Do stents prevent reversal?

I've seen this phenomenon several times now: A highly-motivated Track Your Plaque participant with a stent in one artery will do all the right things--lose weight, achieve 60:60:60 in basic lipids, identify and correct hidden lipoprotein disorders, take fish oil, correct vitamin D, etc.

Follow-up heart scan shows dramatic reduction in scoring in the two arteries without stents--30% per artery. But the artery with the stent will show marked increase in scoring above and/or below the stent. (It's impossible to tell what happens in or around the stent itself from a calcium scoring standpoint, since steel looks just like calcium on a CT heart scan.) In other words, there is marked plaque growth in the vicinity of the stent, despite the fact that dramatic reversal of atherosclerosis has occurred in other arteries without stents.

Should we take this to mean that a stent destroys the opportunity for atherosclerotic plaque reversal in the stented artery? I don't know, but I fear this may be true. What dangers does this different sort of plaque pose? Is it the result of the injury imposed at time of stent implantation, some modification of flow or biologic responses as a result of the presence of the stent?

These are all unanswered questions. But I believe that it is yet another suggestive piece of evidence that the best stent is no stent at all.

At what score should I have a heart cath?

This question comes up frequently: At what specific heart scan score should a heart catheterization be performed? In other words, is there a specific cut-off that automatically triggers a need for catheterization?

In my view, there is no such score. We can't say, for instance, that everybody with a score above 1000 should have a catheterization. It is true that the higher your score, the greater the likelihood of a plaque blocking flow. A score of 1000 carries an approximately 25-30% likelihood of reduced blood flow sufficient to consider a stent or bypass. This can nearly always be settled with a stress test. Recall that, despite their pitfalls for uncovering hidden heart disease in the first place, stress tests are useful as gauges of coronary blood flow.

But even a score of 1000 carries a 70-75% likelihood that a procedure will not be necesary. This is too high to justify doing heart catheterizations willy-nilly.

Unfortunately, some my colleagues will say that any heart scan score justifies a heart cath. I believe this is absolutely, unquestionably, and inexcusably wrong. More often than not, this attitude is borne out of ignorance, laziness, or a desire for profit.

Does every lump or bump justify surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy on the chance it could represent cancer? Of course not. There is indeed a time and place for these things, but judgment is involved.

In my view, no heart scan score should autmatically prompt a major heart procedure like heart catheterization in a person without symptoms.

Niacin makes NY Times

In the wake of the crash and burn of Pfizer's torcetrapib, media attention has turned up the miracles of . . .good old niacin. The NY Times carried a well-written report on niacin in its recent report, An Old Cholesterol Remedy Is New Again.


(Read the entire report at http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/23/health/23consume.html?em&ex=1169701200&en=670fa84ae2ea648c&ei=5087%0A)

Among their comments:

...torcetrapib worked primarily by increasing HDL, or good cholesterol. Among other functions, HDL carries dangerous forms of cholesterol from artery walls to the liver for excretion. The process, called reverse cholesterol transport, is thought to be crucial to preventing clogged arteries.

Many scientists still believe that a statin combined with a drug that raises HDL would mark a significant advance in the treatment of heart disease. But for patients now at high risk of heart attack or stroke, the news is better than it sounds. An effective HDL booster already exists.

It is niacin, the ordinary B vitamin.

In its therapeutic form, nicotinic acid, niacin can increase HDL as much as 35 percent when taken in high doses, usually about 2,000 milligrams per day. It also lowers LDL, though not as sharply as statins do, and it has been shown to reduce serum levels of artery-clogging triglycerides as much as 50 percent. Its principal side effect is an irritating flush caused by the vitamin’s dilation of blood vessels.

Despite its effectiveness, niacin has been the ugly duckling of heart medications, an old remedy that few scientists cared to examine. But that seems likely to change.

“There’s a great unfilled need for something that raises HDL,” said Dr. Steven E. Nissen, a cardiologist at the Cleveland Clinic and president of the American College of Cardiology. “Right now, in the wake of the failure of torcetrapib, niacin is really it. Nothing else available is that effective.”

In 1975, long before statins, a landmark study of 8,341 men who had suffered heart attacks found that niacin was the only treatment among five tested that prevented second heart attacks. Compared with men on placebos, those on niacin had a 26 percent reduction in heart attacks and a 27 percent reduction in strokes. Fifteen years later, the mortality rate among the men on niacin was 11 percent lower than among those who had received placebos.

'Here you have a drug that was about as effective as the early statins, and it just never caught on,' said Dr. B. Greg Brown, professor of medicine at the University of Washington in Seattle. 'It’s a mystery to me. But if you’re a drug company, I guess you can’t make money on a vitamin.'



Of course, you and I don't have to wait for the media to endorse something. I'm nonetheless thrilled that this hugely helpful vitamin is gaining greater recognition. My preferred form nowadays is over-the-counter SloNiacin (Upsher Smith). Weve seen no liver side-effects and a minimal quantity of flushing. It's also reasonably priced, $13.99 for 100 tablets of 500 mg at Walgreen's. That's a lot cheaper than prescription Niaspan at $130 for 60 tablets.

Perhaps the notoriety will cut back on the silly responses from some physicians that I still hear about from patients: "My doctor said to stop the niacin because it's going to destroy my liver."

Wheat: the nicotine of food

Yes, we know that wheat contributes to creating small LDL, drops HDL, raises triglycerides, and VLDL. We also know it indirectly slows the clearance of after-eating fats from the blood (curious, I know). Wheat products also increase inflammation (C-reactive protein), raise blood sugar, and contribute tremendously to diabetes.

What many people don't know is that wheat products also have an addictive quality: have one donut and you want another. It's true for bread, breakfast cereals, pretzels, cookies, etc. How many times have you had just one Oreo cookie?

Curiously, elimination of wheat products, unlike elimination of nicotine, usually causes the cravings to disappear. In other words, if you stop smoking cigarettes, the desire to smoke doesn't go away. With wheat products, the often overwhelming desire for more wheat products often just goes away.

But most people are simply unable to dramatically reduce or eliminate wheat products from their daily diet and therefore struggle each and every day with excessive cravings for bagels, donuts, cookies, breads, etc.

Try this useful experiment: Eliminate wheat products for a month and see what happens. Most people drop blood pressure, lose the tummy excess, feel more alert, see a drop in blood sugar, experience improvements in lipoproteins, and regain control over appetite.

Good time for a heart attack?

Man Has Heart Attack At Right Place, Right Time

If Robert Ricard had picked the wrong restaurant for lunch, he might have died.

The 71-year-old Michigan man suffered a heart attack shortly after ordering a glass of wine with friends at Bentley's Roadhouse on Saturday.

Luckily, a disaster medical team was sitting nearby.



A TV station in Michigan reported the above story. You've heard these "if it wasn't for ___, so and so would have died" stories. They're reported in all cities at one time or another.

What amazes me about these common local stories is that they're accepted at all. The question that comes to my mind is "Why couldn't the heart attack have been averted in the first place?" Early identification then, as close as humanly possible, elimination of risk would have been a preferable path.

Of course, it may not be the role of the media to cast judgement on why and how the entire episode could have been completely prevented from occurring. But you shouldn't fall into the same trap of complacency. We cannot expect others to save us when the "big one" hits. Your best assurance is to never have one in the first place.

How good is the South Beach Diet?

I'm a fan of the South Beach Diet.

Though it is billed as a program for weight loss (for which it is very effective), it is really a program for health. The basic approach of South Beach involves:

Eat good fats — Choose good fats from olive oil, canola oil, peanut oil, flaxseed oil, walnut oil, avocados, nuts, and fish. Omega-3 (fish oil) supplements are also fine.


Eat good carbs — Good carbs include high-fiber, nutrient-dense fruits, vegetables, legumes, and whole grains.

Eat lean protein — Good sources include eggs, low-fat dairy, nuts, seeds, legumes, skinless white-meat poultry, fish, shellfish, lean cuts of meat, and vegetarian options such as tofu.

(From The South Beach Diet, Dr. Arthur Agatston)


There's no doubt that South Beach can yield dramatic weight loss. In my experience, the success in weight loss depends on 1) how unhealthy your diet was in the first place, and 2) how long you can stick to Phase I, the inital phase during which weight loss is most dramatic. Some people have to periodically cycle back to Phase I to break a "plateau" or to lose faster.

But South Beach is also healthy. It has all the ingredients of a healthy eating program: Low saturated and hydrogenated fats, rich in monounsaturated fats, high fiber, low- to moderate- glycemic index, vegetables and fruits, lean proteins.

The Atkins' diet, in contrast, while very effective for weiglht loss, is an unhealthy process. I've seen lots of bladder infections, constipation, skin rashes, and kidney stones. That's just in the short term. If you stick to the "induction phase" (the no carbohydrate, low fiber, indiscriminate fat initial phase) for an extended period, I suspect that other adverse internal phenemena also develop that might not show for years, like cancer. But--it does work for weight loss!

South Beach's Phase I is also carbohydrate restricted, but steers you towards healthier foods, such as healthy oils from olive and canola, raw or dry roasted nuts, and lean proteins and vegetables.

What really makes South Beach special, however, are its clever recipes. Dr. Arthur Agatston (the author) involved chefs from the restaurants in the South Beach area of Miami to help create healthy yet delicious recipes. We've tried many of them and, while they are different from traditional fare, are delicious and satisfying for the most part.

Criticisms? None, really. But, when my patients choose South Beach (which I often encourage), I often have to impress on them that the Track Your Plaque program is not about weight loss. It is about seizing control of a potentially life-threatening disease. It is a far more important goal with greater implications. Weight loss is just one aspect of a coronary plaque control effort. For this reason, we sometimes have to make changes in the South Beach program to allow for correction of specific lipoprotein patterns.

The most common modification is in people with small LDL particles. This pattern often does indeed respond to weight loss and/or niacin. However, it occasionally persists despite these efforts. We then will ask the patient to continue to restrict the re-introduction of wheat products, though it is allowed after Phase I in South Beach. In other words, for this specific and sometimes difficult to control lipoprotein pattern, a spedific modification of the off-the-shelf South Beach program is sometimes necessary. Of course, the diet is created to suit everybody. Lipoprotein analysis permits detailed insight into your patterns and it's only to be expected that specific modifications might be needed.

But, as written, you can do quite well in your plaque control program by sticking to South Beach.

Be patient with niacin

Mel's HDL started at 37 mg/dl one year ago. Mel had several other abnormal lipoprotein patterns along with his HDL (inc. small LDL and Lp(a)), but HDL was clearly a crucial factor in his panel.

With a heart scan score of 1166, we needed to raise Mel's HDL to the Track Your Plaque target of 60 mg/dl. So Mel started niacin, our number one method to raise HDL, in addition to reducing his exposure to wheat products and other high glycemic index foods; increasing his physical activity; trying to reduce his excess tummy fat; fish oil; dark chocolate (2 oz per day) and red wine (1-2 glasses per day, preferably dark French reds). The form of niacin we often choose is SloNiacin (Upsher Smith), available over-the-counter for about $12-14 per 100 tablets.

Mel started out with niacin 500 mg per day at dinner, increased to 1000 mg at dinner after four weeks. Although this is usually too soon to reassess HDL, Mel insisted. His HDL 41 mg/dl. Mel's disappointment was palpable. He was the usual type A personality: he wanted his HDL higher--now! So Mel insisted that we increase niacin to 1500 mg per day. (We never go higher than this if low HDL or small LDL is the indication for niacin; only when Lp(a) is present do we go higher.)

Six months into this process, HDL: 45 mg/dl. Still a sluggish response.

One year later, HDL: 68 mg/dl. Finally!

That is typical for niacin, as well as combination of lifestyle changes Mel made. None of them result in an immediate rise in HDL; all take months to 1-2 years to exert full HDL-raising effect.

Think of HDL as the 82-year old grandma who takes a long time to cross the street-she does get there!

Note: Doses of niacin >500 mg per day should be taken with medical supervision.

Can vitamin D be a SOLE risk factor?

Here's a crazy question. It occurred to me as I was talking to Drew, a slender, active 54-year old dentist with no bad habits including no smoking.

Drew's heart scan score was 222. His lipoprotein analysis mostly revealed a lot of nothing, which is unusual. The only pattern that showed up was a modestly high LDL of 122 mg/dl with a very slight excess of small LDL. That's it. I would not be satisfied that these were sufficient cause for Drew's level of coronary plaque.

Drew's 25-OH-vitamin D3 level: 15 ng/ml--severe deficiency--despite the fact that his doctor had suggested that he take a vitamin D2 preparation. In other words, Drew had been profoundly deficient, probably for years.

Given the unimpressive cholesterol and lipoprotein values, could vitamin D serve as a trigger for coronary plaque all by itself?

I don't have an answer and know of nobody else who does. However, my opinion is that vitamin D is indeed a potent risk that can cause heart disease as a sole risk factor.

Perhaps it's another piece of circumstantial evidence suggesting that vitamin D has an enormous influence on health, including coronary plaque. Interestingly, the only other health problem Drew has had is prostate cancer, treated a few years ago with prostate removal and radiation. Good evidence suggests that vitamin D deficiency escalates risk of prostate cancer substantially.

By the way, I've seen people taking vitamin D2 preparations, called "ergocalciferol," who are every bit as deficient as those who take no vitamin D at all. Avoid D2 or ergocalciferol preparations: they're worthless.

Does fish oil raise LDL cholesterol?

Katie had an LDL (conventionally calculated) of 87 mg/dl, HDL of 48 mg/dl.

She added fish oil, 6000 mg per day. Three months later her LDL was 118 mg/dl, HDL 54 mg/dl. In other words, LDL increased by 31 mg. What gives?

Several studies have, indeed, shown that fish oil raises LDL cholesterol, usually by 5-10 mg/dl. Occasionally, it may be as much as 20-30.

Unfortunately, many physicians often assume that it's the (minor) cholesterol content of fish oil capsules, or some vague, undesirable effect of fish oil. It's nothing of the kind.

Since we based Katie's program on (NMR) lipoprotein analysis, not conventional lipids (HDL, calculated LDL, triglycerides, total cholesterol), I knew that Katie also had a severe excess of intermediate-density lipoprotein, or IDL, and very-low density lipoproteins, VLDL. This signifies that after a meal, dietary fats persist for 12, 24,or more hours. Fish oil is a very effective method to clear IDL and VLDL, though sometimes it also causes a shift of some IDL and VLDL into the LDL class. Thus, the apparent increase in LDL.

Another contributor: Conventional LDL is a calculated value, not measured. The calculation for LDL is thrown off by any reduction in HDL or rise in triglycerides. In Katie's case, the rise in HDL from 48 to 54 means that calculated LDL is becoming more accurate and rising towards the true measured value. At the start, Katie's true measured LDL was 122 mg/dl, 35 mg higher than the calculated value. Calculated LDL is therefore approximating measured LDL more accurately as HDL rises.

The most important lesson to learn is that, if LDL rises significantly on fish oil and you haven't had lipoproteins formally measured, there may have been a substantial postprandial abnormality like IDL that was unrecognized.

Heart disease is everywhere

If you ever need convincing that heart disease is everywhere, you should do what I do: subscribe to Google Alerts and have them forward news anytime the search phrase "heart attack" crosses the web. (Just go to Google, click on "more" to the right of the search bar, and follow the links.)


Some recent samples:


Workmates resuscitate driver after heart attack

A woman coal mine truck driver had a heart attack and required resuscitation with a defibrillator 3 times on the way to the hospital.





Heart attack kills groom at reception
A 34-year old man died during his wedding reception, leaving behind his 26-year old new wife.






Heart attack ruled as cause of crash

An Alabama man drove his pick-up truck into oncoming traffic while suffering a heart attack.






Heart-attack victim to return to Hamburg stage


Country music artist, Michael Harding, suffered a heart attack and cardiac arrest during a performance. He is apparently recovered and returning to the stage.



That's just a sample from the last two days. While you and I are carry on a conversation on reversal of heart disease, our neighbors and friends drop over every day. Even though I witness successful heart disease reversal routinely, the rest of the world is not participating.

Pass it on: Coronary disease is identifiable, preventable, controllable, and reversible.
AGEing gracefully

AGEing gracefully

Advanced Glycation End-products, or AGEs, have the potential to change our entire conversation about diet.

AGEs come from two principal sources:

1) Endogenous--Glucose-protein interactions that arise from high blood glucose levels

2) Exogenous--From diet

The first is sensitive to glucose levels: the higher the glucose level, the greater the AGE formation. The second depends on the quantity of AGE in the food consumed.

A compelling body of evidence points towards AGEs as an agent of aging, as well as kidney dysfunction, dementia, and atherosclerosis. Some of the observations made include:

--If AGEs are infused into an experimental animal, it develops atherosclerosis, kidney disease, and other "diseases of senescence" within weeks to months.

--In endothelial cells (cells lining arteries), AGE induces expression of adhesion molecules and inflammatory signals. In fibroblasts, AGE provokes collagen production. In smooth muscle cells, AGE triggers migration and proliferation. In monocytes and macrophages, AGEs induce chemotaxis and release of inflammation mediators. In short, AGEs have been implicated in just about every step leading to atherosclerosis.

--In humans, greater quantities of AGEs are present in diabetics, pre-diabetics and people with insulin resistance. We all know that these people develop atherosclerosis, kidney disease, cataracts, and other conditions at an accelerated rate.

--Foods containing greater quantities of AGEs cause endothelial dysfunction, i.e., artery constriction via blockade of nitric oxide and other mechanisms.

Short of taking agents that block AGE activity, how can you minimize the absorption or production of AGEs? There are two general strategies:

1) Keep blood glucose low--The Whitehall study demonstrated increased cardiovascular mortality with a postprandial (actually 2-hour post- 50-gram glucose challenge) blood sugar of 83 mg/dl. Lower blood glucose, less glycation. Less carbohydrates in the diet, the lower the blood sugar, the less the glycation. Studies like Whitehall demonstrate that glycation begins with glucose values within the normal range. Thus, aging occurs even with normal glucose levels. It occurs faster with higher glucose levels.

2) Choose and prepare foods with lower AGE content. Food content of AGEs is a major determinant of blood AGE levels. Fats and meats are the primary dietary source of AGEs, particularly if cooked at high temperature (broiling, frying). While this does not mean that meats and fats need to be avoided, it can mean that limiting serving size of meats and fats, while being selective in how they are prepared, are important. This can mean cutting your meats in thinner slices or smaller pieces to permit faster cooking, eating rare when possible (not poultry, of course), avoiding cooking with sauces that contain sugar (which enhances AGE formation). Is this an argument in favor of sashimi?

Minimizing exposure to AGEs, endogenous or exogenous, has the potential to slow the aging process, or at least to lessen the likelihood of many of the phenomena of aging.

More on this to come.

Comments (32) -

  • yoyo

    5/5/2010 11:17:44 AM |

    I'm more worried about endogenous AGEs; exogenous the evidence seems a bit more mixed.

    Are food advanced glycation end products toxic in biological systems?

    Chuyen NV, Arai H, Nakanishi T, Utsunomiya N.

    Japan Women's University, Department of Food and Nutrition, 2-8-1 Mejiro-dai, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 8681, Japan. nvc@fc.jwu.ac.jp
    Abstract

    Model food advanced glycation end products (AGEs) were prepared as glycated casein (GC) and glycated soy protein (GS) by the reaction of casein or soy protein with glucose at 50 degrees C, relative humidity 75% for seven days in a powder state. These browned proteins were used as materials for animal experiments. A mixture of 20% glycated proteins (GC:GS = 1:1) diet was fed to streptozotocin (STZ)-diabetic rats for 11 weeks. The results showed that: (1) fructoselysine was observed in the hepatic portal veins, arteries, and femoral veins of rats fed with glycated proteins after 2 h of feeding; (2) blood sugar of glycated protein-fed rats was lower than that of diabetic rats fed with intact protein, while HbA1C in blood and glucose in urine of both groups were similar; (3) lipid peroxidation status in serum, liver, and kidney of both groups was similar; (4) superoxide dismutase (SOD) and glutathione-S-transferase (GST) enzymatic activity in serum and liver of both groups were also similar; (5) there were no differences in degree of cataract formation and concentration of glucose, fructose, sorbitol, and lipid peroxide in the lenses of both groups. From the above results, it can be estimated that food AGEs are not toxic in biological systems, and reactive oxygen species increase in diabetic rats is not caused by glycated proteins but by other pathways.

    PMID: 16037268 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

    Unfortunately, starches have much lower AGE content. Any preparation of meat has large amounts, though still variable. This might be why high-carb diets work well for traditional societies where obesity is not common.

  • Joel

    5/5/2010 11:49:11 AM |

    Less carbs, less meats, less fats--sounds like you're just promoting calorie restriction since that doesn't leave much that you can eat in significant quantities.

  • Denny Barnes

    5/5/2010 12:16:33 PM |

    Looking forward to your future writings on AGEs. I hope you will talk about the role of fructose which can form ten times as many AGEs as glucose. Not all carbs are created equal. As a fellow T2 diabetic, I think we focus too much on blood glucose and miss the stealth carb -- frutose.  It is by far the most insidious.

    Forgive me for saying it, but I feel that the ghost of your vegetarian past still haunts your writing.  Yes, barbecued, fried and broiled meats can have way too much AGEs, especially if cooked with sweet sauces, but animal protein cooked with water has 1/10 as many AGEs. I am a happy carnivore who loves stewed meats and chicken and steamed fish.

  • Martin Levac

    5/5/2010 12:49:37 PM |

    Then there's ketosis which stimulates something called chaperone-mediated autophagy (CMA). This process is basically the recycling of junk protein. AGEs would constitute such junk. So it's not only a question of low blood glucose but of ketosis as well. Incidentally, if one eats only meat or very little carbs, then he will be in ketosis most of the time. In that sense, it doesn't matter how much AGEs come from this diet since the same diet would provide the recyclers as well. Here's the post by Eades on the subject:

    http://www.proteinpower.com/drmike/ketones-and-ketosis/ketosis-cleans-our-cells/

  • Ned Kock

    5/5/2010 1:20:12 PM |

    Supporting your point regarding endogenous AGEing, there is also reliable evidence that blood glucose control before age 55 may increase your chances of living beyond 90:

    http://healthcorrelator.blogspot.com/2010/04/blood-glucose-control-before-age-55-may.html

    However, I am yet to see reliable evidence that significant damage can be caused by ingested AGEs through cooked meat and fat (e.g., resulting from Maillard reactions).

    I don't doubt that injecting AGEs into model animals, particularly rodents, will lead to problems. But human digestion in a healthy person (e.g., no leaky gut) is another story. Moreover, cooked meat is denatured and thus rendered more easily digestible.

  • Jen

    5/5/2010 3:42:07 PM |

    Thanks for the post Dr. Davis!

    I would love to get info on what happens to the body as you are lowering your blood sugar via diet.  I have been using a monitor and feel my best at around 85 but at times crave sugar pretty bad and have energy spikes and dips.  I exercise too, so curious how this factors in?

  • Apra -- The Shaman

    5/5/2010 3:42:07 PM |

    I agree with Yoyo.  It seems to me this could be another red herring, like the dietary cholesterol nonsense.  Until they can tease apart whether the issue is due to dietary AGEs of the stuff produced from hyperglycemia then I don't necessarily see any reason to jump on an anti-meat bandwagon.

    Still, if you're truly concerned, invest in some Sous Vide equipment and cook your meat at low temperatures and don't finish it with a nice sear.

  • Stephan

    5/5/2010 6:36:09 PM |

    I just read the Whitehall study, it really didn't show that CHD mortality increases from 83 mg/dL.  That's based on their mathematical extrapolation, which didn't fit the actual data very well at the lower range of blood glucose.  According to the data itself, CHD risk didn't begin increasing until 5.7 mmol/L, or 102 mg/dL.  

    That makes sense because 83 mg/dL is totally normal fasting glucose.

  • Adolfo David

    5/5/2010 9:55:08 PM |

    Sad to say: Dr Michael Holick recommends at the end of his new book VITAMIN D SOLUTION essentially one brand of vitamin D supplements: Nature Made! :S

  • Anonymous

    5/6/2010 1:02:37 AM |

    2 things might help AGE's.
    I read that Carnosine which is a combo of 2 amino acids helps prevent glycation and many anti-aging experts recommend this supplement.
    Metformin reduces glucose production in the liver, reduces glucose absorption in the intestines and increases tissue sensitivity to actual glucose in the blood.
    Also may decrease cancer risk
    I have started these supplements in hopes of combating AGE's

  • Lori Miller

    5/6/2010 1:29:00 AM |

    Another way to cook meat quickly is by using a pressure cooker. The 1.5-pound roast I'm having for dinner was done in 20 minutes--15 probably would have been fine. The package called for roasting it for four hours in the oven.

  • Anonymous

    5/6/2010 2:05:20 AM |

    A fasting glucose of 80-109 mg/dl was optimal for CVD and overall mortality in this paper.

    http://circ.ahajournals.org/cgi/content/full/101/17/2047

  • pmpctek

    5/6/2010 2:51:51 AM |

    I've heard that Benfotiamine (200mg twice/day) is a potent AGE inhibitor.  I haven't been able to find much study on humans that backs up that claim though.

  • Anonymous

    5/6/2010 4:19:34 AM |

    Forgive my extreme ingnorance in this area, but how do meat and fats contain AGEs?

    A grilled steak? An egg fried in coconut oil? Where is the source of glucose here?

  • Fran

    5/6/2010 4:29:09 AM |

    "Fats and meats are the primary dietary source of AGEs..." I'm sorry, but this makes no sense to me... that fats and meats will increase blood sugar levels. My understanding to this point is that carbs are the cause, while good saturated fats and protein stabilize blood sugar levels.

  • Dr. John Mitchell

    5/6/2010 4:31:51 AM |

    I'd like to see references for many of your statements.

  • Bruce

    5/6/2010 4:34:46 AM |

    May I offer a little anecdotal evidence? After hearing a researcher from Australia's Baker Heart Institute describe how a low exogenous AGE diet appeared to reverse the complications of Type II Diabetes - although not Diabetic, I was intrigued enough to devise my own low-AGE regime.

    During the subsequent 5 months, with no attempt to restrict calories, I have lost nearly 15 kg, have had my total Cholesterol drop from 5.9 to 4.6, blood pressure drop from 128/88 to 110/62. Part of my strategy has been to avoid all sugars, including most fructose sources, in the interest of limiting endogenous AGE formation.

    BTW, I am 60 years (suddenly) young.

  • Michael Barker

    5/6/2010 2:57:54 PM |

    Humans have been cooking meats, at least, 100,000 years before the invention of agriculture. The fact that it is so ubiquitous suggests that we are quite adapted to this even without thinner slices or smaller portions.

  • Anonymous

    5/6/2010 3:26:07 PM |

    Marinating meat with acid (vinegar) before grilling greatly reduces the maillard reaction and the formation of AGEs in meat.

  • Peter

    5/6/2010 4:48:23 PM |

    As we learn more about food, we learn more about the downsides: fish have mercury, meat has AGE's, carbs increase insulin sensitivity, etc. If you ask an expert what to eat, each one gives you a different answer.  How can we tell truth from belief?

  • CB Predator

    5/7/2010 10:50:32 AM |

    I wanted to thank you for this great read!! I definitely enjoying every little bit of it I have you bookmarked to check out new stuff you post

  • foodnearsnellville

    5/7/2010 4:54:40 PM |

    At what point is research like this going to limit the use of sugary glazes and marinades in meats and restaurant foods?

  • Anne

    5/8/2010 12:05:57 PM |

    Could adding spices and herbs reduce the bad effects of cooked meat. The study is small and funded by McCormick. Simple Addition to Meat Helps

  • Marianne

    5/8/2010 9:22:51 PM |

    Just discovered this blog so forgive me if this has already been covered.  What about Neu5Gc?  Some recommend all mammal products be avoided as they all contain this substance and it sets up an inflammatory process in the body as humans do not have Neu5Gc and recognize it as foreign.  I  have recently been poking around at eating better (not that my past was bad!) and I have never been so confused in my entire life!!! Everyone has their own opinion and most of it is contradictory. High carb, low carb, no meat, more meat, more fish, all whole grains.  It's like a crap shoot.

  • yoyo

    5/9/2010 10:57:30 AM |

    I don't have access to the original study, but the best one i could find has the food levels of AGEs reproduced with some comments at this gentleman's blog: http://inhumanexperiment.blogspot.com/2009/09/age-content-of-foods.html

    meat, even with low heat low pH preparations, seems to be high. eggs and legumes are low for their protein content.

  • Dr. William Davis

    5/9/2010 12:25:34 PM |

    Yoyo, Joel--

    Much of the work on the AGE content of food, its absorption, and its consequences have been generated by Dr. Helen Vlassara's group in New York. The Japanese group Yoyo cites has, indeed, found some conflicting observations.

    I do not think that we can construct an "AGE-free" diet nor lifestyle, nor are the data on AGE-blockers sufficiently solid to justify taking them, in my view.

    However, this is such a fascinating line of research that I think it's worth being aware of and discussing.

  • Dr. William Davis

    5/9/2010 12:33:50 PM |

    Bruce--

    Fascinating experience!

    How did you handle the AGE in meats issue?

  • Dr. William Davis

    5/9/2010 12:36:17 PM |

    Marianne--

    Sorry, no insights into Neu5Gc.

    As I mentioned in the post, this is not a "no meat" comment. It is simply discussing the fascinating observations made by Helen Vlassara's group that, when taken as a whole, fit like a perfect puzzle piece into the question of why people with high blood sugars, e.g., diabetics and pre-diabetics, develop all the undesirable health effects they do.

  • Bruce

    5/9/2010 11:50:47 PM |

    May I add a few more comments?

    Regarding meat, I have been eating normal and even generous portions - but I purchased a steamer and slow cooker to keep the cooking temps as low as possible. There is a limit in how far you can lower exogenous AGEs unless you adopt an extreme Raw regime.

    Then, your body will still produce its baseline of indogenous AGEs. I eat virtually zero sugar except for a minimal amount of fruit - usually 2 servings or 3 per day at most.

    We're really talking about a low Maillard Reaction Products diet, then I think. AGEs are many in type and the chemistry is complex. But there is good and growing evidence that the overall mix of MRPs are toxic. One study I read stated that lowering the exogenous AGE load by 40% reduces the circulating AGEs  by 60% and at this level, the body's own ability to scavenge out these compounds recovers.

    This suggests to me that we can tolerate MRPs up to a certain level, but the western diet is increasingly loading with these compounds. I wonder if this provides a (at least) partial explanation of the obestity epidemic.

    Food has been plentiful and cheap for at least 3 generations now, yet obesity is 'exploding' at the same time that the food industry is in an 'arms race' to heighten the marketability of their products.

  • Kevin

    5/10/2010 3:38:54 PM |

    I wonder how calorie restriction affects AGEs.  Is this possibly how CR influences longevity?  

    kevin

  • Santiago

    5/10/2010 11:34:41 PM |

    Hi Dr Davis
    I've hear from some diabetics how honey doesn't seem to affect them that bad.
    I looked arround and found some studies showing that honey after eaten for a while lowers blood sugar levels improiving liver function.
    Was wondering if you have an opinion related to honey

  • Anonymous

    8/30/2010 3:50:39 PM |

    So don't eat meat or carbs.  Good advice.

Loading