Green coffee bean extract in AGF Factor I

7. June 2012 William Davis (16)
Track Your Plaque's new and proprietary formulation, AGF Factor I, is designed to to support a program to achieve low levels of endogenous glycation.

Endogenous glycation, discussed at length in a recent Track Your Plaque Special Report, makes LDL particles (especially small LDL particles) more prone to oxidation and thereby more atherogenic, i.e., more likely to contribute to atherosclerotic plaque. Endogenous glycation also exerts unhealthy effects on long-lived proteins in the body, such as the proteins in the lenses of your eyes (cataracts), the lining of arteries (hypertension), and the cartilage cells of joints (brittle cartilage and arthritis).

Endogenous glycation is reduced by slashing carbohydrates in the diet, especially the most offensive carbohydrates of all, the amylopectin A of wheat, sucrose, high-fructose corn syrup and other fructose sources. Endogenous glycation can also be blocked by using blockers of the glycation reaction, such as benfotiamine (lipid-soluble thiamine), pyridoxal-5'-phosphate (a form of vitamin B6 with greater glycation blocking effect), and chlorogenic acid from green coffee beans, all components of AGF Factor I, which also contains Portulaca oleracea (Portusana), or purslane, for reduction of glucose.

Green coffee bean extract, and thereby chlorogenic acid, is receiving increased attention, most recently due to a study demonstrating substantial weight loss with 750-1050 mg green coffee bean extract, providing approximately 325-500 mg chlorogenic acid per day. Participants lost 15.4 pounds over 8 weeks at the higher dose (500 mg chlorogenic acid per day), while participants lost 8.8 pounds over 8 weeks at the lower dose (325 mg chlorogenic acid per day).

AGF Factor I was not formulated for weight loss but, taken twice or three times per day, does indeed mimic the dose of chlorogenic acid from green coffee bean extract used in the weight loss study. If you wish to take advantage of this application of chlorogenic acid/green coffee bean extract, while also maximizing protection from endogenous glycation, our AGF Factor I is one excellent choice to do so.
Tags :

Comments (16) -

  • Susan

    6/8/2012 1:11:38 PM |

    Thank you, Dr. Davis,
    Do you know what the mechanism is that would explain the weight loss? Is there caffeine in the green coffee extract? If yes, would it be sufficient to explain weight loss?
    Susan

  • Dr. Davis

    6/9/2012 12:52:08 PM |

    There is no caffeine, Susan.

    The mechanism is unknown, though at least part of the effect may be due to a reduction in formation of endogenous products of glycation.

  • Gene K

    6/9/2012 10:43:45 PM |

    Dr Davis,
    To those with APOE-4 who still rely on statins (Crestor) to control their smLDL, would you advise to try the green coffee bean extract instead?

  • Susan

    6/11/2012 12:40:14 PM |

    I just bought some green coffee extract from GNC. For 200 mg chlorogenic acid, the label said there was "no more than 16 mg. caffeine," (whatever that means)! I am going to try it and will report back if I get skinny or not. Smile

  • johnny

    6/12/2012 2:26:27 PM |

    Hi Dr.Davis,
    Does the green coffee bean extract need to be taken with meals?
    Thanks!

  • jaxrph

    6/14/2012 1:53:55 PM |

    With the B vitamins Is this safe to take post-intracoronary stent?

  • Dr. Davis

    6/15/2012 5:09:10 PM |

    I have no reason to believe that the components in this preparation pose any risk, Jax.

    I'm not convinced that the folates (NOT in this preparation) are truly a risk, either.

  • Dr. Davis

    6/15/2012 5:09:29 PM |

    No, but it might blunt any minimal nausea that arises.

  • Dr. Davis

    6/15/2012 5:10:52 PM |

    Hi, Gene--

    No, I don' think so.

    You could make a case for either chlorogenic acid/green coffee bean extract or the AGF Factor I to block glycation of small LDL particles, however.

  • Gene K

    6/17/2012 2:17:50 AM |

    Dr Davis,

    I think I didn't word my question clearly.

    I wonder whether it is worthwhile for APOE-4 patients to consider the AGF Factor I supplement as a replacement for statins to control smLDL while staying on a strict low-carb diet.

    Thank you.

  • Gene K

    6/19/2012 2:45:33 PM |

    Dr Davis, I take my question back. I reread your answer and now I understand that oxidation and glycation are two separate processes, and the supplement in question may help block glycation from AGEs. Oxidation of LDL particles, on the other hand, can be controlled with a low-carb diet. Is my interpretation correct?

    Thank you.

  • Dr. Davis

    6/20/2012 6:48:36 PM |

    I believe it is, Gene.

    Oxidation is a complex multi-faceted phenomenon. If we are looking for methods to inhibit or minimize oxidation that involve natural methods, not ingesting oxidized foods is a big factor. Not having particles prone to glycation, and thereby oxidation, is another.

  • Ms Martin

    7/23/2012 5:58:44 PM |

    i was just prescribed simvastatin, I believe 20mg per dose...is it safe to take green tea extract with this medicine?

  • RPF

    7/24/2012 5:46:50 PM |

    Is green coffee extract a blood thinner?

  • Green Coffee Bean Extract to Lose Weight | My Weight Loss Journey

    9/4/2012 3:35:31 PM |

    [...] quit taking it.  Check out this link for more information or to purchase Green Coffee Bean Extract.Green coffee bean extract seems to be a supplement that can make weight loss a lot easier.  Accordi... is coffee in its rawest, purest form, before roasting takes place. The unroasted beans of coffea [...]

  • Kay Belvin

    10/20/2012 12:37:28 AM |

    Is it safe to take green coffee extract with Simvastatin 40 Mg. and also is the extract a blood thinner as I take Warfarin?

Add comment

Loading
Should you take Plavix?

Should you take Plavix?

22. April 2006 William Davis (2)
A question I get fairly frequently nowadays is, "Should I take Plavix?"

For the few of you who've managed to miss the mass advertising campaign for this drug on TV, USA Today, etc., Plavix is a platelet-blocking drug, known chemically as clopidogrel, that "thins" the blood and helps prevent blood clot formation in coronary arteries and carotid arteries, thus potentially reducing heart attack and stroke risk.

What if you have a heart scan score of, say, 450--should you take Plavix?

In general, no. First of all, aspirin and Plavix (generally taken together, since the effect of Plavix is incremental to that of aspirin) only block blood clot formation. They have no effect whatsoever on the rate of plaque growth. Aspirin and Plavix will neither slow it or increase it.

What they do is when a plaque ruptures like a little volcano and exposes its internal contents (inflammatory cells, fat, etc.--like a raw wound), a blood clot forms on top of the ruptured surface. If the clot is big enough, it can occlude the vessel and causes heart attack. Or, if it's a carotid artery, debris from the clot can break off and find its way headward to the artery controlling your speech or memory center. Aspirin and Plavix simply help inhibit clot formation once a plaque ruptures. That's it.

Interestingly, if you view any of Sanofi Aventis' commercials for Plavix, you'd think they came up with a cure for heart disease. It ain't true.

When is Plavix helpful? It's clearly an advantage after someone receives a coronary stent, drug-coated or uncoated;, after coronary bypass, particularly if certain metal punch devices are used to create the grafts in the aorta; and during and after heart attack. These are all situations in which blood clot formation is a forceful process. Blocking it helps.

In general, in asymptomatic people with positive heart scan scores at any level, we do not recommend taking Plavix. The Plavix people are extremely aggressive pushing their drug (hang around any medical office and see!) and, I believe, have gone overboard in promoting its benefits. Rarely, in someone with a very high heart scan score, say 2000 or more, we'll use Plavix for a period of a few months until lipids/lipoproteins and other risk measures are addressed, just as an added safety measure. But, in general, the great majority of people with some heart scan score or another do not receive it and I don't believe that they should.

As always, look beyond the marketing. The purpose of marketing is to increase profits, not to educate.
Tags :

Comments (2) -

  • Anonymous

    1/27/2009 5:11:00 AM |

    My father died of a heart attack on January 16, 2009 while taking Plavix. He has been taking this drug for a couple of years, and I believe that it killed him.

    Pharmaceutical companies, such as Bristol-Myers Squibb and Sanofi Aventis, who knowing sell medications which kill the people who are taking it should be criminally prosecuted!

    I’m mad as hell, and I’m looking for legal advice concerning this medication and how it may have caused my father’s death.

  • buy jeans

    11/3/2010 2:21:37 PM |

    When is Plavix helpful? It's clearly an advantage after someone receives a coronary stent, drug-coated or uncoated;, after coronary bypass, particularly if certain metal punch devices are used to create the grafts in the aorta; and during and after heart attack. These are all situations in which blood clot formation is a forceful process. Blocking it helps.

Add comment

Loading
Even moore from Jimmy Moore

Even moore from Jimmy Moore

14. September 2011 William Davis (8)
The ubiquitous and irrepressible Jimmy Moore posted even more commentary about the Wheat Belly phenomenon here, what he calls "The Wheat Belly Bonanza."

Is low-carb really, at its core, little more than elimination of wheat? Sure, corn, rice, and sugar exert deleterious effects. But the dominant effect--by far--is the elimination of wheat. So is the low-carb movement really, at its core, a wheat-elimination movement?

Food (non-wheat-containing, of course) for thought.
Tags :

Comments (8) -

  • marilynb

    9/14/2011 12:12:20 PM |

    "So is the low-carb movement really, at its core, a wheat-elimination movement?"
    I think wheat would be the very close runner up to sugar.  Of course, if you eliminate wheat  you've also eliminated a major vehicle for sugar (cookies, cakes, donuts, muffins, hearthealthywholegrain bread...)

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/15/2011 11:51:43 AM |

    Hi, Marilyn--

    I would reverse it: wheat is far worse than sugar. Let me explain.

    Unlike sugar, wheat has other components, including gliadin, that stimulates appetite. Sucrose does not do this.

    Eliminating sucrose does not eliminate desire for wheat; eliminating wheat eliminates desire for sucrose.

  • Physician Nexus

    9/19/2011 7:19:31 AM |

    Dear Dr. William Davis:

    This letter is a request asking your permission to allow us to post your blog on our website, Physician Nexus, worldwide network exclusively for physicians.
    www.PhysicianNexus.com
    Physician Nexus is the fastest growing social network dedicated exclusively to physicians.  It is a global communications platform that was developed with a vision to transform the field of medicine, allowing physicians to connect with each other in ways that were not possible before.

    We would include your name as the author and include the link on your blog site.  However, even better would be if you joined and posted the blog.  
    Our community has more than 1300 physicians from 66 countries.  It's free, takes seconds, and is designed for physicians only.

    Sincerely,
    Omar Baig
    Physician Nexus Team
    2530 Berryessa Road
    San Jose, CA 95132
    (408) 802-5267

  • Jackie G

    9/24/2011 9:54:30 PM |

    In my low-carb house, being gluten-free and sugar-free go hand in hand. If someone were to "slip" I'd rather see a sucrose slip than gluten!

    (Side note, since I've eliminated gluten, I've been free from all headaches - now THAT is telling! I used to get migraines 3x/week!)

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/25/2011 12:04:55 AM |

    I agree, Jackie. Sucrose is not good for you, but it does not invite the appetite stimulation of wheat.

    I'm thrilled about your freedom from migraines.

  • John

    9/26/2011 10:07:14 PM |

    I am new to this site, but have seen numerous remarks about the importance of vitamin D.  I'm a kidney stone former and I'm afraid to take vitamin D supplements.  My wife was put on vitamin D and Calcium supplementation; never had a kidney stone and -- BAM -- got her first one at age 57.  Any wisdom about this?  I am seriously thinking about limited carbs and wheat as Dr. Davis suggests.  We'll see where that takes me.

  • Donna

    9/29/2011 3:23:19 PM |

    Dr. Davis, I was diagnosed with primary biliary cyrrhosis of the liver about 5 years ago, stage 2.  I'm a third generation liver disease patient, with a twin sister and a 1st cousin having the same disease also.  At that time, the doc I was seeing was honest enough to tell me he was not very educated about the disease, but did research it and found that low Vit D was a problem associated with PBC.  My level was almost not existent.  After years of taking the wrong vit D and taking it wrong altogether and getting only as high as a 16, I started researching it myself and put myself on the correct VitD and dosage of my choice and now have a level of 99.  Whoops!  I feel better, but I did stop the Vit D about 3 months ago to try to drop it a bit.  My doc did not order a repeat test.  I didn't ask for one as I was being scolded for prescribing my own treatment at the time.  lol  So, being the good Doc, what should I do at this point.  Retest the vit D level and go from there, or just begin a maintenence dose and retest the next time they draw labs, which could be 6-12 months from now?  And what would a maintenence dose be, in your opinion?  I have no reason to believe my level would stay up with nothing bc it was so low and bc of the PBC.

    Thank you, Donna

  • Philip

    10/16/2011 12:32:26 PM |

    My 93 year old Granny who is still going strong lived on a staple diet all her life of toast for breakfast (wheat) granary brown bread sandwiches every day with cheese or ham usually and in the evening the staple is usually potatos with a meat dish.... My theory is that the situation is highly conditional on how many calories you are burning, if it's being burnt off it makes no difference to a person of normal weight, no?

    How do you explain that?

Add comment

Loading
Can I eat quinoa?

Can I eat quinoa?

29. July 2011 William Davis (15)
. . . or beans, or brown rice, or sweet potatoes? Or how about amaranth, sorghum, oats, and buckwheat? Surely corn on the cob is okay!

These are, of course, non-wheat carbohydrates. They lack several crucial undesirable ingredients found in our old friend, wheat, including no:

Gliadin--The protein that degrades to exorphins, the compound from wheat digestion that exerts mind effects and stimulates appetite to the tune of 400 additional calories (on average) per day.
Gluten--The family of proteins that trigger immune diseases and neurologic impairment.
Amylopectin A--The highly-digestible "complex" carbohydrate that is no better--worse, in fact--than table sugar.

So why not eat these non-wheat grains all you want? If they don't cause appetite stimulation, behavioral outbursts in children with ADHD, addictive consumption of foods, dementia (i.e., gluten encephalopathy), etc., why not just eat them willy nilly?

Because they still increase blood sugar. Conventional wisdom is that these foods trend towards having a lower glycemic index than, say, table sugar, meaning it raises blood glucose less.

That's true . . . but very misleading. Oats, for instance, with a glycemic index of 55 compared to table sugar's 59, still sends blood sugar through the roof. Likewise, quinoa with a glycemic index of 53, will send blood sugar to, say, 150 mg/dl compared to 158 mg/dl for table sugar--yeah, sure, it's better, but it still stinks. And that's in non-diabetics. It's worse in diabetics.

Of course, John Q. Internist will tell you that, provided your blood sugars after eating don't exceed 200 mg/dl, you'll be okay. What he's really saying is "There's no need for diabetes medication, so you're okay. You will still be exposed to the many adverse health consequences of high blood sugar similar to, though less quickly than, a full diabetic, but that's not my problem."

In reality, most people can get away with consuming some of these non-wheat grains . . . provided portion size is limited. Beyond limiting portion size, there are two ways to better manage your carbohydrate sensitivity to ensure that metabolic distortions, such as high blood sugar, glycation, and small LDL particles, are not triggered.

More on that in the future.


Tags :

Comments (15) -

  • Jordi Posthumus

    7/29/2011 1:01:43 AM |

    This is exactly what Ron Rosedale said back in 2004.

  • Payam

    7/29/2011 4:45:07 AM |

    If the only problem is that they raise blood sugar then are they okay if you eat them with fiber/fat?  If not, please explain why..

  • Anne

    7/29/2011 12:44:09 PM |

    I found that all grains, even when eaten with fat, raise my blood sugar to unacceptable levels. Grains can easily get me to over 200. Get a glucometer and see what these grains do to your blood sugar. I also found that when I want to see what a food does to my blood glucose I have to test every 15-20 min after I eat. If I test only at 2 hours I might miss the spike and be falsely reassured that I can eat that food. My fasting is in the 80's and I try to keep postprandial spikes under 110 and even that may be too high.

    If you are gluten sensitive, it is very common to have problems with oats(even the ones that are certified gluten free). Corn also seems to be a a problem for a good number of people who can't eat gluten.

  • Renfrew

    7/29/2011 12:44:24 PM |

    Sorry for disgressing a bit. Here is an excellent discussion about NIACIN and its effectiveness for decreasing cardiac events:
    http://www.theheart.org/article/1231453.do
    Do we have to give up NIACIN?
    Renfrew

  • Might-o'chondri-AL

    7/29/2011 6:09:41 PM |

    Hi Renfrew,
    Statin used with niacin, anti-fungals, genfibrozil, cyslosporin and erythromycin are already known by Mayo Clinic to have the potential to trigger muscle breakdown, called rhabdo-myolysis. This sends a byproduct called myo-globin into the blood that when reaches kidneys and degrades causes kidney renal tubule obstructive damage.

    HDL traffics mainly with the Apoliprotein A-1 (ApoA1), which is key to bring cholesterol to HDL for binding cholesterol molecules to transport for recycling. Compromised kidneys create a uremic environment which depresses ApoA1 bio-syntheis,  while proteinuria physically overloads the kidney tubule cells; in other words HDL ends up just carrying more triglycerides around and  HDL is not properly performing desired reverse cholesterol transport (recycling).

    Statins , to be fair, are showing  good results in preventing post surgery human acute kidney failure and some other kidney cases.  Of course  niacin  in rats with chronic renal failure ameliorated hypertension, proteinuria, inflammation and oxidative stress (see 2009: Am. J. Physiol. Renal Physiol. 297, F106-F113 and follow similarly related 2010: "Niacin Improves Renal Lipid Metabolism and Slows Progression in Chronic Kidney Disease" in Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1800, 6-15) .  So my non-clinician take is that niacin use, such as Doc's, without co-administered statins is largely preventative of lipo-toxicity; whereas the experiment you read of  dosing statins plus niacin risked a potential drug interaction Mayo Clinic already warned about .

  • conrack

    7/29/2011 7:13:16 PM |

    Allow me to rephrase your question: If the only problem with eating glucose is that it raises your blood sugar then is it ok to eat glucose with fats & just eat donuts?

    Brilliant.

  • Buckaroo Banzai

    7/29/2011 8:57:46 PM |

    I've never heard of table sugar being rated on the glycemic index as low as 59.  Nutritiondata says 68 and I have read 70 in books.  http://nutritiondata.self.com/topics/glycemic-index#values

  • Payam

    7/30/2011 2:15:50 AM |

    Thanks for putting words in my mouth wise guy.  What I was saying is that if I eat a sweet potato with enough coconut oil that it doesnt spike my blood sugar, what is the problem.  Dr. Davis said in the article that it wouldnt " cause appetite stimulation, behavioral outbursts in children with ADHD, addictive consumption of foods, dementia, etc."  If the only problem is that it spikes blood sugar and you avoid that problem, then whats wrong with a sweet potato.  But you already knew what my question was.. you just wanted to take out your frustration on me...

  • steve

    7/30/2011 8:08:17 PM |

    Dr Davis:
    What is a safe level for post prandial glucose measurement?  Is it under 120, under 100 or what?  Also, are you advocating a zero carb-starch diet?

    Thanks,

  • conrack

    7/30/2011 9:50:10 PM |

    Thanks for giving me another opportunity to make fun of your insistence on eating anything made of glucose.  What you were saying is that if you eat a GLUCOSE potato with enough coconut oil that it BECOMES A DONUT, it WILL still spike your blood sugar, that is the problem. (ANY glucose + ANY fat = DONUTS!)  Dr. Davis said in the article "IF they don't cause (conditions & behaviors caused by high blood sugar)" and then said "That’s...very misleading." If you think the only problem (and it's NOT) is that it spikes blood sugar, and you THINK you can, but actually CAN NOT avoid that OR the other problems, then that's whats wrong with a glucose potato. But you already knew what the answer is.. you just wanted to justify & take out your glucose addiction on me…

  • conrack

    7/30/2011 9:58:58 PM |

    Oops, that should read (conditions & behaviors caused by wheat). Got lost in the cuts & pastes.

  • Payam

    7/30/2011 11:39:23 PM |

    Okay, so rather than speaking in generalities, answer this.  I just had a baked potato with cinnamon and melted coconut oil.  Measured my blood glucose every 30 mins for 2 hours and it didn't go over 100.  It could be and probably is because I am a triathlete and I worked out in the morning so my muscle glycogen stores were empty.  So, glucose would preferentially go to muscle.  But what is wrong with eating a baked potato after a workout.  In other words, what are these "other problems" that you mention. (I didn't eat the skin by the way, b/c of the glycoalkaloids).  

    I am not trying to get into an argument with you, I really dont care.  I am just trying to get more informed.  I understand however, that Dr. Davis's information applies more to diabetics and insulin resistant, so maybe for someone active like me, its not as big a deal.  But if a potato doesn't spike my blood sugar, why, specifically, should I avoid it? Thanks

  • Tim Dietz

    7/31/2011 8:40:53 PM |

    I've monitored this blog for quite a while now and either I"ve forgotten the reasons or I've never seen them, but could somebody point me to the article(s) that outline the effects of high post prandial glucose?

    Thanks,

    Tim

  • conrack

    8/5/2011 7:30:52 PM |

    The answer is in the second half of this article posted on August 5, 2011 here: http://www.trackyourplaque.com/blog/2011/08/carb-counting.html

  • Sami Paju

    8/12/2011 3:06:48 PM |

    Hello,

    I would like to add to the discussion one significant issue with quinoa; saponins. They are molecules that are supposedly a major gut-irritant, and when compared to e.g. plant and animal foods have a high likelihood to cause leaky gut and inflammation of the small intestine. And inflammation is rather counterproductive for anyone trying to lose weight.

    //sami

Add comment

Loading