Comments on: Fast food and endothelial dysfunction

By: Cathy

Cathy — Tue, 21 Aug 2007 15:57:13 +0000

You might be interested that AOL has a teaser headline/link today (8/21/07) that references the hamburger study. The story doesn’t provide many details, and the reporter’s conclusion is that all fast food is dangerous! Didn’t even consider that it was the carbs. Here’s the link: http://www.thatsfit.com/2007/08/16/healthy-fast-food-is-bad-for-your-heart-too/

Cathy

By: Jordyn

Jordyn — Sat, 18 Aug 2007 23:15:55 +0000

hi i enjoyed the read

By: James Hickman

James Hickman — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 03:36:11 +0000

Dr. Mike
Outstanding post. I think I’ll steer tomorrow’s lunchroom conversation over to diet theory and then — between beefy bites of my green chili cheeseburger — I’ll enlighten my co-workers about endothelium health as it relates to saturated fat. I’m sure to impress and with some luck I just might convince one of the low-fatters at the table to eat sensibly again like our ancestors used to do. They had cheeseburgers way back when didn’t they?

Hello James–

Knowing your co-workers as I do, I would love to be a fly on the wall during this lunchroom discussion.

Cheers–

Mike

By: Lyndsey

Lyndsey — Tue, 14 Aug 2007 17:26:08 +0000

Haven’t diabetics been able to test for sugar in urine for like, ever?

For many, many years.�

By: Hootch

Hootch — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 15:33:38 +0000

What a pity they did not test the burger on its own then as they had all the guinea pigs lined up and ready to eat as instructed.
Or do you know of a similar study where things with hi satd fat and lo carb/ hi carb content were tested in the same way? What was the outcome of that?

I don’t know of any such study, but I’ll stay on the lookout for one.

Cheers–

MRE

By: Chris

Chris — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 09:11:22 +0000

This is an interesting and related thing from the BBC –

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6933799.stm

Obese ‘under-report’ sugar intake

Obese people underestimate the amount of sugar they eat, making studies into the condition based on self-reporting very unreliable, UK researchers say.
But a new urine test has been developed which can for the first time work out how much sugar people have consumed.

In a study of hundreds of volunteers, researchers compared what people said they ate with data from urine tests.

The findings appear in the journal Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers and Prevention.

“These results show what many have suspected for some time: obese people are not able to tell us what they actually eat,” said Professor Sheila Bingham who led the team from the Medical Research Council and University of Cambridge.

“If we are to tackle the scourge of obesity, both exercise and diet need to be taken into account.”

Linked after all?

Studies have suggested that eating more sugar is not linked to obesity.

But the report says these conclusion were based on studies which relied on self-reporting and that their findings show these to be inaccurate.

“The spot urine and blood tests established that obese people consume more sugar and less Vitamin C than their thinner counterparts, but this did not show up when asked,” said Professor Bingham.

“Although obese people may have a less active lifestyle than people of normal weight, reports about what they ate were less accurate than those from their normal weight counterparts.”

Dr Colin Waine of the National Obesity Forum said the tendency to under-report food intake among the overweight was a major problem for medical practitioners.

“Used sensitively, this test could be a great tool in helping patient and practitioner work out what’s going wrong and talk through what could be done about it.”

By: Marilyn Leahy

Marilyn Leahy — Sun, 12 Aug 2007 19:51:05 +0000

Dr. Mike, I wonder if you care to comment on a recently published study that reinforces statin-worship. It seems to contradict previous studies that identify risks associated with low cholesterol. Thanks.

Leeper NJ, Ardehali R, deGoma EM, Heidenreich PA. Statin use in patients with extremely low low-density lipoprotein levels is associated with improved survival. Circulation 2007; 116:613-618.

Hi Marilyn–

I read the study, which is meaningless. It’s an observational study, a kind of study that really has no value except as a generator of hypotheses. If I simply look at people who, for whatever reason, are taking a drug and compare them to people who aren’t, and find that those taking the drug have some change in condition that those not taking the drug don’t have, the info is meaningless. These studies – called observational studies – generate data that makes researchers say, hmm, that’s interesting. Maybe we should study it. Then subjects are selected who are then randomized to either a study group, which is given the drug, or a control group, which is given placebo. Neither the subjects nor the researchers know who got what until the study is over, i.e., it is double blinded and placebo controlled. Then if there is a significant difference in outcome, you have something.

Far too many people, including those who know better, try to make observational studies comparable to real, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies.

Hope this helps.

MRE

By: Wil B.

Wil B. — Sat, 11 Aug 2007 22:29:05 +0000

Dr. Mike, a nice find and discussion as usual. I’m surprised that there has not been the usual number of comments in response; but maybe that’s because it’s hard, really, to think of anything to say about these Hamburg, Germany researchers expect that they are indeed a bunch of “Dummkoepfer” (forgive me if my German is a little rusty). Or maybe everyone is on vacation at the beach this week.

So here is a somewhat OT matter I’ve been wondering about: for a person who has been lo-carbing for awhile and in the process of losing visceral as well as subcutaneous (sp?) fat, which does the body shed first….the visceral stuff (like around the organs) or the other? Or does it tend to all happen more or less contemporaneously? And is there a practical way to figure out if / when you’ve reached optimal fat loss?

Best,

Hi Wil–

There are more comments, I just haven’t had the chance to get to them until now.

One definitely loses the visceral fat first.� That’s the good news/bad news situation: visceral fat is unhealthy, but it comes off fairly quickly.� To determine optimal fat loss, you can use the tables in Protein Power.

Cheers–

MRE�

By: Tom Kociemba

Tom Kociemba — Sat, 11 Aug 2007 21:14:48 +0000

What role do free radicals play in inflammation? It is my understanding that the antioxidants in fruits and vegetable are needed to deal with preventing free radicals from oxidizing. There for what role do fruits and vegetables play in preventing inflammation? Hi Tom-- Fruits and vegetables do provide antioxidants, but these antioxidants outside of the fruits and vegetables, i.e., in supplement form, have never been shown to be helpful in increasing lifespan or preventing disease.� No one knows if it is really the antioxidants or the specific combination of antioxidants or if it is a compound as of yet undiscovered that provides the benefit. The role of free radicals in inflammation is immense� and way beyond the scope of a simple answer to a comment.� The issue deserves a long post sometime. Cheers-- MRE�

By: simon fellows

simon fellows — Fri, 10 Aug 2007 22:30:32 +0000

and i’d forgotten about his grant and though many try to tie him to Kelley when he came upon Kelley work as i recall he chucked oot owt that dubious in its case history
http://members.aol.com/pbchowka/gonzalez-cafta.html