Almonds are the new wheat

Once you eliminate this genetically-altered Frankengrain called modern wheat, the diet should center around vegetables, nuts, healthy oils like olive and coconut, fish, meats, cheese, olives, avocados and other real whole foods. This is, in fact, the diet that I have advocated in my heart disease prevention practice, as well as my online program for prevention and reversal of heart disease.

But what if you'd like a piece of cheesecake or a nice slice of dessert bread---but you don't want to gain two pounds, spend 48 hours in the bathroom suffering with diarrhea and cramps, 3 weeks of joint pains and leg swelling, wade through mental "fog," anxiety, and rage just because you had that momentary indulgence---as you would with wheat?

That's why I've been focusing on recipes that allow you to have something familiar, e.g., chocolate coconut bread or biscotti, but using ingredients that will not generate the metabolic contortions triggered by wheat.

On perusing these recipes, you will notice that there are recurring ingredient themes. Many of the same ingredients pop up time and again. Among the most frequent, versatile, user-friendly, and tasty: Almonds.

You can use almonds as ground whole almonds, ground blanched almonds for a finer texture, ground roasted almonds, almond butter (though, for maximum health benefits, I prefer the ground whole almonds). Ground almonds allow you to recreate muffins, breads, scones, pizza crust, pie crust, biscotti, and cookies with health benefits that exceed that of whole wheat---but with none of the downside: no weight gain, no high blood sugar, no triggering of small LDL particles (#1 cause of heart disease in the U.S.), no accumulation of visceral fat, no appetite stimulation.

In short, you just have your chocolate almond biscotti or mocha cupcake and enjoy it, no health price to pay. So I call almonds the new wheat, except better.

Being regular is dangerous to your health

No, I'm not referring to your daily morning ritual in the bathroom. I'm talking about heart rate.

Counterintuitively, a perfectly regular heart rate is a marker of poor health. People with perfect regularity of heart rate have more heart attacks, for instance.

Regularity of heart rate occurs more commonly in people with hypertension and other metabolic derangements, and it signals increased risk for both heart attack and death. A perfectly regular heart rate, i.e., no variation in the time interval from beat to beat, suggests that the parasympathetic nervous system, the component of automatic ("autonomic") nervous system control that is associated with the relaxation response, feelings of well-being, quiet, and relaxation, is weak. It also means that the opposing sympathetic nervous sytem that regulates the "fight or flight," adrenaline-like response is allowed to be dominant. Dominance of the sympathetic over the parasympathetic system generates regularity of heart rate. Heart rate also tends to be faster, e.g., 85 beats per minutes rather than 55 or 60 beats per minute. So perfect regularity, as well as increased rate, is undesirable.

What we want is irregularity of heart rate. But not irregularity that occurs chaotically with no rhyme or reason. More precisely, we want variability in heart rate. And we want variability to occur in synchrony with breathing, i.e., the respiratory cycle.

The ideal response is:

1) increase in heart rate with inspiration

2) decrease in heart rate with expiration.

Heart rate in healthy people typically varies 15-20 beats per minute within the respiratory cycle, e.g., 60 bpm at end-exhalation, 80 bpm at end-inspiration.

Restoration of increased heart rate variability is associated with reduced blood pressure, reduced blood sugars (HbA1c), reduced inflammatory markers and cortisol (associated with stress), even an increase in DHEA levels. Feelings of well-being and calm also develop.

Among the strategies to consider to restore heightened heart rate variability and slowed heart rate include:

--Omega-3 fatty acid supplementation
--Exercise
--Weight loss
--Deep breathing exercises
--Meditation, prayer, and biofeedback

For our Track Your Plaque purposes, we are folding in the HeartMath strategies, i.e., use of a heart rate monitor that calculates heart rate variability in the context of respiratory cycle. If you've not already done so, take a look at the two Special Reports devoted to this topic on the Track Your Plaque website.

You mean weight loss is hazardous to your health?

In my last Heart Scan Blog post, What is this wacky thing called weight loss?, I discussed how weight loss is associated with distortions in cholesterol and blood sugar values that can be very confusing, often leading your doctor to wrongly and unnecessarily prescribe drugs--since he/she likely rarely sees weight loss.

Blog reader, Donald K., posted his enlightening story:

I experienced this very thing.

After losing serious weight from the eliminating wheat, processed, and sugary foods (1 year in total) I lost 130 pounds. When I was nearly finished I went to see my doctor. He wanted to put me on statins. I explained to him how the data does not support application to me (no evidence of heart disease) and I got the mantra about standards of practice, etc, etc. I held my ground and decided I am much happier eating dairy, eggs, grass fed beef, wild caught fish, and as much raw foods (nuts, veggies, fruits) as my body desires to treat my health parameters.

Maintaining weight, it is easy. My BMI (23 down from 40) has remained constant for a few months now. You are right: metabolic processes definitely change. I no longer have sensations of glucose fluctuations or an uncontrolled appetite. I can only imagine the improved hormone regulation and metabolic communication going on inside my body.

The symptoms from obesity, all gone. Goodbye sleep apnea, hypertension, hemorrhoids, arrhythmias, gastroinestinal disruptions, smelly body, chaffing thighs, and others not mentioned. The positive effects are just as dramatic, but I don’t want to ramble on.

Weight loss? What is it? Getting your life back!


Brace yourself: If you are following the nutrition advice posted here and in the Track Your Plaque program, or the discussion I've initiated in Wheat Belly, then you may find yourself in the very same health predicament as Donald. Arm yourself to protect yourself against the drug-wielding ways of doctors. No, weight loss to achieve ideal weight is definitely not bad for health. But your doctor's misinterpretation of its effects can be!

What is this wacky thing called "weight loss"?

I've discussed this before, but it has proven such an (encouragingly!) frequent issue that I thought it was worth discussing once again.

What happens when you lose weight?

The process of weight loss is characterized by multiple shifts in metabolic patterns that can be confusing. To the uninitiated eye, weight loss can look like a disastrous distortion in metabolism. The naive doctor on seeing your lab values, for instance, might insist you take a statin drug, a fibrate like Tricor (to reduce triglycerides or increase HDL), or simply berate you for your bad health habits--when it's actually a good thing you've accomplished.

So when you lose weight, say, 30 pounds in 3 months, what have you accomplished?

Energy stored as fat, especially from visceral fat stores, is mobilized into the bloodstream. It floods the bloodstream as fatty acids and triglycerides. These fatty acids and triglycerides don't occur in isolation, but interact with other particles and metabolic patterns. The resulting blood patterns include:

--Increased triglycerides--An increase in triglycerides, for instance, from 90 mg/dl to 200 mg/dl in the midst of weight loss is common.

--Reduced HDL--The flood of triglycerides leads to increased degradation of HDL, thus a drop. A drop in HDL from, say, 40 mg/dl to 27 mg/dl--very frightening to people--is exceptionally common.

--Increased blood sugar--The flood of fatty acids and triglycerides results in insulin resistance, leading to higher blood sugars. It is not uncommon for someone with pre-diabetes to develop diabetic-range blood sugars, or a non-diabetic to show pre-diabetic blood sugars.

--Increased small LDL particles--Though small LDL is highly variable during weight loss. When it does happen, it's probably from the interaction of VLDL (triglycerides) with LDL particles and the reaction that overloads LDL particles with triglycerides and conversion to small LDL particles.

So why don't doctors often recognize these patterns when a patient loses weight? Because they rarely see it. Most of my colleagues are accustomed to having patients come back with weight gain, getting heavier and heavier each time. Lose weight? Impossible! So they just don't recognize weight loss effects when they see it. As followers of The Heart Scan Blog know, a frequent conversation around here is "Am I too skinny?" or "How do I stop losing weight?"

The solution: Be patient. Be patient and wait about two months after a weight plateau has been achieved. That's when the numbers "settle down" and you see marked drops in triglycerides, increases in HDL, drops in blood sugar, reductions in small LDL.

As with many things, it's all about timing.

Why small LDL particles are the #1 cause of heart disease in the US

Ask your doctor: What is the #1 cause of heart disease in the US?

Let's put aside smoking, since it is an eminently modifiable risk and none of those crazies read this blog anyway. What will your doctor say? Most like he or she will respond:

High cholesterol or high LDL cholesterol

Too much saturated fat

Obesity

Pfizer, Merck, AstraZeneca and their kind would be overjoyed to know that they can add your doctor to their eager following.

I'd tell you something different. I would tell you that small LDL particles are, by far and away, the #1 cause for heart disease. I base this claim on several observations:

--Having run over 10,000 lipoprotein panels (mostly NMR) over the past 15 years, it is a rare person who does not have a moderate, if not severe, excess of small LDL particles. 50%, 70%, even 90% or more small LDL particles are not rare. Over the course of a year, the only people who show no small LDL particles are slender, athletic, pre-menopausal females.

--In studies in which lipoproteins have been quantified in people with coronary disease, small LDL particles dominate, just as they do in my office. Here's a 2006 review.

--Small LDL is largely the province of people who consume carbohydrates, such as the American population instructed to "cut fat and eat more healthy whole grains." Conventional diet advice has therefore triggered an expllosion in small LDL particles.

--When fasting triglycerides exceed 60 mg/dl, small LDL particles increase as a proportion of total LDL particles. This includes the majority of the US population. (This ignores postprandial, or after-eating, triglycerides, which also contribute to small LDL formation.)

If you were to read the data, however, you might conclude that small LDL affects a minority of people. This is because in most studies small LDL categorize it as either "pattern B," meaning exceeding some arbitrary threshold of percentage of small LDL particles, versus "pattern A," meaning falling below that same arbitrary threshold.

Problem: There is no consensus on what percentage of small LDL particles should mark the cutoff between pattern A vs. pattern B. In many studies, for instance, people with 50% small LDL particles are called "pattern A."

If, instead, we were to set the bar lower to identify this highly atherogenic (atherosclerotic plaque-causing) particle at, say, 20-30% of total, then the number or percentage of people with "pattern B" small LDL particles would go much higher.

I see this play out in my office and in the online program, Track Your Plaque, every day: At the start eating a low-fat, grain-filled diet with lots of visceral fat ("wheat belly") to start, they add back fat and cut out all wheat and limit carbohydrates. Small LDL particles plummet

Even moore from Jimmy Moore

The ubiquitous and irrepressible Jimmy Moore posted even more commentary about the Wheat Belly phenomenon here, what he calls "The Wheat Belly Bonanza."

Is low-carb really, at its core, little more than elimination of wheat? Sure, corn, rice, and sugar exert deleterious effects. But the dominant effect--by far--is the elimination of wheat. So is the low-carb movement really, at its core, a wheat-elimination movement?

Food (non-wheat-containing, of course) for thought.

Heart Scans: An Interview with Jimmy Moore

My friend, Jimmy Moore, of The Livin' La Vida Low Carb Show, posted this video of an interview I did with him.

I provide some background on how heart scanning came about and how it led to the creation of the Track Your Plaque program.

It reminds me how far we've come over the 8 years since the program got started. From its modest start as just an information resource to help people understand their heart scan score, to a comprehensive program that helps followers gain incredible control over coronary plaque and coronary risk that has now expanded to over 30 countries. High-tech heart procedures still dominate public consciousness, but the tremendous power of real heart disease prevention efforts are gaining more and more attention as each day passes.

Wheat Belly #5 on New York Times Bestseller list!

The New York Times just released its bestseller list due for release September 18th, 2011 . . . .

Wheat Belly is #5!! (That darned Jane Fonda woman elbowed me out for the #4 spot!

[caption id="attachment_4452" align="alignright" width="574" caption="Wheat Belly hits #5 on New York Times Bestseller List--in 1st week!"][/caption]

Interview with Jimmy Moore of Livin' La Vida Low-Carb

Here's my podcast interview with Jimmy Moore, host of the Livin' La Vida Low-Carb Show. (If you want to fast forward to the interview, go to time marker 41:20 on the slidebar.)



In the podcast, I talk about how the Track Your Plaque program and its focus on lipoprotein testing, along with the need to reverse the incredible epidemic of diabetes and pre-diabetes, led to elimination of all wheat from the diet and the book, Wheat Belly.

An open letter to the Grain Foods Foundation

Readers: Please feel free to reproduce and disseminate this letter any way you see fit.


To:

Ms. Ashley Reynolds
490 Bear Cub Drive
Ridgway, CO 81432
Phone: 617.226.9927
ashley.reynolds@mullen.com


Ms. Reynolds:

I am writing in response to the press release from the Grain Foods Foundation that describes your effort to "discredit" the assertions made in my book, Wheat Belly: Lose the wheat, lose the weight and find your path back to health. I'd like to address several of the criticisms of the book made in the release:

" . . . the author relies on anecdotal observations rather than scientific studies."
While I do indeed have a large anecdotal experience removing wheat in thousands of people, witnessing incredible and unprecedented weight loss and health benefits, I also draw from the experiences already documented in clinical studies. Several hundred of these studies are cited in the book (of the thousands available) and listed in the Reference section over 16 pages. These are studies that document the neurologic impairment unique to wheat, including cerebellar ataxia and dementia; heart disease via provocation of the small LDL pattern; visceral fat accumulation and all its attendant health consequences; the process of glycation via amylopectin A of wheat that leads to cataracts, diabetes, and arthritis; among others. There are, in fact, a wealth of studies documenting the adverse, often crippling, effects of wheat consumption in humans and I draw from these published studies.


"Wheat elimination 'means missing out on a wealth of essential nutrients.'"
This is true--if the calories of wheat are replaced with candy, soft drinks, and fast food. But if lost wheat calories are replaced by healthy foods like vegetables, nuts, healthy oils, meats, eggs, cheese, avocados, and olives, then there is no nutrient deficiency that develops with elimination of wheat. There is no deficiency of any vitamin, including thiamine, folate, B12, iron, and B6; no mineral, including selenium, magnesium, and zinc; no polyphenol, flavonoid, or antioxidant; no lack of fiber. With regards to fiber, please note that the original studies documenting the health benefits of high fiber intake were fibers from vegetables, fruits, and nuts, not wheat or grains.

People with celiac disease do indeed experience deficiencies of multiple vitamins and minerals after they eliminate all wheat and gluten from the diet. But this is not due to a diet lacking valuable nutrients, but from the incomplete healing of the gastrointestinal tract (such as the lining of the duodenum and proximal jejunum). In these people, the destructive effects of wheat are so overpowering that, unfortunately, some people never heal completely. These people do indeed require vitamin and mineral supplementation, as well as probiotics and pancreatic enzyme supplementation.


I pose several questions to you and your organization:

Why is the high-glycemic index of wheat products ignored?
Due to the unique properties of amylopectin A, two slices of whole wheat bread increase blood sugar higher than many candy bars. High blood glucose leads to the process of glycation that, in turn, causes arthritis (cartilage glycation), cataracts (lens protein glycation), diabetes (glycotoxicity of pancreatic beta cells), hepatic de novo lipogenesis that increases triglycerides and, thereby, increases expression of atherogenic (heart disease-causing) small LDL particles, leading to heart attacks. Repetitive high blood sugars that develop from a grain-rich diet are, in my view, very destructive and lead to weight gain (specifically visceral fat), insulin resistance, leptin resistance (leading to obesity), and many of the health struggles Americans now experience.

How do you account for the psychologic and neurologic effects of the wheat protein, gliadin?
Wheat gliadin has been associated with cerebellar ataxia, peripheral neuropathy, gluten encephalopathy (dementia), behavioral outbursts in children with ADHD and autism, and paranoid delusions and auditory hallucinations in people with schizophrenia, severe and incapacitating effects for people suffering from these conditions.

How do you explain the quadrupling of celiac disease over the last 50 years and its doubling over the last 20 years?
I submit to you that, while this is indeed my speculation, it is the changes in genetic code and, thereby, antigenic profile, of the high-yield semi-dwarf wheat cultivars now on the market that account for the marked increase in celiac potential nationwide. As you know, "hybridization" techniques, including chemical mutagenesis to induce selective mutations, leads to development of unique strains that are not subject to animal or human safety testing--they are just brought to market and sold.

Why does the wheat industry continue to call chemical mutagenesis, gamma irradiation, and x-ray irradiation "traditional breeding techniques" that you distinguish from genetic engineering? Chemical mutagenesis using the toxic mutagen, sodium azide, of course, is the method used to generate BASF's Clearfield herbicide-resistant wheat strain. These methods are being used on a wide scale to generate unique genetic strains that are, without question from the FDA or USDA, assumed to be safe for human consumption.

In short, my view on the situation is that the U.S. government, with its repeated advice to "eat more healthy whole grains," transmitted via vehicles like the USDA Food Pyramid and Food Plate, coupled with the extensive genetic transformations of the wheat plant introduced by agricultural geneticists, underlie an incredible deterioration in American health. I propose that you and your organization, as well as the wheat industry and its supporters, are at risk for legal liability on a scale not seen since the tobacco industry was brought to task to pay for the countless millions who died at their product's hands.

I would be happy and willing to talk to you personally. I would also welcome the opportunity to debate you or any of your experts in a public forum.

Wiliam Davis, MD
Author, Wheat Belly: Lose the wheat, lose the weight and find your path back to health (Rodale, 2011)
Let's soak 'em with fish oil

Let's soak 'em with fish oil

If you don't think that charging drug prices for fish oil is wrong, take a look at a letter from an angry Heart Scan Blog reader:


Hello Dr. Davis,

My 44 year old brother had an MI [myocardial infarction, or heart attack] in June. He got pushed around due to "bad government insurance," a state-run program for the "uninsured": government pays 1/3, job pays 1/3, and individual pays 1/3.

What they didn't tell him is that there is no major medical coverage and little to no prescription coverage. We fought for 4 months to get him open heart surgery that the insurance was not going to pay for.

Now, with no assistance, terrible insurance, and no disability he has little to no income. He is a heavy equipment mechanic and is trying to be the "good American"-- take care of his bills, not file bankruptcy, etc.

Anyway, the doctors never seem to pay attention to what they prescribe. Lipitor was not working for him, due to side effects. Now they want to give him Zetia and Lovaza....Zetia at $114, and Lovoza is $169.85! Wow! For dead fish???? I think this is a little fishy! I looked up Lovaza, gee how nice, they will give you a $20 coupon....

Forget it, he can't afford this stuff. So I am enrolling in the Zetia program for him. And trying to get him OTC [over-the-counter] fish oil. The most prevalent fish oil around here (that I take myself is) Omega 3 Fish Oil that has EPA 410mg, DHA 274.

Thanks for your blog. It made me feel better that I wasn't the only one outraged by this stuff. I 've been a nurse for 20 years and it just never seems to get better. Thank you for your wisdom.

Sincerely JP, Tennessee



Had this reader not been aware that her brother could take fish oil as a nutritional supplement, he likely would have been denied the benefit of omega-3 fatty acids in slashing the risk for recurrent cardiovascular events. You and I can buy wonderfully safe and effective fish oil as a nutritional supplement, but there won't be a sexy drug representative to sell it, nor an expensive dinner and payment for a trip to Orlando to hear about it.

Comments (12) -

  • Richard A.

    2/8/2010 5:47:27 PM |

    Why expensive Zetia. Niacin appears to outperform Zetia.

    http://www.webmd.com/cholesterol-management/news/20091116/niacin-tops-zetia-in-cutting-artery-plaque

    While in this study the expensive Niaspan was used, you can by Slo-Niacin dirt cheap.

    http://www.costco.com/Browse/Product.aspx?Prodid=11118583

  • Ateronon

    2/8/2010 7:24:40 PM |

    Why do insurance companies pay for Lovaza? They are usually very picky and Lovaza would seem an obvious "soak" job?

    How did it get on approved drug lists?

  • Jenny

    2/9/2010 12:05:32 AM |

    Dr. Davis,

    Your correspondent should tell his brother to ditch the Zetia too. The research makes it clear it does not prevent heart attack and may worsen health. Statins appear to be helpful because of their impact on inflammation, not because they lower LDL cholesterol. Zetia lowers cholesterol in a mechanical way that has no impact on inflammation.

  • zach

    2/9/2010 1:16:17 AM |

    Why is a 44 year old being subjected to open heart surgery? Quacks.

  • Rick Loftus, M.D.

    2/9/2010 2:05:01 AM |

    As an internist not categorically opposed to statins (although I agree with starting with nutrition first, which is why I read this blog), there are generic alternatives for this person's brother. If my patients need Western drugs, I start with cheap generics whenever possible. Zetia has dubious benefits of ANY kind, and costs a fortune. And of course Dr. D is right that there are many cheaper sources of fish oil; I usually point my patients in that direction.

    I often feel "standard" American-style medical practice is intended to waste as much money as possible. People need to be able to trust their docs to execute plans that are not only based on the research evidence, but are cost effective. There is no culture of cost-effective medicine in this country, because health care was defined by the Americans as a for-profit arena.

    "Prescribe unto others as you would have them prescribe unto you."

  • Anonymous

    2/9/2010 4:39:50 AM |

    Lovaza fills a void created by bad government and insurance policy. According to IRS rules, over the counter supplements cannot be covered by many insurance handlers. My work's HSA is like this. Fish oil / omega-3 is technically considered an over the counter supplement. The folk making Lovaza more than understand the benefits of omega-3 and want to sell it to the folks who want their insurance to pay for it. So they made it into a "drug" and sell it as such. It's a brilliant marketing plan and it seems to be working for them. The sad part is that it is working! It shouldn't! Same thing goes with Lovastatin. Why not take a good red yeast rice? Oh well... you pay for what you don't know.

    -- Boris

  • Anne

    2/9/2010 8:04:37 AM |

    Your post, Dr Davis, seems more a call for better health care, the kind we here in the United Kingdom get under our National Health Service, than a call for different fish oils or different meds.

    The NHS does have it's problems, sure, but they're nothing like the problems this person you describe has.

  • tom

    2/9/2010 1:09:59 PM |

    It's ironic that her brother is trying to be a "good" American by paying his bills and not filing bankruptcy.
    If only his doctors, insurance companies, and drug mNUFcturers had a similar ethic.  It seems that for them, being a good American is maximizing their income regardless of who they take it from.
    Ordinary Americans have been sold this "good" American concept from birth.  It's propaganda.  Far too many special interests have used it to enrich only themselves.

  • Alfredo E.

    2/15/2010 9:09:26 PM |

    Your brother should not be paying anything for drugs to lower cholesterol.

    Cholesterol is not the enemy, nor is saturated fat.

    The real enemy is chronic inflammation that comes from several sources but mainly from a high grain diet (too much omega 6).

    Please, read http://www.omega-3-fish-oil-wonders.com/good-fats.html

    Best wishes,
    Alfredoe

  • beverly

    3/3/2010 3:19:19 PM |

    I have read with interest the comments concerning Lovaza. I was put on it in 2008. I have tried numerous times to ask GSK through emails & ph calls the calorie make up in the gelcap. No one seems to know! Not the Doctor who put me on it, the pharmacist, or anyone from GSK!!! As a diabetic who has lost 140 lbs, following my diet plan is very important to me. Any suggestions on who can make them give up the big calorie secret?
    Thanks,
    Beverly

  • buy jeans

    11/3/2010 10:20:24 PM |

    Had this reader not been aware that her brother could take fish oil as a nutritional supplement, he likely would have been denied the benefit of omega-3 fatty acids in slashing the risk for recurrent cardiovascular events. You and I can buy wonderfully safe and effective fish oil as a nutritional supplement, but there won't be a sexy drug representative to sell it, nor an expensive dinner and payment for a trip to Orlando to hear about it.

  • Dave

    5/31/2011 4:43:42 AM |

    Beverly,
    A rough estimate for the caloric content of each Lovaza capsule would be approximately 8-10 calories.  Since each capsule contains roughly 1 gram of total fat.

Loading
Bosom buddies

Bosom buddies

Male breast reduction surgery is a booming business. While most industries are in a downward tailspin, breast reduction surgery in men is growing at double-digit rates.

Other efforts, some legitimate, some not, are also cropping up, all intended to help men deal with this embarassing problem:

Exercise programs to reduce male breast size.

Liposuction--Not just for the belly!

Plastic surgery

Gynexin--a supplement that purportedly reduces male breast size.

Conventional medical treatment also includes estrogen blocking drugs, the same ones used to treat breast cancer, drugs like tamoxifen. There's even clothing intended to make breasts less obvious.


While male breast enlargement--"gynecomastia"--can occasionally occur due to rare endocrinologic problems, such as high prolactin hormone levels (hyperprolactinemia) or somewhat more commonly as failed testosterone production (hypogonadism), the vast majority of men who suffer with this problem simply have high estrogen levels.

Makes sense: Women develop larger breasts during development mostly due to increased levels of estrogen. A parallel situation in men likewise stimulates breast tissue.

So where does the excess estrogen come from?

Visceral fat converts testosterone to estrogen. Men with excess visceral fat therefore develop low levels of testosterone and high levels of estrogen. Estrogen levels can, in fact, be substantially higher compared to slender males.

So what foods cause the accumulation of visceral fat and, thereby, increased estrogen and decreased testosterone?

Foods that increase blood glucose and insulin to the greatest degree are the foods that begin this cascade. The common foods that increase blood sugar the most? Here's a list, starting with most blood glucose-insulin provoke at the top, least at the bottom:

Gluten-free foods (dried, pulverized cornstarch, rice starch, potato starch, tapioca starch)
Whole wheat bread
Sucrose
Milky Way bars
Snickers bars

So the whole wheat sandwiches you've been eating increase blood sugar and insulin, leading to visceral fat. (And, yes, whole wheat bread increases blood sugar higher than Milky Way bars and Snickers bars.) The more visceral fat grows, the more resistant to the effects of insulin you become, further escalating blood sugar. Estrogen increases, testosterone drops, mammary gland tissue grows, normal male breasts grow to B- or C-cup size.

Yet again, an entire industry is growing from the unintended consequence of conventional advice. In this instance, the advice to "eat more healthy whole grains" leads to this booming industry of male breast reduction efforts from surgery to medications to clothing. The REAL solution: Eliminate the foods that start the process in the first place.

Comments (22) -

  • Sara

    10/8/2010 6:54:43 PM |

    Man-boobs: Another reason to lay off the Doritos.

  • Anonymous

    10/8/2010 7:28:09 PM |

    I'm usually the first to say, "Hoooray for boobies!" Maybe not this time though.

    I've known about man-boobs for a while and I have noticed many thinner guys having them too. It makes me wonder how much fat is inside that that slimmer body.

    What does a man do with their own boobs though?  Hmm... a new potential market!

    --

  • Anonymous

    10/8/2010 7:35:42 PM |

    not just grains.. also too much fruits and fruit juices.

    off topic Q: 47y male, very busy, but otherwise fit and lean, on paleo since a few months, has CRP=0, A1c=5.5, homocysteine=11, TSH=3.4, cholesterin 4.1mmol. low vitamin D (about to be remedied). his father has some bypasses. do you think to stay low-carb'ish paleo is sufficient here, or should he do something about his TSH and homocysteine (it's my brother). can this be caused by drinking 8-10 coffees a day lol? thanks!

  • Anand Srivastava

    10/8/2010 7:37:51 PM |

    Soy also contains a lot of phytoestrogens. Another thing to get rid of.

  • Againstthegrain

    10/8/2010 8:48:55 PM |

    Ditch flax, too.  

    Hmmm, is the rate of male breast cancer rising, too I wonder?

  • Anonymous

    10/9/2010 3:18:21 AM |

    not just for men
    heaps of my female patients want breast reduction surgery
    I tell them to start eating green veges and more fish, and kill the carbs, but most would prefer the surgery because the healthy option is too hard!  go figure

  • Anonymous

    10/9/2010 4:13:52 AM |

    the sad thing is for some of us even when we lose the weight, or the vast majority of the weight, the male breasts still don't go away. I have my gynecomastia surgery schedule for november....it's been a dream of mine for several years and i've been saving for it for a long time.

  • Garth Huckabay

    10/9/2010 11:31:10 AM |

    I read that drinking milk can cause a substantial insulin response even greater than that of a snickers bar?  There are a whole lot of people out there addicted to milk.  Telling them they shouldn't eat bread and pasta mortifies but adding dairy to the equation puts them right over the top Smile

  • Me

    10/9/2010 3:03:19 PM |

    Not to split hairs, but glycemic load, which is what raises blood insulin,  is an entirely dose-dependent variable.

    According  to Nutritiondata. com, a Snickers bar comes in three sizes.

    "Fun size" (15g) GL of 5
    I bar (2 oz)  GL of  57
    I king size bar (4 oz) GL of 113

    Whole wheat bread, commercially prepared
    1 slice: GL of 5

    So, yes if you had two slices of WW bread, you've doubled the amount of a fun-size Snicker.  But eat the big Snickers and you are way, way over that.

    The devil is in the details.

  • Anonymous

    10/10/2010 12:06:06 AM |

    Great post.  I'm sorry it wasn't there 2 years ago when I was working with a male client who was in despair about the man boobs.

    Nina

  • Larry

    10/10/2010 1:54:24 AM |

    Could low Testosterone blood levels in the male population be the cause of this ?
    There's a detailed article on this matter in the June 2010 LEF magazine.
    The article shows that this deficiency is in epidemic numbers.

  • Dr. William Davis

    10/10/2010 12:43:39 PM |

    Hi, Me--

    Absolutely correct.

    However, you will find that, of the foods listed, ALL increase blood glucose not a little, but a lot. Drawing distinctions among them and declaring one is better is like telling people that Marlboros are bad for you and Salems are better. Therefore, smoke more Salems.

    It's that bad.

  • CarbSane

    10/10/2010 1:09:27 PM |

    I'm curious about your statement that visceral fat converts testosterone to estrogen --> the man boobies.

    There's the implication then that visceral fat leads to low testosterone.

    This study would indicate that the direction of causation may be the other way around.  Visceral and total fat were measured in 110 Japanese-American men and measured again 7.5 years later.  Those with low testosterone levels at the beginning of the study had increased visceral fat.  

    Visceral fat produces estrogen and that can lead to man boobies.

    So lowT --> belly --> boobs seems a more likely scenario.  

    I'm not sure we can look to a booming plastic surgery business for male breast reduction as being indicative of some sort of dietary induced increase in the incidence of man boobs.  Undergoing the knife has become increasingly popular for all sorts of procedures for men.

    I would also add anecdotal evidence that many of the overweight men I know with this problem also happen to carry more weight in their butts, legs and subQ belly rather than sporting the "pot-belly".

  • Kevin

    10/10/2010 6:59:17 PM |

    After being diagnosed with BPH I specifically looked for a remedy other than 5-alpha reductase inhibitors.  I found and used beta-sitosterol for nearly a year.  Eventually I noticed nipple sensitivity.  I read it's an early symtom of gynecomastia.  Then I found that beta-sitosterol acts as a 5-alpha reductase inhibitor.  I quit using the medication about six weeks ago and now have significantly less sensitivity.  But the tradeoff is now I'm back to nocturia.  

    kevin

  • vitamin c

    10/12/2010 2:46:53 AM |

    It really looks awful for a man to have boobies and that's one that turns me off. I don't want to be with a man be with bigger boobs than I am. Is soya included in the list of food to be avoided?

  • Kathryn

    10/12/2010 6:53:40 AM |

    And soy, soy, soy.  It is being promoted as a "health food" but most of it is genetically modified (unless organic) & all of it is high in plant estrogens.  NOT good for anyone:  women, men, developing children. (Unless it is fermented, not typical.) What is the formula most commonly used for babies?  Soy & lots of sugar.  

    Bad, bad stuff.

  • buy viagra online

    10/12/2010 9:49:38 AM |

    Very interesting Blog.



    Smith Alancli

  • renegadediabetic

    10/12/2010 3:19:03 PM |

    I too would add soy to the list.  All these "healthy" foods aren't so healthy.  They are being promoted as "healthy" because they make $$$$ for big processed food.

    I once saw an ad from PCRM telling men to go veg to reduce man boobs.  However, going veg would just mean more soy and insulin-dirupting foods, which would make the problem worse.

  • Anonymous

    10/12/2010 4:43:37 PM |

    Thank you so much for this info. My family has been gluten free for several years, but I still react to GF breads. Most of our dietary decisions have come about through observing how we react to particular foods, even when we don't understand *why*. I've been avoiding "GF" breads because I react so badly to them . . . and now I know why. Thanks for the verification.

  • Anonymous

    10/27/2010 5:16:16 PM |

    Men who are taking the BP med sprionolactone (trade name Aldactone) can sometimes experience gynecomastia. It's an uncommon, but well-known side effect of some drugs, and not always just a function of food intake or exercise (or lack thereof).

  • Rogue Dietitian

    11/6/2010 10:58:22 PM |

    You forgot one VERY important thing on your list:

    ALCOHOL!

    Ethanol promotes aromatase converting testosterone to estrogen. Also, lupulin in hops is a potent phytoestrogen making beer a double whammy.

    I would also like to add that brassica vegetables (broccoli, cauliflower, kale, cabbage, Brussels sprouts, etc) are rich in indole-3-carbinol and diindoylemethane which are wonderfully potent anti-estrogenic molecules.

  • bactrim

    11/7/2010 2:11:37 PM |

    If you are clever you always can money from anywhere or from nothing Smile

Loading