A long piece this week on low-carb and aging. Plus a section on the Administrative State, followed by a study on statins and insulin sensitivity. Finally, the video of the week.
Once again I am totally gobsmacked at the extent of the information you have researched and put together in a way that makes sense. As a new subscriber I am embarrassed that my financial reward falls so short of the amount of time and effort you have put in. Each week you restore my faith in a human capacity to give so much for the benefit of others. Thank you!!!!!!!!!!!!
Great read, as always. Re: DC, the founding fathers gotta be rolling over in their graves over the shit-show this government has turned into! Keep up the good work!!
Yes, indeed. One suspects they would be rolling over in their graves. Speaking of the founding fathers, I just came across this hilarious video that will probably be next week's Video of the Week, unless something better comes up. Hard to beat this one for humor.
OMAD? I don't know if I could eat three eggs, three slices of thick bacon, two cups of milk, one ounce of cheese, eight ounces of ground beef, and twenty grams of collagen in one meal. Not to mention any plant foods.
Ah! Did you miss the first book in that series? "SJWs Always Lie: Taking Down the Thought Police
Book 1 of 2: The Laws of Social Justice"
"The Laws of Social Justice" was intended to be a three-book series, the third book would have been: "SJWs Always Project." Instead, the third book is "Corporate Cancer: How to Work Miracles and Save Millions by Curing Your Company." (And {wink} what with your appliance MFGing 'corporate experiences,' you might actually enjoy it!)
And, by happenstance, today I got my "backer's edition' of the latest from Arkhaven Comics: (The Legend) "Chuck Dixon's Avalon." No page numbers but it's a 1" deep beautiful softbound version. Dunno if your comic-loving sons have been following Chuck Dixon's Avalon on Arkhaven -- but this is a bound version the first 12 issues. (I THINK Vox said there's a hardbound coming too -- and maybe even a leather bound one. The new Castalia Bindery is doing trial runs right now.)
I hope you find a graceful balance between "I must answer everyone" and "I cannot possibly answer everyone!" Good luck!
I have seen that plot, or similar, before by Cahill showing the buildup of BHB over time. I am 76 and have been on a ketogenic diet for 12 years. I prick my finger to confirm all of this. My hobby has always been cycling, so it is common for me to ride 50-70 miles and maybe once or twice per year, ride 100 miles. Ten years ago I decided to not eat before and when riding, so at the end of the day it would be 24 hours fasted. The objective, was to maintain mental acuity, and a constant energy availability - no bonking. The first time I did this (60 miles) I pricked my finger and the glucose level was 38 and BHB level was 5.8. I was amazed that I was not dead, but I had plenty of mental acuity. Over the next several years, I continued to do this and the end of day glucose levels came up and the BHB levels went down. I kept wondering how far you could take this without bonking so at age 73 I did 100 miles without eating. Glucose was in the upper 50's and BHB was slightly above 3 at the finish. So what happens now, age 76? Glucose does not change. You basically finish where you started, say about 80 and the BHB will finish between 1.5 and 2.5.
There are many reasons to do do this, but my initial motivation was to maintain mental acuity, which is the case, all day. The second reason is to maintain a stable energy level, which is what happens. I had no trouble sprinting at the end of that fasted 100 mile ride. In my case this is what I call "fat-adapted," and it is a safer and easier approach to riding. Just about everything that has been pushed with regard to sports related nutrition has been wrong.
Thanks for the info. In the original Cahill starvation study from which that graphic was taken (the 2006 study was a recap of the original study in (I think) 1963) some subjects got their blood sugar down to 25 mg/dl, which is almost unthinkable. Those studies could never be done today because Institutional Revue Boards would never permit them. Thought I've never seen it in anyone myself, I'm convinced that many fat adapted people--especially younger ones--do fine with glucose levels in 25-35 mg/dl range.
"And throw in the comments to the Arrow… so, as I say woefully behind.
Anyway, if you’ve emailed me in the last month and haven’t heard back, this is why. I’m doing the best I can, I just can’t keep up."
Vox Day does a smart thing: the only emails he answers are those he chooses to answer publicly ON his blog, because it will benefit (or he wishes to make a point to) his readers. So, if -- as you have done here -- someone writes in something Vox thinks will benefit everyone, he answers it ON the blog. The rest of us know he won't answer us if we're just adding a comment.. (And thus, most of us don't try to tie up his time with commenting such as one does on a social.)
You've just here / above - - and you regularly -- answered an email that you believe will benefit us all. Please consider making that your OWN boundary. I'd guess most of us would prefer you spend the time on PP2 -- and on having a life with your lovely wife and family. You're NOT a tele-med doc (and thus not getting paid in time or money!), and you don't need to try to clarify everyone and anyone's reading, misreading, or extending the great info you already provide!
Your 'guilt' for not answering every single human on the planet who writes you is inappropriate. If you were presenting to us AT some conference, you STILL wouldn't / couldn't answer every question from the (limited by # of seats) audience (unlimited online!), and I hope you would not feel guilty for that!
Ah, Vox Day. Hadn't thought of him in ages. I've never read his blog, but I did read his great book "SJWs Always Double Down." Had a major impact on my thinking.
I've thought about doing as you suggested, but... The emails from many of my readers are on subjects that would be of interest to all, but there are a lot of them. The entire Arrow would be taken up with them. Every week. So I would have to pick and choose. Then those who's emails didn't get chosen would feel ill used.
I do read all the emails. But most of the time, I don't have the time right then to formulated an intelligent response, so I put them off thinking I'll get back to them later. Problem is, they stack up, then I'm confronted with spending hours trying to answer them.
I'll figure something out. Thanks for your suggestion. I appreciate it.
Another great read for Friday morning (talk about a much-appreciated steady state - even if it is weekly it's vital!). I watched the whole Tucker Carlson interview - totally amazing and depressing that such malevolence goes on and no one is accountable to honesty and integrity. No one. Your story about dealing with the regulators is positively Kafkaesque and just confirms what we all know but don't really want to think about. Thanks again for great work - and a really interesting discussion about clearance, which I'm sending to the 'hubs' - clearance definitely needed after a tussle with Lyme disease and a course of antibiotics. Ugh. And hospital food? Talk about malevolence!!
they assume to diet is over.
Although I suppose "to diet" does make sense, did you mean "the diet is over"?
The dotted horizontal line on the fasting glucose graphic show the demarcation between
Shouldn't it be "shows the demarcation"?
which, if it pure spirits, contains zero carbs
which, if it's pure spirits . . .
And entire industry has grown up in Washington, DC
An entire industry?
they work in and institution outside of China,
. . .in an institution (I think your autocorrect had fun changing "an" to "and"
My experience was totally Kafkaesque. And totally disturbing. When you grow up in the US--at least when I did; I can't comment on today--you are inculcated with how much freedom we have and how the gov't protects all those freedoms. When you run headlong into the reality, it is difficult to comprehend.
As always, thanks for catching the typos. All fixed now.
At 60 I have found that I am much more sensitive to carbs and that eating once a day and being strict with low carb is indeed my answer to maintain weight. Just wondering if you have any additional thoughts about OMAD in this situation regarding your previous recommendation to eat protein twice a day to keep sarcopenia at bay?
Thank you for the years of exceptional work! You have certainly helped my practice of medicine immeasurably.
Are you reading the Trust the Evidence Substack by Tom Jefferson and Carl Heneghen (Don’t think you are because you would have certainly mentioned them more)? They are of the Oxford Cochrane group. Very enlightening. I’m sure you would come to think, like me, that having access to the CRS for drug trials is critical for any analysis of efficacy and safety.
Your posts are a damn treasure. Thanks to your thinking both on sat fat reverse electron transport and on PUFAs, I've been taking off a few pounds I put on at menopause. So hugely grateful! Hilariously, I've been doing this by not only eating my morning cheesy scrambled eggs but eating each bite with a spoonful of sour cream, plus taking Sarah Halberg's advice that "vegetables are a vehicle for fat," and loading on ghee or beef tallow.
Ancel Keys, Diet Theory of Heart Disease, saturated fats, and more all treated in a humorous way. It's all about topics Dr. Eades has written about many times.
Once again I am totally gobsmacked at the extent of the information you have researched and put together in a way that makes sense. As a new subscriber I am embarrassed that my financial reward falls so short of the amount of time and effort you have put in. Each week you restore my faith in a human capacity to give so much for the benefit of others. Thank you!!!!!!!!!!!!
I'm doubtless nowhere near as benevolent as you give me credit for, but thanks for the very nice comment. I appreciate it.
Great read, as always. Re: DC, the founding fathers gotta be rolling over in their graves over the shit-show this government has turned into! Keep up the good work!!
Yes, indeed. One suspects they would be rolling over in their graves. Speaking of the founding fathers, I just came across this hilarious video that will probably be next week's Video of the Week, unless something better comes up. Hard to beat this one for humor.
https://rumble.com/v34c46a-al-sharpton-can-you-imagine-if-the-founding-fathers-tried-to-overthrow-the-.html
Your article about D.C. regulatory both depressed and sickened me. To me, this is part of the tyrannical Administrative State.
OMAD? I don't know if I could eat three eggs, three slices of thick bacon, two cups of milk, one ounce of cheese, eight ounces of ground beef, and twenty grams of collagen in one meal. Not to mention any plant foods.
Hey Mike,
Ah! Did you miss the first book in that series? "SJWs Always Lie: Taking Down the Thought Police
Book 1 of 2: The Laws of Social Justice"
"The Laws of Social Justice" was intended to be a three-book series, the third book would have been: "SJWs Always Project." Instead, the third book is "Corporate Cancer: How to Work Miracles and Save Millions by Curing Your Company." (And {wink} what with your appliance MFGing 'corporate experiences,' you might actually enjoy it!)
And, by happenstance, today I got my "backer's edition' of the latest from Arkhaven Comics: (The Legend) "Chuck Dixon's Avalon." No page numbers but it's a 1" deep beautiful softbound version. Dunno if your comic-loving sons have been following Chuck Dixon's Avalon on Arkhaven -- but this is a bound version the first 12 issues. (I THINK Vox said there's a hardbound coming too -- and maybe even a leather bound one. The new Castalia Bindery is doing trial runs right now.)
I hope you find a graceful balance between "I must answer everyone" and "I cannot possibly answer everyone!" Good luck!
I have seen that plot, or similar, before by Cahill showing the buildup of BHB over time. I am 76 and have been on a ketogenic diet for 12 years. I prick my finger to confirm all of this. My hobby has always been cycling, so it is common for me to ride 50-70 miles and maybe once or twice per year, ride 100 miles. Ten years ago I decided to not eat before and when riding, so at the end of the day it would be 24 hours fasted. The objective, was to maintain mental acuity, and a constant energy availability - no bonking. The first time I did this (60 miles) I pricked my finger and the glucose level was 38 and BHB level was 5.8. I was amazed that I was not dead, but I had plenty of mental acuity. Over the next several years, I continued to do this and the end of day glucose levels came up and the BHB levels went down. I kept wondering how far you could take this without bonking so at age 73 I did 100 miles without eating. Glucose was in the upper 50's and BHB was slightly above 3 at the finish. So what happens now, age 76? Glucose does not change. You basically finish where you started, say about 80 and the BHB will finish between 1.5 and 2.5.
There are many reasons to do do this, but my initial motivation was to maintain mental acuity, which is the case, all day. The second reason is to maintain a stable energy level, which is what happens. I had no trouble sprinting at the end of that fasted 100 mile ride. In my case this is what I call "fat-adapted," and it is a safer and easier approach to riding. Just about everything that has been pushed with regard to sports related nutrition has been wrong.
Thanks for the info. In the original Cahill starvation study from which that graphic was taken (the 2006 study was a recap of the original study in (I think) 1963) some subjects got their blood sugar down to 25 mg/dl, which is almost unthinkable. Those studies could never be done today because Institutional Revue Boards would never permit them. Thought I've never seen it in anyone myself, I'm convinced that many fat adapted people--especially younger ones--do fine with glucose levels in 25-35 mg/dl range.
"And throw in the comments to the Arrow… so, as I say woefully behind.
Anyway, if you’ve emailed me in the last month and haven’t heard back, this is why. I’m doing the best I can, I just can’t keep up."
Vox Day does a smart thing: the only emails he answers are those he chooses to answer publicly ON his blog, because it will benefit (or he wishes to make a point to) his readers. So, if -- as you have done here -- someone writes in something Vox thinks will benefit everyone, he answers it ON the blog. The rest of us know he won't answer us if we're just adding a comment.. (And thus, most of us don't try to tie up his time with commenting such as one does on a social.)
You've just here / above - - and you regularly -- answered an email that you believe will benefit us all. Please consider making that your OWN boundary. I'd guess most of us would prefer you spend the time on PP2 -- and on having a life with your lovely wife and family. You're NOT a tele-med doc (and thus not getting paid in time or money!), and you don't need to try to clarify everyone and anyone's reading, misreading, or extending the great info you already provide!
Your 'guilt' for not answering every single human on the planet who writes you is inappropriate. If you were presenting to us AT some conference, you STILL wouldn't / couldn't answer every question from the (limited by # of seats) audience (unlimited online!), and I hope you would not feel guilty for that!
Ah, Vox Day. Hadn't thought of him in ages. I've never read his blog, but I did read his great book "SJWs Always Double Down." Had a major impact on my thinking.
I've thought about doing as you suggested, but... The emails from many of my readers are on subjects that would be of interest to all, but there are a lot of them. The entire Arrow would be taken up with them. Every week. So I would have to pick and choose. Then those who's emails didn't get chosen would feel ill used.
I do read all the emails. But most of the time, I don't have the time right then to formulated an intelligent response, so I put them off thinking I'll get back to them later. Problem is, they stack up, then I'm confronted with spending hours trying to answer them.
I'll figure something out. Thanks for your suggestion. I appreciate it.
Another great read for Friday morning (talk about a much-appreciated steady state - even if it is weekly it's vital!). I watched the whole Tucker Carlson interview - totally amazing and depressing that such malevolence goes on and no one is accountable to honesty and integrity. No one. Your story about dealing with the regulators is positively Kafkaesque and just confirms what we all know but don't really want to think about. Thanks again for great work - and a really interesting discussion about clearance, which I'm sending to the 'hubs' - clearance definitely needed after a tussle with Lyme disease and a course of antibiotics. Ugh. And hospital food? Talk about malevolence!!
they assume to diet is over.
Although I suppose "to diet" does make sense, did you mean "the diet is over"?
The dotted horizontal line on the fasting glucose graphic show the demarcation between
Shouldn't it be "shows the demarcation"?
which, if it pure spirits, contains zero carbs
which, if it's pure spirits . . .
And entire industry has grown up in Washington, DC
An entire industry?
they work in and institution outside of China,
. . .in an institution (I think your autocorrect had fun changing "an" to "and"
I posted it I found it interesting
I posted that I found it interesting
My experience was totally Kafkaesque. And totally disturbing. When you grow up in the US--at least when I did; I can't comment on today--you are inculcated with how much freedom we have and how the gov't protects all those freedoms. When you run headlong into the reality, it is difficult to comprehend.
As always, thanks for catching the typos. All fixed now.
At 60 I have found that I am much more sensitive to carbs and that eating once a day and being strict with low carb is indeed my answer to maintain weight. Just wondering if you have any additional thoughts about OMAD in this situation regarding your previous recommendation to eat protein twice a day to keep sarcopenia at bay?
I would make my OMAD heavy in protein and earlier in the day. Not necessarily breakfast or lunch, but maybe mid-afternoon.
Good morning Mike!
Thank you for the years of exceptional work! You have certainly helped my practice of medicine immeasurably.
Are you reading the Trust the Evidence Substack by Tom Jefferson and Carl Heneghen (Don’t think you are because you would have certainly mentioned them more)? They are of the Oxford Cochrane group. Very enlightening. I’m sure you would come to think, like me, that having access to the CRS for drug trials is critical for any analysis of efficacy and safety.
Thanks again!
Robert Cooney, MD
I have read a few of their Substack pieces, but I haven't subscribed. I'll do so now. Thanks for reminding me.
Your posts are a damn treasure. Thanks to your thinking both on sat fat reverse electron transport and on PUFAs, I've been taking off a few pounds I put on at menopause. So hugely grateful! Hilariously, I've been doing this by not only eating my morning cheesy scrambled eggs but eating each bite with a spoonful of sour cream, plus taking Sarah Halberg's advice that "vegetables are a vehicle for fat," and loading on ghee or beef tallow.
Thanks for the props. And happy you're losing the menopause [ fill in the blank] pounds.
This is sort of off-topic, but I thought people might like this video about butter: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXkdy9KDC1Q.
Ancel Keys, Diet Theory of Heart Disease, saturated fats, and more all treated in a humorous way. It's all about topics Dr. Eades has written about many times.
Thanks for the video. The guy does a good job, and it's funny.