A Diet for All Reasons

[Bowwowmeow]

From Dr Michael Klaper

<embed id="VideoPlayback" src="http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?docid=-3881515735687284929&hl=en&fs=true" style="width: 400px; height: 326px;" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash">

[Gliondrach]

Very good, generally. I had to refresh the page after about 10 minutes because it stopped playing. But he didn't mention vitamin B12 again after saying it could be found in plants. And he says that high protein diets can lead to calcium loss from bones. The evidence from studies is mixed. Some say yes and some say no. One found no extra risk of hip fractures but increased risk of forearm fractures in those who consume the most protein. Some studies were in post-menopausal women and some in pre-menopausal women. Some say there's no risk as long as there is an adequate source of calcium in the diet. Another one acknowledged the risk of calcium loss in high protein diets but found that supplementing with potassium bicarbonate - to counter the effects of the acid from protein metabolism - may increase calcium absorption. Yet another study, giving people placebo or potassium bicarbonate, sodium bicarbonate, or potassium chloride found that the bicarbonates but not the potassium on its own, reduced calcium loss. Both these later studies were done in people aged over 50. The last one wasn't looking at protein effects.

I suspect that some studies could be sponsored by the meat and dairy industry - to show meat and dairy as healthy. A bit like the way tobacco studies were financed by the tobacco industry. And they consistently found that cigarettes didn't cause lung cancer.

[Fauxmage]

I think bone loss, calcium excretion through urine, calcium intake, etc. are still not very well understood. It does make intuitive sense to me that if the body's bloodstream is under immediate threat from too much acid, minerals must be utilized in order to control the blood's pH, or death will be imminent. Calcium will of course be one of those minerals.

Most of the known nutrients we are aware of do work in concert with one another in complex ways we still do know enough about, and what we know now doesn't even include all the nutrients that haven't been discovered yet, and their relationships with the nutrients we do know about.

Some people have a casual approach to B12, and others don't. What doesn't make any sense to me is that most those people who develop B12 anemia have an absorption problem, rather than a dietary deficiency problem, and they need injections, because their bodies lack intrinsic factor. I've never seen a study that shows that loss of intrinsic factor is caused by dietary deficiency of B12, and that once intrinsic factor is lost, dietary B12 supplementation is useless.

Again intuitively, I would guess that relying on artificial sources of B12 might be what would cause the body to lose its ability to produce its own B12, which it is supposed to be able to do, given the presence of the necessary gut bacteria.

But I would never suggest to someone to ignore the potential need for B12 supplementation.

Along the same lines, I wonder at the wisdom of people taking the very expensive algal DHA supplements. The body is equipped to produce its own DHA from ALA, given the proper ration of Omega 3 to Omega 6 fatty acids, and I would guess that if pre-formed DHA is relied upon, the body will slowly lose the ability to do this conversion.

It's very much like the advice given to avoid dependence upon laxatives. Relying upon substances to do the work of the bowels causes the bowels to lose their ability to do their work unassisted.

[Gliondrach]

I think my diet leans a bit too much to the omega-6 side and has done for decades. But I am healthy. I must admit, though, that I am tempted to buy some of the algal DHA/EPA. Our bodies don't always convert to them well, especially not when there's a lot of omega-6 in relation to omega-3.

I think I saw that chap on the video today when I was searching for something else. If it is the same person, he says we make B12 in our mouths. I find that hard to believe.

If we have the ability to have B12 syntesised in our bodies - IF - I am probably well placed because I've never had anti-biotics. And I filter my water, so there'll be little chlorine in it. But I'lll keep taking the supplement.

[Fauxmage]

I think my diet leans a bit too much to the omega-6 side and has done for decades. But I am healthy. I must admit, though, that I am tempted to buy some of the algal DHA/EPA. Our bodies don't always convert to them well, especially not when there's a lot of omega-6 in relation to omega-3.

I think I saw that chap on the video today when I was searching for something else. If it is the same person, he says we make B12 in our mouths. I find that hard to believe.

If we have the ability to have B12 syntesised in our bodies - IF - I am probably well placed because I've never had anti-biotics. And I filter my water, so there'll be little chlorine in it. But I'lll keep taking the supplement.
Same here, except I've never heard of making B12 in the mouth, and I am not tempted to take algal supplements. :shakespeare:

[Gliondrach]

I've read of a study which says that the ratio of omega-6 to omega-3 in the diet is not as important as the total amount of omega-3. If you get enough omega-3, normally in the form of ALA, you will convert enough of it to EPA and DHA.

I've been wondering about my DHA status. I haven't had fish for 35 years, my diet has a lot of omega-6 and yet I am healthy. Vegans have low levels of DHA in their blood but it's obvious that we have enough in the tissues where it really counts - otherwise we wouldn't be healthy. Perhaps our bodies can adapt to a low intake of omega-3. Perhaps healthy humans don't need as much as the recommended amounts. Perhaps the low amounts of EPA and DHA seen in people with various diseases are not the cause of the disease but are caused by the disease.

But I'm still thinking about a supplement. If not the algal capsules, perhaps spirulina which is supposed to contain both EPA and DHA. Spirulina has been found to lower triglycerides total cholesterol, lower LDL cholesterol and raise HDL cholesterol in people with type-2 diabetes. And to lower their blood glucose levels. That study gave people 2 grams a day for 2 months. Another study found the same things in non-diabetics and also that it lowered blood pressure. They used 4.5 grams a day for 6 weeks 1.5 grams, 3 times a day. These particular tablets consisted of protein 57.35%, lipids 5.44 % (ether extract), ash 11.41 %, fibre 0.41 % and carbohydrates 25.33% on dry base analyses. It didn't say what the lipids were - if there was any DHA or EPA. The spirulina they used was spirulina maxima, which is grown in Mexico. I don't know what type was used in the first study. Spirulina platensis is grown in the US.

Journal of Medicinal Food. 2001 Winter;4(4):193-199.
Role of Spirulina in the Control of Glycemia and Lipidemia in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus.

Lipids in Health and Disease. 2007 Nov 26;6:33.
Antihyperlipemic and antihypertensive effects of Spirulina maxima in an open sample of Mexican population: a preliminary report.

[Bowwowmeow]

The worst thing about any health study is that they are all done based on the condition of the average "healthy" human being, who is of course a meat eater who most likely consumes all sorts of processed modern foods. I don't see how anyone can arrive at the optimal conditions for real health in humans when examples barely exist. Who is to say that any of the requirements people are establishing right now aren't actually necessary to counteract all the damage done by the typical diet, rather than being necessary constituents in the diet of a person who eats as his body was originally adapted to eat?

I have read that the calcium intakes in less industrialized nations are less than half that recommended by American doctors, and yet osteoporosis is practically unknown in these countries. Makes you wonder if all that calcium we are "supposed" to be eating isn't as necessary for bone health as it is for preventing our highly acidic meat and dairy based diets from dissolving our bones.

Which makes you start to wonder what else is really necessary for the maintenance of true health, as opposed to just mitigating the damage done by a bad omnivorous diet, and that if meat and dairy were not ingested on a regular basis in the first place, our RDAs might be drastically different.

[Gliondrach]

As it says below, omnivores get preformed DHA in their diets so they have more in their blood and tissues. And vegans have stable levels in their blood.


In addition, vegans who consume ALA but not EPA and DHA in their diets have low but stable concentrations of DHA in plasma.

Amercian Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 2006 Jun;83(6 Suppl):1467S-1476S.
Distribution, interconversion, and dose response of n-3 fatty acids in humans.


Small amounts of preformed DHA (as low as 200mg) result in a large increase in the proportion of DHA in blood lipids in vegetarians and vegans. There is no evidence of adverse effects on health or cognitive function with lower DHA intake in vegetarians. CONCLUSIONS: Preformed DHA in the diet of omnivores explains the relatively higher proportion of this fatty acid in blood and tissue lipids compared with vegetarians. The pathophysiological significance of this difference remains to be determined.

Prostaglandins Leukotrienes and Essential Fatty Acids. 2009 Aug-Sep;81(2-3):137-41. Epub 2009 Jun 4.
DHA status of vegetarians.

[Bowwowmeow]

The pathophysiological significance of this difference remains to be determined.Haha, remains to be determined indeed! I would wager that if there are higher levels in the blood of meat eaters, this would be something to be avoided, based on how much more likely meat eaters are to succumb to one of the top three killers of humans in industrialized nations. A person can certainly ingest too much of a good thing to the detriment of their health, especially the fat based nutrients.

Even too much water will kill you.