After seeing some writing from Dr. Blaylock (associated with the unending advertising of NewsMax - ugh). He appears to be very much of the same thought as Dr. Sears. I just got access to some archives of some 48 months of his newsletters, and scanning through some of them.
Here's one paragraph from one article:
I've never seen it quite put this way, even from Dr. Sears: this might be helpful to those who worry during those times when they don't lose weight . . .
//EXCERPT// I have never been able to convince people that weight doesn’t matter — it is excess fat that matters. Muscle weighs more than fat, so losing a lot of weight often means you are losing a lot of muscle, and that is not good. This is a problem especially common with very low-calorie diets. Because the heart is also made of striated muscle, just like other muscles, it too is damaged by extreme weight loss. //END EXCERPT//
NOTE in this second excerpt (on Cholesterol and the Triglycerides to HDL ratio, the LDLSD is, I suspect the higher density LDL Dr. Sears refers to vs. the (good) lower density "fluffy beach ball" type.
Another //EXCERPT// Critical Information: The Ratio of Triglycerides to HDL Cholesterol A growing number of studies show that the most important test you can use to evaluate your risk of a heart attack or stroke is the ratio between your triglyceride level and your HDL cholesterol (“good” cholesterol).
We have long known that high triglyceride levels are a significant independent risk factor for heart attack and stroke. Eating a lot of carbohydrates and sugars is the main culprit. One study found that men with a high ratio (high triglycerides and low HDL cholesterol) had a 260% increased risk of ischemic heart disease. This was true even when they had normal conventional risk factors, such as total cholesterol levels. An even greater surprise was that this ratio is more significant than hypertension levels and might explain why correcting high blood pressure has such a minor effect on lowering heart attack risk. People with high ratios also had higher rates of insulin resistance, plasma insulin and higher LDL cholesterol.
In essence, this means that the medical experts may have had everything backward. It was not high LDL cholesterol that was the culprit, but the metabolic syndrome – which was caused by a bad diet. All this was illustrated in a 1995 study in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition.
It showed that those who ate a diet with 60% carbohydrates — vs. 40% -- had lower HDL cholesterol, higher triglycerides and higher plasma insulin, which led them to develop the metabolic syndrome. A high insulin level always precedes high LDLSD levels, which represent the most harmful form of LDL cholesterol.
High plasma insulin is caused by a diet high in high glycemic carbohydrates (including sugars), smoking and excitotoxic food additives like MSG, aspartame and others. Smoking was shown to cause insulin resistance, high LDLSD cholesterol and the abnormal ratio mentioned above. Previously, I have mentioned the C-reactive protein as a vital test for to determine your risk. This is true, but remember that it measures the eventual result of metabolic syndrome — not the cause. //END EXCERPT//