Tag Archives: heart disease

Does Diabetes Drug Empagliflozin Reduce Heart Disease Risk?

diabetic mediterranean diet, Steve Parker MD

Pharmacist using her advanced degree to count pills

Larry Husten writing at CardioBrief mentions a recent press release alleging that empagliflozin reduces cardiovascular disease risk.

Larry points out a problem with diabetes drugs that I’ve been harping on for years: we don’t know the long-term outcomes and side effects of most of our drugs. As long as a diabetes drug reduces blood sugar and seems to be relatively safe in the short term, it will be approved for use by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Larry writes:

Until now the best thing anyone could say for sure about all the new diabetes drugs was that at least they didn’t kill people. That’s because although these drugs have been shown to be highly effective in reducing glucose levels, a series of large cardiovascular outcomes trials failed to provide any evidence of significant clinical benefit.

Cardiovascular disease is a major stalker of diabetics. I’m talking about heart attacks, strokes, heart failure, sudden cardiac death.

The aforementioned press release touts reduced cardiovascular disease risk in patients taking empagliflozin. What’s missing is any mention of overall death reduction. Even if the drug really prevents heart attacks and strokes, which I doubt, don’t you want to know about overall death rates? I do. For all we know, the drug could promote illness and death from infections and cancer while reducing heart attacks and strokes. The drug’s net effect could be premature death. 

I’m 99% certain the researchers doing the work have the mortality data. Unless they don’t want to know.

By no means am I against drug use. But if I had type 2 diabetes, I’d do all I can with exercise, weight control, and low-carb eating before resorting to new or higher doses of drugs.

Steve Parker, M.D.

Dietary Saturated Fat Doesn’t Influence Future Course of Coronary Heart Disease

kkk

Most heart attacks occur in folks with pre-existing coronary artery disease that’s been present for years

If you already have coronary artery disease, Dr. Axel Sigurdsson says that ongoing saturated fat intake probably doesn’t matter, in terms of future cardiac events (like heart attacks) or risk of death from any cause.

Dr. Sigurdsson is a cardiologist in Iceland.

Some quotes from his blog:

For decades, cardiologists have advised patients with heart disease to restrict the intake of saturated fats and dietary cholesterol. Many patients still believe this to be the cornerstone of their lifestyle modification.

The main reason for avoiding saturated fats is the assumption that they adversely affect the lipid profile of our patients.

*   *   *

Recent studies suggest that the recommendation to avoid saturated fats may have been premature and not based on solid scientific evidence.

Now, a recently published Norwegian study shows that dietary intake of saturated fatty acids was not associated with risk of future events or death among patients with established coronary artery disease.

It is important to keep in mind that most of the patients were receiving secondary prevention drug therapy including aspirin, beta blockers and statins.

Anyhow, the results of the study certainly suggest that high intake of saturated fats is not a risk factor among patients with coronary heart disease receiving modern-day treatment.

These recent scientific data don’t imply hat we should urge our patients to consume high amounts of saturated fats. They only tell us that there is no association and accordingly, restriction won’t help.

So, it’s certainly a lifeline for those who believe red meat, whole-fat milk, cheese, cream, butter and eggs can be a part of a healthy diet.

On the other hand we must realise that scientific studies often provide contradictory results. A US study published last year suggested that greater adherence to a low carbohydrate diet high in animal sources of fat and protein was associated with higher all-cause and cardiovascular mortality following acute heart attack.

It appears the jury is still out…

RTWT.

Steve Parker, M.D.

Theoretical Support for the Healthfulness of the Paleo Diet

See modern man walking off that cliff?

See modern man walking off that cliff?

Aren’t people healthier now, thanks to the Agricultural and Industrial Revolutions?

As a marker for health, we can look at life span and longevity. Humans started to see dramatic increases in longevity probably around 30,000 years ago, before the revolutions. Nevertheless, Kuipers, Joordens, and Muskiet note that average life expectancy after the start of the Agricultural Revolution 10,000 years ago fell from about 40 to around 20 years.

Other researchers report that average height in the Nile River Valley at the time of the transition fell by 4 inches (10 cm). The Agricultural Revolution allowed for rapid expansion of human populations through more births, but those folks still didn’t live very long. As before the revolution, infections and high infant/child mortality rates were devastating killers, dragging down average life spans. If you survived childhood, you had a shot at hitting 50 or 60.

At the dawn of the Industrial Revolution, life expectancy at birth was only 35–40 years, even in then-sophisticated cultures like Switzerland. Consider Thomas Jefferson, the principal author of the U.S. Declaration of Independence and the third U.S. president, who lived between 1743 and 1826 (he died on July 4, Independence Day). He and his wife Martha had six children; only two survived to adulthood, and only one past the age of 25. Martha died at age 33. This mortality picture was typical for the times.

Since 1800, life expectancy has doubled in industrialized countries, but it’s mostly due to public health measures and economic prosperity. Other than smallpox vaccination, it wasn’t until the mid-20th century that medical care advances contributed in a major way to longevity.

Overview: Conflict Between Our Paleolithic Genes and Modern Life

A number of diseases or conditions may result from the mismatch of our Paleolithic genes and modern lifestyle. If not caused by the mismatch, they’re aggravated by it. These are the so-called “diseases of civilization”:

  • type 2 diabetes
  • high blood pressure
  • overweigh and obesity
  • dental caries (tooth decay or cavities)
  • osteoporosis
  • fertility problems (polycystic ovary syndrome)
  • pregnancy complications (pre-eclampsia, gestational diabetes)
  • some cancers (colon, breast, prostate)
  • heart disease (such as coronary artery disease)
  • major and postpartum depression
  • autism
  • schizophrenia
  • some neurodegenerative diseases (Parkinsons disease, Alzheimer’s disease)
  • constipation
  • hemorrhoids
  • diverticulosis
"I ate well over 70 grams of fiber daily!"

“I ate well over 70 grams of fiber daily!”

Overweight and Obesity

The Paleolithic diet is lower in total carbohydrate calories compared to the standard American diet: 30-35% versus 50-55% of calories. The higher consumption today, especially of highly processed refined carbohydrates, contributes to overweight and obesity, diabetes, gallbladder disease, heart disease, and possibly dementia. Ian Spreadbury hypothesizes that carbohydrate density of modern foods may be the cause of obesity. Refined sugars and grains—types of acellular carbohydrates—are particularly bad offenders. These acellular carbs may alter our gut microorganisms, leading to systemic inflammation and leptin resistance, etc. Our Paleolithic ancestors had little access to acellular carbohydrates. Here’s how Spreadbury explains acellular: “Tubers, fruits, or functional plant parts such as leaves and stems store their carbohydrates in organelles as part of fiber-walled living cells. These are thought to remain largely intact during cooking, which instead mostly breaks cell-to-cell adhesion. This cellular storage appears to mandate a maximum density of around 23% non-fibrous carbohydrate by mass, the bulk of the cellular weight being made up of water. The acellular carbohydrates of flour, sugar, and processed plant-starch products are considerably more dense. Grains themselves are also highly dense, dry stores of starch designed for rapid macroscopic enzymic mobilization during germination. Whereas foods with living cells will have their low carbohydrate density “locked in” until their cell walls are breached by digestive processes, the chyme produced after consumption of acellular flour and sugar-based foods is thus suggested to have a higher carbohydrate concentration than almost anything the microbiota of the upper GI tract from mouth to small bowel would have encountered during our coevolution.” (Reference: “Comparison with ancestral diets suggests dense acellular carbohydrates promote an inflammatory microbiota, and may be the primary dietary cause of leptin resistance and obesity,” in Diabetes, Metabolic Syndrome, and Obesity: Targets and Therapy. 2012; vol 5: 175–189. doi: 10.2147/DMSO.S33473 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3402009/)

Added sugar provides 17 % of total energy in modern societies, contributing to overweight, obesity, tooth decay, and diabetes. Modern diets provide 15–20% of calories from protein, compared to 25–30% in the Paleolithic diet. To the extent that high protein consumption is satiating, lower consumption may cause over-eating of carbohydrates and fats, then overweight and obesity and all their associated medical conditions.

Heart Disease

I written elsewhere on the blog that the much lower omega-6 to omega-3 fatty acid ratio in the Paleolithic diet. There’s some evidence that today’s high ratio may contribute to systemic inflammation and chronic disease, heart disease in particular. Today’s ratio is quite high due to our consumption of industrial seed oils, such as those derived from soybeans, peanuts, corn, and safflower. And we don’t eat enough cold-water fatty fish, which are major sources of omega-3 fatty acids. Two long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids, EPA and DHA, are essential fatty acids. That means our bodies cannot make them. We have to get them from diet. DHA and EPA are also cardioprotective omega-3 fatty acids.

High Blood Pressure

Most modern diets have much more sodium and much less potassium than the Paleolithic diet, perhaps contributing to high blood pressure, which in turn contributes to heart attacks, strokes, and possibly premature death. The higher magnesium content of the paleo diet may also help prevent high blood pressure.

Gastrointestinal Problems

We eat much less fiber these days, contributing to constipation, hemorrhoids, and diverticulosis. Some experts believe low fiber consumption adversely effects development of palate bones, jaws, and tooth placement.

Osteoporosis

Our lower vitamin D levels these days may cause osteoporosis (thin fragile bones) and raise the risk of diabetes and cancer. Our prehistoric ancestors spent more time in the sun, allowing their bodies to make vitamin D.

Type 2 Diabetes

Robert Lustig and associates looked at sugar consumption and diabetes rates in 175 countries and found a strong link between sugar and type 2 diabetes. It’s not proof of causation, just suggestive. From the scientific article abstract: “Duration and degree of sugar exposure correlated significantly with diabetes prevalence in a dose-dependent manner, while declines in sugar exposure correlated with significant subsequent declines in diabetes rates independently of other socioeconomic, dietary and obesity prevalence changes. Differences in sugar availability statistically explain variations in diabetes prevalence rates at a population level that are not explained by physical activity, overweight or obesity.” (Reference: Basu S, Yoffe P, Hills N, Lustig RH (2013) The Relationship of Sugar to Population-Level Diabetes Prevalence: An Econometric Analysis of Repeated Cross-Sectional Data. PLoS ONE 8(2): e57873. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0057873)

A major diet change from Stone Age to modern diets is a reduction in magnesium consumption. This could be one reason type 2 diabetes is a problem today. A 2013 article at Diabetes Care suggests that higher magnesium consumption in modern populations may protect against type 2 diabetes (Reference: http://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/early/2013/09/23/dc13-1397.abstract.html?papetoc).

Dental Problems

Dentist John Sorrentino wrote at his blog in 2012: “The truth is that tooth decay is a relatively new phenomenon. Until the rise of agriculture roughly 10,000 years ago, THERE WAS NO TOOTH DECAY IN HUMANS. Let that sink in for a moment. Humanity is 2,500,000 years old. For the first 2,490,000 years no one ever had a cavity. If we understand that tooth decay started when people started farming instead of hunting and gathering for a living clearly you realize that tooth decay is a disease or mismatch between what you are eating and what your body expects you to eat. If we examine the past as prologue it becomes clear that the path to proper health starts in the mouth and the answers are so simple that not only did a Cave Man do it. They perfected it.” (Reference: http://www.sorrentinodental.com/blog.html?entry=why-teeth-decay-i)

To be fair and balanced, a research report from 2014 found a very high incidence of caries (cavities) in a Stone Age population living in what is now Morocco. The authors attributed the cavities to heavy consumption of acorns, which are rich in carbohydrates and sticky, to boot.

Orthodontist Mike Mew, BDS, MSc, made a presentation at the 2012 Ancestral Health Symposium titled “Craniofacial Dystrophy—Modern Melting Faces.” Dr. Mew says 30% of folks in Western populations have crooked teeth and/or malocclusion, and the mainstream orthodontic community doesn’t know why. But they’ve got expensive treatment for it! Dr. Mew thinks he knows the cause and he shared it at the symposium. The simple cure is “Teeth together. Lips together. Tongue on the roof of your mouth.” And eat hard food that requires lots of chewing, like our ancestors did, ideally in childhood before age 9. Older people also benefit, he says.

NPR (National Public Radio) in February, 2013, ran an article called “Ancient Choppers Were Healthier Than Ours,” by Audrey Carlsen. An excerpt: “Hunter-gatherers had really good teeth,” says Alan Cooper, director of the Australian Centre for Ancient DNA. “[But] as soon as you get to farming populations, you see this massive change. Huge amounts of gum disease. And cavities start cropping up.” And thousands of years later, we’re still waging, and often losing, our war against oral disease. Our changing diets are largely to blame. In a study published in the Nature Genetics, Cooper and his research team looked at calcified plaque on ancient teeth from 34 prehistoric human skeletons. What they found was that as our diets changed over time — shifting from meat, vegetables and nuts to carbohydrates and sugar — so too did the composition of bacteria in our mouths. Not all oral bacteria are bad. In fact, many of these microbes help us by protecting against more dangerous pathogens. (Reference: http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2013/02/24/172688806/ancient-chompers-were-healthier-than-ours)

Dentist Mark Burhenne wrote the following at Huffington Post – Canada: “It is generally well accepted that tooth decay, in the modern sense, is a relatively new phenomena. Until the rise of agriculture roughly 10,000 years ago, there was nearly no tooth decay in the human race. Cavities became endemic in the 17th century but became an epidemic in the middle of the 20th century (1950). If we understand that tooth decay started when people started farming, rather than hunting and gathering, it’s clear that tooth decay is the result of a mismatch between what we’re eating and what our bodies are expecting us to eat based on how they evolved….The recent changes in our lifestyle create a “mismatch” for the mouth, which evolved under vastly different environments than what our mouths are exposed to these days. Our mouths evolved to be chewing tough meats and fibrous vegetables. Sugar laden fruit was a rare and special treat for our paleolithic ancestors. Now, our diets are filled with heavily processed foods that take hardly any energy to chew — smoothies, coffees, and sodas high in sugar, white bread, and crackers to name just a few.” (Reference: http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/mark-burhenne/paleo-diet-oral-health_b_4041350.html)

Shrinking Brains

Since the end of the Stone Age, human brain size has been shrinking. That’s not good, is it? Anthropologist John Hawks has noted that over the past 20,000 years, the average volume of the human male brain has decreased from 1,500 cubic centimeters to 1,350 cc, losing a chunk the size of a lemon. The female brain has shrunk proportionately. Anthropologists don’t know why. Is it modern nutrition? The experts aren’t sure what it means for our future. As for me, I think the answer is in Mike Judge’s movie, “Idiocracy.”

His brain was bigger than yours

His brain was bigger than yours

Death By Sugar

Sugar-sweetened beverages kill almost 200,000 worldwide annually, according to a Gitanjali Singh, Ph.D., a postdoctoral research fellow at the Harvard School of Public Health. How could that be? Sugar-sweetened beverages contribute to obesity, which in turn leads to diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and some cancers. (Reference: Singh, GM, et al “Mortality due to sugar-sweetened beverage consumption: A global, regional, and national comparative risk assessment,” American Heart Association Epidemiology and Prevention/Nutrition, Physical Activity and Metabolism 2013 Scientific Sessions, Abstract EPI-13-A-879-AHA.) Reducing consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages was one of the major points in the American Heart Association’s 2010 guidelines for reducing heart disease.

Elderly Cognitive Impairment

Diets high in sugar and other carbohydrates raise the risk of elderly cognitive impairment, according to recent research by the Mayo Clinic. Mild cognitive impairment is often a precursor to incurable dementia. (Most authorities think dementia develops more often in people with diabetes, although some studies refute the linkage.) Researchers followed 940 patients with normal baseline cognitive functioning over the course of four years. Diet was assessed via questionnaire. Study participants were ages 70 to 89. As the years passed, 200 of them developed mild cognitive impairment. Compared with those eating the lowest amount of sugar, those eating the most sugar were 1.5 times more likely to develop cognitive impairment. Looking at total carbohydrate consumption, those eating at the highest levels of carbohydrate consumption were almost twice as likely to develop mild cognitive impairment. The scientists note that those eating lower on the carbohydrate continuum were eating more fats and proteins. (Reference: Mayo Clinic website, published October 16, 2012 http://www.mayoclinic.org/news2012-rst/7128.html)

Is a Paleolithic-Style Diet the Healthiest Way to Eat?

Certified paleo-compliant, plus high omega-3 fatty acids

Certified paleo-compliant, plus high omega-3 fatty acids

The jury’s still out on that one! My strong sense is that it’s definitely more healthful than the Standard American Diet. Maybe the traditional Mediterranean diet or DASH diet is even healthier. Don’t hold your breath waiting for the randomized controlled trials that would answer the question definitively.

If the paleo diet is the healthiest, which version is best? That’s a question for another day (or year).

The most healthful diet for you depends on your genetic make-up and any medical conditions you have.

Steve Parker, M.D.

Fish Oil Supplements Are a Waste for Many

Salmon is one the the cold-water fatty fish loaded with omega-3 fatty acids

Salmon is one the the cold-water fatty fish loaded with omega-3 fatty acids

Many of us are eating fish or taking fish oil supplements, hoping that they will prevent heart attacks and the associated premature death. As it turns out, they may do neither.

I’ve been sitting on this research report a few years, waiting until I had time to dig into it. That time never came. The full report is free online (thanks, British Medical Journal!). I scanned the full paper to learn that nearly all the studies in this meta-analysis used fish oil supplements, not the cold-water fatty fish the I recommend my patients eat twice a week.

Here’s the abstract:

Objective: To review systematically the evidence for an effect of long chain and shorter chain omega 3 fatty acids on total mortality, cardiovascular events, and cancer.

Data sources: Electronic databases searched to February 2002; authors contacted and bibliographies of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) checked to locate studies.

Review methods Review of RCTs of omega 3 intake for 3 6 months in adults (with or without risk factors for cardiovascular disease) with data on a relevant outcome. Cohort studies that estimated omega 3 intake and related this to clinical outcome during at least 6 months were also included. Application of inclusion criteria, data extraction, and quality assessments were performed independently in duplicate.

Results: Of 15 159 titles and abstracts assessed, 48 RCTs (36 913 participants) and 41 cohort studies were analysed. The trial results were inconsistent. The pooled estimate showed no strong evidence of reduced risk of total mortality (relative risk 0.87, 95% confidence interval 0.73 to 1.03) or combined cardiovascular events (0.95, 0.82 to 1.12) in participants taking additional omega 3 fats. The few studies at low risk of bias were more consistent, but they showed no effect of omega 3 on total mortality (0.98, 0.70 to 1.36) or cardiovascular events (1.09, 0.87 to 1.37). When data from the subgroup of studies of long chain omega 3 fats were analysed separately, total mortality (0.86, 0.70 to 1.04; 138 events) and cardiovascular events (0.93, 0.79 to 1.11) were not clearly reduced. Neither RCTs nor cohort studies suggested increased risk of cancer with a higher intake of omega 3 (trials: 1.07, 0.88 to 1.30; cohort studies: 1.02, 0.87 to 1.19), but clinically important harm could not be excluded.

Conclusion: Long chain and shorter chain omega 3 fats do not have a clear effect on total mortality, combined cardiovascular events, or cancer.

If you’re taking fish oil supplements on your doctor’s advice, don’t stop without consulting her. The study at hand doesn’t address whether eating cold-water fatty fish twice a week prevents heart attacks and premature death. 

Steve Parker, M.D.

Reference: Hooper, Lee et al. Risks and benefits of omega 3 fats for mortality, cardiovascular disease, and cancer: systematic review. BMJ  2006;332:752-760 (1 April), doi:10.1136/bmj.38755.366331.2F (published 24 March 2006).

Nuts and Berries: Good for Your Brain, Heart, and Immune System

Here’s the abstract from American Journal of Clinical Nutrition:

The inclusion of nuts in the diet is associated with a decreased risk of coronary artery disease, hypertension, gallstones, diabetes, cancer, metabolic syndrome, and visceral obesity. Frequent consumption of berries seems to be associated with improved cardiovascular and cancer outcomes, improved immune function, and decreased recurrence of urinary tract infections; the consumption of nuts and berries is associated with reduction in oxidative damage, inflammation, vascular reactivity, and platelet aggregation, and improvement in immune functions. However, only recently have the effects of nut and berry consumption on the brain, different neural systems, and cognition been studied. There is growing evidence that the synergy and interaction of all of the nutrients and other bioactive components in nuts and berries can have a beneficial effect on the brain and cognition. Regular nut consumption, berry consumption, or both could possibly be used as an adjunctive therapeutic strategy in the treatment and prevention of several neurodegenerative diseases and age-related brain dysfunction. A number of animal and a growing number of human studies show that moderate-duration dietary supplementation with nuts, berry fruit, or both is capable of altering cognitive performance in humans, perhaps forestalling or reversing the effects of neurodegeneration in aging.

Fruits and Vegetables May Increase Lifespan, Decrease Cancer and Heart Disease

MedPageToday has some of the details.  A quote:

The largest benefits were seen in people who ate seven or more servings of fruits and vegetables a day compared with those who ate less than one serving, with the higher level of consumption associated with significantly lower all-cause mortality (hazard ratio 0.67; 95% CI 0.58-0.78), lead researcher Oyinlola Oyebode of University College London, and colleagues, reported online in the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health.

diabetic diet, paleobetic diet, low-carb diet

Prepping for bacon brussels sprouts 

The population under study was English. In addition to lower risk of death, the heavy fruit and vegetable consumers had lower rates of cancer and cardiovascular disease. Click for the actual research report.

If seven servings a day seems like a lot, note that a typical serving is only half a cup. You’ll get those with the Paleobetic Diet.

Steve Parker, M.D.

Eat Nuts to Reduce Cardiovascular Risk and Improve Type 2 Diabetic Blood Sugars

Paleobetic diet

Macadamia nuts on the tree

Most of the diets I recommend to my patients include nuts because they’re so often linked to improved cardiovascular health in scientific studies. Walnuts are associated with reduced risk of type 2 diabetes in women, and established type 2 diabetics see improved blood sugar control and lower cholesterols when adding nuts to their diets.

paleobetic diet, diabetic diet, low-carb diet

Apples, pecans, and blueberries: So simple even a redneck can make it (I are a redneck)

Nut consumption lowers total and LDL cholesterol levels, and if triglycerides are elevated, nuts lower them, too. Those changes would tend to reduce heart disease.

Conner Middelmann-Whitney has a good nutty article at Psychology Today.

Steve Parker, M.D.

Reference: Joan Sabaté, MD, DrPH; Keiji Oda, MA, MPH; Emilio Ros, MD, PhD. Nut Consumption and Blood Lipid Levels: A Pooled Analysis of 25 Intervention Trials. Archives of Internal Medicine, 2010, Vol. 170 No. 9, pp 821-827. Abstract:

Background  Epidemiological studies have consistently associated nut consumption with reduced risk for coronary heart disease. Subsequently, many dietary intervention trials investigated the effects of nut consumption on blood lipid levels. The objectives of this study were to estimate the effects of nut consumption on blood lipid levels and to examine whether different factors modify the effects.

Methods:  We pooled individual primary data from 25 nut consumption trials conducted in 7 countries among 583 men and women with normolipidemia and hypercholesterolemia who were not taking lipid-lowering medications. In a pooled analysis, we used mixed linear models to assess the effects of nut consumption and the potential interactions.

Results:  With a mean daily consumption of 67 g of nuts [about 2 ounces or 2 palms-ful], the following estimated mean reductions were achieved: total cholesterol concentration (10.9 mg/dL [5.1% change]), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol concentration (LDL-C) (10.2 mg/dL [7.4% change]), ratio of LDL-C to high-density lipoprotein cholesterol concentration (HDL-C) (0.22 [8.3% change]), and ratio of total cholesterol concentration to HDL-C (0.24 [5.6% change]) (P < .001 for all) (to convert all cholesterol concentrations to millimoles per liter, multiply by 0.0259). Triglyceride levels were reduced by 20.6 mg/dL (10.2%) in subjects with blood triglyceride levels of at least 150 mg/dL (P < .05) but not in those with lower levels (to convert triglyceride level to millimoles per liter, multiply by 0.0113). The effects of nut consumption were dose related, and different types of nuts had similar effects on blood lipid levels. The effects of nut consumption were significantly modified by LDL-C, body mass index, and diet type: the lipid-lowering effects of nut consumption were greatest among subjects with high baseline LDL-C and with low body mass index and among those consuming Western diets.

Conclusion:  Nut consumption improves blood lipid levels in a dose-related manner, particularly among subjects with higher LDL-C or with lower BMI.

Mouth Bacteria May Be an Important Cause of Heart Disease

…according to an article at University Herald.

paleo diet, Steve Parker MD,calcium, osteoporosis

That milk mustache is a tell-tale sign she’s not eating pure paleo

The idea is that nasty bacteria around your gums somehow cause arterial inflammation in your heart arteries, which could lead to heart attacks. I’ve written about this before.

A quote from the article:

The researchers followed 420 adults as part of the Oral Infections and Vascular Disease Epidemiology Study (INVEST), a randomly sampled prospective cohort of Northern Manhattan residents. Participants were examined for periodontal infection. Overall, 5,008 plaque samples were taken from several teeth, beneath the gum, and analyzed for 11 bacterial strains linked to periodontal disease and seven control bacteria. Fluid around the gums was sampled to assess levels of Interleukin-1β, a marker of inflammation. Atherosclerosis in both carotid arteries was measured using high-resolution ultrasound.

Over a median follow-up period of three years, the researchers found that improvement in periodontal health-health of the gums-and a reduction in the proportion of specific bacteria linked to periodontal disease correlated to a slower intima-medial thickness (IMT) progression, and worsening periodontal infections paralleled the progression of IMT. Results were adjusted for potential confounders such as body mass index, cholesterol levels, diabetes, and smoking status.

Thickening of the arterial lining is linked to higher rates of heart attack and stroke.

It remains to be seen whether alteration of gum bacteria and periodontal disease via oral self-care and dental care will reduce cardiovascular risk going forward. Stay tuned.

Read more at http://www.universityherald.com/articles/5322/20131101/brushing-your-teeth-could-prevent-heart-disease.htm#rvx294vC7VKJ6Qu3.99

Heart Attacks Hinge on LDL Cholesterol Particle Number (LDL-P)

medical clearance, treadmill stress test

This treadmill stress test is looking for hidden heart disease

…according to Drs. Thomas Dayspring and James Underberg. I don’t know if these guys are right or not. I bet it’s more complicated than LDL particle number. I’m always skeptical of grand unification theories.

People with diabetes tend to have shorter life spans than average. One reason is a predisposition to heart disease, specifically coronary artery disease that leads to heart attacks.

Most heart attacks (aka myocardial infarctions) do indeed seem to be caused by acute rupture of an atherosclerotic plaque that’s been present for years. Two key questions are:

  1. What causes the plaque?
  2. Why causes it to rupture?

Underberg and Dayspring write:

The only absolute requirement for plaque development is the presence of cholesterol in the artery: although there are additional heart risk factors like smoking, hypertension, obesity, family history, diabetes, kidney disease, etc., none of those need to be present. Unfortunately, measuring cholesterol in the blood, where it cannot cause plaque, until recently has been the standard of risk-testing. That belief was erroneous and we now have much better biomarkers to use for CV risk-assessment. The graveyard and coronary care units are filled with individuals whose pre-death cholesterol levels were perfect. We now understand that the major way cholesterol gets into the arteries is as a passenger, in protein-enwrapped particles, called lipoproteins.

Particle entry into the artery wall is driven by the amount of particles (particle number) not by how much cholesterol they contain. Coronary heart disease is very often found in those with normal total or LDL-cholesterol (LDL-C) levels in the presence of a high LDL particle number (LDL-P). By far, the most common underlying condition that increases LDL particle concentration is insulin resistance, or prediabetes, a state where the body actually resists the action of the sugar controlling hormone insulin. This is the most common scenario where patients have significant heart attack risk with perfectly normal cholesterol levels. The good news is that we can easily fix this, sometimes without medication. The key to understanding how comes with the knowledge that the driving forces are dietary carbohydrates, especially fructose and high-fructose corn syrup. In the past, we’ve often been told that elimination of saturated fats from the diet would help solve the problem. That was bad advice. The fact is that until those predisposed to insulin resistance drastically reduce their carbohydrate intake, sudden deaths from coronary heart disease and the exploding diabetes epidemic will continue to prematurely kill those so afflicted.

***

 And for goodness’ sake, if you want to live longer, start reducing the amount of dietary carbohydrates, including bread, potatoes, rice, soda and sweetened beverages (including fruit juices), cereal, candy – the list is large).

Read the whole enchilada.

Offhand, I don’t recall any clinical study looking at LDL cholesterol particle number in folks who switched to a paleo diet. Given the prominence of coronary heart disease, I’m sure Dayspring and Underberg would favor a low-carb version of the paleo diet for anyone going the paleo route. Here’s my version of low-carb paleo.

Underberg and Dayspring don’t mention LDL particle size, such as small/dense and large/fluffy; the former are thought by many to be much more highly atherogenic, while the latter may not be at all. Is this idea outdated?

Whoever figures out the immediate cause of plaque rupture and how to reliably prevent it will win a Nobel Prize in Medicine.

Steve Parker, M.D.

About Dayspring and Underberg:

Thomas Dayspring MD, FACP, FNLA   Director of Cardiovascular Education, The Foundation for Health Improvement and Technology, Richmond, VA. Clinical Assistant Professor of Medicine, University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey, New Jersey Medical School.

James Underberg MD, FACP, FNLA   Clinical Assistant Professor of Medicine in the Division of General Internal Medicine at NYU Medical School and the NYU Center for Cardiovascular Disease Prevention . Director of the Bellevue Hospital Primary Care Lipid Management Clinic.

h/t Dr. Axel Sigurdsson

Do Vegetables and Fruits Prevent Disease?

Switching to the paleo diet often leads to increased vegetable and fruit consumption

Switching to the paleo diet often leads to increased vegetable and fruit consumption

Potential answers are in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition (2012).  I quote:

For hypertension, coronary heart disease, and stroke, there is convincing evidence that increasing the consumption of vegetables and fruit reduces the risk of disease. There is probable evidence that the risk of cancer in general is inversely associated with the consumption of vegetables and fruit. In addition, there is possible evidence that an increased consumption of vegetables and fruit may prevent body weight gain. As overweight is the most important risk factor for type 2 diabetes mellitus, an increased consumption of vegetables and fruit therefore might indirectly reduces the incidence of type 2 diabetes mellitus. Independent of overweight, there is probable evidence that there is no influence of increased consumption on the risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus. There is possible evidence that increasing the consumption of vegetables and fruit lowers the risk of certain eye diseases, dementia and the risk of osteoporosis. Likewise, current data on asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and rheumatoid arthritis indicate that an increase in vegetable and fruit consumption may contribute to the prevention of these diseases. For inflammatory bowel disease, glaucoma, and diabetic retinopathy, there was insufficient evidence regarding an association with the consumption of vegetables and fruit.

It bothers me that vegetables and fruits are lumped together: they’re not the same.

The paleo diet is unfairly characterized as meat-centric. It can certainly provide beaucoup vegetables and fruits. Diabetics should be careful which ones they choose, to avoid spikes in blood sugar.

Steve Parker, M.D.