NutritionFacts.org

Health Topics

  1. #
  2. A
  3. B
  4. C
  5. D
  6. E
  7. F
  8. G
  9. H
  10. I
  11. J
  12. K
  13. L
  14. M
  15. N
  16. O
  17. P
  18. Q
  19. R
  20. S
  21. T
  22. U
  23. V
  24. W
  25. X
  26. Y
  27. Z
Browse All Topics

Low Carb Diets and Coronary Blood Flow

Blood flow within the hearts of those eating low carb diets was compared to those eating plant-based diets.

March 21, 2014 |
GD Star Rating
loading...

Topics

Supplementary Info

Can't view the video above? Try it on Vimeo!
View Low Carb Diets and Coronary Blood Flow on Vimeo

Sources Cited

Acknowledgements

Images thanks to C-Monster, seagers and Mykl Roventine; Veronidae and Linda Bartlett via Wikimedia Commons and the World Lung Foundation.

Transcript

People going on low carb diets may not see a rise in their cholesterol levels. How is that possible? Because weight loss by any means can drop your cholesterol. You could go on an all-Twinkie diet and lower your cholesterol if you were unable to eat the dozen daily Twinkies necessary to maintain your weight. That’s why a good cocaine habit could end up lowering your cholesterol. Chemotherapy, can drop your cholesterol like a rock. Tuberculosis can work wonders on your waistline. Anything that drops your weight can drop your cholesterol, but the goal isn’t to fit into a skinnier casket, the reason we care about cardiovascular risk factors like cholesterol is because we care about cardiovascular risk, the health of our arteries.

Well now we have studies that have measured the impact of low carb diets on arteries directly, and a review of all the best studies to date found that low carb diets impair arterial function, as evidenced by a decrease in flow-mediated dilation, meaning low carb diets effectively stiffen people’s arteries, And since that meta-analysis was published a new study found the same thing. A dietary pattern characterized by high protein and fat, but low carbohydrate was associated with poorer peripheral small artery function, again measuring blood flow into people’s limbs. But peripheral circulation is not as important as the circulation in the coronary arteries that feed our heart.

There has only been one study ever done measuring actual blood flow to the heart muscles of people eating low carb diets and this is it. Dr. Richard Fleming, an accomplished nuclear cardiologist, enrolled 26 people into a comprehensive study of the effects of diet on cardiac function using the latest in nuclear imaging technology--so-called SPECT scans, enabling him to actually directly measure the blood flow within the coronary arteries.

He then put them all on a healthy vegetarian diet, and a year later the scans were repeated. By that time, however, 10 of the patients had jumped ship onto the low carb bandwagon. At first I bet he was pissed, but surely soon realized he had an unparalleled research opportunity dropped into his lap. Here he had extensive imaging of 10 people following a low carb diet and 16 following a high carb diet. What would their hearts look like at the end of the year? We can talk about risk factors all we want, but compared to the veg group, did the coronary heart disease of the patients following the Atkins-like diets improve, worsen, or stay the same?

Those sticking to the vegetarian diet showed a reversal of their heart disease as expected. Their partially clogged arteries literally got cleaned out. They had 20% less atherosclerotic plaque in their arteries at the end of the year than at the beginning. What happened to those who abandoned the treatment diet, and switched over to the low carb diet? Their condition significantly worsened. 40 to 50% more artery clogging at the end of the year. Thanks to the kind generosity of Dr. Fleming we see the changes in blood flow for ourselves.

Here are some representative heart scans. The yellow and particularly red represent blood flow through the coronary arteries to the heart muscle. This patient went on a plant-based diet and their arteries opened right up increasing the blood flow. This person, however, started out with good flow, but after a year on a low carb diet, they significantly clogged down their arterial blood flow.

So this is the best science we have, demonstrating the threat of low carb diets, not just measuring risk factors, but actual blood flow in people’s hearts on different diets. Of course the reason we care about cardiac blood flow, is we don’t want to die, and a meta-analysis was recently published that finally went ahead and measured the ultimate end-point, death, and low-carb diets were associated with a significantly higher risk of all-cause mortality, meaning living a significantly shorter lifespan.

To see any graphs, charts, graphics, images, and quotes to which Dr. Greger may be referring, watch the above video. This is just an approximation of the audio contributed by Ariel Levitsky.

To help out on the site please email volunteer@nutritionfacts.org.

Dr. Michael Greger

Doctor's Note

The reason I have so few videos about low carb diets, is that I already wrote a whole book about it! Carbophobia is now available free online full-text at AtkinsFacts.org. Atkins’ lawyers threatened to sue, leading to a heated exchange I reprint on the site.

I did touch on low carb diets in my video Atkins Diet: Trouble Keeping it Up, though they don’t have to necessarily be that unhealthy (see my video Plant-Based Atkins Diet).

Here are some recent videos I’ve done on conquering our #1 killer:

If you haven't yet, you can subscribe to my videos for free by clicking here.

  • Markus

    Hmm..from the abstractof the first study (Bueno et.al.)

    The primary outcome was bodyweight. … Individuals
    assigned to a VLCKD showed decreased body weight (weighted mean
    difference 20·91 (95% CI 21·65, 20·17) kg, 1415 patients), TAG (weighted
    mean difference 20·18 (95% CI 20·27, 20·08) mmol/l, 1258 patients)and
    diastolic blood pressure (weighted mean difference 21·43 (95% CI 22·49,
    20·37) mmHg, 1298 patients) while increased HDL-C(weighted mean
    difference 0·09 (95% CI 0·06, 0·12) mmol/l, 1257 patients) and LDL-C
    (weighted mean difference 0·12 (95% CI 0·04,0·2) mmol/l, 1255 patients).
    Individuals assigned to a VLCKD achieve a greater weight loss than
    those assigned to a LFD in the longterm; hence, a VLCKD may be an
    alternative tool against obesity.

    The Fleming study looks for me a little bit flawed as there were only 19 people under obeservation at first, later 26 (some of theme seemed to hop on and off hier diet), so a small, inconstistent group is a little bit difficullt to make some conclusions. For more critique about Fleming’s study see also:

    http://bit.ly/1hNi2wi

    • http://macsmiley.tumblr.com/ MacSmiley

      There are flaws in every study, and in the Fleming study, the opportunity to make a comparison between two truly contrasting groups was unforeseen. So you’re going to nitpick for that?

      If the SPECT FMD scans were not conclusive, their cautionary data should certainly not be discounted, either. How can your average low-carb dieter know whether or not he could be very much like one of those Atkins dieters in Fleming’s study until it’s possibly too late? When was the last time you asked your doctor for a SPECT/FMD scan?

      At the very least, this is an opportunity for a larger study to confirm or falsify Flemings ad hoc results. Where are the Atkins Foundation and the NuSI guys when you need them?

      • Dale

        I am wondering why Sweden would change their diet advise and tell people to eat low carb high fat diets. Are they wrong?

        • http://macsmiley.tumblr.com/ MacSmiley

          The MSM/Atkins/Paleo/Low Carb reports on the Interwebs are wrong. As usual, the devil is in the details.

          Debunking News of Sweden’s “Low-Carb, High-Fat” Guidelines

          “Although the Swedish Council on Health Technology Assessment found benefits of eating healthy fats, they won’t be changing their guidelines.”

          http://experiencelife.com/newsflashes/debunking-news-of-swedens-low-carb-high-fat-guidelines/

          When we contacted Anna Karin Lindroos, PhD, a nutritionist at Sweden’s National Food Agency, to ask about the new guidelines, she set the record straight: “Sweden does not have any guidelines on low-carb-high-fat diets. The information that Sweden has guidelines on low-carb-high-fat diets is based on incorrect information circulating on the Internet.”

          As it turns out, reporters had mistaken a review published by the Swedish Council on Health Technology Assessment (SBU) in September for new national guidelines. Måns Rosén, PhD, executive director at SBU, was anxious to squelch the rumors. “First, I would like to stress that we do not do guidelines, only systematic reviews and health technology assessment reports,” he says. “Second, we have earlier focused on patients with diabetes and now obese persons, not the general population.”

          For the obese, the report found a benefit for a Mediterranean style diet with extra virgin olive oil and nuts. Low carb diets are mentioned as having a short term weight loss advantage over low fat diets. Full fat dairy may lead to weight loss in obese children and adults.

          I’m sure Dr. Greger will agree to disagree, that full-fat animal products have satiety value over junk carbs, but a high quality carb WFPB diet is better for long term health and weight loss.

          • Dale
          • http://macsmiley.tumblr.com/ MacSmiley

            Why are you posting a sensationalized, low carb propagandist article after I just posted an answer for you from a low carb website admitting that Sweden’s national guidelines have not been changed?

          • Dale

            Checked the link you provided. It appears that Sweden is not changing their guideline, but the article seems to advocate high fat, low carb. I would be more convinced if you had more than one study. Plus the study was done over ten years ago.

          • http://macsmiley.tumblr.com/ MacSmiley

            Right. That was the point. It wasn’t a vegetarian-slanted site disputing the report but a HFLC site saying, We wish this were true, but it isn’t.

            I wasn’t paying attention to any studies. Just the erroneous headlines.

  • DGH

    Low carb helped me lose weight but my lipids went to sky-high, very dangerous levels — to the point that they were as higher, or higher, than those seen in familial hypercholesterolemia, a genetic condition which I do not have. Veganism has helped me keep the weight off and lowered my lipids; now my BP is resting around 90/50 in the doctor’s office. You wear the fat you eat.

    I have not been able to get rid of nuts on my diet, but perhaps I don’t have to.

    My diet has gone from being very low carb to moderately carb without any weight gain – actually, further weight and BP reduction.

    • CM11

      “helped me lose weight but my lipids went to sky-high, very dangerous levels — to the point that they were as high, or higher, than those seen in familial …”
      Same here; weird chest pains & chronic tendonitis as well.no thanks. Vegan works just fine for me

    • Mike Quinoa

      Why would you want to get rid of the nuts? I eat raw, natural almonds, Brazil nuts, and walnuts, as well as sunflower and pumpkin seeds (and ground flax seeds and dry-roasted peanuts—which are legumes, of course). I’ve started eating unsweetened shredded coconut—not sure if the jury is still out on this comestible (?).
      These all help me keep a steady weight. I find it hard to get sufficient calories without the above foods in the mix, and I think some good plant fat can be a healthful thing.

      • Lucille Austero

        If getting enough calories is the goal, eat more food. Nothing wrong with nuts and seeds of course…great food, but eating more high carb foods like fruit and starches will up your calorie intake while still maintaining your weight. Just don’t add fat (ie go McDougall style) Btw nuts are required by law to be steamed are therefore not raw (even if it says raw on the packet)

        • Mike Quinoa

          Thanks for that Lucille. There is some disagreement amongst the plant docs regarding nuts and seeds. Dr. Greger seems to give them tacit approval (through his videos), as does Dr. Fuhrman. On the other hand, you have Drs. McDougall and Esselstyn toeing more or less the no-nuts line. Hard to know who to believe. Personally, I feel the addition of nuts helps to moderate the glycemic load of a meal.

          • Thea

            Mike: For what it’s worth: I recently re-listened to a talk that Esselstyn gave in 2012. He said something along the lines of (not a direct quote), “If I told people that it was OK to eat a *small* amount of nuts, that’s not what they would hear. They would hear, ‘Esselstyn says nuts are OK!’ If you are a healthy person who eats a healthy whole plant food diet, a small amount of nuts, especially walnuts, is fine. But for people with serious heart disease, I would suggest staying away from all nuts. I do encourage people to eat ground flaxseed and chia seeds.” My point being that Dr. Esselstyn’s take on nuts is more complicated/nuanced that is usually attributed to him. Heck, Esselstyn even included a walnut-based salad dressing in his Prevent and Reverse Heart Disease book – just cautioning heart patients to skip it.

            ————————–

            Also, to address your original question of, “Why would you want to give up the nuts?” I recently re-watched the DVD from Jeff Novick titled, “From Oil To Nuts”. He lays a convincing argument about the importance of having the correct ratio of omega 6 to omega 3 fats in your diet. Unfortunately, most nuts (baring one type of walnuts) have an insane ratio of omega 6 to omega 3. In general, you want to keep the ratio at 4:1 or less. In other words, for every 1 part of omega 3, take in 4 parts or less of omega 6. Here is how some nuts and seeds break down:
            black walnuts – 16:1
            english walnuts – 4:1 (best bet!)
            cashews – 117:1
            almonds – 1800:1
            pumpkin seed – 117:1

            sunflower seed – 300:1
            flaxseed – 3.9:1

            chia seed – 3:1

            Another problem with nuts for many people (but not everyone) is that nuts are so calorie dense.

            Even with all of that information, Jeff Novick asks something like, “Are nuts good for you? Yes!!!!” But says we need to eat nuts in a way that is closer to how our ancestors might have – very few because it is hard to get all that many when you have to crack every shell and the food is only available/ripe a short time of the year. So, at the end of the DVD, Jeff Novick recommends that people take in 1-2 ounces of nuts (or less) a day.

            Please Note: I’m ***not*** at all pushing you or anyone else to give up nuts. For all I know, it is the perfect food for your situation. I’m just sharing one reason why some people (myself included) want to be eating less nuts if we can get there.

          • Mike Quinoa

            Thanks Thea. Your kind advice is well-taken. I should watch my omega ratios and intake amount a bit more closely. I do find a few nuts with a meal give it a satisfying satiety, and so I have no desire to nibble between meals.

          • Thea

            Being full/satiated is definitely important! I don’t discount that.

          • http://macsmiley.tumblr.com/ MacSmiley

            I don’t worry about the Omega ratios. I really don’t think their alleged inflammatory properties have been confirmed, especially in whole foods, and it’s an issue paleo’s obsess over. If you can, eat a variety of nuts, for they each have their individual benefits, an ounce or two a day, but split them up and eat them with meals.

            I do believe part of the trouble Esselstyn may have had with patient self-control had to do with the added oils and salt in roasted commercial nuts like Planters causing addictive snacking, and the refined oils did no favors to damaged hearts and arteries.

          • DGH

            The main problem with the omega-3:omega-6 story is that we don’t know if 1) it’s the overall ratio that’s really important or 2) the absolute amount of omega-6 is the real problem (no one seems to think that omega-3 is an issue, at least in excess).

            If it’s just a ratio issue, consuming more plant-derived omega-3′s and perhaps supplementing with concentrated omega-3 should counterbalance any problem from overconsuming omega-6 in the form of nuts/seeds. On the other hand, if the problem is eating too many omega-6′s from any source, then it doesn’t matter how much omega-3 is being consumed – it will not fix the problem.

            Interestingly, the recent meta-analysis in Annals that got so much attention this week seems to suggest that higher blood levels of arachidonic acid, DHA, DPA and EPA are protective against cardiovascular events (though, of course, there could be confounding, as the same review pointed out that recent randomized trials have been negative, at least for DHA/EPA administration). Arachidonic acid is a direct downstream mediator formed from omega-6 intake in the diet. This would tend to argue that omega-6 per se is not the problem, but rather achieving an optimal balance of O3:O6 is most important. Therefore, consuming flaxseed, hempseed, walnuts, canola oil and omega-3 supplementation could be beneficial. Linoleic acid, either in the diet or in the blood marker studies, did not appear to be implicated in harm, and this is the major omega-6 fatty acid. Thus overconsumption of nuts, seeds and vegetable oils does not look as problematic as we once thought, in terms of “too much” omega-6 intake. At least according to this new meta-analysis.

          • Wilma Laura Wiggins

            I wouldn’t lump whole foods like nuts and seeds in with refined foods such as oils, especially canola oil

          • Thea

            DGH: Thanks for adding to the conversation.

          • Wilma Laura Wiggins

            McDougal is not no nuts – he is be careful with them if you want to lose weight.

          • Wynn Horton

            Fats DO slow down metabolism which helps moderate blood sugar. I LOVE my raw almonds. I need the vit. e from SOME source !

          • JoAnn Downey

            I decided to go the Ornish/Esselstyn route re fat as a % of daily calories, and the CRONOMETER doesn’t lie. Have you used that online tool? I can see exactly how many grams of fat I’m eating. I use it maybe twice a month but after eating this way for a long time I pretty much know my fat intake. So on 2000 calories I stick to about 22 grams of fat to come up with 10%, and I play around with the seeds and nuts depending on what I feel like eating. I always include 2T ground flaxseed for the Omega 3s. I’ll admit it took discipline and willpower at first to weigh a few nuts rather than grabbing a handful, but I looked on the exercise as a learning experience and I’m very aware now of just how much fat is in my food. It was a pain at first, but in the back of my mind I knew it was a worse pain to have surgery for blocked coronary arteries.

          • Wilma Laura Wiggins

            Thanks for sharing – I didn’t know about CRONOMETER. Looks helpful.

      • Gaura Priya Glick

        Coconut is excellent for many reasons. Esp. for the thyroid.

      • DGH

        “Why would you want to get rid of the nuts?”

        1) Because I feel guilty eating them.

        2) Because they are very high in fat, in particular omega-6 fatty acids, which downstream leads to linoleic acid.

        3) Because they are addictive and very easy to snack on. Other than carrots (!), I have not yet found another food that is so filling and easy to snack on, and I would prefer not to snack between meals.

        4) The fat you eat is the fat you wear. If you eat a lot of easily oxidizable fats like polyunsaturates, you end up with lipid peroxides in your cell membranes.

        On the other hand, there is a lot of data to suggest that nuts are health-promoting, at least in moderation. The cardiovascular benefits appear to be compelling. But… I would urge moderation. If I was imaginative enough, I am sure I could completely replace nuts in my diet with something else, and I’m quite certain I wouldn’t miss them. At this point I eat almonds, walnuts, pecans, brazil nuts (in moderation), pumpkin seeds, hazelnuts/filberts.

        • abk

          Nuts have the healthy fats your body needs and wants. I have almonds daily.

        • http://macsmiley.tumblr.com/ MacSmiley

          Why snack? Eat your nuts with meals. You’ll be less likely to over-consume them, if that’s a problem, and their healthy unsaturated fats will aid absorption of some vitamins.

          Skipped the addictive oiled, salted and/or sugared nuts.

          The perceived dangers of oxidized PUFAs are over exaggerated by WAPF and paleos:

          PUFAs Oxidize!

          http://www.plantpositive.com/41-pufas-oxidize/

          • DGH

            There *is* some evidence that PUFAs, especially omega-6 rich vegetable oils, are quite unhealthy.
            For example, the Sydney Diet Heart Trial, which replaced saturated fat with a supplemental margarine containing safflower oil, showed increases in dying from heart disease in a randomized trial population. A similar trial in the 1960′s in Los Angeles veterans showed a doubling of cancer-related deaths using corn oil to replace saturated fat.
            If anything, since SFA appears to be negative, the results of both trials should have shown that death rates went down, however the exact opposite was found. Not because SFA is protective (it’s not), but because omega-6 cooking oils oxidize, and this is why the Sydney Trial showed the effects were MOST prominent in smokers and alcohol abusers.
            It’ll take me some time to dig out the references for you.

          • http://macsmiley.tumblr.com/ MacSmiley

            PUFAs in whole plant foods, nuts and seeds and leafy greens are far from detrimental.

            Dr Greger does not advocate bottled oils of any kind.

          • DGH

            I tend to agree with you – moderation though is the golden principle. It’s really easy to overdo consumption of anything, even whole nuts and seeds, even with meals. I eat about 2 ramikin-sized quotients of mixed nuts per day, not more. I eat a tahini salad dressing which is crushed sesame seed paste – about 1-2 tbsp, not more. I don’t use any vegetable oil other than that. I crush my nuts/seeds into a morning smoothie. I’ve found I can replace some nuts/seeds with carrots after meals if I am still hungry.

    • Wynn Horton

      I mostly follow the Dr. Sears’ Zone Diet – the Soy Zone mostly, I guess. I eat almost no meat – ONLY seafood, zero-fat dairy (mostly Greek yogurt) and sometimes protein bars and tofu. My triglycerides are 58, my total cholesterol is 127, my b.p. avg is 105/66. Saturated fat and maybe cholesterol seem to be the cause of problems- esp. when on the low carb diet. The Zone is a fairly low carb diet, but not as low as Atkins, I think.

      • DGH

        Very interesting, thanks for sharing that. I stopped tracking my lipids when I went fully vegan (they were quite low on lacto/pesco-vegetarian diet before that). I think another source of problems on a low carb diet is excess protein, and specifically animal protein, which seems to cause IGF-1 spiking and diabetes.

      • http://myhealthyveganworld.blogspot.co.uk/ Jennifer

        I follow this debate with curiosity and also wonder the distinction between saturated animal fat and lipids from oily fish and whole plant sources. Many low-carbers/paleo types expressly favour sat fat consumption, but it is equally possible to eat low carb with lower levels of sat fat and I would be interested to see this investigated.

    • lucidvu

      Hypotension – Both high and low blood pressure may play a role in brain atrophy, at least in populations studied so far, particularly with a diastolic below 70.

  • ABCVegan

    Low carb animal fat diets, or low carb *plant-based* diets? I’m vegan, and my doctor has me going gluten free (thereby accidentally cutting out lots of carbs) and eating lots of fat (2 T coconut oil, an avocado, and 3 T of a ground seed mixture every day). The weight is dropping off (NOT the reason for the diet, but an interesting consequence), but I can’t help but wondering if it’s healthy…. Which side of this spectrum will this fall on? The low-carb side, or the plant-based side…?

    • http://macsmiley.tumblr.com/ MacSmiley

      Why the coconut oil and not whole food shredded coconut?

    • http://macsmiley.tumblr.com/ MacSmiley

      All whole plants are carbs by definition. Though some have a lower starch content than others and fall lower on the glycemic index.

    • masobel

      As long as the diet is plant based, you are likely to be ok. Check out Dr. Greger’s video on Plant based Adkins. Harvard did a large study on Low-Carb vs Plant Based Low Carb (Eco-Adkins) and found that while the Low Carb dieters had higher overall mortality rates than the general population, the Plant Based Low Carb group did very well.

      Many people do lose weight when they go gluten free, but it is most likely because they are avoiding refined flour. Most of the wheat products available are highly processed. Even the products marketed as “whole wheat” are what Dr. Fuhrman refers to as “white bread with a fake tan”. If you do not have celiac or a sensitivity to gluten, whole wheat berries would probably be ok.

  • Ellis

    PLEASE CLARIFY – If one is to incorporate carbs into a vegetarian diet – or ANY diet – I assume we’re not talking about carbs from refined grains (i.e. white bread, pasta, white rice, ext). So, Dr. G, could you please be specific about the types of Carbs we should throw into the mix?

    • http://macsmiley.tumblr.com/ MacSmiley

      Dr. Greger advocates a whole foods, plant-based diet. Junk carbs are never a part of his recommendations, including white bread, white pasta, or white rice.

      • rsbmg

        I don’t know that I would call white rice “junk” considering it has fed and continues to feed world populations for thousands of years. That aside, if you are an athlete you are not going to fuel your activity on spinach no matter how hard you try.

        • Ellis

          Yes, there’s always been debate about white rice. It’s a significant element of several diets throughout the world regarded as healthier than ours. Perhaps it’s metabolized more slowly in those diets because it’s consumed with healthy fats and/or protein??

        • Wilma Laura Wiggins

          Recall that Arnold Schwarzenegger won Mr. Universe as a vegan (i.e., eating spinach). However, I agree with you on the rice. I recently came across some nutrition information to the effect that the bran on rice prevents the absorption of nutrients to the point that more are available with white rice. How about them apples?

          • Bryan

            Arnold was not – AFAIK- a vegan. Bill Pearl was a Lacto/Ovo winner of the Universe.

          • Wilma Laura Wiggins

            Bryan, thank you for correcting my misconception. Don’t know where I got that info but obviously wrong.

          • http://macsmiley.tumblr.com/ MacSmiley

            Dave’s comment below about the fortification of white rice explains the absorption. Meanwhile, today’s new video explains that phytates appear to be healthful.

            http://nutritionfacts.org/video/phytates-for-the-prevention-of-cancer/

          • rsbmg

            Arnold was never a vegan (I have read his autobiography) No vegan has ever won any major bodybuilding competition and spinach alone while part of a healthy diet could never support the energy requirements required to be an elite athlete.

          • Wilma Laura Wiggins

            Yes thank you, as I acknowledged above, Arnold was not vegetarian. I don’t follow bodybuilding as a sport. I was never serious about the spinach alone for anyone, was just using it as a stand in for vegetables.

          • Thea

            rsbmg: You may be interested in the information below. Vegan bodybuilders have not only won metals, but set world records. Also, you may be interested to know that a couple vegan athletes won some metals at the recent Olympics. These stories are just the tip of the iceberg.

            ————————-
            (from meatout mondays)
            Vegan Bodybuilders Dominate Texas Competition

            The Plant Built (PlantBuilt.com) team rolled into this year’s drug-free, steroid-free Naturally Fit Super Show competition in Austin, TX, and walked away with more trophies than even they could carry.

            The Plant Built team of 15 vegan bodybuilders competed in seven divisions, taking first place in all but two. They also took several 2nd and 3rd place wins.

            For More Info:
            http://www.plantbuilt.com/

            ———————
            When Robert Cheeke started VeganBodybuilding.com in 2002, being the only vegan athlete he knew of, he may not have imagined that the website would quickly grow to have thousands of members. Robert says, “We’re discovering new vegan athletes all the time, from professional and elite levels… to weekend warriors and everyone in between.”

            For More Info:
            http://www.veganbodybuilding.com/
            —————–
            There was that other guy who just did a world record in weight lifting. “Congratulations to Strongman Patrik Baboumian who yesterday took a ten metre walk carrying more than half a tonne on his shoulders, more than anyone has ever done before. After smashing the world record the Strongman let out a roar of ‘Vegan Power’…” For more info:
            http://www.onegreenplanet.org/news/vegan-strongman-patrik-babaoumain-breaks-world-record/

            —————–
            Here’s another site that I like:
            http://www.greatveganathletes.com/

            I found this story on the above site: “Pat Reeves has set a new world powerlifting record at the WDFPA World Single Lift Championships. The 66 year old lifter, who has been vegan for 46 years, lifted 94 kg to set a record for the under 50.5kg weight class while competing in France in June 2012. The lift was more than 1.85 times her bodyweight, which is exceptional for her division. Pat is now officially the oldest competing weightlifter in Europe.”

        • Dave

          White rice is a product of the industrial revolution, which introduced large scale milling and polishing to lengthen the storage life of rice . This resulted in an epidemic of beriberi (thiamine deficiency) in populations that relied on rice as a main calorie source. White rice is now fortified (like most refined grains) to reintroduce some vitamins and minerals that are removed in the milling process. There are no populations that have relied on white rice for thousands of years.

          • rsbmg

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rice There are many “strains” of rice which have been eaten for thousands of years. I never meant to imply that Asians 13,000 years ago microwaved a packet of Uncle Bens

          • Dave

            When you said “white rice” I assumed you meant white rice http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_rice. This implies milling and polishing of the grain which removes the bran and cereal germ, please read the “preparation as food” section of your own reference for a more detailed explanation (there is also a nice graphic that illustrates this process). “White rice” does not denote any particular cultivar. All rice consumed before the introduction of milling and polishing was brown or whole grain rice http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_rice. White and brown rice of any cultivar differ significantly in their fibre, vitamin and mineral content.

          • rsbmg

            Latest research I have read indicates white rice is healthier for us than brown anyway. Rice is good no matter how you slice it. Pick your flavor and have at it.

          • JacquieRN

            Interesting, can you cite that research here please?

        • http://macsmiley.tumblr.com/ MacSmiley

          Just a thought: The Japanese do pretty well with enriched white rice, but the traditional Okinawans (centenarians) amongst them have done much better with more nutritious sweet potatoes. As the younger generation abandons the traditional foods, including swapping out the sweet potatoes with white rice, their healthy life expectancy is dropping.

      • Ellis

        How do you view starchy whole foods such as potatoes, yams, and bananas? Just curious….I know potatoes, in particular, are controversial in that they are a white starch – though packed with nutrients. Thanks for your thoughts.

        • Julot Julott

          Ripe bananas(spotted ones with no green) barely have any starch left~

          • Kitsy Hahn

            A frozen ripe banana is delicious chopped-up on my cooked whole-grain breakfasts in the morning — either millet, buckwheat groats, barley, steel-cut oats, (organic) brown rice, etc — or a combination.

            I always eat a few chunks before adding them to the grains — they’re my “ice cream” kick for the day. ;-) I know we’re supposed to eat fruit separately and all that, but ….

          • Julot Julott

            I doubt it hurt much if they are not mixed in big amount…

        • http://macsmiley.tumblr.com/ MacSmiley

          My starch choices depend largely on food sensitivities and reactivity with meds. Relegated to rolled oats, wild rice, and sweet yellow corn for now.

      • Julot Julott

        And whole grains are harder on the GI tract and usually more toxic than white ones~

        • val

          then sprout them if you think that’s a problem…just saying!

        • http://macsmiley.tumblr.com/ MacSmiley

          See Dr. Greger’s series of videos on phytates. Those “toxins” are pretty beneficial.

          • Julot Julott

            I’m talking of arsenic, pesticides and similar concentrated in the bran there are a lot of studies on it~

          • http://macsmiley.tumblr.com/ MacSmiley

            There are toxins in EVERYTHING we eat, both naturally and because of our contaminated environment.

            Every item of food is a compromise, every diet a compromise, and neither is perfect. It’s always a cost-benefit trade-off. Compared to animal foods where poisons from the grains and/or grass in the natural environment they eat are concentrated in the flesh and fat, grains are comparatively less hazardous.

          • Julot Julott

            I agree but there are major toxins like arsenic mercury, others heavy metals and others one that are much less toxic or easier to excrete.
            Any grains is better than most meat yes but white one seems to be less toxic and easier to digest than whole one with the bran, just what i said~

          • http://macsmiley.tumblr.com/ MacSmiley

            Tu parles le français, par hasard?

          • Julot Julott

            Oui~

  • Luke

    Dr. Gregor,
    I appreciate the information in you video clips. Is the audio from these available to be aired on a radio station?

    Thanks,

    Luke

    • JacquieRN

      Hi Luke, you are free to use the audio on the radio. Do you need something specific? What radio station?

      • Luke

        Jacquie,
        Thanks. Is there any way to get .wav or .mp3 files of the audio? I’m not sure how to extract the audio from the video clips online. You could probably get these on a lot of stations if you made the audio available on an ftp site.
        Our station is WSJL, 88.1 FM. It reaches part of Birmingham, AL.

        Thanks,

        Luke

        • JacquieRN

          Hi Luke, Thanks for sharing your station – if you have time keep me posted on when you play the video(s) for fun!

          You can convert the youtube videos to a mp3 file and download. Go youtube > nutritionfacts.org > select the youtube video you want > select the video’s url > open site: http://www.youtube-mp3.org > paste in the url. > convert > download. This should work.

          Or: http://www.convertmemp3.com/ there are more as well out there.

          Let me know how it goes!

          • Luke

            Jacquie,
            We will probably use the audio clips as fillers, so I can’t predict when they will play.

            I see that you have all the videos DVDs. That would be easier for us to rip. Could we get a set of those? We could send the ripped mp3s back to you to use with other radio stations.

            Thanks,

            Luke

          • JacquieRN

            Hi Luke, let me check on that for you.

          • Tommasina

            Hi Luke, I wonder if it might be easier to rip from the podcast? http://nutritionfacts.org/podcast

            Just an idea! :) what a great project!

      • Luke

        Jacquie,
        Katie S. has taken care of my request.

        Thanks,

        Luke

  • cathy

    I love this site – but have to call out that the imagery used from 0:27 to 0:47 might be a little heavy handed. I found myself having to look away from the Tuberculosis patient who was in serious distress, under what looked like shocking conditions. I don’t live in a bubble, but as a non-medical person I am not desensitized to seeing suffering, as it was not needed to illustrate your point, I felt it was disrespectful to the patient pictured.

    • rsbmg

      Oh brother

    • Thea

      cathy: Your post is so well-worded and respectful, and I’m glad you feel comfortable posting your opinion here. While it is hard to please everyone, I’m sure Dr. Greger is happy to get people’s opinions and integrates them as best he can going forward for future videos.

    • ellis

      Hi Cathy – Agreed – the TB patient was a bit over the top….I was taken aback too. I think when this approach is taken, rather than hammering the message home, the opposite occurs – the message is diluted by the overt use of “shock” images. The studies cited and Dr. G’s words should be enough to persuade – without resorting to visual histrionics.

    • Js

      Hate to say it, but it clearly got your attention and made a point didn’t it?

      • cathy

        For me, no it did not help make the point, perhaps it is effective for others. I am on the site for information, not to be converted, or shocked into a lifestyle change. I think I have been so used to the humorous tone of some of past videos that I was surprised by the serious visuals juxtaposed with Dr. G’s voice over. This is a minor comment – the Dr’s videos are so beneficial to many.

        • b00mer

          With a more respectful and sober voiceover, I wouldn’t have had any issue with the unpleasant and graphic nature of the photo. But while I usually appreciate the humor with these videos, the joking tone used in combination with that photo did seem exploitative and insensitive to me as well.

          • JacquieRN

            Hi all, thanks for sharing your thoughts/reactions about the picture and how it made you feel. I can empathize with you – since you pointed it out. I certainly didn’t think about it until then.

            Therefore, I don’t think it crossed Dr. Greger’s mind that a malnourished uber skinny man with TB would be considered graphic to some – simply because as healthcare professionals this is is not at all considered graphic. I have done medical work in developing areas and this again is not disturbing to me – looks clean and he is getting help, even an IV. A matter of perspective for sure.

            But you know – nurses and docs will talk about anything while enjoying a good dinner!

            Thanks for the feedback, Jacquie

  • Ruby

    Really really awesome info, with visuals. I’m thankful every vid Dr G. You’re a font. Thanks for your work.

  • Not buying it

    The Fleming study doesn’t even look at low carb diets. It compares a 70% carb /15% protein /15% fat diet to 10 people in the study that didn’t stay on the instructed diet. Most studies would call this group “drop outs,” but this study calls them a “high protein group.” High protein, I guess, is anything over the recommended 15%. There’s no mention of what these people actually ate. Very very poor study.

    The preponderance of scientific data indicates the low carb diets either do not effect, or reduce heart disease risk. You forgot to mention that here.

    Seems like you really cherry picked your studies.

    • Mike Quinoa

      “The preponderance of scientific data indicates the low carb diets either do not effect, or reduce heart disease risk.”
      Have there been any studies taking subjects with clinically proven heart disease, and reversing this heart disease with a low carb diet? This reversal has occured with a plant-based diet. To me, this would be the gold standard test of a diet’s healthfulness.

    • The Dude

      “A new scientific
      truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see
      the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new
      generation grows up that is familiar with it.”
      — Max Planck (1858-1947)

    • http://macsmiley.tumblr.com/ MacSmiley

      Cherry picked? I’ll repeat my comment from above:

      “There are flaws in every study, and in the Fleming study, the opportunity to make a comparison between two truly contrasting groups was unforeseen. So you’re going to nitpick for that?

      If the SPECT FMD scans were not conclusive, their cautionary data should certainly not be discounted, either. How can your average low-carb dieter know whether or not he could be very much like one of those Atkins dieters in Fleming’s study until it’s possibly too late? When was the last time you asked your doctor for a SPECT/FMD scan?

      At the very least, this is an opportunity for a larger study to confirm or falsify Flemings ad hoc results. Where are the Atkins Foundation and the NuSI guys when you need them?”

      • http://macsmiley.tumblr.com/ MacSmiley

        Come to think of it, I’d love to see an IVUS (intravenous ultrasound) study contrasting long-time WFPB dieters v. long-time low carb/paleo/WAPF eaters.

        No more wrangling over biomarkers. We’d see who has ACTUAL plaques hiding on the outside and inside of their artery walls!!

        Let’s start with all the diet doctors themselves, and include all the propagandists like Gary Taubes, Sally Fallon, and Mary Enig while we’re at it!

  • ellis

    DR. GREGER: A few days before this video, the New York Times published a somewhat in depth piece denouncing carbs. It also advocated some saturated fats (such as one in whole milk) saying they increase both HDL and LDL – and that the LDL increase only applies to the less harmful large particle LDL. We’d love it if you could comment on this noteworthy article – especially in the context of the video you just released…thank you. Here is the link:

    http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/03/17/study-questions-fat-and-heart-disease-link/

    • JacquieRN

      Is Saturated Fat (Dairy, Meat, and Eggs)

      For you consideration the abstract: http://annals.org/article.aspx?articleid=1846638

      Note “Limitation: Potential biases from preferential publication and selective reporting.”

      Comments on the National Headlines about the March 18, 2014 “Annals of Internal Medicine” Article Suggesting Saturated Fat (Dairy, Meat, and Eggs) Is OK to Eat by Dr. McDougall: http://on.fb.me/1iOfvEZ.

      1) I agree with the conclusion that polyunsaturated fats (fish oil) and monounsaturated fat (olive oil) are not going to prevent heart disease. They are at least fattening and most likely promote cancer.

      http://www.techtimes.com/articles/4520/20140318/omega-3-fatty-acids-with-minimal-benefits-in-lowering-risks-of-heart-disease-study.htm

      2) However, I know that one of their main conclusions is wrong: That it is OK to eat animals. Dairy, meat, and eggs are bad for people and the planet.

      http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/03/17/study-questions-fat-and-heart-disease-link/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_php=true&_type=blogs&ref=health&_r=1&

      “This March 18, 2014 Annals of Internal Medicine article will become a feeding frenzy for the animal-food-industries: a “nugget of proof” that their saturated fat-laden foods can be eaten guiltlessly. Millions of people worldwide, especially those who are looking to hear good news about their bad habits, will die of heart disease, diabetes, cancer, and obesity, and if left unchallenged, resulting increases in livestock production will accelerate global warming even faster.”

      Please read on if you are an interested in the details:

      1) The main scientific study they used showing the safety of saturated fat(reference 12), was a study supported by the National Dairy Council.(Siri-Tarino PW, Sun Q, Hu FB, Krauss RM. Meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies evaluating the association of saturated fat with cardiovascular disease. Am J Clin Nutr. 2010;91:535-46.) This is the single study used to promote eating animals by the low-carb movement and the animal food industries.

      http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/91/3/535.full.pdf

      Jeremiah Stamler, MD wrote an editorial in this same issue of the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition criticizing this flawed paper that has received so much attention in the lay press.

      http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/91/3/497.full.pdf

      Letters to the editor that followed were also highly critical of this advertisement for meat and dairy (saturated fat).

      http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/92/2/458.full.pdf

      And more Letters.

      http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/92/2/459.2.full.pdf

      2) In the results section of the Annals of Internal Medicine (March 18, 2014) article they wrote: “Seventy-two unique studies were identified (Figure 1 of Supplement1 and theTable). Nineteen were based in North America, 42 inEurope, and 9 in the Asia-Pacific region; 2 were multinational.”

      I would like to look at the 9 in the Asia-Pacific region and the 2 that were multinational, independently. This would show the effect of different diets on health (and coronary heart disease).

      In the nineteen that were based in North America and 42 in Europe, people all ate the same diet (full of saturated fat, ie. Dairy, meat, and eggs) – how could you possibly see any difference in health?

      3) This is an incorrect statement in the discussion of the Annals of Internal Medicine (March 18, 2014) paper:

      “For example, the influence of metabolism seems particularly relevant for the denovo synthesis of even-numbered saturated fatty acids in the body, compositions of which are largely determined by dietary factors, including carbohydrate and alcohol consumption (33–35), and other metabolic pathways (36, 37) rather than direct dietary intake.”

      Excess Starch (and even Sugar) Does Not Turn to Body Fat (Easily)

      http://www.drmcdougall.com/misc/2009nl/mar/passionate.htm

      A widely held belief is that the sugars in starches are readily converted into fat and then stored unattractively in the abdomen, hips, and buttock. Incorrect! And there is no disagreement about the truth among scientists or their published scientific research.(5-13). After eating, the complex carbohydrates found in starches, such as rice, are digested into simple sugars in the intestine and then absorbed into the bloodstream where they are transported to trillions of cells in the body in order to provide for energy. Carbohydrates (sugars) consumed in excess of the body’s daily needs can be stored (invisibly) as glycogen in the muscles and liver. The total storage capacity for glycogen is about two pounds. Carbohydrates consumed in excess of our need and beyond our limited storage capacity are not readily stored as body fat. Instead, these excess carbohydrate calories are burned off as heat (a process known as facultative dietary thermogenesis) or used in physical movements not associated with exercise.(9,13)

      The process of turning sugars into fats is known as de novo lipogenesis. Some animals, such as pigs and cows, can efficiently convert the low-energy, inexpensive carbohydrates found in grains and grasses into calorie-dense fats.5 This metabolic efficiency makes pigs and cows ideal “food animals.” Bees also perform de novo lipogenesis; converting honey (simple carbohydrates) into wax (fats). However,human beings are very inefficient at this process and as a result de novo lipogenesis does not occur under usual living conditions in people.(5-13) When, during extreme conditions, de novo lipogenesis does occur the metabolic cost is about 30% of the calories consumed—a very wasteful process.(11)

      Under experimental laboratory conditions overfeeding of large amounts of simple sugars to subjects will result in a little bit of de novo lipogenesis. For example, trim and obese women were overfed 50% more total calories than they usually ate in a day, along with an extra 3.5 ounces (135 grams) of refined sugar. From this overfeeding the women produced less than 4 grams (36 calories)of fat daily, which means a person would have to be overfed by this amount of extra calories and sugar every day for nearly 4 months in order to gain one extra pound of body fat. (10) Obviously, even overeating substantial quantities of refined and processed carbohydrates is a relatively unimportant source of body fat. So where does all that belly fat come from? The fat you eat is the fat you wear.

      5) Hellerstein MK. De novo lipogenesis in humans: metabolic and regulatory aspects. Eur J Clin Nutr. 1999 Apr;53 Suppl 1:S53-65.

      6) Acheson KJ, Schutz Y, Bessard T, Anantharaman K, Flatt JP, Jequier E. Glycogen storage capacity and de novo lipogenesis during massive carbohydrate overfeeding in man.Am J Clin Nutr. 1988 Aug;48(2):240-7.

      7) Minehira K, Bettschart V, Vidal H, Vega N, Di Vetta V, Rey V, Schneiter P, Tappy L.Effect of carbohydrate overfeeding on whole body and adipose tissue metabolism in humans. Obes Res. 2003 Sep;11(9):1096-103.

      8) McDevitt RM, Bott SJ, Harding M, Coward WA, Bluck LJ, Prentice AM. De novo lipogenesis during controlled overfeeding with sucrose or glucose in lean and obese women. AmJ Clin Nutr. 2001 Dec;74(6):737-46

      9) Dirlewanger M, di Vetta V, Guenat E, Battilana P, Seematter G, Schneiter P,J Çquier E, Tappy L. Effects of short-term carbohydrate or fat overfeeding one nergy expenditure and plasma leptin concentrations in healthy female subjects.Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord.2000 Nov;24(11):1413-8.)

      10) McDevitt RM, Bott SJ, Harding M, Coward WA, Bluck LJ, Prentice AM. De novo lipogenesis during controlled overfeeding with sucrose or glucose in lean and obese women. Am J Clin Nutr. 2001 Dec;74(6):737-46

      11) Danforth E Jr. Diet and obesity. Am J Clin Nutr. 1985 May;41(5 Suppl):1132-45.

      12) Hellerstein MK. No common energy currency: de novo lipogenesis as the road less traveled. Am J Clin Nutr. 2001 Dec;74(6):707-8.

      13) Tappy L.Metabolic consequences of overfeeding in humans. Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care. 2004 Nov;7(6):623-8.

    • JacquieRN

      Also by Dr. David Katz: http://huff.to/1qX5ZTQ

      • Thea

        JacquieRN: Nice article! Thanks for the link.

    • http://macsmiley.tumblr.com/ MacSmiley

      Re Large and fluffy LDL being benign or even beneficial: ALL ApoB-containing particles (found in LDL of all sizes) are atherogenic.

      Large, small LDL diameters increased CV mortality risk
      Grammer TB. Eur Heart J. 2014;doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehu055.

      http://www.healio.com/endocrinology/cardiometabolic-disorders/news/online/%7Bffe9124d-148d-4f9a-96df-acfaf47b308f%7D/large-small-ldl-diameters-increased-cv-mortality-risk

      Letter from Columbia University doctors refuting the large LDL fallacy promulgated by Dr. Oz:

      http://s.doctoroz.com/sites/default/files/dm_uploads/Columbia%20Letter.pdf

      A nice wrap up of the issue at Plant Positive:

      25 Cholesterol Confusion 8 A Large and Fluffy Distraction

      http://www.plantpositive.com/25-cholesterol-confusion-8-a-l/

  • mineralt

    People are so afraid to give up their precious meat that they go on and on trying to discredit people like Dr Gregor which silly nitpicking of studies like this. Look, I was fat, had a heart attack, and was told at 42 that I was 75% clogged around critical areas of my heart. I was on five prescription pills, unhappy, lethargic and basically on my way to an early expiration date.

    After 6 months of a whole food, plant based diet, I was off all meds, had a lot of energy, and today I am a marathon runner. What the meat-fanatics never seem to understand is THAT YOU WILL FEEL INFINITELY BETTER if you give up the meat. You’ll get off pills, you’ll be as skinny as you were at age 18, and you’ll have unlimited energy. Exercise goes from being a chore to being a joy. It is that simple.Stop nitpicking and get over your addiction to animal flesh. It’s not worth it.

    • Arjan den Hollander.

      Sorry to say this but its not the meat persee.

      If a person goes from a shitty diet to a vegan shitty diet, that person will probably be worse off.

      Probably best to start eating meat every other day and slowly increase vegetables, nuts and fruits to at least over a kilogram a day.

      I noticed to many details in nutrition to handle practically so I adopted a 5,5,5,5,5 system for myself to avoid deficiency issues.
      5 types of fruit, veggies, nuts(100gr), spices, starchy stuff each every day. Filling the base bulk with whatever is on sale. Plus the magic 4 veggies that are about fixed, red beets, leeks, spinach and kale/red cabbage. (+ started Natto.)

      Its a good start. Anyone on a typical diet will see the first amazing results in a few weeks. Men will be harder than they’ve ever been. (to put in an extra bit of motivation)

      Myself on 2 meat days a week now instead of every other day at start of switch, I still have fear of deficiencies. Results have been spectacular, never recorded a lower blood pressure in my life, heartbeat 55 (started woking out too) my skin is actually regenerating and thickening, eyes look clearer, hands are warm with delightfull youthfull colour.

      I’m not ready to stop eating meat altogether, for now 2 moments a week of animal product intake works wonders for me. All other foods are whole foods, nothing processed which is I’m sure as important as dropping continuous meat consumption.

      People should stop doubting and start trying. Give it a month or 2, at the very least a few weeks. The 55555 system is easy avoids having to do endless research before you start and in my experience one can have 2 steaks a week if you exclude all animal or proccessed food products for the rest of the week to get massive benifits.

      Don’t reply just try!!! :)

      Regards.

      • bruxe

        I like the sound of this 5,5,5,5,5 thing … can you work this up into a program or algorithm or something or tell us more about it.

        I agree with you at this point on meat. First, I am not sure I could quit it totally, nor am I convinced by all of the numbers that it is universally bad, but I do try to minimize it.

        What I want to know is how to you manage this diet, how do you put it together, what form to eat in, stuff like that. Where did you find out about it, is there a book or a reference site that explains it further?

        • Arjan den Hollander.

          You are making it more difficult then I ever intended :).

          Just start cramming your face with as many different fruits nuts and veggies etc as you can manage with the biggest possible variety without it becoming a day job or prohibitively expensive.

          Blending stuff with a scoop of soy protein works like a charm to save preperation time.

          Meat will be bad, but deficiencies because of lacking knowledge will be equally bad, and I suspect science hasn’t discovered even a quarter of what there is to know about nutrition.

  • rick

    http://www.foodpolitics.com/2014/03/is-saturated-fat-a-problem-food-for-debate/
    This very large study has completely blown my understanding of eating animal foods.

  • Alberto

    I find the term “low carb diet” terribly confusing. The issue here is that “high protein” and “high fat” diets are unhealthy.

    For me “low carb” diet means eating overall less carbs, hence reducing your daily caloric intake. CRON (Calorie Restriction with Optimal Nutrition) is achieved by lowering your daily carb intake and has proven very healthy.

    • Wilma Laura Wiggins

      Most people use the term “carb” when they mean “starch”. All plant foods are carbs.

    • EP_2012

      When you raise both protein AND fat, you ultimately get low-carb… the term “low-carb” could be seen as a “high fat AND high protein” diet, not EITHER high-protein OR high-fat.

      Your definition is simply “low calorie” and that’s not the same as low-carb. Most people don’t identify low-carb as calorie restriction, but carb restriction.

  • feeling better than ever

    Can’t convince anyone until they are ready

  • Lawrence

    The great debate continues, judging from some of these comments. If you are as curious as I am about the mechanisms of atherosclerotic plaque progression and regression, may I offer up the following paper that I-a lay reader but digging in nonetheless- find absolutely fascinating:

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3209544/

    And, if you haven’t yet seen the “USDA Great Debate” circa 2000, take a few hours and witness our Favorite Doctors et al lay waste to the Masters of Metabolic Mayhem. Enjoy!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=feCpP40ZHqI

  • Marc Bates

    An honest discussion of this topic is a worthy idea–of course I question the academic honesty of this video when it starts with Red Herring arguments (Twinkle diet, chemo therapy and tuberculosis) and the first proof cited is claimed to be a study, when it is a letter to the editor of the BJN. There is a need to have good debate on this without resorting to such tactics.

    • EP_2012

      The screen shot in the video isn’t actually the study… the link in the sources cited gives you the actual study and it was a published study, not a “letter to the editor”. So there really is no problem here.

      http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3555979/

      or

      http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0055030

      As for the “red herrings”… I just don’t think you understand Dr. Greger’s comedy. He was bringing up the point that weight loss (REGARDLESS of the method), results in lower cholesterol.

      If you have a legitimate concern over the actual study or the the data they’ve gathered, feel free to mention them.

      • Marc Bates

        OK, at best these are examples of gross hyperbole, but these are classic red-herring attacks, since there are numerous studies done today that clearly show that there is no correlation between the CVD markers cited and CVD with or without weight loss.

        As to the actual study cited? I reviewed the video and transcript, no mention of the PLOS Online Article appears (that I could see), but the BJN Letter to the Editor is prominently displayed with the voice-over saying studies now show… This is false representations at best but it probably is just outright purposeful deception. If the intent was to cite the PLOS article, why wasn’t a screen shot of it shown? Why hide it int he sources cited section. Please explain the deception before you explain the validity of the study.

        One possible reason the PLOS article was not shown is the relatively greater recognition of the BJN as a peer-reviewed source. I might also surmise that the PLOS article had only one citation so far (I know it is a relatively new article), that citation was a refutation of the basic methodology used. If I can quote:

        You can find this article at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3945587/

        Regarding the overall effects of ketogenic diet on health there are
        differences in opinion about the research. Recently, in a recent
        systematic review based on limited observational studies, Noto and
        colleagues suggested a possible harmful effect of low carbohydrate/high
        protein diet (LC/HP) on health: i.e., an increase of all-cause mortality risk whilst there was no effect on CVD mortality [81].
        On the other hand, for example, a large European study demonstrated
        that an increase in protein content and a reduction in the glycaemic
        index led to better maintenance of weight loss without differences
        regarding adverse effects.

        The article was published in: International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health and for full disclosure, since its Feb 2014 publication does not appear to have been cited in other research.

        A second reason is that the PLOS model is free open access, and anyone would have been able to access the article and comment on it, where the BJN article requires a subscription. A nasty little trick to try and keep people from double checking your sources.

        I welcome valid debate on this subject, this is not valid debate.

        • EP_2012

          Hyperbole, perhaps, but I found it was effective in getting the point across.

          The sources cited simply send you to the abstract. The full text will get you to the PLOS and PMC journals. Almost all these videos cite abstracts, likely for clarification, but also because most full texts require paid subscriptions to access (making the information useless to the general public). So I don’t find any conflict here either. Why you have to make assumptions attacking the credibility of Dr. Greger is perhaps part of your agenda.

          In regards to your link regarding ketogenic diets, the “large European study” did not test a ketogenic diet. in fact the difference between the “high protein” and “low protein” group was only a 5.4% difference in protein intake… then you have the fact that 29% dropped out (that’s a staggering number) and it was only a 26 week study. This doesn’t make any case for ketogenic diets.

          “… since there are numerous studies done today that clearly show that there is no correlation between the CVD markers cited and CVD with or without weight loss.”

          Could you link those studies? The only ones I’ve seen that appear to show no correlation are funded by the egg/beef/dairy industries and/or use researchers on their payroll (which won’t always show up in disclosure part of the study (as I’ve found out several times already).

        • JacquieRN

          Hello Marc, we actually welcome vigorous debate of the science. However, please understand that Dr. Greger has no intention to or nothing to gain by: “false representations at best but it probably is just outright purposeful deception.” You may notice this site has no advertisements and any money for Dr. Greger’s appearances, etc. are donated by him to charity.
          So please, for everyone’s benefit, help us foster a community of mutual respect by not posting any further personal attacks. Thank you in advance, Jacquie

  • guest

    It would be cool to see a video on capers. They are the highest known source of quercetin and kaemperfol (180mg and 135mg per 100g respectively).

    check this out:
    http://nutrition.merschat.com/foods-by-nutrient.cgi

  • Karman

    Here we go again. The small size of this study makes it suspect right off. Who were these people..?how were they chosen? Were they picked out of a bingo parlor or a health club.? . Did any have any health problems? Did any smoke.. The study leaves a lot more questions then it answers. Just another guy that thinks he just discovered America.

    • The Dude

      “Those sticking to the vegetarian diet showed a reversal of their heart
      disease as expected. Their partially clogged arteries literally got
      cleaned out. They had 20% less atherosclerotic plaque in their arteries
      at the end of the year than at the beginning. What happened to those who
      abandoned the treatment diet, and switched over to the low carb diet?
      Their condition significantly worsened. 40 to 50% more artery clogging
      at the end of the year.” None of your questions matter- the those eating more plants = less plaque.

    • The Dude

      And what are your credentials? Appeared on the movie “Star Wars”

  • EP_2012

    If you follow the first study in the sources sited, you’ll see that even meta-analysis of over 200,000 people concluded that “Low-carbohydrate diets were associated with a significantly higher risk of all-cause mortality and they were not significantly associated with a risk of CVD mortality and incidence”

    The second study sited lists 247 patients. The study being focused on in the video only validates the evidence of the other studies… so what’s the objection?

    At some point you’ll have to concede to the fact that low-carb diets aren’t healthful.

  • anne

    Could someone please tell me what exactly is a Low Carb Diet? How many grams of Carbs can one eat in a day? What is the best source of carbs? Carbs are everywhere, even in vegetables. I’m 60 yrs old, 132 lbs, exercise 4x week, teach 4 low impact exercise classes a week and I consider myself a vegetarian. Please advise!

    • JacquieRN

      Hi Anne, A low-carb diet limits carbohydrates — such as grains, starchy vegetables and fruit. It is mainly dietary protein and fat. Many types of low-carb diets exist, each with varying restrictions on the types and amounts of carbohydrates you can eat.

      Common food sources of naturally occurring carbohydrates include:Fruits, Vegetables, Nuts, Grains, Seeds, Legumes. And of course sugar! So limiting processed carbs like cakes, cookies, sodas.

      The amount of carbs one can eat in a day, depends on health goals and which type of carbs. For instance to lose weight – one may want to decrease decrease fruit consumption and eat more veggies, etc.

      Hope that helps, Jacquie

  • bruxe

    My God, this is confusing. I just watched a video by Gary Taubes where he talks about carbs as stimulating insulin, and characterized insulin as the “fat-making” hormone. I mean, there are all these different doctors on the web and writing books, and all sound like they know what they are talking about, and all have conflicting idea, and all claim to have many testimonials from people whose lives were saved because they lost weight – doing whatever it was whatever doctor told them to do. But I did find it odd that Taubes says that rice is bad when several billion of the world’s thinnest and mostly healthy people eat rice every day without a problem. I really do not know what to think, of what to eat. I tend to be scared these days of too much meat, too many chemicals in meat, dairy, eggs, though I eat a moderate amount of these things just because I’ve eaten them most of my life and it seems silly to go go whole “hog” so to speak and cut out totally foods that I like. But I do think that if I could cut down meat to a bare minimum it would be better. But things like milk, dairy, cheese, and then to me yogurt seems to be in a different class from the rest of this stuff. I would choose yogurt here.

    • JacquieRN

      HI bruxe, it is confusing for sure. That is one reason Dr. Greger always points to research. I wanted to be sure you know that Taubes is a journalist not a doctor – I think you know but the way it was written I just wanted to be sure. From what I have heard and read of Taubes – there are flaws in his words.

      There is no study that drills down to the exact amount of animal product that is ok – thus many people choose to eliminate it altogether since nutritional benefit from plants is over the top. I like to suggest for those that choose to eat dairy or animal – try Meat Mondays instead of Meatless Mondays – so the balance is low on animal. Think of it as a continuum or Spectrum (Ornish), with animal on the low end of nutritional scale.

      • bruxe

        Hi Jacquie … Actually Taubes is a journalist, by way of being a scientist … so the attack the person to discredit the idea meme – at least to me is not going to work. Here is a bit about Taubes from his bio:

        Born in Rochester, New York, Taubes studied applied physics at Harvard University (BS, 1977)[3] and aerospace engineering at Stanford University (MS, 1978). After receiving a master’s degree in journalism at Columbia University in 1981, Taubes joined Discover magazine as a staff reporter in 1982.[4] Since then he has written numerous articles forDiscover, Science and other magazines. Originally focusing on physics issues, his interests have more recently turned to medicine and nutrition. His brother, Clifford Henry Taubes, is the William Petschek Professor of Mathematics at Harvard University.[5]

        After hearing Taubes speak and debate on the Internet, i.e. YouTube to be specific I find he makes a lot of sense and does not really conflict much with what others say either. One has to look very carefully at the claim made by anyway and what they really mean.

        I think Taubes is correct when he pins a lot of our obesity problem on refined/processed carbs. Just for kicks from my normal diet I cut carbs out the next day and I was amazed at how mentally clear and calm I felt. Now, I don’t know what to make of that. As a hypothesis I cut down on carbs and sugars and I feel noticeably much better … much better than when I cut out meat for week, but them much of what I was eating in its place was carbs. Which brings up my problem with vegan/vegetarianism to me now … it is very difficult to do – not to mention expensive – and not sacrifice huge amounts of convenience too.

        Taubes is saying basically much of what the vegans are saying, but that you can eat reasonable quantities of good animal protein.

        • http://macsmiley.tumblr.com/ MacSmiley

          No one said Taubes didn’t have credentials. What I said is that he is abusing those credentials to mislead others.

          Don’t believe Plant Positive’s mountains of evidence? Wanna hear some proof of his dishonesty from a low carb dieter? Search Evelyn (CarbSane)’a blog
          http://carbsanity.blogspot.com
          for “Gary Taubes”. When low-carber’s with their own scientific background think Taubes’s misleading rhetoric gives them a bad name, there’s a problem. There is no substance to his pet theory that ALL CARBS make us fat.

          Congrats on getting rid of the junk carbs. Anyone who gets rid of addictive hyperprocessed carbs is bound to feel better. That doesn’t make eggs and sausage for breakfast and a pound of steak for dinner (I.e., a ketogenic diet) a healthy regimen.

          PS. Taubes admits his wife is mostly vegetarian who refuses to let his kids eat the way he does.

        • Thea

          bruxe: You wrote, “Which brings up my problem with vegan/vegetarianism to me now … it is
          very difficult to do – not to mention expensive – and not sacrifice huge
          amounts of convenience too.”

          Most people find whole plant based eating to be quite convenient once they get over the learning curve. Though I think convenience may depend in part on where you live in the country. For example, it’s really easy in say California, Oregon and Washington USA. I’m guessing it’s less easy in the middle sections of USA.

          As for cost, whole plant based eating is the cheapest (not to mention healthiest) way to eat! If you would like to learn more, check out this video:
          http://nutritionfacts.org/video/eating-healthy-on-a-budget/

          This one may also interest you:
          http://nutritionfacts.org/video/eating-healthy-on-the-cheap/

          Good luck.

    • http://macsmiley.tumblr.com/ MacSmiley

      I encourage you to view Plant Positive’s excellent series of videos deconstruction of Gary Taubes’ misleading tactics. Once you see how he is abusing his science-writer cred, instance by instance, you will never again be confused by his smoke-and-mirrors.

      http://www.plantpositive.com

      • bruxe

        MacSmiley … I never indicated that everything Gary Taubes said was right, but what I do think is – first that Taubes primary focus is on obesity and weight loss. The videos you point to as far as I can tell are disagreeing with Taubes on what I think are minor nit-picky points. I mean, the first video starts our quoting George Orwell/1984 framing the whole debate as one of propaganda. I don’t call that honest inquiry either.

        The main point I see Taubes as making is that when we eat carbs, the are processed by the body and insulin is shot into the blood, and these days we eat so many carbs almost all day that we always have insulin our blood. The second leg is that he calls insulin “The Fact Making Hormone” and backs that up with science. In some cases insulin processes so much carb to fat that an animal genetically programmed to be fat because of their insulin chemistry can actually starve to death while being hugely obese and eating all it wants.

        What Taubes said made a lot of sense and explained why people are getting fat better than other alternatives. For example Lustig from UCSC says it is all due to fructose, and he makes good points, but I think it is a subset of what Taubes is referring to. Now, when Taubes goes on to extend his ideas past that, I am not sure I buy what he says.

        Figuring out what these studies say and what they do not say is very difficult and should be more concentrated on by the people who are supposed to be reading and informing us.

        • http://macsmiley.tumblr.com/ MacSmiley

          Many of Taubes’s tactics are blatant obfuscation. His rewriting history (the reason for the 1984 citation), that is, his account of Ancel Keys’ research borders on libel. PlantPositive is far from nit-picking.

          One example:

          In his book, Why We Get Fat and What to Do About It, he cites 3 recommendations of the World Cancer Research Fund.

          (1) Be lean and avoid gaining fat mass. (2) Be physically active. (3) Avoid energy dense foods and sugary drinks to avoid weight gain. By themselves, those recommendations do not justify his promotion of a low carb diet. But they don’t rule it out either.

          However, Taubes fails to mention many of the other recommendations by that organization, which include (4) Limit red meats and avoid processed meats and (5) Eat mostly foods of plant origin.

          Is Taubes promoting a plant-based diet, as his source does? No. And that’s only one of a mountain of truthy detours. Follow him and he’ll take you for quite a ride.

        • http://macsmiley.tumblr.com/ MacSmiley

          I just read this discussion of Taubes’s insulin theory by Stephan Guyanet which takes on Taubes’s theory itself instead of his misleading manipulation:

          The Carbohydrate Hypothesis of Obesity: a Critical Examination

          http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/2011/08/carbohydrate-hypothesis-of-obesity.html?m=1

    • Thea

      bruxe: I second MacSmiley’s recommendation to watch Plant Positive’s Videos. You will learn all about the problems with Gary Taubes’ statements/”logic”. Good luck.

  • BTBC0147

    the bottom line is NO ONE has ever been able to prove you can eat more than your bodies maintenance and NOT gain weight…Atkins admitted in a court that his diet was based on if he told people to eat more protein and fat they would automatically eat less which proves cal in vs out..

  • Arjan den Hollander.

    Bottom line is you should feed your body what it needs. Deprive it of something your body will find alternative ways to still keep performing.
    Wasting tissues it doesn’t need, breaking down less critically stocked reserves converting it to what is needed wherever it can..

    In the end the result is the same, you force your cells/body to work harder and less efficient. Less efficient means more waste toxins/products, which means aging faster as also you do from working harder.

    You can actually see this principle happen in micro scale in your skin. Which was a very big surprise to me after switching to plant based diet. Better blood flow, more nutrients and less waste, healthier skin.

    The knowledge that that is actually happening everywhere still brings a smile on my face.

  • JacquieRN

    To supplement the information I provided along with others in many of the comments below: “Scientists Fix Errors in Controversial Paper About Saturated Fats”

    Willett says correcting the paper isn’t enough. “It is good that they fixed it for the record, but it has caused massive confusion and the public hasn’t heard about the correction.” The paper should be withdrawn, he argues.”
    “It’s dangerous.”
    http://bit.ly/1jxyIJv

  • Sorin

    Seems not a lot of people think these studies have any value….hmmm… got any good studies?

  • robert janko

    those on low fat were also on high protein, my question is, was the blood flow in the arteries worsened because of the low carb or the high protein?

    • robert janko

      those on low carbs i meant*

  • Craig

    These studies are always so flawed and unrealistic.

    Why do they always have to measure the outcomes of an extreme diet?

    Why not study for e.g. a whole foods approach to nutrition perhaps on a paleo/primal template of moderate carbs (heaps of veg, some fruit, no grains/cereals), low sugar, moderate protein and fat (moderate to high) as necessary for energy and weight maintenance depending on ones activity levels?

    • Craig

      Probably because the way a lot of ‘health conscious active people’ actually eat doesn’t show dramatic enough results to create attention and there’s no government, medical body, pharmaceutical or food manufacturer/organisation to fund it…

  • http://jonathandfriesen.blogspot.ca/ Jonathan Friesen

    So you are talking about low carb diets but in the video I read “…effect of high protein diets on…”. Are high protein and low carb diets interchangeable in your view?

  • dale

    Sweden just adopted low carb high fat. Are they wrong?

  • http://macsmiley.tumblr.com/ MacSmiley

    This information is incorrect. In general, cholesterol levels tend to fall during calorie restriction of any type, including low carb. (See the Twinkie and potato diets.)

    Atkins and other low carb proponents rig their studies to show a cardiac benefit by contrasting a hypo-caloric low carb diet with an isocaloric junk carb diet. Typically the low-carb diet shows a small improvement in lipids and Voilà! Low carb = good.

    And even that doesn’t always work. On the famous one year, all-meat diet undertaken by Stefansson and Anderson, both had increased blood lipids. Anderson’s TC went as high as 800! It lowered considerably afterwards, but neither achieved a healthy level.

    As a side note, by the end of the study, Anderson had sugar in his urine and Stefansson was pre-diabetic.