ofonorow wrote:The new-found knowledge suggests that had you supplemented with vitamin C, and perhaps other nutrients you were missing by avoiding eggs and fish, you may have been much better, if not well.
How on earth is this decades old knowledge, that subclinical scurvy requires additional supplemental even high-dose vitamin C, is now 'new-found knowledge'?
ofonorow wrote:What I am suggesting is trying to take any extra sugar - as glucose/dextrose, instead of sucrose (w/fructose).
Instead what I'm suggesting is, after calculating the net-carb content of anything, testing 1 hr post-prandial blood-glucose. And then eliminating those foods which cause the largest blood-glucose spikes. Regardless if from sugar, fruits or starchy veggies.
ofonorow wrote:I'm also pointing out that we absolutely need a certain amount of glucose, so people on Keto-like diets shouldn't consider glucose "wasted" calories.
Not wasted, but due to its damage to endothelial cells actually the most dangerous calories!
ofonorow wrote:Finally, while this is not said in the MM books, I INFER from what is said, insulin is REQUIRED for nutrients to first be processed by the liver, so they may be utilized by cells in the rest of the body.
Who has lack of insulin? Maybe Typ1 diabetics. Which most are not. Most suffer not optimal, but still too high insulin.
ofonorow wrote:You blame the low-fat diet, and I would suggest that your low-vitamin C diet was more likely the root cause of your stenosis.
Of course I do blame the lack of vitamin C as the main reason. Which a low-fat diet didn't prevent (despite the abundance of glucose in the blood). But a high-fat diet along with vitamin C did move it into remission.
ofonorow wrote:I still don't see the 'complete opposition' with Pauling, unless you consider sugar the same as glucose? I don't. The suggestion to reduce fat has to do with the load eating fat puts on the liver, and most people have toxic livers. If your liver is healthy and you are toxin free, the books do not suggest that everyone should reduce fats to 15% of calories.
Actually had a fatty and fibrotic liver after decades of low-fat (again, not caused solely by it, but not at all prevented either). High fat healt that scar tissue and fatty liver!
Net carb content=sugar=blood glucose; as any cheap blood-glucose meter would let you know.
ofonorow wrote:Yes, we learn from Dr. Atkins and others that carbohydrates, strangely, increase triglycerides; (fat in the blood). But these high triglycerides apper to be more of a function of the typical American Diet. Eating some fruits and vegetables as Pauling recommended, should not inordinately raise triglycerides.
Should not? Holy Moses, you never checked your high triglycerides? Or drive them down again?
ofonorow wrote:I think it is interesting that under this theory, "insulin resistance" is a mechanism whereby the body protects what little glucose their is in the blood rom entering muscles, by creating insulin resistance, so the sparse glucose can make it to the brain/liver.
Don't guess, but test. Again you're only enamoured with a vile theory. I know the plenty blood-glucose and triglycerides when on too much carbs. Therefore I bring them down to healthy levels with low-carb/high fat. And wont suffer from an ambutated toe due to faulty theory, so easily tested wrong.
Of course, dose-response to carbs is completely individual. There are some up at very high age who don't seem to be harmed even by any amount of added sugar. But these are exceptions, up to half of the population with prediabetes, does point to what the majority suffers. Therefore the importance of testing, and employing effective counter-meassures when needed.