Fish oil in the news



Hooray for the New York Times. They ran an article pointing out the miserable and inexcusable failure of American physicians to use fish oil after heart attack.

“It is clearly recommended in international guidelines,” said Dr. Massimo Santini, the hospital’s chief of cardiology, who added that it would be considered tantamount to malpractice in Italy to omit the drug.

...in the United States, heart attack victims are not generally given omega-3 fatty acids, even as they are routinely offered more expensive and invasive treatments, like pills to lower cholesterol or implantable defibrillators. Prescription fish oil, sold under the brand name Omacor, is not even approved by the Food and Drug Administration for use in heart patients."

The article focuses on the use of fish oil only after heart attack and doesn't tackle the larger issue of how fish oil is crucial for coronary disease in general. Of course, the article doesn't address the extraordinary effects of fish oil on lipoproteins, particularly triglyceride-containing varieties like VLDL and the postprandial (after-eating) intermediate-density lipoprotein (IDL).

It also talks about prescription fish oil and just glosses over fish oil as a nutritional supplement. I know of few reasons to use the prescription form. More than 90% of the time, nutritional sources of fish oil do the trick. (That is, fish oil capsule supplements, not just eating fish which doesn't provide enough for coronary plaque reduction or control.)

Occasionally, I'll meet someone who has a severe hypertriglyceridemia (very high triglycerides), or is a Apo E 2/2 homozygote (very rare). These special instances may, indeed, do better using prescription fish oil, since it is more concentrated--one prescription capsule providing the same omega-3 fatty acid content as three conventional capsules (1000 mg fish oil, 300 mg EPA+DHA).


But for most of us, the standard fish oil supplement you buy at the health food store or department store does just fine. If you read about the impurity of fish oil supplements (likely prompted by the manufacturer of Omacor, prescription fish oil), refer to the studies by Consumer Reports and Consumer Labs, both of which found no mercury or pesticide residues in dozens of fish oil preparations tested.

Look on the bright side. The conversation is growing. Fish oil, whether prescription or my favorite, Sam's Club Members' Mark brand, is a fabulously effective supplement with benefits that, in nearly all cases, exceeds the benefits of drugs.

Fish oil is an absolute requirement for your Track Your Plaque program and for you to hope to achieve control or reduction of your heart scan score.

Nutritional approaches to homocysteine reduction


For an in-depth discussion of nutritional approaches to homocysteine reduction, see my new article, Nutritional Therapies for Managing Homocysteine , in the most recent issue of Life Extension magazine. You'll find it at:

http://www.lef.org/magazine/mag2006/oct2006_report_homocysteine_01.htm

The report contains a detailed discussion of how to use foods to control homocysteine levels. Though I'm not a homocysteine-crazed fanatic like Life Extension publisher, William Falloon, I still there's some interesting aspects of homocysteine metabolism that need to be explored. I also think there's some genuine benefit to reducing homocystine, preferably with foods, secondarily with supplements.

Also see our recent update on homocysteine on the www.cureality.com website at:
http://www.cureality.com/library/fl_01-006homocysteine.asp

In the update, we tried to make sense of what the new studies on homocysteine treatment, NORVIT and HOPE-2, tell us in light of all the other studies on homocysteine that preceded them.

The American Heart Association diet guarantees you get heart disease!

Perhaps I stated that too strongly.

But the fact remains: the diet advocated by the American Heart Association is awful. The foods endorsed by their approach have no place on a list of healthy foods. Yes, you will find vegetables and fruits, etc.. But you will also find that the 2006 American Heart Association Diet and Lifestyle Recommendations dance around the issue of what foods to avoid. There's no explicit mention of how, for instance, common foods like Shredded Wheat cereal, ketchup, low-fat salad dressings, etc, among thousands of others, should be avoided.

No matter how you time your meals, mix them, combine proteins, fats, and carbohydrates, etc., you simply cannot squeeze health out of products like breakfast cereals, instant mashed potatoes, dried soup mixes, wheat crackers, etc. Yet these are the sorts of foods that are implicitly allowable in the Heart Association's diet program.

You can obtain a little insight into the motivations behind the diet design by looking at the Heart Association's Annual Report list of major supporters:

--ACH Food Companies--maker of Mazola margarine and corn oil. A contributor of between $500,000 and $999,000 to the Heart Association.

--ConAgra Foods--You know them as Chef BoyArdee, Peter Pan peanut butter, Kid Cuisine (pizza, macaroni and cheese). ConAgra contributed between $500,000 and $999,000 to the Heart Association.

--Archer Daniels Midland--Huge worldwide supplier of wheat flours, high-fructose corn syrup, and basic ingredients for manufacture of soft drinks, candies, and baked foods. ADM contributed between $1-4.9 million dollars to the American Heart Association.

Of course, the Heart Association provides many hugely positive services like funding research. But, on many official statements, you need to read between the lines. The Heart Association is funded by industry: medical device makers, drug makers, food manufacturers. Yes, some is contributed in the interest of health. But you can be sure that lots of money is also contributed in the hope of protecting specific commercial interests. Many of those decisions are made behind closed doors or on the golf course.

Be skeptical. Just because the Heart Association diet is a Casper Milquetoast version of a health program, it does not mean that you have to subscribe to their watered-down, politically correct, and downright useless nutrition recommendations.

I'm just right!

Ben is an energetic 45-year old entrepreneur. He started his own security alarm company and has, with tremendous hard work and long hours, built it into a successful local business. Despite his long hours, he found time to coach his son's football team and help with raising his 3 kids.

Ben's life took a detour when he had urgent bypass surgery at age 39. Just three years later, the chest pains and fatigue he'd experienced before bypass returned. Another heart catheterization revealed that all of his bypass grafts except one had closed. Three stents were implanted to salvage his original coronary arteries.

That's when I met Ben. Shockingly (perhaps I should know by now!), Ben was taking Lipitor and had been advised to follow a low-fat diet. That was the full extent of his heart disease prevention program. The burning question that I wanted answered was "Why did a 39-year old man have heart disease?".

Our analysis uncovered a smorgasbord of hidden patterns. You name it, Ben had it: postprandial (after-eating) patterns like IDL, low HDL, and, most notably, small LDL and lipoprotein(a). That's why Ben had heart disease as a 39-year old man--plain and simple.

We proceeded to correct all of his patterns. But the one aspect of his program that he struggled with: weight. At 5 ft 9 inches, Ben started at 285 lbs before bypass. He did manage to get to 270 after his surgery. I told him that, if he was going to get full control of his small LDL pattern, he needed to get to <210 lbs, perhaps even lower. Without substantial weight loss, he would never seize full control over coronary plaque.

Ben was satisfied that we had identified the hidden causes of his heart disease. But he remained skeptical that that magnitude of weight loss was necessary. Built like a football player, he looked stocky but not outright fat. He got down to 240 lbs but then he decided that he looked too skinny and just went right back up to 250-260 in weight.

At a weight of 250, this puts Ben's BMI (body mass index) at around 37, way over the cut-off of 30 for obesity. Now, the BMI can be misleading in people with larger frames and more muscle. But Ben undeniably had a generous abdomen, encasing the visceral fat that drives small LDL.

Unfortunately, Ben remained skeptical until I put three more stents into his right coronary artery last evening.

Small LDL is a powerful activator of lipoprotein(a). In other words, there's something peculiarly evil about the combination of small LDL and lipoprotein(a) that brings out the worst in both. You can't correct just one or the other. You've got to correct both. Don't learn this lesson the hard way.

I think (hope) that Ben is on track to get to around 200 lbs.

Prevention: Bad news in bits and pieces

Jan clearly did not want to talk about her heart scan. Her score of 502 came as a shock to her. After all, she'd survived breast cancer just a year earlier, having been through dozens of radiation treatments, chemotherapy, not the mention the emotional upheaval.

Now I was telling Jan that she had a very high heart scan score with a heart attack risk of 5% per year. Then we got to her lipoprotein patterns: Jan had several striking abnormalities, including a misleading LDL cholesterol that underestimated her true LDL by nearly 100% (LDL particle number), small LDL, and the dreaded lipoprotein(a).

"I can't handle this! Why did I get the stupid scan in the first place?!"

Giving her a chance to collect her emotions, I discussed how, even though this business can be frightening, it's far--FAR--better than the alternative: heart attack at 3 am, rush to the hospital, stents, bypass surgery, etc. Or, death for the >30% of people who don't make it to the hospital in time.

That's why I often tell people that prevention of disease is bad news in bits and pieces. But it's a lot more manageable this way. Coronary plaque is a controllable process. You don't have much control in the midst of a heart attack.

A second chance

Stewart had a CT heart scan in 2004. Score: 475.

As always in the Track Your Plaque program, Stewart had his lipoproteins assessed. Among his patterns were LDL 157 mg/dl, severe small LDL, and the (post-prandial, or after-eating) IDL. Stewart was also "pre-diabetic" with a blood sugar of 123 mg/dl. Blood pressure was also a major issue. Although initially concerned, life and distractions got in the way, and Stewart's attentions drifted away.

Two years of a lackadaisical effort and Stewart's heart scan score was 600, a 26% increase. Not as bad as it could have been doing nothing (i.e., 30% per year), but still far from great. But, even with the increase in score, we still really didn't get Stewart's attention. He went about his business with a very lax dietary program, overindulging in breads, crackers, goodies, hot dogs, etc., and following a virtually non-existent exercise program except for playing golf once or twice a week.

Unfortunately, Stewart started having pains in his chest with very minimal efforts like climbing a single flight of stairs. His stress test proved abnormal. Stewart then received a stent in his left anterior descending coronary and another in his circumflex. His right coronary artery had a 40-50% blockage, close to requiring a stent.

I stressed to Stewart that this had been preventable. Should motivation remain unchanged, the next step would be bypass surgery.

I think I finally succeeded in getting Stewart's attention. He found the prospect of a bypass operation a lot more concrete than the idea of progression or regression of coronary plaque. So Stewart is being given a second chance. Unfortunately, we will no longer be able to track Stewart's plaque very effectively, since two of three arteries now contain stents, and only the right coronary remains scorable.

I hope Stewart succeeds. But I sure wish he had done this earlier. He had realistic hopes of never requiring stents or bypass surgery.

Learn from Stewart's mistakes. Attention to your program requires vigilance. You can't ignore the causes of your coronary plaque for any length of time without it catching up to you. But seize your first and best chance.

Are you a skinny fat person?

AT 186 lbs. and 5 feet 10 inches, Doug did not regard himself as overweight. Sure, he had a little extra "love handles", a small bulge in the belly and a waist of 34 inches. But he was by no means fat, particularly compared to most of his friends, neighbors, and co-workers, many of whom were 50-100 lbs heavier.

But examine Doug's lipoprotein patterns and, if you didn't know what he looked like, you'd guess that he's at least 50 lbs or more overweight. His prominent patterns included low HDL, small LDL, high triglycerides, the after-eating IDL, and borderline high blood sugar of 116 mg/dl. His blood pressure usually ranged around 138/82.

In other words, Doug is among the 5-10% of people who have most of the features of the so-called "metabolic syndrome", but don't look the part. They usually (though not always) have a modest excess of visceral abdominal fat. While some people have to be 100 lbs overweight before they express these patterns, someone like Doug could do it with minimal excess weight, sometimes as little as 5-10 lbs.

Several specific genetic patterns can account for this exagerrated sensitivity to weight, but the solutions remain much the same. Heightened sensitivity to processed carbohydrates, particularly those containing wheat, is commonly present. A sharp reduction in processed carbohydrates like breads, breakfast cereals, and pretzels yields a huge benefit. Reduction in weight, of course, can also yield marked improvement in these patterns. This means that Doug should consider achieving his truly ideal weight of <175 lbs and become a truly skinny skinny person. Though his patterns might not be fully corrected, he will see substantial improvement across the board.

These patterns are also potent triggers for coronary plaque growth. Correction of low HDL, small LDL, etc. is crucial if you are to seize hold of your heart scan score.

Heart disease "reversal" gives health a bad name

Put the search phrase "reverse heart disease" into your internet search engine, and you'll uncover an astonishing range of sites, all making extravagant promises.

The treatment programs offered range from the bizarre (colonic irrigation, magnetism, etc.), to centers using conventional approaches like statin drugs and low-fat diets, to sites that make lofty predictions with few unique tools (slash the fat and heart disease dissolves).

95% or more of the sites you turn up are clearly pandering to the unknowing, the unsophisticated, the hopeless, or other helpless niche groups. Homeopathic preparations, chelation, magnical combinations of herbals, you name it, you'll find it attached to claims for heart disease reversal.

I've seen people use many of these treatments. Is there any effect on the rate of increase of the heart scan score? Do they impact on the 30% per year expected rate of increase? Absolutely not.

Unfortunately, this gives anyone practicing truly effective methods to reverse coronary plaque a bad name. Just associating with this suspect group of "practitioners" can make us look bad--guilt by association.

Whenever someone claims to have the secret of heart disease reversal, I ask "Can you prove it?" Show me some evidence. It doesn't necessarily have to be $30 million drug company sponsored study, but some evidence of effectiveness should be available. The only thing we should take on faith is our religion, not our health care.

Our growing number of people who have, indeed, reversed their heart scan scores--reversed heart disease--to me is persuasive evidence of the value of the Track Your Plaque approach. Not foolproof, not 100%, but the best damned approach I'm aware of, by a long shot.

Trans fats to be banned

Sometimes good may come from legislation.

The City of New York is contemplating a ban on trans-fat use by restaurants, bakeries, and other food establishments in preparation of their foods. (Trans-fats are also known as hydrogenated fats.)

At this point, I believe it's unclear, should this pass, what the response will be. If food preparers turn to butter, that's not much better. (Don't get fooled by the non-sensical argument of which is better, butter or margarine--they're both terrible.) Subtracting hydrogenated fats will no doubt cause major disruption of food preparation habits. It may even increase the cost of food slightly.



I believe that the true positive effect of this situation, however, will be the tremendously heightened awareness it will raise in the public, both in New York and elsewhere, on just how bad and pervasive trans-fats are. It may increase awareness that foods like donuts and pastries are not just about excessive quantities of sugars, but also trans-fat content.

If you're already a Track Your Plaque follower, you already know that the easiest way to dodge trans-fats in your diet is to minimize your use of processed foods--the cellophane-wrapped, pulverized, dried, just-add-water, microwavable and ready-to-eat foods that line supermarket shelves. Trans-fats are purely man-made. You won't find them--not a stitch--in green peppers, lettuce, olive oil, almonds. . .unprocessed foods. Watch for an in-depth report on trans-fats on the Track Your Plaque website in which we will detail the scientific evidence behind this movement, how to recognize when foods contain trans-fats, etc.

Back to basics!

Harold is energetic and highly motivated. His heart scan score of 997 really threw him for a loop: his view of himself as a healthy, slender, 58-year old clearly needed revision.

So Harold set himself on a quest to find new ways to help him deal with his heart disease risk. He enrolled in the Track Your Plaque program. Unfortunately, he skimmed through the information but didn't really put much of it to use.

Instead, he wanted the "secret" information that other people didn't know about, "insider" information that couldn't be found in magazines, wasn't know by doctors.

He'd read that hawthorne was useful for opening coronary arteries, so he bought hawthorne at the health food store. He read that coenzyme Q10 was a little know way to strengthen the heart, so he added that. A Chinese doctor in town was advertising chelation therapy that "dissolved plaque". He subscribed to a once-a-week intravenous infusion at the doctor's holistic clinic of Eastern medicine. He'd heard that testosterone opened up arteries, so he purchased a preparation of chrysin, horny goat weed, yohimbine, and saw palmetto. He was suspicious of many conventional medicines, but he didn't want to ignore his LDL cholesterol of 172 mg/dl. So he added guggulipid and a combination cholesterol-reducing product that contained about 10 ingredients.

Harold pursued his quest, often adding new agents that came with promising stories. One year later, Harold eagerly got another heart scan, certain that his extraordinary efforts were sure to yield a dramatic drop in his heart scan score. The score: 1372, a 37% increase.

Harold was therefore several thousand dollars poorer and several steps closer to taking the plunge, allowing a potentially fatal disease to cut his life short.

The message: There's no need to re-invent the wheel. There are no top-secret ways to reverse atherosclerotic plaque.


Don't neglect the basics. You can't do calculus until you learn how to add, subtract, and divide. From a heart scan score reducing perspective, achieving 60-60-60 in basic lipids, normalizing blood pressure and blood sugar, identifying any hidden lipoprotein patterns like small LDL and Lp(a), losing weight to your ideal weight, taking fish oil, normalizing vitamin D blood levels to 50-70 ng/ml--these are the necessary prerequisites to achieve control over your coronary plaque and stop the increase in your heart scan score.

You don't need to waste your time with the rants of some supplement-hawker eager to sell you the next cure for heart disease. I'm often amazed at the number of people who do so yet have never even taken care of someone with heart disease. Would you allow someone to try and repair your car if they've never actually laid their hands on an engine before? Then why would you entrust such a person with your health?

The Track Your Plaque approach is not fool-proof, but it's the best there is by a long shot.
Fat Head, Wheat belly, and the Adventures of Ancel Keys

Comments (22) -

  • Jeff

    3/14/2010 2:13:51 PM |

    I assume you don't agree that the cholesterol hypothesis is "wrong," since you recommend reducing LDL to 60.

  • Steve L.

    3/14/2010 4:18:40 PM |

    Fat Head has been in the back of my mind for awhile, but you've reminded to to go ahead and order it.  I think it will be great to pass on to friends curious about paleo/low-carb without having their eyes glaze over.  Very jealous of the cruise -- gotta get on it next year.

  • Peter

    3/14/2010 4:44:30 PM |

    Most of the people in extreme high carb cultures are Asians before their food started getting westernized.  And they had very low rates of heart disease, diabetes, and obesity  It's a population of billions, not a study of small group.  

    If carbs are bad for me(and I am more and more thinking they are bad for me) why weren't they bad for them?

    I'm not arguing for any particular diet, I'm trying to figure out what to have for dinner.

  • LiPiderman

    3/14/2010 10:09:25 PM |

    Most folks who bash Ancel Keys haven't actually opened any of his books.  They would be surprised to discover he advocated eating organ meats, wild fish and game, and real food.  One of his books has a chapter on choosing the proper wines for dinner.  He was a fan of espresso coffee about 30 years before we all started going to Starbucks.  His dietary advice was not ultra "low-fat" a la Ornish.  In fact, he mainly recommended substituting unsaturated fats for saturated, which is advice you hear from many contemporary sources, including the first "Paleo" proponents like Lorne Cordain.  It's advice that has appeared from time to time on this very blog!

    Keys undoubtedly got a few things wrong.  All scientists and researchers do.  Their mistakes are corrected by those who follow.  That's the way science works.  To blame him for the obesity crisis, or for the "low-fat" marketing strategy that Food Inc concocted in the 80s and 90s, is silly.  As for the lipid theory itself, the naysayers have their own sorting out to do. Some say it's all bunk, others want to keep bits and pieces of it.   When the science behind one of these camps becomes overwhelming, their view will prevail. This takes a while.  Nutrition is an extremely complex subject!

    As for Keys, he lived to be 100 following the Mediterranean diet he advocated for others.  His wife and co-researcher Margaret died at 97. Call that anecdotal evidence if you want.  I call it having the last laugh your critics.

  • moblogs

    3/14/2010 11:51:59 PM |

    I like this trend of documentaries making it to the cinema, beats the butchered remakes of classic films, and the pomp of it attracts a wider audience.
    Michael Moore seems to have started kick-started it all.

  • Dr. William Davis

    3/15/2010 12:48:14 AM |

    Hi, Steve--

    Not knowing what to expect when Jimmy Moore invited me to join his cruise, I didn't tell everyone about it.

    However, now having had the experience, I can recommend it wholeheartedly to anyone desiring a fun informative experience for the low-carbohydrate eating viewpoint. Jimmy seems to have a talent for appealing to speakers who come from a diverse panel of perspectives, all who contribute something unique to the low-carb conversation.

  • Anonymous

    3/15/2010 1:55:07 AM |

    Too much hype for me, I'm afraid ...
    and the "humor" wears thin pretty quickly. The message is obscurred by
    this guy trying too hard to be folksy.

    What ever happened to the "Keep It
    Simple Stupid" approach to things.

  • sonagi92

    3/15/2010 2:28:28 AM |

    "Most of the people in extreme high carb cultures are Asians before their food started getting westernized. And they had very low rates of heart disease, diabetes, and obesity It's a population of billions, not a study of small group.

    If carbs are bad for me(and I am more and more thinking they are bad for me) why weren't they bad for them?"


    I lived more than a decade in Korea and China and made several visits to Japan and Southeast Asia.  The only high-carb food on the table is a bowl of rice or noodles.  The other dishes contain non-starch veggies, legumes, and some animal protein.  The liquid on the table is water or unsweetened tea.  Traditionally Asians don't snack between meals and rarely eat sweets although young people are picking up these habits and it shows.  Fruit is expensive, consumed only in season.  The SAD probably contains more easily digested carbs than traditional Asian diets.  

    True obesity is rare, but type II diabetes is not, and neither are cardiovascular diseases.  Americans are much more likely to get heart attacks while Asians are more likely to have strokes.

  • Lou

    3/15/2010 2:45:05 AM |

    Peter,

    You'd have to travel to Asian countries to fully understand what their diet is all about. It's not what you think. The BIGGEST problem is that we eat way too much of carbs.

    I just saw documentaries of North Korea and pretty much every single person is skinny. Only the "president" of NK looked to be overweight.

    What else... oh yeah, Asian people tend to eat rice, not wheat/corn starch/fructose. Probably not as much rice as you'd think. American people consume unbelievable amount of wheat/cornstarch/fructose. They are everywhere in USA. 95% of food at stores are from them...

  • Matt Stone

    3/15/2010 1:39:07 PM |

    Ancel Keys dazzled me as well when I actually took the time to review his work.  Reading his 1385 page The Biology of Human Starvation was quite an enlightening experience, and highlighted the integrity of Keys as a laboratory scientist.  Sure, he rushed to conclusions with the lipid hypothesis, but can you blame him?  I'm sure it seemed obvious and irrefutable at the time that he noticed cholesterol in the arteries of heart attack victims while noticing that fat tended to raise cholesterol levels.

    But it wasn't any more flawed than blaming carbohydrates for all of mankind's problems either, as the biggest carb-eaters on earth remain the healthiest and longest-lived peoples, and high-carb/low-fat diets continue to drop fasting insulin and glucose levels in clinical study.    

    And Keys lived the good life until the ripe age of 100. It's unlikely that any low-carb author/blogger will live more quality years than Keys.

  • Anonymous

    3/15/2010 4:19:59 PM |

    There were several things I liked about the Fathead documentary. It pointed out the weaknesses of Supersize Me, it outlined many of the problems of the lipid hypothesis, it presented a clear explanation of why low-carb can be effective for both weight loss and cardiovascular health.

    Things I didn't like? Fathead had a clear agenda - to promote Libertarian politics and ways of thinking. As such, Naughton was obligated to place primary blame for all problems on government. Sure, government has a role to play. But if the scientific community had it's act together, government would follow. If we talk about other public health issues (smallpox, tuberculosis, goiter), then we must acknowledge that government can do things right sometimes.  

    Also, there was a disconnect between the 'common sense' of the people and the scientific explanation that was offered. Sure, people know that fast food meal has more calories than a carrot. So what?  If people have that common sense, why is obesity, diabetes, and heart disease so prevalent? I don't think he really answers that. Does common sense tell people that a large plate of pasta is equivalent to eating a cup or two of sugar? Does 'common sense' also tell them that saturated fat is bad, or that to lose weight, they simply need to eat less and exercise more?

  • Anonymous

    3/15/2010 6:13:34 PM |

    This may be a simplification for why Asians may have less heart disease, but it simply could be because of the use of red yeast rice in many of their foods?

  • sonagi92

    3/15/2010 9:20:23 PM |

    Curcumin is a component of turmeric.  Koreans and Japanese don't consume it, except in fast-food type curry dishes.  Most of China's major cuisines do not use the spice either.  It is South and Southeast Asians who use it, and Indians have notoriously high rates of heart disease and diabetes.

    As for North Korea, the semi-starving country dependent on foreign aid isn't exactly representative of Asia.  Prosperous neighbors Japan and South Korea have the lowest obesity rates in the OECD.

  • Neonomide

    3/17/2010 1:09:32 AM |

    Very fascinating info on raising Vitamin D status and CAD below. People who had their 25(OH)D up to 30 ng/ml from 19 ng/ml got the benefits and in the other study 43 ng/ml level seemed optimal yet extra benefits were not seen in, say, 60 gn/ml:

    http://www.webmd.com/heart-disease/news/20100315/vitamin-d-supplements-lower-heart-disease-risk?src=RSS_PUBLIC

  • moblogs

    3/17/2010 10:54:35 AM |

    There was, perhaps, a misunderstanding on Ted's part. We're from England where we term Asian as Indian, Pakistani or Bangladeshi and call the Japanese, Chinese and Koreans individually.

    The core reason of increased heart disease in South Asians probably is partly vitamin D deficiency caused by a conservative dress sense in a sunny climate. India also has a lot of air pollution.

    Many Asian foods (and I mean all of Asia now) use similar ingredients; in fact one Japanese dessert looks and tastes exactly like a Indian/Pakistani one (how that came to be - I don't know). South Asians though eat chapattis (wheat) quite commonly, and from what I gather there isn't a large wheat consumption in East Asians.

  • Anonymous

    3/17/2010 3:26:35 PM |

    Yes, as Anonymous above mentions, Naughton's political ideology  
    distorts his views. That actually seems more important to him than the issue of diet in Fat Head, which is why he expends so much effort defending Fast Food companies. Witness the part where he holds a huge bucket of French fries
    (think about how many carbs are in that!) and rants something to the effect of:
    "If they want to sell me a huge bucket of fries for 50 cents, and I want to buy it, it's no one's business to tell
    us we shouldn't."
    I'd imagine most readers of this blog are interested in diet and health, not political ideology, so overall Fat Head will probably not appeal to them.

  • Anonymous

    3/17/2010 10:49:21 PM |

    "I'd imagine most readers of this blog are interested in diet and health, not political ideology" ~ Anonymous above

    I used to be uninterested in anything political until I got interested in diet and health care.  The idea that a nanny government could dictate what I can and cannot eat is quite frightening, especially when you consider what the establishment thinks is healthy.  I personally do not want to eat french fries but if we don't object to the government making french fries illegal, who is going to stop the government from banning "artery clogging" coconut oil or outlawing meat?

  • Anonymous

    3/19/2010 12:47:40 PM |

    >> who is going to stop the government from banning "artery clogging" coconut oil or outlawing meat?

    Yeah, that is the paranoia talking. After 40+ years of research showing the dangers of smoking, tobacco is still legal. Government is not going to outlaw meat, and I question the good judgment of anyone who suggests that they might.

  • buy jeans

    11/3/2010 10:29:32 PM |

    I lived more than a decade in Korea and China and made several visits to Japan and Southeast Asia. The only high-carb food on the table is a bowl of rice or noodles. The other dishes contain non-starch veggies, legumes, and some animal protein. The liquid on the table is water or unsweetened tea. Traditionally Asians don't snack between meals and rarely eat sweets although young people are picking up these habits and it shows. Fruit is expensive, consumed only in season. The SAD probably contains more easily digested carbs than traditional Asian diets.

  • Carl

    3/6/2011 6:45:10 PM |

    I lean heavily toward low carb/paleo and think the "conventional wisdom" is full of holes, but I don't think "Fat Head" does a good job (at all) of advancing the argument to the uninitiated.

    The attack on Morgan Spurlock is misguided, and Naughton's counter-experiment proves nothing.  Spurlock went on an extreme binge which everyone, including Spurlock, expected in advance to cause weight gain and other negative effects ("duh"), which he wanted to document on film.  It was more of an exercise in "performance art" than in science, and meant to simply to provoke the viewer into the thinking a bit about the possible consequences of regularly ingesting the same kind of food over a lifetime.

    Naughton, on the other hand, takes in an actual caloric deficit, with restricted carbs, and regular exercise, and then experiences a weight loss.  How does Naughton's experiment in any way "rebut" Spurlock's?  And, given the fact that Naughton goes on to argue that restricting carbs is more important than lowering calorie intake, his own experiment is useless to prove either strategy, since he cut intake of both calories AND carbs.

    The film is poorly organized and produced, and is undermined at every turn by the injection of sophomoric humor.  In a typically tedious sequence, the snarky Naughton asks people on the street if they have ever collapsed with a heart attack immediately after eating fettuccine alfredo.  Tres dumb.  Especially when you consider that a plate-full of pasta smothered in cream, butter, and cheese is a food that both low carb and low fat eaters would want to avoid eating often.  In one of his failed attempts at humor (in a scene showing his own wife in bed), she asks if he is a moron, and in that moment she seems to speak on behalf of the viewer.

    Worst of all is the ongoing anti-government Libertarian ideology that underscores Naughton's narrative.  He argues that anyone "with a functioning brain" can make proper food choices, but at the same time argues that the public has been deluged with mountains of false information and bad advice for decades.  The film is littered with such logical inconsistencies.  Naughton's gratuitous political agenda shows up in some bizarre assertions, like when he argues that higher tendency toward obesity among the poor is merely the result of a predisposition among non-whites toward "thicker" bodies, and the assertion that court-mandated busing to achieve racial desegregation contributed to overweight school children.  These theories simply detract from the credibility of the diet and health science he eventually discusses.  Naughton is entitled to whatever political views he wishes, but injecting them into a documentary about nutrition and health does nothing to advance an essentially purely scientific subject.

    At his blog and in interviews like the one above, Naughton comes off considerably better than in the amateurish film that he actually made.  If you know anyone "with a functioning brain" that is still clinging to the conventional wisdom that you'd like to convert, showing them "Fat Head" may not be the best way to get them to become more open-minded, thanks to the many mis-guided and unhelpful aspects of the film.

  • Be

    8/4/2011 11:59:09 AM |

    But they are trying to shut down raw milk, continue to protect Monsanto and not include GMO in nutrition labeling, and continue to put up barriers and regulations that effectively hurt small local and sustainable food producers.  The result is that soon all food will be GMO/CAFO!

Loading