Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Acne-Diet study to be published in '05

20 posts in this topic

I've been in correspondence with Loren Cordain, a Colorado State physiology professor, author of "the Paleo Diet", and the one who made the notable (and controversial) claim of an acne-diet connection in his 2001 science journal article. He told me last year about a study his team was doing in Australia based on the findings detailed his article. Yesterday I asked him about the progress of this study and if substantial evidence was found in favor of his hypothesis.

His colleague Neil Mann has been heading the experiment, which is just wrapping up. He said it took almost a year to collect the data because of statistical considerations (sample size, power etc). He told me that the subjects in the study had "dramatic improvement in their symptoms -- many with complete remission". He said news about the study's results have leaked out and is already "upsetting the apple cart". He expects the article to be published by this fall and that the connection between acne and diet to be common knowledge within a few years. He said after the article is published there will be little doubt that diet is the major environmental factor responsible for acne.

Exciting stuff. Especially because soon dermatologists will not be able to claim with any validity that there is no acne-diet connection. Thanks to Dr. Cordain and Dr. Mann for rocking the boat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't expect it to rock the boat-- Mann and Cordain have very little credit in the medical world and they were the ones two years ago who suggested the bread/acne link while mostly citing the now-discredited New Guinea case study. Also, while "Dr"s, I doubt their credentials get them credit for anything; Cordain has a Ph.D in Exercise Physiology.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand Cordain and Mann don't have much credibility in the world of conventional medicine, largely because their views are unconventional. But for this study, Mann was able to recruit one of the world's leading experts on acne to provide the medical text. He said this lady was one of the major players who pushed the notion that diet and acne were unrelated years ago. I guess she has now acknowledged the success and validity of the experiment and is willing to renounce her archaic claim that there is no acne-diet relationship. I got this info from Cordain himself.

Even though Cordain doesn't have credibility with conventional physicians (who often aren't required to take a single nutrition class throughout their schooling), his article 2 years back still created a stir and was referenced in countless magazine articles, derm journals, and on tv. You can't deny the power of publicity. Because the public becomes aware of these studies, derms are forced to provide an answer to patients who reference the articles and want to know their validity. That alone stirs the pot. But I guess the overall effect will be seen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

upsetting the apple cart?? can anyone tell me what that means??

Has his research suggested apple is bad? cuz i'm eating a lot of them lately along with oranges....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
upsetting the apple cart?? can anyone tell me what that means??

Has his research suggested apple is bad? cuz i'm eating a lot of them lately along with oranges....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
upsetting the apple cart?? can anyone tell me what that means??

Has his research suggested apple is bad? cuz i'm eating a lot of them lately along with oranges....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, are they giving any clues regarding what the findings are?--what we should be eating and not eating????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
upsetting the apple cart?? can anyone tell me what that means??

Has his research suggested apple is bad? cuz i'm eating a lot of them lately along with oranges....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I checked out Cordain's Paleo diet and it makes some sense.

The general public is fed a lot of biased "scientific" studies funded by food corporations and pharmaceutical industries. I mean, how many bogus margarines do they have to keep reinventing?

Cordain makes a good point about how the standard diet today deviates from the early natural diets.

Most people don't make the connection between politics, money and the mega-corporations when it comes to food.

While I don't think that acne is caused by diet, I'm sure that diet can play some role in the healing of acne, like with any skin problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When is this study coming out?

Also: Has anyone tried the Paleo Diet and seen ANY results???

My question: believing in free markets, why don't more people do this instead of spending millions on other treatments?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some guy put up a post in this forum recently suggesting diet is completely responsible for acne. At first I did not take this post seriously. However, it got me thinking about my own experience, plus the experiences of of acne.org members who have indeed solved their acne problem 100% through a new diet.

Are you ready for a theory? Here goes...

I believe people suffering from acne fall into 1 of 3 categories:

1. Diet having no significant effect. When I was a teen, this was the case for me.

2. Mixed effect, diet causing significant acne to person, but medications or other treatments are also necessary to eliminate it.

3. Diet is primary driver and can virtually eliminate the acne.

Now, another thing I think is that diet is more likely to affect the adult acne cases. I say this because #1 that is my personal experience, and also a disproportianate number of teens get acne. It seems unlikely that teen diets are significantly different than adults in their early 20s, and yet teens suffer from a higher rate of acne.

To sum up, hormonal problems appear to cause the majority of teen acne, and diet problems cause the majority of adult acne. If true, it would suggest medications as primary treatment modality for teens and diet for adults. Comments?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re results. I've been trying a very basic Paleo diet (i.e. cut out the hi-gi carbs, eat more protein, leafy veg, fats - interestingly, the amount of saturated fat I eat has probably gone up, although Cordain would advise to avoid this). I've been on this for about five weeks. It's tough to organize though, because I'm married and my wife thinks I'm a lunatic for refusing to eat rice or bread. It's tough to arrange different meals for yourself when everyone else is loading up on hi-gi carbs.

My skin actually got better. I had some stubborn whiteheads and small red nodules, mostly around the chin and neck. Plenty of milia. Most of that went away. The acne around the chin went completely and that around the neck had almost disappeared. There seemed to be considerably less milia too. Sebum production was about the same though, so I'm guessing that (at least in my case) what is mainly affected by the diet is hyperkeratinization in the follicles.

Unfortunately for the last two weeks I've had to eat plenty of rice and bread and shit, and now - yes - I have whiteheads and nodules around the chin and neck, more milia, etc.

I'm trying to be careful about interpreting all this. If I can stay on a Paleo diet for two months and get virtually clear, then it's the diet for sure. I'm thirty-six and have had acne since I was a teenager. For most of my adult life I've controlled it with Accutane, but the stuff wears off after a couple of years. For the last couple of years I've just been trying to clear the stuff up topically, but nothing was working. The diet, however, did seem to be working, though really it's too early to say.

To anyone else, I say try it. Remember, it's the hi-gi carbs that are theorized to be the villians. That's what you need to avoid. Forget all this crap about fats - that's magical thinking, like I've said before. (Sebum is grease, and fat is grease, therefore ... a witch! Burn her!')

Regards everyone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Loren Cordain and his group made a very important study on acne. Alhough, I am a physician, I highly appreciate what they did. They major finding was that there is a relationship between acne and high carbohydrate diet. Recently, another research group came with the "dairy hypothesis".

I believe, that my hypothesis can explain both approach. This is the "vitamin D link"! I think fungal and yeast infection cause hormonal changes and acne.

See my topic "IS ACNE A FUNGAL INFECTION?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I should add a couple of things to clarify. It's not just hi-gi carbs you cut out if you're interested in acne, it's anything that gives a strong insulin response. So dairy goes, because as Cordain says, milk is low-gi but it's 'strikingly insulinotropic'. (It seems to be something in the whey fraction, so you can still have some dairy products as long as most of the whey is out of it. I seem able to have small amounts of butter without a problem, though there is still some whey in butter. The thing is that people usually have butter with BREAD, and it's the damn bread that brings on the zits, and they go, 'Oh dear! The FAT in that butter!'. For me, butter without bread equals clear; butter with bread equals 'oh no ...') Coffee also appears to elicit higher insulin secretion. Chocolate (i.e. cocoa by itself) does the same, but I still feel free to drink it without sugar or milk.

Also, I actually started this diet about nine weeks ago, but I've kept records about it for only the last five. From those I see I'm still getting those crap hi-gi meals on average about a third of the time (as opposed to 100 percent of the time before).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I should add a couple of things to clarify. It's not just hi-gi carbs you cut out if you're interested in acne, it's anything that gives a strong insulin response. So dairy goes, because as Cordain says, milk is low-gi but it's 'strikingly insulinotropic'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jay, whilst what you have said is correct in a general sense, it is also pretty much irrelevant in the current context. If the theory is that insulinotropic foods are related to acne, then someone interested in that can test it out by cutting down on insulinotropic foods and seeing what happens. So it doesn't make sense to just ditch grains from your diet but retain milk. I wanted anyone who is interested in trying what I am doing to get a fair go at it - which won't happen if they cut out grains but quaff litres of milk every day. Then they will come back with, 'Hey, it doesn't work!', and won't give the idea another try - which would be unfortunate, if it would have worked if done properly.

Your point means nothing in the context of what I wrote and I am rather annoyed by it. There isn't just a 'correlation' between insulinotropic foods and acne: there's a described biochemical pathway in terms of sebum production via androgens and hyperkeratinization of epithelial cells as a result of insulin boosting IGF-1 and suppressing IGFPB-3, which affects the action of retinoid receptors. This is pretty strong stuff and anyone with acne ought to be at least interested in checking out whether cutting insulinotropic foods from their diets will work for them. It's not just that there's a correlation. There's a described chemical pathway.

That quote you have at the end is pretty inapposite, by the way. All of science has proceeded on theorising before one has data - in the sense that the data is not complete, because what counts as relevant has to be constantly revised in the light of new evidence.

If you presume to give me a lesson, at least please let it be a relevant one.

Respectfully,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Insulinotropic, never thought of it that way, but I should have. Thanks for giving me something more to research into. I keep hearing about the Insulin Index, but I'm not finding much on it (not the same as the glycemic load?). Several times over, I've heard that certain proteins (lectins & gluten) are insulin mimickers, but very few studies discuss this. Of course, some members intentially take insulin mimickers like ALA or Cinnamon Extract (where they bind to the insulin receptor on cells to let glucose in), yet they don't have the same possibly negative affect on us as certain lectins or gluten, which makes me wonder if these glycoproteins are a very different type of insulin mimickers.

I don't carbohydrate count. I eat as I please and avoid foods based on my response to them. I've never followed the Glycemic Index as there are foods on there that I eat almost everyday and based on it, I should have serious problems, but I do not. There are foods listed on there that are supposed to be "safe" for me to eat, yet those are my biggest offenders (gluten, whey, fructose, nuts) and, based on current testing methods, I am not allergic or intolerant to those foods. I think based on my response, others, and the studies that are coming out that this is a good example of how science is evolving. The studies are showing that it can't all be based on glucose, that it can't all be based on "whole grain", that for the most sensitive of cases, that there are still other (dietary) factors that we need to keep in mind.

I can turn my acne 100% on or 99%+ off, so obviously I haven't figured it all out for myself, but this is the closest I have ever gotten to success. I do not presume to know everything about this, but somewhere in here the truth may indeed lie. Until then, this is the closest any of us has ever gotten to finding some sort of "answer" and perhaps once that other reason that these diets work for us is revealed, everyone else (that it could work for) will be able to be acne-free.

Anyway, por kx711

Am J Clin Nutr. 2004 Nov;80(5):1246-53. Related Articles, Links 

 

Glycemia and insulinemia in healthy subjects after lactose-equivalent meals of milk and other food proteins: the role of plasma amino acids and incretins.

Nilsson M, Stenberg M, Frid AH, Holst JJ, Bjorck IM.

Department of Applied Nutrition and Food Chemistry, Lund University, Sweden. [email protected]

BACKGROUND: Milk products deviate from other carbohydrate-containing foods in that they produce high insulin responses, despite their low GI. The insulinotropic mechanism of milk has not been elucidated. OBJECTIVE: The objective was to evaluate the effect of common dietary sources of animal or vegetable proteins on concentrations of postprandial blood glucose, insulin, amino acids, and incretin hormones [glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP) and glucagon-like peptide 1] in healthy subjects. DESIGN: Twelve healthy volunteers were served test meals consisting of reconstituted milk, cheese, whey, cod, and wheat gluten with equivalent amounts of lactose. An equicarbohydrate load of white-wheat bread was used as a reference meal. RESULTS: A correlation was found between postprandial insulin responses and early increments in plasma amino acids; the strongest correlations were seen for leucine, valine, lysine, and isoleucine. A correlation was also obtained between responses of insulin and GIP concentrations. Reconstituted milk powder and whey had substantially lower postprandial glucose areas under the curve (AUCs) than did the bread reference (-62% and -57%, respectively). Whey meal was accompanied by higher AUCs for insulin (90%) and GIP (54%). CONCLUSIONS: It can be concluded that food proteins differ in their capacity to stimulate insulin release, possibly by differently affecting the early release of incretin hormones and insulinotropic amino acids. Milk proteins have insulinotropic properties; the whey fraction contains the predominating insulin secretagogue.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.f...2&dopt=Abstract

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, I don't want to give lessons to anyone. Take it as a joke instead.

We are all suffering of thinking in medical dogmas... and it is not easy to get rid of them. FREE YOUR MIND! :-)

"See what everyone sees, but think what nobody thinks!" that was another famous researcher A.SZ.GY.

About theorising: all the researchers favour their own theory and it is not easy for them to chage their way of thinking. This means that they often IGNORE other facts that cannot be explained by their theory.

That was the "message" of the quote.

Jay, whilst what you have said is correct in a general sense, it is also pretty much irrelevant in the current context. If the theory is that insulinotropic foods are related to acne, then someone interested in that can test it out by cutting down on insulinotropic foods and seeing what happens. So it doesn't make sense to just ditch grains from your diet but retain milk. I wanted anyone who is interested in trying what I am doing to get a fair go at it - which won't happen if they cut out grains but quaff litres of milk every day. Then they will come back with, 'Hey, it doesn't work!', and won't give the idea another try - which would be unfortunate, if it would have worked if done properly.

Your point means nothing in the context of what I wrote and I am rather annoyed by it. There isn't just a 'correlation' between insulinotropic foods and acne: there's a described biochemical pathway in terms of sebum production via androgens and hyperkeratinization of epithelial cells as a result of insulin boosting IGF-1 and suppressing IGFPB-3, which affects the action of retinoid receptors. This is pretty strong stuff and anyone with acne ought to be at least interested in checking out whether cutting insulinotropic foods from their diets will work for them. It's not just that there's a correlation. There's a described chemical pathway.

That quote you have at the end is pretty inapposite, by the way. All of science has proceeded on theorising before one has data - in the sense that the data is not complete, because what counts as relevant has to be constantly revised in the light of new evidence.

If you presume to give me a lesson, at least please let it be a relevant one.

Respectfully,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No, I don't want to give lessons to anyone. Take it as a joke instead.

We are all suffering of thinking in medical dogmas... and it is not easy to get rid of them. FREE YOUR MIND! :-)

"See what everyone sees, but think what nobody thinks!" that was another famous researcher A.SZ.GY.

About theorising: all the researchers favour their own theory and it is not easy for them to chage their way of thinking. This means that they often IGNORE other facts that cannot be explained by their theory.

That was the "message" of the quote.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites