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

haidut

Member
Forum Supporter
Joined
Mar 18, 2013
Messages
19,798
Location
USA / Europe
Although I have not read anywhere in his articles about this connection, I came upon this study and immediately saw why Ray may be leaning towards a low(er) fat diet. Long story short - high fat diets increase serotonin synthesis and levels in plasma and tissues, and serotonin apparently directly contributed to obesity.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3293832/


"...Expression of tryptophan hydroxylase 1 (TPH1), the rate-limiting enzyme in serotonin (5-HT) biosynthesis, and the 5-HT7 receptor (HTR7), which regulates mammary gland involution, were significantly increased in mammary glands of HFD animals. Additionally, we saw elevation of the inflammatory markers interleukin-6 (IL-6) and tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF- α). These results indicate that consumption of HFD impairs mammary parenchymal tissue and impedes its ability to synthesize and secrete milk, possibly through an increase in 5-HT production within the mammary gland leading to an inflammatory process."

The entire study is good read so I recommend reading it for those that are not bored by biochemical topics.
 

juanitacarlos

Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2012
Messages
417
I know it's subjective, but what do people think constitutes high/low fat? I personally think anything above about 30% is getting into high fat territory.

What do others think?
 

slayers

Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2012
Messages
165
I dont know but I feel best on 50% carb, 25% protein, 25% fat (or 50% carb, 30% fat, 20% protein)
 

Ben

Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2013
Messages
497
RP said he was eating too much of his calories from fat (50% I think), and he said that wasn't good since all fat contains some PUFA, even coconut oil. So he lowered it. A person needs more protein if he or she did a lot of heavy lifting or has been exposed to toxins (because the liver needs amino acids for detoxification), and more carbs if there was cardiovascular exercise. Fat is good before bed according to RP (does anyone know why?), and food doesn't get as well-digested without it. RP emphasized nobody knows the ideal ratios yet. Like with other aspects of his recommendations, do what makes you feel best.
 

charlie

Admin
The Law & Order Admin
Joined
Jan 4, 2012
Messages
14,359
Location
USA
Ben said:
Fat is good before bed according to RP (does anyone know why?),...
Maybe because the fat slows down digestion so that you will have a longer delivery of nutrients, sugar, etc, to the system so stress hormones stay down longer.
 
OP
haidut

haidut

Member
Forum Supporter
Joined
Mar 18, 2013
Messages
19,798
Location
USA / Europe
Charlie said:
Ben said:
Fat is good before bed according to RP (does anyone know why?),...
Maybe because the fat slows down digestion so that you will have a longer delivery of nutrients, sugar, etc, to the system so stress hormones stay down longer.

The fact that all fat will have some PUFA is probably a factor as well, but I think there is more to low-far than just PUFA. I think the main reason Ray does not favor high fat is that metabolically speaking fat will generate less CO2 than carbs, so it's not as pro-metabolic as sugar. Also, Ray wrote that fat-free diet virtually guarantees lack of cancer, but that may be b/c without ingesting any fat one would not be ingesting any PUFA. Saturated fat has benefits like absorption of certain vitamins (K, A, D, E), healing the liver (search his articles for "saturated fat" and "liver"), in the case of coconut oil also raising thyroid hormone (T4) production and conversion into T3. But in some of his articles and emails he says that in general he suggests low fat (especially milk). So, that's my take on it - metabolically speaking fat is not as crucial as protein and sugar. If it's PUFA, it's obviously bad due to its hormone-like negative effects (i.e. mimics estrogen). And if it's saturated, then it has some benefits but if a person decides to go fat free in terms of diet, the body will probably synthesize whatever fat it needs from sugar. I think in general people associated fat with synthesis of hormones, but it is the cholesterol we need for that and one can get cholesterol even on a very low-fat diet.
I am sure it's more complicated than that, but those points above are all extracted from Ray's articles.

As far as eating fat before bed, I think Ray would favor casein over fat. Casein is very slow-digesting protein (slower than fat actually), and has many anti-stress properties, including forming a gel-like substances during digestion very much like gelatin, which protects the gut from inflammation. Given that darkness is stress, loading up on protein (casein/gelatin) and sugar is probably the best defense while we are asleep.
Just my 2c.
 

jyb

Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2012
Messages
2,783
Location
UK
haidut said:
Casein is very slow-digesting protein (slower than fat actually), and has many anti-stress properties, including forming a gel-like substances during digestion very much like gelatin, which protects the gut from inflammation.

I didn't know gelatin was anti-inflammatory in part due to its form during digestion. This would mean that the non-hydrolyzed gelatin has more of that effect. However, this also means that it remains undigested for a while to keep this form, and then bacteria can feed on and create problems, so I'm a bit puzzled.
 

Ben

Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2013
Messages
497
haidut said:
Charlie said:
Ben said:
Fat is good before bed according to RP (does anyone know why?),...
Maybe because the fat slows down digestion so that you will have a longer delivery of nutrients, sugar, etc, to the system so stress hormones stay down longer.

The fact that all fat will have some PUFA is probably a factor as well, but I think there is more to low-far than just PUFA. I think the main reason Ray does not favor high fat is that metabolically speaking fat will generate less CO2 than carbs, so it's not as pro-metabolic as sugar. Also, Ray wrote that fat-free diet virtually guarantees lack of cancer, but that may be b/c without ingesting any fat one would not be ingesting any PUFA. Saturated fat has benefits like absorption of certain vitamins (K, A, D, E), healing the liver (search his articles for "saturated fat" and "liver"), in the case of coconut oil also raising thyroid hormone (T4) production and conversion into T3. But in some of his articles and emails he says that in general he suggests low fat (especially milk). So, that's my take on it - metabolically speaking fat is not as crucial as protein and sugar. If it's PUFA, it's obviously bad due to its hormone-like negative effects (i.e. mimics estrogen). And if it's saturated, then it has some benefits but if a person decides to go fat free in terms of diet, the body will probably synthesize whatever fat it needs from sugar. I think in general people associated fat with synthesis of hormones, but it is the cholesterol we need for that and one can get cholesterol even on a very low-fat diet.
I am sure it's more complicated than that, but those points above are all extracted from Ray's articles.

As far as eating fat before bed, I think Ray would favor casein over fat. Casein is very slow-digesting protein (slower than fat actually), and has many anti-stress properties, including forming a gel-like substances during digestion very much like gelatin, which protects the gut from inflammation. Given that darkness is stress, loading up on protein (casein/gelatin) and sugar is probably the best defense while we are asleep.
Just my 2c.
What do you mean by casein? Cheese and milk have a mixture of both casein and whey, and I think RP warned against protein powder (I know that he warned against whey in particular).
 
OP
haidut

haidut

Member
Forum Supporter
Joined
Mar 18, 2013
Messages
19,798
Location
USA / Europe
Ben said:
haidut said:
Charlie said:
Ben said:
Fat is good before bed according to RP (does anyone know why?),...
Maybe because the fat slows down digestion so that you will have a longer delivery of nutrients, sugar, etc, to the system so stress hormones stay down longer.

The fact that all fat will have some PUFA is probably a factor as well, but I think there is more to low-far than just PUFA. I think the main reason Ray does not favor high fat is that metabolically speaking fat will generate less CO2 than carbs, so it's not as pro-metabolic as sugar. Also, Ray wrote that fat-free diet virtually guarantees lack of cancer, but that may be b/c without ingesting any fat one would not be ingesting any PUFA. Saturated fat has benefits like absorption of certain vitamins (K, A, D, E), healing the liver (search his articles for "saturated fat" and "liver"), in the case of coconut oil also raising thyroid hormone (T4) production and conversion into T3. But in some of his articles and emails he says that in general he suggests low fat (especially milk). So, that's my take on it - metabolically speaking fat is not as crucial as protein and sugar. If it's PUFA, it's obviously bad due to its hormone-like negative effects (i.e. mimics estrogen). And if it's saturated, then it has some benefits but if a person decides to go fat free in terms of diet, the body will probably synthesize whatever fat it needs from sugar. I think in general people associated fat with synthesis of hormones, but it is the cholesterol we need for that and one can get cholesterol even on a very low-fat diet.
I am sure it's more complicated than that, but those points above are all extracted from Ray's articles.

As far as eating fat before bed, I think Ray would favor casein over fat. Casein is very slow-digesting protein (slower than fat actually), and has many anti-stress properties, including forming a gel-like substances during digestion very much like gelatin, which protects the gut from inflammation. Given that darkness is stress, loading up on protein (casein/gelatin) and sugar is probably the best defense while we are asleep.
Just my 2c.
What do you mean by casein? Cheese and milk have a mixture of both casein and whey, and I think RP warned against protein powder (I know that he warned against whey in particular).

Cheese should have no whey left if produced properly. The rennet splits the protein into casein and whey and the whey is discarded or fed to animals. Strained yogurt should also be mostly casein. Regular milk has both whey and casein, but lately I have been eating mostly cheese and strained yogurt and I find it very relaxing. Also, I made another post recently about Icelandic "skyr", which is something like a mix between yogurt and cottage cheese and should also be mostly casein.
 
OP
haidut

haidut

Member
Forum Supporter
Joined
Mar 18, 2013
Messages
19,798
Location
USA / Europe
jyb said:
haidut said:
Casein is very slow-digesting protein (slower than fat actually), and has many anti-stress properties, including forming a gel-like substances during digestion very much like gelatin, which protects the gut from inflammation.

I didn't know gelatin was anti-inflammatory in part due to its form during digestion. This would mean that the non-hydrolyzed gelatin has more of that effect. However, this also means that it remains undigested for a while to keep this form, and then bacteria can feed on and create problems, so I'm a bit puzzled.

I think you are right, gelatin can have some unpleasant effects on the gut if it stays undigested for too long. Some people on the forum have complained about gut issues when they used regular gelatin and not the hydrolyzed variety.
Either way, in moderate quantities I find both casein and gelatin to be very well accepted by my picky gut.
 
OP
haidut

haidut

Member
Forum Supporter
Joined
Mar 18, 2013
Messages
19,798
Location
USA / Europe
fyo said:
The high fat diet in this study (found here http://www.researchdiets.com/system/res ... D12492.pdf ) is lard-based and very synthetic. The effects seen may be from the high PUFA and low nutrition of the diet rather than 'fat' itself.

Thanks for finding this out, I was wondering as well if the effects were due to the PUFA in their so-called "high fat diet". There are some studies on saturated fat as well and I think the effects were similar, but without the rats developing fatty liver disease (NAFLD). It matches well with Ray's statement that saturated fat is good for the liver.
 

charlie

Admin
The Law & Order Admin
Joined
Jan 4, 2012
Messages
14,359
Location
USA
:bump2
 

YuraCZ

Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2015
Messages
674
slayers said:
post 35182 I dont know but I feel best on 50% carb, 25% protein, 25% fat (or 50% carb, 30% fat, 20% protein)
Exactly like my optimal macronutrient ratio.. I was on low carb, low fat and any of these extremes is not right for me...
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Ulla

Member
Joined
Sep 16, 2015
Messages
285
YuraCZ said:
post 103196
slayers said:
post 35182 I dont know but I feel best on 50% carb, 25% protein, 25% fat (or 50% carb, 30% fat, 20% protein)
Exactly like my optimal macronutrient ratio.. I was on low carb, low fat and any of these extremes is not right for me...

I am also loging calories these days - more than a week and I noticed quite similar ratio :)
I eat according my desires but also choosing low fat milk, cottage etc on purpose...
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DaveFoster

Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2015
Messages
5,027
Location
Portland, Oregon
The fact that all fat will have some PUFA is probably a factor as well, but I think there is more to low-far than just PUFA. I think the main reason Ray does not favor high fat is that metabolically speaking fat will generate less CO2 than carbs, so it's not as pro-metabolic as sugar. Also, Ray wrote that fat-free diet virtually guarantees lack of cancer, but that may be b/c without ingesting any fat one would not be ingesting any PUFA. Saturated fat has benefits like absorption of certain vitamins (K, A, D, E), healing the liver (search his articles for "saturated fat" and "liver"), in the case of coconut oil also raising thyroid hormone (T4) production and conversion into T3. But in some of his articles and emails he says that in general he suggests low fat (especially milk). So, that's my take on it - metabolically speaking fat is not as crucial as protein and sugar. If it's PUFA, it's obviously bad due to its hormone-like negative effects (i.e. mimics estrogen). And if it's saturated, then it has some benefits but if a person decides to go fat free in terms of diet, the body will probably synthesize whatever fat it needs from sugar. I think in general people associated fat with synthesis of hormones, but it is the cholesterol we need for that and one can get cholesterol even on a very low-fat diet.
So what do you think an optimal fat saturated fat intake stands at considering a diet with minute amounts of PUFA?

Do you think after .5 g/lb diminishing returns starts to set in after CO2 production decreases; obviously some saturated fat has benefits as you said.
 
OP
haidut

haidut

Member
Forum Supporter
Joined
Mar 18, 2013
Messages
19,798
Location
USA / Europe
So what do you think an optimal fat saturated fat intake stands at considering a diet with minute amounts of PUFA?

Do you think after .5 g/lb diminishing returns starts to set in after CO2 production decreases; obviously some saturated fat has benefits as you said.

I feel best on 10% - 15% of calories, and this is what the long term studies on rodent longevity seem to favor as well. More than that is tastier but can give me weight gain. Less than that gives me the same fat-starved feeling that a high dose biotin or niacinamide can give.
 

DaveFoster

Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2015
Messages
5,027
Location
Portland, Oregon
I feel best on 10% - 15% of calories, and this is what the long term studies on rodent longevity seem to favor as well. More than that is tastier but can give me weight gain. Less than that gives me the same fat-starved feeling that a high dose biotin or niacinamide can give.
I know that feeling. This study suggests at least 14g saturated fat/1000 kcal for testosterone production:
F2.large.jpg

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.
 
OP
haidut

haidut

Member
Forum Supporter
Joined
Mar 18, 2013
Messages
19,798
Location
USA / Europe
I know that feeling. This study suggests at least 14g saturated fat/1000 kcal for testosterone production:
F2.large.jpg

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.

Thanks, really cool figures, especially the one about PUFA decreasing T:):
Btw, the conclusion of the study said the DIF had higher testsoterone, not lower. Am I reading it wrong?
"...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."
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom