Q: For a little while a few years ago I did a diet called the Primal diet by Aajonus Vonderplanitz, which is a raw meat diet.

Anyway, I decided it wasn’t really a good diet for me overall, but one thing that stuck me from it was that he thinks that raw fat is really important, and much better for you than cooked fat.  At that time I was ordering raw butter from California , (which was expensive and a hassle).

Now that I’m focusing on eating a lot of fat again, I’m just wondering if you think there’s anything too this.

Thanks again,  Ann

A: Eating fat that is as unprocessed as possible and fresh (non-rancid) is, of course, important.  OVER-cooking fats can have negative consequences with respect to rancidity and oxidative damage.  (see information on oxidative stress here)

Minimally cooked fat is always best.  That being said, saturated fats (coconut oil, tallow, lard, butter) tend to be fairly resistant to oxidation by comparison and have a high smoking point, so cooking meats, eggs, etc…as long as they are not OVER cooked should be OK.

I never ever cook with vegetable oils and only use olive oil in salad dressing or in a dish after it has been cooked.  I may use a dash or two of sesame oil at the end of a cooking process for flavoring but minimize its time being heated.  Polyunsaturates (i.e., safflower oil, flax oil, corn oil, sunflower seed oil…etc) and oils such as canola or soybean oil (all of which—unless specifically labeled as “organic” and “expeller pressed”–are partially hydrogenated as part of their deodorization process) should never, ever be used for cooking, in my opinion.

~ Nora

Nora Gedgaudas

Here it is…June already…and I am fast approaching yet another semi-milestone along the path of my existence:  It just so happens I turn 49 years of age this Thursday, June 10th.  I’ll be “pushin’ 50”.

A lot of folks (women, in particular, I think) would be freaking out about this, maybe “feeling old”, maybe counting the aches and pains or gray hairs and wondering what other downturn was next.  For me, though, it’s just another birthday (though I really like birthdays) along the way and a time in which I am celebrating excellent health and vitality.

Some of you might be thinking “well, she’s probably got good genetics and was just blessed with good health.”

Not so.  My genetics actually suck.

My family tree is riddled throughout with health issues on every level—including issues with cancer, cardiovascular disease, arthritis and autoimmune illness, along with weight issues and various other assorted brain, nervous system and emotionally related challenges.  In the past I have struggled with weight, eating disorders, long-term depression, anxiety and panic attacks.  Those are all very much things of the past.  More recently, various stress-related challenges have really rocked my equilibrium and have tested what I have learned in no small way.  Thus far, I’m happy to say I’ve managed to dodge the other bullets and am the only member of my family that has managed to never spend a single night at a hospital for anything.  I can tell you, though, that “luck” and “great genes” have nothing to do with the health I enjoy today.  I have worked hard at this…and I’ve learned that I really don’t have that much room for error.

I have been passionate about diet and health for 30 years now, though I would have given anything to know what it is I know now even 20 years ago.  I’ve been led down a lot of different paths.  It has literally taken me most of this time to sort out the convoluted quagmire that is the current realm of nutritional information and nutritional dis-information to arrive at what it is you read in Primal Body-Primal Mind.   I continue to learn and reach for answers that underlie the supposed answers and will forever continue to do so.  I have looked both inside and outside “the box” of accepted dogma to arrive at a coherent picture that makes foundational sense and (more importantly) really works.  I’ve learned, too, that the answers are seldom where one would expect to find them and that economic and political interests are there to seduce and trip you up every step of the way.  There is no university program that teaches it in full.  There isn’t even a single university course available as yet in the field of Functional Medicine.  The field is THAT new.  Accurate foundational nutrition or health education is never taught in a conventional setting.  There are simply too many vested interests influencing and distorting such curriculums.

It’s been a journey for me of peeling away layers of an onion to get at the principles I’ve uncovered that can make becoming healthy—and remaining healthy into even old age a very plausible reality for most anyone that is willing to apply this foundational and functional approach to well being.  Sometimes the answers were so obvious they were difficult at first to see (such as the evolutionary basis for establishing our nutritional requirements…DUH!) and sometimes it took the willingness and self-discipline to relinquish the temptation to reach for simple “single note” answers and be willing to take into account the complex orchestration of the human organism and all its dimensions; and a more systems-related and functional approach to unraveling the truth.  It’s a more difficult and less seductive pathway to take, but one that yields far more genuine rewards.  It takes de-compartmentalizing the body and mind to get that it’s all part of a functional network that can’t be separated out or fully understood inside a limited box.  Things are rarely as literal as they seem and you seldom can fix one system by viewing it as something that stands alone.  In other words (just for instance), if your thyroid is functioning low it is probably not as simple as adding more thyroid hormone or just thyroid “accessory nutrients” to fix the problem, even though this is the “gold standard” approach in conventional and even most natural medicine.  There are other endocrine networks to take into account, possible immune challenges, environmental factors, food sensitivities and basic nutritional requirements that all factor into the total picture.  That’s what’s called the “functional” picture.  This is the paradigm I come to you from…and I’m sticking to it.

So….here I am in my last days of being 48 years of age, still feeling fully functional and even feeling “younger” in some ways than I felt even a year or two ago.  I’m still on the path to figuring out the mysteries of longevity and optimal health and wellness…and as long as there’s someone who wants to hear about it I’ll be around…hopefully for a very long while…to share what I’ve learned with all of you.

This is, after all, what I believe I was born to do.

~ Nora

A couple of weeks ago I put a Q&A on my blog concerning someone’s issue with neuropathy. (here is the blog post) I had readily extolled the dangers of dietary gluten in these populations and made some fairly strong statements about it.  In response, I received a rather nasty and scathing e-mail from an individual I attempted to e-mail back, but unfortunately they had not given me their proper e-mail address.  This person, in one of their kinder sentences accused me of being “immoderate” and “extreme” in my views about gluten and said he planned to cancel his subscription to my newsletter because of it.  OK…So be it.  Certainly his prerogative.

Nonetheless, I totally stand by everything I said (and, by the way, I am willing to own up where I might be wrong).

It got me to thinking, though, that he might not have been the only person to not fully appreciate what a dangerous and potentially damaging inclusion to the diet that gluten really is…or why even occasional imbibing is something a gluten sensitive individual simply cannot afford.  The whole subject of gluten is greatly misunderstood by most people–even those that are aware of being affected by it or claim to appreciate its problematic-ness.

Just what is Gluten, anyway?

Gluten (the Latin word for “glue”), is a substance found in numerous grains such as wheat (durum, semolina, spelt, kamut, rye, triticale and barley).  It is typically present in oats, too, due mainly to modern processing methods.  Small amounts of gliadin-related compounds are also present in corn products and corn starch.  All foods with high prolamin (a plant storage protein with high proline content) content should be considered suspect.  This includes all cereal grains such as wheat/triticale/durum/semolina/spelt/ kamut (gliadin), rye (secalin), barley (hordein), corn (zein) and oats (avenin). What is called “gluten” is actually made up of two proteins: gliadin and glutenin, which make up at least 80% of the protein content in most grains.   Used in baking it gives bread dough its elasticity and baked goods their fluffiness and chewiness.  It is also used as an additive and stabilizing agent in innumerable processed foods and personal care products.  Insanely, gluten is nearly everywhere.  Laws do not require its labeling on all products so the consumer is left to judge for themselves whether gluten may be an additive or not.  I, personally, don’t trust any product that isn’t clearly labeled “gluten free”.

For us humans, where we have spent nearly all of the last 2.6 million years as hunter-gatherers, gluten (and its closely related compounds) is a very new inclusion to the diet and is very difficult for us to digest.  To say that gluten can add complications to your health is putting things mildly.  Problems with gluten are becoming literally epidemic and although public awareness about this issue is certainly growing there is more that is poorly understood by most than not.  The consequences of gluten sensitivity (diagnosed or undiagnosed) can literally be lethal.  And, no, I am not being “extreme” when I say this.  The consequences are very real.

Although commonly associated with celiac disease many do not appreciate gluten’s potentially incredible impact on the health of countless individuals or the commonality with which people may be afflicted with non-celiac “gluten sensitivity”.  In fact, gluten may well be at the silent root of a great many of the health challenges millions of people face today, both physical and mental.  It is rarely suspected as the underlying culprit in most instances, however.  Furthermore, the inherent presence of what are called exorphins in grains (morphine-like compounds) make gluten-containing grains quite addictive and leave many in frank denial of the havoc it can wreak (including also quite possibly my “mystery critic”).

Allow me to elaborate:

A 2009 study in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA Sept 16; 302(11):1171-8) found that those with celiac disease and/or gluten sensitivity, whether diagnosed or undiagnosed had a significantly higher risk of death, particularly from heart disease and cancer.  It is currently estimated (conservatively) that one in every 200 people suffers from celiac disease, a devastating consequence of gluten-containing grain consumption. Some more recently hypothesize that this number may be closer to one in 30.  Gluten “sensitivity” (vs. celiac disease) is considerably much more common and is currently nearly epidemic in its scope.  The effects of and markedly increased mortality risks associated with both full blown celiac disease and gluten sensitivity happen to be virtually identical.  Both are autoimmune conditions that create inflammation and immune system effects throughout the body.  They can affect all organ systems (including your brain, heart, kidneys, etc.), your nervous system, your immunological functioning, your digestive system and even your musculoskeletal system.  –Almost literally everything from your hair follicles down to your toenails and everything in-between.  Exposure to gluten in a sensitive individual essentially shuts down blood flow to the prefrontal cortex—the part of our brains that allow us to focus, manage emotional states, plan and organize and exercise our short term memory.  The prefrontal cortex is our brain’s “executive function” control center and is the part of our brain that basically makes us the most human.  The inflammatory response invoked by gluten exposure additionally activates the brain’s microglial cells, which have no built in inhibitory mechanisms and do not readily wind down again. It can literally take months.  The damage and neural degeneration this can cause over time, together with sympathetic (“fight or flight”) nervous system over-arousal can be significant. 

In routine blood tests, seeing chronic states of anemia (serum iron below 85 ug/dL and hemoglobin below 13.5), functionally depressed or elevated serum protein levels (below 6.9 or above 7.4 G/dL), unusually depressed triglycerides (below 75 mg/dL–especially where carbs play a significant dietary role) and/or alkaline phosphatase levels (significantly below 70 U/L), functionally depressed BUN (below 13 mg/dL), abnormally high HDL (in excess of 75 mg/dL) and/or chronically (even functionally) elevated liver enzymes, among other chronic inflammatory and malabsorptive markers although not diagnostic here can be cause–especially when found in combination with one another–for possible suspicion.  It takes further testing to be sure–though even some of the best testing methods can vary greatly in their accuracy.

Gluten can also be looked upon somewhat as a bit of as “gateway food sensitivity”.  It is known to increase an enzyme in the body known as zonulin, which controls intestinal permeability.  Elevated zonulin levels in the presence of gluten can also serve to allow other types of undigested proteins to slip past what would otherwise be more selectively permeable barriers and cause additional immunological reactions to other foods.  Casein (milk protein) is the most common co-sensitivity with gluten, but the immune system can come to react to almost anything if gluten consumption persists.  This can be a very real problem.  Once multiple food sensitivities take over it can amount to a very vicious cycle that only worsens with time and becomes extremely difficult to correct.  Living with this can be miserable at best.

A study published in 2009 in the peer reviewed journal, Gastroenterology (July;137(1):88-93) compared 10,000 available blood samples from individuals 50 years ago to 10,000 people today and found that there has been a 400% increase in the incidence of full blown celiac disease!  Changes made to American strains of wheat, giving them much higher gluten content is likely a significant part of the problem. Increased genetic susceptibility due to a variety of causes is likely another.  According to the Journal of Gastroenterology fully 30-50% of all people carry the gene for celiac disease (known as HLA-DQ8 or HLA-DQ2)–and eight times more people with celiac disease have no GI symptoms than do.  Gluten sensitivity genes are significantly more common (HLA-DQB1, Alleles 1 and/or 2).
Gluten containing grains include wheat (e.g., durum, graham, semolina, kamut, spelt), as well as rye, barley, oats and triticale.  Although oats technically are not part of the gliadin-containing family of grains, modern methods of processing nearly always ensure gluten contamination of oat products and the presence of actual gluten should always be assumed unless labeled “100% gluten free”.  The prolamin (avenin) content of oats, however, still makes them at least potentially suspect for inherent sensitivity issues. 

Fully 99% of those who suffer from this entirely curable and potentially lethal condition do so completely unaware of the dangerous vulnerability within themselves.  Although a biopsy of the small intestine is commonly used to diagnose celiac disease, fully seven out of ten celiac sufferers exhibit no intestinal or GI symptoms at all. In fact, an article in the journal Neurology (Vol 56/No.3 Feb 13, 2005) states that “Gluten sensitivity can be primarily and at times exclusively a neurological disease”, affecting not only the brain and nervous system directly, but also cognitive and psychiatric illness.  In the Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry (1997; 63; 770-775) an article states “Our finding…implies that immune response triggered by sensitivity to gluten may find expression in organs other than the gut; and the central and peripheral nervous systems are particularly susceptible.” 

A 2002 review paper in the New England Journal of Medicine (Jan 17; 346(3):180-188) found that fully 55 diseases are known to be caused by gluten.  These partly include heart disease, cancer, nearly all autoimmune diseases, osteoporosis, irritable bowel syndrome, as well as many common psychiatric illnesses, partly including anxiety issues, ADD, bipolar disorder, depression dementia, schizophrenia, Hashimoto’s (autoimmune thyroid disorders), migraines, epilepsy, Parkinson’s, ALS, neuropathies (having normal EMG), and most other degenerative neurological disorders…as well as Autism, which is technically an autoimmune brain disorder.  In my opinion, it is always safest to assume the presence of gluten sensitivity in these populations, or frankly wherever significantly compromised health is an issue. 

Testing for gluten sensitivity 

Although there are numerous methods for assessing gluten sensitivity and/or celiac disease, most are unfortunately somewhat unreliable in their accuracy (including the so-called “gold standard” approach of intestinal biopsy), which may be partly why so few are properly diagnosed even when testing is sought out.  With respect to blood and salivary testing, out of 12 different sub-fractions of gliadin, for instance, typically only one—beta-gliadin—is ever tested for.  If you happen to have a sensitivity for any of the eleven other forms of gliadin it might not ever show.  False negatives are a notorious part of this type of testing, unfortunately.  Accuracy (where negative results are concerned) is never 100%.  Immunoglobulin testing for food sensitivities in those with autoimmune disorders and particularly Hashimoto’s are almost always skewed due to chronic imbalances of TH-1 (T-cell) and TH-2 (B-cell) immune response.  It’s critical to look for multiple markers (although the overwhelming—nearly 100% association between gluten sensitivity and Hashimoto’s and most other autoimmune disorders make the automatic assumption of gluten sensitivity a good idea).  The most important tests to run are IgA (anti-gliadin antibodies and anti-entomysial antibodies), IgG (anti-gliadin antibodies), IgM, antibodies, tissue transglutaminase antibodies, which is most associated with small intestine villous atrophy (IgA and IgG), gluten antibodies, total IgA antibodies and if possible, always test for the presence of genes’ HLA-DQ2 and HLA-DQ8, as well as HLA-DQB1, Alleles 1 and 2.  I’ve seen individuals test negative for antibodies in blood, salivary and even the most accurate stool antigen tests (again, false negatives are quite common) but they then test positive for both pairs of celiac or gluten sensitivity  genes…meaning one can basically take the diagnosis of celiac or gluten sensitivity to the bank. I’ve found that by far the most accurate assessment may be made by using a proprietary stool antibody test from EnteroLab (www.enterolab.com). Their Web site also contains extremely helpful information on the subject and includes accurate testing for other major common food sensitivities as well.  Getting the additional genetic markers for gluten sensitivity and predisposition potential for celiac disease that they offer helps minimize false negatives.   In time, there will likely be new and hopefully even more accurate diagnostic methods developed as studies demonstrating the devastating health impacts of gluten mount.  For now, EnteroLab seems to have the best corner on the market for accuracy, demonstrating a six-fold greater accuracy rate than available blood antigen tests.  Otherwise, elimination diets, and/or testing for multiple markers using blood sampling are probably the next best bet. 

Elimination diets can be an effective means of determining the potential for gluten sensitivity, but must be strictly adhered to for no less than 2-3 weeks and ideally at least 6-8 months to make a genuinely clear determination.  Avoidance of gluten must be no less than 100% from all (even hidden sources) and not so much as even a single crumb of bread.  Also, beware of cross contamination issues—where non-gluten foods may come into contact with gluten-containing foods via cooking/preparation surfaces and utensils in restaurants or at home (yes—this matters).  The inflammatory effects of even trace gluten exposure in the brain especially and throughout the body can reverberate fully 6 months or more in sensitive individuals.  Any exposure of any kind (even seemingly innocuous unintentional slip-ups) means you must start over with the time spent on the elimination diet.  Sorry to sound so dramatic, but this is an issue that needs to be taken extremely seriously. Gastroenterology (2009; 137:88-93) states that “During a 45 year follow up, undiagnosed celiac disease was associated with a nearly 4-fold increased risk of death.  The prevalence of undiagnosed CD seems to have increased dramatically in the United States during the last 50 years.”  In an individual with either full blown celiac or gluten sensitivity the risk of death from all causes, according to the journal Lancet (Vol 358, August 4, 2001) was dramatically greater: “Death was most significantly affected by diagnostic delay, pattern of presentation, and adherence to the gluten free diet…Non adherence to the gluten free diet, defined as eating gluten once-per-month increased the relative risk of death 600%.”  Next time you want to rationalize that “one little piece of bread” –think twice. 

Being “mostly gluten free” or imbibing in gluten-containing foods “only occasionally” just doesn’t cut it. 
Brain and mood disorders, migraines, osteoporosis, diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, bowel diseases, autoimmune diseases, inflammatory disorders and cancer are rampant. Grains are rarely suspected as the original culprit, though every one of these disorders, among many more, can potentially be traced to often-insidious gluten intolerance. Gluten sensitivity is only rarely obvious to the afflicted, and many are even entirely surprised to learn they have this sensitivity.  I know I was. 

Only an estimated 1% of all suffering gluten sensitivity or celiac disease is ever diagnosed. 

The good news is that the devastating symptoms of gluten sensitivity and celiac disease are often entirely curable.  –The treatment solution?  You MUST eliminate 100%–not just “most”–gluten from your diet, including not just gluten containing dietary grains but all hidden sources, as well, which can include (but are not limited to) soups, broths, processed food mixes and soy sauce, teriyaki and other sauces, corn products and corn starch, and salad dressings. It can be listed as vegetable protein, seitan, hydrolyzed vegetable protein, modified food starch and others. Gluten is even an ingredient in many shampoos, cosmetics and lipsticks (which can potentially absorb transdermally–through the skin), children’s Play-Doh, medications, vitamins (unless specifically labeled “gluten free”)–even non self-adhesive stamps and envelopes. 

Although I realize all this need for ultra-strict avoidance sounds rather tedious and extreme, an article in the Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry (1997; 63; 770-775) states clearly: “Even minute traces of gliadin (gluten) are capable of triggering a state of heightened immunological activity in gluten sensitive people”, meaning prolonged inflammation and other symptoms.  Saying you’ve eliminated “most” gluten from your diet is a bit like saying you’re just “a little bit pregnant”.  Either you are or you’re not.  There are NO in-betweens.  Avoidance must be strict…and total. 

Many people will claim they have been adhering to a strict gluten-free diet when, in fact, they have only been avoiding the obvious sources and really haven’t been paying attention enough to potentially hidden sources, including their personal care products.  They will eventually rationalize their lack of positive health results to the idea that they weren’t gluten sensitive after all and they simply go back to eating whatever they want.  This is a HUGE mistake!  Even where adherence to a genuinely gluten free diet doesn’t seem to generate expected turnarounds in health and well being, you have at least removed one very major hurdle to improvement.  There can always be other hurdles yet to conquer.  Gluten is by far not the only modern substance challenging the health of the masses.  Restoring health can be like peeling back the layers of an onion.  It is a process.  Still, often enough, by simply removing this one major dietary antigen the turnaround in some people can seem nothing short of miraculous.  It can also make a massive difference where seemingly more benign issues like resistant weight loss may be concerned. 

Wait just a minute, back up—did you just say “personal care products”?  What???

Crazy sounding, but true.  You need to examine your shampoos, conditioners and other hair care and skin care products for the presence of wheat protein, sometimes also listed as “hydrolyzed vegetable protein”.  Look for corn-related additives, also. 

While you’re at it, you might also want to consider avoiding toxic additives like parabens, pthlates, artificial fragrances, sodium laurel sulfate, methylisothiazolinone (MIT), and petroleum derivatives like mineral oil, toluene, petrolatum and paraffin (slightly off-topic, but extremely noteworthy, nonetheless).  Note that the FDA does nothing to ensure the safety of any chemical used in personal care products, so you’re left to trust the manufacturer.  Even the FDA states: “Cosmetic products and ingredients are not subject to FDA premarket approval authority, with the exception of color additives … Cosmetic firms are responsible for substantiating the safety of their products and ingredients before marketing.”  Out of roughly 126 or more chemicals consumers regularly apply to their skin, 90% have never, ever been tested for their safety.  Most people think nothing of the products they apply on their hair or skin and the cosmetics industry readily capitalizes on this ignorance at tremendous potential cost to your health for considerable profit.

Why is this important?  I mean, we’re just talking about skin, right?  It’s not like you’re drinking the stuff…

In fact, it’s probably worse.

Keep in mind that your skin is your largest organ and that it is exceedingly thin (less than 1/10th of an inch in thickness) and permeable.  If you were to eat or drink these products you’d have several things come into play to help protect you from direct bloodstream exposure—your gut lining, hydrochloric acid, enzymes, etc.  In a hot shower, however, with your pores open wide, there is very little between you and direct absorption of anything you are applying to your scalp and skin right into your bloodstream where it is all free to travel throughout your body to your brain and all your other organs.  The concern here is very real.  When you’re reading hair and skin care labels it’s a good idea to ask yourself whether you would be willing to actually drink the contents of that product or not.  If you’re reading a list of a whole lot of difficult-to-pronounce chemicals and/or also seeing wheat protein/vegetable protein on the label you’d do well to think twice about using it.  –And don’t let buzzwords like “organic” or “natural” fool you.  A partial listing of product sources can be found at www.celiac.com.   Another source for allergen-free hair and skin care products is www.gfsoap.com.  Just Google “gluten and additive-free hair and skin-care products” in your computer’s browser.  The potential selection is huge.  If you happen to have a smart phone there are also numerous available “gluten-free apps” available to help you screen individual products, restaurants, grocery stores and other shopping sources at your fingertips.  The good news is that the awareness of these issues is rapidly spreading and resources are likely to grow exponentially in the very near time to come.

So what about gluten-free “substitutes”?

Seeking out gluten-free substitutes is certainly an option, as there are scores of “gluten-free” products of all kinds available today. It’s big business for food manufacturers these days, in fact. Clearly, gluten free shampoos and cosmetics are a good and necessary idea.  Unfortunately, even though other grains, such as quinoa, corn, millet and buckwheat (or rice) do not contain gluten, they are still more a source of starch than of protein and the majority of “gluten-free substitutes” are highly, highly processed foods.   Many are soy-based, as well (don’t get me started on THAT!).   Just because something is “gluten-free” does not mean it is actually healthy for you, anymore than the word “organic” does.  Gluten and carbohydrate intolerance, in general, are far more the rule than the exception in today’s world. It is logical to conclude that grain consumption, especially gluten-containing grains, just isn’t worth the dietary risk, given our culture’s innumerable health challenges and vulnerabilities. Why play Russian roulette? Why add to the unnecessary, glycating, fattening and neurotransmitter and hormonally dysregulating carbohydrate load?  In my view it’s better to take processed food off the radar screen entirely and stick to the foods that don’t need a label you have to read every time.

In short, there is no one alive for whom grains are essential for health and gluten, in particular, is a health food for no one.

It stands to further reason that the more symptoms a person has physically, cognitively or psychologically, the more primitive a diet  (in other words, pre-agricultural or “Primal”), one ought to consider adopting for reclaiming rightful health.  The commonality of degenerative diseases does not make these diseases a normal part of aging, or even remotely inevitable.

The choice is mostly ours.

For more information about gluten sensitivity and celiac disease go to www.celiac.com.
For the most accurate testing and more information go to: www.enterolab.com.
Another site for locating available gluten sensitivity centers and public lectures is www.conquergluten.com.

Studies involving the use of caloric restriction for significantly improved health and longevity have been ongoing for about the last 75 years.  Most of these studies have involved species such as worms, fruit flies,  mice and dogs due to their shorter life spans.  Although some degree of benefit, often enormous benefit relating to the impact of caloric restriction has been shown in every species studied, some degree of skepticism existed as to whether such dietary restriction would be of similar benefit to primates such as us.

In July of 2009 the eagerly awaited results of a twenty year study on the effects of caloric restriction on primates were finally published in the journal, Science (2009 Jul 10; 325(5937): 201-204).

Two groups of Rhesus monkeys (selected for their strong similarity to us) were studied.  One group of Rhesus monkeys were allowed to eat as much as they wanted and the other group was given a sufficiently nutrient dense diet with 30% fewer calories than they would normally consume.  Twenty years later only 63% of the monkeys that ate as much as they wanted were still alive.  37% of them had died due to age related causes (heart disease, cancer or diabetes).

And the caloric restriction group?

Fully 87% were still alive and only 13% had died–and of these only 5 of the 14 individuals died of age related causes!  The rest died from complications of anesthesia, gastric bloat, endometriosis or injury.

Even the researchers themselves were blown away by these results and confidently speculated that these findings would have considerable implications for combating aging and disease in humans.

Of all monkeys that survived–the remaining two groups of monkeys even looked considerably different from one another.  Each group had aged very, very differently.

Throughout their lives the calorically restricted group maintained superior health and aging-related biomarkers in every area: brain health, metabolic health and rate, insulin sensitivity and cardiovascular vitality.  The caloric restriction group enjoyed a 3-fold reduction in age-related disease!!  Also, they lost fat weight but maintained healthy levels of lean tissue mass.  They additionally retained greater brain volume (which normally shrinks with age and glycation) but more than that they retained superior cognitive function.  The cardiovascular disease rate of the caloric restricted group was fully half the rate of the control group.  40% of the control group developed diabetes (or pre-diabetes).  Not ONE single monkey in the calorically restricted group developed either.

Remarkable.

Photos from the study, shown here, present examples of age-matched individuals from the two groups.  The contrast is visually striking.  Stunning, even.  The caloric restricted monkeys looked almost literally half the age of the controls:

Example of a control group monkey is shown on the left (AB) and a calorically restricted monkey on the right (CD)–both are exactly the same age

The study was designed, of course, well before Cynthia Kenyon’s work was published or anything related to mTOR–both of which have added richly to the understanding behind the mechanisms of just why caloric restriction is so effective, so one can only imagine how much more might have been accomplished with that awareness in mind.

FYI–Among the most common misconceptions about monkeys and apes, incidentally, is that they are vegan animals.  They are better adapted to making use of plants in some ways than we are, but they also readily eat the same things we eat. ALL monkeys and apes are known to eat meat–and many even hunt for meat. The one notable exception is the mountain gorilla…and even they get some insects in their diet. Monkeys and apes are omnivores and, like us, will eat whatever might be available to them in their environment. Some even catch and eat fish (crazy, but true)!  One of the reasons Rhesus monkeys were selected for this particular study, in fact, is because of their pronounced similarity to us, even in terms of diet.  For more reading about this particular aspect of things I can recommend the book, “The Hunting Apes: Meat Eating and the Origins Of Human Behavior” by Craig B. Stanford.

Recent Human Longevity Research

There are actually other recent studies, too, showing significant health benefit where caloric restriction in actual humans is concerned.  A newly released study in the Journal of Applied Research, Clinical Experience of a Diet Designed To Reduce Aging (Ron Rosedale, MD, E.C. Westman, MD, MHS, J.P. Konhilas, PhD; Vol 9, No. 4, 2009) demonstrated in the context of an outpatient medical clinic that a diet high in fat (unlimited quantity), adequate in protein (50-80 grams per day) and very low in carbohydrate, with some added multi-vitamin and mineral supplementation (together with 2,000 mg/day L-carnitine, 400 mg alpha lipoic acid, 100 mg CoQ10, and 1 TBSP cod liver oil) led to significant improvement in recognized serum factors related to the aging process (glucose, insulin, leptin and triglycerides).  Patients were told to eat when they were hungry.  The results also included a significant loss of adipose body weight, a significant reduction in systolic and diastolic blood pressure, and a reduction in levels of leptin, insulin, fasting glucose, and free T3 (with TSH levels and creatinine largely unchanged).  Despite the predominance of fat in the diet, serum triglycerides were also greatly reduced.

Another area of human longevity research getting a lot of publicity these days involves manipulating the length of something called “telomeres”.  Telomeres are sequences of nucleic acids extending from the ends of chromosomes and act to maintain chromosomal integrity. Every time our cells divide telomeres are shortened, leading to cellular damage and cellular death associated with aging. Scientists (at Geron Corporation) discovered that the key element in rebuilding our disappearing telomeres is the “immortalizing” enzyme telomerase, an enzyme found only in germ cells and cancer cells. Telomerase appears to repair and replace telomeres manipulating the “clocking” mechanism that controls the life span of dividing cells.  Drug companies, of course, are looking for ways to enhance telomerase any way they can.  In fact, look for up-coming supplements and possibly “life extension” related medications claiming to do just this.  What they won’t tell you, however, is that caloric restriction also preserves telomere length.  You don’t have to wait for a questionable drug to come out or go broke buying hyped “designer supplements”.

Of course, it’s easy to restrict overall calories with lab animals, as they have no choice in the matter.  It is quite another matter to try and restrict overall caloric intake when you’re driving past 15 fast food joints on your way home, are surrounded by constant advertisement and have a refrigerator and cupboards full of food at your ravenous fingertips.  UNLESS, of course, you apply the caloric restriction model in a way that does not leave you hungry–which is exactly what Primal Body-Primal Mind tells you how to do.  Just follow the simple, most basic dietary guidelines outlined in my book to eat optimally well while feeling fully satisfied, live healthier, longer–and even save some real money along the way!

The most basic guideline to remember is this: greatly restrict or eliminate sugar and starch (preferably eliminating gluten completely), keep your protein intake adequate (roughly the RDA–44-56 g/day or 0.8 g/kg of ideal body weight) amounting to approximately 6-7 ounces of organic grass fed/wild caught meat/seafood total per day, eat as many fibrous “above ground”/non-starchy vegetables and greens as you like and eat as much fat (from fattier cuts of meat or fish, nuts, seeds, avocados, coconut, butter/ghee, olives, olive oil…etc) as you need to satisfy your appetite.

The bottom line here is that natural dietary fat is not at all our enemy–and that in the absence of dietary carbohydrate and with adequate protein can result in a far more satisfying, longer and healthier life overall. Simple, delicious and satisfying.  No hunger or feelings of deprivation needed…and all the benefits of supporting a longer and healthier life while saving you money.

If you do nothing from my book other than what was outlined in the paragraph above your health and well being will change remarkably–and chances are you will age much more gracefully and live longer.

And that’s no monkey business.

Q: I have a health question about my school-girlfriend in Germany.

She’s got something happening in her legs which make walking kind of shaky and unsafe. She always needs to use a walking stick outside now. She was in the hospital for 5 days doing all kinds of tests. All blood tests came out OK.

They call it POLYNEUROPATHY and have no explanation for it. It’s supposedly age-related.

The pain gets a little better or less when taking Vitamin B6 and B12.

Do you know more about it? She and her husband are not particularly skinny and don’t eat a very healthy diet.

A: Any neuropathy is basically a state of advanced glycation—where sugars in the bloodstream combine with fats and proteins throughout the body–but especially in the nerve fibers and cause them to become sticky, misshapen and malfunction.  Nerve and brain tissue are especially vulnerable to glycation because they cannot become insulin resistant.  Some glycation may be reversed but much of it can’t.  It is basically the primary mechanism of aging and what eventually does us in.  A nerve damaged by glycation is also much more vulnerable to other free radical and antigenic (allergy-related) influences and damage.

My recommendation to her would be to undertake a complete avoidance of ALL sugar and starch (even fruit) and start a regimen of anti-glycating nutrients such as L-carnosine, R-lipoic acid, acetyl l-carnitine, benfotiamine and pyridoxamine.  That’s what I would do.  She will need to be very disciplined if she hopes to improve her condition.  B6, B12, folic acid and other methyl donors (and B-complex in general) are always helpful to the brain and nervous tissue and help to minimize the toxic effects of homocysteine, but they are not directly anti-glycating, except for B6 (in its P-5-P form).  I agree they are also a very good idea, however.  For B12 she should be taking it sublingually and in a form called “methylcobalamin”.  Methyl donors (along with phospholipids, fats, cholesterol and other B vitamins) are essential to the integrity of the myelin sheath—the protective insulating layer covering nerves.  B12 deficiencies are common in old age because digestion, hydrochloric acid and intrinsic factor tend to be diminished.   There is no question that B12 deficiency can be a contributing factor here.  You need ample methyl donors for healthy nerves.  B6 (P-5-P) is an important anti-glycating nutrient, especially in its fat soluble form, called “pyridoxamine”.  Essential fatty acids (omega-3’s and GLA) and vitamin D are also important.

I would also HIGHLY recommend a very strict gluten free diet.  There is NO question that gluten and gliadin (from grains) can have a devastating impact on the nervous system.  In fact, it can be THE primary manifestation of celiac disease for many!  This is very commonly overlooked by most doctors and she will have to do some homework to find a specialist knowledgeable about these issues.  It might be very worthwhile for your friend to explore the possibility of celiac disease.  Here in the States we have a very innovative lab, called “EnteroLab”, offering the most accurate testing for gluten sensitivity and the genetic markers that predispose to that (www.enterolab.com).  Gluten sensitivity and celiac disease are essentially identical in effect and health impact.  What distinguishes them from one another is a fine gray line of “genetic” manifestation.  Genetic manifestation is not essential for celiac disease effects to occur, however, and diagnostic methods have traditionally been somewhat unreliable.  False negatives are VERY common.  Doing a salivary or blood test and having the result show as “negative” does NOT necessarily mean you don’t have the problem.  If it shows “positive” in any way, shape or form you can take that to the bank—but negatives tell you ultimately very little, unfortunately.  My perspective says to go by symptoms.  ANY symptoms affecting gastrointestinal issues, nervous system or brain issues, mood, memory, cognitive functioning, inflammation, autoimmune issues or almost anything tell me that gluten sensitivity is a very real possibility, if not an overwhelming likelihood.  I tend to just want to assume it in those cases and proceed accordingly…but many people need to see the proof in a lab test.  It can take a variety of diagnostic methods to get at the truth.  The gold standard is really an “elimination diet” where gluten-containing foods are simply removed from the diet and one is left to observe whether symptoms improve in time.  I’m not sure what she has available there in Germany but intestinal biopsy as a “classical” diagnostic method can miss 7 out of 10 cases.  The next best thing would be to test for IgA, IgG and IgM, gluten, gliadin antibodies and transglutaminase in the blood.  If they have the means to test for the genetic markers for celiac disease, so much the better.  Avoidance of gluten for the susceptible goes well beyond avoiding grains, though.  It is in virtually ALL processed foods unless otherwise specifically labeled “gluten free”.  Those vulnerable to gluten (and I would put money on this with your friend) need also to avoid gluten present even in shampoos, lotions and cosmetics (often listed as “wheat protein” or “hydrolyzed protein”).  Even one crumb of gluten in a month or the tiniest bit absorbed by the skin into the system can set up an inflammatory response that can last for up to 6-8 months and have devastating consequences! Gluten sensitivity is THAT serious.  Abstinence has to be 100% ALL of the time.  NO exceptions.  Casein sensitivity (milk protein) is a distinct possibility, also, and should always be suspected where gluten issues are present.  Gluten sensitivity and celiac disease are currently epidemic.

The diet of choice here is a sugar and starch-free, gluten-free (and probably casein-free) diet with a moderate amount of complete (animal/seafood source) protein and enough quality natural fats to satisfy appetite and also meet critical essential fatty acid and fat soluble nutrient needs.  Dietary fat and cholesterol become VERY important where nerve health is concerned.

We all love our indulgences and feel they are harmless–or maybe even think they are somehow good for us–until they begin to exert their cumulative toll and things start breaking down.  What is happening to your friend didn’t happen “all of a sudden” but is the result of a certain way of eating and lifestyle over many, many years—even a lifetime.  Eventually it catches up with you.  That is what got her into the state she’s in and she’ll need to address similar mechanisms if she wants to get out of it.  She has no more room for indulgences.

Neuropathy isn’t a “normal variant of aging”.  It is nerve damage brought on (in simple terms) by a lifetime of sugar and starch consumption.  No drug will fix it.

I hope she is able to find some improvement and relief from her condition!

~ Nora

Q: My twin sister and I have PCOS (Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome).  For years we have been told various ways of eating that supposedly are going to get rid of the symptoms (such as insulin resistance, infertility, belly fat, etc).  We have become so confused by all the “advice” we have been given that we have thrown our hands up and now eat whatever we want.  Do you have any input on the optimum diet for women affected by PCOS?

A: PCOS typically occurs in women of reproductive age and has been associated with obesity, high blood testosterone levels, increased facial and body hair growth, problems with ovulation and infertility.  80% of the time PCOS is associated with obesity–and essentially 100% of the time obesity is directly associated with insulin and leptin resistance.  This is unfortunately the tip of the iceberg, however.  PCOS is part of a vicious inflammatory cycle initiated by insulin resistance that leads to androgen (testosterone) dominance…which in turn further exacerbates insulin resistance.  The intermediate catalyst appears to be either the adrenals or the ovaries.  Most commonly, an enzyme in the ovaries called 17, 20 lyase gets up-regulated in the presence of insulin and chronically converts estrogen to testosterone.

Sometimes birth control pills get prescribed for this but that only really results in shutting down the hormonal feedback loops and does nothing to repair the problem.  Adding extra estrogen isn’t the answer, since any added estrogen will likely only be converted to testosterone eventually and further exacerbate the problem.

The best single way to address this disorder is eat in a manner that restores insulin sensitivity.  The dietary approach I talk about in my book, Primal Body-Primal Mind is powerfully geared toward balancing of hormones such as insulin and leptin and greatly improving insulin sensitivity.  DIET DOES MATTER!! The more you can do to metabolically adapt yourself to fat burning instead of sugar burning the better off you will be (and for this, the dietary approach I advocate is about as optimum as you can get).  My article on “Taming the Carb Craving Monster” may have some additional information you may find useful.

One more factor I urge you to consider is iodine deficiency.  Iodine deficiency tends to be a factor wherever cysts are an issue and has been strongly linked to PCOS.  Ordering an iodine test (being sure to include a bromide toxicity test) from Hakala Labs could be an important step to take in resolving your PCOS issue.  Always test first prior to iodine supplementation or iodine loading.  If you know or suspect you may have thyroid issues and/or Hashimoto’s (positive for TPO antibodies) then I recommend you proceed with extreme caution and consult with an experienced clinician prior to any iodine supplementation.

~ Nora

NOTE:

The ideas and suggestions written by Nora Gedgaudas on this website or blog are provided as general educational information only and should not be construed as medical advice or care. All matters regarding your health require supervision by a personal physician or other appropriate health professional familiar with your current health status. Always consult your qualified personal health care provider before making any dietary or exercise changes. Nora Gedgaudas and Northwest Neurofeedback, Inc. disclaims any liability or warranties of any kind arising directly or indirectly from use of this website or blog. If any medical problems develop, always consult your qualified personal health care provider. Only your physician can provide you medical advice.

Q: What do I feed my children (2, 5, 8)?  Carbohydrates do not agree with them at all and cause many digestive issues so I am comfortable putting them on a low-carb diet, but it seems that meat always becomes the focus.  How can I make fat the focus??  I can’t just put a glob of fat on their plates.  This evening, we had chicken, Swiss chard and a salad.  The 2 year old ONLY ate chicken – no veggies (even though I buttered the Swiss chard & had a flax-oil based dressing on the salad).  The five year old only ate chicken and Swiss chard.  Especially for the two year old, he needs fat!  But the only way I can seem to get it into him is with a carby-type snack (and the carbs really do not agree with him).  I saw your recipe for nut balls – I will be making those as our snacks.  But just a little lost on how to set up our actual meals…  I guess it’s just a matter of sticking with the non-starchy vegetables and serving nothing else until he starts trying them (??)…

A: Dietary fat is richly present within animal source foods (meat, poultry, seafood and fish).  Choosing fattier cuts of meat is a great way to increase the fats.  Use less lean ground beef, rib-eyes instead of tenderloins, lamb, pork, etc.  Leaving the skin on poultry and using dark, instead of light meat, for instance, can also be a way of significantly increasing fat content (leg and thigh meat is also less expensive than breast meat…and more nutritious!).  You can also sauté onions and mushrooms in butter or olive oil and pour that over meat or fish as a bonus.  Choosing oilier fish such as salmon (and cooking in butter or coconut oil) is another way.  Add healthy, rich sauces.  There is no need to overly restrict protein with children and teens, as they are growing and their cells reproducing rapidly as part of their normal development.   Restricting the carbohydrates (sugar and starch) still makes good sense.  If they like the veggies, great.  If not, don’t worry about it too much.  You could try my “Cauliflower Mashers” recipe as another approach to veggies kids really love (better than mashed potatoes!).  Nutrient dense, complete protein and natural fat are the most important thing in a developing child.  You could possibly try green drinks (NanoGreens are delicious) if you want them to have the extra antioxidants and phytonutrients available in veggies.  Additional fat can be from melted butter, coconut milk, olive oil, supplemental omega 3′s (preferably from fish oil and not so much from flax oil)…etc.  Avocados (very rich in monounsaturated fats) are a great addition to the meal, which kids usually love.  –Or make guacamole.  Remember—it’s about making sure that you’re eating a variety of natural fats and including sufficient essential fatty acids.  Eat just enough natural fat to satisfy your appetite—but don’t feel like you have to wash down a meal with a mug of liquid lard. 

~ Nora

Q:  Any tips for a Primal Pregnancy and raising Primal Kids?

A:  When it comes to pregnancy the rules change a bit.  Remember that activating mTOR pathways are the equivalent to activating reproductive pathways and a cellular proliferation mode.  I would say that pregnancy qualifies as reproductive mode.    Also, a growing child needs to produce lots of new cells and healthy growth is important here.  I would not be inclined to overly restrict protein or fat under your circumstances at all, or for your child.  Kids (and teens) should not be overly subject to protein or fat caloric restriction due to their pronounced metabolic needs.

You still have no need for sugar or starch, but complete (i.e., nutrient dense animal source) protein, fat and naturally occurring fat soluble nutrients in them are critical for you and you need to keep in mind you are eating for two!  Now is not the time for caloric restriction.  You can revisit that after you are done breast feeding!

I would also like to refer you to guidelines provided for pregnancy on the Weston A. Price web site at www.westonaprice.org.  It will help you to familiarize with those.

~ Nora

All low-carb diets ‘promise’ weight loss, which is what most people want. But I’m the exception. I’ve never had a weight problem in my life eating full fat and whole foods. I’m 67. I don’t want to lose any weight and wouldn’t mind gaining a couple of pounds.

All I’m trying to do with this way of eating is keep my blood sugar within normal range. Right now my fasting blood glucose is between 110 and 125 with spikes to 200 if I eat starchy foods like grains/potatoes, etc. – clearly pre-diabetic.

So my question is:

What adjustments would you suggest for a person like me to control blood glucose but keep the weight or even gain a few pounds?

Thank you so much!

Rosemarie

The diet my book promotes isn’t “about” weight loss but about reclaiming and expanding upon real health. I would expect weight normalization in time. High carbohydrate diets and certain forms of dysglycemia can also readily raise cortisol levels which can lead to muscle wasting and undesirably low weight issues in some. My book does discuss the mechanism for this. Whatever weight loss you might experience initially should be followed by an eventual normalization of healthy weight.

~ Nora

Primal Body Primal Mind

Q:   Are all fruits forbidden with this eating plan?

A:   Consider that modern day fruit is NOT bred for its nutrient content so much as for its sweetness.  Modern cultivated fruit is much larger and far more filled with sugar than its wild counterparts.  Wild fruit is far more tart, in general, than sweet and has way more fiber.  It was only seasonally available to our ancestors living in more temperate zones.

In other words, it isn’t a food we were designed to eat a whole lot of and modern fruit bears little resemblance to the fruit we evolved eating on occasion.  Fruit sugar is also largely fructose, which although less likely to provoke an insulin response is 20-30 times more glycating (damaging to our body) than glucose by itself.  If you enjoy eating a few organic berries now and then, so be it.  I have no problem with that.  I wouldn’t equate fruit with vegetables in terms of their nutrient value and importance, however.  Not by a long shot.

~ Nora

Primal Body Primal Mind