Lipoproteins . . . zero!

27. July 2011 William Davis (23)
With the recent refinements in our approach to correction of the lipoprotein abnormalities that lead to coronary plaque and heart disease risk, I have been witnessing more and more people achieve:

Small LDL particles 0 nmol/L
Lipoprotein(a) 0 nmol/L


For instance, Ted, a 58-year old man I saw in the office today started with:

Small LDL 1673 nmol/L
Lipoprotein(a) 219 nmol/L

In other words, both small LDL particles and lipoprotein(a) are being knocked down to zero values.

Incidentally, the combination of lipoprotein(a) with small LDL is among the most atherogenic (atherosclerotic plaque-causing) patterns known. Despite his athletic, slender build and avoidance of unhealthy habits, Ted's heart scan score was 922--very high.

So Ted followed the diet I advocate, i.e., wheat elimination followed by elimination of cornstarch, oats, and sugars; high-dose fish oil (total daily EPA + DHA of 6000 mg/day); vitamin D supplementation sufficient to achieve a 25-hydroxy vitamin D level of 60-70 ng/ml; iodine supplementation; and thyroid normalization which, in Ted's case, required supplementation with the T3 thyroid hormone, liothyronine, at a small dose.

The result:

Small LDL particles 0 nmol/L
Lipoprotein(a) 0 nmol/L

Not everybody, of course, is achieving these incredible--and previously impossible--results. But the numbers are growing. Ted is the third person to achieve zeroes all around, in fact, over the past 10 days.

Heart disease prevention is getting better and more powerful every day. And it ain't all about Lipitor and low-fat.


Tags :

Comments (23) -

  • Bill Davis

    7/26/2011 11:25:38 PM |

    "high-dose fish oil (total daily EPA + DHA of 600 mg/day); "
    I am sure you mean 6000 mg/day of EPA + DHA.
    Maybe I can get zeros also. I'm trying.

  • Dr. William Davis

    7/27/2011 2:11:57 PM |

    Hi, Bill--

    Yes, 6000 mg per day. Thanks for catching that.

    Now corrected.

    Patience really pays with this strategy. I have been able to add more and more people to my list of great successes reducing Lp(a) with high-dose fish oil, although it may take 2 years or more to show its effects.

  • Galina L.

    7/27/2011 4:07:05 PM |

    I regularly eat  a tea-spoon of cod liver mixed with liver oil. Is it a valid substitute for a fish oil?

  • Gene K

    7/27/2011 5:42:10 PM |

    Dr. Davis,

    With a consistent improvement in the NMR indicators and lp(a) like you discuss here, is the change in the heart scan score still the final criterion based on which the heart disease risk should be assessed, or will a heart scan actually not add much to this risk assessment in this case?

  • Albert Lundy

    7/27/2011 6:12:30 PM |

    Hi Dr. Davis,
    We have great respect for your thoughts.
    We read about Quinoa a while back. It is a plant-based seed and related to leafy green vegetables such as spinach, chard, and beets. As it is naturally gluten-free, would that be a great substitute for Wheat? Would you have any concerns about Quinoa?

    (Reference:  http://shine.yahoo.com/event/green/how-to-make-quinoa-the-powerhouse-seed-2410950/)

    Thanks much!
    Lundy family

  • Soul

    7/27/2011 6:13:56 PM |

    Congrats Dr. Davis!  For as long as I've been following the blog, finding answers for lowering LpA has been a tough nut to crack it seems.

  • Might-o'chondri-AL

    7/27/2011 6:33:40 PM |

    Zero small LDL may be unattainable for everyone but the implication of Doc's protocol involving fish oil has resonance with data from a 2008 analysis of  281 Japanese residing in Japan & 306 American  men in their 40's. The blood profile of the Japanese had fish oil n-3 levels = 9.2% vs the American's blood n-3 levels = 3.9%; broken down to:  Japan EPA = 2.5% vs. American EPA = 0.8% ... Japan DHA = 5.9% vs. American DHA = 2.4% ... Japan Arachidonic acid = 6.6% vs. American  Arachidonic acid 9.0 % .

    Results were: the studied Japanese had less coronary artery calcification and less severe vascular intima-media thickness than the Americans (see Journal of the American College of Cardiology, vol 52, issue 6, 417-424) ; apparently the  blood fatty acid profile reflects in a matter of weeks what the tissue cells will come to show in months or years to come.

  • jaxrph

    7/27/2011 8:48:55 PM |

    Lp(a) reduction without niacin?  I guess there is hope for me.  I am on this plan now and will watch my numbers.

  • Buckaroo Banzai

    7/27/2011 11:00:16 PM |

    Is iodine supplementation only needed if thyroid values are abnormal?  What doses are we talking about?

  • Susan Clarke

    7/28/2011 12:04:24 AM |

    re: Iodine supplements, I tried Sea Kelp capsules a while back, but ended up with a sore throat and a sore neck after about a week to ten days.  Quit the capsules and it went away.  I figured it was conflicting with my Levoxyl, maybe causing an overdose.  Possible?

  • Steve Cooksey

    7/28/2011 4:37:02 PM |

    Awesome Dr. DAVIS!!!  
    Congrats to your and your patient's SUCCESS!!!

    Will be sharing widely! Smile

    Steve

  • Steve Cooksey

    7/28/2011 4:38:57 PM |

    Just a quick suggestion... your new logo ... the 'skinless' human.... is scaring people. Smile

    Ok... it scares me. Smile

  • sharon

    7/28/2011 5:05:54 PM |

    i love the skinless human.

  • steve

    7/28/2011 6:02:58 PM |

    Dr Davis:
    Exceptional results!  How low a carb restricted diet was he on?  Was this achieved with zero statin or other medicines taken?  What was his total particle count, and HDL and LDL, and trig levels?  Did you determine his Apo E before diet recommendations

    Thanks,

  • Dr. William Davis

    7/29/2011 12:33:02 AM |

    Hi, Gene--
    Yes, it is still helpful to obtain this cumulative end-result that shows the long-term effects of your program, i.e., a coronary calcium score.

  • Dr. William Davis

    7/29/2011 12:33:37 AM |

    Hi, Lundy's--
    I'll be discussing this and related issues in near-future.

    It all boils down to carb sensitivity.

  • Dr. William Davis

    7/29/2011 12:35:01 AM |

    Hi, Steve--
    Don't worry: He won't bite!

    Actually, I kind of like the little guy. In fact, I thought it might serve as a nice little avatar to use to guide people through our program. But maybe it's too scary for some people.

  • Dr. William Davis

    7/29/2011 12:36:48 AM |

    Buckaroo and Linda--
    Please see prior discussions about iodine.

    Iodine is essential for health, whether or not you have thyroid problems. It is no more dangerous than shaking the salt shaker a couple of times, provided excessive doses are not taken. For instance, I believe that iodine is among the most underappreciated means of reducing risk for fibrocystic breast disease and breast cancer. It can also serve as an oral anti-bacterial, since the salivary glands secrete iodine in saliva.

  • Albert Lundy

    7/30/2011 12:40:28 AM |

    Thanks Dr. Davis. Much appreciated!
    Al

  • Anyone

    8/5/2011 8:56:31 PM |

    If there’s voting, I vote for something else. It’s a strong gut reaction, in part to the concept, and in part to the style.

  • majkinetor

    8/15/2011 1:30:58 PM |

    Doc, what do you think, then, about Pauling/Rath hypothesis:

    See "A Unified Theory of Human Cardiovascular Disease"
    http://orthomolecular.org/library/jom/1992/pdf/1992-v07n01-p005.pdf

    Quote:
    The metabolic level is characterized by the close connection of ascorbate with metabolic regulatory systems that determine the risk profile for CVD in clinical cardiology today. The most frequent mechanism is the deposition of lipoproteins, particularly lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)], in the vascular  wall. With sustained ascorbate deficiency, the result of insufficient  ascorbate uptake, these defense mechanisms overshoot and lead to the development of CVD

    If not all, perhaps subset of folks with high LP(a) would benefit from C megadoses.

  • LisaMichelle

    8/26/2011 4:24:02 PM |

    I'm a 44 yr old female who recently had a consultation w/ a cardiologist due to some strange symptoms I'd experience a few days prior.   At my consultation I was told that all of my blood work was "normal" and that I had a very low risk of heart attack.   The next day I requested a copy of my actual lab results be faxed to me, so I could see them for myself.

    I found out my Hgb a1c was at the high end of normal (something I would have liked to have been told, so that I was aware and could make appropriate diet/lifestyle changes to prevent developing diabetes in the future)

    I was never told that my Lp(a) was quite elevated.   My result was 55 (normal range here is 0-33).   Having no real knowledge of Lp(a), I did some reading up on it that night, which is how I came across this blog.    How is that considered "normal"?  Hardly.   I called back to the cardiologist's office yesterday to request to speak with the particular cardiologist who'd seen me, to further discuss what this really means, to put it into perspective.  I was told by the nurse who called me back (I'm an RN myself) that my result was 'just fine' and that Lp(a) is one that we want to be elevated, like HDL.   I politely but firmly told her that that wasn't the case based on what I'd read.    She was not backing down.   The best she could do was tell me that she'd have the head of the practice (head cardiologist) call me in a "couple of weeks" once he returned from vacation.   Ignorance abounds.   This is exactly why I'm a HUGE proponent of obtaining copies of one's lab results and asking questions, never just 'assume' that because a doctor tells you everything is fine, that it is.  Sure it may be, but sometimes lab values are trending up even if within the normal range.....and it's good to know this so that one can be proactive.

    I was also told that my LDL was just fine too.     Well, yes.....it is within the normal range but it's at the HIGH end of the range (my result was 3.36 and high end of range is 3.4); up from 3.19 6 months prior.    

    Is an Lp(a) of 55 a real cause for concern?
    I have ordered some Nordic Naturals Ultimate Fish Oil and I've purchased some Niacin (to start out slowly).....thanks to this blog, and requesting my results...or I would have just went along thinking everything was just fine and I could continue with my current diet/lifestyle.

  • Mark

    1/18/2014 12:48:56 PM |

    Hi

    Can anyone give me a list of places one can go in America and receive these battery of lipid tests . I am based in the UK and the provision here is woeful. You can get your Total, HDL and LDL measured but thats about it. If you mention particle size to a cardio or a doctor as I have done, they simply don't know what you are talking about.

    Thanks

    Mark

Add comment

Loading

When niacin doesn't work

20. September 2007 William Davis (7)
Dan had the usual collection of metabolic syndrome lipoprotein abnormalities:

low HDL of 28 mg/dl, triglycerides 280 mg/dl, 90% of his LDL particles were small.

Along with elimination of wheat and junk foods, exercise, and fish oil, I asked Dan to add niacin. I usually ask people to buy SloNiacin and begin at 500 mg per day with dinner, increased to 1000 mg per day at dinner after 4 weeks.

Dan came back several months later. His lab results:

HDL 40 mg/dl, triglycerides 76 mg/dl.

(We didn't repeat the full lipoprotein analysis, so no small LDL value was available.) Better, though still some room for improvement. I urged Dan to stick to his program, lose some more weight off his 260 lb frame, exercise, be strict about the wheat products.

Dan returned another few months later. Lab results:

HDL 29 mg/dl, triglycerides 130 mg/dl.

Dan had lost another 8 lbs and was reasonably compliant with his diet.

What's going on here? Why would he backtrack on HDL and triglycerides despite sticking to his program?

I asked Dan where he purchased his niacin. "I got it from Sam's Club. The pharmacist said to try this 'no-flush' kind so the hot flush wouldn't bother me."

Aha! It's no wonder. "No-flush" niacin, or inositol hexaniacinate, is an outright scam. It has virtually no effect on lipids or lipoproteins in humans. It's therefore no surprise that, by replacing real niacin with the no-flush variety, Dan's blood patterns began to revert back to their original state.

Let me be straight on this: No-flush niacin is a scam. It does not work: it does not raise HDL, reduce triglycerides, nor reduce small LDL. It's expensive, too, far more expensive than the real thing. It has no business being sold by stores like Sam's Club or your health food store.

SloNiacin (Upsher Smith) has become our preferred preparation. (I obtain no compensation of any sort for saying so.) We buy it at Walgreen's.

Niacin and blood sugar

19. September 2007 William Davis (14)
We've been engaging in a conversation on the Track Your Plaque Forum on whether niacin raises blood sugar.

Yes, it does. In the vast majority of instances, however, the rise is trivial and without consequence. Typically, someone will start with a borderline elevated blood sugar of, say, 108 mg/dl. Niacin, 1000 mg per day, then raises blood sugar to 112 mg/dl. This small increase does not oblige any specific action, nor does it pose any excess risk.

Blood sugars in the normal range of <100 mg/dl tend not to show this effect. Higher blood sugars, e.g., 130 mg/dl, may show a more exagerrated effect but it is also rarely of great consequence. People who take medications for adult type II diabetes, or people with childhood-onset, type I diabetes will also experience rises in blood sugar. This is a somewhat larger issue in these people.

Niacin is best undertaken with a change in diet, specifically a reduction in processed carbohydrate foods, particularly evil and ubiquitous wheat products.This will often compensate for the blood sugar effect.

Niacin also shares many of the benefits of weight loss: rise in HDL, drop in triglycerides and small LDL.

Keep it all in perspective: If HDL is low, e.g., 30 mg/dl, or there is a significant small LDL pattern, or you have Lp(a), using niacin--vitamin B3--is quite safe and the most effective treatment we have. It's also a vitamin. Also recall the famous HATS Trial of simvastatin and niacin: simvastatin (Zocor) reduced heart attack risk 30%; adding niacin reduced heart attack risk an astounding 90%.

Very few strategies can yield the enormous benefits, both as a stand-alone treatment or in combination with others, that niacin can, whether or not blood sugar creeps up a few milligrams.

Statin drugs and Coenzyme Q10

17. September 2007 William Davis (10)
I am continually impressed at how few of my colleagues take advantage of a wonderful nutritional supplement, Coenzyme Q10 (CoQ10).

Despite some of the recent backlash against statin agents, I do believe that they serve a role. I take issue with the pharmaceutical industry's endless advertising and force-feeding of drugs to the public and to physicians. Nonetheless, statin agents do serve a purpose.

If you go to your doctor with a fever of 103 degrees, coughing up thick yellow sputum, and you are struggling to breathe, would you refuse an antibiotic for pneumonia? Probably not. But an antibiotic for a sore throat may be a different matter.

So it goes with the statin drugs, too. An otherwise healthy 50-year-old woman with an LDL cholesterol of 140 mg/dl probably does not need a statin drug. A 35-year-old man with heterozygous hypercholesterolemia with an LDL cholesterol of 280 mg/dl, who will develop his first heart attack within the next 2 or 3 years, does need these drugs. The rub, of course, is deciding who in between also needs them.

Let's just accept that some people do indeed need a statin drug for one reason or another. How common are the muscle aches?



In my experience, muscle aches are inevitable. The longer you take a statin drug, the more likely you will develop them. The higher the dose, the more likely.

Thankfully, for most people muscle aches are more of a nuisance than a real danger. Usually, a reduced dose of the drug, periodic breaks from the drug (we often advise one or two weeks off every three months), or a change to another agent helps.

However, in my view, coenzyme Q10 provides a virtual antidote to most of the muscle aches and weakness. A recent review was published in the Journal of the American College of Cardiologist that concluded that there was insufficient evidence to support the use of CoQ10 for this purpose. Obviously, the authors do not use CoQ10 in everyday practice. If they did, they would have no doubt whatsoever that CoQ10 provides the majority of people with complete relief of the muscle complaints.

Time and time again, I have witnessed complete relief from muscle aches and muscle weakness from statin drugs using CoQ10. However, in our experience, a dose of at least 100 mg per day needs to be maintained. Occasionally, a higher dose will be necessary, e.g., 300 mg per day. The preparation also must--MUST--be an oil-based gelcap to work (just like vitamin D). The capsules that contain powder are so poorly absorbed that they usually fail to yield the needed effects.

Pictured is the Sam's Club (Members' Mark brand) that has served us well, providing reliable effects at a reasonable price. (CoQ10 is expensive, no matter where you buy it. That's the only drawback I'm aware of.) GNC has a great preparation, as does Life Extension. Just be sure it is a gelcap, not a capsule filled with powder.

There's more to CoQ10 than relief of statin muscle aches. More about that in future.

More Andy Kessler

15. September 2007 William Davis (2)


I can't help but quote a few more passages from Andy Kessler's irreverent but nonetheless insightful book, The End of Medicine. I find his quotes irresistible because I believe that he is (unintentionally) describing precisely what we are doing in the Track Your Plaque program:


"Maybe the jig is up on the cholesterol conspiracy. Any real scientist running studies on cholesterol drugs would not just check to see if participants in the study had a heart attack. You would scan, check for plaque, provide drugs, scan again, see if the plaque increased or decreased, repeat. Instead, we have a multibillion-dollar statin business based on vagaries and deception."


Kessler cuts to the chase on that one. Except we do it with a lot of things beyond drugs.


"256-slice scanners, faster than your heartbeat, just might be the magic pill of diagnosis. It's as if doctors will be saying I was blind before i could see. . . Six blind doctors feeling around an elephant and describing a wall, spear, snake, tree, fan and a rope. Looking for clues in all the wrong places. Measuring cholesterol and blood pressure is like reading the outside temperature and humidity from inside your house and guessing if it's raining. Open the window, stick your goddamn hand outside and know for sure.

How much do these scans have to cost to become widespread? $500? $100? $20? It almost doesn't matter. The savings come over time. Spread the R&D over millions and you get scale. It works.

. . . what if the spending was on detection instead of intervention? With some breakthrough, the economic consequences can be staggering. if medicine as we know it is replaced by health monitoring, hmmmm . . ."


Get beyond his humor and you see that Kessler shares our appreciation of the futility of cholesterol testing for predicting your heart's future. He advocates early detection, no surprise.


And lastly:

"I go to conferences about wikis and Wi-Fis, podcasts and blogs, and I always leave with an empty feeling, bored to tears. It's all great stuff, but technology somehow seems gripped with incrementalism. It's all really neat and cool and wow, but somehow predictable. Gee, in five years we'll have cheap terabyte drives so that we can, what, watch Simpsons reruns and shop more efficiently?

Forget that. It's all about taking control. One by one, industries are being democratized. Power is shifting from producers and service providers to users. . . Power to the people--everywhere except medicine . . . With the right tools, we'll all take control."


Amen. He's right. Taking control of health care out of the hands of the doctors and putting it in your own hands. But you are going to need better tools, more information, and guidance.

I couldn't have said it any better.

The End of Medicine

14. September 2007 William Davis (0)



"It's not about staying young--it's about staying healthy. They say 60 is the new 50. If you stay healthy, got a good ticker lay off tobacco, are lucky enough to avoid some weird cancer, you can kick up your heels, keep running your company, or better yet, travel the world, hike a mountain, ski Zermatt--heck, Tony Randall even started a new family.




But that's a big if. We pump ourselves with cholesterol-lowering drugs as if that was the magic elixir. Not so simple.

Instead, our skin is getting peeled back for a quick look inside. This is the end of medicine as we know it. Don't guess that I might have hardening of the arteries. Open me up and take a look. Don't guess that I don't have cancer because I'm not spitting up blood or growing a tumor the size of a grapefruit out my side."


If you can get beyond some of the frat-boy joking in the book, you will see that the author, Andy Kessler, actually acquires some pretty canny insights into the future of medicine in his book, The End of Medicine.

It's a book not about the end of medicine, but about the end of medicine as we know it today: the doctor by the bedside, the treating-when-symptoms-appear approach that characterizes current practice.

Instead, Kessler predicts that new technology will supplant the role of doctor-as-gatekeeper and decision-maker. Early detection is key. He picked up on that right away, as his quote above shows.

Despite the sophomoric humor, I was impressed that much of the Track Your Plaque approach--online, self-empowered, based on the concept of early detection followed by practical and effective tools for correction, involving your doctor only peripherally--is what Kessler is trying to articulate.

In actuality, I would not necessarily recommend his book, unless you need a light moment and some fodder for thinking about our health future. But he does have some startling insights for a guy who just invests money and has no real health background.


Another excerpt:

CT Anxiety

I always feel a certain anxiety when I walk into the Hyatt Regency at the bottom of California Avenue in San Francisco. The cutsie Trolley car outside, the Embarcadero tile pattern on the sidewalk — they are all part of the package. But as I've done every time I've been there, I head straight into the lobby, tilt my head back and scan the Escher-like floors, starting at the top and then down and outwards to the bottom until I start feeling dizzy. I thank Mel Brooks for this.

This guy was zooming through someone's brain like it was a Sunday drive. More like a Sunday afternoon video game.

With my head spinning from this "High Anxiety" flashback, I stroll into the conference, half expecting to be given a barium enema by a cross between Nurse Diesel from Mel Brooks' flick and Nurse Ratched from One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest. I really gotta switch to decaf on days like this.

The 7th International Multi-Detector Row Computed Tomography Symposium sounded innocuous enough. I assumed it would be a bunch of technical papers on the future of scanning, where I would read the paper in the darkened hall until lunchtime and then head off for some hot Hunan and home.

Instead, the place was like a carnival for cardiologists.


Kessler has, in Silicon Valley style, left a wide wake of electronic content to get a better view of his ideas. There is a podcast located on the InstaPundit site that you can listen to at: http://podcasts.instapundit.com/AndyKessler.mp3, that provides some more of this irreverent but out-of-the-box thinker's thoughts.

Life Extension article on vitamin D

14. September 2007 William Davis (5)

For anyone looking for a discussion about the emerging role of vitamin D as a cause for coronary disease, see my recent article, Vitamin D’s Crucial Role in Cardiovascular Protection, in Life Extension Magazine, now posted online at:

http://www.lef.org/magazine/mag2007/sep2007_report_vitamind_01.htm.




Vitamin D has assumed an absolutely critical role in the Track Your Plaque program for coronary plaque reversal and dropping CT heart scan scores. Since adding vitamin D and aiming for blood levels of 50-60 ng/ml, our success rate has skyrocketed. In fact, I wonder just how well our two most recent record holders--51% and 63% drops in heart scan scores--would have fared without it. (They probably would have dropped, but no where near as much.)

Also, a full-length booklet that contains just about everything you want to know about vitamin D (or at least a right-this-moment summary of what is known about it) will be available to Track Your Plaque Members for free before the end of the year.

If you haven't done so already, DO THE D!!

Why healthy can make us fat

13. September 2007 William Davis (0)

Brian Wansink, author of Mindless Eating: Why we eat more than we think (see yesterday's Heart Scan Blog post), also has a Blog. Despite the bland advice offered on much of the Prevention Magazine and website, Wansink's Food Think Blog is a winner.

In a recent post, Wansink quotes a report from Science Daily that described a study he recently published in the Journal of Consumer Research. Wansink's study describes how just applying the label "healthy" to fast food choices increased consumers' calorie intake:


"When we see a fast-food restaurant like Subway advertising its low-calorie sandwiches, we think, 'It's OK: I can eat a sandwich there and then have a high-calorie dessert,' when, in fact, some Subway sandwiches contain more calories than a Big Mac."

In one study, Chandon and Wansink had consumers guess how many calories are in sandwiches from two restaurants. They estimated that sandwiches contain 35% fewer calories when they come from restaurants claiming to be healthy than when they are from restaurants not making this claim.

The result of this calorie underestimation? Consumers then chose beverages, side dishes, and desserts containing up to 131% more calories when the main course was positioned as "healthy" compared to when it was not--even though, in the study, the "healthy" main course already contained 50% more calories than the "unhealthy" one.

"These studies help explain why the success of fast-food restaurants serving lower-calorie foods has not led to the expected reduction in total calorie intake and in obesity rates," the authors write.

Interesting. In fact, I've had many patients say that they eat at Subway or similar chains and choose the "healthy" options. "That's got to be better than a cheeseburger and fries!" Perhaps not. (Of course, you can't leave Subway or other fast food operation feasting on wheat products.)

Wansink can be counted on for some truly fascinating observations into many behaviors that are subconscious but explain at least part of the reason why we're so fat. Though his Blog has a relatively short history of posts, there's lots of great commentary.

Pierre Chandon and Brian Wansink. "The Biasing Health Halos of Fast Food Restaurant Health Claims: Lower Calorie Estimates and Higher Side-Dish Consumption Intentions" Journal of Consumer Research, October 2007.

Outsmarting the enemy

12. September 2007 William Davis (2)

"Everyone--every single one of us--eats how much we eat largely because of what's around us. We overeat not because of hunger but because of family and friends, packages and plates, names and numbers, labels and lights, colors and candles, shapes and smells, distractions and distances, cupboards and containers. This list is almost as endless as it's invisible.

Invisible?

Most of us are blissfully unaware of what influences how much we eat . . . We all think we're too smart to be tricked by packages, lighting, or plates. We might acknowledge that others could be tricked, but not us. That is what makes mindless eating so dangerous. We are almost never aware that it is happening to us."


So opens Brian Wansink's book, Mindless Eating: Why we eat more than we think.

Wansink studies consumer behavior at Cornell University. He's the guy who scrutinizes in excruciating detail why we eat what we do, what factors determine what we eat like food color and smell, the company we keep, product packaging. He works without food industry funding, though there are plenty of researchers who do this sort of research funded by the likes of Kraft, Nabisco, and Kellogg's.

His book is packed full of the conclusions he and his team have come to over the years studying our buying and eating habits. While this information could (and is) be easily used by the food industry to coerce us to eat more and more, understanding many of the concepts Wansink talks about can also open your eyes to their clever tactics.

He especially details how our internal satiety signals fail us when external cues are present that easily trip us up. He talks about one experiment he ran in which soup bowls were rigged with concealed rubber tubes in the bottom that continually replenished the soup as the person consumed it. Thus, with the bowl continually refilled, the eater had no idea how much he or she had consumed. When the quantity of soup eaten from the endless bowl was compared to people eating from standard bowls, there was as much as a three-fold increase in the quantity and calories eaten.

Just be aware that, while Wansink is an expert in consumer eating behavior, he is not necessarily an expert in nutrition. Just as a card shark can show you lots of clever tricks to hoodwink your opponent, he might not be the best person to teach you how to play bridge.

For a great hint at some of the interesting and all-too-human observations Wansink makes, the online Prevention Magazine posted a brief video:

http://link.brightcove.com/services/link/bcpid1155399889/bclid1171884988/bctid1113465050

We might not be able to stop Big Food from selling garbage foods, but we can at least be armed with insight into how we are subconsciously coerced into eating more.

Test Of Scanner Saves A Doctor's Life

11. September 2007 William Davis (5)

















Read the story online at http://www.courant.com/news/health/hc-luckydoc.artsep10,0,7572510.story?coll=hc_features_promo

I personally hate these stories, the ones that turn heart scans into drama by describing how someone had a heart scan, then turned out to have so much coronary plaque that they had to have bypass surgery.

But I point this one out because the story is related in an interesting way. It highlights the utter ignorance that operates in heart disease detection.

The story highlights how a 50-year-old, 5 ft 8, 150 lb slender, exercising neurologist underwent a CT coronary angiogram in a newly installed device in a Hartford, Connecticut hospital (not a heart scan) that detected entirely unsuspected severe and diffuse coronary disease. You know the rest: abnormal stress test, heart catheterization, bypass surgery of the hapless doctor-now-patient, followed by grateful patient saying things like "This machine saved my life."

It probably is true. You've seen these stories before. I've witnessed these sorts of headline-makers for the past decade. I remain surprised that it still happens.

The doctor is not some ignorant, uninformed man who can't even fill out his income tax forms. Yet how does a man like this walk around with life-threatening disease and not know it? Why does it still make headlines?

Anyway, despite all my jawing about heart scans and early heart disease detection, many physicians and the public remain in the stone age of heart disease. Even though this neurologist's story made headlines, the many other people who 1) identified their heart disease earlier with a simple heart scan, then 2) took action to put a stop to it, do not make headlines. But that's the way to go.

Why isn't the rest of the story being told? Why was this man's heart disease uncovered only in its late phases? Hartford, Connecticut is not some backwater. I've been there. It's a major city with large hospitals and a University Medical Center. But a professional with presumed knowledge of health and his doctor(s) allowed this to happen?

In other words, this is not a story of success, but of failure--failure to identify coronary disease years earlier when preventive action would have prevented bypass. But that's not such a compelling headline, is it?

As an aside, I'll bet you that this man has lipoprotein(a), a severe small LDL pattern, and severe deficiency of vitamin D. Correct these and it's unlikely he'll need bypass again. But that's kind of boring, isn't it?

The great food industry deception

8. September 2007 William Davis (1)
I'd forgotten what a powerful report Peter Jennings and ABC News produced about the enormous deception perpetrated by the food industry and its effects on health until Dr. Joe Mercola posted the YouTube clips from the report on Mercola.com.

(This is not meant to be an endorsement of everything Dr. Mercola has to say. He says lots of things; I agree with only a fraction of it. But this is a gem.)

Although made in 2004, the report remains every bit as relevant today as it was then. It concerns me deeply that, despite reports like this being broadcast to Americans, the obesity epidemic continues unabated. In fact, it's worse just in the short three years since then.

Be aware of what the food industry is up to. They intensively market high profit margin foods to us--and especially our children--to increase sales. As Jennings points out, the U.S. government (USDA) is, for a variety of reasons both good and bad, complicit with this massive deception. While many media reports continue to focus on lack of exercise as the root cause for the obesity epidemic, it is really the active and purposeful selling of processed junk foods to Americans that is principally to blame.

By the way, how many of these foods proudly boast the American Heart Association Check Mark of approval?



Part 1





Part 2




Part 3




Part 4




Part 5