Does eating meat protein contribute to high cholesterol and colon cancer risk? page

[lpoliski]

Has there been any research on eating primally and cholesterol levels and colon cancer risks? I am trying to cut out grains but I am concerned about eating so much meat and eggs? Trying to stick to chicken, fish, turkey with good grass fed beef. Not sure where salty pork fits into the primal nutrition tenants.

Also would like to know if there are peer reviewed medical/nutrition studies that support or negate eating primally? I understand the perspective of evolution being the longest longitudinal study but life expectancies of Grok and his family members were shorter due to environmental risks etc so who knows if they would have ended up with heart disease or colon cancer if they lived until their 70s?

If this topic has been covered already, I would appreciate knowing the search words for the threads/articles?

Thanks!

[Stabby]

Depends on what you mean by "high cholesterol". Eating meat will raise your total cholesterol level higher than, say, fruit loops and canola oil, but that's not a bad thing. It is the size of an LDL particle, the amount of HDL particles and what happens to them that poses a health risk, not simply "high cholesterol". Extremely high cholesterol can be a sign of other problems, but that isn't the same thing is simply having higher cholesterol than rock-bottom low cholesterol. Griff has a good thread in "primal research' that explains everything. There's also the international network of cholesterol skeptics and countless people who don't believe that the lower the cholesterol the better. http://www.thincs.org/



As for cancer, that's silly. Humans have eaten meat for millions of years and only in the last few decades has the epidemic of cancer arose. Also, anyone claiming that it does cause colorectal cancer is dishonest, even the studies they cite to prove their point don't actually prove their point. http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/full...urcetype=HWCIT

I guarantee that none of the researchers distinguished between real meat, slim jims, and big macs and yet there is still no correlation.

[Bisous]

Here's a bit about a study published in a peer-reviewed journal (Diabetolgia, I believe the journal is called) comparing Paleolithic diets to the so-called "Mediterranean diet" :

http://www.staffanlindeberg.com/DiabetesStudy.html

[Bisous]

There is also more science than you can shake a stick at at this blog:

http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com

[MikeEnRegalia]

Read the book "Good Calories, Bad Calories" by Gary Taubes ... it a very detailed comparison of the various studies about cholesterol, saturated fats and carbohydrates in the last 100+ years.

[cillakat]

We're headed in the direction of understanding that colon cancer is primarily a vitamin D deficiency problem. Not a meat ingestion problem.

http://www.ucsd.tv/search-details.aspx?showID=16454

There's too much scientific information for me to even be able to begin posting it but...well....."fix vitamin D deficiency" trumps just about any other medical recommendation

[Pantera]

Show me one person that is physically allergic* to beef and I will believe there might be some limit as to how much of it we should eat. Until then, I'll keep eating as much of it as I can.

*not psychologically impaired people such as vegetarians or vegans, but someone who tests positive for allergies in a proper medical test.

[Bisous]

Hah - I actually have an IgG antibody to beef. But it is to a moiety found on grain-fed beef, not grass fed. My nutritionist swears to me this is true, and he does know his stuff. But it's a good thing so far as primal eating is concerned - when I was told I couldn't have steak, you can bet I got online immediately to have a big batch of 100% grass fed sent to my house ASAP!!

[cillakat]

The other key thing to note about this diet is that it's not a meat dominated one but a produce dominated one. The dominate food - volumewise - is produce. I put this doc together with informaion from the book and additional sources as it seems to be a common misconception that this is an 'eat more meat....and then some more' kind of diet:
http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AV...drZnFmNw&hl=en
Primal Blueprint and Produce
Here's what The Primal Blueprint says about produce:

p40 TPB
"The gathering of berries and other fruit, leafy greens, primitive roots, shoots and other vegetation, nuts and seeds provide the bulk of Grok's food supply."

p.112 TPB
"'it may take some acclimation to center your diet around vegetables....Dont follow the example of restaurants that serve skimpy vegetable portions seemingly just for decoration; serve yourself heaping portions that crowd everything else on your plate"

p.111
"Plant foods..naturally promote a beneficial balance between acidity and alkalinity..inyour bloodstream. Almost all cells prefer a slightly alkaline environment to function properly, but many metabolic processes, including the normal production of cellular energy, result in the release of acidic waste products. The buildup of acidic waste is toxic to your body so it works very hard at all times to preserve a slightly alkaline environment, measured by the familiar pH levels."

p110 TPB
see food pyramid: the base is produce indicating that in terms of volume, this is a produce dominated
diet. His food pyramid is a clear supportive visual to both his writing, and the evidence available
regarding a primal diet (diet in our environment of evolutionary adaptation). Volume-wise, we're
eating mostly produce, though in terms of a percentage of calories, we are getting more calories from
protein and many more from saturated fat even when we don't add much, if any, free fat.

In this blogpost regarding inflammation and gut health, Mark said:

"I mentioned Dr. Art Ayer’s Cooling Inflammation blog last week, and I’m
to do so again. First, Art suggests adopting an anti-inflammatory diet. His dietary
recommendations are essentially identical to mine – high SFA, moderate animal
protein, low O-6, O-3 supplementation, leafy greens, some fruit and nuts."


❑ 3,500 mg potassium (K) is the "Daily Value" (DV) intake per the FDA, NIH,
ADA etc. Consdering that nutrient intakes from these organizations reflect
standard intakes, not optimal, consider viewing potassium needs through a
'primal' lens based on K intakes in traditional diets and what we know of diets
in environment closer to those in which we adapted.

❑ Potassium intakes in the above 'primal' diets - likely ranges
based on potassium to sodium ratio
5mg K:1mg Na to 16mg K: 1mg Na

based on potassium to calorie ratio
2-4mg K per calorie ingested

❑ 10-13 servings produce will often be required to supply potassium at
optimal or nearly optimal levels

❑ if needed to bring K:Na ratios or K:Kcal ratios into balance, tomato products
at each meal or by drinking homemade veggie peeling broths are easy, low
calorie, high potassium supplements. adding 99mg from a potassium tab
is essentially worthless when total potassium needs are 3,500-12,000 mg.

Think of magnesium and potassium as the relaxors and calcium and sodium as
the contractors. We need both - but it's all about ratio just like it is wrt Ω3 and Ω6.

[Stabby]

Magnesium appears to have a benefit too. 35% difference between high (barely anybody) and low (most everybody) intake. It's pretty evident that deficiency in some nutrients is the consequence of deficiency in others. Vitamin d deficiency causes a whole lot of other deficiencies, including magnesium. Though with magnesium the problem is usually dietary lack AND vitamin d deficiency. Talk about a double-whammy.

http://jonnybowdenblog.com/this-mine...ncer/#more-925