What's up with garlic?

13. March 2007 William Davis (0)

Fanatic Cook has posted an excellent summary on the recent negative attention cast on garlic preparations, at least for LDL cholesterol reduction.

Go to http://fanaticcook.blogspot.com to view.

I think Fanatic Cook is right--despite the lack of LDL reducing effects, it doesn't necessarily mean no benefit whatsoever. Anti-coagulation and anti-inflammatory effects, in particular, are well proven.

I do think, however, that it argues more in favor of sticking to whole cloves, rather than supplements. The benefits are also likely small. I would view garlic as a soft advantage for your plaque control program. You can do fine without it. You might do slightly better with it.
Tags :

Add comment

Loading
It's the score, stupid

It's the score, stupid

14. November 2009 William Davis (4)
Sal has had 3 heart scans. (He was not on the Track Your Plaque program.) His scores:

March, 2006: 439

April, 2007: 573

October, 2009: 799

Presented with the 39% increase from April, 2007 to October, 2009, Sal's doctor responded, "I don't understand. Your LDL cholesterol is fine."

This is the sort of drug-driven, cholesterol-minded thinking that characterizes 90% of primary care and cardiologists' practices: "Cholesterol is fine; therefore, you must be fine, too."

No. Absolutely not.

The data are clear: Heart scan scores that continue to increase at this rate predict high risk for cardiovascular events. Unfortunately, when my colleagues hear this, they respond by scheduling a heart catheterization to prevent heart attack--a practice that has never been shown to be effective and, in my view, constitutes malpractice (i.e., performing heart procedures in people with no symptoms and with either no stress test or a normal stress test).

It's the score, stupid! It's not the LDL cholesterol. Pay attention to the increasing heart scan score and you will know that the disease is progressing at an alarming rate. Accepting this fact will set you and your doctor on the track to ask "Why?"

That's when you start to uncover all the dozens of other reasons that plaque can grow that have nothing to do with LDL cholesterol or statin drugs.
Tags :

Comments (4) -

  • Dexter

    11/15/2009 5:43:29 PM |

    Even more evidence that CVD confusion reigns supreme among PCPs.

    http://www.theheart.org/article/1020935.do

  • Roger

    11/15/2009 5:52:16 PM |

    Dr. Davis,

    In June you kindly profiled my "near-miss" CT angiogram, where I had to take charge and make sure I was getting only a CT calcium score scan.

    The good news was that my score was a zero.  I can't really explain that; while I was a vegetarian for many years, I also ate too many refined carbs and until recently was carrying a few too many pounds. There is heart disease in my family.  I am 54 years old.

    Is it genes, luck, or inadvertantly prudent lifestyle?   How often should folks with low scores be re-tested?  I know you probably cover this at TYP but I'm sure the blog readers would also find it informative.  Thanks again for reporting my story.

    Roger

  • Dr. William Davis

    11/15/2009 11:31:13 PM |

    Hi, Roger--

    Genes enter into the equation in a big way. Lifestyle is important, but it is not everything.

    For people starting with a score of zero, I generally suggest waiting 3-5 years before thinking about another scan.

  • Jenny Light

    11/16/2009 5:00:14 PM |

    I'll second the motion about catherizations being malpractice!

    My mom died three years ago in a cath lab!  After having chest pains after a chemical stress test, she was hospitalized overnight and the next day had a catherization with two stents implanted.  

    Something went wrong during the procedure, and an artery was torn. She became unconscious, she stopped breathing, and they were unable to insert a breathing tube.  They did an emergency tracheotomy but it was too late.  No cardiac surgeon was in the facility at the time.

    The cardiologists explination to us was that "she had very small arteries".

    I would think it would be reasonable for a patient to request that a cardiac surgeon be "in the house" during this procedure.

    My dad about hit the roof when he saw the cause of death listed on her death certificate as "myocardial infraction". He requested that the coroner check the circumstances, after which he changed the cause to "cardio-pulmenary arrest due to long term heart disease".  Sorry, but it should have read: "Due to complications during catherization procedure".  

    Not a benign procedure folks!  Ask whether drugs can perhaps be used in lieu of this invasive (and very lucritive for the hospital) action.

Add comment

Loading
Repentance for past sins

Repentance for past sins

7. May 2007 William Davis (0)
If you are new to the Track Your Plaque program and would like to jump start your effort, or if you are struggling with losing weight and excess weight is a part of the situation that created your CT heart scan score, then don't forget about fasting.

Fasting is the cessation of eating. However, recall from the Track Your Plaque Special Report, Fasting: Fast Track to Control Plaque at http://www.cureality.com/library/fl_04-012fasting.asp, there are many variations on fasting that permit some intake of healthy foods. (Thus, they are not, in the strict sense, "fasting". Accurate or no, there are variations that may be more palatable or do-able in the real world by real people.)

My personal favorite method to fast is to use a low-sugar, low-fat soy milk such as Light Silk, available at most major grocery stores. This high-protein, low-fat, low-sugar soy milk takes the edge off hunger and provides a minimal quantity of calories. A minimum of 72 hours is required for substantial results. (My one reservation about this brand of soy milk is that the Fanatic Cook claims that the manufacturer, Dean Foods, is a factory farm operation that abuses livestock--a discussion for another day.)

Fasting yields more than weight loss. It refreshes your appreciation for food. It reawakens you to the amount and quality of food you've been putting in your body. Fasting also allows you to recognize just how bad you might feel from the diet you were eating.

You also emerge from a fast with a reduced appetite and a renewed sense of appreciation for food. It makes the discipline of healthy eating a lot easier when you break your fast.

I tell people that fasting is not punishment. It is a form of enlightenment, of re-experiencing food and life. Fasting allows you to "catch up" on all the indiscretions you've been guilty of over the years.

It also provides enormous advantage in gaining control over coronary plaque.
Tags :

Add comment

Loading
"Friday is my bad day"

"Friday is my bad day"

19. November 2011 William Davis (29)
At the start, Ted had a ton of small LDL particles. His starting (NMR) lipoprotien values:

LDL particle number: 2644 nmol/L

Small LDL: 2301 nmol/L

In other words, approximately 85% of all LDL particles were abnormally small. I showed Ted how to use diet to markedly reduce small LDL particles, including elimination of wheat, limiting other carbohydrates, and even counting carbohydrates to keep the quantity no higher than 15 grams per meal ("net" carbs).

Ted comes back 6 months later, having lost 14 pounds in the process (and now with weight stabilized). Another round of lipoproteins show:

LDL particle number: 1532 nmol/L

Small LDL: 799 nmol/L

Better, but not perfect. small LDL persists, representing nearly 50% of total LDL particle number.

So I quiz Ted about his diet. "Gee, I really stick to this diet. I have nothing made of wheat, no sugars. I count my carbs and I almost never go higher . . . except on Fridays."

"What happens on Friday?" I asked.

"That's when I'm bad. Not really bad. Maybe just a couple of slices of pizza. Or I'll go out for a big custard cone or something. That wouldn't do it, would it?"

That's the explanation. Your liver is well-equipped to recognize normal, large LDL particles. Large LDL particles therefore "live" for only a couple of days in the bloodstream. But the human liver does not recognize the peculiar configuration of small LDL particles, so it lets them pass--over and over and over again. The result: Once triggered by, say two slices of pizza, small LDL particles persist for 5 days, sometimes longer.

So Ted's one "bad" day per week is enough to allow a substantial quantity of small LDL particles to persist. While a fat indulgence (if there is such a thing) pushes large LDL up, the effect is relatively short-lived. Have a carbohydrate indulgence, on the other hand, and small LDL particles persist for up to a week. It means that Ted's one "bad" day per week is enough to allow his small LDL particles to persist at this level, preventing him from gaining full control over coronary plaque.

It also means that, if you have blood drawn for lipoprotein analysis but had a carbohydrate goodie within the previous week, small LDL particles may be exaggeratedly high.
Tags :

Comments (29) -

  • yuma

    11/19/2011 4:45:34 PM |

    This is scary! One bad day sets you back a week.
    I limit my carbohydrates (zero grains, no more than 25 grams of sugar) to no more than 100 per day. How low should I go?

  • Jeff

    11/19/2011 8:44:09 PM |

    Dr. Davis, I think we need some clarification on "carbohydrates" -such as which sub-group, sugars (of which there are also sub-groups), starches (more sub-groups), and fiber (more sub groups) need limits. Obviously, sugars are of top concern, with starches following close behind. But arent some of the fiber carbohydrates desirable?

  • Jeff

    11/19/2011 8:45:36 PM |

    I think your website clock is off by twelve hours.....

  • Mary Titus

    11/19/2011 10:58:44 PM |

    How would this affect triglycerides, Dr. Davis.

  • Might-o'chondri-AL

    11/20/2011 4:24:33 AM |

    Hi All-
    Got server error where this belongs, so...about lamestream media hype of vitamin D & fibrilation here is the study's own press release - they only worry about D over 100ng/ml.
    Quote:  "... Dr. Bunch and his colleagues examined blood tests from 132,000 patients in the Intermountain Healthcare database.Patients did not have any known history of atrial fibrillation, and all had previously received a vitamin D assessment as part of their routine care. Patients were then placed into categories to compare levels of vitamin D: low (less than 20 nanograms per decilter), low/normal (21-40 ng/dl), normal (41-80 ng/dl), high/normal (81-100 ng/dl), and excess (more than 100).Patients with vitamin D levels in the normal range were compared with other groups to assess their risk of developing atrial fibrillation.
    In patients with low, low-normal, normal and high-normal levels of vitamin D there was no increased risk of atrial fibrillation.  However, in those with excess levels of vitamin D there was a significant increased risk of atrial fibrillation.  Atrial fibrillation risk was two and a half times greater in patients with excess levels of vitamin D compared to those with normal levels."

  • Teresa

    11/20/2011 2:42:29 PM |

    Thanks for bringing that up, Al.  I had heard of the study, but hadn't gotten around to looking it up.  

    Two and a half times higher risk of atrial fibrillation may not be as much of an increase as it sounds.  It depends on how many people were in the group, and what the real numbers are.  I found this on WebMD:  http://www.webmd.boots.com/heart-disease/news/20111118/high-vitamin-d-levels-linked-to-heart-condition

    The risk of a-fib in those with normal levels of vit D was 1.4%.  With high levels, it was 3.8%.  It isn't that much of a difference, and not as significant as it would be if the risk went from say 10% to 25%.  It is also not as significant if the group number is very small, but we don't have that information.  

    I also found this note on a case study in which a-fib stopped after starting vit D.  Go figure.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2379840

  • Dr. William Davis

    11/20/2011 3:53:11 PM |

    Triglycerides tend to go up, Mary, though not with the same magnitude as small LDL particles.

  • Dr. William Davis

    11/20/2011 3:57:27 PM |

    Hi, Jeff--

    The problem with the fiber is that it comes with digestible carbohydrate. It means that a slice of white Wonder bread triggers small LDL, but so does a cup of quinoa, millet, or buckwheat, all fiber-rich grains.

    Got to be careful: We can't fall for the same logic that has fooled generations of nutritionists: If something bad for you is replaced by something less bad and there is apparent benefit, lots of the less bad thing is good for you.

  • Dr. William Davis

    11/20/2011 3:58:35 PM |

    Wow, that's a lot, Yuma.

    It varies with individual carbohydrate sensitivity, but most people tolerate 15 grams per meal well without postprandial rises in blood glucose or triggering of small LDL.

  • STG

    11/20/2011 4:26:57 PM |

    Dr. Davis:
    It amazes me how some nutritionists  (e.g., ADA or AHA  based) and diet book writers encourage people to cheat on their diets without considering the health impacts. Clearly a mixed message when one is told to make changes, but then told that they can ignore the dietary changes once a week or on special occasions or holidays.

  • Dr Matti Tolonen

    11/21/2011 11:44:07 AM |

    Hi doc, are you sure you have the right units (nmol/l)? Hwere in  Europe, the target for LDL is less than 3 mmol/l which would equal to 3000 µg/l (not nmol/l).

  • Dr. William Davis

    11/21/2011 1:39:01 PM |

    Hi, STG--

    Yes, it is amazing. I have done so many lipoprotein panels (tens of thousands) that I see patterns that a casual observer would not see. This is a substantial, though underappreciated, effect.

  • Jim

    11/21/2011 2:11:19 PM |

    Great post Doc! That really brings the message home.

  • Jeff

    11/21/2011 3:43:08 PM |

    Actually, I am questioning how much do we ned to be concerned about the carbohydrate content of things like green peppers or onions? Flax seed has a nearly all-fiber carb content, doesn't it? What's a safe daily target for total carbohydrate intake, and how should we do the math, if any?

  • Kent

    11/21/2011 4:18:48 PM |

    Knowing that high postprandial glucose levels cause an increase in small ldl particles. And we know that carbohydrates, especially wheat, significantly raise post prandial glucose levels. Would it make sense that Ted could cheat on Fridays with a carb load and still drop his particle score just by exercising after being bad if it kept his glucose levels from spiking?

  • Renfrew

    11/21/2011 10:19:10 PM |

    Kent,
    exercising after "cheating" (eating carbs) MAY work, especially for people who still have enough residual beta cells left in their pancreas and not much insulin resistance. But often exercise is counterproductive because the exercise raises cortisol levels which in turn release blood sugar from the liver. This can only be determined by tight blood sugar measuring (pre/post exercise).
    Renfrew

  • Dr. William Davis

    11/22/2011 3:16:41 AM |

    Hi, Jeff--

    It varies, but most people can do well with around 15 grams carbohydrate grams ("net" carbs, meaning total carbs minus fiber) per meal.

  • Dr. William Davis

    11/22/2011 3:17:26 AM |

    This has never been studied, Kent, but I suspect that exercising will only partially blunt the effect, not eliminate it.

  • steve

    11/23/2011 2:36:27 AM |

    Dr Davis:
    Where do you come out regarding the "safe starch" debate on the Jimmy Moore website?

  • Lindas

    11/23/2011 2:47:10 AM |

    Can anyone (or Dr. Davis)  tell me what they include in their 15 gr. carb meals?  how many carbs per day total,,,,SNACKS ETC? does this cause ketosis?  I've been trying to eat right,  however, at 8:30 PM my blood sugar was 112. is that bad or ok?  I'm a 61 year old woman. my calcium score 4/11 was 206. thank you

  • Dr. William Davis

    11/25/2011 2:13:48 PM |

    Sorry, Steve, I'm not familiar with that term.

    If you are referring to amylose, the form of carbohydrate that is less efficiently digested, it will boil down to blood sugar consequences of a specific amylose-containing food.

  • Dr. William Davis

    11/25/2011 2:15:10 PM |

    Hi, Lindas--

    I aim for blood sugar to stay below 100 mg/dl--all the time, including after meals.

    Ketosis can occur, though usually not. Eat vegetables, nuts and nut meals, oils, olives, avocados, meats, cheese. Plenty to eat without wheat and limited carbs.

  • Chris Buck

    11/26/2011 5:09:38 AM |

    Can I add vegetables does not include potatoes, corn, and rice - just to be clear.

  • Dr. William Davis

    11/27/2011 2:16:38 PM |

    Yes, correct. They will trigger small LDL if consumed in anything but the smallest portion size (e.g., more than 1/2 cup).

  • steve

    11/28/2011 6:18:55 PM |

    Dr Davis:
    The "safe starch" discussion is related to rice and potatoes being "safe starch" according to the writers of the Perfect Health Diet, The Jaminets.

    1/2 cup serving per meal X3 = 1.5 cups per day.  If three meals consumed in a day and zero at one meal could you eat 1 cup at one meal, and 1/2 cup at another and still be ok from an overall perspective?
    Are you advocating zero rice, potatoes as well as wheat and other starches?
    How is the level of acceptable maximum small LDL?
    Which would you find more acceptable for a person with CAD with normal weight, thryroid, D?
    LDL 2200
    small 200
    HDL 69
    The above with no statins; or
    LDL 650
    small <90
    HDL 60
    The above with statins
    Both with virtually zero starch
    Is zero starch healthy?  Will zero starch induce thyroid issues?
    Meat, chesse, fish, veggie diet healthy ok for those who cannot eat nuts?

    Thanks,
    Wheat Belly sound advice; I have recommended it to several who have  gotten the book

  • STG

    11/29/2011 3:19:21 AM |

    Dr. Davis:
    What population develops small LDL--your patients, anyone who eats carbohydrates, individuals with defective glucose metabolism (e.g., prediabetic, diabetic, insulin resistant)?

  • Dr. William Davis

    12/1/2011 4:22:34 AM |

    Yes and yes. It is truly ubiquitous with few modern people escaping it.

  • Dr. William Davis

    12/1/2011 4:27:04 AM |

    Hi, Steve--

    The triggering of small LDL tends to be dependent on the contents of a single meal. It does not necessarily mean zero carbohydrates, but staying below the threshold for provocation, which can be approximated by checking a 1-hour postprandial glucose: If any rise above the pre-prandial level is seen, then there is potential for provoking small LDL.

    There is no confident answer to which is better. But, given the apo E4-driven or other abnormal metabolic pattern with the LDL particle number of 2200, I would opt for statin, much as I hate to say it.

  • Amos

    12/7/2011 7:25:33 AM |

    I'm not familiar with American blood sugar levels....what on earth would it mean to keep blood sugar under 100, in Canadian terms?  (I've been given a target of 4-7 before meals, and 7-9 after meals....)

Add comment

Loading
Heart scan curiosities 3

Heart scan curiosities 3

10. December 2006 William Davis (7)


This is a sample image from the heart scan of a 54-year old, 212 lb, 5 ft 2 inch woman. The heart is the whitish-gray in the center; lungs are the dark (air-filled) areas on either side of the heart. Note the massive amount of surrounding gray tissues that encircles the heart and lungs. This is fat. At this weight, the diameter of total fat exceeds the combined diameter of the heart and lungs. If we were to show the abdomen, there would be even more fat. (The image shows the body not well centered because the technologist centers the heart, since this is, after all, a heart scan.)





This is a 55-year old, 151 lb, 5 ft 4 inch woman. Note the contrast in the quantity of fat tissue surrounding the chest, a much more normal appearance. Note that this woman is still around 25 lb over ideal weight, but not to the extreme degree of the woman above.

Another curious observation: Note the more whitish streaking in the heavier woman's lungs. Heart scans are performed while holding a deep inspiration (a deep breath inwards), mostly to eliminate lung respiratory motion during image acquisition. Nonetheless, the heavier woman's lungs are not as fully expanded as the more slender woman. In other words, the heavier woman cannot inflate her lungs as effectively as the thinner woman. Ever notice how breathless heavy people are? Some of this effect is just being out of shape. But there's also the added effect of the abdominal fat exerting upwards compression on the lung tissues, and the constrictive effect of the encircling fat mass. At the beginning of inspiration, the chest fat exerts the resistance of inertia to inspiration that is absent, or less, in a slender person. With each breath, the heavy woman must move 50 lbs or so of surrounding fat mass just to inhale.

The heavier woman is, in effect, suffocating herself in fat.

The distortions to the human body incurred by extreme weight gain are both fascinating and shocking. I hope you're breathing easily.
Tags :

Comments (7) -

  • Anonymous

    12/14/2006 4:55:00 PM |

    Exactly what triggers people to choose to be obese or even 20 lbs overweight? I find it disgusting.  People have to realize being overweight is unhealthly and puts that person at extreme risk for health problems. How sad it must be for young children not to have parents that can run with them in the park or worse yet lose one to heart disease, stroke or cancer.

  • Soundhunter

    1/1/2007 7:04:00 AM |

    hmmm. Me again, commenting twice.

    My 5 month old daughter has "pectus excavatum ", the docs said it's mild and won't show when she's an adult, they only seemed concerned with it for cosmetic reasons.

    I also have thought that the roof of her mouth seemed "deeper" or higher I guess you could say, than my other daughter's was in infancy. But, 5 monther with pectus excavatum doesn't have slender fingers, though she is quite long, repeated ultrasounds showed she had long legs. Is she possibly at higher risk for heart problems as an adult? Why wouldn't 2 different family docs know this, or tell me about it?

  • Dr. Davis

    1/1/2007 2:30:00 PM |

    An ultrasound of the heart, or echocardiogram, would settle the question. It's a harmless test that requires just a few minutes. If your daughter's doctor won't order it, find one that will.

  • Mo D.

    2/27/2007 2:54:00 AM |

    I'm saddened but not surprised that a doctor would call pectus excavatum just a curiosity.  I have quite a number of heart and lung ailments from my PE.  Had my doctor felt differently about PE when I was a kid and had suggested surgery, I would have suffered less than I have to having the surgery in my 30s. They say the teen years are the best time for surgical repair of PE. So yes, PE does cause heart and lung problems in adults.  At least this adult.

  • Anonymous

    2/28/2007 3:55:00 PM |

    Here's a relevant cite:
    Cardiovascular function following surgical repair of pectus excavatum: a metaanalysis.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=16899852&query_hl=2&itool=pubmed_docsum

  • Paul Höppener MD Phd

    11/16/2007 6:32:00 PM |

    I am a 69 year old retired fysician.With a moderate congenital pectus excavatum. For more than 10 years I suffered from complaints like shorness of breath, fatigue and arythmia.Even a catheter ablation has been performed 4 years ago to stop Supraventricular tachycardia of 220.min. After 3 months a more moderate tachycardia returned. My complaints where posture dependent: bending or pressure on the upper abdomen or the pectus cavity did increase the problems.
    CT showed cardiocompression!
    To go short: after corrective surgery (Ravitch) my complaints have totally disappeared. I could stop with all medicines, can walk uphill agian and cycle with proper speed. Reborn without reincarnation.
    Lesson: symptomatic pectus excavatum can also happen to senior people an dcorrective surgery is worth while.
    See also:  http://www.spesweb.nl/SPES_English.htm

  • buy jeans

    11/3/2010 2:54:30 PM |

    It could mean that some attention and exploration of how floppy his mitral valve might be could be useful, e.g., an ultrasound or echocardiogram. He might even require oral antibiotics at the time of any oral or some gastrointestinal procedures, since floppy valve are more susceptible to blood infections when potentially "dirty" orifices are instrumented.

Add comment

Loading
Chocolate . . . for adults only

Chocolate . . . for adults only

30. November 2011 William Davis (22)
If you've got a serious chocolate addiction and you'd like to make it as healthy as possible, give this X-rated dark chocolate a try.
I call it X-rated because it is certain to not satisfy young, sugar-craving palates, but is appropriate for only the most serious chocolate craver. This is a way to obtain the rich flavors and textures of cocoa, the health benefits (e.g., blood pressure reduction, antioxidation) of cocoa flavonoids, while obtaining none of the sugars/carbohydrates . . . and certainly no wheat!

It is easy to make, requiring just a few ingredients, a few steps, and a few minutes. Set aside and save for an indulgence, e.g., dip into natural peanut or almond butter.

Ingredients:
8 ounces 100% unsweetened cocoa
5 tablespoons coconut oil, melted
1/2 cup dry roasted pistachios
1/4 cup whole flaxseeds or chia seeds
Truvia or other non-aqueous sweetener

Using double-boiler method, melt cocoa. Alternatively, melt cocoa in microwave in 15-20 second increments. Stir in coconut oil, pistachios, and flaxseeds or chia seeds. Stir in sweetener, mixing thoroughly. (Note that the sweetener must be non-aqueous, as water-based sweeteners will separate in the oils.)

Lay a sheet of parchment paper out on a large baking pan. Pour chocolate mixture slowly onto paper, tilting pan carefully to spread evenly until thickness of thick cardboard obtained. Place pan in refrigerator or freezer for 20 minutes.

Remove chocolate and break by hand into pieces of desired size.
Tags :

Comments (22) -

  • Geoffrey Levens

    11/30/2011 4:43:44 PM |

    If you substitute Fair Trade cacao for the cocoa you will avoid being party to child slave labor. Also, there are a lot of nutritionally beneficial compounds in raw cacao that are lost in the "Dutching" process used to make most cocoa.

  • Buckaroo Banzai

    11/30/2011 6:12:45 PM |

    Just tried it with a little Truvia.  The granules did not dissolve.  I've added some stevia which seems to mix in just fine.  Agree on fair trade/organic if you can find it.

  • Dee

    11/30/2011 7:12:30 PM |

    Truiva is maltodextos and stevia, not a true product.

  • cancerclasses

    11/30/2011 9:10:59 PM |

    As an alternate to the pan & parchment paper (too fussy, extra equipment & cost) you can pour the stuff into quart or gallon size regular or freezer zippy bags then lay the bag flat in your freezer.  Been doing this long time now with coconut oil & coco candy, works good & it's already in a bag for storage.  To eat just break it up in the bag before opening, no muss, no fuss.

  • Thomas Moore

    12/1/2011 12:40:24 AM |

    loved reading your various blog's, lot's of stuff to get my teeth into.  Don't worry I'll get through it slowly..........very slowly!!!!!!!!

  • Laura

    12/1/2011 12:52:03 AM |

    Actually Truvia is stevia and erythritol (not sure of that spelling) and it is a sugar alcohol that has very little if any impact on blood sugar and consequently insulin.  
    If you add the Truvia into the coconut oil and then melt and warm the coconut oil (stir the truvia occassionally) it will dissolve better.

  • Dr. William Davis

    12/1/2011 4:18:52 AM |

    Thanks, again, Cancerclasses! I also saw your wonderful suggestion on the Wheat Belly Blog.

  • Dr. William Davis

    12/1/2011 4:19:31 AM |

    Yes, while I am not a fan of the manufacturer, Cargill, I believe they have a good product in Truvia, which is erythritol and rebiana.

  • Lindas

    12/1/2011 6:58:39 PM |

    May seem silly, but how much would be a serving?
    AND  Is coconut really OK, I have read that most of the concern was with Hydrogenated processed coconut oil, not  organic?     How much is ok per day if eating coconut oil?

  • Lindas

    12/1/2011 7:00:13 PM |

    Sorry for being SO serious about chocolate...in the comment above....but just wondered!

  • Geoffrey Levens

    12/1/2011 7:04:26 PM |

    "Actually Truvia is stevia and erythritol (not sure of that spelling) and it is a sugar alcohol that has very little if any impact on blood sugar and consequently insulin."

    I am pretty sure that ANY sweet taste, including zero calories stevia and the nasty chem ones will all provoke an insulin response. Here's one study to that effect

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20619074
    Br J Nutr. 2010 Nov;104(10):1415-20. Epub 2010 Jul 12.
    Sweet-taste receptors, low-energy sweeteners, glucose absorption and insulin release.
    Renwick AG, Molinary SV.

  • Laura

    12/2/2011 1:10:00 AM |

    Geoffrey
    That most likely is an accurate observation.  I know that if I indulge in too much no-calorie sweetened food (even if very low carb) it can stall my weight loss.  An occassional indulgence or a little sweetner in my coffee with real cream in the morning doesn't seem to be a problem.  
    My BS doesn't seem to change but if that is because the insulin is kicking in that would explain the problem.

  • STG

    12/2/2011 3:09:00 AM |

    This chocolate sounds great! However, I found when I was eating dark chocolate my HbA1c was too high. Also, a little chocolate was good but more was better (carb creep). Since I have restricted fruit, eliminated "safe carbs" (e.g., potatoes and sweet potatoes) and eliminated dark chocolate, I have my HBA1c in a normal range.  For me that has meant retraining my relationship with food and not seeking out sweetness. At this point in time, almonds and plain cocoa powder actually taste sweet to me. I don't want to set-off the sweet cravings, so it is best for me to avoid anything sweet. That said, I am sure many of you can eat this chocolate with joy and health--go for it!

  • Jeanne

    12/3/2011 4:04:49 PM |

    This is the first time I've made anything like this, and it was wonderful. I used macadamina nuts, instead.

  • SkyKing

    12/5/2011 1:52:47 AM |

    Dr. Mercola advises to avoid Truvia and Purevia brands since they've undergone a ton of processing.

    I personally prefer to use the NuStevia brand.

  • Hans Keer

    12/5/2011 4:42:30 PM |

    Beware of the negative effects of theobromine in chocolate doc.

  • Dr. William Davis

    12/6/2011 5:22:39 PM |

    Eat all you want, Lindas, of the non-hydrogenated organic coconut oil and dark chocolate.

  • Dr. William Davis

    12/6/2011 5:23:47 PM |

    Yes, agreed. But I am skeptical that, with removal of wheat and limiting other carbohydrates, followed by substantial weight loss and return to ideal weight, that it has much practical significance.

  • Allison

    12/10/2011 11:10:25 PM |

    Do you mean unsweetened cocoa powder or do you mean unsweetened chocolate?  How do you melt cocoa powder?  I'm confused.

  • Dr. William Davis

    12/14/2011 2:51:37 AM |

    Sorry for the confusion, Allison. 100% chocolate or unsweetened baking chocolate, not the powder.

  • Al

    1/17/2012 6:27:21 PM |

    Can one use undutched cocoa powder, such as hershey's, and dissolve in the melted coconut oil? Is it ok to add some good quality 2x vanilla, and cinnamon to it? If the cocoa powder is ok to use, is the quantity the same as the baking chocolate of 8 oz?

  • Rmm0117

    2/4/2012 9:05:41 PM |

    What amount of sweetener?

Add comment

Loading
Calcium reflects total plaque

Calcium reflects total plaque

4. December 2006 William Davis (0)




People frequently ask, "Why measure coronary artery calcium? My doctor said that calcium only tells you if there's hard plaque, and that hard plaque is stable. He/she says that calcium doesn't tell you anything about soft plaque."

Is that true? Is calcium only a reflection of "hard" plaque? Is hard plaque also more stable, less prone to rupture and causes heart attack?

Actually, calcium is a means of measuring total plaque, both soft and hard. That's because calcium comprises 20% of total plaque volume. Within plaque, there may be areas that are soft (labeled "lipid pool" in the diagram). There are also areas made of calcium (shown in white arcs within the plaque). Even though this is just a graphic, it's representative of what is seen when we perform intracoronary ultrasound of a live human being's coronary artery. In other words, this cross section contains both "soft" (lipid pool) as well as "hard" (calcium) elements.

Is this artery "soft" or "hard"? It's both, of course. The artery compostion can vary millimeter by millimeter, having more soft or hard elements. The artery can also change over time in either direction. Thus, "soft" plaque may indeed be soft today, only to be "hard" in 6 months, and vice versa.

The essential point is that measuring just "soft" plaque provides limited information. What the CT heart scan does is provide a gauge of total plaque, soft and hard, and it does so easily, safely, precisely. If your score increases, the lengthwise volume of total plaque has also grown. If your score decreases, the total amount of plaque has also decreased.
Tags :

Add comment

Loading
Report from Washington II

Report from Washington II

16. July 2006 William Davis (0)
Today's discussions at the Society for Cardiovascular Computed Tomography (SCCT) focused on atherosclerotic "plaque characterization".

As CT scanners get better and better at imaging the various components of plaque, some fascinating issues emerge:

--CT heart scans provide insights into what exactly is contained in an individual's atherosclerotic plaque that are not often provided even during heart catheterization. In other words, CT heart scanning is, in many instances, superior to heart catheterization, since it provides images of the artery wall, not just the internal contents.

--Progression (i.e., increase) in heart scan score is a powerful predicter of heart attack risk. Dr. Matthew Budoff of UCLA argued persuasively that the annual rate of increase in score is probably the most accurate measure of risk available, superior to cholesterol and calculated measures like the Framingham risk score.

--Coronary calcium scoring remains the best method to gauge total plaque throughout the entire coronary tree. In a person free of symptoms, the risk of a cardiac "event" (heart attack, death, procedures) is low and additional imaging (like CT angiography) is generally unnecessary.


Dr. Budoff, among the true thought leaders in CT heart scanning, also recounted his perspective on the history of heart scans. He noted that the questions asked through the years have evolved:




1995-2000 Should we do coronary calcium scans?

2000-2002 Do high or low risk patients benefit from coronary calcium scoring?

2003-2004 What is the better scanner, EBT or MDCT?

2006 How often should we perform coronary calcium imaging?


I believe that Dr. Budoff summarizes wonderfully where the Track Your Plaque programs fits into the overall scheme of things: Serial (repeated)CT heart scans to gauge progression or reversal is the wave of the future. We shouldn't just be interested in identifying persons at risk for heart attack. We should also be interested in showing the person at risk exactly how to reduce or eliminate that risk.
Tags :

Add comment

Loading