View Single Post
  #6   ^
Old Sat, May-31-08, 00:06
Elihnig's Avatar
Elihnig Elihnig is offline
Don't dream it be it
Posts: 5,734
 
Plan: Low Carb
Stats: 292.4/272.0/165 Female 70 inches
BF:
Progress: 16%
Location: Maine
Default

From the end:

Quote:
My take on fat is that if I am treating a patient who is generally hyperinsulinemic or
overweight, I want them on a low saturated fat diet. Because most of the fat they
are storing is saturated fat. When their insulin goes down and they are able to start
releasing triglycerides to burn as fat, what they are going to be releasing mostly is
saturated fat. So you don't want to take anymore orally. There is a ration of fatty
acids that is desirable, if you took them from the moment you were born, but we
don't, we are dealing with an imbalance here that we are trying to correct as rapidly
as we can. You have plenty of saturated fat. Most of us here have enough saturated
fat to last the rest of our life. Truthfully. Your cell membranes require a balance of
saturated and poly-unsaturated fat, and it is that balance that determines the
fluidity. As I mentioned, your cells can become over-fluid if they don't have any
saturated fat. Saturated fat is a hard fat. We can get the fats from foods to come
mostly from nuts. Nuts are a great food because it is mostly mono-unsaturated. Your
primary energy source ideally would come mostly from mono-unsaturated fat. It's a
good compromise. It is not an essential fat, but it is a more fluid fat. Your body can
utilize it very well as an energy source.
(Question)
Animal proteins are fine and are good for you, but not the ones that are fed grains.
Grainfed animals are going to make saturated fat out of the grains. Saturated fat in
nature occurs to a very tiny degree. Not in the wild there is very little saturated fat
out there. If you talk about the Paleolithic diet, we didn't eat a saturated fat diet.
Saturated fat diets are new to mankind. We manufactured a saturated fat diet by
feeding animals grains. You can consider saturated fat to be second generation
carbohydrates. We eat the saturated fats that other animals produce from
carbohydrates.
(Question)
Zone was a good diet compared to the American diet it was unusual. Is it an optimal
diet? No. Is it optimal for what is known today about nutrition, it is not. He is stuck
in this mold he can't get out of but now he is trying to get out of it through the back
door. Initially the author spoke about how it made no difference if you got your
carbohydrate from candy or vegetables. The Volkswagen was a good car, but
eventually they had to change it to keep up with modern technology. What he is
doing now is changing his recipes so that the 40% carbohydrates are coming
primarily from vegetables, and the carbohydrates are going way down because he
knows that if he doesn't it's not as good a diet.
(Question)
I would go 20% of calories from carbs. Depending on the size of the person, 25 to
30% of calories from protein, and 60-65% from fat. You can get non-grain fed beef.
Lasater beef is non-grain fed, and buffalo is non-grain fed.
Insulin is not the only cause of disease. There are other considerations such as iron.
We know that high iron levels are bad for you. If a person's ferritin is high, red meat
is out for a while, till we get their iron down. SO there are other things involved
about if we are going to allow a person to eat red meat or not.
(Question)
There is a great deal of difference between a non-grain fed cow and a grain fed cow.
Non-grain fed will have only 10% or less saturated fat. Grain fed can have over 50%.
There is a big difference. A non-grain fed cow will actually be high in Omega 3 oils.
Plants have a pretty high percentage of Omega 3, and if you accumulate it by eating
it all day, every day for most of your life, your fat gets a pretty high proportion of
Omega 3. I would try for 50% oleic fat, and the others would depend on the
individual, but about 25% of the other two. In a fat diabetic I would probably go
down on the saturated fat and go 60% oleic. I would go 1 to 1 on the omega 6 to 3,
that would be therapeutic. The maintenance ratio would be about 2.5 to 1 omega 6
to 3. Arachadonic acid, DHA, to EFA. Therapeutic, I would go lesser on the saturated
fats. I would try to do most of this through diet. There are some practicalities
involved. I would ask the person if they like fish and if they practically puke in front
of me they are going on a tablespoon of cod liver oil, the best brand is made by
Carlton which doesn't taste fishy at all. There are probably some others too that are
okay. Most people end up going on a supplement of Omega 3 oils because most of
them are not going to eat enough fish to get it, which would be about four days a
week, and it can't be overcooked etc., it is a little hard to get that much entirely
from diet.
Other therapeutic doses of nutrients include:
Elemental magnesium 300 to 400 depending on what their gut can tolerate. I like
I.V. magnesium to replenish them.
Vitamin E, big fan of Vitamin E, I would go to 2000mg.
Zinc, 30 to sixty mg, balanced with 2mg of copper per 15 mg of zinc, usually 4mg of
copper sebacate.
Taurine: 1gm twice a day.
Chromium 1000mcg
Vanadium 25mg for about two to three months. Then down to 71/2 mg three times a
day, then I'll go down further, then I take them off completely once they are better.
They can have as much glutamine as they want and as much carnitine as they can
afford. The more the better
I use gymnema sylvestre a lot.
I like sardines if they will eat them. Sardines are a very good therapeutic food. They
are baby fish so they haven't had time to accumulate a bunch of metal. They are
smoked so they are not cooked and the oil is not spoiled in them. You have to eat
the whole thing. Not the boneless and skinless. You need to eat all the organs and
they are high in vitamins and magnesium.
DNA glycates. So if people are worried about chromosomal damage from chromium,
what they should really be worried about instead is high blood sugar. DNA repair
enzymes glycate as well. Insulin is by far your biggest poison. They disproved that
study that was against chromium many times. They showed that it only happens if
you put cells in a petrie dish with chromium but in vivo studies prove otherwise. The
lowering of insulin is going to be better than any possible detriment of any of the
therapies you are using. Insulin is associated with cancer, everything.
Insulin should be tested on everybody repeatedly, and why it is not is only strictly
because there hasn't been drugs till recently that could effect insulin, so there is no
way to make money off of it. Fasting insulin is one way to look at it, not necessarily
the best way. But it is the way that everybody could do it. Any family doctor can
measure a fasting insulin. There are other ways to measure insulin sensitivity that
are more complex that we do sometimes. We use intravenous insulin and watch how
rapidly their blood sugar crashes in a fasting state in 15 minutes and that assesses
insulin sensitivity, then you give them dextrose to make sure they don't crash any
further. There are other ways that are utilized to directly assess insulin sensitivity,
but you can get a pretty good idea just by doing a fasting insulin.
Reply With Quote