I’ll try to stay focused today. I need to write some serious fiction tonight.
Background:
I
– am a type 1 diabetic in my 37th year of battle.
– am 51 years old.
– ‘ve worn an insulin pump since 2006
– have battled diabetic proliferative retinopathy since 1994
– have received 4,000 plus lasers that kill the peripheral regions of my eyes
– experienced major bleeds in 2006 resulting in blindness and surgery (vitrectomy)
– suffered subsequent bleeds for two years
– decided I needed to risk a major change, so I tried a high fat low carb style of eating in 2008
– have been 911’d nine times while sleeping
– have experienced over 100 major hypoglycemic events [I’m thick headed]
– I’ve fought HBP at 145/80
Current Status:
I’m still at it and doing very well. I now run an A1C hovering 6%, my optho hasn’t seen any signs of damage since I started this way of eating, I’m down 20 pounds, I have much more energy, and I feel great, my BP is normal now with no meds.
I now have hope I’ll live until my senior years and actually be able to enjoy some of them.
Cholesterol:
But this post isn’t about all of these changes. This diet I follow centers around animals as food, and not just the red, stringy muscle but the fat too. In fact, the more fat the better. My breakfast is usually a cup of two of coffee with coconut oil (a saturated fat) and heavy whipping cream, no sugah. My dinner tonight was a package of bologna, some cheddar cheese, and some raw pineapple. My lunch was a bag of garden kale.
I eat the diet everybody says is supposed to kill me. Well, that’s what they say. The curious part, though, is when you ask them to explain it, they backtrack a bit:
“We know that cholesterol causes heart disease, and your diet raises cholesterol.”
“But have you studied whether this diet really results in heart disease? I mean, that’s one big assumption you’re making here.”
Silence.
The standard response to this question is silence. Everybody believes so much in it that they feel there’s no need to support it to us radicals. The world is simply better off if we continued our suicidal paths — an estimated 10 million people worldwide have bought in to this plan.
The truth seems to be there’s no scientific evidence to support this belief that consuming fat and cholesterol kill. I could throw study after study after study at you, but honestly, I can’t even find a hint of science that supports it. Well, there is some. I’ve pretty much convinced myself after my own reviews of the evidence, and I do ask supporters of the lipid hypothesis for their evidence, that this hypothesis actually has no sound basis. So far, nothing.
I’ll throw one little meta analysis at you. Dr. Ronald Krause has shown that there is in fact no association between saturated fat intake and heart disease. These are the studies this lipid hypothesis is based on, and they don’t even link to heart disease.
So back to cholesterol. Do I really care if fat makes my cholesterol rise if it doesn’t cause heart disease? Does fat even raise choelsterol? Studies used to arrive at this conclusion have also been debated, but I won’t get into those. Let’s assume studies show it’s true. I’m more curious about what it does to me. My records below go back four years, and when I started keeping track, I was taking a statin. This magic pill was supposed to produce magical cholesterol values, numbers I’d be able to write mom about if she were still alive. Numbers my endocrinologist was very happy with. Note that yellows are not on target — their targets. My ratios have all been optimal: they couldn’t get any better, yet he wanted me back on a statin because my LDL was not where a diabetic’s should be, never mind lowering it risks many things such as mental degradation and muscle [including the heart] damage.
Summary of targets: HDL should be high, LDL should be low, and Triglycerides (TG) should be below 150.
Debate: The low carb community wants TGs below 0.8 which indicates LDL particle size is large and fluffy and benign, the only measurement that really matters. I tend to agree. Low TGs will naturally increase LDL because of size increase: The Friedwald is a volume measurement, and particle size increases volume. As a test, throw ten grains of sand in a full glass of water. Then set ten larger pebbles or stones in it. That’s basically how the Friedwald test works to measure cholesterol.
So please, explain how my lipid profile has evolved into something that looks like I made it up it looks so good? I found a comment that said the highest HDL value ever seen was 117, and mine’s 112. Explain how this diet that is supposed to kill me does that? And now my LDL is lower than when I was on a statin. I’ll repeat that. My LDL, the value my doctor gets all worked up about, is as low as it was while I took his statin. Am I a freak of nature? Hopefully at a future appointment I’ll ask for my pre-2008 values. I’d really like to see what my numbers were before all this hoopla.
The bottom line: saturated fat is supposed to be deadly because it messes up cholesterol numbers. Right. You run with that people.
Chol History
Cardiovascular Risk:
John is a type 1 so falls into the high risk category. His LDL-C should be below 70 and his Non-HDL-C should be below 100.
http://www.mayomedicallaboratories.com/articles/communique/2011/11.html
|
Goal (mg/dL)
|
||
| Risk category |
LDL-C
|
Non-HDL-C
|
| Very high riska | <100 (optional <70) | <130 (optional <100) |
| High risk: CHDb or CHD risk equivalentc | <100 | <300 |
| Moderately high risk: ≥2 risk factorsd (10-y risk, 10% to 20%) | <130 (optional <100) | 160 (optional <130) |
| Moderate risk: ≥2 risk factorsd (10-y risk <10%) | 130 | 160 |
| Lower risk | 160 | 190 |
Café Moi 
I am intrigued by your post. I don’t have the medical history that you do; but do have high cholesterol and am resistant to taking statins as my doctor encourages. I have found a diet that also breaks all the rules and has drastically lowered my LDL levels as well as triglycerides. It is called Paleo. It offers a lot of food options and yes, it could be considered high fat as things like coconut oil, olive oil, avocado and such are encouraged daily. So glad you have found something that gives you hope that you will live to a ripe old age! You Matter! Smiles, Nancy
I follow Paleo advice, to a point. As an overweight type 1 diabetic, I have metabolic challenges. I really can’t tolerate any carbohydrates; though I have not yet been able to totally avoid them. I do not eat any wheat products and virtually no processed foods. All of my meat is locally pastured.
Good for you. I gave up all dairy and grain of any kind including rice. I eat no starchy veggies but lots of others. Avoid processed foods too. Haven’t reached the point of locally pastured meats and chicken, mainly because of the cost. Hope to get there soon. How long did it take to bring your numbers down/up? particularly LDL and HDL? I’ve been doing the Paleo for two months now and my LDL actually went up.
Click my spreadsheet image. Four years.
Many years from now scientists will discover we were way too worried about our diets. Stay active, don’t eat like a pig, and things will take care of themselves.
There are some indisputable problems: the western civilizations are suffering from nutrition deficiencies. We have an epidemic of obesity, diabetes, cancers, nervous disorders, and hosts of problems like athsma and autism never seen before and not seen in societies living on more natural diets. Is it the food, the toxins, or the lifestyle? I have to bet on food and lifestyle; because that is what I can control.
Many argue your comments do make sense but only when living under a natural diet.
Interesting post. While I agree that not many studies ( if any) have shown that high cholesterol itself is a direct cause for heart disease, there are many many others that show that consuming foods that contain it do indeed raise your risk. It’s the whole package that counts. Animal foods raise inflammation which is a marker for many chronic diseases including heart disease, diabetes and autoimmune diseases. Also, latest research shows that meat contains bacterial endotoxins that cannot be eliminated by high temperature cooking. These endotoxins enter our bodies through our intestines aided by the fat found in meat. Inflammation ensues. While cholesterol may not be as important on its own, it’s an indicator of higher consumption of foods that are detrimental to one’s health. As for diabetes, it’s a reversible disease and many have been cured by a whole foods plant based diet. It’s a sad fact that many suffer needlessly while the cure is in our food.
I will present a couple of questions:
What do these animal inflamation studies really say? Are they good science? Are you and I qualified to assess that? I see arguably 100% success with my approach which is basically Paleo/Primal but leaning more towards Dr. Bernstein since I’m very carb-challenged as they say.
I encourage you to keep searching and questioning with an open mind.
Thank you for your reply. Here is a reference
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22210577
I am a physician by trade and I study nutrition extensively. The problem with animal foods is the whole package. You get few nutrients but many toxic substances along with it. We cannot single one element like cholesterol and blame it for the ills of humanity. Nature works as an interrelated web and food is no different. The paleo diet can be helpful to someone eating the standard American diet due to the elimination of processed foods which is helpful no doubt. You can lose weight even and possibly reverse diabetes. It’s benefits do not however go beyond benefits of weight loss. It’s a cancer protective diet and it I’m hard pressed to see a study that it reverses heart disease. Furthermore, our true paleo ancestors were mostly gatherers rather than hunters because meat was unpredictable and had to be eaten immediately before it rotts. So the paleo diet is not paleo at all. Here is an excerpt from dr. Mcdougall ( a pioneer in plant based nutrition with an outstanding record of healing thousands with diet
“When asked about the commonly held idea that ancient people were primarily meat-eaters, the highly respected anthropologist, Nathanial Dominy, PhD, from Dartmouth College responded, “That’s a myth. Hunter-gathers, the majority of their calories come from plant foods…meat is just too unpredictable.” After studying the bones, teeth, and genetics of primates for his entire career as a biological anthropologist, Dr. Dominy, states, “Humans might be more appropriately described as ‘starchivores.’”
Carbs as found in nature are our cleanest fuel. Do not be afraid of them. It’s the overload of protein that harms, causing acidotic load neutralized by leaching calcium from the bone, kidney damage and inflammation. Even diabetics do better on high carb diets as dr. Mcdougall has shown over and over in his case studies.
Does meat taste good? Yes, but so do donuts and cheese doodles.
Eat more plants and excercise a bit. You’ll do just fine.
I’ve seen that study before, and it does have problems. Read what my fellow laymen have to say about it.
http://www.diabetesforums.com/forum/scientific-studies/65100-high-fat-meals-increase.html
Great blog!
Gathering green stuff is only useful in a warm climate, not in Europe for example. Europeans from at least 50,000 BP lived on meat and milk. First reindeer and then forest species. In Scotland the people had a totally animal diet with venison, milk, eggs and some fish (but they didn’t like it or need it). Very little gathered vegetable stuff since there isn’t any.
Willie
Type 1 diabetes is not considered reversable. It is a disorder of the Pancreatic system. Adult onset, on the otherhand is considered reversable. What is interesting is that most docs just want to throw meds at a diabetic situation instead of really working with the patient to help them reverse the situation. I had such an experience with my doc several years ago.
I’ve been on high fat/low carb/high protein diet my whole life. Last time I got sick was a couple of years ago. I’m a slim 39 year old man and I feel like I’m 20 still. My vision is perfect, as are motor function, hearing and olfactory senses. I am intelligent and have a large family of friends I adore, and who adore me back. Most of them are falling apart at the seams but strangely do yoga, pilates, weights, jogging. Everything. The only friends I have that don’t have constant medical problems are those few radical “hippies” who have switched to the same diet I’ve always been on. I also don’t take sugar. I do eat plenty of vegies though. Go me! And go you!
We’re only one-ofs. We’re anacdotal anomalies to the health industries. We need to rethink our science, re-test some of these apparently false assumptions we’ve made. And we are.
Intriguing post. I believe in eating things as close to their natural state, as possible, although I don’t bite living animals like the Masai tribe! And all things in moderation.
“All things in moderation” is a sentiment I hear a lot, but it rings false. It basically says if you eat less, you won’t get fat and you’ll be healthy. While it’s an obvious solution, it has never worked very well, if at all. People are now trying to rethink the whole obisity epidemic — which is clearly tied to all western diseases. Many are now claiming the science is clear, but we’ve interpreted it wrong or worse, completely ignored it. I have listened to these people, and they made sense to me. As a type 1 diabetic, I am basically a lab rat anyway, so I tried out their ideas, and it worked. It really has worked, to an extent. My weight loss is still stuck, but there are explanations for that too.
Have you read or listened to any Gary Taubes? Try to watch this with an open mind. It’s the kind of talk that makes me think.
okay – will watch, thanks 🙂
I was very intrigued by his hypothesis, and it makes sense, but it doesn’t translate well in real life though. Where are the studies showing people being healed? Dr. Dean Ornish showed amazing success with heart disease with his plant based program and published trials. Eating Taubes way is environmentally unsustainable anyway and even if it were true, we’d need 7 more earths to feed us his way. And I doubt Nature was a fool when we evolved.
Bravo! Thank you for posting this information. I am a medical technologist of nearly twenty years and I know all about blood testing for diabetes and monitoring HgA1c (hemoglobin A1c), cholesterol levels and lipo-proteins. All I can say is that “statin drugs” do more harm than good and that a natural diet that includes animals fats is by far, better for you than what the mainstream media wants you to believe.
The REAL KILLER in our eating habits is PROCESSED SUGARS AND FATS. Great post and congratulations!!!!
Thank you. “Sugah Kills” is my mantra.
Read read read Gary Taubes’ books…… if nothing else, “How we get fat”
Many here are painfully showing they are newbies ,perhaps some hoping to sell their business something or other other by getting in some comment,any comment.
The sugar burners can certainly be cute,naive; perhaps well intentioned,as are the just- found -religion -Paleo followers.Hey that’s great for them. an improvement over the SAD.
…… Try to refrain from giving ‘advice ‘ to diabetics or over weight people battling for their lives and/ or an obesity problem, especially advice from the 20 something’s……this is hardly gonna resonate with you so maybe you will enjoy more the other blogs to get and give advice that may be more palatable …such as the “all things in moderation” type, or the move more eat less or the CICO groups..
This is a whole new ball game requiring guerilla warfare nutrition tactics.And the MD’s hoping to be helpful and to correct our wayward fat -burning ways may not be able to stomach this radical stuff either….
I believe that medical science claims to know much more than they actually do about most issues. Unfortunately for us, they tout their educated guesses as fact, and gamble our health in the process. Cudos to you for finding your own way to stay healthy without prescription drugs!
I have to follow my own assertions here: if we can’t prove cholesterol causes heart disease, then I can’t say these levels prove I’m healthy either. Just sayin’ 😉
Absolutely correct. 🙂 Fair is fair, LOL!
Nice work. All this cholesterol and calorie talk does my head in. One thing though which I have had to ask many a time. If fat isn’t so bad, chips become a healthy food. Discuss
Here’s how I treat them.
Chips come in American and non-American flavo[u]rs. Potato chips are potatoes and french fries [chips] are potatoes. Potatoes are carbohydrates. The LCHF Taubsian theory says the fat will store in fat cells while the insulin response to the carbs will keep it there. The excess carbs, and it really doesn’t take much to be excess, get processed by the liver into VLDL packaged triglycerides — a saturated fat. Studies actually show systemic SF higher under carb loads than fat loads. But all the fat on a chip is polyunsaturated (PUFA). PUFAs are highly oxidizable, and I stay away from them, at least the processed versions. You can’t avoid PUFAs completely.
It is quite a conundrum we’ve gotten ourselves, as a population, into.
I have come to believe that one size does not fit all in area of nutritional fashion.
Like you, I have hyperlipidemia, or did. My cholesterol levels were brought to a “normal” level after years of playing with diet/exercise and 10 years of statins. I agree with you that statins can and probably will do more harm than good. So, now that the cholesterol levels are at a healthy level I decided to challenge the medical community and switch to a low fat plant based nutrition model. It has allowed me to be more diverse in what I eat, and I think therefore, to eat healthier.
I agree with the statements that the majority of our health problems have come from a diet full of processed foods.
I say follow your intuition. I think there is room for plant based and more carniverous humans on the planet. Just hunt them yourself.
One last thing: there is an interesting study on fat consumption and endothelium relaxation/nitric oxide effects. Research Brachial Artery Tourniquet Study or Caldwell Esselstyn, Jr. M.D.
I don’t agree with plant based only eating — can you show me a plant only civilization anywhere anytime? But I won’t try and stray people away. I do encourage consumption of more fats, though. I recommend EVOO and Sunflower Oil.
I’ve tried replying from my blog, it seems to have failed.
So, a plant only (vegan) civilization? No. A “plant based” civilization, most certainly.
Many if not all of the third world countries eat a plant based diet out of necessity. Those countries also have little if any cardiovascular disease, cancer, diabetes (health concerns that the “Westernized” populations have). BUT, what is the average life expectancy? Is it more or less than the average of the planet? Is their quality of life markedly better/worse/same as those of us in the more civilized areas?
I also think that everyone truly is an individual and therefore you can’t have every human eating exactly the same way. Personally, I’ve found that my body throws a rebellion when I intake beans, peas and legumes. Kind of shoots a hole in the “plant based protein” theory for me. I’ve been trying it for almost 6 weeks. I think that’s a fair amount of time.
I think if you have found something that is keeping you healthy, keeping you out of the medical community, by all means follow it!I truly hope for all of the diabetics that you have come across something that may lead to a better way of life for all of you.
I’m still searching, perhaps one day I will be as “luckie” as you and find my solution.
Stay healthy, stay happy!
Let me clarify. I think animal foods are necessary, but I am not saying we don’t need plants. I grow a garden and I’m currently enjoying fresh kale, carrots, and beans plus a variety of fresh spices. I probably eat more vaggies than your average person. Dr. Terry Wahls and the Coltens — Naked Calories both influence me here. But we don’t need sugar. Sugar is the enemy, and whenver you consume high sugar plants, you make a trade-off. For a “fat” person, that trade-off shouldn’t be made “often” until weight is under control.
Thank you for your insight.l had suffered a heart attach,since then l do watch my diet.Cheers.Jalal Michael
Heart disease is a very modern infliction. It doesn’t make sense a diet we’ve evolved on should be dangerous. There is argument about whether we evolved on veggies or meat or both, but we do kow a few things.
– North American settlers followed reindeer north.
– Remnants (eskimos, Inuit) ate very high fat and very low veggie. Yes they have discovered signs of atherosclerosis, but keep in mind other causes such as smoke. Ancient peoples lived in smoke filled huts, caves, and igloos.
– These modern western diseases were very rare in all Aboriginal societies we’ve discovered. There’s something¿ about western/european food, and I say it’s the carbs.
Not willing to debate, but do your own reading and research.
I van relate sto some of your situation. I have a thyroid problem and my cholesterol ratios were great, though my total cholesterol was 200, my doc kept pushing drugs to deal with it. Oh and my TGs were in the normal range too.
Then there was the time my BP was high because I took a decongestant that had me all dried out, he immediately wanted to put me on BP meds. I refused. He accepted that if the next time I came in my BP was in the normal range and if I agreed to check my BP daily. I did, and once my body had dispelled the decongestant, my BP was back to normal and consistently runs 120/70.
I think Docs like to throw drugs at everything. Swear they get kickbacks from the ec companies…
Doctors have to cover their butts too. There’s pressure from patienbts to tow the line: if they break from guidelines and something goers wrong, it doesn’t look good on them, but if they follow guidelines and it goes wrong, oh well. IMHO the drug companies control the guidelines, not the doctors.
Interesting. I watched a few food documentaries (Food, Inc., Fork Over Knife) that scared the crap out of me. I did the plant-based thing for a week, but I guess I’m not creative enough to come up with meals that tasted good or didn’t leave me calorie deficient. Re-introduced dairy the next week, back at the “normal” diet (poultry, dairy, occasionally beef) ever since. I did more research because I figured there were some hidden agendas, and there were. Bottom line is now I try to buy local, free-range chicken and beef that’s not been slaughtered in poop-covered disgusting environments. For me, exercising and not smoking helped a whole lot in lowering my cholesterol and blood pressure. I still eat (what I consider to be) way too much cheese (yum!), and just finished eating oven-fried chicken and mashed potatoes I’d been craving and prepared for dinner, and your post makes me feel a lot better about my food choices tonight 🙂
Keep in mind that when we change more than one variable at a time, we can never be sure what changed things. Was it the smoking, the low carb, the exercise, the salt, or the whatever?
Hmmm – I agree with some of this – sugar is certainly more to blame for obesity, diabetes and so on. However, too much animal fat will surely block your arteries and cause stroke? It is also highly implicated in causing many cancers as I know to my cost (although, when I changed my diet to cut out the excess fat-eating, I got better).
Dairy-type animal fats are very mucous-producing so your diet would be a very bad idea for asthmatics or people prone to rhinitis such as myself. Also, for myself, I really wouldn’t want to have animals killed for me to eat either.
As people are saying above though, it’s right that there were several hidden agendas saying it was fat, and not sugar, causing obesity. There are companies involved in producing sugar but not, of course, fat as such. Those were the companies blocking the research findings against sugar products.
Fat blocks arteries, but why? Fat doesn’t clog in the sense of a clogged drain. It buils up behind the artery walls, not on the inside, and it’s not just fat that clogs.
There are a number of unproven theories, but the leading candidate seems to be oxidized LDL, The best level one evidence causing heart disease and stroke seems to be sugar via glycation.. Google Chris Masterjohn.
Daiy is contentions, and I don’t drink milk. I do drink heavy cream and high fat cheases as they have the least sugar. Galactose along with fructose seem to be the most glycating.
Cruelty to animals is an issue, but cruelty to animals doesn’t cause heart disease. It’s a choice that people have to make, and I have a hard time choosing Franken-meats. I can’t condemn people that choose mostly plant foods yet still eat high fat and suppliment with humanely treated animal animal products, especially organ meats.
Can I just say how glad I am that this post of yours got Freshly Pressed and is now out there for so many people to see!? I am completely with you on this. I actually just started an 8 week challenge to “quit sugar” (that is, get off fructose), a journey I’m also blogging about, and week two is titled “Operation Eat Fat.” It’s so counter-intuitive in our culture, but lets just face the facts, the American diet, the one that is so widely promoted by food industries, drug industries, medical industries alike, simply DOES.NOT.WORK. I think you’re on the right track here. Keep up the good work! Congrats on FP!
Thank you, but I’m just one of many.
People like Jimmy Moore, Gary Taubes, Sean Croxton, Dr. Michael Eades, Mark Sisson, Dr,Richard Bernstein, Tom Naughton, Steve Cooksey, Richard Nokeley, Dr. Richard Feinman (the food scientist, not the nuclear one), and many, many, many more are my hero bloggers and authors.
One size fits all diets are a crock!
I applaud people who write that “this works” or “that doesn’t work” (for them), but to imply it should also work for everyone else (re: “too much animal fat will surely block your arteries and cause stroke”) is naive… as well as a crock!
It does take time, but we MUST each figure out what types of foods work best with our own body. I understand that what works best for me doesn’t work quite the same for my sister or brother, my closest “genetic similars”.
When I’ve done low calorie or near-vegetarian diets in the past my body has shut down, barricaded itself (aka, gained weight) as if in preparation for a siege. It seems as though it was waiting, waiting, for the food shortage to REALLY kick in. They say we all have a second brain in our body… in our gut (hence, “gut instinct”). When it comes to food, I listen carefully to what my gut instincts (this include my stomach) are telling me.
The only way I can moderate my weight is to go low carb. My blood type is O, the first blood type of humans. I cannot thrive on a vegetarian/vegan diet because I’ve learned from experience that my body NEEDS animal protein (meat or dairy).
As an O type, my stomach is more acidic (all that acid is needed to break down that tough animal protein), so for me a breakfast of yoghurt, fruit and cereal is guaranteed to have me suffer stomach pain because of excess acid. I find I MUST have protein (cheese, eggs, sausage, etc) for breakfast so that I can last through to lunch.
Carbs are my #1 enemy. Needless to say… I crave them. Only age has taught me the wisdom of not indulging in them… delayed gratification in this case is a wise choice.
We are all different, and you rightly guard against, but at the same time we are also very much similar, as you also argue.
I do not say everybody has to eat high fat, but I’d lay a $20 bill down that anybody could do well on high fat; though it may not be optimal for them. It is very much trial and error.
By the way, I have not been able to restrict my calories either — and am down 20 pounds and holding. I think I am also an O blood type, but since I can’t give, I don’t really pay attention to it. Interesting.
I follow these rules/objectives:
– triglycerides below 80 mg/dl (0.8 mmol/l)
– normalized weight
– good energy and good vibes
– good blood sugars
If I could achieve all these on 300g of carbs a day, I would, but I can’t, so I don’t. And as my bloog says, I’m oing just fine 🙂
Rock on with what works for you!
What too few people say is that each individual react differently to the same diets. Sometimes this is enough to make the difference between a better and a worse diet. My guess is we have not learnt much about what make us so different from one another and how those differences affect our ideal diet.
If we find out more about this, we could be able to create different rules for different groups of people without too much generalising distortion.
Gary Taubes suggests this “factor” is insulin resistance — our ability to channel energy to various cells. IR apparently can differ among cell types. I think what those of us are doing is exactly what you are saying — we find the point where carbs are toxic for us, and we stay below it. Somewhere in the mess is an optimal level for our own metabolism and lifestyle.
I just happened upon your blog in the freshly pressed area and I say, go you! If it’s working for you, then why do people feel the need to bring you down over it?? Most people eat entirely too much processed junk and that probably causes more harm than eating something in its natural state, fat and all.
Thank you. It’s strange how most peoplereact just fine, very sensibly even. Just read teh posts on here. It’s my health care “system” that applies the most resistance. I’ve examined where my doctor gets his cholesterol treatment guidelines, and guess what, they trace right back to industry. The NHLBI’s ATP sets treatment policy, and the handful of rule-setters, the top lipidologists, are all in the pockets of big pharma. I won’t call it a consipiracy; though it wouldn’t surprise me. I simply call it a biased group of decision makers. The control groups are just as biased. The same thing happens in the USDA’s food guidelines. Big Sugah funded food experts are filtered by Big Sugah funded nutritionalists. IMHO our health care systems need to be ripped completely apart and rebuilt based on good science, not convenient science.
Here are a couple of interesting reads. Of coure I’m biased, so do your own investigations.
http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/guidelines/cholesterol/atp3upd04_disclose.htm#disclose
http://www.nutritionjrnl.com/article/S0899-9007(10)00289-3/abstract
Mucha suerte con su dieta y que disfrute de ella mucho tiempo. 😀
Gracias.
The work of Dr. Kelley is interesting in it’s analysis of different diets for different metabolic types. I totally agree that some people with thrive on high fat, high meat, low carb diets. For others….not so good. I have a sympathetic dominant system, which does not do well with this (I’ve tried). But hooray for you for improving your health so much! I also agree that the medical field is pretty screwed up.
We know so little about nutrition, and sometimes small omittances can be a problem. Restoring health does not happen overnight.
One example is sodium. We are preached to reduce sodium, yet the evidence supporting this behavior is flimsy at best. The modern Atkins convention is to suppliment salt into your diet. It’s postulated that symptoms such as cravings and negative feelings are often due to low sodium. I often drink a cup of bullion, particularly when I’m eating very high fat.
Try watching this video. 11min and 13min
Thanks for the video clip. I’m listening to it right now. I love that it started out stating that eggs are the perfect food. I raise my own chickens and eat organic, free-range, farm-fresh eggs every day. I don’t believe the advice that eggs are a problem due to cholesterol.
This is great! Really intriguing stuff. I was studying natural medicine for a while (had to put the studies on hold, unfortunately), and while reading your post, there was all kinds of things that I learned and discussed (or watched others discuss, as is the way of online learning forums) that came to mind while reading your post. I think this high fat thing is a great idea, and it’s doing you so well, it’s ridiculous people are getting their panties in a twist about it. As far as I understood, high fat = bad was an outdated idea anyway. These days too many people consume sugars/carbs (yeah, something I’m a culprit of too unfortunately) and then wonder why they feel so crap. Not only is fat not a sugar, but it actually gives off the most energy when it is metabolised. When there aren’t many carbs to metabolise, then the fat will be.
As far as high fat causing high cholesterol is concerned, that seems to be just a myth. My knowledge isn’t great on this but basically a cholesterol buildup can come from an excess of anything, which then just sits about and causes damage. It doesn’t necessarily have to be too much fat, but that was the health scare thing that was going around in the 90’s, if memory serves me correct. So people hang on to this idea as they age and voila, myths of nutrition are born. (Now I could be wrong, but this is what I understand.)
I really do try to take an objective stance. I have to. I am have a long term chronic disease, and I need to make correct decisions. I even listen to the crazies over at http://www.30bananasaday.com/
Take this video with a grain of salt, but if you have any sense of politics, you have to know what is said here could very well be true. Minnesota is in many ways the center of the vortex: Ancel Keys, General Mills, Senator McGovern, UM’s Dr. Joanne Slavin – head of the Carbohydrate and Proteins Committee of the DGAC, and of course the Mayo Clinic which pushes carbs on its patients like nobody else. It’s interesting to note that UM still lauds the Seven Countries Study, arguably the tipping point back in teh 70’s that caused all of this mess. This study is now considered by most a disaster. http://www.sph.umn.edu/epi/history/overview/
*note: John was born on the east bank of the Mississippi River and comes by his distaste of Minnesota honestly. On Wisconsin!
Exactly. It’s so important to get it right! I don’t really know much about this health history in America but it sounds very interesting and I’ll look into it!
Very interesting discussion in this thread. What do people think about the fact that high fat, extremely low carb diets are notoriously difficult to stick to long term? Also, I would point out that the commonly accepted total cholesterol max of 200 is not actually protective against heart attack. 150 seems to be. (and I grant the fact that cholesterol is more a marker of coronary artery disease, not the precise culprit.) How many people on high fat diets are having success getting to that number? I follow a vegan diet and got mine to 147, and I am curious if other folks have found alternative diets to get them there? I’m always interested in what works for people.
They are ‘notoriously’ difficult to stick to is right. I’m constantly told that. Honestly, I’ve had no issues sticking to it, not physiological issues. The study that comes to mind ‘recruited’ test subjects and then increased their carb consumption. Both of these are recipes for failure.
I have tried carb days, and truthfully, they suck. They really do. I feel absolutelu lousy when I cheat, and it’s not guilt. The people I follow in social media circles also have no issues. There are lots of pressures, though. You can’t walk through a food court in a mall, for example, and find real food.
Cholesterol numbers are accepted, but find me the evidence they mean anything, seriously. Also total cholesterol is useless without a breakdown. Vegans tend to run very high triglycerides and very low HDL, both indicators of CHD risk. The premise is that high antioxidant levels protect them, but vegans are not immune from CHD. This is another area that needs further study. Again, I like to see grain free and higher fat (EVOO) vegans.
Vegans who eat whole foods don’t tend to run high triglycerides, or low HDL, as far as my reading has shown me. I’m curious where you get that data? Genuinely curious– I have not come across that in my lit searches.
I mean, one can be a vegan and eat nothing but sugar and white pasta and french fries, but that’s the letter and not the spirit of the law.
HDL is very high in your typical whole foods eating vegan. And no, vegans certainly are not immune to CHD, but it appears that people with total cholesterol under 150 are. That does not, as you point out, mean that cholesterol is the causative culprit, but it’s a pretty reliable marker of underlying disease processes. Just because we don’t know the mechanism doesn’t mean the association is invalid.
As for mall food courts, I hear you; anyone looking to eat whole foods, unprocessed foods, or foods that aren’t pumped full of sugar definitely has to find creative alternatives. Eating well makes you realize how much crap most of the population is eating every day, vegan, carnivore, or whatever else.
Hahaha where do newly initiated low carb dieters get support and advice?except for great blogs like this, jimmy Moores ,etc… Very little support is forthcoming from the usual sources. Heck there’s no one gonna risk their position in health by agreeing with any of it’s principles…. it’s”tolerated”
The advicemay go like this. ” certainly ,dear poorly educated fat silly patient, you canTRY this way of eating, but nobody can stick to it so I don’t recommend it” wow way to cheer on the sufferer who is finally accepted the need for radical change.. How many faithfully stick to a low fat calorie restricted diet longterm?” maintain weight loss?maintain any type of weight loss project? Yeah, It’s new territory that’s for sure, those who have traveled and proven it works are not the main voiceThe brave pioneers can either give up and make the nay Sayers more comfortable and give in to feel the temporary comfort of a starch feeding and its subsequent sequelae..or….press on to succeed, rebel and go against the common food culture and never look back or suffer carb cravings from being a sugar burner. (what? you’re eating that burger for lunch with your fingers and ditched the bun?peanut butter and no whole wheat cracker? Turkey sandwich w/o the wich? Breakfast w / no toast? Fatty sauce and no pasta ?it’s heresy … OMG you simply CANT cut out a food group…your brain will die of no glucose….hahaha …really? Watch me!)
I admit my TG and HDL data is completely anecdotal from marginally scanning boards and is totally unreliable. It is something I’ll watch for. Thanks.
Well thanks for this post and this blog–I’ve been thinking about it, and talking about it with friends on various diets and with various conditions, which I think is what a blog is meant to do. So kudos! (but not the snack bar Kudos, which has way too much sugar 🙂
Healthy fats are soooo good for us and I’m so happy more people are starting to see that the low fat craze is not what it was cut out to be! Have you read Diane Schwarzbein’s The Schwarzbein Principle II ? You post reminds me of her fabulous book on endocrinology and diabetes.
I took a peek. I like her exercise philosophy.
She’s one of many doctors who have discovered these principles on their own: Dr. Richard Bernstein, Dr. Eric Westman, Dr. Petrer Attia, Dr. Jay Wortman, and many more..
I must admit that there’s a lot of this–the acronyms–that I don’t understand, but I can get the gist of what you’re trying to communicate. I find it very interesting and I’m glad you’re sharing the surprising results of your diet with others. It seems we can’t trust many medical reports that are out there.
I’m not really surprised; I’m more confused. Why did I settle in for two years then improve even more? Something happened, and I hope it’s because of something good: less fatty liver, less atherosclerosis, healthier mitochondria, pfft. We’re way out of my league. I know I feel better right now than I ever have before.
Very interesting discussion you’ve started here. I’m just now beginning to look at all of this since I recently (reluctantly) went on a statin for my “numbers,” (Dr. shrugs, “Everybody takes them.”!!) but am now hearing so much negative information about statins. Never been overweight, no smoking, mostly sedentary lifestyle. I prefer all the side dishes to meat and freely admit to a (mostly) balanced relationship with beer and vodka. Family history of diabetes and heart disease, but also family history of sedentary living, obesity and carb worship. I’ve never been “on a diet” in my life and it’s daunting trying to figure this out.
It sure is daunting. I remember about five years arguing with other diabetics about this. I tried to tell them this style of eating would kill them. They basically said I didn’t know anything, and I had to agree. I made two decisions that day: 1. discover the truths about what causes heart disease, and 2. follow whatever the science tells you to do. I did both, and I do both every day.
Advice: try a strict Paleo diet for 30 days. One month won’t kill you, but you really need at least that long to gain some appreciation. If I was to start over, I’d first take some reliable readings of BP, A1C, H-CRP (inflammation) and cholesterol, preferrably the new VAP test. I’d also do some sort of insane exercise before and after. If you don’t exercise much, do a 30 minute run and try to accurately record your performance. How far you went, when you needed to stop, how you felt. Do it before and after.
One of my biggest surprises has been my cardio performance. My before and after don’t even come close, seriously. It’s no contest.
http://www.paleochallenge.net/
I really enjoyed reading your blog post.
If you want to learn more about where to get “healthy fats”, check out
If you want to learn about the Paleo Diet, which is low carb, check out
I could write to you all day, but you probably wouldn’t read it all. Let’s just say I can’t find any compelling science to support your and all dietitians’ understanding of what is and isn’t a healthy fat. By any stretch of the imagination saturated fats are far more stable than polyunsaturated fats. PUFAs have to present more of an oxidative stress than SFAs.
It’s the cholesterol, of course. SFAs raise choelsterol and PUFAs lower it, so therefore PUFAs are better. Pfft. That’s not science. It never was and never will be. And it’s not what I and other SFA eaters experience. People like me are getting healthier by breaking all your rules; while people that follow your rules get sick and fat.
Keep reading my blogs, and maybe we’ll free you from your puppet strings 😉
There is tons of compelling science behind it.
Oh ,lovely , advice from commenter with cute photo , touting themselves…and their own website, how cute and non obvious.
When I read this I nearly jumped for joy. I have an article on the same subject about saturated fats and the preaching of western medical practitioners and pharmaceutical companies – http://freedomnow-online.com/fats. I am so happy that there are people out there like you who are brave enough to help others caught in instilled fears. The more people like you, the more people will come to know the truth. Thank you!
http://www.nutritionjrnl.com/article/S0899-9007(11)00314-5/abstract
Abstract
Given the large social impact of dietary advice, it is important that the advice have a solid scientific basis. Evidence-based dietary advice should be built on results from all studies available, according to a given methodology. Conclusions should be a valid representation of the summarized results. The association between saturated fat intake and cardiovascular disease was examined. Results from three reports of leading U.S. and European advisory committees were compared with results as they were presented in the articles referred to. Findings were put into perspective with results not included in these reports. Different lines of evidence were included in the different reports. No overlap whatsoever was found in the articles included. Most results from the scientific literature were lacking for most different lines of evidence in all reports. All three reports included the effect of saturated fat on low-density lipoprotein cholesterol in the evidence linking saturated fat to cardiovascular disease, but the effect on high-density lipoprotein cholesterol was systematically ignored. Both U.S. reports failed to correctly describe the results from the prospective studies. Results and conclusions about saturated fat intake in relation to cardiovascular disease, from leading advisory committees, do not reflect the available scientific literature.
The tough part about gaining weight is it not only affects you physically it affects you mentally and emotionally. Society can be cruel when it comes to this scenerio. I personally have several friends who are currently overweight. I can personally say I love them despite societies views and opinions. A site i go to view reviews of weight loss is http://harrisreviews.com. I remember when I was 30lbs overweight and the way I was treated. Not cool.
Do you know if your comments section is html-able?
“The truth seems to be there’s no scientific evidence to support this belief that consuming fat and cholesterol kill. I could throw study after study after study at you, but honestly, I can’t even find a hint of science that supports it.”
I think you should look harder.
It’s not as concrete as one might like, but there is a reasonable amount of prospective data if you look hard enough. I think it’s important to look at long-term prospective data to answer this question, and so far the only studies that I’ve run across matching this criteria show that people eating low carb die earlier, and of the same conditions one might expect. (Although there was a paper around 2008-2009 that showed a much higher risk of death from accidents in the people with the highest red meat intake — I found that amusing.)
————————-
“CONCLUSION: Red and processed meat intakes were associated with modest increases in total mortality, cancer mortality, and cardiovascular disease mortality.”
Arch Intern Med. 2009 Mar 23;169(6):562-71.
Meat intake and mortality: a prospective study of over half a million people.
Sinha R, Cross AJ, Graubard BI, Leitzmann MF, Schatzkin A.
Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute-Nutritional Epidemiology Branch, Rockville, MD 20852, USA. sinhar@nih.gov
BACKGROUND: High intakes of red or processed meat may increase the risk of mortality. Our objective was to determine the relations of red, white, and processed meat intakes to risk for total and cause-specific mortality. METHODS: The study population included the National Institutes of Health-AARP (formerly known as the American Association of Retired Persons) Diet and Health Study cohort of half a million people aged 50 to 71 years at baseline. Meat intake was estimated from a food frequency questionnaire administered at baseline. Cox proportional hazards regression models estimated hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) within quintiles of meat intake. The covariates included in the models were age, education, marital status, family history of cancer (yes/no) (cancer mortality only), race, body mass index, 31-level smoking history, physical activity, energy intake, alcohol intake, vitamin supplement use, fruit consumption, vegetable consumption, and menopausal hormone therapy among women. Main outcome measures included total mortality and deaths due to cancer, cardiovascular disease, injuries and sudden deaths, and all other causes. RESULTS: There were 47 976 male deaths and 23 276 female deaths during 10 years of follow-up. Men and women in the highest vs lowest quintile of red (HR, 1.31 [95% CI, 1.27-1.35], and HR, 1.36 [95% CI, 1.30-1.43], respectively) and processed meat (HR, 1.16 [95% CI, 1.12-1.20], and HR, 1.25 [95% CI, 1.20-1.31], respectively) intakes had elevated risks for overall mortality. Regarding cause-specific mortality, men and women had elevated risks for cancer mortality for red (HR, 1.22 [95% CI, 1.16-1.29], and HR, 1.20 [95% CI, 1.12-1.30], respectively) and processed meat (HR, 1.12 [95% CI, 1.06-1.19], and HR, 1.11 [95% CI 1.04-1.19], respectively) intakes. Furthermore, cardiovascular disease risk was elevated for men and women in the highest quintile of red (HR, 1.27 [95% CI, 1.20-1.35], and HR, 1.50 [95% CI, 1.37-1.65], respectively) and processed meat (HR, 1.09 [95% CI, 1.03-1.15], and HR, 1.38 [95% CI, 1.26-1.51], respectively) intakes. When comparing the highest with the lowest quintile of white meat intake, there was an inverse association for total mortality and cancer mortality, as well as all other deaths for both men and women. CONCLUSION: Red and processed meat intakes were associated with modest increases in total mortality, cancer mortality, and cardiovascular disease mortality.
PMID: 19307518 [PubMed – indexed for MEDLINE]
————————-
“adherence to a CR dietary pattern appeared to increase mortality in elderly Swedish men” — using 10-year mortality in a longitudinal study. Decent level of evidence, but a restricted demographic.
Am J Clin Nutr. 2010 Oct;92(4):967-74. Epub 2010 Sep 8.
Mediterranean and carbohydrate-restricted diets and mortality among elderly men: a cohort study in Sweden.
Sjögren P, Becker W, Warensjö E, Olsson E, Byberg L, Gustafsson IB, Karlström B, Cederholm T.
Department of Public Health and Caring Sciences, Section of Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden. per.sjogren@pubcare.uu.se
BACKGROUND: Comparative studies on dietary patterns and long-term mortality are sparse.
OBJECTIVE: The objective was to examine the relations between 10-y mortality and adherence to the World Health Organization dietary guidelines [Healthy Diet Indicator (HDI)], a Mediterranean-like diet, and a carbohydrate-restricted (CR) diet in elderly Swedish men.
DESIGN: Dietary habits were determined by 7-d dietary records in a population-based longitudinal study of 924 Swedish men (age: 71 ± 1 y). The HDI score (-1 to 8 points), the Mediterranean Diet Score (MDS; 0-8 points), and the CR score (2-20 points) were calculated for each participant. Nonadequate reporters of energy intake were identified (n = 413). Mortality was registered during a median follow-up of 10.2 y. Cox proportional hazards regression, with multivariable adjustments, was used to determine the effects of adherence to each dietary pattern.
RESULTS: Two hundred fifteen and 88 subjects died of all-cause and cardiovascular disease, respectively. In all individuals, risk relations to mortality for each SD increment in the scores were observed for only MDS, with an adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of 0.83 (95% CI: 0.70, 0.99). Among adequate dietary reporters (n = 511), adjusted HRs for each SD increment in scores were enhanced for MDS (ie, 0.71; 95% CI: 0.55, 0.92) for all-cause mortality and 0.63 (95% CI: 0.42, 0.96) for cardiovascular mortality. Corresponding HRs for CR diet score were 1.19 (95% CI: 0.97, 1.45) for all-cause mortality and 1.44 (95% CI: 1.03, 2.02) for cardiovascular mortality.
CONCLUSION: Adherence to a Mediterranean-like dietary pattern reduced mortality, whereas adherence to a CR dietary pattern appeared to increase mortality in elderly Swedish men, especially when only adequate dietary reporters were considered.
PMID: 20826627 [PubMed – indexed for MEDLINE]
————————-
“CONCLUSION: A low-carbohydrate diet based on animal sources was associated with higher all-cause mortality in both men and women, whereas a vegetable-based low-carbohydrate diet was associated with lower all-cause and cardiovascular disease mortality rates.”
Ann Intern Med. 2010 Sep 7;153(5):289-98.
Low-carbohydrate diets and all-cause and cause-specific mortality: two cohort studies.
Fung TT, van Dam RM, Hankinson SE, Stampfer M, Willett WC, Hu FB.
Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts 02115, USA. teresa.fung@simmons.edu
Ann Intern Med. 2010 Sep 7;153(5):337-9.
BACKGROUND: Data on the long-term association between low-carbohydrate diets and mortality are sparse.
OBJECTIVE: To examine the association of low-carbohydrate diets with mortality during 26 years of follow-up in women and 20 years in men.
DESIGN: Prospective cohort study of women and men who were followed from 1980 (women) or 1986 (men) until 2006. Low-carbohydrate diets, either animal-based (emphasizing animal sources of fat and protein) or vegetable-based (emphasizing vegetable sources of fat and protein), were computed from several validated food-frequency questionnaires assessed during follow-up.
SETTING: Nurses’ Health Study and Health Professionals’ Follow-up Study.
PARTICIPANTS: 85 168 women (aged 34 to 59 years at baseline) and 44 548 men (aged 40 to 75 years at baseline) without heart disease, cancer, or diabetes.
MEASUREMENTS: Investigators documented 12 555 deaths (2458 cardiovascular-related and 5780 cancer-related) in women and 8678 deaths (2746 cardiovascular-related and 2960 cancer-related) in men.
RESULTS: The overall low-carbohydrate score was associated with a modest increase in overall mortality in a pooled analysis (hazard ratio [HR] comparing extreme deciles, 1.12 [95% CI, 1.01 to 1.24]; P for trend = 0.136). The animal low-carbohydrate score was associated with higher all-cause mortality (pooled HR comparing extreme deciles, 1.23 [CI, 1.11 to 1.37]; P for trend = 0.051), cardiovascular mortality (corresponding HR, 1.14 [CI, 1.01 to 1.29]; P for trend = 0.029), and cancer mortality (corresponding HR, 1.28 [CI, 1.02 to 1.60]; P for trend = 0.089). In contrast, a higher vegetable low-carbohydrate score was associated with lower all-cause mortality (HR, 0.80 [CI, 0.75 to 0.85]; P for trend </= 0.001) and cardiovascular mortality (HR, 0.77 [CI, 0.68 to 0.87]; P for trend < 0.001).
LIMITATIONS: Diet and lifestyle characteristics were assessed with some degree of error. Sensitivity analyses indicated that results were probably not substantively affected by residual confounding or an unmeasured confounder. Participants were not a representative sample of the U.S. population.
CONCLUSION: A low-carbohydrate diet based on animal sources was associated with higher all-cause mortality in both men and women, whereas a vegetable-based low-carbohydrate diet was associated with lower all-cause and cardiovascular disease mortality rates.
PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institutes of Health.
PMID: 20820038 [PubMed – indexed for MEDLINE]
Pingback: Thank You Jimmy Moore « Café Moi
Pingback: Cholesterol Logic « Café Moi
Pingback: 54: Jeff And Dee Miles Combat The Push To Consume More Carbohydrates For Weight Loss | Low-Carb Conversations
Pingback: 54: Jeff And Dee Miles Combat The Push To Consume More Carbohydrates For Weight Loss | Health and Wellness Tips
Pingback: Effective Treatment for Diabetes: A High Fat Diet…
Pingback: unlike this » Archive » A Diabetic Tries Out a High Fat Diet
Love it! I have followed a gradual path to a diet high in fat and very low in carbs over the last 8 months. I had ended up in the hospital after a bout of a. fib., and found out my thyroid was very low, and my lipid profile was horrible. Add to this about 100 extra pounds. They wanted to start me on statins, but I resisted for several reasons, not the least of which is a bad experience with joint pain with a short trial in the past. I started out with trying to get my fats lower, and eating more fruit and veggies. Ate a near perfect SAD. The weight barely budged, and the lipids got worse. My TG’s barely moved down. After watching Lustig’s video on sugar, I cut out HFCS, and within a few weeks, all sweeteners. Then, after reading Taubes, it was a easy step from here to getting rid of all grains. The great news, and a surprise to me, is that my joint pain, especially in my hips at night, was almost completely gone. And, my lipids started moving in a much better direction. The weight has been slow in coming off. But, I am now working to keep my fat consumption between 75 -80%, and carbs at about 5%….and the weight is starting to move. Down about 30 pounds now. I got some grief recently about my higher total cholesterol from my cardiologists, but did not accept it passively. I explained that my HDL is higher, and yes perhaps my LDL is up a bit too, but until we know the type of LDL we are talking about it is a meaningless number. And my TG/HDL ratio is dramatically improved. It shut him up for now. He also agreed that perhaps he could test for the LDL type sometime in the future. Yeah for science, and having a understanding of what is lore and what is fact. I hope to see the kind of improvements you have seen over time. Thanks for sharing!
Amen! Keep at it. My approach is a lifetime of unhealthiness will take a lifetime to reverse.
I am very encouraged by the intelligence shown in the article and all of the posts that have followed.
I am a type 2 that after suffering from Metformin usage have, by following Dr Bernstein’s protocols have , attained normal blood sugars, have an A1C of 5.4, and a TG to HDL ratio of 1.4. No longer on Med and have lost 40 pounds and kept it off for more that 6 – 8 months.
Thank you for your contribution to encouraging us all to manage our health and make healthy choices.
Thank you.
Dr. Bernstein will go down in history as a hero. Too bad it will be long after his death,
Those are great numbers. Promise me you’ll come back with a reply after three years that you’ve kept that 40lbs off. My diabetes educator and dietitians all claim it can’t be done on a HFLC eating plan.