Guest guest Posted May 31, 2002 Report Share Posted May 31, 2002 This is basically a Hawaiian spin on the Ornish Diet. Very low fat very high carb. What is unique is the improvement of the HDL / Cholesterol ratio and the lowering of triglycerides. On the Ornish program triglycerides have been known to double or tipple (mine were 229 on Ornish) and HDL dramatically lower (mine was as low as 18). Now my triglycerides are 63 and my HDL is 42. When this was published (I think it was 1998) I sent an e-mail to Dr. Shantini about the lowering of HDL. It took about 3 months to get a reply from his staff but I got the same response and Ornish: Low HDL is not a concern if you are following a low fat diet. At 03:59 AM 5/31/2002 +0000, you wrote: > > > ><< What didn't ring true to me was the claim that Hawaiians were >mainly > > >vegetarians (? with all those fish swimming around?). I sometimes >wonder (if > > >in fact the story is true) >> > > >Not only fish, but I believe they're big on pork as well. Did this >gentleman > > >you're referring to do any published studies. If the people he >says were > > >cured of diabetes lost weight that also could account for their >improvement. > > >Also, it the diet kept the people away from SAD food such as white >flour, > > >sugar and bad fats, that would help a lot too. The key may be -- > " traditional > > >diet " > > > > > >Namaste, Liz > > > > Liz: > > > > They weight (or so it is said) -- it is primarily a weight-loss >diet. The diet's focus (per the book I read) was mainly to go to " low >caloric-density foods " , which would be your fruits and vegies, with >poi as the main starch, and protein twice a week, and no processed >foods, and the foods in the book were really pretty good. He did >refer to studies, but I didn't look them up. That was the book, which >mentioned his work with poorer Hawaiians and the need for a cheap, >healthy diet, which I also think is a great idea (except for >the " organic food " part, an NT no-processed-food diet should be >cheaper than most SAD diets). > > > > And he stressed that early Hawaiians were basically vegetarian. Now >THAT part seems odd to me. I bought the book in paperback for not >very much. But then came the " diet pack " for $125 so now I'm not sure >what it's all about. > > > > Anyway, I can't go long without protein so I never tried it. But it >DID get me thinking about " caloric density " and processed foods, and >that was the beginning of a long journey to get rid of the processed >stuff. > > > > If you are curious, one write up is at: > > > > > <http://rd.mailshell.com/kalama.doe.hawaii.edu/~normanc/wcchc/diet/diet.html>htt\ p://kalama.doe.hawaii.edu/~normanc/wcchc/diet/diet.html > > > > And a comment on it: > > > > > <http://rd.mailshell.com/starbulletin.com/97/01/22/news/kokualine.html>http://st\ arbulletin.com/97/01/22/news/kokualine.html > > > > To quote part of it: > > > > Reversal of serious illness and weight loss without limiting >calories was demonstrated by a non-calorie restricted traditional >Hawaiian diet at the Waianae Coast Comprehensive Health Center in >Hawaii. An average weight loss of 17.1 pounds per person was noted >along with reversal heart disease, high blood pressure, and diabetes >in a study involving 19 Native-Hawaiian adults over a period of just >three weeks. This was even more remarkable because Hawaiians have >among the highest rates of obesity and death from these diseases in >the nation. The results of this study was published in the world's >leading nutrition journal, the American Journal of Clinical >Nutrition, by Terry Shintani, M.D., M.P.H., Hawaiian nutritionist > , M.S., R.D., Helen Kanawaliwali O'Connor, C.H.W., and >Sheila Beckham, M.P.H., R.D.C. in the June 1991 edition. > > > > In this program, known as the Waianae Diet Program (WDP), Native- >Hawaiians were placed on a diet consisting of exclusively Native- >Hawaiian foods (available before Western contact) for a period of 21 >days. They were allowed to eat as much as they wanted with the >exception of some restriction on the quantity of animal protein. >Results indicated an average weight loss of 17.1 pounds over 21 days. >In addition, cholesterol fell 14.1% from an average of 222.3 mg/dl to >an average of 191 mg/dl, with a slight improvement in HDL to >cholesterol ration. Triglycerides, a risk factor for heart disease >improved as well, falling from an average of 211.3 to 163 mg/dl. >Blood sugar control improved in all seven individuals with diabetes >on the program with the overall blood sugar level decreasing from >161.9 to 123.4 mg/dl. One individual who was on 60 units of insulin >per day no longer needs any diabetes medication one year later. There >was no increase in exercise on the program and analysis of ! > > the > > intake revealed that the participants ate more food on the diet but >ingested fewer calories. > > > > Composition of the diet > > > > The Waianae Diet was intended to reflect what Hawaiians ate in >ancient times. It was very low in fat (7-12%), high in starches (75- >80%) and moderate in protein (12-15%). This is in sharp contrast to >the high fat Standard American Diet. The S.A.D. has 400% more fat >than the Hawaiian diet. Is it any wonder that high fat diets make >high fat people? > > > > ============= > > > > 12-15% protein seems higher than what I read in the book, unless >they were using soy protein (which doesn't strike me as very native). >Also I'd think that native Hawaiians would be eating a lot of >coconut, which isn't very low fat. > > > > Here is part of what I keep thinking about: > > > > The Hawaiians, and the Native Americans, and the Samoans, and the >Africans, have all done extremely poorly when exposed to the SAD >diet, as the website points out. Their rates of obesity and diabetes >are even worse than the average Americans. But somehow the Asians >that have migrated here seem to be doing ok. Is it because they stick >more to their original diets? I've known 2nd and 3rd generation >Japanese and Koreans and Chinese and they were all in much better >shape than the Northern European stock (and seemingly never on a >diet). But I can't say that they were avoiding junk food either. It's >a mystery ... maybe because the Asian diet has included a lot of >starch for a long time and they handle it better? > > > > > > > > Heidi Schuppenhauer > > Trillium Custom Software Inc. > > heidis@t... > > >Hi Heidi, >The Asian peoples have a longer intestinal tract which helps them to >digest the starchs. I read this in NT. >Sheila > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 31, 2002 Report Share Posted May 31, 2002 At 03:59 AM 5/31/2002 +0000, you wrote: >Hi Heidi, >The Asian peoples have a longer intestinal tract which helps them to >digest the starchs. I read this in NT. >Sheila I read that too -- and a larger pancreas. Sheesh. I want one too. Heidi Schuppenhauer Trillium Custom Software Inc. heidis@... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 31, 2002 Report Share Posted May 31, 2002 At 10:45 PM 5/30/2002 -0700, you wrote: >This is basically a Hawaiian spin on the Ornish Diet. Very low fat very >high carb. What is unique is the improvement of the HDL / Cholesterol ratio >and the lowering of triglycerides. On the Ornish program triglycerides have >been known to double or tipple (mine were 229 on Ornish) and HDL >dramatically lower (mine was as low as 18). Now my triglycerides are 63 >and my HDL is 42. When this was published (I think it was 1998) I sent an >e-mail to Dr. Shantini about the lowering of HDL. It took about 3 months >to get a reply from his staff but I got the same response and Ornish: Low >HDL is not a concern if you are following a low fat diet. Hmmm. That is interesting. I would think it would be fairly similar to Ornish (not that I'm familiar with him either). But their CLAIM is that it is close to the original Hawaiian diet: it would be interesting to see what they based that on. Heidi Schuppenhauer Trillium Custom Software Inc. heidis@... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 31, 2002 Report Share Posted May 31, 2002 At 03:59 AM 5/31/02 +0000, you wrote: >Hi Heidi, >The Asian peoples have a longer intestinal tract which helps them to >digest the starchs. I read this in NT. >Sheila Well that defuncts the Land Bridge Theory and the Inuit being from Mongolia. SAD did the same to them as other Native Americans. Wanita Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 1, 2002 Report Share Posted June 1, 2002 >From: Wanita Sears <wanitawa@...> > >Hi Heidi, > >The Asian peoples have a longer intestinal tract which helps them to > >digest the starchs. I read this in NT. > >Sheila > >Well that defuncts the Land Bridge Theory and the Inuit being from >Mongolia. >SAD did the same to them as other Native Americans. Not at all. The migration across the Bering land bridge is believed to have happened in preagricultural times. The Orientals' adaptation to rice would have happened after that. _________________________________________________________________ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 1, 2002 Report Share Posted June 1, 2002 >>From: Wanita Sears <wanitawa@...> > >> >Hi Heidi, >> >The Asian peoples have a longer intestinal tract which helps them to >> >digest the starchs. I read this in NT. >> >Sheila >> >>Well that defuncts the Land Bridge Theory and the Inuit being from >>Mongolia. >>SAD did the same to them as other Native Americans. wrote: > >Not at all. The migration across the Bering land bridge is believed to have >happened in preagricultural times. The Orientals' adaptation to rice would >have happened after that. So 10,000 years of rice eating in Asia extended the intestine and increased pancreas size. I've heard reports from dentists in Japan concerned with dental deterioration in children who now eat more of a SAD diet because of its availability there. Wanita Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 1, 2002 Report Share Posted June 1, 2002 ----- Original Message ----- From: " Wanita Sears " <wanitawa@...> > >Not at all. The migration across the Bering land bridge is believed to have > >happened in preagricultural times. The Orientals' adaptation to rice would > >have happened after that. > > So 10,000 years of rice eating in Asia extended the intestine and increased > pancreas size. Something like that. It's not like developing an entirely new trait--significant genetic variation for these traits exists in any population. 10,000 years is about 500 generations, so even a small reproductive advantage for those with enlarged intestines and pancreases would dramatically increase the average size of these organs in a fraction of that time. > I've heard reports from dentists in Japan concerned with dental > deterioration in children who now eat more of a SAD diet because of its > availability there. Of course. The Japanese have adapted to consume greater amounts of *unrefined* carbohydrates than those of European stock. This does not mean that they can replace their traditional brown rice with white rice, sugar, and white flour with impunity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.