Low-glycemic-load diets: impact on obesity and chronic diseases



Matti Narkia wrote:

> 23 Oct 2003 13:54:34 -0700 in article
> <[email protected]> [email protected] (Dr.
> Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD) wrote:
>
> >Matti Narkia <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> >> Thu, 23 Oct 2003 14:29:41 -0400 in article
> >> <[email protected]> "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"
> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Matti Narkia wrote:
> >
> >> >> Ketosis in adults can be prevented by a daily carbohydrate intake of about
> >> >> 50 g. Hyperhomocysteinemia can in most cases be prevented by taking folic
> >> >> acid supplements. Vitamins B6 and B12, and TMG could also be helpful.
> >> >
> >> >Glad that you are finally acknowledging the concerns.
> >> >
> >> That's not a specific concern for LC diets.
> >
> >The former is a specific concern of high-fat (and low-carb) diets.
>
> The ketosis may occur, if daily carbohydrate intake is below 50 g, quite a
> low amount. Whether ketosis in LC diet is a reason for concern is
> disputable.
>

Hardly. Else, why call them *ketogenic* LC diets?

>
> >The latter a specific concern of high-protein (also low-carb) diets.
> >
> You cannot say that unequivocally.

Actually, I do easily write unequivocally that the latter remains a specific concern.

> Food items with highest folate contents
> are liver products, which are high protein foods.

There are those who are inherently predisposed to elevated homocysteine levels even in the face of enough
folate, B12, and B6. These folks will have higher levels when ingesting higher levels of animal protein
(higher methionine content).

> Another very high folate
> food is yeast, which also relatively high in protein. Soy powder is also
> high in folate (it has more folate than any green vegetables) _and_ _very_
> high in protein.
>

See above.

>
> Having said that, folate needs may be higher than generally assumed, at
> least for some individuals, so it's good to take precaution, IMHO.

If you are that concerned about it, why subject yourself to a LC diet in the first place?

--
Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Board-Certified Cardiologist
http://www.heartmdphd.com/
 
Jim Chinnis wrote:

> "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <[email protected]> wrote in part:
>
> >> If high protein, low carb does better that's great; if not then
> >> I guess I'm not in much worse shape than prior to the diet change.
> >>
> >
> >Except for the hyperketonemia (and possible hyperhomocysteinemia).
>
> I believe all the published studies show a negative association between %
> calories from protein and level of homocysteine... But it's possible...
> --
> Jim Chinnis Warrenton, Virginia, USA

Depends on the source of the protein, Jim.

--
Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Board-Certified Cardiologist
http://www.heartmdphd.com/
 
Owen Lowe wrote:

> In article <[email protected]>,
> "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > If he's eating plenty of protein, how is hyperketonemia likely?
> > >
> >
> > It is still possible if he is eating lots of fat (albeit unsaturated) and is
> > hypocaloric (ie burning fat stores).
>
> The fat burning would stop however once the desired weight loss was
> achieved.

Then the fat will return.

--
Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Board-Certified Cardiologist
http://www.heartmdphd.com/
 
Fri, 24 Oct 2003 09:38:11 -0400 in article
<[email protected]> "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Matti Narkia wrote:
>
>> Thu, 23 Oct 2003 14:29:41 -0400 in article
>> <[email protected]> "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> >Matti Narkia wrote:
>> >
>> >> Thu, 23 Oct 2003 13:57:38 -0400 in article
>> >> <[email protected]> "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"
>> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >Owen Lowe wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> If high protein, low carb does better that's great; if not then
>> >> >> I guess I'm not in much worse shape than prior to the diet change.
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >Except for the hyperketonemia (and possible hyperhomocysteinemia).
>> >> >
>> >> Ketosis in adults can be prevented by a daily carbohydrate intake of about
>> >> 50 g. Hyperhomocysteinemia can in most cases be prevented by taking folic
>> >> acid supplements. Vitamins B6 and B12, and TMG could also be helpful.
>> >
>> >Glad that you are finally acknowledging the concerns.
>> >
>> That's not a specific concern for LC diets.
>
>Low fat/chol (higher carbs) diet would have neither concern.
>
Yes, they do, unless you specify them so accurately that these concerns are
minimized. For example in the Foster et al. study a part of the control
group was also in ketosis. I don't know how this is possible, perhaps they
reduced calories so severely that a combination of calorie restriction and
relatively low carb intake in grams (which follows from severe calorie
restriction) produced ketosis.

As for hyperhomocysteinemia, there is a study which found that strict vegans
had elevated serum homocysteine concentration caused by too low intake of
vitamin B12. And according to some studies need for folate may vary
individually and some individuals may not get enough of it even from a diet
designed to provide enough of it, not to mention more vague low-fat
high-carb diets.

--
Matti Narkia
 
Valley Of Mu_n wrote:

>
>>>What evidence to you have that your choice of diets (which led to your
>>>obesity thru overeating on it) had anything to do with your blockage?
>
>
> On Thu, 23 Oct 2003 22:12:01 -0700, Owen Lowe <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>
>>AHA! With your comment in mind, what drives the mainstream notion that
>>low-carb will lead to people keeling over right and left while a
>>high-carb diet won't?
>
>
> Beats me; I never said that. Again I ask you, without dodging the
> question this time, what evidence to you have that your choice of
> diets (which led to your obesity thru overeating on it) had anything
> to do with your blockage?

Well what do you know. This is the same bovine Mu who assailed me with
his mighty macro that said my diet was causative for my blockages.

>>>>I'm curious about one thing. Whomever is promoting/advising/prescribing
>>>>a diet, it seems they believe that their single diet will serve all
>>>>people with equal success.
>>>
>>>That has been my experience with the 2PDiet.
>>
>>A controlled study group of 1?
>
>
> Incorrect.
>
>
>>How long have you been on it?
>
>
> 18 months. See how easy it is to answer a question?
>
>
>>What
>>happens if next week you decide to eat 2.25 lbs and begin gaining weight
>>- has the diet failed you?
>
>
> .25 "extra" pounds for one week will not produce any weight gain. Been
> there, done that. See how easy it is to answer a question?
>
>
>>Or perhaps did *you* fail the diet - as is
>>the case with, I dare say, *all* diet failures.
>
>
> I haven't failed the diet, the diet has not failed me. See how easy
> it is to answer a question?
>
>
>>>>Is it not possible that the variability of
>>>>humans would lead to a variety of diets that work equally well with
>>>>different people?
>>>
>>>Don't care. Found the one that already does this.
>>
>>Good for you. I've found one that works for me.
>
>
> What exactly is that? Length of time, how much sat fats are you
> eating, volume by weight, etc.
>
>
>>Isn't the world a grand
>>place when we can choose among food options and pick the one that suits
>>our fitness goal, lifestyle, tastes, budget and satiety?
>
>
> Be certain that you aren't living in a deluded world. See how easy it
> is to answer a question?

Who are you? What are your credentials? Show us how easy it is to
answer a question. Why do you lie? Show us how easy it is to answer a
question.

Pastorio


>
> http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap031021.html
> Lift well, Eat less, Walk fast, Live long.
 
Fri, 24 Oct 2003 09:48:40 -0400 in article
<[email protected]> "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Matti Narkia wrote:
>
>> 23 Oct 2003 13:54:34 -0700 in article
>> <[email protected]> [email protected] (Dr.
>> Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD) wrote:
>>
>> >Matti Narkia <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
>> >> Thu, 23 Oct 2003 14:29:41 -0400 in article
>> >> <[email protected]> "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"
>> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >Matti Narkia wrote:
>> >
>> >> >> Ketosis in adults can be prevented by a daily carbohydrate intake of about
>> >> >> 50 g. Hyperhomocysteinemia can in most cases be prevented by taking folic
>> >> >> acid supplements. Vitamins B6 and B12, and TMG could also be helpful.
>> >> >
>> >> >Glad that you are finally acknowledging the concerns.
>> >> >
>> >> That's not a specific concern for LC diets.
>> >
>> >The former is a specific concern of high-fat (and low-carb) diets.
>>
>> The ketosis may occur, if daily carbohydrate intake is below 50 g, quite a
>> low amount. Whether ketosis in LC diet is a reason for concern is
>> disputable.
>>
>
>Hardly. Else, why call them *ketogenic* LC diets?
>
You didn't get it. I think that ketosis does occur in most LC diets at least
during first three months, but whether this is a problem or not is under
dispute. It certainly has not yet been proven that this transient limited
ketosis is harmful in LC diets.
>
>There are those who are inherently predisposed to elevated homocysteine levels even in the face of enough
>folate, B12, and B6. These folks will have higher levels when ingesting higher levels of animal protein
>(higher methionine content).
>
LC diets don't necessarily have higher levels of animal protein. Some LC
diets get the extra protein from high protein plants or plant products,
perhaps even from plant based protein supplements.

>> Another very high folate
>> food is yeast, which also relatively high in protein. Soy powder is also
>> high in folate (it has more folate than any green vegetables) _and_ _very_
>> high in protein.
>>
>
>See above.
>
Ditto. Soy powder and yeast are plant based.
>>
>> Having said that, folate needs may be higher than generally assumed, at
>> least for some individuals, so it's good to take precaution, IMHO.
>
>If you are that concerned about it, why subject yourself to a LC diet in the first place?
>
Other diets have the same concern and LC diets have benefits proven in
trials.

--
Matti Narkia
 
Matti Narkia wrote:

> Fri, 24 Oct 2003 09:48:40 -0400 in article
> <[email protected]> "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >Matti Narkia wrote:
> >
> >> 23 Oct 2003 13:54:34 -0700 in article
> >> <[email protected]> [email protected] (Dr.
> >> Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD) wrote:
> >>
> >> >Matti Narkia <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> >> >> Thu, 23 Oct 2003 14:29:41 -0400 in article
> >> >> <[email protected]> "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"
> >> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >Matti Narkia wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> >> Ketosis in adults can be prevented by a daily carbohydrate intake of about
> >> >> >> 50 g. Hyperhomocysteinemia can in most cases be prevented by taking folic
> >> >> >> acid supplements. Vitamins B6 and B12, and TMG could also be helpful.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Glad that you are finally acknowledging the concerns.
> >> >> >
> >> >> That's not a specific concern for LC diets.
> >> >
> >> >The former is a specific concern of high-fat (and low-carb) diets.
> >>
> >> The ketosis may occur, if daily carbohydrate intake is below 50 g, quite a
> >> low amount. Whether ketosis in LC diet is a reason for concern is
> >> disputable.
> >>
> >
> >Hardly. Else, why call them *ketogenic* LC diets?
> >
> You didn't get it.

What's there not to get.

> I think that ketosis does occur in most LC diets at least
> during first three months,

at least while working.

> but whether this is a problem or not is under
> dispute.

Go ahead an cite your source for your claim that it is not a problem. You have my sources for why
hyperketonemia is a concern.

> It certainly has not yet been proven that this transient limited
> ketosis is harmful in LC diets.

Why subject yourself to the uncertain risk?

What happened to your mantra of prevention?

>
> >
> >There are those who are inherently predisposed to elevated homocysteine levels even in the face of enough
> >folate, B12, and B6. These folks will have higher levels when ingesting higher levels of animal protein
> >(higher methionine content).
> >
> LC diets don't necessarily have higher levels of animal protein.

Far and away more times they do. It is the rare individual that goes ketogenic low-carb combined with vegan.

> Some LC
> diets get the extra protein from high protein plants or plant products,
> perhaps even from plant based protein supplements.
>

Rarely.

>
> >> Another very high folate
> >> food is yeast, which also relatively high in protein. Soy powder is also
> >> high in folate (it has more folate than any green vegetables) _and_ _very_
> >> high in protein.
> >>
> >
> >See above.
> >
> Ditto. Soy powder and yeast are plant based.
>

See above.

> >>
> >> Having said that, folate needs may be higher than generally assumed, at
> >> least for some individuals, so it's good to take precaution, IMHO.
> >
> >If you are that concerned about it, why subject yourself to a LC diet in the first place?
> >
> Other diets have the same concern

Not the 2PD approach.

> and LC diets have benefits proven in
> trials.
>

What benefits independent of the weight loss?

--
Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Board-Certified Cardiologist
http://www.heartmdphd.com/
 
Fri, 24 Oct 2003 11:08:14 -0400 in article <[email protected]>
"Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <[email protected]> wrote:

>Matti Narkia wrote:
>
>> I think that ketosis does occur in most LC diets at least
>> during first three months,
>
>at least while working.
>
>> but whether this is a problem or not is under
>> dispute.
>
>Go ahead an cite your source for your claim that it is not a problem.
>
You deliberately misquote me. As everyone can see from above I wrote:
"whether this is a problem or not is under dispute". See, no claim about it
not being a problem. ;-) You should concentrate better in what you're
reading, so that you don't see what you wish to see ;-).

> You have my sources for why
>hyperketonemia is a concern.
>
In diabetes. It's hardly relevant to transient limited ketosis in LC diets
with non-diabetic subjects. If you think it is, prove it.

>> It certainly has not yet been proven that this transient limited
>> ketosis is harmful in LC diets.
>
>Why subject yourself to the uncertain risk?
>
Whether it is a risk or not has not been established. Even if it were a
risk, a risk has to be balanced against benefits, which IMHO in the LC
weight loss diets are greater than your imaginary risk.
>
>Far and away more times they do. It is the rare individual that goes ketogenic low-carb combined with vegan.
>
>> Some LC
>> diets get the extra protein from high protein plants or plant products,
>> perhaps even from plant based protein supplements.
>
>Rarely.
>
Now how would you _know_ that? You just say anything which pleases you and
hardly ever give any evidence supporting what you say.
>>
>> >>
>> >> Having said that, folate needs may be higher than generally assumed, at
>> >> least for some individuals, so it's good to take precaution, IMHO.
>> >
>> >If you are that concerned about it, why subject yourself to a LC diet in the first place?
>> >
>> Other diets have the same concern
>
>Not the 2PD approach.
>
That's a big laugh. The 2pd diet is as vague as diet can get. You can go
wrong in millions of ways with it.

>> and LC diets have benefits proven in
>> trials.
>>
>
>What benefits independent of the weight loss?
>
Well, LC diet trials have been done with normal weight subjects resulting to
similar benefits than in LC weight loss diets, but you seem to have problem
with a minuscule unintended weight loss, which occurred, so I'm just
agreeing to disagree with you about this issue until further trials give
more evidence one way or other.


--
Matti Narkia
 
Matti Narkia wrote:

> Fri, 24 Oct 2003 11:08:14 -0400 in article <[email protected]>
> "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >Matti Narkia wrote:
> >
> >> I think that ketosis does occur in most LC diets at least
> >> during first three months,
> >
> >at least while working.
> >
> >> but whether this is a problem or not is under
> >> dispute.
> >
> >Go ahead an cite your source for your claim that it is not a problem.
> >
> You deliberately misquote me. As everyone can see from above I wrote:
> "whether this is a problem or not is under dispute". See, no claim about it
> not being a problem. ;-)

In this discussion, you have been pro-LC

> You should concentrate better in what you're
> reading, so that you don't see what you wish to see ;-).
>

I see the truth.

>
> > You have my sources for why
> >hyperketonemia is a concern.
> >
> In diabetes. It's hardly relevant to transient limited ketosis in LC diets
> with non-diabetic subjects. If you think it is, prove it.
>

I have already presented the evidence that support my concerns that hyperketonemia is physiological harmful in any
setting. Go ahead and use Google.

>
> >> It certainly has not yet been proven that this transient limited
> >> ketosis is harmful in LC diets.
> >
> >Why subject yourself to the uncertain risk?
> >
> Whether it is a risk or not has not been established. Even if it were a
> risk, a risk has to be balanced against benefits, which IMHO in the LC
> weight loss diets are greater than your imaginary risk.

Care to revisit hyperketonemia to prove your point?

>
> >
> >Far and away more times they do. It is the rare individual that goes ketogenic low-carb combined with vegan.
> >
> >> Some LC
> >> diets get the extra protein from high protein plants or plant products,
> >> perhaps even from plant based protein supplements.
> >
> >Rarely.
> >
> Now how would you _know_ that?

Experience.

> You just say anything which pleases you and
> hardly ever give any evidence supporting what you say.

I write truthfully.

>
> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Having said that, folate needs may be higher than generally assumed, at
> >> >> least for some individuals, so it's good to take precaution, IMHO.
> >> >
> >> >If you are that concerned about it, why subject yourself to a LC diet in the first place?
> >> >
> >> Other diets have the same concern
> >
> >Not the 2PD approach.
> >
> That's a big laugh. The 2pd diet is as vague as diet can get.

It is very specific for the one variable that matters for permanent weight loss.

> You can go
> wrong in millions of ways with it.
>

Only on purpose.

>
> >> and LC diets have benefits proven in
> >> trials.
> >>
> >
> >What benefits independent of the weight loss?
> >
> Well, LC diet trials have been done with normal weight subjects resulting to
> similar benefits than in LC weight loss diets, but you seem to have problem
> with a minuscule unintended weight loss, which occurred

Glad you are finally acknowledging the latter.

--
Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Board-Certified Cardiologist
http://www.heartmdphd.com/
 
x-no-archive: yes

>In diabetes. It's hardly relevant to transient limited ketosis in LC diets
>with non-diabetic subjects. If you think it is, prove it.
>

In type l diabetics. Careful not to confuse ketoacidosis with benign dietary
ketosis.

Susan
 
24 Oct 2003 16:58:28 GMT in article
<[email protected]> [email protected]ospam (Susan )
wrote:

>x-no-archive: yes
>
>>In diabetes. It's hardly relevant to transient limited ketosis in LC diets
>>with non-diabetic subjects. If you think it is, prove it.
>>
>
>In type l diabetics. Careful not to confuse ketoacidosis with benign dietary
>ketosis.
>
That's what I've been hinting to Dr. Chung. Do you possibly have any
references to prove the difference to him beyond reasonable doubt?


--
Matti Narkia
 
Matti Narkia wrote:

> 24 Oct 2003 16:58:28 GMT in article
> <[email protected]> [email protected]ospam (Susan )
> wrote:
>
> >x-no-archive: yes
> >
> >>In diabetes. It's hardly relevant to transient limited ketosis in LC diets
> >>with non-diabetic subjects. If you think it is, prove it.
> >>
> >
> >In type l diabetics. Careful not to confuse ketoacidosis with benign dietary
> >ketosis.
> >
> That's what I've been hinting to Dr. Chung. Do you possibly have any
> references to prove the difference to him beyond reasonable doubt?
>

She wouldn't because there is no confusion except perhaps on your part.

--
Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Board-Certified Cardiologist
http://www.heartmdphd.com/
 
x-no-archive: yes

>That's what I've been hinting to Dr. Chung. Do you possibly have any
>references to prove the difference to him beyond reasonable doubt?
>
>
>--
>Matti Narkia

What would be the point? He'll never agree.

Susan
 
Fri, 24 Oct 2003 12:07:26 -0400 in article
<[email protected]> "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Matti Narkia wrote:
>
>> You should concentrate better in what you're
>> reading, so that you don't see what you wish to see ;-).
>
>I see the truth.
>
Your "truth" seems to interfere with your reading.
>>
>> > You have my sources for why
>> >hyperketonemia is a concern.
>> >
>> In diabetes. It's hardly relevant to transient limited ketosis in LC diets
>> with non-diabetic subjects. If you think it is, prove it.
>
>I have already presented the evidence that support my concerns that hyperketonemia is physiological harmful in any
>setting. Go ahead and use Google.
>
I haven't seen it.
>>
>> >> It certainly has not yet been proven that this transient limited
>> >> ketosis is harmful in LC diets.
>> >
>> >Why subject yourself to the uncertain risk?
>> >
>> Whether it is a risk or not has not been established. Even if it were a
>> risk, a risk has to be balanced against benefits, which IMHO in the LC
>> weight loss diets are greater than your imaginary risk.
>
>Care to revisit hyperketonemia to prove your point?
>
>> You just say anything which pleases you and
>> hardly ever give any evidence supporting what you say.
>
>I write truthfully.
>
So you say, perhaps someone will even believe you, but that's not enough. We
need evidence for your numerous claims.
>>
>> >> >> Having said that, folate needs may be higher than generally assumed, at
>> >> >> least for some individuals, so it's good to take precaution, IMHO.
>> >> >
>> >> >If you are that concerned about it, why subject yourself to a LC diet in the first place?
>> >> >
>> >> Other diets have the same concern
>> >
>> >Not the 2PD approach.
>> >
>> That's a big laugh. The 2pd diet is as vague as diet can get.
>
>It is very specific for the one variable that matters for permanent weight loss.
>
You cannot be serious.

>> You can go
>> wrong in millions of ways with it.
>
>Only on purpose.
>
Apparently you haven't heard of Murphy.

--
Matti Narkia
 
On Fri, 24 Oct 2003 11:08:14 -0400, "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>> LC diets don't necessarily have higher levels of animal protein.
>
>Far and away more times they do. It is the rare individual that goes ketogenic low-carb combined with vegan.

One of the greatest attraction to Atkins is that he takes the
ridiculous stance that sat fat research is all wrong. It is and will
remain his strongest attraction to potential Atkins dieters who simply
refuse to give up their high sat fat intake.

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap031021.html
Lift well, Eat less, Walk fast, Live long.
 
On 24 Oct 2003 19:27:29 GMT, [email protected]ospam (Susan ) wrote:

>>That's what I've been hinting to Dr. Chung. Do you possibly have any
>>references to prove the difference to him beyond reasonable doubt?
>>
>>
>>--
>>Matti Narkia
>
>What would be the point? He'll never agree.

the point is that either you discuss only if you feel that you can
make a change or you discuss hoping to make a change. The former
requires little effort, the latter does. Remember, all is Googled so
there will be the discussion for the ages to see.

Or, in your case, not.

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap031021.html
Lift well, Eat less, Walk fast, Live long.
 
On Fri, 24 Oct 2003 10:04:54 -0400, Bob Pastorio <[email protected]>
wrote:

>Well what do you know.

This.

Until you answer the questions regarding your quad bypass, your
smoking, your obesity and why, with all the information known to you,
by your own admission, you nearly killed yourself with a lousy diet,
gluttony, excesses and no exercise, you can keep your hands off your
keyboard and in your pants.

It will be the only thing you will have left to play with, Cheffie.
I'm no longer interested in your pitiful TROLLING and useless
demagoguery.


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


http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap031021.html
Lift well, Eat less, Walk fast, Live long.
 
Susan wrote:

> x-no-archive: yes
>
> >That's what I've been hinting to Dr. Chung. Do you possibly have any
> >references to prove the difference to him beyond reasonable doubt?
> >
> >
> >--
> >Matti Narkia
>
> What would be the point? He'll never agree.
>

Matti looks crestfallen.

--
Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Board-Certified Cardiologist
http://www.heartmdphd.com
 
"Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <[email protected]> wrote in part:

>Jim Chinnis wrote:
>
>> "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <[email protected]> wrote in part:
>>
>> >> If high protein, low carb does better that's great; if not then
>> >> I guess I'm not in much worse shape than prior to the diet change.
>> >>
>> >
>> >Except for the hyperketonemia (and possible hyperhomocysteinemia).
>>
>> I believe all the published studies show a negative association between %
>> calories from protein and level of homocysteine... But it's possible...
>> --
>> Jim Chinnis Warrenton, Virginia, USA
>
>Depends on the source of the protein, Jim.

Oh...well hang on while I check...

It's animal protein that was found to associate negatively with homocysteine.
And vegans have the highest homocysteine levels, probably due to B12
deficiencies and stupidity.

The effects of soy seem unclear, because soy is rich in folate and that seems
to be uncontrolled in the studies.

So you recommend eating more meat?
--
Jim Chinnis Warrenton, Virginia, USA
 
x-no-archive: yes

>And vegans have the highest homocysteine levels, probably due to B12
>deficiencies and stupidity.

ROFL!

So true.

Susan
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom Back