Now I have studied food and health thoroughly, and a picture emerges that
is scaring. Today's health advice (more or less unchanged for more
than 30 years) are a direct cause to the increase in national diseases
like coronary heart disease (CHD), stroke, cancer, obesity,
adult-onset diabetes, allergy, eye diseases, etc. Life has been
unnecessary shortened for many, still more people have got a reduced
quality of life.
Many researchers know it, but their good health advice does not
reach the general public via government agencies or media. E.g.
the Swedish government has received the following letter, with a very
interesting appendix, without any action seen:
Missledande kostråd kan förorsaka övervikt och diabetes
(Mislead health advice can cause obesity and diabetes).
This far I guess most can agree with me, but you will
hardly believe in what I say below. But it is based on numerous
research reports that almost all point towards the same direction.
I will explain them first briefly, then more thoroughly later and
give lots of references. To enter this field like a health detective
(I have spent more than 300 hours reading documents during two months
in spring 2003)
I find more thrilling than reading a detective book.
There are both undeliberate and deliberate errors, you need to
follow the clues and investigate if proofs are firm.
And we are all part of the action, the world's biggest
food experiment.
Follow me!
HEALTH ADVICE
The three worst (i.e. bad) food advice:
Eat a variety of low fat food.
Let the main energy content be complex carbohydrates,
like pasta, rice, potatoes, bread, etc.
Use margarine instead of animal fat.
And here are some good food advice:
Eat a variety of low carbohydrate food
(preferably not more than 60 g carbohydrates/day).
Let fat be the main energy content.
Avoid all hardened fats (margarine and many additives).
Avoid all food based on cereals and legumes.
Avoid high amounts of polyunsaturated fats, but small amounts with
a high content of omega-3 fat are good, e.g. fat fish captured in the wild
(eel, mackerel, sardines, salmon, trout and herring).
Avoid artificial sweeteners in drinks.
You should probably avoid milk, but whip cream and butter are OK.
Fish, eggs, meat, nuts, non-starchy vegetables, butter, cream
and not too sweet fruits and berries can be included in healthy meals.
Some additional health advice:
Don't smoke.
Make a long walk (about 2 hours) every second
week or more and not immediately after a meal.
Eat relaxed, don't stress.
The above advice somewhat simplified: Eat less carbohydrates
and more fat (not spreads, though). That is easy to remember.
THE BRIEF EXPLANATION
Regarding 3 and 6: Margarine is manufactured from polyunsaturated
vegetable oil. But we want a more firm consistency, so they harden it.
They use heat and a nickel catalyst to add hydrogen to the fat chains.
Some of the fat thus created turns into trans-fat, which has a geometry
different from natural fats. Enzymes in your body are, like all
enzymes, very dependent on molecular geometry. So they don't recognize
trans-fat and it is not handled normally. Damaged trans-fat in cell
membranes is not replaced when needed and fat based hormones don't
get the intended effect.
Research shows an increased risk of
arteriosclerosis, diabetes, allergy, breast and prostate cancer.
There are also residues of nickel and other contaminations from the
manufacturing and the heating damages antioxidants and other useful
ingredients that originally were in the oil. Margarine contains no
useful nutrients in it;
butter is a better choice (there is, however, a
small amount of trans-fat also in butter; but the types of isomers that
are found in the ruminant fats behave in a very different way from those
found in the partially hydrogenated vegetable oils; the contents
difference can be seen on page 9 and 15 in
The influence of trans fatty acids on health
). Butter contains
many useful vitamins and minerals and animal saturated fat
do not cause diseases.
On the contrary, more saturated fat causes
less arteriosclerosis and logically
less risk for premature death.
According to the Danish report above, if you eat trans fatty acids
(e.g. pop corn, cakes and margarine) you are ten times more likely
to get CHD diseases compared to those that eat saturated fats;
also the risk to develop allergy and diabetes was higher.
Enligt den danska
rapporten ovan löper den som äter transfett (t.ex. popcorn, kakor och
tidigare margarin) 10 gånger högre risk
att få hjärt- kärlproblem jämfört med dem som äter mättat fett,
även risken för allergi och diabetes är högre.
In Sweden, producers of spreads have been good in reducing the trans-fat
content from earlier high levels,
see table (they use a mixture of saturated and
polyunsaturated fats instead of hardening). Industrial margarine and
frying oils still have high
levels, which affect many fried or baked products, like chips, fried
potatoes, cookies and crackers.
There may be trans fat in other foods too (e.g. ice cream, muesli);
check if the contents label says hardened fat or vegetable oil but
the product is not oily.
The high content of omega-6 fat in margarine and spreads clearly is
unhealthy and the most important cause to many of our national diseases,
see 8 below.
Regarding 8: High amounts of polyunsaturated fats suppress
the immune system. It has because of that been given to patients
to avoid tissue rejection after an organ transplant. But the cancer
frequency rose several times, see:
POLYUNSATURATED OILS AND CANCER. Cooking oils, margarine and spreads
contains lots of polyunsaturated fats.
Polyunsaturated fats easily get oxidized (rancid), even inside the body.
Then free radicals are created that damage nearby cells. Because of
that vitamin E or other antioxidant should always be used together
with it (always present in the original product, but lost when processed).
Heat, light and oxygen accelerate the process, so it is important
to keep the oil cool, in the dark and minimize air exposure.
To prevent getting oxidized fat, never use unsaturated fat for frying
or deep-frying. Butter or coconut oil is best for this use.
Regarding 7: Cereals, rice, corn, beans, peas and soy
contains "anti nutrients", i.e. substances that inhibit the
uptake of nutrients that is in the food. The worst one is phytate, which
inhibits uptake of calcium, iron, magnesium, zinc, and other important
metals. Uptake of biotin is also suppressed and causes ridged nails.
Cereals also contain
lectins that can cause the body's immune system to attack its
own cells, which causes rheumatism. Can also cause allergy.
The fat content of this group of foods also has too high ratio of
omega-6 fat compared to omega-3 fat. This high ratio is also reflected
in meat and eggs from grain or soy fed animals.
Regarding 1, 2, 4 and 5: Food consists mainly of proteins, fats
and carbohydrates. We eat food for two reasons (besides it tastes good):
To get building parts to build and maintain the cells of our body
and to get energy.
Proteins are needed to maintain our muscles,
including our heart, enzymes and hormones, but it is inefficient
to use it as an energy source.
They consist of amino acids and our body uses about 20 kinds as
building parts. Eight of these are essential, our food must have
them and in suitable ratios. If one or more of them is missing in a meal,
the protein cannot be used as building parts but just for energy.
Animal proteins are always complete whereas many plant proteins are
missing some of the essential proteins. So using plants as a protein
source, you have to mix several for each meal to get all required
amino acids.
Fats of different kinds we need to build cell membranes and hormones,
but it is also a good source for energy.
Fat consists of fatty acids. They can be saturated, monounsaturated or
polyunsaturated. Saturated fats are stable (don't oxidize or get rancid)
whereas polyunsaturated are very unstable; in nature they come together
with antioxidants to protect them. We need a suitable mixture of
all three kinds so our cell membranes get the right flexibility
and permeability.
Two of the polyunsaturated fatty acids are essential,
we must get them from the food. They are called omega-6 and omega-3
fats. A suitable ratio between them is in the range of 3:1 - 1:1,
but in today's food unfortunately it is usually 20:1. Fat
is also the carrier of vitamins, minerals and flavors.
Carbohydrates are not used to
build up anything, but can be used as an energy source. It is first
broken down to sugar and enters the blood stream. There it can be used by
our muscles and our brain, the rest is converted to fat and stored
away for later use.
Food with complex carbohydrates generally causes
just as fast a rise in blood sugar as food with simple carbohydrates. But some
food (e.g. most fruits) are slower than other food (e.g. bread or potatoes),
see GI/GL/II tables below.
The problem using carbohydrates as the main energy source can be seen
in the diagram to the right, the yellow line showing blood sugar as
a function of time after a meal.
Except for fibers, all carbohydrates are broken down to sugar, which
enters the blood. After a carbohydrate-rich meal there will be a big
sugar peak that requires high insulin levels to bring sugar down to
a normal level (fasting level, the dashed black line).
Unfortunately, the insulin level does not decrease as fast as the
sugar does. So even after normal sugar level is reached, the conversion
to fat continues. This creates a sugar deficiency (orange stripes
in the diagram), a dangerous state
because the brain cannot live without energy. So we get very hungry
and eat again, even though we just stored energy as fat. Again blood
sugar and insulin levels increase and it all repeats.
Why doesn't our body convert the just stored energy to sugar when it
now is needed, although it has the means to do so? This process is also
dependent on the insulin level. When it is low, stored fat is converted
to a form that can directly be used by our muscles, and to sugar for
our brain. But, as I said, after a carbohydrate-rich meal the insulin level
is high for a long time, so no stored fat is converted. In this type of
eating, stored fat will never be used. We grow overweight and obese
although we often feel hungry.
Another problem with carbohydrate-rich meals is that the body has no
built-in feeling of satisfaction when enough energy has been provided
by carbohydrates. The only satisfaction feeling is the volume of food,
when there is no more space in our stomach, but that goes away quickly.
However, for a fat-rich meal it is hard to eat more fat
than is needed. When you have eaten enough the satisfaction feeling gets
very strong and lasts. Even if you eat more the excess is not used or
stored, rather
fat burning is increased.
A third problem with carbohydrate-rich meals is that
a high level of
sugar or insulin in our blood is in itself dangerous.
Here is a list of effects:
146 Reasons Why Sugar Is Ruining Your Health .
Sugar depresses the immune system. That increases the risk of cancer
and to get a virus or bacteria infection. Sugar accelerates aging by
attaching to the ends of proteins, which then stop working. High levels
of sugar and insulin are a direct cause to arteriosclerosis,
CHD and
stroke. High insulin level in itself also causes a high blood pressure
by inhibiting uptake of magnesium, which is muscle relaxing, also in
veins. Some eye diseases get worse by high sugar levels.
Sugar can
cause mental diseases and
epilepsy; even haemorrhoids
are caused or made worse by sugar.
The following reference in four parts is a lecture that Ron Rosedale
has been giving his students. After a slow start it then turns
very interesting:
Insulin and Its Metabolic Effects.
Formally it is about insulin (he is a diabetes expert), but by and by
almost all aspects on how our body handles food is explained. It is told
in a way that you don't need to be an expert to understand it.
It is a long text, but well worth the two hours it takes to read it.
Do so! A better motivation to change food habits is hard to get.
Regarding 9: Already when we feel the sweet taste in our mouth,
the insulin production starts in anticipation to the expected sugar uptake.
But if it is just artificial sweetness there will be no sugar and the
blood sugar level goes too low. That causes us to get hungry and we
start to eat. Not the effect we want from a diet-drink. Also see
special problems with Aspartame:
Aspartame, A Bitter Sweetener. There are
risks with other sweeteners too. Even
Splenda/Sucralose is bad.
Regarding 11:
You should eat a "normal" amount of protein (15-25 % of calories),
as little carbo hydrates as possible and as much fat as possible.
The fat should mainly be saturated or monounsaturated.
All sorts of spreads and margarines should be avoided.
If you are allergic to any of the suggested
foods, you should of course omit those. Nuts, eggs, tomatoes and
green peppers are the most common problems. For eggs, it is usually
boiled or fried eggs that cause trouble, raw eggs less often.
Recipe suggestions with mostly healthy food (skip those containing soy):
Start breakfast with an
egg yolk (from grass fed hens) in a glass and pour over
orange juice while stirring with a knife. It is extremely
healthy, still tastes orange and a hint of cookie mixture.
The problem with this tip is that only 1/200000 part of the raw
white contains enough of the anti nutriant avidin to
block all of the biotin in the egg yolk (biotin deficiency causes
brittle and ridged fingernails). A cooked egg feels safer,
heat destroyes the avidin.
Always keep walnuts at home. Use them at breakfast and as snacks. You
can add
Brazil nuts,almonds and hazelnuts, but just a little as they lack
omega-3 fat.
Pour plenty of extra virgin olive oil on salads and
vegetables.
Ensure you always have fresh fruit at home and eat it
at breakfast and in the evening.
I must emphasize how important it is to eat fat fish because of its
high omega-3 fat content. I propose one breakfast a week with sardines
in tomato sauce, one lunch a week with mackerel/salmon/herring and
one supper a week with pickled herring. And the best fish of all is
eel, which you should eat as often as there is an opportunity to.
Shrimps, tunas, perch, cod, stockfish, fish balls and fish fingers
contains less than 1/10 as much omega-3 fat as the previously
mentioned ones, so it would require unreasonable amounts to balance
all the omega-6 fat normal food contains (but they do contain
more omega-3 than omega-6 fat, so they are still good food).
Also cut down on omega-6 fat as much as possible, like cooking oils,
margarine, spreads, soy and cereal foods. Saturated or monosaturated
you can eat as needed to get enough calories.
I think that if you eat low carb food six days a week, it doesn't
matter much if you eat high carb food once a week, e.g. if
you are invited to dinner or going to a restaurant.
That is assuming you are not a diabetic or are addicted to
carbohydrates and will have problems returning to low carb
meals the next day. If possible, choose something with a low
GI/GL/II value, see references further down.
The risk of getting thrombus or stroke is slightly higher on such
a day, but on the other hand it was still higher eating high carb
food seven days a week.
It is worth considering that even if you haven't come down to just
60 g carbohydrates per day, any step down from a high value is
a big improvement to health. And although you have to skip many
kinds of food because they have too much carbs, you can still
eat a tasty meal. How about e.g. a 3-dish meal with
salad and shrimps for first course, beef with butter, tomatoes and
cauliflower for main course and strawberries with cream for dessert.
And for snacks
nuts are healthy.
Regarding 12: There are firm proofs that smoking damages the
body. However, if we use all the good advice given here, the body
will more often succeed in repairing the damages.
It is more important to stop eating carbs than to stop smoking.
Don't try to do both at the same time,
it almost always fails. Change
food first, and then when you are healthier, stop smoking.
Regarding 13: Every time when we get a sugar peak, and thus
an insulin peak, it increases the insulin resistance of the cells.
That is, it requires higher and higher insulin levels for it to
have any effect.
Eventually the required level is so high, it cannot be produced.
Then the sugar level goes up permanently and we have become
adult-onset diabetics.
But if we go for a walk, and it is not immediately after a meal,
then after about half an hour (when the sugar stored in the muscles
have been used up) the insulin level will become so
low that stored fat will be used for the energy need. That is
twofold good: We get rid of some stored fat and the low insulin
level decreases insulin resistance. We get a
decreased disease risk. This effect has been found to
work best using a slow walk; heavy exercise is not as good
because then the liver releases sugar into the blood preventing
fat burning.
If we walk immediately after a meal
it takes longer for the fat
burning to start, it is best to first wait 1 - 2 hours. Besides
walking, bicycling, dancing and other activities with suitable
intensity and duration should work too.
To prevent that a trivial thing like a false step may cause
a sprained muscle, some fitness exercise is useful. I like
TBK:s
Bodyweight Exercise Routines, they are easy to do anywhere
and don't take much time to do.
Regarding 14: Atherosclerosis starts with a damage of the
inner cell layer of the arteries, the endothelium. Factors that have been
shown to damage the endothelium include:
High blood sugar levels (diabetes or carbohydrate-rich food)
High levels of insulin (diabetes type 2 or carbohydrate-rich food)
High levels of stress hormones (depression, anxiety or because you are hurried)
Smoking or snuffing
High levels of triglyceride (diabetes, alchohol intake or carbohydrate-rich food)
Lack of vitamins C, B6, B12 or folic acid (causes high homocysteine levels and that's bad)
Trace element deficiencies (copper, zinc, ...)
Antioxidant deficiency (eat berries!)
Microbial infection
Dietary trans fatty acids (spreads, cookies, popcorn, ice cream, etc)
High omega-6/omega-3 ratio (spreads, cooking oil, cereals, etc)
oxidized LDL (anti-oxidant deficiency, normal "bad" LDL is not bad)
It sounds logical that if we are too fat, we should eat low fat food if
we want to loose weight. But chief physician Christer Enkvist writes
in a morning paper: "We don't grow fatty by eating fat. Thinking so
is as stupid as thinking we get green by eating greens."
And, as we saw above: food low in fat means it is
relatively high in carbs, causing high insulin levels, which prevents
fat burning. So we don't loose weight even if we try.
And there is a big risk we don't get all the essential fats needed to
maintain a healthy body.
If we reduce both fat and carbs we can reduce weight by
starving our body. This is also not a good method. Our body notices that
it is bad times and adapts to a low energy economy. It increases
nutrial uptake efficiency and stores away energy as often as it can.
The metabolism rate goes down (you are not performing well).
If energy is still insufficient, it will convert protein from muscles
(including our heart) into sugar. It could worst case cause heart failure.
Sooner or later we give up and return to old food habits, but after
a while we will weigh more than when we started.
Then there is the third method: Eat low carb food with lots of fat and
make a long walk now and then. It makes insulin levels go low and
gives our body the opportunity to burn stored fat. Everyone that has tried
has managed much better than with other methods. The first one to find
this out was William Banting already in 1863 (the Swedish verb "banta"
is referring to him), see:
The Father of the Low-Carbohydrate Diet.
Later it has been rediscovered now and then, many books have been
written to inform others:
Eat Fat And Grow Slim",
"
Eat Fat, Loose Weight", "
Eat Fat, Get Thin",
Ät dig ner i vikt!,
Fettskrämd,
etc. You don't have to count calories, you don't have to be hungry
and you loose weight.
Diabetes
There are many reports where diabetic people using low carb eating
have been able to drastically decrease the amount of insulin needed
and very often can totally stop insulin injection. It should be done
with supervision; blood sugar and insulin levels should be monitored.
You can't do that yourself and it also has to be correctly interpreted.
Here are some references:
Therapeutic achievements of the Optimal Nutrition and
The evidence that a low-carb, saturated fat diet is better for diabetics.
Diabetes type 1 we often get when young and it causes the body not to
be able to produce normal levels of insulin. In such a case it is
important to add insulin to prevent blood sugar to raise too high,
the amount needed depends mainly on the amount of carbs in the food.
Diabetes type 2 we normally get when we grow older and is caused by
the cells increased resistance to insulin. In this case we should
not add more insulin; the level is already too high
and will increase damage. Instead the remedy is more exercise and
low carb food.
Dr Mercola writes:
"I am constantly amazed at how many type 2 diabetics are placed on
insulin to further control their blood
sugars by well-intentioned physicians. Unfortunately this uninformed
and absurd therapy is a prescription
for disaster that will rapidly accelerate the death of virtually
anyone who is placed on it.
The problem in type 2 diabetes is not that there isn't enough insulin,
but that the insulin present doesn't
work very well due to impaired insulin receptor sensitivity.
So when type 2 diabetics are placed on insulin, their blood sugar drops,
but their insulin levels rise. The
problem here is that the increased insulin levels increase the diabetic's
appetite and they gain even more
weight.
The weight gain contributes to a worsening of their insulin receptor
dysfunction and their blood sugar
continues to rise, thus resulting in higher and higher levels of insulin.
The ultimate insanity is giving the type 2 diabetic a pancreatic transplant.
Not only does this not solve
the problem, but also the diabetic, whose immune system is already impaired,
will be placed on
immunosuppressive drugs to control the rejection. These costly drugs need
to be taken for their entire life
and will invariably increase their risk of cancer.
So what is the solution?
Fortunately it is quite straightforward. One needs to reduce,
not increase insulin levels and this is
typically done by radically reducing the foods that cause one to make
insulin. This is primarily grains and
sugars.
Exercise will do wonders to improve the insulin receptor sensitivity,
as will omega-3 oils and sleep."
Salt
We often hear nowadays that we should reduce the intake of salt to get
a lower blood pressure and thus a lower risk of CHD and stroke.
But there is
no scientific evidence for such an effect. The only investigation
that has been done on death risk as a function of salt intake showed
the opposite, a slightly decreased risk at higher salt intake.
There is a risk for cancer in the stomach and
bone loss
with high salt intake;
a low intake on hot days can cause heart failure and feebleness.
But to decrease salt intake from "normal" to low
is controversial
and other means have much greater CHD-reducing effect, e.g. more long walks.
If you have read this far, you have learnt all the important things.
What follows is advanced info on which the above health advice is based.
Go directly to Final Comment at the end.
But if you find it interesting, read on, there will be many references.
First some info on how to read and interpret documents on health.
On examining documents and proofs
When reading reports on food and health, one must be aware,
as I mentioned in the beginning, that there are both
undeliberate and deliberate errors.
It happens that a research team gets money to verify that food A
causes less CHD risk. When the investigation is done they find
that it was true, but also that the cancer risk increased more
than the CHD risk decreased. But the last part may be missing from the
summary; you have to read the whole report to notice it.
In another case there was a table showing a death risk completely
uncorrelated with intake of saturated fat. But when creating a
diagram, data was selected from the table to give a nice rising line
instead of getting scattered dots all over.
It is not uncommon to investigate the effect of eating more of
food A and B. If it shows positive health effects, then both
manufacturer of food A and manufacturer of food B can say that
their food contributed to better health. In reality, it could be
that A was very positive but B slightly negative, together it
became positive.
And if you increase A and B, then either total calories increases
or you have to decrease C. Maybe that was what caused the most effects.
To make objective investigations they should be double blind
(neither researcher nor the test person knows who gets which
substance). But that is hard when it comes to food:
"Eat this now and you will not be told if it is beef or pasta".
That cows' milk is not good for humans is often motivated by the
reason that it was never intended for humans, only for the calf,
and thus must be unsuitable for us. It is probable that it
is unsuitable for us, but not because of that "proof". If so,
eating egg yolks should also be unsuitable for us, because it
was intended for the chickens, and we are not chickens.
But in reality
the egg yolk is the most perfect food of all
(if hens have been eating grass and worms instead of cereal food, in Sweden
KRAV-labeled are closest, also
omega-3-eggs are good).
It contains all essential proteins, fats, minerals and vitamins
in suitable amounts, only vitamin C is missing.
A very common error, probably unintentional, occurs the following way:
What we really want to measure is premature death risk or
number of disease cases. But that is expensive, we need to
observe many people and during a long time to get significant
results. What is often done instead is to use an indicator
from such a big investigation and then adding new inexpensive
measurements on how to affect this indicator.
Example: A big investigation has shown
that both blood cholesterol
level and death risk increases when smoking. Same for overweight.
Then an investigation is done on the effect of polyunsaturated fat
on the cholesterol level. And yes, more PUF reduces the cholesterol
level a little. This is an inexpensive finding; it is easy to
measure cholesterol levels in the blood after just a few weeks.
Then when more money is available and the death rate is also
measured, they find that, whoops, cholesterol level decreased but
death rate went up. How could that be? Earlier test did show positive
correlation with cholesterol level and death risk.
To explain this we use a simulated example where we measure things
everybody can understand. We assume that it is easy and inexpensive
to measure firemen density in an area and it is expensive to
measure damage cost caused by fire. But there has been a big
investigation done that found a positive correlation, the more damage
in an area the more firemen there have been. Then three research
teams start investigations
on how firemen density can be affected. Team A varies their salary
and finds a positive correlation, lower salary means fewer firemen.
Team B changes the number of fire engines, and finds a similar
positive correlation. There is no living journalist that can
resist the temptation to write an article on how researchers now
have found means to reduce fire damage by reducing salaries
and fire engines. Team C changes the number of fire warning devices
and finds that it requires more devices to see fewer firemen
in an area. Then all three teams get more money and can measure
cost of fire damage too. Team A and B find that their advice
was totally wrong, it caused fewer firemen but higher damage cost.
The advice from team C happened to be right; fewer firemen also
meant lower damage.
From this we learn that firemen are just an indicator, they arrive
to the area because there are fires but they did not start the fires.
In the same way, cholesterol is just an
indicator, not the primary cause of CHD. There are lots of
cholesterol in the cell membranes, and if it gets damaged
cholesterol is needed to repair it. If you throttle the
creation of cholesterol, then some cells will not be repaired
and death rate increases.
Blood pressure is probably also just an indicator, not the
primary cause of CHD. To decrease blood pressure via a lower
insulin level from more exercise decreases CHD risk, but
decreasing pressure by eating less salt
does not seem to have any benefit.
I'm astonished of that about 80% of all reports I've seen
have just measured some indicator in the blood.
True, they are inexpensive to produce, but a lot of money is thrown
away for very little use. If the indicator level decreases,
how would you know if it is because of lower need or throttled
creation? You don't, you have to ignore the report. But it
can very well already have been copied and cited a 1000 times,
almost making it true. That is why I think health detective
and proof examination are notions that suit.
The investigation starts
My interest in food matters started with an article in Scientific
American, which I subscribe to since long ago. It was named
"Rebuilding the Food Pyramid" and effectively turned the current
food pyramid upside down. The food pyramid, see picture to the right,
is rather ingenious. At the wide base are things we should eat
a lot of and at the top things we should eat just a little.
The gist of the article was that white bread, rice, potatoes and pasta
went from the bottom to the top and different fats from the top
to the bottom,
see picture below (click on the image below to read the full article).
Then in May 2003 I happened to see an interview in Swedish television
with Göran Burenhult, who is an archaeologist at Gotland University,
but he has also investigated the life of now living hunter-gatherers.
Almost the whole interview was about food and life style, like
this (Swedish) article:
Ta ditt hälsoansvar!
He has also written a book,
Det ofullkomliga djuret (The imperfect animal), that I bought.
An excerpt on food from the book is here:
Vilken föda är vi biologiskt anpassade till att äta?
(What foods are we biologically adapted to eat?).
What has struck Burenhult is that hunter-gatherers don't have any
of our modern diseases even if they become very old. Elderly
people participate in all activities without problems until one
day they get an infection and die after a week without any painful
disease.
Bone remains show that from being big and healthy,
after the start of agriculture people became
shorter and got more diseases.
Burenhult, and other spokesmen for paleodiet, conclude that all
new food types introduced by agriculture must be bad. That is
cereals, rice, legumes, milk, butter,
cheese, sugar, salt, spices,
etc. I, as a health detective, think it just means that the
old food was good and that something in the new
food is bad (it may be all the new food types).
There is also some disagreement on the content of typical
food used by hunter-gatherers. Those Burenhult has studied
eat a lot of vegetables and a little meat, while other groups
eat a lot of meat and preferably
guts and grease, including
brain, marrow and lard.
However, everyone agrees that they did not eat any of the new food types
introduced by agriculture.
They get suitable exercise when they walk long paths hunting,
bring home preys and climb up trees for coconuts.
Barry Groves has spent many years on reading reports
thoroughly and his articles always have many references
of good quality:
Welcome to Second Opinions.
Go and see his site, it is well worth the time. In addition
to health effects of carbohydrates and fats, there is info on:
weight loss, diabetes, cancer treatment, vegetarianism,
sunscreens (many increase the cancer risk!),
fiber (ditto!), bottle water, health food, additives,
food for athletes, mad-cow-disease, smoking, coffee, etc.
Latest news on low carb food with many articles and
research reports:
TheOmnivore.
Sanna Ehdin has a page on fats:
Fat for life!
Most of the things she writes on her site are correct, but
unfortunately I think she also uncritically reproduces some
less good information.
Easy to understand reading on Cholesterol:
Cholesterol -- Your Life Depends on It!
Everything from its chemistry to its functions in our body,
such as building part for cell membranes and hormones,
digestion, building muscles and bones, key function for memory,
protecting against infectious diseases.
Eat International has both short free lectures and longer ones
for a charge
in Scandinavia on low carb eating. Web pages with recipe suggestions,
exercise info, food facts, etc.
Links to research reports on food and health and exercise:
A review by Chris Masterjohn on research o Alzheimer's disease:
Myth: Cholesterol Causes Alzheimer's Disease and
The Real Causes of Alzheimer's Disease. Conclusion:
"It makes sense to increase our consumption of fresh fruits and vegetables, saturated fats, and sources of DHA such as egg yolks from pastured chickens and cod liver oil, and to decrease our consumption of carbohydrates and most polyunsaturated fatty acids. A high-fat diet may help by preventing insulin resistance and by contributing neuro-protective ketone bodies as well."
A Danish report on trans fatty acids:
The influence of trans fatty acids on health.
"The studies indicate that,
gram for gram, the intake of trans fatty acids as compared with saturated
fatty acids is associated with an approximately 10-fold higher risk
increment for the development of heart disease."
A swedish study using low carb food:
Karlshamnsstudien. Many diabetics could stop take insuline.
After reading all of the above documents, and many of those they
refer to, a picture emerges that shows that our health depends on
our food much more than people are aware of. Unfortunately, the health
advice we get from government agencies and media are not the best.
Research shows that paleodiet based food is beneficial for
all, children, grown-ups and elderly. It greatly reduces the
risk of getting our common diseases. Those that already got
diseases,
e.g. those with obesity, diabetes, rheumatism, MS, etc.,
often become better or even recover fully. The reason paleodiet
type of food reduces or prevents so many different diseases
is because it is the kind of food that we are genetically adapted to.
We have not yet adapted to the new food types introduced by agriculture
about 10'000 years ago.
Unfortunately there are many that still are skeptical to low carb
eating and there are also
many misunderstandings about it.
If everybody started eating paleodiet food I think there would be
some problems to pay pension to all long living pensioners.
But costs for hospital treatment and drugs would decrease
enormously, so there will probably be a net gain. And most
important, quality of life would increase for everybody.
Although not knowing the paleodiet benefits, I myself made a few steps in the
right direction 15 years ago. I quit eating bread for breakfast, lunch
and in the evening, also started to eat three fruits every evening.
And I have always made long walks every week.
That can be the reason that despite my age I have a low value of
"bad" cholesterol and a high value of "good" cholesterol.
My blood pressure, though, has increased from a low to a normal value.
That indicates an increasing insulin resistance, surely because
there were still grains, legumes and sugar in my food.
I will now successively go the remaining steps towards a full paleodiet
type of eating. May goal is that for the rest of my life always be able
to participate in all activities without impairment from diseases.
Changes to the food consumption I've done are
Less carbohydrates: Muesli from more than 100 g to 50 g,
potatoes from 5 pcs to 0-2 pcs, milk from 5 dl to 2 dl the rest replaced
by orange juice, cup of chocolate milk with cake replaced by a glass of juice,
no sweets (I used however very little sweets).
More fat: For breakfast 30 g olive oil, 30 g bacon, 15 g Walnuts,
a raw egg yolk. For lunch: 30 g olive oil. In the evening:
Cooked food (e.g. 100 g sausage with vegetables), and a raw egg yolk,
Brazil nuts as snacks.
More vegetables: Now about 250 g in total a day, mainly
broccoli, cauliflower, carrots, onions, tomatoes.
More berries: I eat 1 hg berries with whipped cream every day.
That seems to be a certain increase of the calorie intake and I have never
felt hungry, so it is interesting that I despite this have lost weight.
It shows that my body just use as much of the fat that it needs.
Status after 1.5 years with low carb food is that I initially lost 2 kg
and then have been keeping that weight, 63 kg and 174 cm for a long while.
I have had to punch 3 new holes in my belts. Lately I have gained some weight,
but without changing holes in my belts. It is muscles that have gained.
It has increased my jogging speed and I'm down to times that I had 13
years ago (seen to physical performance I grow younger by the time :-)
Three years ago I became more farsighted than I was before, now I'm back
to my former nearsightednes. My haemorrhoids have giving me trouble several
times a month for many years, but now I've had no trouble at all.
I get fewer colds than before.
I would like to have an icon put on low carb food. Think it
would make it more interesting for food companies to release
low carb food products. I think a suitable symbol is an
hour glass. It is easy to recognize, has a thin waist which is
what you get eating such food. It also indicates time and
you don't get hungry as fast as with high carb food.
The question is which authority is to award and control
such icon permits and exactly what the requirements
on the food are. Is the food better than other of the same type
or should it be a content limit (maybe different for different
food types)?
I definitely don't want this icon on
artificial low carb food with removed fat and added soy
(
soy is neither good for your health nor
for the environment).
What requirements would facilitate your food buying the most?
Please submit your suggestions to my email address below.