Omega-6 / omega-3 ratio

Most of us already know that the intake of omega-6 fatty acids in the American diet has gone overboard, much at the expense of the omega-3 fraction. This occurred as a result of the misguided advice of the 1970s and 1980s to eat polyunsaturated oils like corn, sunflower, and safflower, because of their presumed cholesterol-reducing properties compared to saturated fats. However, more recent examinations of this advice have suggested that the omega-6 fraction of oils present in polyunsaturated oils may amplify arachidonic acid and other inflammatory patterns despite the reduction in cholesterol (total and LDL).

Dr. Artemis Simopoulos of the Center for Genetics, Nutrition and Health in Washington, D.C. has written extensively on the role of omega-6 and omega-3 fatty acids in diet.

In a review entitled The Importance of the Omega-6/Omega-3 Fatty Acid Ratio in Cadiovacular Disease and Other Chronic Disease , Dr. Simopoulos collects the following comparison of omega-6 to omega-3 ratios from various populations:


Paleolithic humans 0.79
Greece (prior to 1960) 1.00-2.00
Current Japan 4.00
Current India, rural 5-6.1
Current United Kindom and northern Europe 15.00
Current United States 16.74
Current India, urban 38-50

(The numbers refer to the ratio of omega-6 to omega-3 intake.)


If we believe the observations of Dr. Loren Cordain and others, while paleolithic man died of trauma and infectious diseases, they did not die of heart disease. Paleolithic human intake of omega-3 exceeded that of omega-6.

Likewise, the traditionally low cardiac event regions of the world like Japan and Greece have less omega-3 intake than Paleolithic man, but still many times more than the U.S. and U.K.

Worst of all with an enormous preponderance of omega-6 over omega-3 are urban Indians, who experience among the highest rates of heart disease in the world.

Just for perspective, let's assume you eat an 1800 calorie per day diet, of which 30% of calories come from fat. This would amount to 540 calories per day from fat. With 9 calories per gram of fat, this means that there are 60 grams, or 60,000 mg, of fat in your diet per day.

Paleolithic man has been found to have existed on a diet consisting of 21% of calories from fats. Again assuming an 1800 calorie per day diet, that comes to 42 grams of fat per day (42,000 mg).

If we were to try to recreate the Paleolithic fat composition of diet, we would ingest 21,000 mg of omega-3 fatty acids (EPA, DHA, linolenic acid) per day. Even recreating a Japanese experience with a 4:1 ratio, it would mean 8400 mg of omega-3 per day. (Curiously, this does not agree with all estimates of Japanese intake of omega-3s.)

No matter how you look at it, cultures with lower rates of cardiovascular disease take in greater--much greater--quantities of omega-3 fatty acids.

So don't complain about your six fish oil capsules (usually containing 6000 mg of total oil, 1800 mg omega-3s)!

Dr. Bernadine Healy on heart scans


A Heart Scan Blog reader brought the following tidbit to my attention.

Cardiologist and now writer for U.S. News and World Report, Dr. Bernadine Healy, wrote this editorial, a glowing endorsement of heart scans:

The approach is beautifully simple. Calcium accumulates in advanced plaques, so calcium visible in the heart's arteries indicates atherosclerosis. An exploding number of studies in the past few years have unequivocally shown that the calcium score predicts both heart attack and sudden death. As a generalization, patients with scores between 100 and 400 face three to four times the risk of a heart attack or death compared with others at the same age with a zero score. Over 400, that elevated risk more than doubles.

Most doctors rely instead on the Framingham calculator, which estimates a symptom-free person's risk of a heart attack in the next 10 years based on smoking history, blood pressure, cholesterol levels, sex, and age. It's available free online from the National Institutes of Health. Most people taking the test will have minimal or no coronary disease, though risk estimates over 9 percent should inspire vigorous preventive efforts. For some, however, coronary heart disease is sneaky, and Framingham will underestimate what lies ahead. Roughly half of those who suffer a major heart attack or sudden coronary death are symptom free. Calcium scores are additive to Framingham; they pick up the individual surprises by using X-ray vision to look inside the heart. No wonder insurance companies are scrambling to use coronary calcium scores—life insurers, that is.



Dr. Bernadine Healy is no small-time player. In addition to her academic credentials, she is former chief of the National Institutes of Health (the first woman to hold the influential post), former head of the American Red Cross, and former deputy director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy under the Reagan administration. An endorsement of CT heart scans, though written under the guise of a probing editorial, will do an enormous amount of good to overcome the hurdles in gaining wider acceptance of heart scans.

Those of us applying heart scans in everyday practice have long appreciated their enormous power to detect and track coronary plaque. Framingham scoring can't even touch the certainty and quantification provided by heart scans in day-to-day life. Hundreds of studies have validated their use, but they still suffer from lying in the shadows of the procedural bullies aiming to boost the number of heart catheterizations, angioplasties, stents, bypass surgeries.

Dr. Healy, a voice with great weight, not just a political figure but also a cardiologist and scientist, has done a great service to broadcast the message of heart scanning.

Mercury and fish oil

As time passes, the dose of fish oil advocated in the Track Your Plaque program is going upward.

While epidemiologic studies, like the Chicago Western Electric Study and the Nurses' Health Study suggest that decreases in mortality from heart disease begin by just eating fish a couple times per month, there are newer data that suggest greater quantities confer greater benefits.

In the last Heart Scan Blog post, I discussed the recently-released ERA JUMP Study that demonstrated a relationship between higher omega-3 fatty acid blood content and reduced quantities of carotid and coronary plaque. The JELIS Study demonstrated a 19% reduction in cardiovascular events when fish-consuming Japanese added 1800 mg of EPA (only).

However, the suggestion that increased quantities of fish oil potentially yield greater protection from heart attack and facilitate coronary plaque regression is also stirring up worries about mercury exposure. So I dug up a Heart Scan Blog post from a year ago that discussed this issue and reprint it here.


I often get questions about the mercury content in fish oil. I've even had patients come to the office saying their primary care doctor told them to stop fish oil to avoid mercury poisoning.

Manufacturers of fish oil also make claims that this product or that ("super-concentrated", "pharmaceutical grade", "purified", etc.) is purer or less contaminated than competitors' products. The manufacturers of the "drug" Omacor [now Lovaza], or prescription fish oil, have added to the confusion by suggesting that their product is the most pure of all, since it is the most concentrated of any fish oil preparation (900 mg EPA+DHA per capsule). They claim that "OMACOR is naturally derived through a unique, patented process that creates a highly concentrated, highly purified prescription medicine. By prescribing OMACOR® (omega-3-acid ethyl esters), a prescription omega-3, your doctor is giving you a concentrated and reliable omega-3. Each OMACOR capsule contains 90% omega-3 acids (84% EPA/DHA*). Nonprescription omega-3 dietary supplements typically contain only 13%-63% EPA/DHA."

How much truth is there in these concerns?

Let's go to the data published by the USDA, FDA, and several independent studies. Let's add to that the independent (and therefore presumably unbiased) analyses provided by Consumer Reports and Consumer Labs (www.consumerlab.com). How much mercury has been found in fish oil supplements?

None.

This is different from the mercury content of whole fish that you eat. Predatory fish that are at the top of the food chain and consume other fish and thereby concentrate organic methyl mercury, the toxic form of mercury. Thus, shark, swordfish, and King mackerel are higher in mercury than sardines, herring, and salmon.

The mercury content of fish oil capsules have little to do with the method of processing and much more with the animal source of oil. Fish oil is generally obtained from sardines, salmon, and cod, all low in mercury. Fish oil capsules are not prepared from swordfish or shark.

Thus, concerns about mercury from fish oil--regardless of brand--are generally unfounded, according to the best information we have. Eating whole fish--now that's another story for another time. But you and I can take our fish oil to reduce triglycerides, VLDL, IDL, small LDL, and heart attack risk without worrying about mercury.



I am not advocating ad libitum eating of fish. Sadly, this may be related to excessive accumulation of contaminants. I am suggesting that greater quantities of omega-3 fatty acids from relatively contaminant- and mercury-free fish oil capsules.

More on this in an upcoming webinar on the Track Your Plaque website: Fish Oil and the Track Your Plaque Program - Is More Better?

ERA JUMP: Omega-3 fatty acids and plaque


The results of the uniquely-constructed ERA JUMP Study were just released, a fascinating study of the relationship of omega-3 fatty acids to coronary and carotid plaque.

The study adds insight into why the Japanese experience only one third of the heart attacks of Americans, and why Japan occupies the bottom of the list for least heart attacks among all developed countries.

The Electron-Beam Tomography, Risk Factor Assessment Among Japanese and U.S. Men in the Post-World War II Birth Cohort Study (ERA JUMP), a collaborative U.S.-Japanese effort, compared three groups of men:

-- 281 Japanese men living in Japan
-- 306 non-Japanese men living in the U.S. (Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania)
-- 303 Japanese Americans (having both parents Japanese without “ethnic admixture”) living in Hawaii.

The last group represents a group that is genetically similar to the group in Japan, but exposed to an American diet and lifestyle.

Three main measures were compared:

-- Blood levels of omega-3 fatty acids, EPA and DHA)
-- Carotid intimal-medial thickness (CIMT, the thickness of the carotid artery lining that can serve as an index of body-wide atherosclerosis)
-- Coronary calcium (heart scan) scores.

Interestingly, at the start of the study, the Japanese men possessed an overall cardiovascular risk profile worse than the Americans: Though more slender (BMI 23.6), Japanese men were more likely to be smokers, alcohol drinkers, had more high blood pressure, and were less likely to take cholesterol medications. The Americans, conversely, although heavier (BMI 27.9), were less likely to be smokers and drinkers, and had a four-fold greater use of cholesterol medications.

The Japanese Americans were the most likely to be hypertensive, diabetic, with a similar proportion of overweight as the non-Japanese Americans.

Despite the overall greater heart disease risk for profile for Japanese men, compared to non-Japanese Americans they had 10% less CIMT. In addition, only 9.3% of Japanese men had abnormal coronary calcium scores vs. 26.1% of non-Japanese Americans. Japanese-Americans were the worst, however, with nearly 10% more CIMT than non-Japanese Americans and 31.4% with abnormal calcium scores.

The most intriguing finding of all was the fact that, of all the various groups and degrees of atherosclerosis, whether gauged via CIMT or coronary calcium scores, the blood level of omega-3 fatty acids was inversely related, i.e., the greater the omega-3 blood level, the less plaque by either measure was detected.

Japanese men had the highest omega-3 blood levels: twice that of the non-Japanese Americans. The Japanese-Americans had levels only slightly greater than non-Japanese Americans.

While other studies, like the GISSI Prevenzione study, have persuasively demonstrated that omega-3 fatty acids substantially reduce heart attack, a weak link in the omega-3 argument has been a study that links greater omega-3 intake with less atherosclerosis. The unique construction of the ERA JUMP Study, employing two groups with sharply different omega-3 intakes, very powerfully argues for the plaque-inhibiting effects of this fraction of fats.

How much omega-3 fatty acids do Japanese people eat? Estimates vary, depending on part of the country, coastal vs. inland, age, etc., but Japanese tend to ingest anywhere from 5 to 15-times more omega-3 fatty acids than Americans. The actual intake of omega-3 fatty acids (EPA +DHA) in Japanese ranges from 850 to 3100 mg per day.

Mediterranean diet and blood sugar


Data such as that from the Lyon Heart Study have demonstrated that a so-called Mediterranean diet substantially reduces risk for heart attack.

But there are aspects of the Mediterranean diet and lifestyle that are not entirely sorted out.

For instance, what specific component(s) of the diet provide the benefit? Is it olive oil and linolenic acid? Is it red wine? Is it the reduced exposure to processed snack foods that Americans are indundated with? Is it their more slender builds and greater tendency to walk? How about exposure to the Mediterranean sun? What about the inclusion of breads, since in the Track Your Plaque program I advocate elimination of wheat products for many abnormalities?

Anyway, here's a wonderfully thoughtful set of observations from Anna about her experiences traveling Italy, trying to understand the details of the Mediterranean diet while also trying to keep blood sugar under control.


I just returned from a two week stay in Italy, doing a bit of my own "Mediterranean Diet" experiments. When practical, we sought out food sources and places to eat that were typical for the local area, and tried as much as possible/practical to stay away from establishments that mostly catered to tourist tastes. I was really curious to see how the mythical "Mediterranean Diet" we Americans are urged to follow compared to the foods really consumed in Italy.

The first week, we stayed in a rural Tuscan farmhouse apartment (agriturismo), so many, if not most of our meals were prepared by me with ingredients I bought at the local grocery store (Coop) or the outdoor market in Siena. In addition, I purchased really fantastic free-range eggs from the farm where we were staying. (Between some language issues and seasonality, eggs and wine were what we could buy from them - though I was tantalized by the not-quite-ripe figs heavy on many trees). Mostly, our meals consisted of simple and easily prepared fresh fruits and vegetables, rustic cured meats (salami, proscuitto, pancetta, etc.) hand-sliced at the deli down the road, fresh sausages, various Italian cheeses, plus plenty of espresso. It was a bit disappointing to find underripe fruit & tomatoes as well as old green beans in the grocery stores, not to mention too many low fat and highly processed foods, but all over Europe the food supply is becoming more industrialized, more centralized, and homogenous, so I'm not too surprised that it happens even in Italy. But even with the smaller grocery store size, the amount of in-season produce was abundant, yet one still was better off shipping from the perimeter of the store, venturing into the aisles only for spices, olive oil, vinegar, coffee, etc. Without the knowledge of where to go and the language to really talk in depth about food with people, I wasn't able to find truly direct and local sources for as many foods as I would have liked, but still, we ate well enough!

The first week I maintained blood sugar levels very similar to those I get at home, because except for the Italian specialties, we ate much like we always do. A few rare exceptions to my normal BG tests were after indulging in locally made gelato or a evening limoncello cordial, but even then, the BG rise was relatively modest and to me, acceptable under the circumstance. Even with the gelato indulgences, it felt like I might have even lost a few pounds by the end of the first week and my FBG didn't rise much over 100.

The second week we stayed in two cities (Florence & Rome), and I didn't prepare any of my own food because I didn't have a kitchen/fridge. I found it impossible to get eggs anywhere for breakfast, and the tickets our hotels provided for a "continental" breakfast at a nearby café/bar was always for a coffee or hot chocolate drink and some sort of bread or roll (croissant, brioche, danish, etc.). At first I just paid extra for a plate of salami and cheese if that was available - or went to a small grocery store for some plain yogurt, but then I decided to go off low-carb and conduct a short term experiment, though I didn't consume nearly as many carbs as a typical Italian or tourist would.

So I breakfasted with a brioche roll or plain croissant for breakfast with my cappuccino, but unfortunately no additional butter was available. I didn't feel "full" enough with such a breakfast and I was usually starving an hour or two later. Additionally, when I ate the "continental" breakfast, I noticed immediate water retention - my ankles, lower legs, and knees looked like someone else's at the end of a day walking and sightseeing, swollen heavy. Exercising my feet and lower legs while waiting in lines or sitting didn't seem to help.

Food is much more expensive in Europe than in the US, and the declining US$ made everything especially expensive (not to mention the higher cost of dining out rather than cooking at home), so we tried to manage food costs by eating simple lunches at local take-away places, avoiding the corporate fast food chains. I was getting tired of salami/proscuitto & cheese plates, but the typical "quick" option was usually a panini (sandwich). At first I tried to find alternatives to paninis, but the available salads were designed for side dishes, not main meals and rarely had any protein, and the fillings of the expensive sandwiches were too skimpy to just eat without the bread. So I started to eat panini, although I sometimes removed as much as half of the bread (though it was nearly always very excellent quality pan toasted flatbreads or crusty baguette rolls, not sliced America bread). So of course, my post-prandial BGs rose, as did my FBG. I also found my hunger tended to come back much too soon and I think overall I ate more than usual in terms of volume.

Then we deviated from the "Italian" lunch foods and found a better midday meal option (quick, cheaper, and easier to customize for LC) - stopping at one of the numerous kebab shops and ordering a kebab plate with salad, hold the bread (not Italian, but still Mediterranean, I guess). I felt much better fueled on kebab plates (more filling and enough protein) than paninis, though I must say I still appreciated the taste of caprese paninis (slices of fresh mozzerella and tomato, basil leaves, mustard dressing on crusty, pan-toasted flat bread). If I followed my appetite, I could have eaten two caprese paninis.

We had some great evening dinners, at places also frequented by locals. This often was a fixed price dinner of several courses ("we feed you what we want you to eat"). Multi-course meals included house wine, and invariably consisted of antipasta (usually LC, such as a cold meat and cheese plate), pasta course (much smaller servings than typical US pasta dishes), main course plus some side vegetables, and dessert/coffee. These were often the best meals we experienced, full of local flavor and tradition (sometimes with a grandmotherly type doing the cooking), and definitely of very good quality, though we noticed the saltiness overall tended to be on the high side. I ate from every course, including some of the excellent bread (dipped in plenty of olive oil) and usually about half of the pasta served (2 oz dry?), plus about half of the dessert. After these meals I always ran BGs higher than usual, varying from moderately high (120-160 - at home I would consider this very high for me) to very high (over 180). By late in the week, my FBG was into the 115 range every morning (usually I can keep it 90-100 on LC food). Nearly everything that week was delicious, well-prepared food, but the high carb items definitely were not good for my BG control in the long run.

And most days I was doing plenty of walking, sprinting for the Metro subway trains, stair climbing (4th and 5/6th floor hotel rooms!), etc. but since I didn't have my usual housework to do, it probably wasn't too different from my usual exertion level.

So it was very interesting to experience the "Mediterranean Diet" first hand. Meats and cheeses were plentiful, fruits and vegetables played a much more minor role (main courses didn't come with vegetables other than what was in the sauce, but had to be ordered as additional items), but the overall carbs were decidedly too many. As I expected, it wasn't nearly as pasta-heavy as is portrayed in the US media/health press, but it is still full of too much grain and sugar, IMO. Low fat has become the norm in many dairy products, sadly, and if the grocery stores are any indication, modern families are gravitating towards highly processed, industrial foods. Sugar seems to be in everything (I quickly learned to order my caffe freddo con panno or latte sensa zuccero - iced coffee with cream or milk without sugar) after realizing that adding lots of sugar was the norm).

And, after several days of breakfasting at the café near our Rome hotel (where carbs were the only option in the morning), I learned that our very buff, muscular, very flat-stomached, café owner doesn't eat pasta (said as he proudly patted his 6 pack abs). I probably could have stuck closer to the carb intake I know works better for my BG control, but I figured if I was going to go off my LC way of eating and experiment, this was the time and place.

And yes, there were far fewer really obese people than in the US and lots of very slender people, but I could still see there were *plenty* of overweight, probably pre-diabetic and diabetic Italians (very visible problems with lower extremities, ranging from what looked like diabetic skin issues, walking problems, acanthosis nigricans, etc.). Older people do seem to be generally more fit than in the US (fit from everyday life, not exercise regimes), but there were plenty of "wheat bellies" on men old and young, even more young women with "muffin tops", and simply too many overweight children (very worrisome trend). So it may well be more the relaxed Italian way of living life (or a combination of other factors such as less air conditioning, strong family bonds, lots of sun, etc?) that keeps Italian CVD rates lower than the American rates, more than the mythical "Mediterranean diet".

Who is your doctor?


Primary care physicians are the initial entry point for healthcare for the majority of Americans.

Develop pneumonia; go to your family or internal medicine physician (internist) to be prescribed an antibiotic. Need your blood pressure or cholesterol checked? Develop a sore knee or swelling in your leg? Once again, go to your primary care physician.

Image courtesy Dedde'


Primary care physicians are a patient’s guide to a bewildering array of technology and specialists. If you require a specific diagnostic test or consultation with a specialist, your primary care physician will help you navigate through the maze, choosing the path that is best for you. He or she will order a chest x-ray for a cough and fever, provide vaccines to prevent flu or pneumococcal pneumonia, perform an annual physical. If you require hospitalization, your primary care physician will admit you. He or she will order diagnostic tests like MRI’s, ultrasounds, x-rays, and blood testing, usually performed in the hospital or a hospital-owned facility. If you require the services of a gastroenterologist, orthopedist, general surgeon, or neurologist, your primary care physician will refer you to the appropriate specialist.

That’s how it’s supposed to work, at least in principle. In fact, during the first eight decades of the 20th century, it did work that work way for the most part. Your primary care physician acted not just as a provider of healthcare, but as your advocate, someone who knew you and worked to protect your welfare. Your family doctor often knew your parents, maybe even delivered you at birth, and cared for your children. His children often went to the same schools as your children. He and his family lived in the same town and sometimes went to the same church.

That hardly happens any more. It’s more likely you got the name of your primary care physician from a doctor referral service provided by a hospital. Or you picked a name off a list provided by your health insurer. It’s also common to see one doctor, only to see another a year later. Two, three, or more different primary care physicians over a five-year period are common. Doctors come and go, since physician turnover in clinics and practices has been on the increase for years. Insurance companies frequently force policyholders to change doctors, requiring you to choose from a list.

The end result of this shuffling of primary care is increasing impersonality of the relationship. You probably don’t know your primary care physician outside of the 10-minute interaction you had six months ago. She probably never met your mother and will likely not care for your children. Two years from now, she will likely not be your doctor any more, replaced by someone else who obtains the details of your health from a chart. Your chart is more likely to be electronic, with the details of your health history listed in a checklist. There’s little room to detail the idiosyncrasies and quirks of your unique personality or health profile. Throw into this impersonal equation the fact that many doctors have become scared of patients because of potential for lawsuits, often over the most trivial of issues, or because of an error of oversight or misdiagnosis.

This flawed and impersonal system, though emotionally unsatisfying, can still work if each doctor who assumes a patient’s care maintains the ethic of putting health and welfare above all.

But what if your primary care physician is not just an advocate for your welfare, but is a representative of the hospital? What if there are hidden, unspoken financial incentives paid to your doctor to direct you to the hospital for diagnostic testing, hospitalization, and referral to specialists? If a headache becomes a $4800 MRI, or chest pain becomes a $4200 nuclear stress test, then a $14,000 heart catheterization, your primary care physician becomes the purveyor of far greater financial opportunity for the hospital. The entire interaction, founded on the proposition that your doctor actually cares about you, collapses in a heap of financially motivated testing and procedures. It appears to work, and you and your family can still obtain access to healthcare. The problem is that you’re likely to get too much of it.

This message has not been lost on the shrewd administrators at hospitals. Take a look at the ranks of primary care physicians who refer patients to some of your local hospitals. It is typical that a hospital system maintains several hundred primary care physicians on their payroll, all of whom are expected to refer patients to the hospital, cardiologists, and other proceduralists. Why so many?

Most primary care physicians today have signed contracts with a hospital. In other words, they are employees of the hospital. This practice is not unusual: the American Medical Association reported that 4 of 5 primary care physicians are now bound by such employment arrangements across the U.S. In effect, 80% of primary care physicians are legally bound by contract to direct patients to cardiologists who work at hospitals.

On top of contractual obligations, there are financial incentives for the volume of procedures that are generated as a result of referrals. The more procedures generated from an internist’s or family practitioner’s practice, the greater the end-of-year productivity bonus will be, not uncommonly totaling tens of thousands of dollars. Dr. Ted Phillips (not his real name, since he declined to allow me to use it) received a bonus check of $9,437 this year for his “productivity,” defined murkily as the return on specialist referrals. While the bonus may have helped him pay for his son’s college tuition, it clearly was a situation that made him acutely uncomfortable when asked.

Several primary care physicians are also quietly dismissed every year from the ranks of employed physicians for not maintaining a minimum flow of patients into the system.

Another hazardous point of entry: Many patients enter the hospital through the emergency room (ER). A patient in the emergency room is at his or her most vulnerable, seeking help for an urgent complaint and usually willing to accept whatever the ER physician advises. Hospitals know this. That’s why many systems insist that the ER physicians be employees of the hospital, with their practice habits subject to control. A patient goes to the ER with chest pain or breathlessness. The worst thing that can happen from a financial standpoint is for the patient to be evaluated and discharged. For this reason, a growing number of hospitals employ ER physicians, then proceed to legislate practice patterns. Consulting a cardiologist is strongly encouraged, since they generally provide access to the downstream revenue-producing procedures offered in the hospital. That way, what might have been a four hour, $2500 ER visit is converted into a $10,000 to $40,000 hospital stay, even when nothing was wrong in the first place. There are millions of people nationwide who have the hospital bills to prove it after being discharged with a diagnosis of indigestion.

Caveat emptor: Buyer beware.

The “Heart Healthy” scam

Like many scams, this one follows a predictable formula.

It is a formula widely practiced among food manufacturers, ever since food products began to jockey for position based on nutritional composition and purported health benefits.

First, identify a component of food, such as wheat fiber or oat bran, that confers a health benefit. Then, validate the healthy effect in clinical studies. Wheat fiber, for instance, promotes bowel regularity and reduces the likelihood of colon cancer. Oat bran reduces blood cholesterol levels.

Second, commercialize food products that contain the purported healthy ingredient. Wheat bran becomes Shredded Wheat, Fiber One, and Raisin Bran cereals and an endless choice of “healthy” breads. Oat bran becomes Honey Bunches of Oats, Quaker’s Instant Oatmeal, and granola bars. Even if many unhealthy components are added, as long as the original healthy product is included, the manufacturer continues to lay claim to healthy effects.

Third, as long as the original healthy ingredient remains, get an agency like the American Heart Association to provide an endorsement: “American Heart Association Tested and Approved.”

The last step is the easiest: just pay for it, provided the product meets a set of requirements, no matter how lax.

You will find the American Heart Association certification on Quaker Instant Oatmeal Crunch Apples and Cinnamon. Each serving contains 39 grams carbohydrate, 16 grams sugar (approximately 4 teaspoons), and 2.5 grams fat of which 0.5 grams are saturated. Ingredients include sugar, corn syrup, flaked corn, and partially hydrogenated cottonseed oil. Curiously, of the 4 grams of fiber per serving, only 1 gram is the soluble variety, the sort that reduces cholesterol blood levels. (This relatively trivial quantity of soluble fiber is unlikely to impact significantly on cholesterol levels, since a minimum 3 grams of soluble fiber is the quantity required, as demonstrated in a number of clinical studies.) Nonetheless, this sugar product proudly wears the AHA endorsement.

Thus, a simple component of food that provides genuine benefit mushrooms into a cornucopia of new products with added ingredients: sugar, high fructose corn syrup, corn starch, carageenan, raisins, wheat flour, preservatives, hydrogenated oils, etc. What may have begun as a health benefit can quickly deteriorate into something that is patently unhealthy.

There’s a clever variation on this formula. Rather than developing products that include a healthy component, create products that simply lack an unhealthy ingredient, such as saturated or trans fats or sodium.

Thus, a ¾-cup serving of Cocoa Puffs cereal contains 120 calories, no fiber, 14 grams (3 ½ teaspoons) of sugar—but is low in fat and contains no saturated fat. Proudly displayed on the box front is an American Heart Association stamp of approval. It earned this stamp of approval because Cocoa Puffs was low in saturated, trans, and total fat and sodium. Likewise, Cookie Crisp cereal, featuring Chip the Wolf, a cartoon wolf in a red sweater (“The great taste of chocolate chip cookies and milk!”), has 160 calories, 26 grams carbohydrate and 19 grams (4½ teaspoons) of sugar per cup, and 0 grams fiber—but only 1.0 gram fat, none saturated, thus the AHA check mark. (Promise margarine, made with hydrogenated vegetable oil and therefore containing significant quantities of trans fats, was originally on the list, as well, but removed when the trans fat threshold was added to the AHA criteria.)

It is this phenomenon, the sleight of hand of taking a healthy component and tacking on a list of ingredients manageable only by food scientists, or asserting that a product is healthy just because it lacks a specific undesirable ingredient, that is a major factor in the extraordinary and unprecedented boom in obesity in the U.S. Imagine the chemical industry were permitted such latitude: “Our pesticide is deemed safe by the USDA because it contains no PCBs.” Such is the ill-conceived logic of the AHA Heart-Check program the "Heart Healthy" claims.

It’s best we keep in mind the observations of New York University nutritionist and author of the book, Food Politics, Marion Nestle, that “food companies—just like companies that sell cigarettes, pharmaceuticals, or any other commodity—routinely place the needs of stock holders over considerations of public health. Food companies will make and market any product that sells, regardless of its nutritional value or its effect on health. In this regard, food companies hardly differ from cigarette companies. They lobby Congress to eliminate regulations perceived as unfavorable; they press federal regulatory agencies not to enforce such regulations; and when they don’t like regulatory decisions, they file lawsuits. Like cigarette companies, food companies co-opt food and nutrition experts by supporting professional organizations and research, and they expand sales by marketing directly to children, members of minority groups, and people in develop countries—whether or not the products are likely to improve people’s diets.”

Qualms over just how heart-healthy their products are? Doubtful.

Exploitation of trust

Once upon a time, the tobacco industry was guilty of conducting a widespread, systematic, highly organized campaign to deliver their product to as much of the unsuspecting public as possible.

As clinical data mounted linking smoking and health problems like cancer and heart disease, tobacco producers labored fiercely to counter these claims despite darkening public sentiment. When individual company executives were questioned on why they continued to perpetuate the industry’s scandalous practices, the invariable justification offered was “Well, I had to pay my mortgage.” That tidy ends-justifies-the-means rationalization has a familiar ring when you examine the behavior of those in the heart "industry."

Things are not what they seem. The hospital, once an institution to serve the sick, a place for clergy, volunteers, and other altruists, has evolved into a business serving a thriving bottom line. You are the “product” they seek. The cardiologist, ostensibly in the service of alleviating heart disease, instead seeks to grow his checkbook by performing procedures that have nothing to do with lessening the burden of heart disease. He dives into the water to save drowning victim after drowning victim, but fails to simply toss in the life preserver that has been close at hand all along.

The woeful family practitioner, who is expected to bear undue responsibility for the broad spectrum of health, ignorantly permits heart disease to grow under his or her nose and, by default, allows heart disease to become the exclusive province of the proceduralist. Worse, the family practitioner or internist in the employ of the hospital (a situation that has quietly grown to encompass 80% of all primary care physicians) labors to fatten hospital business by directing patients into hospital services. The comparative lowly incomes of the primary care physician are substantially supplemented by participating in this huge revenue-generating machine called heart care.

The astounding grasp of the system has caused one of every 10 adults in the U.S. to have undergone a heart procedure. The lemming-like procession to the hospital creates a crowd mentality among some sectors of the frightened public. “My friends and neighbors have all had bypass operations. Sooner or later I guess it’s going to be my turn.”

Tragically, the system has grown through the exploitation of trust. The faith we have in doctors, hospitals, and the institutions and people associated with healthcare has been subverted into the service of profit. Many practitioners and institutions choose to operate under the guise of doing good, but instead capitalize on the public’s willingness to accept as fact the need for major heart procedures and all its associated costly trappings.

Bait and switch

"When banks compete, you win.”

The TV ad opens with a 60-something man sitting in his living room, talking to a three-piece suit-clad, 30-something banker. The older man is explaining to the dismayed younger man why he’s going to use Lending Tree loan service for a home loan.

“But Dad, I’m you’re son!” the younger whines.

Many of Lending Tree’s clients have collaborated in filing a multi-million dollar class action suit against the company, claiming “bait and switch” tactics. They claim that home buyers are lured by low interest rates or low closing costs on a home loan. Once the buyer concludes the hassle of filling out numerous forms, the suit accuses Lending Tree of making a switch to a costlier loan.

Bait and switch is among the oldest con games around. If you’ve ever bought a car from a car dealer, chances are you’ve had your own little brush with this deception. The ad promises the SUV you’ve wanted for only $299 per month. Only, once you get there, the salesman informs you that only a limited number of special deals were available and they’ve run out. But he’s still got a really good deal right over here!

Most of us recognize that we’ve been hookwinked. Yet we still go along and buy a car from the dealer.

What if it’s not a sleazy salesman behind the pitch, but a physician. If it’s hard to resist the sales pitch at the car dealership, it can be near impossible to ignore the advice of your doctor. But the truth is often loud and clear: in many instances, it is a genuine, bona fide, and fully-certified scam.

Among the most common bait-and-switch heart scams: Your cholesterol is high. The sequence of subsequent testing is well-rehearsed. “Gee, Bob, I’m worried about your risk for heart disease. Let’s schedule you for a nuclear stress test.”

The stress test, like 20% or more of them, is “falsely positive,” meaning abnormal even though there’s nothing wrong with you. Another 30% are equivocal, not clearly abnormal but also not clearly normal. Now up to 50% of people tested “need” a heart catheterization in the hospital to clarify this frightening uncertainty. You might end up with a stent or two, even bypass surgery. Your simple $20 cholesterol panel has metamorphosed into $100,000 in hospital procedures.

That familiar sequence is followed thousands of times, seven days a week, 365 days a year.

If a disease lacks a procedure . . . create one

Congestive heart failure is among the most common diagnoses in the hospital nowadays.

Congestive heart failure is the result of injury to the heart muscle such as that occurring during heart attack, viral infections of the heart (myocarditis), poorly controlled high blood pressure, and a smattering of other rare causes. Eight million Americans with congestive heart failure account for over one million hospital admissions annually (AHA Update, 2007). It has become so common, in fact, that it has ranked as number one cause for hospital admission for the last several years.

Heart failure is a frightening condition causing the sufferer to gasp for breath. Excess fluid accumulates in the lungs, amplifying the work of breathing and imparting a feeling of unease. Some heart failure sufferers struggle to the point of blacking out or requiring mechanical ventilation on a respirator.

There are a number of standard treatments for heart failure that usually rapidly rescue the patient from the brink of respiratory failure. These generally consist of intravenous diuretics that force the kidney to clear excess water rapidly, medications to increase heart muscle strength, and other treatments. It’s not uncommon for a heart failure patient to drop 10–20 lbs. in water weight with treatment. The treatments are quite effective for the majority of patients with rapid relief of the breathlessness generally obtained within hours.

However, the problem with congestive heart failure is not generally the rapidity or effectiveness of acutely providing relief, it is the chronic recurring nature of the disease. Someone can come to the hospital, obtain prompt treatment with relief of the breathlessness within 48–72 hours, only to return to the hospital in several weeks with a recurrence of the same process.

As common as congestive heart is in hospitals, it has also presented the perennial problem: how to convert this frequent reason for hospitalization into a profit opportunity. Some people who experience heart failure will undergo the usual sequence of heart procedures of heart catheterization, stents, bypass surgery, valve surgery, etc. But, because heart failure tends to be a repeatedly recurring event, even patients tire of the “need” for heart procedures. Then how can more heart failure occurrences be converted into profitable events?

A unique principle operates in the medical device market: If a disease lacks a procedure . . . create one.

Several problems are solved by such a principle. First, procedures are much more generously reimbursed by insurers than standard medical care without procedures. Two, the physician is provided an opportunity to also bill at a higher level. Third, patients often love the more dramatic, heroic nature of procedures, whether or not there is true benefit.

To the rescue of the poorly reimbursed area of congestive heart failure walks a Minnesota company called CHF Solutions, Inc., manufacturers of the Aquadex device.

Cost? $14,500 plus $900 per filter every time a patient gets one treatment. The Aquadex works by a decades-old process called ultrafiltration, used for many years but used principally for kidney failure not severe enough to require regular dialysis. New York cardiologist Howard Levin simply adapted the process, using smaller catheters inserted into the arm veins, in 2000. As in conventional ultrafiltration, blood is taken from the body from a catheter, passed through a filter that removes excess water, then returned to the body.

This is a serious effort. Dr. Levin raised $51 million in venture backing on top of $12 million seed capital. The device sailed through the Food & Drug Administration in June 2002, since it was labeled a newer form of ultrafiltration, thereby obtaining approval through the FDA’s 501k rule, a minor modification of existing technology. (Many truly technologically unique devices do come to market and therefore require the full process of FDA approval, a generally lengthy and costly process for devices. However, there’s another way: bill a device as “substantially equivalent” to an existing technology and the approval process is relatively quick and easy.)

In an industry publication, Cath Lab Digest, Dr. Levin was interviewed in February, 2003, and proclaimed, “We can treat many of the symptoms of heart failure, but we’re a long ways off from a cure. That’s why new technologies are so exciting, such as LVADs for the very sickest heart failure patients; biventricular pacing for the small subset of patients who seem to benefit from it; and simplified ultrafiltration such as the System 100 that can be applied to a broad range of congestive heart failure patients with fluid overload. “

What does this have to do with heart scans and heart disease reversal? Nothing-directly. I highlight this phenomenon because it caricatures how things work in medicine and health care in general, more so in cardiovascular diseases in which the profit motive is especially deeply ingrained. Focus on a need, then generate a profitable treatment for it. Profits are what drive growth, marketing, sales, and expansion into new revenue-generating niches.

Sadly, the reverse principle does not work: Replace profitable procedures with unprofitable strategies, regardless of their effectiveness. Replacing coronary angioplasty and coronary stent implantation, or bypass surgery, with intensive prevention efforts is no easy matter. Just witness the enormous resistance to the concept of early heart disease detection achieved with heart scans. A day doesn’t go by without a major media outlet bashing heart scans, or confusing them with CT coronary angiograms with claims of excessive radiation.

But the mounting volume of criticisms against heart scans also means that they are gaining some traction in mainstream thinking. But will there be a day when they replace the need for profitable procedures? I believe they will, when coupled with a powerful program of prevention, but don’t hold your breath.
Fasting with green tea

Fasting with green tea

I've been playing around with brief (18-24 hour) fasts with the use of green tea. Of the several variations on fasting, such as juice "fasts,"  I've been most impressed with the green tea experience.

While the weight loss effects of daily green tea consumption are modest, there seems to be a specific satiety effect that has now been demonstrated in multiple studies, such as this and this. In other words, green tea, through an uncertain mechanism, reduces hunger. The effect is not just due to volume, since the effect cannot be reproduced with hot water alone.

I therefore wondered whether green tea might be a useful beverage to consume during a fast, as it might take the "edge" off of hunger. While hunger during a fast in the wheat-free is far less than wheat-consuming humans, there is indeed an occasional twinge of hunger felt.

So I tried it, brewing a fresh 6-8 oz cup evert two hours or so. I brewed a pot in the morning while at home, followed by brewing single cups using my tea infuser at the office. Whenever I began to experience a hunger pang, I brewed another cup and sipped it. I was pleasantly surprised that hunger was considerably reduced. I sailed through my last 18 hours, for instance, effortlessly. The process was actually quite pleasant.

I brew loose Chinese bancha, sencha, and chunmee teas and Japanese gyokuro tea. Gyokuro is my favorite, but also the most expensive. Bancha is more affordable and I've used that most frequently.

If anyone else gives this a try, please report back your experience.

Comments (34) -

  • Phyllis

    6/1/2011 12:04:50 AM |

    I would like to know if this works with iced green tea as well. I used a method of one meal per day to loose 50+ pounds. I found it pretty easy, all in all, but have regained about 20 now and need to get back on it. I think I will give iced green tea a try! (I'm not crazy about hot green tea, but like it fine iced)

  • preserve

    6/1/2011 12:09:56 AM |

    I use tea as a method of extending eating intervals.  It works well.  I'm sure a lot of it has to do with the "upper" effect.  Ie.  uppers reduce appetite as a result of blocked sensory.

    I find fasting and sensory blocking to be counter-productive.

  • Geoffrey Levens, L.Ac.

    6/1/2011 12:33:19 AM |

    May be other effects but caffeine and it's cousin theobromine in the tea are pretty reliable appetite suppressants.  But isn't getting jacked up (even if only a little) a bit counter productive to some of the potential benefits of fasting?  The idea is to rest your physiology while catabolism is in full swing. Activating the sympathetic nervous system so you don't have to experience the sensations you don't like during the early stages of fasting does not seem to me to really promote that.

  • fredt

    6/1/2011 1:09:29 AM |

    Yes, green tea reduces my hunger; I just use Tetley in the bag. Some of the greens do not have a satiating effect on me, nor do any of the black teas. Coffee increases hunger for me. Bullion cubes or OXO packets also help. I make a 1.5 l thermos, and suck on that until its done. Some days 3 or 4 of them in a day. I think I have more hunger than most people, but I am down 55 kgs, 2 to 4 years ago and have been down for 2 years.

    The other thing that helps me is chew-able Vitamin C, a couple of 500s any time I feel hungry. It seems to raise BG, possible due to BG sparing, as it is required for far oxidation, or inside cell far transport, depending on who is explaining. Two 500's raise my BG form 4.0 to 5.3 -- OK US 72 to 95.
    I am off wheat mostly; occasionally Clam chowder, sausages, and a few crackers for low BG issues. One cracker raises BG 1.5 at 15 mins.

    Thanks for the one hour BG idea. Some of my higher protein meals were a problem, like 280 Calories of canned salmon ran my BG to 9.0 (OK 162). And my doctor says I an not diabetic but my a.m. BG sure is erratic, 4.0 to 6.2 this week.

  • Sharon

    6/1/2011 2:22:06 AM |

    Hey Phyllis, I'm with you. I have been drinking 4 cups green tea made with tea bags and then chilled and have noticed that I'm not as hungry but didn't really connect it with the tea itself. I need to lose 50 lbs and I like the idea of one meal a day.

  • Scott P.

    6/1/2011 2:24:11 AM |

    Green tea, or any tea actually, makes me a little ill on an empty stomach.  Not sure but believe it is the tannins.  I also was consuming a lot of green/white tea while fasting and I just felt really acidic and my face got red splotches, which seems to coincide with acidity.  I know the net result is supposed to be alkaline for green/white tea but that has not been my experience.  Recently, I've been adding a tablespoon of apple cider vinager to a cup of warm water.  Went a fairly easy 18 hours today but did break down and had four or five macadamia nuts around 12 hours in.

  • MAS

    6/1/2011 2:44:37 AM |

    I absolutely drink green and lightly oxidized oolongs during my fasts.   It curbs the hunger and provides focus.  Been doing it for 2.5 years.

  • Dr. William Davis

    6/1/2011 2:49:43 AM |

    After millennia of human starvation, to think that we still have tons to learn about fasting used for health purposes!

    Phyllis--While I've not tried it personally, nor do I know of any formal data, I expect that iced green tea--provided it is real brewed green tea, and not the bottled variety--should work every bit as well.

  • Dianne - TPSW

    6/1/2011 1:28:40 PM |

    I am unable to drink green tea at all on an empty stomach, I will absolutely throw up if I do.  I end up with pullovertothesideoftheroadI'mgoingtopukeyesseriously!".   I actually threw up all over my suit once which was really special.  Green tea with food often makes me queasy as well.  I am allergic to oak so I think there may be a tannin connection as some heavy oak wines are problematic for me.

  • Anne

    6/1/2011 4:46:28 PM |

    I am making today a fast day. I have been drinking a mix of green and white tea but it is decaffeinated.  How often should one fast?

  • Jonathan Carey

    6/1/2011 5:58:30 PM |

    For those who get dizzy on green tea, try puerh tea.  It is a fermented green tea that is also much lower in caffeine and it taste much better than green.  It is the equivalent of drinking an aged red wine over 2 buck chuck.

  • JLL

    6/2/2011 11:27:49 AM |

    This question has been around for quite some time,  but no one seems to know the answer for certain.

    Theoretically at least, consuming antioxidants during fasting could be detrimental to autophagy (removing "junk" cells), since antioxidants might suppress the stress response from fasting. This is why some studies show antioxidants and exercise are a bad combination -- you *want* some stress to happen so that the body can adapt to it.

    Then again, there is the theory that small amounts of antioxidants actually work through the same mechanism as fasting and exercise -- hormesis. In which case fasting + antioxidants might complement each other. But that's just speculation.

    What we do know from studies is that green tea seems to increase weight loss, for example when combined with calorie restriction (and thus should apply to fasting):

    http://inhumanexperiment.blogspot.com/2009/04/green-tea-increases-weight-loss-during.html

    And when combined with exercise:

    http://inhumanexperiment.blogspot.com/2009/03/green-tea-extract-increases-insulin.html
    http://inhumanexperiment.blogspot.com/2009/02/green-tea-extract-enhances-abdominal.html

    And when combined with capsaicin (from chilli pepper), it reduces the feeling of hunger and thus calorie intake:

    http://inhumanexperiment.blogspot.com/2009/04/green-tea-and-capsaicin-reduce-hunger.html

    So all in all, whatever the mechanism is, if you're fasting just for the sake of losing weight, I'd say green tea is a pretty good bet.

    - JLL

  • Paul Lee

    6/2/2011 12:21:31 PM |

    Would depend on the length of fasts, but the East Stop East method advocates two fasts per week.  My fasts are now usually shorter, as they kind of trained me to stop grazing. I usually don't bother with breakfast now. The more you eat, the more you want to eat sometimes.

  • nina

    6/2/2011 8:10:00 PM |

    I'm subscribed to your blog, but since  you changed format the posts haven't been showing up in my mail box.  I tried to re-subscribe, but am told I'm already subscribed.  How do I get back in the loop?

    Nina

  • Dr. William Davis

    6/3/2011 1:31:00 AM |

    Anyone not receiving email versions of this blog:

    I wonder if the shift over to the new platform caused a few glitches. My blog IT help is out of commission temporarily. Therefore, please sign up again at the top.

    Sorry about that.

  • Dr. Mary Taylor, PT, DPT

    6/3/2011 6:41:41 PM |

    Yes, I completely agree with you! I went 90% wheat and sugar free from November 2010 to February 2011 and lost a whopping 2 pounds. It wasn't until I went to 95% or more wheat free that I was able to start losing weight. I am now 100% wheat free and I have lost 36.2 pounds in 15 weeks. I have also been able to significantly cut my caloric intake to 500-700 calories per day (sometimes less than 500) using iced jasmine green tea. I truly believe that a diet that is lower in calories is better for health. I typically drink 6-8 glasses a day and I really enjoy it. It helps immensely with any hunger I may have and completely satisfies my sense to eat. I use any of the varieties available in tea bag (Numi, Two Leaves and a Bud, Stash, and Mighty Leaf are my favorites). I typically choose whatever's on sale. I also drink a full glass every morning prior to eating and that also seems to stimulate my colon which is a bonus as well when consuming such low caloric counts.

    On a cholesterol and BG level, my family genetics are something that should be studied. While I started my diet at 234.8# on 2/15/2011 (I'm 5'3" and 47 y/o female) my total cholesterol was 167 and my HDL was 54. My 102 y/o grandmother however, has a total cholesterol of 155 and an HDL of 115! My 76 y/o mother also has the same great results but her HDL is "only" 109. Neither of them are on any medication for cholesterol and both of them eat a diet fully based on things we berate on this blog (cookies, bread, ice cream, fried foods, etc). Neither are overweight either. I'm eager to see what my levels become when I reach my goal weight. Maybe I can surpass that HDL of 115!

  • nina

    6/3/2011 9:39:20 PM |

    I tried that before I posted and it tells me I'm already subscribed.

    Nina

  • Ron Saunders

    6/5/2011 8:06:56 AM |

    About 15 years ago I went on a fast and had only water.  The fast lasted for 10 days.  No green tea.  Just water.  After 18 hours, I completely lost any hunger.  Meanwhile I continued to cook meals for my family.  I also continued to go to work every day.

    The experience seemed wonderful.  I had been suffering badly from asthma, and all symptoms disappeared!  I could have kept going forever without eating.  However, after 10 days I started to have problems with urination.  I began excreting small, hard pellets.

    I went to the doctor, and he exploded.  "You bloody fool!" he said.  I had altered the ketone content of my blood.

    So I started eating again.  My first meal was brown rice (no salt).  It was the most beautiful meal I ever had.  Gradually I returned to normal eating.  Gradually I returned to my asthma symptoms. Gradually all meals started tasting the same.

    Did I lose weight?  I'm not sure, as my ketone problem overshadowed all else.  Did I need green tea or anything else to curb my appetite?  No, plain water (not even distilled or bottled water, but tap water) was good enough. Do I recommend fasting?  In moderation.  10 days is far too long.

  • Gabriella Kadar

    6/6/2011 3:20:06 AM |

    Is the fluoride content of any tea (Camellia sinensis) not an issue?  Data on ppm fluoride vary but they all appear to be quite high and much higher than water fluoridation levels.

  • David

    6/7/2011 8:37:20 PM |

    Try Jasmine Tea which is green tea with Jasmine flowers.  Much tastier.
    I don't like plain green tea myself, but I love Jasmine tea.

  • Renfrew

    6/8/2011 8:08:38 AM |

    There is only one problem with green tea: Pesticides.
    Most green tea is imported from India or China because it is the cheapest. On testing, a serious amount of pesticides, fungicides, microcides is found regularly. I wonder if this diminishes the health aspect of green tea.
    I used to buy organic green tea from Japan but after Fukushima that option is also out.
    Still, certified organic is the only option left, I suppose.
    Renfrew

  • nina

    6/8/2011 8:04:07 PM |

    Just tried again and I get the same message 'You're already subscribed'.  Pity that Feedburner no longer delivers to me.

    Nina

  • GaryR

    6/9/2011 9:43:01 AM |

    Started IF HFLC diet three months ago. 30 lbs lost and A1c down to
    5.1 !! (was 6.7 ) . Curiously I have been drinking green tea during the daily 18 hour fasts and hunger is a rare occurance,  hunger pains last only a few seconds. The tea helps,  body and mind trained to not think about food until
    nightly free for all. Thank you, Dr. Davis and contributors>

  • majkinetor

    6/9/2011 1:37:31 PM |

    2 Gabriella

    Flouride IS an issue with green tea. There are known cases of flourde poisoning with excessive green tea drinking - woman drinking equivalent of 20-30 green tea cups per day. This isn't something to worry about on regular usage but if you do it on IF with reduced nutrient input and more frequently to reduce appetite it can become a problem.

    White tea has lower content of fluoride as it is harvested when plant is still young. It is much more expensive but overall better then green tea due to less processing and lower fluoride content.

    Coffee works for me absolutely amazing in reducing hunger. To some people, however, it works the opposite way. My friend develops hand tremor, nervousness, and heat. The same thing she got from the green tea but not other teas. Caffeine might be problematic for some I guess, or maybe tannin. We are currently in the process of isolation of such substance.

    To reduce appetite, I found the following valuable:
    - Garlic, fresh, in tomato juice (parsley can be included to block the smell). The capsule doesn't work.
    - High intensity exercise, short bursts of 15-20 minutes will shut down digestive engine and you will not be able to eat for hour at least.
    - Marijuana restriction - its usage during fat loss might be problematic due to activation of CB1/anandamide system.
    - Periodic IF can learn body to handle prolonged food abstinence. I find that 16-24 hours fast is enough.
    - Almonds, 10-15g, are cool, especially if you tend to go crazy before sleep - its mostly fat which doesn't rise insulin during night. 2g CHO, 3.5g MUFA, 1g PUFA, 2g P is enough to make your hunger go down at least a bit and still keep your insulin down.
    - Water

    I would suggest extensive supplementation during IF - especially Vit C (at least 2g as frequent as possible), Mg, Iodine, Selenium, Idebenon.

  • Sifter

    6/10/2011 4:13:39 AM |

    Drs. Davis or Taylor (or anyone else) have you noticed any issues with accumulated caffeine intake from multiple cups of Green Tea throughout the day?

  • Cate

    6/12/2011 8:22:10 PM |

    Dr. Davis, I hadn't heard about the dangers of pesticide use relating to green tea (as mentioned by Renfew, above)...is this a viable concern?  Since green tea is loaded with antioxidants, do the benefits outweigh the risks in this case?

    I have been drinking about two to three cups of Tazo Zen Green Tea for quite awhile now (hot, as well as chilled), and enjoy it very much.  It does seem to curb cravings quite well.  I also notice increased energy without the edgy side effects that coffee sometimes causes.  Before Tazo, I was not a big fan of the taste of green tea, but the Zen blend also contains lemon verbena, spearmint leaves and lemongrass, which enhances the flavor and makes it quite delicious--providing an "aromatherapy experience" along with the tea consumption.  Smile

  • Evolutionarily

    6/21/2011 7:28:23 AM |

    Thank you for your informative comment JLL!

  • azzy

    6/27/2011 12:15:19 PM |

    me too!i keep hearing about green tea for fasting, so i took it on day 2 i think and was detoxing to fast cos i took it on a empty stomach....:/

  • Logan

    9/15/2011 7:56:34 PM |

    I drink the Tazo Zen Green Tea from Starbucks. I prefer this green tea over any others, however I have noticed extreme dizziness when I drink this tea. Has anyone experienced this? I even bought the tea bags to brew at home, I do not add any sweetener and love the taste. I occasionally drink black tea or soda and do not get the same dizzy feeling, therefore I believe it is not caffeine causing me to feel dizzy it's just green tea. Any suggestions or comments? I like the benefits of green tea but not sure it's worth the dizziness.

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/16/2011 2:36:08 AM |

    Wacky. No, I'm not sure why this happens.

    Perhaps its some mixture or proportion of the theaflavins or other components. There are hundreds of green tea preparations available. It might be worth finding a happy alternative.

  • Wendy Rahilly

    11/25/2011 3:50:05 PM |

    I have been using green tea for years in weight loss.  You are right, it is not a "speedy" remedy and you will only recognize small affects it has, however, it does work.  On average, it is said that you can burn anywhere from 70 to 80 calories a day drinking green tea.  This is assuming you are drinking at least 3 to 4 cups daily.  It should be combined with water and a healthy diet and exercise.

  • Dr. H

    10/27/2012 11:38:52 AM |

    About the dizziness, I had severe vertigo in the middle of the night, i.e. at 3 am (my blood pressure was 130/100 pr 90), and the day and the night before sleeping, I consumed 4 mugs of green tea. The vertigo was associated with vomiting (which relieved the vertigo for a while). The vertigo lasted till the next day (vomited 4x). The green tea was a gift from a friend who came back from China-loose dried leaves. After that episode, I think I can't make myself to drink green tea again.

  • Jennifer

    2/20/2013 7:12:45 AM |

    I sometimes do a morning 'flush' of green tea, up to 4 freshly brewed mugfuls, with the addition of a squeeze of fresh lemon, which complements the taste and gives extra benefits, vitamin c and supporting detoxification.

    I recently saw a BBC documentary which demonstrated an optimal brew time of 7 minutes for maximum anti-oxidant release.

    Also, the cooled teabags are an excellent beauty treatment for the eye area, squeeze excess moisture and relax for a few minutes.

    Am reluctant to extend beyond midday due to stimulating effect of caffeine, how about switching to other teas that deliver other useful benefits? Ginger, fennel, liquorice come to mind.

    Blessings of health

Loading