A Curriculum For Self-education In Biological Nutrition

[burtlancast]

Ancel Keys was a brilliant scientist who did a lot of important basic research, but he was wrong about the diet heart hypothesis.

As Tara wrote, if Keys simply discarded the results that didn't fit his theory and attempted to hide the fact, it equals to scientific fraud, not scientific mistake.

"The cholesterol myths" by Uffe Ravnskov pretty much demolishes any frauds perpetrated by the pharmaceutic firms and their scientific minions.

 

[j.]

Rodents don't reduce metabolic rate in response to calorie restriction but primates do.

Did they also do an experiment with primates where one group had PUFA and the other didn't?

 

[CellularIconoclast]

As Tara wrote, if Keys simply discarded the results that didn't fit his theory and attempted to hide the fact, it equals to scientific fraud, not scientific mistake.

Take a look at Denise Minger's article that I linked on the last page. She goes into depth looking at his data and argues that he didn't do this.

 

[CellularIconoclast]

Did they also do an experiment with primates where one group had PUFA and the other didn't?

I haven't seen that one but if you find it I'd like to see it.

 

[j.]

Then I don't see how you could arrive to your conclusion. How could you know low calorie diets slow down metabolism in primates independently of the type of fat intake -which isn't true in rats- without seeing an experiment?

 

[burtlancast]

As Tara wrote, if Keys simply discarded the results that didn't fit his theory and attempted to hide the fact, it equals to scientific fraud, not scientific mistake.

Take a look at Denise Minger's article that I linked on the last page. She goes into depth looking at his data and argues that he didn't do this.

There's simply no science behind what Keys argued.

Just as there's no science behind the great heart cholesterol study ( Framingham) which attempted to prove the heart disease-cholesterol relationship, and whose results were simply turned upside down on their head ( with the collaboration of every media and medical university) as to start the sale of the most profitable drugs in the history of pharmaceuticals ( ie statins) .

Probably the most criminal scientific fraud of the last century.

 

[Such_Saturation]

Squirrels and bears alike need PUFA to hibernate.

 

[CellularIconoclast]

Then I don't see how you could arrive to your conclusion. How could you know low calorie diets slow down metabolism in primates independently of the type of fat intake -which isn't true in rats- without seeing an experiment?

The thyroid system works very differently in rodents vs primates. In rodents, the thyroid itself is the main regulator of metabolism and produces most of the T3 independent of liver glycogen. In primates, the liver is the main regulator of metabolism and produces most of the T3 in proportion to glycogen status. In humans calorie restriction causes a rapid reduction in T3 levels, and a reduction in per-cell metabolic rate. In rodents, calorie consumption on a per-cell basis remains about the same, and only drops with decreasing body mass.

In line with the rate-of-living theory of aging, many investigators initially thought that CR extended life span by lowering metabolic rate. While rats subjected to CR had a low BMR per whole animal compared with controls, CR also results in a reduced body size, and it was shown over twenty years ago that the CR in rats does not reduce their mass-specific metabolic rate, expressed relative to either total body mass or lean body mass (225). Indeed, it has recently been shown that CR in rats results in a metabolic rate higher than would be predicted from the altered body composition (319). Similarly CR does not reduce metabolic rate in either mice (99) or Drosophila (157).

Source: http://physrev.physiology.org/content/87/4/1175#sec-19

 

[Such_Saturation]

But by that logic, caloric restriction should work for rodents and not for primates.

 

[j.]

I think you are ignoring that the type of fat slows down thyroid function independently of what the glands and liver do and thus exaggerating the anti-thyroid effects of calorie restriction, in a blanket statement without clarifying that the types of fats in the diet and adipose tissue significantly affect how much metabolism is slowed down and how long it will take to recover.

 

[CellularIconoclast]

I think you are ignoring that the type of fat slows down thyroid function independently of what the glands and liver do and thus exaggerating the anti-thyroid effects of calorie restriction

In all of these calorie restriction experiments, the composition of the diet remains unchanged, so a reduction in calories results in a proportional reduction of total PUFA intake.This could account for why the metabolic rate of rodents actually raises slightly, but doesn't account for the significant reduction in metabolic rate seen in humans and other primates.

 

[Such_Saturation]

What about the decreased intake of noxious amino acids? Ray Peat has said that explains the benefits, but I don't know if he was talking about primates.

Have you seen:
http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2014/14040 ... s4557.html

 

[CellularIconoclast]

Other primate studies have shown the opposite. I've only looked at the abstracts of these primate studies- I think we need to look at these more carefully at the methods to figure out what's going on.

On the surface it seems like these two labs NIA and WNPRC conducted the same study, but got conflicting results.

"We report here that a CR regimen implemented in young and older age rhesus monkeys at the National Institute on Aging (NIA) has not improved survival outcomes"
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v489/n7415/full/nature11432.html

 

[Such_Saturation]

The estimated lifespans also only come out at a couple more years... I think that we are asking the wrong question with these studies. And making some monkeys really stressed out.

<<monkeys on CR have demonstrated an increase in licking, sucking, and rocking behavior.>> <<rats on CR are prone to attack strangers more fiercely and are more likely to kill other rats than are controls>>

How would that work for your electorate?

 

[CellularIconoclast]

How would that work for your electorate?

When I tried a calorie restricted diet I was also prone to attack strangers more fiercely.

 

[narouz]

Here are some scientists Peat mentioned favorably
in the latest (Rain-Making Time) interview.
I'm sure some are spelled wrongly:

-William Berg DeLong
-Sidney Fox
-Gilbert Lewis
-Peter Stewart (Stuart?)
-Ian Dell Henderson
-Vernadsky (Russian)
-Buteyko
-PKC Cary
-Kutomo (Cutomo?) (Italian)

Also (not from the interview, don't know if it's been mentioned): Koch (quinones)

 

[CellularIconoclast]

Speaking of Ivan Illich, he has been as influential as William Blake, as Ray has said he has similar goals in mind with respect to the impact of his work.

The similarities between the two are striking. Both started radical colleges in Mexico that were shut down by bureaucracy. With both I get the impression that medicine isn't a primary interest, but a case study in how authoritarian institutions are paradoxical and harm the very cause they claim to serve.

 

[narouz]

I don't know...
maybe we should include Peat's dissertation advisor,
Dr. Arnold Soderwall (not sure I've got that spelled right).

I've often thought that it was very fortuitous that Peat
happened to study under him.
He seems to be the one who discovered (not sure of this...at least he researched it)
some of the crucial health effects of Vitamin E
in the area of reproductive health.
Peat said he was "a real scientist."

 

[Blossom]

From Danny Roddy's work Ray Peat's Brain Part 2 Danny wrote/Ray said:

I have looked for the best workers in many scientific fields, and it seems that their discoveries fit into a meaningful picture of life. Warburg, Shute, Biskind, Lipshutz, Seyle, Szent-Gyorgyi, Barnes, Ling, Meerson and others have revolutionized biology and medicine, but their work has never supported the dominant corporate view, and so it has been actively suppressed by the forces that control science education. The therapeutic methods that have grown out of their discoveries are simple, basic, inexpensive and extremely effective.

I thought this might be a nice addition to this topic.

 

[Such_Saturation]

Luca Turin