Our Shoot With Ray

[bradley]

post 100118 Glucose isn't sugar.

If Glucose isn't a sugar I don't know what is...

 

[haidut]

post 100118 I wouldn't qualify potatoes as high sugar. They have no sugar. Glucose isn't sugar.

Ice cream has sugar true, but it usually has an equal or greater amount of fat. I would also guess ice cream was more of a treat, and not a dietary staple. This is how ice cream is treated by most of the world.

The amount of sugar in chocolate varies pretty widely depending on the brand, cacao percentage, etc., and I'm willing to bet she wasn't eating Hershey's.

Glucose is a sugar, by definition. What we call sugar is actually sucrose and consists of two sugars - glucose and fructose. So, sugar is...sugars.
Can you get some more detailed information on what these people ate? Since these were the food listed it makes it sound like this is what their typical meal was. Eating 2lbs of chocolate weekly is certainly more than a treat. I am not disputing what you say, I just need more information to be able to decide.

 

[charlie]

Glucose is a sugar with the molecular formula C6H12O6. The name "glucose" (/ˈɡluːkoʊs/) comes from the Greek word γλευκος, meaning "sweet wine, must".[3] The suffix "-ose" is a chemical classifier, denoting a carbohydrate. It is also known as dextrose or grape sugar. With 6 carbon atoms, it is classed as a hexose, a sub-category of monosaccharides. α-D-glucose is one of the 16 aldose stereoisomers. The D-isomer (D-glucose) occurs widely in nature, but the L-isomer (L-glucose) does not. Glucose is made during photosynthesis from water and carbon dioxide, using energy from sunlight. The reverse of the photosynthesis reaction, which releases this energy, is a very important source of power for cellular respiration. Glucose is stored as a polymer, in plants as starch and in animals as glycogen.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glucose

Bold mine.

 

[Lightbringer]

post 100118 I wouldn't qualify potatoes as high sugar. They have no sugar. Glucose isn't sugar.

Ice cream has sugar true, but it usually has an equal or greater amount of fat. I would also guess ice cream was more of a treat, and not a dietary staple. This is how ice cream is treated by most of the world.

The amount of sugar in chocolate varies pretty widely depending on the brand, cacao percentage, etc., and I'm willing to bet she wasn't eating Hershey's.

I'm sure all supercentenarians consumed small amounts of sugar. The question isn't whether they ever consumed sugar, the question is whether they considered sugar a dietary staple and got a large amount of calories from sugar, especially at the expense of fat calories. I haven't seen one supercentenarian, or even one long-lived culture, that was known for pounding orange juice, but in a surprisingly large amount of cases there is reference to them eating crazy, "unhealthy" amounts of fat.

Drawing conclusions about diet from other people can be a bit tricky. Peat's usage of the term sugar includes sucrose, fructose, glucose, lactose etc. These are found quite liberally in some of the examples you cited. However, you also find some 'anti-Peat' foods like Beans and perhaps fried chicken.

I think longer life expectancy is dependent on various factors and diet is just one part of it. That is why you see people doing well on different diets. So in addition to the high fat examples cited above, low fat vegetarian diets can also have better health outcomes (seventh day adventist) or eating a ton of sweet potatoes like the Okinawans.

 

[factosauras]

When I say sugar, I am referring to sucrose [50/50 glucose/fructose], and I assume that when people refer to a high sugar diet, they are referring to a high sucrose intake, and not a high starch intake, which would be referred to as a high carbohydrate diet. Yes, if you want to get semantic about it, all carbohydrate can be referred to as sugar, and glucose can be referred to as a sugar, but its not what I'm referring to when I say sugar.

I said the ice cream was most likely a treat, not the 2 lbs of chocolate, which I said I was uncertain about the sucrose content of, as chocolate varies a lot in how sweetened it is.

Okinawans have eaten sweet potatoes since the 1600s, when they were introduced to combat famine caused by typhoons, and poverty caused by Japan's invasion in 1609. So, as Peat says of most starches, it is literally kind of a "poverty food", used to combat caloric shortages. I wouldn't argue that it is a superior source of calories.

I have heard many people say that low fat high carbohydrate, pseudo-vegetarian diets lead to longevity, but I have had trouble finding evidence for this, especially among supercentenarians.

 

[dd99]

I think the longevity of the supercentenarians has more to do with their network of family and friends, generally active lifestyles (walking), relatively unpolluted environments (how many are in cities?) and birth and formative years before widespread estrogenic, carcinogenic pollutants and foods. I wonder how many supercentenarians there will be in future who were born in 1950?

 

[haidut]

post 100161 When I say sugar, I am referring to sucrose [50/50 glucose/fructose], and I assume that when people refer to a high sugar diet, they are referring to a high sucrose intake, and not a high starch intake, which would be referred to as a high carbohydrate diet. Yes, if you want to get semantic about it, all carbohydrate can be referred to as sugar, and glucose can be referred to as a sugar, but its not what I'm referring to when I say sugar.

I said the ice cream was most likely a treat, not the 2 lbs of chocolate, which I said I was uncertain about the sucrose content of, as chocolate varies a lot in how sweetened it is.

Okinawans have eaten sweet potatoes since the 1600s, when they were introduced to combat famine caused by typhoons, and poverty caused by Japan's invasion in 1609. So, as Peat says of most starches, it is literally kind of a "poverty food", used to combat caloric shortages. I wouldn't argue that it is a superior source of calories.

I have heard many people say that low fat high carbohydrate, pseudo-vegetarian diets lead to longevity, but I have had trouble finding evidence for this, especially among supercentenarians.

Well, here are two studies showing increased lifespan from low-fat / high-carb diets:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26027933
"...Both caloric restriction (CR) and low-protein, high-carbohydrate (LPHC) ad-libitum-fed diets increase lifespan and improve metabolic parameters such as insulin, glucose, and blood lipids. Severe CR, however, is unsustainable for most people; therefore, it is important to determine whether manipulating macronutrient ratios in ad-libitum-fed conditions can generate similar health outcomes. We present the results of a short-term (8 week) dietary manipulation on metabolic outcomes in mice. We compared three diets varying in protein to carbohydrate ratio under both CR and ad libitum conditions. Ad libitum LPHC diets delivered similar benefits to CR in terms of levels of insulin, glucose, lipids, and HOMA, despite increased energy intake. CR on LPHC diets did not provide additional benefits relative to ad libitum LPHC. We show that LPHC diets under ad-libitum-fed conditions generate the metabolic benefits of CR without a 40% reduction in total caloric intake."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25733862
"...Maximal longevity was achieved on diets containing a P:C ratio of 1:13 in males and 1:11 for females. Diets that optimized testes mass and epididymal sperm counts (indicators of gamete production) contained a higher P:C ratio (1:1) than those that maximized lifespan. In females, uterine mass (an indicator of estrogenic activity) was also greatest on high P:C diets (1:1) whereas ovarian follicle number was greatest on P:C 3:1 associated with high-F intakes. By contrast, estrous cycling was more likely in mice on lower P:C (1:8), and the number of corpora lutea, indicative of recent ovulations, was greatest on P:C similar to those supporting greatest longevity (1:11)."

 

[factosauras]

post 100162 I think the longevity of the supercentenarians has more to do with their network of family and friends, generally active lifestyles (walking), relatively unpolluted environments (how many are in cities?) and birth and formative years before widespread estrogenic, carcinogenic pollutants and foods. I wonder how many supercentenarians there will be in future who were born in 1950?

I would say the incidence of supercentenarians will probably increase due to technological advancements, increased quality of life, etc.

post 100168 Well, here are two studies showing increased lifespan from low-fat / high-carb diets:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26027933
"...Both caloric restriction (CR) and low-protein, high-carbohydrate (LPHC) ad-libitum-fed diets increase lifespan and improve metabolic parameters such as insulin, glucose, and blood lipids. Severe CR, however, is unsustainable for most people; therefore, it is important to determine whether manipulating macronutrient ratios in ad-libitum-fed conditions can generate similar health outcomes. We present the results of a short-term (8 week) dietary manipulation on metabolic outcomes in mice. We compared three diets varying in protein to carbohydrate ratio under both CR and ad libitum conditions. Ad libitum LPHC diets delivered similar benefits to CR in terms of levels of insulin, glucose, lipids, and HOMA, despite increased energy intake. CR on LPHC diets did not provide additional benefits relative to ad libitum LPHC. We show that LPHC diets under ad-libitum-fed conditions generate the metabolic benefits of CR without a 40% reduction in total caloric intake."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25733862
"...Maximal longevity was achieved on diets containing a P:C ratio of 1:13 in males and 1:11 for females. Diets that optimized testes mass and epididymal sperm counts (indicators of gamete production) contained a higher P:C ratio (1:1) than those that maximized lifespan. In females, uterine mass (an indicator of estrogenic activity) was also greatest on high P:C diets (1:1) whereas ovarian follicle number was greatest on P:C 3:1 associated with high-F intakes. By contrast, estrous cycling was more likely in mice on lower P:C (1:8), and the number of corpora lutea, indicative of recent ovulations, was greatest on P:C similar to those supporting greatest longevity (1:11)."

Those studies were done on mice. Gorillas are much close to humans genetically, but you won't catch me eating 50lbs of leaves every day.

Actually the gorilla thing is interesting because even though they eat straight plant fibers all day, the bacteria in their gut ferments the fibers and every carbohydrate calorie they consume is converted into short chain fatty acids.

So...end result? Gorillas eat a high fat diet.

 

[Westside PUFAs]

post 100118 Glucose isn't sugar.

So...end result? Gorillas eat a high fat diet.

And look at their big bellys:

Gorillas never figured out how to dig up starchy tubers and steam them like pre-humans did. Gorillas never figured out how to or had the wit to obtain honey. Gorillas never figured out how to or had the wit to use the milk of a high milk producing animal for its lactose, which is sugar, content. Milking an animal without the technology of homogenization naturally leaves the cream content to float to the top where it can be discarded while the high sugar/protein liquid remains.

We're not gorillas. We're high sugar creatures. Our brains constant steady need for glucose shows this:

Regarding intelligence and a big head - "the brain is energetically a very expensive organ in terms of its energy requirements, and the liver has to be very efficient to meet its needs, so when there is a nutritional or hormonal problem, the problems can be especially intense. Nutritional needs for sugar, protein, vitamins, and minerals can be very high." - RP

There is not a real human nutritional need for fat:

PUFA (all oils besides coconut, nuts, seeds, soybean, some shellfish and finfish, caviar, pork) - Keep low. No need to eat overt PUFA when you can use refined, tasteless coconut oil if you don't like the taste of virgin, or if virgin is allergenic. Many other foods have a mix of PUFA and other fats but should be noted due to having high enough PUFA by themselves.

MUFA (olive, avocado, macadamia nut, palm oil) - Keep low due to accompanied PUFA and simply fat calories. No reason to gorge on olives, avocado, and macadamia nut.

SAFA (cream, any milk/yogurt above skim, cheese, ruminant meat fat, coconut, cacao) - Protective/anti-stress and the body safely burns it at rest, mainly the heart muscle and other muscles at rest. It's what the majority of our adipose tissue should be made up of because we're warm-blooded animals. Some of our bacteria convert dietary carbohydrate into butyric acid, a SAFA, in our gut but it's nothing compared to that of a Gorilla. Overt SAFA can be used in context but it's over-consumption in a short amount of time can lead to fat gain and problems with FFA's and the Randle Cycle. The only exceptional SAFA in that reguard would be coconut fat due to it's special instant liver energy properties and metabolism.

So if one is avoiding PUFA and not gorging on MUFA olives and avocados and chicken, then the problem with fat comes in with SAFA. Gorging on high amounts of the easiest to consume, most tasty SAFA is cream, which is any milk/yogurt above skim, cheese and butter, and ice cream, which is iced cream. The only fat that one would add to a meal is cream.

A lot of details of the centenarians you mention are left out. Look at these folks living on low fat, high sugar, and high vegetable matter:

https://youtu.be/pOpsOnei6wU

 

[factosauras]

post 100214 And look at their big bellys:

That's where they ferment the fiber.

post 100214 Gorillas never figured out how to dig up starchy tubers and steam them like pre-humans did. Gorillas never figured out how to or had the wit to obtain honey. Gorillas never figured out how to or had the wit to use the milk of a high milk producing animal for its lactose, which is sugar, content. Milking an animal without the technology of homogenization naturally leaves the cream content to float to the top where it can be discarded while the high sugar/protein liquid remains.

Well arguably they did figure all this stuff out, or at least one of our common ancestors did, as they were evolving into us. They also had a much more readily available source of sugar calories than milk: fruit. Though fruit was readily available in the trees around them, they have generally abstained.

Can't think of any examples where drinking low-fat milk is commonplace except in our fat phobic culture. I've even heard Peat say full-fat dairy is inversely correlated with obesity.

I think the part about the milk is reaching a bit. I don't think cows milk was engineered by cows to have the cream conveniently float to the top so humans could scrape it off to make the milk safe for their consumption. That reasoning seems kinda backwards. Not sure if that was what you were trying to say.

post 100214 There is not a real human nutritional need for fat

I think most people would disagree with you on this statement.

post 100214 A lot of details of the centenarians you mention are left out. Look at these folks living on low fat, high sugar, and high vegetable matter:

Well first off, if by high sugar you mean high sucrose, then no, the good people of Yuzurihara do not eat a high sugar diet. They do eat a high carb diet, but they also eat a high fiber diet, and have different intestinal flora as a result from other Japanese people living around them. Fiber gets fermented in the human colon to produce SFA's, just as in gorillas. So, their high fiber diet still gets them a large amount of SFA's, even if it doesn't taste as good as just eating the fat and saving yourself the trouble.

Also, comparing Michael Jordan to a gorilla is extremely racist.

 

[InterrogaOmnia]

"Oh, that's awful." The reporter at the end eating the jelly root vegetable.

 

[Westside PUFAs]

post 100222 That's where they ferment the fiber.

You or I don't have that belly, unless you have a gut. But a human "gut", aka bellyfat is just excess adipose tissue, not a large intestine.

post 100222 I've even heard Peat say full-fat dairy is inversely correlated with obesity.

He's never said that. This is one of the big Peat myths that floats around the internet. When he talked about his travels to Russia in the 60's, the context there is that they had a high calcium intake, not a high fat intake. Here are direct quotes where he talks about low fat dairy: viewtopic.php?f=17&t=7402&p=93284#p93284

"When there is adequate calcium, vitamin D, and magnesium in the diet, PTH is kept to a minimum. When PTH is kept low, cells increase their formation of the uncoupling proteins, that cause mitochondria to use energy at a higher rate, and this is associated with decreased activity of the fatty acid synthase enzymes." - RP

http://raypeat.com/articles/articles/milk.shtml

The fat in milk serves no purpose in this context. It's the calcium that's important. Skim milk provides calcium, casein, and lactose, but the fat is unnecessary. If steroid hormones are made from cholesterol, and the liver makes cholesterol, then there is no need to eat high amounts of fat in hopes that fat will be converted into cholesterol for hormone production.

"Sweet fruits will usually bring cholesterol levels up to normal" says Peat. So fat serves no purpose for hormone production.

post 100222 I think most people would disagree with you on this statement.

The purpose of dietary fat is one of my main interests. But my interest is outside of the snake oil that is ketosis/paleo.

post 100222Fiber gets fermented in the human colon to produce SFA's, just as in gorillas.

We do not know how much. But it should be obvious with humans, it's not much when you understand that we're the most amylase producing primates, and understand the sugar/glycogen/stress connection, but above all, our glucose monster living in between our skull, the brain.

And since we can convert fiber into SAFA, that may be the clue that shows that overt fat intake is unnecessary since we can make it ourselves and it;s the overconsunption of overt fat that really causes problems.

 

[tara]

post 100226 our glucose monster living in between our skull

 

[factosauras]

post 100226 You or I don't have that belly, unless you have a gut. But a human "gut", aka bellyfat is just excess adipose tissue, not a large intestine.

Yes, we are not gorillas.

post 100226 He's never said that. This is one of the big Peat myths that floats around the internet. When he talked about his travels to Russia in the 60's, the context there is that they had a high calcium intake, not a high fat intake. Here are direct quotes where he talks about low fat dairy: viewtopic.php?f=17&t=7402&p=93284#p93284

"When there is adequate calcium, vitamin D, and magnesium in the diet, PTH is kept to a minimum. When PTH is kept low, cells increase their formation of the uncoupling proteins, that cause mitochondria to use energy at a higher rate, and this is associated with decreased activity of the fatty acid synthase enzymes." - RP

http://raypeat.com/articles/articles/milk.shtml

The fat in milk serves no purpose in this context. It's the calcium that's important. Skim milk provides calcium, casein, and lactose, but the fat is unnecessary. If steroid hormones are made from cholesterol, and the liver makes cholesterol, then there is no need to eat high amounts of fat in hopes that fat will be converted into cholesterol for hormone production.

"Sweet fruits will usually bring cholesterol levels up to normal" says Peat. So fat serves no purpose for hormone production.

I am aware of Peat's stance on fat. I agree he is generally against, most likely for calorie concerns. The coconut oil ice cream recipe he recommends contains ~25g of fat per 1/2 cup of ice cream, which is more fat than any brand of ice cream I've ever come across. I do remember him saying full fat dairy prevented obesity in one of his radio interviews, and have seen several studies to confirm this.

post 100226 The purpose of dietary fat is one of my main interests. But my interest is outside of the snake oil that is ketosis/paleo.

I also have no interest in ketosis or paleo.

post 100226 We do not know how much. But it should be obvious with humans, it's not much when you understand that we're the most amylase producing primates, and understand the sugar/glycogen/stress connection, but above all, our glucose monster living in between our skull, the brain.

And since we can convert fiber into SAFA, that may be the clue that shows that overt fat intake is unnecessary since we can make it ourselves and it;s the overconsunption of overt fat that really causes problems.

The opposing argument could obviously be made, that saturated fats are so essential as an energy substrate that we have retained the ability to manufacture them from crude fiber if need be.

 

[danishispsychic]

Awesome.

 

[Such_Saturation]

Post production done soon guys

 

[Nicole W.]

Filomena Taipe Mendoza
Age: 116
Peru
Potatoes, goat meat, sheep's milk, goat cheese and beans

Jeanne Calment
Age: 122
France
Port Wine, Chocolate [2lbs/week], Olive Oil, Cigarettes

Gertrude Baines
Age: 115
Crispy Bacon, Ice Cream, Fried Chicken

Edna Parker
Age: 115
Eggs, Sausage, Bacon, Fried Chicken

Lorena Volz
Age: 107
California
Fried her fish in bacon grease, drank quite a bit, smoked til 95.

Just a few individual examples. Macro examples would be like, Okinawa, where they eat a ***t ton of pork and fry everything in pork fat. They raise their own pork oftentimes, and it is known as the island of pork. Because pork fat largely reflects the diet of the pig, american pork might not share the same health benefits as it is raised on corn, soybeans, industrial byproducts, etc. It's also a tropical climate, skewing dietary sources of fat toward saturated, and further encouraging the pigs to have saturated fat. Sardinians obviously eat a lot of olive oil, drink wine, and eat a lot of products from goat's milk and sheep's milk.

Even Peat espouses the benefits of saturated fat, and he himself recommends the most saturated of all fats, coconut oil. Where his recommendations differ is that he touts the benefits of sugar, when in actuality a lot of evidence points to the contrary. Perhaps sugar isn't as harmful if you are eating a ***t-ton of saturated fat to begin with, but a low fat high sugar diet might be a bad idea.

 

[Mufasa]

When is this moving coming out?

 

[Nicole W.]

Thank you for pointing out that the people of Okinawa eat a lot of fatty pork. Even the Blue Zone author obscures/ avoids this fact by attributing their longevity to sweet potato consumption because the traditional fatty pork dish they all eat doesn’t fit into his paradigm. I’m sure the totality of their diet is beneficial, it’s just not the pork obviously, but it is part of it. My girlfriend, who is From Okinawa, thinks that it’s probably the traditional pork dish that is the key to their longevity as most people outside the area do not eat this dish, but otherwise have similar diets.

 

[SOMO]

Thank you for pointing out that the people of Okinawa eat a lot of fatty pork. Even the Blue Zone author obscures/ avoids this fact by attributing their longevity to sweet potato consumption because the traditional fatty pork dish they all eat doesn’t fit into his paradigm. I’m sure the totality of their diet is beneficial, it’s just not the pork obviously, but it is part of it. My girlfriend, who is From Okinawa, thinks that it’s probably the traditional pork dish that is the key to their longevity as most people outside the area do not eat this dish, but otherwise have similar diets.

Heritage breeds of pork or even non-heritage breeds that are simply raised on tubers, truffles and root-veggies (natural diet of pigs, I think) are mostly MUFA.
It is industrial feedlot CAFO pigs that are high-PUFA.

Poles and other East European countries heavily consume CAFO-pork (and those countries aren't known for being particularly healthy. )
I love traditional smoked meats like Polish Kielbasa or Head-Cheese, but I just don't think modern pork is a healthy product.

If I had a good source of Pork where I live, I would make it a regular part of my diet, but as it stands it's more of a treat.