Fructose And Endotoxin [edwardjedmonds]

[Blinkyrocket]

http://edwardjedmonds.com/fructose-and-endotoxin/
Im really confused, and starting to wonder why we should believe any scientific studies. -_-

 

[Blinkyrocket]

Re: Fructose and Endotoxin

http://edwardjedmonds.com/cravings/
here he is saying that saturated fat is a better source of energy and respiration than sucrose.

With no studies linked might I add.
But IDK, I do know most tropical diets are %60 coconut oil and they aren't doing too bad in the health department.
http://edwardjedmonds.com/fructose-aneu ... sclerosis/
even more blasphemy.
http://edwardjedmonds.com/thyroid-funct ... rated-fat/
This stuff is getting to me, though, because when I was on a high saturated fat diet I felt like it was almost impossible for me to get anxious about anything but my anxiety is creeping back up and sometimes I just have this feeling in my head and a feeling of unease.

I'm starting to think maybe the only or at least most important factor in longevity is prenatal and natal nutrition and childhood experiences.

 

[nikotrope]

Re: Fructose and Endotoxin

Saturated fat is food for health, RP is not against it at all. And it's also true that carbs require far more nutrients than fat to be metabolised and so deficiencies are more of a problem in a high carb diet. Eating too much carbs (glucose and/or fructose) at once will convert carbs to lactate instead of producing ATP+CO2 and will result in decreased ATP and CO2 levels. A good health will allow one to be able to eat more carbs without problems. But for many people carbs have to be taken in moderation. Ray Peat thinks the carb tolerance can be quite high as opposed to people like Edward.

Edward is also showing a study on calcium inhibition by fructose (probably related to his post on aneurysms) but with ample amounts of milk like RP recommends it is not a problem.

I personally think sugar is good and saturated fat is good but mixing them together in a meal can be problematic. So some people prefer to go high carbs and some prefer to go high fat.

 

[Blinkyrocket]

Re: Fructose and Endotoxin

That's something I've been thinking about, the fact that maybe for some people just being unhealthy makes it hard to actually get healthy, unfortunately. Besides, I dont necessarily wanna live long if I'm not happy, but that's why I'm trying to find the diet that lowers anxiety, whether or not I actually live longer as a result is just a bonus.

 

[Blinkyrocket]

Re: Fructose and Endotoxin

Which is why I don't want endotoxin OR lactic acid -_-

 

[BobbyDukes]

Re: Fructose and Endotoxin

I tried Edwards dietary recommendations for a bit (in the name of experimenting), as I noticed how much saturated fat warmed me up. He says to drink as much whole milk as you like. Breakfast, for him, is a pot of cream. He also thinks that protein is overrated and too much of it actually swamps the cell.

The way I see it, you either have to concentrate on fat or on carbs. There's no way you can eat the amount of fat that he's eating, without relying on your body to efficiently burn fat for fuel (his PUFA intake is going to be higher).

I can see why he's not a fan of carbs. They're problematic for me as well. I mean, what are the options? Starch (lovely), man made fruit juices (which are junk, period), fruit (eaten whole causes food for endotoxin) or refined sugar.

He says that fructose slowly damages the arteries.

He thinks that the milk sugar is ok. From experience though, I get a powerful stress reaction when I drink milk without the use of extra sugar to buffer it, somewhat. The sugar in milk is not enough in my case. It's a bit smoother with whole milk, but the fat will only slow the stress reaction a bit longer.

I tried his 'approach' did two days, but stopped when I woke up in the middle of the night with a pounding hard. I had eaten a tub of cream before going to bed. Obviously this did something pretty nasty to my blood sugar. Almost felt like a heart attack. Also, I notice with too much fat, I start getting chest pains and feel extremely sluggish I'm general. Not good. So that experiment didn't last long.

 

[jyb]

Re: Fructose and Endotoxin

I tried his 'approach' did two days, but stopped when I woke up in the middle of the night with a pounding hard. I had eaten a tub of cream before going to bed. Obviously this did something pretty nasty to my blood sugar. Almost felt like a heart attack. Also, I notice with too much fat, I start getting chest pains and feel extremely sluggish I'm general. Not good. So that experiment didn't last long.

The chest pain is something I would associate with taking a huge amount of sucrose without nutrients. Never from good dairy products nor a tub of pure cream (which I think is slightly excessive and may cause some symptoms but not chest pain). A whole tub of ice cream is not optimal neither from a Peat nor Edward perspective...

 

[jyb]

Re: Fructose and Endotoxin

Saturated fat is food for health, RP is not against it at all.

For some benefits like endotoxin and nutrients yes, but as fuel he is against it, because one of his top recommendation is niacinamide and lowering free fatty acids, and using glucose instead. And vice versa, a large amount of sugar and coconut oil seems fundamentally incompatible with Edward's model of a stable endogenous fuel supply.

 

[Tom]

Re: Fructose and Endotoxin

I believe Peat suggested in a recent radio interview that somewhere in between 180 and 350 grams of carbs daily seemed ideal, based (he said) on a 2000-3500 kcal diet (depending on activity level etc). So that´s like 35-40E% carbs, about the same as human milk. I don´t see any reason why we shouldn´t be well adapted to mixed diet relatively high in both fats and carbs. But of course it may require different nutrients like more choline for example, and I don´t think one can simply adjust to a much higher fat diet overnight and then make judgments after a few days, rather after a few weeks at least.

 

[Dean]

Re: Fructose and Endotoxin

I believe Peat suggested in a recent radio interview that somewhere in between 180 and 350 grams of carbs daily seemed ideal, based (he said) on a 2000-3500 kcal diet (depending on activity level etc). So that´s like 35-40E% carbs, about the same as human milk. I don´t see any reason why we shouldn´t be well adapted to mixed diet relatively high in both fats and carbs. But of course it may require different nutrients like more choline for example, and I don´t think one can simply adjust to a much higher fat diet overnight and then make judgments after a few days, rather after a few weeks at least.

That seems like a reasonable enough conclusion. I don't see why not either. In my own personal experience, however, I've only ever been able to lose weight or even prevent weight gain/creep by severely restricting carbs or more generally restricting overall calories, where fat intake is the most prominently restricted. A mixed diet of 2000-3500 calories, which I agree seems quite natural and is one I unconsciously gravitate to when I'm not following some kind of "diet", only results in steady, if not rapid, weight gain for me. This goes all the way back to my childhood. Maybe there is some missing component, like choline--as you suggest, or insufficient protein, or food allergy or whatever.

 

[Brian]

Re: Fructose and Endotoxin

I don´t see any reason why we shouldn´t be well adapted to mixed diet relatively high in both fats and carbs. But of course it may require different nutrients like more choline for example, and I don´t think one can simply adjust to a much higher fat diet overnight and then make judgments after a few days, rather after a few weeks at least.

A mixed macro diet (high in everything) seems to work best in the context of glycogen depleting muscle building exercise. I think it might even be optimal (for hormone production) when the carbs come from high glycemic starch, and the fat from egg yolks, dairy and beef. The insulinogenic effect is useful in the context of a person who lifts weights 3-7 times a week. Otherwise it is probably the quickest way possible to gain fat especially for someone who is hypothyroid, hormone deficient, and insulin resistant.

An Edward type diet really appeals to me because of its simplicity. What is easier than sipping on cream all day plus some greek yogurt and meat? But side effects would be too high for me. Once adapted, the insulin resistance it would cause makes eating even a small to moderate amount of starch or fruit induce a coma. That's not something I would associate with resilience and good health.

Since I love starch and fat I've accepted that I need to do something to significantly deplete muscle glycogen at least every other day.

 

[Tom]

Re: Fructose and Endotoxin

...Maybe there is some missing component, like choline--as you suggest, or insufficient protein, or food allergy or whatever.

Yeah, maybe, or infection or something. If you haven´t tried it, perhaps drinking whole milk rather than cheese, and add some coconut oil and vinegar would be helpful.

 

[Tom]

Re: Fructose and Endotoxin

I don´t see any reason why we shouldn´t be well adapted to mixed diet relatively high in both fats and carbs. But of course it may require different nutrients like more choline for example, and I don´t think one can simply adjust to a much higher fat diet overnight and then make judgments after a few days, rather after a few weeks at least.

A mixed macro diet (high in everything) seems to work best in the context of glycogen depleting muscle building exercise. I think it might even be optimal (for hormone production) when the carbs come from high glycemic starch, and the fat from egg yolks, dairy and beef. The insulinogenic effect is useful in the context of a person who lifts weights 3-7 times a week. Otherwise it is probably the quickest way possible to gain fat especially for someone who is hypothyroid, hormone deficient, and insulin resistant.

An Edward type diet really appeals to me because of its simplicity. What is easier than sipping on cream all day plus some greek yogurt and meat? But side effects would be too high for me. Once adapted, the insulin resistance it would cause makes eating even a small to moderate amount of starch or fruit induce a coma. That's not something I would associate with resilience and good health.

Since I love starch and fat I've accepted that I need to do something to significantly deplete muscle glycogen at least every other day.

Have you checked this study:

http://link.springer.com/article/10.100 ... 007-0716-y

The "paleo diet" (no dairy and grains) group ate 1344 kcal, of which 28E% protein, 40E% carbs and 27E% fats (and 4E% alcohol) and the majority of the carbs came from fruits, vegetables (fructose, glucose). After 12 weeks glucose tolerance was normalized. "The more pronounced improvement of glucose tolerance in the Palaeolithic group was unrelated to weight loss or decrease in waist circumference."

 

[Dean]

Re: Fructose and Endotoxin

The paleo diet and low carb diets like, Atkins, always drove me insane with cravings. I could lose weight, but it was miserable. Zero, or at least negligible, carb (meat and eggs only) gave me tremendous results in terms of weight, energy, mood (after the 1st hellacious few days), etc. as long as the meat wasn't too fatty.

Maybe I didn't stick with paleo/low carb long enough to "normalize glucose tolerance." My concern with paleo/low/no carb isn't with the short term. Lots of people who eat that way long term seem to develop metabolic issues, which is what lead me away from that WOE.

As an FYI...In my third try at peating, I am very satisfied (i.e. no hunger or cravings, fruit doesn't make me crave something more sweet, etc) and have to really force (sufficient) calories on myself. This, I believe, is a result of finally being able to get my protein up to Peat's optimal levels. Haven't been able to lose or even stop gaining weight yet, however.

 

[Tom]

Re: Fructose and Endotoxin

The paleo diet and low carb diets like, Atkins, always drove me insane with cravings. I could lose weight, but it was miserable. Zero, or at least negligible, carb (meat and eggs only) gave me tremendous results in terms of weight, energy, mood (after the 1st hellacious few days), etc. as long as the meat wasn't too fatty.

Maybe I didn't stick with paleo/low carb long enough to "normalize glucose tolerance." My concern with paleo/low/no carb isn't with the short term. Lots of people who eat that way long term seem to develop metabolic issues, which is what lead me away from that WOE.

As an FYI...In my third try at peating, I am very satisfied (i.e. no hunger or cravings, fruit doesn't make me crave something more sweet, etc) and have to really force (sufficient) calories on myself. This, I believe, is a result of finally being able to get my protein up to Peat's optimal levels. Haven't been able to lose or even stop gaining weight yet, however.

Personally I think the "paleo" concept is rather irrelevant, or rather just a point of departure. It is better to look at the very few specific studies like the one I mentioned and then evaluate the result, not to listen to people that "went paleo", because this could mean all sorts of different types of diets.

To my knowledge a high fat "paleo" diet does not show this improvement in glucose tolerance even if the caloric intake is the same. In the mentioned Swedish study, carb intake was around 130-140 grams per day, so it is much higher than what many low carb high fat people consume.

Another important fact in the study was that caloric intake was spontaneously reduced, it wasn´t a forced calorie restriction. Somehow the diet triggered immense amount of fat burning and this gave the participants enough energy so they didn´t "crave" any extra food.

Sure, it may be unpleasant, it may give some lasting harmful effects etc, but isn´t it worth going through some pain for someone with diabetes, with life expectancy cut by as much as 10 years? These people are going to suffer so much misery anyway because of their disease.

 

[Dean]

Re: Fructose and Endotoxin

Yeah Tom, I wasn't trying to diminish the study. I didn't look it over yet; I was simply relating my own experience with weight loss/gain in relation to your own post/summary of the link you posted regarding paleo and low-carb diets. Sure, I wouldn't presume to tell a diabetic to not undertake a WOE to get their situation under control for fear of creating another problem down the line. Every individual would have to weigh it out themselves.

In relating my own experience, I wasn't clear in differentiating low carb and paleo. I know low carb-paleo is all the rage now; and perhaps that "distortion" of the concept has undermined its validity. At the time I did it, however, I was more concerned with the paleo eating concept than micro-managing macro-nutrient percentages. I was at least at the carb level of those in the study you cite when paleoing, probably higher. I just could not feel satisfied. The more fruit I ate, the more sweet I craved. As I said, maybe I didn't stick it out long enough.

I don't remember how much fat I was consuming during that time. I do know that high fat never worked for me on low-carb (i.e. Atkins) or zero carb. We can assume that those doing low-carb paleo have a high percentage of fat in their diet. Another reason, I guess, that WOE doesn't seem to end well for most.

 

[Amazoniac]

Re: Fructose and Endotoxin

http://evolvinghealthscience.blogspot.c ... -john.html

 

[Tom]

Re: Fructose and Endotoxin

It seems based on these small "paleo" trials that a lower fat intake is crucial coupled with high protein intake and low caloric intake, and the carbs should be fruits and vegetables and perhaps some tubers and potatoes, but not grains.

There was another study similar as the one I mentioned where they ingested more fat and it gave a poorer (although still good) result, caloric intake was then also somewhat higher, around 1600 kcal I believe, 40E% fats or something.

It was also shown 30 years ago how Australian aboriginals reversed diabetes in just 7 weeks on a 1200 kcal diet, with 52E% protein and 13E% fats. (I mentioned this in another post.)

I think it is just hard to get to the truth these days with the increasing power of pharmaceutical and other industries that profit so much on diseases like diabetes. More good research can come out of a small country like Sweden than from the US.

And listening to people´s experiences on message boards can also be misleading because it is impossible to know 100% if they are telling the truth or not, have some hidden agenda (whether it´s pride or they just want to promote another diet or work for some pharmaceutical company, the government, or just have been brainwashed and become foot soldiers for such entitites, or all sorts of other reasons). So it is kind of hard. I´m not talking about you or this message board in particular.

Whatever danger may be presented with such "extreme" diets as I mentioned, we should always remember that the body isn´t stupid, and listening to one´s own instincts, and eat foods presented throughout our evolution, there will be so many feedback mechanisms to prevent eating a deadly diet. It is when the diet is of the laborarory, artificially made type, and people are forcing themselves to eat something they find repelling and that tastes bad, that serious problems can arise over time. This is perhaps why there was no complications even for the diabetic Australian aboriginals that ingested 52E% protein for 7 weeks.

 

[Tom]

Re: Fructose and Endotoxin

http://evolvinghealthscience.blogspot.com.br/2012/05/fate-of-fructose-interview-with-dr-john.html

Good reading. I think common sense should tell us that humans are very different from these other animals that were fed high fructose, due to our ancestors long period as fruit eaters. I am wondering if there are some economic motives behind all this fuzz about fructose, for example that US main agriculture products, are corn and soy (US is the world´s major producer and exporter of those), and the country doesn´t produce much sugar, even fruits. I am sure the corn industry is very happy about the anti-gluten sentiments, just as the soybean industry is happy about the obsession with the omega-3 to omega-6 ratio, making this oil "better" than most other vegetable oil (when it is in my opinion worse than most).

See also:

http://advances.nutrition.org/content/4/2/246.long

"On closer examination, much of the accusing evidence appears based on confusion of fructose-containing sweeteners and their compositions, incorrect reporting of fructose use and intake figures, extreme experimental designs bearing little resemblance in amount or pattern to actual human use, and emphasis on statistical rather than clinical importance."

"In considering the volume of contemporary literature on fructose, 1 conclusion stands clear: fructose is safe at typical intake levels but can produce adverse metabolic effects when abused—as is true of most nutrients. It turns out that the largest abusers of fructose are not American consumers, but research scientists. For the adult population as a whole, dietary fructose exposure ranges from very low to <18% E. Over this range, recent meta- and NHANES analyses demonstrate no differential effects of fructose compared with other sugars on weight gain, blood pressure, uric acid, blood lipids, and hyperlipidemia; indeed, there may be a positive role for fructose in glycemic control at normal exposures. It is only when researchers hyperdose human and animal subjects with fructose in amounts that exceed the 95th percentile by 1.5- to 3- and 4- to 5-fold, respectively, that adverse effects are provoked."

 

[Amazoniac]

Re: Fructose and Endotoxin

Fructose seems toxic only in large doses and when it's isolated, but what is not clear is the optimal ratio of fructose:glucose. I don't know if it's desirable that they enter in a ratio close to 1 or much less for having the same effect..