Re: (cr support group) macro nutrients, sat fats

[Guest guest]

Without the specifics and the studies showing the benefit, and with the

acknowedgment that it is difficult, if not impossible, to meet the minimum RDAs

on a high fat diet, and with the amount of literature showing the benefit of a

healthy whole food diet that is " lower " in fat, especially saturated fat, I

think it is unwise to consume a high fat diet, let alone a high SF diet.

It is possible for people to write books, have websites and say whatever they

want without being held accountable. Thats why this list insists on current

published peer reviewed data. Thats why they also all include a waiver saying

smoething like......this information is not to be taken as medical advice......

and if you do so, you do so at your own risk.... etc etc

However, the Atkins Council is presently being sued by a man who developed CHD

while following the diet, and in the last study, 2 of the Atkins dieters died

and 1/3 of them had their LDLs go up significantly.

IN addition (from a recent article I wrote).....

You have to read some of these studies that are supposed to " validate " the low

carb diets more closely.

Of the two recent ones published in the May 18 issue of the ls of Internal

Medicine. Both groups of authors warned that the studies had serious flaws. The

first, which followed 132 obese adults at Philadelphia Veterans Affairs Medical

Center, had a very high dropout rate (34% of the dieters) as well as " suboptimal

dietary adherence of the enrolled persons. "

In the second study, funded by the C. Atkins Foundation and conducted at

Duke University, the 120 moderately obese dieters were followed for only 24

weeks, and the Atkins followers received nutritional supplements that the

low-fat dieters did not receive, which, the authors feared, might have skewed

results because the supplements have favorable effects on cholesterol and

triglyceride levels and weight loss. But what we, the American public, saw in

the media were headlines like " Low- Carb Is King! " and " Low-Carb Dieters Knew It

All Along. "

LDL " BAD " CHOLESTEROL ROSE IN 30% OF ATKINS DIETERS. The Duke University study

measured LDL cholesterol levels and found that after one year overall changes in

LDL levels did not differ between the Atkins and low-fat dieters, but 30% of the

Atkins diets did experience increases of LDL levels of 10% or more. In fact, two

of the 60 Atkins dieters who began the study dropped out because of high LDL

cholesterol levels: one suffered an LDL increase of 182 to 219 in four weeks;

the second dieter's LDL shot up from 184 to 283 in three months. A third Atkins

participant developed chest (angina) pain and was subsequently diagnosed with

coronary heart disease.

TWO OF THE ATKINS DIETERS DIED. Though the Philadelphia study was small in

number - just 66 men and women were on the Atkins diet - and their average age

was only 53 years old, two of the Atkins dieters died, one from hyperosmola coma

five months into the study, and the second from severe ischemic cardiomyopathy

ten months into the study. No one had died on the low-fat diet.

THE ATKINS DIETERS SUFFERED FAR MORE SIDE EFFECTS. In the Duke University

study, two thirds of the Atkins dieters reported constipation problems, 60%

reported headaches, and 25% complained of a general feeling of weakness. The

Atkins followers were five times more likely to suffer from muscle cramps

compared to the low-fat dieters, and three times more likely to have diarrhea.

THE LOW-FAT DIET WAS NOT AN OPTIMAL LOW-FAT DIET, NOT EVEN CLOSE. It's no

surprise that the weight loss, cholesterol, and triglyceride results of the

low-fat diets in these studies were disappointing. The diets themselves were the

worst kind of low-fat diets, " The Philadelphia study reported data on what the

subjects actually ate, and the numbers are illuminating. At the end of one year,

" there was no significant difference in the amount of saturated fat on the

Atkins diet and the low-fat diets. " (What?! And the latter was supposed to be

low-fat and heart-healthy?!) Moreover, the total amount of fat on the low-fat

diet (about 30% of calories) was at least twice as high as the amount of fat I

would recommend and four to five times higher in saturated and trans fats.

It appears, too, that the low-fat dieters in the Philadelphia were not filling

their plates with fruits and vegetables. The fiber content of their diet

remained constant throughout the year, " proving that their increased

carbohydrate consumption came from refined carbs, like sugar and refined grains "

Lots of " bad " fat? Lots of " bad " carbs? This is not a healthy low-fat diet,

certainly not one that would impact favorably on weight loss, blood lipids like

cholesterol, and other cardiovascular risk factors, all of which have been shown

to dramatically improve on the Pritikin Program.

Dr. Atkins' himself, his widow conceded in a press statement in February 2004,

had blockages in his arteries, and " did have some progression of his coronary

artery disease in the last three years of his life, including some new blockage

of a secondary artery. According to his death certificate, Atkins' medical

history included a heart attack, high blood pressure, and a failing heart. Plus,

at 258 pounds and 6 feet tall, he was morbidly obese. " Not exactly an

endorsement for a diet he claimed could reverse heart disease and lead to

permanent weight control, "

By contrast, well-designed research has found that a very low-fat diet full of

whole, fiber-rich foods like fruits, vegetables, and whole grains has been shown

to not only reverse coronary artery disease but also substantially diminish and

even eliminate angina pain.

True, the Atkins dieters in the two new studies saw their HDL " good " levels go

up, " but HDL levels are a complex issue, " . " HDL has subfractions. Some of these

subfractions are made up of the protective 'good' part of HDL, the part that

returns excess cholesterol to your liver, where it's recognized as waste

material and disposed of. But some HDL subfractions are made up of unprotective

HDL. Which type did the Atkins diet raise? We don't know. But given the fact

that two of the Atkins dieters died and one developed angina, I'm skeptical that

the rise in HDL came from the beneficial subfractions. "

[Guest guest]

Hi Shaman:

Probably the single largest, most comprehensive, best organized and

most important empirical, epidemiological, health study world-wide to

date has been the Nurses' Health Study. It has followed the

nutrition and lifestyles of more than 100,000 women in considerable

detail over a period of about thirty years. **Many** of the subjects

in that study have now keeled over and died, or become seriously ill

with what the conventional wisdom has come to call the 'diseases of

aging'. So it is now possible to go back and look at the

characteristics of those that became sick or died early, and compare

them with the characteristics of those who are still healthy for

their age.

If you are uncertain about the health effects of saturated fats one

place you might want to consider taking a look at is that study's

results. One way to do so might be to read 'Healthy Women Healthy

Lives' - Willett. If your local library doesn't have it, ask them

why not.

Rodney.

PS: What criteria do you use to come to conclusions as to the

quality of the sources you come across for health information?

--- In , " shaman7uk " <shaman7uk@y...>

wrote:

> Which studies are these? And what are the beneficial aspects?

>

> to be honest I have not yet seen a study that is in any way

> conclusive that proves saturated fat = problem with heart or heart

> health ...................

[Guest guest]

In the interests of impartiality, Atkin's widow claims that the

weight gain was a result of fluid retention after his accident while

in coma. He was allegedly at a healthy weight before hitting his

head. That's not unreasonable given the lower net calorie yield of a

high protein diet. But even a cursory physical look at Atkins would

have shown that he was hardly a picture of health, suffering from

wrinkling and age spots all over.

I really doubt the Atkins diet raises the good HDL2b subfraction and

more than likely raises the bad HDL3a subfraction.

One you rule out the outdated Lipid Theory (cholesterol) which

confuses causation with correlation in CVD, it should be quite

obvious everything then falls back upon nutrition and that nutrition

in any sense is woefully inadequate on a high-fat or high-protein

diet.

The current " low fat " meme definitely didn't (or doesn't)

include " healthy fats " and " low insulinic/glycemic carbs " . It would

be a mistake to assume American Boobus understands exactly what you

mean when you use that term.

Logan

--- In , " Jeff Novick " <jnovick@p...>

wrote:

>

a heart attack, high blood pressure, and a failing heart. Plus, at

258 pounds and 6 feet tall, he was morbidly obese. " Not exactly an

endorsement for a diet he claimed could reverse heart disease and

lead to permanent weight control, "

>

> True, the Atkins dieters in the two new studies saw their

HDL " good " levels go up, " but HDL levels are a complex issue, " . " HDL

has subfractions. Some of these subfractions are made up of the

protective 'good' part of HDL, the part that returns excess

cholesterol to your liver, where it's recognized as waste material

and disposed of. But some HDL subfractions are made up of

unprotective HDL. Which type did the Atkins diet raise? We don't

know. But given the fact that two of the Atkins dieters died and one

developed angina, I'm skeptical that the rise in HDL came from the

beneficial subfractions. "

[Guest guest]

>in the interests of impartiality, Atkin's widow claims that the weight gain was

a result of fluid retention after his accident while

in coma. He was allegedly at a healthy weight before hitting his head.

Actually, the supposed 'recorded' lower weight of Dr Atkins (as released in a

press release by DR Trager) said that at the time of his admittance his weight

was such that based on his height/weight at the time of his death, that it would

still put him at a BMI of 26.9, clearly not a healthy weight, expecially for

someone expousing a lifestyle that would result in permanent weight control. It

is commonly accepted that a BMI under 24.9 is healthy and as it has been

discussed here, the reality is that a BMI of around 18-20 is probably even

better.

>>>I really doubt the Atkins diet raises the good HDL2b subfraction and more

than likely raises the bad HDL3a subfraction.

We will both have to guess for a while. However, the Fleming study, which

lasted one year and the Kwitorvich study which lasted 2 years both showed

significant decreases in HDL and significant increased in LDL, TC, TGs, CRP,

Lipo (a), Hcy in those following the low carb diets. Neither looked at HDL

subfractions but the overall results werent good.

>>One you rule out the outdated Lipid Theory (cholesterol) which confuses

causation with correlation in CVD,

I dont know of any " outdated " lipid theory to rule out. However, I do know of

a lipid theory that we are constantly learning more about. And one thing that

we all just learned is that in the very recent large multi country study that

Rodney posted, it showed that 90% of all CVD risk can be explained by 9 risk

factors with abnormal lipids (cholesterol) being one of them. So, which

outdated lipid theory are you discussing?

>>it should be quite obvious everything then falls back upon nutrition and that

nutrition in any sense is woefully inadequate on a high-fat or high-protein

diet.

As I said, if it isnt " woefully inadequate " than just simply design for me a

diet, that is low in carb and high in fat and/or protein that is " adequate " in

nutrient content. I dont think that even Dr Atkins could as he recommended

that his followers take supplements to make up for the " inadequacy " and

supplements were given to those on the Atkins diet in some of the studies.

>>The current " low fat " meme definitely didn't (or doesn't) include " healthy

fats " and " low insulinic/glycemic carbs " . It would be a mistake to assume

American Boobus understands exactly what you mean when you use that term.

I dont speak for or of any low fat " meme " and have regularly posted about the

importance of adequate EFA intake.

And, its also why I personally wouldnt just rely on the term " low fat " .

Focusing on any one nutrient as the key indicator of the health status of any

diet would be misguided. There are nutrients, fiber, sodium, sugars,

cholesterol, SFA, EFAs, TFAs, that must also be considered. However, as I

stated earlier, when i am done designing an optimal diet, it will be lower in

fat that many people are currently consuming. That doesnt make it low fat. I

would say that currently most people consume too much fat, and the wrong fats.

It would be " adequate " in fat. And, that once we do define an optimnal diet,

increasing the fat over a certain percentage would only make the " overall "

nutrient density of the diet go down.

it is actually easy to design a diet that is adequate in EFAs and a total fat

content under 20-25%.

If you disagree, again, instead of discussing semantics, just simple present a

diet, that is adequate in all the known nutrients that is high in fat and/or

protein and low in carb. I would love to see it.

Walford couldnt. Thats why he recommended keeping the fat within the range that

Francesca posted.

Regards

jeff

[Guest guest]

Ooppps...

I said...

>>based on his height/weight at the time of his death, that it would still put

him at a BMI of 26.9,

I meant...

At the time of his fall.

With all due respect.

Jeff

[Guest guest]

> In the interests of impartiality, Atkin's widow claims that the

> weight gain was a result of fluid retention after his accident

while

> in coma. He was allegedly at a healthy weight before hitting his

> head. That's not unreasonable given the lower net calorie yield of

a

> high protein diet. But even a cursory physical look at Atkins

would

> have shown that he was hardly a picture of health, suffering from

> wrinkling and age spots all over.

>

> I really doubt the Atkins diet raises the good HDL2b subfraction

and

> more than likely raises the bad HDL3a subfraction.

>

> One you rule out the outdated Lipid Theory (cholesterol) which

> confuses causation with correlation in CVD, it should be quite

> obvious everything then falls back upon nutrition and that

nutrition

> in any sense is woefully inadequate on a high-fat or high-protein

> diet.

>

> The current " low fat " meme definitely didn't (or doesn't)

> include " healthy fats " and " low insulinic/glycemic carbs " . It

would

> be a mistake to assume American Boobus understands exactly what you

> mean when you use that term.

Hi All,

Please see:

http://tinyurl.com/5leo4

Weight loss on Atkins diet short-lived, review finds

Last Updated Fri, 03 Sep 2004 14:38:14 EDT

LONDON - High-fat, low-carb diets like Atkins may

help people lose weight, but its side effects could

lead to problems in the long term, a new review

suggests.

Cheers, Al Pater.

[Guest guest]

Hi All,

Please read:

http://tinyurl.com/5klsq

Cheers, Al Pater.

[Guest guest]

--- In , " Jeff Novick " <jnovick@p...>

wrote:

> I dont know of any " outdated " lipid theory to rule out. However,

> I do know of a lipid theory that we are constantly learning more

> about. And one thing that we all just learned is that in the very

> recent large multi country study that Rodney posted, it showed that

> 90% of all CVD risk can be explained by 9 risk factors with

> abnormal lipids (cholesterol) being one of them. So, which

> outdated lipid theory are you discussing?

That is indeed the theory I'm referring to, the current economically

fashionable Lipid Theory that is now 60+ years old. I'm not

concerned with correlating RISK factors in CVD (which does sound like

modern revisionism), I'm concered with the CAUSE.

I have a paper in layman terms describing the more rational

hypothesis released in 1991, so anyone can e-mail me if they'd

like to receive it.

> If you disagree, again, instead of discussing semantics, just

> simple present a diet, that is adequate in all the known nutrients

> that is high in fat and/or protein and low in carb. I would

> love to see it.

I never said and don't disagree with this, and I'd be amazed if you

could get the RDA every day without supplementation. What I do

disagree with is that saturated fat or cholesterol is the cause of

CVD as opposed to the crowding out of or excaberated nutrition

requirements due to high fat or high protein intakes. It's a subtle

difference.

Logan

[Guest guest]

> .... What I do

> disagree with is that saturated fat or cholesterol is the cause of

> CVD ...

And cigarettes do not cause cancer nor do traffic accidents cause

injuries. They increase the probablity that they will occur. Many

smoke and are in accidents and develop no lung cancer or injuries.

[Guest guest]

Hi Logan:

If what you say below is true then why is it that it is only

saturated and trans fats that are associated with elevated rates of

CVD? All types of fat contain about nine calories per gram. All of

them, if eaten in excess, have the same identical ability to 'crowd

out' better nutrition. Why is it that diets high in polyunsaturated

and monounsaturated fats (that are associated with REDUCED rates of

CVD) do not crowd out higher nutrient intakes?

Rodney.

> ........... What I do disagree with is that saturated fat or

> cholesterol is the cause of CVD as opposed to the crowding out of

> or excaberated nutrition requirements due to high fat or high

> protein intakes.