Active Low-Carber Forums
Atkins diet and low carb discussion provided free for information only, not as medical advice.
Home Plans Tips Recipes Tools Stories Studies Products
Active Low-Carber Forums
A sugar-free zone


Welcome to the Active Low-Carber Forums.
Support for Atkins diet, Protein Power, Neanderthin (Paleo Diet), CAD/CALP, Dr. Bernstein Diabetes Solution and any other healthy low-carb diet or plan, all are welcome in our lowcarb community. Forget starvation and fad diets -- join the healthy eating crowd! You may register by clicking here, it's free!

Go Back   Active Low-Carber Forums > Main Low-Carb Diets Forums & Support > Low-Carb Studies & Research / Media Watch > LC Research/Media
User Name
Password
Register FAQ Members Calendar Mark Forums Read Search Gallery My P.L.A.N. Survey


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   ^
Old Fri, Aug-10-18, 06:22
teaser's Avatar
teaser teaser is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 12,843
 
Plan: mostly milkfat
Stats: 190/152.4/154 Male 67inches
BF:
Progress: 104%
Location: Ontario
Default Dietary carbohydrates could lead to osteoarthritis, new study finds

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releas...80809112417.htm

The carbs being accused here are sugar and insoluble fiber (cellulose).

Quote:
Do your knees ache? According to new findings from the Oklahoma Medical Research Foundation, your diet could be a culprit.

In a study led by OMRF scientist Tim Griffin, Ph.D., researchers found that the carbohydrate composition of diets increased the risk of osteoarthritis in laboratory mice -- even when the animals didn't differ in weight.

"We know increased body fat elevates risk, but we haven't appreciated as much how diet itself affects the disease risk," said Griffin. "These findings give us new clues that there can be significant dietary effects linked to increased OA risk even in the absence of obesity."

Osteoarthritis, or OA, is the most common form of arthritis and the most widespread form of disability in the country, affecting nearly 27 million people in the U.S. It occurs when the cartilage that cushions bones in the joints breaks down and wears away, causing the bones to rub against one another.

Several factors can increase risk, including high-impact physical jobs, previous joint injuries, age and genetics, but carrying extra body weight is among the most proven contributors.

"Obesity is the one of the most significant factors for developing disease in the knee joint," said Griffin. "However, therapeutic strategies to prevent or treat obesity-associated OA are limited because of the uncertainly about the root cause of the disease."

To study how, exactly, obesity contributes to osteoarthritis, Griffin and his lab placed groups of mice on different high-fat diets. However, over time, they observed that the carbohydrate makeup of the rodents' low-fat control diet was alone sufficient to alter their chances of developing OA.

The primary culprits: fiber and sugar.

In particular, Griffin's team found that changing the amount of sucrose -- table sugar -- and fiber in the diet altered OA pathology in the rodents. The high-sucrose diet increased signs of joint inflammation, while the high-fiber diet caused changes in cartilage genes and cellular stress-response pathways.

While the study involved mice, Griffin said the findings could ultimately have human implications.

"It's important to understand how our diet affects the health of our joints," he said. "We were surprised to see so many OA-related differences between the two high-carb diets even though body weight and body fat were the same."

Griffin next plans to investigate how different types of dietary fiber and other components of our diets can contribute to OA, and also look at the role the body's microbiome and gut bacteria play in the disease.


Fiber?
Quote:
However, the use of cellulose as an insoluble
fiber supplement in many purified defined diets, such as those used in the current study, causes
substantial changes in gut morphology and microbiota content compared to chow-fed mice
(Chassaing et al., 2015; Dalby et al., 2017). These changes may underlie our findings indicating
Disease Models & Mechanisms DMM Accepted manuscript
that the LFLS diet was moderately stressful to the mice. Numerous serum metabolic biomarkers
were elevated in the LFLS diet group, including serum albumin, bilirubin, gammaglutamyltransferase,
globulins, protein, and urea nitrogen.


http://dmm.biologists.org/content/d...034827.full.pdf


Okay, cellulose. There's a study called "A ketogenic diet results in a unique metabolic state in mice" or some such that had to be restarted six months in when the mice on the ketogenic diet were dying too early--switching from cellulose to wheat middlings allowed the animals to live long enough for the purposes of the study. Another study looked at 25 different diets, of varying macronutrient ratios and calorie density. Calorie density was controlled by varying amounts of cellulose. Regardless of macro ratio, the low density, high cellulose mice all died early, the most obviously interesting finding. So the headline was based on a mild effect of varying carb/protein content.

Celery isn't in my diet right now, but for the record, I'm not that paranoid about eating it or not eating it.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2   ^
Old Fri, Aug-10-18, 06:36
teaser's Avatar
teaser teaser is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 12,843
 
Plan: mostly milkfat
Stats: 190/152.4/154 Male 67inches
BF:
Progress: 104%
Location: Ontario
Default

The idea in this study that the benefit of soluble fiber might at least in part be due to what the soluble fiber replaces is interesting. To keep caloric density the same, cellulose is a convenient ingredient for the control diet, so if there's an ill effect of cellulose in mouse chow on the gut, that's a problem when looking at benefits of soluble fiber.
Reply With Quote
  #3   ^
Old Fri, Aug-10-18, 06:45
teaser's Avatar
teaser teaser is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 12,843
 
Plan: mostly milkfat
Stats: 190/152.4/154 Male 67inches
BF:
Progress: 104%
Location: Ontario
Default

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releas...80808134241.htm


Just to balance things out, here's a wonderful bit about using cellulose nanofibers to promote healthful fat malabsorption.

Quote:
Tiny balls of nano-sized cellulose fibres added to food reduced fat absorption by up to half in laboratory and animal experiments, report scientists from Nanyang Technological University, Singapore (NTU Singapore) and Harvard University, United States.

This discovery could aid in the global battle against obesity, as experiments done in a simulated gastrointestinal tract showed that nanocellulose fibres 100 times smaller than the width of a human hair could cut fat absorption by up to 48 per cent.

In animal experiments, rats fed with heavy cream containing nanocellulose absorbed 36 per cent less fats than rats fed with heavy cream alone.

Associate Professor Joachim Loo and Associate Professor Ng Kee Woei from NTU's School of Materials Science and Engineering, together with senior author of the study, Associate Professor Philip Demokritou, from the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, discovered how nanocellulose can bind and trap fat molecules known as triglycerides.

Typically, digestive enzymes in the gut will break down triglycerides into fatty acids, which are absorbed by the small intestines and converted to fat by the human body.

However, when triglycerides are trapped in nanocellulose fibres -- like how cotton balls absorb oil -- enzymes involved in breaking down triglycerides for fat absorption are less effective, thus reducing the amount of fatty acids that can be absorbed by the body.

Published in the scientific journal ACS Nano in June, this new method of using nanocellulose fibres as fat blockers has been granted a US provisional patent, jointly filed by Harvard and NTU.

Assoc Prof Ng Kee Woei, a biomedical engineer and materials scientist, said their finding reinforces the conventional wisdom that eating a high fibre diet is good for health.

"We've known for a long time that fibre in the diet has positive health benefits but what we have shown now, is that in animal experiments, fibres at the nanoscale are much more effective at reducing fat absorption than in its bulk form," Assoc Prof Ng said.

In experiments, 1 mg of nanocellulose was added to 100mg of heavy cream, a ratio of 1:100. Prof Ng thinks that if more nanocellulose was added, it could have absorbed and trapped a larger percentage of fat.

"Nanocellulose could be used as food additives or supplements that could help to mitigate fat absorption for certain groups of people, as the concentration can be adjusted for different applications. We look forward to establishing whether this will be safe and effective for people to take."

Assoc Prof Joachim Loo, a scientist researching on nanomaterials said cellulose is categorised by the US Food & Drug Administration as a Generally Regarded As Safe (GRAS) material as it is found in all plants. Nanocellulose can be easily produced by grinding cellulose into extremely fine powder.

"In our study, three types of nanocellulose were compared to commercially available fat-reducing options, and all of them performed much better in the amount of fats they trapped," Assoc Prof Loo said, although he highlighted that more studies are still needed to determine why the three had better performance.

Professor Philip Demokritou, Director of Harvard's Center for Nanotechnology and Nanotoxicology, said the discovery is like "having your cake and eating it too."

To him, the most exciting aspect is that fat absorption can be curbed simply through the use of a nanoscale material made of naturally-obtained fibres derived from plants, engineered using mechanical means without any chemicals.

"I'm a believer that we should learn more from nature and use more nature-inspired and derived materials," he said. "There's 4 billion years of free R&D there, and instead we always look toward chemicals."

Giving an independent comment from the medical perspective, Dr Terence Tan, Head, Advanced Medicine Oncology Centre in Singapore, said: "To date, there is sufficient evidence to show that the absence of excess body fat has a cancer-preventive effect, and lowers the risk of developing thirteen different types of cancers including common cancers such as colorectal and post-menopausal breast cancers.

"Avoidance of weight gain in the form of excess body fat is therefore an important strategy in our fight against cancer. Excess fat in our food can easily tip the scale towards an excess of energy intake over energy expenditure, which in turn drives weight gain over time," added Dr Tan, a cancer specialist researching on nanotechnology in food for healthier living and cancer prevention.

"This new nature-derived nanocellulose technology has the potential of reducing digestion and absorption of excess fat from our food without compromising on quality and taste, and is very exciting and promising. I look forward to the further evaluation of this technology in animals and humans to validate the findings of this study."

Moving forward, the NTU and Harvard scientists will continue to probe the toxicological profile of nanocellulose to examine its safety for consumption in large amounts in further animal trials.


If you don't want to absorb fat, how about not eating the bloody stuff? I continue to concentrate on taking in nutrients in hopes that they'll nourish my body.

Quote:
To him, the most exciting aspect is that fat absorption can be curbed simply through the use of a nanoscale material made of naturally-obtained fibres derived from plants, engineered using mechanical means without any chemicals.


None of this makes it safe. Nor does "chemical" make something dangerous. The exciting thing is that this will be good for marketing.
Reply With Quote
  #4   ^
Old Fri, Aug-10-18, 06:59
Ms Arielle's Avatar
Ms Arielle Ms Arielle is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 8,240
 
Plan: atkins
Stats: 247/218/153 Female 5'8"
BF:
Progress: 31%
Location: Massachusetts
Default

You're funny!!!

The cellulose deaths-- no mention of the need for specific microbes that are needed to digest that stuff. Termites can handle it but otherwise, I can see it is a problem with out help to digest it. AND maybe the change in th gut microbes is what killed the mice-- who knows.

By the end, I didnt understand the effect of the cellulose on the joints. Can you paraphrase for me, again.
Reply With Quote
  #5   ^
Old Fri, Aug-10-18, 07:14
teaser's Avatar
teaser teaser is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 12,843
 
Plan: mostly milkfat
Stats: 190/152.4/154 Male 67inches
BF:
Progress: 104%
Location: Ontario
Default

Basically there were markers of stress in the high cellulose group, whether they were high sugar or not.

Quote:
Numerous serum metabolic biomarkers
were elevated in the LFLS diet group, including serum albumin, bilirubin, gammaglutamyltransferase,
globulins, protein, and urea nitrogen.


I don't know the exact relevance of these to osteoarthritis.

Also;

Quote:
To further characterize the metabolic effects of dietary sucrose and fat content, we also
analyzed a panel of diagnostic serum metabolic markers in blood collected at the time of death.
Upon necropsy, we observed tumor-like nodules in the liver of two LFLS animals. The presence
of nodules was associated with altered serum metabolites and synovial thickening (Fig. S1);
therefore, these samples were excluded from the final serum and synovial analyses as well as
cartilage gene and protein analyses. We did not, however, observe differences in cartilage or
osteophyte histopathology scores associated with liver nodules so these samples were included
in these outcome analysis.


When it comes down to it--this study doesn't actually show any effect of cellulose on the joints, since there's no cellulose-free control group. They're just hypothesizing based on other research that cellulose might be responsible for unexpected pathology in the control group.
Reply With Quote
  #6   ^
Old Fri, Aug-10-18, 07:20
Ms Arielle's Avatar
Ms Arielle Ms Arielle is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 8,240
 
Plan: atkins
Stats: 247/218/153 Female 5'8"
BF:
Progress: 31%
Location: Massachusetts
Default

OK. GOt it.

My concern with the cellulose goes back to the effect on the GI microbes and their possibly protective effect on how they could digest the cellulose. Maybe someday that study will be done.
Reply With Quote
  #7   ^
Old Fri, Aug-10-18, 07:42
teaser's Avatar
teaser teaser is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 12,843
 
Plan: mostly milkfat
Stats: 190/152.4/154 Male 67inches
BF:
Progress: 104%
Location: Ontario
Default

In ruminants, a lot of this happens in the stomach, entirely different part of the gut. Maybe there's a reason things developed that way?

I would bet that comparable amounts of cellulose from celery would be harmless. Freeze dried vs. fresh celery might be an interesting study.

Problem is, once it's not pure cellulose, you don't know if it's that cellulose in celery is harmless (if that's the case) or if something else in the celery negates the effects.
Reply With Quote
  #8   ^
Old Fri, Aug-10-18, 08:01
Ms Arielle's Avatar
Ms Arielle Ms Arielle is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 8,240
 
Plan: atkins
Stats: 247/218/153 Female 5'8"
BF:
Progress: 31%
Location: Massachusetts
Default

All pertinent.

The ruminants have a HUGE first sac of the GI, and a seive that keps larg partiles from moving out and into the remaining GI, like the true stomache like we have.

The microbes in that vat are critical to the digestion of all kinds of fibrous material, along with rechewing their cud, lots of saliva. The right microbes in the right proportions make this work.

Monogastrics cannot process nearly so much fibrous material; limited digestion in the GI tract compared to the ruminants. Some animals like bunnies have a big cecum to act as a rumen. Our appendix is useless cecum. I dont know about mice and rats. Will need to research them.

Im not convinced cellulose is a good food choice for humans.

PS. I raise sheep, a ruminant, for ovr 30 years.

Last edited by Ms Arielle : Fri, Aug-10-18 at 08:18.
Reply With Quote
  #9   ^
Old Fri, Aug-10-18, 09:00
GRB5111's Avatar
GRB5111 GRB5111 is offline
Posts: 2,318
 
Plan: Ketogenic (LCHFKD)
Stats: 227/186/185 Male 6' 0"
BF:
Progress: 98%
Location: Herndon, VA
Default

The theory that fiber can be isolated as the cause of OA is as weak as it can get. When I stopped consuming grains, the pain in my finger joints, particularly when waking in the morning, went away. Forever. Yes, fiber is present in grains as are other toxins. It's folly to think they're on the road to isolating a single substance as the root cause. But hey, if they're funded, they'll do the study regardless of how poorly it's designed.
Reply With Quote
  #10   ^
Old Fri, Aug-10-18, 09:16
teaser's Avatar
teaser teaser is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 12,843
 
Plan: mostly milkfat
Stats: 190/152.4/154 Male 67inches
BF:
Progress: 104%
Location: Ontario
Default

They can isolate whether supplemental cellulose, or at least cellulose incorporated into ketogenic pelleted mouse chow, is harmful. At least of potential concern to those eating the massive food pellets we call protein bars.

Massive distrust is probably warranted, through. A bit of veggies next to or on top of or even mixed in to a burger is a far cry from cellulose included in a "purified" chow diet.
Reply With Quote
  #11   ^
Old Fri, Aug-10-18, 09:47
Ms Arielle's Avatar
Ms Arielle Ms Arielle is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 8,240
 
Plan: atkins
Stats: 247/218/153 Female 5'8"
BF:
Progress: 31%
Location: Massachusetts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by teaser
They can isolate whether supplemental cellulose, or at least cellulose incorporated into ketogenic pelleted mouse chow, is harmful. At least of potential concern to those eating the massive food pellets we call protein bars.

Massive distrust is probably warranted, through. A bit of veggies next to or on top of or even mixed in to a burger is a far cry from cellulose included in a "purified" chow diet.


I have OD's on Atkins bars. Cant eat only one. ANd the results were disturbing.... of the GI, that is.

Carbohydrates come in many forms as you know. Cellulose and lignan require specialized digestion, and as us humans are not in that catagory, limited amounts would be prefered by the GI. Us humans dont eat grasses because of the cellulose and lignan content unless it is juicing wheat grass---which effectivley removes both.

Eating our salads provides small amounts......very small compared to what a ruminant eats. BUT we still need a way to process it.
Reply With Quote
  #12   ^
Old Fri, Aug-10-18, 09:55
Ms Arielle's Avatar
Ms Arielle Ms Arielle is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 8,240
 
Plan: atkins
Stats: 247/218/153 Female 5'8"
BF:
Progress: 31%
Location: Massachusetts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GRB5111
The theory that fiber can be isolated as the cause of OA is as weak as it can get. When I stopped consuming grains, the pain in my finger joints, particularly when waking in the morning, went away. Forever. Yes, fiber is present in grains as are other toxins. It's folly to think they're on the road to isolating a single substance as the root cause. But hey, if they're funded, they'll do the study regardless of how poorly it's designed.


Just easier to dump the grains.

I am interested in any cross over by eating our ducks and chickens that eat th grains.....that study is 100 years away.

But as you said the evidence is weak. Which leads me to thinking about other related causes, if any, that could be in the realm of the microbes that feed on the cellulose.

In the ruminants, ( I am recalling from a grad class over 30 years ago) the dairy cattle are fed food stuffs to feed the microbiome of the rumen. The by-products like butyerate, which I cannot spell anymore, is transformed and is a component in raw milk and then into the dairy products we eat.

More and more evidence is stacking up against humans eating grains. This study is too shaky to count.
Reply With Quote
  #13   ^
Old Fri, Aug-10-18, 13:06
Nancy LC's Avatar
Nancy LC Nancy LC is offline
Experimenter
Posts: 45,269
 
Plan: Paleo 99.5%
Stats: 210/170/160 Female 67.5"
BF:
Progress: 80%
Location: San Diego, CA
Default

I've sometimes wondered if dairy might make my arthritis worse. I know it can make my muscles spasm and I think it also makes my joints hurt more. :-(
Reply With Quote
  #14   ^
Old Fri, Aug-10-18, 13:08
GRB5111's Avatar
GRB5111 GRB5111 is offline
Posts: 2,318
 
Plan: Ketogenic (LCHFKD)
Stats: 227/186/185 Male 6' 0"
BF:
Progress: 98%
Location: Herndon, VA
Default

Beef is my grain filtration system . . .
Reply With Quote
  #15   ^
Old Fri, Aug-10-18, 16:14
Ms Arielle's Avatar
Ms Arielle Ms Arielle is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 8,240
 
Plan: atkins
Stats: 247/218/153 Female 5'8"
BF:
Progress: 31%
Location: Massachusetts
Default

A mixed bag of reactions. While the effects of the grains itsef might be mitigated, the new product might have new components that are problematic Dairy could be problematic in the A1 vs A2 proteins. Or lactose. Beef--- Im unfamiliar with any allergies to beef.

THough I do know some of the feed compoenents do transfer into the beef and milk. Dairy operations need to be careful about some weeds that are poisonous in the milk. ANd the glycosphate, not sure of spelling, is used to speed the the drying of the grain heads and has been found in breast fed children. That is not a grain component itself, but an addative during harvesting.

Lots of options to knock us off our rockers.



Or the plant chemicals that are eaten and transfered into the milk. There
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 18:42.


Copyright © 2000-2018 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.