Track Your Plaque goes global

21. September 2007 William Davis (3)
I don't use this space to toot my horn (at least I don't too often), but we were looking at the listings of our viewers and members. I was surprised to learn that we now have Track Your Plaque followers in 15 different countries around the world!

We have members from Europe including England, Ireland, Switzerland, Belgium, and the Czech Republic. We have members from as far away as South Africa, Australia, India, Singapore, Thailand, and China.

I see the entire Track Your Plaque process as a grand experiment. Never before in history has a system of health been delivered via a communication medium like the web. The internet provides more interactivity than television, it's more fluid than a book, it's more dynamic and evolves more rapidly than a face-to-face interaction. While we cannot be hands-on over the internet, we can still deliver all the crucial information and, hopefully, the knowledge on how to get it done.



Track Your Plaque is part of an even grander experiment: The movement to shift control over health away from the medical system, doctors, and hospitals and back to individuals. When you think about it, the idea that "health" (more acurately sickness) should be managed by people and institutions (e.g., hospitals and insurance companies) outside of the individual is a 20th century concept. I predict that this notion will also become a relic of the 20th century.

Someday, we will look back and laugh at the folly of the 20th century style of paternalistic health care. Perhaps it was a necessary step in the sequence to transform health to a better system that returns control to the individual. But it's clearly time for a change.

Track Your Plaque is an example of the extraordinary power that can be taken by a lone individual with only minimal assistance of a health care provider. I see Track Your Plaque members who understand heart disease (at least the coronary disease aspect) far better than 95% of my cardiology colleagues, 100% of my internal medicine and family practice colleagues. Physicians maintain a role, but their role has shrunk and receded. They should be facilitators of success in health, educators, a resource to turn to when we need help. It's not that way today. It will be in 50 years.

But, right now, we can get started on this wonderfully self-empowering--liberating-- movement by participating in this global experiment known as Track Your Plaque, the program with the goofy name that has the potential to usurp and unravel this enormous institutionalized system of health care the world has created.
Tags :

Comments (3) -

  • J Phillip

    9/21/2007 1:01:00 PM |

    Bravo, Dr. Davis!  As always, you have hit the proverbial nail on the head. It is refreshing to see a medical professional who truly believes that cardiac (and overall medical) care should be the responsibility of the individual with guidance as necessary from their doctor.  Every time I see my doctor (part of a large hospital-based practice), he only wants to schedule a $5000 stress test, even though I have repeatedly 'stressed' to him that I feel great, have no symptoms and would much rather have a heart scan (alas his hosptal does not offer this test, so it is clearly not an option... I'll have to arrange for it on my own... taking care of my own health, I imagine!).  The doctor only rolls his eyes, I can only guess he doesn't understand the importance of the scan or views it as unimportant since his facility doesn't get to bill for it.  Who knows for sure, but it clearly is time for a new forward-thinking medical professional!
    I would like to tell you that I believe your blog is of immense value to those with current cardiac disease, as well likely as anyone over the age of 30 with a heart, and I look forward to every post... thanks!

  • J Phillip

    9/21/2007 1:02:00 PM |

    Bravo, Dr. Davis!  As always, you have hit the proverbial nail on the head. It is refreshing to see a medical professional who truly believes that cardiac (and overall medical) care should be the responsibility of the individual with guidance as necessary from their doctor.  Every time I see my doctor (part of a large hospital-based practice), he only wants to schedule a $5000 stress test, even though I have repeatedly 'stressed' to him that I feel great, have no symptoms and would much rather have a heart scan (alas his hosptal does not offer this test, so it is clearly not an option... I'll have to arrange for it on my own... taking care of my own health, I imagine!).  The doctor only rolls his eyes, I can only guess he doesn't understand the importance of the scan or views it as unimportant since his facility doesn't get to bill for it.  Who knows for sure, but it clearly is time for a new forward-thinking medical professional!
    I would like to tell you that I believe your blog is of immense value to those with current cardiac disease, as well likely as anyone over the age of 30 with a heart, and I look forward to every post... thanks!

  • wccaguy

    9/23/2007 2:56:00 AM |

    Kudos to you Dr. Davis for the work you've done to understand the various dimensions of dealing with coronary artery disease in preventative and crisis management situations.

    Thanks also for not sitting on that knowledge but instead establishing a vision and engaging in activity to assist those of us who suffer from the disease to make more informed and better choices to deal with it.

    I just found your work in the last 6 weeks or so and still have a lot to digest and implement.  Nevertheless, to be honest, I already consider you to be the best source for cardiology information and advice.

    My HMO has been great and I'm sure will be great as needed in my crisis situations but is virtually worthless for purposes of understanding prevention except to process my lipid medication prescriptions.

    I'm moving through your TrackYourPlaque book now.  It's great.

    Thanks.

Add comment

Loading
Breakfast of champions?

Breakfast of champions?

12. April 2006 William Davis (1)
I spend time every day educating or reminding patients that breakfast cereals are not health foods.

I see jaws drop in shock when I tell them that, in my opinion and despite the marketing claims, Cheerios, Raisin Bran, Shredded Wheat, and the like do not yield health benefits. In fact, they do the the opposite: dramatically raise blood sugar and trigger an adverse cascade of events that eventually leads to diabetes and heart disease.

Why the health claims in advertising? Because these products contain insoluble fiber, the sort that makes your bowels regular. Yes, your bowels are important to health, too. But the benefits end there.

Breakfast cereals are a highly refined, processed food that are not good for your plaque control program. What they are is a highly profitable, multi-billion dollar business, deeply entrenched in American culture ("They'rrrre grrrrrreat!"--Tony the Tiger; "There's a whole scoop of raisins in every box of Post Raisin Bran!" Bet you remember them all.)

I find it particularly upsetting when I see the stamp of approval from the American Heart Association on some products. Gee, if the Heart Association says it's good for you, it must be true! Don't you believe it. The American Heart Association relies on corporate donations, just like any other charity.

If you must eat breakfast cereals, refer to www.glycemicindex.com for a full database of glycemic indexes. You can look up a specific product and it will list its glycemic index, or sugar-releasing properties. You should try to keep glycemic index of the foods you choose below 50.

For a revealing discussion of the influence of food marketers on our perceptions of food, see Track Your Plaque nutrition expert, Gay Riley's discussion The Marketing of Food and Diets in America at her website, www.netnutritionist.com.
Tags :

Comments (1) -

  • Anonymous

    4/12/2006 8:07:00 PM |

    Dr. Davis,
    Your daily posts are very interesting with extremely valuable information.
    Thank you.

Add comment

Loading
Getting your dose of fish oil right

Getting your dose of fish oil right

23. December 2008 William Davis (11)
Confusion often stems from the simplest of calculations: dose of fish oil.

Actually, you and I don't take fish oil for fish oil. We take fish oil for its content of omega-3 fatty acids, the dominant ones being EPA and DHA. The contents of fish oil outside of its EPA + DHA content likely exert little or no benefit (beyond that of other dietary oils).

To determine what you are currently taking, simply examine the back of your fish oil bottle and look for the EPA + DHA composition. This should be clearly and prominently labeled. If not, don't buy that brand again. Add up the EPA + DHA content per capsule, then multiply by the number of capsules you take per day. That yields your daily EPA + DHA intake.

The only other substantial source of omega-3 fatty acids is fish. Other food sources, such as non-fish meats, eggs, etc., contribute little or none. Processed foods that bear health claims of "contains heart healthy omega-3" often contain linolenic acid or flaxseed oil, which contributes very little to total EPA + DHA, or contain relatively trivial quantities of DHA. What are you doing eating processed foods, anyway?

What should the total daily dose of EPA + DHA dose be? That depends on what your goals are.

If your goal is to modestly reduce the risk of dying from heart attack, then just eating fish a couple of times per month will begin to exert an effect, or just taking a dose of 300 mg EPA + DHA per day from a low-potency capsule will do it. However, that's an awfully unambitious goal.

Our starting omega-3 dose in the Track Your Plaque program has, over the years, increased and now stands at 1800 mg EPA + DHA per day. However, the dose for 1) full reduction of triglycerides and/or triglyceride-containing abnormal lipoproteins, 2) reduction of Lp(a), and 3) the ideal dose for coronary and carotid plaque control are substantially higher.

But once you know your desired daily target of total EPA + DHA, you can easily determine the quantity of capsules to take by doing the above arithemetic, totaling the EPA + DHA per capsule. For example, if you have been instructed to take 6000 mg per day EPA + DHA, and your capsule contains 750 mg EPA + DHA, then you will need to take 8 capsules per day (6000/750).
Tags :

Comments (11) -

  • JoeEO

    12/24/2008 4:27:00 PM |

    Merry Christmas, Dr. Davis!

    Peace

    Joe E O

  • Anonymous

    12/24/2008 5:15:00 PM |

    Now this I can understand! Thanks for blogging so clearly.

    Smile

    Stevie

  • rabagley

    12/24/2008 9:15:00 PM |

    I have no idea why people mess around with capsules when the bottled lemon-flavored fish oil is so much more palatable and easier to take.

    1.5 tablespoons of Carlson's finest fish oil (which is about what the large spoons in my kitchen drawer hold) contains:

    3600mg EPA
    2250mg DHA
    1350mg other O-3 fatty acids

    And all of that goes down in one smooth, lemon-flavored swallow.

    I take enough supplements as pills already without having to choke down six or nine more of those fish oil capsules.

  • Anonymous

    12/24/2008 9:43:00 PM |

    Dr Davis, I know you no longer post here, but I wanted you to know that you gave me a great Christmas present. Diagnosed with high LP(a) of 87 I couldn't get it below 35-45 even with 1500mg of Niacin daily. Reading your blogs I increased my Fish capsules to 1800 3 months ago along with the 1500 Niacin. Just got my blood workup back and after 6 yrs of trying my LP(a)is now "normal" at 11.
    I think the D helped too that I learned about on your blog.
    You deserve a Santa hat and my gratitude. Thank You and Happy holidays......... Over&Oout

  • Craig

    12/24/2008 11:22:00 PM |

    My fish oil has total 300mg. of epa/dha.  The label then indicates 300mg of omega 3's.  Do those count for any heart benefits?  The bottle label claims these are 1,000mg fish oil softgels but I can't find anything that adds up to
    1,000mgs.  So, my question is am I getting 300, 600, or 1,000mgs in one capsule?  Your posted explanation is very clear, but I need a bit more clarification.

    Thanks.

  • Rich

    12/25/2008 3:21:00 PM |

    I second the vote for the liquid fish oil - the only way to go if you are trying to take a therapeutic dose of fish oil.  I’ve been using various liquid brands for many years – also avoids the “burps” you get with some softgels.

    The only downside to the liquid is if you travel, as it needs to be kept refrigerated, which can be inconvenient.  I keep a small supply of softgels around for when I am travelling.

    In response  to Craig:  on your bottle, all you care about is the amount of EPA+DHA listed in the ingredients – in your case, apparently a total of 300 mg EPA+DHA per softgel.   So, for example, if you want a dose of 1800 mg EPA+DHA per day, you will need 6 softgels.

  • Jack Cameron

    12/27/2008 12:32:00 AM |

    In my opinion high vitamin cod liver oil is the best way to get a base amount of fish oil. One tablespoon provides about 1 mg of EPA + DHA and all the vitamin A and D you need. I use fish oil tablets to supplement the cod liver oil.

  • Anonymous

    1/2/2009 1:38:00 AM |

    I have posted a couple of times here and I guess I will join the TYP since I have found good guidance in general. When I started out at the end of 2002 with angina problems, I was encouraged by a U.Guelph study discussing the benefits of a combination of fish oil and Garlic (Adler et al) Here, on Track your Plaque, the mega-dose of fish oil is also recommended.
      
    BUT..... Chris Masterjohn, who appears to provide well researched and ref. articles, states clearly that it is only DHA that is desired and that excess EPA can inhibit the conversion of ALA....
    SO...... Good or bad, high fish oil intake with EPA ?

    are there any sources of just DHA?

  • Anonymous

    5/15/2009 12:21:00 AM |

    Cod liver oil has too much vitamin A.  Fish oils make a big contribution to overfishing, much more than eating fish.  You can get algae-derived DHA supplements, and two companies make a DHA/EPA product from algae :www.water4.net, maker of V-Pure; and www.source-omega.com, maker of Pure One.

  • buy jeans

    11/3/2010 10:33:05 PM |

    If your goal is to modestly reduce the risk of dying from heart attack, then just eating fish a couple of times per month will begin to exert an effect, or just taking a dose of 300 mg EPA + DHA per day from a low-potency capsule will do it. However, that's an awfully unambitious goal.

Add comment

Loading
What's the best lipoprotein test?

What's the best lipoprotein test?

29. May 2007 William Davis (5)
This is a frequent question from Track Your Plaque Members and others interested in improving their heart disease prevention program beyond that of simple-minded cholesterol testing.

I obtain lipoprotein testing every day on patients. I can tell you with the confidence of having done thousands of these tests that plain, old-fashioned cholesterol testing is like relying on riding a scooter to work compared to an 8-cylinder modern automobile. The scooter might get you there, but any rain, snow, or long distance to travel and you can just forget it.

All too often, lipoprotein testing uncovers abnormalities that standard cholesterol testing simply fails to uncover.

So, among the various lipoprotein tests available, which is best?


There are three commercial tests available today:

1) Gel electropheresis (GGE)--often known by its "brand" name as the Berkeley lipoprotein profile, after Berkeley HeartLabs. GGE uses a gel with an electric field applied to cause lipoproteins to migrate, based on particle size and charge.

2) Vertical auto-profile (VAP)--a form of centrifugation, or high-speed spinning of blood plasma to separate lipoprotein particles.

3) Nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR)--the idea of putting plasma in an NMR (also known as MRI) device to characterize blood proteins.

All three tests do an excellent job. All are competitively priced. All have validating data--lots of it--to justify their broad use (though health insurers, in their vast wisdom, would still have you believe that the tests are "experimental").

But is one better?

Having done many of all three (though least of VAP), I am partial to Liposcience's NMR. (By the way, I receive no fees from Liposcience to use their test, nor to promote it in any way.)

I believe NMR is superior in a few ways:

1) I believe that the LDL particle number is the best way to truly quantify LDL, better than apoprotein B and "direct" LDL.

2) It provides what I believe to be more accurate small LDL measures.

3) It provides intermediate-density lipoprotein (IDL), a post-prandial, or after-eating, measure not available on the other two.

Perhaps I'm biased because I use the NMR most frequently. But I've used it because I felt it yielded superior, more clinically believable, data.

In truth, all three laboratories do an excellent job and you'd be served fine by obtaining any of the three. But my heart goes to NMR.
Tags :

Comments (5) -

  • Anonymous

    5/30/2007 3:41:00 AM |

    Thank you for clarifying which test to use.  

    I personally find this information very helpful.

    My previous testing was done at Berkeley.

    How often do you suggest retesting be done?  Yearly or ??

    Thank you.

    Marilyn

  • Dr. Davis

    5/30/2007 11:30:00 AM |

    Marilyn--
    In the Track Your Plaque program, we advocate lipoprotein testing at the beginning to diagnose the full extent of causes of coronary plaque, and then again when correction is believed to have been achieved. Standard lipids are used in between to assess response. Of course, this is just one way we've used that we've become comfortable with.

  • Anonymous

    1/24/2009 12:51:00 AM |

    The VAP does provide IDL on their profile.

    What sort of external validation does NMR have on their methods?

  • Charlotte jess

    9/27/2010 12:35:23 PM |

    Randox provide a kit which tests for the full lipid profile - a group of tests comprising triglycerides, total cholesterol, HDL and LDL cholesterol. The lipid profile is used, together with other risk factors, to assess a person's risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD).

    It is very important to get the balance between the protective HDL and the destructive LDL right in order to reduce the risk of CVD. This can be achieved either through dietary and lifestyle changes or treatment with cholesterol reducing drugs called statins.

    All Randox cholesterol tests, including small LDL, are direct enzymatic clearance tests, and as such are highly accurate even in lipaemic samples.

    For more information click here http://www.randox.com/lipid%20profile.php

  • buy jeans

    11/3/2010 2:56:03 PM |

    Having done many of all three (though least of VAP), I am partial to Liposcience's NMR. (By the way, I receive no fees from Liposcience to use their test, nor to promote it in any way.)

Add comment

Loading
Extreme carbohydrate intolerance

Extreme carbohydrate intolerance

25. August 2010 William Davis (26)
Here's an interesting example of what you might call "extreme carbohydrate intolerance."

May is a 44-year woman who has now had her 7th stent placed in her coronary arteries. She lives on a diet dominated by breads, breakfast cereals, muffins, rice, corn products, along with some real foods.

Her conventional lipid panel and other lab values:

Total cholesterol 346 mg/dl
Triglycerides: 877 mg/dl
HDL cholesterol: 22 mg/dl
LDL cholesterol: incalculable
(Recall that LDL cholesterol is usually a calculated, not a measured value. The excessively high triglycerides make the standard calculation invalid--more invalid than usual.)

Fasting blood glucose: 210 mg/dl
HbA1c (a reflection of previous 60-90 days average glucose): 7.2% (desirable 4.5% or less)
ALT (a "liver enzyme"): 438 (about five-fold normal)


At 5 ft even and 138 lbs (BMI 27.0), May appears small. But the modest excess weight is all concentrated in her abdomen, i.e., in visceral fat.

By lipoprotein analysis via NMR (Liposcience), May's LDL particle number was 2912 nmol/L, or what I would call a "true" LDL of 291 mg/dl. (Drop the last digit.) Of the 2912 nmol/L LDL particles, 2678 nmol/L, or 92%, were small.

The bad news: This pattern of extremely high triglycerides, extremely high LDL particle number, low HDL, predominant small LDL, and diabetes poses high-risk for heart disease--no surprise. It earned her 7 stents so far. (Unfortunately, she has made no effort whatsoever to correct these patterns, despite repeated advice to do so.)

The good news: This collection is wonderfully responsive to diet. LDL particle number, small LDL, triglycerides, blood glucose, and HbA1c drop dramatically, while HDL increases. Heart disease will at least slow, if not stop.

It's amazing how far off human metabolism can go while indulging in carbohydrates, particularly a genetically carbohydrate-intolerance person. (Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if May's diet, as bad as it seems to you and me, still fits within the dictates of the USDA food pyramid.) The crucial step in diet to correct this smorgasbord of disaster is elimination of carbohydrates, especially that from wheat, cornstarch, and sugars.
Tags :

Comments (26) -

  • john

    8/24/2010 9:57:22 PM |

    Wow, these numbers are wild.  It'd be great to see where they are in six months, assuming a change in diet.

  • Tuck

    8/24/2010 10:03:12 PM |

    Did you see the WSJ article today?

    "Giving Up Gluten to Lose Weight? Not So Fast"

    The last sentence is priceless:

    “Also, for dieters, going back to gluten after avoiding it can lead to stomach cramps, bloating, diarrhea and other symptoms, at least temporarily.”

    If an egg had that effect on you, they'd do a recall.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703846604575447413874799110.html

  • qualia

    8/24/2010 10:59:36 PM |

    great post! would be cool if you could pipe the links to your posts into your twitter account as well (there are online services), so that it can easier be forwarded by followers of you.

  • Anonymous

    8/24/2010 11:06:26 PM |

    The WSJ should give up the diet reporting and stick to what they (supposedly) know - financial news.  

    There's giving up gluten and then there's giving up gluten but maintaining a high starch alternative grain  GF diet.   Of course replacing one starch with another won't result in weight loss if one is overweight.  It's even possible to gain weight on such a GF diet.    

    Are people really silly enough to take diet advice from "creaky bones" Gwenyth Paltrow?

  • dan

    8/25/2010 1:01:04 AM |

    I watched the WSJ video.  It wasn't bad.  It was mainly ridiculing "gluten-free" imitation products.  The lady recommended eating natural foods that are gluten free.

  • Tommy

    8/25/2010 1:50:03 AM |

    I am completely baffled by some of the lipid panel numbers I see. She had 7 stents put in but there are many out there seemingly with no problems, with high numbers like that. Meanwhile I have eaten right and exercised seriously for the last 30 years, have never been overweight, always been in shape, had good lipid panel results but suffered a heart attack last year anyway. I just had bloodwork shortly before the attack and once again (as had been the case for years) I was told I was in perfect health. My triglycerides were good as was my CRP and my complete lipid panel. Actually any test I took ever, always produced good results. Even after my heart attack they couldn't get my heart rate up high enough in my stress test unless I ran longer and at the steepest incline. I'm still in great shape.....but I had a heart attack.  I never had a belly or bulge and still don't. 5'10" 169 lbs.  Go  figure.

  • 42

    8/25/2010 4:28:11 AM |

    My results after eight months: http://paleohacks.com/questions/9124/first-post-paleo-blood-work-results

    After 8 months and -50lbs  I can safely say that the std American flour/sugar diet is complete bullshit.

  • Lori Miller

    8/25/2010 4:36:29 AM |

    I bet that poor woman has forgotten what it's like to feel good. She'll surely feel better with an improved diet. I wish her the best.

    Re: WSJ article, I got a stomach ache that lasted two days the last time I ate a chocolate chip cookie made of wheat flour. That's some kind of "temporarily"!

  • Anonymous

    8/25/2010 5:58:01 AM |

    Lipids after two years of high-fat, moderate-protein, very low-carb eating:
    Total Cholesterol: 220, Triglycerides: 69,
    HDL: 98,
    LDL: 108.
    I think I'll carry on that way.

  • Anonymous

    8/25/2010 6:19:42 AM |

    After 7 stents and she still refuses to change her eating habits? I think that got my attention more than anything else in your report of this patient. I guess I am baffled on why people do not take charge of their health especially when expert advice is offered on a "silver platter".

  • Derek

    8/25/2010 2:11:31 PM |

    Tommy,

    Sorry to hear that.  I guess it goes to show nothing is a guarantee.  No matter what we do, the chance is always there.

  • Jonathan

    8/25/2010 3:39:40 PM |

    Tommy, your case only goes to prove that cholesterol doesn't cause heart attacks.  
    There is something else causing CVD.
    Inflammation from Poly fat and grains seem the most plausible to me.

  • Tommy

    8/25/2010 4:04:49 PM |

    "Tommy, your case only goes to prove that cholesterol doesn't cause heart attacks.
    There is something else causing CVD.
    Inflammation from Poly fat and grains seem the most plausible to me."

    I had my CRP checked and it was below 4 just before my HA. After taking care of myself for the last 30 years and always doing well in every aspect I really felt backed against the wall afterward. My numbers are very low now (pretty close to 60's across the board) but all of this is more complexed than just numbers.

  • Dr. William Davis

    8/25/2010 5:05:28 PM |

    Hi, Tuck--

    That's great!

    It reminds me of the USDA's request for public commentary on the food pyramid revision, prefaced by "We don't understand why, after we tell people to increase consumption of whole grains, they keep on gaining weight and becoming diabetic."

  • Dr. William Davis

    8/25/2010 5:07:20 PM |

    42--

    Well said!

  • Jonathan

    8/25/2010 5:20:01 PM |

    "eating right" and "taking care of myself" only tells me you were healthy by your standards or by the governments standards.  Most of the people I hear say "I eat healthy" means they eat lower fat but mostly trans fat when they do.

    There has to be something causing your problem.  I would suspect what ever makes you extra hungry would be a possible cause.  Maybe it's too low cholesterol.  Agreed; very complicated.  Maybe it's just genetics.  Maybe there's something in the past 30 years that was not right but what?  A lot of maybes there.  Have you had a calcium score?

  • David

    8/25/2010 7:46:48 PM |

    Tommy-

    Do you have Lipoprotein(a)? You sound to me like a textbook Lp(a) case. Better get it checked and address it.

  • Tommy

    8/25/2010 8:41:00 PM |

    Trans fat? nooooooooo...lol.
    No refined crap, no processed anything. Damn...I don't even eat ketchup(sugar)!! I consider AMA snobish about food intake. I had a conversation with a "heart healthy" dietitian from the hospital after my heart attack and she wanted me to have less than 50 g of fat per day (impossible). I told her I go by percentages of total calories consumed and explained it to her. She had no clue and didn't understand it in simplest terms. "Ok what if I wanted to consume more fat and just added non fat calories to my total intake....that would lower my percentage right? Uhhh....what? lol

    @ David
    I am thinking I may be LP(a) and I have been taking extra Vitamin D as well as a high dose of fish oil. Next cardiologist visit I will discuss Niacin as well as pattern B possibilities.

  • David

    8/26/2010 7:41:39 AM |

    Tommy, what about stress and sleep?  Stress is a killer...

  • Tommy

    8/26/2010 12:42:21 PM |

    David, that is my suspicion. It's complicated because a lot of things happened at once at that time. Through July and August I was under stress from problems at work combined with personal family issues. In September i went on a cruise an ate up a storm as well as drank more than normal gaining 14 lbs. (my prior good blood labs gave me confidence ..ha ha ha.) Then I came home, worked out hard and lost all the weight in a week. Then my grand daughter got sick and I was very stressed out about it while my work issues were still mounting. In October I had an argument in the morning before leaving work (I had been switched to an overnight shift)and was stewing when I went to sleep. I woke up a few hours later having a heart attack. The rest is history.

  • Ned Kock

    8/26/2010 2:50:39 PM |

    Hi Dr. Davis.

    These numbers are awful, but I think a point must be stressed regarding natural vs. industrial carbohydrate-rich foods. These numbers are not typical for normoglycemic folks who eat natural carbohydrate-rich foods.

    Avoiding natural carbohydrate-rich foods in the absence of compromised glucose metabolism is unnecessary. Those foods do not “tire” the pancreas significantly more than protein-rich foods do.

    Protein elicits an insulin response that is comparable to that of natural carbohydrate-rich foods, on a gram-adjusted basis (but significantly lower than that of refined carbohydrate-rich foods, like doughnuts and bagels).

    http://healthcorrelator.blogspot.com/2010/04/insulin-responses-to-foods-rich-in.html

    And nobody can live without protein. It is an essential nutrient. Usually protein does not lead to a measurable glucose response because glucagon is secreted together with insulin in response to ingestion of protein, preventing hypoglycemia.

  • Anonymous

    8/26/2010 10:33:29 PM |

    I definitely get the whole low-carb thing, but I think you always use the extreme cases to make your point.  Even dietitians would not recommend that much starch.  In fact, many of the "top" dietitians limit starch quite drastically in their meal plans.  They are not as ignorant as you think.  However, because they have clinical experience (which I know you have too), they know that draconian, restrictive diets do not work.  Therefore, they work starches in the diet a bit, so people don't feel "deprived."  Still they choose "better" starch options like beans (OMG LECTINS!!!).

    I do not believe for one second that the majority of people claiming to be eating according to the USDA guidelines are doing so within the correct caloric guidelines.  They are eating far too much and making terrible choices for starches to boot.  Portion control is tough obviously.  I think people who cannot master it may find low-carb useful because they eliminate starches/sugars outright and don't have to worry about serving sizes.  Plus, ketosis gives them a metabolic advantage allowing them to consume more calories and still lose weight.  It definitely is not an end all solution though.

  • Anonymous

    8/26/2010 10:37:29 PM |

    Also, they don't bad mouth carbs in the press because people being people would start avoiding things like vegetables.

    There is nothing inherently wrong with carbs.  We just have to eat them within reason.  Just like calcium for example.  Too much calcium is linked to heart attacks and prostate cancer.  But in moderate amounts, it is helpful.

  • stop smoking help

    8/27/2010 3:47:04 AM |

    Okay, I went my two weeks without wheat carbs. My results are purely non-scientific, but here goes. I lost 4 pounds, down to 156. I wasn't hungry at all. I didn't have any bread cravings like I thought I would. But I did have a hard time sleeping, for whatever reason.

    After my two weeks I had angel hair pasta and a hamburger on a wheat roll. My stomach was slightly upset for a couple of days once I started eating wheat carbs again - probably just a coincidence though.

    So I proved I could do it and I proved to myself that I wouldn't starve or go crazy without my bread. So, I think I'll be more careful about the wheat I put into my system. On the other hand, it looks like May needs to correct things and do it sooner than later.

  • scall0way

    8/29/2010 7:19:55 PM |

    Just goes to show ya. I'd *love* to weigh what Mary weighs - but it seems there is more involved that that. I just had an NMR test recently myself. Total LDL particle count was 2018. My doctor is freaked and says it's a horrible number. Every website I consult says it's a horrible number -though my small LDL is 212, only 10.6% of the total. But all the websites I consult say the total number is far more a risk factor than paticle size.

    But what were the HDL and triglycerides of the people with high particle counts. High like Mary's? My own HDL (measured just last week) is 66 and my triglycerides 49.

    But how do you get the particle number down? I've already been low-carb for four years, gluten-free for 18 months, avoid all sugars, take D3, magenesium, K2, 1500 mg niacin.

    Might it go down if I can get my thyroid normalized? That's one issue I'm still trying to work through with my doctor. Sheesh, the older I get the harder it gets. So many things to consider I sometimes wonder how anyone manages to stay alive for a few weeks - let alone many years for most of us.

  • Tommy

    8/30/2010 1:54:37 PM |

    So for people with existing coronary artery issues and Small particle LDL is it true that increasing fat (especially saturated fat) only makes this worse? If you go low carb you need to also be low fat?
    I read that "low fat" is bad for Pattern A but beneficial to pattern B.

    Dr. Davis?

Add comment

Loading
Burn off the fat

Burn off the fat

9. May 2006 William Davis (0)

If you've ever wondered just how many calories you're burning with various activities like yard work, driving, climbing stairs, etc. go to this great website that will calculate it for you: http://www.caloriecontrol.org/exercalc.html.

Here are some examples:


Dancing for 30 minutes(fast, e.g., tango): 193 calories
Yoga for 30 minutes: 204 calories
Washing the car for 30 minutes: 173 calories
Vacuuming for 30 minutes: 88 calories

(All are for a 170 lb person.)

As you see, physical activity does not necessarily have to consist of exercise. It doesn't require fancy equipment or expensive outfits. But it does require you to keep moving. Sedentary work is among the most common reasons I see in my patients for failing to control weight and its associated lipoprotein patterns, like low HDL and small LDL.

If your work is sedentary, then a minimum of 60 minutes of physical activity per day is necessary to begin to correct weight-related patterns. If you gauge by calories burned, then a useful goal is 500 calories per day in physical activity--at a minimum.
Tags :

Add comment

Loading
Diabetes is a choice you make

Diabetes is a choice you make

24. July 2006 William Davis (0)
Tim had heart disease identified as a young man. He had his first heart attack followed by a quadruple bypass surgery at age 38. Recurrent anginal chest pain and another small heart attack led to several stents over three procedures in the first four years after bypass.

Tim finally came to us, interested in improving his prevention program. You name it, he had it: small LDL, low HDL (28 mg/dl), lipoprotein(a), etc. The problem was that Tim was also clearly pre-diabetic. At 5 ft 10 inches, he weighed 272 lbs--easily 80 or more pounds overweight.

Tim was willing to make the medication and nutritional supplement changes to gain control over his seeminglly relentless disease. He even turned up his exercise program and lost 28 lbs in the beginning. But as time passed and no symptoms recurred, he became lax.

Tim regained all the weight he'd lost and some more. Now Tim was diabetic.

"I don't get it. I eat good foods that shouldn't raise my insulin. I almost never eat sweets."

I stressed to Tim that diabetes and pre-diabetes, while provoked acutely by sugar-equivalent foods (wheat products, breads, breakfast cereals, crackers, etc.), is caused chronically by excess weight. If Tim wants to regain control over his heart disease, he needed to lost the weight.

Unlike, say, leukemia, an unfortunate disease that has little to do with lifestyle choices, diabetes is a choice you make over 90% of the time. In other words, if you become diabetic (adult variety, not children's variety) as an adult, that's because you've chosen to follow that path. You've neglected physical activity, or indulged in too many calories or poor food choices, or simply allowed weight to balloon out of control.

But diabetes is also a path most people can choose not to take. And it is a painfully common choice: Nearly two-thirds of the adults in my office have patterns of pre-diabetes or diabetes when I first meet them.

Let me stress this: For the vast majority of adults, diabetes is a choice, not an inevitability.
Tags :

Add comment

Loading