Those that have followed this blog may know that I make no bones about my disdain of high-carb diets. There are essential amino acids that must be eaten. There are essential fatty acids. But there is no such thing as an essential carbohydrate. Althought the medical associations, politicians, bureaucrats and the MSM have demonized fat as the cause of the obesity epidemic, I blame the preponderance of carbohydrates in the diet. Of course, that preponderance is a function of free will aka personal decisions for godd or, as is the case here, for ill.
As a natural bodybuilder, I thrive on a high protein, moderate-fat, low carbohydrate diet with twice-weekly high-carb meals to refill glycogen stores. That's when I'm cutting down for a show. In the off-season, I enjoy "regular" food like anyone else, albeit my diet is still high protein, and carbs are limited to at most one meal a day. I just go from 2 days a week to 5 or 6 (or 7). And I relax the kind of carbs I eat. During dieting, it's restricted to mostly oatmeal and sweet potato.
The last few years, I've had checkups when I was in mostly decent shape, albeit short of contest-ready, and my blood chemistry is superior to when I am off-season. High HDL cholesterol, low LDL, low triglycerides, etc. Good solid numbers. From my own experience, and the anecdotal evidence from others that I communicate with in the bodybuilding community in-person and on various forums, it is clear that carbs, at least very high carbs, are detrimental to overall health. I have met bodybuilders older than me who have licked insulin-resistance, syndrome-X, high blood cholesterol, low HDL levels, high triglycerides, heart palpitations, obesity, and partial blockage of arteries with the natural bodybuilding lifestyle (no drugs whatsoever!).
And nothing helps more than a bodybuilding contest diet where through a combination of restricted calories (especially carbs) and exercise bodyfat percentages are brought down to the single digits. All of a sudden, all of the above ailments just disappear. But it is quite hard to systematically starve oneself for several months straight without losing either lean tissue or your mind.
In any case, anecdotal evidence tends to be dismissed out of hand by the medical community. Heck - I have had doctors tell me I was obese even in times I had hardly any fat on me because my BMI was high. I was like "what the heck do you want me to lose?" Thus, it is good to read a story in the paper or on a blog that confirms outright what we have known for a long time. Such is the case today with this article (although I have some reservations and concerns on a scientific basis that I will touch on below) from the Israel National News via
Doug Ross @directorblue:
Medical First: Watching Effects of Hi-Carb Food on Arteries.
Using a clinical technique pioneered by his laboratory in Israel, Dr. Michael Shechter of Tel Aviv University’s Sackler School of Medicine and the Heart Institute of Sheba Medical Center was able to visualize what happens inside our arteries before, during and after eating high carb foods. Doctors have known for decades that foods like white bread and corn flakes aren’t good for cardiac health. But, this new landmark study shows exactly how these high carb foods increase the risk for heart problems.
"Looking inside” the arteries of students eating a variety of foods, Dr. Shechter was able to visualize that foods with a high glycemic index caused swelling of brachial arteries in the upper arm for several hours.
Elasticity of arteries anywhere in the body can be a measure of heart health. But when aggravated over time, a sudden expansion of the artery wall can cause a number of negative health effects, including reduced elasticity, which can cause heart disease or sudden death.
“It’s very hard to predict heart disease,” says Dr. Shechter, a fellow of the American College of Cardiology and the American Heart Association. “But doctors know that high glycemic foods rapidly increase blood sugar. Those who excessively indulge in these foods have a greater chance of sudden death from heart attack. Our research connects the dots, showing the link between diet and what’s happening in real time in the arteries.”
...The results were published in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology.
Using 56 healthy volunteers, the researchers looked at four groups. One group ate a cornflake mush mixed with milk, a second a pure sugar mixture, the third bran flakes, while the last group was given a placebo (water). Over four weeks, Dr. Shechter applied his method of “brachial reactive testing” to each group. The test uses a cuff on the arm, like those used to measure blood pressure, which can visualize arterial function in real time.
The results were dramatic. Before any of the fasting patients ate, arterial function was essentially the same. After eating, except for the placebo group, all had reduced functioning.
Enormous peaks indicating arterial stress were found in the high glycemic index groups: the cornflakes and sugar group. “We knew high glycemic foods were bad for the heart. Now we have a mechanism that shows how,” says Dr. Shechter. “Foods like cornflakes, white bread, french fries, and sweetened soda all put undue stress on our arteries. We’ve explained for the first time how high glycemic carbs can affect the progression of heart disease.” During the consumption of foods high in sugar, there appears to be a temporary and sudden dysfunction in the endothelial walls of the arteries.
Endothelial health can be traced back to almost every disorder and disease in the body. It is “the riskiest of the risk factors,” says Dr. Shechter, who practices at the Chaim Sheba Medical Center ― Tel Hashomer Hospital. There he offers a test that can show patients ― in real time ― if they are at high risk for heart attacks. “Medical tourists” from America regularly visit to take the heart test.
The take-away message? Dr. Shechter says to stick to foods like oatmeal, fruits and vegetables, legumes and nuts, which have a low glycemic index. Exercising every day for at least 30 minutes, he adds, is an extra heart-smart action to take.
Let me be just a tad nit-picky about the study. The glycemic index (GI) is about as useful as the BMI. It is an index based upon the average of postprandial glucose tests from 12 individuals that are healthy. The variations between the 12 are statistically significant and there is no guarantee that one persons body will handle the absorption of carbohydrates anywhere near what another person will. Nutrient absorption especially with carbs is all over the map. I have tested myself with a glucose meter (you can pick one up at any pharmacy for free and get cheap test strips on ebay) every 20 minutes after a meal and found that my response to sweet potato, a low GI food, is no different from my response to a bagel, a very high GI food. I changed my diet based on the results.
The other thing that sticks out in the study is that medium-GI foods were not used. Nor, for that matter, foods considered low-GI. Why? Wouldn't it have been prudent to test supposedly low-GI foods to show that they don't cause arterial stress rather than trotting out such a conclusion indirectly? That is simply bad science in experimentation. Also, what is the root cause in the arterial stress? Is it just the blood glucose content? The insulin concentration? Other hormones that are affected by blood glucose? This is extremely important and should have been fully addressed in the study. I'm curious if the peer review at the Journal where this study got published asked any of these questions? Or is that future work that will be published later? I might have to dig out the Journal article and see for myself.
My guess is that arterial stress will still be present almost to the same degree with what is considered medium-GI food. With low-GI food, it will be less pronounced but still there. My guess as to the causal relationship is that it is the insulin spike from a large glucose load that causes the stress, which doesn't bode well for insulin-resistant people, which comprises a far bigger chunk of our population than is known. After all, how many people test their GI response with a glucometer like myself? My other guess is that even though a lower GI-food will cause less stress, the lower stress will be present over a much longer period of time. After all, no matter the GI of the food, 50g of carbohydrate will be converted into 50g of blood sugar regardless of what kind of carb it is. Look over at the graph on the left. Note that in either case the area under each curve is essentially the same. It's just that the high-GI has a higher peak but a shorter duration, while the lower-GI has a lower peak but a much longer duration. Thus, pick your poison, if you will.
UPDATE: I've railed against the BMI, mentioned above, many times on this blog as utterly flawed in measuring health. A few instances here, here and here. Anyway, Professor Glenn Reynolds at Instapundit points to this article over at NPR: Top 10 Reasons Why The BMI Is Bogus. Again, the glycemic index is almost as useless...
UPDATE #2: Well this isn't going to bode well: Michigan Cops Open Doughnut Shop. HT: The Minority Report.
Parking lot P1 is stuffed to the gills with cars. P3 less so. Anyway, from The Oakland Press: OU board approves new Human Health Building. Oakland University will receive $40 million for construction from the state’s 2008 capital outlay budget. The remaining $22 million, along with roughly $11 million in related infrastructure and technology improvements, will be financed through the issuance of university general revenue bonds.
Of course, scientific progress ensues. Thus today's article: 
