Insulin--Could This Be the Key?

If it's on your mind and it has to do with multiple sclerosis in any way, post it here.

Trans fatty acids and hyperinsulinemia

Postby lyndacarol » Sun Jun 03, 2007 10:45 am

Given my focus on hyperinsulinemia, I was especially drawn to the line, "increase blood insulin in response to glucose."

From Fats that Heal Fats that Kill by Udo Erasmus (pages 111-112):

"A Silver Spring, Maryland researcher (Mary Enig, Trans-Fatty Acids in the Food Supply: a comprehensive report covering 60 years of research, 1993) has researched, followed, and summarized others' research on the effects of trans-fatty acids for many years. Research from Harvard (Willet, 1994) and other institutions show that besides interfering with EFA functions, raising total cholesterol and lowering the 'good' HDL, inhibiting conversions of EFAs to their derivatives, and worsening essential fatty acid deficiency, trans-fatty acids also:
- raise Lp(a), a strong risk factor in human atherosclerosis;
- lower the efficiency of B cell response and increase proliferation of T cells (B and T cells are involved in immune funtions);
- decrease testosterone and increase abnormal sperm (in animals);
- interfere with pregnancy;
- correlate with low birth weight in humans;
- lower the quality of breast milk and decrease volume of cream;
- increase blood insulin in response to glucose;
- decrease insulin response (undesirable for diabetics);
- alter the activities of a liver enzyme system that metabolizes carcinogens and toxins (mixed function oxidase cytochromes P-448/450);
- alter membrane transport and fluidity;
- alter the size, number, and fatty acid composition of adipose (fat) cells;
- increase peroxisomal activity; and
- interact with fish oil and tissue w3s.
Since trans-fatty acids have detrimental effects on our cardiovascular system, immune system, reproductive system, energy metabolism, fat and essential fatty acid metabolism, liver function, and cell membranes, we should consider margarines, shortenings, shortening oils, and partially hydrogenated vegetable oils to be harmful to human health!"
User avatar
lyndacarol
Family Elder
 
Posts: 2312
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 4:00 pm

Advertisement

Postby gwa » Sun Jun 03, 2007 10:58 am

Mary Enig, the expert on diets and fats, was behind the push to get trans fats out of the food system. She has for years recommended that we eat unprocessed coconut oil, butter and olive oil.

Big companies have been playing a game with the FDA for years so that they could buy time in getting the hydrogenated fats out of their products.

Even now if you look at the ingredients on the side panels of food, it may show no trans fats, but further down in the list of ingredients, partially hydrogenated oil will show up. The per serving ratio can be made so low that the trans fats are below the 1g level and then the companies don't have to declare it in the fat count.

The FDA knows that these fats are artery blockers and killers, but did not until the past few years come up with guidelines to get the fats out of the system and I believe that Mary Enig was the one that made it happen

Why the FDA stalls on getting these killers out of the system is any one's guess.

gwa
User avatar
gwa
Family Elder
 
Posts: 846
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 4:00 pm

Re: Trans fat regulation

Postby NHE » Sun Jun 03, 2007 7:47 pm

gwa wrote:The per serving ratio can be made so low that the trans fats are below the 1g level and then the companies don't have to declare it in the fat count.

It was my understanding that trans fat had to be below 0.5 g per serving in order to be counted as "0" g on the label. Please see this link for more information.

As a result of this ruling, I have noticed a general trend where the "serving size" has shrunk. On one box of crackers it was about 4 crackers that made up one serving. I think that very few people actually eat just 4 crackers at a time...

NHE
User avatar
NHE
Volunteer Moderator
 
Posts: 3361
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2004 4:00 pm

Postby gwa » Mon Jun 04, 2007 6:10 am

NHE,

You are right about the 0.5g count. I should have looked the figure up instead of trying to remember the accurate number.

The serving size is definitely shrinking. It must be easier to shrink the size than to remove the trans fats.

gwa
User avatar
gwa
Family Elder
 
Posts: 846
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 4:00 pm

To repeat my analogy of a roomful of keys

Postby lyndacarol » Sun Jul 22, 2007 3:02 pm

This is a good day for thinking. Although I have posted this analogy in another thread, it seems to fit here, too:

"My own analogy of MS is like being locked in a room lined with shelves filled with boxes of keys. The key to the door and freedom is in one of those boxes! But researchers have been looking in the wrong box for 60 years (the one labeled "autoimmune" or "neurology.")

My own opinion is that they need to be looking in the box labeled "neuro-endocrine." HOW do we get them to try keys from a different box???"

Now today, when reconsidering my situation, I have more questions: My first neurological tests showed no evidence of MS--my first three MRIs reported NO lesions (In fact, my first neuro said categorically that I did not have MS. Doctors at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, MN, said the same.); the visual evoked responses were normal; the first EMG was normal. But the abnormal sensations were there! Why were the doctors looking in the "neurology box?"

The paresthesia in my legs and feet could be the same experienced by diabetics, couldn't it? Those with peripheral vascular disease (PVD), specifically peripheral artery disease (PAD), have the same sensations, I believe. In fact, PAD involves various aneurysms (someone mentioned that on this site), even leg weakness, and other symptoms shared by MS.

Insulin damages the lining of blood vessels (endothelium); it also thickens smooth muscles (these surround the blood vessels, bladder, too). Couldn't these effects be responsible for MS difficulties? In my case, it seems logical that the source of my problem is closer to the "vascular box," or the "muscular problem box," or even the "insulin (endocrinology) box!!!" Has anyone had these checked and ruled out?

This would seem to explain why diet improves MS for many--diets that are reducing glucose in the blood stream, and consequently the insulin level, that is.

And a newpaper article reported just this week that scientists have found a genetic basis for the condition of "jimmy legs" (a term that came from a Seinfeld episode--news to me, since I have not watched the TV program Seinfeld!). Has anyone ever looked at excess insulin as a cause of that???

So many questions and no answers--such frustration!!
User avatar
lyndacarol
Family Elder
 
Posts: 2312
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 4:00 pm

Book's relevance to many conditions--even this thread

Postby lyndacarol » Mon Nov 12, 2007 2:28 pm

Although I first mentioned Good Calories, Bad Calories by Gary Taubes in the Reading Nook, it has become my favorite book and I think it has relevance to many conditions and to many hypotheses held at this site.

I think it will be the most important book concerning health to be published in the last century!

Of course, I think the author's chapters on insulin have direct bearing on the insulin hypothesis for MS, although he never mentioned that disease.

The book is obviously well-researched and well-written. It is filled with information! It gives new insight into how research has been done and how results which contradict the preconceptions of the researcher often have been ignored.

I was especially interested in the details of the 1928 experiment when Vilhjalmur Stefansson and Karsten Anderson lived with the Inuit to settle the meat diet controversy. They lived exclusively on meat and fat--NO carbohydrates. "The Inuit considered vegetables and fruit not proper human food." (p. 320)

Please recall that carbohydrates convert to glucose and thus stimulate insulin secretion. Also please recall that MS has been nonexistent among the Eskimos and this has contradicted the generally accepted conventional wisdom of the "north-south gradient."
User avatar
lyndacarol
Family Elder
 
Posts: 2312
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 4:00 pm

Postby gwa » Mon Nov 12, 2007 5:17 pm

lc,

I agree that this book is a must read for all of us. It will be difficult/impossible to get the Dean Ornish people of this world to go with the paradigm shift because the low fat mantra is so pervasive throughout our culture.

It is a shame that fat was made a culprit in our diet because fat is necessary and too many people now avoid all fats, which is harmful to their bodies. Also, sugar has been substituted in globs in our food supply because the government until recently did not hold sugar consumption as harmful.

I am with you on this kiddo, but good luck overturning the demotics of fat consumption in the general population.

gwa
User avatar
gwa
Family Elder
 
Posts: 846
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 4:00 pm

Re: Book's relevance to many conditions--even this thread

Postby CureOrBust » Tue Nov 13, 2007 1:50 am

lyndacarol wrote:Also please recall that MS has been nonexistent among the Eskimos and this has contradicted the generally accepted conventional wisdom of the "north-south gradient."
If we are talking of the same "people" here, they are also known because of their high seal (or whale) blubber diet. I saw a program on it how a DR researched their low incidence of heart problems. It was one of the first studies on very high Omega-3 intake. Also generally thought well for MS.
User avatar
CureOrBust
Family Elder
 
Posts: 2914
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 3:00 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia

Postby Rudi » Tue Nov 13, 2007 3:49 am

As CureOrBust states, it's the type of fat.

Trans and saturated fats are terrible for human health and MS. Whereas omega-3 fats are anti inflammatory.
1st traceable symptoms July 2006 - realized I had MS November 2006
CAP since 27/04/2007. Various supplements and dietary modifications.
Male 27 UK
User avatar
Rudi
Getting to Know You...
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2007 3:00 pm
Location: Midlands UK

Reply to "brain and glucose" post of May 16, 2007

Postby lyndacarol » Mon Dec 03, 2007 6:59 pm

In answer to this May 16, 2007 post: "There is no way for brain cell to use ketones or modify fat for energetic purpose. Ketones are highly toxic and cause the brain tissue damage, irreversible by the way." I have found the following contradiction from my new favorite book, Good Calories, Bad Calories by Gary Taubes.

On page 456.
Without carbohydrates in the diet....the brain and central nervous system will run on ketone bodies, converted from dietary fat and from the fatty acids released by the adipose tissue; on glycerol, also released from the fat tissue with the breakdown of triglycerides into free fatty acids; and on glucose, converted from the protein in the diet.


Further on page 456.
A good discussion of the rationale for a minimal amount of carbohydrates in the diet can be found in the 2002 Institute of Medicine (IOM) report, Dietary Reference Intakes. The IOM sets an "estimated average requirement" of a hundred grams of carbohydrates a day for adults, so that the brain can run exclusively on glucose, "without having to rely on a partial replacement of glucose by ketone bodies." It then sets the "recommended dietary allowance" at 130 grams to allow margin for error. But the IOM report also acknowledges that the brain will be fine without these carbohydrates, because it runs perfectly well on ketone bodies, glycerol, and the protein-derived glucose.


Although I have not consulted the original source cited, the 2002 Institute of Medicine report, I trust that the author has. I have found this idea that the brain runs "perfectly" on ketones in a couple reliable sources and tend to believe it.

So I have redoubled my effort to remove carbs from my diet more completely in an attempt to reduce my insulin level.
User avatar
lyndacarol
Family Elder
 
Posts: 2312
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 4:00 pm

Postby gwa » Tue Dec 04, 2007 8:40 am

Don't forget about the children that are put on a high fat, no carb diet to control seizures at John Hopkins.

If the brain didn't run on ketones, these kids would be brain dead after a few months.

gwa
User avatar
gwa
Family Elder
 
Posts: 846
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 4:00 pm

Postby jimmylegs » Tue Dec 04, 2007 4:20 pm

LC, how much magnesium do you supplement?
jimmylegs
Volunteer Moderator
 
Posts: 9026
Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2006 4:00 pm

Magnesium dosage

Postby lyndacarol » Tue Dec 04, 2007 6:06 pm

JL, magnesium is 250 mg. tablet, twice per day.
User avatar
lyndacarol
Family Elder
 
Posts: 2312
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 4:00 pm

Postby jimmylegs » Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:31 pm

oooo lots! same time as d3, or separate?
jimmylegs
Volunteer Moderator
 
Posts: 9026
Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2006 4:00 pm

Schedule for supplements

Postby lyndacarol » Tue Dec 04, 2007 8:53 pm

JL, I have a trayful of bottles--I dole them out in the morning for the day. I take a small mountain in the morning, including a magnesium tablet and a D gelcap (2000IU). Second magnesium taken at night (a D gelcap with each meal for a daily amount of 6000IU--I have backed off of 8000IU per day which I did for a year; no reason, just thought 3 gelcaps would do as well as 4.)
User avatar
lyndacarol
Family Elder
 
Posts: 2312
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 4:00 pm

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

 


  • Related topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users


Contact us | Terms of Service