1. Registering for the Forum

    We require a human profile pic upon registration on this forum.

    After registration is submitted, you will receive a confirmation email, which should contain a link to confirm your intent to register for the forum. At this point, you will not yet be registered on the forum.

    Our Support staff will manually approve your account within 24 hours, and you will get a notification. This is to prevent the many spam account signups which we receive on a daily basis.

    If you have any problems completing this registration, please email support@jackkruse.com and we will assist you.

Take It Slow

Discussion in 'My Optimal Journal' started by yewwei.tan, Jan 22, 2014.

  1. yewwei.tan

    yewwei.tan Gold

    No. My excerpts may not the most accurate, and Peter's full article should be read to understand the context.

    If you read Peter's article and the studies involved, Fish oil was used in the first study (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmid/21738749/), and specific mention of DHA and EPA were used in the 2nd study (http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00125-006-0300-x).

    DHA and EPA (and all n3's) were uniquely harmful in combination with sucrose at causing obesity. There are 2 ways to deal with this -- restrict n3's, or restrict fructose.

    Note that temporal separation likely also works; eg: n3's eaten in the morning and fructose eaten in the afternoon probably don't interact unfavourably.

    You know my opinion by now -- do not overdose PUFAs of any form (in my book, this means <1g PUFA a day), and use sugars during the appropriate times in the appropriate doses.

    seanb4 likes this.
  2. Inger

    Inger Silver

    Both studies use unnatural Fish oil.
    and I guess under fake light.
    What Jack says... how could that ever give the right picture.

    I feel like this is another of these "waves" coming and going on the internet / Paleo world.... waves that simplify the truth and generalizes.. leaves things out....
    I have learned from my own N=1 if they are not deeply rooted in Nature I will pass
    I rather ride the waves of the season where I live... it resonates with me . and life do not get boring and food will change naturally too.. and it just feels good
  3. nature has a pretty good track record i must say.
    i am interested in the ways in which people can stay well in what is now i totally unnatural world.
    its a romantic notion that everyone can just stop work and hang out in the forest, and i wish it were that way, but alas, it is not.
  4. JanSz

    JanSz Gold

    You are so practical.

    I could use some detailed practical advice.

  5. yewwei.tan

    yewwei.tan Gold

    Some people like to say that DHA supplements are worse than actual fish when it comes to the effects of DHA. If you read my DHA article, I cite some studies showing very similar ability to

    Light has nothing to do with this -- why did the Saturated Fat + Sugar rats gain almost no weight? Whereas the DHA+Sugar or Corn oil+Sugar rats gain so much? If light were a concern, then there's even worse reason to eat DHA -- ie: DHA makes you more vulnerable to artificial light damage.

    Note that Ray Peat is of the idea that DHA increases the susceptibility of the eye to damage. I think this idea only applies to rats. In rhesus monkeys (and likely humans) having the right amount of DHA is critical to protecting the eye -- http://tanyewwei.com/blog/dha/#retinal-dha:be30353b6977b7107e48806b5457b119

    This still doesn't mean that a lot of DHA is needed. Retinal DHA flux is completely unknown, but since there is likely less than 50mg of DHA in an entire single retina (see my article), the total DHA flux cannot be very high.

    Even in rats, which we've already established as being more prone to retinal DHA damage, DHA turnover in rats is 19 days under a 10% linseed diet, and 54 days under a 10% coconut oil diet. This is a low fat diet. Bodyweight did not change, and the experiments were performed on weanling rates (which presumably needed more DHA).. 'Recycling of docosahexaenoic acid in rat retinas during n-3 fatty acid deficiency.' (Stinton et. al., 2009) -- http://www.jlr.org/content/32/12/20...62f52bed69139d8c4b5cb004&keytype2=tf_ipsecsha

    Let's assume some extreme example, whereby DHA half-life in the retina happens in 14 days in humans. This is most certainly too aggressive a figure, but let's stick with it. That would imply a total of 45mg of DHA turned over by both retinas in 14 days. That's 3.22mg of DHA a day :ninja:. Add that to the known brain DHA turnover of at most 5.5mg a day, and let's just round that up to 10mg of DHA a day for both the brain and retina. Again, this is an overly aggressive estimate, but it still leads to 10mg of DHA a day for the brain and retina.

    I am not an advocate of total DHA avoidance, but at 70mg of DHA a week, I can get enough DHA eating seafood once a week. Even 2 of the free-range eggs I can get here already give me >100mg DHA. ie: brain and retinal DHA requirements for a week achieved by 2 free range egg yolks.

    I will then credit someone who is banned on this forum, but still active elsewhere on the Internet, with this study, '“Fishing” for the origins of the “Eskimos and heart disease” story. Facts or wishful thinking? A review' (Fodor et. al., 2013) -- http://ottawa.ctvnews.ca/polopoly_fs/1.1814937!/httpFile/file.pdf

    Eskimos who eat a lot of oily fish aren't exactly the healthiest population, and it's probably the excess oily fish that's the problem.

    This person then notes (quote):

    Keep in mind, the above is in regards to dietary DHA+EPA, not supplements. Furthermore, it is in a culture that is living the "Ancient Pathway" as Jack Kruse would argue - cold, dark, and boring... with a bunch of DHA

    One could make other simple observations as well - there are and were groups in Mongolia, Russia, Czech,Polish mountains, etc. that were exposed to similar conditions (sometimes the same conditions + altitude) yet their main sources of fat were dairy, animal flesh, animal blood, in addition to fermented and preserved veggies, beet kvass, etc. They typically aren't discussed in having shortened lifespans and increased stroke incidences. Or, even, the REAL Sherpa diet, which was not necessarily fat based, and definitely not at all seafood based.​

    This assessment is in line with the mechanical observations of DHA's effects that I've outlined a fair bit now.

    Excess DHA is not good. Excess PUFAs of any form is not good. Avoid getting an excess of either.

    And @JanSz , that's about as practical as we're going to get. @Josh (Paleo Osteo) is a doctor, bound by the usual constraints regarding practicing medicine on the Internet. I am a software developer, who analyses research logically for flaws. "Don't do X" is a already useful information to avoid harmful circumstances. If one wants positive advice ("Do A, B, and C"), then one needs to see someone who is able to determine the nuance of the situation, and diagnose specific treatments for specific problems. Until then, avoidance of harm is the only solution.​

    And yes, agreed with PaleoOsteo, that I would like to live a non-stressful life. He of all people knows of my ideal plan of buying land on the Tablelands, digging my own underground house, growing my own food, etc .... If I had the resources, I'd be doing different things that I would be doing now.

    But for now, I live in a rented house next to the ocean, do whatever I can to minimise blue light and nn-EMF stress, and then work on attaining the resources (using the internet) to fulfil what I need to get done in the future. This is already a privileged position with minimal constraints, and almost every other person on this planet is struggling through much worse than I am. In that regard, I am sympathetic to that struggle, and see the need to provide a working plan to get from point A to where people eventually want to be :ninja:.

    Torrid, nicld and seanb4 like this.
  6. nicld

    nicld Gold

    Just tossing this thought out there. How much does ethnicity plays a part? Yew's ethnicity is one in which higher carbs were a norm (rice). For my n=1, I cannot handle rice at all, anytime. My sister (Korean) and niece (Korean/Hmong) who are Asian can eat rice with no problems and my niece even dislikes potatoes of almost any kind. It was not something that her ethnicity ever really ate.
  7. yewwei.tan

    yewwei.tan Gold

    Maybe and maybe not. One's ancestry may give a clue as to what is tolerated, but there are no guarantees. I know Northern Chinese people who can't tolerate rice well (by "North" I mean Beijing and further. I had a friend from Ha-e-bin / Harbin who didn't tolerate much rice at all). Similarly, a lot of Asians don't do dairy very well, but yet some are completely fine. Some people do corn fine, seemingly unrelated to ancestry.

    ie: I do not care so much for my ancestry as much as I do figuring out what I can tolerate myself. Doesn't matter if my ancestors ate or did not eat a food, if it's harmful for me today, I'm not eating it.

    Shijin13 and nicld like this.
  8. seanb4

    seanb4 New Member

    @yewwei.tan Just read your article on dha and now trying to sum up every ones positions simply, correct me if I'm wrong.

    You believe that DHA turnover is small and any excess consumed is likely going to be oxidsed / broken down into hamful products (reduce NfkB, slow down Complex 1, etc). You also believe keeping the systems that make / deal with / transport DHA are more important than intake.

    Kruse hasn't really addressed this but seems to believe the environment is significantly differen't / worse than these studies indicate and would thus vastly increase turnover. He also seems to believe that the excess DHA would be broken down in to beneficial materials...

    This leaves me to ask @Jack Kruse.
    1. Do you agree with yews generous figures on DHA turnover? Do you think they should be higher?
    2. If the turnover really is massively increased and so intake needs to be, won't that put a lot of strain on the systems that deal with DHA? If you are in an oxidising environment and are sick, can you be sure the DHA won't break down in to harmful products?
  9. yewwei.tan

    yewwei.tan Gold

    No, the causative relation is not correct. What I'm saying is that DHA turnover in critical organs like the brain MUST be regulated very tightly. The observed side effect of this is the low absolute mass of DHA turnover on a daily basis.

    Similarly, "excess DHA" by definition is going to be dependent on how well the body is able to regulate DHA. I describe some of the critical known pathways that DHA is controlled in the body. This is critical, because it is the free, unregulated DHA that is harmful.

    If DHA is stored in adipose tissue and not touched, it's probably going to be relatively benign. If DHA is leeching out of the brain because the regulatory mechanisms are faulty (eg: Alzheimer's disease), this is a very bad thing.

    But note the arrow of causality here -- Regulatory mechanisms screwed => therefore DHA becomes unregulated and harmful.

    I then make the next logical conclusion, that fixing regulatory mechanisms cannot be done by adding more DHA. Ergo, more DHA isn't going to fix a bad liver that is unable to esterify the appropriate amount of DHA, and more DHA isn't going to help fix the MFSD2A transporters into the brain, and more DHA isn't going to fix shitty mitochondria blocked up at Complex 1.

    In fact, more DHA can hurt these processes by preventing energy generation at the mitochondrial level and/or screw with immune cell function (elaborated on in the article).

    I repeat, DHA dys-regulation is a SYMPTOM of some other underlying pathology, and adding more DHA isn't going to solve that underlying problem.

    A bad environment may make regulating DHA even harder. This may have the observation of increased DHA turnover, but that is just a coincidental side effect, not the root cause of the problem.

  10. JanSz

    JanSz Gold

    I do not want excess,
    I do not want deficiency,
    in anything.

    The problem is in defining
    right amount band

    Defining desirable consumed amount. (less critical, can be figured iteratively)
    Defining desirable test. (Blood test)
    Defining desirable test results.

    DHA and other PUFA's are in cell membranes and triglycerides.
    There may be some other places.

    Lacking better ways of testing I test for:
    triglycerides (they are good per blood test, within desirable limits)
    fatty acids, (they are usually always within desirable limit per lab requirements)
    except for DHA, all other fatty acids are below their respective middle lab range.
    Another words:
    I have overall low fatty acids
    with my current rather high fat diet
    If I would eat less fat
    I expect to end up with even lower Fatty acids.

    I would love to see the goals of low PUFA diet.
    To be useful, those goals would have to be described in a way that I could test using blood.
    Going by my test results I already think of myself as if I have low PUFA (on high or highish fat diet)
  11. yewwei.tan

    yewwei.tan Gold

    @JanSz I have suggested reasonable levels for DHA intake in my article. I claimed that the highest bands of need (pregnant woman and growing children) top out at around 150mg of DHA a day. 200mg DHA a day may be warranted in situations of true excess.

    I claimed that anyone else can do with much less than that. On the order of 50mg DHA a day would be more than enough. Higher quantities are not needed. If you want to prevent excess, then this is the threshold that is to be used. Test and see what works for you best. I do not make positive recommendations for specific amounts.

    I have already said that I think that total serum PUFAs of 20% or higher are not optimal.

    I have also already said that the real metric to be gained from decreasing PUFAs is higher metabolism. All the benefits come from better mitochondrial function and energy generation capacity. Objective measures of food intake (the ability to process more food) to heat production (especially in response to cold stress) are useful. Low PUFA concentrations are coupled to increased caloric needs and more mitochondrial uncoupling.

    Another objective measure would be to get a capnometer and measure for increases in CO2 levels, which is again another metabolic marker of good fuel use. Improvements over time that correlate with subjective feelings of wellness are much more important than hard blood tests.

    All the usual serum testing best practices apply, especially to levels of steroid hormones. Hormones like testosterone, progesterone, and all the estrogens should be aimed to be normalised to healthy levels. (Note that low PUFA doesn't mean low fat. I am doing low fat, but saturated fat is fine).

    There is no way to test for DHA levels directly. Serum RBC levels are one vague measure, but amounts stored in adipose tissue, amounts actually transported as LysoPC to the brain, amounts that actually get incorporated into the brain, amounts that are stored in membranes, etc, etc .... all cannot be measured with current technology.

    I am not the person to ask regarding lab tests. Maybe PaleoOsteo knows more since he sees a lot more lab panels than I do.

    seanb4 and Brother John like this.
  12. Not sure why there is so much confusion - if that is even the correct term - in regards to Yew's position, his article, and that of Jack. Read Yew's practical applications portion of the blog, and that explains things rather well. Then go back to read Jack's BG series. There are a few take-aways that I think are prudent to become aware of:

    1. Yew cited many of the studies that Jack cites in the BG series, yet, he actually looked at the data, the graphs, the methods used to conduct the studies, etc. What Yew writes in his article is not just what "Yew says", but is there in the same studies that Jack cites; Jack just made EXTREME over-exaggerations of all the data. For instance, he cited the study "Docosahexaenoic Acid (DHA): An Ancient Nutrient for the Modern Human Brain" by Bradburry et al, which specifically states, "the global rate of DHA incorporation in the human brain was the equivalent of the consumption of 3.8 ± 1.7 mg/day DHA. Further, they used published estimates of the total amount of DHA in the human brain (5 g) and the daily incorporation rate of 0.076% per day, to determine that the half-life of brain DHA was approximately 2.5 years in humans."

    Yet, Jack doesn't prescribe to this, for some reason, despite all the data showing this is what occurs. The amount of DHA in the human brain is literally 5 grams, yet Jack and others are speaking about eating that amount daily... This is just one example of the extremely faulty logic used by Jack and some others, and the inability to accurately dissect massive amounts of data and form quality conclusions.

    2. Yew's ideas are best explained as he did above, and in his article, but I think an okay simplification would be "PUFAs are bad news in most everyone in most every context; some PUFAs, such as oxidized linoleic acid, appear to be more harmful than others. Yet, all PUFAs are, or at the minimum can be extremely harmful, this includes excess DHA from seafood, which can be estimated to be <200 mg day."

    3. Jack has consistently said complete B.S. such as "the worst seafood is better than the best grass-fed meat." Really? Well, then, Jack, explain this: http://ottawa.ctvnews.ca/polopoly_fs/1.1814937!/httpFile/file.pdf “Fishing” for the origins of the “Eskimos and heart disease” story. Facts or wishful thinking? A review

    "The totality of reviewed evidence leads us to the conclusion that Eskimos have a similar prevalence of CAD as non-Eskimo populations, 20-23; 31-32;34-35 they have excessive mortality due MANUSCRIPT ACCEPTED ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT FODOR 9 to cerebrovascular strokes,37-38 their overall mortality is twice as high as that of non-Eskimo populations38and their life expectancy is approximately 10 years shorter than the Danish population.39-40 We also reviewed studies that have assessed the prevalence of CAD or other CVD in the Eskimo/Inuit populations in areas such as the Northwest Territories and Nunavik, in Canada or in Alaska, USA. The results of these investigations confirm that the prevalence of CAD in Inuits is as high or higher compared to non-Eskimo populations.22-23;31-32;34-35In 2003, a thorough analysis of the incidence and available mortality statistics among Inuit populations in Greenland, Canada and Alaska by Bjerregaard et al, also concluded that the totality of evidence from various Northern areas makes a strong argument for high presence of CVD in Eskimos (Appendix A in Supplementary Materials).21 Considering the dismal health status of Eskimos, it is remarkable that instead of labeling their diet as dangerous to health, a hypothesis has been construed that dietary intake of marine fats prevents CAD and reduces atherosclerotic burden. Bang and Dyerberg’s seminal studies from the 1970s are routinely invoked as “proof” of low prevalence of CAD in Greenland Eskimos ignoring the fact that these two Danish investigators did not study the prevalence of CAD.9-12 Instead, their research focused on the dietary habits of Eskimos and offered only speculation that the high intake of marine fats exerted a protective effect on coronary arteries.9-12 As mentioned earlier, Bang and Dyerberg’s acceptance of the low incidence of myocardial infarction (MI) relied on the reports of the CMO in Greenland for 1963-1967 and 1973-1976.27, 41These reports are based on death certificates and hospital admissions. Concerns over the validity and accuracy of death certificates and mortality statistics in Greenland have been raised MANUSCRIPT ACCEPTED ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT FODOR 10 in a number of reports.38,42-43According to the Deputy CMO in Greenland, Flemming Mikkelsen (1974), 4430% of the total population lived in outposts and small settlements where no medical officer was stationed. If a person died in one of these areas, the certificate would be completed by the nearest medical officer, based on information provided by a medical auxiliary or some other “competent” person. Thus, 20% of death certificates were completed without a doctor having examined the patient or the body. Kroman and Green (1980) 45, also pointed out that there was a specific concern with mortality data and hospital admission statistics in Greenland, as doctors had limited diagnostic facilities and the study population was widely scattered with few possibilities of communication during certain seasons. Therefore, the reported data are likely an underestimation of the true magnitude of the disease in this area. In addition to the CMO reports, Bang and Dyerberg also refer to a report by Bent Harvald (1974). 46 In his contribution, Harvald stated: “MI does not occur in the Eskimo population. On the other hand, ECG records in those older than 50 years of age show numerous abnormalities compatible with history of MI at least as frequent as in many Western populations. The same is true for frequent deaths caused by heart failure as a consequence of arteriosclerotic degenerative heart disease. It is therefore a mystery that there are no MIs” (translated from Danish by JGF). We suggest that the likely explanation for this “mystery” lies in the fact that patients suffering MI in remote Greenland settlements have limited possibilities for reaching health centres in the acute phase of the disease where proper diagnostic work-up is possible. In the US as well as in Europe, at least one fourth of MIs remain unrecognized .47Regarding hospital admissions, according to O’Donnell et al (1996), 48 in the United States during the 1990s, only 40% of those who suffered from a MI reached a hospital alive. In 20% of MI cases, MANUSCRIPT ACCEPTED ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT FODOR 11 the first manifestation was sudden death. In Europe, 25% of acute heart attack cases die within two hours.49 To assume that the proportion of those who suffer from an MI in remote arctic areas would have a better chance to reach a hospital alive is unlikely. This is confirmed by Peter Bjerregaard (1986)43who reported that “in Greenland, only one in seven deaths occurs in a hospital with specialized departments and paraclinical facilities allowing thorough investigation of cases”.The theory concerning the beneficial effects of marine fats on Greenland CAD should have been put to rest after Bjerregaard’s et al analysis of the Greenland mortality (2003).21Although the notion that Eskimos are protected against CAD cannot be supported by scientific evidence, a large number of recent publications reporting on the effects of fish oil consumption still perpetuate this belief. Recently, two meta-analyses5, 53 and a well-conducted randomized controlled trial7 reported ambiguous or negative results regarding the cardioprotective benefits of omega-3 fatty acids. At the same time, nutritional guidelines in Canada, US and Europe encourage the dietary intake of fish and omega-3 as part of a preventive approach toward CAD and overall heart-health. The American Heart Association recommends eating fish (particularly fatty fish) at least two times (two servings) a week.54Similarly, the ESC-ESH 2013 Guidelines advise patients with hypertension to eat fish at least twice a week.55Although the evidence for these recommendations is unclear, it is estimated that in the US approximately 11 million adults and close to half a million children consume fish oil capsules.56To date, more than 5000 papers have been published studying the alleged beneficial properties of omega-3 fatty acids not to mention the billion dollar industry producing and selling fish oil capsules based on a hypothesis that was questionable from the beginning."

    I also want to get one thing straight - the analysis of 60+ studies posted above was in regards to DIETARY SEAFOOD!
    Torrid, seanb4 and Brother John like this.
  13. “Man prefers to believe what he prefers to be true.” Francis Bacon
    Brother John likes this.
  14. lilreddgirl

    lilreddgirl New Member

    Don't get mad at me because I really really appreciate Yew's willingness to share here what he's learned. I also appreciate Jack's. I'm just interested in learning, (and especially healing) and so...

    RE the Eskimo studies: It seems the Eskimo studies that showed the higher or equal mortality are RECENT studies. I am gonna say that by these times 90's on, the Eskimo diet would now include (I would venture a significant or even dominant amount of) imported foods that is sold in the outposts... including and especially beans, wheat, processed PUFA and carb foods... the people living there may possibly even have an even harder time handling these introduced foods health wise than other populations due to their absence in their ancestral cultural diet (and the mismatch to environment may be another argument) leading to higher mortality shown in recent studies.

    The earlier studies that declare a lower mortality unfortunately can indeed be considered unreliable due to the factors cited in the study - lack of analysis of cause of death, etc.

    Their overall mortality and life expectancy I would say can definitely be explained by factors such as the environment and lifestyle in that environment - wild Arctic conditions - and in no way due exclusively to diet.

    Therfore to me this study remains inconclusive, since recent studies are flawed due to altered diet and older studies lack evidence.
    Last edited: Jan 18, 2016
    seanb4 likes this.
  15. JanSz

    JanSz Gold


    Your posts and articles are highly informative, thank you.
    When posting my latest, somewhat improved fatty acid analysis (improved per my way of comparing to laboratory mid ranges), I neglected to mention that I have (practically) stopped eating seafood. May be a can/2weeks if that, just to use up my current supply. That EPA was killing me, now it looks better.
    But instead I eat one pill 200mg-DHA(vegetarian) and 250mg-AA.
    Eventually I will adjust doses as need, and if I do not get better criteria I will use my current.

    I see capnometer on amazon.com, cost $1295. I will wait with that.
    How one would use that?

    I am thinking now of a cardiac stress test, but that is to check heart.
    Walk over treadmill, checking EKG.
    What kind of test should I ask my doc for, to get tested using capnometer?
    Newer done that.

    Wonder how much you are interested in studying herat beat frequency?
    from EKG charts,
    2008 heartbeat-64--->length of diastole(relaxation)-2008=30
    2010 heartbeet-84--->length of diastole(relaxation)-2010=19
    2016 heartbeat-79


    figured that I am missing on magnesium
    all kind of blood tests indicate that I have good magnesium
    started adding magnesium, pills, enema with Epsom salts, magnesium oil on skin
    latter was trying the types of magnesium that @Jack Kruse recommends
    nothing works
    my heart is not relaxing for long enough, heartbeat is to fast
    any ideas??

    before 2008 pulse of 64 or less was common
    actually i got nice surprise few days ago seeing 79.

    Do not have the lattes ECG ready for posting, this one is from 2008.

    Last edited: Jan 18, 2016
  16. lilreddgirl

    lilreddgirl New Member

    @JanSz and others

    RE: possible benefits of CO2 concentration and lowering heartbeat pulse rates

    Have you tried or heard of the Buteyko method of breathing? Here is an article mentioning it affecting pulse rate: http://www.independent.co.uk/life-s...thing-technique-a-cure-for-asthma-411996.html

    vangirl on this thread https://forum.jackkruse.com/index.p...ptile-sun-lamps-safe.17233/page-2#post-186512

    has success with (in her case raising) blood pressure with this method, and I have been experimenting with it and have read quite a lot of success stories


    also JanSz you have not posted the 2016 diastole length - do you know its still not enough and hasn't improved the way the pulse has?

    What diastole length would you like to see on your labs (I do not know much about this) ?
  17. Most of the studies were done on indigenous individuals. There were rigorous methods used to study their diets. They weren't eating a SAD diet, these groups were eating traditional Inuit diets. One of the most glaring observations was the increase in most forms of mortality, and a reduction in lifespan, in the seafood eating cultures. If you want, read the entire review, then take the title of specific studies cited within the review search the title + "full text" on google or googl scholar, or search the title of the study and plug it in on libgen; you'll see that what is overwhelmingly shown is the abundance of oily fish = increased mortality and decreased lifespan, not super human performance, alternate states of consciousness, hyper-creativity and intelligence, etc.

    The only thing I can see brought up is Jack saying something like, "bro, there is a lack of UV in their environment." K. lol. There's a lack of UV in other cultures in cold environments who eat lots of saturated fat and some MUFA and they have drastically less health problems.
    seanb4, Shijin13 and lilreddgirl like this.
  18. lilreddgirl

    lilreddgirl New Member

    Thank you for the indication on how to search...

    Grrr! I'm editing a lot because I really don't see that in these studies!

    This one comes somewhat close showing that the group had a high O3 intake:


    (It's just the abstract unfortunately not the full text ... is that why I'm not seeing what you see?)

    but from this it seems it just measured for high O3 intake, not if there was also Other non-traditional foods in the diet. The study did find that the sick people and healthy ones had about the same O3 intake...

    it just seems to suggest that high O3 in itself is not necessarily protective.

    which doesn't suggest that O3 would be harmful... and my question still stands that they may also have OTHER intakes that now affect their health negatively

    (I also read another study where it said a large percentage of the population smoked).

    Can you please point out the studies that show a (strictly) traditional diet as well as ill health?
    Last edited: Jan 19, 2016
  19. Well, a large portion of the Kitavans, Tokelauns, Masai, and others, smoked, and had no health problems. You could attempt to argue a few things based off of that:
    1. Smoking real, non-industrial, non-adulterated tobacco is not bad for you (and there are people that make the case that this is in fact true, some people whom Jack has cited before, probably not knowing they promote tobacco)
    2. There is some aspect of the diet that completely, or largely, protects one from the perils of tobacco smoke, almost a free pass.

    If 2 is true, there are many factors that come into play in regards to the diet, but one of the most glaring aspects in my opinion is the fact that the Kitavans ate a low PUFA diet with lots of tropical fats; Tokelaun's did the same, yet, consumed even more coconut fats than the Kitavan's; Masai consumed an extremely low PUFA, low LC-PUFA (including seafood/DHA) diet, with lots of saturated fat and fermented dairy products. Inuit are the only outlier here in a seafood based, PUFA laden diet.

    Anyhow, I'm not sure how much more I can say about the analysis. It's rather straightforward. There are 60+ cites. I guess I'll just choose some random studies I've seen, both in that review and some not, though perhaps not all living up to your preferences. One is titled n-3 stroke, and I'm uploading it as a pdf.

    Dietary Patterns are Linked to Cardiovascular Risk Factors but Not to Inflammatory Markers in Alaska Eskimos

    I could be looking at the one above incorrectly, but the authors state "Participants in the higher quintiles of the traditional diet had lower serum TG concentrations (P < 0.001) and tended to have higher serum HDL-C concentrations (P = 0.13) (Table 4). Followers of the Western diet had higher homocysteine concentrations and systolic blood pressure (Table 4). Followers of the purchased healthy diet had lower mean homocysteine and fibrinogen and tended to have lower LDL-C (P = 0.09). The beverages and sweets diet was significantly associated with higher LDL-C but lower CRP concentrations. All the trends in inflammatory markers involved differences that were not clinically meaningful." And then state, "Historically, Eskimo diets depended on fish and sea mammals, wild game, berries, roots, and wild greens. The traditional diet appears to reflect this eating style, with large amounts of sea mammals and wild game. The lower carbohydrate and sucrose intake in increasing quintiles of this diet reflects the low intake of breads and sweets, and the higher fiber density in increasing quintiles may reflect intake of greens and wild berries. This dietary pattern appears to reflect the traditional lifestyle and is encouraged by health professionals serving Alaska Eskimos. As can be expected, individuals following this pattern were older but also exhibited a trend toward more physical activity."

    The data tables show:
    Factor 1, Traditional foods
        Q18.09 (6.57–10.00)9.0 (8.6–9.4)7.3 (6.9–7.6)3.0 (2.9–3.1)120 (118–122)2.87 (2.74–3.00)1.50 (1.45–1.58)1.37 (1.28–1.46)
        Q38.09 (6.57-10.00)9.4 (9.0–9.8)7.5 (7.1–7.9)3.0 (2.9–3.2)119 (117–121)3.03 (2.90–3.16)1.55 (1.50–1.63)1.25 (1.17–1.34)
        Q57.62 (6.10–9.52)9.6 (9.2–10.0)6.8 (6.4–7.2)3.0 (2.9–3.2)118 (116–120)2.98 (2.85–3.11)1.60 (1.53–1.661.27 (1.19–1.36)
    vs (for "healthy foods" group):
    Factor 3, Purchased healthy foods
        Q17.71 (6.19–9.52)9.8 (9.4–10.3)7.6 (7.2–8.0)3.1 (2.9–3.3)119 (117–121)2.98 (2.82–3.11)1.48 (1.42–1.55)1.30 (1.21–1.39)
        Q37.43 (6.10–9.24)9.4 (9.0–9.8)7.4 (7.0–7.8)3.0 (2.8–3.2)118 (116–120)3.00 (2.87–3.11)1.58 (1.50–1.63)1.23 (1.15–1.32)
        Q59.43 (7.52–11.71)9.2 (8.4–9.6)6.9 (6.5–7.3)3.0 (2.8–3.2)118 (117–120)2.87 (2.75–3.00)1.53 (1.48–1.61)1.27 (1.19–1.36)

    The lab markers that those numbers correspond to keep getting deleted from the post, but can be found here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2777478/table/tbl4/

    Now, there are some things to take into consideration. Statistical analyses such as the above aren't portraying what can be happening to the "outliers". "Adjusted means represent predicted values of the dependent variables across quintiles of the dietary patterns. P-values for trends across quintiles were separately computed by treating the quintile variables as linear terms in the multivariate models (alpha = 0.05)."

    Regardless, the 'positive' effects of the traditional diet don't seem all that great, considering the differences between the "healthy foods" group is clinicall insignificant to say the least, and additionally, CRP was higher in the traditional diet group. This is further interesting considering the lack of alcohol and what not in the traditional food group.

    Attached Files:

    seanb4 likes this.
  20. I'll post other studies a little later, but in the review, look for the studies that have the words "native" or "indigenous" in regards to the Inuit and their diet, in particular. Regardless, if you read the full-text of most of those studies, they do similar things to the studies posted above, such as breaking the groups up into different diets, one typically being "traditional", or, another way, where they take dietary habits from "traditional peoples".

Share This Page