Ever since learning how wheat causes gut inflammation in nearly everyone, I came to terms with the fact that I have no room in my life for wheat, or any cereal grains, since I have a history of digestive disorders. After being a regular pasta junkie for the better part of my life, I quit. Cold turkey. 3 weeks ago. The great news is how much more mental clarity I have with the lifting of persistent “brain fog” that I couldn’t put my finger on.

But guess what? Those wheat-derived opioids are real: nausea, muscle tension in my TMJ, lightheadness, fatigue. I am in the middle of wheat withdrawal.

What gives? At first, this seemed ridiculous but after Googling “wheat withdrawal”, it became clear that many people experience this short-term setback for the long-term benefit of eliminating wheat from their diets.  Like celiacs or others with leaky gut, I crave the very food that makes me predisposed to illness: wheat. Eliminating corn (apparently a close second to wheat in toxicity) has been comparatively easy. While I miss the idea of corn chips with salsa and guacamole or polenta with homemade chicken cacciatore, I don’t crave it the way I do a plate of fresh pasta with homemade Bolognese sauce right after a long day of skiing. Little did I realize that my narcotic habit was in the form of food.

Wheat poses a double-whammy: it is toxic due to its gluten, wheat germ agglutinin, and opioid content (see blog entry, “The Controversy of Wheat (and all cereal grains for that matter …”), and it contributes to excessive carbohydrate intake (see last week’s blog, “Carbohydrates: The Smoking Gun?”).

In replacing wheat with other more favorable foods, I am concerned about 1) fiber, 2) minerals and vitamins, and 3) “safer” sources of carbohydrates.  My big picture is also transitioning to a different macronutrient profile, i.e., less carbs, less protein, and higher consumption of healthy fats, that is tailored to what works best for me (for more information, read “Perfect Health Diet” by Jaminet and Jaminet).

The opportunity of subtracting toxic foods from one’s diet is discovering new foods that are more satisfying to eat, make you feel good, and contribute to long-term health and vitality.

I am finding that I eat greens and vegetables in much greater quantities than I ever have, including fermented vegetables like homemade sauerkraut and fermented carrots with ginger. I eat (in lesser quantities) “safer” starches such as rice, sweet potatoes, yams, and starchy vegetables like carrots and squash. More than ever, healthy sources of fat, such as Melt® Organic, organic goat milk kefir, pastured organic eggs, avocados, and virgin coconut oil, are critical for stabilizing my blood sugar and fueling my daily work and sports activities.  While I am a believer and huge fan of virgin coconut oil, I find Melt® Organic to be a much more versatile and flavorful way of getting my MCFAs and my Omega 3s all at once.

The essence of nutritional therapy is buying into the concept that diet is the foundation of health or disease.  Not even exercise can trump this underlying reality, though it can postpone some of the effects of an unconscious diet. This can at first be demoralizing, given the high degree of confusion in nutritional “expertise”. However, it is far more empowering to control your own destiny in regards to your health even if it means wading through the lack of consensus.

As for me, experiencing symptoms of wheat withdrawal helps me tap into my determination to ride it out for a happier, healthier life.

–Cygnia F. Rapp, Founder of Prosperity Organic Foods.

Carbohydrate intake requirements vary depending on age and activity level; for example, breast milk offers infants 40% carbohydrates to support rapid brain development and growth. However, as a nation reared on grains we need to take a step back and understand the risks of a high-carb diet. The amount of carbohydrates one should consume for optimal health is a highly controversial topic, but at its heart underscores how important glucose is as a nutrient, which can be manufactured from fat and protein as well as from carbohydrates.

Why We Need Glucose

Most plant foods are broken down in the digestive tract to indigestible fiber or to simple sugars glucose and fructose.

Potentially useful carbs are those that digest to glucose or galactose, such as starch and milk sugars, and indigestible fiber that feeds gut bacteria. According to Jaminet and Jaminet (2010), fructose is potentially toxic at any level because it reacts with proteins and creates toxins. In order to prevent this “fructation”, the body shunts fructose to the liver for disposal where it is most likely to be converted to fat. Since the conversion process damages the liver, moderate- to high-levels of fructose in the diet potentially lead to metabolic syndrome.

How Much Glucose Does the Body Need?

Glucose has three main uses in the body:

• Combines with proteins to form structural molecules called glycoproteins;
• Serves as an alternate fuel that cells can burn instead of fats; and
• Is a precursor for killing compounds (“reactive oxygen species” or ROS) made by immune cells.

A fasting person’s daily glucose production is around 120-160 grams or 480-640 calories per day (Nair et al., 1987).

Glucose in structural molecules: Some structural sugar compounds are highly abundant in the body such as mucin, which is one of the main components of mucus, and protects the gut and airways from pathogens and foreign matter. It is also a key part of tears and saliva. Hyaluronan lubricates joints and helps provide the scaffolding that shapes cells into tissues. Glucosamine and chondroitin sulfate are similar sugar-rich compounds important in connective tissue (Jaminet and Jaminet, 2010).

Glucose as fuel for neurons: One often hears that glucose is the body’s “primary fuel”. This is quite mistaken. While it is true that all human cells can, if needed, metabolize glucose, mitochondria (the energy producers in most human cells) prefer to burn fat. In the body, fat is the preferred and primary fuel except in specialist cells that lack mitochondria (red blood cells) or avoid fat metabolism (neurons). Normal glucose-as-a-fuel consumption is dominated by neurons. The brain and nerves require about 20 calories per hour, waking or sleeping. These 480 daily calories can be provided by either glucose alone or a mix of glucose and ketone bodies (derived from fats or protein). Daily glucose consumption by the brain and nerves is somewhere between 150 to 480 calories depending on ketone availability (Jaminet and Jaminet, 2010).

Glucose for muscle glycogen: Muscles consume glucose in the form of glycogen during intense exertion. Muscle glycogen usage is a relatively small drain on glucose. Highly trained runners use about 50 glycogen calories per mile. Highly trained cyclists cycling at 70% of maximum oxygen utilization (an intense pace) use about 500 calories of glycogen per hour. Low intensity exercise for shorter periods of time (which is most of us) require very few extra glucose calories to maintain muscle glycogen levels. Someone who exercises 20 minutes per day at moderate intensity probably uses less than 50 glycogen calories (Jaminet and Jaminet, 2010).

Glucose as a killing agent: One reason most cells prefer fats to glucose as an energy source is that fats burn cleanly while glucose, when metabolized for energy, produces reactive oxygen species (ROS). ROS are dangerous molecules that can damage or destroy cells. The destructiveness of ROS is used by the immune system with immune cells called macrophages that create and use ROS to kill pathogens like bacteria and fungi. Under normal circumstances the immune system does not consume much glucose for killing pathogens, however people with chronic infections, especially fungi or protozoa, may need extra glucose (Jaminet and Jaminet, 2010).

Endogenous glucose production: Glucose is also routinely produced by the body as a consequence of metabolizing fats. Fats are stored in the body as either phospholipids, which consist of two fatty acids joined by a glycerol backbone to a phosphate group and an organic molecule like choline or inositol, or triglycerides, which consist of three fatty acids and a glycerol backbone. Phospholipids make up cell membranes, while triglycerides are a storage form of fats. When fatty acids are consumed for energy, the glycerol backbones are released. Two glycerols make one molecule of glucose. Recycling of glycerol from fats helps to meet the body’s glucose needs, since fats in food enter the body already attached to glycerol backbones. A typical triglyceride provides about 12% of calories as glycerol, 88% as fatty acids (Jaminet and Jaminet, 2010).

Although the precise number for glucose requirements remains uncertain, it appears the body needs about 150-480 calories for the brain and nerves, 200-300 calories for glycoproteins such as mucin, and 100 calories for muscle glycogen and immune, intestinal, and kidney cell use, some of which is offset in the course of burning fat. In elite athletes, glucose needs are increased by 50 to 100 calories per hour of training. For most people, around 400-650 daily glucose calories must be obtained from the diet, manufactured from protein, or replaced with ketones (Jaminet and Jaminet, 2010).

Risks of Too Much Glucose

Two sources of damage occur from eating excessive carbohydrates and include:

• Hyperglycemia (“too much sugar”), sugar poisoning that inflicts damage, and
• Hyperinsulinemia (“too much insulin”), insulin, a hormone that helps dispose of excess glucose, and inflicts damage by hastening aging, weakening defenses against infection, hardening the arteries, and impairing the mind.

Glucose in excess of bodily needs has toxic effects and ruins health. For purposes of this discussion (i.e., length considerations) we focus on the toxic effects of hyperglycemia, which is adapted from Jaminet and Jaminet (2010).

Ideally, blood glucose levels should remain in a stable range between about 85 to 105 mg/dl. After eating carbohydrates blood glucose typically rises into the 120s to 140s and fall back to the normal range in a few hours. As people increase carb consumption above the body’s glucose needs, they become reliant on slow disposal mechanisms like fat formation and average blood glucose levels go up. If the liver and pancreas are poisoned by toxins like fructose, omega-6 fats, and wheat, insulin resistance may develop and blood glucose levels rise even further.

Dietary carbs cause the atherogenic blood lipid profile: While its well known that a bad lipid profile (high triglycerides, low HDL, high levels of “small, dense” LDL) is a risk factor for heart disease, it is less commonly appreciated that the bad blood lipid profile is almost entirely determined by excess carbohydrate consumption. A series of studies by Dr Ronald Krauss grouped people by the carbohydrate fraction of their diet and measured their blood lipids, classifying them as “atherogenic” or “non-atherogenic”. A slide show by Dr Krauss illustrating this phenomenon can be viewed here: http://www.ciaprochef.com/wohf2009/presentations/RONALD_KRAUSS_Healthy_Metabolism.pdf. The results of the study (Krauss, 2001) suggest that atherogenic lipid profiles may disappear with carb consumption of 25% of energy or less. Any carb intake above this level has to be disposed of, ideally through fat conversion; while this disposal takes place, glucose levels are unnecessarily elevated and glucose toxicity damages health.

Nerve damage occurs when blood sugars rise over 140 mg/dl: In a study of patients with peripheral neuropathy of unknown origin, neurologists found that many people who don’t have diabetes nevertheless have “diabetes neuropathy”, nerve damage from excess glucose. Moreover, when given a glucose tolerance test, the degree to which blood sugars rose over 140 mg/dl was correlated with severity of the neuropathy (Singleton et al., 2001). Since most people’s blood sugars rise over 140 mg/dl after a carb-rich meal, this suggests that most people may be poisoning their nerves incrementally every day. The MONICA study showed that 13% of non-diabetics whose blood sugar rises over 140 mg/dl after a carb-rich meal have nerve damage.

Hyperglycemia destroys the organs of diabetics: In diabetics, organ damage arises from glucose toxicity, primarily due to uncontrolled glycation of proteins by excess blood sugar (Rossetti, 1999; Mooradian and Thurman, 1999). Elevated blood glucose causes neuropathy (nerve damage), nephropathy (kidney damage), retinopathy (eye damage), and cardiovascular disease (The Diabetes Control and Complications Trial Research Group, 1993; UK Prospective Diabetes Study Group, 1998).

Hyperglycemia increases mortality: “Hemoglobin A1c” or HbA1c is useful for measuring average blood glucose levels over the past 30 days. HbA1c measures how much of the hemoglobin on red blood cells is glycated. It is possible to achieve HbA1c levels below 5%, but many people on high-carb diets develop HbA1c levels above 7%. HbA1c is an index of glucose poisoning. The EPIC (European prospective investigation into cancer) study measured HbA1c values in 4462 men and 5570 women aged 45 to 79, and then followed patients, tracking death rates for an average of 6 years (Khaw et al., 2004). They found that men with HbA1c levels above 7% were 5 times more likely to die than men with HbA1c levels below 5%. Women with higher HbA1c values were 12.5 times more likely to die, mostly from heart disease. The risk of heart attacks was increased 7.5-fold in men and 9.5-fold in women by high HbA1c. Blood sugar levels were a strong indicator of heart disease risk. If you want to avoid a heart attack, keep blood sugar low.

Blood glucose levels determine stroke risk: The Whitehall study gave a glucose tolerance test to 19,019 men and then tracked their mortality for 38 years. The risk of stroke rose in a linear fashion with blood glucose level 2 hours after consuming 50 g (200 calories) of glucose. Stroke mortality was lowest with a reading of 83 mg/dl. For every 18 mg/dl above that level, there was a 27% increase in stroke mortality (Batty et al., 2008).

Dietary carbs and heart attacks: Since the EPIC study showed that blood glucose levels, indicated by HbA1c, are responsible for most cardiovascular disease, one would think there is an association between high-carb diets and cardiovascular disease. This question was investigated by a mammoth long-term US study, the Nurse’s Health Study. A 2006 report in the New England Journal of Medicine summarized the effects of carbohydrate composition on the nurses health (Halton et al., 2006). The researchers followed 98,462 women who completed a 1980 diet questionnaire, and split the women into ten equal-sized groups based on the fraction of calories obtained from carbohydrates. For simplicity, the bottom decile obtained 58.8% of calories from carbs and 26.9% from fat (the “high-carb group”); the top decile obtained 36.8 of calories from carbs and 39.9% from fat (the “moderate-carb group”). In general, the moderate-carb group did not take good care of their health: they smoked (26% smoked, compared to 17% in the high-carb group), avoided exercise (20% less exercise than the high carb group), and they drank a lot of coffee. However, the chances of a heart attack in the high-carb group was 42% higher than the moderate-carb group who smoked more and exercised less.

Hyperglycemia worsens the outcome of every health condition: Similar to EPIC patients, critically ill patients in hospitals are more likely to experience death the higher the blood glucose levels, no matter what the health problem. More importantly, lowering blood glucose reduces the chance of death or poor outcome. To summarize, high blood glucose levels have been associated with morbidity and poor outcome in critically ill patients, irrespective of underlying pathology. In a large, randomized controlled study the use of insulin therapy to maintain normoglycemia for at least a few days improved survival and reduced morbidity of patients who are in surgical intensive care unit (Vanhorebeek and Langouche, 2009). Hyperglycemia is a common feature of the critically ill and has been associated with increased mortality. Maintaining normoglycemia with intensive insulin therapy improves survival rates and reduces morbidty in prolonged critically ill patients in both surgical and medical intensive care units, as shown by 2 large randomized controlled studies (Vanhorebeek et al., 2006). These trials reduced blood glucose with drugs. A low-carb diet may have reduced blood glucose without drugs, and possibly produced better results.

Hyperglycemia promotes bacterial infections and many diseases: Chronic infections with parasitic bacteria aggravate or cause a host of diseases. The parasitic bacteria Chlamydophila pneumoniae has been associated with cardiovascular disease, Alzheimer’s. multiple sclerosis, arthritis, and rosacae. The bacterial genus Nocardia has been associated with Parkinson’s, and Borrelia burgdorferi with Lyme disease. Chronic fatigue appears to be caused by Human Gamma Retrovirus. Most chronic diseases, including autoimmune diseases, are probably caused by parasitic, bacterial, viral, or protozoa infections. Bacteria cannot use fats for fuel. They are dependent upon glucose and its metabolites like pyruvate and lactate. Hyperglycemia delivers more glucose into cells, enabling parasitic bacteria to feed and multiply.

Hyperglycemia promotes cancer progression: Cancer cells, like bacteria cannot burn fats. If mitochondria in cancer cells are allowed to burn fats the cell dies. Cancer cells are dependent on glucose for energy, known as the Warburg Effect. Higher blood glucose levels provide more fuel to tumor cells, stimulate their proliferation, and hasten the progression of cancer. If high blood glucose induces cells to start burning glucose, it may actually cause cancer by switching them from normal metabolism to tumor cell metabolism. A Swedish study followed 64,597 people for 10 years and found that people who had fasting blood sugars over 110 mg/dl or who scored over 160 mg/dl two hours after a glucose tolerance test has much higher rates of cancer. The cancers most frequently induced by high blood sugars were cancers of the pancreas, endometrium, urinary tract, and malignant melanoma (Stattin et al., 2007). In contrast, ketogenic diets which keep blood glucose levels low and provide keton bodies to mitochondria have shown remarkable effectiveness at slowing cancer progression. In vitro, ketone bodies have been shown to sometimes restore mitochondria to health, triggering cancer cell death. Ketogenic diets have been shown in clinical trials to slow the progress of brain cancer, and clinical trials for other cancers are in progress. In short, keeping blood glucose levels low, and mixing in some ketone bodies, may help prevent cancer or slow the progression of established cancers.

The Bottom Line

Find your own “sweet spot” for reducing total carbohydrate intake. Adjusting carbohydrate intake is an individual journey that requires personal experimentation and listening to your body for feedback on whether the approach you have chosen is right for your unique biochemistry and genetics. Achieving the goal of optimal health is only possible when you listen to that feedback and adjust your program accordingly.

Defining appropriate carbohydrate intake is controversial and is not “one size fits all”. Some, such as Dr Rosedale, recommend a diet dominated by healthy fats and protein (including those found in organ meat) with carbohydrates restricted to less than 20% of total dietary intake. While this approach may work amazingly well for some, for others this could be too extreme and could pose problems due to glucose deficiency. It may also be an unrealistic goal for many.  Others, such as Dr Jaminet, are a little more forgiving by recommending 20-25% carbohydrate intake with the remaining calories from mostly healthful fats (60-65%) and secondarily from protein (15%). His recommended sources of “safe” carbohydrates are starchy foods like potatoes, taro, sweet potatoes, yams, rice, and starchy vegetables like carrots and squash. Non-starchy vegetables (e.g., dark leafy greens) have a “free pass” and can and should be eaten as much as desired. Grains and legumes are avoided entirely.  For further information, you can read an on-going debate between Dr Rosedale and Dr Jaminet: Perfect Health Diet: Safe Starches Symposium.

Personally, I plan on experimenting with reducing total carbohydrate intake to 30% to see what happens. Since I am a moderately active, athletic person, I am concerned about reducing my carbohydrate intake to less than 30%. I also feel this goal is more achievable.

Consume non-toxic forms of carbohydrates. Regardless of the carbohydrates you choose to include in your meals, finding organic, un-processed sources are important to ensure they are free of pesticides, GMOs, and chemical additives and retain maximum nutrient levels.

Some who have given up grains entirely have thrived; others found they had nutritional deficiencies that were reversed when they re-introduced grains using appropriate methods to detoxify them (i.e., fermentation). Safer methods for consuming whole grains and legumes include soaking grains (including brown rice) for at least 24 hours in advance of cooking using whey, vinegar, or lemon juice. Fermentation and soaking reduce the toxicity of protein compounds discussed in last week’s post, “The Controversy of Wheat (and all cereal grains for that matter)”. The Weston Price Foundation provides information on techniques for reducing these toxic compounds, which they refer to as “anti-nutrients”. Sprouted grain products are also another option; sprouted grains reduce the toxicity of these protein compounds, but may not eliminate them entirely.

Most importantly, enjoy your food and your health!

–Cygnia F. Rapp, Founder of Prosperity Organic Foods

References

Batty GD et al. 2008. Post-challenge blood glucose concentration and stroke mortality rates in non-diabetic men in London: 38-year follow-up of the original Whitehall prospective cohort study. Diabetologia 51(8):1123-6.

Halton TL et al. 2006. Low-carbohydrate-diet score and the risk of coronary heart disease in women. N Engl J Med 355(19):1991-2002.

Hite AH et al. 2010. In the face of contradictory evidence: Report of the Dietary Guidelines for Americans Committee. Nutrition 26:915–924.

Jaminet P, Jaminet SC. 2010 Perfect Health Diet.YinYang Press, Cambridge, MA.

Khaw KT et al. 2004. Association of hemoglobin A1c with cardiovascular disease and mortality in adults: the European prospective investigation into cancer in Norfolk. Ann Intern Led 141(6):413-20.

Krauss RM. 2001. Atherogenic lipoprotein phenotype and diet-gone interactions. J Nutr 131(2):340S-3S.

Micha R, Mozaffarian D. 2010. Saturated Fat and Cardiometabolic Risk Factors, Coronary Heart Disease, Stroke, and Diabetes: a Fresh Look at the Evidence. Lipids 45:893-905.

Mooradian AD, Thurman JE. 1999. Glucotoxicity: potential mechanisms. Clin Geriatr Med 15(2):255.

Nair KS et al. 1987. Leucine, glucose, and energy metabolism after 3 days of fasting in healthy human subjects. Am J Clin Nutr 46(4):557-62.

Rossetti L. 1995. Glucose toxicity: the implications of hyperglycemia in the pathophysiology of diabetes mellitus. Clin Invest Med 18(4):255-60.

Singleton JR et al. 2001. Increased prevalence of impaired glucose tolerance in patients with painful sensory neuropathy. Diabetes Care 24(8):1448-53.

Siri-Tarino P et al. 2010a. Meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies evaluating the association of saturated fat with cardiovascular disease. Am J of Clin Nutr 91:535-46.

Siri-Tarino P et al. 2010b. Saturated fat, carbohydrate, and cardiovascular disease. Am J of Clin Nutr 91:502-9.

Stattin P et al. 2007. Prospective study of hyperglycemia and cancer risk. Diabetes Care 30(3):561-7.

The Diabetes Control and Complications Trial Research Group. The effect of intensive treatment of diabetes on the development and progression of long-term complications in insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. N Engl J Med 329(14):977-86.

UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS 33) Group. Intensive blood-glucose control with sulphonylureas or insulin compared with conventional treatment and risk of complications in patients with type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 33). Lancet 352(9131):837-53.

Vanhorebeek I et al. 2006. Intensive insulin therapy in the intensive care unit: update on clinical impact and mechanisms of action. Endocr Pract 12 Suppl 3:14-22.

Vanhorebeek I, Langouche L. 2009. Molecular mechanisms behind clinical benefits of intensive insulin therapy during critical illness: glucose versus insulin. Best Pract Res Clin Anaethesiol 23(4):449-59.

Unfortunately, cereal grains are a serious concern as both a source of carbohydrates (eaten in excess in the American diet) and as a source of toxic protein compounds. A little known but important fact is that wheat triggers gut inflammation in nearly everyone.

Cereal grains are the seeds of grasses and include wheat, corn, rice, barley, sorghum, oats, rye, and millet.

Grasses are for Grazers

Grasses evolved in concert with grazing mammals: both originated at the same time and they became common together. Grasses, unlike other plants, grow their leaves from the base rather than the tip so they are less likely to be damaged by grazing. Grasses evolved two innovations in order to reproduce successfully despite being regularly eaten. First they generate a multitude of seeds per plant – tens of thousands annually – so that many seeds can be eaten, as long as a few scatter and take root. This fecundity is what makes the grains so attractive for agriculture: much of the harvest can be consumed as food while still retaining plentiful seed for next year’s crop.

The second innovation was a set of toxic compounds specifically designed to sabotage the digestive tract of mammals. The plant’s strategy is to pass its seeds intact through the digestive tract of grazing animals so that they emerge (with fertilizer) to take root in a new location. (In other words, eating wheat causes large amounts of food to be excreted instead of digested in humans; for example, fecal weight increases 5.7 grams for every gram of wheat bran consumed (Cummings, 1993).)

Grazing mammals have evolved defenses for these toxins, such as digestive organs like rumens that allow for the brunt of toxins to be transformed by bacteria via fermentation. Humans, lacking such organs, are comparatively defenseless. (Ironically, this suggests that alcohol is a less toxic form of grain consumption because the grain’s toxins have been removed through fermentation.)

Grain Defenses are Toxic to Humans

Grain toxins are proteins and most abundant in the bran, but present in all parts of the kernel. White wheat flour is about 10% protein by weight, while crude wheat bran is about 16% protein by weight. With corn as a close second, wheat is the most toxic of the cereal grains with the following compounds being of most concern (i.e., there are others):

• Gluten, a compound protein that triggers autoimmune disease and promotes cancer, heart disease, and neuropathy.
• Opioids, which make wheat addictive and trigger schizophrenia.
• Wheat germ agglutinin, a protein that damages the intestine and interferes with vitamin D action, thus sabotaging the immune system and promoting chronic infections.

Gluten is directly toxic to intestinal cells by inhibiting cell proliferation, increasing cellular oxidation products, and changing membrane structure. In the body, gluten changes the structure of the intestine by reducing the height of villi, decreasing the depth of crypts, and decreasing enterocyte surface. In other words, gluten sabotages the gut, reduces it surface area, and impairs digestion.

Like all toxins, gluten inspires an immune response. This immune response helps to clear the gluten from the intestine thereby preventing build up of toxins, however in the process it makes the intestine inflamed. This immune response kills intestinal cells and makes the gut leaky.

There appear to be four levels of immune response to wheat:

1. About 83% of the population develops observable gut inflammation after eating wheat gluten (Bernardo et al., 2007).
2. About 30% of the population develops anti-wheat-gluten antibodies locally in the intestine (Guyenet).
3. About 11% of the population develops systemic antibodies to wheat gluten.
4. About 0.4% of the population develops systemic antibodies that attack human cells in the intestine, thyroid, pancreas, and elsewhere.

This last group is diagnosed with celiac disease. With the immune system attacking and killing gut cells, the intestine can be damaged to the point that sufferers have difficulty absorbing needed nutrients (Sollid and Jabri, 2005).

Leaky gut is a condition that occurs due to the development of gaps between the cells (enterocytes) that make up the membrane lining the intestinal wall. These tiny gaps allow substances such as undigested food, bacteria and metabolic wastes, that should be confined to the digestive tract, to escape into the bloodstream, hence the term leaky gut syndrome.

Once the integrity of the intestinal lining is compromised with a flow of toxic substances “leaking out” into the bloodstream, the body experiences significant increases in inflammation. Consequently, the immune system may become confused and begin to attack the body as if it were an enemy (autoimmune diseases).

Most often, leaky gut syndrome is associated with inflammatory bowel diseases like Crohn’s and ulcerative colitis, or celiac disease. However, even healthy people can have varying degrees of intestinal permeability leading to a wide variety of health symptoms that can be influenced heavily by the foods one chooses to eat.

Side note: Rice, even glutinous rice (e.g., sticky rice), does not contain gluten. Glutinous rice is sticky because of the structure of its starch. Glutinous rice does not contain gluten or other toxic proteins and is safe to eat.

Personal note: I admit I was at first resistant to this information because I love pasta and bread, but when I had a relapse of gut permeability in 2010, I was able to link it back to eating steel cut oats religiously every morning for about one year prior to the outbreak.

New Report Warns of the Sugar in Cereals Marketed to Kids

One of the most common ways grains are consumed is in the form of cereal, many of which are marketed to kids and adults as health foods.  A new report from the Environmental Working Group (EWG) revealed that many popular children’s cereal brands contain more sugar than snack cakes and cookies. For instance, one cup of Kellogg’s Honey Smacks, which is nearly 56 percent sugar by weight, has more sugar than a Twinkie, while a one-cup serving of 44 other children’s cereals analyzed contain more sugar than three Chips Ahoy! cookies.

Sugar, like grains, can upset the balance of bacteria in the digestive tract, encouraging damage to the intestinal lining that can lead to leaky gut. In essence, sugary children’s cereals are a double-edged sword by assaulting the fragile gastrointestinal tract with both damaging sugar and grains. It may be worth considering offering children a healthier breakfast alternative.

Fermented Foods are the Antidote

Leaky gut can cause digestive symptoms such as bloating, gas and abdominal cramps, but it can also cause or contribute to many others, such as fatigue, skin rashes, joint pain, allergies, psychological symptoms, autism and more.

Leaky gut is a vicious cycle because once the digestive tract has been damaged, it allows various gut contents to flood into the bloodstream where they wreak havoc on health. The key to preventing and reversing leaky gut lies in eliminating pro-inflammatory foods in the diet, primarily sugars, grains, and oils high in Omega 6s (e.g., soy, corn, safflower oils) and introducing healthier foods to support beneficial gut bacteria. To restore gut health and prevent leaky gut from occurring, eating traditionally fermented foods is essential.

Fermented foods are essential because they provide probiotic microbes in the best possible form and will carry probiotic microbes all away down to the end of the digestive system. Fermentation predigests the food, making it easy for our digestive systems to handle, which is why fermented foods are easily digested by people with a damaged gut. Fermentation releases nutrients from the food, making them more bio-available for the body; for example, sauerkraut contains 20 times more bio-available vitamin C than fresh cabbage.

On Dr. Campbell-McBride’s web site (http://www.gaps.me/preview/?page_id=30) you can find recipes for many traditionally fermented foods, including sauerkraut, yogurt, kefir, kvass and more. Regularly eating fermented foods that have not been pasteurized (pasteurization kills the naturally occurring probiotics) allows healthy gut bacteria to thrive. Once gut flora is optimized, leaky gut symptoms will improve naturally provided the body is also supported with thoughtful dietary choices.

Personal note: I just finished eating my first home made batch of sauerkraut and I cannot believe what a positive difference it has made in such a short period. I eat a small amount with every meal, particularly with animal products (e.g., organic/ pastured eggs, meat, cheese). Oh, how I wish I had been eating home made sauerkraut 10 years ago when I was so sick from my own digestive disorders!

References

Bernardo D et al. 2007. Is gliadin really safe for non-celiac individuals? Production of interleukin 15 in biopsy culture from non-coeliac individuals challenged with gliadin peptides. Gut 56(6):889-90.

Cummings JH. 1993. The effect of dietary fibre on fecal weight and composition. In: Spiller GA, ed. Handbook of dietary fibre in human nutrition. 2^nd ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, p.547-73.

Gluten composition: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gluten. Howdle PD. 2006. Gliadin, glutenin or both? The search for the Holy Grail in coeliac disease. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 18(7):703-6.

Gut and Psychology Syndrome: http://gaps.me/preview/

Jaminet P, Jaminet, SC. 2010. Perfect Health Diet. Ying-Yang Press. Cambridge, MA.

Sollid LM, Jabri B. 2005. Is celiac disease an autoimmune disorder? Curr Opin Immunol 17(6):595-600.

Stephan Guyenet, http://high-fat-nutrition.blogspot.com/2008/05/gluten-links-from-bloggier.html, quoting Dr Kenneth Fine of EnteroLab; see transcript of Dr Fine’s talk at http://www.enterolab/StaticPages/EarlyDiagnosis.htm.

–Cygnia F. Rapp, Founder of Prosperity Organic Foods

I love Melt®! I really do. It boggles my mind how far it has come along from its humble roots. Even after all of these years, Melt continues to be a regular staple in our household. Between my husband and me, we easily go through one “square” (container) per week. How we use it is only limited by the types of food we are cooking each day.

I mostly use Melt for poaching eggs in our egg poacher in the morning. Yes, Melt is delicious for making eggs. Over time, I have come to prefer my eggs poached instead of fried because they taste so much creamier cooked in water instead of fried in a pan. More and more I go out of my way not to cook over high heat because I believe its damaging to the nutritional content of all food.

Second to poaching my eggs, I use Melt on toast. This may sound a little boring, but keep in mind that when I had to exclude butter while on a restricted diet, it was dry toast in the morning that drove me to create Melt in the first place! For 10 years, we mostly eat sprouted-grain toast in the morning (e.g., Ezekial Bread) because it is so much more nutritious and easier to digest than wheat-based products.

Melt is divine in mashed potatoes made with sweet potatoes or yams. These potatoes have so much more flavor and nutritional value than Russets! When I steam vegetables (mostly green beans), Melt is right by my side as a topping. For snacking, I love Melt over popcorn with an added kick of nutritional yeast sprinkled on top.

What other oils do I use?

I was recently asked what other oils I have in my kitchen besides Melt. It’s pretty simple: we have virgin coconut oil, extra-virgin olive oil, and flax oil.

Fortunately, I enjoy the flavor of unrefined flax oil. The nuttiness is great for making salad dressings, which is how I primarily use flax oil these days (I never buy salad dressing, I always make my own). With that said, I would like to point out that if any flax oil smells “fishy” it is because it is rancid. I primarily buy Spectrum’s unrefined flax oil, but sometimes Barlean’s. I avoid the flax oil products with lignans because these particles can be attachment sites for bacterial growth causing rancidity.

I use virgin coconut oil with or without Melt when I want to add an extra boost of medium chain fatty acids to my meal. Mostly I use virgin coconut oil for higher-heat sautéing uses, but sometimes I add it to my mashed potatoes. I use it on my skin sometimes, but I live in such a dry climate (Rocky Mountains of Idaho) that I mostly use unrefined Shea Butter (which strangely enough has been completely effective as a sun screen). I use olive oil mostly for making salad dressings with flax oil, and for medium-high heat sautéing.

Please feel free to let us know how you use Melt in your life. We look forward to seeing you in the grocery store!

-Cygnia F. Rapp, Founder of Prosperity Organic Foods

Jaminet and Jaminet are two Doctorate–level scientists (one a physicist and the other a vascular biologist and cancer researcher) who ate poorly and ignored the gradual decline of their health. By age forty, both had developed disturbing health problems including chronic rosacea, sluggishness, neuropathy, memory loss, and impaired mood (Paul), and endometriosis, ovarian cysts, uterine fibroids, allergies, constipation, acid reflux, and abdominal bloating (Shou-Ching). When doctors were of little help, they decided by 2005 to take charge of their health by experimenting with the low-carb Paleo diet; they both rapidly reversed their health conditions. The low-carb diet had some pitfalls as well: Paul’s cognitive and neuropathic issues worsened and at one point he developed scurvy. They researched, experimented, and added nutritional supplements to fine-tune the diet. In 2009, Paul traced his remaining problems to a chronic bacterial infection, which a course of antibiotics cleared.  With the recovery of their health reminiscent of their twenties, they decided to write “Perfect Health Diet” as a culmination of what they learned.

The primary premise of the book is that disease and ill health are caused by three inter-related factors: food toxins, malnourishment, and chronic infections by bacteria, viruses, fungi, and protozoa; all three factors must be addressed by diet. Furthermore, in many cases “aging” is in fact infectious disease aggravated by poor diet, meaning, many chronic diseases have a microbial origin that are in many cases left untreated (or for that matter undiagnosed).

I found “Perfect Health Diet” to be compelling due to three concepts that are developed throughout the book:

1)     The concept of “Economics of Nutrition”, which is a discussion on food toxicity. With nutrition, the greatest benefit comes from the first amount eaten of any nutrient; each additional amount provides less benefit until eventually the benefit equals zero. Beyond the “plateau range”, a nutrient can become toxic, with increasing amounts becoming more and more toxic. Jaminet and Jaminet (2010) evaluate the “marginal benefit curve” for carbohydrates, protein, and fats with numerous references to scientific literature.

2)     An excellent discussion on how food is transformed by the body. In other words, what goes in the mouth is not the same as what it becomes in the body. Similarly, different foods produce different by-products after the digestion process. Their discussions on wheat (and all grains), soy (and all legumes), sugar, and polyunsaturated fats (especially Omega 6s) are particularly interesting.

3)     The three mammalian dietary strategies (omnivores, herbivores, carnivores) that have evolved over time, how humans are similar and where humans differ in dietary needs. This chapter is especially interesting because it discusses the differences in how omnivores, herbivores, and carnivores transform their foods, which allows the authors to place context for humans and, in doing so, decrease the margin of error in dietary choices.

Ultimately, the Perfect Health Diet resembles the Pacific Islander Diet: a low-to-moderate-carb (20%), high-fat (65%), moderate-protein (15%) diet. By weight, the diet is about 65% plant foods and 35% meat and oils with targeted supplementation.

Keys to the diet include (found: http://perfecthealthdiet.com/?page_id=8):

• Daily carbohydrate intake should be 400-600 calories, primarily from starches (e.g., rice, potatoes, sweet potatoes, taro), fruits, and berries, except on therapeutic ketogenic diets (which should have ~200 carb calories). Eat a variety of vegetables as well, but don’t count them as calorie sources. Protein should be a modest fraction of daily calories — 200-400 calories — but eat to taste. Fats should supply most (50-70%) daily calories.

• By weight, the diet should be about 2/3 plant foods, 1/3 animal foods.

• Do not eat toxic foods.  Notably:
  • Do not eat cereal grains — wheat, barley, oats, corn — or foods made from them — bread, pasta, breakfast cereals, oatmeal. The exception is white rice, which count as “safe starches.” Rice noodles, rice crackers, and the like are fine.
  • Do not eat calorie-rich legumes. Peas and green beans are fine. Soy and peanuts should be absolutely excluded. Beans might be acceptable with suitable preparation, but it is recommended to avoid them.
  • Do not eat foods with added sugar or high-fructose corn syrup. Do not drink anything that contains sugar: healthy drinks are water, tea, and coffee.
  • Polyunsaturated fats should be a small fraction of the diet (~4% of total calories). To achieve this, do not eat seed oils such as soybean oil, corn oil, safflower oil, sunflower oil, canola oil, or the like. The best cooking oils are coconut oil, clarified butter, and beef tallow; palm oil, lard, olive oil, and avocado oil are next best. Nut butters are another possible source of fats.

• Eat nourishing foods: liver, egg yolks, seaweeds, shellfish, vegetable and bone broths. Make sauces from an acid (lemon juice, vinegar), an oil, and herbs. Get sufficient salt.

I am seriously considering the adoption of this diet to see how it affects my health. Stay tuned.

-Cygnia F. Rapp, Founder of Prosperity Organic Foods

The following information has been adapted from Michael Pollan’s book, “Food Rules: An Eater’s Manual” where he explores the idea of real food.

To summarize, real food includes the plants, animals, and fungi people have been eating for generations versus the highly processed products (“edible food-like substances”) of modern food science and the food industry.

Mr. Pollan elaborates by suggesting you probably are not eating real food if the following general rules of thumb apply:

• Your grandmother or great-grandmother would not recognize the ingredients as food.

• It contains chemical additives and or corn and soy derivatives.

• It contains additives that you would not cook with yourself or that you do not recognize (e.g., ethoxylated diglycerides, cellulose, xanthan gum, TBHQ (tertiary butylhydroquinone)).

• It contains high fructose corn syrup or it contains any sugar or sweetener listed in the top 3 ingredients (e.g., barley malt, beet sugar, brown rice syrup, cane sugar, corn sweetener, dextrin, fructo-oligosaccharides, fruit juice concentrate, glucose, sucrose, invert sugar, polydextrose, sucrose, turbinado sugar, organic sugar, raw cane sugar, etc). The same applies for artificial sweeteners since they do not lead to weight loss and may heighten cravings for more sweetness.

• A third grader cannot pronounce all of the ingredients.

• Food products contain the wordoid “lite” or terms “low-fat” or “non-fat” in their names. Many low-fat and non-fat foods are higher in refined carbohydrates (sugar). Excessive carbohydrate intake is more strongly associated with weight gain, obesity, and secondary illness that go with them than consuming fat. Eat the real thing in moderation.

• It has a long list of ingredients (this is different from following a recipe).

• It is an imitation product and or contains imitation ingredients instead of the real thing (e.g., edemame vs. soy mock meats; hydrogenated oils (fake fats) vs. virgin coconut oil, artificial sweeteners vs. honey).

• It is advertised on TV.

• You found it in the peripheries of the supermarket and not in the middle aisles of the store. Processed foods dominate the center aisles while cases of mostly fresh foods line the walls; exceptions include food products like yogurts flavored with high fructose corn syrup and margarines containing corn/ soy oils and hydrogenated fat.

• It will not eventually rot.

• You got it through the window of your car.

Melt® Organic Buttery Spread easily qualifies as real food even though it is intended as a replacement for butter (and therefore could be considered an imitation food).

With that said, Melt® Organic Buttery Spread is a far cry from the margarines of our parent’s generation.

• Melt is organic, non-GMO (!) and contains no hydrogenated oils, artificial ingredients, synthetic preservatives or corn/ soy derivatives and it never will.

• Melt is made with only wholesome ingredients like virgin coconut oil, flax oil, and others, providing you with a balanced combination of healthy organic saturated, monounsaturated, and polyunsaturated fats in a rich and creamy format that is a pleasure to eat.

• Melt offers an Omega 6 to Omega 3 ratio of 2:1, which you simply do not and will not see matched by any other food product in this part of the grocery store.

We hope you enjoy Melt® Organic Buttery Spread’s goodness and look forward to seeing you in the grocery store!

Go to www.meltbutteryspread.com for more information.

Adapted from mercola.com

Conventional medical authorities say that consumption of saturated animal fats is bad for you and causes heart disease. But a hundred years ago, fewer than than one in one hundred Americans were obese, and coronary heart disease was unknown. The Procter and Gamble started marketing Crisco as a new kind of food — the first commercially marketed trans fat. Crisco was originally used to make candles and soap, but with electrification causing a decline in candle sales, Procter and Gamble decided to promote the fat as a “healthier” all-vegetable-derived shortening.

According to LewRockwell.com: “Feeding high doses of fat and cholesterol to omnivores, like rats and dogs, does not produce atherosclerotic lesions in them … In fact, it turns out that people who have highest percentage of saturated fat in their diets have the lowest risk of heart disease … The last word on this subject should go to Julia Child … Enjoy eating saturated fats, they’re good for you!”

The demonization of saturated fat began in 1953, when Dr. Ancel Keys published a paper comparing saturated fat intake and heart disease mortality. His theory turned out to be flimsy, to say the least, but the misguided ousting of saturated fat has continued unabated ever since. Fortunately, the truth is finally starting to come out, as medical scientists have begun to seriously question Keys’ findings.

Time to Put Ancel Keys’ Theory to Rest

Keys based his theory on a study of six countries, in which higher saturated fat intake equated to higher rates of heart disease. However, he conveniently ignored data from 16 other countries that did not fit his theory. Had he chosen a different set of countries, the data would have shown that increasing the percent of calories from fat reduces the number of deaths from coronary heart disease.

And, as illustrated in the featured article, when you include all 22 countries for which data was available at the time of his study, you find that those who consume the highest percentage of saturated fat have the lowest risk of heart disease.

Furthermore, many have now realized that it’s the trans fat found in margarine, vegetable shortening, and partially hydrogenated vegetable oils that is the true villain, causing far more significant health problems than saturated fat ever could!

Still, despite the scientific evidence, the low-fat dogma remains a favorite among most government health authorities. Case in point: the most recent food chart issued by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) in December of last year, recommends reducing your saturated fat intake to a mere seven percent of caloric intake—down from its previously recommended 10 percent…

Newer Studies Debunk Keys’ Theory

The USDA’s lowered recommendation is illogical when you consider the evidence available today, which supports saturated fat as a necessary part of a heart healthy diet. For example, as discussed in the featured article, a number of indigenous tribes around the world are living proof that a high-saturated fat diet equates to low mortality from heart disease.

These include:

And then there’s human breast milk, which contains 54 percent saturated fat. Since breast milk is the most perfect diet in existence for developing infants, the presence of high amounts of saturated fat cannot easily be construed as a “mistake.”

Furthermore:

• A meta-analysis published last year, which pooled data from 21 studies and included nearly 348,000 adults, found no difference in the risks of heart disease and stroke between people with the lowest and highest intakes of saturated fat.
• In a 1992 editorial published in the Archives of Internal Medicine, Dr. William Castelli, a former director of the Framingham Heart study, stated:
  “In Framingham, Mass., the more saturated fat one ate, the more cholesterol one ate, the more calories one ate, the lower the person’s serum cholesterol. The opposite of what… Keys et al would predict…We found that the people who ate the most cholesterol, ate the most saturated fat, ate the most calories, weighed the least and were the most physically active.”
• Another 2010 study published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition found that a reduction in saturated fat intake must be evaluated in the context of replacement by other macronutrients, such as carbohydrates.
  When you replace saturated fat with a higher carbohydrate intake, particularly refined carbohydrate, you exacerbate insulin resistance and obesity, increase triglycerides and small LDL particles, and reduce beneficial HDL cholesterol. The authors state that dietary efforts to improve your cardiovascular disease risk should primarily emphasize the limitation of refined carbohydrate intake, and weight reduction.

The last point is very important and is likely a major key for explaining the rampant increase in obesity, heart disease and diabetes. And once you can pinpoint the problem, turning it all around becomes that much easier.

Carbohydrates, Not Fat, is the Root of Obesity and Heart Disease

Heart disease is so common today, it’s hard for people to remember that a mere 100 years ago, this disease was really uncommon.  As Dr. Donald Miller writes in the featured article:

“There were 500 cardiologists practicing in the U.S. in 1950. There are 30,000 of them now – a 60-fold increase for a population that has only doubled since 1950.”

Such an explosion of heart disease indicates that something has changed that is contributing to this epidemic.

What is that “something”?

Our diet!

Most likely, the studies that have linked the so-called “Western diet” to an increased heart disease risk simply confirm that sugar and refined carbohydrates are harmful to your heart health. Because although the Western diet is high in red and processed meats and saturated fats, it’s also alarmingly high in sugar and refined carbs like bread and pasta. And, as concluded in the last study listed above, when you reduce saturated fat and increase refined carbohydrates, you end up promoting obesity, heart disease and diabetes…

Gary Taubes has also done an excellent job of explaining the connection between carbs and obesity and its related health issues in his book Why We Get Fat: and what to do about it.

In a nutshell, eating fat and protein does not make you fat—carbohydrates do.I firmly believe the two primary keys for successful weight management and reducing your risk for diabetes, heart disease and other weight-related health problems are:

1. Severely restricting carbohydrates (sugars, fructose, and grains) in your diet, and
2. Increasing healthy fat consumption

According to last year’s Report of the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee on the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, the top 10 sources of calories in the American diet are:

1. Grain-based desserts (cakes, cookies, donuts, pies, crisps, cobblers, and granola bars) 139 calories a day
2. Yeast breads, 129 calories a day
3. Chicken and chicken-mixed dishes, 121 calories a day
4. Soda, energy drinks, and sports drinks, 114 calories a day
5. Pizza, 98 calories a day
6. Alcoholic beverages
7. Pasta and pasta dishes
8. Mexican mixed dishes
9. Beef and beef-mixed dishes
10. Dairy desserts

Looking at this list, it plain to see that CARBS—i.e. sugars (primarily fructose) and grains—are the primary sources of our weight- and health problems, not saturated fats.The updated NHANES survey above covers nutritional data from 2005-2006, placing grain-based foods in the top two slots. (While soda comes in at number four, many people, particularly teenagers, probably get a majority of their calories from fructose-rich drinks like soda.)

The Different Types of Fat

Fats can be confusing, but you can generally divide fats into four types:

1. Saturated fats, from animal fat and tropical oils
2. Monounsaturated fat, such as olive oil
3. Polyunsaturated fat, such as omega-3 and omega-6 fats
4. Trans fats, such as margarine

Sources of healthy fats include:

• Olives and Olive oil
• Coconuts and coconut oil
• Butter made from raw grass-fed organic milk
• Raw Nuts, such as, almonds or pecans
• Organic pastured egg yolks
• Avocados
• Grass fed meats
• Palm oil
• Unheated organic nut oils

Another healthful fat you want to be mindful of is animal-based omega-3. Deficiency in this essential fat can cause or contribute to very serious health problems, both mental and physical, and may be a significant underlying factor of up to 96,000 premature deaths each year.

Having the proper balance between omega-3 and omega-6 fats is also very important for optimal health. So in addition to increasing your omega-3 (which most people are sorely deficient in), you also want to decrease your consumption of omega-6, found primarily in:

• Corn oil
• Soy oil
• Canola oil
• Safflower oil
• Sunflower oil

The ideal ratio of omega-3 to omega-6 is 1:1, but the typical American diet is more like 1:20 in favor of omega-6. The overabundance of these oils in processed foods of all kinds explains our excess omega-6 levels.

The other fats you want to avoid are the trans fats. Trans fats are formed when hydrogen is added to vegetable oil during food processing in order to make it solidify. This process, known as hydrogenation, makes fats less likely to spoil, so foods stay fresh longer, have a longer shelf life and also have a less greasy feel. The end result of the hydrogenation process is a completely unnatural fat that causes dysfunction and chaos in your body on a cellular level.

Your Body NEEDS Saturated Fat for Optimal Function

Saturated fats from animal and vegetable sources provide a number of important health benefits. In fact, your body cannot function without saturated fats! Saturated fats are needed for the proper function of your:

• Cell membranes
• Heart
• Bones (to assimilate calcium)
• Liver
• Lungs
• Hormones
• Immune system
• Satiety (reducing hunger)
• Genetic regulation

Healthy Fat Tips to Live By

So please remember, you do need a certain amount of healthy fat, while at the same time you’ll want to avoid the unhealthy varieties. The easiest way to accomplish this is to simply eliminate processed foods, which are high in all things detrimental to your health: sugar, carbs, and dangerous types of fats.

After that, these tips can help ensure you’re eating the right fats for your health:

• Use organic butter made from raw grass-fed milk instead of margarines and vegetable oil spreads. Butter is a healthy whole food that has received an unwarranted bad rap.
• Use coconut oil for cooking. It is far superior to any other cooking oil and is loaded with health benefits. (Remember that olive oil should be used COLD, drizzled over salad or fish, for example, not to cook with.)
• To round out your healthy fat intake, be sure to eat raw fats, such as those from avocados, raw dairy products, and olive oil, and also take a high-quality source of animal-based omega-3 fat, such as krill oil.

For purposes of discussion, the most prominent forms of Omega-3 fatty acids include alpha-linolenic acid (ALA, 18:3), eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA, 20:5), and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA, 22:6). ALA is present in plant-based sources such as flaxseed oil; EPA and DHA are present in animal and marine sources, such as liver, krill, and fish.

Omega-3 Fatty acids are essential fatty acids, necessary from conception through pregnancy and infancy and throughout life: The ratio of omega-6 to omega-3 fatty acids has increased in industrialized societies because of reduced consumption of foods rich in omega-3 fatty acids and increased consumption of vegetable oils rich in omega-6 fatty acids, i.e., linoleic acid in the form of soy, corn, safflower, and canola oils. Another important feature of omega-3 fatty acids is their role in the prevention and modulation of certain diseases that are common in Western civilization. The following is a partial list of diseases that may be prevented or ameliorated with omega-3 fatty acids, in descending order of importance based on available scientific literature:

• Coronary heart disease and stroke,
• Essential fatty acid deficiency in infancy (retinal and brain development),
• Autoimmune disorders (e.g., lupus and nephropathy),
• Crohn’s disease,
• Cancers of the breast, colon, and prostate,
• Mild hypertension, and
• Rheumatoid arthritis.

Dietary ALA vs. dietary DHA: Within the health community, some debate the ability of individuals to convert dietary sources of ALA into the longer forms of EPA and DHA, which are used by the body for many metabolic functions. This question remains heavily debated despite studies that show the removal of dietary ALA promotes Omega-3 fatty acid deficiency, including DHA, and in spite of many experiments demonstrating dietary inclusion of ALA raises Omega-3 tissue fatty acid content, including DHA. Research shows that ALA is converted to DHA, EPA, and docosapentaenoic acid (DPA, 22:5), depending the body’s needs. Like many other fatty acids, the by-products of metabolizing ALA are reused for synthesizing cholesterol and other fatty acids. In addition, numerous in vitro and animal studies show ALA exerting identical metabolic effects as DHA, although longer treatments or higher concentrations of ALA were needed compared to consuming dietary DHA.

The differences between how the body uses dietary DHA compared to dietary ALA have led to the dogma that ALA is not a useful fatty acid for maintaining DHA levels in human tissues. On the contrary, numerous studies indicate that dietary ALA (found in abundance in flaxseed oil) is a crucial dietary source of Omega-3 fatty acids and including it in one’s diet is critical for maintaining EPA, DPA, and DHA levels in human tissue.

Cardiovascular Benefits of Omega-3 Fatty Acids: The strongest evidence of connecting omega-3 fatty acids and disease prevention is found in the inverse relationship between the amount of omega-3 fatty acids in the diet, blood, and tissues and the occurrence of coronary heart disease and its complications. Effects of omega-3 fatty acids on coronary heart disease have been shown in hundreds of experiments in animals, humans, tissue culture studies, and clinical trials. Omega-3 fatty acids have been shown to be protective of heart disease and, by a variety of mechanisms, prevent deaths from coronary disease, particularly cardiac arrest.

The unique properties of omega-3 fatty acids in coronary heart disease first became apparent while investigating the health of Greenland Eskimos who consumed diets very high in fat from seals, whales, and fish and yet had a low rate of coronary heart disease. Further studies clarified this paradox. The fat the Eskimos consumed contained large quantities of the very-long-chain and highly polyunsaturated fatty acids of EPA and DHA, which are abundant in fish, shellfish, and sea mammals and are scarce or absent in land animals and plants. EPA and DHA are synthesized by phytoplankton, which are the equivalent of oceanic plants that serve as the base of the food chain for marine life.

Dietary omega-3 fatty acids act to prevent heart disease through a variety of actions, including the following:

• Preventing arrhythmias (ventricular tachycardia and fibrillation),
• Acting as prostaglandin and leukotriene precursors,
• Having anti-inflammatory properties,
• Inhibiting synthesis of cytokines and mitogens,
• Stimulating endothelial-derived nitric oxide,
• Acting as an antithrombotic,
• Having hypolipidemic properties with effects on triglycerides and VLDLs, and
• Inhibiting atherosclerosis.

EPA and DHA have strong anti-arrhythmic action on the heart. In experimental animals and tissue culture systems, EPA and DHA prevent the development of ventricular tachycardia and fibrillation. Where omega-3 fatty acid intake was increased, total mortality has been improved in several studies. In one study, men who consumed salmon 1 time/wk had a 70% less likelihood of cardiac arrest. In another study overall mortality was decreased by 29% in men with overt cardiovascular disease who consumed omega-3 fatty acids from fish or fish oil, probably due to reducing cardiac arrests. According to a 1998 Physician’s Health Study in the United States, consumption of 1 fish meal/week was associated with a 52% lower risk of sudden cardiac death compared with consumption of <1 fish meal/month in 20,551 male physicians.

Omega-3 Fatty Acids Essential Components of Cell Membranes in Infancy: Two critical periods are worth noting for adequate consuming omega-3 fatty acids: during fetal development and after birth until the biochemical development in the brain and retina is completed. As already noted, the omega-3 fatty acid DHA is an important constituent of the cell membrane of these neural structures. Omega-3 fatty acid deficiency is manifested in both the blood and in tissue biochemistry. Of note is a strikingly low concentration of DHA, which may fall to as much as one-fifth of the normal amount, which the body attempts to replace with Omega-6 fatty acids. Omega-3–deficient diets fed to pregnant rhesus monkeys that continued after birth induced profound functional changes such as reduced vision, abnormal electroretinograms, impaired visual evoked potential, more stereotypic behavior (e.g., pacing), and disturbed cognitive ability.

Some of these findings have been replicated in infants fed formulas deficient in omega-3 fatty acids. Most studies of premature infants have shown visual impairment and abnormal electroretinograms. A recent study in full-term infants compared standard infant formula with human milk and formulas enriched with DHA, the results of which unequivocally demonstrated the considerable differences in cognitive ability.

All human studies substantiated the omega-3 fatty acid deficiency state in plasma, red blood cells, and occasionally in tissues from autopsied infants. The lower concentrations of DHA in plasma and erythrocytes are mirrored by lower concentrations in the brain and retina. Formula-fed infants have lower concentrations of brain DHA than do infants fed human milk. They also have lower intelligence quotients. During pregnancy, both the mother’s stores and dietary intake of omega-3 fatty acids are of critical importance in insuring that the baby has adequate amounts of omega-3 fatty acids at the time of birth.

All polyunsaturated fatty acids, including DHA, are transferred across the placenta into fetal blood. In addition, EPA and DHA in the mother’s adipose tissue can be mobilized as free fatty acids bound to albumin and be made available to the developing fetus via placenta transport. Several studies in monkeys have indicated that when the mother’s diet is deficient in omega-3 fatty acids, the infant at birth is also deficient with low DHA concentrations observed in their plasma and red blood cells. In humans, consuming fish oil or sardines to pregnant women led to higher DHA concentrations in both the mother’s plasma and red blood cells and in cord blood plasma and red blood cells at the time of birth. Once membrane phospholipids have adequate concentrations of DHA, the brain and retina retain these fatty acids, even though the diet may be deficient afterwards.

Barcelo-Coblijn G, Murphy EJ (2009) Alpha-linolenic acid and its conversion to longer chain n-3 fatty acids: Benefits for human health and a role in maintaining tissue n-3 fatty acid levels. Progress in Lipid Research 48:355-374.

Conner WE (2000) Importance of n-3 fatty acids in health and disease. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 71(suppl):171S-175S.

In Europe genetically modified foods and ingredients have to be labeled.

In the United States, they do not.

But the truth is, if and when GM labeling is finally required in the United States, you’re going to see changes to the majority of food labels in your supermarket, as GM foods already widely appear in our food supply.

Most people are not aware that nearly EVERY processed food you encounter at your local supermarket that does not bear the “USDA Organic” label is filled with GM components.

This is due to the amount of GM crops now grown in the United States (over 90 percent of all corn is GM corn and over 95 percent all soy is GM soy).

As you might suspect, it’s in the interest of the industry to keep the prevalence of GM ingredients quiet and they won’t go down without a fight.

Biotech Industry Spends More Than Half a Billion to Influence Congress

In just over a decade, the food and agriculture biotechnology industry has spent more than $572 million in campaign contributions and lobbying expenditures, according to an analysis by Food & Water Watch.

Key among the goals of this intense lobbying effort is to prevent GM food labeling and keep Americans in the dark about the contents of their food.

The analysis states:

“The food and agriculture biotechnology industry has been flexing its financial political muscle to ease the regulatory oversight of genetically modified foods. Lobbying efforts for some of these firms and groups have included approval of cloned food and genetically engineered food, animals and livestock.

Companies are also fighting to eliminate or prevent labeling on genetically modified foods in the United States and preventing other countries from regulating genetically modified foods. These efforts have dovetailed with lobbying to tighten intellectual property law protections over patented seeds and animals in attempts to further benefit the biotech industry.”

Over 95 percent of Americans polled said they think GM foods should require a label, stating it’s an ethical issue and consumers should be able to make an informed choice. Like people in Europe, Americans are suspicious of GM foods, and a large part of why many continue to buy them is because they are unaware that they’re already in the food. A prominent GM food label would be a death sentence to U.S. GM crops, which are right now enjoying a free for all when it comes to entering the food market.

As Ronnie Cummins of the Organic Consumers Association stated:

“Why are there basically no genetically engineered foods or crops anywhere in Europe, while 75 percent of U.S. supermarket foods—including many so-called “natural” foods—are GE tainted?

The answer is simple. In Europe genetically modified foods and ingredients have to be labeled. In the U.S. they do not. Up until now, in North America, Monsanto and the Biotechnocrats have enjoyed free reign to secretly lace non-organic foods with gene-spliced viruses, bacteria, antibiotic-resistant marker genes, and foreign DNA—mutant “Frankenfoods” shown to severely damage the health of animals, plants, and other living organisms in numerous scientific studies.

Monsanto and their allies understand the threat that truth-in-labeling poses for GMOs.

As soon as genetically modified foods start to be labeled in the U.S., millions of consumers will start to read these labels and react.

They’ll complain to grocery store managers and companies, they’ll talk to their family and friends. They’ll start switching to foods that are organic or at least GMO-free. Once enough consumers start complaining about GM foods and food ingredients; stores will eventually stop selling them; and farmers will stop planting them.

Genetically engineered foods have absolutely no benefit for consumers or the environment, only hazards. This is why Monsanto and their friends in the Clinton, Bush, and Obama administrations have prevented consumer GMO truth-in-labeling laws from ever getting a public discussion, much less coming to a vote in Congress.”

Why the Approval of GM Alfalfa Could Mean the End of Organic

Industry lobbying is clearly working, as to date biotech companies have evaded mandatory labeling laws (although a new California initiative may change all of that). They also succeeded in getting GM alfalfa approved, which quite literally threatens the entire organic industry, including organic meat, as alfalfa is the fourth largest crop in the U.S., and is used to produce forage seed and hay to feed cows and other livestock.

Contamination would be disastrous for organic dairy- and cattle farmers as federal organic standards forbid them from using GM crops, and organic food manufacturers will reject a food ingredient if found to be contaminated with GM material — not to mention Monsanto’s history of suing both conventional and organic farmers for patent infringement should their crops be cross-contaminated.

Download Interview Transcript

Cummins noted in the above interview that any alfalfa growing within a five-mile radius of GM alfalfa will immediately become contaminated, and it’s clearly evident that GM crops of all kinds cannot be contained. They absolutely WILL contaminate their conventional and organic counterparts, which will mean ultimately the entire food supply will contain GMOs.

Some, like Dr. Philip Bereano, professor emeritus at the University of Washington and an engaged activist concerning GM foods, believe contamination is actually an intentional strategy by both the government and the industry to weaken the organic industry to simply allow GM animal feed in organics.

Indeed, while USDA chief Tom Vilsack acknowledged alfalfa contamination concerns in an “Open Letter to Stakeholders” on December 30, 2010, stating that the USDA’s environmental impact statement “acknowledges the potential of cross-fertilization to non-GE alfalfa from GE alfalfa,” adding that cross-fertilization is “a significant concern for farmers who produce for non-GE markets at home and abroad,” steps were not taken to address them.

Congress is the Puppet, Biotech is the Puppeteer

It takes only a flick of biotech’s wrist to move Congress’ regulatory arms, and the truth is the revolving door between the two is spinning so fast that the line between industry lobbyists and legislators is permanently blurred.

As the Food & Water Watch report noted:

“At least a baker’s dozen of former members of Congress represent food and agriculture biotechnology interests as lobbyists. Of the companies surveyed, seven spent over $8.5 million to hire the firms of at least 13 former senators and representatives to represent these biotechnology interests to their former colleagues in the Congress. Many of these former legislators-turned-lobbyists have formidable legislative pedigrees.

For example, Former House Agriculture Committee Ranking Member Charles Stenholm (D-TX) is currently a registered lobbyist for Syngenta, a seller of genetically modified plants in the United States and abroad.”

Biotech giant Monsanto is a prime example of how the industry has infiltrated U.S. regulatory agencies like the FDA and the USDA with their previous employees who are still very loyal to Monsanto. Cummins pointed out the following connections as a start:

• Clarence Thomas, who did not withdraw himself from a Supreme Court decision on genetically engineered alfalfa last year, used to be the general counsel for Monsanto.
• Michael Taylor, who was formerly the vice president of Monsanto, is now the Food and Drug Administration Deputy Commissioner for Foods.
• Roger Beachy, the former director of the Monsanto-funded Danforth Plant Science Center in Saint Louis, is now the director of the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture.
• Islam Siddiqui was vice president of Monsanto and Dupont’s funded pesticide-promotion group CropLife. He is now the agricultural negotiator for the U.S. Trade Representative. In other words, he is the enforcer for U.S. foreign policy that countries have to accept our genetically engineered exports.
• Rajiv Shah is the former Agricultural Development Director for the pro-biotech Gates Foundation, who are frequently partnering with Monsanto. He served as Obama’s USDA undersecretary for Research, Education and Economics.
• Elena Kagan has served as President Obama’s Solicitor General. She took Monsanto’s side against organic farmers on the roundup ready alfalfa case.
• Ramona Ramiro, corporate counsel to Dupont, another biotech bully, has been nominated by President Obama to serve as general counsel for the USDA.

This is not an issue of Republican versus Democrat. As Cummins noted, both parties are guilty:

“We must point that it’s not just the Obama Administration that has served as a revolving door for Monsanto. We saw the same situation under Bush Jr., Clinton and Bush Sr. We have a corporation Monsanto that is not only out of control, but that places its people in high positions; that donates large sums of money to members of congress; and that basically gets its way every time there is a policy decision made in Washington.”

It should not come as a surprise, then, that even the current secretary of the USDA, Tom Vilsack, is thoroughly entrenched in the industry. As the Organic Consumers Association (OCA) pointed out:

• Vilsack has been a strong supporter of genetically engineered crops, including bio-pharmaceutical corn.
• The biggest biotechnology industry group, the Biotechnology Industry Organization, named Vilsack Biotech Governor of the Year. He was also the founder and former chair of the Governor’s Biotechnology Partnership.
• When Vilsack created the Iowa Values Fund, his first poster child of economic development potential was Trans Ova and their pursuit of cloning dairy cows.
• The undemocratic and highly unpopular 2005 seed pre-emption bill was Vilsack’s brainchild. The law strips local government’s right to regulate genetically engineered seed (including where GE can be grown, maintaining GE-free buffers or banning GE corn locally).
• Vilsack is an ardent supporter of corn and soy-based biofuels, which use as much or more fossil fuel energy to produce them as they generate, while driving up world food prices and literally starving the poor.
• Overall, Vilsack’s record is one of aiding and abetting Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs) and promoting animal cloning.

I think this makes it a lot easier to understand why GM crops have proliferated the American landscape and food supply, despite public outcry and organized opposition.

GM Crops Failing Miserably, Threatening Public Health

Virtually all of the claims of benefit of GM crops – increased yields, more food production, controlled pests and weeds, reductions in chemical use in agriculture, drought-tolerant seeds – have not materialized. The Global Citizens’ Report on the State of GMOs states:

• Contrary to the claim of feeding the world, genetic engineering has not increased the yield of a single crop.
• Herbicide tolerant (Roundup Ready) crops were supposed to control weeds and Bt crops were intended to control pests. Instead of controlling weeds and pests, GE crops have led to the emergence of super weeds and super pests … Herbicide resistant crops such as Roundup Ready cotton can create the risk of herbicide resistant “superweeds” by transferring the herbicide resistance to weeds.
• Despite claims that genetically modified organisms (GMOs) will lower the levels of chemicals (pesticides and herbicides) used, this has not been the case. This is of great concern both because of the negative impacts of these chemicals on ecosystems and humans, and because there is the danger that increased chemical use will cause pests and weeds to develop resistance, requiring even more chemicals in order to manage them.
• Monsanto has been claiming that through genetic engineering it can breed crops for drought tolerance and other climate-resilient traits. This is a false promise.
• Among the false claims made by Monsanto and the Biotechnology industry is that GE foods are safe. However, there are enough independent studies to show that GE foods can cause health damage.

At the same time, earlier this year, Cry1Ab, a specific type of Bt toxin from certain GM crops, has for the first time been detected in human and fetal blood samples. It appears the toxin is quite prevalent, as upon testing 69 pregnant and non-pregnant women who were eating a typical Canadian diet (which included foods such as GM soy, corn and potatoes), researchers found Bt toxin in:

• 93 percent of blood samples of pregnant women
• 80 percent of fetal blood samples
• 69 percent of non-pregnant women blood samples

There’s now plenty of evidence that the Bt toxin may trigger an inflammatory response, and as you may know, chronic inflammation is at the root of many increasingly common diseases, such as diabetes and heart disease. Food allergies are also skyrocketing, as isinfertility, which could also be a potential side effect of GM foods, based on results from animal studies. Monsanto insists that GM foods are no different from conventionally grown varieties, but the research does NOT support this claim. Here is just a sampling of the unsavory findings associated with GM foods:

The Time is Ripe to Fight Back

All is not lost on the GM food front, as we now have a practical plan to end this disaster. By educating the public about the risks of GM foods through a massive education campaign, and launching a ballot initiative in California for 2012, which will require mandatory labeling of genetically engineered foods and food ingredients, our plan is to generate a tipping point of consumer rejection to make GMOs a thing of the past.

Several organizations, including Mercola.com, the Organic Consumers Association, the Institute for Responsible Technology, and even the Environmental Working Group are getting actively involved. But we do need your help.

Here’s how you can get involved:

• If you live in California and are willing to attend a short training session and then start collecting petition signatures (you will be part of a team of 2-4 people) in early November for the California Ballot Initiative, sign up here. (For more information see: The California Ballot Initiative: Taking Down Monsanto.) Also remember to share this information with family and friends in California!
• Whether you live in California or not, please donate money to this historic effort
• Talk to organic producers and stores and ask them to actively support the California Ballot. It may be the only chance we have to have to label genetically engineered foods.
• Distribute WIDELY the Non-GMO Shopping Guide to help you identify and avoid foods with GMOs. Look for products (including organic products) that feature the Non-GMO Project Verified Seal to be sure that at-risk ingredients have been tested for GMO content. You can also download the free iPhone application that is available in the iTunes store. You can find it by searching for ShopNoGMO in the applications.
• For timely updates, please join the Organic Consumers Association on Facebook, or follow them on Twitter.
• You can also join the Non-GMO Project on Facebook, or Twitter

In the meantime, the simplest way to avoid GM foods is to buy whole, certified organic foods. By definition, foods that are certified organic must never intentionally use GM organisms, produced without artificial pesticides and fertilizers and from an animal reared without the routine use of antibiotics, growth promoters or other drugs. Additionally, grass-fed beef will not have been fed GM corn feed.

You can also look for foods that are “non-GMO verified” by the Non-GMO Project.

Conventional medical authorities say that consumption of saturated animal fats is bad for you and causes heart disease. But a hundred years ago, fewer than than one in one hundred Americans were obese, and coronary heart disease was unknown. The Procter and Gamble started marketing Crisco as a new kind of food — the first commercially marketed trans fat. Crisco was originally used to make candles and soap, but with electrification causing a decline in candle sales, Procter and Gamble decided to promote the fat as a “healthier” all-vegetable-derived shortening.

According to LewRockwell.com: “Feeding high doses of fat and cholesterol to omnivores, like rats and dogs, does not produce atherosclerotic lesions in them … In fact, it turns out that people who have highest percentage of saturated fat in their diets have the lowest risk of heart disease … The last word on this subject should go to Julia Child … Enjoy eating saturated fats, they’re good for you!”

The demonization of saturated fat began in 1953, when Dr. Ancel Keys published a paper comparing saturated fat intake and heart disease mortality. His theory turned out to be flimsy, to say the least, but the misguided ousting of saturated fat has continued unabated ever since. Fortunately, the truth is finally starting to come out, as medical scientists have begun to seriously question Keys’ findings.

Time to Put Ancel Keys’ Theory to Rest

Keys based his theory on a study of six countries, in which higher saturated fat intake equated to higher rates of heart disease. However, he conveniently ignored data from 16 other countries that did not fit his theory. Had he chosen a different set of countries, the data would have shown that increasing the percent of calories from fat reduces the number of deaths from coronary heart disease.

And, as illustrated in the featured article, when you include all 22 countries for which data was available at the time of his study, you find that those who consume the highest percentage of saturated fat have the lowest risk of heart disease.

Furthermore, many have now realized that it’s the trans fat found in margarine, vegetable shortening, and partially hydrogenated vegetable oils that is the true villain, causing far more significant health problems than saturated fat ever could!

Still, despite the scientific evidence, the low-fat dogma remains a favorite among most government health authorities. Case in point: the most recent food chart issued by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) in December of last year, recommends reducing your saturated fat intake to a mere seven percent of caloric intake—down from its previously recommended 10 percent…

Newer Studies Debunk Keys’ Theory

The USDA’s lowered recommendation is illogical when you consider the evidence available today, which supports saturated fat as a necessary part of a heart healthy diet. For example, as discussed in the featured article, a number of indigenous tribes around the world are living proof that a high-saturated fat diet equates to low mortality from heart disease.

These include:

And then there’s human breast milk, which contains 54 percent saturated fat. Since breast milk is the most perfect diet in existence for developing infants, the presence of high amounts of saturated fat cannot easily be construed as a “mistake.”

Furthermore:

• A meta-analysis published last year, which pooled data from 21 studies and included nearly 348,000 adults, found no difference in the risks of heart disease and stroke between people with the lowest and highest intakes of saturated fat.
• In a 1992 editorial published in the Archives of Internal Medicine, Dr. William Castelli, a former director of the Framingham Heart study, stated:
  “In Framingham, Mass., the more saturated fat one ate, the more cholesterol one ate, the more calories one ate, the lower the person’s serum cholesterol. The opposite of what… Keys et al would predict…We found that the people who ate the most cholesterol, ate the most saturated fat, ate the most calories, weighed the least and were the most physically active.”
• Another 2010 study published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition found that a reduction in saturated fat intake must be evaluated in the context of replacement by other macronutrients, such as carbohydrates.
  When you replace saturated fat with a higher carbohydrate intake, particularly refined carbohydrate, you exacerbate insulin resistance and obesity, increase triglycerides and small LDL particles, and reduce beneficial HDL cholesterol. The authors state that dietary efforts to improve your cardiovascular disease risk should primarily emphasize the limitation of refined carbohydrate intake, and weight reduction.

The last point is very important and is likely a major key for explaining the rampant increase in obesity, heart disease and diabetes. And once you can pinpoint the problem, turning it all around becomes that much easier.

Carbohydrates, Not Fat, is the Root of Obesity and Heart Disease

Heart disease is so common today, it’s hard for people to remember that a mere 100 years ago, this disease was really uncommon.  As Dr. Donald Miller writes in the featured article:

“There were 500 cardiologists practicing in the U.S. in 1950. There are 30,000 of them now – a 60-fold increase for a population that has only doubled since 1950.”

Such an explosion of heart disease indicates that something has changed that is contributing to this epidemic.

What is that “something”?

Our diet!

Most likely, the studies that have linked the so-called “Western diet” to an increased heart disease risk simply confirm that sugar and refined carbohydrates are harmful to your heart health. Because although the Western diet is high in red and processed meats and saturated fats, it’s also alarmingly high in sugar and refined carbs like bread and pasta. And, as concluded in the last study listed above, when you reduce saturated fat and increase refined carbohydrates, you end up promoting obesity, heart disease and diabetes…

Gary Taubes has also done an excellent job of explaining the connection between carbs and obesity and its related health issues in his book Why We Get Fat: and what to do about it.

In a nutshell, eating fat and protein does not make you fat—carbohydrates do.I firmly believe the two primary keys for successful weight management and reducing your risk for diabetes, heart disease and other weight-related health problems are:

1. Severely restricting carbohydrates (sugars, fructose, and grains) in your diet, and
2. Increasing healthy fat consumption

According to last year’s Report of the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee on the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, the top 10 sources of calories in the American diet are:

1. Grain-based desserts (cakes, cookies, donuts, pies, crisps, cobblers, and granola bars) 139 calories a day
2. Yeast breads, 129 calories a day
3. Chicken and chicken-mixed dishes, 121 calories a day
4. Soda, energy drinks, and sports drinks, 114 calories a day
5. Pizza, 98 calories a day
6. Alcoholic beverages
7. Pasta and pasta dishes
8. Mexican mixed dishes
9. Beef and beef-mixed dishes
10. Dairy desserts

Looking at this list, it plain to see that CARBS—i.e. sugars (primarily fructose) and grains—are the primary sources of our weight- and health problems, not saturated fats.The updated NHANES survey above covers nutritional data from 2005-2006, placing grain-based foods in the top two slots. (While soda comes in at number four, many people, particularly teenagers, probably get a majority of their calories from fructose-rich drinks like soda.)

The Different Types of Fat

Fats can be confusing, but you can generally divide fats into four types:

1. Saturated fats, from animal fat and tropical oils
2. Monounsaturated fat, such as olive oil
3. Polyunsaturated fat, such as omega-3 and omega-6 fats
4. Trans fats, such as margarine

Sources of healthy fats include:

• Olives and Olive oil
• Coconuts and coconut oil
• Butter made from raw grass-fed organic milk
• Raw Nuts, such as, almonds or pecans
• Organic pastured egg yolks
• Avocados
• Grass fed meats
• Palm oil
• Unheated organic nut oils

Another healthful fat you want to be mindful of is animal-based omega-3. Deficiency in this essential fat can cause or contribute to very serious health problems, both mental and physical, and may be a significant underlying factor of up to 96,000 premature deaths each year.

Having the proper balance between omega-3 and omega-6 fats is also very important for optimal health. So in addition to increasing your omega-3 (which most people are sorely deficient in), you also want to decrease your consumption of omega-6, found primarily in:

• Corn oil
• Soy oil
• Canola oil
• Safflower oil
• Sunflower oil

The ideal ratio of omega-3 to omega-6 is 1:1, but the typical American diet is more like 1:20 in favor of omega-6. The overabundance of these oils in processed foods of all kinds explains our excess omega-6 levels.

The other fats you want to avoid are the trans fats. Trans fats are formed when hydrogen is added to vegetable oil during food processing in order to make it solidify. This process, known as hydrogenation, makes fats less likely to spoil, so foods stay fresh longer, have a longer shelf life and also have a less greasy feel. The end result of the hydrogenation process is a completely unnatural fat that causes dysfunction and chaos in your body on a cellular level.

Your Body NEEDS Saturated Fat for Optimal Function

Saturated fats from animal and vegetable sources provide a number of important health benefits. In fact, your body cannot function without saturated fats! Saturated fats are needed for the proper function of your:

• Cell membranes
• Heart
• Bones (to assimilate calcium)
• Liver
• Lungs
• Hormones
• Immune system
• Satiety (reducing hunger)
• Genetic regulation

Healthy Fat Tips to Live By

So please remember, you do need a certain amount of healthy fat, while at the same time you’ll want to avoid the unhealthy varieties. The easiest way to accomplish this is to simply eliminate processed foods, which are high in all things detrimental to your health: sugar, carbs, and dangerous types of fats.

After that, these tips can help ensure you’re eating the right fats for your health:

• Use organic butter made from raw grass-fed milk instead of margarines and vegetable oil spreads. Butter is a healthy whole food that has received an unwarranted bad rap.
• Use coconut oil for cooking. It is far superior to any other cooking oil and is loaded with health benefits. (Remember that olive oil should be used COLD, drizzled over salad or fish, for example, not to cook with.)
• To round out your healthy fat intake, be sure to eat raw fats, such as those from avocados, raw dairy products, and olive oil, and also take a high-quality source of animal-based omega-3 fat, such as krill oil.