Getting your dose of fish oil right

Confusion often stems from the simplest of calculations: dose of fish oil.

Actually, you and I don't take fish oil for fish oil. We take fish oil for its content of omega-3 fatty acids, the dominant ones being EPA and DHA. The contents of fish oil outside of its EPA + DHA content likely exert little or no benefit (beyond that of other dietary oils).

To determine what you are currently taking, simply examine the back of your fish oil bottle and look for the EPA + DHA composition. This should be clearly and prominently labeled. If not, don't buy that brand again. Add up the EPA + DHA content per capsule, then multiply by the number of capsules you take per day. That yields your daily EPA + DHA intake.

The only other substantial source of omega-3 fatty acids is fish. Other food sources, such as non-fish meats, eggs, etc., contribute little or none. Processed foods that bear health claims of "contains heart healthy omega-3" often contain linolenic acid or flaxseed oil, which contributes very little to total EPA + DHA, or contain relatively trivial quantities of DHA. What are you doing eating processed foods, anyway?

What should the total daily dose of EPA + DHA dose be? That depends on what your goals are.

If your goal is to modestly reduce the risk of dying from heart attack, then just eating fish a couple of times per month will begin to exert an effect, or just taking a dose of 300 mg EPA + DHA per day from a low-potency capsule will do it. However, that's an awfully unambitious goal.

Our starting omega-3 dose in the Track Your Plaque program has, over the years, increased and now stands at 1800 mg EPA + DHA per day. However, the dose for 1) full reduction of triglycerides and/or triglyceride-containing abnormal lipoproteins, 2) reduction of Lp(a), and 3) the ideal dose for coronary and carotid plaque control are substantially higher.

But once you know your desired daily target of total EPA + DHA, you can easily determine the quantity of capsules to take by doing the above arithemetic, totaling the EPA + DHA per capsule. For example, if you have been instructed to take 6000 mg per day EPA + DHA, and your capsule contains 750 mg EPA + DHA, then you will need to take 8 capsules per day (6000/750).

Flat tummy . . . or, Why your dietitian is fat

When I go to the hospital, I am continually amazed at some of the hospital staff: 5 ft 4 inch nurses weighing over 200 lbs, etc.

But what I find particularly bothersome are some (not all) hospital dietitans--presumably experts at the day-to-day of healthy eating--who waddle through the halls, easily 40, 50, or more pounds overweight. It is, to say the least, credibility-challenging for an obese dietitian to be providing nutritional advice to men or women recovering after bypass or stent while clearly not in command of nutritional health herself.

What's behind this perverse situation? How can a person charged to dispense "healthy" nutritional information clearly display such clear-cut evidence of poor nutrition?

How would you view a success coach dressed in rags? Or a reading coach who can barely read a sentence?

Easy: She follows her own advice.

Hospital dietitians are essentially forced to adhere to nutritional guidelines of "official" organizations, such as the American Heart Association and the USDA. There is some reason behind this. Imagine a rogue dietitian decides to advocate some crazy diet that yields dangerous effects, e.g., high-potassium diets in people with kidney disease. There is a role for oversite on the information any hospital staff member dispenses.

The problem, of course, doesn't lie with the dietitian, but with the organizations drafting the guidelines. For years, the mantra of hospital diets was "low-fat." More recently, this dated message has begun--only begun--to falter, but now replaced with the "healthy, whole grain" mantra. And that is the advice the hapless dietitian follows herself, unwittingly indulging in foods that make us fat.

Sadly, the "healthy, whole grain" message also contributes to heart disease via drop in HDL, increased triglycerides, a huge surge in small LDL, rise in blood sugar, increased resistance to insulin, tummy fat, and diabetes. Yes, the diet provided to survivors of heart attack increases risk.

The "healthy, whole grain" message also enjoys apparent "validation" through the enormous proliferation of commercial products cleverly disguised as healthy: Cheerios, Raisin Bran, whole grain bread, whole wheat pasta, etc. The "healthy, whole grain" message, while a health disaster, is undoubtedly a commercial success.

I'll bet that our fat dietitian friend enjoys a breakfast of healthy, whole grains in skim milk, followed by a lunch of low-fat chicken breast on two slices of whole grain bread, and ends her day with a healthy meal of whole wheat pasta. She then ascribes her continually climbing weight and size 16 figure to slow metabolism, lack of exercise, or the once-a-week piece of chocolate.

Wheat has no role in the Track Your Plaque program for coronary plaque control and reversal. In fact, my personal view is that wheat has no role in the human diet whatsoever.

More on this concept can be found at:

What's worse than sugar?

The Wheat-Deficiency Syndrome


Nutritional approaches: Large vs. Small LDL

Are you wheat-free?

Statin drug revolt

I sense a growing revolt against the intrusion of statin drugs into our lives.

No doubt, the statin drug industry is, at least from an economic perspective, a huge success: $27 billion annual revenues at last accounting. The latest big plug for more and more statins was the JUPITER trial that showed reduced cardiovascular events on Crestor in people with "normal" LDL cholesterol levels and increased c-reactive protein.

It seems that not one day passes that doesn't include some news story about the "benefits" of statin drugs: reduction in heart attack, stroke, colon cancer, osteoporosis, heart failure, etc.

Ironically, the overwhelming economic success of the statin drug industry also seems to be encouraging a grassroots revolt.





More and more people are coming to the office, more people commenting on the web over how they want to avoid statin drugs, stop a drug they are already taking, or at least reduce the dose of an ongoing drug.

My day-to-day experience with coronary plaque control and reversal is that, while statin drugs are helpful tools, they are not necessary tools for full benefit of a prevention program. "Need" for statin drugs can differ by the patterns measured, though not the usual patterns suggested by the drug industry. For instance, using C-reactive protein, a la JUPITER, as justification for statin prescription is, in my view, totally absurd and makes no sense whatsoever, since inflammatory responses can be effective reduced with plenty of other strategies besides statin drugs. Conventional LDL, likewise, is a fictitious number that often bear little or no resemblance to the true and genuine measured value (apoprotein B or LDL particle number).

So here are a number of strategies that can help reduce or eliminate the "need" for a statin drug:

--Elimination of wheat and cornstarch--This is no namby-pamby dietary strategy, as low-fat diets were. This is a powerful, enormously effective strategy, particularly if LDL is in the small category. Small LDL drops like a stone when these foods are eliminated. This means no breads, pasta, breakfast cereals, pretzels, crackers, chips, tacos, wraps, etc.
--Non-wheat fibers--Especially raw nuts, ground flaxseed, and oat bran.
--Vitamin D restoration
--Fish oil
--Weight loss
--Niacin

There are additional strategies that focus on specific subsets of LDL cholesterol (e.g., Lp(a) masquerading as LDL). But the above list can reduce LDL cholesterol substantially, reducing the apparent "need" for a statin drug.

You will notice that there are few money makers in the above list, compared to the billions of dollars reaped by the statin drug industry. There is therefore little incentive to allow a pretty sales rep to go to your doctor and pitch the use of over-the-counter vitamin D or make changes in diet.

Statin drugs in my view need to be shoved back into their more limited role as drugs to be used on occasion when necessary (e.g., heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia with LDL cholesterol values of 250 mg/dl in a person with measurable coronary plaque). These should never have achieved the "celebrity" status they enjoy, complete with gushing endorsements by TV personalities, daily news stories, and back-to-back TV commercials.

Join the revolt!

Lovaza Rip-off

Lovaza is GlaxoSmithKline's prescription fish oil, an ethyl ester modification to allow higher concentration of omega-3 fatty acids, EPA + DHA, per capsule. Each capsule contains 840 mg EPA + DHA.

It is FDA-approved for treatment of high triglycerides (>500 mg/dl). In their marketing, they claim "Unlike LOVAZA, dietary supplements are not FDA approved to treat any disease." They also highlight the "patented five-step" purification process that eliminates any concerns over mercury or pesticide residues.

What does Lovaza cost? In Milwaukee, it costs about $70 per capsule per month (PCPM). Most people are taking four capsules per day: $280 per month, or $3360 per year to obtain 3360 mg of EPA + DHA per day. (Funny coincidence with the numbers.)

Did you catch that? $3360 per year, just for one person to take Lovaza.

What if I instead went to Costco and bought their high-potency fish oil. This is also an ethyl ester form. It costs $14.99 for 180 capsules, or $2.50 PCPM; each capsule contains 684 mg EPA + DHA. I would therefore have to take five capsules per day to obtain the same 3360 mg EPA + DHA per day. This would cost me 5 x $2.50 = $12.50 per month, or $150 per year.

$3360 per year vs. $150 per year to obtain the same dose of omega-3 fatty acids, or a 22.4-fold difference.

Lovaza is FDA-approved for treatment of high triglycerides. But I am seeing more and more people take it for other reasons at this four-capsule-per-day dose. Regardless, this "drug" is adding $3360 per year costs to our healthcare. A school teacher, for instance, recently commented to me that she didn't care about the costs, since her insurance (in Milwaukee county, teachers have unbelievably generous healthcare coverage) covers Lovaza. I've heard this from others: insurance covers it, so they don't care how much it costs.

Guess who eventually has to pay the $3360 per year per person costs? Yup, you and me. We all bitch and moan about the costs of healthcare and health insurance, but many of us are more than willing to shift the costs to our friends and neighbors to save a few bucks. You think Lipitor makes a bundle of money for Pfizer at about $120 per month? Lovaza is making a bundle of money for GlaxoSmithKline, and all because people are cheap and willing to selfishly shift costs to other people.

Keep in mind that $3360 per year is just for fish oil. It's not for surgery, it's not for hospital care, it's just for stinking fish oil.

Santa Claus is alive . . . and works for the drug industry



Maybe your teenagers no longer believe in Santa Claus, but I assure you: Not only is he alive, I believe that we have evidence that he works for the drug industry!

Psshaww! you say. Yet another rant from that kook, Davis. Who can he pick on next? What other imagined "conspiracies" can he uncover?

Let me recount the evidence and I'll let you decide how damning it all is:

--Christmas is a culture of excess, overeating, celebration: Cookies, candy canes, pie, chocolate, egg nog, more cookies . . . A virtual wheat and sugar frenzy!

--Wheat and sugars make us diabetic!

--What does a diabetic look like? How about big protuberant abdomen, florid cheeks, baggy eyes (from sleep apnea)? The red outfit and beard is optional, of course. Could you think of a better representation of what happens to a person when they eat goodies all the time?


I therefore submit that Santa Claus is at the root of a campaign to cultivate diabetes! Diabetes: a growth industry that is raking in billions of dollars for the drug companies!

I'd bet that Mr. Claus would agree with the dietary advice dispensed by the folks at the American Diabetes Association website:

A place to start is at about 45-60 grams of carbohydrate at a meal. You may need more or less carbohydrate at meals depending on how you manage your diabetes.


Eat more carbohydrates, get fatter in the abdomen, require more medication to keep sugar low. Then start over: eat more carbohydrates, get fatter, more medicines. Kaching!

"You may need more?" Personally, I'd be rendered comatose and helpless if I indulged in such carbohydrate gluttony.

If Mr. Claus were, instead, interested in our health and keeping us non-diabetic, Christmas would be a time for pistachios, almonds, dark chocolates, and tea.

You want health advice? Don't ask Santa Claus!

Another case of aortic valve disease reduced with vitamin D

I watched Seth's aortic valve deteriorate over a two year period.

I was first consulted in 2004 to offer an opinion on Seth's heart scan score of 779 and flagrantly abnormal cholesterol patterns, including triglycerides in the 400 mg/dl range. But I heard a murmur, as well, a murmur of a leaky aortic valve, "aortic valve insufficiency."

Over the next two years, I watched Seth's aortic valve worsen, going from mild leakiness to severe.

In 2006-2007, I tiptoed into vitamin D replacement and asked Seth to add some vitamin D. Time passed and Seth's aortic valve got progressively worse.

Over the past year, However, he's maintained a truly healthy level of vitamin D, with blood levels consistently in the 60-70 ng/ml range.

While Seth's last echocardiogram showed a severely leaky aortic valve, the most recent echo showed mild leakiness ("mild aortic insufficiency")--a dramatic reduction.

I continue to see this in many, though not all, patients with aortic valve disease. Though I've more frequently witnessed either stalled progression or reversal of aortic valve stenosis (stiffness), I've now seen a handful of people with aortic valve leakiness (insufficiency) also reverse.

I've posted about this peculiar phenomenon previously:

Aortic valve disease and vitamin D
More on aortic valve disease and vitamin D

Prior to vitamin D, I had NEVER witnessed any aortic valve disease stop or reverse.

A formal trial at some point would be invaluable.

Track Your Plaque Program Data Tracking Tools

At last: After talking about the new Track Your Plaque community tools for the last year, our data tracking software is now available!



Track Your Plaque is, admittedly, somewhat data-intensive. The basic concept relies on the fact that we track heart scan scores, cholesterol values, lipoprotein values like percent small LDL and Lp(a), vitamin D blood levels, intake of omega-3 fatty acids, etc. Our new data tracking tools will help Members track their data over time.

Even more interesting, you can allow other Members (not required) to view your data for comments and feedback. You can also view the program data of other Members (if they choose to make their data "public") to learn how they are going about stopping and reversing their coronary plaque.

In other words, our graphic data tracking tools are yet another way we are using to acquire a collective wisdom on how to put a stop to coronary heart disease, heart attack, and perverse "let's make money with heart procedures" hospital solutions.

One of the aspects that helps make this work is the sharing of data. So far, the people who have begun to enter their data have all made their information "public." It's not truly "public," but viewable only by other Track Your Plaque Members. Also, Members can, in effect, anonymize their data simply by using a nickname, e.g., heartprotection or hearthawk.

The data tracking tools are in beta-test version, so there are bound to be a few glitches. But we're eager to hear from our Members' experiences on how to improve these tools. Report any problems or make your suggestions on the Track Your Plaque Member Forum--Technical Support.

Yet another reason to avoid fructose

Have you seen the Corn Refiners Association commercial campaigns to educate the American public on the safety of fructose? If you haven't, you can view these interesting specimens on You Tube:

"Get the facts--You're in for a sweet surprise: Fructose is safe in moderation!"

Two Moms

Two lovers


Beyond the fact that fructose stimulates liver production of glycerol, which thereby increases liver VLDL production and raises blood levels of triglycerides; likely stimulates appetite; increases cholesterol levels; fructose has also been clearly implicated in increasing blood levels of uric acid.

Uric acid is the substance that, in some people, precipitates in joints and causes gout, the painful inflammatory arthritis that has been increasing in prevalence over the last four decades since the introduction of fructose in 1967. While blood levels of uric acid in the early part of the 20th century averaged 3.5 mg/dl, more recent population assessments have averaged 6.0 mg/dl or higher. (Non-human mammals who don't eat processed foods, drink fruit drinks or beer, and don't eat candy have uric acid levels of <2.0 mg/dl.)

Uric acid is looking like it may prove to be an important risk factor for coronary disease and atherosclerotic plaque. It is no news that people with higher blood levels of uric acid are more likely to experience adverse cardiovascular events like heart attack. People with features of the metabolic syndrome also have higher uric acid blood levels; the more characteristics they have, the higher the uric acid level. However, the prevailing view has been that uric acid is simply an accompaniment of these processes, but not causal.

However, more recent observations suggest that increased levels of uric acid may instead be a cause of metabolic syndrome and high blood pressure.

Increased blood levels of uric acid have been shown to:

--Increase blood pressure
--Induce kidney damage (even in the absence of uric acid kidney stones)
--Antagonize insulin responses

A diagnosis of gout is not required to experience all of the adverse phenomena associated with uric acid. (For not entirely clear reasons, some people, perhaps based on pH or other factors, are more prone to trigger crystallization of uric acid in joints, similar to the phenomena of sugar crystallization when making rock candy.)

Which brings us back to fructose, a sweetener that clearly substantially increases uric acid levels. I suppose that the mothers and lovers in the Corn Refiners' commercials are right to a degree: Our kids will survive, as will you and I, despite increases in triglycerides, enhanced diabetic tendencies, amplified appetites, and increased uric acid due to fructose in our diet. We will also likely survive despite being 100 lbs overweight, partly due to the effects of fructose.

But if long-term health is your desire for you and your family, fructose has no role whatsoever to play.

Interestingly, the obviously expensive and slick ad campaigns from the Corn Refiners' videos have triggered some helpful video counterarguments:

High-fructose corn syrup
Conspiracy for Fat America
High-fructose corn syrup truth


A full discussion of uric acid, the scientific data behind uric acid as a coronary risk factor, and the nutritional means to reduce uric acid will be the topic of a thorough discussion in an upcoming Special Report on the Track Your Plaque website.

Free the Animal

Richard Nikoley from the Free the Animal Blog contributes this informative comment:



'Bout 18 months ago, I was at 230 (5'10) and looked awful. I was on Omeprezole for years for gastric reflux, a variety of prescription meds since early 20s for seasonal sinus allergies, culminating finally in the daily, year round squirts of Flonase-esque sprays (the best for control without noticeable side-effects), and finally, Levothroid for about the last 7 years or so, as I had elevated TSH (around 9ish).

My BP was regularly 145-160 / 95-110.

I decided to get busy. I modified diet somewhat, cutting lots of junk carbs, and began working out -- brief, intense, heavy twice per week. BP began coming down immediately, such that within only a couple of weeks I was borderline rather than full blown high. Then after about six months, a year ago, I went to full blown low-carb, high fat, cutting out all grains, sugar, veg oils, etc, and replacing with animal fats, coconut, olive oil. You know the drill. Then, first of the year I felt great and simply stopped all meds, including the thyroid. I also began intermittent fasting, twice per week, and for a twist, I always do my weight lifting in some degree of fast, even as much as 30 hours.

That's when the weight really started pouring off. Take a look:

http://www.freetheanimal.com/root/2008/09/periodic-photo-progress-update.html

http://www.freetheanimal.com/root/2008/08/faceoff.html

In July I figured it's about time for a physical. Here's the lipid panel, demonstrating am HDL of 106 and Try of 47, great ratios all around:

http://www.freetheanimal.com/root/2008/07/lipid-pannel.html

However, my TSH was even higher -- 16ish. It seems odd that I was able to lose 40-50 pounds of fat (10-15 pounds of lean gain for a 30 pound net loss at that time -- now an additional 10 pounds net loss).

One disclosure is that I was drinking too much, almost daily, and quite a bit (gotta save some vices...). Anyway, I'm at the point now where I want to drill down. I know I need to see an endocrinologist and have T3 and T4 looked at, but in advance, I wanted to see if the recent changes I've made could make a difference:

1. Stopped all alcohol.
2. Stopped most dairy, except ghee and heavy cream, and cheese is now used as a "spice," i.e., tiny quantities -- no more milk.
3. 6,000 IU Vit D per day.
4. 3 grams salmon oil, 2 grams cod liver oil.
5. Vit K2 Menatetrenone (MK-4) -- side story: getting off grains reversed gum disease for which I have had two surgeries, then supplementing the K2 DISSOLVED calculus on my teeth within days -- hygienist and dentist are dumbfounded. Stephan (Whole Health Source), who comments here, has an amazing series on K2.



If you view his photos, you'll appreciate just how far he has come.

Overall, Richard's program is wonderful and his pictures clearly display his success. However, Richard, thyroid function is indeed a problem, a problem that needs to be fixed ASAP. Remember, low thyroid function used to be diagnosed at autopsy at which time the coronary arteries and other arteries of the body were found to be packed solid with atherosclerotic plaque, even in young people.

I'd recommend:

1) Consider 200 mcg Iodine per day from kelp if you do not use iodized salt.

2) Seeing your doctor right away for thyroid replacement, hopefully with consideration of your T3 status.

3) A heart scan--Not to lead to procedures, but something for you to track over time as your program improves and thyroid function is restored.

Beyond this, keep up the great work. Great blog, too!

Low Thyroid and Plaque

Having now tested the thyroid status of several hundred patients over the last few months, I have come to appreciate:

1) That thyroid dysfunction is rampant, affecting at least 25% of everyone I see.
2) It is an enormously effective means to reduce cardiovascular risk.


I'm not talking about flagrant low thyroid dysfunction, the sort that triggers weight gain of 30 lbs, gallons of water retention, baggy eyes, sleeping 14 hours a day. I'm talking about the opposite extreme: the earliest, subtle, and often asymptomatic degrees of thyroid dysfunction that raises LDL cholesterol, lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a), a huge effect!), and adds to coronary plaque growth.

Correcting the subtle levels of low thyroid:

1) Makes LDL reduction much easier

2) Facilitates weight loss

3) Reduces Lp(a)--best with inclusion of the T3 fraction of thyroid hormone.

Recall that, 100 years ago, the heart implications of low thyroid weren't appreciated until autopsy, when the unfortunate victim would be found to have coronary arteries packed solid with atherosclerotic plaque. It takes years of low thyroid function to do this. I advise you to not wait until you get to this point or anywhere near it.

I find it fascinating that many of the most potent strategies we are now employing in the Track Your Plaque process are hormonal: thyroid hormones, T3 and T4; vitamin D (the hormone cholecalciferol); testosterone; progesterone; DHEA, pregnenolone. Omega-3 fatty acids, while not hormones themselves, exert many of their beneficial effects via the eicosanoid hormone pathway. Elimination of wheat and cornstarch exert their benefits via a reduction in the hormone insulin's wide fluctuations.

We haven't yet had sufficient time to gauge an effect on coronary plaque and heart scan scores. In other words, will perfect thyroid function increase our success rate in stopping or reversing coronary plaque? I don't know for sure, but I predict that it will. In fact, I believe that we are filling a large "hole" in the program by adding this new aspect.
Who lost weight?

Who lost weight?

The results of the latest Heart Scan Blog poll are in.


I went wheat-free and I . . .


Gained weight 6 (3%)

Lost no weight 41 (21%)

Lost less than 10 lbs 28 (14%)

Lost more than 10 lbs 34 (17%)

Lost more than 20 lbs 22 (11%)

Lost more than 30 lbs 28 (14%)

I'm still losing weight! 30 (15%)

(189 respondents)


This means that, by eliminating wheat:

24% had no success

31% had moderate success (less than 10 lbs or more than 10 lbs)

25% had extravagant results with 20 lbs or more lost


It would be interesting to know where along the weight-loss spectrum the last category, "I'm still losing weight," group falls. (Anyone with a good story please speak up!)

I believe we can conclude from this casual exercise that, as a simple strategy, wheat elimination is surprisingly effective.

Why would 3% gain weight? Well, without knowing the details, there are several possible explanations:

1) Weight gain developed through other foods. For instance, I've had people eliminate wheat only to replace it with fattening gluten-free alternatives. Remember: wheat-free is not gluten-free. Others load up on the wrong foods, e.g., Craisins and other dried fruit; overdo dairy; or snack on wheat-free but unhealthy foods like ice cream and chips.

2) Too much alcohol

3) Hypothyroidism--A lot more common than you'd think. In fact, this has been the case with a majority of people who have done everything right, yet either failed to lose weight or gained weight.

Those are the biggies.

I'd like to hear your personal stories of wheat elimination--the ups and downs, your success or failure, how you felt during the process, how easy or difficult, your eventual results. Just post them as a response to this blog post.

Comments (30) -

  • Anonymous

    8/1/2009 1:57:23 PM |

    I was one of the persons who gained weight.  I had been a veggie for ages due to my family history of heart disease. The medical evidence backed up the claims so I stated eating cold cuts then sausage.  I totally hate the taste and texture of meat so this was about the only way I was going to do this. I gained around 10 lbs.  Then I reminded myself that this was the kind of diet that got my dad and uncles into trouble.

    I have minimized wheat in my diet (except the one yummy seitan steak) but have dropped the meat.  I have increased fat my intake from coconut oil and butter rather than sunflower oil. Making wheat free bread is sometimes frustrating but pasta without wheat is dirt simple. I've always used plenty of beans and lentils in my diet and that continues.

    Dr D., many thanks for a great information and educational resource

    Trevor

  • Anne

    8/1/2009 2:14:42 PM |

    First I went gluten free 6 years ago. I lost about 10 lbs. I think that was due to the fact I was not sure what I could eat. As time went on, I gained 5 lbs back. A gluten free/wheat free diet can be filled with high carb junk food. Gluten free grains are high in carbs and calories.

    About a year ago I gave up all grains and sugars(except a small square of dark chocolate). That is when I lost about 15 lbs with no effort at all. I have not had any trouble maintaining this weight loss by sticking with a whole foods diet.

  • Nick

    8/1/2009 2:53:52 PM |

    Just fyi, I answered the poll as 'did not lose weight' because I had already lost the ten pounds I needed to lose prior to giving up wheat.  I am at my correct weight, so I don't consider my 'vote' as an indication of lack of success.  I gave up wheat for the health benefits and to avoid gluten.

  • GK

    8/1/2009 4:17:55 PM |

    I went "paleo" in 2007, eliminating all grains.  I am 5'11".  In six months I dropped from 155 to 140 lbs, but regained 5 and have settled in at a very stable 145 for the last year, BMI= 20.2.

  • Anonymous

    8/1/2009 4:57:44 PM |

    wheat free, no change in weight, but my acne cleared up.

  • billye

    8/1/2009 5:22:44 PM |

    It has taken me 10 months to lose 54 pounds.  I am wheat free as well as all grain free, no legumes, limited fresh berries of all types, Limited green vegetables and olive oil, no other type of fruit, no legumes what so ever, a hand full of nuts daily.  I also eat lots of meat (fried in coconut oil)of all types and cuts along with chicken.  I am waiting for the results of an Omega 3 to 6 ratio test that I recently took.  I supplement with 6000 IU vitamin D3, high dose wild Alaskan sockeye salmon oil, super K2, and 325 mg kelp caps.  The evolutionary life style change system I am on and keep refining, is the most positive thing I have done in fifty years of chasing every failing diet I could find.

  • Kurt

    8/1/2009 9:00:49 PM |

    I haven't noticed any big differences since quitting wheat. The only wheat I ate was whole wheat bread and whole wheat pasta, so quitting wasn't difficult. I replaced my morning toast with an oat and nut muesli. I am planning to take a VAP cholesterol test and see if eliminating wheat has helped my numbers.

  • Brock Cusick

    8/1/2009 11:33:41 PM |

    I voted "Lost no weight", which is still more or less true. My waist has narrowed a bit though and I'm down a belt notch since knocking out ALL significant carb sources (not just wheat).

    Body temp in the AM averages 96.6 degrees, so I suspect hypothyroidism. I am trying to convince my local physician to proscribe desiccated thyroid but he's waiting until the TSH/T4/T3 labs come back.

  • Manu

    8/2/2009 12:13:39 AM |

    Is sprouted wheat - or sprouted grains in general - acceptable? I haven't read or heard anything to the contrary. http://brianstpierretraining.com/index.php/the-superiority-of-sprouted-grains/

  • zim

    8/2/2009 12:39:58 AM |

    i've just completed 3 months of this eating plan:

    1. elimination of wheat
    2. near elimination of all sugars (< 20g / day)
    3. concentration on better n-3 / n-6 ratio

    in that time, i've dropped from 225 to 195 lbs., and counting. But more important to me are better heart health and regression of a diagnosed fatty liver.

    next week, I visit the doc for bloodwork and am hoping for some good results.

    the process has been relatively easy for me, especially when compared to prior (misguided) efforts, aka the prudent diet and cardio workouts.

    my energy has been good, i no longer get sleepy in the afternoon, my mood has improved, my frequent headaches have nearly disappeared, and i look/feel healthier. to me, this is not a "diet," but a permanent and positive change in my diet.

  • Van Rensselaer

    8/2/2009 6:48:29 AM |

    Dr. Davis,

    I've made some significant changes in my diet based on the info gathered from your blog and some other valuable sources such as Michael Pollan, Gary Taubes, Whole Health Source, Hyperlipid, and the Westin A. Price Foundation.

    10 weeks ago, I stopped eating *all* cereal grain based products, all legumes, and all starchy tubers.

    I DO eat meat (grass fed or pastured if possible), oily fish, pasture raised eggs, more good fats, fermented dairy products, non-starchy vegetables, *some* nuts (mostly walnuts, almonds, pecans), *some* seeds (pumpkin, flax, hemp), and a little fruit (as berries).

    I am very mindful of my ratio of omega-6 to omega-3 intake.

    I supplement with:

    D3 5000 IU
    K2 as menaquinone-4 5mg
    Lugols solution %5 1 drop
    2-3 grams omega-3 from fish oil (in triglyceride form. 50/50 DHA/EPA).

    I often supplement with curcumin and R-Alpa Lipoic Acid as well.

    Additional fats in my diet come from extra virgin olive oil, raw coconut oil, and grass fed butter.

    The first 5 days of going NO wheat , NO high glycemic load carbs were the hardest: I felt gnawing "hunger" even after I had eaten to fullness.  It was very strange sensation, but it really wasn't so hard for me to get past.  I was fortunate to be raised to have an aversion to sweets and have no great love for bread or pasta.
    Though... I miss beer and pretzels.

    Beyond feeling a little physical discomfort from carb withdrawal, I recall that was a bit of a jerk that week.  Had quite a temper.

    ...days pass...

    In the meanwhile, I would check to see if I was producing ketones (mostly curious, I suppose).  I would really only produce a significant amount of ketones after a period of exceptionally strenuous exercise, such as mountain biking for a few hours; otherwise, I generally produce small readings, if at all.

    ...I began feeling better and better, so I exercised much more intensely and then came across this training approach called "crossfit", which became my new mode of exercise.  Curiously enough, crossfit advocates a paleo-like diet.  Ah-hah!

    ...weeks pass...

    I feel incredible now, as if I'm 10 years younger, at least!  I'm much leaner, stronger, more flexible, have much more energy.  

    I've changed so many variables so I'm giving you quite a loaded anecdote, I realize... but hey, I feel great!

    Unfortunately, I have little in the way of numbers to share with you besides my change weight and blood pressure.

    I'm 40 years old, male, 6'3" tall.

    Beginning weight: 212 lbs

    Current at 192 lbs, approx 10% body fat

    Beginning SYS/DIA  130/84

    Current SYS/DIA 109/70


    Kind Regards,

    Van Rensselaer

  • pmpctek

    8/2/2009 7:39:20 AM |

    I missed the poll.  You can put me down as; "lost more than 20 lbs".

    I lost 25 lbs. (went from 192 to 167) in six months, and it was all fat loss.  As a 5'9" male, my waist size went from 33" to 29".  I'm holding steady at 163 lbs. after 14 months of being grain, sugar, and starch free.

    Although, I didn't eat much wheat and other grains to begin with.  The biggest elimination for me was sugar like from candy, soft drinks, chocolate, etc.  

    The funny thing was though is that I didn't have any of the strong, drug like withdraws and cravings so many others experience with complete elimination... just lucky I guess.

  • Anonymous

    8/2/2009 1:17:33 PM |

    I had no problems giving up wheat, as I noticed it was giving me lower GI symptoms too, I didn't lose much weight, only a little, but I think my body is happier.
    I also got rid of some recalient eczema, which I think is another benefit.
    Jeanne

  • Bekki

    8/2/2009 1:43:06 PM |

    I'm one who lost no weight after going gluten-free.  I did so due to discovering a genetic gluten-intolerance.  I also went off a few other foods that I discovered intolerances to.  I was pregnant at the time, so I didn't expect weight loss.  When that pregnancy ended prematurely, I still didn't lose weight.  My appetite dropped considerably, even while still pregnant, as my gut began to heal and I began to actually digest my food.  I theorize that the reason I haven't lost weight is because I'm digesting my food properly- instead of speeding through my inflamed gut, it's slowly digesting, including all the calories.  And, I haven't really tried.  I admittedly still eat too many sweet things.

    All that to say- I think for some people, proper digestion means they're getting MORE out of their food than they used to, which can cause weight gain or no weight loss.

  • Dr. William Davis

    8/2/2009 8:46:05 PM |

    Thanks, all, for the great stories, positive or otherwise.

    Bekki raises an interesting point: If digestive improves substantially with wheat elimination, is calorie absorption more efficient?

  • fox

    8/2/2009 11:15:11 PM |

    How many didn't lose weight because they traded fat for muscle?

  • Helena

    8/3/2009 1:31:59 AM |

    Hello Dr. Davis.

    I started my diet last Monday (July 27) and have so far lost 2-3kg (6.6 lb) and 3-4 cm (1.6 inches) around my waist. I feel great even though I do have some cravings for some bread and pasta as it used to be in my daily diet, but I am fighting it.

    My exercise have been 60 minute walks a few times over the past week.

    This week I will try to work out more days, but still only 60 minutes at a time.

    I will keep you updated as I did this last year before my wedding, so I KNOW IT WORKS!!!

  • Manu

    8/3/2009 4:20:42 AM |

    No one answered my question (about sprouted wheat). Frown

  • greentree

    8/3/2009 4:47:15 PM |

    Put me in the didn't lose weight camp. I don't think I could lose weight if I starved myself for2 weeks. I am on Synthroid and my TSH is normal but my T3 is showing out of range (low) but I can't get a doctor to address that.

  • Anonymous

    8/3/2009 4:53:15 PM |

    Fourteen of us started low carbing age range 18 to 70 and all have lost weight over the last 7 months average around 21lbs,though some have lost more inches than weight cutting out wheat,pasta rice and upping the good fats,butter extra virgin olive oil but coconut oil (Mct's?) seems to be the best oil for losing weight.
    Some have otimised Vitamin D and Omega 3 others have not.
    Some are still losing weight whilst others seem to vary + or - three or four pounds around their newly found "ideal weight!.".
    More energy,great muscle tone fewer aches less hunger less bloating and mood swings seems to be the benefits and an increasead body temperature.
    a good tip if you are not getting enough protien or are a vegetarian is to use a low carb Whey Protien bodybuilding supplement.

  • Dr. William Davis

    8/3/2009 10:37:47 PM |

    Excellent point, Fox.

  • Anonymous

    8/4/2009 10:02:05 PM |

    I didn't lose weight. OK - maybe I lost 2 or 3 lbs.  I don't even own a scale.  I don't have a goal of losing weight - I only weigh 105 lbs.  My goals are about heart health, not weight loss.

    Bonnie

  • Anonymous

    8/5/2009 10:44:42 PM |

    I marked that I'm still losing weight.

    I gave up wheat, sugar (I may take in less than 10g of carbohydrates in the form of vegetables which I use as a condiment), grains, pulses, and most processed foods.  So I eat a mainly meat and egg diet with the occasional small salad or lacto-fermented veggies. I do eat a lot of fat.

    So far, I've lost 46 pounds, and I hope to lose another 29.  

    I still have limited amounts of soy in grain-free soy sauce, and I still have cheese and cream and butter as well.  Good stuff!

  • puddle

    8/5/2009 11:47:31 PM |

    2002, I was diagnosed with early congestive heart failure; my Cholesterol was 246, and my BP was running about 170/90 or 100.

    I didn't specifically go off of wheat, but doing Atkins, I always need to stay within about 10 to 20 carbs a day. In a year I dropped from 250 to 200.  Over the first two years, my cholesterol dropped to 222, 194, and then to 174. My blood pressure dropped to the 114/80 range.  And my knees stopped aching.

    The doctors have backed off the CHF diagnosis.

    I had Graves Disease in 1986 with a total thyroidectomy, and have been on Levoxyl .175 since then until a month ago when I got my prescription changed to Armour 2 grains.  I think it's going to need to be upped after the blood tests, just based on how I'm feeling. I spent most of my adult life till the Graves on the low side of normal (exact borderline).  Some doctors would prescribe thyroid, others would not.
    I'm almost 69, I feel great, and thank you Dr. Davis!!

  • Alan S David

    8/6/2009 3:47:21 PM |

    I fasted before the wheat elimination, a three day water only fast. I dropped 5 pounds or so. Eliminated 95% or more of the wheat, and corn starch. Added more eggs and fresh vegetables to my diet, and I have been down a total of 15 pounds and have no trouble maintaining that weight. My BMI is 21.
    Hope to see a lowering in my small particle LDL count in the near future. It has gotten better but is still high.

  • Anonymous

    8/8/2009 5:01:04 AM |

    I'm 52 now, had a heart attack at 48 which is rare for a premenopausal woman. Low cholesterol and low blood pressure looks like its an iflammation/ insulin issue for me. I lost just over 20kg in 5 months after reading your blog nearly a kilo a week. Dr Davis, together with my Dr Tessa Jones who is amazing, thank you, you are a life saver. As well as eliminating grains I take the supplements eg fish oil, turmeric, resveratrol, niacin, Vit D) and bioidentical hormones; I am managing hypothyroidism (8 drops/day Lugol's!). My high fasting insulin (dropped from 136 to 80 - but should be 8) and my triglycerides have also fallen dramatically. Breakfast is a whey brewers yeast, egg, nuts berries smoothie. Lunch and dinner is salads and meat/fish. Dark chocolate when I'm craving carbs. But I stopped losing in Jan not sure why and have put on 6kg since then, am very worried. I got a CRP reading of 10.7 My doctor was horrified, gave me a mercury challenge which was so high it poisoned me; she has me taking Far infrared saunas to reduce heavy metals. But still no more weight loss (keeping it just steady) am v obese at 103kg at 5 feet tall. Any advice welcome.

  • psychohist

    8/29/2009 1:43:02 PM |

    I didn't purposely go wheat free, but I dropped pretty much all wheat from my diet in favor of potatoes for a couple years.  I gained about 10 pounds in that time and was on a continuing upward trend.  Note that I was not overweight to start with.

    I then went paleo, dropping the potatoes and strictly removing the wheat.  I lost all the weight I'd gained.

    I suspect some of the gainers replaced the wheat with potatoes or other starchy foods.

  • buy jeans

    11/2/2010 8:42:06 PM |

    I'd like to hear your personal stories of wheat elimination--the ups and downs, your success or failure, how you felt during the process, how easy or difficult, your eventual results. Just post them as a response to this blog post.

  • Megaera

    2/22/2011 7:22:29 AM |

    Interesting, that when facts don't quite fit with your theories your immediate response is to assume that the inconvenient facts are the fault of the unfortunate provider.  That is, when someone says either, I didn't lose any weight on your hobby-horse diet, or even gained weight on it, you immediately pronounce that it must have been that person's fault, he MUST have been doing something very bad.  Well, for what it's worth, I've gone wheat-free, processed-food-free, limit my carbs to leafy greens (no starches) and small quantities of fruit, supplement with fish oils, D3 and iodine.  I drink no juices, eat no nuts or seeds, exercise, in short, do all the "thou shalts" and have omitted just about all the "thou shalt nots" you would seem to insist upon.  I have not quite managed to eliminate dairy, but my intake is minimal.  I don't snack, and my meals are 3/day and small.  My fasting glucose readings are still > 100, and I have not lost a single pound.  I am quite capable of adopting a tough regimen and sticking to it; this is nothing compared to some I've tried.  But it still does nothing, so, thanks for that nothing, I guess.

  • Megaera

    2/24/2011 12:37:08 AM |

    Oh yes, and several months now after starting this process I find I experience none of the magic benefits you keep extolling: no great GI changes for the better, no skin improvements, no "gee, how swell I feel" moments -- in fact, I feel just about as crap as I did before dcing grains and sugars.  So, falsio in unius ...

Loading