Vegetarianism not healthy!

.

 versus 

Source: wiki (both pics)

Large Austrian study was published recently:

Nutrition and Health – The Association between Eating Behavior and Various Health Parameters: A Matched Sample Study

Quote:

Our results revealed that a vegetarian diet is related to a lower BMI and less frequent alcohol consumption. Moreover, our results showed that a
vegetarian diet is associated with poorer health (higher incidences of cancer, allergies, and mental health disorders), a higher need for health care, and poorer quality of life.

From Table 3 (statistically significant results only):

Compared with carnivorous diet rich in meat, vegetarians have 1.8 higher risk of Allergies (30% in absolute terms!), 3 times lower risk of urinary incontinence (2%), 2.7 higher risk of cancer (4.8%), and 2.1 higher risk of anxiety disorder or depression.

Among non-statistically significant results, most notable is about twice as high risk of cardiac infarction (1.5% vegetarian vs 0.6% meat eaters), and a generally higher risk of all other chronic conditions.

See also: Study: Vegetarians Less Healthy, Lower Quality Of Life Than Meat-Eaters

Global Warming - Fight of the Faceless Fomentors

.
Mysterious Steven Goddard's anonymous heretical blog is documenting what appear to be cases of scientific fraud and data-tampering associated with the recent global warming "research" by NASA-GISS (NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies).  Look at the graphs in:

http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2014/03/01/spectacular-data-tampering-from-giss-in-iceland/

http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2013/03/25/30-of-giss-warming-is-due-to-data-tampering-since-2005/?relatedposts_exclude=105745

http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2013/03/25/all-giss-us-warming-is-due-to-data-tampering/

A presence of opposing views or even debunking is essential to the scientific method.  Steven Goddard has attracted his or her fair share of the latter:

http://www.desmogblog.com/steven-goddard

The following anonymous blog (Hey NASA is that you? On the other hand, Steve - if  you made that blog to "debunk" yourself than congratulations!  8-:D   )
-  seems to be devoted mostly to debating and character-assassination of "Steven Goddard"

http://reallysciency.blogspot.ca/

http://nationbuilders.thenation.com/profiles/blogs/debunking-a-climate-denier

http://climatecrocks.com/2011/09/14/new-lows-sea-ice-and-steven-goddard-credibility/

Low dose radiation is healthy!

What has cholesterol-heart disease theory and anti nuclear power environmentalism got in common?  It turns out - a lot!      8-:)

I came across a fascinating conference presentation by Philippe Duport on low level radiation in Ottawa University, January 2002.

Basically, turns out that radiation level between 10 to 1000 times stronger than the typical sea level natural background,  reduces the risk of cancer and extends the lifespan!   Some slides:

Note: 0.2Gy (Gray) is 20rad which is a rather high dosage (lethal dose for humans is 100rad), see also Wiki.

30% lung cancer reduction after 0.15Gy dose.

28% longer lifespan in mice at 35 and 70 times the natural background radiation!

Human cancer studies show a similar risk reduction, for example British radiologists have a lesser risk (by about 30%) than their non-radiologist colleagues.  Similar situation with Canadian radiation workers, 12% and 26% lower SIR (Standardized Incidence Ratio) of cancer in women and men, respectively,  28 and 35% lower cancer mortality rate (SMR=Standardized Mortality Rate) in women and men, respectively,  38 and 41% lower all causes mortality rate (SMR=Standardized Mortality Rate) in women and men, respectively (see slides 36,37).  It is interesting to note that the total mortality rate decreases more with (low level) radiation exposure than the cancer mortality, indicating that the protective effect of low level ionizing radiation against many other causes of death (cardiovascular?)  may be even stronger than against cancer!

The next slides illustrates the effect of rising natural radiation level with altitude above the sea level (due to cosmic ray effect).

High elevation = higher radiation = less cancer!

Similar map appears when plotting cancer incidence maps versus natural radiation map due to radon emission from the ground.

More Radon = more radiation = less cancer!

Conclusions (slides 45,46):

• Ionizing radiation is part of life.
• Sources of ionizing radiation are naturally everywhere, in food, air, water and our body.
• Life appeared and evolved in a radioactive environment.
• At environmental levels, there is no evidence of increased risk with increased dose, even when annual doses exceed current dose limits for radiation workers
• In fact, there are indications of decreased risk of cancer and non-malignant diseases at doses and dose rates well above current regulatory limits for the public and the workers.
• Populations in high background areas tend to have less cancers than those in low background areas.
• Low dose radiation is used in medicine: radon spas, cancer treatment and prevention.

This is supported by many other sources, studies and statistics, for example, see Figure 3 at  http://radiation-hormesis.com/

Optimum health = 100 times higher radiation than typ background!

------
Refs:

http://radiation-hormesis.com/

http://www.lowdose.uottawa.ca/projects.htm

http://www.lowdose.uottawa.ca/publications_files/Facts%20about%20low-dose%20radiation%20effects.ppt

http://stan-heretic.blogspot.ca/search?q=hormesis

The Anointed Ones

.
Fascinating new presentation by Tom Naughton, a must-watch (begin with the Vision of the Anointed at 8m 27s)!

A dissection of the homicidal nutritional disinformation campaign waged throughout the XX-th century by the corporate medical & drug establishment against the population.  Many interesting threads documenting the triumph of the corporate-governmental complex pitted directly against the science and against the public interest.

Proportion of heart attack survivors on different types of fat, clinical study, quoted from Tom Naughton's video (see the Youtube link above)

"Healthy" vegetable fats (2), heart attack survivors, clinical study (same source as above)

Low fat anyone?  Heart attack survivors, clinical study (same source as above)

Death by committee - what did the United States and later all other governments do, following the above studies?  (same source as above)

Twistor Revolution in Physics

.

This is a short alert note! It looks like a new revolution in theoretical physics, involving Twistor concept, has been going on for some time. Spinor coordinates, Clifford Algebra and quantum states replacing the space-time and classical vector calculus. No longer are space and time the free coordinate variables of the quantum or classical equations of motion or of the curvature tensor (General Relativity - R.I.P.).   No space, no time, no singularities, no Feynman diagrams, no locality, no 26 dimensions ...

Roger Penrose presentation (must watch!!!)

More reading, more refs: Andrew Hodges review

For the most hardened, read this unreadable "Primer on Twistors" by Fedja Hadrovich.

Lesson from medical history - beware of liars!

.
An article link was emailed to me by a friend.  An article like many of that kind, published in the last few years exonerating the benefits of low carb nutrition and pointing out some fallacies of the past misguided medical guidelines, full of references and links to various published studies.

  The way it was written, in a succinct way, has caught my attention and made me think about my own path to nutritional heresy and liberation from the Official Medical Dogma.   It dawned on me that it is actually much worse than I ever believed!   Back in 1999, when I once saw a medical article calling for low fat low meat high vegetable and fruit diet, in my naivety, I sent an email to an author, pointing out discrepancies and inaccuracies.   Among them I pointed out that the health risks associated with saturated fat and meat consumption were most likely caused by mixing fat and carbohydrates together in similar caloric proportions.   I believed in that!    The truth turns out (see many of the references links embedded in the article, for example this multi-study review) was much simpler and troubling than that - we were not dealing with the honest scientific mistakes!   The statements of a  health risk from eating saturated fat, with carbohydrates or without -  were a mixture of medical lies, references to irreproducible anti-saturated fat and cholesterol pseudoscience, plus unproven opinions!  Much of the dietary medical "wisdom" doled out so often in the past 30 years by the generations of unintelligent doctors to their patients, has been actually completely disproven by many of the past studies and by a majority of recent studies!

Heretic

References:

1) 13 Nutrition Lies That Made The World Sick And Fat

2) Meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies evaluating the association of saturated fat with cardiovascular disease

Statins review paper

.
"Nuclear explosion" is probably a better term than review!

Source Wiki

"The Ugly Side of Statins. Systemic Appraisal of the Contemporary Un-Known Unknowns" by Sherif Sultan and Niamh Hynes published in Open Journal of Endocrine and Metabolic Diseases, 2013, 3, 179-185.

The whole text is well worth reading in its entirety! Some quotations:

From the Abstract:

A comprehensive review of Pubmed, EM-BASE and Cochrane review databases was undertaken for articles relating to cardiovascular primary prevention and statin side effects with the aim of harmonising their roles within contemporary clinic practice. Particular attention was paid to large-scale randomised controlled trials on contemporary cardiovascular pharmacotherapies and their specific adverse effects on metabolic pathways which feature prominently in cardiovascular primary prevention and regenerative programmes.

There is a categorical lack of clinical evidence to support the use of statin therapy in primary prevention. Not only is there a dearth of evidence for primary cardiovascular protection, there is ample evidence to show that statins actually augment cardiovascular risk in women, patients with Diabetes Mellitus and in the young. Furthermore statins are associated with triple the risk of coronary artery and aortic artery calcification.
...

Utmost Medical Tragedy.

We seem to have fallen into the marketing trap and ignored the niggling side effects with regard to the HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors [1]. The only statin benefit that has actually been demonstrated is in middle aged men with coronary heart disease. However, statins were not shown to best form of primary prevention. Aspirin, as a form of primary prevention decreases the risk for total cardiovascular events and nonfatal Myocardial Infarction over any other factor [5]. In actual fact, high cholesterol levels have been found to be protective in elderly and heart failure patients and hypo-cholestereamic patients had higher incidence of intra-cerebral bleeds, depression and cancer [1].

The statin industry, with all of its spin-off, is a 20-billion-a-year industry. We are observing the revealing of the utmost medical tragedy of all times. It is unprecedented that the healthcare industry has inadvertently induced life-threatening nutrient deficiency in millions of otherwise healthy people. What is even more disparaging is that not only has there been a failure to report on these negative side-effects of statins, there has actually been active discouragement to publish any negative studies on statins.

Statins induce diabetes.

The US Veterans affair healthcare system study on 15 million veterans in 10 hospitals in Southern USA concluded that statins affect fasting and postprandial glucose level by inducing a state of hyperglycaemia in diabetic as well as non diabetic patients [12]. This relationship between statin use and rise in glucose level is independent of age and use of aspirin, beta blockers and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors. Furthermore, a sub-analysis of the JUPITER study showed that statin therapy can induce full blown type 2 diabetes in women [13]. This was astonishingly shown in the sub study of PRO-VE-IT TIMI 22, in which there was a significant increased risk of developing HBA1c > 6% in both diabetics and non diabetics [14]. Moreover Huptas et al. have demonstrated that statin therapy can induce a state of insulin resistance [15].
...
Statins manipulate glucose metabolism as a consequence of inhibitory effects on adipocytes. They induce insulin resistance through reduction in insulin-stimulated glucose uptake with a strong impact on glycaemic control in non obese patients.
...
Preiss et al. [19] demonstrated, in a pooled analysis of data from the five major statin trials, an increased incidence of new onset diabetes with statin therapy and provided evidence of a dose dependent association.

Statins accelerate arterial calcification.

The Confirm registry had shocked the scientific world with the strongest evidence that statin use is associated with an increased prevalence and extent of coronary plaques calcification [32]. Ironically for a drug which was marketed to lower the risk of cardiovascular disease, the confirm registry identified a strong association of statin use to the progression of coronary artery plaque features. Moreover, Statin use was correlated with a greater incidence of severe coronary artery stenosis as well as increase in the numbers of coronary vessels developing obstructive coronary artery disease. Furthermore, statin use was linked to an increase in the prevalence and extent of mixed calcific plaque. Five prospective studies have borne witness to the fact that statin therapy does not induce any coronary calcium regression and evolution of coronary calcium continues regardless of statin treatment[33,34]. The Veteran Affairs Diabetes Trial [35] established that statin consumption was linked to accelerated progression of Coronary Artery Calcification (CAC) in participants with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus without previous coronary artery disease, despite the fact that statin users had significantly lower and nearly optimal LDL-cholesterol levels.

------

Updated 5-Oct-2013, press news by Irish Independent:

"HSE gags surgeon after cholesterol drug claims"

A LEADING vascular surgeon [Sherif Sultan], whose research review concluded cholesterol-lowering medicines may do more harm than good for many otherwise healthy people, has been gagged by the Health Service Executive. ...

Why is Microsoft really doomed?

.
Why are Microsoft and similar large organisations really doomed to fail?

Bad CEO?  Don't think so!

-  It's the system!   - Because of the systemic handicap inherent in large collectives!

Because it is more advantageous for middle ranking management to compete internally underming their colleagues' departments and project developments, rather than make their company compete on the market!

Undermining a corporate colleague is more career-rewarding, for a "monkey", and brings rewards faster than a successful project management! It is a culture of hierarchical collectivism where a stronger must fight a weaker and must suck up to the higher in ranks. It is a culture of punishing the one who tries to work for a slightest mistake while rewarding her  boss for all successes. It is a culture akin of a herd of primates where everybody is a follower, nobody is capable or willing to show any creativity, and everyone spends all energy on social interaction and power games.

Eventually, normal humans are treated as misfits and leave or are pushed out, and those who embrace that culture, or are of this culture - stay in.

See this:
“Microsoft’s Lost Decade” by Kurt Eichenwald
http://www.vanityfair.com/business/2012/08/microsoft-lost-mojo-steve-ballmer


Quotes:

The story of Microsoft’s lost decade could serve as a business-school case study on the pitfalls of success. For what began as a lean competition machine led by young visionaries of unparalleled talent has mutated into something bloated and bureaucracy-laden, with an internal culture that unintentionally rewards managers who strangle innovative ideas that might threaten the established order of things.
...
Fiefdoms had taken root, and a mastery of internal politics emerged as key to career success. In those years Microsoft had stepped up its efforts to cripple competitors, but—because of a series of astonishingly foolish management decisions—the competitors being crippled were often co-workers at Microsoft, instead of other companies. Staffers were rewarded not just for doing well but for making sure that their colleagues failed. As a result, the company was consumed by an endless series of internal knife fights. Potential market-busting businesses—such as e-book and smartphone technology—were killed, derailed, or delayed amid bickering and power plays. That is the portrait of Microsoft depicted in interviews with dozens of current and former executives, as well as in thousands of pages of internal documents and legal records.

...

More employees seeking management slots led to more managers, more managers led to more meetings, more meetings led to more memos, and more red tape led to less innovation. Everything, one executive said, advanced at a snail’s pace. “There was this institutionalized system, and it was like designing software by committee,” said Prasanna Sankaranarayanan, a former Microsoft engineer. “Things moved too slowly. There were too many meetings.” Just as with e-books, opportunities for major product developments slipped away. …
By 2002 the by-product of bureaucracy—brutal corporate politics—had reared its head at Microsoft. And, current and former executives said, each year the intensity and destructiveness of the game playing grew worse as employees struggled to beat out their co-workers for promotions, bonuses, or just survival.
...

Death by "stack ranking" peer-review system.

Quotes:

Microsoft’s managers, intentionally or not, pumped up the volume on the viciousness. What emerged—when combined with the bitterness about financial disparities among employees, the slow pace of development, and the power of the Windows and Office divisions to kill innovation—was a toxic stew of internal antagonism and warfare.

“If you don’t play the politics, it’s management by character assassination,” said Turkel.

At the center of the cultural problems was a management system called “stack ranking.” Every current and former Microsoft employee I interviewed—every one—cited stack ranking as the most destructive process inside of Microsoft, something that drove out untold numbers of employees. The system—also referred to as “the performance model,” “the bell curve,” or just “the employee review”—has, with certain variations over the years, worked like this: every unit was forced to declare a certain percentage of employees as top performers, then good performers, then average, then below average, then poor.

“If you were on a team of 10 people, you walked in the first day knowing that, no matter how good everyone was, two people were going to get a great review, seven were going to get mediocre reviews, and one was going to get a terrible review,” said a former software developer. “It leads to employees focusing on competing with each other rather than competing with other companies.”

...
“I was told in almost every review that the political game was always important for my career development,” said Brian Cody, a former Microsoft engineer. “It was always much more on ‘Let’s work on the political game’ than on improving my actual performance.”

Creating wealth versus selling someone's product.

Quotes:

In Walter Isaacson’s authorized biography Steve Jobs, Jobs acknowledged Ballmer’s role in Microsoft’s problems: “The company starts valuing the great salesmen, because they’re the ones who can move the needle on revenues, not the product engineers and designers. So the salespeople end up running the company.… [Then] the product guys don’t matter so much, and a lot of them just turn off. It happened at Apple when [John] Sculley came in, which was my fault, and it happened when Ballmer took over at Microsoft. Apple was lucky and it rebounded, but I don’t think anything will change at Microsoft as long as Ballmer is running it.”

Most interesting, however, is that Jobs put the ultimate blame on Bill Gates: “They were never as ambitious product-wise as they should have been. Bill likes to portray himself as a man of the product, but he’s really not. He’s a businessperson. Winning business was more important than making great products. Microsoft never had the humanities and liberal arts in its DNA.”

Why are they doing it?

.
Interesting phenomenon: large number of material has appeared on various blogs and youtube recently, debunking the low carbohydrate diets. Most of them appear to be produced by very dedicated individuals with no apparent science background though with very good communication and media skills. The presentations are well written in terms of English and well presented with illustrations and video. It looks like a considerable time effort has been expended by some vegan English Major graduates.   8-:)

It puzzles me because for me personally, nothing seems more fruitless and useless than trying to convince another person how to eat! What is the point?

It is impossible (and unnecessary) to argue against that material because it is too much verbiage with very little hard data, quotes are misrepresented and the references are often either missing or misleading. A good illustration of this is the following example:

http://healthylongevity.blogspot.ca/2013/08/asian-paradox-low-carb-diets.html

Take for example this graph:

The reference link points to a paper:

Explaining the Increase in Coronary Heart Disease Mortality in Beijing Between 1984 and 1999
Julia Critchley, et al.

- which does not implicate meat or animal produce at all, rather points towards the Westernisation of the modern Chinese diet as the main culprit. Anyone visiting China recently remarks how much Western junk food are young Chinese now consuming, pop soda, wheat rolls, sweets and other carbohydrates.

Quote:

Conclusions - Much of the dramatic CHD mortality increases in Beijing can be explained by rises in total cholesterol, reflecting an increasingly "Western" diet. Without cardiological treatments, increases would have been even greater.

Contrary to what the blogger seems to believe, there is nothing here against or for Paleo Diet, nothing that would single out meat, carbohydrates or anything!

Healthylongevity blogger conjures a link between CHD and a consumption of animal produce based on a second-removed correlation between cholesterol and meat. However, high consumption of both carbohydrates and fat or meat calories can also increase blood cholesterol, as witnessed by the Western SAD stats, so it is not really proven that what has caused both cholesterol and CHD in the West is one and the same thing, and it is a completely unproved Healthylongevity's opinon that supposedly, the culprit must be animal produce, not the mountains of sugar, grains or vegetable oils introduced into the world diet!.

It's the Wheat!

The next group of graphs of mysterious origin really fascinates me, since I have never seen a better example of misinformation dressed up as scientific quotation.  The first of the graphs looks like this:

I presume mIHDc stands for mortality from Ishaemic Heart disease (group c=adults) so it seems to stipulate that more wheat = lower IHD mortality!   I was not able to find any source of those graphs, since the only link above them points to some deleted blog article by Michel Blomgren titled "Elektromagnetisk överkänslighet", where the graphs are nowhere to be found!  There is a verbal "explanation" that it was supposed to be some "regressed" scientific data with no comments on the nature of regression, what variables was it regressed against and under which assumptions and models was it calculated, other than it was based on China Study II.  IHD is only one of many (and the less prevalent in China) of mortalities due to cardio-vascular causes.   Would you like to take a look at the total cardiovascular disease mortality instead?  Much higher statistics and therefore much more reliable correlation.  Well, the China Study raw  un-massaged data does show the total cardio-vascular disease versus wheat trend, albeit a completely opposite one! That is, the more wheat one consumes the higher the rate of cardio-vascular disease (in terms of correlation), for example look at the graphs here and there which I generated last 3 years ago (I can send anyone the original spreadsheet, upon request), based on the original China Study data from the Oxford University web site. Incidentally, Oxford data graphs on Wheat vs Cardio-Vascular are very consistent with the Julia Critchley et al. paper quoted above, since Chinese appear to have been recently consuming a record amount of wheat due to Westernisation of their diet!

Heretic

Quantum biophysics is the new microelectronics!

.

I am recently obsessed fascinated by quantum coherent physical phenomena involving biological cellular membranes that may also represent a possible physical mechanism behind cold fusion (aka LENR - Low Energy Nuclear Reactions!).

Brief introduction:

In case of cellular membranes, we are dealing with electron-proton pairs on the opposite sides of the membranes forming the pseudo-particles - bosons i.e. particles of integral spin. Being bosons, those pseudo-particles may form a coherent quantum state - Bose-Einstein (BE) condensate just like the Cooper pairs of electrons in a superconductor, except they are neutral thus they do not produce observable electromagnetic phenomena as a superconductor but they do produce non-local quantum propagation phenomena (neurons, brain) and non-local synchronous energy transfers (bio-catalysis, mitochondria).

In case of deuterium or hydrogen ions in palladium or nickel crystal lattices, we are dealing probably with similar phenomenon of free electrons in the metallic lattice pairing with hydrogen nucleus forming an analog of hydrogen pseudo-atoms of very large dimensions which then form a coherent collective state of B-E condensate like on a cellullar membrane.

A collective state behave like a single "particle" of energy and mass being the multiple of the initial particle state energy (150meV in case of cellullar mitochondria and neurons, about 1eV in case of hydrogen/deuterium ions in metallic crystal lattice), multiplied by the average number N of particle forming the B-E condensate state. if N=10 then the membrane potential can energise all sort of chemical reaction acting like a catalyst. If N=1e6 then the B-E condensate may trigger nuclear reactions!

Once we develop a more accurate understanding and the model, we will be able to optimise and control those processes. From the practical and technological development point of view, I think, quantum biophysics is now what semiconductor microelectronics was in the 1950-ties.

Se also this document: "Proton Pump CF Mechanism".

[to be continued]

Added 9-Jan-2014

Quantum condensate effects observed in the living cells:

Physica Scripta. Vol.40,786-791, 1989., "Magnetic Flux Quantization and Josephson Systems",
E. Del Giudice, S. Doglia, M. Milani, C. W. Smith and G. Vitiello



Quotes:

One of the authors (CWS) and his co-workers have, over many years, found evidence that Josephson-like phenomena are occurring in living systems. The first piece of evidence [lo] came in 1975, when in the course of measurements on enzymes it was found that magnetic fields of the order of 60 mT could lead to very large changes in the dielectric constants of dilute solutions of enzymes.

This clearly indicates the presence of a cooperative phenomenon capable of increasing the susceptibility in a magnetic field. The effect disappeared above a critical value of the field suggesting a Meissner effect. Also the effects disappeared, if the solution was completely sterile biologically. These results have been discussed on the basis of a model in which there is a small superconductive region with linear dimensions smaller than the London penetration depth. A dispersion of such regions will act like a diamagnetic medium and could give rise to an AC Josephson effect. These preliminary results were repeated more extensively and using a different experimental technique for measuring the diamagnetic susceptibility.

Overconsumption of omega-6 plant oils and food allergies

.
Interesting article at The Telegraph: Oily fish and nuts 'cut chance of food allergies'

(From Happy Dietetitian at Wordpress)

Quote:

Academics have discovered that omega-3 fatty acids - found in fish like salmon, mackerel and tuna, as well as walnuts, pumpkin seeds and linseeds - prompt the gut to develop in a way that boosts the immune system. And they warn that more children could now be at risk of food allergies than in the past because consumption of such foods has fallen. The team, from France's National Agricultural Research Institute (INRA), found that when mothers-to-be ate a diet high in a particular group of polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs), the gut walls of their offspring were more permeable.

My comment:
   - Consumption of such food has fallen largely because of the official medical authorities recommendations that overemphasized vegetables, fruits and specific plant oils that are very high in omega-6, and discouraged consumption of fish, nuts and animal produce that contain omega-3 fatty acids.

Dietary fat's undeserved bad reputation, and treatment of diabetes

.

This is based on the paper:

Lawrence GD. Dietary fats and health: Dietary recommendations in the context of scientific evidence. Adv Nutr 2013; 4:294-302.

Quote from the "blasphemous" abstract:

... Over the years, data revealed that dietary saturated fatty acids (SFAs) are not associated with CAD and other adverse health effects or at worst are weakly associated in some analyses when other contributing factors may be overlooked. Several recent analyses indicate that SFAs, particularly in dairy products and coconut oil, can improve health. ... The replacement of saturated fats in the diet with carbohydrates, especially sugars, has resulted in increased obesity and its associated health complications. Well-established mechanisms have been proposed for the adverse health effects of some alternative or replacement nutrients, such as simple carbohydrates and PUFAs. The focus on dietary manipulation of serum cholesterol may be moot in view of numerous other factors that increase the risk of heart disease. The adverse health effects that have been associated with saturated fats in the past are most likely due to factors other than SFAs, ...

Editorial review in The Heart.Org:

Dietary saturated fat has undeserved bad reputation, says review

Quote:

Dietary saturated fat has undeserved bad reputation, says review
MAY 17, 2013 Steve Stiles

Rockville, MD - "The influence of dietary fats on serum cholesterol has been overstated," concludes a review in an American Society for Nutrition publication that, in its words, "calls for a rational reevaluation of existing dietary recommendations that focus on minimizing dietary [saturated fatty acids] SFAs, for which mechanisms for adverse health effects are lacking" [1].

Indeed, argues the author, Dr Glen D Lawrence (Long Island University, Brooklyn, NY), it is likely other factors, such as oxidized polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) or preservatives in processed meats, that are also present in high-SFA foods that lead to adverse health effects typically associated with high SFA intake.

"The meager effect that saturated fats have on serum cholesterol levels when modest but adequate amounts of polyunsaturated oils are included in the diet, and the lack of any clear evidence that saturated fats are promoting any of the conditions that can be attributed to PUFA, makes one wonder how saturated fats got such a bad reputation in the health literature," Lawrence writes in the review, published May 1, 2013 in Advances in Nutrition.

The article's case is built on interpretations of research from the biochemistry, epidemiologic, and clinical literature but which, nonetheless, does not reference a tremendous body of research supporting alternative views. Still, Lawrence describes:

* The role of lipid peroxidation in promoting atherogenesis, arguing that its effects are more pronounced on PUFA than on SFAs or monosaturated fatty acids.

* An arguably protective effect of omega-3 PUFAs against proinflammatory effects of omega-6 and other PUFAs.

* Evidence that potentially carcinogenic preservatives in processed meats as well as high-heat cooking methods have influenced perceptions that red meat per se has adverse health effects.

* How "the preparation and cooking methods used for foods that are traditionally classified as saturated-fat foods may be producing substances from PUFAs and carbohydrates in those foods that are promoting disease."

* Studies suggesting positive health effects from dairy fat and tropical oils, both high in SFAs.

* The hazards of diets with increased carbohydrates as a result of being lower in fat, in low-fat diets followed to improve health, especially cardiovascular health.

"The adverse health effects that have been associated with saturated fats in the past are most likely due to factors other than SFAs," the article concludes. "Consequently, the dietary recommendations to restrict saturated fats in the diet should be revised to reflect differences in handling before consumption. . . . It is time to reevaluate the dietary recommendations that focus on lowering serum cholesterol and to use a more holistic approach to dietary policy."

Interesting comments under the editorial, quotes:

# 5 of 6
May 20, 2013 01:46 (EDT)
Robert Bramel
Good Calories, Bad Calories Showed This in 2006
Good Calories, Bad Calories, written in 2006, is beyond doubt the most thoroughly and carefully researched diet and nutrition book ever written (3000+ references), and the author, Taubes, makes an extremely compelling argument that "dietary fat, whether saturated or not, is not a cause of obesity, heart disease, or any other chronic disease of civilization". Anyone hoping to argue against this position ought to spend the three years I did studying and critiquing many of Taubes' reference works. The evidence is overwhelming. The real culprit is insulin, and not incidentally carbohydrates, especially, but not exclusively, the most easily digestible and refined types because they have the most effect on raising insulin levels. Since that time I have watched carefully for studies in any relevant arena that would argue against the insulin hypothesis -- none found so far.

# 6 of 6
May 20, 2013 02:00 (EDT)
Robert Bramel
Response to D Hackam
"...saturated fat often comes 'bundled' with dietary cholesterol. Second, saturated fat can stimulate hepatic LDLc production."
Although I am a special case with LDL of 520 and TC of 620, switching to a high fat (mostly from meat and dairy) diet in 2006, there was no significant change in serum cholesterol levels. The only change was a predicted shift in the makeup of my LDL. With a high carbohydrate diet I had "mixed AB" particle size, and now my single peak is extraordinarily large (279 Angstrom, with a lab range limit of 285). Whatever the effect, my heart arteries continue to have zero calcification.

I found that link in Peter's post and karl's comments - recommended reading!

See also Treatment of Diabetes and Diabetic Complications With a Ketogenic Diet.

Quote (abstract):

Accumulating evidence suggests that low-carbohydrate, high-fat diets are safe and effective to reduce glycemia in diabetic patients without producing significant cardiovascular risks. Most of these studies have been carried out specifically restricting carbohydrates, which tends to lead to increased protein intake, thus reducing the ketosis. However, diets that limit protein as well as carbohydrates, entailing a composition very high in fat, appear even more effective to reduce glucose and whole-body glucose metabolism in humans. In animal models, low-carbohydrate, high-protein diets do not produce ketosis or reduce glycemia but rather cause obesity. However, limiting both protein and carbohydrates as in a classic ketogenic diet remarkably reduces blood glucose in animal models of type 1 and type 2 diabetes and reverses diabetic nephropathy. ...

Dr.Jan Kwasniewski was right!
.

105-year-old woman says eating bacon every day is her key to long life

.

Raw Story article

Quote:

Pearl Cantrell’s love of bacon is so strong that the Oscar Meyer Wienermobile made a stop through town last week to wish her a happy birthday, all because she told a local news station her amazing secret.
"I love bacon, I eat it everyday," she told a reporter for Abilene-based Big Country Homepage in April. "I don’t feel as old as I am, that’s all I can say."

Peasants on high animal fat & potato diet - very healthy!

.

Pommes De Terre Au Lard or Speckkartoffeln (Bacon Potatoes).
From  http://www.food.com/recipe/pommes-de-terre-au-lard-or-speckkartoffeln-bacon-potatoes-456385

According to this paper (thanks JC):
"The value of whole potato in human nutrition",
by Stanislaw Kazimiarz Kon and Aniela Klein, State School of Hygiene, Warsaw, Poland.
(Received December 29th, 1927.)

Quote:

The potato is a very important constituent of the diet of many civilised nations, and it may be considered to furnish, with bread, the bulk of the food of the rural population of such countries as Poland and Russia. There is little doubt that the Polish or Russian peasant is nevertheless very healthy and able to do extremely hard work under trying conditions. Deficiency diseases such as beriberi, pellagra or scurvy are practically unknown in Poland.
...
The diet consisted of potatoes, supplemented with butter or pork fat with the addition of a few fruits (apples and pears); tea or black coffee and sugar were also occasionally taken. The amount of fat consumed was not accurately estimated, it varied from 120-150 g.

They consumed between 1-1.7kg of potatoes daily, which amount to about 200-300g of carbohydrates, thus given the amount of animal fat they consumed, works out at 50% (roughly) fat diet by calories. It is hard to estimate it more accurately, since the pre-WWII traditional Eastern European breed of potatoes that they probably used contained more protein and less starch than the high yielding post-WWII varieties. They also tasted much better (H).
.

More animal fat & less veg oils = longevity!

.
1. New study on the topics of mono-unsaturated and saturated versus polyunsaturated fats:

"Lipidomics of Familial Longevity.", by Gonzalez-Covarrubias V, et al.
Aging Cell. 2013 Mar 2. doi: 10.1111/acel.12064. [Epub ahead of print]

Quote:

In addition, the longevity-associated lipid profile was characterized by a higher ratio of monounsaturated (MUFA) over polyunsaturated (PUFA) lipid species suggesting that female offspring have a plasma lipidome less prone to oxidative stress. Ether PC and SM species were identified as novel longevity markers in females, independent of total triglycerides levels. Several longevity-associated lipids correlated with a lower risk of hypertension and diabetes in the Leiden Longevity Study cohort.

2. Longevity marker = MUFA/PUFA ratio in cellullar membranes:

"Fatty acid profile of erythrocyte membranes as possible biomarker of longevity.", Puca AA, et al., Rejuvenation Res. 2008 Feb;11(1):63-72.

Quote:

Erythrocyte membranes from nonagenarian offspring had significantly higher content of C16:1 n-7, trans C18:1 n-9,[mono-unsaturated] and total trans-fatty acids, and reduced content of C18:2 n-6 and C20:4 n-6 [polyunsaturated fats].

(comments in brackets added by me)

3. Vegetable oils strongly impair absorption of vitamin D, no good if you are vegan:

"Type of dietary fat is associated with the 25-hydroxyvitamin D3 increment in response to vitamin D supplementation.",Niramitmahapanya S, Harris SS, Dawson-Hughes B., J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2011 Oct;96(10):3170-4. doi: 10.1210/jc.2011-1518. Epub 2011 Aug 3.

Quote:

The change in plasma 25OHD (nanograms per milliliter) during vitamin D supplementation was positively associated with MUFA, (β = 0.94; P = 0.016), negatively associated with PUFA, (β = -0.93; P = 0.038), and positively associated with the MUFA/PUFA ratio (β = 6.46; P = 0.014).

------------

Other interesting sources:

forum/sci.med.nutrition

-------------------

Comment on the particular vegetable fats that have similar composition to animal fats.

When refering to "vegetable oils" I have to make an exception to olive oil, coconut fat and palm oil.   Those particular fats are much lower in polyunsaturated fats than other vegetable fats and thus resemble animal fats.  Unsurprisingly, their physiological effects are different from those of other seeds and nuts oils, see my previous blog post.  For example, olive oil is mostly monounsaturated fat, thus in the light of the above study using the MUFA/PUFA ratio, olive oil adds to the nominator of the ratio alongside the animal fats.  I would express it as follows: the higher this ratio  (animal fat + olive oil + coconut fat) / (other vegetable oils) the lower the risk.

Olive oil composition:

 The average fatty acid composition of olive oil is 78-83% in mono-unsaturated oleic acid, 6-9% in essential polyunsaturated linoleic acid, 8-15% in saturated palmitic acid and 1.5-3% in stearic acid.
.

It's the olive oil not veggies!

.
"Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease with a Mediterranean Diet" NEJM, February 25, 2013

A total of 7447 persons were enrolled in this Spanish study (age range, 55 to 80 years). Three groups: (1) control diet, (2) Meditteranean Diet with Nuts, and (3) Meditteranean Diet with Extra Virgin Olive Oil.

Significantly less cardiovascular events and death in group (2) and (3) (P=0.009 and 0.02) but only group (3) showed a noticeable (P=0.11) reduction of death from all causes.

Fig.1 from the Spanish study.

Please notice no reduction of death from all causes in the nuts group!

To me this study is a clear endorsement of the type of fatty acids characteristic of olives, as being unequivocally healthy, while nuts may lower one risk while increase some other.

Why were nuts as good as extra virgin olive oil (EVOO) for cardio but not as good in terms of total death?  Was there some other  cause of death that was positively correlated with nuts (but not with EVOO), which neutralized the benefit of eating nuts for cardio-vascular health?   I am guessing here but it is quite possible that polyunsaturated fat from nuts may have contributed to cancer risk whereas the mono-unsaturated and saturated fats from the olive oil did not!  

See also NYT article.

Cold environment, ketogenic diet and longevity

.

A new lead:
Feeling Cold May Add Years to Your Life

Living in cold and frigid temperatures may be worth while as new research shows possible benefits of cold air for humans. A research study done at the University of Michigan observed the effects of cold air on the gene receptor, TRPA-1. The TRPA-1 receptor channel can be found in the nerve and fat cells of nematodes, also known as roundworms. It was discovered that roundworms live significantly longer under colder environments because the cold air seems to start a domino effect beginning with the receptor that eventually leads to the activation of the DAF-16/FOXO, the gene linked to longevity.
...
Due to this new research, the human body's receptors should ideally trigger the longevity gene when it comes into contact with cold air. The research also concluded that mice, which are also warm blooded mammals, can live longer when their body temperatures are lowered by 0.9 degrees Fahrenheit. It was measured that their lifespan can be lengthened by 20%. Warm blooded mammals can reduce their core body temperature by careful calories restrictions. However, these methods have not been practiced or studied with the human body. In addition to cold air, research shows that other factors, such as wasabi and mustard oil also act as triggers to this chain reaction.

Does ketogenic diet come in only as the pretext to consume wasabi and mustard? Not only, ketogenic diet stimulates production of methylglyoxal ["Methylglyoxal on Atkins... Uh oh!" , "Ketosis leads to increased methylglyoxal production on the Atkins diet."] which activates TRPA-1 [see "METHYLGLYOXAL ACTIVATES NOCICEPTORS THROUGH TRPA1..."]. Incidentally methylglyoxal also disrupts cancerous cells ["A brief critical overview of the biological effects of methylglyoxal..."]

More reading on the subject, and on Dr. Jack Kruse's Cold Thermogenesis ideas can be found in his blog.
.

Study: double mortality after replacing animal fats with vegetable fats

.
Also a mystery of some "missing data" etc. I am reposting this quote from Barry Groves' blog:

Quote:

...
The new research, published online in the British Medical Journal, was carried out by experts from the US Government’s National Institutes of Health in Maryland. They recovered missing data from a study in the 1960s involving 458 men aged 30-59 who had suffered a heart attack or angina. Using modern statistical methods to compare death rates, they found there was no evidence of the benefit of replacing saturated fats with omega-6 linoleic acid, found in vegetable fats. In fact, they said replacing the animal fats with polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) from vegetable fats increased risk of death in those patients with cardiovascular disease. Those who increased their intake of the “healthy” fats over three years were almost twice as likely to die. The omega-6 linoleic acid group in the study had a higher risk of death from all causes (62 per cent), as well as from cardiovascular disease (70 per cent) and coronary heart disease (74 per cent), compared to others. Linoleic acid is present in high amounts in some commonly used vegetable oils such as corn, sunflower, safflower and soya bean.
...

The study was published in BMJ on the 5-Februsary 2013: "Use of dietary linoleic acid for secondary prevention of coronary heart disease and death: evaluation of recovered data from the Sydney Diet Heart Study and updated meta-analysis" (pdf)

More quotes (from the study, the highlights and the capitalized comments in [] brackets are mine):

Advice to substitute vegetable oils rich in polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) for animal fats rich in saturated fatty acids (SFAs) has been a cornerstone of worldwide dietary guidelines for the past half century.1 When this advice originated in the 1960s, PUFAs were regarded as a uniform molecular category with one relevant biological mechanism—the reduction in blood cholesterol.1 2 Omega 6 (n-6) linoleic acid (LA) was the best known dietary PUFA at the time.

...

Diet intervention
The intervention group received instructions to increase their PUFA intake to about 15% of food energy, and to reduce their intake of SFA and dietary cholesterol to less than 10% of food energy and 300 mg per day, respectively.10 To achieve these targets, intervention participants were provided with liquid safflower oil and safflower oil polyunsaturated margarine (“Miracle” brand, Marrickville Margarine). Liquid safflower oil was substituted for animal fats, common margarines and shortenings in cooking oils, salad dressings, baked goods, and other products, and was also taken as a supplement. Safflower oil polyunsaturated margarine was used in place of butter and common margarines.

Control
The control group received no specific dietary instruction. However, some participants began substituting polyunsaturated margarine for butter after their coronary event.33 Because the research team made no effort to alter the PUFA or SFA content of control diets, such dietary changes were allowed to continue.
...
In this cohort, substituting dietary linoleic acid in place of saturated fats increased the rates of death from all causes, coronary heart disease, and cardiovascular disease. An updated meta-analysis of linoleic acid intervention trials showed no evidence of cardiovascular benefit. These findings could have important implications for worldwide dietary advice to substitute omega 6 linoleic acid, or polyunsaturated fats in general, for saturated fats.[IF THEY HAD BEEN PUBLISHED RATHER THAN GONE MISSING, AT THE TIME, FOURTY YEARS AGO!]
...
Increased all cause mortality in the safflower oil group was reported in 1978,10 although deaths due to cardiovascular disease and coronary heart disease were not reported by group.[BECAUSE THE DATA WENT MISSING!] Clinical outcomes for cardiovascular disease and coronary heart disease have been considered to be more relevant than all cause mortality when evaluating the evidence base25 and formulating dietary guidelines.26 Therefore, previous meta-analyses of PUFA intervention trials and risk of cardiovascular disease25 27 28 have been incomplete because they were not able to include these missing data from the SDHS. [SDHS=SYDNEY DIET HEART STUDY. CONCIDENTALLY, THE MISSING HEART MORTALITY DATA HAPPENED TO CONTRADICT, BY A LARGE FACTOR, THE EXPECTED OUTCOME! HAD THE HEART MORTALITY DATA NOT GONE "MISSING" FOURTY YEARS AGO, THE ENTIRE VEGETABLE OIL INDUSTRY WOULD PROBABLY NOT EXIST BY NOW!]

Interestingly, since the control group was found also shifting towards substituting all animal fats with vegetable oils and spreads, the degree of dietary change between the study group and the control group was most likely smaller than the nominal goal for PUFA intake increase to 15%. Yet, such a small difference of probably much less than 15% in PUFA (in absolute calories) have created a huge increase in cardiovascular disease, by about 70%. It indicates that the relative risk of cardiovascular disease rises proportionally to the absolute PUFA caloric intake, with a proportionality factor of about 5 or higher! (If the linear interpolation model holds true). Furthermore, an increase due to PUFA was even higher than an increase in cardiovascular mortality due to smoking (see Table 6)!

This high multiple factor seems to be confirm by the data from Table 5 indicating that for every 5% PUFA increase (in absolute energy%) the All cause mortality, the Cardiovascular disease mortality and the Coronary heart disease mortality increased by 31%, 35% and 26% respectively (relative risk factor).  This implies a proportionality factor of about 5-7.

 That is, for every 1% added Poly-Unsaturated Fatty Acids ( PUFA) in absolute calories % of the total, cardiovascular mortality INCREASED  by 5 to 7%. This is big news!

There is an even bigger news: Saturated fat is good for us! Table 5 exonerates the much maligned saturated fats from being implicated in heart disease (Dr. Ornish, please listen). For every 5% added saturated fat (in % of absolute total calories) the risk of mortality defined in the same categories as above DECREASED  by 30%, 28% and 28% respectively!  With the proportionality factor being also about 6, that is for every +1% of absolute saturated fat intake, mortality decreased by 6%!

This study has also neatly killed the second "bird" - the infamous cholesterol-heart disease hypothesis, quote:

As expected, increasing n-6 LA from safflower oil in the SDHS significantly reduced total cholesterol; however, these reductions were not associated with mortality outcomes (results not shown). Moreover, the increased risk of death in the intervention group presented fairly rapidly and persisted throughout the trial. These observations, combined with recent progress in the field of fatty acid metabolism, point to a mechanism of cardiovascular disease pathogenesis independent of our traditional understanding of cholesterol lowering.

It is interesting to observe the exact moment, around year 3.5 into the study on the graph Fig.2c below. I am speculating here, but a dramatic fall of mortality rates in both the intervention and in the control group coincidental with a sudden increase in quitting the study, may indicate a point when the participants and doctors realized that something is wrong and begun reverting to their previous diet. Butter, anyone?

Fig.2 (bottom) from the study.  

Notice how the number of deaths dropped to zero after year 3.5, and a dramatically higher rate of study-quitting by the patients. About 30 people used to leave the intervention group per year (out of which 5-16 were due to death) until year 3.5. Subsequently 49 and 36 patients quit but none died! There is probably more to be told that wasn't discussed in the paper, but the numbers reveal enough...

Prosocialites vs neurotics

.

In my previous articles I wrote about a theory postulating that our human ancestors broke away from a "herd of apes" collectivistic lifestyle.  Escaping out of a jungle "paradise" where no work was necessary for acquiring food but social interplay and obedience to herd hierarchy and the group authority was paramount for survival  [Sapolsky 1 and 2 ], meant a change over from the collectivistic towards an individualistic nomadic lifestyle.  The lifestyle where one's survival depended more on the individual foraging, hunting and toolmaking skills, as well as one's ability to construct shelters and make warm clothing.    Human development meant shift from social herd animal to industrious self-reliant individual.  It does not mean shift from social life to a complete absence of social life but it does mean interacting with smaller and more mobile groups that is characterized by less rigidity, less formal hierarchy and exhibits flexible social interactions.

The following recent study has illustrated this surprisingly well:

Study Of Indigenous Peoples Shows Big Five Personality Traits May Not Be Universal

According to a report summarizing years of research, the Big Five – which include openness, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness,   and   neuroticism – may be a culturally driven model that only really holds true for people in developed, western countries.

...

In his paper, UCSB anthropology professor Michael Gurven details how he and his team were unable to apply the Big Five model to the indigenous hunter-gatherer Tsimane people. Instead, they report, the personalities of the Tsimane appear to be characterized by a “Big Two” pair of traits – prosociality  and  industriousness. And while they report that these Big Two appear to combine certain elements of the Big Five that are used to describe Americans and Europeans, these two core personality traits seem to be a reflection of features that are specific to highly social, subsistence-based societies.

(Note: color highlights are mine)

The fact is, modern academic social science has blown up the pro-social (collectivistic) trait into multiple sub-categories, such as "openess", "consentiousness", "extrovertion" and "agreeableness".  Unsurprizingly, given who they are, the social scientists have shoved the entire multiverse of individualistic traits and skills into just one bin called "neuroticism"!  Why didn't they just call them "nerds" instead?

This study tells us that the social scientists and probably a majority of the society (4 out of 5 perhaps?) has devolved a "stuck in the past" mindset that considers collectivistic prosocial traits of more relevance than the "industriousnes" - pardon "neuroticism".   This is in stark contrast to the stone age people like the Tsimane tribe, whose "industrious" members are described with relevant word, while their pro-social members are bunched into one category rather than splitting them into different party-going monkey categories.

Stan (Heretic) aka Nerd

Anti-oxidants may promote rather than fight cancer!

.

Hold off those berries and vitamins, suggests DNA discoverer James Watson, in today's article titled "DNA pioneer James Watson takes aim at 'cancer establishments'" article.

From wiki

Quotes:

On the $100 million U.S. project to determine the DNA changes that drive nine forms of cancer: It is "not likely to produce the truly breakthrough drugs that we now so desperately need," Watson argued. On the idea that antioxidants such as those in colorful berries fight cancer: "The time has come to seriously ask whether antioxidant use much more likely causes than prevents cancer."

...

That is why Watson advocates a different approach: targeting features that all cancer cells, especially those in metastatic cancers, have in common.

One such commonality is oxygen radicals. Those forms of oxygen rip apart other components of cells, such as DNA. That is why antioxidants, which have become near-ubiquitous additives in grocery foods from snack bars to soda, are thought to be healthful: they mop up damaging oxygen radicals.

That simple picture becomes more complicated, however, once cancer is present. Radiation therapy and many chemotherapies kill cancer cells by generating oxygen radicals, which trigger cell suicide. If a cancer patient is binging on berries and other antioxidants, it can actually keep therapies from working, Watson proposed.

"Everyone thought antioxidants were great," he said. "But I'm saying they can prevent us from killing cancer cells."