Sun, Feb-17-13, 16:31
|
 |
Experimenter
Posts: 25,866
|
|
Plan: DDF
Stats: 202/185.4/179
BF:
Progress: 72%
Location: San Diego, CA
|
|
I wrote a comment to Dr. Ede about some of the things we discussed here and here is her reply.
Quote:
Hi Twin
I really appreciate the crowdsourcing help! Thanks, crowd!
I haven't looked into the long-term physiological insulin resistance myself yet, but will do that at some point...if only I didn't have to sleep and see patients I would know everything already All I can say at this point is that insulin resistance is not always a bad thing. It spares glucose for the brain, for example. I think insulin resistance may only be a problem if you're eating too many carbs...because that really taxes the insulin system. Insulin's primary purpose is not to process carbohydrate. It is to act as a growth hormone under certain special conditions (childhood/adolescence, pregnancy, etc.). Maybe the body is only supposed to be sensitive to insulin under certain circumstances. I don't know enough about this topic yet to say anything more intelligent than that yet...
I'd never considered a muscle scan, and shouldn't pay for one rig ht now, but even if I could, it might be confounded by exercise...which I plan to add back to my regimen very soon. Theoretically I believe the opposite to be true of carbs and muscle--it is well-established that body protein is broken down regularly on standard low-calorie diets that contain significant carbohydrate (see carbohydrate page and also low-cal diets page). I doubt muscle loss is an issue with ketogenic diets, but I really don't know for sure. I don't know, maybe I should invest in this scan after all...I'll think about it...
My eyes are only dry on certain mornings upon waking (for about 30 mins), and at least for me, it's been about olives. Yesterday I ate zero olives for the first time in many days, and no dry eyes this morning. I have never had constipation on an all-meat diet, even when I did it for a full 90 days last summer. I believe constipation is about what IS eaten, not about what is NOT eaten, if you follow me. I used to have a major problem in this area before I changed my diet 6 years ago, so I am no stranger to the issue. When I ate a "standard" Atkins diet over 10 yrs ago for a month or more, it was a major issue, for example. For me it seemed to be about nuts, dairy, crucifers, and soy foods (also see my blog post about constipation if you haven't already).
The fact that my blood sugar levels were so much higher on 75 g of protein than on 50 g of protein suggests to me that my body wasn't using that extra protein to build muscle or enzymes or mucus or anything else...it was just turning it into blood glucose--far in excess of what anyone needs in the bloodstream. Unhealthy levels of blood glucose. Even according to the Jaminets, hyperglycemia is perilous. I do agree with them on that. How would they propose I lower my blood glucose below 90's then? I was already eating very low carbs, and even low calories on many days. Lowering protein really did the trick.
On pa ges 32 and 33 of the Jaminet's book, they write several paragraphs about the "dangers of glucose deficiency" and cite exactly zero sources to support their bold claims. I find that to be very unfortunate. It doesn't mean that the theory is definitely false, or that it may not be true for some individuals, but without any evidence, it will remain in my mind as a belief of theirs that each individual would need to test for him/herself.
Thanks, twin, for your continued interest and the great questions--much food for thought!
|
|
Linear Mode
