Tag Archive for: nutrition

Can Fasting Reduce Inflammation?

/in /by

In this Memo, I’ll review the third paper from the recent journal Cell on fasting and summarize what this all may mean for the use of intermittent fasting.

Researchers used both mice and humans as subjects in a series of studies. The objective was to examine how the immune system responded to a fasting protocol. For the study in humans, the subjects fasted for 19 hours after eating, with blood samples taken before and after the fast. In the mice, a variety of protocols were used. The most common was mice were fed for a short time before food was withheld for the remainder of 24 hours.

In mice and humans, circulating monocytes were reduced. This was important because they were pro-inflammatory in nature; thus inflammation decreased in response to the fasting protocol. In some of the studies, this reduction was maintained even with exposure to pathogens. That means the immune response was not compromised even in animals with induced autoimmune diseases.

Fasting Protocols

Three different studies used at least three different approaches to fasting. In the first study, food was withheld completely for 36 hours. In some phases of the second study, calories were reduced by 50% although the vitamins, minerals, and protein were maintained at normal levels. The final study used a fasting protocol we’re most familiar with: eat within a few hours and liquids only the remainder of the day.

The results were similar in sustaining and perhaps improving the immune system of the animals when placed under pathogenic stress. The only issue is what form of dietary restriction worked best? You can’t ask mice how they felt; you can only check immune system markers. In one of the approaches, the skin of the mice was injured at different times of continued fasting. The healing ability continued until the fast went beyond 48 hours; after that wound-healing was impaired.

The Bottom Line

These studies haven’t changed my approach to fasting. If you’re going to fast to rejuvenate your immune system, don’t play games. Reduce caloric intake to 500 to 800 calories per day for two to three days; those studies show the best benefit. Be sure to select small quantities of the healthiest foods.

Fasting is not abstinence. The current approaches to intermittent fasting are really intermittent abstinence. The idea is to abstain from food completely for 12 to 18 hours while still drinking liquids. That may not be possible for everyone. Some medications have to be taken in relation to food intake. Pre-diabetics and type 2 diabetics should still monitor blood sugar, especially if exercising during the fasting times. The current intermittent fasting approach is more about controlling when you eat than anything else, and that’s something you should do anyway.

I believe in fasting. That’s why I wrote Real-Life Detox—so you could do it right and gain the most benefit. The critical thing is to find a way to eat that you can sustain for the rest of your life, and that includes occasional fasts.

Eat less. Eat better. Move more. That’s always the goal.

What are you prepared to do today?

        Dr. Chet

References:
1. Cell. 2019. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2019.07.047.
2. Cell. 2019. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2019.07.049.
3. Cell. 2019. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2019.07.050

Fasting and Immune Function

/in /by

Intermittent fasting is the latest health fad. When I say fad, I mean there are as many definitions of what it means as there are experts. In a recent edition of the journal Cell, three papers were published that provided some insight into the effects of three different types of intermittent fasting on three different systems involved in immune function. That’s our topic of the week. I’ll present each study and comment on the implications on Saturday.

In the first paper, researchers used juvenile mice to examine changes in immune function in sections of the intestine called Peyer’s patches (PP). These patches form an important part of the immune system by monitoring intestinal bacteria populations and preventing the growth of pathogenic bacteria in the intestines. The mice were fasted for 36 hours. Results were compared with normally fed mice that served as controls.

During fasting, immune cells were disrupted and thus compromised the typical immune response; specifically, B cells were sent to bone marrow. It’s difficult to say whether this is a protective mechanism or not. The B cells were returned to the PP during re-feeding. There were many more parts of the study, but the bottom line was that the immune system was compromised during fasting and remained impaired for a time after re-feeding.

We’ll take a look at the second study on Thursday.

What are you prepared to do today?

        Dr. Chet

References:
1. Cell. 2019. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2019.07.047.
2. http://bit.ly/2lxYIRa.

How Methionine Affects Cancer Treatment

/in /by

If you’ve ever been diagnosed with cancer and you start searching the Internet, one of the things that you’ll come across is using a vegetarian diet to help treat the cancer. I’ve recommended it myself combined with conventional treatment. The question is why? Yes, the phytonutrients from plants are healthier, but is there something in animal products that’s detrimental?

A research group examined the impact of the amino acid methionine on a pathway of one-carbon metabolism; this pathway is the target of a variety of cancer interventions that involve chemotherapy and radiation. They demonstrated that removal of methionine from the diet of mice and humans resulted in more effective treatment in two types of cancer. Chemotherapy and radiation were more effective in both types of cancer once the diet was changed.

There are a couple of important points. First, this was tested on only two types of cancer. There’s no reason to think it would benefit every type of cancer treatment because this one-carbon pathway is not a target for every treatment. Second, because methionine is found in all meat and seafood, it would mean giving up all meat for the duration of treatment.

For myself, I’d give up meat and seafood during treatment whether we have the research or not. It wouldn’t have to be forever and combined with giving up refined carbs to reduce the risk of C diff, it could lead to a better chance for treatments to work. And that’s the key. It’s not in place of treatment; it’s combined with treatment. The goal is to put the odds in your favor. This seems like a simple way to do that.

What are you prepared to do today?

        Dr. Chet

Reference: Nature Vol 572: 397–401 (2019).

Should Your DNA Guide Your Diet?

/in /by

In an opinion piece, a college professor in the U.K. who had written about personalized nutrition wanted to find out whether she should change her diet based on her genetic profile. She decided to send her DNA to Norway for analysis.

Her genetic profile indicated that she was at risk for having high cholesterol and an increased risk for cardiovascular disease. To deal with that, she became a vegetarian. She also takes high levels of B vitamins because she doesn’t process one of the B vitamins very well. Her point was that knowing her genetics gave her the motivation to take control of her diet and lifestyle. She now advocates that all of us should take control of our health through personalized nutrition based on our DNA analysis.

I’m not so sure. I think genetics are one piece of a complex puzzle. What causes the genes to express themselves? What turns them off? More than anything, what role does the microbiome play when combined with the genes? We still don’t know the answers to any of those questions.

Someday we may be at a point where we can be very specific about nutrition, but we’re not there yet because we not only don’t know the answers—we don’t know the correct questions to ask. For reliable results, it still comes down to what I always tell you: Eat better. Eat less. Move more.

What are you prepared to do today?

        Dr. Chet

Reference: http://bit.ly/2ZclpII

Nutrition Education: The Best Solution

/in /by

The scientific paper about nutrition education programs from South America was an opinion piece derived from a student’s dissertation defense. It addressed nutrition labels in Brazil: the labels were too focused on the caloric content instead of the ingredient information.

The paper gives an example of two foods that have 97 calories but are vastly different in nutritional value. Chewy fruit-flavored candy had 21 grams of carbs, no protein, 1.5 grams of saturated fat, and no fiber; 14 almonds had 3.6 grams of carbohydrate, 3.5 grams of protein, 8.4 grams of healthy fat, and 2.1 grams of fiber. The almonds also had several vitamins and minerals while the chewy fruit candy had none.

The question is whether labels alone can change the nutritional health of a nation. Hard to say. Brazil came up with a simple public health approach using three recommendations:

  1. Choose whole, minimally processed foods
  2. Cook those foods yourself
  3. Eat those foods with other people

I think that’s an excellent approach. It means that people may have to shop a little more often and spend more time preparing food. But when you consider travel to get take-out or fast food, or the expense of food delivery, we can get better and fresher quality foods with fewer preservatives and more nutrition for around the same price.

Eating those foods with other people, at a minimum, means that families eat at least one meal together daily, possibly two if we include breakfast. The other possibility is to invite neighbors, friends, or other family members. We don’t have to fix feasts; just fresh, healthier foods that are simple to cook and share.

The Bottom Line

I think the Brazilian approach could work in the U.S. If we were to use the public health nutrition education program from WWII with an emphasis on the benefits of the foods for our health along with videos people could use to prepare the foods simply, and even scale that down to individual communities where small groups could learn how to shop and cook, we can change the health of the nation.

I also think it begins with parents: they’ll have to lead the way if they expect children to eat better. When we visited Paula’s cousin, who has three children under two (a toddler girl and identical twin baby boys), we remarked at the variety of food their daughter was willing to eat. Her dad said that she may be the only kid in preschool asking, “Excuse me, where is the hummus?” It may mean that parents will have to learn more about healthier foods and how to prepare them. I think it’s a small price to pay to improve their kids’ potential for better health.

What are you prepared to do today?

        Dr. Chet

Reference: Adv. Nutr. 2019;10:549–556.

How Can We Improve Nutrition and Public Health?

/in /by

I recently read a couple of articles, one from a newspaper and another from a journal, that talked about South American countries and how their governments should deal with the obesity epidemic and how some are approaching this issue. There may be lessons we can use here for us in the U.S. and other parts of the world.

Some historical perspective: the last public health initiative that actually worked well in the U.S. was during WWII. To direct more meat to the people fighting the war, the government enlisted any and all means to convince the public that organ meats were actually delicacies. Instead of a simple call to support the war movement, the pitch was to help consumers understand how organ meats such as brains, intestines, liver, and kidneys were nutritious. Along with that, they provided recipes for how to prepare these special parts of cows and pigs. It worked and those cuts were really considered delicacies. After the war ended, the special nature of these parts gradually drifted away.

In my opinion, that was the most successful public health education program ever done. When you consider all that’s been done related to educating the public about cholesterol, fat, trans fat, and sugar, nothing has ever gotten people to change their habits; the nutrition facts label is often more confusing that helpful. It’s obvious we need help, but what and how? We’ll take a look at what these countries in South America have tried on Thursday.

What are you prepared to do today?

        Dr. Chet

Making Burgers Leaner

/in /by

The series of Memos on meatless burgers generated many interesting comments. With the major holiday for grilling just two days away, I want to show you how to reduce calories in beef burgers.

First, use a leaner cut of meat for your burgers. Ground sirloin is often designated 90/10, ground round 85/15, ground chuck as 80/20, and hamburger meat as 70/30. The first number is the percentage of protein while the second is the percentage of fat by weight, but the grams of fat are vastly difference. A 4-ounce burger made of ground sirloin has eight grams of fat while the most commonly used cut for burgers at 80/20 has 21 grams of fat. That’s a difference of close to 120 calories, and those calories come from fat.

Second, you can consider the amount of fat lost while grilling. For 80/20 it can be up to seven grams of fat or about 60 calories while 90/10 only loses about one gram of fat or just 10 calories. However, the difference in shrinkage would be significant. The four ounces can drop to 2.6 ounces with the 80/20, but you lose just under one ounce in the 90/10. That means the ground sirloin will give you a bigger burger with a lot less fat.

How do you decide? It depends on whether burgers are a staple of your diet. If you have a burger or two only on outdoor-grilling holidays, who cares? If you grill burgers a couple times of week, the fat and calories begin to add up. Add lots of veggies——tomato, lettuce, onion, pickle—and use a whole wheat bun; check the calories in the buns because they can vary greatly.

You can have your burger, meatless or beef, and enjoy it, too. Of course, there are a whole lot more options for grilling, but to me there’s nothing like a good burger grilled outdoors.

Have a Happy 4th of July and enjoy your Independence Day celebration. I’ll be back next week with another health topic to discuss in detail. If you’re not in the U.S., I hope you’ll grill along with us.

What are you prepared to do today?

        Dr. Chet

The Bottom Line on Meatless Burgers

/in /by

There are a couple more differences between the meatless burgers and beef burgers. To get the red color, the Impossible Burger uses soy leghemoglobin from the roots of soy plants, while the Beyond Burger uses beet juice. Both are vegan and give the burgers their red color. The Impossible Burger also adds some B vitamins and minerals. The Beyond Burger seems to add only some iron.

Are the meatless burgers healthy or not? From a strict look at fat content, no. Cholesterol level, yes. Sodium content, no, depending on how much salt you add to your beef burger; if you add more than one-sixth teaspoon of salt to your burger, you’ve lost that advantage. In effect, they’re very comparable to 80-20 burgers you would cook.

The real difference is that the meatless burgers are sourced from vegetable protein. Even that may strike up a debate because one uses soy protein while the other uses pea protein. Some people try to avoid soy, although there’s no real reason for it with the exception of being allergic to soy. (Check The Bottom Line on Soy Protein in the Store).

The other difference is that they both have carbohydrates and fiber because they’re sourced from plants. While there’s not a lot of fiber, that’s an advantage over beef.

The critical factor is how the burgers are prepared and presented. The final fat count will depend on how long the burgers are cooked: the longer any burger cooks, the more fat it loses to the grill. The presentation also matters. Buns, mayonnaise, cheese (for vegetarians who eat dairy), ketchup, and other condiments can take a 250 calorie burger and explode it to 700 calories or more.

There’s no information available about the environmental effects of meatless burgers, but usually vegan foods are environmentally friendlier than animal products even with the shipping and processing necessary for faux foods.

Beyond Patties

You can find Beyond Meat burger patties in some grocery stores in addition to their brand of plant-based bratwurst sausage, Italian sausage, and meat crumbles. Would your chili or meatloaf taste different with faux beef? We’ve tried cooking with other brands of vegan “beef” and noticed only a lack of fat, although if we use beef, we usually rinse it after browning it to remove most of the fat. The lower cholesterol in the meatless beef would be a big nutritional plus, but of course all this scientifically created food comes at a price: expect to pay two or three times as much as for plain old ground beef.

The Bottom Line

On paper, the meatless burgers could potentially be healthier than beef burgers. Whether they’re healthy or not is a different story. I haven’t seen research on how the meatless burgers respond to flames and whether they may produce undesirable chemicals. On top of that, the presentation mentioned earlier also matters.

Most likely whether they’re successful or not depends on the taste. I haven’t tasted either yet but I’ve planned a tasting barbecue soon, and I’ll let you know what I find out. Until then, it’s beef burgers for me. It would be exciting to have a plant-based burger that meets the taste test. Let me know how you feel if you try them.

What are you prepared to do today?

        Dr. Chet

Defining Healthier Burgers

/in /by

Other than being plant-based, how do these burgers compare for being healthy? In order to know that, we must define “healthy.” Beef is criticized, no matter how it’s raised and processed, for having too much unhealthy fat. How about the Impossible and Beyond Meat burgers?

A burger generally uses 80/20 beef, which means 80% protein to 20% fat by weight. That isn’t how it turns out in calories. A typical four-ounce beef patty has 280 calories with 20 grams of protein and 22 grams of fat. There’s also 80 mg of cholesterol.

Both faux burgers offer 20 grams of protein, but then the differences begin. The Impossible Burger has 14 grams of fat in a four-ounce burger with no cholesterol. The Beyond Burger has 18 grams of fat and no cholesterol. There’s a little less fat in the vegan burgers, but it’s fat that makes a burger a burger so they’re about tied.

One difference is in sodium levels. Beef does not have sodium added, so it starts with about 80 mg of sodium while the vegan burgers come in with close to 400 mg of sodium each—but you know you’re going to salt that burger before you eat it, so to be fair, you need to factor in whatever salt you add. What I don’t know is whether the sodium is critical to the vegan burgers or not. Because it’s a manufactured product, does the sodium have to be there as a preservative or something to that effect? Could they be manufactured with less sodium without sacrificing taste?

I’ll finish this up this weekend so you can get the menu set for the 4th of July.

What are you prepared to do today?

        Dr. Chet

Are You Ready for Meatless Burgers?

/in /by

Grilling season is here and that means all kinds of meat get char-broiled. I love a good burger, but that leaves a growing segment of the population out of luck: vegans and vegetarians. Grilled vegetables are great, from asparagus to zucchini, but some people love the sensation of chowing down on a burger. They miss out.

There are veggie burgers out there. I’ve had Boca Burgers and black bean burgers as well. They may be shaped like a burger, but the taste often leaves me feeling cheated. That may not be the case any more with two new additions: the Impossible Burger and the Beyond Meat Burger. Even before I could dig into the background of each, there have been a number of articles questioning whether these burgers are actually healthier than regular burgers. That’s what we’ll focus on this week: what’s in these burgers and whether they’re healthier than a regular burger.

In checking the labels, one difference is the protein source. The Impossible uses soy-based proteins while the Beyond uses pea protein. One thing to note is that they’re both proteins because they have all the necessary amino acids or can make them from the essential amino acids contained within. I’ll get into the rest of the ingredients on Thursday to check whether they’re healthier than beef burgers.

What are you prepared to do today?

        Dr. Chet