| Online: | |
| Visits: | |
| Stories: |
| Story Views | |
| Now: | |
| Last Hour: | |
| Last 24 Hours: | |
| Total: | |
MORE COMMENTS ON “WRONG THINKING” OF INTEREST WHEN ON A ZERO CARB DIET
Thursday, May 1, 2014 9:51
% of readers think this story is Fact. Add your two cents.
It seems my last post had a big success so it got motivated to write more stuff about all these wrong ideas too many people have about eating a low carb diet, not forgetting all the bad science about the wrongful “lipid hypothesis” that we had to support since the ‘70s.
What I like to do is make knowledge “accessible” to all, trying to keep explanations clear and simple. Of course, I know I should provide references each time I state something new but this is extremely time consuming and, at the end, it will change nothing to what I want to bring in.
So again today, I will state some “wrong thinking statements” that are, according to today’s science and research, misleading a lot of people and, sadly, keeping sick folks as sick as when they were first diagnosed.
By the way, I hope many of you had the chance to see Dr. Oz recent shows where he admits having given wrong advice when advocating a low fat diet, especially a low saturated fat diet. Not that I am a fan of his shows but he certainly reaches a lot of folks out there…
“CHOLESTEROL IS THE NUMBER ONE CAUSE OF HEART DISEASE”
Just recently, new statistics came out confirming what we already knew about the relationship between cholesterol and hearth disease: there is NONE. Sadly, this will be overlook, as usual…
So here we go: 75 % of patients presenting themselves at the emergency room with a ongoing heart attack “have a normal lipid profile”. Yes, 75%!!! This is more then significant. What is particular about this study is, this time, they have included patient taking STATINS. Do you realize what this means? Folks that had probably just a little bit blood cholesterol were given STATINS, which normalize their blood lipid profile and, still, they suffer a hearth attack… ALONG with the other folks with NO STATIN and a long history of normal lipids.
But this is not all: 50 % of patients with ABNORMAL blood lipids NEVER have a hearth attack. What do we need more to convince ourselves cholesterol has nothing to do with hearth diseases? The only reason there is “some” cholesterol in artery blockage is it came after to repair the damages CAUSE BY SOMETHING ELSE.
Even the COCHRANE GROUP, an independent international structure evaluating the real value of any medical treatment, have found NO relationship between cholesterol and hearth diseases after reviewing the available literature on the subject including more then 70 studies.
Of course, we must be careful here about the real problem with cholesterol, the “genetic hypercholesterolemia” diseases that can be very serious. But, even then, if there is NO initial damage done to the arterial lining, considering the excess LDL in the blood are not oxidized, the chances of having a hearth attack is very low. And how this is done? By cutting down inflammation in the body, which causes the said arterial damage and the said oxidation of LDL. And what is the BEST way to cut down inflammation? By cutting down carbohydrates in the diet…
“ARTERIOSCLEROSIS IS MADE OF CHOLESTEROL DEPOSIT”
Strangely, it is quite difficult to find any pathological study of the lipid composition of arteriosclerosis deposit in arteries.
I said and insist on “strange” because this should be of the first interest. Anyway, one nice study was done in the 90’s and luckily, one more recently, and they have both the same conclusions: when one analyses the “fat profile” of artery deposit, nearly 80% is made of UNSATURATED fats (including monounsaturated like olive oil, AND polyunsaturated like corn or soy omega-6 rich vegetable oils).
SO WHERE IS THE SUPPOSE SATURATED FAT AND THE CHOLESTEROL DEPOSIT IN THE BLOCKED ARTERIES??? Well, they make up the 20% of what is left in the lipid profile… not very much…
I must also underline these “arteriosclerotic” blockage do not only contains lipids. They also include other materials like calcium, fibrous structures such as collagen, debris from dead cells, dendritic cells, mast cells, macrophages, foam cells, monocytes, smooth muscle cells, T cells, the list is so long that cholesterol looks like a minimalistic substance in all this (give a look to the following diagram showing a cross-section of a lumen blockage and look for the cholesterol…)
The end point: avoid unsaturated cheap vegetable oils full of omega-6 which can get easily oxidized and glycated (by glucose) when transported toward your cells by your LDL and so, are at ease to penetrate any lesion if they are present in your arteries.
“THE HUMAN BODY ‘NEEDS’ GLUCOSE”
Maybe I am repeating myself but, still, I will say it again: no medical or nutrition textbooks have ever stated the human body needs a diet containing glucose to work properly.
Still, and I will not argue here, some of the our body cells do need glucose to perform: our blood red cells, some cells in our eyes and a few in our kidneys. But this is it. And if you calculate these needs, which are evaluated at 30 g of glucose per day, which is extremely minimal, they are certainly far away from the 310 g of carbohydrates recommended per day by our “health authorities”.
Our needs in glucose are so small that our body can produce it from proteins and fats. To detail how efficient our body is at doing its job of “neoglucogenesis”, up to about 50% of proteins and 10% of the fat we eat can by transformed into glucose to answer our daily requirements.
The other sad thing about glucose is that, to often, it is provided as a “simple sugar” in diets, simple meaning “refined”. And, sadly again, “refined” means void of nutritious value. Yes, a thing like white sugar contains only “useless glucose” and nothing else: no vitamins, no minerals, no antioxidants, absolutely no nutrients the body desesperatly needs to keep working properly.
“FRUCTOSE IS A ‘GOOD SUGAR’ AS IT IS CONTAINED IN FRUITS”
In the recent years, and I am happy about this, fructose is getting bad marks. To make it short, fructose is to our body what alcohol is: it is toxic, especially to our liver and brain.
Fructose is not welcome in our body. Why? Because our body has no use for it and so, no real efficient pathways to metabolize it properly. So, as for other unwanted substances entering our system, our body will have to use its “desintoxication center” to get rid of fructose and this is when the LIVER become handy. But there is a price for this job and, as for alcohol, each time the liver has an overload of fructose to clear up, it suffers. The process is simple: it will transform fructose in triglycerides that will slowly “infiltrate” the liver and so, make it fat. This is what we call the “non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NFLD), a problem affecting 45% of the general population. It makes these folks at risk for permanent liver damage (where the liver enlarges) and, over time, liver cells are replaced by scar tissues. This is called cirrhosis, a situation when liver can’t work properly and may develop function failure, cancer and eventually death. And all these damages, very often underestimated, are not better then what alcohol can do to the liver…
So why do folks believe fructose, as it is contained in fruit, has to be good for us? We first have to understand today’s fruit have nothing to do with the original one created in nature. Nowadays, fruits are larger, contains much more sugar and much less fiber. To give an example of the gravity of the situation, monkeys in zoo are now getting diabetes because they are fed new hybrid of bananas that are so sweet, their liver cannot metabolize all the fructose they contain.
We now think that the “sweetness” of the fruits our ancestors got in nature (and only in season…) is comparable with the sweetness of a carrot from today. Not very sweet, indeed. So when some folks are gorging on fruits thinking it is good for their health, they expose their livers to huge amount of fructose with all the consequences you know.
But fructose is not only bad for your liver; it has also a lot of effect on the human body; but his will make the subject of a future posting.
“EVERYONE WITH HIGH CHOLESTEROL SHOULD TAKE STATINS”
I will begin writing on this subject by citing a striking fact: nowadays, any patient admitted into hospital for a hearth attack will automaticaly get some STATINS prescribed and, most of the time, even WITHOUT any lipid profile done. This is how much doctors are convinced (by who???…) STATINS are essential… no more discussion. This is scary; and certainly not a very objective approach.
I am always amazed when I see statistic about STATINS prescriptions. In the US population, 50%of all adult folks are taking STATINS and, in some regions, this number goes up to 75%. Personality, I do not think nature could have created the humane body SO weak and SO in need to take an artificial chemical molecule like STATINS to survive.
And this is done when studies have proven STATINS offers no protection for women, no protection for men without a history of hearth problem and certainly no protection for anyone over 65 years old…
Sadly, many “authorities” advice to continue STATINS up to 85 years old while other “authorities” are proposing to make them “mandatory for all” or, even worst, forcing Water Companies to add them into tap water like we did with fluorine….
But what scares me more is to think some “authorities” would like to do a lipid profile to all newborns (maybe even earlier by taking a blood sample while in the gestation state inside the mother) and prescribe STATINS if needed…
Again, I believe if a patient suffers from “familiar genetic hypercholesterolemia” and has a problem getting his liver to recycle his LDL because of a lack of receptors, maybe a STATIN would be required… but this has to come well after everything is done to prevent damages to the inside lining of arteries!!!
Denis
Source: http://zero-carb.blogspot.com/2014/05/more-comments-on-wrong-thinking-of.html
