Low-carb diets, heart disease incidence and all-cause mortality?

Juhana Harju said:

There is good evidence that reducing carbohydrates can improve some
metabolic markers, especially improve glycemic control. But are there any
studies showing that low-carb diets have reduced heart disease incidence or
all-cause mortality?

http://clinical.diabetesjournals.org/cgi/content/full/22/4/155 says
"There is no clear evidence to support severe restriction of dietary
carbohydrate as promoting either long-term health or weight reduction.
All carbohydrates are not the same. Choosing fiber-rich carbohydrates,
such as fruits, vegetables, and whole grains, as well as foods low in
saturated, and preferably high in monounsaturated fats seems a sane
course to follow. Choosing a double cheeseburger without the bun does
not."

--
Ron

"Juhana Harju" <[email hidden]> wrote in part:

Quoted message said:

There is good evidence that reducing carbohydrates can improve some
metabolic markers, especially improve glycemic control. But are there any
studies showing that low-carb diets have reduced heart disease incidence or
all-cause mortality?

I'd rephrase the question to be whether there are any studies that examine
the question at all. Are there any studies that determine the effect of
low-carb (of any types) on mortality or morbidity?

I know that--for me--low-carbing (of the type I do) either improves or is
neutral with respect to every risk factor i can measure. So if low-carbing
is not improving my odds it is because of things that we do not or cannot
yet measure.
--
Jim Chinnis Warrenton, Virginia, USA [email hidden]

Jim Chinnis said:

"Juhana Harju" <[email hidden]> wrote in part:

Quoted message said:

There is good evidence that reducing carbohydrates can improve some
metabolic markers, especially improve glycemic control. But are
there any studies showing that low-carb diets have reduced heart
disease incidence or all-cause mortality?

I'd rephrase the question to be whether there are any studies that
examine the question at all. Are there any studies that determine the
effect of low-carb (of any types) on mortality or morbidity?

Well, yes that is what I am looking for. I am looking for any studies
investigating this subject but I guess there are none. There are some
studies about the effect of moderately reduced carbs on mortality but I
guess that is all.

Quoted message said:

I know that--for me--low-carbing (of the type I do) either improves
or is neutral with respect to every risk factor i can measure. So if
low-carbing is not improving my odds it is because of things that we
do not or cannot yet measure.

--
Juhana

"Juhana Harju" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

There is good evidence that reducing carbohydrates can improve some
metabolic markers, especially improve glycemic control. But are there any
studies showing that low-carb diets have reduced heart disease incidence
or all-cause mortality?

--
Juhana

Studies are probably under way, but will require many years to show results.

With any diet, "compliance" is a serious problem. This will make any
studies difficult to make scientifically valid.

IMHO: low carb leads to low total insulin release. Sustained reduced
insulin would seem to be a good thing from what is already known.

Juhana Harju said:

Jim Chinnis said:

"Juhana Harju" <[email hidden]> wrote in part:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

There is good evidence that reducing carbohydrates can improve some
metabolic markers, especially improve glycemic control. But are
there any studies showing that low-carb diets have reduced heart
disease incidence or all-cause mortality?

Quoted message said:

I'd rephrase the question to be whether there are any studies that
examine the question at all. Are there any studies that determine the
effect of low-carb (of any types) on mortality or morbidity?

Well, yes that is what I am looking for. I am looking for any studies
investigating this subject but I guess there are none. There are some
studies about the effect of moderately reduced carbs on mortality but I
guess that is all.

The closest that is currently available is historical data by
culture. Heart disease is unknown among a wide assortment
of hunter-gatherer societies who eat either low carb or low
fat diets but is well known among societies that eat a modern
mix that's neither low carb nor low fat. As to all-cause
mortality I don't know how much data is available on life
expectancy in various cultures and how many deaths are
injury related.

"Juhana Harju" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

There is good evidence that reducing carbohydrates can improve some
metabolic markers, especially improve glycemic control. But are there any
studies showing that low-carb diets have reduced heart disease incidence
or all-cause mortality?

--
Juhana

I think one of the best points Doc Atkins made was that of the studies
showing how bad eating a fat rich diet was for your heart, no one took into
account the carb intake as well! His contention was that those eating a
high fat diet were probably eating a high carb diet as well, and that was
the real culprit. .

--
JK Sinrod
www.SinrodStudios.com
www.MyConeyIslandMemories.com

Juhana Harju said:

There is good evidence that reducing carbohydrates can improve some
metabolic markers, especially improve glycemic control. But are there any
studies showing that low-carb diets have reduced heart disease incidence or
all-cause mortality?

--
Juhana

Just the opposite. Read "The China Study" by Colin Campbell.
Evidence that the higher the animal protein consumption, the higher
the incidence of illness such as heart disease, diabetes, stroke,
cancer. A plant based whole foods diet of vegetables, whole grains,
fruit, legumes promotes better health. If there are any criticisms of
the scientific methodology of the team of scientists who did the study
I haven't read them. Maybe someone out there has.

Dolores

Cubit said:

"Juhana Harju" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

There is good evidence that reducing carbohydrates can improve some
metabolic markers, especially improve glycemic control. But are there any
studies showing that low-carb diets have reduced heart disease incidence
or all-cause mortality?

Quoted message said:

--
Juhana

Studies are probably under way, but will require many years to show results.

With any diet, "compliance" is a serious problem. This will make any
studies difficult to make scientifically valid.

IMHO: low carb leads to low total insulin release. Sustained reduced
insulin would seem to be a good thing from what is already known.

What is low carb? Atkins, South Beach, The Zone? I do know that in
Sears' first book, "The Zone Diet" , he has charts showing the
results of a small study he did showing blood lipids, blood glucose,
insulin after six weeks and after twelve weeks. The whole purpose of
the Zone diet is to control and reduce insulin. He tested blood at 6
weeks and 12 weeks. I noticed that after twelve weeks, while there
are results for other blood values, there are none for insulin.
Several years ago I e mailed Sears and asked why there were results
for insulin at six weeks but no results for insulin after twelve
weeks. He wrote back and said that insulin was expensive to test and
that if I wanted to know insulin results I could fund a study myself.
An odd reply from someone whose main premise is that people lose
weight on his diet because it controls insulin. You would think that
if he only had a limited amount of money to spend he would spend it on
finding insulin values. (They lose weight because according to his
"scientific principle" and carefully calculated figures, the dieter
eats between 800 and 1400 calories. Later, after the book was written,
he said on his web site that people were complaining that 800 calories
was too little and they couldn't stick to the diet. So he arbitrarily
raised the lower limit to 1100 calories. So much for careful
scientific calculation,) Too bad I had web tv at the time and
couldn't save that e mail.

Dolores

dorsy1943 said:

On Jul 15, 2:59 am, "Juhana Harju" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

There is good evidence that reducing carbohydrates can improve some
metabolic markers, especially improve glycemic control. But are
there any studies showing that low-carb diets have reduced heart
disease incidence or all-cause mortality?

Just the opposite. Read "The China Study" by Colin Campbell.
Evidence that the higher the animal protein consumption, the higher
the incidence of illness such as heart disease, diabetes, stroke,
cancer. A plant based whole foods diet of vegetables, whole grains,
fruit, legumes promotes better health. If there are any criticisms of
the scientific methodology of the team of scientists who did the study
I haven't read them. Maybe someone out there has.

I have read it. I even wrote a short review of it to this group
(sci.med.nutrition). But that is another subject.

--
Juhana

"dorsy1943" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Cubit said:

"Juhana Harju" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

There is good evidence that reducing carbohydrates can improve some
metabolic markers, especially improve glycemic control. But are there
any
studies showing that low-carb diets have reduced heart disease
incidence
or all-cause mortality?

Quoted message said:

--
Juhana

Studies are probably under way, but will require many years to show
results.

With any diet, "compliance" is a serious problem. This will make any
studies difficult to make scientifically valid.

IMHO: low carb leads to low total insulin release. Sustained reduced
insulin would seem to be a good thing from what is already known.

What is low carb? Atkins, South Beach, The Zone? I do know that in
Sears' first book, "The Zone Diet" , he has charts showing the
results of a small study he did showing blood lipids, blood glucose,
insulin after six weeks and after twelve weeks. The whole purpose of
the Zone diet is to control and reduce insulin. He tested blood at 6
weeks and 12 weeks. I noticed that after twelve weeks, while there
are results for other blood values, there are none for insulin.
Several years ago I e mailed Sears and asked why there were results
for insulin at six weeks but no results for insulin after twelve
weeks. He wrote back and said that insulin was expensive to test and
that if I wanted to know insulin results I could fund a study myself.
An odd reply from someone whose main premise is that people lose
weight on his diet because it controls insulin. You would think that
if he only had a limited amount of money to spend he would spend it on
finding insulin values. (They lose weight because according to his
"scientific principle" and carefully calculated figures, the dieter
eats between 800 and 1400 calories. Later, after the book was written,
he said on his web site that people were complaining that 800 calories
was too little and they couldn't stick to the diet. So he arbitrarily
raised the lower limit to 1100 calories. So much for careful
scientific calculation,) Too bad I had web tv at the time and
couldn't save that e mail.

Dolores

With a non-compliance issue in his study, he might well have been covering
something up.

Mr. Spock once said, "If I drop a hammer on a planet with a positive
gravity, I need not see it fall to know that it has fallen." [quoted from
memory]

By the above quote, I'm suggesting that if you remove the triggers for
insulin release, it is a good bet that insulin has reduced.

Cubit said:

"dorsy1943" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Cubit said:

"Juhana Harju" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> There is good evidence that reducing carbohydrates can improve some
> metabolic markers, especially improve glycemic control. But are there
> any
> studies showing that low-carb diets have reduced heart disease
> incidence
> or all-cause mortality?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> --
> Juhana

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Studies are probably under way, but will require many years to show
results.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

With any diet, "compliance" is a serious problem. This will make any
studies difficult to make scientifically valid.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

IMHO: low carb leads to low total insulin release. Sustained reduced
insulin would seem to be a good thing from what is already known.

Quoted message said:

What is low carb? Atkins, South Beach, The Zone? I do know that in
Sears' first book, "The Zone Diet" , he has charts showing the
results of a small study he did showing blood lipids, blood glucose,
insulin after six weeks and after twelve weeks. The whole purpose of
the Zone diet is to control and reduce insulin. He tested blood at 6
weeks and 12 weeks. I noticed that after twelve weeks, while there
are results for other blood values, there are none for insulin.
Several years ago I e mailed Sears and asked why there were results
for insulin at six weeks but no results for insulin after twelve
weeks. He wrote back and said that insulin was expensive to test and
that if I wanted to know insulin results I could fund a study myself.
An odd reply from someone whose main premise is that people lose
weight on his diet because it controls insulin. You would think that
if he only had a limited amount of money to spend he would spend it on
finding insulin values. (They lose weight because according to his
"scientific principle" and carefully calculated figures, the dieter
eats between 800 and 1400 calories. Later, after the book was written,
he said on his web site that people were complaining that 800 calories
was too little and they couldn't stick to the diet. So he arbitrarily
raised the lower limit to 1100 calories. So much for careful
scientific calculation,) Too bad I had web tv at the time and
couldn't save that e mail.

Quoted message said:

Dolores

With a non-compliance issue in his study, he might well have been covering
something up.

Mr. Spock once said, "If I drop a hammer on a planet with a positive
gravity, I need not see it fall to know that it has fallen." [quoted from
memory]

By the above quote, I'm suggesting that if you remove the triggers for
insulin release, it is a good bet that insulin has reduced.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

O.K. but I read somewhere that meat causes a greater rise in insulin
than pop corn. Unfortunately, we can see that sugar might rise less
on a high protein low carb diet but so far we have no way to easily
test insulin after eating.

Dolores

x-no-archive: yes

dorsy1943 said:

On Jul 18, 2:28 pm, "Cubit" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted message said:

O.K. but I read somewhere that meat causes a greater rise in insulin
than pop corn. Unfortunately, we can see that sugar might rise less
on a high protein low carb diet but so far we have no way to easily
test insulin after eating.

You're misunderstanding the insulin index.

Meat causes more insulin to be released, but in a slow, steady fashion,
as protein is digested less efficiently and doesn't cause a sudden
glucose spike demanding a sudden gush of insulin. Protein doesn't
damage pancreatic beta cell function the way high starch/sugar eating does.

Susan

dorsy1943 said:

Juhana Harju said:

There is good evidence that reducing carbohydrates can improve some
metabolic markers, especially improve glycemic control. But are there any
studies showing that low-carb diets have reduced heart disease incidence or
all-cause mortality?

Just the opposite. Read "The China Study" by Colin Campbell.
Evidence that the higher the animal protein consumption, the higher
the incidence of illness such as heart disease, diabetes, stroke,
cancer.

Unless the study includes carb intake it's worthless for discussion
on low carb. For people in China, do they eat less rice as they
are able to afford more animal protein in their diet? That's the
low carb approach and if they don't do so their data does not
apply to low carb discussions. So there's a study that given a
high carb diet, adding further protein and/or fat is bad. Like that's
a surprise.

Quoted message said:

A plant based whole foods diet of vegetables, whole grains,
fruit, legumes promotes better health.

That's one valid way to promote health, among many others.
But citing a study that doesn't include actually trying low carb
to reach that conclusion isn't professional when posting to a
low carb group.

Quoted message said:

If there are any criticisms of
the scientific methodology of the team of scientists who did the study
I haven't read them. Maybe someone out there has.

What's the data on the carb consumption in test subjects.

Good point. -and if he were still alive he might add trans fats to that
interpretation...

"glassman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Juhana Harju" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

There is good evidence that reducing carbohydrates can improve some
metabolic markers, especially improve glycemic control. But are there any
studies showing that low-carb diets have reduced heart disease incidence
or all-cause mortality?

--
Juhana

I think one of the best points Doc Atkins made was that of the studies
showing how bad eating a fat rich diet was for your heart, no one took
into account the carb intake as well! His contention was that those
eating a high fat diet were probably eating a high carb diet as well, and
that was the real culprit. .

--
JK Sinrod
www.SinrodStudios.com
www.MyConeyIslandMemories.com

Jim Chinnis said:

I'd rephrase the question to be whether there are any studies that examine
the question at all. Are there any studies that determine the effect of
low-carb (of any types) on mortality or morbidity?

Yes.

Most of them are studies on diabetics though, not on the general
population. There's definitive evidence that the incidence of kidney
disease, heart disease, impotence, amputation, etc. are much lower
with better bg control.

I'm less familiar with studies conducted on non-diabetics. However, I
know of one that showed that the best predictor of heart disease is
HbA1c (a measure of average blood glucose over time). This was true
even for those with normal, non-diabetic values - the lower your bg,
the better.

Doug Freyburger said:

Unless the study includes carb intake it's worthless for discussion
on low carb. For people in China, do they eat less rice as they
are able to afford more animal protein in their diet? That's the
low carb approach and if they don't do so their data does not
apply to low carb discussions. So there's a study that given a
high carb diet, adding further protein and/or fat is bad. Like that's
a surprise.

http://endo.endojournals.org/cgi/reprint/144/9/4154 shows a
synergistic effect of high glucose and free fatty acids causing human
beta cell death.

--
Ron

Ron Peterson said:

Doug Freyburger said:

Unless the study includes carb intake it's worthless for discussion
on low carb. For people in China, do they eat less rice as they
are able to afford more animal protein in their diet? That's the
low carb approach and if they don't do so their data does not
apply to low carb discussions. So there's a study that given a
high carb diet, adding further protein and/or fat is bad. Like that's
a surprise.

http://endo.endojournals.org/cgi/reprint/144/9/4154 shows a
synergistic effect of high glucose and free fatty acids causing human
beta cell death.

That study shows that combined high glucose and triglycerides
are unhealthy. Not exactly shocking news. At also says that
converting free fatty acids to acetyl-CoA is beneficial to reduce
the problem.

Ketosis inducing low carb does include converting free fatty
acids to acetyl-CoA. The ketones are a sign that free fatty
acids are getting converted faster then the CoA can be
recycled. It also reduces blood glucose level from low
dietary carbs as well as cause triglycerides to plummet.

So this is a study that suggest that low carb should be good
for type-2 diabetics. Also not exactly shocking news.

Unfortunately it deals with short term not long term events
so it doesn't much address the OP's question.

[email hidden] wrote in part:

Quoted message said:

Jim Chinnis said:

I'd rephrase the question to be whether there are any studies that examine
the question at all. Are there any studies that determine the effect of
low-carb (of any types) on mortality or morbidity?

Yes.

Most of them are studies on diabetics though, not on the general
population. There's definitive evidence that the incidence of kidney
disease, heart disease, impotence, amputation, etc. are much lower
with better bg control.

I'm less familiar with studies conducted on non-diabetics. However, I
know of one that showed that the best predictor of heart disease is
HbA1c (a measure of average blood glucose over time). This was true
even for those with normal, non-diabetic values - the lower your bg,
the better.

I know there are studies showing that bg control is good. The question is
whether there are studies showing that low-carbing is good. Though I believe
low-carbing means better bg control, do the studies exist that relate low
carbing to better morbidity/mortality?
--
Jim Chinnis Warrenton, Virginia, USA [email hidden]