No BS weight loss

If there's something out there on the market for weight loss, we've tried it. By we, I mean myself along with many people and patients around me willing to try various new strategies.

Maybe you say: "Well that's not a clinical trial. How can we know that there aren't small effects?"

Who cares about small effects? If a weight loss strategy causes you to lose 1.2 lbs over 3 months--who cares? Sure, it may count towards a slight measure of health in a 230 lb 5 ft 3 inch woman. But it is insufficient to engage that person's interest and keep them on track. That little result, in fact, will discourage interest in weight loss and cause someone to return to previous behaviors.

What I'm talking about is BIG weight loss--20 lbs the first month, 40 lbs over 4 months, 50-60 lbs over 6 months.

Right now, there are only three things that I know of that yield such enormous effects:

1) Elimination of wheat, cornstarch, and sugars

2) Thyroid normalization (I don't mean following what the laboratory says is "normal")

3) Intermittent fasting


Combine all three in various ways and the results are accelerated even more.

Self-directed health is ALREADY here

It can't happen.

People are too stupid/ignorant/lazy or simply don't care.

It is irresponsible. People will misuse, abuse, misdiagnose, fail to recognize all manner of medical conditions.



It's all true. Most of the medical establishment believes it. And it is self-fulfulling: If you believe it, it will happen.

But it's not true for everybody. If readers of this blog, for instance, were to view the conversations we have in our Track Your Plaque Forum, you would immediately recognize that we have a following that is more sophisticated and knowledgeable about coronary heart disease than 90% of cardiologists. That is really something. Perhaps they can't put in a stent or defibrillator, but they understand an enormous amount about this disease we are all trying to control and reverse, sufficient to seize control over much of their own healthcare for this process and related conditons.

Anyway, self-directed health is already here. And it's happening on an incredible scale.

Witness:

--Nutritional supplements--Now a $21 billion (annual revenues) phenomenon, booming sales of nutritional supplements are a powerful testimonial to the enthuasiasm of the public for self-directed health treatments. Sure, there are plenty of junk supplements out there, but there are also many spectacularly effective products. Information, not marketing, will help tell the difference. Over the long-run, the truth will win out.

The 1994 Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act has allowed the definition of “nutritional supplement” to be stretched to the limit. "Nutritional supplements" includes obviously non-nutritional (though still potentially interesting) products like the hormones pregnenolone, dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA), and melatonin to be sold on the same shelf as vitamin C. There are also amino acids, polysaccharides, minerals and trace minerals, herbal preparations, flavonoids, carotenoids, antioxidants, phytonutrients.

In fact, I believe that the nutritional supplement pipeline is likely to yield far more exciting and effective products than the drug research pipeline! And you will have access to all of it--without your doctor's involvement.

--Self-ordered laboratory testing--In every state except New York and California, an individual can obtain his or her own laboratory testing. New services are appearing to service this consumer segment. As more people become frustrated with the silly gatekeeping function of their primary care physician and as more people gain more control over some of their healthcare dollars through medical savings accounts, flex-spending, and high-deductible health insurance, more are shopping for cost-saving, self-ordered lab testing. Even at-home lab tests are becoming available, such as ZRT Lab tests we make available through Track Your Plaque.

(In California, a doctor's order, or an order from a health professional allowed to prescribe, is still required which, for most people, is just a formality. Just ask your doctor to sign the form with the tests you'd like. Only the most cretinous of physicians will refuse, in which case you should say goodbye. New York is the only state in the U.S. that still dunks women to see if they float, divines the entrails of sacrificial cows, and prohibits lab self-testing.)

--Self-ordered medical imaging--Heart scans, full body scans; ultrasound screening for abdominal aneurysms, carotid disease, osteoporosis such as that offered by LifeLine Screening (who does a great job). There's plenty of room here for entrepreneurial types to develop new services, though there will also be battles to fight with hospitals, radiologists, and others invested in the status quo. But it is happening and it will grow.

(By the way, since I've previously been accused of making bundles of money from medical imaging: I have never--NEVER--owned and do not currently own any medical imaging facility.)


So the question is not "will it happen?" It is already happening. The question is how fast will it grow to include a larger segment of the public? How much more of conventional healthcare can it include? How can we develop better unbiased information sources, untainted by marketing, that guide people through the maze of choices?

Fire your stockbroker, fire your doctor

Is it yet time to fire your doctor?

I advocate a model of self-directed health, a style of healthcare in which individuals have the right to direct his or her own healthcare with only the occasional assistance of a physician or healthcare provider.

Healthcare would not be the first industry that converted to such a self-directed model. Remember travel agents? Only 15 years ago, making travel plans meant calling your travel agent to book your arrangements. This was a flawed system, because they worked on commission, thereby impairing incentive to search for the best prices. You were, in effect, at their mercy.

The investment industry is another such example, though on a larger scale.

Up until the 1980s, individual investment was managed by a stockbroker or other money manager. Stockbrokers, analysts, and investment houses commanded the flow of investment in stocks, options, futures, commodities, etc. Individuals lacked access to the methods and knowledge that allowed them to manage their own portfolios. Individuals had no choice but to engage the services of a professional investor. This was also a flawed system. Like travel agents, stockbrokers worked on commission. We've all heard horror stories in which stockbrokers churned accounts, making thousands of dollars in commissions while their clients' portfolios shrunk.

That has all changed.

Today, the process has largely converted to discount brokers and online services used by individuals trading and managing their own portfolios. Stockbrokers and investment houses continue, of course, but are competing for a shrinking piece of the individual investment market. Independent investors now have access to investment tools that didn’t even exist 20 years ago. Companies like E-Trade and Ameritrade now command annual revenues of approximately $2 billion each.

Travel agents, stockbrokers . . . is healthcare next? Can we convert from the paternalistic, “I’m-the-doctor, you’re the patient” relationship to what in which you self-direct your own healthcare and turn to the healthcare system only in unique situations?

I believe that the same revolution that shook the investment industry in the 1980s will seize healthcare in the future. In fact, the transition to self-directed health will dwarf its investing counterpart. It will ripple more broadly through the fabric of American life. Health is a more complicated “product,” with more complex modes of delivery, and more varied levels of need than the investment industry.

I predict that the emergence of health directed by the individual, just as the emergence of self-directed investment, will dominate in the coming years.

While I hope you've already fired your stockbroker, and I doubt that anyone on the internet still uses a travel agent, I wouldn't yet fire your doctor altogether. But I believe that we are approaching a time in which you should begin to take control over your own health and begin to reduce reliance on doctors, drugs, and hospitals.

Blast small LDL to oblivion

Here's a graphic demonstration of the power of wheat elimination to reduce small LDL particles, now the number one cause for heart disease in the U.S.

Lee had suffered a stroke due to an atherosclerotic plaque in a brain artery. She also had plenty of coronary plaque with a heart scan score of 322.

Lee began with an LDL particle number (the "gold standard" for measuring LDL, far superior to conventional calculated LDL) of 2234 nmol/L. This is exceptionally high, the equivalent of an LDL cholesterol of 223 mg/dl (drop the last digit). Of this 2234 nmol/L, 90% were abnormally small, with 1998 nmol/L of small LDL particles.

Lee eliminated wheat products from her diet, as well as cutting out sugars and cornstarch. Six months later, her results:

LDL particle number: 1082 nmol/L--a 52% reduction from the starting value and equivalent to an LDL of 108 mg/dl. Small LDL: zero--yes, zero.

In other words, 100% of Lee's LDL particles had shifted to the more benign large LDL simply with elimination of these foods---NO statin drug. (In addition to wheat elimination, she was also taking vitamin D and omega-3 fatty acids at our recommended doses.)

While not everybody responds quite so vigorously due to genetic variation, nor does everyone try as hard as Lee did to eliminate the foods that trigger small LDL, her case provides a great illustration of the power of this strategy.

Buy local, get a goiter

The notion of buying food locally--"buy local"--i.e., food produced in your area, state, or region, is catching on.

And for good reason: Not only do you support your local economy, buying locally saves energy, since food doesn't have to be transported from South America or other faraway locations.

But what about those of us in the Midwest, particularly around the Great Lakes basin, i.e., the region previously known as the "goiter belt"? In the early 20th century, up to a third of the residents of this region had enlarged thyroid glands, or goiters, due to iodine deficiency. Lack of iodine causes the thyroid to enlarge, or "hypertrophy," in an effort to more efficiently extract any available iodine in the blood.

Well, there's been a resurgence of iodine deficiency nationwide with 11.3% of the population severely deficient, representing a four-fold increase since the 1970s.

Why an iodine deficiency? Because more people are avoiding iodized salt, the principal source of iodine for Americans since the FDA introduced its voluntary program for iodization of table salt back in 1924. Approximately 90% of the patients I ask now declare that they use very little iodized table salt. While a few take multimineral or multivitamin supplements that contain iodine, the majority do not. The globalization of the food supply--eat global--however, has softened the blow, since we eat tomatoes from Mexico, blueberries from Argentina, lettuce from the Salinas Valley of California.

Now, we have the growing trend to eat local. In the Midwest, it means that the vegetables, fruits, and meats grown locally will also be iodine depleted, since the soil is also iodine-poor, being so far from the sea.

Ironically, two healthy trends--avoiding salt and eating local--will be accounting for a surge in unsightly neck bulges in the Midwest, as well as an increase in thyroid disease.

The lesson: Avoid salt, eat local, but mind your iodine.

Self-directed thyroid management

Is there an at-home test you can do to gauge thyroid status?

Yes. Measure your temperature.

Unlike a snake or alligator that relies on the sun or its surroundings to regulate body temperature, you and I can internally regulate temperature. The hypothalamus-pituitary-thyroid glands are the organs involved in thermoregulation, body temperature regulation. While the system can break down anywhere in the sequence, as well as in other organs (e.g., adrenal), the thyroid is the weak link in the chain.

Thus, temperature assessment can serve as a useful gauge of thyroid adequacy. Unfortunately, temperature measurement as a reflection of thyroid function has not been well explored in clinical studies. It has also been subject to a good deal of unscientific discussions.

How should temperature be measured? The temperature you really desire is between 3 am and 6 am, while still asleep. However, this is difficult to do, since it would require your bed partner to surreptitiously insert a thermometer into some body orifice without disturbing you. A practical solution is to measure temperature first upon arising in the morning, before drinking water, coffee, making the bed, etc.--immediately.

While traditionalists (followers of Dr. Broda Barnes, who first suggested that temperature reflects thyroid function) still advocate axillary (armpit) temperatures, in 2009 it is clear that axillary temperatures are unreliable. Axillary temperatures are inconsistent, vary substantially with the clothing you wear, vary from right to left armpit, ambient temperature, sweat or lack of sweat, and other factors. It also can commonly be 2-3 degrees Fahrenheit below internal ("core") temperature and does not track with internal temperatures through the circadian rhythms of the day (high temperature early evening, lowest temperature 3-6 am).

Rectal, urine, esophageal, tympanic membrane (ear), and forehead are other means to measure body temperature, but are either inconvenient (rectal) or require correction factors to track internal temperature (e.g., forehead and ear). For these reasons, we use oral temperatures. Oral temperatures (on either side of the underside of the tongue) are convenient, track reasonably well with internal temperatures, and are familiar to most people.

Though there are scant data on the distribution of oral temperatures correlated to thyroid function, we find that the often-suggested cutoff of 97.6 degrees Fahrenheit, or 36.4 C, seems to track well with symptoms and thyroid laboratory evaluation (TSH, free T3, and free T4). In other words, oral temp <97.6 F correlates well with symptoms of fatigue, cold hands and feet, mental fogginess, along with high LDL cholesterol, all corrected or improved with thyroid replacement and return of temperature to 97.6 F.

But be careful: There are many factors that can influence oral temperature, including clothing, season, level of fitness, "morningness" (morning people) vs. "nightness" (night owls), relation to menstrual cycle, concurrent medical conditions.

Also, be sure that your thermometer can detect low temperatures. Just because it shows low temperatures of, say 94.0 degrees F, doesn't mean that it can really measure that low. If in doubt, dip your thermometer in cold water for one minute. If an improbable temperature is registered, say, 97.0 F, then you know that your device is incapable of detecting low temps.

A full in-depth Special Report on thermoregulation will be coming soon on the Track Your Plaque website.

Self-directed health: At-home lab testing

I have a prediction.

I predict that more and more healthcare can and will be obtained directly by the individual--without doctors, without hospitals, without the corrupt profit-at-any-costs modus operandi of the pharmaceutical industry. I predict that, given the right tools, Joe or Jane Q. Public will have the choice to manage his or her own health using tools that are directly accessible, tools that include direct-to-consumer medical imaging (CT scans, ultrasound, MRI, etc.), nutritional supplements (a loosely-defined term, to our advantage), and direct-to-consumer laboratory testing.

Done responsibly, self-directed healthcare is superior to healthcare from your doctor. While no one expects you to remove your own gallbladder, you can manage cholesterol, blood sugar issues, vitamin D, low thyroid, and others--better than your doctor.

As everyone becomes more comfortable with the notion of self-directed health, you will see new services appear that help individuals manage their health. You will see prices for direct-to-consumer medical imaging and lab testing drop due to competition, something that doesn't happen in current insurance-based healthcare delivery. People are being exposed to larger deductibles and/or draw money from a medical savings account and will seek more cost advantages. Such direct-to-consumer competitive pricing will meet those needs. Overall, the presently unsustainable cost of healthcare will decline.

To help accelerate the shift of human healthcare away from conventional paths and divert it towards the individual, we have launched a panel of direct-to-consumer at-home laboratory tests that we are making available on the Track Your Plaque website.

On your own (except in California, which requires a doctor's order or prescription; and NY, the only state in the nation that prohibits entirely), you can now test, in the comfort of your own home with no laboratory blood draw required, parameters including:

--Thyroid tests--Free T3, free T4, TSH
--Lipids
--C-reactive protein
--Vitamin D
--Testosterone
--Progesterone

and others.

As the technology improves, more tests will become available for testing at home. (Lipoproteins are not yet available, but will probably be available within the next few years. That would be an enormous boon to those of us interested in supercharged heart disease prevention and reversal.)

Anyone interested in our at-home testing can just go to the Track Your Plaque lab test Marketplace.

When I first began the Track Your Plaque program around 8 years ago, I saw it as a way for people to learn how to control or reverse coronary atherosclerotic plaque, and I'd hoped that physicians would begin to see the light and become patient advocates in this process. But I have lost hope that most of my colleagues are interested in becoming your advocate in health. They are too locked into the "call me when you hurt" mentality. I now see Track Your Plaque as a way for people to seize control over coronary plaque with minimal assistance from their doctors. Indeed, some of our Members have achieved reduction of their plaque in spite of their doctors.

This is just the tip of the iceberg of what's to come. Brace yourself for a cataclysmic shift in returning health to you and away from those who would profit from your misfortune.

Vitamin D for Peter, Paul, and Mary

Why is it that vitamin D deficiency can manifest in so many different ways in different people? One big reason is something called vitamin D receptor (VDR) genotypes, the variation in the receptor for vitamin D.

It means that vitamin D deficiency sustained over many years in:

Peter yields prostate cancer

Paul yields coronary heart disease and diabetes

Mary yields osteoporosis and knee arthritis.


Same deficiency, different diseases.

VDR genotype-determined susceptibility to numerous conditions have been identified, including Graves' thyroiditis, osteoporosis and related bone demineralization diseases, prostate cancer (Fok1 ffI genotype), ovarian cancer, rheumatoid arthritis, breast cancer (Fok1 ff), birth weight of newborns, melanoma and non-melanoma skin cancers, insulin resistance and metabolic syndrome, susceptibility to type I diabetes, Crohn's disease, and neurological or musculoskeletal deterioration with aging that leads to falls, respiratory infections, kidney cancer, even periodontal disease.


Why is it that the dose of vitamin D necessary to reach a specific level differs so widely from one person to the next? VDR genotype, again. Variation in blood levels of 25-hydroxy vitamin D from a specific dose of vitamin D can vary three-fold, as shown by a University of Toronto study. In other words, a dose of 4000 units per day may yield a 25-hydroxy vitamin D blood level of 30 ng/ml in Mary, 60 ng/ml in Paul, and 90 ng/ml in Pete--same dose, different blood levels.

Should we all run out and get our VDR genotypes assessed? So far the data have not progressed far enough to tell us. If, for instance, you prove to have the high-risk Fok1 ff genotype, would you do anything different? Would vitamin D supplementation be conducted any differently? I don't believe so.

Virtually all of us should be supplementing vitamin D at a dose that generates healthy blood levels, regardless of VDR genotype. For those of us following the Track Your Plaque program for coronary plaque control and reversal, that means maintaining serum 25-hydroxy vitamin D levels between 60-70 ng/ml.

As the fascinating research behind VDR genotype susceptibility to disease unfolds, perhaps it will suggest that specific genotypes be somehow managed differently. Until then, take your vitamin D.

Blowup at Milwaukee Heart Scan

A local TV investigative news report just ran a critical report of the goings-on at Milwaukee Heart Scan:

Andy Smith went to Milwaukee Heart Scan. "It passed the smell test like a road kill skunk. I mean it was bad," Smith explained.

Our hidden cameras went inside the high pressure sales pitch. "On a good day I sell eight, nine, 10 people. On a bad day probably three," sales manager Angelo Callegari told us.


What the heck happened?

Let me tell you a story.

Back in 1996, I learned of a new technology called UltraFast CT scanning, or electron-beam tomography (EBT), a variation on the standard CT technology that permitted very rapid scanning, sufficiently rapid to allow visualization of the coronary arteries. Back then, only a few dozen devices had been established nationwide.

But the technology was so promising and the initial data so powerful that I lobbied several hospital systems in town to consider purchasing one of the $1.8 million devices. I was interested in applying this exciting technology for early detection of coronary heart disease in Milwaukee. While administrators from several hospitals listened, they quickly lost interest when they figured out that the scanner was primarily a tool for prevention, and would not be directly useful to increase revenue-generating hospital procedures.

I floundered about for a year, trying to drum up support for obtaining a scanner. The manufacturer of the device, Imatron, put me in touch with a couple from Indiana who were also interested in setting up a scanner and had actually obtained the investment capital to do it. We met and, over the next year, got Milwaukee Heart Scan up and running. I served as Medical Director (but never an investor or owner).

Milwaukee Heart Scan was busy from day one, performing EBT heart scans, as well as CT coronary angiograms as long ago as the late 1990s, virtual colonoscopies, and other imaging tests. We all spent a great deal of time educating the public and physicians on what this technology meant for detection and prevention of disease.

Despite the public's perception that the owners, Nancy and Steve Burlingame, were making a bundle of money, in reality they could barely pay their expenses. As price competition heated up in Milwaukee with the lower-cost competing multidetector scanners cropping up, the Burlingames often did not pay themselves.

My interest was to keep this device afloat. I therefore told the Burlingames that they should pay their bills first--their staff, overhead, the scanner costs, and pay themselves--and not worry about reimbursing me for the (very modest) heart scan interpretation fees. For several years, I read thousands of scans without any compensation. But that was okay with me--I just wanted to be sure this device remained available.

But in 2008, some business people from Chicago contacted Steve Burlingame with prospects of applying a contract model of long-term scanning to patients,i.e.,getting people to sign a several-year contract for discounted imaging. They proposed that Milwaukee Heart Scan offer heart scans for free to get people in the door.

What was peculiar about all this is that none of the four physicians on staff at Milwaukee Heart Scan had any knowledge of these discussions at all, including myself. Personally, I figured something was afoot when I came in to read scans in the summer of 2008. While, ordinarily, there is a single stack of scans to read from the preceding few days, this time there were numerous stacks of scans, hundreds of scans in all. Not a word had been said to me or my colleagues. I quickly figured out (thanks to the staff filling me in) that they had been offering scans for free. Not surprisingly, many people took them up on the offer.

Up until then, I had been readily willing to read heart scans without compensation, provided I could perform scan readings in a modest time commitment every week on the weeks it was my responsibility. But work several hours every day for free? Impossible.

My colleagues and I were deeply upset and concerned and insisted on a meeting with all the people involved, including the Burlingames, who had engineered this new sales program. We expressed serious reservations about what they were doing and insisted that they dramatically scale back the promises being made to people. I personally asked that they fire several of the people they had hired as sales people, given what we thought was unprofessional appearance and behavior.

The Burlingames and their new business partners essentially thumbed their noses at the physicians and ignored our advice. So, of the four physicians (one radiologist, three cardiologists), three of us resigned. (The one remaining cardiologist, I believe, didn't really understand what was going on.)

Apparently, after we left, the hard sales tactics continued. The news media got hold of the story through some understandably disgruntled people, and you know the rest.

The tragedy in all this is that, as wonderful as heart scans are, they don't make money for the people who invest in the technology. In the sad case of Milwaukee Heart Scan, it meant that my former friends, the Burlingames, turned to questionable tactics to make this technology pay.

Make no mistake: Heart scans remain a wonderful medical imaging modality. EBT, in particular, remains a fabulous technology that would--even today--remain the pre-eminent means to image coronary arteries, except that GE (who acquired Imatron some years ago) decided that a more direct path to bigger revenues was to purchase Imatron, then promptly scrap the entire operation, choosing to focus on multidetector technology exclusively.

Don't let the spotty past and petty ambitions cloud the fact that heart scans remain the best way to identify and track coronary plaque. Just don't get tempted by the offer of any free scans "without obligation."

Do you work for the pharmaceutical industry?

In response to my post, Lovaza Rip-off, I received this angry comment:


Very high triglycerides, as you all know, is a very serious and life-threatening condition. Therefore, it is very important that any medication you take for treatment must be FDA proven and scientifically backed. This is true for a few reasons. First, there have been zero studies done to show the effects of Costco brand fish oil pills on patients with high triglycerides. So, you cannot assume, simply because the pills you are taking "claim" to have a certain amount of Omega 3 in the them, that they actually do (supplement labeling is self-submitted by the company, and not regulated by any external or 3rd party agency).

Secondly, the other components in fish oil, and maybe in Costco brand (no one knows because it isn't on the label) can actually inhibit the bioavailablity of Omega 3, most notably, Omega 6. And, nowhere on the Costco label does it tell you how much Omega 6 is in it. We also cannot underestimate the importance of purity with these compounds: a top selling brand of fish oil found stores like CVS was recently recalled because it was found to have large amounts of fire retardant in it! These supplements are NOT regulated by the FDA.

Thirdly, be careful when you compare costs. The cost of hospitalization due to acute pancreatitis (a risk of very high triglycerides) far outweighs the cost of taking Lovaza for even several years. If you have a real disease, you need a real drug. And, until Costco does a prospective long-term clinical trial to show that it lowers triglycerides, it should not be used in place of Lovaza.

Finally, I am a living example of how taking a high-potency supplement form of Omega 3 barely lowered my triglycerides, yet within 2 weeks of being on Lovaza there was a significant difference. I am now at my goal. So, before you knock a company, that, in my opinion, has saved my life, please do your research and do not mislead people into thinking that an Omega 3 is an Omega 3 is an Omega 3. If your insurance covers the most potent, the most pure, and the ONLY proven Omega 3 pill on the market, you should be thankful.



The comment was posted anonymously, so I don't know who it came from. But I can tell who I think it is: Someone who works for the drug industry.

This is a common phenomenon: Large corporations are fearful of the comments that are generated on internet conversations and other media. On the internet, there are actually people whose job it is to do "damage control." I suspect this came from one of them.

Why bother? Surely there are better things to do? Well, that's easy. There are billions of dollars at stake. Lovaza, in particular, is sold on the perception that it is somehow superior. If word gets out that maybe you can achieve the same results at a fraction of the cost . . .

Perhaps the "commenter" should also question whether omega-3 fatty acids can come from eating fish.

As part of my cardiology practice, I provide consultation on complex hyperlipidemias, or unusual lipid abnormalities. I have many patients with something called familial hypertriglyceridemia, a genetic condition that permits triglyceride levels of 500, 1000, even many thousands of mg/dl, levels that, as the anonymous commenter points out, can be dangerous.

I virtually never prescribe Lovaza for these people. In their treatment program, I use simple fish oil supplements, such as that from Costco, Sam's Club, or other retailers. I have not witnessed a single failure in treating these people and reducing triglycerides. People with lesser triglyceride abnormalities likewise respond very nicely to inexpensive fish oil that we can buy at the health food store. (I do rely on useful services like Consumer Reports and www.consumerlab.com to reassure us that no pesticide residues, mercury, or other contaminants are in the brands we use.) Excellent, high-quality fish oil supplements are sold by Carlson, Life Extension, Barlean's, even the Members' Mark brand from Sam's Club.

So, the notion that only prescription fish oil is capable of reducing triglycerides is, in a word, nonsense.

Take that back to your CEO.
What is this wacky thing called "weight loss"?

What is this wacky thing called "weight loss"?

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

What happens when you lose weight?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Comments (41) -

  • chuck

    9/20/2011 2:02:02 AM |

    Isn't the form of storage fat saturated fat?  maybe this is how they came up with the theory saturated fat is bad for you.  look at all those symptoms when all that sat fat is released into the blood ;)

  • Dee Miles

    9/20/2011 3:18:39 AM |

    Wow!  I'm so glad you explained this very topic because that's exactly what happened to me recently.  For the past 8 weeks I've not had any grains or sugars and I've kept my carb level about 20g per day. I've lost 15 lbs so far.  I visited my Dr. in May (prior to any weight loss, and maybe during some gain), and the lipid panel was like this: LDL 84, HDL 76, Trig 40.  When I had another blood test in early Sept, I was shocked to see the markers worse!  LDL 122, HDL 48, Trig 88.  Boy was I disappointed in those latest numbers.  Thank you for explaining how this works while losing weight.  At one point recently I was really discouraged but now I'm really glad about the timing of the tests and your post.  My next blood draw is scheduled for 3 months out from last week, at the request of my Dr.  Maybe then the numbers will have shown some improvement.
    Also, glad to hear the you will be on the low carb cruise in May.  My hubby and I are looking forward to hearing you speak and hopefully meeting you then.

  • Donald Kjellberg

    9/20/2011 5:18:03 AM |

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

    Maintaining weight, it is easy. My BMI (23 down from 40) has remained constant for a few month now. You are right, metabolic processes definitely change. I no longer have sensations of glucose fluctuations or an uncontrolled appetite. I can only imagine the improved hormone regulation and metabolic communication going on inside my body. The symptoms from obesity, all gone. Goodbye sleep apnea, hypertension, hemorrhoids, arrhythmias, gastroinestinal disruptions, smelly body, chaffing thighs, and others not mentioned.

    The positive effects are just as dramatic, but I don't want to ramble on.

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

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/20/2011 12:30:01 PM |

    Excellent, excellent, excellent, Donald!

    I'm glad you got your life back and deprived Big Food and Big Pharma of revenues.

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/20/2011 12:31:07 PM |

    Yup, happens time and again. And your doctor will have no idea what this pink elephant is.

    Yes, see you on the cruise!

  • Buckaroo Banzai

    9/20/2011 1:45:43 PM |

    Would the same lipid response happen if one were replacing body fat with muscle and remain at roughly the same weight?

  • kathyj333

    9/20/2011 1:51:53 PM |

    When I lost a large amount of weight, I had a gallbladder attack. I had my cholesterol levels done during this time, and, yes, the LDL was high. Thanks for this post.

  • Jack Kronk

    9/20/2011 2:16:45 PM |

    Dr Davis,

    I began VLC back in Aug 2010 and transitioned until December. During that time, I went from a slightly pudgy and undefined 163 to a slim and muscular 148 (meaning that I likely lost more than 15 pounds of fat since I was gaining muscle at the same time.)

    My weight has remained stable but very graudally increased since December 2010 because I do heavy resistance weight training consistently and take a whey protein powder supplement. Currently I weigh in at about 155 and I have very little flab, if any.

    With respect to my lipid numbers, is my body still in some kind of transition phase?
    http://paleohacks.com/questions/64890/hack-jack-kronks-latest-lab-results-sept-2011

    Thanks,
    JK

  • Haggus

    9/20/2011 7:23:52 PM |

    I went through this back some 3 years ago and was put on a statin as a result.  While it seems out of fashion now with Dr. Davis, at least with those with blood sugar issues, I used oat bran to drive my LDL to 38 from 193mg/dl, thereby bettering Dr. Davis's 60/60/60 guidelines.

    Other effects: My trigs actually went down from 55 to 15mg/dl, my a1c increased from 4.8 to 4.9% and finally, I became anemic.

    Would I do it again if need be?  Yes, for me, life without the use of a statin trumps most everything else.  Thankfully, these days I still have better 60/60/60 numbers without the heavy use of oat bran which keeps my doctor and the blood bank happy.

  • Linda

    9/20/2011 9:20:57 PM |

    Dr. Davis................
    Another question regarding D3................
    Is there any benefit derived from taking D3 and glaucoma? Does it help relieve eye pressure in any way?

    [I am facing laser surgery, so I am really wondering if the D3 will help.]

  • Joe

    9/20/2011 9:31:43 PM |

    I don't think there's anything in the literature about D3 helping prevent glaucoma. There is some correlation between D3 and prevention of macular degeneration, but the jury is still out on it.

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/20/2011 11:05:11 PM |

    Sorry, Linda: Way out of my area of expertise.

    However, vitamin D is beneficial across so many aspects of health that it's worth doing regardless.

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/20/2011 11:25:13 PM |

    Hi, Jack--

    If your VAP doesn't reflect recent weight loss, consider:

    1) On the surface, your pattern looks like excessive carbohydrate intake for your genetic susceptibility (small LDL, low HDL, high triglycerides).
    2) Apo E2
    3) Another condition has entered the picture, such as kidney disease. Unlikely, thank goodness, but worth thinking about.

    Let me know what comes of this.

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/20/2011 11:25:38 PM |

    Yes, Buck, since the fat still needs to be mobilized into the bloodstream.

  • Ellen

    9/21/2011 2:47:16 AM |

    THANK YOU, Dr. Davis for posting this!   I've been trying to find supporting information on what happens during weight loss, because I get questions about changes in blood work from the readers of my websites.   It made sense to me that trigs would increase because of stored fat mobilization, but I searched all over pubmed and could not find a single paper to support that hypothesis.   Thanks again for confirming this!

  • Bob

    9/21/2011 3:37:37 AM |

    Dr. Davis, I posted last week about high numbers after being on a no carb, no sugar, no wheat diet for a year. You posted back that it could be weight loss and not to worry. I just heard back from two different doctors who looked at my last two VAP tests and they both suggested that I start statins as soon as possible. They are both doctors who specialize in lipids and also believe in not eating carbs sugar etc. They both want me to take a NMR test which would give them a clearer picture of what is going on. I have lost 25 lbs. over the last year. Do you think that after a year of losing weight it would still have an effect on my numbers? They are worried about apo B which I guess is why they want to see NMR. I don't mind taking the statin if I really need it but I am worried that if my apoB is high because of weight loss I am making a big mistake because once I start there will be reason to be taken off of them. I am also worried that if I don't take the statin now, if I wait another 6 months for another test, I am risking my health. I am 59 with two young children.
    Thanks

  • Jack Kronk

    9/21/2011 2:55:39 PM |

    ApoE2? I thought I was more in the running for ApoE4. Isn't 4 the one where it gets a bit dicey with dietary fats?

    Also, kidney disease? what makes you say that. I have had 7 kidney stones (all calcium oxalate. all "pre paleo").  I have several hypotheses about why I don't get them anymore, but my best guess is due to the increase in VitK2, since K2 sort of 'directs' where calcium goes. So I figured my kidneys were much happier with my new diet than with my SAD.

    As for excessive carbohydrate intake, yah that may be true, but I think you make an important reference about genetic susceptibility, as many people can do just fine with my carb intake as it does not produce these numbers for them.

    We have some interesting things brewing over there on PaleoHacks about what might be affecting my lipids. Travis Culp is kind of leading the charge right now and Dr K is in the mix as well.

    http://paleohacks.com/questions/66154/medium-chain-fatty-acids-appear-to-raise-vldl-triglycerides

    Thanks for your thoughts Doc.

    -JK

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/21/2011 9:36:04 PM |

    Hi, Jack--

    If the 150 grams carbohydrates mentioned in the blog post was referring to your intake, then that is definitely at least part, if not all. of the underlying cause.

    Apo E2 would serve to exaggerate this effect, mostly by way of delayed clearance of postprandial lipoproteins. This could be apo E4 but it would be a very atypical pattern, since there are low HDL/high triglycerides.

    Kidney stones in and of themselves would be insufficient; it would have to involve overt kidney dysfunction.

    Anyway, please let me know what comes of this.

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/21/2011 9:40:23 PM |

    Hi, Bob--

    It's not so much the period of time required to lose the weight, but whether the blood was drawn too soon (less than 2 months) after weight plateaued. If drawn too soon, it will yield confusing or alarming numbers to the weight loss-uninitiated.

    Getting an NMR is always a good idea, since it yields the most confident value, LDL particle number.

    Have you gotten a heart scan? Remember, it's more about coronary plaque than about calculated LDL or apo B.

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/21/2011 9:42:40 PM |

    Hi, Ellen--

    Surprising, isn't it? Perhaps it's something we should do!

    Anyway, it is critical to recognize this, else people get mad and throw things and think that the diet is destructive when, in reality, it works like crazy--if you know when to draw the blood sample.

  • Bob

    9/21/2011 10:28:03 PM |

    Dr. Davis,
    I had a heart scan thanks to your blog about 4 years ago with a score of zero. At the time I was on Lipitor following low carb diet but with little sat. fat. I was mostly eating skinless chicken, salmon with mayo. Now I am on high sat. fat diet. Beef and more beef. My weight is still dropping. I started at 186 and now I am 159. I have no idea when my weight will plateau. I feel I am in a bad position as two lipid doctors feel I should be on statins now yet I believe the numbers are not accurate because of the weight loss. If I wait for weight loss to stop I may be putting myself at risk but I don't want to go on statins if not necessary.
    Tomorrow I am planning on the NMR test.
    Thanks

  • Gene K

    9/22/2011 2:25:42 AM |

    Since I consistently get a server error trying to post this comment to the small LDL post, I am posting it here.

    Dr Davis,

    Do you think at some point you will drop the TYP target for LDL to be 700 or less in favour of a target amount or percentage of small LDL?

    Thank you.

  • Kat

    9/22/2011 8:38:16 PM |

    I've got to show this article to my mom. My mom has struggled with her weight for a long time. Her doctor told her she would give her 6 months to try and improve her numbers through diet and exercise. If they didn't go down she would have to start taking statins which my mom did not want to do. My mom did manage to lose a considerable amount of weight (about 50 pounds) in that 6 months period. She went to see her doctor, had a lipid panel done and the doc said her lipid panel numbers were worst than before. The doctor blamed her for not eating the right stuff  and said she needed to start statins now or die. It really scared my mom and she got frustrated. She ended up taking the statins because she didn't feel she had a choice and reverted back to her old lifestyle. Maybe if she knew this information she wouldn't have been so discouraged.

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/23/2011 12:35:53 AM |

    Oh, boy, Kat. It sounds like this is precisely what happened.

    I truly find it incredible that weight loss for my colleagues is such an uncommon thing that they don't even recognize it.

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/23/2011 12:37:46 AM |

    Hi, Gene--

    Yes, I am trending in that direction. However, it remains unclear what the safe threshold is for LDL particle number or apo B when small LDL is minimized or eliminated. BIG question with no current answer.

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/23/2011 12:47:36 AM |

    Hi, Bob--

    Be careful: Even the NMR is subject to the confusing and transient changes that occur during weight loss. In fact, you can observe these effects in ALL lipoprotein testing techniques.

    I know of no way to subtract the effect of weight loss except to be patient and wait for weight to plateau.

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/23/2011 12:49:06 AM |

    Donald--

    I loved your comment so much I'd like to make it the focus of a blog post!

  • Tom

    9/24/2011 3:17:32 PM |

    I' ve cut out wheat from my diet and my wheat belly has disappeared. Unfortunately there is still fat around the hips/thighs. Still, I'm very pleased. Thanks!

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/25/2011 12:08:12 AM |

    Great, Tom!

    Just be patient. It tends to come with time.

  • Suze

    10/2/2011 1:31:41 PM |

    This post brought tears to my eyes. Thank you SO VERY MUCH for posting this. I have been going crazy trying to figure out what the heck is going on.
    I went to see my doc in mid-June, who put me on lovastatin (added to blood pressure meds, Ambien, and Prilosec). He had done labs and was unhappy with my cholesterol.
    I went on low carb in early June, about a week before the doc visit. I have done low carb before and knew it would drop my cholesterol, but went along for now. For 6 weeks all was fine and I lost nearly 20 pounds. Started feeling better - was able to get off Ambien and sleep better. Was able to stop the Prilosec also (my GERD disappeared). Because I was trying to get into ketosis to burn fat, I was monitoring my blood sugar. At about 6 weeks into it, I hit a stall and have had to fight like heck to keep losing any weight. But the worst part (for me) was my glucose level. Inexplicably, my fasting glucose crept up just over 100 and stayed there most days. I was horrified - I was not eating any excess sugars, in fact, trying to stay under 20-30 carbs a day. I am a nurse and I know what a fasting glucose over 100 will get me diagnosed with - diabetes. My goal is to get OFF all meds, not get labeled with diabetes and put on more of them. To top it off, my doc wanted new labs after 6 weeks on lovastatin, and I refuse to go until I figured out what the heck was going on with my glucose and fixed the problem. My doc is nice, but I highly doubt he is evolved enough to listen to this argument. He still subscribes to the high cholesterol theory of heart disease, after all.
    I Googled my head off and tried to figure it out. Lots of theories out there. I tried all kinds of supplements supposed to regulate your glucose, and experimented with timing of food and activity. Even stranger, my glucose would RISE after exercise in the morning (still fasting!), but lower if done in the afternoon. I thought maybe I wasn't eating enough carbs and my liver was kicking out glycogen during the night. The day I came home from work after a just-over-100 fasting that morning and checked my glucose and it was 90 (!) 4 hours after lunch, I wanted to go get the damn labs done, but they were closed.
    I knew blood pressure, cholesterol levels and glucose are all tied together, but it had not occurred to me that losing weight mobilized fats into the bloodstream and may be behind my glucose being a pain. Makes me wonder what the lovastatin did for the 60 days I was on it, lol. But my dilemma is that to find out, if I go with an elevated glucose, I will be hosed. :-( So I guess I'll go find a home cholesterol kit and see, and be patient on the glucose issue.
    I also found some interesting info on low stomach acid - I had been on Tums, Zantac and then Prilosec for some time, and I found my glucose issues started around the time I *stopped* taking that stuff... More food for thought.
    Anyway, thank you so much for posting this - at least I am not in a panic at the moment. I am not done yet, though - I still have about 45-50 pounds to go. I am not sure I can hold off the labs that long. I plan to keep an eye on my fasting (97 this morning) and when it's well under 100 will try to get the damn labs done.

  • Dr. William Davis

    10/2/2011 2:32:28 PM |

    That's great, Suze!

    Yes, we have to be properly armed against our doctors!

  • Kelly

    10/9/2011 1:09:15 PM |

    What defines a weight plateau? I was diagnosed with gestational diabetes while pregnant. I left the hospital 20 pounds lighter than I was pre-pregnancy thanks to a lower-carb diet. Over the next 6 months, I lost an additional 25-30 pounds. I'm not losing weight drastically any longer -- I'm now well within the "normal" range for my BMI. However I am still dropping a pound or two every month or so (still breastfeeding). When I tested my blood sugar about 4 months ago, my fasting number was 104. I'm now 11 months postpartum, so its been about 5 months of very gradual weight loss. Would this still change my numbers because I'm technically still losing weight?

  • Dr. William Davis

    10/9/2011 10:59:32 PM |

    Probably not, Kelly.

    I don't know why, but weight loss that has "decelerated" to this degree seems to not be associated with distortion of metabolic markers. It doesn't mean that continued weight loss won't yield further improvement, but that the current numbers are indeed true.

  • DanD

    10/12/2011 4:48:46 PM |

    Donald, congratulations on these tremendous improvements.  Your experience makes me think that I can do the same if I keep at it.

  • Wanda E

    10/18/2011 1:59:06 PM |

    Dr. Davis, I really appreciate all the work you put into the Wheat Belly book.  It is an eye opener.  I have a question.  My husband is diabetic (2 shots per day) also he has Mysenthia Gravis.  Do you have any information regarding Mysenthia Gravis.  Will  eliminating wheat help get rid of or lessen the effects of this disease.  My husband and I are deleting the wheat and i already feel better.  Thank you.

  • Dr. William Davis

    10/19/2011 1:28:44 AM |

    Thanks. Wanda.

    There are, unfortunately, no formal clinical observations that combine wheat/gluten elimination with markers for myasthenia gravis.

    On the most anecdotal level, I have one patient with myasthenia gravis who tells me that her symptoms are substantially improved, though not entirely relieved, with wheat elimination. This seems to be true of nearly all neurologic phenomena that do not have wheat as their original cause: at least partial improvement.

    It is certainly worth trying for this as well as a host of other reasons.

  • Jo

    10/22/2011 2:25:09 AM |

    Thank you for posting this. I think I'm going through this right now. I've lost 63 lbs since being diagnosed with DM last Nov and my A1C is down to 5.5 from over 13.3.  My weight loss has slowed to about 5 lbs per month now and I have low thyroid symptoms but all my doctor cares about is putting me on statins. I'm seeing a new doc next month to try to get more than a TSH test but I know he's going to be concerned about my lipid profile, too. I'm going to ask for either a VAP or NMR test. I don't know how bad these numbers really are but they made the last doctor flip out. I keep under 30 carbs per day, am off all wheat now, and walk at least a mile a day. Here are the most recent numbers and the change from 8 months ago:
    Total: 338 (+58)
    Trigs: 138 (-39)
    HDL: 50 (+10)
    VLDL: 35 (+4)
    LDL: 253 (+44)
    %HDL: 15 (+1)
    Chol:HDL Ratio: 7 (no change)

    I'm not sure what to do in the meantime while I wait for the next appointment, other than be patient, but I'm going to print this post out, anyway.

  • Dr. William Davis

    10/22/2011 12:42:39 PM |

    Very nice result on your weight and diabetes, Jo!

    It looks like you have a genetically-determined pattern, either familial heterozygous hypercholesterolemia and/or apo E4. Sadly, in this situation, diet efforts cannot fully disable the impaired handling of fats that arises from these genetic variants. Statins in this case may not be a bad idea. You may be the occasional exception. Statins are overused and abused, but your situation is one in which they may be appropriate.

  • Suze

    10/23/2011 3:34:55 PM |

    Well, I finally went to get the labs done, and it's a mixed result. After 4 months on low carb and nearly wheat-free:
    cholesterol - 368 to 282 (-86)
    HDL - 40 to 61 (+21 :-D)
    LDL - 287 to 185 (-102)
    ratio - 9.2 to 4.6 (cut in half!)
    VLDL - 41 to 36 (-5)
    triglycerides - 207 to 179 (-28)
    Pretty good improvement in 4 months, I think. The first two months I was on lovastatin, and the last two months, all diet/exercise. I really do not want to go back on statins.
    However, my fasting glucose was 104, despite my efforts to get it lower before getting labs. Now I will have to argue with my doc, I am sure. I got an A1c and it was 5.2, which is totally normal, so at least I am armed with something!!!
    Suze

  • Suze

    10/23/2011 4:04:17 PM |

    P.S. - I have also lost almost 30 pounds!
    And - I just ordered Wheat Belly to read on my Nook. I can't wait! I think you are SO right about all of this!

  • Dr. William Davis

    10/23/2011 11:46:11 PM |

    Wow, Suze!

    Stupendous progress! Keep going.

Loading