One Reason Why Ray Peat Recommends Low(er) Fat Diet

[tca300]

@haidut What is wrong with high dose caffeine ( coffee )? What do you consider a high dose?
Ray had mentioned that statistically people who consume 5 or more cups of coffee daily are the healthiest, which is 500mg+ of caffeine per day, based on the average cup of coffee.

 

[haidut]

@haidut What is wrong with high dose caffeine ( coffee )? What do you consider a high dose?
Ray had mentioned that statistically people who consume 5 or more cups of coffee daily are the healthiest, which is 500mg+ of caffeine per day, based on the average cup of coffee.

I think a single dose of more than 400mg can cause stress response for a lot of people, especially one with poor liver function. So, caffeine consumption should be gauged as per the response it generates and the dose adjusted accordingly. You can still have 5 cups of coffee, just not in one sitting

 

[tca300]

@haidut Oh! I see what your saying! Thanks!

 

[mayweatherking]

Cypro helped a lot, as did niacinamide and thiamine. Caffeine also helped lose some weight but the high doses should be used sparingly IMO. As little as 200mg caffeine daily is enough for liver benefits.
Doing mundane, routine work and being under a lot of stress professionally was probably the primary driver of bad metabolism. Very few things can stress you as much as being overworked and working on things that you feel are absolutely meaningless. Once I figured out a way to reduce that burden things seemed to improve in a very systemic fundamental way and gradually I felt very little need to supplement with anything on a daily basis.

Cool.. was it just high stress? Do u think u had enough preg floating around or cholesterol, or were you lacking there also and you were experiencing cortisol steal?

If u extend hypo with no preg floating around, caffeine could b counter intuitive ?

 

[Owen B]

@haidut You've said that you like lentils due to their nutritional and amino acid profile not that long ago. Lentils are a legume.



Yes and it will produce butyric acid, a saturated fat.

Tater Haters Love Resistant Starch



Not all beans. Fava beans. And it's not really the fava beans, it's an pretty rare enzyme deficiency. It's called "favism" and it's caused by a G6PD deficiency (glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase deficiency)

What Is G6PD Deficiency



I can't find anything supporting this. Please provide sources.



Fruits and grains are above ground. People who are anti-grain use the "subsistence" argument in the wrong way. They say they are nutrient poor and are only used for subsistence. Well, that's exactly the point. The human being needs that constant energy source which is exactly why all successful populations used grains as their main fuel and still do. You can't have thriving humans without them, or some form of starch which shows the human being is hardwired to have a boiled starch base for energy. Today there are ways to bypass boiled starch as ones main daily energy but that doesn't take anything away from the original point. You can get your other micronutrients elsewhere but you need that main macronutrient of carbohydrate for calories.



Non-human animals don't know how to process and cook legumes. And even if we fed them our processed and cooked versions, they are not us.



But humans are clever:





Studies showing toxicity of compounds in beans is eliminated from cooking:

"The haemagglutinin (lectin), which occurs naturally in the red kidney bean, is inactivated by thorough cooking of well soaked beans. In many of the outbreaks reported the implicated beans were consumed raw or following an inadequate heat process."

Food poisoning from raw red kidney beans. - PubMed - NCBI

Red kidney bean poisoning in the UK: an analysis of 50 suspected incidents between 1976 and 1989.

Studies on germination conditions and antioxidant contents of wheat grain. - PubMed - NCBI

Changes of folates, dietary fiber, and proteins in wheat as affected by germination. - PubMed - NCBI

Comparative study on nutrient composition, phytochemical, and functional characteristics of raw, germinated, and fermented Moringa oleifera seed flour

Effect of fermentation on antinutrients, and total and extractable minerals of high and low phytate corn genotypes. - PubMed - NCBI

Many talk about raw or undercooked beans/vegetables, but I don't know anyone who eats beans/vegetables raw/undercooked. It's a weird thing to say.

The Seventh-day Adventists in California are long lived bean eaters:

Adventist Health Studies - Wikipedia

Why Loma Linda residents live longer than the rest of us: They treat the body like a temple

Ellsworth Wareham who's now 103



Yes and it saved his life and no it is not "mostly beans." And why do you expect a stressed out 70 year old to look like he's 50?

Say what you will about Ornish and Esselstyn but they are the only ones publishing clinical trials showing reversal of the number one killer through diet: http://www.healthpromoting.com/sites/default/files/JFP_06307_Article1.pdf

Ornish allowed fat free yogurt.



All the people I know drinking whole milk, eating low fiber, high meat and low starch have terrible digestion issues, terrible skin quality, and they don't sleep much at night.

Whole Health Source: Beans, Lentils, and the Paleo Diet

Legumes: the most important dietary predictor of survival in older people of different ethnicities

Cooked kidney beans have 1% of the lectins of raw kidney beans: BBB - Phytohaemagglutinin

Some Lectins Anti-cancer:

Lectins with Potential for Anti-Cancer Therapy

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1...

http://ar.iiarjournals.org/content/25...

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2...

Boiling spinach removed about 60% of the oxalates: http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/j..

.

I got back on this thread because I've been having prostate swelling and I can't locate the problem. So I saw Haidut's post on BPH and endotoxin.

I'm still not sure about the starch vs. no starch issue and you've provided some great info here.

But what's your thinking on endotoxin then? If starch (boiled) is OK are you still concerned about endotoxin and if so, where do you think it comes from?

 

[CLASH]

@DaveFoster @haidut
Do you guys have access to the full study involving the hockey players? In the abstract they say that cortisol increased for the high carb group which @Wagner83 pointed out was contradictory. I thought so as well. I also thought it was a bit contradictory that the SHBG increased as monosaccharides are known to decrease SHBG (I would assume monosaccharide transport to the liver would be increased with the higher carb assuming they were eating some sugar or amylopectin based starches). However, I reread the study today and saw in the abstract that the higher carb group, had a negative energy balance: "The endocrine differences between the teams may be explained by a relative negative energy balance in DIF" (DIF was the high carb group). So the cortisol and the increased SHBG could have been due to the caloric deficit which is known to increase both cortisol and SHBG. Also, if the carbs the hockey players were eating contained a lot of fiber then SHBG could have also been increased via this pathway as well. With this in mind this study actually shows that higher carb intake not only increases testosterone but does so on caloric deficit. I wanted full access to the study to see the extent of the caloric deficit and the fiber content or at least the food the hockey players ate to increase their carb content. Thanks for your guys time. Happy holidays.

 

[DaveFoster]

@DaveFoster @haidut
Do you guys have access to the full study involving the hockey players? In the abstract they say that cortisol increased for the high carb group which @Wagner83 pointed out was contradictory. I thought so as well. I also thought it was a bit contradictory that the SHBG increased as monosaccharides are known to decrease SHBG (I would assume monosaccharide transport to the liver would be increased with the higher carb assuming they were eating some sugar or amylopectin based starches). However, I reread the study today and saw in the abstract that the higher carb group, had a negative energy balance: "The endocrine differences between the teams may be explained by a relative negative energy balance in DIF" (DIF was the high carb group). So the cortisol and the increased SHBG could have been due to the caloric deficit which is known to increase both cortisol and SHBG. Also, if the carbs the hockey players were eating contained a lot of fiber then SHBG could have also been increased via this pathway as well. With this in mind this study actually shows that higher carb intake not only increases testosterone but does so on caloric deficit. I wanted full access to the study to see the extent of the caloric deficit and the fiber content or at least the food the hockey players ate to increase their carb content. Thanks for your guys time. Happy holidays.

Cortisol decreased with a high carbohydrate intake. I had the same confusion when talking with haidut, and he clarified.

 

[CLASH]

@DaveFoster
If im not mistaken cortisol increased:
"Serum concentrations of testosterone, SHBG, NST and cortisol increased significantly during the study period in the DIF group and were, with the exception of SHBG, significantly higher than in the SSK group at the end of the study"

If I recall correctly I think you were confused with testosterone not cortisol.

Either way I thought it was interesting that testostetone increased on the higher carb diet even though the hockey players were in a caloric deficit. The only reason the cortisol and SHBG elevated was because of the deficit, atleast from my point of view.

 

[DaveFoster]

@DaveFoster
If im not mistaken cortisol increased:
"Serum concentrations of testosterone, SHBG, NST and cortisol increased significantly during the study period in the DIF group and were, with the exception of SHBG, significantly higher than in the SSK group at the end of the study"

If I recall correctly I think you were confused with testosterone not cortisol.

Either way I thought it was interesting that testostetone increased on the higher carb diet even though the hockey players were in a caloric deficit. The only reason the cortisol and SHBG elevated was because of the deficit, atleast from my point of view.

Well, testosterone tends to oppose the effects of cortisol, so the point's moot. The ratio would be more insightful.

 

[stargazer1111]

I know that feeling. This study suggests at least 14g saturated fat/1000 kcal for testosterone production:

Source: ARTICLES | Journal of Applied Physiology

The curve for saturated fat seems to be linear as well, but I'm sure there's a point of diminshing returns. Certainly 16 g/1000 kcal would continue the linear trend.

For a 4,000 calorie diet, that's somewhere around 60 grams of saturated fat and 80 grams would likely provide a similar increase.

Here's another study that of hockey teams:
Effects of a diet regimen on pituitary and steroid hormones in male ice hockey players. - PubMed - NCBI
" One of the teams (DIF, n = 22) participated in a special dietary program including reduction in fat from approximately 40 per cent of total energy intake (E%) to less than 30 E% and an increase in carbohydrate intake from 45 E% to about 55 E%, while the other (SSK, n = 21) served as a control group and had no special dietary program."

"Serum concentrations of testosterone, SHBG, NST and cortisol increased significantly during the study period in the DIF group and were, with the exception of SHBG, significantly higher than in the SSK group at the end of the study."

Basically dropping the fat calories from 40% to 30% decreased androgen concentrations. I'm assuming high-calorie diets, as these are sports teams; somewhere between 4k-5k calories per day.

It could just be a decrease in calories due to the removal of a dense calorie source, such as saturated fat.

Otherwise, there's evidence that at least 40% of a 4,000 calorie diet should be fat; ideally saturated.

That translates to around 140 grams daily.

I just have to comment on these graphs. The R-squared values aren't all that great, particularly on the PUFA/SAFA graph. When you remove the outlier value on that graph, the trend is much more subtle. The same thing is true for the protein/carb graph. Removal of the outlier would result in a flat line that indicates no change in testosterone at all regardless of protein/carb ratio.

The SAFA and MUFA g/1000 cals have better fit lines, but they still aren't terribly great. In biostatistics, we would call those associations moderate.

 

[dreamcatcher]

I should have mentioned the lentils, I thought I did but I guess I forgot. Lentils are probably safe and certainly safer than other legumes. I am not saying that legumes cannot be eaten, just that they are not optimal food for humans. They are a food when there is nothing else around though.
How do you know Clinton's life was saved by the Ornish diet? Clinton had his bypass in 2004 and his Ornish diet started long after that. So, it was probably his bypass that played a much more direct role in saving his life.
Clinton's Heart Bypass Surgery Called a Success (washingtonpost.com)

More importantly, Bill's issues go back to his youth. As he said, he was a "fat band boy". I don't think the beans played any role in improving his health. He looks worse than Bernie Sanders and Bernie is older. Again more importantly, Bernie looked worse than Clinton 20 years ago but somehow stabilized while eating junk food and pretty much what he wants. I am not saying the beans did Clinton in, his heart disease did. But the beans do not seem to be helping. And that high protein low carb diet he did while practicing intermittent fasting was probably not good either.
Is Bill Clinton a Vegan or Not? Turns Out, He's as Baffled About Dieting as You Are.
"...In his 2004 memoir, My Life, Clinton describes his younger self as a “fat band boy.” By age 13 he weighed 185 pounds. One summer, while still a teenager, he designed his own diet: a high-protein, low-carb plan that allowed for only one meal a day. Clinton claims he lost 20 pounds in one month. "
Let me dig for the beans/lymphoma link. It was linked to only two of them - I think Burkitt's and Hodgkin's. But I will find the studies and post here.

@haidut What do you think of Dr Ellsworth Wareham who had astonishing health until his death at 104? He was so cognitive in his very advanced age and no bone issues. Apparently he followed a LOW FAT vegan diet in the last 50+ years.

 

[Jessie]

Low fat vegan diets will presumably supply the same suppression of FAO as any other low-fat diet. If the metabolic rate can stay high, then the gut motility will likely not become compromised. These are the two most important factors. 1) keeping free fatty acids low, and 2), keeping transit time high to prevent LPS accumulation. That doc was avoiding both of these issues most likely. And like most low-fat vegans, if he was also a kale fanatic, he was likely balancing calcium/phosphate better then most standard dieters.

Of course, clearly things don't fall this beautifully in line for every vegan. If anyone has kept track with the so called "starchivore" community, many of these folks have shown signs of considerable advanced aging and even dementia (in the case of McDougall) in recent years. Clearly starch is causing a inflammatory response in some of them. So this appears to be a very case specific phenomena. I suspect those who respond well to starch based diets have less overall PUFA accumulation. I think PUFA accumulation is probably the primary cause to excess endotoxin buildup and intestinal dysbiosis. And once you have a bad endotoxin problem, starch isn't going to do you any favors.

 

[stargazer1111]

Low fat vegan diets will presumably supply the same suppression of FAO as any other low-fat diet. If the metabolic rate can stay high, then the gut motility will likely not become compromised. These are the two most important factors. 1) keeping free fatty acids low, and 2), keeping transit time high to prevent LPS accumulation. That doc was avoiding both of these issues most likely. And like most low-fat vegans, if he was also a kale fanatic, he was likely balancing calcium/phosphate better then most standard dieters.

Of course, clearly things don't fall this beautifully in line for every vegan. If anyone has kept track with the so called "starchivore" community, many of these folks have shown signs of considerable advanced aging and even dementia (in the case of McDougall) in recent years. Clearly starch is causing a inflammatory response in some of them. So this appears to be a very case specific phenomena. I suspect those who respond well to starch based diets have less overall PUFA accumulation. I think PUFA accumulation is probably the primary cause to excess endotoxin buildup and intestinal dysbiosis. And once you have a bad endotoxin problem, starch isn't going to do you any favors.

McDougall looks awful. I'm not sure at this point if he is deluded and still believes the crap he peddles or if he's outright lying to keep his income stream.

I think for him, not enough protein and high insulin from the starch-centric diet are at play here. He also touts the "benefits" of the polyunsaturated fats though he recommends keeping total fat intake below 8% of calories.

This is why I don't trust nutrition experts who write books and create programs based on them. They have a financial incentive to lie to me if they discover they are incorrect. Although it doesn't prove Peat's ideas are correct (though I believe many of them are), I am more inclined to trust him because his information is free on his website and he doesn't write books and make all this money doing seminars and programs all the time.

 

[Jessie]

McDougall looks awful. I'm not sure at this point if he is deluded and still believes the crap he peddles or if he's outright lying to keep his income stream.

I think for him, not enough protein and high insulin from the starch-centric diet are at play here. He also touts the "benefits" of the polyunsaturated fats though he recommends keeping total fat intake below 8% of calories.

This is why I don't trust nutrition experts who write books and create programs based on them. They have a financial incentive to lie to me if they discover they are incorrect. Although it doesn't prove Peat's ideas are correct (though I believe many of them are), I am more inclined to trust him because his information is free on his website and he doesn't write books and make all this money doing seminars and programs all the time.

I mean, if you were to prioritize PUFA/MUFA on a 8% fat diet you'd still be significantly lower in PUFA intake then most of the western population. Ray is the only person I know who takes fat avoidance to the next level (some may even claim fringe level), by stating "essential fatty acids" don't even exist. McDougall clearly looks like crap, and I think he's got beginning stages of Alzheimers. The last interview I saw him in he looked like straight s**t, and was really disconnected and delusional acting. But yeah, I still think vegans tend to fair better then low carbers, in terms of chronic disease and stuff. I wouldn't really consider him a expert.

I've got my inner circle (Peat, Lonsdale, Jamiet, Barnes, Selye, Pauling, Masterjohn, etc.) I pay attention to and not many others. It's important to surround yourself with information from the best and brightest. Unfortunately, the best and brightest isn't always the most widely recognized. In many cases they're purposefully suppressed.

 

[stargazer1111]

I mean, if you were to prioritize PUFA/MUFA on a 8% fat diet you'd still be significantly lower in PUFA intake then most of the western population. Ray is the only person I know who takes fat avoidance to the next level (some may even claim fringe level), by stating "essential fatty acids" don't even exist. McDougall clearly looks like crap, and I think he's got beginning stages of Alzheimers. The last interview I saw him in he looked like straight s**t, and was really disconnected and delusional acting. But yeah, I still think vegans tend to fair better then low carbers, in terms of chronic disease and stuff. I wouldn't really consider him a expert.

I've got my inner circle (Peat, Lonsdale, Jamiet, Barnes, Selye, Pauling, Masterjohn, etc.) I pay attention to and not many others. It's important to surround yourself with information from the best and brightest. Unfortunately, the best and brightest isn't always the most widely recognized. In many cases they're purposefully suppressed.

Well, I wouldn't lump MUFA and PUFA together. MUFA have a peroxidation index almost as low as SAFA, so I think MUFA are relatively safe. It depends on what the PUFA/MUFA ratio is. If all of it is PUFA, 8% of calories is getting into the 20's gram wise with the fat intake and if all of it is PUFA, that's definitely not good.

I think Jaminet is wrong. People laud him because he's from Harvard, but his information is heavily biased. He presents only the research against fructose and ignores all the literature supporting Peat's stance. He also calls potatoes and taro safe starches when neither should be considered so. Potatoes have a moderate amount of oxalates and the glycoalkaloids can be problematic for the intestines. Taro is so high in oxalates that it's literally inedible unless you soak and boil it for long periods and even then the oxalate content is so high that it rivals spinach.

Fred Kummerow is one I like, though. He was a cardiologist who rang the bells about lipid peroxidation and polyunsaturated fats even before Peat did.

I think the solution for heart disease is a combination of Pauling, Kummerow, and Barnes's hypotheses. Eliminate polyunsaturated fat, maximize vitamin C, and maximize thyroid function. Vitamin K2 would be a minor, but important player in keeping calcium out of the arterial wall as well.

 

[Recoen]

Well, I wouldn't lump MUFA and PUFA together. MUFA have a peroxidation index almost as low as SAFA, so I think MUFA are relatively safe. It depends on what the PUFA/MUFA ratio is. If all of it is PUFA, 8% of calories is getting into the 20's gram wise with the fat intake and if all of it is PUFA, that's definitely not good.

I think Jaminet is wrong. People laud him because he's from Harvard, but his information is heavily biased. He presents only the research against fructose and ignores all the literature supporting Peat's stance. He also calls potatoes and taro safe starches when neither should be considered so. Potatoes have a moderate amount of oxalates and the glycoalkaloids can be problematic for the intestines. Taro is so high in oxalates that it's literally inedible unless you soak and boil it for long periods and even then the oxalate content is so high that it rivals spinach.

Fred Kummerow is one I like, though. He was a cardiologist who rang the bells about lipid peroxidation and polyunsaturated fats even before Peat did.

I think the solution for heart disease is a combination of Pauling, Kummerow, and Barnes's hypotheses. Eliminate polyunsaturated fat, maximize vitamin C, and maximize thyroid function. Vitamin K2 would be a minor, but important player in keeping calcium out of the arterial wall as well.

Will you share what your current diet looks like?

 

[stargazer1111]

Will you share what your current diet looks like?

1/4 pound 80/20 ground beef plus a little coconut oil 2-3 times per day depending on how much I feel like eating.
Boulder Canyon Coconut Oil Potato Chips. 1-2 servings per day
Fat-free milk with no vitamins added. Roughly the equivalent of 2 quarts with 2-3 tablespoons of sugar, 1/2 teaspoon of iodized salt, 1/2 teaspoon of cocoa powder per cup.
Regular coke (not Mexican). 2 per day usually.
Regular sprite (not Mexican) 1-2 per day usually.
A glass or so of grape juice.
100-200 mg of pure caffeine.
5500 IU vitamin D3
200-300 ug vitamin K2
2-3 grams vitamin C
500 mg extra Magnesium Citrate to balance the high calcium intake

That's it. I feel great as long as I don't try to lower the fat or the sugar and keep the calories high.

 

[Inaut]

Kummerow is the man btw @stargazer1111 . I just looked him up and his diet:)

 

[stargazer1111]

Kummerow is the man btw @stargazer1111 . I just looked him up and his diet:)

Agreed, although I think his hypothesis was incomplete. He did actually have an arterial blockage and bypass surgery at the age of 89 despite his low PUFA diet. I believe this was likely due to insufficient vitamin C intake (perhaps also insufficient vitamin K2 intake) and also maybe too much iron from all the red meat, but that's purely speculation on my part.

His diet likely slowed down the progression of the atherosclerotic lesions which is probably why he didn't have a blockage until age 89.

 

[Jessie]

Yeah Jamiet has biased views regarding starch. I just thought his article on bacteria and metabolic flexibility was a real home run. If it weren't for that, I may would have never broke free of the anti-sugar cult and all those keto frauds pushing sugar as the cause of bacterial overgrowth. Despite his pro-starch bias, he's still anti-PUFA and anti-low carb. He's got some less than ideal views about fermented foods, but other then that he okay. Lets put it this way, if somone has been doing ketogenic dieting for several years and they're sick, the PHD protocol would be a substantial improvement.

I thought Kummerow was focused on trans fats, not PUFA per se? But I don't really know that much about him. I vaguely remember reading a Mark Sisson article several, several years ago about him. But regardless, he probably deserves a tip of the hat as well. Kummerow, Yudkin, Price, etc. anyone who refuted the lipid theory of disease deserves special recognition in my book. Especially considering the fact they knew it wasn't going to do their careers any favors. They rather be true to the science, rather then becoming sell outs. No one deserves more credit in my opinion then scientists actually being scientists, rather then being industry backed puppets.

I think Selye's research into physiological stress was really important regarding heart disease too. Adrenaline plays a very centric role in the formation of the artery degradation.