Anthony William wrote:Trying to get life-sustaining glucose into organs, muscles and the nervous system while meeting resistance from excess fat is the true, unknown meaning of the term insulin resistance.
Thanks to Dr. Ken Berry's succinct youtube discussion of Keto, we can now say with some authority that the fatal flaw in the keto theory is categorizing carbs as "empty" calories.
This great mistake is put into perspective in Medical Medium, Volume I, Chapter 7:
Anthony William wrote:The fundamental fuel for your body is glucose, a simple sugar that provides all your cells with the energy they need to function, heal, grow, and thrive.
Glucose keeps us going -- and keeps us alive. The central nervous system runs on it, as does every organ in the body, including the heart. Glucose is what we use to build and sustain muscle, and it performs vital functions such as repairing damaged tissue and cells
When you eat food, your body breaks it down into glucose and places it in your bloodstream so it can travel to all your cells. However, your cells can't access the glucose directly. They need some help from your pancreas, which is a large endocrine gland located behind your stomach.
Your pancreas is constantly monitoring your bloodstream. When it detects a rise in glucose levels, it responds by producing a hormone called insulin. Insulin attaches to your cells and signals them to open up and absorb the glucose from your blood. Insulin therefore both allows your cells to get the energy they need and ensures your blood glucose levels remain stable.
We take glucose for granted, and trust that there is correct science behind the widespread advice to limit sugar/carbs and not eat Fruit. Glucose, unlike fat (and protein), has only positive effects. It is a primary nutrient, on the order of water, air and salt.
One problem is that ordinary table sugar is fully half fructose. This turns out to be the key. Fructose in limited amounts (i.e. from fruits) is beneficial. Fructose in very high amounts, on the other hand, especially in the high amounts typical in the modern American diet, signals the liver to create fat. Limiting ordinary cane (table) sugar makes sense. It now seems to me that if all our processed and SAD foods were sweetened with glucose, instead of ordinary cane (table) sugar sucrose, the problem of obesity would likely be solved. However, any diet that throws the baby (glucose) out with the bathwater (table sugar) and recommends against eating fruits, is doomed to fail over time because it starves the body of glucose.
Liver Rescue, P. 250 wrote: .. when a diet goes high-fat (what many call "high protein,"not realizing it automatically means high-fat), it goes no-carb or low-carb, too. You'll hear that its because the sugar that carbohydrates break down into and sugar itself itself cause problems, in part by turning into fat. When low quality carbs in a diet go up, doctors observe that patients' health declines and they don't know why, though it's easy to blame carbs. What no one realizes is that the problem is the combination of sugar with fat. Together, they clash.
It is interesting that terrestrial epidemiological and meta analysis have shown that heart patient outcomes are better on the low-fat (Ornish or Pritikin) diets than on the Keto, Adkins or even Paleo diets. Not only do the high-fat Keto-like diets deprive the brain and liver of their most important nutrient and fuel, high fat intake puts a strain on the liver. All animal proteins contain fat. (Ref MM Liver Rescue).
.Liver Rescue, p.251 wrote:Here's the catch with protein. If you were to take out fat from protein sources, people on high-protein, no-carb diets would literally starve to death
In today's world, we learn from the ancient science that contrary to popular beliefs, eating fruits should be encouraged rather than discouraged. I for one now understand that fruits provide glucose in its most useful form, i.e., a myriad of nutrients are bound to glucose in fruits, many with previously unknown antioxidants that offer anti-viral and other health benefiting properties,.
This realization spurned a thought: It has recently occurred to me that the recommended fruits were genetically engineered by an ancient science. This idea is discussed in this post: https://vitamincfoundation.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=15468 and that would mean, if true, that the MM books are essentially a "user' guide" for this genetic engineering.
So why are the " fat is good " diets so popular? We all want to lose weight. Burning protein requires water and initially people quickly lose some water weight on the high fat/high protein diets.
And avoiding all sugar would turn off the liver's fat switch (eventually at the expense of all organs).
Liver Rescue, p.252 wrote:blood sugar ... It's what sustains us and keeps us alive: glucose. Beyond that, storage bins of glycogen keep your brain from atrophying, keep your liver strong, and keep other vital parts of your body going to keep you alive. On a high-fat, low-carb diet the heart slowly becomes weary. It yearns for the person to eat the better... [the small amount of fruit now in most hybrid diets] because it desperately needs and wants even the very little sugar they contain. While it won't really be adequate, it will be just enough to keep the heart going - because the heart is a muscle that needs glucose for survival.
FRUCTOSE IS THE FAT SWITCH
A new understanding of the "Fat Switch" in our bodies holds the promise of staying healthy and trim. Fructose, and not glucose, in high amounts, just as Linus Pauling told us, signals the liver to make fat.
youtube direct link
In Linus Pauling's book HOW TO LIVE LONGER AND FEEL BETTER, he identified the sugar fructose (half of table sugar sucrose) as a potential health issue because modern diets contain much more that our bodies have ever had to process in the past. Fruit contains both glucose and fructose too, but as the Medical Medium explains, one has to eat a "hundred pounds of sugar from eating fruits, one thousand pounds of fruit would have to be eaten." In other words, there are very limited amount of high quality sugars in fruits.
Fructose is a Fat On switch.
Thanks to this documentary starting around minute 6,
https://youtu.be/-ygExIZm7Wo?t=415
we learn the mechanism that spurs the liver to manufacturer human fat. The metabolism of the sugar fructose. The video contains a reference to the Johnson book The Fat Switch , which seems to contain the answer for what has caused the epidemic of obesity: The development of cane sugar. If the Johnson book had been widely read, it may have led to curing obesity in America. More companies would sweeten their products with D-glucose (dextrose) than sucrose.
The idea from the documentary is that mammals survived winters by eating fruits during the summer. Eating fruits in the summer creates fat that mammals burn during the winter. (Technically, uric acid prompts the liver to make fat, and fructose helps create uric acid.)
The conundrum is that glucose is good, our body needs it, fructose is good in moderation, but bad when eaten in the same amounts as glucose, and the "cane" or table sugar sucrose (which contains glucose and fructose in equal amounts) is everywhere.
And an argument could be made that even too much glucose would put a strain on the pancreas.
Linus Pauling cites a book by Yudkin book SWEET AND DEADLY. The research informs us that at that time the of Yudkin book, people were eating 100 grams per day of sugar, of sucrose. This means they were eating 50 grams of glucose, and 50 grams of fructose. While our ancestors were accustomed to about 10 grams of fructose. This means that people in modern societies generally eat something like four 4 (to 10 times) times more than they would get simply eating fruit[/u]. Medical medium puts that amount at 10 times.
URIC ACID
There are two known metabolic pathways to uric acid, as shown in the above Low Salt, More Fat documentary.
#1. Fructose (makes sense, we store fats when fruits are available) and
#2 LOW SODIUM also turns on the same (uric acid) switch.
Now that we know how to keep the liver from producing fat. And thanks to Anthony William, we know that the liver is where fat is made. (This idea didn't sound right when I first read Anthony William. Also, we eat fat, but that is a different story.)
All coming together into a clear picture or unifying theory.
We know, glucose is like "air and water and salt" to the liver and brain (Thank you Anthony). Everyone on Keto believes that "carbs" are empty calories and that we crave sugar from addiction, like we crave alcohol or cocaine.
If we deprive our body of glucose - say from eating a strick Keto or Atkins dieat - it will adjust to spare glucose for the brain/liver - by making other parts of the body insulin resistant. If muscles become insulin resistant, glucose won't be able to get into muscles, for example, so the body quickly becomes "fat adapted" and burns fat instead of glucose. This is good "insulin resistance" and a few aware N.D.s realize this condition is not necessarily bad. But they don't know why. Now readers here do. The brain and liver cannot burn fat, which is why glucose is not an "empty calorie."
And this is ultimately why keto, by restricting sugar (carbs), can lead to rapid fat loss. The body knows its in trouble from a lack of glucose.
As an aside, glucose intake can be a regulator on how fast people lose weight. Eating less glucose is like pushing on the "fat burning" gas pedal.
However, you can reduce ordinary table sugars, only take glucose and not make fat, and still burn fat, just not as fast. In fact, you can burn both glucose and fat at the same time, in different parts of the body.