Flashback Friday: Paleo Diets May Negate Benefits of Exercise

Flashback Friday: Paleo Diets May Negate Benefits of Exercise
4.93 (98.57%) 42 votes

The deleterious effects of a Paleolithic diet appear to undermine the positive effects of a Crossfit-based high-intensity circuit training exercise program.

Discuss
Republish

Much of the low carb and paleo reasoning revolves around insulin. To quote one random blogger, “Carbohydrates increase insulin, the root of all evil when it comes to dieting and health.” So because carbs increase insulin, we should stick mostly to meat, which is fat and protein—no carbs, so no increase in insulin, right? Wrong. We’ve known for half a century that if you give someone just a steak, no carbs, no sugar, no starch–their insulin goes up. Carbs make your insulin go up, but so does protein.

In 1997 an insulin index of foods was published, ranking 38 foods on which stimulates higher insulin levels. What do you think causes a larger insulin spike: a large apple and all its sugar, a cup of oatmeal packed with carbs, a cup and a half of white flour pasta, a big bunless burger—no carbs at all–or half of a salmon fillet? The answer is the meat.

They looked only at beef and fish, but subsequent data showed that there’s no significant difference between the insulin spike from beef, versus chicken or pork—they’re all just as high. Thus, protein- and fat-rich foods may induce substantial insulin secretion. In fact, meat protein causes as much insulin release as pure sugar.

So, based on their own framework, if they really believed insulin is the root of all evil, then low carbers and paleo folks would be eating big bowls of white spaghetti day in and day out before they’d ever touch meat.

Yes, having hyperinsulinemia–too high levels of insulin in the blood–like type 2 diabetics have, is not a good thing, and may increase cancer by like 10%. But if low carb and paleo people stuck to their own theory, if it’s all about insulin, they would be out telling everyone to go vegetarian, as vegetarians have significantly lower insulin levels, even at the same weight. It’s true for ovolactovegetarians. It’s true for lactovegetarians and vegans. Meateaters have up to 50% higher insulin levels.

Put someone on a strictly plant-based diet–man, woman, young, old, skinny or fat–and you can significantly bring their insulin levels down within just three weeks on a healthy vegan diet. And then just by adding egg whites back to the diet, you can boost insulin production 60% within four days.

What if you take people and add carbohydrates, double their carbohydrate intake? You can bring their insulin levels down. Why? Because they weren’t feeding people jellybeans and sugar cookies; they were feeding people whole plant foods, lots of whole grains, beans, fruits, and vegetables.

What if you put someone on a very low-carb diet, like an Atkins diet? Low carb advocates assumed that it would lower insulin levels. Dr. Westman is the new Dr. Atkins, after the old Dr. Atkins died overweight with, according to the Medical Examiner, a history of heart attack, congestive heart failure and hypertension. But Dr. Westman was wrong. No significant drop in insulin levels on very low carb diets. What they got is a significant rise in their LDL cholesterol levels, the #1 risk factor for our #1 killer, heart disease.

Atkins is an easy target, though. No matter how many new, new, extra new Atkins diets that come out, it’s still old news. What about paleo? The paleo movement gets a lot of things right. They tell people to ditch dairy and doughnuts, eat lots of fruits, nuts, and vegetables, and cut out a lot of processed junk. But this new study’s pretty scary. Took a bunch of young healthy folks, put them on a Paleolithic diet along with a Crossfit-based, high-intensity circuit training exercise program. Now if you lose enough weight exercising you can temporarily drop your cholesterol levels no matter what you eat. You can see that with stomach stapling surgery, tuberculosis, chemo, a cocaine habit—just losing weight by any means can lower cholesterol, which makes these results all the more troubling. Ten weeks of hard-core workouts and weight loss, and LDL cholesterol still went up. And it was even worse for those who started out the healthiest. Those starting out with excellent LDLs, under 70, had a 20% elevation in LDL, and their HDL dropped. Exercise is supposed to boost your good cholesterol, not lower it. The Paleo diet’s deleterious impact on blood fats was not only significant, but substantial enough to counteract the improvements commonly seen with improved fitness and body composition. Exercise is supposed to make things better. Put people instead on a plant-based diet and a modest exercise program—mostly just walking-based, and within three weeks they can drop their bad cholesterol 20%, and their insulin levels 30%, despite the 75-80% carbohydrate diet, whereas the paleo diets appeared to negate the positive effects of exercise.

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 Katie Schloer.

Please consider volunteering to help out on the site.

Images thanks to picaidol via Pixabay and Pascal, Lonnie, and sriram bala via Flickr.

Much of the low carb and paleo reasoning revolves around insulin. To quote one random blogger, “Carbohydrates increase insulin, the root of all evil when it comes to dieting and health.” So because carbs increase insulin, we should stick mostly to meat, which is fat and protein—no carbs, so no increase in insulin, right? Wrong. We’ve known for half a century that if you give someone just a steak, no carbs, no sugar, no starch–their insulin goes up. Carbs make your insulin go up, but so does protein.

In 1997 an insulin index of foods was published, ranking 38 foods on which stimulates higher insulin levels. What do you think causes a larger insulin spike: a large apple and all its sugar, a cup of oatmeal packed with carbs, a cup and a half of white flour pasta, a big bunless burger—no carbs at all–or half of a salmon fillet? The answer is the meat.

They looked only at beef and fish, but subsequent data showed that there’s no significant difference between the insulin spike from beef, versus chicken or pork—they’re all just as high. Thus, protein- and fat-rich foods may induce substantial insulin secretion. In fact, meat protein causes as much insulin release as pure sugar.

So, based on their own framework, if they really believed insulin is the root of all evil, then low carbers and paleo folks would be eating big bowls of white spaghetti day in and day out before they’d ever touch meat.

Yes, having hyperinsulinemia–too high levels of insulin in the blood–like type 2 diabetics have, is not a good thing, and may increase cancer by like 10%. But if low carb and paleo people stuck to their own theory, if it’s all about insulin, they would be out telling everyone to go vegetarian, as vegetarians have significantly lower insulin levels, even at the same weight. It’s true for ovolactovegetarians. It’s true for lactovegetarians and vegans. Meateaters have up to 50% higher insulin levels.

Put someone on a strictly plant-based diet–man, woman, young, old, skinny or fat–and you can significantly bring their insulin levels down within just three weeks on a healthy vegan diet. And then just by adding egg whites back to the diet, you can boost insulin production 60% within four days.

What if you take people and add carbohydrates, double their carbohydrate intake? You can bring their insulin levels down. Why? Because they weren’t feeding people jellybeans and sugar cookies; they were feeding people whole plant foods, lots of whole grains, beans, fruits, and vegetables.

What if you put someone on a very low-carb diet, like an Atkins diet? Low carb advocates assumed that it would lower insulin levels. Dr. Westman is the new Dr. Atkins, after the old Dr. Atkins died overweight with, according to the Medical Examiner, a history of heart attack, congestive heart failure and hypertension. But Dr. Westman was wrong. No significant drop in insulin levels on very low carb diets. What they got is a significant rise in their LDL cholesterol levels, the #1 risk factor for our #1 killer, heart disease.

Atkins is an easy target, though. No matter how many new, new, extra new Atkins diets that come out, it’s still old news. What about paleo? The paleo movement gets a lot of things right. They tell people to ditch dairy and doughnuts, eat lots of fruits, nuts, and vegetables, and cut out a lot of processed junk. But this new study’s pretty scary. Took a bunch of young healthy folks, put them on a Paleolithic diet along with a Crossfit-based, high-intensity circuit training exercise program. Now if you lose enough weight exercising you can temporarily drop your cholesterol levels no matter what you eat. You can see that with stomach stapling surgery, tuberculosis, chemo, a cocaine habit—just losing weight by any means can lower cholesterol, which makes these results all the more troubling. Ten weeks of hard-core workouts and weight loss, and LDL cholesterol still went up. And it was even worse for those who started out the healthiest. Those starting out with excellent LDLs, under 70, had a 20% elevation in LDL, and their HDL dropped. Exercise is supposed to boost your good cholesterol, not lower it. The Paleo diet’s deleterious impact on blood fats was not only significant, but substantial enough to counteract the improvements commonly seen with improved fitness and body composition. Exercise is supposed to make things better. Put people instead on a plant-based diet and a modest exercise program—mostly just walking-based, and within three weeks they can drop their bad cholesterol 20%, and their insulin levels 30%, despite the 75-80% carbohydrate diet, whereas the paleo diets appeared to negate the positive effects of exercise.

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 Katie Schloer.

Please consider volunteering to help out on the site.

Images thanks to picaidol via Pixabay and Pascal, Lonnie, and sriram bala via Flickr.

Doctor's Note

I touched on paleo diets before in Paleolithic Lessons, and I featured a guest blog on the subject: Will The Real Paleo Diet Please Stand Up?

I wrote a book on low carb diets (now available free full-text online) and touched on it in Atkins Diet: Trouble Keeping It Up and Low Carb Diets and Coronary Blood Flow.

And just two months ago, I published a bunch of videos on the low-carb keto diet:

And if you’re thinking, yeah, but what about the size of the cholesterol, small and dense or large and fluffy? Please see my video Does Cholesterol Size Matter?

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

80 responses to “Flashback Friday: Paleo Diets May Negate Benefits of Exercise

Comment Etiquette

On NutritionFacts.org, you'll find a vibrant community of nutrition enthusiasts, health professionals, and many knowledgeable users seeking to discover the healthiest diet to eat for themselves and their families. As always, our goal is to foster conversations that are insightful, engaging, and most of all, helpful – from the nutrition beginners to the experts in our community.

To do this we need your help, so here are some basic guidelines to get you started.

The Short List

To help maintain and foster a welcoming atmosphere in our comments, please refrain from rude comments, name-calling, and responding to posts that break the rules (see our full Community Guidelines for more details). We will remove any posts in violation of our rules when we see it, which will, unfortunately, include any nicer comments that may have been made in response.

Be respectful and help out our staff and volunteer health supporters by actively not replying to comments that are breaking the rules. Instead, please flag or report them by submitting a ticket to our help desk. NutritionFacts.org is made up of an incredible staff and many dedicated volunteers that work hard to ensure that the comments section runs smoothly and we spend a great deal of time reading comments from our community members.

Have a correction or suggestion for video or blog? Please contact us to let us know. Submitting a correction this way will result in a quicker fix than commenting on a thread with a suggestion or correction.

View the Full Community Guidelines

  1. Humorous image on the video cover. What I like best: the small bone stuck in the caveman’s garment. Something for him to munch on later, maybe?

    He’s smart enough to invent a wheel. Somebody should tell him to replace the bone with an asparagus spear.

    1. If I were an actual ‘doctor’ and not just playing one on the internet, for one I would not HAVE TIME to play on the internet and secondly my comments would come from a medical viewpoint.

      And the rest of you that constantly want to try to turn these boards into youtube nonsense and childish off topic comments perhaps would be better suited to stay on youtube.

      It is selfishly distracting to people who come here for health information and discussion.

      1. Reality bites,

        These comments are generally filled to the brim with real discussion.

        Several times people have come here and said how useful the comment section has been to them.

        But, you don’t like when people take medical advice online is what you have said several times.

        You also don’t like people being playful.

        I don’t know if you can have it both ways.

        Either way, people do have excellent conversations almost every single day and I don’t know that you will find any other site on the internet that has a more passionate comment section.

        1. Reality bites,

          What would you like to discuss about this topic?

          The animal products causing insulin to go up?

          Or maybe we could speculate whether Keto has the same pattern as Paleo?

          The thing is, Dr. Cobalt is mentioning the creative parts of the site and that is a legitimate topic of the process.

          Dr. Greger works so hard to have those images be interesting and he gets feedback from us and responds to it all of the time and us communicating what we respond to will make this site better.

          It also makes this site friendlier.

          I do know that there are real doctors who come here and there are also people who are not even health-oriented at all. In many ways, I don’t mind that you pick on the regulars, but there might be people who come who have cancer or diabetes and have never heard any of it at all and having a friendly comment section is also beneficial.

          I know though that some people feel like that is a waste of time, but the people who are attracted to entertaining videos are probably the ones showing up the most and having entertaining comments will appeal to those people.

        2. I think reality just forgot to take his happy pill this morning…

          Perhaps reality might find a different reality on a different nutrition website…

          1. “Perhaps reality might find a different reality on a different nutrition website…”
            – – – –

            :-D Oh, but where? ‘Tis said, “We create our reality,” so this indeed is the reality he’s creating. *_^

          2. People being a bit silly and other being a bit overly critical is just part of the spectrum of our behavior. I find that using Dr Greger’s daily dozen has both raised my frustration threshold and increased my interest in the health information he shares. But human behavior is what we get when we communicate and I like this comment section.

      2. “And the rest of you that constantly want to try to turn these boards into youtube nonsense and childish off topic comments perhaps would be better suited to stay on youtube”
        – – – – – –

        And with that, RealityBites stamped his little foot and said, “I’m going to pick up my ball and go home.”

        P.S. to Dr. J.: I still intend to make the sourdough bread. :-)

          1. YR, Yes, Google’s algorithm manipulation to insert their biases is despicable. I use the alternate search engine “DuckDuckGo”, and a web browser called “Brave”, instead of Chrome. Looks like all these big tech companies are trying their best to steer people’s thinking in the direction they want. I also closed my account on Facebook for their underhanded biases, too. These big tech companies aren’t called the “Masters of the Universe” for nothing. George Orwell is probably rolling over in his grave by now!

            https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/11/11/report-google-secretly-accessed-millions-of-personal-health-records-in-21-states/

  2. I think I read that same quote from the random blogger.

    The internet is quite a bit like the telephone game of old.

    LDL going up and HDL going down and insulin going up is a scary combination.

    I am a few months away from my lab tests.

    I am curious to see what happens, but I am hoping to clean things up even further by then.

    I am not cheating all that often, but I know the holidays are almost here.

    I will have to wait at least 3 weeks after the holidays to make sure I am getting proper readings.

    I like that sentence “within three weeks they can drop their bad cholesterol 20%, and their insulin levels 30%”

    1. Julie,

      I thought the same thing and have had friends who are Diabetic try to go all meat and watched their Diabetes get worse.

      This is from Dr. Greger’s transcript. Animal products are a big factor in Type 2 Diabetes.

      People who eat a plant-based diet have been found to have just a small fraction of the diabetes rate seen in those who regularly eat meat. As diets become increasingly plant-based, there appears to be a stepwise drop in diabetes rates. Based on a study of 89,000 Californians, flexitarians (who eat meat maybe once weekly rather than daily) appear to cut their rate of diabetes by 28 percent, and those who cut out all meat except fish appear to cut their rates in half. What about those eliminating all meat, including fish? They appear to eliminate 61 percent of their risk. And those who go a step farther and drop eggs and dairy, too? They may drop their diabetes rates 78 percent compared with people who eat meat on a daily basis.

  3. Hi
    For many of us trying to keep the complications of ‘pre-diabetes’ and diabetes at bay, the solution appears to be keeping blood-sugar levels down, which seems to be addressed by Jenny Ruhl’s approach (as detailed in her books ‘ Blood Sugat 101’ and her ‘Answering Questions about Diabetes’.
    Could you please review those books,
    as her thesis, that keeping blood sugars down is the best way to avert/minimize Diabetic complications, is convincing.
    Thank you

    1. Ros,

      She isn’t a researcher and I didn’t get very much off of her site without buying a book.

      People like Dr. Barnard got Type 2 Diabetics off of meds in a few weeks using Whole Food Plant-Based vegan with no oil or refined carbs.

      How does her plan compare to that?

      The thing is neuropathy can be reversed in a matter of a few days and retinopathy can be reversed, rather than kept “at bay” and Dr. Greger has videos on topics like that.

      1. In the reviews, people say she is low carb emphasis.

        Why go low-carb when you can reverse T2 Diabetes with high carb, no-oil, no-refined carbs?

        Whole Food Plant-Based can heal the pancreas.

        Low carb doesn’t do that.

            1. I will add the Simply Raw documentary, mostly because almost everybody got off of their Diabetes meds in a week, but that diet was also restrictive and I would go with Dr. Barnard or Dr. Fuhrman or Dr. McDougall or any of the Whole Food Plant-Based doctors instead.

              I just do think it is helpful to see how easy it can be to reverse it.

              https://www.filmsforaction.org/watch/simply-raw-reversing-diabetes-in-30-days/

              Type 1 isn’t easy to reverse and I would send people to the Mastering Diabetes site for that or Type 1.5 and they have a blog that tells how to figure out which one you are using a C-Peptide test.

      2. Deb,

        Type 2 has been rather easy to reverse. Sometimes seemingly unrelated events like unrelated surgery can improve things to the point where there is a reversal. But diet can make a greater difference that lasts.

        The other reversals may be just in mice so far with extraordinary means far beyond diet involved if you are taking about Sinclair’s work.

      3. Deb, Would you post the study that shows that neuropathy can be reversed in days? That sounds pretty exciting!
        Neuropathy is caused by nerve damage from high blood sugars over a period of time. I was taught that nerves can heal, but they heal quite slowly.

    2. Ros, Jenny Ruhl is a 1.5 type diabetic. People with that form are generally not overweight. They have diabetes because they cannot produce enough insulin, not because they are insulin resistant.
      Genuine type 2’s actually produce more insulin than normal people, their bodies just cannot use it properly.
      Her book is helpful for those with type 1.5 for that reason. Lowering both carbohydrates and protein lower the need for insulin, thus lowering the need for diabetic drugs.
      Type 1.5’s cannot be cured by eating high carb, it only makes them worse. Dr. MacDougall has stated that he puts them on insulin.

      1. Marilyn Kaye,

        What exactly do you mean by “high carb?” High starch? Mostly plant based? Because all plants contain lots of carbohydrates — for example, it’s what makes up cellulose in the cell walls, which we call fiber in our diets. But not all plants contain high amounts of starch.

        And then there are refined carbohydrates, such as sugar and sugar concentrates, refined flour, products made from these food components, etc. Some folks refer to these as “high carbohydrates.”

        (I wonder if dairy milk is considered “high carbohydrate,” due to the fairly high amount of sugar present. EG: “ One cup of whole milk provides 149 calories, 8 grams of protein, 12 grams of carbohydrate, 12 grams of sugar, 8 grams of total fat and 5 grams of saturated fat.” So the biggest single solid component by weight is sugar.)

        1. Dr. J, I am fully aware that all plants contain carbs. Of course, even spinach and broccoli have carbs. But fairly low amounts, especially compared with their fiber content, also technically carbs, which slows absorption.
          Diets with high starch content based on plant foods like rice and potatoes would be considered ‘high carb’. So are most fruits.
          Each individual has to monitor their blood sugar to find out what foods, and how much of them, they tolerate. And that varies widely. It also matters whether those foods are cooked, cooked and reheated, etc.
          Any diabetic serious about managing their disease knows not to eat refined carbs.
          I don’t recommend milk, lactose isn’t the only problem with it.

          1. Marilyn,

            Inwardly, I had the same question as Dr. J. Mentally, the problem becomes what are they eating instead of carbs? Oils would make it worse. Animal products would make it worse. So maybe nuts, seeds, and avocado?

            I have been reading sites where people share their diets in great detail and one woman spent years trying to manage her Diabetes low-carb, switched to high-carb and her numbers came down, but she couldn’t psychologically handle it and said that she felt like her sugars would be up, but kept checking and they were all still low, but one day she ate cheese and her numbers that night went through the roof. She ended up following the mental logic that if Whole Food Plant-Based made her so sensitive to fats that her numbers would get worse after one high-fat meal, she shouldn’t do it and she switched back to low-carb. I guess I am wondering if she is pushing oil. A lot of the people who use the word, “carb” push oil.

            When I look at the Mastering Diabetes website, Type 1 Diabetics improved their condition by eating a lot more fruits and vegetables and what surprised me with the first woman I looked at was that she was eating things like potatoes for lunch. They have a lot of testimonials and what I saw is that some of them who by their C-Peptide score probably shouldn’t have been able to get off their meds with diet sometimes were, but they seemed to go very high in fruits and vegetables.

      2. Marilyn,

        Thanks.

        Mastering Diabetes site uses the C-Peptide test for whether people can reverse it with diet alone, but that site has had people who were 1.5 who I believe did manage it with diet. They give the percent that manage it with diet in their blog post.

        1. Deb, people with diabetes need to monitor meals. They can usually eat a lot of low glycemic Load carbs. Basically it’s a healthy high fiber, high vegetable diet, very filling. Most find there are some -whole- grains they do well on. High fiber is what to strive for. So lots of legumes and vegetables. Nuts and seeds, avocados are good. There is no biological reason to eat a lot of starchy foods. Many can eat foods like potatoes -in moderation- if they are cooked, cooled and reheated.
          Frankly, now, most people just eat too much of everything. Check out what portion sizes were 50 years ago. And activity levels were much higher then also.
          Also depends on the time of day, and how much glucose their muscles will be using in the next hours.
          The problem I see with most of these studies is that they just report what happened to Most subjects. But people are individuals, and need to be treated as such.
          To my mind, that is what is wrong with much of allopathic medicine. It treats people like genetically the same lab rats, with the same lifestyle.
          I work with real human beings, one on one.

          1. Also, people need to keep in mind that this video is relating the effect of high protein on Insulin levels. Not the effect of protein on blood sugar. Not the same at all.
            High insulin is not healthy, but neither is high blood sugar.

            1. Yes but surely the important point is

              “Insulin resistance often is the primary metabolic abnormality leading to the development of type 2 diabetes. Type 2 diabetes can be viewed as the consequence of a series of pathophysiologic changes, each of which makes the patient vulnerable to subsequent disruption of normal glucose homeostasis. In most individuals, insulin resistance is the first of a sequence of abnormalities leading to the development of type 2 diabetes. Insulin resistance is compensated by increased insulin secretion (hyperinsulinemia), which allows glucose metabolism to remain normal.”

              https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/412682

    3. Ros

      Symptom control is no doubt important but it doesn’t address the root cause of the problem.. Nor does it address the key issue of preventing diabetes in the first place

  4. I ordered some outreach cards from this site; I consider it a donation. AND I get to give them to folks who seem like they might be interested in learning more about nutrition, and diseases or lifestyle conditions.

    Today I gave one to an acquaintance who owns a store in our town center; he seemed interested. He also appears to be on all the same meds that my brother was. So, I told him my brother’s story; then I suggested that he check out the site, and some of the videos, to see what he thinks. He tucked the card into his shirt pocket.

    Finally, I second what Julie wrote above: “Meat protein causes as much insulin release as pure sugar. Wow!” WOW indeed. I’d forgotten this. I really like the Flashback Friday videos; some I’ve never seen, and some I have but forgot important points.

  5. The problem of this video, which was brought to my attention by someone on another forum, is that Dr. Greger’s information is old, and biased. Perhaps that’s the problem of Flashback Fridays: the articles/topics may be old or outdated. To me, that endangers Dr. Greger’s credibility as a trusted source to disseminate the science well for his viewers. The studies below are more current with the last being a meta-analysis of RCTs which show that Paleo is actually helpful to cardio-metobolic health. I wish Dr. G would stop selecting specific studies that support his agenda and simply present the science. Of course, I would like a whole-food, vegan diet to be hands-down the winner in every case but there are other dietary approaches that appear healthful as well. (PLEASE NOTE, AS A VEGAN MYSELF, I AM NOT DISMISSING ANIMAL WELFARE OR THE ENVIRONMENT!)

    Consider the following studies:
    Frassetto, L., Schloetter, M., Mietus-Synder, M., Morris, RC Jr., Sebastian, A. (2009). Metabolic and physiologic improvements from consuming a paleolithic, hunter-gatherer type diet. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 63(8):947-55. doi: 10.1038.
    Ryberg, M., Sandberg, S., Melberg, C., Stegle, O., Lindahl, B., Larsson, C., Hauksson, J, Olsson, T. (2013). A Palaeolithic-type diet causes strong tissue-specific effects on ectopic fat deposition in obese postmenopausal women. Journal of Internal Medicine. doi.org/10.1111/joim.12048.
    Lindeberg, S., Jonsson, T., Granfeld, Y., Borgstrand, E., Soffman, J., Sjostrom,K., Ahren, B. (2007). A Palaeolithic diet improves glucose tolerance more than a Mediterranean-like diet in individuals with ischaemic heart disease. Diabetologia. 50(9):1795-1807. doi: 10.1007/s00125-007-0716-y.

    The Beneficial Effects of a Paleolithic Diet on Type 2 Diabetes and Other Risk Factors for Cardiovascular Disease
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2787021/
    De Menezes, E., Sampaio, H., Carioca, A., Parente, N., Brito, F., Moreira, T., de Souza, A., Arruda, S. (2019). Influence of Paleolithic diet on anthropometric markers in chronic diseases: systematic review and meta-analysis. Nutrition Journal. 18(1):41. doi: 10.1186/s12937-019-0457-z.

    Effects of a Paleolithic Diet on Cardiovascular Disease Risk Factors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
    https://academic.oup.com/advances/article-abstract/10/4/634/5482319

    1. I was reading the Diabetes study you posted and it had too small a sample size and disbanded without finishing but there was “almost a statistically significant difference” compared to a Diabetic diet which also had people eating animal products.

      Almost statistically significant with a small sample size of 6 people who disbanded early isn’t exactly a newer study.

        1. The cardiovascular analysis said that the analysis came up with a benefit in the profiles by removing studies and that the results should be looked at with caution.

          1. And is that “benefit” which may or may not be real versus the Standard American Diet?

            It is not versus Whole Food Plant-Based.

            You are accusing Dr Greger but the results of each of the things you brought was questionable at best.

            1. I think that the Paleo diet can have more Plant food than the Diabetic diet is likely the case.

              Meaning, some people do the very very high Vegetables and herbs as described by the woman who improved her MS.

              Other people do more of a Paleolithic diet based on a concept of what symbolic cavemen ate.

              The whole notion of cavemen seems fascinating to me. How many actual caves are there?

                1. “Hard to have a caveman concept of what eating only lean meats would be.”
                  – – – – –

                  Good point, Deb.

                  Thinks the caveman, “Even though I’m starving, that critter looks way too fatty for me. Gotta watch my figure, doncha know!”

    2. jeffreywp,

      Did these Paleolithic diets cut out processed food? Because to me, that’s one major source of our health problems today.

      Also, my problems with eating that way (though I’m not exactly sure what is meant by a Paleolithic diet; I’d like a good definition but I think that it’s meat heavy and includes certain vegetables that “resemble” those available during the Paleolithic era) is that because it’s meat heavy, it’s not sustainable (it uses far too many resources in terms of land, water, petroleum products (fuels, fertilizers, biocides, etc), it’s environmentally degrading, it’s cruel to animals and animal product industry workers, and it contributes to antibiotic resistance. And it contributes to greenhouse gas emissions and climate warming. And I’m thinking about a global diet that is healthy for everyone to eat, not just a select few in developed countries. A diet that is healthy for everyone, and for the planet. I see that we agree on this point.

      Finally, I liked Deb’s responses to your comment, and I thank her for sharing them with us. Especially her questions about the diet to which a Paleolithic diet was compared: SAD (Standard American Diet, full of processed food and meat centric) or Whole Food Plant Based eating? Is there anything in these studies that you cite that specifically refutes the information in this video? eg, that meat does not cause an increase in blood insulin levels?

    3. Jeffrey

      In your first study, I note that the supposed paleo diet included canola oil and mayonnaise! In this study, the paleo diet was compared to the subjects’ ‘usual diet’ – presumably a standard American diet.(SAD) The paleo diet was also a higher fibre, lower saturated fat, lower cholesterol, higher potassium and lower sodium diet. It is hardly surprising that such a diet would be less unhealthy than the SAD.

      in the second study, primarily about NAFLD, rapeseed and olive oil were allowed (in limited amounts). These don’t sound any more paleo to my ears than canola and mayonnaise do. Also, the participants consumed 22% fewer calories, significantly restricted saturated fat and significantly increased MUFA and PUFA consumption. As the authors themselves note: ‘the possibility cannot be excluded that the same result would be obtained with different food choices of identical macronutrient compositions.’

      In the third study, both rapeseed and olive oil were again allowed (in limited amounts). I have no idea what is ‘paleo’ about oils. Also, the paleo diet group consumed 25% fewer calories than the comparison diet group (which is pretty close to the 26% AUG Glucose (0-12) decrease that is the main benefit reported in this study). So, no surprise that their markers/numbers were generally better.

      more randomized clinical studies with larger populations and duration are necessary to prove health benefits.’

      Similarly, your last paper concluded ‘Although the present meta-analysis revealed that a PD has favorable effects on cardiovascular disease risk factors, the evidence is not conclusive and more well-designed trials are still needed.’

      None of this represents a rousing or convincing endorsement of so-called paleo diets. It is noteworthy that neither the American Diabetes Association, the American Heart Association or the US Dietary Guidelines endorse paleolithic diets. In fact the AHA published the results of a study only two months ago that showed that a paleo diet showed no benefit for older women with T2D in warding off cardiovascular disease.
      https://www.heart.org/en/news/2019/09/19/these-diets-helped-women-with-diabetes-cut-heart-attack-stroke-risk

      It’s quite clear where the bias lies here. It appears to belong with paleo diet enthusiasts rather than Greger.

      1. Not sure what happened there. The middle text appears to have disappeared.during my copy/paste from Notepad. Here’s the full post

        Jeffrey

        In your first study, I note that the supposed paleo diet included canola oil and mayonnaise! In this study, the paleo diet was compared to the subjects’ ‘usual diet’ – presumably a standard American diet.(SAD) The paleo diet was also a higher fibre, lower saturated fat, lower cholesterol, higher potassium and lower sodium diet. It is hardly surprising that such a diet would be less unhealthy than the SAD.

        in the second study, primarily about NAFLD, rapeseed and olive oil were allowed (in limited amounts). These don’t sound any more paleo to my ears than canola and mayonnaise do. Also, the participants consumed 22% fewer calories, significantly restricted saturated fat and significantly increased MUFA and PUFA consumption. As the authors themselves note: ‘the possibility cannot be excluded that the same result would be obtained with different food choices of identical macronutrient compositions.’

        In the third study, both rapeseed and olive oil were again allowed (in limited amounts). I have no idea what is’paleo’ about oils. Also, the paleo diet group consumed 25% fewer calories than the comparison diet group (which is pretty close to the 26% AUG Glucose (0-12) decrease that is the main benefit reported in this study). So, no surprise that their markers/numbers were generally better.

        The 4th paper you cite is a brief summary of a selection of studies that apparently found beneficial effects from consuming diets described as paleo diets.

        The 5th paper concluded ‘The Paleolithic diet may assist in controlling weight and waist circumference and in the management of chronic diseases. However, more randomized clinical studies with larger populations and duration are necessary to prove health benefits.’

        Similarly, your last paper comcluded ‘Although the present meta-analysis revealed that a PD has favorable effects on cardiovascular disease risk factors, the evidence is not conclusive and more well-designed trials are still needed.’

        None of this represents a rousing or convincing endorsement of so-called paleo diets. It is noteworthy that neither the American Diabetes Association, the American Heart Association or the US Dietary Guidelines endorse paleolithic diets. In fact the AHA published the results of a study only two months ago that showed that a paleo diet showed no benefit for older women with T2D in warding off cardiovascular disease.
        https://www.heart.org/en/news/2019/09/19/these-diets-helped-women-with-diabetes-cut-heart-attack-stroke-risk

        It’s quite clear where the bias lies here. It appears to belong with paleo diet enthusiasts rather than with Dr Greger.

    4. Jeffreywp did you see this video ?https://nutritionfacts.org/video/benefits-of-a-macrobiotic-diet-for-diabetes/#collapseTranscript
      They got great results.
      Also, I notice on studies where dietary patterns are differentiated, pescatarians are often thrown in with the lacto-ovo group. That is, there is rarely a group described where they eat something closer to wfpb with small amounts of fish. This might be closer to the paleo description. Dr Greger’s daily dozen includes the beans and grains which the paleo people are rejecting I guess.

        1. Hey Deb, well they are just experimenting with leptin to record the body’s responses to the rise and fall of leptin. It’s interesting for a few reasons. The subject of hunger is not an easy one and this link describes various ways in which we can fall prey to hunger. https://www.dietdoctor.com/fasting-and-hunger (I realise many people are not Dr Fung fans… I am only posting because of the wonderful description of ways we can start to feel hunger that have nothing to do with food or calorie shortage…I recognize some of my “hypoglycemic” episodes are no more than conditioned responses. )

          I don’t know if leptin is something they are looking at as an aid, but I think becoming aware of our triggers is certainly something we all can do. The other thing is that they talk about reduced metabolism, but honestly Deb, if I plug in my height, weight, age and gender into a calculator, I find no surprises there for daily calorie maintenance.

          1. Nola is a pretty gal. This video was filmed nearly eight years ago….I wonder what she looks like today. Was she actually on a liquid diet for the nine months she was “entombed” at the hospital? No fiber? Or did I hear that wrong?

            Even if leptin was indeed considered a weight-loss solution (I think they concluded that it wasn’t good for that, but maybe for other ailments), I wouldn’t want to be injected with it every day. What would be the long-term effects?

            I dunno. Back when I was growing up, we ate the same junk foods, but it was very rare to see anybody who was overweight. They stuck out “like sore thumbs.” Nowadays, fatties are the norm. And there weren’t any smart phones back then for kids to hunch over and spend all their time playing with. Kids were a whole lot active back in the day, too. I sure was!

            1. YR, Yes, I hope Nola is doing great too. They did the liquid diet for weeks until they got it exactly right matching her daily calorie burn. Then more weeks untill she lost 10% body weight followed by testing. Then they said she got a lot of counselling etc and presumably lower calorie food til she lost the 40 lbs.

              I noticed a couple of things. One was that I see hunger as more of a sign or guage of success at the end of my day. I don’t mean starvation, but a frequent feeling of hunger is, to me, a sign I am eating less than I am using up.
              The other thing is the talk at the end by the doctor on what a tough road it will be to not gain the weight back etc. Sure times may have changed for the worst regarding rates of obesity, food environment and industry, but looking back over my last 50 years I have to agree with the doctor. It isn’t easy keeping weight off. It takes day by day (moment by moment sometimes) vigilence just to ‘remain the same’.

              1. “It takes day by day (moment by moment sometimes) vigilence just to ‘remain the same’.
                – – – – –

                Barb, I certainly agree with you on that one. Even when the weather is yucky (cold), I try to get out every day, if only to “walk off” my hefty breakfast. :-) The ol’ bod’s gotta keep moving — just as we have to brush and floss our teeth every day, take showers, yadda yadda.

                As I said in another post, “our cells are always listening.” They WANT for us to be healthy and in good shape! And so we do what we gotta do.

          2. Barb

            The dietdoctor website is belongs to the egregious Andreas Eenfeldt. He is a long-time low carb promoter – but is also now rebranding himself as a keto diet expert. Consequently, I wouldn’t take anything he says on trust.

            Plant Positive made a number of videos some 7 years ago about the way that Eenfeldt carefully selects studies that appear to support his misleading claims

            http://plantpositive.com/37-cherry-picked-research-by-a/
            http://plantpositive.com/38-cherry-picked-research-by-a/
            http://plantpositive.com/39-cherry-picked-research-by-a/
            http://plantpositive.com/40-cherry-picked-research-by-a/

            1. Thanks Fumbles ! I didn’t know who owned the site, but the link I provided was an article written by Dr Jason Fung. I have listened to a number of his lectures on youtube but that article just describes how we can mistake conditioning /habit for actual hunger. Or like I do, eat when I am actually thirsty.

              I am not familiar with Andreas Eenfeldt, nor the low carb type thinking, but I do recognize plantpositive, and enjoy his presentations very much. Thanks for the links!

              1. Thanks Barb.

                Fung’s article must have been written a couple of years ago since he advises people to eat a bowl of bone broth. That was a huge craze at one time but we seldom hear about it now from diet hipsters.

  6. “evil insulin production” lol. I have actually never seen this video, glad it was chosen as a flashback friday or I may never have come across it. Brilliant info!

  7. One major problem here. Paleo and Low carb aren’t the same animals. Ignorant Low carb bloggers might be interested in insulin but real Paleo and Ancenteral people are not. Real Paleo shuns processed food, oils, dairy, grains and beans. Everything else is still on the dining room table including potatoes and every kind of fruit and vegetable you can think of. As a doctor and an “expert” on nutrition you shouldn’t have to be told all this by a lowly electrical engineer like me.

    Now, let’s get to the low carbers. You tell us some low carb ignorant blogger is concerned with the amount of insulin secreted when eating carbs and that’s an intelligent low carbers main concern. This isn’t so and never have been. You need to tell us what the low carb gurus are telling their followers, but of course that wouldn’t make for an interesting video. Their concern isn’t insulin. Their concern is blood sugar levels and how long blood sugar stays high after a meal, not how much insulin is required to bring that level down quickly. And since a good number of well educated real doctors and researchers have shown that low carb does in fact control blood sugar extremely well what your saying in this video is pointless. What you’re doing is the same thing done by the other side. The ignorant among them will use junk food vegans when comparing health outcomes to one of them. They wouldn’t ever dare using a whole food, plant based vegan in a comparison.

    1. Michael

      Your post appears incorrect on a number of points. For one thing, paleo diet orthodoxy excludes potatoes despite your statement to the contrary
      https://thepaleodiet.com/what-to-eat-on-the-paleo-diet-paul-vandyken/

      Let’s just ignore the fact that grains and legumes were also eaten in the paleolithic period and move right along though.

      Second what low carbers tell their followers isn’t the issue. It’s mostly nonsense we know that. Controlling blood sugar levels is simply symptom management. Insulin production is however a causal factor in diabertes. That’s why intelligent low carbers are concerned by it. Gurus and unintelligent on the other hand are more concerned with selling stuff and building a following …. so no wonder they usually avoid mentioning insulin production and concentrate on managing blood sugar.

      Thirdly, your comment is in fact the one that is quite obviously pointless because it concentrates on a symptom (blood sugar levels) and wants us to ignore a key mechanism in diabetes development and progression – insulin production (something that is impaired by low carb high fat diets).
      http://diabetes.us/what-is-diabetes/insulin-fat-and-protein/

      1. “Insulin resistance often is the primary metabolic abnormality leading to the development of type 2 diabetes. Type 2 diabetes can be viewed as the consequence of a series of pathophysiologic changes, each of which makes the patient vulnerable to subsequent disruption of normal glucose homeostasis. In most individuals, insulin resistance is the first of a sequence of abnormalities leading to the development of type 2 diabetes. Insulin resistance is compensated by increased insulin secretion (hyperinsulinemia), which allows glucose metabolism to remain normal.”
        https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/412682

  8. The problem with the main study in this video is that every sentence in the “Dietary Intervention” section of the paper is false, according to the owner of the CrossFit gym where the study was conducted (see https://keepfitnesslegal.crossfit.com/2014/09/08/acsm-fellow-publishes-bad-science-on-crossfit-and-paleo/). The researchers did not require the subjects to follow a paleo diet and have no idea what they actually ate, so the paper has no scientific value.

    1. Mark

      Why should we ignore the facts about cholesterol?

      If you want to know about LDL cholesterol, read what leading international scientists and physicians say about it ………….. not what crackpots and quacks on YouTube and the internet generally, say.
      https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/38/32/2459/3745109

      High blood cholesterol is clearly a key risk factor.heart. I am not aware of any credible health authority anywhere in the world saying otherwise eg
      https://www.bhf.org.uk/informationsupport/heart-matters-magazine/medical/risk-factors

  9. Good day!
    we are engaged in muscle treatment (trigger points)
    and faced with cases such as muscle fibrosis.
    we treat him with a hard deep massage.

    I tell clients to include more plant foods. But it’s so hard to convince them.

    We encounter patients with very large muscle fibrosis. Are there any ways to improve treatment? What plant foods are more likely to help treat muscle fibrosis?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This