"Life Without Bread"

[Laura]

quote from bettlemaniac:

Although I doubt the theory of glucose deficiency holds any weight, adding carbs is more of a stopgap measure I think. It's much likely to be a hormonal dysfunction at the adrenals. For example the adrenals when stressed cannot produce enough cortisol, and supposedly at the same time there is a tendency for high insulin, causing hypoglycemia (which I often experience as a dizziness, after going without food for a while)

I found after awhile on the paleo diet that my energy level has become so low that I can barely function. Perhaps this because I cut out everything at once, or I'm not doing it right.

I had much the same effects. I was really looking for the "feeling good" thing that others were experiencing. While I COULD detect that my brain was working better, my energy was abysmal for quite awhile.

I started taking potassium iodide, D3, L-carnitine, NAC, and omega 3s every morning. At night, magnesium and vitamin E.

That helped, but what seems to have really kicked me over that hump has been the cryo therapy.

So, you are not alone with this struggle. I think some of us have so much damage to fix that it takes longer and some figuring out how to get from here to there while getting from here to there!!!

Also notice, I started adjusting diet, experimenting, detoxing, etc, in August of 2008, so it is not an instantaneous thing.

 

[nicklebleu]

Many thanks for the articles beetlemaniac and Psyche.

I don't think that adrenal fatigue is my case as I don't have the symptoms. I am convinced that I suffered from it during my late childhood and teenage years, I remember very well the fatigue and the inability to eat breakfast or anything whatsoever until around 1pm or 2pm. My levels of energy are now consistently high though, and I feel very well.

The whole cholesterol issue is complex. Indeed, the recommended levels being pushed are ridiculously low and lead to even greater problems. However, there may be a between point, going either too much above or below it my be a sign not to be dismissed. In my case total cholesterol levels were in the range of 423mg/dl in September, and are now at 313mg/dl. TG and HDL levels are "normal", and LDL that was at 286 is now 212. "Normal" levels are considered to be around 116mg/dl. When I read "Normal", I always think above it, for all the reasons already mentioned here regarding cholesterol, but even so, there may be a limit as to how high it can go before being a sign of an issue to be addressed?

I'm also curious to test it again in a couple of months. That I'm aware of I have changed nothing in my diet since September and cholesterol levels have changed, possibly showing an adaptation to the diet. As many researchers have said, changing to the paleo diet does take a while to adapt to, and some changes can take place even years down the road.

Gertrudes,

I am not sure if you're not wasting your time (and money) remeasuring your lipid profile. The whole cholesterol measurements don't really tell you much ...

Have you read Fallon's "Eat Fat, Loose Fat"? She gives a pretty good rundown on the whole cholesterol issue (unfortunately I cannot quote it here, as I only have the book on my kindle). Basically whether high or not hasn't got any impact on your risk to develop coronary artry disease. In fact, low cholesterol might be more of an issue than high one (in the Framingham study for instance, for every drop of 1 mg/dl of cholesterol, there was a 11% increase in coronay and total mortality).

There are better markers, for instance triglycerides (low is good). And this is almost invariably the case if you are on a ketogenic diet. Another one is lipoprotein a (low is good).

But if you are following a low-carb, high-fat diet, I personally wouldn't worry too much about the lipid profile ...

 

[webglider]

quote from Oxajil:

Hey webglider, thanks for the update. Many of us have gone through feelings of tiredness in the beginning of transition. May I ask what supplements you're taking? Are you for example taking enough salt, potassium, L-Glutamine, L-Carnitine (which will help your body's energy producing factories (mitochondria) to use the fats as energy)? I know that these supplements helped me greatly with overcoming the tiredness, and some pains I experienced in the beginning.

And don't worry too much about having eaten an apple, try to add some more veggies instead, like green beans, if you feel like you need some more carbs. You might also want to eat more fat, if you think you could have more. Fwiw.

quote from Laura:

I had much the same effects. I was really looking for the "feeling good" thing that others were experiencing. While I COULD detect that my brain was working better, my energy was abysmal for quite awhile.

I started taking potassium iodide, D3, L-carnitine, NAC, and omega 3s every morning. At night, magnesium and vitamin E.

That helped, but what seems to have really kicked me over that hump has been the cryo therapy.

So, you are not alone with this struggle. I think some of us have so much damage to fix that it takes longer and some figuring out how to get from here to there while getting from here to there!!!

Also noticye, I started adjusting diet, experimenting, detoxing, etc, in August of 2008, so it is not an instantaneous thing.

Thank you both for the encouragement, recommendations, and sharing your process with me. My morale was really low when I wrote that post, and it's better now. It really helps to be reminded that this a process and the transition to better health does not happen all at once.

oxajil - Thanks for asking about the supplements I'm using. After I wrote these lists to answer your question, I realized that I may be going a little overboard here.

Until the doctor analyzes the results of the lab test, I have developed the following protocol for myself for cancer:

AT/BC by Quantum which is for tumors, fungal formula by AT/BC, Clove extract, Wormwood, Essiac tea, tumeric extract, Adrenal energy formula by AT/BC, Lysine, NAC,

The other supplements are one vitamin 50,000 unit vitamin D once a month, (This is a prescription from another doctor), NAC, vitamin C, Stress Vitamin B, Omega fatty acids, Calcium Magnesium, (which I realize I haven't been taking),

For asthma I'm taking Advair and preventil and for allergies I'm taking certizine.

Quote from Oxajil:

Are you for example taking enough salt, potassium, L-Glutamine, L-Carnitine

Glasses of water mixed with a teaspoon of salt taste really good to me. I have not been taking potassium, L-Glutamine, or L-Carnitine. I guess I should add them.

I have also been taking cold showers.

I just want to conclude with this quote from Laura:

So, you are not alone with this struggle. I think some of us have so much damage to fix that it takes longer and some figuring out how to get from here to there while getting from here to there!!!

Thank you for these words of encouragement.

 

[nicklebleu]

The other supplements are one vitamin 50,000 unit vitamin D once a month, (This is a prescription from another doctor), NAC, vitamin C, Stress Vitamin B, Omega fatty acids, Calcium Magnesium, (which I realize I haven't been taking),

webglider,

50'000 U of Vit.D is actually a really low dose, especially if taken as part of a cancer protocol, unless you have measured your 25-OH-Vit D level (they should be somewhere between 70 - 100 ng/ml). Your doctor might think this is too high, but many of the vitamin researchers agree on that level. To achieve a higher level of Vit D you might have to take anything between 5000 and 10'000 U per day.

Safest would be to discuss this with your doctor and to measure where the levels are at the moment, then to adapt the dose and to remeasure the levels after 3 months.

And remember, the best Vit D is from sunlight (but you need to take the sunbath at mid-day, as only the UV-B portion of sunlight produces Vit D).

A good rundown on the Vit D issue can be found here:
_http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2010/09/06/vitamin-d-linked-to-cancer-and-autoimmune-disease-genes.aspx

 

[dugdeep]

Gertrudes,

I am not sure if you're not wasting your time (and money) remeasuring your lipid profile. The whole cholesterol measurements don't really tell you much ...

Have you read Fallon's "Eat Fat, Loose Fat"? She gives a pretty good rundown on the whole cholesterol issue (unfortunately I cannot quote it here, as I only have the book on my kindle). Basically whether high or not hasn't got any impact on your risk to develop coronary artry disease. In fact, low cholesterol might be more of an issue than high one (in the Framingham study for instance, for every drop of 1 mg/dl of cholesterol, there was a 11% increase in coronay and total mortality).

There are better markers, for instance triglycerides (low is good). And this is almost invariably the case if you are on a ketogenic diet. Another one is lipoprotein a (low is good).

But if you are following a low-carb, high-fat diet, I personally wouldn't worry too much about the lipid profile ...

Hi nicklebleu. I'm not sure this is good advice. While total cholesterol is limited in its use, and doctors want to stick anyone on statins for creeping over the 200 mark (which is ridiculous), I think there is such a thing as too high cholesterol. It's important to remember it's a symptom of something else, though, and that forcing these numbers down will not get to the root cause of the problem. According to Chris Kresser in his Paleo Summit talk, a cholesterol level of over 300 should be investigated. I've been meaning to do up a summary of that talk, which I'll try to get to soon (won't be today, though). I'll post it here when it's done.

 

[nicklebleu]

Gertrudes,

I am not sure if you're not wasting your time (and money) remeasuring your lipid profile. The whole cholesterol measurements don't really tell you much ...

Have you read Fallon's "Eat Fat, Loose Fat"? She gives a pretty good rundown on the whole cholesterol issue (unfortunately I cannot quote it here, as I only have the book on my kindle). Basically whether high or not hasn't got any impact on your risk to develop coronary artry disease. In fact, low cholesterol might be more of an issue than high one (in the Framingham study for instance, for every drop of 1 mg/dl of cholesterol, there was a 11% increase in coronay and total mortality).

There are better markers, for instance triglycerides (low is good). And this is almost invariably the case if you are on a ketogenic diet. Another one is lipoprotein a (low is good).

But if you are following a low-carb, high-fat diet, I personally wouldn't worry too much about the lipid profile ...

Hi nicklebleu. I'm not sure this is good advice. While total cholesterol is limited in its use, and doctors want to stick anyone on statins for creeping over the 200 mark (which is ridiculous), I think there is such a thing as too high cholesterol. It's important to remember it's a symptom of something else, though, and that forcing these numbers down will not get to the root cause of the problem. According to Chris Kresser in his Paleo Summit talk, a cholesterol level of over 300 should be investigated. I've been meaning to do up a summary of that talk, which I'll try to get to soon (won't be today, though). I'll post it here when it's done.

Hi dugdeep,

Thanks for the comment - looking forward to your post!

 

[SeekinTruth]

I just want to remind you, webglider, about the cold showers. It's not clear if Cold Thermogenisis / cryo therapy is good for cancer -- right now it seems to be contraindicated, at least for cryogenic chamber therapy. So be careful, perhaps have a wait and see attitude to see if more information becomes available (or actively search for it yourself).


I also tend to agree with nicklebleu about cholesterol numbers. They fluctuate considerably on a daily (even hourly) basis for no known reasons. Cholesterol and the LDL / HDL transport mechanisms play so many vital roles in biology that, I guess, it depends on what's going on internally as far as the wild fluctuations of blood tests. So triglycerides and lipoprotein A seem to be much more meaningful if there's something going on to be concerned about. Although I do also tend to also agree with Gertrudes that there's a range, above and below which may be something to look into. But overall, the most data seems to show that a low carb/high fat diet should make most concerns of the lipid profile not be so important, as the glycation/oxidation process will be minimized or non-existent. OSIT.


On a different note, I'm going to be preparing a bunch of material for my neighbor to read. He was diagnosed with prostate cancer and has recently started having hormone therapy. He also had a large "benign" tumor removed from his intestines back in the summer. He's 75 years old. He's a microbiologist/cellular biologist and a microbiology professor at one of the main Universities here (his wife also works as a botanist).

So I think if I get together a bunch of the material, including many of the scientific papers/studies, he'll be able to understand them much more than the average person. He reads English, though I'm sure it will be harder than reading for example in Russian. I'm probably going to give a link to this thread, as well.

I talked to him for about half hour this morning, going over the general ideas and asked if I give him links and books to read, he would be interested, and he said yes. I've actually talked to him before and offered to give him information about all this, saying whenever it's convenient for him, let's talk. But months past since my last conversation, probably partly because he's usually very tired and sleeps in the late afternoon/early evening after coming home from the University lectures.

I also talked to him back in 2006 when we first arrived to Armenia about the importance of diet for general health. Of course I knew A LOT less back then, but I had generally the right idea. He was already on cholesterol lowering drugs and had undergone heart surgery a few years before. His childhood friend who we met for a late lunch/early dinner one day because she and her husband worked for many years with a relative of mine in an architectural/engineering firm during the Soviet Armenian years. We were put in contact with them by my mother's cousin in Boston (the wife of the man who worked with them -- he passed away from cancer back in 2000). And through coincidence, when they talked on the phone, and she found out where we were living, she said that she grew up in the building and asked if we knew the neighbors across the hall.

Anyway, long story short, my mother found out that they grew up together and invited the neighbor to the get-together. During eating and conversation, he mentioned his heart problems and the high cholesterol and the drugs. When I mentioned to him that he can fix his problems by dietary changes and some supplements, he said he can't give up his favorite foods, etc. He said he'd rather eat what he likes (lots of sweets/pastries/cakes and dairy, etc.) and pay the price.

So I dropped the subject, especially because the lady who worked with my relative is kind of the authoritarian follower type regarding diet, drugs, smoking, etc. She was telling me how if I'm into researching health issues, why do I smoke? Meanwhile she's had cancer and her husband has also had 2 heart surgeries and she dies her hair with chemicals, etc. I just kept it short and changed the subject. (By the way, her husband knows the best food supply around the city, including {fatty} meats and bacon. He always has given the best advise of where to get what, while she tries to steer toward low fat, etc.)

Anyway, I guess my neighbor has suffered enough that he may be ready to change his diet now. I'm going to put some time into getting the material ready for him to read and play it by ear. If he's sincere, I'll try to help him as much as I can. Already, from today's conversation, he said "so I guess I should start reducing carbs little by little." I told him not to rush into anything until he reads and understands the why's and how's (and we talk as needed). I said if he wants, he can immediately start eliminating grains. I could tell he wasn't very happy about that but I'll wait and see what happens. He was also surprised that I told him he should be eating fatty meats mostly, increasing his fat while reducing his carbs. But it was a short overview of a conversation and we touched on some technical/scientific subjects and he's pretty well versed in mainstream biology. So I think he gets a kick out of the fact that I'm so interested as a layman in research such topics.


Added: just saw the new posts by nicklebleu and dugdeep. I also look forward to your post, dugdeep.

 

[SeekinTruth]

Oh, forgot to mention: when my neighbor got out of the hospital last summer after the surgery to remove the tumor in his intestines, and was started on solid food, guess what was the only thing he could eat the first couple of weeks (as instructed by the doctors)? Meat, of course, and only meat!!

 

[dugdeep]

I've been meaning to do up a summary of that talk, which I'll try to get to soon (won't be today, though). I'll post it here when it's done.

OK, I just remembered that the Paleo Summit material came with transcripts, so I'll quote the relevant part of Kressers talk here (it's just a quick snip, so I think it should be OK to post).

[quote author=Chris Kresser]
...And in the last ten years, especially, thereʼs been a real movement of people who are challenging [the viewpoint that cholesterol causes heart disease]. And in the Paleo community, that is probably the dominant idea, that cholesterol is not the cause of heart disease, and that thereʼs really not much point in measuring cholesterol because itʼs really not the cause of heart disease, nor is it the cause of other diseases. So why bother?

The problem, I think, is that the pendulum may have swung too far back in the other direction. I get a little nervous sometimes. I donʼt spend a lot of time on other blogs at this point because I just donʼt have the time to do that. But every now and then, someone will forward me a comment that they saw on another blog where somebody came on there and said, “Hey, I just had my cholesterol tested. It was 350 and my doctor is freaking out and wants to put me on a statin. What should I do?”

And then you see a bunch of responses saying, “Donʼt worry about it,” or something to that affect, “because cholesterol is not the cause of heart disease. So donʼt worry about it.” So that makes me, as a clinician, really, really nervous when I see that because although cholesterol itself is not the cause of heart disease, really high cholesterol like that can be indicative of an underlying problem that needs to be addressed. And furthermore, cholesterol can certainly contribute to heart disease risk, especially when it becomes oxidized, which weʼll talk about a little more.

But I wanted to briefly cover a few different problems that high cholesterol can be a marker for. One is leptin resistance. And I know youʼve talked a lot about this, Sean, in your fantastic weight-loss product and in several articles. And weʼve seen a lot of discussion about this in the Paleo sphere. But leptin is basically the master signal that communicates whether or not the body is in a state of abundance. And when the cell needs more cholesterol, or when leptin is signaling to the cell that the body is in a state of abundance, the activity of the LDL receptor ramps up.

So the LDL receptor is the receptor on a cell that takes LDL out of the blood and brings it inside of the cell where the nutrients that it carries, such as the triglycerides and the cholesterol, can perform all of the actions that theyʼre supposed to. But when somebody is leptin resistant, this doesnʼt happen. The LDL receptor activity does not get ramped up, and LDL stays around in the blood which causes high cholesterol. So, leptin resistance is one of the things that high cholesterol can point to.

Number two, thyroid hormone T3 is necessary to activate the LDL receptor. So if somebody is hypothyroid - theyʼve got Hashimotoʼs or iodine deficiency or some other cause of hypothyroidism - then you can see high cholesterol just from that alone. Leptin resistance, by the way, can contribute to hypothyroidism because leptin is kind of the master control hormone. So, if somebody has high cholesterol, I definitely recommend that they get their thyroid checked for that reason.

Another cause of high cholesterol is infection. So, we know now that LDL and HDL play important roles in the immune system. And LDL levels rise with infection. And a recent study that Mat Lalonde sent to me actually found that in mice with a defect in the LDL receptor - which means that they end up having very high levels of LDL cholesterol - they are protected against gram-negative bacterial infections and the endotoxemia that results from those infections. So that clearly shows that LDL is playing a pretty important role in protecting against infectious disease.

Another potential cause of high cholesterol is inflammation. Studies have shown that LDL rises after dental surgery, for example. So when you have some tissue damage, LDL is a repair substance. You can think of it a little bit like spackling. If you were to punch a hole in the wall, youʼve got to fill it up with spackling. So, LDL will rise when thereʼs some tissue damage.

Another potential cause is micronutrient deficiency. Iron and copper deficiency can cause dyslipidemia, elevations in cholesterol. Also, iodine deficiency can contribute to that via hypothyroidism, as I just mentioned.

And then, last but not least - because this is actually a fairly common issue in North America - is a genetic mutation called familial hypercholesterolemia where one of the genes that codes for the LDL receptor doesnʼt function well. Or it doesnʼt function at all. So what happens here is that people have usually very high cholesterol levels. Their total cholesterol will be something around 300-500 and up, and their LDL cholesterol will be pretty high, but their HDL will be normal, and their triglycerides will be normal. And these folks do, in fact, experience an increased risk of death from all causes and death from heart disease. And there are particular things that need to be done, I think, if somebody has familial hypercholesterolemia. And I donʼt think itʼs wise to just ignore it and write it off and say, “Well, cholesterol is not the cause of heart disease.”

So, as you can see, thereʼs a number of possible things going on when you have an elevated cholesterol level. And I think the best approach if you have high cholesterol is to investigate all of those various mechanisms and try to rule them out or address them if theyʼre present rather than just ignoring it.[/quote]

Quick note for webglider: coconut oil (or MCT oil) increases the amount of ketones in the blood, even if you're not in ketosis and can be very helpful with the transition. If you tolerate it, you might want to start adding lots of it to your diet, at least until your body gets into fat burning mode. This has been given as advice by both Mark Sisson and Paul Jamminet, I believe, as ways of avoiding or minimizing "low carb flu".

 

[Gertrudes]

Thanks for posting that transcript dugdeep. I had heard Kriss Kresser's podcast a while back and it was indeed very insightful. Many paleo doctors are thinking similarly to him, in that we may have swung too far into the other extreme regarding cholesterol. I do think that there is a middle ground there, and if levels are either too low or too high, they are a sign of something that needs to be looked into.

From my research, there seems to be a number of us with extremely high cholesterol levels after having gone paleo. Unfortunately, I don't know how my numbers were looking like pre diet, but definitely intend to understand what is going on with me and what, precisely, is causing this. What is it telling me that's happening?

The Portuguese blogger Ricardo Carvalho created a database correlating serum cholesterol levels with disease and mortality levels. You can see in his graph that mortality levels rise sharply below 200, and begin to rise again above 240. His graph can be found here:
_http://perfecthealthdiet.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/O-Primitivo-Cholesterol.jpg

I am aware that Nora Gedgaudas doesn't really buy into the theory that paleo can lead to hypothyroid, and her assessment has been posted earlier on this thread. However, some researchers ( an example given on my last post where I linked the article _http://perfecthealthdiet.com/?p=4457, as well as in dugdeep's last post) are of the opinion that in a minority of us low carb triggers an hibernation response that suppresses thyroid function by lowering T3, which further suppresses LDL receptor sensitization. Leptin resistance seems to be a, or one of the possibilities for the root cause. So the problem in this particular case of thyroid malfunctioning doesn't seem to me to lie in the low carb aspect of it, but in how it can bring to surface an existing underlying problem.
In that sense I agree with beetlemaniac in that adding carbs can be a stopgap measure for something that is hidding a far more complex problem.

 

[Gertrudes]

Also of possible relevance, here is a very interesting interview with Loren Cordain where she gives another perspective to the whole issue of atherosclerosis (the hardening of the arterial walls due to accumulation of fatty substances such as cholesterol)

So I just bring to you one paper that I’d like you to distribute. That paper is published in an obscure journal, the Texas Heart Institute Journal in 1993. So nobody’s read it, because you can’t get it on Medline. What this guy did, he was a physician, an MD PhD by the name of Zimmerman. Zimmerman was a pathologist, and he was lucky enough to be in Alaska when a 400 AD, so we’re talking 1600 year old, frozen Inuit mummy was recovered. He did an autopsy on this, and he sectioned the coronary arteries. So this is 400 AD. These people had never seen white people. They had only eaten what Steve Phinney had suggested people eat–fat and protein–and significant atherosclerosis in a 53 year old Inuit woman, on pathology.That wasn’t just the only case. He then was privy to another group of frozen Eskimo bodies that were recovered in Barrow, Alaska, and these people date to about 1520 AD, so just slightly after the time Columbus had discovered America. Once again, no influence of Western civilization. So presumably, they were living at Barrow, 60 degrees north, they were eating meat and fat their entire life. They might get a little bit of berries sometime in the summer. Extensive atherosclerosis was in the older woman, who was 30. All three of them were osteoporotic. They were severely osteoporotic on that type of diet. So you can give this to people who claim that all we need to eat is meat and fat.

And then I’ll take this one step further, and here’s another obscure paper because we’re no longer allowed to perform these experiments in primates in which we feed them atherosclerotic diets and try to induce an MI.

That means a heart attack. A Myocardial Infarction. An MI.

In 10 rhesus monkeys and two other monkeys, they were able to induce myocardial infarctions, and electrocardiographic abnormalities, unexpected and relative sudden death in these non human primates are also consistent with signs that are frequently observed in humans. This is an obscure paper that absolutely needs to be addressed by the unlimited saturated fat type groups.

Let’s see what the response of people like Steve Phinney, Eric Westman and Jeff Volek would be. They have a new book out, the Atkins diet book. There’s some difference of opinion between the three. They’re all top-notch scientists.

I agree. I respect all these people. I respect all the scientists. I’m on record stating that saturated fats are not uni-dimensionally responsible for cardiovascular disease. They represent a risk factor. And the risk factor of saturated fats can be small. In the context of a Paleolithic diet I don’t believe that high stearic acid levels which is 18-O, is atherogenic. I don’t believe high 12-O or 14-O is atherogenic because they occur in such small concentrations.

Palmitic acid is atherogenic. And there’s not an experiment in humans or animals or tissue to show that it doesn’t down regulate the LDL receptor. This is a point that is never addressed in Gary Taubes’s book or Eric Westman’s articles, or Ron Krauss. You need to address the down regulation of the LDL receptor. That controls the flux of oxidized LDL in and out of the intima.

So on a molecular basis, you can’t deny this information. Now, how relevant is that information under the umbrella of a high carbohydrate diet? A high carbohydrate diet combined with a high saturated fat diet is even worse.

And that’s something that it seems like all you researchers tend to agree on. Steve Phinney did mention that he thinks there are islands of safety in many ways of eating.

Yes. I would agree.

You would agree with that?

Yes. I think you can tend to eat a high saturated fat diet. A high animal food diet. You’re going to be at risk for osteoporosis, Vitamin A deficiency and some other factors, if you don’t eat some plants in your diet. Now if you eat liver, the Vitamin A is a non-issue. But if you only ate muscle meat and fat, then it’s not going to work.

If you eat organ meats like traditional people consumed then you’re going to be in pretty good shape. The osteoporosis does not clear out, and you can see that in these papers here.

If we believe the results of this pathology, that we have atherosclerosis in people who never consumed carbohydrate, always ate a high fat, high protein diet, this atherosclerosis who always consumed a high fat, high protein diet. Then the question comes up, did they ever suffer a fatal MI. My opinion is that they probably didn’t.

Even though they had hardening of the arteries, plaque, they might not have had the inflammatory conditions that cause heart attacks.

Bingo, there you go!

In that way, you and Steve Phinney might agree.

I’ve always stated that, and I’ve been misquoted so often on this saturated fat issue and atherosclerosis. The devil’s in the detail. So I believe these Inuit women who had never been exposed to Western Food did indeed have atherosclerosis.
They had a lot of plaque in their arteries, they had hardening of the arteries, but did that mean they had a heart attack?

No! What kills you is not plaque in the arteries. What kills you is the rupture of the plaque. What causes the rupture of the plaque . . . because I think what happens is that atherosclerosis goes forth. Our bodies wall it over, we wall it out, and the lumen of the artery actually expands to compensate for the thickness of the intima. What kills us in the Western world, we have this atherosclerotic process going on, like we have in these Inuit. But in contrast to them, we have a pro-inflammatory diet. If you took these 1600 year old Inuit women and fed them bread along with their high fat diet, I would be almost certain that you would see myocardial infarctions.

Whole interview can be found here: _http://www.meandmydiabetes.com/2010/03/24/loren-cordain-caution-on-saturated-fats-disaster-with-grains-will-be-public-after-march-25th/

I haven't yet read the paper Cordain mentioned, but it can be found here: _http://www.meandmydiabetes.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/Atherosclerosis-in-Pre-Westernized-Inuit.pdf

 

[dugdeep]

Also of possible relevance, here is a very interesting interview with Loren Cordain where she gives another perspective to the whole issue of atherosclerosis (the hardening of the arterial walls due to accumulation of fatty substances such as cholesterol)

[snip]

Whole interview can be found here: _http://www.meandmydiabetes.com/2010/03/24/loren-cordain-caution-on-saturated-fats-disaster-with-grains-will-be-public-after-march-25th/

I haven't yet read the paper Cordain mentioned, but it can be found here: _http://www.meandmydiabetes.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/Atherosclerosis-in-Pre-Westernized-Inuit.pdf

Note that this interview is from 2010. I haven't read it yet, but apparently in Loren Cordain's new book he (note: Loren Cordain is a man :)) takes a different stance on saturated fat, something closer to it being a harmless component of the diet. It is interesting what he says about atherosclerosis and osteoporosis in ancient Inuit bodies, though. Makes me think about getting a test done...

 

[Gertrudes]

Note that this interview is from 2010. I haven't read it yet, but apparently in Loren Cordain's new book he (note: Loren Cordain is a man :)) takes a different stance on saturated fat, something closer to it being a harmless component of the diet. It is interesting what he says about atherosclerosis and osteoporosis in ancient Inuit bodies, though. Makes me think about getting a test done...

A man.... :D

Cordain didn't really come across to me as finding saturated fat harmful, but rather finding the combination of it with our Western carb loaded diet deadly. In his opinion Inuit weren't likely to have suffered from atherosclerotic problems the same way we do in the Western world because their diet wasn't inflammatory, therefore they could have probably lived a great deal of their lives with plaque without ever having a problem. Since there wasn't inflammation, there was nothing to cause a ruptured plaque.
Well, this was at least the message I got.

 

[nicklebleu]

Hi dugdeeo,

Thanks for the article, very interesting stuff!

I reckon, as mentioned in Gertrudes article, that the devil - as usual - lies in the detail. Put as in your article, the statement that cholesterol levels don't tell you anything, is propably incorrect.

I agree with Kresser, that it might be indicative of certain problems. But what is the remedy of leptin resistance? Going low-carb ... And what is the treatment of hypothyroidism due to autoimmune disease (apart from temporarily substituting thyroid hormone until the inflammation has been cleared)? Avoid gluten and other allergens, go low-carb etc.

What I'm trying to say is, that this might well be the case, but the treatment will most likely be a Paleo Diet, some substitution of vital minerals and vitamins, detoxing the body, reducing leptin resistance etc. ... all things that a lot of us are trying to achieve anyway. And if in that context the cholesterol goes up, it probably doesn't matter.

Same with familial hyperlipidaemia ... I would be quite convinced, that the numbers would come down on a diet program as advocated in this thread, maybe not acutely so, but over time (due to epigenetic shift of gene expression). One would have to experiment of course on the right mix of fats, which might be quite challenging.

Would I advocate statins for famiial hyperlipidemia? That's a hard one, but probably not, maybe only if all else fails ...

I am not 100% convinced of my stance at the moment, but that's how I integrate the available evidence at this stage. But given new data I will gladly incorporate this ...

 

[dugdeep]

Note that this interview is from 2010. I haven't read it yet, but apparently in Loren Cordain's new book he (note: Loren Cordain is a man :)) takes a different stance on saturated fat, something closer to it being a harmless component of the diet. It is interesting what he says about atherosclerosis and osteoporosis in ancient Inuit bodies, though. Makes me think about getting a test done...

A man.... :D

Cordain didn't really come across to me as finding saturated fat harmful, but rather finding the combination of it with our Western carb loaded diet deadly. In his opinion Inuit weren't likely to have suffered from atherosclerotic problems the same way we do in the Western world because their diet wasn't inflammatory, therefore they could have probably lived a great deal of their lives with plaque without ever having a problem. Since there wasn't inflammation, there was nothing to cause a ruptured plaque.
Well, this was at least the message I got.

Yes, that's the message I got too. But Cordain's version of the paleo diet has always emphasized 'lean meats', which is why many in the paleo community like to distance themselves from him somewhat, OSIT. I think the wider context to the interview is a disagreement between Phinney/Volek and Cordain about whether an ideal diet should be low carb/high fat or low carb/high protein and Cordain was bringing up the Inuit as evidence that high fat may not be as great as Phinney/Volek are claiming. This is what I got out of it, anyway. The comments have a short response from Phinney.

Still, I find the idea that an all meat and fat diet can lead to atherosclerosis and osteoporosis disturbing. Even if one manages to keep their inflammation down, which is no guarantee in this day and age as it isn't solely dependent on diet, that this diet may be causing harm in some way isn't really made lighter by the fact that it might not kill you :)

That said, we don't know anything about these ancient Inuit that were found. Maybe their diets were way too high in protein making them sugar-burners, which Gedgaudas has said can lead to bone loss, especially if those sugar-burners are forced to go long times between meals when the body will turn to its own protein stores from muscle or bone to use for fuel. Or maybe these particular Inuit were of a Southern variety who became vegetarians for no apparent reason, LOL. Who knows?

The fact is, we don't have a whole lot of data to go on here and I've always kind of held in the back of my mind that what we're doing is 'safe' because hey, look at the Inuit. But I can't really entertain the idea that we're eating 'the ideal human diet' if it causes arterial stiffening and bone degradation, which is why I think we need more data. That's why I was thinking about getting testing done. :)