Tag Archives: CAD

Fred Kummerow, PhD, fought the battle against Trans Fats for over 50 years.

Professor Fred Kummerow passed away on May 31 at his home in Urbana, Ill at age 102. He ate butter, red meat and eggs cooked in butter, along with plenty of fruits and vegetables. He avoided margarine, french fries and other fried foods, along with cookies, cake and crackers which contained artificial trans-fats. He conducted research in his nutrition science laboratory at the University of Illinois up until his death. he authored the book Cholesterol Won’t Kill You, But Trans Fat Could: Separating Scientific Fact from Nutritional Fiction in What You Eat

Fred warned the American public and scientists in the 1950s about the dangers of artificial man-made trans fats. His research was largely ignored and criticized by the food industry and by scientists who were funded by the food industry for decades. Despite mounting evidence in both animals and humans that artificial trans fats dramatically increased the risk of heart attacks, strokes, peripheral vascular disease, diabetes, obesity, and probably several forms of cancer, the FDA ignored his pleas to address the issue. In 2009 Professor Kummerow filed a petition with the FDA to ban the use of trans fats. Although federal law required that the FDA respond within 180 days to such a petition, the FDA remained silent. In 2013, approaching the age of 99, Professor Kummerow sued the FDA. Two years latter in 2015 the FDA declared that artificial trans-fats were unsafe and should be eliminated from the US food supply by 2018.

Through his lifelong work, Professor Kummerow has produced a policy change that will likely save hundreds of thousands of lives.

What are trans fats and why have they been in our food for 7 decades?

Although there are some forms of natural trans fats which are safe for consumption when consumed in whole foods, artificial trans-fats are produced by placing unsaturated fat (such as corn oil, soy oil) under high pressure and high temperature conditions and adding hydrogen in the presence of a metal catalyst. These fats were introduced to many American foods because they dramatically extend the shelf life of foods and give a pleasant mouth texture to a variety of processed foods. They remain in many foods still on the shelves today. You cannot rely on labels such as “NO TRANS FATS” OR “TRANS FAT FREE” because food companies are allowed to make this statement as long as the amount of trans fats does not exceed 0.5 grams per serving. No amount is safe!

The Institute of Medicine, on July 10, 2002 declared manufactured trans fatty acid (TFA) a serious danger to the health of our nation with a: “tolerable upper intake level of zero.”  This means there is no safe level of consumption. Despite that strong statement in 2002, it has taken the efforts of an elderly professor, including a lawsuit, to bring the FDA around to finally address the issue.

But it is not over yet, you can bet that the food industry will try to delay the implementation of the ban or possibly even argue against the overwhelming science that supports such a ban.

In the meantime read labels. If any food item contains “partially hydrogenated” oil of any kind or “hydrogenated oil” of any kind it contains trans fats. These foods are typically foods you should not be eating any way because they usually also contain added sugar, refined flour and/or refined easily oxidized inflammatory “vegetable” oils. They are not whole foods and therefore should not be consumed for many reasons. But if you want to eat cake, cookies, crackers, bread, or any other processed foods, beware and read the ingredients so as to at least avoid trans-fats.

You can read about Fred Kummerow, his life and research at these sites:

Fred A. Kummerow, scientist who raised early warnings about trans fats, dies at 102 – The Washington Post

Fred A. Kummerow, an Early Opponent of Trans Fats, Dies at 102 – The New York Times

Fred Kummerow, U. of I. professor who fought against trans fats, dies at 102 – Chicago Tribune

Fred also studied the effects of a oxysterols and oxidized low-density lipoprotein (OxLDL) both of which contribute to atherosclerosis.  In a  2013 publication Professor Kummerow stated

“levels of oxysterols and OxLDL increase primarily as a result of three diet or lifestyle factors: the consumption of oxysterols from commercially fried foods such as fried chicken, fish and french fries; oxidation of cholesterol in vivo driven by the consumption of excess polyunsaturated fatty acids from vegetable oils; and cigarette smoking.”

Yet the American Heart Association continues to recommend increased consumption of polyunsaturated fats from the likes of corn oil, soy oil, cottonseed and similar oils. I have discussed the problems with that advice here and here.

So the next time you avoid trans fats by reading food labels, think of Professor Kummerow who brought light to some very dark areas in the history of nutrition and food in the US.

Eat clean, live clean, and enjoy.

Dr. Bob

STATINS OF NO BENEFIT AGE 80 AND UP, even after a heart attack!


Here is the abstract from the study

Statin Therapy and Mortality in Older Adults With CAD
Objectives: To examine the effect of statins on long-term mortality in older adults hospitalized with coronary artery disease (CAD).
Design: Retrospective analysis.
Setting: University teaching hospital.
Participants: Individuals aged 80 and older (mean aged 85.2, 56% female) hospitalized from January 2006 to December 2010 with acute myocardial infarction (AMI), unstable angina pectoris, or chronic CAD and discharged alive (N = 1,262). Participants were divided into those who did (n = 913) and did not (n = 349) receive a discharge prescription for a statin.
Measurements: All-cause mortality over a median follow-up of 3.1 years.
Results: Participants treated with statins were more likely to be male, to have a primary diagnosis of AMI, to have traditional cardiovascular risk factors, and to receive other standard cardiovascular medications in addition to statins. In unadjusted analysis, statin therapy was associated with lower mortality (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.71–0.96). After adjustment for baseline differences between groups and propensity for receiving statin therapy, the effect of statins on mortality was no longer significant (HR = 0.88, 95% CI = 0.74–1.05). The association between statins and mortality was similar in participants aged 80 to 84 and those aged 85 and older.
Conclusion: In this cohort of older adults hospitalized with CAD, statin therapy had no significant effect on long-term survival after adjustment for between-group differences. These findings, although preliminary, call into question the benefit of statin therapy for secondary prevention in a real-world population of adults aged 80 and older and underscore the need for shared decision-making when prescribing statins in this age group.

In layman’s terms. This study compared patients aged 80 and older who were hospitalized with documented coronary artery disease and compared those sent home on statins and those sent home without a prescription for statins. There was no difference in death rates between the two groups. The use of statins in this situation (known heart disease) is referred to as secondary prophylaxis. Secondary prophylaxis would be expected to have greater risk reduction when compared to primary prophylaxis (no know heart disease).

I have advocated against the use of statins in primary prophylaxis. Statin Guidelines, one step forward, two steps backwards | Practical Evolutionary Health

The data in this study shows no protection from statins when used for secondary prophylaxis (higher risk group) for age 80 and above.

For more discussions on statins, atherosclerosis, coronary artery disease, go here. Statin Drugs | Practical Evolutionary Health

Live clean, eat clean, sleep well.

Bob Hansen MD

Nutrition Journals and the influence of the food industry

Ever wonder why the public is so confused about nutrition recommendations? Just follow the money and you will understand that most of the professional societies that publish nutrition articles are funded by big food companies that are trying to sell more sugar, refined carbs and junk food. I recently read an excellent post about this topic here:

The Vilest Villain: American Society of Nutrition

This theme is repeated by medical journals that are “The Official Journal of the Society of >>>>>>” Just fill in the blanks for just about any medical society. Funding comes from big pharmaceutical companies the same way that funding in the nutrition Journals comes from large (junk) “food” manufacturers.

Don’t get me wrong, there are plenty of very valuable, life-saving drugs out there.

But most chronic human disease in developed societies is generated by various combinations of poor nutrition, lack of exercise, disruption of circadian rhythm, inadequate restorative sleep, stress and lack of social support systems.

The obesity and diabetes epidemics continue to worsen yet the failed dietary advise of major health organizations is slow to respond to the data. Excess refined carbs (especially in the form of “food” made with flour) and added sugar (especially in the form of HFCS) are the major driving forces for obesity, diabetes and cardiovascular disease. Red meat is not the culprit, provided the meat is properly sourced (hormone and antibiotic free, grass fed) and cooked in a manner that does not create carcinogens and inflammatory mediators (cook with slow, low, moist heat, high temperature grilling and smoking cause problems, but that topic  is for another post).

Americans consume an average 130 pounds per year of added sugar and 140 pounds per year of refined flour. Those are averages so there are many people who consume more. The added sugar is not the white stuff people put in their coffee. It comes in all sorts of forms but is found in energy drinks, soda, lattes and mochas, salad dressing,  ketchup, canned soups, canned vegetables, white AND whole grain breads, pasta (even “whole grain”), crackers, breakfast cereal,  just about any packaged food that has more than one ingredient on the label. These foods represent 70% of the American diet. The problems created by this situation are enormous and will bankrupt our “healthcare system”. This is a cultural and economic problem.

The solutions are simple but largely ignored in our society. We are creatures of habit and convenience.

Eat whole foods, nothing from a package that has more than one ingredient. Eat meat, seafood, poultry, fresh organic vegetables (6-9 servings per day), fresh organic fruits, and nuts. Meat should be hormone and antibiotic free (free range, grass fed). Seafood should be wild. Poultry should be free range and the eggs should come from free range chickens, ducks, geese.

Do not worry about eating fat as long as it comes from healthy animals and sources such as coconut oil, extra-virgin olive oil, avocado oil and clarified butter (ghee).

Do not use any “vegetable” oils (corn, soy, and other oils from grains or seeds) The vegetable oils are highly refined and inflammatory. They contain easily oxidized omega 6 fats that feed the production of inflammatory mediators in your body and create oxidized LDL leading to atherosclerosis.

Exercise daily, preferably outside in a green space. Twice per week spend 20-30 minutes  doing resistance training (lift weights, work against the resistance of bands, use your own body weight doing pushups, pull-ups etc)

Reduce stress with mediation, yoga, tai chi, dancing, engaging in fun sports and social activities. Walk on the beach, by a lake, river or stream, in the woods, listen to music.

Get some sunshine regularly especially during the morning to get your circadian rhythm in order and to produce adequate amounts of vitamin D.

Spend time with family, friends and colleagues who are supportive and fun to be around.

Sleep in the dark.

Get at least 7 hours of sleep per night. Avoid TV, computer screens and other electronic devices for at least 2 hours before bedtime.

Unplug from the internet, email, etc on a regular basis.

We evolved as hunter-gatherers.


Bob Hansen MD



Why do our tax dollars continue to subsidize death, disability and disease?

Yesterday I posted a comment on Medscape after reading an article Longtime Dietary Fat Advice Unsupported by Data: Analysis . Medscape is a website with articles and news written for physicians and other health professionals. Anyone can access this information by creating a user name and password, there is no fee.

Here is my comment. It is long and technical. I will provide an explanation in lay terms after quoting myself.

Sugar, especially HFCS (high fructose corn syrup), used in so many foods is more inflammatory than saturated fat. Grass fed meat from ruminants has a fatty acid mix that is exactly the same as wild game, which we evolved to eat, along with tubers, green leafy vegetables, and fruit in season. Excess refined fructose intake AND use of modern refined “vegetable oils” along with non-healthy grains combine to cause excess caloric intake, NAFLD (non-alcoholic fatty liver disease), obesity, metabolic syndrome and CAD (coronary artery disease). N6 PUFA (omega six polyunsaturated fatty acids) are easily oxidized. N3 PUFA (omega 3 fatty acids) despite greater number of double bonds are protected from oxidation in cell and Lipoprotein membranes by plasmalogens as opposed to linoleic acid which is not easily  incorporated into plasmalogens. The PUFA in vegetable oils (linoleic acid) is the FA (fatty acid) that is oxidized on LDL particles and remnant particles, stimulating monocytes to transform to macrophages and then foam cells. The USDA, ADA and AHA have had it upside down for decades and they still fail to admit folly. We evolved for > 1 million years without grains and they have contributed to disease. Per calorie fresh vegetables have five times the amount of fiber compared to whole grains. We do not need grains and would be better without them. They contain anti-nutrients and wheat, hybridized in the 1980s to a storm resistant dwarf plant, now has 50 times more gluten/gliadin than the old wheat. This has generated more gluten intolerance and celiac. Our greatest nutritional threats to public health include refined sugar, carbohydrates predominantly from grains and refined vegetable oils. Vegetable oils are not healthy, we did not evolve to eat them. N3 FAs are anti-inflammatory but have been competing in our diets with a sea of inflammatory N6 PUFA from unnatural refined and easily oxidized “vegetable oils”. Even though PUFA can reduce LDL-C they wreak havoc by creating ox-LDL particles which initiate the cascade of atherosclerosis. Substituting SFA (saturated fatty acids) with PUFA results in increased levels of Lp(a) and oxLDL in humans, not a good thing. Close the feed lots, stop government subsidy of corn, wheat, dairy and soy, eat meat from grass fed ruminants, wild seafood, fresh organic vegetables and fruits in season. Nibble on tree nuts. Stop creating carcinogens with high dry heat cooking methods and we will watch obesity, insulin resistance, metabolic syndrome and atherosclerosis melt away.

That was my comment. Here is some explanation.

I have previously discussed the pro-inflammatory nature of refined “vegetable oils”. “Vegetable oils” are actually not from vegetables, they are from grains, seeds and legumes. The two major sources of excess omega six polyunsaturated fats in the American diet are corn oil and soy oil marketed by various brand names such as Wesson. They are major components of margarine and other butter substitutes and are present in most salad dressings. Most salad dressings sold in our supermarkets contain high levels of easily oxidized unhealthy refined “vegetable oils” and HFCS. The use of these salad dressings converts a healthy salad into a vector for disease.

The major source of caloric sweeteners in our food and beverages is high fructose corn syrup. Both corn (oil and sugar) and soy predominate our processed food supply because they are cheap. They are cheap because our tax dollars subsidize their production. This subsidy started during the Nixon administration. Once a food subsidy is put in place it is very difficult to eliminate, Big Agriculture provides a deep pocket for lobby money and our elected officials from the mid-west bread-basket respond to $$.

Another major source of disease causing elements in the standard American diet is highly refined flour from wheat. Doctors Davis and Perlmutter discuss the problems associated with wheat-flour foods in their books Wheat Belly and Grain Brain respectively. The production of wheat has also been subsidized since the Nixon administration.

Wheat is not what it used to be. A new dwarf hybrid wheat has predominated the US market since the 1980s. Bread and pasta are not what they used to be when great grand-mother made her own bread and pasta in the kitchen from coarsely ground whole flour. But even if we all went back to making our own whole-grain bread and pasta from locally ground pre-1980s wheat, bread, pasta and pastry would still present a health risk because of issues related to intestinal permeability, auto-immune disease (now epidemic in the USA), and the presence of nasty lectins and phytates (discussed in my manifesto and previous posts).

The Medscape comment quoted above describes  adverse consequences caused by replacing saturated fat in the diet with “vegetable oils”. This is a complex subject and I will try to be brief for now but promise to expand on this in a future post.

Many factors contribute to atherosclerosis, heart attack and stroke. Sedentary lifestyle, stress, inadequate restorative sleep, smoking and poor dietary choices top the list. These factors also contribute to obesity, diabetes, metabolic syndrome, insulin resistance and many cancers.


The combination of sugared foods and beverages (predominantly sweetened with HFCS), refined flour foods, and excess consumption of the PUFA in “vegetable oils” TOGETHER  contribute to the formation of plaque in the walls of our arteries (atherosclerosis).

How does this happen?

LDL (low density lipoprotein) is a particle that transports cholesterol and triglycerides through our blood to our organs. This particle is comprised of a core and a surrounding membrane.  Here is a picture.


The core contains cholesterol in a storage form (esters) and triglycerides. The outer membrane includes a large protein called apoprotein B-100, “free” cholesterol molecules and phospholipids. The phospholipids contain fatty acids, including PUFA.

LDL has been demonized as “the bad cholesterol” and that demonization has mislead the public.

hdl_ldl good guy bad guy

LDL is the major lipoprotein in our blood but there are others that have different names.

Cholesterol is cholesterol, whether it is carried in LDL or HDL. When carried in the core of a lipoprotein it is carried as a cholesterol ester. 80% of the cholesterol in an LDL particle is carried as an ester in the core. 20% is carried as “free” cholesterol on the outer surface or membrane.

LDLand cholesterol molecule

HDL (high density lipoprotein) is smaller and denser. HDL has been called “the good cholesterol”, another misnomer.

HDL particles, when they are functioning correctly can protect us from atherosclerosis but in patients with diabetes, obesity, and insulin resistance, HDL particles do not function well and in fact probably contribute to disease. (More about that in a future post)

But back to LDL.

Although the risk of cardiovascular disease is correlated with the amount of cholesterol carried by LDL in our blood (referred to as LDL-C), the total amount of cholesterol shuttled by LDL particles is much less relevant than one would be led to believe given the great use of statin drugs to lower LDL-C.

The short version is as follows.

Compared to LDL-C, a much better predictor of cardiovascular disease is the amount of “modified” LDL particles circulating in the blood. Oxidized LDL particles are one form of “modified LDL”. LDL can also  be modified by excess blood sugar levels (especially from HFCS). This modification is referred to as glycosylated or glycated LDL. In this latter form of modification, the major protein on the outer membrane of the LDL particle (apo B 100 in the picture above) becomes attached to a sugar and the result is an LDL particle that is not easily cleared by normal processes. The modified LDL is not “recognized” by the LDL receptors that act as entry points into our cells for proper processing. The result is that the glycated LDL particles circulate longer and are more likely to use up their anti-oxidants (Vitamin E and  Co-enzyme Q 10).

As a result glycated LDL are more likely to become oxidized. That is not good because oxidized LDL sets up a cascade of unhealthy events.

The portion of the LDL particle that becomes oxidized is the fat (fatty acid) from “vegetable oil”, specifically the fatty acid called linoleic acid. This fatty acid has two double bonds making it more likely to be oxidized than for example oleic acid, the major fatty acid in extra virgin olive oil which has only one double bond.

The double bonds between the carbons in the fatty acids are unstable and easily oxidized. The single bonds in saturated fat do not get oxidized.

All other things being equal (and you will see that they are not), the more double bonds in a fatty acid the greater chance for oxidation.

Here is a picture showing the linoleic acid, also called linoleate, on the outer membrane of the LDL particle.

LDL with linoleate

And here is a picture that shows the phospholipids that contain the linoleic acid.


Let’s say it again. The fatty acid found in “vegetable” oil, linoleic acid, is easily oxidized because it has two double bonds.

Saturated fats are not oxidized because they contain no double bonds.

The part of the LDL particle that becomes oxidized is the fatty acid that comes from “vegetable oils”.

A particular kind of immune cell (white blood cells called monocytes) have  special receptors for oxidized LDL particles. When ox-LDL are “seen” by these monocytes, the monocytes become transformed into macrophages. Macrophages are designed to destroy bacteria that invade our bodies. The oxidized LDL particles resemble the structures of invading bacteria. The macrophages, with very specialized receptors for oxidized LDL, “swallow” the LDL particles and release toxic chemicals to destroy “the invader”.  The macrophages then become “foam cells” in the walls of our arteries, initiating the creation of plaque. Here is a picture.

ldl_mechanisms oxidation in vessel wall

This picture depicts the oxidation occurring in the wall of the artery after LDL particles have penetrated the wall. However LDL particles can and do become oxidized while still circulating in the blood and these oxidized particles can stimulate monocytes to transform into macrophages and gobble up the oxidized or modified LDL while these particles are still circulating in the blood.

How and whether unmodified LDL particles cross the wall of arteries into the “sub-endothelial” area remains an unsolved complex issue. The picture above implies that LDL particles simply move across the endothelial cells that line the wall of the artery but that is a presumption.

Clearly, macrophages that have “swallowed” modified LDL particles have mechanisms to work their way between the junctions formed by adjacent endothelial cells.

This is an important distinction because many cardiologists believe that what drives atherosclerosis is a mass effect. The greater the number of LDL particles, the more likely they are to cross the endothelial barrier, get oxidized and retained and start the process of plaque formation. However the process is much more complex and not clearly understood.

We do not yet know or understand completely the factors that influence the permeability of the endothelium to Lipoprotein particles. We do know that modified (oxidized and glycated LDL) disrupt the protective surface of endothelial cells which is called the glyocalyx. Other factors that disrupt the glyocalyx include high blood sugars, dramatic fluctuations in blood pressure (too high or too low), oxidative stress, infections, and circulating endotoxin (which is governed by intestinal permeability).

It is clear from several studies that modified (oxidized) LDL as a single variable predicts cardiovascular disease and heart attacks with much greater accuracy than LDL-C (total cholesterol content of LDL particles). It is also clear that monocyte receptors are specific for modified LDL and that the  process that initiates the cascade of events that leads to plaque formation involves the interaction between modified lipoprotein particles and the immune system (monocytes).

Now here is another twist.

Omega 3 fatty acids in fish oil are considered “heart healthy”. They help prevent heart attacks and strokes. They also decrease inflammation throughout the body thereby producing many health benefits.


How do they avoid contributing to atherosclerosis? Are they not even more readily oxidized than linoleic acid?

The simple answer is no.

The major reason is that the omega three fatty acids are protected by “plasmalogens” which are important components of our LDL particle outer membranes. Plasmalogens are found in the membranes of lipoprotein particles and in the membranes of human cells. Because of their chemical structures, omega three fats are easily incorporated into plasmalogens which protect the double bonds of omega three fats from oxidation. Linoleic acid, the predominant component of “vegetable oils” is not easily incorporated into the protective arms of plasmalogens.

This selective protection is well described on pages 141-142 of  “The Fats of Life”, written by Dr. Glen Lawrence and published in paperback in 2013. (link below)

I asked Dr. Lawrence about this issue in an email and here was his response.

“The omega-3 fatty acids are preferentially incorporated into plasmalogens, which act as antioxidants due to the double bond adjacent to the ether linkage of these phospholipids. This structure would tend to scavenge free radicals or reactive oxygen species near the surface of the membrane, rather than allowing them to penetrate deeper in the membrane where the double bonds of PUFA are located. This makes any polyunsaturated fatty acids attached to the plasmalogens more resistant to oxidation than they would be in a regular phospholipid. See pp 141-142 of The Fats of Life. The shorter chain and less unsaturated linoleic acid does not tend to be incorporated into plasmalogens.”

In summary:

  1. “Vegetable oil” is actually not oil from vegetables but rather a highly processed and refined oil. This oil contains primarily the easily oxidized omega 6 PUFA (polyunsaturated fatty acid) linoleic acid. Oxidation can occur during manufacture,  before consumption while sitting in the bottle, but especially during high heat cooking (fried foods). Oxidation can also in your body as this fat circulates in your blood on the membrane of lipoprotein particles.
  2.  LDL particles are the major lipoprotein particles that shuttle cholesterol and fatty acids (in in the form of triglycerides) through our bodies in our bloodstream.
  3. Modified LDL particles (glycated and/or oxidized LDL) stimulate monocytes (immune cells) to transform into macrophages and gobble up the modified LDL. In addition, glycated LDL particles are more easily oxidized because they circulate longer in our blood.
  4. Macrophages become filled with modified LDL. These are called foam cells. Foam cells  initiate a cascade of events that lead to the formation of plaque in the walls of our arteries.
  5. The part of the LDL particle membrane that becomes oxidized is the phospholipid that contains linoleic acid which comes from “vegetable oils”
  6. High amounts of sugar, especially HFCS, and highly refined flour foods in our diets cause larger blood sugar fluctuations than whole foods and therefore contribute to the glycation of LDL particles. This glycation leads to more oxidation of LDL. In this manner HFCS and refined flour foods contribute to the process of atherosclerosis.
  7. High amounts of sugar, HFCS and refined flour foods also contribute to obesity, insulin resistance and diabetes which then increase the risk of heart attack and stroke.
  8. Several factors contribute to the disruption of the glycocalyx which is the protective surface of the endothelial cells that line our arteries. These include but are not limited to modified LDL, inflammation, high blood sugars, abnormal fluctuations in blood pressure, circulating endotoxin (associated with increased intestinal permeability), infections. Disruption of the glycocalyx contributes to the formation of plaque (atherosclerosis).
  9. Modified LDL particles might also migrate through the junctions that connect adjacent endothelial cells either inside macrophages or on their own. Many factors, known and unknown likely determine the susceptibility or permeability of these junctions to this migration.

These are the major points, but there is allot more to discuss. Substituting “vegetable oils” for saturated fat in our diets not only increases the amount of oxidized LDL but also increases a dangerous lipoprotein called Lp(a). On third of Americans have an amount of Lp(a) that is considered “high risk” for heart attack and stroke. More about that in a future post.

Then there is the process of an actual heart attack or stroke which involves disruption of plaque and the creation of a blood clot that ultimately disrupts the flow of blood and the death of heart or brain tissue. The susceptibility of plaque to disruption is a huge topic that involves high blood pressure, diabetes, insulin resistance, oxidative stress, inadequate sleep, and stress to name a few. So much more to discuss.

But getting back to the title of this post, why don’t you ask your elected representatives why our tax dollars continue to subsidize nutritional root causes of death, disability and disease?

Here are some links to papers and books that support the discussion above.

Circulating Oxidized LDL Is a Useful Marker for Identifying Patients With Coronary Artery Disease

Cholesterol deposition in macrophages: foam cell formation mediated by cholesterol-enriched oxidized low density lipoprotein.

Erythrocyte fatty acid profiles can predict acute non-fatal myocard… – PubMed – NCBI

Changes in Dietary Fat Intake Alter Plasma Levels of Oxidized Low-Density Lipoprotein and Lipoprotein(a)

Low-density lipoprotein subclass patterns and risk of myocardial in… – PubMed – NCBI

Subendothelial Lipoprotein Retention as the Initiating Process in Atherosclerosis

Oxidative susceptibility of low density lipoprotein subfractions is… – PubMed – NCBI

Effects of linoleate-enriched and oleate-enriched diets in combinat… – PubMed – NCBI

Enhanced oxidative susceptibility and reduced antioxidant content o… – PubMed – NCBI

Susceptibility of small, dense, low-density lipoproteins to oxidati… – PubMed – NCBI

Modulation of Endothelial Glycocalyx Structure under Inflammatory Conditions

Oxidized Lipoproteins Degrade the Endothelial Surface Layer

S1P Control of Endothelial Integrity

Mechanical control of the endothelial barrier. – PubMed – NCBI

Therole of actin-binding proteins in the control of endothelial bar… – PubMed – NCBI

The Fats of Life, Dr. Glen Lawrence

Functions of plasmalogen lipids in health and disease

Grain Brain: The Surprising Truth about Wheat, Carbs, and Sugar–Your Brain’s Silent Killers: David Perlmutter, Kristin Loberg: 9780316234801: Amazon.com: Books

Finally a quote from the Dali Lama (thanks to my cousin Diane for bringing this to my attention).

“Man. Because he sacrifices his health in order to make money. Then he sacrifices money to recuperate his health. And then he is so anxious about the future that he does not enjoy the present, the result being that he does not live in the present or the future, he lives as if he is never going to die, and dies having never really lived.”

Eat clean, live clean, sleep well, exercise wisely, rest often, enjoy the company of loved ones, spend time outdoors and live in the present.


Low Carb Beats Low Fat Again, Annals of Internal Medicine article

Once again, a randomized trial demonstrates that a carbohydrate restricted approach is superior to a low fat diet with regards to weight loss, inflammation, body composition and cardiovascular risk factors. This study was recently published in the Annals of Internal Medicine, the official journal for the American College of Physicians.

Men and women aged 22 to 75 years with a body mass index of 30 to 45 kg/m2 (obesity defined as BMI > 30, morbid obesity defined as BMI >35) were recruited from the general public by using mailing lists, fliers, work site and community screenings, and television advertisements.

Neither diet included a specific calorie or energy goal. Participants in each group were asked to refrain from changing their physical activity levels during the intervention

Here is the summary cut and pasted from the abstract.

Objective: To examine the effects of a low-carbohydrate diet compared with a low-fat diet on body weight and cardiovascular risk factors.

Design: A randomized, parallel-group trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00609271)

Setting: A large academic medical center.

Participants: 148 men and women without clinical cardiovascular disease and diabetes.

Intervention: A low-carbohydrate (<40 g/d) or low-fat (<30% of daily energy intake from total fat [<7% saturated fat]) diet. Both groups received dietary counseling at regular intervals throughout the trial.

Measurements: Data on weight, cardiovascular risk factors, and dietary composition were collected at 0, 3, 6, and 12 months.

Results: Sixty participants (82%) in the low-fat group and 59 (79%) in the low-carbohydrate group completed the intervention. At 12 months, participants on the low-carbohydrate diet had greater decreases in weight (mean difference in change, −3.5 kg [95% CI, −5.6 to −1.4 kg]; P = 0.002), fat mass (mean difference in change, −1.5% [CI, −2.6% to −0.4%]; P = 0.011), ratio of total–high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol (mean difference in change, −0.44 [CI, −0.71 to −0.16]; P = 0.002), and triglyceride level (mean difference in change, −0.16 mmol/L [−14.1 mg/dL] [CI, −0.31 to −0.01 mmol/L {−27.4 to −0.8 mg/dL}]; P = 0.038) and greater increases in HDL cholesterol level (mean difference in change, 0.18 mmol/L [7.0 mg/dL] [CI, 0.08 to 0.28 mmol/L {3.0 to 11.0 mg/dL}]; P < 0.001) than those on the low-fat diet.

Limitation: Lack of clinical cardiovascular disease end points.

Conclusion: The low-carbohydrate diet was more effective for weight loss and cardiovascular risk factor reduction than the low-fat diet.

Primary Funding Source: National Institutes of Health.

Let’s go through those results again: At 12 months, participants on the low-carbohydrate diet had

  1.  greater decreases in weight. This has been demonstrated in multiple previously published studies.
  2.  greater decreases in  fat mass. This is an important distinction, the low carb group lost more fat, not muscle.
  3.  greater decreases in the ratio of total to high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol. This ratio is a measure of cardiovascular risk (risk for heart attack and stroke). It improved more on low carb than on low fat diets.
  4.  greater decreases in triglyceride level. Triglyceride level is also an important cardiovascular risk factor. It went down significantly more as compared to the low fat diet.
  5.  greater increases in HDL cholesterol level. This result is considered to be protective against heart attack and stroke.
  6. greater decreases in CRP level than those in the low-fat group. CRP (C-reactive protein) is a blood test for inflammation and is also a cardiovascular risk factor.
  7. significant decreases in estimated 10-year risk for coronary heart disease as measured by the Framingham risk analysis at 6 and 12 months, whereas those in the low-fat group did not. Say again, the low fat group did not decrease their Framingham risk analysis but the low carb group did.

All of these differences were “statistically significant”, meaning they were unlikely caused by accident.
And what about side-effects?

The number of participants who had symptoms, including constipation, fatigue, thirst, polyuria, diarrhea, heartburn, gas, nausea, vomiting, appetite changes, or headache, did not differ significantly between the low-carbohydrate and low-fat groups, except significantly more participants on the low-fat diet reported headaches at 3 months

The authors concluded:

Our study found that a low-carbohydrate diet induced greater weight loss and reductions in cardiovascular risk factors at 12 months than a low-fat diet among black and white obese adults who did not have diabetes, CVD, or kidney disease at baseline. Compared with a low-fat diet, a low-carbohydrate diet resulted in greater improvements in body composition, HDL cholesterol level, ratio of total–HDL cholesterol, triglyceride level, CRP level, and estimated 10-year CHD risk. Because CVD is the most common cause of death in the United States and obesity is a particularly prevalent risk factor, our study has important clinical and public health implications

Effects of Low-Carbohydrate and Low-Fat Diets: A Randomized Trial, A. Bazzano, MD, PhD, MPH et. al., Ann Intern Med. 2014;161(5):309-318. doi:10.7326/M14-0180

Get rid of the sugar-added foods, processed and refined flour foods and vegetable oils. Send a message to corporate America that crap-in-a bag and crap-in-a-box is no longer in demand. Eat only grass-fed meat, wild seafood, fresh vegetables, fresh fruit and tree nuts. Enjoy better health and better food.


Bob Hansen MD.

Carbohydrate Restriction for Diabetes I and II

A great review article challenging the current low fat dogma has been published. This should be required reading for all physicians. It brings clarity, data, and perspective to the discussion.

Here is the abstract:


“The inability of current recommendations to control the epidemic of diabetes, the specific failure of the prevailing low-fat diets to improve obesity, cardiovascular risk or general health and the persistent reports of some serious side effects of commonly prescribed diabetic medications, in combination with the continued success of low-carbohydrate diets in the treatment of diabetes and metabolic syndrome without significant side effects, point to the need for a reappraisal of dietary guidelines.”

Here are the opening paragraphs.

“The benefits of carbohydrate restriction in diabetes are immediate and well-documented. Concerns about the efficacy and safety are long-term and conjectural rather than data-driven. Dietary carbohydrate restriction reliably reduces high blood glucose, does not require weight loss (although is still best for weight loss) and leads to the reduction or elimination of medication and has never shown side effects comparable to those seen in many drugs.

Here we present 12 points of evidence supporting the use of low-carbohydrate diets as the first approach to treating type 2 diabetes and as the most effective adjunct to pharmacology in type 1. They represent the best-documented, least controversial results. The insistence on long-term random-controlled trials as the only kind of data that will be accepted is without precedent in science. The seriousness of diabetes requires that we evaluate all of the evidence that is available. The 12 points are sufficiently compelling that we feel that the burden of proof rests with those who are opposed.

“At the end of our clinic day, we go home thinking, ‘The clinical improvements are so large and obvious, why don’t other doctors understand?’ Carbohydrate restriction is easily grasped by patients: because carbohydrates in the diet raise the blood glucose, and as diabetes is defined by high blood glucose, it makes sense to lower the carbohydrate in the diet. By reducing the carbohydrate in the diet, we have been able to taper patients off as much as 150 units of insulin per day in eight days, with marked improvement in glycemic control – even normalization of glycemic parameters.”

— Eric Westman, MD, MHS [1].

Here is the link to the whole article.

Dietary Carbohydrate restriction as the first approach in diabetes management. Critical review and evidence base

Peace and good health.

Bob Hansen MD

Weight Gain, Another Reason to Avoid Statins

Published on line two days ago in advance of print publication, a new study demonstrates an association between statin use and increased caloric intake resulting in weight gain. (1)

A brief editorial (Written by Dr. Rita Redberg, on faculty at UCSF and editor of JAMA: INTERNAL MEDICINE). is worth quoting in entirety as it succinctly reviews many criticisms of statin overuse that I have discussed in previous posts here and here.

“There remains much controversy over the risks and benefits of statins for primary prevention. Besides the risks of muscle aches, diabetes, and cognitive dysfunction, I have observed over the years that for many patients, statins provide a false reassurance, as people seem to believe that statins can compensate for poor dietary choices and a sedentary life. In an elegantly performed analysis of NHANES data from 1999 to 2010, Sugiyama and colleagues have documented exactly such behavior. They found that compared with statin nonusers, statin users significantly increased their fat intake and calorie consumption, along with their BMI, in the last decade. This article raises concerns of a potential moral hazard of statin use, in addition to the already known adverse effects. Focusing on cholesterol levels can be distracting from the more beneficial focus on healthy lifestyle to reduce heart disease risk.” (2)

Of course association does not imply causation, but the editorial above suggests a plausible explanation for the relationship.

I have previously discussed how a carbohydrate restricted whole foods diet (here and here) results in superior weight loss, improved glucose control, reduced blood pressure, reduced triglycerides and improved HDL when compared to a low fat American Heart Association type diet. The former results in spontaneous reduction of caloric intake (improved satiety-no calorie counting required), the latter requires calorie counting in order to reduce caloric intake. The carbohydrate restricted approach does NOT result in increased net fat intake but because carbohydrates are reduced, fat as a % of total calories is increased. On average most studies in adults report a spontaneous reduction of about 400-600 calories per day when carbohydrates are significantly restricted.

A paleolithic diet that eliminates all processed foods, refined vegetable oils, grains, legumes and dairy but includes pastured grass-fed meat, wild seafood, free range poultry and eggs, organic fresh vegetables, fruit and nuts is typically low carbohydrate compared to the standard American diet (SAD). A paleolithic nutritional approach produces similar metabolic improvement within a few weeks. (3)

(1) Sugiyama T, Tsugawa Y, Tseng C-H, Kobayashi Y, Shapiro MF. Different time trends of caloric and fat intake between statin users and nonusers among US adults: gluttony in the time of statins? [published online April 24, 2014]. JAMA Intern Med. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2014.1927. PubMed

(2) Statins and Weight Gain: Redberg RF. JAMA Intern Med. 2014 Apr 24. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2014.1994. [Epub ahead of print]  PubMed

(3) Metabolic and physiologic improvements from consuming a paleolithic, hunter-gatherer type diet L A Frassetto1, M Schloetter, M Mietus-Synder, R C Morris Jr1 and A Sebastian European Journal of Clinical Nutrition (2009) 63, 947–955; doi:10.1038/ejcn.2009.4; published online 11 February 2009 PubMed

Go in peace

Bob Hansen MD