Freedomain Radio

I have become fascinated with this guy, Molyneux, and have been reading and listening to his podcasts this past week. And... he has mentioned in a few places that he believes that eating fat is the cause of obesity in older adults. I think he recently said that he stopped eating meat, and I've heard him joke about those diets where you 'Eat Fat! Lose Weight!'

The Truth, when I discovered it, changed my life.

When people get older, their metabolism doesn't 'slow down' as so many people believe. They lose the ability to process insulin, and they develop insulin resistance. People  don't really know why this happens, but the body responds to this inability to process insulin, by secreting more insulin.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insulin

Insulin causes the body to store glucose in the blood, as fat in the body. Insulin is secreted in response to elevated blood sugar levels. Elevated blood sugar levels occur when people eat carbohydrates.

So, if someone forgoes the eating of fat, and replaces that energy souce with carbohydrates, his insulin levels go up, and he gains weight. Moreover, the higher insulin levels prevent the glucose from being burned as energy, and the person's cells will stay deprived of energy even though their blood sugar levels are elevated. Thus, the person may stay hungry even though he just ate. This cycle of eating carbohydrates, elevating blood sugar, elevating insulin, staying hungry and eating some more, is the first stage in a cycle which leads to obesity, diabetes, and all the negative things that go along with this process.

So, to lose weight, lower the intake of food which raises blood sugar. This is primarily sugar and grains. Replace this energy source with fat and you will lose weight. Your body will learn to burn fat. Your blood sugar level will stay low. Your insulin level will come down. Your body will be able to use the energy in the blood, and your hunger levels will fall.

A few years ago I weighed 280 lbs. Two years ago, I stopped eating sugars and starches. Today I weigh 175, which was my high school weight, and all my health markers are excellent. My meals consist primarily of meat and vegetables, but no sugar, grain, or high-carbohydrate vegetables like potatoes.

This is the Atkins diet, and has been criticized sharply. However, about three years ago, people began studying this diet in clinical trials, and now a new study comes out about every week or so. WITHOUT EXCEPTION, every study shows improved health markers across the board. Triglycerides come down, HDL goes up. LDL particle size becomes larger. C-Reactive Protein drops. LipoProtein(A) drops. Bood Pressure drops. HbA1c drops. Blood sugar drops, and WEIGHT drops.

This is causing a sort of conundrum in the field of nutrition because all of the epidemiological studies in the past, draw correlations between the amount of fat people eat, and many negative health markers such as weight and cardiovascular disease - where all clinical trials where carbohydrates are restricted, show  improvements in all health markers.

This researcher, who is a vegan, did a two year study.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eREuZEdMAVo

Go to minute 23 for the presentation on health markers.

For an excellent look into the science behind it, take a look at Good Calories, Bad Calories by Gary Taubes.

http://www.amazon.com/Good-Calories-Bad-Controversial-Science/dp/1400033462/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1282741044&sr=8-1

How wonderfull that you were able to lose bodyfat and improve your health with your low carb diet! Congratulations, it must have been difficult trying to  go the low carb route when soo many people seem to think the exact opposite way (restricted calories, low fat) is the way to improve one's health. I myself have gotten into better shape by trying to keep my carb count under 100 a day. And I am curious to see if Stef has an oppinion about Atkins, or other low carb lifestyles. Though I hope people in this thread will refrain from MEAT=CANCER types of comments.

well said snowdog!

There are actually alot of us on FDR that are atkin / primal / paleo eaters with great success! so your not the only one. 

However, there are also quite a few passionate vegetarians on the board and most threads like this (we've  had a few) do turn into pretty heated arguments.

Again though, congratulations on your health! Also, do you read marksdailyapple.com ?

Cool. Good to know the topic has been covered before.

I've come across a lot of websites which support this way of eating, including Marks Daily Apple, William Davis' blog, Jimmy Moore's site, www.paleonu.com, The Eades website, and numerous others.

I use to cook eggs with coconut oil in the morning. Now I use butter. I think my only sin is that I overindulge in peanuts from time to time. :)

"Feed Your Brain, Lose Your Belly" is a really good, science-based book on low-carb diets. I'm pretty sure I learned about it at FDR.

http://www.amazon.com/Feed-Your-Brain-Lose-Belly/dp/0615339506/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1282771711&sr=8-2

SnowDog:

Cool. Good to know the topic has been covered before.

I've come across a lot of websites which support this way of eating, including Marks Daily Apple, William Davis' blog, Jimmy Moore's site, www.paleonu.com, The Eades website, and numerous others.

I use to cook eggs with coconut oil in the morning. Now I use butter. I think my only sin is that I overindulge in peanuts from time to time. :)

 

Marks Daily Apple is great! I've lost 130 lbs after getting off of prescription drugs and eating low carb. I eat like Grok and have never been happier with my diet

... The piece was written by freelance writer and Atkins advocate Gary Taubes (who reportedly scored a
book deal from it--and a $700,000 advance). The Washington Post investigated his pro-Atkins article
and found that Taubes simply ignored all the research that didn’t agree with his conclusions.

Taubes evidently interviewed a number of prominent obesity researchers and then twisted their words.
"What frightens me," said one, "is that he picks and chooses his facts.... If the facts don’t fit in with his
yarn, he ignores them."

... a 2004 medical review concluded, the Atkins Diet is so "seriously deficient" in nutrition that "there is
real danger of malnutrition in the long term."

... Less often reported in the media is the fact that one of the research subjects placed on the Atkins Diet in
the 2003 "vindication" study was hospitalized with chest pain and another died. Similarly, in the
widely publicized May 2004 study, less widely publicized was the fact that two people in the low
carb-diet arm of the study couldn’t complete the study because they died. One slipped into a coma; the
other dropped dead from heart disease. As the Director of Nutrition at the Harvard School of
Medicine has written, "there is still much danger in the widespread fad enthusiasm for these diets."

http://www.atkinsexposed.org/pdf/atkins-exposed.pdf

Johnathan Smithson:

... Though I hope people in this thread will refrain from MEAT=CANCER types of comments.

What like these ones...

Atkins’ followers also risk cancer. Studies at Harvard and elsewhere involving tens of thousands of
women and men have shown that regular meat consumption may increase colon cancer risk as much as
300 percent. As one Harvard School of Public health researcher noted, because of the meat
content, two years on the Atkins Diet "could initiate a cancer. It could show up as a polyp in 7 years and
as colon cancer in ten." Another Harvard study showed that women with the highest intake of animal
fat seem to have over a 75% greater risk of developing breast cancer.

It’s tragically ironic that after McDonalds’ CEO apparently dropped dead of a heart attack in 2004, their
new CEO was in the operating room with colo-rectal cancer only 16 days later.

The most comprehensive report on diet and cancer in history was published in 1997. It took over four
years to complete, reviewing 4500 studies from thousands of researchers across the globe--a landmark
scientific consensus document written by the top cancer researchers in the world. After all that work, what
was their number one recommendation? "Choose a diet that is predominantly plant based, rich in a variety
of fruits, vegetables, nuts, and beans with minimally processed starchy foods." In other words,
essentially the opposite of the Atkins Diet.

In the January issue of Scientific American it was noted: "Cancer is most frequent among those branches
of the human race where carnivorous habits prevail." That was the January issue in 1892! This is
nothing new. Whats the number one recommendation of the American Institute for Cancer Research?
Plant based diets. The number one recommendation of the World Cancer Research Fund?
Plant-based diets. The number one recommendation of the National Cancer Institute, the World
Health Organization and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations? More fruits and
vegetables. The number one recommendation of the American Cancer Society? More plants,
less meat. In fact the American Cancer Society has officially condemned diets high in animal grease,
concluding that "a low carb diet can be a high-risk option when it comes to health."

http://www.atkinsexposed.org/pdf/atkins-exposed.pdf

SimonF:

 meat consumption may increase colon cancer risk as much as
300 percent.

 could initiate a cancer. It could show up as a polyp in 7 years and
as colon cancer in ten.

" Another Harvard study showed that women with the highest intake of animal
fat seem to have over a 75% greater risk of developing breast cancer.
 

They seem sure that meat consumption may increase risk of cancer. . . Also the china study that was loosely cited is just correlation, and not even that strong of correlation. 

SimonF:

Johnathan Smithson:

... Though I hope people in this thread will refrain from MEAT=CANCER types of comments.

What like these ones...

Atkins’ followers also risk cancer. Studies at Harvard and elsewhere involving tens of thousands of
women and men have shown that regular meat consumption may increase colon cancer risk as much as
300 percent. As one Harvard School of Public health researcher noted, because of the meat
content, two years on the Atkins Diet "could initiate a cancer. It could show up as a polyp in 7 years and
as colon cancer in ten." Another Harvard study showed that women with the highest intake of animal
fat seem to have over a 75% greater risk of developing breast cancer.

It’s tragically ironic that after McDonalds’ CEO apparently dropped dead of a heart attack in 2004, their
new CEO was in the operating room with colo-rectal cancer only 16 days later.

The most comprehensive report on diet and cancer in history was published in 1997. It took over four
years to complete, reviewing 4500 studies from thousands of researchers across the globe--a landmark
scientific consensus document written by the top cancer researchers in the world. After all that work, what
was their number one recommendation? "Choose a diet that is predominantly plant based, rich in a variety
of fruits, vegetables, nuts, and beans with minimally processed starchy foods." In other words,
essentially the opposite of the Atkins Diet.

In the January issue of Scientific American it was noted: "Cancer is most frequent among those branches
of the human race where carnivorous habits prevail." That was the January issue in 1892! This is
nothing new. Whats the number one recommendation of the American Institute for Cancer Research?
Plant based diets. The number one recommendation of the World Cancer Research Fund?
Plant-based diets. The number one recommendation of the National Cancer Institute, the World
Health Organization and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations? More fruits and
vegetables. The number one recommendation of the American Cancer Society? More plants,
less meat. In fact the American Cancer Society has officially condemned diets high in animal grease,
concluding that "a low carb diet can be a high-risk option when it comes to health."

http://www.atkinsexposed.org/pdf/atkins-exposed.pdf

 

 

It would help if you posted the actual studies themselves, and not someone's interpretations of them. What I've found when digging through this, is that the studies which indicate cancer, obesity, and cardiovascular disease are, with no exceptions that I've yet found, epidemiological studies which do not restrict carbohydrate consumption. It's quite likely that the people who eat the most meat in society, are the same people who like to drink, smoke, and follow lifestyles where they don't particularly pay attention to their health.

@SimonF

While I appreciate that you are most likely posting these studies perhaps with concern for the people here who are following a low carb diet, I thought I would explain why the 2 studies you cited are not useful as arguments against low carb diets.

In the first study about the Atkins diet you mention that a man dies and another is admitted to hospital (no need to post links- I have read about this study), I have to point out though that in any longitudinal study on any diet there are almost always a hand full of people who fall ill and die, if you care to go back through medical journals, you will find many studies also in which high carb diets were being tested and a lot of people still died from diet related illnesses, I am not even saying this necessarily to criticise high carb diets, Im saying it to make the point that low carb or high carb diet aside, some people still get ill and need to go hosptial. Albeit, I must say that the 2 people who became ill in this Atkins study are the only 2 I have ever heard of becoming ill on this diet in controlled studies, I have read many more where higher numbers of people die and become ill in high carb diet studies, a frightening amount of people dying actually. I want to add also, that I have read a lot of studies on low/high carb diets, to point out that it is not a case of selection bias in my studies.

In the second study it is said that people who eat meat regularly may suffer from cancer more often than those who do not eat meat regularly, OK maybe it's true, we don't really know anyway because it's pretty vague but we are not discussing regular meat consumption here we are discussing low carb diets specifically. A lot of people eat meat regularly, it doesn't mean they aren't eating a lot of other things that could also be affecting cancer rates.

rpellow:

SimonF:

 meat consumption may increase colon cancer risk as much as
300 percent.

 could initiate a cancer. It could show up as a polyp in 7 years and
as colon cancer in ten.

" Another Harvard study showed that women with the highest intake of animal
fat seem to have over a 75% greater risk of developing breast cancer.
 

They seem sure that meat consumption may increase risk of cancer. . . Also the china study that was loosely cited is just correlation, and not even that strong of correlation. 

In any statistical study you will get some people on the tail ends of the bell curve, i.e. a few will have greatly elevated risks, and a few negligible increase in risk.

For a random member of the population, they may be at either extreme or the middle, so they "could" be at a greatly elevated risk, or they "could" be at not much elevated risk. Most likely they will be somewhere in the middle (i.e. moderately elevated risk).

The article I have cited contains well over 1000 references, from reputable publications and health authorities. I don't think anyone with a substantial understanding of nutritional science recommends low-carb diets. The evidence that high fat/meat consumption is unhealthy is supportable with biologically plausible explanations, epidemiology and empirical clinical data all of which agree. Low-carb diets have no such comparable data to support them.

Given the options of agreeing with thousands of PhDs or a few crackpots, I'll go with the PhDs every time.

SnowDog:

It would help if you posted the actual studies themselves, and not someone's interpretations of them. What I've found when digging through this, is that the studies which indicate cancer, obesity, and cardiovascular disease are, with no exceptions that I've yet found, epidemiological studies which do not restrict carbohydrate consumption. It's quite likely that the people who eat the most meat in society, are the same people who like to drink, smoke, and follow lifestyles where they don't particularly pay attention to their health.

 

I've posted a link to my source, so you can do the research yourself as can anyone else here.

Unlikely you will find epi studies on low-carb dieters, complience is very low, and the fad is dying out, so yes, there is a lack of evidence in favour of low-carb diets. There have been a number of studies of low-carb dieters, and they are not favourable at all.

The Inuit population is perhaps the ideal low-carb population, but their lifestyle is so different to Westerners that results woud not be useful. This is what Dr. Greger says about low-carb diet studies and the Inuit:

A 2003 review of the safety of low carbohydrate diets reeled off an alarming list of potential problems:
"Complications such as heart arrhythmias, cardiac contractile function impairment, sudden death,
osteoporosis, kidney damage, increased cancer risk, impairment of physical activity and lipid [cholesterol]
abnormalities can all be linked to long-term restriction of carbohydrates in the diet."
There is a particular concern that children who go on the Atkins Diet might suffer permanent physical and
mental damage as a result of starving their bodies of critical nutrients. As one U.S. child nutrition
specialist explained, "The effect can be to dull the mind, stunt growth, and soften bones...I wouldn’t want
to risk it by putting my child on a low carbohydrate diet."

The concern with bone health arises from the fact that muscle protein has a high sulphur content. When
people eat too much of this meat protein, sulfuric acid forms within our bodies which must somehow be
neutralized to maintain proper internal pH balance. One way our bodies can buffer the sulphuric acid load
caused by meat is with calcium borrowed from our bones. Cheese is also a leading source of these
sulphur-containing proteins. People on high meat diets can lose so much calcium in the urine that it
can actually solidify into kidney stones. Over time, high animal protein intakes may leach enough
calcium from the bones to increase one’s risk of osteoporosis. People may be peeing their bones into the
toilet along with the ketones.

The Harvard Nurse’s Health Study, which followed over 85,000 nurses for a dozen years, found that those
who ate more animal protein had a significantly increased risk of forearm fracture. While plant-based
proteins did not show a deleterious effect, women eating just a serving of red meat a day seemed to have
significantly increased fracture risk. Other studies have linked meat consumption to hip fracture risk
as well.

Although Atkins conceded, "kidney stones are a conceivable complication," Atkins dismissed any
assertion that his diet might endanger bone health. Researchers decided to test his claim directly.
In 2002, researchers from the Universities of Chicago and Texas published a study that put people on the
Atkins Diet and measured 1) how acidic their urine got and 2) just how much calcium they were losing in
their urine. They reported that the Atkins Diet resulted in a "striking increase in net acid excretion." After
just two weeks on the Atkins Diet, the subjects were already losing 258mg of calcium in their urine every
day. They concluded that the Atkins Diet "provides an exaggerated acid load, increasing risks for renal
calculi [kidney stone] formation and bone loss." In addition, the Atkins Diet is actually deficient in
calcium in the first place--even if one includes his recommended 65 supplements. Luckily there’s a
66th, available on his website.

We don’t have any long-term published data on the bone health of Atkins’ followers (or any other health
parameter for that matter). One might look to the Inuit peoples--the so-called "Eskimos"--for hints,
though. (The word Eskimo comes from the word Eskimaux--"eaters of raw flesh.") They seem to be
the only population on Earth approximating the Atkins Diet, living largely off Atkins’ dream foods like
blubber.

Despite having some of the highest calcium intakes in the world, the Inuit also have some of the worst
rates of osteoporosis. Although calcium intakes vary widely, people in some villages get over
2500mg per day, almost 5 times what most Americans get, due to their eating many of their fish whole,
bones and all. For example, their recipe for "Ice Cream" calls for "2 cups moose grease," not in and
of itself high in calcium, but with the addition of "1 dressed pike," this Atkins-friendly dessert offers up a
respectable 130mg of calcium per serving. The "unusually rapid bone loss" found in every study ever
published on Inuit bone health is blamed on the "acidic effect of a meat diet."

Not only does the near-Atkins level of animal protein in their diet seem to be dissolving their bones, the
near-Atkins level of animal fat leaves the Inuit womens breast milk with some of the highest levels of
PCBs in the world. Their blood is swimming with mercury and other toxic heavy metals. "They’re at the
top of the food chain," says Dr. Russel Shearer, an environmental physical scientist with the Canadian
Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, and therefore "accumulate the highest levels of
these contaminants." In the last edition of his book, Atkins did finally acknowledge the threat posed
by the industrial pollutants in animal foods and urged his followers to choose organic free-range
meat.