While I do agree with what is being said regarding diet I think it was unfortunate that they failed to mention that he comes from a family history of heart disease. As this plays a very large roll.
http://downthebackstretch.blogspot.com/2013/12/staying-alive-healthy-vs-fit.html
From the link above,
"Unfortunately, I do come from a family that has a history of heart disease, in particular, a higher than normal cholesterol level. It is simply in the gene pool. I only realized this about ten years ago and started taking a cholesterol lowering statin for it. However, I had a bad reaction to the statin (mainly muscle cramping) and as such got frustrated and stopped taking it for quite some time. I eventually experimented with different ones until I came up with the one that worked best."
Letsrun Scientist wrote:
Sugary foods don't cause heart disease.
high saturated fat, red meat, low fruits/veggie consumption do cause heart problems.
Sugary foods can worsen weight gain and cause the beetus, but are less directly related to heart problems than an overall poor diet full of fried/fatty foods and no natural foods.
It would be best to avoid sugary foods AND have a healthy diet with lean meat and lots of fruits and veggies PLUS avoiding fatty and fried foods.
Finally someone with common sense and experience, instead of the usual reckless propaganda by macho types like XcrossfitBruno the Real One.
I have friends and significant other who have had relatives, parent, etc. very traumatically, die at an early age, in spite of an athlete and cardiovascular life.
Of course, genetics and sometimes, out right genetic heart abnormalities, are sometimes responsible.
Sometimes, the events are so traumatic that fact-finding is impeded, but often it is the case, and other times, I suspect, the most conspicuous factor to be the accumulation of cholesterol and other harmful byproducts (saturated fat, dioxins and pesticides, and even excess protein, some nutritionists hypothesize),
in combination with later life stress after mid-life, I suspect to be responsible. It's not a laughing matter to troll about on internet forums, at all. Again: heart disease is not funny.
ecin wrote:
From the link above,
"Unfortunately, I do come from a family that has a history of heart disease, in particular, a higher than normal cholesterol level. It is simply in the gene pool. I only realized this about ten years ago and started taking a cholesterol lowering statin for it. However, I had a bad reaction to the statin (mainly muscle cramping) and as such got frustrated and stopped taking it for quite some time. I eventually experimented with different ones until I came up with the one that worked best."
Family history of heart disease is not necessary the equivalent of genetic abnormalities. In fact, that inherited risk may be epigenetic, i.e. accumulated poor lifestyles (in terms of nutrition), since, post Industrial revolution, a lot of family lines started consuming more meat, through greater standard of living and (urban) supply access, or, at any rate, less fresh produce.
For example, there have been some studies suggesting that, for instance, Jewish descendants whose ancestors faced and survived persecution in Eastern Europe have inherited negative epigenetic factors from the stressful circumstances of generations past.
I myself, as well as people I know, have such family history risks. It's important to know, of course, but the paradigm by a lot of the medical treating community seems flawed--a rigid "diagnoses" followed by statin drugs. I have a relative who works in the Pharmaceutical business--he's usually resistant to a lot of my harsh criticisms of existing social institutions and Big Pharma, but he himself opines, that statin drugs have a lot of dangers and basically generate profit through symptom treatment, and the approach has an unsound flavor.
Instead, there should be a massive systematic medical effort to really prevent and reduce heart disease risk. The idea that most people at risk for heart disease are just "genetic types" to which you just give a drug, I think is an incorrect idea. I think the modern epidemic of heart disease is not just a sudden appearance and matter of "genetic types," it's something more sinister about the way our Society runs and what we eat.
The emphasis should be on heavily encouraging lifestyles (not just exercise, but nutritional factors) that reduce heart disease risk.
Of course, this is easier said than done, and I myself don't always practice what I preach. Delicious animal products and indulgent foods are everywhere in our society--resisting them is not a simple matter.
clarification: the tidbit about Jewish epigenetics is not about heart disease, but illustrates how negative traits can be inherited in a short time scale, rather than eons of evolution, in order to illuminate/make a point about heart disease relating to a certain Western, post-Industrial lifestyle of heavy animal product consumption and inadequate fresh produce consumption.
Kipketer_Pumpkin_Eater wrote:
ecin wrote:From the link above,
"Unfortunately, I do come from a family that has a history of heart disease, in particular, a higher than normal cholesterol level. It is simply in the gene pool. I only realized this about ten years ago and started taking a cholesterol lowering statin for it. However, I had a bad reaction to the statin (mainly muscle cramping) and as such got frustrated and stopped taking it for quite some time. I eventually experimented with different ones until I came up with the one that worked best."
Family history of heart disease is not necessary the equivalent of genetic abnormalities. In fact, that inherited risk may be epigenetic, i.e. accumulated poor lifestyles (in terms of nutrition), since, post Industrial revolution, a lot of family lines started consuming more meat, through greater standard of living and (urban) supply access, or, at any rate, less fresh produce.
For example, there have been some studies suggesting that, for instance, Jewish descendants whose ancestors faced and survived persecution in Eastern Europe have inherited negative epigenetic factors from the stressful circumstances of generations past.
I myself, as well as people I know, have such family history risks. It's important to know, of course, but the paradigm by a lot of the medical treating community seems flawed--a rigid "diagnoses" followed by statin drugs. I have a relative who works in the Pharmaceutical business--he's usually resistant to a lot of my harsh criticisms of existing social institutions and Big Pharma, but he himself opines, that statin drugs have a lot of dangers and basically generate profit through symptom treatment, and the approach has an unsound flavor.
Instead, there should be a massive systematic medical effort to really prevent and reduce heart disease risk. The idea that most people at risk for heart disease are just "genetic types" to which you just give a drug, I think is an incorrect idea. I think the modern epidemic of heart disease is not just a sudden appearance and matter of "genetic types," it's something more sinister about the way our Society runs and what we eat.
The emphasis should be on heavily encouraging lifestyles (not just exercise, but nutritional factors) that reduce heart disease risk.
Of course, this is easier said than done, and I myself don't always practice what I preach. Delicious animal products and indulgent foods are everywhere in our society--resisting them is not a simple matter.
I find it seriously troubling that you are arguing the point that family history plays a roll in risk. If this is in fact what you are trying to say?
I didn't make it through your entire post because it was a lot of ramble and didn't even seem like you were addressing the point I made, despite actually quoting my post.
The one piece that really threw me off is where you seemed to suggest I'm saying this is the only way to heart disease. I'd suggest you reread me post if this is what you assume I was suggesting because it's not. I simply said that it was too bad this bit of info was left out of the article. I believe the entire story should be told and not just a piece of it. And his family history is a big piece could be a big factor. .
One more thing: I meant to emphasize animal products, but I made some grammatical errors and some omissions. Nevertheless, it should be said that non animal-product-consumption factors--like smoking, excessive dietary salt, dietary and environmental toxins, and nutritional and lifestyle factors that otherwise directly and indirectly negatively impact the circulatory system, are important. One poster de-emphasized sugar and diabetes--certainly, more attention and focus needs to be on animal products, but processed sugar and carb diets (not whole grain, but many degrees from nature) are not irrelevant. Also, often, bad circulatory health issues from the same lifestyle responsible for blood sugar metabolic issues.
My health was never worse than the 14 years I spent as a vegetarian. By age 30 I was very close to hospitalization for the maladies attending a high-carbohydrate, non-animal protein diet.
KPE, you are trapped in nutrition dogma. I was fortunate to continue evolving my views on nutrition, training and lifestyle. Otherwise I might not be here to post at all, much less enjoying the best years of my life. I will leave it to readers to take heed and research for themselves, and use the feedback from their own body as they make changes, as they strive to optimize your health, rather than following the propagandizing of diet zealots.
I only wish this recent information was available to me 25 years ago. Following dogma while downplaying the negative effects of your actions can have profound consequences. Ask anyone who has had their heart re-started on several occasions.
Kipketer_Pumpkin_Eater wrote:
ecin wrote:From the link above,
"Unfortunately, I do come from a family that has a history of heart disease, in particular, a higher than normal cholesterol level. It is simply in the gene pool. I only realized this about ten years ago and started taking a cholesterol lowering statin for it. However, I had a bad reaction to the statin (mainly muscle cramping) and as such got frustrated and stopped taking it for quite some time. I eventually experimented with different ones until I came up with the one that worked best."
Family history of heart disease is not necessary the equivalent of genetic abnormalities. In fact, that inherited risk may be epigenetic, i.e. accumulated poor lifestyles (in terms of nutrition), since, post Industrial revolution, a lot of family lines started consuming more meat, through greater standard of living and (urban) supply access, or, at any rate, less fresh produce.
For example, there have been some studies suggesting that, for instance, Jewish descendants whose ancestors faced and survived persecution in Eastern Europe have inherited negative epigenetic factors from the stressful circumstances of generations past.
Can you link me to some of these? CAD/high cholesterol come from my Dad's side, and his parents are both Holocaust survivors. I'm super interested. My Dad has an extremely healthy lifestyle and I have a pretty healthy one but already have high cholesterol at age 23.
xenonscreams wrote:
I'm super interested. My Dad has an extremely healthy lifestyle and I have a pretty healthy one but already have high cholesterol at age 23.
You should be on one or more lipid-lowering medications depending on the pathogenesis of your disease. You also should undergo testing for familial lipid disorders like familial hypercholesterolemia and sitosterolemia.
Do you have xanthomas, by any chance?
This article is crap. They gave anecdotal examples of 2 different diet runners (McGillivray and Burfoot- vegetarian), who are BOTH at risk or experienced heart issues. What's the commonality here? IT'S NOT THEIR DIETS, as the article and you guys are speculating-- it's EXERCISE!There's studies that came out a few years ago in which 1/2 of the lifelong male runners showed scarring/fibrosis on their hearts. Exercise was further confirmed as the fibrosis trigger, not diet, in a rat study.http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/03/09/when-exercise-is-too-much-of-a-good-thing/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0For those poking fun at the bean-eating Mexicans, here's an excerpt from a research study that examined the diets of adolescent Kenyan/Kalenjin distance runners. Br J Nutr. 2002 Dec;88(6):711-7.Food and macronutrient intake of male adolescent Kalenjin runners in Kenya. Christensen DL1, Van Hall G, Hambraeus L.
The diet of the Kalenjin runners was very high in carbohydrate (71% 8·7 g/kg body weight per d) and very low in fat (15 %).... The energy intake was mainly derived from vegetable sources (90 %) with maize and kidney beans as the staple food (81 %)....The diet of the Kalenjin runners was strikingly similar to the food intakes of the Mexican Tarahumaras, an indigenous people living approximately 2000m above sea level and well-known for their exceptional endurance capacity in distance running (Cerqueira et al. 1979). In both groups the staple food items were maize and beans and intake of meat was very modest.
The Kenyan adult runners also drink lots and lots of hot tea with sugar/milk throughout the day.
Kipketer_Pumpkin_Eater wrote:
xenonscreams wrote:I'm super interested. My Dad has an extremely healthy lifestyle and I have a pretty healthy one but already have high cholesterol at age 23.
You should be on one or more lipid-lowering medications depending on the pathogenesis of your disease. You also should undergo testing for familial lipid disorders like familial hypercholesterolemia and sitosterolemia.
Do you have xanthomas, by any chance?
I don't. But my dad, sister, and I all have high cholesterol so I assume there's something genetic going on. My doctor wanted me to wait on the meds. My dad got early CAD, my heart is still healthy but my cholesterol is pretty absurd for a healthy young woman who runs 75 mile weeks and eats a reasonable diet. Although admittedly I like eggs a little too much.
Thanks - your mention of inflammation reduction is notable for me because I have off and on eczema and I'm trying to remember how my skin responded to months of carb depletion when I did it 7 years ago. How many grams of carbs a day were you taking in? I know it's something most don't really keep track of, but I remember years ago surprised at a study that noted Kenyan runners took in 600g of carbs a day.
Without Mercy wrote:
I was eating gluten-free (which helped, along w/low sugar), so stuff like corn (chips/totillas), rice, beans, potatoes, etc.. Don't know my blood type.
xenonscreams wrote:My doctor wanted me to wait on the meds.
Your doctor is wrong. Get yourself on a potent, low dose statin at the very least.
Most vegetarians are unhealthy because they "mac" out on the cheese. Complete dairy overload.
Kipketer_Pumpkin_Eater wrote:
xenonscreams wrote:My doctor wanted me to wait on the meds.Your doctor is wrong. Get yourself on a potent, low dose statin at the very least.
Maybe she has the rare doctor that isn't owned by big pharma. Maybe you work for big pharma?
Xeno: eggs should typically have very little effect on body cholesterol. What are your HDL, LDL, Tri values and what does your diet look like in terms of macros?
Also, which kind of carbs (whole grains, grains, rice, potato, fruits) you eat would be relevant and the fat you consume: saturated, n6/n3, monounsaturated?
If you can break that down I think we can give you better advise.
Kipketer_Pumpkin_Eater wrote:
xenonscreams wrote:My doctor wanted me to wait on the meds.Your doctor is wrong. Get yourself on a potent, low dose statin at the very least.
The logic goes like this:
1. High LDL is associated with CVD
2. Statins lower LDL
3. Therefore statins lower CVD
However, there hasn't been a single study to prove the third point.
But it is big $$$ for pharma and Americas doctors so they continue to prescribe it to everyone left and right.
Xfit_guy_the_real_1 wrote:
3. Therefore statins lower CVD
However, there hasn't been a single study to prove the third point.
Ignorant twit.
Statins have been definitively shown to lower CVD risk in diverse patient population; however, the exact mechanism(s) whereby statins lower CVD risk is not known. It's probably occurs as a result of beneficial effects on various lipids, blood/tissue factors and inflammation.
Xenonscreams, of course you should listen to some dude on the internet who has heard a few words about you over your personal physician. The internet guy is obviously far more familiar with your case.