Believe Half of What You See, But None of What You Hear

A recent prospective cohort study and meta-analysis was published in the Lancet ¹ . It looked at dietary carbohydrate intake and mortality. This study acts as a perfect example of why it’s so important to look at the detail rather than simply read and believe the headline messages you read in the media.

Study background

This study was a serious and well-presented piece of research, spanning three decades and covering large groups of subjects spread across different continents. It’s aim was to find out whether a person’s risk of mortality is determined by their intake of carbohydrates.

Study findings

This chart comes from the study and is the main item I want to discuss with you.

What it basically shows is a U-shaped curve, indicating that you are likely to have a premature death (Hazard Ratio) whether you eat too little or too much carbohydrate as a percentage of your diet.

The other macronutrients would, of course, be proteins and fats.

On the face of it, you would think therefore that the ideal amount of carbs to consume would be around 50% of your total calorie intake. This would mean that you’d then be getting the remaining 50% from proteins and fats.

So what’s the problem?

The problem is that, if the above summation is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, then much of what I’ve been writing in previous blogs is up the swanny! ²

We’ve seen how Dr T Colin Campbell and others claim ³ we should be aiming for 8-12% protein and 10-15% fat, with the lower figures being ideal. So, you don’t need to be a mathematician to realise that this leaves 77-82% carbohydrates.

The latter figure would be in the upper end of the right hand side of the U-shaped curve, which would make it as unhealthy (higher mortality rate) as the bottom part of the left hand side, where carbs are around 20% – basically the amount in a really heavy-duty Paleo/Atkins-type diet, which we’ve seen has been shown ⁴ ⁵ ⁶ to be a strikingly unhealthy option…

Naturally, if a person just looked at that one chart and derived their opinion of the study researchers’ conclusions from that alone, they could be misled into believing that something like the WFPB diet (which ideally has the 77-82% carb content mentioned above) is not the way to go. Far better to follow the age-old mantra “Moderation in all things“.

However, the U-shaped curve above does not tell the whole story.

So where’s the solution?

The solution to this quandary lies in both the type and source of carbohydrate, and not so much in the simple percentage of carbs in the diet. Not all carbohydrates are the same… ⁷ ⁸

The researchers in this study state, for instance, that much of the data regarding the highest levels of carbohydrate consumption are in populations (e.g. China and Japan) which consume huge quantities of white rice, which not only forms the major type of carbohydrate consumed, but also represents pretty much the only food some of these communities eat:

“…high carbohydrate diets, which are common in Asian and less economically advantaged nations, tend to be high in refined carbohydrates, such as white rice; these types of diets might reflect poor food quality ⁹ ¹⁰ and confer a chronically high glycaemic load that can lead to negative metabolic consequences ¹¹ .”

Additionally, the authors state:

“…There are limitations to this study that merit consideration. This study represents observational data and is not a clinical trial…Our study focused on general carbohydrate intake, which represents a heterogeneous group of dietary components. Any number and combination of dietary components could have been considered and adjusted for in this analysis; therefore, some confounders might have been unadjusted for.”

Thus, it appears that the vast majority of group eating high levels of carbohydrate (above the 50% which would appear to be the optimum from the U-shaped curve) were actually eating the sort of refined carbohydrates (white rice etc) which would never be considered as part of an optimal WFPB diet.

It’s also useful to note that the study does not look at how much of the recorded carbohydrate intake derives from so-called Frankenfoods ¹² – the typical highly-processed, pre-packed, junk food which increasingly comprises the ever-spreading SAD (standard american diet).

In their conclusion, the authors are very clear on one matter, which is in line with findings from studies covered in previous blogs ¹³ ¹⁴ ¹⁵ , indicating that protein and fat from animal sources are more harmful to human health than protein and fat from plant sources:

“Low carbohydrate dietary patterns favouring animal-derived protein and fat sources, from sources such as lamb, beef, pork, and chicken, were associated with higher mortality, whereas those that favoured plant-derived protein and fat intake, from sources such as vegetables, nuts, peanut butter, and whole-grain breads, were associated with lower mortality, suggesting that the source of food notably modifies the association between carbohydrate intake and mortality.”

And whilst they don’t mention the problems with protein and fat (as well as PCBs, heavy metals, pesticides, diotoxins, etc) from dairy and fish, previous blogs certainly have covered them ¹⁶ ¹⁷ .

There are some caveats about saturated fats from the likes of coconut oil ¹⁸ and all isolated vegetable fats/oils ¹⁹ ²⁰ , but the general picture of the higher health benefits of unprocessed whole plant proteins and fats is clear from previous studies, as well as from the above study:

“…animal-based low carbohydrate diets should be discouraged. Alternatively, when restricting carbohydrate intake, replacement of carbohydrates with predominantly plant-based fats and proteins could be considered as a long-term approach to promote healthy ageing.”

The position is made even more apparent when you consider that eating a balanced and varied diet of whole unrefined plant foods provides the natural macronutrient balance ²¹ – which just happens to be in line with the 10:15:75 (or 10:10:80) protein:fat:carbohydrate ratio recommended by the likes of Drs Campbell, Klaper, Esselstyn, Greger, Fuhrman, McDougall, et al.

The above chart ²² shows the sort of diet that helps Chinese centenarians to live long and healthy lives.

Final thoughts

There’s limited long-term research yet available on the relationship between mortality and the type of carbohydrate consumption a WFPB diet recommends – that is, whole vegetables, fruits, legumes, nuts, seeds and mushrooms without any (or, at least, with very low quantities of) added salt, oil or sugar.

When we look at the so-called Blue Zones ²³ ²⁴ ²⁵ , we see a consistently high pattern of low animal-sourced consumption and a high level of unrefined plant-sourced consumption. And it’s important to emphasise the unrefined aspect of these healthy diets.

So to advocate that we “Believe half of what we see but none of what we hear” might make it seem as though we have to be critical and unbelieving – but that’s how we need to be in this society of soundbites and truncated attention-spans if, that is, we want to wrestle fact from fiction.

References

Bitter Effects of Artificial Sweeteners

There are still plenty of people who think they’re doing themselves a favour by using artificial sweeteners, but plenty of research appears to indicate that this is far from the case. Anything which professes ¹ to be a healthy alternative to table sugar and high fructose corn syrup but which, in reality, actually increases the progression of serious chronic illness ² would be a bitter pill to swallow for those with a sweet tooth.

Whichever artificial sweetener you’re using – saccharin (Sweet & Low), sucralose (Splenda), or aspartame (NutraSweet) – it appears that the manufacturers’ claims, that they are harmless sugar substitutes providing the sweet taste without the calories or spikes in blood sugar, are unfounded. And not only that, these products seem to produce even worse health problems than normal table sugar.

Correlation or causation?

Artificial sweeteners are mainly consumed in fizzy drinks (known as diet sodas in the US) such as Diet Coke, etc. There are increasing concerns about the association between an increase in a population’s consumption of such drinks and a corresponding increase in rates of:

heart disease ³
stroke ⁴
obesity ⁵
metabolic syndrome ⁶
type 2 diabetes ⁷

Testing in the lab

When the immediate physiological responses to the intake of the likes of sucralose are tested in the lab, the results ⁸ ⁹ show a significant blood sugar spike in response to a glucose tolerance test.

This means that more insulin is produced (around 20% more) and this, in turn, can lead to insulin resistance. This would explain why consumption of artificial sweeteners is linked to increased rates of the above chronic diseases.

What mechanism is involved?

Normal table sugar (sucrose) and other natural sugars are converted into glucose and absorbed into the bloodstream while passing through the stomach and small intestine. The producers of sucralose etc claim ¹ that they are supposed to be relatively inert substances that passes through the intestinal tract and out of the body without being absorbed.

Well, this might be the case in terms of absorption in the stomach and small intestine, but when these chemicals end up in the large intestine (colon), that’s when the trouble begins.

Research has shown ¹⁰ ¹¹ that, upon arriving in the colon, sucralose, saccharin and aspartame (as well as another artificial sweeteners called acesulfame K ¹² ) all exert a negative effect on our microbiota, also called gut flora – the billions of microbes living in our guts. In previous blogs ¹³ ¹⁴ ¹⁵ ¹⁶ ¹⁷ ¹⁸ , we’ve seen the wide-reaching influence of our gut bacteria on pretty much all aspects of our health. Additional studies on both rats ¹⁹ and humans ²⁰ have found that the changes to the microbiota caused by consumption of artificial sweeteners induces glucose intolerance.

So, it came as quite a shock to some ²¹ that substances introduced to help solve the problems associated with obesity are actually having quite the opposite effect by producing unhealthy microbial alternations.

Researchers found ²² , for instance, that each molecule of aspartame is metabolised into formaldehyde, not a substance you want inside your body ²³ ²⁴ ²⁵ .

Industry bias? surely not…

Regarding aspartame, all studies funded by the artificial sweetener industry show that it’s perfectly safe .

However, 92% of independently funded studies ²⁶ found that aspartame produces adverse health effects.

As Dr Greger says in an article covering this subject ²⁷ : “That should tell you something.”

IBD & artificial sweeteners

We know how particularly important a healthy microbiota is for those with:

IBS (irritable bowel syndrome)
IBDs (inflammatory bowel diseases)
UC (ulcerative colitis)
CD (Crohn’s disease)

However, it may not be made clear to these individuals that research shows ²¹ artificial sweeteners can exacerbate their already unpleasant symptoms by negatively affecting their gut bacteria.

Increase in IBDs in whole populations

Canada was the first country to approve the use of sucralose. IBD rates doubled after sucralose was approved ²⁸ .

In the United States, after decades of relatively stable rates of ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease, rates started rising after artificial sweeteners were introduced ²⁹ ³⁰ .

In China, IBD rates rose by 1200% after sucralose was introduced ³¹ .

Similar related increases have been found in Norway, Europe and Australia ³¹ ³² .

It would be hard to discount completely a causal connection existing here…

Is stevia okay?

There needs to be a lot more research on stevia, a sugar substitute extracted from the leaves of the plant species Stevia rebaudiana. Dr Greger considers ³³ that its unwelcome ability to cause a big spike in mutagenic DNA damage ³⁴ in rats should not be of great concern if you have only two beverages per day sweetened with stevia. Above this quantity, there’s evidence that it may cause DNA damage in humans.

However, neither Dr Greger nor any other source I can find at the moment gives any clear data on stevia’s effect on insulin spikes. Some research ³⁵ ³⁶ ³⁷ ³⁸ is available if you want to study it further. For my part, I would leave well alone, since there is simply too much uncertainty about its effects on humans over prolonged periods of time. In any event, it is still a sweetener that will help to keep us hooked on that sweet taste – something we should ideally learn to live without for the most part.

What if you stop using artificial sweeteners?

Research ³⁹ shows that once you stop using artificial sweeteners, the balance of your normal gut bacteria should be restored within just a matter of weeks.

Final thoughts

So what’s the solution?

It’s not just a matter of avoiding all artificial sweeteners, but of avoiding all added sugars, if possible. Giving up sucralose to take up sucrose or high fructose corn syrup is not advised ⁴⁰ if you want to maintain optimal health (as can be seen from the following chart, where SSB = sugar-sweetened beverage and ASB = artificially-sweetened beverage).

I know personally that it’s tough to make a change away from sweet foods and drinks once you’ve become used (addicted?) to them. I’ve always had a sweet tooth and getting through a single meal without a sugar hit was almost impossible for me during the majority of my life. However, I’ve found that it’s possible to ditch all added sugars and reeducate the taste buds.

Yes, it may take some effort at first, but it’s worth it in the long run and your body will thank you for it ²⁶ .

References

Being Overweight is Not Just a Cosmetic Issue

The way your body appears from the outside when you’re overweight or obese is a fairly obvious thing that anyone can see; however, what about inside the body? The internal effects of those extra kilos of fat are not so widely appreciated. Dr Joel Fuhrman, in an off-stage video interview ¹ while at the Real Truth About Health Conference ² , gives us the low-down on one of the most devastating effects that being overweight has on our bodies.

Overweight – a serious condition

Being overweight is not a cosmetic issue; rather, it’s a serious medical condition because when you’re overweight, your body becomes insulin sensitive/resistant ³ ⁴ .

Insulin overproduction

Insulin sensitivity/resistance is basically when your pancreas has to produce more insulin in response to eating foods which, if you were not overweight, would not stimulate the pancreas to produce so much.

Thus, just eating oats or an apple will cause the pancreas to go into an insulin-production mode that exceeds what would happen if you were not overweight – according to Dr Fuhrman ⁵, up to 10 times the amount of insulin can be produced. The insulin wants to put the glucose into cells, but the receptors within cells become blocked from being able to accept the glucose because of the fat within the cell ⁶ .

This results in the pancreas having to overwork itself just in order to function normally. Any organ will suffer when it is having to overwork for prolonged periods of time, leading to type 2 diabetes and a whole host of chronic diseases.

Insulin promote cancer

Not a lot of people realise that excessive insulin production can cause cancer ⁷ ⁸ ⁹ .

Insulin promotes angiogenesis

As a fat-storing hormone, insulin can promote angiogenesis – that is, it can promote the growth of new blood vessels. We saw in an earlier blog ¹⁰ that reducing angiogenesis is a good thing for reducing the growth of cancers, since they need new blood vessels to feed them and allow them to grow.

Angiogenesis = Production of New Blood Vessels

Dr Fuhrman explains that, for fat cells to grow within the body, they need to excrete angiogenesis-promoting hormones, and insulin further promotes this process. The new blood vessels then feed the fat cells with oxygen and glucose, etc – thus making the fat grow. By doing this, it also promotes other fat cells to grow ¹¹ .

When you’re overweight, the continual circulation of insulin also promotes atherosclerosis ¹² and prematurely ages the body ¹³ .

Fat cells & oestrogen

Another factor comes into play when you are overweight: namely, the higher levels of circulating oestrogen, which is linked to both breast cancer ¹⁴ and prostate cancer ¹⁵ .

Moderate is okay?

Dr Fuhrman considers that even being moderately overweight is a health risk.

He states quite bluntly:

“There’s no such thing as being a healthy overweight person. If you’re overweight, you’re not at your optimal health. You have to be at your optimal weight to have your optimal health.”

What causes us to be overweight?

He considers that the so-called SAD (Standard American Diet) is what’s really to blame. It keeps us addicted to wanting more food than the body requires.

But when you eat healthy food, you’re flooding yourself with healthy nutrients that the body needs. By eating the right foods, your appetite becomes normal and your weight drops, as he showed in a 2012 research project with 750 individuals who were able to naturally reduce appetite by increasing the nutritional quality of their diets ¹⁶ . When you’re body is cleaner, leaner and healthier – fuelled with phytochemicals and antioxidants – you’re not going to have to go through the discomfort of the usual detoxification process that most people experience when they are consuming the ‘wrong’ foods.

Why do most diets fail?

People fail on diets because they try to cut back on calories without increasing the nutritional quality of the foods they eat. And it’s so much easier and more natural to reduce excessive calorie intake when nutrient density increases.

Overweight linked to depression

Research shows ¹⁷ ¹⁸ that when we are overweight, our brains are affected and the likelihood of becoming clinically depressed increases. And this isn’t just because we look in the mirror and don’t like the look of ourselves; it’s linked to biochemical changes within our bodies that change dependent on whether we are at or above our optimal weight.

One in five people in the USA are now classed as mentally ill, and the link between these mental conditions and body weight is clear ¹⁹ . And research is starting to uncover ²⁰ a surprising and unwelcome association between increased violent and criminal activity and increased rates of obesity .

Good news – smaller is better

The good news is that normal function of the pancreas can be restored, and type 2 diabetes completely reversed ²¹ ²² ²³ , through losing weight – ideally through eating an optimally healthy diet consisting totally or mainly of whole plant foods.

Final thoughts

There are so many benefits to being at one’s optimal body weight – both visually and in terms of the internal health of our bodies. It’s good to know that the best way to achieve and maintain this ideal body weight is not through will-power, but can be achieved naturally, healthily and relatively easily by simply eating the right foods for our bodies – that is, foods that are high in nutrients and low in empty calories.

And which diet fits the bill most perfectly? You guessed, a wholefood plant-based diet that avoids added salt, oil and sugar.

Keep an eye out for all the new recipes I regularly add to this website ²⁴ . They’re all guaranteed to be optimally healthy as well as delicious and easy to make.

References

Nutrients in Plant and Animal Foods

A useful resource for those interested in nutrition is the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) group of Food Composition Databases ¹ . They analyse a massive range of foods and list their nutritional content. In this brief blog, I want to give you a snap-shot of the nutrient values shown within these databases for a given amount of plant-based foods when compared with the same amount of animal-based foods.

The research data

The chart below comes from the USDA databases ² and from the Journal of Food Composition and Analysis ³ and represents 500 calories of each of the food sources:

The plant-based foods are composed of equal parts of:

tomatoes
spinach
lima beans
peas
potatoes

The animal-based foods are composed of equal parts of:

beef
pork
chicken
whole milk

The exact food listings in the database were:

plant-based foods
- spinach, raw
- tomatoes, red, ripe, raw, year-round average
- lima beans, large, mature seeds, raw
- peas, green, raw
- potatoes, russet, flesh and skin, raw

animal-based foods
- ground beef, 80% lean meat/20% fat, raw
- pork, fresh, ground, raw
- chicken, broilers or fryers, meat and skin, raw
- milk, dry, whole

Final thoughts

The above speaks for itself. As you can see, there’s much more nutritional value per calorie in plant-foods than in animal-foods, and this is apart from the myriad health problems associated with the latter compared with the former.

As Dr Joel Fuhrman pointed out ⁴ , Health = Nutrient Intake/Calories. That is, the more nutrient value there is per calorie of the foods you consume, the better health you should expect from your diet; on the other hand, the less nutrient value there is per calorie, the less health benefits you should expect to see.

References

Iodine Deficiency in Vegans

Iodine intake is a complex subject which you’ll find covered all over the internet. The aim of this blog is to provide a brief outline of the possible dangers of an iodine deficiency (hypothydroidism). Additionally, we’ll look at some ways in which this deficiency can be avoided through diet and supplementation.

Recommended daily intake

The U.K. NHS recommends ¹ Iodine an adult daily intake of 0.14 mg. This equates to 140 micrograms (also shown as 140 µg or 140 mcg).

The U.S. NIH ( National Institutes of Health – Office of Dietary Supplements) recommends ² a slightly higher daily figure of 0.15 mg (150 µg/mcg).

Main dietary sources

Oddly, the (USDA’s) National Nutrient Database ³ , which lists highly detailed nutrient content of a vast range of foods, doesn’t list the iodine content of foods or even provide lists of foods containing iodine. I think that a part of the reason for this is the wide variability between iodine content in foods in different locations around the world.

The general consensus is that the foods containing most iodine are sea vegetables/seaweeds, followed by fish, dairy products, meat and eggs, then fruits, vegetables, legumes, nuts and seeds.

The following list ⁴ provides a reasonably useful snapshot of iodine content within food groups:

As can be seen from the above chart, seaweed is a source which can easily provide sufficient iodine on its own but, importantly, consuming too much iodine-rich seaweed (particularly the likes of kelp/kombu) can be dangerous ⁵ ⁶ ⁷ as it may cause iodine toxicity, whilst other forms of seaweed (for instance, hiziki and paddle weed) absorb poisons like arsenic ⁸ .

Plant foods and iodine

Plant foods (e.g. cranberries, potato skins, prunes, bananas, corn, etc) provide some iodine but it’s safe to assume that they provide insufficient on their own. So eating a vegan/WFPB diet presents something of a challenge unless you like seaweed, take an iodine supplement (for instance, the Vegan Society’s Veg-1 ⁹ ) , or add iodine salt ¹⁰ ¹¹ to meals.

Some people are not happy about taking a general supplement, such as Veg-1.

Others are not happy about using iodized salt, because they don’t want to add salt to meals.

And yet others don’t like the taste of seaweed.

However, if you’re going to eat a WFPB diet, you’re going to have to consider one or more of the above non-animal sources of iodine if you want to avoid the dangerous issues associated with iodine deficiency – something of extreme importance for pregnant women ¹² ¹³ .

Cruciferous vegetables cause hypothyroidism?

Well, technically, this is not quite accurate. As Dr Greger points out ¹⁴ , what happens is that you can have a problem if you eat goitrogenic foods ¹⁵ , (e.g. raw cruciferous veg, some starchy plants, some fruits and soy products). However, this may be the case if, and only if, you have a pre-existing iodine deficiency. So those of us with no iodine deficiency needn’t worry too much about this – unless, of course, you’re eating several kilos of raw sprouts, broccoli or cabbage a day!

There are other lifestyle and environmental factors which may produce goitrogenic effects. These include getting insufficient supply of dietary selenium ¹⁶ , smoking ¹⁷ , certain cosmetics and pollution from heavy metals ¹⁸ , and high levels of emotional stress ¹⁹ .

Current methods of treatment

The medical profession, having a self-confessed lack of expertise in nutrition ²⁰ , tend to prescribe pharmaceuticals for anyone showing an iodine deficiency ²¹ . However, research indicates that pills and potions are unnecessary if dietary changes are made, which would include all the food groups – including, meat, dairy, fish and eggs – along with veg and fruit ²¹ .

So, should we revert to eating animal products?

There are those who look at things with a myopic viewpoint ²² . The result of this is that one fact about something that supports a person’s particular agenda means that they support that viewpoint regardless of any additional alternative facts. This is very much the case with regard to iodine.

There are so many problems with animal foods ²³ ²⁴ ²⁵ that it would be careless to recommend eating them just in order to ensure that your conventional diet provides you with enough iodine.

The obvious alternative is to take some form of iodine supplement, or include appropriate quantities and types of seaweed, to a diet which consists wholly or largely of plant foods.

Iodine through the skin

As a final thought, what about administering iodine through the (unbroken) skin? Putting a small amount of tincture of iodine on your skin is a rule-of-thumb check often used to see if you have an iodine deficiency. You apply the iodine to any part of your body (ideally arm, stomach or thigh) and see how long it takes to disappear. If the yellow stain it makes disappears quickly, then it’s likely you have a deficiency; if it lasts for more than 8 hours or so, you’re unlikely to have a deficiency.

But is there any research that can tell us whether or not applying iodine tincture to the skin will give us all the iodine we need?

There are a few relevant studies. One 2015 study ²⁶ which tests providone, the water-based iodine skin disinfectant. The researchers found that an unexpected result of repeated treatment with providone is that it does increase the body’s store of iodine. Another article ²⁷ lists research showing that a small percentage of iodine tincture applied to the skin is, indeed, absorbed into the body and finds its way to stores within the thyroid gland.

Final thoughts

I use iodine tincture ²⁸ to test my bodily levels of iodine. However, I don’t recommend that it’s used to ‘feed’ your body with iodine. Neither do I suggest eating animal foods or adding iodised salt.

My preferred route is to either consume small quantities ⁶ of wakame seaweed or take an iodine supplement ²⁹ .

For those who eat only plants, ignoring the risks of iodine deficiency is similar to side-tracking the need to get enough vitamin B12 in the diet – ignore at your peril…

References

How Much Nutrition Training Do Doctors Have?

In order to get an answer to this question, we’ll take a quick look at one of the most prestigious medical institutions in the West, the American College of Cardiology (ACC). So, what percentage of its trainees and practising physicians do you think feel sufficiently educated and empowered to give nutritional advice to their patients? Dr Kim Williams , ex-president of the ACC, gives us the facts in no uncertain terms.

Dr Williams was the ACC’s first vegan president ¹ . In a recent videoed off-stage interview ² at the Real Truth About Health Conference ³ , he gives us the background on how he was able to find out the precise percentage of those medical experts who feel their many years of medical education provided them with sufficient knowledge to give any dietary help to their patients.

He points out in the interview that the ACC has a nutrition subcommittee within the ACC’s Prevention Task Force. The subcommittee members, including Dr Williams himself, were concerned about how much (or, perhaps, how little) education the physicians were getting on this vital area of medicine.

Survey

So, they sent out a survey, including the following question:

“Based on the education you’ve had, how expert do you feel giving patients advice on nutrition?”

The responses were pretty shocking.

Only 1% of practising physicians felt sufficiently expert.

And, the number of trainee doctors – those having already gone through college medical school and internal medicine, and then specialised in cardiology – was zero.

As a result, Dr Williams states: “We have a serious deficit that we have to try to overcome in terms of physician education.”

So what?

Well, the knock-on effect of this, Dr Williams states, is that people treated by cardiologists come back with second and third events (heart attacks, angina, stroke, etc).

Basically, they get patched up and then, unless they change diet and lifestyle, they’ll end up on the operating table again, or on a mortuary slab. And this includes a number of the cardiologists themselves as well!

Final thoughts

Whilst we’ve looked into the general topic of nutrition training for doctors in previous blogs ⁴ ⁵ , the survey results mentioned by Dr Williams reiterate a stark reality.

Until such time as medical schools include nutrition as a central part of the curricula, don’t expect anything other than pharmaceutical and/or surgical ‘solutions’ from your GP for health issues which can only be truly solved by making appropriate long-term diet and lifestyle changes.

References

Onions & Garlic – Better Cooked or Raw?

All vegetables contain health-promoting phytonutrients. Garlic and onions are, of course, right up there at the top of the list; but are the healthy compounds they contain made more available to our bodies when eaten cooked or raw? Research appears to provide some clues…

First, though, what are some of the health claims being made?

Health benefits of garlic

Research suggests ¹ ² ³ that garlic has lots of health benefits, including:

cardiovascular disease protection
anti-clotting properties
clot-busting abilities
antioxidant properties
blood pressure-lowering effects
cholesterol-lowering effects
age-related aorta stiffness-reducing effects

In fact, the blood-thinning ability of garlic is so efficient that doctors advise ⁴ patients to stop eating garlic a week before they arrive at hospital for elective surgery, presumably so that they don’t ‘bleed out’ on the operating table!

Health benefits of onions

It’s been shown ⁵ that onions (Allium cepa L.) contain compounds reported to have a range of health benefits, including:

anticarcinogenic properties
antiplatelet activity
antithrombotic activity
antiasthmatic effects
antibiotic effects

Two of the most abundant groups of chemical compound are the following flavonoids ⁶ :

anthocyanins ⁷ (which produce the red/purple colour in some varieties)
flavanols ⁸ (e.g. quercetin and its derivatives which produce the yellow and brown skins of other varieties)

Cooked or raw?

So, are all the above health benefits most available to us when we eat garlic and onions cooked or raw?

The answer is: raw.

It appears ⁹ that the more you fry, microwave, boil, steam or bake your chosen allium ¹⁰ , the more these particular health benefits are removed. You’ll still get some benefits from having the likes of onion soup ¹¹ , but not as many as from raw onions, and probably negated completely if there’s added oil and salt.

But which is best?

In terms of which is better for you, garlic or onions, an answer was provided by a study referred to earlier ¹² which concludes: “The results of this study show that garlic is about 13 times more potent than onion in inhibiting platelet aggregation and suggest that garlic and onion could be more potent inhibitors of blood platelet aggregation ¹³ …” adding: “…if consumed in raw than in cooked or boiled form.”

What about the aftermath?

Many people avoid eating garlic and onions (particularly raw) because of the effects it has on their breath afterwards.

Reasons

With garlic, the smell on your breath is caused because a substance called alliin is converted to allicin when the inside of a garlic bulb are exposed to air. The allicin then converts into various sulphur-containing compounds that give garlic its distinctive smell.

With both garlic and onions, a compound called allyl methyl sulphide gets released when they are cut. This substance is then absorbed into your bloodstream, and ends up being emitted through lungs and skin pores. Additionally, with both garlic and onions, another sulphuric compound called cysteine sulphoxide causes an unpleasant odour on the breath almost immediately after the vegetables are eaten.

How to neutralise the odour

Here are eleven useful ideas:

1. Drink water to remove remnants from the tongue or between the teeth. This also stimulates saliva-production and gets rid of some of the bacteria that can add to the production of the smell.

2. Brush and floss. Bacteria like the plaque on the teeth and below the gum line. It also gets rid of food particles.

3. Use a tongue scraper. Not a lot of people do this, but bacteria, dead skin cells and tiny particles of food collect on here. Continue scraping until there is no residue left on the scraper. (Yuk!)

4. Rinse with mouthwash. Best to use one without added alcohol. Peppermint flavour is a good option.

5. Eat fresh veg with the meal and fresh fruits after it. Raw apple or raw lettuce apparently significantly reduce the odour of garlic on the breath.

6. Eat herb leaves. Chewing parsley is an age-old remedy for garlic or onion breath. It cleanses the palate and masks unpleasant odours. Also try mint leaves as they have been shown to significantly reduce garlic breath.

7. Try apple cider vinegar. A tablespoon of apple cider vinegar in water before or after meals apparently gets rid garlic and onion breath. Check this out a bit more before doing so, since it has no known general medical approval.

8. Chew (non-sugar) gum with a minty flavour. This also stimulates saliva production. Helps to remove food particles and bacteria, as well as helping to reduce cavities.

9. Drink a cup of green tea. It’s reported that green tea (maybe something to do with the catechins in it) may eliminate bad breath better than mints, chewing gum, or a product containing parsley oil.

10. Drink lemon water by adding a squeeze of fresh lemon juice (approximately 1 tablespoon) to a glass of water and drinking it after an onion- or garlic-rich meal. It seems to neutralise the odours.

11. Remove the core of the garlic before consuming. Cut each garlic clove in half and remove the stem from the middle of the bulb. This is where a lot of the odour-producing compounds reside.

Hope that helps…

Final thoughts

Heating garlic and onions for a short period of time (a minute or so) will not remove all the above health benefits; but it does appear that the best way to get the most from them is by eating them raw.

Try finely chopping onions into salads, crushing garlic into oil-free salad dressings, and adding both of them to a whole range of meals (sauces, soups, stews, etc) – but maybe add them at the last minute or so if you want to take advantage of all their health-promoting properties.

References

Cow’s Milk Increases Health Benefits of Coffee, Tea and Berries?

Coffee ¹ ² , tea ³ and berries ⁴ have all been shown to have significant health benefits; but what happens to those benefits if you add cow’s milk to your cuppa, cream to a bowl of your favourite berries (blueberries, strawberries etc)? Do you think those benefits will be increased or deceased? Read on…

Coffee & chlorogenic acid

It’s thought that a phytochemical found in coffee, called chlorogenic acid ⁵ , not only reduces blood sugar levels – thus having an anti-diabetic effect, but also helps us to lose weight – thus having an anti-obesity effect, improves endothelial cell function and blood pressure ⁶ , and has antioxidant properties ⁷ .

However, it’s been shown ⁸ ⁹ that the more you roast the coffee beans, the more of the chlorogenic acid is destroyed.

But what happens when you add cow’s milk to your coffee?

Tea & catechins/theaflavins

It’s been shown ¹⁰ ³ that tea (black and green) is a pretty healthy drink, partly because it both acts as an antioxidant and is good at improving flow-mediated dilation ¹¹ , that is, it helps blood vessels relax and lets blood flow more easily.

In green tea, the important antioxidant polyphenols are called catechins, and in black tea they are called theaflavins ¹² .

It’s been shown ¹³ that the addition of cow’s milk to your cup of tea will completely inhibit the beneficial effects on artery function provided by drinking tea without added cow’s milk.

Berries & caffeic acid/ferulic acid

Research increasingly reveals¹⁴ that consumption of berries can produce significant health benefits, particularly with regard to their powerful antioxidant properties.

Two of the dietary phenols ¹⁵ involved in this beneficial effect are called caffeic acid ¹⁶ and ferulic acid ¹⁷ .

A 2009 study ¹⁸ looked at blueberries being consumed with or without added dairy. The results were very clear:

blueberries eaten on their own enhanced plasma concentrations of caffeic acid and ferulic acid, (that is, increased plasma antioxidant capacity)
blueberries eaten with dairy (in this case milk, but cream would presumably have a similar effect) impaired plasma concentrations of caffeic acid and ferulic acid (that is, reduced plasma antioxidant capacity)

What mechanisms are involved?

It’s thought that the casein (a protein in cow’s milk) is responsible because it binds to the phytonutrients and prevents them from being available to the body.

So what about plant milks?

There are plenty of benefits of plant milks (soy, almond, oat, etc), but do they have the same negative nutrient-binding/blocking effect on tea and coffee as cow’s milk?

A 2015 study ¹⁹ gave us the answer to this question when it tested the results of drinking black coffee against drinking coffee with added soy milk.

The above charts show that there was no significant difference between available levels of chlorogenic acids and isoflavones when you consumed black coffee or coffee with soy milk. Although there needs to be further research, similar results would likely be found with other plant milks (oat, almond, etc).

A glass of milk in every bar

It probably comes as no surprise, then, that research ²⁰ shows dark chocolate retains more nutrients than milk chocolate – not simply because there’s a higher ratio of cocoa, which we know ²¹ is beneficial on its own, but because of the higher level of milk in the milk chocolate.

The same nutrient-robbing effect probably applies when you have a glass of milk with your meal, although more studies are needed in this area since, historically, there’s been a tendency to beef up the benefits of cow’s milk, in spite of known health problems associated with it ²² .

Final thoughts

It’s quite true that there are some downsides to drinking coffee (such as its cholesterol-increasing potential, depending on how it’s prepared ²³ ) ; but the upsides make it a useful beverage – when drunk black or with plant milk.

Tea is a great drink and there are no downsides worth mentioning that I’ve come across, except if it’s drunk with cow’s milk.

And, finally, to berries. There’s nothing but good things to say about them – so long as you keep them away from dairy. They are a central part of Joel Fuhrman’s G-BOMBS ²⁴ and Dr Greger’s Daily Dozen ²⁵ , and that’s good enough credentials for me. I have lots of them every day (taken from the freezer, defrosted in the microwave and added to my morning mountain of fruit and oaty goodness).

So, another great reason to leave the cow’s milk for a drinker who will benefit from it…

References

Effects of High-Carb Diets on BMI & Insulin Resistance

A September 2018 16-week randomised controlled clinical trial by the Physician’s Committee for Responsible Medicine¹ looked at whether a plant-based high-carbohydrate, low-fat diet in overweight individuals would have a more beneficial effect on body weight, body composition and insulin resistance when compared with a standard Western diet. Controversy in the media is rife about whether or not a carbohydrate-rich diet is healthy, so will this research study help settle the argument once and for all?

Study method

75 participants were randomised to follow either a plant-based high-carbohydrate, low-fat (vegan) diet or to maintain their current diet.

The intervention group was asked to follow a low-fat vegan diet consisting of vegetables, grains, legumes, and fruits, and avoiding animal products and added oils. There were no limits on energy or carbohydrate intake. The control group participants were asked to maintain their current diets, which included meat and dairy products, for the 16-week intervention period.

All study participants were asked not to alter their physical activity and to continue their preexisting medication regimens for the duration of the study, except as modified by their personal physicians.

Measurements were taken before and at the end of the trial.

Study results

The results can be seen in the charts below.

So, in the vegan group:

fat mass reduced
insulin resistance significantly reduced
- and these results remained significant after adjustment for energy intake

The more total and insoluble fibre consumed, the greater the drop in the following:

BMI
fat mass
volume of visceral fat
- again, these results remained significant even after adjustment for energy intake

Increased consumption of carbohydrate and fibre, as part of a plant-based high-carbohydrate, low-fat diet, were associated with beneficial effects on the following:

weight
body composition
insulin resistance

Discussion

Obesity – a pandemic?

Percent of Adults with BMI ≥30. Source: WHO, Global Database on Body Mass Index.

The World Health Organisation estimates that more than 1.9 billion adults worldwide have excess body weight ² ³ . Hence, obesity rates are rising rapidly. Since increased body weight is associated with a higher all-cause mortality ⁴ , it’s vital that sustainable and practical solutions are found.

Causes of obesity

It’s pretty obvious to anyone who does a little research: poor dietary habits (such as high intakes of processed meat products and sodium with low intakes of fruits and vegetables) are one of the leading contributors. This single avoidable behavioural factor contributes to huge numbers of deaths through a range of chronic diseases – including around half of cardio-metabolic deaths in the United States alone ³ ⁵ ⁶ .

Solutions to obesity

In contrast to the above, plant-based diets have been shown repeatedly to represent an effective strategy for improving nutrient intake ⁷ , being clearly associated with decreased all-cause mortality and decreased risk of obesity, type 2 diabetes, and coronary heart disease ⁸ .

The following dietary elements of a plant-based diet have been shown to have independent advantages for weight loss and weight management:

whole grains ⁹ ¹⁰
legumes ¹¹
fruits and vegetables ¹² ¹³ ¹⁴
high carbohydrate (low glycaemic index) intake ¹⁵ ¹⁶
high fibre content ¹⁷

Final thoughts

Above, I asked whether this study would settle once and for all the question of whether or not a carbohydrate-rich diet is healthy. As long as the carbohydrates are what’s found in wholefood plants and not in processed junk food, it appears to me that this, as well as many other studies mentioned above, do indeed favour a positive answer to this question.

Naturally, however, the industries benefiting from producing, advertising and selling processed junk foods and animal products will continue in their attempts to deny/ignore/marginalise the facts with the aim of confusing the public. That, unfortunately, is the way business is done. But each of us can take responsibility for what foods we consume, and thus exert complete dietary control to help ourselves avoid so many chronic diet-related diseases.

References

No Whey Man says Robert Cheeke

Robert Cheeke ¹ is a leading light in the area of vegan bodybuilding. His advice ² on whether or not we should use whey powders in an attempt to build muscle should probably be adhered to or, at the least, listened to and carefully considered.

For over fifteen years, Robert has been involved with the bodybuilding industry and knows how it works – basically, it’s kept afloat by the supplement companies that sponsor the athletes representing it. Naturally, the fans who admire these athletes end up buying the products they advertise. This ends up in a cycle that drives record sales and profits, all the while potentially damaging the health of the unsuspecting amateur athletes who just want to get as muscley and healthy as they perceive their heroes to be.

However, there are at least two reasons that Robert considers it important to question the real value of these protein powders – two of his favourite professional bodybuilders, Nasser El Sonbaty and Mike Matarazzo, who died in their forties, most likely due to the consumption of too much protein, coupled with the daily use of performance enhancing substances until their organs simply gave up on them.

He points out that though it’s obvious that bodybuilders exercise more than the average person, something that should improve overall health, the actual rate of bodybuilders suffering from diet-related health problems is often more common than the general public falling ill to diet-related diseases. He considers this to be a problem related to the wide-scale use of supplements – particularly protein powders – and it’s something that should be addressed.

The two powders of choice among mainstream bodybuilders are whey and casein. These are proteins from cow’s milk. Athletes adopt the mistaken notion that consuming more and more protein is a great idea with no downside, and this fallacy has been propagated for financial profit by the sports and supplement industries. Of course, they don’t bother to mention to proven ³ ⁴ serious harms of excess protein in the diet.

Indeed, you’ll often hear warnings about the very opposite – that following a plant-based diet means protein will be hard to come by without consuming animal products. Not only are these warnings not based on any research data, they are shown to be false and misleading – if you eat enough food, you get enough protein, no matter what you eat ⁵ .

Cancer & milk protein

Years ago, The China Study ((The China Study)) by Dr. T. Colin Campbell & Dr. Thomas Campbell, showed how by merely changing the intake level of casein, cancer growth can be turned on and off like a switch. Dr. Campbell’s findings show that when casein is consumed in large quantities, cancer cells increase in size, and when there is a cessation in consumption of casein, cancer tumour cells recede.

Elevated levels of any animal protein, including casein and whey, cause:

kidney damage
kidney stones
liver problems
increase heart failure risk
excess fat gain
artery wall lining damage
arterial plaque build up
lethargy
diminish bone density
a host of other health problems ((Animal Protein – Nutritionfacts.org)) ⁶ ⁷ ⁸

Milk proteins, including casein and whey, have stronger links to prostate cancer than any other protein ⁹ . So why are they allowed to be produced as concentrated powders and drinks and sold in stores? After all, who needs them, besides calves?

Protein deficiency?

If athletes in the West need to consume special protein powders created from cow’s milk, it begs the question: “is it because our society has particularly high rates of protein deficiency?”

The answer is simple – No. Protein deficiency is unheard of in Western societies and is only ever found in someone who does not consume adequate calories. Some level of protein is present in all foods, and in significant quantities in specific types of foods such as beans and other legumes, nuts, seeds, leafy green vegetables, other vegetables and grains. The amount of protein required by the human body (5-10% of total calories per day) is relatively low in comparison to the other macronutrients. It is therefore impossible to be protein deficient when sufficient calories are consumed. This is how nature works. In reality, most people in developed countries, including those following a plant-based diet, eat too much protein, not the other way around ¹⁰ .

Why propagate the protein myth?

Robert points out that part of the answer lies in the world of bodybuilding and the magazines, books, websites, athletes, and other individuals that feed the industry:

“The community that I have been part of for so long is a key factor in keeping these antiquated ideas about protein alive. It is therefore my (and others’) mission to effectively dispel these myths by showing a healthier way to support fitness goals without the use of any substances that came from a cow’s udder. As a semi-retired bodybuilder and current health and wellness advocate and multi-sport athlete, I endorse a whole-food, plant-based diet for optimal results, even when bodybuilding. I aim to put the desire for elevated levels of protein to rest by showing how a relatively low protein, whole-food, plant-based diet can support all athletic endeavors effectively and efficiently. I have achieved great results as a plant-based athlete for the past two decades, and have sought to lead by example.”

It’s pretty obvious from the following, that his plant-based approach works…

No whey, man!

As Robert says, if your goal is health, then your answer to cow-based protein powders should be, “No whey, man.” Taking into consideration even just some of the research about the dangers of high levels of animal protein, particularly protein in cow’s milk, may hopefully lead people away from buying powders made from cow secretions.

Final thoughts

You get all the macronutrients, including protein, from a wholefood plant-based diet. Additionally, you get all the phytonutrients and fibre that are lacking in all animal foods.

Plant-based protein powders are not covered in Robert’s article. My research has shown me that even these are probably not worth bothering with, simply because the body does not need and cannot utilise excess protein intake – from any source, animal or plant. Additionally, although research has shown the body does not suffer the same negative health effects from excess plant protein as it does from excess animal protein, for me the jury is still out on whether there are benefits without deficits for packing in the pea protein. After all, it doesn’t seem that the likes of elephants or gorillas need protein powders to supplement their plant-based diets…