · October 05, 2011 at 8:29 PM

There is no evidence that the brain works best on ketone bodies. Where are you finding this?

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
56616 · October 05, 2011 at 8:24 PM

Consider that trials of low-fat vegan diets also improve those numbers as much as Rosedale's diet does, and these are trials on people who are Westerners like us.

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
56616 · October 05, 2011 at 8:23 PM

Quilt, what are you even talking about? I already said that titles mean nothing in helping people out. As for the Kitavans having some epigenetic thing that makes them so different from us, I haven't seen any proof.

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 05, 2011 at 7:33 PM

Some of the best enthnographic studies were done by Weston A Price.....A doctor of dental medicine! I guess someone forgot that. This doctor/PHd thing is total bullshit. The summation of someone's work has nothing to do with their contribution. Titles mean nothing in helping people out. Ethnogrphic studies do not help with causation they show correlation. The issue at hand is what controls macronutrient partitioning in the body and brain. We know that answer....epigenetics. we just dont know how to change it well. The kitavins epigenetics can not be duplicated. Citing them is useless

Af1d286f0fd5c3949f59b4edf4d892f5
18412 · October 05, 2011 at 7:30 PM

then when my doc learns that my mom died of cancer and my dad died of heart disease and type 2, they barf up the classic response.. "you're gonna need to eat a low fat low cholesterol diet of whole grains and let's get you on that 'medication program' as soon as possible". right... because... there is certainly nothing that is readily identifiable as the causes behind my parents health challenges. no way. "Neither of them smoked, drank, or did drugs. It's such a mystery!" Again >> Madness.

66e6b190e62fb3bcf42d4c60801c7bf6
12407 · October 05, 2011 at 7:26 PM

why is she leptin sensitive if her diet hasn't been low carb to keep her leptin sensitive all these years?

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 05, 2011 at 7:25 PM

maj plus one.....youre becoming a stud on here.....

Af1d286f0fd5c3949f59b4edf4d892f5
18412 · October 05, 2011 at 7:24 PM

add in some nasty margarine. lots of homemade cakes with crisco frosting. pudding. more soda. more 2% homogenized ultra past milk. powdered milk at the end of the month. cinnamon rolls. toast with margarine and Equal sprinkled all over it. taco bell. taco bell. taco bell. more taco bell. pizza. so disgusting.

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 05, 2011 at 7:22 PM

The higher carb paleo group completely avoids this topic like the plague. Kinda glad to see it here. I still think Cordain needs to be pinned down on this. I know Mike Eades has talked to him about this too and so has Robb.

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 05, 2011 at 7:21 PM

This issue is why Cordain is not a fan of saturated fat in the current iteration of the paleo diet talked about by harris, SG, PHD, Kresser. I think Robb has said carbs intake should match activity but if you are eating lots of carbs the jury is out on whether long chain saturated fats in combination with that diet is a good idea. The problem is Cordain never just says it.....he leaves us in the know to infer it. Ron has hit on this here a bit. Those espousing a ketogenic MCT paleo diet skirt this issue completely. This is the manner in which I apply that paleo diet clinically.

Af1d286f0fd5c3949f59b4edf4d892f5
18412 · October 05, 2011 at 7:21 PM

Aaron - you just described my childhood. NO JOKE. soy formula. check. butt loads of sugary cereal with crappy milk.check. fruit juices and sodas. check. peanut butter and breads. double check. check check checketty check all over the place. So unfortunate how misled we are. Madness.

Af1d286f0fd5c3949f59b4edf4d892f5
18412 · October 05, 2011 at 7:19 PM

Aaron - you just described my childhood. NO JOKE. soy formula. check. butt loads of sugary cereal with crappy milk.check. fruit juices and sodas. check. peanut butter and breads. double check. check check checketty check all over the place.

66e6b190e62fb3bcf42d4c60801c7bf6
12407 · October 05, 2011 at 7:19 PM

@mer i was too. i have pics to prove it.

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 05, 2011 at 7:16 PM

Melissa the answer is easy......she is clearly Leptin Sensitive at the brain liver and muscle level. That is the only reason.

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 05, 2011 at 7:11 PM

When I hear somebody say the brain works best on glucose they are speaking 1960-70's understanding of brain CMRO2 and CBF studies. It dates them badly.

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 05, 2011 at 7:10 PM

The brain does work best on ketone bodies. There is copious data on this and the advantage is seen by decreased leakiness at the first cytochrome and by the FADH in the ketone pathways that further decrease ROS at neuronal mitochondria. Matt Lalonde left a comment about this very issue on my blog. And Travis ketogenic diets are not like starvation at all. The biological hormonal response is completely different. I guess you are looking at it from a non hormone optic but that to me makes no sense considering hormonal response is how the brain controls 20 trillion cells.

66e6b190e62fb3bcf42d4c60801c7bf6
12407 · October 05, 2011 at 7:03 PM

my man, where have you been? missing all the fun!

Medium avatar
39841 · October 05, 2011 at 6:48 PM

Meredith: Thanks a lot for the link. This may partly explain my greater lucidity following zinc supplementation.

0dbd7154d909b97fe774d1655754f195
16131 · October 05, 2011 at 6:37 PM

Travis this it totally unrelated but this was a zinc article that just came out. Pretty interesting. http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2011-10/uots-zri100511.php

E34fbfa1bca9ae970c9c7313bf9de9f8
1436 · October 05, 2011 at 6:05 PM

The body needs glucose.. why not eat it?

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 05, 2011 at 6:04 PM

Thx doc. I always thought that long chain [saturated or not] fats + carbs are not great idea. Could you perhaps tell us why or provide some links? Ice creams are promoted by several popular low carbers as good stuff because fat will slow down sugar absorption or something like that (i.e. http://perfecthealthdiet.com/?p=302)

E34fbfa1bca9ae970c9c7313bf9de9f8
1436 · October 05, 2011 at 6:02 PM

The body needs glucose.. why not eat it?

D1c02d4fc5125a670cf419dbb3e18ba7
13692 · October 05, 2011 at 5:46 PM

@LB - I prefer an electric razor to Occam's, but sometimes for my thick bush, I need to break out the machete. Manscaping is totally not Paleo, but a good base cut is the difference between being a chia pet vs a porn star. I know ya feel me bro! Oh, BTW +1 because I agree

Medium avatar
39841 · October 05, 2011 at 5:43 PM

If ketone-bodies were the preferred fuel source of the brain, wouldn't we be storing them instead of, or at least alongside, liver glycogen? Wouldn't their production always be at a maximal rate instead of in the absence of glucose? Isn't it a bit presumptuous to imply that the brain's default fuel preferences are incorrect and that evolution made a mistake?

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 05, 2011 at 5:16 PM

short and medium chain saturated fats are great. Longer chain saturated fats without sugars/starch; pretty good in a fat adapted person.. LC saturated fats mixed with sugar/starch; not good

Medium avatar
39841 · October 05, 2011 at 5:10 PM

I wonder how much of it is due to a magnesium deficiency.

Medium avatar
39841 · October 05, 2011 at 5:08 PM

The part that sticks out to me is how much these very low carb diets resemble starvation biochemically. I guess I just have a hard time believing that doing a lot of the things that the body does to cope with starvation year-round for decades is optimal for health. Seems like it's giving undue weight to certain populations of hominins during glacial maxima at the expense of the majority of our evolution and the current ethnographic record. The idea that "natural" is irrelevant and that you can *game* the system is not uncommon in medicine, and not particularly effective either.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 05, 2011 at 5:03 PM

Hyperbole sells more books.

24df4e0d0e7ce98963d4641fae1a60e5
8879 · October 05, 2011 at 4:51 PM

BTW Ron: I consider hyperglycemia a symptom not the underlying pathology. Diabetes is beta cell dysfunction. Non-diabetic obese and classical T2's can have nearly identical metabolic mileus -- elevated NEFA, hyperinsulinemia, with different glycemic outcomes (even some can have elevated FBG w/o postprandial IGT and vice versa). There's *something* else going on in a relatively small percentage of the population where compensation fails, and beta-cell impairment and/or destruction ensues. Which doesn't make prediabetes benign ... just not necessarily "pre" anything.

24df4e0d0e7ce98963d4641fae1a60e5
8879 · October 05, 2011 at 4:41 PM

@majkinetor: The *shallow* U curve I was referring to was for HbA1c and CVD or something like that (perhaps life expectancy?). No need to be explained by enzyme catalysis. Just that slight "underglycylation" had equal outcome to slight "overglycation". It's somewhere on Ned's blog. I'll try and look later.

24df4e0d0e7ce98963d4641fae1a60e5
8879 · October 05, 2011 at 4:39 PM

Dr. Rosedale, I've been researching the literature on this for a year now. I have yet to see any study demonstrating that carbohydrates and the insulin responses they elicit contribute to insulin resistance. The only foods that seem to are those that do not elicit an insulin response (fructose and fat). If there is robust evidence, it shouldn't be difficult to provide a few review papers implicating carb induced glucose and insulin spikes. Thanks in advance, I look forward to reading those studies.

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 05, 2011 at 4:12 PM

Hey Ron.....you need to update your knowledge on leptin wiring. See MYers work from Michigan circa 2011.

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 05, 2011 at 4:02 PM

Regarding what I have said on my site.....Carbs are what americans use too much of. You can do a leptin reset with fat alone too.....few people will do it because the the dosages of Fat will not destroy incretin signals like protein does. So protein is why its in my leptin Rx......clinically as a neurosurgeon I use the fat leptin reset more than protein. A ketogenic paleodiet with coconut oil.....which you clearly dont like based upon your book. We have differences but in the grand scale of things we are not far off. I think this chaps your ass more than it should.

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 05, 2011 at 3:59 PM

Byron Richards is a nutritionist selling supplements.....what he says I take with a grain of salt. You should too.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 05, 2011 at 3:58 PM

Perhaps Rosedale himself could clear this up - SFA is good or not to healthy human ?

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 05, 2011 at 3:58 PM

knowing my position but I answered Jimmy's questions and they were not too kind to be honest to the other crew. Jimmy posted on your link that I was being factual with my response which was made before you ever linked me to those other people. You did not know or read it so I am willing to lay it down......but be careful before you attribute words to me I did not say. You words are out there for all to see in your books. Your position is clear. I would never put words in someones mouth if I did not know their position. We all know what you think here quite well.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 05, 2011 at 3:58 PM

In his book he says something like ... farm animals are fed with carbs, those carbs convert to saturated fat, we eat that fat -> we eat 2nd generation carbs.

0dbd7154d909b97fe774d1655754f195
16131 · October 05, 2011 at 3:57 PM

A friend of mine gave me this tid bit "Hydrolyzing triglyceride so that fat can be used in the mitochondria of liver and fat cells is dependent hydrolysis from hormone sensitive lipase which is activated by cortisol which is elvated due a rise in glucagon in response to dropping blood sugar. Non-glucose based control of blood sugar = higher cortisol." I don't know what it means, but people for sure use the elevated cortisol argument as a reason not to go low carb. Any thoughts about this would be great. Thanks!

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 05, 2011 at 3:55 PM

Ron just quote me accurately.....you editted it and I am fine with the edit. These comments by me were done before your edit because I felt your intent was not correct. Simple. You and I are closer than you think. our disagreements are on things we will find out soon enough with regards to mTOR and protein and Saturated fat and CRON. As for the character questions I wonder aloud why you would lump me in with that crew. I have multiple posts why I think SG et all are off. You made the edit so I am backing off my criticism of you. Im willing to give you the benefit of the doubt of not

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 05, 2011 at 3:53 PM

Worm holes? we should not forget about string theory and remember that starches are stings of sugars.

21fd060d0796fdb8a4a990441e08eae7
24523 · October 05, 2011 at 3:52 PM

While eating fat would provide some more glycerol than starving, I can't imagine it would be a huge amount more (since you'd still be burning predominantly fat either way, but with a lowered metabolism from starving, would presumably burn less fat). Is this correct?

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
56616 · October 05, 2011 at 3:52 PM

Ethnographic studies might not tell us the optimum, but they can rule out the idea that a low-carb low-fiber diet is the gold standard for anti-aging since there have been many cultures that eat these diets and do not have exceptional longevity.

D1c02d4fc5125a670cf419dbb3e18ba7
13692 · October 05, 2011 at 3:51 PM

You are a dummy Kumar

21fd060d0796fdb8a4a990441e08eae7
24523 · October 05, 2011 at 3:50 PM

Travis Culp posted this above: "These researchers were kind enough to starve obese subjects for 5-6 weeks and it looks like they got 19g of glucose a day from the mobilization of triglycerides. Equates to 22% of daily glucose. I would wager that starving for a few weeks counts as being fat-adapted." ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC535723

0dbd7154d909b97fe774d1655754f195
16131 · October 05, 2011 at 3:46 PM

I've run out of upvotes. It is great news to be sure that people are not doomed to dysfunctional in their leptin receptors if they were overweight at age six - like I was.

C471216c9fb4fcf886b7ac84a4046b49
1371 · October 05, 2011 at 3:16 PM

WOULd like to know more about hyperleptinemia...

96bf58d8c6bd492dc5b8ae46203fe247
37187 · October 05, 2011 at 3:14 PM

Thanks, Melissa HGL! I think we're meant to eat differently by season and instead we seem to overlay a template of "ideal" diet. In the growing season, we ate eggs and meat plus every carb we could find; in winter we ate what was available, mostly meat, and I bet we craved the carbs but cravings did no harm in that context.

66e6b190e62fb3bcf42d4c60801c7bf6
12407 · October 05, 2011 at 3:09 PM

I asked this same question of quilt last week, dr rosedale when he told me that those things were set by age six. seems just too arbitrary a number given our differences.

C471216c9fb4fcf886b7ac84a4046b49
1371 · October 05, 2011 at 2:29 PM

nice call out by rosedale...i totally did not buy the shaping of hypo- in the first 6 years of life.

C471216c9fb4fcf886b7ac84a4046b49
1371 · October 05, 2011 at 2:26 PM

i think when rosedale mentions fat he means the body, when UNadapted shoudl receive MUFAS first and after the body gets adjusted, adding in SF is of no harm...

C471216c9fb4fcf886b7ac84a4046b49
1371 · October 05, 2011 at 2:11 PM

good point aaron, most of us were doomed from birth lol

100fd85230060e754fc13394eee6d6f1
18671 · October 05, 2011 at 1:57 PM

I'm rarely sick, but it's not never. With 3 children, I get plenty of exposure. I can remember one time feeling ill for 2 hours when there was a flu going through. I also had a mild head cold last year, which I remember because I cleaned my ear canal with a cotton swab and the swollen ear drum burst -- not fun. I don't remember any other times in recent years, but having studied memory, I don't trust it very much. :-) One thing that may reflect high immunity: I used to get approx annual cold sores, and basically haven't since going ZC. (One time I felt one coming on, but it never appeared.)

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 05, 2011 at 1:53 PM

There is also this one: Neuronal activity modifies the DNA methylation landscape in the adult brain. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21874013

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 05, 2011 at 1:53 PM

There is also this one: Neuronal activity modifies the DNA methylation landscape in the adult brain.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 05, 2011 at 1:43 PM

Superb genetics probably. My grandma has 100 too and she has very low fasting blood sugar although she eats bread, carbs etc... although she eats only cooked stuff.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 05, 2011 at 1:41 PM

Yes, Sweden: http://www.dietdoctor.com/the-swedish-low-carb-revolution

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
56616 · October 05, 2011 at 1:30 PM

How come my great aunt is 100 and still hasn't burned out the system? When she turns 120 can she expect to get diagnosed with diabetes?

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 05, 2011 at 1:28 PM

I will post an answer to questions and other comments in this post when I have a bit of time..Thanks for the interest.

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 05, 2011 at 1:20 PM

...These data suggest that leptin-mediated plasticity in the ob/ob hypothalamus may underlie some of the hormone’s behavioral effects." The effect of leptin altering hypothalamic wiring has been shown in other studies also.

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 05, 2011 at 1:17 PM

...To study the intrinsic activity of these neurons and their responses to leptin, we generated mice that express distinct green fluorescent proteins in these two neuronal types. Leptin-deficient (ob/ob)mice differed from wild-type mice in the numbers of excitatory and inhibitory synapses and postsynaptic currents onto neuropeptide Y and proopiomelanocortin neurons. When leptin was delivered systemically to ob/ob mice, the synaptic density rapidly normalized, an effect detectable within 6 hours, several hours before leptin’s effect on food intake...

667f6c030b0245d71d8ef50c72b097dc
15976 · October 05, 2011 at 1:16 PM

we need to see what gildenstern has to say about this

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 05, 2011 at 1:14 PM

Quilt states; "The hypothalamic wiring is set in those six yrs". This is not true. I am surprised that you do not know this as I know that you follow my writings and talks, and I have cited this famous article often…and this is in your field of neuroscience… The abstract... 2 APRIL 2004 VOL 304 SCIENCE Rapid Rewiring of Arcuate Nucleus Feeding Circuits by Leptin "The fat-derived hormone leptin regulates energy balance in part by modulating the activity of neuropeptide Y and proopiomelanocortin neurons in the hypothalamic arcuate nucleus...

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 05, 2011 at 1:10 PM

This is because enzymatic g is active, it doesn't happen by chance.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 05, 2011 at 1:09 PM

U curve ? U better find some reference because it goes against basic principles of physiology - the non-enzymatic glycosylation always happens and its percentage depends on level of glucose. This one is bad, because proteins loose their function. The enzymatic glycosylation always happens and is a good thing, it serves the body. If you say there is U turn that could only mean that enzymatic glycosylation is enhanced with lower glucose levels, anything else doesn't make sense.

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 05, 2011 at 12:55 PM

..drug treatment is given to lower blood sugar usually by overworking and stressing the islets even more while raising insulin, ignoring leptin, ultimately wiping out the islet cells, now requiring more and more exogenous insulin to bring down glucose that people are being told is fine to eat, all the while worsening the underlying cause… and doctors wonder why diabetics die young.

2870a69b9c0c0a19a919e54cb3a62137
1515 · October 05, 2011 at 12:55 PM

70-100? Mine was 54 last it was measured.

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 05, 2011 at 12:46 PM

Defining the disease of diabetes strictly by elevated blood sugar allows the real disease(s) of insulin and leptin resistance with accompanying hyperinsulinemia and hyperleptinemia (that do worsen with time in a continuum) to go unnoticed , often for decades, while damage and 'disease' secondary to this accumulates until finally islet cells start burning out, fatty liver sets in, hyperleptinemia and leptin resistance results in excess hepatic gluconeogenesis, and the diagnosis of 'diabetes' is finally made...

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 05, 2011 at 12:44 PM

There is plenty of robust evidence that chronic elevations/spikes in glucose, insulin, and leptin highly contribute to insulin and leptin resistance, that are the foundation for the development of diabetes (by its current definition of high blood sugar). Additionally, diabetes (T2) is not primarily a disease of blood sugar, but a disease of hormonal miscommunication primarily of insulin and leptin, as manifested by insulin and leptin resistance and should really be diagnosed as such.

03fa485bfd54734522755f47a5e6597e
3914 · October 05, 2011 at 12:20 PM

Exactly. I have no trouble believing that a population of humans who haven't inherited gut weakness in the womb and who never ate significant amounts of the neolithic agents of disease (especially gluten) could eat plenty of safe starches and be healthy. Unfortunately, for most of us, that's an irrelevant fantasy. We're already damaged from decades of SAD, and if some of the new ideas about epigenetics are true, our future children may be damaged to some extent even if we eat perfectly from today on. What was safe for a caveman to find and eat may not be safe for us in the same quantities.

03fa485bfd54734522755f47a5e6597e
3914 · October 05, 2011 at 12:09 PM

I don't find it at all hard to believe that most Americans are "diabetic to some extent." After all, many of us are started out on soy-based formulas that start messing with our hormones right away. Then we're fed cereal as soon as possible, plus plenty of fruit juice. As we get big enough to feed ourselves, the cereal keeps getting more sugar added to it, and we start eating plenty of bread and PUFA-heavy foods like peanut butter. So there's the trifecta of neolithic disease right there, setting us up for the inability to handle starches, "safe" or not.

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 05, 2011 at 11:53 AM

Kruse; "I see why Mike Eades and him split now" Talk about speaking of something that you have absolutely no knowledge about...

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 05, 2011 at 11:41 AM

I may not have exactly stated (indirectly) your position on starches, but that does not warrant your bending so far over backwards to challenge my character…So why? Can't challenge the science? Deeper reasons?

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 05, 2011 at 11:38 AM

…and what about the main scientific point that I was making in that section? What I really was expecting from you and others were comments to my statement that you, Byron Richards, and others miss the main point that glucose spikes leptin, so whether insulin is more important or leptin is more important is somewhat irrelevant as far as glucose is concerned. Glucose spikes both contributing greatly to both insulin and leptin resistance and any optimal diet should take that into account. I am surprised this is being ignored in in lieu of your stance on carbs.

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 05, 2011 at 11:37 AM

However, my statement was not made totally without substance. On your own website you state as part of your plan to "try to avoid starches until you have mastered your cravings and hunger". That is not the same as saying to avoid starches, period. Adding starches even after "mastering cravings" will again cause cravings. I believe I also read that you recommend a book about leptin by Byron Richards that recommends eating considerable carbohydrates. So, thank you for your clarification and support in disagreeing with the 'safe starch' concept.

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 05, 2011 at 11:30 AM

Kruse; Interesting attack by you. I had just intended to add your name to those talking about leptin's importance, as I have noticed this in some posts of yours. I maybe should have been more specific in the next sentence to single out your name for exclusion from the group explicitly pushing starches in this draft. I do not follow paleo sites thoroughly, and I do not know exactly everyone's stance, so I had asked Jimmy to review for any such misinterpretation prior to his posting. I did not know it would be leaked before that…

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 05, 2011 at 10:35 AM

Because fungus, unlike bacteria are eukaryota, and can use both ketones and glucose to power up. I think his point is to reduce glucose so that it doesn't bath in energy without entering full ketosis since then, it will use both ketones and sugar created by the liver. He also points out about the problem with immunity and glucose deficiency, although I don't find this convincing.

B0fe7b5a9a197cd293978150cbd9055f
8933 · October 05, 2011 at 9:47 AM

"Lets also not forget that Jaminet might be biased as he has/had fungal infections which might get worse on ketogenic diet" Why?

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 05, 2011 at 9:16 AM

Todays eating patterns with carbs in main meals and snacks mean that blood glucose can be fluctuating most of the day and that it drops only when you sleep.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 05, 2011 at 9:00 AM

@Ambimorph: Tell me, how is your immunity ? Do you get sick ? According to some, you shouldn't, if you have enough Ascorbate. If not, I suspect you will be very responsive to it.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 05, 2011 at 8:47 AM

@Kamal, those are not unsupprted. Support may be flawed tho.

C0cf19329f850011e66d1ccfa7d10896
278 · October 05, 2011 at 8:45 AM

I agree, but these are studies to prove a better way of living, take people off drugs & reverse illnesses. Yep, pharma is not going to fund that one, nor will any associated with them like the ADS, AHS. Rosedale was working with a large hospital chain, they were about to conduct his study along with 3 other popular diets. When it got to the protocol to reduce and in many cases eliminate drugs, they asked Rosedale to 'adjust his diet so drugs could be maintained'.The study was abruptly halted as their 'investors' would not approve the program, Rosedale did not adjust to maintain their drugs.

C0cf19329f850011e66d1ccfa7d10896
278 · October 05, 2011 at 8:30 AM

The body needs glucose.. you just don't need to eat it..

C0cf19329f850011e66d1ccfa7d10896
278 · October 05, 2011 at 8:25 AM

I have seen several times people address Rosedale as the high carb guy! last was on a Denver radio show, clearly had the wrong doc! Rosedale did not attack below the belt about integrity. Quilt/Kruse missed the point, that Rosedale was including Kruse as people talking about the importance leptin, clearly a complement which was totally missed. Maybe next time he should not mention names at all. You all missed the most important part which is that glucose spikes leptin. The whole Eides ~ Rosedale thing, Eides went to do an infomercial, no other reason, no drama or madness, sorry no dirt there!

Medium avatar
8239 · October 05, 2011 at 5:46 AM

I added starch to my laundry, and damn if I didn't get stiffed.

Medium avatar
39841 · October 05, 2011 at 5:31 AM

Rosedale seems to have an anti-fructose argument masquerading as an anti-starch argument. The glycation and insulin resistance is most potent with fructose, but even that doesn't really matter if it's whole fruit consumed by an active individual. I only advocate the consumption of the amount of starch that repletes the amount of glycogen depleted per day. Even I'd be hesitant to "go Kitavan."

Medium avatar
39841 · October 05, 2011 at 5:29 AM

Ambimorph: I hadn't seen anyone go that low in BG; I edited my range. I suppose that there are hormonal effects either way. I still don't understand how 25g of (net?) carbs could make that big of a difference. The effect on lipolysis/lipid oxidation would be fairly small and fleeting, unless we're talking about an increase in overall appetite. I guess I don't have a complete enough understanding of what mechanisms are varying between individuals.

Medium avatar
39841 · October 05, 2011 at 5:20 AM

Many would like to wish away the fact that we require glucose, but there's no point. It's obvious that we as humans have a lot of unanswered questions about which diet is truly optimal. The whole point of the paleo idea is that when in doubt, you default to what has a broad evolutionary precedent. ZC simply doesn't have it. It's *possible* that it's best for longevity, but carbohydrate starvation is simply too much like actual starvation from a biochemical standpoint for my tastes.

Medium avatar
39841 · October 05, 2011 at 5:16 AM

The problem with your analogy is that our red blood cells must run on glucose and our brains will run partly on glucose no matter what. On the 40th day of starvation, the brain still uses 40g of glucose a day. It doesn't drop below that point until death. The heart can run on glucose, ketone bodies, lipids whatever. It has the highest expression of LPL and the highest concentration of VLDL receptors because it needs a ton of energy of any time all the time and the consequences of an interruption are death.

Cbb1134f8e93067d1271c97bb2e15ef6
5477 · October 05, 2011 at 5:10 AM

underground storage organs dance over back of cows flying rice in bird beaks to moon.

21fd060d0796fdb8a4a990441e08eae7
24523 · October 05, 2011 at 4:47 AM

ur too nice lik cloud in sky saying hi to sun and then bye

0dbd7154d909b97fe774d1655754f195
16131 · October 05, 2011 at 4:13 AM

I really don't see why anyone should be attacking anyone personally. I've had a blog once and many a time tried posting in a hurry. So many honest errors and typos. I do try to look past those things at the bigger picture if there is one. But that's just me. Whatever the error was it's gone now. BTW Dr. Eades does not come across as Mister Cutiepie on Twitter. Just saying.

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 05, 2011 at 4:00 AM

Im not buying a lot of that either.......our environment dictates what we do and our biology adapts to that environment. What the Kitavans of Inuits do best with is based upon the natural selection of how their epigenetic switches were set by three factors. Grandma diet when prego with mom, Mom diet preg with fetus, and then what the baby was reared on for the first six yrs. The hypothalamic wiring is set in those six yrs and leptin is uploaded from momma's breast milk to run the show.

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 05, 2011 at 3:56 AM

Looks like he did edit it now and put my name in brackets on the starch bullshit.

3c6b4eed18dc57f746755b698426e7c8
5132 · October 05, 2011 at 3:50 AM

When I started, I bought into the myth of these ketogenic HGs running around in their loin clothes hunting preys for every meal. Reading Gueyenet will shatter that myth, not becuz he discusses modern HGs but becuz he chronicles how out of the ordinary and enormously difficult it is to live off of a carnivorous diet. Cf: the Masais are not carnivores; they're pastoralists. The Inuits are migrating carnivores living off of marine mammals. They're oddballs. Blessed w/a better climate (Inuits) or better senses, they'd be digging up yuca and chasing after warthogs once every 3 days.

B3e7d1ab5aeb329fe24cca1de1a0b09c
5242 · October 05, 2011 at 3:50 AM

Valid counter argument.

3c6b4eed18dc57f746755b698426e7c8
5132 · October 05, 2011 at 3:41 AM

That's what I used to think. But rice was around for 10k yrs. in Asia, tubers much longer. HGs by definition gathered these tubers & root vegs, which can be stored much longer than a carcass. Hunting is dangerous & don't always result in a catch. It also depends on game migration, climactic shifts, droughts, weapons, mobilization of men. The risk of injury is always high. The path of lesser resistance is tubers: the gathering component is much bigger than what most people romanticize about HGs. Hunting was sporadic & occasionally fruitful. In comparison, gathering was a slam dunk.

4b8bf8683630d2acfb13303e5f311e71
79 · October 05, 2011 at 3:36 AM

Ambimorph: So was mine when I was zc. I agree about gluconeogenesis.

0dbd7154d909b97fe774d1655754f195
16131 · October 05, 2011 at 3:34 AM

Thanks Amber I was afarid of that! They all go to the same FB page. I will try to fix this.

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 05, 2011 at 3:27 AM

He took off the comment where I questioned his character but still did not edit the post. I see why Mike Eades and him split now.

4b8bf8683630d2acfb13303e5f311e71
79 · October 05, 2011 at 3:22 AM

I appreciate your attempt to explain away everything I am asking, Travis -- but do you see what I am getting at? I'm trying to point out that it is unclear what a the optimum dose of something which is toxic at high levels is. Sure, some starches can be tolerated indefinitely. Agreed. But can you say that you are better off thereby? The metaphor that I've hear KGH and others use is the multi-fuel stove model or the engine model. We, just as stoves and car engines, are capable of running on multiple fuels. I know that I can put alcohol in my car in emergencies -- but I wouldn't otherwise.

100fd85230060e754fc13394eee6d6f1
18671 · October 05, 2011 at 3:21 AM

I think your first two links for Rosedale are the same?

100fd85230060e754fc13394eee6d6f1
18671 · October 05, 2011 at 3:20 AM

Not that it makes a difference in you basic argument, but my BG was last measured at 71. I don't think gluconeogenesis is necessarily more costly than dealing with the hormonal effects of ingesting glucose.

Medium avatar
39841 · October 05, 2011 at 3:19 AM

Atherosclerotic plaques are the result of oxidized lipoproteins becoming foam cells as a result of macrophages eating them. Arterial calcification from a K-2 deficiency plays a role in both of those issues. Neither is a normal part of aging and neither is related to starch consumption. If it were, we would see those in hunter gatherer societies consuming a lot of starch, but we don't.

100fd85230060e754fc13394eee6d6f1
18671 · October 05, 2011 at 3:18 AM

You can't necessarily count the remaining HGs as representative of our evolutionary past. Even the end of the Paleolithic was likely to be a different environment than the earlier. It's quite possible that many more tribes were ketogenic, and that only later did those cultures who didn't resort to plants more often die out due to lack of big game.

0dbd7154d909b97fe774d1655754f195
16131 · October 05, 2011 at 3:16 AM

"The Jaminet, Guyenet, Kruse, and Harris group is right that leptin likely supersedes insulin as far as importance in obesity, diabetes, and other chronic diseases, at least in humans. However, they (not including Kruse) are quite wrong in believing that it is therefore okay to consume “safe starches” that will largely digest into glucose."

4b8bf8683630d2acfb13303e5f311e71
79 · October 05, 2011 at 3:15 AM

From my limited knowledge -- a lot of symptoms from the "diseases of western civilization" are created by glycation. Atherosclerotic plaque, blood vessel stiffening, etc., if not looked at clinically, can be attributed to age, i.e. decreased cardiovascular health, for one, can cause other symptoms which tend to be looked on as part of aging -- like decreased physical performance.

100fd85230060e754fc13394eee6d6f1
18671 · October 05, 2011 at 3:11 AM

I don't think high BG is universal in ZC, btw. Mine was 71 last I checked.

Medium avatar
39841 · October 05, 2011 at 3:10 AM

I think it's important to keep in mind that we have a lot of cellular turnover/repair that is completely normal and healthy for a living thing battling the forces of entropy. We recycle our glycated RBCs just like we recycle (hopefully in time) our oxidized lipoproteins. 150g of starch a day for a healthy person just isn't going to outstrip our ability to cope. 300g a day with 100g of fructose is a whole different story.

4b8bf8683630d2acfb13303e5f311e71
79 · October 05, 2011 at 3:09 AM

There are monosaccharides in tubers, too... The ratio of starch:sugar in veggies could have been (and I'm guessing *was* -- with two asterisks) different in paleolithic times.

Medium avatar
39841 · October 05, 2011 at 3:07 AM

It's generally thought that aging is the result of oxidative stress, not glycation. Fruit would then be a blood glucose spiking agent that could very well reduce aging due to the antioxidants neutralizing ROS.

Medium avatar
39841 · October 05, 2011 at 2:58 AM

Kamal: double asterisk

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
56616 · October 05, 2011 at 2:57 AM

he is referred to as "Kruse" not the quilt

4b8bf8683630d2acfb13303e5f311e71
79 · October 05, 2011 at 2:53 AM

Upvoted for the quote. The irony there is awesome.

8949bf87b0e0aefcad10f29975e4fa2b
8979 · October 05, 2011 at 2:52 AM

Did he update the note? It seems like you were exempted from the "group" when it comes to safe starches. What am I missing?

21fd060d0796fdb8a4a990441e08eae7
24523 · October 05, 2011 at 2:50 AM

I think a starchy tuber has to be starchy in order to fill it's job description. Now tell me how to bold comments.

4b8bf8683630d2acfb13303e5f311e71
79 · October 05, 2011 at 2:48 AM

Also, you said that we've been spiking BG for years -- to what degree? I think I get your argument -- that some BG spiking is fine, in metabolically healthy people -- compared to what, though? I've heard modern veg are much more starchy than they used to be. How much does anyone know about the carb content of veggies for the last 10k+ years?

4b8bf8683630d2acfb13303e5f311e71
79 · October 05, 2011 at 2:48 AM

We are in agreement that some things (e.g. breathing, exercise, surgery) which are damaging in the short-term can be beneficial long-term. I'm wondering where do we make that distinction? What does the science tell us. I believe that neuropathy isn't the only symptom of hyperglyceamia. What if daily yams are just doing incremental damage, which barely outstrips our repair capabilities? It seems like it could just masquerade as aging -- though it could possibly be avoided.

Medium avatar
39841 · October 05, 2011 at 2:43 AM

This whole thing is a bit like telling people that they should only eat beta-carotene and never retinol since the conversion process from the former to the latter is so inefficient that hypervitaminosis A is nigh on impossible. It's a bit ham-handed and too "safety scissors" for my tastes.

21fd060d0796fdb8a4a990441e08eae7
24523 · October 05, 2011 at 2:40 AM

Uh oh, time for a walk-off! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8VwHyc6WHzE

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 05, 2011 at 2:32 AM

Cant do that right M......might affect my red skin huh?

Medium avatar
39841 · October 05, 2011 at 2:25 AM

There should be some amount of glycation at any physiological BG level. The question is whether it's elevated high enough and for long enough postprandially to actually cause significant damage i.e. neuropathy. Hominins have been spiking their blood glucose for millions of years. It may be technically damaging, but so is the inhalation of oxygen. Turns out it works quite well as a final electron acceptor.

Medium avatar
39841 · October 05, 2011 at 2:21 AM

These researchers http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC535723/ were kind enough to starve obese subjects for 5-6 weeks and it looks like they got 19g of glucose a day from the mobilization of triglycerides. Equates to 22% of daily glucose. I would wager that starving for a few weeks counts as being fat-adapted.

21fd060d0796fdb8a4a990441e08eae7
24523 · October 05, 2011 at 2:11 AM

Hold on here...you've been a member for ten days and yet you were able to bold text in a comment? How?? How?!?!?!?? *I just learned how to italicize!*

4b8bf8683630d2acfb13303e5f311e71
79 · October 05, 2011 at 2:09 AM

Travis, do you know if there is glycation at low BG levels? I've heard there is (I think from Chris Kresser and Kurt Harris). If that were the case, then I think Rosedale would be arguing something different than what you're saying he is. Trying to interpret his thinking as graciously as possible, I think he is saying that **excess glucose is bad** -- not all glucose. Thoughts?

4b8bf8683630d2acfb13303e5f311e71
79 · October 05, 2011 at 2:08 AM

Travis, do you know if there is glycation at low BG levels? I've heard there is (I think from Chris Kresser and Kurt Harris). If that were the case, then I think Rosedale would be arguing something different than what you're saying he is. Trying to interpret his thinking as graciously as possible, I think he is saying that **excess glucose** is bad not all glucose. Thoughts?

0dbd7154d909b97fe774d1655754f195
16131 · October 05, 2011 at 2:04 AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nHRERLEM2eE

21fd060d0796fdb8a4a990441e08eae7
24523 · October 05, 2011 at 2:00 AM

It would be SO cool if Paul were a rapper. He would totally own with his evidence-based rapping. Stabby, I forgot about the immune thing, and should never forget that for every paper I've read Paul has read 900.

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
56616 · October 05, 2011 at 2:00 AM

But I love them.... (ellipses...and carbs...)

66e6b190e62fb3bcf42d4c60801c7bf6
12407 · October 05, 2011 at 1:59 AM

and stabby drops the mic while yelling "sexual chocolate" while storming off the stage

Be1dbd31e4a3fccd4394494aa5db256d
17949 · October 05, 2011 at 1:59 AM

And I don't like the argument that because brain disease improve on a ketogenic diet then that means that it is glucose's fault. Lipotoxicity improves on a low fat diet but it wasn't fat's fault. Stuff that is messed up is not comparable to stuff that isn't messed up. Paul does think that the autophagy from ketosis is good, though. So he says that a couple days a week people should dip into ketosis for a while, and that should be the same as ketosis all of the time.

4b8bf8683630d2acfb13303e5f311e71
79 · October 05, 2011 at 1:57 AM

This is intriguing. I like the back and forth between all these thinkers -- it gives me time to spend outside of thinking about nutrition.

Be1dbd31e4a3fccd4394494aa5db256d
17949 · October 05, 2011 at 1:57 AM

Paul says that the immune system needs glucose too, quite a bit of it. It uses it as a killing agent. And when we don't get very much glucose in the diet, yes we increase production of ketones, but we also slow down the metabolism in order to conserve glucose. He says it depends on how infected one is whether one needs 50g of glucose or 100g, but he says that we do need some starch because low carb vegetables don't allow the glucose to absorb quickly enough and it gets gobbled up by gut flora. He also references this stuff. You know what? Paul>everybody. Peace the frack out.

Be1dbd31e4a3fccd4394494aa5db256d
17949 · October 05, 2011 at 1:55 AM

Paul says that the immune system needs glucose too, quick a bit of it. It uses it as a killing agent. And when we don't get very much glucose in the diet, yes we increase production of ketones, but we also slow down the metabolism in order to conserve glucose. He says it depends on how infected one is whether or not they need 50g of glucose or 100g, but he says that we do need some starch because low carb vegetables don't allow the glucose to absorb quickly enough and it gets gobbled up by gut flora. He also references this stuff. You know what? Paul> everybody. Peace the frack out.

21fd060d0796fdb8a4a990441e08eae7
24523 · October 05, 2011 at 1:49 AM

Melissa, you overuse ellipses one more time and I'm calling the cops on you.

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
56616 · October 05, 2011 at 1:48 AM

I like having it both ways- low carb in the winter, high-carb in the summer. So far it works for me.

Cbb1134f8e93067d1271c97bb2e15ef6
5477 · October 05, 2011 at 1:48 AM

Tuberheads! Tuberheads! Chase the @#$%!!! tuberheads down and bake and MASH them mightily!!!

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
56616 · October 05, 2011 at 1:47 AM

Kamal...you are a moderator...luckily none of us has the power to see who downvoted what. Either way, the Jaminets were devoted long-term ketogenic folks, I hardly think they pulled a self-fulfilling prophecy.

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
56616 · October 05, 2011 at 1:45 AM

oh snap, can't believe Rosedale lumped you in with starchers. He's really in the mood to burn bridges!

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 05, 2011 at 1:40 AM

Dude.....its all aboutmthe epigentic switches are counted by the brain......and our environment determines how the switches are set. This macronutrient bullshit has to go by the way side.

21fd060d0796fdb8a4a990441e08eae7
24523 · October 05, 2011 at 1:36 AM

Paul Jaminet was an astrophysicist at Harvard! I think this is all coming together now, somehow. With the help of gluons.

95eda9fa0cec952b482e869c34a566b6
3891 · October 05, 2011 at 1:34 AM

Yes, and do we really understand the word star? There's black holes, red giants, white dwarves, neutron and the spinning version known as a pulsar, and so on. The universe isn't messing around. I mean, it even gave us quasars and the possibility of worm holes.

95eda9fa0cec952b482e869c34a566b6
3891 · October 05, 2011 at 1:33 AM

Yes, and do we really understand the word star? There's black holes, red giants, white dwarves, neutron and pulsar, and so on. The universe isn't messing around. I mean, it even gave us pulsars and the possibility of worm holes.

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 05, 2011 at 1:26 AM

And i added more comments on the rest of his responses

21fd060d0796fdb8a4a990441e08eae7
24523 · October 05, 2011 at 1:25 AM

Nice, Quilt! He'll think twice about sticking "Kruse" into future lists.

66e6b190e62fb3bcf42d4c60801c7bf6
12407 · October 05, 2011 at 1:25 AM

and light on the ketones since i suspect one of those dreaded tuberheads did this!!!

21fd060d0796fdb8a4a990441e08eae7
24523 · October 05, 2011 at 1:24 AM

Unless long term keto dieting induces a large jump in glycerol use, Rosedale might indeed be off in his glucuneogenesis bit. Maybe he knows something that we collectively didn't pick up here? http://paleohacks.com/questions/26415/how-much-glucose-can-we-synthesize-from-glycerol-in-our-dietary-triglycerides#axzz1ZrgQDdBg

1f8384be58052b6b96f476e475abdc74
2231 · October 05, 2011 at 1:22 AM

30BAD guys i know it... lol

21fd060d0796fdb8a4a990441e08eae7
24523 · October 05, 2011 at 1:19 AM

What if moderators could find out who invisible downvoters were and call the cops on them? When the cops arrived, the probability of pee in your pants would be at least 50%.

499f188c87c6980742b9ba98caa6f563
683 · October 05, 2011 at 1:19 AM

Judy Garland was the *real* star.

499f188c87c6980742b9ba98caa6f563
683 · October 05, 2011 at 1:18 AM

Judy Garland was the real star.

1f8384be58052b6b96f476e475abdc74
2231 · October 05, 2011 at 1:18 AM

not to mention it wasnt MY arguement, just putting juice up from articles linked

21fd060d0796fdb8a4a990441e08eae7
24523 · October 05, 2011 at 1:14 AM

Oh man, next time I get drunk and talk about philosophy, I hope Socrates comes up! (Sehcrats, that is)

98bf2ca7f8778c79cd3f6c962011cfdc
24271 · October 05, 2011 at 1:12 AM

Is that really the best you have cliff?

Be1dbd31e4a3fccd4394494aa5db256d
17949 · October 05, 2011 at 1:11 AM

Starches backwards is Sehcrats, which sounds like a drunk guy saying Socrates, Socrates taught us that we didn't really know anything. That could also be why. We could debate this if you want, Kamal.

667f6c030b0245d71d8ef50c72b097dc
15976 · October 05, 2011 at 1:11 AM

I like the "which is worse: cort of post pran" thing, T.

21fd060d0796fdb8a4a990441e08eae7
24523 · October 05, 2011 at 1:11 AM

Like my grandma always told me: "Y'all better not tell your opinion like it's a fact!" (my grandma is indian though and doesn't know english, but that's what it would sound like in english)

0dbd7154d909b97fe774d1655754f195
16131 · October 05, 2011 at 1:10 AM

Me too! I am not an invisible downvoter.

98bf2ca7f8778c79cd3f6c962011cfdc
24271 · October 05, 2011 at 1:10 AM

I'm up voting you but only because you made me laugh.

Be1dbd31e4a3fccd4394494aa5db256d
17949 · October 05, 2011 at 1:09 AM

And I don't know what he meant about Kitava either. I do know that all of the evidence points to them not having pathological leptin resistance due to eating sweet potatoes. FFS.

742ff8ba4ff55e84593ede14ac1c3cab
3521 · October 05, 2011 at 1:09 AM

woops, meant to say "...without diabetes"

0dbd7154d909b97fe774d1655754f195
16131 · October 05, 2011 at 1:08 AM

SOOOO Starches is a Liza Minnelli Cryptographic Hardware System. Duh!

21fd060d0796fdb8a4a990441e08eae7
24523 · October 05, 2011 at 1:08 AM

You have Google on your finger? That's so high-tech!

Be1dbd31e4a3fccd4394494aa5db256d
17949 · October 05, 2011 at 1:07 AM

I understand them, but they are just hypotheses. There isn't a single bit of evidence that 100g of glucose is going to cause any significant amount of pathological glycation. We have ample defense against that if we are eating properly, and glucose is supposed to be cleared very quickly if we are eating properly. Sounds like grasping at straws. I have found one study that claimed to show that you could only induce leptin resistance if you had hyperleptinemia, but we need to distinguish between an acute spike, probably benign, and a chronic spike, which is pretty much what causes problems.

21fd060d0796fdb8a4a990441e08eae7
24523 · October 05, 2011 at 1:07 AM

I also have a hard time believing that, although our brains and red blood cells run pretty okay on glucose, we were meant to avoid glycation by glucose at any cost.

66e6b190e62fb3bcf42d4c60801c7bf6
12407 · October 05, 2011 at 1:07 AM

i'm interested in why this was downvoted. i think this is a legit argument even though i feel differently.

0dbd7154d909b97fe774d1655754f195
16131 · October 05, 2011 at 1:07 AM

Verb: (of a movie, play, or other show) Have (someone) as a principal performer: "a film starring Liza Minnelli". Definition for ches: Workshop on Cryptographic Hardware and Embedded Systems (CHES) is a workshop for cryptography research, focusing on the implementation of cryptographic algorithm. The two general areas treated are the efficient and the secure implementation of algorithms. Am I the only one with a GOOGLE finger????

667f6c030b0245d71d8ef50c72b097dc
15976 · October 05, 2011 at 1:06 AM

I've been wondering for years about that damn "ches" too. Nothing and I mean nothing on wiki

21fd060d0796fdb8a4a990441e08eae7
24523 · October 05, 2011 at 1:04 AM

occam's razor cuts through any criticism of kitavans!

21fd060d0796fdb8a4a990441e08eae7
24523 · October 05, 2011 at 1:02 AM

Too many unsupported claims-- although maybe he provides support for them elsewhere. (probably, hopefully, as he is totally smart)

E5c7f14800c5992831f5c70fa746dc5c
12847 · October 05, 2011 at 12:57 AM

Fear mongering plain and simple.

1f8384be58052b6b96f476e475abdc74
2231 · October 05, 2011 at 12:55 AM

"Leptin levels and ultimately leptin resistance, and therefore chronic diseases of aging including obesity and diabetes, are determined more from spikes and elevations in glucose following meals than anything else including the amount of one's stored fat. Though elevations in glucose raising insulin may not be the major cause of obesity and fat accumulation (though still very important), the fact that glucose spikes leptin still places sugars, including glucose from so-called "safe starches" and fructose, at the centerpiece of obesity and disease. "

742ff8ba4ff55e84593ede14ac1c3cab
3521 · October 05, 2011 at 12:53 AM

...but in all seriousness, I find it extremely hard to believe that we are all diabetic to some extent and that 'safe starches' are harmful. Many cultures consume high starch diets with diabetes. Plus we have a high amount of amylase to digest starch.

742ff8ba4ff55e84593ede14ac1c3cab
3521 · October 05, 2011 at 12:51 AM

Rosedale is full of...

1f8384be58052b6b96f476e475abdc74
2231 · October 05, 2011 at 12:50 AM

curious as well i like dr rosedale

Total Views
15K

Recent Activity
Medium avatar

Last Activity
43D AGO

Followers
1

Get Free Paleo Recipes Instantly

23 Answers

Medium avatar
24
39841 · October 05, 2011 at 1:00 AM

So he thinks that nearly everyone has diabetes and that glucose is always a glycating poison. OK, so why does the body still force (mostly via the metabolically costly, and one might argue toxic, process of gluconeogenesis) a blood glucose level of 70-100 mg/dL in zero carbers? Is that glycating proteins? Sure, who cares? Whether you're zero carb or zero food, the CNS and RBCs will require glucose and scavenge it one way or another.

Which is worse: A cortisol spike or a postprandial blood glucose spike?

Seems like another example of biochemical reductionism resulting in the demonization of an essential component of our physiology.

Handing your body a preformed version of something it wants (that in excess is toxic) is not the same as poisoning it.

Glycerol accounts for a little over 20% of glucose production during total starvation: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7647479

2870a69b9c0c0a19a919e54cb3a62137
1515 · October 05, 2011 at 12:55 PM

70-100? Mine was 54 last it was measured.

667f6c030b0245d71d8ef50c72b097dc
15976 · October 05, 2011 at 1:11 AM

I like the "which is worse: cort of post pran" thing, T.

4b8bf8683630d2acfb13303e5f311e71
79 · October 05, 2011 at 2:09 AM

Travis, do you know if there is glycation at low BG levels? I've heard there is (I think from Chris Kresser and Kurt Harris). If that were the case, then I think Rosedale would be arguing something different than what you're saying he is. Trying to interpret his thinking as graciously as possible, I think he is saying that **excess glucose is bad** -- not all glucose. Thoughts?

4b8bf8683630d2acfb13303e5f311e71
79 · October 05, 2011 at 3:36 AM

Ambimorph: So was mine when I was zc. I agree about gluconeogenesis.

Medium avatar
39841 · October 05, 2011 at 5:31 AM

Rosedale seems to have an anti-fructose argument masquerading as an anti-starch argument. The glycation and insulin resistance is most potent with fructose, but even that doesn't really matter if it's whole fruit consumed by an active individual. I only advocate the consumption of the amount of starch that repletes the amount of glycogen depleted per day. Even I'd be hesitant to "go Kitavan."

0dbd7154d909b97fe774d1655754f195
16131 · October 05, 2011 at 6:37 PM

Travis this it totally unrelated but this was a zinc article that just came out. Pretty interesting. http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2011-10/uots-zri100511.php

Medium avatar
39841 · October 05, 2011 at 2:58 AM

Kamal: double asterisk

Medium avatar
39841 · October 05, 2011 at 5:29 AM

Ambimorph: I hadn't seen anyone go that low in BG; I edited my range. I suppose that there are hormonal effects either way. I still don't understand how 25g of (net?) carbs could make that big of a difference. The effect on lipolysis/lipid oxidation would be fairly small and fleeting, unless we're talking about an increase in overall appetite. I guess I don't have a complete enough understanding of what mechanisms are varying between individuals.

4b8bf8683630d2acfb13303e5f311e71
79 · October 05, 2011 at 2:08 AM

Travis, do you know if there is glycation at low BG levels? I've heard there is (I think from Chris Kresser and Kurt Harris). If that were the case, then I think Rosedale would be arguing something different than what you're saying he is. Trying to interpret his thinking as graciously as possible, I think he is saying that **excess glucose** is bad not all glucose. Thoughts?

21fd060d0796fdb8a4a990441e08eae7
24523 · October 05, 2011 at 2:50 AM

I think a starchy tuber has to be starchy in order to fill it's job description. Now tell me how to bold comments.

Medium avatar
39841 · October 05, 2011 at 3:10 AM

I think it's important to keep in mind that we have a lot of cellular turnover/repair that is completely normal and healthy for a living thing battling the forces of entropy. We recycle our glycated RBCs just like we recycle (hopefully in time) our oxidized lipoproteins. 150g of starch a day for a healthy person just isn't going to outstrip our ability to cope. 300g a day with 100g of fructose is a whole different story.

Medium avatar
39841 · October 05, 2011 at 2:25 AM

There should be some amount of glycation at any physiological BG level. The question is whether it's elevated high enough and for long enough postprandially to actually cause significant damage i.e. neuropathy. Hominins have been spiking their blood glucose for millions of years. It may be technically damaging, but so is the inhalation of oxygen. Turns out it works quite well as a final electron acceptor.

100fd85230060e754fc13394eee6d6f1
18671 · October 05, 2011 at 3:20 AM

Not that it makes a difference in you basic argument, but my BG was last measured at 71. I don't think gluconeogenesis is necessarily more costly than dealing with the hormonal effects of ingesting glucose.

Medium avatar
39841 · October 05, 2011 at 2:21 AM

These researchers http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC535723/ were kind enough to starve obese subjects for 5-6 weeks and it looks like they got 19g of glucose a day from the mobilization of triglycerides. Equates to 22% of daily glucose. I would wager that starving for a few weeks counts as being fat-adapted.

21fd060d0796fdb8a4a990441e08eae7
24523 · October 05, 2011 at 1:24 AM

Unless long term keto dieting induces a large jump in glycerol use, Rosedale might indeed be off in his glucuneogenesis bit. Maybe he knows something that we collectively didn't pick up here? http://paleohacks.com/questions/26415/how-much-glucose-can-we-synthesize-from-glycerol-in-our-dietary-triglycerides#axzz1ZrgQDdBg

100fd85230060e754fc13394eee6d6f1
18671 · October 05, 2011 at 3:11 AM

I don't think high BG is universal in ZC, btw. Mine was 71 last I checked.

Medium avatar
39841 · October 05, 2011 at 5:20 AM

Many would like to wish away the fact that we require glucose, but there's no point. It's obvious that we as humans have a lot of unanswered questions about which diet is truly optimal. The whole point of the paleo idea is that when in doubt, you default to what has a broad evolutionary precedent. ZC simply doesn't have it. It's *possible* that it's best for longevity, but carbohydrate starvation is simply too much like actual starvation from a biochemical standpoint for my tastes.

Medium avatar
39841 · October 05, 2011 at 3:19 AM

Atherosclerotic plaques are the result of oxidized lipoproteins becoming foam cells as a result of macrophages eating them. Arterial calcification from a K-2 deficiency plays a role in both of those issues. Neither is a normal part of aging and neither is related to starch consumption. If it were, we would see those in hunter gatherer societies consuming a lot of starch, but we don't.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 05, 2011 at 9:00 AM

@Ambimorph: Tell me, how is your immunity ? Do you get sick ? According to some, you shouldn't, if you have enough Ascorbate. If not, I suspect you will be very responsive to it.

Medium avatar
39841 · October 05, 2011 at 2:43 AM

This whole thing is a bit like telling people that they should only eat beta-carotene and never retinol since the conversion process from the former to the latter is so inefficient that hypervitaminosis A is nigh on impossible. It's a bit ham-handed and too "safety scissors" for my tastes.

Medium avatar
39841 · October 05, 2011 at 5:16 AM

The problem with your analogy is that our red blood cells must run on glucose and our brains will run partly on glucose no matter what. On the 40th day of starvation, the brain still uses 40g of glucose a day. It doesn't drop below that point until death. The heart can run on glucose, ketone bodies, lipids whatever. It has the highest expression of LPL and the highest concentration of VLDL receptors because it needs a ton of energy of any time all the time and the consequences of an interruption are death.

Medium avatar
39841 · October 05, 2011 at 6:48 PM

Meredith: Thanks a lot for the link. This may partly explain my greater lucidity following zinc supplementation.

Medium avatar
39841 · October 05, 2011 at 3:07 AM

It's generally thought that aging is the result of oxidative stress, not glycation. Fruit would then be a blood glucose spiking agent that could very well reduce aging due to the antioxidants neutralizing ROS.

4b8bf8683630d2acfb13303e5f311e71
79 · October 05, 2011 at 2:48 AM

We are in agreement that some things (e.g. breathing, exercise, surgery) which are damaging in the short-term can be beneficial long-term. I'm wondering where do we make that distinction? What does the science tell us. I believe that neuropathy isn't the only symptom of hyperglyceamia. What if daily yams are just doing incremental damage, which barely outstrips our repair capabilities? It seems like it could just masquerade as aging -- though it could possibly be avoided.

4b8bf8683630d2acfb13303e5f311e71
79 · October 05, 2011 at 10:08 PM

I appreciate the view from the micro perspective -- but what about the macro/whole health view? Unfortunately we don't have many clinical longitudinal trials on carnivores that I know of. I've yet to see you make a convincing point that life without excessive glucose is suboptimal. I'm not talking about high end athletes either who needs constant replenishment of glycogen to stave of cortisol spikes.

4b8bf8683630d2acfb13303e5f311e71
79 · October 05, 2011 at 2:48 AM

Also, you said that we've been spiking BG for years -- to what degree? I think I get your argument -- that some BG spiking is fine, in metabolically healthy people -- compared to what, though? I've heard modern veg are much more starchy than they used to be. How much does anyone know about the carb content of veggies for the last 10k+ years?

4b8bf8683630d2acfb13303e5f311e71
79 · October 05, 2011 at 3:15 AM

From my limited knowledge -- a lot of symptoms from the "diseases of western civilization" are created by glycation. Atherosclerotic plaque, blood vessel stiffening, etc., if not looked at clinically, can be attributed to age, i.e. decreased cardiovascular health, for one, can cause other symptoms which tend to be looked on as part of aging -- like decreased physical performance.

21fd060d0796fdb8a4a990441e08eae7
24523 · October 05, 2011 at 2:11 AM

Hold on here...you've been a member for ten days and yet you were able to bold text in a comment? How?? How?!?!?!?? *I just learned how to italicize!*

4b8bf8683630d2acfb13303e5f311e71
79 · October 05, 2011 at 3:09 AM

There are monosaccharides in tubers, too... The ratio of starch:sugar in veggies could have been (and I'm guessing *was* -- with two asterisks) different in paleolithic times.

4b8bf8683630d2acfb13303e5f311e71
79 · October 05, 2011 at 3:22 AM

I appreciate your attempt to explain away everything I am asking, Travis -- but do you see what I am getting at? I'm trying to point out that it is unclear what a the optimum dose of something which is toxic at high levels is. Sure, some starches can be tolerated indefinitely. Agreed. But can you say that you are better off thereby? The metaphor that I've hear KGH and others use is the multi-fuel stove model or the engine model. We, just as stoves and car engines, are capable of running on multiple fuels. I know that I can put alcohol in my car in emergencies -- but I wouldn't otherwise.

100fd85230060e754fc13394eee6d6f1
18671 · October 05, 2011 at 1:57 PM

I'm rarely sick, but it's not never. With 3 children, I get plenty of exposure. I can remember one time feeling ill for 2 hours when there was a flu going through. I also had a mild head cold last year, which I remember because I cleaned my ear canal with a cotton swab and the swollen ear drum burst -- not fun. I don't remember any other times in recent years, but having studied memory, I don't trust it very much. :-) One thing that may reflect high immunity: I used to get approx annual cold sores, and basically haven't since going ZC. (One time I felt one coming on, but it never appeared.)

4b8bf8683630d2acfb13303e5f311e71
79 · October 05, 2011 at 10:06 PM

Hmm.. Never wished away glucose as a fuel, Travis. And my metaphor still works -- combustion engines rely on combustion regardless of fuel. I see your point about starvation -- but I think you're exaggerating. Similarity doesn't imply that both processes are necessarily the same. I had no symptoms of starvation on ZC and I wasn't even forced ZC by disease or ill-health like many others. Body comp., eyesight, skin, mental clarity, BM regularity, and energy levels all got better for me on ZC. It was an experiment that I learned a lot from.

4b8bf8683630d2acfb13303e5f311e71
79 · October 05, 2011 at 10:03 PM

Hmm.. Never wished away glucose as a fuel, Travis. And my metaphor still works -- combustion engines rely on combustion regardless of fuel. I see how your point about starvation -- but I think you're exaggerating. I had no symptoms of starvation on ZC and I wasn't even forced ZC by disease or ill-health like many others. Body comp., eyesight, skin, mental clarity, BM regularity, and energy levels all got better for me on ZC. It was an experiment that I learned a lot from.

66e6b190e62fb3bcf42d4c60801c7bf6
23
12407 · October 05, 2011 at 1:02 AM

disclaimer: i've been low carb and moderate to high starch and had good experiences with both being that my body was different in each situation. i'm not married to either position- i'm an ideological whore on this subject.

I find KGH a bit more convincing with his analogy that we have evolved to efficiently get energy from two different pathways in the context of a healthy body. i think dr. rosedale, whom i respect and think is right on so much, is overstating by saying everyone is diabetic to a degree. i find it odd how a lot of flailing happens when trying to explain the kitavans and okinawans when an occams razor-type explanation is that the populace is undamaged metabolically so they handle starch fine.

my less than $.02

03fa485bfd54734522755f47a5e6597e
3914 · October 05, 2011 at 12:20 PM

Exactly. I have no trouble believing that a population of humans who haven't inherited gut weakness in the womb and who never ate significant amounts of the neolithic agents of disease (especially gluten) could eat plenty of safe starches and be healthy. Unfortunately, for most of us, that's an irrelevant fantasy. We're already damaged from decades of SAD, and if some of the new ideas about epigenetics are true, our future children may be damaged to some extent even if we eat perfectly from today on. What was safe for a caveman to find and eat may not be safe for us in the same quantities.

D1c02d4fc5125a670cf419dbb3e18ba7
13692 · October 05, 2011 at 5:46 PM

@LB - I prefer an electric razor to Occam's, but sometimes for my thick bush, I need to break out the machete. Manscaping is totally not Paleo, but a good base cut is the difference between being a chia pet vs a porn star. I know ya feel me bro! Oh, BTW +1 because I agree

21fd060d0796fdb8a4a990441e08eae7
24523 · October 05, 2011 at 1:04 AM

occam's razor cuts through any criticism of kitavans!

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
56616 · October 05, 2011 at 1:48 AM

I like having it both ways- low carb in the winter, high-carb in the summer. So far it works for me.

96bf58d8c6bd492dc5b8ae46203fe247
37187 · October 05, 2011 at 3:14 PM

Thanks, Melissa HGL! I think we're meant to eat differently by season and instead we seem to overlay a template of "ideal" diet. In the growing season, we ate eggs and meat plus every carb we could find; in winter we ate what was available, mostly meat, and I bet we craved the carbs but cravings did no harm in that context.

66e6b190e62fb3bcf42d4c60801c7bf6
12407 · October 05, 2011 at 7:03 PM

my man, where have you been? missing all the fun!

D1c02d4fc5125a670cf419dbb3e18ba7
13692 · October 05, 2011 at 8:50 PM

LB - You know I'm laying low. But I was checking up on my boy Kamal to see how bad he was cheating, and then decided to cheat myself and give PH just a little bit of attention today (not too much though). Like crack or a fine piece o' tail, I usually can't do just a little. Oh well.

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
22
1722 · October 05, 2011 at 3:43 PM

A few points of info and clarification...

i.e. 'safe starches' and the study "Glycerol accounts for a little over 20% of glucose production during total starvation: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7647479"

The following is the main point of that article; "These findings confirm that the contribution of glycerol to glucose production is directly correlated to its release as a consequence of lipolysis and support the notion that the central physiological role of accelerated lipolysis in fasting is the provision of gluconeogenic precursors."

In other words, the main point of the article is that burning fat results in glycerol used to make glucose. This is only after 4 days. The use of ketones and fatty acids as fuel continues to increase, and the need for glucose (and lean mass catabolism) declines as (carbohydrate and protein) starvation continues. Furthermore, eating fat and not starving will provide greater amounts of fatty acids and glycerol to be used as substrates for energy, reducing the need for glucose further than if one was starving..

Also, sometimes (usually? always?) the truth is more hidden than realized. Another main glucogenic precursor is lactate derived from glucose??? I.e. glucose is recycled, such that the glycerol used to make glucose is also used to make lactate that makes glucose??? This is called the Cori cycle. Glycerol use goes further than what appears on the surface.

For point of interest; George Cahill is considered an expert in this field..

Annu. Rev. Nutr. 2006. FUEL METABOLISM IN STARVATION George F. Cahill, Jr.! Department of Medicine, Harvard Medical School

p.9 "After several weeks of starvation??? Many studies suggest human brain cells can survive with little to no glucose"

But again, the major point is being missed; that there is plenty of substrate to provide all of the glucose necessary without having to eat it, if one is adapted to a high-fat, very low non-fiber carbohydrate diet.

A few other points;

It seems that many people have a hard time understanding that I am not advocating that what is ???natural??? is best. Dying soon after our children have a reasonable chance to make it on their own is very natural??? a very long post reproductive lifespan is not. What we are trying to do is live unnaturally long, and that's perfectly fine with me and I am endeavoring to find out how.

What I am talking about is optimal diet for optimal health, not just a better, healthier than SAD diet. If that's all we were talking about, then any diet other than the SAD would do. An optimal diet to me is one that might extend youth and maximal lifespan, not just average lifespan. There are no societies on earth that can reveal how to do this, not the Okinawans, not the Kitavans. However, the science of the biology of aging has powerful clues.

I am not saying that we do not need glucose. I'm saying that we do not need to go out of our way to eat it. I understand that glucose is needed for many functions such as cell recognition, manufacture of mucus, the immune system, etc. However, just eating glucose will not necessarily improve those functions, any more than eating extra protein will build more muscle, and will likely impair those functions. There must be an up regulation in genetic expression of enhanced immune system function for glucose to be utilized, and taking extra glucose will not do this; other factors and hormones regulate this. What glucose is necessary can be supplied without having to eat it and without the concurrent detrimental effects of non-enzymatic glycation and elevated insulin and leptin. That is what I am saying. I have also said that having zero carbohydrate intake is essentially impossible without starving. Cruciferous and other vegetables that I am in favor of, have sugar. Every non-starving animal will have some sugar, for better or for worse. We do not need to go out of our way to have more, as so-called 'safe starch' proponents advocate.

Medium avatar
39841 · October 05, 2011 at 5:43 PM

If ketone-bodies were the preferred fuel source of the brain, wouldn't we be storing them instead of, or at least alongside, liver glycogen? Wouldn't their production always be at a maximal rate instead of in the absence of glucose? Isn't it a bit presumptuous to imply that the brain's default fuel preferences are incorrect and that evolution made a mistake?

0dbd7154d909b97fe774d1655754f195
16131 · October 05, 2011 at 3:57 PM

A friend of mine gave me this tid bit "Hydrolyzing triglyceride so that fat can be used in the mitochondria of liver and fat cells is dependent hydrolysis from hormone sensitive lipase which is activated by cortisol which is elvated due a rise in glucagon in response to dropping blood sugar. Non-glucose based control of blood sugar = higher cortisol." I don't know what it means, but people for sure use the elevated cortisol argument as a reason not to go low carb. Any thoughts about this would be great. Thanks!

100fd85230060e754fc13394eee6d6f1
18671 · October 06, 2011 at 2:55 AM

Indeed! It is indisputable that humans evolved to use both.

3c6b4eed18dc57f746755b698426e7c8
5132 · October 06, 2011 at 2:04 PM

I mean continuous, unremitting and persistent constipation that could only be relieved by adding safe starch. But then I ain't the only one.

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 05, 2011 at 7:11 PM

When I hear somebody say the brain works best on glucose they are speaking 1960-70's understanding of brain CMRO2 and CBF studies. It dates them badly.

Ba686a7b91a9c04f18170dd4ac762968
764 · October 06, 2011 at 12:36 AM

"The idea that "natural" is irrelevant and that you can game the system is not uncommon in medicine, and not particularly effective either. Isn't it a bit presumptuous to imply that the brain's default fuel preferences are incorrect and that evolution made a mistake?" - TRAVIS "I guess you are looking at it from a non hormone optic" - QUILT I favor Travis' wide field of view binocular over the narrow field of view high power "hormone' optic. It makes absolutely no sense that neurons only start using ketone bodies under nutritional stress- glucose shortage - if that is the "best"....

3c6b4eed18dc57f746755b698426e7c8
5132 · October 06, 2011 at 5:48 AM

Ambi, those studies also showed susceptibility to kidney stones and other complications that beset ketogenic diets. I agree with PHD 100% on this mainly because I've experienced the very same complications while on a ketogenic diet: constipation due to mucosal dryness; fungal toes and scaly feet that resembled an alligator's; dry eyes (although for me this may have otehr causes); fainting spells when getting up from a chair; possible hypothyroidism, as I display subclinical symptoms; and low LIBIDO! All these I attribute specifically to my ketogenic diet experiment that lasted 12 mos.

100fd85230060e754fc13394eee6d6f1
18671 · October 06, 2011 at 12:59 AM

"Works best" is a bit vague. There are plenty of studies that are at least suggestive that ketone bodies are uniquely healthy brain fuel. They are certainly neuroprotective, reducing the effects of trauma, and various neurodegenerative states. They are efficient, and do decrease ROS production and inflammation.

21fd060d0796fdb8a4a990441e08eae7
24523 · October 05, 2011 at 3:50 PM

Travis Culp posted this above: "These researchers were kind enough to starve obese subjects for 5-6 weeks and it looks like they got 19g of glucose a day from the mobilization of triglycerides. Equates to 22% of daily glucose. I would wager that starving for a few weeks counts as being fat-adapted." ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC535723

21fd060d0796fdb8a4a990441e08eae7
24523 · October 05, 2011 at 3:52 PM

While eating fat would provide some more glycerol than starving, I can't imagine it would be a huge amount more (since you'd still be burning predominantly fat either way, but with a lowered metabolism from starving, would presumably burn less fat). Is this correct?

100fd85230060e754fc13394eee6d6f1
18671 · October 06, 2011 at 2:03 PM

Namby, your experiences are interesting to me. But my comment really had nothing to do with whether it's better for your whole system to eat starch, it was whether ketones are a better fuel for the brain specifically. So the studies I'm talking about, but didn't name, show no such thing.

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
56616 · October 05, 2011 at 3:52 PM

Ethnographic studies might not tell us the optimum, but they can rule out the idea that a low-carb low-fiber diet is the gold standard for anti-aging since there have been many cultures that eat these diets and do not have exceptional longevity.

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
56616 · October 06, 2011 at 1:48 AM

both systems have their places and it's likely humans evolved to use both

Medium avatar
39841 · October 05, 2011 at 5:08 PM

The part that sticks out to me is how much these very low carb diets resemble starvation biochemically. I guess I just have a hard time believing that doing a lot of the things that the body does to cope with starvation year-round for decades is optimal for health. Seems like it's giving undue weight to certain populations of hominins during glacial maxima at the expense of the majority of our evolution and the current ethnographic record. The idea that "natural" is irrelevant and that you can *game* the system is not uncommon in medicine, and not particularly effective either.

1f8384be58052b6b96f476e475abdc74
2231 · October 06, 2011 at 12:42 AM

soooo for a young person trying to become fertile, the bio-chemical and physiological changes/signals brought on my a fatty acid burning system is prolly the worst idea possible?????????

3c6b4eed18dc57f746755b698426e7c8
5132 · October 06, 2011 at 6:15 AM

Add to that no libido and you do feel like an Inuit stuck in Winter Wonderland with no spear to throw. No Libido + Constipation + Low Energy + Dry Skin + Creeping Hpothyroidism = No Pursuit of Happiness.

100fd85230060e754fc13394eee6d6f1
18671 · October 06, 2011 at 1:03 AM

I find the term "default fuel preference" confusing. It presupposes a default diet. When ketones are not available, the brain uses glucose, when they are, it uses them.

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 06, 2011 at 6:42 AM

I have very successfully treated multiple patients with the primary complaint of constipation using a high fat, low carbohydrate diet. Constipation and fatigue is sometimes a problem with low carbohydrate, high-protein diets. Fatigue after the first several weeks is generally only a problem if enough fat is not eaten because of our fat phobic society, or if most of the consumed fat is long chain saturated, that is harder to burn.

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 05, 2011 at 7:10 PM

The brain does work best on ketone bodies. There is copious data on this and the advantage is seen by decreased leakiness at the first cytochrome and by the FADH in the ketone pathways that further decrease ROS at neuronal mitochondria. Matt Lalonde left a comment about this very issue on my blog. And Travis ketogenic diets are not like starvation at all. The biological hormonal response is completely different. I guess you are looking at it from a non hormone optic but that to me makes no sense considering hormonal response is how the brain controls 20 trillion cells.

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
56616 · October 05, 2011 at 8:29 PM

There is no evidence that the brain works best on ketone bodies. Where are you finding this?

Medium avatar
39841 · October 06, 2011 at 8:19 PM

Ambi: If ketone-bodies were preferred, I would expect overeating to result in up-regulated ketogenesis and excretion of glucose. Instead, in the presence of glucose, we see excretion of ketones, even if a person is eating a highly ketogenic fat like coconut.

100fd85230060e754fc13394eee6d6f1
18671 · October 07, 2011 at 7:30 PM

Travis, glucose is preferred by some tissue, ketones by some other, including parts of the brain, and lactate by other. Preferred is a terrible term, because it makes it sound like the tissue "wants" it most. This may or may not be the case, and so it creates a lot of confusion.

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
56616 · October 05, 2011 at 8:33 PM

There is absolutely no research scientist out there who believes that ketones are the preferred fuel for the brain in adults. It's sad for me to see the paleo community lap woo up just because it comes from an MD.

3c6b4eed18dc57f746755b698426e7c8
5132 · October 06, 2011 at 6:03 AM

It's all relative but the argument from the safe starch Paleo camp has been that more ethnic groups have been healthy eating starchy-based diets than ketogenic diets. And that a significant portion of experimenters face aforemntioned side effects. This is not just isolated cases or a noisy minority. I mean, constipation is an epidemic among low-carbers; most just don't talk about it. When you actually attain fecal incontinence you finally come to your senses and realize that you don't need your colon walls to be stone dry, giving birth to Bristol Chart 1 rabbit pellets.

3c6b4eed18dc57f746755b698426e7c8
5132 · October 06, 2011 at 5:57 AM

In fact, I'm a t2 diabetic that's doing moderate-carb Paleo w/safe starches, as the above problems of ketosis became too debilitating (especially constipation). At first I thought I'd sacrifice BG control. No! My A1c is now lower than when I was ketogenic: 5.5 vs. 5.7. It's counterintuitive: sweet potatoes actually make me more insulin sensitive, while a ketogenic diet froze out my insulin. For the metabolically deranged (which u seeem to be), VLCing and ketosis might be ideal; but for those who ain't, it is fraught w/unwanted complications that're actually worse than diabetes.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 08, 2011 at 6:40 AM

Its better to say like this: All cells except few can work on ketones, only few can work exclusively on glucose.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 06, 2011 at 3:16 PM

@Namby Pamby - Starch is also an important source for butyrate production in your colon. This could be why you found such an improvement as butyrate has many beneficial effects on your gut lining.

100fd85230060e754fc13394eee6d6f1
18671 · October 06, 2011 at 2:59 AM

Indeed! It is indisputable that humans evolved to use both. That doesn't mean that one can't be "better" than the other, though. But I think it's important to be specific when talking about being better. Being better is only meaningful relative to some goal.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 12:25 PM

Mhm, keeping sugar in bladder to feed urinary bacteria seems like a really bad idea. Maybe if you were peeing constantly :)

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 12:23 PM

Yes, keeping sugar in urine to feed urinary bacteria seems like a really nice idea. Maybe if you were peeing constantly.

3c6b4eed18dc57f746755b698426e7c8
5132 · October 06, 2011 at 2:03 PM

Dr. Ron, that same advice is doled out by Nora Gedgaudaus, Robb Wolff, Dr. Su (mo coconut oil) et al and is about as useful as this clinical pearl given by GIs: "Mo water, mo fiber." That, in turn, is as usefl as: try psyllium husk, try Miralax, Senna, mo exercise, crouch low, avoid hard cheese, dig enzymes, try probiotics, try prebiotics." None of that worked except for Paul Jaminet's suggestion of adding 150g of safe starch. Paul has this low-carb demon figgered out. Colon moisture immediately returned. We're not talking about occasional, sporadic or even frequent constipation.

1f8384be58052b6b96f476e475abdc74
19
2231 · October 05, 2011 at 1:01 AM

As such, what Jaminet is recommending is a self-fulfilling prophecy; requiring the consumption of glucose forming carbohydrates such as potatoes and rice increases blood glucose and insulin enough to greatly reduce ketone production, necessitating the use of glucose by the brain. This is not good. I have talked decades about the change in brain function when it converts from glucose to primarily ketone use; it becomes much healthier. Studies are now pouring in on the connection between glucose and chronic brain diseases. Jaminet rightly mentions the benefit of increasing ketone use in epilepsy. Epilepsy is an extreme of an over excitable brain. Is it possible that a brain primarily burning ketones as its primary fuel may function better all of the time? I believe strongly that the answer to this is yes- rosedale

Be1dbd31e4a3fccd4394494aa5db256d
17949 · October 05, 2011 at 1:55 AM

Paul says that the immune system needs glucose too, quick a bit of it. It uses it as a killing agent. And when we don't get very much glucose in the diet, yes we increase production of ketones, but we also slow down the metabolism in order to conserve glucose. He says it depends on how infected one is whether or not they need 50g of glucose or 100g, but he says that we do need some starch because low carb vegetables don't allow the glucose to absorb quickly enough and it gets gobbled up by gut flora. He also references this stuff. You know what? Paul> everybody. Peace the frack out.

1f8384be58052b6b96f476e475abdc74
2231 · October 05, 2011 at 1:18 AM

not to mention it wasnt MY arguement, just putting juice up from articles linked

Cbb1134f8e93067d1271c97bb2e15ef6
5477 · October 05, 2011 at 1:48 AM

Tuberheads! Tuberheads! Chase the @#$%!!! tuberheads down and bake and MASH them mightily!!!

0dbd7154d909b97fe774d1655754f195
16131 · October 05, 2011 at 2:04 AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nHRERLEM2eE

21fd060d0796fdb8a4a990441e08eae7
24523 · October 05, 2011 at 1:19 AM

What if moderators could find out who invisible downvoters were and call the cops on them? When the cops arrived, the probability of pee in your pants would be at least 50%.

1f8384be58052b6b96f476e475abdc74
2231 · October 05, 2011 at 1:22 AM

30BAD guys i know it... lol

Be1dbd31e4a3fccd4394494aa5db256d
17949 · October 05, 2011 at 1:59 AM

And I don't like the argument that because brain disease improve on a ketogenic diet then that means that it is glucose's fault. Lipotoxicity improves on a low fat diet but it wasn't fat's fault. Stuff that is messed up is not comparable to stuff that isn't messed up. Paul does think that the autophagy from ketosis is good, though. So he says that a couple days a week people should dip into ketosis for a while, and that should be the same as ketosis all of the time.

C0cf19329f850011e66d1ccfa7d10896
278 · October 05, 2011 at 8:30 AM

The body needs glucose.. you just don't need to eat it..

66e6b190e62fb3bcf42d4c60801c7bf6
12407 · October 05, 2011 at 1:25 AM

and light on the ketones since i suspect one of those dreaded tuberheads did this!!!

66e6b190e62fb3bcf42d4c60801c7bf6
12407 · October 05, 2011 at 1:07 AM

i'm interested in why this was downvoted. i think this is a legit argument even though i feel differently.

21fd060d0796fdb8a4a990441e08eae7
24523 · October 05, 2011 at 2:00 AM

It would be SO cool if Paul were a rapper. He would totally own with his evidence-based rapping. Stabby, I forgot about the immune thing, and should never forget that for every paper I've read Paul has read 900.

B3e7d1ab5aeb329fe24cca1de1a0b09c
5242 · October 05, 2011 at 3:50 AM

Valid counter argument.

0dbd7154d909b97fe774d1655754f195
16131 · October 05, 2011 at 1:10 AM

Me too! I am not an invisible downvoter.

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
56616 · October 05, 2011 at 2:00 AM

But I love them.... (ellipses...and carbs...)

21fd060d0796fdb8a4a990441e08eae7
24523 · October 05, 2011 at 1:49 AM

Melissa, you overuse ellipses one more time and I'm calling the cops on you.

66e6b190e62fb3bcf42d4c60801c7bf6
12407 · October 05, 2011 at 1:59 AM

and stabby drops the mic while yelling "sexual chocolate" while storming off the stage

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
56616 · October 05, 2011 at 1:47 AM

Kamal...you are a moderator...luckily none of us has the power to see who downvoted what. Either way, the Jaminets were devoted long-term ketogenic folks, I hardly think they pulled a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Be1dbd31e4a3fccd4394494aa5db256d
17949 · October 05, 2011 at 1:57 AM

Paul says that the immune system needs glucose too, quite a bit of it. It uses it as a killing agent. And when we don't get very much glucose in the diet, yes we increase production of ketones, but we also slow down the metabolism in order to conserve glucose. He says it depends on how infected one is whether one needs 50g of glucose or 100g, but he says that we do need some starch because low carb vegetables don't allow the glucose to absorb quickly enough and it gets gobbled up by gut flora. He also references this stuff. You know what? Paul>everybody. Peace the frack out.

8ea84667a7f11ac3967f2ecfcad28ad8
641 · October 06, 2011 at 10:32 PM

It's possible simultaneously include starches in the diet while remaining ketogenic. http://paleohacks.com/questions/64219/carbs-and-ketosis-simultaneously-hack-my-experiment#axzz1a2FlyytT

E34fbfa1bca9ae970c9c7313bf9de9f8
1436 · October 05, 2011 at 6:05 PM

The body needs glucose.. why not eat it?

4781cf8ae1bfcb558dfb056af17bea94
4359 · October 07, 2011 at 3:42 PM

Mallory, ketosis is not the norm and you have provided no evidence that it is healthy. In fact, people in ketosis for long periods of times seems to end up with HIGHER serum glucose than other people. Mysteries yet to be worked out... Nobody had the answers.

100fd85230060e754fc13394eee6d6f1
18671 · October 07, 2011 at 7:39 PM

Jay, where are you getting the higher serum glucose tidbit? I think a couple of highly vocal ZCers have mentioned having higher BG, but it really isn't the norm. And there is surely enough evidence that ketones are therapeutic for multiple brain conditions that by now one needn't repeat it every time it is mentioned. Anyway, I think this a quote, not Mallory's words at all.

21fd060d0796fdb8a4a990441e08eae7
18
24523 · October 05, 2011 at 1:00 AM

Maybe in order to understand starches we have to look at that word itself. STARCHES. Basically, it's made up of two separate words "star" and "ches". What do these words really mean? It's a mystery and that's why so are starches.

On top of that, I tend to agree with Kurt Harris and Paul Jaminet. If I were a caveman, I sure as heck would like to find some potatoes (err, I mean taro) and fill myself up. Underground storage organs rule, as long as you don't need to be low carb for a special reason. Also, I wish Rosedale explained these things more, because they don't make immediate sense to me.:

"Also, there is really no totally safe level of blood sugar that will not cause non-enzymatic glycation or damage."

"...the fact that glucose spikes leptin still places sugars, including glucose from so-called "safe starches" and fructose, at the centerpiece of obesity and disease."

"Though my knowledge of the Kitavans is less, I believe much the same applies to them, and there are similar myths based on poor science and falsities that is being written about them that unfortunately is getting much unwarranted publicity."

667f6c030b0245d71d8ef50c72b097dc
15976 · October 05, 2011 at 1:06 AM

I've been wondering for years about that damn "ches" too. Nothing and I mean nothing on wiki

0dbd7154d909b97fe774d1655754f195
16131 · October 05, 2011 at 1:07 AM

Verb: (of a movie, play, or other show) Have (someone) as a principal performer: "a film starring Liza Minnelli". Definition for ches: Workshop on Cryptographic Hardware and Embedded Systems (CHES) is a workshop for cryptography research, focusing on the implementation of cryptographic algorithm. The two general areas treated are the efficient and the secure implementation of algorithms. Am I the only one with a GOOGLE finger????

21fd060d0796fdb8a4a990441e08eae7
24523 · October 05, 2011 at 1:11 AM

Like my grandma always told me: "Y'all better not tell your opinion like it's a fact!" (my grandma is indian though and doesn't know english, but that's what it would sound like in english)

Be1dbd31e4a3fccd4394494aa5db256d
17949 · October 05, 2011 at 1:09 AM

And I don't know what he meant about Kitava either. I do know that all of the evidence points to them not having pathological leptin resistance due to eating sweet potatoes. FFS.

Be1dbd31e4a3fccd4394494aa5db256d
17949 · October 05, 2011 at 1:07 AM

I understand them, but they are just hypotheses. There isn't a single bit of evidence that 100g of glucose is going to cause any significant amount of pathological glycation. We have ample defense against that if we are eating properly, and glucose is supposed to be cleared very quickly if we are eating properly. Sounds like grasping at straws. I have found one study that claimed to show that you could only induce leptin resistance if you had hyperleptinemia, but we need to distinguish between an acute spike, probably benign, and a chronic spike, which is pretty much what causes problems.

95eda9fa0cec952b482e869c34a566b6
3891 · October 05, 2011 at 1:33 AM

Yes, and do we really understand the word star? There's black holes, red giants, white dwarves, neutron and pulsar, and so on. The universe isn't messing around. I mean, it even gave us pulsars and the possibility of worm holes.

21fd060d0796fdb8a4a990441e08eae7
24523 · October 05, 2011 at 1:08 AM

You have Google on your finger? That's so high-tech!

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 05, 2011 at 3:53 PM

Worm holes? we should not forget about string theory and remember that starches are stings of sugars.

499f188c87c6980742b9ba98caa6f563
683 · October 05, 2011 at 1:18 AM

Judy Garland was the real star.

0dbd7154d909b97fe774d1655754f195
16131 · October 05, 2011 at 1:08 AM

SOOOO Starches is a Liza Minnelli Cryptographic Hardware System. Duh!

95eda9fa0cec952b482e869c34a566b6
3891 · October 05, 2011 at 1:34 AM

Yes, and do we really understand the word star? There's black holes, red giants, white dwarves, neutron and the spinning version known as a pulsar, and so on. The universe isn't messing around. I mean, it even gave us quasars and the possibility of worm holes.

C471216c9fb4fcf886b7ac84a4046b49
1371 · October 05, 2011 at 3:16 PM

WOULd like to know more about hyperleptinemia...

21fd060d0796fdb8a4a990441e08eae7
24523 · October 05, 2011 at 1:07 AM

I also have a hard time believing that, although our brains and red blood cells run pretty okay on glucose, we were meant to avoid glycation by glucose at any cost.

667f6c030b0245d71d8ef50c72b097dc
15976 · October 05, 2011 at 1:16 PM

we need to see what gildenstern has to say about this

21fd060d0796fdb8a4a990441e08eae7
24523 · October 05, 2011 at 1:14 AM

Oh man, next time I get drunk and talk about philosophy, I hope Socrates comes up! (Sehcrats, that is)

Be1dbd31e4a3fccd4394494aa5db256d
17949 · October 05, 2011 at 1:11 AM

Starches backwards is Sehcrats, which sounds like a drunk guy saying Socrates, Socrates taught us that we didn't really know anything. That could also be why. We could debate this if you want, Kamal.

98bf2ca7f8778c79cd3f6c962011cfdc
24271 · October 05, 2011 at 1:10 AM

I'm up voting you but only because you made me laugh.

21fd060d0796fdb8a4a990441e08eae7
24523 · October 05, 2011 at 1:36 AM

Paul Jaminet was an astrophysicist at Harvard! I think this is all coming together now, somehow. With the help of gluons.

D1c02d4fc5125a670cf419dbb3e18ba7
13692 · October 05, 2011 at 3:51 PM

You are a dummy Kumar

499f188c87c6980742b9ba98caa6f563
683 · October 05, 2011 at 1:19 AM

Judy Garland was the *real* star.

Medium avatar
8239 · October 05, 2011 at 5:46 AM

I added starch to my laundry, and damn if I didn't get stiffed.

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
13
1722 · October 07, 2011 at 10:45 AM

@Dr. Harris and for clarifications;

Dr Harris; "It makes absolutely no sense that neurons only start using ketone bodies under nutritional stress- glucose shortage - if that is the "best"

You are making a huge and false assumption; that glucose shortage is equivalent to nutritional stress. The brain's use of ketones may be very natural and likely much more prevalent during much of our evolution, and indeed our human brain did not likely evolve on glucose???see 'Expensive Tissue Hypothesis' cited several times. The brain uses ketones when they are available, i.e.when glucose is not.

You say I said, "It makes sense if excess sugar is poisonous to the body." I do not believe that came from me, though I do not necessarily disagree with the statement.

Dr. Harris; "You are suggesting that the brain only uses glucose as a favor to buffer us from excess glycation?"

I do not know that that is what the statement was suggesting if I didn't say it, however that is not altogether a bad reason???but not the only reason. The brain burns lots of glucose when it is available because it can and when the subsequent toxic effects are not severe enough until after we have had a chance to reproduce, preventing evolution from having selected against it, and where the effects of burning it, such as reduced glycation, offers benefit.

Dr. Harris "If that is so, why does it [ketone burning?] stop at 60% of energy needs."

It doesn't.

Dr. Harris; "Why use any glucose at all and why make the liver engage in GNG to provide it - using precious energy while you are starving?"

For the tissues that need it I suppose???it takes energy to stay alive??? Furthermore, I suspect that it takes far less energy to derive the necessary glucose via GNG from glycerol or lactate than having to eat and digest it from starches when not starving.

Dr. Harris; "PP BG increases do not cause hyperinsulinemia."

Wrong. Have you ever measured glucose, insulin and insulin resistance in people before and after eating. If you had, I do not think you would make that statement. Glucose and insulin will spike after eating starch, insulin following glucose, particularly rice and potatoes, in some more than others, in those already quite resistant, and those not very, and will do so often to a greater degree in a child that has not yet had much chance to become insulin resistant. In fact some believe, including myself, that cells become resistant to insulin, partially to help protect from intracellular glycation. The major damage from glycation occurs in those tissues where glucose entry is largely not mediated by insulin such as nerves, endothelium, basement membrane of kidneys, etc seen so regularly in diabetics. And talking about stress; raising glucose raises insulin, raises leptin, and this stimulates the SNS???raising glucose..

Dr. Harris; "Pathological insulin resistance causes hyperinsulinemia [rather than PPBG]."

Incomplete. What causes the pathological insulin resistance? Glucotoxicity of receptors, overuse of insulin receptors that cannot be recycled fast enough, fatty liver secondary to hyperleptinemia, etc..

You say I said, "There are no redundant systems in the body to control for blood sugar except utilisation, so ... you must utilise it to get rid of it."

Where is that said?

Dr. Harris; "The liver is a large and flexible buffer that in normal people can soak up huge amounts of glucose."

Yes???and your point? Isn't the liver utilizing it then?,,,and doesn't it need instructions to do so? and isn't the liver one of the first and main organs that becomes dysfunctional with insulin and leptin resistance?

Dr. Harris; "All of these systems demonizing dietary carbohydrate fatally conflate glucose as a cellular fuel with glucose in the diet. Hyperglycemia and subsequent glycation is caused by failed glucoregulation, not dietary glucose in "spikes"???"

Hyperglycemia happens after one eats starch/glucose. It is made worse by failed glucoregulation that elevated glucose/spikes in glucose, spikes in leptin helps to cause.

Dr. Harris; "Why did we not evolve to be more independent of the need for glucose at the cellular level?"

To have an anaerobic fuel supply???for fight and flight..

Dr. Harris; "it [glucose] is valuable. Our neurons literally die without it. Period.The reason the brain can run partially on ketones is SO THAT IT CAN LAST LONGER ON LIMITED GLUCOSE WITHOUT DYING."

Since you apparently are still misunderstanding what I and others are saying, and since you like so much to capitalize so we can see better; NO ONE IS SAYING GLUCOSE IS NOT VALUABLE OR NECESSARY. All WE ARE SAYING IS THAT WE SHOULDN'T GO OUT OF OUR WAY TO EAT IT.

5740b342b3b4ca4af7625f9505f7eb5d
281 · October 07, 2011 at 10:53 AM

I ask as intermittent fasting is suppose to be highly beneficial when it comes to preventing and dealing with insulin resistance.

5740b342b3b4ca4af7625f9505f7eb5d
281 · October 07, 2011 at 10:53 AM

How do your PB hyperinsulinemia theories tie into intermittent fasting (daily 16hr fasts, approx. 2 meals a day, no snacks, 100-300g carbs per day)? I ask as intermittent fasting is suppose to be highly beneficial when it comes to preventing and dealing with insulin resistance.

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 08, 2011 at 12:45 AM

majkinetor; I see that you had answered similarly FenFire's question earlier. Thank you.

5740b342b3b4ca4af7625f9505f7eb5d
281 · October 07, 2011 at 1:52 PM

You answered Majkinetor, but not myself, so for the time being I will assume you don't know how to answer the question!

5740b342b3b4ca4af7625f9505f7eb5d
281 · October 07, 2011 at 2:43 PM

"Better results" - I assume you are referring to AGEs? So far, my mood, exercise, sleep, colonic and financial regimen has done better on higher carbohydrates, predominantly from sweet potatoes. I'm actually getting leaner too. Generally I eat around 100-130g per day, but twice that straight after a very heavy lifting session. There are so many factors in choosing foods that I'm starting to get a little bit fed up with blanket statements that are made from what I understand to be fairly poorly understood physiological mechanisms...

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 12:51 PM

Oh FFS, if we are deficient in glucose, we would be HYPOGLYCEMIC and that is MEASURABLE!. The question for me is more, **weather CHO rich foods come with some beneficial substances not present in low glycemic foods**. I know for at least one - POLICOSANOL (sugar cane, yams, wheat, beeswax) - which is used as panacea in Cuba. I don't claim such substance is SO beneficial (it looks like it helps) but it is found ONLY in CHO foods AFAIK.

667f6c030b0245d71d8ef50c72b097dc
15976 · October 08, 2011 at 1:10 PM

day after day I'm checking this thread - just wanted to say thanks to Melissa HGL, Rosedale, Quilt, Maj, and the rest of you. It's semi-educational and just plain enjoyable to see you guys go back and forth. Good stuff, wish I could chime in.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 12:52 PM

Oh FFS, if we are deficient in glucose, we would be *HYPOGLYCEMIC* and that is *MEASURABLE* !. The question for me is more, weather CHO rich foods come with some beneficial substances not present in low glycemic foods. I know for at least one - POLICOSANOL (sugar cane, yams, wheat, beeswax) - which is used as panacea in Cuba. I don't claim such substance is SO beneficial (it looks like it helps) but it is found ONLY in CHO foods AFAIK

5740b342b3b4ca4af7625f9505f7eb5d
281 · October 07, 2011 at 2:52 PM

"Good point. In general, the detriment such as non-enzymatic (unregulated) glycation of a macronutrient such as starch will outweigh any micronutrient benefit it might offer." - Reference?

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 08, 2011 at 12:51 AM

Awesome thread here.....ron and maj!

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 2:25 PM

@ZenFire. IF is similar to ketetosis in many aspects. You spend **majority** of time keeping sugar on native level. You would probably achieve far better results keeping cabs at lower range.

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 08, 2011 at 12:06 AM

If one reads this article and the Expensive Tissue Hypothesis, it is seen that diet quality is being equated with energy density i.e. fat content, as is typical in studies such as this. Melissa, I'm happy to answer questions or entertain other thoughts, but please don't argue just for the sake of argument. Please have some merit... And if people are eating out of my hands, great; they're filled with almonds right now, no starches.

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 07, 2011 at 11:58 PM

Melissa.. this is a very popular theory and accepted by many. This is your field? "Name one study"? OK.. Dietary constraints on encephalization in primates. Am J Phys Anthropol. 2003 Feb;120(2):171-81. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12541334 Abstract; Encephalization, and its relationship to potential selective forces, have been a focus of many studies of primate adaptation. It has been argued that gut size may constrain brain mass because these two types of "expensive tissue"(among others) compete in their metabolic requirements (Aiello and Wheeler [1995] Curr. Anthropol.36:199-221...

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 07, 2011 at 11:09 PM

ZenFire;didn't see the question, and only have so much time. Intermittent fasting as you laid out is one way to limit exposure to excess sugar and protein and should show benefit. The purpose of my study that has been referred to previously is to show similar benefits, at least in laboratory parameters, to caloric restriction. In other words, just “fasting” from sugar/starch and excess protein, while not necessarily having to fast from beneficial fats may be as good or better, and likely easier for most people, than the fasting program you referred to. Thanks for the question.

5740b342b3b4ca4af7625f9505f7eb5d
281 · October 07, 2011 at 10:52 AM

How do your PB hyperinsulinemia theories tie into intermittent fasting (daily 16hr fasts, approx. 2 meals a day, no snacks, 100-300g per day)?

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
56616 · October 07, 2011 at 1:11 PM

Have you read the Expensive Tissue Hypothesis? It's unbelievable that you would cite that as evidence that humans brain evolved a ketogenic optimum. Nowhere in the entire paper do the authors even mention ketones.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 2:24 PM

@ZenFire. IF is similar to ketetosis in many aspects. You spend **big majority** of time keeping sugar on native level.

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 07, 2011 at 1:07 PM

Good point. In general, the detriment such as non-enzymatic (unregulated) glycation of a macronutrient such as starch will outweigh any micronutrient benefit it might offer.

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 08, 2011 at 12:00 AM

abstract cont.; Following from the inverse correlation of gut size with diet quality, the expensive tissue hypothesis predicts that differences in diet quality are positively correlated with differences in brain mass, once the correlation of each variable with body mass is taken into account. We tested this prediction… The results of both methods are consistent with predictions made by the expensive tissue hypothesis…Overall, the results indicate that improved diet quality, by allowing reduction in relative gut mass, is one mechanism involved in increased encephalization. ...

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
56616 · October 07, 2011 at 10:27 PM

Dr. Rosedale, fortunately one of the people who contributed to that paper is my mentor and advisor. You've got people who have no experience with this stuff eating out of your hand. Name one paleoanthropologist who agrees with you. In fact, the evidence for a high-fat diet in early African hominids and humans is very thin and is my research area because I would like to prove that they did have access to more fat than typical paleoanthropologists think (I got interested when arguing with Cordain, but my opinion is on the fringe and honestly more reputable PAs (Wrangham) look more towards carbs.

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
56616 · October 07, 2011 at 1:10 PM

Have you real the Expensive Tissue Hypothesis? It's unbelievable that you would cite that as evidence that humans brain evolved a ketogenic optimum.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 12:54 PM

Oh FFS, if we are deficient in glucose, we would be **HYPOGLYCEMIC** and that is **MEASURABLE** !. The question for me is more, whether CHO rich foods **come with some OTHER beneficial substances NOT PRESENT in low glycemic foods**. I know for at least one - POLICOSANOL (sugar cane, yams, wheat, beeswax) - which is used as panacea in Cuba. I don't claim such substance is SO beneficial (it looks like it helps) but it is found ONLY in CHO foods AFAIK

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 2:24 PM

@ZenFire. IF is similar to ketetosis in many aspects. You spend **majority** of time keeping sugar on native level.

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 07, 2011 at 7:43 PM

Melissa; I have read the paper more than once, and better yet, I have thought about it. It might serve you well to do the same. The Expensive Tissue Hypothesis is powerful evidence that pre and early humans must have eaten a high fat, lower carb diet for their brain to have evolved its current, large 'metabolically expensive' size. The authors did not, could not measure brain energy substrate use millions of years ago. However, if evolving man was indeed eating a high fat diet, in times of feast and famine, what fuel do you think their brains were mostly burning? Hint; not glucose.

5740b342b3b4ca4af7625f9505f7eb5d
281 · October 07, 2011 at 7:50 PM

Still ducking my question 'Doc'. Nice one.

87f26cf235a0e2420e28779113b0257b
11
1092 · October 07, 2011 at 5:14 AM

@Dr. Rosedale

I said:

"It makes absolutely no sense that neurons only start using ketone bodies under nutritional stress- glucose shortage - if that is the "best"

You responded:

It makes sense if excess sugar is poisonous to the body.

You are suggesting that the brain only uses glucose as a favor to buffer us from excess glycation? So it "prefers" ketones, but only gets to use them when we are avoiding "toxic" glucose in the diet. If that is so, why does it stop at 60% of energy needs. Why use any glucose at all and why make the liver engage in GNG to provide it - using precious energy while you are starving?

" There are no redudant systems in the body to control for blood sugar except utilisation, so ... you must utilise it to get rid of it."

Well, no. The liver is a large and flexible buffer that in normal people can soak up huge amounts of glucose, and as you know even if you never eat a molecule of glucose, it will flood your bloodstream with demonically glycating glucose if for even a minute it stops hearing, or listening to, insulin.

All of these systems demonizing dietary carbohydrate fatally conflate glucose as a cellular fuel with glucose in the diet. Hyperglycemia and subsequent glycation is cause by failed glucoregulation, not dietary glucose in "spikes"...

Why did we not evolve to be more independent of the need for glucose at the cellular level? Neurons and red cells require glucose.

"Insulin is the only hormone that promotes that. If sugar was so valuable we would have some redudancy I guess."

But it is valuable. Our neurons literally die without it. Period.

The reason the brain can run partially on ketones is SO THAT IT CAN LAST LONGER ON LIMITED GLUCOSE WITHOUT DYING.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 8:31 AM

Kurt, have you checked reduced phagocytosis of WBC with all types of CHO ? Thats why its poison if elevated for instance. The fact that something is toxic doesn't mean you don't need it. Oxygen is toxic but you chain it in iron and use it. The problem is too much of it.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 8:22 AM

RE: I don't say sugar is not valuable, I don't think its SO valuable that you have to eat it :) Its obviously valuable as we can't live without endogenous production.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 07, 2011 at 2:51 PM

They fed cream or bacon. The point was that people always cite that study showing carbs reduce phagocytosis but never look up the effects of dietary fat on white blood cells.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 8:18 AM

RE: Brain can live on more then 60% of ketones, the figures go as high as 80%. Red blood cells are optimized to deliver things, they don't have room for mitos. That doesn't prove your point. We make what we need.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 07, 2011 at 2:25 PM

I didn't realise that. I can email you a copy if you like.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 8:17 AM

Thats what I said, not Rosedale

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 07, 2011 at 2:52 PM

I didn't realise that it was not available. I can email you a copy if you send me your address.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 8:23 AM

RE: Natural de-glycation... thats interesting.. don't know much about it, will have to read, thx for pointing it out.

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
56616 · October 07, 2011 at 5:19 AM

It's also a relic of infancy. The infant brain is heavily reliant on ketones and burns them more efficiency than a human adult can. The amount human babies rely on this is unique among living primates and is a testament to how energy hungry our brains are, as this occurs even in regularly fed babies.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 07, 2011 at 8:02 AM

But Kurt you forget that *The sugar is evil!* If you believe that i'm sure it all makes sense.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 8:20 AM

RE: Its not only that sugar spikes are poisonous. You don't have much storage for sugar, it makes sense to use it first, just as you would use alcohol as a fuel *before* sugar. You would do the same in your house if you had a choice to eat raw milk that can live for 3 days or fatty lard which could be stored for a year or more without problem.

C0cf19329f850011e66d1ccfa7d10896
278 · October 07, 2011 at 9:43 AM

Thank goodness you revised your answer Dr. Harris as I thought i might be losing my mind, I know and follow Dr. Rosedale and what you had quoted him as saying, was so totally not Dr. Rosedale's words at all.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 07, 2011 at 8:13 AM

No offence to you Kurt but I sometimes wonder why medical doctors are so vulnerable to discovering THE *TRUTH* and deciding that they have solved all the worlds problems. Particularly American doctors for some reason.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 07, 2011 at 2:52 PM

I didn't realise that it was not available. I can email you a copy if you post you email here. Delete the comment once you have it.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 07, 2011 at 9:20 AM

majikinetor, you might find this study interesting to read http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1650714

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 12:13 PM

@Matthew: I can not find full paper. I don't know which kind of fat is used, we all know that different fats differently influence immunity.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 9:41 PM

"The point was that people always cite that study" - That study ??? There are at least 10 studies that I know with normal people and at least 5 I know related to exercise. Its not THAT study. Contrary, I couldn't find anything more related to the study you referred. Further, there is a well known physiological explanation - vitmin c competition - that is crucial to understanding of basics of immune function in all animals. Its so primal that the latest book is named "Primal Panacea". If you could upload it to server and give me the link I would appreciate it anyway

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 9:43 PM

*"The point was that people always cite that study"* - **That** study ??? There are at least 10 studies that I know with normal people and at least 5 I know related to exercise. Its not THAT study. Contrary, I couldn't find anything more related to the study you referred. Further, there is a well known physiological explanation - vitmin c competition - that is crucial to understanding of basics of immune function in all animals. Its so primal that the latest book is named "Primal Panacea". If you could upload it to server and give me the link I would appreciate it anyway.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 9:40 PM

*"The point was that people always cite that study"* - **That** study ??? There are at least 10 studies that I know with normal people and at least 5 I know related to exercise. Its not THAT study. Contrary, I couldn't find anything more related to the study you referred. Further, there is a well known physiological explanation - vitmin c competition - that is basic to understanding of basics of immune function in all animals. Its so primal that the latest book is named "Primal Panacea". If you could upload it to server and give me the link I would appreciate it anyway.

Medium avatar
11
8239 · October 05, 2011 at 1:31 AM

Fat phobia.

Carb phobia.

Protein phobia.

Nutritional monotheism, all. And what all forms of monotheism seem to require is: a devil, against which to rally and rail.

"May God us keep From Single vision & Newton's sleep." ???Blake

4b8bf8683630d2acfb13303e5f311e71
79 · October 05, 2011 at 2:53 AM

Upvoted for the quote. The irony there is awesome.

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 05, 2011 at 1:40 AM

Dude.....its all aboutmthe epigentic switches are counted by the brain......and our environment determines how the switches are set. This macronutrient bullshit has to go by the way side.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
10
78422 · October 05, 2011 at 8:40 AM

What Rosedale claims is may be even close to truth. That we are all diabetics, he may be right.

For instance, John T. A. Ely claims similar things basically:

In several contexts, there is considerable theoretical and experimental evidence that ascorbate (or ascorbic acid, also called vit. C, although it is not a vitamin) is much more effective if blood glucose is in the low range, i.e., 50-90 mg/deciliter (mg/dL) (2-6). This was normal until the 1900's and is still seen today where the primitive (unrefined) diet prevails but blood glucose is only half the glycemic levels typical of affluence (6,7).

From "Unrecognized Pandemic - Subclinical Diabetes of the Affluent Nations: Causes, Cost and Prevention"

During the Calcutta Diabetes Study, the 2-hour postprandial blood glucose values for non-diabetic humans aged 40 to 70 in India were reported to range from 50 to 90 mg/dl[12]. However, in a long term investigation of 1400 people in the U.S., decadal age group medians for the same 2-hour values were reported to range from 105 to 122 mg/dl in nondiabetic 40 to 70 year olds [13]; this distribution is completely disjoint from the Indian median values (which clearly must fall inside the 50 to 90 range reported above). In addition, the 2-hour GTT values are observed to rise circa 10% per decade of age in the U.S [14]

The situation is probably similar to what we know about some other nutrients - for instance vitamin D level that is now accepted as normal is far bellow what many D experts consider healthy.

I don't get the Jaminets conclusion about glucose deficiency. First, if such thing exists, it would be seen via sugar meter. If my blood glucose is between 4-6 (72-108) then I don't have a deficiency as deficieny would cause hypoglicemia - bg less then 3.8 (68.4). Second, its well known that higher CHO content equals to less vitamin C availability:

There exists in the scientific literature a wealth of data that explains the role of ascorbic acid in immune system function and documents its requirement for greater than micronutrient quantities to fight infections. The inhibitory effect by glucose of the actions of ascorbic acid could well explain the lack of beneficial effect of ascorbic administration in many studies reported in the literature because few, if any, such studies controlled for dietary carbohydrates. In light of the current dietary sugar excesses and concomitant obesity epidemic, clinicians should be reminded of the great importance of the long recognized but largely unappreciated inhibitory action of glucose against ascorbic acid. In summary, ascorbic acid is essential for effective immune system function and, further, it can be a potent immune system stimulator when high glycemic dietary carbohydrates are restricted.

I guess it boils down mostly to not eating refined stuff, not eating potatoes or rice with every meal and use moderate quantities and ofc, rarely eat any fruits. This depends a lot on your physical activity also. You can tolerate more carbs if you are more active, particularly ananerobic type of activity.

Lets also not forget that Jaminet might be biased as he has/had fungal infections which might get worse on ketogenic diet. Stubby says also "but he says that we do need some starch because low carb vegetables don't allow the glucose to absorb quickly enough and it gets gobbled up by gut flora.", but gut flora works in the colon and glucose is absorbed in stomach and small intestines which keep far far lesser amounts of gut flora. AFAIK, he actually said that those low amounts of glucose would be used ASAP to power digestion. And again, there is that vitamin c inhibition thing. We now know that glucose can't inhibit it completely though, as another type of receptor for VC is found (SVCT1/2), but some systems don't have it expressed, for instance brain's blood barrier. It seems to get expressed after a stroke though which tells about importance of proper C metabolism.

All this said, I think Rosedale can be very wrong, he for instance claims that saturated fat is "second generation carbohydrate" which is ... well.. nonsense. Everything is 2nd or 3td generation something.

I don't see a point in dissecting isolating communities like Kitawians because you can't ever isolate variables correctly - they live different life, in different world, with different air and water with different environmental toxins with different eating habits with different pregnancies, different activities etc... nothing can be further from city life. I think its best to concentrate on what current state of physiology has to tell us.

At the end, I must say that Fiona summed it up the best possible:

The body needs glucose.. you just don't need to eat it.. ??? Fiona

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 05, 2011 at 3:58 PM

Perhaps Rosedale himself could clear this up - SFA is good or not to healthy human ?

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 05, 2011 at 7:22 PM

The higher carb paleo group completely avoids this topic like the plague. Kinda glad to see it here. I still think Cordain needs to be pinned down on this. I know Mike Eades has talked to him about this too and so has Robb.

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 05, 2011 at 5:16 PM

short and medium chain saturated fats are great. Longer chain saturated fats without sugars/starch; pretty good in a fat adapted person.. LC saturated fats mixed with sugar/starch; not good

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 06, 2011 at 7:38 AM

There are some clues - sugar makes oxidative stress higher and we can get oxidized cholesterol. If it is all about PUFA its easily oxidized. MCTs do not go that pathway and SFA are stable. I don't know why would long chain fatty acids be a problem. Thats why I asked and thats what Rosedale claims.

B0fe7b5a9a197cd293978150cbd9055f
8933 · October 05, 2011 at 9:47 AM

"Lets also not forget that Jaminet might be biased as he has/had fungal infections which might get worse on ketogenic diet" Why?

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 05, 2011 at 7:21 PM

This issue is why Cordain is not a fan of saturated fat in the current iteration of the paleo diet talked about by harris, SG, PHD, Kresser. I think Robb has said carbs intake should match activity but if you are eating lots of carbs the jury is out on whether long chain saturated fats in combination with that diet is a good idea. The problem is Cordain never just says it.....he leaves us in the know to infer it. Ron has hit on this here a bit. Those espousing a ketogenic MCT paleo diet skirt this issue completely. This is the manner in which I apply that paleo diet clinically.

Ba686a7b91a9c04f18170dd4ac762968
764 · October 06, 2011 at 12:48 AM

If you eat animals, you will get roughly get equal amounts of saturated and mono fats for your fuel. Outside a handful of tropical biomes that have easily processed sources of MCTs via coconut, it makes no evolutionary or historical sense to even talk about choosing between fat types that are "safe" to combine with starches. You can eat starch. You can eat animal fat that is 50/50 mono/LCSF. You can eat coconut fat for fuel as well. The idea that you can't safely combine them without some armchair theoretician's permisssion is just silly. There is no good evidence for this idea.

E34fbfa1bca9ae970c9c7313bf9de9f8
1436 · October 05, 2011 at 6:02 PM

The body needs glucose.. why not eat it?

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 05, 2011 at 7:25 PM

maj plus one.....youre becoming a stud on here.....

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 05, 2011 at 10:35 AM

Because fungus, unlike bacteria are eukaryota, and can use both ketones and glucose to power up. I think his point is to reduce glucose so that it doesn't bath in energy without entering full ketosis since then, it will use both ketones and sugar created by the liver. He also points out about the problem with immunity and glucose deficiency, although I don't find this convincing.

C471216c9fb4fcf886b7ac84a4046b49
1371 · October 05, 2011 at 2:26 PM

i think when rosedale mentions fat he means the body, when UNadapted shoudl receive MUFAS first and after the body gets adjusted, adding in SF is of no harm...

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 07, 2011 at 1:39 AM

thanks majkinetor for your good comments

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 05, 2011 at 3:58 PM

In his book he says something like ... farm animals are fed with carbs, those carbs convert to saturated fat, we eat that fat -> we eat 2nd generation carbs.

667f6c030b0245d71d8ef50c72b097dc
15976 · October 06, 2011 at 1:26 PM

@KGH: as always thanks for the injection of common sense. I love CO and cook with it quite a bit but I never think or tell people that it's THE go-to fat and that it is the key to something. It's great stuff but it is one fuel source - one.

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 07, 2011 at 1:31 AM

majkinetor; "I don't know why would long chain fatty acids be a problem." I don't think they would be a major problem once one is adapted to burning fat. However, in general, the longer chain a saturated fatty acid is, the harder it is to burn.

8949bf87b0e0aefcad10f29975e4fa2b
8979 · October 05, 2011 at 11:24 PM

Ice cream is NOT recommended by any popular low carbers that I know of. It is popularized by CW dietitians as a way to regulate bs spikes in diabetics.

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 07, 2011 at 1:37 AM

...and fat should not be combined with sugar forming starches.. the glycemic load remains the same. The sugar will still raise insulin and leptin and impair ones ability to burn fat..

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 05, 2011 at 6:04 PM

Thx doc. I always thought that long chain [saturated or not] fats + carbs are not great idea. Could you perhaps tell us why or provide some links? Ice creams are promoted by several popular low carbers as good stuff because fat will slow down sugar absorption or something like that (i.e. http://perfecthealthdiet.com/?p=302)

C0cf19329f850011e66d1ccfa7d10896
278 · October 07, 2011 at 9:40 AM

majkinetor.. great comments..

3c6b4eed18dc57f746755b698426e7c8
10
5132 · October 05, 2011 at 2:49 AM

At issue is whether post-prandial BG spikes are harmful even though it's temporary. In a healthy person, post-prandial BG spikes return to normal (fasting) quickly after 60 minutes and well before 120 minutes. Normally, this would not result in "chronic" insulin nor leptin elevation.

However, Rosedale says that even a temporary BG spike is bad, because it will spike insulin and leptin as well, albeit temporarily. Is the quick deployment of insulin/leptin to deal with spiking BG bad? Is this gonna still result in all the ailments associated with chronically elevated insulin/leptin: cancer, AGEs, glycation, autoimmunity, etc.?

I don't think so. Just about every tribal group (except those Inuits and Masais) have subsisted on starches -- healthy starches that entail insulin spikes. Starch-based diets far outnumber ketogenic diets. Yet, as long as the starches are "safe" they will not lead to diabetes. No one got diabetes by eating potatoes, yams, sweet potatoes, even tropical fruits like watermelon or mangoes. At least not to our knowledge.

What is Rosedale mising? Some of us tend to think it's gluten (white flour) and sugar (fructose), but not endogenous sugar in fruits nor carbs in starchy whole foods.

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 05, 2011 at 1:20 PM

...These data suggest that leptin-mediated plasticity in the ob/ob hypothalamus may underlie some of the hormone’s behavioral effects." The effect of leptin altering hypothalamic wiring has been shown in other studies also.

66e6b190e62fb3bcf42d4c60801c7bf6
12407 · October 06, 2011 at 12:12 AM

mer, the kids in elementary school make me look avg at that age. and i was the biggest BY FAR 25-30 years ago...

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 05, 2011 at 1:53 PM

There is also this one: Neuronal activity modifies the DNA methylation landscape in the adult brain.

66e6b190e62fb3bcf42d4c60801c7bf6
12407 · October 05, 2011 at 7:19 PM

@mer i was too. i have pics to prove it.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 05, 2011 at 1:53 PM

There is also this one: Neuronal activity modifies the DNA methylation landscape in the adult brain. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21874013

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 05, 2011 at 4:12 PM

Hey Ron.....you need to update your knowledge on leptin wiring. See MYers work from Michigan circa 2011.

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 05, 2011 at 4:00 AM

Im not buying a lot of that either.......our environment dictates what we do and our biology adapts to that environment. What the Kitavans of Inuits do best with is based upon the natural selection of how their epigenetic switches were set by three factors. Grandma diet when prego with mom, Mom diet preg with fetus, and then what the baby was reared on for the first six yrs. The hypothalamic wiring is set in those six yrs and leptin is uploaded from momma's breast milk to run the show.

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 05, 2011 at 1:28 PM

I will post an answer to questions and other comments in this post when I have a bit of time..Thanks for the interest.

3c6b4eed18dc57f746755b698426e7c8
5132 · October 05, 2011 at 3:41 AM

That's what I used to think. But rice was around for 10k yrs. in Asia, tubers much longer. HGs by definition gathered these tubers & root vegs, which can be stored much longer than a carcass. Hunting is dangerous & don't always result in a catch. It also depends on game migration, climactic shifts, droughts, weapons, mobilization of men. The risk of injury is always high. The path of lesser resistance is tubers: the gathering component is much bigger than what most people romanticize about HGs. Hunting was sporadic & occasionally fruitful. In comparison, gathering was a slam dunk.

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 05, 2011 at 1:14 PM

Quilt states; "The hypothalamic wiring is set in those six yrs". This is not true. I am surprised that you do not know this as I know that you follow my writings and talks, and I have cited this famous article often…and this is in your field of neuroscience… The abstract... 2 APRIL 2004 VOL 304 SCIENCE Rapid Rewiring of Arcuate Nucleus Feeding Circuits by Leptin "The fat-derived hormone leptin regulates energy balance in part by modulating the activity of neuropeptide Y and proopiomelanocortin neurons in the hypothalamic arcuate nucleus...

100fd85230060e754fc13394eee6d6f1
18671 · October 05, 2011 at 3:18 AM

You can't necessarily count the remaining HGs as representative of our evolutionary past. Even the end of the Paleolithic was likely to be a different environment than the earlier. It's quite possible that many more tribes were ketogenic, and that only later did those cultures who didn't resort to plants more often die out due to lack of big game.

0dbd7154d909b97fe774d1655754f195
16131 · October 05, 2011 at 3:46 PM

I've run out of upvotes. It is great news to be sure that people are not doomed to dysfunctional in their leptin receptors if they were overweight at age six - like I was.

0dbd7154d909b97fe774d1655754f195
16131 · October 05, 2011 at 8:33 PM

@LB - remember when being the fat kid was an anomaly? I stuck out - literally. There are so many kids in my local elementary school who are so much bigger than I ever was. It's at the point of bat-shit crazy and something radical has to be done.

3c6b4eed18dc57f746755b698426e7c8
5132 · October 05, 2011 at 3:50 AM

When I started, I bought into the myth of these ketogenic HGs running around in their loin clothes hunting preys for every meal. Reading Gueyenet will shatter that myth, not becuz he discusses modern HGs but becuz he chronicles how out of the ordinary and enormously difficult it is to live off of a carnivorous diet. Cf: the Masais are not carnivores; they're pastoralists. The Inuits are migrating carnivores living off of marine mammals. They're oddballs. Blessed w/a better climate (Inuits) or better senses, they'd be digging up yuca and chasing after warthogs once every 3 days.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 05, 2011 at 9:16 AM

Todays eating patterns with carbs in main meals and snacks mean that blood glucose can be fluctuating most of the day and that it drops only when you sleep.

C471216c9fb4fcf886b7ac84a4046b49
1371 · October 05, 2011 at 2:29 PM

nice call out by rosedale...i totally did not buy the shaping of hypo- in the first 6 years of life.

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 05, 2011 at 1:17 PM

...To study the intrinsic activity of these neurons and their responses to leptin, we generated mice that express distinct green fluorescent proteins in these two neuronal types. Leptin-deficient (ob/ob)mice differed from wild-type mice in the numbers of excitatory and inhibitory synapses and postsynaptic currents onto neuropeptide Y and proopiomelanocortin neurons. When leptin was delivered systemically to ob/ob mice, the synaptic density rapidly normalized, an effect detectable within 6 hours, several hours before leptin’s effect on food intake...

66e6b190e62fb3bcf42d4c60801c7bf6
12407 · October 05, 2011 at 3:09 PM

I asked this same question of quilt last week, dr rosedale when he told me that those things were set by age six. seems just too arbitrary a number given our differences.

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 08, 2011 at 1:47 AM

Im also going to get dr. Myers latest papers on this together as well

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 08, 2011 at 1:46 AM

The data and cites for the ages of hardwiring are found in my transgenerational epigentic post. You can read them.

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 09, 2011 at 11:51 PM

ttp://www.nature.com/oby/journal/v18/n2/full/oby2009228a.html here is the link. About leptin not being able to help neuroplasticity in adulthood here are those links. 1. Harvey J, Solovyova N, Irving A. Leptin and its role in hippocampal synaptic plasticity. Prog Lipid Res 2006;45:369–378. | Article | PubMed | ChemPort | 2. Moult PR, Milojkovic B, Harvey J. Leptin reverses long-term potentiation at hippocampal CA1 synapses. J Neurochem 2009;108:685–

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 09, 2011 at 11:45 PM

This is from the 2010 Nature article on Leptin: Perturbed arcuate connectivity can be reversed in ob/ob mice by administering leptin perinatally, but not in adulthood. These data support the idea that a perinatal leptin surge acts as a developmental signal to promote arcuate connectivity and the formation of pathways which control energy homeostasis. Beyond its role in the hypothalamus, leptin is also proposed to play an important role in long-term potentiation, which underlies learning and memory within the hippocampus.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
7
78422 · October 06, 2011 at 8:06 AM

I think that sites comments are limiting [bad stackoverflow] so let me react in another post.

"that you can game the system is not uncommon in medicine, and not particularly effective either" [Harris]

But if we ignore non-medical interests, medicine did find some valuable gems. Its general failure when chronic disease are in question may have nothing to do with potential ability of the body to be improved in unnatural ways, it means that it sucks at it at the current stage. We are nothing more then complex machines. Every machine can get overclocked the safe way.

"It makes absolutely no sense that neurons only start using ketone bodies under nutritional stress- glucose shortage - if that is the "best" [Haris]

It makes sense if excess sugar is poisonous to the body. There are no redudant systems in the body to control for blood sugar except utilisation, so ... you must utilise it to get rid of it. Insulin is the only hormone that promotes that. If sugar was so valuable we would have some redudancy I guess.

"Ambi, those studies also showed susceptibility to kidney stones and other complications that beset ketogenic diets." [Namby]

Its much more probable that you had Mg or C deficiency. Ketogenic diets can be applied wrong. Since you are T2DM you are surelly C deficient, its well known fact about diabets. Drop from 5.7 to 5.5 A1C is meaningless IMO.

"I agree with PHD 100% on this mainly because I've experienced the very same complications while on a ketogenic diet: constipation due to mucosal dryness" [Namby]

Perceived constipation might be because you have reduced stool content on ketogenic diet becaue nutrients are fully absorbed unlike most of the complex CHO. There is also an option that you didn't eat enough fat.

"fainting spells when getting up from a chair" [Namby]

This is probably mineral disbalance [not enough salt for instance]. You need to supplement because humans mostly eat animal muscles. If you did exercise like all T2DM are suggested then this would make it worse.

"and low LIBIDO" [Namby]

Possible zinc deficiency if you are a man.

As you can see all your problems could be described the other ways. I don't claim its not about lack of CHO, there are beneficial things coming up with CHO, like flavonoids but those are available in vegtables and nuts too.

I think its notoriously easy to get malnourished on any weight loss diet and ketogenic diet further limit food chocices. Industrial animals are also deficient themselves and you can't really be sure how is animal treated.

It seems that many people have a hard time understanding that I am not advocating that what is ???natural??? is best. Dying soon after our children have a reasonable chance to make it on their own is very natural??? a very long post reproductive lifespan is not. What we are trying to do is live unnaturally long, and that's perfectly fine with me and I am endeavoring to find out how. [Rosedale]

Amen! That is true hacking spirit.

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
56616 · October 06, 2011 at 11:42 AM

There is no reputable scientist who believes that the ketone system is the optimal system rather than a backup.

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 06, 2011 at 10:18 AM

... and don't forget to drink plenty of water especially during the transition and not be afraid of fats and oils (limit w6)... and do not eat high protein... substituting high-protein for carbohydrates will cause you to burn protein as fuel... producing excess urea... while still preventing proper burning of fat.. unhealthy and you will not feel well..

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 06, 2011 at 11:40 AM

@CarbSane: I didn't say glucose is SO toxic. Its needed as turbo fuel and for those cells which lack mito. Also, you said it yourself. Reason is *conversion* - why convert when you can use it ASAP. Evolution doesn't choose such wasting of energy.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 06, 2011 at 11:43 AM

@CS: If ketones are so toxic, hibernating animals like bears and squirrels would not exist and during times of starvation, we would probably all be dead soon.

7d64d3988de1b0e493aacf37843c5596
2861 · October 06, 2011 at 1:30 PM

"Body hacking in 'unnatural' way" does seem kind of the opposite of the paleo principle. One problem with unnatural body hacking is that we usually don't know enough to get it right. Anabolic steroids "work", but there is a price to pay. I think focusing on simple mechanisms we can better kinda understand (steroid -> muscle, insulin -> fat) and trying to extrapolate from that leads to all kinds of problems in practice because the body is so complex.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 1:05 PM

Meh... old individuals do not contribute once they rise kids and pass the knowledge. They are actually harmful as they drain energy. Even in some human communities there was a practice to send old people to rest in some form of ritual because of this very reason. Animals are not much different. They will kill older of their own kind in many cases without any problem to promote genome dominance and fuel preservation.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 07, 2011 at 3:29 PM

*"Meh... old individuals do not contribute once they rise kids and pass the knowledge"* Glad I'm not your grandparent :)

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 06, 2011 at 9:01 PM

Your opinion, all I have right now is doubt :)

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 06, 2011 at 10:10 AM

"fainting spells when getting up from a chair" [Namby] called postural hypotension... from low vascular fluid..As insulin comes down, you will lose excess retained fluid, especially for the first couple of months and this will take magnesium and potassium with it. Therefore this needs to be supplemented for at least the first couple of months... and generally all will be well..

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 06, 2011 at 6:16 PM

Melissa, look, its not that hard. We know that energy is most important, that is the reason we have mito and evolved and what differs us from the invisible life forms. Now, since we understand the importance of energy and the fact that brain is energy hog, we can convincingly say that everything that boosts brain's energy is probably very very good for you as brain controls everything. Now we have this sugar which needs some transporters and is also used by invisible life forms as preferred fuel source which can happen to live inside your brain for instance....

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 06, 2011 at 11:31 PM

@majkinetor - I do not have "beliefs" on nutritional science. I consider uncertainty to be the only valid position on many points of issue. Undue levels of certainty are what causes a lot of the confusion around what to eat. Occasionally I amuse myself by questioning people who do have deep faith on any side of an argument, it rarely has any effect though.

24df4e0d0e7ce98963d4641fae1a60e5
8879 · October 06, 2011 at 11:35 AM

Alternately we could have upregulated de novo lipogenesis. Or, how about an excretory pathway for glucose excesses?

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 06, 2011 at 11:49 AM

@Melissa: First you need to calm down. Second, somehow I don't trust people [perhaps watching House MD to much]. The fact that somebody 'tried very hard' means nothing to me because they still could do it wrong. BTW, I am not VLC and nobody claims that there is 1 diet for all, just that 1 diet is most likely to do it for all, I thought that is apperent by now. However, I am still interested in body hacking in 'unnatural' way, I am sorry if that offenses you purists...

8949bf87b0e0aefcad10f29975e4fa2b
8979 · October 06, 2011 at 4:08 PM

sheesh! Melissa, you need to go out and play

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 06, 2011 at 6:20 PM

... so we came to one important distinction here - ketones float around, freely accessible by mitos, ignoring barriers and shit, simply diffusing around, while glucose needs to be delivered to the location and not get hijacked in between. So it does really make some sense. Could it be wrong ? Sure. How likely it is? Not very likely IMO <-- this is the part where it turns to faith for me, for now.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 06, 2011 at 11:45 AM

@Melissa: So what? There was no reputable scientist believing in quasicrystals but the dude got the Nobel Prize anyway.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 06, 2011 at 8:44 PM

Thats why i wrote that word *IMO* Matthew. You also practice faith, just you don't know it. I am well aware of it and so I can change it.

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
56616 · October 06, 2011 at 2:47 PM

maj, name one research scientist who believes keto is optimal. Search all the scientific databases...there are none. You don't need to know every scientist to determine that there are no papers that even argue this.

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
56616 · October 06, 2011 at 11:41 AM

You don't get it do you? Different diets work for different people and all the people you and Rosedale are advising have gotten this same exact advice on this forum. They tried very hard to make VLC HFLC work. The VLC-ians can only see their own success and their own desire to see their favorite diet be considered the human optimal. Good thing there is no such thing.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 06, 2011 at 9:06 PM

Your opinion, all I have right now is lack of belief :)

3aea514b680d01bfd7573d74517946a7
11986 · October 06, 2011 at 3:25 PM

I don't know if they think keto is "optimal," but they certainly don't think it's "suboptimal." Stephen Phinney: http://authors.simonandschuster.net/Dr-Stephen-D-Phinney/71212576 Jeff Volek: http://www.education.uconn.edu/directory/details.cfm?id=85

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 06, 2011 at 9:02 PM

Your opinion, all I have right now is doubt :)

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 06, 2011 at 11:49 AM

@Melissa, BTW, I didn't know you knew all reputable scientists.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 06, 2011 at 11:37 AM

I am so sorry we are disappointing for you Melissa.....

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 06, 2011 at 7:25 PM

@majkinetor - To many people base their ideas on faith. After a while you begin to forget it is a faith... "So it does really make some sense. Could it be wrong ? Sure. How likely it is? Not very likely IMO" Sorry but biochemistry doesn't work by what "makes some sense" to you.

24df4e0d0e7ce98963d4641fae1a60e5
8879 · October 06, 2011 at 11:32 AM

*"It makes absolutely no sense that neurons only start using ketone bodies under nutritional stress- glucose shortage - if that is the "best" [Haris] It makes sense if excess sugar is poisonous to the body. There are no redudant systems in the body to control for blood sugar except utilisation, so ... you must utilise it to get rid of it. Insulin is the only hormone that promotes that. If sugar was so valuable we would have some redudancy I guess.* Ketones are made from Acetyl CoA so there's no reason we wouldn't have glucose to ketone conversion if glucose were so toxic and ketones preferd

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 06, 2011 at 8:47 PM

That is why i wrote that word **IMO**, Matthew. You are also deep in faith, but it appears to me that you don't know that. That is the difference between me and you. I know I am believer, so I can change.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 06, 2011 at 10:02 PM

All I have right now is lack of faith...

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
56616 · October 06, 2011 at 11:22 AM

Reads like a vegan forum around here these days. "Just do this or that and the vegan diet will work, Dr. so and so said so!"

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 06, 2011 at 11:47 AM

@Melissa: First you need to calm down. Second, somehow I don't trust people [perhaps watching House MD to much]. The fact that somebody 'tried very hard' means nothing to me. BTW, I am not VLC, that is apperent by now. However, I am still interested in body hacking in unnatural way, I am sorry if that offenses you purists.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 12:35 PM

Yeah, that is really apparent in animal life :S

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 06, 2011 at 11:33 PM

@majkinetor - I do not have "beliefs" on nutritional science. I consider uncertainty to be the only valid position on many points of issue. Undue levels of certainty are what causes a lot of the confusion around what to eat. Occasionally it is amusing to question people who do have deep convictions on any side of an argument, it rarely has any effect though.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 07, 2011 at 3:27 PM

@majkinetor - *"Meh... old individuals do not contribute once they rise kids and pass the knowledge"* There speaks a young person? :)

667f6c030b0245d71d8ef50c72b097dc
15976 · October 07, 2011 at 1:23 PM

the difference between saying *nature does not need us after we procreate* and saying *nature does not need us after we raise children* is large. They are two totally different claims.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 1:06 PM

Meh... old individuals do not contribute once they rise kids and pass the knowledge. They are actually harmful as they drain energy and require maintenance that could be used to secure survival. Even in some human communities there was a practice to send old people to rest in some form of ritual because of this very reason. Animals are not much different. They will kill older of their own kind in many cases without any problem to promote genome dominance and fuel preservation

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 6:44 PM

LOL . . .

C0cf19329f850011e66d1ccfa7d10896
278 · October 07, 2011 at 9:54 AM

When Rosedale talks about being unnatural, he is not meaning using bad products, or drugs, he is very against that, he is talking about allowing the body to maximize its true potential, naturally nature does not need us after we procreate as he said, we are only allowing the signals in the body to believe we still have a purpose and a need, I for sure would opt for a longer expiry date the natural way for super health!

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 07, 2011 at 11:54 AM

"Nature" does need us after we procreate. If it did not we would be unlikely to have the option of a long life.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 07, 2011 at 3:25 PM

*nature needs us until we have helped raise our grandchildren*

1f8384be58052b6b96f476e475abdc74
2231 · October 08, 2011 at 1:34 AM

wow, i think we are all burning ketones after hacking at this...our brains used up all our glucose hacking!!

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
7
56616 · October 05, 2011 at 1:29 PM

Do you know what's kind of scary? I've lived in Sweden and the people there are thinner, eat better, and get more exercise. They have all the appearance of a fairly healthy people. But when Dr. Lindeberg looked at their blood glucose levels compared to Kitavans, the Kitavans have lower blood fasting glucose and maintain this throughout age, whereas in the Swedes it ends up climbing higher and higher. So the evidence is that even somewhat "healthy" Westerners who don't have diabetes experience aging of that system.

In his book Lindeberg emphasizes both the fact that refined sugars screw this up, but that more and more scientists believe it has an autoimmune component. The wheat lectin can also bind to insulin receptors.

In Rosedale's article measuring his diet's effect on what he thinks are markers of aging, his diet did improve their markers, but they don't even approach those of the Kitavans or fish-eating Tanzanians. I know it's not a real study (if doctors and their clinical anecdotes ran science we'd still be bleeding patients for sore throats) and the patients were sick, but there is simply no proof out there that the low-carb high-fat diet has an anti-aging advantage. Ethnographic studies can only tell us so much, but since there already exist cultures eating a high-fat low-carb diet and they are unexceptional in regards to longevity, we can rule out this as the answer to our aging woes.

Don't forget all doctors are not scientists. If I listened to doctors and didn't delve into real scientific data, I'd still be overweight and sick. And guess what? If you are selling a low-carb diet, making your money off of it, it does suck that the pillars of the paleo community are abandoning it.

I'm also really disturbed by Dr. Rosedale's misuse of paleoanthropology. He claims that the Expensive Tissue Hypothesis proves the human brain evolved for a keto optimum and a high-fat diet. I have had the pleasure to study under one of the reviewers of the original Expensive Tissue Hypothesis paper and there is absolutely no consensus on the matter on paleoanthropology and no one I know of believes in a keto optimum, even keto-friendly people working in the area like Stephan Cunnane. The consensus is that high quality food was the fuel for the expensive tissue, but what fuel that is remains under heavy debate. My own research interest is looking into whether fat was high in the ancient paleolithic African diet, but it is a very fringe interest and even I will admit that. Most papers show that African game and the African ancestral environment is low in fat. I'm looking to argue against that, but not because I think keto is optimum, but because I think fat is an important nutrient for humans and I do think our ancestors used both the keto and glucose burning systems on and off. The vast majority of researchers focusing on the high-quality food are looking at protein and that's how I got into it, because Cordain cites that research to advise people to eat lean meats. Richard Wrangham of Harvard is arguing for roots and tubers. Rosedale is playing on people's relative ignorance of this debate and of paleoanthropology in order to espouse an absurd fringe theory and sell his diet books.

In my own experience, I had rather poor blood fasting glucose when I was 17 and now it is much much lower. It has remained low throughout my relatively high and low carb diets. If we truly all had diabetes, our markers of the damage that makes that disease so problematic would be increasing.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 05, 2011 at 1:41 PM

Yes, Sweden: http://www.dietdoctor.com/the-swedish-low-carb-revolution

Medium avatar
39841 · October 05, 2011 at 5:10 PM

I wonder how much of it is due to a magnesium deficiency.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 06, 2011 at 7:38 PM

@majkinetor - "There is nothing wrong in putting your faith on any type of diet, just don't impose that on others like its a math theorem." - I think this is exactly what you are doing and this is what is annoying Melissa. Also no one is talking about proof, just good evidence. If you don't learn to tell the difference you will end up believing all kinds of nonsense.

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
56616 · October 05, 2011 at 8:23 PM

Quilt, what are you even talking about? I already said that titles mean nothing in helping people out. As for the Kitavans having some epigenetic thing that makes them so different from us, I haven't seen any proof.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 06, 2011 at 1:18 PM

You constantly talk about proofs. Proof is a concept of mathematics and it doesn't exist in science. Science is about models and evidences, not about proofs. At the end, you will still have to put your faith in the model. There is nothing wrong in putting your faith on any type of diet, just don't impose that on others like its a math theorem.

8949bf87b0e0aefcad10f29975e4fa2b
8979 · October 06, 2011 at 11:43 PM

Don't forget all self-appointed experts are not statisticians. If I listened to the experts and didn't delve into real statistical issues, I'd still be overweight and sick.

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 06, 2011 at 10:54 PM

The study had a bunch of statistically viable samples...analyzed and computed to some up with very significant p values by Duke University. You really have no idea what you are talking about.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 2:30 PM

Its evolutionary thingy - there are only 2 things that can keep a man - food and sex. You need to be superb in both to get and keep the alpha male. No references, pure XP, so you will have to trust me on that.

C0cf19329f850011e66d1ccfa7d10896
278 · October 06, 2011 at 6:01 AM

@Melissa-Hunt. As far as I have seen, there are no other studies that show the same magnitude and direction of change in laboratory markers of calorie restriction such as insulin, leptin, freeT3, and body temperature as Rosedale's diet does. No vegan diets, no any diets. Please show me the studies that you might be referring to.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 06, 2011 at 7:48 PM

Hey Melissa :) There are none so blind as those who will not see...

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
56616 · October 06, 2011 at 4:29 PM

it was not a controlled study and did not have a statistically viable sample.

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 07, 2011 at 2:10 AM

Amazing how ones perspective colors their perception of scientific reality. When the summation does equal someones perspective we go ad hominem. Nice.

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
56616 · September 07, 2013 at 1:28 AM

ok, there is no evidence at all that kitavans are different

8949bf87b0e0aefcad10f29975e4fa2b
8979 · October 05, 2011 at 10:52 PM

Quilt, it's just pillar envy

8949bf87b0e0aefcad10f29975e4fa2b
8979 · October 06, 2011 at 4:12 PM

+ a bunch, majkinetor, for calling out some of the pseudo-science going on here.

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 05, 2011 at 7:33 PM

Some of the best enthnographic studies were done by Weston A Price.....A doctor of dental medicine! I guess someone forgot that. This doctor/PHd thing is total bullshit. The summation of someone's work has nothing to do with their contribution. Titles mean nothing in helping people out. Ethnogrphic studies do not help with causation they show correlation. The issue at hand is what controls macronutrient partitioning in the body and brain. We know that answer....epigenetics. we just dont know how to change it well. The kitavins epigenetics can not be duplicated. Citing them is useless

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
56616 · October 05, 2011 at 8:24 PM

Consider that trials of low-fat vegan diets also improve those numbers as much as Rosedale's diet does, and these are trials on people who are Westerners like us.

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
56616 · October 06, 2011 at 11:20 AM

Fiona, since Rosedale's isn't a real study, you can't even compare his "numbers" to those in real studies. I will do a post on this later.

8949bf87b0e0aefcad10f29975e4fa2b
8979 · October 06, 2011 at 4:15 PM

...like, oh, so and so isn't a real scientist and such and such isn't a real study and I'm the only one around here who gets to say what's real.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 9:56 PM

@Andre: Its a bit different for a man - cooking is more like... women generally don't know to cook and you can't really depend on woman because one day she will have that period or something when she will be like 'no dinner for you' - but hey, you don't care as you cook far better, and if you muster both skills, then her new lover will look like a fail blog and give you opportunity to xpress your alpha attributes toward other females - you see, its a win win win combination.

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 06, 2011 at 11:45 PM

The patients were their own control...before and after. And yes, it was an interventional retrospective study... more "controlled" than Kitavan and other population studies with no intervention to control, and perhaps more relevant for us... Shows the same people with the same genes and lifestyle can greatly improve health parameters in a few months...perhaps the Kitavans could also. I'd like to do a prospective study...comparing my diet to any you'd like to try...care to fund it?

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 07, 2011 at 3:11 PM

lol majkinetor, being a good cook is also a good way to keep a women happy.

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
56616 · October 07, 2011 at 1:50 AM

The guy who says everyone has diabetes is telling me I have extreme unscientific bias? The guy whose data shows his diet improves leptin/insulin, but the improved values don't even approach those of Kitavans or raw vegans?

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 9:52 PM

@Matthew: I know, I master both skills. :D

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 12:41 PM

@Melissa: http://goo.gl/GihS6

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
56616 · October 06, 2011 at 11:21 PM

The sample was 31 people chosen by you. You can certainly calculate a p value that's significant, but whether it has any bearing on the general population depends on the study design. The study design was not adequate to extrapolate to that.

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
56616 · October 07, 2011 at 1:46 AM

The guy who says everyone has diabetes is telling me I have extreme unscientific bias? I'm in touch with many researchers, researchers with PhDs, and they laugh at such conjectures.

8949bf87b0e0aefcad10f29975e4fa2b
8979 · October 07, 2011 at 2:58 PM

+1 Quilt....................

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 9:57 PM

@Andre: Its a bit different for a man - cooking is more like... women generally don't know to cook and you can't really depend on woman because one day she will have that period or something when she will be like 'no dinner for you' - but hey, you don't care as you cook far better, and if you master both skills, then her new lover will look like a fail blog and give you opportunity to xpress your alpha attributes toward other females - you see, its a win win win combination

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 2:29 PM

Its evolutionary thingy - there are only 2 things that can keep a man - food and sex. You need to be superb in both to get the alpha male. No references, you will have to trust me on that.

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 07, 2011 at 12:14 AM

M-H; "The wheat lectin can also bind to insulin receptors". Glucose binding to receptors and islet cells themselves is likely to be far more detrimental.. I'm certainly not an advocate of wheat...or rice, or potatoes...

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 06, 2011 at 11:54 PM

M-H Gathet Love; They were not 31 people chosen by me... They were the people that did all the necessary before and after lab work...and the statistics were analyzed by an expert statistician from Duke. This WAS a real study, with very valid information that should absolutely be studied further and not dismissed by extreme unscientific bias such as yours.

149af6e19a06675614dfbb6838a7d7c0
3202 · October 07, 2011 at 3:59 PM

Right Mattew, so cook for her and her new lover.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 07, 2011 at 2:21 PM

I know. I was supportive !

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
56616 · October 07, 2011 at 1:23 PM

@maj, coincidentally, that is one of my favorite games.

149af6e19a06675614dfbb6838a7d7c0
3202 · October 08, 2011 at 5:15 AM

majkinetor, I am there opening night of your restaurant and I can't wait to see the quality of the waitresses you have hand picked. I aim to be head bus-boy.

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
7
25467 · October 05, 2011 at 1:21 AM

https://www.facebook.com/notes/dr-rosedale-and-the-rosedale-health-plan/leptin-a-point-of-major-importance-that-is-a-prime-source-of-confusion-error-div/201273786608605

This guy loves to put words in your mouth you have never said.

Not diggin his methods even though we agree on most things but a few

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
56616 · October 05, 2011 at 2:57 AM

he is referred to as "Kruse" not the quilt

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 05, 2011 at 3:27 AM

He took off the comment where I questioned his character but still did not edit the post. I see why Mike Eades and him split now.

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 05, 2011 at 11:37 AM

However, my statement was not made totally without substance. On your own website you state as part of your plan to "try to avoid starches until you have mastered your cravings and hunger". That is not the same as saying to avoid starches, period. Adding starches even after "mastering cravings" will again cause cravings. I believe I also read that you recommend a book about leptin by Byron Richards that recommends eating considerable carbohydrates. So, thank you for your clarification and support in disagreeing with the 'safe starch' concept.

21fd060d0796fdb8a4a990441e08eae7
24523 · October 05, 2011 at 2:40 AM

Uh oh, time for a walk-off! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8VwHyc6WHzE

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 05, 2011 at 11:53 AM

Kruse; "I see why Mike Eades and him split now" Talk about speaking of something that you have absolutely no knowledge about...

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 05, 2011 at 1:26 AM

And i added more comments on the rest of his responses

C0cf19329f850011e66d1ccfa7d10896
278 · October 05, 2011 at 8:25 AM

I have seen several times people address Rosedale as the high carb guy! last was on a Denver radio show, clearly had the wrong doc! Rosedale did not attack below the belt about integrity. Quilt/Kruse missed the point, that Rosedale was including Kruse as people talking about the importance leptin, clearly a complement which was totally missed. Maybe next time he should not mention names at all. You all missed the most important part which is that glucose spikes leptin. The whole Eides ~ Rosedale thing, Eides went to do an infomercial, no other reason, no drama or madness, sorry no dirt there!

8949bf87b0e0aefcad10f29975e4fa2b
8979 · October 05, 2011 at 2:52 AM

Did he update the note? It seems like you were exempted from the "group" when it comes to safe starches. What am I missing?

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 05, 2011 at 11:41 AM

I may not have exactly stated (indirectly) your position on starches, but that does not warrant your bending so far over backwards to challenge my character…So why? Can't challenge the science? Deeper reasons?

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 05, 2011 at 2:32 AM

Cant do that right M......might affect my red skin huh?

21fd060d0796fdb8a4a990441e08eae7
24523 · October 05, 2011 at 1:25 AM

Nice, Quilt! He'll think twice about sticking "Kruse" into future lists.

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 05, 2011 at 11:30 AM

Kruse; Interesting attack by you. I had just intended to add your name to those talking about leptin's importance, as I have noticed this in some posts of yours. I maybe should have been more specific in the next sentence to single out your name for exclusion from the group explicitly pushing starches in this draft. I do not follow paleo sites thoroughly, and I do not know exactly everyone's stance, so I had asked Jimmy to review for any such misinterpretation prior to his posting. I did not know it would be leaked before that…

Cbb1134f8e93067d1271c97bb2e15ef6
5477 · October 05, 2011 at 5:10 AM

underground storage organs dance over back of cows flying rice in bird beaks to moon.

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
56616 · October 05, 2011 at 1:45 AM

oh snap, can't believe Rosedale lumped you in with starchers. He's really in the mood to burn bridges!

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 05, 2011 at 3:56 AM

Looks like he did edit it now and put my name in brackets on the starch bullshit.

21fd060d0796fdb8a4a990441e08eae7
24523 · October 05, 2011 at 4:47 AM

ur too nice lik cloud in sky saying hi to sun and then bye

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 05, 2011 at 3:58 PM

knowing my position but I answered Jimmy's questions and they were not too kind to be honest to the other crew. Jimmy posted on your link that I was being factual with my response which was made before you ever linked me to those other people. You did not know or read it so I am willing to lay it down......but be careful before you attribute words to me I did not say. You words are out there for all to see in your books. Your position is clear. I would never put words in someones mouth if I did not know their position. We all know what you think here quite well.

0dbd7154d909b97fe774d1655754f195
16131 · October 05, 2011 at 4:13 AM

I really don't see why anyone should be attacking anyone personally. I've had a blog once and many a time tried posting in a hurry. So many honest errors and typos. I do try to look past those things at the bigger picture if there is one. But that's just me. Whatever the error was it's gone now. BTW Dr. Eades does not come across as Mister Cutiepie on Twitter. Just saying.

0dbd7154d909b97fe774d1655754f195
16131 · October 05, 2011 at 3:16 AM

"The Jaminet, Guyenet, Kruse, and Harris group is right that leptin likely supersedes insulin as far as importance in obesity, diabetes, and other chronic diseases, at least in humans. However, they (not including Kruse) are quite wrong in believing that it is therefore okay to consume “safe starches” that will largely digest into glucose."

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 05, 2011 at 11:38 AM

…and what about the main scientific point that I was making in that section? What I really was expecting from you and others were comments to my statement that you, Byron Richards, and others miss the main point that glucose spikes leptin, so whether insulin is more important or leptin is more important is somewhat irrelevant as far as glucose is concerned. Glucose spikes both contributing greatly to both insulin and leptin resistance and any optimal diet should take that into account. I am surprised this is being ignored in in lieu of your stance on carbs.

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 05, 2011 at 3:55 PM

Ron just quote me accurately.....you editted it and I am fine with the edit. These comments by me were done before your edit because I felt your intent was not correct. Simple. You and I are closer than you think. our disagreements are on things we will find out soon enough with regards to mTOR and protein and Saturated fat and CRON. As for the character questions I wonder aloud why you would lump me in with that crew. I have multiple posts why I think SG et all are off. You made the edit so I am backing off my criticism of you. Im willing to give you the benefit of the doubt of not

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 05, 2011 at 3:59 PM

Byron Richards is a nutritionist selling supplements.....what he says I take with a grain of salt. You should too.

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 05, 2011 at 4:02 PM

Regarding what I have said on my site.....Carbs are what americans use too much of. You can do a leptin reset with fat alone too.....few people will do it because the the dosages of Fat will not destroy incretin signals like protein does. So protein is why its in my leptin Rx......clinically as a neurosurgeon I use the fat leptin reset more than protein. A ketogenic paleodiet with coconut oil.....which you clearly dont like based upon your book. We have differences but in the grand scale of things we are not far off. I think this chaps your ass more than it should.

Eecc48184707bc26bce631485b5b7e34
4764 · October 06, 2011 at 11:06 PM

Hey Dr. Rosedale, while I used to have incredible difficulty with cravings and food addiction, it's really gone now after 18 mos paleo. Something changed. I can and do eat starch, maybe 75-100g per day without cravings, without weight gain, without issue. My post 30,60,90 minute prandial blood glucose sticks right around 100 with my starchy (high fat, moderate protein) meals and when I was lower carb (ie no starches but lots of non-starchy produce). Fasting am BG has always been (paleo or not) 70-74. Just an n=1

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 08, 2011 at 12:42 AM

Katherine make a great point here. Once someone recovers leptin sensitivity i do not think macronutient ratios matter one bit. This is why i have no problem with carbs once the signs of LS return. As they do i recommend uping HIIT with carb loads. This fits with PHD and others. My comments were focused on carbs and cancer. Oncogenesis is a physiologic novel place to be. Once cells lose growth controls hundreds of thousands of articles that are peer reviewed have been written about this in a simple pub med search.

B3e7d1ab5aeb329fe24cca1de1a0b09c
6
5242 · October 05, 2011 at 3:59 AM

One thing is for sure, we need more evidence. That will mean more funding for more studies that are conducted using the proper scientific method and without bias.

Dream on Rhubarb, dream on.

C0cf19329f850011e66d1ccfa7d10896
278 · October 05, 2011 at 8:45 AM

I agree, but these are studies to prove a better way of living, take people off drugs & reverse illnesses. Yep, pharma is not going to fund that one, nor will any associated with them like the ADS, AHS. Rosedale was working with a large hospital chain, they were about to conduct his study along with 3 other popular diets. When it got to the protocol to reduce and in many cases eliminate drugs, they asked Rosedale to 'adjust his diet so drugs could be maintained'.The study was abruptly halted as their 'investors' would not approve the program, Rosedale did not adjust to maintain their drugs.

C0cf19329f850011e66d1ccfa7d10896
278 · October 06, 2011 at 6:15 AM

Yes, it was very unfortunate. There lead doctors were very embarrassed, especially after 6 months and lots of money putting it all together.

8949bf87b0e0aefcad10f29975e4fa2b
8979 · October 06, 2011 at 3:59 PM

Why would they be embarrassed? It looks like they may have avoided another ACCORD fiasco.

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 08, 2011 at 1:44 AM

Many have tried to bury accord.....there is a lot to learned from that study. I remember when it came out i posted a thread on here about it and all the carb lovers were just dead silent.

8949bf87b0e0aefcad10f29975e4fa2b
8979 · October 06, 2011 at 3:27 AM

Well, that is unfortunate

C0cf19329f850011e66d1ccfa7d10896
278 · October 08, 2011 at 6:48 AM

Rosedale does exactly the opposite of ACCORD, and shows that you can reverse diabetes without drugs using his diet alone. The ugly truth of ACCORD is that despite lowering glucose, the use of more meds (most raising insulin) results in more death. Rosedale is an expert whose opinion on ACCORD was published by the NY Times. He said, and has said for 20 yrs, that the reason there were more deaths is because medicine does not realize that diabetes is not a disease of glucose; it is a disease of dysfunctional hormone signaling. What ACCORD had shown was the treatment becoming the disease.

C0cf19329f850011e66d1ccfa7d10896
278 · October 08, 2011 at 6:51 AM

The NY times Rosedale letter to the editor.. http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E05EFD9123AF930A25751C0A96E9C8B63

2c2349bc7af0fedb59a5fe99dac9fae2
5
2707 · October 05, 2011 at 2:21 PM

As always it depends on the individual. Humans have existed and thrived on many different diets.

I think it up to us to tweak our diets, and react based on our energy levels and overall health. For example, if you are feeling a bit lethargic, try adding in some safe starches. If you are able to tolerate and it resolves your issue continue.

I don't think we have to be so black or white on this. We should allow a healthy spectrum from low to carb to moderate carb all eating healthy safe foods.

543a65b3004bf5a51974fbdd60d666bb
4
4393 · November 02, 2011 at 2:00 AM

fyi all, i have just seen that Paul Jaminet has posted a reply to Dr Rosedale here;

http://perfecthealthdiet.com/?p=5027

24df4e0d0e7ce98963d4641fae1a60e5
4
8879 · October 05, 2011 at 10:53 AM

Well, the evangelist picture/quotation certainly isn't helpful. Whassup wid dat?? We're all different degrees of diabetic? Why must low carbers employ such hyperbole?

There is NO evidence that postprandial insulin spikes and BG spikes cause diabetes. Heck, even the current conversion rate from prediabetes to frank diabetes on the SAD is in the low single digit percents. The progression goes through insulin resistance, and carbs do not cause IR.

As regards glycation, the first step is a reversible equilibrium. A little bit goes down the path with a glucose spike, then hops back off when glucose falls. It's the chronic elevation that causes problems. I can't find the post at the moment on Ned Koch's blog, but the risk curve for HbA1c makes a shallow U around "normal" -- risk is slightly elevated as much for very low than for slightly high. The curve really takes off after that.

Diabetes is not a continuum. There's a clear "switch" from compensators to beta cell dysfunction. We see it in both directions where GBP, intense early insulin therapy, and that crash diet all have been known to restore normal glycemic control in diabetics in rather short timeframes.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 05, 2011 at 1:10 PM

This is because enzymatic g is active, it doesn't happen by chance.

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 05, 2011 at 7:16 PM

Melissa the answer is easy......she is clearly Leptin Sensitive at the brain liver and muscle level. That is the only reason.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 05, 2011 at 1:09 PM

U curve ? U better find some reference because it goes against basic principles of physiology - the non-enzymatic glycosylation always happens and its percentage depends on level of glucose. This one is bad, because proteins loose their function. The enzymatic glycosylation always happens and is a good thing, it serves the body. If you say there is U turn that could only mean that enzymatic glycosylation is enhanced with lower glucose levels, anything else doesn't make sense.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 05, 2011 at 5:03 PM

Hyperbole sells more books.

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 05, 2011 at 12:44 PM

There is plenty of robust evidence that chronic elevations/spikes in glucose, insulin, and leptin highly contribute to insulin and leptin resistance, that are the foundation for the development of diabetes (by its current definition of high blood sugar). Additionally, diabetes (T2) is not primarily a disease of blood sugar, but a disease of hormonal miscommunication primarily of insulin and leptin, as manifested by insulin and leptin resistance and should really be diagnosed as such.

24df4e0d0e7ce98963d4641fae1a60e5
8879 · October 05, 2011 at 4:51 PM

BTW Ron: I consider hyperglycemia a symptom not the underlying pathology. Diabetes is beta cell dysfunction. Non-diabetic obese and classical T2's can have nearly identical metabolic mileus -- elevated NEFA, hyperinsulinemia, with different glycemic outcomes (even some can have elevated FBG w/o postprandial IGT and vice versa). There's *something* else going on in a relatively small percentage of the population where compensation fails, and beta-cell impairment and/or destruction ensues. Which doesn't make prediabetes benign ... just not necessarily "pre" anything.

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 06, 2011 at 4:54 AM

Another study, one lay and the journal article http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/09/080905215945.htm http://www.jci.org/articles/view/34587 I also know from perhaps treating 1000 diabetic patients that reducing insulin and leptin via diet rapidly improves insulin and leptin resistance, and greatly improves, if not altogether reverses, T2 diabetes and other chronic diseases of aging. The reduction in leptin and insulin happens first and appears to be a requisite. Others are now doing this including Eric Westman and Mary Vernon who have published papers.

24df4e0d0e7ce98963d4641fae1a60e5
8879 · October 06, 2011 at 11:07 AM

Weight loss improves insulin sensitivity no matter the method. Hyperinsulinemia contributes to insulin resistance only as a down stream cycle -- e.g. when it keeps glycogen stores topped off thus reducing non-oxidative glucose disposal which is the general defect responsible for impaired glucose disposal into skeletal muscle. I don't get the relevance of the CHOP paper to all of this. Except that the basal insulin requirements deplete the ability to make insulin for GSIS. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC508661/pdf/1011094.pdf ...

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 06, 2011 at 2:06 PM

There are indeed papers showing that free fatty acids stimulate insulin release, but it is circumstantial and seem to increase with level of saturation and chain size. For instance http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC302480/ http://www.springerlink.com/content/l50vrq37getytvjw/fulltext.pdf

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 07, 2011 at 1:26 AM

...Far better to treat T2 DM by improving insulin and leptin sensitiviy, and this is done by greatly reducing those foods that provoke insulin and leptin, i.e. starches. Like being in a smelly room reduces your ability to smell, you must reduce the odor to regain it. You do not reverse T2 diabetes by giving them more insulin.. You must reduce it...

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 05, 2011 at 12:46 PM

Defining the disease of diabetes strictly by elevated blood sugar allows the real disease(s) of insulin and leptin resistance with accompanying hyperinsulinemia and hyperleptinemia (that do worsen with time in a continuum) to go unnoticed , often for decades, while damage and 'disease' secondary to this accumulates until finally islet cells start burning out, fatty liver sets in, hyperleptinemia and leptin resistance results in excess hepatic gluconeogenesis, and the diagnosis of 'diabetes' is finally made...

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad
56616 · October 05, 2011 at 1:30 PM

How come my great aunt is 100 and still hasn't burned out the system? When she turns 120 can she expect to get diagnosed with diabetes?

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 05, 2011 at 9:32 PM

@Luckybastard - Leptin sensitivity is one of the immeasurable factors that, along with epigenetics, can be used to explain away anything that disagrees with your own personal theory.

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 06, 2011 at 11:41 AM

free fatty acids do not stimulate insulin release. I am certainly not confusing postprandial insulin response with basal insulin. Early Insulin therapy for type I DM was tried a number of years ago including by myself, and failed to stem the disease... Insulin therapy for type II diabetics (producing their own insulin prior to significant islet cell burnout) makes them worse and should not be a part of medicine.

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 05, 2011 at 12:55 PM

..drug treatment is given to lower blood sugar usually by overworking and stressing the islets even more while raising insulin, ignoring leptin, ultimately wiping out the islet cells, now requiring more and more exogenous insulin to bring down glucose that people are being told is fine to eat, all the while worsening the underlying cause… and doctors wonder why diabetics die young.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 05, 2011 at 1:43 PM

Superb genetics probably. My grandma has 100 too and she has very low fasting blood sugar although she eats bread, carbs etc... although she eats only cooked stuff.

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 05, 2011 at 9:42 PM

@Luckybastard - Leptin sensitivity is one of those things that, along with epigenetics, can be used to explain away anything that disagrees with your own pet theories. They can also apparently be easily diagnosed over the internet.

24df4e0d0e7ce98963d4641fae1a60e5
8879 · October 05, 2011 at 4:41 PM

@majkinetor: The *shallow* U curve I was referring to was for HbA1c and CVD or something like that (perhaps life expectancy?). No need to be explained by enzyme catalysis. Just that slight "underglycylation" had equal outcome to slight "overglycation". It's somewhere on Ned's blog. I'll try and look later.

24df4e0d0e7ce98963d4641fae1a60e5
8879 · October 06, 2011 at 5:35 PM

*free fatty acids do not stimulate insulin release.* Wrong. http://carbsanity.blogspot.com/2011/04/chronic-exposure-to-free-fatty-acid.html http://carbsanity.blogspot.com/2011/07/effects-of-ffa-and-ketone-levels-on.html http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC302480/pdf/jcinvest00184-0197.pdf @majkinetor, it's hardly in vitro circumstantial evidence.

Ba686a7b91a9c04f18170dd4ac762968
764 · October 06, 2011 at 12:55 AM

The linear relationship between HBA1c and mortality falls apart below 6.0 for several reasons. Diabetics have shortened red cell lifespan compared to healthy normals, which means healthy normals HBA1c overestimates glycation damage. Healthy normals have higher variability in HBA1c, that makes it less accurate at these lower levels. Finally, we all have de-glycation enzymes that repair the glycation damage. No one has zero glycation, and no one needs to have it.

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 06, 2011 at 10:35 AM

... and one must also recognize the extremely high contribution that leptin resistance plays in diabetes... may even be more important than insulin. Spikes in blood sugar cause spikes in leptin, contributing to if not causing leptin resistance resulting in centrally mediated (brain) increased gluconeogenesis, elevated insulin, islet burnout... diabetes...

24df4e0d0e7ce98963d4641fae1a60e5
8879 · October 06, 2011 at 5:42 PM

... In this trial, 92% of 382 subjects with poorly controlled diabetes achieved glycemic targets (fasting and 2-h postprandial capillary glucose levels of <110 mg/dl and <144 mg/dl, respectively) within an average of 8 days from start of therapy (Table 2). Treatment was withdrawn after 2 weeks of normoglycemia, followed by diet and exercise management. ... By the end of 1 year, remission rates were significantly higher in the groups that had received initial insulin therapy (51 and 45% in the continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion and multiple daily insulin injections groups, respectively)..

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 06, 2011 at 6:36 PM

Carbsane, its more probable that its physiological. During ketosis there must be physiological insulin resistance to save glucose for cells without mitos and also to keep pancreas functioning in absence of dietary glucose spikes. That is also concluded in review you posted. Also, the studies from diabetic patients aren't quite representative for healthy humans. Its also well known fact that during starvation your insulin levels drop down quickly, its not the same when somebody puts needle with fat in your vein. This is there like in every book: http://goo.gl/wCYLe

24df4e0d0e7ce98963d4641fae1a60e5
8879 · October 05, 2011 at 4:39 PM

Dr. Rosedale, I've been researching the literature on this for a year now. I have yet to see any study demonstrating that carbohydrates and the insulin responses they elicit contribute to insulin resistance. The only foods that seem to are those that do not elicit an insulin response (fructose and fat). If there is robust evidence, it shouldn't be difficult to provide a few review papers implicating carb induced glucose and insulin spikes. Thanks in advance, I look forward to reading those studies.

8949bf87b0e0aefcad10f29975e4fa2b
8979 · October 06, 2011 at 12:27 AM

http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736%2810%2960614-9/fulltext

66e6b190e62fb3bcf42d4c60801c7bf6
12407 · October 05, 2011 at 7:26 PM

why is she leptin sensitive if her diet hasn't been low carb to keep her leptin sensitive all these years?

24df4e0d0e7ce98963d4641fae1a60e5
8879 · October 07, 2011 at 11:58 AM

Ron, Did you read the paper? Or at least my quotation above? Diabetes is profoundly reversed (not just put into remission where a few grams of carbs sends BG's skyrocketing) by the early insulin treatment (and with that crash diet). Half of the EIT's were still diabetes free after a year. Yet you say EIT has no place in medicine? Really?? The mechanism is that the EIT relieves the hyperglycemia that is compounding the lipotoxicity and likley lowers the elevated NEFA causing the GSIS impairment. Now the pancreas can produce insulin properly instead of hyper-basal and impaired GSIS.

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 06, 2011 at 4:52 AM

Insulin: In need of some restraint? Salk Institute Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,March 07, 2007 "the study reveals the "dark side" of high insulin production, the kind that results from over eating and obesity. "Insulin is very effective at lowering blood sugar, and promotes fat storage, preparing the animal for times when food may not be available," he says. "But when the hormone is produced at too high a level for too long, the body becomes insulin resistant and blood sugar and certain blood lipids gradually creep up, which can cause progressive damage to multiple organ."

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
19220 · October 05, 2011 at 9:40 PM

@Luckybastard - Leptin sensitivity is one of the immeasurable factors that, along with epigenetics, can be used to explain away anything that disagrees with your own pet theories. They can also easily be diagnosed over the internet apparently.

24df4e0d0e7ce98963d4641fae1a60e5
8879 · October 06, 2011 at 5:44 PM

... compared with 27% in the oral therapy group. **Whereas in the oral agent group, acute insulin response at 1 year declined significantly compared with immediate post-treatment, it was maintained in the insulin treatment groups. ** I'd say there ought to be a place in medicine for EIT in T2's.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · September 07, 2013 at 1:28 AM

Carbsane, its more probable that its physiological. During ketosis there must be physiological insulin resistance to save glucose for cells without mitos and also to keep pancreas functioning in absence of dietary glucose spikes. That is also concluded in review you posted. Also, the studies from diabetic patients aren't quite representative for healthy humans. Its also well known fact that during starvation your insulin levels drop down quickly, its not the same when somebody puts needle with fat in your vein. This is there like in every book: goo.gl/wCYLe

Ba686a7b91a9c04f18170dd4ac762968
764 · October 06, 2011 at 12:59 AM

"There is NO evidence that postprandial insulin spikes and BG spikes cause diabetes." This is the bottom line and is the loch ness monster of the CIH. I've looked for over 4 years and seen no convincing evidence that this happens. PP BG increases do not cause hyperinsulinemia. Pathological insulin resistance causes hyperinsulinemia, not the other way 'round...

8949bf87b0e0aefcad10f29975e4fa2b
8979 · October 06, 2011 at 12:27 AM

...just couldn't wait!....

24df4e0d0e7ce98963d4641fae1a60e5
8879 · October 06, 2011 at 11:23 AM

Ron, your premise seems to conflate postprandial insulin response with basal insulin. Basal insulin is stimulated significantly by free fatty acids that there is robust research, to use your term, to support are the initiating factor in the etiology of diabetes. Bierman, McGarry, Frayn, Boden, DeFronzo, the list could go on. Can't find it right now but there's a study showing early insulin therapy cures diabetes and the participants were able to stop therapy after like 8 weeks or so with normal glucose homeostasis.

24df4e0d0e7ce98963d4641fae1a60e5
8879 · October 07, 2011 at 2:24 AM

What part of roughly 50% remission from diabetes after VERY short term insulin treatment did the Drs. not get? They're not stressing their islets with insulin. They reduce lipo and gluco toxicity and allow the beta cells to regain proper function.

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 06, 2011 at 4:47 AM

There IS plenty of evidence that hyperinsulinemia is a major contributor if not the main cause of type II diabetes. Admittedly, not that easy to find, as it is not something that that gets much research money and pharmaceutical companies are turning their heads, as drugs to lower insulin are nonexistent.Even so-called insulin sensitizers are not that. Showing that hyperinsulinemia is a major precursor to islet dysfunction and the onset of T2 diabetes is not something that Medicine (or the food industry) would wish to know about. Not only would the major therapy then be dietary and not drugs...

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 06, 2011 at 4:48 AM

..it would be more than embarrassing since the vast majority of treatment for diabetes over the last half century or longer results in hyperinsulinemia. Medicine (and its lawyers) don't want to face itself in the mirror knowing it's been helping to kill its patients. A couple of studies...

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 07, 2011 at 1:16 AM

CarbSane.."A recent study comparing intensive insulin therapy (multiple daily insulin injections or continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion) with oral hypoglycemic agents (glicazide and/or metformin) in newly diagnosed patients with type 2 diabetes provided some provocative results (21)". They are comparing insulin therapy with oral agents that raise insulin by stressing islets. So raising insulin without stressing islets is better than stressing islets. Either way they are raising insulin and worsening an underlying cause of the disease.

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 07, 2011 at 6:21 AM

So, are you recommending periodic treatment with insulin injections (that will ultimately increase resistance) every week? month? to reduce stress and glucotoxicity secondary to sugars from starches in their diet that is sure to recur if those people continue to eat as they had previously?...or maybe those with diabetes, diagnosed as a disease of high blood glucose, and where the typical goal of therapy is to lower it, should just minimize eating it?

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 06, 2011 at 4:42 AM

i.e.HbA1c;there is another explanation that I feel is most likely; these are patients on diabetic medications.To achieve lower A1 C they likely received greater amounts of medications,and the vast majority of medications used to treat diabetes excessively raise insulin,causing at the very least artificial hyperinsulinemia,islet cell stress and dysfunction, islet cell death, worsening of the underlying cause of diabetes and increased mortality.Other medications such as PPARg agonists have their own manifest problems increasing mortality.In other words, the treatment itself becomes the disease.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
78422 · October 06, 2011 at 6:34 PM

Carbsane, its more probable that its physiological. During ketosis there must be physiological insulin resistance to save glucose for cells without mitos and also to keep pancreas functioning in absence of glucose. That is also concluded in review you posted. Also, the studies from diabetic patients aren't quite representative for healthy humans. Its also well known fact that during starvation your insulin levels drop down quickly, its not the same when somebody puts needle with fat in your vein. This is there like in every book: http://goo.gl/wCYLe

5dffdd2f807170dcc66d6d687f4e2ba4
1722 · October 06, 2011 at 11:33 AM

It is the other way around. Improvement in insulin and especially leptin resistance comes first, within the first few weeks prior to significant weight loss, and this will then result in fat loss if necessary and multiple other physiologic benefits including improved cardiovascular function. The rest of what you said about insulin has little to do with the truth and is regardless trivial as a major cause of diabetes. The CHOP study just shows relevance for hyperinsulinemia resulting in islet stress contributing to islet cell death.

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 07, 2011 at 2:00 AM

Ron plus 1000 on the answers here.....we agree a lot more than we disagree.

24df4e0d0e7ce98963d4641fae1a60e5
8879 · October 06, 2011 at 5:40 PM

Regarding Early Insulin Therapy: *Insulin therapy for type II diabetics (producing their own insulin prior to significant islet cell burnout) makes them worse and should not be a part of medicine* {Rosedale} http://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/32/suppl_2/S266.full A recent study comparing intensive insulin therapy (multiple daily insulin injections or continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion) with oral hypoglycemic agents (glicazide and/or metformin) in newly diagnosed patients with type 2 diabetes provided some provocative results (21). ...

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · October 07, 2011 at 2:05 AM

Lucky you can eat carbs and not become LR is your epigenetic switches are built for it. This is precisly what colpo's argument is with dr. Eades. He is correct. I believe most LR is caused by Pufa's.....but how we fix LR best is with high protein resets. We can do it with hi fat resets but they take longer and are tougher for patients to handle clinically, they work best in neurological cases in which i happen to see with regularity. For t2d and obesity protein is easier and better tolerated clinically

3ec82663c71ecbd1db95f17a1eb4f982
2
104 · October 07, 2011 at 2:46 PM

I'm going with the "it all depends" stance. There are so many variables within variables so that what is safe for one person is not for another. Of the research cited in these articles, was there a difference between male and female; what about oriental vs. European; what about age differences. Even if the group was really focused such as all male northern European in the age range of 30-35, there are still variables of lifestyle, genetics, etc.

We all know that some foods are going to be better, for example, between a grocery store apple imported from China v. organic from your own tree, your own tree wins. Then we can get into the argument of how well the produce is grown since fertile soil (organic, of course) will produce a better item than worn-out soil.

Then there is what is the basis for this declaration; what were the assumptions in the study; what was the theory did it start with; what other information arose from the study; and even was the entire study valid.

It all comes down to knowing your body, what it needs, and being aware it all changes, then skip over the rest of the noise.

5e92edc5a180787a60a252a8232006e9
1
340 · August 19, 2012 at 6:36 AM

Many low-carb people just don't believe that our ancestors could have eaten carb-heavy diets. We saw this at the 2012 AHS again. These people still cling to the romantic notion that the hunter-gatherers mainly lived off of animal carcasses. All cultures more or less thrived on a starch-based diet. In fact, the new book by the vegan guru, Dr. McDougall, is largely correct that most indigenous tribes and even pre-agricultural civlizations depended on a few staple starches.

Of course, they also ate animal carcasses. (Except perhaps Pacific Islanders, who ate fish and marine life). That's why it's so shocking when confronted with the evidence that the Okinawans ate lots of carbs, mostly their purple sweet potatoes. Many used to claim that the Okinawans ate mainly pork and fiber-rich vegetables. Mention the Kitavans or the Highlanders of New Guinea, and the low-carb camp will still deny that they ate a carb-heavy diet centering on tubers.

Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5
5381 · August 27, 2012 at 11:07 PM

Are you descended from the kitavans, okinawans or the highlanders of new guinea?

5e92edc5a180787a60a252a8232006e9
340 · August 31, 2012 at 3:27 AM

Why would that be an issue. The point is that most people ate diets where starch figured as a huge component of their daily caloric intake. The highlanders and Kitavans happen to be closer to the carb-heavy side; the Okis have been misrepresented as being low-carb but finally shown to be moderate to high carb, to the surprise of many low-carb diehards.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094
1
78422 · August 19, 2012 at 1:07 AM

As always, the answer is in the genes. It's why Jeanne Calment lived to the age of 122 whilst smoking till 117. She did, however, consume a lot of olive oil. And chocolate. Does this mean if she avoided chocolate and cigarettes she would have lived till 140?

Most of us do not carry her genes and according to actuarial tables can expect to live 65% of her lifespan. There is evidence that paleo-type diets will improve healthspan but no evidence on extending lifespan (other than avoiding premature death due to gross pathology rather than frailty). In fact, for humans, there is no known intervention that has been shown to increase lifespan.

In any case, I intuitively tend to lean towards Rosedale's position. Carbs appear to be problematic for most people, particularly as they get older or become more sedentary, causing metabolic dysregulation. Also, many types of carbs end up as food for gut bacteria and this is another dimension to the carb problem when you take into account that people also have different gut bacteria populations.

However, the unavoidable fact is that people like eating carbs and - in a world of endless abundance and variety of carb based foods - will continue to consume them and find ways of rationalising their consumption. Therefore Jaminet's position is the more pragmatic.

Looking towards the future, it's more likely we will end up altering our genome (ala The Bourne Legacy) and that of our gut bacteria to accomodate carb intake rather than eliminate from our diet.

C0cf19329f850011e66d1ccfa7d10896
1
278 · August 18, 2012 at 10:56 AM
Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5
5381 · August 18, 2012 at 1:30 PM

As I stated in the other thread, I found his thoughts on longevity pretty darn interesting.

543a65b3004bf5a51974fbdd60d666bb
4393 · August 18, 2012 at 11:13 PM

& Pauls' done a new one as well, http://perfecthealthdiet.com/2012/08/ahs-2012-the-safe-starches-panel/

543a65b3004bf5a51974fbdd60d666bb
4393 · August 18, 2012 at 11:14 PM

& Paul has a new one as well http://perfecthealthdiet.com/2012/08/ahs-2012-the-safe-starches-panel/

3cdc762b2ae30b4ca3529f011ccac174
186 · August 18, 2012 at 11:42 PM

Seems like much of what Rosedale said at AHS12 however was validated by the cancer researchers here: http://www.biomedcentral.com/series/metabolismdietanddisease AMPK, mTor, AKT, PK13. . .these things are worth considering, I think. So I'm giving Rosedale a little more credence now despite his unpleasant manner.

6fe055d6eddb6463b2cf4820d9307dea
0
0 · May 24, 2014 at 1:25 PM

The best information I've found on the web for a ketogenic diet. By adhering to a strict ketogenic diet, Jason Lincoln Jeffers cured himself of candida, IBS, Chron's colitis, type 2 diabetes, chronic fatigue syndrome and other diseases. He is also a ketogenic diet coach and author on the subject.

963322f175cdd4c5f7d52cc372b3a167
0
656 · August 19, 2012 at 6:45 AM

Of COURSE our ancestors ate low carb/high fat. I have no doubt that Grok probably chowed down on things like this - http://livinlavidalowcarb.com/blog/jimmy-moores-n1-experiments-nutritional-ketosis-day-61-90/15125.

Answer Question

Login to Your PaleoHacks Account

Get Free Paleo Recipes