Study shows low carb diet could lead to heart disease

[joanmhe]

A study has come out showing that mice who eat a low-carb diet develop heart disease.
Low-Carb Diets Linked to Atherosclerosis and Impaired Heart Vessel Growth - Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center

The mice are "apoe" mice - i.e. genetically predisposed. The author was on a low-carb diet himself, and quit after conducting this study.
This leads me to conclude for myself, since I probably carry at least one copy of the apoe 4 alele, that I should follow a mostly raw, vegan diet.
Worth noting, the standard mouse diet, which did not cause atherosclerosis, is a high-carb, low-fat diet - fairly similar ratios to Steve's raw diet.

[aggie]

i never understood the whole evil carb thing...and the protein and fat such as suggested by atkins diet....no veggies or fruits of certain kinds...but bacon and eggs for breakfast..huh?

i know everyone metabolizes differently...and their are good carbs and bad...but i am a carb junkie...i always try to do the good ones...highest consumption in am and taper off with food in general as the day goes on....

[Parthon]

It's not carbs that are bad, it's calories. A restricted calorie diet with all the correct nutrients is what leads to good health.

I have no idea how people are meant to get all the right nutrients with fruit and vegetables.

Edit: I mean without fruis and veges.

[aggie]

yeah, the whole thing with restricted diets that eliminate anything entirely...forget one basic fact...a calorie is a calorie regardless of what it comes from...fat, protein or carbs....

[stanmrak]

I'll bet you could find a whole bunch of studies that show that a low-carb diet prevents heart disease. Such is the world of nutritional science. Don't put too much weight on any one study.

I'd stay away from foods high on the glycemic index. And eggs? One of the healthiest foods you can eat; don't buy into the cholesterol scares. There is NO relationship between dietary cholesterol and blood levels of cholesterol — NONE. Your liver produces most of the cholesterol in your body; it's an crucial component of cellular repair.

There is also NO relationship between your cholesterol level and your risk of heart disease. 30 years of deceptive advertising is the source of that fairy tale... and they sure sell a lot of statin drugs with it!

[joanmhe]

The mice on the low-carb diet had lipid profiles similar to the mice on the "western" diet, but much worse plaque. So in this study, cholesterol levels were not related to the level of heart disease, at least comparing a western diet with a low-carb diet. The mice on the standard mouse diet had the least plaque, and lower cholesterol.
I don't think I have seen any credible claim that a low-carb diet prevents heart disease.
I agree that a calorie is a calorie, but I find it easier to reduce calories if I cut the carbs - but not too much

[liamona]

Peter just wrote about this on his Hyperlipid blog:

Low carbohydrate, high protein and ApoE-/- mice

One offspring from the impatience of cardiologists is the apoE-/- mouse. This mouse is a genetic cripple who's ability to process fat has been severely damaged. There are a very, very, very small number of people in the world who are homozygous for defective apoE. They are functionally apoE-/-. Nature does not allow this commonly. Contrast it with FH [Familial Hypercholesterolemia] where there are hundreds of different types of FH, ie breaking your LDL receptor gene is easily done and evolution has not attempted to conserve it particularly highly.

Feeding a high fat diet to apoE-/- mice is bad news for the mice. Until anyone gives us the full text of the paper we'll have no idea of exactly what they fed to the mice but, ultimately, they broke the mice first. Actually, if Dr Murray is anything to go by, even the full text won't tell us much about what they fed the mice!

If you are apoE -/- I wish you luck. Statistically, you're not. Neither is the cardiologist, Dr Rosenzweig, who gave up his LC diet on the basis of this study. But then, he thinks the transgenic apoE-/- mouse is a model for human arteriosclerosis.

One of the blog commentators wrote a hilarious letter responding to the lead researcher, Anthony Rosenzweig's "findings."

[edith]

If you don't understand the whole "low-carb" thing, I suggest reading Dr. Michael Eades' blog at proteinpower.com or the articles at fitnessspotlight.com.

The "calorie is a calorie" thing has been fairly well debunked, yet persists, along with the low-fat thing, in popular culture (and in the processed food product industry).

What kinds of foods are mice naturally suited for anyway?

[ginkgo]

The guy who wrote The Zone, said that is is good for losing weight but will destroy your heart. Dr Atkins is dead from a heart attack. He had an accident before he died, but a year before that he had heart failure and that was before his accident. Also he always looked fat or heavy from his pictures.

But I bet if someone eats tons of carbs from only raw foods, they will never be fat. There are good carbs and bad carbs.

Carbs are fuel. If you put bad fuel in your car, it can ruin your engine. Some carbs burn cleaner than other carbs. The carbs in grapefruit are different than the carbs in cake. Right? See Losing Weight below for more on this.

[Excellent Lodestar]

these geniuses tested MICE? lol.

...WHERE DO WE FIND THESE PESTS IN NATURE?
wherever grains are stored, mice are never far away. so it makes sense that feeding them something(high protein) that messes with their genome will wreak havoc...just like grains and processed crap destroys the human genome.

it's like saying waterboarding is harmless to humans because fish seem to tolerate it well
common sense people.

[Parthon]

I'm with loadstar. We are not mice, no matter how much we sometimes act like it. We aren't sheep either, even though so many of us try and prove that wrong.

And yeah, it's not just about calories, there's far more to the food game than most people think, and there's no one simple answer.

[Angela Leeds]

Personally, I definitely don't hold with the "a calorie is a calorie" way of thinking, which seems to my mind one element of what can lead to degenerative health, whether heart disease or something else.

The heart pumps life, pumps blood. The blood needs rich nutrients. There are rich nutrients in many carbs. There are also many carbs that are "dead calories". Eat a diet rich in nutrients and living enzymes... whether they come from carbs or not... and you're goin' in a good direction.

People make diet so complicated and create so much stress for themselves over it... now that could lead to heart disease!

[aggie]

oh, i know that going strictly by the calorie is a calorie thing can be bad if one only gets those calories from a bad source....i just meant it is so touted as like a carb calorie is going to put more WEIGHT on you than other calorie sources.

lodestar: LOL!

we have been messing with poor lab rats an mice for years! most of their lives have been in vain. i mean, i guess/hope it is being fazed out...but the LD50 testing....if you over give anything to mouse...it is probably bound to kill it......bleach has been poured down test animal throats to prove it can kill you too....

don't mean to digress...but don't like or put much faith in these kind of studies...

[joanmhe]

Using mice as models for people has a lot of limitations - I'm curious to find out more about this, particularly the genetically modified mice.
thanks to liamona for the quote on the apoe genes, this was very informative. However, the mice on the low carb diet ate the same amount of fat as a typical western diet, they made up the calorie difference with protein. I did see another blogger criticizing this saying that low-carb diets are all high fat, so this was the wrong formula - but there are versions that are higher in protein. I would guess that Dr. Rosensweig followed the higher protein version, similar to Dr. Eades Protein Power.
I find Michael Eades blog, and the hyperlipid blog well written, presenting some very well-reasoned arguments in favor of a low-carb approach to eating, but I am finding that there are many bloggers who will selectively quote from studies that support their views, while disregarding the studies that present opposing evidence.
I just read Michaels Pollan's book "In Defense of Food", and he does a good job of highlighting just how difficult it is to study the nutrition /disease relationship. It looks like most studies of human nutrition have major flaws. Agree that when looking at the effect of carbs, what kind of carbs makes a huge difference. If one consumes a diet that is 50% refined grains and sugars, plus meat from animals raised on factory farms, one's health will most likely suffer. There is a huge amount of evidence to support this. Beyond that, I would like to figure out whether I should still avoid saturated fats from dairy to stave off the future dementia or heart attack based on my family history. So I found this latest study intriguing.

[joanmhe]

Originally Posted by Angela Leeds

People make diet so complicated and create so much stress for themselves over it... now that could lead to heart disease!

LOL - orthorexia is probably another cause of heart disease.

[Dreamline]

Mice are chosen for a reason. They genetically respond to studies in an extraordinarily human-like way. They are inexpensive. Easily mutate-able. Breed quickly.

As far as humans and diet, the assumption that 'one size fits all' is a hoax.

I put the most credibility on the blood type diet and Fit For Life. According to the blood type diet, you would be out of your mind to be a Type A and eat low carb. Bad bad combo. But do the researchers running these studies EVER take blood type into account? (Not that you could with mice, anyway...) Never. They never do.

So their expensive, time-consuming studies ignore the one thing that makes you unique and then proceeds to fill your head with phantom fears about everything. Carbs are good. Carbs are bad. Meat is good. Meat will kill you. Don't drink. Drinking helps with heart disease. Glass of wine a night. (Even though my meat eating older relatives lived to be 92, 86, 84 and 96 and one close to 100 and worked almost until their deaths, played on bowling teams in their 90s, mowed the lawns, climbed ladders to put up storm windows, ran farms, travelled for business, wrote books...) Guess what? They were all blood type O. Except for one auntie who was A. Amputated to the knees, wheelchair bound. Diabetic. Heart disease. Eventually died of cancer. My Dad is A. ALmost had his foot amputated this year, diabetic, arthritic. My sister is A. Morbidly obese (probably > 300lbs) with unexplainable poylps in her upper digestive system that the MD fears are precancerous. Type As have the highest rates of stomach cancer in the world when they don't mind their ideal diet.

You have to get information based on what will work for YOU. Customized to your system, not what works for your guru. I'm shocked at how many of my patients in their 40s (!) exhibit calcifying arteries in their breasts. That is a sign of impending heart disease, also known as hardening of the arteries. Atherosclerosis. They are in shape. Look great. Seem healthy. Probably think they are doing all the right things.

Jennifer

[aggie]

you are so right jennifer.

you can look great on the outside......

i am 57, slim, athletic build, almost non existent bmi, exercise and weight train at least 3 times a week, have always watched what i eat and look younger, good lab result high hdl...guess what? my plac level is high...hereditary...now on niaspan...ya never know...rats ain't gonna tell you that either.

[liamona]

Originally Posted by joanmhe

It looks like most studies of human nutrition have major flaws.

I'm glad more people are seeing that!

Agree that when looking at the effect of carbs, what kind of carbs makes a huge difference. If one consumes a diet that is 50% refined grains and sugars, plus meat from animals raised on factory farms, one's health will most likely suffer. There is a huge amount of evidence to support this. Beyond that, I would like to figure out whether I should still avoid saturated fats from dairy to stave off the future dementia or heart attack based on my family history. So I found this latest study intriguing.

It shouldn't be that hard to figure out, should it? I'm so skeptical of what passes as "research" that I basically do the opposite of what is touted as good. So that means I eat tons of saturated fat every day.

They're in foods like eggs and milk, because the fat is necessary for the body to absorb the fat-soluble vitamins (so drinking low or non-fat milk is a waste of money).

Saturated fats contain palmitoleic, myristic and lauric acids.

Myristic acid is in coconut oil and dairy fats. It is important for the immune system and helps fight tumors in a function called myristoylation.

Lauric acid has anti viral, bacterial, and protozoal properties which protects against harmful microorganisms in the digestive tract. Palmitoleic acid also has antimicrobial properties as well.

One of the best books for understanding all this is Know Your Fats: The Complete Prier for Understanding the Nutrition of Fats, Oils, and Cholesterol by nutritionist/biochemist Dr. Mary Enig. Although it's written for the layperson, I have to warn that it is also quite technical.

I want to add that heart problems and high blood pressure run in my family, too, but so far so good (I'm in my mid-forties).

[Andrew Brunelle]

Low Carb diets can be very beneficial if the people who are on those diets are getting all their nutrients. I find that carbs are good when they are healthy carbs, such as vegetables and some fruits, but most other carbs are not good for you.

If you want to try a high carb diet with lots of veggies and fruits, then you may thrive on it, but you always need a good amount of fat and protein to go with it. Nuts are a great source and good, healthy meat is another. Animals who are pasture-raised or certified humane are going to have all those omega-3 fatty acids, along with EPA and DHA. Let's not forget organic, pasture-raised eggs. They may be expensive, but it is worth it for the vitamins and fatty acids.

I don't advocate for a very high fat diet, but a diet that has a lot of fat, enough where it's around 1/3 of your diet. And make sure they are healthy fats, not vegetable oils that are processed to death.

[Dreamline]

Originally Posted by ginkgo

The guy who wrote The Zone, said that is is good for losing weight but will destroy your heart. Dr Atkins is dead from a heart attack. He had an accident before he died, but a year before that he had heart failure and that was before his accident. Also he always looked fat or heavy from his pictures.

But I bet if someone eats tons of carbs from only raw foods, they will never be fat. There are good carbs and bad carbs.

Carbs are fuel. If you put bad fuel in your car, it can ruin your engine. Some carbs burn cleaner than other carbs. The carbs in grapefruit are different than the carbs in cake. Right? See Losing Weight below for more on this.

Dr Atkins did not die from a heart attack. He died from falling on an icy sidewalk, hitting his head and getting a subdural hematoma, going into a coma. Who makes up this stuff? It's proof you can just slander someone online and get away with making up anything.

He weighed less than 200 lbs before he fell and was in excellent health according to those who actually knew him. I met him in person a year before his death and he was not even close to being chubby, let alone obese.

Jennifer

[joanmhe]

Everyone - thanks for your info - lots of food for thought here.

[liamona]

Originally Posted by Dreamline

He weighed less than 200 lbs before he fell and was in excellent health according to those who actually knew him. I met him in person a year before his death and he was not even close to being chubby, let alone obese.

What was he like in person? I've always been a big admirer of his.

I recently picked up his "Vita-Nutrient Solution: Nature's Answer to Drugs," which is a great reference even though it was written back in the 90s.

In it he documents how the AMA convened a special nutrition consensus panel in 1973 that issued a press release and position paper criticizing the LC diet without reviewing scientific papers that supported it.

Dr. Atkins said this was a career-changing moment, and from then on he questioned every edict it issued:

"I found examples of improper recommendations wherever I looked—recommendations for unnecessary and futile surgery, recommendations to use dangerous medications instead of safer agents, recommendations for invasive and risky diagnostic procedures that provide less information that safer tests—and perhaps worst of all, total refusal to consider vita-nutrient therapies."

He recommended supplements and testing for thyroid disorders in his original diet book from the early 70s. Definitely ahead of his time.

[chrisrushton]

Originally Posted by aggie

yeah, the whole thing with restricted diets that eliminate anything entirely...forget one basic fact...a calorie is a calorie regardless of what it comes from...fat, protein or carbs....

no. well, yes in principle but there are a couple of things wrong with this.

1) Calories on the side of a packet are calculated based on how much the food warms water when it's burned. It's not necessarily true that a human will still get the same amount of calories from the food. Whole foods (for example) have a lower "efficiency" factor.

2) Calories aren't created equal. A high GI carb will cause insulin spikes in the bloodstream which can lead to things like diabetes if not managed properly. It's also more likely to settle as fat. Low GI carbs don't have the spike (no sugar rush) and are less likely to settle as fat.

Eating carbs is not bad. Eating refined sugar, sweets, cola and other soda types products etc, is bad unless managed properly. There are times when a hit of high GI carbs is good, like before the gym or something similar but they aren't good for people who just sit around on message boards

[Dreamline]

Originally Posted by liamona

What was he like in person? I've always been a big admirer of his.

I recently picked up his "Vita-Nutrient Solution: Nature's Answer to Drugs," which is a great reference even though it was written back in the 90s.

In it he documents how the AMA convened a special nutrition consensus panel in 1973 that issued a press release and position paper criticizing the LC diet without reviewing scientific papers that supported it.

Dr. Atkins said this was a career-changing moment, and from then on he questioned every edict it issued:

"I found examples of improper recommendations wherever I looked—recommendations for unnecessary and futile surgery, recommendations to use dangerous medications instead of safer agents, recommendations for invasive and risky diagnostic procedures that provide less information that safer tests—and perhaps worst of all, total refusal to consider vita-nutrient therapies."

He recommended supplements and testing for thyroid disorders in his original diet book from the early 70s. Definitely ahead of his time.

He was quite kind and answered our questions even though he wasn't "working" at the time. Funnier than I expected.

Yeah, I think he drank from the poison cup, career-wise, when he dared to go against the traditional AMA-sanctioned train of thought for medical doctors. They are quite a racket.

Jennifer

[kwicherbichen]

Originally Posted by aggie

i never understood the whole evil carb thing...and the protein and fat such as suggested by atkins diet....no veggies or fruits of certain kinds...but bacon and eggs for breakfast..huh?

i know everyone metabolizes differently...and their are good carbs and bad...but i am a carb junkie...i always try to do the good ones...highest consumption in am and taper off with food in general as the day goes on....

It is because carbs makes insulin rise in your body and if you're over weight, it shows that your body can't handle the rise in insulin.

Something to do with insulin levels and sugars binding themselves to enzymes, slowing them down.

[Dreamline]

Originally Posted by chrisrushton

Eating carbs is not bad. Eating refined sugar, sweets, cola and other soda types products etc, is bad unless managed properly. There are times when a hit of high GI carbs is good, like before the gym or something similar but they aren't good for people who just sit around on message boards

If I eat before I work out, I get cramps and stitches in my side. So I don't. I can also go without food for a long long time without suffering the effects of it. Efficient metabolism gifted from my caveman ancestors. Bad in the modern world where people eat too much. Good in the ancient world where you didn't know where your next meal was coming from.

Carbs, for someone with my ancestry--recent and ancient--are more than the sum of their parts in how they interact on my metabolism. If I don't restrict my carbs, despite my workouts, I gain weight even when eating probably 50% of what a normal person eats. To stay my normal weight I have to both restrict carbs and workout often.

Many obese people, or people that can't seem to lose weight would benefit from this knowledge. Instead, society shuns them as hidden bingers or lazy....

This is where conventional science loses the race.


Jennifer