Admitting the diet and acne connection
#1
Posted 04 July 2009 - 09:34 AM
http://health.yahoo.com/experts/skintype/1...xXnBqdTeKbd1IZ4
She made another blog post on how sugar/high GL, inflammatory diet ages your skin and causes wrinkles.
#2
Posted 04 July 2009 - 09:55 AM
So this is the issue. Should I use acne as a signal from my body and embrace a low fat diet, knowing very well that it is not healthy? Or should I eat a diet that experts believe is more healthy, one with a moderate dose of fats, and accept that acne is in my genes and not a sign of poor health?
Unable to resolve this issue in my mind, I went on accutane again. And my skin is clear.
#3
Posted 05 July 2009 - 09:10 AM
If they cause you to break out instantly, then you most likely have a food intolerance to them, especially the fish, grains and nuts. It's never healthy to consume foods you have an intolerance for. You do have to consider your own individuality.
#4
Posted 05 July 2009 - 09:37 AM
These intolerances happen in spite of not over eating. I used to overeat to an extent, but I haven't for almost 2 years, now. I can't stand a low fat diet, asit does not only make social eating impossible. It makes me feel like a monk. Never satiated, always hungry.
It's interesting that many nutritional experts still insist that oils--even olive oil--is not a health food. I suggest you read articles by Jeff Novick, though he may appear to have a vegan agenda that arises. But his writings make me think twice about using oils in salads. Perhaps oil is not necessary. Perhaps the Mediterranean Diet is healthy in spite of the oil, not because of the oil.
Nevertheless, I still drizzle the olive oil. Perhaps this is is my indirect way of saying that my body is wrong. But alas, oil tastes so good!
If they cause you to break out instantly, then you most likely have a ffood intolerance to them, especially the fish, grains and nuts. It's never healthy to consume foods you have an intolerance for. You do have to consider your own individuality. There's also a matter of amounts and what else you eat. Did you have excessive amounts of these?
#5
Posted 05 July 2009 - 10:26 AM
The purpose of this thread is to gather lists of mainstream doctors recognizing the diet and acne connection.
Although I want to add that rancid oils aren't healthy for anyone. There have also been threads in the past on fats contributing to acne with valid theories, links to research and clinical studies, but I couldn't find them so I could add them to my lists. It's so hard to find old threads via the search function. That's why I started making my lists.
Edited by alternativista, 21 November 2010 - 11:13 AM.
#6
Posted 05 July 2009 - 03:39 PM
Dermatologists, Dr William Danby and Dr. Valori Treloar are mentioned in the articles below, which advocate no dairy and a low-glycemic diet. One article states, "Treloar and Danby say they can count on both hands the number of US dermatologists and researchers who lend their voices and efforts to helping prove a food-acne connection." That statement alone shows that the diet-acne connection isn't being taken seriously. Until that changes, when it comes to diet, people are better off listening to the experiences of other acne sufferers and their conclusions... or to the few derms that believe in the diet-acne connection!
A Clear Connection?Most dermatologists tell their patients diet plays no role in acne. New research suggests that's wrong.
How a pint of milk a day can give you acne
Now.... if only the derms would investigate the role of cruciferous veggies and their powerful ability to help clear skin!! Dr. Joel Fuhrman is one doctor who admits to cruciferous vegetables being crucial in the recovery of his patients with acne. Below is an article with an example.
Acne: Diet a Major Determining Factor...
#7
Posted 05 July 2009 - 07:40 PM
#8
Posted 05 July 2009 - 08:33 PM
Good one. Is there a link you can give for his acne protocol?
Not all of his information is based on credible, peer-reviewed studies, but I still think much of his information is on the right track, though I disagree with many of his views on diet. For any on the fence about Mercola, these articles by Dr. Fuhrman, who only uses peer-reviewed studies, might help: http://www.google.com/search?q=mercola%2C+...;rlz=1I7GGLL_en
#9
Posted 05 July 2009 - 10:54 PM
#10
Posted 06 July 2009 - 09:35 AM
We know. And so do numerous researchers and doctors. Whether or not you've managed to figure out what all you need to do.
------------------------------------
Jillian Michaels, trainer from that stupid show The Biggest Loser, has a book out about diet and exercise to straighten out hormones, metabolism, etc. Names acne, pms, fatigue, etc as symptoms.
Here: http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/30072993/</a> Not a bad article/excerpt from her book
And a video of her Today show appearance. http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/26184891/vp/30087875#30087875
#11
Posted 06 July 2009 - 09:48 AM
Edited by alternativista, 08 February 2011 - 06:13 PM.
#12
Posted 06 July 2009 - 10:43 AM
I ascribe to the diet-acne connection, but more specifically the topic of 'digestion'.
Quick story... my family had a Korean student live with us for a few years (home stay). She never had acne in her life until she started drinking milk (almost all Asians are lactose intolerant). Indigestion->acne... or milk hormones->acne? Maybe a case can be made for both.
Either way, a traditional diet would do well to resolve a lot of these problems and his been working great for me so far.
-Cleric
#13
Posted 07 July 2009 - 11:51 PM
There's definitely some good information to be found there, such as eating real, whole foods, but much of it is also dangerous advice and based on pseudo-science. The following article offers an opposing view to the Sally Fallon and Weston A. Price opinions: Weston A. Price Foundation, Stupid Traditions You can find more more free articles, based on credible, peer-reviewed scientific studies, at www.diseaseproof.com.
#14
Posted 08 July 2009 - 12:15 PM
There's definitely some good information to be found there, such as eating real, whole foods, but much of it is also dangerous advice and based on pseudo-science.
Second that.
#15
Posted 08 July 2009 - 02:34 PM
#16
Posted 24 July 2009 - 03:25 PM
I kept getting a page not found error when trying to go to paleodiet.com, so here's a link to wikipedia.
And there are links to journal articles specifically on acne in the pinned Clinical studies thread.
From the http://www.dietaryacnecure.com website.
For nearly 50 years scientists have understood the following four immediate causes of acne:
* The pores become blocked by skin cells that stick together.
* Glands in the skin produce excessive oil.
* Bacteria colonize and infect the oil filled, blocked pore.
* The oil filled, blocked pore and surrounding tissue become inflamed.
However, until now the reason behind these immediate causes of acne was not well understood. Most people grow up thinking that “acne just happens”, and that other than expensive and mostly ineffective treatments, nothing can be done to prevent it. But in fact, we now know that diet directly affects all four of the immediate causes of acne.
For instance, there is an enzyme called ZAG that normally dissolves the proteins holding together skin cells lining the pore, so that they can flake away and not block the pore. But there is exciting new evidence showing that components of certain foods enter the bloodstream and inhibit ZAG, thus causing the skin cells lining the pore to stick together and thereby block the pore.
In The Dietary Cure for Acne, Dr. Cordain explains the causes of acne, and its connection to diet. You’ll learn how pore blockage also results from excess blood concentrations of a hormone called IGF-1, and insufficiencies of another hormone called IGFBP-3, and how the food you eat influences both of these hormones. You’ll learn how excess oil production is caused by certain foods, and you’ll learn how the inflammation of acne can be rapidly calmed by eating the right anti-acne diet. And much more.
#17
Posted 25 July 2009 - 07:41 AM
There's definitely some good information to be found there, such as eating real, whole foods, but much of it is also dangerous advice and based on pseudo-science. The following article offers an opposing view to the Sally Fallon and Weston A. Price opinions: Weston A. Price Foundation, Stupid Traditions You can find more more free articles, based on credible, peer-reviewed scientific studies, at www.diseaseproof.com.
I read the diseaseproof article and, in short, it is a gross misrepresentation of what the Weston A. Price foundation promotes on its website.
In fact, the article didn't make a single good point that I could identify. On the topic of saturated fat, they said to the effect that "Dr. Fuhrman doesn't advocate high SFA intake, therefore, the Weston A. Price foundation must be wrong." Then, they discuss the results of a study that Fuhrman and T. Colin Campell teamed up for, and conveniently ignored the results of all contradictory studies. A good scientist would prefer to try to disprove his own theories before discrediting others'.
#18
Posted 25 July 2009 - 01:07 PM
Thanks for your input. I should have mentioned that that article is quite short and is meant to be used more as a link to the other, more in depth articles (I think) that this article gives links to. I haven't read them recently, but I think there are more details, studies, etc. listed in those. Dr. Fuhrman only comes to conclusions based upon the thousands of credible, peer-reviewed studies in science. He's also the first to admit to being wrong if research later shows otherwise. In fact, he's publicly stated that he knows he risks scaring people away, as he's not afraid to speak what he believes is the truth, based upon the research out there, even if he knows it's not what people are going to want to hear. His main objective is speaking the truth, and I truly believe he's a person of integrity and honesty. Whatever studies he chooses to use or ignore, I'm sure he has good reason. Also, I don't think he ever teamed up in researching with T. Colin Campbell? I think Dr. Fuhrman just respects his work in research? From what I read, Dr. Campell has conducted the most thorough studies ever done on the effects of animal products on the human body.
#19
Posted 26 July 2009 - 01:11 PM
Thanks for your input. I should have mentioned that that article is quite short and is meant to be used more as a link to the other, more in depth articles (I think) that this article gives links to. I haven't read them recently, but I think there are more details, studies, etc. listed in those.
I read a couple of the articles that your article linked to, and for the most part, my stance remains. In "Fanciful Folklore Is No Match For Modern Science", Fuhrman is again guilty of exaggeration and misinterpretation. The Weston A. Price foundation primarily advocates the usefulness of animal products in the diet; that does not mean, as Fuhrman implies, that they don't believe that fruit, vegetables, whole grains, nuts and seeds, and legumes aren't healthy. Quite the contrary, actually.
The WAPF is not the gold standard of public health, but Fuhrman really misses the mark with them.
I'm sure he's a good person and everything, and the diet he advocates is perfectly healthy (though maybe not for everybody), but there is a lot of conflicting information out there that I've never seen him respond to or take into account when he writes. Mainstream food writers are oftentimes clever like that; by responding to certain counter-arguments, they maintain the illusion that they're good scientists, when in reality, their foundations are shaky. You see it with food writers from Fuhrman to Atkins.
#20
Posted 29 July 2009 - 11:46 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hRwWd3AhPtM
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users



Home











