Wheat brain

Among the most common effects of wheat are those on the brain.

Consume wheat and susceptible individuals will experience a subtle euphoria. Others experience mental cloudiness or sleepiness. (This is what I personally get.)

It gets worse. Children with ADHD and autism have difficulty concentrating on a task and have behavioral outbursts after a cookie. Schizophrenics experience paranoid delusions, auditory hallucinations, and worsening of social detachment. People with bipolar disorder can have the manic phase triggered by a breadcrumb. All these effects are blocked by administering drugs that block the brain's opiate receptors. (This is why, by the way, a drug company is planning to release an oral agent, naltrexone, formerly administered to heroin addicts to help control addiction, for weight loss: block the euphoric effect, take away the temptation, lose weight.)

Here is Heart Scan Blog reader, Nicole's, mental fog story:

I have been grain-free (no gluten free grains either) for quite a long time (about a year and a half). Earlier this week, I decided to try white bread and pasta. The experiment only lasted two days. I had horrible terminal insomnia both nights, causing me on the second night to wake up at 2:30 am unable to get back to sleep at all. I felt drugged and in a mind-fog all the next day and even dozed off a few times! Luckily I had the day off work.

I had very bad forgetfulness also. I forgot that I left my bag and groceries at work, so I had to go back for them. Then I had to use my husband's keys to get in because I thought my keys were in my bag, but it turns out they were in my pocket. Then I got my bag, set the alarm, locked the door and then realized I forgot my groceries. So I had to re-open the door, unset the alarm, and go back for the groceries. Then I locked the door, forgetting to set the alarm, so I had to unlock it, open up and set the alarm. It was just ridiculous, I am NEVER like that!

In addition to the insomnia and forgetfulness, I also had horrible anxiety and paranoia, almost to the point of panic. Which I NEVER have, I am usually very easy-going, even-tempered, and worry-free. But this was horrible, I really was quite paranoid and anxious about everything. Weird!

And the worst, was that in just two days of eating wheat, I gained 4 lbs and 2% bodyfat!! It's two days wheat-free now, and it's finally going back down, but wow. Just two days of wheat-eating caused that much weight and fat gain!

Anyway, I've learned my lesson and will continue to avoid grains (including gluten free grains) entirely.


Eat more "healthy whole grains"? Modern dwarf Triticum aestivum, perverted even further by agricultural geneticists and modern agribusiness, subsidized by the U.S. government to permit $5 pizza, is better than any terrorist plot to discombobulate the health and performance of the American people.

The Westman Diet

Dr. Eric Westman has been a vocal proponent of carbohydrate restriction to gain control over diabetes, as have Drs. Richard Bernstein, Mary Vernon, Richard Feinman, and Jeff Volek.

Several studies over the years have demonstrated that reductions in carbohydrate content of the diet yield reductions in weight and HbA1c (glycated hemoglobin, a reflection of average blood glucose over the preceding 60-90 days).

Among the more important recent clinical studies is a small experience from Duke University's Dr. Eric Westman. In this study, obese type 2 diabetics reduced carbohydrate intake to 20 grams per day or less: no wheat, oats, cornstarch, or sugars. Participants ate nuts, cheese, meats, eggs, and non-starchy vegetables.

After 6 months, average weight loss was 24.4 lbs, BMI was reduced from 37.8 to 34.4. At the end of the study, 95% of participants on this severe carbohydrate restriction reduced or eliminated their diabetes medications.

That was only after 6 months. Note that the ending BMI was still quite well into the obese range. Imagine what another 6-12 months would do, or achieving BMI somewhere closer to ideal.

Curiously, this idea of severe low-carbohydrate restriction to cure or minimize diabetes is not new. Sir William Osler, one of the founders of Johns Hopkins Hospital and author of the longstanding authoritative text, Principles and Practice of Medicine, advocated an diet identical to Dr. Westman's diet. So did Dr. Frederick Banting, discoverer of the pancreatic extract, insulin, to treat childhood diabetics. Before insulin, Banting and his colleagues at the University of Toronto used carbohydrate elimination (less than 10 g per day) to prolong the lives of children with diabetes.

This lesson was also learned many times during war time, when staples like bread were unavailable. The Siege of Paris in 1870 yielded cures for diabetes in many (or at least they stopped passing urine that tasted--yes, tasted--sweet and attracted flies), only to have it recur after the siege was over.

These are lessons we will have to relearn. As long as the American Diabetes Association and most physicians continue to advocate a diet of reduced fat, increased carbohydrate that includes plenty of "healthy whole grains," diabetics will continue to be diabetics, taking their insulin and multiple medications while developing neuropathy (nervous system degeneration), nephropathy (kidney disease and failure), atherosclerosis and heart attack, cataracts, and die 8 to 10 years earlier than non-diabetics.

All the while, we've had the combined wisdom from antiquity onwards: Carbohydrates cause diabetes; elimination of carbohydrates cures diabetes.

(This applies, of course, only to adult overweight type 2 diabetics, not type 1 or some of the other variants.)

Handy dandy carb index

There are a number of ways to gauge your dietary carbohydrate exposure and its physiologic consequences.

One of my favorite ways is to do fingerstick blood sugars for a one-hour postprandial glucose. I like this because it provides real-time feedback on the glucose consequences of your last meal. This can pinpoint problem areas in your diet.

Another way is to measure small LDL particles. Because small LDL particles are created through a cascade that begins with carbohydrate consumption, measuring them provides an index of both carbohydrate exposure and sensitivity. Drawback: Getting access to the test.

For many people, the most practical and widely available gauge of carbohydrate intake and sensitivity is your hemoglobin A1c, or HbA1c.

HbA1c reflects the previous 60 to 90 days blood sugar fluctuations, since hemoglobin is irreversibly glycated by blood glucose. (Glycation is also the phenomenon responsible for formation of cataracts from glycation of lens proteins, kidney disease, arthritis from glycation of cartilage proteins, atherosclerosis from LDL glycation and components of the arterial wall, and many other conditions.)

HbA1c of a primitive hunter-gatherer foraging for leaves, roots, berries, and hunting for elk, ibex, wild boar, reptiles, and fish: 4.5% or less.

HbA1c of an average American: 5.2% (In the population I see, however, it is typically 5.6%, with many 6.0% and higher.)

HbA1c of diabetics: 6.5% or greater.

Don't be falsely reassured by not having a HbA1c that meets "official" criteria for diabetes. A HbA1c of 5.8%, for example, means that many of the complications suffered by diabetics--kidney disease, heightened risk for atherosclerosis, osteoarthritis, cataracts--are experienced at nearly the same rate as diabetics.

With our wheat-free, cornstarch-free, sugar-free diet, we have been aiming to reduce HbA1c to 4.8% or less, much as if you spent your days tracking wild boar.

Battery acid and oatmeal

Ever notice the warnings on your car's battery? "Danger: Sulfuric acid. Protective eyewear advised. Serious injury possible."

Sulfuric acid is among the most powerful and potentially harmful acids known. Get even a dilute quantity in your eyes and you will suffer serious burns and possibly loss of eyesight. Ingest it and you can sustain fatal injury to the mouth and esophagus. Sulfuric acid's potent tendency to react with other compounds is one of the reasons that it is used in industrial processes like petroleum refining. Sulfuric acid is also a component of the harsh atmosphere of Venus.

Know what food is the most potent source of sulfuric acid in the body? Oats.

Yes: Oatmeal, oat bran, and foods made from oats (you know what breakfast cereal I'm talking about) are the most potent sources of sulfuric acid in the human diet.

Why is this important? In the transition made by humans from net-alkaline hunter-gatherer diet to net-acid modern overloaded-with-grains diet, oats tip the scales heavily towards a drop in pH, i.e., more acidic.

The more acidic your diet, the more likely it is you develop osteoporosis and other bone diseases, oxalate kidney stones, and possibly other diseases.

Here's one reference for this effect.

What'll it be: Olive oil or bread?

We frequently discuss the advisability of consuming fats, carbohydrates, and various types within each category.

But what's the worst of all? Combining fats with carbohydrates.

Putting aside the wheat-is-worst form of carbohydrate issue and treating bread as a prototypical carbohydrate, let's play out a typical scenario, a make-believe feeding study in which a theoretical person is fed specific foods.

John is our test person, a 40-year old, 5 ft 10 inch, 210 lb, BMI 27.7 (roughly the mean for the U.S.) He starts with an average American diet of approximately 55% carbohydrates and 30% fat. Starting lipoproteins (NMR):

LDL particle number 1800 nmol/L
Small LDL 923 nmol/L


(The LDL particle number of 1800 nmol/L translates to measured LDL cholesterol of 180 mg/dl, i.e., drop last digit or divide by 10.)

Also, calculated LDL cholesterol is 167 mg/dl (yes, underestimating "true" measured LDL), HDL 42 mg/dl, triglycerides 170 mg/dl.

We feed him a diet increased in carbohydrates and reduced in fat, especially saturated fat, with more breakfast cereals, breads and other wheat products, pasta, fruit juices and fruit, and potatoes. After four weeks:

LDL particle number 2200 nmol/L
Small LDL 1378 nmol/L

Note that LDL particle number has increased by 400 nmol/L due entirely to the increase in small LDL particles triggered by carbohydrate consumption. Lipids show calculated LDL cholesterol 159 mg/dl--yes, a decrease, HDL 40 mg/dl, triglycerides 189 mg/dl. (At this point, if John's primary care doctor saw these numbers, he would congratulate John on reducing his LDL cholesterol and/or suggest a fibrate drug to reduce triglycerides.)

John takes a rest for four weeks during which his lipoproteins revert back to their starting values. We then repeat the process, this time replacing most carbohydrate calories with fats, weighed heavily in favor of saturated fats like fatty red meats, butter and other full-fat dairy products. After four weeks:

LDL particle number 2400 nmol/L


Let's

Chocolate peanut butter cup smoothie

Here's a simple recipe for chocolate peanut butter cup smoothie.

The coconut milk, nut butter, and flaxseed make this smoothie exceptionally filling. If you are a fan of cocoa flavonoids for reducing blood pressure, then this provides a wallop. Approximately 10% of cocoa by weight consists of the various cocoa flavonoids, like procyanidins (polymers of catechin and epicatechin) and quercetin, the components like responsible for many of the health benefits of cocoa.


Ingredients:
1/2 cup coconut milk
1 cup unsweetened almond milk
2 tablespoons cocoa powder (without alkali)
2 tablespoons shredded coconut (unsweetened)
1 tablespoon ground flaxseed
1 teaspoon almond extract
1 1/2 tablespoons natural peanut, almond, or sunflower seed butter
Non-nutritive sweetener to taste (stevia, Truvia, sucralose, xylitol, erythritol)
4 ice cubes

Combine ingredients in blender. Blend and serve.

If you plan to set any of the smoothie aside, then leave out the flaxseed, as it absorbs water and will expand and solidify if left to stand.

For an easy variation, try adding vanilla extract or 1/4 cup of sugar-free (sucralose) vanilla or coconut syrup from Torani or DaVinci and leave out the added sweetener.

The compromise I draw here is the use of non-nutritive sweeteners. Beware that they can increase appetite, since they likely trigger insulin release. However, this smoothie is so filling that I don't believe you will experience this effect with this recipe.

Letter from the insurance company

Claudia got this letter from her health insurance company:

Dear Ms. ------,

Based on a recent review of your cholesterol panel of January 12, 2011, we feel that you should strongly consider speaking to your doctor about cholesterol treatment.

Reducing cholesterol values to healthy levels has been shown to reduce heart attack risk . . .


Okay. So the health insurer wants Claudia to take a cholesterol drug in the hopes that it will reduce their exposure to the costs for her future heart catheterization, angioplasty and stent, or bypass surgery. This is understandable, given the extraordinary costs of such hospital services, typically running from $40,000 for a several hour-long outpatient catheterization procedure, to as much as $200,000 for a several day long stay for coronary bypass surgery.

So what's the problem?

Here are Claudia's most recent lipid values:

LDL cholesterol 196 mg/dl
HDL 88 mg/dl
Triglycerides 37 mg/dl
Total cholesterol 291 mg/dl

By the criteria followed by her health insurer, both total and LDL cholesterol are much too high. Note, of course, that LDL cholesterol was a calculated value, not measured.

Here are Claudia's lipoproteins, drawn simultaneously with her lipids:

LDL particle number 898 nmol/L
Small LDL particle number less than 90 nmol/L (Values less than 90 are not reported by Liposcience)

LDL particle number is, by far and away, the best measure of LDL particles, an actual count of particles, rather than a guesstimate of LDL particles gauged by measuring cholesterol in the low-density fraction of lipoproteins (i.e., LDL cholesterol). It is also measured and is highly reproducible.

To convert LDL particle number in nmol/L to an LDL cholesterol-like value in mg/dl, divide by ten (or just drop the last digit).

Claudia's measured LDL is therefore 89 mg/dl--54% lower than the crude calculated LDL suggests.

This is because virtually all of Claudia's LDL particles are large, with little or no small. This situation throws off the crude assumptions built into the LDL calculation, making it appear that she has very high LDL cholesterol.

Do you think that Big Pharma advertises this phenomenon?

Healthy smoothies

I've now seen several people who have either caused themselves to be diabetic or to have other phenomena associated with excessive consumption of carbohydrates, all by innocently indulging in a carbohydrate-packed smoothie every morning.

Kay, for instance, has a smoothie of a half-pint blueberries, a banana, a scoop of whey, low-fat yogurt, a cup of milk every morning. The rest of her diet was fairly healthy: salads with oil-based dressing for lunch, salmon and asparagus for dinner, only an occasional carbohydrate indulgence outside of her morning smoothie ritual. Yet she had a HbA1c (a reflection of prior 60 to 90 days average blood sugar) at the near-diabetic range of 5.9%.

The mistake most people make when making smoothies is relying too heavily on carbohydrates like fruit. A smoothie like the one made by Kay can easily top 50, 60, or 70 grams carbohydrates per serving, more than sufficient to send blood sugars up to 150 mg/dl or more.

So what can you put in your smoothie and not send you over the edge to diabetes, small LDL, and all the other undesirable phenomena of excessive carbohydrates? Here's a list:

--coconut milk, unsweetened almond milk. Less desirable: milk, full-fat soymilk
--ground flaxseed
--oils: flaxseed oil, coconut oil (melted), extra-light olive oil, walnut oil
--dried coconut
--extracts: vanilla, almond, coconut, cherry, hazelnut
--spices: cinnamon, nutmeg, ginger
--herbs: mint leaves, cilantro
--cocoa powder (unsweetened)
--nut or seed butters (peanut butter, almond butter, sunflower seed butter)
--tofu
--exotic ingredients (ingredients you wouldn't expect in a smoothie): spinach, kale, cucumber

How do you sweeten a smoothie? This is what trips up most people. If you resort to fruit like bananas, pineapple, or apple, you will readily send your blood sugar skyward. Honey, agave syrup, and sugar, of course, all increase blood sugar and/or have the adverse effects of fructose. Be careful of yogurt, also, for similar reasons.

Therefore, to sweeten your smoothie, consider:

--Small servings of berries, e.g., 8-10 blueberries, 2 strawberries, a few wedges of apple, half a kiwi
--Non-nutritive sweeteners like stevia, Truvia, sucralose, xylitol, erythritol. Also, sugar-free (sucralose-based) syrups like those from DaVinci and Torani are useful. (Just be aware that non-nutritive sweeteners can increase appetite--use sparingly.)

Also, note that, if you have divorced yourself from wheat, cornstarch, and sugars, your desire for sweet should be much reduced. Foods other people find just right will taste sickeningly sweet to you. You might therefore find that foods like peanut butter or coconut milk have a mild natural sweetness; added sweetness is only minimally necessary.

Coming next: I'll share a smoothie recipe or two of mine. Anyone want to share a recipe?

Insulin secretagogue

Dairy products have the peculiar property of triggering pancreatic release of insulin. The research group at Lund University in Sweden have contributed the most to documenting this phenomenon:




Mean (±SEM) incremental changes (?) in serum insulin in response to equal amounts of carbohydrate from a white-wheat-bread reference meal (x) and test meals of whey (?), milk (?), cheese (?), cod (?), gluten-low (?), and gluten-high (?) meals. From Nilsson 2004.

Note that it is the area under the curve (AUC), not the peak value, that assumes greatest importance.

Dairy products, especially milk, whey, and yogurt, are insulin secretagogues: they stimulate pancreatic release of insulin. The effect is likely due to amino acids and/or polypeptides in dairy products. (The effect is less prominent with cheese. Also see this study.)

By conventional wisdom, this may be a good thing, since the excess insulin will blunt the glucose rise after consumption. However, in my book, this is not such a good thing, since most of us have tired, beaten, overworked pancreatic beta cells from our decades of carbohydrate overconsumption. I fear that the effect of dairy products just take us a bit closer to beta cell failure: diabetes.

Good news: The effect is least with cheese.

Be gluten-free without "gluten-free"

While I've discussed this before, it is such a confusing issue that I'd like to discuss it again.

I advocate wheat elimination because consumption of products made from modern dwarf Triticum aestivum:

--Triggers formation of extravagant quantities of small LDL and LDL particle number (or apoprotein B)
--Triggers inflammatory phenomena like c-reactive protein, increases leptin resistance, and reduction of the protective adipocytokine, adiponectin.
--Encourages accumulation of deep visceral fat ("wheat belly") that is inflammatory and causes resistance to insulin
--Increases blood sugar more than nearly all other foods--higher than a Milky Way bar, higher than a Snickers bar, higher than table sugar.
--Is being linked to a growing number of immune-mediated diseases, including celiac disease (quadrupled over past 50 years), type 1 diabetes in children, and cerebellar ataxia and peripheral neuropathies.

This last group of wheat-related phenomena are primarily due to gluten, the collection of 50+ proteins found in each wheat plant. For this reason, people diagnosed with celiac disease are advised to eliminate gluten from wheat and other sources (barley, rye, triticale, bulgur) and to eat gluten-free foods.

Gluten-free has therefore come to be viewed as wheat-free and problem-free. It ain't so.

Among the few foods that increase blood glucose higher than wheat: cornstarch, rice starch, potato starch, and tapioca starch--Yup: the ingredients commonly used to replace wheat in gluten-free foods. They are also flagrant triggers of the small LDL pattern, along with increased triglycerides, reduced HDL, increased visceral fat, increased blood pressure. In short, gluten-free foods lack the immune and brain effects of wheat gluten, but still make you fat, hypertensive, and diabetic.

I tell patients to view gluten-free foods like jelly beans: Gluten-free pancakes, muffins, breads, etc. are indulgences, not healthy replacements for wheat. It's okay to have a few jelly beans now and then. But they should not be part of a frequent or daily routine. Same with gluten-free foods.
Thiazide diuretics: Treatment of choice for high blood pressure?

Thiazide diuretics: Treatment of choice for high blood pressure?

Thiazide diuretics are a popular first-line treatment for hypertension among the primary care set.

This practice became especially well-established with the 2002 publication of the ALLHAT Study (Major Outcomes in High-Risk Hypertensive Patients Randomized to Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor or Calcium Channel Blocker vs Diuretic:The Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT)).

ALLHAT showed that an inexpensive diuretic like chlorthalidone (a weak diuretic in the thiazide class, similar to hydrochlorothiazide) as first-line treatment for hypertension achieved equivalent reductions in cardiovascular events (cardiovasular death and heart attack) as non-thiazide antihypertensives, lisinopril (an ACE inhibitor) and amlodipine (a calcium channel blocker, better known as Norvasc).

After 7 years of treatment, there was 14% death or heart attack among all three groups--no difference.

This was interpreted to mean that inexpensive thiazide diuretics like chlorthalidone offer as much benefit as other blood pressure medications at reduced cost.

On the surface, that's great. Anything that detracts from the ubiquitous pharmaceutical industry propaganda of bigger, better, more expensive drugs to replace old, inexpensive, generic drugs is fine by me.

But you knew there'd be more to this issue! If we accept that thiazides are equivalent to other single-drug treatments for high blood pressure, what do we do with the following issues:

--Thiazides deplete body potassium-This effect can be profound. In fact, built into the ALLHAT mortality rate is an expected death rate from potassium depletion. When potassium in the body and blood go low, the heart becomes electrically unstable and dangerous rhythms develop.

--Thiazides deplete magnesium--Similar in implication to the potassium loss, magnesium loss also creates electrical instability in the heart, not to mention exaggeration of insulin resistance, rise in triglycerides, reduction in HDL.

--Thiazides reduce HDL cholesterol

--Thiazides increase triglycerides

--Thiazides increase small LDL particles--You know, the number one cause for heart disease in the U.S.

--Thiazides increase uric acid--Uric acid is increasingly looking like a coronary risk factor: The higher the uric acid blood level, the greater the risk for heart attack. Thiazides have long been known to increase uric acid, occasionally sufficient to trigger attacks of gout (uric acid crystals that precipitate in joints, like rock candy). (Fully detailed Special Report on uric acid coming this week on the Track Your Plaque website.)

What about the advice we commonly give people to hydrate themselves generously? Yet we give them diuretics? Which is it: More hydration or less hydration? You can't have both.

Do thiazides exert an apparent cardiovascular risk reduction in a society due to its flagrant sodium obsession?

Thus, there are a number of inconsistencies in the thinking surrounding thiazides. In my experience, I have seen more harm done than good using these agents. While I cannot fully reconcile the reported benefit seen in ALLHAT with what I see in real life, all too often I see people having to take another drug to make up for a side-effect of a thiazide diuretic (e.g., high-dose prescription potassium to replace lost potassium, allopurinol to reduce uric acid, etc.). I have seen many people get hospitalized, even suffer near-fatal or fatal events from extremely low potassium or magnesium levels.

My personal view: ALLHAT or no, avoid thiazide diuretics like the plague. Sure, it might save money on a population basis, but I suspect that the ALLHAT data are deeply misleading.

What's better than a thiazide, calcium blocker, or ACE inhibitor? How about vitamin D restoration, thyroid normalization, wheat elimination?

Comments (14) -

  • Anonymous

    1/5/2009 6:29:00 PM |

    Does wheat elimination apply to rye and other grains, or only to wheat?

  • Jay

    1/5/2009 8:24:00 PM |

    I am curious, do some of the potassium sparing diuretics ( like Maxzide ) eliminate some of these blood chemistry changes (all of which are concerning) ?

    I have been using a similar product and find my side effects minimal compared to the previous lisinopril/verapromil combo that resulted in the same degree of lowering BP for me.

    Thanks

  • Jeff

    1/5/2009 9:18:00 PM |

    My mother is on this drug and I just happened to discuss it with her a week or so ago.  She claims no potassium issues and that she takes the lowest possible dose.  I sense it doesn't make sense for her to be on this.  Any suggestions?

  • Anonymous

    1/5/2009 9:45:00 PM |

    Dr, Davis, this is not directly related to this post, but I have a question about fish oil. Mine comes in a capsule form with soybean oil. Is it acceptable or should I look for another one which does not contain soybean oil.

    I also took my first pill of Niacin yesterday ( Just got report of high total cholesterol levels -230). I was up almost all night and was frazzled similar to what I would feel if I drank coffee at night. Is this due to niacin?

  • rabagley

    1/6/2009 6:40:00 AM |

    Anonymous,

    Dr. Davis isn't answering questions on the blog, but I'll try to sum up without too badly screwing up what he might say.

    Dr. Davis is particularly against wheat as a negative value food ingredient.  He has quoted primary research and various non-mainstream dietary experts who theorize that wheat contains addictive substances and contains still more substances that worsen multiple risk factors for metabolic syndrome (early diabetes), diabetes, heart disease, etc.  Basically: bad stuff.  Whole wheat is very little different from refined wheat in his view.

    Dr. Davis doesn't quite seem ready to throw out all grains, and does not have much to say about oats, rice, barley, rye, etc. one way or the other.  I suspect that this is simply because there isn't that much reporting on those grains and he isn't as confident that they're quite as bad.

    Now for my take on it (I am a software developer with no dietary or medical training): high carbohydrate foods are dangerous.  Don't even get into the fact that grains are a really bad idea.  Those foods with refined, fast digesting carbohydrates (sugars, simple starches, refined flour, etc.) are slightly more dangerous than "whole grain" or "high fiber" foods, but only slightly more dangerous.  They're all bad.  

    They're bad because our bodies are not used to a diet containing very many carbohydrates.  Our bodies have evolved to thrive on a diet containing mostly fat and a moderate amount of protein with a few carbs here and there.  We tamper with that preference and pay the price with the "diseases of civilization" (Diabetes, Heart Disease, etc.).

    Carbohydrates used to be a signal that either game was scarce and/or winter was approaching.  When we eat large quantities of carbohydrates (more than 15-20% of calories), our bodies start to pack calories away.  This storage response is a reaction triggered by insulin, which is itself triggered by the digested sugars moving from the gut to the bloodstream.  When we chronically eat large quantities of carbohydrates, our fat cells get packed tight and eventually can't pack away any more calories.  When this happens, the fat cells are said to be "insulin resistant", and when that happens, you're only a perceptive doctor's visit away from being classified as having Type 2 diabetes.

    And that's only one way that a high-carb, low-fat diet is bad for you.  That doesn't even begin to get into HDL cholesterol, lipid particle sizes, triglycerides (fructose is one of the worst sources of triglycerides in the diet, and triglycerides are one of the primary indicators of risk of heart disease) or anything else.

    I previously states that "grain" itself is a bad idea but didn't explain why.  It's simple evolution.  An apple tree gets a benefit when an animal comes by and eats an apple.  The seeds will go through the digestive tract and emerge unscathed in a pile of fertilizer some distance from the original tree.  The tree wins all around.  But what if you crack open the apple seeds and try to eat them?  Bad plan.  Apple seeds have about a dozen poisons in them, including potassium cyanide.  The plant does not get a benefit if you eat the whole ovary.  We eat the whole ovary of grains and pulses.  This is risky because we have to defuse all of those poisons or we risk damage from those that accumulate or have damage that accumulates.  Some of the defensive chemicals can be neutralized with cooking, some with fermenting, some with physical removal of layers, some with oxidation.  There's a decent chance that you can get them all and not eat any toxins, but I'm not convinced that we're doing it right with soy, wheat, rice, oats, rye, spelt, millet, etc.

    We just don't know enough to be certain.  And there's no real reason to take the risk.

    Read up for yourself.  "Good Calories, Bad Calories" is a fantastic recounting about the history of dietary policy and dietary science, eventually leading to some very interesting conclusions about what makes for a good calorie and a bad calorie.

  • Anna

    1/6/2009 5:02:00 PM |

    Anonymous-
    high total cholesterol levels -230

    But did you have any of the lipid fractions done, too?  High total cholesterol may mean nothing, but you won't know that unless you have more information.  

    An example,  my total cholesterol and LDL (by calculation, not direct measurement has risen a bit (higher than yours, I think it was 261 last time) over the past 10 years with improvements in my diet over the past 5 yrs (LC, no gluten/wheat, low sugar/fructose, minimal processed foods/more home prepared foods, many foods sources direct from the farm/ranch).  But my endocrinologist was fussing about my basic lipid panel results.

    BUT my HDL has also improved quite a bit (gone up 20+) and while my LDL is high according to the conventional wisdom, it is made up of the large fluffy pattern type, which ISN'T associated with CVD.  My total chol/HDL ratio is great.  My triglycerides are very low (they used to be high when I ate high carb/low fat).  AND, my first coronary calcium scan score, done a few weeks ago was 0, no sign of plaque, despite many years of undiagnosed hypothyroidism & impaired glucose tolerance (both treated/managed now), and current high consumption of grass-fed butter and other natural traditional animal fats, whole fat dairy, and 2-3 eggs every single day, plus Vit D supplementation ( my Vit D levels drop too low on sun exposure alone, despite living in So Cal).

    So, the total chol is essentially meaningless without a context.  You need to know the lipid subfractions (by direct measurement, not "calculation") so that the number and size can be assessed.  Many primary care docs just don't understand this and only order the basic panel (much cheaper) instead of a more informative VAP.  

    My husband on the other hand, has a not so great cholesterol lipid fraction profile (he's a long-time smoker, but now trying harder to quit), and his coronary calcium scan score wasn't so rosy.  He started niacin a couple months ago and hasn't had too many problems with the side effects (the flushing has occurred, but not too disruptively).  BUT, he started with a really low dose (50 mg) and gradually built up the amount, going to 2 x 50 mg, 3 x 50 mg, etc.  He's now at 3 x 100 mg daily with little or no side effects.   You might try gradually increasing the dose to see  if that helps.

  • Robert M.

    1/6/2009 8:05:00 PM |

    Anonymous:

    Wheat, barley, and rye all contain the same gluten protein that can cause an immune system reaction or allergy.  Oats are often contaminated, although wheat-free oats are available at specialty stores.

  • Anna

    1/6/2009 11:55:00 PM |

    Grains are not essential to a healthy diet, even if one appears to not suffer from eating them (appears being the significant word!).

    "Essential" applies to nutrients that must come from the diet because the body cannot make them.  There are essential amino acids and essential fatty acids, but no essential carbohydrates.  The body can make all the carbohydrates it needs from a nutrient-dense diet without grains.

  • puddle

    1/7/2009 9:36:00 PM |

    I'd also point out that the Thiazides are sulfa drugs.  Which luckily my pharmacist's computer was aware of, because my medical team sure wasn't.  And I have an anaphylactic shock reaction to sulfa.

  • David

    1/8/2009 9:00:00 PM |

    I agree that it's generally not a good idea to be on blood pressure meds, but I'm curious about what we should do about these drugs for someone who has already had a heart attack? My dad had high BP (over 145/90) before his heart attack, and the docs (two stents later) put him on an ACE inhibitor (Lisinopril) and beta-blocker (Lopressor). He's been exercising, taking vitamin D, cutting out the wheat, and pretty much doing all the normal TYP stuff, and his BP is down to 112/60, heart rate like 54 bpm. Is there any reason someone in his condition would still need to be on the meds? This is not just a personal question, but a general note of curiosity.

    Those med recommendations came from Dr. O'Keefe, the vitamin D researcher here in Kansas City, by the way. After reading his book, I didn't think he'd be such a pill pusher, but he was! He hadn't even looked at dad's chart and was already telling him he needed to up the dose of all his meds. According to O'Keefe (and I was standing right there when he said this) "The best three things you can do for your health right now: 1. Statins. 2. Vitamin D. 3. Fish oil. Don't worry about any of those other supplements [referring to things like magnesium, CoQ10, pomegranate, cocoa, etc]. The science is Simvastatin. The science is Lisinopril."

    Well, at least he was promoting the vitamin D and fish oil! Even at that, though, he didn't even look to see how much fish oil dad was taking, and he told him 1,000-2,000 IU of vitamin D was fine- without even having the blood work back yet! Grrrr.....

    Anyone know of a good cardiologist in the Kansas City area?

  • cure for high blood pressure

    8/20/2009 10:17:32 AM |

    Wheat, barley, and rye all contain the same gluten protein that can cause an immune system reaction or allergy. Oats are often contaminated, although wheat-free oats are available at specialty stores.High blood pressure cure supplement, natural herbal remedy to lower & control high blood pressure.Use Alistrol everyday to help maintain healthy circulation and support cardio-vascular health.

  • Anonymous

    11/18/2009 3:11:29 PM |

    It was extremely interesting for me to read that post. Thanx for it. I like such themes and everything connected to this matter. I definitely want to read more on that blog soon.

  • buy jeans

    11/3/2010 6:18:48 PM |

    Thus, there are a number of inconsistencies in the thinking surrounding thiazides. In my experience, I have seen more harm done than good using these agents. While I cannot fully reconcile the reported benefit seen in ALLHAT with what I see in real life, all too often I see people having to take another drug to make up for a side-effect of a thiazide diuretic (e.g., high-dose prescription potassium to replace lost potassium, allopurinol to reduce uric acid, etc.). I have seen many people get hospitalized, even suffer near-fatal or fatal events from extremely low potassium or magnesium levels.

  • simvastatin side effects

    5/7/2011 1:44:30 PM |

    Thiazide increases uric acid thus increasing the risk of heart attacks. The higher the level of uric acid blood level, the more the risk of heart attacks. This is a great information.

Loading