alex3619
Senior Member
- Messages
- 13,810
- Location
- Logan, Queensland, Australia
Hi Heapsreal, some peoples, typically normadic or hunting societies. live on mostly meat. They are quite healthy. Meat does supply most of the nutrients we need (though some are destroyed by cooking) and often supply them in a highly bio-available form. We struggle to absorb iron from beetroot, but we have no trouble absorbing it from meat. Folic acid from supplements can accumulate and are now linked to dementia and NK cell failure. Yet the form in meat wont do this.
Peskin makes his claims, from what I can gather (I still have not read it all) from two things:
1. Increased omega-6s will boost blood vessel flexibility.
2. Increased omega-6s will boost insulin responses.
I have known both of these things since before 2001. They are correct. This is highly reductionistic though. Omega-6s are also pro-inflammatory and so might also induce heart attacks.
Some drugs used to treat diabetes are omega-6s analogues. They are basically modified omega-6 fats. They work.
This is a complex tale and we don't have all the pieces of the puzzle. Nutritional medicine, functional medicine, is still in its infancy. I think its the future of medicine, particular for people with chronic disease, but it is essential to apply it holistically. We need systems biology.
If Peskin wants to prove these approaches are better for older people with signs of vascular stiffening, he can show this by a long term study of large numbers of patients. Do they survive longer from all causes, not just heart attacks and strokes? That is the outcome measure he needs.
One of the arguments cited for Evidence Based Medicine is the failure of methodologies like Peskin is applying. Anti-arrhythmia drugs were used to control heart irregularities. These irregularities kill. The drugs work. Ergo it reduces the death rate. Not so. Deaths increased. Other factors were not taken into account - the primary outcome measure should be survival, not reduction in heart irregularities.
Bye, Alex
Peskin makes his claims, from what I can gather (I still have not read it all) from two things:
1. Increased omega-6s will boost blood vessel flexibility.
2. Increased omega-6s will boost insulin responses.
I have known both of these things since before 2001. They are correct. This is highly reductionistic though. Omega-6s are also pro-inflammatory and so might also induce heart attacks.
Some drugs used to treat diabetes are omega-6s analogues. They are basically modified omega-6 fats. They work.
This is a complex tale and we don't have all the pieces of the puzzle. Nutritional medicine, functional medicine, is still in its infancy. I think its the future of medicine, particular for people with chronic disease, but it is essential to apply it holistically. We need systems biology.
If Peskin wants to prove these approaches are better for older people with signs of vascular stiffening, he can show this by a long term study of large numbers of patients. Do they survive longer from all causes, not just heart attacks and strokes? That is the outcome measure he needs.
One of the arguments cited for Evidence Based Medicine is the failure of methodologies like Peskin is applying. Anti-arrhythmia drugs were used to control heart irregularities. These irregularities kill. The drugs work. Ergo it reduces the death rate. Not so. Deaths increased. Other factors were not taken into account - the primary outcome measure should be survival, not reduction in heart irregularities.
Bye, Alex