Papua New Guinea - Sweet Potato Diet

T

tca300

Guest
They aren't on a low protein diet. Potatoes are full of keto acids. I asked Ray about just getting my protein exclusively from potatoes on November 30th 2015

Me: "I'm going to be moving to an area that doesn't have any good animal proteins, do you think replacing animal protein with potatoes would work because of their keto acid content? Thank you very much!"

Ray: "Yes, people in New Guinea who eat nothing but potatoes for 51 weeks of the year (and pork the other week) have been studied and found to be healthy with no signs of protein deficiency."
 

tara

Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2014
Messages
10,368
I didn't make graphs, but many of the sections in the journal mention very low fat intakes, as in under 10-15% of total kcal with relatively high amounts of proportional PUFA.

Despite this, the natives do not suffer from obesity. I'd attribute this completely to the PUFA depletion effect for under 15% oral fat as mentioned by a study that haidut posted on the forum.
If we are talking under 2000 calories total, as in the PNG example you quoted, this would seem a pretty important factor, whatever the food was?
 
G

Gray Ling

Guest
What the hell's going on in New Guinea?:chicken: Sweet potato all year round? I thought it was a seasonal potato?
 

tara

Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2014
Messages
10,368
What the hell's going on in New Guinea?:chicken: Sweet potato all year round? I thought it was a seasonal potato?
I don't know much about growing them, but they are not nightshades like ordinary white potatoes, and they can be stored for many months if you get the conditions right.
I've just seen that PNG has more than a thousand varieties - maybe each community can can grow more than one variety and/or crop per year?
 
OP
DaveFoster

DaveFoster

Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2015
Messages
5,027
Location
Portland, Oregon
If we are talking under 2000 calories total, as in the PNG example you quoted, this would seem a pretty important factor, whatever the food was?
If you read the study, you'll see average kcal intakes widely ranging from 1400 - 6400 per day. They tend to be around 3000 - 4000 for males, and 2500-3000 for females.

Ray: "Yes, people in New Guinea who eat nothing but potatoes for 51 weeks of the year (and pork the other week) have been studied and found to be healthy with no signs of protein deficiency."
I just read that in the study. The amount of knowledge Dr. Peat has is astounding.
 

tara

Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2014
Messages
10,368
If you read the study, you'll see average kcal intakes widely ranging from 1400 - 6400 per day. They tend to be around 3000 - 4000 for males, and 2500-3000 for females.

Ah, OK. This is more like it, for active farmers and bush folk. I was thinking about by the other figures in an earlier post:
"A dietary survey undertaken in the Western Highlands in 1972 showed that the diet consisted almost entirely of sweet potato. The daily energy intake was 2300 for males and 1770 kilocalories for females. ..."
Actually, I thought I'd seen even lower numbers, but that might be my dodgy memory.

I just read that in the study. The amount of knowledge Dr. Peat has is astounding.
I agree - he is enormously widely-read regarding health. But he refers there to potatoes, rather than sweet potatoes or taro, and they are not quite the same wrt protein. AFAIK, regular white potatoes are not a staple in PNG?
 

Drareg

Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2016
Messages
4,772
Well said.

Could you be more obtuse?

There's no such way, but this study does an adequate job. They have poor conclusions, though. I analyzed the data myself, as I'm writing a paper on it. There's a negligible positive correlation between sugar consumption and obesity, while there's a definite correlation between total fat consumption and obesity. There's also a negligible negative correlation between coconut consumption and obesity.

I'll just show you a couple of the many graphs that I made up:

View attachment 2442

Very strong positive correlation between vegetable oil consumption and obesity.


View attachment 2443

Moderate positive correlation between animal product consumption and obesity.

View attachment 2444

Almost no correlation between refined sugar consumption and obesity.

SOURCE NEW CALEDONIA DATA: Nutritional status in adults in the pluri-ethnic population of New Caledonia. The CALDIA Study Group. - PubMed - NCBI

SOURCE OBESITY DATA:
Gender Statistics | Data (accessed 3.15.16).

SOURCE FOOD CONSUMPTION DATA: http://www.wpro.who.int/publications/docs/diet_food_supply_obesity.pdf


They refer to kumara as "sweet potato," while taro is referred to as "taro."

Please don't call me obtuse, and if you do ,clarify where I was.
westsidepufa is using diet from thousands of years ago as examples, please put my quote into context instead of Cherry picking as a guise for ad hominem.

Do you have the chronology for your graphs.

It's also necessary to try establish the reasons for longevity ,average male lifespan currently 60.
 
OP
DaveFoster

DaveFoster

Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2015
Messages
5,027
Location
Portland, Oregon
Actually, I thought I'd seen even lower numbers, but that might be my dodgy memory.
I meant the whole report, not just the Papua New Guinea surveys; I should have clarified.

One of the surveys recorded a caloric intake of 6400 or so for males, but this was during a pork festival.

Please don't call me obtuse, and if you do ,clarify where I was.
westsidepufa is using diet from thousands of years ago as examples, please put my quote into context instead of Cherry picking as a guise for ad hominem.

Do you have the chronology for your graphs.

It's also necessary to try establish the reasons for longevity ,average male lifespan currently 60.
No harm intended. I don't see how it's possible to measure a population after having undergone Western influence.

The hunter-gatherer diet is not necessarily the ideal diet, although your own personal ancestral diet may have some advantages, but that's more naturalistic speculation.

As far as chronology, I posted my sources. It's 1997 for the New Caledonia obesity statistics, 2016 for all other obesity statistics, and the 2003 WHO survey for the macronutrient ratios.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Feb 4, 2015
Messages
1,972
A quick internet search finds the following.

Non-obese patients with type 2 diabetes and prediabetic subjects: distinct phenotypes requiring special diabetes treatment and (or) prevention? - PubMed - NCBI

Over 140 non obese type 2 diabetes contributed here.
Is type 2 diabetes a different disease in obese and nonobese patients? - PubMed - NCBI

Asian Indian subjects have a high tendency to develope type 2 diabetes even though obesity is uncommon.
Type 2 diabetes in non-obese Indian subjects is associated with reduced leptin levels: study from Mumbai, Western India. - PubMed - NCBI

The research goes on and on, plenty of type 2 diabetes who are thin.

You ask for data but rarely provide anything to back up your claims.

Just because something is on PubMed, doesn't mean it's good information.

The first study:

"The non-obese T2DM phenotype is characterized by disproportionally reduced insulin secretion and less insulin resistance, as compared with obese patients with T2DM."

"Nevertheless, non-obese patients with T2DM may progress to insulin treatment more rapidly as compared with obese patients with T2DM."

If they had reduced insulin secretion then that is not type two diabetes, it is type one. If there is any problem with the pancreas producing insulin, or enough insulin, and if the person has to inject any amount of insulin, then it is not type two diabetes.

The second study:

"In obese patients, as in nonobese patients, the lower beta-cell function seems likely to be the major pathogenetic factor in the appearance of secondary failure, while being overweight plays only a minor role, thus showing that type 2 diabetes is the same disease in obese and nonobese patients."

Again, beta-cell function is not type two diabetes.

There third study:

"were given 75 g oral glucose tolerance test."

That's not objective enough. You have to look at the whole persons history of diet and drugs and lifestyle, not a simple glucose test. That study is also focused on leptin like Robert Lustig.

In conclusion, not good studies. The fact remains, almost everyone with real type two diabetes, type two, type two, type two, have excess adipose tissue. After eating a meal, their blood sugar remains high and overtime it causes damage to nerves which is why they go blind or lose a foot, starting with the toes. That is type two diabetes. It is not really a "disease" is the classic sense. It's a symptom of poor diet and lifestyle combined with excess fat that can turn around in a day. They take Metformin. Metformin helps the body to control blood sugar in several ways. It helps type 2 diabetics respond better to their own insulin, lower the amount of sugar created by the liver, and decreasing the amount of sugar absorbed by the intestines. It does all of that but it doesn't treat the cause of the problem. The diet that gives you type two diabetes is the diet that makes you fat. If you put these people on a low fat, high fiber, natural starch diet, insulin resistance goes away and T2D is gone as long as keep the excess fat off and life a good lifestyle.

Decreases in dietary glycemic index are related to weight loss among individuals following therapeutic diets for type 2 diabetes. - PubMed - NCBI

A low-fat vegan diet and a conventional diabetes diet in the treatment of type 2 diabetes: a randomized, controlled, 74-wk clinical trial. - PubMed - NCBI

A dietary intervention for chronic diabetic neuropathy pain: a randomized controlled pilot study. - PubMed - NCBI

Vegetarian and vegan diets in type 2 diabetes management. - PubMed - NCBI

A plant-based diet for type 2 diabetes: scientific support and practical strategies. - PubMed - NCBI

A low-fat vegan diet elicits greater macronutrient changes, but is comparable in adherence and acceptability, compared with a more conventional dia... - PubMed - NCBI

Changes in nutrient intake and dietary quality among participants with type 2 diabetes following a low-fat vegan diet or a conventional diabetes di... - PubMed - NCBI

Type 2 diabetes and the vegetarian diet. - PubMed - NCBI

Dean Ornish - http://stage.ornishspectrum.com/wp-content/uploads/comparison-of-coronary-risk-factors.pdf
 
Last edited:

Peater Piper

Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2016
Messages
817
If they had reduced insulin secretion then that is not type two diabetes, it is type one. If there is any problem with the pancreas producing insulin, or enough insulin, and if the person has to inject any amount of insulin, then it is not type two diabetes.
I was under the impression that types 1 and 1.5 dealt with destruction of the beta cells due to autoimmunity or a virus. There's a number of ways the beta cells can malfunction that aren't due to burn out or destruction, and function can return, unlike Type 1 (and eventually 1.5) where once insulin production is gone, it's irreversible, as of now anyway. It's not all down to insulin resistance.
 
Joined
Feb 4, 2015
Messages
1,972
But type 1.5 is still type 1, it's just now things are worse because the person is also type 2. I haven't seen anything on people regenerating their pancreas after being a true type 1. Again, type 1 is very rare so type 1.5 is rare. Type 2 is the epidemic.
 

Peater Piper

Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2016
Messages
817
Supposedly type 1.5 (LADA) is more common than is realized. Some suspect quite a few Type 2's are actually LADAs, which complicates things, because a person with LADA won't necessarily respond to the same treatment as a Type 2, yet most doctors don't even do the proper testing to find out. It damages the efficacy of these studies, because I assume most of them featuring presumed Type 2's aren't bothering to test beta cell and insulin antibodies. I fit into the LADA category, thin, little insulin resistance based on fasting measures, but post prandial readings are a mess, and no doctor will run the necessary tests because my blood work appears pristine.

Anywho, this is derailing the thread, just wanted to rant. :)
 

Drareg

Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2016
Messages
4,772
I meant the whole report, not just the Papua New Guinea surveys; I should have clarified.

One of the surveys recorded a caloric intake of 6400 or so for males, but this was during a pork festival.

No harm intended. I don't see how it's possible to measure a population after having undergone Western influence.

The hunter-gatherer diet is not necessarily the ideal diet, although your own personal ancestral diet may have some advantages, but that's more naturalistic speculation.

As far as chronology, I posted my sources. It's 1997 for the New Caledonia obesity statistics, 2016 for all other obesity statistics, and the 2003 WHO survey for the macronutrient ratios.

It's only possible to speculate on hunter gatherer/ paleo diets ,very difficult to confirm, if anything your study will point more toward consuming the calories you need from starch won't cause weight gain but over consumption is another matter. Proving diseases is another matter entirely.

For example Staffan Lindeberg studies on the Kitavans is open to scrutiny, a lot of anecdotal evidence, it shouldn't be discredited for that ,even proving his studies does not take away from the short lifespan.elephant in the room. I think their lifespan may have been 45 years of age.
Evidence for heart disease in many cases was EKG and asking people if they ever had stroke or heart disease, they established people's age by asking them historical questions as proof, it might have been no other way but that's poor evidence imo.
You can't rule out cardiovascular disease in these areas based on that.

Dying at 60 won't show a build up of a whole lot either Imo.
 

tara

Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2014
Messages
10,368
If they had reduced insulin secretion then that is not type two diabetes, it is type one. If there is any problem with the pancreas producing insulin, or enough insulin, and if the person has to inject any amount of insulin, then it is not type two diabetes.
Why do you think people who produce insufficient insulin are irrelevant? Why is this distinction so important to you in this discussion?

Just because something is on PubMed, doesn't mean it's good information.
True, methods and conclusions are not always sound. But there is information there, and writing it all off can just end up being anti-science.

There is evidence there that there are many people who are lean and have diabetes, which was the point of contention in the discussion. Seems you didn't find any lean diabetics because you didn't look.

Again, beta-cell function is not type two diabetes.
It is diabetes, though, and it's pretty important to the many people who suffer it, whether lean or round.

Since this discussion arose from you concluding health from pictures of lean people, the distinction between type 1 nad type two doesn't strike me as central.

There third study:

"were given 75 g oral glucose tolerance test."

That's not objective enough. You have to look at the whole persons history of diet and drugs and lifestyle, not a simple glucose test. That study is also focused on leptin like Robert Lustig.
I agree that a single GTT test is not adequate for diagnosing diabetes. It y warrant further investigation and changes of some kind.
 

Drareg

Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2016
Messages
4,772
Just because something is on PubMed, doesn't mean it's good information.

The first study:

"The non-obese T2DM phenotype is characterized by disproportionally reduced insulin secretion and less insulin resistance, as compared with obese patients with T2DM."

"Nevertheless, non-obese patients with T2DM may progress to insulin treatment more rapidly as compared with obese patients with T2DM."

If they had reduced insulin secretion then that is not type two diabetes, it is type one. If there is any problem with the pancreas producing insulin, or enough insulin, and if the person has to inject any amount of insulin, then it is not type two diabetes.

The second study:

"In obese patients, as in nonobese patients, the lower beta-cell function seems likely to be the major pathogenetic factor in the appearance of secondary failure, while being overweight plays only a minor role, thus showing that type 2 diabetes is the same disease in obese and nonobese patients."

Again, beta-cell function is not type two diabetes.

There third study:

"were given 75 g oral glucose tolerance test."

That's not objective enough. You have to look at the whole persons history of diet and drugs and lifestyle, not a simple glucose test. That study is also focused on leptin like Robert Lustig.

In conclusion, not good studies. The fact remains, almost everyone with real type two diabetes, type two, type two, type two, have excess adipose tissue. After eating a meal, their blood sugar remains high and overtime it causes damage to nerves which is why they go blind or lose a foot, starting with the toes. That is type two diabetes. It is not really a "disease" is the classic sense. It's a symptom of poor diet and lifestyle combined with excess fat that can turn around in a day. They take Metformin. Metformin helps the body to control blood sugar in several ways. It helps type 2 diabetics respond better to their own insulin, lower the amount of sugar created by the liver, and decreasing the amount of sugar absorbed by the intestines. It does all of that but it doesn't treat the cause of the problem. The diet that gives you type two diabetes is the diet that makes you fat. If you put these people on a low fat, high fiber, natural starch diet, insulin resistance goes away and T2D is gone as long as keep the excess fat off and life a good lifestyle.

Decreases in dietary glycemic index are related to weight loss among individuals following therapeutic diets for type 2 diabetes. - PubMed - NCBI

A low-fat vegan diet and a conventional diabetes diet in the treatment of type 2 diabetes: a randomized, controlled, 74-wk clinical trial. - PubMed - NCBI

A dietary intervention for chronic diabetic neuropathy pain: a randomized controlled pilot study. - PubMed - NCBI

Vegetarian and vegan diets in type 2 diabetes management. - PubMed - NCBI

A plant-based diet for type 2 diabetes: scientific support and practical strategies. - PubMed - NCBI

A low-fat vegan diet elicits greater macronutrient changes, but is comparable in adherence and acceptability, compared with a more conventional dia... - PubMed - NCBI

Changes in nutrient intake and dietary quality among participants with type 2 diabetes following a low-fat vegan diet or a conventional diabetes di... - PubMed - NCBI

Type 2 diabetes and the vegetarian diet. - PubMed - NCBI

Dean Ornish - http://stage.ornishspectrum.com/wp-content/uploads/comparison-of-coronary-risk-factors.pdf

I believe anything on Pubmed is more reliable than your strawmans.
You have managed to turn a thread into something else again, when your ready do explain the longevity of 45 years of age in highlands, the rest of the country is 60 years of age.
Clarify the obesity of the 85% vegetarian diet ,mainly starches that the obese elites consumed.

You haven't refuted anything in those studies in relation to thin people with type 2 according to mainstream views.
You have offered your own opinion and conclusion to the maninstream view.
We know Peats view on type 2.

Your studies are redundant unless you take environment into account, this is what you were looking for in an earlier paragraph but now it doesn't apply for you?
You switch angles when it suits you.

Can you please start a thread on your complete view on starches, if your that confident put it to the test.
 

Drareg

Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2016
Messages
4,772
Why do you think people who produce insufficient insulin are irrelevant? Why is this distinction so important to you in this discussion?


True, methods and conclusions are not always sound. But there is information there, and writing it all off can just end up being anti-science.

There is evidence there that there are many people who are lean and have diabetes, which was the point of contention in the discussion. Seems you didn't find any lean diabetics because you didn't look.


It is diabetes, though, and it's pretty important to the many people who suffer it, whether lean or round.

Since this discussion arose from you concluding health from pictures of lean people, the distinction between type 1 nad type two doesn't strike me as central.


I agree that a single GTT test is not adequate for diagnosing diabetes. It y warrant further investigation and changes of some kind.

Potatoes also contain plenty of potassium, I'm not sure if this will help in relation to diabetes with these diets?

Nevertheless we don't have much if any evidence for chronic disease from their past ,we do have longevity however.
 

tara

Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2014
Messages
10,368
But type 1.5 is still type 1, it's just now things are worse because the person is also type 2. I haven't seen anything on people regenerating their pancreas after being a true type 1. Again, type 1 is very rare so type 1.5 is rare. Type 2 is the epidemic.
I think the logic you are using is round-about and has gaps in it.
You seem to be arguing that:
1. Only Type 2 matters because it is much more common than Type 1.
2. Type 2 is statistically more commonly correlated with obesity.
3. All those lean diabetics that exist are probably Type 1 really.
Therefore there are hardly any lean Type 2 diabetics.
Therefore, a picture of lean people indicates absence of diabetes.

Quite apart from the problems with each of those premises, can you see why I don't buy the logic here? For one thing, there's a problem with counting the lean diabetics differently in premises 1 and 3.

Proving diseases is another matter entirely.
+1
Not to mention proving causation.
I do think longevity counts for something wrt evidence about health (unless mortality is largely from accidents and homicides).
I don't think that it's strong evidence for or against the actual constituents of this particular diet, since there are some other major confounding factors too.
 

Drareg

Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2016
Messages
4,772
Show me data on "skinny" people with type 2 diabetes. I can't find it.

Do you still stand over this quote ?
"lean people get T2D? If they do, then yes, it would be something to do with what you said. But that is extremely rare. Ihaven't seen too much on it besides a Chris Kresser article, and, that guy sells supplements".

Below is a thread started by westsidepufa,forum member @XPlus does an incredible job of putting points to you on the strawman you have created in this thread. You ignore his points.
Forum member @mujuro makes a valid point on type 2 diabetes in Bangladesh(mainstream view) ,very thin people. You ignore him.

The absolute worst, stupidest, and most dangerous TED talk on type 2 diabetes, ever.

You need to start a thread on starch instead of behaving like this throughout the forum Imo.
 

Barry Obummer

Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2016
Messages
111
Location
Northeast USA
If Ray is right, the protein content is probably way higher.
Wait.... why is that so? I don't know about this supposed hidden protein in potatoes.
 

jyb

Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2012
Messages
2,783
Location
UK
Do you still stand over this quote ?
"lean people get T2D? If they do, then yes, it would be something to do with what you said. But that is extremely rare. Ihaven't seen too much on it besides a Chris Kresser article, and, that guy sells supplements".

Note that lean people having T2D does not mean that fat accumulation is not the problem, it could just mean that the fat capacity was more limited and so it took less time to reach diabetes. I've seen this argued elsewhere online.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom