HI,
I HAD ACNE FOR ******* 6 MONTHS ( SEVERE WITH NODULES ). THAT`S CALLED CYSTIC ACNE, THIS MEANS I HAD GODDAMN CYSTS ON MY FACE. SO I DID SOME RESEARCH, BUT I WANTED THE REAAAAAAAAL TRUTH BEHIND MY ACNE, NOT THE PHARMACEUTICAL TRUTH. SO I WENT INTO ADVANCED RESEARCH AND FOUND THIS PALEOLITHIC DIET. TRY IT. THAT`S ALL IM GONNA SAY. OH AND IM HEALED BTW, TOOK A WEEK TO NOTICE ENORMEOUS CHANGES. ( PEOPLE SAY THEY BARELY SEE ANYTHING ). THIS POST WILL BE DELETED BECAUSE NOBODY MAKES MONEY OVER THIS CURE SO HURRY THE HECK UP. GOD BLESS Y`ALL.
On 7/18/2016 at 0:37 PM, PALEOLITHIC DIET said:HI,
I HAD ACNE FOR ******* 6 MONTHS ( SEVERE WITH NODULES ). THAT`S CALLED CYSTIC ACNE, THIS MEANS I HAD GODDAMN CYSTS ON MY FACE. SO I DID SOME RESEARCH, BUT I WANTED THE REAAAAAAAAL TRUTH BEHIND MY ACNE, NOT THE PHARMACEUTICAL TRUTH. SO I WENT INTO ADVANCED RESEARCH AND FOUND THIS PALEOLITHIC DIET. TRY IT. THAT`S ALL IM GONNA SAY. OH AND IM HEALED BTW, TOOK A WEEK TO NOTICE ENORMEOUS CHANGES. ( PEOPLE SAY THEY BARELY SEE ANYTHING ). THIS POST WILL BE DELETED BECAUSE NOBODY MAKES MONEY OVER THIS CURE SO HURRY THE HECK UP. GOD BLESS Y`ALL.
I found out 35 years ago that diet was the key and have been able to help my daughter who has the same condition, we ate any crap,fries,burgers,pizza,chocolate etc etc the key in our diet is to avoid chemical additives so your diet would work I imagine for us,healthy food is just a bonus for our bodies but don't prevent our now gone spots.
veganbat94: A diet high in [quality, nutrient-dense] saturated fat and cholesterol most certainly does not promote heart disease, diabetes, and cancer. In fact, the complete opposite it true.Our bodies crave fat-soluble nutrients and we need them to maintain hormonal balance, repair cell membranes, lubricate connective tissue, and so much more.
Foods high in saturated fat such as [A2 derived] butter, cheese, fatty seafood, and lard were prized and consumed liberally in non-industrialized societies where ailments such as heart disease and obesity werevirtually nonexistent.
Of course, the quality of fats we consume makes all the difference. Medium-chain triglycerides and Omega 3 and 9 fatty acids are best. And when it comes to the animals from which we derive our fat, it is imperative that they be organically fed and pastured, and that they also be raised without synthetic hormones.
Cardiovascular Disease, Diabetes, and Cancer all stem from the chronic inflammation caused by autoimmune disease (occasionally coupled with certain genetic mutations), and have nothing to do with saturated fat in and of itself.
I'm in no way suggesting that Paleo, or any other"low-carb"dietthat allows for less than a 20% daily carbohydrate intakeis health-optimal. But in a similar vein, the suggestion thatsaturated fat (in any form) should be avoided is anoverly-simplistic and specious one.
While you are correct that very low-carb diets like Paleo have the potential to raise LDL(i.e.the "bad cholesterol") to dangerous levels, it's not at all because of the presence of saturated fats, but rather the lack of carbohydrates. In a small butsignificant minority of people, extended low-carbing can resultin a complex (and hella complicated) process that essentially raises LDL-C levels bydecreasingthyroid function. In this case, the problem is not inthe creation of cholesterol (consuming saturated fats), but a problem with the clearance of cholesterol.
Despite the prejudice the medical profession has long held against saturated fats, there was never real evidence against them, and for the last 6-7 years, research has been mounting that actuallyindicates saturated fats contribute to animprovement of cardiovascular health.
This study from 2010 followed 58,453 Japanese adults, aged 40 to 79 at the start of the study, for 14.1 years. [1] The study found that higher saturated fat intake was associated with:
- A 31% reduction in mortality from stroke
- An 18% reduction in mortality from cardiovascular disease
Also in 2010, a systematic review of the literature found that there is no significant evidence for concluding that dietary saturated fat is associated with an increased risk of CHD or CVD. [2] In a few decades the reviews will probably have to go further: there will be significant evidence that dietary saturated fat is protective against CHD and CVD.
References:
[1] Yamagishi K et al. Dietary intake of saturated fatty acids and mortality from cardiovascular disease in Japanese: the Japan Collaborative Cohort Study for Evaluation of Cancer Risk Study.Am J Clin Nutr. 2010 Aug 4. [Epub ahead of print] http://pmid.us/20685950.
[2] Siri-Tarino PW et al. Meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies evaluating the association of saturated fat with cardiovascular disease.Am J Clin Nutr.2010 Mar;91(3):535-46. http://pmid.us/20071648.
10 hours ago, SkinDeeply said:Cardiovascular Disease, Diabetes, and Cancer all stem from the chronic inflammation caused by autoimmune disease (occasionally coupled with certain genetic mutations), and have nothing to do with saturated fat in and of itself.
I'm in no way suggesting that Paleo, or any other"low-carb"dietthat allows for less than a 20% daily carbohydrate intakeis health-optimal. But in a similar vein, the suggestion thatsaturated fat (in any form) should be avoided is anoverly-simplistic and specious one.
While you are correct that very low-carb diets like Paleo have the potential to raise LDL(i.e.the "bad cholesterol") to dangerous levels, it's not at all because of the presence of saturated fats, but rather the lack of carbohydrates. In a small butsignificant minority of people, extended low-carbing can resultin a complex (and hella complicated) process that essentially raises LDL-C levels bydecreasingthyroid function. In this case, the problem is not inthe creation of cholesterol (consuming saturated fats), but a problem with the clearance of cholesterol.
Despite the prejudice the medical profession has long held against saturated fats, there was never real evidence against them, and for the last 6-7 years, research has been mounting that actuallyindicates saturated fats contribute to animprovement of cardiovascular health.
This study from 2010 followed 58,453 Japanese adults, aged 40 to 79 at the start of the study, for 14.1 years. [1] The study found that higher saturated fat intake was associated with:
- A 31% reduction in mortality from stroke
- An 18% reduction in mortality from cardiovascular disease
Also in 2010, a systematic review of the literature found that there is no significant evidence for concluding that dietary saturated fat is associated with an increased risk of CHD or CVD. [2] In a few decades the reviews will probably have to go further: there will be significant evidence that dietary saturated fat is protective against CHD and CVD.
References:
[1] Yamagishi K et al. Dietary intake of saturated fatty acids and mortality from cardiovascular disease in Japanese: the Japan Collaborative Cohort Study for Evaluation of Cancer Risk Study.Am J Clin Nutr. 2010 Aug 4. [Epub ahead of print] http://pmid.us/20685950.
[2] Siri-Tarino PW et al. Meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies evaluating the association of saturated fat with cardiovascular disease.Am J Clin Nutr.2010 Mar;91(3):535-46. http://pmid.us/20071648.
You say it's not saturated fat that raises LDL cholesterol but lack of carbohydrates. Study after study has shown that decreasing saturated fat intake lowers cholesterol. If 30% of your diet is saturated fat, your cholesterol levels increase by 50 points http://nutritionfacts.org/video/the-saturated-fat-studies-set-up-to-fail/
On 7/27/2016 at 9:17 PM, SkinDeeply said:Cardiovascular Disease, Diabetes, and Cancer all stem from the chronic inflammation caused by autoimmune disease (occasionally coupled with certain genetic mutations), and have nothing to do with saturated fat in and of itself.
I'm in no way suggesting that Paleo, or any other"low-carb"dietthat allows for less than a 20% daily carbohydrate intakeis health-optimal. But in a similar vein, the suggestion thatsaturated fat (in any form) should be avoided is anoverly-simplistic and specious one.
While you are correct that very low-carb diets like Paleo have the potential to raise LDL(i.e.the "bad cholesterol") to dangerous levels, it's not at all because of the presence of saturated fats, but rather the lack of carbohydrates. In a small butsignificant minority of people, extended low-carbing can resultin a complex (and hella complicated) process that essentially raises LDL-C levels bydecreasingthyroid function. In this case, the problem is not inthe creation of cholesterol (consuming saturated fats), but a problem with the clearance of cholesterol.
Despite the prejudice the medical profession has long held against saturated fats, there was never real evidence against them, and for the last 6-7 years, research has been mounting that actuallyindicates saturated fats contribute to animprovement of cardiovascular health.
This study from 2010 followed 58,453 Japanese adults, aged 40 to 79 at the start of the study, for 14.1 years. [1] The study found that higher saturated fat intake was associated with:
- A 31% reduction in mortality from stroke
- An 18% reduction in mortality from cardiovascular disease
Also in 2010, a systematic review of the literature found that there is no significant evidence for concluding that dietary saturated fat is associated with an increased risk of CHD or CVD. [2] In a few decades the reviews will probably have to go further: there will be significant evidence that dietary saturated fat is protective against CHD and CVD.
References:
[1] Yamagishi K et al. Dietary intake of saturated fatty acids and mortality from cardiovascular disease in Japanese: the Japan Collaborative Cohort Study for Evaluation of Cancer Risk Study.Am J Clin Nutr. 2010 Aug 4. [Epub ahead of print] http://pmid.us/20685950.
[2] Siri-Tarino PW et al. Meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies evaluating the association of saturated fat with cardiovascular disease.Am J Clin Nutr.2010 Mar;91(3):535-46. http://pmid.us/20071648.
After reading the meta-analysis you referenced I wish to add a few things. First I would like to say that there's somewhat of a conflict of interest with these researchers. For example: according to the University of California's website where Dr. Krauss is active he has been "Funded by the National Dairy Council since 1989". Now this does not necessarily mean that his research is invalid somehow, but I will show you that it may have influenced the outcome somewhat.
If we go to the Siri-Tarino PW et al meta-analysis, and we look at figure 2 we see that nine studies showed an increase in CVD risk from saturated fat whether it was statistically significant or not, and seven showed no association. I would like to focus on the seven studies that showed no association between saturated fat and CVD.
The first one is by McGee et al and listed as reference number nine in the meta-analysis.
McGee DL, Reed DM, Yano K, Kagan A, Tillotson J.Ten-year incidence of coronary heart disease in the Honolulu Heart Program: relationship to nutrient intake.Am J Epidemiol1984;119Men who developed coronary heart disease had a lower average intake of calories, carbohydrates, starch, and vegetable protein than men who remained free of coronary heart disease. Men who developed coronary heart disease also had a higher mean intake of percentage of calories from protein, fat, saturated fatty acids, and polyunsaturated fatty acids than men who remained free of coronary heart disease. These men also had a significantly lower mean percentage of calories from carbohydrates and a higher mean ingestion of cholesterol per 1000 calories than men who remained free of coronary heart disease."
Seems quite clear to me. The men who consumed most saturated fat had a higher incidence of coronary heart disease. What went wrong here? What made the researchers of your meta-analysis conclude that there was no association? Apparently, they had used the data after adjustment for serum cholesterol levels. The entire reason almost all major health institutions have recommended a reduction in the consumption of dietary saturated fatty acids is due to the fact that they increase serum cholesterol levels. Was this just a honest mistake by the researchers? I doubt it, since nearly all of their references do not really support their conclusion.
The next study which showed no association according to the authors of the cited meta-analysis is by Posner et al.
Reference number 16.
Posner BM, Cobb JL, Belanger AJ, Cupples LA, D'Agostino RB, Stokes J., IIIDietary lipid predictors of coronary heart disease in men. The Framingham Study.Arch Intern Med1991;151:11817
This was a 16 year study all based on a single dietary assessment at the very beginning. Personally, I feel this isn't the most rigorous of scientific methods. Let's ignore its poor study design and see what it actually says: "Those who consumed 10% of energy intake from saturated fatty acid, compared with the mean level of 15.2%, had a CHD relative risk of 0.78
So even in this study a lower consumption of saturated fatty acids was associated with a lower heart disease risk.
I could go over all of the studies they cited but I think you get the picture. This meta-analysis merely looks at observational studies, and only homogenous ones at that. It does not address any of the animal studies, metabolic ward experiments, interventional trials or randomized controlled trials that have been conducted. For these reasons many health experts like those of the Harvard School of Public Health have said it raises too many red flags and should largely be ignored. We mustn't forget that some RCTs have even achieved reversal of heart disease through a healthy lifestyle and very low intake of saturated fats and cholesterol.
As to your claim that saturated fat can contribute to improvement of heart health, observational studies could never prove that, even if they were of much higher quality than the ones you have provided us.