It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Modern high carbohydrate diet; let's discuss the science behind.

page: 3
11
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 25 2015 @ 09:07 AM
link   
a reply to: hypervalentiodine

Thanks for the informed critics. Here is some quotes relating to the brain. I can dig my doc. for further ref. about other organs if interested, but AFAIK other organs are less problematic than the brain for glucose.



Obviously a cancerous cell needs glucose to replicate. So do all of our cells.


here are some quote from: 'CAHILL, G. F. - Ketoacids? Good Medicine?'

"So after a week or longer, levels of circulating amino acids released from muscle diminish, hepatic gluconeogenesis decreases, and brain metabolism is supplied mainly by the principal ketone body, B-hydroxybutyrate."

"A number of investigators have shown BOHB displacing glucose utilization in brain preparations and the same has been shown to occur in man (5,16,17). This illustrates the concept introduced by Sir Philip Randle that fat and fat-derived products like acetate and BOHB take precedent over carbohydrate and its products such as pyruvate."



And from: "Metabolic Management of GBM using Std Therapy together with a restricted KD - Case Report"

"In contrast to normal brain cells, the tumor cells are largely unable to metabolize ketone bodies for energy due to mitochondrial defects."

"Moreover, recent studies in a variety of cultured human tumors cells show that ketone bodies inhibit the viability of tumor cells, but not of normal cells, suggesting that ketone bodies could inhibit tumor cell growth through multiple mechanisms. The numerous mutations expressed in the tumor cells reduce metabolic flexibility thus rendering the tumor cells vulnerable to the therapeutic action of the R-KD."

"A high glycolytic rate with lactic acid production, resulting largely from impaired respiratory function, is a primary metabolic phenotype of GBM and of most cancers [5,6,8]. In contrast to normal brain cells, which evolved to metabolize ketone bodies for energy when glucose levels are reduced, most brain tumor cells are dependent on glycolysis for survival and are unable to metabolize ketone bodies for energy due to impaired mitochondrial function [9]. This metabolic deficiency allows the tumor cells to be metabolically isolated from normal cells. A strong dependence on glucose makes the tumor cells vulnerable to death using therapies that target glucose metabolism."

"It is well documented that brain tumor growth in mice is dependent to a large extent on circulating levels of glucose [11,32]. The same phenomenon also appears to be the case for human brain cancer patients, as reduced survival is associated with high blood glucose levels [33-35]."



From: 'VEECH, R, L - Therapeutic Implications of Ketone Bodies: Effects in Pathological Conditions'

"Ketone bodies are an alternative to glucose as a supplier of the metabolic energy needs for brain. Cahill has shown [51] that during prolonged fasting, when total blood ketone bodies are in the 5–7 mM range, blood glucose concentrations can be decreased to below 1 mM without either convulsions or any discernable impairment of cognitive function. At these concentrations, ketone bodies can provide essentially all of the energy demands in brain to maintain function."




posted on Feb, 28 2015 @ 04:29 PM
link   
a reply to: hypervalentiodine

Maybe I should have used the more general wording 'deactivated' for the mitochondria. Your point of the mitochondria being shut down by the cancer cell is interesting, but overall the effect stay the same.



Obviously a cancerous cell needs glucose to replicate. So do all of our cells.


My point is that most "normal" cell having a mitochondria not deactivated by cancer, can operate in other metabolic mode that cancerous cell cannot. Some of those other modes are beta-oxidation, the process by which fatty acid molecules are broken down in the mitochondria to generate acetyl-CoA, and ketosis, also restricted to the mitochondria, to produce acetyl-CoA using Succinyl-CoA.

As of me largely misrepresenting the Warburg hypothesis, can you be more specific on what exactly is wrong in my interpretation? Is it from the fact that you seem to not account for the fact that glucose metabolism is not the only one that exist? The citation you provided seem to amplify my arguments:

Warburg effect

"
In oncology, the Warburg effect is the observation that most cancer cells predominantly produce energy by a high rate of glycolysis followed by lactic acid fermentation in the cytosol, rather than by a comparatively low rate of glycolysis followed by oxidation of pyruvate in mitochondria as in most normal cells.[4][5][6] The latter process is aerobic (uses oxygen). Malignant, rapidly growing tumor cells typically have glycolytic rates up to 200 times higher than those of their normal tissues of origin; this occurs even if oxygen is plentiful.

Otto Warburg postulated this change in metabolism is the fundamental cause of cancer,[7] a claim now known as the Warburg hypothesis. Today, mutations in oncogenes and tumor suppressor genes are known to be responsible for malignant transformation, and the Warburg effect is considered to be a result of these mutations rather than a cause.
"

Maybe it is a misunderstanding or bad wording on my part. I acknowledge that malfunctionning/disabled mitochondria may not be the cause of cancer in a cell if we want to stay highly rigorous in the definition, but in fact "disabled" by some gene/virus machineries. But if we consider that a cancerous cell cannot possibly continue it's existence if we choke its metabolic process by restricting glucose availability and "force" the ketone bodies and fatty acid pathways, that single point of metabolic failure for cancerous cells can be considered by a practical standpoint as being the "true" cause of cancer. In other word, cancer cells cannot continue to "thrive" and multiplicate at a high rate.



More probable is that cancer cells shut down production in the mitochondria, which forces the cell to produce energy anaerobically. The reason they might do this is because mitochondria play a key role in cell induced death (apoptosis) - shut the mitochondria down, you stop the cell from killing itself in response to damage or other metabolic shifts.


Here, and from non included quote from you, I don't understand your point that reducing glucose level won't affect negatively a neoplasic cell. If the cell can only produce energy by anaerobic glycolysis, then limiting its source of fuel, namely glucose should have an effect.



posted on Apr, 3 2015 @ 10:23 PM
link   
Johns Hopkins University experiment on PSL-001 seem to strongly confirm what I'm saying about glucose starvation of cancerous cells and the Warburg hypothesis on the cause(s) of cancer.

PreScience Labs Announced that the FDA Accepts IND Application for Novel Oncology Drug


About PSL-001:

PSL-001 is part of a patent portfolio fully and exclusively licensed from Johns Hopkins University by PreScience. PSL-001 is one of a new class of drugs that targets the tumor glycolysis pathway. This pathway is a signature of cancer cells and is considered one of the hallmarks of cancer. Tumor glycolysis has been exploited for diagnostic purposes (PET imaging) and is now being explored for therapeutic intervention. One of the key enzymes in tumor glycolysis, GAPDH, is the primary target of PSL-001. PSL-001 irreversibly binds to GAPDH resulting in a multi-prong assault on cancer cells, ultimately leading to their death. The predominant effect of this interaction is the profound depletion of ATP, depriving the cancer cells of any energy. Because glycolysis is the dominant metabolic pathway in cancer cells, those cells are acutely sensitive to any disruption of that pathway. In addition, because normal cells do not rely on glycolysis, but rather on oxidative phosphorylation for their energy needs, disruption of glycolysis is highly specific to cancer cells. The combination of high sensitivity and specificity makes targeting tumor glycolysis highly attractive. Through its ability to inhibit GAPDH, PSL-001 has proven extremely effective at shutting down the energy-producing capabilities of cancer cells which in turn destroys them. PreScience’s core technology and patent protection relies on both the novel PSL-001 compound and the targeted regional delivery of the drug, thereby treating only the cancer. PSL-001 will be further evaluated in a PreScience sponsored Phase I study to begin enrollment in early-2014.


Bromopyruvic acid

Glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate dehydrogenase

Always much more profitable to patent a drug than a non-lucrative simple ketogenic diet.

edit on 2015-4-3 by PeterMcFly because: (no reason given)

edit on 2015-4-3 by PeterMcFly because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 3 2015 @ 11:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: PeterMcFly
Johns Hopkins University experiment on PSL-001 seem to strongly confirm what I'm saying about glucose starvation of cancerous cells and the Warburg hypothesis on the cause(s) of cancer.

PreScience Labs Announced that the FDA Accepts IND Application for Novel Oncology Drug


About PSL-001:

PSL-001 is part of a patent portfolio fully and exclusively licensed from Johns Hopkins University by PreScience. PSL-001 is one of a new class of drugs that targets the tumor glycolysis pathway. This pathway is a signature of cancer cells and is considered one of the hallmarks of cancer. Tumor glycolysis has been exploited for diagnostic purposes (PET imaging) and is now being explored for therapeutic intervention. One of the key enzymes in tumor glycolysis, GAPDH, is the primary target of PSL-001. PSL-001 irreversibly binds to GAPDH resulting in a multi-prong assault on cancer cells, ultimately leading to their death. The predominant effect of this interaction is the profound depletion of ATP, depriving the cancer cells of any energy. Because glycolysis is the dominant metabolic pathway in cancer cells, those cells are acutely sensitive to any disruption of that pathway. In addition, because normal cells do not rely on glycolysis, but rather on oxidative phosphorylation for their energy needs, disruption of glycolysis is highly specific to cancer cells. The combination of high sensitivity and specificity makes targeting tumor glycolysis highly attractive. Through its ability to inhibit GAPDH, PSL-001 has proven extremely effective at shutting down the energy-producing capabilities of cancer cells which in turn destroys them. PreScience’s core technology and patent protection relies on both the novel PSL-001 compound and the targeted regional delivery of the drug, thereby treating only the cancer. PSL-001 will be further evaluated in a PreScience sponsored Phase I study to begin enrollment in early-2014.


Bromopyruvic acid

Glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate dehydrogenase

Always much more profitable to patent a drug than a non-lucrative simple ketogenic diet.


Being a hallmark of cancer does not make you a cause of cancer. Please see my previous post on this.



posted on Apr, 3 2015 @ 11:39 PM
link   
a reply to: hypervalentiodine



Being a hallmark of cancer does not make you a cause of cancer. Please see my previous post on this.


I think I have previously responded to that but you seemed to ignore my arguments. Please see my previous posts on this.



posted on Apr, 3 2015 @ 11:43 PM
link   
I got to read some of this stuff tomorrow, but I am too tired right now. Just commenting so I remember.



posted on Apr, 3 2015 @ 11:49 PM
link   
a reply to: PeterMcFly

I am a busy human and may have missed it. I'll have a look later when I have some time.



posted on Apr, 4 2015 @ 12:09 AM
link   
I have read all that can be read about food. Old things like 3 cups of milk for stronger bones to new science standing, that milk and animal protein will reduce calcium in human body. But I will speak from personal experience.

Little note to the guy who test diets per 30 day. Man ur making your body stressful. Every time you change diet there is a minimum 30 days adaption. So if you wish to test diet I suggest minimum 6 months periOd.

I was eating high animal protein diet for 2 years. At start it was good. I was having more energy than usual. But at end I know I need to switch. Since my wife and me were getting fat and we were most of the time very tired. Also my health was not best.

So we switch to macrobiotic. No animal protein and no processed food with crap like Conservatives or preservative or other synthetic products. Now is almost 1 year and I feal like Rambo. I can work hard physical work whole day. Just need to make sure I eat enough natural protein's. Like beans, nuts and soy.

My health and my wife health is extraordinary. But I must say that we had extremely stressful 2 months adoption period.

Recently I started to fast. I don't eat and drink for 48h in a week. And I must say that after fasting you look at food with different eyes. And fasting even more boosted my overall energy levels.



posted on Apr, 4 2015 @ 12:16 AM
link   
a reply to: saadad

The info I have indicate that it is important to have a ratio of 80:20 Fat to protein (by energy and NOT by weight) and provide supplementation like mineral, vitamin & etc...

Too high in protein is not good.



posted on Apr, 4 2015 @ 12:20 AM
link   
Here is a copy of something I recently posted elsewhere here on ATS. It is a rather good simplification and wish to integrate here:


In a cancerous cell, the mitochondria are inoperative (either defective or shutdown by cancer process). This cause the accumulation of pyruvate (the output of the metabolism of glucose known as glycolysis) in the cytosol and force the cell to do fermentation and create lactate. Rapidly growing tumor cells typically have glycolytic rates up to 200 times higher than those of their normal tissues of origin, thus meaning a lot of pyruvate created.

Citing Wikipedia on Anoxic regeneration of NADH (fermentation):


Anoxic regeneration of NADH is only an effective means of energy production during short, intense exercise, providing energy for a period ranging from 10 seconds to 2 minutes and is dominant from about 10–30 seconds during a maximal effort. It replenishes very quickly over this period and produces 2 ATP molecules per glucose molecule, or about 5% of glucose's energy potential (38 ATP molecules in bacteria). The speed at which ATP is produced is about 100 times that of oxidative phosphorylation. The pH in the cytoplasm quickly drops when hydrogen ions accumulate in the muscle, eventually inhibiting enzymes involved in glycolysis.

It is my opinion that cancer create the acidic condition and not the inverse.

Then what to do to fight cancer?

1- Starve the cancerous cells to death by eliminating its main source of fuel for glycolysis, principaly glucose.

2- Nourish all the other normal cells of your body using ketones bodies and fatty acid, anything that depend on a functioning mitochondrion (ketogenic diet).



posted on Apr, 4 2015 @ 01:05 AM
link   
Here another transcript I wish to integrate here, mostly to answer the vegetarian argumentation:


The primate evolved in tropical forests, their diet was mostly equivalent to a vegetarian; fruit, succulent leaf... Essentially carb but not "grain" based.

Then forest has been gradually loosing ground to grassland plains, monkey that evolved to survive in those plains evolved to become human. This period is a phase of adaptation to a hunter diet that lasted for millions of years. At the end, some have become hordsmen. This is a period of meat eating and massive brain development. Brain power permitted to create tool, like silex knife to cut meat and hunting accessories. Language have also helped group hunting. This is why human does not have dentition caracteristics of carnivor, and no claw, they used knife and tools, they used their brain.

After that, human have developed agriculture, since only at max in the last 10kyears.

Monkey that stayed in the forrest did not evolve due to unchanging habitat and stayed the same.



posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 12:02 AM
link   
This is a very interesting thread to me because I have hypoglycemia and have been trying to work out some issues to control the spells while also trying to lower sugar consumption to help with my Temporal Lobe Epilepsy. Overconsumption of simple Carbs boost my insulin and then I crash because I tend to make too much insulin. This causes me problems. If I cut the carbs too far down, I get the spins. If I increase carbs continuously, I have no problems with anything but the epilepsy and I have tons of energy...but colors get bright and things get distracting and I have symptoms of partial seizures.

I have had hypoglycemia all my life. I have had either Low blood volume or anemia as long as I can remember. I'll take the low volume before the anemia anyday. I also seem to pee out all my salt but if I eat more sugar, I seem to retain more salt. So sugar keeps my sodium levels from going too low. With low blood volume, it makes both hypoglycemia and hyponatremia more of an issue. I also have a normal heart rate of about one twenty, which is related to the low blood volume needing a higher rate to pump blood faster. This is hereditary also.

The acquired problem is what is causing all the problem. I got the TLE from an auto accident and it doesn't work well with the other genetic differences I have. It isn't easy to figure out ways to regulate epilepsy and the meds for the epilepsy nearly killed me and did some damage to my liver and kidneys. They seem to be recovering somewhat though over the last six or so years since I came off the various meds. So I control the epilepsy with diet.

The testing I do on myself can only be backwards adapted to others. Most people do not have my issues. Before my accident, I would only eat one meal a day, supper, but carried peanut butter cups or peanut M&Ms in my worktruck. I could eat two pounds of meat and a pound of veggies along with a few donuts with no problem after working twelve to fourteen hours. Now, I have to treat epilepsy with diet and it requires eating more sulfur foods, which actually mess with my blood. That causes an even lower blood volume.

I found slow carbs aren't a bad thing, I make my own bread with some added whole grain rye and barley and wheat germ added. I can eat barley, rye, and oatmeal mixture with no problems, it is a slower release carb and I have no problems with that. My sugar always stayed below a hundred, but it would go too low frequently. Now after I eat, it spikes up to a hundred forty for about an hour then comes down again into the nineties. I try not to drink juice, it drops to the fifties.

I never ate much carbs though, but I always have craved fatty food and when I used to eat the fatty food I had more energy that was mellow. Now proteins sometimes cause me problems if I eat too much but they do control my headspins better than the carbs. The headspins are from hypoglycemia, coupled with some nitrogen levels getting too high sometimes. The blood vessels open up and I don't have enough blood and my pressure drops a little too low quickly but only for a few minutes.

Everyone has different genetics and different needs. That is what I am trying to show in my post here. Everyone has to actually see how things effect them to know what is best for them. A doctor cannot tell you much in the fifteen minute appointment and if your blood volume is low, the tests could not be being interpreted right by the medical field. I think when some people get older, their blood volume drops, they get rope veins and higher blood pressure if this occurs. Slowly adding nitrogen containing foods to the diet may help this, too fast and you could get lightheaded.



posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 12:12 AM
link   
a reply to: PeterMcFly

Humans have been scavengers for a very long time. We have cooked our foods or aged them for most of recorded history. The neurochemicals created by the aging process actually can cause an increase in the size of the brain. Also we have learned to eat certain spices like Sage and thyme and rosemary, these are nootropic and we have been doing that and similar stuff for thousands of years. Who knows how long before that we have been doing it.

Scavengers tend to be the craftiest of the animals. Our ancestors ate grains like barley and rye mostly until they started making beer out of them. The nutrients went into the beer. Wheat did not make that good of beer. Our bread flours are not just wheat, they contain malted barley and rye mixed in. There are enzymes in Rye and a chemical that extends telomeres is in barley. I know some about the enzyme degradation of rye when heated, but not much about the chemical degradation by heat in barley.



posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 04:55 AM
link   
a reply to: rickymouse

Have you ever considered a ketogenic diet for the TLE and hypoglycemia?

According to 'Cahill, G. F. Jr. (1980) Alternate Fuel Utilization in Brain' and repeated in 'Veech, R. L. (2003) Therapeutic Implications of Ketone Bodies: Effects in Pathological Conditions':



Ketone bodies are an alternative to glucose as a supplier of the metabolic energy needs for brain. Cahill has shown [51] that during prolonged fasting, when total blood ketone bodies are in the 5– 7 mM range, blood glucose concentrations can be decreased to below 1 mM (18 mg/dL) without either convulsions or any discernable impairment of cognitive function. At these concentrations, ketone bodies can provide essentially all of the energy demands in brain to maintain function. The induction of mild ketosis therefore offers a method for obtaining tighter control of blood glucose in brittle diabetics without the induction of the physiological consequences of hypoglycemia on cerebral function.


It is important to remember that it is for individuals already well ADAPTED to ketosis, that mean several days and probably at least 2 weeks.

In other words, the quoted info said that it is not true that glucose is the sole fuel for the brain (and the rest of the body). The brain requirement in glucose is very small and can be provided by gluconeogenesis (GNG) if someone eat absolutely NO carb at all.

Also, high protein diet are not good IMHO. We stricly need the quantity of protein that the body need for some repair. AFAIK a proper diet shall be composed of a ratio of 80:20 Fat to Protein (by energy ratio and NOT weight). High protein diet, especially with problematic kidney, produce nitrogenous product in blood that are very bad for the brain.

Don't know if your kidney and liver conditions would allow for a ketogenic diet.

Also check coconut oil as a fast and easily digestible source of energy, it is an MCT oil.

If you don't already use them, here are some suggestion for usefull monitoring.

100 x DOCTOR/GP 10 PARAMETER URINE REAGENT STRIP TESTS - DIABETES/pH/UTI & MORE

Ketostix

Ketostix is for the frequent control of urine ketone bodies at low cost. The other urine strip is used less often but usefull to catch some serious pathological conditions.

Ketone bodies is best measured in blood but due to the cost, are usually measured in urines even if they correlate badly with blood concentration.


edit on 2015-4-5 by PeterMcFly because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 05:49 AM
link   
About energy content of the food:

Carbohydrate = 4 calories/gram
Protein = 4 calories/gram
Fat = 9 calories/gram

Alcohol = 7 calories/gram


Raw lean meat contain lots of water.

For a 80:20 Fat to Protein (in energy): A steak (beef T-bone) of 110 grams is 25g protein (100 calories) and 35g fat (315 calories) for a total of 415 calories. We need to add 9.4 g of fat (85 calories) to balance to 80:20.

That mean the suggested ratio of 80:20 can be deceptive if wrongly assumed in weight ratio!

Depending of source of information and type of meat, meat composition (protein and fat) vary wildly.



posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 06:25 AM
link   
Why nobody talks about animal protein and calcium and cancer?

Why nobody talk about where from this meat comes. This is not meat. It is animal stuffed with chemicals and growth hormone.

So consider this or at least investigate.



posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 07:54 AM
link   
the best example of a high carb diet: Fois Gras

Humans get fatty liver, too. Especially drinkers.

Carbohydrates are meant to be a seasonal food for those of us hailing from the north. I do terrible eating carbs. It effects my health poorly in multiple ways.



posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 08:21 AM
link   
No Carbs to Low Carbs is the way to go.



posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 10:27 AM
link   
a reply to: PeterMcFly

I usually eat the crispy fatty stuff off the roasts and steaks and always eat the chicken skin and dark meat. I can process fat really well, but I get sticky poop...I hate that. I like fried potatoes, fried in bacon grease and I like fried fish.

I always ate that way and when I did I was skinny, avoiding most carbs all the time. But I am married and when we make food, my wife likes carbs and dislikes fat. So I have a hard time with getting enough for me to control the TLE with that. She always wants to buy lean meats.

Soybean oil is definitely not good for epilepsy, but coconut oil and butter and bacon grease work fine. Corn oil seems to be all right. So we have switched our deep frier oil over to corn oil. The fat on our organic grass fed beef is good for my problem, but grassfed organic free range cows don't have much fat on them.

My brain needs a lot of food when I study and analyze the research, the high fat diet does not give me that. I have to eat some carbs. I have modified my breads, I can eat bread with whole grain barley and rye flour added.

You are right about the nitrogen compounds in meat being a problem too. I can only eat about four ounces of lean meat. I can't eat much ham or lunchmeats either, the nitrates/nitrites I think are giving me a problem. So I clean most of the sparce fat off the roasts and steaks.

I went to the pharmacy to get ketox strips, I talked to the pharmacist and she said I needed to up protein consumption instead of simple carbs. It usually does work, I don't get the spins or shakes, but it is not infallible. Meat will bind you up if you eat too much and you can only eat so much beans.


edit on 5-4-2015 by rickymouse because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 10:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
the best example of a high carb diet: Fois Gras

Humans get fatty liver, too. Especially drinkers.

Carbohydrates are meant to be a seasonal food for those of us hailing from the north. I do terrible eating carbs. It effects my health poorly in multiple ways.


My wife loves carbs and they have always bothered me. She could eat spaghetti every day. This is a problem, When I worked all the time, I ate on the way home and devoured all the leftover meats when I got home. But now I am not working and my wife is also retired, so she keeps making all the carb foods. Lots of them. I hate to waste food. It sucks.



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join