A short history of the human food supply

The real goal of nutrition is the management of cellular inflammation. Increased cellular inflammation makes us fat, sick, and dumb (how about overweight, ill, and less intelligent). Strictly speaking, diets are defined by their macronutrient balance. This is because that balance determines the resulting hormonal responses. This doesn’t mean you can ignore the impact of various food ingredients on the generation of cellular inflammation.

This is why I categorize food ingredients into three major classes depending on when they were introduced into the human diet. The more ancient the food ingredients, the less damaging inflammatory impact they will have on turning genes off and on (i.e. gene expression). This is because the greater the period of time our genes have co-evolved with a given food ingredient, the more our body knows how to handle them. Unfortunately, human genes change slowly, but changes in our food supply can happen very rapidly.

With that as a background, let me describe the three major categories of food ingredients, especially in terms of their introduction to the human diet.

Paleolithic Ingredients

This category includes food ingredients that were available more than 10,000 years ago. Our best evidence is that humans first appeared as a new species in Southern Africa about 200,000 years ago (1). For the next 190,000 years, food ingredients of the human diet consisted of animal protein (grass-fed only), fish, animal and fish fats, fruits, vegetables, and nuts. I call these Paleolithic ingredients. This means for the first 95 percent of our existence as a species, these were the only food ingredients that genes were exposed to. As a result of 190,000 years of co-existence with our genes, these food ingredients have the least inflammatory potential on our genes.

Our best estimate of the macronutrient composition of the typical Paleolithic diet some 10-15,000 years ago was 25-28 percent protein, 40 percent carbohydrate, 32-35 percent fat with a very high intake of EPA and DHA (about 6 grams per day) and a 1:1 ratio of omega-6 to omega-3 fats (2). This is basically the composition of the anti inflammatory diet (3-5). If you use only Paleolithic ingredients, then you are almost forced to follow an anti inflammatory diet. The food ingredients are more restrictive, but the increased anti-inflammatory benefits are well worth it.

Mediterranean Ingredients

The second group of food ingredients represents those food choices that were available 2,000 years ago. We started playing Russian roulette with our genes 10,000 years ago as we started to introduce a wide variety of new food ingredients into the human diet. First and foremost was the introduction of grains, but not all at the same time. Wheat and barley were introduced about 10,000 years ago with rice and corn coming about 3,000 years later. Relative latecomers to the grain game were rye (about 5,000 years ago) and oats (about 3,000 years ago).

At almost the same time came the first real use of biotechnology. This was the discovery that if you fermented grains, you could produce alcohol. Alcohol is definitely not a food ingredient that our genes were prepared for (and frankly our genes still aren’t). I think it only took mankind about 10 years to learn how to produce alcohol, which probably makes the first appearance of beer occurring some 9,990 years ago. Wine was a relatively late arrival appearing about 4,000 years ago. With the domestication of animals (some 8,000 years ago) came the production of milk and dairy products. About 5,000 years ago, legumes (beans) were also introduced. Legumes tend to be rich in many anti-nutrients (such as lectins) that must be inactivated by fermentation or boiling. Needless to say, these anti-nutrients are not the best food ingredients to be exposed to.

I call this second group of food ingredients Mediterranean ingredients since they are the hallmark of what is commonly referred to as a “Mediterranean diet” (even though the diets as determined by macronutrient balance in different parts of the Mediterranean region are dramatically different). Those cultures in the Mediterranean region have had the time to genetically adapt to many of these new ingredients since all of these ingredients existed about 2,000 years ago.

Unfortunately, many others on the planet aren’t quite as fortunate. That’s why we have lactose intolerance, alcohol-related pathologies, celiac disease, and many adverse reactions to legumes that have not been properly detoxified. As a result these Mediterranean ingredients would have greater potential to induce increased levels of cellular inflammation than Paleolithic ingredients. However, at least they were better than the most recent group, which I term as, the “Do-You-Feel-Genetically-Lucky” group.

Do-You-Feel-Genetically-Lucky Ingredients

Unfortunately, these are the food ingredients that are currently playing havoc with our genes, especially our inflammatory genes. You eat these ingredients only at your own genetic risk. The first of these was refined sugar. Although first made 1,400 years ago, it didn’t experience a widespread introduction until about 300 years ago. With the advent of the Industrial Revolution came the production of refined grains. Products made from refined grains had a much longer shelf life, were easier to eat (especially important if you had poor teeth), and could be mass-produced (like breakfast cereals).

However, in my opinion the most dangerous food ingredient introduced in the past 200,000 years has been the widespread introduction of refined vegetable oils rich in omega-6 fatty acids. These are now the cheapest source of calories in the world. They have become ubiquitous in the American diet and are spreading worldwide like a virus. The reason for my concern is that omega-6 fatty acids are the building blocks for powerful inflammatory hormones known as eicosanoids. When increasing levels of omega-6 fatty acids in the diet were combined with the increased insulin generated by sugar and other refined carbohydrates, it spawned a massive increase in cellular inflammation worldwide in the past 40 years starting first in America (6). It is this Perfect Nutritional Storm that is rapidly destroying the fabric of the American health- care system.

The bottom line is that the macronutrient balance of the diet will generate incredibly powerful hormonal responses that can be your greatest ally or enemy in controlling cellular inflammation. Unless you feel incredibly lucky, try to stick with the food ingredients that give your genes the best chance to express themselves.

References

  1. Wells S. “The Journey of Man: A Genetic Odyssey.” Random House. New York, NY (2004)
  2. Kuipers RS, Luxwolda MF, Dijck-Brouwer DA, Eaton SB, Crawford MA, Cordain L, and Muskiet FA. “Estimated macronutrient and fatty acid intakes from an East African Paleolithic diet.” Br J Nutr 104: 1666-1687 (2010)
  3. Sears, B. “The Zone.” Regan Books. New York, NY (1995)
  4. Sears, B. “The OmegaRx Zone.” Regan Books. New York, NY (2002)
  5. Sears, B. “The Anti-Inflammation Zone.” Regan Books. New York, NY (2005)
  6. Sears B. “Toxic Fat.” Thomas Nelson. Nashville, TN (2008)

Nothing contained in this blog is intended to be instructional for medial diagnosis or treatment. If you have a medical concern or issue, please consult your personal physician immediately.

How to get depressed quickly

Your grandmother always said that high purity omega-3 oil was “brain food”. Now we are discovering more of the molecular mechanisms that are making grandma’s wisdom from yesteryear into today’s molecular biology breakthroughs.

The newest study that validates grandma’s wisdom will be reported in an upcoming issue of Nature Neuroscience and demonstrates the devastating impact that a lifetime diet that is deficient in omega-3 fatty acids can have on mood and impaired emotional behavior (1).

What enables the brain to make new connections is the endocannabinoid pathway that controls remodeling (i.e. plasticity) of neurons. In particular, the endocannabinoids must interact with their receptors to initiate neuronal remodeling. Without the adequate dietary intake of omega-3 fatty acids, the animals became far more depressed than their genetically identical cousins. The effect of the omega-3 fatty acid deficiency was not a general effect, but localized in the pre-frontal cortex, the area of the brain that is implicated in emotional rewards. Both EPA and DHA were depressed in the pre-frontal cortex. In addition, the levels of arachidonic acid (AA) were significantly increased in the same brain region thereby increasing the extent of neuro-inflammation. An earlier study indicated that it only takes one generation of deficiency of omega-3 fatty acids to increase depression and aggression in rats (2).

This study also helps to explain why high doses of omega-3 fatty acids improve depression in various clinical studies (3-6).

I suspect the mechanism may be the following. The depressed levels of DHA would decrease the fluidity of the neural membrane. This would make it more difficult for the activated endocannabinoid receptor to transmit its signal to the interior of the neuron necessary for the initiation of new neural synthesis. The depression of EPA as well as the increase in AA in the pre-frontal cortex would increase the levels of neuro-inflammation in the brain that would further inhibit the signaling mechanisms necessary to initiate the remodeling of neural tissue.

But to be effective, you must take a therapeutic dose of omega-3 fatty acids. That can be best determined by the AA/EPA ratio in the blood (7). This is because the brain doesn’t make these long-chain fatty acids, but it can readily take them up from the blood.

As usual your grandmother was correct when she called high purity omega-3 oil “brain food”. Her wisdom was in line with epidemiological studies that indicate lowered fish consumption is strongly associated with increased depression (8).

References

  1. Lafourcade M, Larrieu T, Mato S, Duffaud A, Sepers M, Matias I, De Smedt-Peyrusse V, Labrousse VF, Bretillon L, Matute C, Rodriquez-Puertas R, Laye S, and Manzoni OJ. “Nutritional omega-3 deficiency abolishes endocannabinoid-mediated neuronal functions.” Nature Neuroscience doi: 10:1038/nn.2736 (2011)
  2. De Mar JC, Ma K, Bell JM, Igarashi M, Greenstein D, and Rapoport SI. “One generation of n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acid deprivation increases depression and aggression test scores in rats.” J Lipid Res 47: 172-180 (2006)
  3. Rondanelli M, Giacosa A, Opizzi A, Pelucchi C, La Vecchia C, Montorfano G, Negroni M, Berra B, Politi P, and Rizzo AM. “Effect of omega-3 fatty acids supplementation on depressive symptoms and on health-related quality of life in the treatment of elderly women with depression: a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial.” J Am Coll Nutr 29: 55-64 (2010)
  4. da Silva TM, Munhoz RP, Alvarez C, Naliwaiko K, Kiss A, Andreatini R, and Ferraz AC. “Depression in Parkinson’s disease: a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled pilot study of omega-3 fatty-acid supplementation.” J Affect Disord 111: 351-359 (2008)
  5. Stahl LA, Begg DP, Weisinger RS, and Sinclair AJ. “The role of omega-3 fatty acids in mood disorders. Curr Opin Investig Drugs 9: 57-64 (2008)
  6. Stoll AL, Severus WE, Freeman MP, Rueter S, Zboyan HA, Diamond E, Cress KK, and Marangell LB. “Omega 3 fatty acids in bipolar disorder: a preliminary double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.” Arch Gen Psychiatry 56: 407-412 (1999)
  7. Adams PB, Lawson S, Sanigorski A, and Sinclair AJ. “Arachidonic acid to eicosapentaenoic acid ratio in blood correlates positively with clinical symptoms of depression.” Lipids 31: S157-161 (1996)
  8. Hibbeln JR. “Fish consumption and major depression.” Lancet 351: 1213 (1998)

Nothing contained in this blog is intended to be instructional for medial diagnosis or treatment. If you have a medical concern or issue, please consult your personal physician immediately.

When is a diet not a diet?

One of the major problems in nutrition is the lack of rigor in describing diets. The first problem is that the root of the word diet comes from the ancient Greek phrase “way of life”. A diet is not a short-term plan to fit into a swimsuit, but rather it is a way of life to reach a lifetime goal, like a longer and better life. If your goal is less grand like simply to lose weight, then to lose that weight and keep it off, you had better maintain that diet for the rest of your life. From that perspective, a diet like the Grapefruit diet doesn’t make much sense.

The second problem is the lack of precision in defining a diet. My definition of a diet is based on the macronutrient balance that ultimately determines hormonal responses. From this perspective, there are really only four diets based on the glycemic load, assuming that each diet contains the same number of calories.

Diet Common Name
Very low glycemic-load diet Ketogenic (i.e. Atkins diet)
Low glycemic-load diet Non-ketogenic (i.e. Zone Diet)
High glycemic-load diet American Heart (or Diabetes or Cancer, etc.) Association diet
Very high glycemic-load diet Strict vegetarian (i.e. Ornish diet)

Assuming these diets have an equal number of calories, you can then rank them in terms of the total amount of calories coming from protein, carbohydrates and fat as shown below:

Diet Macronutrient Composition
Very low glycemic-load diet 30% P, 10% C, and 60% F
Low glycemic-load diet 30% P, 40% C, and 30% F
High glycemic-load diet 15% P, 55% C, and 30% F
Very high glycemic-load diet 10% P, 80% C, and 10% F

You can see that depending on the macronutrient composition of the diet you choose to follow, it will generate very different hormonal responses. A ketogenic diet will induce increased cortisol levels that make you fat and keep you fat. High-glycemic diets induce excess insulin levels that make you fat and keep you fat. It’s only a low-glycemic diet that has been shown to burn fat faster (1) as well as maintain weight loss most effectively (2).

That’s why unless you define a diet carefully in terms of macronutrient balance, you can’t ever undertake any meaningful nutritional research to validate whether or not it achieves its stated goal. This is why most diet studies produce such conflicting results.

The wild card is which food ingredients you choose for a particular diet. This is where much of the confusion emerges as people throw around arbitrary terms like a Paleolithic diet or a Mediterranean diet. What the heck is a Mediterranean diet? Is it the diet from Morocco, Lebanon, Italy, or Spain? What you can do, however, is to review the food ingredients found in these diets.

For example, Paleolithic food ingredients would consist only of fruits, vegetables, nuts, grass-fed beef, eggs, and fish. A pretty limited group of foods to choose from, but it was all that was available to man 10,000 years ago. Mediterranean food ingredients include all of those in the Paleolithic group but now adding whole grains, alcohol, legumes, and dairy products. These were the dietary choices available about 2,000 years ago — a more diverse number of food choices for a particular diet, but now with a greater potential for generating inflammatory responses. Finally, there are the “Do-You-Feel-Lucky” food ingredients. This includes very recent additions to the human diet, such as sugar, refined carbohydrates and vegetable oils. These are food ingredients that make processed foods possible. However, they carry with them the greatest potential to increase cellular inflammation. Remember, it is increased cellular inflammation that makes you fat, sick, and dumb.

So if you want to be correct about the use of the word diet, then you should use the right terms. It could be an anti inflammatory diet using only Paleolithic food ingredients (i.e. a Paleo Zone Diet), or an anti inflammatory diet using only Mediterranean food ingredients (i.e. a Mediterranean Zone Diet), or even an anti inflammatory diet using the “Do-You-Feel-Lucky” food ingredients. This designation includes the most recent additions (sugar, refined carbohydrates, and vegetable oils) that have the greatest impact on inducing cellular inflammation, regardless of the macronutrient balance. Ultimately important are the hormonal responses of the macronutrient balance of the diet (especially after avoiding the worst offenders in the “Do-You-Feel-Lucky” group). The more restrictive your choices for food ingredients for any diet, the better the hormonal outcome for that particular diet. In particular, the primary clinical outcome for the anti inflammatory diet is the life-long management of cellular inflammation. And for that clinical parameter, the clinical research has found the anti inflammatory diet to be the clear winner regardless of the food ingredients selected (3-5).

References

  1. Layman DK, Evans EM, Erickson D, Seyler J, Weber J,; Bagshaw D, Griel A, Psota T, and Kris-Etherton P. “A moderate-protein diet produces sustained weight loss and long-term changes in body composition and blood lipids in obese adults.” J Nutr 139: 514-521 (2009)
  2. Larsen TM, Dalskov SM, van Baak M, Jebb SA, Papadaki A, Pfeiffer AF, Martinez JA, Handjieva-Darlenska T, Kunesova M, Pihlsgard M, Stender S; Holst C, Saris WH, and Astrup A. “Diets with high or low protein content and glycemic index for weight-loss maintenance.” N Engl J Med 363: 2102-2113 (2010)
  3. Pereira MA, Swain J, Goldfine AB, Rifai N, and Ludwig DS. “Effects of a low glycemic-load diet on resting energy expenditure and heart disease risk factors during weight loss.” JAMA 292: 2482-2490 (2004)
  4. Johnston CS, Tjonn SL, Swan PD, White A, Hutchins H, and Sears B. “Ketogenic low-carbohydrate diets have no metabolic advantage over nonketogenic low-carbohydrate diets.” Am J Clin Nutr 83: 1055-1061 (2006)
  5. Pittas AG, Roberts SB, Das SK, Gilhooly CH, Saltzman E, Golden J, Stark PC, and Greenberg AS. “The effects of the dietary glycemic load on type 2 diabetes risk factors during weight loss.” Obesity 14: 2200-2209 (2006)

Nothing contained in this blog is intended to be instructional for medial diagnosis or treatment. If you have a medical concern or issue, please consult your personal physician immediately.

Breast cancer and inflammation

Breast cancer is probably the greatest fear women have, even though they are 10 times more likely to die from heart disease. Yet both diseases are driven by cellular inflammation.

Cellular inflammation occurs when the most primitive part of your immune system (the innate immune system) is activated. The key player in the innate immune system is a gene transcription protein known as nuclear factor-kappaB (NF-κB). Once activated, NF-κB moves into the cell’s nucleus and causes the expression of a wide variety of pro-inflammatory mediators that accelerate the growth of the tumor. A recent publication in Cancer Research has demonstrated that complete inhibition of the NF-κB in the breast tissue prevents the development of breast cancer in animal models (1).

Of course, there is one slight problem with this approach. If you inhibit NF-κB too much, you make yourself a sitting target for microbial invasion. So the question is what activates the NF-κB in the first place? The answer is the diet, and specifically how the diet increases the levels of arachidonic acid, as I described in my most recent book, “Toxic Fat” (2). As the levels of arachidonic acid increase in the cell, there is an increased formation of inflammatory compounds (i.e. leukotrienes) that activate NF-κB (3).

So what might the best approach be for reducing the risk of breast cancer? The obvious answer is to decrease the levels of arachidonic acid in the breast tissue. The best way would be to follow a strict anti inflammatory diet to reduce the formation of arachidonic acid in the first place (4).

Unfortunately, most women (and men) are not willing to take that step. That being the case, then what other dietary approach can be used? I would suggest that supplementing the diet with high-purity omega-3 fatty acid concentrates rich in EPA and DHA is the one approach that everyone can follow. This is especially true since it takes only 15 seconds a day. The benefits of this approach was recently demonstrated in another article published last year in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition that demonstrated supplementation with purified omega-3 concentrates can dramatically increase the levels of omega-3 fatty acids in the breast tissue of women who have a high-risk potential of developing breast cancer (5).

Of course, if you not only take high-purity omega-3 fatty acid concentrates, but also follow the anti inflammatory diet, then you will have done every possible dietary intervention to reduce the activation of NF-κB in the target tissue for breast cancer (not to mention also reducing the risk for heart disease). Of course, there are some side effects to this dietary approach: You become thinner, smarter and happier in the process.

References

  1. Liu M, Sakamaki T, Casimiro MC, Willmarth NE, Quong AA, Ju X, Ojeifo J, Jiao X, Yeow WS, Katiyar S, Shirley LA, Joyce D, Lisanti MP, Albanese C, and Pestell RG. “The canonical NF-kappaB pathway governs mammary tumorigenesis in transgenic mice and tumor stem cell expansion.” Cancer Res 24: 10464-10473 (2010)
  2. Sears B. “Toxic Fat.” Thomas Nelson. Nashville, TN. (2008)
  3. Sanchez-Galan E, Gomez-Hernandez A, Vidal C, Martin-Ventura JL, Blanco-Colio LM, Munoz-Garcia B. Ortega L, Egido J, and Tunon J. “Leukotriene B4 enhances the activity of nuclear factor-kappaB pathway through BLT1 and BLT2 receptors in atherosclerosis.” Cardiovasc Res 81: 216-225 (2009)
  4. Sears B. “The Zone.” Regan Books. New York, NY (1995)
  5. Yee LD, Lester JL, Cole RM, Richardson JR, Hsu JC, Li Y, Lehman A, Belury MA, and Clinton SK. “Omega-3 fatty acid supplements in women at high risk of breast cancer have dose-dependent effects on breast adipose tissue fatty acid composition.” Am J Clin Nutr 91:1185–1194 (2010)

Nothing contained in this blog is intended to be instructional for medial diagnosis or treatment. If you have a medical concern or issue, please consult your personal physician immediately.

Coffee and diabetes: What’s the connection?

One of the great controversies in nutrition is the role of coffee and human health. On the one hand, coffee is the primary source of polyphenols in the American diet because of the lack of consumption of fruits and vegetables. On the other hand, coffee is rich in caffeine, an alkaloid that acts as a stimulant on the central nervous system and is known to be an addictive agent (1). In fact, Roland Griffiths, professor of Behavioral Biology at the John Hopkins School of Medicine (and my old college roommate), says, “Caffeine is the world’s most widely used mood-altering drug.” So the question remains is caffeine good for you?

No one knows for sure, but one interesting point has been made that it appears the more coffee you drink, the lower your risk for developing diabetes (2). In fact, if you drink more than four cups of coffee per day, you decrease your risk of diabetes by 50 percent. This new research demonstrates that coffee increases the levels of sex hormone-binding globlin (SHBG) in the blood. As I pointed out in my book “The Anti-Aging Zone,” SHBG plays an important role in sequestering the levels of estrogen and testosterone in the blood so that levels of these unbound sex hormones that can interact with their receptors are tightly regulated (3). Usually as insulin resistance increases, the levels of SHBG decrease in the blood (4). This can lead to an over-stimulation of the receptors by the unbound sex hormones resulting in increased risk for breast and prostate cancer development.

What in the coffee actually causes the increase in SHBG is unknown, but what is known is that once you decaffeinate the coffee, all its benefits on the elevation of SHBG levels and any reduction in risk for diabetes disappear.

It is highly unlikely that caffeine by itself is beneficial for reducing type 2 diabetes, since there were no benefits related to drinking tea or to total daily caffeine intake (2). Perhaps some other compound that was also extracted with the caffeine may play a role in the reduction of type 2 diabetes.

So what really happens when you decaffeinate coffee? First, you soak the beans in water to remove the caffeine and flavors as well as the polyphenols. Then you treat the water with organic solvents (methylene chloride or ethyl acetate) to remove the caffeine (as well as many of the polyphenols and much of the flavor). Then (assuming you have removed all of the organic solvent), you add back the treated water extract to the beans to hopefully reabsorb some of the flavors back into them. Obviously, not all the flavors or polyphenols return since the resulting taste is far less robust than the original coffee bean.

So it seems to me that exploring what else has been extracted in addition to the caffeine may lead to new dietary treatments for diabetes. Whether that will be done is highly unlikely. Instead of waiting for such experiments, you might as well follow the best treatment for preventing diabetes, which is following the anti inflammatory diet for a lifetime. That is how you control cellular inflammation, which is the driving force for development of type 2 diabetes (5,6).

References

1. Juliano LM and Griffiths RR. “A critical review of caffeine withdrawal: empirical validation of symptoms and signs, incidence, severity, and associated features.” Psychopharmacology 176: 1-29 (2004)

2. Goto A, Song Y, Chen BH, Manson JE, Buring JE, and Liu S. “Coffee and caffeine consumption in relation to sex hormone-binding globulin and risk of type 2 diabetes in postmenopausal women.” Diabetes 60: 269-275 (2011)

3. Sears B. “The Anti-Aging Zone.” Regan Books. New York, NY (1999)

4. Akin F, Bastemir M, and Alkis E. “Effect of insulin sensitivity on SHBG levels in premenopausal versus postmenopausal obese women.” Adv Ther 24: 1210-1220 (2007)

5. Sears B. “Anti-inflammatory diets for obesity and diabetes.” J Coll Amer Nutr 28: 482S-491S (2009)

6. Sears B. “The Anti-Inflammation Zone.” Regan Books. New York, NY (2005)

Nothing contained in this blog is intended to be instructional for medial diagnosis or treatment. If you have a medical concern or issue, please consult your personal physician immediately.

Increased satiety: The real secret to weight loss

Satiety is defined as lack of hunger. If you aren’t hungry, then cutting back calories is easy. Unfortunately, Americans seem to be hungrier than ever. This is not caused by a lack of willpower but due to hormonal imbalances in the hypothalamus that tell the brain to either seek more food or spend time on more productive activities. So the real question is not what is the best diet for weight loss, but what is the best diet for satiety?

the anti inflammatory diet has been clinically shown to burn fat faster than standard, recommended diets (1-3) as well as decreasing hunger compared to standard, recommended diets (4,5). But then whoever said that standard, recommended diets (like the USDA Food Pyramid) are good? A better comparison might be the anti inflammatory diet versus a Mediterranean diet.

I have often said that the anti inflammatory diet should be considered as the evolution of the Mediterranean diet because of its enhanced hormonal control. So where is the data for my contention?

The first randomized controlled research appeared in 2007 using patients with existing heart disease (6). In this study, while both groups lost weight, it was only the group on a Paleolithic diet that had any benefits in glucose reduction. So what’s a Paleolithic diet? In this study it was one that supplied 40 percent of the calories as low-glycemic-load carbohydrates, 28 percent of the calories as low-fat protein, and 28 percent from fat (the remaining calories came from alcohol, which didn’t exist in Paleolithic times). That sounds exactly like the anti inflammatory diet to me, so I will simply call it that. On the other hand, the Mediterranean diet was lower in protein (20 percent) and higher in carbohydrates (50 percent) as well as containing far more cereals and dairy products than the anti inflammatory diet.

The interesting thing that came out of this initial study was that patients on the anti inflammatory diet were apparently eating fewer calories, but with greater satiety. So they repeated the study again with another set of cardiovascular patients, except they measured leptin levels this time. The results were exactly the same (7), that is the anti inflammatory diet was more satiating per calorie, and there was also a greater reduction in leptin levels. This makes perfect sense since improved glycemic control seen in the first comparison study (6) would have been a consequence of reducing insulin resistance. The decrease in the leptin levels in the second study (7) would have been a consequence of the reduction of leptin resistance. The most likely cause of this hormone resistance would be the anti-inflammatory benefits of the anti inflammatory diet because it decreases cellular inflammation. It’s cellular inflammation that disrupts hormonal signaling efficiency and causes hormone resistance.

So here we have two randomized controlled studies (6,7) that indicate the superiority of the anti inflammatory diet compared to Mediterranean diet relative to reducing hormone resistance as well providing greater satiety with fewer calories, just as demonstrated in earlier studies when the anti inflammatory diet was compared to standard recommended diets (4,5). It is increased satiety that is ultimately how you lose weight and keep it off. The anti inflammatory diet appears the easiest way to reach that goal.

References

1. Layman DK, Boileau RA, Erickson DJ, Painter JE, Shiue H, Sather C, and Christou DD. “A reduced ratio of dietary carbohydrate to protein improves body composition and blood lipid profiles during weight loss in adult women.” J Nutr 133: 411-417 (2003)

2. Lasker DA, Evans EM, and Layman DK, “Moderate-carbohydrate, moderate-protein weight-loss diet reduces cardiovascular disease risk compared to high-carbohydrate, low-protein diet in obese adults. A randomized clinical trial.” Nutrition and Metabolism 5: 30 (2008)

3. Fontani G, Corradeschi F, Felici A, Alfatti F, Bugarini R, Fiaschi AI, Cerretani D, Montorfano G, Rizzo AM and Berra B. “Blood profiles, body fat and mood state in healthy subjects on different diets supplemented with omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids.” Eur J Clin Invest 35: 499-507 (2005)

4. Ludwig DS, Majzoub JA, Al-Zahrani A, Dallal GE, Blanco I, and Roberts SB. “High glycemic-index foods, overeating, and obesity.” Pediatrics 103:e26 (1999)

5. Agus MSD, Swain JF, Larson CL, Eckert E, and Ludwig DS. “Dietary composition and physiological adaptations to energy restriction.” Am J Clin Nutr 71: 901-907 (2000)

6. Lindberg S, Jonsson T, Granfeldt Y, Borgstrand E, Soffman J, Sjostrom K and Ahren B. “A Paleolithic diet improves glucose tolerance more than a Mediterrean-like diet in individuals with ischaemic heart disease.” Diabetologia 50: 1795-1807 (2007)

7. Jonsson T, Granfeldt Y, Erlanson-Albertsson, Ahren B, and Lindeber S. “A Paleolithic diet is more satiating per calorie than a Mediterrean-like diet in individuals with ischemic heart disease.” Nutrition & Metabolism 7:85 (2010)

Nothing contained in this blog is intended to be instructional for medial diagnosis or treatment. If you have a medical concern or issue, please consult your personal physician immediately.

Why the Atkins diet doesn’t work and never will

The goal of any diet is to help you lose excess weight and keep it off. The first part is relatively easy to achieve; the second part is incredibly difficult to maintain. Any diet that restricts calories will do the first part, but invariably the lost weight returns. This is definitely the situation for the Atkins diet. I knew Bob Atkins well, and the only answer he had as to why people regain weight on his diet was that they are addicted to carbohydrates. Frankly, I never bought into that explanation from Bob any more than I believed the reasoning of the advocates for low-fat diets saying the failure to maintain weight loss is because people are addicted to fat. To paraphrase former President Clinton, “It’s the hormones, stupid.”

In most cases what really causes weight regain is cellular inflammation induced by hormonal imbalance. This is why any diet that uses the word “low” or “high” to describe itself will induce hormonal imbalance, and therefore ultimately fail. Low-fat diets are generally high-carbohydrate diets. High levels of carbohydrates will increase the production of insulin, which is the hormone that makes you fat and keeps you fat. This increase in insulin will generate increased cellular inflammation that increases the likelihood for weight regain (1). On the other hand, the Atkins diet is a low-carbohydrate diet that is also a high-fat diet. If those fats on the Atkins diet are rich in saturated and omega-6 fats (which they usually are), then their presence will also increase cellular inflammation (1). This increase in cellular inflammation (by either type of diet) disrupts hormonal signaling patterns (especially for insulin signaling) that generate increased insulin resistance. This was shown in one of my earlier research articles that demonstrated that under carefully controlled clinical conditions, following the Atkins diet shows significant increases in cellular inflammation compared to those subjects following the Zone Diet (2). In addition, there was decreased endurance capacity of the subjects on the Atkins diet compared to those on the Zone Diet (3).

The differences are probably due to the fact that the  anti inflammatory diet is a diet that is moderate in protein, carbohydrate and fat. It’s this type of dietary moderation of macronutrients that generates hormonal balance.Now new data from Yale Medical School indicates that a ketogenic (i.e. Atkins) diet may even have worse health implications than simply weight regain (4). In this study, it was demonstrated that although indicators of insulin resistance in the blood may be decreased on a ketogenic diet, insulin resistance in the liver was dramatically increased. Since the liver is the central processing organ for controlling metabolism, this would suggest that long-term use of the Atkins diet would cause metabolic problems leading to accumulation of excess fat. Adding even more fuel to this hormonal fire is another study that demonstrated that a ketogenic diet leads to increased production of cortisol (another hormone that makes you fat and keeps you fat) in the fat cells (5). Any increase in cortisol increases insulin resistance in that particular organ.

So it appears that ketogenic diets (like the Atkins diet) may initially reduce insulin levels in the blood, but increase insulin resistance in organs, such as the liver and the adipose tissue. The bottom line: Any initial weight loss with the Atkins diet is a false hope since it causes insulin resistance in various organs that ultimately cause the regain of any lost weight as excess fat. That’s a very bad prescription.

References:
1. Sears B. “Toxic Fat.” Thomas Nelson. Nashville, TN (2008)
2. Johnston CS, Tjonn SL, Swan PD, White A, Hutchins H, and Sears B. “Ketogenic low-carbohydrate diets have no metabolic advantage over nonketogenic low-carbohydrate diets.” Am J Clin Nutr 83: 1055-1061 (2006)
3. White AM, Johnston CS, Swan PD, Tjonn SL, and Sears B. “Blood ketones are directly related to fatigue and perceived effort during exercise in overweight adults adhering to low-carbohydrate diets for weight loss: a pilot study.” J Am Diet Assoc 107: 1792-1796 (2007)

4. Jornayvaz FR, Jurczak MJ, Lee HY, Birkenfeld AL, Frederick DW, Zhang D, Zhang XM, Samuel VT, and Shulman GI. “A high-fat, ketogenic diet causes hepatic insulin resistance in mice, despite increasing energy expenditure and preventing weight gain.” Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab 299: E808-815 (2010)
5. Stimson RH, Johnstone AM, Homer NZ, Wake DJ, Morton NM, Andrew R, Lobley GE, and Walker BR. “Dietary macronutrient content alters cortisol metabolism independently of body weight changes in obese men.” J Clin Endocrinol Metab 92: 4480-4484 (2007)

Nothing contained in this blog is intended to be instructional for medial diagnosis or treatment. If you have a medical concern or issue, please consult your personal physician immediately.

Want to lose Weight? Eat like our Paleolithic ancestors

A recent article appeared in the British Journal of Nutrition that gives an updated estimate of what diet (i.e. Paleolithic) our ancestors may have eaten during the time from their first appearance in Africa some 200,000 years ago until they started leaving Africa 100,000 years later (1). This is important because this type of diet until 10,000 years ago (with the advent of agriculture) was the nutritional foundation through which our genes evolved. Since our diet and gene expression are intimately tied together (2), understanding the dietary forces that molded how our genes respond to diet is important. This is particularly true since nutritional science has many conflicting interactions that make the study of a single nutrient often result in conflicting data. One such example is the study of insulin responses induced by the diet without studying the impact of fatty acid composition on insulin secretion and vice versa. This is why the study of Paleolithic nutrition provides a template to ask questions to optimize our current diet. In fact, I actually I stated this on page 99 of my first book, “The Zone” (3).

So what are the newest updates on the composition of the Paleolithic diet of our African ancestors? It appears the protein content was between 25 and 29 percent, the carbohydrates were about 40 percent and the total fat was about 30-36 percent. If that sounds familiar to the 30 percent protein, 40 percent carbohydrate, and 30 percent fat ratio in the anti inflammatory diet, it should. Essentially the newest estimate of the Paleolithic diet of our human ancestors in Africa is the anti inflammatory diet.

Equally important, it was estimated that the intake of long-chain omega-3 fatty acids (EPA and DHA) was about 6 grams per day. This is similar to my recommendations in “The OmegaRx Zone,” published in 2002 (4). The dietary ratio of arachidonic acid (AA) to EPA was also estimated in this article and was found to be about 2. Since the dietary intake of these fatty acids would be reflected in the blood, then we can assume the AA/EPA ratio in Paleolithic man was about 2. This AA/EPA ratio is again strikingly similar to the recommendations in my various books about what the best AA/EPA ratio should be for optimal control of the cellular inflammation, which leads to the acceleration of chronic disease (4-6).

When you follow the Paleolithic diet (a.k.a. the anti inflammatory diet), you find almost instantaneous changes in hormonal responses (7, 8) and improved glycemic control (8,9) before there is any weight loss. And if you continue to follow it, you not only lose weight, but also burn fat faster (11-14).

Was I just taking lucky guesses on my recommendations for the anti inflammatory diet over the past 15 years? I would like to think they were not lucky guesses, but based on insight coming from my background in drug delivery technology that strives for a therapeutic zone for optimal results. The lucky part was having the perseverance to stay true to those insights. On the other hand, it is always nice to get validation even 15 years after the fact.

References
1. Kuipers RS, Luxwolda MF, Dijck-Brouwer DJA, Eaton SB, Crawford, MA, Cordain L, and Muskiet FAJ. “Estimate macronutrient and fatty acid intakes from an East African paleolithic diet.” British J Nutr 104: 1666-1687 (2010)
2. Sears B and Ricordi C. “Anti-Inflammatory nutrition as a pharmacological approach to treat obesity.” J Obesity published online September 30, 2010. doi: 10.1155/2011/431985. (2010)
3. Sears B. “The Zone.” Regan Books. New York, NY (1995)
4. Sears B. “The OmegaRx Zone.” Regan Books. New York, NY (2002)
5. Sears B. “The Anti-Inflammation Zone.” Regan Books. New York, NY (2005)
6. Sears B. “Toxic Fat.” Nelson Publishing. Nashville, TN (2008)
7. Ludwig DS, Majzoub JA, Al-Zahrani A, Dallal GE, Blanco I, and Roberts SB. “High-glycemic-index foods, overeating, and obesity.” Pediatrics 103: E26 (1999)
8. Markovic TP, Jenkins AB, Campbell LV, Furler SM, Kragen EW, and Chisholm DJ. “The determinants of glycemic responses to diet restriction and weight loss in obesity and NIDDM.” Diabetes Care 21: 687-694 (1998)
9. Lindberg S, Jonsson T, Granfeldt Y, Borgstrand E, Soffman J, Sjorstrom K, and Ahren B. “A Paleolithic diet improves glucose tolerance more than a Mediterranean-like diet in individuals with ischaemic heart disease.” Diabetologia 50: 1795-1807 (2007)
10. Frassetto LA, Schloetter M, Mietus-Synder M, Morris RC, and Sebastian A. “Metabolic and physiologic improvements from consuming a Paleolithic, hunter-gatherer type diet.” Eur J Clin Nutr 63: 947-955 (2009)
11. Osterdahl M. Kocturk T. Koochek A, and Wandell PE. “Effects of a short-term intervention with a Paleolithic diet in healthy volunteers.” Eur J Clin Nutr 62: 682-685 (2008)
12. Layman DK, Boileau RA, Erickson DJ, Painter JE, Shiue H, Sather C, and Christou DD. “A reduced ratio of dietary carbohydrate to protein improves body composition and blood lipid profiles during weight loss in adult women.” J Nutr 133: 411-417 (2003)
13. Lasker DA, Evans EM, and Layman DK, “Moderate carbohydrate, moderate protein weight loss diet reduces cardiovascular disease risk compared to high-carbohydrate, low-protein diet in obese adults. A randomized clinical trial.” Nutrition and Metabolism 5: 30 (2008)
14. Fontani G, Corradeschi F, Felici A, Alfatti F, Bugarini R, Fiaschi AI, Cerretani D, Montorfano G, Rizzo AM and Berra B. “Blood profiles, body fat and mood state in healthy subjects on different diets supplemented with omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids.” Eur J Clin Invest 35: 499-507 (2005)

Nothing contained in this blog is intended to be instructional for medial diagnosis or treatment. If you have a medical concern or issue, please consult your personal physician immediately.

A cash cow based on bad science

There has been no more profitable class of drugs than the cholesterol-lowering statins. Their success is based on a very simple premise: High cholesterol levels mean certain cardiovascular death. While there has always been questioning of the cholesterol story at the fringes of academic research (1), now the cries are rising within the highest reaches of the academic research community that something is just not right.

Since no one wants to die, you would think that measurement of mortality would be the primary clinical end-point for any clinical trial of a statin drug. There is no question that for people who have already had a heart attack, taking a statin prolongs their life by reducing all-cause mortality. But what about the people who have never had a heart attack but have high cholesterol levels? There the answer is much more open.

One recent article has studied all the published studies with some 65,000 patients who had high cholesterol but no evidence of heart disease to see the effect that statin drugs have on their mortality (2). The answer was virtually none. In fact, in all the statin trials published since 2005, there has been a striking lack of benefits in populations that simply had high cholesterol levels but no evidence of any cardiovascular disease (3). This is true except for one trial that was funded by a drug company that makes a new powerful, statin and run by the individual who has the patent for measuring C-reactive protein as a marker for cardiovascular risk (3).

Here was a new premise: People who had normal levels of cholesterol and no heart disease but high levels of C-reactive protein also need even more powerful statins. The fact that C-reactive protein is an unreliable marker in cardiovascular patients because it changes so quickly was conveniently ignored (4). Nonetheless a successful trial would generate more sales for the drug company and more testing of C-reactive protein for everyone going to see a physician.

So when a careful analysis of this “highly-successful” trial was published this year, it was found that there were no benefits in reducing cardiovascular mortality between the active and placebo groups (3). As the cholesterol story appears to have a growing number of flaws in it, I predict it will become more commonplace to have drug companies and medical researchers continue to use sleight-of-hand statistical dodges to make it appear their “wonder” drugs are actually doing wonderful things, like reducing death from heart disease in those who have no evidence of heart disease.

Maybe it’s time to return to a better working hypothesis of what really drives heart disease—inflammation and to use anti-inflammatory diets to prevent the occurrence of cardiovascular disease (5,6).

References

1. Ravnshov U. The Cholesterol Myths. New Trends Publishing. Warsaw, IN (2002)
2. Ray KK, Seshasai SRK, Erqou, S, Sever P, Jukema JW, Ford I, and Sattar N. “Statins and all-cause mortality in high-risk primary prevention.” Arch Intern Med 170: 1-024-1031 (2010)
3. De Lorgeril M, Salen P, Abramson J, Dodin S, Hamazaki T, Kotucki W, Okuyama H, Pavy B, and Rabaeus M. “Cholesterol lowering, cardiovascular diseases, and the rosuvastatin-JUPITER controversy.” Arch Intern Med 170 1032-1036 (2010)
4. Bogaty P, Brophy JM, Boyer L, Simard S, Joseph L, Bertrand F, and Dagenais GR. “Fluctuating inflammatory markers in patients with stable ischemic heart disease. Arch Intern Med 165: 221-226 (2005)

5. Sears B. “The Zone.” Regan Books. New York, NY (1995)
6. Sears B. “The Anti-Inflammation Zone.” Regan Books. New York, NY (2005)

Nothing contained in this blog is intend to be instructional for medial diagnosis or treatment. If you have a medical concern or issue, please consult your personal physician immediately.

Weight loss or fat loss? It makes a difference

With the New Year comes the guaranteed resolution for most people to lose weight. Invariably that resolution is usually abandoned some time in February. Part of the reason is that we really don’t know what we are talking about when it comes to weight loss. Weight loss is composed of three separate components: water loss, muscle loss, and fat loss. If you restrict calories, you are going to lose weight. What that weight loss might consist of (water, muscle, or fat) is a very different question.

There are no health benefits to water loss (i.e. dehydration) or muscle loss (i.e. protein deprivation), but there is something magical about fat loss. If you can lose excess body fat, then you are virtually guaranteed to lower blood sugar levels, blood lipid levels, and blood pressure. Not surprisingly, drugs used to reduce blood sugar, blood lipids and blood pressure are the biggest sellers in the country.

Considering the continuing outcry to reverse our obesity epidemic, no one seems to bother to measure fat loss in any clinical trials. This is why you see a lot of research studies published stating it doesn’t matter what diet you follow because if you restrict calories, you will lose weight. I agree with that statement. But if you want better health (not to mention looking better in a swimsuit), then you want to make sure that you are losing fat at the fastest possible rate while conserving muscle mass at the same time. The published clinical studies that have looked at fat loss make it very clear that the anti inflammatory diet is the best dietary strategy to burn fat faster (1-3).

If the moderate-carbohydrate anti inflammatory diet is good, then shouldn’t an even lower-carbohydrate diet like the Atkins diet be better? Not so fast. The published studies comparing the anti inflammatory diet to the Atkins diet make it clear that there are no benefits to consuming a lower-carbohydrate diet that generates ketosis, but there are plenty of negative consequences, such as increased cellular inflammation and decreased capacity for exercise (4,5).

But losing weight is relatively easy compared to keeping it off. That’s why the recent DIOGENES study is so important (6). This study makes it very clear that if you want to keep lost weight off, then your best choice is maintaining a diet that has at least 25 percent of the calories coming from protein, and about 40 percent of the calories coming from low-glycemic carbohydrates. That’s the anti inflammatory diet.

So if your New Year’s resolution is to lose weight (and really lose fat) and keep it off, then the anti inflammatory diet should be your only choice.

References

1. Layman DK, Boileau RA, Erickson DJ, Painter JE, Shiue H, Sather C, and Christou DD. “A reduced ratio of dietary carbohydrate to protein improves body composition and blood lipid profiles during weight loss in adult women.” J Nutr 133: 411-417 (2003)
2. Lasker DA, Evans EM, and Layman DK, “Moderate-carbohydrate, moderate-protein weight-loss diet reduces cardiovascular disease risk compared to high-carbohydrate, low-protein diet in obese adults. A randomized clinical trial.” Nutrition and Metabolism 5: 30 (2008)
3. Fontani G, Corradeschi F, Felici A, Alfatti F, Bugarini R, Fiaschi AI, Cerretani D, Montorfano G, Rizzo AM and Berra B. “Blood profiles, body fat and mood state in healthy subjects on different diets supplemented with omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids.” Eur J Clin Invest 35: 499-507 (2005)
4. Johnston CS, Tjonn SL, Swan PD, White A, Hutchins H, and Sears B. “Ketogenic low-carbohydrate diets have no metabolic advantage over nonketogenic low-carbohydrate diets.” Am J Clin Nutr 83: 1055-1061 (2006)
5. White AM, Johnston CS, Swan PD, Tjonn SL, and Sears B. “Blood ketones are directly related to fatigue and perceived effort during exercise in overweight adults adhering to low-carbohydrate diets for weight loss: a pilot study.” J Am
Diet Assoc 107:1792-1796 (2007)
6. Larsen TM, Dalskov SM, van Baak M, Jebb SA, Papadaki A, Pfeiffer AF, Martinez JA, Handjieva-Darlenska T, Kunesova M, Pihlsgard M, Stender S, Holst C, Saris WH, and Astrup A. “Diets with high or low protein content and glycemic index for weight-loss maintenance.” N Engl J Med 363: 2102-2113 (2010)

Nothing contained in this blog is intended to be instructional for medial diagnosis or treatment. If you have a medical concern or issue, please consult your personal physician immediately.