Thursday, November 27, 2014

The P479L gene for CPT-1a and fatty acid oxidation

In order to work out what is happening with a given child having an episode of hypoglycaemia as a result of having the P479L version of CPT-1a, we need some information.

My thanks to Mike Eades for the full text of the paper on the Canadian Inuit, which does include a certain amount of useful clinical data.

Here is the snippet about a young girl having a hypoglycaemic episode while hospitalised:

“Plasma free fatty acid was 3.8 mmol/L and plasma 3-hydroxybutyrate was 0.5 mmol/L”

Blood glucose was 1.9 mmol/l at the time. An FFA level of 3,800 micromol/l is impressively high. She was generating a small amount of ketones.

No one would argue with intravenous glucose at this point, the question is about how she got here.

So. The problem here does not (as I'd initially thought) appear to insulin induced suppression of FFAs to a level at which beta oxidation fails to support metabolism. FFAs are very high, even for an P479L person after a short fast. With ketones starting to be produced (and low blood glucose) I feel it is reasonable to assume that her liver glycogen is depleted and, while some fatty acids are entering the hepatocytes, not enough of them are being oxidised to support ketogenesis. Glycogen is being depleted to keep liver cells functional. Gluconeogenesis from protein is unable to meet the hepatic (and whole body) demand for glucose calories in the situation of limited access to FFA calories.

However much glycogen derived glucose you consider that the ancestral diet contained I feel it is very, very unlikely to be greater than the glucose and fructose of a modern diet. I feel that getting enough glycogen in to the liver to fully fuel its metabolism in the absence of adequate fatty acid oxidation is a non starter. The P479L mutation was not "permitted" by high oral carb loading, it was permitted by conditions which facilitated fatty acid oxidation. You don't have to agree.


What starts to look much more interesting is what controls CPT-1a activity and how this might vary from the ancestral diet to the modern diet.

The paper makes the point that omega 3 fatty acids appear to up regulate fatty acid oxidation (in rats at least) by the liver. If this is true in humans then a high level of omega 3 fatty acids from marine fats might up regulate fatty acid oxidation to a level which no longer necessitates the depletion of hepatic glycogen derived form oral glucose intake or protein catabolism.

In support of this is that the distribution of P479L within Alaska is not uniform, it's significantly commoner in the coastal regions compared to the inland areas.

"The allele frequency and rate of homozygosity for the CPT-1a P479L variant were high in Inuit and Inuvialuit who reside in northern coastal regions. The variant is present at a low frequency in First Nations populations, who reside in areas less coastal than the Inuit or Inuvialuit in the two western territories"

I'm open to other explanations, there are papers suggesting that the mutation helps to preferentially dispose of omega 6 PUFA, with omega 3 fatty acids as the facilitator.

In summary: Maintaining adequate FFA oxidation to avoid glycogen depletion looks to be the core need in P479L. A high fat diet with a large proportion of omega 3 fats might be a plausible way of maintaining adequate hepatic fatty acid oxidation. Hyperglycaemia (via Crabtree effect) looks to be anathema. Glycogen loading with a normal starch/sugar based modern diet is clearly ineffective to prevent hypoglycaemia for some individuals. Resistant starch as a reliable nightly adjunct to infant feeding seems very unlikely in the ancestral diet. Repeated periods of fasting were probably routine when hunting was poor and does not appear to have selected against P479L in weaned children. Unweaned children are unlikely to be exposed to fasting, provided milk was available from lactation.

Well, there are some more thoughts on the biochemistry.

People clearly have very differing ideas of what the Inuit did or did not eat as an ancestral diet. The P479L gene eliminates the need for source of dietary glucose to explain very limited levels of ketosis recorded in the Inuit. While it is perfectly possible to invoke a high protein diet to explain a lack of ketosis in the fed state this goes nowhere towards explaining the limited ketosis of fasting. P479L fits perfectly well as an explanation.

I have some level of discomfort with using the Inuit as poster people for a ketogenic diet. That's fine. They may well have eaten what would be a ketogenic diet for many of us, but they certainly did not develop high levels of ketones when they carried the P479L gene.

However. Over the months Wooo and I seem to have come to some sort of conclusion that, while systemic ketones are a useful adjunct, a ketogenic diet is essentially a fatty acid based diet with minimal glucose excursions and maximal beta oxidation. Exactly how important the ketones themselves are is not quite so clear cut. From the Hyperlipid and Protons perspective I would be looking to maximise input to the electron transport chain as FADH2 at electron-transferring-flavoprotein dehydrogenase and minimise NADH input at complex I. Ketones do not do this. Ketones input at complex II, much as beta oxidation inputs at ETFdh, but ketones also generate large amounts of NADH in the process of turning the TCA from acetyl-CoA to get to complex II, which ETFdh does not. I'm not a great lover of increasing the ratio of NADH to NAD+. These are my biases.

Confirming that the Inuit are not poster boys for ketosis is a "so what?" moment for me. Using their P479L mutation to argue against ketogenic diets is more of a problem. It's a massive dis-service to any one of the many, many people out there who are eating their way in to metabolic syndrome to suggest that a ketogenic diet is a Bad Thing because no one has lived in ketosis before. Even the Inuit didn't! My own feeling is that everyone comes from stock who occasionally practiced and survived intermittent fasting so we are should be adapted to this. I'd guess that if you are of Siberian, Inuit or First Nations extraction you might benefit from Jay Wortman's oolichan oil as part of a ketogenic diet.

I'm always amazed by the concept that a ketogenic diet might be temporarily therapeutic but must be discontinued because it eventually becomes Bad For You. It reminds me so much of the converse concept that low fat diets, which might worsen every marker of health which people may care to look at, will deliver major benefits at some mythical future date.

Ultimately, point scoring on the internet about what the Inuit did or didn't eat shouldn't destroy people's chances of health. Destroying a circular argument about Inuit diets may may the destructor feel good. Destroying the feet, eyes and kidneys of a person with type 2 diabetes, who need a ketogenic diet, as a spin off from that victory must be difficult to live with. I don't know how anyone can do this.

I think that's probably all I have to say for now.

Peter

338 comments:

«Oldest   ‹Older   201 – 338 of 338
Tim Steele said...

@Matt - I really kept hoping that if we kept this up, Kurt Harris, Melissa McEwan, Stephen Guyenet, and CarbSane would show up.

All we got was Kruse, Woo, Eades, and Stanton...

Where have all my heroes gone?

This sure felt like 2011, though, for a little while.

August said...

I have always felt ketogenic was similar to photogenic: just as one can be photogenic without anyone necessarily taking a photo, a diet can be ketogenic with or without ketones being generated.

Richard Nikoley said...

"just as one can be photogenic without anyone necessarily taking a photo, a diet can be ketogenic with or without ketones being generated. "

Love comments like this. It's the sycophant equivalent of GG early snark that Peter will leave up for posterity.

You all deserve this level of "support."

JohnN said...

@Matt Huston
Nice!
"The tyranny of the loud encourages the tyranny of the nasty" which in turn discourages thoughtful and relevant comments from the silent majority.

Duck Dodgers said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Gabriella Kadar said...

No doubt Peter is thrilled.

George Henderson said...

The Paleo constant is that portions are as enormous as it is humanly possible to consume when good food is available, even if this causes pain and suffering.

https://web.archive.org/web/20100613035155/http://andaman.org/BOOK/chapter15/text15.htm

Galina L. said...

I am familiar with the Hygienic hypothesis. It sound logical, however,as usual, it doesn't explain all anecdotal evidences. Very often life is more complicated, and science often allows people to see only small parts of a complex puzzle. In the light of that theory my family example looks odd. My maternity grandmother was a complete hygienic freak, chasing dust and dirt occupied most of her day.All clothes of a young child was ironed from both sides for the complete germs elimination. My dad's mom was remarkably sloppy, she didn't wash tea cups and water glasses because she thought such beverages didn't soil the glasses enough to justify washing, she lived in a small town in a house with a coal heating, kept life-stock while not old. I inherited from my dad migraines, allergies, abilities to design and draw. My mom is naturally very healthy,I look like her. My dad died at 51 from a heart arrest, he was diagnosed at 40 with ischemia.

My allergy manifests itself now only with more pinkish cheek color, which would be total overkill to fuss much about. I consider it as my body warning to stay away from a particular food. I have no problem with most fruits, but awoid citruses and strawberries. I had irritated lips during summer after eating fresh figs from my garden,but it was hard to be sure was it an allergy or a reaction on fig as a plant - its sap is an irritant for many people. It is ridiculous to declare the people , who had very serious and debilitating allergies in a past, to be in the dear need for a treatment now, when just remnants of their previous troubles are left.

@Tim and Richard,
A lot of science is being discussed on blogs now, so much that we normally forget that many of us can touch it only in a very simplified form. Besause of it It is easy to overlook small but important details, even for a well-educated person with unlimited time. Jane K. is a good example how one can read a scientific literature for last 30 years in order to put a foundation under her scientific ideas and not being able to put enough pieces together in order to make others convinsed and interested. Some people can make others interested, but later suffer a criticism because their critics see nothing else but overlooked detailes. Look how it happened with Taubes explaining glycerol-3-phosphate role in a lipogenesis. It is easy to make a mistake while accessing how a complex system works. You sound like guys who think about yourselves as totally right revolutioneres in a nutrition, you declare that LCarbing is dead, that advice on ketosis is wrong for the most, you almost try to scare others into thinking you are right. It is not a marketing campaign, take it easier. I truly wish many years ago I was less trustful to the people who energetically and convincingly presented Atkins as a maniac nut case. Then I may enjoy more years of health, like LeenaS.

Richard, thank you for your congratulations with my coming birthday.

Sky King said...

@RN

You said, "Matt Houston understands the anarchy of blog comments. Or, as Jeffrey Tucker puts it: Beautiful Anarchy."

I would say that's very hypocritical of you, wouldn't you say so..?! Afterall.... just a week or so ago "Brettany" and I were going at it a bit (3-4 comments/insults were exchanged) over on FTA, but you decided to step in and put a stop to a little anarchy!

So, it's a "Beautiful Anarchy" when it takes place on someone else's blog, but on yours it's not allowed...?! It requires "policing" by you?

You do know what the definition of "anarchy" is, don't you? Or do you have your own definition..?!

Sky King said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Jane Karlsson said...

Galina, could I ask please, do you think your reaction to the fruit was allergic, or was it to do with blood sugar?

August said...

And there is insulinogenic, which describes various foods, but if your pancreas is shot, insulin does not appear.

There is more than sycophantic snark going on here.

Manythings said...

Galina, thank you for talking such a lot of good sense, as you always do. I am just a few years older than you and agree entirely that as one becomes older, it is harder to tolerate carbohydrates.

I also have found, as you did, that even a diet of "real food" and unrefined carbohydrates is still not tolerated as I get older. By eating high fat and low carbs I have reversed many health problems commonly supposed to be caused by ageing. And also lost so much weight, as fat, that I am now as slim as a young girl. Keeping blood sugars, and insulin, low seems to have been key to these improvements.

Regarding rosacea - I find that eating a diet low in histamines helps with that and also has nearly eradicated what initially appeared to be the symptoms of atopic eczema.

I also heartily agree with Woo on the subject of supplements.

Jane Karlsson said...

Galina, I didn't see your comment before I posted mine.

"Jane K. is a good example how one can read a scientific literature for last 30 years in order to put a foundation under her scientific ideas and not being able to put enough pieces together in order to make others convinsed and interested."

I did not start with 'scientific ideas' and then look in the literature for confirmation, I started with my experimental work and then studied the literature to find explanations for my findings.

Here are my papers. They are on regeneration, which is much the same thing as maintenance and repair, the process that goes wrong in degenerative disease.

http://www.nature.com/nature/j...
http://dev.biologists.org/cont...
http://dev.biologists.org/cont...
http://dev.biologists.org/cont...
http://dev.biologists.org/cont...

I found in my study of the literature that some of the key enzymes involved in these processes are activated by manganese or copper, and realised that these metals get removed from much of our food. Then I read about the Hunza, who did not remove the metals from their food, and did not have our diseases.

So you see, the problem is not that I have been unable to put the pieces together. A small child could have done it.

Jane Karlsson said...

http://dev.biologists.org/content/59/1/315.short
http://dev.biologists.org/content/66/1/117.short
http://dev.biologists.org/content/61/1/303.short
http://dev.biologists.org/content/65/Supplement/37.short
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v279/n5712/abs/279426a0.html

Galina L. said...

Jane, I have told you a while ago that I don't want to talk with you about anything any-longer because your use of false dichotomies and changing topics of conversation as a debating technique. I answered your previous question as an exception.

Richard Nikoley said...

"but if your pancreas is shot, insulin does not appear."

Another have your cake and eat it too moment. Shot pancrease is the layman's definition of T1. IR, the layman's definition of T1.

So I see where this will go. T2's have a shot pancrease, not just shot cells in terms of sensitivity.

Got to cover all bases, right?

Moreover, virtually ALL foods are "insulinogenic" in whole form. Pure fat is not, which explains the fear-based fat gluttony in some quarters.

Richard Nikoley said...

"one becomes older, it is harder to tolerate carbohydrates."

I love how people presume to speak to others.

By targeting gut food, my wife and I are getting older (she's newly 55 and I'll be 54 next month) and are tolerating carbs better than since as in our 20s and 30s.

We eat beans every day. Our staple. Weight dropping, digestion great, and near zero fartage. The gut bugs work that out amongst themselves, over time.

For some weird reason, people, even Peter, can count some things perfectly physiologically normal, while making fun of other categories of same, Farts are easy. But, see, my wife's family are beaners and so far as I can tell over 20 years, don't fart up a strorm.

Now I know why.

Richard Nikoley said...

...This entire physiological insulin resistance, carbohydrate intolerance game is as pathetic as hypochondriac couch potatoes who, having seen their heart race to 250 BPM after climbing a flight of stairs, conclude that they can't tolerate normal human physical activity, much less exercise.

It all reminds me of an aunt who is so proud of every disability badge she wears, with honor. Every malady is a blessing,

Richard Nikoley said...

...and OK, this just came across in email. New TED:

http://www.ted.com/talks/barbara_natterson_horowitz_what_veterinarians_know_that_doctors_don_t

Peter is really my favorite health blogger. I told so many people way back: consult a veterinarian. They're species agnostic.

August said...

Jane, I'm seriously doubting the idea a child can put that together. Maybe once you get past the abstract all becomes clear, but I am not a Drosophila, so I doubt it matters.

Tim Steele said...

Hi, Jane -

I just looked at your articles on regeneration and transdetermination. That must have been incredibly rewarding work!

Have you been keeping up with the latest science on miRNA and non-coding RNAs as determinates of gene expression? I wonder what you research would have looked like with all of this brand new genetic information?

Here is a great paper on the effects of nutrition on miRNA and gene expression, I'd love to hear your thoughts!

MicroRNAs Regulation by Nutrients, the New Ray of Hope in Obesity Related Glucose and Lipid Metabolic Disorders

Tim

Galina L. said...

@Rich,
not everybody tolerates starches so well as you and your wife. I tried to add some cold potatoes couple years ago and the result was a creeping weight gain and increased hunger. It could be the metabolic reason why I was the chubbiest (but still normal) child in my school while living in a society where everyone cooked and ate a traditional food, snacking was discouraged and fat children didn't exist. I remember how everyone in a childcare was receiving a big tablespoon of a cod liver oil weekly. However, modern diseases and wide-spread tooth problem were the normal part of life.

Duck Dodgers said...

Galina L said: "I tried to add some cold potatoes couple years ago and the result was a creeping weight gain and increased hunger. It could be the metabolic reason why I was the chubbiest (but still normal) child in my school while living in a society where everyone cooked and ate a traditional food, snacking was discouraged and fat children didn't exist."

I'm not trying to argue/debate your health, but since we have a relatively neutral ground here... Logically speaking, would you imagine that your genetics should have allowed you to be well-adapted to starches? If so, then what do we suppose causes such an intolerance to starches?

When people say "I don't tolerate starches well" I'm left wondering where such an intolerance could have developed from if our recent ancestors were well-adapted to eating starches. There must be an underlying mechanism to the disruption. Simply demonizing carbs (not saying you do this) isn't really pinpointing the underlying issue.

The gut flora may in fact be the culprit dé jour, but it is rather fascinating how many things it's being tied to in the literature. If you can name a modern disease, there's often (though not always) a connection to the gut flora and various pathogens.

Bea said...

American Anarchist = Middle class angry white male in the throes of a severe case of midlife crisis.


Richard Nikoley said...

@Galina

"not everybody tolerates starches so well as you and your wife."

Wasn't always the case, but rather than wear it as a badge of honor, we realized that's dumb and shortsighted, and fixed it by what I like to call metabolic exercise. Beans are a good way, since they're pretty nutrient dense, digest more slowly, and feed the gut, especially if sometimes rated cold and reheated.

@Sky

"I would say that's very hypocritical of you, wouldn't you say so..?! Afterall.... just a week or so ago "Brettany" and I were going at it a bit (3-4 comments/insults were exchanged) over on FTA, but then you decided to step in, like a cop, and put a stop to a little anarchy!"

Well, I've been dealing with people who conflate anarchy with nihilism for over 20 years. No exception. Same ignorance prevails.

I actually checked. You and Bet had a number od value added comments before even engaging one-another. Then, when you did, the first three between you were on topic. Then from the point it went to insult, there are 11 comments between the two of you trading completely out-of context insult, trying to one-up one another.

It got ugly. To to make it beautiful, I asked you both to stop, you both honored that without a single follow-up, respecting my property.

Beautiful. No state required. I could also point out that I often use the term anarchy metaphorically (when there's no STATE involvement), but my peal/swine quota has been used up.

@Bea

"Middle class angry white male in the throes of a severe case of midlife crisis."

Beyond the fact that the vast majority of "anarchists" are in their 20's, I guess I don't need to think far to understand your baggage.

Overlooking peals/swine, here's a thread you might find interesting:

http://freetheanimal.com/2014/11/btw-im-in-mexico.html

I casually mentioned the "underlying anarchy" I experience in Mexico (as well as the 30-some other 3rd world countries I've visited—hardly bastions of angry white males in charge.

Take a look at how the people living on the ground in far off. poor places seem to understand what I was getting at.

Anarchy begins at home. Here:

http://freetheanimal.com/2012/10/anarchy-begins-at-home-the-blog-series-part-1.html

AHS12 Presentation on Anarchy:

http://vimeo.com/54314333

So, cure your ignorance, then shut your blowjob hole.

Bea said...

"Take a look at how the people living on the ground in far off. poor places seem to understand what I was getting at."

I don't have to I'm married to a man that had to flee for his life from a evil dictator. He didn't have time to luxuriate in beautiful anarchy. He was to busy running for his life from Castro's firing squads.
I respect people that put their lives on the line to try to facilitate change in dangerous
places . Not armchair pampered American Anarchists.

"So, cure your ignorance"

I think my husband could cure your ignorance

" then shut your blowjob hole."

Wow, your wife is one lucky woman!

Richard Nikoley said...

"I don't have to I'm married to a man that had to flee for his life from a evil dictator."

And this is relevant to what? My dad grew up under Hitler's regime. Nearly starved to death at the end of WWII and got separated from his family for 3 years on the wrong side of the wall.

"He didn't have time to luxuriate in beautiful anarchy."

You're just daft, right? you're now conflating anarchy with totalitarianism.

"I think my husband could cure your ignorance"

Veiled violence, eh? Charming.

"Wow, your wife is one lucky woman!"

Bea (short for Beatrice, my Latina wife of about 15 years) isn't complaining.

Tim Steele said...

If anyone is still following the original story and wonders how this is playing out in the real (Eskimo) world. Here's a great article from our local paper on the healthcare implications of P479L:

Alaska Dispatch news. Clues emerging about Arctic gene, diet and health.

And probably of interest to Peter is a study linked in the article:

Journal of Lipid Research. A Genetic polymorphisms in carnitine palmitoyltransferase 1A gene are associated with variation in body composition and fasting lipid traits in Yup’ik Eskimos

From the main article linked above:

"The findings result in some explicit medical instruction for parents and caregivers of Native children with the Arctic gene: A sick baby or small child who hasn’t eaten -- because of vomiting, prolonged sleep or other effects of illness -- should get glucose fluids through breast milk, formula, drinks like Pedialyte or, if necessary, an intravenous glucose drip, experts say. Caregivers should make sure affected children carrying the gene eat frequently, and they are advised to consult with health providers and state officials once the gene has been identified.

Anecdotal evidence is that some adults have long coped with the effects of this gene, if unknowingly, Hirschfeld said. They may talk about how they make sure to carry along snacks if they are engaged in strenuous activity like hunting, he said. After a few hours of exertion and no eating, as these adults describe it, they get sluggish, sleepy and “real jittery,” classic signs of hypoglycemia, Hirschfeld said. “They’d have a candy bar, and they’d snap out of it.”

Adults, with their larger bodies, can store more sugar in their blood and livers, and even those with the Arctic variant of the gene are able to fast for longer periods than children, unless they are exercising strenuously, Hirschfeld said.

The most serious problems afflict the youngest children, who can't get their own food when they need it, which is why it's important to detect the condition at birth."

Galina L. said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Galina L. said...

From the common sense perspective I am not surprised that Inuit's bodies are adapted to run on the most abandon nutrient they had - protein, and use ketones mostly during fast to spare valuable fat.
Tim's links are the good example how you could cherry-pick on internet anything to foot basically any theory. There are many evidences to the contrary about Inuits high endurance(journals by Frederick Schwatka is a good example) and also their ability to tolerate fast (Peter Heinbecker "Studies on the metabolism of Eskimos") without a need in a glucose drip or serial bars consumption.

Galina L. said...

@ LeenaS and Manythings,
Thank you.

@DD,
I can only speculate why I feel better on the diet with less starches, but my guess is - as a Russian (Russia is situated in Europe and mostly Asia, and there are a lot of genes in the population from ethnicities which lived by herding cattle and hunting in Siberia), I may have more genes from the not European genetic pool than others who tolerate starches well. BTW, Mongolian invasion reached even Poland. I look like a person with mixed Asian/European ancestry. I don't metabolize alcohol well. It will be interesting what a colonoscopy would show, which is overdue. When my husband had his - he was told his GI tract was longer than on average. He has no problem with starches.


@Richard,
I understand how satisfactory it feels to be adapted to the food you didn't tolerate well before. It is how I feel toward fats. Trust me, it was not easy to be able to eat fat foods after the gallbladder removal surgery, and I think it took longer than you adaptation to starches.I was diagnosed with the gallbladder inflammation (the gift of gluten - my guess) at ten years old, and had to be careful with the amount of fat I ate most of my life. As you noticed himself - when you eat more starches, you spare fats. You are right, you can't do both, like put a butter even on sushi (a rice with a vinegar-based syrup flavored with a see-stuff) and get away with it.

Duck Dodgers said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Jane Karlsson said...

Hi Tim

You looked at my papers! You nice man. Yes, it was incredibly rewarding work. Nothing like teensy-weensy-scale microsurgery for job satisfaction.

Thanks for the review, I hadn't been keeping up with the miRNA stuff and it was just what I needed. I'll get back to you.

Duck Dodgers said...

Galina L. said: "From the common sense perspective I am not surprised that Inuit's bodies are adapted to run on the most abandon nutrient they had - protein, and use ketones mostly during fast to spare valuable fat."

Heinbecker's three studies on the Eskimos showed that the Inuit struggled to make ketones even on prolonged fasts. Again, CPT1a presents as a ketogenesis disorder. The only Eskimos that Heinbecker could find who made normal levels of ketones during a prolonged fast were lactating women.

Furthermore, the literature shows that CPT1a is mostly a problem for young children. For the adults it seems to just be mild hypoglycemia and rarely ever a problem.

The Eskimos were well known to snack constantly, as observed by many explorers — including Eades' new favorite book, "Overland to Starvation Cove," where Klutschak writes that the Eskimos had two main meals per day and took snacks at every hour day and night. So, even the early literature supports what Tim has been saying.

As far as the Inuit children go, I wondered how the Inuit traditionally avoided the problems from CPT1a in their children. Turns out they had a little trick:

The Incidence Of Anaemia In Infancy And Early Childhood Among Central Arctic Eskimos, by Sellers, et al. (1959)

"In questioning the Eskimos about the diet fed to children, it was found that infants usually receive breast milk only and that other foods are not begun until after the first year of life. Even then, the diet consists largely of bannock [i.e bread] and breast milk. Breast feeding continued until three or four years of age or until another child makes it impossible to continue. It is only after this that meat becomes a staple in the diet. Rarely do Eskimo mothers masticate meat in order to feed it to the young child—a common practice found in former times."

So the Eskimos simply gave their toddlers carbohydrate-rich breast milk as long as humanly possible to stave off the effects of CPT1a.

Duck Dodgers said...

And Heinbecker found children being breastfed as late as 4 to 6 years of age, in 1936:

Studies On The Metabolism Of Eskimos, by Peter Heinbecker (1928)

"The amount of meat eaten is very large. In times of plenty an average adult consumes 4 to 8 pounds in a day. Growing adolescents require even more. Babies are wholly breast-fed until the end of the 2nd year when meat is added to their diet. Children often nurse irregularly until the’age of 4 or 6."

And there you have it folks. All this pontification about shoving a LCHF diet down the throats of Inuit children and the literature shows us they were doing everything they could to feed kids carbohydrate-rich breast milk as long as humanly possible.

Additionally, the breast milk would have primed children's guts with the unique microbiota of their mothers for up to the first half-decade of a child's life.

To invent a new LCHF regimen for Eskimo kids would only have the opposite effect on their developing biomes, compared to what was traditionally done in their culture.

Score another point for failed modern interventions.

Unknown said...

@ DD

One of the things I took from that article and it's just common sense, is that Inuit babies, like ALL babies for that matter, should have only mother's milk during their early formative years! Duh..!?

And especially so for Inuit babies due to their "Artic gene" until they are able to start eating/digesting/assimilating their natural diet consisting of HIGH protein and HIGH fat, with SOME carbs thrown in mostly in the form of BERRIES!

No where in that article did I see it suggest that the Inuit need to continue on a HIGH carb diet after weaning from mother's milk, nor did I see anywhere suggesting that the Inuit will need to supplement their future diets with potato starch and/or banana plantains, tapioca starch, etc.

As for the PUFA's that was mentioned in the article, I'll assume he meant obtaining those mostly from fish as a source, and not from veggie oils..?!

Correct me if I'm wrong, but were you trying to use this article as another reason to bash LCHF diets?

Richard Nikoley said...

"One of the things I took from that article and it's just common sense, is that Inuit babies, like ALL babies for that matter, should have only mother's milk during their early formative years! Duh..!?"

...

"No where in that article did I see it suggest that the Inuit need to continue on a HIGH carb diet after weaning from mother's milk, nor did I see anywhere suggesting that the Inuit will need to supplement their future diets with potato starch and/or banana plantains, tapioca starch, etc."

See what I mean about peals/swine? You keto-advocates SOUNDLY deserve this sort of hubristic ignorance that doesn't even recognize it.

Unknown said...

@RK

{See what I mean about peals/swine? You keto-advocates SOUNDLY deserve this sort of hubristic ignorance that doesn't even recognize it]

And likewise...yourself and your fellow FatPhobics!

You sure are in the habit of ASSUMING many things, not only about people who you know nothing about, but also about nutrition in general.

You've managed to convince yourself, while trying to convince everyone else, that you've found the "SECRET" to health and how to solve everyone's health problems. All they need to do is "fix" their gut by feeding "them" the "right" foods....mainly RS! And you can identify which of the tens of thousands of the different gut bugs that live in our guts while being able to distinguish all the good ones from the bad, and that ALL the good ones are craving RS! I nominate you for the Noble Prize in Medicine! Congrats!

All kidding aside... let me ask you something about potatoes. You do know where potatoes originally came from, don't you? From Peru. They've only been in Europe some 400 years. Are you implying that you've evolved over thousands of years to require potatoes and potato starches so your gut can flourish? And how do you know for sure that PS may or may not be feeding ALL the good bacteria?

You're so damn focused on feeding your gut bacteria RS, that you might be missing the bigger picture. Nutrition and how the body works is much more complicated than making sure your gut bugs are getting RS.

Duck Dodgers said...

@Unknown, No one is suggesting that the Inuit should eat, or has ancestrally eaten, a "HIGH carb" diet. Pay attention.

Galina L. said...

The average breastfeeding time for traditional cultures in the world is 4.2 years, not only for Inuits. I guess you are a male who didn't have an experience of a breastfeeding, or don't remember how it was when your child was small. I can tell you, that while in a modern culture it may be viewed as an inconvenience, breastfeeding is a super convenient way to provide your child with a food - you know it is always there even when you don't have any food available for other family members, you don't have to cook while your hungry child cry loudly, you are free from a chore to make a special food for an infant, you know that food is not spoiled and may cause a deadly or worrisome stomach infection, you absolutely sure your child wouldn't be too fussy about it, you don't need to give him/her patiently spoon after spoon of pureed food and can do simple house work while you child sucks a breast, when a child cry at night, you can give him/her a breast and he/she will blissfully shut-up and you may resume your sleeping. Bread (sure a recent addition) is another almost as much convenient food which is do not get rotten easily ,don't need to be pureed and children are not fussy about. Ladies on the fare North were not busy trying to provide as much carbohydrates as possible for their children, but rather making sure they had a ready-to use food which would not cause any immediate illness. I wonder, why Eskimos were great examples of endurance during the time of Arctic exploration, but nowadays Hirschfeld have noticed they have to treat hypoglycemia during hunting with cereal bars in order to get more energy. I am sure in a past the cereal products were not an option. May be after several generation being fed with a bread during weaning and later diminished their liver's ability to synthesize glucose from proteins, their Arctic heritage interferes with the synthesis of ketones, and poor North nations were just screwed? I am sure eating bread from infancy somewhat improved their starch tolerance and Gemma and others who feel compassionate toward little bugs inside humans, may be more satisfied with how their (Inuits, Eskimos) gut flora looks now. I doubt much good could be said about their teeth or other aspects of their health, like it is often the case with the people from First Nations. BTW, if you Google traditional American Indians Cuisine , you will find frayed bread and corn bread first to mention.
Bread and grains are very convenient and taste great. I can't deny that.

Duck Dodgers said...

"The average breastfeeding time for traditional cultures in the world is 4.2 years, not only for Inuits"

And you waited until now to share that with us? You could have saved us so much time. :)

Galina L. said...

So, bread-defending propaganda(carbs are so important that even wheat bread is not bad at all) is like "pearls" and individuals who don't swallow it are like ignorant swines. Nice. If you don't feed your bugs they would eat you from inside - another pearl. One moment we are generous protectors of army of tiny helpless creatures, who are like our pets, on another turn we are their hostages. Holy shit!

Duck Dodgers said...

Galina L. said: "I wonder, why Eskimos were great examples of endurance during the time of Arctic exploration, but nowadays Hirschfeld have noticed they have to treat hypoglycemia during hunting with cereal bars in order to get more energy"

Hmm, I wasn't able to find evidence that they were regularly fasting and simultaneously exerting themselves tremendously at the same time. What I've seen so far suggests that they were snacking constantly, and the habit was confirmed by some early explorers. Do you have evidence to the contrary?

Gemma said...

@Galina

"One moment we are generous protectors of army of tiny helpless creatures, who are like our pets, on another turn we are their hostages."

Actually you have summed it up quite well, though unknowingly.

Galina L. said...

@DD,
My best friend recently became a grandma. I have my own experience with a breast-feeding, and I absolutely can judge the convenience of it, but she inundated me with breastfeeding stories, she can't talk about anything else, but how wrong the modern childcare is. At the moment I am very happy that my son is 22 and I 99% free from responsibilities of a parent.

Duck Dodgers said...

Galina L. said: "One moment we are generous protectors of army of tiny helpless creatures, who are like our pets, on another turn we are their hostages. Holy shit!."

Well, I think the description is more of a symbiosis actually. So, again, the timeline on the evolution of animal guts matches up with the oxygenation of the atmosphere. A symbiotic relationship ensues. Not exactly that hard to believe.

Termites are a good example of this. If the termites were to stop eating wood, things would need to change a bit (genes, biome, etc).

There's no need to be so hostile to such new ideas—unless the goal is to stop learning and exposing ourselves to such research. Would it really be that hard to have an open mind about such matters as they are being researched?

Richard Nikoley said...

"yourself and your fellow FatPhobics! "

I love it when someone exposes their ignorance right in the first sentence. For myself, since "Unknown" apparently wishes to remain that way, I have no reference point beyond a single post. I, on the other hand, have 4,000 posts and over 100,000 comments on my blog.

So who's guilty?

I argue against fat gluttony, not for fat phobia.

Tsk, tsk, swine. I told you: pearls/swine.

Richard Nikoley said...

"And you can identify which of the tens of thousands of the different gut bugs that live in our guts while being able to distinguish all the good ones from the bad, and that ALL the good ones are craving RS!"

Which is the exact opposite of what I've blogged and even commented here.

Do a Cntl+F on the comments here for "too complicated."

(/pearls.swine)

Duck Dodgers said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Duck Dodgers said...

In terms of the radical idea of feeding the gut bugs, it's curious that the official fiber recommendations around the world, are well above what people can obtain on a SAD diet. But mention the need for zinc or magnesium and we just take the official recommendation as common sense.

WHFoods: Fiber

"...The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) did not set any Tolerable Upper Intake Level (UL) for fiber when its fiber recommendations were updated in 2005. From studies of diets worldwide, we also know that routine dietary intake can average 75-100 grams per day when whole, natural plant foods account for the vast majority of dietary intake. The big picture here appears to be a ringing endorsement of all fiber amounts that correspond to healthy intake of whole, natural foods, even when those foods are particularly fiber-rich."

So, the idea of a Westerner eating up to 40g of fiber in a day isn't exactly radical by any stretch of the imagination when we look at worldwide fiber intake of whole food diets that include plants. Quite the contrary, 40g is actually a rather paltry amount. I hardly see why the notion is controversial.

Richard Nikoley said...

"All kidding aside... let me ask you something about potatoes. You do know where potatoes originally came from, don't you? From Peru. They've only been in Europe some 400 years. Are you implying that you've evolved over thousands of years to require potatoes and potato starches so your gut can flourish? And how do you know for sure that PS may or may not be feeding ALL the good bacteria"

You weren't kidding, so first lie. Don't worry, I've been dealing with liars for decades. They generally can't help it. It's a conditioning from birth that only few escape. My parents and three brothers still lie to themselves every day and love it.

I have a "wife-in-law" (wife of BIL) from Peru. She's a high power lawyer for Apple, now, formerly for SUN Micro (an employer of my own self way back, 'cause I speak French). The Peruvians do wonderful things with potatoes and I must wonder: It's necessarily BAD they domesticated them?

In terms of plants, we evolved together. They, except for fruits, defend themselves. The pull in response to the push is that poison in small enough doses is hormetic, and the world turns. We evolve.

Ironically, the "Evolutionary Diet" is now about stopping ever continuing evolution. And for some reason, only 10,000 year and older evolution is cool. 400 years is shit.

Jesus but I'm feeling peals/swine, again. I loath hubris combined with ignorance more than anything.

People like you, conditioned to think you know something about evolution don't seem to realize or accept that when a plant goes from generally toxic to generally beneficial on evolutionary scale, that there's a fuzzy line that's dose dependent.

People can live exclusively on potatoes husbanded in Peru. You are complaining about settled evolution, even though human engineered.

"You're so damn focused on feeding your gut bacteria RS, that you might be missing the bigger picture. Nutrition and how the body works is much more complicated than making sure your gut bugs are getting RS."

Too stupid to comments on, even overlooking the misrepresentation.

Pearls. Swine.

But, I'm glad the sycophants seem to think it's safe to go in the water.

Richard Nikoley said...

"when a child cry at night, you can give him/her a breast and he/she will blissfully shut-up and you may resume your sleeping."

I have no doubt.

"...others who feel compassionate toward little bugs inside humans..."

you have dots to connect, Galina: prejudices to get over, ignorance to cure.

I'm rooting for you.

Richard Nikoley said...

"So, bread-defending propaganda(carbs are so important that even wheat bread is not bad at all) is like "pearls" and individuals who don't swallow it are like ignorant swines."

Yes, if people don't take account of facts on the ground.

It's pretty simple that from the research, bread was a decent supplement for infants with the CPT-1A mutation, that the Eskimos seemed to have figured out in advance of the Messiah.

Sorry to play Devil.

Doesn't everything pretty much come down to that?

I call it dishonesty, but that's just me.

http://freetheanimal.com/2014/12/understanding-knowledge-honesty.html

Galina L. said...

Gemma,
I was guessing incorrectly that for any unbiased reader of my comments it would be clear that I was not the denialist of the fact that our body was a complex symbiotic system. I am in doubt that the only peaceful type of bags who wouldn't eat me from inside out are the ones normal for a person who eats substantial amount of RS.

Richard Nikoley said...

"I am in doubt that the only peaceful type of bags who wouldn't eat me from inside out are the ones normal for a person who eats substantial amount of RS."

Be in doubt all you like.

Chalk up all your autoimmune conditions to genetic heredity.

Continue to live in ignorant bliss, and shoot snark at those more mindful and [self] educated than you.

Above all, keep sycophant creds propped. Depending on which comment thread. it may come into play, eventually.

Richard Nikoley said...

...Oh, BTW, Galina.

I forgot to mention that Russians are never wrong.

At least, not in terms of any geopolitics going back a few hundreds of years.

Other than that, they're always right and they also have the most world Chess Champions.

Unknown said...

@ RK

"You weren't kidding, so first lie. Don't worry, I've been dealing with liars for decades. They generally can't help it. It's a conditioning from birth that only few escape. My parents and three brothers still lie to themselves every day and love it."

Of absolutely no value to the discussion whatsoever.

[I have a "wife-in-law" (wife of BIL) from Peru. She's a high power lawyer for Apple, now, formerly for SUN Micro (an employer of my own self way back, 'cause I speak French).]

Of no value to the discussion whatsoever. Just ANOTHER one of yet thousands of narcissistic and egotistical posts in which you feel compelled to tell everyone something about yourself including your dogs, your wife, your in-laws, your travels, etc. etc. etc. Here's a clue: No one gives a fuck!

Now THAT is what I call a pearls/swine moment!

Now for those potatoes, although they were introduced into Europe some 400 years ago, they were shunned by almost everyone until some 150 yrs ago when they started gaining in popularity due to convenience, and only convenience of farming them and cooking them.

"The Peruvians do wonderful things with potatoes and I must wonder: It's necessarily BAD they domesticated them."

Those Peruvians may have been eating those potatoes for tens of thousands of years, so they've evolved to eat them. A 150 yrs time is not equivalent to some 5000-8000 yrs since the Peruvians have been eating them. Not to mention that the purple Peruvian potato is nothing like the potatoes you eat. For example, that purple potato native to Peru has 30x more cancer-fighting anthocyanins than those common russet potatoes you're getting your RS from.

Yup, just had another one of those pearls/swine moments!

Do you sincerely think that tubers were so prized by the ancients? The only reason they would eat tubers was if they couldn't obtain fats, meats, and bones from animals, birds, and fish.

You want to get educated? You can start with this book:

http://www.amazon.com/Fiber-Menace-Constipation-Hemorrhoids-Ulcerative/dp/0970679645/ref=sr_1_3?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1417835525&sr=1-3&keywords=fiber

Richard all you appear to do here is blow smoke in an effort to hide the fact that you're not very intelligent and knowledgeable by any means. It's pretty obvious you're way out of your league in discussing these matters. You come across like a coked-up turkey dancing on a hot stove when trying to get your points across. You spend more time talking about yourself, and criticizing those who disagree with you by referring to them all as 'fucktards' than you do actually making any positive and meaningful contributions to what is being discussed here. Leave the heavy hitting to the more intelligent folks to fight your battles for you, such as DD and T. Steele.

Now, why not go and have yourself a nice big bucket full of glycoalkaloids. The hormesis benefit you'd get from that itself should make you immortal! Either that or as dead as an Irishman seen sucking on a moldy potato back in 1850.

Richard Nikoley said...

"You want to get educated? You can start with this book..."

One of my commenters, a dental surgeon, is a neighbor of that annal-fixated weirdo. I'd tell you all about it, and how the posts on RS have over 10,000 positive anecdotes in comments vs. a few hundred negative, but you have a made up mind and I'm short on time.

"Richard all you appear to do here is blow smoke in an effort to hide the fact that you're not very intelligent and knowledgeable by any means."

What a beautiful coincidence.

You should start a blog.

Duck Dodgers said...

Unknown said: [lots of ignorant statements]

Interestingly, potatoes are a major staple of the longest-lived populations in the world—such as Bama, China; Yuzurihara, Japan, for instance. It flies in the face of everyting bad you've heard about carbs of course.

Additionally, Potatoes supported one of the world's greatest population explosions ever.

And furthermore, potatoes are one of the world's most widely consumed foods.

One can even survive on a potato diet for months and improve their health considerably. Not too many single foods that can do that.

Furthermore, if you are going to exclude new foods that were not available a few centuries ago, better stop eating most vegetables you mind at the farmer's market. For instance, broccoli wasn't even available outside of Italy before 1560. It's a fairly silly reasoning to bring up considering that you likely eat relatively new hybridized foods every day.

Galina L. said...



@DD,
I can't give you links about Eskimos - I never collected anything first-nations related. There are a lot of descriptions how they eat frozen meat or fish dipped into eulachon oil or a seal fat. I remember reading that the oil dipping prevented them from feeling cold from eating a very cold food. I guess, it is possible Inuits and Eskimos have more reasons to snack than being hungry. From my observations the people who have to function in a very cold environment often snack for the reason of keeping themselves warm.

Galina L. said...

@Richard,
May be most Russians do think they are right all the time,I have no idea how true it is, such thing it is easier to notice from outside. Putin looks like a good example of the always right type. But who insists on being 100% right during that particular discussion? LCarbers normally don't think everybody should eat like them. The idea that there is only one healthy set of GI bags is basically the declaration that only one diet is healthy - the one which Richard follows since rather recently which contains plenty of fiber and especially RS from beans and cold potatoes. Yes, people can make a hack and artificially add a raw potato starch or something similar to their LC diets, then they would have sort of two set of foods - one for themselves, and another for their GI micro-flora, because there is no way real, but low in a starch food could be healthy.
On the Duck's quite and respectable question what makes me (and presumably many other LCarbers) so stubborn in accepting the science he presents , I can equally respectfully answer that I saw by now many well-summarized links to research footing one idea or another, while the ideas didn't always work for me. I hope the preference for own experience over what others want me to believe is not necessary could be qualified as an ignorance. I experimented with diets a lot, and with less fiber and starch and more fat, I feel better. I can't and , actually, should not, ignore my experience. That is why I said at the beginning that it is better to remember about the complicity of how a human body system functions. It is easy to overlook some details in an analysis.

Duck Dodgers said...

Galina L said: "There are a lot of descriptions how they eat frozen meat or fish dipped into eulachon oil or a seal fat."

Yes, I'm well aware of that. That was mentioned in the literature over and over again. We all agree that they ate a lot of fat. But, the literature is pretty clear that they were eating enormous quantities of meat—though apparently not all at once :)

Duck Dodgers said...

Galina L said: "I experimented with diets a lot, and with less fiber and starch and more fat, I feel better. I can't and , actually, should not, ignore my experience. That is why I said at the beginning that it is better to remember about the complicity of how a human body system functions. It is easy to overlook some details in an analysis."

Well, given the fact that Homo Sapien guts are widely considered to be adapted to fiber (i.e. there is no set Upper Tolerable Limit by the National Academy of Sciences) you can see how such an intolerance might be construed as a gut problem, no?

I mean, if one's gut doesn't tolerate the USDA of various polysaccharides/glycans that can only be metabolized by gut bugs, it stands to reason that the gut bugs just might be related to the intolerance.

Unknown said...

@ DD

You sure do love to sing the many praises of eating a tater, don't you?! And you do realize that for a single tater you'll get approx. 4gms of fiber per approx. 40gms of carbs. If you want to get your daily equivalent of 40gms of fiber/day, then all you'd have to do is eat 10 taters for a total of 400 gms of carbs containing 1600 calories! Nice! Ya gotta love dem taters!

As for PS, are you aware of a phenomenon called persorption? Back in the '60s, Gerhard Volkheimer had rediscovered the phenomenon called persorption, which had been demonstrated a century earlier. Starch grains, or other hard particles, can be found in the blood, urine, and other fluids after they have been ingested. The iodine stain for starch, and the characteristic shape of the granules, makes their observation very easy.

A potato starch granule happens to be very big. Other starches are more the size of a red blood cell, but a potato starch granule is several times fatter than that. But even these huge granules bigger than cells can get squeezed right through the wall of the intestine, enter the lymphatics and the blood system, so within 30 minutes after you eat starch, you see the starch grains circulating through your blood, and if they’re big they’ll plug up your arterioles. Studies in mice showed that a high raw starch diet accelerated their aging. You can demonstrate areas of every organ that were being killed by plugging up the arteries.

That's what RN would call a pearl/swine moment.

Duck Dodgers said...

@Unknown said: "If you want to get your daily equivalent of 40gms of fiber/day, then all you'd have to do is eat 10 taters for a total of 400 gms of carbs containing 1600 calories! Nice! Ya gotta love dem taters!"

Nah.. Nobody is saying to get all your fiber from RS. You're making it too difficult. Eat some potatoes, some inulin-rich foods and have a cup of beans and your good to go.

@Unknown said: "As for PS, are you aware of a phenomenon called persorption?"

Heh, yeah. I am. I've probably read about 40 different papers on the phenomenon of persorption, so yes, I'm well familiar with it.

Volkheimer fed his subjects an ungodly 200 grams of raw starch in a single glass of water. In the real world, you cook your starches, and chew them, and you don't eat 200 grams at once. He was crazy.

Furthermore, you have three lines of defense to avoid and unplug embolisms. Salivary amylase, pancreatic amylase and plasma amylase. Volkheimer basically discovered a hack to overwhelm all three defenses.

Cheers.

Unknown said...

@ DD

"Nah.. Nobody is saying to get all your fiber from RS. You're making it too difficult. Eat some potatoes, some inulin-rich foods and have a cup of beans and your good to go."

My point was that in order to get 40gms, or MORE, of fiber in your diet there's an associated amount of carbs you'd be ingesting. What's the avg amount of carbs/day one would be consuming do you estimate in order to fullfil the 40gms requirement.

And of course, the insulin response doesn't matter, right?

And who exactly came up with the figure 40gms/day of fiber? Where's all the research and by whom?

Duck Dodgers said...

"My point was that in order to get 40gms, or MORE, of fiber in your diet there's an associated amount of carbs you'd be ingesting."

Ding ding ding.

"And of course, the insulin response doesn't matter, right?"

Well, not to me it doesn't. In my own testing, fiber seems to improve the response considerably.

"What's the avg amount of carbs/day one would be consuming do you estimate in order to fullfil the 40gms requirement."

Depends on what plants are available. It can vary greatly. I don't often get to 40g of fiber myself. If I had access to a Baobab tree, I'd probably have an easy time. Alas, Western markets have limited options beyond beans. Anyway, I was just saying that even with supplementation, 40g is still quite low compared to many indigenous cultures.

Jeff Leach explains...

How Good Gut Bacteria Could Transform Your Health

Btw, don't blow past that article. Read it. It pretty much covers everything in a nutshell. Time for bed.

Duck Dodgers said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Duck Dodgers said...

Unknown said: "And who exactly came up with the figure 40gms/day of fiber? Where's all the research and by whom?"

Most studies show increasing benefit to approximately 35g-50g of RS with no additional benefit beyond that (the rest is pooped out). But, generally speaking, 40g of fiber is just a loose reference to the Dietary Reference Intake (DRI), which is a system of nutrition recommendations from the Institute of Medicine (IOM) of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences (NAS).

We all know the USDA Food Pyramid graphic is put together by lobbyists, but the DRIs are based on scientific research aggregated and analyzed by those organizations. Again, we tend to not question these DRIs for most micronutrients, but fiber is often ignored, perhaps because the benefits and links to combating Western diseases weren't easily explained until the last decade or so (microbiota, etc). The DRIs are not perfect, but the fiber recommendations are well above what one obtains on a Western SAD diet.

Wikipedia: Dietary Reference Intake (DRI)

For instance, here is the DRI table from the IOM:

IOM: Dietary Reference Intakes for Energy, Carbohydrate, Fiber, Fat, Fatty Acids, Cholesterol, Protein, and Amino Acids

You'll notice that the DRI for Males from 31-50 years of age is 38g/day of fiber. Females only need 25g/day, due to decreased food consumption. The note on the right-side of the row that there is no set upper tolerable limit for fiber. So, again, a 40g target of fiber is not a radical amount of fiber. It's just what is recommended based on the literature.

The DRI from the IOM and NAS for fiber falls in line with all other fiber recommendations by governing science organizations around the world. As much as this seems like a conspiracy for eating grains, one cannot really obtain those DRIs from eating refined grains all day without overshooting the DRIs for carbohydrates. So we can see that these recommendations require a real selectivity to whole foods (like potatoes, beans or Baobab) if we were to try and meet the DRIs from food alone.

And it's not difficult to find thousands of research papers and studies supporting the DRIs on fiber. Spend a few minutes in Google Scholar searching for "fiber [insert Western disease here]" and you'll find enough literature to keep you busy for years.

I'd say a problem with the DRI is that it doesn't make much of a distinction between soluble and insoluble fiber. And people tend to look at the units in isolation. So, most Americans just eat more Wheaties™ when they try to get more fiber, which has only limited benefit (though, it still plays a role).

However, most of the research showing the real benefits of fiber tend to focus on soluble fibers (RS, NSP, FOS, GOS, HMOs, Inulin, β-glucans, etc.), so he DRIs tend to be a little vague in that respect.

Tim Steele said...

That was a good explanation, Duck. I wondered how you would answer it.

If there was one area of research I wish I could impact it would be to determine the optimal fiber intake and types. I have a feeling that the DRI's of 25/38g are spot on, but it needs to be a mixture of fermentable fibers and some non-fermentables. The labels of 'soluble' and 'insoluble' are meaningless now that we are looking at RS (it's insoluble!).

What we need is a DRI on gut-bug produced butyrate. That would solve all the riddles.

I'm very sure that soluble fiber in the range of 20-50g/day will provide all the substrate we need to have a healthy biome that produced enough SCFA for our colonic and anti-inflammatory needs.

Konstantin Monastyrski of Fiber Menace was right to balk at the fiber recommendations of the day. At that time, everyone was pushing fiber for "bulking" and using cellulose as the main fiber.

Fiber is way more than a means to bulk-up your stool.

Galina L. said...

I could consume more fiber on my previous diet mostly because I ate more often, also more volume of foods. The current regiment of mostly two meals a day is not very conductive to a lot of fiber consumption. Fortunately, I have no problems with the digestion of foods most people complain about like raw onions and raw cabbage, so I do tolerate fiber well. I noticed I am sensitive to the volume of my food. Smaller nutrient dense meals are more conductive in my case to the stable energy level and the long-term satiety. I do not avoid starches as a poison, just use it sparingly.

Tim Steele said...

Galina - Chest pounding and rhetoric aside, I think that everyone just needs to examine their own health. If there are digestive issues or systemic health problems that may be fixed by adding more fiber, then that should be one of the first things to try.

The glut of digestive problems and metabolic derangement in the world, I am positive, is in part due to our very low fiber diets.

But as we all know, one size does not fit all.

Galina L. said...

@Tim,
some chest pounding (like declarations that LC is dead, apologies for allegedly topped Modern Ketogenic diet) is exactly what set me off enough to promote that long discussion. Such diets are important for many people to feel their best. I agree with your idea that own health has to be closely examined, and ideas from the outside of own comfort zone should be given fare assessment. How you feel is more important that what you believe in. To tell you the truth, I can't share your opinion that it always beneficial to increase the amount of fiber, I saw many examples of the people who were doing better on less, many well recorded diet interventions were low in a fiber. Most of the time when something is beneficial for a body, the more the better is rarely the case.495I am not about to try the meat only diet - eating only meat is almost as much trouble as adapting a low-reward diet, + it is the end of culinary skills. Most cuisines are build around sparing meat and cooking is my hobby. I hope you tried the recipe of a beet salad with fermented vegetables I gave you at some point on a Fat Head blog.

altavista said...

Peter, in the future, more biochemistry, less evolution, please.

Evolution is hard. Biochem is beautiful, as little as we know. Who the EFF cares what paleos ate to procreate and be gone by 25? Rosedale is right on this one. Let's cheat a little.

And I don't like the new 'guests' either. Let'em score points on their own blogs.

Jane Karlsson said...

@Tim
I've just finished reading the review on miRNAs you gave me. It's very, very interesting. I need to think about it and do some more reading. Many thanks.

Unknown said...

@DD

Yes, I'm very familiar with Jeff Leach, his Human Food Project, his blog, and the American Gut Project. Anyone who isn't shouldn't be here making any comments pertaining to the microbiome.

I first heard of him almost 2 years ago and was intrigued, of course, like everyone else should be. The buzz about fecal transplants and how our gut flora may be able to influence everything from our health, our moods (feeling shitty) to even what foods we may be craving got my attention. But, I've also been reading subsequent reports/articles which has me thinking how this new and emerging scientific discipline of our microbiome system is just in its infancy and there's still so much that we don't know.

This article in the NYT is a good example of what I mean:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/02/opinion/sunday/there-is-no-healthy-microbiome.html?_r=0

If anyone has a problem gaining access to that article, I'll be more than happy to post it here in it's entirety.

As for myself, I've done my own n=1 experiments for almost a year now with prebiotics such as Larch Tree Arabingalactin, PS, inulin, psyllium husk, along with probiotics like the ones suggested on FTA. All with very mixed results.

The reason I first became interested in this subject is due to some complications with my defecations ever since I had to take a course of antibiotics almost 2 years ago. I have yet to get to those days prior when I would poop out foot long logs and only have to wipe my ass once or twice. And that was when I was on a LCHFHP (Lo-Carb High(SF)-Fat High Protein) diet due to being competitive amateur bodybuilder. And taking into consideration that my prior diet helping me to have what I think is a healthy poop, may not be so healthy after all now because my gut bugs are starving for fiber? I don't have any health issues at all to speak of (other than having some current poop issues) while people are always telling me that I look great and much younger than my real age (I'm in my early 50's). But, now I'm supposed to believe that my gut bugs are a ticking time-bomb ready to spring some god-forsaken illness on me because I haven't been feeding them 40gms. of fiber/day for almost half-a-century?

I....DON'T....THINK....SO....!!!!

So, how does one explain that? The "lucky" ones who haven't had any issues with their health depite that the fact they don't eat that much fiber? Genes? God?

And I have to ask myself can reputable scientists/researchers such as Volek, Phinney, Rosedale, et al., and numerous others be wrong? Should desperate people looking for answers instead follow the likes of a Jeff Leach (and some of his mindless sheep, like RN), who like Seth Roberts, may just be another nutjob engaging in his own personal n=1 experiments while looking for a reason to write a book? Oh, I see... he has, but it hasn't come out yet.

BTW.... thanks for taking the time to reply to all my (and everyone else's) posts in a courteous and polite fashion. R.K. take note!

Richard Nikoley said...

@Unknown

Cool comment. I agree. We don't really know what's "a healthy gut." We're all snowflakes. I take the evolutionary approach. Incidentally, I just got blood work after a year of starch and various fiber sups, including RS. Drafting a post now. Interesting, especially how mu lipid panel changed.

There's also this, on Tim's blog:

http://vegetablepharm.blogspot.com/2014/12/american-gut-and-ubiome-compared.html

That calls into question even knowing what your microbiome IS, much less what's optimal. But, my gut feeling is that a reasonable level of various fibers is probably better, especially considering other factors like a certain calmness, vivid dreaming, and satiation.

@altavista

Well aren't you just special!

Tim Steele said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Duck Dodgers said...

Unknown said: "But, now I'm supposed to believe that my gut bugs are a ticking time-bomb ready to spring some god-forsaken illness on me because I haven't been feeding them 40gms. of fiber/day for almost half-a-century?

I....DON'T....THINK....SO....!!!!

So, how does one explain that? The "lucky" ones who haven't had any issues with their health depite that the fact they don't eat that much fiber? Genes? God?"

When I said lucky ones, I was referring to those who secrete enough mucus to feed the gut bugs. That's basically what most people do who don't eat enough fiber.

Mucin has glycans that the gut bugs eat and the gut bugs that much on mucin do whatever they do—we don't really know enough about them but most Americans survive their whole lives by just feeding their gut bugs mostly mucin. It is what it is, and many people do just fine. But given that the research suggests that gut bugs appear to influence and play a role so many chronic diseases and conditions, the need for exogenous fiber has tremendous support. If you've played around with Larch AG (LAG), you might have noticed how a little spoonful of LAG can have a poweful effect on the immune system, for instance.

Now, the unlucky ones are the approximately 20% of the population with genes that make them 'non-secretors' of fucose, which are glycans that make up part of the mucin that feeds gutbugs and lines the gut.

If you're a non-secretor, you're not so lucky. So, that's all I meant by "lucky" which, of course, everyone here got so defensive about.

By the way, when Richard mentions calmness, I can't help but think about how annoyed everyone here is about a harmless discussion on fiber and a tiny/remote indigenous culture that nobody should even care about. I've found the reactions to be surprising and even somewhat telling on some people's own well being.

When one eats sufficient fibers, those with GABA-producing gut bugs tend to feel really chill, relaxed, and people tend to sleep really well too. Meanwhile, when those gut bugs aren't fed what they like, the body gets less of those stress-reducing neurochemicals, and well, people start snapping at each other and little disagreements tend to tick them off quite easily. So, for me, I see this as being more than about digestion and disease. It's about well-being too.

Jane said...

@Unknown
"So, how does one explain that? The "lucky" ones who haven't had any issues with their health depite that the fact they don't eat that much fiber? Genes? God?"

No, it's not genes or God, it's manganese. The gut bugs eat mucin if you don't give them fibre, as Duck says, and to make mucin you need manganese. Glycosyltransferases are activated by manganese.

This is the problem with low fibre diets, as I see it: they are often low in manganese as well. Meat has very little, and saturated fat can inhibit its absorption.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11697763

Here's what the Linus Pauling Institute says about manganese.

"Because there was insufficient information on manganese requirements to set a Recommended Dietary Allowance (RDA), the Food and Nutrition Board (FNB) of the Institute of Medicine set an adequate intake level (AI). Since overt manganese deficiency has not been documented in humans eating natural diets, the FNB based the AI on average dietary intakes of manganese determined by the Total Diet Study—an annual survey of the mineral content of representative American diets (4)."

What this means is that nobody has the faintest idea how much manganese we need. The 'adequate intake level' is not based on any science, it's just the average intake.

This is probably the reason people think eating white rice is OK. Brown rice is an excellent source of Mn, and has 3 or 4 times as much as white rice, but according to the 'adequate intake level' it doesn't matter.

Manganese activates some of the most important and interesting enzymes there are. For instance, the enzyme PP2A (Protein Phosphatase 2A) which prevents neurofibrillary tangles in Alzheimer's, is a manganese enzyme.

MnSOD is even more important. It protects mitochondria from excess iron, and the hydrogen peroxide it produces goes to the nucleus and activates an anti ageing programme.

"The data suggest that MnSOD up-regulation and a retrograde signal of reactive oxygen species from the mitochondria normally function as an intermediate step in the extension of lifespan caused by reduced insulin-like signaling in various species. The results implicate a species-conserved net of coordinated genes that affect the rate of senescence by modulating energetic efficiency, purine biosynthesis, apoptotic pathways, endocrine signals, and the detoxification and excretion of metabolites."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18067683

Recent research has shown that excess iron stops Mn from getting into mitochondria, so MnSOD has no Mn and doesn't work. It was reported last year that high fat diets cause diabetes in lab mice by a similar mechanism. Somehow the fat stops Mn from getting into mitochondria.

"Manganese supplementation protects against diet-induced diabetes in wild type mice by enhancing insulin secretion"
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23372018

Despite all this, people still think Mn is toxic, because inhaling Mn dust causes a Parkinson-like disorder. But it was found in 1998 that injecting Mn straight into the relevant part of rats' brains did not give them Parkinson's, it PROTECTED them from IRON-induced Parkinson's.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9681949

Galina L. said...

I don't think the people here (me at least) got annoyed by the idea of the discussing a human microbiote issue, but rather with a chest-beating and grandstanding of some participants, you are not a 100% zen team, guys. Gemma sounded on a snappy side,in my opinion. Richard mentioned a blowjob mouth somewhere at the middle of the conversation and choose to use a descending way of speaking with others. Fortunately, I am not easily offended by so called " inappropriate language", but I have noticed the people who use such way of verbal communications and attempt to offend their opponents are usually far from being calm, chilled and in a good self-control,however may be it makes them sleep better. There are a lot of materials about the ketosis-GABA connection. The Dr.Emily Dean's article "Your brain on ketones", probably, the most famous in the nutritional blogosphere.

Duck Dodgers said...

"I don't think the people here (me at least) got annoyed by the idea of the discussing a human microbiote issue, but rather with a chest-beating and grandstanding of some participants"

Well, you've been a delight to talk to, compared to some. You seem to be an exception rather than the rule. :)

I've seen the ketones-GABA connection, however as far as I know, the studies only show improvement for epileptic children who respond to the diet. The non-epileptic studies seem to be mixed. But, such as it is. We all have our issues to deal with and we all have our various approaches. I don't see why such a conversation needs to be tense when comparing notes.

Unknown said...

Just read this article by a Dr.
Gabriela Segura, "The Ketogenic Diet - An Overview"

http://www.health-matrix.net/2013/08/09/the-ketogenic-diet-an-overview/#more-797

Anyone care to comment?

Richard Nikoley said...

"Anyone care to comment?"

Sure.

"Ketones – contrary to popular belief and myth – are a much needed and essential healing energy source in our cells that comes from the normal metabolism of fat."

The rest goes on, as, like, "its normal, physiological" ...then, that's how everyone ought to live in "abundance" at all times forever and the more the better. More is better, if it's more of what I like; and gluttons line up. I have a glutton disposition myself. Why, honestly, I must address this for the benefit of my fellow gluttons.

Hopefully, someone will devise a way to get to 110% fat intake.

It's a physiological response, perfectly valid in context. Those who use it as a way to tout fat gluttony are, at this point, acting autistically. It's all the rage. Aspergers has jumped the shark and is boring.

The science is in. There's no basis for chronic ketosis, and I'm not wasting my time with those who haven't read the research, even when it was the rage in the Roaring 20s.

In a few years, they'll think they came up with the 100 year old idea.

Tim Steele said...

Just read Segura's "Ketogenic Diet Overview." Ugh.

First, her conclusion:

"Our healthy ancestors never had to deal with the levels of toxicity that we live nowadays and nevertheless, they ate optimally. Considering our current time and environment, the least we can do is eat optimally for our physiology.

The way to have healing ketone bodies circulating in our blood stream is to do a high fat, restricted carb and moderated protein diet. Coupled with intermittent fasting which will enhance the production of ketone bodies, and resistance training which will create mitochondria with healthier mtDNA, we can beat the odds against us.

What is considered nowadays a “normal diet” is actually an aberration based on the corruption of science which benefits Big Agra and Big Pharma. If we would go back in time to the days before the modern diet became normalized by corporative and agricultural interests, we will find that ketosis was the normal metabolic state. Today’s human metabolic state is aberrant. It is time to change that."

These statements can't be backed up! At least not using the Inuit...any others?

And I see Phinney and many others who also erroneously looked at the Inuit as their 'proof.'

And also, her section on how seafood changed human evolution was quite correct, but how she made the leap to continual ketosis is beyond me.

Ketosis is a natural, transient state, and should be kept that way.

Oliver Magoo said...

Jane, what do you think about my manganese? Once you subtract the fiber and resistant starch from the raw potato, net carbs end up at about 40 grams, which is ketogenic for me.

http://i.imgur.com/ZLPyQmW.png

Jane Karlsson said...

Hi Oliver
I'm sorry to say I don't know. I am among the people who don't have the faintest idea how much manganese we should have.

For one thing, manganese undergoes 'enterohepatic circulation', meaning it gets excreted in the bile whether we need it or not, and is (hopefully) reabsorbed further down the gut. It may be that gut bacteria help its reabsorption (they do help magnesium absorption), we just don't know.

BTW I couldn't access your link.

Oliver Magoo said...

Hello Jane,

The link is a Cronometer screenshot, which shows 15.5 mg of manganese or 673% of my requirements.

Jane Karlsson said...

Galina, I am delighted to see you are a reformed character. I do remember you accusing me of making up data to fit my theories.

And of having no common sense. It wasn't easy to work out what you meant, which was why we had to have that extremely long conversation. I now realise you thought I could not see the obvious, namely that ketogenic diets are normal and natural.

Have you changed your mind about this?

Jane Karlsson said...

Thanks Oliver. Could I ask you please, how do you know what your Mn requirements are? I am very interested in this question.

Galina L. said...

Jane, really, leave me alone. I wish you to enjoy communicating with other people on a web, and I happy to see that you probably have just found a new friend in Tim, but I have had enough of you. After having long conversations with you, I developed an opinion that you are quite incline to bent a data in a most convenient for you way. For example, I remember how you told me not to bring Steffanson as an example of a person eating only meat and being healthy because he drunk plenty of tea which contained Mn. So, guys, just drink your tea, especially when eating a white rice, Jane gave a green light on that.

I yet to read the link provided by Unknown, so I can't give my opinion to others. I think our practice to do diets is abnormal, way more abnormal than minimizing carbs, we should be naturally eating everything in sight. Cave people absolutely would.

Jane, I repeat it again, consider yourself banned from conversations with me. Practice using false dilemmas and bending data on somebody else.

Jane Karlsson said...

Galina, accusing a scientist of inventing or manipulating data is a very serious matter. If you do this you must be prepared to defend your position.

I see no defense. Case closed.

Galina L. said...

Thank you, Duck, I can sincerely return you the compliment - it was a pleasure to speak with you. It is just the fact of life that diet discussions are often taken by participants very seriously and people are got emotionally involved into diet strategies they follow.

About comparing notices, I just want to add that due to my experience with the management of migraines with LCarbing I assume ketosis could be more widely used than only for the children with an epilepsy. When EEG showed that during migraines I had an epilepsy-like electrical brain activity, my neurologist was not surprised. She told me it was the well-known connection. Migraines are way more common in a population than an epilepsy, and mood disorders are not a rarity at all. On the top of it, it is safe to add females with PMS and menopausal issues. Many migrainers receive a small dose of anty-seizure medications (with a long list of terrible side-effects) as a migraine-prevention remedy. Such drugs are also used for a BP disorder in a higher dose. As I and many noticed, after one year on a such drug the preventive effect wears off, and you start to feel like a zombie. Diet approach for mental health is preferable.

As a long-term reader of the Hyperlipid blog, I want to remind others that a deep ketosis all the time and practicing gluttony are not what is promoted here, but rather a limitation of carbohydrates and a more liberal consumption of fats. It may be worth the trouble for a visitor to check the old blog entries about Fiaf( Fasting induced adipose factor) and Fruits and vegetables posts in order to be familiar with Peter's reasoning on the subject.

Richard Nikoley said...

@Galina:

"It is just the fact of life that diet discussions are often taken by participants very seriously and people are got emotionally involved into diet strategies they follow."

then...

"I just want to add that due to my experience"

This entire thread exists because Duck and I were tired of not just "my experience," but "Inuit experience," that turned out to be a big stinking lie, and everybody now knows it.

What's disappointing but run of mill, is that nobody just comes clean.

It's easy, though.

http://freetheanimal.com/2014/12/better-honesty-history.html

See?

Oliver Magoo said...

Hi Jane,

According to Cronometer, which I believe uses RDI or RDA, I'm getting nearly seven times the manganese I need. According to you, I'm deficient since I'm low carb.

Am I getting too much or should I supplement?

Galina L. said...

@Richard,
People usually mention ketosis for epileptic children to be an undisputed but rare application, while forgetting it is addressing the root of more wide-spread conditions, so me writing about my personal experience was not exactly an anecdotal evidence.

I wouldn't characterize the Inuit thing to be "the big stinky lie", but rather one of many life ironies, like health and gurus dropping dead young, macrobiotic promoter and his wife passing away from a cancer. Inuits well fit into such pattern giving other nations the example of a healthy life without eating vegetables and fruits, while having troubles to enter the state of ketosis so praised by many LCarbers. Such history rather illustrates the complexity of a science of human physiology. It is as a lie as Gary Taubes telling in interviews, lectures and books about the role of a glycerol phosphate in the synthesis of an adipose tissue . Humans have a tendency to underappreciate the complexity of metabolism, and Gary missed that point while doing his research for the book, but hit many others.
I guess in order to give themselves a perspective on the complexity of a complex self-regulated system, people should more often observe meteorologists who regularly fail to give an accurate weather forecast for a longer period than two weeks. As a Florida resident, I can tell poor guys are totally unable to predict something accurate for next 6 months at the beginning of a hurricane season, and they have good education, advanced degrees , super-fast computers, state-of-the-art software and a huge amount of money. Compare all that with and your team reading around and even with the resources of the whole project the ‎Human Microbiome . I bet you missed a lot of details too, it is hard not to.

The history of using low-carbohydrate diets for improving health and loosing weight is long and very solid, regardless of Inuits being in ketosis or not, and it is not the matter of a personal opinion. Such history simply exists. You are trying to blow Inuit story out of proportion, like Carbsane endlessly used to blog about some glitches in GCBC and declaring the book had little value and bragging of destroying GT.

I have checked the link to your blog post you provided, it doesn't add anything to the discussion.

Jane Karlsson said...

@Oliver Magoo
I did not say 'low carb diets are deficient in Mn', I said low fibre diets are often low in Mn. Low carb diets do not need to be low in Mn, but if they are high in meat and fat they might be.

I also said this: according to the Linus Pauling Institute, the RDA/RDI for Mn is nothing more than the average intake. The experts think the average intake is enough. We have no way of knowing whether they are right, and the possibility exists that they are disastrously wrong.

Could you give me details of your diet please? Where does all that Mn come from?

Oliver Magoo said...

Hi Jane,

My diet is nut-based. I get most of my calories from nuts. Once or twice a week, I'll have some shellfish, liver, or sardines. I have a raw potato daily as well as greens.

The majority of my Mn comes from the nuts and then the greens.

My copper is quite high as well - especially when I eat oysters or liver.

By the way, I don't poop out undigested nut fragments any more. My gut buggers seem to do a good job of getting them fully digested.

Jane Karlsson said...

"Due to my experience with the management of migraines with LCarbing I assume ketosis could be more widely used than only for the children with an epilepsy."

This depends on how the ketogenic diet works. If it works by upregulating MnSOD, as the evidence suggests, eating a high Mn diet might have the same effect. In Anglo-Saxon England, epilepsy was treated with lupine, which is 'exceptionally high in manganese ... manganese depletion has been linked with recurring seizures in both clinical and experimental studies ...'
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11420453

"When EEG showed that during migraines I had an epilepsy-like electrical brain activity, my neurologist was not surprised. She told me it was the well-known connection. Migraines are way more common in a population than an epilepsy, and mood disorders are not a rarity at all."

So this is why you had to take an antiepileptic drug (I believe it was carbamazepine) when you ate some fruit. Your ketogenic diet could not cope.

"On the top of it, it is safe to add females with PMS and menopausal issues. Many migrainers receive a small dose of anty-seizure medications (with a long list of terrible side-effects) as a migraine-prevention remedy. Such drugs are also used for a BP disorder in a higher dose. As I and many noticed, after one year on a such drug the preventive effect wears off, and you start to feel like a zombie. Diet approach for mental health is preferable."

But you don't rely on diet. The drug was not diet, and nor is the magnesium you take.

I believe you suffer from asthma, or have done in the past. The micronutrient most deficient in the diet of asthmatics is ... manganese.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2111195/


Jane Karlsson said...

Thanks Oliver. Very interesting indeed.

Galina L. said...

Jane, are you an idiot? What in the "leave me alone" message beyond your understanding? Watching you behaving quite silly on-line left me in doubts about your ability to process any information properly. Really, it is easy to extrapolate your twisting the data about my health in order to fit your theory into you behaving in a fraudulent way assessing a scientific research and a data. May be eating wheat daily damaged your brain, and no amount of Mn could save you from a gluten-induced damage? Sure, you can always say that my imperfect mastering of the English language prevented you from thinking straight (again).

No, I don't take fruits with carbazamine (I took 100 mg of Finlepcine probably 3 - 5 days during last year, and ate fruits several days of a week), yes I relay on a diet for a migraines management.

Galina L. said...

The blog of a person who eats only meat http://www.empiri.ca/. I got my attention recently, mostly because one of LC blogers experimented recently with the all-meat diet, even though it is not a fresh news.
I don't plan to experiment with it, at least not in a nearest future, but I decided to share. May be she is a high mucus producer, but my question is why? Is it the genetic mutation to be adapted to the low fiber environment, or low-mucus producers are thous who have the special mutation in order not to spent much of body resources on an unnecessary activity? Regardless of how we speculate about it, the whole idea that we all have the same requirement for a fiber as high as 40 grams a day seems simplified.

Galina L. said...

Just another good and a complitely fresh example of Jane using KNOWINGLY and DELIBERATELY a fraudulent tactics in order to make a convenient point in a conversation to try to prove what she wanted to proove at a convenient moment.

She have said in the comments on that particular blog post that Wooo doesn't use a ketosis+supplements like SJW for its benefits for improving her mental health (what Wooo is doing for last 10 years) , but uses for such purpose just a particular supplement Wooo discovered and blogged about since the middle of the year.
Observing how Jane treats and twists the information I can easily judge (like facts from Wooo's blog and what I was telling about my health in different comments), I don't see how she can be trusted in something way more complicated such as a human physiology or even some drozopfila theories. May be her ethic is high when she functions as a scientist, and she gives it a rest while chatting on blogs...

Richard Nikoley said...

"The blog of a person who eats only meat http://www.empiri.ca/. I "

She looks 20-somthing. When I was 20-something, I could exist on beer and chips, and had a flat stomach and felt great.

Seriously, Galina. Russians are NEVER wrong about anything. At least, I've never known one to be wrong about anything.

Richard Nikoley said...

...Moreover, Galina.

What in the holy fuck value is there in an N=1 for a diet NOBODY in the history of mankind ever wished for?

How about shoot us some links to anorexic girls who deal with it and think it's great.

It is the very same mental situation. Broken people, touted as pictures of health, from an always-right Russian.

Richard Nikoley said...

"Just another good and a complitely fresh example of Jane using KNOWINGLY and DELIBERATELY a fraudulent tactics in order to make a convenient point in a conversation to try to prove what she wanted to proove at a convenient moment."

From where I sit, Jane is engaging with other people asking her about Manganese, and you're yelling at her to stop talking to you.

I've never known Russians to knowingly use deliberate tactics to always appear right, however. It's cultural that they never do that.

Are you having another migraine?

Galina L. said...

@Richard, I didn't interfere at all with Jane talking with others about Mn, I have asked her politely couple times already to stop talking with me about anything after long conversations where she used questionable debating tools. Unfortunately, she is like a burr. I hoped a yelling would be more helpful in dropping her as a conversation partner. I hope she does have enough of self-respect for it. Thank you, am not having a migraine, or I would be most likely unable to write and read.
Unfortunately, I can't informed you about aspects of how Russians behave in an always right fashion or not. I believe it mostly depends on an individual, and more noticeable for an outsider than for a person. From my outside perspective you sound like a person who is very sure about having the exactly right point of view.

Richard Nikoley said...

I must have missed it, Galina. I saw her talking with others; you, telling her to stop talking to you.

Henry M. said...

@Richard Nikoley

She looks 20-somthing. When I was 20-something, I could exist on beer and chips, and had a flat stomach and felt great.

She's actually 41 as per this comment. LC since 1997 and carnivorous since 2009.

Jane Karlsson said...

Galina, here is the problem.

"She have said in the comments on that particular blog post that Wooo doesn't use a ketosis+supplements like SJW for its benefits for improving her mental health (what Wooo is doing for last 10 years) , but uses for such purpose just a particular supplement Wooo discovered and blogged about since the middle of the year."

What does this mean? How is it an example of 'Jane using KNOWINGLY and DELIBERATELY a fraudulent tactic'?

"I have asked her politely couple times already to stop talking with me about anything after long conversations where she used questionable debating tools."

My 'debating tools' consist quite simply of my often unsuccessful attempts to find out what you are talking about.

Unknown said...

Uh, oh..!!

High Dose RAW Starch Appears to Suppress Christensenella, Akkermansia, and B longum That Make Us LEAN:

http://drbganimalpharm.blogspot.com/2014/12/paleo-mag-hot-tony-federico-has.html

This is exactly what I was talking about as to not knowing exactly what we're doing and dealing with by feeding our microbiome potato starch, and even perhaps, other fibers. The nature and diversity of our microbiomes is just too complicated and too much is unknown at this time to come up with a diet regimen that will ensure good health.

George Henderson said...

Hepatic ketogenesis is activated when fatty acids are plentiful, carbohydrates are in short supply, and/or circulating insulin concentrations are low (17–21). This spillover pathway converts β-oxidation–derived acetyl-CoA, produced in excess of the hepatocyte’s own energy needs, into ketone body intermediates, thus diverting carbon away from the hepatic TCA cycle and providing extrahepatic tissues with a readily oxidized fuel source. This paradigm forms an “altruistic” model of ketone body metabolism, in which the hepatocyte shares “precatabolized” energy obtained from fatty acids with other organs that may require it, particularly in states of diminished carbohydrate availability. However, this model neither accounts for the hepatocyte’s need to support ketogenesis for its own metabolic homeostasis, nor considers the importance of basal hepatic ketogenesis in physiological states that are not considered “ketogenic” (i.e., carbohydrate restricted). Ours are the first studies to our knowledge to demonstrate a critical role for hepatic ketogenesis in the normal absorptive state and in prevention of metabolic decompensation in the setting of overnutrition. We found that when ketogenic capacity is markedly impaired, an HFD triggers a cascade of events that culminates in hepatic injury and inflammation. These observations are underscored by our recent studies of germline SCOT-KO mice, which cannot terminally oxidize ketone bodies in any tissue. These mice exhibit hyperketonemic hypoglycemia and die within 48 hours of birth in a manner that phenocopies human sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) (32). Despite the fact that SCOT is normally excluded from hepatocytes, livers of SCOT-KO mice develop abnormalities of hepatic fatty acid oxidation, pyruvate metabolism, redox potential, and even ketogenesis (22, 33). In stark contrast to the severe metabolic derangements and SIDS-like phenotype observed in neonatal SCOT-KO mice, mice that cannot oxidize ketone bodies selectively within neurons, cardiomyocytes, or skeletal myocytes, which comprise the 3 greatest consumers of ketone bodies, survive the neonatal period and starvation in adulthood (34). Together, these results indicate that coordination of ketogenesis and ketone body oxidation may be of greater importance to preserve the dynamic intermediary metabolic network in the liver than it is to provide energy to extrahepatic tissues.

http://www.jci.org/articles/view/76388

L. Amber Wilcox-O'Hearn said...

Richard Nikoley: ""The blog of a person who eats only meat http://www.empiri.ca/."

She looks 20-somthing. When I was 20-something, I could exist on beer and chips, and had a flat stomach and felt great."

Thank you, Richard! Just for the record, I'm nearly 42, and before I started eating only meat, I was fat and looked my age.

Ash Simmonds said...

Over 300 studies on this stuff right here:

--> 350 pages of LC-keto research abstracts

I wouldn't bother replying antagonistically against LC/keto until you've read them all. If you do, it's pretty clear your comprehension skills are lacking somewhat.

Richard Nikoley said...

"Uh, oh..!!"

Indeed. But here's a family of 4 with a different story.

http://freetheanimal.com/2014/12/ingestion-probably-irrational.html

bill said...

Ash: If you're the author of Principia Ketogenica, thanks! I have it and it's a wealth of information. Really, thanks.

Anonymous said...

"Over 300 studies on this stuff right here"

Cool. Make sure you add the one about the ketogenic diet's Tylenol effect on liver glutathione.

"The bulk of Ketogenic Diet (KD) research has focused on the brain, as the diet's clinical application is primarily for the control of intractable epilepsies. This has left a void in the literature on the systemic effects of such a diet. One of the primary sources of brain glutathione (GSH) is export from the liver, which is consistent with our observation of depletion of liver GSH levels. This suggests that the liver may be exporting GSH to sustain GSH levels for other organs such as the brain. Even more striking was the finding that CoASH, a reduced mitochondrial thiol, was significantly increased in liver of KD-fed rats, suggesting a highly compartment-specific effect of the KD. These data suggest that mitochondria are specifically increasing their thiol pools and thereby maintaining a reduced state, despite ongoing GSH depletion in nonmitochondrial compartments, such as the cytosol. To our knowledge, the only other instance in which this has been reported is during fasting. It was found that during a 48-hour fast, hepatic GSH concentrations were depleted, while CoASH concentrations were increased (Jenniskens et al., 2002). This is particularly interesting given that the KD was initially designed to metabolically mimic the fasted state. With respect to Nrf2 activation in the liver, our results strikingly parallel those of acetaminophen toxicity studies in which liver GSH is depleted, concomitant with nuclear translocation of Nrf2 and increased transcription of Gclc and HO-1 (Goldring et al., 2004). Thus, the health effects of chronically depleting liver GSH need to be addressed in future studies of the KD... The novel data that chronic consumption of a KD depletes liver GSH make it essential for the medical community to recognize the importance of systemic and brain GSH and how they are affected by the KD."

Anonymous said...

"Over 300 studies on this stuff right here"

Cool. Make sure you add the one about the ketogenic diet's Tylenol effect on liver glutathione.

"The bulk of Ketogenic Diet (KD) research has focused on the brain, as the diet's clinical application is primarily for the control of intractable epilepsies. This has left a void in the literature on the systemic effects of such a diet. One of the primary sources of brain glutathione (GSH) is export from the liver, which is consistent with our observation of depletion of liver GSH levels. This suggests that the liver may be exporting GSH to sustain GSH levels for other organs such as the brain. Even more striking was the finding that CoASH, a reduced mitochondrial thiol, was significantly increased in liver of KD-fed rats, suggesting a highly compartment-specific effect of the KD. These data suggest that mitochondria are specifically increasing their thiol pools and thereby maintaining a reduced state, despite ongoing GSH depletion in nonmitochondrial compartments, such as the cytosol. To our knowledge, the only other instance in which this has been reported is during fasting. It was found that during a 48-hour fast, hepatic GSH concentrations were depleted, while CoASH concentrations were increased (Jenniskens et al., 2002). This is particularly interesting given that the KD was initially designed to metabolically mimic the fasted state. With respect to Nrf2 activation in the liver, our results strikingly parallel those of acetaminophen toxicity studies in which liver GSH is depleted, concomitant with nuclear translocation of Nrf2 and increased transcription of Gclc and HO-1 (Goldring et al., 2004). Thus, the health effects of chronically depleting liver GSH need to be addressed in future studies of the KD... The novel data that chronic consumption of a KD depletes liver GSH make it essential for the medical community to recognize the importance of systemic and brain GSH and how they are affected by the KD."

Anonymous said...

"Over 300 studies on this stuff right here"

Cool. Make sure you add the one about the ketogenic diet's Tylenol effect on liver glutathione.

"The bulk of Ketogenic Diet (KD) research has focused on the brain, as the diet's clinical application is primarily for the control of intractable epilepsies. This has left a void in the literature on the systemic effects of such a diet. One of the primary sources of brain glutathione (GSH) is export from the liver, which is consistent with our observation of depletion of liver GSH levels. This suggests that the liver may be exporting GSH to sustain GSH levels for other organs such as the brain. Even more striking was the finding that CoASH, a reduced mitochondrial thiol, was significantly increased in liver of KD-fed rats, suggesting a highly compartment-specific effect of the KD. These data suggest that mitochondria are specifically increasing their thiol pools and thereby maintaining a reduced state, despite ongoing GSH depletion in nonmitochondrial compartments, such as the cytosol. To our knowledge, the only other instance in which this has been reported is during fasting. It was found that during a 48-hour fast, hepatic GSH concentrations were depleted, while CoASH concentrations were increased (Jenniskens et al., 2002). This is particularly interesting given that the KD was initially designed to metabolically mimic the fasted state. With respect to Nrf2 activation in the liver, our results strikingly parallel those of acetaminophen toxicity studies in which liver GSH is depleted, concomitant with nuclear translocation of Nrf2 and increased transcription of Gclc and HO-1 (Goldring et al., 2004). Thus, the health effects of chronically depleting liver GSH need to be addressed in future studies of the KD... The novel data that chronic consumption of a KD depletes liver GSH make it essential for the medical community to recognize the importance of systemic and brain GSH and how they are affected by the KD."

Galina L. said...

Jane, thank you for admitting using questionable debating tools in conversations with me. In order to spare yourself from troubles in attempts to understand me, avoid in a future all communications with me. I warn you - the only answer your are going to get on all your questions - "Jane, you are a fraud, I don't talk with you any longer about anything."

Minestrone Soup said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Minestrone Soup said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Oliver Magoo said...

Acute is the key word. Wait three weeks and see what happens.

"The mechanisms underlying the efficacy of the ketogenic diet (KD) remain unknown. Recently, we showed that the KD increased glutathione (GSH) biosynthesis. Since the NF E2-related factor 2 (Nrf2) transcription factor is a primary responder to cellular stress and can upregulate GSH biosynthesis, we asked whether the KD activates the Nrf2 pathway. Here we report that rats consuming a KD show acute production of H2O2 from hippocampal mitochondria, which decreases below control levels by 3 weeks, suggestive of an adaptive response. 4-hydroxy-2-nonenal (4-HNE), an electrophilic lipid peroxidation end product known to activate the Nrf2 detoxification pathway was also acutely increased by the KD. Nrf2 nuclear accumulation was evident in both the hippocampus and liver, and the Nrf2 target, NAD(P)H:quinone oxidoreductase (NQO1), exhibited increased activity in both the hippocampus and liver after 3 weeks. We also found chronic depletion of liver tissue GSH, while liver mitochondrial antioxidant capacity was preserved. These data suggest that the KD initially produces mild oxidative and electrophilic stress which may systemically activate the Nrf2 pathway via redox signaling leading to chronic cellular adaptation, induction of protective proteins, and improvement of the mitochondrial redox state."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3102314/

Jane Karlsson said...

Galina, we had a debate, and I questioned you. The correct English here is 'questioning' not 'questionable' debating tools.

Galina L. said...

The English definition of "questionable"- something of doubtful propriety, honesty, morality, respectability, etc.:
When people have a discussion and one of opponents uses changing topics of conversations and false dilemmas,it is not a "questioning" per se.

Jane Karlsson said...

So the problem is that I change the subject and use false dilemmas. You must have questions you want me to answer which I have evaded in the past. I will be very pleased to answer them now.

Tim Steele said...

Merry Christmas from the land of Santa Claus!

Just wanted to post these two recent news articles from my part of the world to show you what Eskimos must endure. These are two stories of Eskimos who fell through the ice and survived for days cold and hungry. Did the CPT1A mutation save them? How many times has this played out over the centuries?

Snowmachiner gets home for Christmas after plunging into frigid Norton Sound

Man survives fall through ice, three days outside near Barrow

Serova said...

Richard Nicoley looks fat and unhealthy http://a.disquscdn.com/uploads/mediaembed/images/1548/1212/original.jpg while claiming eating more starches is good for him.

Robert Andrew Brown said...

GalinaL

Re Roseacea

This may be of interest viz Demodex mites as a possible causative agent ?

http://www.rosacea.org/tags/demodex-mites

Galina L. said...

Thank you, Robert, you provided me with an interesting reading. It is a chicken/egg situation in an already complex issue. Everybody has a demodex, but some people have a problem, also, sun and different allergens(like pollen, dust, particular foods) make Rosacea worse, as well as irritants like chlorinated water in swimming pools and some skin products.

Robert Andrew Brown said...

Hi Galina

Causative bad word contributory probably more accurate. If these parasites like compromised skin tissues / compromised immune system / scar tissue(could dental issues be a factor as well), why would they not colonise given the opportunity after all that is their raison d'etre?

Maybe Peter as a vet has a few thoughts, give the canine version is the cause of mange and vets seem well acquainted with demodex, whereas on a very limited limited sample doctors and pharmacists appear generally unaware of them as an issue in humans. As a result treatments for demodex in humans are not common place.

It seems that sulfur zinc and some plant extracts such as tea tree may have relevance.

If indeed our ancestry was shoreline did regular access to contact and immersion in the sea help keep us free of parasites?

Galina L. said...

@Robert Andrew Brown,
I am in my 50-s now. When I was in early 20-s, I had a serious pimples outbreak and was sent to be tested for a demodex , which was a routine test (I lived in Moscow, Russia back then). The test was positive. I believe the people with an ocular Rosacea get tested for the demodex as well, BTW, no one gave me the diagnosis of a Rosacea back then. I received the standard treatment - made in a pharmacy liquid for wiping face which contained sulfur and a salicylic acid and a cryotherapy. It sort-of worked.
I have observed that demodex is problematic mostly for the people with oily skins. It could be the important contributing factor. May be the abandon natural skin oils provide a better feeding ground for the mites, which lives naturally on everyone's skin, and only the over-population could be a problem. My skin is shinier than overage, it is especially easy to notice on photographs. I use now the prescription cream for the Rosacia and cover my face from sun to avoid excessive redness, as my dermatologist told me to do. On another hand, my thick pinkish skin is resistant to the wrinkles formation , which I appreciate now.

mem said...

Old friends from the Barrow and surrounding villages sending me this today. Slowly, slowly many are dumping the crap out of their diets and returning to a much higher percentage of traditional food (which they never stopped eating, just combined it with SAD super high sugar junk for the worst diet disaster possible!) and totally dumping sugar. The soda intake for many years has been beyond imagining.Alaska Airlines didn't need passengers. The $ it made off of shipping soda (and at some points overwhelming amounts of booze) from Anchorage or Fairbanks to Barrow was where the big $$$$$ was.

http://www.adn.com/article/20150119/researchers-identify-inuit-gene-responsible-sugar-intolerance

Peter said...

$2000 per month for the enzyme and you can drink soda despite carrying the gene! The queue is over there... ROLF!

Peter

Richard Nikoley said...

But Peter.

Really, the post is about a weird mutation, and here we have another one.

Aside from the profit opportunist hilarity, is it not time to kinda dismiss Inuit and other latitudinally extreme populations as simply too far, too long outside the homogenous human gene pool?

...I should send you vid of my 2 ratties fighting. It always puts me I to a nice perspective. They never take it seriously

SM said...

"But what I think the main goal needs to be, is eating foods that have a known fermentation path into butyrate, predominately."

Well, scarfing a lot of fiber is definitely one way to get butyrate, but maybe not the best or easiest. You can also just eat butter, one of the best food sources of butyrate. It's possible that people get unhealthy butyrate-starved colons when they were scared off butter for the last 40 years rather than because of eating less fiber.

My personal program is that I want a LOWER population of bacteria in my colon overall. It's just personal based on my own research, so no p___ing contest on it, please! That way, if anything is amiss like endotoxins escaping through compromised tight junctions (the more important part of that problem), at least it will be smaller in magnitude.

They live primarily off ingested fiber and the small percentage of digestible things that fail to get digested (someone quoted 10% on the latter, I've always read 3% - if that goes up, there is a problem with digestion in general). Some of it also feeds on leftover bile and other such things your body produced to aid with digestion. If I'm getting all the nutrients I need from my OWN digestion (in the small intestine), I have yet to discover any real need for the SCFAs and butyrate given off by a large bacteria colony in the colon. I try to keep fiber to a minimum (and yes, that would include "resistant starch", too) so a to reduce the population.

Another concern is H.Pylori. It is present in something like 80% of humans worldwide. One of very few (if not the only) organisms that can survive in the highly acidic environment of the stomach. It does this by burrowing into the stomach lining and setting up a "fire tent" if you will to protect it from the acid. Most of the time just a few of them survive and they don't cause any harm. Sometimes, they flourish into colonies and that becomes a peptic ulcer. They depend on hydrogen to survive and thrive. The only source of hydrogen in the body is that it is one of the by-products of bacterial fermentation in the colon. Just another reason I want to do LESS of it and not more.

I also find it very interesting that franken-mice which have been bred, modified or whatever to ALWAYS become obese and diabetic never do so if there colons are sterilized of all bacteria. They thrive just fine with normal body weight and normal glucose metabolism!

Galina L. said...

@SM,
I personally keep wondering, why there are so many descendants of an Eastern European population comment on LC blogs. My guess is - their ancestors came predominantly from herding tribes which lived on steppes of Eurasia.Such people may be better adopted to live on milk products and meat than on fermented fiber and grains.

«Oldest ‹Older   201 – 338 of 338   Newer› Newest»