For today’s edition of Dear Mark, I’m answering three questions. First, is HDL all it’s cracked up to be? Is HDL always good? Is it the savior? Or is the story a bit more complicated? Next, what are some good probiotic options for treating acne? Do any exist? And last but not least, what’s the relationship of artificial sweeteners, insulin, appetite, and weight gain?
Carine Dubois wondered:
I am slightly concerned about the age old acceptance of HDL as the good cholesterol in light of the recent failures of HDL potentiating drugs failure to decrease CVD. Could there be more to the story such as good and bad sub fractions as with LDL …. many more studies have to be done using up dated technology before accepting the AHA recommendations as dogma
Great insight, Carine. I feel very similarly. All the HDL-boosting drugs, like torcetrapib, have failed. And not just failed to protect against cardiovascular disease and death, but actively increased the risk of disease and death. They’ve been real disasters.
However, here’s why I think the coconut oil-induced HDL increase is different than the torcetrapib-induced increase:
HDL is “good” because the actions and behaviors and foods that increase it are “good” and the actions and behaviors and foods that decrease it are “bad.” The former include exercising, eating olive oil and avocados, losing weight, and lowering excess carb intake. The latter include smoking and gaining weight. These things aren’t good or bad because of the HDL effect. They’re good or bad for dozens of reasons. Thus, absent HDL-boosting pharmaceuticals, higher HDL is “good” because you have to do “good” things to raise it.
You’re also right that HDL isn’t just HDL. There are different ways to measure. And even with HDL particle number, there’s more to the story than “higher” or “lower.” For instance, small, dense HDL particles tend to be more protective and possess more antioxidative potential than large, buoyant HDL particles. While a pharma exec might take this to mean we should be pumping out drugs that make HDL particles smaller and denser, a person like Carine would take a more nuanced exploration.
Maybe a preponderance of small, dense HDL particles indicates a large inflammatory load that needs quelling. Maybe a shift toward larger, less dense HDL particles indicates an improvement in inflammatory status. After all, the body actively manufactures HDL particles to reduce oxidative damage.
you mentioned that a lotion containing Enterococcus faecalis SL-5 was
shown to be effective against acne. Any idea where one could buy this
bacteria (or bacteria-containing lotion) on the web? My initial
searching was not encouraging. Thanks for all you do!
Unfortunately, I, too, have been unable to track down a good source of Enterococcus faecalis SL-5. I doubt anyone else has had any real luck. The mixture used in the study was made specifically for that study. They isolated E. faecalis from human feces (the bacteria is a normal resident of the human gut) and added it to a regular lotion. I’ve never seen it replicated or a commercial version released. Too bad. I’m sure something is coming down the pipe.
That’s not all you can do, however.
In 2012, topical application of a 5% Lactobacillus plantarum extract reduced acne lesion size. There are patents for topical L. plantarum extracts, but I haven’t seen any products.
Another study found that oral dosing of sucralose did not induce a cephalic insulin response.
As for the others, a review of in vivo studies concluded that “low-energy sweeteners” do not have any effects on insulin or appetite hormones.
Yet, observational studies continue to find links between artificial sweeteners and obesity. Maybe it’s reverse causality—being overweight causes diet soda consumption. Overweight people are more likely to drink diet soda because they think it’ll help them lose weight, and intent to lose weight does predict artificial sweetener usage. But this 2016 study attempted to minimize the effect of reverse causality, and they still found strong links between artificial sweetener consumption and the risk of abdominal obesity. Those who drank the most diet soda had the biggest bellies.
It’s hard to say, but I err on the side of “avoid”—even if the reason has nothing to do with insulin or appetite.
What’s easier to say is that the non-caloric-yet-natural sweeteners, like stevia or monk fruit, are better choices. Take stevia, for example. In one study where it was compared to sugar or Splenda, stevia actually reduced postprandial insulin levels, and those who ate the stevia didn’t increase calories to make up for the missing sugar calories.
All that said, there’s one surefire way non-caloric sweeteners—even natural ones—can compromise fat loss and and stimulate appetite: by compelling you to eat treats you’d otherwise shun.
Say you eat a good Primal dinner. You’re done. You’re quite full. You’d never consider tucking into a sugary bar of milk chocolate—unless it was sweetened by stevia or monk fruit or one of the sugar alcohols.
Before you know it, you’ve eaten an entire sugar-free chocolate bar that you would have ignored if it had sugar. You’ve just tacked on a few hundred calories to your total, all thanks to the stevia.
That’s it for today, folks. Take care and be well.
Let me know if you have anything to add or ask down below.
Mark Sisson is the founder of Mark’s Daily Apple, godfather to the Primal food and lifestyle movement, and the New York Times bestselling author of The Keto Reset Diet. His latest book is Keto for Life, where he discusses how he combines the keto diet with a Primal lifestyle for optimal health and longevity. Mark is the author of numerous other books as well, including The Primal Blueprint, which was credited with turbocharging the growth of the primal/paleo movement back in 2009. After spending three decades researching and educating folks on why food is the key component to achieving and maintaining optimal wellness, Mark launched Primal Kitchen, a real-food company that creates Primal/paleo, keto, and Whole30-friendly kitchen staples.