|
In response to Paleomedicina's statement
Malaena Medford False, on every level. Histamine intolerance is, in fact, an enzyme deficiency in which the body does not produce enough DAO (diamine oxidase) and HNMT (histamine-N-methyl-transferase) to break histamines down like in someone without intolerance. Histamines are a normal immune function of the body and it causes a cascade reaction where the immune system fights off foreign invaters and protects you, but if you are deficient in said enzymes, it becomes chronic and is a double-edged sword. One correct point: leaky gut can and does cause enzyme imbalance and histamine reaction, and thus assisting your gut in healing can heal some people of histamine intolerance, but not all. One major factor is gut biome, as some bacteria produce these enzymes, so getting a healthy gut biome is beneficial to this process. I, myself, eat dirt, especially that black mud near rivers. It is filled with beneficial compounds and a full set of healthy microbes that benefit anyone no matter what their lifestyle is. They even sell this stuff in capsules as a probiotic supplement... Altering the biome can effectively "cure" people of this disorder, but like I said above, those with a severe deficiency find that avoidance is the only answer. Citrus contributes to histamine problems, which means even as a medicine, it should never be used by one suffering this problem. Chocking it all up to leaky gut is not correct. It is demeaning to the people who have this condition, and claiming they are imagining having a problem at all. They do have an actual disorder, and it is actually studied, and it has been found to be an actual occurrence which afflicts a small number of individuals who end up going fresh meat Carnivore as it alleviates the symptoms. ~~ I know from personal experience how a deficiency in even one enzyme can make life a living Hell. I suffer from porphyria, with traits around hereditary coproporphyria, in which the enzyme coproporphyrinogen oxidase is deficient. I am, consequently, violently sensitive to sunlight and bright lights, and they cause severe burns, rashes, blisters, seizures, nerve pain, spasms, intestinal ruptures, and other symptoms. I am also deficient in disaccharidases, which is the enzyme type that is essential to breaking down carbohydrate, and thus I am severely carbohydrate intolerant and they make me extremely ill in very low amounts; this is linked to autism, which I have, and autistic people thrive on Ketogenic and Carnivore because those lifestyles remove the substance causing their degenerating brain and gut. ~~ Smolinska, S., Jutel, M., Crameri, R., & O'Mahony, L. (2014). Histamine and gut mucosal immune regulation. Allergy, 69(3), 273-281. Maintz, L., & Novak, N. (2007). Histamine and histamine intolerance. The American journal of clinical nutrition, 85(5), 1185-1196. Johnston, C. S. (1996). The antihistamine action of ascorbic acid. In Subcellular Biochemistry (pp. 189-213). Springer US. Martner-Hewes, P. M., Hunt, I. F., Murphy, N. J., Swendseid, M. E., & Settlage, R. H. (1986). Vitamin B-6 nutriture and plasma diamine oxidase activity in pregnant Hispanic teenagers. The American journal of clinical nutrition, 44(6), 907-913. Rosell-Camps, A., Zibetti, S., Pérez-Esteban, G., Vila-Vidal, M., Ferrés-Ramis, L., & García-Teresa-García, E. (2013). Histamine intolerance as a cause of chronic digestive complaints in pediatric patients. Revista espanola de enfermedades digestivas: organo oficial de la Sociedad Espanola de Patologia Digestiva, 105(4), 201-207. Kohn, J. B. (2014). Is There a Diet for Histamine Intolerance?. Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, 114(11), 1860. Ji, Y., Sakata, Y., Li, X., Zhang, C., Yang, Q., Xu, M., ... & Tso, P. (2013). Lymphatic diamine oxidase secretion stimulated by fat absorption is linked with histamine release. American Journal of Physiology-Gastrointestinal and Liver Physiology, 304(8), G732-G740. Shakir, K. M., Margolis, S., & Baylin, S. B. (1977). Localization of histaminase (diamine oxidase) in rat small intestinal mucosa: site of release by heparin. Biochemical pharmacology, 26(24), 2343-2347. Luk, G. D., Bayless, T. M., & Baylin, S. B. (1980). Diamine oxidase (histaminase). A circulating marker for rat intestinal mucosal maturation and integrity. Journal of Clinical Investigation, 66(1), 66. Hamada, Y., Shinohara, Y., Yano, M., Yamamoto, M., Yoshio, M., Satake, K., ... & Usami, M. (2013). Effect of the menstrual cycle on serum diamine oxidase levels in healthy women. Clinical biochemistry, 46(1), 99-102. Fukudome, I., Kobayashi, M., Dabanaka, K., Maeda, H., Okamoto, K., Okabayashi, T., ... & Hanazaki, K. (2013). Diamine oxidase as a marker of intestinal mucosal injury and the effect of soluble dietary fiber on gastrointestinal tract toxicity after intravenous 5-fluorouracil treatment in rats. Medical molecular morphology, 1-8. Ferstl, R., Frei, R., Schiavi, E., Konieczna, P., Barcik, W., Ziegler, M., ... & O'Mahony, L. (2014). Histamine receptor 2 is a key influence in immune responses to intestinal histamine-secreting microbes. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 134(3), 744-746.
0 Comments
This is long, and on calories, and I'm so, so very sorry I am a motormouth on this...but it is so very important that people understand this concept!
All right, I keep getting CICOpaths out there, the ones who vehemently believe in the calories in/calories out myth. There is plenty of evidence to show it's fake, and I am posting a thing I did to explain it. Feel free to ask questions if any of it is confusing. Calories are a unit of energy which were "discovered" by placing food items in a little oven called a calorimeter, then setting it on fire to boil water and measure each unit of heat created by 1 kelvin. There's the first problem with "calories" being used for humans. I am not a Bunsen burner. I am not an oven. I don't burn jack squat. Food is metabolized in a complex and immeasurable system of hormonal control and chemical reactivity which science has never and can never measure, especially since each human is completely unique. Unless you are a car, none of that can ever apply to you. Next problem: Metabolic calories came into the show in the 1920's when an aristocratic woman who practiced binging and anorexia nervosa plucked the term calories out of scientific text and put them in her health book demanding everyone use calories to determine weight. She then came up with an eating plan of restriction, not fasting, in which people actively practice anorexia nervosa. This practice was tested by the one and only Ancel Keys, who showed that calorie restriction may cause weight loss, but it causes physical damage and deterioration too. The next one is the matter of Taubes' work, which is based on empirical evidence in which "calories" cannot be true because they cause completely different hormonal responses and also cause completely different reactions to each individual. This can be seen in a little experiment I and several others did, in which we consumed meat and fat (some did plants) for at least 21 days in the amount of 5000+ calories every single day, and all of us not only lost weight, we broke our stalls and the weight lost was rapid. I went down 5 pants sizes. I still eat that much. But if I eat 1200 calories in plants, I will rapidly gain weight. So why is this? Because weight gain is determined by inflammation, hormones, and genetics, not mythical little units of energy that are only a reality for ovens and not biological creatures. Here, we see that they explain that the adipose tissue is an active endocrine organ with hormone secretion and all, and we see that obesity is a form of low-grade inflammation. This is cyclical, in which we can also see that inflammation causes weight gain in the first place, and the swollen adipose increases the weight gain. Now why does it do this? To protect the body. Adipose is a protective organ, and those with subcutaneous fat but no visceral are protected, but it does weigh down their bodies and cause problems. An issue here is this idea that we're getting to much of something, because though obese people are big, they are emaciated like holocaust victims under all that blubber. They are literally starving to death packed in fat. Calories don't come into play at all because it's based on energy, and we aren't made of energy. Fat does not cause fat gain, and in fact causes the opposite, unless you happen to have a disease that causes adipose swell such as hypothyroidism. Obesity and inflammation: the effects of weight loss https://www.cambridge.org/…/7DE5BD1B13C41487F6DE50B8DD19220F [Following the discovery of TNF-α and leptin as secretory products of adipocytes in the early 1990s, subsequent obesity research focused on the new functional role of adipose tissue, as an active endocrine organ. Many more inflammatory peptides have been linked to adiposity, which ultimately characterised obesity as a state of low-grade systemic inflammation, or ‘metaflammation’ which may link obesity to its co-morbidities.] ~ Following? Weight gain is inflammation, not just storing fat. The type of weight gain referred to here is the inflammatory kind and this is not associated with plate fat, but consumption of items the body produces antibodies for, which also attack the person's own tissues. Inflammation-sensitive plasma proteins are associated with future weight gain. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12882928 Fibrinogen, Other Putative Markers of Inflammation, and Weight Gain in Middle‐aged Adults—The ARIC Study https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1038/oby.2000.33 Association of Body Mass Index, Body Fat, and Weight Gain With Inflammation Markers Among Rural Residents in Japan https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/artic…/…/67/4/67_4_323/_article Now, what can cause inflammation? Well, that one's easy: The Dietary Intake of Wheat and other Cereal Grains and Their Role in Inflammation https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3705319/ And here's a whopper of a deception pulled on the public: ">>Page 545, paragraph 1: "Skim milk is one of the most valuable adjuncts of the farm for fattening swine. Used with corn, kafir corn or any of the common grain by-products an almost ideal ration is formed. Hogs like it and relish rations mixed with it. As a result of five years' work in feeding skim milk at the New York station at Cornell, it is concluded that the most economical returns are secured when the milk is fed with corn meal. The proportion of corn meal to skim milk may be varied without apparently affecting the result, but in no case should the amount of skim milk fed be greater than the pigs can quickly and easily consume."<<" https://www.facebook.com/GroveofWisdom/posts/613303135708568 ~Know why they fed them skim? The conjugated linoleic acid in dairy fat has been proven to enhance weight loss, and that would be detrimental to fattening livestock. Now, why are we told something that fattens livestock will make us healthy? And I want to point out it takes very few "calories" of grain to cause weight gain, whereas the same amount of dairy fat would cause the exact opposite and make the piggies lean. Conjugated linoleic acid (CLA), body fat, and apoptosis. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11316347 Antiobesity Mechanisms of Action of Conjugated Linoleic Acid https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2826589/ Efficacy of conjugated linoleic acid for reducing fat mass: a meta-analysis in humans https://academic.oup.com/ajcn/article/85/5/1203/4632999 If calories were true, and CICO worked, none of the above studies would be possible. Ever. But there they are, and there they remain. It's just a shame that what is followed is a form of politics and religion rather than the sciences which are completely opposite what is postulated by the same people who told us that grain was a health food instead of letting the farmers tell us it's pig swill for fattening their animals. There is so much more on this, and I am working on my PhD in this exact area of study. What science says is not anything close to what the nutrition guidelines say. The guidelines made people fat, so why are we still listening to them? Now, what happens when we avoid fat? Anyone? No? Simply put, our bodies have chemicals and hormones to detect fat input. The less fat we put in our bodies, the less fat we will oxidize, ergo, "fat is a lever" should actually be seen as the truth, where removing plate fat shuts off fat metabolism. Eventually this rebounds and people end up re-gaining that weight, sometimes more than what they had before. This is explained by the good man Paul Mabry, who has been studying the effects of fat restriction and has come up with some pretty shocking conclusions in which science shakes the very foundation of the nutrition religion and shows that everything you think you know, is entirely wrong. The gut has a receptor to tell us when fat is plentiful, and when it needs to be saved because it's not coming in: https://www.facebook.com/GroveofWisdom/posts/619644645074417 ~I also give my own input with some studies that show that fat increase causes fat metabolism to go up, not down. The only studies that show high-fat causing weight gain are also high-carb, because you cannot have weight gain on high-fat without specific conditions as mentioned before. This is hormonal. Oh, and before I get the whole "but calorie restriction works!" Well of course, anorexia nervosa will always cause weight loss. That doesn't mean it's healthy nor acceptable. Why would someone intentionally force their child to starve to death, only giving them enough of the poison causing the weight gain to keep them alive but miserable, without wondering if what they are doing is even remotely sane? They listen to the "authorities" blindly, without asking why people are still dying of disease, and then they don't even see the statistics where people who are skinny have just as many if not more incidences of heart disease as obese people. Anyone see that article where that man from "The Biggest Loser" had a heart attack on his low-fat, exercise-intense lifestyle? Then he blamed...fat! He blamed something he actively avoids. Then we see things like this: A risk you can't run off: How celebrity fitness guru and Biggest Loser host suffered a heart attack due to genetics https://www.dailymail.co.uk/…/A-risk-run-Heart-attack-cause… Absolute nonsense. He suffered from his nutrient-deficient diet in which low vitamin K2, A, and possibly D3 caused his arterial calcium to skyrocket and it made him have a heart attack. And Ivor Cummins explains this one in perfect detail with actual models which show the accuracy of this method, along with a video with the explanation of fat being protective, unless it's excessive visceral: CAC CALCIUM, THE ULTIMATE TEST FOR ATHEROSCLEROSIS...CHALLENGES LDL AS CAUSE! http://www.thefatemperor.com/…/cac-calcium-the-ultimate-tes… FoodNews Conference 2018 - fixing the Heart Disease Elephant ! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1H889DhAYwc Here's the thing about calorie restriction. Weight loss does not automatically mean health gain. It can mean the exact opposite. Just because the scale goes down, does that mean the health markers go up? Do you really care more about vanity and appearance than your health? Fixing health almost always causes weight loss. For some, this is a challenge none of us will even begin to understand, and they have to keep pushing through when nothing is working. I work with these people 24/7, and they are delightful people. But I would never give them such shoddy advice as to tell them that calories are even remotely a thing in metabolism. Examples of trials showing that weight loss is not only not controlled by calories--but by macros--but also showing that weight loss does not mean good health: A Randomized Trial of a Low-Carbohydrate Diet for Obesity https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa022207 [The low-carbohydrate diet produced a greater weight loss (absolute difference, approximately 4 percent) than did the conventional diet for the first six months, but the differences were not significant at one year. The low-carbohydrate diet was associated with a greater improvement in some risk factors for coronary heart disease.] The effects of low-carbohydrate versus conventional weight loss diets in severely obese adults: one-year follow-up of a randomized trial. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15148064?dopt=Abstract [Participants on a low-carbohydrate diet had more favorable overall outcomes at 1 year than did those on a conventional diet. Weight loss was similar between groups, but effects on atherogenic dyslipidemia and glycemic control were still more favorable with a low-carbohydrate diet after adjustment for differences in weight loss.] Effects of Low-Carbohydrate and Low-Fat Diets https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4428290/ [The low-carbohydrate diet was more effective for weight loss and cardiovascular risk factor reduction than the low-fat diet. Restricting carbohydrate may be an option for persons seeking to lose weight and reduce cardiovascular risk factors.] A Randomized Pilot Trial of a Moderate Carbohydrate Diet Compared to a Very Low Carbohydrate Diet in Overweight or Obese Individuals with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus or Prediabetes https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3981696/ [Our results suggest that a very low carbohydrate diet coupled with skills to promote behavior change may improve glycemic control in type 2 diabetes while allowing decreases in diabetes medications.] A non-calorie-restricted low-carbohydrate diet is effective as an alternative therapy for patients with type 2 diabetes. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24390522 [Our findings suggest that a low-carbohydrate diet is effective in lowering the HbA1c and triglyceride levels in patients with type 2 diabetes who are unable to adhere to a calorie-restricted diet.] Dietary carbohydrate restriction induces a unique metabolic state positively affecting atherogenic dyslipidemia, fatty acid partitioning, and metabolic syndrome. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18396172 [From the current state of the literature, however, low-carbohydrate diets are grounded in basic metabolic principles and the data suggest that some form of carbohydrate restriction is a candidate to be the preferred dietary strategy for cardiovascular health beyond weight regulation.] Endurance athletes who 'go against the grain' become incredible fat-burners https://www.sciencedaily.com/releas…/2015/…/151117091234.htm [Elite endurance athletes who eat very few carbohydrates burned more than twice as much fat as high-carb athletes during maximum exertion and prolonged exercise in a new study -- the highest fat-burning rates under these conditions ever seen by researchers.] And thus, we can come to the conclusion within the standards of scientific rigor that calorie restriction is not, in fact, something which should be praised nor adhered to. In every instance, weight loss did bupkis and these people were just as likely to die from heart disease as they were, before, and could even be at a higher risk because now they are severely deprived of essential nutrients and their arteries are loaded with calcium from deficiency of fat-soluble vitamin K2. Again I ask, is vanity really more important than health? A little more… And fat? It's not "burned", it's not simply fuel, it's nothing as described to us by the authorities at all. Until you turn into a machine which practices combustion of fuel, forget all that nonsense. Fat is used as a material to create metabolites which are used for chemical and hormonal processes, as well as used to create new tissues in the body. Our body is majorly composed of phospholipid bilayers - phosphorus, fat, and cholesterol, with about an equal amount of protein. We're made of fat, and it's just as important to cellular development and health as protein, and is just as much of a building block of every system in our body as amino acids. Our brains are made of fat and cholesterol, and the body does not choose body fat when plate fat is restricted, it actually slows and the metabolism tanks, causing stalls and holding onto fat. Based on biochemistry, fat is not a fuel, nor is it "empty calories" or "calories" at all, it's a vital material used in various processes, which happens to include energy but is a small part of the importance of dietary fat. Does this mean there's no such thing as too much fat? No. This is entirely subjective to each and every individual and must be tailored based on personal reaction, but has absolutely nothing to do with "calories". Increasing Dietary Fat Elicits Similar Changes in Fat Oxidation and Markers of Muscle Oxidative Capacity in Lean and Obese Humans [In response to an isoenergetic increase in dietary fat, whole-body fat oxidation similarly increases in LN {lean} and OB {obese}, in association with a shift towards oxidative metabolism in skeletal muscle, suggesting that the ability to adapt to an acute increase in dietary fat is not impaired in obesity.] ~ Ergo, fat oxidation is almost entirely identical when fat was increased, not slowed or stopped in the people with extra packing in the trunk. They oxidized fat the same as the skinnies. Now, when we eat fat or have fat, where does it go when we lose it if we don't burn it? We've been misinformed to think that we're machines, and that a fire which cannot be located anywhere in the body gulps in a specific amount of fat and burns it, then… Well, it ends there, because they don't actually tell you what happens to it, do they? I present to you, the answer: You breathe 80% or so of it out as carbon dioxide, and the rest is turned into ketones, water, or free-floating hydrogen ions to keep your body in balance, called homeostasis, along with many other things necessary for you to live. The idea that we burn it or use plate fat goes against everything in biological sciences and human physiology. It simply cannot happen. When somebody loses weight, where does the fat go? https://www.bmj.com/content/349/bmj.g7257 Explanation of the beginning of calories and metabolism: https://www.businessinsider.com/calories-not-perfect-nutrit… You did not develop kidney stones on Keto. It takes years for most to develop and the circumstances require specific biological mechanisms such as vitamin K2 deficiency, excessive sugar consumption, oxalates consumption, and other factors.
What you experienced was the crystals you had from a previous WOE that dislodged as they broke down because Ketogenic breaks down crystalline formations. Now, I will state this, lemons are not essential, but are medicinal and do help to break apart formations in both gout and kidney stone sufferers. Meat does not cause uric acid to hike, sugar, alcohol, and plant proteins do. The plant proteins are coupled with massive amounts of carbohydrate, which blocks uric acid excretion. The results on purines are so inconsistent that they can't even be considered, but the results with those other factors are pretty solid. What meat does is cause a flare with temporary purine hike. There is natural medicine for this and it's supported by science: 1/2 cup tart cherry juice 2 tbs raw apple cider vinegar 2 tbs lemon or lime juice 1/8th tsp magnesium sulfate 1/2 tsp pink or sea salt Enough water so it doesn't kick your face in. Tart cherries have been shown through study to break apart crystalline formations of many types, and has been medicinally recommended for a few years now. Vinegar is a healing substance that has a similar function, but other properties, one of which is diuretic, making you pee and clearing the urinary tract out. Sour citrus has polyphenols or plant nutrients which break apart crystals as well and stimulate the kidneys, which helps them recover from a high carb diet. The magnesium relaxes smooth muscles in the urinary tract and helps you pass the stones easier. The salt is if needed and balances electrolytes as the diuretics can deplete them. Water is water. You don't dilute this, it will be like drinking pure vinegar in intensity. Once you have cleared out, you will not form stones again. The symptoms of the stones leaving is not you developing them. Meat does not and never has caused any diseases involving stones. Edit: Retract the vitamin C on breaking stones, it helps get rid of UTI's. I need to find the studies I misplaced showing the polyphenol reaction to stone breakdown. Fermentation releases even more of the hormone disruptors, making it even worse.
Go to that "Soy Alert!" page. There are thousands of studies showing negative effects on both animals and humans. Why Fermented Soy Is Even More Goitrogenic Than Plain Soy Health Effects of Soy Protein and Isoflavones in Humans Impacts of soy products on thyroid and reproductive functions as well as on certain types of carcinogenesis require further study in this context. Overall, existing data are inconsistent or inadequate in supporting most of the suggested health benefits of consuming soy protein or ISF. ~The more research they do, the more negative soy looks. The soy alert link shows many, many studies. Soy Isoflavones Exert Modest Hormonal Effects in Premenopausal Women The high isoflavone diet decreased free T3 (P = 0.02) and dehydroepiandrosterone sulfate (P = 0.02) levels during the early follicular phase and estrone levels during the midfollicular phase (P = 0.02). ~It reduced T3 thyroid hormone. That is essential to thyroid function. It was destroying thyroid function. 170 Scientific Studies Confirm The Dangers of Soy Milk- and soy-protein ingestion: acute effect on serum uric acid concentration. Serum uric acid decreased significantly 3 h after ingestion of lactalbumin and casein but increased after soybean consumption. ~Want gout? This is how you get gout. Calories do not matter, macro distribution and personal hormonal response to food does. Some people pack on weight easily with fat and others do not. Some gain weight on protein because of hyperactive gluconeogenesis. What does not happen is the body "burning" anything or magically storing a unit of something that does not exist in metabolically-correct occurrences. The reason any food has a different effect on different people is because of very subtle differences in the millions of codes withing our DNA sequences, where there is not one identical set, even in twins, according to a few tests on DNA (it can happen, though). Our DNA tells our bodies how to do everything, even down to telling it what to do with fat. The answer to this would be to tailor your diet to your personal responses and it's really as simple as that.
And the fat as a lever? Bupkis. It's absolute nonsense to believe plate fat has anything to do with losing body fat. It's not only an individual response, but believing this defies the very basis of human biology and biochemistry. Obesity and inflammation: the effects of weight loss https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/nutrition-research-reviews/article/obesity-and-inflammation-the-effects-of-weight-loss/7DE5BD1B13C41487F6DE50B8DD19220F [Following the discovery of TNF-α and leptin as secretory products of adipocytes in the early 1990s, subsequent obesity research focused on the new functional role of adipose tissue, as an active endocrine organ. Many more inflammatory peptides have been linked to adiposity, which ultimately characterised obesity as a state of low-grade systemic inflammation, or ‘metaflammation’ which may link obesity to its co-morbidities.] ~ Following? Weight gain is inflammation, not just storing fat. The type of weight gain referred to here is the inflammatory and this is not associated with plate fat, but consumption of items the body produces antibodies to which also attack the person's own tissues. And here's inflammation and weight gain: Inflammation-sensitive plasma proteins are associated with future weight gain. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12882928 Fibrinogen, Other Putative Markers of Inflammation, and Weight Gain in Middle‐aged Adults—The ARIC Study https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1038/oby.2000.33 Association of Body Mass Index, Body Fat, and Weight Gain With Inflammation Markers Among Rural Residents in Japan https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/circj/67/4/67_4_323/_article ~~ And fat? It's not "burned", it's not simply fuel, it's nothing as described to us by the authorities at all. Until you turn into a car, forget all that nonsense. Fat is used as a material to create metabolites which are used for chemical and hormonal processes, as well as used to create new tissues in the body. Our body is majorly composed of phospholipid bilayers - phosphoros, fat, and cholesterol. We're made of fat, and it's just as important to cellular development and health as protein, and is just as much of a building block of every system in our body as amino acids. Our brains are made of fat and cholesterol, and the body does not choose body fat when plate fat is restricted, it actually slows and the metabolism tanks, causing stalls and holding onto fat. Based on biochemistry, fat is not a fuel, nor is it "empty calories" or "calories" at all, it's a vital material used in various processed, which happens to include energy but is a small part of the importance of dietary fat. Does this mean there's no such thing as too much fat? No. This is entirely subjective to each and every individual and must be tailored based on personal reaction, but has absolutely nothing to do with "calories". Increasing Dietary Fat Elicits Similar Changes in Fat Oxidation and Markers of Muscle Oxidative Capacity in Lean and Obese Humans http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0030164 [In response to an isoenergetic increase in dietary fat, whole-body fat oxidation similarly increases in LN {lean} and OB {obese}, in association with a shift towards oxidative metabolism in skeletal muscle, suggesting that the ability to adapt to an acute increase in dietary fat is not impaired in obesity. ~ Ergo, fat oxidation is almost entirely identical when fat was increased, not slowed or stopped in the people with extra packing in the trunk. They oxidized fat the same as the skinnies. Now, when we eat fat or have fat, where does it go when we lose it if we don't burn it? We've been misinformed to think that we're machines, and that a fire which cannot be located anywhere in the body gulps in a specific amount of fat and burns it, then... Well, it ends there, because they don't actually tell you what happens to it, do they? I present to you, the answer: You breath 80% or so of it out as carbon dioxide, and the rest is turned into ketones, water, or free-floating hydrogen ions to keep your body in balance, called homeostasis. The idea that we burn it or use plate fat goes against everything in biological sciences and human physiology. It simply cannot happen. When somebody loses weight, where does the fat go? https://www.bmj.com/content/349/bmj.g7257 Explanation of the beginning of calories and metabolism: http://www.businessinsider.com/calories-not-perfect-nutritionists-say-2017-5 Given this group's lifestyle and dietary ways, this is appropriate to the reason Carnivore through Primal is the answer to modern diseases and addiction epidemic.
Good morning, saplings, This is long, but it goes beyond what the author says, and it's even worse than what the article shows. Apologies in advance for my blithering ways; I am but a long-winded little Puck, addicted to science and the ways of nature. From SUGARbriety International, a post by Ben Fury, a harsh reality. What is the first thing we are advised to feed a baby for introductory foods? Grains. And after that? Pureed vegetables and fruit. Modern curriculum books say no premasticated (when someone chews it and deposits it into the baby's mouth) food, especially meats, and fails to mention meat at all until around 3 years or not at all, focusing on a vegetarian to nearly vegan-type dietary regimen. This is child abuse. We are being encouraged to feed our children addictive drugs and a nutrient-deficient, gut-damaging diet. It is abhorrent. In my nutritional studies, even those horribly written books emphasize the need for fat--especially animal fats like from breast milk--before they do a 180 and push cereal and plant foods which don't contain the vital fats needed for brain and neural development. I will say this at the beginning to get it up there for short attention spans: the best introductory foods are egg yolk (can be lightly cooked if you're a germaphobe OR if the child was not breastfed (I will do a paper on how breastfeeding programs a baby's immune system), or one can puree liver. Your choice of cooking or not is completely up to you, and I do not claim responsibility to your actions nor recommend any practice which would be deemed hazardous. Chewing is NOT a hazard or disgusting and boosts the baby's immune system by introducing the same bacteria in your digestive system the protects you from your environment (unless you use toothpaste, then you're riddled with antibiotics and parabens; hormone disruptors--seriously, you don't need toothpaste at all or can use coconut oil or baking soda or one of those natural types). Premastication has been around for eons for multiple species including humans. Most species pre-digest for heir young and then...ahem...expel it from their stomachs for their toddlers. So, what are cereal grains? Starch; sugar, no matter how you look at it, cellulose; indigestible and abrasive sugar, fiber; an abrasive, disease-causing material when in excess or from sources like grains, lectins; inflammatory and immunoresponsive proteins--causes immune system overload and attacks the body's tissues, phytates or phytic acid; phosphorus compounds that bind to minerals and draw them from the body, agglutinins; which are proteins that cause binding of other proteins and have even been shown to cause metastasis of cancer cells or even cause overgrowth of cells (tumors). There is much, much more, and the nutrition in these is very small, if not completely unavailable to the human body. Let's break this down a bit using science: Starch https://www.britannica.com/science/starch [Starch is a polysaccharide (q.v.) comprising glucose monomers joined in α 1,4 linkages.] ~Translation: sugar. Cellulose https://www.britannica.com/science/cellulose [Cellulose, a complex carbohydrate, or polysaccharide, consisting of 3,000 or more glucose units.] ~Translation: sugar (indigestible; this is what bloats and constipates people). Fiber This is the book Fiber Menace: The Truth About the Leading Role of Fiber in Diet Failure, Constipation, Hemorrhoids, Irritable Bowel Syndrome, Ulcerative Colitis, Crohn's Disease, and Colon Cancer https://www.gutsense.org/fiber…/about-fiber-menace-book.html ~Although a bit preachy and for some, overwhelming due to his excitement and passion, it is this man's passion which spurs the book and led him to show people just how harmful fiber is for the body. Take note he does not mean from the common fruits and vegetables, but from things pushed on the market like wheat bran and such, which actually cause the bowel complications fiber is purported to resolve. Fruits and vegetables are meant to be peeled and the most fibrous pieces discarded as waste. If you start peeling raspberries, you're neurotic about it, though. But for most fruits, the peeling is where most of the toxicants are (the poisonous compounds that are pesticides to protect the plant--its immune system!). Lectins (specific types of proteins) Lectins: Their Damaging Role in Intestinal Health, Rheumatoid Arthritis and Weight Loss https://www.sott.net/…/237196-Lectins-Their-Damaging-Role-i… ~Oh, woe as us (not to be confused with WOE). Bacteria is blamed, but plants, egg white, and even dairy for some people are the cause. Turns out, most 'pathogen outbreaks' are actually a result of improper plant handling and preparation. Beans and grains are poisonous undercooked (they're poisonous over time, anyway, unless prepared a specific and time-consuming way). Remember this. Agrarian diet and diseases of affluence – Do evolutionary novel dietary lectins cause leptin resistance? https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1326203/ ~Got those uncontrollable hunger pangs every 5 minutes? Well, there may be a reason, and it's not lack of self-control. Dietary Lectins as Disease Causing Toxicants https://scialert.net/fulltext/?doi=pjn.2009.293.303 ~I think the title speaks for itself. These things have been known to be toxic for a very long time, which is why traditionally, they were cooked to death (no nutrition left so why bother with these things?) or fermented. Antinutritive effects of wheat-germ agglutinin and other N-acetylglucosamine-specific lectins. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8399111 ~They even block nutrient absorption and use, causing deficiency of multiple minerals and some vitamins. Modulation of immune function by dietary lectins in rheumatoid arthritis. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10884708 ~Lectins in a completely raw state or improperly prepared like modern bread mimics the tissues of the human body. These are called antigens, being foreign substances that invade the body. The body then forms antibodies to combat these foreign invaders and protect us from a possible disease, like it does with a virus. The problem? These antibodies have a key code to that protein (lectins are proteins, just to remind you all), and that protein is mimicking the tissues in the human body, most especially joint tissues. So much for "healthy whole grains". Phytate or phytic acid Inhibition of trypsin activity in vitro by phytate https://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/jf00112a049 ~Protein digestion is inhibited by this, and minerals are bound and go out of the body in the bowel movements. Ergo, you eat lots of these and you're only pooping nutrients, not absorbing them. Wheat fiber, phytates and iron absorption. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2820048 (Not scientific but very useful and on-point) Anti-nutrients (phytates & others) – Exactly which foods have them and why they need to be properly prepared. https://realhealthykids.com/anti-nutrients-phytates-others…/ Agglutinins agglutinin http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/agglutinin [any substance causing agglutination (clumping together) of cells, particularly a specific antibody formed in the blood in response to the presence of an invading agent. Agglutinins are proteins (immunoglobulins) and function as part of the immune mechanism of the body. When the invading agents that bring about the production of agglutinins are bacteria, the agglutinins produced bring about agglutination of the bacterial cells.] ~So... If agglutinins cause binding of specific proteins, and seed agglutinins (especially grains and legumes, peanuts included) mimic our specific proteins which includes blood, and these agglutinins show up in our bloodstream after we eat them...why are these not being looked at in stroke and embolisms and other clot-related diseases? Why would we even want to eat these if they do this? Fluorescein labeled Peanut Agglutinin (PNA) https://vectorlabs.com/fluorescein-labeled-peanut-agglutini… [Peanut agglutinin binds preferentially to the T-antigen, a galactosyl (β-1,3) N-acetylgalactosamine structure present in many glycoconjugates such as M and N blood groups, gangliosides, and many other soluble and membrane-associated glycoproteins and glycolipids.] ~This is a sample of peanut agglutinin for research purposes. It is used to clot certain proteins and blood. You read correctly, it is used to clot blood. Effects of galactose-binding lectins on human blood platelets: Identity of the peanut agglutinin receptor with the von Willebrand factor receptor https://www.thrombosisresearch.com/…/0049-3848(82)…/fulltext [Peanut agglutinin (PNA), soybean agglutinin (SBA) and [castor bean] agglutinin (RCAI) induced agglutination of desialo-platelets down to concentrations of 25 μg/ml.] ~In case you were wondering if the statement above were accurate, here's another study explaining how these lectins cause random blood clotting and what mechanism is present to cause it. This shows that peanut, soy, and castor bean causes platelet and cell clotting. Peanut agglutinin appearance in the blood circulation after peanut ingestion mimics the action of endogenous galectin-3 to promote metastasis by interaction with cancer-associated MUC1. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25326505 ** Insulin-Like Growth Factors are Mitogenic for Human Keratinocytes and a Squamous Cell Carcinoma https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8399111 ** Ponzio G, et al. Wheat germ agglutinin mimics metabolic effects of insulin without increasing receptor autophosphorylation. Cell Signal 1990;2:377-386. https://www.sciencedirect.com/…/artic…/pii/089865689090068L… ** Shechter Y. Bound lectins that mimic insulin produce persistent insulin-like activities. Endocriology 1983;113:1921-1926. https://academic.oup.com/…/article-abst…/113/6/1921/2537962… ** ~As if you needed another reason to avoid peanuts and other seeds. Antinutritive effects of wheat-germ agglutinin and other N-acetylglucosamine-specific lectins. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8399111 ~Antinutritive, meaning these aren't nutritious, they cause deficiency. ~~ This is just the tip of the iceberg and I didn't feel it would be appropriate to overload you poor things with over 500 studies. They'll be on the main website when I do a full set of articles which are more scientific in nature but in layman's terms so everyone (or most) can read them without wondering what the heck hippopotomonstrosesquippedaliophobia means or other large words (which often also appear on ingredient labels; clever...). The point about sugar stands: babies are being exposed to this early and on a massive scale. And we wonder why drug addiction is so bad. On sugar addiction: Preclinical evidence for the addiction potential of highly palatable foods: Current developments related to maternal influence https://www.sciencedirect.com/…/artic…/pii/S0195666316309357 ~Now, I want to break this down because it has several flawed points that are common to studies whose authors have a clear bias to promote the standard guidelines: [Although there are many causative factors leading to excessive weight gain including genetics and sedentary lifestyle, the transformation of the food environment has undoubtedly contributed to the dangerously high rates of obesity.] ~Sedentary has nothing to do with most people's weight gain. Some thrive better on high physical activity, but some people, like me, are mostly sedentary and managed to get from 256 lbs (116 kg) to 130 lbs (59 kg) simply by avoiding processed foods (to 179 lbs [81 kg] on Ketogenic), then completely avoiding plants. Ergo, exercise has little to do with it. And this: [The current food landscape is inundated with food engineered to contain artificially high levels of sugar and fat.] This is true. If you eat large amounts of fat with sugar, you cannot use the fat and the body stores it for when you're not loaded up on excessive carbohydrate--which you should know that today, everything is loaded on carbs. But here's the thing: carbohydrate does this, anyway, but fat just adds to it through that pathway. Not everyone reacts this way, so individuality matters! Then this: [These neurobehavioral adaptations are similar to what is observed in drugs of abuse.] Carbs are a drug. They affect the chemistry of the brain just like all drugs when in an isolated form. In a true sugar addict, even fruit can be a problem and should be avoided. When alone, fat causes mild satiety, and with protein the effect is greater; to add to this, foods high in nutrient density like liver have the most sating effect because it contains every nutrient vital to health in perfect proportions. I'll do a paper on that later so stay tuned! And I really don't approve of Healthline as any form of resource, but this one hit home and used credible research, which I will be using in a future article and will edit this post with my own so as not to lead people to a site that promotes consumption of unhealthy things like fiber and grains. [“Research shows that sugar can be even more addicting than cocaine,” says Cassie Bjork, R.D., L.D., founder of Healthy Simple Life. “Sugar activates the opiate receptors in our brain and affects the reward center, which leads to compulsive behavior, despite the negative consequences like weight gain, headaches, hormone imbalances, and more.” Experts Agree: Sugar Might Be as Addictive as Cocaine It’s legal, socially accepted, and lurking in everything we eat. https://www.healthline.com/…/experts-is-sugar-addictive-dru… “Studies suggest that every time we eat sweets we are reinforcing those neuropathways, causing the brain to become increasingly hardwired to crave sugar, building up a tolerance like any other drug,” she adds.] And another valuable paper with links to the research and mention of the good man Dr. James DiNicolantonio, which shows the emerging alarm that refined sugars are probably one of the worst things, which includes improperly prepared seeds, which are filled with starches that just become sugar in the digestive tract! Is there such a thing as sugar addiction? https://www.clickondetroit.com/health/good-health/infants-at-greatest-risk-of-becoming-addicted-to-sugar-research-shows >takes a breath< Hope you all learned something! #health #nutrition #sugar #addiction #drugs #cocaine #nicotine #carbohydrate #carbs #grain #rice #wheat #seed #lowcarb #weightloss #carnivore #keto #ketogenic #paleo #primal #lchf #infants #children #abuse #childabuse https://www.clickondetroit.com/health/good-health/infants-at-greatest-risk-of-becoming-addicted-to-sugar-research-shows Those of us adapted to raw meat have this thing called an immune system. By exposing ourselves to germs deemed as dangerous pathogens, we become immune to them. The immune system also fights parasites, but there is a history of parasite symbiotic partnership in animals that we scientists are just beginning to understand, but it's there and parasitic infestation isn't necessarily a death sentence, nor is it incurable through natural means.
Through zoopharmacognosy, animals have figured out and teach their offspring the ways of medicinal use of their environment. Parrots eating clay to neutralize toxins in the seeds they eat; apes teaching their young which part of the plant is a medicine and even patting the hand away in an obvious "not that one" communication; and even wolves showing their young how to cure a problem with local botanicals. The United States is not the rest of the world. It's the country of hypochondria and germophobia because of the market of pharmaceuticals and the fear of germs which was spread around and caused the spread of illness due to avoidance of microbiota. Japan, France, Belgium--to name a few, have raw meat foods all the time and have no problem. In fact, they practice pharmacognosy. Lesson in botanical medicine: wasabi is an anti-parasitic and antimicrobial; ginger and turmeric are, too, as well as being cancer preventatives; rosemary deactivates carcinogens in certain foods and is protective of cellular structure while destroying cancerous cells; garlic has the same anti-parasite and anti-microbial properties; etc, etc. Humans have been medicating themselves against parasites for eons with food items. When exposed to environmental pathogens, one becomes immune to others they've never even been exposed to. So what does that mean? Eat dirt. That's not even a joke. Dirt contains thousands, even millions of microbiota which allows for a healthy gut flora and immunity to supposedly deadly pathogens. Raw meat, further, is easier on the digestive system for a lot of people such as myself. I hardly cook my meat at all. I've also been through multiple outbreaks of e. coli, salmonella, and four I can't remember the names of because I was younger, and I was the only one who was unaffected, and the only one who was a dumb kid who ate bugs and didn't listen to the warnings about raw meat. My aunt was also unaffected because she lived in a filthy environment and it built up her immune system. If you want to improve odds and avoid possible negative reactions, start with eating dirt or wallowing in mud, or use vinegar if you can to destroy the microbes. If you get sick, keep hydrated and just wait it out while keeping the emergency room in mind if you have any horrible reactions such as extreme cramping, which can be a life-threatening reaction. Your body needs to adapt to it, but conventional practice will completely destroy your gut microbiota with antibiotics and your immune system will weaken. If you make that choice, it's yours to make. I'm not your mommy. I'm a scientific major with a 4.0 and background in immunological, nutritional, and botanical sciences. I'm just someone who informs. Too clean, or not too clean: the Hygiene Hypothesis and home hygiene https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1448690/ Immune systems of healthy adults 'remember' germs to which they’ve never been exposed, Stanford study finds https://med.stanford.edu/.../immune-systems-of-healthy... Getting Dirty Is Good for Your Immune System https://www.commondreams.org/.../getting-dirty-good-your... Dirty Baby, Healthy Baby? Early Filth May Reduce Allergies https://www.nbcnews.com/.../dirty-baby-healthy-baby-early... Study suggests that being too clean can make people sick https://www.eurekalert.org/pub.../2010-11/uom-sst112410.php THINK AGAIN ABOUT KEEPING LITTLE ONES SO SQUEAKY CLEAN Research suggests that everyday germs may prevent diseases in adulthood https://www.northwestern.edu/.../stories/2009/12/germs.html Childhood Exposure To Germs May Help Immunity https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/243384.php ~~ And as it turns out, most of the food poisoning and things are self-reported but were not affirmed by medical tests. Plants, not meat, are responsible for more cases of food poisoning. One thing is, plants contain bacteria inside them, so washing them doesn't do anything. They are living organisms just like animals and have a microbiota. The negative reaction is the fault of the antibiotics mashed into everything including soaps to armpit deodorant. You are more likely to get sick from plants than you are from meat, as well, because vegetables contain natural toxicants and poisons to keep animals from eating them, and they must be prepared correctly to make them safe for humans because we are a carnivorous species by physiology, not herbivores with specialized anatomy meant for plant digestion. Lectins: Their Damaging Role in Intestinal Health, Rheumatoid Arthritis and Weight Loss https://www.sott.net/.../237196-Lectins-Their-Damaging... The Lowdown On Lectins https://www.marksdailyapple.com/lectins/ Dietary Lectins as Disease Causing Toxicants https://scialert.net/fulltext/?doi=pjn.2009.293.303 How Lectin In Undercooked Red Beans And Rice Causes Food Poisoning https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/78478.php Lectin-Based Food Poisoning: A New Mechanism of Protein Toxicity http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article... Modulation of immune function by dietary lectins in rheumatoid arthritis. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10884708 Vegetables http://www.diagnosisdiet.com/food/vegetableS/ ~~ Hope this helps. I'm still working on the article for my book and blog on immunological aspects in foods and the role of plants in food poisoning cases. Here's one on raw milk: http://www.bccdc.ca/.../RevisedPresentationJuly8Rawmilkmy... Scroll to Myth#4 of being a high-risk food. First and foremost, this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SEE-oU8_NSU explains the metabolic state of cancer cells, from the fermentation of glucose, which you already know is a major factor in cancer and is in my post in the portion above (I can bring it down here if you need to see it), to the Warburg effect.
"The reason that acidity is seen as an issue is because while healthy cells get the majority of their energy from oxygen respiration, cancerous cells tend to inefficiently use glucose at a higher rate than healthy cells. This consumption of glucose (a process called glycolysis) results in acidic waste products, and consequently a higher acidity around cells which use this mechanism. This increased reliance of cancer cells on glucose even when there’s enough oxygen is known as the Warburg effect." ~Ergo, cancer causes the acidic environment around it through glycolysis, the fermentation of glucose in the cell. That is explained earlier in the video. One important thing to take note of is that the alkaline diet is most definitely not Ketogenic, and is vegan in nature; this is the common one that most websites use as their basis: Acidic: Meat, poultry, fish, dairy, eggs, grains and alcohol. Neutral: Natural fats, starches and sugars. Alkaline: Fruits, nuts, legumes and vegetables. Now, I usually do not post Snopes because they aren't a scientific site, but they did post science I will place under the article and have a good explanation and even links to the site of the man who made up that nonsense. His name was 'David “Avocado” Wolfe'. Everyone Who Has Cancer Has a pH That Is Too Acidic https://www.snopes.com/.../everyone-who-has-cancer-has-a.../ ~The results were false, and science explains why. The site, itself is not a scientific reference so please know I am not claiming it is. Nutritional disturbance in acid–base balance and osteoporosis: a hypothesis that disregards the essential homeostatic role of the kidney https://www.cambridge.org/.../3EAD569004A55B4.../core-reader ~This study, for one, shows that in order for blood to be overly acidic, one would have to not have kidneys. Other important PH-balancing organs which would need to not exist are the liver and lungs. Potential renal acid load of foods and its influence on urine pH. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7797810 ~This study explains that diet affects urinary PH. Beyond that, it pretty much has nothing to do with your blood or tissue PH, which is controlled tightly by your lungs, kidneys, and liver--if we were able to alter that in any way with diet beyond a fraction, we would die, period. Cancer Cell Metabolism: Warburg and Beyond http://www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/S0092-8674(08)01066-0 ~An explanation as to how cancer metabolism works. THE METABOLISM OF TUMORS IN THE BODY. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/.../PMC2140820/pdf/519.pdf [In every case, the veins contain more lactic acid than the arteries, hence in every case lactic acid is formed as the blood passes through the tumor.] "That means, by his model, that both the acidity and the low oxygen would be a symptom, not a cause. It also bears highlighting that Warburg is talking about the pH of blood in veins and arteries here, which, as discussed above, cannot be modified by diet." The kidney and acid-base regulation https://www.physiology.org/doi/full/10.1152/advan.00054.2009 Liver regulation of acid-base balance. https://link.springer.com/.../10.1007/978-88-470-2278-2_39 Acid-Base Homeostasis https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4670772/ ~~ These two studies show that not only do cells become more invasive with acidity rise, it's caused by the cancer, themselves, and is a part of the cancer metabolism, not because of bodily PH. That metabolic state of acidity is an isolated pathway not affected by dietary factors. Acidic pH enhances the invasive behavior of human melanoma cells. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8605731 Acid treatment of melanoma cells selects for invasive phenotypes. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18301995 [Solid tumors become acidic due to hypoxia and upregulated glycolysis. We have hypothesized that this acidosis leads to more aggressive invasive behavior during carcinogenesis (Nature Reviews Cancer 4:891-899, 2004). Previous work on this subject has shown mixed results. While some have observed an induction of metastasis and invasion with acid treatments, others have not.] ~This concludes that further, it's not even solid evidence because while it happened in some, it didn't happen in others. It was more along the lines that acid actually destroyed weaker cells and the more aggressive ones were able to survive. Thus it's not actually a case of "acid makes it more invasive", it's a case of the acid killing off the weaker cells and the invasive ones proliferating because they have no competition. ~~ Now, with all of that research above, it can be simply explained by this doctor; no, I don't like quackwatch--this man just explains everything in a comprehensive article which can be verified by biology texts and the above information--I'm working on my own article on my site for this group: Acid/Alkaline Theory of Disease Is Nonsense https://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRela.../DSH/coral2.html Someone posted this in another group. I’m interested to hear response.
Someone who is a “certified health coach and trainer” gave me their opinion on why they believe keto is bad. I would appreciate input. Starving your body of carbs shifts the metabolic pathways through which your body obtains energy. This is what people refer to as ketosis. It's essentially your bodies starvation mode. Carbs are our primary source of energy. When we refuse our body carbs, we're communicating to our system that we are in a crisis state unable to obtain propper nutrition. Your body then switches up and starts looking to breakdown things in our body and use different metabolic pathways so we can make more use of the fat and protein we're getting. In order for this to happen, the body had to become very acidic. Our bodies at equilibrium are alkaline. To throw your body off equilibrium and make it acidic, we become more susceptible to sickness, disease , and even cancer. Side affects of keto can be adrenal fatigue, mood swings, depression, rage. Because chemically and hormonally your body believes you are in a state of crisis, it will respond accordingly. That's the best I can sum it up. It's not natural. I see keto as an eating disorder. Starving your body of necessary macronutrients in order to lose weight or obtain a desired physique is an eating disorder. To which Malaena responded: That is one uneducated coach. None of this is true. For one, ketosis is the natural state of the body and is optimal for performance, energy, and mental clarity. It's not just for starvation mode, it's just a swap from carbs to fat and nothing more. Plus, the benefits of fasting have been shown overwhelmingly to have health benefits, and a starvation mode while actually getting your nutrients would thus be a benefit to your body. Is Ketosis Really Bad For You? https://www.docmuscles.com/is-ketosis-really-bad-for-you/ The Fat Burning Brain: What Are the Cognitive Effects of Ketosis? https://www.marksdailyapple.com/the-fat-burning-brain.../ Keto has zero nutrient deficiencies and opens new nutrient pathways, meaning you are getting more for less when you don't eat those carbs. 5 Nutrients You’re Deficient In… If You Eat Too Much Sugar https://www.thepaleomom.com/5-nutrients-youre-deficient.../ ~Remember, carbs are sugar. Plain and simple, they all break down into glucose. Some are benign, like those found in animal sources. Fat and protein buffers the effects from these sources. Some are really bad, like those found in grains and legumes, and these are loaded with all sorts of anti-nutrients, anyway. Long-term effects of a ketogenic diet in obese patients. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2716748/ [CONCLUSIONS: The present study shows the beneficial effects of a long-term ketogenic diet. It significantly reduced the body weight and body mass index of the patients. Furthermore, it decreased the level of triglycerides, LDL cholesterol and blood glucose, and increased the level of HDL cholesterol. Administering a ketogenic diet for a relatively longer period of time did not produce any significant side effects in the patients. Therefore, the present study confirms that it is safe to use a ketogenic diet for a longer period of time than previously demonstrated.] ~There you have it. The effects of low-carbohydrate versus conventional weight loss diets in severely obese adults: one-year follow-up of a randomized trial. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15148064?dopt=Abstract [CONCLUSION: Participants on a low-carbohydrate diet had more favorable overall outcomes at 1 year than did those on a conventional diet. Weight loss was similar between groups, but effects on atherogenic dyslipidemia and glycemic control were still more favorable with a low-carbohydrate diet after adjustment for differences in weight loss.] Very-low-carbohydrate diets and preservation of muscle mass https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1373635/ Keto does not avoid carbs, it avoids sugar and starch (which is still sugar), while focusing on carbs from vegetables and a moderate amount of fruit. Carbs have overwhelmingly been shown in scientific literature to cause diseases. The only thing being eliminated from the diet are toxic, subsidized commodities which have a huge role in influencing political, nutritional, and pharmaceutical agendas, and are proven without a single doubt that they are the cause of many diseases. Agrarian diet and diseases of affluence – Do evolutionary novel dietary lectins cause leptin resistance? https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1326203/ The Dietary Intake of Wheat and other Cereal Grains and Their Role in Inflammation https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3705319/ Why Grains are Killing You https://crossfitimpulse.com/why-grains-are-killing-you/ WHAT IS WRONG WITH GRAINS https://paleoleap.com/what-is-wrong-with-grains/ ~This one’s actually pretty good! Some of the alternatives are not looking too great, though, like almonds. Association between Carbohydrate Intake and Serum Lipids https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1479303/ Influence of dietary carbohydrate and fat on LDL and HDL particle distributions. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16256003 Effects of Step-Wise Increases in Dietary Carbohydrate on Circulating Saturated Fatty Acids and Palmitoleic Acid in Adults with Metabolic Syndrome http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article... Effect of Dietary Carbohydrate on Triglyceride Metabolism in Humans https://academic.oup.com/jn/article/131/10/2772S/4686463 Dietary fats, carbohydrate, and progression of coronary atherosclerosis in postmenopausal women https://academic.oup.com/ajcn/article/80/5/1175/4690419 When under trial, it was shown that the body suffers no detriment in making its own glucose, and that it doesn't even use the glucose for energy and thus negates that little factor because you don't waste materials making glucose if your body makes enough of its own while not even using it except on the very few processes that need it. Athletes who were Ketogenic had no change in glycogen levels because they were using fat instead. Metabolic characteristics of keto-adapted ultra-endurance runners https://www.sciencedirect.com/.../pii/S0026049515003340 [Conclusion: Compared to highly trained ultra-endurance athletes consuming an HC diet, long-term keto-adaptation results in extraordinarily high rates of fat oxidation, whereas muscle glycogen utilization and repletion patterns during and after a 3 hour run are similar.] ~My reaction? If you’re not using glucose to begin with, why would you need it in the first place? You only use glucose as fuel to prevent sugar toxicity. Endurance athletes who 'go against the grain' become incredible fat-burners https://www.sciencedaily.com/rel.../2015/11/151117091234.htm [Elite endurance athletes who eat very few carbohydrates burned more than twice as much fat as high-carb athletes during maximum exertion and prolonged exercise in a new study -- the highest fat-burning rates under these conditions ever seen by researchers.] A Low-Carbohydrate Ketogenic Diet Combined with 6-Weeks of Crossfit Training Improves Body Composition and Performance https://www.clinmedjournals.org/.../international-journal...Manage docmuscles.com Is Ketosis Really Bad For You? - DocMuscles Our bodies are neutral. Protein makes us remove acids from circulation or alkali because protein is not acidic nor alkaline. "Amino acid" literally means alkaline acid--they are bound together with carbon bonds. The idea that we are alkaline stems from nonsense a scientist hypothesized called the "Acid-Ash hypothesis" which was subsequently debunked. Considering it ignores the vital role of the kidneys and lungs in maintaining homeostasis, it was automatically a failure the moment it was suggested. Alkaline bodies are filled with disease. Acidic bodies less so. Plus, it also depends on what part of the body we're talking about because some are alkaline, and some are acidic. Acidic environments prevent illness by destroying germs, and so does fever. Cancer produces acid, acid does not produce cancer. That's another myth from the early 1900's that was debunked. Read the book “Eat Meat and Stop Jogging” for further details. Influence of nutrition on acid-base balance – metabolic aspects https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s394-001-8348-1 ~Protein causing acid excretion, not retention. Nutritional disturbance in acid–base balance and osteoporosis: a hypothesis that disregards the essential homeostatic role of the kidney https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3828631/ Homeostatic and Excretory Functions of the Kidney https://link.springer.com/cha.../10.1007/978-1-4613-3524-5_2 Acid-Base Homeostasis https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4670772/ Meta‐Analysis of the Effect of the Acid‐Ash Hypothesis of Osteoporosis on Calcium Balance** https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1359/jbmr.090515 [There is no evidence from superior quality balance studies that increasing the diet acid load promotes skeletal bone mineral loss or osteoporosis. Changes of urine calcium do not accurately represent calcium balance. Promotion of the “alkaline diet” to prevent calcium loss is not justified.] Oh but soy, sugar, carbs, and alcohol can affect acid levels, particularly uric acid. Exercise also affects this. The point is that these can have an effect, but it’s the dose that makes the poison. Of the things that cause acid spikes, only those high in carbs were detrimental, preventing the acid from being removed from the body. Milk- and soy-protein ingestion: acute effect on serum uric acid concentration. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2000819 Sugar, Uric Acid, and the Etiology of Diabetes and Obesity https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3781481/ Differential effects of exercise intensity on serum uric acid concentration. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3343917 The effects of alcoholic beverages on urate metabolism in gout sufferers. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7551661 Alcohol’s Impact on Kidney Function https://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/arh21-1/84.pdf Oh and ignore purines in gout. They are a scapegoat. GOUT: FORGET THE PURINES; SKIP THE SUGAR? https://paleoleap.com/gout-forget-purines-skip-sugar/ Side effects of Keto include weight loss; temporary fatigue during fat adaptation and Keto flu, then normalizes; mood swings as your hormones balance out after being jacked up by carbs for so long, then a state of mental clarity and peace for a lot of people; you hardly get sick at all; it reverses and even prevents depression (the second being for those born to a Ketogenic mother); there is no rage on Ketogenic, that's not even supported by science. A Randomized Trial of a Low-Carbohydrate Diet for Obesity http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa022207 The effects of low-carbohydrate versus conventional weight loss diets in severely obese adults: one-year follow-up of a randomized trial. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15148064?dopt=Abstract Effects of Low-Carbohydrate and Low-Fat Diets https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4428290/ Do High-Fat Diets Cause Depression? http://www.diagnosisdiet.com/high-fat-diets-and-depression/ [So, what about the role of fat in depression and anxiety disorders? When it comes to brain conditions, high-fat, low-sugar diets are GOOD. While there is very little scientific research available to tell us whether a high-fat diet could be helpful in treating depression, it is well-established that ketogenic diets, which are very high in fat, have uniquely powerful healing properties when it comes to other serious brain conditions such as epilepsy and neurodegenerative diseases.] Again, the body does not believe it's in a crisis. It's swapping from one fuel to another because it no longer has to compensate for the obnoxious amount of carbs you're shoving into it, which would otherwise cause massive amounts of damage to your body, and still do, but this mechanism of obesity is actually the body's attempt to protect itself. The body's own fat-metabolism protects against the harmful effects of sugar https://www.sciencedaily.com/rel.../2017/09/170915144158.htm [Researchers from Aarhus University have discovered a metabolite that reveals how the body's fat-metabolism provides protection against the harmful effects of sugar. This may explain be the chemical link between a low carbohydrate diet and healthy aging.] Ketogenic Diet Reduces Midlife Mortality and Improves Memory in Aging Mice http://www.cell.com/cell.../fulltext/S1550-4131(17)30489-8 That “sum” of Keto was so pseudoscientific it's not even close to funny. Vegetarian and vegan are eating disorders. Calorie restriction is an eating disorder. The food guidelines are an eating disorder. Ketogenic is real, whole foods without proven inflammatory and poisonous things going into the body. These are things I have science on, without bias, because I am a former vegetarian and it almost killed me from nutrient deficiency and hormone dysregulation. "Necessary macronutrients". Never in the history of science have carbs been shown to be necessary in the diet. Quite the opposite. Fat and protein are required. Carbs are not. Is dietary carbohydrate essential for human nutrition? https://academic.oup.com/ajcn/article/75/5/951/4689417 [Thus, although carbohydrate could theoretically be eliminated from the diet, the recommended intake of 150 g/d ensures an adequate supply of glucose for the CNS. However, it appears that during starvation (a condition in which the intakes of carbohydrate, protein, and fat are eliminated), an adequate amount of substrate for the CNS is provided through gluconeogenesis and ketogenesis (6). The elimination of dietary carbohydrate did not diminish the energy supply to the CNS under the conditions of these experiments. Second, carbohydrate is recommended to avert symptomatic ketosis. In the largest published series on carbohydrate-restricted diets, ketosis was not typically symptomatic (7).] ~Throughout the article, it’s been pointed out that there has never been one study proving any use for dietary carbohydrates at all. Protein, fat, and carbohydrate requirements during starvation: anaplerosis and cataplerosis. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9665093 [Hepatic and renal gluconeogenesis were not curtailed. Blood glutamate served as a vehicle for carbon and nitrogen transport; the contribution of glycerol to gluconeogenesis equaled that of all amino acids combined.] ~The body has no issues making its own glucose, and doesn’t even use it for many systems unless there’s way too much.Manage sciencedaily.com The body's own fat-metabolism protects against the harmful… Peanuts are toxic and are legumes just like soy and beans. They contain aflatoxin, a potent carcinogenic compound in fungus that grows on grains and legumes. They contain toxic lectins which lead to autoimmune dysfunction, leptin resistance, tissue deterioration, poisoning, inflammation, and a whole slew of other issues. They contain agglutinins, proteins which cause binding of other proteins and generate random clotting of blood, and this goes for high blood glucose as well, and promote metastatic response of cancer and cancer-like tissues. They contain an obnoxious amount of polyunsaturated omega-6, which is the same as those rancid vegetable oils and is pro-inflammatory and atherogenic (causes atherosclerosis).
I would stick with other forms of fat like butter or even virgin coconut oil. Peanuts, like grains, have been blown out of proportion as a health food and it's completely wrong. |
AuthorMalaena Medford a bright young student and teacher of all things nutrition and health. Archives
October 2018
Categories |
Gregg's Diet Shack
- Journey
- Index
-
Basics
- Discussions by Subject >
- Foods - Nobody does it better than Georgia Ede >
-
The People
>
- Rosedale Lecture
- All Sorts of Links and Videos
- The 20 Myths
- Diet and Nutrition for the Australian People
- Diet, Nutrition and Biochemistry Blogs and Websites
- Discussion on the 'life expectancy' myth
- Micronutrients Veg vs. Meat
- Human History >
- The Fat of the Land
-
Diseases
-
The Studies
- Tools
- Blog
- Quotes
- Recipes
- Articles
- Contact
- RDA
- Liver Flush
- Smacking
- Controversy
- Whisky
- Lentils
- Chad
- IQ
- False
- Falseinfo
- factcheckgood
- factcheckivermectin
- TGC-Licence
- Moccasins
- totalgym
- Law
- Scooters
- Nami
- Search
RSS Feed
