Low Toxin Diet Grant Genereux's Theory Of Vitamin A Toxicity

[InChristAlone]

Grant is a man in his mid-fifties, and his ferritin number is right about where you would expect it to be for a man of his age who doesn't regularly employ an iron lowering strategy.

Yeah well since Dr. Smith is a big believer in the toxicity of iron and since they have been chatting hopefully he can help him with that.

 

[NatUK]

Referring to it as poison isn't keeping biases to a minimum, you also don't seem to be researching this issue avidly otherwise you would've read right in the first link posted this reference:
[15] No enhancing effect of vitamin A on iron absorption in humans

I'm not commenting this to annoy you, it just seems that you're only interested in one side for now.

If you don't have cravings for liver, then it's better not to eat it (sunraiser, 2018). If you're having trouble finding food sources of carotenes (I remember you're not into leafy greens), carrot-apple juice is an option, carrots are quite nutritious. Cron-o-meter has data for it, using the standard equivalences, 2 cups give you something like 2500 IU of retinol (it can vary a lot), and you can blend it with a little fat. It shouldn't be difficult to note when you're getting more than you can handle.

Dose is low in this study and the length of time supplemented not long enough considering it is stored. In addition, the variables that can impact at a low level of supplementation like access to sunlight etc at this level nullifies the result for me.
The accumulative effects over time could show totally different results.
I think we all agree this is really about dosage and at what level it creates toxicity or adverse effects for the body. And the mechanisms and cofactors involved.
The debate is ONLY really about dosage. We all agree on toxicity... it’s just at what level does it hit? And what impact is it having at a cell/mitochondrial/metabolic/whatever- we-choose level that can impact a number of bodily functions? Changes we are now seeing and believing “normal” or healthy that are in fact, symptoms of a body fighting toxicity.

 

[sunraiser]

Dose is low in this study and the length of time supplemented not long enough considering it is stored. In addition, the variables that can impact at a low level of supplementation like access to sunlight etc at this level nullifies the result for me.
The accumulative effects over time could show totally different results.
I think we all agree this is really about dosage and at what level it creates toxicity or adverse effects for the body. And the mechanisms and cofactors involved.
The debate is ONLY really about dosage. We all agree on toxicity... it’s just at what level does it hit? And what impact is it having at a cell/mitochondrial/metabolic/whatever- we-choose level that can impact a number of bodily functions? Changes we are now seeing and believing “normal” or healthy that are in fact, symptoms of a body fighting toxicity.

But the dosage is relative to the cofactors.

In my view it's important to remember it's an imbalance as opposed to toxicity - as amazoniac mentioned there's highly likely to be a functional vitamin A deficiency in this state.

Bringing the cofactors in line should allow for the stored vitamin A to be utilised and for mineral balance and reuptake to occur (alongside all the hormonal implications of vitamin A).

I do think it's important to conceptualise it correctly so you, and others (and me!) don't get into trouble later on. Vitamin A used correctly is not a toxic substance, and if a person is imbalanced in vitamin A then they need to restore cofactors so that they can utilise the vitamin A they have.

With health being transient this might mean cravings eventually changing and perhaps enjoying vitamin A rich foods again (nb: this won't happen if we get all neurotic and class it as a poison or enemy!) .

 

[Amazoniac]

Dose is low in this study and the length of time supplemented not long enough considering it is stored. In addition, the variables that can impact at a low level of supplementation like access to sunlight etc at this level nullifies the result for me.
The accumulative effects over time could show totally different results.
I think we all agree this is really about dosage and at what level it creates toxicity or adverse effects for the body. And the mechanisms and cofactors involved.
The debate is ONLY really about dosage. We all agree on toxicity... it’s just at what level does it hit? And what impact is it having at a cell/mitochondrial/metabolic/whatever- we-choose level that can impact a number of bodily functions? Changes we are now seeing and believing “normal” or healthy that are in fact, symptoms of a body fighting toxicity.

The dose is physiological: equivalent to about 1800 IU of retinol.
What does you means by length not being enough? They labelled iron to track absorption.
If you're too concerned about it, just avoid vitamin A in your meal that's richest in iron, it's simple.

iron absorption was 20–30% lower when coffee was given with the meal than when water was given instead

 

[Amazoniac]

Check these out (it's what they found to be elevated in kidney disease):
- Retinol Binding Protein-4 and Adiponectin Levels in Thyroid Overt and Subclinical Dysfunction
- Retinol Binding Protein-4 Elevation Is Associated with Serum Thyroid-Stimulating Hormone Level Independently of Obesity in Elderly Subjects with Normal Glucose Tolerance

 

[MarcelZD]

But the dosage is relative to the cofactors.

In my view it's important to remember it's an imbalance as opposed to toxicity - as amazoniac mentioned there's highly likely to be a functional vitamin A deficiency in this state.

Bringing the cofactors in line should allow for the stored vitamin A to be utilised and for mineral balance and reuptake to occur (alongside all the hormonal implications of vitamin A).

I do think it's important to conceptualise it correctly so you, and others (and me!) don't get into trouble later on. Vitamin A used correctly is not a toxic substance, and if a person is imbalanced in vitamin A then they need to restore cofactors so that they can utilise the vitamin A they have.

With health being transient this might mean cravings eventually changing and perhaps enjoying vitamin A rich foods again (nb: this won't happen if we get all neurotic and class it as a poison or enemy!) .

However, at least in my case, that doesn't explain the seeming benefits of a vitamin A restricted diet. I used to eat a highly micronutrient dense diet and supplemented with all the usual vitamins (except VA), and it never did much for me. It's the vitamin A restriction that makes the difference.

 

[somuch4food]

I think Peat might have had an ace up his sleeve all this time with aspirin: Effect of aspirin administration on retinoic acid toxicity in mice. - PubMed - NCBI

Can someone access the study to validate it?

There's an abstract on this website: Effect of aspirin administration on retinoic acid toxicity in mice

EDIT: Nevermind, there's another study that was unable to reproduce results: Failure of indomethacin and aspirin to protect against retinoic acid toxicity

 

[InChristAlone]

Check these out (it's what they found to be elevated in kidney disease):
- Retinol Binding Protein-4 and Adiponectin Levels in Thyroid Overt and Subclinical Dysfunction
- Retinol Binding Protein-4 Elevation Is Associated with Serum Thyroid-Stimulating Hormone Level Independently of Obesity in Elderly Subjects with Normal Glucose Tolerance

I thought RBP was a good thing? It means the vitamin A won't be free to do a lot of damage.

 

[Amazoniac]

I thought RBP was a good thing? It means the vitamin A won't be free to do a lot of damage.

Yes, but when it's out of range it indicates issues.

Hypervitaminosis A is prevalent in children with CKD and contributes to hypercalcemia

↳ Isoforms of Retinol binding protein 4 (RBP4) are increased in chronic diseases of the kidney but not of the liver
It seems that when it's too low it points to liver problems, and when it's high, kidneys.

 

[sunraiser]

However, at least in my case, that doesn't explain the seeming benefits of a vitamin A restricted diet. I used to eat a highly micronutrient dense diet and supplemented with all the usual vitamins (except VA), and it never did much for me. It's the vitamin A restriction that makes the difference.

The benefits make sense to me. The biggest consequence in my opinion is mineral imbalance. If a person has been too high in vitamin A and too low in D and/or K2 then they'll at the very least be skewed towards phosphorous over calcium (in reality it's far more complex). The body has to work to find balance but only so much can be done over long periods.

A nutrient dense diet when mineral metabolism and stores are completely skewed is more likely to exacerbate problems, while moving to a less nutrient dense diet (especially white grains) will provide calories without creating further imbalance and stressing the body.

Especially when it comes to phosphorous - white rice and sourdough are going to be more tolerable.

In my view you'll eventually run into insulin resistance issues this way as you're slowly using up nutrients to metabolise the empty carbs.

I personally favour using some vitamin D and k2 (mk4 actually does seem necessary, though I've said otherwise in the past) as it allows the minerals your deficient in to be restored, as opposed to just making the problem less severe. Both options might perhaps end with the same result provided a person has lots of sun access when it feels good to them.

On the note of functional vitamin A deficiency, I recently have been supplementing retinol palmitate to some good effect, however the improvements haven't lasted. I believe the supplements force vitamin A metabolism when the body isn't necessarily ready due to mineral balance issues. Vitamin A is heavily involved in hormone signalling but we obviously need cofactors in place for robust health.

I think retinol supplements are perhaps best left behind unless one has gone overboard on vitamin D and k2 for a long time. But in that case some chicken or lamb liver to craving is maybe safer.

 

[InChristAlone]

The benefits make sense to me. The biggest consequence in my opinion is mineral imbalance. If a person has been too high in vitamin A and too low in D and/or K2 then they'll at the very least be skewed towards phosphorous over calcium (in reality it's far more complex). The body has to work to find balance but only so much can be done over long periods.

A nutrient dense diet when mineral metabolism and stores are completely skewed is more likely to exacerbate problems, while moving to a less nutrient dense diet (especially white grains) will provide calories without creating further imbalance and stressing the body.

Especially when it comes to phosphorous - white rice and sourdough are going to be more tolerable.

In my view you'll eventually run into insulin resistance issues this way as you're slowly using up nutrients to metabolise the empty carbs.

I personally favour using some vitamin D and k2 (mk4 actually does seem necessary, though I've said otherwise in the past) as it allows the minerals your deficient in to be restored, as opposed to just making the problem less severe. Both options might perhaps end with the same result provided a person has lots of sun access when it feels good to them.

On the note of functional vitamin A deficiency, I recently have been supplementing retinol palmitate to some good effect, however the improvements haven't lasted. I believe the supplements force vitamin A metabolism when the body isn't necessarily ready due to mineral balance issues. Vitamin A is heavily involved in hormone signalling but we obviously need cofactors in place for robust health.

I think retinol supplements are perhaps best left behind unless one has gone overboard on vitamin D and k2 for a long time. But in that case some chicken or lamb liver to craving is maybe safer.

The benefits don't last because it isn't a vitamin A deficiency. That's why studies looking at short term trials of using a vitamin A supplement are bunk in my opinion. What about long term? I never want to get rid of a symptom in the short term but keep having to use high amounts to keep it at bay (*ahem* Chris Masterjohn) especially when using fat solubles. Water soluble vitamins that are easily flushed out like ascorbic acid I'm not worried about.

 

[sunraiser]

The benefits don't last because it isn't a vitamin A deficiency. That's why studies looking at short term trials of using a vitamin A supplement are bunk in my opinion. What about long term? I never want to get rid of a symptom in the short term but keep having to use high amounts to keep it at bay (*ahem* Chris Masterjohn) especially when using fat solubles. Water soluble vitamins that are easily flushed out like ascorbic acid I'm not worried about.

The effects were very apparent on sleep and general wellbeing.

The biggest one was restored sun tolerance which vitamin A is directly involved in.

Functional deficiency makes sense to me, even if it's just via mineral balance. Again, to be absolutely clear I have stopped supplementing vitamin A.

 

[Steven Bussinger]

I had started reading the e-book and I am not crazy about his tone. However, I do think he is right about not going blind. I had read the older George Wald studies on photoconduction, and it appears to me that retinal in the eye serves merely as a 'sunshade.'

His writing also aggravates me. He writes exactly like Jack Kruse. Lots of pomp and fluff. Copious leading questions and repetition of material. And then he'll skip over an essential mechanism when he introduces something, you'll be confused, and then he finally mentions the crucial factor in passing 20 pages later. He likes to write and write and write, which is why he has 3 books and they're hugely longer than necessary. I think he goes into a sort of alpha state when writing, so organized thinking is dropped in favor of rhetorical prose. Like I said, this is exactly like Jack Kruse.

On this VA depletion diet, since about 2-3 months in, I've noticed that when I go outside for the first time upon waking, from a dark room into the bright outdoors:

• my eyes adapt to the bright light much quicker than in the past
• there is less eye strain, and the eye strain does not last as long
• once my eyes adjust, I have no eye strain at all

I didn't realize it before, but I now realize I must have had a dull strain at all times when I was out on a bright sunny day — because now, I can go without sunglasses or a hat to shade my eyes and it feels completely pain-free, no strain or discomfort at all. That must developed so gradually that I didn't even notice a change — but I've only noticed now that it's gone. It feels like how I remember it used to feel when I was younger, no discomfort at all in my eyes on even the brightest sunny day and with no shade or sunglasses.

So this is another common symptom — increased sensitivity to sunlight — associated with (i.e falsely blamed on) aging that may actually just be caused by a life-long process of accumulating retinol in the body tissues as a result of excessive VA intake.

Does anyone else see the contradiction here? Travis says retinol acts as a sunshade, yet VAD improves light sensitivity? I'm wondering if VAD doesn't prompt the body to produce RBP or some other carrier protein that actually fixes these problems with retinol. Remember that toxicity and deficiency have some overlap in symptoms. Or maybe there is no overlap, if we're confining our interpretations of toxicity and deficiency to like two studies done in the 1920's.

Also, you say after months on this diet, vitamin A sensitivity gets worse. If I was undertaking a diet, I would want my sensitivities to lessen, for my bodies robustness to increase. Suddenly developing severe allergies and reactions to very normal foods, months down the line, would be a big red flag for me that this diet isn't healthy, or doing my body good. That doesn't sound like you are getting healthier to me.

I have a general distrust of protocols that make you less robust, especially when they're so restrictive in diet. Is that how we're supposed to live, constantly in fear of most foods and isolating ourselves from our wider community?

Nobody is being cured, they are on a medical protocol. This is symptom management, just like in other auto-immune protocols.

By the way, for those of who have read the books, have you noticed that Genereux doesn't have a clue what the literal meaning of "auto-immune" is? He thinks "auto" means "automatic", and not "self". It would be one thing if he had one isolated section about it. Instead, he makes a huge **** of himself every time he uses his "automagic-immune" rant as a capstone when concluding a line of argumentation.

Penniston, Kristina. "The acute and chronic toxic effects of vitamin A." The American journal of clinical nutrition (2006)

'Clinical observations, such as hypercalcemia and elevated alkaline phosphatase, in persons with vitamin A toxicity clearly suggested that vitamin A affects bone. ​

Is ALP a blood test that people should take if they are convinced of their vitamin A toxicity? And should the reference ranges be trusted, since it's probably canon to presume we are all vitamin A toxic?

By Mori’s observation, and definition of the disease, it included five distinct symptoms (comorbidities if you prefer that term). These were: diarrhea, abdominal expansion, excessive appetite, night blindness, xerosis of the conjunctiva, and thinning of the hair.

In addition to these five specific symptoms, he also documented the children commonly having dry skin, and having significant sensitivity to sunlight too. One other very important little detail he documented was that the condition was more prevalent in the summer months. Therefore, clearly, the Hikan disease condition was much more than just an eye disease. Nonetheless, Mori very successfully treated the disease by just adding more fats to the diets of the children. He was quite certain that it was just the additional fats and not something special hidden within the fats, that was responsible for the recovery from the disease. ​

Please note that the condition was more prevalent during summer months, when D would be higher. Suggesting a possible imbalance between A and D. What kind of fats did he use? Was it butter, like Dr. Weston Price? If so, was it one of the quinones, an Activator X? I know there has been a post allegedly debunking the A/D counter-theory. I haven't read it yet because I was trying to quickly get through this monster thread and it was text dump that required significant investment.

Also, please note the symptom of excessive appetite. I know there was one poster here who tried VAD and said they were eating as much as someone twice their size.

I do think it's quite possible that we have made vitamin A dangerous. Between the fortification with unnatural components, continuous and increased intake of carotenes from plants year round, and the possible vitamin A metabolism derangement posited by @dfspcc20 (accutane), we have changed our relationship to vitamin A.
However, we should remember that, as Dr. Price found, the liver and other organs were highly prized foods in healthy cultures according to their culinary tradition. They were given to couples expecting to procreate. Perhaps adults are at risk of vitamin A toxicity, but we should be careful to not let this new obsession spill over and interfere with the healthy development of children.

 

[Steven Bussinger]

What is his reasoning behind this? Personally, I doubt it.

There's obviously many factors, but I would say the 4 biggest factors are-

1. Higher iron intake than at anytime since 1909. Since a lot of this is due to fortification, likely highest in all of history.
2. Sedentary lifestyle. Less iron lost through sweat and incidental blood loss.
3. Complete reversal on bloodletting in the late 1800s. It was THE go to medical practice all across the world for centuries. Then basically, it becomes quackery.
4. Reduction and Elimination of parasitic intestinal worms in modern countries. Those things fed on host blood.

I'm always baffled when Iron researchers overlook ALL of those four factors.

EDIT- One other thing to mention- both iron and calcium oppose the absorption of the other. In fact, iron researcher E.D. Weinberg takes a calcium channel blocker to help keep his own iron stores low. One overlooked factor in the US, UK, and Canada could be iron fortification, which could essentially make a normal calcium diet into a low calcium diet, and trigger release of prolactin and PTH.

You have been dropping some knowledge on iron that I haven't really seen fleshed out before @tankasnowgod. Is it in Weinberg's book?

 

[tankasnowgod]

You have been dropping some knowledge on iron that I haven't really seen fleshed out before @tankasnowgod. Is it in Weinberg's book?

Most of it is. Weinberg's book is fantastic, easily the best health related book I have ever read. Weinberg didn't mention the Calcium Channel blocker in the book, that was in an interview he gave- Eugene D. Weinberg on Iron Toxicity - Rogue Health and Fitness

I also read Dr. Facchini's book, and he pretty much starts off with the hookworm idea as a big factor that kept iron stores low for most of human history.

 

[tankasnowgod]

I thought RBP was a good thing? It means the vitamin A won't be free to do a lot of damage.

The idea behind RBP has got me thinking that supplemental A (like Retinal Palmitate) might be a lot more damaging than the same amount of A from a food source. Comparing, say, a a glass of fortified skim milk with a unfortified glass of whole. Same amount of Vitamin A (in theory), but if the fortified glass doesn't have the RBP that whole milk would naturally have. Similar to supplemental iron in grains vs. an equal amount of iron in Red Meat.

 

[InChristAlone]

His writing also aggravates me. He writes exactly like Jack Kruse. Lots of pomp and fluff. Copious leading questions and repetition of material. And then he'll skip over an essential mechanism when he introduces something, you'll be confused, and then he finally mentions the crucial factor in passing 20 pages later. He likes to write and write and write, which is why he has 3 books and they're hugely longer than necessary. I think he goes into a sort of alpha state when writing, so organized thinking is dropped in favor of rhetorical prose. Like I said, this is exactly like Jack Kruse.



Does anyone else see the contradiction here? Travis says retinol acts as a sunshade, yet VAD improves light sensitivity? I'm wondering if VAD doesn't prompt the body to produce RBP or some other carrier protein that actually fixes these problems with retinol. Remember that toxicity and deficiency have some overlap in symptoms. Or maybe there is no overlap, if we're confining our interpretations of toxicity and deficiency to like two studies done in the 1920's.



I have a general distrust of protocols that make you less robust, especially when they're so restrictive in diet. Is that how we're supposed to live, constantly in fear of most foods and isolating ourselves from our wider community?

Nobody is being cured, they are on a medical protocol. This is symptom management, just like in other auto-immune protocols.

By the way, for those of who have read the books, have you noticed that Genereux doesn't have a clue what the literal meaning of "auto-immune" is? He thinks "auto" means "automatic", and not "self". It would be one thing if he had one isolated section about it. Instead, he makes a huge **** of himself every time he uses his "automagic-immune" rant as a capstone when concluding a line of argumentation.




Is ALP a blood test that people should take if they are convinced of their vitamin A toxicity? And should the reference ranges be trusted, since it's probably canon to presume we are all vitamin A toxic?



Please note that the condition was more prevalent during summer months, when D would be higher. Suggesting a possible imbalance between A and D. What kind of fats did he use? Was it butter, like Dr. Weston Price? If so, was it one of the quinones, an Activator X? I know there has been a post allegedly debunking the A/D counter-theory. I haven't read it yet because I was trying to quickly get through this monster thread and it was text dump that required significant investment.

Also, please note the symptom of excessive appetite. I know there was one poster here who tried VAD and said they were eating as much as someone twice their size.

I do think it's quite possible that we have made vitamin A dangerous. Between the fortification with unnatural components, continuous and increased intake of carotenes from plants year round, and the possible vitamin A metabolism derangement posited by @dfspcc20 (accutane), we have changed our relationship to vitamin A.
However, we should remember that, as Dr. Price found, the liver and other organs were highly prized foods in healthy cultures according to their culinary tradition. They were given to couples expecting to procreate. Perhaps adults are at risk of vitamin A toxicity, but we should be careful to not let this new obsession spill over and interfere with the healthy development of children.

I havent even begun to read his books. I want to go through the literature myself because Im sure Grant got some stuff wrong. The stuff I'm seeing written by scientists I wish was talked about more by WAPF and the ray peat forum. It seemed all of them had no fear of toxicity. Even after quoting Peat saying 5,000 is enough for most people, we have people regularly consuming double that if not 10 times more than that a week. I truly believe this is a huge problem in these communities. The first world simply does not need to ever worry about getting it.

 

[tankasnowgod]

I havent even begun to read his books. I want to go through the literature myself because Im sure Grant got some stuff wrong. The stuff I'm seeing written by scientists I wish was talked about more by WAPF and the ray peat forum. It seemed all of them had no fear of toxicity. Even after quoting Peat saying 5,000 is enough for most people, we have people regularly consuming double that if not 10 times more than that a week. I truly believe this is a huge problem in these communities. The first world simply does not need to ever worry about getting it.

Yep. I think Peat also mentions that beta carotene can itself be problematic (while also recommending carrots to cleanse the bowel). The more I've been thinking about it, the more I can see several potential issues with Vitamin A, and levels even the "average" person gets, possibly being-

1. Straight up A Toxicity
2. Skewed D to A ratio
3. Other skewed cofactors (like k2)
4. Beta Carotene Toxicity
5. Toxic A metabolites, like Accuatne and Retin-A
6. Increased sensitivity to UV and/or blue light (again, maybe a carotene issue_
7. Lack of protective proteins (like RBP) for Retinyl Palmitate, in vitamins and fortification

 

[tankasnowgod]

Expanding on the beta carotene idea a bit....

I had a former co-worker with a mutlicolor tattoo, and she happened to mention one day that the yellow part ALWAYS got sunburned when she went to the beach. I told her that actually makes sense, as certain color inks would absorb the opposite light, so the yellow part of her tat was likely absorbing more UV than other parts.

Since carotene can gather in callouses and such, it would make sense that it could be doing the same thing. In fact, Grant mentions on his blog that a UV light can inspect areas for carotene.

Personally, I'm starting to swap out those beta carotene foods (like orange juice) for red/purple/blue ones, like raspberries, grape juice, cherry cider, and such. I always remember hearing about how those purple potatoes were supposed to be really healthy (from the purple compounds) back in my paleo days. I think grapes and blackberries have the same compounds. It'd be real funny if those compounds were basically a natural methylene blue.

 

[MarcelZD]

I have since completely cut out dairy, and started relying on gelatin and lean beef for protein. I get sugar from grape juice and coke. I also eat quite a bit of white bread and pasta as I cannot stand white rice.

It is srange, but it seems like this is the silver bullet for me. My seborrheic skin condition is clearing up. I also have an issue that I presume to be either bacterial or fungal in nature judging by my frequently coated tongue. This appears to be improving by the day. Not to be gross, but I noticed weird white strains in my stool, and whatever it is I'm glad my body's getting rid of it.