High-Protein Diets In Midlife

Hi protein is bad for you until it's good for you? Vegetarianism vs Paleo vs Mediterranean vs Adkins. Sometimes this stuff is bewildering!

"While high-protein diets have been all the rage over the last few years for their waist-whittling goodness, a new study says they could be as bad for you as smoking". As bad for you as smoking. This is pretty bad!!!

"The research shows that a low-protein diet in middle age is useful for preventing cancer and overall mortality, through a process that involves regulating IGF-I and possibly insulin levels," study co-author Eileen Crimmins said in a release.

"The good news? High-protein diets could actually be beneficial after age 65, when IGF-I levels naturally level off. People over 65 with a high- or moderate-protein diet are actually less susceptible to chronic disease."


<[www.huffingtonpost.com];

Hi:

I read this article on Drudge. Just goes to show that science isn't exact, things change, a while back eggs were bad for you, now they are good, of course it depends on which Guru is talking or writing.

A lot of these diet books are written to make money, how much research and people followed for 5 years or more to determine if a vegan diet or paleo diet is good for you. I listened to a Dr. David Pearlmutter (not sure about the spelling) last night and he was advocating a diet similar to the Paleo diet, said grain is bad for you, also beans, said the grain that our ancestors ate years ago is different than the grains of today. He also spoke about the hunter gathers of millions of years ago and claims that our digestive system isn't compatible to eating grains, I say after millions of years our system should have adapted.

There are all kinds of (what I would call scams) cleanses, flushing out toxins, exactly what is a toxin anyway? I believe in eating good protein, eggs, veggies, fruits, meat, beans and whole grains, cook everything yourself, don't buy canned foods, rarely eat in resturants and pick your ancestors.

Liz

The paleo diet is 80% fat (actually essential fatty acids from animal source) and 20% raw protein - this is by calories.

I am one of the very few who must do this, as everything else made me sick. I get tired of it, and try adding other stuff like scrambled eggs or rarely ham with a generous sprinkle of vit. C crystals and gobs of butter, lately clementines, but not for long.

Yes, high protein is bad for me, and apparently everyone else long term, certainly if it is cooked. Cooked carbohydrates turned out to be even worse.

So if you can stick to the true paleolithic diet you will never get sick, and your current problems will disappear, and you will die of boredom or frustration.

Dennis - The dietary intake or eating plan that keeps your glucose levels low as measured by Hemoglobin A1C and a fasting insulin that is in the lower segment of the range is the one that you should follow since as we age, the tendency for glucose handling and the resultant insulin resistance is what starts a large number of complications, not the least of which is inflammation. It's the AGEs...or Advanced Glycation Endproducts that do us harm... as in our body 'carmelizes.'

If you haven't read the report offered here many times over the years... by insulin expert, Ron Rosedale, MD... titled
Insulin and Its Metabolic Effects... you should spend time 'digesting' that information. He explains how insulin affects us all through life and what eventually determines our healthy longevity or one that is frought with various health ailments. About 10 years ago, Dr. Rosedale reported he has examined over 10,000 scientific studies so bases his observations on what the science reveals.
[www.mercola.com]

The intake he recommends is relatively low protein but lots of healthy fat for efficient metabolism.


Here's a clip from his report:

Because the immediate effects of raising your blood sugar from a high carbohydrate meal is to raise insulin and that immediately triggers the sympathetic nervous system which will cause arterial spasm, constriction of the arteries. If you take anybody prone to a heart attack and that is when they are going to get it.

Diet really becomes pretty simple. Carbohydrates we started talking about. You've got fiber and non-fiber and that's real clear-cut. Fiber is good, non-fiber is bad. Fibrous carbs, like vegetables and broccoli, those are great. What is a potato? A potato is a big lump of sugar. That's all it is. You chew a potato, what are you swallowing? Glucose. You may not remember, but you learned that in eighth grade, but the medical profession still hasn't learned that.

What is the minimum daily requirement for carbohydrates?
ZERO.

What is the food pyramid based on?
A totally irrelevant nutrient.

Let's go beyond Carbohydrates.
Let's back up even further? Why do we eat? One reason is energy. That's half of the reason. It is very simple, there are two reasons why we eat, one is to gather energy. We need to obtain energy. The other essential reason (Not just for fun! Fun is a good one, but you won't have much fun if you eat too much) is to replace tissue, to gather up building blocks for maintenance and repair.

Those are the two essential reasons that we need to eat. We need the building blocks and we need fuel, not the least of which is to have energy to obtain those building blocks and then to have energy to fuel those chemical reactions to use those building blocks.

So what are the building blocks that are needed, proteins and fatty acids. Not much in the way if carbohydrates. You can get all the carbohydrates you need from proteins and fats. So the building blocks are covered by proteins and fats.

So where do carbohydrates come in?
They don't. There is no essential need for carbohydrates. SO why are we all eating carbohydrates? To keep the rate of aging up, we don't want to pay social security to everyone.

I didn't say you can't have any carbs, I said fiber is good. Vegetables are great, I want you to eat vegetables. The practical aspect of it is that you are going to get carbs, but there is no essential need. The traditional Eskimo diet for most of the year subsists on almost no vegetables at all, but they get their vitamins from organ meats and things like eyeball which are a delicacy, or were.

So, you don't really need it, but sure, vegetables are good for you and you should eat them. They are part of the diet that I would recommend, and that is where you'll get your vitamin C. I recommend Vitamin C supplements, I don't have anything against taking supplements, I use a lot of them.

Start at the beginning.... [articles.mercola.com]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/06/2014 10:40AM by Jackie.

Jackie:

I had my ALc checked in Dec. 2013, it was 5.4, lab value <5.7, so I am good, I eat carbs (not a lot, but I do eat them), so could you post what your ALC is, since you are on a no carb diet it should be much better than mine.

You say you take a lot of supplements, you think that is so much better than eating good food? I personally rather get my vitamins from food, I hate sallowing a bunch of pills.

My mother ate potatoes everyday of her life, she also ate some ice cream and she loved donuts, I am not saying that is a good thing, but apparently it didn't do her a lot of harm she died at 92 and only the last year of her life did she require some care.

William: I think you are a rare bird, doubtful anyone else could survive on such a diet nor would they want to.

Liz

Jackie: Do you know or even know of anyone who can or has adhered to any diet that restrictive for more than a few months? It seems very unrealistic to me for anything other than an emergency weight loss, etc.,

For example, no Banana, Cantaloupe, Dried fruit (all varieties), Grapes, Honeydew, Orange, Pineapple, Watermelon, Yams, Pumpkin, White Potatoes, Corn or any grains.

And, of course, Rosendale like Mercola, recommends lots of supplements that he sells. Doesn't that bother you? It does me.

His book came out in 2004 and has sort of gone by the wayside since, except for the leptin, asit's been more recently replaced by Atkins, South Beach, et. al., all similiar and low rated.

Here's a link to a more full description of the Rosendale Plan and sample meal, (which, since I grow avocados commercially, I should heartily support.) [www.everydiet.org]

Here's Consumer Reports take on the top diet plans. [www.consumerreports.org]

Gordon

Liz - once again, I did not say I was on a no-carb diet. I definitely am not. I was reporting the effects of insulin on those who become resistant and can't process glucose efficiently. The Rosedale report describes how that works. Many people are totally unaware of their glucose handling status because the doctors don't evaluate the Hemoglobin A1C.

Gordon - I know many people who are on various restrictive diets for essential reasons and they seem motivated to stay on them as those plans keep them out of trouble. I also know many who can't find the discipline and suffer the consequences. It's the "horse and water" analogy. Some people seem to have to follow a plan because they lack the knowledge of what constitutes basic macronutrient intake and add too much in the way of empty calories. Thus, the various "diets" have been abundant starting way back with the Adkins diet. Oddly enough, otherwise intelligent individuals are totally clueless as to what's a healthy food...or healthy eating habits. If that weren't the case, we wouldn't have the enormity of the diabetes/obesity epidemic now referred to as the Diabesity Epidemic. Long ago, nutrition was taught in school. Cooking was taught in school. Today a great number of people only know how to buy packaged foods or eat fast foods. Don't know how to cook even if given the raw materials. Thus, when they have health issues, dietary plans that lay out exactly what is okay and what is to be avoided seems to be essential for success.

I agree totally that whole food sources are a much better way to take in the standard dietary requirements but I also know from personal experience that sometimes one can't get the optimization needed for reversing a deficiency or correcting an imbalance without supplements. I also know that if there is a glucose handling problem, then that person must learn to avoid fruit sugars (fructose) as it helps perpetuate the problem. So, yes, while Paleo type eating is very restrictive for some foods, if the goal is to prevent the glycation endproducts,, inflammation, and all of the consequences of elevated glucose including diabetes, then a Paleo type diet helps. George N has posted prolifically on the successes of Dr. Bernstein and his Ketosis diet which also is very restrictive but highly effective in managing glucose handling problems.

Just because Dr. Mercola did the interview with Dr. Rosedale, doesn't negate Dr. Rosedale's successes. I agree that Dr. Mercola's hawking of supplements is objectionable, but I've always been able to look beyond that and find merit in many of his well-known guests that offer their treatment successes with their patients.

Functional or Restorative Medicine does require the use of therapeutic doses of neutraceuticals that are either not available in sufficient quantity to correct or prevent a health proglem or when one couldn't possibly eat enough food with a specific nutrient content to be therapeutic. We know that to be the case in magnesium intake for the majority of afibbers. Coenzyme Q10 is another that is not likely to reach therapeutic levels in as we age. For others, it might be selenium or zinc. It goes without saying that one can't "guess" about the nutrient value of the food we consume. Unfortunately, these days, it's not a given that what 'ought' to be in the food, is actually there.

I do recall that you grow avocados...and I thank you! I rely on avocados for healthy fat and for the substantial potassium content.

Be well,
Jackie

Jackie:

I asked if you would post your A1C, you did not, I think it would be helpful.

Liz

Hi Liz, I wonder if it is as simple as the person with the lowest A1c has the best diet. It would be great if it were so. It would take the mystery out of which diet to follow for me. You might be on to something! Dennis

Dennis:

We get a lot of papers that are posted from various doctors like Rosedale etc., that claim eating carbs leads to insulin problems which causes a lot of our health maladies. As I said I do eat whole wheat products, corn, beans, yet my A1c is still in the good zone, so I am wondering if someone who has a more stringent diet omitting a lot of grains, corn and beans, which I thought Jackie said she doesn't eat too much of those foods, would post her A1c, or anyone else for that matter, that adheres to a similar diet, we could then have a comparison.

Liz

Have been so busy lately have missed out some checking in on the General health forum lately. Liz, with A1c going muvh lower than 5.4 would not signify a health advantage and that is pretty much an ideal level as far as that test goes. You obviously benefit from some good genetics in that regard as well aka your mother apparently from her good long term health eating many things not necessarily considered super healthy. But the real comparison for the advantage of any diet on one's glucose metabolism when using only the limited view that a simple A1C test would indicate, would be to show comparative tests and the relative changes in A1C under different diets as manifest in your own body and blood levels.

For example, a person with excellent glucose genetic might not show much fluctuation when eating lots is fast cabs versus not. Whereas a majority if folks who aren't so lucky with the genetic roulette might have much wider swings in those same A1C numbers on two different diets with different amounts of fast carbs versus good fats and proteins.
As such, I'm afraid just a straight shootout challenge between two individuals A1C levels would not provide much more clarity about the relative impact pod two diets other than for bragging rights on who has the most admirable number.

Now if you compared numbers between many hundred or thousands of people each eating two well defined diets with strictly defined different carb amounts that might well show a trend for one diet over another as you are far more likely to get a real world blend of people in such a survey and help filter out the genetic roulette to some degree.

Cheers!
Shannon

This study assessed mortality data over eighteen years but only looked at the diet of the participants over one 24 hour period.

The mind boggles!

Sam

Shannon:

Unlikely that a study of hundreds or thousands of participants will happen - No bragging rights Shannon, rather curiosity, we are constantly told on this site that eating wheat products, corn, beans, many fruits will lead to insulin problems, Dr. Rosedale is always being quoted. There are doctors that say they can cure heart problems, they put their patients on diets of eating whole wheat, corn beans lots of fruits and vegetables and no meat.

There also has been postings that claim genetics aren't that dominate, I have always believed otherwise that they certainly do play a big part in our health. We probably have DNA in us from generations past, so I agree with you that our genetic makeup definitely enter into the equation.

Liz