stargazer1111
Member
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2017
- Messages
- 425
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.
Yeah, I think Kummerow initially went after trans fats specifically but later realized the negative effects of peroxidized PUFAs.