Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Help Shut my CICO Friend Up - THE GHEE CHALLENGE

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Challenging the Fructose Hypothesis: New Perspectives on Fructose Consumption and Metabolism

    Read through it quickly but here's what I got. Most of this stuff is above my pay grade...hence I refer to experts that I trust.
    It didn't see a comparison of sugar/HFCS between babyboomers to children and young adults. It stands to reason that babyboomers would be reducing their sugar intake over the past 10 years causing the total per capita consumption to decline.

    Going back to the Lalone webinar...he said animal studies are useful but you have to allow for the differences between humans and rats. As the paper pointed out rats produce uricase and humans do not so you have to slug them with extra. And is corroborated here with this argument: Synergistic effect of uricase blo... [Am J Physiol Renal Physiol. 2013] - PubMed - NCBI
    "Fructose in sweetened beverages (SB) increases the risk for metabolic and cardiorenal disorders, and these effects are in part mediated by a secondary increment in uric acid (UA). Rodents have an active uricase, thus requiring large doses of fructose to increase plasma UA and to induce metabolic syndrome and renal hemodynamic changes. We therefore hypothesized that the effects of fructose in rats might be enhanced in the setting of uricase inhibition. Four groups of male Sprague-Dawley rats (n = 7/group) were studied during 8 wk: water + vehicle (V), water + oxonic acid (OA; 750 mg/k BW), sweetened beverage (SB; 11% fructose-glucose combination) + V, and SB + OA. Systemic blood pressure, plasma UA, triglycerides (TG), glucose and insulin, glomerular hemodynamics, renal structural damage, renal cortex and liver UA, TG, markers of oxidative stress, mitDNA, fructokinase, and fatty liver synthase protein expressions were evaluated at the end of the experiment. Chronic hyperuricemia and SB induced features of the metabolic syndrome, including hypertension, hyperuricemia, hyperglycemia, and systemic and hepatic TG accumulation. OA alone also induced glomerular hypertension, and SB alone induced insulin resistance. SB + OA induced a combined phenotype including metabolic and renal alterations induced by SB or OA alone and in addition also acted synergistically on systemic and glomerular pressure, plasma glucose, hepatic TG, and oxidative stress. These findings explain why high concentrations of fructose are required to induce greater metabolic changes and renal disease in rats whereas humans, who lack uricase, appear to be much more sensitive to the effects of fructose."

    I didn't google for him but one of the authors to the above quote is Dr Richard Johnson (The Fat Switch). IIRC from his book they used rats with a genetic defect (they didn't produce uricase) in an attempt to better mimic human metabolism.

    The lab studies referred to on humans were (by necessity) acute studies. Even then....
    Nutrition & Metabolism | Full text | Consumption of fructose- but not glucose-sweetened beverages for 10 weeks increases circulating concentrations of uric acid, retinol binding protein- 4, and gamma-glutamyl transferase activity in overweight/obese

    PLOS ONE: Uric Acid Stimulates Fructokinase and Accelerates Fructose Metabolism in the Development of Fatty Liver

    So you tell me...as a layman who tries to ferret out as much of this stuff as I can (which is way more than 95% of the population) and understand it as much as I can, who am I supposed to believe? You? And if so why? Guys like Dr Johnson and Lustig are doing the labs/clinicals and disseminating it (through books/videos) to people like me who want to know.

    BTW, N=1, I have a friend who was on meds for gout. He read sugar might be the cause so he gave it up. He went off med and hasn't had gout in over a year. Tell him there isn't a connection.
    Last edited by Scott F; 07-02-2013, 04:53 PM.
    Would I be putting a grain-feed cow on a fad diet if I took it out of the feedlot and put it on pasture eating the grass nature intended?

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Scott F View Post
      Challenging the Fructose Hypothesis: New Perspectives on Fructose Consumption and Metabolism

      Read through it quickly but here's what I got. Most of this stuff is above my pay grade...hence I refer to experts that I trust.
      It didn't see a comparison of sugar/HFCS between babyboomers to children and young adults. It stands to reason that babyboomers would be reducing their sugar intake over the past 10 years causing the total per capita consumption to decline.

      Going back to the Lalone webinar...he said animal studies are useful but you have to allow for the differences between humans and rats. As the paper pointed out rats produce uricase and humans do not so you have to slug them with extra. And is corroborated here with this argument: Synergistic effect of uricase blo... [Am J Physiol Renal Physiol. 2013] - PubMed - NCBI
      "Fructose in sweetened beverages (SB) increases the risk for metabolic and cardiorenal disorders, and these effects are in part mediated by a secondary increment in uric acid (UA). Rodents have an active uricase, thus requiring large doses of fructose to increase plasma UA and to induce metabolic syndrome and renal hemodynamic changes. We therefore hypothesized that the effects of fructose in rats might be enhanced in the setting of uricase inhibition. Four groups of male Sprague-Dawley rats (n = 7/group) were studied during 8 wk: water + vehicle (V), water + oxonic acid (OA; 750 mg/k BW), sweetened beverage (SB; 11% fructose-glucose combination) + V, and SB + OA. Systemic blood pressure, plasma UA, triglycerides (TG), glucose and insulin, glomerular hemodynamics, renal structural damage, renal cortex and liver UA, TG, markers of oxidative stress, mitDNA, fructokinase, and fatty liver synthase protein expressions were evaluated at the end of the experiment. Chronic hyperuricemia and SB induced features of the metabolic syndrome, including hypertension, hyperuricemia, hyperglycemia, and systemic and hepatic TG accumulation. OA alone also induced glomerular hypertension, and SB alone induced insulin resistance. SB + OA induced a combined phenotype including metabolic and renal alterations induced by SB or OA alone and in addition also acted synergistically on systemic and glomerular pressure, plasma glucose, hepatic TG, and oxidative stress. These findings explain why high concentrations of fructose are required to induce greater metabolic changes and renal disease in rats whereas humans, who lack uricase, appear to be much more sensitive to the effects of fructose."

      I didn't google for him but one of the authors to the above quote is Dr Richard Johnson (The Fat Switch). IIRC from his book they used rats with a genetic defect (they didn't produce uricase) in an attempt to better mimic human metabolism.
      De novo lipogenesis (DNL; the hepatic conversion of dietary carbohydrate to fat) in rats occurs at about 10-fold the rate of humans. This alone invalidates the comparison of carbohydrate feeding effects between humans & rats - and especially so, when rats are fed artificially prodigious amounts of the carbohydrate in question. This is just the tip of the iceberg in terms of physiological disparities, but it's enough. 25% of total kcals from fructose fed to a sedentary population is obviously a bad idea. But no one is arguing in favor of extremes. You linked a study examining the effects of roughly 150 g/day of isolated fructose. Achieving this dose would require 300 g sucrose (table sugar). This is obviously far-fetched, especially in populations with half a brain & a modicum of dietary consciousness.
      So you tell me...as a layman who tries to ferret out as much of this stuff as I can (which is way more than 95% of the population) and understand it as much as I can, who am I supposed to believe? You? And if so why? Guys like Dr Johnson and Lustig are doing the labs/clinicals and disseminating it (through books/videos) to people like me who want to know.
      To you as a layman, I would have you re-read White's paper, and do it with an open mind.
      BTW, N=1, I have a friend who was on meds for gout. He read sugar might be the cause so he gave it up. He went off med and hasn't had gout in over a year. Tell him there isn't a connection.
      I'm not interested in anecdotes at this point, sorry. We can share our personal anecdotes all day long, and I have 20 years of client data to bat around - ain't nobody got time fo' dat. I'd rather restrict this discussion to objective data, not subjective testimony.

      Comment


      • More reading for you after you read White's review: Health implications of fructose consumption: A review of recent data

        Comment


        • The whole point of eating the way we do is to nourish our bodies with high quality, whole foods. Why would you engage in such nonsense? Make a point by setting an example not by taking on such a silly challenge. I love ghee. I make my own from pastured butter. I would NEVER agree to drink it in such quantities.

          Sent from my SGH-T989 using Tapatalk 2

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Alan Aragon View Post
            More reading for you after you read White's review: Health implications of fructose consumption: A review of recent data
            Cliffs?

            JK..haven't read this paper, thanks for sharing it. Working my way through it now.
            My nutrition/fitness/critical thinking blog:

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Scott F View Post
              So you tell me...as a layman who tries to ferret out as much of this stuff as I can (which is way more than 95% of the population) and understand it as much as I can, who am I supposed to believe? You? And if so why? Guys like Dr Johnson and Lustig are doing the labs/clinicals and disseminating it (through books/videos) to people like me who want to know.
              Scott, i just wanted to point out in case you were unaware, Alan Aragon has some pretty good credentials of his own. AlanAragon.com - Fitness Based on Science & Experience Why hes here (Hi Alan!) arguing about fructose in a thread about ghee, im not really sure. Seems like a poor choice of time to try and convince you, even im not taking the bait. Haha.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Zach View Post
                Scott, i just wanted to point out in case you were unaware, Alan Aragon has some pretty good credentials of his own. AlanAragon.com - Fitness Based on Science & Experience Why hes here (Hi Alan!) arguing about fructose in a thread about ghee, im not really sure. Seems like a poor choice of time to try and convince you, even im not taking the bait. Haha.
                Well, it's kinda my fault that the thread got thrown off track (ok, it's all my fault). But, I couldn't let that Lustig video get posted and not say anything about it!
                My nutrition/fitness/critical thinking blog:

                Comment


                • Originally posted by jakejoh10 View Post
                  Well, it's kinda my fault that the thread got thrown off track (ok, it's all my fault). But, I couldn't let that Lustig video get posted and not say anything about it!
                  I've fallen for that trap too. Anyone who posts that video, has nothing important to say. I learned to just move on.
                  Make America Great Again

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Neckhammer View Post
                    Alrighty then.... thats really all I got to say.... Except.... I WIN THE THREAD!
                    Sorry NH, Kochin already won the thread, post 12.
                    A little primal gem - My Success Story
                    Weight lost in 4 months - 29kg (64 lbs)

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by dilberryhoundog View Post
                      Sorry NH, Kochin already won the thread, post 12.
                      No kick to the nuts?!?!.... Fine whatever. Shits rigged anyhow!

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Zach View Post
                        Scott, i just wanted to point out in case you were unaware, Alan Aragon has some pretty good credentials of his own. AlanAragon.com - Fitness Based on Science & Experience Why hes here (Hi Alan!) arguing about fructose in a thread about ghee, im not really sure. Seems like a poor choice of time to try and convince you, even im not taking the bait. Haha.
                        Howdy Zach. It's a pingback from Jake that brought me here, he is to blame for the mayhem .... I just scrolled back in the thread & noticed that Jake's pingback to my blog was in response to Scott linking Lustig's Bitter Truth video.

                        Scott - in case you read this, I've debated Lustig directly, and can objectively say that his sense of logic, reason, and knowledge of the body of research evidence were all sorely lacking. I would not put the man on a pedestal.
                        Last edited by Alan Aragon; 07-02-2013, 10:32 PM.

                        Comment


                        • Silly me. I thought this might be a fun paleo forum. Seems to be a frat boy play ground.

                          Sent from my SGH-T989 using Tapatalk 2

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by oceangrl View Post
                            Silly me. I thought this might be a fun paleo forum. Seems to be a frat boy play ground.
                            Fun? Whatchu talkin bout Willis? Paleo is serious business.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by randomcow View Post
                              Please let me know any risks you foresee in me drinking 1000kcal of melted ghee (about 140g) every morning for two weeks just in order to prove a point with my CICO buddy.

                              Seriously, I've had it with this guy. I swear he has dreams about having sex with CICO professors doused in Coke Zero. All he does is walk around like a doofus saying that you can lose weight by reducing calories, that the source of the calories doesn't matter.

                              I'm going to prove him wrong by drinking 140g of melted ghee (or equivalent in melted butter, macadamia oil, olive oil, etc) in addition to my regular diet, and show him that I didn't put on the several kg of fat he is expecting I will.

                              FOR SCIENCE!!!
                              I'd like to say this whole post is awesome.

                              The goofy CICO thing got started over a 100 years ago with some idiot burning up food in a mini-oven. It set the foundation for nutrition "science" in America, which hasn't worked out well for those people.

                              Mini-ovens do not have a hormonal response to food.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Alan Aragon View Post
                                25% of total kcals from fructose fed to a sedentary population is obviously a bad idea. But no one is arguing in favor of extremes. You linked a study examining the effects of roughly 150 g/day of isolated fructose. Achieving this dose would require 300 g sucrose (table sugar). This is obviously far-fetched, especially in populations with half a brain & a modicum of dietary consciousness.
                                Does that rule out Americans?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X