Boy, was I wrong!

Around 10 years ago, I was talking to a balloon and stent manufacturer's representative, who was raving about some new device that was due for release to the market. Back then, the sky seemed the limit to cardiac device manufacturers, who were falling over themselves scrambling to design and market the next new device.

The angioplasty market then had ballooned (no pun intended) from nothing to a multi-billion dollar industry. Stents were just getting underway but clearly had potential for being at least as large.

But this was a time when preventive therapies were also beginning to get quite powerful. We had just gotten started doing CT heart scans and were excited about the possibilities, statin drugs were gaining evidence through clinical trials, and the power of many nutritional supplements was finally achieving validation. We were even learning the error of our prior low-fat ways.

So I broadly pronounced to the enthusiastic product representative, "In 10 years, balloons, angioplasty, and stents will occupy this little corner of cardiac care because prevention will have become so powerful. We won't talk about heart procedures. We'll talk about coronary plaque regression!"

I even advised the representative that he should consider a career change in anticipation of the coming wave of preventive strategies.

Was I ever wrong. Despite the power of heart disease prevention--which is indeed true--cardiac device and procedure technology has boomed, both in popularity as well as in revenue success. Device manufacturing and sales are hugely successful. Implanting devices into people is a hugely profitable enterprise.

Since my ill-timed comments to the salesman, Boston Scientific, a major manufacturer of stents and other cardiac devices, reported revenues of $6.2 billiondollars in 2005, a 12% increase over the prior year. Medtronic reported 2005 revenues of $11.3 billion, growing at 15% per year. Clearly, cardiac procedures are still quite popular--and profitable.

My timing was off, but not for long. The huge crest of change in preventive therapies is upon us. That's the premise behind the Track Your Plaque concept: heart disease prevention can't be found in a hospital, is not supported by cardiac device manufacturers, and is not being advocated by most cardiologists or primary care physicians. Yet the tools are getting better and better every day.

Those of you who succeed in halting or reducing your heart scan score are extremely unlikely to add to Boston Scientific's or Medtronic's revenues. Help me spread the word.

Don't forget how dangerous heart disease can be

Sometimes it's easy to get smug when coronary plaque is a reversible process.

When you see people day in, day out, week in, week out, drop their heart scan scores, reversing what could be a dangerous disease, you can sometimes lose sight of just how dangerous coronary disease can be.

Whether I like it or not, I maintain a reasonably active role in hospitals out of necessity. I do need their services occasionally for people with advanced heart disease when I meet them (when regression is not the initial conversation for safety reasons), or valve disease is diagnosed, or someone shows up with congenital or heart muscle diseases. In other words, although we focus on coronary issues, there's more to heart disease than just coronary disease.

This unfortunate case just served to remind me how powerful coronary disease can be. Elizabeth, an active 67-year old, finally came to the hospital after suffering 6 months of chest pain and increasing breathlessness. She hated hospitals and hadn't seen a doctor in 30 years since she was successfully treated for cancer.

In those 30 years, she'd been quite active with family and a small business. But she also smoked 2 packs of cigarettes most of those years.

After she was admitted to the hospital, it became clear that Elizabeth had experienced one, if not several, heart attacks along the way. The entire front 2/3 of her heart was non-functional. If that wasn't bad enough, two of her heart valves were severely diseased and dysfunctional: Her aortic valve barely opened (aortic valve "stenosis", or stiffness) and the mitral valve leaked severely (mitral valve "insufficiency", or leakiness). All of this was confirmed with conventional testing in the hospital, including a heart catheterization.

Elizabeth ended up in emergency surgery--very unusual, by the way, for valve surgery of the sort she had--but died in the first few hours after her procedure. Her heart had simply been too damaged from her heart attacks, and the extraordinary stress of surgery that included two valves was too much. She died on the ventilator.

Coronary disease is a very serious matter. When I see cases like Elizabeth, it boosts my commitment to tell everyone that heart disease--when identified early enough--is a controllable, preventable, even reversible process. For poor Elizabeth, she was much too far down the path of severe, irreversible disease that control or reversal was simply not an option. She was in imminent danger of dying even upon arrival.

It's exciting yet sometimes frightening to know what you have in your hands: The means to control this monster called coronary disease. Use it wisely. But don't lose sight of what it can do it you permit it to grow, fester, and explode.

How many ways can you disguise sugar?

I came across this shockingly silly report on AOL, who obtained their info courtesy Health Magazine:

The Best New Healthy Foods for Busy People
from Health


The foods on their list:

Kettle Brand Bakes Hickory Honey BBQ--the healthy claim is based on the lack of trans-fatty acids and low-fat.










Post Healthy Classics Raisin Bran Cereal Bars, Cranberry--Likewise, low-fat, sweet, and addictive means healthy to these people.




Amy’s Mediterranean Pizza With Cornmeal Crust --Please!!



Horizon Organic Colby Cheese Sticks --Because it's made by cattle without use of growth hormone or antibiotics, they declare this healthy. I guess we can ignore the saturated fat content and high total fat content.

100% Whole Grain Chips Ahoy! Cookies --You mean we can add the bran back to wheat products and make it healthy?!


This kind of mass-market marketing trickery leaves me incredulous. Don't believe it for a moment. This is typical of the food industry: Take one aspect of nutrition that is truly healthy, such as high-fiber, or low-fat, or organic. Then add undesirable, unhealthy ingredients. The current fad is to add lots of sugar and or sugar-equivalents (usually flour and other wheat products). Because there's one healthy ingredient, they'll call the end-product healthy, too.

If you want to see what health looks like if you indulge in "healthy" products like this, just look up and down the grocery aisles at your neighborhood grocery store. You're likely to see the results: Gross obesity, diabetes, and arthritis.

You won't, of course, see the huge acceleration of growth in coronary plaque, but it's there, ticking away.

To remind us what ideal body weight is: Watch an old movie!

Jack was skeptical. At 273 lbs, 5 ft 11 inches, he felt that he was "just right".

"I feel fine. I don't see why you think I should lose weight," he declared. "In fact, when I lost 25 lbs a couple of years ago, everyone said I was too skinny!"

I showed Jack why: He had an HDL of 35 mg/dl, small LDL (over 90% of all LDL particles), an elevated blood sugar of 123 mg/dl (diabetes is officially 126 mg/dl or greater), high blood pressure, and increased inflammation (C-reactive protein). These were all manifestations that his body weight was too much for it to handle.




So I told Jack that we've all forgotten what ideal weight should look like. Our perception of "normal" has been so utterly and dramatically distorted by the appearance of our friends, family, co-workers, and other people around us that we've all lost a sense of what a desirable weight for health should be.




So I suggested to Jack that, if he wanted to rememember what ideal weight is and what people are supposed to look like, just watch old movies.

Old movies, like the 1942 production of Casablanca, or the 1952 production of Singin' in the Rain, show the body build that was prevalent in those days. Look at Humphrey Bogart or Gene Kelly--men with average builds, weighing 140-160 lbs--that's how humans were meant to look.

A report this morning on the Today Show showed the "after" photos of several people following bariatric (weight reduction) surgery. The "after" pictures, from the perspective of ideal weight and ideal health, remain hugely overweight.

We need to readjust our perceptions of weight. The average woman in the U.S. now weighs 172 lbs(!!!). Don't confuse average with desirable.

Diabetes is a choice you make

Tim had heart disease identified as a young man. He had his first heart attack followed by a quadruple bypass surgery at age 38. Recurrent anginal chest pain and another small heart attack led to several stents over three procedures in the first four years after bypass.

Tim finally came to us, interested in improving his prevention program. You name it, he had it: small LDL, low HDL (28 mg/dl), lipoprotein(a), etc. The problem was that Tim was also clearly pre-diabetic. At 5 ft 10 inches, he weighed 272 lbs--easily 80 or more pounds overweight.

Tim was willing to make the medication and nutritional supplement changes to gain control over his seeminglly relentless disease. He even turned up his exercise program and lost 28 lbs in the beginning. But as time passed and no symptoms recurred, he became lax.

Tim regained all the weight he'd lost and some more. Now Tim was diabetic.

"I don't get it. I eat good foods that shouldn't raise my insulin. I almost never eat sweets."

I stressed to Tim that diabetes and pre-diabetes, while provoked acutely by sugar-equivalent foods (wheat products, breads, breakfast cereals, crackers, etc.), is caused chronically by excess weight. If Tim wants to regain control over his heart disease, he needed to lost the weight.

Unlike, say, leukemia, an unfortunate disease that has little to do with lifestyle choices, diabetes is a choice you make over 90% of the time. In other words, if you become diabetic (adult variety, not children's variety) as an adult, that's because you've chosen to follow that path. You've neglected physical activity, or indulged in too many calories or poor food choices, or simply allowed weight to balloon out of control.

But diabetes is also a path most people can choose not to take. And it is a painfully common choice: Nearly two-thirds of the adults in my office have patterns of pre-diabetes or diabetes when I first meet them.

Let me stress this: For the vast majority of adults, diabetes is a choice, not an inevitability.

I'll call the doctor when I feel bad!

Max just had his heart scan. He sat down with the x-ray technologist at the work console while she pointed out the white areas in his coronary arteries that represented plaque.

"It looks like you're going to have a fairly high score," the technologist commented. "The final report will be available after one of our cardiologists reviews your images."

Max shrugged. "Well, I don't feel anything. I'm always running around with work, with my kids, stuff like that. That's better than any stress test. I guess I'll worry about it if it starts to bother me."


You'd be surprised how common this view remains: If it's not bothering you, then just forget about it. It's easy to do, since you have no symptoms, nothing to impair your physical activities. But what are the potential consequences of ignoring your heart scan? Here's a few:

--Prevention and plaque reversal efforts are most effective the earlier you start. From a heart scan score viewpoint, the lower your starting score, the easier it is to gain control over it. More people will succeed in reducing their score when the starting score is lower.

--The role of prevention of heart disease instantly crystallizes when you know your score. Your LDL cholesterol of 142 mg/dl or HDL of 41 mg/dl no longer seem like just numbers of borderline signficance. Instead, they become useful tools to gain control over plaque. They cast your numbers in a new and clear light.

--Knowing your heart scan score today gives you a basis for comparison in future. Your score of, say 250, today, can be 220 in one year. Without your preventive efforts, it will be 30% higher: 325. That's a big difference!

--Sudden death or heart attack--can occur in up to 35-40% of people with hidden heart disease--without warning.

Don't even bother getting a heart scan if you're going to ignore it. I've said it before and I'll say it again: A heart scan is the most important health test you can get--but only if you do something about it.

Coenzyme Q10 and statin drugs

Although drug manufacturers claim that muscle side effects from statin drugs occurs in only around 2% or people or less, my experience is very different.

I see muscle weakness and achiness develop in the majority of people taking Lipitor, Crestor, Zocor, Vytorin, etc. I'd estimate that nearly 90% of people get these feelings sooner or later.

Thankfully, the majority of the time these feelings are annoyances and do not lead to any impairment. Full-blown muscle destruction is truly rare--I've seen it once in over 10 years and thousands of patients.

The higher the dose of statin drug and the longer you take it, the more likely you're going to have muscle aches.

I experienced a strange phemomenon myself today. I worked outdoors for about 4 hours, pulling weeds, digging in the dirt, spreading topsoil. (I have an area of overgrowth in the front yard.) Admittedly, I worked pretty hard and it was a warm, humid day.

I was sore, as you'd expect at age 49. But, much more than that, I was exhausted--my muscles ached and I had barely enough strength to get up the stairs.

Hoping for some relief, I took an extra dose of coenzyme Q10. I usually take 50-100 mg per day. Today, when I felt this overwhelming muscle fatigue, I took an additional 200 mg. Within 10 minutes, I felt a surge of energy. It was, in fact, a perceptible, quite dramatic feeling.

I am thoroughly convinced, through my own experiences on Lipitor (I have a high LDL particle number despite a healthy lifestyle, among other abnormalities), and the experiences of many other people, that coenzyme Q10 can be an extremely useful tool to minimize the muscle aches and weakness of the statin drugs.

If you do indeed need to take one of these agents, coenzyme Q10 is worth knowing about. Supplementing coenzyme Q10 has, for me, been a real lifesaver. For many people, LDL reduction is a crucial part of their heart scan score control program. In my experience, many of them would not be able to take the drug without eozyme Q10.

Blast your LDL with oat bran and almonds

Nearly all of us can use an extra boost in reducing LDL cholesterol. We have a large number of people, in fact, who have reduced LDL into the Track Your Plaque range of 60 mg/dl or less without the use of statin cholesterol-reducing drugs.




Oat bran is among my favorite ways to reduce LDL. Three tablespoons per day is a really effective method to drop your LDL around 20 points. There's twice the beta glucan (soluble, or "viscous", fiber)in oat bran, as compared to the more popular oatmeal. Add oat bran to anything you can think of: yogurt, cottage cheese, vegetarian chili, oatmeal, top desserts with it, etc. Some people struggle to find oat bran in the grocery store. Most health food stores that sell bulk products will have oat bran, usually less than a $1 per pound. Many grocery stores will also have an oat bran hot cereal along with the Cream of Wheat and oatmeal. That's okay, provided the only ingredient is oat bran--no added sugars, etc.





Another dynamite method to reduce LDL 10-20 points is adding raw almonds to your daily food choices. One or two handfuls per day works great. We find it at Sam's Club for around $12.99 for a 3 lb. bag. The plentiful fibers and monounsaturates in almonds keep you full and satisified, take the edge off your sweet tooth, and even blunt the blood sugar rise caused by other foods.

Both these foods are also great ways to combat the metabolic syndrome. Since both fiber-rich oat bran and almonds slow the release of sugars into the blood, blood insulin level is also reduced. This results in a happy cascade of less small LDL, increased HDL, and a reduction in inflammation.

All these wonderful effects contribute to inching you closer to success: dropping your heart scan score.

Pre-diabetes with normal blood sugar

We pay special attention to pre-diabetes, in all its varied manifestations, in the Track Your Plaque program. This is because these factors are potent instigators of coronary plaque growth.

Early in the Track Your Plaque program we ignored these measures. After all, this is a program for heart disease risk reduction, not for mangement of diabetes. But we saw explosive rates of plaque growth when pre-diabetic factors were not controlled--even when cholesterol and related factors were under excellent control.

It became increasingly clear that factors associated with pre-diabetes needed to be managed, as well. This includes small LDL, increased blood sugar, high blood pressure, increased inflammation (as CRP).

Many people, however, have normal blood sugars (100 mg/dl or less) with a high blood insulin level (>10 microunits/ml). (This blood test is available in most laboratories.) This means that they have early resistance to insulin. The pancreas, the source of insulin, responds to the body's unresponsiveness to insulin by increasing insulin production.

Increased blood insulin with normal blood sugar will drive production of higher triglycerides, a drop in HDL, creation of small LDL, and inflammation--and coronary plaque growth, as evidenced by increasing CT heart scan score.

Blood insulin levels can be very effectively dropped by weight loss; exercise; reduction of processed carbohydrates like breads, pretzels, and breakfast cereals; and increased raw nuts and oat products; and vitamin D replacement to normal levels. Drug manufacturers are desperately trying to make this a mandate for drug treatment (Actos, Avandia), but are encountering resistance, since most people without overt diabetes don't want to take diabetic medication (rightly so!).

You and your doctor should consider insulin as a factor to track, especially if you have small LDL, low HSL, or high triglycerides, or any of the other manifestations listed above.

Sometimes small LDL is the only abnormality

Janet is a 58-year old schoolteacher. At 5 ft 3 inches and 104 lbs, she had barely an ounce of fat on her size-2 body. For years, Janet's primary care physician complimented her on her cholesterol numbers: LDL cholesterol values ranging from 100 to 130 mg/dl; HDL cholesterol of 50-53 mg/dl.

Yet she had coronary disease. Her heart scan score: 195.

Lipoprotein analysis uncovered a single cause: small LDL. 95% of all of Janet's LDL particles were in the small category. What was surprising was that this pattern occurred despite her slender build. Weight is a powerful influence on the small LDL pattern and the majority of people with it are overweight to some degree. But not Janet.

How did she get small LDL if she was already at or below her ideal weight? Genetics. Among the genetic patterns that can account for this pattern is a defect of an enzyme called cholesteryl-ester transfer protein, or CETP. This is the exact step, by the way, that is blocked by torcetrapib, the new agent slated for release sometime in future (The manufacturer, Pfizer, is apparently going to sell this agent only packaged in the same tablet as Lipitor. This has triggered an enormous amount of criticism against the company and they are, as a result discussing marketing torcetrapib separately.)

Also note that Janet had a severe excess of small LDL despite an HDL in the "favorable" range. (See my earlier conversation on this issue, The Myth of Small LDL at http://drprevention.blogspot.com/2006/06/myth-of-small-ldl.html.)

With Janet, weight loss to reduce small LDL was not an option. So we advised her to take fish oil, 4000 mg per day; niacin, 1000 mg per day; vitamin D, 2000 units per day; use abundant oat bran and raw almonds, both of which suppress small LDL. This regimen has--surprisingly--only partially suppressed her small LDL pattern by a repeat lipoprotein analysis we just performed. We're hoping this may do it, i.e., stop progression or reduce her heart scan score.

The lesson: Small LDL is a very potent pattern that can be responsible for heart disease, even if it occurs in isolation. And, contrary to conventional thinking, small LDL can occur as an independent abnormality, even when HDL is at favorable levels.
Construct your glucose curve

Construct your glucose curve

In a previous Heart Scan Blog post, I discussed how to make use of postprandial (after-meal) blood sugars to reduce triglycerides, reduce small LDL, increase HDL, reduce blood pressure and inflammatory measures, and accelerate weight loss.

In that post, I suggested checking blood glucose one hour after finishing a meal. However, this is a bit of an oversimplification. Let me explain.

A number of factors influence the magnitude of blood glucose rise after a meal:

--Quantity of carbohydrates
--Digestibility of carbohydrates--The amylopectin A of wheat, for example, is among the most digestible of all, increasing blood sugar higher and faster.
--Fat and protein, both of which blunt the glucose rise (though only modestly).
--Inclusion of foods that slow gastric emptying, such as vinegar and fibers.
--Body weight, age, recent exercise

Just to name a few. Even if 10 people are fed identical meals, each person will have a somewhat different blood glucose pattern.

So it can be helpful to not just assume that 60 minutes will be your peak, but to establish your individual peak. It will vary from meal-to-meal, day-to-day, but you can get a pretty good sense of blood glucose behavior by constructing your own postprandial glucose curve.

Say I have a breakfast of oatmeal: slow-cooked, stoneground oatmeal with skim milk, a few walnuts, blueberries. Blood glucose prior: 95 mg/dl. Blood glucose one-hour postprandial: 160 mg/dl.

Rather than taking a one-hour blood glucose, let's instead take it every 15 minutes after you finish eating your oatmeal:


In this instance, the glucose peak occurred at 90-minutes after eating. 90-minute postprandial checks may therefore better reflect postprandial glucose peaks for this theoretical individual.

I previously picked 60-minutes postprandial to approximate the peak. You have the option of going a step better by, at least one time, performing your own every-15-minute glucose check to establish your own curve.

Comments (24) -

  • Eric

    2/19/2011 5:03:57 AM |

    Have you ever used a DexCom 7, like Tim Ferriss did for the 4 Hour Body book?

  • Kurt

    2/19/2011 12:55:16 PM |

    There is evidence that alcohol decreases the blood glucose rise, which may explain in part why moderate drinkers have lower risk of heart attacks. Have you found this to be true?

  • Anonymous

    2/19/2011 3:01:47 PM |

    With all respects, Doctor Davis, but I am at a loss to understand your reasoning behind the suggestion of constructing a 2-hour curve with readings taken every 15 minutes. Invariably after eating, blood glucose level will rise and then fall over the two-hour period. I can control the severity of the "spike" by the type of food I consume. After eating however, I cannot control the shape of the curve without the intervention of medication or physical exercise. This is known. So what additional practical information is provided me from this exercise?
    My regards, StanO

  • Anonymous

    2/19/2011 3:09:36 PM |

    Hi! These are my readings using a 1-low carb meal-day approach during months.

    day   hour mg/dL
    02/15 11:17 74
    02/15 12:57 83
    02/15 13:53 79
    exercise lifting weights
    02/15 15:11 93
    end of exercise
    02/15 15:46 75
    02/15 16:22 86
    02/15 16:49 83
    meal time

    As you can see these are my pre-meal levels in a low carb diet, one meal a day approach eating nuts, yogurt, liver, meat, fish, especial atkins bread, butter, chicken, eggs etc..

    Next day I change my normal low carb meal for a high carb meal (pasta with a bit of meat) with my morning sugar in these same levels. Lets the party begin.

    02/16 13:20 finish pasta festival
    02/16 13:29 114
    02/16 13:42 103
    02/16 13:57 125
    02/16 14:06 127
    02/16 14:12 137
    02/16 14:23 119
    02/16 14:36 126
    02/16 14:48 130
    02/16 15:03 123
    02/16 15:15 106
    02/16 15:30 112
    02/16 15:46 111
    02/16 16:11 107
    02/16 16:22 105
    02/16 16:47 114
    02/16 17:21 121
    02/16 17:32 120
    02/16 18:07 113
    02/16 18:21 125
    02/16 18:50 110
    02/16 19:42 114
    02/16 20:21 130
    02/16 21:29 112
    02/16 23:37 119
    time to bed. I also feel like shit.

    Next day, do you think the party is over?

    02/17 07:20 121 (no)
    02/17 12:15  71 (finally, nearly 24 hours of high sugar levels!)
    02/17 13:00  84
    02/17 14:50  81
    02/17 15:57  71
    02/17 16:30  end meal (with a bit of wheat bread)
    02/17 16:48  99
    02/17 17:08 111
    02/17 17:27  94
    02/17 17:47  82
    02/17 18:18  87
    02/17 18:42  73
    02/17 20:09  78
    exercise (please, do not ask what type of exercise and how I can manage to check my sugar in that situationSmile
    02/17 21:31  98
    02/17 22:01  97
    end of exercise
    02/17 23:15  88
    02/17 00:38  83

    Next day

    02/18 09:18 79
    02/18 10:36 81
    02/18 11:38 85
    exercise (ski, more aerobic so my sugar levels do not increase to much. Cannot use the sticks due to low temp)
    02/18 18:00 80
    low carb meal using  whole grain special atkins bread
    02/18 18:31 85
    02/18 18:47 98
    02/18 19:08 90
    02/18 19:30 88
    02/18 19:45 93
    02/18 20:20 87
    02/18 20:40 80
    exercise
    02/18 21:12 92
    02/18 21:58 94
    02/18 22:26 91
    end of exercise
    02/18 23:39 88
    02/18 01:17 88
    exercise
    02/18 02:20 93
    end of exercise

    Next day similar to my first set of data.

  • Geoffrey Levens

    2/19/2011 5:01:08 PM |

    "I am at a loss to understand your reasoning behind the suggestion of constructing a 2-hour curve"

    Varies so much per person and meal composition.  Some people will get peak even longer than two hours w/ something like pizza that has lot of heavy grease as well as the carbs.  Or if they have any gastroparesis  issues

  • Dr. William Davis

    2/19/2011 7:05:00 PM |

    Hi, Eric--

    Sorry, but I don't know what DexCom 7 is. Can you tell me anything about it?


    Hi, Kurt--

    The effects of alcohol and alcoholic beverages are complex. The blood sugar effect is only a small part of the equation. Among the most consistent effects are reduced blood sugar with red wine, increased blood sugar with beer.

  • Dr. William Davis

    2/19/2011 7:07:12 PM |

    Hi, Anonymous--

    Impressive effort!

    Incredibly, just about any primary care doc would declare your values "normal," since you don't "need" medication.

    You've found the secret: Carbohydrates screw up health galore.

  • STG

    2/19/2011 10:54:14 PM |

    I almost had a wheat relapse today, but what I realized is that I wanted the butter. So, I ate a small bite of organic butter.

  • revelo

    2/20/2011 1:01:30 AM |

    Carbohydrates don't screw up health in most people, but they have to be managed properly. Anonymous's glucose spike occurred because he/she surprised the body with a heavier carb load than it was adapted to. It takes a week or so for the body to upregulate insulin sensitivity and glycogen storage ability. Until that upregulation occurs, high carb intake will indeed cause glucose spikes.

    Here's my own anecdote. After switching to a paleo diet for a week, I then switched back to high-carb. Upon eating 200g (dry) of cooked oats, my glucose shot up to 195 mg/dL. A week later, I was able to eat the same 200g (dry) of cooked oats and glucose remained below 120 mg/dL. What happened is that my ability to process glucose downregulated when I switched to paleo, then upregulated after I switched back to high-carb. Both the down and upregulation take a few days. It is probably inadvisable to constantly switch between paleo and high-carb. If you plan to eat high-carb, then do so consistently, so that the body is always prepared for high glucose loads.

    My recent VAP blood tests, taken after resuming my usual high-carb regimen, show HDL=66 mg/dL, LDL=61, VLDL=12, Trig=45, Lp(a)=15, HDL-2=23 (most protective HDL greater than Lp(a), thus counteracting the latter), and type A LDL pattern (mostly large buoyant LDL). CRP was .16mg/L, which is very low. Laboratory measurement of fasting glucose was 85 mg/dL, versus 84 for Reli-On Confirm home glucose testing device measured that same morning (the Reli-On device thus appears to be accurate). These results hardly suggest that a high-carb diet necessarily screws up health.

    There is also plenty of other evidence that carbs are not unhealthy for people who are lean, get daily exercise, don't have an underlying illness, and eat mostly unrefined carbs. All sorts of primitive peoples (Kitavans, Tarahumara indians, Bantus,  traditional mediterranean people's, etc) eat high-carb diets and have very low incidence of diabetes, heart disease and other chronic illnesses due to diet (they may have chronic illnesses due to parasites).

  • Might-o'chondri-AL

    2/20/2011 1:17:59 AM |

    Depression a variable: Japan 2010 journal "Anti- Aging" showed affect on blood glucose in 5 hour glucose(75 grams) tolerance test on a clinic's depressed in-patient (woman age 36). The articles authors conclude a "very low saccharide diet" is better for the brain, which runs fine on ketones.

    Fasting blood sugar = 74
    30 min post glucose = 97
    1  hour  "    "     = 78
       (coincides with insulin peak)
    2 hour post glucose = 54
       (27% below fasting blood    
        sugar)
    3 hour post glucose = 99
       (insulin less than 1/2 of
        30 min. insulin & 1/3 of
         2 hour insulin)
    4 hour post glucose = 75
    5 hour "     "       = 80

  • Anonymous

    2/20/2011 2:04:08 AM |

    I have a big question here.
    I persoanlly have my peak at 30 minutes. So my question is:
    Is it a BG of 140-160 after 30 minutes if after 60 minutes it is under 100 too bad?

  • revelo

    2/20/2011 2:49:20 AM |

    @Might-o'chondri-AL: Can't understand the logic of low-carb for depressed people. High-carb boosts serotonin. The only reason I could think of prescribing low-carb for a depressed person is because they are overweight, and the excess weight is partly responsible for the depression (inability to move about and exercise due to morbid obesity, for example).

  • Anonymous

    2/20/2011 6:27:17 AM |

    revelo, thanks for some sanity.  Reading these blog posts and most of the comments that follow is depressing.  They would have everyone believe that their inability to handle carbs is representative of normal, healthy, individuals.

    Maybe they need to get healthy, and then they can actually eat whole-food sources of carbs and stop being so scared and go and live life.

  • Might-o'chondri-AL

    2/20/2011 8:30:25 AM |

    Hi Revelo,
    I've got nothing against carbs & am still learning (I eat carbs); your blood profile seems excellent enough to trade for.My thinking on your approach is: that you may find, like me in my 20/30/40s + years, care free
    carbohydrates are fine and by
    the time hit 60 there's the unforseen to adjust to. The famous quote is: "Old age ain't for sissys."
      
    So, back to Japan ....
    Psychiatric clinic tested 2,000;
    detailed one to show how variable blood sugar/insulin expression is in depression. They claim to have got her off meds and adressed low neuro-transmitters of depression; which clinically they say (depression) is common in metabolic syndrome.

    Their flow chart for seratonin is dietary amino acid L-tryptophan as substrate with folic acid, iron, niacin and enzyme tryptophan hydroxylase; yields, 5-HTP with vitamin B6 and enzyme 5-HTP decarboxylase; yields seratonin (which in it's own right is the substrate for
    magnesium and SAMe to make into melatonin). I'll skip their GABA and dopamine flow charts.

    This was a geriatric symposium paper, so focus was on brain down the line. Their pitch was for preventing cognitive decline;
    and that ketones protect the brain from Alzheimers and Parkinsons - just as ketones diets do help in
    epilesy and other mental disorders.

    They specify that in the brain beta-hydroxy-butyrate (ketone) ups utilization of circulating oxygen more, decreases CO2 in tissues from glucose "burning", and ketones make ATP more efficiently too. As for the mitochondria, they continue to get their essential glucose molecules from gluco-neogenesis.

    My impression is they're showing that in geriatrics the potential
    accumulation of what Doc's blog
    warned about, namely  A.G.E.s
    (advanced glycation endproducts)is a risk factor for Alzheimers, etc. The authors conclusion was the central nervous system used ketones just fine;and carbohydrates were not required for old people to have good levels of circulating blood sugar.





    sowed data for 1 depressed lady

  • Anonymous

    2/20/2011 11:43:35 AM |

    Dr Davis: Two comments were made asking for your reasoning behind the suggestion for construction of a 2 hr curve. To me the comments are politely made. They are appropriate in my opinion and they deserve a response. It is obvious that you chose deliberately to ignore them.

    Your commentary is followed and I expect influences countless readers; some possibly obsessively, ie healthy individual who performed more the 75 glucose checks over a few days time.

    With your efforts to maintain this blog come added responsibilities to its readers which you currently are ignoring.

    Shame on you.

  • STG

    2/20/2011 3:47:40 PM |

    Anonymous: Your response to this blog is somewhat emotional and critical. Perhaps you could be open to the idea that some people can consume a high, unrefined carbo diet and be healthy; others will suffer adverse effects on a high carbo diet and need a more protein based or mixed diet. For those individuals that are carbo sensitive, there is good dietary advise on the blog. I do not currently test my blood sugar. I do not want to become myopic about health; however,I don't judge others on this blog who want to pursue this strategy even if they are not insulin resistant, diabetic or pre-diabetic. Moreover, I may have to resort to using a monitor in the future. The blood sugar data from another "anonymous" is very interesting and certainly provides real data for determining his or her dietary choices. Please keep an open mind and avoid insulting comments like "shame on you" which add nothing to the dicussion and are meant to insult not to educate or enlighten others.

  • Geoffrey Levens

    2/20/2011 4:38:32 PM |

    DexCom 7 is a "continuous" bg monitor for home use. http://www.dexcom.com/products

    I have been eating Dr Fuhrman's diet and lately, typical meal contains 3-4 cups chopped leafy greens, 2/3 cups cooked beans, about 2/3 oz raw seeds/nuts, 200 grams starchy root veg, one piece of fruit (most often an apple).  Peak postprandial sugars for me come very close to one hour after end of meal and are in low 120's to high hundred teens, back to fasting by 90-120 minutes Usually 90 minutes).

  • joseph

    2/20/2011 4:54:29 PM |

    why do you think that post meal levels of 120 or 140 are "normal"? Simply because are the levels that people get when eat a lot of carbs in a meal.

    You body do not like this levels, that is why it try to put them down using insulin. Why is your body doing that if they are "normal levels"?

    If you check my levels in the 4 reply you could find that when you do not eat for longs periods of time your body try keep your sugar between 70 and 90. If you are relaxed the level could be in the 70 zone and if you do some exercise it will go to 90 zone. Why your body do no increase it to "normal levels" of 120-140? Probably because this levels are not "normal".

    So you have a high carb meal. Your body react to it trying to keep your sugar down, why?. Yes... your body is stupid and doesn't have a degree in nutrition so cannot understand the science behind this "normal levels".

    When you body finally got the 85 level your dietitian says that you need to have another high carb meal. So your levels return to 120-140, and you ignorant body starts to reduce this "normal level" to 70-85. When you got that level is time to have another high carb meal, and your ignorant body returns to do the same trick.

    Years of doing that and your body cannot maintain the true normal levels your doctor says that you need to do some exercise to well... reduce sugar levels! and of course still doing 5-6 small high carb meals a day.

    So now you need to run the New York City Marathon to get rid of all that carbs in all that meals your are eating during the day.

    Of course you need increase the carbs in these meals to have energy to do all that exercises. In one of those healthy marathons you also take a high carb drink to... well... you know.

    It doesn't work, you end eating more than before because your body needs more energy to run all that healthy marathons and you are all the day hungry.

    Later your unscientific and stupid  pancreas collapse and your doctor says that you need to maintain your 34646464 high carbs meals a day, but take some insulin to help your body to reduce all the sugars YOU ARE EATING EVERY 3 HOURS.

    Probably our pancreas simply commit suicide because is not able to understand our rock solid science.

  • Anonymous

    2/20/2011 5:15:30 PM |

    Can someone explain to a non-scientist what "up-regulate" and "down-regulate" mean?  Peter

  • Anonymous

    2/21/2011 1:38:04 AM |

    A couple of people have asked why construct your own glucose curve so I thought I'd throw out my thoughts on it.  Every person's glucose will peak at different points either due to slower stomach emptying or a slower absorbed carb or whatever. I have read that many people will peak at 75 minutes.  So if you are trying to get a real idea as to how your body reacts to glucose/insulin then you need to test frequently to find YOUR personal peak.  Then you will know when to test when you try new foods.  Is that others understanding too?
    Char

  • Anonymous

    2/21/2011 3:21:29 AM |

    This blog post is so full of Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt.  People asking questions due to being scared by Dr. Davis' suggestion of "constructing your glucose curve", so they ask him questions in the comments, like what their "glucose curve" should look like.  People thinking now they better be jabbing themselves 15 times after a meal.  Thinking about a meal for hours after a meal.  Guilt for eating that meal.

    So Dr. Davis' response?  IGNORE THEM and put up a new blog post with MORE scare-mongering:


    Now you should fear the banana!
    http://www.heartscanblog.org/2011/02/american-heart-association-diet-makes.html

    "Would you like a banana?"


    What a joke.  Show us a single person who got fat off of bananas OR potatoes, or any whole food carbs.

  • Might-o'chondri-AL

    2/21/2011 5:10:31 AM |

    Hi Peter,
    Up-regulate is an action on a gene that makes it do more of what it's capable of doing. And down-regulate is when a gene is being acted on in a way that it will do less of what it's capable of doing.

    A gene can be overactive or underactive. Depending on the dynamic, of how a specific gene ideally should be doing, regulation up or down is desired.

  • eye lift guide

    2/22/2011 9:34:34 AM |

    Here is giving nice tips. Thanks for its. I the way you explain us.

  • Dr George

    3/29/2011 7:35:53 AM |

    Hey there Dr Davis,

    Created my own glucose curve as part of my own research and actually got a bit of a scare!

    I was doing a high carb meal to try and demonstrate an early carb spike then drop.

    While I didn't get the response I was looking for I got something a bit scarier. A fasting glucose indicitive of pre-diabetes reading instead. I am amazed how one bad meal was able to send my sugar awol over night.

    Back onto low carbs for me.

    Thanks for helping open my eyes to my potential diabetes.

    Dr George

Loading