"Life Without Bread"

[Gaby]

Your "caramelized" protein levels (HbA1c) are high though your levels are still considered in normal range depending on the country.

The other thing to keep in mind is that HbA1c is not 100% reliable. For instance:

http://chriskresser.com/when-your-normal-blood-sugar-isnt-normal-part-1

A1c measures how much glucose becomes permanently bonded (glycated) to hemoglobin in red blood cells. In layperson’s terms, this test is a rough measure of average blood sugar over the previous three months. The higher your blood sugar has been over the past three months, the more likely it is that glucose (sugar) is permanently bonded to hemoglobin.

The problem with the A1c test is that any condition that changes hemoglobin levels will skew the results. Anemia is one such condition, and sub-clinical anemia is incredibly common. I’d say 30-40% of my patients have borderline low hemoglobin levels. If hemoglobin is low, then there’s less of it around to become bonded to glucose. This will cause an artificially low A1c level and won’t be an accurate representation of your average blood sugar over the past three months.

Likewise, dehydration can increase hemoglobin levels and create falsely high A1c results. {Some people often underestimate how much dehydrated they get on a low carb diet and quite often cramps and weakness problems resolve when drinking enough water}

The “normal” range for A1c for most labs is between 4% and 6%. (A1c is expressed in percentage terms because it’s measuring the percentage of hemoglobin that is bonded to sugar.) Most often I see 5.7% as the cutoff used.

 

[Oxajil]

Hey webglider, you said you are taking magnesium-calcium, perhaps it would be better to supplement with magnesium citrate/malate and get your calcium from bone broth (you can do some searching on the forum for more on that).

Here's what I got in the mailbox, that I think will be helpful to you (and others):

Cancer & Magnesium

Here are four major points I made about magnesium and cancer in The Magnesium Miracle.

1. Dr. Mildred Seelig wrote Magnesium In Oncogenesis And In Anti-Cancer Treatment: Interaction With Minerals And Vitamins. She noted an important relationship between magnesium deficiency and cancer, which should have alerted the cancer establishment to do further research. But unfortunately, it didn't.

2. J. I. Rodale wrote a chapter on cancer and magnesium in his 1963 publication Magnesium: The Nutrient That Could Change Your Life. He quoted Dr. Delbet, a French doctor who felt that magnesium acts as a "brake" for cancer. Delbet also observed that as the body grows older it grows more deficient in magnesium, and with this loss in magnesium there is a decrease in vitality, resistance, and cell regeneration.

3. Drugs such as painkillers, diuretics, antibiotics, and cortisone, many of which are inappropriately used, further deplete magnesium and other minerals, allowing symptoms to get completely out of control. Surgery, malnutrition, third-degree burns, serious injuries, pancreatic inflammation, liver disease, malabsorption disorders, diabetes, hormonal imbalance, and cancer are all seriously stressful medical conditions requiring increased amounts of magnesium.

4. Research has shown that even the pain of cancer can respond to magnesium. Cancer sometimes metastasizes into nerve bundles located in the neck or lower back and may not respond to even the strongest analgesics such as morphine. There is a special receptor site called NMDA that is responsible for creating this type of nerve pain; magnesium helps block this receptor. In cases of severe pain, intravenous magnesium has shown very powerful analgesic effects.

 

[webglider]

quote from Oxajil:

Hey webglider, you said you are taking magnesium-calcium, perhaps it would be better to supplement with magnesium citrate/malate and get your calcium from bone broth (you can do some searching on the forum for more on that).

Here's what I got in the mailbox, that I think will be helpful to you (and others):

Quote from: Dr. Carolyn Dean

Cancer & Magnesium

Here are four major points I made about magnesium and cancer in The Magnesium Miracle.

1. Dr. Mildred Seelig wrote Magnesium In Oncogenesis And In Anti-Cancer Treatment: Interaction With Minerals And Vitamins. She noted an important relationship between magnesium deficiency and cancer, which should have alerted the cancer establishment to do further research. But unfortunately, it didn't.

2. J. I. Rodale wrote a chapter on cancer and magnesium in his 1963 publication Magnesium: The Nutrient That Could Change Your Life. He quoted Dr. Delbet, a French doctor who felt that

magnesium acts as a "brake" for cancer.

Delbet also observed that as the body grows older it grows more deficient in magnesium, and with this loss in magnesium there is a decrease in vitality, resistance, and cell regeneration.

3. Drugs such as painkillers, diuretics, antibiotics, and cortisone, many of which are inappropriately used, further deplete magnesium and other minerals, allowing symptoms to get completely out of control. Surgery, malnutrition, third-degree burns, serious injuries, pancreatic inflammation, liver disease, malabsorption disorders, diabetes, hormonal imbalance, and cancer are all seriously stressful medical conditions requiring increased amounts of magnesium.

4. Research has shown that even the pain of cancer can respond to magnesium. Cancer sometimes metastasizes into nerve bundles located in the neck or lower back and may not respond to even the strongest analgesics such as morphine. There is a special receptor site called NMDA that is responsible for creating this type of nerve pain; magnesium helps block this receptor. In cases of severe pain, intravenous magnesium has shown very powerful analgesic effects.

This is helpful. Thank you for thinking of me.

 

[Mrs. Peel]

I'm not doing something right, obviously. :/

Your triglycerides and HDL sounds enviable. It is your HDL, your "good cholesterol", which is contributing in your high cholesterol levels.

Your LDL doesn't look bad either, it was not too long ago when the range was lowered to a ridiculously low because supposedly high cholesterol means a heart attack and a good reason to prescribe a statin drug. Check out your ranges of cholesterol here:

http://www.vaughns-1-pagers.com/medicine/cholesterol-range.htm

Your ratio is good!

The other tests do point out to inflammation, and perhaps you can talk about your symptoms and brainstorm with people here. I would check vitamin D levels which I suspect might be very low as well.

Your "caramelized" protein levels (HbA1c) are high though your levels are still considered in normal range depending on the country. This could be because either you are having too many carbs (too many "safe starches" and "safe sweeteners"?) or too much protein. This is explained very well in a synthesized way on Primal Body Primal Mind, and some think that the verdict is still out for this one (i.e. Dr. Kruse in his Cold Adaptation series), but here is a synthesis of the setbacks of too much protein This is why it is recommended in PBPM to eat a high fat, moderate protein and restricted carb diet.

Could be too much protein. I am eating way more meat than last year. I have cut back on carbs while transitioning myself as I don't think I'm healthy enough yet to go to all meat/fat, am eating only some brown rice and/or quinoa with meals. I use stevia as a sweetner in tea periodically, but I usually only drink water. I do have a copy of PMPB.

My iron level is 56, the recommended range is 35-155. A year ago it was 129, so for some reason, it's come way down, even though I almost exclusively cook with an iron skillet. I was anemic as a kid.

My vitamin D level was only about 35, which is low, I think, even tho I take supplemental D3.

The more water I drink though, the more times I have to get up at night to use the bathroom, even if I've drank it earlier in the day. Liquids seem to take a while to pass through me. I am also recovering from a headcold, I don't know if that skewed any of the results. I didn't take any drugs for it, except ibuprophen the day before the bloodwork.

My glucose is 96, the normal range is 65-99. Last year it was 104, so I've come down there, at least!

 

[Gaby]

The more water I drink though, the more times I have to get up at night to use the bathroom, even if I've drank it earlier in the day. Liquids seem to take a while to pass through me. I am also recovering from a headcold, I don't know if that skewed any of the results. I didn't take any drugs for it, except ibuprophen the day before the bloodwork.

A cold raises C Reactive Protein, so there you have it.

A good bone broth helps to replenish minerals if you are going to the bathroom a lot, and vitamin D levels do take awhile to raise, especially with the recommend supplemental dosage:

http://www.drbriffa.com/2012/03/21/if-your-vitamin-d-levels-are-low-whats-a-useful-starting-dose/

I was talking with someone yesterday about his vitamin D levels. He had these tested recently and found these came in at 15 ng/ml (about 38 nmol/l). Personally, I like vitamin D levels to be maintained in the region of 50 ng/ml. So, I suggested he take 5,000 IU of vitamin D3 for three months after which he’ll re-check his levels.

He asked me how I arrived at a dose of 5,000 IU. Good question. This ‘starting dose’ is actually based on my experience. It’s this sort of level of intake that I find can get vitamin D levels up from quite low levels to more optimal levels in a reasonable amount of time (say, a couple of months).

When I started supplementing myself with vitamin D (starting levels, 15 ng/ml), I thought I was being gung-ho by taking 2,000 IU a day. I soon realised this was an inadequate dose for my requirements. I now take about 5,000 IU during the summer and about 7,500 IU per day during the rest of the year.

Later in the day, I decided to see if there was any recent science in this area. I found a study published just a few days ago in which individuals with vitamin D deficiency were treated with either 2,000 or 5,000 IU vitamin D for 3 months [1]. All individuals started with vitamin D levels at or below 20 ng/ml.

At the end of the study, those taking 2,000 IU saw their vitamin D levels increase by about 80 per cent, while those on 5,000 IU had their levels more than treble on average. At the end, 45 per cent taking 2,000 IU had achieved levels of 30 ng/ml or more, compared to 93 per cent taking 5,000 IU.

No-one in the study suffered from adverse symptoms or raised blood levels of calcium (a theoretical risk of high vitamin D levels).

This study appears to provide some support for the idea that those with low vitamin D levels might start with a dose in the order of 5,000 IU. How people respond to supplementation is, however, quite variable, which is why I advise monitoring blood vitamin D levels.

Previously I have used testing provided by Grass Roots for Health and Vitamin D3 World. However, here in the UK, I’ve recently started to use this service out of City Hospital in Birmingham which seems to be very good (and economical). See here.

 

[SeekinTruth]

Just wanted to mention that all the variables that will effect lab tests are so hard to pin down. For example:

I haven't been fully clean throughout, however.

I have cut back on carbs while transitioning myself as I don't think I'm healthy enough yet to go to all meat/fat, am eating only some brown rice and/or quinoa with meals.

So in the case of beetlemaniac (not sure what he meant by not being "fully clean throughout") and Mrs. Peel, we don't know what the result of eating brown rice and quinoa, for example, are (quite likely, not good). It would probably be best to steer clear of ALL grains and eat other veggies instead. Inflammation (and related problems) is quite likely to result from grains. In the case of Mrs. Peel, the head cold would clearly be another culprit.

Also, high triglycerides could be very concerning, so that should be looked into for anyone with high results. It would probably point to too much carbs, especially grains and any slips with gluten and casein. On the version of the Paleo/Primal diet recommended here on the forum, I don't see why anyone would have high triglycerides if adhering closely to the guidelines. So if it's not just a blip in blood tests, but consistent, I think high triglycerides are a concern that needs to be further investigated for underlying issues.

The reason there's never much alarm with triglycerides generally, is because there aren't numerous lucrative drugs to lower blood triglycerides on the market, I think. From my current understanding, it's much more bad news than some of the other concerns with the blood lipid panel and should not be ignored. FWIW.

 

[beetlemaniac]

I slipped having some grains (wheat, rice and soy sauce) as well as sugar when I was back at my parent's place for a few times. I'm getting that under better control now though. Also I'm constantly having sleep problems and am focusing all I can on that. The Robb Wolf article Psyche posted notes that:

Now, it’s well understood that inflammation is elevated in hyperinsulinemia and that this represents a nasty feed forward mechanism. If insulin is high, inflammation increases, insulin sensitivity worsens. In the Zone books insulin is pro-inflammatory in that insulin affects the output of the Delta-5 desaturase pathways in a pro-inflammatory manner. This is certainly true under chronic hyperinsulinemia, but it begs a question: Is the high insulin the CAUSE or an effect? Is high insulin always bad? Interestingly, in acute sepsis, insulin represents a potent, in fact lifesaving ANTI-inflammatory. The poison is in the dose and as with many things, Framework Matters.

Let’s look at a few things we suspect play a role in insulin resistance/hyperinsulinemia:

1-Carbohydrate load

1A-Fructose

2-Lack of exercise

3-Vitamin D- deficiency

4-Sleep dept

5-Stress

6-Sepsis (infection)

If we time order these issues we see that carbohydrate load, vitamin d deficiency and sedentism may take months or years to manifest as overt hyperinsulinism. If fructose intake is high that time may be dramatically shortened, while sleep dept and stress seem to manifest insulin resistance quite quickly (only a few days.) But sepsis is unique in this list in that it can induce insulin resistance in mere minutes and to such a degree that one could die from metabolic cascades which look eerily similar to type 2 diabetes.

I noticed that my belly fat increases whenever I don't get proper sleep and progressively gets better as sleep becomes normalised. So do things like cravings and being disciiplined about food choices get better with sleep. But getting better sleep, I find, takes a lot of effort and consistency. Any deviation seem to set me back a mile. I'm keeping lights off after sunset except for a little bedside lamp to help me tune into the cycles, but the night wakings seem to be unavoidable for now.

Also, high triglycerides could be very concerning, so that should be looked into for anyone with high results.

The last result I had high triglycerides, and I was pretty much having a sleep debt, which is obvious from the dark rings under my eyes.

The reason there's never much alarm with triglycerides generally, is because there aren't numerous lucrative drugs to lower blood triglycerides on the market, I think. From my current understanding, it's much more bad news than some of the other concerns with the blood lipid panel and should not be ignored. FWIW.

Good call, SeekinTruth, I almost ignored that part of my results because of the focus on LDL.

 

[SeekinTruth]

I slipped having some grains (wheat, rice and soy sauce) as well as sugar when I was back at my parent's place for a few times. I'm getting that under better control now though. Also I'm constantly having sleep problems and am focusing all I can on that. The Robb Wolf article Psyche posted notes that:

Now, it’s well understood that inflammation is elevated in hyperinsulinemia and that this represents a nasty feed forward mechanism. If insulin is high, inflammation increases, insulin sensitivity worsens. In the Zone books insulin is pro-inflammatory in that insulin affects the output of the Delta-5 desaturase pathways in a pro-inflammatory manner. This is certainly true under chronic hyperinsulinemia, but it begs a question: Is the high insulin the CAUSE or an effect? Is high insulin always bad? Interestingly, in acute sepsis, insulin represents a potent, in fact lifesaving ANTI-inflammatory. The poison is in the dose and as with many things, Framework Matters.

Let’s look at a few things we suspect play a role in insulin resistance/hyperinsulinemia:

1-Carbohydrate load

1A-Fructose

2-Lack of exercise

3-Vitamin D- deficiency

4-Sleep dept

5-Stress

6-Sepsis (infection)

If we time order these issues we see that carbohydrate load, vitamin d deficiency and sedentism may take months or years to manifest as overt hyperinsulinism. If fructose intake is high that time may be dramatically shortened, while sleep dept and stress seem to manifest insulin resistance quite quickly (only a few days.) But sepsis is unique in this list in that it can induce insulin resistance in mere minutes and to such a degree that one could die from metabolic cascades which look eerily similar to type 2 diabetes.

I noticed that my belly fat increases whenever I don't get proper sleep and progressively gets better as sleep becomes normalised. So do things like cravings and being disciiplined about food choices get better with sleep. But getting better sleep, I find, takes a lot of effort and consistency. Any deviation seem to set me back a mile. I'm keeping lights off after sunset except for a little bedside lamp to help me tune into the cycles, but the night wakings seem to be unavoidable for now.

Also, high triglycerides could be very concerning, so that should be looked into for anyone with high results.

The last result I had high triglycerides, and I was pretty much having a sleep debt, which is obvious from the dark rings under my eyes.

The reason there's never much alarm with triglycerides generally, is because there aren't numerous lucrative drugs to lower blood triglycerides on the market, I think. From my current understanding, it's much more bad news than some of the other concerns with the blood lipid panel and should not be ignored. FWIW.

Good call, SeekinTruth, I almost ignored that part of my results because of the focus on LDL.

Sleep is definitely crucial. Also "slipping" on the diet can take a long time to remedy, grains being the worst as it can take up to 6 months for the toxicity to be cleared and the inflammatory response to subside.

Triglycerides can be an indirect way of measuring LDL count. If you can't get LDL particle count (and even more importantly, type -- small dense LDL particles are indicative of oxidation, whereas "fluffy" LDL is not dangerous because there's no oxidation). Just a reminder.

If you (or anyone) else wants to review some of the details/nitty gritty of it all two good articles are below:

http://www.sott.net/articles/show/242558-Metabolic-Syndrome-Caused-by-a-High-Fructose-and-Relatively-Low-Fat-Low-Cholesterol-Diet-

http://www.sott.net/articles/show/223978-The-most-important-thing-you-probably-don-t-know-about-cholesterol

 

[beetlemaniac]

Thanks SeekinTruth. I'm in the middle of reviewing that paper again (the first link), it's really in depth. With regards to small dense particles, the article in the second link (Chris Kresser) also mentions checking blood glucose levels, which I presume will give an indicator of the glycation processes going on in the body.

Here's an old article that some might find interesting:

http://www.westonaprice.org/blogs/cmasterjohn/2010/12/10/why-is-my-cholesterol-so-high-on-this-diet/

I believe this likely reflects the fact that humans with fatty liver tend to be insulin resistant and leptin resistant. Insulin is a major hormone that clears triglycerides from plasma. Leptin causes us to make and activate thyroid hormone, which activates the LDL receptor. When people are choline deficient, much of the fat and cholesterol their livers make will stay in the liver. When they are insulin resistant and leptin resistant, whatever fat and cholesterol makes it out into the blood will stay there until it eventually oxidizes and gets mopped up by the immune system into an atherosclerotic plaque.

Several studies suggest that resolving fatty liver with choline or its close cousin betaine may increase blood lipids. Betaine is found abundantly in wheat, spinach, and beets. Choline is a precursor to betaine, which is used in the liver and kidney for an important process called methylation. It substitutes for vitamin B12 and folate in this process, as shown in the following diagram:

A nourishing, traditional diet may thus increase blood lipids in many people while healing them from fatty liver disease.

Presumably, this effect should be temporary, and over time this fat should be stored properly or burnt off for energy.

However, I believe that patients and health care practitioners who are “in the know” should start monitoring levels of liver fat as people transition to a healthy diet, especially if their blood lipids increase. This can provide critical anecdotal information while we wait, wait, and wait some more for the randomized, controlled trials to come in.

 

[SeekinTruth]

Hmm. Interesting, beetlemaniac. And I've read that eating lots of fructose (in any form including lots of fruits) is a major contributor to fatty liver. So those who ate a lot of fruit until going on a low carb diet might still have fatty liver and need time until it's resolved?

 

[Oxajil]

I know this was mentioned before, having a glass of water with salt once one has woken up, but I thought I'd mention this again, because I'm observing now that it affects my energy levels quite interestingly. To those who wake up with low energy levels, try putting some unrefined celtic sea salt on your tongue and have that with some water. I've noticed that the salt energizes me immediately!

 

[beetlemaniac]

Hmm. Interesting, beetlemaniac. And I've read that eating lots of fructose (in any form including lots of fruits) is a major contributor to fatty liver. So those who ate a lot of fruit until going on a low carb diet might still have fatty liver and need time until it's resolved?

Could be, especially with the fruits, since they are commonly considered "healthy" after all. I remember having a few pieces some time ago. Fructose is present abundantly in the tropical fruits like papaya. Sucrose (table sugar) is half glucose and half fructose. Agave nectar has lots of fructose as well. On the other hand, I presume eating choline and betaine will help resolve an existing fatty liver problem.

What I'm thinking is that is that as long as we keep making more right choices over the wrong, in time our bodies will come around to it's proper state of balance in the neurological, endocrine and immune systems and start to work as a whole, where communication between sub-systems are in sync with a minimum of noise or "misfiring". Thus things like adrenal fatigue, and even diseases like diabetes get resolved in the process. But to reach this balance, consistency in thought and action must be there, IOW we need to stick to our aim. OSIT.

Here's a blog with a lot of pro-cholesterol studies if anyone is interested:
http://healthydietsandscience.blogspot.com/

 

[SeekinTruth]

I know this was mentioned before, having a glass of water with salt once one has woken up, but I thought I'd mention this again, because I'm observing now that it affects my energy levels quite interestingly. To those who wake up with low energy levels, try putting some unrefined celtic sea salt on your tongue and have that with some water. I've noticed that the salt energizes me immediately!

I've been making brine with Himalayan salt rocks in distilled water for a couple of years now. I'd put 1 to 2 teaspoons of the brine water in a glass of distilled water first thing in the morning on an empty stomach and drink it. Now since the posts about the high levels of fluoride in Himalayan salt, I'm using unprocessed rock salt bought locally and making brine (from the coarse, large crystals) and doing the same.

I still have a bunch of Himalayan salt rocks, but since I'm also drinking black tea (and sometimes green tea), which also have pretty high fluoride content, I'm using it once a week or less until it's finished. There are claims about some unique "energy" in both brands of Himalayan salt I've been buying the last couple of years, but I don't put much stock in them. Any salt will definitely boost energy. I've experienced the effects of salt for many years -- it's very similar to caffeine, but maybe the effect is faster.

Back in the U.S. for several years, my brother and I used to drive long hours (usually to from NYC to Montreal) on business trips and be sleep deprived/keeping all sorts of weird schedules. When we used to get sleepy taking turns to drive there or back (although my brother tended to do most of the driving), having something salty immediately woke us up (sometimes we'd just get packets of salt from a diner or somewhere like that and just eat plain salt). Back then we used to drink coffee too, but there's only so much coffee you can drink and salt really added to the effect and seemed much more immediate. But salt definitely boosts energy quickly. FWIW.

 

[SeekinTruth]

Hmm. Interesting, beetlemaniac. And I've read that eating lots of fructose (in any form including lots of fruits) is a major contributor to fatty liver. So those who ate a lot of fruit until going on a low carb diet might still have fatty liver and need time until it's resolved?

Could be, especially with the fruits, since they are commonly considered "healthy" after all. I remember having a few pieces some time ago. Fructose is present abundantly in the tropical fruits like papaya. Sucrose (table sugar) is half glucose and half fructose. Agave nectar has lots of fructose as well. On the other hand, I presume eating choline and betaine will help resolve an existing fatty liver problem.

What I'm thinking is that is that as long as we keep making more right choices over the wrong, in time our bodies will come around to it's proper state of balance in the neurological, endocrine and immune systems and start to work as a whole, where communication between sub-systems are in sync with a minimum of noise or "misfiring". Thus things like adrenal fatigue, and even diseases like diabetes get resolved in the process. But to reach this balance, consistency in thought and action must be there, IOW we need to stick to our aim. OSIT.

Here's a blog with a lot of pro-cholesterol studies if anyone is interested:
http://healthydietsandscience.blogspot.com/

Yeah, all good points. It might be a good idea to take choline and/or betaine supplements as the food sources having high amounts of them aren't too good to eat so much of (and wheat, of course, should be avoided entirely). I wonder if betaine HCl will give any supplemental betaine as well (killing two birds with one stone).

The other thing is to try Dr. Kruse's Leptin reset protocol (lots of people are having very good result, usually in 4 to 6 weeks). And also experiment (carefully) with his Cold Thermogenisis protocol. These should probably reset things and correct mismatches, etc.

And I definitely agree that keep on this diet, things will begin to improve in time, including fatty liver. If Kruse's protocols and the right supplements are added, it will only speed up the process and resolve problems better.

I'll read that blog when I have some time (got lots of SOTT reading to catch up on, as well as, a bunch of other things). Thanks for the link. :)

 

[beetlemaniac]

Thanks ST and Oxajil, on the topic of salt, I stumbled on a blog post by Chris Kresser on his series regarding the same. I guess we don't really know how salt is so good for us, but everything seems to indicate that it is? That was an interesting story ST, comparing salt to caffeine makes me want to try and salt my tongue a little too. :P

As Taubes explained over a decade ago, “the data supporting universal salt reduction have never been compelling, nor has it ever been demonstrated that such a program would not have unforeseen negative side effects.” The 1988 Intersalt Study, designed to resolve contradictions in ecological and epidemiological studies, failed to demonstrate any linear relationship between salt intake and blood pressure. Now, in 2012, we have data that suggests long-term salt restriction may pose serious risks for much of the population. Yet major health organization guidelines still recommend the restriction of salt for all Americans, regardless of blood pressure status.

In short, there is a healthy range of salt consumption for most people. When eating a whole foods diet, most people tend to consume an appropriate amount of salt simply due to an innate preference for saltiness. In fact, the consumption of salt around the world for over two centuries has remained in the range of 1.5 to three teaspoons per day, which appears to hold the lowest risk for disease. (25)

Our bodies may have a natural sodium appetite through which our ideal salt intake is regulated. By following a whole foods, Paleo diet, and eliminating processed foods, excess sodium in your diet will be drastically reduced. Thus, you can be confident in following your own natural taste for salt when adding it to your food during preparation. In other words, there are few reasons to deprive yourself of salt!