Talking about Diet

[Jan18]

Trigs ( 148) divided by HDL (61) is a 2.4:1 (2.4 trigs to 1 HDL) ratio. Many of us are shooting for a 1:1 ratio. In your case, that would be trigs of 61 and HDL of 61. I agree with Tincup that trigs of 148 are running a little high for optimum. Cutting back on starchy carbs will probably help. Possible benefits? Reduced insulin resistance and vascular protection.

Those were from last winter. I don't do starchy carbs, nor refined carbs, anymore. Nor do I eat anything with sugar and even cut out berries when I was being so detailed with Gundry's keto plant paradox program. But my doctor neglected to recheck my triglycerides and I was really annoyed with that!

I'll get them retested soon. Should be much improved.

[Jan18]

I agree with Tincup and slacker that your trigs are high and that cutting back on calorically dense carbohydrates - grains, potatoes, sugar - may help you bring them down closer to your HDL level, which looks good. Other practices that I think may also move the needle are vigorous exercise, especially resistance training (calisthenics, weights), and some form of fasting such as limiting food intake to an 8 hour window each day.

Thanks for the input, MarcR.

See my reply to Slacker (those values were last winter.) I do intermittent fasting usually 16 hours and don't eat grains, sugars, potatoes or dairy now (except for 2 T. half and half in my coffee)...for the last couple of months anyway. No packaged foods and cooking at home rather than eating out. That alone should show improved levels (though I was loathe to give up eating out, as I am single and it was a big part of my social life. But I am determined and I persisted!) My doctor neglected to retest my triglyceride levels and I was really bummed, as I wanted to see how much they were affected.

I hope to retest in a month or so!

[Jan18]

There is no "standard" of what way of eating is best for E4's (& I'm a Gundry patient). Most of us do agree that controlling excess serum insulin (and thereby excess glucose) are best practices.

So if my glucose daily is between 70-90 as Bredesen recommends (and usually in the 70's) now that I've been changing my diet, Tincup, does it follow that my insulin is probably responding?

We may have been through this before and I probably need to restudy what raises insulin levels, but my question is a knee-jerk response to your last input. Just wondering if there is a simple answer, but will push to retest within the next month.

[Jan18]

FWIW I’ve recently become interested in Dr Lyon’s work as a muscle specialist. I have no expertise with which to evaluate her ideas. She says we need at least 30 gms at each of three meals just to maintain muscle (presumably 45/45 if two meals?), more if you’re building muscle, with at least 2500 mg leucine in that 30+ gm of protein to stimulate mTOR for muscle building. She cautions no snacking in between meals so mTOR returns to baseline rather than being constantly elevated. I’m trying for this.

Thanks, Circular. I'm confused about this, because I keep reading Americans get too much protein. Just what is "too much?" And I haven't eaten like "most Americans" for a long, long time so I wonder if I'm getting enough. I've read and been told by my functional medicine doctor that too much protein turns to fat. (Wouldn't too many calories of anything more than your body needs turn to fat, though?)

Barbara

[circular]

Thanks, Circular. I'm confused about this, because I keep reading Americans get too much protein. Just what is "too much?" And I haven't eaten like "most Americans" for a long, long time so I wonder if I'm getting enough. I've read and been told by my functional medicine doctor that too much protein turns to fat. (Wouldn't too many calories of anything more than your body needs turn to fat, though?)

It is confusing. I think when people make that statement about Americans eating too much protein, the reference used is the US RDA for protein requirements. Dr. Lyon (and others) say that the RDA for protein was devised after (during?) WWII and based on pig studies using a method that is now scientifically outdated and inadequate. There are newer, better ways of determining protein requirements. I put some links about this in the protein thread I started. Of course even if many protein-loving people are eating enough protein, they may not be eating healthy types (cooking methods, processing, and so on), which is a different issue.

I don't know about the too much protein turns to fat comment. I would think especially high fat protein sources could. But Dr. Jason Fong has a video where he talks about why the calories in/calories out model is also inadequate. It must be this one, but I now see his valuable videos are only free during a first free month under a new registration scheme ( ) I think if you Google it the info must be somewhere online for free. Hormones complicate the calories in/calories out picture.

Welcome to Wonderland! Good job taking on the issues, and yep, we do have to keep our worry tamed or it just becomes another risk factor.

[xactly]

I don't know about the too much protein turns to fat comment.

This is a really interesting question. The WHO recommends protein intake of 0.8 g per day per gram of bodyweight. I have been roughly using 1g per kg of bodyweight as a guideline, since I do Crossfit 5 days per week. However, Gundry recommends a much lower target, 0.37 g per kg of bodyweight, to suppress mTOR and IGF1. He cites the low protein consumption in Blue Zone populations as support for the position.

There are several scholarly articles and research studies on the metabolism of protein. This article https://academic.oup.com/jn/article/130/4/886/4686684 suggests there is no benefit from consuming more protein than you need each day, and there are a number of problems from doing so.

According to the studies referenced in the article, excess protein consumption promotes insulin secretion and obesity; increases risk for non-insulin-dependent diabetes and microalbuminuria, a predictor of renal and cardiovascular disease; and decreases plasma levels of glutamine, alanine and glycine.

For now, I'm sticking with my 1g/1kg ratio. I'm concerned that using the very low target Gundry recommends will result in loss of muscle mass, and studies cited by Rhonda Patrick say preservation of muscle mass is important for healthspan. Even though I don't eat meat, I find it extremely easy to hit my daily target. The primary sources of protein in my diet currently are eggs, nuts and seeds, beans (cooked from dry in an Instant Pot), hemp protein, goats' milk (2 cups a day to help reach my daily requirements for calcium and phosphorus) and marine collagen.

[floramaria]

Jan18,
This goes way back to an earlier post on this thread from the first page where you said that Dr Gundry now says that pressure cooking does not destroy lectins. I just read through various parts of his website and other websites regarding lectins and I couldn't find that. I am reading The Plant Paradox now and am in the first 2 weeks of Phase 2. ( I have an autoimmune disease which is why I decided to follow Dr Gundry's program) . Phase 3, sometime in my future, where I get to eat some lectin free pressure cooked beans or lentils is something I'm looking forward to.

Can you recall where you heard or read Dr Gundry state that pressure cooking doesn't destroy lectins in beans? Or could someone else who is up on the latest from Dr Gundry respond?

[circular]

I don't know about the too much protein turns to fat comment.

This is a really interesting question. ...

This article https://academic.oup.com/jn/article/130/4/886/4686684 suggests there is no benefit from consuming more protein than you need each day, and there are a number of problems from doing so.

According to the studies referenced in the article, excess protein consumption promotes insulin secretion and obesity; increases risk for non-insulin-dependent diabetes and microalbuminuria, a predictor of renal and cardiovascular disease; and decreases plasma levels of glutamine, alanine and glycine.

For now, I'm sticking with my 1g/1kg ratio. I'm concerned that using the very low target Gundry recommends will result in loss of muscle mass, and studies cited by Rhonda Patrick say preservation of muscle mass is important for healthspan. Even though I don't eat meat, I find it extremely easy to hit my daily target. The primary sources of protein in my diet currently are eggs, nuts and seeds, hemp protein, goats' milk (2 cups a day to help reach my daily requirements for calcium and phosphorus) and marine collagen.

Thanks xactly. I think protein requirements must be a very nuanced area where context is very important also. I recall Dr. Lyon saying that the fear of high protein leading to kidney problems is misguided and that the protein actually improves GFR. I have no idea what studies her ideas come from.

I think I'm very curious because my sense is that I need much more protein, so I'm interested in what the arguments for it may be. At least I know there are some, although I think this area is crazy complicated. For example we don't want insulin, glucose, mTOR and IGF too high, and protein will raise them, but less so than carbohydrates, and by fasting between meals you allow all these to go back to baseline rather than stay higher.

The flip side is that we don't want things too low either or we're not providing our whole system with adequate trophic support. In my case I've dropped carbs and raised healthy fat without raising protein. In fact I lowered it following Dr. Gundry's perspective. My lipid and metabolic markers are good but my muscles, although improving, need help. That probably reflects that my brain still needs a trophic boost too. Maybe higher dietary protein in the context of lower carbs is a sweet spot. In the context of low carb, the protein may stimulate insulin and glucose just enough but not too much??? Ditto mTOR and IGF. I'm beginning to think that following Dr Gundry's protein requirements like I was is just asking for sarcopenia-driven atrophy all over, over time.

I think Blue Zones are generally less of everything bad, so there's a more health-serving balance overall? Where I live and have lived has delivered a tsunami of toxins (okay that was just fun to say ) and poor lifestyle requirements and choices. I would love to live in a Blue Zone, but I'm afraid the Garbage Zone has taken its toll and I'm still in the repair shop. (Oh geez I better move on to something else .) I've been in catabolic states and need to keep reversing that trend to become more anabolic.

You and others may not have those issues. One of these days I'll try to track down the science supporting Dr. Lyon saying that leucine specifically is required to lay down new muscle tissue and that to get enough leucine requires a higher animal protein intake than the RDA, and that it's much more challenging to get enough leucine without animal protein but can be done with supplementation. I too want to know if this is right. Funny, recently I wanted to use goat milk to get more leucine, but I don't think I tolerated it well (consistent with the past).

Since the paper you cite is from 2000, I pulled it up in PubMed to look for 'cited by' papers.

This study protocol from Sept 2016 describes a trial to explore high protein in kidney disease. It's study proposal states:

DISCUSSION:
Diets with higher protein content and lower glycemic index may lead to weight loss because of higher satiety sensation. However, there is a concern about the association of high protein intake and kidney damage. Nevertheless, there is little evidence on the impact of high protein intake on long-term kidney function outcome. Therefore, we designed a study to test if a high protein diet with low-glycemic index will be an effective and safe nutritional intervention to prevent weight gain in kidney transplant patients.

This trial is expected to conclude in Dec, but I suppose it'll be a long while before results are published.

That said, there are other papers talking about this association between high protein and kidney disease, so. I just think it's possible there's a lot more than meets the eye. In the meantime, it would be easy to try higher protein and track these risks using simple biomarkers:

• insulin secretion (two hr post-meal insulin)
  obesity (waist hip ratio)
  non-insulin-dependent diabetes (two hr post-meal insulin fasting glucose, fasting insulin, A1c, TG/HDL)
  microalbuminuria (comprehensive metabolic panel)
  glutamine, alanine and glycine (amino acid test)

[circular]

I don't know about the too much protein turns to fat comment.

This is a really interesting question ...

xactly I continued this conversation in the 'Dr. Gabriel Lyon - Benefits of High Protein' thread I'd started so I don't swamp the OP with minutia. I added a paper I found that provides some science that I don't understand but is presumably what is behind Dr. Lyon's and others' recommendations for protein and BCAA intake higher than the RDA. It also mentions the WHO's recommendations being outdated. It seems this is an area where public service messages may be out of sync with the latest science.

[xactly]

Note: I edited this post after reading the thread on Dr. Lyon's higher protein recommendations.

xactly I continued this conversation in the 'Dr. Gabriel Lyon - Benefits of High Protein' thread I'd started so I don't swamp the OP with minutia. I added a paper I found that provides some science that I don't understand but is presumably what is behind Dr. Lyon's and others' recommendations for protein and BCAA intake higher than the RDA. It also mentions the WHO's recommendations being outdated. It seems this is an area where public service messages may be out of sync with the latest science.

circular: Thanks for the additional info. The WHO guidelines may be outdated. I just listened to a Chris Masterjohn Lite podcast on preservation of muscle mass, and he recommends 1g per pound of target bodyweight, which would more than double my 1g/1kg daily target. It sounds like that is in line with what Dr. Lyon is recommending, so I need to take a closer look.

I used to take branched-chain amino acids (leucine, isoleucine and valine) before and during workouts, but I think relatively recent research has shown that leucine is the only one of the three that is effective for muscle building. BCAAs do seem to help recovery and reduce muscle soreness, but I stopped taking them because leucine drives mTOR.

I'll try to find time to read and/or listen to the information related to Dr. Lyon's recommendation. It may be appropriate for me to increase my protein target and start taking BCAAs (or, at least, leucine) again.