I'm not dead! Who knew?
I saw https://twitter.com/JimJohnsonSci/status/468745252170248192 and read Modeling type 2 diabetes in rats using high fat diet and streptozotocin.
What I find a bit sad is the "cure > prevention" attitude. The cause of pre-diabetes & type 2 diabetes is pretty well known now, i.e. it's basically the inability of body stores (liver/muscle glycogen stores & fat masses) to accommodate any more, resulting in excessive amounts of various things (e.g. glucose, fat, cholesterol, NEFAs etc) in the blood, with varying degrees of beta cell dysfunction.
The degree of fatness at which body stores become full depends on the degree of adipocyte hyperplasia, so it's possible for slim people to become type 2 diabetic, though ~85% of type 2 diabetics are over-fat. Some slim people are misdiagnosed with type 2 diabetes, as they have LADA or signalling abnormalities. Some have acquired endocrine abnormalities.
I've been pre-diabetic twice to my knowledge, the most recent occasion being last year when I became slightly manic after mum died and got into a large number of arguments on various blogs. I "took my eye off the ball" diet-wise and ended up gaining too much body-fat, even though my belt didn't feel noticeably tight. I blogged about feeling too hot last year. When I had blood tests in September to find out why I was overheating so much, the results revealed hyper****aemia, where **** = glucose, total cholesterol & triglycerides. The doctor recommended that I take a statin. I declined, stating that I knew what had caused the problem and that I would deal with it. I was told to have repeat blood tests in 3 months time.
I subsequently "kept my eye on the ball" diet-wise (using bathroom scales to monitor progress), lost 8kg (some of it fat mass & some of it muscle mass) and when I was retested 3 months later, the previously abnormal blood test results were back to completely normal. That's twice I've gone from pre-diabetes to normal, which suggests that deterioration from pre-diabetes to type 2 diabetes is not inevitable, provided that the cause is dealt with before excessive irreversible beta cell dysfunction occurs.
The main reason why the incidence of over-fatness & type 2 diabetes is increasing is the overconsumption of "Crap in a bag/box/bottle" by increasing numbers of people. How to reverse this trend? Damned if I know!
Showing posts with label CIAB. Show all posts
Showing posts with label CIAB. Show all posts
Tuesday, 20 May 2014
Wednesday, 24 July 2013
Back to black, CIAB, pharmaceutical drug deficiencies & nerds.
First, a song by someone who should be alive, but isn't...
The above video was inspired by a Facebook friend who had an accident with Schwartzkopf black hair dye and spent ages getting the stains off her skin. You know who you are!
I may have mentioned that nutrient deficiencies can adversely affect mental (and/or other) function. Nowadays, many people live on a diet of Crap-In-A-Bag (CIAB). There's just enough essential amino acids (EAAs), essential fatty acids (EFAs), minerals & vitamins to keep their bodies alive. However, Alive ≠ Working properly.
To compensate for one (or more) nutrient deficiencies, many people are prescribed one (or more) pharmaceutical drugs to tweak how their brains work e.g. fluoxetine, citalopram/escitalopram, venlafaxine, quetiapine, risperidone, valproate etc. There are no pharmaceutical drug deficiencies!
There are people who suffer from mental (and/or other) illnesses, despite having diets & lifestyles that provide sufficient amounts of all nutrients. This post isn't about them. There are people who suffer from depression due to traumatic & inescapable events/situations. This post isn't about them, either.
Finally, nerds! We nerds love to compile information. For an interesting interview with a top compiler of useful information, see Examine's Supplement Goals Reference Guide.
For an excellent article with a mere 148 references, see Why Calories Count. To sum up:-
Where body weight is concerned, calories count (but don't bother trying to count them).
Where body composition is concerned, partitioning counts.
Where health is concerned, macronutrient ratios, EFAs, minerals, vitamins & lifestyles count.
N.B. Poor health can adversely affect body weight and/or body composition, by increasing appetite and/or by adversely affecting partitioning.
Continued on Chow on chow, Parkinson's Law, two ways of doing something, and love.
The above video was inspired by a Facebook friend who had an accident with Schwartzkopf black hair dye and spent ages getting the stains off her skin. You know who you are!
I may have mentioned that nutrient deficiencies can adversely affect mental (and/or other) function. Nowadays, many people live on a diet of Crap-In-A-Bag (CIAB). There's just enough essential amino acids (EAAs), essential fatty acids (EFAs), minerals & vitamins to keep their bodies alive. However, Alive ≠ Working properly.
To compensate for one (or more) nutrient deficiencies, many people are prescribed one (or more) pharmaceutical drugs to tweak how their brains work e.g. fluoxetine, citalopram/escitalopram, venlafaxine, quetiapine, risperidone, valproate etc. There are no pharmaceutical drug deficiencies!
There are people who suffer from mental (and/or other) illnesses, despite having diets & lifestyles that provide sufficient amounts of all nutrients. This post isn't about them. There are people who suffer from depression due to traumatic & inescapable events/situations. This post isn't about them, either.
Finally, nerds! We nerds love to compile information. For an interesting interview with a top compiler of useful information, see Examine's Supplement Goals Reference Guide.
For an excellent article with a mere 148 references, see Why Calories Count. To sum up:-
Where body weight is concerned, calories count (but don't bother trying to count them).
Where body composition is concerned, partitioning counts.
Where health is concerned, macronutrient ratios, EFAs, minerals, vitamins & lifestyles count.
N.B. Poor health can adversely affect body weight and/or body composition, by increasing appetite and/or by adversely affecting partitioning.
Continued on Chow on chow, Parkinson's Law, two ways of doing something, and love.
Thursday, 28 March 2013
Use and abuse of technology and energy.
Take a look at the picture below.
Using technology and energy: Oil, ores, minerals and sand are turned into plastics, metals, ceramics and glasses. The latter cost and are worth more than the former. Using more technology and energy: Plastics, metals, ceramics and glasses are turned into smart-phones, computers, TV sets, cars, planes, musical instruments, w.h.y. The latter cost and are worth more than the former. Creating gizmos creates wealth and increases value.
Take a look at the picture below (hat-tip to Beth Mazur).
Using technology and energy: Produce are turned into crap-in-a-bag/box/bottle (CIAB). The latter cost more than the former but are worth less, as nutritional value has been reduced. Creating CIAB creates wealth but decreases value.
I would like there to be more production of gizmos and less production of CIAB.
 |
| Samsung Galaxy S vs iPhone 4 |
Take a look at the picture below (hat-tip to Beth Mazur).
 |
| You know who is really leaning in? Little Debbie. We have enough crap to eat. Dial it back a little. |
Using technology and energy: Produce are turned into crap-in-a-bag/box/bottle (CIAB). The latter cost more than the former but are worth less, as nutritional value has been reduced. Creating CIAB creates wealth but decreases value.
I would like there to be more production of gizmos and less production of CIAB.
Monday, 11 February 2013
Kelloggs Special K Cracker Crisps.
At home, I watch TV on my lap-top with ad and script-blocking plugins. As a result, I don't see any adverts on commercial TV, YouTube etc.
While visiting mum today, the TV was set to a commercial channel. During an ad break, there was an advert for Kelloggs Special K Cracker Crisps, with the following tag-line (emphasis mine):- Introducing New Special K Cracker Crisps, the deliciously moreish savoury snack that you can feel good about.
A serving (21 crisps weighing ~23g) provides only 95kcals. A box contains 100g which provides 413kcals. I wonder how many people will be able to stop after eating 21 of these crisps?
Walkers salt & vinegar crisps contain the following ingredients:- Potatoes, Sunflower Oil (25%), Rapeseed Oil, Salt & Vinegar Seasoning, Salt & Vinegar Seasoning contains: Flavouring, Dried British Vinegar, Salt, Citric Acid, Sugar, Potassium Chloride, Yeast Extract.
Kelloggs Special K Cracker Crisps S & V contain the following ingredients:- Tapioca Starch, Dried Potato, Wheat Flour, Salt & Balsamic Vinegar Seasoning (Lactose {from Milk}, Sugar, Acidity Regulator {Sodium Diacetate}, Salt, Flavourings (contains Barley), Sea Salt, Citric Acid, Balsamic Vinegar Powder, Rapeseed Oil, Dried Tamarind Extract, Yeast Extract, Black Pepper, Stabiliser {E450a}, Antioxidant {E304}), Sunflower Oil, Maize Flour, Oat Fibre, Salt, Emulsifier (E471).
With food engineering like that, I'm sure that they'll sell like hot cakes. Here's my opinion on how the fight against the obesity epidemic is going...
While visiting mum today, the TV was set to a commercial channel. During an ad break, there was an advert for Kelloggs Special K Cracker Crisps, with the following tag-line (emphasis mine):- Introducing New Special K Cracker Crisps, the deliciously moreish savoury snack that you can feel good about.
A serving (21 crisps weighing ~23g) provides only 95kcals. A box contains 100g which provides 413kcals. I wonder how many people will be able to stop after eating 21 of these crisps?
Walkers salt & vinegar crisps contain the following ingredients:- Potatoes, Sunflower Oil (25%), Rapeseed Oil, Salt & Vinegar Seasoning, Salt & Vinegar Seasoning contains: Flavouring, Dried British Vinegar, Salt, Citric Acid, Sugar, Potassium Chloride, Yeast Extract.
Kelloggs Special K Cracker Crisps S & V contain the following ingredients:- Tapioca Starch, Dried Potato, Wheat Flour, Salt & Balsamic Vinegar Seasoning (Lactose {from Milk}, Sugar, Acidity Regulator {Sodium Diacetate}, Salt, Flavourings (contains Barley), Sea Salt, Citric Acid, Balsamic Vinegar Powder, Rapeseed Oil, Dried Tamarind Extract, Yeast Extract, Black Pepper, Stabiliser {E450a}, Antioxidant {E304}), Sunflower Oil, Maize Flour, Oat Fibre, Salt, Emulsifier (E471).
With food engineering like that, I'm sure that they'll sell like hot cakes. Here's my opinion on how the fight against the obesity epidemic is going...
Wednesday, 23 January 2013
Not exactly rocket science, is it?
If Paul (astrophysicist) Jaminet met Jack (neurosurgeon) Kruse ;-)
The paleo diet was recently ridiculed as a food fad in Natural’s Not In It. It also came last in a US News Best Diets survey.
Ways of eating such as very-low-carbohydrate, low-carbohydrate, low-reward, paleo, primal, ancestral, just eat real food etc discourage the consumption of manufactured food products and encourage the consumption of produce. If a large percentage of the population stop filling their shopping baskets with manufactured food products and start filling them with produce, who suffers? Not exactly...
This is why the food manufacturing industry tries to ensure that the population gets the best nutritional and dietetic advice that money can buy. See also New study: Big Food’s ties to Registered Dietitians.
While libertarians and anarchists moan about freedom from government interference, the food manufacturing industry has the freedom to crap all over the aforementioned diets and influence people to buy manufactured food products. Morbidity is also very profitable for healthcare and drug companies.
I think that I've now flogged this particular horse to death!
The paleo diet was recently ridiculed as a food fad in Natural’s Not In It. It also came last in a US News Best Diets survey.
Ways of eating such as very-low-carbohydrate, low-carbohydrate, low-reward, paleo, primal, ancestral, just eat real food etc discourage the consumption of manufactured food products and encourage the consumption of produce. If a large percentage of the population stop filling their shopping baskets with manufactured food products and start filling them with produce, who suffers? Not exactly...
This is why the food manufacturing industry tries to ensure that the population gets the best nutritional and dietetic advice that money can buy. See also New study: Big Food’s ties to Registered Dietitians.
While libertarians and anarchists moan about freedom from government interference, the food manufacturing industry has the freedom to crap all over the aforementioned diets and influence people to buy manufactured food products. Morbidity is also very profitable for healthcare and drug companies.
I think that I've now flogged this particular horse to death!
Monday, 25 June 2012
Adipocyte Hyperplasia - Good or Bad?
The answer is "It depends!".
The above plot is from Fig. 4 of Cytokine-mediated modulation of leptin and adiponectin secretion during in vitro adipogenesis: Evidence that tumor necrosis factor-α- and interleukin-1β-treated human preadipocytes are potent leptin producers and shows that leptin secretion from adipocytes increases non-linearly with increasing culture period.
As adipocytes fill, there's insignificant leptin secretion up to a certain level of fullness. Above that level of fullness, leptin secretion increases non-linearly. What this means is that reducing adipocyte fullness by x% reduces leptin secretion by more than x%.
If adipocytes become full due to a chronic caloric excess, there are four permutations of continued caloric excess/subsequent caloric deficit & hyperplasia/no hyperplasia.
1a: There is continued caloric excess. No preadipocytes are converted into adipocytes i.e. there is no adipocyte hyperplasia. There is no additional storage capacity available for excess nutrients, so they remain in circulation. T2DM has developed = bad.
1b: There is subsequent caloric deficit, adipocytes start to deplete, storage capacity becomes available and T2DM goes away (if beta cells haven't been destroyed). The low number of fairly full adipocytes secrete sufficient leptin, so metabolic rate is high and hunger is low = good.
2a: There is continued caloric excess. Pre-adipocytes are converted into adipocytes i.e. there is adipocyte hyperplasia. There is additional storage capacity available for excess nutrients, so T2DM doesn't develop = good.
2b: There is subsequent caloric deficit. Adipocytes start to deplete. However, there are more adipocytes than in 1b, so for a given fat mass, adipocytes are less full than in 1b. The higher number of less full adipocytes secrete less leptin than in 1b, so metabolic rate is lower and hunger is higher than in 1b = bad.
Adipocyte hyperplasia is good for preventing T2DM as fat mass increases, but bad for metabolic rate and hunger after subsequent fat mass loss. Children are growing, so have adipocyte hyperplasia. Adults aren't growing, so have less/no adipocyte hyperplasia. Therefore, adipocyte hyperplasia during childhood will result in some protection from developing T2DM, but life-long misery due to increased hunger and reduced metabolic rate after subsequent fat mass loss. This is why I believe that children need to be protected from the persuasive marketing of manufacturers of CIAB (Crap-in-a-Bag/Box/Bottle).
See Beradinelli-Seip Syndrome – stick that in your pipe and smoke it and read the comments to see why adults with insufficient adipocytes are highly likely to develop T2DM. This is why Asians who remain skinny in childhood (so have no adipocyte hyperplasia) have a high risk of developing T2DM. Sumo wrestlers are Asians who become fat in childhood (so they have a lot of adipocyte hyperplasia) so they have a lower risk of developing T2DM.
According to Adipocyte Turnover: Relevance to Human Adipose Tissue Morphology:-
"Occurrence of hyperplasia (negative morphology value) or hypertrophy (positive morphology value) was independent of sex and body weight but correlated with fasting plasma insulin levels and insulin sensitivity, independent of adipocyte volume (β-coefficient = 0.3, P < 0.0001). Total adipocyte number and morphology were negatively related (r = −0.66); i.e., the total adipocyte number was greatest in pronounced hyperplasia and smallest in pronounced hypertrophy. The absolute number of new adipocytes generated each year was 70% lower (P < 0.001) in hypertrophy than in hyperplasia, and individual values for adipocyte generation and morphology were strongly related (r = 0.7, P < 0.001). The relative death rate (∼10% per year) or mean age of adipocytes (∼10 years) was not correlated with morphology."
If you want to remain slim, high fasting serum insulin due to hepatic and/or muscular insulin resistance and/or chronic overconsumption is bad.
The above plot is from Fig. 4 of Cytokine-mediated modulation of leptin and adiponectin secretion during in vitro adipogenesis: Evidence that tumor necrosis factor-α- and interleukin-1β-treated human preadipocytes are potent leptin producers and shows that leptin secretion from adipocytes increases non-linearly with increasing culture period.
As adipocytes fill, there's insignificant leptin secretion up to a certain level of fullness. Above that level of fullness, leptin secretion increases non-linearly. What this means is that reducing adipocyte fullness by x% reduces leptin secretion by more than x%.
If adipocytes become full due to a chronic caloric excess, there are four permutations of continued caloric excess/subsequent caloric deficit & hyperplasia/no hyperplasia.
1a: There is continued caloric excess. No preadipocytes are converted into adipocytes i.e. there is no adipocyte hyperplasia. There is no additional storage capacity available for excess nutrients, so they remain in circulation. T2DM has developed = bad.
1b: There is subsequent caloric deficit, adipocytes start to deplete, storage capacity becomes available and T2DM goes away (if beta cells haven't been destroyed). The low number of fairly full adipocytes secrete sufficient leptin, so metabolic rate is high and hunger is low = good.
2a: There is continued caloric excess. Pre-adipocytes are converted into adipocytes i.e. there is adipocyte hyperplasia. There is additional storage capacity available for excess nutrients, so T2DM doesn't develop = good.
2b: There is subsequent caloric deficit. Adipocytes start to deplete. However, there are more adipocytes than in 1b, so for a given fat mass, adipocytes are less full than in 1b. The higher number of less full adipocytes secrete less leptin than in 1b, so metabolic rate is lower and hunger is higher than in 1b = bad.
Adipocyte hyperplasia is good for preventing T2DM as fat mass increases, but bad for metabolic rate and hunger after subsequent fat mass loss. Children are growing, so have adipocyte hyperplasia. Adults aren't growing, so have less/no adipocyte hyperplasia. Therefore, adipocyte hyperplasia during childhood will result in some protection from developing T2DM, but life-long misery due to increased hunger and reduced metabolic rate after subsequent fat mass loss. This is why I believe that children need to be protected from the persuasive marketing of manufacturers of CIAB (Crap-in-a-Bag/Box/Bottle).
See Beradinelli-Seip Syndrome – stick that in your pipe and smoke it and read the comments to see why adults with insufficient adipocytes are highly likely to develop T2DM. This is why Asians who remain skinny in childhood (so have no adipocyte hyperplasia) have a high risk of developing T2DM. Sumo wrestlers are Asians who become fat in childhood (so they have a lot of adipocyte hyperplasia) so they have a lower risk of developing T2DM.
According to Adipocyte Turnover: Relevance to Human Adipose Tissue Morphology:-
"Occurrence of hyperplasia (negative morphology value) or hypertrophy (positive morphology value) was independent of sex and body weight but correlated with fasting plasma insulin levels and insulin sensitivity, independent of adipocyte volume (β-coefficient = 0.3, P < 0.0001). Total adipocyte number and morphology were negatively related (r = −0.66); i.e., the total adipocyte number was greatest in pronounced hyperplasia and smallest in pronounced hypertrophy. The absolute number of new adipocytes generated each year was 70% lower (P < 0.001) in hypertrophy than in hyperplasia, and individual values for adipocyte generation and morphology were strongly related (r = 0.7, P < 0.001). The relative death rate (∼10% per year) or mean age of adipocytes (∼10 years) was not correlated with morphology."
If you want to remain slim, high fasting serum insulin due to hepatic and/or muscular insulin resistance and/or chronic overconsumption is bad.
Wednesday, 13 June 2012
Dirty Rotten Scoundrels.
Who, these guys?
No. I'm referring to Manufacturers of Crap-in-a-Bag/Box/Bottle (CIAB), or MOCIAB for short.
In Obesity is multi-factorial, spectra and other stuff, I mentioned Mayor of NYC Michael Bloomberg's ban on the use of cups larger than 16oz for the sale of sugary sodas. Note that Mayor Bloomberg is not trying to ban sugary sodas or tax anything. People are still free to buy as many cups of sugary soda as they want. However, the whining from people is deafening!
Surprise, surprise! MOCIAB have retaliated with the usual dirty tricks.
1) Lies, damned lies and MOCIAB statistics.
2) Have a number of MOCIAB/pro-MOCIAB groups/sites drown-out good advice with bad. This is a standard marketing trick pioneered by Edward Bernays. Some examples of MOCIAB/pro-MOCIAB groups are:- Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, https://www.ameribev.org/, https://www.consumerfreedom.com/, https://www.letsclearitup.org/ and https://www.livepositively.com/.
In Psychological manipulation, there was a link to a story about a hypnotist who used his freedom of speech to influence women into "freely" handing him cash. So, why is he not allowed to use his freedom of speech to influence people (Italian police were hunting him) whereas MOCIAB are?
EDIT: I'll repeat it here, in case you missed it in the other post. Confessions of a former Dirty Rotten Scoundrel.
 |
| From https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00kz6jc |
No. I'm referring to Manufacturers of Crap-in-a-Bag/Box/Bottle (CIAB), or MOCIAB for short.
In Obesity is multi-factorial, spectra and other stuff, I mentioned Mayor of NYC Michael Bloomberg's ban on the use of cups larger than 16oz for the sale of sugary sodas. Note that Mayor Bloomberg is not trying to ban sugary sodas or tax anything. People are still free to buy as many cups of sugary soda as they want. However, the whining from people is deafening!
Surprise, surprise! MOCIAB have retaliated with the usual dirty tricks.
1) Lies, damned lies and MOCIAB statistics.
 |
| Cherry-picked studies, much? |
In Psychological manipulation, there was a link to a story about a hypnotist who used his freedom of speech to influence women into "freely" handing him cash. So, why is he not allowed to use his freedom of speech to influence people (Italian police were hunting him) whereas MOCIAB are?
EDIT: I'll repeat it here, in case you missed it in the other post. Confessions of a former Dirty Rotten Scoundrel.
Saturday, 2 June 2012
Obesity is multi-factorial, spectra and other stuff.
This post is a hotch-potch of thoughts that are currently whizzing around in my brain.
1) Obesity: Like just about everything in life, obesity is multi-factorial. Each factor may have only a small impact on obesity. Tackling one factor alone won't solve the problem. Every factor has to be tackled, one at a time.
So, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg announcing a ban on sales of sugary drinks larger than 16 ounces in restaurants, delis, sports arenas, and movie theaters won't solve the obesity problem, but it will help.
EDIT: In shops and supermarkets in the UK, tobacco products now have to be kept out of sight. I'd like to see the same thing happen to Crap-In-A-Bag/Box/Bottle (CIAB).
2) Spectra: As also mentioned in my first link, there is a spectrum of fatness in the general population which probably follows a bell distribution curve. From skinniest to fattest, there are people who are:-
Extremely skinny. Very skinny. Skinny. A bit skinny. Average. A bit fat. Fat. Very fat. Extremely fat.
If you take somebody in a category who isn't currently consuming CIAB and introduce CIAB to their diet, what happens? They move to a category to the right. Therefore, it's possible for there to be very skinny people who consume CIAB. Therefore, anybody who (or should that be Wooo?) states that the existence of very skinny people who consume CIAB is proof that Food Reward doesn't exist is wrong.
3) Other stuff: I am concerned with people overlooking postprandial (a.k.a. nonfasting) triglycerides (a.k.a. triacylglycerols a.k.a. TAGs a.k.a. TGs) after eating large amounts of fat. According to Fasting Compared With Nonfasting Triglycerides and Risk of Cardiovascular Events in Women, serum TGs 2-4 hours post-meal are very significantly associated with Cardiovascular Events (fully adjusted hazard ratio [95% confidence interval] for highest vs lowest tertiles of levels, 4.48 [1.98-10.15] [P < 0.001 for trend]).
After 4 hours post-meal, serum TGs are cleared from circulation by being burned by muscles and/or by being stored in fat cells. See Figure 3B in Extended effects of evening meal carbohydrate-to-fat ratio on fasting and postprandial substrate metabolism.
1) Obesity: Like just about everything in life, obesity is multi-factorial. Each factor may have only a small impact on obesity. Tackling one factor alone won't solve the problem. Every factor has to be tackled, one at a time.
So, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg announcing a ban on sales of sugary drinks larger than 16 ounces in restaurants, delis, sports arenas, and movie theaters won't solve the obesity problem, but it will help.
EDIT: In shops and supermarkets in the UK, tobacco products now have to be kept out of sight. I'd like to see the same thing happen to Crap-In-A-Bag/Box/Bottle (CIAB).
2) Spectra: As also mentioned in my first link, there is a spectrum of fatness in the general population which probably follows a bell distribution curve. From skinniest to fattest, there are people who are:-
Extremely skinny. Very skinny. Skinny. A bit skinny. Average. A bit fat. Fat. Very fat. Extremely fat.
If you take somebody in a category who isn't currently consuming CIAB and introduce CIAB to their diet, what happens? They move to a category to the right. Therefore, it's possible for there to be very skinny people who consume CIAB. Therefore, anybody who (or should that be Wooo?) states that the existence of very skinny people who consume CIAB is proof that Food Reward doesn't exist is wrong.
3) Other stuff: I am concerned with people overlooking postprandial (a.k.a. nonfasting) triglycerides (a.k.a. triacylglycerols a.k.a. TAGs a.k.a. TGs) after eating large amounts of fat. According to Fasting Compared With Nonfasting Triglycerides and Risk of Cardiovascular Events in Women, serum TGs 2-4 hours post-meal are very significantly associated with Cardiovascular Events (fully adjusted hazard ratio [95% confidence interval] for highest vs lowest tertiles of levels, 4.48 [1.98-10.15] [P < 0.001 for trend]).
After 4 hours post-meal, serum TGs are cleared from circulation by being burned by muscles and/or by being stored in fat cells. See Figure 3B in Extended effects of evening meal carbohydrate-to-fat ratio on fasting and postprandial substrate metabolism.
Friday, 25 May 2012
Testing hypotheses - a rant.
My brain just exploded! On Why conventional view of obesity / FR is wrong, ItsTheWoo wrote "...there is not a doubt in my mind obesity is entirely 100% an illness, a disorder... "
According to ItsTheWoo's hypothesis, the increasing incidence of obesity all around the world since 1970 is 100% caused by the increasing incidence of illness all around the world since 1970. Seriously, WTF?
According to Nigeepoo's hypothesis, the increasing incidence of obesity all around the world since 1970 is significantly caused by the increasing influence of Crap-in-a-Bag/Box/Bottle (CIAB) manufacturers on the population by cunning marketing and on the Government by
The former results in increasing consumption of CIAB and the latter results in increasing subsidies on the raw materials used for manufacturing CIAB, making CIAB cheaper (also more profitable) than natural foods, thus increasing consumption of CIAB. See Why are Twinkies cheaper than carrots?
There are other factors causing increased obesity e.g. increasing numbers of towns/cities which discourage walking. See also Determinants of the Variability in Human Body-fat Percentage.
Highly-engineered and highly-calorific CIAB encourages subconscious over-eating via Food Reward. The hyper-secretion of insulin (compensatory hyperinsulinaemia) caused by the subconscious over-eating of CIAB causes subconscious under-moving by inducing drowsiness and lethargy, sometimes followed by the munchies if blood glucose goes too low. Insulin is just a hormone that is secreted for the storage of stuff and a reduction in the burning of stuff. Don't blame insulin for doing its job. If you have zero insulin (e.g. untreated type 1 diabetes), your body stops storing stuff and starts burning stuff uncontrollably. Before the invention of insulin injections, people with type 1 diabetes usually died within 2 years.
Subconscious over-eating is good for the profits of CIAB manufacturers. An increasing number of dyslipidaemic/hypertensive/depressed/diabetic/demented/w.h.y. people is good for the profits of health-care providers and drug manufacturers. These organisations currently make huge profits, so it's not going to be easy to change anything that will reduce them.
I deleted the last part of my rant as it was a bit too ranty, but I'm reinstating it in a toned-down form as I've mentioned it in the comments.
ItsTheWoo continually conflates subconscious over-eating and under-moving with conscious over-eating and under-moving (gluttony and sloth). The vast majority of over-fat people become over-fat due to subconsciously over-eating and under-moving. A tiny minority of over-fat people are gluttonous and slothful.
Telling people to consciously Eat Less, Move More doesn't work. This doesn't mean that Eat Less, Move More doesn't work. It means that Eat Less, Move More has to be done subconsciously. This is where low-carb/paleo/real food diets come into their own.
Rant over.
Tuesday, 14 February 2012
Does it really matter?
I mean, does it really matter exactly how & why low-carb diets work? My thoughts...
There's a lot of in-fighting on the internet about low-carb & paleo diets etc. Which is "best", exactly how they work and so on. I don't believe that there is a best diet. Everyone is different (in genetics, environment, activity etc). To boil it down to the basics:-
1) Eat real food that hasn't been buggered-about with too much. Grains that have had the outer husk removed (e.g. white rice) are O.K. Grains that have been rolled flat or inflated to a large size by heating to >100°C are O.K. Grains that have been ground into dust are not O.K.
2) If eating "X" causes you problems, stop eating "X". If certain proteins cause you problems, you either have a genetic condition (e.g. coeliac disease) or excessive gut permeability. The first isn't fixable but the second may be. If certain carbohydrates cause you problems, you either have a genetic problem or insulin resistance. The first isn't fixable but the second may be.
The real enemy here is the food manufacturers. They don't want people to stop eating their highly-profitable Crap-in-a-Bag/Box/Bottle (CIAB), as it's bad for business. They also influence Governments. So let's stop fighting amongst ourselves and attack the real enemy any way that we can. Lead by example.
There's a lot of in-fighting on the internet about low-carb & paleo diets etc. Which is "best", exactly how they work and so on. I don't believe that there is a best diet. Everyone is different (in genetics, environment, activity etc). To boil it down to the basics:-
1) Eat real food that hasn't been buggered-about with too much. Grains that have had the outer husk removed (e.g. white rice) are O.K. Grains that have been rolled flat or inflated to a large size by heating to >100°C are O.K. Grains that have been ground into dust are not O.K.
2) If eating "X" causes you problems, stop eating "X". If certain proteins cause you problems, you either have a genetic condition (e.g. coeliac disease) or excessive gut permeability. The first isn't fixable but the second may be. If certain carbohydrates cause you problems, you either have a genetic problem or insulin resistance. The first isn't fixable but the second may be.
The real enemy here is the food manufacturers. They don't want people to stop eating their highly-profitable Crap-in-a-Bag/Box/Bottle (CIAB), as it's bad for business. They also influence Governments. So let's stop fighting amongst ourselves and attack the real enemy any way that we can. Lead by example.
Friday, 2 January 2009
Why counting Calories and weighing yourself regularly can be a waste of time.
To lose weight, eat fewer Calories than you burn. Sounds fairly straightforward, doesn't it?
What is a Calorie?
One dietary Calorie (Cal) is 1000calories, or 1kcal for short. A calorie (cal) is the amount of energy required to heat 1g (1mL) of water by 1degree C. As 1cal is a tiny amount of energy, kcal is commonly used. I prefer to use kcal rather than Cal, as the first word in a sentence is always capitalised which could cause confusion.
The SI unit of energy is the Joule (J) and is the amount of energy required to lift a 1kg weight 1m into the air. As 1J is also a tiny amount of energy, kJ is commonly used. There are 4.186kJ in 1kcal.
Why counting Calories can be a waste of time.
In addition to Calorie listings on labels not being very accurate:-
1. Many people are hopeless at judging portion sizes, See You suck at estimating portion sizes!
2. People suffer from "The dieter's Paradox", where they erroneously believe that adding something supposedly healthy to Crap-In-A-Bag/Box/Bottle (CIAB) reduces the total number of calories. See The Dieter’s Paradox – Research Review.
3. If people reach their Calorie intake target for the whole day, but it's only 5pm and they're starving hungry, they're going to eat more food and exceed their target, unless they have supreme willpower. If you're eating the wrong diet, Calorie targets are moot. Find a diet where Calorie intake is naturally reduced, without causing hunger pangs.
Why weighing yourself regularly can be a waste of time.
As mentioned previously, scales cannot distinguish between muscle, body-fat, glycogen+water, urine, faeces etc. Bodyweight can fluctuate considerably on a day-to-day basis. The following list (source forgotten!) lists the effect of various things on body-weight.
Thing_____________________Weight change(lb)
Glycogen supercompensation________~+10
Glycogen replenishment/depletion_+/-4 to 5
Pre-menstrual water retention_____~+5
Eating a high-sodium meal__________+2 to 3
Fluid retention on airplane flight +2 to 3
Going to the loo (No.2)____________-1 to 2
Going to the loo (No.1)___________~-0.5
Drinking a mug of tea_____________~+0.5
So stop stepping on the scales too regularly, or do a rolling average to smooth-out day-to-day fluctuations. If there's an increasing trend, or if your belt/clothes are getting tighter, reduce the frequency of eating "treat" foods (moreish foods that are usually high in sugar, fat, salt & flavourings).
And finally, a little light relief. If I just waffle on about Diet & Nutrition all the time, it can get boring. So here's a YouTube video of a really cool cat that must have watched the Doctor Who episode "Blink". You know, the one with the Weeping Angels. Ninja cat comes closer while not moving!
What is a Calorie?
One dietary Calorie (Cal) is 1000calories, or 1kcal for short. A calorie (cal) is the amount of energy required to heat 1g (1mL) of water by 1degree C. As 1cal is a tiny amount of energy, kcal is commonly used. I prefer to use kcal rather than Cal, as the first word in a sentence is always capitalised which could cause confusion.
The SI unit of energy is the Joule (J) and is the amount of energy required to lift a 1kg weight 1m into the air. As 1J is also a tiny amount of energy, kJ is commonly used. There are 4.186kJ in 1kcal.
Why counting Calories can be a waste of time.
In addition to Calorie listings on labels not being very accurate:-
1. Many people are hopeless at judging portion sizes, See You suck at estimating portion sizes!
2. People suffer from "The dieter's Paradox", where they erroneously believe that adding something supposedly healthy to Crap-In-A-Bag/Box/Bottle (CIAB) reduces the total number of calories. See The Dieter’s Paradox – Research Review.
3. If people reach their Calorie intake target for the whole day, but it's only 5pm and they're starving hungry, they're going to eat more food and exceed their target, unless they have supreme willpower. If you're eating the wrong diet, Calorie targets are moot. Find a diet where Calorie intake is naturally reduced, without causing hunger pangs.
Why weighing yourself regularly can be a waste of time.
As mentioned previously, scales cannot distinguish between muscle, body-fat, glycogen+water, urine, faeces etc. Bodyweight can fluctuate considerably on a day-to-day basis. The following list (source forgotten!) lists the effect of various things on body-weight.
Thing_____________________Weight change(lb)
Glycogen supercompensation________~+10
Glycogen replenishment/depletion_+/-4 to 5
Pre-menstrual water retention_____~+5
Eating a high-sodium meal__________+2 to 3
Fluid retention on airplane flight +2 to 3
Going to the loo (No.2)____________-1 to 2
Going to the loo (No.1)___________~-0.5
Drinking a mug of tea_____________~+0.5
So stop stepping on the scales too regularly, or do a rolling average to smooth-out day-to-day fluctuations. If there's an increasing trend, or if your belt/clothes are getting tighter, reduce the frequency of eating "treat" foods (moreish foods that are usually high in sugar, fat, salt & flavourings).
And finally, a little light relief. If I just waffle on about Diet & Nutrition all the time, it can get boring. So here's a YouTube video of a really cool cat that must have watched the Doctor Who episode "Blink". You know, the one with the Weeping Angels. Ninja cat comes closer while not moving!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)