Swank-Wahls hybrid

[Jimpsull]

Swank studied 200 patients for 34 years. Most of those who kept saturated fats below 15 grams per day were alive and walking after 34 years. Those who didn't were bedridden or dead. No drug or other lifestyle regimen can claim anything even close to this compelling.

There are a lot of really good concepts underlying the Wahls Protocol - and some anecdotal data indicating it can lessen MS fatigue and trigger a remission. However, she ignores Swank's (MUCH more THOROUGH) 50+ years of clinical AND LABORATORY (blood viscosity etc) research.

I am now on a hybrid diet. My exclusions come from Swank (dairy fat, red meat, pork, hydrogenated oils, heavily processed foods). I am now making sure I get the 9 cups per day of veggies Wahls prescribes. I've also (most likely temporary) gone gluten free. I am getting my carbs from beets, sweet potatoes, carrots, and occasionally rice.

[ElliotB]

Perhaps you need to reread what the Wahls diet/protocol is about - you may have missed the point. She 'ignores' Swank's diet with good reason.

[Jimpsull]

I am reading Wahls book. She has lots of great theory but not a lot of hard evidence, which Swank has. Why does the Wahls protocol exclude eggs? Because she's allergic to them. Turns out they should be avoided because of their high saturated fat content but that isn't exactly a good basis for a protocol to be adopted by many.

The evidence for The Wahls protocol is still largely anecdotal whereas Swanks ability to keep progression at bay for 34+ years is incontrovertible.

[ElliotB]

'...Wahls book. She has lots of great theory but not a lot of hard evidence, which Swank has."

And what evidence is that? Like Dr. Wahls, Dr. Swank did not conduct clinical trials.




"eggs... should be avoided because of their high saturated fat content"


Depends on the eggs... there are a couple of brands of eggs that are higher/high in Omega 3 fats that are actually good for you. The only downside is that they are expensive and not readily available.

[NHE]

'...Wahls book. She has lots of great theory but not a lot of hard evidence, which Swank has."

And what evidence is that? Like Dr. Wahls, Dr. Swank did not conduct clinical trials.

Swank study.
https://www.drmcdougall.com/2014/07/31/ ... sis-study/

Wahls vs. Swank diet study.
http://www.nationalmssociety.org/About- ... owa-Launch

Swank's papers.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?te ... lerosis%22

[jimmylegs]

without knowing all the details, imho both swank and wahls are working to the middle from different extremes. wahls probably makes more sense for an ex vegan. swank makes sense for an ex fatty fat fat meat eater. that's why neither diet should be expected to work perfectly for all. also why swank could be expected to work for more people than a wahls approach.

avoiding potential allergens like eggs was a recommendation given to me by my naturopath (who has declined over the last decade in spite of ccsvi treatment in costa rica). consistent with best bet diet and others, the idea made no sense to me, having spent 15 yrs completely avoiding eggs already. meanwhile klenner protocol suggested high protein diet with 2 eggs for breakfast. that changed my pre dx status quo, so it made sense. i ate the eggs, along with a ton of megadosing other stuff, and had drastic improvements inside 3 days. klenner wouldn't necessarily work for all either. i can't see adding eggs doing much of anything for someone already topped right up on animal protein. and as far as avoiding 'potential' allergens in general is concerned, if all that means is 'pro-inflammatory' there's IF scoring/balancing for that. no need to throw out the baby with the bathwater. just be sure to feed the 'brakes' chemistry of an overactive immune system. i've helped folks in other settings, to nourish the immune system so that former 'allergies' (probably more like sensitivities) no longer appear when tested.

without digging in, i wonder idly whether both swank and wahls diets are designed to meet all dietary recommendations for basic essential nutrition, if inflammation factors are indeed considered for whole foods consumed, and if the answer to both is yes in terms of design, how easy would it be for an individual to screw things up by tweaking the guidelines to suit personal tastes and preferences.

also curious, but not enough to go digging right now, whether either diet has been shown to optimize serum levels of nutrients of concern for ms patients.

[Jimpsull]

From the McDougall article:

"During his remarkable career Dr. Swank published dozens of studies in major medical journals showing that a low-fat diet would essentially stop the progression of MS. Unfortunately, his work never caused an impact on the practice of neurology, primarily because there is no financial incentive to promote simple diets to cure diseases. Drug therapies, costing $55,000 annually, are the only therapies available to MS patients, even though they are largely ineffective. With the best efforts of well-meaning neurologists, half of patients diagnosed with MS will become severely disabled, or worse, within 10 years.

The excuse medical doctors use for ignoring Dr. Swank’s cost-free, side effect-free approach is that his studies of 5,000 patients spanning 50 years of research were observational. “Real scientists” preach a gold standard of research called, the doubled-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Drugs fit into this model with a placebo pill acting as the “blind and controlled” portion of the study design. Food is impossible to blind (because patients and investigators can see what they eat). Diet therapy is also fraught with the fact that people’s eating behaviors are hard to regulate and analyze."

[jimmylegs]

??

[ElliotB]

Dr. Swank never completed controlled trials to validate his results and either has Dr. Wahls.

Why is it that all MS diets seem to work for some and not for others. Interesting!

It is also very interesting that there are those like Dr. McDougall that promote vegetarianism as the best form of diet and there are others like Dr. Wahls that promote [grass fed] meat based diets. AND both forms of diet seem to work for some and not for others. Interesting indeed!!

[jimmylegs]

pretty sure i indicated above, what i think along those lines.

imho both swank and wahls are working to the middle from different extremes. wahls probably makes more sense for an ex vegan. swank makes sense for an ex fatty fat fat meat eater. that's why neither diet should be expected to work perfectly for all. also why swank could be expected to work for more people than a wahls approach.

if clarification is needed, that's because there are just fewer vegetarians/vegans on balance.

[ElliotB]

" swank makes sense for an ex fatty fat fat meat eater."

Actually the consumption of fat, GOOD fat, makes a lot of sense - BUT not all fats are created equal.


Few will disagree that Omega 3 fat found in wild caught fish like salmon and tuna is very good for you. BUT what so very few understand is that the fat in meats from grass fed animals is ALSO high in Omega 3 and is as good for you as the Omega 3 fat found in wild caught fish.

[jimmylegs]

clarification for readers: given as an example of a non-healthy extreme, 'fatty fat fat' should not be taken to mean balanced healthful fats.

related discussion (2 pages of posts, 2006-2016)
http://bit.ly/2kiIshz