I’ve gotten a number of questions over the timing of taking the supplements advocated in the Wheat Belly lifestyle. So let’s talk about this issue. It’s actually quite simple.
Probiotic–Timing is unimportant. It’s also unclear whether they can or should be taken with food or on an empty stomach, as there are no clear data on this. So, until we have clarification, take it any old time. The only precaution is that it is probably best to not take your probiotic with anything really hot, e.g., coffee, as some species are heat-sensitive and will not survive. It is probably best to not take your probiotic at the same time as iodine, as iodine is an effective antimicrobial and may kill off some of the probiotic species.
Prebiotic fibers–Timing here is likewise unimportant, or at least no one has ever identified any timing-dependent issues. Whether you take your daily doses of prebiotic fibers as a Detox Shake/smoothie, inulin/FOS/GOS powders in other foods, small servings of legumes, or other means, timing does not seem to matter.
Iodine–Timing here is also unimportant. We are supposed to obtain iodine from consuming plants and animal products that were coastal, i.e., near the ocean, the world’s repository of iodine, as well as sharing the thyroid gland of animals we kill. In other words, these are events in which timing was not important. So your timing of iodine supplementation, whether as potassium iodide drops or kelp tablets, also does not matter. Just take it.
Fish oil–Timing here does matter, but for somewhat complex reasons. One of the wonderful ways in which the omega-3 fatty acids, EPA and DHA, exert their cardiovascular and metabolic benefits is by accelerating the clearance of postprandial (after-meal) byproducts of digestion (chylomicrons first, followed by VLDL lipoprotein particles from the liver). Heart disease is caused in this postprandial period and the omega-3 fatty acids, by a number of means, such as activation of the enzyme, lipoprotein lipase, helps clear these particles from the bloodstream more rapidly. But the effect only lasts a few hours. So taking your fish oil capsules—remember: NOT krill oil or flaxseed oil—just just before or during a meal is the best policy to maximally subdue postprandial lipoprotein floods. Ideally, you’d take it before/during every meal but, as a practical matter, taking it before/during two meals per day spaced apart, e.g., breakfast and dinner, works just fine, too. It’s also not a good idea to take fish oil on an empty stomach, as it can cause stomach upset.
Vitamin D–Vitamin D is an important factor in the human circadian rhythm, the day-night cycle of the human body. We are supposed to obtain vitamin D via exposure to sunlight. But, for many of us, daily sun exposure over a substantial surface is not easily achieved due to climate, latitude, schedules, clothing covering a large surface area, as well as the decline in the ability to activate vitamin D with sun exposure as we age. Thus, we take vitamin D. But your body senses some of the effects of sunlight with oral vitamin D and, taken later in the day, it can inhibit sleep, just as exposure to a bright sun at 10 p.m. would keep you awake. So vitamin D is best take in the morning.
Magnesium–The timing of magnesium is not important. BUT magesium cannot be taken as a single dose, as the full 400-500 mg of elemental magnesium taken all at once causes an osmotic diarrhea. So we break it into 2- or 3-doses to avoid the loose bowels.
In summary, the timing of the “core” supplements in the Wheat Belly lifestyle goes like this:
Breakfast/a.m.: iodine, fish oil, vitamin D, magnesium, prebiotic fibers
Lunch/afternoon: optional fish oil, optional magnesium, optional prebiotic fibers
Dinner/evening: fish oil, magnesium, optional prebiotic fibers
Is there anything you should avoid at the same time as magnesium that hinders absorption or interacts, besides iron?
Sara wrote: «Is there anything you should avoid at the same time as magnesium that hinders absorption or interacts, besides iron?»
Can you provide a reference for the iron conflict?
In a look around the web, and in a book dedicated to micronutrients, I don’t see that competition mentioned. I do see suggestions to bias Mg intake toward evening to improve sleep, and to not take it at the same time as Zinc.
That said, iron itself, typically taken by women, and often avoided by men (as a supplement), does have timing considerations of its own. I see suggestions to take it on an empty stomach, away from Vitamin E, Zinc, and Calcium. Calcium supplementation is not presently recommended by Dr. Davis.
________
Blog Reply Associate (click my user name for details)
The first place I saw it mentioned was on a pamphlet for one of the iron supplements I was given by my doctor. I don’t think I really looked it up afterwards, just heard from others that they interfere with each other’s absorption. Also, could be coincidental, but my ferritin went up much more when I started taking iron and magnesium several hours apart.
Sara wrote: «Also, could be coincidental, but my ferritin went up much more when I started taking iron and magnesium several hours apart.»
Not coincidental – this is more about the Iron than the Mg. The micronutrient book I have recommends taking Iron at midday, away from all other supplements, and that Iron conflicts with 10 other supplements that book recommends.
The book either doesn’t mention which 10, or has scattered that information elsewhere in the book, and not bothered to show it in the Index. So Mg might be one of them, but you won’t easily learn that from these authors. I’m not going to mention the name of the book, because this is only one of the frustrations with it.
________
Blog Reply Associate (click my user name for details)
Very helpful. And it’s not an impossibly long list of stuff to take.
I always chuckle when I read the preference of fish oil over krill oil in Dr. Davis’s blogs. Dr. Mercola says just the opposite, but then again he sells a product that contains krill. I received a long article today from Dr. Al Sears advocating krill because he claims it has more DHA and is absorbed better than fish oil. Actually, it was written like an article, but it was really an ad promo for a supplement he is selling.
The difference is Dr. Davis doesn’t sell fish oil. He just tells you to buy a good quality brand of it.
Malcolm Achtman wrote: «…advocating krill because he claims it has more DHA and is absorbed better…»
As I have said before, the problem with krill is mainly economic. You’ll get sticker shock at what it costs for 3000-3600mg per day of DHA+EPA. Also, the potency claims are based on conjectures about the benefits of the astaxanthin, which may just be marketing puffery.
I don’t have a real problem with health advocates selling supplements. They may be expected to sell what they recommend. The truth about the supps market is, alas:
▼ most of what’s on the shelf is either useless or includes adverse junk
▼ it’s really expensive to offer quality products, and flat forget about custom multi-vitamins
Both Drs. Davis and Perlmutter used to offer supplements, and have since departed that business. So, we’re on our own, if no specific brands and products are endorsed. Get a subscription to consumerlab.com (essentially a Consumer Reports for supplements), and factor in that they have a consensus medical bias.
Watch out for fillers, binders, encapsulation and supposed “inert” ingredients. CL isn’t really alert on that yet, and wheat by-products, sugars, PUFA oils, rice flour, calcium and other things we want to avoid are common.
________
Blog Reply Associate (click my user name for details)
Here is another case for krill.
https://youtu.be/SDzLFzuotiE
John Es wrote: «Here is another case for krill.»
Here’s the sort of synopsis that I encourage people to post when referencing video links.
That’s a 10-minute video by a Dr. Rhonda Patrick. The principal arguments are that:
• Krill DHA & EPA may be more bio-available than most forms of fish oil, to the extent that we might be able to take 37% less vs. fish oil.
• Krill DHA might cross the blood-brain-barrier more easily.
• Astaxanthin is advanced as a benefit.
As comments below the video point out, these conjectures are mostly based on rodent data, and so may not hold up for humans.
And Dr. Patrick closed by admitting that she herself is taking both fish oil and krill.
Even if it is possible to reduce the target intake of DHA&EPA to, say, 2000 mg/day by using krill, krill is still going to be a strikingly expensive way to get it.
________
Blog Reply Associate (click my user name for details)
And then there’s Dr. Michael Greger with his new “How To Not Die” book – now on the NY Times best-seller list. His first chapter about cardiovascular disease says never take any fish oil as it increases heart disease.
Malcolm Achtman wrote: «And then there’s Dr. Michael Greger…»
Described by one site as: “…planet Earth’s foremost pioneer in decoding and presenting vegan scientific studies to the masses.”
One of his colleagues with no apparent axe to grind puts it “… I started to watch every day and it soon became clear that there was an agenda here. Every video either spoke about the benefits of some plant component in the diet or the harm caused by some chemical in animal products. Dr. Greger has swallowed the vegan philosophy hook, line and sinker; not that there’s anything wrong with that. …He promotes veganism with religious fervour … You will never see Dr. Greger refer to a study that shows anything positive about meat, … I think his videos are worth watching, but keep in mind that there is some cherry picking of data.”
«His first chapter about cardiovascular disease says never take any fish oil as it increases heart disease.»
Dr. Davis’ DHA&EPA recommendations are based on actual results in his practice, which has a focus on preventing, arresting and reversing heart disease. Dietary recommendations are under continuous review, based on actual outcomes, with a bias toward adopting things that appear to be consistent with human history.
The need for DHA&EPA are a key theoretical problem for vegetarians. The only plant source for them (that doesn’t include an overload of ALA, or an overload of Omega 6) is marine algae. This implies that being a strict vegetarian or vegan cannot be an ancestral human diet for the majority of genotypes. DHA&EPA are perhaps at the top of the list of things that therefore must be deprecated, explained away or otherwise flat out forbidden for the faithful.
It is possible, by the way, to follow the Wheat Belly lifestyle as a vegetarian or vegan. See:
https://www.cureality.com/forum/topics.aspx?id=18308
A number of those essential nutrients have serious implications for dietary philosophy.
________
Blog Reply Associate (click my user name for details)
Hi Bob,
I totally agree on all points. Thanks for the reminder. I get annoyed when people simply post a link.
John Es wrote: «Thanks for the reminder. I get annoyed when people simply post a link.»
Yeah, I sometimes wonder if the looming post-literate future of human communication is reduced to video links and Facebook posts consisting entirely of nouveau hieroglyphics (the emojis being added to Unicode at a ferocious rate).
I also wonder if the people putting up videos are doing it because:
☯ they think it saves them time, or
☯ because they think their audience can’t/won’t read.
Excluding videos that record some live event, or have material visual content…
When no transcript or text edition is available, I consider made-for-web talking-head videos, and pure audio streamers, to be generally disrespectful of the audience’s time and critical comprehension skills (what was just said, again?).
Video and audio presentations also don’t really save the author time. They usually have to prepare a script anyway, spend time editing in post-production, and then end up with a product that can only be revised with substantial effort (and consequently almost never is).
On the Wheat Belly & Cureality sites, all of the video content is also available as text. ☺
________
Blog Reply Associate (click my user name for details)
Hi I am starting on the WB diet and could use your help. Got all the books and am overwhelmed. When I try to print guides like these it take a huge number of pages to print. Can you recommend a short cut to wb for beginners, a short version, without all the explanations of why like Dr. Oz has one page versions of his diets. I’m having trouble retaining all the information. Thanks so much!
Grateful wrote: «Got all the books and am overwhelmed.»
If one of the books is the new 10-Day Detox book, start with that. Let us know if there’s anything you are having trouble with.
«When I try to print guides like these it take a huge number of pages to print.»
If you are trying to print articles from this (or any) blog, most browsers will print the article plus all the Comments, which is usually not what we want to do.
Here are a couple of approaches:
1. Print selection from browser (example using Firefox)
◊ Highlight from “When to take…” in the heading to “…optional prebiotic fibers”
◊ Press and hold the [Ctrl] key, then press and release the [p] key.
That should present a Print dialog.
◊ Elect (•) Selection
◊ Click [OK]
If that doesn’t work, try…
2. Copy to word processor and print from there
◊ If you have an office suite on your device, open the word processing application, such as MS Word (Notepad and Wordpad won’t suffice).
◊ Highlight just the blog article contents, as for approach #1.
◊ Copy from the blog. [Ctrl] plus [c], or mouse right-click ☞ Copy
◊ Paste into the word processor. [Ctrl] plus [v] or right-click ☞ Paste
◊ Use the word processor’s print feature.
If you don’t have a word processor, you can download the free LibreOffice suite and use the Writer app in it, which is what I use for printing selected content from blogs.
«Can you recommend a short cut to wb for beginners…»
https://www.wheatbellyblog.com/2012/12/wheat-belly-quick-dirty-2/
is about as simple as it can be put, and that summary is old enough that it doesn’t cover the important topic of gut microbiome.
Tackle what you can in stages. Start by eliminating wheat from your diet, and that means, alas, learning all the aliases it uses to hide in products.
________
Blog Reply Associate (click my user name for details)
i wish i read the bookl 3 years ago
i put my cat on a grain free diet also as most at foods are mainly grains and i seen a few older cats become diabetic.
Monty,
I did too! I found brands that are totally grain free – not just wheat free. Isn’t it interesting that industry is taking grains out of so many brands of pet food but not out of human food? Tells us something doesn’t it?
Best,
CA
Culinary Adventurer wrote: «I did too! I found brands that are totally grain free – not just wheat free.»
Unfortunately, grain-free is exactly zero assurance that the net carbs are lower than the grain-polluted blends. The usual tip-off are that there will be no claim of “low carb”, and any detail about carbohydrates will be mysteriously absent from whatever nutritional data is provided.
http://www.petmd.com/dog/centers/nutrition/evr_multi_what_is_grain_free_pet_food_really
Keep doing the math.
« Isn’t it interesting that industry is taking grains out of so many brands of pet food but not out of human food?»
Is is a fascinating development in pet food marketing. Rachael Ray might have started it, not that her products are any more open about carbs.
________
Blog Reply Associate (click my user name for details)
Will the supplements have no effect if consumed at a time other than Dr. Davis’ directives?
For my omega 3s, I take cod liver oil because unlike the pills, it is natural thus better absorbed. Any comments?
palo wrote: «Will the supplements have no effect if consumed at a time other than Dr. Davis’ directives?»
They may have reduced effect (reduced absorption), undesired effect (excess motility, no help with sleep), or may be canceled out entirely. Each needs to be considered separately.
«For my omega 3s, I take cod liver oil…»
Cod liver oil contains excessive amounts of the retinol form of vitamin A, which blocks the beneficial effects of vitamin D. At the levels of Omega 3 suggested on Wheat Belly (3,000 to 3,600 mg/day), the retinol might even be directly toxic.
Further, cod liver raises the issue of mercury contamination.
«…unlike the pills…»
WB recommends capsules, and not pills, for DHA&EPA, although a bulk bottled oil form might be fine.
________
Blog Reply Associate (click my user name for details)
Bob, what about these 2 that have both omega 3s and vitamin d?
http://www6.netrition.com/nordic_naturals_ultimate_omega_d3.html
Bad link. Sorry! Try these:
http://www2.netrition.com/nordic_naturals_ultimate_omega_d3_sport.html
http://www2.netrition.com/nordic_naturals_ultimate_omega_d3.html
palo wrote: «what about these 2 that have both omega 3s and vitamin d?»
(Nordic Naturals – Ultimate Omega-D3)
Well, that link was 404 (die to dynamic server load balancing, it appears), but I found it. Nordic Naturals has so far been a credible brand. That specific product is fine for Omega 3 DHA&EPA, but if you take enough for 3,000 to 3,600 mg of n3/day, you’ll only be getting 3,000 IU of D3. Many people take 5,000.
So you need to run the numbers on what’s the least expensive way to get all the n3 and D3 desired. Combination products, alas, tend to never be exactly the combination you want (and multi-vitamins are assured to be ideal for exactly no one).
I might also add that I’ve never used Netrition as a supplier, and have no advice there.
________
Blog Reply Associate (click my user name for details)
Can anyone offer a reference, comment or thoughts on the stability of the iodine available in kelp supplements. In Dr. Davis’ article discussing iodine supplementation he mentions the volatility of iodine in salt making it effective for only a short period of time. Is this an issue with kelp supplements as well?
Reference Articled: https://www.wheatbellyblog.com/2012/07/an-iodine-primer/
Sam wrote: «Can anyone offer a reference, comment or thoughts on the stability of the iodine available in kelp supplements.»
I would start with the container.
What is the expiration date?
What is the potency claim (until expiration date, or the worthless “at time of manufactured”)?
You won’t usually be able to see an expiry date on any supplement reseller’s web page, but on the more useful sites you can usually see 360° views of the package, showing the potency claim.
I did find one assertion on the web that “Kelp does not lose its potency.”
http://www.drlwilson.com/articles/KELP.HTM
I’m not sure I’d rely on that without further research.
This topic also raises the question of dose formulation. Kelp tablets are at some risk of containing binders, fillers, and other supposed “inert” ingredients that are not inert. Calcium compounds are the main risk encountered and need to be avoided. This tends to suggest that capsules are a safer choice.
________
Blog Reply Associate (click my user name for details)
Thanks for your input Bob. I ran across Dr.Wilson’s article in my search but was unsure of the source of his claim.
Bob Niland wrote: <>
I was favoring the capsule kelp supplements theorizing that the capsule shell might offer some additional longevity for the contents. I had noticed that some tablets had ingredients like calcium and rice flour. Your prior comments about most people getting to much calcium came to mind as well as Dr. Davis’ admonitions about rice flours and such. Thanks for your thoughts and for all of the responses you make; they are very valuable offerings.
Well that didn’t turn out as expected. It should read:
Bob Niland wrote: This tends to suggest that capsules are a safer choice.
It was brought into question a while back as to whether fish oil has any health or cardiovascular benefit at all. I can’t say officially either way, but the evidence seems to be stacking up against it. Chris Kresser did yet another article about them claiming they may not be as beneficial as previously claimed, may cause harm, or do nothing at all based on meta-analysis of many different studies.
DM wrote: «…whether fish oil has any health or cardiovascular benefit at all.»
Cite the article or study, and I’ll take a look at it.
The Wheat Belly target for DHA&EPA is based on clinical results in Dr. Davis’ practice, with dosage fine-tuned over many years. On the Cureality site the suggested intake is actually higher for people with specific indications.
The problems with most studies on fish oil include but are not limited to:
▼ using a dose too low (typically 1000 mg/day)
▼ subjects remaining on an adverse high-carb, high PUFA diet
▼ focusing on useless metrics, like LDL-C
«Chris Kresser did yet another article…»
Recently? I don’t see it there. His latest is on round 127 of the Perpetual Coffee Debate lately re-started by Dr. Andreas Eenfeldt (DietDoctor).
«…based on meta-analysis of many different studies.»
Treat “meta-analysis” as a warning label until proven otherwise by a critical examination of the paper. It is extremely rare for a meta-analysis or epidemiological study to deliver a meaningful insight (but not impossible, as the Danish vagus nerve / Parkinson’s study demonstrated in 2015).
________
Blog Reply Associate (click my user name for details)
I might further add a couple of things:
1. Dr. Davis arrived at his Omega 3 recommendations starting from a cardiovascular point of view. His colleague Dr. Perlmutter has arrived at the same recommendation, starting from a neurological point of view.
2. Then we have the Japanese paradox, a pesky black swan for consensus cholesterol confusion:
Continuous decline in mortality from coronary heart disease in Japan despite a continuous and marked rise in total cholesterol: Japanese experience after the Seven Countries Study’ International Journal of Epidemiology, 2015, 1614–1624 due: 10.1093/ije/dyv143
The full paper is pay-walled, but Dr. Malcolm Kendrick has explored it in a recent post:
http://drmalcolmkendrick.org/2015/12/21/cholesterol-goes-up-heart-disease-goes-down/
He mentions without further explanation “They did find that the Japanese ate more fish than in most other countries and that, my friends, was that.”
Eating lots of fish means consuming lots of fish oil. For a reference point, 3 standard small cans of sardines per day would also provide 3,000 mg of DHA&EPA. (That I know of, Dr. Kendrick is not an advocate of any specific diet for CVD prevention, which would suffice to explain why he didn’t explore this connection.)
________
Blog Reply Associate (click my user name for details)
http://chriskresser.com/should-you-really-be-taking-fish-oil/
I don’t remember seeing the quality of fish oil used cited in the study. That would be a factor in absorption and effect.
“subjects remaining on an adverse high-carb, high PUFA diet”
So if the subjects followed a low-carb or ketogenic diet, the fish oil (if good enough quality) would have a positive effect as opposed to doing nothing or possibly causing harm? I don’t know what the turnover rate of fish oil is in the body and if there’s a need to take daily fish oil pills. I haven’t been able to find that online. Maybe you know a bit more about it. Maybe they should do a large fish oil study on WB followers or low-carb dieters to see if there’s different long term effects.
Do you just do your own internet research on health topics for getting your information? Thanks for your thorough response.
DM wrote: «link to CK blog post»
Keep our context in mind: Wheat Belly recommends 3,000 to 3,600 mg of DHA+EPA per day, from fish oil, within a context of a grain-free, very low net carb, high specific fats, low PUFA, moderate protein diet that includes attention to things like Iodine, Magnesium, Vitamin D and microbiome.
It is likely that taking 3 grams of FO per day is actually unwise on a consensus diet. Conversely, on the WB diet, taking less than (just guessing) 2,000 mg (2 grams) of DHA+EPA per day may be below the therapeutic threshold.
So let’s look at CK’s cites.
Reference #1 concludes “Dietary supplementation with omega-3 fatty acids should be considered in the secondary prevention of cardiovascular events.” Bottom line: study does not conflict with WB recommendations.
Reference #2 was a “placebo controlled” trial but used only 600 mg of DHA+EPA daily. There was apparently no control of diet. The placebo was not disclosed, and it’s often a confounder, as the majority of nutritional researchers are clueless about what is really inert. Bottom line: at 18% of WB recommendation, dose is too low to provide insight.
Reference #3 was another placebo controlled trial, with even less DHA+EPA (376 mg), delivered in 18 grams of PUFA (margarine)! The paper itself admitted that this was “low dose”. Bottom line: dose too low.
References #4, 5 and 6 were focused on afib. I didn’t look at those because WB makes no claims about fish oil and afib.
Reference #7 was a meta, relying on trials using doses ranging from 400 to 4,800 mg day. There was no focus on subject diets. Placebos were all over the place, or poorly defined, often adverse fats (a negative confounder). Papers (only 14, and the list appears to include the “negatives” above) were selected strictly by keyword search of databases. The keyword list was rather narrow. “Our meta-analysis showed insufficient evidence…”, but they had to ignore (exclude) one trial even to say that. Also, “Among the trials, there was no significant difference in the occurrence of adverse events, such as gastrointestinal troubles or gastrointestinal bleeding, between the intervention and placebo groups.”, which is what happens on otherwise adverse [consensus] diets. Bottom line: iffy analysis of iffy original research.
Reference #8 (another meta) is pay-walled. Bottom line: no way to know.
Reference #9 (another meta) – can’t even find full-text. Bottom line: no way to know.
Reference #10 (another meta, and pay-walled) concludes “our results supply evidence that long-term effect of high dose omega-3 fatty acid supplementation may be beneficial for the onset of cardiac death, sudden death and myocardial infarction among patients with a history of cardiovascular disease.” Bottom line: study does not conflict with WB recommendations.
Reference #11 was a controlled trial that had odd intervention groups. The fish oil amounted to 3 grams daily, but the FO-only group got no other dietary advice. The other groups got pretty bizarre dietary advice. One chart shows that the fish-only advice group had better survival, but these clueless researchers decided it was better to conclude “This result is unexplained…”. Bottom line: seems to support WB recommendation despite the design sabotage.
Reference #12 was a clinical trial of FO on people with metabolic syndrome. The full text is available, but is in Portuguese. The abstract (English) captures the essence of it “We conclude that intake of fish oil resulted in decreased levels of triglycerides and increased the TRAP (total antioxidant capacity) of patients with MS (metsyn); however, increased LDL levels and insulin resistance, were observed.” Bottom line: the FO improved a metric that matters (TG), but violated LDL-C dogma, and they were pretty clueless about when IR is really a problem.
Reference #13: “The present study provides evidence that increased dietary ω-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids and extra virgin olive oil have beneficial synergistic effects on lipid metabolism and oxidative stress in patients with MetS.”, so does not contradict WB.
Reference #14 is pay-walled, so I can only see the abstract. It was actually a trial of soy. No other dietary intervention was done, and I can’t draw any real conclusions from the abstract. Bottom line: no way to know.
Reference #15 was a test of krill oil, which WB discourages. Bottom line: no insight on WB fish oil.
Reference #16 used only 900 mg of DHA+EPA and was “restricted to patients with impaired fasting glucose, impaired glucose tolerance, or diabetes”, with no apparent other dietary intervention. Bottom line: dose too low to be insightful on WB recommendation.
The remaining references were in respect to cancer. Based on what I found by following the earlier ones, I didn’t bother to look. Omega 3 doesn’t strike me at the moment as being a huge factor one way or the other in cancer. The things to focus on in cancer may be: very low carb, grain free, low inflammatory, immune system support (microbiome) and generally avoid mitochondrial antagonists.
«So if the subjects followed a low-carb or ketogenic diet, the fish oil (if good enough quality) would have a positive effect as opposed to doing nothing or possibly causing harm?»
That’s my bet.
«I don’t know what the turnover rate of fish oil is in the body and if there’s a need to take daily fish oil pills.»
There can be side effects to taking too much at once, as the base article here implies by suggesting taking it at multiple meals during the day. I suspect that dosing less often than daily would be unpleasant, and probably ineffective.
«Do you just do your own internet research on health topics for getting your information?»
Basically; plus I can search Cureality, which sometimes has information not easily found elsewhere.
________
Blog Reply Associate (click my user name for details)
Wow. Quite a response. Thanks. I was wondering in the last part, more so if you know at what rate fish oil would be lost in metabolism or whatever else in the body. I’ve heard from a couple different sources (can’t remember where from so I can’t cite) that DHA stays in the brain and body for quite some time. Do you take any fish oil? I’m interested in the supposed brain-boosting effects of DHA and wondering how well it works specifically on a low-carb diet in that regard. I’m wondering if it’s marketing or if fish oil (DHA) would improve brain function (comprehension, learning, etc) in any person in general.
DM wrote: «Wow. Quite a response.»
Thanks. Fish Oil fright articles (which may be just click bait) arise periodically in reader comments on this blog (and on the Cureality forum). I thought it was time to dive into one and see if there was any “there” there. There doesn’t appear to be. I’m always open to being mistaken, and new discoveries, but as usual, the breathless headlines are based on what is sadly typical nutrition research.
«…what rate fish oil would be lost in metabolism or whatever else in the body.»
I can only infer that from the specifics of the supplement recommendations made by Drs. Davis & Perlmutter. Both advocate daily intake. Dr. Davis is clear about splitting it across two meals. Dr. Davis is clear that the DHA+EPA total needs to be above 2,000 mg for benefit (Wheat Belly Total Health, page 278). Dr. Perlmutter is clear that the daily DHA needs to be 1,000 mg.
Trying larger doses at lower frequencies may have unpleasant side effects, and may result in titer dips, but as you can see, I’m beginning to speculate there.
«Do you take any fish oil?»
Yep. Twice a day. Can’t recall the specific product off hand.
«I’m wondering if it’s marketing or if fish oil (DHA) would improve brain function (comprehension, learning, etc) in any person in general.»
Here are some leads on that on Dr. P’s blog:
http://www.drperlmutter.com/daily-dose-dha/
It appears that the answer is yes.
________
Blog Reply Associate (click my user name for details)
That cleared everything up, thanks. Though I didn’t really understand your first paragraph. “I thought it was time to dive into one and see if there was any “there” there”? And the rest that follows?
DM wrote: «Though I didn’t really understand your first paragraph. “I thought it was time to dive into one and see if there was any “there” there”?»
Nutrition articles that rely on nutrition studies tend to be less reliable than the papers they cite. Nutrition papers themselves are, without much exaggeration, about 95% worthless. The only thing even less reliable is mass media reports, usually based on press releases about such papers.
Although we have to remain open to new information that alters, or even falsifies, what we think we know, reading nut. papers is tedious and often a waste of time, thus the cliché that there is no there there.
It also requires learning how to read them. Dr. Davis knows how, and does. Most MDs don’t and don’t – they rely on third parties, who often have an agenda.
I remarked about nut. papers a bit more at:
https://www.wheatbellyblog.com/2015/10/go-ahead-eat-your-meat/comment-page-1/#comment-62697
By the way, there have been a non-trivial number of retractions on fish oil papers. Retractionwatch dot com follows these developments, which of course never get the same headlines as the original Magic Elixir or Terrifying Toxin stories based on these now “oh, oops, nevermind” papers. You can use “fish oil” in their search feature.
________
Blog Reply Associate (click my user name for details)
By the way, there have been a non-trivial number of retractions on fish oil papers.
I was trying to think where I heard certain things about fish oil and ending up coming back to Brian Peskin’s work where he advises against taking fish oil. I think fish oil staying in the body for long periods, and how rapidly it oxidizes/how unstable it is in the body may have been him I heard it from. I don’t remember him citing studies for some of the claims he made and some of his history (charged with some sort of deception about his products) doesn’t help his case out either. I just came across a retracted article of his on ncbi which was against fish oil. I don’t know what his motive is; maybe money.
DM wrote: «…coming back to Brian Peskin’s work…»
Retractions don’t seem to even be his biggest problems:
http://www.quackwatch.com/11Ind/Peskin/peskin.html
«I don’t know what his motive is; maybe money.»
On fish oil papers, after making sure the paper isn’t retracted, another thing to check is investigator bias. Although this doesn’t appear to apply in the Peskin case, the apparent human need for 3 grams per day of DHA+EPA is a huge theoretical problem for vegetarians, who would like to make it go away, by any means necessary.
________
Blog Reply Associate (click my user name for details)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3914521/
1. I am going to try the wheat belly diet. Which books should be the first and the second to buy for instruction in the diet ? Our food budget is quite limited .
2. Wheat was recommended to me several years ago as a primary feed for chickens by a feed specialist who suspected that wheat had been genetically altered, even tho not officially GMO-ed . For the last 3 years I have been giving my 2 dozen chickens ( in daily-moved pasture cages ) mostly whole grain wheat with mixed-grain feed added for variety and extra protein ( all of it comes from our local feed mill ). They eat at least 4 times as much whole grain wheat as they eat mixed-grain feed.
I have just found a source for non-GMO mixed-grain feed without wheat in it. If I continue to give them whole grain wheat from the local mill ( i.e. , gene-altered ) along with the non-GMO mixed-grain feed , I can reduce my overall feed cost by 30 %.
Do you know whether modern wheat affects chickens and other livestock in a manner similar to the way it affects people ?
John H. wrote: «Which books should be the first and the second to buy…»
1. Wheat Belly 10-Day Grain Detox
2. Either of the cookbooks, perhaps the Wheat Belly 30-Minute (Or Less!) Cookbook
«Our food budget is quite limited.»
See: https://www.wheatbellyblog.com/2014/09/lose-grains-save-green-excerpt-wheat-belly-total-health/
«Do you know whether modern wheat affects chickens and other livestock in a manner similar to the way it affects people?»
No, and yes.
Unlike humans, birds are seed eaters, so feeding them seeds of grasses is not an inherently unsuitable diet. If your chickens are like ours, however, what they would actually prefer is a steady diet of insects. ☺
Issues with feeding them modern grains include added medications, pesticide uptake and nutritional distortions.
You are probably already avoiding medicated feed, which is entirely needless, if not frankly adverse, for pastured birds. We have takne this step for our birds. We see chicken feed as a dietary supplement. Our chickens get most of their diet from foraging.
Non-GMO feed avoids grains that ARE pesticides (such as Bt genetics). I’m not sure that other aspects of being GMO present a second-hand food risk to humans. Because chickens foraging on uncontaminated soil are constantly topping-off their gut flora, low level pesticide exposure may be substantially less of a problem than it is for people.
“Organic” seeds or feeds should avoid both GMO issues and pesticide residues – from field application, dessication/staging and fumigants in storage and transport. Organic chicken feed is fairly expensive, and not a step that we have taken.
You might look into the practices advocated by Joel Salatin of Polyface Farms.
«…and other livestock…»
Ruminants are not inherently seed eaters. They are grass eaters. Grain makes them fat, much as it does for people.
________
Blog Reply Associate (click my user name for details)
In the post entitled WHEAT BELLY QUICK AND DIRTY 2 he mentions eggs among the unlimited items. Does he mean that I could eat 8 to 12 eggs from my own hens daily for years on end without encountering something like a kidney or liver overload ?
John H. wrote: «…eggs among the unlimited items.»
“Unlimited” in the Wheat Belly context doesn’t seem to be precisely defined, and I just looked again in several places.
My general impression is that it means:
you could eat that item to satiety as the only ingredient of the meal.
It might also mean:
there is no need to calculate carbohydrate exposure for any reasonable portion size.
It doesn’t mean:
you may consume your body weight in one sitting.
Even water will kill you at some modest fraction of that consumption.
«Does he mean that I could eat 8 to 12 eggs from my own hens daily for years on end without encountering something like a kidney or liver overload?»
The numbers on that suggest to me: yes
You’d have to eat about 36 large eggs at one meal for it to reach 15 grams of carbs. Nobody is going to eat that many.
8 to 12 eggs per day amounts to nil carbs, and isn’t even very many calories. You might starve if that was all you ate. Wheat Belly is a “moderate protein” diet, and that many eggs isn’t much protein either, using protein targets from vaguely similar diets that have numbers for such things.
We have had clarification that for condiment type items, like hummus, “unlimited” is in a condiment context, and the item is presumed to not be a main course dish.
________
Blog Reply Associate (click my user name for details)
Why should I buy the Detox book instead of the original WHEAT BELLY ? I would greatly prefer not to be involved in an e-course as mentioned in the book description.
John H. wrote: «Why should I buy the Detox book instead of the original WHEAT BELLY?»
The Detox book is a step-by-step how-to-get-started that’s ideal for someone who just wants to dive right in.
If that doesn’t appeal to you, then I’d suggest Wheat Belly Total Health, rather than the original book. WBTH covers important material not present in the original Wheat Belly, such as gut flora.
The original Wheat Belly book has more recipes than WBTH, but either of the later cookbooks are superior sources of recipes.
«I would greatly prefer not to be involved in an e-course as mentioned in the book description.»
That’s optional. The Detox book works with or without the video material.
________
Blog Reply Associate (click my user name for details)