Ron Put

Perhaps. But then it would be the time to supplement. Happy New Year!

Ah, all sorts of deities continue to live in the gaps of knowledge.... We cannot disprove the existence of the Tooth Fairy, nor disprove that She had valuable input in the creation of the universe. We cannot disprove that it is She who created the Almighty and pays him minimum wage as a chief projectionist to entertain the believers. But all that doesn't mean that the untestable tales of the Tooth Fairy or Her Almighty helper should be given equal weight to testable theories, such as the Big Bang, which provide certain predictions, which in turn can then be tested.

Good point, Tom, and good citations, Sibiriak. The studies below may add further clarification about the role of visceral fat: Fat Distribution and Mortality: The AGES-Reykjavik Study "Results In men, every standard deviation (SD) increment in thigh intermuscular fat was related to a significantly greater mortality risk (HR:1.17, 95%CI:1.08–1.26) after adjustment for age, education, smoking, physical activity, alcohol, BMI, type 2 diabetes and coronary heart disease. In women, visceral fat (per SD increment) significantly increased mortality risk (HR:1.13, 95%CI:1.03–1.25) while abdominal subcutaneous fat (per SD increment) was associated with a lower mortality risk (HR:0.70; 95%CI:0.61–0.80). Significant interactions with BMI were found in women indicating that visceral fat was a strong predictor of mortality in obese women while abdominal and thigh subcutaneous fat were associated with a lower mortality risk in normal and overweight women. Conclusions Fat distribution is associated with mortality over 11 years of follow-up independent of overall fatness. The divergent mortality risks for visceral fat and subcutaneous fat in women suggest complex relationships between overall fatness and mortality." Visceral Fat Is an Independent Predictor of All‐cause Mortality in Men "Visceral fat is a significant predictor of mortality in men after adjustment for age, follow‐up time, subcutaneous fat, and liver fat. These findings underscore the importance of setting abdominal obesity as a primary target for obesity reduction and, consequently, the need to educate health care practitioners on the importance of routine measurement of visceral fat. Although we measured visceral fat directly by CT scans in this study, waist circumference provides a reasonable approximation of visceral fat in clinical settings." Abdominal obesity and mortality: The Pennington Center Longitudinal Study "The results of this study demonstrate an independent effect of VAT on all-cause mortality rates in a sample of white men and women. The magnitude of the association after adjustment for SAT (HR=1.72; 1.20–2.47) is similar to that obtained by Kuk et al.7 (RR=1.93; 1.15–3.23) in men, and McNeely et al.8 (HR=1.47 (1.14–1.89) in Japanese Americans. All three studies have demonstrated that the association between VAT and mortality is independent of several covariates. Among Japanese Americans, the association between VAT and mortality was reduced somewhat after adjustment for body mass index (RR=1.34 (0.99–1.82); however, in this study, the inclusion of body mass index as an additional covariate in Model 2 did not reduce the strength of the association (HR=1.66; 1.07–2.57). These human studies are supported by research that shows that the surgical removal of VAT in rats results in higher mean and maximum lifespan, compared with ad libitum fed rats.12 These results support the use of VAT as a primary target for obesity-reduction strategies. Lifestyle-based interventions such as diet and physical activity have been shown to significantly reduce VAT even in the absence of weight loss.13 VAT is currently not routinely measured in clinical practice, in part due to the requirement of magnetic resonance imaging or CT. However, recent technological advances may allow for the quantification of VAT using other modalities such as dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry."

So, I got my first DEXA scan last week. I did it mostly to check if my Withings Cardio Scale was accurate in its estimate of 11% body fat. The DEXA scan came up with 13.5%, which is relatively close, I guess. Withings nailed the Bone Mineral Content (BMC) at 6.4 - 6.5 (DEXA scan 6.4) and Lean Mass at 123.5 lbs (DEXA scan 124.1). Here is a shot of some of the other data: Where on the body fat/bone density scale are most of those who frequent this forum? I remember seeing scans from AI and Saul, but wondering about the rest.

Well, I am technically close, since my Ferritin is at 30 ng/mL, with normal values between 22-415 ng/mL. I definitely don't feel anemic :) But I remember reading up on iron a few years ago and from what I recall, overall mortality increases with higher iron levels.

A couple of points: While there appears to be evidence that across a large population there is a raise in total serum cholesterol correlating with diterpenes intake, I didn't see anything specifying if such raise was uniform across LDL and HDL, or not. It seems as if it would matter. I didn't see anything specifically addressing mortality risk, either (coffee in general appears to reduce it). Also, as Sibiriak points out, what does it all mean for someone like Dean, who has already very low lipids levels, low RHR and generally low CVD risk? In such a case, something like prostate cancer would be of greater concern and as per the studies mentioned above, unfiltered coffee appears to reduce the risk. To place this in perspective, I believe that I achieved a rather significant drop in total cholesterol (to the low 150s mg/dL or less than 4.0 mmol/L, with basically 1x1 LDL/HDL ratio) and triglycerides (51mg/dL or 0.6 mmol/L) by dramatically reducing my olive oil intake and getting close to 1x1 ratio for Omega 3/Omega 6 intake (flax and chia seeds, mostly). I don't think I have made any other dramatic changes, although I cannot be certain it is the reduction in olive oil consumption, of course. But there is some evidence to support the notion that olive oil, while better than animal fat or vegetable oils, is still detrimental. Yet, many here persist in consuming it. Having said this, I did order a couple of reusable cloth filters and I plan to filter my French press coffee through them. I am not sure that I will actually do it, since I'd like to read up a little more on the subject, but I'll try it while deciding. I chose cloth because I try to stick to reusable products and based on studies like this one: Cholesterol-raising diterpenes in types of coffee commonly consumed in Singapore, Indonesia and India and associations with blood lipids: A survey and cross sectional study

I have always been under the impression that higher ferritin levels correlate with higher mortality rates. Here is what my cursory search found: The Risk of Too Much Iron : Normal Serum Ferritin Levels May Represent Significant 

Health 

Issues "However, there is considerable evidence that within this range adverse e"ects of iron are implicated, which impact the development and progression of a number of common disorders. !ere is also considerable data indicating that lowering ferritin levels within the normal range to values corresponding to near iron depletion produces bene#cial results for a number of diseases. In addition, oxidative DNA damage is strongly and signi#cantly associated with ferritin levels within the normal reference range with no apparent threshold. It is hypothesized that optimum ferritin levels are at the low end of the normal reference range near the threshold for anaemia. Failure to measure ferritin and respond to results above this suggested optimum may do a disservice to patients. Either blood donation or phlebotomy is very e"ective in achieving these levels"

Hah, I like my French press coffee better than the filtered varieties (and better than espresso), so I am looking for justification not to change :) It does appear that diterpenes exhibit anti-tumor propperties, as Sibiriak points out: Coffee diterpenes kahweol acetate and cafestol synergistically inhibit the proliferation and migration of prostate cancer cells Background Coffee inhibits the progression of prostate cancer; however, the direct mechanism through which coffee acts on prostate cancer cells remains unclear. This study aimed to identify the key compounds of coffee that possess anti‐cancer effects and to investigate their mechanisms of action. Methods The anti‐proliferation and anti‐migration effects of six potentially active types of coffee compounds, including kahweol acetate, cafestol, caffeine, caffeic acid, chlorogenic acid, and trigonelline hydrochloride, were evaluated using LNCaP, LNCaP‐SF, PC‐3, and DU145 human prostate cancer cells. The synergistic effects of these compounds were also investigated. Apoptosis‐related and epithelial‐mesenchymal transition‐related proteins, androgen receptor in whole cell and in nucleus, and chemokines were assessed. A xenograft study of SCID mice was performed to examine the in vivo effect of coffee compounds. Results Among the evaluated compounds, only kahweol acetate and cafestol inhibited the proliferation and migration of prostate cancer cells in a dose‐dependent manner. The combination treatment involving kahweol acetate and cafestol synergistically inhibited proliferation and migration (combination index <1) with the induction of apoptosis, the inhibition of epithelial‐mesenchymal transition, and decrease in androgen receptor, resulting in the reduction of nuclear androgen receptor in androgen receptor‐positive cells. Moreover, kahweol acetate and cafestol downregulated CCR2 and CCR5 without an increase in their ligands, CCL2 and CCL5. The xenograft study showed that oral administration of kahweol acetate and cafestol significantly inhibited tumor growth. Conclusion Kahweol acetate and cafestol synergistically inhibit the progression of prostate cancer. These coffee compounds may be novel therapeutic candidates for prostate cancer. It also appears that the negative effect of coffee consumption (and the effect of other substances) is correlated with CYP1A2 genotype, despite the 2018 UK Biobank study, which appears to be a bit of an outlier: CYP1A2 genotype modifies the association between coffee intake and the risk of hypertension These data show that the risk of hypertension associated with coffee intake varies according to CYP1A2 genotype. Carriers of slow *1F allele are at increased risk and should thus abstain from coffee, whereas individuals with *1A/*1A genotype can safely drink coffee. Coffee, CYP1A2 Genotype, and Risk of Myocardial Infarction In summary, consistent with most case-control studies, we found that increased coffee intake is associated with an increased risk of nonfatal MI. The association between coffee and MI was found only among individuals with the slow CYP1A2*1F allele, which impairs caffeine metabolism, suggesting that caffeine plays a role in the association.

I just ran across an interesting article discussing fiber. What caught my attention was that sources of fiber seem to matter quite a bit, with grains being strongly correlated with reduced mortality, while fruits (the study doesn't specify what kind, it may be lumping orange juice with pulp in there) are on the opposite end of the spectrum. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3513325/

Thanks, Dean. I read the other thread, and even posted there. :) But Sibiriak had a good point there, plus I wonder if the metal filter attachment for the Aeropress is not in some ways similar to the filter in a French press? My stainless steel French press has a rather dense filter attachment.

Thanks, Sibiriak! My understanding of the inconsistent studies on the benefits of coffee is that it genetics were muddying the waters -- fast metabolizers get the CV benefits, while slow metabolizers don't (e.g. https://drwillcole.com/caffeine-one-thing-standing-optimal-health/ )

Thanks, Brian. You just ruined my day :D I really like my low acidity French press coffee.

Thanks, Tom! I just placed an order for 1lb of organic date sugar (100% ground dates) and will try it.

Oh, dude.... Or, should I say, oh Google Translate? Or, a confused bot?

This is an interesting article discussing milk kefir microbial/yeast geographic diversity: http://microbialfoods.org/science-digested-exploring-kefir/ I am thinking of buying a goat milk kefir which Whole Foods carries once in a while, maybe monthly or bimonthly, and sticking to water kefir for regular consumption. I also still drink store-bought kombucha occasionally. Water kefir has fewer, less diverse organisms than milk kefir (10-15 vs 30-50 by most accounts), but it is also non-dairy and has far fewer calories -- depending on the time allowed for fermentation, 20-30 or less calories per 500ml. I use sugar which is truly unrefined (most have the molasses taken out, and even most of the expensive dark varieties are processed, with molasses put back in after). This is the best I have found and the fact that my grains grow well in it supports it: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0797JQQK5/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o02_s00?ie=UTF8&amp;psc=1 I also keep the grains in cloth sachets and place them in a large glass jar.

I don't necessarily enjoy exercise and the last time I entered a gym was when the office I worked at had one. But I try to get up from my desk and do something once an hour or so, be it a set of push ups, or a plank, or squats, or pull ups. I normally listen to upbeat music during exercise. A few times a week I also hike in the hills (run some uphill portions to get my heart rate up). I sometimes listen to an audiobook while hiking, but more often simply enjoy the outdoors.

"...in theory, reprogramming epigenetics should work on mice and people at any age, says first author Alejandro Ocampo, adding that even cells from human centenarians could eventually be rejuvenated. He and Belmonte say they think they can improve the efficiency and results of the technique with more research—and that they can undo the epigenetic changes responsible for aging by using easier-to-handle chemicals instead of the Yamanaka factors, hopefully moving toward the possibility of treatment for people. Matt Kaeberlein, a molecular biologist at the University of Washington who studies aging but was not part of the work, says other researchers have found that the Yamanaka factors can rejuvenate cells—so in some ways this study is not surprising. But Kaeberlein says no one else had yet shown that the factors can treat age-related diseases in an animal by making the same changes. “That’s the wow factor,” he explains." https://getpocket.com/explore/item/aging-is-reversible-at-least-in-human-cells-and-live-mice?utm_source=pocket-newtab While the above is from 2016, here is how Sinclair is trying to fund (and monetize) it: https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2019/03/anti-aging-research-prime-time-for-an-impact-on-the-globe/ Which would be a good thing, if they get results.

Yeah, Rob Knight is illuminating, if a tad bombastic. Thanks. I don't feel comfortable with Kinght's cavalier suggestion that one day we can industrialize the torture and killing of mice, so that obese yahoos can determine what kind of icecream they can stuff themselves with with the least consequences.... Somewhat on topic: https://www.vox.com/2015/1/22/7871579/poop-feces

While I don't find chopping vegetables joyful, there is a scientific support for Dean's "chop-and-store" method: https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.jafc.7b05913 I also recall that Rhonda Patrick mentioned that storing broccoli sprouts in the freezer significantly increases their sulforaphane content.

You are misrepresenting the significance of the recall notices said, and you are misrepresenting the thrust of the "bioequivalence" article Here is the main point of the "bioequivalence" article you cited: "Practical Implications for Pharmacists Some may claim that the difference between the myth and reality of the 80-125% rule is insignificant. After all, it’s much easier to tell a patient that a generic product can be expected to fall within an 80-125% window then to explain that the PK values and their 90% CIs must fall within that same range. Because pharmacists are often referred to as medication experts, however, it’s important to understand the true definition and requirements for determining bioequivalence. To claim that a generic product may fall within an 80-125% range to the brand-name product is incorrect and may result in some patients reconsidering taking a generic. After all, that 45% net difference could dissuade generic use. Besides, “clinicians who do not realize this may favor branded drugs over generics, thereby substantially increasing the cost of treatment, or they may be skeptical of the efficacy of generics, thereby diminishing the placebo element in the psychopharmacologic response to generics if the skepticism is consciously or unconsciously communicated to the patient.”" And here is the relevant part of the recall notices, which again show that the system works: "Nearly 2500 units of the prescription drug are included in the recall. The impacted product has the following code information: Lot # MR3365, Exp. Feb 17. The FDA classified this as a Class III recall on November 22. A Class III recall is described by the FDA as “a situation in which use of or exposure to a violative product is not likely to cause adverse health consequences.”" The Forbes article is from 2012 and is written by an investment analyst, who may have an interest in promoting non-generic use. Nothing you have cited shows that the system is broken.

How much kefir do you drink each day, Tom? I have been chugging water kefir in quantities between about 750ml to a liter and a half on many days (I make a lot of it :) I find its tangy taste appealing and it's probably less than 150 calories a day (I usually ferment it for 2-3 days).

Hah! But it's also possible that OA sufferers are more likely to take glucosamine.... :) Based on the discussion here and elsewhere, I've added a combined Calcium, Magnesium and Zinc supplement by Solimo (Amazon brand): https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B079C799K4/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o03_s00?ie=UTF8&amp;psc=1 I take 1 caplet per day, which supplies: Calcium: 333mg Magnesium: 133mg Zinc: 5mg (The serving size is 3 caplets per day).

Todd, have you rechecked your lead lead levels? If still so high, there may be a different culprit -- it's not so easy to get it from glaze or intact siding/paint. See this: https://www.acsh.org/news/1998/08/01/lead-and-health-an-update As to the violations presented, it is not clear to me that they are material. I did a cursory search and litigation related to generic drugs appears to be focused on price fixing and not on quality. While a few years ago there was a scandal about expired and less effective drugs being sent to Africa, the only recent significant issue relating to quality I am aware of, is described here: WHAT IS GOING ON WITH THE VALSARTAN RECALL? "Valsartan, the generic version of Diovan, belongs to a class of drugs that also includes irbesartan (Avapro) and losartan (Cozaar), which are commonly used to treat high blood pressure and heart failure, either on their own or in combination with other medications. These drugs, known as angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs), work by inhibiting a hormone in the body called angiotensin, which can cause the blood vessels to constrict and cause hypertension, or high blood pressure. There is currently an ongoing investigation into the contamination of these valsartan drugs and the health risks they pose for patients. According to the FDA, the drugs contain carcinogenic impurities like N-Nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA), N-Nitrosodiethylamine (NDEA) and N-Nitroso-N-methyl-4-aminobutyric acid (NMBA), which are probable carcinogens, meaning they can cause cancer in humans. The issue with these drugs is that the generic versions were being made in labs overseas, almost exclusively by Zhejiang Huahai Pharmaceutical Co. (ZHP) of China and Hetero Labs Limited of India, and the manufacturing process the labs were using to make the drugs produced as byproducts the carcinogenic impurities NDMA, NDEA and NMBA. These impurities contaminated the blood pressure medications, which were then shipped to the United States for consumer use. Blood Pressure Medication Recalls There have been multiple recalls affecting hundreds of lots of valsartan, irbesartan and losartan, the first of which was announced in July 2018, after it was discovered that batches of drug products containing valsartan that were manufactured by ZHP of China were tainted with NDMA. According to reports, the tainted medications had been distributed in the United States by Teva Pharmaceutical Industries, Major Pharmaceuticals and Solco Healthcare. After the first valsartan recall, the FDA launched an investigation into the contamination and several other drug recalls followed, which affected medications distributed by Torrent Pharmaceuticals, Mylan Pharmaceuticals, Aurobindo Pharma USA, Inc., and other drug makers. In addition to widespread valsartan recalls issued by the FDA, dozens of lawsuits have also been filed by individuals across the country who allege that contaminated valsartan, losartan and irbesartan products caused them to suffer potentially life-threatening side effects, like kidney cancer, kidney damage, liver cancer, liver damage, colorectal cancer and gastric cancer. The product liability lawsuits also allege that the drug companies knew about the potential contamination of their valsartan products for years, yet did nothing to warn patients about the potential health risk." https://www.consumersafetywatch.com/latest-valsartan-news/ Which basically shows that the system is largely working as intended.

Interesting. I was aware of it, but this does lend more robust support to the benefits of spices. Since I rarely use salt at home, I consume significant amounts of spices, including paprika, cayenne pepper, jalapeno peppers, etc., to increase palatability. Luckily, I genuinly like spicy food -- much better than being cold :D

This may be of interest: "The chemical form of iron is an important factor affecting the iron availability of vegetarian diets. Less than 40% of the iron in meat, poultry, and fish (10) is in the heme form, which is more efficiently absorbed than the remaining nonheme iron present in these and all other foods (11–15). Nonvegetarian diets with substantial amounts of red meat supply about 2 mg/d, or 10–12%, of the total iron in the heme form (8); in comparison, diets based on poultry or fish contain less heme iron, roughly in proportion to the decrease in total iron content, and vegetarian diets contain no heme iron. Heme iron is better absorbed (≈15–40%) than nonheme iron (≈1–15%) (11–15). Both forms are absorbed in inverse logarithmic proportion to body iron stores. However, the result is a greater range of efficiency for nonheme iron absorption, compared with that of heme iron, as iron stores vary from low to high normal values (11–15). Heme iron can account for nearly half of the iron absorbed by people with moderate iron stores consuming moderate to liberal amounts of red meat (12, 16). In contrast, because of apparent upregulation of nonheme iron absorption, nonheme iron contributes more than heme iron to the total amount of iron absorbed in people with low body iron stores (12). Thus, the generally less well absorbed nonheme iron in vegetarian diets is more responsive than heme iron to differences in body iron status: nonheme iron absorption can be more completely limited by those with high iron stores, while being nearly as well absorbed as heme iron by those with very low iron stores. However, the efficiency of nonheme iron absorption by those with low iron stores depends on the enhancing and inhibiting food constituents being consumed concurrently." https://academic.oup.com/ajcn/article/78/3/633S/4690005#109811017