15 Comments

I've never understood or ascribed to the Keto diet. It always seemed to me that the diet consists of too much protein and too much fat. Thank you for this series and explanation re. the research. I've ascribed to a whole food/natural food/plant diet for more than 50 years and I am very healthy.

Expand full comment
author

The proof is in the plant-based pudding! I have grave fears about people currently in their 20s and 30s who are jumping on the keto bandwagon, while we have no idea what will happen to them in 10, 20 or 30 years' time.

Expand full comment

Thanks Robyn. I concur with your summary. In all a well balanced fresh wholefood as organic as possible seasonal diet, sunshine fresh air n clean water. Ahh

Expand full comment
author

It's not rocket science, is it? Eat your fruit and veg, just like your granny told you, move your butt around the place, and get outdoors. But where's the money in that ;-)?

Expand full comment

I urge everyone to read the Steffanson-Bellvue experiment conducted in Canada about 90 odd years ago. I believe 2 men embarked on an Inuit diet for 12 months for the purpose of health results

After fine tuning this ancient diet , it was discovered a diet rich in liver, no more than 15% flesh and the balance in fats provided optimal wellness. Note zero greens, dairy, eggs, beans, fruit, rice, grains!!!

Many people claim this diet is proof people can exist on a diet of steaks and nothing else, this is false.

Read the report and digest its contents.

Weston Price was also a pioneer of diets and published many books on the subject.

There is no such thing as a one diet fits all. Your body will clearly express if the food going in is right or wrong. Liquid stools are a clear signal of issues. Wind is another alarm bell, this signals gut fermentation, very toxic issue. Reflux is another cause for concern, the biome is out of balance.

Know one rule in Life, abuse is normal, endless abuse will end in very poor outcomes.

Know when to stop and rebuild.

It took me years to find my optimal diet. I call it the Waxxed Stool Rocket Diet. No need to explain right? If your bowel movements are WSR's , you have found the optimal diet for your system.

If you suffer zero conditions, you are right on the money.

Never listen to anyone telling you what to eat, just avoid all processed products, products are not food, Produce is!!

Example, I very rare;y eat fruit, it makes me gasteric, too much sugar. My system works better with citrus. To get from ill to well can take years. Keep notes, yes it is a Science.

No matter what diet you settle for always add iodine, Selenium and Mg.

Plenty of work has been done on these very vital minerals.

Always consider Farmer and never Pharma!!

Expand full comment
author

This Substack is a place for discussing good-quality scientific studies that shed light on the optimal diet for human health and longevity. The Stefansson and Anderson experiment, which was - not coincidentally - funded by the American Meat Institute, a trade association representing the US meat and poultry industries, is not in this category. The fact that two men (one 38, one 48) didn't develop conditions detectable with tests available in the 1920s, after living (they claimed) on meat for a year, tells us nothing about the effect of such a diet on the healthspan and lifespan of human beings when followed long them.

Likewise, Weston A. Price was a dentist with no training in any discipline which would have given him the knowledge and skills to make scientifically accurate observations of the connections between nutrition and health. His whistle-stop visits to various societies are about as far from valid nutritional epidemiology as current policies are from true public health.

It is perfectly normal and natural to have some 'wind', as you put it, which is simply a by-product of bacterial fermentation of undigested components of food. The bacterial fermentation of undigested carbohydrates (fibre, resistant starch, complex sugars) produces a wealth of beneficial compounds called short chain fatty acids such as butyrate, acetate and propionate. Entire scientific papers have been written about the manifold benefits of SCFAs, e.g. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24388214/, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4756104/, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32865024/. Hydrogen and methane gases, which make up the majority of bowel gases, are simply by-products of this beneficial process. If you don't have any bowel gas, you're not producing any SCFAs.

Bacterial fermentation of undigested proteins, unabsorbed fats and bile which are found in excess in the colons of people who eat a diet high in animal foods, on the other hand, produce foul-smelling and highly toxic gases and compounds associated with colorectal cancer, systemic inflammation and autoimmune disease - which I'll be delving into in part 6 of this series.

I agree that farmers, not pharma, are the key to good health, assuming they are practising forms of agriculture that maintain the health of the soil.

Expand full comment

They did not live on ''meat'' for 12 months. They lived on a diet of 85% fats and 15% livers and flesh. Have you read the study? It was only after the flesh % was reduced that the body showed benefits. The mantra of today that fats and oils cause ill health is 100% false.

Fats and oils do not cause any ills or harms. Dr Robert Lustig has proved beyond doubt exactly what is causing today's mass health issues. I suggest you look him up.

Expand full comment
author

I suggest you actually read my articles, including the references, before making any further comments.

Expand full comment

Interesting. I've seen arguments presented that sugar is 'bad' not for directly feeding cancerous cells, but for creating the acidic PH levels in surrounding tissues which encourage their growth. Which, if true for some people, would mean the Ketogenic diet would yield good personal/anecdotal results I guess.

Here's a laugh on sugar is poison: (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cjbxgHK16JM&list=PLnc2Frk9X1hjLqy5X0x7Rvm-FofJ5SMR8)

Expand full comment
author

The notion that acidic pH levels surrounding malignant tumours encourage their growth is actually an instance of reverse causation. The metabolic activity of tumours causes them to excrete acidic waste products which cause their immediate surrounds to be more acidic.

I've seen many 'alternative' types claim that cancer cannot thrive in an alkaline environment. That's plainly untrue, because leukaemia thrives in the alkaline (pH 7.4) environment of the blood.

In any case, it's debatable that sugar intake causes a more acidic bloodstream. While it is true that the abnormally high blood sugar level seen in uncontrolled diabetes results in ketoacidosis (acidic bloodstream related to high blood sugar level secondary to lack of insulin), this doesn't mean that if the average non-diabetic person eats lots of sugar, that their blood pH will turn acidic. Obviously I'm not advocating a diet that is high in added sugars, because by definition, that's a junk food diet. However, eating foods that contain natural sugars, such as fruit, does not result in an acidic bloodstream pH; quite the opposite.

Expand full comment

Empowered is such a satisfying place to learn. Thankyou thankyou.

Expand full comment
author

That makes me so happy because it's exactly what I wanted to create in starting this Substack - a place where people can learn together, engage in conversations, challenge each others' ideas in a respectful way, and regain the autonomy that public education stole from most of us.

Expand full comment

Perhaps, but don't animal proteins also tend to be acidic?

Expand full comment
author

Animal proteins are higher in sulphur-containing amino acids which do yield acidic byproducts.

Expand full comment

I'm no naturopath, but that has also been my understanding, i just hadn't thought of it until you asked! Then we'd need to ask is this true for all livers, microbiomes, genetics, etc.

Expand full comment