The Nourished Life: Myths

Showing posts with label Myths. Show all posts

Why I Drink Coffee Every Day

Coffee every day? You bet. There are some things we hate to love. And some we love to hate. Coffee is both. People talk about the evils of coffee in the same way they talk about addictions to meth or cocaine (or the so-called evils of sugar). Whether you drink it or not, you've likely been told over and over about the detriment of coffee consumption from one health guru or another.

I once believed that myth and quit drinking coffee completely for a couple of years. Now I drink coffee every day. Because I'm a hopeless addict? No. Because I sifted through the hype and learned about the health benefits of coffee.

Health benefits of coffee? Yes, they really do exist. And some are pretty cool. So here's why I drink coffee every day:

Coffee is nutritious! It contains a lot of magnesium and B vitamins essential to our health and well being. I firmly believe it's best to get nutrients from food sources if possible (supplements can be problematic for a variety of reasons), so coffee fits right into that equation.

I don't like cancer. Drinking coffee every day is linked to a 25 percent lower endometrial cancer risk in women. Plus women who drink coffee daily are far less at risk for certain types of breast cancer (like up to 57 percent less!). More studies have shown coffee's protective effects against skin cancer and colon cancer.

I do like my liver, and coffee may protect your liver. Studies show people who drink caffeinated coffee have lower markers of liver disease.

Thyroid health is paramount if you want to be healthy and feel well, and some research suggests coffee may play a key role in protecting you from thyroid disease.

Coffee can inhibit iron absorption, which can protect against various health problems associated with high iron.

Coffee drinkers are less likely to develop Parkinson's disease, and coffee can help reduce symptoms in current Parkinson's patients.

Coffee can help lower serotonin levels. (Think that's a bad thing? Check out my posts here.) This may explain why coffee lowers suicide risk.

But the health benefits of coffee aren't the only reason I indulge my java habit. Here are even more reasons I love drinking coffee every day...

Coffee is an excellent medium for other nutritious foods. I drink my coffee with a full serving of real milk and a healthy dose of gelatin protein. Getting plenty of protein is a must for me, so it's a great way to start my morning. I sometimes also throw in a spoonful of coconut oil, which can help with managing weight, clearing up acne and a whole lot more.

It smells fantastic! Very few people I've met have told me they don't love the aroma of fresh-brewed coffee. Forget air freshener. Just brew me a cup of joe.

Of course, there are two sides to every story, even this one. As always, I recommend doing your own research and listening to your body when it comes to coffee--or food, exercise, and pretty much everything else in life!

Do you drink coffee? Do you think it's a bad habit or a good one? Let me know what you think in the comments below!

References:

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/health/story/health/story/2011-11-22/Study-links-coffee-to-lower-cancer-risk-in-women/51352352/1

http://www.medscape.org/viewarticle/758338

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2816215

http://www.breastcancer.org/research-news/20110513

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/08/120801165353.htm

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/7815087/Coffee-can-cut-chances-of-developing-Parkinsons-disease-according-to-new-research.html

http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/07/02/really-drinking-coffee-lowers-colon-cancer-risk/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/02/coffee-skin-cancer-caffeine-basal-cell-carcinoma_n_1644262.html

http://raypeat.com/articles/articles/caffeine.shtml

Photo Credit

-----------------------------------

Serotonin Myths: High Serotonin Blues, Part 3

This is Part 3 in a series on high serotonin. Check out Part 1 and Part 2 here.

Questions are one of the only things in life that come in unlimited quantities. Ask any four-year-old. I certainly found no shortage of questions when I started looking into the problems of high serotonin. Yes, I said high serotonin. While serotonin deficiency seems to be the blanket diagnosis these days, there's evidence that too much serotonin may be causing more problems than too little.

So, questions? Yep, there are plenty. Here are some of my own questions about serotonin, and what I've drummed up through a little out-of-the-box research.

High Serotonin Q and A

If serotonin deficiency doesn't cause depression, then what does?

There are a number of possible answers, but some of the top contenders are low thyroid function, dopamine deficiency, and hormonal imbalance (such as low progesterone/high estrogen in women). All of these can be interrelated and are largely affected by diet and lifestyle.

How do we treat mood disorders outside of increasing serotonin?

Looking at some of the possible root causes above, some of the best ways to approach mood disorders and depression would be improving metabolic health and balancing hormones. Granted, that's easier said than done. But again, lifestyle and diet play an enormous role in these areas. (More on that in the future.)

Why do tryptophan, 5-HTP and St. John's Wort make some people feel terrible (like me), but make others feel better?

Believe me, this is a big question of mine. It obviously depends a lot on a person's specific metabolic state. But one interesting possibility is that high serotonin stimulates the release of stress hormones adrenaline and cortisol. Both of these chemicals can boost your mood and energy in the short term, but can have negative side effects if levels remain chronically high.

What about light therapy, getting enough sleep, exercising, and eating well? Don't all these make you feel better because they raise serotonin levels?

No! That's a mainstream myth. Pretending that those things only affect serotonin levels is a great example of one-dimensional thinking. For example, being in the sunlight boosts thyroid function, exercising can raise dopamine levels, and eating enough protein can improve liver health. All of those directly impact your moods. And that's just a couple quick examples. The body is an incredible cascade of hormones, chemicals, energy and cells. Reducing it all to serotonin levels is ignoring the larger picture of mental (and physical) health.

How did our ideas about serotonin get turned so upside down?

Short answer? Follow the money. Around the mid-20th century, there were some concerns about the possible side effects of large doses of LSD (which is a serotonin antagonist). Because LSD is essentially anti-serotonin, some took the idea and ran with it. Suddenly increasing serotonin levels became the shiny new treatment for mood disorders and depression. Pretty soon the pharmaceutical industry was up to its elbows in drugs for increasing serotonin, and pretty much stayed that way for the next several decades. It would be financial suicide for them to backpedal and suddenly question the entire mainstream concept of serotonin.

If you're anything like me, these brief answers may have triggered even more questions! In that case, you might want to read some interesting articles on serotonin from Dr. Ray Peat (with ample references) here and here.

Photo Credit

-----------------------------------

Serotonin Myths: High Serotonin Blues, Part 2

This is Part 2 of a series on high serotonin. Check out Part 1 and Part 3 if you want to learn more.

After my disturbing experience with 5-HTP and tryptophan supplements (read about that here), I started thinking it was time to question my ideas about serotonin. Although it's known as the "happy" neurotransmitter, I quickly discovered other people have had experiences similar to mine. I started researching high serotonin symptoms and the effects of too much serotonin.

And that's when I found out a very disturbing side effect of high serotonin: increased risk of suicide.

What?!?!

Talk about a huge light bulb moment. Is this why pharmaceutical antidepressants can cause suicidal thoughts? Obviously, anxiety and suicidal thoughts are supposed to be what antidepressants are treating. Then why are they causing the very problems they are supposed to solve?

The answer is simple: our ideas about serotonin are wrong. Dead wrong.

Serotonin Is Not So "Happy" After All

Although I did find that others had experienced the same 5-HTP side effects as I did, I quickly found out how few professionals acknowledged the problem. Books, articles, websites... they all said the same old thing. Serotonin makes you happy. Serotonin is the depression antidote. We all need some more of that good ole serotonin.

Everyone seemed to know about the potentially life-threatening risks of anti-depressant drugs, but no one dared to implicate serotonin. I was asking a question that no one wanted to answer.

Well, not exactly no one. Dr. Ray Peat was one researcher in the field of biology that publicly questioned mainstream medicine's ideas about serotonin. He even proposed that serotonin could cause the very problems it's supposed to solve: depression, apathy, anxiety, etc.

I had heard of Ray Peat, but some of his ideas sounded kooky to me, so up until that point I had largely ignored all of his work. But now I was listening. And boy did I get an earful.

Here are a few interesting quotes about serotonin from Dr. Peat:

- In hibernating animals, the stress of a declining food supply causes increased serotonin production. In humans and animals that don’t hibernate, the stress of winter causes very similar changes. Serotonin lowers temperature by decreasing the metabolic rate. Tryptophan and melatonin are also hypothermic. In the winter, more thyroid is needed to maintain a normal rate of metabolism.

- Overdose with the serotonin reuptake inhibitors, or with 5-hydroxytryptophan [or 5-HTP], which has effects similar to serotonin, can cause the sometimes fatal "serotonin syndrome." Symptoms can include tremors, altered consciousness, poor coordination, cardiovascular disturbances, and seizures. Treatment with anti-serotonin drugs can alleviate the symptoms and usually can prevent death. [Note to self: super glad I stopped taking 5-HTP.]

- The serotonin syndrome has been reported in users of St. John’s wort as an antidepressant.

- Although several amino acids can be acutely or chronically toxic, even lethal, when too much is eaten, tryptophan is the only amino acid that is also carcinogenic. (It can also produce a variety of toxic metabolites, and it is very susceptible to damage by radiation.) Since tryptophan is the precursor of serotonin, the amount of tryptophan in the diet can have important effects on the way the organism responds to stress, and the way it develops, adapts, and ages.

- Decreasing tryptophan or decreasing serotonin improves learning and alertness, while increased serotonin impairs learning.

- Serotonin's contribution to high blood pressure is well established. It activates the adrenal cortex both directly and through activation of the pituitary. It stimulates the production of both cortisol and aldosterone.

(You can read Dr. Peat's articles on serotonin and check out his references here and here.)

Reading Dr. Peat's ideas on serotonin provided some answers, but it also led to even more questions.

If serotonin deficiency doesn't cause depression, then what does?

How do we treat mood disorders outside of increasing serotonin?

Why do tryptophan, 5-HTP and St. John's Wort make some people feel terrible (like me), but make others feel better?

How did our ideas about serotonin get turned so upside down?

I plan to answer these questions (to the best of my ability) in Part 3 of this series. Stay tuned.

Photo Credit

-----------------------------------

Serotonin Myths: High Serotonin Blues, Part 1

This is Part 1 in a series on high serotonin. Check out Part 2 and Part 3 to learn even more.

A vast majority of anti-depressant drugs, natural treatments for depression, and much of how the mainstream medical institution views mental health is hinged on one theory: serotonin is the "happy" neurotransmitter. There are thousands of books, blogs, articles and podcasts about increasing serotonin levels to combat depression. But what if our ideas about serotonin are fundamentally wrong?

Questioning mainstream medicine is never fun or easy. It also doesn't tend to make you many friends. But I still managed to find myself in the mess of detangling the serotonin web, trying to sift fact from fiction, reality from hyperbole. And with good reason. I had my own personal experience to reckon with.

Tryptophan, 5-HTP and Serotonin: My Path to Happy?

Mood issues were one of the main reasons I started researching health and nutrition a few years ago. I found right away that most natural health gurus gushed about serotonin's "happy" and "feel-good" benefits. There was a general consensus that serotonin deficiency is a rampant condition that causes everything from depression to insomnia. The conclusion? Most folks need more serotonin. And, hey, I must be one of those folks.

Tryptophan and 5-HTP supplements are all the rage in the natural health community, since these are used by the body to make serotonin. It makes sense: they increase serotonin, and serotonin makes you happy. And who doesn't want to be happy?

It all sounded well and good to me. So off I went to procure my first bottle of 5-HTP. I followed the dosage instructions of a popular mood therapy book, and went about my life, waiting for the happiness to set in.

Unfortunately, that's not quite what happened.

Nightmare on Serotonin Street

It was subtle at first. Just a general brain fog, a touch of apathy. My sleep wasn't improving as much I wanted, so I referred back to my mood book and upped my 5-HTP dosage to the next recommended level.

That's when a stronger sense of apathy set in. I felt unnaturally listless and helpless. Almost like my real self was suddenly trapped in a thick fog in my mind, unable to reach the surface.

And for the first time in my life, I was exhibiting definite signs of depression. I had gone from occasional mood swings and low moods to checking off all the boxes in a depression questionnaire!

Something wasn't right, but I couldn't put my finger on it yet. After all, I was following recommendations for raising my serotonin, which was supposed to stop depression. There was only one theory about serotonin and therefore only one answer: I must need more serotonin.

Following that line of logic, I raised my dosage of 5-HTP again (though still within recommended levels). It seemed so harmless at the time, but it wasn't.

Within 15 minutes of my first dose, a feeling of intense panic set in. Not a thing in my life had changed in those 15 minutes, and yet suddenly it felt like my entire world was falling apart. My heart was pounding, my palms were sweating, my mind was racing. I genuinely felt I must be losing my mind.

After an hour or so, as the feeling slowly began to fade, as my heart rate returned to normal, a very small but important thought popped into my head: "This started when I took the 5-HTP."

To test this budding theory, I stopped taking 5-HTP completely (to be honest, I was so freaked out I chucked my bottle right into the trash can). I felt much better within hours and completely normal within a few days. And in finding this one answer, I had opened a whole new jar of questions about serotonin.

Getting Some Answers... and Even More Questions

It's funny to think that only by blindly following mainstream ideas about serotonin could I come to a place where I dared to question them.

One of the drawbacks of taking your health into your own hands is that sometimes you don't find out you're wrong until you've pushed the limits and fallen flat on your face. I've done it a few times. It's never fun, but it's always a learning experience.

A few months after the 5-HTP incident, I dared to experiment with tryptophan and endured a similar reaction (though I caught on earlier so it didn't escalate into crazy scary). That's when I started seriously questioning what I'd read about 5-HTP and tryptophan, which led to questioning modern ideas about serotonin and antidepressants as well.

I've learned a lot, but I definitely don't have all the answers... in fact, I've found just as many questions as answers along the way. But even without all the answers, this is too important of a subject to sit on the back burner. After all, our mental health is at stake.

Stay Tuned...

There is a lot more to say on the subject, and I've barely scratched the surface today. So it seems I'm destined to do a series of serotonin posts, and I will be posting more on the topics of tryptophan, serotonin syndrome and high serotonin symptoms in the weeks to come.

Update: I've written more in my series on serotonin! Check out Part 2 and Part 3 if you want to know more.

Image Credit

-----------------------------------

Refined vs. Unrefined Coconut Oil: 3 Reasons I Use Refined Coconut Oil

One of the biggest misconceptions I see in the health world is that unrefined automatically equals better. This isn't always the case, especially with coconut oil. The refined vs. unrefined coconut oil debate has raged on for decades, with unrefined coconut oil usually winning the battle. However, I choose refined coconut oil every time and here are three reasons why:

3 Reasons I Use Refined Coconut Oil

1. It's All in the Fat

Coconut oil's benefits are due to one important factor: its fatty acid composition. Coconut oil contains a high concentration of medium-chain saturated fatty acids like lauric acid. These fight inflammation caused by unstable polyunsaturated fatty acids, are easily digested, and put up one powerful fight against pathogens like bacteria, viruses and fungal infections.

So here's the question: does unrefined coconut oil have a better fatty acid composition than refined coconut oil? The answer is no. They are essentially the same. So if you're looking for the benefits of coconut oil's fatty acids, you'll still find them in the refined oil.

2. The Taste is More Practical

Don't get me wrong: I really dig the occasional coconut macaroon or coconut cream pudding. But I don't want coconut flavor invading my scrambled eggs, fresh popcorn or homemade chicken broth. And neither does the rest of my family. We tend to eat more coconut oil when it's refined and flavorless, because it's so much easier to blend into any kind of dish.

If you love coconut-flavored anything, then this probably isn't a big deal. But if you're like me, refined coconut oil simply fits into your life more seamlessly.

3. It's Better for Sensitive Digestion and Allergies

Digestive issues and allergies are some of the most common health problems invading our society today. For this reason, unrefined coconut oil can be irritating to sensitive individuals, because it contains a lot of potentially allergenic compounds. In refined oil, these have been completely removed, which is why it is odorless and flavorless.

If someone tells me they have stomach pains after eating a very small amount of coconut oil, I always ask if it was refined or unrefined. Chances are, they answer unrefined. Usually switching to a quality refined oil eliminates this problem.

More Tips on Buying and Eating Coconut Oil:

It's still a good idea to buy high quality coconut oil. Quality sources make sure their coconut oil is clean, pure and uncontaminated. Click here to find my favorite source of refined, expeller-pressed coconut oil.
If you are new to coconut oil, start with less than a teaspoon per day and then slowly add more as desired. This can help with digestion and also prevents any possible reaction that your system might have to coconut oil's strong antibacterial, antiviral and antifungal properties.

Read More About Coconut Oil:

-----------------------------------

Sugar: Prisoner of War

If you want to wage war against food, there are plenty of ways to do it. We have vegans, who writhe in disgust at the thought of eating animal foods. And we have meatatarians, who eat animal foods almost exclusively (and writhe in disgust at the thought of being vegan).

There's low-carb and low-fat, high-protein and low-glycemic. Raw or cooked. Good fats and bad fats, good carbs and bad carbs, soaked grains and grain-free...

And, of course, there are limitless combinations. "Hi, I'm a low-fat, grain-free raw vegan." Or, "Hey, I'm a low-carb, high-fat meatatarian." There are low-fat meatarians and high-fat vegans. The list goes on and on.

Even with all of these different ways to wage war on food, there is really only one mission: to eat healthfully. Everyone's just trying to get there in competing ways. Vegans spread smear campaigns against meat and dairy. Low-carb gurus preach on the perils of the bread basket. Raw foodies condemn frying pans (even the safe kinds).

With so much hate flying around, something was bound to get caught in the crossfire. And it was something considered so evil, so sinister, so addictive, it's been likened to cocaine and heroin because of the destruction it leaves in its wake (or so we've been told).

You may have heard of it. It's called sugar.

Almost every single one of these food camps can agree on at least one thing: sugar is the bane of modern society. It's a poison. It's a drug. Some folks want to tax it. Some even want to outlaw it.

The problem? It's your body's favorite fuel.

Sugar: We Love to Hate It... and Hate to Love It

A few years ago, I knew sugar was bad. And I knew I was bad for craving it. Wanting something sweet was a weakness, a flaw in my very nature, an addictive behavior that needed to be swiftly eradicated. I could never be healed, I could never really be whole, as long as I gave in to this monster we call sugar.

But slowly--very slowly--a different explanation began to dawn on me: maybe my body was craving sugar because it needed it.

Blasphemy! I couldn't speak of this idea to anyone. It was nutritional heresy.

I did more research, I experimented with purposefully adding sugar to my diet. I educated myself on some basic biological functions. At first it was difficult to acknowledge, much less actually believe. But all the while I was coming to the realization that my ideas about sugar were--if I dare admit it--wrong.

Sugar Myths: "Sugar Makes You Fat!"

Whole Health Source blogger Stephan Guyenet put together a fascinating post about whether or not science really points to sugar inherently being fattening. It turns out, sugar itself isn't a determining factor in weight gain and obesity. Obesity is a multi-faceted issue, to say the least, and blaming it all on sugar is not looking at the bigger picture.

Sugar Myths: "Sugar Causes Diabetes!"

The connection between sugar and diabetes seems obvious on the surface level: type II diabetes is characterized by high blood sugar, and sugar can raise blood sugar levels. But high blood sugar issues are more likely to be a result of high stress hormones, which impair the body's natural ability to regulate insulin and blood sugar. High blood sugar is more of a symptom than a cause.

Sugar Myths: "Sugar Causes Adrenal Stress!"

In fact, just the opposite happens. Chronic low blood sugar promotes high stress hormones (like adrenaline and cortisol). What combats this effect? That's right. Sugar! Pair it with a little protein and you've got yourself an anti-stress snack. That's why some fruit and cheese or hot cocoa may be the perfect antidote to your insomnia at bedtime.

Stress hormones are also required when you force your body to burn fat or protein as fuel. Giving your body a more efficient fuel source (like sugar), keeps those hormones in check.

Sugar in Context

Obviously, this post barely even scratches the surface when it comes to sugar. Each of the issues I've touched on could easily be expanded into multiple posts. Plus there are other issues to consider, like:

What types of sugar are best (fruit vs. juice vs. honey vs. table sugar)?
Does diet and lifestyle affect how we handle sugar?
Are other ingredients in sweets (like sodas, cakes, candies, etc) to blame rather than just the sugar?

These questions are definitely worth asking.

I know by now I've inspired oodles of hate mail just from daring to question sugar's bad reputation. Believe me, the last thing I want to do is stir up more controversy--I've been on the fence about posting this for a couple years now.

In the end, I hope to inspire curiosity and a healthy level of questioning rather than hate and confusion. I want to break down the walls of dogmatic thinking, not build another layer of them.

Want to Learn More About Sugar?

I don't pretend to be an expert in nutritional biology. If you want to learn more, I highly recommend checking out some of these blog posts by those far more versed in this field than myself:

Sugar: Pure, White and Awesome by Danny Roddy

Fructose to the Rescue and The Benefits of Fructose by Cliff McCrary

Blood Sugar by Rob Turner

-----------------------------------

Real Food Myths: Attitude Doesn't Count

Food affects our moods. This concept is well known in the real food community and I've written about it several times myself. It's also an idea that hits close to home for me, because the reason I became interested in real food nutrition was because my own emotional health (or lack thereof) was really putting my life and my family through the wringer. When you're plagued with mood swings that prompt fits of irrational anger and bouts of crippling depression... well, suffice it to say that's a real wake-up call that things need to change!

And let me tell you: real food played a key role in improving my mental and emotional health. After all, nutrition affects our blood sugar levels, our stress hormone levels, our neurotransmitter levels and so much more. It's easy to see why eating well provides a strong foundation for emotional healing.

But it's important to realize that while it is a foundation, real food is not the only factor involved with achieving emotional resilience.

In fact, promoting the idea that real food alone is the solution to all of our mental woes sets up unrealistic expectations and can ultimately cause you to feel pretty discouraged. And if you're anything like me, you'll end up chasing your tail trying to find the magical real food pill that will transform your dark side into sunshine and rainbows.

Well, I learned from experience: that ain't gonna happen! In fact, this myth just caused me a lot of unnecessary stress and ended up perpetuating the bad mood cycle by keeping me focused on the negative and the unrealistic.

Don't Let Diet be a Crutch

I would be lying if I said real food alone solved all of my emotional problems. It took a lot more than just food to really make an impact, including making key lifestyle changes and working on eradicating mental thinking habits that detracted from my life.

And all of this also took time. I started my healing journey more than three years ago, and while I saw many positive changes in my moods within just a few months, I've also noticed significant improvements in the last year as well.

And I can assure you that this did not happen because my diet became more perfect during this time... if anything I've relaxed my standards quite a bit since I started my journey.

For me, believing that a perfect diet is a requirement for emotional health often trapped me into blaming any negative thought or bad mood on my diet. Over time, I learned this isn't a very productive way of thinking: it never motivated me to eat better, and it certainly never helped me get to a better place mentally or emotionally. In fact, it basically did just the opposite.

Once I admitted that I wanted to improve my moods whether or not my diet was ideal, it opened the door for me to discover how other factors were contributing to my moods--and how to get past them. I realized my own attitudes and thinking patterns had an enormous impact on my moods. Making changes in this area has been an invaluable part of my journey.

I also recognized that I was human and bound to make mistakes or experience negative moods regardless of my diet. Real food doesn't make me superhuman!

Real Food: One (Important) Piece of the Puzzle

My point is not that real food doesn't matter. I do believe good nutrition is important and even crucial if you want improve your moods. It is an excellent place to start and it can pave the way for greater emotional healing down the road. And some people do experience downright miraculous transformations in their moods from diet changes alone.

But for others, real food is only one piece of the puzzle. And if that's the case for you, continuing to focus on nutrition alone is denying yourself the complete healing experience you deserve.

What do you think? Is it all about diet or is there more to the picture than just nutrition? I want to hear your side of the story! Tell me what you think in the comments below.

-----------------------------------

What Price Said... About Carbs and Grains

It goes something like this: "But Weston A. Price said traditional cultures who ate carbohydrates and grains had more health problems than those who didn't." Or something to that effect. Because of course we all know that Weston Price came back from his world travels touting the benefits of a low-carb diet and recommending that folks ditch the grains and slash their carbs.

Except he didn't. At least, I can't find anything like that in my copy of Nutrition and Physical Degeneration. Maybe the USDA conspirators went in and took those parts out before the most recent printing? Or maybe not.

Just speculate with me for a moment: maybe Weston Price didn't come back to the states and stick all his patients on a high-fat, low-carb diet. Maybe he didn't tell his friends and family that grains were incompatible with health, that carbohydrates cause insidious weight gain, and that everyone who asked for his advice had better learn to fear potatoes because goodness knows no healthy traditional culture ate starchy tubers!

Well, the fact is that Price didn't do any of those things. In fact, Price gave his patients a therapeutic diet that included wheat muffins and oatmeal sweetened with sugar to taste (gasp!). He even noted remarkable improvement in patients eating these very foods (along with some very important additions, of course).

But you don't have to take my word for it. Instead I'll be sharing some quotes directly from Price's book Nutrition and Physical Degeneration.

Dental Caries in Various Populations

As you may know, Weston A. Price was a dentist, so it comes as no surprise that he examined the teeth of the people he studied during his travels. He kept track of how many teeth he examined as well as the percentage he found with dental caries (or tooth decay).

I've heard a few folks claim that Price said populations who didn't eat grains and carbs had fewer dental caries. I'm curious as to where this rumor came from, because I failed to find the evidence of this claim when I read Nutrition and Physical Degeneration for myself. Of course, populations who didn't eat a lot of grains or carbs (like the Inuit or North American Indians) had excellent teeth, as noted by Price here in chapter 6 of his book:

"In an examination of eighty-seven individuals having 2,464 teeth only four teeth were found that had ever been attacked by dental caries. This is equivalent to 0.16 per cent."

Well, there you go. That's proof that low-carb, grain-free diets are ideal... right? Not quite. Here's another quote from Price about the Baitu tribe in Africa (chapter 9):

"This group lives largely on dairy products from cattle and goats, together with sweet potatoes, cereals and bananas. In a study of 364 teeth of thirteen individuals, not a single tooth was found to have been attacked by dental caries."

By the way, cereals are (drum roll, please)... grains. And a trip to Kenya produces this quote:

"They live within easy reach of Lake Victoria from which they obtain large quantities of fish which constitutes an important part of their diet, together with cereals and sweet potatoes. A study of 552 teeth of nineteen individuals revealed only one tooth with dental caries, or 0.2 per cent."

Here are a few more examples of groups in Africa who Price noted ate diets that included cereal grains, starchy tubers and sweet fruits:

The mission at Masaka in Uganda: 0.4 percent tooth decay out of 664 teeth
The Wanande Tribe in the Belgian Congo: 2.2 percent tooth decay out of 368 teeth
The Dinkas in Sudan: 0.2 percent tooth decay out of 592 teeth

There were also some other groups that ate grains, starches and fruit but did not appear to have animal foods like goat milk or fish as a significant portion of their diet. These groups tended to have dental caries at a rate of about 6-7 percent. (This may seem high in comparison to 0.16-2.2 percent, but keep in mind that cultures who ate a modernized diet often experience tooth decay at an incredible rate of 12-83 percent!)

Leaving Africa for a moment, we'll go to Switzerland where Price commented:

"In a study of 4,280 teeth of the children of these high valleys, only 3.4 per cent were found to have been attacked by tooth decay."

And populations eating a traditional diet of oats and seafood on the Isle of Lewis off the coast of Scotland were noted to experience a tooth decay rate of 1.3 percent.

Why Do We Misquote Price?

I'll be the first to admit that anyone who claims Price said grains and carbohydrate foods cause health issues isn't making it up out of thin air. I understand the misconception, because there is a grain of truth contained therein (no pun intended).

Price did note in chapter 9 of his book (Isolated and Modernized African Tribes) that irregularities of dental arches and facial structure were noted more often in tribes who relied heavily on plant foods (3.4 percent irregularities in the Masai versus 18.2 and 18.9 percent irregularities in the Kikuyu and Wakamba, for example). But he made it clear that a far more dramatic difference existed in populations eating a modernized diet.

And also, in a letter about nutrition, Price does say:

"Cut down on starches and sugars."

There, he did say it. But don't gloat about it yet. Price immediately follows this statement with recommendations that include eating cooked cereal made from fresh cracked wheat or oats (sweetened to taste with a limited amount of sugar), whole wheat muffins topped with high vitamin butter, and cooked applesauce with butter (not too highly sweetened, of course).

Doesn't sound like Atkins to me.

What Was Price Really Saying?

In reading through Nutrition and Physical Degeneration, I was wholly impressed by the level and depth of information Price recorded during his studies. I was also quite surprised that his work is used to promote restrictive diets that limit food groups and macronutrients, when his own recommendations are fairly simple and straightforward:

"In my clinical practice, in which I am endeavoring to put into practice the lessons I am learning from the primitive people, I do not require that the foods of the primitive races be adopted but that our modern foods be reinforced in body-building materials to make them equivalent in mineral and activator content to the efficient foods of the primitive people."

Price never claimed that one needed to eliminate grains, starches and fruit to be healthy. He simply advised not to emphasize them to the extent that highly nutritious foods were excluded from the diet. Basically, make room for the good stuff! As Price says:

"A properly balanced diet is good for the entire body."

Weston Price, I couldn't agree more.

This post is part of Fight Back Friday.

-->

-----------------------------------

Book Review: Fat Politics by J. Eric Oliver

Fat Politics: The Real Story behind America's Obesity Epidemic

If you want to fire people up, try talking about fat. Not spicy enough for you? Throw in some commentary about politics, money, society, exercise, diet and health. Now you've got the perfect recipe for controversy. We're talking about Fat Politics by J. Eric Oliver. You're either going to love this book or hate it with a passion. But either way, it's sure to stir up some strong opinions.

Oliver questions the existence of an obesity epidemic and whether fat itself should be labeled as a dangerous disease. If read with an open mind, his research certainly gives you something to think about (whether or not you end up fully agreeing with him).

"Consider, for example, what an obesity epidemic means for the following groups. For scientists researching issues of weight, an obesity epidemic inflates their stature and allows them to get more research grants. For government health agencies, it is a powerful rationale for increasing their programs and budget allocations. For weight-loss companies and surgeons, it is a way to get their services covered by Medicare and health insurance providers. And, for pharmaceutical companies it can justify the release of new drugs, and help inflate their stock prices. The very same people who have proclaimed that obesity is a major health problem also stand the most to gain from it being classified as a disease. For America's public health establishment, an obesity epidemic is worth billions."

In chapter two, Oliver explains How Obesity Became an Epidemic Disease. He demonstrates how politics and the media skewed our ideas about fat and health, and why labeling obesity as a disease actually holds us back from finding real solutions for lasting health.

The Link Between Metabolic Health and Disease

Oliver rightly points to overall metabolic action as the cause not only of obesity but also degenerative disease. He questions the idea that weight itself is the cause behind our more troubling health problems, and suggests that perhaps there is a bigger picture.

"And it is these other metabolic changes that are behind many of the diseases that are typically associated with being too fat. The reason that diabetes and some types of cancer are on the rise is not because Americans weight too much, it is because their metabolisms are out of whack. Fatness may result from metabolic processes that are behind these ailments, but it is the underlying metabolic processes, and not the weight, that cause us so much trouble."

Why We Hate Fat People

Have you ever thought about it? Why our society harbors such resentment and malice toward heavier people? We are afraid of fat. This has to do with numerous factors, according the Oliver, including our modern standards of beauty and propaganda from the medical community. But wherever it's coming from, the fear of fat is very real.

"For instance, more that a quarter of college students believe that becoming fat is the worst thing that could happen to a person."

Really? That sure says a lot about our priorities in life. Oliver suggests getting some perspective about fat in his chapter about genetics and obesity:

"Fatness is not a disease or a bodily dysfunction; it is a protective mechanism that evolved to survive fluctuations in our food supply. Judging someone's health by how much they weigh is like judging a camel by how much water it has in its hump--in conditions of privation, our extra weight, just like water, may be exactly what we need to survive. Our weight is merely an expression of this adaptive mechanism at work."

What We Eat and What We Weigh

Oliver challenges many beliefs about diet and weight. He's read the work of Gary Taubes (awesome, right?) but doesn't fall into the trap of blaming any particular macronutrient for our weight and health problems. His stance is that carbs are no more to blame than fat. Instead Oliver speculates that there are a number of dietary factors that could be contributing to obesity and disease. After all, a lot has changed in the last 40 years when it comes to what (and how) we eat. Oliver discusses everything from crop subsidies to the invention of the microwave, but in the end concludes that it's most likely the combination of all these things--rather than just one of them--that impacts our weight the most.

Being Thin Versus Being Healthy

This is always one of my favorite topics. In our pursuit of being thin, many of us have sacrificed our health. According to Oliver, it is the American way.

"Although most Americans value bodily fitness as a marker of social prestige, they value thinness more. And for good reason--in a culture in which obesity is so demonized, being fit yet heavy does little to remove the stigma of a large body size, particularly for women. For instance, if a woman is incredibly fit but still bulky or heavy, she is still likely to face size discrimination. The emphasis on female fitness is primarily concerned with being thin not necessarily being healthy. Because of our cultural obsession with thinness, any discussion of exercise inevitably becomes connected to issues of weight while concerns of health fly out the window."

I mean, think about it: how many people do you know that joined a gym to get healthy? Yeah, right. Most people exercise to achieve a particular physical appearance, not to achieve better health. Which is too bad, because research shows that exercise has a far more substantial impact on our health that it does on our waistlines.

But Are There Any Solutions?

My biggest beef with Oliver's book is that you aren't left with a solid idea of what we should be doing, perhaps because Oliver believes that his research doesn't point to there being a particular solution.

"In truth, the only way we are going to 'solve' the problem of obesity is to stop making fatness a scapegoat for all our ills. The means that public health officials and doctors need to stop making weight a barometer of health and issuing so many alarmist claims about the obesity epidemic. This also means that the rest of us need to stop judging others and ourselves by our size."

I personally couldn't agree more. There's far too much hate and melodrama surrounding our weight. But considering we're in a society that puts so much focus on being thin, at the end of the book you're sort of left standing with your hands up in the air thinking, "Well, what the heck am I supposed to do now?"

The answer: simply allow yourself to focus on more important things than weight. Whether or not you are at the weight you would like to be cannot be a determining factor in your happiness. If it is, then it's guaranteed you'll be miserable. Regard health as part of the bigger picture and not just in terms of your dress size. Live to be healthy and enjoy life, rather than living to be thin.

Buy Fat Politics by J. Eric Oliver today.

-----------------------------------

Correlation Does Not Equal Causation

Science can be a funny thing. And obesity science is generally ambiguous at best. But media reports on science are often downright misleading. Granted, journalists need catchy headlines like Obesity More Dangerous Than Terrorism to draw in readers who are always hungry to hear about the next crisis. But an article that sounds extremely captivating may also be just plain deceitful.

Take the demonization of saturated fat and cholesterol. Many of you are familiar with the flawed science behind the era of hate for eggs and butter. (If not, check out Tom Naughton's video.) In fact, though further research continues to exonerate saturated fat and cholesterol (and even demonstrate their benefits), the majority of Americans are still convinced that egg yolks and whole milk cause disease and obesity.

So it helps to approach scientific research in general with an eye for detail. For example, it helps to understand the fact that correlation does not equal causation. This means that factors can be associated with each other without one thing causing the other. Confusing correlation with causation produces not only flawed reports on health issues, but also reinforces stereotypes and prejudices.

"The majority of knowledge regarding the relationship between health and weight is drawn from epidemiological research. Epidemiological obesity research compares groups of overweight and obese individuals with a control group of normal weight individuals. It is intended to uncover associations which then need further examination. It cannot tell us whether a variable causes or even influences another.

Consider this: It is well established through epidemiological research that bald men have a higher incidence of heart disease than men with a full head of hair. However, this doesn't mean that baldness promotes heart disease or that hair protects against heart disease. Nor is it recommended that bald men try to grow hair or buy toupees in order to lessen their disease risk."

- from page 129 in Health at Every Size by Linda Bacon

"Correlation does not equal causation. There's an example often used in Sociology 101 classes to illustrate this point: In the summer months, both ice cream sales and murders increase, meaning there's a correlation between ice cream sales and murder. Now, in theory, once a correlation has been established, it's worth looking into whether one thing causes the other. Does ice cream trigger homicidal impulses? Do murderers like to celebrate a job well done with a nice waffle cone? No, probably not. In fact, heat is what causes the rise in both ice cream sales and homicide. Correlation does not equal causation."

- from page 175 in Lessons from the Fat-O-Sphere by Kate Harding and Marianne Kirby

So when I bring up touchy subjects as I did when I questioned the obesity epidemic and asked if obesity really killed, I'm not just trying to rock the boat. I'm actually trying to do some critical thinking about the ideas that many of us take for granted because of the attention they receive in the media.

Don't be convinced by reports that use melodramatic language and scare tactics to influence your opinions. Instead, simply be willing to question what you hear and form your own ideas rather than being tossed from one dogmatic regime to another.

I don't know about you, but after spending a few years being seriously afraid of real food like cheese, butter and eggs because a pediatrician told me saturated fat causes cancer, I'm willing to take a step back and give it some critical thought before jumping on the next health bandwagon.

This post is part of Real Food Wednesday.

-----------------------------------

Dangers of Dieting: Why You Shouldn't Diet in 2011

Did you know that nearly 40 percent of all New Year's resolutions are related to weight? So if you made a resolution to lose weight this year, you're certainly not alone. In fact, there's about 45 million people jumping on the diet bandwagon with you (along with their shiny new eating plan and exercise routine). You've made this resolution every year for decades. But of course this year is different. This year it's actually going to work.

Never mind that 95 percent of folks who go on a diet don't maintain their loss in the long-term (and nearly half of them gain back more than they lost). That doesn't matter, because most of us are convinced that somehow we'll be part of the 5 percent that succeeds in keeping off the weight after a restrictive diet. Every year we come back to the same resolution because we think we can finally beat those odds. It's almost as sad as watching someone invest their life's savings in a slot machine.

But the biggest problem isn't that dieting doesn't work. Unfortunately, regaining the weight you lose (and possibly even more) is the least of your concerns. The truth is that most people don't understand the dangers of dieting. The health risks you take when you diet are very real, but it's something health officials like to sweep under the rug while spouting off phrases like "obesity epidemic" and talking about how obesity kills.

The Dangers of Dieting

Research shows that weight fluctuations are more dangerous than carrying excess weight. A history of weight cycling via dieting is strongly associated with an increased risk for developing metabolic diseases like diabetes, hypertension and heart disease. This is independent of weight (so it applies whether you're a dieter who is skinny or one who's heavy). This evidence strongly suggests that dieting affects you on more than a body fat level: dieting affects you--and can harm you--on a metabolic level.

One study showed that obese women who diet are far more likely to have high blood pressure than obese women who do not have a history of dieting--more evidence that demonstrates the dangers of dieting on the entire metabolism.

Weight loss that comes through dieting (especially extreme dieting) always risks losing lean body tissue in addition to fat. This robs your muscles, bones and organs of the material they need to function properly. While some diets increase this risk more than others, it is a risk with all diets that restrict calories.

Our eating habits are passed on to our children. Kids pick up on our obsessions about weight and our eating habits. Whether we realize it or not, we often project our own insecurities about our weight and our restrictive eating habits onto our kids. It's hard not to. But research shows that parents who impose restrictive eating habits only encourage further weight gain in their children. Stopping this vicious cycle in its tracks is reason enough to swear off dieting forever, in my opinion.

Dieting distorts our natural relationship with hunger and food. When food becomes "good" and "bad," eating becomes a moral issue rather than an issue of nourishment. When we deny our hunger, we forget how to eat for natural reasons and instead develop habits of emotional eating and experience guilt when we eat the "wrong" food. Basically, we forget how to eat. This can result in eating disorders, distorted body image and poor health in long run.

Suddenly dieting doesn't sound like the path to health and happiness, does it? The dangers of dieting are unfortunately all too real, but millions of people ignore these risks every day.

The best resolution you can make for 2011 is to stop dieting. It's time to end our unhealthy relationship with food, exercise, and our bodies. There's a better way to improve your health and the way you feel about yourself, and that's something I'll be talking a lot more about this year.

This post is part of Fight Back Friday.

-----------------------------------

Does Obesity Really Kill?

The propaganda surrounding the obesity crisis is fueled by one belief: obesity kills. We are so frightened by fat weight because we are continually told that even ten extra pounds can put our life in danger. We are under the impression that fat weight causes disease. This, however, is a big fat myth.

But wait. Doesn't obesity cause hypertension, heart disease, diabetes and cancer? Doesn't obesity cause hundreds of thousands of deaths each year? The answer is no. Here is some interesting information regarding obesity, death and disease:

In 2005, researchers reported in the Journal of the American Medical Association that, despite having spent months analyzing countless records, they failed to show that even severe obesity increases mortality risk.

To quote Linda Bacon from Health at Every Size on a study of 1.7 million Norwegians: "In this, the largest epidemiological study ever conducted, the highest life expectancy is among individuals who are overweight by our current standards and the lowest life expectancy is among those defined as underweight. What's more, individuals who fit into what is deemed the ideal weight range had a lower life expectancy than some of those who were obese."

Research has demonstrated that obese people who are physically fit have mortality rates as low as people who are lean and fit. In fact, overweight and obese people who are fit will most likely live longer than someone who is lean but unfit.

Angiographic studies have shown that obesity has no relationship to the development or progression of heart disease. Some studies have indicated that being overweight or obese may actually decrease your risk of dying from a heart attack or stroke.

Some researchers claim there is a link between obesity and cancer. The truth is, most studies fail to find an association between weight and cancer mortality. In fact, for every study you can find that claims an association between obesity and cancer, you can find another one that shows obesity is actually protective against cancer.

Although we have been led to believe that obesity is a leading cause of diabetes, research indicates that insulin resistance appears before weight gain. Insulin resistance is causing weight gain and diabetes. Weight gain is not causing insulin resistance and diabetes.

Conditions such as hypertension, heart disease and diabetes can all be improved in overweight and obese individuals through dietary and lifestyle habits, regardless of whether weight is lost or not.

Clearly there are some discrepancies when it comes to the information fed to the masses about obesity and health. The biggest problem with propagating this misinformation is that it places the focus on weight alone rather than on diet and lifestyle habits.

Consider this: if fat weight was really the cause of health problems and even death, why aren't we all rushing out to get liposuction? Because we all know that's ridiculous! Then why do we think that losing fat will solve all of our health problems? The fact is that it won't.

Lifestyle trumps weight. Eat real food that nourishes your body. Be active because it energizes you. Give your body the rest it needs. Be a part of something that gives you joy and fulfillment. If these things lead you to weight loss, that's wonderful. If not, that doesn't mean you haven't greatly improved your health and quality of life in the meantime. The exaggerated focus on weight is an arbitrary distraction, so don't let it distract you from what's really important when it comes to your health and happiness.

Further Reading On This Subject:

Health At Every Size: The Surprising Truth About Your Weight by Linda Bacon

Rethinking Thin: The New Science of Weight Loss by Gina Kolata

The Diet Cure by Julia Ross

Fat Politics: The Real Story behind America's Obesity Epidemic by J. Eric Oliver

Big Fat Lies: The Truth about Your Weight and Your Health by Glenn A. Gaesser

This post is part of Real Food Wednesday hosted by Kelly the Kitchen Kop.

-----------------------------------

Pages

High Serotonin Q and A

3 Reasons I Use Refined Coconut Oil