Low Carb Friends  
Netrition.com - Tools - Reviews - Faces - Recipes - Home


Go Back   Low Carb Friends > Main Lowcarb Lobby
Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-09-2013, 08:09 PM   #31
Way too much time on my hands!
 
metqa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Athens, GA
Posts: 12,631
Gallery: metqa
Stats: 147/136/125; 5'1"
WOE: PSMF/hcg Transitioning to HFLC
Start Date: joined LCF 2003: HCG/PSMF 07/2014
I was reading up on my plant lore on basil when I found that, according to wikipedia, Basil contains a known carcinogen!!!

Why hasn't the news reported on this! Millions of People are being poisoned by their pesto!!

Oh, and that you'd have to eat 1000 times your body weight and it would still be only a minimal risk.

This non news is not reported because no one is trying to push the idea that Basil causes cancer. But replace basil with red meat and it becomes the scare of the nation.
metqa is offline   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old 04-10-2013, 05:07 AM   #32
Chatty Cathy
 
clackley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Ontario
Posts: 16,772
Gallery: clackley
Stats: 228.5/168/125
WOE: N.K.=vlc/hf/moderate protein & organic/pastured
Start Date: Restart Oct 18 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by metqa View Post
I was reading up on my plant lore on basil when I found that, according to wikipedia, Basil contains a known carcinogen!!!

Why hasn't the news reported on this! Millions of People are being poisoned by their pesto!!

Oh, and that you'd have to eat 1000 times your body weight and it would still be only a minimal risk.

This non news is not reported because no one is trying to push the idea that Basil causes cancer. But replace basil with red meat and it becomes the scare of the nation.
clackley is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2013, 08:17 AM   #33
Senior LCF Member
 
PianoAl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 663
Gallery: PianoAl
Stats: 165/155.5/155
WOE: Atkins
Start Date: June 2010
The most irritating thing about the news reports like this is that they are usually presented like this:

"Everyone knows that eating red meat causes heart disease, but it may not be just the saturated fat that is bad."
PianoAl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2013, 09:04 AM   #34
Major LCF Poster!
 
snowmop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: florida
Posts: 1,783
Gallery: snowmop
Stats: 113/89/90 4' 10" 67 yrs old
WOE: atkins
Start Date: Long, long ago!
Quote:
Originally Posted by PianoAl View Post
The most irritating thing about the news reports like this is that they are usually presented like this:

"Everyone knows that eating red meat causes heart disease, but it may not be just the saturated fat that is bad."
EXACTLY!!!!!
snowmop is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2013, 10:24 AM   #35
Way too much time on my hands!
 
metqa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Athens, GA
Posts: 12,631
Gallery: metqa
Stats: 147/136/125; 5'1"
WOE: PSMF/hcg Transitioning to HFLC
Start Date: joined LCF 2003: HCG/PSMF 07/2014
oooh, I hate that. That grates on my nerves each time I see a statement like that in the article.

Or a comment like" Antibiotics may reduce the bacteria that causes the problem, but it's not good to take needless antibiotics just to eat more meat" As if people just want to eat MORE meat instead of just eating what normal people eat and wanting to be healthy as well. Stupid reporters and authors!
metqa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2013, 05:34 AM   #36
Chatty Cathy
 
clackley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Ontario
Posts: 16,772
Gallery: clackley
Stats: 228.5/168/125
WOE: N.K.=vlc/hf/moderate protein & organic/pastured
Start Date: Restart Oct 18 2009
Does Carnitine From Red Meat Contribute to Heart Disease Through Intestinal Bacterial Metabolism to TMAO? | Mother Nature Obeyed - Weston A Price Foundation
clackley is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2013, 06:18 AM   #37
Major LCF Poster!
 
Erin57's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 2,297
Gallery: Erin57
Stats: 220/150/145 5'9"
WOE: Moderate Carb/IF
Start Date: April 2010
I haven't had a chance to read this and understand it yet. Just thought I would post for others.

Does Carnitine From Red Meat Contribute to Heart Disease Through Intestinal Bacterial Metabolism to TMAO? | Mother Nature Obeyed - Weston A Price Foundation



If you highlight you can search with bing and pull up the article.

Last edited by Erin57; 04-11-2013 at 06:20 AM..
Erin57 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2013, 06:23 AM   #38
Very Gabby LCF Member!!!
 
sunday's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Heartland- smack dab in the middle
Posts: 4,819
Gallery: sunday
Stats: 225/145/ ...
WOE: Perfect Health Diet- 16hr Daily Fast
Start Date: JUDDD - 2/01/12 Began at 200, Goal 130
Chris Kresser (Beyond Paleo) has an excellent response to this NYT piece. His blog as well as Jaminet's (Perfect Health) blog have interesting scientific reasoning why this truly boils down to what populates the gut? Another reminder to balance our diet with good whole foods.

This from Jaminet's blog today...

Quote:
Conclusions & lessons of this study are:

Don’t eat a high-sugar, high-flour, low-fiber diet.

Do eat natural whole foods that have the kind of fiber we and our probiotic gut flora co-evolved eating; mainly, resistant starch from in-ground starches like potatoes and soluble fiber from fruits and vegetables.

Don’t eat excessive amounts of meat. As we noted in the book, excess protein is available to gut bacteria for fermentation and that produces a number of toxic byproducts.

Do eat PHD levels of meat – one-half to one pound per day. This level of meat consumption will provide healthful and nourishing amounts of protein, choline, and carnitine, and will not cause any harm if accompanied by PHD levels of healthy plant foods.

None of these lessons is new. This study doesn’t overturn any established dietary wisdom. It is just one more piece of data reminding us to eat a balanced diet consisting of the foods we evolved eating – plant as well as animal.
Chris Kresser

Quote:
The mistaken blame of saturated fat and cholesterol as drivers of heart disease led to a decades-long campaign to encourage low-fat, high-carbohydrate diets. Unfortunately, the effects of this campaign were not harmless. Not only did it unnecessarily deprive people of nutrient-dense, nourishing (and delicious!) foods like meat, butter and eggs, it may have indirectly contributed to the epidemics of obesity, heart disease and diabetes. Studies have shown that when people replace saturated fat with carbohydrates, the risk of heart disease doesn’t go down—it goes up. (1) This is not because of the carbohydrates, per se, but because 85% of the grain consumed in the U.S. is in the highly refined form. (2)

The diet-heart hypothesis should be a cautionary tale that prevents us from jumping to rash conclusions based on limited evidence. Alas, the almost complete lack of criticism or scrutiny in the popular media reports on this study indicate that caution has been thrown to the wind. Let’s now examine three reasons why I’m not yet ready to take the conclusions of this study (i.e. red meat causes heart disease via TMAO) at face value.
Epidemiological evidence is inconsistent

If red meat consumption elevates TMAO, and elevated TMAO increases the risk of heart disease, we’d expect to see higher rates of heart disease in people that eat more red meat. The epidemiological evidence examining this question is mixed. A large meta-analysis published in Circulation by Micha et al. covering over 1.2 million participants found that consumption of fresh, unprocessed red meat is not associated with increased risk of coronary heart disease (CHD), stroke or diabetes. (3) On the other hand, a smaller prospective study including about 121,000 participants from the Nurses Health Study and Health Professionals Follow-up Study did find an association between red meat consumption (both fresh and processed) and total mortality, cardiovascular disease (CVD) and cancer. (4)

If eating meat increases heart disease risk we might expect lower rates in vegans and vegetarians. Early studies suggested this was true, but later, better-controlled studies suggest it’s not. The early studies were poorly designed and subject to confounding factors (i.e. vegetarians tend to be more health conscious on average than general population, so there could be other factors explaining their longevity, such as more exercise, less smoking, etc.). Newer, higher quality studies that have attempted to control for these confounding factors haven’t found any survival advantage in vegetarians. For example, one study compared the mortality of people who shopped in health food stores (both vegetarians and omnivores) to people in the general population. They found that both vegetarians and omnivores in the health food store group lived longer than people in the general population. (5) This suggests, of course, that eating meat in the context of a healthy diet does not have the same effect as eating meat in the context of an unhealthy diet. (Hold this thought: we’ll be coming back to it shortly.) A very large study performed in the U.K. in 2003 including over 65,000 subjects corroborated these results: no difference in mortality was observed between vegetarians and omnivores. (6)

Taken together, these data do not suggest a strong relationship between red meat and heart disease. It’s also crucial to remember that epidemiological evidence does not prove causality. Even if red meat intake is associated with a higher risk of CVD (or any other health problem), such studies don’t tell us that red meat is causing the problem. If you’re new to this concept, I suggest reading these excellent articles by Denise Minger and Chris Masterjohn.
The “healthy user bias” strikes again

The healthy user bias is the scientific way of explaining the phenomenon I described above, where people that engage in one behavior that is perceived as healthy (whether it is or not) are more likely to engage in other behaviors that are healthy. (7, 8) Of course the flip-side is also true: those that engage in behaviors perceived to be unhealthy are more likely to engage in other unhealthy behaviors. The healthy user bias is one of the main reasons it’s so difficult to infer causality from epidemiological relationships. For example, say a study shows that eating processed meats like bacon and hot dogs increases your risk of heart disease. (9) Let’s also say, as the healthy user bias predicts, that those who eat more bacon and hot dogs also eat a lot more refined flour (hot dog and hamburger buns), sugar and industrial seed oils, and a lot less fresh fruits, vegetables and soluble fiber. They also drink and smoke more, exercise less and generally do not take care of themselves very well. How do we know, then, that it’s the processed meat that is increasing the risk of heart disease rather than these other things—or perhaps some combination of these other things and the processed meat? The answer is, we don’t. Good studies attempt to control for some of these confounding factors, but inevitably some will not be controlled for. And one of the most important potential confounding factors that is never controlled for is the gut microbiome.
sunday is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2013, 07:04 AM   #39
Blabbermouth!!!
 
reddarin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Texas
Posts: 5,460
Gallery: reddarin
Stats: 6' 47y/o 265/193/170
WOE: NK
Start Date: Aug 13, 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by sunday View Post
Chris Kresser (Beyond Paleo) has an excellent response to this NYT piece. His blog as well as Jaminet's (Perfect Health) blog have interesting scientific reasoning why this truly boils down to what populates the gut? Another reminder to balance our diet with good whole foods.

This from Jaminet's blog today...



Chris Kresser
The Kresser article is very interesting.

"The human study compares a single vegan that they managed to convince to eat a steak to five “representative” meat-eaters. "

I wonder if the stress of choking down an animal product with the confirmed vegan had any impact on results? Are there any vegans that are not moralist?
reddarin is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:53 PM.


Copyright ©1999-2014 Friends Forums LLC. All rights reserved. - Terms of Service | Privacy Policy
LowCarbFriends® is a registered mark of Friends Forums, LLC.