Re: High Triglycerides

[Guest guest]

Your question has multiple answers and I'm sure I'm going to leave

some factors out but here are a few reasons as to why the differences

in sugar/starch handling.

A) White Sugar and White flour are as toxic as cyanide and arsenic it

just takes a lot more of the first two to kill you. So these are a

problem for everyone, the problems just vary according to " flavor " .

Arthritis, diabetes, heart disease, cancer, etc...

Long term abuse of the above or even " healthy " starch/sugars will

stress the endocrine and digestive systems and ultimately damage the

mechanisms used for their digestion. When this happens it requires a

period of recovery where they are eliminated for a time. For some

people they will be able to re-introduce these in moderation for some

they will not.

C) The differences in people are usually the length of time and how

serious they were as abusers in . Also factor in the amount of

PUFA damage they've had and you'll find the varying amount of

recovery and or permanent damage done.

D) Realize that starch/sugar abuse is harmful 100% of the time to

everyone who does it. Differences in length of time before

breakdown, time of recovery, flavor of breakdown, etc... are all

related to aging, genetics, environment, current diet, blah, blah,

blah,

DMM

> > > > Alecwood,

> > > >

> > > > Hi! Please help me to understand something. I

> > > > thought that triglycerides are fats. Why do they go

> > > > up when sugar and starchy carbos are eaten? I know

> > > > that insulin will rise, but why triglycerides?

> > >

> > > Excessive carbs, especially simple sugars are quickly converted

> to

> > > triglycerides.

[Guest guest]

Hi Dr. M,

I found your comparison of sugars and white flour to deadly poisons

to be scary, but true. I have already started to use your comparison

when talking to people about nutrition.

I brought up the subject of the total lack of degenerative disease,

among the Eskimos, at a group of friends the other night. The

response was, " Oh, the Eskimos lived in a closed culture " . These

highly educated woman seemed to think this explained the lack of

degenerative disease. I had to explain it was the diet of whole raw

foods which prevented the degenerative diseases. I could feel the

huge doubt hung in the air! I'm sure this is a common occurance for

NTer's everywhere.

I find there is a large resistance to facing the fact that the foods

people have prepared themselves and the foods they have eaten in

restaurants has badly effected their health or the health of the ones

they love. Denial is the way to avoid this painful truth, but of

course solves nothing.

I have become very sensitive to when I have said enough about

nutrition around most people. I find it impossible to keep entirely

quiet. The information is too important not to be shared. It is

wonderful to feel so comfortable discussing any nutritional issues

with you and the other members of native nutrition.

One question you did not answer was, what is a healthy range for

triglycerides?

Your answers are very helpful. Thanks.

Sheila

> > > > --- In @y..., Coyle <jafffaus@y...>

wrote:

> > > > > Alecwood,

> > > > >

> > > > > Hi! Please help me to understand something. I

> > > > > thought that triglycerides are fats. Why do they go

> > > > > up when sugar and starchy carbos are eaten? I know

> > > > > that insulin will rise, but why triglycerides?

> > > >

> > > > Excessive carbs, especially simple sugars are quickly

converted

> > to

> > > > triglycerides.

[Guest guest]

> One question you did not answer was, what is a healthy range for

> triglycerides?

> Your answers are very helpful. Thanks.

> Sheila

>

Hi Shiela:

On Dr. Mercola's site

http://www.mercola.com/1998/mar/30/triglycerides_risk_for_heart_attack.htm

he states that the ideal triglyceride level is 150, but the range is between

100-200. However, the other page he has on

http://www.mercola.com/1997/oct/27/heart_risk.htm suggests that it's the

triglyceride/HDL ratio that makes the difference. Supposedly, a *high*

triglyceride/HDL ratio is high risk in comparison to a *low*

triglyceride/HDL ratio. So, with that, it seems that in order for you to

tell if your triglycerides are *too* high you would first need to know what

your HDL level is too. (Otherwise you won't know what your triglyceride/HDL

ratio is.) Unfortunately, he doesn't state what the ideal ratio is, so even

if you did know what your ratio is, you still don't know if the ratio is too

high.

This triglyceride stuff is new to me, so I'm just learning from these posts

on this list, but I now have other thoughts. If Ravnskov is right that

triglycerides are normally high because because we usually eat three meals a

day and it takes about 12 or so hours for it to go down, then why don't they

measure what the normal *high* is than the low? Evidently, our bodies

function with high triglycerides most of the time. Shouldn't they try to

figure out what the normal high is and then decide how much above the high

is dangerous or abnormal? Also, if the triglycerides are so easy to control

by controlling insulin, then is it possible that a person who eats lots of

junk food will have a normal triglceride level after, say, a 24 hour fast?

We already have the knowledge that eating refined sugars and refined white

flour, etc. causes diseases, so what is this triglyceride test really for?

To tell us to stop eating sugar and white flour? I wouldn't be surprised if

their working on a new drug to lower triglyceride levels. As you can see

from Mercola's article on triglyceride/HDL ratios that they didn't tell us

what's normal. I think the pharmacy companies like that, so they can make

the guideline that will help them market more of their drugs.

Marla

[Guest guest]

Marla,

It would be very rare to find a doctor who would ask you to not eat

sugar and refined white flour. In fact the only one I ever met who

even asked what I eat was was an enviromental allergist. Even my very

fine alternative doctor does not choose to discuss food with me.

Wouldn't it be interesting to check the triglyceride levels of native

people? Do you think anyone has done this? We need a modern day

scientist to check out the blood profiles of native peoples. It would

be fascinating to see what they eat and see how healthy they are

today. I wonder how many native people there are left in the world

untouched by the " devalued foods of modern commerece. "

Sheila

> > One question you did not answer was, what is a healthy range for

> > triglycerides?

> > Your answers are very helpful. Thanks.

> > Sheila

> >

>

> Hi Shiela:

>

> On Dr. Mercola's site

>

http://www.mercola.com/1998/mar/30/triglycerides_risk_for_heart_attack

..htm

> he states that the ideal triglyceride level is 150, but the range

is between

> 100-200. However, the other page he has on

> http://www.mercola.com/1997/oct/27/heart_risk.htm suggests that

it's the

> triglyceride/HDL ratio that makes the difference. Supposedly, a

*high*

> triglyceride/HDL ratio is high risk in comparison to a *low*

> triglyceride/HDL ratio. So, with that, it seems that in order for

you to

> tell if your triglycerides are *too* high you would first need to

know what

> your HDL level is too. (Otherwise you won't know what your

triglyceride/HDL

> ratio is.) Unfortunately, he doesn't state what the ideal ratio

is, so even

> if you did know what your ratio is, you still don't know if the

ratio is too

> high.

>

> This triglyceride stuff is new to me, so I'm just learning from

these posts

> on this list, but I now have other thoughts. If Ravnskov is right

that

> triglycerides are normally high because because we usually eat

three meals a

> day and it takes about 12 or so hours for it to go down, then why

don't they

> measure what the normal *high* is than the low? Evidently, our

bodies

> function with high triglycerides most of the time. Shouldn't they

try to

> figure out what the normal high is and then decide how much above

the high

> is dangerous or abnormal? Also, if the triglycerides are so easy

to control

> by controlling insulin, then is it possible that a person who eats

lots of

> junk food will have a normal triglceride level after, say, a 24

hour fast?

>

> We already have the knowledge that eating refined sugars and

refined white

> flour, etc. causes diseases, so what is this triglyceride test

really for?

> To tell us to stop eating sugar and white flour? I wouldn't be

surprised if

> their working on a new drug to lower triglyceride levels. As you

can see

> from Mercola's article on triglyceride/HDL ratios that they didn't

tell us

> what's normal. I think the pharmacy companies like that, so they

can make

> the guideline that will help them market more of their drugs.

>

> Marla

[Guest guest]

Quoting h2ocolor1937 <h2ocolor@...>:

> It would be very rare to find a doctor who would ask you to not eat

> sugar and refined white flour. In fact the only one I ever met who

> even asked what I eat was was an enviromental allergist. Even my very

> fine alternative doctor does not choose to discuss food with me.

I'm not sure how common it is, but some doctors do recommend Atkins and

other low-carbohydrate diets. Didn't the PCR(sic)M recently issue a press

release suggesting that doctors could be sued for doing so?

--

Berg

bberg@...

[Guest guest]

YOU WROTE: " recently issue a press > release suggesting that doctors could

be sued for doing so. "

I read that too. So now the rare doctors, who do anything other than push

drugs, are even more threatened. What is wrong with this picture?

I have health challenges that force me to see doctors from time to time, but

I use them for diagnostic purposes ONLY. I have had severe reactions to all

medications, even aspirin, and it is pathetic how limited our " healer " are

in this country.

For 10 years I have " treated " myself with herbs, oils, diet, etc. And am

really getting results!

When I had my accident I was SO thankful for the emergency care I received.

That is where our medical community excels. Everything after that was

rather frightening.

The doctors act as if my body should recognize a prescription as nutritious

rather than a poisonous drug. Almost without exception, the doctors have

blamed me for the drugs not working! Go figure.

I have found that we NEED TO EDUCATE OURSELVES.

Kat

http://www.katking.com

----- Original Message -----

From: " Berg " <bberg@...>

< >

Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2002 12:57 PM

Subject: Re: Re: High Triglycerides

> Quoting h2ocolor1937 <h2ocolor@...>:

> > It would be very rare to find a doctor who would ask you to not eat

> > sugar and refined white flour. In fact the only one I ever met who

> > even asked what I eat was was an enviromental allergist. Even my very

> > fine alternative doctor does not choose to discuss food with me.

>

> I'm not sure how common it is, but some doctors do recommend Atkins and

> other low-carbohydrate diets. Didn't the PCR(sic)M recently issue a press

> release suggesting that doctors could be sued for doing so?

>

> --

> Berg

> bberg@...